Elsevier

Biological Conservation

Volume 128, Issue 1, February 2006, Pages 67-78
Biological Conservation

Richness, distribution and conservation status of cavity nesting birds in Mexico

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.09.017Get rights and content

Abstract

A considerable number of bird species depend on tree cavities availability for nesting in temperate and tropical forests in Mexico. Tree cavity availability is reduced in heavily managed forests, making cavity nesting species particularly vulnerable to the high rates of forest loss and degradation that occur every day in the remaining wilderness areas of the country. We analyzed information about nesting behavior, distribution, and conservation status of resident landbird avifauna from 35 important and protected bird areas of Mexico. The main intention was to determine the proportion of resident bird species that nest in tree cavities and are more sensitive to intensive forest management practices. Our results revealed that 17% (112 species) of the resident landbird avifauna need tree cavities for nesting. Cavity nesters represented a higher proportion of endangered and threatened species than non-cavity nesters. The families Strigidae and Psittacidae represented the highest number of tree cavity nesting species in status. In the 35 avifaunas examined, the mean percentage of cavity nesting species ranged from 17% to 21%. The cloud forest reserve of “El Triunfo” with 43 species, is the area with the highest concentration of cavity nesting species in Mexico.

Introduction

In birds, nesting site selection (cavity nesting vs. open nesting) is known to influence an important number of life-history traits such as nesting success, clutch size, incubation time, nestling period length, and adult survival during incubation (Martin and Li, 1992, Martin, 1995, Eberhard, 2002). Worldwide, a substantial percentage of landbirds depend on tree cavities for their reproduction (Newton, 1998). Cavity nests provide important advantages, such as greater thermal insulation (Joy, 2000), lower risk of nest predation, and higher nest success compared to open nests (Scott, 1979, Nilsson, 1986, Martin and Li, 1992, Martin, 1995). Most cavity nesters select cavities in tall, large-diameter trees and snags to maximize brood space and avoid terrestrial predators; different studies have shown a decrease in predation rate with the increasing height of nest placement (Nilsson, 1984, Dobkin et al., 1995, Joy, 2000). Cavity nesting species have been classified in two groups, primary cavity nester species (which dig their own cavities) also called “excavators”, and secondary cavity nesters or non-excavators (which nest in pre-existing cavities) also known as “cavity adopter species”. The two types of cavity nesters differ in several important life-history traits, including nesting success, clutch size, nestling period length, and adult survival (Martin and Li, 1992, Eberhard, 2002, Arsenault, 2004, Martin et al., 2004).

Cavity nesting species constitute a structured community that interacts through the creation and competition for nesting sites in temperate forests. Analogous to food webs, some species depend partly or entirely on excavators to produce a key resource “tree cavities” (Martin et al., 2004). In absence of human interference, all natural forested vegetation provide usable cavities in large trees and snags, and their availability increases with age and decay of trees and forest patches, which augment the amount of dead wood and facilitates cavity formation (Newton, 1998, Joy, 2000). Persistence of cavity-nesting species depends on the continual recruitment of large trees and snags, where cavities are form as a result of the natural process of forest decay. Some studies have demonstrated that cavity nesters populations are limited by suitable nesting cavities availability, this situation is observed more frequently in highly managed temperate habitats, but also witnessed in tropical forests (Hilden, 1965, Scott, 1979, Mannan et al., 1980, Munn, 1992, Collar and Juniper, 1992, Gibbs et al., 1993, Newton, 1994, Holt and Martin, 1997, Saab et al., 2004).

The great majority of studies about cavity nesting species have been done in North America and Europe, showing that 4–5% of landbird resident species are obligate cavity-nesters, whereas in Australia approximately 11% of resident species are obligate cavity-nesters (Saunders et al., 1982, Newton, 1998).

In Mexico, this is the first published analysis focused on assessing the proportion of cavity nesting species and their status. This analysis is particularly important because the country has one of the highest rates of forest loss and degradation in Latin America. Agrosystem expansion and widespread intensive forest exploitation for timber purposes have contributed to the estimated loss of 90% of tropical rainforests, 67% of tropical dry forests, 54% of cloud forests, 50% of coniferous forests, and 99% of high-elevation old-growth forests in the last 50 years, with annual forest loss rates from 1% to10% depending on region and vegetation types (Lammertink et al., 1996, Challenger, 1998, INE-UNAM, 2002).

