Landscape Ecology

, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp 109–122 | Cite as

Effects of spatial habitat heterogeneity on habitat selection and annual fecundity for a migratory forest songbird

Research Article


Understanding how spatial habitat patterns influence abundance and dynamics of animal populations is a primary goal in landscape ecology. We used an information-theoretic approach to investigate the association between habitat patterns at multiple spatial scales and demographic patterns for black-throated blue warblers (Dendroica caerulescens) at 20 study sites in west-central Vermont, USA from 2002 to 2005. Sites were characterized by: (1) territory-scale shrub density, (2) patch-scale shrub density occurring within 25 ha of territories, and (3) landscape-scale habitat patterns occurring within 5 km radius extents of territories. We considered multiple population parameters including abundance, age ratios, and annual fecundity. Territory-scale shrub density was most important for determining abundance and age ratios, but landscape-scale habitat structure strongly influenced reproductive output. Sites with higher territory-scale shrub density had higher abundance, and were more likely to be occupied by older, more experienced individuals compared to sites with lower shrub density. However, annual fecundity was higher on sites located in contiguously forested landscapes where shrub density was lower than the fragmented sites. Further, effects of habitat pattern at one spatial scale depended on habitat conditions at different scales. For example, abundance increased with increasing territory-scale shrub density, but this effect was much stronger in fragmented landscapes than in contiguously forested landscapes. These results suggest that habitat pattern at different spatial scales affect demographic parameters in different ways, and that effects of habitat patterns at one spatial scale depends on habitat conditions at other scales.


Abundance Black-throated blue warbler Dendroica caerulescens Habitat heterogeneity Habitat selection Reproductive success Spatial population dynamics 



This project was supported by grants from the National Science Foundation, Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, and US Department of Agriculture McIntyre Stennis fund. We thank R. T. Holmes, A. M. Strong, and three anonymous reviewers for their comments on the manuscript. Finally, this project would not have been possible without the hard work and persistence of many field assistants. The Vermont Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit is jointly sponsored by the US Geological Survey, the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, the University of Vermont, and the Wildlife Management Institute. Use of trade names in this article does not confer government endorsement.

Supplementary material

10980_2009_9405_MOESM1_ESM.docx (26 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 25 kb)


  1. Ambuel B, Temple SA (1983) Area-dependent changes in the bird communities and vegetation of southern Wisconsin forests. Ecology 64:1057–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andren H (1992) Corvid density and nest predation in relation to forest fragmentation: a landscape perspective. Ecology 73:794–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andren H (1994) Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat—a review. Oikos 71:355–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Battin J, Lawler JJ (2006) Cross-scale correlations and the design and analysis of avian habitat selection studies. Condor 108:59–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bayne EM, Hobson KA (2001) Effects of habitat fragmentation on pairing success of ovenbirds: importance of male age and floater behavior. Auk 118:380–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Betts MG, Forbes GJ, Diamon AW, Taylor PD (2006) Independent effects of fragmentation on forest songbirds: an organism based approach. Ecol Appl 16:1076–1089CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bowman GB, Harris LD (1980) Effects of spatial heterogeneity on ground-nest depredation. J Wildl Manage 44:806–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Budnik JMT, Thompson FR, Ryan MR (2002) Effect of habitat characteristics on the probability of parasitism and predation of Bell’s vireo nests. J Wildl Manage 66:232–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burke DM, Nol E (1998) Influence of food abundance, nest-site habitat, and forest fragmentation on breeding ovenbirds. Auk 115:96–104Google Scholar
  10. Burke DM, Nol E (2000) Landscape and fragment size effects on reproductive success of forest-breeding birds in Ontario. Ecol Appl 10:1749–1761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burnham KP, Anderson DE (2002) Model inference and multimodel selection. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Chalfoun AD, Thompson FR, Ratnaswamy MJ (2002) Nest predators and fragmentation: a review and meta-analysis. Conserv Biol 16:306–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cody ML (1985) Habitat selection in birds. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Coker DR, Capen DE (1995) Landscape-level habitat use by brown-headed cowbirds in Vermont. J Wildl Manage 59:631–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cornell KL (2007) Scale-dependent mechanisms of habitat selection and demography for a forest songbird in a heterogeneous landscape. Dissertation, University of VermontGoogle Scholar
  16. Donovan TM, Lamberson RH, Kimber A, Thompson FR, Faaborg J (1995) Modeling the effects of habitat fragmentation on source and sink demography of neotropical migrant birds. Conserv Biol 9:1396–1407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Donovan TM, Jones PW, Annand EM, Thompson FR (1997) Variation in local-scale edge effects: mechanisms and landscape context. Ecology 78:2064–2075Google Scholar
  18. Donovan TM, Thompson FR, Faaborg J (2000) Cowbird distribution at different scales of fragmentation: tradeoffs between breeding and feeding opportunities. In: Cooke T, Robinson SK, Rothstein SI, Sealy SG, Smith JNM (eds) Ecology and management of cowbirds. University of Texas Press, Austin, TXGoogle Scholar
  19. Driscoll MJL, Donovan TM, Mickey R, Howard A, Fleming KK (2005) Determinants of wood thrush nest success: a multi-scale, model selection approach. J Wildl Manage 69:699–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Faccio SD (2003) Effects of ice storm created gaps on forest breeding bird communities in Central Vermont. For Ecol Manage 186:133–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Flaspohler DJ, Temple SA, Rosenfield RN (2000) Relationship between nest success and concealment in two ground-nesting passerines. J Field Ornithol 71:736–747Google Scholar
  22. Hanski IA, Simberloff D (1997) The metapopulation approach, it’s history, conceptual domain, and application to conservation. In: Hanski IA, Gilpin ME (eds) Metapopulation biology, ecology, genetics, and evolution. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  23. Hildén O (1965) Habitat selection in birds: a review. Ann Zoo Fenn 2:53–75Google Scholar
  24. Hochachka WM, Martin TE, Artman V, Smith CR, Hejl SJ, Andersen DE, Curson D, Petit L, Mathews N, Donovan T, Klaas EE, Wood PB, Manolis JC, McFarland KP, Nichols JV, Bednarz JC, Evans DM, Duguay JP, Garner S, Tewksbury J, Purcell KL, Faaborg J, Goguen CB, Rimmer C, Dettmers R, Knutson M, Collazo JA, Garner L, Whitehead D, Geupel G (1999) Scale dependence in the effects of forest coverage on parasitization by brown-headed Cowbirds. Stud Avian Biol 18:80–88Google Scholar
  25. Holmes RT, Sherry TW (1992) Site fidelity of migratory warblers in temperate breeding and neotropical wintering areas: implications for population dynamics, habitat selection, and conservation. In: Hagan JM, Johnston DW (eds) Ecology and conservation of neotropical migrant landbirds. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC, pp 563–575Google Scholar
  26. Holmes RT, Marra PP, Sherry TW (1996) Habitat-specific demography of breeding black-throated blue warblers (Dendroica caerulescens): implications for population dynamics. J Anim Ecol 65:183–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Holmes RT, Rodenhouse NL, Sillett TS (2005) Black-throated blue warbler (Dendroica caerulescens). In: Poole A (ed) The birds of North America. Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  28. Huggins RM (1989) On the statistical analysis of capture experiments. Biometrika 76:133–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Huggins RM (1991) Some practical aspects of a conditional likelihood approach to capture experiments. Biometrics 47:725–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hughes M (2003) Effects of local- and landscape-scale variation on the distribution of three area-sensitive forest songbirds in Vermont. Thesis, University of VermontGoogle Scholar
  31. James FC (1971) Ordinations of habitat relationships among breeding birds. Wilson Bull 83:21–236Google Scholar
  32. Kelley R (2001) The1998 ice storm: Vermont assessment and response. In Proceedings of the New York Society of American Foresters Ice Storm symposium, pp. 91-96. USDA Forest Service Report NA-TP-03-01Google Scholar
  33. King DI, DeGraaf RM (2006) Predators at bird nests in a northern hardwood forest in New Hampshire. J Field Ornithol 77:239–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kurki S, Nikula A, Helle P, Linden H (2000) Landscape fragmentation and forest composition effects on grouse breeding success in boreal forests. Ecology 81:1985–1997Google Scholar
  35. Lichstein JW, Simons TR, Franzweb KE (2002) Landscape effects of breeding songbird abundance in managed forests. Ecol Appl 12:836–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mahon CL, Martin K, LeMay V (2008) Do cross-scale correlations confound analysis of nest site selection for chestnut-backed chickadees? Condor 110:563–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McGargal K, Marks B (1995) Fragstats: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. USDA Forest ServiceGoogle Scholar
  38. McGarigal K, McComb WC (1995) Relationships between landscape structure and breeding birds in the Oregon coast range. Ecol Monogr 65:235–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nagy LR, Holmes RT (2005) To double-brood or not? Individual variation in the reproductive effort in black-throated blue warblers (Dendroica caerulescens). Auk 122:902–914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Orians GH, Wittenberger JF (1991) Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection. Am Nat 137:S29–S49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Peters DPC, Pielke RA Sr, Bestelmeyer BT, Allen CD, Munson-McGee S, Havstad KM (2004) Cross scale interactions, nonlinearities, and forecasting catastrophic events. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:15130–15135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am Nat 132:652–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pyle P, Howell SNG, Yundick RP, DeSante DF (1987) Identification guide to North American passerines. Slate Creek Press, BolinasGoogle Scholar
  44. Renfrew RB, Ribic CA (2008) Multi-scale models on grassland passerine abundance in a fragmented system in Wisconsin. Landscape Ecol 23:181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Richards ZL (1999) The effect of forest isolation on breeding black-throated blue warblers in Vermont. M.S. thesis, University of Vermont, Burlington, VermontGoogle Scholar
  46. Robinson SK, Thompson FR, Donovan TM, Whitehead DR, Faaborg J (1995) Regional forest fragmentation and the nesting success of migratory birds. Science 267:1987–1990CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Rodenhouse NL, Sherry TW, Holmes RT (1997) Site-dependent regulation of population size: a new synthesis. Ecology 78:2025–2042Google Scholar
  48. Rodenhouse NL, Sillett TS, Doran PJ, Holmes RT (2003) Multiple density-dependence mechanisms regulate a migratory bird population during the breeding season. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 270:2105–2110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rodrigues R (1994) Microhabitat variables influencing nest-site selection in tundra birds. Ecol Appl 4:110–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rolstad J (1991) Consequences of forest fragmentation for the dynamics of bird populations: conceptual issues and the evidence. Biol J Linn Soc 42:149–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. SAS (1999) The SAS system for windows. SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
  52. Schooley RL, Branch LC (2007) Spatial heterogeneity in habitat quality and cross-scale interactions in metapopulations. Ecosystems 10:846–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sillett TS, Holmes RT (2002) Variation in survivorship of a migratory songbird throughout its annual cycle. J Anim Ecol 71:296–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sillett TS, Rodenhouse NL, Holmes RT (2004) Experimentally reducing neighbor density affects reproduction and behavior of a migratory songbird. Ecology 85:2467–2477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Steele BB (1992) Habitat selection in breeding black-throated blue warblers at two spatial scales. Ornis Scand 23:33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tewksbury JJ, Garner L, Garner S, Lloyd JD, Saab V, Martin TE (2006) Tests of landscape influence: nest predation and brood parasitism in fragmented ecosystems. Ecology 87:759–768CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Thompson FR (1994) Temporal and spatial patterns of breeding brown-headed cowbirds in the midwestern United States. Auk 111:979–990Google Scholar
  58. Thompson FR, Donovan TM, DeGraaf RM, Faaborg J, Robinson SK (2002) A multi-scale perspective of the effects of forest fragmentation on birds in eastern forests. Stud Avian Biol 25:8–19Google Scholar
  59. Trzcinski MK, Fahrig L, Merriam G (1999) Independent effects of forest cover and fragmentation on the distribution of forest breeding birds. Ecol Appl 9:586–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Turner M (1989) Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process. Ann Rev Ecolog Syst 20:171–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Turner MG (2005) Landscape ecology: what is the state of the science? Ann Rev Ecol Syst 36:319–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Vander Haegen WM (2007) Fragmentation by agriculture influences reproductive success of birds in a shrubsteppe landscape. Ecol Appl 17:934–937CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Vergara PM, Armesto JJ (2009) Response of Chilean forest birds to anthropogentic habitat fragmentation across spatial scales. Landscape Ecol 24:25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Villard MA, Martin P, Drummond C (1993) Habitat fragmentation and pairing success in the ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapillus). Auk 110:759–768Google Scholar
  65. Vogelmann JE, Howard SM, Yang L, Larson CR, Wylie BK, Van Driel N (2001) Completion of the 1990s National Land Cover Data Set for the conterminous United States from Landsat Thematic Mapper data and ancillary. Photogramm Eng Rem S 67:650–652Google Scholar
  66. Walsberg G (1981) Nest-site selection and the radiative environment of the warbling vireo. Condor 83:86–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Whitcomb RF, Robbins CS, Lynch BL, Whitcomb MK, Klimkiewicz MK, Bystrak D (1981) Effects of forest fragmentation on avifauna of the eastern deciduous forest. In: Burgess RL, Sharpe DM (eds) Forest island dynamics in man-dominated landscapes. Springer, New York, pp 125–205Google Scholar
  68. White GC, Burnham KP (1999) Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study 46:120–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wiens JA, Rotenberry JT (1981) Habitat associations and community structure of birds in shrubsteppe environments. Ecol Monog 5:21–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zanette L, Doyle P, Tremont S (2000) Food shortage in small fragments: evidence from an area-sensitive passerine. Ecology 81:1654–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyCollege of William and MaryWilliamsburgUSA
  2. 2.Vermont Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural ResourcesUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA
  3. 3.United States Geological Survey, Vermont Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research UnitUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations