Responses of functional traits in cavity-nesting birds to logging in subtropical and temperate forests of the Americas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Logging causes changes in habitat structure, which can potentially lead to variations in taxonomic and functional richness of biodiversity. Studies on how functional traits in birds are affected by logging operations can provide an important element for the understanding of ecosystem processes. In this paper, we examined how logging in subtropical Andean forests influenced taxonomic and functional diversity of cavity-nesting birds. We used these results to compare how logging affected ecosystem functions in temperate and subtropical forests of the Americas. We used point-counts to examine the effects of logging on taxonomic and functional traits in avian communities (Functional Richness, Functional evenness, Functional Divergence, and Community-weighted mean). We found that logging changed bird richness and abundance, although it had no effect on the functional response to the measured traits. The comparison of our results with those of temperate forests of Canada and Chile reveals differences in the functional richness of birds in these habitats, with a lower impact of logging on functional traits. We highlight the importance of including functional traits in the analyses, since the reduction in the species richness and abundance may not be translated into functional changes within the ecosystem.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".