Next Article in Journal
A Hybrid Deep Learning Model for Early Forest Fire Detection
Next Article in Special Issue
Habitat Composition and Preference by the Malabar Slender Loris (Loris lydekkerianus malabaricus) in the Western Ghats, India
Previous Article in Journal
Can Forest Management Improve Water Retention Conservation Under Climate Change? A Case Study of the Republic of Korea
Previous Article in Special Issue
Monitoring Wildlife Using Camera Traps: Effect of Bait Type in Pine Plantations and Natural Hardwood Stands
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 16
Issue 5
10.3390/f16050861
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Foraging Guilds of Birds in Continuous and Fragmented Forests of Southeast China

by
Yuan Wang
1,
Jiawen Liu
1,
Shuai Gao
1,
Sichun Tong
1,
Zheng Wang
1,* and
Ning Li
2,*
1
College of Life Sciences, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
2
Institute of Applied Ecology, Nanjing Xiaozhuang University, Nanjing 211171, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2025, 16(5), 861; https://doi.org/10.3390/f16050861
Submission received: 25 March 2025 / Revised: 15 May 2025 / Accepted: 20 May 2025 / Published: 21 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wildlife Ecology and Conservation in Forest Habitats)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Habitat fragmentation is one of the main factors leading to changes in bird foraging behavior. Therefore, studying bird diversity, foraging groups, and spatial utilization in fragmented habitats is of great significance for forest bird conservation. This experiment was conducted in the continuous and fragmented forests of Meihua Mountain National Nature Reserve in southeast China. We collected bird foraging behavior data using the distance sampling method and compared the composition of bird foraging groups in the two habitats between October and December 2020 and 2021. The 46 bird species observed in the fragmented habitat belonged to 3 orders and 24 families, forming a total of 8 bird foraging groups. In contrast, the continuous habitat had 45 bird species belonging to 3 orders and 19 families, forming 7 bird foraging groups. Using principal component analysis and log-linear analysis, we demonstrated significant differences in foraging location, foraging substrate, foraging height, and foraging mode between the fragmented and continuous habitats during autumn and winter. Birds in the fragmented habitat tended to pick up food from high tree crown layers, while those in the continuous habitat preferred picking up or exploring food from low shrubs and ground levels. This study revealed that the separation of foraging variables among different groups allows for efficient utilization of foraging space, and foraging behavior is influenced by habitat type. Consequently, there are notable differences in resource utilization within evergreen broad-leaved forests. These results provide valuable scientific insights into how habitats with varying degrees of fragmentation affect biodiversity and species spatial utilization.

1. Introduction

A guild is a group that utilizes habitat resources at the same level of similarity [1]. Root first proposed this concept in the 1960s, and it has since been extensively studied, primarily focusing on the impact of habitat on bird foraging behavior within groups [2,3,4] and the species composition of bird foraging guilds [5,6]. Bird foraging guilds, as an important entry point for studying community ecology and functional diversity, have seen significant progress in multiple dimensions in recent years. Existing research indicates that the composition and structure of foraging groups are highly dependent on habitat characteristics and resource availability. For instance, Pigot et al. found that bird foraging groups in tropical forests exhibit higher functional diversity [7], while Newbold et al. demonstrated that habitat fragmentation leads to a significant reduction in carnivorous and fruit-eating groups [8]. Despite these advances, the dynamic changes of foraging groups across different geographical scales still require further exploration. This study provides theoretical foundations for avian biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management.
Habitat fragmentation is widely recognized as a major driver of global biodiversity loss, exerting profound impacts on ecological communities and species interactions [9]. Avian species, in particular, are among the most vulnerable groups due to their high sensitivity to alterations in habitat configuration and resource availability, which significantly influences their foraging behaviors and guild structures [10]. The transformation of continuous habitats into smaller, isolated patches within fragmented landscapes frequently results in substantial ecological consequences, including disrupted food web dynamics, diminished resource accessibility, and altered species composition [11]. These environmental modifications may trigger cascading effects on avian foraging guilds—ecological groups comprising species that utilize similar food resources through comparable foraging strategies—potentially leading to significant transformations in their structural organization and functional roles within ecosystems.
This study addresses the following key questions: (1) What are the characteristics of bird foraging groups in the fragmented habitat and continuous habitat? (Including similarity in resource utilization, differentiation of ecological niches, mechanisms of competition, coexistence, diversity and stability) (2) What impact does the habitat fragmentation have on the spatial utilization of bird foraging groups?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Meihua Mountain Nature Reserve is located in the southwestern Fujian Province. The vegetation flora transitioned from the southern edge of the subtropical zone to the southern subtropical zone, forming typical subtropical forest vegetation with abundant vegetation types and animal and plant resources. The area of the core zone was 7041.7 km2, the buffer zone was 2443.1 km2, and the experimental zone was 2683.7 km2 [12]. This study selected fragmented habitats in the Yew Ecological Garden and continuous habitats in the Tiger Park as research sites, both conducted within the experimental area.
Yew Ecological Garden as a fragmented habitat (25°16′28″–25°16′29″ N, 116°52′40″–116°52′59″ E) is in Chongtou Natural Village, Meihua Mountain Nature Reserve. The main habitat type around the tourist area is the bamboo forest. Yew Ecological Garden is dominated by evergreen broad-leaved forests with many tall trees. Overall, vegetation cover was relatively high. Taxus. chinensis is the most important tree species in Yew Ecological Garden. The main habitat around the Yew Ecological Garden is bamboo forests and farmland, showing a fragmented distribution. The local protection authorities have increased their efforts to protect the park; for example, the prevention of illegal fruit-picking has been enforced during the ripening period of T. chinensis, however, tourism activities continue to affect its growth environment. There are studies indicating that human interference leading to the continuous loss of natural habitats has an impact on the movement behavior of fruit-eating birds, which in turn affects their dispersal patterns and efficiency of southern Chinese yew seeds [13]. There are many other tall dominant trees in the evergreen broad-leaved forest habitat of Yew Ecological Garden, including Machilus thunbergii, Quercus glauca, and Sloanea sinensis.
The Tiger Park as a continuous habitat (25°17′16″–25°18′47″ N, 116°52′7″–116°52′58″ E) is an ecological tourism scenic spot based on forest landscape. Its location is in the southwestern part of Meihua Mountain Nature Reserve, Fujian Province, mainly distributed in evergreen broad-leaved forests that exhibit a continuous distribution pattern. The plant composition in and around the park is very complex, and the vegetation flora transitions from the southern edge of the subtropical zone to the southern subtropical zone, forming a typical subtropical forest vegetation. The main tree species in the park are Q. glauca, Castanopsis eyrei, and S. sinensis.

2.2. Data Collection

In the autumn and winter of October–December 2020 and October–November 2021, four transects were established using the distance sampling method in Yew Ecological Garden and Tiger Park, respectively. The transects covered evergreen broad-leaved forests in both areas, and each distance was approximately 500 m long. Five cycles of surveys were conducted on each of the two habitats, with each cycle lasting 4 days, for a total of 80 days. Observations were conducted directly using the naked eye and KOWA BD 42 × 8 XD binoculars (Kowa Company, Ltd., Nagoya, Japan) and recording the species and quantity of birds seen and heard 30 m on each side of the sample line. During each survey, we recorded both bird species and their associated foraging behaviors using a timer to record quantitative observations of bird foraging behaviors within the telescope’s line of sight every 30 s. After observing bird foraging activities, the foraging location (Stay away from the trunk; Close to the trunk; Shrub; Ground), foraging substrate (Upper canopy; Middle canopy; Lower canopy; Sprig; Thick stem; Trunk; Ground; Air), foraging height (0–1 m; 1–5 m; 5–10 m; 10–15 m; >15 m), and foraging method (Glean; Hover; Sally; Probe) were recorded [10]. Before collecting the observation results, we measured the diameter at the breast height of the fruit trees.

2.3. Data Analysis

The bird classification system was divided according to the fourth edition of the “Chinese Bird Classification and Distribution List” [14]. We used the Shannon Wiener Diversity Index (H’), Pielou Uniformity Index (J), and Simpson Dominance Index (C) to evaluate the diversity of bird communities at different levels of fragmentation. The Sorensen Similarity Index (S) is used to compare the similarity of bird communities between two habitats with different degrees of fragmentation [15].
We constructed a tree diagram based on the outcomes of k-means clustering analysis, from which the aggregation level can be discerned by examining the Euclidean distance coordinates of each node. To uncover the response patterns of bird foraging strategies to the spatial structure of habitats and assess the relative impact of fragmentation types and intensities on community functional differentiation in two locations, we quantified the consistency between the clustering results of bird communities and the gradient of habitat fragmentation. Furthermore, we performed a log-linear analysis on the foraging variables of birds in the two locations using R, aiming to identify significant interactions and dependencies between habitat types and foraging variables. The percentage matrix data were used for cluster analysis and principal component analysis, and the Shapiro–Wilk test was used to compare the differences in foraging location, foraging substrate, foraging height, and foraging methods between the fragmented habitat and continuous habitat. All data were tested for normality using the Shapiro–Wilk test before further statistical testing, and data processing was performed using R 4.0.2 [16,17].

3. Results

3.1. Composition and Diversity of Foraging Birds

The fragmented habitat was used for data analysis, with 46 bird species belonging to 3 orders and 24 families, and 41 bird species belonging to the Passeriformes order, accounting for 89.13% of the total bird species. There were two species of national second-class wild protected animals: Lophura nycthemera and Garrulax canorus. There were 45 species of birds used for data analysis in the continuous habitat belonging to 3 orders and 19 families, including 38 species of Passeriformes, accounting for 84.09% of the total number of bird species. There are three species of national second-class wild protected animals: the white browed mountain partridge Arborophila gingica, L. nycthemera, and G. canorus. Per the Shannon diversity index and Pielou evenness index, the continuous habitat was more diverse than the fragmented habitat; per the Simpson dominance index, the fragmented habitat was more diverse than the continuous habitat (Table 1).

3.2. Bird Foraging Guilds

We constructed the tree diagram based on the findings of k-means clustering analysis. A lower aggregation level among species suggests more similar foraging behavior patterns and indicates a greater degree of ecological niche overlap, potentially signifying competitive relationships among these species.
Based on the methodology proposed by Holmes et al., the avian community was classified into distinct foraging groups using the average Euclidean distance (đ) between species as the primary classification criterion [18]. At a threshold of đ = 12.25, our analysis revealed differential group partitioning between habitat types: the fragmented habitat was segregated into 8 distinct foraging groups, while the continuous habitat yielded 7 groups. Both habitat types shared six common foraging groups: (1) shrub and ground foraging group, (2) shrub foraging group, (3) ground foraging group, (4) lower canopy foraging group, (5) middle canopy foraging group, and (6) upper canopy foraging group. Notably, the inner trunk foraging group was exclusively identified in the fragmented habitat, representing a unique ecological adaptation to habitat patchiness (Figure 1).

