Bolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, Stevens MH, et al. Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol. 2009;24:127–35.
Article
Google Scholar
Bonter DN, Zuckerberg B, Sedgwick CW, Hochachka WM. Daily foraging patterns in free-living birds: exploring the predation–starvation trade-off. Proc R Soc London B: Biol Sci. 2013;280:20123087.
Article
Google Scholar
Breckheimer I. Mapping habitat quality in conservation’s neglected geography. Doctoral dissertation. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina; 2012.
Brown JS. Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 1988;22:37–47.
Article
Google Scholar
Brown JS, Alkon PU. Testing values of crested porcupine habitats by experimental food patches. Oecologia. 1990;83:512–8.
Article
Google Scholar
Brown JS, Kotler BP. Hazardous duty pay and the foraging cost of predation. Ecol Lett. 2004;7:999–1014.
Article
Google Scholar
Burnham KP, Anderson DR. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2002.
Google Scholar
Charnov EL. Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theor Popul Biol. 1976;9:129–36.
Article
CAS
Google Scholar
Collins KA, Horn DJ. The role of oil content and size in seed selection by wild birds. Illinois State Acad Sci Trans. 2012;105(3/4):107.
Google Scholar
Cresswell W. Non-lethal effects of predation in birds. Ibis. 2008;150:3–17.
Article
Google Scholar
Deshpande SS. Fungal toxins. In: Deshpande SS, editor. Handbook Food Toxicol. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.; 2002. p. 413–7.
Chapter
Google Scholar
Dostine PL, Franklin DC. A comparison of the diet of three finch species in the Yinberrie Hills area, Northern Territory. Emu. 2002;102:159–64.
Article
Google Scholar
Eccard JA, Pusenius J, Sundell J, Halle S, Ylönen H. Foraging patterns of voles at heterogeneous avian and uniform mustelid predation risk. Oecologia. 2008;157:725–34.
Article
Google Scholar
Ezealor AU. Critical sites for biodiversity conservation in Nigeria. Lekki: Nigerian Conservation Foundation; 2002.
Google Scholar
Greig-Smith PW, Wilson MF. Influences of seed size, nutrient composition and phenolic content on the preferences of bullfinches feeding in ash trees. Oikos. 1985;1:47–54.
Article
Google Scholar
Higginson AD, Fawcett TW, Trimmer PC, McNamara JM, Houston AI. Generalized optimal risk allocation: foraging and antipredator behavior in a fluctuating environment. Am Nat. 2012;180:589–603.
Article
Google Scholar
Kamil AC, Krebs JR, Pulliam HR, editors. Foraging behavior. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.
Google Scholar
Karasov WH, del Rio CM. Physiological ecology: how animals process energy, nutrients, and toxins. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2007.
Google Scholar
Kelly JF. Population limitation in birds. Auk. 1999;116:866.
Article
Google Scholar
Kotler BP. Behavioral resource depression and decaying perceived risk of predation in two species of coexisting gerbils. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 1992;30:239–444.
Article
Google Scholar
Legge S, Garnett S, Maute K, Heathcote J, Murphy S, Woinarski JC, et al. A landscape-scale, applied fire management experiment promotes recovery of a population of the threatened Gouldian Finch, Erythrura gouldiae, in Australia’s Tropical Savannas. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0137997.
Article
Google Scholar
Lemon WC. Fitness consequences of foraging behavior in the zebra finch. Nature. 1991;352:153.
Article
Google Scholar
Lomas SC, Whisson DA, Maguire GS, Tan LX, Guay PJ, Weston MA. The influence of cover on nesting red-capped plovers: a trade-off between thermoregulation and predation risk? Victor Nat. 2014;131:115.
Google Scholar
Matson KD, Millam JR, Klasing KC. Cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus) reject very low levels of plant secondary compounds. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2004;85:141–56.
Article
Google Scholar
McNamara JM, Houston AI. The value of fat reserves and the tradeoff between starvation and predation. Acta Biotheor. 1990;38:37–61.
Article
CAS
Google Scholar
Molokwu M, Olsson O, Nilsson JÅ, Ottosson U. Seasonal variation in patch use in a tropical African environment. Oikos. 2008;117:892–8.
Article
Google Scholar
Morris DW, Davidson DL. Optimally foraging mice match patch use with habitat differences in fitness. Ecology. 2000;81:2061–6.
Article
Google Scholar
Mwansat GS, Lohdip YN, Dami FD. Activities of the AP Leventis, the West African foremost ornithological research center. Sci World J. 2011;6:9–12.
Article
Google Scholar
Newton I. Population limitation in birds. New York: Academic Press; 1998.
Google Scholar
Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-137; 2012. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme. Accessed 15 May 2019.
Odoemelam SA, Osu CI. Aflatoxin B1 contamination of some edible grains marketed in Nigeria. J Chem. 2009;6:308–14.
CAS
Google Scholar
Olsson OL, Molokwu MN. On the missed opportunity cost, GUD, and estimating environmental quality. Israel J Ecol Evol. 2007;53:263–78.
Article
Google Scholar
Olsson O, Brown JS, Smith HG. Long-and short-term state-dependent foraging under predation risk: an indication of habitat quality. Anim Behav. 2002;63:981–9.
Article
Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Version 2.15.1. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2017. http://cran.rproject.org/. Accessed 20 Apr 2019.
Roff D, editor. Evolution of life histories: theory and analysis. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 1993.
Google Scholar
Russell L, Jonathan L, Maxime H. emmeans: estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1.1.2; 2018. https://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=emmeans. Accessed 27 May 2019
Saracco JF, Collazo JA, Groom MJ. How do frugivores track resources? Insights from spatial analyses of bird foraging in a tropical forest. Oecologia. 2004;139:235–45.
Article
Google Scholar
Schielzeth H. Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients. Methods Ecol Evol. 2010;1:103–13.
Article
Google Scholar
Schmidt KA, Brown JS, Morgan RA. Plant defenses as complementary resources: a test with squirrels. Oikos. 1998;81:130–42.
Article
Google Scholar
Shochat E, Lerman SB, Katti M, Lewis DB. Linking optimal foraging behavior to bird community structure in an urban-desert landscape: field experiments with artificial food patches. Am Nat. 2004;164:232–43.
Article
Google Scholar
Stankowich T, Blumstein DT. Fear in animals: a meta-analysis and review of risk assessment. Proc R Soc London B Biol Sci. 2005;272:2627–34.
Article
Google Scholar
Stearns SC. The evolution of life histories. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1992.
Google Scholar
Stephens DW, Krebs JR. Foraging theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1986.
Google Scholar
Tobias JA, Sekercioglu CH, Vargas FH. Bird conservation in tropical ecosystems: challenges and opportunities. Key Topics Conserv Biol. 2013;2:258–76.
Article
Google Scholar
Tvardíková K, Fuchs R. Do birds behave according to dynamic risk assessment theory? A feeder experiment. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2011;65:727–33.
Article
Google Scholar
Vickery J, Jones PJ. A new ornithological institute in Nigeria. Bull Afr Bird Club. 2002;9:61–2.
Google Scholar
Wilmers CC, Nickel B, Bryce CM, Smith JA, Wheat RE, Yovovich V. The golden age of bio-logging: how animal-borne sensors are advancing the frontiers of ecology. Ecology. 2015;96:1741–53.
Article
Google Scholar
Witter MS, Cuthill IC. The ecological costs of avian fat storage. Phil Trans R Soc London B Biol Sci. 1993;340:73–92.
Article
CAS
Google Scholar
Wolf LL, Hainsworth FR. Temporal patterning of feeding by hummingbirds. Anim Behav. 1977;25:976–89.
Article
Google Scholar
Zimmer C, Boos M, Poulin N, Gosler A, Petit O, Robin JP. Evidence of the trade-off between starvation and predation risks in ducks. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e22352.
Article
CAS
Google Scholar