Literature DB >> 26483509

Inquiry into congruencies and trade-offs among conservation objectives requires a consistent typology of homogeneous types.

Thomas Kirchhoff1.   

Abstract

Mesh：

Year:  2015        PMID： 26483509      PMCID： PMC4640794          DOI： 10.1073/pnas.1517860112

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN： 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


× No keyword cloud information.
  2 in total

1.  Confronting and resolving competing values behind conservation objectives.

Authors:  Daniel S Karp; Chase D Mendenhall; Elizabeth Callaway; Luke O Frishkoff; Peter M Kareiva; Paul R Ehrlich; Gretchen C Daily
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Six common mistakes in conservation priority setting.

Authors:  Edward T Game; Peter Kareiva; Hugh P Possingham
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 6.560
  2 in total
  1 in total

1.  Reply to Kirchhoff: Homogenous and mutually exclusive conservation typologies are neither possible nor desirable.

Authors:  Daniel S Karp; Chase D Mendenhall; Elizabeth Callaway; Luke O Frishkoff; Peter M Kareiva; Paul R Ehrlich; Gretchen C Daily
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 11.205
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.