The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Large trees are keystone structures in urban parks
Open accessAbstract
Large trees are considered keystone structures in agricultural and forestry production landscapes, but research demonstrating this in urban landscapes is urgently needed. If large trees are keystone structures in urban parks, it is imperative that this is recognized in policy to ensure their ongoing existence. We studied the role of large native trees for birds in urban parks in Canberra, Australia. We found that (1) large trees had a consistent, strong, and positive relationship with five measures of bird diversity, and (2) as trees became larger in size, their positive effect on bird diversity increased. Large urban trees are therefore keystone structures that provide crucial habitat resources for wildlife. Hence, it is vital that they are managed appropriately. With evidence‐based tree preservation policies that recognize biodiversity values, and proactive planning for future large trees, the protection and perpetuation of these important keystone structures can be achieved.
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
Cited by
The role of ‘nativeness’ in urban greening to support animal biodiversity
Berthon, K., Thomas, F., & Bekessy, S. (2021) · Landscape and Urban Planning · doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103959 · Cited by 202
Wilk, A. J., Donlon, K. C., & Peterman, W. E. (2020) · Urban Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/s11252-020-00958-8 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Stagoll, K., Lindenmayer, D. B., Knight, E., Fischer, J., & Manning, A. D.
- Venue
- Conservation Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-02-02
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 115-122
- ISSN
- 1755-263X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2149101344
- Cited by
- 295
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 31.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.