DOCSLIB.ORG

Estimates of Breeding Bird Abundance and Habitat Use in Thetford Forest Park

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Estimates of Breeding Bird Abundance and Habitat Use in Thetford Forest Park TITL BTO RESEARCH REPORT 531 Estimates of breeding bird abundance and habitat use in Thetford Forest Park. Greg Conway & Ian Henderson BTO Research Report No. 531 Estimates of Breeding Bird Abundance and Habitat Use in Thetford Forest Park Authors Greg Conway & Ian Henderson Report of work carried out by The British Trust for Ornithology for the Forestry Commission England March 2009 © British Trust for Ornithology British Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk, IP24 2PU Registered Charity No. 216652 CONTENTS Page No. List of Tables ......................................................................................................................................... 3 List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................ 5 List of Appendices ................................................................................................................................. 7 1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 9 2. METHODS ............................................................................................................................. 11 2.1 Survey Sampling Design ........................................................................................................ 11 2.2 Field Methods ......................................................................................................................... 11 2.3 Habitat Structure ................................................................................................................... 11 2.4 Data Methods and Analysis ................................................................................................... 11 2.5 Relative Density Estimates and Habitat Association .......................................................... 12 2.6 Comparison of Bird Densities with the Deer Project .......................................................... 12 2.7 Population Estimates ............................................................................................................. 12 3. RESULTS ............................................................................................................................... 15 3.1 Survey Coverage .................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Bird Data ................................................................................................................................ 15 3.2.1 Relative density estimates and habitat association ................................................ 15 3.2.2 Species richness ......................................................................................................... 15 3.2.3 Species of conservation concern .............................................................................. 16 3.2.4 Comparison with the Deer Project results .............................................................. 16 3.2.5 Population estimates ................................................................................................. 16 4. DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................... 17 4.1 Survey Coverage .................................................................................................................... 17 4.2 Species Richness ..................................................................................................................... 17 4.3 Species of Conservation Concern ......................................................................................... 17 4.4 Relative Density Estimates for Growth Stages and Habitats ............................................. 17 4.5 Comparison of breeding bird densities with other studies………………………….……18 4.6 Comparison with the Deer Project Results.......................................................................... 18 4.7 Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 18 References ............................................................................................................................................ 21 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................. 22 Tables ................................................................................................................................................. 23 Figures ................................................................................................................................................. 33 Appendices ........................................................................................................................................... 41 BTO Research Report No. 531 1 Draft March 2009 BTO Research Report No. 531 2 Draft March 2009 LIST OF TABLES Page No. Table 1 Definition of forest growth stages and habitats, derived form the Forestry Commission sub-compartment database ................................. 23 Table 2 Number of 1-km survey squares covered in each forest block............................. 23 Table 3 (part 1) Summary of all species encountered, excluding flight only records, and Maximum counts for singing and all individuals from all records and distance band up to 75 m ..................................................... 24 Table 3 (part 2) (As above) ............................................................................................................ 25 Table 4 Area of each primary habitat in Thetford Forest Park and area surveyed ........................................................................................................ 26 Table 5a Breeding population estimates and 95% confidence intervals for Thetford Forest Park. (A) Males .................................................................... 27 Table 5b (As above) (B) All registrations ........................................................................... 28 Table 6 Species richness within primary habitats ............................................................. 28 Table 7 Summary of associations between species and habitat structure derived from mixed models .................................................................................. 29 Table 7a Comparative bird density estimates, with confidence intervals, for Pre-Thicket, Thicket and Pre-fell growth stages, derived from GLMM’s using Deer Project (2007 & 2008) and breeding birds monitoring (2008) data ................................................................................ 30 Table 7b Comparative bird density estimates, with confidence intervals, for Pre-Thicket, Thicket and Mature growth stages, derived from GLMM’s using Deer Project (2007 & 2008) and breeding birds monitoring (2008) data ......................................................................................... 31 Table 8 Densities estimates (individuals per hectare) and confidence intervals (ci’s), of selected non-forest species, as derived from the Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) for Norfolk (n=66 1-km squares) and Suffolk (n=53 1-km squares) in 2006…………………………………………...32 BTO Research Report No. 531 3 Draft March 2009 BTO Research Report No. 531 4 Draft March 2009 LIST OF FIGURES Page No. Figure 1 Location of 1-km squares where line transects were surveyed ............................ 33 Figure 2a-f Relative density estimates (from maximum single count per Visit), across growth stages and habitats ......................................................................... 34 Figure 3a-d Relative density estimates (from maximum single count of, singing or all, individuals per Visit), across growth stages and habitats........................... 35 Figure 4a-f Relative density estimates (from maximum single count of, singing or all, individuals per Visit), across growth stages and habitats........................... 36 Figure 5a-f Relative density estimates (from maximum single count of, singing or all, individuals per Visit), across growth stages and habitats........................... 37 Figure 6a-f Relative density estimates (from maximum single count of, singing or all, individuals per Visit), across growth stages and habitats........................... 38 Figure 7a-e Relative density estimates (from maximum single count of, singing or all, individuals per Visit), across growth stages and habitats........................... 39 BTO Research Report No. 531 5 Draft March 2009 BTO Research Report No. 531 6 Draft March 2009 LIST OF APPENDICES Page No. Appendix 1a Species Lists and relative abundance for each growth stage/ habitat class (all registrations) .............................................................................. 41 Appendix 1b Species Lists and relative abundance for each growth stage/ habitat class (all registrations) .............................................................................. 42 Appendix 1c Species Lists and relative abundance for each growth stage/ habitat class (all registrations) .............................................................................. 43 Appendix 2 Woodland growth stage / Distribution and type of understorey within stand / Mature woodland structure ............................................................ 44 BTO Research Report No. 531 7 Draft March 2009 BTO Research
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 345 Fieldfare Put Your Logo Here
    Javier Blasco-Zumeta & Gerd-Michael Heinze Sponsor is needed. Write your name here Put your logo here 345 Fieldfare Fieldfare. Adult. Male (09-I). Song Thrush FIELDFARE (Turdus pilaris ) IDENTIFICATION 25-26 cm. Grey head; red-brown back; grey rump and dark tail; pale underparts; pale flanks spotted black; white underwing coverts; yellow bill with ochre tip. Redwing Fieldfare. Pattern of head, underwing co- verts and flank. SIMILAR SPECIES Song Thrush has orange underwing coverts; Redwing has reddish underwing coverts; Mistle Thrush has white underwing coverts, but lacks pale supercilium and its rump isn’t grey. Mistle Thrush http://blascozumeta.com Write your website here Page 1 Javier Blasco-Zumeta & Gerd-Michael Heinze Sponsor is needed. Write your name here Put your logo here 345 Fieldfare SEXING Male with dark or black tail feathers; red- dish feathers on back with blackish center; most have a broad mark on crown feathers. Female with dark brown tail feathers but not black; dull reddish feathers on back with dark centre (but not blackish); most have a thin mark on crown feathers. CAUTION: some birds of both sexes have similar pattern on crown feathers. Fieldfare. Sexing. Pattern of tail: left male; right fe- male. Fieldfare. Sexing. Pat- AGEING tern of Since this species doesn’t breed in Aragon, only crown feat- 2 age groups can be recognized: hers: top 1st year autumn/2nd year spring with moult male; bot- limit within moulted chestnut inner greater co- tom female. verts and retained juvenile outer greater coverts, shorter and duller with traces of white tips; pointed tail feathers.
    [Show full text]
  • Host Alarm Calls Attract the Unwanted Attention of the Brood Parasitic
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Host alarm calls attract the unwanted attention of the brood parasitic common cuckoo Attila Marton 1,2*, Attila Fülöp 2,3, Katalin Ozogány1, Csaba Moskát 4,5 & Miklós Bán 1,3,5 It is well known that avian brood parasites lay their eggs in the nests of other bird species, called hosts. It remains less clear, however, just how parasites are able to recognize their hosts and identify the exact location of the appropriate nests to lay their eggs in. While previous studies attributed high importance to visual signals in fnding the hosts’ nests (e.g. nest building activity or the distance and direct sight of the nest from vantage points used by the brood parasites), the role of host acoustic signals during the nest searching stage has been largely neglected. We present experimental evidence that both female and male common cuckoos Cuculus canorus pay attention to their host’s, the great reed warbler’s Acrocephalus arundinaceus alarm calls, relative to the calls of an unparasitized species used as controls. Parallel to this, we found no diference between the visibility of parasitized and unparasitized nests during drone fights, but great reed warblers that alarmed more frequently experienced higher rates of parasitism. We conclude that alarm calls might be advantageous for the hosts when used against enemies or for alerting conspecifcs, but can act in a detrimental manner by providing important nest location cues for eavesdropping brood parasites. Our results suggest that host alarm calls may constitute a suitable trait on which cuckoo nestlings can imprint on to recognize their primary host species later in life.
    [Show full text]
  • The Birds of the Phoenix Park, County Dublin: Results of a Repeat Breeding Bird Survey in 2015
    The Birds of the Phoenix Park, County Dublin: Results of a Repeat Breeding Bird Survey in 2015 Prepared by Lesley Lewis, Dick Coombes & Olivia Crowe A report commissioned by the Office of Public Works and prepared by BirdWatch Ireland September 2015 Address for correspondence: BirdWatch Ireland, Unit 20 Block D Bullford Business Campus, Kilcoole, Co. Wicklow. Phone: + 353 1 2819878 Email: [email protected] Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 9 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 10 Methods ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 Survey design ...................................................................................................................................... 10 Field methods ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Data analysis & interpretation ........................................................................................................... 12 Results .......................................................................................................................................................... 12 Species diversity and abundance
    [Show full text]
  • Birds in South Park Gardens Medium Sized Birds Great Spotted Woodpeckers in South Park Gardens There Are at Least Twenty-Three Kinds of Birds to Be Seen
    Birds in South Park Gardens Medium Sized Birds Great Spotted Woodpeckers In South Park Gardens there are at least twenty-three kinds of birds to be seen. They fall into several categories, but in this trail leaflet These birds are more usually heard than seen. They make a loud click sound with a second or so between each click. When you hear them they have been grouped into big, medium sized and small. There are look up to the tops of the trees and sometimes you will see a bird on other ways of describing them, such as the type of food they eat the side of a branch. The young birds have a red cap. Sometimes in and whether they are birds that migrate during the winter. the early summer the great spotted woodpecker makes a very rapid Wood Pigeon Ring Dove Feral Pigeon Ring-neck Parakeets drumming noise with it is beak on dead boughs the tree trunk. Big Birds Pigeon Mistle Thrush Big birds include carrion crows, magpies, jays, wood pigeons, ringdoves The biggest pigeons in the park are called wood pigeons. They look A pair of mistle thrushes has tried to nest in the park for the last and feral (wild or untamed) pigeons. plump with short legs and clear white marks on either side of its neck. few years in a holm oak tree in the North West corner but probably They graze on the ground looking for worms, spiders, and grass seeds. each year the squirrels have taken all the eggs. The birds make a dry They also eat berries on trees and bushes.
    [Show full text]
  • THE NATURE and CHARACTERISTICS of SUB-SONG by W
    THE NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SUB-SONG By W. H. THORPE and P. M. PILCHER (Madingley Field Station, Department of Zoology, Cambridge University) (Plates 69-74) INTRODUCTION AVICULTURALISTS and bird fanciers have long used the term "recording" to denote the quiet "practice-like" singing so often heard from their pet birds before they come into the phase of true song. It has often been asserted that the instrument known as the Recorder originally took its name from the bird flageolet which was used by bird fanciers for teaching tunes to Canaries (Serinus canarius), Bullfinches (Pyrrhula pyrrhula) and other song birds, but we are indebted to R. Thurston Dart for a recent reference (Trowell, 1957) which shows that this is in fact improbable; it seems more likely that the bird song was named from the instrument—as indeed Daines Barrington (1773) supposed. Early aviculturalists must have noted from time to time the utterance by birds in the wild of sounds similar to their "record­ ing" and there is no doubt that many of the early naturalists (for example, Daines Barrington) refer in their writings to sub-song, either as "recording" or without giving it a definite name. E. M. Nicholson has reminded us of Gilbert White's mention of the contrast between "the Blackcap's loud and wild pipe" and its "sweet but inward melody" and Miss E. M. Barraud has given us the reference in Charles Darwin's Descent of Man: "The first attempts to sing 'may be compared to the imperfect endeavour in a child to babble'. The young males continue practising, or as the bird-catchers say, 'recording', for ten or eleven months.
    [Show full text]
  • The Field Identification of North American Pipits Ben King Illustrated by Peter Hayman and Pieter Prall
    The field identification of North American pipits Ben King Illustrated by Peter Hayman and Pieter Prall LTHOUGHTHEWATER PIPIT (Anthus ground in open country. However, the in this paper. inoletta) and the Sprague's Pipit two speciesof tree-pipits use trees for (Antbus spragueit)are fairly easy to rec- singing and refuge and are often in NCEABIRD HAS been recognized asa ogmze using the current popular field wooded areas. pipit, the first thing to checkis the guides, the five species more recently All the pipits discussedin the paper, ground color of the back. Is it brown added to the North American list are except perhaps the Sprague's, move (what shade?), olive, or gray? Then note more difficult to identify and sometimes their tails in a peculiarpumping motion, the black streaks on the back. Are they present a real field challenge. The field down and then up. Some species broad or narrow, sharply or vaguely de- •dentffication of these latter specieshas "pump" their tails more than others. fined, conspicuousor faint? How exten- not yet been adequatelydealt with in the This tail motion is often referred to as sive are they? Then check for pale North American literature. However, "wagging." While the term "wag" does streaks on the back. Are there none, much field work on the identification of include up and down motion as well as two, four, many? What color are they-- pipits has been done in the last few side to side movement, it is better to use whitish, buff, brownish buff? Are they years, especially in Alaska and the the more specificterm "pump" which is conspicuousor faint? Discerningthese Urnted Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • EUROPEAN BIRDS of CONSERVATION CONCERN Populations, Trends and National Responsibilities
    EUROPEAN BIRDS OF CONSERVATION CONCERN Populations, trends and national responsibilities COMPILED BY ANNA STANEVA AND IAN BURFIELD WITH SPONSORSHIP FROM CONTENTS Introduction 4 86 ITALY References 9 89 KOSOVO ALBANIA 10 92 LATVIA ANDORRA 14 95 LIECHTENSTEIN ARMENIA 16 97 LITHUANIA AUSTRIA 19 100 LUXEMBOURG AZERBAIJAN 22 102 MACEDONIA BELARUS 26 105 MALTA BELGIUM 29 107 MOLDOVA BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 32 110 MONTENEGRO BULGARIA 35 113 NETHERLANDS CROATIA 39 116 NORWAY CYPRUS 42 119 POLAND CZECH REPUBLIC 45 122 PORTUGAL DENMARK 48 125 ROMANIA ESTONIA 51 128 RUSSIA BirdLife Europe and Central Asia is a partnership of 48 national conservation organisations and a leader in bird conservation. Our unique local to global FAROE ISLANDS DENMARK 54 132 SERBIA approach enables us to deliver high impact and long term conservation for the beneit of nature and people. BirdLife Europe and Central Asia is one of FINLAND 56 135 SLOVAKIA the six regional secretariats that compose BirdLife International. Based in Brus- sels, it supports the European and Central Asian Partnership and is present FRANCE 60 138 SLOVENIA in 47 countries including all EU Member States. With more than 4,100 staf in Europe, two million members and tens of thousands of skilled volunteers, GEORGIA 64 141 SPAIN BirdLife Europe and Central Asia, together with its national partners, owns or manages more than 6,000 nature sites totaling 320,000 hectares. GERMANY 67 145 SWEDEN GIBRALTAR UNITED KINGDOM 71 148 SWITZERLAND GREECE 72 151 TURKEY GREENLAND DENMARK 76 155 UKRAINE HUNGARY 78 159 UNITED KINGDOM ICELAND 81 162 European population sizes and trends STICHTING BIRDLIFE EUROPE GRATEFULLY ACKNOWLEDGES FINANCIAL SUPPORT FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION.
    [Show full text]
  • Spots Below and a Striking Grey Head and Rump
    Siskin Siscín 12 cm A small green finch with black Blackcap Caipín dubh 13 cm streaks. Male has black cap and Female small black ‘bib’, while the female A member of the warbler family, the has a streaked head and is male is grey with a jet black cap. The browner overall. Usually only female is slightly browner and has a visits gardens during the reddish-brown cap. One of the finest winter months, when singers of all Irish birds. Garden Birds it readily uses peanut feeders. Woodpigeon Colm coille 41 cm Our largest pigeon, instantly recognisable by the white patch on each side of its neck (missing in young birds) and the broad white band visible on each wing when in flight. Often seen foraging on open lawns. Male Goldfinch Lasair choille 13 cm Very colourful, with a red and black face and black and yellow wings. Often seen on peanut feeders, this species also loves feeding on teasel and thistle heads. Bullfinch Corcrán coille 16 cm A chunky, compact finch with a plump body, and thick ‘bullish’ neck. Usually seen in pairs, the male is grey above with a stunning red breast, black cap, wings and tail, with a white wing bar and rump patch. On females, the red is replaced by greyish-brown. Eats flower buds and seeds. Coal Tit Meantán dubh 11 cm The smallest of the tit family, it is mainly black and grey with whitish cheek patches. The white patch at the back of its 9 cm neck distinguishes it from other species. Goldcrest Cíorbhuí Our smallest bird, most common 14 cm Long-tailed Tit Meantán earrfhada around conifers.
    [Show full text]
  • Knepp Castle Estate Breeding Bird Survey 2018
    Knepp Castle Estate Breeding Bird Survey 2018 By Paul James M.Sc, MCIEEM Contents 1.0 Introduction 3 2.0 Methodology 3 - 4 2.1 Surveyor 3 2.2 Methodology 3 - 4 3.0 Survey Results 5 - 6 3.1 Weather summary 5 3.2 Species recorded 6 4.0 Conclusions 7 - 8 5.0 References 9 Appendices App. 1: List of species recorded, 2018 10 - 11 App. 2: Number of territories: Transect A 12 - 13 App. 3: Number of territories: Transect B 13 - 14 App. 4: Additional species recorded, 2018 15 - 16 App. 5: List of species recorded, 2005 – 18 17 Figures Fig. 1: Total number of chiffchaff territories transect B, 2007 – 18 Fig. 2: Total number of common whitethroat territories transect B, 2007 - 18 Fig. 3: Transect A – BoCC Green listed species Fig. 4: Transect A – BoCC Red and amber listed species Fig. 5: Transect B – BoCC Green listed species Fig. 6: Transect B – BoCC Red and amber listed species 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION Repeat transect surveys of the breeding bird communities present within two discrete areas of the Knepp Castle Estate were carried out in spring/summer 2018 following similar surveys in 2005 and 2007 – 17. The aims of the surveys were to: • Identify the bird species breeding on site and to estimate the number of territories, • Highlight the conservation status of the bird species recorded. 2.0 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Surveyor The surveys were again conducted by Paul James who carried out the previous surveys. 2.2 Field methods The same two transects were surveyed as in previous years: the first in the northern block of the Estate north of the A272 and east of Shipley Road (transect A) and the second in the southern block south of Countryman Lane and west of New Barn Farm (transect B).
    [Show full text]
  • The Newsletter of the Nest Record Scheme
    The newsletter of the Nest Record Scheme Issue 30 MAY 2014 InsIde thIs edItIon 02 news roundup 03 dAvId glue 1947–2014 04 A recorder reFlecTs 05 All-TIMe Top recorders 06 A 13,000 pAge suMMArY 07 Treecreeper boxes 08 nrs AnnuAl Totals 10 nrs MenTorIng 12 moorlAnd MonITorIng 13 runway plovers 14 rockIT scIence 15 nrs latesT resulTs 16 spoT The nesT This season sees the official launch of NRS mentoring. See the article on page 10, and visit www.bto.org/ volunteer-surveys/nrs/taking- part/nrs-mentoring to find your nearest mentor (screenshot below). Top: Bernard Pleasance, John Dries, Tony Davis, Josh Marshall and Richard Castell at the NRS 75th anniversary conference. Left: Veteran recorder David Warden photographing a nest box in 1949. Right: A young nest recorder checking a Song Thrush nest with a mirror in 2011. 75 years of nesting he Hatching and Fledgling year, 80 such volunteers came to the Inquiry was started by the BTO Nunnery for a day of celebrating the T in 1939 to collect information on success of NRS and looking forward facets of basic breeding biology, such to its future. It was thrilling to see as incubation and fledging periods. In like-minded ornithologists from all the first five years, 1,988 nest record over the country meeting up to talk cards were sent in by c.20 participants. about nest recording. We enjoyed Seventy five years on, the Nest Record talks from speakers including David Scheme (NRS) has c.660 active Warden, a recorder since 1948, and recorders and an amazing 1.6 million Josh Marshall, a recorder since 2013! nest records have been collected, an NRS mentor Mark Lawrence gave The NRS mentoring scheme invaluable dataset that has been used a talk to mark the official launch of is generously sponsored by for scientific study far beyond the scope NRS mentoring (see p 10), which of the original inquiry.
    [Show full text]
  • Domestic Cats' Effect on Urban Wildlife
    Domestic cats’ effect on urban wildlife – using citizen science and camera traps Kajsa Johansson Master’s thesis • 30 credits Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SLU Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies Forest Science programme Examensarbete/Master's thesis, 2021:3 Umeå 2021 Domestic cats’ effect on urban wildlife – using citizen science and camera traps Kajsa Johansson Supervisor: Tim Hofmeester, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies Assistant supervisor: Joris Cromsigt, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies Examiner: Navinder Singh, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies Credits: 30 credits Level: Second cycle, A2E Course title: Master’s thesis in Forest Science Course code: EX0968 Programme/education: Forest Science programme Course coordinating dept: Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies Place of publication: Umeå Year of publication: 2021 Cover picture: From camera trap Title of series: Examensarbete/Master's thesis Part number: 2021:3 Keywords: Domestic cat, Felis catus, camera traps, citizen science, visitation frequency Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Faculty of Forest Sciences Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies Approved students’ theses at SLU are published electronically. As a student, you have the copyright to your own work and need to approve the electronic publishing. If you check the box for YES, the full text (pdf file) and metadata will be visible and searchable online. If you check the box for NO, only the metadata and the abstract will be visible and searchable online. Nevertheless, when the document is uploaded it will still be archived as a digital file.
    [Show full text]
  • Breeding Biology of an Endemic Bornean Turdid, the Fruithunter (Chlamydochaera Jefferyi), and Life History Comparisons with Turdus Species of the World
    The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 129(1):36–45, 2017 BREEDING BIOLOGY OF AN ENDEMIC BORNEAN TURDID, THE FRUITHUNTER (CHLAMYDOCHAERA JEFFERYI), AND LIFE HISTORY COMPARISONS WITH TURDUS SPECIES OF THE WORLD ADAM E. MITCHELL,1,4 FRED TUH,2 AND THOMAS E. MARTIN3 ABSTRACT.—We present the first description of the breeding biology for the Fruithunter (Chlamydochaera jefferyi), a member of the cosmopolitan family Turdidae, and a montane endemic to the tropical Asian island of Borneo. We also compile breeding biology traits from the literature to make comparisons between the Fruithunter and the thrush genus Turdus. Our comparisons indicate that Fruithunters exhibit a slower life history strategy than both tropical and north temperate Turdus. We located and monitored 42 nests in 7 years in Kinabalu Park, Sabah, Malaysia. The mean clutch size was 1.89 6 0.08 eggs, and the modal clutch size was 2 eggs. Mean fresh egg mass was 6.15 6 0.13 g, representing 9.5% of adult female body mass. Average lengths of incubation and nestling periods were 14.56 6 0.24 and 17.83 6 0.31 days respectively. Only the female incubated and brooded the eggs and nestlings, but both the male and female fed nestlings. Female attentiveness during incubation was high throughout, reaching an asymptote around 85% with average on-bouts of 39.0 6 2.5 mins. The daily nest survival probability was 0.951 6 0.025, and the daily predation rate was 0.045 6 0.024. Female feeding rate increased as brooding effort decreased, suggesting that female feeding rate may be constrained by the need to provide heat while nestlings are unable to thermoregulate.
    [Show full text]