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 *

362 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25382827)

  • 1. The value of using feasibility models in systematic conservation planning to predict landholder management uptake.
    Tulloch AI; Tulloch VJ; Evans MC; Mills M
    Conserv Biol; 2014 Dec; 28(6):1462-73. PubMed ID: 25382827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accounting for complementarity to maximize monitoring power for species management.
    Tulloch AI; Chadès I; Possingham HP
    Conserv Biol; 2013 Oct; 27(5):988-99. PubMed ID: 24073812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of threat management interactions on conservation priorities.
    Auerbach NA; Wilson KA; Tulloch AI; Rhodes JR; Hanson JO; Possingham HP
    Conserv Biol; 2015 Dec; 29(6):1626-35. PubMed ID: 26171646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Integrating biological and social values when prioritizing places for biodiversity conservation.
    Whitehead AL; Kujala H; Ives CD; Gordon A; Lentini PE; Wintle BA; Nicholson E; Raymond CM
    Conserv Biol; 2014 Aug; 28(4):992-1003. PubMed ID: 24617898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of risk aversion on prioritizing conservation projects.
    Tulloch AI; Maloney RF; Joseph LN; Bennett JR; Di Fonzo MM; Probert WJ; O'Connor SM; Densem JP; Possingham HP
    Conserv Biol; 2015 Apr; 29(2):513-24. PubMed ID: 25327837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The grain of spatially referenced economic cost and biodiversity benefit data and the effectiveness of a cost targeting strategy.
    Sutton NJ; Armsworth PR
    Conserv Biol; 2014 Dec; 28(6):1451-61. PubMed ID: 25381868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Informed actions: where to cost effectively manage multiple threats to species to maximize return on investment.
    Auerbach NA; Tulloch AIT; Possingham HP
    Ecol Appl; 2014; 24(6):1357-73. PubMed ID: 29160659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Efficiency and concordance of alternative methods for minimizing opportunity costs in conservation planning.
    Cameron SE; Williams KJ; Mitchell DK
    Conserv Biol; 2008 Aug; 22(4):886-96. PubMed ID: 18637906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Rabbit biocontrol and landscape-scale recovery of threatened desert mammals.
    Pedler RD; Brandle R; Read JL; Southgate R; Bird P; Moseby KE
    Conserv Biol; 2016 Aug; 30(4):774-82. PubMed ID: 26852773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Use of surrogate species to cost-effectively prioritize conservation actions.
    Ward M; Rhodes JR; Watson JEM; Lefevre J; Atkinson S; Possingham HP
    Conserv Biol; 2020 Jun; 34(3):600-610. PubMed ID: 31691376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessing conservation opportunity on private land: socio-economic, behavioral, and spatial dimensions.
    Raymond CM; Brown G
    J Environ Manage; 2011 Oct; 92(10):2513-23. PubMed ID: 21664035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Using changes in agricultural utility to quantify future climate-induced risk to conservation.
    Estes LD; Paroz LL; Bradley BA; Green JM; Hole DG; Holness S; Ziv G; Oppenheimer MG; Wilcove DS
    Conserv Biol; 2014 Apr; 28(2):427-37. PubMed ID: 24372589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Detecting extinction risk from climate change by IUCN Red List criteria.
    Keith DA; Mahony M; Hines H; Elith J; Regan TJ; Baumgartner JB; Hunter D; Heard GW; Mitchell NJ; Parris KM; Penman T; Scheele B; Simpson CC; Tingley R; Tracy CR; West M; Akçakaya HR
    Conserv Biol; 2014 Jun; 28(3):810-9. PubMed ID: 24512339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Understanding the effects of different social data on selecting priority conservation areas.
    Karimi A; Tulloch AIT; Brown G; Hockings M
    Conserv Biol; 2017 Dec; 31(6):1439-1449. PubMed ID: 28425128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Conservation businesses and conservation planning in a biological diversity hotspot.
    Di Minin E; Macmillan DC; Goodman PS; Escott B; Slotow R; Moilanen A
    Conserv Biol; 2013 Aug; 27(4):808-20. PubMed ID: 23565917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Constraints of philanthropy on determining the distribution of biodiversity conservation funding.
    Larson ER; Howell S; Kareiva P; Armsworth PR
    Conserv Biol; 2016 Feb; 30(1):206-15. PubMed ID: 26460820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fundamental insights on when social network data are most critical for conservation planning.
    Rhodes JR; Guerrero AM; Bodin Ö; Chadès I
    Conserv Biol; 2020 Dec; 34(6):1463-1472. PubMed ID: 32691916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Benefits to poorly studied taxa of conservation of bird and mammal diversity on islands.
    Aslan C; Holmes N; Tershy B; Spatz D; Croll DA
    Conserv Biol; 2015 Feb; 29(1):133-42. PubMed ID: 25065901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Personal circumstances and social characteristics as determinants of landholder participation in biodiversity conservation programs.
    Moon K; Marshall N; Cocklin C
    J Environ Manage; 2012 Dec; 113():292-300. PubMed ID: 23064247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.