Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26099570›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental management2015

Guidelines for Using Movement Science to Inform Biodiversity Policy.

Philip S Barton, Pia E Lentini, Erika Alacs, Sana Bau, Yvonne M Buckley, Emma L Burns, Don A Driscoll, Lydia K Guja, Heini Kujala, José J Lahoz-Monfort and 4 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental management, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

14 authors.

Philip S BartonNational Environmental Research Program, Environmental Decisions Hub, Canberra, Australia, philip.barton@anu.edu.au.
Pia E Lentini
Erika Alacs
Sana Bau
Yvonne M Buckley
Emma L Burns
Don A Driscoll
Lydia K Guja
Heini Kujala
José J Lahoz-Monfort
Alessio Mortelliti
Ran Nathan
Ross Rowe
Annabel L Smith

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Substantial advances have been made in our understanding of the movement of species, including processes such as dispersal and migration. This knowledge has the potential to improve decisions about biodiversity policy and management, but it can be difficult for decision makers to readily access and integrate the growing body of movement science. This is, in part, due to a lack of synthesis of information that is sufficiently contextualized for a policy audience. Here, we identify key species movement concepts, including mechanisms, types, and moderators of movement, and review their relevance to (1) national biodiversity policies and strategies, (2) reserve planning and management, (3) threatened species protection and recovery, (4) impact and risk assessments, and (5) the prioritization of restoration actions. Based on the review, and considering recent developments in movement ecology, we provide a new framework that draws links between aspects of movement knowledge that are likely the most relevant to each biodiversity policy category. Our framework also shows that there is substantial opportunity for collaboration between researchers and government decision makers in the use of movement science to promote positive biodiversity outcomes.

Indexed as

Policy MakingAnimal DistributionAnimal MigrationAnimalsBiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesDecision MakingEcologyGovernment RegulationGuidelines as TopicRisk Assessment

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.