ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2026
A global assessment of animal community responses to agricultural management.
Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2026. 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.
- A global assessment of animal community responses to agricultural management.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Transitions in agricultural management through crop and noncrop diversification on intensively managed croplands or pastures have benefited biodiversity. However, the extent to which agricultural management benefits species communities present in undisturbed ecosystems remains largely unclear. We quantified the animal biodiversity associated with a range of agricultural systems varying in crop and noncrop diversity and compared these with biodiversity associated with undisturbed reference ecosystems (mostly forests). We added data on agricultural management to three large databases-PREDICTS, GLOBIO, and a database compiled by Kuipers et al.-and grouped 107,386 observations from 151 studies into one of nine agricultural classes. We evaluated the animal biodiversity associated with the agricultural class, including the presence of threatened species, based on four biodiversity metrics (intactness, relative richness, compositional similarity, relative abundance). Biodiversity of monoculture annual and perennial croplands was least like that of reference ecosystems across biodiversity metrics. We found small biodiversity benefits of crop diversification and the presence of sparse trees on farmland. Biodiversity in agroforests and silvopastures was the most similar to reference ecosystems, probably due to a high density of trees, resulting in similar vegetation structure and diversity to undisturbed forests. Over time, biodiversity increased in agroforests, whereas the biodiversity of perennial croplands remained stable. Overall, our results suggested that the extent to which species associated with undisturbed ecosystems find refuge in agricultural areas is influenced by agricultural management, but different types of agricultural systems produced varying benefits. The outcomes of our study highlight the potential of introducing agricultural policies that aim to enhance agricultural management through tree planting and crop diversification to accommodate species that inhabit undisturbed ecosystems.
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.