Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Measuring habitat heterogeneity reveals new insights into bird community composition

  • Community ecology - Original research
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fine-scale vegetation cover is a common variable used to explain animal occurrence, but we know less about the effects of fine-scale vegetation heterogeneity. Theoretically, fine-scale vegetation heterogeneity is an important driver of biodiversity because it captures the range of resources available in a given area. In this study we investigated how bird species richness and birds grouped by various ecological traits responded to vegetation cover and heterogeneity. We found that both fine-scale vegetation cover (of tall trees, medium-sized trees and shrubs) and heterogeneity (of tall trees, and shrubs) were important predictors of bird richness, but the direction of the response of bird richness to shrub heterogeneity differed between sites with different proportions of tall tree cover. For example, bird richness increased with shrub heterogeneity in sites with high levels of tall tree cover, but declined in sites with low levels of tall tree cover. Our findings indicated that an increase in vegetation heterogeneity will not always result in an increase in resources and niches, and associated higher species richness. We also found birds grouped by traits responded in a predictable way to vegetation heterogeneity. For example, we found small birds benefited from increased shrub heterogeneity supporting the textual discontinuity hypothesis and non-arboreal (ground or shrub) nesting species were associated with high vegetation cover (low heterogeneity). Our results indicated that focusing solely on increasing vegetation cover (e.g. through restoration) may be detrimental to particular animal groups. Findings from this investigation can help guide habitat management for different functional groups of birds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander JD, Seavy NE, Ralph CJ, Hogoboom B (2006) Vegetation and topographical correlates of fire severity from two fires in the Klamath–Siskiyou region of Oregon and California. Int J Wildl Fire 15:237–245. doi:10.1071/WF05053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen CR, Holling CS (2002) Cross-scale structure and scale breaks in ecosystems and other complex systems. Ecosystems 5:315–318. doi:10.1007/s10021-001-0075-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allouche O, Kalyuzhny M, Moreno-Rueda G, Pizarro M, Kadmon R (2012) Area–heterogeneity tradeoff and the diversity of ecological communities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:17495–17500. doi:10.1073/pnas.1208652109

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Massada A, Wood EM (2014) The richness–heterogeneity relationship differs between heterogeneity measures within and among habitats. Ecography 37:528–535. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2013.00590.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Massada A, Wood EM, Pidgeon AM, Radeloff VC (2012) Complex effects of scale on the relationships of landscape pattern versus avian species richness and community structure in a woodland savanna mosaic. Ecography 35:393–411. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2011.07097.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton PS, Cunningham SA, Manning AD, Gibb H, Lindenmayer DB, Didham RK (2013) The spatial scaling of beta diversity. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 22:639–647. doi:10.1111/geb.12031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton P, Ikin K, Smith A, MacGregor C, Lindenmayer D (2014) Vegetation structure moderates the effect of fire on bird assemblages in a heterogeneous landscape. Landsc Ecol 29:703–714. doi: 10.1007/s10980-014-0017-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazzaz FA (1975) Plant species diversity in old-field successional ecosystems in Southern Illinois. Ecology 56:485–488. doi:10.2307/1934981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benayas JMR, Bullock JM, Newton AC (2008) Creating woodland islets to reconcile ecological restoration, conservation, and agricultural land use. Front Ecol Environ 6:329–336. doi: 10.1890/070057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benton TG, Vickery JA, Wilson JD (2003) Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends Ecol. Trends Ecol Evol 18:182–188. doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(03)00011-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjornstad ON, Falck W (2001) Nonparametric spatial covariance functions: estimation and testing. Environ Ecol Stat 8:53–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonthoux S, Barnagaud J-Y, Goulard M, Balent G (2013) Contrasting spatial and temporal responses of bird communities to landscape changes. Oecologia 172:563–574. doi:10.1007/s00442-012-2498-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bradstock RA, Bedward M, Gill AM, Cohn JS (2005) Which mosaic? A landscape ecological approach for evaluating interactions between fire regimes, habitat and animals. Wildl Res 32(5):409–423. doi: 10.1071/WR02114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosi BJ (2009) The effects of forest fragmentation on euglossine bee communities (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Euglossini). Biol Conserv 142:414–423. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.11.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chessel D, Dufour AB, Thioulouse J (2004) The ade4 package-I-one-table methods. R News 4:5–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliff AD, Ord JK (1981) Spatial processes. Pion, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Core Team R (2012) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawley MJ (2002) Statistical computing: an introduction to data analysis using S-Plus. Wiley, West Sussex

    Google Scholar 

  • De la Montana E, Rey-Benayas JM, Carrascal LM (2006) Response of bird communities to silvicultural thinning of Mediterranean maquis. J Appl Ecol 43:651–659. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01171.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolédec S, Chessel D, Braak CJF, Champely S (1996) Matching species traits to environmental variables: a new three-table ordination method. Environ Ecol Stat 3:143–166. doi:10.1007/BF02427859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DSEWPaC (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) (2013) Fire history of Booderee National Park Jervis Bay Territory. DSEWPaC

  • Elzinga CL, Salzer DW, Willoughby JW (eds) (1998) Measuring and monitoring plant populations, Denver, CO. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, National Applied Resource Sciences Center, Denver

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB, Montague-Drake R (2008) The role of landscape texture in conservation biogeography: a case study on birds in south-eastern Australia. Divers Distrib 14:38–46. doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00411.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gandiwa E (2011) Effects of repeated burning on woody vegetation structure and composition in a semiarid southern African savanna. Int J Environ Sci 2:458–471

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Megías A, Gómez JM, Sánchez-Piñero F (2011) Spatio-temporal change in the relationship between habitat heterogeneity and species diversity. Acta Oecol 37:179–186. doi:10.1016/j.actao.2011.01.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorini L et al (2012) Habitat heterogeneity and mammalian predator–prey interactions. Mammal Rev 42:55–77. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2907.2011.00189.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould WA, Gonzalez G, Carrero Rivera G (2006) Structure and composition of vegetation along an elevational gradient in Puerto Rico. J Veg Sci 17:653–664. doi:10.2307/4096714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanspach J, Fischer J, Ikin K, Stott J, Law BS (2012) Using trait-based filtering as a predictive framework for conservation: a case study of bats on farms in southeastern Australia. J Appl Ecol 49:842–850. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02159.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JD, Fahrig L, Cappuccino N (2005) Body size affects the spatial scale of habitat–beetle interactions. Oikos 110:101–108. doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2005.13638.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1992) Cross-scale morphology, geometry, and dynamics of ecosystems. Ecol Monogr 62:447–502. doi:10.2307/2937313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes RT, Recher HF (1986) Determinants of Guild Structure in Forest Bird Communities: an intercontinental comparison. Condor 88:427–439. doi:10.2307/1368268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings MJ, John EA, Stewart AJA (2000) The ecological consequences of environmental heterogeneity: 40th symposium of the British Ecological Society. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikin K, Knight E, Lindenmayer D, Fischer J, Manning A (2012) Linking bird species traits to vegetation characteristics in a future urban development zone: implications for urban planning. Urban Ecosyst 15:961–977. doi:10.1007/s11252-012-0247-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingwersen F (1977) Regeneration of vegetation after fire at Jervis Bay and its implications for management. MSc thesis, Australian National University, Canberra

  • Jacobsen R (2012) Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; revised critical habitat for the northern spotted owl. US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Department of the Interior

  • Jeltsch F, Moloney K, Milton SJ (1999) Detecting process from snapshot pattern: lessons from tree spacing in the southern Kalahari. Oikos 85:451–466. doi:10.2307/3546695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin XM, Zhang Y-k, Schaepman ME, Su Z (2008) Impact of elevation and aspect on the spatial distribution of vegetation in the Qilian Mountain area with remote sensing data. The international archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences. Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 37:1385–1390

    Google Scholar 

  • Karr JR, Roth RR (1971) Vegetation structure and avian diversity in several New World areas. Am Nat 105:423–435. doi:10.2307/2459511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katayama N et al (2014) Landscape heterogeneity–biodiversity relationship: effect of range size. PLoS ONE 9:e93359. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093359

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Khoury F, Janaydeh M, Al-Hmoud A (2009) Nest placement and nesting success in two finch species colonizing a recently established plantation in an arid region. J Ornithol 150:29–37. doi:10.1007/s10336-008-0314-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kushla JD, Ripple WJ (1997) The role of terrain in a fire mosaic of a temperate coniferous forest. For Ecol Manage 95:97–107. doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(97)82929-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin SA (1992) The problem of pattern and scale in ecology: the Robert H. MacArthur award lecture. Ecology 73:1943–1967. doi:10.2307/1941447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leyequién E, de Boer WF, Toledo VM (2010) Bird community composition in a shaded coffee agro-ecological matrix in Puebla, Mexico: the effects of landscape heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales. Biotropica 42:236–245. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7429.2009.00553.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB (2000) Factors at multiple scales affecting distribution patterns and their implications for animal conservation—Leadbeater’s Possum as a case study. Biodivers Conserv 9:15–35. doi:10.1023/a:1008943713765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Cunningham RB (2011) Longitudinal patterns in bird reporting rates in a threatened ecosystem: is change regionally consistent? Biol Conserv 144:430–440. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.09.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer D, Hobbs RJ (2007) Managing and designing landscapes for conservation: moving from perspectives to principles. Wiley, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Knight EJ, Crane MJ, Montague-Drake R, Michael DR, MacGregor CI (2010) What makes an effective restoration planting for woodland birds? Biol Conserv 143:289–301. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2009.10.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Horn HS (1969) Foliage profile by vertical measurements. Ecology 50:802–804. doi:10.2307/1933693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur R, MacArthur JW (1961) On bird species–diversity. Ecology 42:594–598. doi:10.2307/1932254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin TE (1993) Nest predation and nest sites. Bioscience 43:523–532. doi:10.2307/1311947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized linear models: monographs on statistics and applied probability, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McElhinny C, Gibbons P, Brack C, Bauhus J (2005) Forest and woodland stand structural complexity: its definition and measurement. For Ecol Manage 218:1–24. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2005.08.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McElhinny C, Gibbons P, Brack C, Bauhus J (2006) Fauna-habitat relationships: a basis for identifying key stand structural attributes in temperate Australian eucalypt forests and woodlands. Pac Conserv Biol 12:89–110

    Google Scholar 

  • McGranahan DA, Engle DM, Fuhlendorf SD, Winter SL, Miller JR, Debinski DM (2013) Inconsistent outcomes of heterogeneity-based management underscore importance of matching evaluation to conservation objectives. Environ Sci Policy 31:53–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montague-Drake RM, Lindenmayer DB, Cunningham RB (2009) Factors affecting site occupancy by woodland bird species of conservation concern. Biol Conserv 142:2896–2903. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2009.07.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morelli F, Pruscini F, Santolini R, Perna P, Benedetti Y, Sisti D (2013) Landscape heterogeneity metrics as indicators of bird diversity: determining the optimal spatial scales in different landscapes. Ecol Indic 34:372–379. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.05.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison ML, Marcot BG, Mannan RW (2006) Wildlife-habitat relationships: concepts and applications. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Munro N, Lindenmayer D (2011) Planting for wildlife: a practical guide to restoring native woodlands. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer TM (2003) Spatial habitat heterogeneity influences competition and coexistance in an African acacia ant guild. Ecology 84:2843–2855. doi:10.1890/02-0528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patthey P, Signorell N, Rotelli L, Arlettaz R (2012) Vegetation structural and compositional heterogeneity as a key feature in alpine black grouse microhabitat selection: conservation management implications. Eur J Wildl Res 58:59–71. doi:10.1007/s10344-011-0540-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins AJ, Whittingham MJ, Bradbury RB, Wilson JD, Morris AJ, Barnett PR (2000) Habitat characteristics affecting use of lowland agricultural grassland by birds in winter. Biol Conserv 95:279–294. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00042-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pianka ER (1972) r and K selection or b and d selection? Am Nat 106:581–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid JRW (1999) Threatened and declining birds in the New South Wales sheep-wheat belt: 1. Diagnosis, characteristics and management. In: CSIRO (ed), Canberra

  • Rey Benayas J, Bullock J (2012) Restoration of biodiversity and ecosystem services on agricultural land. Ecosystems 15:883–899. doi:10.1007/s10021-012-9552-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoennagel T, Turner MG, Romme WH (2003) The influence of fire interval and serotiny on postfire lodgepole pine density in Yellowstone National Park. Ecology 84:2967–2978. doi:10.1890/02-0277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Specht RL, Specht A (2002) Australian plant communities: dynamics of structure, growth and biodiversity. Oxford University Press, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffan-Dewenter I, Munzenberg U, Burger C, Thies C, Tscharntke T (2002) Scale-dependent effects of landscape context on three pollinator guilds. Ecology 83:1421–1432. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[1421:SDEOLC]2.0.CO;2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland WJ, Newton I, Green RE (2004) Bird ecology and conservation: a handbook of techniques. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Taws N (1997) Vegetation survey and mapping of Jervis Bay Territory: a report to Environment Australia. Taws Botanical Research, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor G, Abell R, Jacobson G (eds) (1995) Geology, geomorphology, soils and earth resources. Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • ter Braak CJF (1986) Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology 67:1167–1179. doi:10.2307/1938672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tews J, et al. (2004) Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity of the vegetation: the importance of keystone structures. J Biogeogr 31:79–92. doi:10.1046/j.0305-0270.2003.00994.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyre AJ, Tenhumberg B, Field SA, Niejalke D, Parris K, Possingham HP (2003) Improving precision and reducing bias in biological surveys: estimating false-negative error rates. Ecol Appl 13:1790–1801. doi:10.1890/02-5078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US Fish and Wildlife Service (2011) Revised recovery plan for the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina). US Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanbergen AJ et al (2007) Scale-specific correlations between habitat heterogeneity and soil fauna diversity along a landscape structure gradient. Oecologia 153:713–725. doi:10.2307/40213020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vikery J, Arlettaz R (2012) The importance of habitat heterogeneity at multiple scales for birds in European agricultural landscapes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Warton DI, Wright IJ, Falster DS, Westoby M (2006) Bivariate line-fitting methods for allometry. Biol Rev 81:259–291. doi:10.1017/s1464793106007007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weidinger K (2001) Does egg colour affect predation rate on open passerine nests? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49:456–464. doi:10.1007/s002650100324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA (1989) Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct Ecol 3:385–397. doi:10.2307/2389612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood EM, Pidgeon AM, Radeloff VC, Keuler NS (2013) Image texture predicts avian density and species richness. PLoS ONE 8:e63211. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0063211

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zamora J, Verdú JR, Galante E (2007) Species richness in Mediterranean agroecosystems: spatial and temporal analysis for biodiversity conservation. Biol Conserv 134:113–121. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2006.08.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng Y, Xu J, Wang Y, Zhou C (2013) Habitat association and conservation implications of endangered Francois’ langur (Trachypithecus francoisi). PLoS ONE 8:e75661. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0075661

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith G (eds) (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the staff and the traditional owners of Booderee National Park for their support and Chris McGregor for logistical assistance. This manuscript was improved by constructive comments from Philip Barton, Annabel Smith and Dejan Stojanovic and two anonymous reviewers. I. S. was funded by an Australian Postgraduate Award. K. I. and P. G. were partly funded by the Environment Decisions Hub of the Australian Government’s National Environmental Research Program. D. B. L. is funded by an ARC Laureate Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Act, 0200, Australia

    Ingrid A. Stirnemann, Karen Ikin, Philip Gibbons, Wade Blanchard & David B. Lindenmayer

Authors
  1. Ingrid A. Stirnemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karen Ikin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Philip Gibbons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wade Blanchard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. David B. Lindenmayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ingrid A. Stirnemann.

Additional information

Communicated by Toni Laaksonen.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 96 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stirnemann, I.A., Ikin, K., Gibbons, P. et al. Measuring habitat heterogeneity reveals new insights into bird community composition. Oecologia 177, 733–746 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-014-3134-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-014-3134-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation