Alien vs. Predator: Impacts of Invasive Species and Native Predators on Urban Nest Box Use by Native Birds

Simple Summary We aimed to investigate how an invasive cavity-breeding bird, the common (Indian) myna, and a native nest predator, the common brushtail possum, influence urban nest box use by native birds in Queensland and New South Wales, Australia. We quantified nest box use by invasive and native species, assessed nesting success and failure rates, and explored what environmental factors might influence nest box occupancy and nesting success. We found that the native possums were the most common nest box users and that possum occupancy of boxes was associated with higher rates of nesting failures by all bird species. More common myna nesting attempts were observed in areas where mynas have been established longer. We found no evidence of a significant negative impact by the common myna on other birds in our study locations, which may be partly due to the low rates of use of our nest boxes by native birds. Nevertheless, better nest box design and guidelines for setting them up are needed if we aim to provide more nesting opportunities for native birds to replace the decline in big old cavity trees. Abstract Many bird species in Australia require tree hollows for breeding. However, assessing the benefits of urban nest boxes to native birds requires frequent monitoring that allows to assess nesting success. To better understand the benefits of nest boxes for native birds, we examined the impact of local habitat characteristics, invasive species (common myna, Acridotheres tristis), and native mammalian predators on urban nest box use and nesting success of native birds. We installed 216 nest boxes across nine locations in southeastern Australia (S.E. Queensland and northern New South Wales) in both long-invaded sites (invaded before 1970) and more recently invaded sites (after 1990). We monitored all boxes weekly over two breeding seasons. We recorded seven bird species and three mammal species using the nest boxes. Weekly box occupancy by all species averaged 8% of all boxes, with the species most frequently recorded in the nest boxes being the common brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula), a native cavity user and nest predator. We recorded 137 nesting attempts in the boxes across all bird species. The most frequent nesting species were the invasive alien common mynas (72 nesting attempts). We recorded an average nesting failure rate of 53.3% for all bird species. We did not record any common mynas evicting other nesting birds, and found that several native species used the same box after the common myna completed its nesting. We recorded native possums in 92% of the boxes, and possum occupancy of boxes per site was negatively correlated with bird nesting success (p = 0.021). These results suggest that when boxes are accessible to invasive species and native predators, they are unlikely to significantly improve nesting opportunities for native birds. To ensure efficient use of limited conservation resources, nest boxes should be designed to target species of high conservation importance and limit other species of both predators and competitors.

[1]  S. Kark,et al.  18. Australia’s Urban Cavity Nesters and Introduced Parrots: Patterns, Processes, and Impacts , 2021 .

[2]  Naturalized Parrots of the World , 2021 .

[3]  R. Heinsohn,et al.  Do nest boxes breed the target species or its competitors? A case study of a critically endangered bird , 2020, Restoration Ecology.

[4]  A. S. Griffin,et al.  Noisy neighbours and myna problems: Interaction webs and aggression around tree hollows in urban habitats , 2020 .

[5]  B. D. Taylor,et al.  Nest box contentions: Are nest boxes used by the species they target? , 2020 .

[6]  M. Ross,et al.  Overlap in reproductive phenology increases the likelihood of cavity nest usurpation by invasive species in a tropical city , 2020, The Condor.

[7]  A. S. Griffin,et al.  Two speed invasion: assisted and intrinsic dispersal of common mynas over 150 years of colonization , 2018, Journal of Biogeography.

[8]  S. Kark,et al.  Factors shaping avian alien species richness in Australia vs Europe , 2017 .

[9]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  The anatomy of a failed offset , 2017 .

[10]  J. Marzluff,et al.  Cavity nesting birds along an urban-wildland gradient: is human facilitation structuring the bird community? , 2017, Urban Ecosystems.

[11]  S. Kark,et al.  Nest-site competition between invasive and native cavity nesting birds and its implication for conservation. , 2016, Journal of environmental management.

[12]  J. Hyett Review - A Field Guide to Nests and Eggs of Australian Birds , 2016 .

[13]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Do nest boxes in restored woodlands promote the conservation of hollow‐dependent fauna? , 2016 .

[14]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Enriching small trees with artificial nest boxes cannot mimic the value of large trees for hollow‐nesting birds , 2016 .

[15]  K. Buchanan,et al.  How does nest-box temperature affect nestling growth rate and breeding success in a parrot? , 2015 .

