Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36530402›Full record

ReviewPeerJ2022

Animal movement ecology in India: insights from 2011-2021 and prospective for the future.

Harish Prakash, R Suresh Kumar, Bibhuti Lahkar, Raman Sukumar, Abi T Vanak, Maria Thaker

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Harish PrakashCentre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
R Suresh KumarDepartment of Endangered Species Management, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Bibhuti LahkarAaranyak, Guwahati, Assam, India.
Raman SukumarCentre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Abi T VanakAshoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Maria ThakerCentre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of animal movement ecology has advanced by leaps and bounds in the past few decades with the advent of sophisticated technology, advanced analytical tools, and multiple frameworks and paradigms to address key ecological problems. Unlike the longer history and faster growth of the field in North America, Europe, and Africa, movement ecology in Asia has only recently been gaining momentum. Here, we provide a review of the field from studies based in India over the last 11 years (2011-2021) curated from the database, Scopus, and search engine, Google Scholar. We identify current directions in the research objectives, taxa studied, tracking technology and the biogeographic regions in which animals were tracked, considering the years since the last systematic review of movement ecology research in the country. As an indication of the growing interest in this field, there has been a rapid increase in the number of publications over the last decade. Class

Indexed as

Animal MigrationAnimalsAnimals, WildEcologyEcosystemIndiaPantheraProspective StudiesTigersAnthropogenicClimate changeConservationHome-rangeIndiaMovement ecologyProtected areasTelemetryTrackingWildlife conflict

Identifiers

PMID36530402
PMCPMC9756863

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.