Categorizing urban avoiders, utilizers, and dwellers for identifying bird conservation priorities in a Northern Andean city

IF 2.4 3区环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY

Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution Pub Date : 2024-08-13 DOI:10.3389/fevo.2024.1432340

Jaime A. Garizábal-Carmona, Jefry S. Betancur, Sergio Montoya-Arango, Laura Franco-Espinosa, N. Javier Mancera-Rodríguez

{"title":"Categorizing urban avoiders, utilizers, and dwellers for identifying bird conservation priorities in a Northern Andean city","authors":"Jaime A. Garizábal-Carmona, Jefry S. Betancur, Sergio Montoya-Arango, Laura Franco-Espinosa, N. Javier Mancera-Rodríguez","doi":"10.3389/fevo.2024.1432340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionCategorizing species according to their frequencies across urbanization levels and identifying some species traits that explain this variation could be a valuable tool for focusing conservation efforts, particularly in biodiversity hotspots with high endemism rates. This study proposes a semi-quantitative and multi-scale protocol to categorize bird species as urban avoiders, utilizers, and dwellers, based on their frequencies at different urbanization levels. Additionally, it evaluates the relationships of these categories with altitudinal ranges, trophic guilds, and foraging strata.MethodsWe performed bird counts in 124 points located within urban areas, and in 15 points located in non-urban areas of a Colombian Northern Andean city (Medellín and surroundings). Each urban point was assigned to urbanization levels based on 200, 500, and 1,000 m buffers categorized as high (67–100% of built cover), moderate (34–66% of built cover), or low (0–33% of built cover).ResultsWe categorized 103 bird species: 49 as urban avoiders, 31 as urban utilizers, and 23 as urban dwellers. The two recorded Colombian endemic species and seven near-endemics were categorized as urban avoiders, with only one near-endemic species categorized as an urban utilizer (the other three were data deficient). Furthermore, most bird species with exclusive Andean distribution were categorized as urban avoiders (78.57%). Urban avoiders had narrower altitudinal ranges (1,969 ± 524 m) than utilizers (2,287 ± 592m) and dwellers (2,569 ± 654m), and they had the largest proportion of frugivorous and frugivorous-insectivorous species, while urban dwellers had a greater proportion of omnivorous species. Overall, bird species with exclusive Andean distribution and narrow altitudinal ranges are the most threatened by urban sprawl, irrespective of their trophic guild or foraging strata.DiscussionThis study emphasizes the importance of protecting native forest remnants in urban surroundings for conserving native Andean bird species, as urban green spaces in high-density cities may not sufficiently support their long-term survival and reproduction. Also, it highlights the need to identify conservation priorities based on local biodiversity patterns, taking into account that species-specific urban tolerance depends on particular landscape dynamics and species regional pools.","PeriodicalId":12367,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2024.1432340","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

IntroductionCategorizing species according to their frequencies across urbanization levels and identifying some species traits that explain this variation could be a valuable tool for focusing conservation efforts, particularly in biodiversity hotspots with high endemism rates. This study proposes a semi-quantitative and multi-scale protocol to categorize bird species as urban avoiders, utilizers, and dwellers, based on their frequencies at different urbanization levels. Additionally, it evaluates the relationships of these categories with altitudinal ranges, trophic guilds, and foraging strata.MethodsWe performed bird counts in 124 points located within urban areas, and in 15 points located in non-urban areas of a Colombian Northern Andean city (Medellín and surroundings). Each urban point was assigned to urbanization levels based on 200, 500, and 1,000 m buffers categorized as high (67–100% of built cover), moderate (34–66% of built cover), or low (0–33% of built cover).ResultsWe categorized 103 bird species: 49 as urban avoiders, 31 as urban utilizers, and 23 as urban dwellers. The two recorded Colombian endemic species and seven near-endemics were categorized as urban avoiders, with only one near-endemic species categorized as an urban utilizer (the other three were data deficient). Furthermore, most bird species with exclusive Andean distribution were categorized as urban avoiders (78.57%). Urban avoiders had narrower altitudinal ranges (1,969 ± 524 m) than utilizers (2,287 ± 592m) and dwellers (2,569 ± 654m), and they had the largest proportion of frugivorous and frugivorous-insectivorous species, while urban dwellers had a greater proportion of omnivorous species. Overall, bird species with exclusive Andean distribution and narrow altitudinal ranges are the most threatened by urban sprawl, irrespective of their trophic guild or foraging strata.DiscussionThis study emphasizes the importance of protecting native forest remnants in urban surroundings for conserving native Andean bird species, as urban green spaces in high-density cities may not sufficiently support their long-term survival and reproduction. Also, it highlights the need to identify conservation priorities based on local biodiversity patterns, taking into account that species-specific urban tolerance depends on particular landscape dynamics and species regional pools.

