Species inequality in scientific study;Inequidad de especies en el estudio científico

Conservation Biology

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 886-890

  Trimble, Morgan J ^a   van Aarde, Rudi J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Conservation funding; Endangered species; Red list; Science funding; Threatened species

Indexed keywords

AMPHIBIAN; BIRD; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; CONSERVATION STATUS; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH; MAMMAL; RED LIST; REPTILE; SPECIES CONSERVATION;

AFRICA; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION;

AFRICA, SOUTHERN; ANIMALS; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; ENDANGERED SPECIES;

SOUTHERN AFRICA;

AMPHIBIA; ANIMALIA; AVES; MAMMALIA; REPTILIA;

EID: 77956567387     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: 15231739     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01453.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bartlett, P.P., B. Griswold, and R.D. Bartlett. 2001. Reptiles, amphibians. and invertebrates: an identification and care guide. Barron's Educational Series, Hauppauge, New York.
2. Berger, J. 1994. Science, conservation, and black rhinos. Journal of Mammalogy 75:298-308.
3. Cleary, D. 2006. The questionable effectiveness of science spending by international conservation organizations in the tropics. Conservation Biology 20:733-738.
4. Gaston, K.J., and R.A. Fuller. 2007. Commonness, population depletion and conservation biology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23:14-19.
5. Higgins J. V., J.L. Touval, R.S. Unnasch, S. Reichle, D.C. Oren, W.R. Waldman, and J.M. Hoekstra. 2006. Who needs to spend money on conservation science anyway? Conservation Biology 20:1566-1568.
6. IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). 2001. IUCN Red List categories and criteria. Version 3.1. Species Survival Commission, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
7. IUCN (International Union for Conservation ofNature). 2008. The IUCN Red List of threatened species. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Available from http://www.iucnredlist.org (accessed September 2008).
8. Joseph, L.N., R.F. Maloney, and H.P. Possingham. 2009. Optimal allocation of resources among threatened species: a project prioritization protocol. Conservation Biology 23:328-338.
9. Keesing, F. 2000. Cryptic consumers and the ecology of an African savanna. BioScience 50:205-215.
10. McDonald-Madden, E., P.W.J. Baxter, and H.P. Possingham. 2008. Subpopulation triage: how to allocate conservation effort among populations. Conservation Biology 22:656-665.
11. McIntyre, G.W., B.R.L. Kitching, and H.F. Recher. 1992. Species triage-seeing beyond wounded rhinos. Conservation Biology 6:604-606.
12. Metrick, A., and M.L. Weitzman. 1996. Patterns of behavior in endangered species preservation. Land Economics 72:1-16.
13. Meyer, S. 2006. The end of the wild. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
14. Murdoch, W., S. Polasky, K.A. Wilson, H.P. Possingham, P. Kareiva, and R. Shaw. 2007. Maximizing return on investment in conservation. Biological Conservation 139:357-388.
15. Ovid Technologies. 2008. Zoological record database. Ovid Technologies, New York. Available from http://www.ovid.com/site/catalog/DataBase/200.jsp (accessed September 2008).
16. Possingham, H.P., S.J. Andelman, M.A. Burgman, R.A. Medellin, L.L. Master, and D.A. Keith. 2002. Limits to the use of threatened species lists. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17:503-507.
17. rd edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
18. Vie, J.-C., C. Hilton Taylor, and S.N. Stuart, editors. 2009. Wildlife in a changing world-an analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. International Union for Conservation of Nature, Gland, Switzerland.