ReviewEcology and evolution2019
Climate change, woodpeckers, and forests: Current trends and future modeling needs.
Review in Ecology and evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Climate change, woodpeckers, and forests: Current trends and future modeling needs.Ecology and evolution · 2019Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The structure and composition of forest ecosystems are expected to shift with climate-induced changes in precipitation, temperature, fire, carbon mitigation strategies, and biological disturbance. These factors are likely to have biodiversity implications. However, climate-driven forest ecosystem models used to predict changes to forest structure and composition are not coupled to models used to predict changes to biodiversity. We proposed integrating woodpecker response (biodiversity indicator) with forest ecosystem models. Woodpeckers are a good indicator species of forest ecosystem dynamics, because they are ecologically constrained by landscape-scale forest components, such as composition, structure, disturbance regimes, and management activities. In addition, they are correlated with forest avifauna community diversity. In this study, we explore integrating woodpecker and forest ecosystem climate models. We review climate-woodpecker models and compare the predicted responses to observed climate-induced changes. We identify inconsistencies between observed and predicted responses, explore the modeling causes, and identify the models pertinent to integration that address the inconsistencies. We found that predictions in the short term are not in agreement with observed trends for 7 of 15 evaluated species. Because niche constraints associated with woodpeckers are a result of complex interactions between climate, vegetation, and disturbance, we hypothesize that the lack of adequate representation of these processes in the current broad-scale climate-woodpecker models results in model-data mismatch. As a first step toward improvement, we suggest a conceptual model of climate-woodpecker-forest modeling for integration. The integration model provides climate-driven forest ecosystem modeling with a measure of biodiversity while retaining the feedback between climate and vegetation in woodpecker climate change modeling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.