I remember taking an extremely similar quiz before... trick is just to remember that the closer to the tropics a country is the more diversity, and of course being a big country helps, as does being a country made up of many islands which increase genetic drift.
Yeah.. which don't fit? Every single one of these countries have some land within the tropics (between 23 degrees north and south of the equator). And size obviously plays a factor. The ones that have the most land farthest from the tropics (USA, China, South Africa) are all huge. The smallest countries are the ones that are right on or near the equator (Ecuador, Papua New Guinea) or they are both near the equator and made up of tons of islands (Malaysia, Philippines)... the criteria I gave was perfect.
There are a few countries that fit the criteria I gave that *don't* make the list... those are all African countries on the Sahara desert.
Actually none are on the Sahara Desert. But his criteria were right on. I guessed by 3 criteria: Size, South America, and the country's tropics, and the country's animals.
There are a few countries that fit the criteria I gave that *DON'T* make the list (large, close to the tropics)... those are all African countries on the Sahara desert.
...eh.. actually I think the countries with the greatest elevation are simply excluded because mountains, much like deserts, tend to be much less biodiverse than jungle basins... for example Bolivia and Ethiopia I think both fail to make the list because in spite of being large and near the tropics the elevation is too high.
to kalbahamut last comment: maybe the problem with Bolivia and Ethiopia is not so much their average elevation but them being not so humid. And both countriesm while totally into the tropical area, are not so close to the Equator (in fact Bolivia's southernmost point is very close to the Tropic of Capricorn).
Not a high average elevation, but a large elevation span. Colombia is considered the most biodiverse country of the world partly because every few hundred metres you gain in elevation the species you see will be different ones.
High elevation will lead to lower humidity. Frequent changes in elevation will lead to pockets of biological isolation and increase genetic drift having the same effect as islands.
Frankly I'm surprised Bolivia doesn't make it. It sits in tropical latitudes, has a large variety of climates and has a large area. Especially given that part of its territory lies in the Amazon Basin, probably the single most biodiverse region in the world. Perhaps the lack of coastline and therefore marine biodiversity is working against it.
According to the wikipedia definition megadiverse countries must have 5000 endemic plant species and must border marine ecosystems. Therefore Ethiopia and Bolivia both don't make the cut. A quick search on Japan (which I thought would be on here) says there are 6000 species of plants so for some reason it appears to be overlooked as I believe there is a coastline.
I think Kalbahamut has a strong point and he makes it well. I would also say that being landlocked hinders biodiversity, hence why all 17 of these countries have shorelines, and most of them lots of it.
I think South Africa is the only one that might not fit these criteria. South Africa is big of course, but not really an outlier among much of Subsaharan Africa. Angola is larger and doesn't make the list, and other countries like Ethiopia, Tanzania, Nigeria, and Mozambique are not that far behind.
I think the fynbos ecosystem might be carrying a lot of weight for South Africa. That combined with also having the more pan-African ecology in the east might be what brings South Africa up.
South Africa is the 3rd largest country in Sub-Saharan Africa after the DRC, which makes the list, and Angola, which apart from the coast is mostly a high arid plateau and some desert in the south.
After South Africa, the next-largest country in the region is Mauritania, which is about 20% smaller.
The last two could be condensed into widest spread - that is, both larger and more 'spread out' countries are good criteria. This is most notable with the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia.
Cringe Dragon: it's a Brazilian internet expression that literally says "Dancing Samba in front of your enemy" (the verb "sambar" can mean dancing Samba as well). It's used when you do a great job and you are showing it to somebody. Doesn't need to have literally an enemy. I think he/she said that because Brazil is very good regarding biodiversity.
Costa Rica is too small, Botswana is landlocked and thus misses out on a lot of marine diversity, Namibia has a lot of desert or semi-desert areas and lacks the ecological diversity of some of the others, Kenya actually is not that large, and Tanzania surprised me as well.
1264 was when Kublai solidified his role as Khan of Khans and truly settled the Mongol Dynasty down in China, moved the capital to the modern location of Beijing
Argentina is huge, but mostly sits outside tropical latitudes. Its climate zones are also those that don't particularly lend themselves to biodiversity. There's arid mountainous terrain and semi-arid terrain in the north and west. There's open grassland, mostly given over to agriculture in the centre (the Pampas), there's cold desert (central Patagonia) then there's cold steppe and sub-polar forests in Southern Patagonia. The actual high biodiversity area is largely restricted to the three small northeastern provinces, and even then that area pales in comparison to the biodiversity of the Amazonian countries.
Large area, but relatively low diversity in climate types. Colder areas closer to the poles tend to have lower biodiversity. Plus, the presence of tropical rainforest is virtually a must to be on this list.
Can't believe Russia is not on the list - from the polar north to the half-desert south, Siberia, Kamchatka, Caucasus... Lake Baikal itself is just amazing with so many endemic species
Got Mexico with 3 secs to go. Stoked. Also tried countries like Costa Rica, Panama, Botswana, Namibia, Kenya, Tanzania, India, and good old NZ as well which obviously weren't on this list
Yeah, I tried it. Was there recently and on guided tours they often mentioned that for its size it's the most biodiverse country in the world. It's small though. Wikipedia has it as "in the top 20" most biodiverse countries so I guess it just misses out on being on this list.
Bolivia also has territory in the Amazon basin, an extremely biodiverse area, though. EDIT: Additionally the tropical climate area of Bolivia is larger than the arid altiplano areas.
Jokes aside, I am a bit surprised Japan didn't make it. Large amount of coastline, multiple islands with different climates. Seems like it would be pretty ecologically diverse.
You say that like it's strange. Colombia is actually the world's most biodiverse country. It's also about twice the size of Madagascar and sits on the equator, whereas Madagascar is 12 degrees south of the equator at its most northerly point and some of its territory is outside the tropics. It's also relatively dry in many places. By contrast Colombia has territory in the Amazon basin, as well as coastal rainforests on its Pacific and Caribbean coasts. It has huge elevation variation and its multiple high mountain ranges create isolated pockets of biodiversity. Just compare the landscapes of the two countries - Colombia is far more diverse.
Guyana's relatively small (though not hugely less than Ecuador), but someone elsewhere said coastal and marine ecosystems were a requirement for listing. If that's the case, Chile denied Bolivia a chance of being on this list back in 1879 when it took its coastline.
Countries of the World But You Have To Spell Them Backwards: https://www.jetpunk.com/user-quizzes/322930/countries-of-the-world-but-you-have-to-spell-them-backwards
There are a few countries that fit the criteria I gave that *don't* make the list... those are all African countries on the Sahara desert.
I think the fynbos ecosystem might be carrying a lot of weight for South Africa. That combined with also having the more pan-African ecology in the east might be what brings South Africa up.
After South Africa, the next-largest country in the region is Mauritania, which is about 20% smaller.
This beats or equals 88.8% of test takers."
Interesting....
(Sorry for advertising)
https://rainforests.mongabay.com/03highest_biodiversity.htm
https://news.mongabay.com/2016/05/top-10-biodiverse-countries/
I've also made a quiz regarding biodiversity.
Big countries with small biodiversity.
https://www.jetpunk.com/user-quizzes/1812094/big-countries-with-low-biodiversity