Complementary approaches to biodiversity offsets are needed, balancing large tree preservation and revegetation.
Measures of species abundance and diversity at the community level, along with measures of functional diversity that incorporate information on species traits, provide opportunities for complementary insights into biodiversity responses to disturbances.
The word "rewilding" became an essential part of talk among conservationists in the late 1990s when two well-known conservation biologists, Michael Soulé and Reed Noss, wrote a now classic paper called "Rewilding and biodiversity: Complementary Goals for Continental Conservation".
This is why when evaluating biodiversity, complementary information such as the diversity of the ecological roles of the species [1] [5] should be included.
A complementary approach to biodiversity assessment is to ask how different two or more localities, or indeed time periods, are in terms of their species composition.
But your article does not address a complementary third path for biodiversity.
The approach does not however supplant the necessity for complementary strategies for maintaining biodiversity such as the creation of reserves to protect rare, old or simply natural ecosystems.
To improve the reliability and usefulness of EIAs in biologically diverse ecosystems, we suggest three relatively fast and cost-effective complementary approaches for assessing biodiversity: remote sensing, reflectance spectroscopy, and DNA meta-barcoding.
Based on our results and theory we suggest a complementary approach to managing biodiversity in urban landscapes – instead of maximising the value and quality of individual patches efforts could go into enhancing over-all landscape quality at the neighbourhood scale by splitting up part of the green infrastructure.
Given such contrasts, major efforts to protect global biodiversity must involve complementary conservation approaches in areas of unique species as well as those with highest diversity and threat.
