USGS ScienceSearch

Geology topics

L. Wes Burger

Publications and source records attributed to L. Wes Burger.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Avian response to conservation buffers in agricultural landscapes during winter

Native herbaceous vegetation cover along row‐crop field edges (i.e., field buffers) increases breeding densities of many bird species. However, the effect of field buffers on bird species during the non‐breeding season is less understood. We compared density, avian richness, and avian conservation value on row‐crop fields containing buffers strategically designed for wildlife versus fields without buffers in 3 southeastern U.S. states during winter 2007 and 2008. Fields with buffers were enrolled in U.S. Department of Agriculture, Conservation Reserve Program practice Habitat Buffers for Upland Birds (CP33), which targets restoration of northern bobwhite ( Colinus virginianus ) and other upland bird species. Overall species richness did not differ on fields with buffers versus fields without buffers in 2007, but was 29% greater on fields with buffers in 2008. Swamp sparrows ( Melospiza georgiana ), song sparrows ( M. melodia ), field sparrows ( Spizella pusilla ), and red‐bellied woodpeckers ( Melanerpes carolinus ) had greater densities on fields with buffers compared with fields without buffers. Increasing field‐buffer width did not result in greater bird densities. Our results suggest a small change in primary land use (≈7%) produced a disproportionate population response by some grassland‐dependent and woodland bird species during winter. Because field buffers provide a direct source of winter food and cover resources, they may be a pragmatic means to provide critical non‐breeding habitat with little alteration of existing agricultural systems.

Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi

Provisioning of nestling Dickcissels in native warm-season grass field buffers

We used video cameras in 2008–2009 to record provisioning activities at Dickcissel (Spiza americana) nests in and around Conservation Reserve Program field buffers in north-central Mississippi, USA. We simultaneously observed foraging flight distances of parents. Provisioning rate (P = 0.412), biomass (P = 0.161), and foraging distance (P = 0.159) did not increase with nestling age. Parents delivered larger items to meet demand associated with older nestlings (P = 0.010–0.001). This suggests energetic costs of changes in prey selection were less than costs of increasing the number or distance of provisioning trips. Presence of male helpers increased provisioning rate (P < 0.001) but not biomass (P = 0.992) because males brought smaller prey items (P = 0.001–0.021). Presence of observers 30 m from the nest reduced provisioning rates (P = 0.005) and biomass delivered (P = 0.066). Lack of habitat effects for any aspect of provisioning suggests grass field buffers provided nestling food resources similar to surrounding habitats. Use of continuous video monitoring of nest activity allows well-concealed activities including provisioning and male helping to be directly observed and better quantified.

Mississippi