Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40337258›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2025

Using a large citizen science dataset to uncover diverse patterns of elevational migration in Himalayan birds.

Tarun Menon, Paul R Elsen, Umesh Srinivasan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Tarun MenonCentre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Karnataka, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2397-5372
Paul R ElsenGlobal Conservation Program, Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9953-7961
Umesh SrinivasanCentre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Karnataka, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8040-1124

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among montane birds, elevational migration is a well-described phenomenon. Yet, apart from mountain ranges in the Americas, there is little information on the large-scale patterns and extent of elevational migration. Using a large citizen science dataset (eBird), we determine the elevational ranges of 377 Himalayan bird species in their breeding and non-breeding periods. Based on the position of species' seasonal elevation ranges, we describe five elevational migration patterns that broadly include post-breeding upslope and downslope migration. Most high-elevation breeders (65-75%) were downslope migrants, which were further subdivided into four distinct patterns: 'displace' (complete downslope), 'shift' (partial downslope), 'expand' (lower limit expansion) and 'contract' (upper limit contraction). We find significant intraspecific variation in migration patterns across the Himalayas, possibly determined by local biotic and abiotic conditions. Specialized dietary guilds like invertivores were more likely to show shift or displace migration, potentially tracking seasonally fluctuating food resources, while generalists like omnivores and human commensals were more likely to be resident. Territorial birds were largely non-migratory, most likely to retain high-quality breeding territories. As mountains are a bounded domain with limited combinations of species' seasonal elevation ranges, the patterns we describe here are useful for understanding elevational migration globally.

Indexed as

citizen scienceeBirdelevational movementguildsHimalayaspartial migration

Identifiers

PMID40337258
PMCPMC12055286

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.