N. United, World Population Prospects 2019. Retrived from https://population.un.org/wpp/Download/Standard/Population/ (2020) (available at https://population.un.org/wpp/Download/Standard/Population/).
Ceballos, G., Ehrlich, P. R. & Dirzo, R. Biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 114, E6089–E6096 (2017).
Google Scholar
Cincotta, R. P., Wisnewski, J. & Engelman, R. Human population in the biodiversity hotspots. Nature 404, 990–992 (2000).
Google Scholar
McKee, J. K., Sciulli, P. W., David Fooce, C. & Waite, T. A. Forecasting global biodiversity threats associated with human population growth. Biol. Conserv. 115, 161–164 (2004).
Google Scholar
Pimm, S. L. et al. The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science (80-) 344, 1246752–1246752 (2014).
Google Scholar
Malhi, Y. The concept of the anthropocene. 42 (2017).
Crutzen, P. J. Geology of mankind. Nature 415, 23 (2002).
Google Scholar
Zalasiewicz, J. et al. When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal. Quat. Int. 1, 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.11.045 (2014).
Google Scholar
Dirzo, R. et al. Defaunation in the anthropocene. Science (80-) 345, 401–406 (2014).
Google Scholar
Barnosky, A. D. et al. Has the Earth’s sixth mass extinction already arrived?. Nature 471, 51–57 (2011).
Google Scholar
Ceballos, G., Ehrlich, P. R., García, A. The sixth extinction crisis loss of animal populations and species conservation biology view project cost-effective conservation planning view project the sixth extinction crisis loss of animal populations and species (2010) (available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266231196).
Leakey, R. E. & Lewin, R. The sixth extinction: Patterns of life and the future of Humankind (Doubleday, 1995).
Pimm, S. L., Russell, G. J., Gittleman, J. L. & Brooks, T. M. The future of biodiversity. Science (80-) 269, 347–350 (1995).
Google Scholar
Burkhead, N. M. Extinction rates in North American freshwater fishes, 1900–2010. Bioscience 62, 798–808 (2012).
Google Scholar
Bornmann, L. & Mutz, R. Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 66, 2215–2222 (2015).
Google Scholar
Evans, J. A. Future science. Science (80-). 342, 44–45 (2013).
Google Scholar
Fortunato, S. et al. Science of science. Science (80-). 359, 1. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao0185 (2018).
Google Scholar
Williams, D. R., Balmford, A. & Wilcove, D. S. The past and future role of conservation science in saving biodiversity. Conserv. Lett. 13, e12720 (2020).
Google Scholar
Bolam, F. C. et al. How many bird and mammal extinctions has recent conservation action prevented?. Conserv. Lett. 1, 1 (2020).
Groves, C. R., Jensen, D. B., Valutis, L. L., Redford, K. H., Shaffer, M. L., Scott, J. M., Baumgartner, J. V., Higgins, J. V., Beck, M. W., & Anderson, M. G. Planning for biodiversity conservation: Putting conservation science into practice. A seven-step framework for developing regional plans to conserve biological diversity, based upon principles of conservation biology and ecology, is being used extensively by the nature conservancy to identify priority areas for conservation” (Oxford Academic, 2002). https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0499:PFBCPC]2.0.CO;2.
Syed, S., Borit, M. & Spruit, M. Narrow lenses for capturing the complexity of fisheries: A topic analysis of fisheries science from 1990 to 2016. Fish Fish. 19, 643–661 (2018).
Google Scholar
Aksnes, D. W. & Browman, H. I. An overview of global research effort in fisheries science. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 73, 1004–1011 (2016).
Google Scholar
F. Natale, G. Fiore, J. Hofherr, Mapping the research on aquaculture. A bibliometric analysis of aquaculture literature. Scientometrics. 90, 983–999 (2012).
Donaldson, M. R. et al. Contrasting global game fish and non-game fish species. Fisheries 36, 385–397 (2011).
Google Scholar
Konno, K. et al. Ignoring non-English-language studies may bias ecological meta-analyses. Ecol. Evol. 10, 6373–6384 (2020).
Google Scholar
Nuñez, M. A. & Amano, T. Monolingual searches can limit and bias results in global literature reviews. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 2000933 (2021).
Stefanoudis, P. V. et al. Turning the tide of parachute science. Curr. Biol. 31, 161–185 (2021).
