Nestbox use and reproductive parameters of Tree Sparrows Passer montanus: are they affected by the presence of old nests?

• Autorzy: Garcia-Navas V , Arroyo L. , Sanz J.J.

Warianty tytułu

PL

Wplyw starego materialu gniazdowego na wykorzystanie skrzynek legowych i wyniki legow mazurkow

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

There is a controversy over the effects of old nest reuse on the breeding biology of hole nesters. Some authors have shown that the presence of old nest material could increase ectoparasite pressure and/or reduce cavity size, whereas others argue that it could facilitate nest-building and serve as an informative cue for breeding birds. However, the possible functions of old nests may not be limited to the reproductive period in burds that perform autumnal courtship or use nest cavities as shelters during the winter season, as is the case with the Tree Sparrow. The importance of the presence of old nest material on nest box choice during the non-breeding period and its implications on the subsequent breeding performance of this multi-brood species are assessed. Occupancy rates and reproductive parameters (such as phenology, clutch size, nestling condition, breeding success) were compared between woodcrete and wooden nest boxes with and without old nest material inside. During the non-breeding period no effect of box type or its content on nest box selection was discovered, but in spring it was found that the strong preference of birds for breeding in woodcrete nest boxes was independent of the presence of old nests. In relation to this latter point, evidence was found that old nest reuse could negatively affect the reproductive output of Tree Sparrows: clutches were laid later, nestlings had longer wings (which presumably fledged earlier) and reproductive success was lower in nest boxes containing old nest material. The results of this study suggest that, taking the non-breeding and breeding seasons as a whole, the accumulation of old nest material seems to be detrimental rather than advantageous to this species.

PL

Badania prowadzono w okresie od września 2006 do sierpnia 2007 na 15 ha terenie kampusu uniwersyteckiego w Toledo, gdzie znajdowało się 100 skrzynek lęgowych dla mazurków. Skrzynki wisiały parami — po jednej betonowej i drewnianej — na tych samych drzewach bądź w sąsiedztwie. W części z nich (zarówno zasiedlanych co roku jak i słabo wykorzystywanych) pozostawiono stary materiał gniazdowy, w części usunięto go jesienią. W okresie pozalęgowym nie stwierdzono wpływu rodzaju skrzynek i obecności bądź braku materiału gniazdowego na wybór dokonywany przez mazurki. Natomiast wiosną stwierdzono silną preferencję mazurków skrzynek drewnianych, niezależnie od ich zawartości. Oprócz tego, w skrzynkach zawierających stary materiał gniazdowy mazurki przystępowały do lęgów później, pisklęta miały dłuższe skrzydła; niższy był też sukces lęgowy (Fig. 1, Tab. 1).

Słowa kluczowe

EN

ornithology; old nest; Tree Sparrow; reproductive parameter; Passer montanus; bird; statistical analysis; nest box; temperature; nest building; breeding period; breeding performance; autumn

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Ornithologica
• Rocznik: 2008
• Tom: 43
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.32-42,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Garcia-Navas V

• National Museum of Natural Sciences-CSIC, Jose Gutierrez Abascal, 2, E-28006 Madrid, Spain

autor

Arroyo L.

autor

Sanz J.J.

Bibliografia

• Arroyo L., García-Navas V., Díaz, M., Sanz J. J. in press. [Nestbox use by the community of hole nesting birds of the Antigua Fábrica de Armas Campus (Toledo)]. Anuario Ornitológico de Toledo 2.
• Barclay R. M. R. 1988. Variation in the costs, benefits and frequency of nest reuse by barn swallows (Hirundo rustica). Auk 105: 53-60.
• Browne S. J. 2006. Effect of nest box construction and colour on the occupancy and the breeding success of nesting tits Parus spp. Bird Study 53: 187-192.
• Burtt E. H. Jr., Chow W., Babbitt G. A. 1991. Occurrence and demography of mites of tree swallow, house wren, and eastern bluebird nests. In: Loye J. E., Zuk M. (eds). Bird- Parasite Interactions. Ecology, Evolution and Behaviour. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, pp. 104-122.
• Christe P., Oppliger A., Richner H. 1994. Ectoparasite affects choice and use of roost sites in the great tit Parus major. Anim. Behav. 47: 895-898.
• Clark L., Mason J. R. 1985. Use of nest material as insecticidal and anti-pathogenic agents by the European starling. Oecologia 67: 169-176.
• Clark L., Mason J. R. 1988. Effect of biologically active plants used as nest material and the derived benefit to starling nestlings. Oecologia 77: 174-180.
• Cyprich D., Krumpál M. 1996. Fleas (Siphonaptera) in nests of the house sparrow (Passer domesticus) and the tree sparrow (P. montanus). Biologia 51: 153-161.
• Danchin E., Heg D., Doligez B. 2001. Public information and breeding habitat selection. In: Clobert E., Danchin A. A., Dhondt, Nichols J. D. (ed.). Dispersal. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, pp. 243-258.
• Davis W. H., Kalisz P. J., Wells R. J. 1994. Eastern Bluebirds prefer boxes containing old nests. J. Field Ornithol. 65: 250-253.
• De Lope F., González G., Pérez J.J., Møller A. P. 1993. Increased detrimental effects of ectoparasites on their bird hosts during adverse environmental conditions. Oecologia 95: 234-240.
• Doligez B., Danchin E., Clobert J. 2002. Public information and breeding habitat selection in a wild bird population. Science 297: 1168-1170.
• Erckmann W. J., Beletsky L. D., Orians G. H., Johnsen T., Sharbaugh T., DAntonio C. 1990. Old nests as cues for nest-site selection: an experimental test with Red-winged Blackbirds. Condor 92: 113-117.
• Fitze P. S., Tschirren B., Richner H. 2004. Life history and fitness consequences of ectoparasites. J. Anim. Ecol. 73: 216- 226.
• García-Navas V., Arroyo L., Sanz J. J., Díaz M. 2008. Effect of nestbox type on the occupancy and the breeding biology of Tree Sparrow Passer montanus in central Spain. Ibis 150: 356-364.
• Gauthier M., Thomas D. W. 1993. Nest site selection and the cost of nest building by Cliff Swallows (Hirundo pyrrhonota). Can. J. Zool. 71: 1120-1123.
• Gwinner H., Oltrogge M., Trost L., Nienaber U. 2000. Green plants in starling nests: effects on nestlings. Anim. Behav. 59: 301-309.
• Harper G. H., Marchant A., Boddington D. G. 1992. The ecology of the hen flea Ceratophyllus gallinae and the moorhen flea Dasypsyllus gallinulae in nestboxes. J. Anim. Ecol. 61: 317-327.
• Hansell M. 2000. Bird Nests and Construction Behaviour. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
• Kaczmarek S. 1991. [Fleas from the nests of Passer domesticus and Passer montanus]. Wiad. Parazytol. 37: 67-71.
• Karlsson J., Nilsson S. G. 1977. The influence of nest-box area on clutch size in some hole nesting passerines. Ibis 119: 207-211.
• Kendeigh C. 1961. Energy of birds conserved by roosting in cavities. Wilson Bull. 73: 140-147.
• Kozłowski P. 1992. [Nest-boxes as a site of bird broods in Warsaw urban park]. Acta Ornithol. 27: 21-33.
• Krumpál M., Cyprich D., Fenda P., Pinowski J. 2001. Invertebrate fauna in nests of the House Sparrow Passer domesticus and the Tree Sparrow Passer montanus in central Poland. International Studies on Sparrows 27-28, 35-38.
• Loye J. E., Carroll S. P. 1998. Ectoparasite behaviour and its effect an avian nest site selection. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 91: 159-163.
• Mappes T., Mappes J., Kotiaho J. 1994. Ectoparasites, nest site choice and breeding success in the pied flycatcher. Oecologia 98: 147-149.
• Martín Mateo M. P. 2006. [Diversity and distribution of Mallophaga (Insecta) species in birds and mammals of the region of Madrid]. Graellsia 62: 21-32.
• Mazgajski T. D. 2007a. Effect of old nest material on nest site selection and breeding parameters in secondary hole nesters — a review. Acta Ornithol. 42: 1-14.
• Mazgajski T. D. 2007b. Effect of old nest material in nestboxes on ectoparasite abundance and reproductive output in the European starling Sturnus vulgaris (L.). Pol. J. Ecol. 55: 377-385.
• Merino S., Potti J. 1995a. Pied Flycatchers prefer to nest in clean nest boxes in an area with detrimental nest ectoparasites. Condor 97: 828-831.
• Merino S., Potti J. 1995b. Weather dependent effects of nest ectoparasites on their bird hosts. Ecography 19: 107-113.
• Merino S., Potti J. 1998. Growth, nutrition and blowfly parasitism in nestling Pied Flycatchers. Can. J. Zool. 76: 936- 941.
• Mertens J. A. L. 1977. Thermal conditions for successful breeding in Great Tits (Parus major L.). II. Thermal properties of nests and nest boxes and their implication for the range of temperature tolerance of Great Tit broods. Oecologia 28: 57-65.
• Morley A. 1943. Sexual behaviour in British Birds from October to January. Ibis 85: 132-158.
• Moss W. W., Camin J. H. 1970. Nest parasitism, productivity and clutch size in purple martins. Science 168: 1000-1003.
• Møller A. P. 1989. Parasites, predators and nest boxes: facts and artefacts in nest box studies of birds? Oikos 56: 421-423.
• Møller A. P. 1990. Effects of parasitism by a hematophagous mite on reproduction in the barn swallow. Ecology 71: 2345-2357.
• Nilsson J.-Å. 1990. What determines the timing and order of nest-leaving in the marsh tit (Parus palustris)? In: Blondel J., Gosler A., Lebreton J.-D., McCleery R. (eds.). Population Biology of Passerine Birds. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 369-380.
• Nilsson J.-Å., Gårdmark A. 2001. Sibling competition affects individual growth strategies in marsh tit, Parus palustris, nestlings. Anim. Behav. 61: 357-365.
• Olsson K., Allander K. 1995. Do fleas and/or nest material, influence nest site preference in hole-nesting passerines? Ethology 101: 160-170.
• Oppliger A., Richner H., Christe P. 1994. Effect of an ectoparasite on lat date, nest-site choice, desertion, and hatching success in the great tit (Parus major). Behav. Ecol. 5: 130-134.
• Orell M., Rytkönen S., Ilömaki K. 1993. Do pied flycatchers prefer nest boxes with old nest material? Ann. Zool. Fenn. 30: 313-316.
• Pacejka A. J., Santana E., Harper R. G., Thompson C. F. 1996. House wrens Troglodytes aedon and nest-dwelling ectoparasites: mite population growth and feeding patterns. J. Avian Biol. 27: 273-278.
• Pacejka A., Thompson C. F. 1996. Does removal of old nest from nestboxes by researches affect mite populations in subsequent nest of house wrens? J. Field Ornithol. 67: 558-564.
• Petit C., Hossaert-McKey M., Perret P., Blondel J., Lambrechts M. M. 2005. Blue tits use selected plants and olfaction to maintain an aromatic environment for nestlings. Ecol. Lett. 5: 585-589.
• Pielowski Z., Pinowski J. 1962. Autumn sexual behaviour of the Tree Sparrow. Bird Study 9: 116-122.
• Pinowski J. 1965. Overcrowding as one of the causes of dispersal of young tree sparrows. Bird Study 12: 27-33.
• Pinowski J. 1967. Die Auswahl des Brutbiotops beim Feldsperling (Passer m. montanus [L.]). Ekol. Pol. A 15: 1-30.
• Pinowski J., Haman A., Jerzak L., Pinowska B., Barkowska M., Grodzki A., Haman K. 2006a. The thermal properties of some nests of the Eurasian Tree Sparrow Passer montanus. J. Thermal Biol. 31: 573-581.
• Pinowski J., Pinowska B., Barkowska M., Jerzak L., Zduniak P., Tryjanowski P. 2006b. Significance of the breeding season for autumnal nest-site selection by tree sparrows Passer montanus. Acta Ornithol. 41: 83-87.
• Puchała P. 1996. Detrimental effects of larval blow flies (Protocalliphora azurea) on nestlings and breeding success of Tree Sparrows (Passer montanus). Can. J. Zool. 82: 1285-1290.
• Reed J. M., Boulinier T., Danchin E., Oring L. W. 1999. Prospecting by birds for breeding site. Current Ornithol. 15: 189-259.
• Rendell W. B., Verbeek N. A. M. 1996a. Are avian ectoparasites more numerous in nest boxes with old nest material? Can. J. Zool. 74: 1819-1825.
• Rendell W. B., Verbeek N. A. M. 1996b. Old nest material in nestboxes of tree swallows: effects on nest-site choice and nest building. Auk 113: 319-328.
• Richner H., Christe P., Oppliger A. 1993. Effect of an ectoparasite on reproduction in great tits. J. Anim. Ecol. 62: 703-710.
• Safran R. J. 2004. Adaptive site selection rules and variation in group size of barn swallows: Individual decisions predict population patterns. Am. Nat. 164: 121-131.
• Seel D. C. 1968. Clutch-size, incubation and hatching success in the House Sparrow and Tree Sparrow Passer spp. at Oxford. Ibis 110: 270-282.
• Sengupta S. 1981. Adaptive significance in the use of margosa leaves in nest of house sparrows Passer domesticus. Emu 81: 114-115.
• Skoracki M. 2002. Three new species of the ectoparasitic mites of the genus Syringophiloidus Kethley, 1970 (Acari: Syringophilidae) from paseriform birds from Slovakia. Folia Parasitol. 49: 305-313.
• Stanback M. T., Dervan A. A. 2001. Within-season nest-site fidelity in Eastern Bluebirds: disentangling effects of nest success and parasite avoidance. Auk 118: 743-745.
• Stanback M. T., Rockwell E. K. 2003. Nest-site fidelity in Eastern Bluebirds (Sialis sialis) depends on the quality of alternate cavities. Auk 120: 1029-1032.
• Thompson C. E., Neill A. J. 1991. House Wrens do not prefer clean nestboxes. Anim. Behav. 42: 1022-1024.
• Tomás G., Merino S., Moreno J., Morales J. 2007. Consequences of nest reuse for parasite burden and female health and condition in blue tits, Cyanistes caeruleus. Anim. Behav. 73: 805-814.
• Tripet F., Jacot A., Richner H. 2002. Larval competition affects the life histories and dispersal behaviorof an avian ectoparasite. Ecology 83: 935-945.
• Wesołowski T. 2002. Anti-predator adaptations in nesting marsh tits Parus palustris: the role of nest-site security. Ibis 144: 593-601.
• Wimberger P. H. 1984. The use of green plant material in bird nests to avoid ectoparasites. Auk 101: 615-618.