Skip to main content
Log in

Asymmetric seasonal nest site competition between Great Tits and House Sparrows

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Ornithology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using nest boxes with different sized entrances, we experimentally examined whether a large species of cavity breeder (House Sparrow, Passer domesticus) affects the nest box occupancy and breeding success of a smaller species (Great Tit, Parus major), and whether there are differences in the effects of competition during different parts of the breeding season. Great Tits occupied nest boxes regardless of the number of House Sparrows breeding in the vicinity. During the second part of the breeding season, the percentage of successful Great Tit pairs was negatively correlated with the occupation of nest boxes by the House Sparrows, in both the large- and small-entrance nest boxes. More Great Tit pairs bred and more young were fledged in the small- than large-entrance nest boxes. Great Tits occupied more large-entrance nest boxes during the first than the second part of the breeding season. This difference was probably due to House Sparrows occupying more large-entrance nest boxes during the second than first part of the breeding season. 74 % of the large-entrance nest boxes in which Great Tits built nests in both the first and second parts of the season were later occupied by House Sparrows. Great Tits preferred large-entrance nest boxes in the fall, when House Sparrows use only a few boxes for roosting, but not for breeding. The findings indicate that Great Tits are subject to interspecific competition with House Sparrows for nesting cavities, the intensity of which varies during the breeding season and is higher during the second part when more House Sparrows breed.

Zusammenfassung

Asymmetrische saisonale Nistplatzkonkurrenz zwischen Kohlmeise Parus major und Haussperling Passer domesticus

Mit Hilfe von Nistkästen mit unterschiedlich großen Öffnungen untersuchten wir experimentell, ob eine große höhlenbrütende Art (Haussperling, Passer domesticus) die Besetzung von Nistkästen durch eine kleinere höhlenbrütende Art (Kohlmeise, Parus major) und deren Bruterfolg beeinflusst und ob es Unterschiede in den Effekten der Konkurrenz zu verschiedenen Zeiten der Brutsaison gibt. Kohlmeisen besetzten Nistkästen unabhängig von der Zahl der in der Nähe brütenden Haussperlinge. Während des zweiten Teils der Brutsaison war der Anteil von erfolgreichen Kohlmeisen-Paaren negativ korreliert mit der Besetzung von Nistkästen durch den Haussperling, und zwar sowohl in Nistkästen mit großen als auch kleinen Eingangsöffnungen. In den Nistkästen mit kleinen Eingangsöffnungen brüteten mehr Kohlmeisenpaare und mehr Jungvögel wurden flügge als in den Kästen mit großer Eingangsöffnung. Kohlmeisen besetzten im ersten Teil der Brutsaison mehr Nistkästen mit großer Eingangsöffnung als im zweiten Teil. Dieser Unterschied kam wahrscheinlich dadurch zustande, dass Haussperlinge im zweiten Teil der Brutsaison mehr Nistkästen mit großer Eingangsöffnung besetzten als im ersten. 74 % der Nistkästen mit großer Eingangsöffnung, in denen Kohlmeisen sowohl im ersten als auch zweiten Teil der Brutsaison nisteten, wurden später von Haussperlingen besetzt. Kohlmeisen bevorzugten im Herbst Nistkästen mit großer Eingangsöffnung, wenn Haussperlinge nur wenige Kästen zum schlafen nutzen, aber nicht zum brüten. Die Ergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass Kohlmeisen mit Haussperlingen in einer interspezifischen Konkurrenz um Bruthöhlen stehen, deren Intensität sich im Verlauf der Brutsaison ändert und im zweiten Teil größer ist, wenn mehr Haussperlinge brüten.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barba E, Gil-Delgado JA (1990) Competition for nest-boxes among four vertebrate species: an experimental study in orange groves. Ecography 13:183–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair RB (1996) Land use and avian species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecol Appl 6:506–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanc L, Walter JR (2008) Cavity nest-webs in a longleaf pine ecosystem. Condor 110:80–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanc L, Walters JR (2007) Cavity-nesting community webs as predictive tools: where do we go from here? J Ornithol 148:417–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cam E, Nichols JD, Sauer JR, Hines JE, Flather CH (2000) Relative species richness and community completeness: birds and urbanization in the mid-Atlantic states. Ecol Appl 10:1196–1210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain DE, Toms MP, Cleary-McHarg R, Banks AN (2007) House sparrow (Passer domesticus) habitat use in urbanized landscapes. J Ornithol 148:453–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charter M, Izhaki I, Leshem Y (2010a) Effects of the risk of competition and predation in large secondary cavity breeders. J Ornithol 151:791–795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charter M, Leshem Y, Halevi S, Izhaki I (2010b) Nest box use by great tits in semi–arid rural residential gardens. Wilson J Ornithol 122:604–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charter M, Izhaki I, Leshem Y (2011) Predation or facilitation? An experimental assessment of whether generalist predators affect the breeding success of passerines. J Ornithol 153:533–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clergeau P, Jokimäki J, Savard J-PL (2001) Are urban bird communities influenced by the bird diversity of adjacent landscapes? J Appl Ecol 38:1122–1134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crooks KR, Suarez AV, Bolger DT (2004) Avian assemblages along a gradient of urbanization in a highly fragmented landscape. Biol Conserv 115:451–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhondt AA (1977) Interspecific competition between great and blue tit. Nature 268:521–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhondt AA (1989) Ecological and evolutionary effects of interspecific competition in tits, Parus spp. Wilson Bull 101:198–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhondt AA (2010) Effects of competition on great and blue tit reproduction: intensity and importance in relation to habitat quality. J Anim Ecol 79:257–265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dhondt AA, Adriaensen F (1999) Experiments on competition between great and blue tit: effects on blue tit reproductive success and population processes. Ostrich 70:39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhondt AA, Eyckerman R (1980) Competition and the regulation of numbers in great and blue tits. Ardea 68:121–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Forsman JT, Hjernquist MB, Taipale J, Gustafsson L (2008) Competitor density cues for habitat quality facilitating habitat selection and investment decisions. Behav Ecol 19:539–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Germaine SS, Rosenstock SS, Schweinsburg RE, Richardson WS (1998) Relationships among breeding birds, habitat, and residential development in greater Tuscon, Arizona. Ecol Appl 8:680–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gustafsson L (1987) Interspecific competition lowers fitness in the collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis: an experimental demonstration. J Anim Ecol 68:291–296

