PDF(Sci-hub)
Abstract：
The expansion of overhead power lines worldwide challenges companies of energy transmission and distribution, regulators and environmental consultants, among other stakeholders, to effectively mitigate their negative impacts on wildlife. Wire-marking is currently the most widespread and recommended measure to reduce bird collisions with these infrastructures. Nevertheless, and despite its importance for a bird-friendly development of energy projects, there is still much uncertainty about what explains wire-marking effectiveness. We performed an extensive literature review and meta-analysis to evaluate the overall effectiveness of wire-marking in reducing bird collisions with power lines, including the possible influencing factors of power line voltage, habitat and type of device. We gathered data from 35 field studies across the world (which included 66 trials) assessing the effectiveness of wire-marking based on regular carcass searches beneath power lines. Overall, wire-marking reduced bird collisions with power lines by half (50.4%; 95% Confidence Interval Estimate: 40.4-58.8%), although this estimate of effectiveness is lower than the one reported in a meta-analysis performed in 2011. Despite the effort to include both peer-reviewed and grey literature studies in the present meta-analysis, the risk of publication bias could not be entirely excluded and may be still overestimating the true overall effect of wire-marking. High heterogeneity among the study outcomes hindered the power to detect clear moderating effects, with none of explanatory variables being statistically significant. Large between-study heterogeneity is (to some extent) explained by the variety of anti-collision devices available, wire-marking intensities used and ecological circumstances in which the experiments were carried out. Nonetheless, it may be also related to within-study methodological biases and reporting gaps in the existing field studies. Robust experimental designs (ideally using Before-After-Control-Impact approaches), comprehensive reporting of results and broad dissemination of study findings are needed to increase the statistical power of future meta-analyses. Ways to achieve these improvements in field studies are presented in detail. Their inclusion in future meta-analyses will increase the knowledge on the drivers of wire-marking effectiveness, which is critical to better inform decision-making processes and environmental management plans.
摘要：
全球架空电力线的扩展挑战了能源传输和分配公司，监管机构和环境顾问，在其他利益相关者中，有效减轻其对野生动物的负面影响。导线标记是目前最普遍和推荐的减少鸟类与这些基础设施碰撞的措施。然而，尽管它对鸟类友好的能源项目发展很重要，如何解释导线标记的有效性仍然存在很大的不确定性。我们进行了广泛的文献综述和荟萃分析，以评估导线标记在减少鸟类与电力线碰撞方面的总体有效性。包括电力线电压可能的影响因素，栖息地和设备类型。我们收集了来自全球35项实地研究（包括66项试验）的数据，这些研究评估了基于电力线下方常规car体搜索的导线标记的有效性。总的来说,导线标记可将鸟类与电源线的碰撞减少一半（50.4％；95％置信区间估计：40.4-58.8％），尽管这一有效性估计值低于2011年进行的荟萃分析中报道的估计值.尽管努力将同行评审和灰色文献研究纳入本荟萃分析，发表偏倚的风险无法完全排除,而且可能仍高估了导线标记的真正整体效果.研究结果之间的高度异质性阻碍了检测明确调节作用的能力，没有任何解释变量具有统计学意义。研究之间的巨大异质性（在某种程度上）由可用的防撞设备的多样性来解释，使用的线标记强度和进行实验的生态环境。尽管如此，这也可能与研究内方法学偏差和现有领域研究中的报告差距有关。稳健的实验设计（理想情况下使用前后控制冲击方法），需要全面报告结果并广泛传播研究结果,以提高未来荟萃分析的统计能力.详细介绍了在实地研究中实现这些改进的方法。将它们纳入未来的荟萃分析将增加对导线标记有效性驱动因素的了解，这对于更好地为决策过程和环境管理计划提供信息至关重要。
