ReviewConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2026
Global review of shorebird tracking data to identify research gaps and conservation priorities.
Review in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2026. 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.
- Article
- Global review of shorebird tracking data to identify research gaps and conservation priorities.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tracking has enabled rapid advances in knowledge of the movement behavior and habitat use of shorebirds and is thus making a growing contribution to their conservation. However, realizing the full potential that tracking holds for conservation involves understanding what has been performed on shorebirds to date and identifying regional and taxonomic knowledge gaps. To this end, we reviewed the literature on 195 species across 10 shorebird families. We determined the number of shorebird tracking studies published over time, types of tracking devices used, reporting rates for data archiving in online repositories, and coverage of the major flyways by the data collected. Using Movebank, we further identified tracked species that have not appeared in the literature. We included 351 peer-reviewed publications in the review. Tracking data were lacking for 50% of the species reviewed. Considerably more tracking studies were conducted in temperate regions and in flyways that include wealthy countries than in the tropics. Of the 351 publications, 26.9% reported data were archived in an online repository, although the annual rate increased over time. We identified 16 species whose conservation needs and a lack of data make them relevant priorities for future tracking. Improving data archiving practices and coordination around tag deployment to cover understudied regions is key to maximizing the utility of tracking for shorebird research and conservation.
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.