BIRDS AND CAVITIES: KEY INTERACTIONS TO MANAGE LOGGED FORESTS

VIVANCO CONSTANZA; RUGGERA ROMAN; SCHAAF ALEJANDRO; POLITI NATALIA; RIVERA LUIS

Congreso; Ornithological Congress of the Americas; 2017

text-stroke-width: 0px; ">Comparing interaction networks between cavity-nesting birds and trees, in undisturbedsites (US) and logged sites (LS), is useful for management guidelines of the latter. Wepresent results of an ongoing monitoring of three US?s and four LS?s in piedmont forestsof Salta and Jujuy. We recorded 229 interactions among 14 tree species and 20 birdspecies (five excavators, and 15 non- excavators) at UD?s, and 50 interactions betweeneight tree species and 14 bird species (four excavators and 10 non-excavators) at LS?s.Non-excavators mostly used decay-formed cavities; woodpecker-excavated cavitieswere more often used at LS?s (25% of non-excavator interactions, n=24) than at US?s(10%, n=68). Key tree species based on Importance and Strength indiceswere Calycophyllum multiflorum, Anadenanthera colubrina and "snags" (dead trees) atUS?s, and snags, A. colubrina and Astronium urundeuvaat LS?s. Simulated extinction ofkey tree species disappeared 32% of bird species at US?s, and 46% at LS?s. There werethree interaction modules at US?s; a fourth module of non-excavating birds with decayformed cavities in snags was added at LS?s. Other parameters were similar in SSD vs.SAF: connectance 0.15 vs. 0.16; interaction dominance 0.135 vs. 0.140; and interactionevenness 0.957 vs. 0.962. The exposed differences suggest a shortage of decay-formedcavities in living trees at LS?s, possibly due to the high extraction of C. multiflorum