Impact of Oil Palm Plantation Expansion on Avian Species Diversity in Banggai District, Central Sulawesi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth of oil palm plantations, which converts land use patterns to monocultures, is believed to impact the diversity of animal species, particularly birds.Bird species diversity is one of the important indicators for assessing environmental quality and requires more attention.Various studies have shown that the development of oil palm plantations can reduce bird diversity, although on the other hand, with the development of oil palm plants, bird diversity can increase.Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the number of species, richness, uniformity, and diversity of bird species in different types of land cover.This study was conducted from March to May 2024.The study was carried out in oil palm plantations in Banggai District, Central Sulawesi.The research locations included both mature and young oil palm plantations, as well as areas with high conservation value (HCV).Bird species diversity was assessed through direct observations along transects that were 1 km in length, or adapted to the field conditions, and 100 meters wide.The data analysis focused on the species richness, diversity, and evenness indices.The findings revealed a total of 55 bird species present in the oil palm plantations.The mature oil palm areas had the highest number of bird species, with 41 species, while the young oil palm areas had the lowest, with 34 species.The highest species richness index was recorded in the mature oil palm areas, with a value of (Dmg = 8.02), and the lowest in the young oil palm areas, with (Dmg = 6.36).The evenness index in the study areas was relatively uniform, ranging from 0.8 to 0.9, which is close to 1.This suggests that managing oil palm plantations in a way that preserves the original forest land cover can help maintain bird species diversity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".