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.
188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28574183)
1. Quantitative tools for implementing the new definition of significant portion of the range in the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Earl JE; Nicol S; Wiederholt R; Diffendorfer JE; Semmens D; Flockhart DTT; Mattsson BJ; McCracken G; Norris DR; Thogmartin WE; López-Hoffman L Conserv Biol; 2018 Feb; 32(1):35-49. PubMed ID: 28574183 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A framework for developing objective and measurable recovery criteria for threatened and endangered species. Himes Boor GK Conserv Biol; 2014 Feb; 28(1):33-43. PubMed ID: 24112040 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Actual and potential use of population viability analyses in recovery of plant species listed under the US endangered species act. Zeigler SL; Che-Castaldo JP; Neel MC Conserv Biol; 2013 Dec; 27(6):1265-78. PubMed ID: 24033732 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A biological framework for evaluating whether a species is threatened or endangered in a significant portion of its range. Waples RS; Adams PB; Bohnsack J; Taylor BL Conserv Biol; 2007 Aug; 21(4):964-74. PubMed ID: 17650247 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. The role of scientists in statutory interpretation of the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Wilhere GF Conserv Biol; 2017 Apr; 31(2):252-260. PubMed ID: 27601227 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Incorporating climate and ocean change into extinction risk assessments for 82 coral species. Brainard RE; Weijerman M; Eakin CM; McElhany P; Miller MW; Patterson M; Piniak GA; Dunlap MJ; Birkeland C Conserv Biol; 2013 Dec; 27(6):1169-78. PubMed ID: 24299083 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Species-level persistence probabilities for recovery and conservation status assessment. Che-Castaldo JP; Neel MC Conserv Biol; 2016 Dec; 30(6):1297-1306. PubMed ID: 27030933 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Estimating effects of tidal power projects and climate change on threatened and endangered marine species and their food web. Busch DS; Greene CM; Good TP Conserv Biol; 2013 Dec; 27(6):1190-200. PubMed ID: 24299085 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Climate change, marine environments, and the US Endangered species act. Seney EE; Rowland MJ; Lowery RA; Griffis RB; McClure MM Conserv Biol; 2013 Dec; 27(6):1138-46. PubMed ID: 24299080 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Geography and recovery under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Carroll C; Vucetich JA; Nelson MP; Rohlf DJ; Phillips MK Conserv Biol; 2010 Apr; 24(2):395-403. PubMed ID: 20151988 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Factors Associated with Listing Decisions under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Smith-Hicks KN; Morrison ML Environ Manage; 2021 Apr; 67(4):563-573. PubMed ID: 33638664 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Same law, diverging practice: Comparative analysis of Endangered Species Act consultations by two federal agencies. Evansen M; Li YW; Malcom J PLoS One; 2020; 15(3):e0230477. PubMed ID: 32196537 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Hybridization, agency discretion, and implementation of the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Lind-Riehl JF; Mayer AL; Wellstead AM; Gailing O Conserv Biol; 2016 Dec; 30(6):1288-1296. PubMed ID: 27113272 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Attributes of preemptive conservation efforts for species precluded from listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Stanley AE; Epanchin-Niell R; Treakle T; Iacona GD Conserv Biol; 2024 Apr; 38(2):e14200. PubMed ID: 37817673 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Incorporating climate science in applications of the US endangered species act for aquatic species. McClure MM; Alexander M; Borggaard D; Boughton D; Crozier L; Griffis R; Jorgensen JC; Lindley ST; Nye J; Rowland MJ; Seney EE; Snover A; Toole C; VAN Houtan K Conserv Biol; 2013 Dec; 27(6):1222-33. PubMed ID: 24299088 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Defining critical habitats of threatened and endemic reef fishes with a multivariate approach. Purcell SW; Clarke KR; Rushworth K; Dalton SJ Conserv Biol; 2014 Dec; 28(6):1688-98. PubMed ID: 25302855 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Use of standardized methods to improve extinction-risk classification. Mothes CC; Clements SL; Hewavithana DK; Howell HJ; David AS; Leventhal ND; Searcy CA Conserv Biol; 2020 Jun; 34(3):754-761. PubMed ID: 31584211 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Implicit decision framing as an unrecognized source of confusion in endangered species classification. Cummings JW; Converse SJ; Smith DR; Morey S; Runge MC Conserv Biol; 2018 Dec; 32(6):1246-1254. PubMed ID: 29987850 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]