Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32274066›Full record

ArticleConservation physiology2020

Striving for population-level conservation: integrating physiology across the biological hierarchy.

Elizabeth M Ames, Meaghan R Gade, Chelsey L Nieman, James R Wright, Christopher M Tonra, Cynthia M Marroquin, Annalee M Tutterow, Suzanne M Gray

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation physiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

8 authors.

Elizabeth M AmesSchool of the Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Meaghan R GadeSchool of the Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Chelsey L NiemanSchool of the Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
James R WrightSchool of the Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Christopher M TonraSchool of the Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Cynthia M MarroquinDepartmant of Evolution, Ecology and Organismal Biology, The Ohio State University, 318 W. 12th Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Annalee M TutterowSchool of the Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Suzanne M GraySchool of the Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of conservation physiology strives to achieve conservation goals by revealing physiological mechanisms that drive population declines in the face of human-induced rapid environmental change (HIREC) and has informed many successful conservation actions. However, many studies still struggle to explicitly link individual physiological measures to impacts across the biological hierarchy (to population and ecosystem levels) and instead rely on a 'black box' of assumptions to scale up results for conservation implications. Here, we highlight some examples of studies that were successful in scaling beyond the individual level, including two case studies of well-researched species, and using other studies we highlight challenges and future opportunities to increase the impact of research by scaling up the biological hierarchy. We first examine studies that use individual physiological measures to scale up to population-level impacts and discuss several emerging fields that have made significant steps toward addressing the gap between individual-based and demographic studies, such as macrophysiology and landscape physiology. Next, we examine how future studies can scale from population or species-level to community- and ecosystem-level impacts and discuss avenues of research that can lead to conservation implications at the ecosystem level, such as abiotic gradients and interspecific interactions. In the process, we review methods that researchers can use to make links across the biological hierarchy, including crossing disciplinary boundaries, collaboration and data sharing, spatial modelling and incorporating multiple markers (e.g. physiological, behavioural or demographic) into their research. We recommend future studies incorporating tools that consider the diversity of 'landscapes' experienced by animals at higher levels of the biological hierarchy, will make more effective contributions to conservation and management decisions.

Indexed as

Biological Hierarchyconservationphysiologyscaling up

Identifiers

PMID32274066
PMCPMC7125044

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.