↓ Skip to main content

Supplementary feeding of wild birds indirectly affects ground beetle populations in suburban gardens

Overview of attention for article published in Urban Ecosystems, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#49 of 787)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
36 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Supplementary feeding of wild birds indirectly affects ground beetle populations in suburban gardens
Published in
Urban Ecosystems, August 2014
DOI 10.1007/s11252-014-0404-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melanie E. Orros, Rebecca L. Thomas, Graham J. Holloway, Mark D. E. Fellowes

Abstract

Supplementary feeding of wild birds by domestic garden-holders is a globally widespread and popular form of human-wildlife interaction, particularly in urban areas. Vast amounts of energy are thus being added to garden ecosystems. However, the potential indirect effects of this activity on non-avian species have been little studied to date, with the only two previous studies taking place under experimentally manipulated conditions. Here we present the first evidence of a localised depletive effect of wild bird feeding on ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in suburban gardens under the usual feeding patterns of the garden-holders. We trapped significantly fewer ground beetles directly under bird-feeding stations than in matched areas of habitat away from feeders. Video analysis also revealed significantly higher activity by ground-foraging birds under the feeding stations than in the control areas. Small mammal trapping revealed no evidence that these species differ in abundance between gardens with and without bird feeders. We therefore suggest that local increases in ground-foraging activity by bird species whose diets encompass arthropods as well as seed material are responsible for the reduction in ground beetle numbers. Our work therefore illustrates that providing food for wild birds can have indirect negative effects on palatable prey species under typical conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 2%
Hungary 1 1%
Unknown 89 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 21%
Researcher 15 16%
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Other 6 7%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 14 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 47%
Environmental Science 21 23%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 17 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 25 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,186,879
of 24,346,461 outputs
Outputs from Urban Ecosystems
#49
of 787 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,201
of 240,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Urban Ecosystems
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,346,461 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 787 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 240,194 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.