Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 357

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantifying Land Use Impacts on Biodiversity: Combining Species–Area Models and Vulnerability Indicators

Open access
Chaudhary, Abhishek, Verones, Francesca, de Baan, Laura, Hellweg, Stefanie·2015·Environmental Science & Technology
DOI 10.1021/acs.est.5b02507
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Habitat degradation and subsequent biodiversity damage often take place far from the place of consumption because of globalization and the increasing level of international trade. Informing consumers and policy makers about the biodiversity impacts "hidden" in the life cycle of imported products is an important step toward achieving sustainable consumption patterns. Spatially explicit methods are needed in life cycle assessment to accurately quantify biodiversity impacts of products and processes. We use the Countryside species-area relationship (SAR) to quantify regional species loss due to land occupation and transformation for five taxa and six land use types in 804 terrestrial ecoregions. Further, we calculate vulnerability scores for each ecoregion based on the fraction of each species' geographic range (endemic richness) hosted by the ecoregion and the IUCN assigned threat level of each species. Vulnerability scores are multiplied with SAR-predicted regional species loss to estimate potential global extinctions per unit of land use. As a case study, we assess the land use biodiversity impacts of 1 kg of bioethanol produced using six different feed stocks in different parts of the world. Results show that the regions with highest biodiversity impacts differed markedly when the vulnerability of species was included.

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 · 10.1021/acs.est.5b02507

Cites

64 of 64 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

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. 2005, Ecosystems and human wellbeing: biodiversity synthesis
  2. Proença, 2013, Species–area models to assess biodiversity change in multi-habitat landscapes: the importance of species habitat affinity, Basic Appl. Ecol., 14, 102, 10.1016/j.baae.2012.10.010 · doi:10.1016/j.baae.2012.10.010
  3. Goedkoop, 2009, ReCiPe 2008. Main Report, Part 1: Characterization
  4. Koellner, 2008, Assessment of land use impacts on the natural environment. Part 2: generic characterization factors for local species diversity in Central Europe, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 13, 32, 10.1007/s11367-006-0292-2 · doi:10.1007/s11367-006-0292-2
  5. 2014, ArcGIS
  6. 2011, Matlab
  7. 2001, IUCN red list categories and criteria
  8. Sørensen, 1948, A method of establishing groups of equal amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species content, Biol. Skr.─K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk., 5, 4

Cited by

See all 357

Metadata

Authors
Chaudhary, A., Verones, F., de Baan, L., & Hellweg, S.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2015-07-31
Volume
49
Issue
16
Pages
9987-9995
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
DOI
10.1021/acs.est.5b02507
OpenAlex
W2412175981
Cited by
357
References
64
FWCI
19.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid
Licence
pubs.acs.org/page/policy/authorchoice_termsofuse.html (vor, 31 d)
Funders
Schweizerische Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (136612)

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

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.