Sentence examples for declines in population size from inspiring English sources

We conclude that the populations of habitat-specialist rare plants such as R. osiliensis are endangered not only by the loss of habitats but also by other changes in landscape composition, e.g. afforestation, leading to strong declines in population size accompanied by genetic bottlenecks, decreased genetic diversity and high inbreeding.

This is evidenced by the reversal of the trend documented through evolutionary analyses (from less integrated among mission populations to much more integrated among mission populations) in the face of continued declines in population size.

In particular, provided our sampling recommendations are followed, the marked recount should be fairly sensitive in detecting large declines in population size, though smaller declines may still be difficult to easily detect.

Several studies have also reported stable genetic diversity despite declines in population size (e.g. [ 43]).

By the terminal Classic period, massive declines in population size led to the abandonment of many Maya territories.

The simplest and most direct explanation is the aforementioned increase in breeding population size; declines in genetic variation are really only expected with declines in population size.

Historic declines in population sizes as a consequence of forest fragmentation are quantified and dated.

This is a very conservative estimate, since it (incorrectly) assumes that the latter did not experience recent declines in population sizes.

Using a generation time of 12 years, the bottlenecks coincide with the 1940s and the 1970s, two periods in which many native horse breeds in Europe experienced dramatic declines in population sizes [46].

Interestingly, the period during which this invasion appears to have taken place immediately follows the coldest Patagonian glaciation approximately 0.7 Ma, which was responsible for dramatic declines in population sizes of the co-distributed freshwater galaxiid, Galaxias platei[ 17].

These views have been confronted by the 'general evolutionary impact assessment' presented by Andersen and Brander (2009), suggesting that FIE is slow and within the range of 0.1 0.6% per year; dealing with FIE is therefore less urgent than reducing direct declines in population sizes caused by overfishing.