Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 972

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Inbreeding Depression in Conservation Biology

Hedrick, Philip W., Kalinowski, Steven T.·2000·Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics

Abstract

▪ Abstract Inbreeding depression is of major concern in the management and conservation of endangered species. Inbreeding appears universally to reduce fitness, but its magnitude and specific effects are highly variable because they depend on the genetic constitution of the species or populations and on how these genotypes interact with the environment. Recent natural experiments are consistent with greater inbreeding depression in more stressful environments. In small populations of randomly mating individuals, such as are characteristic of many endangered species, all individuals may suffer from inbreeding depression because of the cumulative effects of genetic drift that decrease the fitness of all individuals in the population. In three recent cases, introductions into populations with low fitness appeared to restore fitness to levels similar to those before the effects of genetic drift. Inbreeding depression may potentially be reduced, or purged, by breeding related individuals. However, the Speke's gazelle example, often cited as a demonstration of reduction of inbreeding depression, appears to be the result of a temporal change in fitness in inbred individuals and not a reduction in inbreeding depression. Down, July 17, 1870 My Dear Lubbock, …In England and many parts of Europe the marriages of cousins are objected to from their supposed injurious consequences: but this belief rests on no direct evidence. It is therefore manifestly desirable that the belief should be either proved false, or should be confirmed, so that in this latter case the marriages of cousins might be discouraged… It is moreover, much to be wished that the truth of the often repeated assertion that consanguineous marriages lead to deafness and dumbness, blindness, &c, should be ascertained: and all such assertions could be easily tested by the returns from a single census. Believe me, Yours very sincerely, Charles Darwin

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.31.1.139

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 972

Metadata

Authors
Hedrick, P. W., & Kalinowski, S. T.
Venue
Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics
Published
2000-11
Volume
31
Issue
1
Pages
139-162
ISSN
0066-4162 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2141518313
Cited by
972
References
1
FWCI
12.80
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: Inbreeding Depression in Conservation Biology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.139
The paper
Hedrick, P. W., & Kalinowski, S. T. (2000). Inbreeding Depression in Conservation Biology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.139

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.