Effects of stand, landscape, and spatial variables on bird communities in larch plantations and deciduous forests in central Japan

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 38, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 1223-1243

  Yamaura, Yuichi ^a,b   Katoh, Kazuhiro ^a   Takahashi, Toshimori ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

^b FORESTRY AND FOREST PRODUCTS RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Japan)

^c UTSUNOMIYA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIRDS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

BIRD COMMUNITIES; DECIDUOUS FORESTS; SPATIAL VARIABLES;

FORESTRY;

BASAL AREA; BIRD; BREEDING SEASON; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; CONIFEROUS FOREST; DECIDUOUS FOREST; LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE; MONTANE FOREST; PLANTATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SNAG; SPATIAL VARIATION; STAND STRUCTURE;

BAMBOO; BIRDS; HARDWOODS; JAPAN; LARIX; PLANTATIONS;

ASIA; CHUBU; EURASIA; FAR EAST; HONSHU; JAPAN; NAGANO;

ABIES; ABIES HOMOLEPIS; AVES; CONIUM; LARIX; LARIX KAEMPFERI; PSEUDOLARIX KAEMPFERI; SASA; SASA SENANENSIS; TSUGA; TSUGA DIVERSIFOLIA;

EID: 44449139945     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/X07-226     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Andrén, H. 1994. Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscape with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos, 71: 355-366. doi:10.2307/3545823.
2. Angelstam, P., Mikusinski, G., and Fridman, J. 2004. Natural forest remnants and transport infrastructure: does history matter for biodiversity conservation planning? Ecol. Bull. 51: 149-162.
3. Austin, M.P. 2002. Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between ecological theory and statistical modelling. Ecol. Model. 157: 101-111. doi:10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00205-3.
4. Bibby, C.J., Aston, N., and Bellamy, P.E. 1989. Effects of broad-leaved trees on birds of upland conifer plantations in north Wales. Biol. Conserv. 49: 17-29. doi:10.1016/0006-3207(89)90110-9.
5. Blake, J.G., and Hoppes, W.G. 1986. Influence of resource abundance on use of tree-fall gaps by birds in an isolated woodlot. Auk, 103: 328-340.
6. Borcard, D., and Legendre, P. 2002. All-scale spatial analysis of ecological data by means of principal coordinates of neighbor matrices. Ecol. Model. 153: 51-68. doi:10.1016/S0304-3800(01)00501-4.
7. Borcard, D., and Legendre, P. 2004. SpaceMaker2 - user's guide. Département de Sciences Biologiques, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Que.
8. Borcard, D., Legendre, P., Avois-Jacqet, C., and Tuomisto, H. 2004. Dissecting the spatial structure of ecological data at multiple scales. Ecology, 85: 1826-1832. doi:10.1890/03-3111.
9. Bourque, J., and Desrochers, A. 2006. Spatial aggregation of forest songbird territories and possible implications for area sensitivity. [online] Avian Conserv. Ecol. 1(2): Article 3 Available from www.ace-eco.org/vol1/ iss2/art3/ [accessed 20 June 2007].
10. Brind'Amour, A., Boisclair, D., Legendre, P., and Borcard, D. 2005. Multiscale spatial distribution of a littoral fish community in relation to environmental variables. Limnol. Oceanogr. 50: 465-479.
11. Brokaw, N.V.L., and Lent, R.A. 1999. Vertical structure. In Maintaining biodiversity in forest ecosystems. Edited by M.L. Hunter, Jr. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. pp. 373-399.
12. Broström, G. 2005. The glmmML R package, version 0.26-3 edition. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
13. Brotons, L., and Herrando, S. 2001. Factors affecting bird communities in fragments of secondary pine forests in the north-western Mediterranean basin. Acta Oecol. 22: 21-31. doi:10.1016/S1146-609X(00)01095-X.
14. Brotons, L., Mönkkönen, M., Huhta, E., Nikula, A., and Rajasärkkä, A. 2003a. Effects of landscape structure and forest reserve location on old-growth forest bird species in northern Finland. Landsc. Ecol. 18: 377-393. doi:10.1023/A:1026148825138.
15. Brotons, L., Mönkkönen, M., and Martin, J.L. 2003b. Are fragments islands? Landscape context and density-area relationships in boreal forest birds. Am. Nat. 162: 343-356. doi:10.1086/376887. PMID:12970842.
16. Brown, J.H., and Kodric-Brown, A. 1977. Turnover rates insular biogeography: effects of immigration on extinction. Ecology, 58: 445-449. doi:10.2307/1935620.
17. Crawley, M.J. 2007. The R book. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
18. Curry, G.N. 1991. The influence of proximity to plantation edge on diversity and abundance of bird species in an exotic pine plantation in north-eastern New South Wales. Wildl. Res. 18: 299-314. doi:10.1071/WR9910299.
19. Cushman, S.A., and McGarigal, K. 2002. Hierarchical, multi-scale decomposition of species-environment relationships. Landsc. Ecol. 17: 637-646. doi:10.1023/A:1021571603605.
20. Díaz, M., Carbonell, R., Santos, T., and Telleria, J.L. 1998. Breeding bird communities in pine plantations of the Spanish plateau: biogeography, landscape and vegetation effects. J. Appl. Ecol. 35: 562-574. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664.1998.3540562.x.
21. Dormann, C.F., McPherson, J.M., Araújo, M.B., Bivand, R., Bolliger, J., Carl, G., Davies, R.G., Hirzel, A., Jetz, W., Kissling, W.D., Kühn, I., Ohlemüller, R., Peres-Neto, P.R., Reineking, B., Schroder, B., Schurr, F.M., and Wilson, R. 2007. Methods to account for spatial autocorrelation in the analysis of species distributional data: a review. Ecography, 30: 609-628. doi:10.1111/j.2007.0906-7590.05171.x.
22. Drapeau, P., Leduc, A., and McNeil, R. 1999. Refining the use of point counts at the scale of individual points in studies of bird-habitat relationships. J. Avian Biol. 30: 367-382. doi:10.2307/3677009.
23. ESRI Inc. 1999. ArcView GIS, version 3.2 edition. ESRI Inc., Redlands, Calif.
24. Estades, C.F., and Temple, S.A. 1999. Deciduous-forest bird communities in a forested landscape dominated by exotic pine plantations. Ecol. Appl. 9: 573-585. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(1999)009[0573:DFBCIA]2.0.CO;2.
25. Fahrig, L. 2001. How much habitat is enough? Biol. Conserv. 100: 65-74. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00208-1.
26. Fahrig, L. 2003. Effect of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34: 487-515. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34. 011802.132419.
27. Flather, C.H., and Bevers, M. 2002. Patchy reaction-diffusion and population abundance: the relative importance of habitat amount and arrangement. Am. Nat. 159: 40-56. doi:10.1086/324120.
28. Fleishman, E., McDonal, N., Mac Nally, R., Murphy, D.D., Walters, J., and Floyd, T. 2003. Effects of floristics, physiognomy and non-native vegetation on riparian bird communities in a Mojave desert watershed. J. Anim. Ecol. 72: 484-490. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.2003.00718.x.
29. Freckleton, R.P. 2002. On the misuse of residuals in ecology: regression of residuals vs. multiple regression. J. Anim. Ecol. 71: 542-545. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00618.x.
30. Gascon, C., Lovejoy, T.E., Bierregaard, R.O., Jr., Malcom, J.R., Stouffer, P.C., Vasconcelos, H.L., and Laurance, W.F. 1999. Matrix habitat and species richness in tropical forest remnants. Biol. Conserv. 91: 223-229. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00080-4.
31. Gobeil, J.-F., and Villard, M.-A. 2002. Permeability of three boreal forest landscape types to bird movements as determined from experimental translocations. Oikos, 98: 447-458. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2002.980309. x.
