MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093093933 · doi:10.1111/mam.12227

Effects of land‐use changes on Brazilian bats: a review of current knowledge

2020· review· en· W3093093933 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMammal Review · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsBiomeGeographyBiodiversityLand useEcologyUrbanizationBiological dispersalEcosystem servicesAmazon rainforestNettingMetapopulationAgroforestryEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementBiologyPopulationEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One third of Brazil has been converted to human‐modified lands, emphasising the need to understand biodiversity’s responses to land‐use changes. To address this issue, we reviewed 53 studies on the effects of land‐use changes on bats in the country from 1990 to 2018. Bats were chosen because they contribute towards numerous ecosystem services, including seed dispersal and insect control. For each study, we obtained data on the biome where fieldwork was conducted, participating institutes, sampling method, sampling effort, main results and academic impact. Spatial scales of studies were divided into ‘local’, ‘fragment’, ‘landscape’ or ‘metapopulation’. Our results indicate an increasing interest in bats and land‐use changes in Brazil over time; however, no trend in academic impact factor was found. Studies carried out in the Atlantic Forest were the most common, appearing earlier in the literature, but studies in Amazonia, often from long‐term research, had larger sampling efforts, were published in higher impact factor journals and received more citations. We identified several gaps in the literature: 1) lack of acoustic surveys complementing mist‐netting, 2) telemetry studies were rare, 3) underrepresentation of the Caatinga biome, along with Pantanal and Grasslands (= Pampa), and 4) fewer studies using the landscape and fragment scale than local studies. We suggest that future research should focus on filling those gaps. Bat diversity is often found to be positively related to forest cover, fragment size and natural vegetation. Logging and agroforestry seem to have the lesser impact on bats compared to agriculture and urbanisation. Only haematophagous bats are benefited by pastures. We found guild‐specific responses to land‐use changes. Haematophagous batsseem to be the least impacted by them compared to other guilds, while animalivorous bats are particularly impacted by habitat fragmentation. Facing continuous deforestation, we can expect that bat diversity in Brazil will possibly reduce. Conservation efforts should focus on species shown to be sensitive to land‐use changes, especially where higher deforestation rates are expected.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.254 · 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