DOI: 10.5061/dryad.k7c3v
title: Data from: Comparative demographics of a Hawaiian forest bird community

description: Estimates of demographic parameters such as survival and reproductive
 success are critical for guiding management efforts focused on species of
 conservation concern. Unfortunately, reliable demographic parameters are
 difficult to obtain for any species, but especially for rare or endangered
 species. Here we derived estimates of adult survival and recruitment in a
 community of Hawaiian forest birds, including eight native species (of
 which three are endangered) and two introduced species at Hakalau Forest
 National Wildlife Refuge, Hawaiʻi. Integrated population models (IPM) were
 used to link mark–recapture data (1994–1999) with long-term population
 surveys (1987–2008). To our knowledge, this is the first time that IPM
 have been used to characterize demographic parameters of a whole avian
 community, and provides important insights into the life history
 strategies of the community. The demographic data were used to test two
 hypotheses: 1) arthropod specialists, such as the ‘Akiapōlā‘au Hemignathus
 munroi, are ‘slower’ species characterized by a greater relative
 contribution of adult survival to population growth, i.e. lower fecundity
 and increased adult survival; and 2) a species’ susceptibility to
 environmental change, as reflected by its conservation status, can be
 predicted by its life history traits. We found that all species were
 characterized by a similar population growth rate around one,
 independently of conservation status, origin (native vs non-native),
 feeding guild, or life history strategy (as measured by ‘slowness’), which
 suggested that the community had reached an equilibrium. However, such
 stable dynamics were achieved differently across feeding guilds, as
 demonstrated by a significant increase of adult survival and a significant
 decrease of recruitment along a gradient of increased insectivory, in
 support of hypothesis 1. Supporting our second hypothesis, we found that
 slower species were more vulnerable species at the global scale than
 faster ones. The possible causes and conservation implications of these
 patterns are discussed.
description: Individual (adult)
 mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species =
 AKEP)Data used as input for
 the IPM, here in the MARK format.AKEP.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = AKEP)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).AKEP.Counts.txtIndividual (adult) mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species = AKIP)Data used as input for the IPM, here in the MARK format.AKIP.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = AKIP)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).AKIP.Counts.txtIndividual (adult) mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species = APAP)Data used as input for the IPM, here in the MARK format.APAP.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = APAP)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).APAP.Counts.txtIndividual (adult) mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species = ELEP)Data used as input for the IPM, here in the MARK format.ELEP.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = ELEP)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).ELEP.Counts.txtIndividual (adult) mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species = HAAM)Data used as input for the IPM, here in the MARK format.HAAM.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = HAAM)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).HAAM.Counts.txtIndividual (adult) mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species = HCRE)Data used as input for the IPM, here in the MARK format.HCRE.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = HCRE)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).HCRE.Counts.txtIndividual (adult) mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species = IIWI)Data used as input for the IPM, here in the MARK format.IIWI.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = IIWI)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).IIWI.Counts.txtIndividual (adult) mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species = JAWE)Data used as input for the IPM, here in the MARK format.JAWE.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = JAWE)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).JAWE.Counts.txtIndividual (adult) mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species = OMAO)Data used as input for the IPM, here in the MARK format.OMAO.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = OMAO)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).OMAO.Counts.txtIndividual (adult) mark-recapture histories for the 1994-1999 period (species = RBLE)Data used as input for the IPM, here in the MARK format.RBLE.CH.inpActual annual female abundance for the 1994-1999 period (species = RBLE)We fitted species-specific state-space models for annual abundance data over the 1987-2008 period outside the IPM, and used the 1994-1999 error-filtered female abundance as input to the IPM (data presented here).RBLE.Counts.txt