| Literature DB >> 24058634 |
Justus P Deikumah1, Clive A McAlpine, Martine Maron.
Abstract
Conversion of farmland land-use matrices to surface mining is an increasing threat to the habitat quality of forest remnants and their constituent biota, with consequences for ecosystem functionality. We evaluated the effects of matrix type on bird community composition and the abundance and evenness within avian functional groups in south-west Ghana. We hypothesized that surface mining near remnants may result in a shift in functional composition of avifaunal communities, potentially disrupting ecological processes within tropical forest ecosystems. Matrix intensification and proximity to the remnant edge strongly influenced the abundance of members of several functional guilds. Obligate frugivores, strict terrestrial insectivores, lower and upper strata birds, and insect gleaners were most negatively affected by adjacent mining matrices, suggesting certain ecosystem processes such as seed dispersal may be disrupted by landscape change in this region. Evenness of these functional guilds was also lower in remnants adjacent to surface mining, regardless of the distance from remnant edge, with the exception of strict terrestrial insectivores. These shifts suggest matrix intensification can influence avian functional group composition and related ecosystem-level processes in adjacent forest remnants. The management of matrix habitat quality near and within mine concessions is important for improving efforts to preserveavian biodiversity in landscapes undergoing intensification such as through increased surface mining.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24058634 PMCID: PMC3772896 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074852
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Map of South-west Ghana showing bird survey locations within tropical forest remnants.
Insert in bottom right shows the location of Ghana in Africa.
Description of explanatory variables in addition to adjacent matrix type and distance to edge used to assess influence of site and landscape characteristics on forest bird richness.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
| km2 | Amount of forest habitat in 1km2 radius of survey site. |
|
| − | Type of tropical rainforest based on the total annual rainfall received (moist semi-deciduous or evergreen) |
|
| percent | Understorey foliage projected cover of small plants and young trees (with DBH < 10 m) |
|
| count | Sum of all fruiting vegetation (trees, shrubs and lianas) across all surveys. |
|
| count | Sum of all flowering vegetation (trees, shrubs, lianas) across all surveys |
* Explanatory variables used in analyses in addition to matrix type and distance to edge
Results of ANOVA comparisons of abundance within avian functional guilds at different distances from edge and matrix types.
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edge | Interior | Edge | Interior | Dist.edge | Matrix | Interaction | |
|
| 71.0 (15.6) | 90.5 (13.4) | 54.3 (25.6) | 62.8 (20.9) | 4.13* | 10.44* | 6.64* |
|
| 5.6 (3.3) | 8.1 (2.4) | 7.6 (2.9) | 6.6 (3.4) | 0.49 | 0.05 | 2.67 |
|
| 130.6 (57.7) | 119.8 (47.9) | 97.9 (34.4) | 61.0 (19.1) | 2.49 | 9.45** | 0.73 |
|
| 125.4 (34.2) | 140.6 (21.7) | 115.5 (17.4) | 107.5 (34.9) | 0.13 | 4.68* | 1.37 |
|
| 2.3 (1.4) | 4.3 (1.3) | 1.3 (2.9) | 2.8 (1.7) | 6.59* | 3.36 | 0.13 |
|
| 2.00 (1.9) | 5.2 (4.3) | 1.5 (1.2) | 2.4 (1.4) | 5.07* | 3.35 | 1.61 |
|
| 3.5 (3.2) | 5.5 (3.1) | 1.3 (1.3) | 2.8 (1.4) | 4.21* | 8.59** | 0.09 |
|
| 10.0 (3.3) | 16.4 (7.6) | 10.9 (4.4) | 12.9 (4.2) | 4.71* | 0.74 | 1.81 |
|
| 0.8 (1.0) | 2.1 (1.7) | 0.3 (0.7) | 0.8 (0.9) | 5.27* | 5.27* | 1.15 |
|
| 22.9 (16.8) | 21.3 (14.3) | 12.0 (2.4) | 15.5 (8.2) | 0.05 | 3.98* | 0.39 |
|
| 5.6 (3.3) | 8.1 (2.4) | 7.6 (2.9) | 6.5 (3.4) | 0.49 | 0.05 | 2.67 |
|
| 25.1 (31.5) | 12.9 (15.9) | 9.9 (11.6) | 7.0 (9.2) | 1.25 | 2.44* | 0.48 |
|
| 32.4 (16.1) | 31.1 (8.3) | 31.4 (14.1) | 29.3 (15.9) | 0.12 | 0.08 | 0.01 |
|
| 1.0 (0.8) | 2.0 (1.4) | 1.5 (1.3) | 1.4 (1.9) | 1.08 | 0.02 | 1.78 |
|
| 137.6 (100.5) | 127.6 (86.0) | 72.0 (14.1) | 93.3 (49.5) | 0.05 | 3.88 | 0.39 |
|
| 8.4 (3.9) | 7.5 (2.3) | 6.6 (2.1) | 7.1 (4.1) | 0.03 | 0.87 | 0.36 |
|
| 8.9 (3.1) | 10.3 (3.4) | 7.0 (3.2) | 5.3 (3.2) | 0.03 | 9.07** | 3.55* |
|
| 13.5 (6.1) | 11.0 (5.5) | 11.3 (3.6) | 11.1 (7.9) | 0.39 | 0.25 | 0.32 |
Significance codes: <0.001 '*** '; < 0.01 '** ' <0.05 '* '
Results of ANOVA (Type II tests) in which species evenness, H, of avian functional groups were modelled with distance from edge, matrix and interaction between both.
| Functional group | Agricultural matrix(mean ± SD) | Mining matrix (mean ± SD) |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edge | Interior | Edge | Interior | Dist.edge | Matrix | Interaction | |
| Terrestrial insectivores | 0.74 (0.08) | 0.79 (0.04) | 0.48 (0.30) | 0.69 (0.10) | 5.23* | 9.87** | 2.11* |
| All lower strata birds | 0.77 (0.12) | 0.71 (0.08) | 0.59 (0.14) | 0.55 (0.15) | 1.42 | 14.16*** | 0.05 |
| All upper strata birds | 0.53 (0.19) | 0.43 (0.10) | 0.36 (0.12) | 0.37 (0.15) | 0.68 | 4.78* | 0.96 |
| Obligate frugivores | 0.67 (0.16) | 0.61 (0.12) | 0.44 (0.31) | 0.34 (0.29) | 0.90 | 8.37** | 0.10 |
| Partial fruigivores | 0.72 (0.12) | 0.67 (0.06) | 0.66 (0.13) | 0.72 (0.07) | 0.07 | 0.00 | 2.03 |
| Salliers | 0.19 (0.12) | 0.18 (0.12) | 0.22 (0.19) | 0.18 (0.18) | 0.17 | 0.08 | 0.05 |
| Upper strata bark gleaners | 0.59 (0.40) | 0.48 (0.39) | 0.75 (0.37) | 0.60 (0.31) | 1.04 | 1.23 | 0.03 |
| Upper strata foliage gleaners | 0.26 (0.18) | 0.27 (0.05) | 0.17 (0.12) | 0.27 (0.11) | 1.84 | 1.16 | 0.93 |
| All bark gleaning insectivores | 0.59 (0.40) | 0.40 (0.40) | 0.83 (0.36) | 0.60 (0.31) | 2.06 | 2.31 | 0.13 |
| Lower strata bark gleaners | 0.89 (0.02) | 0.99 (0.01) | 0.70 (0.43) | 0.64 (0.42) | 0.08 | 9.78** | 0.08 |
| Lower strata foliage gleaners | 0.30 (0.12) | 0.38 (0.06) | 0.27 (0.10) | 0.34 (0.14) | 3.59 | 0.84 | 0.01 |
| Canopy insectivores | 0.41 (0.40) | 0.10 (0.07) | 0.27 (0.16) | 0.30 (0.32) | 2.06 | 0.07 | 3.05 |
| Raptors | 0.41 (0.30) | 0.74 (0.38) | 0.50 (0.41) | 0.81 (0.35) | 6.15* | 0.38 | < 0.01 |
| Granivores | 0.61 (0.45) | 0.67 (0.39) | 0.13 (0.20) | 0.13 (0.07) | 0.08 | 21.18*** | 0.06 |
| Omnivores | 0.20 (0.11) | 0.24 (0.11) | 0.18 (0.12) | 0.20 (0.10) | 0.49 | 0.42 | 0.04 |
| Nectarivores | 0.79 (0.32) | 0.75 (0.36) | 0.92 (0.22) | 0.90 (0.19) | 0.11 | 2.00 | < 0.01 |
| All insectivores | 0.42 (0.11) | 0.46 (0.06) | 0.42 (0.04) | 0.39 (0.13) | 0.04 | 1.21 | 1.11 |
| Lower strata aerial sweepers | 0.19 (0.12) | 0.42 (0.27) | 0.10 (0.15) | 0.35 (0.32) | 5.29* | 0.19 | 0.24 |
| Upper strata aerial sweepers | 0.19 (0.18) | 0.14 (0.09) | 0.13 (0.06) | 0.35 (0.41) | 0.94 | 0.90 | 2.69 |
| All aerial sweepers | 0.34 (0.08) | 0.21 (0.21) | 0.29 (0.10) | 0.31 (0.13) | 1.26 | 0.33 | 2.39 |
Significance codes: <0.001 '*** '; < 0.01 '** ' <0.05 '* '
Figure 2Non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination of proximity to edge and matrix type by key habitat attributes according to their dissimilarities in species composition within a two-dimensional association space.
Fitted arrows indicate environmental variables with significant importance in structuring avian communities ( = density of large trees, = density of fruiting trees, (1 km2) = amount of forest habitat in 1km2 radius and = forest type). Arrow direction indicates direction of steepest increase in respective variable, arrow length indicates precision of inference and angles between arrows and axes reflect their correlations.