4.6 Article

A spatially explicit model for estimating risks of pesticide exposure to bird populations

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 16, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252545

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel integrated modeling system was developed to evaluate the impacts of pesticides on bird populations, with a case study focusing on the California Gnatcatcher population. Results showed varying effects from different pesticides on gnatcatcher abundance and distribution.
Pesticides are used widely in agriculture and have the potential to affect non-target organisms, including birds. We developed an integrated modeling system to allow for spatially-explicit evaluation of potential impacts to bird populations following exposures to pesticides. Our novel methodology builds upon three existing models: the Terrestrial Investigation Model (TIM), the Markov Chain Nest Productivity Model (MCnest), and HexSim to simulate population dynamics. We parameterized the integrated modeling system using information required under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, together with species habitat and life history data available from the scientific literature as well as landcover data representing agricultural areas and species habitat. Our case study of the federally threatened California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica) illustrates how the integrated modeling system can estimate the population-scale consequences of pesticide applications. We simulated impacts from two insecticides applied to wheat: one causing mortality (survival stressor), and the other causing reproductive failure (reproductive stressor). We observed declines in simulated gnatcatcher abundance and changes in the species' distribution following applications of each pesticide; however, the impacts of the two pesticides were different. Our methodology attempts to strike a balance between biological realism and model complexity and should be applicable to a wide array of species, systems, and stressors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据