STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

The aim of the A.P.E.S. Dashboard is to support broad scale comparisons of the pressure upon Important Ape Sites (IASs). Broad scale analysis has the potential to guide conservation actions. The intent of the A.P.E.S. Dashboard is to support broad scale scoping decisions via the provision of a set of analytical tools which can highlight the differences among selected sites. Results from the A.P.E.S. Dashboard will enable the user to identify a subset of focus IASs which can be further refined through detailed analysis, study and data collection.

FILTERS

Regions (obligatory): The first step in analysing sites is to select one of two regions, Africa or Asia. This limits the analyses to regional species and country combinations. The region can be selected on the initial dashboard landing page (http://apesportal.eva.mpg.de/status/tools/dashboard). To return to the landing page reload or refresh this webpage.

Taxa (optional): The user may select which taxa are to be included in the analyses (taxa of interest). All combinations of taxa are possible, with the only restriction being the region, i.e. only species within the same region (Africa or Asia) can be included in the same analysis.

Countries (optional): The analysis can be constrained to a particular country or group of countries within the selected region. The countries filter allows you to choose which IASs to include in the analysis. For example, if interested in ape conservation within a particular country, by selecting all taxa in the first step, and a country of interest in the second, all ape taxa that occur in that country will be included in the analysis.

Site category (optional): The category filter allows you to choose which type of IASs to include in the current analysis. Important Ape Site(IASs) can be protected areas (as listed in the WDPA, an ape priority area as identified by the IUCN/SSC species action plans (Tutin et al, 2005; Morgan et al, 2011 and Plumptre et al, 2010) or a conservation landscape as identified by CARPE or the ARCUS foundation.

SCORES AND SLIDERS

Pressure score (Y axis): This score, which ranges from 0 – 1, provides a relative measure of the extent and severity of several threats acting upon the extent of occurrence (EOO) of a given taxon within a site. The pressure score combines a set of four proxies including the human influence index, human population count and change, deforestation and temporal changes in habitat suitability. The pressure score for a selected taxon is determined by the highest of all four proxy scores (the proxy determining the overall pressure score is specified in the full downloadable table). If multiple, selected taxa occur within one site, the overall site pressure score is determined by the taxon with the highest pressure score within that IAS.
A high pressure score (approaching one) is indicative that one (or more) species present at that IAS encounter(s) high pressure relative to the pressure observed within its entire EOO. This means that the species of interest at that site can be considered to be under significant pressure relative to where it occurs.

Habitat score (X axis): This score, which ranges from 0 – 1, provides an estimate of habitat condition within the EOO of a given taxon within an IAS. It is calculated using the mean percent vegetation cover as a proxy for habitat condition. For a selected taxon at a given site, the habitat score reports a score based on (a) the habitat preferences of the taxon and (b) vegetation cover at the site relative to the range of values encountered by the taxon within its EOO. If there are multiple taxa within one site the overall habitat score is that of the taxon which determines the overall pressure score within the IAS. A high habitat score (approaching one) indicates that one (or more) species at that site encounter(s) high amounts of vegetation cover relative to (a) its preferred habitat and (b) vegetation cover found in its EOO.

Response (can be selected): This score, which ranges from 0 – 1, provides a measure of the conservation actions undertaken within the IAS based on two proxies: (a) the proportion of the IAS formally designated as a protected area, and (b) a measure of the IUCN protected area management category of the protected areas within the IAS. The colour of a circle represents the relative response score. Darker colours (brown) indicate higher values, for example, a darker coloured site would have a higher protection extent and/or protection category than a lighter coloured site. The response slider allows you to filter sites included in the analysis according to their overall response score.

Biodiversity (can be selected): This score, which ranges from 0 – 1, provides an estimate of the relative potential of a given site to conserve regional biodiversity and contribute to the conservation of ecosystem services. Proxies for biodiversity and ecosystem services considered include (a) vertebrate species richness, (b) the number/proportion of vertebrate threatened species and (c) carbon stock. The colour of a circle (shades of green/blue) represents the relative biodiversity score for the corresponding site. Therefore, a darker coloured (dark blue) site has the potential to contain a relatively high number of vertebrate species (when compared within a region), a high proportion of threatened vertebrate species and/or relatively high carbon stock (when compared within a region). The biodiversity slider allows you to filter the sites included in the analysis according to biodiversity potential and carbon stocks.

IAS Area: The area of the IASs is reported in square kilometres. The IAS area slider allows you to filter the sites included in the analysis according to their spatial extent. In the graph the circle area is proportion to the IAS area. Note that larger IASs do not necessarily imply larger ape populations.

Uncertainty (available in summary table): The uncertainty score provides a relative estimate of the confidence surrounding scores derived for a given IAS. It has two proxies: (a) the extent of the analysed area and (b) dataset availability. The utility of uncertainty scores is to compare the relative values among sites, not the absolute value. For example, an IAS with an uncertainty value of 0.5 is not 50% accurate, it does however have lower uncertainty associated with its overall scores than a site with a score of 0.75. Equally, a score of 0.75 is not 25% worse than a score of 0.5.

