ArticlePloS one2023
Assigning harvested waterfowl to geographic origin using feather δ2H isoscapes: What is the best analytical approach?
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Establishing links between breeding, stopover, and wintering sites for migratory species is important for their effective conservation and management. Isotopic assignment methods used to create these connections rely on the use of predictable, established relationships between the isotopic composition of environmental hydrogen and that of the non-exchangeable hydrogen in animal tissues, often in the form of a calibration equation relating feather (δ2Hf) values derived from known-origin individuals and amount-weighted long-term precipitation (δ2Hp) data. The efficacy of assigning waterfowl to moult origin using stable isotopes depends on the accuracy of these relationships and their statistical uncertainty. Most current calibrations for terrestrial species in North America are done using amount-weighted mean growing-season δ2Hp values, but the calibration relationship is less clear for aquatic and semi-aquatic species. Our objective was to critically evaluate current methods used to calibrate δ2Hp isoscapes to predicted δ2Hf values for waterfowl. Specifically, we evaluated the strength of the relationships between δ2Hp values from three commonly used isoscapes and known-origin δ2Hf values three published datasets and one collected as part of this study, also grouping these data into foraging guilds (dabbling vs diving ducks). We then evaluated the performance of assignments using these calibrations by applying a cross-validation procedure. It remains unclear if any of the tested δ2Hp isoscapes better predict surface water inputs into food webs for foraging waterfowl. We found only marginal differences in the performance of the tested known-origin datasets, where the combined foraging-guild-specific datasets showed lower assignment precision and model fit compared to data for individual species. We recommend the use of the more conservative combined foraging-guild-specific datasets to assign geographic origin for all dabbling duck species. Refining these relationships is important for improved waterfowl management and contributes to a better understanding of the limitations of assignment methods when using the isotope approach.
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.