The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Extinction of Mammal Populations in Western North American National Parks
Abstract
Patterns of local extinction of mammal populations in western North American parks were examined in relation to current biogeographic and population lifetime models. The analysis was based on species sighting records as of 1989. While western North American parks are obviously not true isolates, patterns of mammal extinction in them are nonetheless consistent with two predictions of the land‐bridge island hypothesis. First, the number of extinctions has exceeded the number of colonizations since park establishment, and, second, the rate of extinction is inversely related to park area. Factors influencing the lifetime of mammal populations were evaluated using a stepwise multivariate survival analysis procedure for censored data. Survival time for mammal populations was positively related to estimated initial population size. After accounting for population size, species within the order Lagomorpha were particularly prone to extinction. Finally, after controlling for population size and taxon variation, survival time was positively related to age of maturity, indicating that species with longer generation times—age of maturity and generation time are highly correlated in mammals—persist longer in absolute time.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Responding to these types of critiques, as well as mounting empirical evidence of long-term challenges to protected areas such as species loss (e.g., Newmark, 1995), discussions are ongoing to improve protected area design.”
From Power of Maps: (Counter) Mapping for Conservation (2015) · cites this paper as Newmark, 1995
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Species diversity: from global decreases to local increases
Sax, D. F., & Gaines, S. D. (2003) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(03)00224-6 · Cited by 860
Patterns and determinants of mammal species occurrence in India
Karanth, K. K., Nichols, J. D., Hines, J. E., Karanth, K. U., & Christensen, N. L. (2009) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01710.x · Cited by 161
Power of Maps: (Counter) Mapping for Conservation
Harris, L. M., & Hazen, H. D. (2015) · ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies · doi:10.14288/acme.v4i1.730 · Cited by 158
Metadata
- Authors
- Newmark, W. D.
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-06
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 512-526
- ISSN
- 0888-8892
- 1523-1739
- Cited by
- 181
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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