Umbrellas and flagships: efficient conservation surrogates or expensive mistakes?

By Sandy J. Andelman, William F. Fagan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2000

730 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c17e175b925f3b0b6c4ffc644258ec2c72a6ec4c

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

In Ecology

Citations in the corpus

Shared resources between giant panda and sympatric wild and domestic mammals (2015, background): “At a practical level, conservation of a focal species does not always result in co-occurring species increasing (Andelman and Fagan, 2000), as some species are limited by ecological factors that are not relevant to the umbrella species (Roberge and Angelstam, 2004), or the management requirements…”
Use of Substitute Species in Conservation Biology (2005, background): “1997; Simberloff 1998; Caro & O’Doherty 1999; Andelman & Fagan 2000; Zacharias & Roff 2001; Sanderson et al. 2002; Caro et al. 2004) and those that use the response of one species or population to an environmental disturbance to predict the response of another to a similar disturbance (e.g., Oatley…”
Grassland management intensification weakens the associations among the diversities of multiple plant and animal taxa (2015, methodology): “These estimates are then often used in conservation planning (e.g., reserve selection) and in the assessment of management actions (Andelman and Fagan 2000, Schulze et al. 2004, Kessler et al. 2011).”
What are we saving? Developing a standardized approach for conservation action (2009, background): “…approach to conservation is therefore understandable, but does not always convey wide-ranging benefits to biodiversity and arguably diverts resources away from species of greater value or conservation need (Kerr, 1997; Andelman & Fagan, 2000; Linnell, Swenson & Andersen, 2000; Clucas et al., 2008).”
How Many Animals Do We Want to Save? The Many Ways of Setting Population Target Levels for Conservation (2006, background): “Andelman and Fagan (2000) and many others have challenged this presumption on distributional grounds, however, because the distribution of one population is highly unlikely to cover completely the distribution of all other species in an area.”
An introduction to biodiversity concepts for environmental economists (2004, background): “Unfortunately, although widely used, there is not much evidence that surrogate species are in fact good predictors of other components of biodiversity (Andelman and Fagan, 2000).”
Using Surrogate Species and Groups for Conservation Planning and Management (2008, background): “…the proliferation of approaches to define groups or surrogate species, the conceptual foundation and use of these approaches have generated substantial criticism (e.g., Verner 1984, Landres et al. 1988, Simberloff 1998, Andelman and Fagan 2000, Lindenmayer et al. 2002, Roberge and Angelstam 2004).”
Making smart conservation decisions (2001, background): “Although biodiversity has many dimensions, since we are limited in the number of things we can measure, and there is pressure for quick answers, it is popular to rely on monitoring surrogates such as indicators, keystones, or umbrella species (Landres et al. 1988, Simberloff 1998, Andelman and Faga”