130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33909929)
1. 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]
2. Effects of threat management interactions on conservation priorities.
Auerbach NA; Wilson KA; Tulloch AI; Rhodes JR; Hanson JO; Possingham HP
Conserv Biol; 2015 Dec; 29(6):1626-35. PubMed ID: 26171646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Use of surrogate species to cost-effectively prioritize conservation actions.
Ward M; Rhodes JR; Watson JEM; Lefevre J; Atkinson S; Possingham HP
Conserv Biol; 2020 Jun; 34(3):600-610. PubMed ID: 31691376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
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. 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]
8. Benefits of integrating complementarity into priority threat management.
Chadés I; Nicol S; van Leeuwen S; Walters B; Firn J; Reeson A; Martin TG; Carwardine J
Conserv Biol; 2015 Apr; 29(2):525-36. PubMed ID: 25362843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Reallocating budgets among ongoing and emerging conservation projects.
Wu CH; Dodd AJ; Hauser CE; McCarthy MA
Conserv Biol; 2021 Jun; 35(3):955-966. PubMed ID: 32648317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Optimal dynamic control of invasions: applying a systematic conservation approach.
Adams VM; Setterfield SA
Ecol Appl; 2015 Jun; 25(4):1131-41. PubMed ID: 26465047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Rapidly assessing cobenefits to advance threat-management alliances.
Rees MW; Carwardine J; Reeson A; Firn J
Conserv Biol; 2020 Aug; 34(4):843-853. PubMed ID: 32406533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Accounting for complementarity to maximize monitoring power for species management.
Tulloch AI; Chadès I; Possingham HP
Conserv Biol; 2013 Oct; 27(5):988-99. PubMed ID: 24073812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Using empirical models of species colonization under multiple threatening processes to identify complementary threat-mitigation strategies.
Tulloch AI; Mortelliti A; Kay GM; Florance D; Lindenmayer D
Conserv Biol; 2016 Aug; 30(4):867-82. PubMed ID: 26711716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Priority threat management of invasive animals to protect biodiversity under climate change.
Firn J; Maggini R; Chadès I; Nicol S; Walters B; Reeson A; Martin TG; Possingham HP; Pichancourt JB; Ponce-Reyes R; Carwardine J
Glob Chang Biol; 2015 Nov; 21(11):3917-30. PubMed ID: 26179346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The need for spatially explicit quantification of benefits in invasive-species management.
Januchowski-Hartley SR; Adams VM; Hermoso V
Conserv Biol; 2018 Apr; 32(2):287-293. PubMed ID: 28940505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Prioritizing species conservation programs based on IUCN Green Status and estimates of cost-sharing potential.
Lloyd NA; Keating LM; Friesen AJ; Cole DM; McPherson JM; Akçakaya HR; Moehrenschlager A
Conserv Biol; 2023 Jun; 37(3):e14051. PubMed ID: 36661059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Learning from conservation planning for the U.S. National Wildlife Refuges.
Meretsky VJ; Fischman RL
Conserv Biol; 2014 Oct; 28(5):1415-27. PubMed ID: 24724940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Optimal allocation of resources among threatened species: a project prioritization protocol.
Joseph LN; Maloney RF; Possingham HP
Conserv Biol; 2009 Apr; 23(2):328-38. PubMed ID: 19183202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A long-term experimental case study of the ecological effectiveness and cost effectiveness of invasive plant management in achieving conservation goals: bitou bush control in booderee national park in eastern australia.
Lindenmayer DB; Wood J; MacGregor C; Buckley YM; Dexter N; Fortescue M; Hobbs RJ; Catford JA
PLoS One; 2015; 10(6):e0128482. PubMed ID: 26039730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
