Species‐Habitat Relationships and Priority Areas for Marsh‐Breeding Birds in Ontario

Tozer, Douglas C.; Stewart, Rebecca L. M.; Steele, Owen; Gloutney, Mark L.

doi:10.1002/jwmg.21840

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the final model selection stage, a positive effect of wetland cover was only retained for one species of waterfowl compared to three of the five marsh birds, suggesting that wetland cover in the landscape may be more important for marsh birds than for waterfowl. This means that in order to determine or maintain highly preferred sites for the marsh birds that we analyzed, managers should consider wetland composition much farther into the surrounding landscape than previously thought (e.g., up to 6400 m; see also Tozer et al 2020). The mechanism(s) behind these patterns remain unclear and would be a productive area for further research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Species were selected for analysis based on the Bird Conservation Region 14 priority species list (ACJV 2020), and by requiring a minimum naïve site occupancy of 0.14 (number of sites occupied/ number of sites surveyed) to help ensure model convergence and improve model inference (Tozer et al 2020). This selection procedure resulted in five species of marsh birds and five species of priority waterfowl for modelling ( within R Environment version 3.6.1 (R Core Team 2019).…”

Section: Occupancy Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The response variable was the presence or absence of ≥1 individual of the species in question on each of these surveys. Single-season site occupancy models can be used across multiple years (e.g., Glisson et al, 2017;Tozer et al, 2020), although we recognize that such a broad closure assumption is imperfect (Rota et al 2009), and that it may differ between waterfowl and marsh birds in ways that are unclear, potentially influencing our results in unknown ways. Given that movement between sites is possible Gabor 2006, McClure andHill 2012), the most appropriate interpretation of model results is the probability that sites were ever used during the 4-year period, which is in keeping with our goal to identify and compare the habitat characteristics which most influence site use by our species.…”

Section: Occupancy Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Notably, diversity in emergent vegetation, surface water inundation, and water:vegetation interspersion have been identified as important site characteristics for marsh birds (Alexander andHepp 2014, Bradshaw et al 2020). Landscape composition can be important to marsh birds at a surprisingly broad range of spatial scales (up to 6400m; Tozer et al, 2020) and habitat associations can be region-specific (Roach et al 2017). While some studies suggest that habitat associations for marsh birds likely differ from those of waterfowl (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Land cover habitat associations of breeding marsh birds and priority waterfowl differ in eastern Canada

Studholme¹,

Tranquilla²,

Berrigan³

et al. 2022

ACE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waterfowl (ducks, geese, swans) are among the few bird groups showing recent population increases in North America. By contrast, marsh birds (bitterns, rails, grebes) are declining, despite this group appearing to benefit from many of the same conservation actions applied for waterfowl. To help understand this dichotomy, we 1) assessed land cover habitat associations for breeding marsh birds and priority waterfowl in eastern Canada at a broad range of spatial scales, and 2) compared these results between guilds -using data collected by the Maritimes Marsh Monitoring Program of Birds Canada. As we observed variation both within and between these groups, managers will do well to take species-specific or life-history-based approaches to wetland conservation and landscape management. Nonetheless, we offer guild-level generalizations that capture the majority of the effects on occupancy for the species we analyzed in our study area. We found that occupancy of both groups was higher in protected wetlands (e.g., in parks, land trusts) and at wetlands influenced by water control structures; however, marsh birds may benefit more than waterfowl from water level control. Occupancy by both groups increased with increasing amounts of water and wetland in the surrounding landscape, but this was more pronounced and included a greater variety of wetland types at broader spatial scales for marsh birds compared to waterfowl. Some marsh birds showed negative associations with urban land use and none had strong relationships with agriculture, yet occupancy of nearly all waterfowl increased with either urban or agricultural land cover. Actions that will benefit both groups include conserving large wetland complexes interspersed with, and surrounded by, low and intermediate amounts of urban and agricultural land use, respectively. A greater understanding of habitat use by wetland bird species helps construct sustainable working landscapes that benefit both birds and people.Les associations d'habitats de couverture terrestre des oiseaux de marais nicheurs et de la sauvagine prioritaire diffèrent dans l'est du Canada RÉSUMÉ. Les oiseaux aquatiques (canards, oies, cygnes) fait partie des quelques groupes d'oiseaux dont la population a récemment augmenté en Amérique du Nord. En revanche, les oiseaux des marais (butors, râles, grèbes) sont en déclin, bien que ce groupe semble bénéficier d'un grand nombre des mêmes mesures de conservation que celles appliquées aux oiseaux aquatiques. Pour mieux comprendre cette dichotomie, nous avons 1) évalué les associations d'habitats de couverture terrestre pour les oiseaux de marais nicheurs et les oiseaux aquatiques prioritaires dans l'est du Canada à une large gamme d'échelles spatiales, et 2) comparé ces résultats entre les guildes -en utilisant les données recueillies par le Programme de surveillance des marais des Maritimes d'Oiseaux Canada. Comme nous avons observé des variations tant au sein de ces groupes qu'entre eux, les gestionnaires auront intérêt à adopter des actions de la conservation ...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Occupancy Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Occupancy Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Land cover habitat associations of breeding marsh birds and priority waterfowl differ in eastern Canada

