Two basic concepts of guild definition were developed in community ecology that enable simplification of complex communities or ecosystems into structural building blocks of species with similar niches. Root defined guild as a group of species utilising the same environmental resources by a similar foraging method. MacMahon et al. simplified the original definition even more by excluding a foraging method. This concept is focused on utilisation patterns of resources by species regardless the purpose of use. Our objectives were: (1) to test guild structure within a model ecosystem from matrices reflecting the differences between the two concepts, (2) to compare guild patterns detected by the two concepts, (3) to test whether the mixed forest ecosystem consists of significantly different groups of species representing deciduous and coniferous faunal elements. The study was conducted in a primeval beech-fir forest in NW Slovakia during 1997–2000. In total, 26 bird species were used for further numerical analyses. Two data matrices were constructed reflecting the differences between the two guild concepts. To statistically determine guild structure without arbitrary fusion criteria, a bootstrapped cluster analysis (UPGMA) of chord distances was employed to analyse the data matrices. Symmetric correspondence analysis (CA) was applied for extraction of eigenvectors responsible for the segregation of species into guilds. The classification proposed by Root produced two guild models at the levels of 6 or 9 group partitions at α = 0.10, while the classification following MacMahon et al. detected 7 guild types. The guild structures based on the two concepts were significantly different when tested by two-tailed Wilcoxon paired sample tests and the Monte Carlo among-cluster error sum of squares (SSQ) distance simulation test. Six out of the eight interpretable factors (75%) indicated analogous environmental gradients when comparing two CA ordinations. The most important environmental gradients were: (1) vertical foraging substrate — habitat structure, (2) water — terrestrial foraging substrate gradient, (3) spatial tree morphology, (4) terrestrial foraging substrate gradient, (5) arboreal — airspace gradient, and (6) mountain stream environmental gradient. We did not detect significantly different guilds for generalists and for coniferous and deciduous forest specialists.
Adamík, P. and M. Korňan. 2004. Foraging ecology of two bark foraging passerine birds in an old-growth temperate forest. Ornis Fenn. 81:13–22.
Adamík, P., M. Korňan and J. Vojtek 2003. The effect of habitat structure on guild patterns and the foraging strategies of insectivorous birds in forests. Biologia, Bratislava 58:275–286.
Adams, J. 1985. The definition and interpretation of guild structure in ecological communities. J. Anim. Ecol. 54:43–59.
Alatalo, R.V. 1982. Multidimensional foraging niche organization of foliage-gleaning birds in northern Finland. Ornis Scand. 13:56–71.
Alatalo, R.V., L. Gustafsson, M. Lindén and A. Lundberg. 1985. Interspecific competition and niche shifts in tits and the goldcrest: an experiment. J. Anim. Ecol. 54:977–984.
Alatalo, R.V. and J. Moreno. 1987. Body size, interspecific interactions, and use of foraging sites in tits (Paridae). Ecology 68:1773–1777.
Blondel, J. 2003. Guilds or functional groups: does it matter? Oikos 100:223–231.
Brandl, R., A. Krištín and B. Leisler. 1994. Dietary niche breadth in a local community of passerine birds: an analysis using phylogenetic contrasts. Oecologia 98:109–116.
Brennan, L.A. and M.L. Morrison. 1990. Influence of sample size on interpretations of foraging patterns by Chestnut-backed Chickadees. Stud. in Avian. Biol. 13:187–192.
Cody, M.L. 2000. Antbird guilds in the lowland Carribbean rainforest of souteast Nicaragua. Condor 102:784–794.
Cummins, K.W. 1974. Structure and function of stream ecosystems. Bioscience 24:631–641.
Connor, E.F. and D. Simberloff. 1979. The assemblyof species communities: chance or competition? Ecology 60:1132–1140.
Cornell, H.V. and D.M. Kahn. 1989. Guild structure in the British arboreal arthropods: is it stable and predictable? J. Anim. Ecol. 58:1003–1020.
Cooper, R.J., P.J. Martinat and R.C. Whitmore. 1990. Dietary similarity among insectivorous birds: influence of taxonomic versus ecological categorization of prey. Stud. in Avian. Biol. 13:104–109.
Diamond, J.M. 1975. Assembly of species communities. In: Cody, M.L. and J.M. Diamond (eds), Ecology and Evolution of Communities. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, pp. 342–444.
Drake, J.A. 1990. Communities as assembled structures: do rules govern pattern? Trend. Ecol. Evol. 5:159–164.
Eckhardt, R.C. 1979. The adaptive syndromes of two guildsof insectivorous birds in the Colorado Rocky Mountains. Ecol. Monogr. 49:129–149.
Ford, H.A., L. Bridges and S. Noske. 1990. Interobserver differences in recording foraging behavior of Fuscous Honeyeaters. Stud. in Avian Biol. 13:199–201.
Gauch, H.G., Jr., R.H. Whittaker and T.R. Wentworth. 1977. A comparative study of reciprocal averaging and other ordination techniques. J. Ecol. 65:157–174.
Giannini, N.P. and E.K.V. Kalko 2004. Trophic structure in a large assemblage of phyllostomid bats in Panama. Oikos 105: 209–220.
Gilpin, M.E. and J.M. Diamond. 1982. Factor contributing to nonrandomness in species co-occurrences on islands. Oecologia 52:75–84.
Gotelli, N.J. 2000. Null model analysis of species co-occurrence patterns. Ecology 81:2606–2621.
Hairston, N.G. 1981. An experimental test of a guild: salamander competition. Ecology 62:65–72.
Hejl, S.J. and J. Verner. 1990. Within-season and yearly variations in foraging locations. Stud. in Avian Biol. 13:202–209.
Hintze, J.L. 1997. NCSS ’97. User’s guide. Kaysville.
Holmes, R.T., R.E. Bonney, Jr. and S.W. Pacala. 1979. Guild structure of the Hubbard Brook bird community: a multivariate approach. Ecology 60:512–520.
Holmes, R.T. and H.F. Recher. 1986. Determinants ofguild structure in forest bird communities: an intercontinental comparison. Condor 88:427–439.
Hutchinson, G.E. 1957. Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 22:415–427.
Inger, R.F. and R.K. Colwell. 1977. Organization of contiguous communities of amphibians and reptiles in Thailand. Ecol. Monogr. 47:229–253.
Jackson, D.A. 1997. Compositional data in community ecology: the paradigm or peril of proportions? Ecology 78:929–940.
Jaksic, F.M. 1981. Abuse and misuse of the term “guild” in ecological studies. Oikos 37:397–400.
Jaksic, F.M. and R.G. Medel. 1990. Objective recognition of guilds: testing for statistically significant species clusters. Oecologia 82:87–92.
Jaksić, F.M., P. Feinsinger and J.E. Jiménez. 1993. A long-term study on the dynamics of guild structure among predatory vertebrates at a semi-arid Neotropical site. Oikos 67:87–96.
Jongman, R.H.G., C.J.F. Ter Braak and O.F.R. VanTongeren. 1997. Data Analysis in Community and Landscape Ecology. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
Keane, J.J. andM.L. Morrison. 1999. Temporal variation in resource use by Black-throated Gray Warblers. Condor 101:67–75.
Korňan, M. 1996. Analyses of Lowland Forest Bird Communities in Slovakia and Effect of Migratory Guilds on Forming Forest Bird Community Structure in an Elevational Gradient. M.Sc. thesis, Faculty of Sciences of Comenius University, Bratislava.
Korňan, M. 2000. Interspecific foraging substrate preferences among flycatchers in a primeval mixed forest (Šrámková National Nature Reserve). Oecologia Montana 9:36–43.
Korňan, M. 2004a. Structure of the breeding bird assemblage of a primaeval beech-fir forest in the Šrámková National Nature Reserve, the Malá Fatra Mts. Biologia, Bratislava 59:219–231.
Korňan, M. 2004b. Structure of Bird Foraging Guilds and Resource Partitioning in a Primaeval Beech-fir Forest. PhD dissertation, Faculty of Sciences of Comenius University, Bratislava.
Korňan, M. 2005. Concept of structural and functional organization of communities: guilds and functional groups. Biological papers 70:81–106.
Krištín, A. 1992. Trophische beziehungen zwischen singvögeln und wirbellosen im eichen-buchenwald zur brutzeit. Orn. Beob. 89:157–169.
Landres, P.B. and J.A. MacMahon. 1983. Community organization of arboreal birds in some oak woodlands of western North America. Ecol. Monogr. 53:183–208.
Lawlor, L.R. 1980. Structure and stability in natural and randomly constructed competitive communities. Am. Nat. 116:394–408.
Legendre, L. and P. Legendre. 1983. Numerical Ecology. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam.
Lincoln, R., R. Boxshall and P. Clark. 1998. A Dictionary of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
MacFadyen, A. 1957. Animal ecology: Aims and Methods. Pitman and Sons, London.
MacMahon, J.A., D.J. Schimpf, D.C. Andersen, K.G. Smith and R.L. Bayn, Jr. 1981. An organism-centered approach to some community and ecosystem concepts. J. Theor. Biol. 29:287–307.
Mac Nally, R.C. 1983. On assessing the significance of interspecific competition to guild structure. Ecology 64:1646–1652.
Mac Nally, R.C. 1994. Habitat-specific guild structure of forest birds in south-eastern Australia: a regional scale perspective. J. Anim. Ecol. 63:988–1001.
Marhold, K. and F. Hindák. (eds) 1998. Checklist of Non-vascular and Vascular Plants of Slovakia. Veda, Bratislava.
Mitchell, M. 1997. An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms. MIT Press, Cambridge.
Moreno, E. and L.M. Carrascal. 1993. Leg morphology and feeding postures in four Parus species: an experimental ecomorphological approach. Ecology 74:2037–2044.
Muñoz, A.A. and F.P. Ojeda. 1998. Guild structure of carnivorous intertidal fishes of the Chilean coast: implications of ontogenetic dietary shifts. Oecologia 114:563–573.
Noon, B.R. 1981. Techniques for mapping avian habitats. In: Copen, D.E. (ed), The Use of Multivariate Statistics in Studies of Wildlife Habitat. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM–87, Fort Collins. pp. 42–49.
Pillar, V.D. 1999. How sharp are classifications? Ecology 80:2508–2516.
Pillar, V.D. 2004. MULTIV – Multivariate Exploratory Analysis, Randomization Testing and Bootstrap Resampling. User’s guide v.2.3.9. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Pianka, E.R. 1988. Evolutionary Ecology. Harper and Row, New York.
Podani, J. 1997. SYN-TAX 5.10-pc. Supplement to the User’s Manual. Scientia Publishing, Budapest.
Podani, J. 2000. Simulation of random dendrograms and comparison tests: some comments. J. Classif. 17:123–142.
Podani, J. and T. A. Dickinson. 1985. Comparison of dendrograms: a multivariate approach. Can. J. Bot. 62:2765–2778.
Remsen, J.V.,Jr. and S.K. Robinson. 1990. A classification scheme for foraging behaviour of birds in terrestrial habitats. Stud. in Avian Biol. 13:144–160.
Rohlf, F.J. 1974. Methods of comparing classifications. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5:101–113.
Root, R.B. 1967. The niche exploitation pattern of the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher. Ecol. Monogr. 37:317–350.
Sabo, S.R. 1980. Niche and habitat relations in subalpine bird communities of the White Mountains of New Hampshire. Ecol. Monogr. 50:241–259.
Schoener, T.W. 1974. Resource partitioning in ecological communities. Science 185:27–39.
Simberloff, D. and T. Dayan. 1991. The guild concept and the structure of ecological communities. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 22:115–143.
Snow, D.W. and C.M. Perrins. 1998. Birds of the Western Palearctic. Concise Edition. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
Strauss, R.E. 1982. Statistical significance of species clusters in association analysis. Ecology 63:634–639.
Suhonen, J., M. Halonen and T. Mappes. 1993. Predation risk and the organization of the Parus guild. Oikos 66:94–100.
Székely, T. and C. Moskát. 1991. Guild structure and seasonal changes in foraging behaviour of birds in a Central-European oak forest. Ornis Hungarica 1:10–28.
Tebbich, S., M. Taborsky, B. Fessl, M. Dvorak and H. Winkler. 2004. Feeding behaviour of four arboreal Darwin’s finches: adaptations to spatial and seasonal variability. Condor 106:95–106.
Ulfstrand, S. 1976. Feeding niches of some passerine birds in a South Swedish coniferous plantation in winter and summer. Ornis Scand. 7:21–27.
Vološčuk, I. 1986. The forest vegetation of the State Nature Reserve Šrámková. Ochrana prírody 7:237–251.
Wagner, J.L. 1980. Seasonal change in guild structure: oak woodland insektivorous birds. Ecology 62:973–981.
Wiens, J.A. 1989. The Ecology of Bird Communities. Vol. I. Foundations and Patterns. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
Winemiller, K.O. and E.R. Pianka. 1990. Organization in natural assemblages of desert lizards and tropical fishes. Ecol. Monogr. 60:27–55.
Wilson, J.B. 1999. Guilds, functional types and ecological groups. Oikos 86:507–522.
Wilson, J.B. and Roxburgh. 1994. A demonstration of guild-based assembly rules for a plant community, and determination of intrinsic guilds. Oikos 69:267–276.
Wilson, J.B., R.B. Allen and W.G. Lee. 1995a. An assembly rule in the ground and herbaceous strata of a New Zealand rainforest. Funct. Ecol 9: 61–64.
Wilson, J.B., M.T. Sykes and R.K. Peet. 1995b. Time and space in the community structure of a species-rich grassland. J. Veg. Sci. 6:729–740.
Wilson, J.B., J.B. Steel, J.E. Newman and R.S.Tangney. 1995c. Are bryophyte communities different? J. Bryol. 18:689–705.
Wilson, J.B. and H. Gitay. 1999. Alternative classifications in the intrinsic guild structure of a New Zealand tussock grassland. Oikos 86:566–572.
About this article
Cite this article
Korňan, M., Adamík, P. Foraging guild structure within a primaeval mixed forest bird assemblage: a comparison of two concepts. COMMUNITY ECOLOGY 8, 133–149 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.8.2007.2.1
- A posteriori approach
- Bootstrap testing
- Cluster analysis
- Generalist species
- Guild concepts
- Specialist species
- Šrámková National Nature Reserve