ArticleScience advances2024
Global monitoring for biodiversity: Uncertainty, risk, and power analyses to support trend change detection.
Article in Science advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global patterns and drivers of extinction risk in island endemic terrestrial vertebrates.Science advances · 2026Article
- Predicting Coral Cover Trends From Local to Broad Spatial Scales.Global change biology · 2026Article
- From data to decisions: Toward a Biodiversity Monitoring Standards Framework.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Aiming Higher to Test a Bend in the Curve of Biodiversity Loss: The Challenge of Halt-The-Loss Targets.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Assessing coverage of the monitoring framework of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and opportunities to fill gaps.Nature ecology & evolution · 2025Article
- The utility of the Living Planet Index as a policy tool and for measuring nature recovery.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Progress in developing and operationalizing the Monitoring Framework of the Global Biodiversity Framework.Nature ecology & evolution · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Global targets aim to reverse biodiversity declines by 2050 but require knowledge of current trends and future projections under policy intervention. First, given uncertainty in measurement of current trends, we propose a risk framework, considering probability and magnitude of decline. While only 11 of 198 systems analyzed (taxonomic groups by country from the Living Planet Database) showed declining abundance with high certainty, 20% of systems had a 70% chance of strong declines. Society needs to decide acceptable risks of biodiversity loss. Second, we calculated statistical power to detect trend change using ~12,000 populations from 62 systems currently showing strong declines. Current trend uncertainty hinders our ability to assess improvements. Trend change is detectable with high certainty in only 14 systems, even if thousands of populations are sampled, and conservation action reduces net declines to zero immediately, on average. We provide potential solutions to improve monitoring of progress toward biodiversity targets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.