Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
B. Sæther, S. Engen, A. Møller, H. Weimerskirch, M. Visser, W. Fiedler, E. Matthysen, M. Lambrechts, A. Badyaev, P. Becker, J. Brommer, D. Bukaciński, M. Bukacińska, Hans Christensen, J. Dickinson, C. Feu, F. Gehlbach, D. Heg, H. Hötker, J. Merilä, Jan Nielsen, W. Rendell, R. Robertson, D. Thomson, J. Török, P. Hecke (2004)
Life‐History Variation Predicts the Effects of Demographic Stochasticity on Avian Population DynamicsThe American Naturalist, 164
D. Saunders, C. Margules, B. Hill (1998)
Environmental indicators for national state of the environment reporting : biodiversity
Seal Seal, Westley Westley, Byers Byers, Ness Ness (1998)
Bringing people into population and habitat viability analysesEndang. Species Updates, 15
B. Brook, M. Burgman, H. Akçakaya, Julian O'Grady, R. Frankham (2002)
Critiques of PVA Ask the Wrong Questions: Throwing the Heuristic Baby Out with the Numerical Bath WaterConservation Biology, 16
B. Brook, L. Traill, C. Bradshaw (2006)
Minimum viable population sizes and global extinction risk are unrelated.Ecology letters, 9 4
(1977)
Habitat, the template for ecological strategies
Sjögren‐Gulve Sjögren‐Gulve, Ebenhard Ebenhard (2000)
The use of population viability analyses in conservation planningEcol. Bull., 48
(1987)
Extinction models and mammalian
R. Frankham (1996)
Introduction to quantitative genetics (4th edn): by Douglas S. Falconer and Trudy F.C. Mackay Longman, 1996. £24.99 pbk (xv and 464 pages) ISBN 0582 24302 5Trends in Genetics, 12
(2001)
IUCN red list categories and criteria : Version 3 . 1 . Gland , Switzerland , and Cambridge , UK : IUCN Species Survival Commission
Armbruster Armbruster, Fernando Fernando, Lande Lande (1999)
Timeframes for population viability analysis of species with long generationsan example with Asian elephants, 2
W. Newmark (1995)
Extinction of mammal populations in Western North American national parksConservation Biology, 9
J. Millar, R. Zammuto (1983)
Life Histories of Mammals: An Analysis of Life TablesEcology, 64
G. Acquaah (2012)
Introduction to Quantitative GeneticsQuantitative Genetics
E. Menges (2000)
Population viability analyses in plants: challenges and opportunities.Trends in ecology & evolution, 15 2
S. Tuljapurkar (1997)
Stochastic Matrix Models
(2003)
VORTEX: a stochastic simulation of the extinction process. Version 9.21 user's manual
D. Reed, Julian O'Grady, J. Ballou, R. Frankham (2003)
The frequency and severity of catastrophic die‐offs in vertebratesAnimal Conservation, 6
M. Shaffer (1981)
Minimum Population Sizes for Species ConservationBioScience, 31
(2002)
2002).Model selection and multimodel inference: an information theoretic approach
B. Brook, D. Bowman (2005)
One equation fits overkill: why allometry underpins both prehistoric and modern body size-biased extinctionsPopulation Ecology, 47
Tim Coulson, Georgina Mace, Elodie Hudson, HUGH Possingham (2001)
The use and abuse of population viability analysis.Trends in ecology & evolution, 16 5
Stéphane Boissinot, S. Shyue (2000)
Evolutionary Biology
(1994)
RAMAS s Metapop: viability analysis for stage-structured metapopulations (Version 1.1). Setauket
(2005)
2004 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: A Global Species Assessment edited by Jonathan E.M. Baillie, Craig Hilton-Taylor & Simon N. Stuart (2004), xxiii + 191 pp., IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. ISBN 2 8317 0826 5 (pbk), £18.50.Oryx, 39
M. McCarthy, C. Thompson (2001)
Expected minimum population size as a measure of threatAnimal Conservation, 4
Brook Brook, Bowman Bowman (2005)
One equation fits overkillwhy allometry underpins both prehistoric and modern body size-biased extinctions, 42
E. Leigh (1981)
The average lifetime of a population in a varying environment.Journal of theoretical biology, 90 2
B. Brook, Julian O'Grady, A. Chapman, M. Burgman, H. Akçakaya, R. Frankham (2000)
Predictive accuracy of population viability analysis in conservation biologyNature, 404
N. Collar (1996)
The reasons for Red Data BooksOryx, 30
(2002)
Evaluating the accuracy of species assessment systems using population viability analysis
R. Frankham, B. Brook (2004)
The importance of time scale in conservation biology and ecologyAnnales Zoologici Fennici, 41
(1994)
RAMAS s stage: generalized stage-based modeling for population dynamics
Brook Brook, Burgman Burgman, Akçakaya Akçakaya, O'Grady O'Grady, Frankham Frankham (2002)
Critiques of PVA ask the wrong questionsthrowing the heuristic baby out with the numerical bath water, 16
Julian O'Grady, M. Burgman, D. Keith, L. Master, S. Andelman, B. Brook, G. Hammerson, T. Regan, R. Frankham (2004)
Correlations among Extinction Risks Assessed by Different Systems of Threatened Species CategorizationConservation Biology, 18
M. Montgomery, L. Woodworth, R. Nurthen, D. Gilligan, D. Briscoe, R. Frankham (2000)
Relationships between population size and loss of genetic diversity: comparisons of experimental results with theoretical predictionsConservation Genetics, 1
(1996)
Mammal populations: fluctuation, regulation, life history theory and their implications for conservation
G. Belovsky, D. Botkin, T. Crowl, K. Cummins, J. Franklin, M. Hunter, A. Joern, D. Lindenmayer, J. Macmahon, C. Margules, J. Scott (2004)
Ten Suggestions to Strengthen the Science of Ecology, 54
B. Sæther, R. Lande, S. Engen, H. Weimerskirch, Magnar Lillegård, R. Altwegg, P. Becker, T. Bregnballe, J. Brommer, R. Mccleery, J. Merilä, E. Nyholm, W. Rendell, Raleigh Robertson, P. Tryjanowski, M. Visser (2005)
Generation time and temporal scaling of bird population dynamicsNature, 436
Jean-Michel Roberge, P. Angelstam (2004)
Usefulness of the Umbrella Species Concept as a Conservation ToolConservation Biology, 18
J. Clark, S. Carpenter, M. Barber, S. Collins, A. Dobson, J. Foley, D. Lodge, M. Pascual, R. Pielke, W. Pizer, C. Pringle, W. Reid, Kenneth Rose, O. Sala, W. Schlesinger, D. Wall, D. Wear (2001)
Ecological forecasts: an emerging imperative.Science, 293 5530
L. Oaklander (2001)
The importance of time
L. Traill, C. Bradshaw, B. Brook (2007)
Minimum viable population size: A meta-analysis of 30 years of published estimatesBiological Conservation, 139
R. Lande, S. Engen, B. Sæther (2003)
Stochastic Population Dynamics in Ecology and Conservation
M. Ryan, R. Primack (1994)
Essentials of Conservation BiologyJournal of Wildlife Management, 59
Bessa‐Gomes Bessa‐Gomes, Danek‐Gontard Danek‐Gontard, Cassey Cassey, Møller Møller, Legendre Legendre, Colbert Colbert (2003)
Mating behaviour influences extinction riskinsights from demographic modelling and comparative analysis of avian extinction risk, 40
Fieberg Fieberg, Ellner Ellner (2001)
Stochastic matrix models for conservation biologya comparative review of methods, 4
P. Armbruster, P. Fernando, R. Lande (1999)
Time frames for population viability analysis of species with long generations: an example with Asian elephantsAnimal Conservation, 2
Julian O'Grady, D. Reed, B. Brook, R. Frankham (2004)
What are the best correlates of predicted extinction riskBiological Conservation, 118
J. Beck, Zhishen Wu (2006)
IntroductionComputer‐Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 21
S. Engen, R. Lande, B. Sæther, T. Bregnballe (2005)
Estimating the pattern of synchrony in fluctuating populationsJournal of Animal Ecology, 74
G. Belovsky (1987)
Viable Populations for Conservation: Extinction models and mammalian persistence
R. Lacsamana (1986)
Where do we go from here?The Journal of the Florida Medical Association, 73 12
D. Reed, Julian O'Grady, B. Brook, J. Ballou, R. Frankham (2003)
Estimates of minimum viable population sizes for vertebrates and factors influencing those estimatesBiological Conservation, 113
(1994)
RAMAS Metapop: viability
P. Brussard, Lianne Ball, Graeme Caughley, Anne Gunn (1995)
Conservation Biology in Theory and PracticeJournal of Animal Ecology, 65
M. Soulé (1987)
Viable Populations for Conservation: Where do we go from here?
