Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 220

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Avian assemblage structure and domestic cat densities in urban environments

Open access
Sims, Victoria, Evans, Karl L., Newson, Stuart E., Tratalos, Jamie A., Gaston, Kevin J.·2008·Diversity and Distributions

Abstract

While there is intense debate regarding the impact of domestic cat populations on wildlife, its resolution is hindered by the lack of quite basic information. Domestic cats are generalist and obligate predators that receive supplementary food, and their population density reflects that of humans more than the density of their prey. In such a predator–prey system there is the potential for cat populations to have negative impacts on avian assemblages, which may be indicated by negative correlations between cat density and avian species richness and density. Here we report on the nature of such correlations across urban areas in Britain both for groups of species classified regarding their vulnerability to cat predation and individual species. Taking the availability of green space into account, we find negative relationships between cat densities and the number of bird species breeding in urban 1 km × 1 km squares. These relationships are particularly strong among groups of species that are vulnerable to cat predation. We find positive correlations between cat and avian densities; these have low explanatory power and shallow slopes among the species groups that are particularly vulnerable to cat predation. Evidence that the densities of individual species that are vulnerable to cat predation are negatively correlated with cat densities is equivocal, with at least half the species showing no marked pattern, and the remainder exhibiting contrasting patterns. Our results appear not to be confounded by the density of nest‐predating corvids (carrion crow, magpie, and jay), as the density of these species was not strongly negatively correlated with avian species richness or density. The general lack of marked negative correlations between cat and avian densities at our focal spatial scale may be a consequence of consistently high cat densities in our study areas (minimum density is 132 cats per square kilometre), and thus uniformly high impacts of cat populations on urban avian assemblages.

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 · 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00444.x

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 220

Metadata

Authors
Sims, V., Evans, K. L., Newson, S. E., Tratalos, J. A., & Gaston, K. J.
Venue
Diversity and Distributions
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-12-07
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
387-399
ISSN
  • 0967-9952 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-9516
  • 1472-4642
OpenAlex
W1588129121
Cited by
220
References
4
FWCI
7.39
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: Avian assemblage structure and domestic cat densities in urban environments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00444.x
The paper
Sims, V., Evans, K. L., Newson, S. E., Tratalos, J. A., & Gaston, K. J. (2008). Avian assemblage structure and domestic cat densities in urban environments. Diversity and Distributions. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00444.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.