MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Are the negative effects of roads on breeding birds caused by traffic noise?

2011· article· en· W2108397748 on OpenAlexafffund
Patricia D. Summers, Glenn M. Cunnington, Lenore Fahrig

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Ecology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpecies richnessAbundance (ecology)Traffic noiseNoise (video)TransectEcologyGeographyRoad trafficWildlifeEnvironmental scienceBiologyTransport engineeringComputer scienceNoise reductionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary 1. The effects of roads on wildlife populations are widespread and well documented. Many studies have shown that bird abundance, occurrence and species richness are reduced near roads, with the largest reductions where traffic levels are high. Negative correlations have been reported between bird richness/abundance and traffic noise but the possible causes of road effects are inter‐correlated. It is important to disentangle the different effects so that appropriate mitigation measures can be implemented. 2. We tested the hypothesis that traffic noise is a key negative effect by testing three predictions: (i) bird richness/abundance should reach a maximum at the same distance from roads that traffic noise reaches a minimum; (ii) the effect of traffic noise on bird richness/abundance should be stronger than the effect of distance from the road on bird richness/abundance; and (iii) sites with more traffic noise at a given distance from the road should show lower bird richness/abundance than sites with less traffic noise at the same distance. 3. We collected breeding bird occurrence and traffic noise data along twenty 600‐m transects perpendicular to roads at 10 high‐traffic road sites. 4. Traffic noise decreased and bird species richness increased with increasing distance from the roads. However, none of the predictions derived from the traffic noise hypothesis was supported. 5. Synthesis and applications. Our results suggest that traffic noise is not the main cause of the negative relationship between bird species richness/abundance and proximity to roads. Instead, traffic mortality may be the main mechanism causing this relationship. We suggest that mitigation of road impacts on birds should focus mainly on reducing mortality rather than reducing traffic noise. In particular, engineering road surfaces, tyres and vehicle engines to reduce noise would not mitigate road effects; instead, structures to keep birds away from roads or force them to fly above the traffic would be more effective.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations191
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied EcologySame topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207