ArticlePloS one2019
Land use, REDD+ and the status of wildlife populations in Yaeda Valley, northern Tanzania.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Community-based wildlife management area supports similar mammal species richness and densities compared to a national park.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
REDD+ projects primarily focus on reducing carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries. These projects are regularly evaluated against their core objective of conserving carbon stocks, but their contribution to biodiversity conservation has rarely been assessed. To assess the conservation value of the area and the relative performance of a REDD+ land use plan in Yaeda Valley, a semi-arid savannah ecosystem in northern Tanzania, we implemented an annual wildlife monitoring scheme. Based on direct sightings and indirect signs of wildlife, obtained from stratified walking transects conducted annually from 2015-2018, we estimated annual trends of mammal species richness and wildlife densities in three REDD+ and three non-REDD+ land-use strata. Our surveys document a near complete mammal community in the area. Species accumulation curves, and subsequent statistical comparisons, indicated highest mammal species richness in the woodland habitats (both REDD+ and non REDD+ strata) as compared to more human and livestock impacted areas, and suggested constant species richness from 2015-2018. To estimate stratum- and year-specific livestock and wildlife densities (cattle, donkey, goat and sheep combined, Thomson's gazelle, Kirk's dik-dik) and wildlife sign densities (aardvark, bushbuck, bushpig, Kirk's dik dik, eland, elephant, Maasai giraffe, greater kudu, hyena, impala, lesser kudu, warthog, wildebeest, Plains zebra), we fitted species-specific detection functions in a distance sampling framework. Species-specific densities varied between 2015 and 2018 and showed substantial increases and occasional declines in other species-stratum combinations. However, population growth rates were not systematically associated with specific land-use strata. Although our results do not explicitly provide evidence that REDD+ land-use plans directly co-benefit wildlife conservation, they show that REDD+ areas have the potential to maintain intact wildlife assemblages. To ensure effective long-term conservation outcomes, we advocate for a more formal integration of wildlife conservation goals in the REDD+ scheme.
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.