CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 498

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Realistic levels of inbreeding depression strongly affect extinction risk in wild populations

O’Grady, Julian J., Brook, Barry W., Reed, David H., Ballou, Jonathan D., Tonkyn, David W., Frankham, Richard·2006·Biological Conservation
DOI 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.05.016
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.05.016

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

  • Low functional connectivity can result in small, isolated populations that have an increased risk of extinction because of inbreeding depression, demographic stochasticity and reduced opportunity for rescue.

    “Low functional connectivity can result in small, isolated populations that have an increased risk of extinction because of inbreeding depression, demographic stochasticity and reduced opportunity for rescue (Beier 1993;Keller & Waller 2002;O'Grady et al. 2006).”

    From Landscape connectivity for wildlife: development and validation of multispecies linkage maps (2014) · cites this paper as O'Grady et al. 2006

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 59

  1. Akçakaya, 2000, Population viability analyses in conservation planning: an overview, Ecological Bulletins, 48, 23
  2. Armbruster, 2005, Inbreeding in benign and stressful environments, Heredity, 95, 235, 10.1038/sj.hdy.6800721 · DOI
  3. Bijlsma, 2000, Does inbreeding affect the extinction risk of small populations? Predictions from Drosophila, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 13, 502, 10.1046/j.1420-9101.2000.00177.x · DOI
  4. Brook, 2000, Predictive accuracy of population viability analysis in conservation biology, Nature, 404, 385, 10.1038/35006050 · DOI
  5. Brook, 2002, Contribution of inbreeding to extinction risk in threatened species, Conservation Ecology, 6, 10.5751/ES-00387-060116 · DOI
  6. Brown, 1998, Are inbred offspring less fit? Survival in a natural population of Mexican jays, Behavioural Ecology, 9, 60, 10.1093/beheco/9.1.60 · DOI
  7. Burgman, 1992, A stochastic model for the viability of Banksia cuneata populations: environmental, demographic and genetic effects, Journal of Applied Ecology, 29, 719, 10.2307/2404481 · DOI
  8. Byers, 1999, Do plant populations purge their genetic load? Effects of population size and mating history on inbreeding depression, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 30, 479, 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.30.1.479 · DOI
  9. Caro, 1994, Ecological and genetic factors in conservation: a cautionary tale, Science, 263, 485, 10.1126/science.8290956 · DOI
  10. Caughley, 1994, Directions in conservation biology, Journal of Animal Ecology, 63, 215, 10.2307/5542 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Crnokrak, 2002, Perspective: purging the genetic load: a review of evidence, Evolution, 56, 2347, 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2002.tb00160.x · DOI
  12. Crnokrak, 1999, Inbreeding depression in the wild, Heredity, 83, 260, 10.1038/sj.hdy.6885530 · DOI
  13. Daniels, 2000, Inbreeding depression and its effects on natal dispersal in red-cockaded woodpeckers, Condor, 102, 482, 10.1650/0010-5422(2000)102[0482:IDAIEO]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  14. Ebert, 2002, A selective advantage to immigrant genes in a Daphnia metapopulation, Science, 295, 485, 10.1126/science.1067485 · DOI
  15. Frankham, 1995, Inbreeding and extinction: a threshold effect, Conservation Biology, 9, 792, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.09040792.x · DOI
  16. Frankham, 2004, Time scale in conservation biology and ecology, Annales Zoologici Fennici, 41, 459
  17. Frankham, 2001, Inbreeding and extinction: effects of purging, Conservation Genetics, 2, 279, 10.1023/A:1012299230482 · DOI
  18. Gibbs, 1989, Inbreeding in Darwin’s medium ground finches (Geospiza fortis), Evolution, 43, 1273, 10.2307/2409362 · DOI
  19. Ginzburg, 1990, Reconstructibility of density dependence and the conservative assessment of extinction risk, Conservation Biology, 4, 63, 10.1111/j.1523-1739.1990.tb00268.x · DOI
  20. Greenwood, 1978, Inbreeding and dispersal in the great tit, Nature, 271, 52, 10.1038/271052a0 · DOI
  21. Hedrick, 2000, Inbreeding depression in conservation biology, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 31, 139, 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.139 · DOI
  22. Husband, 1996, Evolution of the magnitude and timing of inbreeding depression in plants, Evolution, 50, 54, 10.2307/2410780 · DOI
  23. Husband, 1997, The effect of inbreeding in diploid and tetraploid populations of Epilobium angustifoliun (Onagraceae): implications for the genetic basis of inbreeding depression, Evolution, 51, 737, 10.2307/2411150 · DOI
  24. Keller, 1998, Inbreeding and its fitness effects in an insular population of song sparrows (Melospiza melodia), Evolution, 52, 240, 10.2307/2410939 · DOI
  25. Lacy, 1997, Importance of genetic variation to the viability of mammalian populations, Journal of Mammalogy, 78, 320, 10.2307/1382885 · DOI
  26. Lacy, 1998, Effectiveness of selection in reducing the genetic load in populations of Peromyscus polionotus during generations of inbreeding, Evolution, 52, 900, 10.2307/2411285 · DOI
  27. Lande, 1988, Genetics and demography in biological conservation, Science, 241, 1455, 10.1126/science.3420403 · DOI
  28. Leberg, 1990, Influence of genetic variability on population growth: implications for conservation, Journal of Fish Biology, 37, 193, 10.1111/j.1095-8649.1990.tb05036.x · DOI
  29. Leigh, 1981, The average lifetime of a population in a varying environment, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 90, 213, 10.1016/0022-5193(81)90044-8 · DOI
  30. Levins, 1966, The strategy of model building in population biology, American Scientist, 54, 421
  31. Madsen, 1999, Restoration of an inbred adder population, Nature, 402, 34, 10.1038/46941 · DOI
  32. Madsen, 2004, Novel genes continue to enhance population growth in adders (Vipera berus), Biological Conservation, 120, 145, 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.01.022 · DOI
  33. Manansang, J., Hedges, S., Siswomartono, D., Miller, P., Seal, U.S., 1996. Anoa species (Bubalus quarlesi and Bubalus depressicornis) population and habitat viability assessment workshop report 22–26 July 1996. Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, Species Survival Commission, IUCN, Apple Valley, MN.
  34. McRae, 1996, Family values: costs and benefits of communal nesting in the moorhen, Animal Behaviour, 52, 225, 10.1006/anbe.1996.0169 · DOI
  35. Menges, 2000, Population viability analyses in plants: challenges and opportunities, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 15, 51, 10.1016/S0169-5347(99)01763-2 · DOI
  36. Miller, 2001, Purging of inbreeding depression and fitness decline in bottlenecked populations of Drosophila melanogaster, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 14, 595, 10.1046/j.1420-9101.2001.00303.x · DOI
  37. Mills, 1994, Demographic consequences of inbreeding in remnant populations, American Naturalist, 144, 412, 10.1086/285684 · DOI
  38. Morton, 1956, An estimate of the mutational damage in man from data on consanguineous marriages, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 42, 855, 10.1073/pnas.42.11.855 · DOI
  39. Newman, 1997, Increased probability of extinction due to decreased genetic effective population size: experimental populations of Clarkia pulchella, Evolution, 51, 354, 10.2307/2411107 · DOI
  40. O’Grady, J.J., 2002. Evaluating the accuracy of species assessment systems using population viability analysis. Ph.D. thesis, Macquarie University, Sydney.
  41. O’Grady, 2004, Correlations among extinction risks assessed by different systems of threatened species categorisation, Conservation Biology, 18, 1
  42. O’Grady, 2004, What are the best correlates of predicted extinction risk?, Biological Conservation, 118, 513, 10.1016/j.biocon.2003.10.002 · DOI
  43. Ralls, 1988, Estimates of lethal equivalents and the cost of inbreeding in mammals, Conservation Biology, 2, 185, 10.1111/j.1523-1739.1988.tb00169.x · DOI
  44. Reed, 2005, Relationship between population size and fitness, Conservation Biology, 19, 563, 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00444.x · DOI · Paper page
  45. Reed, 2003, Correlation between fitness and genetic diversity, Conservation Biology, 17, 230, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01236.x · DOI
  46. Reed, 2002, Inbreeding and extinction: effects of environmental stress and lineage, Conservation Genetics, 3, 301, 10.1023/A:1019948130263 · DOI
  47. Reed, 2003, Inbreeding and extinction: effects of rate of inbreeding, Conservation Genetics, 4, 405, 10.1023/A:1024081416729 · DOI
  48. Reed, 2003, Estimates of minimum viable population sizes for vertebrates and factors influencing those estimates, Biological Conservation, 113, 23, 10.1016/S0006-3207(02)00346-4 · DOI
  49. Saccheri, 1998, Inbreeding and extinction in a butterfly metapopulation, Nature, 392, 491, 10.1038/33136 · DOI
  50. Schwartz, 2005, Gene flow after inbreeding leads to higher survival in deer mice, Biological Conservation, 123, 413, 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.11.016 · DOI
  51. Simmons, 1977, Mutations affecting fitness in Drosophila populations, Annual Review of Genetics, 11, 47, 10.1146/annurev.ge.11.120177.000405 · DOI · Paper page
  52. Slate, 2000, Inbreeding depression influences lifetime breeding success in a wild population of red deer (Cervus elaphus), Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 267, 1, 10.1098/rspb.2000.1192 · DOI
  53. Spielman, 2004, Most species are not driven to extinction before genetic factors impact them, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 101, 15261, 10.1073/pnas.0403809101 · DOI
  54. Thévenon, 2002, The impact of inbreeding depression on population survival depending on demographic parameters, Animal Conservation, 5, 53, 10.1017/S1367943002001075 · DOI
  55. van Noordwijk, 1981, Inbreeding in an island population of the great tit, Evolution, 35, 674, 10.2307/2408240 · DOI
  56. Vilà, 2003, Rescue of a severely bottlenecked wolf (Canis lupus) population by a single immigrant, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 270, 91, 10.1098/rspb.2002.2184 · DOI
  57. Vilas, 2006, Relative contribution of inbreeding depression and eroded adaptive diversity to extinction risk in small populations of shore campion, Conservation Biology, 20, 229, 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00275.x · DOI
  58. Vucetich, 1999, Erosion of heterozygosity in fluctuating populations, Conservation Biology, 13, 860, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.98268.x · DOI
  59. Westemeier, 1998, Tracking the long-term decline and recovery of an isolated population, Science, 282, 1695, 10.1126/science.282.5394.1695 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
O’Grady, J. J., Brook, B. W., Reed, D. H., Ballou, J. D., Tonkyn, D. W., & Frankham, R.
Venue
Biological Conservation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-11
Volume
133
Issue
1
Pages
42-51
ISSN
0006-3207
DOI
10.1016/j.biocon.2006.05.016
Cited by
498
References
1
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

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