INTERSPECIFIC INTERFERENCE COMPETITION IN 3 EUROPEAN RAPTOR SPECIES

被引:48
作者
KOSTRZEWA, A [1 ]
机构
[1] UNIV COLOGNE,INST ZOOL,LEHRSTUHL 1,W-5000 COLOGNE 41,GERMANY
关键词
COMMON BUZZARD BUTEO-BUTEO; GOSHAWK ACCIPITER-GENTILIS; HONEY BUZZARD PERNIS-APIVORUS; INTERFERENCE COMPETITION; NESTING TERRITORIES; DISTANCE TO NEAREST NEIGHBOR; BREEDING SUCCESS;
D O I
10.1080/08927014.1991.9525379
中图分类号
B84 [心理学]; C [社会科学总论]; Q98 [人类学];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 030303 ; 04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
(1) These analyses were based on 366 territory-years in Common Buzzards, 134 territory-years in Goshawks and 105 territory-years in Honey Buzzards. All sets of data which could have been biased by factors other than interference competition were previously omitted. (2) Common Buzzards and Goshawks defended territories against con- and interspecifics throughout the year in the study area. The migratory Honey Buzzards also defended their territories during the breeding season. Goshawks took over several nesting territories of Common Buzzards, and have also taken young of Honey and Common Buzzards. After Goshawks settled in territories of Common Buzzards, the Buzzard pairs disappeared from these areas. This seemed to be the most important evidence for competition for territories between species and had effects on local Buzzard density. (3) Interspecific spacing of all three species was highly regular, indicating a competition for space. Spacing between conspecifics was also regular. (4) Due to interference by Goshawks, Common Buzzards and Honey Buzzards lost a proportion of young each year, which was highly correlated with the distance to the nearest active Goshawk nest. (5) Between Common Buzzards and Honey Buzzards no such effect could be detected, despite interactions observed between these species. (6) Other factors, besides Goshawk interference, which could have lowered breeding success in Common or Honey Buzzards, such as food or weather factors, intraspecific interference or habitat differences, were ruled out.
引用
收藏
页码:127 / 143
页数:17
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
Brown D., A test of randomness of nest spacing, Wildfowl, 26, pp. 102-103, (1975)
[2]  
Brown D., Rothery P., Randomness and local regularity of points in a plane, Biometrica, 65, pp. 115-122, (1978)
[3]  
Charnov E., Orians G.H., Hyatt K., Ecological implications of resource depression, American Naturalist, 110, pp. 247-259, (1976)
[4]  
Cody M.L., Competition and structure of bird communities, Monographs in Population Biology, 7, pp. 1-318, (1974)
[5]  
Cramp S., Simmons K., Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, The Birds of the Western Palaearctic, 2, (1980)
[6]  
Dhondt A.A., The effect of interspecific competition on numbers in bird population, Acta XVIII Congressus Int. Orn. Moscow, pp. 792-796, (1985)
[7]  
Dunkle S.W., Swainson's Hawks on the Laramie plains, Wyoming, Auk, 94, pp. 65-71, (1977)
[8]  
Hutchinson G.E., Homage to Santa Rosalia, or why are there so many kinds of animals, American Naturalist, 93, pp. 145-159, (1959)
[9]  
Janes S.W., Influences of territory composition and interspecific competition on Red-tailed Hawk reproductive success, Ecology, 65, pp. 862-870, (1984)
[10]  
Korpimaki E., Dietary shifts, niche relationships and reproductive output of coexisting Kestrels and Long-eared Owls, Oecologia, 74, pp. 277-285, (1987)