Variability of patch type preferences in relation to resource availability and breeding success in a bird

Oecologia

Volumn 127, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 435-443

  Olsson, Ola ^a   Wiktander, Ulf ^a   Malmqvist, Andreas ^a   Nilsson, Sven G ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Dendrocopos minor; Food availability; Foraging preferences; Giving up density; Reproduction

Indexed keywords

FORAGING BEHAVIOR; HABITAT SELECTION; PATCH USE; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; RESOURCE AVAILABILITY;

EID: 0035033994     PISSN: 00298549     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s004420000596     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Agassiz DJL (1987) The British Argyresthiinae and Yponomeutinae. Proc Trans Br Entomol Nat Hist Soc 20:1-26
2. Arthur SM, Manly BFJ, McDonald LL, Garner GW (1996) Assessing habitat selection when availability changes. Ecology 77:215-227
3. Bond AB, Kamil AC (1998) Apostatic selection by blue jays produces balanced polymorphism in virtual prey. Nature 395: 594-596
4. Brown JS (1988) Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22: 37-47
5. Brown JS (1999) Vigilance, patch use and habitat selection: Foraging under predation risk. Ecol Evol Res 1:49-71
6. Chesson J (1983) The estimation and analysis of preference and its relationship to foraging models. Ecology 64:1297-1304
7. Cottam G, Curtis JT (1956) The use of distance measures in phytosociological sampling. Ecology 37:451-460
8. Cramp S (1985) The birds of the Western Palearctic, vol IV. Oxford University Press, Oxford
9. Crist TO, MacMahon JA (1992) Harvester ant foraging and shrubsteppe seeds: interactions of seed resources and seed use. Ecology 73:1768-1779
10. Daan S, Dijkstra C, Drent RH, Meijer T (1988) Food supply and the annual timing of avian reproduction. Proc Int Ornithol Congr 19:392-407
11. Daan S, Dijkstra C. Tinbergen JM (1990) Family planning in the kestrel Falco tinnunculus: the ultimate control of covariation of laying date and clutch size. Behaviour 114:83-116
12. Holbrook SJ, Schmitt RJ (1988) The combined effects of predation risk and food reward on patch selection. Ecology 69: 125-134
13. Hurlbert SH (1984) Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol Monogr 54:187-211
14. Källander H (1974) Advancement of laying of great tits by the provision of food. Ibis 116:365-367
15. Kinnaird MF, O'Brien TG, Suryadi S (1996) Population fluctuation in Sulawesi red-knobbed hornbills: tracking figs in space and time. Auk 113:431-440
16. Leckie FM, Thirgood SJ, Redpath SM (1998) Variation in the diet of red foxes on Scottish moorland in relation to prey abundance. Ecography 21:599-604
17. Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68: 619-640
18. Lucas JR (1983) The role of foraging time constraints and variable prey encounter in optimal diet choice. Am Nat 122:191-209
19. MacArthur RH, Pianka ER (1966) On optimal use of a patchy environment. Am Nat 100:603-609
20. McDonald LL, Manly BFJ, Raley CM (1990) Analyzing foraging and habitat through selection functions. Studies Avian Biol 13:325-331
21. Miller CK, Knight RL, McEwen LC, George TL (1994) Responses of nesting savannah sparrows to fluctuations in grasshopper densities in interior Alaska. Auk 111:962-969
22. Mitchell WA (1989) Informational constraints on optimally foraging hummingbirds. Oikos 55:145-154
23. Moser EB, Barrow WC, Hamilton RB (1990) An exploratory use of correspondence analysis to study relationships between avian foraging behavior and habitat. Stud Avian Biol 13:309-317
24. Olsson O (1998) Through the eyes of a woodpecker: understanding habitat selection, territory quality and reproductive success from individual behaviour. PhD dissertation, Lund University
25. Olsson O, Holmgren NMA (1999) Gaining ecological information about Bayesian foragers through their behaviour. I. Models with predictions. Oikos 87:251-263
26. Olsson O, Wiktander U, Holmgren NMA, Nilsson SG (1999) Gaining ecological information about Bayesian foragers through their behaviour. II. A field test with woodpeckers. Oikos 87:264-276
27. Palm T (1959) Die Holz- und Rinden-Käfer der Süd- und Mittelschwedischen Laubbäume. Opusc Entomol Suppl 16:1-121
28. Podolsky RH, Price MV (1990) Patch use by Dipodomys deserti (Rodentia: Heteromyidae): profitability, preference, and depletion dynamics. Oecologia 83:83-90
29. Schooley RL (1994) Annual variation in habitat selection: patterns concealed by pooled data. J Wildl Manage 58:367-374
30. Sherratt TN, MacDougall AD (1995) Some population consequences of variation in preference among individual predators. Biol J Linn Soc 55:93-107
31. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry. Freeman, New York
32. Steenhof K, Kochert MN (1988) Dietary responses of three raptor species to changing prey densities in a natural environment. J Anim Ecol 57:37-48
33. Stephens DW, Lynch JF, Sorensen AE, Gordon C (1986) Preference and profitability: theory and experiment. Am Nat 127: 533-553
34. Török J (1990) resource partitioning among three woodpecker species (Dendrocopos spp.) during the breeding season. Holarct Ecol 13:257-264
35. Whitehead SC, Wright J, Cotton PA (1995) Winter field use by the European starling Sturnus vulgaris: habitat preferences and the availability of prey. J Avian Biol 26:193-202
36. Wiktander U, Olsson O, Nilsson SG (in press a) Annual and seasonal reproductive trends in the lesser spotted woodpecker Dendrocopos minor. Ibis
37. Wiktander U, Olsson O, Nilsson SG (in press b) Seasonal variation in home range size, and habitat area requirement of the lesser spotted woodpecker (Dendrocopos minor) in south Sweden. Biol Conserv
38. Wilkinson L, Hill M, Vang E (1992) SYSTAT for the Macintosh, version 5.2. Systat, Evanston