Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33442329›Full record

ArticleBioscience2021

Wolf Delisting Challenges Demonstrate Need for an Improved Framework for Conserving Intraspecific Variation under the Endangered Species Act.

Carlos Carroll, Daniel J Rohlf, Bridgett M vonHoldt, Adrian Treves, Sarah A Hendricks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioscience, 2021. 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. Review
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

5 authors.

Carlos CarrollKlamath Center for Conservation Research, Orleans, California.ORCID 0000-0002-7697-8721
Daniel J RohlfEarthrise Law Center, in the Lewis and Clark Law School, Portland, Oregon.
Bridgett M vonHoldtDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey.ORCID 0000-0001-6908-1687
Adrian TrevesNelson Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.ORCID 0000-0002-3052-4708
Sarah A HendricksInstitute for Bioinformatics and Evolutionary Studies, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in genomics have increased our understanding of geographic patterns of intraspecific variation and the importance of this variation in enhancing species' potential to adapt to novel threats. However, as part of an effort to limit the scope of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the US government has proposed the removal of the gray wolf from the list of protected species on the basis of a claim that the statute permits a species to be declared recovered given the existence of a single presently secure population. We rebut this interpretation and propose a framework for the conservation of adaptive potential that builds on current agency practice in delineating subspecific recovery units and reconciles the definition of significance in the statute's "distinct population segment" and "significant portion of range" clauses. Such a coordinated policy would enhance the ESA's effectiveness in stemming loss of biodiversity in the face of climate change and other factors altering Earth's ecosystems.

Indexed as

adaptive potentialCanis lupusconservation genomicsdistinct population segmentrecovery planning

Identifiers

PMID33442329
PMCPMC7791361

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.