Red-bellied Woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus)

Shackelford, Clifford E.; Brown, Raymond E.; Conner, Richard N.

doi:10.2173/bna.500

Cited by 23 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The remainder of their foraging time was spent on fruits and nuts (Shackelford et al, 2000). In Minnesota, this species spends 26.3% of their foraging time excavating, and 62.4% of their time probing (Shackelford et al, 2000).…”

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Minnesota, this species spends 26.3% of their foraging time excavating, and 62.4% of their time probing (Shackelford et al, 2000). In addition, these birds are also highly adapted for excavation and probing.…”

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The tongue is also long, extending more than 3 inches beyond the tip of the bill, and is in addition highly maneuverable. Their tongue is better suited for probing and extraction from bark than other woodpeckers studied (Shackelford et al, 2000).…”

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Courtship displays, both male and female, appear to be entirely auditory, consisting of tapping (light drumming), calls, and drumming (bill rapidly strikes a hard surface that has good resonance, for example dead or hollow trees, metal light fixtures) (Shackelford et al, 2000). However, UV reflectance from red-bellied woodpecker plumage and mate selection thereupon…”

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the response to predators is to hide on the opposite side of trunks or limbs and remain still and quiet, rather than to fly to safety. In the event that capture is imminent, the response is not to evade by flying between branches or around trees, but rather to dive erratically into low dense vegetation (Shackelford et al, 2000).…”

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Spatial contrast sensitivity of birds

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contrast sensitivity (CS) is the ability of the observer to discriminate between adjacent stimuli on the basis of their differences in relative luminosity (contrast) rather than their absolute luminances. Prior to this study, birds had been thought to have low contrast detection thresholds relative to mammals and fishes. This was a surprising phenomenon because birds had been traditionally attributed with superior vision. In addition, the low CS of birds could not be explained by retinal or optical factors, or secondary stimulus characteristics. Unfortunately, avian contrast sensitivity functions (CSFs) were sparse in the literature, so it was unknown whether low contrast sensitivity was a general phenomenon in birds. This study measured CS in six species of birds The quail and pigeon data obtained in this experiment fit well with existing CS data for these species. The kestrel data were not similar to kestrel data in the literature; however the data in the literature were collected from a single subject. All of the birds studied had contrast sensitivities that were consistent with their retinal or optical morphologies relative to other birds (in species for which such data exists) and seem well suited for their natural environments. In addition, all of these birds exhibited low CS relative to humans and most mammals, which suggests that low CS is a general phenomenon of birds.Explanations for this avian low CS phenomenon include a possible trade-off between contrast mechanisms and UV mechanisms in cone systems, and lateral inhibitory mechanisms that are perhaps categorically different from mammals. Lateral inhibition affects contrast gain, and has been shown to differ according to ganglion cell types, which in turn will differ in vertebrate species.

show abstract

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Woodpeckersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Spatial contrast sensitivity of birds

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Climate change, woodpeckers, and forests: Current trends and future modeling needs

Walsh

Vierling

Strand

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The structure and composition of forest ecosystems are expected to shift with climate‐induced changes in precipitation, temperature, fire, carbon mitigation strategies, and biological disturbance. These factors are likely to have biodiversity implications. However, climate‐driven forest ecosystem models used to predict changes to forest structure and composition are not coupled to models used to predict changes to biodiversity. We proposed integrating woodpecker response (biodiversity indicator) with forest ecosystem models. Woodpeckers are a good indicator species of forest ecosystem dynamics, because they are ecologically constrained by landscape‐scale forest components, such as composition, structure, disturbance regimes, and management activities. In addition, they are correlated with forest avifauna community diversity. In this study, we explore integrating woodpecker and forest ecosystem climate models. We review climate–woodpecker models and compare the predicted responses to observed climate‐induced changes. We identify inconsistencies between observed and predicted responses, explore the modeling causes, and identify the models pertinent to integration that address the inconsistencies. We found that predictions in the short term are not in agreement with observed trends for 7 of 15 evaluated species. Because niche constraints associated with woodpeckers are a result of complex interactions between climate, vegetation, and disturbance, we hypothesize that the lack of adequate representation of these processes in the current broad‐scale climate–woodpecker models results in model–data mismatch. As a first step toward improvement, we suggest a conceptual model of climate–woodpecker–forest modeling for integration. The integration model provides climate‐driven forest ecosystem modeling with a measure of biodiversity while retaining the feedback between climate and vegetation in woodpecker climate change modeling.

show abstract

Testing the predictive capabilities of ecological niche models: a case study examining Red‐bellied Woodpeckers

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As humans continue to alter natural habitats indirectly and directly, species’ geographic ranges may change as they track shifting climate regimes or changing landscapes. Ecological niche models (ENMs) are frequently used to show modern ranges and forecast future range changes. These models, however, assume that a species will exhibit niche conservatism, though this is rarely tested. Here, we examine a woodpecker species with a well‐documented recent range expansion to assess the effectiveness of predictive models by comparing the pre‐ and post‐expansion climate/habitat niche using ENMs and multivariate principal components analysis. Occurrence data for the Red‐bellied Woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus) were obtained from the pre‐expansion (1910–1939; n = 299) and post‐expansion (1980–2009; n = 868) time periods. Ecological niche models were constructed using GIS layers describing climate data and crop cover for the pre‐ and post‐expansion time periods. We then used the pre‐expansion ENM to forecast the distribution of Red‐bellied Woodpeckers into the post‐expansion time period, and vice versa, and calculated the niche overlap of the projected distributions and the actual distributions in those time periods to determine whether pre‐ and post‐expansion niches were similar. Predictive ENMs did not closely match the actual distributions in the pre‐ and post‐expansion time periods, respectively, and the pre‐expansion and post‐expansion niches were significantly different from each other (Schoener's D = 0.745, P < 0.001). Multivariate analyses revealed that the present‐day niche encompasses the past niche and that Red‐bellied Woodpeckers today have broader temperature and precipitation tolerances and are found in both more‐ and less‐forested areas than they were in the pre‐expansion era. Our analyses reveal that Red‐bellied Woodpeckers are not exhibiting climate or habitat niche conservatism, explaining why predictive ENMs for this species could not effectively track their range shift. This study emphasizes that predictive models may not be effective for species undergoing niche changes.

show abstract

Red-bellied Woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus)

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 publications

Spatial contrast sensitivity of birds

Spatial contrast sensitivity of birds

Climate change, woodpeckers, and forests: Current trends and future modeling needs

Testing the predictive capabilities of ecological niche models: a case study examining Red‐bellied Woodpeckers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About