Urbanization and nest-site selection of the Black-billed Magpie ( Pica pica ) populations in two Finnish cities: From a persecuted species to an urban exploiter

Jokimäki, Jukka; Suhonen, Jukka; Vuorisalo, Timo; Kövér, L.; Kaisanlahti‐Jokimäki, Marja‐Liisa

doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.08.001

Cited by 45 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…, Jokimäki et al. ). Furthermore, the number of generalist predators increases with the level of urbanization, whereas the number of specialist predators decreases (Sorace and Gustin ), which might also suggest differences between land‐sharing and land‐sparing areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Land‐sharing vs. land‐sparing urban development modulate predator–prey interactions in Europe

Jokimäki

Suhonen

Benedetti

et al. 2020

Ecological Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban areas are expanding globally as a consequence of human population increases, with overall negative effects on biodiversity. To prevent the further loss of biodiversity, it is urgent to understand the mechanisms behind this loss to develop evidence‐based sustainable solutions to preserve biodiversity in urban landscapes. The two extreme urban development types along a continuum, land‐sparing (large, continuous green areas and high‐density housing) and land‐sharing (small, fragmented green areas and low‐density housing) have been the recent focus of debates regarding the pattern of urban development. However, in this context, there is no information on the mechanisms behind the observed biodiversity changes. One of the main mechanisms proposed to explain urban biodiversity loss is the alteration of predator–prey interactions. Using ground‐nesting birds as a model system and data from nine European cities, we experimentally tested the effects of these two extreme urban development types on artificial ground nest survival and whether nest survival correlates with the local abundance of ground‐nesting birds and their nest predators. Nest survival (n = 554) was lower in land‐sharing than in land‐sparing urban areas. Nest survival decreased with increasing numbers of local predators (cats and corvids) and with nest visibility. Correspondingly, relative abundance of ground‐nesting birds was greater in land‐sparing than in land‐sharing urban areas, though overall bird species richness was unaffected by the pattern of urban development. We provide the first evidence that predator–prey interactions differ between the two extreme urban development types. Changing interactions may explain the higher proportion of ground‐nesting birds in land‐sparing areas, and suggest a limitation of the land‐sharing model. Nest predator control and the provision of more green‐covered urban habitats may also improve conservation of sensitive birds in cities. Our findings provide information on how to further expand our cities without severe loss of urban‐sensitive species and give support for land‐sparing over land‐sharing urban development.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Land‐sharing vs. land‐sparing urban development modulate predator–prey interactions in Europe

Jokimäki

Suhonen

Benedetti

et al. 2020

Ecological Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Especially ground-nesting bird species have been shown to be sensitive for urbanization (Jokim€ aki and Huhta 2000, Clergeau et al 2006, Croci et al 2008, Evans et al 2011). However, the safe-habitat hypothesis has also been questioned (Jokim€ aki et al 2005, Chamberlain et al 2009) and, while cities are characterized by an overall decrease in the abundance of native predators, they also experience an increase in domestic (cats and dogs) and humanassociated predators (rats and corvids; e.g., Gregory and Marchant 1996, Gering and Blair 1999, Jerzak 2001, Sims et al 2008, Valcarcel and Fern andez-Juricic 2009, D ıaz et al 2013, Jokim€ aki et al 2017. Furthermore, the number of generalist predators increases with the level of urbanization, whereas the number of specialist predators decreases (Sorace and Gustin 2009), which might also suggest differences between land-sharing and landsparing areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drought exacerbates negative consequences of high‐intensity cattle grazing in a semiarid grassland

Souther

Loeser

Crews

et al. 2020

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grasslands managed for grazing are the largest land‐use category globally, with a significant proportion of these grasslands occurring in semiarid and arid regions. In such dryland systems, the effect of grazing on native plant diversity has been equivocal, some studies suggesting that grazing reduces native plant diversity, others that grazing increases or has little impact on diversity. One impediment toward generalizing grazing effects on diversity in this region is that high levels of interannual variation in precipitation may obfuscate vegetative response patterns. By analyzing a long‐term data set collected over a 20‐yr period in a semiarid grassland, we explicitly evaluated the role of climate in regulating the effect of cattle grazing on plant communities, finding that climate interacted with grazing intensity to shape grassland communities. Community composition of plots that were intensively grazed varied considerably in response to climatic variation and native species richness was low relative to ungrazed and moderately grazed plots. Following a severe drought in 2002, exotic species richness rapidly increased in the high‐intensity grazing plots. While this pattern was mirrored in the other treatments, exotic species richness increased to a greater extent and was slower to return to pre‐drought levels in the high‐intensity grazing plots. Overall, moderate grazing, even compared to grazing cessation, stabilized grassland communities through time, increased resilience to drought, and maintained the highest levels of native plant diversity and lowest levels of exotic diversity. These findings suggest that grazing, at moderate levels, may support grassland resilience to climate change in semiarid regions. However, grazing that exceeds tolerances, particularly in combination with extreme climatic events, like drought, can alter plant composition over relatively long timescales and possibly increase invasibility by nonnative species.

show abstract

“…On the other hand, human activities may also provide benefits to some species (e.g. through provisioning of food resources and nest sites; Kurosawa et al 2003;Oro et al 2013, West andPeery 2017;Jokimäki et al 2017). Therefore, the presence of people potentially means the presence of food sources in the form of human food scraps (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural responses to human disturbance in an alpine bird

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urbanization and nest-site selection of the Black-billed Magpie ( Pica pica ) populations in two Finnish cities: From a persecuted species to an urban exploiter

Abstract: This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version usually differs somewhat from the publisher's final version, if the self-archived version is the accepted author manuscript.

Cited by 45 publications

References 40 publications

Land‐sharing vs. land‐sparing urban development modulate predator–prey interactions in Europe

Land‐sharing vs. land‐sparing urban development modulate predator–prey interactions in Europe

Drought exacerbates negative consequences of high‐intensity cattle grazing in a semiarid grassland

Behavioural responses to human disturbance in an alpine bird

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About