OUTPUTS

Graph: The graph is the principle tool within the A.P.E.S. Dashboard for comparing sites and their relative scores. This graph enables the interpretation of four types of information simultaneously: Pressure score, Habitat score, IAS area and Biodiversity or Response score (depending on the user selection).

Map: The spatial context of IASs is best analysed via the map display. Included layers enable the user to explore the position of the site relative to major urban areas, roads and rivers. Datasets included in the scoring of sites such as human population, deforestation, human influence index, forest cover, species richness, carbon stocks and the species EOOs are also included in the map display under the “visible layers” dropdown. It should be noted that the Extent of Occurrence of Gibbon species are displayed at the Genus level. This aggregation is for ease of display. All Gibbon species are analysed at the most detailed taxonomic level available (see table below).

Table: Detailed site comparisons are reliant on the values included in the summary table. Tabular outputs are split into two levels. A simplified table (as displayed on the website) includes a summary of site scores only. Fields contained in the summary table are explained throughout this help file (see above) excluding the “Taxon-Site Overlap (%)”. This field details the percentage of the IAS that overlaps with the extent of occurrence (EOO) of the taxon that drives the pressure, habitat and uncertainty scores. Detailed results tables (available for download) include all scoring component values plus additional information in the form of actual parameter values. Results in this table are included for all species and all sites. Fields included in the downloadable tables are fully described in the full methodology document (available from the methodology link on the A.P.E.S. Dashboard).

Tabular outputs contain the following taxa codes:

Taxa Scientific Name	Taxa Common Name	Taxa Code
Hylobates lar ssp. lar	Malaysian lar	hll
Hylobates lar ssp. entelloides	Central lar	hle
Hylobates lar ssp. carpenteri	Carpenter's lar	hlc
Hylobates lar ssp. yunnanensis	Yunnan lar	hly
Hylobates lar ssp. vestitus	Sumatran lar	hlv
Hylobates agilis	Agile gibbon, Black-handed gibbon	ha
Hylobates muelleri ssp. funereus	Northern gray gibbon	hmf
Hylobates muelleri ssp. abbotti	Abbott's gray gibbon	hma
Hylobates muelleri ssp. muelleri	Southern gray gibbon	hmm
Hylobates moloch	Silvery gibbon	hm
Hylobates pileatus	Pileated gibbon, capped gibbon	hp
Hylobates albibarbis	Bornean agile gibbon	hal
Hylobates klossii	Kloss's gibbon, Mentawai gibbon, Bilou	hk
Hoolock hoolock	Western hoolock gibbon	hh
Hoolock leuconedys	Eastern hoolock gibbon	hl
Symphalangus syndactylus	Siamang	ss
Nomascus concolor ssp. lu	Laotian black crested gibbon	ncl
Nomascus concolor ssp. concolor	Tonkin blackcrested gibbon	ncc
Nomascus concolor ssp. furvogaster	West Yunnan black crested gibbon	ncf
Nomascus concolor ssp. jingdongensis	Central Yunnan black crested gibbon	ncj
Nomascus nasutus	Eastern black crested gibbon	nn
Nomascus leucogenys	White-cheeked crested gibbon	nl
Nomascus siki	Souhtern white-cheecked gibbon	ns
Nomascus hainanus	Hainan black crested gibbon	nh
Nomascus gabriellae	Yellow-cheeked gibbon	ng
Pongo pygmaeus	Bornean orangutan	ppy
Pongo abelii	Sumatran orangutan	pa
Gorilla gorilla ssp. gorilla	Western lowland gorilla	ggg
Gorilla gorilla ssp. diehli	Cross River gorilla	ggd
Gorilla beringei ssp.beringei	Mountain gorilla	gbb
Gorilla beringei ssp. graueri	Eastern lowland gorilla	gbg
Pan troglodytes ssp. verus	Western chimpanzee	ptv
Pan troglodytes ssp. ellioti	Nigerian-Cameroon chimpanzee	pte
Pan troglodytes troglodytes	Central chimpanzee	ptt
Pan troglodytes ssp. schweinfurthii	Eastern chimpanzee	pts
Pan paniscus	Bonobo	pp

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF USE OF THE A.P.E.S. DASHBOARD

The A.P.E.S. Dashboard scoring methodology has been developed by UNEP-WCMC in consultation with Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and IUCN Species Survival Commission and the data incorporated in the analyses has been made available for use by the conservation community. For a full list of data sources and data acknowledgements please refer to the full methodology document. The information presented represents the best available information for the analyses and we take no responsibility for use by third parties.

ABOUT:

The A.P.E.S. Dashboard was produced by UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK (c) 2012.

For questions please contact Elizabeth Farmer, Cecilia Larrosa or Jörn Scharlemann at mailto:info@unep-wcmc.org (including the subject header A.P.E.S. Dashboard).

RECOMMENDED CITATION:

UNEP-WCMC (2012) A.P.E.S. Dashboard. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK. Available at http://apesportal.eva.mpg.de/status/tools/dashboard

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:

We thank all data providers, the ARCUS foundation for funding, and the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and IUCN Species Survival Commission for their input into the development of the A.P.E.S. Dashboard methodology. Please refer to the full methodology document (http://apesportal.eva.mpg.de/status/tools/dashboard/APES_Dashboard_Methodology.pdf) for full project acknowledgements.