328 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26395969)
1. Cost-effective conservation of an endangered frog under uncertainty.
Rose LE; Heard GW; Chee YE; Wintle BA
Conserv Biol; 2016 Apr; 30(2):350-61. PubMed ID: 26395969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Developing metapopulation connectivity criteria from genetic and habitat data to recover the endangered Mexican wolf.
Carroll C; Fredrickson RJ; Lacy RC
Conserv Biol; 2014 Feb; 28(1):76-86. PubMed ID: 24112074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Planning for ex situ conservation in the face of uncertainty.
Canessa S; Converse SJ; West M; Clemann N; Gillespie G; McFadden M; Silla AJ; Parris KM; McCarthy MA
Conserv Biol; 2016 Jun; 30(3):599-609. PubMed ID: 26306549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The sensitivity of population viability analysis to uncertainty about habitat requirements: implications for the management of the endangered southern brown bandicoot.
Southwell DM; Lechner AM; Coates T; Wintle BA
Conserv Biol; 2008 Aug; 22(4):1045-54. PubMed ID: 18477023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Multi-action planning for threat management: a novel approach for the spatial prioritization of conservation actions.
Cattarino L; Hermoso V; Carwardine J; Kennard MJ; Linke S
PLoS One; 2015; 10(5):e0128027. PubMed ID: 26020794
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A stochastic structured metapopulation model to assess recovery scenarios of patchily distributed endangered species: Case study for a Mojave Desert rodent.
Castle ST; Foley P; Clifford DL; Foley J
PLoS One; 2020; 15(8):e0237516. PubMed ID: 32790738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A decision framework for prioritizing multiple management actions for threatened marine megafauna.
Fuentes MM; Blackwood J; Jones B; Kim M; Leis B; Limpus CJ; Marsh H; Mitchell J; Pouzols FM; Pressey RL; Visconti P
Ecol Appl; 2015 Jan; 25(1):200-14. PubMed ID: 26255368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A statistical forecasting approach to metapopulation viability analysis.
Howell PE; Hossack BR; Muths E; Sigafus BH; Chenevert-Steffler A; Chandler RB
Ecol Appl; 2020 Mar; 30(2):e02038. PubMed ID: 31709679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Building robust conservation plans.
Visconti P; Joppa L
Conserv Biol; 2015 Apr; 29(2):503-12. PubMed ID: 25362995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cost-effectiveness of translocation options for a threatened waterbird.
Martínez-Abraín A; Regan HM; Viedma C; Villuendas E; Bartolomé MA; Gómez JA; Oro D
Conserv Biol; 2011 Aug; 25(4):726-35. PubMed ID: 21676027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Genetic structure and diversity of the endangered growling grass frog in a rapidly urbanizing region.
Keely CC; Hale JM; Heard GW; Parris KM; Sumner J; Hamer AJ; Melville J
R Soc Open Sci; 2015 Aug; 2(8):140255. PubMed ID: 26361543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. When experts disagree (and better science won't help much): using structured deliberations to support endangered species recovery planning.
Gregory R; Long G; Colligan M; Geiger JG; Laser M
J Environ Manage; 2012 Aug; 105():30-43. PubMed ID: 22516871
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species: how should the economic costs be evaluated?
Plantinga AJ; Helvoigt TL; Walker K
J Environ Manage; 2014 Feb; 134():127-35. PubMed ID: 24473346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Frog population viability under present and future climate conditions: a Bayesian state-space approach.
McCaffery R; Solonen A; Crone E
J Anim Ecol; 2012 Sep; 81(5):978-85. PubMed ID: 22574643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Testing decision rules for categorizing species' extinction risk to help develop quantitative listing criteria for the U.S. Endangered Species Act.
Regan TJ; Taylor BL; Thompson GG; Cochrane JF; Ralls K; Runge MC; Merrick R
Conserv Biol; 2013 Aug; 27(4):821-31. PubMed ID: 23646933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Optimal timing of biodiversity offsetting for metapopulations.
Southwell DM; Heard GW; McCarthy MA
Ecol Appl; 2018 Mar; 28(2):508-521. PubMed ID: 29266594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Integrating modeling, monitoring, and management to reduce critical uncertainties in water resource decision making.
Peterson JT; Freeman MC
J Environ Manage; 2016 Dec; 183(Pt 2):361-370. PubMed ID: 27012362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Combining structured decision making and value-of-information analyses to identify robust management strategies.
Moore JL; Runge MC
Conserv Biol; 2012 Oct; 26(5):810-20. PubMed ID: 22862796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
