<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stoms, David M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nogeire, Theresa M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Davis, Frank W.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Biofuels and Biodiversity in California: A Framework for Conducting a Trade‐Off Analysis</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biodiversity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biofuels</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CWHR</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">energy</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">08/2013</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.energy.ca.gov/2013publications/CEC-500-2013-032/CEC-500-2013-032.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">California Energy Commission</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sacramento, California</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Contract Report</style></work-type></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Weiss, Stuart B.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Impacts of Nitrogen Deposition on California Ecosystems and Biodiversity</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">annual grasses</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biodiversity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">California</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">deserts</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eutrophication</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">grasslands</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">invasive species</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">nitrogen deposition</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">threatened and endangered species</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2006</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2006</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.energy.ca.gov/pier/final_project_reports/CEC-500-2005-165.html</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">University of California Santa Barbara and Creekside Center for Earth Observations</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Santa Barbara</style></pub-location><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">68</style></pages><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CEC-500-2005-165</style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Recognized as a &quot;biodiversity hotspot,&quot; California supports numerous endemic taxa with narrow ranges, and that diversity may be threatened by atmospheric nitrogen deposition. This California-wide risk screening included: (1) a 36 x 36 kilometer (km) map of total Nitrogen (N)-deposition for 2002, developed from the Community Multiscale Air Quality Model (CMAQ); (2) identification of sensitive habitats; (3) an overlay of the Forest Resource and Protection (FRAP) vegetation map; (4) an overlay of animal and plant species occurrence data from the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB); (5) an initial analysis of species life history and habitat; and (6) a discussion of relevance and guidance for assessments of power plant impacts. An area of 55,000 square kilometers (km2) of California is exposed to more than 5 kilograms of N per hectare per year (kg-N ha-1 year-1), and 10,000 km2 are exposed to more than 10 kg-N ha-1 year-1. Deposition hotspots include: Los Angeles-San Diego, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, and the Sierra Nevada foothills. The major documented impact of N-deposition on California terrestrial biodiversity is to increase invasive annual grasses in low biomass ecosystems, resulting in species loss. Of 225 &quot;threatened&quot; and &quot;endangered&quot; plant taxa, 99 are exposed to an average &gt; 5 kg-N ha-1 year-1. Of 1,022 &quot;rare&quot; plant taxa, 290 are exposed to &gt; 5 kg-N ha-1 year-1. Listed animal species follow similar patterns. This initial screening outlines potential impacts on California&#039;s biodiversity and provides targeted guidance for assessing the impacts of power plant and other sources of atmospheric N-deposition.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Williams, P.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hannah, L.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andelman, S.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Midgley, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Araujo, M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hughes, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Manne, L.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Martinez-Meyer, E.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pearson, R.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Planning for climate change: Identifying minimum-dispersal corridors for the Cape proteaceae</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Conservation Biology</style></secondary-title><short-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Conserv Biol Conserv Biol</style></short-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">area-selection algorithms</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">bioclimatic modeling</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biodiversity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biodiversity conservation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">connectivity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Conservation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">distance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">distribution models</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">distributions</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">floristic region</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">habitat suitability</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">plant migration</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Protected areas</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">reserve selection algorithms</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">south-africa</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">species persistence</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;Go to ISI&gt;://000231118600013</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">19</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1063-1074</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Climate change poses a challenge to the conventional approach to biodiversity conservation, which relies on fixed protected areas, because the changing climate is expected to shift the distribution of suitable areas for many species. Some species will persist only if they can colonize new areas, although in some cases their dispersal abilities may be very limited. To address this problem we devised a quantitative method for identifying multiple corridors of connectivity through shifting habitat suitabilities that seeks to minimize dispersal demands first and then the area of land required. We applied the method to Proteaceae mapped on a 1-minute grid for the western part of the Cape Floristic Region of South Africa, to supplement the existing protected areas using Worldmap software. Our goal was to represent each species in at least 35 grid cells (approximately 100 km(2)) at all times between 2000 and 2050 despite climate change. Although it was possible to achieve the goal at reasonable cost, caution will be needed in applying our method to reserves or other conservation investments until there is further information to support or refine the climate-change models and the species&#039; habitat-suitability and dispersal models.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>13</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stoms, D. M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kuhn, W. A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Davis, F. W.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Final Report to the Environmental Protection Agency, C. A. pp</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Acquisition and Evaluation of Data Sets for Comparative Assessment of Risk to Biodiversity on a Continental Scale: Threats to Biodiversity</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">anthropogenic effects</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biodiversity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">NDVI</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">potential NDVI</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">rare species</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">species richness</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">stressors</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">West Cosat Transect</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1998</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">September 30, 19</style></date></pub-dates></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">University of California, Santa Barbara</style></publisher><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><notes><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">[]</style></notes></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>5</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Davis, F. W.</style></author></authors><secondary-authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chou, C. I. Peng</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">C. H.</style></author></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mapping and monitoring terrestrial biodiversity using geographic information systems</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biodiversity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">connectivity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">evidence</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">GIS</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">southern California</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">whiptail</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1994</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Institute of Botany, Academia Sinica</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Taipei</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Monograph Series No. 14</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">461-471</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Location in space and time are attributes of nearly all biodiversity data. Obvious examples include species&#039; collection localities, range maps and habitat maps. Geographic Information Systems for managing and analyzing spatial data are rapidly becoming an integral tool for scientists, resource managers and policy makers concerned with biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management. Database capabilities of GIS have extended the traditional map to a much more flexible and powerful representation of spatial information by allowing potentially large amounts of non-graphical information to be attached to each map unit. Biologists have yet to fully exploit this aspect of GIS in classification and mapping of biodiversity patterns. Some advantages of the GIS model over traditional maps are illustrated with a vegetation mapping project in southern California. In recent years GIS has been applied to a wide range of biodiversity issues, for example, modeling species distributions, Gap Analysis, population viability analysis, modeling ecosystem disturbance processes, and projecting the ecological impacts of global climate change. Specimen data can be of much greater use in conservation planning when coupled to predictive habitat relationship models and accurate habitat maps. The use of GIS to assemble multiple lines of evidence in modeling species&#039; distribution is illustrated for Cnemidophorus hyperythrus, an endangered lizard of coastal southern California. Lastly, an example is provided of the application of GIS modeling of habitat suitability and connectivity to conservation planning in southern California.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>