scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources

GovernmentSaint Paul, Minnesota, United States
About: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is a government organization based out in Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Stocking. The organization has 457 authors who have published 854 publications receiving 23678 citations. The organization is also known as: Minnesota DNR & MN DNR.
Topics: Population, Stocking, Odocoileus, Trout, Macrophyte


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Jan Schipper1, Jan Schipper2, Janice Chanson2, Janice Chanson1, Federica Chiozza3, Neil A. Cox2, Neil A. Cox1, Michael R. Hoffmann1, Michael R. Hoffmann2, Vineet Katariya2, John F. Lamoreux4, John F. Lamoreux2, Ana S. L. Rodrigues5, Ana S. L. Rodrigues6, Simon N. Stuart1, Simon N. Stuart2, Helen J. Temple2, Jonathan E. M. Baillie7, Luigi Boitani3, Thomas E. Lacher4, Thomas E. Lacher1, Russell A. Mittermeier, Andrew T. Smith8, Daniel Absolon, John M. Aguiar4, John M. Aguiar1, Giovanni Amori, Noura Bakkour9, Noura Bakkour1, Ricardo Baldi10, Ricardo Baldi11, Richard J. Berridge, Jon Bielby12, Jon Bielby7, Patricia Ann Black13, Julian Blanc, Thomas M. Brooks1, Thomas M. Brooks14, Thomas M. Brooks15, James Burton16, James Burton17, Thomas M. Butynski18, Gianluca Catullo, Roselle Chapman, Zoe Cokeliss7, Ben Collen7, Jim Conroy, Justin Cooke, Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca19, Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca20, Andrew E. Derocher21, Holly T. Dublin, J. W. Duckworth10, Louise H. Emmons22, Richard H. Emslie2, Marco Festa-Bianchet23, Matthew N. Foster, Sabrina Foster24, David L. Garshelis25, C. Cormack Gates26, Mariano Gimenez-Dixon, Susana González, José F. González-Maya, Tatjana C. Good27, Geoffrey Hammerson28, Philip S. Hammond29, D. C. D. Happold30, Meredith Happold30, John Hare, Richard B. Harris31, Clare E. Hawkins32, Clare E. Hawkins14, Mandy Haywood33, Lawrence R. Heaney34, Simon Hedges10, Kristofer M. Helgen22, Craig Hilton-Taylor2, Syed Ainul Hussain35, Nobuo Ishii36, Thomas Jefferson37, Richard K. B. Jenkins38, Charlotte H. Johnston8, Mark Keith39, Jonathan Kingdon40, David Knox1, Kit M. Kovacs41, Kit M. Kovacs42, Penny F. Langhammer8, Kristin Leus43, Rebecca L. Lewison44, Gabriela Lichtenstein, Lloyd F. Lowry45, Zoe Macavoy12, Georgina M. Mace12, David Mallon46, Monica Masi, Meghan W. McKnight, Rodrigo A. Medellín47, Patricia Medici48, G. Mills, Patricia D. Moehlman, Sanjay Molur, Arturo Mora2, Kristin Nowell, John F. Oates49, Wanda Olech, William R.L. Oliver, Monik Oprea22, Bruce D. Patterson34, William F. Perrin37, Beth Polidoro2, Caroline M. Pollock2, Abigail Powel50, Yelizaveta Protas9, Paul A. Racey38, Jim Ragle2, Pavithra Ramani24, Galen B. Rathbun51, Randall R. Reeves, Stephen B. Reilly37, John E. Reynolds52, Carlo Rondinini3, Ruth Grace Rosell-Ambal1, Monica Rulli, Anthony B. Rylands, Simona Savini, Cody J. Schank24, Wes Sechrest24, Caryn Self-Sullivan, Alan Shoemaker2, Claudio Sillero-Zubiri40, Naamal De Silva, David E. Smith24, Chelmala Srinivasulu53, P. J. Stephenson, Nico van Strien54, Bibhab Kumar Talukdar55, Barbara L. Taylor37, Rob Timmins, Diego G. Tirira, Marcelo F. Tognelli56, Marcelo F. Tognelli11, Katerina Tsytsulina, Liza M. Veiga57, Jean-Christophe Vié2, Elizabeth A. Williamson58, Sarah A. Wyatt, Yan Xie, Bruce E. Young28 
Conservation International1, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources2, Sapienza University of Rome3, Texas A&M University4, Instituto Superior Técnico5, University of Cambridge6, Zoological Society of London7, Arizona State University8, Columbia University9, Wildlife Conservation Society10, National Scientific and Technical Research Council11, Imperial College London12, National University of Tucumán13, University of Tasmania14, University of the Philippines Los Baños15, University of Edinburgh16, Earthwatch Institute17, Drexel University18, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais19, Global Environment Facility20, University of Alberta21, Smithsonian Institution22, Université de Sherbrooke23, University of Virginia24, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources25, University of Calgary26, James Cook University27, NatureServe28, University of St Andrews29, Australian National University30, University of Montana31, General Post Office32, University of Otago33, Field Museum of Natural History34, Wildlife Institute of India35, Tokyo Woman's Christian University36, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration37, University of Aberdeen38, University of the Witwatersrand39, University of Oxford40, University Centre in Svalbard41, Norwegian Polar Institute42, Copenhagen Zoo43, San Diego State University44, University of Alaska Fairbanks45, Manchester Metropolitan University46, National Autonomous University of Mexico47, University of Kent48, City University of New York49, Victoria University of Wellington50, California Academy of Sciences51, Mote Marine Laboratory52, Osmania University53, White Oak Conservation54, Aaranyak55, University of California, Davis56, Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi57, University of Stirling58
10 Oct 2008-Science
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a comprehensive assessment of the conservation status and distribution of the world's mammals, including marine mammals, using data collected by 1700+ experts, covering all 5487 species.
Abstract: Knowledge of mammalian diversity is still surprisingly disparate, both regionally and taxonomically. Here, we present a comprehensive assessment of the conservation status and distribution of the world's mammals. Data, compiled by 1700+ experts, cover all 5487 species, including marine mammals. Global macroecological patterns are very different for land and marine species but suggest common mechanisms driving diversity and endemism across systems. Compared with land species, threat levels are higher among marine mammals, driven by different processes (accidental mortality and pollution, rather than habitat loss), and are spatially distinct (peaking in northern oceans, rather than in Southeast Asia). Marine mammals are also disproportionately poorly known. These data are made freely available to support further scientific developments and conservation action.

1,383 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
10 Dec 2010-Science
TL;DR: Though the threat of extinction is increasing, overall declines would have been worse in the absence of conservation, and current conservation efforts remain insufficient to offset the main drivers of biodiversity loss in these groups.
Abstract: Using data for 25,780 species categorized on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List, we present an assessment of the status of the world's vertebrates. One-fifth of species are classified as Threatened, and we show that this figure is increasing: On average, 52 species of mammals, birds, and amphibians move one category closer to extinction each year. However, this overall pattern conceals the impact of conservation successes, and we show that the rate of deterioration would have been at least one-fifth again as much in the absence of these. Nonetheless, current conservation efforts remain insufficient to offset the main drivers of biodiversity loss in these groups: agricultural expansion, logging, overexploitation, and invasive alien species.

1,333 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is found that overlap indices can accurately rank pairs of UDs in terms of the extent of overlap, but estimates of overlap indices are likely to be biased.
Abstract: The concept of an animal's home range has evolved over time, as have methods for estimating home-range size and shape. Recently, home-range estimation methods have focused on estimating an animal's utilization distribution (UD; i.e., the probability distribution defining the animal's use of space). We illustrate the importance of the utilization distribution in characterizing the degree of overlap between home ranges (e.g., when assessing site fidelity or space-use sharing among individuals). We compare several different statistics for their ability to accurately rank paired examples in terms of their degree of overlap. These examples illustrate limitations of indices commonly used to quantify home-range overlap and suggest that new overlap indices that are a function of the UD are likely to be more informative. We suggest 2 new statistics for measuring home-range overlap: (1) for a measure of space-use sharing, we suggest a generalization of Hurlbert's (1978) E/Euniform statistic, which we term the utilization distribution overlap index (UDOI), and (2) for a general measure of similarity between UD estimates, we suggest Bhattacharyya's affinity (BA; Bhattacharyya 1943). Using a short simulation study, we found that overlap indices can accurately rank pairs of UDs in terms of the extent of overlap, but estimates of overlap indices are likely to be biased. The extent of the bias depended on sample size and the degree of overlap (UDs with a high degree of overlap resulted in statistics that were more biased [low]), suggesting that comparisons across studies may be problematic. We illustrate the use of overlap indices to quantify the degree of similarity among UD estimates obtained using 2 different data collection methods (Global Positioning Systems [GPS] and very high frequency [VHF] radiotelemetry) for an adult female northern white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in north-central Minnesota.

726 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jan 2006-Oikos
TL;DR: It is suggested that connection of isolated habitat fragments may in some cases reduce, rather than enhance, landscape-level biodiversity, and implies that biodiversity at the regional level will be maximized if the local habitat patches vary widely in size and degree of connectivity.
Abstract: Contemporary ecological landscape planning is often based on the assumption that small isolated habitat patches sustain relatively few species. Here, we suggest that for shallow lakes and ponds, the opposite can be true for some groups of organisms. Fish communities tend to be poor or even absent in small isolated lakes. However, submerged vegetation is often more abundant in such waterbodies. As a consequence of low fish biomass and high vegetation abundance, the richness of aquatic birds, plants, amphibians and invertebrates is often relatively high in small, shallow, isolated lakes. Although the rarity of fish is in line with expectations from the ruling paradigms about effects of habitat fragmentation in landscape ecology, the relative richness of various other groups of organisms in small ponds is opposite to these expectations. The case of shallow lakes illustrates that incorporating ecological interactions is essential to understanding the potential effects of habitat fragmentation. Single-species meta-population approaches may be misleading if ecological interactions are strong. A meta-community approach that explicitly incorporates biotic interactions, also those involving different trophic levels, is needed. Our diagnosis suggests that connection of isolated habitat fragments may in some cases reduce, rather than enhance, landscape-level biodiversity, and implies that biodiversity at the regional level will be maximized if the local habitat patches vary widely in size and degree of connectivity.

385 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Analytical methods for dealing with correlated data in the context of resource selection are reviewed, including post hoc variance inflation techniques, ‘two-stage’ approaches based on models fit to each individual, generalized estimating equations and hierarchical mixed-effects models.
Abstract: With the advent of new technologies, animal locations are being collected at ever finer spatio-temporal scales. We review analytical methods for dealing with correlated data in the context of resource selection, including post hoc variance inflation techniques, ‘two-stage’ approaches based on models fit to each individual, generalized estimating equations and hierarchical mixed-effects models. These methods are applicable to a wide range of correlated data problems, but can be difficult to apply and remain especially challenging for use–availability sampling designs because the correlation structure for combinations of used and available points are not likely to follow common parametric forms. We also review emerging approaches to studying habitat selection that use fine-scale temporal data to arrive at biologically based definitions of available habitat, while naturally accounting for autocorrelation by modelling animal movement between telemetry locations. Sophisticated analyses that explicitly model correlation rather than consider it a nuisance, like mixed effects and state-space models, offer potentially novel insights into the process of resource selection, but additional work is needed to make them more generally applicable to large datasets based on the use–availability designs. Until then, variance inflation techniques and two-stage approaches should offer pragmatic and flexible approaches to modelling correlated data.

286 citations


Authors

Showing all 462 results

Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
8.6K papers, 264K citations

90% related

Patuxent Wildlife Research Center
1.6K papers, 101K citations

87% related

National Park Service
3.6K papers, 101.9K citations

85% related

Illinois Natural History Survey
2.8K papers, 93.1K citations

85% related

United States Forest Service
21.8K papers, 959.1K citations

84% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
20233
20226
202170
202066
201944
201853