Disproportionate Declines in Ground-Foraging Insectivorous Birds after Mistletoe Removal
Insectivorous birds have been recognized as disproportionately sensitive to land-use intensification and habitat loss, with those species feeding primarily on the ground exhibiting some of the most dramatic declines. Altered litter inputs and availability of epigeic arthropods have been suggested to...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2015-12, Vol.10 (12), p.e0142992-e0142992 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | e0142992 |
---|---|
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | e0142992 |
container_title | PloS one |
container_volume | 10 |
creator | Watson, David M |
description | Insectivorous birds have been recognized as disproportionately sensitive to land-use intensification and habitat loss, with those species feeding primarily on the ground exhibiting some of the most dramatic declines. Altered litter inputs and availability of epigeic arthropods have been suggested to underlie reduced abundances and shrinking distributions but direct evidence is lacking. I used a patch-scale removal experiment in southern Australia to evaluate whether ground-feeding insectivores are especially vulnerable to altered litter-fall. Building on work demonstrating the importance of mistletoe litter to nutrient dynamics, litter was reduced by removing mistletoe (Loranthaceae) from one set of eucalypt woodlands, responses of birds three years after mistletoe removal compared with otherwise similar control woodlands containing mistletoe. Despite not feeding on mistletoes directly, insectivores exhibited the greatest response to mistletoe removal. Among woodland residents, ground-foraging insectivores showed the most dramatic response; treatment woodlands losing an average of 37.4% of their pre-treatment species richness. Once these 19 species of ground-foraging insectivores were excluded, remaining woodland species showed no significant effect of mistletoe removal. This response reflects greater initial losses in treatment woodlands during the study (which coincided with a severe drought) and double the number of species returning to control woodlands (where mistletoe numbers and litter were not manipulated) post-drought. These findings support the productivity-based explanation of declining insectivores, suggesting diminished litter-fall reduced habitat quality for these birds via decreased availability of their preferred prey. In addition to altered prey availability, interactions between litter-fall and epigeic arthropods exemplify the importance of below-ground / above-ground linkages driving ecosystem function. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0142992 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1757044649</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A437105978</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_f9873bba7e01464c9e292aa22f793d05</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A437105978</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-dde1bc4ddf2b2105b4f4f6d65fa8b0e44e160be972bf55514ac617aeaa2bf6bc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk99v0zAQxyMEYqPwHyCIhITgocV2HLt-QRobG5WGJo0f4s1ynEvrybWL7VTw3-PSbGrQHlAeHF0-973c13dF8RyjGa44fnfj--CUnW28gxnClAhBHhTHWFRkygiqHh68HxVPYrxBqK7mjD0ujghjFM1FfVz8ODNxE_zGh2S8UwnKM9DWOIilceVF8L1rp-c-qKVxy3LhIuhktj7HY_nBhDaWqksQys8mJgvJQ3kNa79V9mnxqFM2wrPhnBTfzj9-Pf00vby6WJyeXE41EyRN2xZwo2nbdqQhGNUN7WjHWlZ3at4goBQwQw0ITpqurmtMlWaYK1AqB1ijq0nxcq-7sT7KwZQoMa85opRRkYnFnmi9upGbYNYq_JZeGfk34MNSqty9tiA7MedV0ygO2VBGtQAiSC5FOi6qNts3Kd4P1fpmDa0Gl4KyI9HxF2dWcum3kjKOOaZZ4M0gEPzPHmKSaxM1WKscZE_zf1NeVZizKqOv_kHv726glio3YFznc129E5UnNM8JqgWfZ2p2D5WfFtZG5wnqTI6PEt6OEjKT4Fdaqj5Gufhy_f_s1fcx-_qAXYGyaRW97XfTF8cg3YM6-BgDdHcmYyR3C3DrhtwtgBwWIKe9OLygu6Tbia_-AIcrAgA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1757044649</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Disproportionate Declines in Ground-Foraging Insectivorous Birds after Mistletoe Removal</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Watson, David M</creator><contributor>Umapathy, Govindhaswamy</contributor><creatorcontrib>Watson, David M ; Umapathy, Govindhaswamy</creatorcontrib><description>Insectivorous birds have been recognized as disproportionately sensitive to land-use intensification and habitat loss, with those species feeding primarily on the ground exhibiting some of the most dramatic declines. Altered litter inputs and availability of epigeic arthropods have been suggested to underlie reduced abundances and shrinking distributions but direct evidence is lacking. I used a patch-scale removal experiment in southern Australia to evaluate whether ground-feeding insectivores are especially vulnerable to altered litter-fall. Building on work demonstrating the importance of mistletoe litter to nutrient dynamics, litter was reduced by removing mistletoe (Loranthaceae) from one set of eucalypt woodlands, responses of birds three years after mistletoe removal compared with otherwise similar control woodlands containing mistletoe. Despite not feeding on mistletoes directly, insectivores exhibited the greatest response to mistletoe removal. Among woodland residents, ground-foraging insectivores showed the most dramatic response; treatment woodlands losing an average of 37.4% of their pre-treatment species richness. Once these 19 species of ground-foraging insectivores were excluded, remaining woodland species showed no significant effect of mistletoe removal. This response reflects greater initial losses in treatment woodlands during the study (which coincided with a severe drought) and double the number of species returning to control woodlands (where mistletoe numbers and litter were not manipulated) post-drought. These findings support the productivity-based explanation of declining insectivores, suggesting diminished litter-fall reduced habitat quality for these birds via decreased availability of their preferred prey. In addition to altered prey availability, interactions between litter-fall and epigeic arthropods exemplify the importance of below-ground / above-ground linkages driving ecosystem function.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142992</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26640895</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Animals ; Arthropoda ; Arthropods ; Arthropods - physiology ; Australia ; Availability ; Birds ; Birds - physiology ; Climate change ; Descaling ; Drought ; Droughts ; Ecosystem ; Experiments ; Feeding ; Feeding Behavior - physiology ; Food chains ; Foraging behavior ; Foraging habitats ; Forests ; Genetic aspects ; Habitat loss ; Hypotheses ; Insectivora - physiology ; Insectivores ; Insectivorous animals ; Land use ; Litter ; Litter fall ; Mistletoe - physiology ; Nutrient dynamics ; Population Dynamics ; Prey ; Rain ; Seasons ; South Australia ; Species richness ; Vegetation ; Woodlands</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2015-12, Vol.10 (12), p.e0142992-e0142992</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2015 David M. Watson. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2015 David M. Watson 2015 David M. Watson</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-dde1bc4ddf2b2105b4f4f6d65fa8b0e44e160be972bf55514ac617aeaa2bf6bc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-dde1bc4ddf2b2105b4f4f6d65fa8b0e44e160be972bf55514ac617aeaa2bf6bc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4671714/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4671714/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,865,886,2103,2929,23871,27929,27930,53796,53798</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26640895$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Umapathy, Govindhaswamy</contributor><creatorcontrib>Watson, David M</creatorcontrib><title>Disproportionate Declines in Ground-Foraging Insectivorous Birds after Mistletoe Removal</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Insectivorous birds have been recognized as disproportionately sensitive to land-use intensification and habitat loss, with those species feeding primarily on the ground exhibiting some of the most dramatic declines. Altered litter inputs and availability of epigeic arthropods have been suggested to underlie reduced abundances and shrinking distributions but direct evidence is lacking. I used a patch-scale removal experiment in southern Australia to evaluate whether ground-feeding insectivores are especially vulnerable to altered litter-fall. Building on work demonstrating the importance of mistletoe litter to nutrient dynamics, litter was reduced by removing mistletoe (Loranthaceae) from one set of eucalypt woodlands, responses of birds three years after mistletoe removal compared with otherwise similar control woodlands containing mistletoe. Despite not feeding on