ArticleEcology and evolution2017
Lazarus ecology: Recovering the distribution and migratory patterns of the extinct Carolina parakeet.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patterns and Factors Influencing Parrot (Order: Psittaciformes) Success in Establishing Thriving Naturalized Populations within the Contiguous United States.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Article
- The Complete Genome Sequence ofBiodiversity genomes · 2022Article
- The demography of extinction in eastern North American birds.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Assessing congruence of opportunistic records and systematic surveys for predicting Hispaniolan mammal species distributions.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
- Population trends inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018Article
- Georeferenced sighting and specimen occurrence data of the extinct Carolina Parakeet (Biodiversity data journal · 2018Article
- Lazarus ecology: Recovering the distribution and migratory patterns of the extinct Carolina parakeet.Ecology and evolution · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study of the ecology and natural history of species has traditionally ceased when a species goes extinct, despite the benefit to current and future generations of potential findings. We used the extinct Carolina parakeet as a case study to develop a framework investigating the distributional limits, subspecific variation, and migratory habits of this species as a means to recover important information about recently extinct species. We united historical accounts with museum collections to develop an exhaustive, comprehensive database of every known occurrence of this once iconic species. With these data, we combined species distribution models and ordinal niche comparisons to confront multiple conjectured hypotheses about the parakeet's ecology with empirical data on where and when this species occurred. Our results demonstrate that the Carolina parakeet's range was likely much smaller than previously believed, that the eastern and western subspecies occupied different climatic niches with broad geographical separation, and that the western subspecies was likely a seasonal migrant while the eastern subspecies was not. This study highlights the novelty and importance of collecting occurrence data from published observations on extinct species, providing a starting point for future investigations of the factors that drove the Carolina parakeet to extinction. Moreover, the recovery of lost autecological knowledge could benefit the conservation of other parrot species currently in decline and would be crucial to the success of potential de-extinction efforts for the Carolina parakeet.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.