Browse > Article

The Relation of the Species Number of Bird to the Urban Biotope Area in Seoul  

Chae, Jin-Hwak (Department of Environmental Science ＆ Engineering, Kyung Hee University)
Kim, Jung-Soo (Department of Environmental Science ＆ Engineering, Kyung Hee University)
Koo, Tae-Hoe (Department of Environmental Science ＆ Engineering, Kyung Hee University)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology / v.17, no.4, 2004 , pp. 375-382 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study is conducted to investigate number of species in various habitat size in the area of urban biotope in Seoul from October to November in 2001 and from May to June in 2002. It is established that habitat size does not significantly affect the number of species in urban biotope. Thirty-two bird species were observed in 54 sites. Thirteen species of birds used sites of up to 1㏊, 29 species from 1 to 10 ㏊, and 8 species in the sites larger than 10㏊. We find that most of species appeared in size (1-10㏊), rather than in size (<1㏊, >10㏊). The cumulative number of species for a given cumulative area was consistently higher when small sites were added first. We think that this habitat size is the actual area to promote number of species within the urban area. Also, there was significant increase of number of species at biotope with water source and multiple vegetation structure. Therefore, if water resources and multiple vegetation structure is maintained, even small area can be helpful to the bird species promotion.
Keywords
URBAN AREA; HABATAT SIZE;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Adams, L.W.(1994) Urban Wildlife Habitats : A Landscape Perspective. University of Minnesota Press, Mineapolis, MN
2 Bischoff, N.T. and R.G.H. Jongman (1993) Development of rural areas in Europe: the claim for nature. Netherlands scientific council for government Policy. The hague: Sduuitgeverij, Plantijnstraat, p. 206
3 Clergeau, P. and F. Bure1(1997) The role of spatio-tem-poral patch connectivity at the landscape level: anexample in a bird distribution. Landsc. Urban Plann. 38: 37-43   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Degraaf, R.M. and J.M. Wentworth(1981) Urban bird communities and habitats in New England. In: Proceedings of the 46th North American Wildlife Conference, Washington, DC, 21-25 March, pp. 396- 412
5 DeGraaf, R.M., A.D. Geis. and P.A. Hea1y(1991) Bird population and habitat surveys in urban areas. Landsc. Urban Plann. 21:181-188   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Quinn, J.F. and S.P. Harrison(1988) Effects of habitat fragmentation and isolation on species richness:evidence from biogeographic patterns. Oecologia 75:132-140   DOI
7 Semlitsch, R.D. and J.R. Bodie(1998) Are small, isolated wetlands expendable? Conservation Biology 12:1129-1133   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Zuidema, P.A., J.A. Sayer. and W. Dijkman(1996) Forest fragmentation and biodiversity: the case for intermediate-sized conservation areas. Environ-mental Conservation 23: 290-297   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Fischer, J. and D.B. Lindenmayer(2002) Small patches can be valuable for biodiversity conservation: two case studies on birds in southeastern Australia .Biol. Conserv. 106:129-136   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Holling, C.S.(1992) Cross-scale morphology, geometry and dynamics of ecosystems. Ecol. Monogr. 62:447- 502   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Gilfedder, L. and J.B. Kirkpatrick(1998) Factors influ-encing the integrity of remnant bushland in Subhu-mid Tasmania. Biological Conservation 84: 89-96   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Middleton, J.(1994) Effects of urbanization on biodiversity in Canada. In: Biodiversity in Canada Environment Canada, Ottawa, pp. 15-20
13 Saunders, D.A. and R.J. Hobbs(Eds.)(1991) Nature conservation: the role of corridors. Surrey Beatty and Sons, Australia, p. 442
14 BIair, R.B. 1996. Land-use and avian species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecol. Appl. 6, 506-519   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Hostetler, M.E. and C.S. Holling(2000) Detecting the scales at which birds respond to structure in urban landscapes. Urban Ecosyst. 4: 25-54   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Kotliar, N.B. and J.A. Wiens(1990) Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity. Oikos 59: 253-260   DOI
17 Emlen, J.T.(1974) An urban bird community in Tucson, Arizona: derivation, structure, regulation. Condor 76:184-197   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Oh, K.(2001) LandScape Information System: A GIS approach to managing urban development. Landsc. Urban Plann. 54: 79-89
19 Mills, G.S., J.B. Dunning Jr. and J.M. Bates (1989) Effects of urbanization on breeding bird Communi-ty structure in southwestern desert habitats. Condor 91: 416-428   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Hostetler, M.(1999) Scale, birds, and human decisions: a potential for integrative research in urban ecosys-tems. Landsc. Urban Plann. 45: 15-19   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Savard, J.P.L.(1978) Birds in metropolitan Toronto: dis-tribution, relationships with habitat features and nesting sites. M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Zoology, University of Toronto, Ont., 221 pp
22 Fenton, J.(1997) A primary producer s perspective on nature conservation. In: Hale, P., Lamb, D. (Eds.), Conservation Outside Nature Reserves. University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 3-9
23 Noss, R.F.(1993) Wildlife corridors. In: Smith, D.S., Calwood Hellmund, P. (Eds.), Ecology of Greenways. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN, pp. 43-68
24 Woolfenden, G. and S. Rohwer(1969) Breeding birds in a Florida suburb. Fla. State Mus. Bull. No. 13
25 Hostetler, M. and K. Knowles-Yanez(2003) Land use, scale, and bird distributions in the Phoenix metro-politan area. Landsc. Urban Plann. 62: 55-68   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Jokimki, J. and J. Suhonen(1998) Distribution and habi-tat selection of wintering birds in urban environ-ments. Landsc. Urban Plann. 39: 253-263   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Walcott, C.(1974) Changes in bird life in Cambridge, MA, from 1860 to 1964. Auk 91:151-160
28 Clergeau, P.(1993) Utilisation des concepts de I' ecologie du paysage pour I' elaboration d' un nouveautype de passage a faune. Gibier et Faune Sauvage 10: 47-57