Результаты исследований: Научные публикации в периодических изданиях › статья › Рецензирование
Effectiveness of “the IUCN red list of threatened species” application on a regional scale : Current state of the “red data books” of Russia. / Popov, Igor; Fadeeva, Anastasia; Palenova, Elena; Shamilishvily, George; Gorin, Kirill; Burdo, Andrey; Melchakova, Evgenia; Trofimova, Yulia; Sukristik, Viktor; Morova, Nadezhda; Kroo, Ksenia; Kirillova, Yulia.
в: Biological Communications, Том 62, № 1, 01.04.2017, стр. 57-60.Результаты исследований: Научные публикации в периодических изданиях › статья › Рецензирование
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Effectiveness of “the IUCN red list of threatened species” application on a regional scale
T2 - Current state of the “red data books” of Russia
AU - Popov, Igor
AU - Fadeeva, Anastasia
AU - Palenova, Elena
AU - Shamilishvily, George
AU - Gorin, Kirill
AU - Burdo, Andrey
AU - Melchakova, Evgenia
AU - Trofimova, Yulia
AU - Sukristik, Viktor
AU - Morova, Nadezhda
AU - Kroo, Ksenia
AU - Kirillova, Yulia
PY - 2017/4/1
Y1 - 2017/4/1
N2 - Nowadays at least 140 Red Data books or lists are used in Russia. They reflect threatened species of various subdivisions of Russia in addition to all-Russian Red Data book. None of them uses criteria for the species assessment of the modern version of the IUCN list. Non-threatened species had not been included in the Russian red books. Most of species listed in the all-Russian Red Data book (77 %) has not yet been assessed for the IUCN red list. These particularities indicate on the necessity of gap-analysis in the planning of the following work on the IUCN red list keeping. It should focus first of all on revealing of the most urgent objectives, but not on the simple increase of species assessments. Now more than a half of species of “Тhe IUCN red list of threatened species” are not threatened ones, that is why its title does not reflect its contents.
AB - Nowadays at least 140 Red Data books or lists are used in Russia. They reflect threatened species of various subdivisions of Russia in addition to all-Russian Red Data book. None of them uses criteria for the species assessment of the modern version of the IUCN list. Non-threatened species had not been included in the Russian red books. Most of species listed in the all-Russian Red Data book (77 %) has not yet been assessed for the IUCN red list. These particularities indicate on the necessity of gap-analysis in the planning of the following work on the IUCN red list keeping. It should focus first of all on revealing of the most urgent objectives, but not on the simple increase of species assessments. Now more than a half of species of “Тhe IUCN red list of threatened species” are not threatened ones, that is why its title does not reflect its contents.
KW - Methodology
KW - Red Data book
KW - Red list
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050791252&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.21638/11701/spbu03.2017.107
DO - 10.21638/11701/spbu03.2017.107
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85050791252
VL - 62
SP - 57
EP - 60
JO - Biological Communications
JF - Biological Communications
SN - 2542-2154
IS - 1
ER -
ID: 47545603