Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37540671›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Anthropogenic threats to owls: Insights from rehabilitation admittance data and rodenticide screening in Texas.

Eres A Gomez, Heather L Prestridge, Jennifer A Smith

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eres A GomezDepartment of Integrative Biology, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2961-8034
Heather L PrestridgeBiodiversity Research and Teaching Collections, Department of Ecology and Conservation Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.
Jennifer A SmithDepartment of Integrative Biology, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7717-2642
The University of Texas at San Antonio · USTexas A&M University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Owls (Strigiformes) provide myriad ecosystem services and are sentinels for ecosystem health. However, they are at continued risk from anthropogenic threats such as vehicle collisions, entanglement with human-made materials, and exposure to anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs), a widespread pesticide known to affect owls. Texas is an important region for numerous migratory and non-migratory owl species in the United States (US), yet assessments of threats owls face here are lacking preventing the development of informed conservation strategies. This study coupled assessment of admittance data from two wildlife rehabilitation centers in Texas with AR liver screening to (1) identify which species of owls are commonly admitted, (2) evaluate seasonality of admittance, and (3) assess causes of admittance for owls in Texas. Between 2010 and 2021, 1,620 owls were admitted into rehabilitation, representing eight species of which the Great-horned Owl (Bubo virginianus) was the most common. For all owls combined admittance rates were highest in the spring, driven by an influx of juveniles (n = 703, 43.40%). The leading cause of admittance amongst species was 'no apparent injury' (n = 567, 34.94%). Where clear diagnoses could be made, the leading causes of admittances were 'entrapment in human infrastructure' (n = 100, 6.11%) and 'collision with vehicles' (n = 74, 4.56%). While the admittance data did not reveal any cases of AR poisoning, liver screening demonstrated high incidences of AR exposure; of 53 owls screened for ARs, 50.94% (n = 27) tested positive with 18 showing exposure to multiple ARs. Brodifacoum was the most frequently detected AR (n = 19, 43.18%) and seven owls (25.93%) tested positive within lethal ranges. Our results suggest that owls in Texas are at risk from myriad anthropogenic threats and face high exposure rates to ARs. In doing so, our results can inform conservation strategies that mitigate anthropogenic threats faced by owls in Texas and beyond.

Indexed as

RodenticidesStrigiformesAnimalsAnticoagulantsEcosystemHumansTexasAnticoagulantsRodenticides

Identifiers

PMID37540671
PMCPMC10403058
OpenAlexW4385574939

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.