Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 322

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Preserving the Information Content of Species: Genetic Diversity, Phylogeny, and Conservation Worth

Crozier, R. H.·1997·Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics

Abstract

A variety of phylogenetic measures have been proposed to quantify distinctiveness, often held to mark species of high conservation worth. However, distinctiveness of species and their numbers have different implications for conservation policy, depending on whether moral, esthetic, or utilitarian reasons are accepted as justifying conservation. The utilitarian position values species according to increasing numbers, and as they are more, as opposed to less, distinctive. The view is taken that conservation should seek to maximize the preserved information of the planet's biota, best expressed in terms of genetic information held in genes and not in portions of the genome of uncertain or no function. Gene number is thus an important component of assessing conservation value. Phylogenetic measures are better indicators of conservation worth than species richness, and measures using branch-lengths are better than procedures relying solely on topology. Distance measures estimating the differences between genomes are preferable to substitution distances. Higher-taxon richness is a promising surrogate for branch-length measures. Complete enumeration of biotas in terms of phylogeny is desirable to avoid uncertainties in the use of indicator groups, and this is achievable now for bacteria. Phylogenetic measures are already important for management of sets of populations within species and are applicable for sets of species. Measures incorporating extinction probabilities and decision costs are being developed, and these, in conjunction with the use of confidence limits on the conservation worth of alternative reserves, are vital for conservation decision-making.

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 · 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.28.1.243

Cites

7 of 7 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 7 references

Cited by

See all 322

Metadata

Authors
Crozier, R. H.
Venue
Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics
Published
1997-11
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
243-268
ISSN
0066-4162 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2171947644
Cited by
322
References
7
FWCI
8.34
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: Preserving the Information Content of Species: Genetic Diversity, Phylogeny, and Conservation Worth. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.28.1.243
The paper
Crozier, R. H. (1997). Preserving the Information Content of Species: Genetic Diversity, Phylogeny, and Conservation Worth. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.28.1.243

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.