The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
DECLINING DOWNWIND: AMPHIBIAN POPULATION DECLINES IN CALIFORNIA AND HISTORICAL PESTICIDE USE
Abstract
Pesticides have long been proposed as a possible cause of amphibian population declines, but due to a number of challenges there has been relatively little ecotoxicological research on pesticides and declines in natural populations. My study examines the association between the spatial patterns of declines for five California amphibian species and historical patterns of pesticide use in California from 1974 to 1991 based on Department of Pesticide Regulation records. Information on declines was derived from maps of historical sites and current population status for the Yosemite toad (Bufo canorus), California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), foothill yellow-legged frog (R. boylii), Cascades frog (R. cascadae), and the mountain yellow-legged frog (R. muscosa). Multiple logistic-regression and generalized additive models were used to analyze the relationship between site status (present or absent) and total upwind pesticide use, 64 pesticide classes and groups, and covariates including precipitation, elevation, surrounding urban and agricultural land use, and spatial location. Total pesticide use was a strong, significant variable in logistic-regression models for all species, except B. canorus. Total pesticide use was a significant variable even when spatial autocorrelation was accounted for by inclusion of a spatial location covariate. Cholinesterase-inhibiting pesticides (most organophosphates and carbamates) stood out as more strongly associated with population declines than any other class of pesticides. This is the first study in which population declines of multiple declining species have been associated with historical pesticide applications.
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
Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach.
Guthery, F. S., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802723 · Cited by 41,495
Cited by
Are we in the midst of the sixth mass extinction? A view from the world of amphibians
Wake, D. B., & Vredenburg, V. T. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0801921105 · Cited by 1,786
Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations
Blaustein, A. R., Walls, S. C., Bancroft, B. A., Lawler, J. J., Searle, C. L., & Gervasi, S. S. (2010) · Diversity · doi:10.3390/d2020281 · Cited by 420
Ryan, M. E., Palen, W. J., Adams, M. J., & Rochefort, R. M. (2014) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/130145 · Cited by 78
Metadata
- Authors
- Davidson, C.
- Venue
- Ecological Applications
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-12
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1892-1902
- ISSN
- 1051-0761 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2073920966
- Cited by
- 288
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.13
- 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: DECLINING DOWNWIND: AMPHIBIAN POPULATION DECLINES IN CALIFORNIA AND HISTORICAL PESTICIDE USE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/03-5224
- The paper
- Davidson, C. (2004). DECLINING DOWNWIND: AMPHIBIAN POPULATION DECLINES IN CALIFORNIA AND HISTORICAL PESTICIDE USE. Ecological Applications. https://doi.org/10.1890/03-5224
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.