EcoService Models Library (ESML)
Home
Search EMs
My
EMs 
Learn about
ESML
View ESML Data Maploading
EM: Loggerhead shrike abundance, Piedmont ecoregion, USA (EM-839)
Collapse All
Expand All
- Export Data to Spreadsheet (Free Viewers)
- View Variable Relationship Diagram (PDF)(1 pp, 80 KB, About PDF)
EM Identity and Description
EM Identification
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-839 |
|
EM Short Name
em.detail.shortNameHelp
?
|
Loggerhead shrike abundance, Piedmont region, USA |
|
EM Full Name
em.detail.fullNameHelp
?
|
Loggerhead shrike abundance, Piedmont ecoregion, USA |
|
EM Source or Collection
em.detail.emSourceOrCollectionHelp
?
|
None |
|
EM Source Document ID
|
405 |
|
Document Author
em.detail.documentAuthorHelp
?
|
Riffel, S., Scognamillo, D., and L. W. Burger |
|
Document Year
em.detail.documentYearHelp
?
|
2008 |
|
Document Title
em.detail.sourceIdHelp
?
|
Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program on northern bobwhite and grassland birds |
|
Document Status
em.detail.statusCategoryHelp
?
|
Peer reviewed and published |
|
Comments on Status
em.detail.commentsOnStatusHelp
?
|
Published journal manuscript |
Software and Access
| Not applicable | |
|
Contact Name
em.detail.contactNameHelp
?
|
Sam Riffell |
|
Contact Address
|
Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA |
|
Contact Email
|
sriffell@cfr.msstate.edu |
EM Description
|
Summary Description
em.detail.summaryDescriptionHelp
?
|
ABSTRACT:"The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) has converted just over 36 million acres of cropland into potential wildlife habitat, primarily grassland. Thus, the CRP should benefit grassland songbirds, a group of species that is declining across the United States and is of conservation concern. Additionally, the CRP is an important part of multi-agency, regional efforts to restore northern bobwhite populations. However, comprehensive assessments of the wildlife benefits of CRP at regional scales are lacking. We used Breeding Bird Survey and National Resources Inventory data to assess the potential for the CRP to benefit northern bobwhite and other grassland birds with overlapping ranges and similar habitat associations. We built regression models for 15 species in seven different ecological regions. Forty-nine of 108 total models contained significant CRP effects (P < 0.05), and 48 of the 49 contained positive effects. Responses to CRP varied across ecological regions. Only eastern meadowlark was positively related to CRP in all the ecological regions, and western meadowlark was the only species never related to CRP. CRP was a strong predictor of bird abundance compared to other land cover types. The potential for CRP habitat as a regional conservation tool to benefit declining grassland bird populations should continue to be assessed at a variety of spatial scales. We caution that bird-CRP relations varied from region to region and among species. Because the NRI provides relatively coarse resolution information on CRP, more detailed information about CRP habitats (spatial arrangement, age of the habitat (time since planting), specific conservation practices used) should be included in future assessments to fully understand where and to what extent CRP can benefit grassland birds. " |
|
Specific Policy or Decision Context Cited
em.detail.policyDecisionContextHelp
?
|
None reported |
|
Biophysical Context
|
Conservation Reserve Program lands left to go fallow |
|
EM Scenario Drivers
em.detail.scenarioDriverHelp
?
|
N/A |
EM Relationship to Other EMs or Applications
|
Method Only, Application of Method or Model Run
em.detail.methodOrAppHelp
?
|
Method + Application |
|
New or Pre-existing EM?
em.detail.newOrExistHelp
?
|
New or revised model |
Related EMs (for example, other versions or derivations of this EM) described in ESML
em.detail.relatedEmHelp
?
|
Document ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmDocumentIdHelp
?
|
Doc-405 |
|
EM ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmEmIdHelp
?
|
EM-841 | EM-842 | EM-843 | EM-844 | EM-845 | EM-846 | EM-847 |
EM Modeling Approach
EM Relationship to Time
|
EM Temporal Extent
em.detail.tempExtentHelp
?
|
2008 |
|
EM Time Dependence
em.detail.timeDependencyHelp
?
|
time-stationary |
|
EM Time Reference (Future/Past)
em.detail.futurePastHelp
?
|
Not applicable |
|
EM Time Continuity
em.detail.continueDiscreteHelp
?
|
Not applicable |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Value
em.detail.tempGrainSizeHelp
?
|
Not applicable |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Unit
em.detail.tempGrainSizeUnitHelp
?
|
Not applicable |
EM Spatial Extent
|
Bounding Type
em.detail.boundingTypeHelp
?
|
Physiographic or ecological |
|
Spatial Extent Name
em.detail.extentNameHelp
?
|
Piedmont Ecoregion |
|
Spatial Extent Area (Magnitude)
em.detail.extentAreaHelp
?
|
100,000-1,000,000 km^2 |
Spatial Distribution of Computations
|
EM Spatial Distribution
em.detail.distributeLumpHelp
?
|
spatially lumped (in all cases) |
|
Spatial Grain Type
em.detail.spGrainTypeHelp
?
|
Not applicable |
|
Spatial Grain Size
em.detail.spGrainSizeHelp
?
|
Not applicable |
EM Structure and Computation Approach
|
EM Computational Approach
em.detail.emComputationalApproachHelp
?
|
Analytic |
|
EM Determinism
em.detail.deterStochHelp
?
|
deterministic |
|
Statistical Estimation of EM
em.detail.statisticalEstimationHelp
?
|
|
Model Checking Procedures Used
|
Model Calibration Reported?
em.detail.calibrationHelp
?
|
Yes |
|
Model Goodness of Fit Reported?
em.detail.goodnessFitHelp
?
|
No |
|
Goodness of Fit (metric| value | unit)
em.detail.goodnessFitValuesHelp
?
|
None |
|
Model Operational Validation Reported?
em.detail.validationHelp
?
|
No |
|
Model Uncertainty Analysis Reported?
em.detail.uncertaintyAnalysisHelp
?
|
No |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Reported?
em.detail.sensAnalysisHelp
?
|
Yes |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Include Interactions?
em.detail.interactionConsiderHelp
?
|
Unclear |
EM Locations, Environments, Ecology
Location of EM Application
Terrestrial location (Classification hierarchy: Continent > Country > U.S. State [United States only])
em.detail.relationToSpaceTerrestrialHelp
?
|
Marine location (Classification hierarchy: Realm > Region > Province > Ecoregion)
em.detail.relationToSpaceMarineHelp
?
| None |
Centroid Lat/Long (Decimal Degree)
|
Centroid Latitude
em.detail.ddLatHelp
?
|
36.23 |
|
Centroid Longitude
em.detail.ddLongHelp
?
|
-81.9 |
|
Centroid Datum
em.detail.datumHelp
?
|
WGS84 |
|
Centroid Coordinates Status
em.detail.coordinateStatusHelp
?
|
Estimated |
Environments and Scales Modeled
|
EM Environmental Sub-Class
em.detail.emEnvironmentalSubclassHelp
?
|
Grasslands |
|
Specific Environment Type
em.detail.specificEnvTypeHelp
?
|
grasslands |
|
EM Ecological Scale
em.detail.ecoScaleHelp
?
|
Ecological scale corresponds to the Environmental Sub-class |
Scale and taxa of organisms modeled
Scale of differentiation of organisms modeled
em.detail.nameOfOrgsOrGroupsHelp
?
|
EM Organismal Scale
em.detail.orgScaleHelp
?
|
Species |
Taxonomic level and name of organisms or groups identified
taxonomyHelp
?
|
EnviroAtlas URL
em.detail.enviroAtlasURLHelp
?
| GAP Ecological Systems, U.S. EPA (Omernik) ecoregions |
EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system
CICES v 4.3 - Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (Section > Division > Group > Class)
em.detail.cicesHelp
?
|
(Environmental Subclass > Ecological End-Product (EEP) > EEP Subclass > EEP Modifier)
fegs2Help
?
|
EM Variable Names (and Units)
Predictor
em.detail.variablesPredictorHelp
?
|
Driving Variables (and Units)
view details (4 variables)
em.detail.drivingVariableHelp
?
|
|
|
Constant or Factor Variables (and Units)
view details (2 variables)
em.detail.constantFactorVariableHelp
?
|
Intermediate
|
Intermediate (Computed) Variables (and Units)
em.detail.intermediateVariableHelp
?
|
None |
Response
em.detail.variablesResponseHelp
?
|
Observed Response Variables (and Units)
view details (1 variable)
em.detail.observedResponseHelp
?
|
|
|
Computed Response Variables (and Units)
view details (1 variable)
em.detail.computedResponseHelp
?
|