Literature DB >> 32419138

Food availability limits avian reproduction in the city: An experimental study on great tits Parus major.

Gábor Seress1, Krisztina Sándor2, Karl L Evans3, András Liker1.   

Abstract

The altered ecological and environmental conditions in towns and cities strongly affect demographic traits of urban animal populations, for example avian reproductive success is often reduced. Previous work suggests that this is partly driven by low insect availability during the breeding season, but robust experimental evidence that supports this food limitation hypothesis is not yet available. We tested core predictions of the food limitation hypothesis using a controlled experiment that provided supplementary insect food (nutritionally enhanced mealworms supplied daily to meet 40%-50% of each supplemented brood's food requirements) to great tit nestlings in urban and forest habitats. We measured parental provisioning rates and estimated the amount of supplementary food consumed by control and experimental nestlings, and assessed their body size and survival rates. Provisioning rates were similar across habitats and control and supplemented broods, but supplemented (and not control) broods consumed large quantities of supplementary food. As predicted by the food limitation hypothesis we found that nestlings in (a) urban control broods had smaller body size and nestling survival rates than those in forest control broods; (b) forest supplemented and control broods had similar body size and survival rates; (c) urban supplemented nestlings had larger body size and survival rates than those in urban control broods; and crucially (d) urban supplemented broods had similar body size and survival rates to nestlings in forest control broods. Our results provide rare experimental support for the strong negative effects of food limitation during the nestling rearing period on urban birds' breeding success. Furthermore, the fact that supplementary food almost completely eliminated habitat differences in survival rate and nestling body size suggest that urban stressors other than food shortage contributed relatively little to the reduced avian breeding success. Finally, given the impacts of the amount of supplementary food that we provided and taking clutch size differences into account, our results suggest that urban insect populations in our study system would need to be increased by a factor of at least 2.5 for urban and forest great tits to have similar reproductive success.
© 2020 British Ecological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  arthropod; breeding success; food limitation hypothesis; mortality; nestling food; supplementary food; urban birds; urbanization

Year:  2020        PMID: 32419138     DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.13211

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Ecol        ISSN: 0021-8790            Impact factor:   5.091


  8 in total

1.  Seychelles warblers with silver spoons: Juvenile body mass is a lifelong predictor of annual survival, but not annual reproduction or senescence.

Authors:  Thomas J Brown; Hannah L Dugdale; Martijn Hammers; Jan Komdeur; David S Richardson
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-07-03       Impact factor: 3.167

2.  Evaluating the effects of water and food limitation on the life history of an insect using a multiple-stressor framework.

Authors:  Sugjit S Padda; Zachary R Stahlschmidt
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  The impact of urbanization on body size of Barn Swallows Hirundo rustica gutturalis.

Authors:  Yanyan Zhao; Yu Liu; Elizabeth S C Scordato; Myung-Bok Lee; Xiaoying Xing; Xinyuan Pan; Yang Liu; Rebecca J Safran; Emilio Pagani-Núñez
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2020-12-19       Impact factor: 2.912

4.  Epigenetics and the city: Non-parallel DNA methylation modifications across pairs of urban-forest Great tit populations.

Authors:  Aude E Caizergues; Jeremy Le Luyer; Arnaud Grégoire; Marta Szulkin; Juan-Carlos Senar; Anne Charmantier; Charles Perrier
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 5.183

5.  Diet composition and diversity does not explain fewer, smaller urban nestlings.

Authors:  Erin E Grabarczyk; Sharon A Gill; Maarten J Vonhof; Magdy S Alabady; Zengyan Wang; Jason M Schmidt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Great tits feed their nestlings with more but smaller prey items and fewer caterpillars in cities than in forests.

Authors:  Csenge Sinkovics; Gábor Seress; Ivett Pipoly; Ernő Vincze; András Liker
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-17       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Urban resources limit pair coordination over offspring provisioning.

Authors:  Davide Baldan; Jenny Q Ouyang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  The Biological Deserts Fallacy: Cities in Their Landscapes Contribute More than We Think to Regional Biodiversity.

Authors:  Erica N Spotswood; Erin E Beller; Robin Grossinger; J Letitia Grenier; Nicole E Heller; Myla F J Aronson
Journal:  Bioscience       Date:  2021-01-20       Impact factor: 11.566

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.