Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

Identifying engaging bird species and traits with community science observations.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America - 19 Apr 2022

Stoudt Sara, Goldstein Benjamin R, de Valpine Perry

Abstract excerpt

Identifying rates at which birders engage with different species can inform the impact and efficacy of conservation outreach and the scientific use of community-collected biodiversity data. Species that are thought to be “charismatic” are often prioritized in conservation, and previous researchers have used sociological experiments and digital records to estimate charisma indirectly. In this study, we take...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Birds
Share to Conservation of Natural Resources

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Databases, Factual

Share to Phenotype

Share to Species Specificity

Source

Open in PubMed Open full text

Identifiers

PMID: 35412904
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2110156119
PMCID: PMC9169790

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 6 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Identifying engaging bird species and traits with community science observations.PMID 35412904Read ↗

Global Scientific and Public Interest in Birds and their ConservationSemantic proximity Read ↗

Human dimensions of bat conservation – 10 recommendations to improve and diversify studies of human-bat interactionsSemantic proximity Read ↗

Proxy variables of the closeness between humans and wildlife that associate with the public interest in bird species in JapanSemantic proximity Read ↗

The hidden majority: Zoos can enhance their contributions to global biodiversity objectives by reducing taxonomic bias on social media communicationSemantic proximity Read ↗

Functional traits driving species role in the structure of terrestrial vertebrate scavenger networks.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Using remote camera traps to assess mammal and bird assemblages across a complex environmental landscapeSemantic proximity Read ↗

Experiencing the wild: Red fox encounters are related to stronger nature connectedness, not anxiety, in peopleSemantic proximity Read ↗

Nature for whom? How type of beneficiary influences the effectiveness of conservation outreach messagesSemantic proximity Read ↗

Defining species: the indirect impact of humans on biodiversity.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Historical shifts, geographic biases, and biological constraints shape mammal species discoverySemantic proximity Read ↗

Killing with kindness: Does widespread generalised provisioning of wildlife help or hinder biodiversity conservation efforts?Semantic proximity Read ↗

Bias and complementarity in species occurrence data from citizen science, museum, and social media collectionsSemantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.