The effect of land cover and fragmentation of agricultural landscape on the density of White Stork [Ciconia ciconia L.] in Brandenburg, Germany

• Autorzy: Latus C , Kujawa K.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The aim of the study was to identify landscape properties which are responsible for the large differences in White Stork population densities occurring in an agricultural landscape. The study area covered six plots (308– 1218 km²) in Brandenburg (Germany). They differed in respect to proportions of main landscape components (grasslands, crop fields, woodlands, parks and gardens, built-up areas), to degree of fragmentation of grasslands and crop fields and to proportions of different grassland types (moist meadows, slightly moist pasturelands, dry grasslands, persistent nitrophilous ruderal communities, herbaceous perennials and intensively used sown grassland). The correlation coefficients between the Stork density and proportions of main landscape components were small (|rs |<0.7) and insignificant (P>0.15) but the Stork density was positively related to proportion of intensively used sown grasslands. However, the greatest part of variation in Stork density could be explained by the fragmentation of grasslands and crop fields. Stork density was positively correlated with density of crop field patches as well as with grassland edge density. The spatial distribution of these patches was not important. Our results suggest that at a moderate proportion (ca. 10%) of grasslands, composition and high fragmentation of these habitats are vital for white storks.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

landscape structure; bird; population density; grassland; agricultural landscape; land cover; Germany; White Stork; Ciconia ciconia; fragmentation; Brandenburg

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Ecology
• Rocznik: 2005
• Tom: 53
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: p.535-543,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Latus C

• Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural landscape and Land Use Research, Eberswalder Str.84, 15374 Muncheberg, Germany

autor

Kujawa K.

Bibliografia

• AG Berlin /Brandenburger Ornithologen 2001– Die Vogelwelt von Brandenburg und Berlin –Brandenburgischer Buchverlag, Natur und Text, 684 pp. (in German)
• Alonso J. C., Alonso J. A., Carrascal L. M. 1991 – Habitat selection by foraging White storks Ciconia ciconia during breeding season – Can. J. Zool., 69: 1957–1962.
• Baierlein F. 1991 – Population studies of White Storks in Europe (In: Bird population studies: relevance to conservation and management, Ed. C. M. Perrins) – Oxford University Press, pp. 207–229.
• Blaschke T. 1999 – Quantifizierung von Fragmentierung, Konnektivität und Biotopverbund mit GIS (In: Angewandete Geographische Informationsverarbeitung XI – Beiträge zum AGIT-Symposuim, Salzburg 1999, Eds: Strobl J., Blaschke T.) – Weichmann Verlag.
• Donovan T. M., Flather C. H. 2002 – Relationships among North American songbird trends, habitat fragmentation, and landscape occupancy – Ecological Applications, 12 (2): 364–374.
• Estades C. F. 2001 – The effect of breedinghabitat patch size on bird population density – Landscape Ecology, 16 (2): 161–173.
• Forman R. T. T., Godron M. 1981 – Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology – Bioscience, 31 (10): 733–740.
• Fuller R. J., Trevelyan R. J., Hudson R. W. 1997 – Landscape composition models for breeding bird populations in lowland English farmland over a 20 year period – Ecography, 20: 295–307.
• Johnson D. H. 2001 – Habitat fragmentation effects on birds in grasslands and wetlands: a critique of our knowledge – Great Plains Research, 11(2): 211–213.
• Johst K., Brandl R., Pfeifer R. 2001 – Foraging in a patchy and dynamic landscape: human land use and the white stork – Ecological Applications, 11,1: 60–69.
• Jonkers D. A. 1989 – Status and conservation of the White Stork in the Netherlands: A review (In: Weißstorch – White stork. Proc. I Int. Stork Conserv. Symp., Eds: Rheinwald G., Odgen J., Schulz H.) – Schriftenreihe DDA 10, pp 45–54.
• Kaatz C. 1999 – Die Bestandessituation des Weißstorchs (Ciconia ciconia) in Deutschland unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Jahre 1994 und 1995 (In: Weißstorch im Aufwind? White Storks on the up? Proc. Internat. Symp. On the White Stork, Hamburg 1996, Ed. Schulz, H.) – NABU (Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V.), pp. 137–155. (in German).
• Krebs C. S. 1989 – Ecologixal methotology – Harper & Row, New York, 654 pp.
• Kuitunen M., Rossi E., Stenroos A. 1998 – Do highways influence density of land birds? – Environmental Management, 22(2): 297–302.
• Lack D. L. 1966 – Population Studies of Birds – Oxford, Clarendon Press, 341 pp.
• Landesumweltamt Brandenburg 1995 – Daten zur Umweltsituation im Land Brandenburg, Biotoptypen- und Landnutzungskartierung Brandenburg aus CIR-Luftbildern – Ministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Raumordnung des Landes Brandenburg. 11 pp. (in German)
• Latus C., Kujawa K. 1999 – The impact of landscape structure on occurrence of white stork’s nests – Berkut, 8 (2): 150–154.
• Latus C., Kujawa K., Gemnitz M. 2000 – The influence of landscape structure on White Stork’s Ciconia ciconia nest distribution – Acta ornithologica, 35,1: 97–102.
• LDS (Landesamt für datenverarbeitung und Statistik) Brandenburg 1994 – Statistische Jahrbücher des Landes Brandenburg – Potsdam 1994. 518 pp. (in German)
• Löhmer R., Harms S. 1999 – Bestandeserholung beim Weißstorch und Besiedlung pessimaler Brutstandorte im Raum Hannnover/Niedersachsen (In: Weißstorch im Aufwind? White Storks on the up? Proc. Internat. Symp. On the White Stork, Hamburg 1996, Ed. Schulz, H.) – NABU (Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V.), pp. 463–470. (in German)
• Ludwig B. (Ed.) 1994 – Mitteilungsblatt 86/94 der BAG Weißstorchschutz – Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V. 16 pp. (in German)
• Mazerolle M. J., Villard M. A. 1999 – Patch characteristics and landscape context as predictors of species presence and abundance: a review – Ecoscience, 6: 117–124.
• Pinowska B., Pinowski J. 1989 – Feeding ecology and diet of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia in Poland (In: White stork. Internat. Council for Bird Preservation, Walsrode, Germany, Eds: Rheinland G., Odgen J., Schulz), pp. 381–396.
• Profus P. 1986 – Zur Brutbiologie und Bioenergetik Weißstorchs in Polen – Beih. Veröff. Naturschutz Landschaftspflege Bad.– Württ., 43: 205–220. (in German)
• Rat von Sachverständigen für Umweltfragen, 2002 – Für eine Stärkung und Neuorientierung des Naturschutzes – Sondergutachten, Metzler Poschel, Stuttgart. 552 pp. (in German)
• Saunders D. A., Hobbs R. J., Margules C. R. 1991 – Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: A review. – Conserv. Biol., 5: 18–32.
• Schneider M. 1988 – Periodisch überschwemmtes dauergünland ermöglicht optimalen Bruterfolg des Weißstorchs in der Save-Stromaue – Vogelwarte, 34: 164–173. (in German)
• Trojan P. 1975 – Ekologia ogólna – PWN, Warszawa, pp. 419. (in Polish)
• Webb N. R. 1994 – The habitat, the biotope and the landscape (In: Fragmentation in Agricultural Landscapes. Proc. 3th annual IALE UK conference, Ed. Dover J.W.), pp. 21–30.
• Wiens J. A., Stenseth N. C., van Horne B., Ims R. A. 1993 – Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology – Oikos, 66: 369–380.
• Winter M., Faaborg J. 1999 – Patterns of area-sensitivity in grassland-nesting birds – Conserv. Biol., 13: 1424–1436.