If you don't have access to a paper, please, request us a PDF copy here.


1. Costello M et al. 2016. Field work ethics in biological research. Biological Conservation, in press.

2. Ribeiro B et al. 2016. Assessing mammal exposure to climate change in the Brazilian Amazon. PLoS ONE, in press.

3. Gouveia S et al. 2016. Climate and land use changes will degrade the configuration of the landscape for titi monkeys in eastern Brazil. Global Change Biology, 22: 2003-2012.

4. Nori J et al. 2016. Buying environmental problems: the invasive potential of imported turtles in Argentina. Aquatic Conservation, in press.

5. Brancalion P et al. 2016. A critical analysis of the Native Vegetation Protection Law of Brazil (2012): updates and ongoing initiatives. Nat. Conserv. 14(S): 1-15.

6. Zacarias D et al. 2016. Systematic review on the conservation genetics of African savannah elephants. PeerJ, in press.

7.Garcia L et al. 2016. Análise científica e jurídica das mudanças no Código Florestal, a recente Lei de Proteção da Vegetação Nativa, 1st ed. ABECO/Editora da UFMS, Rio de Janeiro.

8. Vieira R et al. 2016. Acoustic communication in two species of the Hypsiboas albopunctatus group (Anura: Hylidae) in sympatry and allopatry. Zoologia, 33(2): e20150037.

9. Hayward M et al. 2016. Prey Preferences of the Jaguar Pantheraonca Reflect the Post-PleistoceneDemise of Large Prey. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 3:148.

10. Brancalion P et al. 2016. Análise crítica da Lei de Proteção da Vegetação Nativa (2012), que substituiu o antigo Código Florestal: atualizações e ações em curso. Nat. Conserv. 14(S): e1-e16.

11. Signorelli L et al. 2016. Vocalizations of Hypsiboas goianus (Lutz, 1968) (Anura: Hylidae) in Central Brazil. Studies on Neotropical Fauna and Environment, DOI: 10.1080/01650521.2016.1226314

12. Lowemberg-Neto, P., Loyola, R., 2016. Biogeografia da Conservação, in: Carvalho, C.J.B. de, Almeida, E.A.B. de (Eds.), Biogeografia Da América Do Sul: Analisando Espaço, Tempo E Forma. Editora Roca, São Paulo, pp. 169–178.

13. Lima F, Bastos R et al. 2016. Sapeando na lagoa: um guia sobre sapos, rãs e pererecas do Cerrado. 44p.

14. Peixoto F et al. 2016. Geographical patterns of phylogenetic beta diversity components in terrestrial mammals. Global Ecology and Biogeography, In press.

15. Barbosa C et al. 2016. Changes in ecological niche of invasive species: the case of Furcraea foetida (L.) Haw. (Asparagaceae). Austral Ecology, In press.

16. Pellegrini T et al. 2016. Linking spatial scale dependence of land-use descriptors and invertebrate cave community composition. Subterranean Biology, in press.

17. Zacarias D & Loyola R. 2016. How ecotourism affects human communities. In: Ecotourism’s promise and peril: a biological evaluation (D Blumstein & D Samia Eds). Springer. In press.

18. Schwartsburd P et al. 2016. Additions to the taxonomy of the Hypolepis rugosula-complex (Dennstaedtiaceae) in Africa: Corrections, two new subspecies, and new distribution maps. Folia Geobotanica, in press.

19. Loyola R. 2016. Áreas protegidas ou áreas que ninguém quer? O Eco. Link:

20. Loyola R. 2016. Período de eleições presidenciais favorece desmatamento da Amazônia. O Eco. Link:

21. Loyola R. 2016. Cerrado: dores e amores aos 65 milhões de anos. O Eco. Link:

22. Loyola R. 2016. Áreas protegidas que ninguém quer - parte 2. O Eco. Link:

23. Loyola R. 2016. Resgatar o Cerrado da extinção. Valor Econômico. Link:

24. Lima-Ribeiro M et al. 2016. Fossil record improves species vulnerability assessment under future climate change scenarios. Submitted.

25. Sales L et al. 2016. Consistent model predictions show high climate change vulnerability of Amazonia's endemic biodiversity. Submitted.

26. Sales L et al. 2016. The big bad pig: niche conservatism and the invasive potential of the wild boar. Submitted.

27. Bergamin R et al. 2016. Linking beta diversity patterns to protected areas: lessons form the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Submitted.

28. Nieto C et al. 2016. The role of macroinvertebrates in freshwater systems conservation.Submitted.

29. Zwiener V et al. 2016. Planning for conservation and restoration under climate and land-use change in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Submitted.

30. Karam-Gemael M et al. 2016. Poor alignment of priorities between scientists and policymakers highlights the need for an evidence-informed conservation in Brazil. Submitted.

31. Ribeiro B et al. 2016. Contrasting strategies for biodiversity conservation under climate change in the Amazon. Submitted.

32. Joner D et al. 2016. Forecasted extinctions of mammals and birds under climate change in the Brazilian semi-arid. Submitted.

33. Soto C et al. 2016. Opportunity territories to conciliate stakeholder´s governability with umbrella specie´s conservation: a countrywide approach in Mexico. Submitted.

34. Strassburg B et al. 2016. Moment of truth for the Cerrado Hotspot. Submitted.

35. Martins E et al. 2016. Challenges and perspectives in achieving the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation targets in Brazil. Submitted.

36. Lemes P et al. 2016. Integrated assessment of taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional diversity reveals opportunities for conservation in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Submitted.

37. Lemes L & Loyola R. 2016. Spatial priorities for agricultural development in the Brazilian Cerrado. Submitted.

38. Manhães A et al. 2016. Matching the Protection of Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity with Opportunity Costs in Conservation Planning. Submitted.

39. Vila-Nova D et al. 2016. Where do we bet our future? Towards an ecosystem-based approach for marine conservation in Brazil. Submitted.

40. Rattis L et al. 2016. A method to evaluate habitat connectivity and carrying capacity at the scale of species' range. Submitted.

41. Resende F et al. 2016. Learning from the past and paving the way for long-lasting conservation of nature in the Anthropocene. Submitted.

42. Monteiro L et al. 2016. Conservation priorities for the threatened flora of mountaintop grasslands in Brazil. Submitted.




1. Nori J et al. 2015. Amphibian conservation, land-use changes and protected areas: a global overview. Biological Conservation, 191:367-374 .

2. Nori J & Loyola R. 2015. On the worrying fate of Data Deficient amphibians. PLoS ONE, 10: e0125055.

3. Hidasi-Neto J et al. 2015. Global and Local Evolutionary and Ecological Distinctiveness of Terrestrial Mammals: Identifying Priorities Across Scales. Diversity and Distributions. 21: 548-559.

4. Vilar C et al. 2015. Setting priorities for the conservation of marine vertebrates in Brazilian waters. Ocean & Coastal Management, 107: 28-36.

5. Schlottfeldt S et al. 2015. Multi-objective optimization for plant germplasm collection conservation of genetic resources based on molecular variability. Tree Genetics & Genomes, 11: DOI 10.1007/s11295-015-0836-3.

6. Schlottfeldt S et al. 2015. Multi-objective optimization in systematic conservation planning and the representation of genetic variability among populations. Genetics and Molecular Research 14: 6744-6761. 

7. Loyola R & Bini LM. 2015. Water shortage: a glimpse into the future. Natureza & Conservação, 13: 1-2.

8. Dobrovolski R & Rattis L. 2015. Water collapse in Brazil: the danger of relying on what you neglect. Natureza & Conservação, 13: 80-83.

9. Loyola R & Nori J 2015. A Political-Oriented Framework for Protecting Data Deficient Amphibians. FrogLog, 23: 13-14. 

10. Martins E et al. 2015. Tree Red Listing in Brazil: lessons and perspectives. BGjournal, 12: 8-11.

11. Instituto LIFE et al. 2015. Ecorregiões do Brasil - prioridades terrestres e marinhas. Série Caderno Técnico Vol. III.

12. Loyola et al. 2015. Amphibians in a changing world: a global look at their conservation status. FrogLog, 24: 30-31.

13. Sales L et al. 2015. Time-lags in primate occupancy: a study case using dynamic models. Natureza & Conservação, 13: 139-144.

14. Pougy N et al. 2015. Plano de ação nacional para a conservação da flora ameaçada de extinção da Serra do Espinhaço Meridional. Andrea Jakobsson Estúdio: Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico, Rio de Janeiro. 100 p.

15. Pougy N et al. 2015. Plano de ação nacional para a conservação da flora ameaçada de extinção de Grão Mogol - São Francisco Sá. Andrea Jakobsson Estúdio: Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico, Rio de Janeiro. 64 p.

16. Zacarias D & Azevedo H 2015. Políticas públicas edesenvolvimento do turismo em Mocambique: experiencias, estudos eperspectivas. Maputo, ESSOHFOTOH Editora. 229 p.

17. Loyola R & Machado N. 2015. Áreas prioritárias para a conservação da flora ameaçada de extinção da Serra do Espinhaço Meridional. In: Pougy N et al. Plano de ação nacional para a conservação da flora ameaçada de extinção da Serra do Espinhaço Meridional. Pp. 49-77.

18. Loyola et al. 2015. Prioridades espaciais para a conservação da flora ameaçada de extinção de Grão Mogol - Francisco Sá. In: Pougy N et al. Plano de ação nacional para a conservação da flora ameaçada de extinção de Grão Mogol - Francisco Sá. Pp. 49-69.

19. Schlottfeld S et a. 2015. A Multi-objective Optimization Approach Associated to Climate Change Analysis to Improve Systematic Conservation Planning In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science.1 ed.Amsterdam: Springer International Publishing, p. 458-472.




1. Loyola RD et al. 2014. Clade-specific consequences of climate change to amphibians in Atlantic Forest protected areas. Ecography, 37: 65-72.

2. Loyola R 2014. Brazil cannot risk its environmental leadership. 2014. Diversity and Distributions, 20: 1365-1367.

3. Lemes P et al. 2014. Climate change threatens protected areas of the Atlantic Forest. Biodiveristy and Conservation, 23: 357-368.

4. Mazel F et al. 2014. Multifaceted diversity-area relationships reveal global hotspots of mammalian species, trait and lineage diversity. Global Ecology and Biogeography 23: 836-847.

5. Dobrovolski R et al. 2014. Globalizing conservation efforts to save species and enhance food production. Bioscience 64: 539-545.

6. Ferro V et al. 2014. The reduced effectiveness of protected areas under climate change threatens Atlantic Forest tiger moths. PLoS ONE 9(9): e107792.

7. Duarte L et al. 2014. Phylobetadiversity among Forest Types in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest Complex. PLoS ONE, 9(8): e105043.

8. Campos FS et al. 2014. The efficiency of indicator groups for the conservation of amphibians in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Ecology and Evolution 4: 2505-2514.

9. Dobrovolski R & Rattis L. 2014. Brazil should show the way to both agricultural expansion and forest protection in developing nations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 12: 376.

10. Loyola R 2014. Taking the next step in communicating good conservation science. Natureza & Conservação 12: 1-2.

11. Sobral et al. 2014. Spatial conservation priorities for top predators reveal mismatches among taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity. Natureza & Conservação 12 - DOI: 10.1016/j.ncon.2014.09.008

12. Brum FT et al. 2014. Clade-specific impacts of human land use on primates. Natureza & Conservação 12 - DOI: 10.1016/j.ncon.2014.09.009

13. Bonaccorso E et al. 2014. Bottlenecks in the Open-Access System: Voices from Around the Globe Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication 2(2): eP1126. DOI: 10.7710/2162-3309.1126

14. Bonaccorso E et. 2014. Подводные камни системы публикаций открытого доступа: мнения в разных странах мира. Nauchnaja periodika: problemy i reshenija (Moscow), 2: 9-20.