Studholme¹,

Tranquilla²,

Berrigan³

et al. 2022

ACE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, McKinney et al (2011) noted increased dependence of birds on wetlands with increasing urbanization regardless of wetland size, while Baldwin (2004) found increased complexity and higher plant diversity in a restored urban wetland relative to multiple reference wetlands. Both studies highlight the importance of urban wetland restoration, though Tozer (2016) and Tozer et al (2020) argue for increasing marsh connectivity and minimizing development‐bordering marshes. Based on the results of our study, these two goals need not be mutually exclusive; restoring emergent wetland at immediate spatial scales and pond restoration at local (200 m) scales will both improve wetland connectivity and help increase wetland bird occupancy in urban and rural wetlands throughout the Chicago Wilderness region.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial drivers of wetland bird occupancy within an urbanized matrix in the Upper Midwestern United States

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wetland birds are undergoing severe population declines in North America, with habitat degradation and wetland loss considered two of the primary causes. Due to the cryptic nature of many wetland bird species, the ecological conditions (e.g., matrix composition) that influence bird occupancy, and the relevant spatial scales at which to measure bird responses, remain unclear but may affect inference about wetland use and suitability. We conducted wetland bird surveys at 477 points across northeastern Illinois and northwestern Indiana within the highly urbanized landscape surrounding Chicago. Using remotely sensed land cover data, we built occupancy models for 10 wetland bird species (American Coot Fulica americana, Black-crowned Night-Heron Nycticorax nycticorax, Blue-winged Teal Anas discors, Common Gallinule Gallinula galeata, Least Bittern Ixobrychus exilis, Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris, Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps,

show abstract

Application of habitat association models across regions: Useful explanatory power retained in wetland bird case study

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Species often exhibit regionally specific habitat associations, so habitat association models developed in one region might not be accurate or even appropriate for other regions. Three programs to survey wetland‐breeding birds covering (respectively) Great Lakes coastal wetlands, inland Great Lakes wetlands, and the Prairie Pothole Region offer an opportunity to test whether regionally specific models of habitat use by wetland‐obligate breeding birds are transferrable across regions. We first developed independent, regional population density models for four species of wetland‐obligate birds: Pied‐billed Grebe (Podilymbus podiceps), Virginia Rail (Rallus limicola), Sora (Porzana carolina), and American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus). We then used adjusted pseudo‐R2 values to compare the amount of variation explained by each model when applied to data collected in each of the three regions. Although certain habitat characteristics, such as emergent vegetation and wetland area, were consistently important across regions, models for each species differed by region—both in variables selected for inclusion and often in the directionality of relationships for common variables—indicating that habitat associations for these species are regionally specific. When we applied a model developed in one region to data collected in another region, we found that explanatory power was reduced in most (71%) models. Therefore, we suggest that ecological analyses should emphasize regionally specific habitat association models whenever possible. Nonetheless, models created from inland Great Lakes wetland data had higher median explanatory power when applied to other regions, and the amount of explanatory power lost by other transferred models was relatively small. Thus, while regionally specific habitat association models are preferable, in the absence of reliable regional data, habitat association models developed in one region may be applied to another region, but the results need to be cautiously interpreted. Additionally, we found that median explanatory power was higher when local‐scale habitat characteristics were included in the models, indicating that regionally specific models should ideally be based on a combination of local‐ and landscape‐scale habitat characteristics. Conservation practitioners can leverage such regionally specific models and associated monitoring data to help prioritize areas for management activities that contribute to regional conservation efforts.

show abstract

Species‐Habitat Relationships and Priority Areas for Marsh‐Breeding Birds in Ontario

Cited by 15 publications

References 58 publications

Land cover habitat associations of breeding marsh birds and priority waterfowl differ in eastern Canada

Land cover habitat associations of breeding marsh birds and priority waterfowl differ in eastern Canada

Spatial drivers of wetland bird occupancy within an urbanized matrix in the Upper Midwestern United States

Application of habitat association models across regions: Useful explanatory power retained in wetland bird case study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About