Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Thresholds in forest bird richness in response to three types of forest cover in Ontario, Canada

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Context

Identification of threshold values in avian responses to habitat loss provides science-based guidelines on how to best manage anthropogenically altered landscapes for wildlife preservation.

Objectives

Our objectives were to test for thresholds in species richness of forest-breeding birds in relation to deciduous, coniferous, mixed, and total forest cover in two landscapes varying in the amount of forest present, and to determine whether thresholds for each forest type were coincident within and among landscapes, and across two spatial scales.

Methods

We used Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas data to calculate species richness of forest-breeding birds. Percent deciduous, coniferous, mixed, and total forest cover were determined in 250 m radius circles around survey locations (local scale) and for 10 × 10 km squares (landscape scale) in the fragmented, sparsely forested Mixedwood Plains ecozone and in the more continuously forested Ontario Shield ecozone. Best-fit models explaining variation in species richness were selected from candidate sets of models that included 1–6 variables in addition to segmented or linear terms for forest cover.

Results

Threshold models had support at the local and landscape scales, and for all forest types. Thresholds ranged from 4 to 45 % cover, being slightly higher in the more continuously forested landscape, and for more prevalent forest types.

Conclusions

Thresholds can provide useful targets for conservation efforts, but it is crucial to recognize that habitat levels should be maintained above threshold values to avoid ecological degradation, and to address the habitat requirements of species with occupancy thresholds above those of the assemblage.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Addicott JF, Aho JM, Antolin MF, Padilla DK, Richardson JS, Soluk DA (1987) Ecological neighborhoods: scaling environmental patterns. Oikos 49:340–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen T, Carstensen J, Hernandez-Garcia E, Duarte CM (2009) Ecological thresholds and regime shifts: approaches to identification. Trends Ecol Evol 24:49–57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Andrén H (1994) Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71:355–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrén H (1996) Population responses to habitat fragmentation: statistical power and the random sample hypothesis. Oikos 76:235–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austen MJW, Francis CM, Burke DM, Bradstreet MSW (2001) Landscape context and fragmentation effects on forest birds in southern Ontario. The Condor 103:701–714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bélisle M, Descrochers A, Fortin M-J (2001) Influence of forest cover on the movements of forest birds: a homing experiment. Ecology 82:1893–1904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betts MG (2006) Independent effects of fragmentation on songbirds in a forest mosaic: an organism-based approach. Ecol Appl 16:1076–1089

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Betts MG, Forbes GJ, Diamond AW (2007) Thresholds in songbird occurrence in relation to landscape structure. Conserv Biol 21:1046–1058

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Betts MG, Hagar JC, Rivers JW, Alexander JD, McGarigal K, McComb BC (2010) Thresholds in forest bird occurrence as a function of the amount of early-seral broadleaf forest at landscape scales. Ecol Appl 20:2116–2130

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boscolo D, Candia-Gallardo C, Awade M, Metzger JP (2008) Importance of interhabitat gaps and stepping-stones for lesser woodcreepers (Xiphorhynchus fuscus) in the Atlantic forest, Brazil. Biotropica 40:273–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boulinier T, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Sauer JR, Flather CH, Pollock KH (2001) Forest fragmentation and bird community dynamics: inference at regional scales. Ecology 82:1159–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyle SA, Smith AT (2010) Can landscape and species characteristics predict primate presence in forest fragments in the Brazilian Amazon? Biol Conserv 143:1134–1143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodal inference. A practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadman MD, Sutherland DA, Beck GG, Lepage D, Couturier AR (2007) Atlas of the breeding birds of Ontario, 2001–2005. Federation of Ontario Naturalists and Long Point Bird Observatory. University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo

    Google Scholar 

  • Coreau A, Martin J-L (2007) Multi-scale study of bird species distribution and of their response to vegetation change: a Mediterranean example. Landscape Ecol 22:747–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham MA, Johnson DH (2012) Habitat selection and ranges of tolerance: how do species differ beyond critical thresholds? Ecol Evol 2:2815–2828

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cushman S, McGarigal K (2003) Landscape-level patterns of avian diversity in the Oregon coast range. Ecol Monogr 73:259–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danchin E, Giraldeau L-A, Valone TJ, Wagner RH (2004) Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science 305:487–491

