Wider Countryside Report Header
BTO Blueline
Main WCR menu image Site navigation menu item Results overview menu item Other info menu item BTO website menu item
BTO Blueline

BBWC Home > Contents > Discussion > Changes in breeding performance

4.5       Changes in breeding performance

Changes in a range of aspects of breeding performance can be measured under the Nest Record Scheme (NRS) and the Constant Effort Sites (CES) scheme. The former provides information on components of breeding performance per nesting attempt. The latter provides an index of breeding performance accrued over all nesting attempts in a particular year, combined with the effect of changes in the survival of fledglings once they have left the nest but before they are caught as juveniles – a period when losses of young can be high.

Breeding performance may be influenced by a variety of factors, including food availability, predation pressure and weather conditions. Variation in breeding performance may help to influence a population, and may even be the main demographic factor responsible for determining its size. Conversely, the breeding performance of a population may be negatively related to its size, with productivity decreasing as the number of individuals increases, and vice versa. This relationship may be due to the action of density-dependent factors, such as competition for resources: as numbers increase, competition for resources is likely to increase, possibly resulting in poorer productivity. Alternatively, increases in abundance may be accompanied by range expansion into new, suboptimal habitats where breeding performance is poorer, thus reducing the average productivity of the population; conversely, where declines result from the loss of individuals from these suboptimal habitats, there may be a subsequent increase in average productivity.

4.5.1 Changes in clutch and brood size from Nest Record Scheme data

Those species exhibiting statistically significant trends in clutch and brood size over the past 38 years (1968–2006) are shown in Tables 4.5.1.1 and 4.5.1.2. More species showed decreases than increases in clutch size (19 decreases, 15 increases) while the reverse was true for brood size (18 decreases, 22 increases).

Table 4.5.1.1

Significant trends in Clutch size measured between 1968-2006

Species Period
(yrs)
Mean
annual
sample
Trend Predicted
in first year
Predicted
in last year
Change Comment
Long-tailed Tit 38 34 Linear decline 7.63 eggs 6.46 eggs -1.17 eggs  
Magpie 38 45 Curvilinear 5.62 eggs 4.56 eggs -1.06 eggs  
Great Tit 38 152 Linear decline 8.32 eggs 7.38 eggs -0.94 eggs  
Hen Harrier 38 13 Curvilinear 5.48 eggs 4.73 eggs -0.75 eggs Small sample
Moorhen 38 91 Linear decline 6.52 eggs 5.96 eggs -0.56 eggs  
Blue Tit 38 156 Linear decline 9.28 eggs 8.74 eggs -0.54 eggs  
Peregrine 38 16 Linear decline 3.58 eggs 3.09 eggs -0.49 eggs Small sample
Twite 38 12 Curvilinear 5.43 eggs 5.1 eggs -0.33 eggs Small sample
Mute Swan 38 22 Curvilinear 5.89 eggs 5.64 eggs -0.25 eggs Small sample
Pied Wagtail 38 59 Linear decline 5.12 eggs 4.92 eggs -0.2 eggs  
Nightjar 38 17 Linear decline 2.02 eggs 1.82 eggs -0.2 eggs Small sample
Greenfinch 38 93 Curvilinear 4.73 eggs 4.54 eggs -0.19 eggs  
Chaffinch 38 86 Curvilinear 4.22 eggs 4.03 eggs -0.19 eggs  
Linnet 38 108 Curvilinear 4.7 eggs 4.57 eggs -0.13 eggs  
Common Sandpiper 38 11 Curvilinear 3.99 eggs 3.88 eggs -0.11 eggs Small sample
Sedge Warbler 38 37 Curvilinear 4.95 eggs 4.85 eggs -0.1 eggs  
Spotted Flycatcher 38 81 Curvilinear 4.22 eggs 4.15 eggs -0.07 eggs  
Rook 38 13 Curvilinear 4.15 eggs 4.12 eggs -0.03 eggs Small sample
Grey Wagtail 38 38 Curvilinear 4.68 eggs 4.65 eggs -0.03 eggs  
Carrion Crow 38 33 Curvilinear 4.08 eggs 4.09 eggs 0.01 eggs Includes Hooded Crow
Dipper 38 72 Curvilinear 4.48 eggs 4.5 eggs 0.02 eggs  
Yellowhammer 38 44 Curvilinear 3.35 eggs 3.39 eggs 0.04 eggs  
Swallow 38 220 Curvilinear 4.46 eggs 4.51 eggs 0.05 eggs  
Lapwing 38 122 Linear increase 3.69 eggs 3.82 eggs 0.13 eggs  
Mistle Thrush 38 35 Linear increase 3.88 eggs 4.09 eggs 0.21 eggs  
Jackdaw 38 43 Linear increase 4.35 eggs 4.57 eggs 0.22 eggs  
Little Owl 38 18 Linear increase 3.39 eggs 3.62 eggs 0.23 eggs Small sample
Dunnock 38 99 Linear increase 3.94 eggs 4.2 eggs 0.26 eggs  
Skylark 38 38 Linear increase 3.37 eggs 3.68 eggs 0.31 eggs  
Redstart 38 48 Curvilinear 5.89 eggs 6.23 eggs 0.34 eggs  
Sand Martin 38 32 Curvilinear 4.68 eggs 5.06 eggs 0.38 eggs  
Tree Sparrow 38 155 Curvilinear 4.71 eggs 5.11 eggs 0.4 eggs  
Starling 38 76 Linear increase 4.42 eggs 4.97 eggs 0.55 eggs  
Barn Owl 38 22 Linear increase 4.53 eggs 5.15 eggs 0.62 eggs Small sample

