of the Azov-Black Sea Ornithological Station
Branta Cover Language of the article: Russian Cite: Shupova, T. V., Koniakin, S. N. (2020). Formation of nesting bird communities in parks on the gradient of anthropic load in Kiev metropolis. Branta: Transactions of the Azov-Black Sea Ornithological Station, 23, 41-59 Keywords: nesting bird communities, α-diversity, anthropic load, ecological groups, synanthropization, parks, Kiev Published online: 17.12.2020 Views: 839 Branta copyright Branta license

Branta Issues > Issue №23 (2020)

Branta: Transactions of the Azov-Black Sea Ornithological Station, 41-59


Formation of nesting bird communities in parks on the gradient of anthropic load in Kiev metropolis

T. V. Shupova, S. N. Koniakin

Institute for Evolutionary Ecology of the NAS of Ukraine

In settlements, safe places for birds nesting and feeding need to be created. The purpose of the work is to assess the state and identify vectors of the formation of nesting bird communities in parks under the pressure of anthropic load in the metropolis. In parks of Kyiv 62 species of birds nest. Such faunogenetic complexes like European nemoral (25.0–53.3%), Desert-mountain (12.0–27.8%) and Forest-steppe (6.9–25.0%) prevail. The number of community species in each of parks is 49–12, the average nesting density is 0.08±0.02–0.9±0.19 pairs / ha, and the dispersion is 0.12–1.62. With the combination of anthropic load on biotopes of more than 140 points with a small area of parks (2.0–16.5 ha), the species composition of communities decreases, and the average nesting density and density dispersion increase. Dominated by density: Parus major, Columba livia, Sturnus vulgaris, Turdus merula, Passer domesticus, Passer montanus, Fringilla coelebs, Columba palumbus, Apus apus, Ficedula albicollis, Erithacus rubecula, Turdus pilaris. All birds in communities are obligate synanthropes (12.9%; n=62) or hemisinanthropes. Obligate synanthropes are distributed in communities of 0-7 species. According to the gradient of increasing anthropic load on parks, logarithmic trends show a slight increase in the percentage share of obligate synanthropes in the species composition and in the number of breeding pairs. 47–70% nest on trees, 0–14.3% in shrubs, 0–13.0% on ground and in buildings. In parks, birds (16–38% of the species composition), in addition to using species-specific stations, nest in the cavities of buildings. Such species like Motacilla alba L., Sturnus vulgaris, Ficedula albicollis, Muscicapa striata Pallas, Erithacus rubecula, Parus major, Passer domesticus, Passer montanus nest in this way. Due to this nesting strategy, the need of the birds in hollows and the dependence on the woodpeckers in the community decreases. High parameters of the Shannon index (1.51–3.14) and Pielou index (0.61–0.95) were revealed, with low data of the Berger-Parker index (0.15–0.61). With an anthropic load of more than 160 points, there is a sharp decrease in species diversity, evenness of species, and increased dominance pressure. Cluster analysis showed the division of bird communities into similarity groups according to the area of the parks, the proximity of parks to the outskirts of the city and large forest tracts of the area and specifics of the anthropic load.

