Skip to main content
Log in

Landscape patterns as habitat predictors: building and testing models for cavity-nesting birds in the Uinta Mountains of Utah, USA

  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The ability to predict species occurrences quickly is often crucial for managers and conservation biologists with limited time and funds. We used measured associations with landscape patterns to build accurate predictive habitat models that were quickly and easily applied (i.e., required no additional data collection in the field to make predictions). We used classification trees (a nonparametric alternative to discriminant function analysis, logistic regression, and other generalized linear models) to model nesting habitat of red-naped sapsuckers (Sphyrapicus nuchalis), northern flickers (Colaptes auratus),tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor), and mountain chickadees (Parus gambeli) in the Uinta Mountains of northeastern Utah, USA. We then tested the predictive capability of the models with independent data collected in the field the following year. The models built for the northern flicker, red-naped sapsucker, and tree swallow were relatively accurate (84%, 80%, and 75% nests correctly classified,respectively)compared to the models for the mountain chickadee (50% nests correctly classified). All four models were more selective than a null model that predicted habitat based solely on a gross association with aspen forests. We conclude that associations with landscape patterns can be used to build relatively accurate, easy to use, predictive models for some species. Our results stress, however, that both selecting the proper scale at which to assess landscape associations and empirically testing the models derived from those associations are crucial for building useful predictive models.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brawn J.D. and Balda R.P. 1988. Population biology of cavity nesters in northern Arizona: do nest sites limit breeding densities? Condor 90: 61-71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiman L., Friedman J.H., Olshen R.A. and Stone C.J. 1984. Classification and regression trees. Wadsworth and Brooks/Cole, Monterey, California, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cody M.L. 1985. Habitat selection in birds. Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conner R.N. and Adkisson C.S. 1977. Principal component analysis of woodpecker habitat. Wilson Bulletin 89: 122-129.

    Google Scholar 

  • De'ath G. and Fabricius K.E. 2000. Classification and regression trees: a powerful yet simple technique for ecological data analysis. Ecology 81: 3178-3192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobkin D.S., Rich A.C., Pretare J.A. and Pyle W.H. 1995. Nest-site relationships among cavity-nesting birds of riparian and snowpocket aspen woodlands in the Northwestern Great Basin. Condor 97: 694-707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning J.B. 1993. CRC handbook of avian body masses. CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards T.C., Deshler E.T., Foster D. and Moisen G.G. 1996. Adequacy of wildlife habitat relation models for estimating spatial distributions of terrestrial vertebrates. Conservation Biology 10: 263-270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich P.R. and Daily G.C. 1988. Red-naped Sapsuckers feeding at willows: possible keystone herbivores. American Birds 42: 357-365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans K.E. and Conner R.N. 1979. Snag management. In: DeGraaf R.M. and Evans K.E. (eds), Management of north central and northeastern forests for nongame birds. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NC-51., pp. 214-225.

  • Fielding A.H. and Bell J.F. 1997. A review of methods for the assessment if prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environmental Conservation 24: 38-49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fielding A.H. and Haworth P.F. 1995. Testing the generality of bird habitat models. Conservation Biology 9: 1466-1481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird populations of aspen forests in western North America Flack J.A.D. 1976..

  • Freemark K.E., Dunning J.B., Hejl S.J. and Probst J.R. 1995. A landscape ecology perspective for research, conservation, and management. In: Martin T.E. and Finch D.M. (eds), Ecology and management of Neotropical migrant birds. Oxford University Press, New York, USA, pp. 381-421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freemark K.E. and Merriam H.G. 1986. Importance of area and habitat heterogeneity to bird assemblages in temperate forest fragments. Biological Conservation 36: 115-141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutzwiller K.J. and Anderson S.H. 1987. Multiscale associations between cavity-nesting birds and features of Wyoming streamside woodlands. Condor 89: 534-548.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen A.J. and diCastri F. 1992. Landscape boundaries: consequences for biotic diversity and ecological flows. Ecological Studies 92. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawrot R.Y. and Niemi G.J. 1996. Effects of edge type and patch shape on avian communities in a mixed conifer-hardwood forest. Auk 113: 586-598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hildén O. 1965. Habitat selection in birds. Annales Zoologici Fennici 2: 53-75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karl J.W., Wright N.W., Heglund P.J. and Scott J.M. 1999. Obtaining environmental measures to facilitate vertebrate habitat modeling. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27: 357-365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudenslayer W.F. and Balda R.P. 1976. Breeding bird use of a pinyon-juniper-ponderosa pine ecotone. Auk 93: 571-586.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K., and Marks B. 1993. FRAGSTATS, spatial analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest-General Technical Report PW-351. USDA Forest Service, Portland, Oregon, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson A.T. and Cohoon K.P. 1999. Sensitivity of distributional prediction algorithms to geographic completeness. Ecological Modelling 117: 159-164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raphael M.G. and Marcot B.G. 1986. Validation of a wildlife-habitat-relationships model: vertebrates in a Douglas-fir sere. In: Hagan J.W. and Johnson D.W. (eds), Ecology and conservation of Neotropical migrant birds. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington, D.C., USA, pp. 129-144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raphael M.G. and White M. 1984. Use of snags by cavity-nesting birds in the Sierra Nevada. Wildlife Monographs 86: 1-66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rendell W.B. and Robertson R.J. 1990. Influence of forest edge on nest-site selection by Tree Swallows. Wilson Bulletin 102: 634-644.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson R.J., Sutchbury B.J. and Cohen R.R. 1992. Tree Swallow. In: Poole A., Stettenheim P. and Gill F. (eds), The birds of North America, no. 11. The Academy of Natural Sciences; The American Ornithologists' Union, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., USA, pp. 1-28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson S.K. 1992. Population dynamics of breeding Neotropical migrants in a fragmented Illinois landscape. In: Hagan J.M. and Johnston D.W. (eds), Ecology and conservation of Neotropical migrant land birds. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., USA, pp. 408-418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salwasser H. 1982. California's wildlife information system and its application to resource decisions. Cal-Neva Wildlife Transactions: 34-39.

  • Gap analysis: a geographic approach to protection of biological diversity Scott M.J., Davis F., Csuti B., Noss R., Butterfield B., Groves C. et al. 1993..

  • S-PLUS 4.3 1998. Professional release 2. Math-soft Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

  • Stauffer D.F. and Best L.B. 1986. Effects of habitat type and sample size on habitat suitability index models. In: Verner J., Morrison M.L. and Ralph C.J. (eds), Wildlife 2000: modeling habitat relationships of terrestrial vertebrates. University ofWisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, USA, pp. 71-91.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Fish and Wildlife Service 1981. Standards for the development of suitability index models. Ecological Services Manual 103. United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Ecological Services. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Horne B. and Wiens J.A. 1991. Forest bird habitat suitability models and the development of general habitat models. Fish Wildlife Research 8. US Fish and Wildlife Service.

  • Venables W.N. and Ripley B.D. 1997. Modern applied statistics with S-PLUS. 2nd edn. Springer, New York, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verner J. and Boss A.S. 1980. California wildlife and their habitats: western Sierra Nevada. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, General Technical Report PSW-37. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experimental Station, Berkeley, California, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verner J., Morrison M.L. and Ralph C.J. 1986. Wildlife 2000: modeling habitat relationships of terrestrial vertebrates. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiens J.A. 1989. Spatial scaling in ecology. Functional Ecology 3: 385-397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcove D.S. 1985. Nest predation in forest tracts and the decline of migratory songbirds. Ecology 66: 1211-1214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winternitz B.L. 1980. Birds in aspen. In: Management of western forests and grasslands for nongame birds. USDA General Technical Report INT-86. Intermountain Forest and Range Station, Ogden, Utah, USA, pp. 247-257 Management of western forests and grasslands for nongame birds. USDA General Technical Report INT-86. Intermountain Forest and Range Station, Ogden, Utah, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • With K.A. 1994. Using fractal analysis to assess how species perceive landscape structure. Landscape Ecology 9: 25-36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zweig M.H. and Campbell G. 1993. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clinical Chemistry 39: 561-577.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lawler, J.J., Edwards, T.C. Landscape patterns as habitat predictors: building and testing models for cavity-nesting birds in the Uinta Mountains of Utah, USA. Landscape Ecology 17, 233–245 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020219914926

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020219914926

Navigation