Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30759107›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Identifying species threatened with local extinction in tropical reef fisheries using historical reconstruction of species occurrence.

Sarah M Buckley, Tim R McClanahan, Eréndira M Quintana Morales, Victor Mwakha, Jatieno Nyanapah, Levy M Otwoma, John M Pandolfi

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Sarah M BuckleyAustralia Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3185-0572
Tim R McClanahanWildlife Conservation Society, Marine Programs, Bronx, New York, United States of America.
Eréndira M Quintana MoralesThe Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5927-5058
Victor MwakhaKenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute, Mombasa, Kenya.
Jatieno NyanapahWildlife Conservation Society, Marine Programs, Bronx, New York, United States of America.
Levy M OtwomaKenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute, Mombasa, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0002-9811-0560
John M PandolfiAustralia Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying the species that are at risk of local extinction in highly diverse ecosystems is a big challenge for conservation science. Assessments of species status are costly and difficult to implement in developing countries with diverse ecosystems due to a lack of species-specific surveys, species-specific data, and other resources. Numerous techniques are devised to determine the threat status of species based on the availability of data and budgetary limits. On this basis, we developed a framework that compared occurrence data of historically exploited reef species in Kenya from existing disparate data sources. Occurrence data from archaeological remains (750-1500CE) was compared with occurrence data of these species catch assessments, and underwater surveys (1991-2014CE). This comparison indicated that only 67 species were exploited over a 750 year period, 750-1500CE, whereas 185 species were landed between 1995 and 2014CE. The first step of our framework identified 23 reef species as threatened with local extinction. The second step of the framework further evaluated the possibility of local extinction with Bayesian extinction analyses using occurrence data from naturalists' species list with the existing occurrence data sources. The Bayesian extinction analysis reduced the number of reef species threatened with local extinction from 23 to 15. We compared our findings with three methods used for assessing extinction risk. Commonly used extinction risk methods varied in their ability to identify reef species that we identified as threatened with local extinction by our comparative and Bayesian method. For example, 12 of the 15 threatened species that we identified using our framework were listed as either least concern, unevaluated, or data deficient in the International Union for the Conservation of Nature red list. Piscivores and macro-invertivores were the only functional groups found to be locally extinct. Comparing occurrence data from disparate sources revealed a large number of historically exploited reef species that are possibly locally extinct. Our framework addressed biases such as uncertainty in priors, sightings and survey effort, when estimating the probability of local extinction. Our inexpensive method showed the value and potential for disparate data to fill knowledge gaps that exist in species extinction assessments.

Indexed as

Endangered SpeciesAnimalsBayes TheoremConservation of Natural ResourcesCoral ReefsEcosystemExtinction, BiologicalFisheriesFishesGeologic SedimentsKenyaPopulation DynamicsRisk AssessmentSpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID30759107
PMCPMC6373906

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.