Soulé Soulé (1985)
What is conservation biology?Bioscience, 35
J. Lebreton (2005)
DYNAMICAL AND STATISTICAL MODELS FOR EXPLOITED POPULATIONS †Australian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics, 47
Bürger Bürger, Lynch Lynch (1995)
Evolution and extinction in a changing environmenta quantitative-genetic analysis, 49
Montgomery Montgomery, Woodworth Woodworth, Nurthen Nurthen, Gilligan Gilligan, Briscoe Briscoe, Frankham Frankham (2000)
Relationships between population size and genetic diversitycomparisons of experimental results with theoretical predictions, 1
R. Levins (1966)
The strategy of model building in population biologyAmerican Scientist, 54
H. Akçakaya, M. Burgman, O. Kindvall, C. Wood, P. Sjogren-Gulve, J. Hatfield, M. McCarthy (2004)
Species conservation and management : case studies
Carmen Bessa-Gomes, Marine Danek-Gontard, P. Cassey, A. Møller, Stéphane Legendre, J. Clobert (2003)
Mating behaviour influences extinction risk: insights from demographic modelling and comparative analysis of avian extinction riskAnnales Zoologici Fennici, 40
Clark Clark, Carpenter Carpenter, Barber Barber, Collins Collins, Dobson Dobson, Foley Foley, Lodge Lodge, Pascual Pascual, Pielke Pielke, Pizer Pizer, Pringle Pringle, Reid Reid, Rose Rose, Sala Sala, Schlesinger Schlesinger, Wall Wall, Wear Wear (2001)
Ecological forecastsan emerging imperative, 293
Traill Traill, Bradshaw Bradshaw, Brook Brook (2007)
Minimum viable population sizea meta-analysis of 30 years of published estimates, 139
B. Sæther, J. Tufto, S. Engen, K. Jerstad, O. Røstad, J. Skâtan (2000)
Population dynamical consequences of climate change for a small temperate songbird.Science, 287 5454
LeeE. Frelich (2009)
Conservation BiologyThe Quarterly Review of Biology, 84
(1994)
The risk of extinction: ranking management options for Leadbeater's possum using population viability analysis. Canberra: Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies
B. Sæther, S. Engen, A. Møller, M. Visser, E. Matthysen, W. Fiedler, M. Lambrechts, P. Becker, J. Brommer, J. Dickinson, C. Feu, F. Gehlbach, J. Merilä, W. Rendell, R. Robertson, D. Thomson, J. Török (2005)
Time to extinction of bird populationsEcology, 86
J. Baillie, C. Hilton, Taylor, S. Stuart (2004)
A Global Species Assessment
R. Bürger, M. Lynch (1995)
EVOLUTION AND EXTINCTION IN A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT: A QUANTITATIVE‐GENETIC ANALYSISEvolution, 49
L. Master (1991)
Assessing Threats and Setting Priorities for ConservationConservation Biology, 5
(2002)
Population viability analysis and conservation. In Population viability analysis: 123–142
R. Frankham (1996)
Relationship of genetic variation to population size in wildlifeConservation Biology, 10
Millar Millar, Zammuto Zammuto (1983)
Life histories of mammalsan analysis of life tables, 64
C. Fowler (1988)
Population dynamics as related to rate of increase per generationEvolutionary Ecology, 2
L. Lim (2001)
Introduction to Conservation GeneticsPacific Conservation Biology, 7
Menges Menges (2000)
Population viability analyses in plantschallenges and opportunities, 15
S. Ellner, J. Fieberg, D. Ludwig, C. Wilcox (2002)
Precision of Population Viability AnalysisConservation Biology, 16
It is critical to search for, and to apply, robust generalizations in conservation biology as species‐specific data on endangered species are often limited. While generalizations are common in conservation genetics, where processes are treated on the scale of generations, the unique population dynamics of species are often stressed in ecology and conservation management. Is the apparent uniqueness of population attributes partly an artefact of measurement scale? One facet of this debate is the question of whether extinction risk scales better to years or to generations. To resolve this issue, the extinction risk of 100 well‐studied vertebrate taxa was estimated using stochastic computer projections and analyses conducted to determine whether risk related better to years or generations. Relative strengths of evidence for alternative hypotheses were assessed using information theory. Extinction risk, assessed as the population size required for a 90% probability of persistence for 100 years, was strongly related to generation length. Conversely, when extinction risk was assessed for a fixed number of generations, there was no support for a relationship between risk and years. This finding has ramifications for assessing and reporting extinction risk because it shows that (1) crucial signals for the effective management of threatened species may not be detected when risk is measured on a scale of years alone; (2) correcting for generation length will allow data from a wider range of species to be used as defaults for species with limited data; (3) generational‐scale tests of factors affecting extinction risk are more powerful than year‐based ones. We recommend that extinction risk be routinely reported on a generational scale, with results on a year scale added where warranted.
Animal Conservation – Wiley
Published: Oct 1, 2008
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.