Secondary forests are rapidly replacing primary forests in temperate and tropical regions, most forestry practices include intensive and selective logging of large commercial trees and the removal of large standing snags as “sanitary procedures” (Lammertink et al., 1996, Challenger, 1998). Secondary forests do not posses the specific structural properties required by most cavity nesting species, due to the majority of standing trees have small dimensions for cavity formation (Newton, 1994). Management plans in forestry districts do not take into consideration habitat requirements of native fauna because wildlife protection laws are poorly enforced. The country has not implemented breeding bird survey programs, making difficult to asses the situation of most bird species. However, a decline of many obligate cavity nesting populations have been recently documented (Iñigo-Elías, 1996, Ceballos and Valdelamar, 2000, Monterrubio-Rico and Enkerlin-Hoeflich, 2004). In addition, all remaining breeding habitats for some endangered cavity-nesting species are inside parks and reserves, this situation is faced today by the scarlet macaw (Ara macao) and the resplendent quetzal (Pharomachrus mocinno) (Hernández-Baños et al., 1995, Iñigo-Elías, 1996, Ceballos and Valdelamar, 2000). The extinction of the endemic imperial woodpecker (Campephilus imperialis), the largest species of woodpecker in the world (Lammertink et al., 1996), is the most dramatic remainders of the negative effects that inadequate forestry practices are causing to the resident avifauna in Mexico.

Due to the sensitivity of cavity nesting species in terms of nesting requirements, the alarming rates of forest loss and degradation, and the absence of national breeding bird survey programs, it is necessary to asses the number of cavity nesting species potentially vulnerable. For those reasons, we conducted our study focused on the following aims: (a) to determine the percentage of the Mexican landbird avifauna requiring tree cavities for nesting, (b) to identify the habitats and relevant protected areas to conserve cavity nesting species, and (c) to analyze the percentage of species in status comparing cavity nesters and open nesters.

We hypothesized that the present high rates of forest degradation are affecting more severely cavity nesters than non-cavity nesters, if this is true, we can expect a higher proportion of cavity nesting species threatened or endangered. We also expected that forest degradation is not affecting equally the two groups of cavity nesting species, with a higher proportion of species at risk in “secondary cavity nesters” than “primary cavity nesters”. In addition, we predicted that the highest concentration of cavity nesting species would occur more frequently in habitats with greater structural complexity as tropical rain forests than in less complex habitats as temperate forests.

Section snippets

Methods

We gathered data about the distribution of resident landbird avifauna from 35 areas covering the major vegetation types and different regions of Mexico (Arriaga et al., 2000). Most areas analyzed correspond to Biosphere Reserves, National Parks or IBAS (Important Bird Areas). These areas posses several forested habitats; and relatively well-known avifaunas counting with published bird checklists. Some of these areas are the best preserved and last remaining forested habitats of considerable

Results

A preliminary species assessment resulted in a total of 657 resident landbird species that breed in temperate and tropical habitats of the country, hence were included in the analysis. This figure represents 65% of the 1007 bird species known to occur in Mexico based on the estimates of Escalante-Pliego et al. (1993). Of these 657 species, 112 (17%) have different tree cavity requirements for nesting, including 81 (12%) species that are obligate cavity nesters (Table 1 and Appendix A). From

Discussion

The resident landbird avifauna in Mexico can be considered rich and diverse but relatively vulnerable based on the high proportion of species requiring tree cavities for their reproduction and the widespread reduction of primary forests. The high number of cavity-nesting birds in Mexico is due, in large part, to the belonging of Mexico to both Nearctic and Neotropical regions. Cavity-nesting species include bird families with Neotropical and Nearctic affinities. Two families were particularly

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the help and advise of K. Renton, J. Van Remsen, Mark. S. Hafner, Lorena Tellez-García. We greatly appreciate the suggestions made by two anonymous reviewers. We thank to Sandy J. Andelman for the considerations to the manuscript. Financial support was provided by Fondo Sectorial Ambiental SEMARNAT-CONACYT 2002-C01-0021. We thank Coordinación de Investigación Científica and Facultad de Biología at Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo, and Instituto de Biología UNAM for

References (107)

  • I. Newton

    The role of nest sites limiting the number of hole-nesting birds: a review

    Biological Conservation

    (1994)
  • M. Alvarez del Toro

    New records of birds from Chiapas, México

    The Condor

    (1952)
  • M. Alvarez del Toro

    Notes on the occurrence of birds in Chiapas, México

    The Condor

    (1954)
  • Alvarez del Toro, M., 1980. Las aves de Chiapas, México. Universidad Autónoma de Chiapas, Tuxtla Gutiérrez,...
  • American Ornithologists’ Union (A.O.U.)

    Check-list of North American Birds

    (2004)
  • R.F. Andrle

    Birds of the Sierra de Tuxtla in Veracruz, Mexico

    Wilson Bulletin

    (1967)
  • Arizmendi, M., Berlanga, H., Marquez-Valdelamar, L., Navarijo, L., Ornelas, F., 1990. Avifauna de la región de Chamela,...
  • L. Arriaga et al.

    Regiones terrestres prioritarias de México

    (2000)
  • D.P. Arsenault

    Differentiating nest sites of primary and secondary cavity-nesting birds in New Mexico

    Journal of Field Ornithology

    (2004)
  • G. Bancroft

    The faunal areas of Baja California del Norte

    The Condor

    (1926)
  • G. Bancroft

    Notes on the breeding coastal and insular birds of central lower California Baja California del Norte

    The Condor

    (1927)
  • S.R. Beissinger et al.

    New World Parrots in Crisis

    (1992)
  • Berret, D.G., 1962. The Birds of the Mexican State of Tabasco. Ph.D. Dissertation, Louisiana State University, Baton...
  • Binford, L.C., 1989. A distributional survey of the birds of the Mexican state of Oaxaca. Ornithological Monographs No....
  • E.R. Blake et al.

    Notes on a collection of Birds from Michoacan, Mexico. Field Museum of Natural History

    Zoological Series

    (1942)
  • Boykin, S.L., 1987. Avian Community Dynamics in Tamaulipas, Mexico. Master of Science Thesis. University of Wisconsin,...
  • Ceballos, G., Valdelamar, L.M., 2000. Las aves de México en peligro de extinción. Instituto de Ecología, Universidad...
  • Challenger, A., 1998. Utilización y conservación de los ecosistemas terrestres de México, pasado, presente y futuro,...
  • N.J. Collar et al.

    Dimensions and causes of the parrot conservation crisis

  • J. Del Hoyo et al.

    Handbook of the Birds of the World

    (1994)
  • Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2002. Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059-ECOL-2001. Protección ambiental-Especies nativas...
  • R.W. Dickerman

    A critique of “Birds from Coahuila”, Mexico

    The Condor

    (1963)
  • D.S. Dobkin et al.

    Nest site relationships among birds of riparian and snowpocket aspen woodlands in the northwestern Great Basin

    The Condor

    (1995)
  • B.R. Domínguez et al.

    Avifauna de la reserva “El Ocote”

  • J.R. Eberhard

    Cavity adoption and the evolution of coloniality in cavity nesting birds

    The Condor

    (2002)
  • P.R. Ehrlich et al.

    The Birders Handbook: A Field Guide to the Natural History of North American Birds

    (1988)
  • C.A. Ely

    The birds of Southeastern Coahuila, Mexico

    The Condor

    (1962)
  • Enkerlin-Hoeflich, E.C., 1995. Comparative ecology and reproductive biology of three species of Amazona parrots in...
  • P. Escalante-Pliego

    Aves de Nayarit

    (1988)
  • P. Escalante-Pliego et al.

    A geographic, ecological, and historical analysis of land bird diversity in Mexico

  • B.P. Escalante-Pliego et al.

    Listado de Nombres Comunes de las Aves de México

    (1996)
  • J.M. Forshaw

    Parrots of the World

    (1978)
  • H. Friedmann et al.
  • C. Galindo-Leal et al.

    El Venado de la Sierra Madre Occidental, Ecología, Manejo y Conservación

    (1998)
  • J.P. Gibbs et al.

    Snag availability and communities of cavity nesting birds in tropical versus temperate forests

    Biotropica

    (1993)
  • D.J. Gildardi et al.

    Patterns of activity, flocking, and habitat use in parrots of the Peruvian Amazon

    The Condor

    (1998)
  • H. Gómez-de Silva et al.

    Birds of the upper cloud forest of El Triunfo, Chiapas, Mexico

    Neotropical Ornithology

    (1999)
  • F. Gonzalez-García

    Avifauna de la Reserva de la Biosfera de “Montes Azules”, Selva Lacandona, Chiapas, México

    Acta Zoológica Mexicana

    (1993)
  • J. Grinell

    A distributional summary of the Ornithology of Lower California

    University of California Publications Zoology

    (1928)
  • J.W. Hardy

    Flock social behavior of the Orange-fronted Parakeet

    The Condor

    (1965)
  • Harrell, B.E., 1951. The Birds of Rancho El Cielo, An Ecological Investigation in the Oak-sweet Gum Forest of...
  • B.E. Hernández-Baños et al.

    Bird faunas of the humid montane forests of Mesoamerica: biogeographic patterns and priorities for conservation

    Bird Conservation International

    (1995)
  • O. Hilden

    Habitat selection in birds

    Annals of Zoolgia Fennicci

    (1965)
  • F. Hiraldo et al.

    Overlap in the diets of Diurnal raptors breeding at the Michilia Biosphere Reserve, Durango, México

    Journal of Raptor Research

    (1991)
  • R.F. Holt et al.

    Landscape modification and patch selection: the demography of two secondary cavity nesters colonizing clearcuts

    The Auk

    (1997)
  • S.N.G. Howell et al.

    A Guide to the Birds of México and Northern Central America

    (1995)
  • S.N.G. Howell

    A Bird-finding Guide to Mexico

    (1999)
  • J.E. Hunter et al.

    Habitat configuration around Spotted Owl sites in Northwestern Oregon

    Condor

    (1995)
  • INE-SEMARNAP, 1999a. Programa de manejo reserva de la Biosfera “La Encrucijada”,...
  • INE-SEMARNAP, 1999b. Programa de manejo reserva de la Biosfera “La Sepultura”,...
  • Cited by (54)

    • Trait shifts in bird communities from primary forest to human settlements in Mexican seasonal forests. Are there ruderal birds?

      2022, Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation
      Citation Excerpt :

      This species was recorded only in the primary tropical forest. Its exclusion may be due to the fact that they depend on large mature trees to excavate their nesting cavities (Monterrubio-Rico and Escalante, 2006). Similarly, in the oak forest, the Mountain Trogon (Trogon mexicanus) and the White-striped Woodcreeper (Lepidocolaptes leucogaster), both of which depend on forest cover for nesting and feeding (Ramírez-Bastida et al., 2015), were excluded from the human settlements.

    • Differential resilience to extreme climate events of tree phenology and cavity resources in tropical dry forest: Cascading effects on a threatened species

      2018, Forest Ecology and Management
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, this is likely to be an extremely slow process, requiring decades for the formation of cavities of suitable size and characteristics to be used by large-bodied secondary cavity-nesters. One fifth of the resident terrestrial avifauna of tropical dry forest are cavity-nesters, and this group represents a high proportion of endangered and threatened species (Monterrubio-Rico and Escalante-Pliego, 2006). In tropical forests, most cavity-using vertebrates are dependent on the slow formation of cavities by damage and decay processes (Cockle et al., 2011a).

    • Cavity characteristics, but not habitat, influence nest survival of cavity-nesting birds along a gradient of human impact in the subtropical Atlantic Forest

      2015, Biological Conservation
      Citation Excerpt :

      Populations of these cavity-nesters can be limited by the supply of suitable cavities, which usually occur in large old trees (Newton, 1994, 1998; Gibbons and Lindenmayer, 2002; Cockle et al., 2010, 2011a,b). Consequently, compared to other guilds, cavity-nesters can be disproportionately vulnerable to forest loss and degradation by logging (Monterrubio-Rico and Escalante-Pliego, 2006; Politi et al., 2012). Conservation efforts often focus on maintaining or restoring cavity trees in human-altered habitats, including logged forest and agricultural areas (Manning et al., 2004; Lindenmayer et al., 2006; Bednarz et al., 2013).

    • Distribution and abundance of hollow-bearing trees in urban forest fragments

      2015, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening
      Citation Excerpt :

      The availability of one resource, tree hollows, generally limits the distribution and abundance of many obligate hollow-bearing tree (HBT) users and general species richness of an area (Gibbons and Lindenmayer, 2002). The importance of HBTs for a large range of fauna has been demonstrated globally (Bai et al., 2003; Aitken and Martin, 2004; Monterrubio-Rico and Escalante-Pliego, 2006; Holloway et al., 2007; Blakely et al., 2008; Goldingay, 2009). Hollow-bearing trees are particularly important for Australian faunal communities, given the large number of species (approximately 300) which are reliant upon them as habitat trees (Gibbons and Lindenmayer, 2002; Goldingay, 2009, 2011).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text