Nest-site selection in the barn swallow, Hirundo rustica: What predicts seasonal reproductive success?

Canadian Journal of Zoology

Volumn 84, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 1533-1539

  Safran, Rebecca Jo ^a,b  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^b PRINCETON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGY; SITE SELECTION;

NEST LOCATION; NEST-SITE ATTRIBUTES; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS;

BIRDS;

ECOLOGICAL MODELING; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FITNESS; NEST SITE; OBSERVATIONAL METHOD; PASSERINE; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; SEASONAL VARIATION; SITE SELECTION;

ANIMALIA; AVES; HIRUNDO; HIRUNDO RUSTICA;

EID: 33947233697     PISSN: 00084301     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/Z06-176     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Badyaev, A.V., Martin, T.E., and Etges, W.J. 1996. Habitat sampling and habitat selection by female wild turkeys: ecological correlates and reproductive consequences. Auk, 113: 636-646.
2. Barclay, R.M.R. 1988. Variation in the costs, benefits, and frequency of nest reuse by Barn Swallows. Auk, 105: 53-60.
3. Blums, P., Nichols, J.D., Hines, J.E., Lindberge, M.S., and Mednis, A. 2005. Individual quality, survival variation and patterns of phenotypic selection on body condition and timing of nesting in birds. Oecologia (Berl.), 143: 365-376. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1794-x.
4. Briceno, A.T. 2002. Tail length and sexual selection in the North American Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica erythrogaster. M.S. thesis, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Okla.
5. Brown, C.R., and Brown, M.B. 1999. Barn swallow (Hirundo rustled). In The birds of North America. No. 452. Edited by A. Poole and F. Gill. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia; American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C.
6. Clark, R.G., and Shutler, D. 1999. Avian habitat selection: pattern from process in nest-site use by ducks? Ecology, 80: 272-287. doi:10.2307/176996.
7. Conrad, K.F., and Robertson, R.J. 1993. Clutch size in Eastern Phoebes (Saynornis phoebe). 1. The cost of nest-building. Can. J. Zool. 71: 1003-1007.
8. Danchin, E., Boulinier, T., and Massot, M. 1998. Conspecific reproductive success and breeding habitat selection: implications for the study of coloniality. Ecology, 79: 2415-2428. doi:10.2307/176832.
9. Doerr, V.A.J., Doerr, E.D., and Jenkins, S.H. 2006. Habitat selection in two Australasian treecreepers: what cues should they use? Emu, 106: 93-103. doi:10.1071/MU05020.
10. Gauthier, M., and Thomas, D.W. 1993. Nest site selection and the cost of nest building by Cliff Swallows. Can. J. Zool. 71: 1120-1123.
11. Hafstad, I., Stokke, B.G., Vikan, J.R., Rutila, J., Røskaft, E., and Moksnes, A. 2005. Within-year nest reuse in open-nesting, solitary breeding passerines. Ornis Nor. 28: 58-61.
12. Hansell, M.H. 2000. Bird nests and construction behaviour. Cambridge University Press, New York.
13. Hasselquist, D., Wasson, M.F., and Winkler, D.W. 2001. Humoral immunocompetence correlates with date of egg-laying and reflects work load in female tree swallows. Behav. Ecol. 12: 93-97.
14. Hauber, M.E. 2002. Is reduced clutch size a cost of parental care in Eastern Phoebes (Sayornis phoebe)? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 51: 503-509. doi:10.1007/s00265-001-0450-2.
15. Hill, J.R.H., III. 1982. Reproductive success in the Barn Swallow: effects of nest reuse and age. M.S. thesis, Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
16. Hollander, M., and Wolfe, D.A. 1999. Nonparametric statistical methods. 2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
17. Kim, S., and Monaghan, P. 2005. Interacting effects of nest shelter and breeder quality on behaviour and breeding performance of herring gulls. Anim. Behav. 69: 301-306. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.06.002.
18. Lambrechts, M.M., Caro, S., Charmantier, A., Gross, N., Galan, M.-J., Perret, P., Cartan-Son, M., Dias, P.C., Blondel, J., and Thomas, D.W. 2004. Habitat quality as a predictor of spatial variation in blue tit reproductive performance: a multi-plot analysis. Oecologia, 141: 555-561. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1681-5.
19. Ludwigs, J.-D., and Becker, P.H. 2005. What do pairing patterns in common tern Sterna hirundo recruits reveal about the significance of sex and breeding experience? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 57: 412-421.
20. Martin, K. 1995. Patterns and mechanisms for age-dependent reproduction and survival in birds. Am. Zool. 35: 340-348.
21. Martin, T.E. 1998. Are microhabitat preferences of coexisting species under selection and adaptive? Ecology, 79: 656-670. doi:10.2307/176961.
22. Müller, M., Passinelli, G., Schiegg, K., Spaar, R., and Jenni, L. 2005. Ecological and social effects on reproduction and local recruitment in the red-backed shrike. Oecologia (Berl.), 143: 37-50. doi:10.1007/s00442- 004-1770-5.
23. Murphy, M.T. 2004. Intrapopulation variation in reproduction by eastern kingbirds: the impacts of age, individual performance, and breeding site. J. Avian Biol. 35: 252-261. doi:10.1111/j.0908-8857.2004.03214.x.
24. Møller, A.P. 1990. Effects of parasitism by a haematophagous mite on reproduction in the Barn Swallow. Ecology, 71: 2345-2357. doi:10.2307/1938645.
25. Neter, J., Kutner, M.H., Nachtsheim, C.J., and Wasserman, W. 1996. Applied linear statistical models. 4th ed. Irwin, Chicago.
26. Pärt, T. 2001. The effects of territory quality on age-dependent reproductive performance in the northern wheatear, Oenanthe oenanthe. Anim. Behav. 62: 379-388. doi:10.1006/anbe.2001.1754.
27. Przybylo, R., Wiggins, D.A., and Merilä, J. 2001. Breeding success in blue tits: good territories or good parents? J. Avian Biol. 32: 214-218. doi:10.1111/j.0908-8857.2001.320302.x.
28. Reid, J.M., Bignal, E.M., Bignal, S., McCracken, D.I., and Monaghan, P. 2003. Age-specific reproductive performance in redbilled choughs Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax: patterns and processes in a natural population. J. Anim. Ecol. 72: 765-776. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.2003.00750.x.
29. Saether, B.-E. 1990. Age-specific variation in the reproductive performance of birds. In Current ornithology. Edited by D.M. Power. Plenum Press, New York. pp. 251-283.
30. Safran, R.J. 2004. Adaptive site selection rules and variation in group size of barn swallows: individual decisions predict population patterns. Am. Nat. 164: 121-131. doi:10.1086/422198.
31. Safran, R.J. 2005. From individuals to populations: female habitat- and mate-selection decisions and group size variation in barn swallows. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.
32. Samuel, D.E. 1971. The breeding biology of Barn and Cliff Swallows in West Virginia. Wilson Bull. No. 83. pp. 284-301.
33. SAS Institute Inc. 1990. SAS/STAT® user's guide. Version 6. 4th ed. Vol. 2. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, N.C.
34. Shields, W.M. 1984. Factors affecting nest and site fidelity in Adirondack Barn Swallows. Auk, 101: 780-789.
35. Shields, W.M., Crook, J.R., Hebblethwaite, M.L., and Wiles-Ehmann, S.S. 1988. Ideal free coloniality in the swallows. In The ecology of social behavior. Edited by C.N. Slobodchikoff. Academic Press, San Diego. pp. 189-228.
36. Souter, N.J., Bull, M.C., and Hutchinson, M.N. 2004. Adding burrows to enhance a population of the blue tongue lizard. Biol. Conserv. 116: 403-408. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00232-5.
37. Webb, J.K., and Shine, R. 2000. Paving a way for habitat restoration: can artificial rocks restore degraded habitats of endangered reptiles? Biol. Conserv. 92: 93-99. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00056-7.
38. Weeks, H.P., Jr. 1978. Clutch size variation in the Eastern Phoebe in southern Indiana. Wilson Bull. No. 91. pp. 141-154.
39. Wendeln, H., and Becker, P.H. 1999. Effects of parental quality and effort on the reproduction of common terns. J. Anim. Ecol. 68: 205-214. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.1999.00276.x.