Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 191

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

How Essential Biodiversity Variables and remote sensing can help national biodiversity monitoring

Open access
Vihervaara, Petteri, Auvinen, Ari-Pekka, Mononen, Laura, Törmä, Markus, Ahlroth, Petri, Anttila, Saku, Böttcher, Kristin, Forsius, Martin, Heino, Jani, Heliölä, Janne, Koskelainen, Meri, Kuussaari, Mikko, Meissner, Kristian, Ojala, Olli, Tuominen, Seppo, Viitasalo, Markku, Virkkala, Raimo·2017·Global Ecology and Conservation

Abstract

Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) have been suggested to harmonize biodiversity monitoring worldwide. Their aim is to provide a small but comprehensive set of monitoring variables that would give a balanced picture of the development of biodiversity and the reaching of international and national biodiversity targets. Globally, GEO BON (Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network) has suggested 22 candidate EBVs to be monitored. In this article we regard EBVs as a conceptual tool that may help in making national scale biodiversity monitoring more robust by pointing out where to focus further development resources. We look at one country –Finland –with a relatively advanced biodiversity monitoring scheme and study how well Finland’s current biodiversity state indicators correspond with EBVs. In particular, we look at how national biodiversity monitoring could be improved by using available remote sensing (RS) applications. Rapidly emerging new technologies from drones to airborne laser scanning and new satellite sensors providing imagery with very high resolution (VHR) open a whole new world of opportunities for monitoring the state of biodiversity and ecosystems at low cost. In Finland, several RS applications already exist that could be expanded into national indicators. These include the monitoring of shore habitats and water quality parameters, among others. We hope that our analysis and examples help other countries with similar challenges. Along with RS opportunities, our analysis revealed also some needs to develop the EBV framework itself.

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.gecco.2017.01.007

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

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 191

Metadata

Authors
Vihervaara, P., Auvinen, A.-P., Mononen, L., Törmä, M., Ahlroth, P., Anttila, S., Böttcher, K., Forsius, M., Heino, J., Heliölä, J., Koskelainen, M., Kuussaari, M., Meissner, K., Ojala, O., Tuominen, S., Viitasalo, M., & Virkkala, R.
Venue
Global Ecology and Conservation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-04
Volume
10
Pages
43-59
ISSN
2351-9894 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2586127133
Cited by
191
References
2
FWCI
18.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: How Essential Biodiversity Variables and remote sensing can help national biodiversity monitoring. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.gecco.2017.01.007
The paper
Vihervaara, P., Auvinen, A.-P., Mononen, L., Törmä, M., Ahlroth, P., Anttila, S., Böttcher, K., Forsius, M., Heino, J., Heliölä, J., Koskelainen, M., Kuussaari, M., Meissner, K., Ojala, O., Tuominen, S., Viitasalo, M., & Virkkala, R. (2017). How Essential Biodiversity Variables and remote sensing can help national biodiversity monitoring. Global Ecology and Conservation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2017.01.007

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.