Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39224156›Full record

ReviewEcology and evolution2024

Advances and challenges in ecological connectivity science.

Amanda R Liczner, Richard Pither, Joseph R Bennett, Jeff Bowman, Kimberly R Hall, Robert J Fletcher, Adam T Ford, Julia L Michalak, Bronwyn Rayfield, Julian Wittische and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ecology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Importance of connectivity for carnivore richness and occupancy in fragmented biodiversity hotspots.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

11 authors.

Amanda R LicznerOkanagan Institute for Biodiversity, Resilience and Ecosystem Services University of British Columbia Kelowna British Columbia Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4265-0269
Richard PitherNational Wildlife Research Centre Environment and Climate Change Canada Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Joseph R BennettDepartment of Biology Carleton University Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Jeff BowmanWildlife Research and Monitoring Section Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry Peterborough Ontario Canada.
Kimberly R HallNorth America Science The Nature Conservancy Haslett Michigan USA.
Robert J FletcherDepartment of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA.
Adam T FordOkanagan Institute for Biodiversity, Resilience and Ecosystem Services University of British Columbia Kelowna British Columbia Canada.
Julia L MichalakSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.
Bronwyn RayfieldApex Resource Management Solutions Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Julian WittischeNational Museum of Natural History Luxembourg Luxembourg.
Jason PitherOkanagan Institute for Biodiversity, Resilience and Ecosystem Services University of British Columbia Kelowna British Columbia Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Maintaining and restoring ecological connectivity will be key in helping to prevent and reverse the loss of biodiversity. Fortunately, a growing body of research conducted over the last few decades has advanced our understanding of connectivity science, which will help inform evidence-based connectivity conservation actions. Increases in data availability and computing capacity have helped to dramatically increase our ability to model functional connectivity using more sophisticated models. Keeping track of these advances can be difficult, even for connectivity scientists and practitioners. In this article, we highlight some key advances from the past decade and outline many of the remaining challenges. We describe the efforts to increase the biological realism of connectivity models by, for example, isolating movement behaviors, population parameters, directional movements, and the effects of climate change. We also discuss considerations of when to model connectivity for focal or multiple species. Finally, we reflect on how to account for uncertainty and increase the transparency and reproducibility of connectivity research and discuss situations where decisions may require forgoing sophistication for more simple approaches.

Indexed as

biological realismclimate changeconnectivity conservationcorridorsdirectional movementmulti‐species

Identifiers

PMID39224156
PMCPMC11366504

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.