Estimation of census and effective population sizes: the increasing usefulness of DNA-based approaches
By Gordon Luikart, N. Ryman, David A. Tallmon, M. D. Schwartz, F. Allendorf. Conservation Genetics, 2010
614 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7e5d114bb17bb2e7ce642e1513a3c84a0655ff37
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology
- R. Frankham
- Barry W. Brook
- Corey J. A. Bradshaw
- O. Berry
- D. Fraser
- Robin S. Waples
- J. Ovenden
- J. Koprowski
In Genetics
- C. Do
- R. Frankham
- J. Ovenden
- Corey J. A. Bradshaw
- Barry W. Brook
- Robin S. Waples
- David Peel
- G. M. Macbeth
Citations in the corpus
- NeEstimator v2: re‐implementation of software for the estimation of contemporary effective population size (Ne) from genetic data (2014, methodology): “…conjunction with the primary literature describing the concept of genetic effective population size (e.g. Schwartz et al. 2007; Charlesworth 2009; Luikart et al. 2010; Palstra & Fraser 2012) and the published estimation methods (Waples 1989; Nomura 2008; Waples & Do 2008; Zhdanova & Pudovkin…”
- Ocean's eleven: a critical evaluation of the role of population, evolutionary and molecular genetics in the management of wild fisheries (2015, background): “A key aspect for fisheries science is that Ne is regarded as the number of breeding individuals that successfully transmit genes to the next generation (Frankham 1995), suggesting that it is a proxy for spawner numbers (N) (Ovenden et al. 2007; Luikart et al. 2010).”
- Genetics in conservation management: Revised recommendations for the 50/500 rules, Red List criteria and population viability analyses (2014, background): “Additionally, putative population-density effects (Palstra and Ruzzante, 2008; Luikart et al., 2010) were not confirmed by Palstra and Fraser (2012).”
- Should we consider individual behavior differences in applied wildlife conservation studies (2017, methodology): “…inclusion of non-invasive sampling techniques such as DNA extraction from hair or feces, environmental DNA (Foote et al., 2012), or detection via camera traps (Luikart et al., 2010; Mills et al., 2000) to augment sampling methods such as live trapping or netting and distance sampling (Biro, 2013).”
- Meta‐analysis supports further refinement of eDNA for monitoring aquatic species‐specific abundance in nature (2019, background): “…‐ Nature et Technologies; Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada K E Y W O R D S abundance, biomass, conservation, eDNA, environmental DNA, meta‐analysis, monitoring essentially impossible to obtain (Luikart et al., 2010; Ovenden et al., 2016; Yates, Bernos, & Fraser, 2017).”