Bird services and disservices to strawberry farming in Californian agricultural landscapes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Bird conservation in agricultural settings can be controversial. While some bird species damage some crops, others suppress insect pests. Few studies have simultaneously compared bird services and disservices to assess their net impact. Using an exclusion experiment in six California strawberry farms, we show that bird suppression of berry damage by insect pests (about 3.8% of berries) is similar in magnitude to the damage birds inflict on strawberries (about 3.2% of berries). Across 27 farms, we found that bird species richness and the relative abundance of insectivorous birds increased, while the relative abundance of strawberry‐eating birds and bird damage decreased on farms with more semi‐natural land cover in the surrounding landscapes (1000 m radius). Relative to homogeneous farms, those that implemented diversification practices, such as hedgerows, flower strips or increased crop diversity, had greater bird species richness, total relative abundance, insectivore abundance and strawberry‐eating bird abundance. Synthesis and applications . Conserving semi‐natural land cover in the surrounding landscape benefits bird species richness locally and aids farmers through reduced abundance of strawberry‐eating birds and bird damage. These results highlight the need to consider both the services and disservices of birds when making management decisions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".