Untitled

Mason, C. F.

doi:10.1023/a:1016606410892

Cited by 18 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This number of species is comparable to the bird species richness of woodlots studied in the United Kingdom. For example, the same number of species was recorded in sixteen woodlots (McCollin, 1993), whereas Mason (2001) recorded 46 species in 35 wood forest fragments, and Bellamy et al (1996) found 64 species breeding in 151 fragments (in all cases without considering predators, owls, or feathered game). Besides the considerably wider range areas (which probably leads to a wider scale of habitat types), these studies also did not limit the selection of woodlots according to their isolation from different habitats, while we specifically focused on isolated ones.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Hofmeister et al, 2017) for the purposes of forest bird conservation (McCollin, 1993;Lorenzetti and Battisti, 2006). If the effects of some habitat characteristics were tested, they mostly proved insignificant (McCollin, 1993;Hinsley et al, 1995;Bellamy et al, 1996;Mason, 2001;Lorenzetti and Battisti, 2006) most likely due to strong area effects driven by the large ranges of woodlot sizes in studied samples.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, previous studies focused on effects of woodlot characteristics have mostly considered larger woodland patches (0.02-30 ha in Bellamy et al, 1996 andHinsley et al, 1995;0.3-302 ha in Lorenzetti and Battisti, 2006;0.7-14.5 in McCollin, 1993), and investigated them rather from the perspective of forest fragmentation, focusing mainly on the effects of woodlot spatial characteristics − size, isolation or shape (McCollin, 1993;Hinsley et al, 1995;Lorenzetti and Battisti, 2006). The importance of habitat characteristics has generally not been recognized (but see Bellamy et al, 1996 andMason, 2001). Since there has been little effort to study woodlots as a specific habitat for farmland biodiversity, their importance for the farmland birds remains to be assessed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Habitat Characteristics Supporting Bird Species Richness in Mid-Field Woodlots

Dvořáková

Kuczyński

Rivas-Salvador

et al. 2022

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmland biodiversity has undergone drastic declines due to agricultural intensification during the last decades. To prevent further biodiversity loss, the maintenance and restoration of non-productive habitats is essential. Woodlots, small patches of woody vegetation in agricultural landscapes, are one such habitat that are currently subsidized by the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (EU’s CAP). For effective implementation, however, it is necessary to assess what habitat characteristics are the most beneficial for biodiversity. Our study performs such an assessment using birds as model organisms. Specifically, we related characteristics of various woodlots to (I) the species richness of all birds, and (II) the species richness of both forest and farmland birds–groups with different ecological requirements. For this purpose, we counted birds (27 farmland and 26 forest species) and measured habitat characteristics (describing vegetation structure, diversity and nativeness) and spatial characteristics (area, shape and isolation) in 82 mid-field woodlots (0.76–1.25 ha, average 0.46 ha) in the Czech Republic (Central Europe). After accounting for the effects of spatial characteristics, overall bird species richness increased with vegetation height and woody plant species richness. In addition, richness showed a non-linear decrease with the cover of an invasive tree, the Black Locust Robinia pseudoaccacia. Interestingly, forest bird species richness was related to the same habitat characteristics as the overall bird species richness. By contrast, farmland bird species richness was positively related to the diversity of woodlot microhabitats, which reflects mainly enrichment by non-forest sites such as grassland or sparse shrubs. Our results indicate that the ecological performance of habitat characteristics (and not only the woodlot area) is important for the restoration of bird diversity in woodlots, and as such should be taken into consideration by the EU’s CAP subsidy system. Moreover, if woodlot management aims to maximize the overall bird diversity—a common practice in biodiversity conservation—our results show that current practices may favor widespread forest bird species, but not the farmland birds that are more threatened in Europe. To manage the woodlot habitat for farmland birds, we suggest that microhabitat heterogeneity should be maximized.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Habitat Characteristics Supporting Bird Species Richness in Mid-Field Woodlots

Dvořáková

Kuczyński

Rivas-Salvador

et al. 2022

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The highest diversity observed at the farmland and buildings could be because of habitat heterogeneity (Melles et al, 2003) or some resources which they obtain from such habitat types (Canterbury et al, 2000). Lower diversity observed when woodland occurred alongside farmlands and buildings may indicate less preference for woodland areas by starlings (Hedblom & Söderström, 2010;Mason, 2001;Robinson et al, 2005). However, woodlands are suggested to be important habitat for the conservation of birds (Antos & Bennett, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitat Utilization and Niche Partitioning in Starling Birds at Federal University Dutse, Nigeria

Sotayo,

Isah

2024

dujopas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The micro habitat or niche which a species occupies at a particular time in an ecosystem may give some clue to niche partitioning with regards to such species in that ecosystem. This study aimed to assess habitat utilization patterns as cue to niche partitioning in starling birds of Federal University Dutse. Point count bird census technique was used to survey starling bird at sixteen (16), randomly selected points, across various habitat types within the study location. All starling birds seen or heard were identified, counted and recorded. The habitat or niche where they were sited was also noted. The R Statistical software, version 3.3 was used for data analysis. The result showed that starling birds species diversity differed significantly by study area points (p < 0.001), habitat types (p < 0.05) and marginally by occurring niche (p = 0.06). Point 13 had the highest species diversity, habitat types consisting farmlands and buildings had the highest species diversity and the highest starling diversity was observed on trees. Starling bird abundance on the other hand, differed significantly across study points (p = 0.05) and marginally across occurring niches (p = 0.06). Starling bird abundance was highest at study area point 5 and on trees.

show abstract

What can studies of woodland fragmentation and creation tell us about ecological networks? A literature review and synthesis

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of ecological networks could help reverse the effects of habitat fragmentation on woodland biodiversity in temperate agricultural landscapes. However, efforts to create networks need to be underpinned by clear evidence of the relative efficacy of local (e.g. improving or expanding existing habitat patches) versus landscape-scale actions (e.g. creating new habitat or corridors in the landscape matrix). Using cluster analyses we synthesised the findings of 104 studies, published between 1990 and 2013 focusing on the responses of woodland vascular plant, vertebrate, cryptogam and invertebrate species to local and landscape variables. Species responses (richness, diversity, occurrence) were strongly influenced by patch area, patch characteristics (e.g. stand structure) and isolation (e.g. distance between habitat patches). Patch characteristics were of overriding importance for all species groups, especially cryptogams. Many studies recording significant species responses to patch characteristics did not record significant responses to patch area and vice versa, suggesting that patch area may sometimes act as a surrogate for patch characteristics (i.e. larger patches being of ‘better quality’). Ecological continuity was important for vascular plants, but assessed in only a few vertebrate and invertebrate studies. Matrix structure (e.g. presence of corridors) was important for vertebrates, but rarely assessed for other species groups. Actions to develop ecological networks should focus on enhancing the quality and/or size of existing habitat patches and reducing isolation between patches. However, given that very few studies have assessed all local and landscape variables together, further information on the relative impacts of different attributes of ecological networks in temperate agricultural landscapes is urgently needed

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 18 publications

References 31 publications

Habitat Characteristics Supporting Bird Species Richness in Mid-Field Woodlots

Habitat Characteristics Supporting Bird Species Richness in Mid-Field Woodlots

Habitat Utilization and Niche Partitioning in Starling Birds at Federal University Dutse, Nigeria

What can studies of woodland fragmentation and creation tell us about ecological networks? A literature review and synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About