ArticlePloS one2023
Implications of tree expansion in shrubland ecosystems for two generalist avian predators.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Songbird population trajectories diverge under simulations of conifer encroachment versus removal in a sagebrush ecosystem.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026Article
- 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Shrublands globally have undergone structural changes due to plant invasions, including the expansion of native trees. Removal of native conifer trees, especially juniper (Juniperus spp.), is occurring across the Great Basin of the western U.S. to support declining sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) habitats and associated wildlife species, such as greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). One justification for conifer removal is that it may improve survival of sagebrush-associated wildlife by reducing the abundance of avian predators. However, the relationship between conifer expansion and predator distributions has not been explicitly evaluated. Further, although structural characteristics of habitat are important for generalist predators, overall prey abundance may also affect habitat use by predators. We examined habitat use of common ravens (Corvus corax) and red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), two generalist predators whose populations are increasing in western North America, to variation in structural characteristics and prey distributions in sagebrush habitat that has experienced conifer expansion. Structural characteristics of habitat were important predictors of habitat use for both ravens and red-tailed hawks, whereas measures of prey abundance were unimportant for both species likely because generalist predators can use a wide variety of food resources. Ravens, but not red-tailed hawks, responded positively to increasing cover of juniper and the probability of habitat use was highest (> 0.95) where juniper cover within 100 m was > 20%. Habitat use by red-tailed hawks, but not ravens, was greater near cliffs but was not associated with juniper cover. Our study suggests that the removal of conifer in similar environments may lower the probability of habitat use for ravens, a common predator with significant impacts on many prey species. Therefore, we suggest conifer removal may improve sage-grouse reproductive success and survival depending on responses to conifer removal from other predators. Our results may be reflective of similar changes in rangeland ecosystems around the world undergoing expansion of conifer and other woody vegetation. Though species identities differ from sagebrush habitats, generalist avian predators in other habitats may have similar relationships with structural resources.
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.