Search

Your search keyword '"Al‐Fulaij, Nida"' showing total 15 results
Start Over Author "Al‐Fulaij, Nida"
15 results on '"Al‐Fulaij, Nida"'

1. Funding and delivering the routine testing of management interventions to improve conservation effectiveness

Author

Tinsley-Marshall, Paul, Downey, Harriet, Adum, Gilbert, Al-Fulaij, Nida, Bourn, Nigel A.D., Brotherton, Peter N.M., Frick, Winifred F., Hancock, Mark H., Hellon, Josh, Hudson, Michael A., Kortland, Kenny, Mastro, Kate, McNicol, Catherine M., McPherson, Tom, Mickleburgh, Simon, Moss, James F., Nichols, Christopher P., O'Brien, David, Ockendon, Nancy, Paterson, Stuart, Parks, Danni, Pimm, Stuart L., Schofield, Henry, Simkins, Ashley T., Watuwa, James, Wormald, Kathy, Wilkinson, John, Wilson, Jeremy D., and Sutherland, William J.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. Co‐designing a toolkit for evidence‐based decision making in conservation: Processes and lessons

Author

Smith, Rebecca K., primary, Morgan, William H., additional, Al‐Fulaij, Nida, additional, Amano, Tatsuya, additional, Bowkett, Andrew E., additional, Christie, Alec, additional, Downey, Harriet, additional, Frick, Winifred F., additional, O'Brien, David, additional, Ockendon, Nancy, additional, Oppel, Steffen, additional, Petrovan, Silviu O., additional, Righton, David, additional, Tinsley‐Marshall, Paul, additional, Worthington, Thomas A., additional, and Sutherland, William J., additional

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. Funding evidence‐based conservation

Author

Parks, Danni, primary, Al‐Fulaij, Nida, additional, Brook, Clare, additional, Butchart, Stuart H. M., additional, Collomb, Jean‐Gaël, additional, Cope, David, additional, Dowell, Simon, additional, Falkingham, Becky, additional, Frick, Winifred F., additional, Gibbs, Douglas, additional, Gray, Emily E., additional, Heard, Nicolas, additional, Leventis, Anastasios (Tasso), additional, Mastro, Kate, additional, Meredith, Helen, additional, Mickleburgh, Simon, additional, Miller, Florence, additional, Muir, Matthew, additional, Nuijten, Rascha J. M., additional, Ockendon, Nancy, additional, Owen, Nisha R., additional, Owens, Jacob R., additional, Rodríguez, Jon Paul, additional, Roy, Sugoto, additional, Tully, Elizabeth, additional, and Vié, Jean‐Christophe, additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

10. Agricultural Management and Climatic Change Are the Major Drivers of Biodiversity Change in the UK

Author

Young, Kyle A., Burns, Fiona, Eaton, Mark A., Barlow, Kate E., Beckmann, Björn C., Brereton, Tom, Brooks, David R., Brown, Peter M. J., Al Fulaij, Nida, Gent, Tony, Henderson, Ian, Noble, David G., Parsons, Mark, Powney, Gary D., Roy, Helen E., Stroh, Peter A., Walker, Kevin, Wilkinson, John W., Wotton, Simon R., and Gregory, Richard D.

Subjects
sense organs, skin and connective tissue diseases
Abstract

Action to reduce anthropogenic impact on the environment and species within it will be most effective when targeted towards activities that have the greatest impact on biodiversity. To do this effectively we need to better understand the relative importance of different activities and how they drive changes in species’ populations. Here, we present a novel, flexible framework that reviews evidence for the relative importance of these drivers of change and uses it to explain recent alterations in species’ populations. We review drivers of change across four hundred species sampled from a broad range of taxonomic groups in the UK. We found that species’ population change (~1970–2012) has been most strongly impacted by intensive management of agricultural land and by climatic change. The impact of the former was primarily deleterious, whereas the impact of climatic change to date has been more mixed. Findings were similar across the three major taxonomic groups assessed (insects, vascular plants and vertebrates). In general, the way a habitat was managed had a greater impact than changes in its extent, which accords with the relatively small changes in the areas occupied by different habitats during our study period, compared to substantial changes in habitat management. Of the drivers classified as conservation measures, low-intensity management of agricultural land and habitat creation had the greatest impact. Our framework could be used to assess the relative importance of drivers at a range of scales to better inform our policy and management decisions. Furthermore, by scoring the quality of evidence, this framework helps us identify research gaps and needs.

Published
2016

12. A European monitoring protocol for the stag beetle, a saproxylic flagship species

Author

Campanaro, Alessandro, primary, Zapponi, Livia, additional, Hardersen, Sönke, additional, Méndez, Marcos, additional, Al Fulaij, Nida, additional, Audisio, Paolo, additional, Bardiani, Marco, additional, Carpaneto, Giuseppe M., additional, Corezzola, Serena, additional, Della Rocca, Francesca, additional, Harvey, Deborah, additional, Hawes, Colin, additional, Kadej, Marcin, additional, Karg, Jerzy, additional, Rink, Markus, additional, Smolis, Adrian, additional, Sprecher, Eva, additional, Thomaes, Arno, additional, Toni, Ilaria, additional, Vrezec, Al, additional, Zauli, Agnese, additional, Zilioli, Michele, additional, and Chiari, Stefano, additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

13. Agricultural Management and Climatic Change Are the Major Drivers of Biodiversity Change in the UK

Author

Burns, Fiona, primary, Eaton, Mark A., additional, Barlow, Kate E., additional, Beckmann, Björn C., additional, Brereton, Tom, additional, Brooks, David R., additional, Brown, Peter M. J., additional, Al Fulaij, Nida, additional, Gent, Tony, additional, Henderson, Ian, additional, Noble, David G., additional, Parsons, Mark, additional, Powney, Gary D., additional, Roy, Helen E., additional, Stroh, Peter, additional, Walker, Kevin, additional, Wilkinson, John W., additional, Wotton, Simon R., additional, and Gregory, Richard D., additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

14. Bionomics and distribution of the stag beetle, Lucanus cervus (L) across Europe

Author

Harvey, Deborah J., Gange, Alan C., Hawes, Colin J., Rink, Markus, Abdehalden, Michele, Al Fulaij, Nida, Asp, Therese, Ballerio, Alberto, Bartolozzi, Luca, Brustel, Herve, Cammaerts, Roger, Carpaneto, Guiseppe Maria, Cederberg, Bjorn, Chobot, Karel, Cianferoni, Fabio, Drumont, Alain, Ellwanger, Gotz, Ferreira, Sonia, Grosso-Silva, Jose Manuel, Gueorguiev, Borislav, Harvey, William, Hendriks, Paul, Istrate, Petru, Jansson, Nicklas, Jelaska Šerić, Lucija, Jendek, Eduard, Jović, Miloš, Kervyn, Thierry, Krenn, Harald W., Kretschmer, Klaus, Legakis, Anastasios, Lelo, Suvad, Moretti, Marco, Merkl, Otto, Palma, Rodrigo Megia, Neculiseanu, Zaharia, Rabitsch, Wolfgang, Rodriguez, Santiago Merino, Smit, John T., Smith, Matthew, Sprecher-Uebersax, Eva, Telnov, Dmitry, Thomaes, Arno, Thomsen, Philip F., Tykarski, Piotr, Vrezec, Al, Werner, Sebastian, and Zach, Peter

Subjects
fungi, European distribution, habitat associations, life history characteristics
Abstract

1. The European stag beetle, Lucanus cervus, is thought to be widely distributed across its range, but a detailed description of its occurrence is lacking. 2. Researchers in 41 countries were contacted and information sought on various life history characteristics of the insect. Data on adult body size were collected from seven countries. 3. Habitat associations differ between the United Kingdom and mainland Europe.Larvae are most commonly associated with oak, but the duration of the larval stage and the number of instars varies by up to 100% across Europe. 4. Adult size also varies ; beetles from Spain, Germany, and the Netherlands are larger than those from Belgium or the UK. In the former countries, populations are composed mainly of large individuals, while in the UK, the majority of individuals are relatively small. Allometric relations between mandible size and total body length differ in Germany compared with the rest of Europe. 5. Distribution maps of the insect, split into records pre- and post-1970, from 24 countries are presented. While these inevitably suffer from recorder bias, they indicate that in only two countries, Croatia and Slovakia, does the insect seem to be increasing in range. 6. Our data suggest that the insect may be in decline across Europe, most likely due to habitat loss, and that conservation plans need to be produced that focus on the biology of the insect in the local area.

Published
2011

15. The priority species indicator: measuring the trends in threatened species in the UK

Author

Eaton, Mark A., primary, Burns, Fiona, additional, Isaac, Nick J.B., additional, Gregory, Richard D., additional, August, Tom A., additional, Barlow, Kate E., additional, Brereton, Tom, additional, Brooks, David R., additional, Al Fulaij, Nida, additional, Haysom, Karen A., additional, Noble, David G., additional, Outhwaite, Charlotte, additional, Powney, Gary D., additional, Procter, Deborah, additional, and Williams, James, additional

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results