Bird communities of different woody vegetation types from the Niraj Valley, Romania

Abstract

In this paper, the bird assemblages of different woody vegetation types are presented in a human-modified Eastern European landscape. The studied territory is part of a Special Protection Area for bird species. The following sampling areas were included in the study: hornbeam-beech, oak-hornbeam, and sessile oak forests; thickets of willow; forests of white willow; scrubs of blackthorn and hawthorn; and orchards. Birds were grouped in a community typical of deciduous forests and in another community typical of coppices and scrubs. Bird species number, alpha diversity, and abundance were significantly higher in the Salici-Populetum association and in orchards than in the other plant associations. The value of beta diversity was highest in the Carpino-Quercetum petraeae association. The lowest spatial heterogeneity and equitability were in the Salicetum triandrae association. The Salici-Populetum association had the highest number of characteristic species. The analysis of the ecological structure of the bird communities showed that forests and orchards are more abundant in species associated with closed forest habitats than other plant associations. It can be concluded that orchards have a bird community influenced by the forest habitats. Along with forests, orchards are valuable habitats for bird species requiring designation of protected areas and species of national interest.

Bird Communities and Vegetation Composition in the Urban Forest Ecosystem: Correlations and Comparisons of Diversity Indices

“…The dependence of the diversity of bird communities on the heterogeneity of the stand and the mosaic of habitats was repeatedly emphasised in other studies (Tews et al, 2004;Giltena et al, 2007;Moreno-Rueda, Pizzaro, 2009;Stefanova, Salek, 2014;Domokos E., Domokos J., 2016). The authors suggested that the transformed environment could reduce species abundance because of a decrease in the populations of some species.…”

Trophic links of the chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs) in transformed forest ecosystems of North-Eastern Ukraine

“…The chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs Linnaeus, 1758) is a common insectivorous bird and a principal contributor to forest ecosystem communities of the temperate climate zone (Browne, 2004;Amar et al, 2006;Baillie et al, 2006;Domokos & Domokos, 2016;Ramdani et al, 2019). It is also a migrant of global conservation concern (Bern Convention) and studies on the foraging ecology of the species will defini-tely assist in its conservation.…”

“…It is also a migrant of global conservation concern (Bern Convention) and studies on the foraging ecology of the species will defini-tely assist in its conservation. It has been already revealed that habitat conditions of the chaffinch are crucial for the successful breeding and stability of its population in forests of England (Whittingham et al, 2001;Macleod et al, 2004), Turkey, Germany (Bergen & Abs, 1997;Batary et al, 2014), Sweden (Felton et al, 2016), Romania (Domokos & Domokos, 2016), Spain (Moreno-Rueda & Pizarro, 2009;Peris & Montelongo, 2014) and North East Algeria (Ramdani et al, 2019). The role of artificial light and noise for the finches when they search for food has also been studied (Quinn et al, 2006;Kempenaers et al, 2010).…”

Bird communities and vegetation composition in natural and semi-natural forests of megalopolis: correlations and comparisons of diversity indices (Kyiv city, Ukraine)

“…These practices might have negative consequences for birds that depend on shrubs for breeding and foraging, which showed that it was possible to keep breeding species in managed forests as long as sufficient shrub layer was retained in the understory (Camprodon, Brotons, 2006;Heyman, 2010). The analysis of the ecological structure of the birds communities showed that forests are more abundant in species associated with closed forest habitats than other plant associations (Domokos E., Domokos J., 2016). Recent studies suggest that birds communities are influenced by woodland vegetation cover at both the patch and the landscape scales and that these relationships are consistent over time (Ikin et al, 2014).…”