[16]  S. Magle,et al.  Tree cavity availability across forest, park, and residential habitats in a highly urban area , 2015, Urban Ecosystems.

[17]  Charlotte E. Taylor,et al.  Distribution of tree-hollows and hollow preferences by parrots in an urban landscape , 2014 .

[18]  Luciana L. Porfirio,et al.  Discovery of a novel predator reveals extreme but highly variable mortality for an endangered migratory bird , 2014 .

[19]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  Reduced availability of habitat structures in urban landscapes: Implications for policy and practice , 2014 .

[20]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Are invasive species drivers of native species decline or passengers of habitat modification? A case study of the impact of the common myna (Acridotheres tristis) on Australian bird species , 2014 .

[21]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Does Human-Induced Habitat Modification Influence the Impact of Introduced Species? A Case Study on Cavity-Nesting by the Introduced Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis) and Two Australian Native Parrots , 2013, Environmental Management.

[22]  Charlotte E. Taylor,et al.  Housing Shortages in Urban Regions: Aggressive Interactions at Tree Hollows in Forest Remnants , 2013, PloS one.

[23]  S. Kark,et al.  The complex interaction network among multiple invasive bird species in a cavity-nesting community , 2013, Biological Invasions.

[24]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Is It Benign or Is It a Pariah? Empirical Evidence for the Impact of the Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis) on Australian Birds , 2012, PloS one.

[25]  John Sibert,et al.  AD Model Builder: using automatic differentiation for statistical inference of highly parameterized complex nonlinear models , 2012, Optim. Methods Softw..

[26]  Charlotte E. Taylor,et al.  Do Common Mynas significantly compete with native birds in urban environments? , 2011, Journal of Ornithology.

[27]  G. Luck,et al.  Nest-box use by arboreal mammals in a peri-urban landscape , 2009 .

[28]  R. Goldingay,et al.  Use of artificial tree hollows by Australian birds and bats , 2009 .

[29]  A. Zuur,et al.  Mixed Effects Models and Extensions in Ecology with R , 2009 .

[30]  H. Moller,et al.  Using artificial nests to explore predation by introduced predators inhabiting alpine areas in New Zealand , 2008 .

[31]  J. Anderies,et al.  Living in the city: resource availability, predation, and bird population dynamics in urban areas. , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[32]  Daniel M Tompkins,et al.  Unexpected consequences of vertebrate pest control: predictions from a four-species community model. , 2006, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[33]  M. McCarthy,et al.  The use of nest boxes in urban natural vegetation remnants by vertebrate fauna , 2005 .

[34]  A. Leivits,et al.  Providing nest boxes for hole-nesting birds – Does habitat matter? , 2005, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[35]  Moira A. Pryde,et al.  Control of introduced mammalian predators improves kaka Nestor meridionalis breeding success: reversing the decline of a threatened New Zealand parrot , 2003 .

[36]  G. Crowley,et al.  The Breeding Biology of the Glossy Black-Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus lathami on Kangaroo Island, South Australia , 1999 .

[37]  C. Tidemann,et al.  The Ecology of the Common Myna in Urban Nature Reserves in the Australian Capital Territory , 1997 .

[38]  C. Tidemann,et al.  THE IMPACT OF TWO EXOTIC HOLLOW-NESTING BIRDS ON TWO NATIVE PARROTS IN SAVANNAH AND WOODLAND IN EASTERN AUSTRALIA , 1997 .

[39]  W. Martin,et al.  The Current and Potential Distribution of the Common Myna Acridotheres tristis in Australia , 1996 .

[40]  J. Boyden,et al.  Comparison of the breeding sites and habitat of two hole-nesting estrildid finches, one endangered, in northern Australia , 1992, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[41]  D. Finch EFFECTS OF PREDATION AND COMPETITOR INTERFERENCE ON NESTING SUCCESS OF HOUSE WRENS AND TREE SWALLOWS , 1990 .

[42]  M. Hedblom,et al.  Ecology and conservation of birds in urban environments , 2017 .

[43]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[44]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Are nest boxes a viable alternative source of cavities for hollow-dependent animals? Long-term monitoring of nest box occupancy, pest use and attrition , 2009 .

[45]  D. Ingold THE INFLUENCE OF STARLINGS ON FLICKER REPRODUCTION WHEN BOTH NATURALLY EXCAVATED CAVITIES AND ARTIFICIAL NEST BOXES ARE AVAILABLE , 1998 .