IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pbio00/3001544.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Automated assessment reveals that the extinction risk of reptiles is widely underestimated across space and phylogeny

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriel Henrique de Oliveira Caetano
  • David G Chapple
  • Richard Grenyer
  • Tal Raz
  • Jonathan Rosenblatt
  • Reid Tingley
  • Monika Böhm
  • Shai Meiri
  • Uri Roll

Abstract

The Red List of Threatened Species, published by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), is a crucial tool for conservation decision-making. However, despite substantial effort, numerous species remain unassessed or have insufficient data available to be assigned a Red List extinction risk category. Moreover, the Red Listing process is subject to various sources of uncertainty and bias. The development of robust automated assessment methods could serve as an efficient and highly useful tool to accelerate the assessment process and offer provisional assessments. Here, we aimed to (1) present a machine learning–based automated extinction risk assessment method that can be used on less known species; (2) offer provisional assessments for all reptiles—the only major tetrapod group without a comprehensive Red List assessment; and (3) evaluate potential effects of human decision biases on the outcome of assessments. We use the method presented here to assess 4,369 reptile species that are currently unassessed or classified as Data Deficient by the IUCN. The models used in our predictions were 90% accurate in classifying species as threatened/nonthreatened, and 84% accurate in predicting specific extinction risk categories. Unassessed and Data Deficient reptiles were considerably more likely to be threatened than assessed species, adding to mounting evidence that these species warrant more conservation attention. The overall proportion of threatened species greatly increased when we included our provisional assessments. Assessor identities strongly affected prediction outcomes, suggesting that assessor effects need to be carefully considered in extinction risk assessments. Regions and taxa we identified as likely to be more threatened should be given increased attention in new assessments and conservation planning. Lastly, the method we present here can be easily implemented to help bridge the assessment gap for other less known taxa.The Red List of Threatened Species, published by the IUCN, is a crucial tool for conservation decision making, but is subject to various sources of uncertainty and bias. Modelling the threat status of all global reptiles identifies increased threat to many groups of reptiles across many regions of the world, beyond those currently recognized; moreover, it highlights the effects of the IUCN assessment procedure on eventual threat categories.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriel Henrique de Oliveira Caetano & David G Chapple & Richard Grenyer & Tal Raz & Jonathan Rosenblatt & Reid Tingley & Monika Böhm & Shai Meiri & Uri Roll, 2022. "Automated assessment reveals that the extinction risk of reptiles is widely underestimated across space and phylogeny," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(5), pages 1-24, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3001544
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001544
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001544
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001544&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001544?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rebecca K. Runting & Stuart Phinn & Zunyi Xie & Oscar Venter & James E. M. Watson, 2020. "Opportunities for big data in conservation and sustainability," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-4, December.
    2. Rikki Gumbs & Claudia L. Gray & Monika Böhm & Michael Hoffmann & Richard Grenyer & Walter Jetz & Shai Meiri & Uri Roll & Nisha R. Owen & James Rosindell, 2020. "Global priorities for conservation of reptilian phylogenetic diversity in the face of human impacts," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rikki Gumbs & Oenone Scott & Ryan Bates & Monika Böhm & Félix Forest & Claudia L. Gray & Michael Hoffmann & Daniel Kane & Christopher Low & William D. Pearse & Sebastian Pipins & Benjamin Tapley & Sam, 2024. "Global conservation status of the jawed vertebrate Tree of Life," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Danilo Urzedo & Zarrin Tasnim Sworna & Andrew J. Hoskins & Cathy J. Robinson, 2024. "AI chatbots contribute to global conservation injustices," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-8, December.
    3. Molly E. Brown, 2021. "Metrics to Accelerate Private Sector Investment in Sustainable Development Goal 2—Zero Hunger," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-6, May.
    4. Yi Bao & Zhou Huang & Han Wang & Ganmin Yin & Xiao Zhou & Yong Gao, 2023. "High‐resolution quantification of building stock using multi‐source remote sensing imagery and deep learning," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(1), pages 350-361, February.
    5. Yiwen Zeng & Rebecca K. Runting & James E. M. Watson & Luis Roman Carrasco, 2022. "Telecoupled environmental impacts are an obstacle to meeting the sustainable development goals," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 76-82, February.
    6. Fernando Garrigós-Simón & Silvia Sanz-Blas & Yeamduan Narangajavana & Daniela Buzova, 2021. "The Nexus between Big Data and Sustainability: An Analysis of Current Trends and Developments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, June.
    7. Kimberly R. Hall & Ranjan Anantharaman & Vincent A. Landau & Melissa Clark & Brett G. Dickson & Aaron Jones & Jim Platt & Alan Edelman & Viral B. Shah, 2021. "Circuitscape in Julia: Empowering Dynamic Approaches to Connectivity Assessment," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-24, March.
    8. Qaisar Ali & Hakimah Yaacob & Shazia Parveen & Zaki Zaini, 2021. "Big data and predictive analytics to optimise social and environmental performance of Islamic banks," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 616-632, December.
    9. Sebastian Pipins & Jonathan E. M. Baillie & Alex Bowmer & Laura J. Pollock & Nisha Owen & Rikki Gumbs, 2024. "Advancing EDGE Zones to identify spatial conservation priorities of tetrapod evolutionary history," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Xi Xiang & Michael E Meadows, 2020. "Preparing Adolescents for the Uncertain Future: Concepts, Tools and Strategies for Teaching Anthropogenic Environmental Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-12, August.
    11. Alexandrov, Georgii A., 2025. "When does artificial intelligence replace process-based models in ecological modelling?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 499(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3001544. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosbiology (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.