Does nonrandom nest placement imply nonrandom nest predation?: A reply
Condor
By: R.J. Cooper, R.R. Wilson, G.D. Zenitsky, S.J. Mullin, J.D. Dececco, M.R. Marshall, D.J. Wolf, and Lars Y. Pomara
Links
- More information: Publisher Index Page (via DOI)
- Download citation as: RIS | Dublin Core
Abstract
In response to the critique by Schmidt and Whelan (Condor 101(4):916-920, 1999), we find that the relationship between nest success and tree selectivity is dependent upon inclusion or exclusion of particular tree species, whether or not years are pooled, and the selectivity index used. We question their use of point estimates of nest success with extremely high variances, defend our index, question the application of the Chesson (1983) index to our data, and explain the need to analyze years separately. Bottomland hardwood forest systems are extremely variable; hydroperiods alter the suitability of nesting substrates, availability of alternative food, and behavior of predators and their prey. Given these features, actively searching for Acadian Flycatcher (Empidonax virescens) nests is seldom an efficient predator foraging strategy. Therefore, these predation events are best described as random; nests are principally encountered opportunistically by generalist predators while searching for other prey.
| Publication type | Article |
|---|---|
| Publication Subtype | Journal Article |
| Title | Does nonrandom nest placement imply nonrandom nest predation?: A reply |
| Series title | Condor |
| DOI | 10.2307/1370090 |
| Volume | 101 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Year Published | 1999 |
| Language | English |
| Publisher | Oxford Academic |
| Contributing office(s) | Patuxent Wildlife Research Center |
| Description | 4 p. |
| First page | 920 |
| Last page | 923 |
| Google Analytic Metrics | Metrics page |