Biases in the current knowledge of threat status in lizards, and bridging the ‘assessment gap’

83 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Addressing knowledge gaps in reptile conservation (2016, background): “Böhm et al. (2013) found that tropical regions host high proportions of threatened and Data Deficient species, while Meiri and Chapple (2016) found that they host a large proportion of lizard species that have never been assessed by IUCN (Fig.”
Invasive predators and global biodiversity loss (2016, background): “Reptiles also had a lower average impact score, which may be because reptiles are less studied than birds and mammals (9), with only 40% of the world’s reptiles having been assessed for the Red List thus far (compared with ∼99% for birds and mammals) (24).”
How many reptiles are killed by cats in Australia? (2018, background): “In addition, population trends for reptile species are difficult to discern because there are few substantial population monitoring programs for reptiles (Meiri 2016; Meiri and Chapple 2016; Woinarski 2018).”
The global diversity and distribution of lizard clutch sizes (2020, background): “Birds and mammals are much better studied than reptiles generally (Bonnet, Shine, & Lourdais, 2002; Donaldson et al., 2016; Meiri & Chapple, 2016; Troudet, Grandcolas, Blin, Vignes-Lebbe, & Legendre, 2017).”