Concept Web
┌──────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ BIODIVERSITY │
│ (3 levels: Genetic, Species, Ecological) │
└────────────┬─────────────────────────────┘
│
┌──────────────────┼──────────────────┐
│ │ │
┌─────────▼──────┐ ┌───────▼────────┐ ┌──────▼──────────┐
│ IMPORTANCE │ │ THREATS │ │ CONSERVATION │
│ Direct (food, │ │ (HIPPO: │ │ In-situ: │
│ medicine) │ │ Habitat loss, │ │ parks, reserves,│
│ Indirect │ │ Invasives, │ │ sacred groves │
│ ($33T/yr) │ │ Population, │ │ Ex-situ: │
│ Ethical │ │ Pollution, │ │ zoos, seed banks│
│ (biophilia) │ │ Co-extinction)│ │ cryopreservation│
└────────────────┘ └────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘
│ │ │
└──────────────────▼───────────────────┘
┌───────────────┐
│ LAWS/TREATIES │
│ CBD (1992) │
│ Ramsar (1971) │
│ CITES │
│ WPA India │
└───────────────┘
Cross-Concept Connections
| Connection | Explanation |
|---|
| High biodiversity → High ecosystem services | More species = more redundancy = more stable ecosystem services (Costanza $33T) |
| Habitat loss (H) → Co-extinction (O) | Habitat loss reduces species → dependent species also lost (multiplier effect) |
| Hotspot identification → Conservation priority | Regions with highest endemism + threat get first conservation investment |
| Genetic diversity → Species resilience | Higher genetic variation within species = better adaptation to changing environment |
| Island Z value → Reserve design | Large reserves preferred — smaller reserves lose species faster (higher Z equivalent) |
| Sacred groves → Community conservation model | Shows traditional knowledge systems align with modern in-situ conservation goals |