Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Jessie A. Wells is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Jessie A. Wells.


Ecology Letters | 2010

Land-use intensification reduces functional redundancy and response diversity in plant communities.

Etienne Laliberté; Jessie A. Wells; Fabrice DeClerck; Daniel J. Metcalfe; Carla Catterall; Cibele Queiroz; Isabelle Aubin; Stephen P. Bonser; Yi Ding; Jennifer M. Fraterrigo; Sean McNamara; John W. Morgan; Dalia Sánchez Merlos; Peter A. Vesk; Margaret M. Mayfield

Ecosystem resilience depends on functional redundancy (the number of species contributing similarly to an ecosystem function) and response diversity (how functionally similar species respond differently to disturbance). Here, we explore how land-use change impacts these attributes in plant communities, using data from 18 land-use intensity gradients that represent five biomes and > 2800 species. We identify functional groups using multivariate analysis of plant traits which influence ecosystem processes. Functional redundancy is calculated as the species richness within each group, and response diversity as the multivariate within-group dispersion in response trait space, using traits that influence responses to disturbances. Meta-analysis across all datasets showed that land-use intensification significantly reduced both functional redundancy and response diversity, although specific relationships varied considerably among the different land-use gradients. These results indicate that intensified management of ecosystems for resource extraction can increase their vulnerability to future disturbances.


PLOS ONE | 2010

Effectiveness of Biodiversity Surrogates for Conservation Planning: Different Measures of Effectiveness Generate a Kaleidoscope of Variation

Hedley S. Grantham; Robert L. Pressey; Jessie A. Wells; Andrew J. Beattie

Conservation planners represent many aspects of biodiversity by using surrogates with spatial distributions readily observed or quantified, but tests of their effectiveness have produced varied and conflicting results. We identified four factors likely to have a strong influence on the apparent effectiveness of surrogates: (1) the choice of surrogate; (2) differences among study regions, which might be large and unquantified (3) the test method, that is, how effectiveness is quantified, and (4) the test features that the surrogates are intended to represent. Analysis of an unusually rich dataset enabled us, for the first time, to disentangle these factors and to compare their individual and interacting influences. Using two data-rich regions, we estimated effectiveness using five alternative methods: two forms of incidental representation, two forms of species accumulation index and irreplaceability correlation, to assess the performance of ‘forest ecosystems’ and ‘environmental units’ as surrogates for six groups of threatened species—the test features—mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs, plants and all of these combined. Four methods tested the effectiveness of the surrogates by selecting areas for conservation of the surrogates then estimating how effective those areas were at representing test features. One method measured the spatial match between conservation priorities for surrogates and test features. For methods that selected conservation areas, we measured effectiveness using two analytical approaches: (1) when representation targets for the surrogates were achieved (incidental representation), or (2) progressively as areas were selected (species accumulation index). We estimated the spatial correlation of conservation priorities using an index known as summed irreplaceability. In general, the effectiveness of surrogates for our taxa (mostly threatened species) was low, although environmental units tended to be more effective than forest ecosystems. The surrogates were most effective for plants and mammals and least effective for frogs and reptiles. The five testing methods differed in their rankings of effectiveness of the two surrogates in relation to different groups of test features. There were differences between study areas in terms of the effectiveness of surrogates for different test feature groups. Overall, the effectiveness of the surrogates was sensitive to all four factors. This indicates the need for caution in generalizing surrogacy tests.


PLOS ONE | 2011

Quantifying killing of Orangutans and Human-Orangutan conflict in Kalimantan, Indonesia

Erik Meijaard; Damayanti Buchori; Yokyok Hadiprakarsa; Sri Suci Utami-Atmoko; Anton Nurcahyo; Albertus Tjiu; Didik Prasetyo; Nardiyono; Lenny Christie; Marc Ancrenaz; Firman Abadi; I Nyoman Gede Antoni; Dedy Armayadi; Adi Dinato; Ella; Pajar Gumelar; Tito P. Indrawan; Kussaritano; Cecep Munajat; C. Wawan Puji Priyono; Yadi Purwanto; Dewi Puspitasari; M. Syukur Wahyu Putra; Abdi Rahmat; Harri Ramadani; Jim Sammy; Dedi Siswanto; Muhammad Syamsuri; Noviar Andayani; Huanhuan Wu

Human-orangutan conflict and hunting are thought to pose a serious threat to orangutan existence in Kalimantan, the Indonesian part of Borneo. No data existed prior to the present study to substantiate these threats. We investigated the rates, spatial distribution and causes of conflict and hunting through an interview-based survey in the orangutans range in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Between April 2008 and September 2009, we interviewed 6983 respondents in 687 villages to obtain socio-economic information, assess knowledge of local wildlife in general and orangutan encounters specifically, and to query respondents about their knowledge on orangutan conflicts and killing, and relevant laws. This survey revealed estimated killing rates of between 750 and 1800 animals killed in the last year, and between 1950 and 3100 animals killed per year on average within the lifetime of the survey respondents. These killing rates are higher than previously thought and are high enough to pose a serious threat to the continued existence of orangutans in Kalimantan. Importantly, the study contributes to our understanding of the spatial variation in threats, and the underlying causes of those threats, which can be used to facilitate the development of targeted conservation management.


Systematic Biology | 2012

Independent Contrasts and PGLS Regression Estimators Are Equivalent

Simon P. Blomberg; James G. Lefevre; Jessie A. Wells; Mary Waterhouse

We prove that the slope parameter of the ordinary least squares regression of phylogenetically independent contrasts (PICs) conducted through the origin is identical to the slope parameter of the method of generalized least squares (GLSs) regression under a Brownian motion model of evolution. This equivalence has several implications: 1. Understanding the structure of the linear model for GLS regression provides insight into when and why phylogeny is important in comparative studies. 2. The limitations of the PIC regression analysis are the same as the limitations of the GLS model. In particular, phylogenetic covariance applies only to the response variable in the regression and the explanatory variable should be regarded as fixed. Calculation of PICs for explanatory variables should be treated as a mathematical idiosyncrasy of the PIC regression algorithm. 3. Since the GLS estimator is the best linear unbiased estimator (BLUE), the slope parameter estimated using PICs is also BLUE. 4. If the slope is estimated using different branch lengths for the explanatory and response variables in the PIC algorithm, the estimator is no longer the BLUE, so this is not recommended. Finally, we discuss whether or not and how to accommodate phylogenetic covariance in regression analyses, particularly in relation to the problem of phylogenetic uncertainty. This discussion is from both frequentist and Bayesian perspectives.


BMC Evolutionary Biology | 2012

Bayesian models for comparative analysis integrating phylogenetic uncertainty

Pierre de Villemereuil; Jessie A. Wells; Robert D. Edwards; Simon P. Blomberg

BackgroundUncertainty in comparative analyses can come from at least two sources: a) phylogenetic uncertainty in the tree topology or branch lengths, and b) uncertainty due to intraspecific variation in trait values, either due to measurement error or natural individual variation. Most phylogenetic comparative methods do not account for such uncertainties. Not accounting for these sources of uncertainty leads to false perceptions of precision (confidence intervals will be too narrow) and inflated significance in hypothesis testing (e.g. p-values will be too small). Although there is some application-specific software for fitting Bayesian models accounting for phylogenetic error, more general and flexible software is desirable.MethodsWe developed models to directly incorporate phylogenetic uncertainty into a range of analyses that biologists commonly perform, using a Bayesian framework and Markov Chain Monte Carlo analyses.ResultsWe demonstrate applications in linear regression, quantification of phylogenetic signal, and measurement error models. Phylogenetic uncertainty was incorporated by applying a prior distribution for the phylogeny, where this distribution consisted of the posterior tree sets from Bayesian phylogenetic tree estimation programs. The models were analysed using simulated data sets, and applied to a real data set on plant traits, from rainforest plant species in Northern Australia. Analyses were performed using the free and open source software OpenBUGS and JAGS.ConclusionsIncorporating phylogenetic uncertainty through an empirical prior distribution of trees leads to more precise estimation of regression model parameters than using a single consensus tree and enables a more realistic estimation of confidence intervals. In addition, models incorporating measurement errors and/or individual variation, in one or both variables, are easily formulated in the Bayesian framework. We show that BUGS is a useful, flexible general purpose tool for phylogenetic comparative analyses, particularly for modelling in the face of phylogenetic uncertainty and accounting for measurement error or individual variation in explanatory variables. Code for all models is provided in the BUGS model description language.


PLOS ONE | 2013

People’s Perceptions about the Importance of Forests on Borneo

Erik Meijaard; Nicola K. Abram; Jessie A. Wells; Anne-Sophie Pellier; Marc Ancrenaz; David Gaveau; Rebecca K. Runting; Kerrie Mengersen

We ascertained villagers’ perceptions about the importance of forests for their livelihoods and health through 1,837 reliably answered interviews of mostly male respondents from 185 villages in Indonesian and Malaysian Borneo. Variation in these perceptions related to several environmental and social variables, as shown in classification and regression analyses. Overall patterns indicated that forest use and cultural values are highest among people on Borneo who live close to remaining forest, and especially among older Christian residents. Support for forest clearing depended strongly on the scale at which deforestation occurs. Deforestation for small-scale agriculture was generally considered to be positive because it directly benefits people’s welfare. Large-scale deforestation (e.g., for industrial oil palm or acacia plantations), on the other hand, appeared to be more context-dependent, with most respondents considering it to have overall negative impacts on them, but with people in some areas considering the benefits to outweigh the costs. The interviews indicated high awareness of negative environmental impacts of deforestation, with high levels of concern over higher temperatures, air pollution and loss of clean water sources. Our study is unique in its geographic and trans-national scale. Our findings enable the development of maps of forest use and perceptions that could inform land use planning at a range of scales. Incorporating perspectives such as these could significantly reduce conflict over forest resources and ultimately result in more equitable development processes.


