↓ Skip to main content

Optimal Allocation of Conservation Resources to Species That May be Extinct

Overview of attention for article published in Conservation Biology, March 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Optimal Allocation of Conservation Resources to Species That May be Extinct
Published in
Conservation Biology, March 2010
DOI 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01461.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

TRACY M. ROUT, DEAN HEINZE, MICHAEL A. McCARTHY

Abstract

Statements of extinction will always be uncertain because of imperfect detection of species in the wild. Two errors can be made when declaring a species extinct. Extinction can be declared prematurely, with a resulting loss of protection and management intervention. Alternatively, limited conservation resources can be wasted attempting to protect a species that no longer exists. Rather than setting an arbitrary level of certainty at which to declare extinction, we argue that the decision must trade off the expected costs of both errors. Optimal decisions depend on the cost of continued intervention, the probability the species is extant, and the estimated value of management (the benefit of management times the value of the species). We illustrated our approach with three examples: the Dodo (Raphus cucullatus), the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (U.S. subspecies Campephilus principalis principalis), and the mountain pygmy-possum (Burramys parvus). The dodo was extremely unlikely to be extant, so managing and monitoring for it today would not be cost-effective unless the value of management was extremely high. The probability the Ivory-billed woodpecker is extant depended on whether recent controversial sightings were accepted. Without the recent controversial sightings, it was optimal to declare extinction of the species in 1965 at the latest. Accepting the recent controversial sightings, it was optimal to continue monitoring and managing until 2032 at the latest. The mountain pygmy-possum is currently extant, with a rapidly declining sighting rate. It was optimal to conduct as many as 66 surveys without sighting before declaring the species extinct. The probability of persistence remained high even after many surveys without sighting because it was difficult to determine whether the species was extinct or undetected. If the value of management is high enough, continued intervention can be cost-effective even if the species is likely to be extinct.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 3 3%
United States 2 2%
Brazil 1 1%
Peru 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Afghanistan 1 1%
Argentina 1 1%
Unknown 82 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 22%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Master 10 11%
Other 7 8%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 6 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 48%
Environmental Science 29 32%
Mathematics 2 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 6 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 October 2014.
All research outputs
#14,141,940
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Biology
#3,365
of 3,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,612
of 93,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Biology
#77
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,740 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.8. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 93,391 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.