Data for paper: "Mass-abundance scaling in avian communities is maintained after tropical selective logging"

These data relate to a soon to be published paper in Ecology and Evolution [ISSN: 2045-7758]. "All data_mn_final.csv" is the mist-netting dataset and "All data_pc_final.csv" is the point-count dataset. A list of studies from which these data were extracted are included: "List of studies_mn" for mist-net studies and "List of studies_pc" for point-count studies.

Data were obtained from 30 studies (19 studies using mist-netting methods and 11 studies using point-count methods) that contained information on abundance or capture rate for avian species in both selectively logged forests and old-growth primary forest controls across the tropics. The online Web of Science database was used to search for studies with the keywords ["selective logging" OR forestry OR "secondary forest" OR "regenerating forest"] AND [bird* OR avian OR aves] AND [mass OR abundance OR number OR "capture rate" OR density]. This search was refined by [tropic*] and [“mist-net” OR “point-count”] resulting in 80 156 studies. We further refined the search to only include studies with topics such as environmental sciences, ecology, forestry, zoology and biodiversity conservation, leaving us with 525 studies. We then supplemented the search using two more Google Scholar searches with the keywords; search 1: "selective logging", bird*, avian, aves, mass, abundance, number, "capture rate", density, “mist-net*”, “point-count*”, tropic*; search 2: "regenerating forest, bird*, avian, aves, mass, abundance, number, "capture rate", density, “mist-net*”, “point-count*”, tropic*. Search 1 resulted in 774 studies and search 2 returned 215 studies. This left us with a total of 1514 studies and after removing duplicates, we were left with 1395 studies. Excluding studies based on title reduced the collection to 676 studies and excluding the remaining studies based on abstract resulted in 211 studies. All searches were conducted between 4th April 2019 to 18th April 2019.
Of these 211 studies, studies were only included during full-text screening if they were (i) conducted in the tropics (between 23.43706°N and 23.43706°S), (ii) conducted in closed-canopy forests, (iii) used mist-netting or point-counts to sample birds, (iv) presented species-specific abundance estimates in both selectively logged forests and old-growth primary forests, and (v) mist-net and point-count datasets (if both included) could be separated. This resulted in a total of 47 studies, for one of which the author no longer had the abundance dataset, another one for which the sole author (Johns 1996) was uncontactable, and for 15 of which we did not get a response from the authors we contacted.
This left us with 30 studies (19 mist-netting studies and 11 point-count studies. Where available, mass was obtained from individual studies, and for studies in which no information on mass was provided (or where masses were missing for some species), we used Dunning's CRC Handbook of Avian Body Masses (2008) and Handbook of the birds of the world alive (del Hoyo et al. 2017). The data from two of these studies (Wunderle et al. 2006; Hawes et al. 2008) were split and analysed separately as they contained data from different habitats, where each habitat type contained a distinct avian community. This resulted in 21 separate mist-netting studies.