A comparison of canid depredation research published in journal and gray literature

Abstract

ABSTRACT We evaluated whether coyote and wolf depredation management research in peer-reviewed journals differed from research in gray literature (e.g., conference proceedings, research reports). Regression analysis showed that journal published research was more likely to have used statistical analyses and have authors with academic affiliations. These results show that reliance on one literature type may lead to management and research decisions based on partial information. Focusing on journal literature may reduce the likelihood of encountering descriptive (i.e., non-statistical) analyses that could inform management and illuminate future avenues of research. For instance, half of the 76 descriptive experimental research findings we located, including 10 controlled experiments, were found only in gray literature documents. Our results highlight that canid depredation managers and researchers should utilize both journal and gray literature.