Representation Targets Shape the Spatial Requirements for Conserving Apiomerus and Zelus (Reduviidae) across the Americas

Abstract Systematic conservation planning translates biodiversity representation objectives into spatially explicit conservation networks. The spatial requirements associated with alternative representation targets may vary among species according to the geographic extent and spatial overlap of their documented distributions. This study evaluated the spatial representation requirements of 181 species of the assassin-bug genera Apiomerus and Zelus across the Americas using occurrence-based systematic conservation prioritization. A total of 11,329 georeferenced occurrence records were compiled from taxonomic literature and biodiversity databases, yielding 10,327 unique species-coordinate records after duplicate removal. Occurrences were assigned to 50 × 50 km planning units, and minimum-set optimization was performed for six representation targets: 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%, 75%, and 100% of each species’ occupied planning units. Species occupied between one and 507 planning units; 16 species (8.84%) occupied a single planning unit, whereas 31 (17.13%) occupied no more than two. The number of selected planning units increased from 118 at the 10% target to 2,592 at 100%. All 181 species achieved their specified target in every scenario. Mean realized representation exceeded nominal targets at lower target levels, increasing from 29.45% at 10% to 100% at 100%. Species with few occupied planning units were more strongly affected by the discrete planning framework, whereas widespread species had more spatial alternatives for representation. Increasing representation targets progressively expanded the minimum-set network, demonstrating how species distributional extent and complementarity jointly determine spatial conservation requirements. Implications for insect conservation Systematic conservation planning can quantify how alternative representation targets translate into spatial requirements for insect conservation. Considering target levels, species distributional extent, and complementarity can help identify spatially efficient networks while highlighting species for which few documented spatial alternatives are available.