Applying a metaweb approach to reserve design: large, well protected areas are crucial to maintain food webs

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Establishing protected areas is a promising tool to address the accelerating loss of biodiversity. However, protection levels are often low, and there is an ongoing debate over the most effective spatial configuration of reserves. This debate rarely considers trophic structure and ignores biodiversity outside protected areas. In this study, we investigate which reserve configurations best support species diversity and the persistence of high trophic levels, across systems and spatial scales, both inside and outside protected areas. Using a spatially explicit stochastic model, we assess how reserve architecture influences multiple conservation objectives across 27 empirical terrestrial, freshwater, and marine food webs. Specifically, we explore reserve architecture along three dimensions: the aggregation of protected areas, their proportion at the landscape scale, and the effectiveness level of protection measures. Our results show that having few but larger protected areas enhances all conservation metrics within reserves, while α diversity within and outside reserves is relatively insensitive to reserve aggregation. Smaller and more dispersed reserves improve the overall abundance of species off-reserves through spillover effects. Reconciling all objectives inside and outside reserves becomes feasible when protection effectiveness is sufficiently high. Increasing the efficiency of protection allows for a reduction in the total amount of protected land without compromising conservation outcomes. Moreover, higher species dispersal facilitates the achievement of multiple conservation goals, supporting the implementation of architectures that enhance connectivity among reserves. These findings highlight the importance of an integrated approach combining spatial ecology and trophic functioning to optimize protected area planning under multiple objectives.
Full text 1,970 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Establishing protected areas is a promising tool to address the accelerating loss of biodiversity. However, protection levels are often low, and there is an ongoing debate over the most effective spatial configuration of reserves. This debate rarely considers trophic structure and ignores biodiversity outside protected areas. In this study, we investigate which reserve configurations best support species diversity and the persistence of high trophic levels, across systems and spatial scales, both inside and outside protected areas. Using a spatially explicit stochastic model, we assess how reserve architecture influences multiple conservation objectives across 27 empirical terrestrial, freshwater, and marine food webs. Specifically, we explore reserve architecture along three dimensions: the aggregation of protected areas, their proportion at the landscape scale, and the effectiveness level of protection measures. Our results show that having few but larger protected areas enhances all conservation metrics within reserves, while α diversity within and outside reserves is relatively insensitive to reserve aggregation. Smaller and more dispersed reserves improve the overall abundance of species off-reserves through spillover effects. Reconciling all objectives inside and outside reserves becomes feasible when protection effectiveness is sufficiently high. Increasing the efficiency of protection allows for a reduction in the total amount of protected land without compromising conservation outcomes. Moreover, higher species dispersal facilitates the achievement of multiple conservation goals, supporting the implementation of architectures that enhance connectivity among reserves. These findings highlight the importance of an integrated approach combining spatial ecology and trophic functioning to optimize protected area planning under multiple objectives. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00