32. Greene, C.M., and Stamps, J.A. 2001. Habitat selection at low population densities. Ecology, 82: 2091-2100. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[2091: HSALPD]2.0.CO;2.
33. Griffith, D.A., and Peres-Neto, P.R. 2006. Spatial modeling in ecology: the flexibility of eigenfunction spatial analyses. Ecology, 87: 2603-2613. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2006)087[2603: SMIETF]2.0.CO;2. PMID:17089668.
34. Guénette, J.-S., and Villard, M.-A. 2005. Thresholds in forest bird response to habitat alteration as quantitative targets for conservation. Conserv. Biol. 19: 1168-1180. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00085.x.
35. Hagan, J.M., Vander Haegen, W.M., and McKinley, P.S. 1996. The early development of forest fragmentation effects on birds. Conserv. Biol. 10: 188-202. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10010188.x.
36. Haila, Y. 2002. A conceptual genealogy of fragmentation research: from island biogeography to landscape ecology. Ecol. Appl. 12: 321-334. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[0321:ACGOFR]2.0.CO;2..
37. Hansen, A., and Rotella, J. 1999. Abiotic factors. In Maintaining biodiversity in forest ecosystems. Edited by M.L. Hunter, Jr. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. pp. 161-209.
38. Harrison, R.B., Schmiegelow, F.K.A., and Naidoo, R. 2005. Standlevel response of breeding forest songbirds to multiple levels of partial-cut harvest in four boreal forest types. Can. J. For. Res. 35: 1553-1567. doi:10.1139/x05-076.
39. Hartley, M.J. 2002. Rationale and methods for conserving biodiversity in plantation forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 155: 81-95. doi:10.1016/S0378- 1127(01)00549-7.
40. Hawkins, B.A., Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Bini, L.M., Marco, P.D., and Blackburn, T.M. 2007. Red herrings revisited: spatial autocorrelation and parameter estimation in geographical ecology. Ecography, 30: 375-384. doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2007.05117.x..
41. Higuchi, H., Morioka, H., and Yamagishi, S. 1997. The encyclopedia of animals in Japan. Vol. 4. Birds II. Heibonsha Publishers, Tokyo. [In Japanese.]
42. Holmes, R.T., Sherry, T.W., and Sturges, F.W. 1986. Bird community dynamics in a temperate deciduous forest: long-term trends at Hubbard Brook. Ecol. Monogr. 56: 201-220. doi:10.2307/2937074.
43. James, F.C., and Shugart, H.H., Jr. 1970. A quantitative method of habitat description. Audubon Field Notes, 24: 727-736.
44. Johnson, D.H. 2002. The importance of replication in wildlife research. J. Wildl. Manage. 66: 919-932. doi:10.2307/3802926.
45. Keddy, P.A. 1992. Assembly and response rules: two goals for predictive community ecology. J. Veg. Sci. 3: 157-164. doi:10.2307/3235676.
46. Kiyosu, Y. 1965. The birds of Japan. I. Kodansha Publishers, Tokyo. [In Japanese.]
47. Koenig, W.D. 1999. Spatial autocorrelation of ecological phenomena. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14: 22-26. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01533-X. PMID:10234243.
48. Koper, N., Schmiegelow, F.K.A., and Merrill, E.H. 2007. Residuals cannot distinguish between ecological effects of habitat amount and fragmentation: implications for the debate. Landsc. Ecol. 22: 811-820. doi:10.1007/s10980-007-9083-9.
49. Land, D., Marion, W.R., and O'Meare, T.E. 1989. Snag availability and cavity nesting birds in slash pine plantations. J. Wildl. Manage. 53: 1165-1171. doi:10.2307/3809628.
50. Laurance, W.F. 1991. Ecological correlates of extinction proneness in Australian tropical ran forest mammals. Conserv. Biol. 5: 79-89. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.1991.tb00390.x.
51. Laurance, W.F. 2000. Do edge effects occur over large spatial scales? Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 134-135. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(00)01838-3. PMID:10717681.
52. Lavorel, S., McIntyre, S., Landsberg, J., and Forbes, T.D.A. 1997. Plant functional classifications: from general groups to specific groups base on response to disturbance. Trends Ecol. Evol. 12: 474-478. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(97)01219-6.
53. Legendre, P. 1993. Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm? Ecology, 74: 1659-1673. doi:10.2307/1939924.
54. Legendre, P., and Legendre, L. 1998. Numerical ecology. 2nd ed. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
55. Leps, J., and Smilauer, P. 2003. Multivariate analysis of ecological data using CANOCO. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
56. Lichstein, J.W., Simons, T.R., Shriner, S.A., and Franzreb, K.E. 2002. Spatial autocorrelation and autoregressive models in ecology. Ecol. Monogr. 72: 445-463. doi:10.1890/0012-9615(2002)072[0445:SAAAMI]2.0.CO;2..
57. Liebhold, A., Koenig, W.D., and Bjørnstad, O.N. 2004. Spatial synchrony in population dynamics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 35: 467-490. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132516.
58. Lindenmayer, D.B., and Franklin, J.F. 2002. Conserving forest biodiversity: a comprehensive multiscaled approach. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
59. Lindenmayer, D.B., and Hobbs, R.J. 2004. Fauna conservation in Australian plantation forests: a review. Biol. Conserv. 119: 151-168. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2003.10.028.
60. Lopez, G., and Moro, M.J. 1997. Birds of Aleppo pine plantation in south-east Spain in relation to vegetation composition and structure. J. Appl. Ecol. 34: 1257-1272. doi:10.2307/2405236.
61. Mac Nally, R. 2000. Regression and model-building in conservation biology, biogeography and ecology: the distinction between - and reconciliation of - 'predictive' and 'explanatory' models. Biodivers. Conserv. 9: 655-671. doi:10.1023/A:1008985925162.
62. Martin, T.E. 1993. Nest predation and nest sites: new perspectives on old pattern. Bioscience, 43: 523-532. doi:10.2307/1311947.
63. Martin, T.E. 1998. Are microhabitat preferences of coexisting species under selection and adaptive? Ecology, 79: 656-670. doi:10.1890/0012- 9658(1998)079[0656:AMPOCS]2.0.CO;2.
64. Matthysen, E. 1999. Nuthatches (Sitta europaea: Aves) in forest fragments: demography of a patchy population. Oecologia (Berl.), 119: 501-509. doi:10.1007/s004420050813.
65. Matthysen, E. 2005. Density-dependent dispersal in birds and mammals. Ecography, 28: 403-416. doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005.04073.x.
66. McCarthy, M.A., Thompson, C.J., and Possingham, H.P. 2005. Theory for designing nature reserves for single species. Am. Nat. 165: 250-257. doi:10.1086/427297. PMID:15729654.
67. Mitchell, M.S., Lancia, R.A., and Gerwin, J.A. 2001. Using landscape-level data to predict the distribution of birds on a managed forest: effects of scale. Ecol. Appl. 11: 1692-1708. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2001) 011[1692:ULLDTP]2.0.CO;2.
68. Moore, S.E., and Allen, H.L. 1999. Plantation forestry. In Maintaining biodiversity in forest ecosystems. Edited by M.L. Hunter, Jr. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. pp. 400-433.
69. Newton, I. 1994. The role of nest sites in limiting the numbers of hole-nesting birds: a review. Biol. Conserv. 70: 265-276. doi:10.1016/0006-3207(94)90172-4.
70. Norton, D. 1999. Forest reserves. In Maintaining biodiversity in forest ecosystems. Edited by M.L. Hunter, Jr. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. pp. 525-555.
71. Oksanen, J., Kindt, R., Legendre, P., and O'Hara, B. 2007. The vegan R package, version 1.8-6 edition. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
72. Oliver, C.D., and Larson, B.C. 1996. Forest stand dynamics. Update edition. Wiley, New York.
73. Patterson, I.J., Ollason, J.G., and Doyle, P. 1995. Bird populations in upland spruce plantations in northern Britain. For. Ecol. Manage. 79: 107-131. doi:10.1016/0378-1127(95)03619-9.
74. Pulliam, H.R., Dunning, J.B., Jr., and Liu, J. 1992. Population dynamics in complex landscapes: a case study. Ecol. Appl. 2: 165-177. doi:10.2307/1941773.
75. R Development Core Team. 2006. R: a language and environment for statistical computing, version 2.4.1 edition. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
76. Rempel, R.S., and Carr, A.P. 2003. Patch analyst extension for ArcView, version 3 edition. ESRI Inc., Redlands, Calif.
77. SAS Institue Inc. 2002. JMP IN, version 5.0.1 edition. Japanese edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, N.C.
78. Spies, T. 1997. Forest stand structure, composition, and function. In Creating a forestry for the 21st century. Edited by K.A. Kohm and J.F. Franklin. Island Press, Washington, D.C. pp. 11-30.
79. Stamps, J.A. 2001. Habitat selection by dispersers: integrating proximate and ultimate approaches. In Dispersal. Edited by J. Clobert, E. Danchin, A.A. Dhondt, and J.D. Nichols. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. pp. 230-242.
80. Stuart-Smith, A.K., Hayes, J.P., and Schieck, J. 2006. The influence of wildlife, logging, and residual tree density on bird communities in the northern Rocky Mountains. For. Ecol. Manage. 231: 1-17. doi:10.1016/j.foreco. 2006.02.053.
81. ter Braak, C.J.F., and Smilauer, P. 2002. CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user's guide: software for canonical community ordination, version 4.5 edition. Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, New York.
82. Tittler, R., Hannon, S.J., and Norton, M.R. 2001. Residual tree retention ameliorates short-term effects of clear-cutting on some boreal songbirds. Ecol. Appl. 11: 1656-1666. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[1656:RTRAST]2.0. CO;2.
83. Tubelis, D.P., Lindenmayer, D.B., and Cowling, A. 2004. Novel patch-matrix interactions: patch width influences matrix use by birds. Oikos, 107: 634-644. doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.13420.x.
84. Wagner, H.H., and Fortin, M.-J. 2005. Spatial analysis of landscapes: concepts and statistics. Ecology, 86: 1975-1987. doi:10.1890/04-0914.
85. Ward, M.P., and Schlossberg, S. 2004. Conspecific attraction and the conservation of territorial songbirds. Conserv. Biol. 18: 519-525. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00494.x.
86. Wiens, J.A. 1981. Single-sample surveys of communities: are the revealed patterns real? Am. Nat. 117: 90-98. doi:10.1086/283689.
87. Wiens, J.A. 2002. Central concepts and issues of landscape ecology. In Applying landscape ecology in biological conservation. Edited by K.J. Gutzwiller. Springer, New York. pp. 3-21.
88. Wiens, J.A., Rotenberry, J.T., and Van Horne, B. 1987. Habitat occupancy patterns of North American shrubsteppe birds: the effects of spatial scale. Oikos, 48: 132-147. doi:10.2307/3565849.
89. Yamaura, Y., Katoh, K., and Takahashi, T. 2006. Reversing habitat loss: deciduous habitat fragmentation matters to birds in a larch plantation matrix. Ecography, 29: 827-864. doi:10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04831.x.
90. Yamaura, Y., Katoh, K., and Takahashi, T. 2007. Deciduous habitat fragmentation caused by a larch plantation matrix matters to birds in deciduous habitats. Ornithol. Sci. 6: 67-78. doi:10.2326/1347-0558(2007)6[67: DHFCBA]2.0.CO;2.
91. Yamaura, Y., Amano, T., and Katoh, K. 2008. Ecological traits determine the affinity of birds to a larch plantation matrix, in montane Nagano, central Japan. Ecol. Res.23: 317-327. doi:10.1007/s11284-007-0380-1.
92. Zollner, P.A., and Lima, S.L. 2005. Behavioral tradeoffs when dispersing across a patchy landscape. Oikos, 108: 219-230. doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299. 2005.13711.x.