Conservation Biology最新文献

{"title":"Effects of expansion of protected areas and habitat transformation on spatiotemporal variation in human-wildlife conflict.","authors":"Yumei Li, Chao Zhang, Huayao Gao, Ming Lu, Yonggang Nie","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14393","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Land-use changes and the expansion of protected areas (PAs) have fostered increased interactions between humans and wildlife, resulting in an escalation of human-wildlife conflict (HWC) globally. However, HWC spatiotemporal pattern variation and its associations with PAs and land-use change remain poorly understood. To address this knowledge gap, we mapped and analyzed HWCs from 1990 to 2022 across China. We comprehensively mapped the spatiotemporal dynamics of HWCs in ArcGIS with data sets stratified by county, year, and species; assessed the impact of PAs through propensity score matching; and analyzed the effects of habitat transformation with linear mixed models. As PA increased from 0 to 20,000 km², the likelihood of HWCs initially increased (50%) before declining (20%). Conversely, as the distance from a PA grew, the likelihood of HWC gradually decreased (0 beyond 65 km). There was a temporal lag between the establishment of a PA and the occurrence of HWC. Habitat loss catalyzed HWCs, whereas decreased levels of habitat fragmentation sometimes initially caused a temporary increase in HWCs. In general, the distribution of PAs greatly affected HWC occurrence, and habitat loss and fragmentation were critical drivers of HWCs, both of which exhibited time-lagged effects. HWC has become more challenging to address as conservation initiatives have led to significant recovery of the habitats and populations of wild animals. Further measures to address the HWCs are needed to ensure the preservation of animal welfare while fostering the mutually beneficial coexistence of humans and animal species. Finally, our study provides an important starting point for informing future HWC research and conservation planning on a global scale.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14393"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142459909","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Review of ecological valuation and equivalency analysis methods for assessing temperate nearshore submerged aquatic vegetation.","authors":"Rachel E Pausch, Jessica R Hale, Peter Kiffney, Beth Sanderson, Sara Azat, Katie Barnas, W Bryant Chesney, Natalie Cosentino-Manning, Stephanie Ehinger, Dayv Lowry, Steve Marx","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14380","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14380","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nearshore seagrass, kelp, and other macroalgae beds (submerged aquatic vegetation [SAV]) are productive and important ecosystems. Mitigating anthropogenic impacts on these habitats requires tools to quantify their ecological value and the debits and credits of impact and mitigation. To summarize and clarify the state of SAV habitat quantification and available tools, we searched peer-reviewed literature and other agency documents for methods that either assigned ecological value to or calculated equivalencies between impact and mitigation in SAV. Out of 47 tools, there were 11 equivalency methods, 7 of which included a valuation component. The remaining valuation methods were most commonly designed for seagrasses and rocky intertidal macroalgae rather than canopy-forming kelps. Tools were often designed to address specific resource policies and associated habitat evaluation. Frequent categories of tools and methods included those associated with habitat equivalency analyses and those that scored habitats relative to reference or ideal conditions, including models designed for habitat suitability indices and the European Union's Water and Marine Framework Directives. Over 29 tool input metrics spanned 3 spatial scales of SAV: individual shoots or stipes, bed or site, and landscape or region. The most common metric used for both seagrasses and macroalgae was cover. Seagrass tools also often employed density measures, and some categories used measures of tissue content (e.g., carbon, nitrogen). Macroalgal tools for rocky intertidal habitats frequently included species richness or incorporated indicator species to assess habitat. We provide a flowchart for decision-makers to identify representative tools that may apply to their specific management needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14380"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142459911","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Challenges in assessing the effects of environmental governance systems on conservation outcomes.","authors":"Raphael A Ayambire, Trina Rytwinski, Jessica J Taylor, Matthew W Luizza, Matthew J Muir, Cynthia Cadet, Derek Armitage, Nathan J Bennett, Jeremy Brooks, Samantha H Cheng, Jenny Martinez, Meenakshi Nagendran, Siri Öckerman, Shannon N Rivera, Anne Savage, David S Wilkie, Steven J Cooke, Joseph R Bennett","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14392","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Effective governance is crucial for the success of conservation projects aimed at protecting wildlife populations and supporting human well-being. However, few large-scale, comprehensive syntheses have been conducted on the effects of different environmental governance types on conservation outcomes (i.e., biological and ecological effectiveness or effects of conservation on human well-being), and clarity on the quantity and quality of evidence remains dispersed and ambiguous. We attempted a systematic map of the evidence on the effectiveness of different governance types to meet desired conservation outcomes in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. However, early in this effort, we observed a general lack of empirical research on the links between governance and conservation outcomes. To fill observed data gaps in the