Agriculture is the foundation of human civilization and a prime example of our impact on Earth. Almost 40% of our planet's ice-free land surface, most of which was previously forested, is now dedicated to agriculture. As our demand for food increases, so does agricultural deforestation, which is widely viewed as one of the greatest threats to global biodiversity.
Yet, the magnitude of agriculture's impact on biodiversity varies widely across the world. Take birds, for example. While many species in the Ecuadorian Amazon are highly sensitive to deforestation, most birds in Costa Rican agricultural landscapes seem more tolerant.
Research from the Indian Himalayas has reported some bird species even benefit from agriculture at certain times of the year. So far, this variation has mostly been explained by how 'natural' the agricultural landscapes are, for instance, how much forest cover remains, or how frequently synthetic fertilizers are used. But this reasoning does not adequately explain the full story.
A new study led by Peking University and involving 49 institutions from around the world reports that, beyond the 'naturalness' of agricultural landscapes, regions differ inherently and predictably in how sensitive their bird communities are to agricultural deforestation.
By that age, I was into my third long-term job (> 5 years) and had had upwards of 16 short term ones - multiple part time ones at once, or some just for a few weeks or a couple of months here and there between the long-term ones etc.
48 doesn't seem that unlikely - nor even an indicator that they will not be staying put for any length of time unless your job is a shitty one with a high turnover anyway.