iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry


Importance of residual trees to birds in regenerating pine plantations

BB Hanberry (1)   , P Hanberry (1), S Demarais (2), JC Jones (2)

iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry, Volume 5, Issue 3, Pages 108-112 (2012)
doi: https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor0616-005
Published: Jun 05, 2012 - Copyright © 2012 SISEF

Research Articles

Pine plantation establishment methods can alter vegetation composition and structure, thus affecting habitat important characteristics for declining early successional bird species. We evaluated eight vegetation characteristics, which varied due to a range of pine plantation establishment methods, to identify vegetation most closely associated with spring bird abundance in the Lower Coastal Plain of southern Mississippi, USA. Presence of residual trees and snags was positively related to relative abundance of 10 of 14 common species present in regenerating stands. Cover of woody vegetation was positively related to relative abundance of 4 species and negatively related to relative abundance of 2 species. For 5 species, increasing pine tree cover had a negative relationship with relative abundance. Residual trees and snags contributed to avian abundance and richness in regenerating pine plantations. Integration of habitat elements, such as residual trees that influence abundance of birds and other wildlife, with intensive pine plantation establishment can aid managers to attain wildlife conservation in intensively managed stands.


Forest Management, Establishment, Habitat, Site Preparation, Snags

Authors’ address

BB Hanberry
P Hanberry
School of Natural Resources, 203 Natural Resources Building, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211 USA
S Demarais
JC Jones
Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Box 9690, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA

Corresponding author



Hanberry BB, Hanberry P, Demarais S, Jones JC (2012). Importance of residual trees to birds in regenerating pine plantations. iForest 5: 108-112. - doi: 10.3832/ifor0616-005

Academic Editor

Marco Borghetti

Paper history

Received: Feb 01, 2012
Accepted: May 05, 2012

First online: Jun 05, 2012
Publication Date: Jun 29, 2012
Publication Time: 1.03 months

Breakdown by View Type

(Waiting for server response...)

Article Usage

Total Article Views: 51343
(from publication date up to now)

Breakdown by View Type
HTML Page Views: 40901
Abstract Page Views: 2170
PDF Downloads: 6891
Citation/Reference Downloads: 65
XML Downloads: 1316

Web Metrics
Days since publication: 4366
Overall contacts: 51343
Avg. contacts per week: 82.32

Article Citations

Article citations are based on data periodically collected from the Clarivate Web of Science web site
(last update: Feb 2023)

Total number of cites (since 2012): 15
Average cites per year: 1.25


Publication Metrics

by Dimensions ©

Articles citing this article

List of the papers citing this article based on CrossRef Cited-by.

Battin J (2004)
When good animals love bad habitats: ecological traps and the conservation of animal populations. Conservation Biology 18: 1482-1491.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Bock CE, Jones ZF (2004)
Avian habitat evaluation: should counting birds count? Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 2: 403-410.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Caine LA, Marion WR (1991)
Artificial addition of snags and nest boxes to slash pine plantations. Journal of Field Ornithology 62: 97-106.
Online | Gscholar
Canfield RH (1941)
Application of the line interception method in sampling range vegetation. Journal of Forestry 39 (4): 388-394.
Cavitt JF, Haas CA (2000)
Brown Thrasher (Toxostoma rufum). In: “The birds of North America: No. 557” (Poole A, Gill F eds). The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, DC, USA.
Conner RN (1978)
Snag management for cavity nesting birds. In: Proceedings of the workshop on “Management of Southern Forests for Nongame Birds” (DeGraaf RM ed). Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-14, USDA Forest Service, Asheville, NC, USA, pp. 120-128.
Davis JW (1983)
Snags are for wildlife. Proceedings of the “Symposium on Snag Habitat Management” (Davis JW, Goodwin GA, Okenfels RA technical coordinators). Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-99, Fort Collins, CO, USDA Forest Service, pp. 4-8.
Dickson JG, Conner RN, Williamson JH (1983)
Snag retention increases bird use of a clear-cut. Journal of Wildlife Management 47: 799-804.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Dwernychuk LW, Boag DA (1972)
Ducks nesting in association with gulls - an ecological trap? Canadian Journal of Zoology 50: 559-563.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Fox TR, Jokela EJ, Allen HL (2007)
The development of pine plantation silviculture in the southern United States. Journal of Forestry 105 (7): 337-47.
Greenlaw JS (1996)
Eastern Towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus). In: “The birds of North America: No. 262” (Poole A, Gill F eds). The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, DC, USA.
Gutzwiller KJ, Riffell SK (2007)
Using statistical models to study temporal dynamics of animal-landscape relations. In: “Temporal dimensions of landscape ecology: wildlife responses to variable resources” (Bissonette JA, Storc I eds). Springer, New York, USA, pp. 93-118.
Hanberry BB (2007)
Birds and small mammals, intensively established pine plantations, and landscape metrics of the Coastal Plain. PhD Thesis, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Mississippi State University, Baton Rouge, USA, pp. 140.
Haynes RW (2002)
Forest management in the 21st century: changing numbers, changing context. Journal of Forestry 100 (2): 38-43.
Online | Gscholar
Holmes RT, Schultz JC (1988)
Food availability for forest birds: effects of prey distribution and abundance on bird foraging. Canadian Journal of Zoology 66: 720-728.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Hopp SL, Kirby A, Boone CA (1995)
White-eyed Vireo (Vireo griseus). In: “The birds of North America: No. 168” (Poole A, Gill F eds). The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, DC, USA.
Johnson AS, Landers JL (1982)
Habitat relationships of summer resident birds in slash pine flatwoods. Journal of Wildlife Management 46: 416-428.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Jones PD, Edwards SL, Demarais S, Ezell AW (2009)
Vegetation community responses to different establishment regimes in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) plantations in southern MS, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 257: 553-560.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Jones PD, Burger LW, Demarais S (2010a)
Habitat value of intensively established pine plantations for northern bobwhite. Journal of Wildlife Management 74: 449-458.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Jones PD, Hanberry BB, Demarais S (2010b)
Managing the southern pine forest-retained wetland interface for wildlife diversity: research priorities. Wetlands 30: 381-391.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Lautenschlager RA (1993)
Response of wildlife to forest herbicide applications in northern coniferous ecosystems. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 23: 2286-2299.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Lohr SM, Gauthreaux SA, Kilgo JC (2002)
Importance of coarse woody debris to avian communities in loblolly pine forests. Conservation Biology 16: 767-777.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Martin TE (1988)
Habitat and area effects on forest bird assemblages: is nest predation an influence? Ecology 69: 74-84.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Martin TE (1995)
Avian life history evolution in relation to nest sites, nest predation, and food. Ecological Monographs 65: 101-127.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Nagy LR, Holmes RT (2004)
Factors influencing fecundity in migratory songbirds: is nest predation the most important? Journal of Avian Biology 35: 487-491.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Orians GH, Wittenberger JF (1991)
Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection. American Naturalist 137: S29-S49.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Panjabi AO, Dunn EH, Blancher PJ, Hunter WC, Altman B, Bart J, Beardmore CJ, Berlanga H, Butcher GS, Davis SK, Demarest DW, Dettmers R, Easton W, Gomez de Silva Garza H, Iñigo-Elias EE, Pashley DN, Ralph CJ, Rich TD, Rosenberg KV, Rustay CM, Ruth JM, Wendt JS, Will TC (2005)
The partners in flight handbook on species assessment. Version 2005. Partners in Flight Technical Series No. 3, Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory website.
Online | Gscholar
Pulliam HR (1988)
Sources, sinks, and population regulation. American Naturalist 132: 652-661.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Robertson BA, Hutto RL (2006)
A framework for understanding ecological traps and an evaluation of existing evidence. Ecology 87: 1075-1085.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Robinson SK, Holmes RT (1984)
Effects of plant species and foliage structure on the foraging behavior of forest birds. The Auk 101: 672-684.
Online | Gscholar
Santillo DJ, Brown PW, Leslie DM (1989)
Response of songbirds to glyphosate-induced habitat changes on clearcuts. Journal of Wildlife Management 53: 64-71.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Steele BB (1993)
Selection of foraging and nesting sites by black-throated Blue warblers: their relative influence on habitat choice. Condor 95: 568-579.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Van Horne B (1983)
Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality. Journal of Wildlife Management 47: 893-901.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Verner J (1985)
Assessment of counting techniques. In: “Current Ornithology: Volume 2” (Johnston RF ed). Plenum Press, New York, USA, pp. 247-302.
Weldon AJ, Haddad NM (2005)
The effects of patch shape on Indigo Buntings: evidence for an ecological trap. Ecology 86: 1422-1431.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Wiens JA (1981)
Scale problems in avian censusing. In: “Studies in Avian Biology 6” (Ralph CJ, Scott, JM eds). Cooper Ornithological Society, Lawrence, Kansas, USA, pp. 513-521.
Wiens JA, Rotenberry JT, Van Horne B (1986)
A lesson in the limitations of field experiments: shrubsteppe birds and habitat alteration. Ecology 67: 365-376.
CrossRef | Gscholar

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. More info