Habitat selection by the pale-headed brush-finch (Atlapetes pallidiceps) in southern Ecuador: Implications for conservation

Biological Conservation

Volumn 118, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 33-40

  Oppel, Steffen ^a,c   Schaefer, H Martin ^b   Schmidt, Veronika ^b   Schröder, Boris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OLDENBURG   (Germany)

^b INSTITUTE OF AVIAN RESEARCH VOGELWARTE HELGOLAND   (Germany)

^c NONE   (Germany)

Author keywords

Atlapetes pallidiceps; Endangered species; Habitat selection modelling; Interspecific competition; Pale headed brush finch

Indexed keywords

BIRD; ENDANGERED SPECIES; HABITAT SELECTION; INTRASPECIFIC COMPETITION; SPECIES CONSERVATION;

ATLAPETES; ATLAPETES PALLIDICEPS; ATLAPETES TORQUATUS; BUARREMON; BUARREMON TORQUATUS;

EID: 1842535946     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2003.07.006     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Agreda A., Krabbe N., Rodriguez O. Pale-headed Brushfinch Atlapetes pallidiceps is not extinct. Cotinga. 11:1999;50-54.
2. Araújo M.B., Williams P.H., Fuller R.J. Dynamics of extinction and the selection of nature reserves. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B. 269:2002;1971-1980.
3. Arthur S.M., Manly B.F.J., McDonald L.L., Garner G.W. Assessing habitat selection when availability changes. Ecology. 77:1996;215-227.
4. Austin G.E., Thomas C.J., Houston D.C., Thompson D.B.A. Predicting the spatial distribution of buzzard Buteo buteo nesting areas using a Geographical Information System and remote sensing. Journal of Applied Ecology. 33:1996;1541-1550.
5. BirdLife International, 2000. Threatened birds of the world. Lynx Ediciones and BirdLife International, Barcelona and Cambridge.
6. Bossuyt B., Dercon G., Bièvre B.D., Cisneros F., Deckers J. Agro-ecological zoning of the Austro Ecuatoriano. The Land. 1:1997;159-170.
7. Boyce M.S., Vernier P.R., Nielsen S.E., Schmiegelow F.K.A. Evaluating resource selection functions. Ecological Modelling. 157:2002;281-300.
8. Bradley D.W. The Effects of Visibility Bias on Time-budget Estimates of Niche Breadth and Overlap. Auk. 102:1985;493-499.
9. Buckland S.T., Burnham K.P., Augustin N.H. Model selection: an integral part of inference. Biometrics. 53:1997;603-618.
10. Bullock J.M., Pakeman R.J. Grazing of lowland heath in England: management methods and their effects on heathland vegetation. Biological Conservation. 79:1997;1-13.
11. Burnham K.P., Anderson D.R. Data-based selection of an appropriate biological model: the key to modern data analysis. McCullough D.R., Barrett R.H. Wildlife 2001. 1992;16-30 Elsevier Applied Science, London.
12. Cale P.G. The influence of social behaviour, dispersal and landscape fragmentation on population structure in a sedentary bird. Biological Conservation. 109:2003;237-248.
13. Cody M.L. Habitat selection and interspecific territoriality among the Sylviid warblers of England and Sweden. Ecological Monographs. 48:1978;351-396.
14. Collar N.J., Gonzaga L.P., Krabbe N., Nieto A.M., Naranjo L.G., Parker T.A., Wege D.C. Threatened Birds of the Americas. 1992;International Council for Bird Preservation, Cambridge.
15. Dercon, G., Bossuyt, B., Bièvre, B.D., Cisneros, F., Deckers, J., 1998. Zonificacion agroecologica del Austro Ecuatoriano. Promas, Universidad de Cuenca, Cuenca Ecuador.
16. Elle O. Mikrohabitatwahl und Dispersion als Hinweise auf interspezifische Konkurrenz von Mönchsgrasmücke Sylvia atricapilla und Gartengrasmücke S. borin in einem Wald-Wiesen-Ökoton. Vogelwelt. 123:2002;9-16.
17. Fahrig L. How much habitat is enough? Biological Conservation. 100:2001;65-74.
18. Fielding A.H., Haworth P.F. Testing the generality of bird-habitat models. Conservation Biology. 9:1995;1466-1481.
19. Fielding A.H., Bell J.F. A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environmental Conservation. 24:1997;38-49.
20. Fjeldså J., Krabbe N. Birds of the High Andes. 1990;Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen.
21. Gates S., Donald P.F. Local extinction of British farmland birds and the prediction of further loss. Journal of Applied Ecology. 37:2000;806-820.
22. Gibbs J.P. Distribution of woodland amphibians along a forest fragmentation gradient. Landscape Ecology. 13:1998;263-268.
23. Haffer J. Interspecific competition as a possible factor in limiting the range of some trans-andean forest birds. Hornero. 10:1967;438-440.
24. Hanley J.A., McNeil B.J. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 143:1982;29-36.
25. Holmes R.T., Robinson S.K. Tree species preferences of foraging insectivorous birds in a northern hardwoods forest. Oecologia. 48:1981;31-35.
26. Hosmer D.W., Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression. 2000;John Wiley, New York.
27. Illera J.C. Habitat selection by the Canary Islands stonechat (Saxicola dacotiae) (Meade-Waldo, 1889) in Fuerteventura Island: a two-tier approach with implications for management. Biological Conservation. 97:2001;339-345.
28. Jones J. Habitat selection in avian ecology: a critical review. Auk. 118:2001;557-562.
29. Keane J.J., Morrison M.L. Temporal variation in resource use by Black-throated Gray Warblers. Condor. 101:1999;67-75.
30. Lang J.D., Powell L.A., Krementz D.G., Conroy M.J. Wood Thrush movements and habitat use: effects of forest management for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers. Auk. 119:2002;109-124.
31. Luck G.W. The habitat requirements of the rufous treecreeper (Climacteris rufa). 1. Preferential habitat use demonstrated at multiple spatial scales. Biological Conservation. 105:2002;383-394.
32. Machlis L., Dodd P.W.D., Fentress J.C. The pooling Fallacy: problems arising when individuals contribute more than one observation to the data set. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie. 68:1985;201-214.
33. Martin T.E., Roper J.J. Nest predation and nest-site selection of a western population of the Hermit Thrush. Condor. 90:1988;51-57.
34. Martin T.E., Geupel G.R. Nest-monitoring plots: methods for locating nests and monitoring success. Journal of Field Ornithology. 64:1993;507-519.
35. Martin T.E. Avian life history evolution in relation to nest sites, nest predation, and food. Ecological Monographs. 65:1995;101-127.
36. Martin T.E. Fitness costs of resource overlap among coexisting bird species. Nature. 380:1996;338-340.
37. Martin T.E. Are microhabitat preferences of coexisting species under selection and adaptive? Ecology. 79:1998;656-670.
38. Martin T.E., Scott J., Menge C. Nest predation increases with parental activity: separating nest site and parental activity effects. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B. 267:2000;2287-2293.
39. McClean S.A., Rumble M.A., King R.M., Baker W.L. Evaluation of resource selection methods with different definitions of availability. Journal of Wildlife Management. 62:1998;793-801.
40. Morrison M.L. Influence of sample size and sampling design on analysis of avian foraging behavior. Condor. 86:1984;146-150.
41. Nagelkerke N.J.D. A note on general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika. 78:1991;691-692.
42. Oppel, S., 2002. The role of breeding biology, habitat selection, and cowbird parasitism for the conservation of the Pale-headed Brush-Finch Atlapetes pallidiceps in southern Ecuador. Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, Carl-von-Ossietzky Universität, Oldenburg, Germany.
43. Orians G.H., Willson M.F. Interspecific Territories of Birds. Ecology. 45:1964;736-745.
44. Orians G.H., Wittenberger J.F. Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection. American Naturalist. 137:1991;S29-S49.
45. Paulsch A., Schneider R., Hartig K. Land-use induced vegetation structure in a montane region of Southern Ecuador. Die Erde. 132:2001;93-102.
46. Paynter R.A. Biology and evolution of the Atlapetes schistaceus species-group. Bulletin Museum of Comparative Zoology. 143:1972;297-320.
47. Paynter R.A. Biology and evolution of the avian genus Atlapetes. Bulletin Museum of Comparative Zoology. 148:1978;323-369.
48. Redecker B., Härdtle W., Finck P., Riecken U., Schröder E. Pasture Landscape and Nature Conservation. 2002;Springer, Berlin.
49. Reineking, B., Schröder, B., in press. Computer-intensive methods in the analysis of species-habitat relationships. In: Proceedings "Genes, Bits and Ecosystems" Theory in Ecology. Peter Lang, Frankfurt.
50. Remsen J.V., Graves W.S. Distribution patterns and zoogeography of Atlapetes brush-finches (Emberizinae) of the Andes. Auk. 112:1995;210-224.
51. Remsen J.V., Graves W.S. Distribution patterns of Buarremon brush-finches (Emberizinae) and interspecific competition in Andean birds. Auk. 112:1995;225-236.
52. Rice J. Ecological relationships of two interspecifically territorial Vireos. Ecology. 59:1978;526-538.
53. Ridgely R.S., Greenfield P.J. The Birds of Ecuador - Field Guide. 2001;Cornell University Press, New York.
54. Rotenberry J.T. The role of habitat in avian community composition: physiognomy or floristics Oecologia? 67:1985;213-217.
55. Sæther B.-E. Habitat selection, foraging niches and horizontal spacing of Willow Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus and Chiffchaff P. collybita in an area of sympatry. Ibis. 125:1983;24-32.
56. Schröder, B., (2000) Zwischen Naturschutz und Theoretischer Ökologie: Modelle zur Habitateignung und räumlichen Populationsdynamik für Heuschrecken im Niedermoor. PhD Thesis, Technical University of Braunschweig (with Software for ROC-AUC calculation and classification).
57. Simberloff D. Die Konzeption von Naturreservaten. Usher M.B., Erz W. Erfassen und Bewerten im Naturschutz. 1994;274-291 Quelle und Meyer, Heidelberg.
58. Terborgh J., Weske J.S. The role of competition in the distribution of Andean birds. Ecology. 56:1975;562-576.
59. van den Berg L.J.L., Bullock J.M., Clarke R.T., Langston R.H.W., Rose R.J. Territory selection by the Dartford warbler (Sylvia undata) in Dorset, England: the role of vegetation type, habitat fragmentation and population size. Biological Conservation. 101:2001;217-228.
60. Verbyla D.L., Litvaitis J.A. Resampling methods for evaluating classification accuracy of wildlife habitat models. Environmental Management. 13:1989;783-787.
61. Wiens J.A., Rotenberry J.T. Habitat associations and community structure of birds in shrubsteppe environments. Ecological Monographs. 51:1981;21-41.
62. Winker K., Escalante P., Rappole J.H., Ramos M.A., Oehlenschlager R.J., Warner D.W. Periodic migration and lowland forest refugia in a "sedentary" Neotropical bird, Wetmore's Bush Tanager. Conservation Biology. 11:1997;692-697.
63. Zweig M.H., Campbell G. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clinical Chemistry. 39:1993;561-577.