These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

410 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18402582)

  • 21. Conservation development practices, extent, and land-use effects in the United States.
    Milder JC; Clark S
    Conserv Biol; 2011 Aug; 25(4):697-707. PubMed ID: 21658127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Effects of biological monitoring and results outreach on private landowner conservation management.
    Lutter SH; Dayer AA; Heggenstaller E; Larkin JL
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(4):e0194740. PubMed ID: 29617388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A game theoretical model of deforestation in human-environment relationships.
    Rodrigues A; Koeppl H; Ohtsuki H; Satake A
    J Theor Biol; 2009 May; 258(1):127-34. PubMed ID: 19490882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Classifying private landowners to improve understanding of management decisions and conservation opportunities in urbanizing forested landscapes.
    Balukas JA; Bell KP; Bauer DM
    J Environ Manage; 2019 Feb; 232():751-758. PubMed ID: 30529417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Guidelines and incentives for conservation development in local land-use regulations.
    Reed SE; Hilty JA; Theobald DM
    Conserv Biol; 2014 Feb; 28(1):258-68. PubMed ID: 24001140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Negative off-site impacts of ecological restoration: understanding and addressing the conflict.
    Buckley MC; Crone EE
    Conserv Biol; 2008 Oct; 22(5):1118-24. PubMed ID: 18759779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Changing landowners, changing ecosystem? Land-ownership motivations as drivers of land management practices.
    Sorice MG; Kreuter UP; Wilcox BP; Fox WE
    J Environ Manage; 2014 Jan; 133():144-52. PubMed ID: 24374464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Designing cost-effective payments for conservation measures to generate spatiotemporal habitat heterogeneity.
    Drechsler M; Johst K; Ohl C; Wätzold F
    Conserv Biol; 2007 Dec; 21(6):1475-86. PubMed ID: 18173471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Seasonal variations in the relationship between landscape pattern and land surface temperature in Indianapolis, USA.
    Liu H; Weng Q
    Environ Monit Assess; 2008 Sep; 144(1-3):199-219. PubMed ID: 17899413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Evaluation of the economic and environmental impact of converting cropland to forest: a case study in Dunhua county, China.
    Wang C; Ouyang H; Maclaren V; Yin Y; Shao B; Boland A; Tian Y
    J Environ Manage; 2007 Nov; 85(3):746-56. PubMed ID: 17188798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Collateral biodiversity benefits associated with 'free-market' approaches to sustainable land use and forestry activities.
    Koziell I; Swingland IR
    Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci; 2002 Aug; 360(1797):1807-16. PubMed ID: 12460499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Multiple approaches to valuation of conservation design and low-impact development features in residential subdivisions.
    Bowman T; Tyndall JC; Thompson J; Kliebenstein J; Colletti JP
    J Environ Manage; 2012 Aug; 104():101-13. PubMed ID: 22487398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Costa Rica's payment for environmental services program: intention, implementation, and impact.
    Sánchez-Azofeifa GA; Pfaff A; Robalino JA; Boomhower JP
    Conserv Biol; 2007 Oct; 21(5):1165-73. PubMed ID: 17883482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Increasing participation in incentive programs for biodiversity conservation.
    Sorice MG; Oh CO; Gartner T; Snieckus M; Johnson R; Donlan CJ
    Ecol Appl; 2013 Jul; 23(5):1146-55. PubMed ID: 23967582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Using cost-effective targeting to enhance the efficiency of conservation investments in payments for ecosystem services.
    Chen X; Lupi F; Viña A; He G; Liu J
    Conserv Biol; 2010 Dec; 24(6):1469-78. PubMed ID: 20586786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Assessing the effectiveness of reserve acquisition programs in protecting rare and threatened species.
    Turner WR; Wilcove DS; Swain HM
    Conserv Biol; 2006 Dec; 20(6):1657-69. PubMed ID: 17181801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Estimating the value of non-use benefits from small changes in the provision of ecosystem services.
    Dutton A; Edwards-Jones G; Macdonald DW
    Conserv Biol; 2010 Dec; 24(6):1479-87. PubMed ID: 20560999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Social factors and private benefits influence landholders' riverine restoration priorities in tropical Australia.
    Januchowski-Hartley SR; Moon K; Stoeckl N; Gray S
    J Environ Manage; 2012 Nov; 110():20-6. PubMed ID: 22705856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Role of adaptive management for watershed councils.
    Habron G
    Environ Manage; 2003 Jan; 31(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 12447573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Landowner Perceptions of Payments for Nature Conservation on Private Land.
    Yasué M; Kirkpatrick JB; Davison A; Gilfedder L
    Environ Manage; 2019 Sep; 64(3):287-302. PubMed ID: 31359092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.