Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:16:05.713Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nest density, egg conspicuity, vegetation structure and seasonality affect artificial nest predation in the Brazilian Cerrado

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 May 2022

Ivan R. de Aguiar ,
Vinícius R. Vianna  and
Raphael Igor Dias
Ivan R. de Aguiar
Affiliation:
Faculdade de Ciências da Educação e Saúde, Centro Universitário de Brasília, UniCEUB, Campus da Asa Norte, Brasília, DF, Brasil
Vinícius R. Vianna
Affiliation:
Faculdade de Ciências da Educação e Saúde, Centro Universitário de Brasília, UniCEUB, Campus da Asa Norte, Brasília, DF, Brasil
Raphael Igor Dias*
Affiliation:
Faculdade de Ciências da Educação e Saúde, Centro Universitário de Brasília, UniCEUB, Campus da Asa Norte, Brasília, DF, Brasil
*
Author for correspondence: Raphael Igor Dias, Email: raphael.dias@ceub.edu.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nest predators use visual, acoustic and chemical cues to locate nests. In the Neotropics, predation is high being the main cause of nest failure. Despite that, it is still not completely clear what kind of information predators are using to find nests or whether predators respond differently according to habitat characteristics. Here, we executed an experimental manipulation to investigate how different ecological factors influence nest predation probability. We hypothesised that egg conspicuousness, nest clustering and a more open vegetation structure would increase nest predation probability, and that nest predation would be higher during the breeding season of most avian species in the region. We used artificial nests baited with plasticine and quail eggs (Coturnix coturnix), manipulated egg coloration and nest density. Artificial nests were distributed over forest and savanna-like vegetations. Overall predation rate was 40.9%. We found that nests baited with conspicuous eggs, located in open habitats, at higher densities and during the dry period were more predated. Results suggest that main predators must be visually orientated, and that egg crypsis is an important trait for open-nest species in the area. Moreover, a higher nest density may affect predator behaviour, favouring an increase in nest searching, which may be facilitated in open habitats.

Keywords

Artificial nestBrazilian savannacryptic colorationhabitat selectionneotropicsnest clusteringpredatorrainfall
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 38 , Issue 6 , November 2022 , pp. 362 - 369
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, JT, Blackmer, AL and Eadie, JM (2004) Is predation on waterfowl nests density dependent? Tests at three spatial scales. Oikos 107, 128–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akcali, CK, Adán Pérez-Mendoza, H, Salazar-Valenzuela, D, Kikuchi, DW, Guayasamin, JM and Pfennig, DW (2019) Evaluating the utility of camera traps in field studies of predation. PeerJournal 7, e6487.Google ScholarPubMed
Almeida, MV., Lucindo, AS, Costa, TVV and de Paula, HMG (2013) Predation on artificial nests by marmosets of the genus Callithrix (Primates, Platyrrhini) in a Cerrado fragment in Southeastern Brazil. Biotemas 26, 203–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D, Mächler, M, Bolker, B and Steven, W (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellamy, PE, Burgess, MD, Mallord, JW, Cristinacce, A, Orsman, CJ, Davis, T, Grice, PV and Charman, EC (2018) Nest predation and the influence of habitat structure on nest predation of Wood Warbler Phylloscopus sibilatrix, a ground-nesting forest passerine. Journal of Ornithology 159, 493–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biddle, LE, Broughton, RE, Goodman, AM and Deeming, DC (2018) Composition of bird nests is a species-specific characteristic. Avian Biology Research 11, 132–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanco, G and Bertellotti, M (2002) Differential predation by mammals and birds: implications for egg-colour polymorphism in a nomadic breeding seabird. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 75, 137–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buehler, R, Bosco, L, Arlettaz, R and Jacot, A (2017) Nest site preferences of the Woodlark (Lullula arborea) and its association with artificial nest predation. Acta Oecologica 78, 41–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castilla, A, Dhondt, A, Díaz-Uriarte, R and Westmoreland, D (2007) Predation in ground-nesting birds: an experimental study using natural egg-color variation. Avian Conservation and Ecology 2, 2–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpio, AJ, Castro-Caro, JC and Tortosa, FS (2016) The influence of nest density on nest predation in olive groves depends on habitat features. Ardeola 63, 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherry, MI and Gosler, AG (2010) Avian eggshell coloration: new perspectives on adaptive explanations. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 100, 753–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockle, KL, Bodrati, A, Lammertink, M, Bonaparte, EB, Ferreyra, C and di Sallo, FG (2016) Predators of bird nests in the Atlantic forest of Argentina and Paraguay. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 128, 120–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cove, MV, Fernandez, CM, Alvarez, MV, Bird, S, Jones, DW and Fagan, ME (2017) Toucans descend to the forest floor to consume the eggs of ground-nesting birds. Food Webs 10, 2–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, WA, Thompson, FR and Faaborg, J (2012a) Species and temporal factors affect predator-specific rates of nest predation for forest songbirds in the Midwest. Auk 129, 147–155.Google Scholar
Cox, WA, Thompson, FR and Faaborg, J (2012b) Landscape forest cover and edge effects on songbird nest predation vary by nest predator. Landscape Ecology 27, 659–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dagan, U and Izhaki, I (2020) Vegetation structure governs nest predation in three types of conifer forest habitats. European Journal of Forest Research 139, 721–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darolová, A, Krištofík, J and Hoi, H (2014) Vegetation type variation in marsh habitats: does it affect nest site selection, reproductive success, and maternal investment in Reed Warblers? Journal of Ornithology 155, 997–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, SK (2005) Nest-site selection patterns and the influence of vegetation on nest survival of mixed-grass prairie passerines. The Condor 107, 605–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denno, RF, Finke, DL and Langellotto, GA (2005) Direct and indirect effects of vegetation structure and habitat complexity on predator-prey and predator-predator interactions. In Barbosa, P and Castellanos, I (eds.), Ecology of Predator-Prey Interactions. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 211–239.Google Scholar
Devries, JH, Clark, RG and Armstrong, LM (2018) Dynamics of habitat selection in birds: adaptive response to nest predation depends on multiple factors. Oecologia 187, 305–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Djomo, NE, Sedláček, O, Vokurková, J and Hořák, D (2014) Nest position and type affect predation rates of artificial avian nests in the tropical lowland forest on Mount Cameroon. Ostrich 85, 93–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodonov, P, Paneczko, IT and Telles, M (2017) Edge, height and visibility effects on nest predation by birds and mammals in the Brazilian cerrado. Acta Oecologica 83, 56–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duca, C, Gonçalves, J and Marini, MÂ (2001) Predação de ninhos artificiais em fragmentos de matas de Minas Gerais. Ararajuba 9, 113–117.Google Scholar
Eiten, G (1972) The Cerrado vegetation of Brazil. Botanical Review 38, 201–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faaborg, J (2004) Truly artificial nest studies. Conservation Biology 18, 369–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fogarty, DT, Elmore, RD, Fuhlendorf, SD and Loss, SR (2017) Influence of olfactory and visual cover on nest site selection and nest success for grassland-nesting birds. Ecology and Evolution 7, 6247–6258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
França, LF, Sousa, NO, Santos, LRD, Duca, C, Gressler, DT, Borges, FJ, Lopes, LE, Manica, LT, Paiva, LV, Medeiros, RCS and Marini, MÂ (2009) Passeriformes: nest predators and prey in a Neotropical Savannah in Central Brazil. Zoologia (Curitiba) 26, 799–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
França, LC and Marini, MÂ (2009) Teste do efeito de borda na predação de ninhos naturais e artificiais no Cerrado. Zoologia (Curitiba) 26, 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulton, GR (2019) Meta-analyses of nest predation in temperate Australian forests and woodlands. Austral Ecology 44, 389–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillis, H, Gauffre, B, Huot, R and Bretagnolle, V (2012) Vegetation height and egg coloration differentially affect predation rate and overheating risk: an experimental test mimicking a ground-nesting bird. Canadian Journal of Zoology 90, 694–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guimarães-Silva, MA (2020) Armadilhas fotográficas e predação de ninhos artificiais no cerrado. Master’s dissertation.Google Scholar
Gulson-Castillo, ER, Greeney, HF and Freeman, BG (2018) Coordinated misdirection: a probable anti-nest predation behavior widespread in Neotropical birds. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 130, 583–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanski, IK and Laurila, A (1993) High nest predation rate in the Chaffinch. Ornis Fennica 70, 65–65.Google Scholar
Hartig, F (2020) DHARMa: Residual Diagnostics for Hierarchical (Multi-Level/Mixed) Regression Models. R Package Version 0.2.7. http://florianhartig.github.io/DHARMa/ Google Scholar
Holopainen, S, Vaananen, VM and Fox, AD (2020) Artificial nest experiment reveals inter-guild facilitation in duck nest predation. Global Ecology and Conservation 24, e01305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husby, M and Hoset, KS (2018) Seasonal variation in nest predation rates in boreal forests. Journal of Ornithology 159, 975–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibáñez-Álamo, JD, Magrath, RD, Oteyza, JC, Chalfoun, AD, Haff, TM, Schmidt, KA, Thomson, RL and Martin, TE (2015) Nest predation research: recent findings and future perspectives. Journal of Ornithology 156, 247–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleindorfer, S (2007) The ecology of clutch size variation in Darwin’s Small Ground Finch Geospiza fuliginosa: comparison between lowland and highland habitats. Ibis 149, 730–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krüger, H, Väänänen, VM, Holopainen, S and Nummi, P (2018) The new faces of nest predation in agricultural landscapes—a wildlife camera survey with artificial nests. European Journal of Wildlife Research 64, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurucz, K, Batáry, P, Frank, K and Purger, JJ (2015) Effects of daily nest monitoring on predation rate - an artificial nest experiment. North-Western Journal of Zoology 11, 219–224.Google Scholar
Lack, D (1968) Ecological Adaptations for Breeding in Birds. London: Methue.Google Scholar
Laidlaw, RA, Gunnarsson, TG, Méndez, V, Carneiro, C, Þórisson, B, Wentworth, A, Gill, JA and Alves, JA (2020) Vegetation structure influences predation rates of early nests in subarctic breeding waders. Ibis 162, 1225–1236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leniowski, K and Węgrzyn, E (2018) Synchronisation of parental behaviours reduces the risk of nest predation in a socially monogamous passerine bird. Scientific Reports 8, 7385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lima, SL (2009) Predators and the breeding bird: behavioral and reproductive flexibility under the risk of predation. Biological Reviews 84, 485–513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Magige, FJ, Moe, B and Røskaft, E (2008) The white colour of the ostrich (Struthio camelus) egg is a trade-off between predation and overheating. Journal of Ornithology 149, 323–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maier, TJ and Degraaf, RM (2000) Predation on Japanese quail vs. House sparrow eggs in artificial nests: small eggs reveal small predators. Condor 102, 325–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marini, MÂ, Borges, FJA, Lopes, LE, Sousa, NOM, Gressler, DT, Santos, LR, Paiva, LV, Duca, CG, Manica, LT, Rodrigues, SS, França, LF, Costa, PM, França, LC, Heming, NM, Silveira, MB, Pereira, ZP, Lobo, YPP, Medeiros, RCS and Roper, JJ (2012) Breeding biology of birds in the Cerrado of Central Brazil. Ornitología Neotropical 23, 385–405.Google Scholar
Martin, TE (1993) Nest predation among vegetation layers and habitat types: revising the dogmas. The American Naturalist 141, 897–913.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, TE (1995) Avian life history evolution in relation to nest sites, nest predation, and food. Ecological Monographs 65, 101–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, TE and Li, P (1992) Life history traits of open-vs. cavity-nesting birds. Ecology 73, 579–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matysioková, B and Remeš, V (2018) Evolution of parental activity at the nest is shaped by the risk of nest predation and ambient temperature across bird species. Evolution 72, 2214–2224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Medeiros, RCS and Marini, MÂ (2007) Biologia reprodutiva de Elaenia chiriquensis (Lawrence) (Aves, Tyrannidae) em Cerrado do Brasil Central. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 24, 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menezes, JCT and Marini, MÂ (2017) Predators of bird nests in the Neotropics: a review. Journal of Field Ornithology 88, 99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michalski, F and Norris, D (2014) Artificial nest predation rates vary depending on visibility in the eastern Brazilian Amazon. Acta Amazonica 44, 393–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millones, A and Frere, E (2017) How nest site characteristics influence breeding success in red-legged cormorants Phalacrocorax gaimardi . Acta Ornithologica 52, 239–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mise, FF, Miranda, JM, Santos, DL, Curcino, A and Oda, FH (2021) An opportunist predator hidden in the vegetation: on the predation of birds by Philodryas olfersii (Serpentes: Dipsadidae), Neotropical Biodiversity 7, 61–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, J and Osorno, JL (2003) Avian egg colour and sexual selection: does eggshell pigmentation reflect female condition and genetic quality? Ecology Letters 6, 803–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, RP and Robinson, WD (2004) Artificial bird nests, external validity, and bias in ecological field studies. Ecology 85, 1562–1567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouton, JC and Martin, TE (2019) Nest structure affects auditory and visual detectability, but not predation risk, in a tropical songbird community. Functional Ecology 33, 1973–1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mwangi, J, Ndithia, HK, Kentie, R, Muchai, M and Tieleman, BI (2018) Nest survival in year-round breeding tropical red-capped larks Calandrella cinerea increases with higher nest abundance but decreases with higher invertebrate availability and rainfall. Journal of Avian Biology 49, e01645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakagawa, S and Schielzeth, H (2013) A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecology and Evolution 4, 133–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Natusch, DJD, Lyons, JA and Shine, R (2017) Safety first: terrestrial predators drive selection of highly specific nesting sites in colonial-breeding birds. Journal of Avian Biology 48, 1104–1113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, CWDS, Almeida, GP, Paiva, LVD and França, LF (2013) Predation on artificial nests in open habitats of central Brazil: effects of time and egg size. Biota Neotropica 13, 142–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrella, DF, Zima, PV, Ribeiro-Silva, L, Biagolini, CH Jr, Carmignotto, AP, Galetti, PM Jr and Francisco, MR (2019) Bats as predators at the nests of tropical forest birds. Journal of Avian Biology 51, e02277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, EF and Andersen, DE (2003) Advantages of clustered nesting for Least Flycatchers in north-central Minnesota. Condor 105, 756–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team (2020) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Remeš, V, Matysiokova, B and Cockburn, A (2012) Long-term and large-scale analyses of nest predation patterns in Australian songbirds and a global comparison of nest predation rates. Journal of Avian Biology 43, 435–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribeiro, ML (2011) Reserva Ecológica do IBGE: Biodiversidade Terrestre. Rio de Janeiro: Coordenação de Recursos Naturais e Estudos Ambientais.Google Scholar
Ribeiro-Silva, L, Perrella, DF, Biagolini, CH Jr, Zima, PVQ, Piratelli, A, Schlindwein, MN, Galetti, PM Jr and Francisco, MR (2018) Use of camera traps for detecting nest predation of birds in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Zoologia 35, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricklefs, RE (1969) An analysis of nesting mortality in birds. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 9, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringelman, KM, Eadie, JM and Ackerman, JT (2012) Density-dependent nest predation in waterfowl: the relative importance of nest density versus nest dispersion. Oecologia 169, 695–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roos, S (2002) Functional response, seasonal decline and landscape differences in nest predation risk. Oecologia 133, 608–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roper, JJ, Sullivan, KA and Ricklefs, RE (2010) Avoid nest predation when predation rates are low, and other lessons: testing the tropical–temperate nest predation paradigm. Oikos 119, 719–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roshnath, R, Athira, K and Allesh, SP (2019) Does predation pressure drive heronry birds to nest in the urban landscape? Journal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity 12, 311–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segura, LN, Masson, DA and Gantchoff, MG (2012) Microhabitat nest cover effect on nest survival of the Red-crested Cardinal. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 124, 506–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seibold, S, Hempel, A, Piehl, S, Bässler, C, Brandl, R, Rösner, S and Müller, J (2013) Forest vegetation structure has more influence on predation risk of artificial ground nests than human activities. Basic and Applied Ecology 14, 687–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shitikov, D, Vaytina, T, Makarova, T, Fedotova, S, Volkova, V and Samsonov, S (2018) Species-specific nest predation depends on the total passerine nest density in open-nesting passerines. Journal of Ornithology 159, 483–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva, FAM, Assad, DE and Evangelista, AB (2008) Caracterização climática do Bioma Cerrado. In Sano, SM, Almeida, SP and Ribeiro, JF (eds.), Cerrado Ecologia e Fauna. Brasília: Embrapa Informação Tecnológica, pp. 71–88.Google Scholar
Schmidt, KA and Whelan, CJ (1999) Nest predation on woodland songbirds: when is nest predation density dependent? Oikos 87, 65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somsiri, K, Gale, GA, Pierce, AJ, Khamcha, D and Sankamethawee, W (2020) Habitat structure affects nest predation of the Scaly-crowned Babbler (Malacopteron cinereum) by macaques and snakes in a Thai-seasonal evergreen forest. Journal of Ornithology 161, 389–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spanhove, T, Callens, T, Hallmann, CA, Pellikka, P and Lens, L (2014) Nest predation in Afrotropical forest fragments shaped by inverse edge effects, timing of nest initiation and vegetation structure. Journal of Ornithology 155, 411–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoddard, MC, Marshall, KLA and Kilner, M (2011) Imperfectly camouflaged avian eggs: artifact or adaptation? Avian Biology 4, 196–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Studer, A, Ballarini, Y and Marini, MÂ (2021) Breeding biology of Hooded Tanager Nemosia pileata in Brazil. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club 141, 412–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stutchbury, BJM and Morton, ES (2001) Behavioral Ecology of Tropical Birds. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Vazquez, MS, Zamora-Nasca, LB, Rodriguez-Cabal, MA and Amico, GC (2021) Interactive effects of habitat attributes and predator identity explain avian nest predation patterns. Emu-Austral Ornithology 121, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villard, MA and Part, T (2004) Don’t put all your eggs in real nests: a sequel to Faaborg. Conservation Biology 18, 371–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westmoreland, D and Kiltie, RA (1996) Egg crypsis and clutch survival in three species of blackbirds (Icteridae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 58, 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wicklund, CG and Anderson, M (1994) Natural selection of a colony size in a passerine bird. Journal of Animal Ecology 63, 765–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar