Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBerger-Tal, Oded
dc.contributor.authorBlumstein, Daniel T.
dc.contributor.authorCarroll, Scott
dc.contributor.authorFisher, Robert N.
dc.contributor.authorMesnick, Sarah L.
dc.contributor.authorOwen, Megan A.
dc.contributor.authorSaltz, David
dc.contributor.authorSt. Clair, Colleen Cassady
dc.contributor.authorSwaisgood, Ronald R.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-12T01:40:21Z
dc.date.available2020-06-12T01:40:21Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.issn1523-1739
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/cobi.12654
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12634/361
dc.description.abstractThe role of behavioral ecology in improving wildlife conservation and management has been the subject of much recent debate. We sought to answer 2 foundational questions about the current use of behavioral knowledge in conservation: To what extent is behavioral knowledge used in wildlife conservation and management, and how does the use of animal behavior differ among conservation fields in both frequency and types of use? We searched the literature for intersections between key fields of animal behavior and conservation and created a systematic heat map (i.e., graphical representation of data where values are represented as colors) to visualize relative efforts. Some behaviors, such as dispersal and foraging, were commonly considered (mean [SE] of 1147.38 [353.11] and 439.44 [108.85] papers per cell, respectively). In contrast, other behaviors, such as learning, social, and antipredatory behaviors were rarely considered (mean [SE] of 33.88 [7.62], 44.81 [10.65], and 22.69 [6.37] papers per cell, respectively). In many cases, awareness of the importance of behavior did not translate into applicable management tools. Our results challenge previous suggestions that there is little association between the fields of behavioral ecology and conservation and reveals tremendous variation in the use of different behaviors in conservation. We recommend that researchers focus on examining underutilized intersections of behavior and conservation themes for which preliminary work shows a potential for improving conservation and management, translating behavioral theory into applicable and testable predictions, and creating systematic reviews to summarize the behavioral evidence within the behavior-conservation intersections for which many studies exist.
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.urlhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.12654/abstract
dc.rights2015 Society for Conservation Biology.
dc.subjectWILDLIFE CONSERVATION
dc.subjectBEHAVIOR
dc.subjectBREEDING
dc.subjectFORAGING
dc.subjectREINTRODUCTION
dc.subjectECOLOGY
dc.titleA systematic survey of the integration of animal behavior into conservation
dc.typeArticle
dc.source.journaltitleConservation Biology
dc.source.volume30
dc.source.issue4
dc.source.beginpage744
dc.source.endpage753
dcterms.dateAccepted
html.description.abstractThe role of behavioral ecology in improving wildlife conservation and management has been the subject of much recent debate. We sought to answer 2 foundational questions about the current use of behavioral knowledge in conservation: To what extent is behavioral knowledge used in wildlife conservation and management, and how does the use of animal behavior differ among conservation fields in both frequency and types of use? We searched the literature for intersections between key fields of animal behavior and conservation and created a systematic heat map (i.e., graphical representation of data where values are represented as colors) to visualize relative efforts. Some behaviors, such as dispersal and foraging, were commonly considered (mean [SE] of 1147.38 [353.11] and 439.44 [108.85] papers per cell, respectively). In contrast, other behaviors, such as learning, social, and antipredatory behaviors were rarely considered (mean [SE] of 33.88 [7.62], 44.81 [10.65], and 22.69 [6.37] papers per cell, respectively). In many cases, awareness of the importance of behavior did not translate into applicable management tools. Our results challenge previous suggestions that there is little association between the fields of behavioral ecology and conservation and reveals tremendous variation in the use of different behaviors in conservation. We recommend that researchers focus on examining underutilized intersections of behavior and conservation themes for which preliminary work shows a potential for improving conservation and management, translating behavioral theory into applicable and testable predictions, and creating systematic reviews to summarize the behavioral evidence within the behavior-conservation intersections for which many studies exist.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Conservation Science Publications
    Works by SDZWA's Conservation Scientists and co-authors. Includes books, book sections, articles and conference publications and presentations.

Show simple item record