4.3 Article

A CENTURY OF AVIAN COMMUNITY TURNOVER IN AN URBAN GREEN SPACE IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

Journal

CONDOR
Volume 114, Issue 2, Pages 258-267

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1525/cond.2012.110029

Keywords

community-composition turnover; diversity decay; green spaces; homogenization; urbanization

Categories

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [2008074713]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Over long time periods, urbanization is expected to have a negative effect on species diversity. Predicted effects generally follow one of three competing paradigms: diversity decay, homogenization, or community-composition turnover. However, it has been hypothesized that urban green spaces may provide a means by which urban areas can maintain or increase their species diversity over time. We used surveys conducted in 1913-18, 1938-39, and 2006-07 on the campus of the University of California, Berkeley, to evaluate how an avian community has changed over time in the context of urban growth. In each of the three periods the community differed greatly, yet we found no evidence for a decline in species or functional diversity. Despite the birds of the 1913-18 community having a greater affinity for native habitats than birds of later periods, we found no further evidence that specialists were being replaced by generalists. Of the three paradigms, our results strongly supported community-composition turnover. Parsimoniously, the habitat preferences of groups of species that changed over time were concordant with known changes in landscaping. While urbanization often does result in decreased biodiversity, our results provide an example of how an urban green space can mitigate and potentially reverse this trend within the context of dynamic community change. Our results are concordant with the view that urban green spaces can maintain original bird communities and disturbance-sensitive species can reestablish themselves given appropriate conditions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available