808 B. Moraes et al.


FIG. 3 Binary maps of present and future predictive dis- tribution for (a) A. belzebul, (b) S. flavius and (c) S. libidi- nosus, under (1) current conditions, and future conditions under scenarios of (2) moderate (2070, RCP 4.5) and (3) severe (2070, RCP 8.5) climate change. Future predic- tions are based on 13 general circulation models for each scenario. Shaded areas indicate predicted suitable habitats above the maximum training sensitivity plus specificity threshold.


Our findings reflect the current situation of the protected


areas system in Brazil, with a large proportion categorized as low protection status. Currently, only 10% of the Atlantic Forest is under protection and only 2.6% falls within the high protection status (MMA, 2018b). There is even less protection for the Caatinga and Cerrado biomes, with 8% of each protected and only 1.6 and 3%, respectively, within the integral protection areas (MMA, 2018b). In contrast, 28% of the Amazon falls within protected areas and 9% within integral protection areas (MMA, 2018b). In areas with low protection status, extractive activities are permit- ted in accordance with applicable law, resulting in inade- quate protection for species at imminent risk of extinction (Schulze et al., 2018). In addition, some areas officially desig- nated as protected lack essential infrastructure or resources, resulting in little if any actual protection (Saout et al., 2013; Oliveira & Bernard, 2017). Despite problems related to the poor management of these areas, protected areas are rele- vant because they prevent the conversion of natural ecosys- tems (Geldmann et al., 2013) and support a greater diversity and abundance of species than unprotected areas (Gray et al., 2016). We observed the least overlap between habitat suitabil-


ity for the primate species and government priority areas for biodiversity conservation in the north-eastern Atlantic Forest. This is because most of the Atlantic Forest priority areas are concentrated in southern Brazil (MMA, 2018a).


Only two government priority areas were considered in north-east Brazil and these are located in the state of Bahia, in areas where the target species do not occur. Al- though government priority areas cover c. 25% of biomes such as the Amazon, Caatinga and Cerrado, only 6–10% of these areas were predicted as suitable for the three primate species in our study. Nevertheless, because a large proportion of government priority areas within the mod- elled suitable areas is not within protected areas, it will be necessary to identify potential connectivity areas, and areas for the expansion or creation of new protected areas, to con- serve these primate species. The government priority areas within the areas suitable for the target species thatwill remain suitable under future climate change (SupplementaryTable 4) are potential sites for reintroducing confiscated individuals from the illegal wildlife trade, provided these areas are under some level of legal protection. The low forest cover in areas predicted to be suitable for


the three target species is mainly a result of the high an- thropogenic impact on biomes such as the Atlantic Forest, Caatinga and Cerrado. The north-eastern Atlantic Forest is highly fragmented (Ribeiro et al., 2011), and in the Per- nambuco Endemism Center, which includes the distribu- tion of A. belzebul and S. flavius, 99% of the remnant for- est fragments are smaller than 50 ha (Silva & Fialho, 2013). Similarly, only 50% of the original vegetation remains in the Caatinga and Cerrado (MMA, 2016; Strassburg et al., 2017).


Oryx, 2020, 54(6), 803–813 © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605319001388


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164