The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Assessing Extinction Threats: Toward a Reevaluation of IUCN Threatened Species Categories
Abstract
Abstract: IUCN categories of threat (Endangered Vulnerable, Rare, Indeterminate, and others) are widely used in‘Red lists’of endangered species and have become an important tool in conservation action at international, national, regional, and thematic levels. The existing definitions are largely subjective, and as a result, categorizations made by different authorities diyfer and my not accurately reflect actual extinction risks. We present proposals to redefine categories in tams of the probability of extinction within a specific time period based on the theory of extinction times for single populations and on meaningful time scales for conservation action. Three categories are proposed (CRITICAL, ENDANGE‐, VULNERABLE) with decreasing levels of threat over increasing time scales for species estimated to have at least a 10% probability of extinction within 100 years. The process of assigning species to categories may need to vay among different taxonomic groups, but we present some simple qualitative criteria based on population biology theory, which we suggest are appropriate at least for most large vertebrates. The process of assessing threat is clearly distinguished from that of setting priorities for conservation action, and only the former is discussed here. Resumen: La categorización de la Uniôn Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) de las especies amenazadas (en peligro, vulnerables, raras, indeteminadas y otras) son ampliamente utilizadas en las Listas Rojas de especies en peligro y se ban convertido en una herramienta importante para las acciones de conservacion al nivel internacional, nacional, regional y temático. Las definiciones de las categorias existentes son muy subjetivas y, como resultado, las categorizaciones hechas por diferentes autores dvieren y quizás no reflejen con certeza el riesgo real de extinción. Presentamos propuestas para re‐definir las categoryías en términos de la probabilidad de extinción dentro de un períod de tiempo especifico. Las propuestas estan basadas en la teoría del tiempo de extinción para poblaciones individuales y en escalas de tiempo que tengan significado para las acciones de conservación. Se proponen tres categoryías (CRITICA, EN PELIGRO, VULNERABLE) con niveles decrecientes de amenaza sobre escalas de tiempo en aumento para especies que se estima tengan cuando ménos un 10% deprobabilidad de extinción en 100 años. El proceso de asignar especies a categoryías puede que necesite variar dentro de los diferentes grupos taxóndmicos pero nosotros presentamos algunos criterios cualitativos simples basados en la teoría de la biología de las poblaciones, las cuales suger‐imos son apropiadas para cuando ménos la mayoría de los grandes vertebrados. El proceso de evaluar la amenaza se distingue claramente del de definir las prioridades para las acciones de conservación, sólamente el primero se discute aquí.
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
Cited by
Challenges in the Quest for Keystones
Power, M. E., Tilman, D., Estes, J. A., Menge, B. A., Bond, W. J., Mills, L. S., Daily, G., Castilla, J. C., Lubchenco, J., & Paine, R. T. (1996) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1312990 · Cited by 2,018
Commonness, population depletion and conservation biology
GASTON, K., & FULLER, R. (2008) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2007.11.001 · Cited by 569
Rapid declines of common, widespread British moths provide evidence of an insect biodiversity crisis
Conrad, K. F., Warren, M. S., Fox, R., Parsons, M. S., & Woiwod, I. P. (2006) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2006.04.020 · Cited by 539
Nel, J. L., Roux, D. J., Maree, G., Kleynhans, C. J., Moolman, J., Reyers, B., Rouget, M., & Cowling, R. M. (2007) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00308.x · Cited by 229
Progress, challenges and opportunities for Red Listing
Bachman, S. P., Field, R., Reader, T., Raimondo, D., Donaldson, J., Schatz, G. E., & Lughadha, E. N. (2019) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2019.03.002 · Cited by 192
Mooers, A. Ø., Faith, D. P., & Maddison, W. P. (2008) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003700 · Cited by 163
Alien plant invasions and native plant extinctions: a six-threshold framework
Downey, P. O., & Richardson, D. M. (2016) · AoB PLANTS · doi:10.1093/aobpla/plw047 · Cited by 159
What Exactly Is an Endangered Species? An Analysis of the U.S. Endangered Species List: 1985–1991
Wilcove, D. S., McMillan, M., & Winston, K. C. (1993) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1993.07010087.x · Cited by 115
Brooks, T. M., Akçakaya, H. R., Burgess, N. D., Butchart, S. H. M., Hilton-Taylor, C., Hoffmann, M., Juffe-Bignoli, D., Kingston, N., MacSharry, B., Parr, M., et al. (2016) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.7 · Cited by 81
(2007) · Cited by 85
Strategic collection planning: Theory and practice
Hutchins, M., Willis, K., & Wiese, R. J. (1995) · Zoo Biology · doi:10.1002/zoo.1430140103 · Cited by 54
Novaro, A. J., Funes, M. C., & Jiménez, J. E. (2004) · The Biology and Conservation of Wild Canids · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198515562.003.0015 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- MACE, G. M., & LANDE, R.
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1991-06
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 148-157
- ISSN
- 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-1739
- OpenAlex
- W2000160163
- Cited by
- 888
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 35.06
- 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
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.