查看原文本刊更多论文

对城市避难者、利用者和居住者进行分类，以确定北安第斯城市鸟类保护的优先事项

导言：根据物种在不同城市化水平下的出现频率对其进行分类，并确定一些能够解释这种差异的物种特征，这对于集中开展保护工作（尤其是在具有高特有率的生物多样性热点地区）来说可能是一个非常有价值的工具。本研究提出了一种半定量、多尺度的方案，根据鸟类在不同城市化水平下的出现频率，将鸟类分为城市避免者、利用者和居住者。我们在哥伦比亚北安第斯城市（麦德林及其周边地区）的 124 个城市点和 15 个非城市点进行了鸟类计数。根据 200 米、500 米和 1000 米的缓冲区，将每个城市点划分为高度城市化（67%-100% 的建筑覆盖率）、中度城市化（34%-66% 的建筑覆盖率）或低度城市化（0%-33% 的建筑覆盖率）：我们对 103 种鸟类进行了分类：49 种为避免进入城市的鸟类，31 种为利用城市的鸟类，23 种为居住在城市的鸟类。有记录的两种哥伦比亚特有物种和七种近特有物种被归类为避免进入城市的鸟类，只有一种近特有物种被归类为利用城市的鸟类（其他三种鸟类数据不足）。此外，大多数仅分布于安第斯山脉的鸟类都被归类为避免进入城市的鸟类（78.57%）。与利用者（2 287 ± 592米）和居住者（2 569 ± 654米）相比，城市回避者的海拔范围（1 969 ± 524米）更窄，它们中食性节俭和食性节俭-食虫物种的比例最大，而城市居住者中杂食物种的比例更大。总体而言，无论其营养行会或觅食阶层如何，仅分布于安第斯山脉且海拔范围狭窄的鸟类受城市扩张的威胁最大。讨论这项研究强调了保护城市周边的原生森林遗迹对保护安第斯山脉原生鸟类的重要性，因为高密度城市中的城市绿地可能不足以支持它们的长期生存和繁殖。此外，它还强调了根据当地生物多样性模式确定保护重点的必要性，同时考虑到特定物种对城市的耐受性取决于特定的景观动态和物种区域库。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution Environmental Science-Ecology

CiteScore

4.00

自引率

6.70%

发文量

1143

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research across fundamental and applied sciences, to provide ecological and evolutionary insights into our natural and anthropogenic world, and how it should best be managed. Field Chief Editor Mark A. Elgar at the University of Melbourne is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics and the public worldwide. Eminent biologist and theist Theodosius Dobzhansky’s astute observation that “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution” has arguably even broader relevance now than when it was first penned in The American Biology Teacher in 1973. One could similarly argue that not much in evolution makes sense without recourse to ecological concepts: understanding diversity — from microbial adaptations to species assemblages — requires insights from both ecological and evolutionary disciplines. Nowadays, technological developments from other fields allow us to address unprecedented ecological and evolutionary questions of astonishing detail, impressive breadth and compelling inference. The specialty sections of Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution will publish, under a single platform, contemporary, rigorous research, reviews, opinions, and commentaries that cover the spectrum of ecological and evolutionary inquiry, both fundamental and applied. Articles are peer-reviewed according to the Frontiers review guidelines, which evaluate manuscripts on objective editorial criteria. Through this unique, Frontiers platform for open-access publishing and research networking, Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution aims to provide colleagues and the broader community with ecological and evolutionary insights into our natural and anthropogenic world, and how it might best be managed.