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Desrochers RE, Kerr JT, Currie DJ (2011) How, and how much, natural cover loss increases species richness. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 20:857–867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunford W, Freemark K (2005) Matrix matters: effects of surrounding land uses on forest birds near Ottawa, Canada. Landscape Ecol 20:497–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easton WE, Martin K (1998) The effect of vegetation management on breeding bird communities in British Columbia. Ecol Appl 8:1092–1103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (1998) When does fragmentation of breeding habitat affect population survival? Ecol Model 105:273–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2001) How much habitat is enough? Ecol Appl 100:65–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:487–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2007) Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16:265–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flathers CH, Bevers M (2002) Patchy reaction-diffusion and population abundance: the relative importance of habitat amount and arrangement. Am Nat 159:40–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser G, Stutchbury BJM (2004) Area-sensitive birds move extensively among forest patches. Biol Conserv 118:337–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groffman P, Baron J, Blett T, Gold A, Goodman I, Gunderson L, Levinson B, Palmer M, Paerl H, Peterson G, Poff N, Rejeski D, Reynolds J, Turner M, Weathers K, Weins J (2006) Ecological thresholds: the key to successful environmental management or an important concept with no practical application? Ecosystems 9:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guénette J-S, Villard M-A (2005) Thresholds in forest bird response to habitat alteration as quantitative targets for conservation. Conserv Biol 19:1168–1180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homan RN, Windmiller BS, Reed JM (2004) Critical thresholds associated with habitat loss for two vernal pool-breeding amphibians. Ecol Appl 14:1547–1553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huggett AJ (2005) The concept and utility of “ecological thresholds” in biodiversity conservation. Biol Conserv 124:301–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy CM, Marra PP (2010) Matrix mediates avian movements in tropical forested landscapes: inference from experimental translocations. Biol Conserv 143:2136–2145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koper N, Schmiegelow KA, Merrill EH (2007) Residuals cannot distinguish between ecological effects of habitat amount and fragmentation: implications for the debate. Landscape Ecol 22:811–820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lele SR, Moreno M, Bayne E (2012) Dealing with detection error in site occupancy surveys: what can we do with a single survey? J Plant Ecol 5:22–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Fischer J, Cunningham RB (2005) Native vegetation cover thresholds associated with species responses. Biol Conserv 124:311–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maron M, Bowen M, Fuller RA, Smith GC, Eyre TJ, Mathieson M, Watson JEM, McAlpine CA (2012) Spurious thresholds in the relationship between species richness and vegetation cover. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 21:682–692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martensen AC, Pimentel RG, Metzger JP (2008) Relative effects of fragment size and connectivity on bird community in the Atlantic Rain Forest: implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 141:2184–2192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K, McComb WC (1995) Relationships between landscape structure and breeding birds in the Oregon coast range. Ecol Monogr 65:235–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melles S, Fortin M-J, Badzinski D, Lindsay K (2012) Relative importance of nesting habitat and measures of connectivity in predicting the occurrence of a forest songbird in fragmented landscapes. Avian Conserv Ecol 7:3. <http://www.ace-eco.org/vol7/iss2/art3>, Accessed 25 Aug 2012

  • Muggeo VMR (2003) Estimating regression models with unknown break-points. Stat Med 22:3055–3071

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ontario Biodiversity Council (OBC) (2010) State of Ontario’s Biodiversity 2010. A Report of the Ontario Biodiversity Council, Peterborough, Ontario

  • Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) (1999) Ontario Land Cover Data [computer file]. Toronto, Ontario. <http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/download/ont_landcover/landcover/>, Accessed 30 June 2012

  • Pardini R, de Arruda Bueno A, Gardner TA, Prado PI, Metzger JP (2010) Beyond the fragmentation threshold hypothesis: regime shifts in biodiversity across fragmented landscapes. PLoS One 5(10): e1366. <http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0013666>, Accessed 05 May 2013)

  • Radford JQ, Bennett AF (2007) The relative importance of landscape properties for woodland birds in agricultural environments. J Appl Ecol 44:737–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radford JQ, Bennett AF, Cheers GJ (2005) Landscape-level thresholds of habitat cover for woodland-dependent birds. Biol Conserv 124:317–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes JR, Callaghan JG, McAlpine CA, De Jong C, Bowen ME, Mitchell DL, Lunney D, Possingham HP (2008) Regional variation in habitat-occupancy thresholds: a warning for conservation planning. J Appl Ecol 45:549–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richmond S, Nol E, Burke D (2012) Local-versus landscape-scale effects on the demography of three forest-breeding songbirds in Ontario, Canada. Can J Zool 90:815–828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricketts TH (2001) The matrix matters: effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am Nat 158:87–99

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A, Tiberti N, Lisacek F, Sanchez J-C, Muller M (2014) Display and analyze ROC curves, package ‘pROC’. <http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pROC/pROC.pdf>, Accessed 15 Sep 2014

  • Schmiegelow FKA, Monkkonen M (2002) Habitat loss and fragmentation in dynamic landscapes: avian perspectives from the boreal forest. Ecol Appl 12:375–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith AC, Koper N, Francis CM, Fahrig L (2009) Confronting collinearity: comparing methods for disentangling the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation. Landscape Ecol 24:1271–1285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solymos P, Moreno M, Lele SR (2013) Analyzing wildlife data with detection error, package ‘detect.’ <http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/detect/index.html>, Accessed 15 Sep 2014

  • Statistics Canada (2009) Human activity and the environment. Table 3.4. Population by provincial and territorial ecozone. <http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-201-x/2009000/t167-eng.htm>, Accessed 17 Oct 2014

  • Statistics Canada (2010) Table 153-0058. Selected agricultural activities, Canada, ecozones and ecoregions with agriculture, every 5 years (square kilometers unless otherwise noted). http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a05, Accessed 17 Oct 2014

  • Strobl S, Bland D (2000) Introduction. In: A silvicultural guide to managing southern Ontario’s forests. Queen’s Printer for Ontario. <http://www.ont-woodlot-assoc.org/silvic/index.htm>, Accessed 15 Sep 2014

  • Summerville KS, Crist TO (2001) Effects of experimental habitat fragmentation on patch use by butterflies and skippers (Lepidoptera). Ecology 82:1360–1370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swift TL, Hannon SJ (2010) Critical thresholds associated with habitat loss: a review of the concepts, evidence, and applications. Biol Rev 85:35–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tischendorf L (2001) Can landscape indices predict ecological processes consistently? Landscape Ecol 16:235–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trzcinski MK, Fahrig L, Merriam G (1999) Independent effects of forest cover and fragmentation on the distribution of forest breeding birds. Ecol Appl 9:586–593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG (2005) Landscape ecology: what is the state of the science? Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:319–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uezu A, Beyer DD, Metzgar JP (2008) Can agroforest woodlots work as stepping stones for birds in the Atlantic Forest region? Biodivers Conserv 17:1907–1922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Hoek Y, Renfrew R, Manne LL (2013) Assessing regional and interspecific variation in threshold responses of forest breeding birds through broad scale analyses. PLoS One 8(2):e55996. <http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0055996>, Accessed 05 May 2013

  • Villard M-A, Jonsson BG (2009) Tolerance of focal species to forest management intensity as a guide in the development of conservation targets. Forest Ecol Manag 258:S142–S145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villard M-A, Trzcinski MK, Merriam G (1999) Fragmentation effects on forest birds: relative influence of woodland cover and configuration on landscape occupancy. Conserv Biol 13:774–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitz AC, Rodewald AD (2006) Can regenerating clearcuts benefit mature-forest songbirds? An examination of post-breeding ecology. Biol Conserv 127:477–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willson MF, Comet TA (1996) Bird communities of northern forests: ecological correlates of diversity and abundance in the understory. Condor 98:350–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • With KA, Crist TO (1995) Critical thresholds in species’ responses to landscape structure. Ecology 76:2446–2459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • With KA, King AW (1999) Extinction thresholds for species in fractal landscapes. Conserv Biol 11:945–956

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolfenden BE, Stutchbury BJM, Morton ES (2005) Male Acadian Flycatchers, Empidonax virescens, obtain extrapair fertilizations with distant females. Anim Behav 69:921–929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerberg B, Porter WF (2010) Thresholds in the long-term response of breeding birds to forest cover and fragmentation. Biol Conserv 143:952–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the official sponsors of the Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas (Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Federation of Ontario Naturalists, Ontario Field Ornithologists, and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources) for making the data available. We would also like to thank the countless volunteers who collected the information for the OBBA. Funding for this project was provided by Bird Studies Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, and by a National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Industrial Research and Development Fellowship grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bird Studies Canada, 115 Front Rd., P.O. Box 160, Port Rowan, ON, N0E 1M0, Canada

    Sonya Richmond & Andrew Couturier

  2. Bird Studies Canada, 17 Waterfowl Ln., P.O. Box 6227, Sackville, NB, E4L 1G6, Canada

    Eva Jenkins

  3. Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, 867 Lakeshore Road, Burlington, ON, L7R 4A6, Canada

    Mike Cadman

Authors
  1. Sonya Richmond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eva Jenkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrew Couturier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mike Cadman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sonya Richmond.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 100 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Richmond, S., Jenkins, E., Couturier, A. et al. Thresholds in forest bird richness in response to three types of forest cover in Ontario, Canada. Landscape Ecol 30, 1273–1290 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0183-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0183-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation