CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 86

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Selecting surrogate species for connectivity conservation

Meurant, Margaux, Gonzalez, Andrew, Doxa, Aggeliki, Albert, Cécile H.·2018·Biological Conservation
DOI 10.1016/j.biocon.2018.09.028
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biocon.2018.09.028

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Analysing connectivity according to the needs of a diverse number of species should lead to a more robust and realistic output, as a small number of focal species seldom encompass the whole range of dispersal behaviours.

    “It should lead to a more robust and realistic output, as a small number of focal species seldom encompass the whole range of dispersal behaviours”

    From Omnidirectional and omnifunctional connectivity analyses with a diverse species pool (2020) · cites this paper as Meurant et al., 2018

  • Previous methods to suggest surrogate species for connectivity modeling resulted in a larger number of species (e.g. between 5 to 7 for Meurant et al. 2018).

    “Previous methods to suggest surrogate species for connectivity modeling also resulted in a larger number of species (e.g. between 5 to 7 for Meurant et al. 2018).”

    From Omnidirectional and omnifunctional connectivity analyses with a diverse species pool (2020) · cites this paper as Meurant et al. 2018

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Adriaensen, 2003, The application of ‘least-cost’ modelling as a functional landscape model, Landsc. Urban Plan., 64, 233, 10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00242-6 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Albert, 2017, Applying network theory to prioritize multi-species habitat networks that are robust to climate and land-use change, Conserv. Biol., 31, 1383, 10.1111/cobi.12943 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Anderson, 2010, Conserving the stage: climate change and the geophysical underpinnings of species diversity, PLoS One, 5, 10.1371/journal.pone.0011554 · DOI
  4. Arponen, 2012, Effects of connectivity and spatial resolution of analyses on conservation prioritization across large extents, Conserv. Biol., 26, 294, 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01814.x · DOI
  5. Bowman, 2002, Dispersal distance of mammals is proportional to home range size, Ecology, 83, 2049, 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2049:DDOMIP]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  6. Breckheimer, 2014, Defining and evaluating the umbrella species concept for conserving and restoring landscape connectivity, Conserv. Biol., 00, 1
  7. Caro, 1999, On the use of surrogate species in conservation biology, Conserv. Biol., 13, 805, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.98338.x · DOI
  8. Carroll, 2001, Carnivores as focal species for conservation planning in the rocky mountain region, Ecol. Appl., 11, 961, 10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[0961:CAFSFC]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  9. Cushman, 2012, Multi-taxa population connectivity in the Northern Rocky Mountains, Ecol. Model., 231, 101, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.02.011 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Cushman, 2013, Evaluating population connectivity for species of conservation concern in the American Great Plains, Biodivers. Conserv., 22, 2583, 10.1007/s10531-013-0541-1 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Di Minin, 2014, Improving the surrogacy effectiveness of charismatic megafauna with well-surveyed taxonomic groups and habitat types, J. Appl. Ecol., 51, 281, 10.1111/1365-2664.12203 · DOI
  12. Dilkina, 2017, Trade-offs and efficiencies in optimal budget-constrained multispecies corridor networks, Conserv. Biol., 31, 192, 10.1111/cobi.12814 · DOI
  13. Fall, 2001, A domain-specific language for models of landscape dynamics, Ecol. Model., 141, 1, 10.1016/S0304-3800(01)00334-9 · DOI
  14. Freeman, 1979, Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification, Soc. Networks, 1, 215, 10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Gonzalez, 2018, Spatial ecological networks: planning for sustainability in the long-term, Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain., 29, 187, 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.03.012 · DOI
  16. Grantham, 2010, Effectiveness of biodiversity surrogates for conservation planning: different measures of effectiveness, PLoS One, 5, 10.1371/journal.pone.0011430 · DOI
  17. Heller, 2009, Biodiversity management in the face of climate change: a review of 22 years of recommendations, Biol. Conserv., 142, 14, 10.1016/j.biocon.2008.10.006 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Henle, 2004, Predictors of species sensitivity to fragmentation, Biodivers. Conserv., 13, 207, 10.1023/B:BIOC.0000004319.91643.9e · DOI
  19. Krosby, 2015, Focal species and landscape “naturalness” corridor models offer complementarity approaches for connectivity conservation planning, Landsc. Ecol., 30, 2121, 10.1007/s10980-015-0235-z · DOI
  20. Kukkala, 2013, Core concepts of spatial prioritization in systematic conservation planning, Biol. Rev., 88, 443, 10.1111/brv.12008 · DOI
  21. Lambeck, 1997, Focal species: a multiple-species umbrella for nature conservation, Conserv. Biol., 11, 849, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.96319.x · DOI
  22. Lechner, 2016, Characterising landscape connectivity for conservation planning using a dispersal guild approach, Landsc. Ecol., 32, 1
  23. Lehtomäki, 2013, Methods and workflow for spatial conservation prioritization using Zonation, Environ. Model. Softw., 47, 128, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.05.001 · DOI
  24. Lehtomäki, 2009, Applying spatial conservation prioritization software and high-resolution GIS data to a national-scale study in forest conservation, For. Ecol. Manag., 258, 2439, 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.08.026 · DOI
  25. Lindenmayer, 2002, The focal-species approach and landscape restoration: a critique, Soc. Conserv. Biol., 16, 338, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00450.x · DOI
  26. Magris, 2015, Integrating multiple species connectivity and habitat quality into conservation planning for coral reefs, Ecography, 39, 649, 10.1111/ecog.01507 · DOI
  27. Mitchell, 2015, The Montérégie Connection Project: linking landscapes, biodiversity, and ecosystem services to improve decision-making, Ecol. Soc., 20, 10.5751/ES-07927-200415 · DOI
  28. Olds, 2014, Incorporating surrogate species and seascape connectivity to improve marine conservation outcomes, Conserv. Biol., 28, 982, 10.1111/cobi.12242 · DOI
  29. Opdam, 2008, Setting biodiversity targets in participatory regional planning: introducing ecoprofiles, Ecol. Soc., 13, 20, 10.5751/ES-02438-130120 · DOI
  30. Pavoine, 2005, Measuring diversity from dissimilarities with Rao's quadratic entropy: are any dissimilarities suitable?, Theor. Popul. Biol., 67, 231, 10.1016/j.tpb.2005.01.004 · DOI
  31. Roberge, 2004, Usefulness of the umbrella species concept as a conservation tool, Conserv. Biol., 18, 76, 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00450.x · DOI
  32. Rubio, 2015, Connectivity conservation priorities for individual patches evaluated in the present landscape: how durable and effective are they in the long term?, Ecography, 38, 001, 10.1111/ecog.00935 · DOI
  33. Saura, 2011, Network analysis to assess landscape connectivity trends: application to European forests (1990–2000), Ecol. Indic., 11, 407, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.06.011 · DOI
  34. Silvano, 2017, Selecting focal species as surrogates for imperiled species using relative sensitivities derived from occupancy analysis, Ecol. Indic., 73, 302, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.09.043 · DOI
  35. Taylor, 1993, Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure, Oikos, 68, 571, 10.2307/3544927 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Théau, 2015, An evaluation framework based on sustainability-related indicators for the comparison of conceptual approaches for ecological networks, Ecol. Indic., 52, 444, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.12.029 · DOI
  37. Vos, 2001, Toward ecologically scaled landscape indices, Am. Nat., 183, 24, 10.1086/317004 · DOI
  38. Watson, 2001, An assessment of the focal-species approach for conserving birds in variegated landscapes in southeastern Australia, Conserv. Biol., 15, 1364, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.00166.x · DOI
  39. Wiens, 2008, Using surrogate species and groups for conservation planning and management, Bioscience, 58, 241, 10.1641/B580310 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Meurant, M., Gonzalez, A., Doxa, A., & Albert, C. H.
Venue
Biological Conservation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
227
Pages
326-334
ISSN
0006-3207
DOI
10.1016/j.biocon.2018.09.028
Cited by
86
References
2
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Funders
French government (ANR-11-IDEX-0001-02)

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