|
27e.1 The new science of conservation biology is focused on conserving biodiversity. |
Extinction is a fact of life, as normal and necessary as species formation
is to a stable world ecosystem. Most, species, probably all, go extinct eventually.
More than 99% of species known to science (most from the fossil record) are
now extinct. However, current rates are alarmingly high. Based on the loss of
species of well-described groups of organisms over the past 300 years, and taking
into account the rapid and accelerating loss of habitat that is occurring at
present, especially in the tropics, it has been calculated that as much as 20%
of the world's biodiversity may be lost during the next 30 years (table 27e.1).
Because we have named no more than 15% of the world's eukaryotic organisms,
and a much smaller proportion of those in the tropics, it is obvious that we
will not even know of the existence of many of the organisms that we are driving
to extinction.
TABLE 27e.1 NUMBER AND PERCENT OF THREATENED SPECIES
These losses will not just affect poorly known groups. As many as 50,000 species
of the world's total of 250,000 species of plants, 4,000 of the world's 20,000
species of butterflies, and nearly 2,000 of the world's 9,000 species of birds
could be lost during this short period of time. Considering that our species
has been in existence for only 500,000 years of the world's 4.5 billion year
history, and that our ancestors developed agriculture only about 10,000 years
ago, this is an astonishing rate of loss.
Massive waves of extinction are nothing new to life on earth. At five times
in the past, the earth has lost much of its biodiversity. Mass extinctions eliminated
50% of animal families in the Ordovician about 500 million years ago, 30% of
animal families at the end of the Devonian 345 million years ago (including
agnathan and placoderm fishes), 50% of animal families in the great Permian
extinction 250 million years ago (including over 95% of marine species, many
trees and amphibians, most bryozoans and brachiopods, and all trilobites), 35%
of animal families at the end of the Triassic 180 million years ago (including
many reptiles and marine mollusks), and 40% of animal families at the end of
the Cretaceous 65 million years ago (including all dinosaurs and many marine
forams and mollusks).
Since the last mass extinction 65 million years ago, global biodiversity has
recovered nicely, and indeed reached an all time high, with insects, flowering
plants, and vertebrates reaching their greatest diversity ever about 10,000
years ago. Since then, however, species richness has decreased as the world's
human population has grown.
Direct Economic Value
Many species have direct value, as sources of food, medicine, clothing, biomass
(for energy and other purposes), and shelter. Most of the world's food, for
example, is derived from a small number of plants that were originally domesticated
from wild plants in tropical and semi-arid regions. In the future, wild strains
of these species may be needed for their genetic diversity if we are to improve
yields, or find a way to breed resistance to new pests. In addition, novel species
of plants and animals may be found that are appropriate for domestication, or
as biological control agents for pest species.
About 40% of the prescription and non-prescription drugs used today have active
ingredients extracted from plants or animals. Aspirin, the world's most widely
used drug, was first extracted from the leaves of the tropical willow, Salix
alba. The rosy periwinkle, Catharanthus roseus, from Madagascar has
yielded a potent drug for combating leukemia (figure 27e.2).
TAXON
NUMBER OF THREATENED SPECIES
APPROXIMATE TOTAL SPECIES
PERCENTAGE THREATENED
ANIMALS
Invertebrates
Vertebrates
Birds
Mammals
Total
PLANTS
Gymnosperms
Monocotyledons
Monocotyledons:
palms
Dicotyledons
Total
Source: Smith et. al., 1993
As the world's human population has grown, the rate of loss
of biodiversity has accelerated. Current rates of extinction and habitat loss
suggest a massive die off in the next century.
WHAT'S SO BAD ABOUT LOSING BIODIVERSITY?
What's so bad about losing species? What is the value of biodiversity? Its value
can be divided into three principal components: (1) direct economic value
of products we obtain from species of plants, animals, and other groups; (2) indirect
economic value of benefits produced by species without our consuming them;
and (3) ethical and aesthetic value.

Only in the last few decades have biologists perfected the techniques that make possible the transfer of genes from one kind of organism to another. We are just beginning to be able to use genes obtained from other species to our advantage, as explored at length in chapter 18. Pesticide and insect resistance in crops gained from genes isolated from bacteria is but one example. So-called gene prospecting of the genomes of plants and animals for useful genes has only begun. We have been able to examine only a minute proportion of the existing kinds of organisms so far, to see whether any of their genes have useful properties. By conserving biodiversity we maintain the option of finding useful benefit in the future.
Indirect Economic Value
Diverse biological communities are of vital importance to healthy ecosystems, in maintaining the chemical quality of natural water, in buffering ecosystems against floods and drought, in preserving soils and preventing loss of minerals and nutrients, in moderating local and regional climate, in absorbing pollution, and in promoting the breakdown of organic wastes and the cycling of minerals. By destroying biodiversity, we are creating conditions of instability and lessened productivity and promoting desertification, waterlogging, mineralization, and many other undesirable outcomes throughout the world.
Given the major role played by many species in maintaining healthy ecosystems, it is alarming how little we know about the details of how ecosystems and communities function. It is impossible to predict all the consequences of removing a species, or to be sure that some of them will not be catastrophic. Imagine taking a part list for an airliner, and randomly changing a digit in one of the part numbers: you might change a cushion to a roll of toilet paperbut you might as easily change a key bolt holding up the wing to a pencil. The point is, you shouldn't gamble if you cannot afford to lose, and in removing biodiversity we are gambling with the future of ecosystems upon which we depend, and we don't even know the odds.
Ethical and Aesthetic Value
Many people believe that preserving biodiversity is an ethical issue, feeling that every species is of value in its own right, even if humans are not able to exploit or benefit from it. It is clear that humans have the power to exploit and destroy other species (see table 27e.2), but it is not as ethically clear that they have the right to do so. Sometimes dismissed as "tree huggers," people who hold these views are unable to advance economic argumentsbut considered ethically, their point of view has considerable power.
TABLE 27e.2 ENDANGERED SPECIES OF MAMMALS*
MARSUPIALS
INSECTIVORA
CHIROPTERA
PERISSODACTYLA
PRIMATES
CARNIVORA
CETACEA
ARTIODACTYLA
PROBOSCIDEA
RODENTIA
XENARTHRA
LAGOMORPHA
MACROSCELIDEA
Almost no one would deny the aesthetic value of biodiversity, of a beautiful
flower or noble elephant, but how do we place a value on beauty? Perhaps the
best we can do is to appreciate the deep sense of lack we feel at its permanent
loss (see figure 27e.3).
