Spatial dynamics of coastal forest bird assemblages: the influence of landscape context, forest type, and structural connectivity
Complex structural connectivity patterns can influence the distribution of animals in coastal landscapes, particularly those with relatively large home ranges, such as birds. To understand the nuanced nature of coastal forest avifauna, where there may be considerable overlap in assemblages of adjacent forest types, the concerted influence of regional landscape context and vegetative structural connectivity at multiple spatial scales warrants investigation.
This study determined whether species compositions of coastal forest bird assemblages differ with regional landscape context or with forest type, and if this is influenced by structural connectivity patterns measured at multiple spatial scales.
Three replicate bird surveys were conducted in four coastal forest types at ten survey locations across two regional landscape contexts in northeast Australia. Structural connectivity patterns of 11 vegetation types were quantified at 3, 6, and 12 km spatial scales surrounding each survey location, and differences in bird species composition were evaluated using multivariate ordination analysis.
Bird assemblages differed between regional landscape contexts and most coastal forest types, although Melaleuca woodland bird assemblages were similar to those of eucalypt woodlands and rainforests. Structural connectivity was primarily correlated with differences in bird species composition between regional landscape contexts, and correlation depended on vegetation type and spatial scale.
Spatial scale, landscape context, and structural connectivity have a combined influence on bird species composition. This suggests that effective management of coastal landscapes requires a holistic strategy that considers the size, shape, and configuration of all vegetative components at multiple spatial scales.
KeywordsSpecies composition Avifauna Structural connectivity Coastal forests Spatial scale Landscape context Keystone structure
We thank the following for funding support: BirdLife Australia, Wet Tropics Management Authority, Birds Queensland, and Ecological Society of Australia.
- Anderson MJ (2001) A new method for nonparametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecol 26:32–46Google Scholar
- Brennan SP, Schnell GD (2007) Multiscale analysis of tyrannid abundances and landscape variables in the central plains, USA. Wilson Bull 119:631–647Google Scholar
- Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2006) PRIMER v6: user manual/tutorial. PRIMER-E, PlymouthGoogle Scholar
- Franklin DC, Noske RA (1998) Local movements of honeyeaters in a sub-coastal vegetation mosaic in the Northern Territory. Corella 22:97–103Google Scholar
- Heffernan JB, Soranno PA, Angilletta MJ Jr, Buckley LB, Gruner DS, Keitt TH, Kellner JR, Kominoski JS, Rocha AV, Xiao J, Harms TK, Goring SJ, Koenig LE, McDowell WH, Powell H, Richardson AD, Stow CA, Vargas R, Weathers KC (2014) Macrosystems ecology: understanding ecological patterns and processes at continental scales. Front Ecol Environ 12:5–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- IBRA (2012) Interim biogeographic regionalisation for Australia, version 7. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, CanberraGoogle Scholar
- Kemp JE, Kutt AS (2005) The vertebrate fauna of the Clemant state forest lowlands: a significant coastal woodland remnant in the southern wet tropics bioregion, North-eastern Queensland. Aust Zool 32:508–542Google Scholar
- Kemp JE, Lovatt RJ, Bahr JC, Kahler CP, Appelman CN (2007) Pre-clearing vegetation of the coastal lowlands of the Wet Tropics Bioregion, North Queensland. Cunninghamia 10:285–329Google Scholar
- McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Ene E (2012) FRAGSTATS v4: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical and continuous maps. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html
- NVIS (2012) National vegetation information system, version 4.1. Department of the Environment and Heritage, CanberraGoogle Scholar
- Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Henry M, Stevens H, Wagner H (2015) Vegan: community ecology package. R package version 2.3-1. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan
- Rempel RS, Kaukinen D, Carr AP (2012) Patch analyst and patch grid. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Centre for Northern Forest Ecosystem Research, Thunder BayGoogle Scholar
- Sattler PS, Williams RD (eds) (1999) The conservation status of Queensland’s bioregional ecosystems. Environmental Protection Agency, BrisbaneGoogle Scholar
- R Core Team (2015) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. https://www.R-project.org/