mistletoes directly, insectivores exhibited the greatest response to mistletoe removal. Among woodland residents, ground-foraging insectivores showed the most dramatic response; treatment woodlands losing an average of 37.4% of their pre-treatment species richness. Once these 19 species of ground-foraging insectivores were excluded, remaining woodland species showed no significant effect of mistletoe removal. This response reflects greater initial losses in treatment woodlands during the study (which coincided with a severe drought) and double the number of species returning to control woodlands (where mistletoe numbers and litter were not manipulated) post-drought. These findings support the productivity-based explanation of declining insectivores, suggesting diminished litter-fall reduced habitat quality for these birds via decreased availability of their preferred prey. In addition to altered prey availability, interactions between litter-fall and epigeic arthropods exemplify the importance of below-ground / above-ground linkages driving ecosystem function.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Arthropoda</subject><subject>Arthropods</subject><subject>Arthropods - physiology</subject><subject>Australia</subject><subject>Availability</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Birds - physiology</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Descaling</subject><subject>Drought</subject><subject>Droughts</subject><subject>Ecosystem</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Feeding</subject><subject>Feeding Behavior - physiology</subject><subject>Food chains</subject><subject>Foraging behavior</subject><subject>Foraging habitats</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>Genetic aspects</subject><subject>Habitat loss</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Insectivora - physiology</subject><subject>Insectivores</subject><subject>Insectivorous animals</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>Litter</subject><subject>Litter fall</subject><subject>Mistletoe - physiology</subject><subject>Nutrient dynamics</subject><subject>Population Dynamics</subject><subject>Prey</subject><subject>Rain</subject><subject>Seasons</subject><subject>South Australia</subject><subject>Species richness</subject><subject>Vegetation</subject><subject>Woodlands</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk99v0zAQxyMEYqPwHyCIhITgocV2HLt-QRobG5WGJo0f4s1ynEvrybWL7VTw3-PSbGrQHlAeHF0-973c13dF8RyjGa44fnfj--CUnW28gxnClAhBHhTHWFRkygiqHh68HxVPYrxBqK7mjD0ujghjFM1FfVz8ODNxE_zGh2S8UwnKM9DWOIilceVF8L1rp-c-qKVxy3LhIuhktj7HY_nBhDaWqksQys8mJgvJQ3kNa79V9mnxqFM2wrPhnBTfzj9-Pf00vby6WJyeXE41EyRN2xZwo2nbdqQhGNUN7WjHWlZ3at4goBQwQw0ITpqurmtMlWaYK1AqB1ijq0nxcq-7sT7KwZQoMa85opRRkYnFnmi9upGbYNYq_JZeGfk34MNSqty9tiA7MedV0ygO2VBGtQAiSC5FOi6qNts3Kd4P1fpmDa0Gl4KyI9HxF2dWcum3kjKOOaZZ4M0gEPzPHmKSaxM1WKscZE_zf1NeVZizKqOv_kHv726glio3YFznc129E5UnNM8JqgWfZ2p2D5WfFtZG5wnqTI6PEt6OEjKT4Fdaqj5Gufhy_f_s1fcx-_qAXYGyaRW97XfTF8cg3YM6-BgDdHcmYyR3C3DrhtwtgBwWIKe9OLygu6Tbia_-AIcrAgA</recordid><startdate>20151207</startdate><enddate>20151207</enddate><creator>Watson, David M</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20151207</creationdate><title>Disproportionate Declines in Ground-Foraging Insectivorous Birds after Mistletoe Removal</title><author>Watson, David M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-dde1bc4ddf2b2105b4f4f6d65fa8b0e44e160be972bf55514ac617aeaa2bf6bc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Arthropoda</topic><topic>Arthropods</topic><topic>Arthropods - physiology</topic><topic>Australia</topic><topic>Availability</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Birds - physiology</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Descaling</topic><topic>Drought</topic><topic>Droughts</topic><topic>Ecosystem</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Feeding</topic><topic>Feeding Behavior - physiology</topic><topic>Food chains</topic><topic>Foraging behavior</topic><topic>Foraging habitats</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>Genetic aspects</topic><topic>Habitat loss</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Insectivora - physiology</topic><topic>Insectivores</topic><topic>Insectivorous animals</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>Litter</topic><topic>Litter fall</topic><topic>Mistletoe - physiology</topic><topic>Nutrient dynamics</topic><topic>Population Dynamics</topic><topic>Prey</topic><topic>Rain</topic><topic>Seasons</topic><topic>South Australia</topic><topic>Species richness</topic><topic>Vegetation</topic><topic>Woodlands</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Watson, David M</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Watson, David M</au><au>Umapathy, Govindhaswamy</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Disproportionate Declines in Ground-Foraging Insectivorous Birds after Mistletoe Removal</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2015-12-07</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>e0142992</spage><epage>e0142992</epage><pages>e0142992-e0142992</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Insectivorous birds have been recognized as disproportionately sensitive to land-use intensification and habitat loss, with those species feeding primarily on the ground exhibiting some of the most dramatic declines. Altered litter inputs and availability of epigeic arthropods have been suggested to underlie reduced abundances and shrinking distributions but direct evidence is lacking. I used a patch-scale removal experiment in southern Australia to evaluate whether ground-feeding insectivores are especially vulnerable to altered litter-fall. Building on work demonstrating the importance of mistletoe litter to nutrient dynamics, litter was reduced by removing mistletoe (Loranthaceae) from one set of eucalypt woodlands, responses of birds three years after mistletoe removal compared with otherwise similar control woodlands containing mistletoe. Despite not feeding on mistletoes directly, insectivores exhibited the greatest response to mistletoe removal. Among woodland residents, ground-foraging insectivores showed the most dramatic response; treatment woodlands losing an average of 37.4% of their pre-treatment species richness. Once these 19 species of ground-foraging insectivores were excluded, remaining woodland species showed no significant effect of mistletoe removal. This response reflects greater initial losses in treatment woodlands during the study (which coincided with a severe drought) and double the number of species returning to control woodlands (where mistletoe numbers and litter were not manipulated) post-drought. These findings support the productivity-based explanation of declining insectivores, suggesting diminished litter-fall reduced habitat quality for these birds via decreased availability of their preferred prey. In addition to altered prey availability, interactions between litter-fall and epigeic arthropods exemplify the importance of below-ground / above-ground linkages driving ecosystem function.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>26640895</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0142992</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
ispartof | PloS one, 2015-12, Vol.10 (12), p.e0142992-e0142992 |
issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_plos_journals_1757044649 |
source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
subjects | Animals Arthropoda Arthropods Arthropods - physiology Australia Availability Birds Birds - physiology Climate change Descaling Drought Droughts Ecosystem Experiments Feeding Feeding Behavior - physiology Food chains Foraging behavior Foraging habitats Forests Genetic aspects Habitat loss Hypotheses Insectivora - physiology Insectivores Insectivorous animals Land use Litter Litter fall Mistletoe - physiology Nutrient dynamics Population Dynamics Prey Rain Seasons South Australia Species richness Vegetation Woodlands |
title | Disproportionate Declines in Ground-Foraging Insectivorous Birds after Mistletoe Removal |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-12T13%3A59%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Disproportionate%20Declines%20in%20Ground-Foraging%20Insectivorous%20Birds%20after%20Mistletoe%20Removal&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Watson,%20David%20M&rft.date=2015-12-07&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=e0142992&rft.epage=e0142992&rft.pages=e0142992-e0142992&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0142992&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA437105978%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1757044649&rft_id=info:pmid/26640895&rft_galeid=A437105978&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_f9873bba7e01464c9e292aa22f793d05&rfr_iscdi=true |