Culture and nature are deeply interconnected (Maffi and Woodley, 2010). Biodiversity surrounding human communities determines their survival, welfare, and world view, whereas people’s actions and decisions have an impact on ecosystems, from genes to the global cycles of nature (Maffi, 2001). This close bond is usually more evident when referring to the interactions of indigenous communities and their territories, as it has ancient roots developed for millennia and people of these communities directly sustain their lives on goods and benefits provided by ecosystems (Nakashima and Roué, 2002; Oviedo and Noejovich, 2007). Studying human knowledge, use, and management of biocultural resources is relevant to understand the bidirectional relationship between culture and nature (Gadgil et al., 1993; Berkes et al., 2000). Moreover, assessing the connections that people establish with biodiversity has strong implications for attending the global need of both biological and cultural conservation (Nóbrega Alves, 2012; Gavin et al., 2015; Loch et al., 2023).

From the vast diversity of living things, only a fraction is directly and explicitly relevant to human communities (Sousa et al., 2019; Alcántara-Salinas et al., 2022). Such relevance might be explored through the study of salience, which refers to the properties of things that capture human attention (Berlin et al., 1973; Gosler, 2017). Salience values vary among the resources that are appreciated by people (Wyndham and Park, 2018). Thus, research on salience must go beyond identifying important species and determine their magnitude of prominence too (Sutrop, 2001; Parra-Rondinel et al., 2021). Biocultural salience particularly focuses on identifying the biological and cultural traits associated with species that are relevant for human communities (Berlin et al., 1981; Gosler, 2017). Salience values of biocultural resources might be associated with anthropogenic needs (e.g., feeding, dressing, housing, healing) (de Paula et al., 2017; Loch et al., 2023), human-wildlife conflicts (Ojeda-Linares et al., 2021; Piña-Covarrubias et al., 2022), and aesthetic, ethical, and symbolic relational aspects between human and non-humans (Holbrook and Woodside, 2008; Loch et al., 2023). From a biological perspective, biocultural salient resources might be appreciated for their abundance, biochemical constitution, or seasonality (Shaheen et al., 2020). However, it is still necessary to understand what makes a salient species for different groups of people and among distinct biological assemblages (Jain, 2000; Ladle et al., 2019).

Birds are among the most popular animals used and appreciated by human communities around the world (Turner and Bhattacharyya, 2016). They might be deeply linked with the beliefs, ecological knowledge, nourishment, economy, and recreation of people (Miller and Doolittle, 2017; Cantú et al., 2020). However, the motivations and factors that determine biocultural salient birds are expected to vary according to local practices and pools of species (Wyndham and Park, 2018). Traditionally, the biocultural study of birds has relied on identifying the identity of species that are appreciated by communities, but until recently it has been focused on defining and comparing the factors that motivate such relevance (de Oliveira et al., 2018; Ladle et al., 2019; Andrade et al., 2022). The characteristics of different bird species (e.g., song, color, size) represent biological factors that might affect how people perceive them (Miller and Doolittle, 2017; Andrade et al., 2022), whereas uses, interests and needs of people might influence the human interaction with such animals (Tidemann and Gosler, 2010). Thus, analyzing the relations that exist between cultural and biological factors might enhance an integral identification of the key elements that make a biocultural salient bird.

Here, we aimed to identify the cultural and biological traits that influence salience of birds for an indigenous community in western Mexico. Through semi-structured interviews we learned from local people about birds, enabling us to compute a salience index for species and classifying them into categories of cultural associations. Then, we gathered information about the biological traits that we suspected to impact on local awareness on birds. Finally, we analyzed the relations of local cultural associations and biological traits with bird salience through hierarchical clustering analyses. We hypothesized that the cultural associations (e.g., food) and the biological traits (e.g., abundance) that are linked with a regular coexistence between birds and people have a strong relation with salience values of local species.

On average, 8.7 birds (standard deviation: 7.3) were listed per interviewed person. The mode of our data set was 3. The highest number of names (32) was provided by two people, whereas the majority of members of the sample (n = 30; 75%) listed up to 10 species. Our local pool of birds included 130 species ( Appendix 1 ), of which 58 (44.6%) were listed by the interviewees (salient birds; Appendix 2 ) and 72 (55.4%) were not mentioned by people at all (non-salient birds). The highest Sutrop Index values corresponded to the West Mexican Chachalaca (Ortalis poliocephala), Inca Dove (Columbina inca), Orange-fronted Parakeet (Eupsittula canicularis), and White-winged Dove (Zenaida asiatica) ( Appendix 2 ). The cultural association that contained more local birds was beliefs (19 species), followed by food (12 species), crop damage (8 species), and pets (5 species) ( Appendix 2 ). Poorly noticeable (26 species), medium sized (21-30 cm; 18 species), very vocal (21 species), and conspicuous birds (36 species) were usually mentioned by members of the sample. Common (21 species), diurnal (56 species), terrestrial (53 species), and year-round resident birds (52 species) were also the most frequently listed birds. Species from the families Columbidae (8 species), Cuculidae (4 species), Icteridae (4 species), and Picidae (4 species) were commonly included among the salient birds ( Appendix 2 ).

Although most interviewees were farmers who usually experience an intimate contact with wildlife, only a minority of them (15%) were able to name a considerable number of local birds (16-32 spp.), whereas most people (85%) listed less than 15 species. This is relevant for our study as it determined the variability of lists’ length that we used for the analyses, suggesting that local bird knowledge might be unequally distributed within Zacualpan. Such pattern is consistent with previous studies from the site, which found that traditional knowledge on birds is declining (Ortega-Álvarez and Casas, 2022). According to our observations in the field, we suggest that the personal interest on traditions and biodiversity might be a key factor determining salience, as it influences the desire to create, apply, and maintain the traditional use and knowledge of biocultural resources (Wyndham, 2010). Future studies might explore such individual variation on local bird knowledge.

We observed that there was a strong link between salient birds and human feeding. For instance, birds were locally appreciated as a source of food. However, hunting is locally forbidden, which might increase the populations of common game species (e.g., West Mexican Chachalaca, White-winged Dove), but might jeopardize the maintenance of traditional practices and knowledge associated with the local avifauna. As suggested by elders from the community, the latter might be true because hunting provided the opportunity to community members (i.e., young people) to learn about and appreciate birds. This situation is paradoxical because a biodiversity conservation measure (i.e., hunting ban) might has a proximate benefit to bird demography, but might be ultimately compromising traditional knowledge and wildlife appreciation. Thus, if hunting has to be banned, we suggest that such policy should be accompanied by the promotion of complementary activities for reducing its negative impact on local cultural practices. For example, birdwatching could be promoted to mimic hunting related activities, including the opportunity to learn about avian identification, tracking, and behavior (Sheard, 1999). Moreover, the establishment of wildlife management units within the community might provide a local alternative to hunting for accessing to wild meat (Espino-Barros et al., 2008; Contreras-Hernández, 2021).

Birds were also relevant for other aspect of human feeding: food production. In particular, our study showed that local birds have a cultural relevance as a threat to crops (Anderson et al., 2013; Linz et al., 2015). Nevertheless, we perceived through people’s comments that these animals might not impose huge problems to local farming practices as others do, including mammals (e.g., Collared Peccary - Dicotyles tajacu, White-nosed Coati - Nasua narica) and insects (e.g., ants of the genus Atta) (Lofgren, 1986; Piña-Covarrubias et al., 2022). Additionally, some farmers mentioned that birds were important agricultural pests long time ago, but their numbers and negative associated impacts on crops were reduced after the introduction of agrochemicals. Further research on this topic deserves special attention to understand the effects of industrial pesticides and fertilizers on the local avifauna.

We showed that salient and non-salient birds might be differentiated by their residence status and vocal activity. Local awareness on year-round resident birds might be linked with the possibility to observe their full annual cycle across the territory of the community, including courtship, mating, nesting, hatching, and fledgling stages. Such events are almost impossible to be locally noticed for migratory birds because they mostly happen at distant breeding grounds (DeGraaf and Rappole, 1995). Vocal activity might be specially relevant for the appreciation of year-round resident birds, as they usually initiate singing behavior during the onset of the reproductive period (Rubolini et al., 2010; Furnas and McGrann, 2018). Bird songs are usually attractive for people, influencing the conformation of common names, myths, and species’ selection for cage birds (Tidemann and Gosler, 2010; de Oliveira et al., 2018). Moreover, songs play an important role in the local identification of species, to the extent that community members were more familiarized with the sounds of certain birds than with their visual aspect (e.g., wrens - Troglodytidae, Blue Mockingbird - Melanotis caerulescens, Lesser Ground-Cuckoo - Morococcyx erythropygus).

Abundance was the biological trait that related the most with salience. A species that could be recorded daily in large numbers might facilitate people´s chances to use and learn from it, or simply encounter it in everyday situations (Celis-Diez et al., 2017; Ladle et al., 2019). Other biological traits that were of secondary importance for salient birds were color and detectability. Noticeable colors are usually appreciated by people (Andrade et al., 2022; Senior et al., 2022), for example the bright green of parrots (Psittacidae) or the deep orange of orioles (Icteridae). Finally, bold habits of conspicuous birds might facilitate direct observations by community members, increasing cultural knowledge and awareness (Celis-Diez et al., 2017).

We acknowledge that we might have missed to detect other salient birds for particular members of the community of Zacualpan, as our sample represented about 2% of the population living in the area. This apparently reduced sample size is associated with the time- and effort-consuming methodologies that we used for performing our research. Still, the qualitative methods that we employed provide meaningful, representative, locally contextualized, and high-quality results (Drury et al., 2011), which enabled us to have a better understanding on the biological and cultural traits that are associated with salient birds. Our findings could be locally employed to guide environmental education actions, conservation initiatives, and public policies (Wyndham and Park, 2018). For example, given that local interest on birds is decreasing (Ortega-Álvarez and Casas, 2022), workshops focused on resident, abundant, and vocal species might aid to attract and increase the attention of people towards these animals. Moreover, we suggest that hunting regulations in the community deserve to be reassessed, as this activity simultaneously provide food and educational opportunities for the welfare of the local population. Because governmental and social perception external to the community might reduce its acceptance, alternative activities to hunting (e.g., birdwatching, wildlife management units) might be considered to fulfill sustenance and learning needs of the community.

Our study provides a valuable route to identify cultural and biological factors that influence animal relevance to human communities. This type of assessments is expected to vary among sites and cultures, as other human groups may utilize, appreciate, and understand in different ways the biological diversity that surrounds them (Jain, 2000; Ladle et al., 2019). Also, variations among avian species might have a differential impact on human appreciation (Alcántara-Salinas et al., 2022). Other factors that should deserve future investigation include intergenerational changes of attitudes towards nature, human migration, globalization, personal abilities on bird identification, and the modification of species distribution as a consequence of climate fluctuation. Because human perception is dynamic, temporal variation on the traits that determine biocultural salient birds should deserve special attention by forthcoming research. Although this study focused on birds, assorted biological groups might be assessed through a similar approach. Moreover, this research might serve to future studies as a baseline to design survey tools (e.g., questionnaires, interviews) for understanding differences on the perception of biodiversity among distinct sectors of the community.

We recognize that methods, analyses, and interpretations of results depend on the positionalities of researchers (Hill et al., 2023). However, our approach might serve as a starting point to further investigations, even if they have positionalities of their own. The proposals and interpretations derived from this study should be discussed with the community, as our visions and suggestions might be influenced by our position as conservationists of biocultural diversity. Still, we believe that the results associated with our research could also serve as a guideline to set the dialogue with community members and construct a biocultural conservation agenda that follows the interests, needs, perceptions, and limitations of the local population.

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material . Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation was not required for this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements. Local authorities and interviewees granted permission to perform surveys. Ethical review and approval was not required for the animal study because research on vertebrates was bibliographical and based on information provided by people.

RO-A and AC conceived the study. RO-A collected and analyzed the data. RO-A and AC interpreted the data and wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.