Municipalities, especially those comprising large urban agglomerations, are increasingly aware of their potential role in conserving biodiversity. The identification of key areas for the conservation of biodiversity has often been based on 'single-taxon approaches' (e.g., birds, butterflies, certain mammal species, etc.). Such approaches can lead to biased conclusions because the spatial distribution pattern of a single taxon could misrepresent ecological complexity and diversity. The aim of the present article was to test whether a multi-taxon approach, considering both α- and β-diversity parameter estimates, improves the analysis of the distribution pattern of species richness, conservation value, and identification of key areas for biodiversity conservation at a local (municipal) level. Data used were collected collected in a standard way in the Donostia/San Sebastián municipality (Spain), using three taxonomic groups: birds, amphibians, and vascular plant species of concern. Although we detected some degree of cross-taxon congruence in the spatial distribution pattern of richness (e.g., bird richness was positively correlated with the one of amphibians), the patterns arising after pooling taxa revealed more complex patterns. For instance, whereas the eastern part of the municipality showed a major conservation value for birds, the western part had more importance for amphibians. Assessment of β-diversity estimates through species turnover also revealed patterns that remained hidden when focusing only on α-diversity (richness). As a result, the combined analyses of several taxonomic groups, together with β-diversity estimates, revealed a higher number of key areas for biodiversity conservation at a local level rather than a single key area which we would have obtained taking only birds into account.

Arizaga, J., Garin-Barrio, I., Etxeberria, M., García del Bao, A., Laso, M., 2024. The value of multi-taxon approaches to improve biodiversity assessment at municipal scales. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 47(2), 161-170. https://doi.org/10.32800/
abc.2024.47.0161