Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33956885›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Red List assessment of amphibian species of Ecuador: A multidimensional approach for their conservation.

H Mauricio Ortega-Andrade, Marina Rodes Blanco, Diego F Cisneros-Heredia, Nereida Guerra Arévalo, Karima Gabriela López de Vargas-Machuca, Juan C Sánchez-Nivicela, Diego Armijos-Ojeda, José Francisco Cáceres Andrade, Carolina Reyes-Puig, Amanda Belén Quezada Riera and 23 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
12.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  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
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Egg burying behaviour inEcology and evolution · 2023
    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

33 authors at 10 institutions in 5 countries.

H Mauricio Ortega-AndradeGrupo de Biogeografía y Ecología Espacial, Universidad Regional Amazónica Ikiam, Tena, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0001-9464-3688
Marina Rodes BlancoGrupo de Biogeografía y Ecología Espacial, Universidad Regional Amazónica Ikiam, Tena, Ecuador.
Diego F Cisneros-HerediaInstituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, Casilla, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0002-6132-2738
Nereida Guerra ArévaloGrupo de Biogeografía y Ecología Espacial, Universidad Regional Amazónica Ikiam, Tena, Ecuador.
Karima Gabriela López de Vargas-MachucaUniversidad de La Laguna, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, España.ORCID 0000-0003-3726-6817
Juan C Sánchez-NivicelaInstituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, Casilla, Quito, Ecuador.
Diego Armijos-OjedaLaboratorio de Ecología Tropical y Servicios Ecosistémicos (EcoSs-Lab), Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, Loja, Ecuador.
José Francisco Cáceres AndradeParque Nacional Cajas ETAPA EP, Cuenca, Ecuador.
Carolina Reyes-PuigInstituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, Casilla, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0001-7828-8698
Amanda Belén Quezada RieraMuseo de Zoología de la Universidad del Azuay, Cuenca, Ecuador.
Paul SzékelyLaboratorio de Ecología Tropical y Servicios Ecosistémicos (EcoSs-Lab), Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, Loja, Ecuador.
Octavio R Rojas SotoInstituto de Ecología, A. C., Xalapa, México.ORCID 0000-0002-0201-1454
Diana SzékelyLaboratorio de Ecología Tropical y Servicios Ecosistémicos (EcoSs-Lab), Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, Loja, Ecuador.
Juan M GuayasaminLaboratorio de Biología Evolutiva, Colegio de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales COCIBA, Instituto Biósfera USFQ, Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0003-0098-978X
Fausto Rodrigo Siavichay PesántezCentro de Conservación de Anfibios AMARU, Cuenca, Ecuador.
Luis AmadorInstituto de Ciencias Ambientales y Evolutivas, Doctorado en Ciencias m. Ecología y Evolución, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile.
Raquel BetancourtInstituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, Casilla, Quito, Ecuador.
Salomón M Ramírez-JaramilloProyecto PARG, Ministerio del Ambiente y Agua, PNUD, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0002-3998-7434
Bruno Timbe-BorjaMuseo de Zoología de la Universidad del Azuay, Cuenca, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0001-7804-8061
Miguel Gómez LaportaProyecto PARG, Ministerio del Ambiente y Agua, PNUD, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0003-2161-5090
Juan Fernando Webster BernalMinisterio del Ambiente y Agua, Quito, Ecuador.
Luis Alfredo Oyagata CachimuelMinisterio del Ambiente y Agua, Quito, Ecuador.
Daniel Chávez JácomeInstituto de Ciencias Ambientales y Evolutivas, Doctorado en Ciencias m. Ecología y Evolución, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile.
Valentina PosseLaboratorio de Ecología Tropical y Servicios Ecosistémicos (EcoSs-Lab), Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, Loja, Ecuador.
Carlos Valle-PiñuelaMinisterio del Ambiente y Agua, Quito, Ecuador.
Daniel Padilla JiménezMinisterio del Ambiente y Agua, Quito, Ecuador.
Juan Pablo Reyes-PuigInstituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, Casilla, Quito, Ecuador.
Andrea Terán-ValdezCentro Jambatu de Investigación y Conservación de Anfibios, Fundación Jambatu, Quito, Ecuador.
Luis A ColomaCentro Jambatu de Investigación y Conservación de Anfibios, Fundación Jambatu, Quito, Ecuador.
Ma Beatriz Pérez LaraInstituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, Casilla, Quito, Ecuador.
Sofía Carvajal-EndaraCentro Jambatu de Investigación y Conservación de Anfibios, Fundación Jambatu, Quito, Ecuador.
Miguel UrgilésInstituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, Casilla, Quito, Ecuador.
Mario H Yánez MuñozInstituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, Casilla, Quito, Ecuador.
Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad · ECUniversidad Técnica Particular de Loja · ECCentro Jambatu de Investigación y Conservación de Anfibios · ECAustral University of Chile · CLUniversidad del Azuay · ECUniversidad Regional Amazónica IKIAM · ECInstituto de Ecología · MXUniversidad de La Laguna · ESUniversidad Nacional de Colombia · COUniversidad San Francisco de Quito · EC

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecuador is one of the most biodiverse countries in the world, but faces severe pressures and threats to its natural ecosystems. Numerous species have declined and require to be objectively evaluated and quantified, as a step towards the development of conservation strategies. Herein, we present an updated National Red List Assessment for amphibian species of Ecuador, with one of the most detailed and complete coverages for any Ecuadorian taxonomic group to date. Based on standardized methodologies that integrate taxonomic work, spatial analyses, and ecological niche modeling, we assessed the extinction risk and identified the main threats for all Ecuadorian native amphibians (635 species), using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Our evaluation reveals that 57% (363 species) are categorized as Threatened, 12% (78 species) as Near Threatened, 4% (26 species) as Data Deficient, and 27% (168 species) as Least Concern. Our assessment almost doubles the number of threatened species in comparison with previous evaluations. In addition to habitat loss, the expansion of the agricultural/cattle raising frontier and other anthropogenic threats (roads, human settlements, and mining/oil activities) amplify the incidence of other pressures as relevant predictors of ecological integrity. Potential synergic effects with climate change and emergent diseases (apparently responsible for the sudden declines), had particular importance amongst the threats sustained by Ecuadorian amphibians. Most threatened species are distributed in montane forests and paramo habitats of the Andes, with nearly 10% of them occurring outside the National System of Protected Areas of the Ecuadorian government. Based on our results, we recommend the following actions: (i) An increase of the National System of Protected Areas to include threatened species. (ii) Supporting the ex/in-situ conservation programs to protect species considered like Critically Endangered and Endangered. (iii) Focalizing research efforts towards the description of new species, as well as species currently categorized as Data Deficient (DD) that may turn out to be threatened. The implementation of the described actions is challenging, but urgent, given the current conservation crisis faced by amphibians.

Indexed as

AmphibiansEndangered SpeciesAnimalsAnuraBufonidaeConservation of Natural ResourcesDatabases as TopicEcosystemEcuador

Identifiers

PMID33956885
PMCPMC8101765
OpenAlexW3157631523

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.