TERRITORY SIZE OF A MIGRATORY SONGBIRD IN RESPONSE TO CATERPILLAR DENSITY AND FOLIAGE STRUCTURE

By Matthew Marshall, R. Cooper. 2004

160 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4637293a06988af437b88063d7fbb337313256dc

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. T. Sillett
2. Richard T. Holmes
3. Jonathan B. Cohen
4. Lawrence M. Houghton
5. Jukka T. Forsman
6. E. Yerger
7. Tim Nuttle
8. J. Fraser

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. T. Sillett
2. Jukka T. Forsman
3. E. Yerger
4. Tim Nuttle
5. Matthew Betts
6. Richard T. Holmes
7. Todd E. Ristau
8. S. Stoleson

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. Jukka T. Forsman
2. E. Yerger
3. Tim Nuttle
4. C. Elphick
5. Matthew Betts
6. Richard T. Holmes
7. P. Doran
8. T. Sillett

Citations in the corpus

• Dynamic occupancy models reveal within-breeding season movement up a habitat quality gradient by a migratory songbird (2008, background): “Insect abundance or reproductive output of conspecifics in time t 1 may not correlate well with the same variables in time t (Marshall and Cooper 2004).”
• Nesting Density and Reproductive Success of Piping Plovers in Response to Storm- and Human-Created Habitat Changes (2009, background): “Furthermore, territory size is inversely related to prey density in several avian taxa (Dunk and Cooper 1994, Sherman and Eason 1998, Marshall and Cooper 2004), and density is predicted to be inversely related to territory size in territorial species (Newton 1992).”
• Legacy of top-down herbivore pressure ricochets back up multiple trophic levels in forest canopies over 30 years (2011, background): “If insectivorous bird populations respond to foliage or caterpillar density (Andersson 1978, Marshall and Cooper 2004), deer density during stand initiation is likely to v www.esajournals.org 8 January 2011 v Volume 2(1) v Article 4 continue to influence avian abundance over the century time scale.”
• Competitor density cues for habitat quality facilitating habitat selection and investment decisions (2008, background): “Optimal habitat choices and investment decisions are complicated by spatial and temporal variation in factors affecting the quality of habitats, such as the amount and quality of food resources, intensity of predation and competition, and microclimate conditions (e.g., Gustafsson 1987; Robinson et a”
• NEST SITE SELECTION AND NESTING SUCCESS IN SALTMARSH BREEDING SPARROWS: THE IMPORTANCE OF NEST HABITAT, TIMING, AND STUDY SITE DIFFERENCES (2005, background): “…habitat features that conceal the nest from predators (Kelly 1993, Liebezeit and George 2002) or provide greater food abundance within the nesting area (Marshall and Cooper 2004) should be preferred over more exposed or poor quality sites if they increase the probability of producing fledglings.”