Literature DB >> 22032263

A warrant for applied palaeozoology.

R Lee Lyman1.   

Abstract

It has been argued by some neozoologists (those who study living animals) that the palaeozoological record is biased and incomplete (relative to an existing biological community) and therefore should not be consulted for purposes of conservation biology. An article published in a biology journal in 2011 lists numerous reasons why natural history collections (NHCs) of skins and skulls of animals collected over the past century or two are exceptionally valuable to conservation biologists because those collections provide significant time depth to numerous variables that document global biological change. Many of those same variables can be, and have been, identified in the palaeozoological record. Those variables are of major value to conservation biology, whether their values are taken from 100-year-old NHCs or from palaeozoological remains. Empirical examples in which the identified variables are measured in palaeozoological contexts indicate that the palaeozoological record should indeed be consulted by conservation biologists and can no longer be considered unsatisfactory for modern resource management.
© 2011 The Author. Biological Reviews © 2011 Cambridge Philosophical Society.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22032263     DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2011.00207.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc        ISSN: 0006-3231


  7 in total

1.  Insights from the past: unique opportunity or foreign country?

Authors:  Samuel T Turvey; Erin E Saupe
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 2.  Leveraging palaeoproteomics to address conservation and restoration agendas.

Authors:  Carli Peters; Kristine K Richter; Jens-Christian Svenning; Nicole Boivin
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2022-04-04

Review 3.  Mobilizing the past to shape a better Anthropocene.

Authors:  Nicole Boivin; Alison Crowther
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 15.460

4.  ZooArchNet: Connecting zooarchaeological specimens to the biodiversity and archaeology data networks.

Authors:  Michelle J LeFebvre; Laura Brenskelle; John Wieczorek; Sarah Whitcher Kansa; Eric C Kansa; Neill J Wallis; Jessica N King; Kitty F Emery; Robert Guralnick
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Lake Ontario salmon (Salmo salar) were not migratory: A long-standing historical debate solved through stable isotope analysis.

Authors:  Eric J Guiry; Suzanne Needs-Howarth; Kevin D Friedland; Alicia L Hawkins; Paul Szpak; Rebecca Macdonald; Michelle Courtemanche; Erling Holm; Michael P Richards
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Lama guanicoe remains from the Chaco ecoregion (Córdoba, Argentina): An osteological approach to the characterization of a relict wild population.

Authors:  Thiago Costa; Fernando Barri
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  The overkill model and its impact on environmental research.

Authors:  Lisa Nagaoka; Torben Rick; Steve Wolverton
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 2.912

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.