@article{ThomasCarvalhoHaileetal.2019,
  author    = {Thomas, Jessica E. and Carvalho, Gary R. and Haile, James and Rawlence, Nicolas J. and Martin, Michael D. and Ho, Simon Y. W. and Sigfusson, Arnor P. and Josefsson, Vigfus A. and Frederiksen, Morten and Linnebjerg, Jannie F. and Castruita, Jose A. Samaniego and Niemann, Jonas and Sinding, Mikkel-Holger S. and Sandoval-Velasco, Marcela and Soares, Andre E. R. and Lacy, Robert and Barilaro, Christina and Best, Juila and Brandis, Dirk and Cavallo, Chiara and Elorza, Mikelo and Garrett, Kimball L. and Groot, Maaike and Johansson, Friederike and Lifjeld, Jan T. and Nilson, Goran and Serjeanston, Dale and Sweet, Paul and Fuller, Errol and Hufthammer, Anne Karin and Meldgaard, Morten and Fjeldsa, Jon and Shapiro, Beth and Hofreiter, Michael and Stewart, John R. and Gilbert, M. Thomas P. and Knapp, Michael},
  title     = {Demographic reconstruction from ancient DNA supports rapid extinction of the great auk},
  series = {eLife},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {eLife},
  publisher = {eLife Sciences Publications},
  address   = {Cambridge},
  issn      = {2050-084X},
  doi       = {10.7554/eLife.47509},
  pages     = {35},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {The great auk was once abundant and distributed across the North Atlantic. It is now extinct, having been heavily exploited for its eggs, meat, and feathers. We investigated the impact of human hunting on its demise by integrating genetic data, GPS-based ocean current data, and analyses of population viability. We sequenced complete mitochondrial genomes of 41 individuals from across the species' geographic range and reconstructed population structure and population dynamics throughout the Holocene. Taken together, our data do not provide any evidence that great auks were at risk of extinction prior to the onset of intensive human hunting in the early 16th century. In addition, our population viability analyses reveal that even if the great auk had not been under threat by environmental change, human hunting alone could have been sufficient to cause its extinction. Our results emphasise the vulnerability of even abundant and widespread species to intense and localised exploitation.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ThomasCarvalhoHaileetal.2017,
  author    = {Thomas, Jessica E. and Carvalho, Gary R. and Haile, James and Martin, Michael D. and Castruita, Jose A. Samaniego and Niemann, Jonas and Sinding, Mikkel-Holger S. and Sandoval-Velasco, Marcela and Rawlence, Nicolas J. and Fuller, Errol and Fjeldsa, Jon and Hofreiter, Michael and Stewart, John R. and Gilbert, M. Thomas P. and Knapp, Michael},
  title     = {An ‛Aukward' tale},
  series = {Genes},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {Genes},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {MDPI},
  address   = {Basel},
  issn      = {2073-4425},
  doi       = {10.3390/genes8060164},
  pages     = {164},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {One hundred and seventy-three years ago, the last two Great Auks, Pinguinus impennis, ever reliably seen were killed. Their internal organs can be found in the collections of the Natural History Museum of Denmark, but the location of their skins has remained a mystery. In 1999, Great Auk expert Errol Fuller proposed a list of five potential candidate skins in museums around the world. Here we take a palaeogenomic approach to test which—if any—of Fuller's candidate skins likely belong to either of the two birds. Using mitochondrial genomes from the five candidate birds (housed in museums in Bremen, Brussels, Kiel, Los Angeles, and Oldenburg) and the organs of the last two known individuals, we partially solve the mystery that has been on Great Auk scholars' minds for generations and make new suggestions as to the whereabouts of the still-missing skin from these two birds.},
  language  = {en}
}