Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41536012›Full record

ReviewConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2026

Global review of shorebird tracking data to identify research gaps and conservation priorities.

Grégoire Michel, Josh Nightingale, Martin Beal, Alice Bernard, Maria P Dias, José A Alves

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

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. Ecology and evolution · 2026
    Article
  2. Global review of shorebird tracking data to identify research gaps and conservation priorities.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    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

6 authors.

Grégoire MichelCentre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes (CE3C) & CHANGE - Global Change and Sustainability Institute, Department of Animal Biology, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, Lisboa, Portugal.
Josh NightingaleSouth Iceland Research Centre, University of Iceland, Laugarvatn, Iceland.ORCID 0000-0002-1188-7773
Martin BealCentre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes (CE3C) & CHANGE - Global Change and Sustainability Institute, Department of Animal Biology, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-1654-1410
Alice BernardCEFE, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, EPHE, IRD, Montpellier, France.
Maria P DiasCentre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes (CE3C) & CHANGE - Global Change and Sustainability Institute, Department of Animal Biology, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, Lisboa, Portugal.
José A AlvesSouth Iceland Research Centre, University of Iceland, Laugarvatn, Iceland.ORCID 0000-0001-7182-0936

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia 2023.07655.CEECIND/CP2831/CT0010Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia LA/P/0094/2020Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia UID/00329/2025Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia UID/50017/2025Rannís 228937-051Région Nouvelle Aquitaine
6 · The paper itself

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

BirdsConservation of Natural ResourcesAnimalsEcosystemEvidence Gapsanimal migrationbiodiversity conservationbiologgingbioregistrobiotelemetríabiotelemetryconservación de la biodiversidaddatos abiertosecología del movimientomigración animalmovement ecologyopen datavadeadoreswaders

Identifiers

PMID41536012
PMCPMC12856813

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.