3.3. Important Variables for Dividing Bird Foraging Guilds

The results of the principal component analysis of bird communities in the autumn and winter of the two years (2020 and 2021) showed that the characteristic values of the first two principal components in the fragmented and continuous habitat were both greater than one, with cumulative contribution rates of 70.38% and 75.86% (2020) and 70.13% and 69.64% (2021), respectively.
The principal component analysis (PCA) revealed significant differences and interannual variations in bird foraging strategies between fragmented and continuous habitats. PC1 (explaining variance 39.8%–56.4%) mainly reflects the spatial differentiation of foraging height and substrate: birds in fragmented habitats tend to prefer ground foraging in 2021 (load 0.491), while individuals in continuous habitats prefer mid to high levels (load 0.239) in 2020. PC2 (explaining a cumulative variance of 69.6%–75.9%) highlights the comparison between shrub layer and twig foraging. In 2021, the positive load of shrub foraging in patch habitat (0.431) was significantly higher than that in continuous habitat (−0.500). The interannual variation shows that the foraging strategies of birds in fragmented habitats fluctuate more (such as the reversal of ground foraging load from −0.487 to 0.491), while continuous habitats remain relatively stable. The difference in eigenvalues (with the highest PC1 eigenvalue of 2.632 in 2021) suggest that fragmentation may enhance niche differentiation. Overall, habitat types drive the functional reorganization of bird foraging behaviors by changing resource distribution; and the dynamic response of fragmented habitats is more significant (Table 2).

3.4. Differences in the Utilization of Foraging Space by Birds

The Mosaic plot obtained through the log-linear analysis showed that the ground foraging frequency in fragmented habitats was significantly higher than the independent model’s predicted value (p < 0.001) at the foraging location, while it was significantly lower than the independent model’s predicted value far from the tree trunk. However, the opposite was true in continuous habitats. In terms of foraging methods, the frequency of birds detecting fruits in continuous habitats was significantly higher than the independent model prediction value (p < 0.001), while in fragmented habitats it was significantly lower than the independent model prediction value (p < 0.001), and the other three foraging methods remained consistent with the expected values. On the foraging substrate, the foraging frequency of continuous habitats on the ground was significantly higher than the independent model prediction value (p < 0.001), while it was significantly lower than the independent model prediction value in the upper and lower canopy layers (p < 0.001); but the opposite was true in fragmented habitat. In terms of foraging height, the foraging frequency at ground level in continuous habitats was significantly higher than the predicted value of independent models (p < 0.001); in fragmented habitats, the foraging behavior of H6 (>15 m) almost disappears, which may be related to habitat loss caused by the continuous destruction of tree crowns (Figure 2).

4. Conclusions

The diversity and distribution of birds are strongly influenced by vegetation structure [19]. The Meihua Mountain Nature Reserve, characterized by its evergreen broad-leaved forests, supports high biodiversity with distinct vertical stratification and diverse microhabitats [20], which significantly shape avian community composition and structure [21,22]. In this study, we analyzed foraging guilds using 46 and 45 bird species in fragmented and continuous habitats, respectively. Our results reveal significant differences in foraging locations, mechanisms, vertical stratification, and foraging techniques between the two habitat types. These findings suggest that niche partitioning across multiple foraging dimensions enables optimal spatial resource utilization among avian assemblages. Moreover, the spatial distribution patterns of avian foraging activities show clear correlations with habitat characteristics.
Cluster analysis revealed that fragmented habitats formed eight foraging guilds, one more than the continuous habitats (seven guilds), with the emergence of a unique “inner trunk foraging guild.” This finding contrasts the results reported by Bregman et al. in tropical forests, suggesting that subtropical bird communities exhibit distinct responses to habitat fragmentation [23]. Diversity indices showed that continuous habitats had higher Shannon diversity and evenness, supporting the “habitat heterogeneity hypothesis”. In contrast, the higher Simpson dominance index in fragmented habitats implies that competitive exclusion may dominate community assembly, which aligns with findings by Karp et al. in Neotropical regions [24]. The Sørensen similarity index indicated relatively high community similarity between the two habitat types.
According to the clustering analysis, the bird community in fragmented habitats was divided into eight groups in autumn and winter, and the bird community in continuous habitats was divided into seven groups. There were significant differences in the composition of ground foraging guilds between the two locations; a reason for these differences might be that the fragmented habitat transects were distributed in patch habitats, whereas the continuous habitat transects were distributed in continuous habitats. There are scattered residential areas and roads along the edge of the patches in the fragmented habitat, and human interference is relatively large. However, the continuous habitat has a continuous evergreen broad-leaved forest habitat, which can provide more food and habitat resources for ground foraging bird groups. Within each bird group in both regions, there were birds with very low aggregation levels and very similar foraging space utilization. The potential competitive pressure was also high, which is consistent with existing research results [25,26]. However, utilizing similar resources in a similar manner within the same group does not necessarily indicate significant competition among species [27,28]. In the ground foraging guilds of the two places, the Anthus hodgsoni mainly fed on open surfaces, whereas L. nycthemera was active on forest surfaces with high vegetation coverage. Furthermore, the foraging behavior patterns of L. nycthemera and Bambusicola thoracicus were very similar, but further observation showed that B. thoracicus usually fed on ground clusters near shrubs. B. thoracicus used habitat differences to alleviate competition with L. nycthemera and achieve coexistence. Some studies have found that when the vegetation hierarchy is unclear, multi-layer foraging guilds may appear [26]. For example, Lu et al. conducted a bird survey in the Nonggang karst area of Guangxi and found that 16 bird species fully utilized the foraging space of each layer and were therefore classified as multi-layer foraging guilds [26]. However, this phenomenon was not observed in Meihua Mountain Nature Reserve. Although some canopy foraging guild birds, such as Pycnonotus sinensis and Parus minor, also used foraging positions below the canopy, their main foraging and habitat activities still occurred in the canopy.
The selection of foraging grounds by birds is influenced not only by their dietary preferences but also by the structure of their habitat and the availability of food resources [29]. Such selection can reveal the status, role, and relationships of birds within their ecosystems [30,31]. Our comparison of bird foraging space utilization between fragmented and continuous habitats revealed significant differences in foraging location, substrate, height, and methods between the two areas during autumn and winter. Specifically, birds in the fragmented habitat tended to pick up food from high tree crown layers, while those in the continuous habitat more frequently foraged by picking up or exploring food from low shrubs and ground levels. These differences likely arise because the fragmented habitat was dominated by tall trees, whereas the continuous habitat featured relatively lower tree heights, dense shrubs in some areas, and more complex spatial structures in the middle and lower layers. These findings further demonstrate that birds adapt their foraging behaviors to the vegetation structure of their habitat [32], enabling resource partitioning within evergreen broad-leaved forest communities and facilitating coexistence with species.
This study demonstrates significant differences in avian community composition and species diversity between fragmented and continuous forest habitats in Meihua Mountain, Fujian Province. Our results indicate that habitat fragmentation substantially influences avian foraging guild structure and foraging behaviors, leading to altered resource utilization patterns among bird species. Notably, dominant species exhibited distinct spatial adaptation strategies in response to fragmented habitats. These findings advance our ecological understanding of how habitat fragmentation affects biodiversity and species behavioral ecology. Furthermore, the study provides region-specific insights that can inform conservation strategies and management practices for forest bird populations in fragmented landscapes.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Z.W. and N.L.; methodology, Z.W., J.L., S.G. and N.L.; formal analysis, Y.W. and S.G.; investigation, N.L., Y.W., S.G. and S.T.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.W.; writing—review and editing, Z.W. and N.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant numbers 32171528] and the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [grant numbers BK20221180].

Data Availability Statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the authors upon request.

