No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 19, 2026.

What is conservation physiology? Perspectives on an increasingly integrated and essential science

S. J. Cooke, L. Sack, C. E. Franklin and 4 more (opens in a new tab)

Conservation Physiology · 2013

doi:10.1093/conphys/cot001 (opens in a new tab)

Abstract

Globally, ecosystems and their constituent flora and fauna face the localized and broad-scale influence of human activities. Conservation practitioners and environmental managers struggle to identify and mitigate threats, reverse species declines, restore degraded ecosystems, and manage natural resources sustainably. Scientific research and evidence are increasingly regarded as the foundation for new regulations, conservation actions, and management interventions. Conservation biologists and managers have traditionally focused on the characteristics (e.g. abundance, structure, trends) of populations, species, communities, and ecosystems, and simple indicators of the responses to environmental perturbations and other human activities. However, an understanding of the specific mechanisms underlying conservation problems is becoming increasingly important for decision-making, in part because physiological tools and knowledge are especially useful for developing cause-and-effect relationships, and for identifying the optimal range of habitats and stressor thresholds for different organisms. When physiological knowledge is incorporated into ecological models, it can improve predictions of organism responses to environmental change and provide tools to support management decisions. Without such knowledge, we may be left with simple associations. 'Conservation physiology' has been defined previously with a focus on vertebrates, but here we redefine the concept universally, for application to the diversity of taxa from microbes to plants, to animals, and to natural resources. We also consider 'physiology' in the broadest possible terms; i.e. how an organism functions, and any associated mechanisms, from development to bioenergetics, to environmental interactions, through to fitness. Moreover, we consider conservation physiology to include a wide range of applications beyond assisting imperiled populations, and include, for example, the eradication of invasive species, refinement of resource management strategies to minimize impacts, and evaluation of restoration plans. This concept of conservation physiology emphasizes the basis, importance, and ecological relevance of physiological diversity at a variety of scales. Real advances in conservation and resource management require integration and inter-disciplinarity. Conservation physiology and its suite of tools and concepts is a key part of the evidence base needed to address pressing environmental challenges.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 19, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

1We define conservation physiology as: ‘An integrative scientific discipline applying physiological concepts, tools, and knowledge to characterizing biological diversity and its ecological implications; understanding and predicting how organisms, populations, and ecosystems respond to environmental change and stressors; and solving conservation problems across the broad range of taxa (i.e. including microbes, plants, and animals). Physiology is considered in the broadest possible terms to include functional and mechanistic responses at all scales, and conservation includes the development and refinement of strategies to rebuild populations, restore ecosystems, inform conservation policy, generate decision-support tools, and manage natural resources.’

Introduction

2The idea that physiological knowledge can inform conservation is not new. Although a search for the phrase ‘conservation physiology’ within Web of Science yields <30 papers, the pages of conservation journals include physiological content, while those of physiological journals include population management and conservation. Indeed, prior to the middle of the 20th century, ecology and physiology had largely been regarded as synonymous, resulting in frequent application of physiological approaches to investigations of population dynamics (e.g.;;; ). In many ways, the August Krogh principle for physiological adaptation, which was coined over a century ago (‘for … a large number of problems there will be some animal of choice, or a few such animals, on which it can be most conveniently studied’), is derived from the marvellous match of an animal's physiology with its environment. recognized six categories of effects (i.e. factors) for fish in which the environment and physiology interacted. Much earlier, provided a comprehensive treatment of environmental factors shaping plant and animal distributions, with much focus on physiological mechanisms, poorly explored as many of them were at that time.

3The discussion of physiology in a conservation context began to increase in the early 1990s, perhaps reflecting the growing appreciation for the significance of the field during and after the meeting organized by Wilcox and Soulé at which the term ‘conservation biology’ was first introduced. Although the journal Biological Conservation has existed since the late 1960s, and Conservation Biology since 1987, work with explicit reference to physiology in the abstract only began to appear in the 1990s. Likewise, in the fourth edition of his seminal book, argued the need for greater physiological information on stressed species given drastic environmental change and population reductions. A year later, in reviewing the iconoclastic 1987 volume by Feder et al., devoted his final section to the need for physiology to be concerned with human impacts. A parallel shift has also occurred in the field of toxicology and the sub-field of environmental toxicology. At one time, these areas were concerned with lethality as a measurement and regulatory end-point. Today, the importance of sub-lethal toxicity is well recognized, and books have been devoted to the mechanistic physiology that underlies toxicity (e.g. for fishes,, ). The reason for these shifts is simple; there is a much better appreciation of animal and plant physiology, especially in relationship to their environments.

4Such recognition of the significance of physiology for conservation has grown in primary research and in critical reviews (e.g.;;;;; ), but only recently has the discipline named ‘conservation physiology’ emerged. This discipline has expanded dramatically with the publication of synthetic papers, special issues (e.g.; ), and symposia [e.g. by the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology and Society for Experimental Biology].

5In this overview, we briefly review what we mean by conservation physiology, developing a synthetic definition that reflects the current scope of the field. We then illustrate this scope with a range of examples, demonstrating that conservation physiology has much to offer to science and to those who find themselves with the considerable challenge of practising conservation in our rapidly changing world. In doing so, we provide the reasons for the launch of this new journal, Conservation Physiology. Echoing the words of the first editors of Biological Conservation, we offer no excuse for adding another journal to the world's burgeoning journal stable, but rather demonstrate that the need already exists and the time is ripe.

What is conservation physiology?

6‘Conservation physiology’ has been defined previously in several ways, each implying a somewhat different scope. To our knowledge, the first use of the phrase ‘conservation physiology’ was by, but several earlier phrases were conceptually similar. ‘Conservation physiology’ is more than the sum of its constituent words, though these words are powerful. Conservation is a movement or discipline focused on natural resource use, allocation, and protection. Physiology is focused on the mechanisms involved in how an organism works, including the anatomy and structure of organisms and organs, resource acquisition, metabolism and energy fluxes, regulation and homeostasis, acclimatization to changing environments and environmental tolerances, performance (such as growth, locomotion, and reproductive fitness), and impacts on the ecosystem. Physiology can be studied at the wide range of scales, from organisms, down to organ systems, organs, cells, and biomolecules and their chemical and/or physical functions.

7suggested that studies can be described as ‘conservation physiology’ when physiologists contribute knowledge, concepts, and perspectives to conservation decision-making. Such a definition is broad, but did not include a statement of the meaning of ‘conservation’. Although a zoologist, reminded readers of the threats that plants face given environmental change and pathogen emergence. In a paper titled ‘The importance of physiological ecology in conservation biology’, provided a case study on the nutritional ecology of desert tortoises and noted that ‘many of the threats to the persistence of populations of sensitive species have physiological or pathological mechanisms, and those mechanisms are best understood through the inherently integrative discipline of physiological ecology’. The authors noted that physiological ecology has become critical for understanding threats to the persistence of sensitive species and that physiological data can be used as part of ‘informed opinion’ (ideally, with theory and experiments to test hypotheses that form new syntheses of physiological and ecological knowledge), and eventually to guide management decisions.

8, both zoologists, coined the term ‘conservation physiology’ in a paper with that title. They explicitly defined it as ‘the study of physiological responses of organisms to human alteration of the environment that might cause or contribute to population declines’. The authors acknowledged that conservation physiology was relevant to all taxa, but their examples were entirely focused on vertebrates. One of the greatest limitations of that definition was its being framed only in terms of identifying problems rather than developing solutions. Also limiting is the focus on population declines as an end-point, which fails to recognize other relevant responses, such as range shifts, changes in genetic diversity, and alteration in the structure and function of populations, communities, and ecosystems. Although the authors did not provide a definition of conservation per se, they did provide a specific conservation-oriented metric (i.e. population decline), which is the basis for most regional, national, and international threat assessments (e.g. IUCN Red List; ). The definition provided by remained unchanged for some time despite its limited scope.

9Parallel developments were also focusing on the role of physiological studies in understanding the responses of organisms to anthropogenic change, the consequences thereof, and the scope for both mitigation of and adaptation to impacts. In particular, macrophysiology, defined as ‘the investigation of variation in physiological traits over large geographical and temporal scales and the ecological implications of this variation’, had focused on these conservation-related questions, as made explicit in a series of reviews. Subsequent macrophysiological work identified previously unappreciated conservation problems, such as climate-change-related threats to tropical and sub-tropical populations, illustrating its close links to conservation physiology (see also ).

10Following a brief hiatus in the discussion of conservation physiology, presented a revised definition; one that combined elements of earlier papers (e.g.; ) with that of. Conservation physiology became ‘the application of physiological theory, approaches and tools to elucidate and address conservation problems with the aim to provide a mechanistic understanding of how environmental disturbances and threatening processes impact physiological responses and thereby ecological function, population persistence, and species survival’. This definition was the first to use the word ‘mechanistic’, to refer to theory, approaches, and tools, and to expand the scope from populations to include a higher level of biological organization, namely ecological function and species survival. A key point in that paper was the value of conservation physiology in elucidating the ‘cause and effect’ that underpinned environmental impacts on organisms. This definition was taxon neutral, but there was little formal consideration of plants.

11In the same year, in a ‘conservation in practice’ paper focused on Pacific salmon, adopted the definition of, but showed that physiological knowledge has already been used not only to document problems, but also to generate management models to predict how organisms will respond to change, and to develop and test conservation strategies to generate desirable conservation outcomes (e.g. increases in population size, enabling sustainable use). A range of other studies has also demonstrated the specific conservation and management utility of physiological knowledge (e.g.;;;; ). Collectively, these examples show that conservation physiology can do more than document problems and elucidate mechanisms, which although important, are not always enough to assist population recovery. also noted that although conservation physiology is typically focused on anthropogenic stressors, rarely do stressors act alone, and stressors such as diseases can be moderated by human activities, consistent with ideas presented by. revised the previous definitions as follows: ‘We consider conservation physiology to be an applied subdiscipline within ecophysiology and define conservation physiology as the study of physiological responses of organisms to environmental changes and human-induced impacts, and their implications for population and ecosystem dynamics’. Their refined definition explicitly recognized that natural variations in the environment may alter the response of organisms to human impacts. A similar consideration also exists in the field of toxicology, where prior exposure to a toxicant can alter subsequent exposures, e.g. the induction of metallothionein-binding proteins in blood and detoxification enzymes in the liver. They also expanded the definition beyond population declines to ecosystem processes and emphasized scaling from physiological effects to community and ecosystem processes, though missing the overlap with macrophysiology. The authors noted that ‘conservation’ included conservation of biodiversity as well as the management of exploited living resources (presumably in a sustainable manner; ). used marine fish as a case study, but their definition certainly did not exclude plants. However, like previous definitions, they did not focus on the need for this science to solve conservation problems.

12As evident from these previous definitions, the concept of ‘conservation physiology’ has evolved. We have reviewed the strengths and weaknesses of the previous definitions and considered additional properties required to embody the actual and potential capabilities of conservation physiology, as follows: Taxonomic inclusiveness.Interpretation of ‘physiology’ in the broadest sense to include functions and mechanisms at all scales, from the cellular to the organismal, to the community, ecosystem, and biosphere.Interpretation of ‘conservation’ in the broadest sense to include conservation of biodiversity as well as the sustainable management of biological resources.Inclusion of work not only on declines in populations of species of concern, but also on the broad range of problems facing conservation and management, e.g. how to control invasive species, how to maintain habitat, and how to manage fragmented and degraded systems.Recognition of the need to scale from physiological mechanisms and processes to the levels of interest to conservation practitioners (e.g. populations, species, communities, ecosystems).Focusing not only on the documentation and clarification of conservation problems, but also on identification and refinement of solutions.Extending from the core of basic knowledge to improve understanding and inform decision-making in a number of ways, such as incorporation of knowledge into models and other decision-support tools.Integration with the wide range of scientific sub-disciplines for maximal power and understanding.

13Taxonomic inclusiveness.

14Interpretation of ‘physiology’ in the broadest sense to include functions and mechanisms at all scales, from the cellular to the organismal, to the community, ecosystem, and biosphere.

15Interpretation of ‘conservation’ in the broadest sense to include conservation of biodiversity as well as the sustainable management of biological resources.

16Inclusion of work not only on declines in populations of species of concern, but also on the broad range of problems facing conservation and management, e.g. how to control invasive species, how to maintain habitat, and how to manage fragmented and degraded systems.

17Recognition of the need to scale from physiological mechanisms and processes to the levels of interest to conservation practitioners (e.g. populations, species, communities, ecosystems).

18Focusing not only on the documentation and clarification of conservation problems, but also on identification and refinement of solutions.

19Extending from the core of basic knowledge to improve understanding and inform decision-making in a number of ways, such as incorporation of knowledge into models and other decision-support tools.

20Integration with the wide range of scientific sub-disciplines for maximal power and understanding.

21Taking all these elements on board, we arrived at the definition of conservation physiology that is the epigraph of this paper. Consistent with this definition, we have outlined a series of topics that exemplify what conservation physiology encompasses (Box 1).

The need for conservation science

22From the days of Aldo Leopold (1920–40s) and his promotion of the land ethic (in A Sand County Almanac) and wildlife management (in Game Management) to Rachel Carson's candid assessment of the effects of pesticides on birds, the fate of the natural world and the recognition that we need to take better care of it and even attempt to repair the damage done has become a prevailing societal paradigm. How to do so, of course, remains a considerable challenge given increasing demands on the natural world. The global human population continues to expand rapidly, as does demand for resources. The human population has already doubled in the lifetime of one of the authors and is expected to exceed 9 billion by 2050. However, population size is not the sole problem, because affluence (or consumption) and technology also influence the relationship between humans and the environment. The actions and inactions of humans (e.g.; ) have led to widespread disturbance and environmental change, from local to global scales. In some cases, conservation problems have arisen from intensively managed and exploited species (e.g. Atlantic cod), such that what was once a management issue has since become a conservation problem. However, at the same time excellent targeted conservation actions have brought species back from the brink of extinction, fuelling optimism that the future of conservation is less bleak once we understand the mechanistic connections between and within organisms.

23Although human impact on the environment can be measured in many ways, loss of biodiversity is commonly understood to be important. Biodiversity, in its most simple form, is the variety (at all scales) of life on earth, and is by most accounts in decline. A recent report revealed that despite some local successes, and considerable efforts to slow the decline, the rate of biodiversity loss is not slowing. Amphibians, freshwater fish, and tropical forests, as well as their resident biota, show particularly high rates of biodiversity loss and extinction. Loss of biodiversity is often first noted as declines in population sizes, a common metric used for regional, national, and international threat levels. Population declines are pervasive, with examples in nearly every region and taxon (e.g. sea grasses,; coral reefs, ). Vertebrate imperilment status (as measured by the IUCN Red List) continues to be dire, although the deterioration in species status would have been worse in the absence of conservation efforts. Alarmingly, declines in the abundance of species and the loss of biodiversity have direct and indirect effects on human well-being. Although there is some debate regarding the ecosystem consequences of biodiversity loss (e.g. ), in general it is recognized that there is real potential to alter ecosystem properties and the goods and services they provide to society. Effective conservation of biodiversity is essential for human survival and the maintenance of ecosystem processes and services. Understanding the influences of anthropogenic disturbance and variation in habitat quality on organism condition, health and survivalProviding a mechanistic/functional understanding of the effect of anthropogenic environmental change on organisms; using physiological knowledge to develop mechanistic models for species distributionsEvaluating stress responsiveness and environmental tolerances relative to environmental change (including global climate change and ocean acidification)Developing mechanistic relationships between population declines and physiological processesUnderstanding the relevance of acclimatization and adaptation of physiological processes to environmental variation (e.g. studies of thermal adaptation among populations and species) to management and conservationUnderstanding the physiological mechanisms involved in changes in community, ecosystem and landscape structure, as well as individual species, in response to environmental changeApplications of contemporary genomic and post-genomic technologies to conservation physiologyIntegration of physiology with conservation behaviour, conservation medicine, conservation toxicology, conservation genetics, and other relevant sub-disciplines (Table 1)Understanding the relevance of ecology and evolution of physiological diversity to conservationExploiting knowledge of organismal physiology to control invasive species and restore threatened habitats and populationsUnderstanding the optimal environmental conditions for ex situ preservation of endangered species (captive breeding, seed bank protocols for storage and regeneration, tissue culture for plant species or genotypes that are difficult to regenerate from seeds)Evaluating and improving the success of various management and conservation interventionsApplying physiological biomarkers as part of long-term environmental monitoring programmsDeveloping predictive models in conservation practices that include physiological parametersIntegrating physiological knowledge into ecosystem management and development of tools to solve complex conservation problemsUnderstanding the policy implications of conservation physiology research

24Understanding the influences of anthropogenic disturbance and variation in habitat quality on organism condition, health and survival

25Providing a mechanistic/functional understanding of the effect of anthropogenic environmental change on organisms; using physiological knowledge to develop mechanistic models for species distributions

26Evaluating stress responsiveness and environmental tolerances relative to environmental change (including global climate change and ocean acidification)

27Developing mechanistic relationships between population declines and physiological processes

28Understanding the relevance of acclimatization and adaptation of physiological processes to environmental variation (e.g. studies of thermal adaptation among populations and species) to management and conservation

29Understanding the physiological mechanisms involved in changes in community, ecosystem and landscape structure, as well as individual species, in response to environmental change

30Applications of contemporary genomic and post-genomic technologies to conservation physiology

31Integration of physiology with conservation behaviour, conservation medicine, conservation toxicology, conservation genetics, and other relevant sub-disciplines (Table 1)

32Understanding the relevance of ecology and evolution of physiological diversity to conservation

33Exploiting knowledge of organismal physiology to control invasive species and restore threatened habitats and populations

34Understanding the optimal environmental conditions for ex situ preservation of endangered species (captive breeding, seed bank protocols for storage and regeneration, tissue culture for plant species or genotypes that are difficult to regenerate from seeds)

35Evaluating and improving the success of various management and conservation interventions

36Applying physiological biomarkers as part of long-term environmental monitoring programms

37Developing predictive models in conservation practices that include physiological parameters

38Integrating physiological knowledge into ecosystem management and development of tools to solve complex conservation problems

39Understanding the policy implications of conservation physiology research

40In the 1980s, scientists such as Michael Soulé began to consider the need for a new multi-disciplinary field dedicated to the science of scarcity and diversity. Conservation biology was born, with a focus on providing principles and tools for preserving biological diversity. The field matured and evolved, and eventually adopted an even more holistic perspective and moniker (i.e. conservation science). This field contributed new approaches to conservation practice, such as conceptual frameworks (e.g.;,; ) for scientists to provide information relevant to conservation practitioners (e.g. managers, policy-makers). The recognition grew that evidence, rather than anecdote, was essential for meaningful conservation action, and especially to move beyond arbitrary or ad hoc approaches.

41Within the sphere of conservation science several sub-disciplines have emerged, including conservation genetics, conservation medicine, and conservation social science (see Table 1). Many of these sub-disciplines have become recognized specialty areas in their own right, beyond their integration within the broader realm of conservation science. All of these sub-disciplines are focused on generation of knowledge to understand problems as well as to develop solutions. Indeed, modern conservation science is as much about restoring ecosystems and rebuilding populations (e.g. ) as it is about documenting responses to stressors. The exception, perhaps, is in terms of predicting the future (e.g.;; ) such that it is possible to develop adaptation strategies for environmental change. Clearly, given the multitude of threats facing biodiversity, population persistence, and ecosystem structure and function, conservation science plays an essential role. Likewise, resource management, even of exploited populations, has at its heart conservation and the science behind it (see; note that this was also recognized by ), because management activities were intended to be based on sustainable use within an ecosystemic context. International policy instruments, laws, agreements, and initiatives, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species, and the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and Development Goals, provide institutional guidance for addressing some of the larger-scale conservation issues, although in reality most successes have been based on more localized activities.

The need for conservation physiology

42Conservation physiology is a latecomer relative to the other sub-disciplines that have become trusted and recognized components of conservation science (e.g. conservation genetics, conservation behaviour). While physiology was identified as relevant (see Fig. 1; ) in the early days of conservation biology, one must look quite hard to find even a mention of physiology in any of the introductory conservation biology textbooks (e.g.;;;; ). It is almost as if the relevance of physiology was forgotten or dismissed for some time. evaluated publication trends in conservation science and revealed that most research was focused on species and populations, rather than the broader suite of scales from molecules to ecosystems, demonstrating that physiology was poorly represented within at least key conservation science journals. In the field of ecological restoration, some have even expressed doubt that a general mechanistic approach is necessary at all (e.g. ), while others have vigorously argued that it is essential (e.g.;;; ). We believe that this oversight, intentional or not, reflected the difficulty of easily connecting physiology with its application. With the expanded knowledge in the mechanistic aspects of environmental physiology and environmental toxicology, this is no longer the case. The growth of physiology back towards ecology and application to conservation has been deliberate, albeit perhaps somewhat stealthy.

43Why is conservation physiology needed? In answering this question, we must go beyond the bland statement that linkages between physiology and conservation have become possible. Therefore, more specifically, what does conservation physiology contribute to conservation science, resource management, and policy? In fact, many roles can be outlined for the importance of conservation physiology within the broader sphere of conservation science. These roles can be targeted specifically towards current needs, as recommended by. Indeed, there have been several syntheses that have outlined priority research topics (via horizon scanning and collaborative prioritization exercises) and needs in conservation science in general (see;,,, ), as well as for specific regions (e.g. the UK,; USA,; Canada,; Antarctica, ), taxa (e.g. turtles,; birds,; insects,; pollinators,; metallophytes, ), and pressing problems (e.g. pharmaceuticals in the environment,; coastal and marine management, ). Such research priority documents can be mined to identify potential ways in which conservation physiology can be relevant to practitioners. For example, in the 2012 horizon scan of emerging global conservation issues, listed a number of issues that are in desperate need of mechanistic physiological studies to understand and solve problems (e.g. warming of the deep sea, mining in the deep ocean, climate-driven colonizations in Antarctic waters, increases in pharmaceutical discharges as human populations age, and the potential consequences of graphene on organisms). In addition, a group of physiologists (i.e. ) suggested that physiology had the potential to inform and address a variety of conservation issues and emphasized the need to transform such science into information and tools that other constituencies can process and use. Clearly, there is no shortage of opportunity for the nascent field of conservation physiology.

44It is not possible to review all of the possible applications here, so we refer the reader to other syntheses, including,,, and, as well as to Table 2, for examples of the potential ways in which various research areas within physiology can contribute to plant and animal conservation physiology and conservation science. For all examples provided, a core strength of physiology, i.e. the mechanistic approach, is to identify and confirm cause-and-effect relationships through experimentation. Indeed, suggested that physiologists could be helpful in setting standards for the type of evidence that would constitute compelling proof of a cause-and-effect relationship. Given that physiology moves beyond correlation to seeking causation, it arrives at robust information that would be compelling in legal proceedings, such as are common for conservation and environmental issues (e.g. ), as well as toxicological ones.

45Here we provide a brief overview of key ways in which conservation physiology can contribute in an important manner to conservation science. As noted by, there remain challenges in ensuring that conservation physiology is relevant to policy-makers and conservation practitioners, and thus we aim to demonstrate with concrete examples where successes have been achieved in conservation physiology (see ).

Characterizing physiological diversity, its ecological implications, and importance for conservation

46Physiological diversity is the variation in function and tolerances among individuals, populations, and species, and arises due to a combination of genetic, developmental, and environmental influences. At the most basic level, physiological assessments can identify and characterize functional biodiversity, a necessary requisite to biodiversity conservation. For example, substantial efforts in characterizing physiological diversity in insects (reviewed by ) have revealed that as a consequence of limited upper thermal tolerances and the form of the metabolic rate–temperature relationship, tropical and sub-tropical populations are likely to be much more at risk from changing climates than their more temperate counterparts (;;; Hoffmann et al., in press). Likewise, it appears that responses to changing environments might differ substantially between the hemispheres, and that winter warming may be especially problematic for temperate species. In this respect, point out that the austral marine flora may be more sensitive to global warming than their boreal counterparts. Algal reproduction is extremely sensitive to temperature and, for instance, predicted significant changes, due ocean warming, in coastal community structure associated with the northward shift in the southern boundaries of the major canopy-forming kelps of the genus Laminaria.

47Understanding what such diversity means for the organization and function of ecosystems is also a growing and necessary topic. The recognition that inter-individual variation in physiological diversity can generate intra-population diversity has important implications for conservation (e.g. population reintroduction programmes). Several approaches to explain broad-scale patterns in biodiversity have incorporated elements of physiological diversity (e.g.;; ). As noted by, attempts to derive such relationships between physiological diversity and distribution and/or abundance should be based, where possible, on hypothesis-driven manipulative examinations, not only to document patterns, but also to understand their mechanistic basis. Such examples now exist. For instance, used both ecological and evolutionary physiology to document herpetological diversity along altitudinal gradients in the Andes. Likewise, greater animal diversity at cold seeps vs. hydrothermal vents appears to be related to the greater physiological barriers to invasion of hydrothermal vents. As shown for Hawaiian Plantago species, studies of the physiology of rare plant species within a genus can indicate traits that make them distinctive as conservation priorities, and additionally, reflect their differentiated habitat preferences.

Identifying critical habitats and understanding the consequences of variation in habitat quality

48Habitat is the foundation of functional ecosystems. It is therefore not surprising that many conservation and management efforts relate to identifying and protecting critical habitats from human alteration. Studies of animals have used behavioural information to study their spatial ecology; however, there is increasing interest in documenting the fitness benefits of occupying different habitats and niches, particularly in a bioenergetics context. Niche theory, encompassing both the fundamental niche, where species are able to survive, and the realized niche, where species are actually found, provides a useful framework to examine the influence of abiotic and biotic factors on the distribution of organisms and to predict the impact of environmental change. Physiology plays a fundamental role in setting a fundamental niche, and a secondary role to expressed behaviours in setting a realized niche. Without such physiological knowledge, therefore, niche descriptions become limited. Furthermore, described the concept of ‘energy landscapes’ as a means to consider how animals may make decisions about how they select various habitats or movement paths. Given that landscapes and their constituent habitats vary in composition, such habitats will be of different value to different taxa. In some cases, organisms will be excluded due to environmental thresholds that exceed their tolerances (e.g. light, temperature, moisture), but in other cases organisms may persist in areas of lower habitat quality although they suffer fitness consequences for doing so. Thus, for rare species, as well as for populations of common species at the edge of their ranges, and subject to the influence of climate change, detailed quantification of habitat and physiological responses is necessary. Indeed, advocate ensuring that the nutritional requirements for reptiles are met within protected habitats if they are to benefit reptile conservation. In one study, estuarine habitat quality was evaluated using fish condition as a proxy. Conservation physiology can also be used to inform habitat-related management actions. For example, evaluated energy use in endangered salmon during their spawning migration in different reaches of a regulated river to identify areas where energy use was elevated and thus could represent areas in need of restoration as well as to inform minimal flows. In a unique case, information on the thermal physiology of an endangered Australian snake was used to predict its critical habitat needs from a thermoregulatory perspective. Given that protecting all habitats is unrealistic, physiological tools could be useful for identifying areas that are functionally (rather than structurally) important and that serve as critical habitats.

Predicting how organisms will respond to environmental change

49Changes in the abiotic environment affect the physiology of organisms at multiple levels, which is problematic given the level of anthropogenically mediated environmental change currently underway. From ocean acidification to global climate change and from the Arctic to the Amazon, we need to predict how organisms will respond to such changes. suggested that increased growth and competitive ability of non-calcareous marine macroalgae, alongside negative impacts of acidification on calcifying species, could have major implications for the functioning of coastal reef systems at elevated CO2 concentrations. Studies on microalgae, with their short generation times, have provided insights regarding adaptive responses to global change (see ). Human ‘adaptation’ or adjustments to resource availability and risk are necessary to protect livelihoods. The perceived importance of environmental change and the associated motivation for human response depends largely on the rate and magnitude of environmental change and the projected degree to which humans will be affected. Physiological approaches can be used in experimental tests of the response of individual organisms to different types of environmental change (individual and multiple stressors), thereby enabling predictions for future environmental scenarios. For example, used aerobic scope models and biotelemetry data to predict the success of spawning migrations relative to warming river conditions. Phenotypic plasticity enables the persistence of organisms within a species across a range of environmental conditions to a point; however, it is understood that there is also a limit to physiological compensation for environmental variability such that if conditions exceed the tolerances or capacities of a species, it will be extirpated from a given location. As reviewed by and, compensatory responses occur at different time scales, including between generations (genetic adaptation) and during development (developmental plasticity) so that phenotypes are matched to prevailing environmental conditions, and within the adult lifespan as reversible plasticity (acclimation and acclimatization; ). Individual physiological acclimatization capacity will define the winners and losers relative to different types and extents of environmental change which will be driven. Also relevant are the suite of options available to humans in order to respond to environmental change, something that could be clarified by conservation physiology (e.g. which species are likely to be capable of surviving in a given environment and should we attempt to introduce them to replace the function of species that are extirpated?). In some cases, knowledge of how organisms respond to environmental change could help to identify potential mitigation strategies.

Identifying the sources and consequences of different stressors on organisms

50Disturbance is pervasive as a result of human activities. Physiological tools can be used to identify the sources and consequences of stressors on plants and animals. Of particular importance is the ability to identify thresholds which either do not elicit stress or which do so at a level that is not maladaptive. Novel ways now exist to assess stress without having to handle animals repeatedly (e.g. use of faecal glucocorticoid monitoring, biotelemetry, and biologging) in large part due to a desire to apply such measurements to conservation problems. Two of the earliest of such studies on vertebrates showed that logging and snowmobile activity can increase glucocorticoid stress hormone release in Spotted Owl and elk (Cervus canadensis), respectively, and these discoveries assisted with reserve zoning to restrict such activity in some areas. Similar work has occurred with a range of other taxa and in response to a variety of other stressors (e.g. fisheries interactions, ecotourism, urbanization, aircraft noise). Physiological knowledge has also been used to identify regulatory thresholds for various pollutants for plants (e.g. ) and animals. Another important aspect of such work has been to identify how stress responses vary relative to differences in habitat quality (e.g.; ), as well as determining when and how such stressors affect fitness and population-level processes (for discussion see ). Various stressors also have the potential to promote or mediate disease development and, given high-profile problems such as chytrid fungus and amphibians, conservation physiology approaches are being used to understand disease dynamics. With human populations expected to continue to grow and our footprint to expand, it is certain that organisms will face more disturbance and pollutants in the future.

Understanding reproductive physiology to inform ex situ conservation activities

51Ex situ conservation activities related to highly endangered species remain important safeguards for plants and animals. In many ways, such efforts represent the last resort and are undesirable in that they are resource intensive and expensive, not to mention that there are limitations with such programmes (see ). However, there have been some remarkable successes, and in many of those instances, success has occurred because of a strong understanding of the reproductive biology of the organism (e.g.; ). In fact, much of the earliest work in conservation physiology was directly related to reproduction (see ). In vertebrates, knowledge of endocrine function is typically exploited to monitor and manipulate the reproductive state of captive animals (e.g.;; ). In the field of stress physiology and environmental toxicology, the interactions of cortisol and estrogen mimics are well documented at the physiological and biochemical levels, e.g. sex reversal of fishes by estrogen mimics. Although many of these efforts are directly related to understanding reproductive function and how to manage and maximize reproductive output, other elements of physiology have proved to be valuable. For example, understanding the nutritional physiology of organisms is key when feeding animals in captivity, to ensure that they have the necessary energy and nutrients to engage in reproduction and produce viable offspring (e.g.; ). Also important is minimizing stress during captivity and translocation of animals (e.g.; ) and ensuring that the appropriate environmental conditions are provided. For plants, knowledge of seed dormancy has enabled the development of seed storage for germplasm conservation, and knowledge of habitat requirements and plant–animal interactions continues to improve the outlook for preserving species from extinction and restoring ecosystems.

Informing the selection of various conservation actions

52Conservation practitioners, resource managers and policy-makers often make decisions regarding conservation actions to undertake in order to address given objectives. They are often guided by various plans (e.g. conservation plans, recovery plans, wildlife management plans, forest management plans; ) and the suite of options available to them is ideally based on scientific evidence. In addition, actions are ideally implemented in an active, adaptive way such that monitoring will lead to revision of plans and refinement of actions as appropriate. Conservation physiology can be used as an integral part of such monitoring programmes (see below; ), and furthermore, to assist the identification of actions likely to be most successful. For example, bycatch reduction strategies for sea turtles have benefited greatly from knowledge of sensory physiology (e.g. to develop repellents; ). In addition, physiological knowledge has been useful in elucidating the chemical ecology of natural enemies, herbivores, and host plants such that biological control programme efforts can focus on the most successful strategy. In general, however, physiology is perhaps most useful in parameterizing ecological and management models to support decision-making. For example, describe how various models (e.g. population models, individual-based models, species distribution models, and mass- or energy-balanced models) can incorporate information on the relationship between physiology and the environment to inform management actions. As part of a risk assessment, used species-distribution models populated with physiological data to assess the invasion potential of buffel grass in Mexico to inform management actions related to preventing such an invasion. Likewise, used degree-day information for flowering plant species being transported to Antarctica, along with explicit information on visitor numbers and current and future climates to predict areas of most risk for the establishment of invasive alien species. These assessments are now directing conservation management in the region. emphasized the need for ecophysiological experiments to improve the precision of such models. As modelling techniques become more sophisticated, physiology will play an important role in ensuring that these decision-support tools are appropriately parameterized and calibrated through careful experimentation.

Evaluating and improving the success of various conservation interventions

53One of the strengths of conservation physiology is its ability to provide objective scientific information to permit evaluation of the extent to which various conservation and management activities are successful. For example, restoration of degraded habitats is a common conservation action that is presumed to have benefits at a variety of biological levels. Traditional measures of community structure to assess success can be slow to respond to changes and often take longer than the period for which monitoring is set to occur (if any monitoring at all; ). Physiological tools can be used to understand whether there are individual-level benefits associated with restoration (e.g. reduced stress, improved growth, or nutritional condition) on a shorter time frame. For example, contrasted the response of two eucalypts to seasonal drought at restored sites and determined that although the plants were in the same functional group, they responded differently to resource limitation. Success of restoration plans can be improved by using physiological knowledge about environmental thresholds of different species to identify the types of species or which populations (usually plants) might be likely to succeed, particularly in highly degraded sites (e.g.; ). Translocation of animals is another conservation strategy that has benefited from physiological knowledge. Research has revealed the best practices for relocating wildlife (e.g. ) and plants (e.g. ), while minimizing stress and maximizing survival. Conversely, a recent ecosystem-level decision by the salmon-farming industry in British Columbia, Canada voluntarily to relocate salmon net pens away from the migration path of juvenile Pacific salmon during the migration window was based in part on physiological studies of swimming and osmoregulatory performance of pink salmon that characterized the critical role of fish size in tolerating parasitic sea lice.

Conclusion

54To date, various definitions of conservation physiology have existed, but all possessed limitations. In particular, some were not sufficiently inclusive in recognizing the role and full potential of conservation physiology. Here, we have refined the definition of conservation physiology by reflecting on past definitions and identifying the key requirements of the definition. As a result, the definition we have generated is, in many ways, an integration of previous definitions. Moreover, the definition was generated by a diverse authorship team covering plants and animals (from insects to vertebrates), as well as different topical expertise. To reiterate, conservation physiology is an integrative scientific discipline applying physiological concepts, tools, and knowledge to characterizing biological diversity and its ecological implications; understanding and predicting how organisms, populations, and ecosystems respond to environmental change and stressors; and solving conservation problems across the broad range of taxa, including microbes, plants, and animals. Physiology is considered in the broadest possible terms to include functional and mechanistic responses at all scales, and conservation includes the development and refinement of strategies to rebuild populations, restore ecosystems, inform conservation policy, generate decision-support tools, and manage natural resources.

55We are confident that this new definition will be embraced by the broader scientific community. However, when dealing with biodiversity crises, and in the face of immense management and policy challenges, we recognize that action is more important than the definition. We hope, therefore, that the new definition and journal will galvanize further action. Conservation physiology is certainly needed, and it has great potential to be effective by broadly contributing to conservation science in many ways (; Box 1). In addition, given that physiology embraces a variety of topical sub-disciplines and types of expertise (Table 2), there are many ways in which physiology can contribute. We cannot possibly identify all of the ways in which conservation physiology is needed, but the examples that we provide here represent ways in which tangible and rapid progress can be made (see ). Indeed, it is our view that the creativity of those working on conservation physiology will identify new ways in which it can become even more relevant to conservation practitioners. Moreover, because of the ability of conservation physiology to generate cause-and-effect relationships, we anticipate a rapid expansion of its use in support of evidence-based conservation. Indeed, evidence-based conservation is likely to run a parallel course to that taken by medical science, where mechanistic experimentation is currently the primary way in which the evidence base is established.

56For conservation science to reach its full potential will require true integration, which means that physiologists will need to collaborate with scientists with other expertise (i.e. integration; ), as well as directly with conservation practitioners. The success of conservation science requires building on strengths and foundations of existing sub-disciplines, both basic and applied; physiology certainly provides such a foundation.

References 282

1.
Adams SM Ham KD (2011 ) Application of biochemical and physiological indicators for assessing recovery of fish populations in a disturbed stream. Environ Manage 47: 1047–1063.
Not in our library10.1007/s00267-010-9599-7 (opens in a new tab)
2.
Adger WN Arnell NW Tompkins EL (2005 ) Successful adaptation to climate change across scales. Environ Change 15: 77–86.
Not in our library
3.
Aguirre AA Ostfeld RS Tabor GM House C Pearl MC (eds) (2002 ) Conservation Medicine: Ecological Health in Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
Not in our library
4.
Aleric KM Kirkman LK (2005 ) Growth and photosynthetic responses of the federally endangered shrub, Lindera melissifolia (Lauraceae), to varied light environments. Am J Bot 92: 682–689.
Not in our library10.3732/ajb.92.4.682 (opens in a new tab)
5.
Amara R Selleslagh J Billon G Minier C (2009 ) Growth and condition of 0-group European flounder, Platichthysflesus as indicator of estuarine habitat quality. Hydrobiologia 627: 87–98.
Not in our library
6.
Anderson JP Badruzsaufari E Schenk PM Manners JM Desmond OJ Ehlert C Maclean DJ Ebert PR Kazan K (2004 ) Antagonistic interaction between abscisic acid and jasmonate-ethylene signaling pathways modulates defense gene expression and disease resistance in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 16: 3460–3479.
Not in our library10.1105/tpc.104.025833 (opens in a new tab)
7.
Andrewartha HG Birch LC (1954 ) The Distribution and Abundance of Animals. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Not in our library
8.
Anonymous (1968 ) Editorial statement. Biol Conserv 1: 1–3.
Not in our library
9.
Aplet GH Laven RD Fiedler PL (1992 ) The relevance of conservation biology to natural resource management. Conserv Biol 6: 298–300.
Not in our library
10.
Arriaga L Moreno E Alarcón J (2004 ) Potential ecological distribution of alien invasive species and risk assessment: a case study of buffel grass in arid regions of Mexico. Conserv Biol 18: 1504–1514.
Not in our library
11.
Arrow K Dasgupta P Goulder L Daily G Ehrlich P Heal G Levin S Maler K-G Schneider S Starrett D Walker B (2004 ) Are we consuming too much? J Econ Perspect 18: 147–172.
Not in our library
12.
Balmford A Mace GM Leader WN (2002 ) Designing the ark: setting priorities for captive breeding. Conserv Biol 10: 719–727.
Not in our library
13.
Balmford A Cowling RM (2006 ) Fusion or failure? The future of conservation biology. Conserv Biol 20: 692–695.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00434.x (opens in a new tab)
14.
Beardall J Beer S Raven JA (1998 ) Biodiversity of marine plants in an era of climate change: some predictions on the basis of physiological performance. Botanica Marina 41: 113–123.
Not in our library
15.
Beissinger SR (1990 ) On the limits and directions of conservation biology. BioScience 40: 456–457.
Not in our library
16.
Beissinger SR Westphal MI (1998 ) On the use of demographic models of population viability in endangered species management. J Wildl Manage 62: 821–841.
Not in our library
17.
Bellard C Bertelsmeier C Leadley P Thuiller W Courchamp F (2012 ) Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecol Lett 15: 365–377.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x (opens in a new tab)
18.
Blaustein AR Gervasi SS Johnson PT Hoverman JT Belden LK Bradley PW Xie GY (2012 ) Ecophysiology meets conservation: understanding the role of disease in amphibian population declines. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 367: 1688–1707.
Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2012.0011 (opens in a new tab)
19.
Bonner FT (1990 ) Storage of seeds: potential and limitations for germplasm conservation. For Ecol Manage 35: 35–43.
Not in our library
20.
Bott S Cantrill JG Myers OE Jr (2003 ) Place and the promise of conservation psychology. Hum Ecol Rev 10: 100–112.
Not in our library
21.
Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in the Environment: What Are the Big Questions? · 2012
No notice
22.
Brauner CJ Sackville M Gallagher Z Tang S Nendick L Farrell AP (2012 ) Physiological consequences of the salmon louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis) on juvenile pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha): implications for wild salmon ecology and management, and for salmon aquaculture. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 367: 1770–1779.
Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2011.0423 (opens in a new tab)
23.
Breeman AM (1990 ) Expected effects of changing seawater temperatures on the geographic distribution of seaweed species. In JJ Beukema WJ Wolff JJ Brounseds WM, eds, Expected Effects of Climate Change on Marine Coastal Ecosystems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 69–76.
Not in our library
24.
Brosius JP (2006 ) Common ground between anthropology and conservation biology. Conserv Biol 20: 683–685.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00463.x (opens in a new tab)
25.
Brown JL (2000 ) Reproductive endocrine monitoring of elephants: an essential tool for assisting captive management. Zoo Biol 19: 347–367.
Not in our library
26.
Brudvig LA (2011 ) The restoration of biodiversity: where has research been and where does it need to go? Am J Bot 98: 549–558.
Not in our library10.3732/ajb.1000285 (opens in a new tab)
27.
Buchholz R (2007 ) Behavioural biology: an effective and relevant conservation tool. Trends Ecol Evol 22: 401–407.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2007.06.002 (opens in a new tab)
28.
Buckley LB Waaser SA MacLean HJ Fox R (2011 ) Does including physiology improve species distribution model predictions of responses to recent climate change? Ecology 12: 2214–2221.
Not in our library10.1890/11-0066.1 (opens in a new tab)
29.
Buckley LB Hurlbert AH Jetz W (2012 ) Broad-scale ecological implications of ectothermy and endothermy in changing environments. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 21: 873–885.
Not in our library
30.
Busch DS Hayward LS (2009 ) Stress in a conservation context: a discussion of glucocorticoid actions and how levels change with conservation-relevant variables. Biol Conserv 142: 2844–2853.
Not in our library
31.
Butchart SH Walpole M Collen B van Strien A Scharlemann JP Almond REA Baillie JEM Bomhard B Brown C Bruno J (2010 ) Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328: 1164–1168.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1187512 (opens in a new tab)
32.
Cabin RJ (2007 ) Science-driven restoration: a square grid on a round earth? Res Ecol 15: 1–7.
Not in our library
33.
Callicott JB (1991 ) Conservation ethics and fishery management. Fisheries 16: 22–28.
Not in our library
34.
Callicott JB (2005 ) Whither conservation ethics? Conserv Biol 4: 15–20.
Not in our library
35.
Carey C (2005 ) How physiological methods and concepts can be useful in conservation biology. Integr Comp Biol 45: 4–11.
Not in our library10.1093/icb/45.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
36.
Caro T (1999 ) The behaviour–conservation interface. Trends Ecol Evol 14: 366–369.
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5347(99)01663-8 (opens in a new tab)
37.
Cayot LC Oftedal OT (1996 ) The importance of nutrition in rearing programs for Galapagos land iguanas and giant tortoises. In Desert Tortoise Council, eds, Proceedings of the Annual Desert Tortoise Council Symposium. Desert Tortoise Council, Las Vegas, pp 51–53.
Not in our library
38.
Cheaib A Badeau V Boe J Chuine I Delire C Dufrêne E Francois C Gritti ES Legay M Pagé C (2012 ) Climate change impacts on tree ranges: model intercomparison facilitates understanding and quantification of uncertainty. Ecol Lett 15: 533–544.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1461-0248.2012.01764.x (opens in a new tab)
39.
Adaptation, Plasticity, and Extinction in a Changing Environment: Towards a Predictive Theory · 2010
No notice
40.
Chown SL Addo-Bediako A Gaston KJ (2002 ) Physiological variation in insects: large-scale patterns and their implications. Comp Biochem Physiol B Biochem Mol Biol 131: 587–602.
Not in our library10.1016/s1096-4959(02)00017-9 (opens in a new tab)
41.
Chown SL Gaston KJ Robinson D (2004a ) Macrophysiology: large-scale patterns in physiological traits and their ecological implications. Funct Ecol 18: 159–167.
Not in our library
42.
Hemispheric asymmetries in biodiversity--a serious matter for ecology. · 2004
Not checked
43.
Chown SL Terblanche JS (2007 ) Physiological diversity in insects: ecological and evolutionary contexts. Adv Insect Phys 33: 50–152.
Not in our library10.1016/s0065-2806(06)33002-0 (opens in a new tab)
44.
Chown SL Gaston KJ (2008 ) Macrophysiology for a changing world. Proc Biol Sci 275: 1469–1478.
Not in our library10.1098/rspb.2008.0137 (opens in a new tab)
45.
Chown SL (2012 ) Biotic interactions modify the effects of oxygen on insect gigantism. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109: 10745–10746.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1207931109 (opens in a new tab)
46.
Chown SL Lee JE Hugh KA Barnes J Barret PJ Bergstrom DM Convey P Cowan DA Crosbie K Dyer G (2012a ) Challenges to the future conservation of the Antarctic. Science 337: 158–159.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1222821 (opens in a new tab)
47.
Chown SL Huiskes AHL Gremmen NJM Lee JE Terauds A Crosbie K Frenot Y Hughes KA Imura S Kiefer K (2012b ) Continent-wide risk assessment for the establishment of nonindigenous species in Antarctica. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109: 4938–4943.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1119787109 (opens in a new tab)
48.
Clusella-Trullas S Blackburn T Chown SL (2011 ) Climatic predictors of temperature performance curve parameters in ectotherms imply complex responses to climate change. Am Nat 177: 738–751.
Not in our library10.1086/660021 (opens in a new tab)
49.
Cockrem JF (2005 ) Conservation and behavioral neuroendocrinology. Horm Behav 48: 492–501.
Not in our library10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.03.008 (opens in a new tab)
50.
Cohen JI Williams JT Plucknett DL Shands H (1991 ) Ex situ conservation of plant genetic resources: global development and environmental concerns. Science 253: 866–872.
Not in our library10.1126/science.253.5022.866 (opens in a new tab)
51.
Cook WC (1924 ) The distribution of the pale western cutworm, Porosagrotis orthogonia Morr: a study in physical ecology. Ecology 5: 60–69.
Not in our library
52.
Cooke SJ Suski CD (2008 ) Ecological restoration and physiology: an overdue integration. BioScience 58: 957–968.
Not in our library
53.
Cooke SJ O'Connor CM (2010 ) Making conservation physiology relevant to policy makers and conservation practitioners. Conserv Lett 3: 159–166.
Not in our library
54.
Cooke SJ Hinch SG Donaldson MR Clark TD Eliason EJ Crossin GT Raby GD Jeffries KM Lapointe M Miller K (2012 ) Conservation physiology in practice: how physiological knowledge has improved our ability to sustainably manage Pacific salmon during up-river migration. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 367: 1757–1769.
Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2012.0022 (opens in a new tab)
55.
Costanza R (1991 ) Ecological Economics: The Science and Management of Sustainability. Columbia University Press, Chichester.
Not in our library
56.
Creel S Fox JE Hardy A Sands J Garrott B Peterson RO (2002 ) Snowmobile activity and glucocorticoid stress responses in wolves and elk. Conserv Biol 16: 809–814.
Not in our library
57.
Crossland MR Haramura T Salim AA Capon RJ Shine R (2012 ) Exploiting intraspecific competitive mechanisms to control invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina). Proc Biol Sci 279: 3436–3442.
Not in our library10.1098/rspb.2012.0821 (opens in a new tab)
58.
Das P Samantaray S Rout GR (1997 ) Studies on cadmium toxicity in plants: a review. Environ Pollut 98: 29–36.
Not in our library10.1016/s0269-7491(97)00110-3 (opens in a new tab)
59.
Dawson TP Jackson ST House JI Prentice IC Mace GM (2011 ) Beyond predictions: biodiversity conservation in a changing climate. Science 332: 53–58.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1200303 (opens in a new tab)
60.
Deem SL Kilbourn AM Wolfe ND Cook RA Karesh WB (2000 ) Conservation medicine. Ann N Y Acad Sci 916: 370–377.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb05315.x (opens in a new tab)
61.
Deem SL Karesh WB Weisman W (2001 ) Putting theory into practice: wildlife health in conservation. Conserv Biol 15: 1224–1233.
Not in our library
62.
De Klemm C Shine C (1993 ) Biological Diversity Conservation and the Law: Legal Mechanisms for Conserving Species and Ecosystems No. 29. World Conservation Union, Nairobi.
Not in our library
63.
Deutsch CA Tewksbury JJ Huey RB Sheldon KS Ghalambor CK Haak DC Martin PR (2008 ) Impacts of climate warming on terrestrial ectotherms across latitude. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105: 6668–6672.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0709472105 (opens in a new tab)
64.
Biodiversity Loss Threatens Human Well-Being · 2006
No notice
65.
Dickens MJ Earle KA Romero LM (2009 ) Initial transference of wild birds to captivity alters stress physiology. Gen Comp Endocrinol 160: 76–83.
Not in our library10.1016/j.ygcen.2008.10.023 (opens in a new tab)
66.
Dickens MJ Delehanty DJ Romero LM (2010 ) Stress: an inevitable component of animal translocation. Biol Conserv 143: 1329–1341.
Not in our library
67.
Dicks LV Abrahams A Atkinson J Biesmeijer J Bourn N Brown C Brown MJF Carvell C Connolly C Cresswell JE (2013 ) Identifying key knowledge needs for evidence-based conservation of wild insect pollinators: a collaborative cross-sectoral exercise. Insect Conservation and Diversity doi:10.1111/j.1752-4598.2012.00221.x.
Not in our library
68.
Dillon ME Wang G Huey RB (2010 ) Global metabolic impacts of recent climate warming. Nature 467: 704–708.
Not in our library10.1038/nature09407 (opens in a new tab)
69.
Dirzo R Raven PH (2003 ) Global state of biodiversity and loss. Annu Rev Environ Resour 28: 137–167.
Not in our library
70.
Dobson AP Bradshaw AD Baker AÁ (1997 ) Hopes for the future: restoration ecology and conservation biology. Science 277: 515–522.
Not in our library
71.
Duarte H Tejedo M Katzenberger M Marangoni F Baldo D Beltrán JF Martí DA Richter-Boix A Gonzalez-Voyer A (2012 ) Can amphibians take the heat? Vulnerability to climate warming in subtropical and temperate larval amphibian communities. Global Change Biology 18: 412–421.
Not in our library
72.
Dunbar-Co S Sporck MJ Sack L (2009 ) Leaf trait diversification and design in seven rare taxa of the Hawaiian Plantago radiation. Int J Plant Sci 170: 61–75.
Not in our library
73.
Edwards EJ (2006 ) Correlated evolution of stem and leaf hydraulic traits in Pereskia (Cactaceae). New Phytol 172: 479–789.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01850.x (opens in a new tab)
74.
Ehleringer JR Sandquist DR (2006 ) Ecophysiological constraints on plant responses in a restoration setting. In Falk DA Palmer M Zedler JB, eds, Foundations of Restoration Ecology. Island Press, New York, pp 42–58.
Not in our library
75.
Ehrlich PR Ehrlich AH (1970 ) Population, Resources, Environment: Issues in Human Ecology. WH Freeman & Co. Ltd, San Francisco, p 383.
Not in our library
76.
Eliason EJ Clark TD Hague MJ Hanson LM Gallagher ZS Jeffries KM Gale MK Patterson DA Hinch SG Farrell AP (2011 ) Differences in thermal tolerance among sockeye salmon populations. Science 332: 109–112.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1199158 (opens in a new tab)
77.
Ellen RF (1998 ) Indigenous knowledge of the rainforest: perception, extraction and conservation. In Maloney BK, editor, Human Activities and the Tropical Rainforest. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 87–99.
Not in our library
78.
Ellis RD McWhorter TJ Maron M (2012 ) Integrating landscape ecology and conservation physiology. Landsc Ecol 27: 1–12.
Not in our library
79.
Farrell AP Hinch SG Cooke SJ Patterson DA Crossin GT Lapointe M Mathes MT (2008 ) Pacific salmon in hot water: applying aerobic scope models and biotelemetry to predict the success of spawning migrations. Physiol Biochem Zool 81: 697–709.
Not in our library10.1086/592057 (opens in a new tab)
80.
Farrell AP Eliason EJ Sandblom E Clark TD (2009 ) Fish cardiorespiratory physiology in an era of climate change. Can J Zool 87: 835–851.
Not in our library
81.
Fazey I Fischer J Lindenmayer DB (2005 ) What do conservation biologists publish? Biol Conserv 124: 63–73.
Not in our library
82.
Feder ME (1987 ) The analysis of physiological diversity: the prospects for pattern documentation and general questions in ecological physiology. In Feder ME Bennet AF Burggren WW, eds, New Directions in Ecological Physiology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 38–75.
Not in our library
83.
Fleishman E Blockstein DE Hall JA Mascia MB Rudd MA Scott JM Sutherland WJ Bartuska AM Brown AG Christen CA (2011 ) Top 40 priorities for science to inform US conservation and management policy. BioScience 61: 290–300.
Not in our library
84.
Foley JA DeFries R Asner GP Barford C Bonan G Carpenter SR Chaplin FS Coe MT Daily GC Gibbs HK (2005 ) Global consequences of land use. Science 309: 570–574.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1111772 (opens in a new tab)
85.
Frankham R (1995 ) Conservation genetics. Annu Rev Genet 29: 305–327.
Not in our library10.1146/annurev.ge.29.120195.001513 (opens in a new tab)
86.
Frankham R Ballou JD Briscoe DA (2002 ) Introduction to Conservation Genetics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Not in our library
87.
Franklin CE (2009 ) Conservation physiology: assessing and forecasting the responses of organisms to environmental change. In Annual Meeting of the Society for Experimental Biology, London Vol 153, S56–S56.
Not in our library
88.
Franklin CE Seebacher F (editors) (2012 ) Conservation physiology: integrating physiological mechanisms with ecology and evolution to predict responses of organisms to environmental change. Philos Trans R Soc 367: 1605–1779.
Not in our library
89.
Fry FEJ (1947 ) Effects of the Environment on Animal Activity. University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
Not in our library
90.
Garland T Jr Carter PA (1994 ) Evolutionary physiology. Annu Rev Physiol 56: 579–621.
Not in our library10.1146/annurev.ph.56.030194.003051 (opens in a new tab)
91.
Gaston KJ (2003 ) The Structure and Dynamics of Geographic Ranges. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Not in our library
92.
Gaston KJ Chown SL Calosi P Bernardo J Bilton DT Clarke A Clusella-Trullas S Ghalambor CK Konarzewski M Peck LS (2009 ) Macrophysiology: a conceptual reunification. Am Nat 174: 595–612.
Not in our library10.1086/605982 (opens in a new tab)
93.
Giardina CP Litton CM Thaxton JM Cordell S Hadway LJ Sandquist DR (2007 ) Science driven restoration: a candle in a demon haunted world—response to Cabin (2007). Res Ecol 15: 171–176.
Not in our library
94.
Gillson L Dawson TP Jack S McGeoch MA (2013 ) Accommodating climate change contingencies in conservation strategy. Trends Ecol Evol, doi:10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.008.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.008 (opens in a new tab)
95.
Gnaiger E (1992 ) Commentary. J Evol Biol 5: 161–167.
Not in our library
96.
Godefroid S Piazza C Rossi G Buord S Stevens AD Aguraiuja R Cowell C Weekley CW Vogg G Iriondo JM (2011 ) How successful are plant species reintroductions? Biol Conserv 144: 672–682.
Not in our library
97.
Goudie AS (2005 ) The Human Impact on the Natural Environment: Past, Present, and Future. Wiley-Blackwell, New York.
Not in our library
98.
Groom MJ Meffe GK Carroll CR (2006 ) Principles of Conservation Biology. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, pp 174–251.
Not in our library
99.
Groves CR Jensen DB Valutis LL Redford KH Shaffer ML Scott JM Baumgartner JV Higgins JV Beck MW Anderson MG (2002 ) Planning for biodiversity conservation: putting conservation science into practice. BioScience 52: 499–512.
Not in our library
100.
Grumbine RE (2002 ) What is ecosystem management? Conserv Biol 8: 27–38.
Not in our library
101.
Gutzwiller KJ (2002 ) Applying Landscape Ecology in Biological Conservation. Springer, New York.
Not in our library
102.
Hagen AN Hodges KE (2006 ) Resolving critical habitat designation failures: reconciling law, policy, and biology. Conserv Biol 20: 399–407.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00320.x (opens in a new tab)
103.
Hamann M Godfrey MH Seminoff JA Arthur K Barata PCR Bjorndal KA Bolten AB Broderick AC Campbell LM Carreras C (2010 ) Global research priorities for sea turtles: informing management and conservation in the 21st century. Endang Species Res 11: 245–269.
Not in our library
104.
Hansen LJ Johnson ML (1999 ) Conservation and toxicology: integrating the disciplines. Conserv Biol 13: 1225–1227.
Not in our library
105.
Hansen LJ Johnson ML (2009 ) Conservation and toxicology: the need to integrate the disciplines. Environ Toxicol Chem 18: 2121–2122.
Not in our library10.1002/etc.5620181001 (opens in a new tab)
106.
Hanski I von Hertzen L Fyhrquist N Koskinen K Kaisa T Laatikainen T Karisola P Auvinen P Paulin L Mäkelä MJ (2012 ) Environmental biodiversity, human microbiota, and allergy are interrelated. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109: 8334–8339.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1205624109 (opens in a new tab)
107.
Hansson L Angelstam P (1991 ) Landscape ecology as a theoretical basis for nature conservation. Landsc Ecol 5: 191–201.
Not in our library
108.
Hartmann T (1996 ) Diversity and variability of plant secondary metabolism: a mechanistic view. Entomol Exp Appl 80: 177–188.
Not in our library
109.
Hasler CT Cooke SJ Hinch SG Guimond E Donaldson MR Mossop B Patterson DA (2012 ) Thermal biology and bioenergetics of different upriver migration strategies in a stock of summer-run Chinook salmon. J Therm Biol 37: 265–272.
Not in our library
110.
Hawthorne WD Sheil D Agyeman VK Abu JM Marshall CAM (2012 ) Logging scars in Ghanaian high forest: towards improved models for sustainable production. For Ecol Manage 271: 27–36.
Not in our library
111.
Hedrick PW (2001 ) Conservation genetics: where are we now? Trends Ecol Evol 16: 629–636.
Not in our library
112.
Hegland SJ Nielsen A Lázaro A Bjerknes AL Totland Ø (2008 ) How does climate warming affect plant-pollinator interactions? Ecol Lett 12: 184–195.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01269.x (opens in a new tab)
113.
Hepburn CD Pritchard DW Cornwall CE McLeod RJ Beardall J Raven JA Hurd CL (2011 ) Diversity of carbon use strategies in a kelp forest community. A window to a high CO2 ocean? Global Change Biology 17: 2488–2497.
Not in our library
114.
Hildebrandt TB Hermes R Walzer C Sós E Molnar V Mezösi L Schnorrenberg A Silinski S Streich J Schwarzenberger F Göritz F (2007 ) Artificial insemination in the anoestrous and the postpartum white rhinoceros using GnRH analogue to induce ovulation. Theriogenology 67: 1473–1484.
Not in our library10.1016/j.theriogenology.2007.03.005 (opens in a new tab)
115.
Hobbs R (1997 ) Future landscapes and the future of landscape ecology. Landsc Urban Plan 37: 1–9.
Not in our library
116.
Hobbs RJ Harris JA (2001 ) Restoration ecology: repairing the earth's ecosystems in the new millennium. Res Ecol 9: 239–246.
Not in our library
117.
Hochachka PW Somero GN (2002 ) Biochemical Adaptation: Mechanism and Process in Physiological Evolution. Oxford University Press, New York.
Not in our library
118.
Hof C Araújo MB Jetz W Rahbek C (2011 ) Additive threats from pathogens, climate and land-use change for global amphibian diversity. Nature 480: 516–519.
Not in our library10.1038/nature10650 (opens in a new tab)
119.
Hoffmann AA Parsons PA (1997 ) Extreme Environmental Change and Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Not in our library
120.
Hoffmann AA Sgrò CM (2011 ) Climate change and evolutionary adaptation. Nature 470: 479–485.
Not in our library10.1038/nature09670 (opens in a new tab)
121.
Hoffmann AA Chown SL Clusella Trullas S (in press) Upper thermal limits in terrestrial ectotherms: how constrained are they? Funct Ecol, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2435.2012.02036.x.
Not in our library
122.
Hoffman AS Heemeyer JL Williams PJ Robb JR Karns DR Kinney VC Engrecht NJ Lannoo MJ (2010 ) Strong site fidelity and a variety of imaging techniques reveal around-the-clock and extended activity patterns in Crawfish Frogs (Lithobates areolatus). BioScience 60: 829–834.
Not in our library
123.
Holt RD (2009 ) Bringing the Hutchinsonian niche into the 21st century: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 19659–19665.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0905137106 (opens in a new tab)
124.
Holt WV Pickard AR Rodger JC Wildt DE, (eds) (2003 ) Reproductive Science and Integrated Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Not in our library
125.
Homyack JA (2010 ) Evaluating habitat quality of vertebrates using conservation physiology tools. Wildl Res 37: 332–342.
Not in our library
126.
Hooper DU Adair EC Cardinale BJ Byrnes JE Hungate BA Matulich KL Gonzalez A Duffy JE Gamfeldt L O'Connor MI (2012 ) A global synthesis reveals biodiversity loss as a major driver of ecosystem change. Nature 486: 105–108.
Not in our library10.1038/nature11118 (opens in a new tab)
127.
Houston D Mcinnes K Elliott G Eason D Moorhouse R Cockrem J (2007 ) The use of a nutritional supplement to improve egg production in the endangered kakapo. Biol Conserv 138: 248–255.
Not in our library
128.
Huey RB (1991 ) Physiological consequences of habitat selection. Am Nat 137: 91–115.
Not in our library
129.
Huey RB Deutsch CA Tewksbury JJ Vitt LJ Hertz PE Pérez ÃHJ Garland T (2009 ) Why tropical forest lizards are vulnerable to climate warming. Proc R Soc B 276: 1939–1948.
Not in our library10.1098/rspb.2008.1957 (opens in a new tab)
130.
Huey RB Kearney MR Krockenberger A Holtum JAM Jess M Williams SE (2012 ) Predicting organismal vulnerability to climate warming: roles of behaviour, physiology and adaptation. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 367: 1665–1679.
Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2012.0005 (opens in a new tab)
131.
Hunter ML Gibbs JP (2006 ) Fundamentals of Conservation Biology. Wiley-Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.
Not in our library
132.
Hutchings JA Myers RA (1994 ) What can be learned from the collapse of a renewable resource? Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua, of Newfoundland and Labrador. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 51: 2126–2146.
Not in our library
133.
Hutchinson GE (1957 ) Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 22: 415–427.
Not in our library
134.
Jackson RD (1986 ) Remote sensing of biotic and abiotic plant stress. Annu Rev Phytopathol 24: 265–287.
Not in our library
135.
Jacobson SK Duff MD (1998 ) Training idiot savants: the lack of human dimensions in conservation biology. Conserv Biol 12: 263–267.
Not in our library
136.
Jobling S Nolan M Tyler CR Brighty G Sumpter JP (1998 ) Widespread sexual disruption in wild fish. Environ Sci Technol 32: 2498–2506.
Not in our library
137.
Kaufman AJ Adams R Cox LJ (2006 ) A tropical paradise: native Hawaiians and visitors to Hawaii landscape perception of aesthetic qualities of the urban forest and natural landscapes of Hawaii. In: XXVII International Horticultural Congress-IHC2006: International Symposium on Horticultural Practices and Therapy for Human, Vol 775, pp. 131–137.
Not in our library
138.
Kearney M Porter WP (2004 ) Mapping the fundamental niche: physiology, climate, and the distribution of a nocturnal lizard. Ecology 85: 3119–3131.
Not in our library
139.
Kellermann V Overgaard J Hoffmann AA Flojgaard C Svenning JC Loeschcke V (2012 ) Upper thermal limits of Drosophila are linked to species distributions and strongly constrained phylogenetically. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109: 16228–16233.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1207553109 (opens in a new tab)
140.
Khan ZR James DG Midega CA Pickett JA (2008 ) Chemical ecology and conservation biological control. Biol Control 45: 210–224.
Not in our library
141.
Kharouba HM McCune JL Thuiller W Huntley B (2012 ) Do ecological differences between taxonomic groups influence the relationship between species' distributions and climate? A global meta-analysis using species distribution models. Ecography doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07683.x
Not in our library
142.
Kramer AT Havens K (2009 ) Plant conservation genetics in a changing world. Trends Plant Sci 14: 599–607.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tplants.2009.08.005 (opens in a new tab)
143.
Lambers H Chapin FS Pons TL (2008 ) Plant Physiological Ecology, Ed 2 Springer, New York.
Not in our library
144.
Larcher W (2003 ) Physiological Plant Ecology, Ed 4 Springer, Berlin.
Not in our library
145.
Lawler JJ Aukema JE Grant JB Halpern BS Kareiva P Nelson CR Olden K Schlaepfer MA Silliman BR Zaradic P (2006 ) Conservation science: a 20-year report card. Front Ecol Environ 4: 473–480.
Not in our library
146.
Lindenmayer D Burgman M (2005 ) Practical Conservation Biology. CSIRO publishing, Collingwood.
Not in our library
147.
Liu P Yang YS Xu G Hao C (2006 ) Physiological response of rare and endangered seven-son-flower (Heptacodium miconioides) to light stress under habitat fragmentation. Environ Exp Bot 57: 32–40.
Not in our library
148.
Lohbeck KT Riebesell U Reusch TBH (2012 ) Adaptive evolution of a key phytoplankton species to ocean acidification. Nat Geosci 5: 346–351.
Not in our library
149.
Ludwig D Hilborn R Walters C (1993 ) Uncertainty, resource exploitation, and conservation: lessons from history. Science 260: 17–36.
Not in our library10.1126/science.260.5104.17 (opens in a new tab)
150.
Ludwig D Mangel M Haddad B (2001 ) Ecology, conservation, and public policy. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32: 481–517.
Not in our library
151.
Mace GM Collar NJ Gaston KJ Hilton-Taylor C Akçakaya HR Leader-Williams N Milner-Gulland EJ Stuart SN (2008 ) Quantification of extinction risk: IUCN's system for classifying threatened species. Conserv Biol 22: 1424–1442.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01044.x (opens in a new tab)
152.
Maclaurin J Sterelny K (2008 ) What is Biodiversity? University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Not in our library
153.
Magurran AE (2004 ) Measuring Biological Diversity, Ed 2 Blackwell, Oxford.
Not in our library
154.
Margules C Sarkar S (2007 ) Systematic Conservation Planning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Not in our library
155.
Marmiroli N Marmiroli M Maestri E (2006 ) Phytoremediation and phytotechnologies: a review for the present and the future. In Twardowska I Allen HE Häggblom MM, eds, Soil and Water Pollution Monitoring, Protection and Remediation. NATO Science Series, Vol 69, pp 403–416.
Not in our library
156.
Marrs RH Williams CT Frost AJ Plant RA (1989 ) Assessment of the effects of herbicide spray drift on a range of plant species of conservation interest. Environ Pollut 59: 71–86.
Not in our library10.1016/0269-7491(89)90022-5 (opens in a new tab)
157.
Martinet V Thebaud O Doyen L (2007 ) Defining viable recovery paths toward sustainable fisheries. Ecol Econ 64: 411–422.
Not in our library
158.
Martínez-Mota R Valdespino C (2007 ) Effects of forest fragmentation on the physiological stress response of black howler monkeys. Anim Conserv 10: 374–379.
Not in our library
159.
Mascia MB Brosius JP Dobson TA Forbes BC Horowitz L McKean MA Turner NJ (2003 ) Conservation and the social sciences. Conserv Biol 17: 649–650.
Not in our library
160.
McCarthy MA Possingham HP (2007 ) Active adaptive management for conservation. Conserv Biol 21: 956–963.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00677.x (opens in a new tab)
161.
McCormick J (1991 ) Reclaiming Paradise: The Global Environmental Movement, Vol 660 Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
Not in our library
162.
McGeoch MA Chown SL Kalwij JM (2006 ) A global indicator for biological invasion. Conserv Biol 20: 1635–1646.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00579.x (opens in a new tab)
163.
McGeoch MA Spear D Kleynhans EJ Marais E (2012 ) Uncertainty in invasive alien species listing. Ecol Appl 22: 959–971.
Not in our library10.1890/11-1252.1 (opens in a new tab)
164.
Medvigy D Moorcroft PR (2012 ) Predicting ecosystem dynamics at regional scales: an evaluation of a terrestrial biosphere model for the forests of northeastern North America. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 367: 222–235.
Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2011.0253 (opens in a new tab)
165.
Meffe GK Viederman S (1995 ) Combining science and policy in conservation biology. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23: 327–332.
Not in our library
166.
Meffe GK (2001 ) Conservation medicine. Conserv Biol 13: 953–954.
Not in our library
167.
Metcalfe JD Le Quesne WJF Cheung WWL Righton DA (2012 ) Conservation physiology for applied management of marine fish: an overview with perspectives on the role and value of telemetry. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 367: 1746–1756.
Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2012.0017 (opens in a new tab)
168.
Meyer EA Cramp RL Bernal MH Franklin CE (2012 ) Changes in cutaneous microbial abundance with sloughing: possible implications for infection and disease in amphibians. Dis Aquat Organ 101: 235–242.
Not in our library10.3354/dao02523 (opens in a new tab)
169.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005 ) Biodiversity. In Hassan R Scholes R Ash N, eds, Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current State and Trends: Findings of the Condition and Trends Working Group Island Press, Washington, pp 77–122.
Not in our library
170.
Miller KM Li S Kaukinen KH Ginther N Hammill E Curtis JMR Patterson DA Sierocinski T Donnison L Pavlidis P (2011 ) Genomic signatures predict migration and spawning failure in wild Canadian salmon. Science 331: 214–217.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1196901 (opens in a new tab)
171.
Integrated genomics, physiology and breeding approaches for improving drought tolerance in crops · 2012
No notice
172.
Mitchell NJ Kearney MR Nelson NJ Porter WP (2008 ) Predicting the fate of a living fossil: how will global warming affect sex determination and hatching phenology in tuatara? Proc Biol Sci 275: 2185–2193.
Not in our library10.1098/rspb.2008.0438 (opens in a new tab)
173.
Monserrat JM Martínez PE Geracitano LA Amado LL Martins CMG Pinho GLL Chaves IS Ferreira-Cravo M Ventura-Lima J Bianchini A (2007 ) Pollution biomarkers in estuarine animals: critical review and new perspectives. Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol 146: 221–234.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cbpc.2006.08.012 (opens in a new tab)
174.
Morris TL Esler KJ Barger NN Jacobs SM Cramer MD (2011 ) Ecophysiological traits associated with the competitive ability of invasive Australian acacias. Diversity and Distributions 17: 898–910.
Not in our library
175.
Naeem S (2002 ) Ecosystem consequences of biodiversity loss: the evolution of a paradigm. Ecology 83: 1537–1552.
Not in our library
176.
Navas CA (2002 ) Herpetological diversity along Andean elevational gradients: links with physiological ecology and evolutionary physiology. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol 133: 469–485.
Not in our library10.1016/s1095-6433(02)00207-6 (opens in a new tab)
177.
Nicotra AB Leigh A Boyce CK Jones CS Niklas KJ Royer DL Tsukaya H (2011 ) The evolution and functional significance of leaf shape in the angiosperms. Funct Plant Biol 38: 535–552.
Not in our library10.1071/fp11057 (opens in a new tab)
178.
Niinemets Ü Peñuelas J (2008 ) Gardening and urban landscaping: significant players in global change. Trends Plant Sci 13: 60–65.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tplants.2007.11.009 (opens in a new tab)
179.
Nobel PS (1983 ) Biophysical Plant Physiology and Ecology. WH Freeman and Company, New York.
Not in our library
180.
Noss R (2006 ) Is there a special conservation biology? Ecography 22: 113–122.
Not in our library
181.
Oftedal OT Allen ME (1996 ) Nutrition as a major facet of reptile conservation. Zoo Biol 15: 491–497.
Not in our library
182.
Orlove BS Brush SB (1996 ) Anthropology and the conservation of biodiversity. Annu Rev Anthropol 25: 329–352.
Not in our library
183.
Orth RJ Carruthers TJ Dennison WC Duarte CM Fourqurean JW Heck KL Hughes AR Kendrick GA Kenworthy WJ Olyarnik S (2006 ) A global crisis for seagrass ecosystems. Bioscience 56: 987–996.
Not in our library
184.
Ostfeld RS Meffe GK Pearl MC (eds) (2002 ) Conservation medicine: the birth of another crisis discipline. In: Conservation Medicine: Ecological Health in Practice. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 17–26.
Not in our library
185.
Pachepsky E Crawford JW Bown JL Squire G (2001 ) Towards a general theory of biodiversity. Nature 410: 923–926.
Not in our library10.1038/35073563 (opens in a new tab)
186.
Pandolfi JM Bradbury RH Sala E Hughes TP Bjorndal KA Cooke RG McArdle D McClenachan L Newman MJH Paredes G (2003 ) Global trajectories of the long-term decline of coral reef ecosystems. Science 301: 955–958.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1085706 (opens in a new tab)
187.
Parsons PA (1995 ) Evolutionary response to drought stress: conservation implications. Biol Conserv 74: 21–27.
Not in our library
188.
Payne NM (1926 ) The effect of environmental temperatures upon insect freezing points. Ecology 7: 99–106.
Not in our library
189.
Pearson RG Dawson TP (2003 ) Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 12: 361–371.
Not in our library
190.
Pence VC (2010 ) The possibilities and challenges of in vitro methods for plant conservation. Kew Bulletin 65: 539–547.
Not in our library
191.
Pereira HM Ferrier S Walters M Geller GN Jongman RHG Scholes RJ Bruford MW Brummitt N Butchart SHM Cardoso AC (2013 ) Essential biodiversity variables. Science 339: 277–278.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1229931 (opens in a new tab)
192.
Philippart JC (1995 ) Is captive breeding an effective solution for the preservation of endemic species? Biol Conserv 72: 281–295.
Not in our library
193.
Pierce SM Cowling RM Knight AT Lombard AT Rouget M Wolf T (2005 ) Systematic conservation planning products for land-use planning: interpretation for implementation. Biol Conserv 125: 441–458.
Not in our library
194.
Pimm SL van Aarde RJ (2001 ) Population control—African elephants and contraception. Nature 411: 766–766.
Not in our library10.1038/35081154 (opens in a new tab)
195.
Porter WP Tracy CR (1983 ) Biophysical analyses of energetics, time-space utilization, and distributional limits. In Huey RB Pianka E Schoener T, eds, Lizard Ecology: Studies of a Model Organism. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 55–83.
Not in our library
196.
Porter WP Budaraju S Stewart WE Ramankutty N (2000 ) Calculating climate effects on birds and mammals: impacts on biodiversity, conservation, population parameters, and global community structure. Am Zool 40: 597–630.
Not in our library
197.
Pörtner HO (2008 ) Ecosystem effects of ocean acidification in times of ocean warming: a physiologist's view. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 373: 203–217.
Not in our library
198.
Pörtner HO Farrell AP (2008 ) Physiology and climate change. Science 322: 690–692.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1163156 (opens in a new tab)
199.
Pressey RL Cabeza M Watts ME Cowling RM Wilson KA (2007 ) Conservation planning in a changing world. Trends Ecol Evol 22: 583–592.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2007.10.001 (opens in a new tab)
200.
Primack RB (1993 ) Essentials of Conservation Biology, Vol 23 Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.
Not in our library
201.
Primmer CR (2009 ) From conservation genetics to conservation genomics. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1162: 357–368.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04444.x (opens in a new tab)
202.
Prosser CL Brown FA (1950 ) Comparative Animal Physiology. Saunders, Philadelphia.
Not in our library
203.
Prosser CL (1991 ) Comparative Animal Physiology, Ed 4 Wiley-Liss, New York.
Not in our library
204.
Pukazhenthi BS Wildt DE (2004 ) Which reproductive technologies are most relevant to studying, managing and conserving wildlife? Reprod Fertil Dev 16: 33–46.
Not in our library10.10371/rd03076 (opens in a new tab)
205.
Pullin A (2002 ) Conservation Biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Not in our library
206.
Pullin AS Knight TM (2001 ) Effectiveness in conservation practice: pointers from medicine and public health. Conserv Biol 15: 50–54.
Not in our library
207.
Pullin AS Knight TM Stone DA Charman K (2004 ) Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making? Biol Conserv 119: 245–252.
Not in our library
208.
Pywell RF Bullock JM Roy DB Warman LIZ Walker KJ Rothery P (2003 ) Plant traits as predictors of performance in ecological restoration. J Appl Ecol 40: 65–77.
Not in our library
209.
Randall D Burggren W French K (2001 ) Eckert Animal Physiology. WH Freeman & Company, New York.
Not in our library
210.
Rands MR Adams WM Bennun L Butchart SH Clements A Coomes D Entwistle A Hodge I Kapos V Scharlemann JPW (2010 ) Biodiversity conservation: challenges beyond 2010. Science 329: 1298–1303.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1189138 (opens in a new tab)
211.
Raven PH (2004 ) Ex situ Plant Conservation: Supporting Species Survival in the Wild. Guerrant EO Havens K Maunder M, eds. Island Press, Washington.
Not in our library
212.
Ricciardi A Rasmussen JB (2001 ) Extinction rates of North American freshwater fauna. Conserv Biol 13: 1220–1222.
Not in our library
213.
Rice RE Gullison RE Reid JW (1997 ) Can sustainable management save tropical forests? Sci Am 276: 44–49.9148402
Not in our library
214.
Richardson DM Whittaker RJ (2010 ) Conservation biogeography–foundations, concepts and challenges. Diversity and Distributions 16: 313–320.
Not in our library
215.
Ricklefs RE Wikelski M (2002 ) The physiology/life-history nexus. Trends Ecol Evol 17: 462–468.
Not in our library
216.
Robinson JG (2006 ) Conservation biology and real-world conservation. Conserv Biol 20: 658–669.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00469.x (opens in a new tab)
217.
Rodrigues AS Pilgrim JD Lamoreux JF Hoffmann M Brooks TM (2006 ) The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 21: 71–76.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2005.10.010 (opens in a new tab)
218.
Rudd MA Beazley KF Cooke SJ Fleishman E Lane DE Mascia MB Roth R Tabor G Bakker JA Bellefontaine T (2011 ) Generation of priority research questions to inform conservation policy and management at a national level. Conserv Biol 25: 476–484.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01625.x (opens in a new tab)
219.
Rudd MA Lawton RN (2013 ) Scientists' prioritization of global coastal research questions. Marine Policy 39: 101–111.
Not in our library
220.
Ruxton GD Schaefer HM (2012 ) The conservation physiology of seed dispersal. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 367: 1708–1718.
Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2012.0001 (opens in a new tab)
221.
Ryder OA (2005 ) Conservation genomics: applying whole genome studies to species conservation efforts. Cytogenet Genome Res 108: 1–3.
Not in our library10.1159/000080796 (opens in a new tab)
222.
Sacharov NL (1930 ) Studies in cold resistance in insects. Ecology 11: 505–517.
Not in our library
223.
Saint Jalme M (2002 ) Endangered avian species captive propagation: an overview of functions and techniques. Avian and Poultry Biology Reviews 13: 187–202.
Not in our library
224.
Salafsky N Margoluis R Redford KH Robinson JG (2002 ) Improving the practice of conservation: a conceptual framework and research agenda for conservation science. Conserv Biol 16: 1469–1479.
Not in our library
225.
Sanz V Grajal A (1998 ) Successful reintroduction of captive-raised yellow-shouldered Amazon parrots on Margarita Island, Venezuela. Conserv Biol 12: 430–441.
Not in our library
226.
Sarasan V Cripps R Ramsay MM Atherton C McMichen M Prendergast G Rowntree JK (2006 ) Conservation in vitro of threatened plants-progress in the past decade. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 42: 206–214.
Not in our library
227.
Saunders CD (2003 ) The emerging field of conservation psychology. Hum Ecol Rev 10: 137–149.
Not in our library
228.
Schwartz MW Brigham CA Hoeksema JD Lyons KG Mills MH Van Mantgem PJ (2000 ) Linking biodiversity to ecosystem function: implications for conservation ecology. Oecologia 122: 297–305.
Not in our library10.1007/s004420050035 (opens in a new tab)
229.
Schwarzenberger F (2007 ) The many uses of non-invasive faecal steroid monitoring in zoo and wildlife species. International Zoo Yearbook 41: 52–74.
Not in our library
230.
Seebacher F Franklin CE (2012 ) Determining environmental causes of biological effects: the need for a mechanistic physiological dimension in conservation biology. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 367: 1607–1614.
Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2012.0036 (opens in a new tab)
231.
Shelford VE (1911 ) Physiological animal geography. J Morphol 22: 551–618.
Not in our library
232.
Simberloff D (1988 ) The contribution of population and community biology to conservation science. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 19: 473–511.
Not in our library
233.
Simberloff DS Abele LG (1976 ) Island biogeography theory and conservation practice. Science 191: 285–286.
Not in our library10.1126/science.191.4224.285 (opens in a new tab)
234.
Smit B Wandel J (2006 ) Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Glob Environ Change 16: 282–292.
Not in our library
235.
Smithers J Smit B (1997 ) Human adaptation to climatic variability and change. Glob Environ Change 7: 129–146.
Not in our library
236.
Snyder NF Derrickson SR Beissinger SR Wiley JW Smith TB Toone WD Miller B (2002 ) Limitations of captive breeding in endangered species recovery. Conserv Biol 10: 338–348.
Not in our library
237.
Sodhi NS Butler R Laurance WF Gibson L (2011 ) Conservation successes at micro-, meso- and macroscales. Trends Ecol Evol 26: 585–594.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2011.07.002 (opens in a new tab)
238.
Somero GN (2010 ) The physiology of climate change: how potentials for acclimatization and genetic adaptation will determine ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. J Exp Biol 213: 912–920.
Not in our library10.1242/jeb.037473 (opens in a new tab)
239.
Soulé ME (1985 ) What is conservation biology? BioScience 35: 727–734.
Not in our library
240.
Soulé ME (1986 ) Conservation Biology. The Science of Scarcity and Diversity. Sinauer Associates Inc, Sunderland.
Not in our library
241.
Soulé ME Orians GH (eds) (2001 ) Conservation Biology: Research Priorities for the Next Decade. Island Press, Washington, p 328.
Not in our library
242.
Southwood A Fritsches K Brill R Swimmer Y (2008 ) Sound, chemical, and light detection in sea turtles and pelagic fishes: sensory-based approaches to bycatch reduction in longline fisheries. Endang Species Res 5: 225–238.
Not in our library
243.
Spicer JI Gaston KJ (1999 ) Physiological Diversity and its Ecological Implications. Blackwell Science, Oxford.
Not in our library
244.
Stevenson RD Tuberty SR deFur PL Wingfield JC (2005 ) EcoPhysiology and conservation: the contribution of endocrinology and immunology– introduction to the symposium. Integr Comp Biol 45: 1–3.
Not in our library10.1093/icb/45.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
245.
Stevenson RD (2006 ) Ecophysiology and conservation: the contribution of energetics—introduction to the symposium. Integr Comp Biol 46: 1088–1092.
Not in our library10.1093/icb/icl053 (opens in a new tab)
246.
Stewart AJ (2012 ) Where to next? The future of insect conservation. In New TR, ed, Insect Conservation: Past, Present and Prospects. pp 403–417.
Not in our library
247.
Stuart SN Chanson JS Cox NA Young BE Rodrigues AS Fischman DL Waller RW (2004 ) Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 306: 1783–1786.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1103538 (opens in a new tab)
248.
Sutherland WJ (1998 ) The importance of behavioural studies in conservation biology. Anim Behav 56: 801–809.
Not in our library10.1006/anbe.1998.0896 (opens in a new tab)
249.
Sutherland WJ Pullin AS Dolman PM Knight TM (2004 ) The need for evidence-based conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 19: 305–308.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.018 (opens in a new tab)
250.
Sutherland WJ Armstrong-Brown S Armsworth PR Brereton T Brickland J Campbell CD Chamberlain DE Cooke AI Dulvy NK Dusic NR (2006 ) The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK. J Appl Ecol 43: 617–627.
Not in our library
251.
Sutherland WJ Adams WM Aronson RB Aveling R Blackburn TM Broad S Ceballos G Côté IM Cowling RM Da Fonseca GAB (2009 ) One hundred questions of importance to the conservation of global biological diversity. Conserv Biol 23: 557–567.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01212.x (opens in a new tab)
252.
Sutherland WJ Bardsley S Clout M Depledge MH Dicks LV Fellman L Fleishman E Gibbons DW Keim B Lickorish F (2010 ) A horizon scan of global conservation issues for 2010. Trends Ecol Evol 2: 1–7.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.022 (opens in a new tab)
253.
Sutherland WJ Bardsley S Bennun L Clout M Côté IM Depledge MH Dicks LV Dobson AP Fellman L Fleishman E (2011 ) Horizon scan of global conservation issues for 2011. Trends Ecol Evol 26: 10–16.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2010.11.002 (opens in a new tab)
254.
Sutherland WJ Alves JA Amano T Chang CH Davidson NC Finlayson CM Gill JA Gill REG González PM Gunnarsson TG (2012 ) A horizon scanning assessment of current and potential future threats to migratory shorebirds. IBIS 154: 663–679.
Not in our library
255.
Szota C Farrell C Koch JM Lambers H Veneklaas EJ (2011 ) Contrasting physiological responses of two co-occurring eucalypts to seasonal drought at restored bauxite mine sites. Tree Physiol 31: 1052–1066.
Not in our library10.1093/treephys/tpr085 (opens in a new tab)
256.
Tabor GM (2002 ) Defining conservation medicine. In Aguirre AA, ed, Conservation Medicine. Ecological Health in Practice. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 8–16.
Not in our library
257.
Taiz L Zeiger E (1991 ) Plant Physiology. The Benjamim/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc, San Francisco.
Not in our library
258.
Thuiller W Albert C Araújo MB Berry PM Cabeza M Guisan A Hickler T Midgley GF Paterson J Schurr FM (2008 ) Predicting global change impacts on plant species' distributions: future challenges. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 9: 137–152.
Not in our library
259.
Tracy CR Flack KM Zimmerman LC Espinoza RE Tracy CR (2005 ) Herbivory imposes constraints on voluntary hypothermia in lizards. Copeia 2005: 12–19.
Not in our library
260.
Tracy CR Nussear KE Esque TC Dean-Bradley K Tracy CR DeFalco LA Castle KT Zimmerman LC Espinoza RE Barber AM (2006 ) The importance of physiological ecology in conservation biology. Integr Comp Biol 46: 1191–1205.
Not in our library10.1093/icb/icl054 (opens in a new tab)
261.
Tsukimura B Carey HV Padilla DK (2010 ) Workshop on the implementation of the Grand Challenges. Integr Comp Biol 50: 945–947.
Not in our library10.1093/icb/icq138 (opens in a new tab)
262.
Tu M Hurd C Randall JM (2001 ) Weed Control Methods Handbook. The Nature Conservancy. http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu
Not in our library
263.
Turnipseed M Knick KE Lipcius RN Dreyer J Van Dover CL (2003 ) Diversity in mussel beds at deep-sea hydrothermal vents and cold seeps. Ecol Lett 6: 518–523.
Not in our library
264.
Valladares F Gianoli E (2007 ) How much ecology do we need to know to restore Mediterranean ecosystems? Res Ecol 15: 363–368.
Not in our library
265.
Vance RR Ambrose RF Anderson SS MacNeil S McPherson T Beers I Keeney TW (2003 ) Effects of sewage sludge on the growth of potted salt marsh plants exposed to natural tidal inundation. Res Ecol 11: 155–167.
Not in our library
266.
Vitousek PM Walker LR (1989 ) Biological invasion by Myrica faya in Hawai'i: plant demography, nitrogen fixation, ecosystem effects. Ecol Monogr 59: 247–265.
Not in our library
267.
Vitousek PM (1994 ) Beyond global warming: ecology and global change. Ecology 75: 1861–1876.
Not in our library
268.
Vitousek PM Mooney HA Lubchenco J Melillo JM (1997 ) Human domination of Earth's ecosystems. Science 277: 494–499.
Not in our library
269.
Wagner CM Jones ML Twohey MB Sorensen PW (2006 ) A field test verifies that pheromones can be useful for sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) control in the Great Lakes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 63: 475–479.
Not in our library
270.
Warren A Goldsmith FB (1983 ) Conservation in Perspective. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Not in our library
271.
Wasser SK Bevis K King G Hanson E (1997 ) Noninvasive physiological measures of disturbance in the northern spotted owl. Conserv Biol 11: 1019–1022.
Not in our library
272.
Webb JK Shine R (1998 ) Using thermal ecology to predict retreat-site selection by an endangered snake species. Biol Conserv 86: 233–242.
Not in our library
273.
Whiting SN Reeves RD Richards D Johnson MS Cooke JA Malaisse F Paton A Smith JAC Angle JS Chaney RL (2004 ) Research priorities for conservation of metallophyte biodiversity and their potential for restoration and site remediation. Res Ecol 12: 106–116.
Not in our library
274.
Wikelski M Cooke SJ (2006 ) Conservation physiology. Trends Ecol Evol 21: 38–46.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2005.10.018 (opens in a new tab)
275.
Williams CM Hellmann J Sinclair BJ (2012 ) Lepidopteran species differ in susceptibility to winter warming. Climate Research 53: 119–130.
Not in our library
276.
Wilson RP Quintana F Hobson VJ (2012 ) Construction of energy landscapes can clarify the movement and distribution of foraging animals. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 279: 975–980.
Not in our library10.1098/rspb.2011.1544 (opens in a new tab)
277.
Wilson RS Franklin CE (2002 ) Testing the beneficial acclimation hypothesis. Trends Ecol Evol 17: 66–70.
Not in our library
278.
Wood CM Farrell AP Brauner CJ (2012a ) Fish Physiology: Homeostasis and Toxicology of Essential Metals. Fish Physiology series, Vol 31A Academic Press, Waltham.
Not in our library
279.
Wood CM Farrell AP Brauner CJ (2012b ) Fish Physiology: Homeostasis and Toxicology of Non-Essential Metals. Fish Physiology series, Vol 31B Academic Press, Waltham.
Not in our library
280.
Wright SJ (2005 ) Tropical forests in a changing environment. Trends Ecol Evol 20: 553–560.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tree.2005.07.009 (opens in a new tab)
281.
Young TP (2000 ) Restoration ecology and conservation biology. Biol Conserv 92: 73–83.
Not in our library
282.
Young JL Bornik Z Marcotte M Charlie K Wagner GN Hinch SG Cooke SJ (2006 ) Integrating physiology and life history to improve fisheries management and conservation. Fish and Fisheries 7: 262–283.
Not in our library

Cited by papers we hold 2

Questions about this paper

We email you if it is retracted, withdrawn, corrected or flagged.

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.