The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Impacts of the coronavirus pandemic on biodiversity conservation
Open accessAbstract
The COVID-19 pandemic is impacting all parts of human society. Like everyone else, conservation biologists are concerned first with how the pandemic will affect their families, friends, and people around the world. But we also have a duty to think about how it will impact the world's biodiversity and our ability to protect it, as well as how it might affect the training and careers of conservation researchers and practitioners. As editors of Biological Conservation, we have heard first-hand from colleagues, authors, and reviewers around the world about the problems they are facing, and their concerns for their students, their staff, and their research projects. Some of our colleagues have become infected with the virus. Field and lab work have largely shut down, while teaching and other communications have moved online, with consequences for training, data collection, and networking that are still unclear. Our colleagues and the media report some examples of reduced human pressures on natural ecosystems, cleaner air and water, and wildlife reclaiming contested habitats. Beyond the direct and immediate consequences of this particular virus, some have also started to think about emerging infectious diseases and their links with biodiversity loss, human activities, and issues of sustainability. As we write this, the pandemic is still accelerating in most countries, although there are hopeful signs of returns to normality in, for example, China. This editorial can therefore only be a snapshot of a quickly evolving situation. We hope, however, that we can offer some encouragement and insights for our colleagues in lockdown. Our world is changing, and the conservation community must be ready to respond.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
The ecological and evolutionary consequences of systemic racism in urban environments
Schell, C. J., Dyson, K., Fuentes, T. L., Des Roches, S., Harris, N. C., Miller, D. S., Woelfle-Erskine, C. A., & Lambert, M. R. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aay4497 · Cited by 665
COVID-19 lockdown allows researchers to quantify the effects of human activity on wildlife
Rutz, C., Loretto, M.-C., Bates, A. E., Davidson, S. C., Duarte, C. M., Jetz, W., Johnson, M., Kato, A., Kays, R., Mueller, T., et al. (2020) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-020-1237-z · Cited by 658
Self-citationNarwal, N., Katyal, D., Kataria, N., Rose, P. K., Warkar, S. G., Pugazhendhi, A., Ghotekar, S., & Khoo, K. S. (2023) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.139945 · Cited by 105
Metadata
- Authors
- Corlett, R. T., Primack, R. B., Devictor, V., Maas, B., Goswami, V. R., Bates, A. E., Koh, L. P., Regan, T. J., Loyola, R., Pakeman, R. J., Cumming, G. S., Pidgeon, A., Johns, D., & Roth, R.
- Venue
- Biological Conservation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-06
- Volume
- 246
- Pages
- 108571
- ISSN
- 0006-3207 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3015027376
- Cited by
- 376
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 30.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impacts of the coronavirus pandemic on biodiversity conservation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108571
- The paper
- Corlett, R. T., Primack, R. B., Devictor, V., Maas, B., Goswami, V. R., Bates, A. E., Koh, L. P., Regan, T. J., Loyola, R., Pakeman, R. J., Cumming, G. S., Pidgeon, A., Johns, D., & Roth, R. (2020). Impacts of the coronavirus pandemic on biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108571
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.