Factors affecting the survival of real and artificial great reed warbler's nests

Biologia - Section Zoology

Volumn 60, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 215-219

  Batáry, Péter ^a   Báldi, András ^b  

^a DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY   (Hungary)

^b INSTITUTE OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Acrocephalus arundinaceus; Clutch initiation; Mayfield method; Nest predation; Nest site; Vegetation structure

Indexed keywords

ACROCEPHALUS ARUNDINACEUS; COTURNIX; COTURNIX COTURNIX; PHASIANIDAE; PHRAGMITES;

EID: 20444461231     PISSN: 13356380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. AEBISCHER, A., PERRIN, N., KRIEG, M., STUDER, J. & MEYER, D.R. 1996. The role of territory choice, mate choice and arrival date on breeding success in the Savi's warbler Locustella luscinioides. J. Avian Biol. 27: 143-152.
2. BALDI, A. & KISBENEDEK, T. 1999. Species-specific distribution of reed-nesting passerine birds across reed-bed edges: effects of spatial scale and edge type. Acta Zool. Hung. 45: 97-114.
3. BATÁRY, P., WINKLER, H. & BALDI, A. 2004. Experiments with artificial nests on predation in reed habitats. J. Ornithol. 145: 59-63.
4. BERRY, L. & LILL, A. 2003. Do predation rates on artificial nests accurately predict predation rates on natural nests? The effects of nest type, egg type and nest-site characteristics. J. Avian Biol. 33: 39-46.
5. BOULTON, R.L. & CLARKE, M.F. 2003. Do yellow-faced honeyeater (Lichenostomus chrysops) nests experience higher predation at forest edges? Wildlife Res. 30: 119-125.
6. BULER, J.J. & HAMILTON, R.B. 2000. Predation of natural and artificial nests in a southern pine forest. Auk 117: 739-747.
7. CRAMP, S. & BROOKS, D.J. 1992. The Birds of the Western Paleartic. Vol. 6: Warblers. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 728 pp.
8. CSÖRGO, T. 1998. Nádirigó [Great Reed Warbler], pp. 306-307. In: HARASZTHY, L. (ed.) Magyarország madarai [Birds of Hungary], Mezogazda Kiadó, Budapest.
9. DAVIDSON, W.B. & BOLLINGER, E. 2000. Predation rates on real and artificial nests of grassland birds. Auk 117: 147-153.
10. DION, N., HOBSON, K.A. & LARIVIERE, S. 2000. Interactive effects of vegetation and predators on the success of natural and simulated nests of grassland songbirds. Condor 102: 629-634.
11. DYRCZ, A. & NAGATA, H. 2002. Breeding ecology of the Eastern Great reed warbler Acrocephalus arundinaceus orientalis at Lake Kasumigaura, central Japan. Bird Study 49: 166-171.
12. EISING, C.M., KOMDEUR, J., BUYS, J., REEMER, M. & RICHARDSON, D.S. 2001. Islands in a desert: breeding ecology of the African Reed Warbler Acrocephalus baeticatus in Namibia. Ibis 143: 482-493.
13. GREGOIRE, A., GARNIER, S., DREANO, N. & FAIVRE, B. 2003. Nest predation in Blackbirds (Turdus merula) and the influence of nest characteristics. Ornis Fennica 80: 1-10.
14. HANSSON, B., BENSCH, S. & HASSELQUIST, D. 2000. Patterns of nest predation contribute to polygyny in the Great Reed Warbler. Ecology 81: 319-328.
15. HENSLER, G.L. & NICHOLS, J.D. 1981. The Mayfield method of estimating nesting success: a model, estimators and simulation results. Wilson Bull. 93: 42-53.
16. HOI, H., DAROLOVÁ, A. & KRIŠTOFÍK, J. 2001. Factors influencing nest depredation in European Reed Passerines, pp. 27-36. In: HOI, H. (ed.) The ecology of reed birds, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna.
17. HOI, H. & WINKLER, H. 1988. Predation pressure on reed-breeding birds: an experimental study. J. Ornithol. 129: 439-447.
18. HOI, H. &: WINKLER, H. 1994. Predation on nests: a case of apparent competition. Oecologia 98: 436-440.
19. HONZA, M., ØIEN, I.J., MØKSNES, A. & ROSKAFT, E. 1998. Survival of Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus clutches in relation to nest position. Bird Study 45: 104-108.
20. ILLE, R., HOI, H. & KLEINDORFER, S. 1996. Brood predation habitat characteristics and nesting decisions in Acrocephalus scirpaceus and A. palustris. Biologia, Bratislava 51: 219-225.
21. JOBIN, B. & PICMAN, J. 1997. Factors affecting predation on artificial nests in marshes. J. Wildlife Manage. 61: 792-800.
22. MAJOR, R.E. & KENDAL, C.E. 1996. The contribution of artificial nest experiments to understanding avian reproductive success: a review of methods and conclusions. Ibis 138: 298-307.
23. MAYFIELD, H. 1975. Suggestions for calculating nest success. Wilson Bull. 87: 456-466.
24. MOSKÁT, C. &: BALDI, A. 1999. The importance of edge effect in line transect censuses applied in marshland habitats. Ornis Fennica 76: 33-40.
25. MOSKÁT, C. & HONZA, M. 2000. Effect of nest site characteristics on the risk of cuckoo Cuculus canorus parasitism in the great reed warbler Acrocephalus arundinaceus. Ecography 23: 335-341.
26. MOSKÁT, C. & HONZA, M. 2002. European Cuckoo cuckoo Cuculus canorus parasitism and host's rejection behaviour in a heavily parasitized Great reed warbler Acrocephalus arundinaceus population. Ibis 144: 614-622.
27. PÄRT, T. & WRETENBERG, J. 2002. Do artificial nests reveal relative nest predation risk for real nests? J. Avian Biol. 33: 39-46.
28. RICKLEFS, R.E. 1969. An analysis of nesting mortality in birds. Smithsonian Contrib. Zool. 9: 1-48.
29. ROBEL, R.J., HUGHES, J.P., KEANE, T.D. & KEMP, K.E. 2003. Do artificial nests reveal meaningful patterns of predation in Kansas grasslands? Southwest. Nat. 48: 460-464.
30. SAWIN, R.S., LUTMAN, M.W., LINZ, G.M. & BLEIER, W.J. 2003. Predators on Red-winged Blackbird nests in eastern North Dakota. J. Field Ornithol. 74: 288-292.
31. STATSOFT, Inc. 1995. STATISTICA for Windows. StatSoft, Inc., Tulsa, Oklahoma.
32. VAN DER HUT, R.M.G. 1986. Habitat choice and temporal differentiation in reed passerines of a Dutch marsh. Ardea 74: 159-176.
33. WILCOVE, D.S. 1985. Nest predation in forest tracts and the decline of migratory songbirds. Ecology 66: 1211-1214.
34. WILSON, G.R., BRITTINGHAM, M.C. & GOODRICH, L.J. 1998. How well do artificial nests estimate success of real nests? Condor 100: 357-364.