Interacting effects of vegetation structure and breeding patterns on the survival of Great Reed Warbler Acrocephalus arundinaceus nests

Ardea

Volumn 97, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 109-116

  Trnka, Alfréd ^a   Batáry, Péter ^b,c   Prokop, Pavol ^a,d  

^a TRNAVA UNIVERSITY   (Slovakia)

^b DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY   (Hungary)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

^d INSTITUTE OF CHEMISTRY   (Slovakia)

Author keywords

Acrocephalus arundinaceus; Edge effect; Nests; Predation; Timing of breeding

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL NEST; BREEDING SEASON; EDGE EFFECT; GRASS; HABITAT QUALITY; NEST PREDATION; NEST SITE; REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY; SITE SELECTION; SONGBIRD; SURVIVAL; VEGETATION STRUCTURE; VEGETATION TYPE;

ACROCEPHALUS ARUNDINACEUS; AVES; PHRAGMITES AUSTRALIS; TYPHA ANGUSTIFOLIA;

EID: 66149188157     PISSN: 03732266     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5253/078.097.0113     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Ackerman J.T., Blackmer A.L. & Eadie J.M. 2004. Is predation on waterfowl nests density dependent? Tests at three spatial scales. Oikos 107:128-140.
2. Báldi A. & Batáry P. 2005. Nest predation in European reedbeds: different losses in edges but similar losses in interiors. Folia Zool. 54: 285-292.
3. Batáry P. & Báldi A. 2004. Evidence of an edge effect on avian nest success. Conserv. Biol. 18: 389-400.
4. Batáry P. & Báldi A. 2005. Factors affecting the survival of real and artificial Great Reed Warbler's nests. Biologia 60: 215-219.
5. Batáry P., Winkler H. & Báldi A. 2004. Experiments with artificial nests on predation in reed habitats. J. Ornith. 145: 59-63.
6. Bensch S. & Hasselquist D. 1994. Higher rate of nest losses among primary than secondary females - infanticide in the great reed warbler. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 35: 309-317.
7. Bergmann F. 1999. Long-term increase in numbers of early- fledged Reed Warblers (Acrocephalus scirpaceus) at Lake Constance (South Germany). J. Ornithol. 140: 81-86.
8. Burke D.M., Eliliott K., Moore L., Dunford W, Nol E., Phillips J., Holmes S. & Freemark K. 2004. Patterns of nest predation on artificial and natural nests in forest. Conserv. Biol. 18: 381-388.
9. Davison WB. & Bollinger E. 2000. Predation rates on real and artificial nests of grassland birds. Auk 117:147-153.
10. Dyrcz A. 1981. Breeding ecology of Great Reed Warbler (Acrocephalus arundinaceus) and Reed Warbler (Acrocephalus scirpaceus) at fish ponds in SW Poland lakes and lakes in NW Switzerland. Acta Ornithol. 18: 307-332.
11. Eeva T., Veistola S. & Lehikoinen E. 2000. Timing of breeding in subarctic passerines in relation to food availability. Can. J. Zool. 78: 67-78.
12. Finch D.M. 1991. House Wrens adjust laying dates and clutch size in relation to annual flooding. Wilson Bull. 103: 25-43.
13. Forstmeier W & Weiss I. 2004. Adaptive plasticity in nest-site selection in response to changing predation risk. Oikos 104: 487-499.
14. Glutz von Blotzheim U.N. & Bauer K. 1991. Handbuch der Vögel Mitteleuropas. Band 12/1. Passeriformes (3. Teil). Sylviidae. Aula Verlag, Wiesbaden
15. Graveland J. 1999. Effects of reed cutting on density and breeding success of Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus and Sedge Warbler A. schoenobaenus. J. Avian Biol. 30: 469-482.
16. Gregoire A., Garnier S., Dreano N. & Faivre B. 2003. Nest predation in Blackbirds (Turdus merula) and the influence of nest characteristics. Ornius Fenn. 80:1-10.
17. Hansson B., Bensch S. & Hasselquist D. 1997. Infanticide in Great Reed Warblers: secondary females destroy eggs of primary females. Anim. Behav. 1997: 297-304.
18. Hansson B., Bensch S. & Hasselquist D. 2000a. The quality and the timing hypotheses evaluated using data on Great Reed Warblers. Oikos 90: 575-581.
19. Hansson B., Bensch S. & Hasselquist D. 2000b. Patterns of nest predation contribute to polygyny in the Great Reed Warbler. Ecology 81: 319-328.
