Key issues in assessing threats to sea turtles:knowledge gaps and future directions

Sea turtles are an iconic group of marine megafauna that have been exposed to multiple anthropogenic threats across their different life stages, especially in the past decades. This has resulted in population declines, and consequently many sea turtle populations are now classified as threatened or endangered globally. Although some populations of sea turtles worldwide are showing early signs of recovery, many still face fundamental threats. This is problematic since sea turtles have important ecological roles. To encourage informed conservation planning and direct future research, we surveyed experts to identify the key contemporary threats (climate change, direct take, fisheries, pollution, disease, predation, and coastal and marine development) faced by sea turtles. Using the survey results and current literature, we also outline knowledge gaps in our understanding of the impact of these threats and how targeted future research, often involving emerging technologies, could close those gaps.</p

Data from: Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science

This record contains the underlying research data for the publication "Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science" and the full-text is available from: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/5257Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available. Replication effects were half the magnitude of original effects, representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had statistically significant results. Thirty-six percent of replications had statistically significant results; 47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size; 39% of effects were subjectively rated to have replicated the original result; and if no bias in original results is assumed, combining original and replication results left 68% with statistically significant effects. Correlational tests suggest that replication success was better predicted by the strength of original evidence than by characteristics of the original and replication teams