基于层次分析法的旗舰物种遴选方法

doi:10.17520/biods.2021536

生物多样性 ›› 2022, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (8): 21536. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2021536

基于层次分析法的旗舰物种遴选方法

徐文轩¹^,²^,³, 徐峰¹^,²^,³, 马伟⁴, 汪沐阳¹^,²^,³, 王建成¹^,^*(), 杨维康¹^,²^,³^,^*

1.中国科学院新疆生态与地理研究所荒漠与绿洲生态国家重点实验室, 乌鲁木齐 830011
2.中国科学院新疆生态与地理研究所标本馆, 乌鲁木齐 830011
3.中国科学院新疆生态与地理研究所木垒野生动物生态监测实验站, 新疆木垒 831900
4.新疆卡拉麦里山有蹄类野生动物自然保护区管理中心, 新疆昌吉 831100

收稿日期:2021-12-22 接受日期:2022-06-12 出版日期:2022-08-20 发布日期:2022-08-31
通讯作者: 王建成,杨维康
作者简介:*共同通讯作者 E-mail: www-1256@ms.xjb.ac.cn;
第一联系人：
#共同第一作者
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(U2003203);国家自然科学基金(31872254);中国科学院战略性先导科技专项(A类)(XDA2005020402);中国科学院生物多样性监测研究网络项目(Sino-BON)

Proposing a quantitative selection method for determining flagship species based on an analytic hierarchy process

Wenxuan Xu¹^,²^,³, Feng Xu¹^,²^,³, Wei Ma⁴, Muyang Wang¹^,²^,³, Jiancheng Wang¹^,^*(), Weikang Yang¹^,²^,³^,^*

1. State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011
2. The Specimen Museum of Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011
3. Mori Wildlife Monitoring and Experimentation Station, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Mori, Xinjiang 831900
4. Management Center of Xinjiang Kalamaili Mountain Ungulate Nature Reserve, Changji, Xinjiang 831100

Received:2021-12-22 Accepted:2022-06-12 Online:2022-08-20 Published:2022-08-31
Contact: Jiancheng Wang,Weikang Yang
About author:First author contact:
#Co-first authors

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

旗舰物种是保护生物学中一个广泛应用的概念, 用于获得公众对保护行为的支持, 在生物多样性保护领域发挥着重要作用。但目前尚未见量化分析遴选和确定旗舰物种的公开报道, 致使学术界对旗舰物种的定义和使用相对主观, 缺乏科学依据。本文对旗舰物种的定义进行了梳理, 探讨了旗舰物种的内涵, 确定了旗舰物种的属性, 制定了遴选标准和量化遴选方法, 以便读者更好地理解和运用这一概念。目前旗舰物种的定义仍然局限在其社会学属性, 作者建议今后应加强其生物生态学属性。作者认为除了公众的关注度和认可度之外, 旗舰物种还应具备以下3个生态生物学和社会文化特征: (1)物种在当地的濒危程度及生存现状; (2)物种在当地生态系统中的重要性; (3)物种在当地民众中的影响力和认可度。基于此, 本文确定了表征旗舰物种社会文化属性和生态生物学属性的8个要素, 基于层次分析法提出了一种量化的旗舰物种遴选方法。该方法综合上述8个要素进行评判和计算分值, 以塔吉克斯坦境内分布的14种大型濒危哺乳动物的生态生物学属性和社会文化影响力为基础, 描述基于层次分析法遴选塔吉克斯坦哺乳类旗舰物种的方法和过程, 最终依据每个备选物种所得分值高低排序, 得到塔吉克斯坦旗舰物种的优先备选物种。本文首次提出了一种量化遴选旗舰物种的方法, 期望今后可基于该方法开发更加合理的旗舰物种遴选模型和算法。

关键词: 旗舰物种, 遴选标准, 层次分析法, 量化遴选, 保护生物学

Abstract

Aims: Flagship species is a widely used concept in conservation biology. Species designated as such have an important role in the conservation of biodiversity by inspiring interest in and motivating support for conservation activities. Despite their importance, flagship species are not chosen with the guidance of quantitative analysis. Instead, species are chosen for the role based upon subjective measures. We improved our understanding and proposed a more informed selection of flagship species by laying out a definition, discussing previous uses, and developing selection criteria based upon quantitative selection methods.

Method: We reviewed the history and development of the flagship species concept. We also determined flagship species should adhere to the following three main eco-biology and cultural selection criteria: (1) having legal protection; (2) having an important role for the maintenance of local ecosystems; (3) being well recognized and highly influential among the general public. On these bases, eight factors that characterize the socio-cultural and eco-biological attributes of flagship species were identified in this paper. After evaluating these factors using an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) decision analysis, a quantitative flagship species selection method was proposed. Specifically, the analytic hierarchy process consists of establishing a hierarchical structure, constructing a comparison matrix, and using consistency testing and a weight calculation. In this method, factors were integrated to calculate a score for each species in consideration, and the flagship can be selected based upon these scores.

Results: The eight factors that capture the key socio-cultural and eco-biological attributes of flagship species are: C1—the legal protection level, C2—whether that level rises to ‘endangered’, C3—whether the target species is endemic to the region or country, C4—trophic level, C5—niche breadth, C6—home range size, C7—recognition among the general public locally, and C8—international recognition. Using a hierarchical process, the weight coefficient of each factor was calculated according to a judgment matrix. After the weight coefficient of each factor was calculated, the score of each was obtained by multiplying the assigned value of each factor by its corresponding weight coefficient. Then the total score of each candidate species was obtained by summing the score value of the eight factors. For an empirical example, we consider 14 candidate species in Tajikistan. Flagship species can be selected based upon the quantitative evidence we report, with the highest score can being the preferred candidate but the specific number chosen to be flagship species being based on the experience of researchers and conservation needs.

Conclusion: The first quantitative method for the selection of flagship species was proposed. The principles and methods we discussed may also inspire further proposals of models and algorithms for flagship species selection. Although our proposed method relies on expert experience, it attempts to mollify the impact of this subjectivity by quantifying expert experience, weighting the coefficient of each selection factor, designing a qualitative and quantitative evaluation system, and ultimately proposing to select flagship species based upon a quantitative evaluation. Importantly, this method provided a rapid means to comprehensively compare candidate species in a certain ecosystem, country, or region, and provided a list of potential flagship species based upon an objective scientific evaluation, and allow it to be considered by researchers and conservation managers for further selection and judgment.

Key words: flagship species, selection criteria, analytic hierarchy process, quantitative selection, conservation biology

徐文轩, 徐峰, 马伟, 汪沐阳, 王建成, 杨维康 (2022) 基于层次分析法的旗舰物种遴选方法. 生物多样性, 30, 21536. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2021536.

Wenxuan Xu, Feng Xu, Wei Ma, Muyang Wang, Jiancheng Wang, Weikang Yang (2022) Proposing a quantitative selection method for determining flagship species based on an analytic hierarchy process. Biodiversity Science, 30, 21536. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2021536.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/10.17520/biods.2021536

https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/Y2022/V30/I8/21536

图/表 4

参考文献 59

[1]	Andelman SJ, Fagan WF (2000) Umbrellas and flagships: Efficient conservation surrogates or expensive mistakes? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 97, 5954-5959.
[2]	Barua M (2011) Mobilizing metaphors: The popular use of keystone, flagship and umbrella species concepts. Biodiversity and Conservation, 20, 1427-1440. DOI URL
[3]	Bowen-Jones E, Entwistle A (2002) Identifying appropriate flagship species: The importance of culture and local contexts. Oryx, 36, 189-195. DOI URL
[4]	Caro T, Engilis A, Fitzherbert E, Gardner T (2004) Preliminary assessment of the flagship species concept at a small scale. Animal Conservation, 7, 63-70. DOI URL
[5]	Caro TM, Girling S (2010) Conservation by Proxy: Indicator, Umbrella, Keystone, Flagship, and Other Surrogate Species. Island Press, Washington, DC.
[6]	Chen QQ, Li ML, Wang X, Qamer FM, Wang P, Yang JW, Wang MY, Yang WK (2019) Identification of potential ecological corridors for Marco Polo sheep in Taxkorgan Wildlife Nature Reserve, Xinjiang, China. Biodiversity Science, 27, 186-199. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
	[陈强强, 李美玲, 王旭, Qamer FM, 王鹏, 杨建伟, 汪沐阳, 杨维康 (2019) 新疆塔什库尔干野生动物自然保护区马可波罗盘羊潜在生态廊道识别. 生物多样性, 27, 186-199.] DOI
[7]	Chen X, Hu RJ, Jiang FQ, Wang YJ, Zhang JM (2015) Physical Geography of Arid Land in China. Science Press, Beijing. (in Chinese)
	[陈曦, 胡汝骥, 姜逢清, 王亚俊, 张建明 (2015) 中国干旱区自然地理. 科学出版社, 北京.]
[8]	Clucas B, McHugh K, Caro T (2008) Flagship species on covers of US conservation and nature magazines. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17, 1517-1528.
[9]	Cruz J, Windels SK, Thogmartin WE, Crimmins SM, Grim LH, Larson JH, Zuckerberg B (2019) Top-down effects of repatriating bald eagles hinder jointly recovering competitors. Journal of Animal Ecology, 88, 1054-1065. DOI URL
[10]	Ducarme F, Luque G, Courchamp F (2013) What are “charismatic species” for conservation biologists? BioSciences Master Reviews, 10, 1-8.
[11]	Entwistle A (2000) Flagships for the future? Oryx, 34, 239-240. DOI URL
[12]	Entwistle AC, Dunstone N. (1997) Priorities for the Conservation of Mammalian Diversity. Has the Panda Had Its Day? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[13]	Fleishman E, Murphy DD, Brussard PF (2000) A new method for selection of umbrella species for conservation planning. Ecological Applications, 10, 569-579. DOI URL
[14]	Garnett ST, Ainsworth GB, Zander KK (2018) Are we choosing the right flagships? The bird species and traits Australians find most attractive. PLoS ONE, 13, e0199253.
[15]	Heywood VH, Watson RT (1995) Global Biodiversity Assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[16]	Home R, Keller C, Nagel P, Bauer N, Hunziker M (2009) Selection criteria for flagship species by conservation organizations. Environmental Conservation, 36, 139-148. DOI URL
[17]	Jiang ZG, Jiang JP, Wang YZ, Zhang E, Zhang YY, Li LL, Xie F, Cai B, Cao L, Zheng GM, Dong L, Zhang ZW, Ding P, Luo ZH, Ding CQ, Ma ZJ, Tang SH, Cao WX, Li CW, Hu HJ, Ma Y, Wu Y, Wang YX, Zhou KY, Liu SY, Chen YY, Li JT, Feng ZJ, Wang Y, Wang B, Li C, Song XL, Cai L, Zang CX, Zeng Y, Meng ZB, Fang HX, Ping XG (2016) Red list of China’s vertebrates. Biodiversity Science, 24, 501-551. (in Chinese and in English)
	[蒋志刚, 江建平, 王跃招, 张鹗, 张雁云, 李立立, 谢锋, 蔡波, 曹亮, 郑光美, 董路, 张正旺, 丁平, 罗振华, 丁长青, 马志军, 汤宋华, 曹文宣, 李春旺, 胡慧建, 马勇, 吴毅, 王应祥, 周开亚, 刘少英, 陈跃英, 李家堂, 冯祚建, 王燕, 王斌, 李成, 宋雪琳, 蔡蕾, 臧春鑫, 曾岩, 孟智斌, 方红霞, 平晓鸽 (2016) 中国脊椎动物红色名录. 生物多样性, 24, 501-551.]
[18]	Johnsingh AJT, Joshua J (1994) Conserving Rajaji and Corbett National Parks—The elephant as a flagship species. Oryx, 28, 135-140. DOI URL
[19]	Joseph LN, Maloney RF, Watson JEM, Possingham HP (2011) Securing nonflagship species from extinction. Conservation Letters, 4, 324-325. DOI URL
[20]	Kalinkat G, Cabral JS, Darwall W, Ficetola GF, Fisher JL, Giling DP, Gosselin MP, Grossart HP, Jähnig SC, Jeschke JM, Knopf K, Larsen S, Onandia G, Pätzig M, Saul WC, Singer G, Sperfeld E, Jarić I (2017) Flagship umbrella species needed for the conservation of overlooked aquatic biodiversity. Conservation Biology, 31, 481-485. DOI PMID
[21]	Li BV, Pimm SL (2016) China’s endemic vertebrates sheltering under the protective umbrella of the giant panda. Conservation Biology, 30, 329-339. DOI URL
[22]	Li S, McShea WJ, Wang DJ, Gu XD, Zhang XF, Zhang L, Shen XL (2020) Retreat of large carnivores across the giant panda distribution range. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 4, 1327-1331.
[23]	Li WP, Bao H, Zhang MH (2017) Habitat analysis and design of potential ecological corridors for Amur tiger in Northeastern China. Acta Theriologica Sinica, 37, 317-326. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[李维平, 包衡, 张明海 (2017) 中国东北虎栖息地分析与潜在生态廊道构建. 兽类学报, 37, 317-326.]
[24]	Li XY, Xiao LY, Liang XC, Cheng C, Feng C, Zhao X, Liu YL, Bian XX, He B, Zhang CZ, Alexander JS, Xing R, Huang YH, Awangjiumei, Xierannima, Song DZ, Huang QW, Zhaxisange, Peng K, Yin H, Lian XM, Yang X, Li S, Shi XG, Yang CM, Lü Z (2019) Ongoing threats and the current status of snow leopard conservation in China. Biodiversity Science, 27, 932-942. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
	[李小雨, 肖凌云, 梁旭昶, 程琛, 冯琛, 赵翔, 刘炎林, 卞晓星, 何兵, 张常智, Alexander JS, 邢睿, 黄亚慧, 阿旺久美, 谢然尼玛, 宋大昭, 黄巧雯, 扎西桑俄, 彭奎, 尹杭, 连新明, 杨欣, 李晟, 施小刚, 杨创明, 吕植 (2019) 中国雪豹的威胁与保护现状. 生物多样性, 27, 932-942.] DOI
[25]	Li YZ, Dong X, Liu XH (2016) Habitat pattern dynamics of the Golden snub-nosed monkey in Baihe Nature Reserve, Minshan Mountains, China, over the past 40 years. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 36, 1803-1814. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[李艳忠, 董鑫, 刘雪华 (2016) 40年岷山地区白河自然保护区川金丝猴的生境格局动态. 生态学报, 36, 1803-1814.]
[26]	Ma JZ (2005) Flagship species and their functions. Man and Biosphare, (6), 1. (in Chinese)
	[马建章 (2005) 旗舰种及其作用. 人与生物圈, (6), 1.]
[27]	MacDonald EA, Hinks A, Weiss DJ, Dickman A, Burnham D, Sandom CJ, Malhi Y, MacDonald DW (2017) Identifying ambassador species for conservation marketing. Global Ecology and Conservation, 12, 204-214. DOI URL
[28]	McGowan J, Beaumont LJ, Smith RJ, Chauvenet alM, Harcourt R, Atkinson SC, Mittermeier JC, Esperon-Rodriguez M, Baumgartner JB, Beattie A, Dudaniec RY, Grenyer R, Nipperess DA, Stow A, Possingham HP (2020) Conservation prioritization can resolve the flagship species conundrum. Nature Communications, 11, 994. DOI URL
[29]	Montesino Pouzols F, Toivonen T, di Minin E, Kukkala AS, Kullberg P, Kuusterä J, Lehtomäki J, Tenkanen H, Verburg PH, Moilanen A (2014) Global protected area expansion is compromised by projected land-use and parochialism. Nature, 516, 383-386. DOI URL
[30]	Myers N (1983) A priority-ranking strategy for threatened species? The Environmentalist, 3, 97-120. DOI URL
[31]	Pillon Y, Chase MW (2007) Taxonomic exaggeration and its effects on orchid conservation. Conservation Biology, 21, 263-265. PMID
[32]	Qian J, Zhuang HF, Yang WK, Chen YF, Chen SL, Qu YH, Zhang YM, Yang YP, Wang YH (2021) Selecting flagship species to solve a biodiversity conservation conundrum. Plant Diversity, 42, 488-491. DOI URL
[33]	Ripple WJ, Chapron G, López-Bao JV, Durant SM, MacDonald DW, Lindsey PA, Bennett EL, Beschta RL, Bruskotter JT, Campos-Arceiz A, Corlett RT, Darimont CT, Dickman AJ, Dirzo R, Dublin HT, Estes JA, Everatt KT, Galetti M, Goswami VR, Hayward MW, Hedges S, Hoffmann M, Hunter LTB, Kerley GIH, Letnic M, Levi T, Maisels F, Morrison JC, Nelson MP, Newsome TM, Painter L, Pringle RM, Sandom CJ, Terborgh J, Treves A, van Valkenburgh B, Vucetich JA, Wirsing AJ, Wallach AD, Wolf C, Woodroffe R, Young H, Zhang L (2016) Saving the world’s terrestrial megafauna. BioScience, 66, 807-812. DOI URL
[34]	Runge CA, Withey JC, Naugle DE, Fargione JE, Helmstedt KJ, Larsen AE, Martinuzzi S, Tack JD (2019) Single species conservation as an umbrella for management of landscape threats. PLoS ONE, 14, e0209619.
[35]	Saaty TL (1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting. McGraw-Hill, New York.
[36]	Samways MJ, Stork NE, Cracraft J, Eeley HAC, Foster M, Lund G, Hilton-Taylor C (1995) Scales, planning and approaches to inventorying and monitoring. In: Global Biodiversity Assessment (eds Heywood VH, Watson RT), pp. 475-517. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[37]	Santarém F, Pereira P, Saarinen J, Brito JC (2019) New method to identify and map flagship fleets for promoting conservation and ecotourism. Biological Conservation, 229, 113-124. DOI URL
[38]	Sergio F, Newton I, Marchesi L, Pedrini P (2006) Ecologically justified charisma: preservation of top predators delivers biodiversity conservation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 43, 1049-1055. DOI URL
[39]	Shen XL, Li S, McShea WJ, Wang DJ, Yu JP, Shi XG, Dong W, Mi XC, Ma KP (2020) Effectiveness of management zoning designed for flagship species in protecting sympatric species. Conservation Biology, 34, 158-167. DOI URL
[40]	Shrader-Frechette KS, McCoy ED (1993) Method in Ecology:Strategies for Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[41]	Simberloff D (1998) Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: Is single-species management passé in the landscape era? Biological Conservation, 83, 247-257. DOI URL
[42]	Smith RJ, Veríssimo D, Isaac NJB, Jones KE (2012) Identifying Cinderella species: Uncovering mammals with conservation flagship appeal. Conservation Letters, 5, 205-212. DOI URL
[43]	Sun JH, Xie ZS, Chen H, Huang H, Li JY (2018) Assessment of geological environment carrying capacity of Beichuan County based on AHP. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 38, 125-128, 2. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[孙金辉, 谢忠胜, 陈欢, 黄海, 李金洋 (2018) 基于层次分析法的北川县环境地质承载力评价. 水土保持通报, 38, 125-128, 2.]
[44]	Thomas-Walters L, Raihani JN (2017) Supporting conservation: The roles of flagship species and identifiable victims. Conservation Letters, 10, 581-587. DOI URL
[45]	Tortoise & Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group (1996) Testudo horsfieldii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 1996. e.T21651A9306759. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.1996.RLTS.T21651A9306759.en. (accessed on 2019-05-10)
[46]	van Vuuren BJ, Woolaver L, Goodman SM (2012) Genetic population structure in the boky-boky (Carnivora: Eupleridae), a conservation flagship species in the dry deciduous forests of central western Madagascar. Animal Conservation, 15, 164-173. DOI URL
[47]	Vargas RV (2010) Using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to select and prioritize projects in a portfolio. PMI Global Congress 2010-North America, Washington, DC. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
[48]	Veríssimo D, Fraser I, Girão W, Campos AA, Smith RJ, MacMillan DC (2014a) Evaluating conservation flagships and flagship fleets. Conservation Letters, 7, 263-270. DOI URL
[49]	Veríssimo D, Fraser I, Groombridge J, Bristol R, MacMillan DC (2009) Birds as tourism flagship species: A case study of tropical islands. Animal Conservation, 12, 549-558. DOI URL
[50]	Verissimo D, MacMillan DC, Smith RJ (2011) Toward a systematic approach for identifying conservation flagships. Conservation Letters, 4, 1-8. DOI URL
[51]	Veríssimo D, Pongiluppi T, Santos MCM, Develey PF, Fraser I, Smith RJ, Macmilan DC (2014b) Using a systematic approach to select flagship species for bird conservation. Conservation Biology, 28, 269-277. DOI URL
[52]	Veríssimo D, Vaughan G, Ridout M, Waterman C, MacMillan D, Smith RJ (2017) Increased conservation marketing effort has major fundraising benefits for even the least popular species. Biological Conservation, 211, 95-101. DOI URL
[53]	Walpole MJ, Leader-Williams N (2002) Tourism and flagship species in conservation. Biodiversity & Conservation, 11, 543-547.
[54]	Wei FW, Costanza R, Dai Q, Stoeckl N, Gu XD, Farber S, Nie YG, Kubiszewski I, Hu YB, Swaisgood R, Yang XY, Bruford M, Chen YP, Voinov A, Qi DW, Owen M, Yan L, Kenny DC, Zhang ZJ, Hou R, Jiang SW, Liu HB, Zhan XJ, Zhang L, Yang B, Zhao LJ, Zheng XG, Zhou WL, Wen YL, Gao HR, Zhang W (2018) The value of ecosystem services from giant panda reserves. Current Biology, 28, 2174-2180. DOI URL
[55]	Western D (1987) Africa’s elephants and rhinos: Flagships in crisis. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2, 343-346. DOI URL
[56]	Williams PH, Burgess ND, Rahbek C (2000) Flagship species, ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in sub-Saharan Africa. Animal Conservation, 3, 249-260. DOI URL
[57]	Xiang ZF, Yu Y, Yang M, Yang JY, Niao MY, Li M (2011) Does flagship species tourism benefit conservation? A case study of the golden snub-nosed monkey in Shennongjia National Nature Reserve. Chinese Science Bulletin, 56, 2553-2558. DOI URL
[58]	Xu SB (1988) Practical Decision-Making Method:Principle of Analytic Hierarchy Process. Tianjin University Press, Tianjin. (in Chinese)
	[许树柏 (1988) 实用决策方法: 层次分析法原理. 天津大学出版社, 天津.]
[59]	Zhao J (2000) Mathematical Modeling and Mathematical Experiments. Higher Education Press, Beijing. (in Chinese)
	[赵静 (2000) 数学建模与数学实验. 高等教育出版社, 北京.]

