Red Listing lichenized fungi: best practices and future prospects

Abstract According to International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) guidelines, all species must be assessed against all criteria during the Red Listing process. For organismal groups that are diverse and understudied, assessors face considerable challenges in assembling evidence due to difficulty in applying definitions of key terms used in the guidelines. Challenges also arise because of uncertainty in population sizes (Criteria A, C, D) and distributions (Criteria A2/3/4c, B). Lichens, which are often small, difficult to identify, or overlooked during biodiversity inventories, are one such group for which specific difficulties arise in applying Red List criteria. Here, we offer approaches and examples that address challenges in completing Red List assessments for lichens in a rapidly changing arena of data availability and analysis strategies. While assessors still contend with far from perfect information about individual species, we propose practical solutions for completing robust assessments given the currently available knowledge of individual lichen life-histories.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Lichenologist
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0024282924000355
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Lichen and fungal ecology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.20

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Red Listing lichenized fungi: best practices and future prospects

María José Chesa, Gesa von Hirschheydt, Nathan Chrismas, Yoshihito Ohmura et al.
7 citations
The Lichenologist
Lichen and fungal ecology
7.20
article

Red Listing lichenized fungi: best practices and future prospects

María José Chesa, Gesa von Hirschheydt, Nathan Chrismas, Yoshihito Ohmura, Roger Rosentreter, Violeta Atienza, Rebecca Yahr, Manuela Dal Forno, Rikke Reese Næsborg, Polina Degtjarenko, Tiina Randlane, Daphne Stone, Renato Andrés García, Siljo Joseph, María de los Ángeles Herrera‐Campos, R. Troy McMullin, N. Howe, Diego Simijaca, Bibiana Moncada, James C. Lendemer, E.V. Larsen, Andrea Michlig, Frank Bungartz, André Aptroot, Jessica L. Allen, Christoph Scheidegger, Pradeep Kumar Divakar, Sergio Pérez‐Ortega, Julianna Paulsen, L.B. Sparrius, Amanda Chandler, Frances Anderson, Eli Balderas, Niles Borukhiyah, Francibelk Roa-García
article en
7 citations

Abstract

Abstract According to International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) guidelines, all species must be assessed against all criteria during the Red Listing process. For organismal groups that are diverse and understudied, assessors face considerable challenges in assembling evidence due to difficulty in applying definitions of key terms used in the guidelines. Challenges also arise because of uncertainty in population sizes (Criteria A, C, D) and distributions (Criteria A2/3/4c, B). Lichens, which are often small, difficult to identify, or overlooked during biodiversity inventories, are one such group for which specific difficulties arise in applying Red List criteria. Here, we offer approaches and examples that address challenges in completing Red List assessments for lichens in a rapidly changing arena of data availability and analysis strategies. While assessors still contend with far from perfect information about individual species, we propose practical solutions for completing robust assessments given the currently available knowledge of individual lichen life-histories.

The LichenologistVol. 56(6)
Boise State University (US), Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES), Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (BR), Charles Darwin Foundation (EC), Botanical Research Institute of Texas (US), Oregon State University (US), California Polytechnic State University (US), Eastern Washington University (US), Universitat de València (ES), George Mason University (US), Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (GB), University of Concepción (CL), Daugavpils University (LV), Nova Scotia Hospital (CA), Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (CH), Santa Barbara Botanic Garden (US), National University of the Northeast (AR), Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas (CO), University of California San Diego (US), Botanic Garden and Botanical Museum Berlin (DE), New York State Museum (US), Canadian Museum of Nature (CA), Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad (EC), Real Jardín Botánico (ES), Royal Dutch Society for the Promotion of Dentistry (NL), National Museum of Nature and Science (JP), National University of Avellaneda (AR), Arizona State University (US), University of Tartu (EE), Institut d'Estudis Catalans (ES), University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US), Freie Universität Berlin (DE), Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX), Kerala Forest Research Institute (IN)
Eastern Washington University, Mohamed bin Zayed Species Conservation Fund
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Lichen and fungal ecology
7.20
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.