Field‐based evidence of impaired sperm quality associated with conventional farming in two passerine birds

The detrimental effects of conventional farming on bird biodiversity are increasingly documented. Despite this, the specific impacts of both organic and conventional farming practices on bird coloration and sperm quality in natural settings remain unexplored. This study aimed to determine whether these farming practices differentially affect body mass, coloration intensity and sperm quality in passerine birds inhabiting agricultural landscapes. We captured seven passerine species in hedgerows adjacent to fields farmed organically or conventionally, within a 250‐m radius representative of their breeding home‐ranges. Body mass was measured across all species, and an index of coloration intensity, based on carotenoid (yellow/orange) and melanin (black) pigments, was assessed in four species. Additionally, we evaluated three sperm quality parameters (sperm density, percentage of abnormal sperm and intra‐individual variance of sperm morphology) using fresh sperm samples collected from four species in the field. We hypothesized that birds living near conventional fields would exhibit lower body mass due to reduced food availability. Additionally, we predicted that the more favourable conditions associated with organic farming – such as greater food abundance and lower exposure to pollutants – would benefit birds, leading to enhanced coloration and improved sperm quality. Our results did not reveal any differences in body mass or coloration. The absence of observable effects might be due to several factors: methodological limitations, cross‐contamination between habitats or insufficient exposure to farming practices that may hide any potential difference between the two habitats, or the intrinsic adaptive strategies of the species. However, subgroup analyses of three and four species revealed a decrease in sperm density and a higher proportion of abnormal spermatozoa in the Common Whitethroat and Common Nightingale living in conventionally farmed areas, respectively. Although our sample size was limited, we believe these findings highlight the potential negative effects of conventional farming on birds.