Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24743447›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

The trajectory of dispersal research in conservation biology. Systematic review.

Don A Driscoll, Sam C Banks, Philip S Barton, Karen Ikin, Pia Lentini, David B Lindenmayer, Annabel L Smith, Laurence E Berry, Emma L Burns, Amanda Edworthy and 12 more

Abstract readHistorical ArticleSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Spatial metrics in fire ecology: seeking consistency amidst complexity.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Conservation-focused mapping of avian migratory routes using a pan-European automated telemetry network.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Stable isotopes (Ecology and evolution · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors.

Don A DriscollARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Sam C BanksARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Philip S BartonARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Karen IkinARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Pia LentiniARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia; School of Botany, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
David B LindenmayerARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Annabel L SmithARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Laurence E BerryARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Emma L BurnsARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Amanda EdworthyARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Maldwyn J EvansARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Rebecca GibsonSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Rob HeinsohnARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Brett HowlandARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Geoff KayARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Nicola MunroARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Ben C ScheeleARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Ingrid StirnemannARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Dejan StojanovicARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Nici SweaneyARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Nélida R VillaseñorARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Martin J WestgateARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dispersal knowledge is essential for conservation management, and demand is growing. But are we accumulating dispersal knowledge at a pace that can meet the demand? To answer this question we tested for changes in dispersal data collection and use over time. Our systematic review of 655 conservation-related publications compared five topics: climate change, habitat restoration, population viability analysis, land planning (systematic conservation planning) and invasive species. We analysed temporal changes in the: (i) questions asked by dispersal-related research; (ii) methods used to study dispersal; (iii) the quality of dispersal data; (iv) extent that dispersal knowledge is lacking, and; (v) likely consequences of limited dispersal knowledge. Research questions have changed little over time; the same problems examined in the 1990s are still being addressed. The most common methods used to study dispersal were occupancy data, expert opinion and modelling, which often provided indirect, low quality information about dispersal. Although use of genetics for estimating dispersal has increased, new ecological and genetic methods for measuring dispersal are not yet widely adopted. Almost half of the papers identified knowledge gaps related to dispersal. Limited dispersal knowledge often made it impossible to discover ecological processes or compromised conservation outcomes. The quality of dispersal data used in climate change research has increased since the 1990s. In comparison, restoration ecology inadequately addresses large-scale process, whilst the gap between knowledge accumulation and growth in applications may be increasing in land planning. To overcome apparent stagnation in collection and use of dispersal knowledge, researchers need to: (i) improve the quality of available data using new approaches; (ii) understand the complementarities of different methods and; (iii) define the value of different kinds of dispersal information for supporting management decisions. Ambitious, multi-disciplinary research programs studying many species are critical for advancing dispersal research.

Indexed as

Empirical ResearchAnimalsEcologyHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumans

Identifiers

PMID24743447
PMCPMC3990620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.