New research finds fresh evidence that urbanization
in the United States threatens the populations of some
species of migratory birds.
But the six-year study
also refutes one of the most widely accepted
explanations of why urban areas are so hostile to some
kinds of birds.
Most ecologists have assumed that common nest
predators in urban areas – such as house cats and
raccoons – were destroying eggs or killing young birds
in greater numbers than in rural areas, said Amanda
Rodewald, co-author of the study and associate
professor of wildlife ecology at Ohio State
University’s School of Environment and Natural
Resources.
But this study was one of the first to actually
test that assumption by monitoring natural nests over
several years. And the results showed that predators
weren’t the main problem: instead, the birds just
didn’t seem to like urban areas and gave up more
easily.
Urban areas attracted lower-quality birds which,
compared to those in rural areas, arrived later in the
spring, left earlier in the fall, made fewer nesting
attempts and were much less likely to return to
nesting spots from year to year.
“There is something about these urban forests that
strikes the birds as unsuitable,” Rodewald said.
“Even when they try nesting, they are less likely to
renest after failure or to return in subsequent
years.”
Rodewald conducted the study with Daniel Shustack,
a graduate student in wildlife ecology at Ohio State.
Their findings were published in a recent issue of the
Journal of Animal Ecology.
The researchers monitored the nesting success in
the Columbus area of Acadian Flycatchers, a migratory
bird that is a relatively common summer resident in
wooded areas across much of the eastern United
States. It winters in Central and South America.
The study involved six years of monitoring 387
nests and 167 breeding pairs of Acadian Flycatchers
who lived in 35 forest stands in and around Columbus.
The researchers found striking differences in the
number of young produced by flycatchers depending on
how urban their nesting sites were. Non-urban sites
averaged nearly two young produced each nesting
season, while urban nests averaged about one young per
year.
Nest survival ranged widely across sites, with 11
to 55 percent of nests successfully raising young.
Nest survival, however, was not related to
urbanization.
The researchers determined how urban a nest site
was by measuring the percentage of land within a 1
kilometer radius that was covered by a building,
parking lot, mowed lawn or other man-made surface.
As other research has suggested, this study did
find that urban areas had more predators, such as
raccoons, when compared to rural areas. But these
predators were not raiding nests more often in urban
areas, Rodewald said.
So what was reducing the number of young produced?
One problem may be that the adults birds who nested
in urban areas tended to be slightly smaller –
although not greatly so -- than those in rural areas.
“The birds are sorting out, and it appears the
lower-quality birds are the ones forced into urban
areas,” Rodewald said. “That means they have no other
options – there are not better rural areas for them to
go.”
The study showed that birds in urban areas started
their nests later, already putting them at a
disadvantage in the relatively short nesting season.
In rural areas, if a nest failed for some reason
early in the season, the flycatchers would often make
a second nesting attempt. But in urban areas, the
flycatchers would often give up if their first nest in
a year wasn’t successful.
While many rural birds returned to the same nest
site year after year, nest site turnover in urban
areas was about two times higher than of those outside
the city.
What is it about urban areas that Acadian
Flycatchers – and other migratory birds like them –
don’t like? Unfortunately, that is not easy to
determine, Rodewald said.
“Is it the noise, the amount of artificial lights
at night, the local vegetation? We just don’t know,”
she said.
However, researchers are testing several theories.
For one, many of the urban forests were dominated
by Amur Honeysuckle plants, an invasive shrub native
to Asia that is often used as ornamental plants in
urban areas. Honeysuckles often made the understory
of urban forests thicker than those in rural areas,
which Acadians may not like for some reason.
Rodewald said she and her colleagues are removing
the plants in some forests to see if that helps
Acadian Flycatchers in those areas.
The researchers are also investigating the role of
Brown-headed Cowbirds, a species of birds that lays it
eggs in the nests of other birds, including the
Acadian Flycatcher. The cowbird fledglings are fed by
the host birds, often at the expense of their own
young.
This study found that urban flycatcher nests were
parasitized by cowbirds more often than nests in rural
areas, and a new study hopes to find out why.
The findings suggest that conservation of birds in
urban areas may be more complex than many ecologists
assumed.
“If it was just nest predation that was threatening
Acadians, than we would know what to do,” Rodewald
said. “But this suggests we need to get a handle on
how birds like Acadian Flycatchers perceive these
urban habitats. We need to know what they don’t like
about urban areas before we can determine what to do.”
And the problem isn’t just with one species of
bird, she said.
“So much of the world is becoming urbanized,” she
said. “From a conservation perspective, really
understanding how animals respond to urbanization is
going to be important for protecting biodiversity.”
The study was funded by the National Science
Foundation and the Ohio Division of Wildlife.
|
Source:
Ohio State University
Published on 22nd
April 2008
|
Advertisement
 |