The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conservation value of degraded habitats for forest birds in southern Peninsular Malaysia
Open accessAbstract
Clearance of tropical forest for agricultural purposes is generally assumed to seriously threaten the survival of forest species. In this study, we quantified the conservation value, for forest bird species, of three degraded habitat types in Peninsular Malaysia, namely rubber tree plantations, oil palm plantations, and open areas. We surveyed these degraded habitats using point counts to estimate their forest bird species richness and abundance. We assessed whether richness, abundance, and activities of different avian dietary groups (i.e. insectivores and frugivores) varied among the habitats. We identified the critical habitat elements that accounted for the distribution of forest avifauna in these degraded habitats. Our results showed that these habitats harboured a moderate fraction of forest avifauna (approximately 46–76 species) and their functions were complementary (i.e. rubber tree plantations for moving; open habitats for perching; shrubs in oil palm plantations for foraging). In terms of species richness and abundance, rubber tree plantations were more important than oil palm plantations and open habitats. The relatively high species richness of this agricultural landscape was partly due to the contiguity of our study areas with extensive forest areas. Forecasts of forest‐species presence under various canopy cover scenarios suggest that leaving isolated trees among non‐arboreal crops could greatly attract relatively tolerant species that require tree canopy. The conservation value of degraded habitats in agricultural landscapes seems to depend on factors such as the type of crops planted and distance to primary forest remnants.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., da Fonseca, G. A. B., & Kent, J. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35002501 · Cited by 31,710
Cited by
Is oil palm agriculture really destroying tropical biodiversity?
Koh, L. P., & Wilcove, D. S. (2008) · Conservation Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1755-263x.2008.00011.x · Cited by 1,120
Edwards, D. P., Larsen, T. H., Docherty, T. D. S., Ansell, F. A., Hsu, W. W., Derhé, M. A., Hamer, K. C., & Wilcove, D. S. (2011) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.1062 · Cited by 360
Is oil palm the next emerging threat to the Amazon?
Butler, R. A., & Laurance, W. F. (2009) · Tropical Conservation Science · doi:10.1177/194008290900200102 · Cited by 159
The impacts of oil palm agriculture on Colombia’s biodiversity: What we know and still need to know
Vargas, L. E. P., Laurance, W. F., Clements, G. R., & Edwards, W. (2015) · Tropical Conservation Science · doi:10.1177/194008291500800317 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Peh, K. S. ‐., Sodhi, N. S., De Jong, J., Sekercioglu, C. H., Yap, C. A. ‐., & Lim, S. L. ‐.
- Venue
- Diversity and Distributions
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-07-26
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 572-581
- ISSN
- 0967-9952 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-9516
- 1472-4642
- OpenAlex
- W2097217970
- Cited by
- 214
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Conservation value of degraded habitats for forest birds in southern Peninsular Malaysia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2006.00257.x
- The paper
- Peh, K. S. ‐., Sodhi, N. S., De Jong, J., Sekercioglu, C. H., Yap, C. A. ‐., & Lim, S. L. ‐. (2006). Conservation value of degraded habitats for forest birds in southern Peninsular Malaysia. Diversity and Distributions. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2006.00257.x
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.