Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Birds in North American Great Lakes coastal wet meadows: is landscape context important?

  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Landscape context can influence species richness, abundance, or probability of patch-use by birds. Little is known, however, about the effects of landscape context on birds in wetland-dominated landscapes. This lack of knowledge is alarming because many wetlands are threatened by development and other human impacts, while serving critical functions as migratory, breeding and foraging habitat. To address this lack of knowledge, we censused birds in North American Great Lakes coastal wet meadows located along the northern Lake Huron shoreline in Michigan (USA) during 1997 and 1998. Using a suite of multivariate techniques, we first accounted for effects of area and within-patch habitat characteristics before testing for effects of landscape context. Most bird variables were significantly related to landscape context, and two major patterns were apparent. First, avian species richness, abundance, and probability of patch-use by some species were higher for wet meadows located in complex contexts (adjacent to many patch types) compared to simpler contexts (adjacent to only one patch type). Second, these variables were higher for wet meadows located in wetland contexts compared to contexts that were terrestrial and road-impacted, dominated by open water habitats, or dominated by forested wetland habitats. Conservation plans for wetlands have focused on saving large wetlands and creating the vegetative habitat structure required by birds, but they should go further and explicitly consider the landscape context of wetlands as well. Specifically, wetlands located in complex and/or wetland contexts should have a higher conservation value than similar wetlands located in simpler, more terrestrial contexts.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Andrén H. 1995. Effects of landscape composition on predation rates at habitat edges. In: Hansson L., Farhig L. and Merriam G. (eds), Mosaic Landscapes and Ecological Processes. Chapman and Hall, London, UK, pp. 225–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayne E.R. and Hobson K.A. 1997. Comparing the effects of land-scape fragmentation by forestry and agriculture on predation of artificial nests. Conservation Biology 11: 1418–1429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedford K.W. 1992. The physical effects of the Great Lakes on tributaries and wetlands. Journal of Great Lakes Research 18: 571–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergin T.M., Best L.B. and Freemark E.K. 1997. An experimental study of predation on artificial nests in roadsides adjacent to agricultural habitats in Iowa. Wilson Bulletin 109: 437–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair R.B. 1996. Landuse and avian species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecological Applications 6: 506–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloutin C. and Jobin B. 1998. Intensity of agricultural practices and effects on adjacent habitats. Ecological Applications 8: 544–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock C.E., Bock J.H. and Bennett C.B. 1999. Songbird abundance in grasslands at a suburban interface on the Colorado high plains. Studies in Avian Biology 19: 131–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolger D.T., Scott T.A. and Rotenberry T.J. 1997. Breeding bird abundance in an urbanizing landscape in coastal southern Cali-fornia. Conservation Biology 11: 406–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers M.A. and Breland B. 1996. Foraging of gray squirrels on and urban-rural gradient: use of the GUD to assess anthropo-genic impact. Ecological Applications 6: 1135–1142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer R., McPeek G.A. and Adams J.R. 1991. The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Michigan. Michigan State University Press, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown M. and Dinsmore J.J. 1986. Implications of marsh size and isolation for marsh bird management. Journal of Wildlife Man-agement 50: 392–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown M. and Dinsmore J.J. 1991. Area-dependent changes in bird densities in Iowa marshes. Journal of the Iowa Academy of Sciences 98: 124–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calme S. and Desrochers A. 2000. Biogeographic aspects of the distribution of bird species breeding in Quebec's peatlands. Journal of Biogeography 27: 725–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cam E., Nichols J.D., Sauer J.R., Hines J.E. and Flather H.C. 2000. Relative species richness and community completeness: birds and urbanization in the mid-Atlantic states. Ecological Applications 10: 1196–1210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantero J.J., Partel M. and Zobel M. 1999. Is species richness de-pendent on the neighboring stands? An analysis of the commu-nity patterns in mountain grasslands of central Argentina. Oikos 87: 346–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig R.J. and Beal G.K. 1992. The influence of habitat variables on marsh bird communities of the Connecticut River estuary. Wilson Bulletin 104: 295–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Draper N.R. and Smith H. 1981. Applied Regression Analysis. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld J.G. and Schneider P.J. 1990. The response of Atlantic white cedar wetlands to varying levels of disturbance from sub-urban development in the New Jersey Pinelands. In: Wingham D.F., Good R.E. and Kvet J. (eds), Wetland Ecology and Man-agement: Case Studies. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dor-drecht, The Netherlands, pp. 63–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estades C.F. and Temple S.A. 1999. Deciduous-forest bird com-munities in a fragmented landscape dominated by exotic pine plantations. Ecological Applications 9: 573–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairbairn S.E. and Dinsmore J.J. 2001. Local and landscape-level influences on wetland bird communities of the prairie pothole region of Iowa, USA. Wetlands 21: 41–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forman R.T.T. 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge University Press, New York, New York, USA.