Read the paper in a PDF file
  1. Amrhein, V. (2013). Wild bird feeding (probably) affects avian urban ecology. In Avian Urban Ecology. Oxford: Oxford University Press [in English]. 
  2. Belik, V. P. (2006) Faunogenetic structure of the Palearctic Avifauna. Entomological Review, 86 (1), 15–31 [in English]. 
  3. Bibby, C., Burgess, N., Hill, D., & Mustoe, S. (2000). Bird census techniques (2nd ed.). London: Academic Press [in English].
  4. Blinkova, O., & Shupova, T. (2017). Bird communities and vegetation composition in the urban forest ecosystem: correlations and comparisons of diversity indices. Ekológia (Bratislava), 36 (4), 366–387 [in English].
  5. Blinkova, O., & Shupova, T. (2018). Bird communities and vegetation composition in natural and semi-natural forests of megalopolis: correlations and comparisons of diversity indices (Kyiv, Ukraine). Ekológia (Bratislava), 37 (3), 259–288. [in English].
  6. Camprodon, J., & Brotons, L. (2006). Effects of undergrowth clearing on the bird communities of the Northwestern Mediterranean Coppice Holm oak forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 221 (1–3), 72–82 [in English].
  7. Croci, S., Buter, A., & Clergeau, Ph. (2008). Does urbanization filter birds on the basis of their biological traits? Condor, 110 (2), 223–240 [in English].
  8. Ditchkoff, S. S., Saalfeld, S. T., & Gibson, C. J. (2006). Animal behavior in urban ecosystems: Modifications due to human-induced stress. Urban Ecosystem, 9, 5–12 [in English].
  9. Felton, A., Hedwall, P. O., Lindbladh, M., Nyberg, T., Felton, A. M., Holmström, E., ... Brunet, J. (2016). The biodiversity contribution of wood plantations: Contrasting the bird communities of Sweden’s protected and production oak forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 365 (1), 51–60 [in English].
  10. Gaychenko, V.A., & Shupova, T.V. (2019). Transformation of the community of nesting birds in the process of reorganization of the forest ecosystem into a park. Ecology and Noospherology, 30(1), 3–13 [in Russian].
  11. Gayduk, V. E., & Abramova, I. V. (2013). Ecology of birds of south-west of Belorussia Brest. [in Russian].
  12. Grachik, R., Fedorenko, A. P., Loskot, V. M., & Chuprin, S. L. (1975). Introduction of the (Turdus merula L.) town population from Poznan into Kiev. Vestnik Zoologii, 3, 29–32 [in Russian].
  13. Grimm, N. B., Faeth, S. H., Golubiewski, N. E., Redman, C. L., Wu, J., Bai, X., & Briggs, J. M. (2008). Global change and the ecology of cities. Science, 319 (5864), 756−760 [in English].
  14. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. (4th ed.). (2004). Adopted by the International Union of Biological Sciences. Second revised edition of the Russian translation. Moscow. [in Russian].
  15. Kharchenko, V. A. (2015). Population of birds of the main forest biotopes in the southern Sikhote-Alin. Contemporary Problems of Ecology, 8 (4), 464 [in English].
  16. Klausnittser, B. (1990). Ecology of urban fauna. Moscow: Mir [in Russian].
  17. Konishchuk, V. V., Mosyakin, S. L, Tsarenko, P. M., Kondratyuk, S. Ya., Borisova, O. V., Virchenko, V. M., ...Shupova, T. V. (2012). Red Book of the Kyiv region. Agroecological journal, 3, 46–58 [in Ukrainian].
  18. Lawlor, K., & Meng, Y. (2019). The changing trend in songbirds’ abundance, variety and physical condition in Connecticut’s forestry habitat. Forestry Studies, 70(1), 17–30 [in English].
  19. Luniak, M., & Mulsow, R. (1988). Ecological parameters in urbanization of the European Blackbird. Acta XIX Congr. Intern. Orn. Ottawa, 2, 1787–1793 [in English].
  20. Lykov, E. L. (2009). Breeding biology of the Woodpigeon in conditions of city (by the example of Kaliningrad). Berkut, 18 (1-2), 54–68 [in Russian].
  21. Lykov, E. L. (2011). Nesting ecology of the Blackbird (Turdus merula) in Kaliningrad. Ornithologia, 36, 2011–2027 [in Russian].
  22. Megurran, E. (1992). Ecological diversity and its estimation. Moscow: Mir [in Russian].
  23. Melnikov, E. Yu. (2014). Woodpecker (Piciformes) of natural and urban ecosystems: spatial distribution, reproduction and features of the choice of food objects (PhD Thesis). Saratov. [in Russian].
  24. Møller, A. P., Díaz, M., Flensted-Jensen, E., Grim, T., Ibáñez-Álamo, J. D., Jokimäki, J., ...Tryjanowski, P. (2015). Urbanized birds have superior establishment success in novel environments. Oecologia, 178(3), 943–950 [in English]. 
  25. Nature Reserve Fund of Ukraine: areas and objects of national importance. (2009). Ukraine Ministry of Environmental Protection. Kyiv: Center for Environmental Education and Information [in Ukrainian].
  26. Novikov, G. A. (1953). Field studies in ecology of surface-dwelling vertebrates. Moscow, Sov. Nauka. [in Russian].
  27. Paker, Y., Yom-Tov, Y., Alon-Mozes, T., & Barnea, A. (2014). The effect of plant richness and urban garden structure on bird species richness, diversity and community structure. Landscape and Urban Planning, 122, 186–195 [in English].
  28. Robles, H., Ciudad, C., & Matthysen, E. (2011). Tree-cavity occurrence, cavity occupation and reproductive performance of secondary cavity-nesting birds in oak forests: The role of traditional management practices. Forest Ecology and Management, 261 (8), 1428–1435 [in English]. 
  29. Romanenko, O. V., Arsan, O. M., Kipnis, L. S., & Sytnyk, Y. M. (2015). Ecological problems of the Kyiv water bodies and adjacent territories. Кyiv: Naukova Dumka Press [in Ukrainian].
  30. Shirihai, H., Gargallo, G., & Helbig, A. (2001). Sylvia Warblers. In Ch. Helm (Ed.), Identification, taxonomy and phylogeny of the Genus Sylvia. London: Black [in English].
  31. Shupova, T. V. (2001). On the current state of abundance of the syrup (Coracias garrulus). Visnyk of Dnipropetrovsk University: Biology, ecology, 9 (2), 119–123 [in Russian].
  32. Shupova, T. V. (2014). Avifauna in settlement zone of Kiev. The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University: Biology, 83–91 [in Russian].
  33. Shupova, T. V. (2014). Adaptations of black redstart (Phoenicurus ochruros S.G. Gmelin) to inhabit in Kyiv city metropolis. Studia Biologica, 8 (1), 187–196 [in Ukrainian].
  34. Shupova, T. V. (2015). Adaptation of the birds the order Columbiformes to the transformation of habitat. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv: Biology, 69, 46–51 [in Ukrainian]. 
  35. Tomiałojc, L. (2007). Changes in the avifauna in two parks in Legnica after 40 years. Notatki Ornitologiczne, (4), 232–245 [in English].
  36. Tomiałojc, L. (1976). The urban population of the Woodpigeon Сolumba palumbus Linnaeus, 1758, in Europe – its origin, increase and distribution. Acta Zoologica Cracoviensia, 21 (18), 585–632 [in English].
  37. Zakharov, R. A. (2002). Ecology and bird population of parks of a large city on the example of Moscow (PhD Thesis). Moscow. [in Russian].