18 results
Are both necessity and opportunity the mothers of innovations?
- Gili Greenbaum, Laurel Fogarty, Heidi Colleran, Oded Berger-Tal, Oren Kolodny, Nicole Creanza
-
- Journal:
- Behavioral and Brain Sciences / Volume 42 / 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 November 2019, e199
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Baumard's perspective asserts that “opportunity is the mother of innovation,” in contrast to the adage ascribing this role to necessity. Drawing on behavioral ecology and cognition, we propose that both extremes – affluence and scarcity – can drive innovation. We suggest that the types of innovations at these two extremes differ and that both rely on mechanisms operating on different time scales.
Preface
-
- By David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp xv-xxi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Conservation biology is an applied multidisciplinary science that often deals with crisis situations. Of the many sciences from which conservation biology draws, it relies most heavily on ecology and its various sub-disciplines (population biology and genetics, community ecology, landscape ecology, etc.). One of these sub-disciplines, behavioral ecology, began in the past two decades receiving particular attention regarding its role in conservation biology. Specifically, several books (e.g. Clemmons & Buchholz 1997, Caro 1998, Festa-Bianchet & Apollonio 2003, Blumstein & Fernández-Juricic E. 2010) and papers (e.g. Sutherland 1998, Caro 1999, Linklater 2004, Angeloni et al. 2008, Greggor et al. 2014) began focusing on the interface between conservation biology and behavioral ecology, arguing that the discipline of behavioral ecology is an important component of conservation theory and practice, but has not yet received the attention it deserves. Further published opinions claimed that, in contrast to other ecology sub-disciplines, behavioral ecology has little bearing on conservation (Caro 2007), while others argued that behavioral ecology is, and always was, an important component of conservation biology (Harcourt 1999 and Buchholz 2007, respectively). A survey of the literature by Angeloni et al. (2008) indicated that only ~5% of papers published in leading conservation journals included the term behavior (or its derivatives) in their title, and that there is no evidence of an increasing trend. Angeloni et al. (2008) concluded, based on these findings, that a gap exists between the two disciplines and that the importance of behavioral ecology to conservation has yet to be fully realized. More recently, Nelson (2014) made a similar analysis and reached the same conclusions. When one considers that similar debates never took place with regard to the role of other ecology sub-disciplines in conservation, this debate is somewhat intriguing. It is especially interesting since all the aforementioned papers appear to pose legitimate arguments backed by logic and data that underpin two basic points of contention: (1) is behavioral ecology an important factor in conservation thinking and decision-making? And (2) is conservation behavior (i.e. the application of animal behavior in conservation) a young discipline not yet receiving the attention it deserves?
Biodiversity is a pivotal issue in conservation biology. The logic is straightforward: Diversity is the engine that drives evolution and enables species to change as the world changes. If ecosystems are to continue to provide the services man needs, diversity must be maintained to enable adaptation to a rapidly changing globe.
Prologue
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp xiii-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Like A. A. Milne's Winnie-the-Pooh, real bears love rich food, and just like Pooh, real bears strive to minimize the costs and maximize the benefits of obtaining that food. Like Pooh, real bears also don't realize the possible consequences. In Pooh's case, his attempts to get free food result in him becoming stuck in one of the entrances to Rabbit's den, after consuming all of Rabbit's honey, and becoming too fat to go back out the way he came in. In the real world, bears learn very quickly that humans can provide easy access to food resources that will increase their net energetic return, and start seeking out human activity and steal or beg for food.
“Don't feed the bears!” is a line commonly appearing on roadside notices in many US National Parks. It encompasses the realization that our actions may alter the behavior of the species around us; a realization that took many years to materialize.
Initially, the begging behavior of bears was considered amusing and the US Park Service actually encouraged this, so called, habituation. It was not long before problems concerning human safety began surfacing. Bears began actively seeking human contact and occasionally would become aggressive towards visitors who would not “share their lunch”. In 1902, the Park Service outlawed the hand feeding of bears, but did not enforce it and the practice continued. The situation became increasingly dangerous for both humans and bears. Fatal attacks on humans became common and problem bears were shot. Finally, in 1970, the Park Service began enforcing the law and devised various methods to prevent bear access to anthropogenic food sources. These include raising awareness in humans, preventing the bears from accessing food (e.g. introducing bear-proof containers), and using bear deterrents and aversive behavioral conditioning to keep bears away. Behavioral conditioning relies on our understanding of how bears learn and how they react to novel stimuli, and behavioral ecologists continue to devise better and more effective methods that will allow wildlife managers to resolve human-bear conflicts in an efficient, non-lethal manner.
