The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Habitat loss and the limits to endangered species recovery
Abstract
Canada is one of the last places on earth with extensive wilderness areas, yet the number of Canadian species threatened with extinction continues to rise every year. Using satellite‐derived land use data, we find that habitat loss explains most of the variation in numbers of endangered species across Canada. Habitat loss within species ranges is, therefore, likely to be the leading factor inhibiting their recovery. We measured habitat loss individually within the known ranges of 243 terrestrial species at risk of extinction across Canada. Recovery potential, as measured by extent of natural habitat within each species’ range, is bimodally distributed, but less than 50% of the range of the majority of Canada's species at risk is natural habitat and there is no detectable habitat remaining for 16 of the 243 species at risk. There were no differences in the recovery potential of species categorized either by threat level (special concern, threatened, or endangered) or taxon. Despite having extensive wilderness areas, Canada has similar rates of endangerment to other countries in the Americas, underlining the effect of severe habitat loss to intensive agriculture that has occurred in Canada's most biologically diverse regions. Improvements to protected areas networks and especially cooperative conservation activities with private landowners will do the most to improve the recovery prospects of species at risk in Canada.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Consequences of changing biodiversity
Chapin III, F. S., Zavaleta, E. S., Eviner, V. T., Naylor, R. L., Vitousek, P. M., Reynolds, H. L., Hooper, D. U., Lavorel, S., Sala, O. E., Hobbie, S. E., et al. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35012241 · Cited by 4,282
Mammal Population Losses and the Extinction Crisis
Ceballos, G., & Ehrlich, P. R. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1069349 · Cited by 968
Population Diversity: Its Extent and Extinction
Hughes, J. B., Daily, G. C., & Ehrlich, P. R. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.278.5338.689 · Cited by 596
Cited by
Land-use choices: balancing human needs and ecosystem function
DeFries, R. S., Foley, J. A., & Asner, G. P. (2004) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0249:lcbhna]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 936
Tackling the habitat fragmentation panchreston
Lindenmayer, D. B., & Fischer, J. (2007) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2006.11.006 · Cited by 347
Resolving Critical Habitat Designation Failures: Reconciling Law, Policy, and Biology
HAGEN, A. N., & HODGES, K. E. (2006) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00320.x · Cited by 58
Gonino, G. M. R., Figueiredo, B. R. S., Manetta, G. I., Zaia Alves, G. H., & Benedito, E. (2019) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.022 · Cited by 42
Prioritization of public and private land to protect species at risk habitat
Proctor, C. A., Schuster, R., Buxton, R. T., & Bennett, J. R. (2022) · Conservation Science and Practice · doi:10.1111/csp2.12771 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Kerr, J. T., & Deguise, I.
- Venue
- Ecology Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-11-12
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1163-1169
- ISSN
- 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
- 1461-0248
- OpenAlex
- W2146455107
- Cited by
- 183
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 4.20
- 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: Habitat loss and the limits to endangered species recovery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00676.x
- The paper
- Kerr, J. T., & Deguise, I. (2004). Habitat loss and the limits to endangered species recovery. Ecology Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00676.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.