(Japanese Journal of Conservation Ecology) 17 : 199-210 (2012) 1 2 1 2 Research object biases in Japanese Journal of Conservation Ecology Masato Yamamichi 1 and Mariko Hiraiwa-Hasegawa 2 1 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, 2 Department of Evolutionary Studies of Biosystems, The Graduate University for Advanced Studies 1996 Abstract: Conservation ecology is an applied area of ecology aimed at conserving biodiversity and maintaining sound ecosystems, and the discipline is expected to contribute to conservation activities. For this purpose, research in conservation ecology should be properly conducted to support such activities. To understand the current features of research in conservation ecology in Japan, we conducted a meta-analysis of papers published in the Japanese Journal of Conservation Ecology, which has been issued by the Ecological Society of Japan since 1996. The number of papers published in this journal has been increasing, and the authors of these papers have diversified since the first issue. However, certain biases were found in the published studies that were published: researchers tended to carry out studies close to the research institute to which they belonged, and they tended to study plants, mammals, and fish more often than insects and other invertebrates. We present these results and discuss problems that should be resolved in the future to improve research in conservation ecology in Japan. Keywords: geographic bias, meta-analysis, Red Data Book, taxonomic bias 2 1996 Pyšek et al. 2008 2 Pyšek et al. 2008 Caro et al. 1 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Corson Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, U.S.A. e-mail: my287@cornell.edu 2012 3 3 2012 8 10 199
2005 Pyšek et al. 2008 Joseph et al. 2008 3 2008 keystone species umbrella species 2004 1987 2001 Conservation Biology Biological Conservation Clark and May 2002 Klironomos 2002 2001 Conservation Biology Biological Conservation Biodiversity & Conservation Fazey et al. 2005 Seddon et al. 2005 Trimble and van Aarde 2010 Pyšek et al. 2008 Pyšek et al. 2008 Reddy and Dávalos 20032004 2009 Martin et al. 2012 1980 Myers et al. 2000 Conservation International http://www.conservation. org/where/priority_areas/hotspots/pages/hotspots_main.aspx 2012 8 27 Primack 2001 200
3 2003 Japanese Journal of Conservation Ecology1996 2002 2003 2012 2 1 1996 2003 500 2010 4,300 1996 2002 2003 2005 2006 2008 2009 2012 2003 2006 2009 2008 75 2009 2 original article report review scientific evaluation news opinion 6 4 2003 4 2011 3 5 http://www.esj.ne.jp/hozen/j_cbnjjce.html 2012 8 27 CiNii http:// ci.nii.ac.jp/vol_issue/nels/aa11857952_ja.html 2012 8 27 1 1 16 2 1996 2011 137 7 29 173 PDF PDF km 1-3 201
1 18 7 50 12 31 8 1 6 18 22 2 88 2.5 0.5 3.5 9 17 22.5 5 13 12 R R Development Core Team 2008 2003 1996 2002 2003 2011 Simpson D Shannon H' 2003 S p i i 1 2012 http://www.stat.go.jp/data/nihon/index.htm 2012 8 27 1 2 Google Map 2 http://www.benricho.org/map_ straightdistance/ 2012 8 27 Pyšek et al. 2008 2 2 0.5 3 NPO Envision http://www.jpnrdb.com/index. html 2012 8 27 RDB Pyšek et al. 2008 2 2002 2003 論文数と著者の変化 2003 1 1996 2002 7 2003 2011 9 1 3.1 12.8 2002 2000 2003 22 68.2 15 50 11 2003 151 202
1 14.6 22 11.9 18 2002 2003 Simpson D 0.70 0.96 Shannon H' 1.64 3.23 研究対象の地域 151 33.1 50 20.5 31 10 1 3 2A -0.090 p 0.82 2B 0.79 5 p 0.011 2C 0.94 0.1 p 0.00016 2D 149 100 km 86 1000 km 13 2C 研究対象の生物 55 88 22.5 17 13 9 0.5 5 3A RDB 3B 2 p < 0.0001 Pyšek et al. 2008 3C p < 0.01 RDB Pyšek et al. 2008 1996 2002 72.7 2003 2011 47.7 2002 D = 0.40 H' = 0.87 2003 D = 0.69 H' = 1.56 論文の多様化 1996 2011 137 203
2 A. B. C. H: T: K: C: N: G: 4: 9: I: D. 200 km 7 29 2003 2002 地理的偏り Pyšek et al. 2008 10 1 204
The Ecological Society of Japan 研究対象の偏り 図 3 A. 保全生態学研究の掲載論文 161 本における研究対象生物の分類群構成 B. 日本のレッドデータブック に掲載されている 18,227 種の生物の分類群構成 C. 世界中の外来種を研究した論文 2,670 本における研究対 象生物の分類群構成 C は Pyšek et al. 2008 の図 1 から改変 205
分類群の偏り 2002 Clark and May 2002 保全生態学の目標と業績評価 研究テーマ選択との齟齬 2007 1 206
Caro T, Eadie J, Sih A (2005) Use of substitute species in conservation biology. Conservation Biology 19:1821-1826. Clark JA, May RM (2002) Taxonomic bias in conservation research. Science 297:191-192 Fazey I, Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2005) What do conservation biologists publish? Biological Conservation 124:63-73. Joseph LN, Maloney RF, Possingham HP (2008) Optimal allocation of resources among threatened species: A project prioritization protocol. Conservation Biology 23:328-338. (2009). 14:1-2. Klironomos JN (2002) Another form of bias in conservation research. Science 298:749. Martin LJ, Blossey B, Ellis E (2012) Mapping where ecologists work: Biases in the global distribution of terrestrial ecological observations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10:195-201. (2003). 8:1-2. (2004). 9:203-204. (2003).,. Myers N, Mittermeler RA, Mittermeler CG, da Fonseca GAB, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853-858. Primack RB (2001) Publish again in another language. Conservation Biology 15:290-291. RB (2008).,. Pyšek P, Richardson DM, Pergl J, Jarošík V, Sixtová Z, Weber E (2008) Geographical and taxonomic biases in invasion ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23:237-244. R Development Core Team (2008) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Reddy S, Dávalos LM (2003) Geographical sampling bias and its implications for conservation priorities in Africa. Journal of Biogeography 30:1719-1727. Seddon PJ, Soorae PS, Launay F (2005) Taxonomic bias in reintroduction projects. Animal Conservation 8:51-58. Trimble MJ, van Aarde RJ (2010) Species inequality in scientific study. Conservation Biology 24:886-890. (2007). 4:58-63. (1996).,. (2006). 11:1-3. 207
1 km 1 25 51.2 1 49 32.8 1 131 14.2 2 55 729.0 2 135 663.7 2 179 22.0 2 189 54.6 3 43 1351.2 3 57 0.0 3 97 33.7 3 111 3 15.8 3 125 51.2 4 1 28.3 4 21 10.2 5 43 59.3 5 197 224.5 6 1 1032.7 6 21 279.1 6 29 48.6 6 111 94.0 7 1 200.5 7 9 55.3 8 3 53.8 8 11 50.2 8 25 32.1 8 33 76.2 8 43 226.0 8 51 94.0 8 99 20.1 8 113 58.4 8 119 1522.7 9 1 15.1 9 13 256.9 9 25 12.5 9 37 39.6 9 45 68.2 9 57 819.0 9 107 745.7 9 117 WWF 1948.0 10 1 10 11 14.9 10 19 10 35 10 47 147.9 10 53 61.5 10 113 10 119 23.0 10 129 45.1 10 139 1062.4 10 151 32.1 11 4 58.1 11 13 107.8 11 21 57.7 11 35 114.7 11 43 565.3 11 53 NPO 107.5 11 85 166.0 11 94 20.8 12 1 37.1 12 10 1529.7 12 20 2.2 12 28 1280.2 12 36 190.0 208
1 12 87 151.9 12 94 30.4 12 103 22.3 12 112 72.9 12 118 287.1 12 126 12 143 14.6 13 1 13 17 72.8 13 29 127.0 13 37 10 13 47 146.7 13 55 3.7 13 65 57.0 13 75 61.2 13 137 80.5 13 151 13 161 487.7 13 169 250.1 13 179 357.5 13 187 17.1 13 199 21.5 13 207 262.3 13 219 1299.0 13 225 501.5 13 237 252.4 13 249 14.9 13 257 14 3 391.2 14 13 14 25 6.7 14 37 357.5 14 45 31.8 14 55 0.4 14 67 3 191.6 14 73 177.8 14 81 RDB 14 143 16.3 14 153 10.5 14 165 64.4 14 173 85.4 14 185 21.2 14 193 14 203 1650.7 14 211 176.0 15 3 148.2 15 17 4 209.2 15 29 53.0 15 39 897.0 15 47 480.5 15 61 1432.8 15 71 2.6 15 163 85.0 15 173 1251.6 15 183 2.5 15 193 1111.3 15 203 917.0 15 211 4.6 15 219 16.3 15 231 4.9 15 241 12.4 15 255 25.0 15 265 13.8 209
1 15 281 66.8 16 1 84.5 16 17 92.9 16 33 26.7 16 45 68.5 16 55 46.4 16 69 60.1 16 85 6.1 16 149 775.2 16 159 25.2 16 169 2.8 2 km 15 291 378.1 16 99 74.9 16 111 64.6 16 121 37.6 16 195 14.9 16 205 386.2 16 213 775.2 3 km 8 97 450.7 8 181 8 183 9 103 24.2 9 203 10 85 10 89 930.5 10 93 10 95 10 201 23.5 11 70 11 76 14.3 11 167-708.1 12 60 216.0 12 66 132.8 12 72 24.2 12 78-270.7 12 163 12 172 997.1 14 119 5 405.8 14 125 14 131 416.0 14 263 88.6 14 279 28.9 14 283 15 147 15 153 16 127 1112.2 16 243 407.2 210