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.
121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32372539)
1. Debate over the importance and meaning of native range in invasion biology: reply to Courchamp et al. Pereyra PJ; Guiaşu RC Conserv Biol; 2020 Aug; 34(4):1044-1046. PubMed ID: 32372539 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Conservation of low-islands: high priority despite sea-level rise. A comment on Courchamp et al. Andréfouët S; Aucan J; Jourdan H; Kench P; Menkes C; Vidal E; Yamano H Trends Ecol Evol; 2015 Jan; 30(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 25454210 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Fact and value in invasion biology: reply to Cuthbert et al. 2020. Sagoff M Conserv Biol; 2020 Dec; 34(6):1583-1585. PubMed ID: 33176004 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Reply to Hulme et al.: Cover of non-native species is too low to adversely affect native plant diversity at a national scale. Thomas CD; Palmer G Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2015 Jun; 112(23):E2990. PubMed ID: 26034294 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Importance of complementary approaches for efficient vulture conservation: reply to Efrat et al. Santangeli A; Girardello M; Buechley ER; Botha A; Minin ED; Moilanen A Conserv Biol; 2020 Oct; 34(5):1308-1310. PubMed ID: 32588448 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
11. Invasion biology and uncertainty in native range definitions: response to Pereyra 2019. Courchamp F; Hulme PE; Pyšek P Conserv Biol; 2020 Aug; 34(4):1041-1043. PubMed ID: 32374031 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Rethinking the native range concept. Pereyra PJ Conserv Biol; 2020 Apr; 34(2):373-377. PubMed ID: 31385368 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The peatland vegetation burning debate: keep scientific critique in perspective. A response to Brown et al. and Douglas et al. Davies GM; Kettridge N; Stoof CR; Gray A; Marrs R; Ascoli D; Fernandes PM; Allen KA; Doerr SH; Clay GD; McMorrow J; Vandvik V Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci; 2016 Nov; 371(1708):. PubMed ID: 28080979 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]