4.6 Article

Annual survival and turnover rates of an afrotropical robin in a fragmented forest

Journal

BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION
Volume 15, Issue 10, Pages 3315-3327

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10531-005-1213-6

Keywords

forest fragmentation; mortality; recruitment; robin; Taita Hills; Tropical

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Whether or not subdivided populations persist in fragmented landscapes primarily depends on how well individuals can survive within discrete habitat patches. Using data from six capture-recapture sessions, survival probabilities of the white-starred robin were estimated in seven indigenous forest patches in the highly fragmented Taita Hills forests, SE Kenya. We found no significant differences in survival probability either among fragment-size categories (large 135 ha, medium 95 ha, and small 2-8 ha) or between adult and first-year birds. However, males had a higher probability of survival from one year to the next than females. Turnover rates of adult birds were higher for females than males, but also higher in the medium and small patches than in the large one within each sex. That survival probability was similar among fragments, but turnover rates differed denoted that different processes caused extirpation from the patches. We suggest that mortality associated with dispersal was probably a more important cause of extirpation than within-patch mortality in the largest habitat, which had the lowest turnover rates. Conversely, high within-patch mortality, for instance due to predation during incubation, could have been more important in the smaller, more disturbed habitats. These results lend support to the proposition that avian conservation efforts should be focussed both at the landscape level to improve connectivity between fragments and reduce mortality during dispersal, and at the patch level to exclude other mortality sources such as nest predation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available