Natural History of the Nuttall Woodpecker at the Hastings Reservation

Miller, Alden H.; Bock, Carl E.

doi:10.2307/1366590

Cited by 22 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…American Kestrels, for example, are 50% larger than starlings and are thus unlikely to be victims of starling nest usurpation. Conversely, Nuttall's Woodpeckers build cavities smaller than starlings can use ( Miller & Bock 1972 ). And, despite considerable attention to interspecific encounters of this species by Short (1971), I am aware of only one reported case of starling interference with this species ( a mention by Lowther [2000] based on comments accompanying a census by Riensche and Cogswell [1993]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

European Starlings and Their Effect on Native Cavity‐Nesting Birds

Koenig

2003

Conservation Biology

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European Starlings ( Sturnus vulgaris ) were introduced to New York City in 1890 and have since become one of North America's most common species. Starlings are aggressive competitors and commonly usurp cavities of other hole‐nesting species. These characters make it a clear choice for a species whose invasion is likely to have significantly affected native cavity‐nesting birds. Using Christmas Bird Counts and Breeding Bird Surveys, I compared the mean densities of 27 native cavity‐nesting species before and after invasion of sites by starlings. Contrary to expectations, only 10 of the species exhibited significant effects potentially attributable to starlings, and only half of these were in part negative. However, in 2 of the 5 species that showed negative effects, evidence for a decline in one analysis was countered by an increase in the other, whereas in 2 others declines were likely due to factors other than starling competition. Only sapsuckers ( Sphyrapicus spp. ) exhibited declines potentially attributable to starlings that were not countered by other data. Although declines may still occur if starlings continue to increase, the results of this study fail to support the hypothesis that starlings have had a severe impact on populations of native birds. These results highlight the difficulties of predicting the impacts of invasive species. Native hole‐nesting birds have thus far apparently held their own against the starling invasion, despite the latter's abundance and aggressive usurpation of often limited cavities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

European Starlings and Their Effect on Native Cavity‐Nesting Birds

Koenig

2003

Conservation Biology

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was mediated through metabolic by-products (alcohol) in yeast, through allelochemicals in Paramecium (7), and by egg predation between species of Tribolium. In the field, interspecific interference competition, e.g., aggression or poisoning, has been found to be important between species of birds (8)(9)(10)(11)(12), mammals (13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20), and invertebrates (21)(22)(23)(24). In contrast, most, if not all, evidence for exploitation competition for food is inferential.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interference Competition and Niche Theory

Case

Gilpin

1974

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

471

335

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A linear model of interspecific competition with separate parameters for exploitation and interference is deduced. Interference is assumed to have a cost and an effect. The interfering species realizes a "profit" if some resources, which the species interfered against would have utilized, are made available as a result of the interference. Interference is favored when its cost is small, its effect is high, and the resource overlap with the species interfered against is high. Interference is likely to be an alternative strategy to high exploitation efficiency. The incorporation of interference into niche theory clarifies the competitive phenomenon of unstable equilibrium points, excess density compensation on islands, competitive avoidance by escape in time and space, the persistence of the "prudent predator," and the magnitude of the difference between the size of a species' fundamental niche and its realized niche.Interspecies competition has long been recognized to be of two types, exploitation competition and interference competition (1, 2). Nonetheless, the "niche theory" of competition in communities (3) assumes that exploitation (or utilization) of "resources", e.g., prey species or habitat types, primarily determines ecological segregation. Most actual field or laboratory studies of interspecies competition show, however, that interference was present, and often played the more important role in determining abundance and distribution.Interference was the major component of competition in the classical studies of Gause (4) on yeast and Paramecium, and of Park (5, 6) on Tribolium. It was mediated through metabolic by-products (alcohol) in yeast, through allelochemicals in Paramecium (7), and by egg predation between species of Tribolium. In the field, interspecific interference competition, e.g., aggression or poisoning, has been found to be important between species of birds (8-12), mammals (13-20), and invertebrates (21-24). In contrast, most, if not all, evidence for exploitation competition for food is inferential.Given this taxonomically broad catalogue of interference competition, it is imperative that interference competition be explicitly included in current niche theory. To this end, we shall develop a mathematical model of competition that separates the contributions from exploitation and interference.By considering the effect of interference on population adaptedness (equilibrium density), it will be possible to predict the circumstances whereunder interference competition may evolve from exploitation competition.Competition models and the evolution of interferenceThe differential equations of Lotka and Volterra are frequently used to model competition and they also serve as the basis of niche theory (25), but this model has some weaknesses. It does not account for sex, age structure, seasonality, thresholds, time delays, stochastic effects and nonlinearities. Nonetheless, the model is simple and general. If its approximate nature is appreciated, it can serve as an excellent vehicle to un...

show abstract

“…We focus on five bird species, acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), NuttallÕs woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii), HuttonÕs vireo (Vireo huttoni), western scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californica), and oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), chosen for their high dependence on coastal oak habitats for survival and reproduction (Grinnell and Miller, 1944;Pitelka, 1951;American OrnithologistsÕ Union, 1957;Short, 1971;Miller and Bock, 1972;Verner, 1979;Koenig and Haydock, 1999;Cicero, 2000) (Fig. 2).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%