Effects of forest structure and harvest‐induced edges on predation risk
ABSTRACT Managed forest systems have implications for wildlife conservation because of their direct influence on condition and distribution of forest patches on the landscape. Spatial arrangement, structure, and composition of patches can influence reproductive outcomes for breeding birds by mediati...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2018-06-01
|
| Series: | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.879 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850116178379276288 |
|---|---|
| author | Jenny R. Foggia Scott A. Rush Darren A. Miller T. Bently Wigley James A. Martin |
| author_facet | Jenny R. Foggia Scott A. Rush Darren A. Miller T. Bently Wigley James A. Martin |
| author_sort | Jenny R. Foggia |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | ABSTRACT Managed forest systems have implications for wildlife conservation because of their direct influence on condition and distribution of forest patches on the landscape. Spatial arrangement, structure, and composition of patches can influence reproductive outcomes for breeding birds by mediating nest site selection, survival, and predator–prey dynamics. Few studies have explored effects of local and adjacent forest‐stand structure and harvest‐induced edges on nest predation risk. Therefore, during summer 2014, we conducted artificial nest experiments within an intensively managed loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) landscape in Mississippi, USA. We used survival models to quantify effects of forest stand structure and proximity to harvest‐induced edges on apparent predation risk (APR). We conducted vegetation surveys and placed artificial nests (n = 146) at systematic distances from edges between 4 different pine stand types (Class 1: newly established stands; Class 2: 3–5 yr old; Class 3: 5–10 yr old; and Class 4: >10 yr old and postthinned). We sampled 4 stand pairs, each consisting of a Class 1 stand adjacent to a stand type of Class 1 (n = 4), 2 (n = 3), 3 (n = 4), or 4 (n = 4), and developed 15 a priori models relating APR to edge and vegetation characteristics. Apparent predation risk tended to be low and negatively related to edge where adjacent stands featured high proportion of shrub cover and vegetation density. We did not find strong evidence to support increased risk of nest predation near edges. These results were consistent with findings from studies in similar landscape contexts and suggest edges in forest‐dominated landscapes do not increase relative risk of nest predation. Rather, we found that APR was lowest in stands featuring dense shrub and vegetation cover that developed following clearcut harvest. Results of our study highlight some implications of forest harvest on reproductive success of birds, particularly those using early successional vegetation. © 2018 The Wildlife Society. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-89a386ff656d4cbebe13cc4cd882cb95 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2328-5540 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2018-06-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| spelling | doaj-art-89a386ff656d4cbebe13cc4cd882cb952025-08-20T02:36:23ZengWileyWildlife Society Bulletin2328-55402018-06-0142223724510.1002/wsb.879Effects of forest structure and harvest‐induced edges on predation riskJenny R. Foggia0Scott A. Rush1Darren A. Miller2T. Bently Wigley3James A. Martin4College of Forest ResourcesMississippi State University, Mississippi StateMS39762USACollege of Forest ResourcesMississippi State University, Mississippi StateMS39762USAWeyerhaeuser CompanyColumbusMS39704USANational Council for Air and Stream ImprovementIncorporatedClemsonSC29634‐0317USAWarnell School of Forestry and Natural ResourcesUniversity of GeorgiaAthensGA30602USAABSTRACT Managed forest systems have implications for wildlife conservation because of their direct influence on condition and distribution of forest patches on the landscape. Spatial arrangement, structure, and composition of patches can influence reproductive outcomes for breeding birds by mediating nest site selection, survival, and predator–prey dynamics. Few studies have explored effects of local and adjacent forest‐stand structure and harvest‐induced edges on nest predation risk. Therefore, during summer 2014, we conducted artificial nest experiments within an intensively managed loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) landscape in Mississippi, USA. We used survival models to quantify effects of forest stand structure and proximity to harvest‐induced edges on apparent predation risk (APR). We conducted vegetation surveys and placed artificial nests (n = 146) at systematic distances from edges between 4 different pine stand types (Class 1: newly established stands; Class 2: 3–5 yr old; Class 3: 5–10 yr old; and Class 4: >10 yr old and postthinned). We sampled 4 stand pairs, each consisting of a Class 1 stand adjacent to a stand type of Class 1 (n = 4), 2 (n = 3), 3 (n = 4), or 4 (n = 4), and developed 15 a priori models relating APR to edge and vegetation characteristics. Apparent predation risk tended to be low and negatively related to edge where adjacent stands featured high proportion of shrub cover and vegetation density. We did not find strong evidence to support increased risk of nest predation near edges. These results were consistent with findings from studies in similar landscape contexts and suggest edges in forest‐dominated landscapes do not increase relative risk of nest predation. Rather, we found that APR was lowest in stands featuring dense shrub and vegetation cover that developed following clearcut harvest. Results of our study highlight some implications of forest harvest on reproductive success of birds, particularly those using early successional vegetation. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.879artificial nest predationavian communitiesearly successionedgeforest managementloblolly pine |
| spellingShingle | Jenny R. Foggia Scott A. Rush Darren A. Miller T. Bently Wigley James A. Martin Effects of forest structure and harvest‐induced edges on predation risk Wildlife Society Bulletin artificial nest predation avian communities early succession edge forest management loblolly pine |
| title | Effects of forest structure and harvest‐induced edges on predation risk |
| title_full | Effects of forest structure and harvest‐induced edges on predation risk |
| title_fullStr | Effects of forest structure and harvest‐induced edges on predation risk |
| title_full_unstemmed | Effects of forest structure and harvest‐induced edges on predation risk |
| title_short | Effects of forest structure and harvest‐induced edges on predation risk |
| title_sort | effects of forest structure and harvest induced edges on predation risk |
| topic | artificial nest predation avian communities early succession edge forest management loblolly pine |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.879 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jennyrfoggia effectsofforeststructureandharvestinducededgesonpredationrisk AT scottarush effectsofforeststructureandharvestinducededgesonpredationrisk AT darrenamiller effectsofforeststructureandharvestinducededgesonpredationrisk AT tbentlywigley effectsofforeststructureandharvestinducededgesonpredationrisk AT jamesamartin effectsofforeststructureandharvestinducededgesonpredationrisk |