Institution
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Nonprofit•Dhaka, Bangladesh•
About: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources is a nonprofit organization based out in Dhaka, Bangladesh. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Biodiversity & Population. The organization has 1317 authors who have published 1870 publications receiving 97588 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
Wildlife Conservation Society1, Royal Veterinary College2, University of Montpellier3, Eduardo Mondlane University4, International Atomic Energy Agency5, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources6, United States Department of State7, Cornell University8, Food and Agriculture Organization9, Tufts University10, Institute for Animal Health11, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna12, World Organisation for Animal Health13, United States Geological Survey14, European Food Safety Authority15, Frankfurt Zoological Society16
TL;DR: The need for a better understanding of PPRV epidemiology at the wildlife-livestock interface to support the integration of wildlife into PPR eradication efforts was highlighted by meeting participants along with the reminder that P PR eradication and wildlife conservation need not be viewed as competing priorities, but instead constitute two requisites of healthy socio-ecological systems.
Abstract: Growing evidence suggests that multiple wildlife species can be infected with peste des petits ruminants virus (PPRV), with important consequences for the potential maintenance of PPRV in communities of susceptible hosts, and the threat that PPRV may pose to the conservation of wildlife populations and resilience of ecosystems. Significant knowledge gaps in the epidemiology of PPRV across the ruminant community (wildlife and domestic), and the understanding of infection in wildlife and other atypical host species groups (e.g., camelidae, suidae, and bovinae) hinder our ability to apply necessary integrated disease control and management interventions at the wildlife-livestock interface. Similarly, knowledge gaps limit the inclusion of wildlife in the FAO/OIE Global Strategy for the Control and Eradication of PPR, and the framework of activities in the PPR Global Eradication Programme that lays the foundation for eradicating PPR through national and regional efforts. This article reports on the first international meeting on, "Controlling PPR at the livestock-wildlife interface," held in Rome, Italy, March 27-29, 2019. A large group representing national and international institutions discussed recent advances in our understanding of PPRV in wildlife, identified knowledge gaps and research priorities, and formulated recommendations. The need for a better understanding of PPRV epidemiology at the wildlife-livestock interface to support the integration of wildlife into PPR eradication efforts was highlighted by meeting participants along with the reminder that PPR eradication and wildlife conservation need not be viewed as competing priorities, but instead constitute two requisites of healthy socio-ecological systems.
32 citations
••
TL;DR: Although the Suriname/French Guiana leatherbacks form a single rookery, individual females show strong nesting fidelity to one side of the Marowijne Estuary.
Abstract: Suriname beaches support a major nesting colony of leatherback turtles. During the 1999–2005 nesting seasons, we collected data on nesting ecology and identified individual turtles that nested at Babunsanti (Galibi Nature Reserve), Samsambo, Kolukumbo, and Matapica. We observed 8462 leatherback females, 6933 of which we PIT-tagged. The remaining 1529 females carried PIT tags of a non-Surinamese origin. Because complete coverage of all nesting beaches was not possible over the study period, estimations of minimum annual nesting colony size were made, which ranged from 1545 to 5500 females in Suriname alone. Of the 7394 turtles observed during 1999–2004, 14.8% were seen renesting by 2005. Annual mean internesting period ranged between 9.4 ± 1.0 to 9.6 ± 1.0 days. Annual mean observed clutch frequency was between 1.6 ± 1.0 to 3.1 ± 1.4 and annual minimum estimated clutch frequency between 4.1 ± 1.6 to 4.9 ± 1.8 clutches. Annual mean standard curved carapace length ranged from 154.1 ± 6.7 to 155.6 ± ...
32 citations
••
32 citations
••
University of California, San Diego1, Eckerd College2, University of California, Davis3, University of Bremen4, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources5, James Cook University6, Federal University of Ceará7, University of Queensland8, Technical University of Mombasa9, University of Los Andes10, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology11, Edinburgh Napier University12, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro13
TL;DR: The Mangrove Microbiome Initiative is outlined, which is focused around three urgent priorities and three approaches for advancing mangrove microbiome research, and requires standardized methods to support reproducible experiments.
Abstract: Mangrove ecosystems provide important ecological benefits and ecosystem services, including carbon storage and coastline stabilization, but they also suffer great anthropogenic pressures. Microorganisms associated with mangrove sediments and the rhizosphere play key roles in this ecosystem and make essential contributions to its productivity and carbon budget. Understanding this nexus and moving from descriptive studies of microbial taxonomy to hypothesis-driven field and lab studies will facilitate a mechanistic understanding of mangrove ecosystem interaction webs and open opportunities for microorganism-mediated approaches to mangrove protection and rehabilitation. Such an effort calls for a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach, involving chemists, ecologists, evolutionary biologists, microbiologists, oceanographers, plant scientists, conservation biologists, and stakeholders, and it requires standardized methods to support reproducible experiments. Here, we outline the Mangrove Microbiome Initiative, which is focused around three urgent priorities and three approaches for advancing mangrove microbiome research.
32 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present the progress made over the last two years and an analysis of the LMMCs' national priority actions; approved Global Environment Facility, GEF-5 and GEF6 protected area-related biodiversity projects; and relevant targets, goals, and actions from National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs).
32 citations
Authors
Showing all 1320 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Kevin M. Smith | 114 | 1711 | 78470 |
Ary A. Hoffmann | 113 | 907 | 55354 |
David W. Macdonald | 111 | 1109 | 51334 |
Michael R. Hoffmann | 109 | 500 | 63474 |
Fred W. Allendorf | 86 | 230 | 34738 |
Edward B. Barbier | 84 | 450 | 36753 |
James J. Yoo | 81 | 491 | 27738 |
Michael William Bruford | 80 | 369 | 23635 |
James E. M. Watson | 74 | 461 | 23362 |
Brian Huntley | 74 | 225 | 28875 |
Brian W. Bowen | 74 | 181 | 17451 |
Gordon Luikart | 72 | 193 | 37564 |
Stuart H. M. Butchart | 72 | 245 | 26585 |
Thomas M. Brooks | 71 | 215 | 33724 |
Joshua E. Cinner | 68 | 177 | 14384 |