  • Forys E. and Humphrey S.R. 1999. The importance of patch at-tributes and context to the management and recovery of an en-dangered lagomorph. Landscape Ecology 14: 177–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freemark K.E., Dunning J.B., Hejl S.J. and Probst J.R. 1995. A landscape ecology perspective for research, conservation and management. In: Martin T.E. and Finch D.M. (eds), Ecology and Management of Neotropical Migrant Birds. Oxford Uni-versity Press, New York, New York, USA, pp. 381–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friesen L.E., Eagles P.F. and MacKay R.J. 1995. Effects of residential development on forest-dwelling Neotropical migrant songbirds. Conservation Biology 9: 1408–1414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gathman J.P., Burton T.M. and Armitage B.J. 1999. Coastal wet-lands of the upper great lakes: distribution of invertebrate com-munities in response to environmental variation. In: Batzer D.P., Rader R.B. and Wissinger S.A. (eds), Invertebrates in Freshwater Wetlands of North America. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA, pp. 949–1013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs J.P. and Melvin S.M. 1993. Call-response surveys for moni-toring breeding waterbirds. Journal of Wildlife Management 57: 27–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grover A.M. and Baldassare G.A. 1995. Bird species richness within beaver ponds in south-central New York. Wetlands 15: 108–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutzwiller K.J. and Anderson S.H. 1987. Multi-scale associations between cavity-nesting birds and features of Wyoming stream-side woodlands. Condor 89: 534–548.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutzwiller K.J. and Barrow W.C. 2001. Bird-landscape relations in the Chihauhaun Desert: coping with uncertainties about predic-tive models. Ecological Applications 11: 1517–1532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helzer C.J. and Jelinski D.E. 1999. The relative importance of patch area and perimeter-area ratio to grassland breeding birds. Ecological Applications 9: 1448–1458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herkert J.R. 1994. The effects of habitat fragmentation on midwest-ern grassland bird communities. Ecological Applications 4: 461–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holm S. 1979. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test proce-dure. Scandanavian Journal of Statistics 6: 65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer D.W. and Lemeshow S. 1989. Applied Logistic Regres-sion. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jobin B. and Picman J. 1997. Factors affecting predation on artifi-cial nests in marshes. Journal of Wildlife Management 61: 792–800.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaldec J.A. and Smith M.L. 1992. Habitat management for breeding areas. In: Batt B.D.J., Afton A.D., Anderson M.G., Ankney C.D., Johnson D.H., Kaldec J.A. et al. (eds), Ecology and Management of Breeding Waterfowl. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, pp. 590–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keough J.R., Thompson T.A., Gunterspergen G.R. and Wilcox D.A. 1999. Hydrogeomorphic factors and ecosystem responses in coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes. Wetlands 19: 821–834.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis D.B. and Magnuson J.J. 2000. Landscape spatial patterns in freshwater snail assemblages across Northern Highland catch-ments. Freshwater Biology 43: 409–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J. and Ashton P.S. 1999. Simulating effects of landscape con-text and timber harvest on tree species diversity. Ecological Applications 9: 186–201.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Minc L.D. and Albert D.A. 1998. Great Lakes coastal wetlands: abiotic and floristic characterization. Michigan Natural Features Inventory Report., Lansing, Michigan, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller R.G. Jr 1981. Simultaneous Statistical Inference. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch W.J. and Gosselink J.G. 1993. Wetlands. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch W.J. and Gosselink J.G. 2000. The value of wetlands: im-portance of scale and landscape setting. Ecological Economics 35: 25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison M.L., Marcot B.G. and Mannan R.W. 1998. Wildlife-Habitat Relationships: Concepts and Applications. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers R.H. 1989. Classical and Modern Regression with Applications. PWS-Kent Publishing Company, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naugle D.E., Higgins K.F., Nusser S.M. and Johnson W.C. 1999. Scale-dependent habitat use in three species of prairie wetland birds. Landscape Ecology 14: 267–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orians G.H. 1980. Some Adaptations of Marsh-Nesting Blackbirds. Monographs in population biology # 14. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton P.W.C. 1994. The effect of edge on avian nest success: how strong is the evidence? Conservation Biology 8: 17–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson S.M. 1993. The spatial extent and relative influence of landscape-level factors on wintering bird populations. Landscape Ecology 8: 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Picman J., Milks M.M. and Leptich M. 1993. Patterns of predation on passerine nests in marshes: effects of water depth and distance from edge, Auk 110: 89–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prince H.H. and Flegel C.S. 1995. Breeding avifauna of Lake Huron. In: Munawar M., Edsall T. and Leach J. (eds), The Lake Huron Ecosystem: Ecology, Fisheries and Management. SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 247–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prince H.H., Padding P.I. and Knapton R.W. 1992. Waterfowl use of the Laurentian Great Lakes. Journal of Great Lakes Research 18: 673–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahbek C. 1997. The relationship among area elevation and re-gional species richness in neotropical birds. American Naturalist 149: 875–902.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ralph C.J., Sauer J.R. and Droege S. [Technical eds.] 1995. Moni-toring bird populations by point counts. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-149. USDA Forest Serv. Sta. Pac. Southwest Res., Albany, California, USA.

  • Rencher A.C. 1992. Interpretation of canonical discriminant func-tions canonical variates and principal components. The American Statistician 46: 217–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice W.R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43: 223–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riffell S.K. 2000. The effects of landscape context and coastline complexity on birds in Great Lakes coastal wet meadows. Dissertation, Michigan State University, E. Lansing, Michigan, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riffell S.K., Keas B.E. and Burton T.M. 2001. Area-and habitat-relationships of birds in Great Lakes coastal wet meadows. Wetlands 21: 492–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risch S.J., Andow D. and Altieri M.A. 1983. Agroecosystem di-versity and pest control: data tentative conclusions and new re-search direction. Environmental Entomology 12: 625–629.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins C.S. 1981. Bird activity levels related to weather. Studies in Avian Biology 6: 301–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotenberry J.T. and Wiens J.A. 1980. Habitat structure patchiness and avian communities in North American steppe vegetation: a multivariate analysis. Ecology 61: 1228–1250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saab V.A. 1999. Importance of spatial scale to habitat use by breed-ing birds in riparian forests: a hierarchical analysis. Ecological Applications 9: 135–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc. 1989. SAS/STAT User's Guide, version 6. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc 1997. SAS/STAT Software: Changes and En-hancements through Release 6.12. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, North Carolina, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sisk T.D., Haddad N.M. and Erlich P.R. 1997. Bird assemblages in patchy woodlands: modeling the effects of edge and matrix habitats. Ecological Applications 7: 1170–1180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skagen S.K. and Knopf F.L. 1994. Migrating shorebirds and habitat dynamics at a prairie wetland complex. Wilson Bulletin 106: 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szaro R.C. and Jackle M.D. 1985. Avian use of a desert riparian island and its adjacent scrub habitat. Condor 87: 511–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor P.D., Fahrig L., Henein K. and Merriam H.G. 1993. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68: 571–573.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terres J.K. 1980. The Audubon Society encyclopedia of North American Birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson F.R. and Schwalbach M.J. 1995. Analysis of sample size counting time and plot size from an avian point count survey on Hoosier National Forest Indiana. In: Ralph C.J., Sauer J.R. and Droege S. (eds), Monitoring Bird Populations by Point Counts Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-149. USDA Forest Serv. Pac. Southwest Res. Sta., Albany, California, USA, pp. 45–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilton D.L. and Schwegler B.R. 1978. The values of wetland habitat in the Great Lakes basin. In: Greeson P.E., Clark J.R. and Clark J.E. (eds), Wetland Function and Values: The State of our Understanding. American Water Resources Association, Min-neapolis, Minnesota, USA, pp. 267–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trexler J.C. and Travis J. 1993. Nontraditional regression analysis. Ecology 74: 1629–1637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verner J. and Willson M.F. 1966. The influence of habitats on mat-ing systems of North American passerine birds. Ecology 47: 143–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickery P.D., Hunter M.L. and Melvin S.M. 1994. Effects of habitat area on the distribution of grassland birds in Maine. Con-servation Biology 8: 1087–1097.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vickery P.D., Tubaro P.L., Cardoso da Silva J.M., Peterjohn B.G., Herkert J.R. and Cavalcanti R.B. 1999. Conservation of grass-land birds in the western hemishpere. Studies in Avian Biology 19: 2–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villard M.A., Trzcinski M.K. and Merriam G. 1999. Fragmenta-tion effects on forest birds: relative influence of woodland cover and configuration on landscape occupancy. Conservation Biology 13: 774–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb N.R. and Hopkins P.J. 1984. Invertebrate diversity on a fragmented Calluna heathland. Journal of Applied Ecology 21: 921–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weller M.W. 1999. Wetland Birds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westfall P.H., Tobias R.D., Rom D., Wolfinger R.D. and Hochberg Y. 1999. Multiple Comparisons and Multiple Tests using the SAS System. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, North Carolina, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westmoreland D. and Best L.B. 1985. The effect of disturbance on Mourning Dove nesting success. Auk 102: 774–780.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox D.A. 1995. The role of wetlands as nearshore habitat in Lake Huron. In: Munawar M., Edsall T. and Leachm J. (eds), The Lake Huron Ecosystem: Ecology Fisheries and Management. SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 223–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zedler J.B. 2000. Progress in wetland restoration ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15: 402–407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 48824, USA

    Samuel K. Riffell, Brian E. Keas & Thomas M. Burton

  2. Center for Integrative Studies – General Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 48824, USA

    Samuel K. Riffell

  3. Department of Biological Sciences, Ohio Northern University, Ada, 45810, USA

    Brian E. Keas

  4. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 48824, USA

    Thomas M. Burton

Authors
  1. Samuel K. Riffell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brian E. Keas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas M. Burton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Riffell, S.K., Keas, B.E. & Burton, T.M. Birds in North American Great Lakes coastal wet meadows: is landscape context important?. Landscape Ecology 18, 95–111 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024411218155

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024411218155

Search

Navigation