Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40168403›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Awaiting discovery: How biases in faunistic surveys hinder conservation in mountain protected areas-A case study from Romania's oldest national park.

Dan Cogălniceanu, Dorel Ruşti, Marius Skolka, Florina Stănescu, Sabina E Vlad, Teodora L Tănase, Laurenţiu Rozylowicz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Dan CogălniceanuResearch Center of the Natural Sciences Department, Ovidius University of Constanţa, Constanţa, Romania.ORCID 0000-0003-2959-014X
Dorel RuştiAsociația Harta Verde România, Bistrița-Năsăud, Romania.
Marius SkolkaResearch Center of the Natural Sciences Department, Ovidius University of Constanţa, Constanţa, Romania.
Florina StănescuResearch Center of the Natural Sciences Department, Ovidius University of Constanţa, Constanţa, Romania.ORCID 0000-0001-6872-664X
Sabina E VladResearch Center of the Natural Sciences Department, Ovidius University of Constanţa, Constanţa, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-4416-669X
Teodora L TănaseResearch Center of the Natural Sciences Department, Ovidius University of Constanţa, Constanţa, Romania.ORCID 0009-0005-2683-3320
Laurenţiu RozylowiczResearch Center of the Natural Sciences Department, Ovidius University of Constanţa, Constanţa, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is virtually impossible to compile a complete list of species and map their distributions in any protected area; nevertheless, a near complete inventory is vital for an adequate management plan. We use Retezat National Park (Romania) as a case study to assess the bias in faunistic inventories over the past 70 years. Retezat National Park is one of the most studied in Eastern Europe since it shelters some of the last patches of virgin old-growth forest in Europe. We reviewed the scientific literature published since the early 1900s dealing with faunistic surveys and retrieved the occurrence records available on GBIF for the study area. We identified a total of 4374 animal species belonging to 2113 genera, 494 families, 99 orders, 23 classes, and nine phyla. The number of publications started to accumulate after 1979, when the park became a Biosphere Reserve, reached a peak in the early 2000 and severely decreased during the last decade, highlighting a decline in the researchers' interest in faunistic surveys and, possibly, a delay between data collection and their publication. GBIF-mediated data made a small contribution, most records (60%) being collected in 2019. The bias analyses included only the distribution records available in the scientific literature, since they were already validated through peer-review. The number of publications and background of experts involved influenced the taxonomic coverage and inventory completeness. We found a strong spatial bias in terms of inventory coverage, with diversity hotspots located near roads and research facilities. Our study provides a roadmap for cost-effective future faunistic studies by prioritizing conservation efforts towards the most understudied areas and taxa within the park.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesParks, RecreationalAnimalsBiodiversityRomaniaSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID40168403
PMCPMC11961002

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.