Development, analysis and interpretation of matrix demographic models for conservation biology;Desarrollo, análisis e interpretación de los modelos demográficos matriciales para la Biología de la Conservación

Ecosistemas

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2002, Pages

  Xavier Pico F ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84890161792     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16972473     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Alvarez-Buylla, E. R. y Slatkin, M. 1993. Finding confidence limits on population growth rates: Monte Carlo test of a simple analytic method. Oikos 68: 273-282.
2. Beinssinger, S. R. y Westphal, M. I. 1998. On the use of demographic models of population viability in endangered species management. Journal of Wildlife Management 62: 821-841.
3. Boyce, M. S. 1992. Population viability analysis. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23: 481-506.
4. Brault, S y Caswell, H. 1993. Pod-specific demography of killer whales (Orcinus orca). Ecology 74: 1444-1454.
5. Caswell, H. 1989. The analysis of life table response experiments. I. Decomposition of effects on population growth rate. Ecological Modelling 46: 221-237.
6. Caswell, H. 2000. Prospective and retrospective perturbation analyses and their use in conservation biology. Ecology 81: 619-627.
7. Caswell, H. 2001. Matrix population models. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland Massachussets.
8. Cohen, J. E. 1987. Stochastic demography. En Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences Vol. 8 (eds. Kotz, S. y Johnson, N.L.), pp. 789-801, John Wiley, New York.
9. de Kroon, H., Plaisier, A., van Groenendael, J. y Caswell, H. 1986. Elasticity: The relative contribution of demographic parameters to population growth. Ecology 67: 1427-1431.
10. Fiedler, P. L. y Kareiva, P. M. 1998. Conservation biology: For the coming decade. Chapman and Hall, New York.
11. Hanski, I. A. y Gilpin, M. E. 1997. Metapopulation biology: Ecology, genetics, and evolution. Academic Press, San Diego, California.
12. Horvitz, C. C., Schemske, D. W. y Caswell, H. 1997. The "importance" of life history stages to population growth: Prospective and retrospective analyses. En Structured population models in marine, terrestrial, and freshwater systems (eds. Tuljapurkar, S. y Caswell, H.), pp. 247-272, Chapman and Hall, New York.
13. Menges, E. S. 2000. Population viability analyses in plants: Challenges and opportunities. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15: 51-56.
14. Moloney, K. A. 1986. A generalized algorithm for determining category size. Oecologia 69: 176-180.
15. Picó, F. X. 2000. Demographic analysis of three herbaceous perennial plants with different life histories: A matrix modelling approach. Tesis Doctoral. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona.
16. Tuljapurkar, S. 1990. Population dynamics in variable environments. Springer-Verlag, New York.
17. Tuljapurkar, S. y Caswell, H. 1997. Structured population models in marine, terrestrial, and freshwater systems. Chapman and Hall, New York.
18. Tuljapurkar, S. y Orzack, S. H. 1980. Population dynamics in variable environments I. Long-run growth rates and extinction. Theoretical Population Biology 18: 314-342.
19. Young, A. G. y Clarke, G. M. 2000. Genetics, demography and viability of fragmented populations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.