Journal of Ecology and Environment

The Ecological Society of Korea (한국생태학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Nest Box Preference by Secondary Cavity-Nesting Birds in Forested Environments

  • Choi, Chang-Yong (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Nam, Hyun-Young (School of Biological Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Eun-Jae (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Chung, Ok-Sik (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Park, Yong-Su (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Jong-Koo (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Hyun, Jee-Yun (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Woo-Shin (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University)
  • Published : 2007.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

We placed and monitored 2,137 nest boxes to determine how the size of the entrance hole and the box placement influenced nest box selection by secondary cavity-nesting birds and to derive recommendations for the use of nest boxes for management of cavity-nesting birds in forested environments. A total of 566 pairs of seven bird species used the nest boxes from 1997 to 2006, 562 of which were secondary cavity-nesters. Sympatric tits such as varied tits (Parus varius), great tits (P. major), and marsh tits (P. palustris) were common breeding birds in nest boxes, and showed clear preferences for 4.0 cm, 3.5 cm and 3.0 cm nest holes, respectively. Tree sparrows (Passer montanus) and Eurasian nuthatches (Sitta europaea) preferred 4 cm and 3.5 cm holes, respectively. We did not detect selection for the directional orientation for the entrance hole, but the birds appeared to avoid nest boxes that faced steep or gentle upward slopes and those less than 1.8 m from the ground. These results are probably related to avoidance of disturbance and predation. We suggest that diverse species can be supported by the placement of nest boxes with entrance holes of various sizes and that specific species can be targeted by selecting the hole sizes preferred by those species. To attract secondary cavity-nesters, managers should avoid placing nest boxes close to the ground and facing hills. This study also suggests that careful selection and placement of nest boxes is needed to avoid biases in research using nest boxes.

Keywords

References

  1. Alatalo RV, Moreno J. 1987. Body size, interspecific interactions, and use of foraging sites in tits (Paridae). Ecology 68: 1773-1777 https://doi.org/10.2307/1939868
  2. Balgooyen TG. 1990. Orientation of American kestrel nest cavities revisited. J Raptor Res 24: 27-28
  3. Brightsmith DJ. 2005. Competition, predation and nest niche shifts among tropical cavity nesters: ecological evidence. J Avian Biol 36: 74-83 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0908-8857.2005.03311.x
  4. Choi JS, Kim JS. 1987. Ecological studies on the inhabitation of artificial nests by wild birds: especially in Gyeongnam province. J Korea For Soc 76: 109-118
  5. Christman BJ, Dhondt AA. 1997. Nest Predation in Black-capped Chickadees: how safe are cavity nests? Auk 114: 769-773
  6. Cowie RJ, Hinsley SA. 1988. Feeding ecology of great tits (Parus major) and blue tits (Parus caeruleus), breeding in suburban gardens. J Anim Ecol 57: 611-626 https://doi.org/10.2307/4928
  7. Dennis J. 1971. Species using red-cockaded woodpecker holes in northeastern South Carolina. Bird Banding 42: 79-87 https://doi.org/10.2307/4511735
  8. Eguchi K. 1979. Food and food consumption of nestling tits, Parus major minor and Parus varius varius, in the evergreen broad leaved forests in northern Kyushu. J Yamashina Inst. Ornithol 54: 1-18
  9. Evans RM, Lank DB, Boyd WS, Cooke F. 2002. A comparison of the characteristics and fate of barrow's goldeneye and buffalehead nests in nest boxes and natural cavities. Condor 104: 610-619 https://doi.org/10.1650/0010-5422(2002)104[0610:ACOTCA]2.0.CO;2
  10. Inouye RS, Huntly NJ, Inouye DW. 1981. Non-random orientation of Gila Woodpecker nest entrances in saguaro cactus. Condor 83: 88-89 https://doi.org/10.2307/1367613
  11. Jacobs J. 1974. Quantitative measurements of food selection. Oecologia 14: 413-417 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00384581
  12. Kim SW. 1978. Needs of nest box settlement. Nature Conserv 22: 24-29
  13. Kim SW, Kim CH, Kim WK. 1967. Breeding biology and chick food of Korean great tit (Parus major wladiwostokensis) in Korea. Res Rep For Res Inst 12: 87-98
  14. Kim SJ, Lee D-P, Koo TH. 2000. A comparative study on the breeding biology of great tit Parus major using nest box in the Younggwang and Gwangju areas. Korean J Orni 7: 33-41
  15. Kim SW, Woo HC. 1987. Studies on the attracting bird to forest (II): ecology of coal tit. Res Rep For Res Inst 35: 123-129
  16. Korol JJ, Hutto RL. 1984. Factors affecting nest site location in Gila Woodpeckers. Condor 86: 73-78 https://doi.org/10.2307/1367350
  17. Lee W-S, Kim S-W. 1996. Foods and nest boxes of wildbirds in natural and degraded ecosystem. Korean J Orni 3: 43-50
  18. Li P, Martin TE. 1991. Nest-site selection and nesting success of cavity-nesting birds in high elevation forest drainages. Auk 108: 405-418
  19. Lumsden HG. 1986. Choice of nest boxes by tree swallows, Tachycineta bicolor, house wrens, Troglodytes aedon, eastern bluebirds, Sialia sialis, and European starlings, Sturnus vulgaris. Can Field-Nat 100: 343-349
  20. Mannan RW, Conner RN, Marcot B, Peek JM. 1996. Managing forestlands for wildlife. In: Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats, 5th ed (Bookhout TA, ed). The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, pp 689-721
  21. Martin K, Aitken KEH, Wiebe KL. 2004. Nest sites and nest webs for cavity nesting communities in interior British Columbia, Canada: Nest characteristics and niche partitioning. Condor 106: 5-19 https://doi.org/10.1650/7482
  22. Martin TE. 1993. Evolutionary determinants of clutch size in cavity nesting birds: Nest predation or limited breeding opportunities? Am Nat 142: 937-946 https://doi.org/10.1086/285582
  23. Mennill DJ, Ratcliffe LM. 2004. Nest cavity orientation in black-capped chickadees Poecile atricapillus: do the acoustic properties of cavities influence sound reception in the nest and extra-pair matings? J Avian Biol 35: 477-482 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0908-8857.2004.03351.x
  24. Minegishi N. 1994. Difference of nest box directions used by tit species and Tree Sparrows. Strix 13: 173-177
  25. Minegishi N. 1996. Difference of nest box use in relation to the height by tit species and Tree Sparrows. Strix 14: 73-79
  26. Newton I. 1994. The role of nest sites in limiting the numbers of holenesting birds: a review. Biol Conserv 70: 265-276 https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(94)90172-4
  27. Nilsson SG. 1984. The evolution of nest-site selection among hole-nesting birds: The importance of nest predation and competition. Ornis Scand 15: 165-175
  28. Park C-R. 2005. Tree species preference and inter-specific difference of foraging maneuver, trees and location among four canopy-dwelling birds at high-elevation temperate deciduous forest in Mt. Jumbongsan. Integrative Biosciences 9: 41-46
  29. Park C-R, Lee W-S, Hino T. 2005. Temporal changes of foraging niches among breeding tits (Paridae) in a Korean temperate deciduous forest. Ornis Fenn 82: 81-88
  30. Purcell KL, Verner J, Oring LW. 1997. A comparison of the breeding ecology of birds nesting in boxes and tree cavities. Auk 114: 646-656 https://doi.org/10.2307/4089284
  31. Raphael MG. 1985. Orientation of American Kestrel nest cavities and nest trees. Condor 87: 437-438 https://doi.org/10.2307/1367234
  32. Rendell WB, Robertson RJ. 1990. Influence of forest edge on nest-site selection by tree swallows. Wilson Bull 102: 634-644
  33. Rendell WB, Robertson RJ. 1993. Cavity size, clutch-size and the breeding ecology of Tree Swallows Tachycineta bycolor. Ibis 135: 305-310 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.1993.tb02848.x
  34. Rendell WB, Robertson RJ. 1994. Cavity-entrance orientation and nestsite use by secondary hole-nesting birds. J Field Ornith 65: 27-35
  35. Robertson RJ, Rendel WB. 1990. A comparison of the breeding ecology of a secondary cavity nesting bird, the Tree Swallow (Tachycineta bicolor), in nest boxes and natural cavities. Can J Zoo 68: 1046-1052 https://doi.org/10.1139/z90-152
  36. Stauffer DF, Best LB. 1982. Nest-site selection by cavity-nesting birds of riparian habitats in Iowa. Wilson Bull 94: 329-337
  37. Wiebe KL, Swift TL. 2001. Clutch size relative to tree cavity size in Northern Flickers. J Avian Biol 32: 167-173 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-048X.2001.320210.x
  38. Won P-O. 1981. Illustrated flora and fauna of Korea. Vol. 25. Avifauna. Ministry of Education, Seoul
  39. Won P-O, Kim S-W, Kim C-H. 1965. Breeding biology and chick food of varied tit Parus varius in Korea. Misc Rep Yam Ins Orn 4: 50-59
  40. Woo H-C, Kim S-W. 1985. Studies on the attracting bird to forest (I): ecology of Korean great tit. Res Rep For Res Inst 32: 77-87

Cited by

  1. Warning signals confer advantage to prey in competition with predators: bumblebees steal nests from insectivorous birds vol.67, pp.8, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-013-1553-2