Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28301877›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Using landscape habitat associations to prioritize areas of conservation action for terrestrial birds.

Tyler M Harms, Kevin T Murphy, Xiaodan Lyu, Shane S Patterson, Karen E Kinkead, Stephen J Dinsmore, Paul W Frese

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Tyler M HarmsCenter for Survey Statistics and Methodology, Iowa State University, 208 Office and Laboratory Building, 2401 Osborn Drive, Ames, Iowa, United States of America.
Kevin T MurphyDepartment of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, 339 Science Hall II, 2310 Pammel Drive, Ames, Iowa, United States of America.
Xiaodan LyuCenter for Survey Statistics and Methodology, Iowa State University, 208 Office and Laboratory Building, 2401 Osborn Drive, Ames, Iowa, United States of America.
Shane S PattersonDepartment of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, 339 Science Hall II, 2310 Pammel Drive, Ames, Iowa, United States of America.
Karen E KinkeadIowa Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Diversity Program, Boone, Iowa, United States of America.
Stephen J DinsmoreDepartment of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, 339 Science Hall II, 2310 Pammel Drive, Ames, Iowa, United States of America.
Paul W FreseIowa Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Diversity Program, Boone, Iowa, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predicting species distributions has long been a valuable tool to plan and focus efforts for biodiversity conservation, particularly because such an approach allows researchers and managers to evaluate species distribution changes in response to various threats. Utilizing data from a long-term monitoring program and land cover data sets, we modeled the probability of occupancy and colonization for 38 bird Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) in the robust design occupancy modeling framework, and used results from the best models to predict occupancy and colonization on the Iowa landscape. Bird surveys were conducted at 292 properties from April to October, 2006-2014. We calculated landscape habitat characteristics at multiple spatial scales surrounding each of our surveyed properties to be used in our models and then used kriging in ArcGIS to create predictive maps of species distributions. We validated models with data from 2013 using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Probability of occupancy ranged from 0.001 (SE < 0.001) to 0.995 (SE = 0.004) for all species and probability of colonization ranged from 0.001 (SE < 0.001) to 0.999 (SE < 0.001) for all species. AUC values for predictive models ranged from 0.525-0.924 for all species, with 17 species having predictive models considered useful (AUC > 0.70). The most important predictor for occupancy of grassland birds was percentage of the landscape in grassland habitat, and the most important predictor for woodland birds was percentage of the landscape in woodland habitat. This emphasizes the need for managers to restore specific habitats on the landscape. In an era during which funding continues to decrease for conservation agencies, our approach aids in determining where to focus limited resources to best conserve bird species of conservation concern.

Indexed as

BirdsConservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemAnimalsBiodiversityUnited States

Identifiers

PMID28301877
PMCPMC5354636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.