The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of Land Use on Bird Species Richness in Sulawesi, Indonesia
Abstract
Abstract: There is still much debate over the potential value of land‐use systems for the maintenance of tropical biodiversity. An increasing number of studies indicate that much forest biodiversity can also be found in the agricultural landscape matrix. Because there is little information on the potential value of land‐use systems for tropical forest bird species, we conducted repeated point counts in near‐primary forest, adjacent young secondary forest, modernized cacao agroforestry systems, and annual cultures at submontane elevations in central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Species richness decreased from natural forest and young secondary forest to agroforestry systems and annual cultures. Although species richness was similar between natural and young secondary forest, the number of endemic bird species was significantly lower in second‐growth forest. Species composition gradually changed as the habitat changed from natural to secondary forest, agroforestry systems, and annual cultures. Despite close proximity to near‐primary forest, the agroforestry systems studied supported only a few small frugivorous‐nectarivorous species. Our results suggest that secondary forest could play an important role in the conservation of many Sulawesi bird species, but, although suitable for colonization, its potential to sustain populations over the long term is unknown. Improvement of the landscape matrix for biodiversity conservation through secondary habitats therefore seems desirable to enlarge the ranges of forest species, but the fight against land conversion within protected areas of the region should be of much higher importance, at least at present.
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
Habitat connectivity and matrix restoration: the wider implications of agri‐environment schemes
DONALD, P. F., & EVANS, A. D. (2006) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01146.x · Cited by 483
Conserving Southeast Asian forest biodiversity in human-modified landscapes
Sodhi, N. S., Koh, L. P., Clements, R., Wanger, T. C., Hill, J. K., Hamer, K. C., Clough, Y., Tscharntke, T., Posa, M. R. C., & Lee, T. M. (2010) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2009.12.029 · Cited by 386
Minimising the harm to biodiversity of producing more food globally
Phalan, B., Balmford, A., Green, R. E., & Scharlemann, J. P. W. (2011) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.11.008 · Cited by 317
The value of primary, secondary and plantation forests for Amazonian birds
Barlow, J., Mestre, L. A. M., Gardner, T. A., & Peres, C. A. (2007) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2006.11.021 · Cited by 290
ARATRAKORN, S., THUNHIKORN, S., & DONALD, P. F. (2006) · Bird Conservation International · doi:10.1017/s0959270906000062 · Cited by 281
Metadata
- Authors
- WALTERT, M., MARDIASTUTI, A., & MÜHLENBERG, M.
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-09-28
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1339-1346
- ISSN
- 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-1739
- OpenAlex
- W2212282624
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.43
- 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: Effects of Land Use on Bird Species Richness in Sulawesi, Indonesia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00127.x
- The paper
- WALTERT, M., MARDIASTUTI, A., & MÜHLENBERG, M. (2004). Effects of Land Use on Bird Species Richness in Sulawesi, Indonesia. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00127.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.