序号 No.	要素名称(C) Selection factors	赋值参考依据 Evaluation basis	参考分值(S) Reference value
1	目标物种在当地的保护等级 The protection level of the target species	目标物种在所在国家或地区是否被列为国家重点(一级或二级)保护动物, 分为国家一级保护动物, 国家二级保护动物, 非保护动物3个级别。 Whether the target species is listed as national key (1st level or 2nd level) protected animal in the country or region; the species were classified into three levels: 1st class national protected animal, 2nd class national protected animal, and non-protected animal.	1?3
2	所在国或地区目标物种的濒危等级* The endangered status of the target species	依据IUCN评估标准, 物种濒危程度由高到低分为绝灭、野外绝灭、极危、濒危、易危、近危、无危7个级别 According to the IUCN evaluation criteria, the endangered species were classified into seven levels: extinct (EX), extinct in the wild (EW), critically endangered (CR), endangered (EN), vulnerable (VU), near threatened (NT), and least concern (LC)	1?8
3	目标物种是否为该国家或地区特有物种 Whether the target species is endemic to the country or region	分为是特有物种和不是特有物种2个级别 Two levels: endemic species and non-endemic species	1?2
4	目标物种的营养级 Trophic levels of the target species	分为植食性动物、杂食性动物、肉食性动物3个级别 Three levels: herbivores, omnivores and carnivores	1?3
5	目标物种栖息地生态位宽度 Niche breadth of target species’ habitat	按照目标物种分布区域的生境类型分类, 分为单一栖息地类型和多种栖息地类型2个级别 According to the habitat type of the target species distribution area, it can be divided into two levels: single habitat type and multiple habitat types	1?2
6	目标物种的家域面积 The home range size of the target species	分为3个级别: 小于50 km²、50-100 km²和大于100 km² Three levels: < 50 km², 50-100 km², and > 100 km²	1?3
7	目标物种在当在文化习俗或历史传说中是否具有特殊含义 Whether the target species has a particular meaning in the culture or historical lore	分为是和否两个级别 Two levels: Yes and No	1?2
8	目标物种是否为国际上有影响力的明星物种和受关注物种 Whether the target species is internationally influential and noteworthy	分为是和否两个级别 Two levels: Yes and No	1?2

序号 No.	要素名称(C) Selection factors	赋值参考依据 Evaluation basis	参考分值(S) Reference value
1	目标物种在当地的保护等级 The protection level of the target species	目标物种在所在国家或地区是否被列为国家重点(一级或二级)保护动物, 分为国家一级保护动物, 国家二级保护动物, 非保护动物3个级别。 Whether the target species is listed as national key (1st level or 2nd level) protected animal in the country or region; the species were classified into three levels: 1st class national protected animal, 2nd class national protected animal, and non-protected animal.	1?3
2	所在国或地区目标物种的濒危等级* The endangered status of the target species	依据IUCN评估标准, 物种濒危程度由高到低分为绝灭、野外绝灭、极危、濒危、易危、近危、无危7个级别 According to the IUCN evaluation criteria, the endangered species were classified into seven levels: extinct (EX), extinct in the wild (EW), critically endangered (CR), endangered (EN), vulnerable (VU), near threatened (NT), and least concern (LC)	1?8
3	目标物种是否为该国家或地区特有物种 Whether the target species is endemic to the country or region	分为是特有物种和不是特有物种2个级别 Two levels: endemic species and non-endemic species	1?2
4	目标物种的营养级 Trophic levels of the target species	分为植食性动物、杂食性动物、肉食性动物3个级别 Three levels: herbivores, omnivores and carnivores	1?3
5	目标物种栖息地生态位宽度 Niche breadth of target species’ habitat	按照目标物种分布区域的生境类型分类, 分为单一栖息地类型和多种栖息地类型2个级别 According to the habitat type of the target species distribution area, it can be divided into two levels: single habitat type and multiple habitat types	1?2
6	目标物种的家域面积 The home range size of the target species	分为3个级别: 小于50 km²、50-100 km²和大于100 km² Three levels: < 50 km², 50-100 km², and > 100 km²	1?3
7	目标物种在当在文化习俗或历史传说中是否具有特殊含义 Whether the target species has a particular meaning in the culture or historical lore	分为是和否两个级别 Two levels: Yes and No	1?2
8	目标物种是否为国际上有影响力的明星物种和受关注物种 Whether the target species is internationally influential and noteworthy	分为是和否两个级别 Two levels: Yes and No	1?2

	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7	C8
C1	1	2	4	5	6	7	8	9
C2	1/2	1	3	4	5	6	7	8
C3	1/4	1/3	1	2	3	4	5	6
C4	1/5	1/4	1/2	1	2	3	4	5
C5	1/6	1/5	1/3	1/2	1	2	3	4
C6	1/7	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2	3
C7	1/8	1/7	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2
C8	1/9	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1

	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7	C8
C1	1	2	4	5	6	7	8	9
C2	1/2	1	3	4	5	6	7	8
C3	1/4	1/3	1	2	3	4	5	6
C4	1/5	1/4	1/2	1	2	3	4	5
C5	1/6	1/5	1/3	1/2	1	2	3	4
C6	1/7	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2	3
C7	1/8	1/7	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2
C8	1/9	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1

中文名 Chinese name	学名 Scientific name	遴选标准 Selection criteria								分值 Values
中文名 Chinese name	学名 Scientific name	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7	C8	分值 Values
赤羊	Ovis orientalis	2	8	2	1	2	2	2	2	2.35
捻角山羊	Capra falconeri	3	6	2	1	2	2	2	2	2.32
雪豹	Panthera uncia	3	6	1	3	2	3	2	2	2.26
盘羊	Ovis ammon	2	4	1	1	2	2	2	2	1.96
鹅喉羚	Gazella subgutturosa	2	8	1	1	2	2	1	1	1.60
猞猁	Lynx lynx	2	6	1	3	2	3	1	1	1.56
棕熊	Ursus arctos	2	6	1	3	2	3	1	1	1.56
水獭	Lutra lutra	2	6	1	3	1	1	1	1	1.47
北山羊	Capra sibirica	2	1	1	1	2	2	2	1	1.42
狼	Canis lupus	1	1	1	3	2	3	2	1	1.40
马鹿	Cervus elaphus	2	1	1	1	1	2	2	1	1.37
豺	Cuon alpinus	3	1	1	3	2	3	1	1	1.33
亚洲胡狼	Canis aureus	1	1	1	3	2	3	1	1	1.14
赤狐	Vulpes vulpes	1	1	1	3	2	2	1	1	1.12

基于层次分析法的旗舰物种遴选方法

Proposing a quantitative selection method for determining flagship species based on an analytic hierarchy process

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 59

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7	C8
C1	1	2	4	5	6	7	8	9
C2	1/2	1	3	4	5	6	7	8
C3	1/4	1/3	1	2	3	4	5	6
C4	1/5	1/4	1/2	1	2	3	4	5
C5	1/6	1/5	1/3	1/2	1	2	3	4
C6	1/7	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2	3
C7	1/8	1/7	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2
C8	1/9	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1

	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7	C8
C1	1	2	4	5	6	7	8	9
C2	1/2	1	3	4	5	6	7	8
C3	1/4	1/3	1	2	3	4	5	6
C4	1/5	1/4	1/2	1	2	3	4	5
C5	1/6	1/5	1/3	1/2	1	2	3	4
C6	1/7	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2	3
C7	1/8	1/7	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2
C8	1/9	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1

