Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36136001›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of heredity2022

Seizing the moment: The opportunity and relevance of the California Conservation Genomics Project to state and federal conservation policy.

Peggy L Fiedler, Bjorn Erickson, Michael Esgro, Mark Gold, Joshua M Hull, Jennifer M Norris, Beth Shapiro, Michael Westphal, Erin Toffelmier, H Bradley Shaffer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of heredity, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Peggy L FiedlerThe Red List Project, Oakland, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6062-3758
Bjorn EricksonEcological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, CA, United States.
Michael EsgroOcean Protection Council, California Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA, United States.
Mark GoldCalifornia Natural Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA, United States.
Joshua M HullEcological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, CA, United States.
Jennifer M NorrisCalifornia Natural Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA, United States.
Beth ShapiroDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, United States.
Michael WestphalU.S. Bureau of Land Management, Central Coast Field Office, Marina, CA, United States.
Erin ToffelmierDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6028-8497
H Bradley ShafferDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5795-9242

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conservation science and environmental regulation are sibling constructs of the latter half of the 20th century, part of a more general awakening to humanity's effect on the natural world in the wake of 2 world wars. Efforts to understand the evolution of biodiversity using the models of population genetics and the data derived from DNA sequencing, paired with legal and political mandates to protect biodiversity through novel laws, regulations, and conventions arose concurrently. The extremely rapid rate of development of new molecular tools to document and compare genetic identities, and the global goal of prioritizing species and habitats for protection are separate enterprises that have benefited from each other, ultimately leading to improved outcomes for each. In this article, we explore how the California Conservation Genomics Project has, and should, contribute to ongoing and future conservation implementation, and how it serves as a model for other geopolitical regions and taxon-oriented conservation efforts. One of our primary conclusions is that conservation genomics can now be applied, at scale, to inform decision-makers and identify regions and their contained species that are most resilient, and most in need of conservation interventions.

Indexed as

BiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesGenetics, PopulationGenomicsPolicybiodiversityCCGPclimate changeconservation genomicslandscape genetics

Identifiers

PMID36136001
PMCPMC9709969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.