2018
DOI: 10.1111/jav.01858
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Can genomic variation explain the extinction of the passenger pigeon?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In short, the lack of detail on the reproduction rate, as well as other issues 6 have led to uncertainty in model outputs that attempt to distinguish between the relative roles of direct exploitation (Blockstein and Tordoff 1985) versus habitat destruction (Bucher 1992). While many now agree that both direct and indirect factors played some role in the demise of passenger pigeons (Blockstein 2002), most downplay the importance of habitat destruction, favouring instead to view the extinction process as one driven by the wanton actions of a self-interested commercial hunting and trapping industry that was supported by an ill-informed pubic (e.g., Hedrick 2018;Hume 2015;Hung, et al 2014;Hung, et al 2018;Kasperbauer 2017;Takahashi, et al 2018). Based on the evidence, however, there is yet no resolution on the relative importance of these two variables, and while it seems highly likely that both played important roles, new evidence could help us better understand what processes drove the species to extinction.…”
Section: Extinction Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In short, the lack of detail on the reproduction rate, as well as other issues 6 have led to uncertainty in model outputs that attempt to distinguish between the relative roles of direct exploitation (Blockstein and Tordoff 1985) versus habitat destruction (Bucher 1992). While many now agree that both direct and indirect factors played some role in the demise of passenger pigeons (Blockstein 2002), most downplay the importance of habitat destruction, favouring instead to view the extinction process as one driven by the wanton actions of a self-interested commercial hunting and trapping industry that was supported by an ill-informed pubic (e.g., Hedrick 2018;Hume 2015;Hung, et al 2014;Hung, et al 2018;Kasperbauer 2017;Takahashi, et al 2018). Based on the evidence, however, there is yet no resolution on the relative importance of these two variables, and while it seems highly likely that both played important roles, new evidence could help us better understand what processes drove the species to extinction.…”
Section: Extinction Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the exact extinction dates are debated, the last generally recognized sightings for these five birds were between 1901 and 1988 [30]. Prior authors attributed these extinctions to habitat changes, disease and hunting [31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38], but the long-term demographic trajectories and causes of decline are not agreed upon [39,40]. Whole-genome data indicate that the C. carolinensis did not undergo a strong bottleneck during the Pleistocene [41].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%