Chicago's Urban Cemeteries as Habitat for Cavity-Nesting Birds

被引:9
|
作者
Smith, Alexis D. [1 ]
Minor, Emily [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, Dept Biol Sci, Chicago, IL 60607 USA
[2] Univ Illinois, Inst Environm Sci & Policy, Chicago, IL 60607 USA
来源
SUSTAINABILITY | 2019年 / 11卷 / 12期
关键词
urban biodiversity; cavity-nesting birds; habitat; conservation; snags; woodpeckers; graveyards; urban land management; cemeteries; URBANIZATION; COMMUNITIES; TREES; WOODPECKERS; ECOLOGY; GUILDS; FOREST;
D O I
10.3390/su11123258
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Although not explicitly managed for conservation, urban cemeteries may provide a reserve of dead and dying trees for cavity-nesting birds. However, the ability of urban cemeteries to support these birds on current landscapes is largely unknown. We surveyed cavity-nesting birds and their habitat in 18 cemeteries in Chicago, Illinois (USA). At each location, we examined vegetation, availability of gravestones and monuments for perches, and landscape-level environmental conditions. We tested the importance of these variables for presence of individual bird species, and for overall richness of native cavity-nesting birds. We also assessed the availability and characteristics of tree cavities and their distribution among different tree species. We found that most cemeteries contained at least one dead or dying tree. Across all sampled areas, we detected 207 naturally-occurring and 77 excavated tree cavities. Tree species generally supported cavities in proportion to their abundance. We observed 12 native and two non-native cavity-nesting bird species in the cemeteries. Cavity-nesting bird species richness was best explained by landscape-level variables such as canopy cover and distance to water, but local-level variables (e.g., number of graves in a 50 m radius) influenced habitat selection for some species. Based on our results, we make suggestions for how both existing cemeteries and new green cemeteries can support biodiversity conservation.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] USE OF SNAGS BY CAVITY-NESTING BIRDS IN THE SIERRA-NEVADA
    RAPHAEL, MG
    WHITE, M
    WILDLIFE MONOGRAPHS, 1984, (86) : 1 - 66
  • [32] CONSPECIFIC EFFECT ON HABITAT SELECTION OF A TERRITORIAL CAVITY-NESTING BIRD
    Quilodran, Claudio S.
    Estades, Cristian F.
    Vasquez, Rodrigo A.
    WILSON JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY, 2014, 126 (03): : 534 - 543
  • [33] The influence of habitat properties on sex determination in cavity-nesting Hymenoptera
    Wittmann, Katharina
    Klein, Alexandra-Maria
    Staab, Michael
    BASIC AND APPLIED ECOLOGY, 2023, 70 : 1 - 11
  • [34] Reproductive success of cavity-nesting birds in partially harvested woodlots
    Straus, Melissa A.
    Bavrlic, Kata
    Nol, Erica
    Burke, Dawn M.
    Elliott, Ken A.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH, 2011, 41 (05) : 1004 - 1017
  • [35] Evidence of information collection from heterospecifics in cavity-nesting birds
    Forsman, Jukka T.
    Thomson, Robert L.
    IBIS, 2008, 150 (02) : 409 - 412
  • [36] Snags, cavity-nesting birds, and silvicultural treatments in Western Oregon
    Walter, ST
    Maguire, CC
    JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2005, 69 (04): : 1578 - 1591
  • [37] THE EFFECTS OF FOREST MANAGEMENT ON CAVITY-NESTING BIRDS IN NORTHWESTERN WASHINGTON
    ZARNOWITZ, JE
    MANUWAL, DA
    JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 1985, 49 (01): : 255 - 263
  • [38] Sound settlement: noise surpasses land cover in explaining breeding habitat selection of secondary cavity-nesting birds
    Kleist, Nathan J.
    Guralnick, Robert P.
    Cruz, Alexander
    Francis, Clinton D.
    ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 2017, 27 (01) : 260 - 273
  • [39] Cavity characteristics, but not habitat, influence nest survival of cavity-nesting birds along a gradient of human impact in the subtropical Atlantic Forest
    Cockle, Kristina L.
    Bodrati, Alejandro
    Lammertink, Martjan
    Martin, Kathy
    BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2015, 184 : 193 - 200
  • [40] LIFE-HISTORY TRAITS OF OPEN-NESTING VS CAVITY-NESTING BIRDS
    MARTIN, TE
    LI, PJ
    ECOLOGY, 1992, 73 (02) : 579 - 592