Skip to main content
Log in

Nest-box size influences where secondary-cavity exploiters roost and nest: a choice experiment

  • Short Note
  • Published:
Journal of Ornithology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The impact of nest-box characteristics (design, position, content) on decisions where to roost or nest have rarely been experimentally investigated. Older studies claimed that secondary cavity-exploiters, such as tits (Paridae), prefer smaller boxes for roosting and larger boxes for breeding. Surprisingly, these aspects of box preference have to our knowledge not been examined in choice experiments. We therefore allowed free-ranging birds to use, as roosting or nesting sites, three box designs attached together on the same support, covering the range of box sizes used to attract Great (Parus major) or Blue (Cyanistes caeruleus) Tits in long-term investigations. We observed that medium-sized and large boxes contained disproportionally more avian excrements before nesting than small boxes. The large boxes also contained disproportionally more body plumages prior to nesting and Great Tit nests. Nest-box size therefore influenced where the birds roosted and nested. Potential costs and benefits of exploitation of boxes differing in size are briefly discussed.

Zusammenfassung

Die Nistkastengröße beeinflusst, wo Sekundär-Höhlenbrüter schlafen und brüten: ein Wahlexperiment

Der Einfluss von Nistkasten-Charakteristika (Design, Lage, Inhalt) auf die Entscheidungen eines Vogels bei der Schlafplatz- und Neststandortswahl wurde bisher kaum experimentell untersucht. Ältere Arbeiten behaupten, dass Sekundär-Höhlenbrüter wie etwas Meisen (Paridae) kleinere Kästen zum Schlafen und größere Kästen für die Brut bevorzugen. Überraschenderweise wurden diese Aspekte der Nistkastenwahl unseres Wissens nach noch nicht in Wahlexperimenten untersucht. Wir gaben daher Wildvögeln die Möglichkeit, drei verschiedene Nistkastenvarianten, die das in Langzeitstudien an Kohl- (Parus major) und Blaumeisen (Cyanistes caeruleus) verwendete Größenspektrum abdeckten, und die wir jeweils zusammen an einer gemeinsamen Halterung anbrachten, zum Schlafen und Nisten zu nutzen. Wir beobachteten, dass mittelgroße und große Nistkästen vor der Brutzeit überproportional mehr Vogelexkremente enthielten als kleine Kästen. In großen Kästen fanden sich darüber hinaus vor der Brutzeit überproportional mehr Körperfedern und Kohlmeisen-Nester. Die Nistkastengröße beeinflusste also die Schlafund Nistplatzwahl der Vögel. Potentielle Kosten und Vorteile einer unterschiedlichen Kastennutzung nach Größe werden kurz diskutiert.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • Caula S, Marty P, Martin J-L (2008) Seasonal variation in species composition of an urban bird community in Mediterranean France. Landsc Urban Plan 87:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christe P, Oppliger A, Richner H (1994) Ectoparasite affects choice and use of roost sites in the great tit, Parus major. Anim Behav 47:895–898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhondt AA, Eyckerman R (1980) Competition between the great tit and the blue tit outside the breeding season in field experiments. Ecology 61:1291–1296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhondt AA, Blondel J, Perret P (2010) Why do Corsican blue tits Cyanistes caeruleus ogliastrae not use nest boxes for roosting? J Ornithol 151:95–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekner A, Tryjanowski P (2008) Do small hole nesting passerines detect cues left by a predator? A test on winter roosting sites. Acta Ornithol 43:107–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson J, Nilsson SG (1977) The influence of nest-box area on clutch size in some hole-nesting passerines. Ibis 119:207–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kempenaers B, Dhondt AA (1991) Competition between blue and great tit for roosting sites in winter: an aviary experiment. Ornis Scand 22:73–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluijver HN (1951) The population ecology of the great tit Parus m. major L. Ardea 39:1–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambrechts MM, Blondel J, Maistre M, Perret P (1997) A single response mechanism is responsible for evolutionary adaptive variation in a bird’s laying date. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:5153–5155

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lambrechts MM, Adriaensen F, Ardia DR et al (2010) The design of artificial nest boxes for the study of secondary hole-nesting birds: a review of methodological inconsistencies and potential biases. Acta Ornithol 45:1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambrechts MM, Wiebe KL, Sunde P et al (2012) Nest box design for the study of diurnal raptors and owls is still an overlooked point in ecology, evolutionary and conservation studies. J Ornithol 153:23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löhrl H (1986) Experimente zur Bruthöhlenwahl der Kohlmeise (Parus major). J Ornithol 127:S51–S59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mainwaring MC (2011) The use of nestboxes by roosting birds during the non-breeding season: a review of the costs and benefits. Ardea 99:167–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazgajski TD (2007) Effect of old nest material on nest site selection and breeding parameters in secondary hole nesters—a review. Acta Ornithol 42:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merilä J, Hemborg C (2000) Fitness and feather wear in the collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis. J Avian Biol 31:504–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nager RG, van Noordwijk AJ (1995) Proximate and ultimate aspects of phenotypic plasticity in timing of great tit breeding in a heterogeneous environment. Am Nat 146:454–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson J-A, Svensson E (1996) The cost of reproduction: a new link between current reproductive effort and future reproductive success. Proc R Soc Lond B 263:711–714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrins CM (1965) Population fluctuations and clutch size in the great tit Parus major L. J Anim Ecol 34:601–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrins CM (1979) British tits. Collins, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinowski J, Haman A, Jerzak L, Pinowski B, Barkowska M, Grodzki A, Haman K (2006) The thermal properties of some nests of the Eurasian tree sparrow Passer montanus. J Therm Biol 31:573–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond M, Rousset F (1995) An exact test for population structure. Evolution 49:1280–1283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Balen JH (1984) The relationship between nest-box size, occupation and breeding parameters of the great tit Parus major and some other hole-nesting species. Ardea 72:163–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Vel’ký M, Kaňuch P, Krištin A (2010) Selection of winter roosts in the great tit Parus major: influence of microclimate. J Ornithol 151:147–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the French ANR (ANR-09-JCJC-0050-01), the city of Montpellier, the University of Montpellier 2, and OSU-OREME. We thank two anonymous referees for constructive comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcel M. Lambrechts.

Additional information

Communicated by T. Friedl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lambrechts, M.M., Abouladzé, M., Bonnet, M. et al. Nest-box size influences where secondary-cavity exploiters roost and nest: a choice experiment. J Ornithol 154, 563–566 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-012-0919-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-012-0919-y

Keywords

Navigation