2002
DOI: 10.1642/0004-8038(2002)119[0391:nsrpfa]2.0.co;2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nest-Site Reuse Patterns for a Cavity-Nesting Bird Community in Interior British Columbia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

7
108
1
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 116 publications
(117 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
7
108
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Time available for breeding is, however, limited, especially in northern latitudes, and cavity-excavating species can save time by reusing old nest holes. Obviously, cavity-excavating bird species are likely to face a trade-off between excavating a new cavity and reusing an old one, and the decision depends on, e.g., population structure or different risks such as predation, competition and ectoparasitism (Short 1979, Aitken et al 2002, Wiebe et al 2006, Mazgajski 2007a. The use of an old cavity may also be beneficial because woodpeckers have previously found it structurally sound, its location is advantageous for feeding or previous nesting attempts were successful (see Aitken & Martin 2004, Wiebe et al 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Time available for breeding is, however, limited, especially in northern latitudes, and cavity-excavating species can save time by reusing old nest holes. Obviously, cavity-excavating bird species are likely to face a trade-off between excavating a new cavity and reusing an old one, and the decision depends on, e.g., population structure or different risks such as predation, competition and ectoparasitism (Short 1979, Aitken et al 2002, Wiebe et al 2006, Mazgajski 2007a. The use of an old cavity may also be beneficial because woodpeckers have previously found it structurally sound, its location is advantageous for feeding or previous nesting attempts were successful (see Aitken & Martin 2004, Wiebe et al 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Early reports concentrated on the value of broadleaves to wildlife (Enns et al 1993) and the need to retain minor amounts of these species in future forests, particularly in riparian zones. With more research, the broader contribution of broadleaved species to biodiversity, forest health and ecosystem functioning has been increasingly recognized (Aitken et al 2002, Lindenmayer and Franklin 2002, Hagar 2007) and the need for a multi-scale approach to planning species retention along multiple management pathways has been proposed (Comeau et al 2005, Simard andVyse 2006).…”
Section: Advantages Of Managing For Broadleavesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…broadleaves in mixed stands include limiting spread of root disease among conifers (Morrison et al 1988, Gerlach et al 1997, reducing the risk of conifer attack by weevils and spruce budworm (Taylor et al 1994, McIntosh et al 1996, protecting understory conifers against frost (Andersson 1985, Pritchard andComeau 2004), providing habitat for ungulates, small mammals and birds (Peterson et al 1997, Aitken et al 2002, and improving soil productivity through nutrient-rich litter inputs (Brockley and Sanborn 2003). In keeping with this last point, total yield (conifers plus broadleaves) in mixed forests has sometimes been higher than in pure coniferous forests because of niche complementarity (Kenk 1992, Mielikainen 1996, Frivold and Kolström 1999, Man and Lieffers 1999, Valkonen and Valsta 2001.…”
Section: Advantages Of Managing For Broadleavesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A similar effect occurs in secondary forests, where the density of large cavities tends to decrease due to the smaller diameter of the trees (Willis & Oniki 2001, Cornelius et al 2008, Cockle et al 2011a). Further, timber management practices based on the exploitation of decaying trees have caused disastrous declines in cavity-nesting birds in Europe and North America (Dobkin et al 1995, Aitken et al 2002, Franco et al 2005. These are evidences that forest type, successional stage, and degree of human disturbance are key elements for cavity nests availability and for the persistence of cavity-nesting birds (Cornelius et al 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%