PLOS ONE | 2011

Why Don't We Ask? A Complementary Method for Assessing the Status of Great Apes

Erik Meijaard; Kerrie Mengersen; Damayanti Buchori; Anton Nurcahyo; Marc Ancrenaz; Serge A. Wich; Sri Suci Utami Atmoko; Albertus Tjiu; Didik Prasetyo; Nardiyono; Yokyok Hadiprakarsa; Lenny Christy; Jessie A. Wells; Guillaume Albar; Andrew J. Marshall

Species conservation is difficult. Threats to species are typically high and immediate. Effective solutions for counteracting these threats, however, require synthesis of high quality evidence, appropriately targeted activities, typically costly implementation, and rapid re-evaluation and adaptation. Conservation management can be ineffective if there is insufficient understanding of the complex ecological, political, socio-cultural, and economic factors that underlie conservation threats. When information about these factors is incomplete, conservation managers may be unaware of the most urgent threats or unable to envision all consequences of potential management strategies. Conservation research aims to address the gap between what is known and what knowledge is needed for effective conservation. Such research, however, generally addresses a subset of the factors that underlie conservation threats, producing a limited, simplistic, and often biased view of complex, real world situations. A combination of approaches is required to provide the complete picture necessary to engage in effective conservation. Orangutan conservation (Pongo spp.) offers an example: standard conservation assessments employ survey methods that focus on ecological variables, but do not usually address the socio-cultural factors that underlie threats. Here, we evaluate a complementary survey method based on interviews of nearly 7,000 people in 687 villages in Kalimantan, Indonesia. We address areas of potential methodological weakness in such surveys, including sampling and questionnaire design, respondent biases, statistical analyses, and sensitivity of resultant inferences. We show that interview-based surveys can provide cost-effective and statistically robust methods to better understand poorly known populations of species that are relatively easily identified by local people. Such surveys provide reasonably reliable estimates of relative presence and relative encounter rates of such species, as well as quantifying the main factors that threaten them. We recommend more extensive use of carefully designed and implemented interview surveys, in conjunction with more traditional field methods.


Nature Communications | 2015

Alternative futures for Borneo show the value of integrating economic and conservation targets across borders.

Rebecca K. Runting; Erik Meijaard; Nicola K. Abram; Jessie A. Wells; David Gaveau; Marc Ancrenaz; Hugh P. Possingham; Serge A. Wich; Fitrian Ardiansyah; Melvin T. Gumal; Laurentius Ambu; Kerrie A. Wilson

Balancing economic development with international commitments to protect biodiversity is a global challenge. Achieving this balance requires an understanding of the possible consequences of alternative future scenarios for a range of stakeholders. We employ an integrated economic and environmental planning approach to evaluate four alternative futures for the mega-diverse island of Borneo. We show what could be achieved if the three national jurisdictions of Borneo coordinate efforts to achieve their public policy targets and allow a partial reallocation of planned land uses. We reveal the potential for Borneo to simultaneously retain ∼50% of its land as forests, protect adequate habitat for the Bornean orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) and Bornean elephant (Elephas maximus borneensis), and achieve an opportunity cost saving of over US


Conservation Biology | 2014

Minimizing the cost of keeping options open for conservation in a changing climate

Morena Mills; Sam Nicol; Jessie A. Wells; José J. Lahoz-Monfort; Brendan A. Wintle; Michael Bode; Martin Wardrop; Terry Walshe; William J. M. Probert; Michael C. Runge; Hugh P. Possingham; Eve McDonald Madden

43 billion. Such coordination would depend on enhanced information sharing and reforms to land-use planning, which could be supported by the increasingly international nature of economies and conservation efforts.


Trends in Biochemical Sciences | 2001

Metabolic databases - what next?

Juliet A. Gerrard; Ashley D. Sparrow; Jessie A. Wells

Policy documents advocate that managers should keep their options open while planning to protect coastal ecosystems from climate-change impacts. However, the actual costs and benefits of maintaining flexibility remain largely unexplored, and alternative approaches for decision making under uncertainty may lead to better joint outcomes for conservation and other societal goals. For example, keeping options open for coastal ecosystems incurs opportunity costs for developers. We devised a decision framework that integrates these costs and benefits with probabilistic forecasts for the extent of sea-level rise to find a balance between coastal ecosystem protection and moderate coastal development. Here, we suggest that instead of keeping their options open managers should incorporate uncertain sea-level rise predictions into a decision-making framework that evaluates the benefits and costs of conservation and development. In our example, based on plausible scenarios for sea-level rise and assuming a risk-neutral decision maker, we found that substantial development could be accommodated with negligible loss of environmental assets. Characterization of the Pareto efficiency of conservation and development outcomes provides valuable insight into the intensity of trade-offs between development and conservation. However, additional work is required to improve understanding of the consequences of alternative spatial plans and the value judgments and risk preferences of decision makers and stakeholders.

Collaboration


Dive into the Jessie A. Wells's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Erik Meijaard

University of Queensland

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Kerrie Mengersen

Queensland University of Technology

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David Gaveau

Center for International Forestry Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Anton Nurcahyo

Australian National University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Nardiyono

The Nature Conservancy

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Anne-Sophie Pellier

Center for International Forestry Research

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge