The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Methods and workflow for spatial conservation prioritization using Zonation
Open accessAbstract
Spatial conservation prioritization concerns the effective allocation of conservation action. Its stages include development of an ecologically based model of conservation value, data pre-processing, spatial prioritization analysis, and interpretation of results for conservation action. Here we investigate the details of each stage for analyses done using the Zonation prioritization framework. While there is much literature about analytical methods implemented in Zonation, there is only scattered information available about what happens before and after the computational analysis. Here we fill this information gap by summarizing the pre-analysis and post-analysis stages of the Zonation framework. Concerning the entire process, we summarize the full workflow and list examples of operational best-case, worst-case, and typical scenarios for each analysis stage. We discuss resources needed in different analysis stages. We also discuss benefits, disadvantages, and risks involved in the application of spatial prioritization from the perspective of different stakeholders. Concerning pre-analysis stages, we explain the development of the ecological model and discuss the setting of priority weights and connectivity responses. We also explain practical aspects of data pre-processing and the post-processing interpretation of results for different conservation objectives. This work facilitates well-informed design and application of Zonation analyses for the purpose of spatial conservation planning. It should be useful for both scientists working on conservation related research as well as for practitioners looking for useful tools for conservation resource allocation.
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
Cites
Species Distribution Models: Ecological Explanation and Prediction Across Space and Time
Elith, J., & Leathwick, J. R. (2009) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120159 · Cited by 6,707
Systematic conservation planning
Margules, C. R., & Pressey, R. L. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35012251 · Cited by 4,631
Conservation planning in a changing world
Pressey, R. L., Cabeza, M., Watts, M. E., Cowling, R. M., & Wilson, K. A. (2007) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2007.10.001 · Cited by 1,061
Adaptive monitoring: a new paradigm for long-term research and monitoring
Lindenmayer, D. B., & Likens, G. E. (2009) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.03.005 · Cited by 796
Mathematical Methods for Identifying Representative Reserve Networks
Possingham, H., Ball, I., & Andelman, S. (2006) · Quantitative Methods for Conservation Biology · doi:10.1007/0-387-22648-6_17 · Cited by 693
Integrating biodiversity distribution knowledge: toward a global map of life
Jetz, W., McPherson, J. M., & Guralnick, R. P. (2012) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2011.09.007 · Cited by 575
Marxan with Zones: Software for optimal conservation based land- and sea-use zoning
Watts, M. E., Ball, I. R., Stewart, R. S., Klein, C. J., Wilson, K., Steinback, C., Lourival, R., Kircher, L., & Possingham, H. P. (2009) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.06.005 · Cited by 561
Aligning Conservation Priorities Across Taxa in Madagascar with High-Resolution Planning Tools
Kremen, C., Cameron, A., Moilanen, A., Phillips, S. J., Thomas, C. D., Beentje, H., Dransfield, J., Fisher, B. L., Glaw, F., Good, T. C., et al. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1155193 · Cited by 561
Self-citationBiodiversity Conservation Planning Tools: Present Status and Challenges for the Future
Sarkar, S., Pressey, R. L., Faith, D. P., Margules, C. R., Fuller, T., Stoms, D. M., Moffett, A., Wilson, K. A., Williams, K. J., Williams, P. H., et al. (2006) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.31.042606.085844 · Cited by 559
Conserving Biodiversity Efficiently: What to Do, Where, and When
Wilson, K. A., Underwood, E. C., Morrison, S. A., Klausmeyer, K. R., Murdoch, W. W., Reyers, B., Wardell-Johnson, G., Marquet, P. A., Rundel, P. W., McBride, M. F., et al. (2007) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050223 · Cited by 523
Cited by
Areas of global importance for conserving terrestrial biodiversity, carbon and water
Jung, M., Arnell, A., de Lamo, X., García-Rangel, S., Lewis, M., Mark, J., Merow, C., Miles, L., Ondo, I., Pironon, S., et al. (2021) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-021-01528-7 · Cited by 409
Joint Species Distribution Modelling: With Applications in R
Ovaskainen, O., & Abrego, N. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108591720 · Cited by 394
Albert, C. H., Rayfield, B., Dumitru, M., & Gonzalez, A. (2017) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.12943 · Cited by 226
Selecting surrogate species for connectivity conservation
Meurant, M., Gonzalez, A., Doxa, A., & Albert, C. H. (2018) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2018.09.028 · Cited by 86
Spiers, J. A., Oatham, M. P., Rostant, L. V., & Farrell, A. D. (2018) · Biodiversity and Conservation · doi:10.1007/s10531-018-1578-y · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Lehtomäki, J., & Moilanen, A.
- Venue
- Environmental Modelling & Software
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-09
- Volume
- 47
- Pages
- 128-137
- ISSN
- 1364-8152 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1987775380
- Cited by
- 454
- References
- 53
- FWCI
- 12.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Methods and workflow for spatial conservation prioritization using Zonation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.05.001
- The paper
- Lehtomäki, J., & Moilanen, A. (2013). Methods and workflow for spatial conservation prioritization using Zonation. Environmental Modelling & Software. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.05.001
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.
