↓ Skip to main content

Landscape Context Mediates Avian Habitat Choice in Tropical Forest Restoration

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
201 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
Landscape Context Mediates Avian Habitat Choice in Tropical Forest Restoration
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0090573
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Leighton Reid, Chase D. Mendenhall, J. Abel Rosales, Rakan A. Zahawi, Karen D. Holl

Abstract

Birds both promote and prosper from forest restoration. The ecosystem functions birds perform can increase the pace of forest regeneration and, correspondingly, increase the available habitat for birds and other forest-dependent species. The aim of this study was to learn how tropical forest restoration treatments interact with landscape tree cover to affect the structure and composition of a diverse bird assemblage. We sampled bird communities over two years in 13 restoration sites and two old-growth forests in southern Costa Rica. Restoration sites were established on degraded farmlands in a variety of landscape contexts, and each included a 0.25-ha plantation, island treatment (trees planted in patches), and unplanted control. We analyzed four attributes of bird communities including frugivore abundance, nectarivore abundance, migrant insectivore richness, and compositional similarity of bird communities in restoration plots to bird communities in old-growth forests. All four bird community variables were greater in plantations and/or islands than in control treatments. Frugivore and nectarivore abundance decreased with increasing tree cover in the landscape surrounding restoration plots, whereas compositional similarity to old-growth forests was greatest in plantations embedded in landscapes with high tree cover. Migrant insectivore richness was unaffected by landscape tree cover. Our results agree with previous studies showing that increasing levels of investment in active restoration are positively related to bird richness and abundance, but differences in the effects of landscape tree cover on foraging guilds and community composition suggest that trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and bird-mediated ecosystem functioning may be important for prioritizing restoration sites.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 201 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
Brazil 4 2%
Australia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 191 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 21%
Student > Master 38 19%
Researcher 33 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Other 33 16%
Unknown 31 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 92 46%
Environmental Science 62 31%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 1%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 <1%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 <1%
Other 5 2%
Unknown 35 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 27 February 2015.
All research outputs
#6,348,301
of 23,154,520 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#77,640
of 197,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,771
of 222,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,018
of 6,089 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,154,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 197,783 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 222,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,089 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.