Google Scholar
Gossa, C., Fisher, M. & Milner-Gulland, E. J. The research-implementation gap: How practitioners and researchers from developing countries perceive the role of peer-reviewed literature in conservation science. Oryx 49, 80–87 (2015).
Google Scholar
Bawa, K. S. et al. Opinion: Envisioning a biodiversity science for sustaining human well-being. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117, 202018436 (2020).
Google Scholar
Cooke, S. J. & Cowx, I. G. The role of recreational fishing in global fish crises. Bioscience 54, 857 (2004).
Google Scholar
Fleishman, E., Murphy, D. D. & Brussard, P. F. A new method for selection of umbrella species for conservation planning. Ecol. Appl. 10, 569–579 (2000).
Google Scholar
Runge, C. A. et al. Single species conservation as an umbrella for management of landscape threats. PLoS ONE 14, e0209619 (2019).
Google Scholar
van Rees, C. B. et al. Safeguarding freshwater life beyond 2020: Recommendations for the new global biodiversity framework from the European experience. Conserv. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12771 (2020).
Google Scholar
World Wildlife Fund for Nature, “The World’s Forgotten Fishes” (2021), (available at www.panda.org).
Novacek, M. J. Engaging the public in biodiversity issues. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 105, 11571–11578 (2008).
Google Scholar
Gerber, L. R. et al. Endangered species recovery: A resource allocation problem. Science (80-). 362, 284–286 (2018).
Google Scholar
Restani, M. & Marzluff, J. M. Funding extinction? Biological needs and political realities in the allocation of resources to endangered species recovery. Bioscience 52, 169–177 (2002).
Google Scholar
McClenachan, L., Cooper, A. B., Carpenter, K. E. & Dulvy, N. K. Extinction risk and bottlenecks in the conservation of charismatic marine species. Conserv. Lett. 5, 73–80 (2012).
Google Scholar
Arlettaz, R. et al. From publications to public actions: When conservation biologists bridge the gap between research and implementation. Bioscience 60, 835–842 (2010).
Google Scholar
McNie, E. C. Reconciling the supply of scientific information with user demands: An analysis of the problem and review of the literature. Environ. Sci. Policy. 10, 17–38 (2007).
Google Scholar
Brewer, G. D., & Stern, P. C. Decision Making for the Environment: Social and Behavioral Science Research Priorities (National Academies Press, 2005).
Sunderland, T., Sunderland-Groves, J., Shanley, P. & Campbell, B. Bridging the gap: How can information access and exchange between conservation biologists and field practitioners be improved for better conservation outcomes?. Biotropica 41, 549–554 (2009).
Google Scholar
Steven, R., Castley, J. G. & Buckley, R. Tourism revenue as a conservation tool for threatened birds in protected areas. PLoS ONE 8, e62598 (2013).
Google Scholar
Joseph, L. N., Maloney, R. F. & Possingham, H. P. Optimal allocation of resources among threatened species: A project prioritization protocol. Conserv. Biol. 23, 328–338 (2009).
Google Scholar
Christie, A. P. et al. Poor availability of context-specific evidence hampers decision-making in conservation. Biol. Conserv. 248, 108666 (2020).
Google Scholar
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), International Union for Conservation of Nature (2018), (available at http://www.iucnredlist.org).
International Game Fish Association (IGFA), International game fish world record list (2018), (available at http://www.igfa.org/records.asp).
Froese, R., & Pauly, D. FishBase. World Wide Web Electron. Publ. (2019), (available at www.fishbase.org).
R Core Team, R: a language and environment for statistical computing (2018).
Aria, M. & Cuccurullo, C. bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J. Informetr. 11, 959–975 (2017).
Google Scholar
Sonderegger, D. L. Significant zero crossings (2020).
Hyndam, R., Athanasopoulos, G., Caceres, G., O’Hara-Wild, M., Petropoulos, F., Razbash, S., Wang, E., & Yasmeen, F. Forecast: Forecasting functions for time series and linear models (2020).
Hyndman, R. J. & Khandakar, Y. Automatic time series forecasting: The forecast package for R. J. Stat. Softw. 27, 1–22 (2008).
Google Scholar
Jenks, G. F. & Caspall, F. C. Error on choroplethic maps: Definition, measurement, reduction. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 61, 217–244 (1971).
Google Scholar
ESRI, ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10.7.1 (2019).
Source: Ecology - nature.com
