Biological Invasions

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 497–513 | Cite as

Predicting the potential distribution of invasive ring-necked parakeets Psittacula krameri in northern Belgium using an ecological niche modelling approach

  • Diederik StrubbeEmail author
  • Erik Matthysen
Original Paper


The threat to biodiversity due to invasive alien species is considered second only to that of habitat loss. Given the large number of species that are currently invading ecosystems all over the world, we need to distinguish invaders with minor effects from those with large effects in order to prioritize management efforts. Ecological niche models can be used to predict the potential distribution of an invasive species from occurrence records and environmental data layers. We used the Ecological Niche Factor Analysis (ENFA), a presence-only predictive modelling approach, to describe the invasive ring-necked parakeets’ realized niche and to identify areas suitable for the parakeet in northern Belgium. ENFA proved to be a robust and reliable modelling technique, able to gauge the ecological requirements of an invasive species without the need to include historical information on the starting point of the invasion. ENFA shows that the parakeets tend to occupy relatively rare habitats compared to the main environmental conditions in northern Belgium, although they show some tolerance for environmental conditions inside parks and forests. The general distribution of the ring-necked parakeet is governed primarily by the amount of older forest patches, parks and built-up area in the landscape—reflecting the parakeets’ need for suitable nesting cavities and its reliance upon urban areas to forage. Our resulting habitat suitability maps show that the parakeets have ample room to further increase their range in northern Belgium. Our results indicate some concern for increased competition between parakeets and the nuthatches, native cavity nesters known to suffer from competition with parakeets, as some regions known as nuthatch strongholds are highly likely to be invaded by the parakeets.


Biodiversity Competition Habitat suitability Invasions Presence-only modelling Ring-necked parakeet 



We would like to thank all observers who transmitted their data on parakeet breeding locations: Héloïse Papillon, Kristin Bluekens, Anne Weiserbs, Jean-Paul Jacob, Alain Reygel, Michel Louette, Alfons Willemsen and all observes of the Flemish Breeding Bird Atlas. D.S. wishes to thank D. Reulen en D. Toor.


  1. Acevedo P, Casinello J, Hortal J, Gortázar C (2007) Invasive exotic aoudad (Ammotragus lervia) as a major threat to native Iberian ibex (Capra pyrenaica): a habitat suitability model approach. Diversity Distrib 13:587–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bluekens K (2002) Inleidende studie naar het nestgebruik van halsbandparkieten en de concurrentie met inheemse vogelsoorten. Unpublished Master Thesis. Lab. of Animal Ecology, Department of Biology, University of AntwerpGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyce M (2006) Scale for resource selection functions. Diversity Distrib 12:269–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyce M, Vernier P, Nielsen S, Schmiegelow F (2002) Evaluating resource selection functions. Ecol Model 157:281–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braun M (2004) Neozoen in urbanen Habitaten: Ökologie und Nischenexpansion des Halsbandsittichs (Psittacula krameri SCOPOLI, 1769) in Heidelberg. Unpublished Master Thesis. Fachbereich Biologie, Philipps-Universität Marburg, MarburgGoogle Scholar
  6. Braunisch V, Suchant R (2007) A model for evaluating the ‘habitat potential’ of a landscape for capercaillie Tetrao urogallus: a tool for conservation planning. Wildl Biol 13:21–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brittingham MC (1991) Effect of winter feeding on wild birds. In: Adams LW, Leedy DL (eds) Wildlife conservation in metropolitan environments. National Institute for Urban Wildlife, ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  8. Busby J (1991) BIOCLIM—a bioclimatic analysis and prediction system. In: Margules CR, Austin MP (eds) Nature conservation: cost effective biological surveys and data analysis. CSIRO, Canberra, pp 64–68Google Scholar
  9. Butler CJ (2003) Population biology of the introduced rose-ringed parakeet Psittacula krameri in the UK. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Department of Zoology, Edward Grey Institute of Field Ornithology, University of Oxford, Oxford PhD thesis, p 312Google Scholar
  10. Butler CJ (2005) Feral parrots in the continental United States and United Kingdom: past, present, and future. J Avian Med Surg 19:142–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Casinello J, Acevedo P, Hortal J (2006) Prospects for population expansion of the exotic aoudad (Ammotragus lervia;Bovidae) in the Iberian Peninsula: clues from habitat suitability modelling. Diversity Distrib 12:666–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Claes D, Matthysen E (2005) Inleidende studie naar de voedselecologie en de mogelijke schadeproblematiek van de Halsbandparkiet Psittacula krameri in Vlaanderen en Brussel. Oriolus 70:145–151Google Scholar
  13. Collar NJ (1997) Family Psittacidae (parrots). In: del Hoyo J, Elliott A, Sargatal J (eds) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol 4. Lynx Edicions, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  14. Cramer S (2003) Logit models: from economics and other fields. Cambridge Univ Press, pp 66–67Google Scholar
  15. Cramp S (1985) Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. Terns to woodpeckers. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 960Google Scholar
  16. De Schaetzen R, Jacob J-P (1985) Installation d’une colonie de perriches jeune-veuve (Myiopsitta monachus) à Bruxelles. Bulletin AvesGoogle Scholar
  17. Dewinck S (2005) Écologie d’une espèce exotique invasive : la Perruche à collier Psittacula krameri, Faculté des Sciences. Université Libre de Bruxelles, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  18. Dhindsa MS, Saina HK (1994) Agricultural ornithology: an Indian perspective. J Biosci 19:391–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dumortier M, De Bruyn L, Hens M, Peymen J, Schneiders A, Van Daele T, Van Reeth W, Weyemberh G, Kuijken E (2005) Natuurrapport 2005. Toestand van de natuur in Vlaanderen: cijfers voor het beleid, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  20. Engler R, Guisan A, Rechsteiner L (2004) An improved approach for predicting the distribution of rare and endangered species from occurrence and pseudo-absence data. J Appl Ecol 41:263–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. ESRI (2005) ArcGIS 9.1. ESRI Inc., RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  22. Forshaw JM (1978) Parrots of the world. Davis and Charles, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Franz D (2007) Papageien vor der Haustür—Halsbandsittiche in Wiesbaden. Cited 09 January 2008
  24. Franz D, Krause T (2003) Biologie und Verbreitung des Halsbandsittichs in Deustschland - Teil2. Papageien 6:209–213Google Scholar
  25. Guisan A, Zimmerman N (2000) Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Model 135:147–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Guo Q, Kellya M, Graham C (2005) Support vector machines for predicting distribution of Sudden Oak Death in California. Ecol Model 182:75–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hilden O (1965) Habitat selection in birds. Ann Zool Fenn 2:53–75Google Scholar
  28. Hirzel A, Arlettaz R (2003) Modeling habitat suitability for complex species distributions by the environmental-distance geometric mean. Environ Manage 32:614PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hirzel A, Hausser J, Chessel D, Perrin N (2002) Ecological niche factor analysis: How to compute habitat suitability maps without absence data? Ecology 83:2027–2036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hirzel A, Hausser J and Perrin N (2006a) Biomapper 3.2. Laboratory for Conservation Biology, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Switzerland. URL:
  31. Hirzel A, Helfer V, Metral F (2001) Assessing habitat-suitability models with a virtual species. Ecol Model 145:111–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hirzel A, Le Lay G, Helfer V, Randin C, Guisan A (2006b) Evaluating the ability of habitat suitability models to predict species presences. Ecol Model 199:142–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hirzel A, Posse B, Oggier P-A, Crettenand Y, Glenz C, Arlettaz R (2004) Ecological requirements of reintroduced species and the implications for release policy: the case of the bearded vulture. J Appl Ecol 41:1103–1116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hutchinson G (1957) Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 22:415–427Google Scholar
  35. Jansson C, Ekman J, Von Broemssen A (1981) Winter mortality and food supply in tits Parus spp. Oikos 37:313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jimenez-Valverde A, Lobo M (2007) Threshold criteria for conversion of probability of species presence to either–or presence–absence. Acta Oecol 31:361–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kahl-Dunkel A, Werner R (2002) Winterverbreitung des Halsbandsittichs Psittacula krameri in Köln. Die Vogelwelt 123:17–20Google Scholar
  38. Levin SA (1992) The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73:1943–1967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Liu C, Berry P, Dawson T, Pearson G (2005) Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distributions. Ecography 28:385–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Manly B, McDonald L, homas D, McDonald T, Erickson W (2002) Resource selection by animals: statistical design and analysis for field studies, 2nd edn. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  41. Martin T (1987) Food as a limit on breeding birds: a life history perspective. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 18:453–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Matthysen E (1998) The nuthatches. T & A. D. Poyser, LondonGoogle Scholar
  43. McComb WC, Noble RE (1981) Nest-box and natural cavity use in three mid south forest habitats. J Wildl Manage 45:93–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McNeely JA, Mooney HA, Neville LE, Schei P and Waage JK (2001) Global strategy on invasive Alien species. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK in collaboration with the Global Invasive Species ProgrammeGoogle Scholar
  45. Meyer C (2007) Does scale matter in predicting species distributions? Case study with the Marbled Murrelet. Ecol Appl 17:1474–1483PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Meyer C, Thuiller W (2006) Accuracy of resource selection functions across spatial scales. Diversity Distrib 12:288–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mitchell M, Lancia R, Gewin K (2001) Using landscape-level data to predict the distribution of birds on a managed forest: effects of scale. Ecol Appl 11:1692–1708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Newton I (1994) The role of nest sites in limiting the numbers of hole-nesting birds: a review. Biol Conserv 70:265–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Newton I (1998) Population limitation in birds. Academic Press, San Diego, p 594Google Scholar
  50. Parker IM, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Goodell K, Wonham M, Kareiva PM, Williaùson B, Von Holle B, Moyle PB, Byers JE, Goldwasser L (1999) Impact: toward a framework for understanding the ecological effects of invaders. Biol Invas 1:3–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pearce J, Boyce M (2006) Modelling distribution and abundance with presence-only data. J Appl Ecol 43:405–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Peterson A (2001) Predicting species’ geographic distributions based on ecological niche modeling. The Condor 103:599–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Philips S, Anderson P, Shapire D (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model 190:231–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pimentel D, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2005) Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecol Econ 52:273–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pithon J (1998) The status and ecology of the ring-necked parakeet Psittacula krameri in Great Britain. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Department of Biology, University of York, York PhD ThesisGoogle Scholar
  56. Reynolds S, Schoech S, Bowman R (2003) Nutritional quality of prebreeding diet influences breeding performance of the Florida scrub-jay. Oecologia 134:308–316PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Scalliet C (1999) Etude de l’adaption et de l’impact de la Perruche à collier Psittacula krameri en milieu urbain bruxellois. Unpublished Master Thesis, Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques, Université de Gembloux, GemblouxGoogle Scholar
  58. Sokal R, Rohlf F (1981) Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. W.H. Freeman, New York, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  59. Sol D, Santos D, Feria E, Clavell J (1997) Habitat selection the monk parakeet during colonization of a new area in Spain. Condor 99:39–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Strubbe D, Matthysen E (2007) Invasive ring-necked parakeets Psittacula krameri in Belgium: habitat selection and impact on native birds. Ecography 30:578–588Google Scholar
  61. Van Der Aa B (2007) Toestand van de natuur in Vlaanderen: cijfers voor het beleid. In: Dumortier M, De Bruyn L, Hens M, Peymen J, Schneiders A, Van Daele T, Van Reeth W (eds) Natuurrapport 2007. Mededelingen van het Instituut voor Natuur- en Bosonderzoek nr. 4, Brussel, pp 38–55Google Scholar
  62. Vermeersch G, Anselin A, Devos K, Herremans M, Stevens J, Gabriëls J, Van Der Krieken B (2004) Atlas van de Vlaamse broedvogels 2000–2002, BrusselGoogle Scholar
  63. Vermeersch G, Anselin A, Devos K (2006) Bijzondere Broedvogels in Vlaanderen in de periode 1994–2005. Populatietrends en recente status van zeldzame, kolonievormende en exotische broedvogels in Vlaanderen. Mededeling van het instituut voor natuur- en bosonderzoek, 2006(2). Instituut voor Natuur- en Bosonderzoek: Brussel, Belgium, p 64Google Scholar
  64. Vitousek P, DAntonio C, Loope L, Rejmanek M, Westbrooks R (1997) Introduced species: a significant component of human-caused global change. N Z J Ecol 21:1–16Google Scholar
  65. Weiserbs A, Jacob J-P (2005) Brussels. In: Kelcey JG, Rheinwald GG (eds) Birds in European cities. GINSTER Verlag, St Katharinen, pp 81–102Google Scholar
  66. Weiserbs A, Jacob J-P (2007) Oiseaux nicheurs de Bruxelles, 2000–2004: répartition, effectifs, évolution. AVES, p 288Google Scholar
  67. Weiserbs A, Janssens M, Jacob J-P (2000) Une troisième perruche nicheuse en Région bruxelloise: la Perruche alexandre Psittacula eupatria. Bull Aves 37:115–120Google Scholar
  68. Weiserbs A, Jacob J-P, Rotsaert G (2002) Evaluation de l’incidence de développement des populations de perruches sur les habitats et les espèces indigènes en Région bruxelloise. Rapport final. Convention entre l’IBGE et AVES a.s.b.lGoogle Scholar
  69. Wesolowski T (2006) Lessons from long-term hole nester studies in a primeval temperate forest. J Ornithol 147:38–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bio Sci 48:607–615Google Scholar
  71. Wils C, Paelinckx D, Adams D, Berten Y, Bosch H, De Knijf G, De Saeger S, Demolder H, Guelinckx R, Lust P, Scheldeman K, T’jollyn F, Van Hove M, Vandenbussche V, Vriens L (2004) Biologische waarderingskaart en natuurgerichte bodembedekkingkaart van het vlaamse gewest: integratie van de bwk en vereenvoudiging tot een 90- en 32- delige legende (80% bwk, versie 2 van 1997 tot 2003 en 20% bwk, versie1). Rapporten van het instituut voor natuurbehoud, (8). Instituut voor Natuurbehoud, Brussel: Belgium, p 39Google Scholar
  72. Zaniewski A, Lehman A, McC Overton J (2002) Predicting species spatial distributions using presence-only data: a case study of native New Zealand ferns. Ecol Model 157:261–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Evolutionary Ecology Group, Department of BiologyUniversity of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations