ArticlePeerJ2019
Incorporating acoustic objectives into Forest Management Planning when sensitive bird species are relevant.
Article in PeerJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe potentially negative effects of timber harvesting on biodiversity and habitat conservation leads to the consideration of a wide range of restrictions to forest logging in natural areas. In particular, high noise levels produced by forest machinery present a challenge to developing sustainable forest management plans. The Cinereous vulture (
methodsOur study was conducted in a Scots pine (
resultsThe minimum distance ( DISCUSSION: Our results highlight the convenience of considering noise modeling tools at a forest planning level in order to address the compatibility of forest logging and the necessity of protecting nature. We found that spatial propagation of noise made by chainsaws at felling sites does not differ between stands even in a mountainous terrain, contrary to what we initially hypothesized. However, temporary logging restrictions could be excluded in about 36% of the current conditioned management areas according to
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.