20. Havlín J. 1971. Nesting biology of Great Reed Warbler and Reed Warbler on the Náměšt'ské rybníky Ponds (Czechoslovakia). Zoologické listy 20: 51-68.
21. Hazier K.R. 2004. Mayfield logistic regression: a practical, approach for analysis of nest survival. Auk 121:707-716.
22. 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.
23. Hoi H. & Winkler H. 1988. Feindruck auf Schilfbrüter: eine experimentelle Untersuchung. J. Orníthol. 129: 439-447.
24. Hoi H. & Winkler H. 1994. Predation on nests: a case of apparent competition. Oecologia 87: 436-440.
25. Hoi H., Darolová A. & Krištofík J. 2001. Factors influencing nest depredation in European Reed Passerines. In:Hoi H. (ed.): The ecology of reed birds. Österreichische Academie der Wissenschaften, Wien, pp. 27-36.
26. Honza M., Moksnes A., Roskaft E. & Øien I.J. 1993. Spatial distribution of nests of the Reed Warbler (Acrocephalus scirpaceus) and the Great Reed Warbler (Acrocephalus arundínaceus) in the Lednice ponds. Zprávy Moravského Ornitologického Spolku 51: 25-33.
27. Honza M., Øien I.J., Moksnes A. & Roskaft E. 1998. Survival of Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus clutches in relation to nest position. Bird Study 45: 104-108.
28. Honza M., Moksnes A., Roskaft E. & Øien I.J. 1999. Effect of Great Reed Warbler Acrocephalus arundinaceus on the reproductive tactics of the Reed Warbler A. scirpaceus. Ibis 141: 489-506.
29. Ille R., Hoi H. & Kleindorfer S. 1996. Brood predation habitat characteristics and nesting decisions in Acrocephalus scirpaceus and A. palustris. Biologia 51: 219-225.
30. Keyser A. J., Hill G. E. & Soehren E. C. 1998. Effects of forest fragment size, nest density, and proximity to edge on the risk of predation to ground-nesting passerine birds. Conserv. Biol. 12: 986-994.
31. Lopéz-Iborra G.M., Pinheiro R.T., Sancho C. & Martinez A. 2004. Nest size influences nest predation risk in two coexisting Acrocephalus warblers. Ardea 92: 85-92.
32. Martin T.E, 1993. Nest predation and nest sites: new perspectives and old patterns. Bioscience 43: 523-532.
33. Martin T.E. 1998. Are microhabitat preference of coexisting species under selection and adaptive? Ecology 79: 656-670.
34. Mayfield H. 1975. Suggestions for calculating nest success. Wilson Bull. 87: 456-466.
35. Mezquida E.T. & Marone L. 2003. Are results of artificial nest experiments a valid indicator of success of natural nests? Wilson Bull. 115: 270-276.
36. Poulin B., Lefebvre G. & McNeil R. 1992. Tropical avian phenology in relation to abundance and exploitation of food resources. Ecology 73: 2295-2309.
37. Robinson S. K., Thompson F. R., Donovan T. M., Whitehead D. R. & Faaborg J. 1995. Regional forest fragmentation and the nesting success of migratory birds. Science 267: 1987-1990.
38. Santisteban L., Sieving K. E. & Avery M. L. 2002. Use of sensory cues by Fish Crows Corvus ossifragus preying on artificial bird nests. J. Avian Biol. 33: 245-252.
39. Schmidt K.A. & Whelan C.J. 1999. Nest predation on woodland songbirds: when is nest predation density dependent? Oikos 87: 65-74.
40. Schulze K, Leisler B. & Winkler H. 1996. Breeding success and reproductive strategies of two Acrocephalus warblers. J. Ornithol. 137:181-192.
41. Seitz L.C. & Zegers D.A. 1993. An experimental study of nest predation in adjacent deciduous, coniferous and successional habitats. Condor 95: 297-304.
42. Thompson F.R. & Burhans D.E. 2003. Predation of songbirds nests differs by predator and between field and forest habitats. J. Wildl. Manage. 67: 408-416.
43. Thyen S. & Exo K.M. 2005. Interactive effects of time and vegetation on reproduction of Redshanks (Tringa totanus) breeding in Wadden Sea salt marshes. J. Ornithol. 146: 215-225.
44. Weidinger K. 2002. Interactive effects of concealment, parental behaviour and predators on the survival of open passerine nests. J. Animal Ecol. 71: 424-437.
45. Winter M., Johnson D. H., Shaffer J. A., Donovan T. M. & Svedarsky W. D. 2006. Patch size and landscape effects on density and nesting success of grassland birds. J. Wildl. Manage. 70: 158-172.
46. Zanette L & Jenkins B. 2000. Nesting success and nest predators in forest fragments: A study using real and artificial nests. Auk 117: 445-454.