Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 976

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Indicators of Biodiversity for Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management

Lindenmayer, David B., Margules, Chris R., Botkin, Daniel B.·2000·Conservation Biology

Abstract

Abstract: The conservation of biological diversity has become one of the important goals of managing forests in an ecologically sustainable way. Ecologists and forest resource managers need measures to judge the success or failure of management regimes designed to sustain biological diversity. The relationships between potential indicator species and total biodiversity are not well established. Carefully designed studies are required to test relationships between the presence and abundance of potential indicator species and other taxa and the maintenance of critical ecosystem processes in forests. Other indicators of biological diversity in forests, in addition or as alternatives to indicator species, include what we call structure‐based indicators. These are stand‐level and landscape‐level (spatial) features of forests such as stand structural complexity and plant species composition, connectivity, and heterogeneity. Although the adoption of practices to sustain (or recreate) key characteristics of forest ecosystems appear intuitively sensible and broadly consistent with current knowledge, information is lacking to determine whether such stand‐ and landscape‐level features of forests will serve as successful indices of (and help conserve) biodiversity. Given our limited knowledge of both indicator species and structure‐based indicators, we advocate the following four approaches to enhance biodiversity conservation in forests: (1) establish biodiversity priority areas (e.g., reserves) managed primarily for the conservation of biological diversity; (2) within production forests, apply structure‐based indicators including structural complexity, connectivity, and heterogeneity; (3) using multiple conservation strategies at multiple spatial scales, spread out risk in wood production forests; and (4) adopt an adaptive management approach to test the validity of structure‐based indices of biological diversity by treating management practices as experiments. These approaches would aim to provide new knowledge to managers and improve the effectiveness of current management strategies.

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 · 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98533.x

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 976

Metadata

Authors
Lindenmayer, D. B., Margules, C. R., & Botkin, D. B.
Venue
Conservation Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-08-15
Volume
14
Issue
4
Pages
941-950
ISSN
  • 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-1739
OpenAlex
W1965431014
Cited by
976
References
1
FWCI
18.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Indicators of Biodiversity for Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98533.x
The paper
Lindenmayer, D. B., Margules, C. R., & Botkin, D. B. (2000). Indicators of Biodiversity for Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98533.x

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.