A NEW METHOD FOR SELECTION OF UMBRELLA SPECIES FOR CONSERVATION PLANNING

By E. Fleishman, D. Murphy, P. Brussard. 2000

296 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/96d3f1b06cbcb5be5fabacc7937e7c9977bd55e8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecological Modeling

1. H. Van Dyck
2. Dirk Maes
3. E. Fleishman
4. Jean-Michel Roberge
5. P. Angelstam
6. R. Mac Nally
7. G. Hess
8. T. Caro

In Ecology

1. Jean-Michel Roberge
2. P. Angelstam
3. H. Van Dyck
4. Dirk Maes
5. E. Fleishman
6. T. Caro
7. G. Hess
8. M. Rubino

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. H. Van Dyck
2. Dirk Maes
3. Jean-Michel Roberge
4. P. Angelstam
5. E. Fleishman
6. R. Mac Nally
7. G. Hess
8. T. Caro

Citations in the corpus

• The white-backed woodpecker: umbrella species for forest conservation planning? (2008, background): “An umbrella species has been deWned as a species whose conservation confers protection to a large number of naturally co-occurring taxa (Fleishman et al. 2000; Roberge and Angelstam 2004).”
• Habitat thresholds for focal species at multiple scales and forest biodiversity conservation - dead wood as an example (2003, result): “This approach is consistent with the concept of umbrella species (e.g., Fleishman et al. 2000, Caro 2003), defi ned as species whose conservation contributes to the protection of numerous naturally co-occurring species.”
• Recommendations for Assessing the Effectiveness of Surrogate Species Approaches (2006, background): “Evidence for guidelines such as ‘‘surrogates should not be extremely rare or ubiquitous’’ (Fleishman et al. 2000), ‘‘simple conservation strategies are not as effective as surrogates’’ (Hess et al.”
• Habitat quality and biodiversity indicator performances of a threatened butterfly versus a multispecies group for wet heathlands in Belgium (2005, methodology): “Management evaluation with a multispecies group is, therefore, more subtle than with a single indicator species ( Fleishman et al., 2000 ).”
• A Successful Predictive Model of Species Richness Based on Indicator Species (2004, background): “…on the richness of an entire biota (all vertebrates, invertebrates, and plants) at scales meaningful for most land-use decisions (Prendergast et al. 1993; Mac Nally et al. 2002; Vessby et al. 2002), indicators still may be effective within limited taxonomic boundaries (Fleishman et al. 2000).”
• EVALUATION OF A MULTIPLE‐SPECIES APPROACH TO MONITORING SPECIES AT THE ECOREGIONAL SCALE (2004, background): “Concepts that fit within this first approach include ‘‘umbrella’’ species (Wilcox 1984, Fleishman et al. 2000) and ‘‘indicator’’ species (Landres et al. 1988, Niemi et al. 1997), as well as tools such as wildlife habitat models (e.g., Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988).”
• Preliminary assessment of the flagship species concept at a small scale (2004, unknown): “Instead, they suggest that small reserves should be designated using other methods such as using several surrogate species in concert (Lambeck, 1997; Fleishman, Murphy & Brussard, 2000; Sanderson etal., 2002b) or simply protecting an area because it contains a particular habitat such as subtropica”
• Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) and Avian Biodiversity: Testing the Umbrella‐Species Concept (2002, background): “The concept sometimes has been used arbitrarily, but several authors have clarified it and called for rigorous application (e.g., Lambeck 1997; Martikainen et al. 1998; Simberloff 1998, 1999; Caro & O’Doherty 1999; Fleishman et al. 2000).”
• Umbrella species: critique and lessons from East Africa (2003, background): “Indeed, some studies have systematically tested whether rare and threatened species co-occur with many other species, arguing that they would be good umbrella species if they did so because they would attract public attention (Andelman & Fagan, 2000; Fleishman et al., 2000).”