Research effort allocation and the conservation of restricted-range island bird species Ricardo F. de Lima a,⇑ , Jeremy P. Bird b , Jos Barlow a a Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, LA1 4YQ Lancaster, UK b BirdLife International Pacific Secretariat, 10 McGregor Rd., Suva, Fiji article info Article history: Received 5 April 2010 Received in revised form 25 October 2010 Accepted 31 October 2010 Available online 3 December 2010 Keywords: Research biases Endemic bird areas ISI’s Web of Knowledge IUCN Red List Conservation prioritization abstract Knowledge gap analyses can be useful to highlight imbalances in research and to improve the distribu- tion of conservation research efforts. We used ISI’s Web of Knowledge (WoK) and BirdLife International’s library catalogue (BLI) to examine the allocation of research effort amongst the extinction-prone island restricted-range birds (RRSs, n = 1321) and the island endemic bird areas and secondary areas (EBAs, n = 108; SAs, n = 58) previously identified by BirdLife International. We found that the distribution of research effort was very uneven across both species and areas. Half of the number of outputs obtained from WoK referred to 3.1% of the island restricted-range bird species and to 4.8% of the endemic bird areas and secondary areas, whereas 52.2% of the species and 34.3% of the areas had no output. The global distribution of research had a strong spatial component, with a limited number of places receiving most of the research efforts (Hawaii, New Zealand, Central America), while many species rich areas were very poorly studied (South East Asia, South Pacific, most Atlantic islands). Research amongst the most threa- tened RRSs tended to be less biased, with these species having a higher probability of having at least one output from WoK than less threatened species. Given that threats to the conservation of biodiversity are often highly context-dependent, we advocate prioriting the study of poorly known species and regions. Finally, we integrate the knowledge gaps we identify with previously established conservation priorities, in order to prioritize for future conservation research on RRS, EBAs and SAs. Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The success of conservation efforts is highly dependent on the existence of a body of evidence-based research for the species or habitat that is being targeted (Sutherland et al., 2004). Given that threats to the conservation of biodiversity are also often highly dependent on biological, physical and socio-economic contexts (Gardner et al., 2009), it is important that research is evenly allo- cated and directed towards conservation priorities. Although several analyses of research effort for biodiversity and conservation science have been conducted in recent years (Clark and May, 2002; Harrison, 2006; Hendriks and Duarte, 2008; Moustakas and Karakassis, 2005; Pitman et al., 2007), only a few analyses have examined whether research effort reflects conserva- tion priorities (Brito, 2008; Brooks et al., 2008; Fazey et al., 2005). Brooks et al. (2008) showed that threat status of bird species and research effort are positively correlated, and that island species tend to be less studied than mainland ones. We advance these studies by examining the global distribution of research, using island bird species as a model. Island birds are especially susceptible to extinction. Many species have a very small geographic range, which in itself is considered a good indica- tor of extinction risk (Gaston and Fuller, 2009; Trevino et al., 2007). The 116 recognized extinctions among island restricted-range bird species (RRSs) represent 86.6% of all bird extinctions; a proportion of extinction that is more than 40 times higher than other birds (adapted from Birdlife International, 2008; Johnson and Stattersfield, 1990; Stattersfield et al., 1998). The total number of extinctions is likely to be much higher since many island bird spe- cies probably disappeared before even being documented (Hold- away et al., 2001; Milberg and Tyrberg, 1993; Steadman, 1995). Moreover this high extinction risk on islands is likely to increase over time, given the vulnerability of island ecosystems to long term disturbance and climate change (Benning et al., 2002; Gillespie et al., 2008). Accordingly, island RRSs are often considered a high priority for conservation purposes (Birdlife International, 2008; Stattersfield et al., 1998; Trevino et al., 2007). Here we conduct the first thorough study of the allocation of re- search on the extinction-prone island RRSs, and the endemic bird areas (EBAs) and secondary areas (SAs) where they occur (Statters- field et al., 1998). With this study we intend to quantify research 0006-3207/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.10.021 ⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 (0)1524 595800x93480; fax: +44 (0)1524 510548. E-mail addresses: r.delima@lancaster.ac.uk, rfaustinol@gmail.com (R.F. de Lima), jezbird@gmail.com (J.P. Bird), jos.barlow@lancaster.ac.uk (J. Barlow). Biological Conservation 144 (2011) 627–632 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon