Volume 14 Issue 1
Feb.  2023
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Abstract
Background
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusions
Authors' contributions
Acknowledgements
Competing interests
References
Related Articles
Denisa Dvořáková, Jan Šipoš, Josef Suchomel. 2023: Impact of agricultural landscape structure on the patterns of bird species diversity at a regional scale. Avian Research, 14(1): 100147. DOI: 10.1016/j.avrs.2023.100147
Citation: Denisa Dvořáková, Jan Šipoš, Josef Suchomel. 2023: Impact of agricultural landscape structure on the patterns of bird species diversity at a regional scale. Avian Research, 14(1): 100147. DOI: 10.1016/j.avrs.2023.100147
shu

Impact of agricultural landscape structure on the patterns of bird species diversity at a regional scale

  • Department of Zoology, Fisheries, Hydrobiology and Apiculture, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00, Brno, Czech Republic

Funds: 

the internal grant agency of the Faculty of AgriSciences of Mendel University in Brno AF-IGA2022-IP-034

More Information
  • Corresponding author:

    E-mail address: denisa.dvorakova@mendelu.cz (D. Dvořáková)

  • Received Date: 20 Apr 2023
  • Rev Recd Date: 28 Sep 2023
  • Accepted Date: 08 Oct 2023
  • Available Online: 10 Jan 2024
  • Publish Date: 09 Nov 2023
    Graphical Abstract
    • Abstract

  • The loss of bird species diversity is a crucial problem in the European agricultural landscape. Change in the area coverage of major land cover types has been mentioned as one of the main factors responsible for bird biodiversity impoverishment. In this study, we focused on the impact of landscape matrix characteristics on bird species richness and on Faith's phylogenetic diversity index on a spatial scale of 1000-m radius around the measured occurrence points. We investigated how land cover composition affects bird diversity on the landscape scale using nationwide citizen science data. In total, 168,739 records of bird occurrence in the South Moravian Region of the Czech Republic during growing season from 2009 to 2019 were evaluated. We found that the presence of water bodies and wetlands significantly corresponded to the areas of highest bird species richness. We also revealed that the presence of forests (~60% of the forest in the Czech Republic is occupied by commercial forests), urban areas and arable land were negatively associated with bird species richness and phylogenetic diversity. Forests (both coniferous and deciduous) and urban habitats were found to have a tendency to host a clustered phylogenetic community structure in comparison with wetland and arable land. A strong negative association between forest proportion and bird diversity led us to conclude that the expansion of the forest (with simple species composition, horizontal and vertical structure) could be one of the critical drivers of the decline of bird species diversity in the European agricultural landscape. On the other hand, our results also pointed out that small woody features (i.e., woodlots) and scattered woodland shrub vegetation were one of the main landscape characteristics supporting a bird diversity in rural landscape. This is in concordance with other studies which mention these landscape structures as important elements for nesting and foraging of farmland birds. We thus recommend to maintain and restore scattered trees or woodlots with complex structure in agricultural landscape.

    • FullText(HTML)

  • The Bar-headed Goose (Anser indicus) breeds in the plateau wetlands of Central Asia, from extreme eastern Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan across southern Russia to western Mongolia and from the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau south to Ladakh in India. The species winters in China from southern Tibet east of Guizhou and from Pakistan east to Myanmar (Miyabayashi and Mundkur 1999). Previously, the world population was estimated at 52, 000-60, 000 birds, based on incomplete counts carried out prior to 2000 (Wetland International 2015). While the Bar-headed Goose is not included in the Threatened category of the IUCN Red List due to its large population and range, BirdLife International (2016) estimated a decreasing trend in its population.

    South-central Tibet is a significant wintering ground for the Bar-headed Geese and periodic surveys have been conducted there since the 1990s (Lu 1991; Bishop et al. 1997). Bishop et al. (1997) estimated the number of geese there between 13, 000 and 14, 500 which represented about 25% of the world population, based on surveys conducted during 1991‒1996. Over the past decade, the status of wintering Bar-headed Geese in south-central Tibet has aroused increasing concern with respect to the surveillance of a highly pathogenic avian influenza, given that this species is considered to be a major potential carrier for H5N1 across the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau (Chen et al. 2005; Brown et al. 2008; Prosser et al. 2011; Zhang et al. 2011). To improve the estimate of the current status of the Bar-headed Geese, we conducted surveys in south-central Tibet in January 2014 and present the size of their winter flock, distribution and habitat use in South-central Tibet as of this date. Considering that the latest world population estimate was based on data from well before 2000, a more reliable and up-to-date population estimate is desirable (Ven et al. 2010; Wetland International 2015). We also revised the estimated world population of this species based on the latest wintering counts available in its range of countries. We also discuss possible recent demographic trends in major wintering areas.

    Study area

    The winter surveys in 2014 were conducted in three major river valleys and their tributaries, i.e., along the Yarlung Zangbo (Hereafter, Yarlung), Lhasa and NyangQu rivers, as well as Yamdrok Lake. These areas are characterized by high elevations, ranging from 2930 to 5030 m. The primary survey areas stretched west from Lhaze (29°07′N, 87°32′E) to Miling (29°28′N, 94°39′E) and north from Lhunzub (29°56′N, 91°00′E) to Nakartse (28°48′N, 90°53′E; Fig. 1). We divided the survey region into six geographic areas, i.e., the valleys of the West Yarlung, Nyang Qu, Lhasa, East Yarlung and Nyang rivers and Yamdrok Lake (Fig. 1).

    Figure  1.  Survey areas of Bar-headed Geese wintering in south-central Tibet in January 2014. Major rivers are shown on the map; name of locations are given in English, with Pinyin Chinese in brackets: 1 Lhaze (Lazi), 2 Sakya (Sajia), 3 Xiatongmoin (Xietongmen), 4 Shigatse (Rikaze), 5 Bainang (Bailang), 6 Gyantse (Jiangzi), 7 Namling (Nanmulin), 8 Rinpung (Renbu), 9 Nyemo (Nimu), 10 Nakartse (Langkazi), 11 Quxu (Qushui), 12 Doilungdeqen (Duilongdeqing), 13 Lhasa (Lasa), 14 Dagze (Dazi), 15 Lhunzub (Linzhou), 16 Maizhokunggar (Mozhugongka), 17 Gonggar (Gongga), 18 Danang (Zhanang), 19 Nedong (Naidong), 20 Sangri (Sangri), 21 Gyatsa (Jiacha), 22 Namshan (Langxian), 23 Miling (Milin), 24 Nylingchi (Linzhi), 25 Gongbo Gyamda (Gongbujiangda)
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    Agriculture is the dominant land use in the Bar-headed Geese wintering areas with most croplands planted with highland barley (Hordeum vulgare), spring wheat (Triticum sp.), winter wheat (Triticum sp.), potatos (Solanum tuberosum), broad beans (Pisum sativum) and rape oilseed (Brassica campestris). Winter wheat is grown during late September to August of the following year, while other crops dominate from April through September. Croplands are fallow in winter and are either ploughed and irrigated immediately after harvest for pest control or remain unploughed until the following spring. Grazing is the second dominant land use with sheep and goats, the most important type of livestock.

    Population survey

    We recorded the number of wintering geese during the brief period from 16‒25 January 2014. Two teams, each consisting of four members, simultaneously surveyed the east and west part of the study area. We followed the survey methods used by Bishop et al. (1997) and Gregory et al. (2010). We drove cars on primary roads though each valley and their major tributaries and stopped to scan with 10× binoculars or a 20‒60× telescope every 1‒2 km over suitable habitat or whenever a flock was seen. Where visibility over suitable habitat was limited, we walked to observe the area using secondary roads.

    Whenever Bar-headed Geese were observed, we recorded their location, flock size and habitat type. To avoid double counting, we ignored flocks flying overhead from behind. A flock was defined as a group of Bar-headed Geese found continuously in a specific type of habitat. Habitat types for the goose were categorized as winter wheat, ploughed field, crop stubble (unploughed highland barley and spring wheat croplands), pastureland, rivers and lake, marshes and other habitats.

    World population estimate

    We reviewed the available wintering survey results of the Bar-headed Geese throughout its range, including papers published in scientific journals, as well as surveys accepted by international conservation agencies or national conservation authorities that reflected the status of the species in their respective countries. Where long-term surveys were conducted, we used the most recent data. Since most estimates outside China were given as a range, we summarized the minimum and maximum values as the world population estimate.

    Number of birds and their distribution

    A total of 67, 000 Bar-headed Geese were recorded in January 2014 (Table 1). The species was observed in the Yarlung River from Lhaze east to Sangri except for Rinpung. No Bar-headed Geese were recorded in the 270 km stretch of the Yarlung River from Gyatsa east to Miling. We recorded geese in all major tributaries, although only several hundred birds were observed in the 68 km stretch of the Maizho Maqu River and 287 km along the Nyang River. Bar-headed Geese were especially abundant in the Lhasa River valley (38.5%), the Nyang Qu River valley (31.0%) and the West Yarlung River valley (19.6%) by geographic area and in Lhunzub (27.2%) and Shigatse (26.7%) by administration division (Table 1; Fig. 2).

    Table  1.  Number of wintering Bar-headed Geese by geographic area and administration division in south-central Tibet in January 2014
    Valleys and counties Elevation (m) Number
    West Yarlung River valley13, 144
    Lhaze County, Yarlung River3920-40001147
    Lhaze County, Sakya Qu River4000-40502148
    Lhaze County, Re Qu River3920-4000211
    Xaitongmoin County, Yarlung River3890-3920161
    Xaitongmoin County, Rong Qu River3920-397091
    Xaitongmoin County, Tanakpu Qu River3890-39301146
    Sakya County, Shab Qu valley3900-3970583
    Shigatse City, Yarlung River3800-38906005
    Namling County, Yarlung River3800-38301388
    Namling County, Shang Qu River3830-4000219
    Rinpung-Nyemo Cos., Yarlung River3710-38000
    Nyemo County, Nyemo Maqu River3710-383045
    Nyang Qu River valley20, 800
    Shigatse City3850-387011, 925
    Bainang County3870-39304075
    Gyantse County3930-50304800
    Yamdrok Lake190
    Nakartse County4460-4520190
    Lhasa River valley25, 809
    Quxu County, Lhasa River3590-36302075
    Doilungdeqen County, Lhasa River3630-364081
    Doilungdeqen County Doilung Qu River3640-3740140
    Lhasa Urban, Lhasa River3640-368015
    Dagze County, Lhasa River3680-37905158
    Lhunzub County, Penbo River3730-397018, 210
    Maizhokunggar County, Lhasa River3790-38400
    Maizhokunggar County, Maizho Maqu River3830-4450130
    East Yarlung River valley6786
    Quxu County3590-37101317
    Gonggar County3570-35902866
    Danang County3560-3570422
    Nedong County3555-35601379
    Sangri County3550-3555802
    Gyatsa-Miling Counties. 2950-32600
    Nyang River valley302
    Gongbo Gyamda and Nylingchi Counties2930-4880302
    Grand total67, 031
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure  2.  Number and distribution of Bar-headed Geese wintering in south-central Tibet of China in January 2014. The survey results in Yarlung River from Gyatsa east to Nylingchi and in Nyang River are not shown; only 302 geese were recorded at the confluence of the Yarlung and Nyang rivers
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    Habitat use

    Wintering Bar-headed Geese were observed at elevations ranging from 2930 to 4470 m. In January 2014, 86.5% of the geese were found in four major habitat types: winter wheat field (39.3%), ploughed field (16.9%), pastureland (15.2%) and marshes (15.1%), while less than 1% of the geese were found on crop stubble (Table 2). Wheat fields and ploughed fields typically occurred as small plots mixed with unploughed croplands (crop stubble). About 68.6% of the flocks we observed were in these small plots, but the flocks were relatively small in size (mean = 214 individuals). In contrast, pastureland and marshes, mainly used as resting habitats by our geese, had larger flock sizes (mean = 472 birds, maximum = 6350 birds).

    Table  2.  Occurrence and details of flocks of Bar-headed Geese by habitat type in south-central Tibet, January 2014
    Habitat Number of flocks Mean flock size (range) Number
    Winter wheat140188 (2-1400) 26, 322 (39.3%)
    Ploughed field35323 (3-2500) 11, 309 (16.9%)
    Pasture20510 (1-6350) 10, 199 (15.2%)
    Marsh23439 (2-3000) 10, 105 (15.1%)
    River and lake24303 (1-3500) 7261 (10.8%)
    Crop stubble866 (5-150) 530 (0.8%)
    Other habitats5261 (15-600) 1305 (1.9%)
    Total255263 (1-6350) 67, 031
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    World population estimate

    A revised world population of Bar-headed Geese was estimated at 97, 000‒118, 000 birds (Table 3), with the highest numbers occurring in China (67.5‒69.2%) and India (17.8‒30.5%). Myanmar supported 2.8‒4.7% of the world total and Pakistan 1.8‒4.7%. Less than 1.0% were found in Bangladesh and Nepal.

    Table  3.  World population estimates for the Bar-headed Geese based on the latest wintering counts available
    Country Number Survey year Reference
    China
    South-central Tibet67, 0002014This study
    Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau5300-72002004-2013Yang (2005), Yang and Zhang (2014)
    Indian19, 100-32, 8002003-2007Li et al. (2009)
    Myanmar3000-50001999-2007Ven et al. (2010)
    Pakistan1800-50001999-2005Li et al. (2009), Ven et al. (2010)
    Bangladesh300-5002006-2010Ven et al. (2010)
    Nepal200-3002000-2007Li et al. (2009), Takekawa et al. (2009)
    Total96, 700-117, 800
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Our results reveal a remarkable increase in the number of Bar-headed Geese wintering in Tibet. Using the same methods, our survey tally in 2014 is four times the 15, 500‒17, 500 geese estimated in December 1993 (Bishop et al. 1997). The number of geese in Tibet during 2014 even exceeded the current world population estimate of 52, 000‒60, 000 birds (Wetland International 2015). Most of the surveyed areas indicated an increase in population, with the exception of Yamdrok Lake. Bar-headed Geese were most abundant in Shigatse City and Lhunzhub County, which agrees with the survey results from 1991 to 1994 (Bishop et al. 1997). Compared with the previous count (Bishop et al. 1997), we surveyed extra valleys of the Maizho Maqu, Nyang River and Yarlung rivers east from Sangri to Miling for the first time, but only small numbers of Bar-headed Geese were recorded, probably because these river stretches are narrow and confined on both sides by steep mountains, where croplands are extremely rare.

    Our results indicate that winter wheat fields are the most frequently used feeding habitat by the wintering Bar-headed Geese in south-central Tibet. Fecal analyses showed that 65% of the total foods consumed by geese, wintering at Caohai in Guizhou Province China, consisted of leaves of Gramineae (Li and Nie 1998), an indication that this was their principal food source. Compared with crop stubble, our results showed that the Bar-headed Geese prefer the soft and irrigated ploughed fields, although these fields have significantly lower residue cover and surface waste grain (Bishop and Li 2002). We interpret this preference for ploughed fields as evidence of niche partitioning between our Bar-headed Geese and Black-necked Cranes (Grus nigricollis), which prefer crop stubble (Bishop et al. 1998). As such, careful consideration is required in cropland management to avoid harmful impacts to either species.

    Our updated species population estimate of 97, 000-118, 000 is almost twice the previous estimate by Wetland International (2015). China recorded the highest population increase (324-367% over the past two decades) according to the estimate of 15, 500-17, 500 birds in 1995 (Bishop et al. 1997). In China, the Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau is the other major wintering ground outside Tibet, where the number of birds is well monitored and showing a relatively stable trend (Lu 1991; Yang 2005; Yang and Zhang 2014). In India, this species has a nationwide wintering range, but its population has never been surveyed at a full scale and its status has been poorly documented over the past years (Li et al. 2009). Recent surveys suggest there may be a significant and increasing wintering population at Pong Dam in Himachal Pradesh and also in other wetlands in northern India (A. Rahmani, personal communication).

    Our population estimate contradicts the global declining trend reported by BirdLife International (2016). The global and regional population increase probably stems from wintering habitat improvements. Over the past two decades, Tibet has been undergoing rapid population and economic growth, which have affected both the environment and agriculture practices. First, cropland areas show an accelerated growth resulting from reclamation of pastures and wetlands (Bai et al. 2014). Second, winter wheat has been grown as a major crop in many areas in south-central Tibet to obtain higher yields. Agriculture development is especially remarkable in the Penbo and the Nyang Qu River valleys, where the Bar-headed Geese is most abundant and shows a rapidly increasing population trend. The wintering habitat improvement in south-central Tibet may also cause short-stopping of the geese, i.e., individual birds normally wintering in south Asia will winter farther north in south-central Tibet (Takekawa et al. 2009; Ven et al. 2010). This behavior may reduce mortality in the Bar-headed Geese that would otherwise undertake a somewhat daunting trans-Himalayan migration (Hawkes et al. 2011).

    While bird flu outbreaks caused the decrease in population of birds breeding at the Qinghai Lake in last decade (Chen et al. 2005), our results reveal a remarkable increase in the number of Bar-headed Geese wintering in south-central Tibet, as well as a rise of the world-wide population estimate. The population increase most likely results from a proliferation of winter wheat fields, a favorite feeding habitat by the Bar-headed Goose. This provides opportunity for us to understand the conservation importance of agricultural cultivation on related bird species. Long-term and full-scale census is still necessary to monitor the population trend and evaluate the impact of bird flu on this susceptible species.

