Factors influencing the dynamics of occurrence of the hazel grouse in a fine-grained managed landscape

Conservation Biology

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 586-592

  Saari, Lennart ^a,b,c   Åberg, Johan ^a,b   Swenson, Jon E ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^c NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE FOR NATURE RESEARCH   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; HAZEL GROUSE; LAND MANAGEMENT; LANDSCAPE;

AVES; BONASA BONASIA; CORYLUS AMERICANA; PHASIANIDAE;

EID: 0031860035     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1998.96275.x     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Aberg, J., G. Jansson, J. E. Swcnson, and P. Angelstam. 1995. The effect of matrix on the occurrence of hazel grouse (Bonasa bonasia) in isolated habitat fragments. Oecologia 103:265-269.
2. Aberg, J., Swenson, J. E., and H. Andren. 1996. The dynamics of hazel grouse (Bonasa bonasia) occurrence in habitat fragments. Pages 35-54 in J. Aberg, editor. Effects of habitat fragmentation on hazel
3. grouse (Bonasa bonasia) in boreal landscapes. Licentiate thesis. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.
4. Andren, H. 1994. Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportion of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71:355-366.
5. Addicott, J. F., J. M. Aho, M. F. Antolin, D. P. Padilla, J. S. Richardson, and D. A. Soluk. 1987. Ecological neighbourhoods: scaling environmental patterns. Oikos 49:340-3-46.
6. Bergmann, H. H., S. Klaus, J. Müller, W. Scherzinger, J. E. Swenson, and J. Wiesner. 1996. Die Haselhuhner, Boiuisa bonasa und B. seirerzotii (Hazelhuhn und China hazelhuhn). Die Neue Brehm-Bucherei Bd. 77. Westarp Wissenschaften, Magdeberg 2.
7. Beshkarev, A. B., J. E. Swenson, P. Angelstam, H. Andren, and A. B. Bla_govidov. 199-4. Long-term dynamics of hazel grouse populations in source- and sink-dominated pristine taiga landscapes. Oikos 71: 375-380.
8. Dunning, J. B., B. J. Danielson, and H. R. Pulliam. 1992. Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos 65: 169-175.
9. Eiberle, K., and N. Koch. 1975. Die Bedeutung der Waldstruktur für die Erhaltung des Haselhuhns. Schwiez Z Forstw 126:876-888.
10. Fahrig, L., and G. Merriam. 1994. Conservation of fragmented populations. Conservation Biology 8:50-59.
11. Gardner, R. IL, B. T. Milne, M. G. Turner, and R. V. O'Neill. 1987. Neutral models for analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern. Landscape Ecology 1:19-28.
12. Hanski, Y. 1989. Metapopulation dynamics: does it help to have more of the same? Tree 4:113-114.
13. Ivanter, E. V. 1962. On the biology of hazel grouse in Karelia (in Russian). Ornitologiya 4:87-98.
14. Opdam, P., D. van Dorp, and C. J. F. ter Braak. 1984. The effect of isolation on the number of woodland birds in small woodlots in the Netherlands. Journal of Biogeography 11:473-478.
15. Saari, L. 1984. The ecology of the wood pigeon (.Colomba patumbits L) and stock dove (C. nenas /-) populations on an island in the SW Finnish archipelago. Finnish Game Research 43:13-67.
16. Skoglund, J., and T. Verwijst. 1989. Age structure of woody species populations in relation to seed rain, germination and establishment along the river Dalälven, Sweden. Vegetatio 82:25-34.
17. Stamps, J. A., M. Buechner, and V. V. Krishnan. 1987. The effect of edge permeability and habitat geometry on emigration from patches of habitat. American Naturalist 129:532-552.
18. Swenson, J. E. 1991. Social organization of hazel grouse and ecological factors influencing it. PhD thesis. University of Alberta, Edmonton.
19. Swenson, J. E. 1993rt. Hazel grouse (Boiiasa boiiasici) pairs during the nonbreeding season: mutual benefits of a cooperative alliance. Behavioral Ecology 4:14-21.
20. Swenson, J. E. 1993b The importance of alder to hazel grouse in Fennoscandian boreal forest: evidence from four levels of scale. Ecography 16:37-46.
21. Swenson, J. E. 1995. The habitat requirements of hazel grouse. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Grouse 6:155-159.
22. Swenson, J. E., and J. Danielsen. 1991. Status and conservation of the hazel grouse in Europe. Ornis Scandinavica 22:297-298.
23. Swenson, J. E., and P. Angelstam. 1993. Habitat separation by sympatric forest grouse in Fennoscandia in relation to boreal forest succession. Canadian Journal of Zoology 71:1303-1310.
24. Swenson, J. E., and J. Danielsen. 1995. Seasonal movements by hazel grouse in southcentral Sweden. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Grouse 6:37-40.
25. Taylor, P. D., L. Fahrig, K. Henein, and G. Merriam. 1993. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68:571-573.
26. Wiens, J. A. 1990. Habitat fragmentation and wildlife populations: the importance of autoecology, time and landscape structure. Transactions of the International Union of game Biologists Congress 19.
27. Wiens, J. A., N. C. Stenseth, B. Van Home, and R. A. Ims. 1993. Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology. Oikos 66:369-380.
28. Wiens, J. A. 1995. Habitat fragmentation: island v landscape perspectives on bird conservation. Ibis 137:S97-S104.
29. Wiesner, J., H. H. Bergman, S. Klaus, and F. Müller. 1977. Siedlungsdichte und Habitatstmktur des Haselhuhns (Botuisa bonasia) in Waldgebieten von Bialowieza (Polen). Journal die Ornitologie 118: 1-20.
30. Wilcove, D. S., C. H. McLellan, and A. P. Dobson. 1986. Habitat frag-
31. mentation in the temperate zone. Pages 237-256 in M. E. Soule, editor. Conservation biology. The science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
32. With, K. A., and T. O. Crist. 1995. Critical thresholds in species' responses to landscape structure. Ecology' 76:2-446-2459.
33. Zackrisson, O. 1977. Influence of forest fires on the North Swedish boreal forest. Oikos 29:22-32.