ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2025
Differences in estimates of extinction risk between occupancy and abundance data.
Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differences in estimates of extinction risk between occupancy and abundance data.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
- Rare species do not disproportionately contribute to phylogenetic diversity in a subalpine plant community.American journal of botany · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Temporal trends in populations are often measured with presence-absence and abundance data. These data types are inherently different, but quantitative comparisons of threat statuses assessed through occupancy or abundance data are currently lacking. We applied International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) criteria to estimate extinction risk of amphibians on the basis of data collected over 25 years. We examined whether occupancy and abundance models provided consistent threat status. Occupancy and abundance data suggested declines for the study species in the study area, but occupancy generally showed smaller proportional changes compared with abundance data. Abundance data yielded higher threat categories than occupancy data but were generally associated with larger uncertainties. With abundance data, population declines were found sooner than with occupancy data, but occupancy data estimates were more robust; thus, we advocate the integration of multiple measures of decline when assessing threat status.
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.