Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cavity nesting birds along an urban-wildland gradient: is human facilitation structuring the bird community?

  • Published:
Urban Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Urbanization brings dramatic and sudden changes to ecological conditions affecting natural communities. Cavity-nesting birds, both primary and secondary (hereafter PCN and SCN, respectively), may be limited in this novel environment because of reduced abundance of nesting sites (e.g. snags and cavities) and competition for cavities with non-native species. But humans can also directly and indirectly provide nest sites (e.g., nest boxes, crevices on houses), especially for SCN species, potentially partially compensating for negative effects. We investigated whether and how PCNs and humans facilitated the cavity-nesting bird community along a gradient of urbanization. To do so, we estimated the abundance of cavity-nesting species between 1998 and 2010 at 135, 1-km2 sites that differed in the degree of urbanization (0–100 % forest cover). Also, we found 367 nests on a subset of 31 sites. PCNs (n = 67 nests) nested mostly on snags (98.5 %), while native SCNs (n = 141) used both natural (71.63 %) and anthropogenic (28.37 %) cavities. Non-native SCNs (n = 159 nests) used mostly anthropogenic cavities (98.11 %). PCN abundance facilitated native SCN abundance on sites with more than 12 % forest cover at 1-km2 scale, but not at less forested sites. There, native SCNs nested primarily (59 %) in anthropogenic cavities. Human facilitation allowed native SCNs to successfully use and reproduce where snags were scarce, changing the composition and structure of the cavity-nesting bird community within the most urbanized sites. Flexible nest site selection and human facilitation provide new opportunities for native cavity-nesting birds in a rapidly changing world.

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
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams LW (1994) Urban wildlife habitats: a landscape perspective. U of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • Akaike H (1973) Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Caski F (eds) Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Information Theory. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, pp. 267–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberti M, Marzluff JM, Waddell P, Handcock M (2006) Modeling interactions among urban development, land-cover change, and bird diversity. NSF Final Report BE/CNH 120024

  • Aronson MF, La Sorte FA, Nilon CH et al (2014) A global analysis of the impacts of urbanization on bird and plant diversity reveals key anthropogenic drivers. P Roy Soc Lond B Bio 281:20133330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrio IC, Hik DS, Bueno CG, Cahill JF (2013) Extending the stress-gradient hypothesis–is competition among animals less common in harsh environments? Oikos 122:516–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beissinger SR, Osborne DR (1982) Effects of urbanization on avian community organization. Condor 84:75–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertness MD, Callaway R (1994) Positive interactions in communities. Trends Ecol Evol 9:191–193

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blair RB (1996) Land use and avian species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecol Appl 6:506–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair R (2004) The effects of urban sprawl on birds at multiple levels of biological organization. Ecol Soc 9

  • Blair RB, Johnson EM (2008) Suburban habitats and their role for birds in the urban–rural habitat network: points of local invasion and extinction? Landsc Ecol 23:1157–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blewett CM, Marzluff JM (2005) Effects of urban sprawl on snags and the abundance and productivity of cavity-nesting birds. Condor 107:678–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooker RW, Maestre FT, Callaway RM et al (2008) Facilitation in plant communities: the past, the present, and the future. J Ecol 96:18–34. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2007.01295.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown CR, Knott AM, Damrose EJ (2011) Violet-green Swallow (Tachycineta thalassina). The Birds of North America Online. doi:10.2173/bna.14

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno JF, Stachowicz JJ, Bertness MD (2003) Inclusion of facilitation into ecological theory. Trends Ecol Evol 18:119–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield B (2009) Effects of facilitation on community stability and dynamics: syntesis and future directions. J Ecol 97:1192–1201. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01569.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chace JF, Walsh JJ (2006) Urban effects on native avifauna: a review. Landsc Urban Plan 74:46–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman KA, Reich PB (2007) Land use and habitat gradients determine bird community diversity and abundance in suburban, rural and reserve landscapes of Minnesota, USA. Biol Conserv 135:527–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clucas B, Marzluff JM (2011) Coupled relationships between humans and other organisms in urban areas. In: Breuste JH, Elmqvist T, Guntenspergen G et al (eds) Urban ecology: patterns, processes, and applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 135–147

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Clucas B, Marzluff JM (2012) Attitudes and actions toward birds in urban areas: human cultural differences influence bird behavior. Auk 129:8–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clucas B, Marzluff JM (2015) A cross-continental look at the patterns of avian species diversity and composition across an urbanisation gradient. Wildl Res. doi:10.1071/WR15007

    Google Scholar 

  • Clucas B, Marzluff JM, Kübler S, Meffert P (2011) New directions in urban avian ecology: reciprocal connections between birds and humans in cities. In: Perspectives in Urban Ecology. Springer, pp 167–195

  • Connell JH (1978) Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science 199:1302–1310

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davies ZG, Fuller RA, Loram A et al (2009) A national scale inventory of resource provision for biodiversity within domestic gardens. Biol Conserv 142:761–771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis A, Major RE, Taylor CE (2014) Distribution of tree-hollows and hollow preferences by parrots in an urban landscape. Emu 114:295–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeGraaf RM, Wentworth JM (1986) Avian guild structure and habitat associations in suburban bird communities. Urban Ecol 9:399–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeStefano S, DeGraaf RM (2003) Exploring the ecology of suburban wildlife. Front Ecol Environ 1:95–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly R, Marzluff JM (2004) Importance of reserve size and landscape context to urban bird conservation. Conserv Biol 18:733–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly R, Marzluff JM (2006) Relative importance of habitat quantity, structure, and spatial pattern to birds in urbanizing environments. Urban Ecosyst 9:99–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elchuk CL, Wiebe KL (2003) Ephemeral food resources and high conspecific densities as factors explaining lack of feeding territories in Northern Flickers (Colaptes auratus). Auk 120:187–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faeth SH, Warren PS, Shochat E, Marussich WA (2005) Trophic dynamics in urban communities. Bioscience 55:399–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher RJ, Wiebe KL (2006) Nest site attributes and temporal patterns of northern flicker nest loss: effects of predation and competition. Oecologia 147:744–753

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fox J (2005) Getting started with the R commander: a basic-statistics graphical user interface to R. J Stat Softw 14:1–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller RA, Warren PH, Armsworth PR et al (2008) Garden bird feeding predicts the structure of urban avian assemblages. Divers Distrib 14:131–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gering JC, Blair RB (1999) Predation on artificial bird nests along an urban gradient: predatory risk or relaxation in urban environments? Ecography 22:532–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham JH, Duda JJ (2011) The humpbacked species richness-curve: a contingent rule for community ecology. Int J Ecol. doi:10.1155/2011/868426

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker SD, Gaines SD (1997) Some implications of direct positive interactions for community species diversity. Ecology 78:1990–2003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen AJ, Knight RL, Marzluff JM et al (2005) Effects of exurban development on biodiversity: patterns, mechanisms, and research needs. Ecol Appl 15:1893–1905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper MJ, McCarthy MA, van der Ree R (2005) The abundance of hollow-bearing trees in urban dry sclerophyll forest and the effect of wind on hollow development. Biol Conserv 122:181–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haskell DG, Knupp AM, Schneider MC (2001) Nest predator abundance and urbanization. In: Marzluff JM, Bowman R, Donnelly R (eds) Avian ecology and conservation in an urbanizing world. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, pp. 243–258

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • He Q, Bertness MD, Altieri AH (2013) Global shifts towards positive species interactions with increasing environmental stress. Ecol Lett 16:695–706. doi:10.1111/ele.12080

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hepinstall JA, Alberti M, Marzluff JM (2008) Predicting land cover change and avian community responses in rapidly urbanizing environments. Landsc Ecol 23:1257–1276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutto RL (2016) Should scientists be required to use a model-based solution to adjust for possible distance- based detectability bias? Ecol Appl 26:1287–1294

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ingold DJ (1994) Influence of nest-site competition between European starlings and woodpeckers. Wilson Bull 110:227–241

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingold DJ (1996) Delayed nesting decreases reproductive success in northern flickers: implications for competition with European starlings. J Field Ornithol 67:321–326

    Google Scholar 

  • Jokimäki J, Kaisanlahti-Jokimäki M-L, Sorace A et al (2005) Evaluation of the “safe nesting zone” hypothesis across an urban gradient: a multi-scale study. Ecography 28:59–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig WD (2003) European starlings and their effect on native cavity-nesting birds. Conserv Biol 17:1134–1140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowarik I (2011) Novel urban ecosystems, biodiversity, and conservation. Environ Pollut 159:1974–1983

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • LaMontagne JM, Kilgour RJ, Anderson EC, Magle S (2015) Tree cavity availability across forest, park, and residential habitats in a highly urban area. Urban Ecosyst 18:151–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loss SR, Will T, Marra PP (2013) The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States. Nat Commun 4:1396. doi:10.1038/ncomms2380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • MacGregor-Fors I, Morales-Pérez L, Schondube JE (2012) From forests to cities: effects of urbanization on subtropical mountain bird communities. Stud Avian Biol-Ser 45:33–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin K, Eadie JM (1999) Nest webs: a community-wide approach to the management and conservation of cavity-nesting forest birds. Forest Ecol Manag 115:243–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin TE, Li P (1992) Life history traits of open-vs. cavity-nesting birds. Ecology 73:579–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzluff JM (2001) Worldwide urbanization and its effects on birds. In: Avian ecology and conservation in an urbanizing world. Springer, pp 19–47

  • Marzluff JM (2002) Fringe conservation: a call to action. Conserv Biol 16:1175–1176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzluff J (2005) Island biogeography for an urbanizing world: how extinction and colonization may determine biological diversity in human-dominated landscapes. Urban Ecosyst 8:157–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzluff JM (2014) Welcome to Subirdia: sharing our neighborhoods with wrens, robins, woodpeckers and other wildlife. Yale University Press

  • Marzluff JM, Withey JC, Whittaker KA et al (2007) Consequences of habitat utilization by nest predators and breeding songbirds across multiple scales in an urbanizing landscape. Condor 109:516–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzluff JM, Clucas B, Oleyar MD, DeLap J (2015) The causal response of avian communities to suburban development: a quasi-experimental, longitudinal study. Urban Ecosyst:1–25. doi:10.1007/s11252-015-0483-3

  • Mazerolle MJ (2016) AICcmodavg: Model selection and multimodel inference based on (Q)AIC(c). R package version 2.0–4. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=AICcmodavg

  • McCune B, Grace JB (2002) Analysis of ecological communities. MjM software design Gleneden Beach, OR

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinney ML (2002) Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. Bioscience 52:883–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melles S, Glenn S, Martin K (2003) Urban bird diversity and landscape complexity: species-environment associations along a multiscale habitat gradient. Conserv Ecol 7

  • Miller JR, Hobbs RJ (2002) Conservation where people live and work. Conserv Biol 16:330–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Møller AP (2009) Successful city dwellers: a comparative study of the ecological characteristics of urban birds in the western Palearctic. Oecologia 159:849–858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison JL, Chapman WC (2005) Can urban parks provide habitat for woodpeckers? Northeast Nat 12:253–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moulton CA, Adams LW (1991) Effects of urbanization on foraging strategy of woodpeckers. In: Wildlife conservation in metropolitan environments, NIUW Symp Ser, pp 67–73

  • Muggeo VM (2008) Segmented: an R package to fit regression models with broken-line relationships. R News 8:20–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton I (1998) Population limitation in birds. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, et al (2013) Vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.0–7. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegancia

  • Pennington DN, Blair RB (2012) Using gradient analysis to uncover pattern and process in urban bird communities. Stud Avian Biol-Ser 45:9–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon AM, Radeloff VC, Flather CH et al (2007) Associations of forest bird species richness with housing and landscape patterns across the USA. Ecol Appl 17:1989–2010

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  • Ralph CJ, Geupel GR, Pyle P, et al (1993) Handbook of field methods for monitoring landbirds. USDA Forest Service/UNL Faculty Publications 105

  • Robb GN, McDonald RA, Chamberlain DE, Bearhop S (2008) Food for thought: supplementary feeding as a driver of ecological change in avian populations. Front Ecol Environ 6:476–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RStudio Team (2014) RStudio: integrated development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston. http://www.rstudio.com/

  • Rullman S, Marzluff JM (2014) Raptor presence along an urban-wildland gradient: influences of prey abundance and land cover. J Raptor Res 48:257–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan DF, Strohbach MW, Warren PS et al (2014) The challenges of urban living. In: Gil D, Brumm H (eds) Avian urban ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 3–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Sol D, González-Lagos C, Moreira D et al (2014) Urbanisation tolerance and the loss of avian diversity. Ecol Lett 17:942–950

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spiess A-N (2014) qpcR: modelling and analysis of real-time PCR data. R package version 1.4-0. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=qpcR

  • Stachowicz JJ (2001) Mutualism, facilitation, and the structure of ecological communities. Bioscience 51:235–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilghman NG (1987) Characteristics of urban woodlands affecting breeding bird diversity and abundance. Landsc Urban Plan 14:481–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tratalos J, Fuller RA, Evans KL et al (2007) Bird densities are associated with household densities. Glob Chang Biol 13:1685–1695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagenmakers E-J, Farrell S (2004) AIC model selection using Akaike weights. Psychon B Rev 11:192–196. doi:10.3758/BF03206482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe KL, Moore WS (2008) Northern Flicker (Colaptes auratus). The Birds of North America Online. doi:10.2173/bna.166

    Google Scholar 

  • Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis, 4th edn. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Tina (Rohila) Blewett, Heather Cornell, Roarke Donnelly, Laura Farwell, Cara Ianni, David Oleyar, Stan Rullman, Thomas Unfried, Kara Whittaker, Sean Williams, and John Withey (among many others) helped collect the data we present. Jon Bakker, Carol Bogezi, Jack DeLap, Michael Heimbuch, Joshua Lawler, Loma Pendergraft, Martin Raphael, Kaeli Swift, and Lauren Walker provided invaluable comments to improve this manuscript. This research was funded by U.S. National Science Foundation (DEB-9875041, IGERT-0114351, BCS 0120024, and BCS 0508002). JAT was partially funded by a Fulbright-Conicyt scholarship and by the School of Environmental and Forest Sciences scholarship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Box 352100, Seattle, WA, 98195-2100, USA

    Jorge A. Tomasevic & John M. Marzluff

Authors
  1. Jorge A. Tomasevic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John M. Marzluff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jorge A. Tomasevic.

Electronic supplementary material

Suppl 1

Relative abundance of primary cavity-nesting species along the gradient of urbanization (forest cover): a. Downy Woodpecker (Linear regression, n.s.), b. Hairy Woodpecker (Linear regression, Adj, R2 = 0.219, F1, 126 = 36.65, p < 0.0001), c. Northern Flicker (Linear regression, Adj, R2 = 0.073, F1, 126 = 11, p = 0.0012), d. Pileated Woodpecker (Linear regression, n.s.), e. Redbreasted Sapsucker (Linear regression, Adj, R2 = 0.073, F1, 126 = 3.837, p = 0.0523). (GIF 168 kb)

High resolution image (EPS 29 kb)

Suppl 2

Relative abundance of native secondary cavity-nesting species along the gradient of urbanization (forest cover): a. Black-capped Chickadee (Linear regression, Adj, R2 = 0.1095, F1, 126 = 16.61, p < 0.0001), b. Bewick’s Wren (Linear regression, n.s.), c. Chestnut-backed Chickadee (Linear regression, Adj, R2 = 0.0921, F1, 126 = 13.88, p < 0.0003), d. Red-breasted Nuthatch (Linear regression, n.s.), e. Violet-green Swallow (Linear regression, n.s.). (GIF 176 kb)

High resolution image (EPS 29 kb)

Suppl 2

Relative abundance of non-native secondary cavity-nesting species along the gradient of urbanization (forest cover): a. House Sparrow (Linear regression, Adj, R2 = 0.2343, F1, 126 = 39.85, p < 0.0001), b. European Starling (Linear regression, Adj, R2 = 0.2227, F1, 126 = 37.39, p < 0.0001 (GIF 132 kb)

High resolution image (EPS 15 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tomasevic, J.A., Marzluff, J.M. Cavity nesting birds along an urban-wildland gradient: is human facilitation structuring the bird community?. Urban Ecosyst 20, 435–448 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-016-0605-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-016-0605-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation