The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic review of effects on biodiversity from oil palm production
Open accessAbstract
Background: During the past decade there has been a growing interest in bioenergy, driven by concerns about global climate change, growing energy demand, and depleting fossil fuel reserves. The predicted rise in biofuel demand makes it important to understand the potential consequences of expanding biofuel cultivation. A systematic review was conducted on the biodiversity impacts of three first-generation biofuel crops (oil palm, soybean, and jatropha) in the tropics. The study focused on the impacts on species richness, abundance (total number of individuals or occurrences), community composition, and ecosystem functions related to species richness and community composition. Methods: Literature was searched using an a priori protocol. Owing to a lack of available studies of biodiversity impacts from soybean and jatropha that met the inclusion criteria set out in the systematic review protocol, all analyses focused on oil palm. The impacts of oil palm cultivation on species richness, abundance, and community similarity were summarized quantitatively; other results were summarized narratively. Results: The searches returned 9143 articles after duplicate removal of which 25 met the published inclusion criteria and were therefore accepted for the final review. Twenty of them had been conducted in Malaysia and two thirds were on arthropods. Overall, oil palm plantations had reduced species richness compared with primary and secondary forests, and the composition of species assemblages changed significantly after forest conversion to oil palm plantation. Abundance showed species-specific responses and hence, the overall abundance was not significantly different between plantations and forest areas. Only one study reported how different production systems (smallholdings vs. industrial estates) affect biodiversity. No studies that examined the effects on ecosystem functions of reduced species richness or changes in community composition met the inclusion criteria. Neither were there studies that reported how areas managed under different standards (e.g. different certification systems) affect biodiversity and ecosystem function. Conclusions: Our review suggests that oil palm plantations have reduced species richness compared with primary and secondary forests, and the composition of species assemblage changes significantly after forest conversion to oil palm plantation. Effects of different production systems on biodiversity and ecosystem function are clear knowledge gaps that should be addressed in future research. Trial registration: CEE10-013
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
The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis
(2019) · doi:10.7758/9781610448864 · Cited by 4,553
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 · cited 3×
“Koh and Wilcove (2008) used butterfly data collected from primary and logged forest in two earlier studies (Hamer et al. 2003, and Dumbrell and Hill 2005) and compared it with the data they collected from an oil palm plantation.”
BackgroundResultMeta-analysis: synthesizing research findings in ecology and evolution
Arnqvist, G., & Wooster, D. (1995) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(00)89073-4 · Cited by 570
Edwards, P., Clarke, M., DiGuiseppi, C., Pratap, S., Roberts, I., & Wentz, R. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1190 · Cited by 340
Why do farmers prefer oil palm? Lessons learnt from Bungo District, Indonesia
Feintrenie, L., Chong, W. K., & Levang, P. (2010) · Small-scale Forestry · doi:10.1007/s11842-010-9122-2 · Cited by 335
Cited by
Whitmee, S., Haines, A., Beyrer, C., Boltz, F., Capon, A. G., de Souza Dias, B. F., Ezeh, A., Frumkin, H., Gong, P., Head, P., et al. (2015) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60901-1 · Cited by 2,998
The role of google scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching
Haddaway, N. R., Collins, A. M., Coughlin, D., & Kirk, S. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138237 · Cited by 2,387
A review of the ecosystem functions in oil palm plantations, using forests as a reference system
Dislich, C., Keyel, A. C., Salecker, J., Kisel, Y., Meyer, K. M., Auliya, M., Barnes, A. D., Corre, M. D., Darras, K., Faust, H., et al. (2017) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12295 · Cited by 373
Global environmental change and noncommunicable disease risks
Frumkin, H., & Haines, A. (2019) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-043706 · Cited by 194
Biodiversity impacts of bioenergy production: Microalgae vs. first generation biofuels
Correa, D. F., Beyer, H. L., Possingham, H. P., Thomas-Hall, S. R., & Schenk, P. M. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.068 · Cited by 161
Metadata
- Authors
- Savilaakso, S., Garcia, C., Garcia-Ulloa, J., Ghazoul, J., Groom, M., Guariguata, M. R., Laumonier, Y., Nasi, R., Petrokofsky, G., Snaddon, J., & Zrust, M.
- Venue
- Environmental Evidence
- Published
- 2014-02-25
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2047-2382 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2103178550
- Cited by
- 159
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 1.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Systematic review of effects on biodiversity from oil palm production. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/2047-2382-3-4
- The paper
- Savilaakso, S., Garcia, C., Garcia-Ulloa, J., Ghazoul, J., Groom, M., Guariguata, M. R., Laumonier, Y., Nasi, R., Petrokofsky, G., Snaddon, J., & Zrust, M. (2014). Systematic review of effects on biodiversity from oil palm production. Environmental Evidence. https://doi.org/10.1186/2047-2382-3-4
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.