50/500 rules need upward revision to 100/1000 - Response to Franklin et al.

Richard Frankham^*, Corey J A Bradshaw, Barry W. Brook

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter › peer-review

13 Citations (Scopus)

Access to Document

@article{d7986cbadd7d4e5088b90de92e8e51ea,

title = "50/500 rules need upward revision to 100/1000 - Response to Franklin et al.",

author = "Richard Frankham and Bradshaw, {Corey J A} and Brook, {Barry W.}",

year = "2014",

month = aug,

doi = "10.1016/j.biocon.2014.05.006",

language = "English",

volume = "176",

pages = "286",

journal = "Biological Conservation",

issn = "0006-3207",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - 50/500 rules need upward revision to 100/1000 - Response to Franklin et al.

AU - Frankham, Richard

AU - Bradshaw, Corey J A

AU - Brook, Barry W.

PY - 2014/8

Y1 - 2014/8

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84904417277&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.05.006

DO - 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.05.006

M3 - Letter

AN - SCOPUS:84904417277

SN - 0006-3207

VL - 176

SP - 286

JO - Biological Conservation

JF - Biological Conservation

ER -