↓ Skip to main content

No evidence of critical slowing down in two endangered Hawaiian honeycreepers

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
No evidence of critical slowing down in two endangered Hawaiian honeycreepers
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0187518
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica C. Rozek, Richard J. Camp, J. Michael Reed

Abstract

There is debate about the current population trends and predicted short-term fates of the endangered forest birds, Hawai`i Creeper (Loxops mana) and Hawai`i `Ākepa (L. coccineus). Using long-term population size estimates, some studies report forest bird populations as stable or increasing, while other studies report signs of population decline or impending extinction associated with introduced Japanese White-eye (Zosterops japonicus) increase. Reliable predictors of impending population collapse, well before the collapse begins, have been reported in simulations and microcosm experiments. In these studies, statistical indicators of critical slowing down, a phenomenon characterized by longer recovery rates after population size perturbation, are reported to be early warning signals of an impending regime shift observable prior to the tipping point. While the conservation applications of these metrics are commonly discussed, early warning signal detection methods are rarely applied to population size data from natural populations, so their efficacy and utility in species management remain unclear. We evaluated two time series of state-space abundance estimates (1987-2012) from Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Hawai`i to test for evidence of early warning signals of impending population collapse for the Hawai`i Creeper and Hawai`i `Ākepa. We looked for signals throughout the time series, and prior to 2000, when white-eye abundance began increasing. We found no evidence for either species of increasing variance, autocorrelation, or skewness, which are commonly reported early warning signals. We calculated linear rather than ordinary skewness because the latter is biased, particularly for small sample sizes. Furthermore, we identified break-points in trends over time for both endangered species, indicating shifts in slopes away from strongly increasing trends, but they were only weakly supported by Bayesian change-point analyses (i.e., no step-wise changes in abundance). The break-point and change-point test results, in addition to the early warning signal analyses, support that the two populations do not appear to show signs of critical slowing down or decline.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 19%
Student > Master 3 14%
Other 2 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 5 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 33%
Environmental Science 4 19%
Psychology 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 November 2017.
All research outputs
#20,451,991
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#175,220
of 196,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,104
of 326,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,193
of 3,461 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 196,142 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 326,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,461 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.