See Help for help with interpretation

Nine species (Nightjar, Pied Wagtail, Spotted Flycatcher, Long-tailed Tit, Blue Tit, Great Tit, Magpie, Chaffinch and Greenfinch) exhibited decreases in both clutch size and brood size over the period, whilst another eight species (Barn Owl, Skylark, Swallow, Dipper, Dunnock, Redstart, Tree Sparrow and Yellowhammer) exhibited increases in both clutch size and brood size. Moorhen, Grey Wagtail, Rook and Linnet all showed a decline in average clutch size and an increase in average brood size, although the magnitude of the change in Rook clutch sizes and in Grey Wagtail and Linnet brood sizes was small (<0.04 eggs/chicks). Jackdaw and Carrion Crow showed the opposite pattern, with clutch sizes increasing while brood sizes decreased, although again the magnitude of the change in Carrion Crow clutch size was very small (0.01 eggs); note that, for historical reasons, Carrion Crow figures include a small proportion of data from Hooded Crow.

Table 4.5.1.2

Significant trends in Brood size measured between 1968-2006

Species Period
(yrs)
Mean
annual
sample
Trend Predicted
in first year
Predicted
in last year
Change Comment
Great Tit 38 287 Linear decline 7.57 chicks 6.24 chicks -1.33 chicks  
Blue Tit 38 270 Linear decline 8.32 chicks 7.35 chicks -0.97 chicks  
Long-tailed Tit 38 28 Curvilinear 6.68 chicks 6.17 chicks -0.51 chicks Small sample
Yellow Wagtail 38 13 Linear decline 4.83 chicks 4.34 chicks -0.49 chicks Small sample
House Sparrow 38 111 Curvilinear 3.39 chicks 2.92 chicks -0.47 chicks  
Greenfinch 38 115 Curvilinear 4.03 chicks 3.61 chicks -0.42 chicks  
Raven 38 67 Linear decline 3.23 chicks 2.83 chicks -0.4 chicks  
Carrion Crow 38 79 Curvilinear 2.87 chicks 2.48 chicks -0.39 chicks Includes Hooded Crow
Chiffchaff 38 33 Linear decline 5.12 chicks 4.74 chicks -0.38 chicks  
Bullfinch 38 36 Curvilinear 4.11 chicks 3.79 chicks -0.32 chicks  
Magpie 38 79 Curvilinear 3.09 chicks 2.84 chicks -0.25 chicks  
Pied Wagtail 38 114 Linear decline 4.53 chicks 4.34 chicks -0.19 chicks  
Corn Bunting 38 12 Curvilinear 3.07 chicks 2.89 chicks -0.18 chicks Small sample
Nightjar 38 24 Curvilinear 1.82 chicks 1.7 chicks -0.12 chicks Small sample
Jackdaw 38 91 Curvilinear 2.69 chicks 2.6 chicks -0.09 chicks  
Chaffinch 38 136 Curvilinear 3.57 chicks 3.49 chicks -0.08 chicks  
Robin 38 169 Curvilinear 4.41 chicks 4.36 chicks -0.05 chicks  
Spotted Flycatcher 38 130 Curvilinear 3.61 chicks 3.6 chicks -0.01 chicks  
Grey Wagtail 38 80 Curvilinear 3.95 chicks 3.95 chicks 0 chicks  
Linnet 38 122 Curvilinear 4.07 chicks 4.08 chicks 0.01 chicks  
Stock Dove 38 111 Curvilinear 1.82 chicks 1.84 chicks 0.02 chicks  
Blackbird 38 151 Curvilinear 3.35 chicks 3.38 chicks 0.03 chicks  
Swallow 38 378 Curvilinear 4.07 chicks 4.12 chicks 0.05 chicks  
Yellowhammer 38 67 Curvilinear 2.96 chicks 3.03 chicks 0.07 chicks  
Buzzard 38 94 Curvilinear 1.87 chicks 1.95 chicks 0.08 chicks  
Kestrel 38 121 Curvilinear 3.74 chicks 3.83 chicks 0.09 chicks  
Collared Dove 38 70 Linear increase 1.76 chicks 1.85 chicks 0.09 chicks  
Barn Owl 38 149 Curvilinear 3.01 chicks 3.12 chicks 0.11 chicks  
Rook 38 85 Curvilinear 2.22 chicks 2.34 chicks 0.12 chicks  
Reed Warbler 38 127 Linear increase 3.45 chicks 3.58 chicks 0.13 chicks  
Dunnock 38 106 Linear increase 3.48 chicks 3.63 chicks 0.15 chicks  
Skylark 38 67 Curvilinear 3.1 chicks 3.29 chicks 0.19 chicks  
Merlin 38 55 Linear increase 3.52 chicks 3.79 chicks 0.27 chicks  
Dipper 38 135 Curvilinear 3.4 chicks 3.69 chicks 0.29 chicks  
Sparrowhawk 38 71 Curvilinear 3.11 chicks 3.45 chicks 0.34 chicks  
Tree Pipit 38 28 Linear increase 4.38 chicks 4.74 chicks 0.36 chicks Small sample
Redstart 38 85 Curvilinear 5.1 chicks 5.48 chicks 0.38 chicks  
Tree Sparrow 38 197 Curvilinear 3.78 chicks 4.21 chicks 0.43 chicks  
Nuthatch 38 62 Curvilinear 4.05 chicks 4.87 chicks 0.82 chicks  
Moorhen 38 77 Curvilinear 3.12 chicks 4.3 chicks 1.18 chicks  

See Help for help with interpretation

Long-term changes in clutch or brood size are associated with long-term population trends in a number of species. Here we highlight those changes that are both statistically significant and likely to be of biological importance.

Declines in population size and productivity were identified for Spotted Flycatcher (clutch and brood size), House Sparrow and Bullfinch (brood size). The mean number of eggs and chicks produced by Spotted Flycatcher began to fall in the mid 1980s, a worrying trend for a species that, by this point, had been in rapid decline for at least two decades. Population modelling work undertaken by Freeman & Crick (2003) suggests that reduced survival rates of first-year birds drove the initial population decline, but an additive effect of reduced reproductive output may now be a possibility. Declines in Bullfinch populations are also thought to have begun due to falling survival rates (Proffitt et al. 2004, Marquiss 2007), although the mechanism is not clear-cut (Siriwardena et al. 2001) and a reduction in brood size over the last 25 years may again have had detrimental effects at a population level.

In the case of the House Sparrow, population modelling based on BTO data has shown that declines in rural areas were caused by reduced survival rates but that these declines were mainly halted due to improvements in breeding performance (Crick et al. 2002). The apparently accelerating reduction in brood size is therefore of some concern. Peach et al. (2008) suggested that insect food for the chicks may be limited in certain situations and recent brood size reductions may be a manifestation of this at a wider scale. However, it should be noted that, over the long term, some of the reduction in brood size might have been compensated for by reduced nest failure rates at the egg and chick stages.

It is worth noting that Pied Wagtail and Grey Wagtail are also exhibiting significant declines in both clutch and brood sizes – data from WBS suggest that populations using rivers and canals declined significantly between the 1970s and the 1990s, although BBS results suggest that Pied Wagtail populations in the wider countryside are stable.

Several increasing species exhibit concurrently increasing brood sizes, particularly Sparrowhawk, Collared Dove, Redstart and Nuthatch. Sparrowhawk has returned to eastern areas of the UK, where populations of songbird prey are greater, which may have impacted positively on breeding success, although both the population and the brood size trends began to level out in the early to mid 1990s. Collared Dove has spread rapidly since colonising the UK in the 1950s, and brood sizes have exhibited a steady increase over the past 35 years. Redstart is one of the only long-distance migrant passerines currently exhibiting significant population growth, and increasing clutch and brood sizes over the last three decades may have contributed to this. The UK Nuthatch population, which has been expanding northwards and has increased considerably in size since the 1970s, currently produces 0.75 more young per nesting attempt than it did on average during the late 1960s. It would seem likely that this has helped to drive the population increase of this species; brood sizes have started to fall in the last decade, however, possibly indicating the onset of density dependent-reductions in productivity (see below).

Inverse associations between clutch or brood size and population trend are found in some 23 species (i.e. they show lower productivity with higher population size). Such relationships may arise through density-dependent processes, whereby increased competition leads to reduced clutch or brood sizes at higher population densities. Eleven increasing species and 12 decreasing species show such associations. Notable examples amongst increasing species include Magpie, Blue Tit, Great Tit, Long-tailed Tit, Chaffinch, Greenfinch (clutch and brood size) Robin and Chiffchaff (brood size). Amongst declining species examples include Skylark, Dunnock, Tree Sparrow (clutch and brood size), Lapwing, Starling and Mistle Thrush (clutch size).

4.5.2 Changes in nest failure rates from Nest Record Scheme data

Statistically significant trends in the daily nest failure rates at the egg and chick stages over the past 38 years (1968–2006) are shown in Tables 4.5.2.1 and 4.5.2.2. The number of species exhibiting declines in failure rates at the egg stage (39) was treble the number displaying increases (13), and while 26 species exhibited declines in chick-stage failure rates, only 13 displayed increases. Thus, the general picture is one of improving nesting success.

Table 4.5.2.1

Significant trends in Daily failure rate (eggs) measured between 1968-2006

Species Period
(yrs)
Mean
annual
sample
Trend Predicted
in first year
Predicted
in last year
Change Comment
Woodlark 38 20 Curvilinear 0.0683 nests/day 0.0275 nests/day -0.0408 nests/day Small sample
Long-tailed Tit 38 52 Linear decline 0.0358 nests/day 0.0084 nests/day -0.0274 nests/day  
Magpie 38 52 Linear decline 0.0273 nests/day 0.0028 nests/day -0.0245 nests/day  
Redshank 38 33 Linear decline 0.0398 nests/day 0.0169 nests/day -0.0229 nests/day  
Dipper 38 100 Curvilinear 0.0257 nests/day 0.0033 nests/day -0.0224 nests/day  
Snipe 38 16 Linear decline 0.033 nests/day 0.0136 nests/day -0.0194 nests/day Small sample
Tree Pipit 38 12 Curvilinear 0.0487 nests/day 0.0312 nests/day -0.0175 nests/day Small sample
Robin 38 188 Curvilinear 0.0247 nests/day 0.0103 nests/day -0.0144 nests/day  
Carrion Crow 38 50 Linear decline 0.0159 nests/day 0.0022 nests/day -0.0137 nests/day Includes Hooded Crow
Treecreeper 38 22 Linear decline 0.0191 nests/day 0.0062 nests/day -0.0129 nests/day Small sample
Sand Martin 38 24 Linear decline 0.0127 nests/day 0.0001 nests/day -0.0126 nests/day Small sample
Yellowhammer 38 66 Curvilinear 0.05 nests/day 0.038 nests/day -0.012 nests/day  
Wood Warbler 38 21 Linear decline 0.0191 nests/day 0.0079 nests/day -0.0112 nests/day Small sample
Redstart 38 73 Linear decline 0.0116 nests/day 0.0031 nests/day -0.0085 nests/day  
Stock Dove 38 78 Curvilinear 0.012 nests/day 0.0036 nests/day -0.0084 nests/day  
Pied Wagtail 38 83 Curvilinear 0.0152 nests/day 0.0068 nests/day -0.0084 nests/day  
Starling 38 118 Linear decline 0.0112 nests/day 0.003 nests/day -0.0082 nests/day  
Tawny Owl 38 55 Linear decline 0.0095 nests/day 0.0018 nests/day -0.0077 nests/day Nocturnal species
House Sparrow 38 92 Linear decline 0.0115 nests/day 0.0041 nests/day -0.0074 nests/day  
Wheatear 38 18 Curvilinear 0.0082 nests/day 0.0009 nests/day -0.0073 nests/day Small sample
Sedge Warbler 38 44 Linear decline 0.013 nests/day 0.0061 nests/day -0.0069 nests/day  
Greenfinch 38 132 Linear decline 0.0248 nests/day 0.018 nests/day -0.0068 nests/day  
Barn Owl 38 18 Linear decline 0.0075 nests/day 0.001 nests/day -0.0065 nests/day Small sample
Marsh Tit 38 20 Linear decline 0.0076 nests/day 0.0014 nests/day -0.0062 nests/day Small sample
Buzzard 38 26 Linear decline 0.007 nests/day 0.0012 nests/day -0.0058 nests/day Small sample
Jackdaw 38 54 Linear decline 0.0076 nests/day 0.002 nests/day -0.0056 nests/day  
Kestrel 38 40 Linear decline 0.0055 nests/day 0.0009 nests/day -0.0046 nests/day  
Merlin 38 26 Linear decline 0.0067 nests/day 0.0024 nests/day -0.0043 nests/day Small sample
Tree Sparrow 38 207 Curvilinear 0.0074 nests/day 0.0032 nests/day -0.0042 nests/day  
Wren 38 141 Linear decline 0.0183 nests/day 0.0143 nests/day -0.004 nests/day  
Sparrowhawk 38 34 Linear decline 0.0047 nests/day 0.0009 nests/day -0.0038 nests/day  
Stonechat 38 35 Curvilinear 0.0052 nests/day 0.0027 nests/day -0.0025 nests/day  
Great Tit 38 265 Curvilinear 0.0068 nests/day 0.0043 nests/day -0.0025 nests/day  
Blue Tit 38 259 Linear decline 0.0046 nests/day 0.0025 nests/day -0.0021 nests/day  
Raven 38 22 Curvilinear 0.0021 nests/day 0.0009 nests/day -0.0012 nests/day Small sample
Dunnock 38 143 Curvilinear 0.0251 nests/day 0.0248 nests/day -0.0003 nests/day  
Spotted Flycatcher 38 122 Curvilinear 0.0177 nests/day 0.0188 nests/day 0.0011 nests/day  
Peregrine 38 21 Curvilinear 0.0014 nests/day 0.0028 nests/day 0.0014 nests/day Small sample
Hen Harrier 38 11 Curvilinear 0.0003 nests/day 0.0022 nests/day 0.0019 nests/day Small sample
Ringed Plover 38 125 Linear increase 0.0236 nests/day 0.0285 nests/day 0.0049 nests/day  
Linnet 38 154 Curvilinear 0.0165 nests/day 0.0229 nests/day 0.0064 nests/day  
Chaffinch 38 165 Curvilinear 0.0297 nests/day 0.0368 nests/day 0.0071 nests/day  
Willow Warbler 38 69 Linear increase 0.0093 nests/day 0.0166 nests/day 0.0073 nests/day  
Lapwing 38 133 Curvilinear 0.0167 nests/day 0.0245 nests/day 0.0078 nests/day  
Moorhen 38 110 Curvilinear 0.0135 nests/day 0.0215 nests/day 0.008 nests/day  
Mute Swan 38 30 Curvilinear 0.0061 nests/day 0.0141 nests/day 0.008 nests/day Small sample
Bullfinch 38 50 Curvilinear 0.0333 nests/day 0.0413 nests/day 0.008 nests/day  
Blackbird 38 179 Curvilinear 0.0257 nests/day 0.0365 nests/day 0.0108 nests/day  
Oystercatcher 38 112 Curvilinear 0.0143 nests/day 0.0272 nests/day 0.0129 nests/day  
Whinchat 38 15 Linear increase 0.0065 nests/day 0.0217 nests/day 0.0152 nests/day Small sample
Reed Bunting 38 52 Linear increase 0.0073 nests/day 0.0274 nests/day 0.0201 nests/day  
Nightjar 38 22 Linear increase 0.0138 nests/day 0.0355 nests/day 0.0217 nests/day Small sample

See Help for help with interpretation

Increases in both egg-stage and chick-stage failure rates were observed for four species: Nightjar, Spotted Flycatcher, Linnet and Bullfinch. Use of nest cameras to identify potential nest predators of Nightjar nests is currently under way in Thetford Forest as part of a collaborative project between BTO and the University of East Anglia, which is also monitoring Woodlark. Researchers have also used nest cameras to observe predation events at Spotted Flycatcher nests, identifying Jay as the main predator in their study population in SW England (Stevens et al. 2008). Predation is not necessarily the only cause of nest failure, but it is a major cause for open-nesting bird species.

Eighteen species exhibited declines in both egg-stage and chick-stage failure rates: Kestrel, Merlin, Barn Owl, Tawny Owl, Stock Dove, Sand Martin, Pied Wagtail, Robin, Redstart, Stonechat, Magpie, Jackdaw, Carrion Crow, Raven, Starling, House Sparrow, Tree Sparrow and Yellowhammer. For a further six species (Tree Pipit, Dipper, Whinchat, Blackbird, Great Tit, Blue Tit and Long-tailed Tit), better success at one stage was partly cancelled out by increases in failure rates at the other, suggesting that different factors may influence productivity at egg and chick stages.

Table 4.5.2.2

Significant trends in Daily failure rate (chicks) measured between 1968-2006

Species Period
(yrs)
Mean
annual
sample
Trend Predicted
in first year
Predicted
in last year
Change Comment
Grey Heron 38 26 Linear decline 0.054 nests/day 0.0004 nests/day -0.0536 nests/day Non-breeders included
Corn Bunting 38 11 Curvilinear 0.045 nests/day 0.0224 nests/day -0.0226 nests/day Small sample
Meadow Pipit 38 60 Linear decline 0.0271 nests/day 0.0108 nests/day -0.0163 nests/day  
Magpie 38 50 Linear decline 0.0173 nests/day 0.0013 nests/day -0.016 nests/day  
Sand Martin 38 36 Linear decline 0.0157 nests/day 0.0008 nests/day -0.0149 nests/day  
Reed Warbler 38 110 Curvilinear 0.0174 nests/day 0.005 nests/day -0.0124 nests/day  
Blackbird 38 154 Linear decline 0.0303 nests/day 0.0192 nests/day -0.0111 nests/day  
Grey Wagtail 38 58 Linear decline 0.0206 nests/day 0.0098 nests/day -0.0108 nests/day  
Jackdaw 38 52 Linear decline 0.0126 nests/day 0.0024 nests/day -0.0102 nests/day  
House Sparrow 38 88 Linear decline 0.013 nests/day 0.0036 nests/day -0.0094 nests/day  
Redstart 38 52 Linear decline 0.0123 nests/day 0.0039 nests/day -0.0084 nests/day  
Collared Dove 38 55 Linear decline 0.0182 nests/day 0.0106 nests/day -0.0076 nests/day  
Stonechat 38 54 Curvilinear 0.0116 nests/day 0.004 nests/day -0.0076 nests/day  
Robin 38 162 Curvilinear 0.0249 nests/day 0.0177 nests/day -0.0072 nests/day  
Merlin 38 29 Linear decline 0.0094 nests/day 0.0024 nests/day -0.007 nests/day Small sample
Tree Sparrow 38 151 Curvilinear 0.0125 nests/day 0.0064 nests/day -0.0061 nests/day  
Carrion Crow 38 42 Linear decline 0.0074 nests/day 0.0014 nests/day -0.006 nests/day Includes Hooded Crow
Stock Dove 38 57 Linear decline 0.012 nests/day 0.0071 nests/day -0.0049 nests/day  
Starling 38 136 Linear decline 0.0063 nests/day 0.0019 nests/day -0.0044 nests/day  
Pied Wagtail 38 91 Linear decline 0.0127 nests/day 0.0084 nests/day -0.0043 nests/day  
Yellowhammer 38 52 Curvilinear 0.0462 nests/day 0.0423 nests/day -0.0039 nests/day  
Great Spotted Woodpecker 38 31 Linear decline 0.0037 nests/day 0.0002 nests/day -0.0035 nests/day  
Tawny Owl 38 82 Curvilinear 0.0031 nests/day 0.0011 nests/day -0.002 nests/day Nocturnal species
Barn Owl 38 69 Linear decline 0.0021 nests/day 0.0003 nests/day -0.0018 nests/day  
Kestrel 38 65 Linear decline 0.0022 nests/day 0.0009 nests/day -0.0013 nests/day  
Raven 38 29 Curvilinear 0.0003 nests/day 0.0002 nests/day -0.0001 nests/day Small sample
Whinchat 38 26 Curvilinear 0.0261 nests/day 0.0261 nests/day 0 nests/day Small sample
Twite 38 13 Curvilinear 0.0061 nests/day 0.0062 nests/day 0.0001 nests/day Small sample
Dipper 38 78 Curvilinear 0.0059 nests/day 0.0062 nests/day 0.0003 nests/day  
Blue Tit 38 194 Linear increase 0.0065 nests/day 0.0087 nests/day 0.0022 nests/day  
Swallow 38 251 Linear increase 0.0028 nests/day 0.0053 nests/day 0.0025 nests/day  
Great Tit 38 197 Linear increase 0.0057 nests/day 0.0083 nests/day 0.0026 nests/day  
Spotted Flycatcher 38 109 Linear increase 0.0098 nests/day 0.0143 nests/day 0.0045 nests/day  
Nightjar 38 21 Curvilinear 0.0005 nests/day 0.0067 nests/day 0.0062 nests/day Small sample
Bullfinch 38 34 Curvilinear 0.0336 nests/day 0.0405 nests/day 0.0069 nests/day  
Linnet 38 110 Linear increase 0.0152 nests/day 0.0224 nests/day 0.0072 nests/day  
Tree Pipit 38 19 Curvilinear 0.0337 nests/day 0.0411 nests/day 0.0074 nests/day Small sample
Long-tailed Tit 38 37 Linear increase 0.008 nests/day 0.0171 nests/day 0.0091 nests/day  
Garden Warbler 38 19 Linear increase 0.0105 nests/day 0.0257 nests/day 0.0152 nests/day Small sample

See Help for help with interpretation

Long-term changes in egg-stage or chick-stage nest failure rates are associated with long-term population trends in a number of species. Here we highlight those changes that are both statistically significant and likely to be of biological importance.

Increased nest failure rates were associated with long-term decreases in population size for ten species, and may have contributed to the observed population declines of Nightjar, Spotted Flycatcher, Linnet, Bullfinch (egg- and chick-stage failure rates increasing), Lapwing, Willow Warbler and Reed Bunting (egg-stage failure rates increasing). Although Nightjar has shown a large historical decline and is red-listed because of this, it should be noted that recent surveys show a population increase (Conway et al. 2007). Reductions in breeding performance at the egg stage have been implicated in a detailed analysis of the population declines of the Linnet (Siriwardena et al. 2000b), but the extent to which decreased productivity has influenced Bullfinch population trends is still not clearly understood (Siriwardena et al. 2001). It has also been suggested that poor breeding performance may be preventing the recovery of Reed Bunting populations (Peach et al. 1999). The increasing trend in egg- and chick-stage failure rates of Spotted Flycatcher has only recently become significant and previous work suggested that other demographic factors were more important in the decline of this species (Freeman & Crick 2003). Researchers have failed to find any trend in survival rates that might explain declines in Lapwing numbers (Peach et al. 1994, King et al. 2008), and a fall in productivity is thought to have been a major factor (Galbraith 1988), although a recent study failed to find any correlation between nest failure rates and changes in abundance at a regional scale (Sharpe et al. 2008). The population decline of Willow Warbler is much more pronounced in the south of the UK than in Scotland, and collaborative project between BTO and the University of East Anglia is currently investigating whether demographic parameters, including productivity, exhibit the similar patterns of spatial variation. Failure rates are also thought to be increasing at the egg and chick stages for the declining Hen Harrier and Twite, although sample sizes for both are extremely limited, and at the egg stage for Moorhen, a species for which the current population trajectory is unclear but which did decline in abundance during the 1980s.

Sixteen species showed clear associations between long-term increases in abundance and long-term reductions in nest failure rates. Sparrowhawk, Buzzard, Wren and Greenfinch experienced reduced nest failure rates at the egg stage, while Grey Heron, Great Spotted Woodpecker and Collared Dove exhibited a reduction in failure rates at the chick stage. The remaining nine species (Barn Owl, Stock Dove, Robin, Redstart, Stonechat, Magpie, Jackdaw, Carrion Crow and Raven) displayed reduced failure rates at both the egg and chick stages. Corvids, such as Magpie, Jackdaw, Carrion Crow and Raven, appear to have benefited from improvements in nesting success at the egg stage, as have owls and raptors such as Barn Owl, Sparrowhawk and Buzzard. Decreased persecution and reduction in the use of pesticides are likely to have been important factors in the recovery of these species. The improvements in the nesting success of Stock Dove could have had a major impact on the size of the population, given the high number of breeding attempts made by this species each year, and the decreased chick-stage failure rates of Collared Dove may have aided the rapid growth of the UK population over the last 38 years. Grey Heron populations have increased over the last 70 years, and improvements in chick-stage nest survival may have played a part in this increase. Greenfinch has rapidly adapted to the provision of supplementary food in gardens and is now very much associated with human habitats. Such provisioning may lead to increased productivity because of its positive impact on adult body condition. Causes of the reduction in failure rates for Wren, Robin, Redstart and Stonechat are less clear, although all feed primarily on ground-dwelling invertebrates and changes in arthropod abundance or activity could be responsible.

Inverse associations between changes in egg- or chick-stage nest survival and population trends are found in some 23 species. Such relationships may arise through density-dependent processes where increased competition leads to increased failure rates at higher population densities. Four increasing species (Mute Swan, Peregrine, Oystercatcher and Chaffinch) showed long-term increases in egg-stage failure rates, while 19 declining species showed evidence of improving nesting success. Ringed Plover, Snipe, Redshank, Woodlark, Dunnock, Wheatear, Sedge Warbler, Wood Warbler and Marsh Tit showed decreasing failure at the egg stage while decreasing chick-stage failure rates were identified for Meadow Pipit, Grey Wagtail and Corn Bunting. The remaining seven species, Kestrel, Merlin, Starling, House Sparrow, Tree Sparrow, Yellowhammer and Pied Wagtail (which is thought to be declining in waterway habitats), exhibited decreasing failure rates at both stages.

Several species demonstrated a decrease in failure rates at one stage but a compensatory increase at the other, including Dipper, Great Tit, Blue Tit, Long-tailed Tit, Tree Pipit, Whinchat (declining egg failure, increasing chick failure) and Blackbird (increasing egg-stage failure, declining chick-stage failure).

4.5.3 Changes in productivity from Constant Effort Scheme ringing data

The CES started monitoring populations in 1983, so the changes in productivity shown in Table 4.5.3 cover roughly half the time period of the Nest Record Scheme results. The CES data set is unique in providing relative measures of adult abundance and productivity from the same set of sites in wetland and scrub habitats. While the NRS data set monitors the productivity of individual nesting attempts, the proportion of juveniles in the CES catch provides a relative measure of annual variation in productivity that integrates the effects of the number of fledglings produced per attempt, number of nesting attempts and immediate post-fledging survival. Use of these two techniques in combination provides a powerful method of determining which factors are responsible for observed declines in recruitment of young birds into the breeding population.

Overall, ten species exhibit declines of greater than 25% in the proportion of juveniles captured, while only Chaffinch shows an increase of greater than 25% in the ratio of juveniles to adults. Six of these species, Nightingale, Sedge Warbler, Blue Tit, Linnet, Goldfinch and Reed Bunting, all exhibit declines in the proportion of juveniles captured over the last 20 years of greater than 50%, although it should be noted that Nightingale occurs on a relatively small number of plots. A further four species show reductions in relative productivity of between 25% and 50%: Song Thrush, Blackcap, Willow Warbler and Great Tit. Of the nine of these species for which sufficient Nest Record Scheme data are available for comparison (Nightingale is excluded), six have also been identified as exhibiting negative trends in either clutch size, brood size or nest survival (Sedge Warbler, Willow Warbler, Blue Tit, Great Tit, Linnet and Reed Bunting).

Six of the ten species exhibiting productivity declines greater than 25% (Nightingale, Song Thrush, Sedge Warbler, Willow Warbler, Linnet and Reed Bunting) have experienced significant population declines, either on CES sites or more widely (based on CBC/BBS figures). For Linnet there is good evidence that variation in productivity has been important in driving the decline (Siriwardena et al. 2000b), but for Song Thrush, Willow Warbler and Reed Bunting other work indicates that variation in survival rates is likely to have been a more important contributor to population changes (Peach et al. 1995a, Peach et al. 1999, Robinson et al. 2004, Baillie et al. 2008). The large decline in Nightingale productivity may have contributed to the complex changes in its distribution shown by the 1999 survey, which identified decreases in abundance over large parts of the species' range. The four other species (Blackcap, Great Tit, Blue Tit, and Goldfinch) demonstrating marked reductions in productivity on CES sites have not experienced related declines in abundance, either on CES sites or more widely. These productivity declines may be driven by density-dependent processes, whereby increased competition for resources in an expanding population reduces the mean breeding success per pair.

Taking the CES data set as a whole, 20 species show some decline in productivity over the last 22 years while only five show increases. The strong preponderance of trends towards lower productivity requires urgent and more detailed investigation.

Table 4.5.3

Changes in productivity indices (percentage juveniles) for CES 1984-2006 (22 years) calculated from smoothed trend

Species Period
(yrs)
Plots
(n)
Change
(%)
Lower
limit
Upper
limit
Comment
Nightingale 22 11 -85 -99 -27 Small sample
Linnet 22 22 -79 -94 -39  
Goldfinch 22 38 -63 -86 -14  
Sedge Warbler 22 69 -55 -75 -34  
Blue Tit 22 99 -54 -64 -41  
Reed Bunting 22 62 -54 -75 -18  
Song Thrush 22 88 -37 -55 -14  
Great Tit 22 97 -32 -51 -1  
Willow Warbler 22 95 -31 -49 -9  
Blackcap 22 94 -25 -44 -5  
Chaffinch 22 84 61 3 192  

See Help for help with interpretation

4.5.4 Changes in average laying dates from Nest Record Scheme data

Over the past 25 years, many species have exhibited a trend towards progressively earlier clutch initiation (Crick et al. 1997) with laying dates showing curvilinear responses over the past 50 years as spring temperatures have cooled and then warmed (Crick & Sparks 1999). Table 4.5.4 confirms that over the past 38 years the majority of species exhibiting significant trends show an advancement of laying dates rather than a delay. Thus 40 species are laying between 31 days and 1 day earlier, on average, than they were 38 years ago. Three species, Nightjar, Twite and Wood Warbler, are added to the list of earlier layers published in the previous report in this series. There are no taxonomic or ecological associations between the species showing such changes, and they seem to occur across a wide range of species (Crick et al. 1997).

Only two species, Skylark and Yellowhammer, show significant changes towards later laying, and sample sizes are small. Both of these species are multi-brooded, however, and it may be that differences in the ratio of first to repeat broods initiated may be obscuring advances in laying date. Evidence of temporal and spatial variation in Yellowhammer repeat-brooding over time is currently being investigated in a collaborative research project between BTO and Aberdeen University. It is likely that the laying dates of the majority of those species that do not show a significant trend in timing of laying are related to some aspect of weather, but that those aspects do not show any trend over time (Crick & Sparks 1999).

