Anthropogenic Threat and Ecological Factors, Not Life

History, Drive Population Trends of Shorebirds

Bar-tailed Godwits (BirdLife International, 2018) Black Stilt – Dick Veitch 1977 (NZ Birds Online, 2019)

Introduction
Shorebirds are a highly diverse group of birds that occur worldwide, with some of the longest known migrations and a varied range of life
history traits. Most shorebird species are experiencing population declines and some species are among the rarest birds in the world.
Shorebirds diverse life histories make them an interesting group to compare and study. It is important to identify which factors, whether
anthropogenic, ecological or life history, may dispose species towards population declines in order to inform conservation priorities.
Multiple regression analysis is used to identify factors that predict population trends in shorebirds. The relative importance of life-history
traits, species range, migration and anthropogenic threats in contributing to population trends of shorebird species are considered.
Table 1: Predictive variables used described and referenced.
Predictive Variable Measured as
Results
Population Trend 1= Increasing, 2= Stable, 3= Decreasing (BirdLife International, 2018). • Long-distance migrants were 5.4 times
Migration Migration distance was determined by number of latitudinal bands crosses more likely to have a declining
between wintering and breeding grounds. population trend than non-migratory
1= Non-migrant, 2= Short-distance migrant (< 5 latitudinal bands crossed), 3=
Long-distance migrant (≥ 5 latitudinal bands crossed) (BirdLife International,
species, and 3.9 times when outliers
2018). removed.
Breeding range Area of breeding range in km2 (BirdLife International, 2018). • Short-distance migrants were 3.4 times
Anthropogenic Threat Score Scored from 0-5, threats: habitat loss, human disturbance, hunting, pollution, more likely to have a declining
introduced species (BirdLife International; HBW Alive, 2018).
population trend than non-migratory
Body Size Mean adult mass (g) of each species (HBW Alive, 2018).
species, and 4.8 times when outliers
Broods per season 1= Single brooded, 2= Double brooded, 3= Multiple broods (HBW Alive, 2018).
removed.
Clutch Size Typical number of eggs in a clutch for each species (HBW Alive, 2018).
• An increase in anthropogenic threat
Parental Care During incubation, as fledging period definition not consistent between sources.
0= Uniparental, 1= Biparental (HBW Alive, 2018). score was associated with an increase
in the odds of having a decreasing
Methods population trend, with an odds ratio of
Data Collection 1.4, and an odds ratio of 1.5 when
• Population trend, migration, life history trait and anthropogenic threat data were collected outliers removed.
from online databases (BirdLife International, 2018; HBW Alive, 2018). • An increase in breeding range was
• Where data was missing from these databases a search of scientific literature was done. associated with an increase in the odds
Species that were missing data were excluded from analysis. of having a decreasing population
• 125 of 215 recognised shorebird species had sufficient data to be used in analysis. trend, with an odds ratio of 1.000 when
Statistical Analysis outliers removed.
• A cumulative odds ordinal regression with proportional odds was run to determine the • Life history traits were not found to be
effect of the predictive variables on the population trend of species. significant predictors of population
• This was repeated with outliers of breeding area and weight removed. trend when analysed individually or
• Life history traits were then grouped into a life history ”score” and cumulative odds ordinal grouped as a life history “score” in any
regression with proportional odds ran on breeding area, migration distance, anthropogenic analyses done.
threat and life history score.
Table 3: Significant results of statistical test for predictors: breeding area, migration distance, anthropogenic
Table 2: Significant results of statistical test for predictors: breeding area, migration distance, threat, weight, no. broods per season, clutch size and parental care when outliers removed
anthropogenic threat, weight, no. broods per season, clutch size and parental care
Predictive Variable Odds Ratio 95% CI WaldX2 P--value
Predictive Variable Odds Ratio 95% CI WaldX2 P--value
Non-migrant compared to 0.260 0.072 – 0.937 4.242 0.039
Non-migrant compared to 0.185 0.059 – 0.578 8.416 0.004
long-distance migrant
long-distance migrant
Short-distance migrant 4.749 1.408 – 16.025 6.305 0.012
Short-distance migrant 3.351 1.155 – 9.722 4.951 0.026
compared to non-migrant
compared to non-migrant
Short-distance migrant 1.234 0.391 – 3.895 0.129 0.720
Short-distance migrant 0.619 0.234 – 1.641 0.929 0.335
compared to long-distance
compared to long-distance
migrant
migrant
Long-distance migrant 3.848 1.067 – 13.871 4.242 0.039
Long-distance migrant 5.412 1.729 – 16.938 8.416 0.004
compared to non-migrant
compared to non-migrant
Anthropogenic threat 1.465 1.060 – 2.024 5.350 0.021
Anthropogenic threat 1.382 1.040 – 1.835 4.981 0.026
Breeding area 1.000 1.000 – 1.000 4.729 0.030
Conclusions
• Contrary to previous studies, short-distance migration was found to be a greater predictor of population decline than long-distance migration.
This may be due to factors not considered in this study, such as site fidelity and habitat preferences, or due to the relatively crude measure of
migration distance used.
• An increase in breeding range area was found to predict a decrease in population trend, contradictory to previous studies. Koleček et al. (2017)
suggests that larger ranges buffer species against environmental stochasticity, correspondingly species with smaller ranges would experience
changes more strongly. Therefore, at risk species with small ranges may respond quickly to positive changes, such as improved conservation
effort, resulting in increasing population trends.
• Life history traits were not found to be significant predictors of population trend. It was expected that “slow” life history traits would be predictive
of a declining population trend, as increased mortality cannot be compensated for by an increase in fecundity. However, Visser, Both and
Lambrechts (2004) suggested that species with “slow” life histories are able to learn through experience and effectively adapt to directional
changes in the environment, inferring an advantage.
• Anthropogenic threat and ecological factors are significant predictors of population trends in shorebirds, whilst life history traits are
not. Further research into the ecological factors that influence population trends would be beneficial, as the results of these were
unexpected and differed from previous studies. References
BirdLife International (2018) Data Zone. [online] Available at: < http://datazone.birdlife.org>
HBW Alive (2018) Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive. [online] Available at <https://www.hbw.com/>
Koleček, J., Procházka, P., Ieronymidou, C., Burfield, I.J., Reif, J. (2017) Non-breeding range size predicts the
magnitude of population trends in trans-Saharan migratory passerine birds. Oikos. 127(4). Pp599-606
Visser, M.E., Both, C., Lambrechts, M.M. (2004) Global climate change leads to mistimed avian reproduction.
Advances in Ecological Research. 35.