Citation
Rice Creek Research Reports, 2008

Material Information

Title:
Rice Creek Research Reports, 2008
Series Title:
Rice Creek Research
Creator:
Weber, Peter ( author )
Ralston, Joel ( author )
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Rice Creek Field Station
SUNY Oswego

Notes

Abstract:
Contains the Report: "Breeding Birds in Old Fields in Central New York State in Relation to Field Mowing"
General Note:
The Rice Creek Associates (RCA) small grants program in support of research at Rice Creek Field Station enters its thirteenth year in 2008. The financial support supplied by Rice Creek Associates continues to be supplemented by the College Provost and by the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs. Most of the projects supported by this program have been conducted by faculty members or other professional scientists and have employed undergraduate students as research assistants. Several independent student research projects have been completed within the larger context of the RCA supported research efforts. In addition to student presentations and reports for courses and programs at SUNY Oswego and reports in previous issues of Rice Creek Research Reports (see below), RCA supported research has been reported in poster and oral presentations at numerous local, national, and international professional conferences and in professional publications (see bibliography on inside back cover). In this issue, Peter Weber and Joel Ralston report on a preliminary study of the impact of habitat management practices on bird nesting behavior in the open fields at Rice Creek Field Station. This project was a direct offshoot of the work reported by Weber, Preston, Duglos and Nelson in a paper due to be published in the April, 2008, issue of the Natural Areas Journal.---Andrew Nelson, Director of Rice Creek Field Station
General Note:
Submitted by Shannon Pritting (pritting@oswego.edu) on 2011-06-06.
General Note:
Made available in DSpace on 2011-06-06T22:58:24Z (GMT).
General Note:
Rice Creek Associates; SUNY Oswego Office of Research and Sponsored Programs; SUNY Oswego Provost's Office

Record Information

Source Institution:
SUNY Oswego
Holding Location:
SUNY Oswego
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Related Items

Related Item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1951/51324

OswegoDL Membership

Aggregations:
Rice Creek Research

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

RICE CREEK RESEARCH REpORTS 2008 RICE CREEK FIELD STATION OSWEGO, STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK OSWEGO, NEW YORK 13126 FEBRUARY 8, 2008 ..

PAGE 2

Rice Creek Research Reports 2008 The Rice Creek Associates (RCA) small grants program in support of research at Rice Creek Field Station enters its thil1eenth year in 2008. The financial support supplied by Rice Creek Associates continues to be supplemented by the College Provost and by the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs. Most of the projects supported by this program have been conducted by faculty members or other professional scientists and have employed undergraduate students as research assistants. Several independent student research projects have been completed within the larger context of the RCA supported research efforts. In addition to student presentations and reports for courses and programs at SUNY Oswego and reports in previous issues of Rice Creek Research Reports ( see below), RCA supported research has been reported in poster and oral presentations at numerous local, national, and international professional conferences and in professional publications (see bibliography on inside back cover). In this issue, Peter Weber and Joel Ralston report on a preliminary study of the impact of habitat management practices on bird nesting behavior in the open fields at Rice Creek Field Station. This project was a direct offshoot of the work reported by Weber, Preston, Duglos and Nelson in a paper due to be published in the April, 2008, issue ofthe Natural Areas Journal. Andrew P. Nelson, Director Rice Creek Field Station January 30, 2008 Contents of Previous Issues Rice Creek Research Reports 1996 Butterfly Populations at Rice Creek Field Station: A Progress Report 1 Survey of Small Mammal Populations at Rice Creek Field Station 11 Flora of Rice Creek Field Station 15 Overview of Recent Herpetological Research at RCFS 16 Rice Creek Research Reports 1997 Butterfly Populations at Rice Creek Field Station: The 1997 Season 1 Survey of the Amphibian and Earthworm Species at Rice Creek Field Station 16 Flora of Rice Creek Field Station 20 A Study of Bird Nesting on Rice Pond and Adjoining Habitats 21 A Survey of Small Mammal Populations at Rice Creek Field Station (Year 2) 30 Rice Creek Research Reports 1998 Variability of Electrical Resistivity at Rice Creek Field Station, Oswego, New York: Implications for the Distribution of Groundwater 1 A Survey of Small Mammal Populations at Rice Creek Field Station (Year 3) 20 Butterfly Populations at Rice Creek Field Station: The 1998 Season 25 Rice Creek Research Reports 1999 2000 Butterfly Populations at Rice Creek Field Station: The 1999 Season 2 The Impact ofPrecipitation on Electrical Properties ofthe Shallow Subsurface at Rice Creek Field Station: Experimental Design and Fires Results 11 A Survey of Small Mammal Populations at Rice Creek Field Station (Year 4) 23

PAGE 3

Breeding Birds in Old Fields in Central New York State in Relation to Field Mowing Peter G. Weber Emeritus Professor of Biology SUNY Oswego Oswego, NY 13126 Joel Ralston* Department ofBiological Sciences SUNY Oswego Oswego, NY 13126 *Present Address: Department of Biological Sciences, University at Albany, State University ofNew York

PAGE 4

Introduction The study of breeding bird communities in old field (shrubland) ecosystems has yielded important insights into changes that OCCllr to avian communities during secondary succession. Early cross-sectional studies showed that breeding bird density and species diversity increases with ecological age from bare ground of recently abandoned farm fields (Kendeigh, 1946; Kendeigh, 1948; Odum, 1950; Johnston & Odum, 1956) or strip mining operations (Karr, 1968) through shrub seral stages to forest. Later studies, both cross-sectional (Shugart & James, 1973; Kricher, 1973; Lanyon, 1981; May, 1982; Bollinger, 1995) and longitudinal (Lanyon, 1981) have supported these findings. These studies have also shown that most bird species are to varying degrees limited in breeding to one or two old field seral stages, although some may breed over several stages. Recent studies of old field birds have focused on threats to their populations (Askins, 2001; Hunter, Buehler, Canterbury, Confer & Hamel, 2001). With a decline in farming practices and an increase in urbanization (Hart, 1968, Kambly, 2006, Numbers, ND), old field specialists have suffered declines in populations as shrublands disappear (Askins, 1998; Dettmers, 2003). Shrublands are second only to grasslands in the proportion of species with significant population declines (500/0 vs. 70% for grassland birds). Askins (1998) presents data showing statistically significant population declines between 1966 and 1994 for brown thrasher (Toxostoma rufum), golden-winged warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera), chestnut-sided warbler (Dendroica pensylvanica) indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea), and field sparrow (Spizella pus ilia) east of the Mississippi River. To this list Dettmers (2003) adds eastern towhee (Pipilo erythropthalamus) and American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis) with significant declines. Each of these species occurs in the managed fields on Rice Creek Field Station (RCFS) grounds as possible or confirmed breeders. Most sites in temperate portions of the world, if not maintained by mowing, grazing or burning, would succeed to deciduous or mixed forest. Concomitantly, bird populations on a site would change as meadow-adapted species are replaced by shrub adapted and eventually by woodland-adapted species (Johnston & Odum, 1956; Shugart & James, 1973; Lanyon, 1981; Bollinger, 1995; Yahner, 2003). In order to maintain habitat diversity, the personnel at RCFS keep three fields at various early stages of old field succession by a schedule of mowing. As a field site changes vegetatively in years following mowing so should its avian community We wished to docllment these changes through the field station's mowing cycle. The majority of mowing studies have investigated the effects on grassland birds in prairie regions. Dale, Martin and Taylor (1997) found numbers of Sprague's pipit (Anthus sprageuii) and western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) to increase the year following mowing. However, LeConte's sparrows (Ammodramus leconteii), savannah sparrows (Passerculus sanwitchensis) and Baird's sparrows (A. bardii) decreased following mowing. Hom and Koford (2000) found sedge wrens (Cistothorus platensis), LeConte's sparrows and red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoenicus) declined following mowing while savannah sparrows became more abundant. Johnson, IgI & Schwartz (in Johnson 2000) fOllnd that three shortgrass species responded favorably in the year following haying. However, many more grassland species responded with reduced breeding densities following haying. Walk and Warner (2000) compared breeding 1

PAGE 5

densities of five species of grassland specialists between mowed, hayed, burned, grazed and areas of warm and cool-season grasses. Overall abundance was lowest In recently burned cool-season grassland areas. Swengel and Swengel (2001) found haying significantly. increased the abundance ofHenslow's (Ammodramus henslowii) and (A. savannarum) compared to burning, but had no effect on'dickcissel (Spiza dmericana) in southwestern Missouri tallgrass prairies. Other workers have investigated the effects of mowing on birds in crop fields. Johnston and Odum (1956), while not focused on mowing per se, found a slight decline in grasshopper sparrow breeding density following mowing of an oat field. Bollinger, Bollinger and Gavin (1990) found a 29-45% mowing-induced mortality in bobolinks (Dolichonyx oryzivous) in upstate New York hayfields. Frawley and Best (1991) found the absence of four species, the reduction in two species and no effect in two species following mowing in Iowa alfalfa fields. Few studies concerning the effects of mowing on old field bird populations per se exist and none have investigated changes during a rotational mowing cycle as in our study. The only systematic study of breeding birds on RCFS grounds has been by Weeks (1998). Weeks docunlented the kinds and numbers of birds breeding in the immediate wetlands surrounding Rice Pond. In a similar vein we set out to document the kinds and number of birds breeding in managed field sectors. We were most interested in how the diversity and numbers of breeders might change dllring the four-year mowing cycle. Moreover, Ollr interest was also in how these changes might be related to sector characteristics (e.g. area, vegetation height, length of edge, etc.). Methods Study Area Rice Creek Field Station is located in the Town of Oswego, Oswego County, New York. The properties extend from approximately 43'34" to 43'33" Nand 76'33" to 76'25" W. The three maintained fields in which we investigated breeding birds are located from east to west from the top of a drumlin, at 104 nl elevation, to a low of 83 m at Rice Creek (Figure 1). The upper alld middle fields are divided into sectors, each which is on a four-year mowing cycle (Table 1, Figure 2). We considered these sectors as distinct sampling areas. There are four such sectors in the upper field and nine in tIle middle field. Younger sectors in the upper and middle fields are contiguous to older sectors. The lower field is not sub-divided into sectors and is mowed in its entirety every four years; we considered it as one sector. Mowing with an International Harvester Brush Hog to an approximate height of 18 cm occurred each year of the study in early August; leaving cut forbs, grasses and woody stems in place. Mowing in late sumnler minimizes disturbance to most nesting species (Mass Audubon, 2007, Sample & Mossman, 1997). Following Reschke's (1990) classification (as revised in Edinger, Evans et aI, 2002), in the first and second year after mowing, sectors can be COllsidered as successional old fields; in the third and fourth year after mowing most sectors meet her criteria of a successional shrub land. Sectors varied in area (0.15 ha to 0.40 ha), in length of wooded periphery (25.86 m to 296.3 m) and in percent of coverage by permanent woody vegetation (0% to 38%) (Table 1). Eight sets of back to back Ilest houses, each set mounted on a pole and situated in mowed circles of approximately 10 m diameter, were located in six sectors of the middle field (Figure 1, 2

PAGE 6

SE NE SW ECN ECS C CS ws WN NW o 12.5 25 50 I! I! , Meters Figure 1. Aerial showing the mowed fields on the Rice Creek Field Station grounds (A = upper field, B = middle field, C = lower field, white circles delineate mown areas around nest boxes in middle field. Fi ure 2. Sector notations used in Tables 1, 2, and 6. Table 1). Since cavity nesters may be influenced by the height and quality of the surrounding vegetation (e.g. Belles-Isles & Picman, 1986), we included them in most of our analyses. Sector areas and periphery lengths were determined with the field calculator in ESRI ArcMapTM v. 9.1. The percent coverage of sectors by permanent woody vegetation was estimated by placing a grid of 5 m2 blocks over a relatively recent (April 2003) aerial map of a sector. The number of blocks filled with permanent tree or shrub vegetation, known from their locations drawn on a map in the field, were then tallied and divided by the total blocks in the sector. Blocks that were a quarter, a third or half filled were scored as such. 3

PAGE 7

Table 1. Location, area, periphery lengths, elevation, coverage by permanent vegetation, mowing schedule and notable features of mowed study areas. For location of sectors in middle and upper fields see Figure 2. Length of Total % Coverage by Location Wooded Length of Periphery Permanent (Field & Sector Periphery Non-wooded Length Elevation Woody Sector) Area (ha) Periphery (m) (m) (m) Vegetation Mowing Schedule Notable Features Middle Each sector every four years on Woods bordering three sides & a hedge on east Field a rotating schedule side EN 0.40 139.9 117.0 256.9 100.5 22.0 Back to back bluebird houses on a pole in lawn ECN 0.26 54.8 137.4 192.2 100.1 16.0 mowed circle Back bluebird houses on a pole in lawn mowed ECS 0.36 25.9 292.5 318.3 94.9 9.0 circle Back to back bluebird houses on a pole in lawn ES 0.38 175.0 84.3 259.3 97.8 20.0 mowed circle; brush pile in SW end C Back to back bluebird houses in E end & a 0.35 68.2 205.7 273.9 92.3 25.0 second set in Wend Back to back bluebird houses on a pole in lawn CN 0.27 96.3 117.5 213.8 96.1 7.0 mowed circle Back to back bluebird houses in E end & a WN 0.33 95.8 162.5 258.3 89.9 2.0 second set in Wend WS 0.15 91.2 104.8 196.0 88.8 0.0 CS 0.16 64.4 128.6 193.0 91.2 2.0 Brush pile in center of sector Upper Each sector every four years on Woods bordering three sides & a hedge on the Field a rotating schedule west side SE 0.21 101.7 101.5 203.2 103.6 21.0 SW 0.23 138.8 102.1 240.9 102.7 10.0 Brush piles in N & Sends NE 0.29 126.3 120.2 246.5 102.8 34.0 NW 0.23 118.3 121.0 239.3 102.4 38.0 Lower Entire field every four years on Woods bordering three sides & Rice Creek on Field 0.38 296.3 9.0 305.3 84.4 16.0 a rotating schedule W side; brush pile in NE end

PAGE 8

Sampling Vegetation: We divided each field sector into 15 m2 grids and randomly sampled half of the grids in each sector. Since sectors each differed in area, the number of sanlpled grids in each varied (Appendix A). Within each grid we then randomly sampled at two points. Following Wiens (1969), to characterize vegetation structure in each sector, once in early June and once in mid to late July, we measured eleven vegetative characteristics at each of the two random points in each grid. Vegetation height was measured as the height to which vegetation reached on a vertical rod. Vertical vegetation density (VVD) was measured as the number of contacts per dm by dead and living plant parts onto a vertical rod. We also measured illumination at 10 cm above ground level and above the vegetation with an A. W. Sperry, SLM-II0 photometer to obtain the proportion of full sun at 10 cm above ground (as a reflection of "canopy development"). Each measurement was taken with the photometer pointing north. We made six specific vegetative determinations: "general vegetation form" (graminoid, forb, woody), "stem arrangement" (parallel, radiating, network), "stem thickness" [thin mm diameter), medium (2-6mm), heavy (6mm-l0cm), very heavy (>10cm)], "leaf shape" [leafless, very narrow (length> 5 x width), narrow (length 2-5 x width), medium (length 1-2 x width), and broad (length < width)], "leaf size" as leptophyll 25 sq. mm), nanophyll (25-225 sq. mm), microphyll (225-2025 sq. mm) or mesophyll (> 2025 sq. mm), and "leaf type" (simple or compound). Lastly, we identified the dominant and/or co-dominant vegetative species at each point. Birds: We sampled for actively nesting birds mainly by repeated visits to sectors to locate breeders. At each visit we listened and searched for territorial or breeding individuals until no new individuals were recorded. Sectors were small enough in area, the largest only 0.40 ha (Table 1), that bird activity could be seen or heard from the edges. We recorded the location ofterritorial or breeding individuals on a map of the given sector. Repeated visits allowed us to see patterns ofterritory locations by various species in a sector and later, during the nestling stage, to locate parents with food. This technique yielded the most breeding confirmations. Since many old field species utilize edge habitat we sampled into a sector's edge approximately 3 m. Table 2 outlines the number and duration of visits in each year; in 2005 we visited active sectors more times, in 2006 we attempted to apportion visits between sectors more evenly. In 2005 we sampled approximately every three days from April 11 until Sept. 18; in 2006 sampling was approximately every two days from April 11 until August 21. We also sampled by dragging a 10m rope between us to flush nesters. This technique was used in the second year in one and two-year sectors. We also systematically walked through a sector side by side within 2 m of one another searching for active nests. Active nests were photo docunlented and their location established using a Garmin eTrex Legend GPS unit. Lastly, we searched for nests after leaves had fallen and nests could easily be located. We used the N.Y. State Breeding Codes (Anonymous 2000) to establish "Possible", "Probable" and "Confirmed" breeders. For each sector we finished at the conclusion of a season with a list of species in each breeding category. "Possible" breeders included all species appearing in a sector excepting ifthe habitat was unsuitable for a given species to breed in. So, for example, eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis) was deleted in 2006 from sector WS because the vegetation was mainly woody and the mean height exceeded 1 m making 5

PAGE 9

Table 2. Number of sampling sessions and total time in each sector in 2005 and 2006. For location of sectors in middle and upper fields see Figure 2. Field and Number of Sessions in Sector Time in Sector (person h) Sector 2005 2006 2005 2006 PrePostPrePostmow mow mow mow Upper SE 26 5 41 1 14.4 8.75 SW 30 7 38 1 20.1 8.02 NE 22 6 34 1 12.5 6.43 NW 24 6 37 1 13.0 7.27 Middle EN 47 5 48 1 27.6 7.78 ECN 29 5 46 1 12.9 7.46 ECS 46 5 48 1 23.9 7.36 ES 34 3 48 2 17.2 7.96 C 34 7 47 2 16.6 9.03 CN 40 5 49 0 22.9 9.04 WN 39 7 49 0 21.4 9.03 WS 22 6 48 1 14.6 8.66 CS 22 5 48 1 8.5 7.51 Lower 29 4 37 0 20.6 20.82 Total 444 76 618 13 246.15 125.12 it unsuitable breeding habitat, even if suitable cavities were in the sector's edge. If a species was apparently holding a territory in the same local of a sector for three or more visits a week apart, we considered it to be a "Probable" breeder in the sector. A species was considered a "Confirmed" breeder in a sector using the following criteria: distraction display by parent, parent carrying a fecal sac, parent with food, nest with eggs or young, newly fledged young or a used nest following the season providing the species was active in the sector dllril1g the season. We removed as many nests as we could find from the previous breedil1g season to insure that any nest found in the following season must have been created that year. The identity ofnests located after the following breeding season, was determined by comparing their measurements to the literatllre and relating the nest location to confirmed or probable breeders in that portion of the sector that might have constructed the nest. We used a Swiss Precision Instruments 2000 vernier caliper to measure nest dimensions. All measurements were by PGW except in the instance of the blue-winged x Brewster's warbler nest which was additionally measured by JR and an independent investigator. Analysis Vegetation: To describe the vegetation in a sector, we determined by visual impact which plant species (or two species) was dominant at a given sampled point. The number of points sampled in a sector depended on the size of the sector and varied from a low of 10 to a high of32 (Appendix A). We then ranked these plants by the frequel1cy ofpoints of OCCllrrence to determine which plant species were dominant in a sector (Appendices B -D). 6

PAGE 10

We compared mean vegetation heights, VVD and percent full sunlight in 1 -4 y sectors via one-way analysis of variance and determined which means differed by a Tukey multiple comparison test. Birds: We compared counts of total pairs ofconfirmed breeders for the four mow ages using a X2 test for equal proportions. The post hoc analysis compared counts from each of the three pairs ofconsecutive years, using an exact one-sample test to ascertain whether the proportion of total pairs of breeding species found in the later period was different from with P-values adjusted to account for the multiple comparison. To determine which measured field variables might influence counts, we aggregated counts (square root transformed) ofprobable breeders for each season, and treated these as the response using the general linear model for our analysis. We chose data from probable breeders because the data for confirmed breeders were too few; and the data for possible breeders were too uncertain in as much as migrants and floaters could have been included. As predictors in our first model we included four fixed field characteristics: Area, Elevation, the Proportion of Cover by Permanent Woody Plants (i.e. ones not mowed) in the sector, and the Ratio of a Sector's Non-wooded Edge to Total Edge. This last measure was to avoid sector size as a bias. This edge ratio was log-transformed. Three properties of fields that change over time were included as predictors: Vegetation Height, VVD and Percent ofFull Sunlight; the Year and the age (years) since last mowing (Mow Age) were our other two predictors. Sector Mow Age was treated as qualitative. We excluded the lower field from the analysis since its characteristics were quite different from the two other fields. (Its inclusion in the analysis showed it to be highly influential on the overall fit.) The analysis was repeated with a second model using only Area and Mow Age as predictors. To measure overall species diversity of probable breeders in sectors of different mow age we used the Shannon index (MacArthur, 1955). The Shannon index is a measure of overall species diversity which incorporates both the number of species (Richness) and the distribution of individuals among the species (Evenness) into a single value. Since these two components influence the overall index, we were further interested in how each might independently vary over the mowing cycle. We measured Evenness as: J = H/log S, where H is the Shannon index and S the count ofprobable breeding pairs of species. We measured Richness simply as the count ofprobable breeding species per ha. We again used the general linear model with the Shannon index, Evenness and Richness as the response variables. For each we fit a general linear model using Sector Mow Age (1, 2,3, and 4), Year (2005,2006) and Sector Area as predictors. We tested to determine which interactions had no predictive value and could be removed from the model. When interactions were removed from the model it was also possible to assess the presence of main effects with significance tests. In post hoc analyses we investigated the response variables as a function of Sector Mow Age (adjusted for area). When Year and Sector Mow Age interacted, these comparisons were made within years. The lower field was excluded from the analysis as were nest box breeders. We obtained data on field and edge species population trends in the lower Great Lakes / St. Lawrence Plain region from the Patuxent Breeding Bird Survey website (Sauer, Hines and Fallon, 2005). 7

PAGE 11

Results Vegetation Changes During the Four-year Mowing Cycle Successional vegetative changes should drive successional changes in avian breeders. Here we describe vegetative changes during the four year mowing cycle. One-year sectors in all fields were dominated nearly exclusively by herbaceous vegetation (Appendix B D). The dominant plants in one-year sectors, based on their frequency of occurrence, included goldenrod (mainly Solidago canadensis), aster (mainly Aster lateriflorus andA. novae-angliae), knapweed (Centaureajacea), bedstraws (Galium sp.), vetches (mainly Vicia sativa and V. villosa) and sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis). Two year sectors were similarly dominated by herbaceous vegetation. In some sectors of the middle field, by the second year following mowing, woody species, particularly silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), establisl1ed themselves as second ranked dominants. In three-year sectors woody vegetation, including silky dogwood, ash (Fraxinus sp.), highbush blackberry (Rubus allegheniensis), arrowood (Viburnum dentatum), common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), became dominant in most sectors. This pattern continued in the fourth year following mowing, except in the lower field where first year herbaceous vegetation persisted (Appendix D). Figures 3 -5 show changes in three vegetative measures across sectors (measurements from June and July were averaged together). Vegetation height increased in older sectors but not significal1tly so from one to two-year sectors (Figure 3). In 2005 the vegetation in three-year old sectors was significantly higher than in one, two or four year sectors. In the two years of sampling, overall VVD showed no consistent pattern over mow age (Figure 4). In 2005 VVD was significantly lower in three-year sectors than in one and two-year sectors, which did not differ significantly from each other while year four sector VVD was significantly higher than year three but not statistically different from year two sectors. In 2006 the pattern was somewhat more consistent, showing a successive sigl1ificant decline in VVD in the last two years. Percent full sun at 10 cm above ground is an indirect measure ofcanopy development. In 2005 this measure showed a significant decrease in three and four-year sectors from one and two-year sectors as woody vegetation replaced herbaceous (Figure SA). In 2006 the percent of full sun decreased successively from year-one to year-four sectors. However, sectors of two, three and four years in age did not differ from each other but did from year-one sectors (Figure 5B). Possible, Probable and Confirmed Breeders in Mowed Sectors Possible Breeders: Table 3 gives the mean percent of sampling sessions, as a measure of relative abllndance, in which the 34 possible nesting species occurred in 2005 and 2006. The majority (15) of species were old field specialists, somewhat fewer than half (11) were edge species and eight were both. Late in the study we documented the existence of a blue-winged warbler (Vermivora pinus) female mated to a Brewster's warbler (Vermivora leucobronchialis == V. pinus x V. chrysoptera) male. Since we also documented the presence of golden-winged warblers (Vermivora chrysoptera), in most instances by its song, we could not be certain if at all times the singing bird could not 8

PAGE 12

I N= 158 I ----.,-------------,--------------, 2 3 4 Sector Mow Age (years) r-----------------._-----I25 -, Vegetation Ht. 2006 I N= 114 I v) 0<3 8' f5IN = 130 I01 Cii -f I N = 195 I N= 88i 100"3 ::! = ::! ...
PAGE 13

-._-_.-----------I------_._--------_.3Vegetation Density 2005 N= 82 I N= 131 I N= 158 I N= 116 I I 41 2 3 Sector Mow Age (years) N=RR Vegetation Density 2006 I I 41 23 Sector Mow Age (years) Figure 4. Mean vertical vegetation density (touches/dIn) standard error in sectors of 1, 2, 3 and 4 years in A. 2005 and B. 2006. Symbols as in Figure 3. 10

PAGE 14

Figure 5. Mean percent full sun at 10cm above ground standard error in sectors of 1, 2, 3 and 4 years in A. 2005 and B. 2006. Symbols as in Figure 3. 11

PAGE 15

Table 3. Mean percent of sampling sessions during which possible breeders were seen in field sectors of 1 to 4 y mow age in 2005 and 2006. Box nesters in bold; N = 7 in each year. Habitat preference taken from DeG-raaf & Rudis,1986 and Herkert, 1995. Field or Sector Mow Age Habitat Preference Old Fieldl Species 1y 2y 3y 4y Shrubland Edge Mallard 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 x Mourning dove 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 x x Black-billed cuckoo 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 x x Eastern kingbird 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.0 x x Gray catbird 21.4 12.3 25.1 39.0 x x Northern cardinal 14.0 8.1 8.0 10.7 x x Indigo bunting 12.3 7.6 7.4 10.6 x x Eastern towhee 11.7 9.1 13.9 16.6 x x Brown-headed cowbird 3.4 1.0 3.6 5.0 x x Am. woodcock 1.3 0.9 0.4 0.9 x Ruby-throated hummingbird 8.0 0.3 0.7 2.7 x Willow flycatcher 5.7 3.9 8.9 6.6 x Least flycatcher 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 x Eastern phoebe 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 x Great crested flycatcher 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 x Tree swallow 1.9 4.9 10.4 5.9 x Blue jay 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 x House wren 23.9 19.6 27.6 19.7 x Blue-gray gnatcatcher 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 x Eastern bluebird 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 x American robin 6.7 0.3 2.1 4.0 x Brown thrasher 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 x Cedar waxwing 8.7 2.4 3.9 4.9 x Blue-winged, golden-winged complex 7.6 2.3 5.4 10.6 x Yellow warbler 23.9 15.4 30.7 59.1 x Chestnut-sided warbler 3.7 0.3 3.3 2.7 x Common yellowthroat 26.6 43.1 47.3 52.9 x Rose-breasted grosbeak 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.9 x Field sparrow 5.0 7.7 4.9 5.0 x Song sparrow 29.7 34.4 49.0 67.9 x Red-winged blackbird 1.3 0.0 0.3 1.1 x Baltimore oriole 3.4 1.6 2.0 3.0 x American goldfinch 18.1 13.9 25.9 39.0 x Me'an of the Mean 0/0 7.3 8.5 11.7 15.7 Total Species 24 212826 have been a Brewster's. Thus we designated the category in this table as "blue winged/golden-winged complex." The dominant species based on their relative abundance, song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia), common yellowthroat (Geothrypis trichas), gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis) and American goldfinch (C. tristis) each reached peak abundance in year four. Overall abllndance of possible breeders increased successively from one-year to four-year sectors but species richness peaked in three-year 12

PAGE 16

sectors. Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), although not strictly a field breeder, was here included because it had bred in the lower field in 2004 (PGW, personal observation). Table 4. Estimated pairs of probable breeding species in field sectors of I Probable Breeders: to 4 y mow age. Sampling years 2005 and 2006 combined; box nesters We tallied 19 probable are in bold. Column headed" I y Lower Field" are data for I y sectors breeding species over the minus I y lower field data. two years (Table 4). Total probable breeding Field or Sector Mow Age pairs was higher in year 1 y-Lower one than in year two Species ly Field 2y 3y 4y sectors, and the diversity Ruby-throated hummingbird I (0) 0 0 I of breeders was higher in Willow flycatcher Tree swallow House wren Gray catbird Cedar waxwing I I 4 4 I (I) (I) (3) (2) (0) 0 I 2 4 I I I 8 6 0 3 3 3 9 0 year one than in years two and three (Table 4). If the lower field year one data are removed Blue-winged x Brewster's 0 (0) 0 I 0 from the analysis (second Golden-winged warbler I (I) 0 I 2 column in Table 4) then Chestnut-sided warbler Yellow warbler Common yellowthroat Northern cardinal I 3 8 3 (0) (2) (6) (2) 2 7 2 I 6 II 2 I 8 12 3 the expected pattern of an increase in breeding pairs and species as Indigo bunting I (I) I 0 I sectors succeed from Eastern towhee I (0) I 2 4 meadow to shrub is Field sparrow 2 (2) 3 3 4 evident. Four of the five Song sparrow Brown-headed cowbird Baltimore oriole 7 1 0 (4) (0) (0) 5 0 0 8 1 0 12 2 1 dominant species again peaked in four-year American goldfinch 1 (0) 2 10 6 sectors; American Total Pairs 41 (25) 31 62 75 goldfinch peaked in Total Species 17 (11) 12 15 17 three-year sectors. Confirmed Breeders: We confirmed breeding in 12 species (including Brewster's x blue-winged warblers) during our two-year study. Considering data from all sectors, the number of confirmed breeding pairs was higher in one-year sectors than in two-year sectors and peaked in three-year sectors (Table 5). The number of breeding species was also higher in one-year than in two-year sectors but it peaked in three and four-year sectors. The counts of total pairs of confirmed breeders were overall significantly different (X2(3) = 15.1, P =0.002), implying that the proportions of pairs of breeders in the four mow ages were not all equal. In post hoc tests only the second and third years were found to be significantly different (z = 3.09, p = 0.009). Do Older Sectors Fill Up More Rapidly with Breeding Species? We investigated the idea that older sectors fill more rapidly, and attain higher numbers of breeding species, by comparing probable breeding species with species accumulation curves in the nine sectors of the middle field in 2005 and 2006. In general older sectors tended to fill more rapidly and reach higher asymptotes (Figure 6A & B). Three exceptions to this pattern were: in 2005 a two-year and a four-year sector reached 13

PAGE 17

Table 5. Number of pairs of confirmed breeding species in field similar mid-level asymptotes sectors of 1 to 4 y mow age. Sampling years 2005 and 2006 (Figure 6A) and in 2006 a combined; box nesters are in bold. Column headed" 1 y Lower three-year sector joined one Field" are data for 1 y sectors minus I y lower field data. and two-year sectors in Field or Sector Mow Age reaching the lowest asymptote 1 y 4 Y -(Figure 6B). Species 1 y lower field 2 y 3 y 4 Y lower field We similarly compared the four upper field sectors and Tree swallow 0 (0) 0 1 2 (2) the lower field. In 2005 the House wren Gray catbird Cedar waxwing 1 3 2 (I) (I) (1) 2 1 0 6 1 0 3 4 0 (3) (3) (0) oldest four-year sector of the upper and lower fields gained Blue-winged x Brewster's 0 (0) 0 1 0 (0) species more rapidly and Yellow warbler 1 (0) 0 5 4 (4) attained higher asymptotes Common yellowthroat 4 (3) 3 7 3 (2) than the younger sectors Indigo bunting 0 (0) 0 0 1 (I) (Figure 7 A). However, in Field sparrow 1 (I) 2 1 2 (2) 2006 the lower field, which Song sparrow 3 (I) 2 4 4 (4) was now in its first year American goldfinch 0 (0) 0 7 1 (I) following mowing, clearly Total Pairs 14 (8) 8 26 19 (17) outpaced the older sectors of Total Species 7 (6) 5 9 9 (9) the upper field (Figure 7B). How is the Number of Old Field Breeders Related to Sector Characteristics? In addition to age, field sectors varied in a number of measurable variables, some of which are given in Table 1. We were interested in whether or not any of these variables are related to the number of breeders. The results from our first analysis using the linear model suggested that most variables were not associated with probable breeders. That is, Sector Elevation, Proportion of Cover by Permanent Woody Plants, the Ratio of a Sector's Non-wooded Edge to Total Edge, Vegetation Height, VVD and Percent of Full Sunlight are not associated with the count ofprobable breeders (F7 ,14 = 0.319, P = 0.9327). We extended the analysis with a second model, using only Sector Area and Mow Age as factors. Counts ofprobable breeders were highly positively associated with Sector Area (F1,3 = 15.23, P = 0.001) and Sector Mow Age (F l 3 = 16.39, P < 0.001). There was no evidence ofinteraction between these two predictors (F3 25 =0.94,P=0.442). Next we compared mean counts in sectors of various mow ages via a Tukey-Kramer test for multiple comparisons (Figure 8). Counts increased with Sector Area for sectors of each mow age. Moreover, counts did not differ significantly in sectors of one and two years of mow age, nor of three and four years mow age. However, counts were significantly higher in years three and four than in years one and two. Does the Diversity of Breeders Increase with Sector Mow Age? Based upon previous old field studies by Johnston & Odum (1956), Shugart & James, (1974) and Lanyon (1981) one might expect an increase in both the diversity and numbers of breeders as sectors succeed from meadow to shrub. We next investigate this 14

PAGE 18

Figure 6. Cumulative probable breeding species in each of the nine sectors of the middle field in, A. 2005 and B. 2006. 14 2 o Species per Sector Middle Field 2005 _.---r 5J 2y, 4Y ..........-.......... .......... ...-.r-1(....-a-....IE. _______---I-----I_-----r-: 8B "'"" ""a "I 1y,1Y I 14 In .-G12 e,) G Do 10 tn .-..=8 ns -6 E 4 U 2 o 100110 120 130140 150 160 170 180 190200210 220230240 Day of Year .. "It ... .... CIllO 0 0 CIIl 00 OClll -..,---.011........[""DICI -=="" "" Species per Sector Middle Field 2006 BE _J ,--IiIiIrIIIIII III r'-IIII 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 Day of Year 15

PAGE 19

IUpper 3 y IUpper 4 y IUpper 1y E A .... A A. ____--1._... __--,D_ID_D_DD-I>D_IDI----.. Upper 2 y ---r--r-I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 14 en .-CI12 U CI 10a. tn CI 8 .-..>6E 4 U 2 0 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 Day of Year Species per Sector Lower & Upper Fields 2006 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 Day of Year ILower 1 y I I Upper4 y 3-Y-.2-Y.-1-YIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII III Figure 7. Cumulative probable breeding species in the lower field and each of the four sectors of the upper field in, A. 2005 and B. 2006. 16

PAGE 20

0 2.25 o B o o __ .-.-'-B2.00 o .... Q 1-75U l'o-o Q nA.... Q & 1.50 .".;;"''''"'"0--J ..,.,-A __ i __ J __ J 1.25 Mow Age (Yrs) o 1 2 1.00 3 o4 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0-40 Sector' Area (1Ia) Figure 8: Square root transformed counts VS. sector area for sectors of 1,2,3, and 4 y mow age. Lines sharing a letter are not significant at p = 0.05 by a Tukey multiple comparison test. expectation for probable breeders in field sectors of one to four-year mow age in each year of sampling. Overall Species Diversity of Breeders: We found that all three of the interactions involving Area were statistically insignificant. Our final model set the Shannon index as a function of the three predictors as follows: Overall the model was highly significant (F S,17 = 9.56, p 0.001). Sector Area was significant (F I ,17 = 7.15, P = 0.02); each additional ha is estimated to result in a 1.02 0.381 (S.E.) unit rise in overall breeding species diversity. Year was also significant (F1,17 = 6.34, P = 0.02); overall breeding species diversity was estimated to be 0.07 0.028 (S.E.) lower in 2006 than in 2005. Sector Mow Age interaction with year was highly significant (F6 ,17 = 8.96, P < 0.001). In both years general species diversity increased as sector mow age increased. Multiple comparisons on the four levels of Sector Mow Age, stratified by Year, revealed significance between year 1 and all other years in 2005 and between year 1 and year 4 in 2006 (Figure 9). Evenness: For three sectors with only one observed species, Evenness was undefined. We were unable to include and assess the three-way interaction among all predictors. All predictors except Year proved to be insignificant. Our final model set Evenness as a function of the Year (FI ,21 = 107.26, P < 0.001): Evenness was significantly lower in 2006 than in 2005. Richness: We found that all three interactions involving Area were statistically insignificant. Our final model set Richness as a function of the three predictors as follows: The overall model was highly significant (FS,17 = 6.56, P < 0.001). Sector Area was significant (FI ,17 = 7.91, P = 0.012): Each additional ha is estimated to result in a 38.5 17

PAGE 21

1.2 13.69 (S.E.) unit drop in Richness. For year (F1,1? == 4.70, P == 0.045): Richness is estimated to be 2.175 1.003 (S.E.) higher in 2006 than in 2005. Although the pattern of evenness was different in each year, Richness generally increased as Sector Mow Age increased. Multiple comparisons on the four levels of Sector Mow age stratified by year showed that in 2005 year 1 sectors differed significantly from year 3 al1d 4 sectors; in 2006 year 1 and 2 sectors differed sigl1ificantly from year 4 sectors (Figure 10). B 1.1 P ... I"'D B ... I ",. ",. .r / ",. ",. / ",. ",. / ",. ",. / ",. ",. / _----0",.i 4.) ------CD _---e------0.7 ------CDG-----C' .'050.6 -----6----'0,6 0.5 '1 2 3 4 'Sector .Iow A;ge Orea.rs) Figure 9. Mean Shannon index ofprobable breeding species in sectors of 1-4 mow age in 2005 and 2006. Means (points) labeled A, B, C are statistically different from each other by a Bonferroni nlultiple comparison test at p = 0.05; means sharing the same letter do not differ significantly. Nest Locations Figure 11 gives the GPS positions of most nests located in 2005 and 2006. Nests discovered in the autumn (after the breeding season), located outside the mown areas, or discovered only after being downed by mowing were not mapped. The majority of nests found were in shrubby vegetation (Table 6). Gray catbirds and yellow warblers appeared to choose multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) as nesting locations; Anlerican goldfinch nested nearly exclusively in silky dogwood (Cornus amomum). Figure 12 compares the species of plant chosen for nest locations in our study in managed fields with that of Weeks (1998) in wetlands borderil1g Rice Pond. The majority of nests in wetlands were placed in Typha (13 nests, nearly exclusively red-winged blackbirds), the majority of nests in fields were placed in Cornus amomum (10 nests, nearly exclusively American goldfinch) and Rosa multiflora (8 nests). A purported blue-winged x Brewster's warbler nest was found in the NW sector of the upper field. This three-year sector was 38% covered by permanent woody vegetation. The nest was photographed in situ and collected for measllring. Four particulars support 18

PAGE 22

----3S B / /"30 / / /" / /2S / /BCDr .;,---0,ee'----G--------AD ------0-----.. 106 1.0 --.......-----'OS 5 A 1 2 3 4 ,Sector l\lowAge (years) Figure 10. Mean Richness index ofprobable breeding species in sectors of 1-4 mow age in 2005 and 2006; means sharing the same letter do not differ significantly. the nest as that of a blue-winged x Brewster's warbler. First, the parents, a female blue winged and a male Brewster's warbler, were each observed with food in the sector at a location not far from the nest location. Second, the microhabitat ofthe ground nest which was attached to tall hairy goldenrod (Solidago rugosa) stems and located under small sapling common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), is congruent with descriptions by authorities (Harrison, 1975; Dunn & Garrett 1997). Third, nest measurements appear to best fit that of a blue-winged or golden-winged warbler, although the other confirmed ground nester of similar size in the sector, common yellowthroat, can 110t be entirely excluded (Table 7). Lastly, the nest location fit the vegetative features ofNew York territories as described by Confer (1992): ...patches ofherbs and shrubs, a few trees scattered throughout, and a tree row or forest edge forming most ofthe perimeter." Comparative Scaling to Selected Habitat Features Again, following Wiens (1969) we attempted to relate, in a preliminary manner because of few data, field breeders to a sllite of habitat variables. Orlly species whose nests were located are included in these results. Box nesting species were not included because nest boxes were not present in all sectors. Ofthe seven species that nested in fields, only four species had two or more located nests. The most consistent pattern was shown by American goldfinch. This species preferred to nest in tall woody vegetation with large simple leaves, a network stem arrangen1ent, low vertical leaf density and high canopy development (Figllre 13). These vegetative characteristics are typical, for the most part, of sectors in years three or four. Yellow warbler nested in sectors with vegetation of n10derate height, moderate vertical density and relatively high percent full sunlight (i.e. lower canopy development). 19

PAGE 23

, N o Figure 11. Locations of nests in 2005 and 2006 as determined by GPS. Symbols: American goldfinch (AG), cedar waxwing (CW), common yellowthroat (CY), field sparrow (FS), grey catbird (GC), house wren (HW), indigo bunting (18), song sparrow (SS), tree swallow (TS), blue-winged x Brewster's warbler (BW/B) and yellow warbler (YW).

PAGE 24

Table 6. Nest location, date, field and sector, sector mow age, plant species located in, height above ground, contents on date located and comments. For sector abbreviations see Figure 2. Sector Height Nest Location Mow Above Contents (Field/ Age Ground (e = eggs) Species Date Sector) (y) Plant (cm) (yg =young) Comments Gray catbird 25-May-05 lower 4 Viburnum dentatum 4 e 2 m out of field (Dumetella carolinensis) 22-J un-06 lower 1 Rosa multiflora 184.15 5 yg 28-Nov-06 lower 1 R. multiflora 182.88 2 m out of field; after season 28-Nov-06 upper/SE 1 R. multiflora 147.32 2 m out of field; after season Cedar waxwing 23-Jul-06 lower 1 Acer negundo 408.90 4e (Bombycilla cedrorum) 28-Nov-06 upper/SE I Fraxinus americana 457.20 nest located after season Blue-winged x Brewster's (Vermivora pinus x V. leucobrachialis) 26-Jul-06 upper/NW 3 Solidago rugosa, Rhamnus cathartica, Gallium molugo, Rubus flagellaris, Toxicodendron radicans, Centaurea jacea, Aster lateriflorus, Clematis virginiana 0.00 fragments of 2-3 e Yellow warbler 7-Jun-06 upper/NW 3 R. multiflora 62.23 4e (Dendroica petechia) 19-Jun-06 upper/ SW 4 R. multiflora 104.14 4yg 20-Jun-06 upper/SW 4 R. multiflora 99.06 4yg N 12-Jun-05 I-Sep-06 upper/SE middle/CN 4 4 R. multiflora Comus amomum 106.00 4e nest in dogwood downed by mowing 28-Nov-06 middle/WS 3 C. amomum 115.57 nest located after season Common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas) 19-Jun-05 22-Jul-05 middle/WS middle/CS 2 I Poaceae sp., C. amomum, Ranunculus acris Solidago canadensis, Phleum pratense, Anthoxanthum odoratum, C. amomum, R. multiflora 0.00 0.00 4yg 1 e Indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea) 19-Jun-05 middle/ECS 4 V. dentatum 57.00 3e Field sparrow (Spizella pusilla) 14-Jul-05 middle/ECS 4 R. multiflora 67.00 4yg Song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) 5-Aug-06 27-Jun-05 middle/ES upper/SW 3 3 Poaceae sp, Stellaria graminifolia, Galium sp. Poaceae sp, Hieracium sp., Glecoma hetderacea 0.00 0.00 3 yg 4yg I-Jun-05 middle/ECS 4 Fraxinus sp. 92.00 2 yg 28-Nov-06 middle/C 3 R. multiflora 80.01 nest located after season Am. goldfinch 17-Aug-06 middle/C 3 C. amomum 109.20 4e (Carduelis tristis) 17-Aug-06 middle/C 3 C. amomum 109.20 5e 17-Aug-06 middle/WS 3 C. amomum 149.90 5 yg 17-Aug-06 middle/WS 3 C. amomum 106.70 2e 29-Jul-05 middle/CN 3 C. amomum 140.00 6e 7-Aug-06 middle/CN 4 C. amomum I e nest lost to mowing 8-Aug-06 10-Aug-05 28-Nov-06 middle/WN middle/C 3 3 C. amomum mostly in C. amomum/part in R. multiflora 143.00 73.66 2e nest located after season

PAGE 25

Nest Location 40 35 30 l!l 25.. CD z '0 20-c "l:! CD 15lL 10 5 0 ------_.,--,._---------,----------.-m----------R' R' R'R' R' ;,'" R' iY';' 00 ",q ",q ",q ",q v<:''-$'(Ji #:s:-'" v'" <1;-'" v'" -$''' v'" ",<:' -<-'" -$'''' 0'" rtS ...q Cp'<:' v'" <;,\v<:' ..+ ;,q ;,<:' 0 cfJ ",.-S o'W"v ,<'> v'" '?-<'!' ,,,,<:$ '* ,,'" 0<:' ",'<:' e;,""' Plant Species Figure 12. Comparison of nest location by plant species between the present oldfield study (light bars) with Week's (1998) wetland study (dark bars). Moreover, yellow warblers nested in relatively thicker stemmed woody plants of moderately narrow, compound leaves characteristic of year three or four sectors. Song sparrow nested in sectors of moderate vegetation height, low vertical vegetation density and moderate percent full sun. The two common yellowthroat nests were located in sectors of low vegetation height, moderate vertical vegetation density and low percent full sun. Yellowthroat nests were in sectors with mainly forbs or grasses of small simple narrow leaves on plants with thin parallel stems, characteristic of sectors in the second year (Figure 13). Table 7. Comparison of measured dimensions of purported blue-winged x Brewster's warbler nest in upper field with dimensions in Harrison (1975)* of three ground nesters found in NW & NE sectors of upper field in 2006. (PW = Peter Weber, NW = Nick Weber, JR = Joel Ralston) Independent Measurements of Ground Nest Published* Measurements in Upper Field NW Sector Golden-winged / Common Song Nest Dimension blue-winged yellowthroat sparrow PW NW JR Mean S.D. Outside dimension (em) 9.2 12.7 8.3 12.7 22.9 10.8 8.6 8.18 9.1933 1.4 Inside dimension (em) 4.4 6.4 4.4 6.4 4.17 4.3 4.15 4.2067 0.08 Heigth (em) 7.6-12.7 8.9 11.4 5.07 5.1 5.52 5.23 0.25 Depth (em) 3.3 6.4 3.8 3.8 4.5 4.7 4.1 4.4333 0.31 22

PAGE 26

LOW VALUES HIGH VALUES IB BW/B AG SSYW YTFS Leaf Shape (%) -----r--I-------I(VN/B) H BW/B AG mYW FS SSYT Stem Arrangement 1 (%) (PIN) H ss FS YT AG YW IB BW/B LeafType (%) -------1-++-11""'------+--.. (SIC) SS BW/B YT FSYW IB AG General Form (%) -------lH--+------I----+ (WIF) AG YWSS FS IB BW/B YT Leaf Smallness (%)1 H H(S/L) FS IBBW/B SS YW YT AG Stem Thinness (%) H++-1-------------------+--..... (T/H) AG FSYT IB SS BW/B YW % Full Sun H r-I H(0 10 cm) SS IB FS YW YT Vertical VegetationfG BTB H 1--+--1Density YT BW/B SS YW FSIB AG Vegetation Height I ---+----+------..,H Figure 13. Comparative scaling of field breeding birds to nine selected habitat features. Placement of species on each scale is relative to other species. Leaf shape is from very narrow (VN) to broad (B); stem arrangement from parallel (P) to network (N); leaf type from simple (S) to compound (C); general form from woody (W) to forb (F); leaf smallness from small (S) to large (L); stem thinness from thin (T) to heavy (H); percent offull sun at 10 em above ground; vertical vegetation density is number of touches per decimeter; vegetation height in em. Species symbols as in Figure 10. 23

PAGE 27

.....-Population Trends in Regional Oldfield Birds Table 8 shows that somewhat under one-half (42.5%) of field/edge species that could possibly have bred in ReFS managed fields during our study have declined from 1966 to 2005 in the Lower Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Plain physiographic region. In somewhat over a quarter of these species (27.3%) the decline trend is statistically significant. On the other hand, a greater percent (39.4%) have shown a statistically significant increased trend over the same time in this physiographic region. Three species that likely bred on the grounds, American woodcock, golden-winged and blue winged-warblers, are on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife National Watch List as species of conservation concern. Table 8. Great Lakes Plain population trends, from 1966 to 2005, in bird species with a breeding status of "Possible" or higher found in managed fields or field edges at Rice Creek Field Station. Great Lakes Plain Trend l Watch List Significant Significant Species Prioritl Decrease Decrease Increase Increase Mallard x American woodcock Moderately High trend uncertain Mourning dove x Black-billed cuckoo x Ruby-throated hummingbird x Willow flycatcher x Least flycatcher x Eastern phoebe x Great-crested flycatcher x Eastern kingbird x Tree swallow x Blue jay x House wren x Blue-gray gnatcatcher x Eastern bluebird x American robin x Gray catbird x Brown thrasher x Cedar waxwing x Blue-winged warbler Moderate x Golden-winged warbler Extremely High x Yellow warbler x Chestnut-sided warbler x Common yellowthroat x Eastern towhee x Northern cardinal x Rose-breasted grosbeak x Indigo bunting x Red-winged blackbird x Baltimore oriole x Brown-headed cowbird x Total American goldfinch Total 9 5 6 1333 I Sauer, Hind & Fallon (2006) 2 Hunter et al (2001) 24 x

PAGE 28

Discussion Vegetative changes over the mowing cycle Sectors of one and two year post-mow age at Rice Creek generally were dominated by forbs and grasses. Sectors ofthese ages generally had the appearance of a meadow. Sectors of three and four years post-mow were dominated by a canopy of woody vegetation. Sectors of these ages generally had the appearance of a young shrubland. Some sectors by three years were nearly completely in shrub cover. The areas comprising the fields at Rice Creek were managed as farm pasture prior to 1966 when the Field Station was established. They were allowed to proceed through natural succession from 1966 until 1983, by which time the areas were all, to a greater or lesser degree, dominated by shrubs and saplings. In 1983, the areas now maintained as fields were cleared by hand cutting of woody vegetation at ground level, leaving isolated trees and shrubs for habitat diversity (as can be seen in Figure 1). In our study, sectors revert to the shrub stage more rapidly because field mowing does not uproot or kill woody vegetation. Other studies have found succession to the shrub stage to proceed much slower. For example, in a cross-sectional study in Georgia, fields were in a meadow stage from 1-10 years following cultivation and in shrubland from 11-20 years (Johnston & Odum, 1956). In a set of five fields on Long Island sampled longitudinally woody cover ranged from 5% by 8 years to 40% by 16 years (Lanyon, 1981). In both studies cultivated areas were allowed to develop successionally after they had been left fallow. The physical changes in vegetation (vegetation height, VVD and percent full sun) were generally more similar in years one and two then changed, usually significantly, in years three and four which, in tum were more similar. This implies that during the first two years following mowing sectors are somewhat alike, as they are in the last two years following mowing. Breeders We confirmed 12 breeding species over the two years. We also found willow flycatcher, chestnut-sided warbler, Eastern towhee, Northern cardinal and brown-headed cowbird were species present throughout the season in both years. These were species we were unable to confirm but that possibly bred in the field edges among older shrub and tree vegetation. The dominant in-field breeders in the first year following mowing were song sparrow and common yellowthroat, both capable of nesting on or near the ground. In abandoned farmland on Long Island, red-winged blackbirds were the dominant species in the earliest successional stage, song sparrows established second (Lanyon, 1981). A pattern similar to Long Island's seemed to occur in abandoned strip-mined land in East-central Illinois (Karr, 1968). Although red-winged blackbirds appeared sporadically early in the season, exclusively in middle field sectors, they presented no indication of being probable breeders. If one considers the number ofpairs of confirmed breeders only, counts were similar in the first two years following mowing and counts increased in years three and four which, again, were similar. This pattern approximately reflects the pattern of physical changes in the vegetation over the same mowing period. 25

PAGE 29

All other things being equal, older habitats (those of three and four years mow age), because they contain a higher proportion of vertical vegetation and therefore have greater vegetational structural complexity than younger sectors, should also contain n10re breeding species (MacArthur & MacArthur, 1961; Cody, 1968; Roth, 1976). Such habitats might also fill up more rapidly with breeders than the simpler one dimensional meadow habitats of one and two years. This does seem to be the case as the species accumulation plots appear to show. Sector Characteristics and Breeders We investigated the relationship between counts of probable breeders and eight sector characteristics: only two showed a significant relationship. Counts increased significantly with sector area: larger sectors held more breeders. This is not surprising since mowed sectors could be considered as small habitat islands. And, according to the theory of island biogeography, species counts should increase with island area, other factors being equal (McArthur and Wilson, 1967). Our results here support those ofBay (1996). Counts also differed between mow ages ofthe sectors: years one and two did not differ but counts in years three and four were significantly higher than in one and two. Years three and four, again, were not different statistically from each other. This supports the contention that the first two years following mowing are similar as are the last two, and that a change in density of breeders occurs between years two and three. Our two-year data set was too small to discern significant patterns between counts of breeders and any of the other six variables. Breeder Species Diversity Overall species diversity increased over mow age in both seasons, but the pattern was different in each. In 2005 the increase was sharp from one year sectors to three; in 2006 the increase was gradual from one year sectors to three. In either season there did not appear to be a jump in species diversity from year two to year three paralleling the jump in counts ofbreeders. We also analyzed the two components of overall diversity: evenness and richness. In neither year was there a significant pattern, although evenness was significantly lower in 2006. The pattern of richness mimicked that of overall diversity. It seems that the overall higher diversity in 2005 was due to the higher value of evenness in that year. Other studies have reported a similar rapid increase in bird species diversity during early oldfield succession. However, comparison with our result is difficult because the authors either did not give the age of the habitat (Shugart & James, 1973) or did not measure diversity by a Shannon index (Lanyon, 1981). Wl1ere both the Shannon index and habitat age are given (Kritcher, 1973, reanalysis of Johnston & Odum, 1956) the early increase (in 11abitats of 1-10 years) in breeding bird diversity does not seem to be as steep as ours in sectors from 1-4 years. For example by 10 years breeding diversity had reached an index of 1.0 whereas in Ollr study it was over 1.0 in 4 year sectors in both sampling seasons. This difference could be due to the rapid regrowth ofthe already established shrubby vegetation following mowing in our study. Nest Locations Shrubs were most favored for nest placement (Table 6). The most commonly lltilized shrub species were Cornus amomum (10 nests) and Rosa multiflora (8 nests). Weeks (1998) found Typha was most favored (13 nests) and Cornus second favored (6 nests) in 26

PAGE 30

wetlands. Bramble, Yahner and Byrnes (1994) found blackberry (Rubus allegheniens is) by far the favored, followed by witchazel (Hammamelis virginiana) in a central Pennsylvania electric utility line right-of-way. How nest choice plant species is related to the proportion of each plant species available was not determined in any of these studies and would be interesting to know. Late Breeding Species A concern regarding mowing as a method of maintaining early successional habitat, as it pertains to birds, is the timing of mow relative to renesting or first nesting. F our year sectors about to be mowed are quite suitable as breeding habitat for the possible late nesting and renesting species that are found on RCFS grounds. We documented a song sparrow with three nestlings in a three-year sector on August 5, and a common yellowthroat with a single egg in a one year sector on July 22 (Table 6). These birds could just as well have renested in four-year sectors as their occurrence as possible breeders was high there (Table 3). Had that been the case, their breeding effort would have been lost to mowing. American goldfinch and cedar waxwing are late breeding species that could breed in sectors that potentially are mowed while they are in the nesting stage. The latter species is of little concern in regard to nest destruction by mowing since it nests in trees or tall shrubs (Ehrlich, Dopkin & Wheye, 1988) that are not mowed. The former, however, breeds at the time of mowing in low woody shrubs of older sectors that are about to be mowed. In choosing to breed in such sectors these birds would have made an inappropriate breeding decision, thus falling into an ecological trap (Battin, 2004; Schlaepfer, Runge & Sherman, 2002). Fortunately, in the two years of our study only one of eight American goldfinch nests was in a four-year sector (Table 6). This nest, with its single egg, was destroyed by mowing one day after it was discovered on August 7, 2006. Although we did not mark birds, it is thought that the pair renested in a three-year sector shortly after their nest had been destroyed. Whether American goldfinches on the Station grounds have, by and large, in some manner adapted to the mowing cycle by choosing to mostly nest in three-year sectors and less in four-year sectors would be interesting to know. Late July or early August may well be the optimal time to mow field sectors at RCFS. Nonetheless, it would be worth while to have long term data documenting nesting and renesting in four year sectors about to be mowed. No such data documenting the potential loss of breeding effort to systematic management mowing exists in the literature. Decline in Oldfield Birds Askins (2000) points out that, according to Breeding Bird Survey data, only one of 16 shrub land species east ofthe Mississippi River has shown a significant population increase since 1966. Breeding Bird Survey data indicates that out of 34 possible RCFS shrubland breeders, about 27% have shown significant declines since 1966 in the Lower Great Lakes/St Lawrence Plain physiographic region. If we widen the view to the entire continent, 59% of possible RCFS shrubland breeders have declined, of which 50% have shown a significant decline over the same time period (data from Sauer, Hines and Fallon, 2005). This decline is due to loss of early successional habitat with increased urbanization and regrowth of forests with a decline in agriculture. Maintaining early successional habitat as the Station does by a mowing cycle is an important management 27

PAGE 31

tool in providing breeding habitat for disturbance-dependent birds such as breed in the managed fields at RCFS. Conclusions A. Counts of breeders remained similar in years one and two following mowing, and then increased significantly in years three and four, which also remained similar. B. Out of eight sector characteristics, counts of breeders showed significant positive relationships only with sector area and mow age. C. Diversity of breeders may increase much more rapidly in habitats that are field mowed compared to habitats that begin succession from plowed (or burned) bare ground. D. Late breeding species may be at risk of loosing their reproductive effort when mowing occurs in late July or early August. However, a much larger data base than our pilot study provides would be required to ascertain the risk. E. Due to the loss of habitat populations of many oldfield bird species have subtly declined---many species of which still appear to be common. If such a trend continues, field mowing in preserves such as RCFS will be of increasing importance in maintaining early successional habitat for oldfield species. F. Our pilot study was carried on for only two years ofthe four-year mowing cycle. In order to ascertain breeding patterns in oldfield birds relative to mowing and the optimal time to mow, such a study would likely need to be carried through two to three four-year mowing cycles. Acknowledgements We are grateful for two years of support from the Rice Creek Associates. Without their support this study would not have been attempted. We are particularly indebted to Scott Preston for undertaking the statistical analysis and constructing some of the graphics. We are also grateful to Andrew Nelson, Director, for the use of the Station's tape recorder, GPS unit and for providing us with the aerials. Nelson also made field calculations from an Arc Map program for us and provided gridded aerials for determining vegetation coverage. Nick Weber helped in the field and with a nest measurement. Lastly, we thank Bill Purcell and Charles Sontag for confirming the identity of the Brewster's warbler from video footage. 28 L

PAGE 32

References Anonymous (2000). New York State Breeding Bird Atlas 2000, Handbook/or Workers, Federation ofNew York State Bird Clubs & NY State Department of Environmental Conservation Askins, R. A. (1998). Restoring forest disturbances to sustain populations of shrubland birds. Restoration and Management Notes, 16, 166-173. Askins, R. A. (2000). Restoring North America's birds: lessons from landscape ecology. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Askins, R A. (2001). Sustaining biological diversity in early successional communities: the challenge of managing unpopular habitats. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 29: 407-412. Battin, J. (2004). When good animals love bad habitats: ecological traps and the conservation of animal populations. Conservation Biology, 18: 1482 -1491. Bay, M. D. (1996). Breeding birds in early successional oldfields: the effect of area on community structure. Proceedings o/the Oklahoma Academy o/Science. 76: 67 -73. Belles-Isles,1. C. & J. Picman (1986). Nesting losses and nest site preferences in house wrens. The Condor, 88, 483 486. Bollinger, E. K. (1995). Successional changes and habitat selection in hayfield bird communities. Auk, 112, 720 730. Bollinger, E. K., P. B. Bollinger and T. A. Glavin (1990). Effects of hay-cropping on eastern populations ofthe bobolink. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 18, 142 150. Bramble, W. C., R. H. Yahner and W. R. Byrnes (1994). Nesting ofbreeding birds on an electric utility right-of-way. Journal 0/Arboriculture, 20, 124 129. Cody, M. L. (1968). On the methods ofresource division in grassland bird communities. American Naturalist, 102, 107 147. Confer, J. L. (1992). Golden-winged warbler, Vermivora chrysoptera. Pp. 369 -383. In K. 1. Schneider and D. M. Pence (eds.) Migratory nongame birds o/management concern in the Northeast. U. S. Dep. Inter., Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Comer, MA. 400 pp. Dale, B. C., P. A. Martin and P. S. Taylor (1997). Effects of hay management on grassland songbirds in Saskatchewan. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 25, 616 626. DeGraaf, R M. & D. D. Rudis (1986). New England Wildlife: Habitat, Natural History and Distribution, General Technical Report NE-108, Northeast Forest Experimental Station, USDA Forest Service, 491 pp. Dettmers, R. (2003). Status and conservation of shrubland birds in the northeastern US. Forest Ecology and Management, 185,81 93. Dunn, J. & K. Garrett (1997). Afieldguide to warblers o/North America. Houghton Mifflin, Boston. Ehrlich, P. R, Dobkin, D. S., & Wheye, D. (1988). The birder's handbook. Simon and Schuster. Edinger, G. J., D. J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T. G. Howard, D. M. Hunt and A. M. Olivero, Eds. (2002). Ecological Communities o/New York State. Second Edition. A Revised and Expanded Edition o/Carol Reschke's Ecological Communities o/New York State. (Draft/or Review). Albany, NY, New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Frawley, B. J. and L. B. Best (1991). Effects of mowing on breeding bird abundance and species composition in alfalfa fields. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 19, 135 142. 29

PAGE 33

Harrison, H. H. (1975) Afieldguide to bird nests in the United States east ofthe Mississippi River, Houghton Mifflin, Boston. Hart, J. F. (1968). Loss and abandonment of cleared farm land in the Eastern United States, Annals ofthe Association ofAmerican Geographers, 58, 417 440. Herkert, J. R. (1995). An analysis ofMidwestern breeding bird population trends: 19661993. The American Midland Naturalist, 134, 41 50. Hom, D. 1. and R. R. Koford (2000). Relation of grassland bird abundance to mowing of Conservation Reserve Program fields in North Dakota. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 28, 653 659. Hunter, W. C., D. A. Buehler, R. A. Canterbury, J. L. Confer and P. B. Hamel (2001). Conservation of disturbance-dependent birds in eastern North America. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 29: 440 455. Johnson, D. H. (2000). Grassland bird use of Conservation Reserve Program fields in the Great Plains. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/glbuse/index.htm. Retrieved: 3-24-2007. Johnston, D. W. & E. P. Odum, (1956). Breeding bird populations in relation to plant succession in the Piedmont of Georgia. Ecology, 37,50 62. Kambly, S. (2006). Land Cover Trends, Northeastern Highlands. http://edc2.usgs.gov/LT/regions/ec058.php Retrieved: 8-23-2007. Karr, 1. R. 1968). Habitat and avian diversity on strip-mined land in east-central Illinois. The Condor, 70,348-357. Kendeigh, S. C. (1946). Breeding birds ofthe beech-maple-hemlock community. Ecology, 27,226 245. Kendeigh, S. C. (1948). Bird populations and biotic communities in northern lower Michigan. Ecology, 29, 101-114. Kricher, 1. C. (1973). Summer bird species diversity in relation to secondary succession on the New Jersey piedmont. The American Midland Naturalist, 89, 121 137. Lanyon, W. E. (1981). Breeding birds and old field succession on fallow Long Island farmland, Bulletin ofthe American Museum ofNatural History, 168, 1-60. MacArthur, R. H. (1955). Fluctuations of animal populations and a measure of community stability. Ecology, 36,533 536. MacArthur, R. H. & J. MacArthur (1961). On bird species diversity. Ecology, 42,594598. MacArthur, R. H. & E. O. Wilson (1967). The Theory ofIsland Biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. Mass Audubon. (2007). Managing small grasslands for grassland birds. http://www massaud ubon .org/B irds & Beyond/ grass land/small. php. Retrieved 4-21 2007. May, P. G. (1982). Secondary succession and breeding bird community structure: Patterns of resource utilization. Oecologia, 55, 208 216. Numbers USA. (ND). Farmland. http://www.numbersusa.comlinterests/farmland.html. Retrieved 8-23-2007. Odum, E. P. (1950). Bird populations ofthe Highlands (North Carolina) Plateau in relation to plant succession and avian invasion. Ecology, 31,597 605. Reschke, C. (1990) Ecological communities ofNew York State, NY Natural Heritage Program, NYS Department ofEnvironmental Conservation, Latham, NY. 30

PAGE 34

Roth, R. R. (1976). Spatial heterogeneity and bird species diversity. Ecology, 57, 773 782. Sample, D. W. and M. J. Mossman (1997). Managing habitat for grassland birds, a guide for Wisconsin. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. http://npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/wiscbird/indes.htm. Retrieved 8-23-2007. Sauer, J. R., 1. E. Hines, and J. Fallon (2005.) The North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis 1966 2005. Version 6.2.2006. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD Schlaepfer, M. A., M. C. Runge & P. W. Sherman (2002). Ecological and evolutionary traps. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 17,474 480. Shugart, H. H. & James, D. (1973). Ecological succession of breeding bird populations in northwestern Arkansas. Auk, 90, 62 -77. Swengel, S. R. and A. B. Swengel (2001). Relative effects oflitter and management on grassland bird abundance in Missouri, USA. Bird Conservation International, 11, 113 -128. Walk, 1. W. and R. E. Warner (2000). Grassland management for the conservation of songbirds in the Midwestern USA, Biological Conservation, 94, 165 172. Weeks, J. A. (1998). A study of bird nesting on Rice Pond and adjoining habitats, spring and summer 1997. In Nelson, A. P. (ed.) Rice Creek Research Reports: 1997. Rice Creek Field Station, SUNY Oswego, Oswego, NY. Wiens, J. A. (1969). An approach to the study of ecological relationships among grassland birds. Ornithological Monographs, 8, 1 93. Yahner, R. H. (2003). Responses of bird communities to early successional habitat in a managed landscape, Wilson Bulletin, 115,292 298. Sontag for confirming the identity ofthe Brewster's warbler from video footage. 31

PAGE 35

Appendices Appendix A. Sector age, date of sampling and number ofpoints sampled for vegetative characteristics in field sectors. Field Number Field Number and Sector Sampling of Points and Sector Sampling of Points Sector Age Year Date Sampled Sector Age Year Date Sampled Upper Middle (con't) NE 1 2005 1-Jun 16 C 2 2005 2-Jun 20 1 2005 14-Jul 20 2 2005 20-Jul 20 2 2006 7-Jun 20 3 2006 14-Jun 20 2 2006 26-Jul 20 3 2006 24-Jul 20 NW 2 2005 1-Jun 15 ES 2 2005 7-Jun 20 2 2005 14-Jul 16 2 2005 19-Jul 20 3 2006 7-Jun 16 3 2006 14-Jun 20 3 2006 26-Jul 14 3 2006 24-Jul 20 SW 3 2005 1-Jun 16 WN 3 2005 3-Jun 24 3 2005 14-Jul 16 3 2005 20-Jul 24 4 2006 5-Jun 16 4 2006 14-Jun 24 4 2006 25-Jul 14 4 2006 25-Jul 24 SE 4 2005 1-Jun 16 CN 3 2005 7-Jun 18 4 2005 15-Jul 20 3 2005 20-Jul 18 1 2006 5-Jun 20 4 2006 14-Jun 18 1 2006 25-Jul 20 4 2006 25-Jul 18 Middle ECS 4 2005 7-Jun 18 ECN 1 2005 2-Jun 14 4 2005 19-Jul 18 1 2005 15-Jul 14 1 2006 8-Jun 18 2 2006 12-Jun 14 1 2006 27-Jul 18 2 2006 24-Jul 14 EN 4 2005 7-Jun 20 CS 1 2005 2-Jun 10 4 2005 19-Jul 20 1 2005 15-Jul 10 1 2006 12-Jun 20 2 2006 12-Jun 10 1 2006 24-Jul 20 2 2006 23-Jul 10 Lower WS 2 2005 2-Jun 10 4 2005 2-Jun 32 2 2005 15-Jul 10 4 2005 20-Jul 30 3 2006 14-Jun 10 1 2006 8-Jun 30 3 2006 24-Jul 10 1 2006 23-Jul 30 32

PAGE 36

Appendix B. Frequency of occurrence of sampled plant species in upper field in 2005 and 2006. -2005Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Sector NE Mow age 1 yr 1-Jun 16 Galium sp. Toxicodendron radicans Rhamnus cathartica T. radicans & Rubus flagel/aris Onoclea sensibilis 14-Jul 20 Onoclea sensibilis Solidago sp.lAster sp. Centaurea jacena Eupatorium maculatum w w Toxicodendron radicans Setaria pumila Convolvulus arvensis Phleum pratense Rubus flagel/aris Sector NW Mow age 2 yr 1-Jun 15 Solidago sp.lAster sp. Galium sp. 14-Jul 16 Solidago sp.lAster sp. Onoclea sensibilis Comus amomum Centaurea jacena Fraxinus sp. Frequency 25% 25% 25% 13% 13% 35% 15% 10% 10% 10% 5% 5% 5% 5% 57% 43% 55% 20% 10% 10% 5% -2006Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Sector NE Mow age 2 yr 7-Jun 20 Solidago sp.lAster sp. Onoclea sensibilis Toxicodendron radicans Galium sp. Clematis virginiana Rosa multiflora 26-Jul 20 Centaurea jacena Solidago sp.lAster sp. Toxicodendron radicans Onoclea sensibilis Astersp. Comus amomum Rubus flagel/aris Sector NW Mow age 3 yr 7-Jun 16 Solidago sp.lAster sp. Centaurea jacena Galium sp. Asclepias syriaca Comus amomum Rhamnus cathartica 26-Jul 14 Solidago sp.lAster sp. Centaurea jacena Rhamnus cathartica Fraxinus sp. Rosa multiflora Asclepias syriaca Frequency 35% 30% 15% 10% 5% 5% 40% 15% 15% 10% 10% 5% 5% 44% 25% 13% 6% 6% 6% 50% 21% 7% 7% 7% 7%

PAGE 37

-2005Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Sector SW -Mow age 3 yr 1-Jun 16 Rubus al/egheniensis Galium sp. Cyperaceae Vicia sp. Onoclea sensibilis Medicago sativa Cornus amomum Rhamnus cathartica 14-Jul 16 Solidagosp./Astersp. Centaurea jacena Phleum pratense w Rubus al/egheniensis Rosa multiflora Carex sp. Galium sp. Lotus corniculata Sector SE -Mow age 4 yr 1-Jun 16 Galium sp. Solidago sp./Aster sp. Rhamnus cathartica Onoclea sensibilis Toxicodendron radicans Rubus occidentalis T. radicans & R. flagel/aris Cyperaceae Vicia sp. Medicago sativa Cornus amomum Frequency 22% 11 % 11 % 11 % 11% 11 % 11 % 11 % 38% 25% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 25% 17% 13% 8% 8% 80/0 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% -2006Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Sector SW -Mow age 4 yr 5-Jun 16 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Asclepias syriaca Viburnum dentatum Lonicera sp. Lotus corniculata Elaeagnus umbel/ata Cornus amomum Rhamnus cathartica 25-Jul 14 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Centaurea jacena Fraxinus sp. Rhus hirta Viburnum dentatum Rhamnus cathartica Toxicodendron radicans Sector SE Mow age 1 yr 5-Jun 20 Poaceae sp. Solidago sp./Aster sp. Galium sp. Ranunculus acris Onoclea sensibilis Toxicodendron radicans Rosa multiflora Lonicera sp. Frequency 44% 13% 6% 60/0 6% 6Jb 60/0 6% 6% 36% 21% 14% 7% 7% 70/0 7% 35% 30% 100/0 5% 50/0 50/0 5% 5%

PAGE 38

--------_11. -2005-2006Sampling Points Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Frequency Date Sampled Dominant Species Frequency 15-Jul 20 Solidago sp./Aster sp. 55% 25-Jul 20 Solidago sp./Aster sp. 550/0 Onoclea sensibilis 20% Poaceae sp. 100/0 Comusamomum 10% Centaurea jacena 5% Centaurea jacena 10% Vitis riparia 5J'c> Fraxinus sp. 50/0 Erigeron philadelphicus 50/0 Comusamomum 5% 5% Aster sp. 5% Fraxinus sp. 5J'c> w Vl

PAGE 39

Appendix C. Frequency of occurrence of sampled plant species in middle field in 2005 and 2006. -2005Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Sector ECN Mow age 1 yr 2-Jun 14 Onoclea sensibilis Galium sp. Rubus idaeus Solidago sp.lAster sp. Lotus comiculata Galium sp., T. radicans, R. f1agellaris 15-Jul 14 Solidago sp.lAster sp. Vicia villosa w 0\ Centaurea jacena Vitis riparia Toxicodendron radicans Rubus allegheniensis Galium sp. Sector CS Mow age 1 yr 2-Jun 10 Onoclea sensibilis Solidago sp.lAster sp. Solidago sp.lAster sp., Poaceae Ranunculus acris, Poaceae 15-Jul 14 Solidago sp.lAster sp. Onoclea sensibilis Fraxinus sp Comus amomum Sector WS Mow age 2 yr 2-Jun 10 Ranunculus acris Frequency 27% 36% 9% 9% 9% 9% 43% 21% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 33% 33% 17% 17% 60% 20% 10% 10% 22% -2006Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Sector ECN Mow age 2 yr 12-Jun 14 Robinia hispida Solidago sp.lAster sp. Comus amomum Rhamnus cathartica Lonicera sp Rubus alleghenensis Vibumum dentatum Asclepias syriaca Galium sp. 24-Jul 14 Solidago sp.lAster sp. Comus amomum Toxicodendron radicans Centaurea jacena Robinia hispida Galium sp. Rhamnus cathartica Sector CS Mow age 2 yr 12-Jun 10 Onoclea sensibilis Solidago sp.lAster sp. Phleum pratense Poaceae 23-Jul 10 Solidago sp.lAster sp. Comus amomum Onoclea sensibilis Sector WS Mow age 3 yr 14-Jun 10 Onoclea sensibilis Frequency 21% 14% 14% 14% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 36% 14% 14% 14% 7% 7% 7% 50% 30% 10% 10% 60% 20% 10% 10% 40%

PAGE 40

-2005-2006Sampling Points Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Frequency Date Sampled Dominant __ Frequency Cornus amomum Solidago sp./Aster sp. Onoclea sensibilis Poaceae, R. acris 15-Jul 10 Cornus amomum Onoclea sensibilis Solidago sp./Aster sp. Fraxinus sp Sector C Mow age 2 yr 2-Jun 20 Onoclea sensibilis Cornus amomum Viburnum dentatum Solidago sp./Aster sp. Carex sp. W -J Fraxinus sp Ranunculus acris Poaceae, Vicia sp. 20-Jul 20 Onoclea sensibilis Solidago sp./Aster sp. Cornus amomum Centaurea jacena Poaceae Aster lanceolatus Vitis riparia Sector ES -Mow age 2 yr 7-Jun 20 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Impatiens capensis Solidago sp./Aster sp., R. multiflora 22% 22% 11 % 11 % 70% 10% 10h> 10% 35% 18% 12% 12% 6% 6h> 6h> 6% 30% 30% 200/0 5% 5% 5% 5% 15% 5% 50/0 Cornus amomum Viburnum dentatum Fraxinus sp. 24-Jul 10 Cornus amomum Fraxinus sp. Eupatorium maculatum Solidago sp./Aster sp. Sector C Mow age 3 yr 14-Jun 20 Cornus amomum Onoclea sensibilis Solidago sp./Aster sp. Fraxinus sp. Rhamnus catharlica Rosa multiflora Viburnum dentatum 24-Jul 20 Cornus amomum Solidago sp./Aster sp. Onoclea sensibilis Centaurea jacena Fraxinus sp. Viburnum dentatum Vitis riparia Eupatorium maculatum Rosa multiflora Sector ES Mow age 3 yr 14-Jun 20 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Fraxinus sp. Onoclea sensibilis 30% 20% 10% 60% 20% 10% 10% 30h> 30% 15% 10h> 5% 5% SOh> 25% 20% 100/0 10% 10h> 10% 5% 5% SOh> 35% 20% 10%

PAGE 41

-2005Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Solidago sp./Aster sp., Veronica sp. Poaceae, T. radicans T. radicans, Fragaria virginiana, Ulmus americana R. allegheniensis, Poaceae Poaceae Solidago sp./Aster sp., Vicia sativa, Poaceae Fraxinus sp / Solidago sp. Fraxinus sp, Galium sp., R. acris, Vicia sp. Lonicera sp. Galium sp., V. riparia, Parthenocissus quinquefolia Fraxinus sp., Prunus virginiana, Lotus corniculata Medicago sativa, Echinochloa crusgalli O. sensibilis, Galium sp. O. sensibilis, Fraxinus sp., Solidago sp., R. multiflora, Poaceae Onoclea sensibilis 19-Jul 20 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Fraxinus sp. Rubus allegheniensis Cornus amomum Phleum pratense Onoclea sensibilis Rhamnus cathartica Sector WN Mow age 3 yr 3-Jun 24 Cornus amomum Frequency 50/0 50/0 5% 50/0 50/0 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 65% 10% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 54% -2006Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Frequency Viburnum dentatum 10% Lotus corniculata 10% Toxicodendron radicans 50/0 Ulmus americana 50/0 Rubus alleghenensis 5% 24-Jul 20 Solidago sp./Aster sp. 55% Onoclea sensibilis 15% Cornus amomum 5% Toxicodendron radicans 5% Rubus alleghenensis 5% Lonicera sp. 5% Phleum pratense 5% Centaurea jacena 5% Sector WN Mow age 4 yr 14-Jun 24 Cornus amomum 54%

PAGE 42

-2005Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Rubus allegheniensis Solidago sp./Aster sp. Viburnum dentatum Cornus sp., V. dentatum, R. occidentalis R. occidentalis, V. dentatum Onoclea sensibilis Solidago sp./Aster sp., O. sensibilis Rubus occidentalis 20-Jul 24 Cornus amomum Fraxinus sp. Solidago sp./Aster sp. Viburnum dentatum Rhamnus cathartica Cyperaceae sp. l;.) '0 Sector CN -Mow age 3 yr 7 -Jun 18 R. cathartica, R. multiflora Lonicera sp., Solidago sp./Aster sp. Cornus sp., V. dentatum, O. sensibilis R. cathartica, C. amomum O. sensibilis, Galium sp. Lonicera sp. O. sensibilis, Solidago sp./Aster sp., R. allegheniensis R. multiflora, O. sensibilis, Fraxinus sp. Onoclea sensibilis Rhamnus cathartica Viburnum dentatum O. sensibilis, R. allegheniensis R. multiflora, C. amomum, R. allegheniensis, V. dentatum Cornus amomum -2006Sampling Points Frequency Date Sampled Dominant Species 13% Fraxinus sp. 8% Solidago sp./Aster sp. 4% Viburnum dentatum 4% Salix sp. 4% Rosa multiflora 4% 4% 40/0 63% 25-Jul 24 Cornus amomum 13% Solidago sp./Aster sp. 8% Viburnum dentatum 80/0 Fraxinus sp. 40/0 Onoclea sensibilis 4% Eupatorium maculatum Sector CN Mow age 4 yr 110/0 14-Jun 18 Rhamnus cathartica 6h> Cornus amomum 6% Solidago sp./Aster sp. 6h> Rosa multiflora 6% Viburnum dentatum 6h> Onoclea sensibilis 6h> 6% 6h> 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Frequency 130/0 13% 80/0 80/0 4h> 67h> 13% 8% 4% 4% 4% 44% 220/0 11 % 11h> 6% 6%

PAGE 43

1/ -2005 -2006Sampling Points Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Frequency Date Sampled Dominant Species Frequency R. cathartica, Fraxinus sp. Solidago sp./Aster sp., R. acris 20-Jul 18 Comusamomum Solidago sp./Aster sp. Onoclea sensibilis Rhamnus cathartica Rosa multiflora Sector ECS -Mow age 4 yr 7-Jun 18 Solidagosp./Astersp. Cornus amomum Poaceae, Solidago sp./Aster sp. R. cathartica, V. dentatum R. cathartica, C. amomum o C. amomum, V. dentatum C. amomum, O. sensibilis Onoclea sensibilis V. dentatum, C. amomum, V. riparia C. amomum, Fraxinus sp. C. amomum, V. dentatum Solidago sp./Aster sp., T. radicans, V. riparia, Asclepias syriaca Poaceae, R. acris, Solidago sp./Aster sp., T. radicans 19-Jul 18 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Fraxinus sp. Cornus amomum Viburnum den tatum Centaurea jacena Poaceae Onoclea sensibilis 6% 6% 44% 17% 170/0 17% 6% 22% 11% 11% 6otic> 6otic> 6otic> 6% 6% 6% 6% 6otic> 60/0 6% 39% 17% 17% 11% 6% 60/0 6% 25-Jul 18 Rhamnus cathartica Cornus amomum Solidago sp./Aster sp. Rosa multiflora Viburnum dentatum Onoclea sensibilis Sector ECS -Mow age 1 yr 8-Jun 18 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Centaurea jacena Vicia sp. Onoclea sensibilis Poaceae Cornus amomum Viburnum dentatum Galium sp. Asclepias syriaca 27-Jul 18 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Onoclea sensibilis Poaceae Rhamnus cathartica Asclepias syriaca Fraxinus sp. 44% 22otic> 110/0 11 % 6% 6% 22% 17% 17% 11% 11% 6% 6% 6% 6% 28% 22% 17% 17% 11% 6otic>

PAGE 44

-2005Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Sector EN Mow age 4 yrs 7-Jun 20 points Solidago sp./Aster sp. Onoclea sensibilis V. dentatum, Prunus virginiana C. amomum, Clematis virginiana Rosa multiflora O. sensibilis, Galium sp., Vicia sativa C. amomum, Fraxinus sp., V. riparia Rubus idaeus, Vicia sativa, Solidago sp./Aster sp. Lonicera SP..f Acer sp., R. cathartica Solidago sp./Aster sp., R. multiflora O. sensibilis, Solidago sp./Aster sp. Viburnum dentatum Lonicera sp., V. riparia, O. sensibilis Lonicera sp. R. cathartica, R. multiflora, Fraxinus sp. R. cathartica, V. riparia, Fraxinus sp. 19-Jul 20 Solidago sp./Aster sp. 'Rhamnus cathartica Cornus amomum Centaurea jacena Rubus allegheniensis Onoclea sensibilis Frequency 25% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 50/0 5% 50/0 50/0 5% 5% 350/0 250/0 150/0 100/0 100/0 50/0 -2006Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Sector EN Mow age 1 yrs 12-Jun 20 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Toxicodendron radicans Onoclea sensibilis Viburnum dentatum Poaceae Fraxinus sp. Rhamnus cathartica Galium sp. Clematis virginiana Parthenocissus quinquifolia 24-Jul 20 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Onoclea sensibilis Lonicera sp. Cornus amomum Rosa multiflora Vitis riparia Rhamnus cathartica Rubus alleghenensis Frequency 35% 150/0 10% 10% 50/0 50/0 5% 50/0 50/0 5% 300/0 250/0 150/0 100/0 5% 50/0 5% 50/0

PAGE 45

II Appendix D. Frequency ofoccurrence of sampled plant species in lower field in 2005 and 2006. -2005Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Mow age 4 yr 2-Jun 32 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Galium sp. Vicia sp. Lonicera sp. Vicia sp. &Galium sp. Solidago sp./Aster sp. & Galium sp. Rosa multiflora Rhus hirta Fraxinus sp. Fraxinus sp. & Solidago sp./Aster sp. 20-Jul 30 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Centaurea jacena Galium sp. +;:. N Asclepias syriaca Comusamomum Vitis riparia Rosa multiflora Poaceae sp. Frequency 40% 30;6 7% 30/0 3% 30/0 30/0 3% 3;6 3% 57% 20% 70/0 3% 3% 30/0 3% 3;6 -2006Sampling Points Date Sampled Dominant Species Mow age 1 yr 8-Jun 30 Vicia sp. Poaceae sp. Solidago sp./Aster sp. Anemone canadensis Cyperaceae sp Galium sp. Epilobum colora tum 23-Jul 30 Solidago sp./Aster sp. Galium sp. Centaurea jacena Lonicera sp. Solanum carolinense Frequency 67% 13% 7% 3% 30/0 30/0 30/0 37% 33% 23% 3% 3%

PAGE 46

RCA Grant Bibliography Publications: Stiles, G., M. Holy and P. G. Weber (2003). The Fiery Skipper (Hylephila Phyleus Drury) in North Central New York. News ofthe Lepidopterists' Society 45 (l): 3-7. Weber, P. G., S. Preston, M. 1. Dlugos and A. P. Nelson (2007). The Effects ofField Mowing on Adult Butterfly Assemblages in Central New York State. Natural Areas Journalln Press. Presentations: Bradley, K., E. Weimer, R. Price, H. Meighan, M. Mathewson, R. Testa and D. Valentino (2002). Use ofAzimuthal Electrical Resistivity to Study Bedrock Fractures in the Subsurface at Rice Creek Field Station, Oswego, New York. Geological Society of America, NE Section, Springfield, MA. Chepko-Sade, B. D., G. Zoanette and 1. A. Lackey (2001). Factors Leading to Mortality in Blarina Brevicauda Trapped in Sherman Live Traps. American Society ofMammalogists. Missoula, Montana. Chepko-Sade, B. D. (2003). Demographic Profiles ofTwo Populations ofEastern Chipmunks (Tamias Striatus) in Upstate New York. American Society ofMammalogists. Lubbock, Texas. Connor, B., J. Thomas, D. Valentino, A. Stamm and J. Chiarenzelli (2000). In Situ Monitoring ofthe Seasonal Moisture Budget and the Impact on Variations in Subsurface Electrical Properties. Geological Society of America. Dlugos,M. and P. G. Weber (2001). Does Field Mowing Affect Butterfly Abundance? Northeast Natural History Conference VII. Albany, New York. Hoover, K. 1., D. W. Valentino and S. T. Peavy (2006). Assessing the Architecture ofa Drumlin with the Use ofElectrical Resistivity Techniques. Oswego, New York. Geological Society ofAmerica. Camp Hill, P A. Hudson, M. R., A. D. Peterson, J. F. Heagerty and A. 1. A. Ouellette (2007a). Characterizing and Identifying Bacteria Inhabiting Fallbrook at Rice Creek Field Station by Maldi-TofMs and 16sr Sequencing. Great Lakes Research Consortium Student/Faculty Conference. Syracuse, New York. Hudson, M. R., A. D. Peterson, J. F. Heagerty and A. J. A. Ouellette (2007b). Whole Cell Mass Spectrometry for Identification ofEnvironmental Isolates. American Society for Microbiology 107th General Meeting. Toronto, Ontario. Peavy, S. T. and D. W. Valentino (1999). Variability ofElectrical Resistivity at the Rice Creek Field Station, Oswego. New York: Implicationsfor the Distribution ofGroundwater. Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems, Annual Meeting of the Environmental and Engineering Geophysical Society. Oakland, California. Peterson, A. D. and A. J. A. Ouellette (2007a). An Evaluation ofMicrobial Interactions in Aquatic Environmental Isolates. Great Lakes Research Consortium Student/Faculty Conference. Syracuse, New York. Peterson, A. D. and A. J. A. Ouellette (2007b). An Evaluation ofMicrobial Interactions in Aquatic Environmental Isolates. American Society for Microbiology 107th General Meeting. Toronto, Ontario. Spencer, J. and H. Kosuba (2006). Introductory Forensic Entomology. Forensic Science, CHE 113, Teacher Orientation. Syracuse University, Department ofChemistry, Syracuse, New York. Valentino, D. W., S. T. Peavy and A. Stamm (2002). Long-Term Electrical Resistivity Monitoring at the Rice Creek Field Station, Oswego, New York. Geological Society ofAmerica, NE Section, Springfield, MA. Valentino, J. D., D. W. Valentino and B. R. Valentino (2007). Mapping the Surface Water Groundwater Interaction in Glacial Till: Electrical Resistivity in My Backyard. Geological Society of America. Durham, NH.