Cited by 173Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementEnvironmental Conservation and Management

A biodiversity target based on species extinctions

Open access
Rounsevell, Mark D. A., Harfoot, Mike, Harrison, Paula A., Newbold, Tim, Gregory, Richard D., Mace, Georgina M.·2020·Science

Abstract

A single target comparable to the 2°C climate target may help galvanize biodiversity policy

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 · 10.1126/science.aba6592

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The current value for the extinction rate is conservatively set at >100 E/MSY.

    “We conservatively set the current value for the extinction rate at >100 E/MSY (24–26).”

    From Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries (2023) · cites this paper as [25]

    Table S3 (Additional information; page not given) estimates 334–3336 E/MSY for all described species, which supports a contemporary estimate above 100. But the same table gives a range of 10–5000 E/MSY for all current species, while the Framework reports 33.6 E/MSY for assessed vertebrates over 1500–2019. The paper therefore does not establish >100 E/MSY as a conservative current value without specifying which estimate is being used. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [19]19. IUCN (2019). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. http://www.iucnredlist.org. Cambridge, UK, IUCN.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rounsevell, M. D. A., Harfoot, M., Harrison, P. A., Newbold, T., Gregory, R. D., & Mace, G. M.
Affiliations
  • Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE)
  • UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (GB)
  • UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (GB)
Venue
Science
Published
2020-06-12
Volume
368
Issue
6496
Pages
1193-1195
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W3034209693
Cited by
173
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 17
FWCI
18.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NERC Open Research Archive (Natural Environment Research Council) (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Conservation and Management
Keywords
biodiversity targets, species extinction, biodiversity policy, climate targets, 2°C target, extinction risk, conservation policy
MeSH terms
Animals, Conservation of Natural Resources, Biodiversity, Extinction, Biological, Global Warming, Environmental Policy

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