2016
DOI: 10.37828/em.2016.7.8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

<p class="NoSpacing1">THE EFFECTS OF WEATHER AND REED MANAGEMENT ON NESTING PARAMETERS OF THE GREAT REED WARBLER, ACROCEPHALUS ARUNDINACEUS (AVES: SYLVIIDAE)

Abstract: Nesting parameters such as clutch size, hatching rate or nesting success have been extensively studied in birds in relation to biotic and abiotic factors. In this study we aimed to investigate the effects of air temperature, amount of precipitation, reed burning, and water depth (independent variables) on nest density, clutch size, hatching rate, and nesting success (dependent variables) of the Great Reed Warbler during a nine-year period. We found that neither the clutch size nor the hatching rate was influen… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 33 publications
(41 reference statements)
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar to the nesting success of host nests (Mérő et al, 2014 ; Mérő & Žuljević, 2016 ), the Cuckoo nesting success was also moderate in deeper water, and lower in reedbeds with shallow or no water (marshes). In the case of Cuckoo, this is likely explained either by higher detectability of Cuckoo‐parasitized nests by predators or by lower suitability of the reed stems to hold the nest with a heavy Cuckoo chick.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…Similar to the nesting success of host nests (Mérő et al, 2014 ; Mérő & Žuljević, 2016 ), the Cuckoo nesting success was also moderate in deeper water, and lower in reedbeds with shallow or no water (marshes). In the case of Cuckoo, this is likely explained either by higher detectability of Cuckoo‐parasitized nests by predators or by lower suitability of the reed stems to hold the nest with a heavy Cuckoo chick.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%