A comparison of foraging‐range sizes, flight distances and foraging habitat preferences in urban and rural House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) populations

Lack of food for nestlings is a crucial factor influencing population size and dynamics in birds. It is one of the most cited reasons for recent House Sparrow Passer domesticus population declines in cities and rural settlements. However, a detailed comparative study of habitat use by parents delive...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ibis (London, England) England), 2022-10, Vol.164 (4), p.1227-1242
Hauptverfasser: Havlíček, Jan, Riegert, Jan, Fuchs, Roman
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1242
container_issue 4
container_start_page 1227
container_title Ibis (London, England)
container_volume 164
creator Havlíček, Jan
Riegert, Jan
Fuchs, Roman
description Lack of food for nestlings is a crucial factor influencing population size and dynamics in birds. It is one of the most cited reasons for recent House Sparrow Passer domesticus population declines in cities and rural settlements. However, a detailed comparative study of habitat use by parents delivering food to offspring in different environments is still missing. To obtain the most detailed information on fine‐scale foraging habitat selection, foraging‐range size, flight distance and foraging duration in typical Central European urban and rural environments, we conducted systematic observations of colour‐ringed focal individuals feeding their offspring. We found that urban House Sparrows had larger foraging‐range sizes and longer foraging distances than rural birds. Additionally, some preferred habitats, such as ruderal and woody vegetation, occurred less frequently in the urban area and consequently increased flight distance to key sources of invertebrate prey. In both environments, the most selected habitats – bin storage areas and poultry holdings – offered a stable and rich but probably lower quality ‘fast food’ source. Birds were willing to fly a longer distance to forage at bin storage areas, tall ruderal vegetation and poultry holdings. Our findings imply that natural food sources in the urban environment are scarce and scattered. Due to the improvement of socio‐economic status associated with better handling of waste products in both urban and rural environments, sprawl of highly urbanized areas and intensification of farming, important foraging habitats have thus decreased. We highlight the importance of maintaining suitable small‐ and medium‐scale farms in rural areas and suggest improvements in the management of green spaces in all types of human settlements that may support House Sparrow populations.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/ibi.13072
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2716386020</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2716386020</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2272-3fdb17e1c795c6b616e9ba3a1816feefad41c7a53869b5289c00b52c2617d3553</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1Kw0AQxxdRsFYPvsGCFwum3d002eZYi9pCQUEFb2Gy2aRb0t24m1DqyUfw7OP5JK6NeHMOMwzzm68_QueUDKm3kcrUkIaEswPUo2M-DhKavByiHiE0Cah3x-jEubVPeZjQHvqcYmE2NVjljMamwIWxUCpdfr1_WNClxE69SXeFi0qVqwbnyjWghXQYdP4H4xVkqoEG11YW0so9oDRubQZ6T9rWQoXnpnUSP_p11mzx5QM4Jy3OzUa6RonWDXBt6raCRhntTtFRAZWTZ7-xj55vb55m82B5f7eYTZeBYIyzICzyjHJJBU8iEWcxjWWSQQh0QuNCygLysa9BFE7iJIvYJBGE-ChYTHkeRlHYRxfd3Nqa19Zfkq5Na7VfmTJOY99HGPHUoKOENc75N9Paqg3YXUpJ-iN96qVP99J7dtSxW1XJ3f9gurhedB3fSsKI7Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2716386020</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison of foraging‐range sizes, flight distances and foraging habitat preferences in urban and rural House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) populations</title><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Havlíček, Jan ; Riegert, Jan ; Fuchs, Roman</creator><creatorcontrib>Havlíček, Jan ; Riegert, Jan ; Fuchs, Roman</creatorcontrib><description>Lack of food for nestlings is a crucial factor influencing population size and dynamics in birds. It is one of the most cited reasons for recent House Sparrow Passer domesticus population declines in cities and rural settlements. However, a detailed comparative study of habitat use by parents delivering food to offspring in different environments is still missing. To obtain the most detailed information on fine‐scale foraging habitat selection, foraging‐range size, flight distance and foraging duration in typical Central European urban and rural environments, we conducted systematic observations of colour‐ringed focal individuals feeding their offspring. We found that urban House Sparrows had larger foraging‐range sizes and longer foraging distances than rural birds. Additionally, some preferred habitats, such as ruderal and woody vegetation, occurred less frequently in the urban area and consequently increased flight distance to key sources of invertebrate prey. In both environments, the most selected habitats – bin storage areas and poultry holdings – offered a stable and rich but probably lower quality ‘fast food’ source. Birds were willing to fly a longer distance to forage at bin storage areas, tall ruderal vegetation and poultry holdings. Our findings imply that natural food sources in the urban environment are scarce and scattered. Due to the improvement of socio‐economic status associated with better handling of waste products in both urban and rural environments, sprawl of highly urbanized areas and intensification of farming, important foraging habitats have thus decreased. We highlight the importance of maintaining suitable small‐ and medium‐scale farms in rural areas and suggest improvements in the management of green spaces in all types of human settlements that may support House Sparrow populations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0019-1019</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1474-919X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/ibi.13072</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Birds ; Colour ; Comparative analysis ; Comparative studies ; Distance ; Ecological distribution ; Farms ; Fast food ; Flight ; Food ; Food quality ; Food sources ; Foods ; Foraging ; Foraging behavior ; Foraging habitats ; Green infrastructure ; Habitat preferences ; Habitat selection ; Habitat utilization ; Habitats ; Human settlements ; invertebrate prey ; Natural &amp; organic foods ; Offspring ; Passer domesticus ; Population decline ; Population number ; Populations ; Poultry ; Prey ; ruderal habitats ; Rural areas ; Rural environments ; small‐scale farming ; Songbirds ; Storage ; Sustainability management ; Urban areas ; Urban environments ; urbanization ; urban–rural gradient ; Vegetation ; Woody plants</subject><ispartof>Ibis (London, England), 2022-10, Vol.164 (4), p.1227-1242</ispartof><rights>2022 British Ornithologists' Union.</rights><rights>Ibis © 2022 British Ornithologists' Union</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2272-3fdb17e1c795c6b616e9ba3a1816feefad41c7a53869b5289c00b52c2617d3553</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2272-3fdb17e1c795c6b616e9ba3a1816feefad41c7a53869b5289c00b52c2617d3553</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4195-1278 ; 0000-0002-0088-8180</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fibi.13072$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fibi.13072$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Havlíček, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Riegert, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fuchs, Roman</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison of foraging‐range sizes, flight distances and foraging habitat preferences in urban and rural House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) populations</title><title>Ibis (London, England)</title><description>Lack of food for nestlings is a crucial factor influencing population size and dynamics in birds. It is one of the most cited reasons for recent House Sparrow Passer domesticus population declines in cities and rural settlements. However, a detailed comparative study of habitat use by parents delivering food to offspring in different environments is still missing. To obtain the most detailed information on fine‐scale foraging habitat selection, foraging‐range size, flight distance and foraging duration in typical Central European urban and rural environments, we conducted systematic observations of colour‐ringed focal individuals feeding their offspring. We found that urban House Sparrows had larger foraging‐range sizes and longer foraging distances than rural birds. Additionally, some preferred habitats, such as ruderal and woody vegetation, occurred less frequently in the urban area and consequently increased flight distance to key sources of invertebrate prey. In both environments, the most selected habitats – bin storage areas and poultry holdings – offered a stable and rich but probably lower quality ‘fast food’ source. Birds were willing to fly a longer distance to forage at bin storage areas, tall ruderal vegetation and poultry holdings. Our findings imply that natural food sources in the urban environment are scarce and scattered. Due to the improvement of socio‐economic status associated with better handling of waste products in both urban and rural environments, sprawl of highly urbanized areas and intensification of farming, important foraging habitats have thus decreased. We highlight the importance of maintaining suitable small‐ and medium‐scale farms in rural areas and suggest improvements in the management of green spaces in all types of human settlements that may support House Sparrow populations.</description><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Colour</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>Distance</subject><subject>Ecological distribution</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>Fast food</subject><subject>Flight</subject><subject>Food</subject><subject>Food quality</subject><subject>Food sources</subject><subject>Foods</subject><subject>Foraging</subject><subject>Foraging behavior</subject><subject>Foraging habitats</subject><subject>Green infrastructure</subject><subject>Habitat preferences</subject><subject>Habitat selection</subject><subject>Habitat utilization</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>Human settlements</subject><subject>invertebrate prey</subject><subject>Natural &amp; organic foods</subject><subject>Offspring</subject><subject>Passer domesticus</subject><subject>Population decline</subject><subject>Population number</subject><subject>Populations</subject><subject>Poultry</subject><subject>Prey</subject><subject>ruderal habitats</subject><subject>Rural areas</subject><subject>Rural environments</subject><subject>small‐scale farming</subject><subject>Songbirds</subject><subject>Storage</subject><subject>Sustainability management</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>Urban environments</subject><subject>urbanization</subject><subject>urban–rural gradient</subject><subject>Vegetation</subject><subject>Woody plants</subject><issn>0019-1019</issn><issn>1474-919X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kM1Kw0AQxxdRsFYPvsGCFwum3d002eZYi9pCQUEFb2Gy2aRb0t24m1DqyUfw7OP5JK6NeHMOMwzzm68_QueUDKm3kcrUkIaEswPUo2M-DhKavByiHiE0Cah3x-jEubVPeZjQHvqcYmE2NVjljMamwIWxUCpdfr1_WNClxE69SXeFi0qVqwbnyjWghXQYdP4H4xVkqoEG11YW0so9oDRubQZ6T9rWQoXnpnUSP_p11mzx5QM4Jy3OzUa6RonWDXBt6raCRhntTtFRAZWTZ7-xj55vb55m82B5f7eYTZeBYIyzICzyjHJJBU8iEWcxjWWSQQh0QuNCygLysa9BFE7iJIvYJBGE-ChYTHkeRlHYRxfd3Nqa19Zfkq5Na7VfmTJOY99HGPHUoKOENc75N9Paqg3YXUpJ-iN96qVP99J7dtSxW1XJ3f9gurhedB3fSsKI7Q</recordid><startdate>202210</startdate><enddate>202210</enddate><creator>Havlíček, Jan</creator><creator>Riegert, Jan</creator><creator>Fuchs, Roman</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>L.G</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4195-1278</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0088-8180</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202210</creationdate><title>A comparison of foraging‐range sizes, flight distances and foraging habitat preferences in urban and rural House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) populations</title><author>Havlíček, Jan ; Riegert, Jan ; Fuchs, Roman</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2272-3fdb17e1c795c6b616e9ba3a1816feefad41c7a53869b5289c00b52c2617d3553</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Colour</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>Distance</topic><topic>Ecological distribution</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>Fast food</topic><topic>Flight</topic><topic>Food</topic><topic>Food quality</topic><topic>Food sources</topic><topic>Foods</topic><topic>Foraging</topic><topic>Foraging behavior</topic><topic>Foraging habitats</topic><topic>Green infrastructure</topic><topic>Habitat preferences</topic><topic>Habitat selection</topic><topic>Habitat utilization</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>Human settlements</topic><topic>invertebrate prey</topic><topic>Natural &amp; organic foods</topic><topic>Offspring</topic><topic>Passer domesticus</topic><topic>Population decline</topic><topic>Population number</topic><topic>Populations</topic><topic>Poultry</topic><topic>Prey</topic><topic>ruderal habitats</topic><topic>Rural areas</topic><topic>Rural environments</topic><topic>small‐scale farming</topic><topic>Songbirds</topic><topic>Storage</topic><topic>Sustainability management</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>Urban environments</topic><topic>urbanization</topic><topic>urban–rural gradient</topic><topic>Vegetation</topic><topic>Woody plants</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Havlíček, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Riegert, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fuchs, Roman</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences &amp; Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Ibis (London, England)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Havlíček, Jan</au><au>Riegert, Jan</au><au>Fuchs, Roman</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison of foraging‐range sizes, flight distances and foraging habitat preferences in urban and rural House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) populations</atitle><jtitle>Ibis (London, England)</jtitle><date>2022-10</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>164</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1227</spage><epage>1242</epage><pages>1227-1242</pages><issn>0019-1019</issn><eissn>1474-919X</eissn><abstract>Lack of food for nestlings is a crucial factor influencing population size and dynamics in birds. It is one of the most cited reasons for recent House Sparrow Passer domesticus population declines in cities and rural settlements. However, a detailed comparative study of habitat use by parents delivering food to offspring in different environments is still missing. To obtain the most detailed information on fine‐scale foraging habitat selection, foraging‐range size, flight distance and foraging duration in typical Central European urban and rural environments, we conducted systematic observations of colour‐ringed focal individuals feeding their offspring. We found that urban House Sparrows had larger foraging‐range sizes and longer foraging distances than rural birds. Additionally, some preferred habitats, such as ruderal and woody vegetation, occurred less frequently in the urban area and consequently increased flight distance to key sources of invertebrate prey. In both environments, the most selected habitats – bin storage areas and poultry holdings – offered a stable and rich but probably lower quality ‘fast food’ source. Birds were willing to fly a longer distance to forage at bin storage areas, tall ruderal vegetation and poultry holdings. Our findings imply that natural food sources in the urban environment are scarce and scattered. Due to the improvement of socio‐economic status associated with better handling of waste products in both urban and rural environments, sprawl of highly urbanized areas and intensification of farming, important foraging habitats have thus decreased. We highlight the importance of maintaining suitable small‐ and medium‐scale farms in rural areas and suggest improvements in the management of green spaces in all types of human settlements that may support House Sparrow populations.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/ibi.13072</doi><tpages>1242</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4195-1278</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0088-8180</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0019-1019
ispartof Ibis (London, England), 2022-10, Vol.164 (4), p.1227-1242
issn 0019-1019
1474-919X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2716386020
source Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Birds
Colour
Comparative analysis
Comparative studies
Distance
Ecological distribution
Farms
Fast food
Flight
Food
Food quality
Food sources
Foods
Foraging
Foraging behavior
Foraging habitats
Green infrastructure
Habitat preferences
Habitat selection
Habitat utilization
Habitats
Human settlements
invertebrate prey
Natural & organic foods
Offspring
Passer domesticus
Population decline
Population number
Populations
Poultry
Prey
ruderal habitats
Rural areas
Rural environments
small‐scale farming
Songbirds
Storage
Sustainability management
Urban areas
Urban environments
urbanization
urban–rural gradient
Vegetation
Woody plants
title A comparison of foraging‐range sizes, flight distances and foraging habitat preferences in urban and rural House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) populations
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T08%3A11%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20of%20foraging%E2%80%90range%20sizes,%20flight%20distances%20and%20foraging%20habitat%20preferences%20in%20urban%20and%20rural%20House%20Sparrow%20(Passer%20domesticus)%20populations&rft.jtitle=Ibis%20(London,%20England)&rft.au=Havl%C3%AD%C4%8Dek,%20Jan&rft.date=2022-10&rft.volume=164&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1227&rft.epage=1242&rft.pages=1227-1242&rft.issn=0019-1019&rft.eissn=1474-919X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/ibi.13072&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2716386020%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2716386020&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true