Bird community composition in a shaded coffee agro-ecological matrix in Puebla, Mexico: The effects of landscape heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales

Biotropica

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 236-245

  Leyequién, Eurídice ^a   de Boer, W F ^a   Toledo, Víctor M ^b  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES EN ECOSISTEMAS Y SUSTENTABILIDAD   (Mexico)

Author keywords

4th corner method; Agricultural landscapes; Avifauna; Habitat heterogeneity; Redundancy analysis

Indexed keywords

AGROECOLOGY; ARABLE LAND; AVIFAUNA; BIRD; CANOPY ARCHITECTURE; COFFEE; DIETARY SHIFT; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; HABITAT TYPE; HETEROGENEITY; LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE; MATRIX; PATCH DYNAMICS; PLANTATION; SPECIES CONSERVATION; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SPECIES RICHNESS; VEGETATION STRUCTURE;

MEXICO [NORTH AMERICA]; PUEBLA [MEXICO];

AVES;

EID: 77951285528     PISSN: 00063606     EISSN: 17447429     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2009.00553.x     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. Aguilar-Ortiz F. Estudio ecológico de las aves del cafetal. Estudios ecológicos en el agroecosistema cafetalero 1982, 103-128. Ávila-Jiménez EGomez-Pompa A. (Eds.), pp, Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Sobre Recursos Bióticos, Xalapa, Veracruz, México
2. Andrén H. Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: A review. Oikos 1994, 71:355-366.
3. Atauri J A, de Lucio J V. The role of landscape structure in species richness distribution of birds, amphibians, reptiles and lepidopterans in Mediterranean landscapes. J. Landscape Ecol. 2001, 16:147-159.
4. Baillon F, Benvenuti S, Ioale P. Fidelity to non breeding site in some species of birds in Senegal. Trop. Zool. 1992, 5:31-43.
5. Bender D J, Fahrig L. Matrix structure obscures the relationship between interpatch movement and patch size and isolation. Ecology 2005, 86:1023-1033.
6. Bengtsson J P, Angelstam, Elmqvis T. Reserves, resilience, and dynamic landscapes. Ambio 2003, 32:389-96.
7. Benton T G, Vickery J A, Wilson J D. Farmland biodiversity: Is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends Ecol. Evol. 2003, 18:182-188.
8. Berg. Diversity and abundance of birds in relation to forest fragmentation, habitat quality and heterogeneity. Bird Study 1997, 44:355-366.
9. Bhagwat S A, Kushalappa C G, Williams P H, Brown N D. Landscape approach to biodiversity conservation of sacred groves in the Western Ghats of India. Conserv. Biol. 2005, 19:1853-1862.
10. Bhagwat S A, Willis K J, Birks H J B, Whittaker R J. Agroforestry: A refuge for tropical biodiversity? Trends Ecol. Evol. 2008, 23:261-267.
11. 2008, http://www.birdlife.org/, Bird life international., Species factsheet, Available at, (accessed January 3, 2008)
12. Bonada N, Rieradevall M, Pratonada N. Macroinvertebrate community structure and biological traits related to flow permanence in a Mediterranean river network. Hydrobiologia 2007, 589:91-106.
13. Borcard D, Legendre P, Drapeau P. Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 1992, 73:1045-1055.
14. Borghesio L. Effects of human subsistence activities on forest birds in northern Kenya. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 22:384-394.
15. Calvo L, Blake J. Bird diversity and abundance on two different shade coffee plantations in Guatemala. Bird Conserv. Int. 1998, 8:297-308.
16. Carlo T A, Collazo J A, Groom M J. Influences of fruit diversity and abundance on bird use of two shaded coffee plantations. Biotropica 2004, 36:602-614.
17. Cohn-Haft M, Whittaker A, Stouffer P C. A new look at the " species-poor" central Amazon: The avifauna north of Manaus, Brazil. Ornithol. Monogr. 1997, 48:205-235.
18. Connor E F, Courtney A C, Yode J M. Individuals-area relationships: The relationship between animal population density and area. Ecology 2000, 81:734-748.
19. Censo cafetalero 2001, Consejo mexicano del cafe., Consejo mexicano del cafe, Puebla, México
20. Cruz-Angon A, Sillett T S, Greenberg R. An experimental study of habitat selection by birds in a coffee plantation. Ecology 2008, 89:921-927.
21. Cushman S A, McGarigal K. Hierarchical, multiscale decomposition of species-environmental relationships. Landscape Ecol. 2002, 17:637-646.
22. Cushman S A, McGarigal K. Patterns in the species-environment relationship depend on both scales and choice of response variables. Oikos 2004, 105:117-124.
23. Daily G C, Ehrlich P R, Sanchez-Azofeifa G A. Countryside biogeography: Use of human-dominated habitats by the avifauna of southern Costa Rica. Ecol. Appl. 2001, 11:1-13.
24. Dietsch T V, Perfecto I, Greenberg R. Avian foraging behaviour in two different types of coffee agroecosystem in Chiapas, Mexico. Biotropica 2007, 39:232-240.
25. Fahrig L. How much habitat is enough? Biol. Conserv. 2001, 100:65-74.
26. Fahrig L. Effects of habitat fragmentation on Biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2003, 34:487-515.
27. Forman R T T. Land mosaics: The ecology of landscapes and regions 1995, Cambridge University Press, New York, New York
28. Foster M S. The potential of fruit trees to enhance converted habitats for migrating birds in southern Mexico. Bird Conserv. Int. 2007, 17:45-61.
29. Freemark K E, Dunning J B, Hejl S J, Probst J R. A landscape ecology perspective for research, conservation and management. Population ecology and conservation of neotropical migrant birds 1995, 381-427. Martin T E, Finch D M, (Eds.), pp, Oxford University Press, New York, New York
30. Fuentes-Flores R. Coffee production systems in Mexico. Workshop on agroforestry systems in Latin America 1979, 60-72. De las Salas F. (Ed.), pp, Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza, Turrialba, Costa Rica
31. Greenberg R, Bichier P, Sterling J. Bird populations in rustic and planted shade coffee plantations of eastern Chiapas, México. Biotropica 1997, 29:501-514.
32. Greenberg R, Perfecto I, Philpott S M. Agroforests as model systems for tropical ecology. Ecology 2008, 89:913-914.
33. Hardner J, Rice R. Rethinking green consumerism. Sci. Am. 2002, 286((5)):89-95.
34. Helle P. Bird communities in open ground-climax forest edges in northeastern Finland. Oulanka Rep. 1983, 3:39-46.
35. Henriques L M P, Wunderle J M, Willig M R. Birds of the Tapajós National Forest, Brazilian Amazon: A preliminary assessment. Ornitol. Neotrop. 2003, 14:307-338.
36. Holland J D, Bert D G, Fahrig L. Determining the spatial scale of species' response to habitat. BioScience 2004, 54:227-233.
37. Holland J D, Fahrig L. Effect of woody borders on insect density and diversity in crop fields: A landscape-scale analysis. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. 2000, 78:115-122.
38. Holm S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand. J. Stat. 1979, 6:65-70.
39. Hughes J B, Daily G C, Ehrlich P R. Conservation of tropical forest birds in countryside habitats. Ecol. Lett. 2002, 5:121-129.
40. 2001, http://www.inegi.org.mx/inegi/default.aspx, INEGI., Land use/land cover digital map, Available at, accessed January 27, 2003
41. 2007, http://www.iucnredlist.org/info/programme, IUCN., Species' red list status, Available at, accessed January 3, 2008
42. Jones J, Ramoni-Perazzi P, Carruthers E H, Tobertson R J. Species composition of bird communities in shade coffee plantations in the Venezuelan andes. Ornithol. Neotrop. 2002, 13:397-412.
43. Kent M, Coker P. Vegetation description and analysis. A practical approach 1992, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK
44. Komar O. Priority contribution. Ecology and conservation of birds in coffee plantations: A critical review. Bird Conserv. Int. 2006, 16:1-23.
45. Laube I, Breitbach N, Bohning-Gaese K. Avian diversity in a Kenyan agroecosystem: Effects of habitat structure and proximity to forest. J. Ornithol. 2008, 149:181-191.
46. Legendre P, Galzin R, Harmelin-Vivien M L. Relating behaviour to habitat: Solutions to the fourth-corner problem. Ecology 1997, 78:547-562.
47. Legendre P, Legendre L. Numerical ecology. Developments in environmental modelling 20 1998, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
48. Lepš J, Šmilauer P. Multivariate analysis of ecological data using CANOCO 2003, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
49. Leyequien E. Birds, coffee and spatial complexity: The diversity puzzle 2006, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
50. Leyequien E. Influence of body size on coexistence of bird species. Ecol. Res. 2007, 22:735-741.
51. Leyequien E, Toledo V M. Flores y aves de cafetales: Ensambles de biodiversidad en paisajes humanos. Biodiversitas 2009, 83:7-10.
52. Lima S L, Dill L M. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: A review and prospectus. Can. J. Zool. 1990, 68:619-640.
53. McGarigal K, Cushman S A, Neel M C. FRAGSTATS: Spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps. Computer software program 2002, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts
54. McGarigal K, McComb W. Relationships between landscape structure and breeding birds in the Oregon coast range. Ecol. Monogr 1995, 65:235-260.
55. Moguel P, Toledo V M. Biodiversity conservation in traditional coffee systems in Mexico. Conserv. Biol. 1999, 13:1-12.
56. Mönkkönen M, Reunanen P. On critical thresholds in landscape connectivity: A management perspective. Oikos 1999, 84:302-305.
57. Nichols J D, Hines J E, Sauer J R, Fallon F W, Fallon J E, Heglund P J. A double-observer approach for estimating detection probability and abundance from point counts. Auk 2000, 117:393-408.
58. Perfecto I, Armbrecht I. The coffee agroecosystem in the Neotropics: Combining ecological and economic goals. Tropical agroecosystems 2003, 159-194. Vandermeer J H, (Ed.), pp, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida
59. Perfecto I, Armbrecht I, Philpott S M, Dietsch T, Soto-Pinto L. Shaded coffee and the stability of rainforest margins in Latin America. The stability of tropical rainforest margins: Linking ecological, economic, and social constraints of land use and conservation. Environmental Science Series 2007, 227-264. Tscharntke T, Leuschner C, Zeller M, Guhudja E, Bidin A. (Eds.), pp, Springer, Heidelberg, Germany
60. Perfecto I, Rice R, Greenberg R, van der Voort M. Shade coffee: A disappearing refuge for biodiversity. BioScience 1996, 46:598-603.
61. Perfecto I, Vandermeer J. Biodiversity conservation in tropical ecosystems. A new conservation paradigm. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 2008, 1134:173-200.
62. Petit L J, Petit D R, Christian D G, Powell H D W. Bird communities of natural and modified habitats in Panama. Ecography 1999, 22:292-304.
63. Philpott S M, Arendt W J, Armbrecht I, Bichier P, Diestch T V, Gordon C, Greenberg R, Perfecto I, Reynoso-Santos R, Soto-Pinto L, Tejeda-Cruz C, Williams-Linera G, Valenzuela J, Zolotoff J M. Biodiversity loss in Latin American coffee landscapes: Review of the evidence on ants, birds, and trees. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22:1093-1105.
64. Philpott S M, Bichier P, Rice R, Greenberg R. Field-testing ecological and economic benefits of coffee certification programs. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 21:975-985.
65. Rappole J H, King D I, Vega-Rivera J H. Coffee and conservation. Conserv. Biol. 2003, 17:334-336.
66. Rickets T H. The matrix matters: Effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am. Nat. 2001, 158:87-99.
67. Roberts D L, Cooper R J, Petit L J. Flock characteristics of ant-following birds in premontane moist forest and coffee agroecosystems. Ecol. Appl. 2000, 10:1414-1425.
68. Rosenzweig M L. Loss of speciation rate will impoverish future diversity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2001, 98:5404-5410.
69. Rosenzweig M L. 2005, Avoiding mass extinction: Basic and applied challenges. 24th Annual Midwest Ecology and Evolution Conference, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona
70. Rotenberry J T. The role of habitat in avian community composition: Physiognomy or floristics? Oecologia 1985, 67:213-217.
71. Saab V. Importance of spatial scale to habitat use by breeding birds in riparian forests: A hierarchical analysis. Ecol. Appl. 1999, 9:135-151.
72. 2007, http://w2.siap.sagarpa.gob.mx/Brio/ihtml/OpenDoc?DocInstanceID=00000110a 8ac0920-0000-111f-0a0b0236&autologin=yes&cultivo=5500&DocUUI D=0000010f53bb0965-0000-0bf3-0a0b0236&pass=sisprro&DocVersion=1 &ciclo=3, SAGARPA., Avance de siembras y cosechas perennes 2007, riego y temporal, Available at, (accessed January 3, 2008)
73. Sallabanks R, Walters J R, Collazo J A. Breeding bird abundance in bottomland hardwood forests: Habitat, edge, and patch size effects. Condor 2000, 102:748-758.
74. Santos T, Tellería J L. Efectos de la fragmentación sobre la saves insectívoras forestales de dos localidades europeas. Ardeola 1997, 44:113-117.
75. Schmiegelow F K A, Machtans C S, Hannon S J. Area boreal birds resilient to forest fragmentation? An experimental study of short-term community responses. Ecology 1997, 78:1914-1932.
76. Schmiegelow F K A, Mönkkönen M. Habitat loss and fragmentation in dynamic landscapes: Avian perspectives from the boreal forest. Ecol. Appl. 2002, 12:375-389.
77. Şekercioĝlu C H, Daily G C, Ehrlich P R. Ecosystem consequences of bird declines. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101:18042-18047.
78. Shankar-Raman T R. Effects of habitat structure and adjacent habitats on birds in tropical rainforest fragments and shaded plantations in the Western Ghats, India. Biodivers. Conserv. 2006, 15:1577-1607.
79. Tejeda-Cruz C, Sutherland W. Bird responses to shade coffee production. Anim. Conserv. 2004, 7:169-179.
80. Ter Braak C J F. The analysis of vegetation-environment relationships by canonical correspondence analysis. Plant Ecol. 1987, 69:69-77.
81. Ter Braak C J F, Šmilauer T. CANOCO reference manual and user's guide to CANOCO for windows: software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5) 1998, Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, New York
82. Terborgh J, Robinson S K, Parker T A, Munn C A, Pierpont N. Structure and organization of an Amazonian forest bird community. Ecol. Monogr. 1990, 60:213-238.
83. Thiollay J M. The role of traditional agroforests in the conservation of rain forest bird diversity in Sumatra. Conserv. Biol. 1995, 9:335-353.
84. Toledo V M. Repensar la conservación ¿Áreas naturales protegidas o estrategia bioregional? Gaceta Ecol. 2005, 77:67-82.
85. Toledo V M, Ortiz-Espejel B, Cortés L, Moguel P, Ordoñez X. The multiple use of tropical forests by indigenous peoples in Mexico: Case of adaptive management. Conserv. Ecol. 2003, 7: 9. http://www.consecol.org/vol7/iss3/art9, Available at, accessed October 12, 2005
86. Tscharntke T, Klein M, Kruess A, Steffan-Dwenter I, Thies C. Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity-ecosystem service management. Ecol. Lett. 2005, 8:857-874.
87. Tscharntke T, Şekercioĝlu C H, Dietsch T V, Sodhi N S, Hoehn P, Tylianakis M. Landscape constraints on functional diversity of birds and insects in tropical agroecosystems. Ecology 2008, 89:944-951.
88. Turner M G. Landscape ecology: The effect of pattern and process. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1989, 20:171-97.
89. Turner M G, Gardner R H. Quantitative methods in landscape ecology: The analysis and interpretation of landscape heterogeneity 1991, Springer-Verlag, New York, New York
90. Vandermeer J, Carvajal R. Metapopulation dynamics and the quality of the matrix. Am. Na. 2001, 158:211-220.
91. Villard M A, Trzcinski M K, Merriam G. Fragmentation effects on forest birds: Relative influence of woodland cover and configuration on landscape occupancy. Conserv. Biol. 1999, 13:774-783.
92. Wiens J A. Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct. Ecol. 1989, 3:385-397.
93. Wunderle J M, Latta S C. Avian resource use in Dominican shade coffee plantations. Wilson Bull. 1998, 110:271-281.
94. Wunderle J M, Latta S C. Avian abundance in sun and shade coffee plantations and remnant pine forest in the Cordillera Central, Dominican Republic. Ornitol. Neotrop. 1996, 7:19-34.