INTERACTION OF TOP-DOWN AND BOTTOM-UP LIFE HISTORY TRADE-OFFS IN MOOSE (ALCES ALCES)

Ecology ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 85 (5) ◽  
pp. 1453-1459 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Ward Testa
Keyword(s):  
Life History ◽  
Alces Alces ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Trade Offs

scholarly journals The influence of top–down, bottom–up and abiotic factors on the moose ( Alces alces ) population of Isle Royale

2004 ◽  
Vol 271 (1535) ◽  
pp. 183-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
John A. Vucetich ◽  
Rolf O. Peterson
Keyword(s):  
Alces Alces ◽  
Abiotic Factors ◽  
Isle Royale ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Bottom Up

Thematic Section: Conservation Implications of Social-ecological Change in Southern Africa Exploring the alignment between the bottom-up and top-down objectives of a landscape-scale conservation initiative

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Samantha Mc Culloch-Jones ◽  
Peter Novellie ◽  
Dirk J Roux ◽  
Bianca Currie
Keyword(s):  
Landscape Management ◽  
Landscape Scale ◽  
Ecological Change ◽  
Landscape Conservation ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Management Objectives ◽  
Social Ecological ◽  
Trade Offs

Summary Globally, there is a trend towards conserving biodiversity by promoting co-management with multiple stakeholders at landscape scales. Environmental policies emphasize stakeholder engagement in decision-making, yet landscape conservation is typically a bureaucratic–scientific endeavour. Building trusting relationships with stakeholders is key to negotiations that minimize trade-offs and maximize synergies. Incorporating shared stakeholder objectives improves co-management, as they act as incentives for participation and trust development. We explored the degree of alignment between the bottom-up stakeholder objectives and top-down management objectives of a landscape-scale conservation initiative on the West Coast of South Africa. We categorized stakeholders into six affiliations representing governmental, private and community organizations, and using a social-ecological inventory we identified ten shared objectives. Of these objectives, three were shared between all affiliations, namely biodiversity conservation, socioeconomic development and coordination of the landscape approach. The first two aligned with the top-down landscape management objectives and the latter did not. The importance of coordinating landscape approaches in multi-stakeholder landscape-scale initiatives is crucial to long-term success, and we recommend that it be formally included as a landscape management objective. Exploring the alignment between bottom-up and top-down objectives can highlight overlooked functions of co-management and can reduce the transaction costs of sustaining conservation efforts in the long term.

POPULATION DYNAMICS AND LIFE HISTORY TRADE-OFFS OF MOOSE (ALCES ALCES) IN SOUTH-CENTRAL ALASKA

Ecology ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 85 (5) ◽  
pp. 1439-1452 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Ward Testa
Keyword(s):  
Population Dynamics ◽  
Life History ◽  
Alces Alces ◽  
South Central ◽  
Trade Offs

Top‐Down and Bottom‐Up Control of Life‐History Strategies in Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch)

2006 ◽  
Vol 167 (5) ◽  
pp. E140-E157 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. L. Snover ◽  
G. M. Watters ◽  
M. Mangel
Keyword(s):  
Life History ◽  
Coho Salmon ◽  
Oncorhynchus Kisutch ◽  
Life History Strategies ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Bottom Up

scholarly journals O processo de formação de estratégias de manufatura em empresas brasileiras de médio e pequeno porte

2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 454-475
Author(s):  
Carlos Alberto Corrêa ◽  
Henrique Luiz Corrêa
Keyword(s):  
Top Down ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Trade Offs

A presente pesquisa é uma investigação exploratória, com o objetivo de melhor entender os processos de formação da estratégia de manufatura nas empresas brasileiras de médio e pequeno porte. Desenvolve-se uma matriz para o auxílio da tipificação e análise dos processos de formação de estratégias de manufatura, com uma dimensão representando o sentido predominante do processo (top-down ou bottom-up) e a outra, a consideração ou não da existência de trade-offs entre critérios de desempenho no processo de formação das estratégias de manufatura. Essa matriz é então aplicada na análise em profundidade de quatro estudos de caso de empresas brasileiras de médio porte. Conclusões são tiradas sobre como as empresas pesquisadas formam suas estratégias de operação em termos de (a) definição de prioridades competitivas; (b) estabelecimento de objetivos de desempenho para a manufatura; (c) priorização de programas de melhoramentos da manufatura; e (d) definição dos indicadores de eficácia da manufatura. É também proposta, entre outras, hipótese de existência de correlação entre os processos bottom-up de formação das estratégias e a contribuição da manufatura na competitividade da empresa.

Artificial evolution of behavioral and life history strategies of high-latitude copepods in response to bottom-up and top-down selection pressures

2019 ◽  
Vol 173 ◽  
pp. 134-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanchana Bandara ◽  
Øystein Varpe ◽  
Rubao Ji ◽  
Ketil Eiane
Keyword(s):  
Life History ◽  
High Latitude ◽  
Life History Strategies ◽  
Artificial Evolution ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Selection Pressures ◽  
Bottom Up

scholarly journals From emissions to source allocation: Synergies and trade-offs between top-down and bottom-up information

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 100088
Author(s):  
L. Sartini ◽  
Marta Antonelli ◽  
E. Pisoni ◽  
P. Thunis
Keyword(s):  
Top Down ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Source Allocation

scholarly journals Comparing and coupling a water quality and a fisheries ecosystem model of the Chesapeake Bay for the exploratory assessment of resource management strategies

2013 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
pp. 703-712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard Townsend
Keyword(s):  
Water Quality ◽  
Chesapeake Bay ◽  
Water Quality Management ◽  
Ecosystem Model ◽  
Integrated Analysis ◽  
Quality Model ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Important Species ◽  
Trade Offs

Abstract The Chesapeake Bay (CB) is the North America's largest estuary and is a highly productive ecosystem. State and Federal agencies have been working for over two decades to implement ecosystem-based management (EBM), which will allow the understanding of the impacts of cumulative stressors and enable decision-making that incorporates trade-offs in ecosystem goods and services. To effectively move towards EBM, models that account for bottom-up (e.g. eutrophication) as well as top-down (e.g. fisheries harvest) drivers are necessary. One step towards the integrated analysis of ecosystem stressors is to integrate the existing models that capture bottom-up and top-down effects. In this paper, the efforts of integrating the CB fisheries ecosystem model and the water quality model are described. Specifically, to achieve the integration of these two models, the methods for (i) model comparisons and (ii) model coupling outlined in a report by the CB Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee are implemented for this paper. Comparative analyses of the two models were performed to assess the model structure uncertainty. Broad indirect coupling of these models allows connections between water quality and commercially and recreationally important species to be made and used to assess trade-offs between water quality management goals and fisheries management goals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document