Combining extinction probability and functional or phylogenetic distinctiveness to define conservation priorities

Given the current accelerating extinction rates, an increasing number of species-based conservation strategies have emerged because of the public interest in helping save particular species by funding rescue actions. Although public interest has focused mainly on well-studied, charismatic species, conservation scientists have developed tools to help prioritize species conservation from a more objective perspective, preserving ecosystem functioning and human well-being for future generations. For that purpose, species-centered biodiversity indicators that account not only for the extinction risk of a species but also for its evolutionary and/or functional distinctiveness have been developed. A species is considered irreplaceable and distinctive if it is isolated on the phylogenetic tree and/or if it has distinct traits, especially functional traits that determine the species' effects on ecosystems. The quantitative values representing extinction risk and distinctiveness of species have often been multiplied to define a quantitative conservation priority score. However, there is a plethora of ways to combine several conservation criteria into a single quantitative priority score, and the product of this multiplication is one such possibility. Each possible way of combining extinction risk and distinctiveness provides a different point of view on which of these should prevail to set conservation priorities. We set up an axiomatic framework on how a species' distinctiveness could be combined with its extinction risk via a tool used to define conservation priorities. By doing so, we show that further work is still needed to better communicate biodiversity indicators to the public and ensure an informed choice of indicators.