The significance of the changes in phenology for breeding performance not well understood but is an active research area within several research groups. Earlier average laying may be beneficial for birds because earlier fledging is often related to improved survival to the following year – early-nesting parents have an increased chance of having their offspring recruited into the next generation (Visser et al. 1998). However, the timing of leaf emergence and the speed of caterpillar development is also changing under increased temperatures (Buse et al. 1999, Visser & Holleman 2001) and the results of several recent studies have suggested that some birds may be unable to advance their phenology sufficiently to match phenological changes in their food supply, such that later-nesting birds are suffering from poorer productivity. Both et al. (2006) demonstrated that mismatches between periods of food availability and chick demand can affect abundance in Dutch Pied Flycatcher populations, with those demonstrating the largest mismatches between arrival in spring and peak caterpillar abundance exhibiting the greatest declines. As a consequence of climate change there may be an increasing mismatch between predator activities and the availability of their food supplies at different trophic levels within ecosystems (Both et al. 2009). The conservation significance of such phenological disjunction remains an active research area with potentially important policy implications for conservation.

Table 4.5.4

Significant trends in Laying date measured between 1968-2006

Species Period
(yrs)
Mean
annual
sample
Trend Predicted
in first year
Predicted
in last year
Change Comment
Magpie 38 35 Curvilinear Apr 21 Mar 21 -31 days  
Grey Heron 38 26 Linear decline Apr 8 Mar 11 -28 days Non-breeders included
Long-tailed Tit 38 44 Linear decline Apr 21 Apr 6 -15 days  
Greenfinch 38 95 Linear decline May 25 May 10 -15 days  
Chiffchaff 38 44 Linear decline May 17 May 3 -14 days  
Redstart 38 61 Curvilinear May 21 May 9 -12 days  
Nuthatch 38 26 Linear decline May 2 Apr 21 -11 days Small sample
Carrion Crow 38 32 Curvilinear Apr 16 Apr 5 -11 days Includes Hooded Crow
Tree Pipit 38 19 Linear decline May 25 May 16 -9 days Small sample
Dipper 38 59 Linear decline Apr 18 Apr 9 -9 days  
Blackcap 38 37 Curvilinear May 20 May 11 -9 days  
Marsh Tit 38 14 Linear decline Apr 28 Apr 19 -9 days Small sample
Treecreeper 38 13 Linear decline May 7 Apr 28 -9 days Small sample
Swallow 38 105 Curvilinear Jun 20 Jun 12 -8 days  
Garden Warbler 38 21 Curvilinear May 25 May 17 -8 days Small sample
Chaffinch 38 107 Linear decline May 11 May 3 -8 days  
Oystercatcher 38 46 Linear decline May 17 May 10 -7 days  
Tawny Owl 38 14 Linear decline Mar 29 Mar 22 -7 days Nocturnal species
Whitethroat 38 18 Curvilinear May 26 May 19 -7 days Small sample
Blue Tit 38 197 Linear decline May 3 Apr 26 -7 days  
Great Tit 38 176 Linear decline May 4 Apr 27 -7 days  
House Sparrow 38 51 Linear decline May 25 May 18 -7 days  
Goldfinch 38 22 Linear decline Jun 6 May 30 -7 days Small sample
Lesser Redpoll 38 11 Curvilinear May 26 May 19 -7 days Small sample
Kestrel 38 21 Linear decline May 4 Apr 28 -6 days Small sample
Robin 38 120 Linear decline Apr 28 Apr 22 -6 days  
Stonechat 38 35 Curvilinear May 3 Apr 27 -6 days  
Ring Ouzel 38 24 Linear decline May 14 May 8 -6 days Small sample
Sedge Warbler 38 49 Curvilinear May 29 May 23 -6 days  
Reed Warbler 38 159 Curvilinear Jun 16 Jun 10 -6 days  
Willow Warbler 38 84 Linear decline May 20 May 14 -6 days  
Moorhen 38 68 Linear decline May 10 May 5 -5 days  
Wren 38 87 Linear decline May 14 May 9 -5 days  
Whinchat 38 27 Curvilinear May 28 May 23 -5 days Small sample
Wood Warbler 38 31 Curvilinear May 23 May 18 -5 days  
Jackdaw 38 23 Curvilinear Apr 23 Apr 18 -5 days Small sample
Tree Sparrow 38 167 Linear decline May 29 May 24 -5 days  
Twite 38 16 Linear decline Jun 2 May 28 -5 days Small sample
Dunnock 38 79 Linear decline May 3 Apr 29 -4 days  
Nightjar 38 18 Curvilinear Jun 17 Jun 16 -1 days Small sample
Skylark 38 20 Curvilinear May 25 Jun 1 7 days Small sample
Yellowhammer 38 27 Linear increase May 30 Jun 7 8 days Small sample

See Help for help with interpretation

Return to previous page

Next page – 4.6 Conclusion

BTO blue divider
 

BTO Home | JNCC Home
 © British Trust for Ornithology. Charity No 216652 (England and Wales).Charity No SC039193 (Scotland)
Company Limited by Guarantee No 357284 (England and Wales).
Registered Office: The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk IP24 2PU, UK.
Terms and Conditions
| Privacy Statement          Email:


This report should be cited as:
Baillie, S.R., Marchant, J.H., Leech, D.I., Joys, A.C., Noble, D.G.,
Barimore, C., Grantham, M.J., Risely, K. & Robinson, R.A. (2009).
Breeding Birds in the Wider Countryside: their conservation status 2008.
BTO Research Report No. 516. BTO, Thetford. (http://www.bto.org/birdtrends)

Pages maintained by Iain Downie, Mandy T Andrews and Laura Smith: Last updated 02.04.2009