Avoiding the consequences that may follow human-wildlife contacts is but one example of how looking at the world from the animal's point of view can improve the way we conserve and manage wildlife. “Thinking like a mountain” is what conservation behavior is all about.
Acknowledgments
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp xxii-xxii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Part I - The integration of two disciplines: conservation and behavioral ecology
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp 1-2
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Dedication
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp vii-viii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Part IV - Behavioral indicators
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp 305-306
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Just as criminal profilers study the behavior of their suspects in order to understand their state of mind and predict their actions, wildlife managers can use the behavior of animals to get insights into their state and the state of their environments.
The conservation behavior framework identifies two types of behavioral indicators – indicators that can reveal the effects of anthropogenic activities before a numerical response is evident, and indicators used to evaluate the effectiveness of management programs at their early stages. While the context in which the two types of indicators are used is very different, their mechanism is identical. In fact, the same behavioral indicator can be used to identify the detrimental effects of an anthropogenic disturbance, and later on to indicate whether the management program aimed at mitigating the disturbance is working effectively. We therefore chose to not divide the two chapters in this section according to the designation of the behavioral indicators, but rather to do it according to their scale of reference.
Behavioral indicators can operate on staggeringly different scales: From assessing the health and well-being of a single individual to helping predict climate change across the globe. However, in this case, the differences in scale of reference usually involve very different behaviors and call for a diversity of management approaches. We refer to behavioral indicators that can inform on the individual state of the animals observed and on the state of their respective populations as “direct behavioral indicators.” When behavioral indicators tell us about other populations within the community, the state of the ecosystem or about environmental changes on a global scale, we term them “indirect behavioral indicators.” Chapters 11 and 12 of this section give an overview and discuss the usefulness of direct and indirect behavioral indicators, respectively.
Contents
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp ix-x
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
12 - Indirect behavioral indicators and their uses in conservation and management
- from Part IV - Behavioral indicators
-
- By Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp 352-375
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
Animals inhabit environments that are rapidly changing due to anthropogenic activities, such as the destruction and fragmentation of habitats, the introduction of exotic species and the alteration of local and global climate regimes. These changes are stretching the capacity of animals to cope, with conditions potentially outside the bounds of those experienced over the recent evolutionary history of the species. For managers of protected areas and endangered populations to respond in time to the threats posed by changing environments, these threats must be recognized early on, when still relatively benign, so as to be able to mitigate or counteract the adverse consequences of the altered environment. Coping takes place most immediately through behavioral responses, perhaps followed at a later stage by adjustments in physiology, and maybe over generational scales by shifts in morphology. This means that changes in animal behavior are potentially sensitive indicators that can provide the necessary early warning. Such behaviors must be documented in such a way that the changes will be revealed. In Chapter 11, Kotler et al. describe in detail how managers can use the behavior of animals as an indicator for their population's status and as a monitoring tool for the success of management programs aimed to assist these populations. However, behavioral indicators can tell us even more.
Animals in the wild do not live their life in isolation. They are a part of a complex ecosystem that includes many different species as well as various abiotic features. All species in a given system interact, to some extent, either directly or indirectly. There are many types of biological interactions between species: The most common ones are competition (either direct competition through interference or indirect through the utilization of shared resources), predation, parasitism and mutualism (e.g. pollination or seed dispersal). In addition, animals interact with their abiotic environment. The environment provides resources such as food and shelter, as well as constraints that may limit the behavior of animals (e.g. barriers that limit movement, the chemical composition of the water that can affect the behavior of aquatic species or noise that can limit communication between individuals). There is a constant feedback between animals and their environment, which, depending on existing conditions, may be either positive or negative.
4 - Behavioral rigidity in the face of rapid anthropogenic changes
- from Part II - Anthropogenic impacts on animal behavior and their implications for conservation and management
-
- By Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp 95-120
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
WHAT IS RIGID BEHAVIOR?
For well over a century, biologists and psychologists have been arguing about the origins of behavior. Is behavior fixed and innate? Is it only determined by the genetic composition of the individual or is it flexible and shaped by the individual's environment? This heated argument, also known as the “nature versus nurture” debate, is yet unsettled (Ridley 2003), although the common consensus (at least among biologists, Bolhuis 2013) is that the dichotomy between innate and learned behaviors is false and that the development of behavior is a complex process involving continual interactions between the characteristics of an individual and its environment (Lehrman 1953).