15. Loyola R et al. 2014. Areas prioritárias para conservação e uso sustentável da flora brasileira ameaçada de extinção. Andrea Jakobsson Estúdio: Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico, Rio de Janeiro. 

16. Martins E et al. 2014. Plano de ação nacional para a conservação do Faveiro-de-Wilson (Dimorphandra wilsoniii Rizzini). Andrea Jakobsson Estúdio: Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico, Rio de Janeiro. 

17. Lemes P & Loyola R. 2014. Mudanças climáticas e prioridades para a conservação da biodiversidade. Revst Biol Neotropical. In press.




1. Diniz-Filho JAF et al. 2013. Darwinian shortfall in biodiversity conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evoluton, 28: 689-695.

2. Loyola RD & Diniz-Filho 2013. Citatons: ethical ways to grow impact. Nature 501: 492. DOI: 10.1038/501492b

3. Faleiro FV, et al. 2013. Defining spatial conservation priorities in the face of land-use and climate change. Biological Conservation, 158: 248-257.

4. Lemes P & Loyola RD. 2013 Accommodating species climate-forced dispersal and uncertainties in spatial conservation planning. PLoS ONE, 8(1): e54323.

5. Loyola RD, et al. 2013 A straightforward conceptual approach for evaluating spatial priorities under climate change. Biodiversity and Conservation, 22: 483-495.

6. Gouveia,SF, et al. 2013. Environmental steepness, tolerance gradient, and ecogeographical rules in glassfrogs (Anura: Centrolenidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 108: 773-783.

7. Brum FT, et al. 2013 Land use explains the distribution of threatened New World amphibians better than climate. PLoS ONE, 8(4):e60742.

8. Faleiro FV & Loyola RD. 2013 Socioeconomic and political trade-offs in biodiversity conservation: a case study of the Cerrado Biodiversity Hotspot, Brazil. Diversity and Distributions, 19: 977-987.

9. Dobrovolski R, et al. 2013 Global agricultural expansion and carnivore conservation biogeography. Biological Conservation, 165: 162-170.

10. Morais A, et al. 2013. Unraveling the conservation status of Data Deficient species. Biological Conservation, 166: 98-102.

11. Machado N & Loyola RD. 2013. A comprehensive quantitative assessment of bird extinction risk in Brazil. PLoS ONE, 8(8):e72283.

12. Machado N, et al. 2013. Modeling extinction risk for seabirds in Brazil. Natureza & Conservação, 11:48-53. DOI: 10.4322/natcon.2013.008.

13. Hidasi-Neto J, et al. 2013. Conservation actions based on red lists do not capture the functional and phylogenetic diversity of birds in Brazil. PLoS ONE, 8(9):e73431.

14. Antonini Y, et al. 2013. Richness, composition and trophic niche of stingless bee assemblages in urban forest remnants. Urban Ecosystem, 16: 527-541.

15. Lima-Ribeiro MS, et al. 2013. Current and historical climate signatures to deconstructed tree species richness pattern in South America. Acta Scientiarum - Biological Sciences 35: 219-231.

16. Nogueira FC, et al. 2013. A teoria ecológica: perspectivas e avanços futuros nos últimos dez anos de pesquisa no Brasil. 1a ed. Universidade Federal do Cerará. 109 p.




1. Loyola RD, et al. 2012. Obsession with quantity: a view from the south. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27: 585.

2. Loyola RD, et al. 2012. Severe loss of suitable climatic conditions for marsupial species in Brazil: challenges and opportunities for conservation. PLoS ONE, 7: e46257.

3. Trindade-Filho J, et al. 2012. Using indicator groups to represent bird phylogenetic and functional diversity. Biological Conservation, 146: 151-162.

4. Dobrovolski R, et al. 2012. Climatic history and dispersal ability explain the relative importance of turnover and nestedness components of beta diversity. Global Ecology and Biogeography. 21: 191-197.

5. Trindade-Filho J, et al. 2012. How does the inclusion of Data Deficient species change coservation priorities for amphibians in the Atlantic Forest? Biodiversiy and Conservation, 21: 2709-2718.

6. Diniz-Filho JAF, et al. 2012. Planning for optimal conservation of geographical genetic variability within species. Conservation Genetics, 13: 1085-1093.

7. Loyola RD & Diniz-Filho JAF. 2012. Two years later: Natureza & Conservação and its impact. Natureza & Conservação, 10(1): 1-2.

8. Rangel TF & Loyola RD. 2012. Labeling ecological niche models. Natureza & Conservação, 10(2): 1-8.

9. Diniz-Filho JAF & Loyola RD. 2012. A conceptual and methodological synthesis on modeling ecological niches and geographical distributions. Natureza & Conservação, 10(2): 1-3.

10. Loyola RD, et al. 2012. Climate change might drive species into reserves: a case study of the American Bullfrog in the Atlantic Forest Biodiversity Hotspot. Alytes, 29: 61-74.

11. Brum FT, et al. 2012. Spatial and phylogenetic structure drive frugivory in Tyrannidae birds across the range of Brazilian Araucaria forests. Oikos 121: 899-906.

12. Lemes P, et al. 2012. Acoustic repertoire of Barycholos ternetzi (Anura: Strabomantidae) in Central Brazil. South American Journal of Herpetology, 7: 157-164.

13. Dobrovlski R. 2012. Marx's Ecology and the Understanding of Land Cover Change. Monthly Review. 64: 31-39.

14. Loyola RD, et al. 2012. Conservação da diversidade filogenética e funcional de mamíferos no Brasil. In: Oliveira T & Vieira E (orgs.) Mamíferos do Brasil: genética, conservação e manejo. vol II., in press.

15. Loyola RD, et al. 2012. Efeitos das mudanças climáticas globais sobre a diversidade e distribuição de marsupiais no Brasil. In: Cáceres N (org.) Os marsupiais do Brasill: biologia, ecologia e conservação, 2a Ed., pp. 487-498.




1. Nori J, et al. 2011. Climate change and American Bullfrog invasion: what could we expect in South America? PLoS ONE, 6(10): e25718.

2. Safi K, et al. 2011. Understanding global patterns of mammalian functional and phylogenetic diversity. Philosophical Transections of the Royal Society B, 366: 2536-2544.

3. Trindade-Filho J & Loyola RD. 2011. Performance and consistency of indicator groups in two Biodiversity Hotspots. PLoS ONE, 6(5): e19746.

4. Dobrovolski R, et al. 2011. Agricultural expansion and the fate of global conservation priorities. Biodiversity and Conservation, 20: 2245-2259.

5. Dobrovolski R, et al. 2011. Agricultural expansion can manace Brazilian protected areas in the 21st Century. Natureza & Conervação, 9(2): 208-213.

6. Perre P, et al. 2011. Insects on urban plants: contrasting the flower head feeding assemblages on native and exotic hosts. Urban Ecosystems, 14: 711-722.

7. Loyola RD, et al. 2011. Twoards an integrative innovative approach to the conservation of mammals. Natureza & Conservação, 9(1): 1-6.

8. Cunha F & Loyola RD. 2011. Prioridades espaciais para a conservaçao de mamiferos ameaçados da regiao Neotropical. Bioikos, 25: 83-98.

9. Lemes P, et al. Refinando dados espaciais para a conservação da biodiversidade. Natureza & Conservação, 9(2): 240-243.

10. Loyola RD & Martins RP. 2011. Small-scale area effect on species richness and nesting occupancy of cavity-nesting bees and wasps. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia, 55: 69-74.

11. Brum FT, et a. 2011. dge expansion of Araucaria forest over southern Brazilian grasslands relies on nurse plant effect. Community Ecology, 12: 196-201.




1. Becker CG et al. 2010. Integrating species life-history traits and patterns of deforestation in amphibian conservation planning. Diversity and Distributions,16: 10-19.

2. Diniz-Filho JAF, et al. 2010. Ensemble forecasting shifts in climatically suitable areas for Tropidacris cristata (Orthoptera: Acridoidea: Romaleidae). Insect Conservation and Diversiy, 3: 213-221.

3. Carvalho RA, et al. 2010. Drafting a blueprint for functional and phylogenetic diversity in the Brazilian Cerrado. Natureza & Conservação, 8: 171-176.

4. Trindade-Filho & Loyola. 2010. O uso de grupos indicadores como atalho para a conservaçao da biodiversidade. Revista de Biologia Neotropical, 7(2): 27-38.

5. Loyola RD & Diniz-Filho JAF. 2010. Carnivore protection: including biological traits in conservation planning. Current Conservation, 3(2): 6-7.

6. Diniz-Filho JAF, et al. 2010. Uma visão macroscópica do Cerrado brasileiro. Revista UFG, 9: 37-43.

7. Diniz-Filho JAF & Loyola RD. 2010. Conservation science in Brazil: challenges for the 21st century. Natureza & Conservação, 8: 1-2.

8. Braga T, et al.. 2010. New record of Dyoctophyma renale in the maned wolf (Chrysocyon brachyrus) in the State of Goiás, Brazil. Bioikos, 24: 43-47.

9. Braga RT, et al. 2010. Fauna parasitária intestinal de Chrysocyon brachyurus (lobo-guará) no Parque Nacional das Emas. Bioikos, 24: 49-55.

10. Brum FT, et al. 2010. Seed removal patterns by vertebrates in different successional stages of Araucaria forest advancing over southern Brazilian grasslands. Community Ecology, 10: 35-40.

11. Pereira RAS, et al. 2010. Vespas de figo. In: Cleber Macedo Polegatto. (Org.). A fauna de insetos da Mata Santa Tereza. A fauna de insetos da Mata Santa Tereza. 1ed.Ribeirão Preto: São Francisco, pp. 143-160.

12. Diniz-Filho et al. 2010. The three phases of the ensemble forecasting of niche models: geographic range and shifts in climatically suitable areas of Utetheisa ornatrix (Lepidoptera, Arctiidae). Revista Brasileira de Entomologia, 54: 339-349.




1. Diniz-Filho JAF, et al. 2009. Partitioning and mapping uncertainties in ensemble forecasts of species turnover under climate change. Ecography, 32: 897-903.

2. Diniz-Filho JAF, et al. 2009. Conservation biogeography and climate change in the Brazilian Cerrado. Natureza & Conservação, 7: 100-112

3. Loyola RD, et al. 2009. Integrating economic costs and biological traits into global conservation priorities for carnivores. PLoS ONE, 4(8): e6807. 4. Loyola RD, et al. 2009. Key Neotropical ecoregions for conservation of terrestrial vertebrates. Biodiversity and Conservation, 18: 2017-2031.

5. Loyola RD & Lewinsohn TM. 2009. Diferentes abordagens para a identificaçao de prioridades de conservaçao em um contexto macro-geografico. Megadiversidade, in press

6. Moretti MS, et al. 2009. Leaf abundance and phenolic concentrations codetermine the selection of case-building materials by Phylloicus sp. (Trichoptera, Calamoceratidae). Hydrobiologia, 630: 199-206.

7. Loyola RD. 2009. Broad-scale hypotheses do not account for species richness patterns of Central American mayflies. The Open Ecology Journal, 2: 29-36.

8. Oliveira-Santos LGR, et al. 2009. Armadilhas de dossel: uma técnica para amostrar formigas no estrato vertical de florestas. Neotropical Entomology, 38: 1-4.

9. Loyola RD & Martins RP. 2009. On a habitat structure-based approach to evaluating species occurrence: cavity-nesting Hymenoptera in a secondary tropical forest remnant. Journal of Insect Conservation, 13: 125-129.




Please visit and