Spatially congruent sites of importance for global shark and ray biodiversity

34. Davidson LNK, Dulvy NK. Global marine protected areas to prevent extinctions. Nat Ecol Evol. 2017; 1: 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-016-0001 35. Earth Natural. Free vector and raster map data. 2018. Available: naturalearthdata.com 36. Redding DW, Hartmann K, Mimoto A, et al. Evolutionarily distinctive species often capture more phylo- genetic diversity than expected. J Theor Biol. 2008; 251: 606–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2007. 12.006 PMID: 18313078 37. Redding DW, Mooers AO. Incorporating evolutionary measures into conservation prioritization. Con- serv Biol. 2006; 20: 1670–1678. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00555.x PMID: 17181802 38. Davidson AD, Boyer AG, Kim H, et al. Drivers and hotspots of extinction risk in marine mammals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012; 109: 3395–3400. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1121469109 PMID: 22308490 39. Pompa S, Ehrlich PR, Ceballos G. Global distribution and conservation of marine mammals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108: 13600–13605. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1101525108 PMID: 21808012 40. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. In: 2011.1 [Internet]. Available: http://www.iucnredlist.org 41. Myers N. The biodiversity challenges: expanded hot-spots analysis. Environmentalist. 1990; 10: 243– 256. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02239720 PMID: 12322583 42. Bibby C., et al. Bird conservation: putting biodiversity on the map: priority areas for global conservation. Int Counc Bird Preserv. 1992; 8: 37. https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0060 43. (ESRI) ESRI. ArcGIS Pro Desktop. Redlands, CA; 2019.

44. Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R foundation for statistical computing.; 2019. Available: http://www.r-project.org/index.html 45. R Studio Team. RStudio: Integrated development for R. Boston, MA: RStudio Inc.; 2018. Available: http://www.rstudio.com 46. Ku¨ per W, Sommer JH, Lovett JC, et al. Africa’s hotspots of biodiversity redefined. 2004; 91: 525–535. 47. Trebilco R, Halpern BS, Flemming JM, et al. Mapping species richness and human impact drivers to inform global pelagic conservation prioritisation. Biol Conserv. 2011; 144: 1758–1766. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.biocon.2011.02.024 48. Mizrahi M, Duce S, Pressey RL, et al. Global opportunities and challenges for shark large marine pro- tected areas. Biol Conserv. 2019; 234: 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.03.026 49. MacKeracher T, Diedrich A, Simpfendorfer CA. Sharks, rays and marine protected areas: A critical eval- uation of current perspectives. Fish Fish. 2018; 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12337 50. Dwyer RG, Krueck NC, Udyawer V, et al. Individual and population benefits of marine reserves for reef sharks. Curr Biol. 2020; 30: 480–489.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.12.005 PMID: 31983638 51. Jetz W, Rahbek C, Colwell RK. The coincidence of rarity and richness and the potential signature of his- tory in centres of endemism. Ecol Lett. 2004; 7: 1180–1191. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004. 00678.x 52. Siqueira AC, Oliveira-Santos LGR, Cowman PF, et al. Evolutionary processes underlying latitudinal dif-

ferences in reef fish biodiversity. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2016; 25: 1466–1476. https://doi.org/10.1111/ geb.12506 53. Kiessling W, Simpson C, Foote M. Reefs as cradles of evolution and sources of biodiversity in the phan- erozoic. Science (80-). 2010; 327: 196–198. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182241 PMID: 20056888 54. Ferretti F, Worm B, Britten GL, et al. Patterns and ecosystem consequences of shark declines in the ocean. Ecol Lett. 2010; 13: 1055–1071. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01489.x PMID: 20528897 55. Jetz W, Rahbek C. Geometric constraints explain much of the species richness pattern in African birds. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001; 98: 5661–5666. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.091100998 PMID: 11344307 56. Collingham YC, Wadsworth RA, Huntley B, et al. Predicting the spatial distribution of non-indigenous riparian weeds: Issues of spatial scale and extent. J Appl Ecol. 2000; 37: 13–27. https://doi.org/10. 1046/j.1365-2664.2000.00556.x 57. Larsen FW, Rahbek C. The influence of spatial grain size on the suitability of the higher-taxon approach in continental priority-setting. Anim Conserv. 2005; 8: 389–396. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1367943005002362 58. Shriner SA, Wilson KR, Flather CH. Reserve networks based on richness hotspots and representation vary with scale. Ecol Appl. 2006; 16: 1660–1673. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[1660: rnborh]2.0.co;2 PMID: 17069361 PLOS ONE Spatially congruent sites of importance for global shark and ray biodiversity PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235559 July 6, 2020 18 / 19