↓ Skip to main content

Habitat Availability Is a More Plausible Explanation than Insecticide Acute Toxicity for U.S. Grassland Bird Species Declines

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Habitat Availability Is a More Plausible Explanation than Insecticide Acute Toxicity for U.S. Grassland Bird Species Declines
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0098064
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jason M. Hill, J. Franklin Egan, Glenn E. Stauffer, Duane R. Diefenbach

Abstract

Grassland bird species have experienced substantial declines in North America. These declines have been largely attributed to habitat loss and degradation, especially from agricultural practices and intensification (the habitat-availability hypothesis). A recent analysis of North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) "grassland breeding" bird trends reported the surprising conclusion that insecticide acute toxicity was a better correlate of grassland bird declines in North America from 1980-2003 (the insecticide-acute-toxicity hypothesis) than was habitat loss through agricultural intensification. In this paper we reached the opposite conclusion. We used an alternative statistical approach with additional habitat covariates to analyze the same grassland bird trends over the same time frame. Grassland bird trends were positively associated with increases in area of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) lands and cropland used as pasture, whereas the effect of insecticide acute toxicity on bird trends was uncertain. Our models suggested that acute insecticide risk potentially has a detrimental effect on grassland bird trends, but models representing the habitat-availability hypothesis were 1.3-21.0 times better supported than models representing the insecticide-acute-toxicity hypothesis. Based on point estimates of effect sizes, CRP area and agricultural intensification had approximately 3.6 and 1.6 times more effect on grassland bird trends than lethal insecticide risk, respectively. Our findings suggest that preserving remaining grasslands is crucial to conserving grassland bird populations. The amount of grassland that has been lost in North America since 1980 is well documented, continuing, and staggering whereas insecticide use greatly declined prior to the 1990s. Grassland birds will likely benefit from the de-intensification of agricultural practices and the interspersion of pastures, Conservation Reserve Program lands, rangelands and other grassland habitats into existing agricultural landscapes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 99 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 27%
Researcher 20 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 5 5%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 18 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 44%
Environmental Science 23 22%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 25 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2014.
All research outputs
#3,051,776
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#40,708
of 202,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,007
of 227,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#833
of 4,642 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,026 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 227,953 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,642 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.