• Open Access

Conservation biogeography of the Antarctic

Authors

  • Aleks Terauds,

    Corresponding author
    1. Australian Antarctic Division, Department of the Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Kingston, Tas., Australia
    • Centre for Invasion Biology, Department of Botany and Zoology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland, South Africa
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Steven L. Chown,

    1. Centre for Invasion Biology, Department of Botany and Zoology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland, South Africa
    Current affiliation:
    1. School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Fraser Morgan,

    1. Landcare Research New Zealand, Private Bag 92170, Auckland Mail Centre, Auckland, New Zealand
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Helen J. Peat,

    1. British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, Cambridge, UK
    Search for more papers by this author
  • David J. Watts,

    1. Australian Antarctic Division, Department of the Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Kingston, Tas., Australia
    Current affiliation:
    1. CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Hobart, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Harry Keys,

    1. Department of Conservation, Turangi, New Zealand
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Peter Convey,

    1. British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, Cambridge, UK
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Dana M. Bergstrom

    1. Australian Antarctic Division, Department of the Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Kingston, Tas., Australia
    Search for more papers by this author

Correspondence: Aleks Terauds, Australian Antarctic Division, Terrestrial and Nearshore Ecosystems, Channel Highway, Kingston, Tasmania 7050, Australia.

E-mail: Aleks.Terauds@gmail.com

Abstract

Aim

To present a synthesis of past biogeographic analyses and a new approach based on spatially explicit biodiversity information for the Antarctic region to identify biologically distinct areas in need of representation in a protected area network.

Location

Antarctica and the sub-Antarctic.

Methods

We reviewed and summarized published biogeographic studies of the Antarctic. We then developed a biogeographic classification for terrestrial conservation planning in Antarctica by combining the most comprehensive source of Antarctic biodiversity data available with three spatial frameworks: (1) a 200-km grid, (2) a set of areas based on physical parameters known as the environmental domains of Antarctica and (3) expert-defined bioregions. We used these frameworks, or combinations thereof, together with multivariate techniques to identify biologically distinct areas.

Results

Early studies of continental Antarctica typically described broad bioregions, with the Antarctic Peninsula usually identified as biologically distinct from continental Antarctica; later studies suggested a more complex biogeography. Increasing complexity also characterizes the sub-Antarctic and marine realms, with differences among studies often attributable to the focal taxa. Using the most comprehensive terrestrial data available and by combining the groups formed by the environmental domains and expert-defined bioregions, we were able to identify 15 biologically distinct, ice-free, Antarctic Conservation Biogeographic Regions (ACBRs), encompassing the continent and close lying islands.

Main conclusions

Ice-free terrestrial Antarctica comprises several distinct bioregions that are not fully represented in the current Antarctic Specially Protected Area network. Biosecurity measures between these ACBRs should also be developed to prevent biotic homogenization in the region.

Ancillary