Advanced

Small habitat islands are inferior breeding habitats but are used by some great tits - competition or ignorance?

Loman, Jon LU (2003) In Biodiversity and Conservation 12(7). p.1467-1479
Abstract
Great tit breeding performance in small habitat islands in an agricultural landscape was compared to that in large deciduous woods. Clutch size was similar in both habitats, but more nestlings starved and fledgling weight was lower in the small habitat islands. The area of wooded habitat in the territories of tits breeding in the small habitat islands was less than what is common to encounter in 'optimum' habitat, deciduous woods. I suggest that this may be responsible, ultimately or proximately, for the poor performance in the small habitat islands. Two possible mechanisms for this effect are discussed. It is possible that the small habitat islands were perceived as inferior by the tits and used by competitively inferior individuals that... (More)
Great tit breeding performance in small habitat islands in an agricultural landscape was compared to that in large deciduous woods. Clutch size was similar in both habitats, but more nestlings starved and fledgling weight was lower in the small habitat islands. The area of wooded habitat in the territories of tits breeding in the small habitat islands was less than what is common to encounter in 'optimum' habitat, deciduous woods. I suggest that this may be responsible, ultimately or proximately, for the poor performance in the small habitat islands. Two possible mechanisms for this effect are discussed. It is possible that the small habitat islands were perceived as inferior by the tits and used by competitively inferior individuals that also were less successful in raising a brood. However, the results were obtained even when female age and weight were controlled for. Therefore, the competitive ability (and probably also young raising competence) may be the same for tits breeding in small habitat islands as for those breeding in optimum habitat. Such a pattern is conceivable if tits have been selected for maintaining a large territory as a response to the close presence of other tits and not as a means of securing a large feeding area. Historically, territories large enough to reduce predation or mate competition (or any cause of territoriality) may always have contained ample food. The presence of small islands, without close neighbours but with insufficient food, may be evolutionarily new. It is probably typical of modern agricultural landscape. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Biodiversity and Conservation
volume
12
issue
7
pages
1467 - 1479
publisher
Springer
external identifiers
  • wos:000182721700011
  • scopus:0037572186
ISSN
0960-3115
DOI
10.1023/A:1023629810919
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
33c4e410-433b-4002-a6a2-c0c67118fac2 (old id 137332)
date added to LUP
2007-06-25 12:20:46
date last changed
2018-01-07 05:35:50
@article{33c4e410-433b-4002-a6a2-c0c67118fac2,
  abstract     = {Great tit breeding performance in small habitat islands in an agricultural landscape was compared to that in large deciduous woods. Clutch size was similar in both habitats, but more nestlings starved and fledgling weight was lower in the small habitat islands. The area of wooded habitat in the territories of tits breeding in the small habitat islands was less than what is common to encounter in 'optimum' habitat, deciduous woods. I suggest that this may be responsible, ultimately or proximately, for the poor performance in the small habitat islands. Two possible mechanisms for this effect are discussed. It is possible that the small habitat islands were perceived as inferior by the tits and used by competitively inferior individuals that also were less successful in raising a brood. However, the results were obtained even when female age and weight were controlled for. Therefore, the competitive ability (and probably also young raising competence) may be the same for tits breeding in small habitat islands as for those breeding in optimum habitat. Such a pattern is conceivable if tits have been selected for maintaining a large territory as a response to the close presence of other tits and not as a means of securing a large feeding area. Historically, territories large enough to reduce predation or mate competition (or any cause of territoriality) may always have contained ample food. The presence of small islands, without close neighbours but with insufficient food, may be evolutionarily new. It is probably typical of modern agricultural landscape.},
  author       = {Loman, Jon},
  issn         = {0960-3115},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {7},
  pages        = {1467--1479},
  publisher    = {Springer},
  series       = {Biodiversity and Conservation},
  title        = {Small habitat islands are inferior breeding habitats but are used by some great tits - competition or ignorance?},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1023629810919},
  volume       = {12},
  year         = {2003},
}