Acknowledgments

We thank anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Root, R.B. The niche exploitation patern of the blue-gray gnatcatcher. Ecol. Monogr. 1967, 37, 317–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Yilangai, M.R.; Abalaka, J.; Nsor, A.C.; Babale, A.; Karau, S.D.; Ivande, S. Effect of disturbance on bird foraging guilds in a West African dry forest. Afr. J. Ecol. 2023, 61, 461–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kavana, J.D.; Mbije, N.; Sirilo, M.T.; Bupamba, H.C. The spatio-temporal influences of habitat heterogeneity on the community structure of avian foraging guilds in human-dominated landscapes of the East African miombo woodlands. Afr. J. Ecol. 2023, 62, e13237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chen, R.Y.; Li, H.Q.; Zhu, X.D.; Zhou, L.Z.; Wang, Y.Z. Analysis on the foraging guild structure and diversity of waterbirds in Caizi Lake under water level changes during overwintering. BMC Biol. 2024, 41, 77–83. [Google Scholar]
  5. Ding, Z.F.; Liang, J.C.; Hu, Y.M.; Zhou, Z.X.; Sun, H.B.; Liu, L.N.; Liu, H.J.; Hu, H.J.; Si, X.F. Different responses of avian foraging guilds to spatial and environmental factors across an elevation gradient in the central Himalaya. Ecol. Evol. 2019, 9, 4116–4128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Burgess, E.E.; Maron, M. Does the response of bird assemblages to fire mosaic properties vary among spatial scales and foraging guilds? Landsc. Ecol. 2016, 31, 687–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pigot, A.L.; Sheard, C.; Miller, E.T.; Bregman, T.P.; Freeman, B.G.; Roll, U.; Tobias, J.A. Macroevolutionary convergence connects morphological form to ecological function in birds. Nature 2020, 585, 234–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Newbold, T.; Scharlemann, J.P.W.; Butchart, S.H.M.; Şekercioğlu, Ç.H.; Alkemade, R.; Booth, H.; Purves, D.W. Ecological traits affect the response of tropical forest bird species to land-use intensity. Biol. Conserv. 2013, 166, 203–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Fahrig, L. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2003, 34, 487–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sekercioglu, C.H. Bird functional diversity and ecosystem services in tropical forests, agroforests and agricultural areas. J. Ornithol. 2012, 153, 153–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wang, Z.; Chen, Q.E.; Gu, Z.Y.; Tang, N.; Li, N. Effects of landscape features on the structure and function of bird seed dispersal networks in fragmented forests. Forest Ecol. Manag. 2023, 545, 121251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Zeng, C. The Structural Composition, Spatial and Temporal Disparities of Wintering Avian Mixed-species Flocks in Meihuashan National Natural Reserve, Fujian Province. Master’s Thesis, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China, 30 June 2021. [Google Scholar]
  13. Li, N.; Wang, Z.; Lu, C.H.; Xiong, T.S.; Fu, W.Y.; Wu, J.P. Seed foraging and dispersal of Chinese yew (Taxus chinensis var. mairei) by frugivorous birds within fragmented habitats. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2014, 34, 1681–1689. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zheng, G.M. A Checklist on the Classification and Distribution of the Birds of China, 4th ed.; Science Press: Beijing, China, 2023; pp. 1–512. [Google Scholar]
  15. Ma, K.P.; Liu, M.Y. Methods for Measuring Biodiversity in Biological Communities Iα Methods for Measuring Alpha Diver-sity (Part 2). Biodivers. Sci. 1994, 4, 231–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rosenblad, A. Correction: Book Review of Extending the Linear Model with R: Generalized Linear, Mixed Effects and Nonparametric Regression Models by Faraway. Psychometrika 2024, 89, 1116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Charrad, M.; Ghazzali, N.; Boiteau, V.; Niknafs, A. NbClust: An R Package for Determining the Relevant Number of Clusters in a Data Set. J. Stat. Softw. 2014, 61, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Holmes, R.T.; Bonney, R.E.; Pacala, S.W. Guild structure of the Hubbard Brook bird community: A multivariate approach. Ecology 1979, 60, 512–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kornan, M.; Adamik, P. Foraging guild structure within a primaeval mixed forest bird assemblge: A comparison of two con-cepts. Community Ecol. 2007, 8, 133–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Fang, J.Y.; Wang, X.P.; Shen, Z.H.; Tang, Z.Y.; He, J.S. Methods and protocols for plant community inventory. Biodivers. Sci. 2009, 17, 533–548. [Google Scholar]
  21. Liu, B.; Zhou, L.Z.; Wang, W.G.; Shen, S.B.; Han, D.M. Seasonal Dynamics of the Avian Guild Structure of Mountain Second-ary Forest in Dabieshan Mountain. Zool. Res. 2009, 30, 277–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Adams, B.T.; Matthews, S.N. Diverse temperate forest bird assemblages demonstrate closer correspondence to plant species composition than vegetation structure. Ecography 2019, 42, 1752–1764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bregman, T.P.; Lees, A.C.; Seddon, N.; MacGregor, H.E.; Darski, B.; Aleixo, A.; Bonsall, M.B.; Tobias, J.A. Species interactions regulate the collapse of biodiversity and ecosystem function in tropical forest fragments. Ecology 2016, 97, 1782–1792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Karp, D.S.; Frishkoff, L.O.; Echeverri, A.; Zook, J.; Juárez, P.; Chan, K.M.A. Agriculture erases climate-driven β-diversity in Neotropical bird communities. Glob. Change Biol. 2018, 24, 338–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Wells Harry, B.M.; Crego, R.D.; Opedal, Ø.H.; Khasoha, L.M.; Alston, J.M.; Reed, C.G.; Weiner, S.; Kurukura, S.; Hassan, A.A.; Namoni, M.; et al. Experimental evidence that effects of megaherbivores on mesoherbivore space use are influenced by species’ traits. J. Anim. Ecol. 2018, 90, 2510–2522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Lu, Z.; Yang, G.; Zhao, D.D.; Wu, Y.H.; Meng, Y.J. Guild structure of forest breeding bird community in Nonggang Nature Reserve of Guangxi. Zool. Res. 2013, 34, 601–609. [Google Scholar]
  27. Pérez-Crespo, M.J.; Fonseca, J.; Pineda-López, R.; Palacios, E.; Lara, C. Foraging guild structure and niche characteristics of waterbirds in an epicontinental lake in Mexico. Zool. Stud. 2013, 52, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Chatterjee, A.; Adhikari, S.; Pal, S.; Mukhopadhyay, S.K. Foraging guild structure and niche characteristics of waterbirds win-tering in selected sub-Himalayan wetlands of India. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 108, 105693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Huang, J.; Yuan, B.D.; Yuan, Y.F. foraging Spatial Niche and Diet of Zosterops japonicus in Spring. Chin. J. Wildl. 2017, 38, 76–80. [Google Scholar]
  30. Wang, W.Y.; Guo, Y.S.; Hu, J.C.; Sun, L.H.; Zhu, L. Preliminary Study on foraging and Spatial Niche of Pycnonotus sinensis in Spring. Sichuan J. Zool. 2005, 4, 28–30. [Google Scholar]
  31. Huan, L.; Zhang, M.X.; Yang, X.J.; Cui, L.W.; Jin, R.C. The breeding biology of Red-Whiskered Bulbul (Pycnonotus jocosus) in Xishuangbanna, southwest China. Zool. Res. 2015, 36, 233–240. [Google Scholar]
  32. Zheng, Y.X. Research on Bird foraging Guilds in Tiantong National Forest Park, Zhejiang Province. Master’s Thesis, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China, 30 June 2018. [Google Scholar]
Forests 16 00861 g001