    DL performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper and prepared figures and tables. GZ and FL designed and performed the experiments. TM performed the experiments. JL conceived the experiments and contributed the reagents, material and tools. FQ conceived, designed and performed the experiments. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

    The study was funded by the Wildlife Rescue Project from the Department of Wildlife Protection and Nature Reserve Management, State Forestry Administration (SFA) of China and the Project of Surveillance of H7N9 in Wild Birds (No. 201404404) from the Department of Science and Technology, SFA. The survey was also co-funded by the International Crane Foundation. We thank Langjie Wangqiu and Ding Dan for their assistance in the surveys the and Forestry Department of the Tibet Autonomous Region for their support in the field work. We thank Mary Anne Bishop, Beverly Pfister, Elena Smirenski and Jim Harris for improving the manuscript and Asad Rahmani, Simba Chan and Xingyao Zhong for their valuable information.

    The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

    • References (124)
  • Anderson, C., Travis, J.M.J., Palmer, S.C.F., Crick, H.Q.P., Lancaster, L.T., 2022. Getting lost in the matrix? On how the characteristics and arrangement of linear landscape elements influence ecological connectivity. Landsc. Ecol. 37, 2503–2517. .
    Andrén, H., 1996. Population responses to habitat fragmentation: statistical power and the random sample hypothesis. Oikos 76, 235. .
    Arcdata Praha, 2016. ArcČR® 500: Digital Vector Geographic Database of the Czech Republic. ArcČR® 500 version 3.3. .
    Bartoń, K., 2022. MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference. Version 1.46.0. .
    Bennett, A.F., Holland, G.J., Haslem, A., Stewart, A., Radford, J.Q., Clarke, R.H., 2022. Restoration promotes recovery of woodland birds in agricultural environments: a comparison of 'revegetation' and 'remnant' landscapes. J. Appl. Ecol. 59, 1334–1346. .
    Berg, Å., 2002. Composition and diversity of bird communities in Swedish farmland–forest mosaic landscapes. Bird Study 49, 153–165. .
    Betts, M.G., Fahrig, L., Hadley, A.S., Halstead, K.E., Bowman, J., Robinson, W.D., et al., 2014. A species-centered approach for uncovering generalities in organism responses to habitat loss and fragmentation. Ecography 37, 517–527. .
    Betts, M.G., Yang, Z., Hadley, A.S., Smith, A.C., Rousseau, J.S., Northrup, J.M., et al., 2022. Forest degradation drives widespread avian habitat and population declines. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 709–719. .
    Bowler, D.E., Bhandari, N., Repke, L., Beuthner, C., Callaghan, C.T., Eichenberg, D., et al., 2022. Decision-making of citizen scientists when recording species observations. Sci. Rep. 12, 11069 .
    Brambilla, M., Casale, F., Bergero, V., Bogliani, G., Crovetto, G.M., Falco, R., et al., 2010. Glorious past, uncertain present, bad future? Assessing effects of land-use changes on habitat suitability for a threatened farmland bird species. Biol. Conserv. 143, 2770–2778. .
    Brown, J.A., Lockwood, J.L., Avery, J.D., Curtis Burkhalter, J., Aagaard, K., Fenn, K.H., 2019. Evaluating the long-term effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas: a 40-year look at forest bird diversity. Biodivers. Conserv. 28, 811–826. .
    Bucher, R., Andres, C., Wedel, M.F., Entling, M.H., Nickel, H., 2016. Biodiversity in lowintensity pastures, straw meadows, and fallows of a fen area – A multitrophic comparison. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 219, 190–196. .
    Burns, F., Eaton, M.A., Burfield, I.J., Klvaňová, A., Šilarová, E., Staneva, A., et al., 2021. Abundance decline in the avifauna of the European Union reveals cross-continental similarities in biodiversity change. Ecol. Evol. 11, 16647–16660. .
    Cade, B.S., 2015. Model averaging and muddled multimodel inferences. Ecology 96, 2370–2382. .
    Callaghan, C.T., Major, R.E., Lyons, M.B., Martin, J.M., Kingsford, R.T., 2018. The effects of local and landscape habitat attributes on bird diversity in urban greenspaces. Ecosphere 9, e02347. .
    Callaghan, C.T., Poore, A.G.B., Hofmann, M., Roberts, C.J., Pereira, H.M., 2021. Largebodied birds are over-represented in unstructured citizen science data. Sci. Rep. 11, 19073 .
    Carbó-Ramírez, P., Zuria, I., 2011. The value of small urban greenspaces for birds in a Mexican city. Landsc. Urban Plann. 100, 213–222. .
    Černá, M., Fišer, B., Potočiarová, E., Vejvodová, A., 2007. Agri-Environmental Schemes in the Czech Republic 2007–2013. Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic and Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic and The Nature Conservation Agency of the Czech Republic, Praha.
    Chamberlain, D., Kibuule, M., Skeen, R.Q., Pomeroy, D., 2018. Urban bird trends in a rapidly growing tropical city. Ostrich 89, 275–280. .
    Chao, A., 1987. Estimating the population size for capture-recapture data with unequal catchability. Biometrics 43, 783. .
    Cherkaoui, I., Hanane, S., 2011. Status and breeding biology of Northern Lapwings Vanellus vanellus in the Gharb coastal wetlands of northern Morocco. Wader Study Group Bull. 118, 49–54.
    Clergeau, P., Croci, S., Jokimäki, J., Kaisanlahti-Jokimäki, M-L., Dinetti, M., 2006. Avifauna homogenisation by urbanisation: analysis at different European latitudes. Biol. Conserv. 127, 336–344. .
    CSO, 2009. Faunistická Databáze. Pozorování. –2019. (Accessed 5 June 2020).
    CZSO, 2009. Územně Analytické Podklady. Datové Vrstvy Pro GIS. –2019. (Accessed 26 Mya 2020).
    CZSO, 2021. Statistical Yearbook of the Jihomoravský Region. (Accessed 26 May 2020).
    CZSO, 2022. Lesnictví V Jihomoravském Kraji V Roce 2021. (Accessed 25 August 2023).
