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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28992381)

  • 1. The self-sabotage of conservation: reply to Manfredo et al.
    Ives CD; Fischer J
    Conserv Biol; 2017 Dec; 31(6):1483-1485. PubMed ID: 28992381
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Revisiting the challenge of intentional value shift: reply to Ives and Fischer.
    Manfredo MJ; Bruskotter JT; Teel TL; Fulton DC; Oishi S; Uskul AK; Redford KH; Schwartz SH; Arlinghaus R; Kitayama S; Sullivan L
    Conserv Biol; 2017 Dec; 31(6):1486-1487. PubMed ID: 28992363
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Need for empirical evidence to support use of social license in conservation: reply to Garnett et al.
    Kendal D; M Ford R
    Conserv Biol; 2018 Jun; 32(3):737-739. PubMed ID: 29660178
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Eliciting human values for conservation planning and decisions: A global issue.
    Wallace KJ; Wagner C; Smith MJ
    J Environ Manage; 2016 Apr; 170():160-8. PubMed ID: 26826807
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evidence-based conservation: reply to Tepedino et al.
    Lebuhn G; Droege S; Connor EF; Gemmill-Herren B; Potts SG; Minckley RL; Jean RP; Kula E; Roubik DW; Wright KW; Frankie G; Parker F
    Conserv Biol; 2015 Feb; 29(1):283-5. PubMed ID: 25545768
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Reply to Brown et al.: Species and places are the priorities for conservation, not economic efficiency.
    Jenkins CN; Van Houtan KS; Pimm SL; Sexton JO
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2015 Aug; 112(32):E4343. PubMed ID: 26240312
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparing spatially explicit ecological and social values for natural areas to identify effective conservation strategies.
    Bryan BA; Raymond CM; Crossman ND; King D
    Conserv Biol; 2011 Feb; 25(1):172-81. PubMed ID: 20825450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Do Social-Ecological Syndromes Predict Outcomes for Ecosystem Services? - a Reply to Bodin et al.
    Dee LE; Thompson R; Massol F; Guerrero A; Bohan DA
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2017 Aug; 32(8):549-552. PubMed ID: 28651896
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. What environmental economists think every conservation biologist should know: reply to Gowdy et al.
    Petrolia DR; Interis MG
    Conserv Biol; 2011 Jun; 25(3):628-30. PubMed ID: 21561473
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Developing effective tools for conservation behaviorists: reply to Greggor et al.
    Schakner ZA; Petelle MB; Berger-Tal O; Owen MA; Blumstein DT
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2014 Dec; 29(12):651-2. PubMed ID: 25439735
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Challenges at the intersection of conservation and ethics: Reply to Meyer et al. 2021.
    Nelson MP; Batavia C; Brandis KJ; Carroll SP; Celermajer D; Linklater W; Lundgren E; Ramp D; Steer J; Yanco E; Wallach AD
    Conserv Biol; 2021 Feb; 35(1):373-377. PubMed ID: 33351969
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Translating cognitive insights into effective conservation programs: reply to Schakner et al.
    Greggor AL; Clayton NS; Phalan B; Thornton A
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2014 Dec; 29(12):652-3. PubMed ID: 25304444
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Need for transparent and repeatable conservation frameworks: reply to Child et al. 2019.
    Grainger MJ; Nilsen EB
    Conserv Biol; 2020 Feb; 34(1):282-285. PubMed ID: 31773797
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Values are a good thing in conservation biology.
    Noss RF
    Conserv Biol; 2007 Feb; 21(1):18-20. PubMed ID: 17298505
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Social research and biodiversity conservation.
    Sandbrook C; Adams WM; Büscher B; Vira B
    Conserv Biol; 2013 Dec; 27(6):1487-90. PubMed ID: 24033825
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Debating REDD+ and its implications: reply to Angelsen et al.
    Fletcher R; Dressler W; Büscher B; Anderson ZR
    Conserv Biol; 2017 Jun; 31(3):721-723. PubMed ID: 28462534
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Reply to Garner et al.
    Shafer ABA; Wolf JBW; Alves PC; Bergström L; Colling G; Dalén L; De Meester L; Ekblom R; Fior S; Hajibabaei M; Hoezel AR; Hoglund J; Jensen EL; Krützen M; Norman AJ; Österling EM; Ouborg NJ; Piccolo J; Primmer CR; Reed FA; Roumet M; Salmona J; Schwartz MK; Segelbacher G; Thaulow J; Valtonen M; Vergeer P; Weissensteiner M; Wheat CW; Vilà C; Zieliński P
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2016 Feb; 31(2):83-84. PubMed ID: 26704456
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Why social values cannot be changed for the sake of conservation.
    Manfredo MJ; Bruskotter JT; Teel TL; Fulton D; Schwartz SH; Arlinghaus R; Oishi S; Uskul AK; Redford K; Kitayama S; Sullivan L
    Conserv Biol; 2017 Aug; 31(4):772-780. PubMed ID: 27757996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Reply to Phelps et al: Liability rules provide incentives to protect natural capital.
    Polasky S; Guerry AD; Lubchenco J; Ruckelshaus M
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2015 Sep; 112(39):E5380. PubMed ID: 26385970
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Intrinsic value: a reply to Justus et al.
    Sagoff M
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2009 Dec; 24(12):643; author reply 644. PubMed ID: 19766345
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.