Nest site selection and nest predation patterns at forest-field edges
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The effects of forest-field edge structure on nest site selection and nest predation at forest-field edges were tested using natural and artificial nests. In the first part of this study, nest site selection patterns of a declining species of edge-nesting neotropical migratory bird, the Golden-winged Warbler (Vermivora chrysopteru) were studied in southeastem Ontario. Habitat features important in nest site selection, and those distinguishing successful and depredated nests were identified. Edges used as nest sites had a more gradual edge slope, and a greater stem density surrounding nests than unused sites along the same edges. Successful nests were associated with greater Goldenrod (Solidago sp.) density and greater nest visibility than depredated nests, but edge shape and woody vegetation density had no effect on nesting success. These results suggest that Golden-winged Warbler breeding habitat could be created by the conversion of abrupt agriculturai edges to more gradual edges by mowing areas adjacent to the edge on a rotating schedule. In the second part of this study, artificial ground nests containing Chinese Painted Quail and plasticine eggs were placed on different forest-field edge structural types to quanti@ the effects of edge Iinearity, edge shape and nest visibility on predation pattems. Edge shape and nest visibility did not affect nest predation intensity, however, nests located on linear edges tended to be depredated more fiequently than those on curvilinear edges, which was attributed to reduced travel along curvilinear boundanes by nest predators. Predator identificati~n revealed individual responses of nest predator groups to variation in edge stmchire and nest Msibility, suggesting that nest predator comrnunity differences between sites may explain the inconsistent results of present studies examining the effects of edge structure on nest predation pattems. Acknowledgements 1 would first like to thank Raleigh Robertson for giving me the oppomuiity to conduct this project. He always had confidence in my abilities, supported my decisions, and he never criticized me when things (fiequently) went wrong. Above all, his sense of humour and fnendship have helped me through many stresshl situations and made this expenence much more enjoyable. 1 would like to express my gratitude to Stephen Lougheed for his guidance that shaped much of this project and his willingness to drop everything vrhen 1 needed his help. 1 especially thank Steve for being disappointed in my decision ta take a hiatus fiom academic biology.. .coming fiom a scientist like yourself, that's about the best compliment that 1 could receive. 1 would also like to thank Demis Jelinski and Vicki Fnesen for inspiring my interest in this topic, and for al1 of their help in focusing this study. Thanks to al1 the folks in the Robertson lab over the past few years for al1 the good times and especially to Barg, Jason Jones and Javier Salgado-Ortiz for ail of their help. For assistance in the field, 1 am indebted to Katharina Manno, Jamie and Erin Beauchamp, and especially William McLeish who, in addition to being a great Wend, is one of the best field ornithologists that I've met. I'd also like to thank Iason Pither and Daniel Memil1 who have both improved this thesis with their many helpful comments. Thanks to the staff (especially Frank Phelan and Floyd C o ~ o r s ) and al1 of my good fnends at QUBS for making my sumrners of research so enriching, enlightening and mernorable. Special thanks go to Ryan DeBniyn, Heather McCracken, and Chris Yourth for their help and friendship, and for always being ready to do anything. Above all, 1 would like to thank the love of my life, Kelly Pageau. 1 wish somehow that 1 could express how much her love, friendship, support, and understanding have helped me through this experience. Despite al1 of the time spent apart, and time spent together where 1 was locked up in my office writing, she endured as a source of constant happiness for me. Thanks KeI. This work was made possible by funding from NSERC, Queen's Graduate Fellowship, and Wildlife Habitat Canada. Abstract Table of
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».