Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Spatial distribution of four sympatric owl species in Carpathian montane forests Cover

Spatial distribution of four sympatric owl species in Carpathian montane forests

Open Access
|Apr 2021

References

  1. Baddeley AJ & Turner R 2005: spatstat: An R package for analyzing spatial point patterns. Journal of Statistical Software 12(6): 1–42.10.18637/jss.v012.i06
  2. Baddeley A, Rubak E & Turner R 2015: Spatial point patterns: methodology and applications with R. Chapman and Hall/CRC Press, London10.1201/b19708
  3. Barbaro L, Blache S, Trochard G, Arlaud C, de Lacoste N & Kayser Y 2016: Hierarchical habitat selection by Eurasian pygmy owls Glaucidium passerinum in old-growth forests of the southern French Prealps. Journal of Ornithology 157: 333–342. DOI: 10.1007/s10336-015-1285-3.10.1007/s10336-015-1285-3
  4. Baroni D, Korpimäki E, Selonen V & Laaksonen T 2020: Tree cavity abundance and beyond: nesting and food storing sites of the pygmy owl in managed boreal forests. Forest Ecology and Management 460: 117818. DOI: 10.1016/j foreco.2019.117818.
  5. Biely A, Bezák V, Elečko M, Gross P et al. 2002: Geological structure, 74–77. In: Miklós L et al. (eds), Landscape Atlas of the Slovak Republic. Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic, Bratislava & Slovak Environmental Agency, Banská Bystrica
  6. Burgos G & Zuberogoitia I 2018: A telemetry study to discriminate between home range and territory size in tawny owls. Bioacoustics 29: 109–121. DOI: 10.1080/09524622.2018.1555717.10.1080/09524622.2018.1555717
  7. Connell J 1983: On the prevalence and relative importance of interspecific competition: evidence from field experiments. American Naturalist 122 (5): 661–696. DOI: 10.1086/284165.10.1086/284165
  8. Cornulier T & Bretagnolle V 2006: Assessing the influence of environmental heterogeneity on bird spacing patterns: a case study with two raptors. Ecography 29: 240–250. DOI: 10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04287.x.10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04287.x
  9. Dhondt AA 2010: Effects of competition on great and blue tit reproduction: intensity and importance in relation to habitat quality. Journal of Animal Ecology 79: 257–265. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2009.01624.x.10.1111/j.1365-2656.2009.01624.x19804539
  10. Faško P & Šťastný P 2002: Mean annual precipitation totals, 99. In: Miklós L et al. (eds.), Landscape Atlas of the Slovak Republic. Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic, Bratislava & Slovak Environmental Agency, Banská Bystrica
  11. Fletcher R & Fortin MJ 2018: Spatial ecology and conservation modeling. Springer, Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-01989-1_4.10.1007/978-3-030-01989-1_4
  12. Fox J & Weisberg S 2019: An R companion to applied regression. 3rd ed. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
  13. Google 2020. Veľká Fatra. CNES / Airbus, Google, Maxar Technologies. Google Earth Pro 7.3.3.7699. Retrieved June 13, 2020.
  14. Hagemeijer EJM & Blair MJ (eds) 1997: The EBCC atlas of european breeding birds. Their distribution and abundance. T & A D Poyser, London.
  15. Hakkarainen H & Korpimaki E 1996: Competitive and predatory interactions among raptors: an observational and experimental study. Ecology 77: 1134–1142.10.2307/2265582
  16. Hakkarainen HV, Koivunen & Korpimäki E 1997: Reproductive success and parental effort of Tengmalm’s owls: Effects of spatial and temporal variation in habitat quality. Ecoscience 4: 35–42.10.1080/11956860.1997.11682374
  17. Henrioux PJD, Henrioux WP & Chopard G 2003: Effects of forest structure on the ecology of pygmy owl Glaucidium passerinum in the Swiss Jura Mountains. Vogelwelt 124: 309–312.
  18. Holm SR, Noon BR, Wiens JD & Ripple WJ 2016: Potential trophic cascades triggered by the barred owl range expansion. Wildlife Society Bulletin 40: 615–624. DOI: 10.1002/wsb.714.10.1002/wsb.714
  19. Hothorn T, Hornik K, van de Wiel M, Winell H & Zeileis A 2017: Package xcoiny 1.2-1. Conditional inference procedures in a permutation test framework. Retrieved January 24, 2018, from http://coin.r-forge.r-project.org/.
  20. Jackman S 2017: pscl: Classes and methods for r developed in the political science computational laboratory. United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney. Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. R package version 1.5.2. Retrieved January 24, 2018, from https://github.com/atahk/pscl/.
  21. Jenkins JM, Lesmeister DB, Wiens JD, Kane JT, Kane VR & Verschuyl J 2019: Three-dimensional partitioning of resources by congeneric forest predators with recent sympatry. Scientific Reports 9(1): 1–10. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-42426-0.10.1038/s41598-019-42426-0646540030988324
  22. Kajtoch Ł, Mihorski M & Wieczorek P 2015: Habitat displacement effect between two competing owl species in fragmented forests. Population Ecology 57: 517–527. DOI: 10.1007/s10144-015-0497-y.10.1007/s10144-015-0497-y
  23. Kajtoch Ł, Matysek M & Figarski T 2016: Spatio-temporal patterns of owl territories in fragmented forests are affected by a top predator (Ural owl). Annales Zoologici Fennici 53: 165–174.10.5735/086.053.0405
  24. Kissling ML, Lewis SB, & Pendleton G 2010: Factors influencing the detectability of forest owls in Southeastern Alaska. Condor 112: 539–548. DOI: 10.1525/cond.2010.090217.10.1525/cond.2010.090217
  25. Kloubec B, Hora J,Šťastný K 2015: Ptáci jižních Čech. Jihočeský kraj, České Budějovice. [In Czech]
  26. Korpimäki E & Hakkarainen H 2012: The boreal owl: Ecology, behaviour and conservation of a forest-dwelling predator. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511844164
  27. König C & Weick F 2008: Owls of the world. 2nd ed. Christopher Helm, London.
  28. LGIS 2020: Lesnícky geografický informačný systém [Forestry geographic information system]. NLC, Zvolen. Retrieved January 24, 2020, from http://gisnlcsk.org/lgis/
  29. Lourenço R, Goytre F, del Mar Delgado M, Thornton M, Rabaça JE & Penteriani V 2013: Tawny owl vocal activity is constrained by predation risk. Journal of Avian Biology 44: 461–468. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-048X.2013.00157.x.10.1111/j.1600-048X.2013.00157.x
  30. Lourenço R, Penteriani V, Rabaça JE & Korpimäki E 2014: Lethal interactions among vertebrate top predators: a review of concepts, assumptions and terminology. Biological Review 89: 270–283. DOI: 10.1111/brv.12054.10.1111/brv.1205423980715
  31. Lundberg A 1980: Why are the Ural owl Strix uralensis and the tawny owl S. aluco parapatric in Scandinavia? Ornis Scandinavica 11: 116–120.10.2307/3675917
  32. Mangiafico S 2017: Package xrcompaniony 1.10.1. Functions to support extension education program evaluation. Retrieved January 24, 2018, from http://rcompanion.org/.
  33. Marks JS, Cunnings RJ & Mikkola H 1999: Family Strigidae (typical owls), 76–242. In: del Hoyo J, Elliot A & Sargatal J (eds), Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 5, Barn owls to hummingbirds. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.
  34. Mennill DJ 2011: Individual distinctiveness in avian localizations and the spatial monitoring of behaviour. Ibis 153: 235–238. DOI: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2011.01119.x.10.1111/j.1474-919X.2011.01119.x
  35. Mikoláš‚ M, Ujházy K, Jasík M, Wiezik M, Gallay I, Polák P, Vysoký J, Čiliak M, Meigs GW, Svoboda M, Trotsiuk V & Keeton WS 2019: Primary forest distribution and representation in a Central European landscape: Results of a large-scale field-based census. Forest Ecology and Management 449: 117466. DOI: 10.1016/j foreco.2019.117466.
  36. Mikkola H 1976: Owls killing and killed by other owls and raptors in Europe. British Birds 69: 144–154.
  37. Mikkola H 1983: Owls of Europe. T. & A. D. Poyser, Calton.
  38. Morosinotto C, Villers A, Thomson, RL, Varjonen R & Korpimäki E 2017: Competitors and predators alter settlement patterns and reproductive success of an intraguild prey. Ecological Monographs 87: 4–20. DOI: 10.1002/ecm.1238.10.1002/ecm.1238
  39. Newton I 1998: Population limitation in birds. Academic Press, San Diego & London.
  40. Newton I 2007: Population limitation in birds: the last 100 years. British Birds 100(9): 518.
  41. Obuch J 2011: Spatial and temporal diversity of the diet of the tawny owl (Strix aluco). Slovak Raptor Journal 5: 1–120. DOI: 10.2478/v10262-012-0057-8.10.2478/v10262-012-0057-8
  42. Pačenovský S 1995: K medzidruhovým vzťahom Glaucidium passerinum, Strix uralensis a Strix aluco [On interspecific relationships between Glaucidium passerinum, Strix uralensis a Strix aluco]. Tichodroma 8: 61–73. [In Slovak with English summary]
  43. Pačenovský S 2002a: Kuvičok vrabčí (Glaucidium passerinum) [Eurasian pygmy owl], 364–367. In: Danko Š, Darolová A & Krištín A (eds), Rozšírenie vtákov na Slovensku [Birds distribution in Slovakia]. Veda, Bratislava. [in Slovak with English summary]
  44. PaŠenovský S 2002b: Pôtik kapcavý (Aegolius funereus) [The Tengmalm’s owl], 379–381 In: Danko Š, Darolová A & Krištín A (eds), Rozšírenie vtákov na Slovensku [Birds distribution in Slovakia]. Veda, Bratislava. [in Slovak with English summary]
  45. Peri A 2018a: A comparison of three methods for planning a census of tawny owl (Strix aluco) populations living at high territorial density. Bioacoustics 27: 245–260. DOI: 10.1080/09524622.2017.1326164.10.1080/09524622.2017.1326164
  46. Peri A 2018b: Censusing a tawny owl (Strix aluco) population living at high density merging two consolidated techniques. Écoscience 25: 249–257. DOI: 10.1080/11956860.2018.1455370.10.1080/11956860.2018.1455370
  47. Polis GA, Myers CA & Holt RD 1989: The ecology and evolution of intraguild predation: potential competitors that eat each other. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20: 297–330.10.1146/annurev.es.20.110189.001501
  48. R Core Team 2020: R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Retrieved January 24, 2020, from https://www.R-project.org/.
  49. Rebollo S, Martínez-Hesterkamp S, García-Salgado G, Pérez-Camacho L, Fernández-Pereira JM & Jenness J 2017: Spatial relationships and mechanisms of coexistence between dominant and subordinate top predators. Journal of Avian Biology 48: 1226–1237. DOI: 10.1111/jav.01337.10.1111/jav.01337
  50. Salvati L, Manganaro A & Ranazzi L. 2002. Wood quality and the tawny owl Strix aluco in different forest types of central Italy. Ornis Svecica 12: 47–51.
  51. Schoeneberger PJ, Wysocki DA, Benham EC & Soil Survey Staff 2012: Field book for describing and sampling soils. Version 3.0. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, Lincoln, NE.
  52. Sergio F, Marchesi L & Pedrini P 2003: Spatial refugia and the coexistence of a diurnal raptor with its intraguild owl predator. Journal of Animal Ecology 72: 232–245. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2003. 00693.x.
  53. Sergio F & Hiraldo F 2008: Intraguild predation in raptor assemblages: a review. Ibis 150: 132–145. DOI: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2008.00786.x.10.1111/j.1474-919X.2008.00786.x
  54. Sergio F, Marchesi L, Pedrini P & Penteriani V 2007: Coexistence of a generalist owl with its intraguild predator: distance-sensitive or habitat-mediated avoidance? Animal Behaviour 74: 1607–1616. DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.10.022.10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.10.022
  55. Solonen T 1994: Factors affecting the structure of Finnish birds of prey communities. Ornis Fennica 71: 156–169
  56. Ševčík R, Riegert J, Šindelář J & Zárybnická M 2019: Vocal activity of the Central European boreal owl population in relation to varying environmental conditions. Ornis Fennica 96: 1–12.
  57. Sih A, Crowley P, McPeek M, Petranka J & Strohmeier K 1985: Predation, competition, and prey communities: a review of field experiments. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 16: 269–311.10.1146/annurev.es.16.110185.001413
  58. Šotnár K, Pačenovský S & Obuch J 2015: On the food of the Eurasian pygmy owl (Glaucidium passerinum) in Slovakia. Raptor Journal 9: 115–126. DOI: 10.1515/srj-2015-0009.10.1515/srj-2015-0009
  59. Šťastný P, Nieplová E & Melo M 2002: Mean annual air temperature, 98. In: Miklós L et al. (eds), Landscape atlas of the Slovak Republic. Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic, Bratislava & Slovak Environmental Agency, Banská Bystrica
  60. Suhonen J, Halonen M, Mappes T & Korpimäki E 2007: Interspecific competition limits larders of pygmy owls Glaucidium passerinum. Journal of Avian Biology 38: 630–634. DOI: 10.1111/j. 2007.0908-8857.03960.x.
  61. Sunde P & Bølstad MS 2004: A telemetry study of the social organization of a tawny owl (Strix aluco) population. Journal of Zoology 263: 65–76. DOI: 10.1017/S0952836904004881.10.1017/S0952836904004881
  62. Townsend CR, Begon M & Harper JL 2008: Essentials of ecology. 3rd ed. Blackwell Science, Oxford.
  63. Venables WN & Ripley BD 2002: Modern applied statistics with S. 4th ed. Springer, New York.10.1007/978-0-387-21706-2
  64. Vrezec A & Bertoncelj I 2018: Territory monitoring of tawny owls Strix aluco using playback calls is a reliable population monitoring method. Bird Study 65 (suppl. 1): S52–S62.10.1080/00063657.2018.1522527
  65. Vrezec A & MiheliŠ T 2013: The Ural owl, Strix uralensis macroura, in Slovenia: an overview of current knowledge on species ecology. Rivista Italiana di Ornitologia 82: 30–37.10.4081/rio.2012.107
  66. Vrezec A & Tome D 2004a: Habitat selection and patterns of distribution in a hierarchic forest owl guild. Ornis Fennica 81: 109–118.
  67. Vrezec A & Tome D 2004b: Altitudinal segregation between Ural owl Strix uralensis and tawny owl S. aluco: evidence for competitive exclusion in raptorial birds. Bird Study 52: 264–269. DOI: 10.1080/00063650409461362.10.1080/00063650409461362
  68. Vrh P & Vrezec A 2006: Interspecific territorial vocal activity of the Ural owl (Strix uralensis) towards tawny owl (Strix aluco), sympatric owl competitor: a playback experiment. Razprave Razreda SAZU 47: 99–105.
  69. Wickham H, Chang W & RStudio 2016: Package xggplot2y 2.2.1. create elegant data visualisations using the grammar of graphics. Retrieved January 24, 2017, from http://ggplot2.tidyverse.org/.
  70. Zuberogoitia I & Campos LF 1998: Censusing owls in large areas: a comparison between methods. Ardeola 45: 47–53.
  71. Zuberogoitia I & Martínez JA 2000: Methods for surveying tawny owl Strix aluco populations in large areas. Biota 1: 79–88.
  72. Zuberogoitia I, Martinez JA, Zabala J & Martínez JE 2005: Interspecific aggression and nest-site competition in a European owl community. Journal of Raptor Research 39: 156–159.
  73. Zuberogoitia I, Burgos G, González-Oreja JA, Morant J, Martínez JE & Zabala Albizua J 2019: Factors affecting spontaneous vocal activity of tawny owls Strix aluco and implications for surveying large areas. Ibis 161: 495–503. DOI: 10.1111/ibi.12684.10.1111/ibi.12684
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/srj-2020-0002 | Journal eISSN: 2644-5247 | Journal ISSN: 1337-3463
Language: English
Page range: 1 - 13
Submitted on: May 31, 2020
Accepted on: Aug 24, 2020
Published on: Apr 30, 2021
Published by: Raptor Protection of Slovakia
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Related subjects:

© 2021 Karol Šotnár, Ján Obuch, Samuel Pačenovský, Benjamín Jarčuška, published by Raptor Protection of Slovakia
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.