Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41737578›Full record

ReviewCambridge prisms. Extinction2026

Many pasts, many futures: Navigating the complexities of species reshuffling to help prevent extinctions.

Erick Lundgren, Jens-Christian Svenning, Martin A Schlaepfer, Arian Wallach, Astrid Andersson, Emma Marris, Yasha Rohwer, Daniel Ramp

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cambridge prisms. Extinction, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Reevaluating introduced herbivores in conservation.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    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

8 authors.

Erick LundgrenDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9893-3324
Jens-Christian SvenningCenter for Ecological Dynamics in a Novel Biosphere, Department of Biology, Aarhus University, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3415-0862
Martin A SchlaepferInstitute for Environmental Sciences, University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Arian WallachSchool of Biology and Environmental Science, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Astrid AnderssonSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Emma MarrisHumanities and Social Sciences Department, Oregon Institute of Technology, USA.
Yasha RohwerHumanities and Social Sciences Department, Oregon Institute of Technology, USA.
Daniel RampTransdisciplinary School, University of Technology Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preventing human-caused extinctions is a foundational aim of conservation. However, in addition to causing extinctions, humans have moved numerous species to new areas. A considerable percentage of these are threatened in their native ranges. Broadening our conservation ethos to include introduced species is contentious and requires critical thinking in empirical and normative dimensions to negotiate between conflicting conservation goals. Here, we present a series of questions to inspire critical thinking in the negotiation of these conflicts. Empirically, we suggest that conservationists should consider whether the effects of introduced species are due to their non-nativeness

Indexed as

alien speciesconservation valuesethics and policyextinctioninvasive species

Identifiers

PMID41737578
PMCPMC12926613

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.