Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 73, Issue 1, pp 67–93 | Cite as

Relationships of Human Disturbance, Bird Communities, and Plant Communities Along the Land-Water Interface of a Large Reservoir

Article

Abstract

We examined the relationships of humanactivity, bird communities, and plant communities along theland-water interface of Lake Texoma, a large human-madereservoir on the Texas-Oklahoma border. Measurements ofhuman activity, plant surveys, and bird surveys wereperformed at 40 paired transects, one with humandisturbance, the other undisturbed. Both principalcomponents and correspondence analyses of bird-survey dataseparated disturbed sites from paired undisturbed sites, andtypical disturbance-tolerant species from those lesstolerant of human activity. Compared to undisturbed sites,disturbed sites tended to have more individual birds persurvey, pavement, and mowed lawns, and less canopy,vegetation volume, and vegetation vertical diversity. Aprincipal components analysis of quantitative disturbancemeasurements revealed that most bird and plant measures werehighly correlated with the first disturbance component. However, the correlation between birds and human activitywas much stronger than that between birds and plants, orbetween plants and disturbance. Our data suggest that bird-species composition is regulated more by human activity thanby plant-community composition. Also, in this system, birdcommunities are a better choice than plant communities toindex the effect of human disturbance. To maintain regionaldiversity of both birds and plants, undisturbed areas shouldbe maintained around reservoirs.

correspondence analysis human disturbance land-water interface principal components analysis Procrustes analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Ornithologists' Union: 1998, The AOU Checklist of North American Birds, 8th ed., American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  2. Applied Biostatistics, Inc.: 1998, NTSYS-pc version 2.02i, Setauket, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Beissinger, S. R. and Osborne, D. R.: 1982, 'Effects of urbanization on avian community organization', Condor 84, 75–83.Google Scholar
  4. Burger, J.: 1998, 'Effects of motorboats and personal watercraft on flight behavior over a colony of common terns', Condor 100, 528–534.Google Scholar
  5. Butcher, G. S., Fuller, M. R., McAllister, L. S. and Geissler, P. H.: 1990, 'An evaluation of the Christmas Bird Count for monitoring population trends of selected species', Wildl. Soc. Bull. 18, 129–133.Google Scholar
  6. Clark, K. L., Euler, D. L. and Armstrong, E.: 1984, 'Predicting avian community response to lakeshore cottage development', J. Wildl. Manage. 48, 1239–1247.Google Scholar
  7. Cox, G. W.: 1996, Laboratory Manual of General Ecology, 7th ed., W. C. Brown Publishers, Dubuque, pp. 69–81.Google Scholar
  8. Croonquist, M. J. and Brooks, R. P.: 1991, 'Use of avian and mammalian guilds as indicators of cumulative impacts in riparian-wetland areas', Environ. Manag. 15, 701–714.Google Scholar
  9. Emlen, J. T.: 1974, 'An urban bird community in Tuscon, Arizona: derivation, structure, regulation', Condor 76, 184–197.Google Scholar
  10. Finch, D. M.: 1991, 'Positive associations among riparian bird species correspond to elevational changes in plant communities', Can. J. Zool. 69, 951–963.Google Scholar
  11. Francl, K. E.: 2000, 'Relationship of Human Disturbances, Bird Communities, and Plant Communities Along the Land-water Interface of a Large Reservoir', M.S. Thesis, University of Oklahoma, Norman, 45 p.Google Scholar
  12. Geis, A. D.: 1986, 'Wildlife Habitat Conservation in Columbia, Maryland and Vicinity', in K. Steinberg and W. W. Shaw (eds.), Wildlife Conservation and New Residential Developments, School of Renewable Natural Resources, University of Arizona, Tuscon, pp. 97–99.Google Scholar
  13. Goldstein, E. L., Gross, M. and Degraah, R.M.: 1986, 'Breeding birds and vegetation: A quantitative assessment', Urban Ecol. 9, 377–385.Google Scholar
  14. Havera, S. P., Boens, L. R., Georgi, M. M. and Shealy, R. T.: 1992, 'Human disturbance of waterfowl on Keokuk Pool, Mississippi River', Wildl. Soc. Bull. 20, 290–298.Google Scholar
  15. Jackson, D. A.: 1995, 'PROTEST: a PROcrustean randomization TEST of community-environment concordance', Ecoscience 2, 297–303.Google Scholar
  16. Klein, M. L.: 1993, 'Waterbird behavioral responses to human disturbances', Wildl. Soc. Bull. 21, 31–39.Google Scholar
  17. Kyrkos, A., Wilson, J. D. and Fuller, R. J.: 1998, 'Farmland habitat change and abundance of yellowhammers Emberiza citrinella: An analysis of Common Bird Census data', Bird Study 45, 232–246.Google Scholar
  18. Lancaster, R. K. and Rees,W. E.: 1979, 'Bird communities and the structure of urban habitats', Can. J. Zool. 57, 2358–2368.Google Scholar
  19. Levins, R.: 1968, Evolution in Changing Environments: Some Theoretical Explorations, Monographs in Population Biology, No. 2, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  20. Link, W.A. and Sauer, J. R.: 1998, 'Estimating population change from count data: Application to the North American Breeding Bird Survey', Ecol. Appl. 8, 258–268.Google Scholar
  21. Ludwig, J. A. and Reynolds, J. F.: 1988, Statistical Ecology: A Primer on Methods and Computing, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  22. MacArthur, R. H. and MacArthur, J. W.: 1961, 'On bird species diversity', Ecology 42, 594–598.Google Scholar
  23. Mills, G. S., Dunning, J. B. and Bates, J. M.: 1989, 'Effects of urbanization on breeding bird community structure in southwestern desert habitats', Condor 91, 416–428.Google Scholar
  24. Mills, G. S., Dunning, J. B. and Bates, J. M.: 1991, 'The relationship between breeding bird density and vegetation volume', Wilson Bull. 103, 468–479.Google Scholar
  25. Moors, A. K.: 1993, 'Towards an Avian Index of Biotic Integrity for Lakes', M.S. Thesis, University of Maine, Orono, 184 p.Google Scholar
  26. National Resources Conservation Service: 1999, 'The PLANTS database, http://plants.usda.gov.plant, National Plant Data Center, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Baton Rouge, LA.Google Scholar
  27. Norton, D. A., Hobbs, R. J. and Atkins, L.: 1995, 'Fragmentation, disturbance, and plant distributions: Mistletoes in woodland remnants in the western Australian wheatbelt', Conserv. Biol. 9, 426–438.Google Scholar
  28. O'Connor, R. J.: 1992, 'The Analysis of Geographic Scale and Population Processes in Bird Population Monitoring Data', in D. E. Hyatt, D.H. McKenzie and V. J. McDonald (eds.), Ecological Indicators, Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 929–960.Google Scholar
  29. Peterson, R. T.: 1980, A Field Guide to the Birds of Eastern and Central North America, 4th ed., Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.Google Scholar
  30. Pfister, C., Harrington, B. A. and Lavine, M.: 1992. 'The impact of human disturbance on shorebirds at a migration staging area', Biol. Conserv. 60, 115–126.Google Scholar
  31. Poole, R. W.: 1974, An Introduction to Quantitative Ecology, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Reijnen, R., Foppen, R., Ter Braak, C. and Thissen, J.: 1995, 'The effects of car traffic on breeding bird populations in woodland. III. Reduction of density in relation to the proximity of main roads', J. Appl. Ecol. 32, 187–202.Google Scholar
  33. Riffell, S. K., Gutzwiller, K. J. and Anderson, S. H.: 1996, 'Does repeated human intrusion cause cumulative declines in avian richness and abundance?', Ecol. Appl. 6, 492–505.Google Scholar
  34. Robertson, R. J. and Flood, N. J.: 1980, 'Effects of recreational use of shorelines on breeding bird populations', Can. Field-Nat. 94, 131–138.Google Scholar
  35. Rodgers, Jr., J. A. and Smith, H. T.: 1995, 'Set-back distances to protect nesting bird colonies from human disturbance', Conserv. Biol. 9, 89–99.Google Scholar
  36. Rottenborn, S. C.: 1999, 'Predicting the impacts of urbanization on riparian bird communities', Biol. Conserv. 88, 289–299.Google Scholar
  37. Snedecor, G. W.: 1956, Statistical Methods, 5th ed., Iowa State College Press, Ames, Iowa.Google Scholar
  38. SPSS, Inc.: 1998, SYSTAT version 8.0, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  39. Tazik, D. J., Warren, S. D., Diersing, V. E., Shaw, R. B., Brozka, R. J., Bagley, C. F. and Whitworth, W. R.: 1992, 'U.S. Army land condition-trend analysis (LCTA) plot inventory field methods', USACERL Technical Report N-92/03. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Champaign, IL. Google Scholar
  40. Teter, D. and McNeely, D. L.: 1995, 'Abundance and diversity of aquatic birds on two South Texas oxbow lakes', Tex. J. Sci. 47, 62–68.Google Scholar
  41. Zar, J. H.: 1999, Biostatistical Analysis, 4th ed., Prentice-Hall, Inc., New Jersey.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Zoology and Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural HistoryUniversity of Oklahoma NormanOklahomaU.S.A

Personalised recommendations