Naturwissenschaften

, Volume 95, Issue 5, pp 391–398 | Cite as

Fear in grasslands: the effect of Eurasian kestrels on skylark abundances

Original Paper

Abstract

Predation has received considerable theoretical and empirical support in population regulation. The effect of predators, however, could be achieved in direct (killing) or indirect effects (such as displacement). In this paper, we explored the relationship between Eurasian kestrels Falco tinnunculus and skylarks Alauda arvensis in Mediterranean grasslands. First, we analysed the presence of skylarks in the kestrel diet over 9 years. We also compared a grassland area of experimentally increased kestrel density and a second grassland as control area to evaluate the direct or indirect effect on skylark abundance. We also considered two different habitats, grazed and ungrazed plots. If skylark abundance decreased as the kestrel breeding season progressed in high-density kestrel area compared with the control area, it would suggest a direct effect (predator hypothesis). If skylark abundance remains constant in both areas of contrasting kestrel density, it would suggest that skylarks avoid kestrels (avoidance hypothesis). We found that skylark abundance decreased in the kestrel area from the beginning of kestrel nest-box installation to recent years. The rate of skylark consumption decreased in a 9-year period as kestrel abundance increased, although the total amount skylark consumption did not show a decreasing trend. In addition, skylarks were more abundant in the kestrel-free area than in the kestrel area. Finally, we found that skylark abundance did not change through the kestrel breeding period in relation to grazing. We suggest that an increased breeding density of kestrels during their breeding period may force the skylarks to breed in other areas, which may explain the decline of their abundance.

Keywords

Eurasian kestrels Falco tinnunculus Skylarks Alauda arvensis Grasslands Mediterranean area Predator–prey relationships 

References

  1. Aparicio JM (2000) Differences in the diets of resident and non-resident Kestrels in Spain. Ornis Fenn 77:169–175Google Scholar
  2. Brown JS, Kotler BP, Smith RJ, Wirth WO (1988) The effect of owl predation on the foraging behaviour of heteromyid rodents. Oecologia 76:408–415Google Scholar
  3. Eng RL, Gullionj GW (1962) The predation of goshawks upon ruffed grouse on the Cloquet forest research center, Minnesota. Wilson Bull 74:227–242Google Scholar
  4. Evans DM, Redpath SM, Evans SA, Elston DA, Dennis P (2005) Livestock grazing affects the egg size of an insectivorous passerine. Biol Lett 1:322–325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Evans DM, Redpath SM, Elston DA, Evans SA, Mitchell RJ, Dennis P (2006) To graze or not to graze? Sheep, voles, forestry and nature conservation in the British uplands. J Appl Ecol 43:499–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fargallo JA (1999) Efecto del Cernícalo Vulgar Falco tinnunculus sobre la abundancia del Topillo Campesino Microtus arvalis: un caso de manejo de poblaciones naturales. Obra Social y Cultural de la Caja de Ahorros y Monte de Piedad de Segovia, SegoviaGoogle Scholar
  7. Fargallo JA, Blanco G, Sotolargo E (1996) Possible second clutches in a Mediterranean montane population of the Eurasian Kestrel. J Raptor Res 30:70–73Google Scholar
  8. Fargallo JA, Blanco G, Potti J, Viñuela J (2001) Nestbox provisioning in a rural population of Eurasian Kestrels: breeding performance, nest predation and parasitism. Bird Study 48:236–244Google Scholar
  9. Ferguson SH, Bergerud AT, Ferguson R (1988) Predation risk and habitat selection in the persistence of a remmant caribou population. Oecologia 76:236–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Flowers MA, Graves BM (1997) Juvenile toads avoid chemical cues from snake predators. Anim Behav 53:641–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gaibani G, Csermely D, Korpimäki E (2005) Parental care of kestrels living in stable and varying environmental conditions. J Ethol 23:63–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Geer TA (1968) Effects of nesting sparrowhawks on nesting tits. Condor 80:419–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. González-Esteban J, Vilate I, Gosálbez E (1995) Expansión del área de distribución de Microtus arvalis astrianus Miller 1908 (Rodentia, Arvicolidae) en la Meseta Norte (España). Doñana Acta Vertebrata 22:106–110Google Scholar
  14. Hileman KS, Brodie ED (1994) Survival strategies of the salamander Desmognathus ochrophaelus: interaction of predator avoidance and anti-predator mechanism. Anim Behav 47:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kennedy M, Shave CR, Spencer HG, Gray RD (1994) Quantifying the effect of predation risk on foraging bullies: no need to assume an IFD. Ecology 75:2220–2226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Korpimäki E (1986) Diet variation, hunting habitat and reproductive output of the Kestrel Falco tinnunculus in the light of the optimal diet theory. Ornis Fenn 63:84–90Google Scholar
  17. Korpimäki E, Norrdahl K (1991) Numerical and functional responses of kestrels, short eared owls, and long-eared owls to vole densities. Ecology 72:814–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Krebs CJ (2001) Ecology. Addison-Wesley Longman., CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  19. Meese RJ, Fuller MR (1987) Distribution and behaviour of passerines around Peregrine Falco peregrinus eyries in western Greenland. Ibis 131:27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Norrdahl K, Korpimäki E (1998) Fear in farmlands: how much does predator avoidance affect bird community structure? J Avian Biol 29:79–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pearce-Higgins JW, Grant MC (2006) Relationships between bird abundance and the composition and structure of moorland vegetation. Bird Study 53:112–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Reif V, Tornberg R, Jungell S, Korpimäki E (2001) Diet variation of common buzzards in Finland supports the alternative prey hypothesis. Ecography 24:267–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Reif V, Jungell S, Korpimäki E, Tornberg R, Mykra S (2004) Numerical response of common buzzards and predation rate of main and alternative prey under fluctuating food conditions. Ann Zool Fenn 41:599–607Google Scholar
  24. Stephens DW, Krebs JR (1986) Foraging theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  25. Suárez F, Garza V, Morales MB (2003) The role of extensive cereal crops, dry pasture and shrub-steppe in determining skylark Alauda arvensis densities in the Iberian peninsula. Agric Ecosyst Environ 95:551–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Suhonen J (1993) Predation risk influences the use of foraging sites by tits. Ecology 74:1197–1203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Suhonen J, Norrdahl K, Korpimäki E (1994) Avian predation risk modifies breeding bird community on a farmland area. Ecology 75:1626–1634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thirgood SJ, Redpath SM, Campbell S, Smith A (2002) Do habitat characteristics influence predation on red grouse? J Appl Ecol 39:217–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Torre I, Díaz M, Martínez-Padilla J, Bonal R, Viñuela J, Fargallo JA (2007) Cattle grazing, raptor abundance and small mammal communities in Mediterranean grasslands. J Basic Appl Ecol 8:565–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tucker GM, Heath MF (1994) Birds in Europe: their conservation status. BirdLife International, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Village A (1990) The kestrel, first edn. T & AD Poyser, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Wilson JD, Evans J, Browne SJ, King JR (1997) Territory distribution and breeding success of skylarks Alauda arvensis on organic and intensive farmland in southern England. J Appl Ecol 34:1462–1478CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aberdeen Centre for Environmental Sustainability (ACES)University of Aberdeen & Macaulay Institute, School of Biological SciencesAberdeenUK
  2. 2.Centre for Ecology and Hydrology-BanchoryHill of BrathensBanchory, AberdeenshireUK
  3. 3.Departamento de Ecología EvolutivaMuseo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, CSICMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations