1046
ISSN 1062-3590, Biology Bulletin, 2017, Vol. 44, No. 9, pp. 1046–1055. © Pleiades Publishing, Inc., 2017.
Original Russian Text © D.A. Shitikov, T.M. Vaytina, T.V. Makarova, S.E. Fedotova, N.A. Krasnykh, Y.A. Yurchenko, 2017, published in Zoologicheskii Zhurnal, 2017, Vol. 96,
No. 7, pp. 827–837.
Breeding Success Affects the Apparent Survival
of Grassland Passerines
D. A. Shitikov*, T. M. Vaytina**, T. V. Makarova***, S. E. Fedotova****,
N. A. Krasnykh*****, and Y. A. Yurchenko******
Moscow State Pedagogical University, Moscow, 129278 Russia
*e-mail: dash.mpgu@gmail.com
**e-mail: vaitinatm@gmail.com
***e-mail: tvmakarova22@gmail.com
****e-mail: s-tka@yandex.ru
*****e-mail: storm-sand@yandex.ru
******e-mail: antareseridan@mail.ru
Received June 20, 2016
Abstract⎯The apparent adult survival rate is one of the key population parameters of migratory birds. The
widely used Cormack–Jolly–Seber capture–mark–recapture model has a number of disadvantages, the
main one of which is the impossibility of discerning mortality and permanent emigration. The accuracy of
survival estimates can be increased using a multistate capture–mark–recapture model, with the help of which
it is possible to assess the survival of successful and unsuccessful birds separately. We used this model to esti-
mate the apparent survival rates of adults in local populations of three ground-nesting passerines: Booted
Warbler (Iduna caligata), Whinchat (Saxicola rubetra), and Yellow Wagtail (Motacilla flava), all breeding on
abandoned agricultural lands. We studied the reproductive success of 472 marked pairs and analyzed individ-
ual capture histories of 814 birds. The previous reproductive success was found to influence significantly the
apparent survival of adults. This relation was best expressed in the Yellow Wagtail (apparent survival of suc-
cessful birds, ϕ = 0.39 ± 0.06, vs. that of unsuccessful birds, ϕ = 0.19 ± 0.06) and the Whinchat (apparent
survival of successful birds, ϕ = 0.32 ± 0.05, vs. apparent survival of unsuccessful birds, ϕ = 0.10 ± 0.05), but
a little lower in the Booted Warbler (apparent survival of successful birds, ϕ = 0.33 ± 0.17, vs. apparent survival
of unsuccessful birds, ϕ = 0.16 ± 0.13). Unsuccessful individuals leave the study area for good, while most of
the successful birds return there the next year. Thus, the apparent survival rate of passerines evaluated with
capture–recapture models is determined to a considerable degree by the previous reproductive success within
local populations.
Keywords: survival rate, multistate capture–mark–recapture model, reproductive success, Booted Warbler,
Iduna caligata, Whinchat, Saxicola rubetra, Yellow Wagtail, Motacilla flava
DOI: 10.1134/S1062359017090138
INTRODUCTION
The adult survival is one of the key population
parameters for migratory birds (Paevskii, 2008; Bur-
skii, 2011). In the second half of the 20th century,
a stochastic model was developed to estimate the sur-
vival rate based on capture–mark–recapture data
(Cormack, 1964; Jolly, 1965; Seber, 1965). To use this
method, data on dead birds were not required, and
therefore, the method quickly gained popularity
among researchers (Lebreton et al., 1992; Burskii,
2011). The main disadvantage of the Cormack–Jolly–
Seber stochastic model is that when work is carried out
in a limited area it is impossible to establish the differ-
ence between bird death and permanent emigration
beyond the territory controlled by the researcher (Gil-
roy et al., 2012). Therefore, the survival rates obtained
using the capture–mark–recapture stochastic model
are usually called the apparent survival rate or surviv-
ability (Bardin, 1990), being distinguished from the
true survival rate calculated on the basis of analysis of
data on ring recoveries from dead birds (Lebreton
et al., 1992; Burskii, 2011). Apparent survival rate is
a product of the true survival rate and philopatry (the
probability of a surviving bird returning to a capture
area). Although most surviving passerines annually
return to the area of previous breeding (Paevskii,
2008), some of them always migrate beyond it to a dis-
tance of hundreds of meters to tens of kilometers (Par-
adis et al., 1998), which inevitably leads to an underes-
timation of the survival rate compared to the true sur-
vival rate (Gilroy et al., 2012). Most of the methods
@Phil_Robichaud
@deepthiw
@JoseServera