Influence of nesting habitat on breeding Song Thrushes<i>Turdus philomelos</i>

Kelleher, Katherine M.; O’Halloran, John

doi:10.1080/00063650709461478

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The effect of nest‐site vegetation on brood parasitism and nest predation in passerines has not been consistent: some have found no effect on either (Smith 1981, Kus et al 2008), while others found higher brood parasitism (Moskát and Honza 2000, Uyehara and Whitfield 2000) or nest predation (Weidinger 2002, Kelleher and O'Halloran 2007) on less concealed nests. Our results showed no influence of nest‐site habitat on brood parasitism rates, but lower nest predation for nests with greater overhead cover.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does cowbird parasitism increase predation risk to American redstart nests?

Hannon¹,

Wilson²,

McCallum³

2009

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brood parasitism and nest predation are major causes of reproductive failure for many bird species nesting in fragmented landscapes. While brood parasites and predators may act independently, they could also interact if brood parasites increase the likelihood that predators detect nests. In this study, we examined the interaction between cowbird parasitism and nest predation in a 10 year study on 466 American redstart Setophaga ruticilla nests in central Alberta, Canada. We used advanced nest survival models to examine the support for three mechanisms that might lead to a positive correlation between brood parasitism and nest predation: 1) the presence of a cowbird nestling might increase the detection of the nest by predators, 2) nests with lower cover are more likely to be detected by both cowbirds and predators, and 3) cowbirds and predators may co‐occur in landscapes of similar structure. Twelve percent of nests were parasitized and those nests had a 16–19% higher rate of failure due to predators compared to unparasitized nests. Daily nest predation rates increased during the nestling stage for both groups, but more strongly for parasitized nests. Loud begging by the cowbird nestling and/or higher parental feeding rates for the cowbird may have increased nest detectability to predators. Brood parasitism and nest predation were also positively related to forest cover, indicating landscape level effects were influential. Most nest predators were forest species and we suspect cowbirds responded positively to forest cover because of the increased abundance of songbird hosts. Nest‐site features had less of an impact on nest predation or brood parasitism, although nests with higher overhead cover were less susceptible to predators. Our study shows how multiple mechanisms, particularly the behavioral effects of the brood parasite nestling and landscape structure, can lead to a positive relationship between nest predation and brood parasitism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From 2001 on, we lured birds into mist nests using redstart decoys and territorial songs, and colour‐banded them. Age was recorded as second‐year (SY) or after‐second‐year (ASY) for males in all years based on plumage colour (Lowther 1983). We did not consider female age here as that was unknown for most (69%) nesting attempts.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does cowbird parasitism increase predation risk to American redstart nests?

Hannon¹,

Wilson²,

McCallum³

2009

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For Common Blackbird, Great Tit and Blue Tit, clutch sizes in woodland were consistently larger than in urban landscapes ( n = 6, 5, and 6 respectively) and, where tested, differences were significant ( n = 1, 3 and 3). Two studies of Common Starling (Siriwardena & Crick 2002, Mennechez & Clergeau 2006) also found significantly lower clutch size in urban landscapes, but for American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos (McGowan 2001), Eurasian Magpie (Eden 1985, Antonov & Atanasova 2003), Song Thrush (Kelleher & O’Halloran 2007) and House Sparrow (Crick & Siriwardena 2002), no significant differences were found. Cape Sparrow Passer melanurus clutch sizes were similar in urban and rural landscapes (Earlé 1988; Fig.…”

Section: Urban and Non‐urban Demographic Parametersmentioning

confidence: 97%

Avian productivity in urban landscapes: a review and meta‐analysis

Chamberlain¹,

Cannon²,

Toms³

et al. 2008

Ibis

470

447

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an urgent need to thoroughly review and comprehend the effects of urbanization on wildlife in order to understand both the ecological implications of increasing urbanization and how to mitigate its threat to biodiversity globally. We examined patterns in comparative productivity of urban and non-urban passerine birds, using published estimates from paired comparisons, and by reviewing and developing explanations in terms of resources, competitors, predators and other specifically urban environmental factors. The most consistent patterns were for earlier lay dates, lower clutch size, lower nestling weight and lower productivity per nesting attempt in urban landscapes; these were supported by a formal meta-analysis. Nest failure rates did not show consistent patterns across the species considered. We suggest that food availability is a key driver of differences in passerine demography between landscapes. In urban habitats, human-provided food may improve adult condition over winter, leading to earlier lay dates and, in some species, to higher survival and higher breeding densities, but paucity of natural food may lead to lower productivity per nesting attempt. We demonstrate that additional comparative research is needed on a wider range of species, on the effects of natural and human-provided food availability, and on the differences in survival and dispersal between urban and non-urban populations. Importantly, better-targeted research and monitoring is needed in areas that are at greatest threat from urbanization, especially in the developing world.

show abstract

“…Studies conducted on other easily synurbizing bird species also report their high plasticity in choosing nest location. Among urban dwelling species that accept a variety of tree species as a nest site and often choose the most abundant tree species are blackbirds (T. merula), song thrush (T. philomelos) and magpie [Pica pica (L., 1758)] (Møller 1988;Ludvig et al 1995;Wysocki 2005;Kelleher & O'Halloran 2007;Jokimäki 2016). It seems that urban areas offer possibilities especially for opportunistic breeders that are able to cope with the challenges of various habitats.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…are among the species which frequently inhabit urban areas (Mikula et al 2014). Common blackbird Turdus merula L., 1758 and song thrush Turdus philomelos Brehm, 1831 are well studied species in an urban environment (Luniak et al 1990;Nowakowski 1994;Wysocki 2005;Kelleher & O'Halloran 2007;Evans et al 2010), by contrast to the fieldfare Turdus pilaris L., 1758, which only recently started to colonize human settlements (Mošanský 2001;Luniak 2004;Biaduń & Żmihorski 2011). Todate studies of fieldfare's breeding ecology were conducted mainly in natural environments (Anderson & Wilkund 1978 ;Furrer 1980;Hogstad 1983;Wiklund 1982;Haland 1984) and reports on populations in urban ecosystems are rather exceptional (for example Mikula et al 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%