↓ Skip to main content

Coffee Agroforests Remain Beneficial for Neotropical Bird Community Conservation across Seasons

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2013
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 (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 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
Coffee Agroforests Remain Beneficial for Neotropical Bird Community Conservation across Seasons
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0065101
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sonia M. Hernandez, Brady J. Mattsson, Valerie E. Peters, Robert J. Cooper, C. Ron Carroll

Abstract

Coffee agroforestry systems and secondary forests have been shown to support similar bird communities but comparing these habitat types are challenged by potential biases due to differences in detectability between habitats. Furthermore, seasonal dynamics may influence bird communities differently in different habitat types and therefore seasonal effects should be considered in comparisons. To address these issues, we incorporated seasonal effects and factors potentially affecting bird detectability into models to compare avian community composition and dynamics between coffee agroforests and secondary forest fragments. In particular, we modeled community composition and community dynamics of bird functional groups based on habitat type (coffee agroforest vs. secondary forest) and season while accounting for variation in capture probability (i.e. detectability). The models we used estimated capture probability to be similar between habitat types for each dietary guild, but omnivores had a lower capture probability than frugivores and insectivores. Although apparent species richness was higher in coffee agroforest than secondary forest, model results indicated that omnivores and insectivores were more common in secondary forest when accounting for heterogeneity in capture probability. Our results largely support the notion that shade-coffee can serve as a surrogate habitat for secondary forest with respect to avian communities. Small coffee agroforests embedded within the typical tropical countryside matrix of secondary forest patches and small-scale agriculture, therefore, may host avian communities that resemble those of surrounding secondary forest, and may serve as viable corridors linking patches of forest within these landscapes. This information is an important step toward effective landscape-scale conservation in Neotropical agricultural landscapes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Uganda 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 128 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 16%
Student > Master 21 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 18 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 69 51%
Environmental Science 29 22%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 1%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 23 17%
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 10 October 2013.
All research outputs
#3,352,126
of 25,826,146 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#42,623
of 225,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,406
of 214,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#962
of 4,934 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,826,146 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 225,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 214,418 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 4,934 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.