Response of woodpeckers to changes in forest health and harvest: implications for conservation of avian biodiversity.
92 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dcfbccd5bd95ddf65540681ca2e4eca57cc46f39
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology
- K. Martin
- K. Cockle
- Tomasz A Wesolowski
- Gabriel Gaona
- Y. van der Hoek
- G. Robledo
- A. Chalfoun
- S. Buskirk
In Global and Planetary Change
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
Citations in the corpus
- The diversity, distribution and conservation status of the tree‐cavity‐nesting birds of the world (2017, background): “Retention of old trees seems equally important (e.g., in ways outlined in Wesołowski, 2007; Drever & Martin, 2010; Bunnell, 2013; Lindenmayer et al., 2014), as cavities formed by decay or mechanical damage, usually found in older, larger, trees, are used by many tree- cavity nesters.”
- Ecological consequences of mountain pine beetle outbreaks for wildlife in western North American forests (2014, background): “Two studies examined changes in absolute or relative abundance by 20 avian species (Drever and Martin 2010, Kroll et al. 2012), and one examined changes in brood size (number of eggs or nestlings per nest) by six woodpecker species (Edworthy et al. 2011).”
- Woodpeckers, decay, and the future of cavity-nesting vertebrate communities worldwide (2011, background): “In North America, woodpeckers may mitigate the impacts of forest loss or disturbance by excavating suitable nesting cavities in relatively younger, deciduous trees that are less likely to be harvested (Drever and Martin 2010).”
- Linking fungi, trees, and hole-using birds in a Neotropical tree-cavity network: Pathways of cavity production and implications for conservation (2012, background): “Forest policies can effectively conserve these communities by insuring that logging operations maintain, in the landscape, the trees and excavators that produce cavities (Drever and Martin, 2010).”