ArticlePloS one2023
Genetic identification of avian samples recovered from solar energy installations.
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.
- Underestimated Fatalities of a Cryptic Avian Species of Conservation Concern at Wind Energy Facilities in California, USA.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Renewable energy production and development will drastically affect how we meet global energy demands, while simultaneously reducing the impact of climate change. Although the possible effects of renewable energy production (mainly from solar- and wind-energy facilities) on wildlife have been explored, knowledge gaps still exist, and collecting data from wildlife remains (when negative interactions occur) at energy installations can act as a first step regarding the study of species and communities interacting with facilities. In the case of avian species, samples can be collected relatively easily (as compared to other sampling methods), but may only be able to be identified when morphological characteristics are diagnostic for a species. Therefore, many samples that appear as partial remains, or "feather spots"-known to be of avian origin but not readily assignable to species via morphology-may remain unidentified, reducing the efficiency of sample collection and the accuracy of patterns observed. To obtain data from these samples and ensure their identification and inclusion in subsequent analyses, we applied, for the first time, a DNA barcoding approach that uses mitochondrial genetic data to identify unknown avian samples collected at solar facilities to species. We also verified and compared identifications obtained by our genetic method to traditional morphological identifications using a blind test, and discuss discrepancies observed. Our results suggest that this genetic tool can be used to verify, correct, and supplement identifications made in the field and can produce data that allow accurate comparisons of avian interactions across facilities, locations, or technology types. We recommend implementing this genetic approach to ensure that unknown samples collected are efficiently identified and contribute to a better understanding of wildlife impacts at renewable energy projects.
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.