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.
131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25538868)
1. Optimization in the utility maximization framework for conservation planning: a comparison of solution procedures in a study of multifunctional agriculture. Kreitler J; Stoms DM; Davis FW PeerJ; 2014; 2():e690. PubMed ID: 25538868 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A local optimization framework for addressing conservation conflicts in mosaic ecosystems. Nowack S; Bauch CT; Anand M PLoS One; 2019; 14(5):e0217812. PubMed ID: 31150510 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A conceptual framework of agricultural land use planning with BMP for integrated watershed management. Qi H; Altinakar MS J Environ Manage; 2011 Jan; 92(1):149-55. PubMed ID: 20863609 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Rarity-weighted richness: a simple and reliable alternative to integer programming and heuristic algorithms for minimum set and maximum coverage problems in conservation planning. Albuquerque F; Beier P PLoS One; 2015; 10(3):e0119905. PubMed ID: 25780930 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Use of inverse spatial conservation prioritization to avoid biological diversity loss outside protected areas. Kareksela S; Moilanen A; Tuominen S; Kotiaho JS Conserv Biol; 2013 Dec; 27(6):1294-303. PubMed ID: 24033397 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Forest and farmland conservation effects of Oregon's (USA) land-use planning program. Kline JD Environ Manage; 2005 Apr; 35(4):368-80. PubMed ID: 15902442 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Winners and losers of national and global efforts to reconcile agricultural intensification and biodiversity conservation. Egli L; Meyer C; Scherber C; Kreft H; Tscharntke T Glob Chang Biol; 2018 May; 24(5):2212-2228. PubMed ID: 29389056 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Characterizing urbanization, and agricultural and conservation land-use change in Riverside County, California, USA. Chen X; Li BL; Allen MF Ann N Y Acad Sci; 2010 May; 1195 Suppl 1():E164-76. PubMed ID: 20586769 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Prioritizing global conservation efforts. Wilson KA; McBride MF; Bode M; Possingham HP Nature; 2006 Mar; 440(7082):337-40. PubMed ID: 16541073 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Land Suitability Evaluation and an Interval Stochastic Fuzzy Programming-Based Optimization Model for Land-Use Planning and Environmental Policy Analysis. Zhang Z; Zhou M; Ou G; Tan S; Song Y; Zhang L; Nie X Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2019 Oct; 16(21):. PubMed ID: 31717718 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A framework for allocating conservation resources among multiple threats and actions. Moore JL; Camaclang AE; Moore AL; Hauser CE; Runge MC; Picheny V; Rumpff L Conserv Biol; 2021 Oct; 35(5):1639-1649. PubMed ID: 33909929 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Using Optimal Land-Use Scenarios to Assess Trade-Offs between Conservation, Development, and Social Values. Adams VM; Pressey RL; Álvarez-Romero JG PLoS One; 2016; 11(6):e0158350. PubMed ID: 27362347 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Balancing agricultural production, groundwater management, and biodiversity goals: A multi-benefit optimization model of agriculture in Kern County, California. Bourque K; Schiller A; Loyola Angosto C; McPhail L; Bagnasco W; Ayres A; Larsen A Sci Total Environ; 2019 Jun; 670():865-875. PubMed ID: 30921719 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessing the shelf life of cost-efficient conservation plans for species at risk across gradients of agricultural land use. Robillard CM; Kerr JT Conserv Biol; 2017 Aug; 31(4):837-847. PubMed ID: 27991681 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A farm-level precision land management framework based on integer programming. Li Q; Hu G; Jubery TZ; Ganapathysubramanian B PLoS One; 2017; 12(3):e0174680. PubMed ID: 28346499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Reserve selection with land market feedbacks. Butsic V; Lewis DJ; Radeloff VC J Environ Manage; 2013 Jan; 114():276-84. PubMed ID: 23141878 [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. Balancing alternative land uses in conservation prioritization. Moilanen A; Anderson BJ; Eigenbrod F; Heinemeyer A; Roy DB; Gillings S; Armsworth PR; Gaston KJ; Thomas CD Ecol Appl; 2011 Jul; 21(5):1419-26. PubMed ID: 21830691 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Optimal dynamic allocation of conservation funding among priority regions. Bode M; Wilson K; McBride M; Possingham H Bull Math Biol; 2008 Oct; 70(7):2039-54. PubMed ID: 18712571 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A multicriteria model for planning agricultural regions within a context of groundwater rational management. Manos B; Papathanasiou J; Bournaris T; Voudouris K J Environ Manage; 2010 Jul; 91(7):1593-600. PubMed ID: 20371401 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]