IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v31y2020i5p1113-1119..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Colony size affects breeding density, but not spatial distribution type, in a seabird

Author

Listed:
  • Sandra Bouwhuis
  • Felix Ballani
  • Marie Bourgeois
  • Dietrich Stoyan
  • John Quinn

Abstract

The spatial distribution of individuals within populations can result in fine-scale density dependence and affect the social environment that is encountered. As such, it is important to quantify within-population spatial structuring and understand the factors that shape it. In this study, we make use of point process statistics to test whether colony size affects the statistical type of spatial nest distribution produced by common terns (Sterna hirundo) breeding at identical manmade rectangular and homogeneous islands of fixed physical size. Comparing subcolonies of variable density both within and across years, we find that inter-nest distances are smaller at higher local and overall breeding density, but that the spatial distribution type does not vary across the observed densities. This suggests that the birds’ main settlement rules do not depend on density. In our case, analyses of fine-scale density dependence or potential social effects therefore do not need to account for between-individual heterogeneity in settlement decision rules or acceptance of these rules. We urge, however, other studies to similarly test for density dependence of the spatial distribution of individuals before undertaking such “downstream” analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandra Bouwhuis & Felix Ballani & Marie Bourgeois & Dietrich Stoyan & John Quinn, 2020. "Colony size affects breeding density, but not spatial distribution type, in a seabird," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 31(5), pages 1113-1119.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:31:y:2020:i:5:p:1113-1119.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/araa058
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:31:y:2020:i:5:p:1113-1119.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.