I'm looking for bird studies that have found either a negative correlation or no correlation between habitat quality and reproductive success.

Or in other words, bird studies that have found that reproductive success was lower in lower quality habitats. Or, that have found there was no difference in reproductive success between habitat classified as high quality and low quality.

Can anyone help?

  • $\begingroup$ Do you mean studies where the habitat quality was assigned before gathering data on reproductive success (i.e. based on other data sources)? Habitats where the reproductive success is low is often considered to be "poor" habitat post-hoc. $\endgroup$ – fileunderwater Jul 12 '15 at 22:04
  • $\begingroup$ Yes where habitat was classified as low quality before high reproductive success was found $\endgroup$ – luciano Jul 13 '15 at 20:56
  • $\begingroup$ I've been part of one paper that estimates habitat-specific survival rates and population growth rate (to evaluate quality), with habitats relating to field-layer height, where there was a rather clear idea of what should correspond to "good" and "bad" habitats, see Arlt et al (2008). Habitat-Specific Population Growth of a Farmland Bird. PlosOne. Does this seem like a suitable study to your question? $\endgroup$ – fileunderwater Aug 20 '15 at 10:27
  • $\begingroup$ Google Scholar pulls up some useful looking options $\endgroup$ – theforestecologist Jan 23 '16 at 1:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.