Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Dec 22;279(1749):4901-6.
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2012.2207. Epub 2012 Oct 24.

Continent-wide tracking to determine migratory connectivity and tropical habitat associations of a declining aerial insectivore

Affiliations

Continent-wide tracking to determine migratory connectivity and tropical habitat associations of a declining aerial insectivore

Kevin C Fraser et al. Proc Biol Sci. .

Abstract

North American birds that feed on flying insects are experiencing steep population declines, particularly long-distance migratory populations in the northern breeding range. We determine, for the first time, the level of migratory connectivity across the range of a songbird using direct tracking of individuals, and test whether declining northern populations have higher exposure to agricultural landscapes at their non-breeding grounds in South America. We used light-level geolocators to track purple martins, Progne subis, originating from North American breeding populations, coast-to-coast (n = 95 individuals). We show that breeding populations of the eastern subspecies, P. s. subis, that are separated by ca. 2000 km, nevertheless have almost completely overlapping non-breeding ranges in Brazil. Most (76%) P. s. subis overwintered in northern Brazil near the Amazon River, not in the agricultural landscape of southern Brazil. Individual non-breeding sites had an average of 91 per cent forest and only 4 per cent agricultural ground cover within a 50 km radius, and birds originating from declining northern breeding populations were not more exposed to agricultural landscapes than stable southern breeding populations. Our results show that differences in wintering location and habitat do not explain recent trends in breeding population declines in this species, and instead northern populations may be constrained in their ability to respond to climate change.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Migratory connectivity of purple martin breeding populations tracked with geolocators to South America; range shown with grey shading. The site with the longest winter residency (124 ± 5.4 days, n = 95) is shown for each individual (triangles are males, circles are females) from (a) British Columbia (n = 6), (b) Minnesota (white, n = 5) and South Dakota (black, n = 9), (c) Pennsylvania (n = 34), (d) New Jersey (n = 11), (e) Oklahoma (white, n = 3) and Texas (black, n = 8), and (f) Virginia (n = 19). British Columbia birds are Progne subis arboricola and all other populations are P. s. subis. Error bars for roost location in (b) shows typical standard deviation in latitude and longitude for estimated winter locations. Map of North America shows the breeding range in grey and stars indicate the location of geolocator deployments.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
(a) Population trends based on the BBS data (1966–2010). Kernel density of all winter roost locations occupied for ≥30 days by martins (P. s. subis) from (b) northern breeding populations (Minnesota, South Dakota, Pennsylvania, New Jersey; n = 59 individuals, 97 roosts) and (c) central/southern breeding populations (Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia; n = 30 individuals, 55 roosts). Maps show kernels of 20, 40, 60 and 80% of the total density. Green shading represents forest and non-agricultural vegetated cover; yellow shading represents agricultural lands.

References

    1. Sillett T. S., Holmes R. T. 2002. Variation in survivorship of a migratory songbird throughout its annual cycle. J. Anim. Ecol. 71, 296–308 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00599.x (doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00599.x) - DOI
    1. Faaborg J., et al. 2010. Conserving migratory land birds in the New World: do we know enough? Ecol. Appl. 20, 398–418 10.1890/09-0397.1 (doi:10.1890/09-0397.1) - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sherry T. W., Holmes R. T. 1995. Summer versus winter limitation of populations: conceptual issues and evidence. In Ecology and management of Neotropical migratory birds: a synthesis and review of critical issues (eds Martin T., Finch D.). New York: Oxford University Press
    1. Sheehy J., Taylor C. M., McCann K. S., Norris D. R. 2010. Optimal conservation planning for migratory animals: integrating demographic information across seasons. Conserv. Lett. 3, 192–202 10.1111/j.1755-263x.2010.00100.x (doi:10.1111/j.1755-263x.2010.00100.x) - DOI
    1. Marra P. P., Norris D. R., Haig S. M., Webster M. S., Royle J. A. 2006. Migratory connectivity. In Connectivity conservation (eds Crooks K. R., Sanjayan M.), pp. 157–183 New York: Cambridge University Press

Publication types