Threatening levels and extinction risks based on distributional, ecological and life-history datasets (DELH) versus IUCN criteria: example of Serbian reptiles

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7&domain=pdf

Web End = http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7&domain=pdf

Web End = http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7&domain=pdf

Web End = Biodivers Conserv (2015) 24:29132934

DOI 10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7

ORIGINAL PAPER

L. Tomovi1 A. Uroevi2 T. Vukov2 R. Ajti3 K. Ljubisavljevi2

I. Krizmani1 D. Jovi4 N. Labus5 S. ordevi1

M. L. Kalezi2 G. Duki2 L. Luiselli6,7

Received: 6 December 2014 / Revised: 24 July 2015 / Accepted: 10 August 2015 /

Published online: 26 August 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Abstract Recent studies on the world reptiles extinction risks pointed out that about 20 % of species are threatened, with another 20 % are data-decient following IUCN criteria. IUCN set up criteria for assessment of extinction risk at global and regional scales, relying on distribution data, population parameters and quantitative analyses. Only 12 % of reptilian species were listed as globally threatened upon population data. Long-term population studies are time-consuming, thus it would be practical to use some other parameters for estimations of extinction risks. Threatening level (and extinction risks) of Serbian reptiles have never been investigated. We aimed to scrutinize species threatening level (thus set up conservation priorities) on the basis of distributional, ecological and life-history datasets (DELH). We estimated which traits are the most important for the conservation of species. Separately, we used IUCN criteria for regional level to assess

Communicated by Marcelo F. Tognelli.

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7

Web End =10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7 ) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

& L. Tomovi [email protected]

1 Faculty of Biology, University of Belgrade, Studentski trg 16, Belgrade 11000, Serbia

2 Institute for Biological Research Sinia Stankovi, University of Belgrade, Bulevar Despota Stefana 142, Belgrade 11000, Serbia

3 Institute for Nature Conservation of Serbia, Dr Ivana Ribara 91, Belgrade 11070, Serbia

4 Institute for Nature Conservation of Serbia, Voda KaradMrd 14, Nis 18000, Serbia

5 Biology Department, Faculty of Science and Mathematics, University of Pritina, Lole Ribara 29, Kosovska Mitrovica 38220, Serbia

6 Niger Delta Ecology and Biodiversity Conservation Unit, Department of Applied and Environmental Biology, Rivers State University of Science and Technology, PMB5080, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria

7 Centre of Environmental Studies Demetra, Via Olona 7, 00198 Rome, Italy

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7&domain=pdf

Web End = http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7&domain=pdf

Web End = http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7&domain=pdf

Web End = http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7&domain=pdf

Web End = http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10531-015-0984-7&domain=pdf