Habitat influences on nest-site selection by the Painted Honeyeater (Grantiella picta): do food resources matter?
Laurence P. Barea
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Ecology and Biodiversity Group, Institute of Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia.
B Present Address: Golder Associates Limited, 102, 2535 3rd Avenue SE, Calgary, AB, T2A 7W5, Canada. Email: laurence_barea@golder.com
Emu 112(1) 39-45 https://doi.org/10.1071/MU10082
Submitted: 9 November 2010 Accepted: 8 November 2011 Published: 24 February 2012
Abstract
Understanding the habitat requirements of threatened species is crucial for their effective management. This paper examines the role of mistletoe food resources and vegetative habitat structure in shaping nest-site selection by the Painted Honeyeater. Painted Honeyeaters responded to the abundance of mistletoes and the proximity of mistletoe clumps near the nest tree as well as habitat structure when selecting nest-trees. Compared with randomly selected trees, nest-trees were on average less than half the distance to the nearest mistletoe-infected host and mistletoe abundance was 2.8 times greater in the surrounding habitat. Vegetation surrounding nest-trees was more open than that surrounding randomly selected trees, but the canopy was more closed within 25 m of nest-trees. Nest-site selection by Painted Honeyeaters was best explained by a combination of mistletoe abundance, proximity of mistletoe clumps to the nest-tree and structural qualities of the surrounding habitat. Hierarchical partitioning further supported the analysis and suggests that Painted Honeyeaters respond primarily to mistletoe abundance when selecting nest-sites. This study supports a link between mistletoe resources and habitat structure and Painted Honeyeater nest-site selection. Conservation management strategies for this declining honeyeater should include effective management promoting an abundance of mistletoe populations as well as a diverse woodland community structure.
Additional keywords: dietary specialist, frugivory, mistletoe, threatened species.
References
Aukema, J. E., and Martínez del Rio, C. (2002). Where does a fruit-eating bird deposit mistletoe seeds? Seed deposition patterns and an experiment. Ecology 83, 3489–3496.| Where does a fruit-eating bird deposit mistletoe seeds? Seed deposition patterns and an experiment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Barea, L. P. (2008a). Nest-site selection by the Painted Honeyeater (Grantiella picta), a mistletoe specialist. Emu 108, 213–220.
| Nest-site selection by the Painted Honeyeater (Grantiella picta), a mistletoe specialist.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Barea, L. P. (2008b). Interactions between frugivores and their resources: case studies with the Painted Honeyeater Grantiella picta. Ph.D. Thesis, Charles Sturt University, Albury, NSW.
Barea, L. P., and Herrera, M. L. G. (2009). Sources of protein in two semi-arid zone mistletoe specialists: insights from stable isotopes. Austral Ecology 34, 821–828.
| Sources of protein in two semi-arid zone mistletoe specialists: insights from stable isotopes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Brodmann, P. A., Reyer, H. U., Bollmann, K., Schläpfer, A. R., and Rauter, C. (1997). The importance of food quantity and quality for reproductive performance in alpine Water Pipits Anthus spinoletta. Oecologia 109, 200–208.
| The importance of food quantity and quality for reproductive performance in alpine Water Pipits Anthus spinoletta.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Burnham, K. P., and Anderson, D. R. (2001). Kullback–Leibler information as a basis for strong inference in ecological studies. Wildlife Research 28, 111–119.
| Kullback–Leibler information as a basis for strong inference in ecological studies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Burnham, K. P., and Anderson, D. R. (2002). ‘Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach’, 2nd edn. (Springer-Verlag: New York.)
Chalfoun, A. D., and Martin, T. E. (2007). Assessments of habitat preferences and quality depend on spatial scale and metrics of fitness. Journal of Applied Ecology 44, 983–992.
| Assessments of habitat preferences and quality depend on spatial scale and metrics of fitness.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chu, M. C. (1999). Ecology and breeding biology of Phainopeplas (Phainopepla nitens) in the desert and coastal woodlands of Southern California. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Clark, R. G., and Shutler, D. (1999). Avian habitat selection: pattern from process in nest site use by ducks. Ecology 80, 272–287.
| Avian habitat selection: pattern from process in nest site use by ducks.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cooch, E., and White, G. (2010). ‘Program Mark: A Gentle Introduction.’ 9th edn. Available at http://www.phidot.org/software/mark/docs/book/ [Verified 27 October 2011].
Crampton, L. H. (2004). Ecological determinants of the distribution, abundance and breeding success of Phainopeplas (Phainopepla nitens, Cl. Aves) at the northern edge of their range. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nevada, Reno, NV.
Frey-Roos, F., Brodmann, P. A., and Heinz-Ulrich, R. (1995). Relationships between food resources, foraging patterns, and reproductive success in the Water Pipit, Anthus sp. spinoletta. Behavioral Ecology 6, 287–295.
| Relationships between food resources, foraging patterns, and reproductive success in the Water Pipit, Anthus sp. spinoletta.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Garnett, S. T., Szabo, J. K., and Dutson, G. (2011). ‘The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne.)
Herrera, M. L. G., Rodríguez, G. M., and Hernández, P. P. (2009). Sources of assimilated protein in a specialized tropical frugivorous bird, the Yellow-throated Euphonia (Euphonia hirundinacea). Auk 126, 175–180.
| Sources of assimilated protein in a specialized tropical frugivorous bird, the Yellow-throated Euphonia (Euphonia hirundinacea).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Higgins, P. J., Peter, J. M., and Steele, W. K. (2001). ‘Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Vol. 5: Tyrant Flycatchers to Chats.’ (Oxford University Press: Melbourne.)
Hutto, R. L. (1990). Measuring the availability of food resources. Studies in Avian Biology 13, 20–28.
James, F. C., and Shugart, H. H. (1970). A quantitative method of habitat description. Audubon Field Notes 24, 727–736.
Janzen, D. H. (1983). Dispersal of seeds by vertebrate guts. In ‘Coevolution’. (Eds D. J. Futuyma and M. Slatkin.) pp. 232–262. (Sinauer: Sunderland, MA.)
Johnson, J. B., and Omland, K. S. (2004). Model selection in ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19, 101–108.
| Model selection in ecology and evolution.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jordano, P. (2000). Fruits and frugivory. In ‘Seeds: The Ecology of Regeneration in Plant Communities’. 2nd edn. (Ed. M. Fenner.) pp. 125–166. (C.A.B. International: Wallingford, UK.)
Luck, G. W. (2002). The habitat requirements of the Rufous Treecreeper (Climacteris rufa). 2. Validating predictive habitat models. Biological Conservation 105, 395–403.
| The habitat requirements of the Rufous Treecreeper (Climacteris rufa). 2. Validating predictive habitat models.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mac Nally, R. (2000). Regression and model-building in conservation biology, biogeography and ecology: the distinction between – and reconciliation of – ‘predictive’ and ‘explanatory’ models. Biodiversity and Conservation 9, 655–671.
| Regression and model-building in conservation biology, biogeography and ecology: the distinction between – and reconciliation of – ‘predictive’ and ‘explanatory’ models.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mac Nally, R. (2002). Multiple regression and inference in ecology and conservation biology: further comments on identifying important predictor variables. Biodiversity and Conservation 11, 1397–1401.
| Multiple regression and inference in ecology and conservation biology: further comments on identifying important predictor variables.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mac Nally, R. M., and Walsh, C. J. (2004). Hierarchical partitioning public-domain software. Biodiversity and Conservation 13, 659–660.
| Hierarchical partitioning public-domain software.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Manly, B. F. J., McDonald, L. L., Thomas, D. L., McDonald, T. L., and Erickson, W. P. (2002). ‘Resource Selection by Animals: Statistical Analysis and Design for Field Studies.’ 2nd edn. (Kluwer: Boston, MA.)
Martin, T. E. (1987). Food as a limit on breeding birds: a life-history perspective. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 18, 453–487.
| Food as a limit on breeding birds: a life-history perspective.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Misenhelter, M. D., and Rotenberry, J. T. (2000). Choices and consequences of habitat occupancy and nest site selection in Sage Sparrows. Ecology 81, 2892–2901.
| Choices and consequences of habitat occupancy and nest site selection in Sage Sparrows.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mueller-Dombois, D., and Ellenberg, H. (1974). ‘Aims and Methods in Vegetation Ecology.’ (Wiley: New York.)