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafsson L (1988) Inter- and intraspecific competition for nest-entrances in a population of the collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis. Ibis 130:11–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakkarainen H, Korpimäki E (1996) Competitive and predatory interactions among raptors: an observational and experimental study. Ecology 77:1134–1142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedblom M, Söderström B (2012) Effects of urban matrix on reproductive performance of Great Tit (Parus major) in urban woodlands. Urban Ecosyst 15:167–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keddy PA (1989) Competition. Chapman and Hall, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kempenaers B, Dhondt AA (1991) Competition between blue and great Tit for roosting sites in winter: an aviary experiment. Ornis Scand 22:73–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loeb SC, Hooper RG (1997) An experimental test of interspecific competition for red-cockaded woodpecker cavities. J Wildl Manag 61:1268–1280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löhrl H (1977) Nistökologische und ethologische Anpassungserscheinungen bei Höhlenbrütern. Vogelwarte 29:92–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzluff JM (2001) Worldwide urbanization and its effects on birds. In: Marzluff JM et al (eds) Avian ecology and conservation in an urbanizing world. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 19–38

  • Maurer BA (1984) Interference and exploitation in bird communities. Wilson Bull 96:380–395

    Google Scholar 

  • Menge BA, Sutherland JP (1976) Species diversity gradients: synthesis of the roles of predation, competition, and temporally heterogeneity. Am Nat 110:351–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merilä J, Wiggins DA (1995) Interspecific competition for nest holes causes adult mortality in the collared flycatcher. Condor 97:445–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller JR, Hobbs RJ (2002) Conservation where people live and work. Conserv Biol 16:330–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minot EO (1981) Effects of interspecific competition for food in breeding blue and great tits. J Anim Ecol 50:375–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minot EO, Perrins CM (1986) Interspecific interference competition–nest sites for blue and great tits. J Anim Ecol 55:331–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson SG (1984) The evolution of nest-site selection among hole-nesting birds: the importance of nest predation and competition. Ornis Scand 15:167–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynaud PA, Thioulouse J (2000) Identification of birds as biological markers along a neotropical urban-rural gradient (Cayenne, French Guiana), using co-inertia analysis. J Environ Manag 59:121–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheiner SM, Gurevitch J (2001) Design and analysis of ecological experiments, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoener TW (1983) Field experiments on interspecific competition. Am Nat 102:240–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slagsvold T (1978) Competition between the great tit Parus major and the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca: an experiment. Ornis Scand 9:46–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strubbe D, Matthysen E (2009) Experimental evidence for nest-site competition between invasive ring-necked parakeets (Psittacula krameri) and native nuthatches (Sitta europaea). Biol Conserv 142:1588–1594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Balen JH, van Booy CJH, van Franeker JA, Osieck ER (1982) Studies on hole-nesting birds in natural nest sites. Availability and occupation of natural nest sites. Ardea 70:1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA (1989) The ecology of bird communities, vol 2; processes and variations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  • Yavin S (1987) Nest site selection of the great tit (Parus major terrae-sanctae). MSc thesis, Tel Aviv University

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the residents of Moshav Ram-On for their assistance. Special thanks to Shai Halevi. Hava Ravid, Uri Ravid, and Daniel Berkowic for technical assistance in the field, to Arnon Lotem and Gadi Katzir for advice, to André Dhondt and Shai Markman for comments on the manuscript, and to Naomi Paz for editorial assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Motti Charter.

Additional information

Communicated by T. Friedl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Charter, M., Leshem, Y. & Izhaki, I. Asymmetric seasonal nest site competition between Great Tits and House Sparrows. J Ornithol 154, 173–181 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-012-0884-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-012-0884-5

Keywords

Navigation