Monitoring global biodiversity from space through remotely sensing geospatial patterns has high potential to add to our knowledge acquired by field observation. Although a framework of essential biodiversity variables (EBVs) is emerging for monitoring biodiversity, its poor alignment with remote sensing products hinders interpolation between field observations. This study compiles a comprehensive, prioritized list of remote sensing biodiversity products that can further improve the monitoring of geospatial biodiversity patterns, enhancing the EBV framework and its applicability. The ecosystem structure and ecosystem function EBV classes, which capture the biological effects of disturbance as well as habitat structure, are shown by an expert review process to be the most relevant, feasible, accurate and mature for direct monitoring of biodiversity from satellites. Biodiversity products that require satellite remote sensing of a finer resolution that is still under development are given lower priority (for example, for the EBV class species traits). Some EBVs are not directly measurable by remote sensing from space, specifically the EBV class genetic composition. Linking remote sensing products to EBVs will accelerate product generation, improving reporting on the state of biodiversity from local to global scales.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Open Access articles citing this article.
Predicting species distributions and community composition using satellite remote sensing predictors
Scientific Reports Open Access 12 August 2021
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to Nature and 55 other Nature journal
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $9.92 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Díaz, S. et al. Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES Secretariat, 2019).
Paganini, M., Leidner, A. K., Geller, G., Turner, W. & Wegmann, M. The role of space agencies in remotely sensed essential biodiversity variables. Remote Sens. Ecol. Conserv. 2, 132–140 (2016).
What are EBVs? GEO BON https://geobon.org/ebvs/what-are-ebvs/ (2020).
Pereira, H. M. et al. Essential biodiversity variables. Science 339, 277–278 (2013).
Jetz, W. et al. Monitoring plant functional diversity from space. Nat. Plants 2, 16024 (2016).
Navarro, L. M. et al. Monitoring biodiversity change through effective global coordination. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 29, 158–169 (2017).
Pettorelli, N. et al. Framing the concept of satellite remote sensing essential biodiversity variables: challenges and future directions. Remote Sens. Ecol. Conserv. 2, 122–131 (2016).
Lausch, A. et al. Understanding forest health with remote sensing, part III: requirements for a scalable multi-source forest health monitoring network based on data science approaches. Remote Sens. 10, 1120 (2018).
Barga, R., Gannon, D. & Reed, D. The client and the cloud democratizing research computing. IEEE Internet Comput. 15, 72–75 (2011).
Muller-Karger, F. E. et al. Satellite sensor requirements for monitoring essential biodiversity variables of coastal ecosystems. Ecol. Appl. 28, 749–760 (2018).
O’Connor, B. et al. Earth observation as a tool for tracking progress towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Remote Sens. Ecol. Conserv. 1, 19–28 (2015).
Geijzendorffer, I. R. et al. Bridging the gap between biodiversity data and policy reporting needs: an essential biodiversity variables perspective. J. Appl. Ecol. 53, 1341–1350 (2016).
Rohde, S., Hostmann, M., Peter, A. & Ewald, K. C. Room for rivers: an integrative search strategy for floodplain restoration. Landsc. Urban Plan. 78, 50–70 (2006).
Belward, A. The Global Observing System for Climate: Implementation Needs Report No. GCOS-200 (Global Climate Observing System, 2016).
Bojinski, S. et al. The concept of essential climate variables in support of climate research, applications, and policy. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 95, 1431–1443 (2014).
Wu, J. G. Effects of changing scale on landscape pattern analysis: scaling relations. Landsc. Ecol. 19, 125–138 (2004).
Lake, P. S. Disturbance, patchiness, and diversity in streams. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 19, 573–592 (2000).
Graves, S. J. et al. Tree species abundance predictions in a tropical agricultural landscape with a supervised classification model and imbalanced data. Remote Sens. 8, 161 (2016).
Schlerf, M., Atzberger, C. & Hill, J. Remote sensing of forest biophysical variables using HyMap imaging spectrometer data. Remote Sens. Environ. 95, 177–194 (2005).
Xue, Y. F., Wang, T. J. & Skidmore, A. K. Automatic counting of large mammals from very high resolution panchromatic satellite imagery. Remote Sens. 9, 878 (2017).
Zhao, M. S., Heinsch, F. A., Nemani, R. R. & Running, S. W. Improvements of the MODIS terrestrial gross and net primary production global data set. Remote Sens. Environ. 95, 164–176 (2005).
Myneni, R. B. et al. Global products of vegetation leaf area and fraction absorbed PAR from year one of MODIS data. Remote Sens. Environ. 83, 214–231 (2002).
Curran, P. J., Dungan, J. L. & Peterson, D. L. Estimating the foliar biochemical concentration of leaves with reflectance spectrometry testing the Kokaly and Clark methodologies. Remote Sens. Environ. 76, 349–359 (2001).
Homolova, L., Maenovsky, Z., Clevers, J., Garcia-Santos, G. & Schaeprnan, M. E. Review of optical-based remote sensing for plant trait mapping. Ecol. Complex. 15, 1–16 (2013).
Khosravipour, A., Skidmore, A. K. & Isenburg, M. Generating spike-free digital surface models using LiDAR raw point clouds: a new approach for forestry applications. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 52, 104–114 (2016).
Verger, A. & Descals, A. Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)—300 m Version 1; Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document (ATBD), Issue 1.00 (Framework Service Contract No. 199494-JRC) (Copernicus Global Land Operations CGLOPS-1, 2020).
Copernicus Global Land Service: FAPAR Copernicus https://land.copernicus.eu/global/about (2020).
Schmidt, K. S. et al. Mapping coastal vegetation using an expert system and hyperspectral imagery. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 70, 703–715 (2004).
Arvor, D., Durieux, L., Andres, S. & Laporte, M. A. Advances in geographic object-based image analysis with ontologies: a review of main contributions and limitations from a remote sensing perspective. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 82, 125–137 (2013).
Lucas, R., Rowlands, A., Brown, A., Keyworth, S. & Bunting, P. Rule-based classification of multi-temporal satellite imagery for habitat and agricultural land cover mapping. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 62, 165–185 (2007).
Skidmore, A. K. An expert system classifies eucalypt forest types using Landsat thematic mapper data and a digital terrain model. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 55, 1449–1464 (1989).
Tuanmu, M. N. & Jetz, W. A global 1-km consensus land-cover product for biodiversity and ecosystem modelling. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 23, 1031–1045 (2014).
Lausch, A. et al. Understanding and quantifying landscape structure—a review on relevant process characteristics, data models and landscape metrics. Ecol. Model. 295, 31–41 (2015).
Buchhorn, M. et al. Copernicus global land cover layers—Collection 2. Remote Sens. 12, 1044 (2020).
Herkt, K. M. B., Skidmore, A. K. & Fahr, J. Macroecological conclusions based on IUCN expert maps: a call for caution. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 26, 930–941 (2017).
Hansen, M. C. et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342, 850–853 (2013).
Pekel, J., Cottam, A., Gorelick, N. & Belward, A. S. High-resolution mapping of global surface water and its long-term changes. Nature 540, 418–422 (2016).
Ye, H. et al. Improving remote sensing-based net primary production estimation in the grazed land with defoliation formulation model. J. Mt. Sci. 16, 323–336 (2019).
Curran, P. J. & Steele, C. M. MERIS: the re-branding of an ocean sensor. Int. J. Remote Sens. 26, 1781–1798 (2005).
Garrigues, S., Allard, D., Baret, F. & Weiss, M. Influence of landscape spatial heterogeneity on the non-linear estimation of leaf area index from moderate spatial resolution remote sensing data. Remote Sens. Environ. 105, 286–298 (2006).
Wu, S. B. et al. Monitoring tree-crown scale autumn leaf phenology in a temperate forest with an integration of PlanetScope and drone remote sensing observations. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 171, 36–48 (2021).
Salcedo-Sanz, S. et al. Machine learning information fusion in Earth observation: a comprehensive review of methods, applications and data sources. Inf. Fusion 63, 256–272 (2020).
Kissling, W. D. et al. Building essential biodiversity variables (EBVs) of species distribution and abundance at a global scale. Biol. Rev. 93, 600–625 (2018).
Healy, C., Gotelli, N. J. & Potvin, C. Partitioning the effects of biodiversity and environmental heterogeneity for productivity and mortality in a tropical tree plantation. J. Ecol. 96, 903–913 (2008).
Richards, J. A., Woodgate, P. W. & Skidmore, A. K. An explanation of enhanced radar backscattering from flooded forests. Int. J. Remote Sens. 8, 1093–1100 (1987).
Morsdorf, F. et al. in Remote Sensing of Plant Biodiversity (eds Cavender-Bares, J. et al.) 83–104 (Springer International, 2020).
Gratani, L. & Bombelli, A. Correlation between leaf age and other leaf traits in three Mediterranean maquis shrub species: Quercus ilex, Phillyrea latifolia and Cistus incanus. Environ. Exp. Bot. 43, 141–153 (2000).
Kitayama, K. & Aiba, S. I. Ecosystem structure and productivity of tropical rain forests along altitudinal gradients with contrasting soil phosphorus pools on Mount Kinabalu, Borneo. J. Ecol. 90, 37–51 (2002).
Nagler, P. L., Glenn, E. P. & Hinojosa-Huerta, O. Synthesis of ground and remote sensing data for monitoring ecosystem functions in the Colorado River Delta, Mexico. Remote Sens. Environ. 113, 1473–1485 (2009).
Brassard, B. W., Chen, H. Y. H., Bergeron, Y. & Pare, D. Differences in fine root productivity between mixed- and single-species stands. Funct. Ecol. 25, 238–246 (2011).
Reich, P. B., Walters, M. B. & Ellsworth, D. S. Leaf life-span in relation to leaf, plant, and stand characteristics among diverse ecosystems. Ecol. Monogr. 62, 365–392 (1992).
Huston, M. A. & Wolverton, S. The global distribution of net primary production: resolving the paradox. Ecol. Monogr. 79, 343–377 (2009).
Jones, M. O., Jones, L. A., Kimball, J. S. & McDonald, K. C. Satellite passive microwave remote sensing for monitoring global land surface phenology. Remote Sens. Environ. 115, 1102–1114 (2011).
Garonna, I., de Jong, R. & Schaepman, M. E. Variability and evolution of global land surface phenology over the past three decades (1982–2012). Glob. Change Biol. 22, 1456–1468 (2016).
Niklas, K. J. et al. ‘Diminishing returns’ in the scaling of functional leaf traits across and within species groups. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 8891–8896 (2007).
Walker, B., Kinzig, A. & Langridge, J. Plant attribute diversity, resilience, and ecosystem function: the nature and significance of dominant and minor species. Ecosystems 2, 95–113 (1999).
Bai, Y. F. et al. Grazing alters ecosystem functioning and C:N:P stoichiometry of grasslands along a regional precipitation gradient. J. Appl. Ecol. 49, 1204–1215 (2012).
Schmeller, D. S. et al. An operational definition of essential biodiversity variables. Biodivers. Conserv. 26, 2967–2972 (2017).
Potter, C. et al. Recent history of large-scale ecosystem disturbances in North America derived from the AVHRR satellite record. Ecosystems 8, 808–824 (2005).
Roy, D. P., Boschetti, L., Justice, C. O. & Ju, J. The collection 5 MODIS burned area product—global evaluation by comparison with the MODIS active fire product. Remote Sens. Environ. 112, 3690–3707 (2008).
Russell-Smith, J., Ryan, P. G. & Durieu, R. A LANDSAT MSS-derived fire history of Kakadu National Park, monsoonal northern Australia, 1980–94: seasonal extent, frequency and patchiness. J. Appl. Ecol. 34, 748–766 (1997).
Van der Werf, G. R. et al. Global fire emissions and the contribution of deforestation, savanna, forest, agricultural, and peat fires (1997–2009). Atmos. Chem. Phys. 10, 11707–11735 (2010).
Nidumolu, U. B., De Bie, C., Van Keulen, H. & Skidmore, A. K. Enhancement of area-specific land-use objectives for land development. Land Degrad. Dev. 15, 513–525 (2004).
Chen, F. et al. Fast automatic airport detection in remote sensing images using convolutional neural networks. Remote Sens. 10, 443 (2018).
Weng, Q. H. Remote sensing of impervious surfaces in the urban areas: requirements, methods, and trends. Remote Sens. Environ. 117, 34–49 (2012).
Scott, G. J., England, M. R., Starms, W. A., Marcum, R. A. & Davis, C. H. Training deep convolutional neural networks for land-cover classification of high-resolution imagery. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 14, 549–553 (2017).
Skidmore, A. K., Turner, B. J., Brinkhof, W. & Knowles, E. Performance of a neural network: mapping forests using GIS and remotely sensed data. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 63, 501–514 (1997).
Joshi, C. et al. Indirect remote sensing of a cryptic forest understorey invasive species. For. Ecol. Manag. 225, 245–256 (2006).
Defries, R. S. et al. Mapping the land surface for global atmosphere–biosphere models—toward continuous distributions of vegetation’s functional properties. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 100, 20867–20882 (1995).
Cunliffe, A. M., Brazier, R. E. & Anderson, K. Ultra-fine grain landscape-scale quantification of dryland vegetation structure with drone-acquired structure-from-motion photogrammetry. Remote Sens. Environ. 183, 129–143 (2016).
Asner, G. P., Wessman, C. A. & Schimel, D. S. Heterogeneity of savanna canopy structure and function from imaging spectrometry and inverse modeling. Ecol. Appl. 8, 1022–1036 (1998).
Peterseil, J. et al. Evaluating the ecological sustainability of Austrian agricultural landscapes—the SINUS approach. Land Use Policy 21, 307–320 (2004).
Saura, S., Bodin, O. & Fortin, M. J. Stepping stones are crucial for species’ long-distance dispersal and range expansion through habitat networks. J. Appl. Ecol. 51, 171–182 (2014).
De Jong, R., de Bruin, S., de Wit, A., Schaepman, M. E. & Dent, D. L. Analysis of monotonic greening and browning trends from global NDVI time-series. Remote Sens. Environ. 115, 692–702 (2011).
Kissling, W. D. et al. Towards global data products of essential biodiversity variables on species traits. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1531–1540 (2018).
Baldeck, C. A. & Asner, G. P. Improving remote species identification through efficient training data collection. Remote Sens. 6, 2682–2698 (2014).
Fassnacht, F. E. et al. Review of studies on tree species classification from remotely sensed data. Remote Sens. Environ. 186, 64–87 (2016).
Lausch, A. et al. Linking earth observation and taxonomic, structural and functional biodiversity: local to ecosystem perspectives. Ecol. Indic. 70, 317–339 (2016).
Shi, Y. F., Wang, T. J., Skidmore, A. K. & Heurich, M. Important LiDAR metrics for discriminating forest tree species in Central Europe. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 137, 163–174 (2018).
Wilkes, P. et al. Using discrete-return airborne laser scanning to quantify number of canopy strata across diverse forest types. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 700–712 (2016).
Hyyppa, J. et al. Review of methods of small-footprint airborne laser scanning for extracting forest inventory data in boreal forests. Int. J. Remote Sens. 29, 1339–1366 (2008).
Transon, J., d’Andrimont, R., Maugnard, A. & Defourny, P. Survey of hyperspectral earth observation applications from space in the Sentinel-2 context. Remote Sens. 10, 157 (2018).
Guanter, L. et al. The EnMAP spaceborne imaging spectroscopy mission for Earth observation. Remote Sens. 7, 8830–8857 (2015).
Qi, W. L. & Dubayah, R. O. Combining Tandem-X InSAR and simulated GEDI LiDAR observations for forest structure mapping. Remote Sens. Environ. 187, 253–266 (2016).
Ramoelo, A., Cho, M., Mathieu, R. & Skidmore, A. K. Potential of Sentinel-2 spectral configuration to assess rangeland quality. J. Appl. Remote Sens. 9, 094096 (2015).
Madonsela, S. et al. Multi-phenology WorldView-2 imagery improves remote sensing of savannah tree species. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 58, 65–73 (2017).
Bush, A. et al. Connecting Earth observation to high-throughput biodiversity data. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 0176 (2017).
Kays, R., Crofoot, M. C., Jetz, W. & Wikelski, M. Terrestrial animal tracking as an eye on life and planet. Science 348, aaa2478 (2015).
Meireles, J. E. et al. Leaf reflectance spectra capture the evolutionary history of seed plants. New Phytol. 228, 485–493 (2020).
McManus, K. M. et al. Phylogenetic structure of foliar spectral traits in tropical forest canopies. Remote Sens. 8, 196 (2016).
Urbano, F. et al. Wildlife tracking data management: a new vision. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 365, 2177–2185 (2010).
Cubaynes, H. C., Fretwell, P. T., Bamford, C., Gerrish, L. & Jackson, J. A. Whales from space: four mysticete species described using new VHR satellite imagery. Mar. Mammal. Sci. 35, 466–491 (2019).
Yang, Z. et al. Spotting East African mammals in open savannah from space. PLoS ONE 9, e115989 (2014).
Neumann, W. et al. Opportunities for the application of advanced remotely-sensed data in ecological studies of terrestrial animal movement. Mov. Ecol. 3, 8 (2015).
Weiss, J. R., Smythe, W. D. & Lu, W. W. Science Traceability. In Proc. IEEE Aerospace Conference 292–299 (IEEE, 2005).
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Thriving on Our Changing Planet: A Decadal Strategy for Earth Observation from Space (National Academies Press, 2018).
Verstraete, M. M., Diner, D. J. & Bezy, J. L. Planning for a spaceborne Earth observation mission: from user expectations to measurement requirements. Environ. Sci. Policy 54, 419–427 (2015).
Skidmore, A. K. et al. Agree on biodiversity metrics to track from space. Nature 523, 403–405 (2015).
Masek, J. G. et al. North American forest disturbance mapped from a decadal Landsat record. Remote Sens. Environ. 112, 2914–2926 (2008).
O’Connor, B., Bojinski, S., Roosli, C. & Schaepman, M. E. Monitoring global changes in biodiversity and climate essential as ecological crisis intensifies. Ecol. Inform. 55, 101033 (2020).
Hansen, M. C., Stehman, S. V. & Potapov, P. V. Quantification of global gross forest cover loss. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 8650–8655 (2010).
Vihervaara, P. et al. How essential biodiversity variables and remote sensing can help national biodiversity monitoring. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 10, 43–59 (2017).
Walters, M. et al. Essential Biodiversity Variables UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/17/INF/7 (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2013).
Asner, G. P. et al. Airborne laser-guided imaging spectroscopy to map forest trait diversity and guide conservation. Science 355, 385–389 (2017).
Coll, M. et al. Ecological indicators to capture the effects of fishing on biodiversity and conservation status of marine ecosystems. Ecol. Indic. 60, 947–962 (2016).
Díaz, S. et al. The global spectrum of plant form and function. Nature 529, 167–171 (2016).
Gibert, J. P., Dell, A. I., DeLong, J. P. & Pawar, S. Scaling-up trait variation from individuals to ecosystems. Adv. Ecol. Res. 52, 1–17 (2015).
Hagen, M. et al. Biodiversity, species interactions and ecological networks in a fragmented world. Adv. Ecol. Res. 46, 89–210 (2012).
Lavorel, S. & Garnier, E. Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning from plant traits: revisiting the Holy Grail. Funct. Ecol. 16, 545–556 (2002).
Thackeray, S. J. et al. Phenological sensitivity to climate across taxa and trophic levels. Nature 535, 241–245 (2016).
Díaz, S. et al. Functional traits, the phylogeny of function, and ecosystem service vulnerability. Ecol. Evol. 3, 2958–2975 (2013).
Turner, W. Sensing biodiversity. Science 346, 301–302 (2014).
Schmeller, D. et al. Building capacity in biodiversity monitoring at the global scale. Biodivers. Conserv. 26, 2765–2790 (2017).
Belward, A. S. & Skoien, J. O. Who launched what, when and why; trends in global land-cover observation capacity from civilian earth observation satellites. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 103, 115–128 (2015).
Vogel, D. Private global business regulation. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 11, 261–282 (2008).
Tranquilli, S. et al. Lack of conservation effort rapidly increases African great ape extinction risk. Conserv. Lett. 5, 48–55 (2012).
Buchanan, G. M. et al. Free satellite data key to conservation. Science 361, 139–140 (2018).
Turner, W. et al. Free and open-access satellite data are key to biodiversity conservation. Biol. Conserv. 182, 173–176 (2015).
Wulder, M. A. et al. Virtual constellations for global terrestrial monitoring. Remote Sens. Environ. 170, 62–76 (2015).
Elith, J. et al. Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29, 129–151 (2006).
Czyz, E. A. et al. Intraspecific genetic variation of a Fagus sylvatica population in a temperate forest derived from airborne imaging spectroscopy time series. Ecol. Evol. 10, 7419–7430 (2020).
Schweiger, A. K. et al. Plant spectral diversity integrates functional and phylogenetic components of biodiversity and predicts ecosystem function. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 976–982 (2018).
Cavender-Bares, J. et al. Associations of leaf spectra with genetic and phylogenetic variation in oaks: prospects for remote detection of biodiversity. Remote Sens. 8, 221 (2016).
Surface Biology and Geology (SBG) NASA Science https://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/decadal-sbg (2020).
This project has received support from the European Space Agency GlobDiversity project, the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement 834709), the NextGEOSS project (grant agreement 730329, H2020-EU.3.5.5) and e-Shape (grant agreement 820852, H2020-EU.3.5.5). The project workshops were supported by the GEO BON Secretariat at iDiv (DFG-FZT 118, project 202548816) (Leipzig, Germany), the European Space Agency (Frascati, Italy) and the University of Twente (Enschede, the Netherlands). W.D.K. acknowledges financial support from the Faculty of Science, Research Cluster Global Ecology, University of Amsterdam. F.E.M.-K. received support from NASA grants NNX14AP62A, 80NSSC20K0017 and NA19NOS0120199. The contribution of M.E.S. is supported by the UZH URPP GCB. P.V. acknowledges the IBC-Carbon Project funded by the Strategic Research Council (SRC) at the Academy of Finland (grant number 312559) and the Finnish Ecosystem Observatory.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information Nature Ecology & Evolution thanks Jeannine Cavender-Bares and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Skidmore, A.K., Coops, N.C., Neinavaz, E. et al. Priority list of biodiversity metrics to observe from space. Nat Ecol Evol 5, 896–906 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01451-x
This article is cited by
Nature Sustainability (2023)
Spatiotemporal impacts of climate change and human activities on water resources and ecological sensitivity in the Mekong subregion in Cambodia
Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2023)
Nature Ecology & Evolution (2022)
Advancing Global Biodiversity Governance: Recommendations for Strengthening the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework
Anthropocene Science (2022)
Anthropogenic Land Use and Land Cover Changes—A Review on Its Environmental Consequences and Climate Change
Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing (2022)