[1]	刘荆州, 钱易鑫, 张燕雪丹, 崔凤. 基于潜在迪利克雷分布(LDA)模型的旗舰物种范式研究进展与启示[J]. 生物多样性, 2024, 32(4): 23439-.
[2]	顾伯健, 王放. 野生绿孔雀生态学及保护生物学研究进展[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(11): 1554-1564.
[3]	庄文颖,李熠,郑焕娣,曾昭清,王新存. 中国非地衣型大型子囊菌受威胁现状评估及致危因素[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(1): 26-40.
[4]	单章建,赵莉娜,杨宇昌,谢丹,覃海宁. 中国植物受威胁等级评估系统概述[J]. 生物多样性, 2019, 27(12): 1352-1363.
[5]	徐诗涛, 宋希强, 凌鹏, 陈元君, 任明迅. 日本演习林制度对中国生物多样性保护与国家公园建设的启示[J]. 生物多样性, 2018, 26(1): 96-104.
[6]	商辉, 严岳鸿. 自然杂交与生物多样性保护[J]. 生物多样性, 2017, 25(6): 683-688.
[7]	张健. 大数据时代的生物多样性科学与宏生态学[J]. 生物多样性, 2017, 25(4): 355-363.
[8]	周喜乐, 张宪春, 孙久琼, 严岳鸿. 中国石松类和蕨类植物的多样性与地理分布[J]. 生物多样性, 2016, 24(1): 102-107.
[9]	黄卫昌, 周翔宇, 倪子轶, 邵丽. 基于标本和分布信息评估中国虾脊兰属植物的濒危状况[J]. 生物多样性, 2015, 23(4): 493-498.
[10]	宋大昭, 王卜平, 蒋进原, 万绍平, 崔士明, 王天明, 冯利民. 山西晋中庆城林场华北豹及其主要猎物种群的红外相机监测[J]. 生物多样性, 2014, 22(6): 733-736.
[11]	张健, 陈圣宾, 陈彬, 杜彦君, 黄晓磊, 潘绪斌, 张强. 公众科学: 整合科学研究、生态保护和公众参与[J]. 生物多样性, 2013, 21(6): 738-749.
[12]	王利松, 赵莉娜, 覃海宁. 基于标本信息初评囊瓣芹属六个种的绝灭风险[J]. 生物多样性, 2012, 20(6): 761-768.
[13]	陈静, 张保卫, 马克平, 蒋志刚. 中国保护生物学研究现状的文献计量学分析[J]. 生物多样性, 2009, 17(4): 423-429.
[14]	李春旺, 蒋志刚, 张恩权, 古远. 保护行为学: 正在兴起的保护生物学分支学科[J]. 生物多样性, 2007, 15(3): 312-318.
[15]	李义明. 种群生存力分析：准确性和保护应用[J]. 生物多样性, 2003, 11(4): 340-350.

	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7	C8
C1	1	2	4	5	6	7	8	9
C2	1/2	1	3	4	5	6	7	8
C3	1/4	1/3	1	2	3	4	5	6
C4	1/5	1/4	1/2	1	2	3	4	5
C5	1/6	1/5	1/3	1/2	1	2	3	4
C6	1/7	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2	3
C7	1/8	1/7	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2
C8	1/9	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1

	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7	C8
C1	1	2	4	5	6	7	8	9
C2	1/2	1	3	4	5	6	7	8
C3	1/4	1/3	1	2	3	4	5	6
C4	1/5	1/4	1/2	1	2	3	4	5
C5	1/6	1/5	1/3	1/2	1	2	3	4
C6	1/7	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2	3
C7	1/8	1/7	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2
C8	1/9	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1

	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7	C8
C1	1	2	4	5	6	7	8	9
C2	1/2	1	3	4	5	6	7	8
C3	1/4	1/3	1	2	3	4	5	6
C4	1/5	1/4	1/2	1	2	3	4	5
C5	1/6	1/5	1/3	1/2	1	2	3	4
C6	1/7	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2	3
C7	1/8	1/7	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2
C8	1/9	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1

	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7	C8
C1	1	2	4	5	6	7	8	9
C2	1/2	1	3	4	5	6	7	8
C3	1/4	1/3	1	2	3	4	5	6
C4	1/5	1/4	1/2	1	2	3	4	5
C5	1/6	1/5	1/3	1/2	1	2	3	4
C6	1/7	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2	3
C7	1/8	1/7	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	2
C8	1/9	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/3	1/2	1