Figure 1. Cluster dendrogram of bird community foraging guild in fragmented habitat and continuous habitat. (a) The fragmented habitat Autumn and Winter 2020; (b) The fragmented habitat Autumn and Winter 2021; (c) The continuous habitat Autumn and Winter 2020; (d) The continuous habitat Autumn and Winter 2021.
Figure 1. Cluster dendrogram of bird community foraging guild in fragmented habitat and continuous habitat. (a) The fragmented habitat Autumn and Winter 2020; (b) The fragmented habitat Autumn and Winter 2021; (c) The continuous habitat Autumn and Winter 2020; (d) The continuous habitat Autumn and Winter 2021.
Forests 16 00861 g001
Forests 16 00861 g002
Figure 2. Log-linear analysis of habitat types and foraging variables.
Figure 2. Log-linear analysis of habitat types and foraging variables.
Forests 16 00861 g002
Table 1. Diversity of foraging bird communities in fragmented habitat and continuous habitat.
Table 1. Diversity of foraging bird communities in fragmented habitat and continuous habitat.
SiteNumber of SpeciesShannon Diversity Index (H’)Pielou Uniformity Index (E’)Simpson Dominance Index (C’)Sorensen Similarity Index
Fragmented habitat463.0230.790.090.69
Continuous habitat453.3080.8740.048
Table 2. Principal component analysis of bird foraging variables.
Table 2. Principal component analysis of bird foraging variables.
Variables of Foraging GuildFragmented HabitatContinuous Habitat
2020202120202021
PC1PC2PC1PC2PC1PC2PC1PC2
Foraging locationStay away from the trunk0.293−0.217−0.217−0.289−0.2110.230−0.1840.273
Close to the trunk0.195−0.195−0.056−0.255−0.1080.249−0.0950.298
Shrub−0.0010.519−0.2190.431−0.175−0.425−0.207−0.500
Ground−0.487−0.1070.4910.1130.494−0.0540.486−0.071
Foraging substrateUpper canopy0.145−0.139−0.040−0.123−0.1100.142−0.0400.098
Middle canopy0.136−0.069−0.123−0.176−0.1050.079−0.1190.148
Lower canopy0.190−0.117−0.121−0.110−0.0810.050−0.1100.165
Sprig0.0130.481−0.2180.432−0.171−0.436−0.205−0.496
Thick stem−0.0130.035−0.001−0.001−0.0040.010−0.001−0.004
Trunk0.017−0.0860.012−0.134−0.0220.206−0.0090.162
Ground−0.488−0.1060.4910.1130.493−0.0520.486−0.071
Air0.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.000
Foraging height0–1 m−0.0300.295−0.0440.111−0.046−0.279−0.040−0.276
1–5 m0.1360.305−0.2550.378−0.3050.044−0.331−0.041
5–10 m0.167−0.160−0.077−0.099−0.1150.239−0.0990.329
10–15 m0.138−0.220−0.071−0.351−0.0260.047−0.0150.058
>15 m0.076−0.114−0.045−0.1520.0000.0000.0000.001
Foraging methodsGlean0.0650.196−0.0920.175−0.076−0.400−0.082−0.171
Probe−0.098−0.1620.102−0.1500.0990.3670.0970.145
Hover0.027−0.025−0.008−0.019−0.0220.031−0.0150.026
Sally0.005−0.008−0.002−0.006−0.0010.0020.0000.000
Eigenvalue2.0661.8112.6321.3362.3461.6542.1431.849
Accumulated variance%44.20070.38039.77070.13056.44075.86044.43069.640
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, Y.; Liu, J.; Gao, S.; Tong, S.; Wang, Z.; Li, N. Foraging Guilds of Birds in Continuous and Fragmented Forests of Southeast China. Forests 2025, 16, 861. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16050861

AMA Style

Wang Y, Liu J, Gao S, Tong S, Wang Z, Li N. Foraging Guilds of Birds in Continuous and Fragmented Forests of Southeast China. Forests. 2025; 16(5):861. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16050861

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Yuan, Jiawen Liu, Shuai Gao, Sichun Tong, Zheng Wang, and Ning Li. 2025. "Foraging Guilds of Birds in Continuous and Fragmented Forests of Southeast China" Forests 16, no. 5: 861. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16050861

APA Style

Wang, Y., Liu, J., Gao, S., Tong, S., Wang, Z., & Li, N. (2025). Foraging Guilds of Birds in Continuous and Fragmented Forests of Southeast China. Forests, 16(5), 861. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16050861

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop