Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35122329›Full record

ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2022

A stochastic model for estimating sustainable limits to wildlife mortality in a changing world.

Oliver Manlik, Robert C Lacy, William B Sherwin, Hugh Finn, Neil R Loneragan, Simon J Allen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A stochastic model for estimating sustainable limits to wildlife mortality in a changing world.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2022
    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

6 authors.

Oliver ManlikBiology Department, College of Science, United Arab Emirates University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0002-0924-3768
Robert C LacySpecies Conservation Toolkit Initiative, Chicago Zoological Society, Brookfield, Illinois, USA.
William B SherwinEvolution and Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological Earth and Environmental Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Hugh FinnCurtin Law School, Faculty of Business and Law, Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia.
Neil R LoneraganEnvironmental and Conservation Sciences, College of Science, Health, Engineering and Education and Centre for Sustainable Aquatic Ecosystems, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
Simon J AllenSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2260-8143

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human-caused mortality of wildlife is a pervasive threat to biodiversity. Assessing the population-level impact of fisheries bycatch and other human-caused mortality of wildlife has typically relied upon deterministic methods. However, population declines are often accelerated by stochastic factors that are not accounted for in such conventional methods. Building on the widely applied potential biological removal (PBR) equation, we devised a new population modeling approach for estimating sustainable limits to human-caused mortality and applied it in a case study of bottlenose dolphins affected by capture in an Australian demersal otter trawl fishery. Our approach, termed sustainable anthropogenic mortality in stochastic environments (SAMSE), incorporates environmental and demographic stochasticity, including the dependency of offspring on their mothers. The SAMSE limit is the maximum number of individuals that can be removed without causing negative stochastic population growth. We calculated a PBR of 16.2 dolphins per year based on the best abundance estimate available. In contrast, the SAMSE model indicated that only 2.3-8.0 dolphins could be removed annually without causing a population decline in a stochastic environment. These results suggest that reported bycatch rates are unsustainable in the long term, unless reproductive rates are consistently higher than average. The difference between the deterministic PBR calculation and the SAMSE limits showed that deterministic approaches may underestimate the true impact of human-caused mortality of wildlife. This highlights the importance of integrating stochasticity when evaluating the impact of bycatch or other human-caused mortality on wildlife, such as hunting, lethal control measures, and wind turbine collisions. Although population viability analysis (PVA) has been used to evaluate the impact of human-caused mortality, SAMSE represents a novel PVA framework that incorporates stochasticity for estimating acceptable levels of human-caused mortality. It offers a broadly applicable, stochastic addition to the demographic toolbox to evaluate the impact of human-caused mortality on wildlife.

Indexed as

Animals, WildConservation of Natural ResourcesAnimalsAustraliaBiodiversityFisheriesanálisis de viabilidadAVPcaptura incidental pesqueraconservation planningdelfinesdolphinsEBPextirpación biológica potencialfisheries bycatchMASAMPBRPBR), 种群生存力分析(PVA), 随机环境中的可持续人为影响死亡率(SAMSE)planeación de la conservaciónpopulation viability analysispotential biological removalPVASAMSE保护规划, 海豚, 渔业副渔获物, 生物可移除潜在量(Potential Biological Removal

Identifiers

PMID35122329
PMCPMC9542519

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.