Ackerly, D. D., Schwilk, D. W. & Webb, C. O. Niche evolution and adaptive radiation: Testing the order of trait divergence. Ecology 87, 50–61 (2006).
Google Scholar
Somaweera, R. et al. The ecological importance of crocodylians: Towards evidence-based justification for their conservation. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 95, 936–959. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12594 (2020).
Google Scholar
Swain, S. et al. Anthropogenic influence on the physico-chemical parameters of Dhamra estuary and adjoining coastal water of the Bay of Bengal. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 162, 111826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111826 (2021).
Google Scholar
IUCN. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2022.1. www.iucnredlist.org (2022).
Markich, S. J. & Jeffree, R. A. (eds) The Finnis River. A Natural Laboratory of Mining Impact—Past, Present and Future (Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, 2002).
Vieira, L. M. et al. Mercury and methyl mercury ratios in caimans (Caiman crocodilus yacare) from the Pantanal area, Brazil. J. Environ. Monitor. 13, 280–287. https://doi.org/10.1039/c0em00561d (2011).
Google Scholar
Quintela, F. M. et al. Arsenic, lead and cadmium concentrations in caudal crests of the yacare caiman (Caiman yacare) from Brazilian Pantanal. Sci. Total Environ. 707, 135479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135479 (2020).
Google Scholar
Briggs-Gonzalez, V. S., Basille, M., Cherkiss, M. S. & Mazzotti, F. J. American crocodiles (Crocodylus acutus) as restoration bioindicators in the Florida Everglades. PLoS ONE 16, e0250510. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250510 (2021).
Google Scholar
Grigg, G. & Kirshner, D. Biology and Evolution of Crocodylians (CSIRO Publishing, 2015).
Google Scholar
Subalusky, A. L., Fitzgerald, L. A. & Smith, L. L. Ontogenetic niche shifts in the American alligator establish functional connectivity between aquatic systems. Biol. Conserv. 142, 1507–1514 (2009).
Google Scholar
Villamarín, F., Escobedo-Galván, A. H., Siroski, P. & Magnusson, W. E. Geographic distribution, habitat, reproduction, and conservation status of crocodilians in the Americas. In Conservation Genetics of New World Crocodilians (eds Zucoloto, R. B. et al.) (Springer, 2021).
Albert, C., Luque, G. M. & Courchamp, F. The twenty most charismatic species. PLoS ONE 13, e0199149. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199149 (2018).
Google Scholar
Verissimo, D., MacMillan, D. C. & Smith, R. J. Toward a systematic approach for identifying conservation flag ships. Conserv. Lett. 4, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00151.x (2011).
Google Scholar
Fleishman, E., Murphy, D. D. & Brussard, P. F. A new method for selection of umbrella species for conservation planning. Ecol. Appl. 10, 569–579 (2000).
Google Scholar
Pressey, R. L., Cabeza, M., Watts, M. E., Cowling, R. M. & Wilson, K. A. Conservation planning in a changing world. Trents Ecol. Evol. 2211, 583–592 (2007).
Google Scholar
Petchey, O. L. & Gaston, K. J. Functional diversity: Back to basics and looking forward. Ecol. Lett. 9, 741–758. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00924.x (2006).
Google Scholar
Magurran, A. E. Measuring Biological Diversity 2nd edn. (Blackwell Publishing, 2004).
Campos, F. S., Lourenço-de-Moraes, R., Llorente, G. A. & Solé, M. Cost-effective conservation of amphibian ecology and evolution. Sci. Adv. 36, e1602929 (2017).
Google Scholar
Dietz, M. S., Belote, R. T., Aplet, G. H. & Aycrigg, J. L. The world’s largest wilderness protection network after 50 years: An assessment of ecological system representation in the US National Wilderness Preservation System. Biol. Conserv. 184, 431–438 (2015).
Google Scholar
UNEP-WCMC, IUCN. Protected Planet Report 2016 (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, 2016).
Jones, K. R. et al. One-third of global protected land is under intense human pressure. Science 360, 788–791. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9565 (2018).
Google Scholar
Rodrigues, A. et al. Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature 428, 640–643. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02422 (2004).
Google Scholar
Ladle, R. J. & Whittaker, R. J. Conservation Biogeography 301 (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011).
Google Scholar
Dinerstein, E. et al. A “global safety net” to reverse biodiversity loss and stabilize Earth’s climate. Sci. Adv. 6, 2824 (2020).
Google Scholar
Lourenço-de-Moraes, R. et al. No more trouble: An economic strategy to protect taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity of continental turtles. Biol. Conserv. 261, 109241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109241 (2021).
Google Scholar
Brochu, C. A. Phylogenetic relationships of Necrosuchus ionensis Simpson, 1937 and the early history of caimanines. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 163, 228–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00716.x (2011).
Google Scholar
Buffetaut, E. Systématique, origine et evolution des Gavialidae sud-américains. In Phylógenie et Paléobiogeography: Livre Jubilaire en l´honneur de Robert Hoffstetter (ed. Buffetaut, E.) 127–140 (Géobios, 1982).
Griffith, P., Lang, J. W., Turvey, S. T. & Gumbs, R. Data from: Using functional traits to identify conservation priorities for the world’s crocodylians. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6645415 (2022).
Griffith, P., Lang, J. W., Turvey, S. T. & Gumbs, R. Using functional traits to identify conservation priorities for the world’s crocodylians. Funct. Ecol. 37, 112. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.14140 (2022).
Google Scholar
Milian-Garcia, Y. et al. Evolutionary history of Cuban crocodiles Crocodylus rhombifer and Crocodylus acutus inferred from multilocus markers. J. Exp. Zool. A 315, 358–375. https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.683 (2011).
Google Scholar
Rodrıguez-Soberon, R., Ross, P. & Seal, U. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (2000).
Milián-García, Y., Ramos-Targarona, R., Pérez-Fleitas, E., Espinosa-López, G. & Russello, M. A. Genetic evidence of hybridization between the critically endangered Cuban crocodile and the American crocodile: Implications for population history and in situ/ex situ conservation. Heridity 114, 272–280 (2015).
Google Scholar
Pacheco-Sierra, G., Gompert, Z., Dominguez-Laso, J. & Vazquez-Dominguez, E. Genetic and morphological evidence of a geographically widespread hybrid zone between two crocodile species, Crocodylus acutus and Crocodylus moreletii. Mol. Ecol. 25, 3484–3498. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13694 (2016).
Google Scholar
Borges, V. S. et al. Evolutionary significant units within populations of Neotropical broad-snouted caimans (Caiman latirostris, Daudin, 1802). J. Herpetol. 52, 282–288 (2018).
Google Scholar
Palmer, M. L. & Mazzoti, F. J. Structure of everglades alligator holes. Wetlands 24, 115–122 (2004).
Google Scholar
Marques, T. S. et al. Intraspecific isotopic niche variation in broad-snouted caiman (Caiman latirostris). Isot. Environ. Health Stud. 49, 325–335 (2013).
Google Scholar
Mascarenhas-Junior, P. B. et al. Conflicts between humans and crocodilians in urban areas across Brazil: A new approach to support management and conservation. Ethnobiol. Conserv. 10, 19. https://doi.org/10.15451/ec2021-12-10.37-1-19 (2021).
Google Scholar
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., Fonseca, G. A. & Kent, J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403, 853–858 (2000).
Google Scholar
Ribeiro, M. C., Metzger, J. P., Martensen, A. C., Ponzoni, F. J. & Hirota, M. M. The Brazilian Atlantic Forest: How much is left, and how is the remaining forest distributed? Implications for conservation. Biol. Conserv. 142, 1141–1153 (2009).
Google Scholar
Filogonio, R., Assis, V. B., Passos, L. F. & Coutinho, M. E. Distribution of populations of broad-snouted caiman (Caiman latirostris, Daudin 1802, Alligatoridae) in the São Francisco River basin, Brazil. Braz. J. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-69842010000500007 (2010).
Google Scholar
Marques, J. F. et al. Fires dynamics in the Pantanal: Impacts of anthropogenic activities and climate change. J. Environ. Manag. 299, 113586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113586 (2021).
Google Scholar
Mataveli, G. A. V. et al. 2020 Pantanal’s widespread fire: Short- and long-term implications for biodiversity and conservation. Biodivers. Conserv. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-021-02243-2 (2021).
Google Scholar
Ripple, W. J. et al. Status and ecological effects of the world’s largest carnivores. Science 343, 124–148 (2014).
Google Scholar
Estes, J. A. et al. Trophic downgrading of planet earth. Science 333, 301–306 (2011).
Google Scholar
Canning, A. & Death, R. Trophic cascade direction and flow determine network flow stability. Ecol. Model. 355, 18–23 (2017).
Google Scholar
Wang, Y. Q., Zhu, W. Q., Huang, L., Zhou, K. Y. & Wang, R. P. Genetic diversity of Chinese alligator (Alligator sinensis) revealed by AFLP analysis: An implication on the management of captive conservation. Biodivers. Conserv. 15, 2945–2955 (2006).
Google Scholar
Zhai, T. et al. Effects of population bottleneck and balancing selection on the chinese alligator are revealed by locus-specific characterization of MHC genes. Sci. Rep. 7, 5549. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05640-2 (2017).
Google Scholar
Sharma, S. P. et al. Microsatellite analysis reveals low genetic diversity in managed populations of the critically endangered gharial (Gavialis gangeticus) in India. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85201-w (2021).
Google Scholar
Nair, T. & Krishna, Y. C. Vertebrate fauna of the Chambal River basin, with emphasis on the National Chambal Sanctuary, India. J. Threat. Taxa 5, 3620–3641 (2013).
Google Scholar
Sharma, R. & Singh, L. Status of mugger crocodile (Crocodylus palustris) in National Chambal Sanctuary after thirty years and its implications on conservation of Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus). Zoo’s Print 30, 9–16 (2015).
Sinhg, H. & Rao, R. Status, threats and conservation challenges to key aquatic fauna (crocodile and dolphin) in National Chambal Sanctuary, India. Aquat. Ecosyst. Health Manag. 20, 59–70 (2017).
Google Scholar
UNEP-WCMC, IUCN. Protected Planet: The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) (UNEP-WCMC, IUCN, 2021).
Smolensky, N. L., Hurtado, L. A. & Fitzgerald, L. A. DNA barcoding of Cameroon samples enhances our knowledge on the distributional limits of putative species of Osteolaemus (African dwarf crocodiles). Conserv. Genet. 16, 235–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-014-0639-3 (2014).
Google Scholar
Shirley, M. H., Villanova, V. L., Vliet, K. A. & Austin, J. D. Genetic barcoding facilitates captive and wild management of three cryptic African crocodile species complexes. Anim. Conserv. 18, 322–330 (2015).
Google Scholar
Shirley, M. H., Carr, A. N., Nestler, J. H., Vliet, K. A. & Brochu, C. A. Systematic revision of the living African Slender-snouted Crocodiles (Mecistops Gray, 1844). Zootaxa 4504, 151–193. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4504.2.1 (2018).
Google Scholar
Murray, C. M., Russo, P., Zorrilla, A. & McMahan, C. D. Divergent morphology among populations of the New Guinea crocodile, Crocodylus novaeguineae (Schmidt, 1928): Diagnosis of an independent lineage and description of a new species. Copeia 107, 517–523. https://doi.org/10.1643/CG-19-240 (2019).
Google Scholar
Hekkala, E. H. et al. An ancient icon reveals new mysteries: Mummy DNA resurrects a cryptic species within the Nile crocodile. Mol. Ecol. 20, 4199–4215 (2011).
Google Scholar
Mobaraki, A. et al. Conservation status of the mugger crocodile Crocodylus palustris: Establishing a task force for a poster species of climate change. Crocodile Specialist Group Newslett. 40(3), 12–20 (2021).
Cunningham, S. W., Shirley, M. H. & Hekkala, E. R. Fine scale patterns of genetic partitioning in the rediscovered African crocodile, Crocodylus suchus (Saint-Hilaire 1807). PeerJ 12, e1901 (2016).
Google Scholar
Platt, S. G. et al. Siamese Crocodile Crocodylus siamensis. In Crocodiles. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan 4th edn (eds Manolis, S. C. & Stevenson, C.) (Crocodile Specialist Group, 2019).
Arcgis Software v. Version 10.1 (2011).
Lourenço-de-Moraes, R. et al. Functional traits explain amphibian distribution in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. J. Biogeogr. 47, 275–287 (2020).
Google Scholar
Pavoine, S., Vallet, J., Dufour, A. B., Gachet, S. & Daniel, H. On the challenge of treating various types of variables: Application for improving the measurement of functional diversity. Oikos 118, 391–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2008.16668.x (2009).
Google Scholar
Colston, T. J., Kulkarni, P., Jetz, W. & Pyron, R. A. Phylogenetic and spatial distribution of evolutionary diversification, isolation, and threat in turtles and crocodilians (non-avian archosauromorphs). BMC Evol. Biol. 20(1), 1–16 (2020).
Google Scholar
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2022).
Faith, D. P. Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biol. Conserv. 61, 1–10 (1992).
Google Scholar
Pio, D. V. et al. Spatial predictions of phylogenetic diversity in conservation decision making. Conserv. Biol. 256, 1229–1239 (2011).
Google Scholar
Rodrigues, A. S. L. & Gaston, K. J. Maximising phylogenetic diversity in the selection of networks of conservation areas. Biol. Conserv. 105, 103–111 (2002).
Google Scholar
Safi, K. et al. Understanding global patterns of mammalian functional and phylogenetic diversity. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 2536–2544 (2011).
Google Scholar
Trindade-Filho, J., Carvalho, R. A., Brito, D. & Loyola, R. D. How does the inclusion of data deficient species change conservation priorities for amphibians in the Atlantic Forest?. Biodivers. Conserv. 21, 2709–2718 (2012).
Google Scholar
Devictor, V. et al. Spatial mismatch and congruence between taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity: The need for integrative conservation strategies in a changing world. Ecol. Lett. 13, 1030–1040 (2010).
Swenson, N. G. Functional and Phylogenetic Ecology in R (Springer, 2014).
Google Scholar
Mouchet, M., Villéger, S., Mason, N. W. H. & Mouillo, D. Functional diversity measures: An overview of their redundancy and their ability to discriminate community assembly rules. Funct. Ecol. 24, 867–876 (2010).
Google Scholar
Chaplin-Kramer, R. et al. Global modeling of nature’s contributions to people. Science 366, 255–258 (2019).
Google Scholar
Sharp, R. et al. InVEST 3.10.2.post28+ug.ga4e401c.d20220324 User’s Guide (The Natural Capital Project, Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, and World Wildlife Fund, 2020).
Lourenço-de-Moraes, R. et al. Climate change will decrease the range size of snake species under negligible protection in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest hotspot. Sci. Rep. 9, 8523. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44732-z (2019).
Google Scholar
Sánchez-Fernandez, D. & Abellán, P. Using null models to identify underrepresented species in protected areas: A case study using European amphibians and reptiles. Biol. Conserv. 184, 290–299 (2015).
Google Scholar
Source: Ecology - nature.com
