Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Number of grid cells within the study area that fulfilled the four hotspot criteria

From: Hotspot analysis of Taiwanese breeding birds to determine gaps in the protected area network

Hotspot criteria fulfilled Grid cells within the study area Highest protection, i.e., national parks Nature reserves Forest reserves Wildlife refuges Medium-to-high protection Major wildlife habitats Low-to-high protection
4 47 8 (17.0%) 6 (12.8%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 14 (29.8%) 28 (59.6%) 41 (87.2%)
3 428 82 (19.2%) 84 (19.6%) 2 (0.5%) 0 (0.0%) 168 (39.3%) 143 (33.4%) 306 (71.5%)
2 858 109 (12.7%) 110 (12.8%) 12 (1.4%) 5 (0.6%) 232 (27.0%) 437 (38.1%) 529 (61.7%)
1 1,609 290 (18.0%) 129 (8.0%) 22 (1.4%) 20 (1.2%) 438 (27.2%) 416 (25.9%) 781 (48.5%)
0 33,080 3,066 (9.3%) 561 (1.7%) 350 (1.1%) 389 (1.2%) 3,965 (12.0%) 3,191 (9.7%) 6,583 (19.9%)
Total 36,022 3,555 890 386 414 4,817 4,817 8,240
  1. Columns 3 to 9 show how many of the grid cells of column 2 fell within the various protected area categories, followed by the percentages in brackets (e.g., for hotspot criterion 4, eight of a total of 47 grid cells (17.0%) were inside national parks). Note that the highest protection level (i.e., national parks) plus nature reserves, forest reserves, and wildlife refuges was defined as medium-to-high protection and that the addition of major wildlife habitats was then defined as low-to-high protection (see the 'Methods’ section for details).