Acoustic approach as an alternative to human-based survey in bird biodiversity monitoring in agricultural meadows

31. Burner RC, Styring AR, Rahman MA, Sheldon FH. Occupancy patterns and upper range limits of low- land Bornean birds along an elevational gradient. J Biogeogr. 2019; 46: 2583–2596. https://doi.org/10. 1111/jbi.13691 32. Hutto RL, Stutzman RJ. Humans versus autonomous recording units: A comparison of point-count results. J Field Ornithol. 2009; 80: 387–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1557-9263.2009.00245.x 33. Celis-Murillo A, Deppe JL, Ward MP. Effectiveness and utility of acoustic recordings for surveying tropi- cal birds. J Field Ornithol. 2012; 83: 166–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1557-9263.2012.00366.x 34. Sedla´ ček O, Vokurkova´ J, Ferenc M, Djomo EN, Albrecht T. A comparison of point counts with a new acoustic sampling method: a case study of a bird community from the montane forests of Mount Camer- oon. Ostrich. 2015; 86: 213–220. https://doi.org/10.2989/00306525.2015.1049669 35. Darras K, Furnas B, Fitriawan I, Mulyani Y, Tscharntke T. Estimating bird detection distances in sound recordings for standardizing detection ranges and distance sampling. Methods Ecol Evol. 2018; 9: 1928–1938. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13031 36. Darras K, Bata´ry P, Furnas B, Celis-Murillo A, van Wilgenburg S, Mulyani Y, et al. Comparing the sam- pling performance of sound recorders versus point counts in bird surveys: A meta-analysis. J Appl Ecol. 2018; 55: 2575–2586. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13229 37. Federico Morelli, Brlı´k V, Benedetti Y, Bussière R, Moudra´ L, Reif J, et al. Detection Rate of Bird Spe-

cies and What It Depends on: Tips for Field Surveys. Front Ecol Evol. 2022: 9: 671492. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fevo.2021.671492 38. EUROSTAT. 2019. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title= Main_Page. 39. Tucker GM, Evans MI. Habitats for birds in Europe. Birdlife Conservation Series. Birdlife International; 1997. 40. Donald PF, Sanderson FJ, Burfield IJ, van Bommel FPJ. Further evidence of continent-wide impacts of agricultural intensification on European farmland birds, 1990–2000. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 2006; 116: 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.02.007 41. Bata´ ry P, Dicks LV, Kleijn D, Sutherland WJ. The role of agri-environment schemes in conservation and environmental management. Conserv Biol. 2015; 29: 1006–1016. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12536 PMID: 25997591 42. Balmford A, Green RE, Jenkins M. Measuring the changing state of nature. Trends Ecol Evol. 2003; 18: 326–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00067-3 43. Budka M, Jobda M, Szłański P, Pio´ rkowski H. Effect of agri-environment measure for the aquatic war- bler on bird biodiversity in the extensively managed landscape of Biebrza Marshes (Poland). Biol Con- serv. 2019; 239: 108279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108279 44. Tworek S, Goławski A, Jobda M, Kosicki JZ. The varying impact of agri-environment schemes on bird- life in two regions of Poland. Ornis Fennica. 2017; 94: 101–112. 45. Bibby CJ, Burgess ND, Hill DA. Bird Census Techniques. Revised edition. London: Academic Press; 2000.

46. Hardin JW, Hilbe JM. Generalized Estimating Equations. 2nd Edition. Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2013. 47. Leach EC, Burwell CJ, Ashton LA, Jones DN, Kitching RL. Comparison of point counts and automated acoustic monitoring: detecting birds in a rainforest biodiversity survey. Emu. 2016; 116: 305–309. https://doi.org/10.1071/MU15097 48. Ta¨ tte K, Møller AP, Ma¨nd R. Towards an integrated view of escape decisions in birds: relation between flight initiation distance and distance fled. Anim Behav. 2018; 136: 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. anbehav.2017.12.008 49. Kubacka J, Oppel S, Dyrcz A, Lachmann L, da Costa JPDB, Kail U, et al. Effect of mowing on productiv- ity in the endangered Aquatic Warbler Acrocephalus paludicola. 2013; 24: 45–58. https://doi.org/10. 3389/fevo.2021.671492 50. Holmes SB, McIlwrick KA, Venier LA. Using automated sound recording and analysis to detect bird spe- cies- at-risk in southwestern Ontario woodlands. Wild Soc Bull. 2014; 38: 591–598. https://doi.org/10. 1002/wsb.421 51. Zwart MC, Baker A, McGowan PJK, Whittingham MJ. The use of automated bioacoustic recorders to replace human wildlife surveys: an example using nightjars. Plos One. 2014; 9: e102770. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102770 PMID: 25029035 52. Sueur J, Farina A, Gasc A, Pieretti N, Pavoine S. Acoustic indices for biodiversity assessment and land- scape investigation. Acta Acust United Acust. 2014; 100: 772–781. https://doi.org/10.3813/AAA. 918757 PLOS ONE Acoustic bird biodiversity monitoring in agricultural meadows

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266557 April 8, 2022 15 / 16