284
Maiorano L, Amori G, Capula M et al (2013) Threats from climate change to terrestrial vertebrate
hotspots in Europe. PLoS One 8:e74989. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0074989
Margules CR, Pressey RL (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405:243–253.
doi:10.1038/35012251
Margules C, Sarkar S (2007) Systematic conservation planning. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, p 278
Moilanen A (2007) Landscape Zonation, benefit functions and target-based planning: unifying
reserve selection strategies. Biol Conserv 134:571–579. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2006.09.008
Moilanen A (2008) Two paths to a suboptimal solution – once more about optimality in reserve
selection. Biol Conserv 141:1919–1923. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.04.018
Moilanen A, Arponen A (2011) Administrative regions in conservation: balancing local priorities
with regional to global preferences in spatial planning. Biol Conserv 144:1719–1725.
doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2011.03.007
Moilanen A, Franco AMA, Early RI et al (2005) Prioritising multiple use landscapes for conserva-
tion: methods for large multi species planning problems. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci
272:1885–1891. doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3164
Moilanen A, Kujala H, Leathwick JR (2009) The Zonation framework and software for conserva-
tion prioritization. In: Moilanen A, Wilson KH, Possingham HP (eds) Spatial conservation
prioritisation: quantitative methods and computational tools. Oxford University Press, Oxford,
pp 196–210
Moilanen A, Leppänen J, Meller L et al (2011) Spatial conservation planning framework and soft-
ware Zonation v. 3.0: user manual. University of Helsinki, Helsinki, p 278
Moilanen A, Anderson BJ, Arponen A et al (2013) Edge artefacts and lost performance in national
versus continental conservation priority areas. Divers Distrib 19:171–183. doi:10.1111/ddi.12000
Mouquet N, Devictor V, Meynard CN et al (2012) Ecophylogenetics: advances and perspectives.
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 87:769–785. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2012.00224.x
Pavoine S, Bonsall MB (2011) Measuring biodiversity to explain community assembly: a unified
approach. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 2:792–812. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2010.00171.x
Pavoine S, Ollier S, Dufour A-B, Crozier R (2005a) Is the originality of a species measurable? Ecol
Lett 8:579–586. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00752.x
Pavoine S, Ollier S, Pontier D (2005b) Measuring diversity from dissimilarities with Rao’s qua-
dratic entropy: are any dissimilarities suitable? Theor Popul Biol 67:231–239
Polasky S, Csuti B, Vossler CA, Meyers SM (2001) A comparison of taxonomic distinctness versus
richness as criteria for setting conservation priorities for North American birds. Biol Conserv
97:99–105
Pressey RL, Humphries CJ, Margules CR et al (1993) Beyond opportunism – key principles for
systematic reserve selection. Trends Ecol Evol 8:124–128
Rao CR (1982) Diversity and dissimilarity coefficients: a unified approach. Theor Popul Biol
21:24–43
Rodrigues ASL, Gaston KLJ (2002) Maximising phylogenetic diversity in the selection of net-
works of conservation areas. Biol Conserv 105:103–111
Rodrigues ASL, Grenyer R, Baillie JEM et al (2011) Complete, accurate, mammalian phylogenies
aid conservation planning, but not much. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 366:2652–2660
Rosauer DF, Mooers AO (2013) Nurturing the use of evolutionary diversity in nature conservation.
Trends Ecol Evol 28:322–323. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2013.01.014
Schweiger O, Klotz S, Durka W, Kühn I (2008) A comparative test of phylogenetic diversity indi-
ces. Oecologia 157:485–495. doi:10.1007/s00442-008-1082-2
Sechrest W, Brooks TM, da Fonseca GAB et al (2002) Hotspots and the conservation of evolution-
ary history. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:2067–2071. doi:10.1073/pnas.251680798
Smith RJ, Veríssimo D, Isaac NJB, Jones KE (2012) Identifying Cinderella species: uncovering
mammals with conservation flagship appeal. Conserv Lett 5:205–212.
doi:10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00229.x
A. Arponen and L. Zupan