Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 283

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Projecting Global Biodiversity Indicators under Future Development Scenarios: Projecting biodiversity indicators

Open access
Visconti, Piero, Bakkenes, Michel, Baisero, Daniele, Brooks, Thomas, Butchart, Stuart H. M., Joppa, Lucas, Alkemade, Rob, Di Marco, Moreno, Santini, Luca, Hoffmann, Michael, Maiorano, Luigi, Pressey, Robert L., Arponen, Anni, Boitani, Luigi, Reside, April E., van Vuuren, Detlef P., Rondinini, Carlo·2016·Conservation Letters

Abstract

To address the ongoing global biodiversity crisis, governments have set strategic objectives and have adopted indicators to monitor progress toward their achievement. Projecting the likely impacts on biodiversity of different policy decisions allows decision makers to understand if and how these targets can be met. We projected trends in two widely used indicators of population abundance Geometric Mean Abundance, equivalent to the Living Planet Index and extinction risk (the Red List Index) under different climate and land-use change scenarios. Testing these on terrestrial carnivore and ungulate species, we found that both indicators decline steadily, and by 2050, under a Business-as-usual (BAU) scenario, geometric mean population abundance declines by 18–35% while extinction risk increases for 8–23% of the species, depending on assumptions about species responses to climate change. BAU will therefore fail Convention on Biological Diversity target 12 of improving the conservation status of known threatened species. An alternative sustainable development scenario reduces both extinction risk and population losses compared with BAU and could lead to population increases. Our approach to model species responses to global changes brings the focus of scenarios directly to the species level, thus taking into account an additional dimension of biodiversity and paving the way for including stronger ecological foundations into future biodiversity scenario assessments.

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 · 10.1111/conl.12159

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Abood, 2014, Relative contributions of the logging, fiber, oil palm, and mining industries to forest loss in Indonesia, Conserv. Lett. this is actually still in press despite online since April 2014. doi: 10.1111/conl.12103. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Alkemade, 2009, GLOBIO3: a framework to investigate options for reducing global terrestrial biodiversity loss, Ecosystems, 12, 374, 10.1007/s10021-009-9229-5 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Allouche, 2006, Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic (TSS), J. Appl. Ecol., 43, 1223, 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01214.x · DOI · Paper page
  4. Boutin, 2014, Climate change and mammals: evolutionary versus plastic responses, Evol. Applic., 7, 29, 10.1111/eva.12121 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Bouwman, 2006, Integrated modelling of global environmental change: an overview of Image 2.4
  6. Brooks, 2014, IPBES ≠ IPCC, Trends Ecol. Evol., 29, 543, 10.1016/j.tree.2014.08.004 · DOI
  7. Butchart, 2007, Improvements to the red list index, PLoS ONE, 2, e140, 10.1371/journal.pone.0000140 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Butchart, 2010, Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines, Science, 328, 1164, 10.1126/science.1187512 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Di Marco, 2014, A retrospective evaluation of the global decline of carnivores and ungulates, Conserv. Biol., 28, 1109, 10.1111/cobi.12249 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Guisan, 2000, Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology, Ecol. Model., 135, 147, 10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00354-9 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Hoffmann, 2011, The changing fates of the world's mammals, Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. B, 1578, 2598, 10.1098/rstb.2011.0116 · DOI · Paper page
  12. IUCN, 2012a, IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1
  13. Nicholson, 2012, Making robust policy decisions using global biodiversity indicators, PLoS ONE, 7, e41128, 10.1371/journal.pone.0041128 · DOI · Paper page
  14. PBL, 2012, Roads from Rio+20 Pathways to achieve global sustainability goals by 2050
  15. Pearson, 2014, Life history and spatial traits predict extinction risk due to climate change, Nat. Clim. Change, 4, 217, 10.1038/nclimate2113 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Rondinini, 2011, Global habitat suitability models of terrestrial mammals, Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. B: Biol. Sci., 366, 2633, 10.1098/rstb.2011.0113 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Schloss, 2012, Dispersal will limit ability of mammals to track climate change in the Western Hemisphere, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 109, 8606, 10.1073/pnas.1116791109 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Soberón, 2009, Niches and distributional areas: concepts, methods, and assumptions, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 106, 19644, 10.1073/pnas.0901637106 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Stehfest, 2009, Climate benefits of changing diet, Clim. Change, 95, 83, 10.1007/s10584-008-9534-6 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Thuiller, 2009, BIOMOD-a platform for ensemble forecasting of species distributions, Ecography, 32, 369, 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2008.05742.x · DOI · Paper page
  21. Vuuren, 2006, The future of vascular plant diversity under four global scenarios, Ecol. Soc., 11, 25, 10.5751/ES-01818-110225 · DOI
  22. Visconti, 2011, Future hotspots of terrestrial mammal loss, Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. B: Biol. Sci., 366, 2693, 10.1098/rstb.2011.0105 · DOI
  23. Williams, 2007, Projected distributions of novel and disappearing climates by 2100 AD, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 104, 5738, 10.1073/pnas.0606292104 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 283

Metadata

Authors
Visconti, P., Bakkenes, M., Baisero, D., Brooks, T., Butchart, S. H. M., Joppa, L., Alkemade, R., Di Marco, M., Santini, L., Hoffmann, M., Maiorano, L., Pressey, R. L., Arponen, A., Boitani, L., Reside, A. E., van Vuuren, D. P., & Rondinini, C.
Venue
Conservation Letters
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-02-23
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
5-13
ISSN
1755-263X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1543590217
Cited by
283
References
5
FWCI
25.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1 (tdm)

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: Projecting Global Biodiversity Indicators under Future Development Scenarios: Projecting biodiversity indicators. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/conl.12159
The paper
Visconti, P., Bakkenes, M., Baisero, D., Brooks, T., Butchart, S. H. M., Joppa, L., Alkemade, R., Di Marco, M., Santini, L., Hoffmann, M., Maiorano, L., Pressey, R. L., Arponen, A., Boitani, L., Reside, A. E., van Vuuren, D. P., & Rondinini, C. (2016). Projecting Global Biodiversity Indicators under Future Development Scenarios: Projecting biodiversity indicators. Conservation Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12159

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.