Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 270

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Post‐fledging survival in passerine birds and the value of post‐fledging studies to conservation

Cox, W. Andrew, Thompson, Frank R., Cox, Allison S., Faaborg, John·2014·The Journal of Wildlife Management

Abstract

Conservation efforts are most effective when we have complete demographic information for a species of concern. Nevertheless, fundamental gaps in our knowledge of demography still exist for many taxa. For passerine birds, the period of time directly after young birds leave the nest and before they disperse and/or migrate (i.e., the post‐fledging period) remains an understudied life stage. We reviewed the literature on survival of passerine birds during the post‐fledging period to synthesize current knowledge on survival rates and the factors affecting these rates, and conducted a sensitivity analysis to explore the relationship between population growth and post‐fledging survival across the range of rates reported in the literature. Fledgling age was a strong predictor of survival, with the highest mortality occurring during the first 3 weeks after birds fledged. Among species, survival ranged from 0.23 to 0.87 during the first 3 weeks post‐fledging and increased with adult body mass and nestling period duration. The relatively high proportion (12 of 19; 63%) of studies that detected at least 1 habitat effect on survival indicates that management focused on post‐fledging habitat can improve survival. Sensitivity analyses indicated that post‐fledging survival rates less than approximately 0.4 require unrealistic overwinter survival rates of juveniles to prevent population decline, unless adult survival rates and seasonal fecundity are high. Post‐fledging survival is a useful metric for monitoring passerine populations because it sets the ceiling on first‐year survival, responds to habitat management, and leads to more comprehensive demographic models for songbirds. © 2014 The Wildlife Society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jwmg.670

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 54 references

Metadata

Authors
Cox, W. A., Thompson, F. R., Cox, A. S., & Faaborg, J.
Venue
The Journal of Wildlife Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-02
Volume
78
Issue
2
Pages
183-193
ISSN
  • 0022-541X (ISSN-L)
  • 1937-2817
OpenAlex
W1491076343
Cited by
270
References
54
FWCI
20.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Post‐fledging survival in passerine birds and the value of post‐fledging studies to conservation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jwmg.670
The paper
Cox, W. A., Thompson, F. R., Cox, A. S., & Faaborg, J. (2014). Post‐fledging survival in passerine birds and the value of post‐fledging studies to conservation. The Journal of Wildlife Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.670

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.