evidence base, we tried triangulating governance data from alternative sources (Protected Planet database) and pooling evidence from research conducted within the same conservation areas. Limited data were contained in the Protected Planet database, and governance types in conservation areas and landscapes were complex, making it difficult to use these approaches to assign governance types to conservation areas. To illustrate our observations from the failed systematic map attempt, we prepared a rapid evidence map that outlines a subset of the evidence base of articles linking governance types and governance principles with conservation outcomes. Only 3.2% (34 of 1067) of the articles we screened directly related conservation outcomes to governance type, and even fewer related governance principles to conservation outcomes. Based on our findings, we recommend improving the evidence base by supporting empirical research and increasing the availability and quality of governance data in freely accessible databases. These recommendations are critical for enhancing understanding of the role of governance in conservation projects and improving conservation outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14392"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142459907","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Conservation priorities for functionally unique and specialized terrestrial vertebrates threatened by biological invasions.","authors":"Clara Marino, Filipa Coutinho Soares, Céline Bellard","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14401","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Invasive non-native species (INS) continue to pose a significant threat to biodiversity, including native population declines, which can ultimately disrupt ecosystem processes. Although there is growing evidence of the impacts of INS on functional diversity, most of the existing approaches to prioritization of species for conservation still focus on taxonomic diversity, neglecting the ecological role of species. We developed the functionally unique, specialized, and endangered by invasive non-native species (FUSE INS) score to fill this gap by combining functional irreplaceability (i.e., uniqueness and specialization) of species with their extinction risk due to INS. We calculated this score for 3642 terrestrial vertebrates exposed to INS by assessing how INS affected them based on the IUCN Red List and by evaluating their specialization and uniqueness in a multidimensional functional space. Thirty-eight percent of native species were both at high extinction risk because of INS and functionally unique and specialized, making them priority species for INS impact mitigation. Priority species of amphibians concentrated in Central America and Madagascar and of lizards in the Caribbean islands, northern Australia, New Zealand, and New Caledonia. Priority bird and mammal species were more widespread (birds, mostly in coastal areas, on Pacific islands, and in northern India and New Zealand; mammals, in southwestern Europe, Central Africa, East Africa, Southern Africa, Southeast Asia, and eastern Australia). Seventy-eight species were also highly irreplaceable but not yet threatened by INS, suggesting that preventive conservation measures may help protect these species. For the 50 birds of the highest priority, 64% required conservation actions to mitigate the INS threat. The FUSE INS score can be used to help prioritize indigenous species representing large amounts of functional diversity. Incorporating functional diversity into the conservation prioritization of species and associated areas is key to accurately reducing and mitigating the impacts of INS on native biodiversity.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14401"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142459908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Role of low-impact-factor journals in conservation implementation.","authors":"Jonathan J Choi, Leo C Gaskins, Joseph P Morton, Julia A Bingham, Ashley M Blawas, Christine Hayes, Carmen Hoyt, Patrick N Halpin, Brian Silliman","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14391","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14391","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Academic review, promotion, and tenure processes place a premium on frequent publication in high-impact factor (IF) journals. However, conservation often relies on species-specific information that is unlikely to have the broad appeal needed for high-IF journals. Instead, this information is often distributed in low-IF, taxa- and region-specific journals. This suggests a potential mismatch between the incentives for academic researchers and the scientific needs of conservation implementation. To explore this mismatch, we looked at federal implementation of the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA), which requires the use of the \"best available science\" to list a species as endangered or threatened and thus receive powerful legal protections. In assessing the relationship between academic sources of this \"best available science\" and ESA implementation, we looked at the 13,292 sources (e.g., academic journals, books, reports, regulations, personal communications, etc.) cited by the second Obama administration (2012-2016) across all ESA listings. We compared the IFs of all 4836 journals that published peer-reviewed papers cited in these listings against their citation frequency in ESA listings to determine whether a journal's IF varied in proportion with its contribution to federal conservation. Most of the peer-reviewed academic articles referenced in ESA listings came from low-IF or no-IF journals that tended to focus on specific taxa or regions. Although we support continued attention to cutting-edge, multidisciplinary science for its ability to chart new pathways and paradigms, our findings stress the need to value and fund the taxa- and region-specific science that underpins actionable conservation laws.