Predation in Ground-Nesting Birds: an Experimental Study Using Natural Egg-Color Variation

We tested the hypothesis that cryptically colored eggs would suffer less predation than conspicuous eggs in the ground-nesting red-legged partridge, Alectoris rufa. We used A. rufa as a model species because it has a wide range of natural egg colors, the eggs are widely available from breeding farms, and nests are easily mimicked because they are scrapes containing no vegetation. The study was conducted in the spring of 2001 in forest and fallow fields of central Spain in Castilla La Mancha, Ciudad Real. We used 384 clutches of natural eggs that were white, white spotted, brown, or brown spotted. Within clutches, eggs were consistent in color and size; among clutches, color differences were distributed across habitats. Clutches were checked once after 2 wk of exposure. Cryptic coloration had a survival advantage that was dependent on the local suite of predators. Rodent predation was nonselective with respect to clutch color; however, avian predation was significantly higher for conspicuous clutches. In addition, there was an interaction of landscape and egg color for avian predation. In forest landscapes, the clutches with highest survival were brown spotted, whereas in fallow landscapes, brown and brown spotted clutches had higher survival than white and white potted clutches. Thus, both the predator suite and the landscape had significant effects on the value of cryptic egg coloration. Our study is relevant for conservationists and managers in charge of restocking programs in hunting areas. The release of other partridge species or their hybrids could result in hybridization with wild partridges, potentially leading to nonoptimal clutch pigmentation and reduced survival of the native species. We therefore recommend that local authorities, managers, and conservationists be cautious with the use of alien species and hybrids and release only autochthonous species of partridges within their natural ranges.

Investigating Targets of Avian Habitat Management to Eliminate an Ecological Trap

Ecological traps are attractive population sinks created when anthropogenic habitat alteration inadvertently creates a mismatch between the attractiveness of a habitat based upon its settlement cues, and its current value for survival or reproduction. Traps represent a new threat to the conservation of native species, yet little attention has been given to developing practical approaches to eliminating them. In the northern Rocky Mountains of Montana, Olive-sided Flycatchers (Contopus cooperi) prefer to settle in patches of selectively harvested forest versus burned forest despite the lower reproductive success and higher nest predation risk associated with the former habitat. I investigated characteristics of preferred perch sites for this species and how these preferences varied between habitats and sexes. I then built on previous research to develop a range of management prescriptions for reducing the attractiveness of selectively harvested forest, thereby disarming the ecological trap. Female flycatchers preferred to forage from shorter perch trees than males, and females’ perches were shorter than other available perch trees. Both sexes preferred standing dead perch trees (snags) and these preferences were most obvious in harvested forest where snags are rarer. Because previous research shows that snag density is linked to habitat preference and spruce/fir trees are preferred nest substrate, my results suggest these two habitat components are focal habitat selection cues. I suggest alternative and complementary strategies for eliminating the ecological trap for Olive-sided Flycatchers including: (1) reduced retention and creation of snags, (2) avoiding selective harvest in spruce, fir, and larch stands, (3) avoiding retention of these tree species, and (4) selecting only even-aged canopy height trees for retention so as to reduce perch availability for female flycatchers. Because these strategies also have potential to negatively impact habitat suitability for other forest species or even create new ecological traps, we urge caution in the application of our management recommendations.