ArticlePrimates; journal of primatology2025
A simple suitability index to guide site selection for primate translocations: an example from northeastern Brazil.
Article in Primates; journal of primatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Establishing clear, rationales for conservation actions is critical to optimizing the chances of rescuing threatened species worldwide. We propose a simple habitat suitability index, a trade-off between occupancy probability and extinction risk, to guide conservation actions for the blond capuchin monkey (Sapajus flavius), whose distribution spans the contrasting but adjacent Atlantic Forest and Caatinga phytogeographic domains of northeastern Brazil. Our objective was to create a map to spatially coordinated management options considering both domains under two divergent but plausible scenarios assuming contrasting conservation outcomes: (1) active conservation efforts, in which government agencies/communities agree to invest and participate in conservation actions; and (2) no intervention and no additional effort. Based on the habitat suitability index, sites were classified into three types: A (protected and suitable, n = 3); B (suitable but under high extinction risk, n = 9); and C (unsuitable and highly defaunated, n = 75). Our results show that under Scenario 1 it would be possible to fund an active taskforce to improve forest quality in habitat remnant types B and C while supporting monitoring and protection of type-A sites. However, little can be done under Scenario 2 without successful educational programs to raise awareness and change the perception of local stakeholders. This study introduces a spatial index to prioritise conservation actions at key sites, providing a practical approach to effective resource management in a changing environment. Our protocol may be useful in guiding conservation action in the face of resource constraints and rapid environmental and climatic change in increasingly threatened biodiversity hotspots.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40815340What 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.