    Dertien, J.S., Self, S., Ross, B.E., Barrett, K., Baldwin, R.F., 2020. The relationship between biodiversity and wetland cover varies across regions of the conterminous United States. PLoS One 15, e0232052. .
    Dolédec, S., Chessel, D., ter Braak, C.J.F., Champely, S., 1996. Matching species traits to environmental variables: a new three-table ordination method. Environ. Ecol. Stat. 3, 143–166. .
    Donald, P.F., Green, R.E., Heath, M.F., 2001. Agricultural intensification and the collapse of Europe's farmland bird populations. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 268, 25–29. .
    Dungel, J., Hudec, K., Šťastný, K., 2021. Atlas Ptáků České a Slovenské Republiky, Vydání 3. In: Přepracované a Rozšířené (Ed.), Atlas. Academia, Praha.
    Dvořaková, L., Kuczyński, L., Rivas-Salvador, J., Reif, J., 2022. Habitat characteristics supporting bird species richness in mid-field woodlots. Front. Environ. Sci. 10, 816255 .
    ESRI, 2021. ArcGIS Pro. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands: CA, Version 2.9.2. .
    European Environment Agency, 2018a. High Resolution Layer: Forest Type (FTY) 2012. . (Accessed 11 August 2020).
    European Environment Agency, 2018b. High Resolution Layer: Forest Type (FTY) 2015. . (Accessed 11 August 2020).
    European Environment Agency, 2018c. High Resolution Layer: Grassland (GRA) 2015. . (Accessed 11 August 2020).
    European Environment Agency, 2019a. Corine Land Cover. CLC 2012. . (Accessed 11 August 2020).
    European Environment Agency, 2019b. Corine Land Cover. CLC 2018. . (Accessed 11 August 2020).
    European Environment Agency, 2019c. High Resolution Layer: Small Woody Features (SWF) 2015. . (Accessed 12 August 2020).
    European Environment Agency, 2020a. High Resolution Layer: Forest Type (FTY) 2018. . (Accessed 11 August 2021).
    European Environment Agency, 2020b. High Resolution Layer: Grassland (GRA) 2018. . (Accessed 11 August 2021).
    European Environment Agency, 2020c. High Resolution Layer: Water & Wetness (WAW) 2015. . (Accessed 12 August 2021).
    European Environment Agency, 2020d. High Resolution Layer: Water & Wetness (WAW) 2018. . (Accessed 12 August 2021).
    Fahrig, L., Baundry, J., Brotons, L., Burel, F.G., Crist, T.O., Fuller, R.J., et al., 2011. Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Ecol. Lett. 14, 101–112. .
    Faith, D.P., 1992. Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biol. Conserv. 61, 1–10. .
    Fischer, J., Stott, J., Law, B.S., 2010. The disproportionate value of scattered trees. Biol. Conserv. 143, 1564–1567. .
    Fox, J., Weisberg, S., 2019. An R Companion to Applied Regression, third ed. SAGE, Los Angeles.
    Fraixedas, S., Lindén, A., Piha, M., Cabeza, M., Gregory, R., Lehikoinen, A., 2020. A stateof-the-art review on birds as indicators of biodiversity: advances, challenges, and future directions. Ecol. Indicat. 118, 106728 .
    Galitsky, C., Lawler, J.J., 2015. Relative influence of local and landscape factors on bird communities vary by species and functional group. Landsc. Ecol. 30, 287–299. .
    Ganzevoort, W., van den Born, R.J.G., Halffman, W., Turnhout, S., 2017. Sharing biodiversity data: citizen scientists' concerns and motivations. Biodivers. Conserv. 26, 2821–2837. .
    Gellrich, M., Baur, P., Koch, B., Zimmermann, N.E., 2007. Agricultural land abandonment and natural forest re-growth in the Swiss mountains: a spatially explicit economic analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 118, 93–108. .
    Gotelli, N.J., 2000. Null model analysis of species co-occurrence patterns. Ecology 81, 2606–2621. .
    Grafen, A., 1989. The phylogenetic regression. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 326, 119–157. .
    Gregory, R., Noble, D., Field, R., Marchant, J., Raven, M.J., Gibbons, D., 2003. Using birds as indicators of biodiversity. Ornis Hung. 12, 11–24.
    Guilherme, J.L., Miguel Pereira, H., 2013. Adaptation of bird communities to farmland abandonment in a mountain landscape. PLoS One 8, e73619. .
    Hanioka, M., Yamaura, Y., Senzaki, M., Yamanaka, S., Kawamura, K., Nakamura, F., 2018. Assessing the landscape-dependent restoration potential of abandoned farmland using a hierarchical model of bird communities. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 265, 217–225. .
    Hendrickx, F., Maelfait, J-P., Van Wingerden, W., Schweiger, O., Speelmans, M., Aviron, S., et al., 2007. How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes: agricultural factors and arthropod biodiversity. J. Appl. Ecol. 44, 340–351. .
    Hill, J.M., Egan, J.F., Stauffer, G.E., Diefenbach, D.R., 2014. Habitat availability is a more plausible explanation than insecticide acute toxicity for U.S. grassland bird species declines. PLoS One 9, e98064. .
    Horak, J., Peltanova, A., Podavkova, A., Safarova, L., Bogusch, P., Romportl, D., et al., 2013. Biodiversity responses to land use in traditional fruit orchards of a rural agricultural landscape. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 178, 71–77. .
    Humphrey, J.E., Haslem, A., Bennett, A.F., 2023. Housing or habitat: what drives patterns of avian species richness in urbanized landscapes? Landsc. Ecol. 38, 1919–1937.
    Isaksson, C., 2018. Impact of urbanization on birds. In: Tietze, D.T. (Ed.), Bird Species, Fascinating Life Sciences. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 235–257. .
    Jakobsson, S., Lindborg, R., 2017. The importance of trees for woody pasture bird diversity and effects of the European Union's tree density policy. J. Appl. Ecol. 54, 1638–1647. .
    Johnston, A., Moran, N., Musgrove, A., Fink, D., Baillie, S.R., 2020. Estimating species distributions from spatially biased citizen science data. Ecol. Model. 422, 108927 .
    Jonsen, I.D., Fahrig, L., 1997. Response of generalist and specialist insect herbivores to landscape spatial structure. Landsc. Ecol. 12, 185–197. .
    Jungandreas, A., Roilo, S., Strauch, M., Václavík, T., Volk, M., Cord, A.F., 2022. Response of endangered bird species to land-use changes in an agricultural landscape in Germany. Reg. Environ. Change 22, 19. .
    Kamp, J., Reinhard, A., Frenzel, M., Kämpfer, S., Trappe, J., Hölzel, N., 2018. Farmland bird responses to land abandonment in Western Siberia. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 268, 61–69. .
    Kembel, S.W., Cowan, P.D., Helmus, M.R., Cornwell, W.K., Morlon, H., Ackerly, D.D., et al., 2010. Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics 26, 1463–1464. .
    Klingbeil, B.T., Willig, M.R., 2016. Matrix composition and landscape heterogeneity structure multiple dimensions of biodiversity in temperate forest birds. Biodivers. Conserv. 25, 2687–2708. .
    Laurance, W.F., Nascimento, H.E.M., Laurance, S.G., Andrade, A., Ewers, R.M., Harms, K. E., et al., 2007. Habitat fragmentation, variable edge effects, and the landscapedivergence hypothesis. PLoS One 2, e1017. .
    Le Roux, D.S., Ikin, K., Lindenmayer, D.B., Manning, A.D., Gibbons, P., 2018. The value of scattered trees for wildlife: contrasting effects of landscape context and tree size. Divers. Distrib. 24, 69–81. .
    Leveau, L.M., Ruggiero, A., Matthews, T.J., Isabel Bellocq, M., 2019. A global consistent positive effect of urban green area size on bird richness. Avian Res. 10, 30. .
    Litteral, J., Shochat, E., 2017. The role of landscape-scale factors in shaping urban bird communities. In: Murgui, E., Hedblom, M. (Eds.), Ecology and Conservation of Birds in Urban Environments. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 135–159.
    Lojka, B., Teutscherová, N., Chládová, A., Kala, L., Szabó, P., Martiník, A., et al., 2021. Agroforestry in the Czech Republic: what hampers the comeback of a once traditional land use system? Agronomy 12, 69. .
    Manning, A.D., Fischer, J., Lindenmayer, D.B., 2006. Scattered trees are keystone structures–Implications for conservation. Biol. Conserv. 132, 311–321. .
    McKinney, M.L., 2002. Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. Bioscience 52, 883. .
    Microsoft Corporation, 2022. Microsoft® Excel®. Version 2210. Redmod: WA. .
    Morelli, F., 2013. Relative importance of marginal vegetation (shrubs, hedgerows, isolated trees) surrogate of HNV farmland for bird species distribution in Central Italy. Ecol. Eng. 57, 261–266. .
    Morelli, F., Pruscini, F., Santolini, R., Perna, P., Benedetti, Y., Sisti, D., 2013. Landscape heterogeneity metrics as indicators of bird diversity: determining the optimal spatial scales in different landscapes. Ecol. Indicat. 34, 372–379. .
    Morelli, F., Beim, M., Jerzak, L., Jones, D., Tryjanowski, P., 2014. Can roads, railways and related structures have positive effects on birds? – a review. Transport. Res. DTransport Environ. 30, 21–31. .
    Morelli, F., Benedetti, Y., Ibáñez-Álamo, J.D., Tryjanowski, P., Jokimäki, J., Kaisanlahti-Jokimäki, M-L., et al., 2021. Effects of urbanization on taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic avian diversity in Europe. Sci. Total Environ. 795, 148874 .
    Müllerová, J., Szabó, P., Hédl, R., 2014. The rise and fall of traditional forest management in southern Moravia: a history of the past 700 years. For. Ecol. Manag. 331, 104–115. .
    Mulwa, R.K., Böhning-Gaese, K., Schleuning, M., 2012. High bird species diversity in structurally heterogeneous farmland in Western Kenya. Biotropica 44, 801–809. .
    Mze, 2022. Zpráva O Stavu Lesa a Lesního Hospodářství 2021. Ministerstvo zemědělství, Praha.
    Norton, L., Johnson, P., Joys, A., Stuart, R., Chamberlain, D., Feber, R., et al., 2009. Consequences of organic and non-organic farming practices for field, farm and landscape complexity. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 129, 221–227. .
    O'Hara, K.L., 2016. What is close-to-nature silviculture in a changing world? Forestry 89, 1–6. .
    Pebesma, E.J., 2004. Multivariable geostatistics in S: the gstat package. Comput. Geosci. 30, 683–691. .
    Pellissier, V., Cohen, M., Boulay, A., Clergeau, P., 2012. Birds are also sensitive to landscape composition and configuration within the city centre. Landsc. Urban Plann. 104, 181–188. .
    Pocewicz, A., Estes-Zumpf, W.A., Andersen, M.D., Copeland, H.E., Keinath, D.A., Griscom, H.R., 2013. Modeling the distribution of migratory bird stopovers to inform landscape-scale siting of wind development. PLoS One 8, e75363. .
    Pykal, J., Mikuláš, I., Vlček, J., Volf, O., 2021. Rozšíření a odhad početnosti chřástala polního (Crex crex) v České republice v roce 2020 a dlouhodobé trendy početnosti ve vybraných oblastech. Sylvia 57, 3–19.
    R Core Team, 2022. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. .
    Reid, A.J., Carlson, A.K., Creed, I.F., Eliason, E.J., Gell, P.A., Johnson, P.T.J., et al., 2019. Emerging threats and persistent conservation challenges for freshwater biodiversity. Biol. Rev. 94, 849–873. .
    Reider, I.J., Donnelly, M.A., Watling, J.I., 2018. The influence of matrix quality on species richness in remnant forest. Landsc. Ecol. 33, 1147–1157. .
    Reif, J., 2013. Long-term trends in bird populations: a review of patterns and potential drivers in North America and Europe. Acta Ornithol. 48, 1–16. .
    Reif, J., Hanzelka, J., 2016. Grassland winners and arable land losers: the effects of posttotalitarian land use changes on long-term population trends of farmland birds. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 232, 208–217. .
    Reif, J., Vermouzek, Z., 2019. Collapse of farmland bird populations in an Eastern European country following its EU accession. Conserv. Lett. 12, e12585 .
    Reif, J., Skálová, A.J., Vermouzek, Z., Voříšek, P., 2022. Long-term trends in forest bird populations reflect management changes in Central European forests. Ecol. Indicat. 141, 109137 .
    Rime, Y., Luisier, C., Arlettaz, R., Jacot, A., 2020. Landscape heterogeneity and management practices drive habitat preferences of wintering and breeding birds in intensively-managed fruit-tree plantations. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 295, 106890 .
    Romero-Calcerrada, R., Perry, G.L.W., 2004. The role of land abandonment in landscape dynamics in the SPA 'Encinares del río Alberche y Cofio, Central Spain, 1984–1999. Landsc. Urban Plann. 66, 217–232. .
    Šálek, M., Hula, V., Kipson, M., Daňková, R., Niedobová, J., Gamero, A., 2018. Bringing diversity back to agriculture: smaller fields and non-crop elements enhance biodiversity in intensively managed arable farmlands. Ecol. Indicat. 90, 65–73. .
    Šálek, M., Kalinová, K., Daňková, R., Grill, S., Żmihorski, M., 2021. Reduced diversity of farmland birds in homogenized agricultural landscape: a cross-border comparison over the former Iron Curtain. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 321, 107628 .
    Šálek, M., Bažant, M., Żmihorski, M., Gamero, A., 2022. Evaluating conservation tools in intensively-used farmland: higher bird and mammal diversity in seed-rich strips during winter. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 327, 107844 .
    Salgueiro, P.A., Silva, C., Silva, A., Sá, C., Mira, A., 2020. Can quarries provide novel conditions for a bird of rocky habitats? Restor. Ecol. 28, 988–994. .
    Sasaki, K., Hotes, S., Kadoya, T., Yoshioka, A., Wolters, V., 2020. Landscape associations of farmland bird diversity in Germany and Japan. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 21, e00891 .
    Schmidt, M.H., Tscharntke, T., 2005. The role of perennial habitats for Central European farmland spiders. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 105, 235–242. .
    Shen, F-Y., Ding, T-S., Tsai, J-S., 2023. Comparing avian species richness estimates from structured and semi-structured citizen science data. Sci. Rep. 13, 1214. .
    Sirami, C., Brotons, L., Martin, J-L., 2007. Vegetation and songbird response to land abandonment: from landscape to census plot. Divers. Distrib. 13, 42–52. .
    Šťastný, K., Bejček, V., Mikuláš, I., Telecký, T., 2021. Atlas Hnízdního Rozšíření Ptáků V České Republice 2014–2017.
    ter Braak, C.J.F., 2017. Fourth-corner correlation is a score test statistic in a log-linear trait–environment model that is useful in permutation testing. Environ. Ecol. Stat. 24, 219–242. .
    ter Braak, C., Šmilauer, P., 2012. Canoco Reference Manual and User's Guide: Software of Ordination (Version 5.0). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NY.
    ter Braak, C.J.F., Cormont, A., Dray, S., 2012. Improved testing of species traits–environment relationships in the fourth-corner problem. Ecology 93, 1525–1526. .
    Thioulouse, J., Stéphane, D., Dufour, A-B., Siberchicot, A., Jombart, T., Pavoine, P., 2018. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data with Ade4. Springer Science+ Business Media, LLC, New York.
    Threlfall, C.G., Mata, L., Mackie, J.A., Hahs, A.K., Stork, N.E., Williams, N.S.G., et al., 2017. Increasing biodiversity in urban green spaces through simple vegetation interventions. J. Appl. Ecol. 54, 1874–1883. .
    Tiang, D.C.F., Morris, A., Bell, M., Gibbins, C.N., Azhar, B., Lechner, A.M., 2021. Ecological connectivity in fragmented agricultural landscapes and the importance of scattered trees and small patches. Ecol. Process. 10, 20. .
    Tscharntke, T., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Kruess, A., Thies, C., 2002. Contribution of small habitat fragments to conservation of insect communities of grassland–cropland landscapes. Ecol. Appl. 12, 354–363. .
    Tscharntke, T., Klein, A.M., Kruess, A., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Thies, C., 2005. Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity–ecosystem service management. Ecol. Lett. 8, 857–874. .
    Tscharntke, T., Sekercioglu, C.H., Dietsch, T.V., Sodhi, N.S., Hoehn, P., Tylianakis, J.M., 2008. Landscape constraints on functional diversity of birds and insects in tropical agroecosystems. Ecology 89, 944–951. .
    Tscharntke, T., Tylianakis, J.M., Rand, T.A., Didham, R.K., Fahrig, L., Batáry, P., et al., 2012. Landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns and processes–eight hypotheses. Biol. Rev. 87, 661–685. .
    Tu, H-M., Fan, M-W., Ko, J.C-J., 2020. Different habitat types affect bird richness and evenness. Sci. Rep. 10, 1221. .
    Tuanmu, M-N., Jetz, W., 2015. A global, remote sensing-based characterization of terrestrial habitat heterogeneity for biodiversity and ecosystem modelling: global habitat heterogeneity. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 24, 1329–1339. .
    Wilson, S., Mitchell, G.W., Pasher, J., McGovern, M., Hudson, M-A.R., Fahrig, L., 2017. Influence of crop type, heterogeneity and woody structure on avian biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Ecol. Indicat. 83, 218–226. .
    Xu, W., Fu, W., Dong, J., Yu, J., Huang, P., Zheng, D., et al., 2022. Bird communities vary under different urbanization types—a case study in mountain parks of Fuzhou, China. Diversity 14, 555. .
    Yang, X., Cui, H., Chen, C., 2022. Bird flight resistance analysis and planning strategies in urban regeneration areas: a case study of a certain area in Shenzhen, China. Sustainability 14, 12123. .
    Zámečník, V., 2013. Metodická Příručka Pro Praktickou Ochranu Ptáků V Zemědělské Krajině: Metodika AOPK ČR. Agentura ochrany přírody a krajiny ČR, Praha.
    Zamora-Marín, J.M., Zamora-López, A., Sánchez-Fernández, D., Calvo, J.F., OlivaPaterna, F.J., 2022. Traditional small waterbodies as key landscape elements for farmland bird conservation in Mediterranean semiarid agroecosystems. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 37, e02183 .
    Zurita, G.A., Pe'er, G., Bellocq, M.I., 2017. Bird responses to forest loss are influence by habitat specialization. Divers. Distrib. 23, 650–655. .
    • Related Articles

  • Related Articles

    Denisa Dvořáková, Jan Šipoš, Josef Suchomel. 2024: Weak influence of natural vegetation in urban green spaces compared to agricultural ecosystems on House Martin populations: Insights from nationwide citizen science data in the Czech Republic. Avian Research, 15(1): 100186. DOI: 10.1016/j.avrs.2024.100186
    Zheng Han, Xi Yang, Xueqi Zhao, Frédéric Jiguet, Piotr Tryjanowski, Haitao Wang. 2023: Mongolian Lark as an indicator of taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity of steppe birds. Avian Research, 14(1): 100124. DOI: 10.1016/j.avrs.2023.100124
    Tatyana Kovinka, Alexander Sharikov, Tatyana Massalskaya, Sergey Volkov. 2023: Structure and heterogeneity of habitat determine diet of predators despite prey abundance: Similar response in Long-eared, Short-eared Owls and Common Kestrels. Avian Research, 14(1): 100072. DOI: 10.1016/j.avrs.2022.100072
    Kevin B. Briggs, Mark C. Mainwaring. 2022: Habitat selection by nestbox-breeding birds and Roe Deer are incongruent within a heterogeneous woodland landscape. Avian Research, 13(1): 100012. DOI: 10.1016/j.avrs.2022.100012
    Shi Li, Dan Li, Lishi Zhang, Weiping Shang, Bo Qin, Yunlei Jiang. 2021: High levels of genetic diversity and an absence of genetic structure among breeding populations of the endangered Rufous-backed Bunting in Inner Mongolia, China: implications for conservation. Avian Research, 12(1): 7. DOI: 10.1186/s40657-020-00236-3
    Aichun Xu, Maojun Zhong, Ke Tang, Xiaoyi Wang, Chen Yang, Haigen Xu, Jianfeng Yi, Wei Liu, Chunlan Zhang, Junhua Hu. 2021: Multidimensional diversity of bird communities across spatial variation of land cover in Zoige on the eastern Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Avian Research, 12(1): 25. DOI: 10.1186/s40657-021-00259-4
    Xueru Yang, Xinwei Tan, Chuanwu Chen, Yanping Wang. 2020: The influence of urban park characteristics on bird diversity in Nanjing, China. Avian Research, 11(1): 45. DOI: 10.1186/s40657-020-00234-5
    Pratikshya Kandel, Ishana Thapa, Nakul Chettri, Rebecca Pradhan Pradhan, Eklabya Sharma. 2018: Birds of the Kangchenjunga Landscape, the Eastern Himalaya: status, threats and implications for conservation. Avian Research, 9(1): 9. DOI: 10.1186/s40657-018-0100-2
    Youhua CHEN. 2013: Conservation priority for endemic birds of mainland China based on a phylogenetic framework. Avian Research, 4(3): 248-253. DOI: 10.5122/cbirds.2013.0021
    Zhongyong FAN, Cangsong CHEN, Shuihua CHEN, Simba CHAN, Yiwei LU. 2011: Breeding seabirds along the Zhejiang coast: diversity, distribution and conservation. Avian Research, 2(1): 39-45. DOI: 10.5122/cbirds.2011.0004

  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(7)

    1. Shanrui Wu, Ru Jia, Ying Wang, et al. Prevalence, Diversity, and Virulence of Campylobacter Carried by Migratory Birds at Four Major Habitats in China. Pathogens, 2024, 13(3): 230. DOI:10.3390/pathogens13030230
    2. Zoljargal Purevdorj, Namsrai Jargal, Onolragchaa Ganbold, et al. Spatial and Temporal Variations in Waterfowl Assemblage Structures in Mongolian Lakes and the Changes Linked to the Gradient of Lake Surface Areas. Diversity, 2023, 15(3): 334. DOI:10.3390/d15030334
    3. Zhongrong Wu, Xiulin Ye, Zhongfan Kuang, et al. Positive Effects of Land Use Change on Wintering Bar-Headed Geese between 2010 and 2021. Animals, 2022, 12(22): 3142. DOI:10.3390/ani12223142
    4. MARY ANNE BISHOP, DONGPING LIU, GUOGANG ZHANG, et al. Rapid growth of the Bar-headed Goose Anser indicus wintering population in Tibet, China: 1991–2017. Bird Conservation International, 2021. DOI:10.1017/S0959270921000265
    5. Wen Wang, Fang Wang, Rongkai Hao, et al. First de novo whole genome sequencing and assembly of the bar-headed goose. PeerJ, 2020, 8: e8914. DOI:10.7717/peerj.8914
    6. Junjian Zhang, Yanbo Xie, Laixing Li, et al. Assessing site-safeguard effectiveness and habitat preferences of Bar-headed Geese (Anser indicus) at their stopover sites within the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau using GPS/GSM telemetry. Avian Research, 2020, 11(1) DOI:10.1186/s40657-020-00230-9
    7. Ruobing Zheng, Lacy Smith, Diann Prosser, et al. Investigating Home Range, Movement Pattern, and Habitat Selection of Bar-headed Geese during Breeding Season at Qinghai Lake, China. Animals, 2018, 8(10): 182. DOI:10.3390/ani8100182

    Other cited types(0)

Catalog

    Figures(4)  /  Tables(3)

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML

    Article Metrics

    Article has an altmetric score of 1
    Article has an altmetric score of 1
    Article views (16) PDF downloads (11) Cited by(7)
    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co. Ltd.   Technical support: info@rhhz.net

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return