Hard times in the city - attractive nest sites but insufficient food supply lead to low reproduction rates in a bird of prey

Frontiers in Zoology

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Sumasgutner, Petra ^a,b   Nemeth, Erwin ^c,d   Tebb, Graham ^e   Krenn, Harald W ^a   Gamauf, Anita ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^b NATURHISTORISCHES MUSEUM WIEN   (Austria)

^c MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR ORNITHOLOGY   (Germany)

^d BirdLife Austria   (Austria)

^e UNIVERSITY OF VETERINARY MEDICINE   (Austria)

Author keywords

Diet choice; Ecological trap; Falco tinnunculus; Historical building structure; Nest site choice; Nest survival; Prey availability; Urban exploiter; Urban gradient

Indexed keywords

EID: 84901430094     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17429994     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1742-9994-11-48     Document Type: Article

References (108)

1. Ramalho CE, Hobbs RJ. Time for a change: dynamic urban ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 2012, 27:179-188. 10.1016/j.tree.2011.10.008, 22093191.
2. Marzluff JM. Worldwide urbanization and its effects on birds. Avian ecology and conservation in an urbanizing world 2001, 19-48. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Marzluff JM, Bowman R, Donnelly R.
3. Lososová Z, Chytrý M, Tichý L, Danihelka J, Fajmon K, Hájek O, Kintrová K, Láníková D, Otýpková Z, Řehořek V. Biotic homogenization of Central European urban floras depends on residence time of alien species and habitat types. Biol Conserv 2012, 145:179-184.
4. McKinney ML. Urbanization as a major cause of biotic homogenization. Biol Conserv 2006, 127:247-260.
5. Rensburg BJ, Peacock DS, Robertson MP. Biotic homogenization and alien bird species along an urban gradient in South Africa. Landsc Urban Plann 2009, 92:233-241.
6. Miller JR, Hobbs RJ. Conservation where people live and work. Conserv Biol 2002, 16:330-337.
7. McDonald RI, Kareiva P, Forman RTT. The implications of current and future urbanization for global protected areas and biodiversity conservation. Biol Conserv 2008, 141:1695-1703.
8. Slabbekoorn H, Ripmeester EAP. Birdsong and anthropogenic noise: implications and applications for conservation. Mol Ecol 2008, 17:72-83. 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03487.x, 17784917.
9. Zhou D, Chu L. How would size, age, human disturbance, and vegetation structure affect bird communities of urban parks in different seasons?. Journal Ornithology 2012, 153:1101-1112.
10. Nemeth E, Brumm H. Blackbirds sing higher-pitched songs in cities: adaptation to habitat acoustics or side-effect of urbanization?. Anim Behav 2009, 78:637-641.
11. Dominoni D, Goymann W, Helm B, Partecke J. Urban-like night illumination reduces melatonin release in European blackbirds (Turdus merula): implications of city life for biological time-keeping of songbirds. Frontiers In Zoology 2013, 10:60. 10.1186/1742-9994-10-60, 3850952, 24090446.
12. Chamberlain DE, Cannon AR, Toms MP, Leech DI, Hatchwell BJ, Gaston KJ. Avian productivity in urban landscapes: a review and meta-analysis. Ibis 2009, 151:1-18.
13. Shanahan DF, Strohbach MW, Warren PS, Fuller RA. The challenges of urban living. Avian Urban Ecology Behavioural and Physiological Adaptations 2014, 3-20. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, Gil D, Brumm H.
14. Møller AP, Diaz M, Flensted-Jensen E, Grim T, Ibáñez-Álamo J, Jokimäki J, Mänd R, Markó G, Tryjanowski P. High urban population density of birds reflects their timing of urbanization. Oecologia 2012, 170:867-875. 10.1007/s00442-012-2355-3, 22588633.
15. Møller AP. Successful city dwellers: a comparative study of the ecological characteristics of urban birds in the Western Palearctic. Oecologia 2009, 159:849-858. 10.1007/s00442-008-1259-8, 19139922.
16. Blair RB. Land use and avian species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecol Appl 1996, 6:506-519.
17. González-Oreja JA. Birds of different biogeographic origins respond in contrasting ways to urbanization. Biol Conserv 2011, 144:234-242.
18. Chace JF, Walsh JJ. Urban effects on native avifauna: a review. Landsc Urban Plann 2006, 74:46-69.
19. Schlaepfer MA, Runge MC, Sherman PW. Ecological and evolutionary traps. Trends Ecol Evolution 2002, 17:474-480.
20. Cramp S, Tomlins AD. The birds of inner London 1951-65. Br Birds 1966, 59:209-233.
21. Kostrzewa R, Kostrzewa A. Der turmfalke. überlebensstrategien eines greifvogels: (The Kestrel. Survival strategies of a raptor species) 1993, Aula Verlag: Wiesbaden.
22. Darolová A. Nesting of Falco tinnunculus (Linnaeus, 1758) in the urban agglomeration of Bratislava. Biologia (Bratisl) 1992, 47:389-397.
23. Piattella A, Salvati L, Manganaro A, Fattorini S. Spatial and temporal variations in the diet of the common Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) in Rome, Italy. J Raptor Res 1999, 33:172-175.
24. Rejt L. Peregrine Falcon and Kestrel in urban environment the case of Warsaw. Naturschutz und Verhalten. Volume 2/2001 2001, 81-85. UFZ-Bericht, Gottschalk E, Barkow A, Mühlenberg M, Settele J.
25. Romanowski J. On the diet of urban Kestrels (Falco tinnunculus) in warsaw. Buteo 1996, 8:123-130.
26. Salvati L, Manganaro A, Fattorini S, Piattella E. Population features of kestrels Falco tinnunculus in urban, suburban and rural areas in central Italy. Acta Ornitholigica 1999, 34:53-58.
27. Sommani E. Note sulla biologia di alcune coppie di Gheppio, Falco tinnunculus, presenti in Roma. Riv Ital Orn Milano 1986, 56:40-52.
28. Garaffa PI, Filloy J, Bellocq MI. Bird community responses along urban-rural gradients: Does the size of the urbanized area matter?. Landsc Urban Plann 2009, 90:33-41.
29. Sorace A, Gustin M. Distribution of generalist and specialist predators along urban gradients. Landsc Urban Plann 2009, 90:111-118.
30. Lerman SB, Warren PS, Gan H, Shochat E. Linking foraging decisions to residential yard bird composition. PLoS One 2012, 7:e43497. 10.1371/journal.pone.0043497, 3425485, 22927974.
31. Pellissier V, Cohen M, Boulay A, Clergeau P. Birds are also sensitive to landscape composition and configuration within the city centre. Landsc Urban Plann 2012, 104:181-188.
32. Wichmann G, Dvorak M, Teufelbauer N, Berg H-M. Die Vogelwelt Wiens Atlas der Brutvögel. (The Avifauna of Vienna - Atlas of Breeding Birds) 2009, Verlag Naturhistorisches Museum Wien: Wien.
33. Sumasgutner P, Krenn HW, Düesberg J, Gaspar T, Gamauf A. Diet specialisation and breeding success along an urban gradient: the kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) in Vienna, Austria. Beiträge Zur Jagd Und Wildforschung 2013, 38:385-397.
34. Kübler S, Kupko S, Zeller U. The kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) in Berlin: investigation of breeding biology and feeding ecology. Journal Ornithology 2005, 146:271-278.
35. Riegert J, Fuchs R. Fidelity to roost sites and diet composition of wintering male urban common kestrels falco tinnunculus. Acta Ornithologica 2011, 46:183-189.
36. Strasser EH, Heath JA. Reproductive failure of a human-tolerant species, the American kestrel, is associated with stress and human disturbance. J Appl Ecol 2013, 50:912-919.
37. Crawley MJ. Chapter 16. Proportion Data. The R Book 2007, 569-591. London: John Wiley & Sons, Crawley MJ.
38. Jenrich J, Löhr P-W, Müller F. Kleinsäuger: Körper-und Schädelmerkmale 2010, Imhof: Ökologie.
39. Spitzenberger F. Die Säugetierfauna Österreichs 2001, Austria Medien-Service: Graz.
40. Mitter G, Sumasgutner P, Gamauf A. City centre or periphery? Distribution and morphological adaptation of Apodemus taxa along an urban gradient. Beiträge Zur Jagd Und Wildforschung 2013, 38:305-319.
41. Newton I. Population ecology of raptors. Vermillion 1979, 55-75. SD U.S.A: Buteo Books.
42. Village A. The role of nest-site availability and territorial behaviour in limiting the breeding density of Kestrels. J Anim Ecol 1983, 52:635-645.
43. Kokko H, Sutherland WJ. Ecological traps in changing environments: Ecological and evolutionary consequences of a behaviourally mediated Allee effect. Evol Ecol Res 2001, 3:537-551.
44. Hromada M, Antczak M, Valone TJ, Tryjanowski P. Settling decisions and heterospecific social information use in shrikes. PLoS One 2008, 3:e3930. 10.1371/journal.pone.0003930, 2592541, 19079540.
45. Stamps JA. The silver spoon effect and habitat selection by natal dispersers. Ecol Lett 2006, 9:1179-1185. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00972.x, 17040320.
46. Robertson BA, Hutto RL. A framework for understanding ecological traps and an evaluation of existing evidence. Ecology 2006, 87:1075-1085. 10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[1075:AFFUET]2.0.CO;2, 16761584.
47. Battin J. When good animals love bad habitats: Ecological traps and the conservation of animal populations. Conserv Biol 2004, 18:1482-1491.
48. Gamauf A, Tebb G, Nemeth E. Honey buzzard Pernis apivorus nest site selection in relation to habitat and the distribution of Goshawk Accipiter gentilis. Ibis 2013, 155:258-270.
49. Fuller RJ. Birds and habitat: relationships in changing landscapes 2012, New York: Cambridge University Press.
50. Chalfoun AD, Schmidt KA. Adaptive breeding-habitat selection: Is it for the birds?. Auk 2012, 129:589-599.
51. Sergio F, Blas J, Forero MG, Donzar JA, Hiraldo F. Sequential settlement and site dependence in a migratory raptor. Behav Ecol 2007, 18:811-821.
52. Fretwell SD. Populations in a seasonal environment 1972, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
53. Charter M, Izhaki I, Bouskila A, Leshem Y, Penteriani V. The effect of different nest types on the breeding success of eurasian kestrels (falco tinnunculus) in a rural ecosystem. J Raptor Res 2007, 41:143-149.
54. López BC, Potrony D, López A, Badosa E, Bonada A, Saló R. Nest-box use by boreal owls (aegolius funereus) in the pyrenees mountains in spain. J Raptor Res 2010, 44:40-49.
55. Tella JL, Hiraldo F, Donazar-Sancho JA, Negro JJ. Costs and Benefits of Urban nesting in the lesser Kestrel. Raptors in Human Landscapes, Adaptations to Built and Cultivated Environments 1996, 53-60. New York: Academic Press, Bird DM, Varlan DE, Negro JJ.
56. Stracey CM. Resolving the urban nest predator paradox: The role of alternative foods for nest predators. Biol Conserv 2011, 144:1545-1552.
57. Evans KL, Newson SE, Gaston KJ. Habitat influences on urban avian assemblages. Ibis 2009, 151:19-39.
58. Village A. The Kestrel 1990, London: T & AD Poyser.
59. Clutton-Brock TH. Sex ratio variation in birds. Ibis 1986, 128:317-329.
60. Anderson DJ, Reeve J, Bird DM. Sexually dimorphic eggs, nestling growth and sibling competition in American Kestrels Falco sparverius. Funct Ecol 1997, 11:331-335.
61. Ingraldi MF. A skewed sex ratio in Northern Goshawks: is it a sign of a stressed population?. J Raptor Res 2005, 39:247.
62. Wu H, Wang H, Jiang Y, Lei F, Gao W. Offspring sex ratio in Eurasian Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) with reversed sexual size dimorphism. Chinese Birds 2010, 1:36-44.
63. Rutz C. Brood sex ratio varies with diet composition in a generalist raptor. Biol J Linn Soc 2012, 105:937-951.
64. Millon A, Bretagnolle V. Nonlinear and population-specific offspring sex ratios in relation to high variation in prey abundance. Oikos 2005, 108:535-543.
65. Dijkstra C, Daan S, Buker JB. Adaptive seasonal variation in the sex ratio of kestrel broods. Funct Ecol 1990, 4:143-147.
66. Rejt L, Gryczynska-Siemiatkowska A, Rutkowski R, Malewska A. Does egg sex ratio in Urban Kestrels (Falco tinnunculus) differ from parity?. Pol J Ecol 2005, 53:545-552.
67. Arroyo B. Sex-biased nestling mortality in the Montagu's harrier Circus pygargus. J Avian Biol 2002, 33:455-460.
68. Goodwin TW. The Biochemistry of the Carotenoids 1980, London, New York: Chapman and Hall, 2.
69. Kirkwood JK. Energy requirements for maintenance and growth of wild mammals, birds and reptiles in captivity. J Nutr 1991, 121:S29-34.
70. Negro JJ, Bustamante J, Melguizo C, Ruiz JL, Grande JM. Nocturnal activity of lesser kestrels under artifical lighting conditions in Seville, Spain. J Raptor Res 2000, 34:327-329.
71. Riegert J, Fainová D, Mikeš V, Fuchs R. How urban Kestrels Falco tinnunculus divide their hunting grounds: partitioning or cohabitation?. Acta Ornithologica 2007, 42:69-76.
72. Riegert J, Dufek A, Fainová D, Mikeš V, Fuchs R. Increased hunting effort buffers against vole scarcity in an urban Kestrel Falco tinnunculus population: capsule In years with low vole abundance birds visited hunting grounds more frequently and for longer. Bird Study 2007, 54:353-361.
73. Korpimäki E. Diet of the Kestrel Falco tinnunculus in the breeding season. Ornis Fenn 1985, 62:130-137.
74. Quere J. Approche du régime alimentaire du Faucon crécerelle (Falco tinnunculus L., 1758) en milieu urbain (Paris intra muros) et durant la période de reproduction. (Study of the kestrel's (Falco tinnunculus) diet in a urban environment (Paris) during the breeding period). Le Passer 1990, 27:92-107.
75. Costantini D, Casagrande S, Di Lieto G, Fanfani A, Dell'Omo G. Consistent differences in feeding habits between neighbouring breeding kestrels. Behaviour 2005, 142:1409-1421.
76. Terraube J, Arroyo B, Madders M, Mougeot F. Diet specialisation and foraging efficiency under fluctuating vole abundance: a comparison between generalist and specialist avian predators. Oikos 2011, 120:234-244.
77. Kark S, Iwaniuk A, Schalimtzek A, Banker E. Living in the city: can anyone become an 'urban exploiter'?. J Biogeogr 2007, 34:638-651.
78. Hollander FA, Titeux N, Van Dyck H. Habitat-dependent prey availability and offspring provisioning explain an ecological trap in a migratory bird. Funct Ecol 2013, 27:702-709.
79. Török J, Hegyi G, Tóth L, Könczey R. Unpredictable food supply modifies costs of reproduction and hampers individual optimization. Oecologia 2004, 141:432-443.
80. Kloskowski J. Fish stocking creates an ecological trap for an avian predator via effects on prey availability. Oikos 2012, 121:1567-1576.
81. Kristan WB. The role of habitat selection behavior in population dynamics: source-sink systems and ecological traps. Oikos 2003, 103:457-468.
82. Kupko S, Schlottke L, Rinder J. Der turmfalke ( Falco tinnunculus L.) im berliner stadtgebiet - eine auswertung unter besonderer berücksichtigung der monitoringfläche Nr. 376 (Berlin-West). Populationsökologie Greifvogel- und Eulenarten 2000, 4:359-372.
83. Malher F, Lesaffre G, Zucca M, Coatmeur J. Oiseaux nicheurs de Paris. Un atlas urbain. (The breeding birds of Paris. An urban atlas) 2010, Paris: Corif. Delachaux et Niestlé.
84. Gamauf A. Greifvögel in Österreich. Bestand - Bedrohung - Gesetz. (Birds of Prey in Austria. Population - Threat - Law) 1991, Umweltbundesamt Wien: Wien.
85. Zuckerberg B, Bonter DN, Hochachka WM, Koenig WD, DeGaetano AT, Dickinson JL. Climatic constraints on wintering bird distributions are modified by urbanization and weather. J Anim Ecol 2011, 80:403-413. 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01780.x, 21118200.
86. Rotella JJ, Dinsmore SJ, Shaffer TL. Modeling nest-survival data: a comparison of recently developed methods that can be implemented in MARK and SAS. Anim Biodivers Conserv 2007, 27:187-205.
87. Eck S, Fiebig J, Fiedler W, Heynen I, Nicolai B, Töpfer T, van den Elzen R, Winkler R, Woog F. DO-G Deutsche Ornithologen-Gesellschaft: measuring birds vögel vermessen. Christ Media Natur 2011,
88. Griffiths R, Double MC, Orr K, Dawson RJG. A DNA test to sex most birds. Mol Ecol 1998, 7:1071-1075. 10.1046/j.1365-294x.1998.00389.x, 9711866.
89. Wellbrock A, Bauch C, Rozman J, Witte K. Buccal swabs as a reliable source of DNA for sexing young and adult common swifts (Apus apus). Journal Ornithology 2012, 153:991-994.
90. Fridolfsson A-K, Ellegren H. A simple and universal method for molecular sexing of non-ratite birds. J Avian Biol 1999, 30:116-121.
91. Nesje M, Røed KH. Sex identification in falcons using microsatellite DNA markers. Hereditas 2000, 132:261-263.
92. Arroyo BE. Diet of Montagu's Harrier Circus pygargus in central Spain: analysis of temporal and geographic variation. Ibis 1997, 139:664-672.
93. von Blotzheim UN G, Bauer KM. Handbuch der Vögel Mitteleuropas. Columbiformes - Piciformes. (Handbook of the Birds of Central Europe, Columbiformes - Piciformes) 1980, 232-234. Wiesbaden: Aula-Verlag.
94. Levins R. Evolution in changing environments; some theoretical explorations 1968, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
95. Südbeck P, Andretzke H, Fischer S, Gedeon K, Schikore T, Schröder K, Sudfeldt C. Methodenstandards zur Erfassung der Brutvögel Deutschlands. (Methods for the detection of breeding birds in Germany) 2005, Die Deutsche Bibliothek: Radolfszell.
96. Krebs CJ. Population cycles revisited. J Mammal 1996, 77:8-24.
97. Janova E, Nesvadbrova J, Heroldova M, Bryja J. Effectiveness of two trapping protocols for studying the demography of common voles. Hystrix Italian Journal of Mammalogy 2010, 21:189-193.
98. Wiener Stadtgebiet M. Der Einfluss öffentlicher Parks und Grünanlagen auf Häufigkeit und Morphologie. (Rodents in the city of Vienna: Distribution and morphological adaptation along an urban gradient). Master thesis 2012, 19-27. Fakultät für Lebenswissenschaften: Universität Wien.
99. Bates D, Maechler M. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes 2013, : R package version 0.999375-32.
100. Zuur AF, Ieno EE, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GM. Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R 2009, 220-223. New York, NY: Springer.
101. Burnham KP, Anderson DR, Huyvaert KP. AIC model selection and multimodel inference in behavioral ecology: some background, observations, and comparisons. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2011, 65:23-35.
102. Tremblay A, Ransijn J. Package 'LMERConvenienceFunctions' 2013,
103. Nakagawa S, Schielzeth H. A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol Evolution 2013, 4:133-142.
104. Barton K. MuMIn: Multi-model inference. R package version 1.9.5 2013,
105. White GC, Burnham KP. Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study 1999, 46:S120-S139.
106. Laake JL, Johnson DS, Conn PB. Marked: an R package for maximum-likelihood and MCMC analysis of capture-recapture data. Methods Ecol Evolution 2013, 4:885-890.
107. Krebs CJ. Ecological Methodology 2014, 149-159. Menlo Park, California: Benjamin / Cummings, 4.
108. ASAB Guidelines for the treatment of animals in behavioural research and teaching. Anim Behav 2012, 83:301-309. ASAB.