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14391"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142459912","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Vulnerability of Southern Hemisphere bats to white-nose syndrome based on global analysis of fungal host specificity and cave temperatures.","authors":"Nicholas C Wu, Justin A Welbergen, Tomás Villada-Cadavid, Lindy F Lumsden, Christopher Turbill","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14390","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14390","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>White-nose syndrome (WNS), a disease affecting hibernating bats, is caused by the fungal pathogen Pseudogymnoascus destructans (Pd). Since the initial introduction of Pd from Eurasia to the United States in 2006, WNS has killed millions of bats throughout the temperate parts of North America. There is concern that if Pd is accidentally introduced to the Southern Hemisphere, WNS could pose similar threats to the bat fauna of the Southern Hemisphere's more temperate regions. Efforts are required to better understand the vulnerability of bats globally to WNS. We examined phylogenetic distances among cave roosting bat species globally to estimate the probability of infection by Pd. We predicted cave thermal suitability for Pd for 441 cave-roosting bat species across the globe via spatial analysis. We used host specificity models based on 65 species tested for Pd to determine phylogenetic specificity of Pd. Phylogenetic distance was not an important predictor of Pd infection, confirming that Pd has low host specificity. We found extensive areas (i.e., South America, Africa, and Australia) in the Southern Hemisphere with caves that were suitable for cave-roosting bat species and for Pd growth. Hence, if Pd spreads to the Southern Hemisphere, the risk of exposure is widespread for cave-roosting bats, and infection is possible regardless of relatedness to infected species in the Northern Hemisphere. Predicting the consequences of infection remains difficult due to lack of species-specific information about bat winter biology. Nevertheless, WNS is an important threat to naive Southern Hemisphere bat populations. Hence, biosecurity measures and planning of management responses that can help prevent or minimize a potential WNS outbreak in the Southern Hemisphere are urgently needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14390"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142459915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Strengths and complementarity of systematic conservation planning and key biodiversity area approaches for spatial planning.","authors":"Andy Plumptre, Jack Hayes, Daniele Baisero, Rob Rose, S Holness, Lize von Staden, Robert J Smith","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14400","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14400","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Developing biodiversity-inclusive spatial plans at a national level is the focus of Target 1 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF). There are 2 general approaches to identifying areas of value for biodiversity plans: criteria-based, such as the Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA) process, and systematic conservation planning (SCP) approaches, which apply complementarity to efficiently achieve specific quantitative targets. We examined the benefits of both approaches and considered how the KBA approach can best complement SCP. We reviewed 200 papers articles that applied SCP to real-world data with the Marxan conservation design software. Our review showed that targets for biodiversity elements are poorly selected in many SCP publications, with more than 75% of the studies applying uniform percentage target amounts to planning elements. Uniform targets favor more widespread species and ecosystems that are likely to be more common and less important for conservation. The strengths and complementarities of KBA and SCP approaches were reviewed and we identified the elements from both approaches that should be considered for spatial planning to achieve Target 1 in the KMGBF. In particular, the global approach of KBAs (i.e., identifying sites of global significance for species or ecosystems) better complements SCP, which often has a national or subnational focus. The KMGBF will fail if conservation of globally significant sites is not targeted and these sites are not incorporated in national spatial planning.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14400"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142459913","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Erratum to An assessment of future rewilding potential in the United Kingdom","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14383","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cobi.14383","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Brown, C., Prestele, R., &amp; Rounsevell, M. (2024). An assessment of future rewilding potential in the United Kingdom. <i>Conservation Biology</i>, 38(4), e14276.</p><p>The wrong grant number was provided for one of the projects involved. The correct number for the WildE project is 101081251 (not 895338 as originally published).</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":"38 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cobi.14383","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142342984","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Ability of new protected areas to counteract losses from downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement.","authors":"Yanyun Yan, Song Ling Tan, Edward L Webb, James E M Watson, L Roman Carrasco","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14381","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14381","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Protected area downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement (PADDD) is a common occurrence. Although PADDD is expected to weaken biodiversity protection, PADDD offsets and new unrelated protected areas (PAs) could help restore representation of biodiversity features to the reserve network affected by PADDD. Globally, we analyzed 16 territories with terrestrial PADDD and 4 territories with marine PADDD from 2011 to 2020. Our objective was to evaluate whether PADDD offsets and new PAs could restore the PAs, key biodiversity areas (KBAs), ecoregions, and threatened amphibian, mammal, bird, and reptile species ranges where PADDD had occurred. In our studied territories, offsets of PADDD were rare (enacted in 3 [19%] terrestrial territories and one [25%] marine territory). One territory had PADDD losses that were compensated fully by PADDD offsets in terms of area coverage and ecoregions represented. All other territories failed to achieve compensation goals. In territories affected by PADDD, PADDD offsets and new PAs partially restored area representation (63%) and KBA coverage (57%). However, only 38% of ecoregion representation and 20%, 33%, 31%, and 21% of threatened amphibian, mammal, bird, and reptile representation, respectively, were restored. Overall, we found a large shortfall in PADDD offsets, even when unrelated PAs were included in the calculus. There is an urgent need to expand PADDD offsets and PAs to advance biodiversity conservation and achieve the Global Biodiversity Framework's 30×30 target. Future planning of newly enacted conservation areas needs to prioritize biodiversity conservation and consider the purpose of restoring reserve networks affected by PADDD, rather than solely focusing on areal targets.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14381"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142342983","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Misrepresentation of invasive species in the mass media with images of unrelated organisms","authors":"Mark K. L. Wong","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14382","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cobi.14382","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Public interest in invasive species and their impacts on ecosystems has grown in recent years, fueled not only by coordinated scientific efforts (Roy et al., &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;) but also by international media coverage (Cai, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;; Chung, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;; Greenfield, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;; Regan, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;). Communication theory underscores that the mass media plays a key role in setting agenda and shaping public opinion across diverse societies and cultures (McCombs &amp; Valenzuela, &lt;span&gt;2021&lt;/span&gt;). Accordingly, accurate portrayals of invasive species and biological invasions in print and digital news, magazines, and social media are indispensable for promoting public understanding of these environmental problems as complex socioecological phenomena (Courchamp et al., &lt;span&gt;2017&lt;/span&gt;; Kueffer &amp; Larson, &lt;span&gt;2014&lt;/span&gt;; Larson, &lt;span&gt;2005&lt;/span&gt;). Effective reporting can even boost public support and engagement with management efforts, such as citizen science initiatives for detecting invasive species (Haley et al., &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;; Koen &amp; Newton, &lt;span&gt;2021&lt;/span&gt;). Yet, despite their potential to shape public awareness and opinion, portrayals of invasive species in the mass media remain understudied (but see Ballari &amp; Barrios-García, &lt;span&gt;2022&lt;/span&gt;; Car et al., &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;; Woodworth et al., &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Although some attention has been paid to the tone and language used in media reports on invasive species (Car et al., &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;), another fundamental challenge is ensuring that the images featured accurately portray the species discussed, instead of other unrelated organisms. This is a pertinent issue for reports on invasive species of lesser known and diverse groups, such as numerous invertebrates (Turner et al., &lt;span&gt;2021&lt;/span&gt;; Wong et al., &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;). Problems are especially likely to occur when journalists are only provided with common names and lack access to accurate images of the organisms. This tends to promote the undesirable sourcing of images from stock image repositories, which can contain vast inaccuracies.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Consider recent media coverage on the red imported fire ant (&lt;i&gt;Solenopsis invicta&lt;/i&gt;), one of the world's most damaging and widespread invasive species (Lowe et al., &lt;span&gt;2000&lt;/span&gt;). International news reports from the past year discussing &lt;i&gt;S. invicta&lt;/i&gt; infestations in Australia (Gillespie, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;; Vidler, &lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;), Asia (Khoo, &lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;), and Europe (Heath, &lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;; Knapton, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;; Symons, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;) featured images depicting a variety of other ant species (Figure 1), all of which were incorrectly identified as “fire ant” in the captions. The credits of many images suggested they were sourced from stock image repositories such as iStock (istockphoto.com) and Getty Images (gettyimages.com). When I performed an image search for “&lt;i&gt;red imported fire ant&lt;/i&gt;” on these 2 platfo","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":"38 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cobi.14382","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142248763","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}