Slopes of Avian Species-Area Relationships, Human Population Density, and Environmental Factors

There is increasing interest in how humans influence spatial patterns in biodiversity. One of the most frequently noted and marked of these patterns is the increase in species richness with area, the species–area relationship (SAR). SARs are used for a number of conservation purposes, including predicting extinction rates, setting conservation targets, and identifying biodiversity hotspots. Such applications can be improved by a detailed understanding of the factors promoting spatial variation in the slope of SARs, which is currently the subject of a vigorous debate. Moreover, very few studies have considered the anthropogenic influences on the slopes of SARs; this is particularly surprising given that in much of the world areas with high human population density are typically those with a high number of species, which generates conservation conflicts. Here we determine correlates of spatial variation in the slopes of species–area relationships, using the British avifauna as a case study. Whilst we focus on human population density, a widely used index of human activities, we also take into account (1) the rate of increase in habitat heterogeneity with increasing area, which is frequently proposed to drive SARs, (2) environmental energy availability, which may influence SARs by affecting species occupancy patterns, and (3) species richness. We consider environmental variables measured at both local (10 km × 10 km) and regional (290 km × 290 km) spatial grains, but find that the former consistently provides a better fit to the data. In our case study, the effect of species richness on the slope SARs appears to be scale dependent, being negative at local scales but positive at regional scales. In univariate tests, the slope of the SAR correlates negatively with human population density and environmental energy availability, and positively with the rate of increase in habitat heterogeneity. We conducted two sets of multiple regression analyses, with and without species richness as a predictor. When species richness is included it exerts a dominant effect, but when it is excluded temperature has the dominant effect on the slope of the SAR, and the effects of other predictors are marginal.

Agricultural Policy and Nest Success of Prairie Ducks in Canada and the United States

The Prairie Pothole Region of North America has been modified by agriculture during the past 100 yr, resulting in habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation that have reduced the abundance and productivity of many wildlife species. The 1985 U.S. Farm Bill provided economic incentives to agriculture that are considered by many to be beneficial to nesting waterfowl and other wildlife. Canada has not experienced an equally comprehensive legislative initiative, which would seem to indicate that benefits to waterfowl in Canada should lag behind those in the United States. However, with the removal of some agricultural subsidies in Canada during the 1990s, the amount of perennial cover in the Canadian prairies increased to levels similar to those of the 1970s. Therefore, it is unclear whether and how the U.S. and Canadian prairies might differ with regard to habitat quality for nesting waterfowl. We used historical and contemporary data to compare temporal trends in duck nest success between the United States and Canada and to assess how mean nest success varied with proportion of cropland and wetland density. The data best supported models with nonlinear temporal trends that varied between the two countries and suggested that mean nest success in Canada declined from its high point in 1930s and remained below the long-term value of 0.16 until the end of the time series in 2005. Mean nest success in the United States also declined from its high point in the 1930s, but increased to above the long-term value of 0.25 during the early 2000s. Mean nest success varied negatively with proportion of cropland in both the United States and Canada. Mean nest success was positively correlated with pond density at Canadian sites, but showed only a weak association with pond density at U.S. sites. All models explained the low proportions of the variation in nest success, suggesting that unmeasured factors such as the abundance and identity of nest predators may have strong effects on nest success. Nonetheless, these results support earlier suggestions that agricultural policy that encourages permanent cover positively influences duck reproductive success. We also found that, for reasons that are not entirely clear, nest success for the same intensity of row cropping was generally higher in the United States than in Canada. Further research is required to elucidate the exact nature of the composition, size, and distribution of permanent cover that coincides with greater average nest success by dabbling ducks in the United States. In addition, the data suggest that the benefits that might accrue from increases in the amount of perennial cover in Canada would be better realized if these efforts are accompanied by strong measures to conserve wetlands.

Risk of Agricultural Practices and Habitat Change to Farmland Birds

Many common bird species have declined as a result of agricultural intensification and this could be mitigated by organic farming. We paired sites for habitat and geographical location on organic and nonorganic farms in Ontario, Canada to test a priori predictions of effects on birds overall, 9 guilds and 22 species in relation to candidate models for farming practices (13 variables), local habitat features (12 variables), or habitat features that influence susceptibility to predation. We found that: (1) Overall bird abundance, but not richness, was significantly (p < 0.05) higher on organic sites (mean 43.1 individuals per site) than nonorganic sites (35.8 individuals per site). Significantly more species of birds were observed for five guilds, including primary grassland birds, on organic vs. nonorganic sites. No guild had higher richness or abundance on nonorganic farms; (2) Farming practice models were the best (ΔAIC < 4) for abundance of birds overall, primary grassland bird richness, sallier aerial insectivore richness and abundance, and abundance of ground nesters; (3) Habitat models were the best for overall richness, Neotropical migrant abundance, richness and abundance of Ontario-USA-Mexico (short-distance) migrants and resident richness; (4) Predation models were the best for richness of secondary grassland birds and ground feeders; (5) A combination of variables from the model types were best for richness or abundance overall, 13 of 18 guilds (richness and abundance) and 16 of 22 species analyzed. Five of 10 farming practice variables (including herbicide use, organic farm type) and 9 of 13 habitat variables (including hedgerow length, proportion of hay) were significant in best models. Risk modeling indicated that herbicide use could decrease primary grassland birds by one species (35% decline from 3.4 to 2.3 species) per site. Organic farming could benefit species of conservation concern by 49% (an increase from 7.6 to 11.4 grassland birds). An addition of 63 m of hedgerow could increase abundance and richness of short distance migrants by 50% (3.0 to 4.8 and 1.3 to 2.0, respectively). Increasing the proportion of hay on nonorganic farms to 50% could increase abundance of primary grassland bird by 40% (6.7 to 9.4). Our results provide support for alternative farmland designs and agricultural management systems that could enhance select bird species in farmland.