The relevant aspect of this debate for our purposes is that some behaviors are mostly fixed, and do not change, regardless of the environment the individual is in, compared to other behaviors that are much more plastic. Furthermore, even plastic behaviors are constrained within limits, and these limits may vary depending on the behavior and the environment. We term the display of fixed behaviors in the face of a changing environment as “behavioral rigidity.” There are three main causes for behavioral rigidity: fixed or “instinctive” behaviors for which the individual displays no learning or that cannot be changed due to physical or physiological constraints, imprinted behaviors that are plastic only during the early period of an organism's life and afterwards become fixed, and behaviors that are flexible, but this flexibility is too slow to keep up with environmental change.
Fixed behaviors
Darwin was one of the first to note that behavioral and personality traits are inherited, using the hereditary nature of behavior in domesticated animals as a compelling example (Darwin 1871). What Darwin was implying, had he possessed the terminology we now have, is that many behaviors are strongly influenced and constrained by genetic factors. It was later shown that roughly 40% of the variation in personality in humans is genetic in nature (Bouchard 1994), and that animal personalities have a similarly strong genetic basis as well (van Oers et al. 2005). One of the more famous examples of such fixed behavior is the cuckoo. Despite never seeing a parent or sibling of the same species, a cuckoo individual is able to sing species-specific songs and attract fellow cuckoos as mates.
Part II - Anthropogenic impacts on animal behavior and their implications for conservation and management
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp 93-94
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The behavior of animals enables them to better confront a constantly changing environment. Specifically, the behavior of animals modifies the environmental conditions an animal experiences in a manner that is expected to improve their fitness. This can be achieved in two main ways: (a) By shifting (moving) from a poorer to a better environment, such as moving to improve foraging efficiency, safety or thermoregulation. (b) By modifying the present environment, for example – attracting mates using various signaling techniques or increasing vigilance if perceived risk increases. Most animals possess a rich portfolio of behavioral responses, which may range in their flexibility from being entirely fixed (i.e. the same behavior will be displayed regardless of the environmental conditions) to being completely flexible (i.e. the behavioral response will change at the same rate as the environment). The level of behavioral flexibility will be dictated by the animal's evolutionary history, past experience, and genetic, physical and physiological constraints.
Human-Induced Rapid Environmental Change (HIREC) is expected to elicit a behavioral response in the animals experiencing this change. However, because these changes may be novel and rapid in evolutionary terms and were not previously experienced by the animal, it may either: fail to recognize the change, fail to respond, respond inappropriately or respond in a manner that initially or seemingly is beneficial but might have long-term negative consequences. The two chapters in this section address conservation concerns stemming from the behavioral responses of animals as their environment is rapidly modified by anthropogenic activity. The first chapter addresses problems stemming from behavioral rigidity resulting in an inappropriate response to novel stimuli, and gives conservation practitioners the means to identify the source of the behavioral rigidity and manage it accordingly. The second chapter addresses plastic responses to anthropogenic changes, their benefits to wildlife, their usefulness as a management tool and their possible long-term negative consequences.
Index
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp 376-382
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
1 - Introduction: the whys and the hows of conservation behavior
- from Part I - The integration of two disciplines: conservation and behavioral ecology
-
- By Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp 3-35
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Our planet is changing at a startling pace. The rate of species extinction is alarmingly high (Barnosky et al. 2011) and unique ecosystems such as coral reefs and tropical forests are rapidly diminishing and disappearing. It is very clear that the only way to prevent, or at least slow down, this mass extinction, is by direct action. The science of conservation biology stands before the ongoing environmental crisis, offering some hope that through the implementation of our accumulating interdisciplinary scientific knowledge we can prevent, and even reverse, the decline of the diversity of life on Earth.
The behavior of an organism is, in a sense, the mediator between the organism and its environment and provides flexibility so the organisms can maintain a adequate fitness over a wider range of environmental conditions. This, of course, has limits, and under extreme changes the organism's behavior will fail to provide a sufficient buffer from the changing environment. Knowledge of a species’ behavioral attributes provides, therefore, important insights into how anthropogenic actions (direct or indirect) will impact the species, and what actions can be taken to minimize this impact.
In this chapter we will start by giving a brief general overview of conservation biology's interdisciplinary foundations. Many excellent volumes have been dedicated to this field (e.g. Groom et al. 2006, Primack 2006, Hunter & Gibbs 2007), and they give a far more comprehensive picture of the history, practice and many challenges of conservation biology. However, we hope we provide enough background in the first part of this chapter to make our readers better understand the goals of conservation, and to have these goals stay in their minds, as they continue reading about the more specific aspects of using behavior in conservation. Before considering the role of behavior in conservation, we will first consider the roots of behavioral ecology, and then discuss the short history of conservation behavior – a field dedicated to the use of the knowledge of animal behavior in conservation biology. To conclude this introductory chapter, we will outline the principles of the conservation behavior framework that serves as the basis for the structure of this book.
Conservation biology has three objectives: (1) Documenting the extant biological diversity on Earth. (2) Locating, defining and investigating anthropogenic threats to biodiversity. (3) Developing and implementing practical approaches to reducing or eliminating these threats (Groom et al. 2006, Primack 2006).
Part III - Behavior-based management: using behavioral knowledge to improve conservation and management efforts
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp 147-148
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
In the previous section we saw how the behavioral responses of animals to anthropogenic activities, and in particular, the level of behavioral plasticity or flexibility an animal can express in response to these activities, influence the fitness of individuals, and by extension, the persistence of wildlife populations. The flip side of the coin is that understanding animal behavior may allow us to predict their responses to anthropogenic changes and to design management protocols that will minimize the risks to wild populations and maximize their fitness under the given conditions.
In one of the first contributions to the emerging field of conservation behavior, Clemmons and Buchholtz’ edited volume on behavioral approaches to conservation, Steve Beissinger lists the seven “tools” that have emerged from the development of conservation biology and that can be applied to conserve biological diversity (Beissinger 1997). The tools are: (1) Reserve and landscape design. (2) Ecosystem management (i.e. management of non-protected areas). (3) Population Viability Analysis (PVA). (4) Sustainable development. (5) Field recovery of endangered species. (6) Captive breeding and reintroduction. (7) Ecosystem restoration (which is nowadays usually considered to include reintroductions of species). While the field of conservation biology has substantially developed and grown in complexity over the last two decades, these seven tools or approaches still compellingly encompass the essence of what conservation management is all about.
The chapters in this section aim to address the seven tools and expand on them from a behavioral point of view. Chapter 7 challenges the traditional spatial approach to reserve and landscape design, within and outside protected areas. Chapters 8 and 10 discuss captive breeding and reintroductions from two perspectives, respectively – the behavioral-sensitive management approach and the behavioral modification approach (see Chapter 1 for more details on these approaches), and Chapter 9 explores the use of behavior ecology in wildlife population modeling, including PVAs and models of sustainable harvesting.
One of the most notable trends of the past few years is the growing interest and rapid increase in research on sensory ecology (Blumstein & Berger-Tal 2015). Advancing technologies and the novel insights they have led to have transformed the understanding of sensory mechanisms into a vital tool in the conservationist's toolbox, shedding light on how animals make decisions and suggesting ways of manipulating these decisions.
List of contributors
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp xi-xii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Frontmatter
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, David Saltz, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
-
- Book:
- Conservation Behavior
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016, pp i-vi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Conservation Behavior
- Applying Behavioral Ecology to Wildlife Conservation and Management
- Edited by Oded Berger-Tal, David Saltz
-
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 03 May 2016
-
Conservation behavior assists the investigation of species endangerment associated with managing animals impacted by anthropogenic activities. It employs a theoretical framework that examines the mechanisms, development, function, and phylogeny of behavior variation in order to develop practical tools for preventing biodiversity loss and extinction. Developed from a symposium held at the International Congress on Conservation Biology in 2011, this is the first book to offer an in-depth, logical framework that identifies three vital areas for understanding conservation behavior: anthropogenic threats to wildlife, conservation and management protocols, and indicators of anthropogenic threats. Bridging the gap between behavioral ecology and conservation biology, this volume ascertains key links between the fields, explores the theoretical foundations of these linkages, and connects them to practical wildlife management tools and concise applicable advice. Adopting a clear and structured approach throughout, this book is a vital resource for graduate students, academic researchers, and wildlife managers.
Contributors
-
- By Lenard A. Adler, Pinky Agarwal, Rehan Ahmed, Jagga Rao Alluri, Fawaz Al-Mufti, Samuel Alperin, Michael Amoashiy, Michael Andary, David J. Anschel, Padmaja Aradhya, Vandana Aspen, Esther Baldinger, Jee Bang, George D. Baquis, John J. Barry, Jason J. S. Barton, Julius Bazan, Amanda R. Bedford, Marlene Behrmann, Lourdes Bello-Espinosa, Ajay Berdia, Alan R. Berger, Mark Beyer, Don C. Bienfang, Kevin M. Biglan, Thomas M. Boes, Paul W. Brazis, Jonathan L. Brisman, Jeffrey A. Brown, Scott E. Brown, Ryan R. Byrne, Rina Caprarella, Casey A. Chamberlain, Wan-Tsu W. Chang, Grace M. Charles, Jasvinder Chawla, David Clark, Todd J. Cohen, Joe Colombo, Howard Crystal, Vladimir Dadashev, Sarita B. Dave, Jean Robert Desrouleaux, Richard L. Doty, Robert Duarte, Jeffrey S. Durmer, Christyn M. Edmundson, Eric R. Eggenberger, Steven Ender, Noam Epstein, Alberto J. Espay, Alan B. Ettinger, Niloofar (Nelly) Faghani, Amtul Farheen, Edward Firouztale, Rod Foroozan, Anne L. Foundas, David Elliot Friedman, Deborah I. Friedman, Steven J. Frucht, Oded Gerber, Tal Gilboa, Martin Gizzi, Teneille G. Gofton, Louis J. Goodrich, Malcolm H. Gottesman, Varda Gross-Tsur, Deepak Grover, David A. Gudis, John J. Halperin, Maxim D. Hammer, Andrew R. Harrison, L. Anne Hayman, Galen V. Henderson, Steven Herskovitz, Caitlin Hoffman, Laryssa A. Huryn, Andres M. Kanner, Gary P. Kaplan, Bashar Katirji, Kenneth R. Kaufman, Annie Killoran, Nina Kirz, Gad E. Klein, Danielle G. Koby, Christopher P. Kogut, W. Curt LaFrance, Patrick J.M. Lavin, Susan W. Law, James L. Levenson, Richard B. Lipton, Glenn Lopate, Daniel J. Luciano, Reema Maindiratta, Robert M. Mallery, Georgios Manousakis, Alan Mazurek, Luis J. Mejico, Dragana Micic, Ali Mokhtarzadeh, Walter J. Molofsky, Heather E. Moss, Mark L. Moster, Manpreet Multani, Siddhartha Nadkarni, George C. Newman, Rolla Nuoman, Paul A. Nyquist, Gaia Donata Oggioni, Odi Oguh, Denis Ostrovskiy, Kristina Y. Pao, Juwen Park, Anastas F. Pass, Victoria S. Pelak, Jeffrey Peterson, John Pile-Spellman, Misha L. Pless, Gregory M. Pontone, Aparna M. Prabhu, Michael T. Pulley, Philip Ragone, Prajwal Rajappa, Venkat Ramani, Sindhu Ramchandren, Ritesh A. Ramdhani, Ramses Ribot, Heidi D. Riney, Diana Rojas-Soto, Michael Ronthal, Daniel M. Rosenbaum, David B. Rosenfield, Durga Roy, Michael J. Ruckenstein, Max C. Rudansky, Eva Sahay, Friedhelm Sandbrink, Jade S. Schiffman, Angela Scicutella, Maroun T. Semaan, Robert C. Sergott, Aashit K. Shah, David M. Shaw, Amit M. Shelat, Claire A. Sheldon, Anant M. Shenoy, Yelizaveta Sher, Jessica A. Shields, Tanya Simuni, Rajpaul Singh, Eric E. Smouha, David Solomon, Mehri Songhorian, Steven A. Sparr, Egilius L. H. Spierings, Eve G. Spratt, Beth Stein, S.H. Subramony, Rosa Ana Tang, Cara Tannenbaum, Hakan Tekeli, Amanda J. Thompson, Michael J. Thorpy, Matthew J. Thurtell, Pedro J. Torrico, Ira M. Turner, Scott Uretsky, Ruth H. Walker, Deborah M. Weisbrot, Michael A. Williams, Jacques Winter, Randall J. Wright, Jay Elliot Yasen, Shicong Ye, G. Bryan Young, Huiying Yu, Ryan J. Zehnder
- Edited by Alan B. Ettinger, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, Deborah M. Weisbrot, State University of New York, Stony Brook
-
- Book:
- Neurologic Differential Diagnosis
- Published online:
- 05 June 2014
- Print publication:
- 17 April 2014, pp xi-xx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation