Settlement of breeding European Starlings in urban areas: Importance of lawns vs. anthropogenic wastes

  • Gwénaëlle Mennechez
  • Philippe Clergeau

Abstract

We examined shifts in the feeding habits of European Starlings along an urban-rural gradient in northwestern France by comparing the diet of nestlings in three habitats: urban, suburban and rural areas. We sampled 99 broods using the neck-collar method. Broods were adjusted to four nestlings each to exclude brood size effects on diet. We have previously shown that parents foraged within 800 m from the nest in each habitat. In all three habitats, most food items brought to nestlings were invertebrates living on and in the ground or on low vegetation. However, diet composition changed along the urbanization gradient: (1) During first nest attempts nestlings reared in the urban area received less Lepidoptera and more Coleoptera than those located in the rural area; (2) Urban and suburban nestlings received less animal food than rural nestlings and more plant food and human refuse; (3) Diet varied with nest attempt and with nestling age. We conclude that, in towns, European Starlings feeding nestlings depend heavily on grasslands despite their ability to use human refuse. We suggest that recent urban planning in France, which encourages lawn plantings, may, in part, explain the increase of urban starling populations.

Key words

Diet European Starling France nestling Sturnus vulgaris urban ecology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, L. W. 1994. Urban wildlife habitat: a landscape perspective. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis Press.Google Scholar
  2. Beissinger, S. R., and D.R. Osborne. 1982. Effects of urbanization on avian community organization. Condor 84: 75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biermann, G.C., and S.G. Sealy. 1982. Parental feeding of nestlings Yellow Warblers in relation to brood size and prey availability. Auk 99: 332–341.Google Scholar
  4. Bogucki, Z. 1974. Studies on the diet of Starling nestlings. Acta. Zool. Crac. 19: 357–390.Google Scholar
  5. Brousseau, P., J. Lefebvre, and J. F. Giroux. 1996. Diet of Ring-billed Gull chicks in urban and non-urban colonies in Quebec. Colonial Waterbirds 19: 22–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clergeau, P. 1980. Fréquentation ďune décharge ďordures menageres de Rennes par ľavifaune. Penn ar Bed 12: 297–312.Google Scholar
  7. Clergeau, P. 1981. Comportements liés à l’alimentation de l’Etourneau Stumus vulgaris en Bretagne; rôle joué par certaines variables environnementales et sociales. Thèse de doctorat, université de Rennes.Google Scholar
  8. Clergeau, P. 1985. Production en jeunes et croissance chez ľétourneau Stumus vulgaris en Bretagne. Caractéristiques bretonnes et signification écologique. Acta Oecol. 6: 135–159.Google Scholar
  9. Clergeau, P. 1994. L’Etourneau Sansonnet, p. 670–673. In D.Yeatman-Berthelot and G. Jarry [EDS.], Nouvel atlas des oiseaux nicheurs de France, Paris.Google Scholar
  10. Clergeau, P., G. Mennechez, A. Sauvage, and A. Lemoine. 2001. Human perception and appreciation of birds: A motivation for wildlife conservation in urban environments in France, p. 69–88. In J. M. Marzluff, R. Bowman, and R. Donnelly [EDS.], Avian ecology and conservation in an urbanizing world. Kluwer Academic, Norwell, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clergeau, P., J. P. Savard, G. Mennechez, and G. Falardeau. 1998. Bird abundance and diversity along an urban-rural gradient: a comparative study between two cities on different continents. Condor 100: 413–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cowie, R. J. 1988. Feeding ecology of Great Tits (Parus major) and Blue Tits (Parus caeruleus), breeding in suburban gardens. J. Anim. Ecol. 57: 611–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cramp, S., and C. M. Perrins. 1994. Birds of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, p. 228–269. In The birds of the Western Paleartic, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  14. Diamond, J. M. 1986. Rapid evolution of urban birds. Nature 324: 107–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunnet, G. M. 1955. The breeding of the Starling Stumus vulgaris in relation to its food supply. Ibis 97: 619–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Erz, W. 1966. Ecological principles in the urbanization of birds. Ostrich suppl. 6: 358–363.Google Scholar
  17. Feare, C. J. 1984. The Starling. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  18. Feare, C.J., and N. MacGinnity 1986. The relative importance of invertebrates and barley in the diet of Starlings Stumus vulgaris. Bird Study 33: 164–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gilbert, L. O. 1989. The ecology of urban habitats. Chapman and Hall, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gromadzka, J., and M. Luniak. 1978. Food composition of the Starling nestlings, Sturnus vulgaris L., in Warsaw. Acta Orn. 16: 275–284.Google Scholar
  21. Gromadzki, M. 1969. Composition of food of the starling, Sturnus vulgaris L., in agrocenoses. Ekol. Pol. 17: 287–310.Google Scholar
  22. Havlin, J., and C. Folk 1965. Food and economic importance of the Starling, Sturnus vulgaris. L. Zool. Listy 14: 193–208.Google Scholar
  23. Henry, C. 1982. Etude du regime alimentaire des passereaux par la méthode des colliers. Alauda 50: 92–107.Google Scholar
  24. Jongman, R. H. G., C. J. F. Ter Braak, and O. F. R Tongeren. 1995. Data analysis in community and landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kluijver, H. N. 1933. Contribution to the biology and the ecology of the Starling (Sturnus vulgaris vulgaris L.) during its reproductive period. Versl. PIZiekt. Dienst Wageningen 69: 1–145.Google Scholar
  26. Madon, M. 1930. L’étourneau et son régime. Alauda 11: 283–317.Google Scholar
  27. Mennechez G. 1999. Urbanisation et espèces habitats-généralistes: biologie comparée de ľEtourneau Sturnus vulgaris lors de la période de reproduction sur un gradient rural-urbain. Thèse de doctorat, université de Rennes.Google Scholar
  28. Mills, G. S., J. B. Dunning, and J. M. Bates 1989. Effects of urbanization on breeding bird community structure in southwestern desert habitat. Condor 91: 416–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pierotti, R., and C. Annett. 2001. The ecology of Western Gulls in habitats varying in degree of urban influence, p. 309–331. In J. M. Marzluff, R. Bowman, and R. Donnelly [EDS.], Avian ecology and conservation in an urbanizing world. Kluwer Academic, Norwell, MA.Google Scholar
  30. Ricou G. 1967. Etude biocénotique d’un milieu naturel, la prairie permanent pâturée. Thèse de doctorat, INRA — Université de Paris.Google Scholar
  31. Shnack, S. 1991. The breeding biology and nestling diet of the Blackbirds Turdus merula L. and the Song Trush Turdus philomelos in Vienna and in an adjacent wood. Acta Orn. 26: 85–106.Google Scholar
  32. Statview. 1992. Abacus Concept, Inc, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  33. Taitt, M. J. 1973. Winter food and feeding requirements of the Starling. Bird Study 20: 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tatner P. 1983. The diet of urban Magpies Pica pica. Ibis 125: 90–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tinbergen J. M. 1981. Foraging decisions in Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris L.). Ardea 69: 1–67.Google Scholar
  36. Yaldon, D. W. 1980. Notes on the diet of urban Kestrel. Bird Study 27: 235–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Whitehead, S. C., J. Wright, and P. A. Cotton. 1995. Winter field use by the European Starling Sturnus vulgaris: habitat preferences and the availability of prey. J. Avian Biol. 26: 193–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gwénaëlle Mennechez
    • 1
  • Philippe Clergeau
    • 2
  1. 1.UMR CNRS 6553 « Ecobio »CNRS-Université Rennes1Rennes cedexFrance
  2. 2.INRA Faune sauvage & UMR CNRS 6553 « Ecobio »Rennes cedexFrance

Personalised recommendations