Cited by 539Lepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyEntomological Studies and EcologyEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

Rapid declines of common, widespread British moths provide evidence of an insect biodiversity crisis

Conrad, Kelvin F., Warren, Martin S., Fox, Richard, Parsons, Mark S., Woiwod, Ian P.·2006·Biological Conservation

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.04.020

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Conrad, K. F., Warren, M. S., Fox, R., Parsons, M. S., & Woiwod, I. P.
Affiliations
  • Rothamsted Research (GB)
  • Butterfly Conservation (GB)
Venue
Biological Conservation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-10
Volume
132
Issue
3
Pages
279-291
ISSN
0006-3207 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2051166810
Cited by
539
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 25
FWCI
5.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biological Conservation (publishedVersion)
  • Rothamsted Repository (Rothamsted Repository) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Lepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Entomological Studies and Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
macro-moths, population trends, threatened species, IUCN Red List criteria, insect conservation, Great Britain, butterflies, insectivorous birds, bats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review