Online Supporting Material for Pocket Parks in a Compact City: How Do Birds Respond To

Online Supporting Material for “Pocket parks in a compact city: How do birds respond to increasing residential density?”

Karen Ikin, R. Matthew Beaty, David B. Lindenmayer, Emma Knight, Joern Fischer and Adrian D. Manning

Table S1. Correlation matrix of standardised explanatory variables, showing the Spearman correlation coefficients for all pairs of variables. Percent residential land use was not used in further analyses.

# trees/ ha / # large eucalypts/ ha / % greenspace land use / % residential land use / Greenspace patch size / # green-space patches / Prox. to green-space >20 ha / Residential block size / # residential blocks
Park composition
# large eucalypts/ha / 0.07
Land use composition
% greenspace land use / 0.04 / -0.01
% residential land use / -0.08 / 0.02 / -0.82
Land use configuration
greenspace patch size / -0.04 / -0.06 / 0.63 / -0.53
# greenspace patches / 0.02 / 0.05 / 0.40 / -0.33 / -0.38
proximity to greenspace >20 ha / -0.08 / 0.02 / 0.00 / -0.06 / 0.02 / -0.06
residential block size / -0.16 / -0.06 / -0.15 / 0.17 / 0.13 / -0.30 / -0.22
# residential blocks / 0.04 / 0.00 / -0.52 / 0.66 / -0.57 / 0.00 / 0.18 / -0.52
Land cover composition
% tree and shrub cover / 0.02 / 0.18 / -0.33 / 0.19 / 0.01 / -0.44 / 0.08 / 0.07 / 0.10

Table S2. Complete list of observed bird species. Nomenclature is taken from Christidis & Boles (2008) and woodland species classification follows Silcocks et al. (2005). Note on species symbols: * denotes species with national threatened species status (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999); ^ denotes species showing evidence of decline or of conservation concern (Bounds et al. 2010); and # denotes exotic (non-native) species.

Common name / Scientific name / Woodland species / Insectivore / Hollow-nester
Australian King-Parrot / Alisterus scapularis /  / 
Australian Magpie / Cracticus tibicen / 
Australian Raven / Corvus coronoides / 
Australian Wood Duck / Chenonetta jubata /  / 
Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike^ / Coracina novaehollandiae /  / 
Buff-rumped Thornbill^ / Acanthiza reguloides /  / 
Common Blackbird# / Turdus merula / 
Common Bronzewing / Phaps chalcoptera / 
Common Myna# / Sturnus tristis /  / 
Common Starling# / Sturnus vulgaris /  / 
Crested Pigeon / Ocyphaps lophotes
Crimson Rosella / Platycercus elegans /  / 
Eastern Koel / Eudynamys orientalis / 
Eastern Rosella / Platycercus eximius /  / 
Eastern Spinebill^ / Acanthorhynchus tenuirostris / 
European Goldfinch# / Carduelis carduelis
Galah / Eolophus roseicapillus / 
Gang-gang Cockatoo / Callocephalon fimbriatum /  / 
Grey Fantail / Rhipidura albiscapa /  / 
House Sparrow# / Passer domesticus / 
Laughing Kookaburra / Dacelo novaeguineae /  / 
Little Corella / Cacatua sanguinea / 
Little Raven / Corvus mellori / 
Magpie-lark / Grallina cyanoleuca / 
Masked Lapwing / Vanellus miles / 
Noisy Friarbird / Philemon corniculatus / 
Noisy Miner / Manorina melanocephala /  / 
Pied Currawong / Strepera graculina /  / 
Red Wattlebird / Anthochaera carunculata / 
Red-rumped Parrot^ / Psephotus haematonotus /  / 
Rock Dove# / Columba livia
Silvereye^ / Zosterops lateralis /  / 
Striated Pardalote / Pardalotus striatus /  /  / 
Sulphur-crested Cockatoo / Cacatua galerita / 
Superb Fairy-wren^ / Malurus cyaneus /  / 
Superb Parrot* / Polytelis swainsonii /  / 
Weebill / Smicrornis brevirostris /  / 
Welcome Swallow / Hirundo neoxena / 
White-plumed Honeyeater^ / Lichenostomus penicillatus / 
White-winged Chough / Corcorax melanorhamphos /  / 
Willie Wagtail^ / Rhipidura leucophrys / 
Yellow Thornbill / Acanthiza nana /  / 
Yellow-faced Honeyeater / Lichenostomus chrysops / 
Yellow-rumped Thornbill^ / Acanthiza chrysorrhoa / 

Table S3. The 95% confidence set of models for each bird metric, showing for each model the maximised log-likelihood (Log(L)), number of estimable parameters (K), Akaike’s Information Criterion corrected for small-sample bias (AICc), difference in AICc compared with the model with the lowest AICc (∆i), and the Akaike weights (wi); models are ordered by decreasing Akaike weight. Bold font indicates best-ranked models (∆i ≤2). To produce the 95% confidence set we summed the Akaike weights of the models in the candidate set, in order, from highest till lowest until the sum was ≥0.95. The number of models within the 95% confidence sets could thus vary between bird metrics. . Group codes correspond to: U = land use composition; C= land cover composition; R = residential configuration; G = greenspace configuration.

Models / Log(L) / K / AICc / ∆i / wi
Total species richness / 1. / P+U / -239.25 / 4 / 486.89 / 0.00 / 0.35
2. / P+R / -238.82 / 5 / 488.24 / 1.35 / 0.18
3. / P+U+C / -239.21 / 5 / 489.01 / 2.12 / 0.12
4. / P+U+R / -238.11 / 6 / 489.07 / 2.17 / 0.12
5. / P+R+C / -238.77 / 6 / 490.38 / 3.49 / 0.06
6. / P+U+R+C / -238.11 / 7 / 491.34 / 4.45 / 0.04
7. / P+G+C / -238.42 / 7 / 491.97 / 5.07 / 0.03
8. / P+U+G / -238.45 / 7 / 492.02 / 5.13 / 0.03
9. / P+G+R / -237.44 / 8 / 492.34 / 5.45 / 0.02
10. / P / -243.32 / 3 / 492.87 / 5.98 / 0.02
Abundance / 1. / P+U / -37.09 / 5 / 84.79 / 0.00 / 0.45
2. / P+U+C / -36.94 / 6 / 86.75 / 1.96 / 0.17
3. / P+U+R / -36.87 / 7 / 88.91 / 4.12 / 0.06
4. / P+R / -38.04 / 6 / 88.95 / 4.15 / 0.06
5. / P+G / -38.41 / 6 / 89.69 / 4.90 / 0.04
6. / P+G+C / -36.14 / 8 / 89.79 / 5.00 / 0.04
7. / P+R+C / -37.32 / 7 / 89.81 / 5.02 / 0.04
8. / P+U+G / -36.29 / 8 / 90.10 / 5.31 / 0.03
9. / P+C / -39.81 / 5 / 90.23 / 5.44 / 0.03
10. / P / -41.01 / 4 / 90.42 / 5.62 / 0.03
11. / P+U+R+C / -36.65 / 8 / 90.81 / 6.01 / 0.02
Woodland species richness / 1. / P+U+C / -191.48 / 5 / 393.55 / 0.00 / 0.29
2. / P+U / -193.31 / 4 / 395.00 / 1.46 / 0.14
3. / P+R / -192.24 / 5 / 395.07 / 1.52 / 0.14
4. / P+R+C / -191.27 / 6 / 395.37 / 1.82 / 0.12
5. / P / -195.06 / 3 / 396.35 / 2.80 / 0.07
6. / P+U+R+C / -190.87 / 7 / 396.86 / 3.31 / 0.06
7. / P+C / -194.40 / 4 / 397.20 / 3.65 / 0.05
8. / P+U+R / -192.20 / 6 / 397.23 / 3.68 / 0.05
9. / P+G+C / -191.33 / 7 / 397.79 / 4.24 / 0.04
10. / P+G / -194.01 / 5 / 398.60 / 5.05 / 0.02
Insectivore richness / 1. / P+U / -205.48 / 4 / 419.35 / 0.00 / 0.38
2. / P+U+C / -205.37 / 5 / 421.32 / 1.98 / 0.14
3. / P+R / -205.67 / 5 / 421.92 / 2.57 / 0.10
4. / P+U+R / -204.58 / 6 / 421.99 / 2.65 / 0.10
5. / P+R+C / -205.06 / 6 / 422.96 / 3.61 / 0.06
6. / P+U+G / -204.35 / 7 / 423.82 / 4.47 / 0.04
7. / P+U+R+C / -204.40 / 7 / 423.93 / 4.58 / 0.04
8. / P+G+C / -204.63 / 7 / 424.38 / 5.04 / 0.03
9. / P+G / -207.04 / 5 / 424.68 / 5.33 / 0.03
10. / P+G+R / -203.94 / 8 / 425.34 / 6.00 / 0.02
11. / P / -209.75 / 3 / 425.74 / 6.39 / 0.02
Hollow-nester richness / 1. / P+U / -197.19 / 4 / 402.77 / 0.00 / 0.37
2. / P / -199.16 / 3 / 404.56 / 1.79 / 0.15
3. / P+U+C / -197.18 / 5 / 404.94 / 2.17 / 0.13
4. / P+R / -197.63 / 5 / 405.85 / 3.08 / 0.08
5. / P+C / -198.82 / 4 / 406.02 / 3.25 / 0.07
6. / P+U+R / -197.07 / 6 / 406.97 / 4.20 / 0.05
7. / P+R+C / -197.41 / 6 / 407.65 / 4.88 / 0.03
8. / P+G / -198.59 / 5 / 407.76 / 5.00 / 0.03
9. / P+U+G / -196.55 / 7 / 408.21 / 5.44 / 0.02
10. / P+G+C / -196.55 / 7 / 408.22 / 5.45 / 0.02

References:

1999. Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. Cth.

Bounds J., Taws N. and Cunningham R.B. 2010. A statistical analysis of trends in occupancy rates of woodland birds in the ACT, December 1998 to December 2008: the ten-year data analysis. Canberra Ornithologists Group.

Christidis L. and Boles W. 2008. Systematics and taxonomy of Australian birds. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

Silcocks A., Tzaros C., Weston M. and Olsen P. 2005. An interim guild classification for woodland and grassland birds in Australia. Birds Australia Supplementary Report to State of the Environment Report 2006, Carlton.