Oliver, D. L., Quin, B. R., Quin, D. G., Walpole, R. M., and Walpole, S. C. (1998). Observations of nectar-and insect-feeding by Painted Honeyeaters Grantiella picta. Australian Bird Watcher 17, 353–355.
Oliver, D. L., Chambers, M. A., and Parker, D. G. (2003). Habitat and resource selection of the Painted Honeyeater (Grantiella picta) on the northern floodplains region of New South Wales. Emu 103, 171–176.
| Habitat and resource selection of the Painted Honeyeater (Grantiella picta) on the northern floodplains region of New South Wales.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Orians, G. H., and Wittenberger, J. F. (1991). Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection. American Naturalist 137, S29–S49.
| Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Parrish, J. D. (2000). Behavioral, energetic, and conservation implications of foraging plasticity during migration. Studies in Avian Biology 20, 53–70.
R Development Core Team (2010). ‘R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.’ (R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria.) Available at http://www.R-project.org [Verified 27 October 2011].
Reid, N. (1990). Mutualistic interdependence between mistletoes (Amyema quandang), and Spiny-cheeked Honeyeaters and Mistletoebirds in an arid woodland. Australian Journal of Ecology 15, 175–190.
| Mutualistic interdependence between mistletoes (Amyema quandang), and Spiny-cheeked Honeyeaters and Mistletoebirds in an arid woodland.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rice, J., Ohmart, J. R. D., and Anderson, B. W. (1983). Habitat selection attributes of an avian community: a discriminant analysis investigation. Ecological Monographs 53, 263–290.
| Habitat selection attributes of an avian community: a discriminant analysis investigation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Robinson, S. K., and Holmes, R. T. (1982). Foraging behavior of forest birds: the relationships among search tactics, diet, and habitat structure. Ecology 63, 1918–1931.
| Foraging behavior of forest birds: the relationships among search tactics, diet, and habitat structure.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rothstein, S. I. (1971). High nest density and non-random nest placement in the Cedar Waxwing. Condor 73, 483–485.
| High nest density and non-random nest placement in the Cedar Waxwing.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Smith, P. A., Gilchrist, H. G., and Smith, J. N. M. (2007). Effects of nest habitat, food, and parental behavior on shorebird nest success. Condor 109, 15–31.
| Effects of nest habitat, food, and parental behavior on shorebird nest success.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Snow, B. K., and Snow, D. W. (1971). The feeding ecology of tanagers and honeycreepers in Trinidad. Auk 88, 291–322.
Walsberg, G. E. (1981). Nest-site selection and the radiative environment of the Warbling Vireo. Condor 83, 86–88.
| Nest-site selection and the radiative environment of the Warbling Vireo.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ward, M. J., and Paton, D. C. (2007). Predicting mistletoe seed shadow and patterns of seed rain from movements of the Mistletoebird, Dicaeum hirundinaceum. Austral Ecology 32, 113–121.
| Predicting mistletoe seed shadow and patterns of seed rain from movements of the Mistletoebird, Dicaeum hirundinaceum.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Watson, D. M. (1997). The importance of mistletoe to the White-fronted Honeyeater Phylidonyris albifrons in western Victoria. Emu 97, 174–177.
| The importance of mistletoe to the White-fronted Honeyeater Phylidonyris albifrons in western Victoria.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Watson, D. M. (2001). Mistletoe-a keystone resource in forests and woodlands worldwide. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32, 219–249.
| Mistletoe-a keystone resource in forests and woodlands worldwide.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Whittingham, M. J., Bradbury, R. B., Wilson, J. D., Morris, A. J., Perkins, A. J., and Siriwardena, G. M. (2001). Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs foraging patterns, nestling survival and territory distribution on lowland farmland. Bird Study 48, 257–270.
| Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs foraging patterns, nestling survival and territory distribution on lowland farmland.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zanette, L., Smith, J. N. M., van Oort, H., and Clinchy, M. (2003). Synergistic effects of food and predators on annual reproductive success in Song Sparrows. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences 270, 799–803.
| Synergistic effects of food and predators on annual reproductive success in Song Sparrows.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |