Differences in predators of artificial and real songbird nests: Evidence of bias in artificial nest studies

被引:147
作者
Thompson, FR
Burhans, DE
机构
[1] Univ Missouri, N Cent Res Stn, Columbia, MO 65211 USA
[2] Univ Missouri, Dept Fisheries & Wildlife Sci, Columbia, MO 65211 USA
关键词
artificial nests; Field Sparrows; Indigo Buntings; nest predation; predators; raccoons; snakes; song-birds;
D O I
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00167.x
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
In the past two decades, many researchers have used artificial nests to measure relative rates of nest predation. Recent comparisons show that real and artificial nests may not-be depredated at the same rates, but no one has examined the mechanisms underlying these patterns. We determined differences in predator-specific predation rates of real and artificial nests. We used video cameras to monitor artificial nests baited with quail and plasticine eggs and Field Sparrow (Spizella pusilla) and Indigo Bunting (Passerina cyanea) nests infield habitats in central Missouri (U.S.A.). Although daily predation estimates (all predators pooled) were similar between artificial and real nests, predators differed substantially in their depredation of artificial versus real nests. Snakes were the major predator at real nests, and raccoons (Procyon lotor) were the major predator at artificial nests. We found strong support for models that distinguished predation between two or among three predator groups and between artificial and real nests. There was no snake predation of artificial nests, and the odds of predation of artificial nests was 115-551% (95% confidence interval) and 2-154% of the odds of predation of real nests by mammals and birds, respectively. Artificial nests with plasticine eggs could not be used reliably to identify predators. In several cases plasticine eggs were marked by mice, and raccoons were recorded on video removing the quail egg. Because biases for artificial nests were positive for some predators and negative for other predators (and could be compensating), and potentially existed for all predator groups, conclusions based on artificial nest studies should be suspect even when there is evidence that overall predation rates are similar among real and artificial nests.
引用
收藏
页码:373 / 380
页数:8
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]  
Askins R.A., 1990, Current Ornithology, V7, P1
[2]  
ASKINS RA, 2000, RESTORING N AM SONGB
[3]  
Buler JJ, 2000, AUK, V117, P739, DOI 10.1642/0004-8038(2000)117[0739:PONAAN]2.0.CO
[4]  
2
[5]   Effects of time and nest-site characteristics on concealment of songbird nests [J].
Burhans, DE ;
Thompson, FR .
CONDOR, 1998, 100 (04) :663-672
[6]   Habitat and microhabitat features associated with cowbird parasitism in two forest edge cowbird hosts [J].
Burhans, DE .
CONDOR, 1997, 99 (04) :866-872
[7]   Patterns of nest predation on artificial and natural nests in forests [J].
Burke, DM ;
Eliliott, K ;
Moore, L ;
Dunford, W ;
Nol, E ;
Phillips, J ;
Holmes, S ;
Freemark, K .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2004, 18 (02) :381-388
[8]  
Burnham K. P., 2002, MODEL SELECTION MULT
[9]   Chipmunks use leverage to eat oversized eggs: Support for the use of quail eggs in artificial nest studies [J].
Craig, DP .
AUK, 1998, 115 (02) :486-489
[10]  
Davison WB, 2000, AUK, V117, P147, DOI 10.1642/0004-8038(2000)117[0147:PRORAA]2.0.CO