The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Carnivore conservation needs evidence-based livestock protection
Open accessAbstract
Carnivore predation on livestock often leads people to retaliate. Persecution by humans has contributed strongly to global endangerment of carnivores. Preventing livestock losses would help to achieve three goals common to many human societies: preserve nature, protect animal welfare, and safeguard human livelihoods. Between 2016 and 2018, four independent reviews evaluated >40 years of research on lethal and nonlethal interventions for reducing predation on livestock. From 114 studies, we find a striking conclusion: scarce quantitative comparisons of interventions and scarce comparisons against experimental controls preclude strong inference about the effectiveness of methods. For wise investment of public resources in protecting livestock and carnivores, evidence of effectiveness should be a prerequisite to policy making or large-scale funding of any method or, at a minimum, should be measured during implementation. An appropriate evidence base is needed, and we recommend a coalition of scientists and managers be formed to establish and encourage use of consistent standards in future experimental evaluations.
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
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 · Cited by 10,505
The United States Department of Agriculture
True, A. C. (1912) · The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science · doi:10.1177/000271621204000113 · Cited by 5,113
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · CHANCE · doi:10.1080/09332480.2005.10722754 · Cited by 4,702 · cited 2×
“Random assignment of treatments avoids sampling or selection bias that is common in our field [8], as in others [18].”
BackgroundStatus and Ecological Effects of the World’s Largest Carnivores
Ripple, W. J., Estes, J. A., Beschta, R. L., Wilmers, C. C., Ritchie, E. G., Hebblewhite, M., Berger, J., Elmhagen, B., Letnic, M., Nelson, M. P., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1241484 · Cited by 3,667
Self-citationPlatt, J. R. (1964) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.146.3642.347 · Cited by 2,907
Recovery of large carnivores in Europe’s modern human-dominated landscapes
Chapron, G., Kaczensky, P., Linnell, J. D. C., von Arx, M., Huber, D., Andrén, H., López-Bao, J. V., Adamec, M., Álvares, F., Anders, O., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1257553 · Cited by 1,868
Self-citationThe need for evidence-based conservation
Sutherland, W. J., Pullin, A. S., Dolman, P. M., & Knight, T. M. (2004) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.018 · Cited by 1,822
Co-Managing Human–Wildlife Conflicts: A Review
Treves, A., Wallace, R. B., Naughton-Treves, L., & Morales, A. (2006) · Human Dimensions of Wildlife · doi:10.1080/10871200600984265 · Cited by 579
Self-citationWildlife Science: Gaining Reliable Knowledge
Romesburg, H. C. (1981) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3807913 · Cited by 380
Managing conflict between large carnivores and livestock
van Eeden, L. M., Crowther, M. S., Dickman, C. R., Macdonald, D. W., Ripple, W. J., Ritchie, E. G., & Newsome, T. M. (2018) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.12959 · Cited by 351
Self-citationTolerance for Predatory Wildlife
Treves, A., & Bruskotter, J. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1252690 · Cited by 327
Self-citationEklund, A., López-Bao, J. V., Tourani, M., Chapron, G., & Frank, J. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-02323-w · Cited by 286
Self-citationPredator control should not be a shot in the dark
Treves, A., Krofel, M., & McManus, J. (2016) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1002/fee.1312 · Cited by 257
Self-citationEvaluating lethal control in the management of human–wildlife conflict
Treves, A., & Naughton-Treves, L. (2009) · People and Wildlife · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511614774.007 · Cited by 197
Self-citationHuman–Wildlife Interactions: Turning Conflict into Coexistence
Frank, B., Glikman, J. A., & Marchini, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · Cited by 174
Effectiveness of contemporary techniques for reducing livestock depredations by large carnivores
Miller, J. R. B., Stoner, K. J., Cejtin, M. R., Meyer, T. K., Middleton, A. D., & Schmitz, O. J. (2016) · Wildlife Society Bulletin · doi:10.1002/wsb.720 · Cited by 163
Self-citationNon‐lethal defense of livestock against predators: flashing lights deter puma attacks in Chile
Ohrens, O., Bonacic, C., & Treves, A. (2019) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1002/fee.1952 · Cited by 82
Self-citationKilling wolves to prevent predation on livestock may protect one farm but harm neighbors
Santiago‐Ávila, F. J., Cornman, A. M., & Treves, A. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0189729 · Cited by 69
Self-citationCoyote depredation management: current methods and research needs
MITCHELL, B. R., Jaeger, M. M., & Barrett, R. H. (2004) · Wildlife Society Bulletin · doi:10.2193/0091-7648(2004)032[1209:cdmcma]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 67
Cited by
Landscapes of Fear: Spatial Patterns of Risk Perception and Response
Gaynor, K. M., Brown, J. S., Middleton, A. D., Power, M. E., & Brashares, J. S. (2019) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2019.01.004 · Cited by 759
Self-citationHuman–wildlife coexistence in a changing world
König, H. J., Kiffner, C., Kramer‐Schadt, S., Fürst, C., Keuling, O., & Ford, A. T. (2020) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.13513 · Cited by 489
Metadata
- Authors
- van Eeden, L. M., Eklund, A., Miller, J. R. B., López-Bao, J. V., Chapron, G., Cejtin, M. R., Crowther, M. S., Dickman, C. R., Frank, J., Krofel, M., Macdonald, D. W., McManus, J., Meyer, T. K., Middleton, A. D., Newsome, T. M., Ripple, W. J., Ritchie, E. G., Schmitz, O. J., Stoner, K. J., Tourani, M., & Treves, A.
- Venue
- PLOS Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2018-09-18
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- e2005577
- ISSN
- 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-7885
- OpenAlex
- W2890065063
- Cited by
- 316
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 31.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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.
