2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.10.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Linking fungi, trees, and hole-using birds in a Neotropical tree-cavity network: Pathways of cavity production and implications for conservation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
78
1
10

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 100 publications
(89 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
78
1
10
Order By: Relevance
“…Conversely, Aitken and Martin (2007) and Boyle et al (2008) found an 85% and 71% occurrence of tree cavities, respectively, in living trees of Canadian forests. Tree decay processes, wood hardness, the presence of excavators, plant community, and rates of cavity decay are the factors considered to influence the proportion of cavities in living versus dead trees (Cockle et al, 2012;Edworthy et al, 2012). Of the total recorded cavities at our sites, 36% were excavated in live trees, of which 50% were done by 5 woodpecker species (Picus mahrattensis, P. squamatus, Dendrocopos himalayensis, D. hyperythrus, and Dinopium benghalense).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conversely, Aitken and Martin (2007) and Boyle et al (2008) found an 85% and 71% occurrence of tree cavities, respectively, in living trees of Canadian forests. Tree decay processes, wood hardness, the presence of excavators, plant community, and rates of cavity decay are the factors considered to influence the proportion of cavities in living versus dead trees (Cockle et al, 2012;Edworthy et al, 2012). Of the total recorded cavities at our sites, 36% were excavated in live trees, of which 50% were done by 5 woodpecker species (Picus mahrattensis, P. squamatus, Dendrocopos himalayensis, D. hyperythrus, and Dinopium benghalense).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…cavity nesting vertebrates (Cockle et al 2012;Müller et al 2014;Lõhmus 2016), epiphytes (Frits & HeilmannClausen (2010) or saproxylic insects (Komonen 2003). Even if most of theses studies do not directly point to specific fungal species as indicators of conservation value at site level, they often have a considerable educational potential by highligthing the key roles fungi play in saproxylic food-webs, and in the creation of habitats for more well-known species, including woodpeckers (cf.…”
Section: Critique and Testing Of Proposed Surrogate Schemesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All nest cavities were in the main trunk and apparently of natural origin (e.g. polypore fungal decay; see Cockle et al 2012), as opposed to having been excavated by primary cavity users such as woodpeckers (Piciformes). Nest cavities-albeit relatively high-nevertheless tended to be located in the lower half of tree boles (Table 1), where past injuries from limb breakage or mechanical damage were oldest and fungal decay and associated cavity development likely more advanced (Cockle et al 2011a(Cockle et al , 2012.…”
Section: Nest Cavitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For such species that specifically use arboreal cavities, cavity suitability can depend upon factors such as internal cavity dimensions, entrance height and orientation and even particular tree species (Snyder et al 1987;Martin et al 2004;Cockle et al 2012;Renton et al 2015). This specificity in nest requirements can result in substantial limitations to cavity availability, especially in humanmodified environments (Cockle et al 2010;Edworthy and Martin 2013;Saunders et al 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%