SynthesisPloS one2026
Do more birds mean more bird-aircraft collisions? A meta-analysis testing a key wildlife management tenet.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bird-aircraft collisions (bird strikes) pose threats to aviation safety and avian life. One of the tenets of airport-based management strategies to prevent bird strikes is the reduction of bird density within established separation distances from air operations areas. The rationale is that higher local bird densities could increase the spatial and temporal overlap in the use of airspace by both birds and aircraft, leading to a higher frequency of bird strikes. However, the strength and direction of this relationship have not been evaluated across published studies. This is an important gap, given how entrenched this assumed relationship has become to allocate limited resources to airport wildlife management. In this study, we assessed the strength of the relationship between avian abundance and bird strikes across studies using a meta-analytic approach. Through a reproducible literature search and screening criteria, we identified 20 outcomes (i.e., effect sizes) from 13 studies. We conducted a multilevel meta-analysis and found a positive correlation (Pearson's r = 0.520, 95% confidence intervals: 0.308-0.683), supporting the positive relationship between bird abundance and bird strike frequency. We additionally found evidence that the existing literature has high levels of between-study heterogeneity and publication bias, low statistical power, and multiple methodological concerns. These issues suggest that our effect size estimation should be interpreted with care. Given the limitations of the published literature testing this relationship, we provide a set of methodological recommendations for improving future experiments. We call for prioritizing the empirical testing of the abundance-bird strike relationship on and near airports across the world, and the standardization of bird survey approaches. These future tests are key to aligning management efforts to local airport needs.
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.