SBE: urban planning, global problems, local policies IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 503 (2020) 012097 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/503/1/012097

Urban Ecology. Bird Diversity in Cities in Southern Chile

A Muñoz-Pedreros1
1
Núcleo de Estudios Ambientales. Departamento de Ciencias Ambientales, Facultad
de Recursos Naturales, Universidad Católica de Temuco, Chile.

E-mail: amunoz@uct.cl

Abstract. Urbanisation is a dominant demographic trend and an important component of the

earth’s global transformation. It has unprecedented socioeconomic, cultural and environmental
implications, and poses a threat to the conservation of biodiversity, as it can provoke
alterations in ecological systems and lead to poor functioning of urban systems as they are
currently structured. From the ecological point of view, the city is a fragmented,
heterogeneous, complex mosaic of habitats, including ecosystems with different degrees of
alteration. Urban systems contain only small areas of fragments of original vegetation and/or
artificial green spaces, leading to a drastic decrease from their original abundance and
diversity. However, green spaces, including original fragments, can help to conserve bird
diversity, improving the functioning of these artificial systems in the medium term. This study
looks at the characteristics and benefits of urban ecology in the framework of sustainable
development, and carries out a meta-analysis of research into bird diversity in four cities in
southern Chile, using ecological indices (Shannon-Wiener, β diversity between cities). The
results reveal that there is low evenness in the four cities and that the city with the highest
evenness is Valdivia (J= 0.78). There is clear dominance by a few bird species (e.g. the exotic
species house sparrow Passer domesticus and rock pigeon Columba livia, and the native
species rufous-collared sparrow Zonotricia capensis, austral thrush Turdus falklandii, southern
lapwing Vanellus chilensis, and chimango caracara Milvago chimango). β diversity is low as
the four cities show similarity greater than 50%. Birds reject paved surfaces in squares and
prefer areas with native bushes and trees, with nearby bodies of water and large spaces (parks
rather than squares). The study proposes technical recommendations and suggests further
research.

1. Introduction
Urban ecosystems include not only urban hubs but also suburban areas and villages that are connected
with urbanized areas where the population density is higher. The boundaries are established in the
same way and for the same reasons as the boundaries of any other ecosystem [1]. Although the city is
partly artificial, its surroundings are normally partly natural and there is a profound interaction
between the two systems [2]. The urban ecosystem can be divided into four “colours” [3]: a matrix of
"grey” infrastructure that includes structures and buildings; the “green” infrastructure that brings
together remnants of vegetation and planted areas (e.g. green areas, front and back domestic gardens);
a "blue” infrastructure comprising water bodies (e.g. wetlands); and a "brown" infrastructure that
includes all vacant building land. These four systems are affected by various factors [4] e.g.: (a) the
predominant climate; (b) the substrate the city is built on; (c) the resident organisms (plants, animals,
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
SBE: urban planning, global problems, local policies IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 503 (2020) 012097 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/503/1/012097

micro-organisms and humans); (d) the elevation and slope; and (e) the time over which the city has
developed, constituting the history of the system. This determines the lines of research that must be
addressed in urban ecology, such as urban climate, urban hydrology, urban soils, urban biodiversity,
urban trophic networks, the biogeochemistry of urban systems and the role of humans in those
systems. This research analysed the characteristics and benefits of urban ecology in the framework of
sustainable development and undertook a meta-analysis of research into bird diversity in four cities in
southern Chile.

2. Urban ecology
This is an interdisciplinary science that brings together natural and social sciences to research urban
ecological systems [5] and contributes the most active intersections between biophysical and social
processes [6]. However, this discipline is not progressing as fast as it should, because it is rarely
included as a criterion in urban, land and economic planning [7], even though planners and citizens are
calling for the design of more sustainable urban environments. Like all ecosystems, the urban
ecosystem needs to be addressed by studying its components, structure and function.
The discipline is addressed from two angles [8]: scientific study and urban planning. In science it
has been used to study the distribution and abundance of organisms in cities. In planning, its focus has
been on the design of environmental services and in reducing environmental impacts [9]. These
approaches are complementary: ecologists, botanists and zoologists record, structure and explain how,
in spite of everything, natural systems subsist within a city, while planners, urban designers and
architects contribute rules and a sustainable urban design.
Urban ecology is applied to interventions not only in parks and squares but throughout the green
infrastructure, including private front and back yards and vacant land. In Brazil, the plant richness of
private back gardens was quantified and found to be similar to that of nearby natural ecosystems. In
fact, some species being grown by people in their back yards are classified as under threat of
extinction [10]. While each back yard is small, when added together they achieve substantial
dimensions in cities. For instance, 19.5% of the area of Dayton in the USA is taken up by front and
back domestic gardens [11]. In the Metropolitan area of Santiago (MAS) in Chile, urban front
domestic gardens (homegardens) comprise 26% of the urban area while 37% is covered with trees and
bushes, making up a total of 12,000 hectares of vegetation in front domestic gardens, equal to 19% of
MAS. This is 3.7 times greater than the area of public green areas [12].

3. The benefits of urban ecology

A city that includes urban ecology in its planning will help to improve the quality of life of its
inhabitants, while also contributing towards optimum governance of nature by restoring ecosystem
services through an increase in green infrastructure. This is particularly important when cities are
located in areas of high environmental importance, like wetlands (e.g. lakes, lagoons, rivers, estuaries)
and native forests, an advantage that exists in many cities in southern Chile.
Urban flora mitigates heat islands and its leaves absorb atmospheric pollutants and fix CO2. People
are less exposed to ultraviolet radiation in urban areas with abundant woody vegetation. Urban
ecosystems with more extensive green areas and native vegetation are more resilient, attract more
biological diversity and present better provision of ecosystem services [13]; they also provide control
of the hydric processes of runoff and flooding, reduce noise levels and lower people’s stress through
the beautification of cities [14,15].
Urban green areas are used by some species of the original fauna, contributing to the functioning of
these artificial ecosystems in the long-term, while helping to conserve a certain level of representation
of the original diversity and improving the quality of life of the inhabitants. Green areas can contribute
to the conservation of autochthonous diversity [16], as has been shown in various Latin American
cities [17]. Cities can therefore be just as important a lever for biological conservation as protected
wild areas [18].

2
SBE: urban planning, global problems, local policies IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 503 (2020) 012097 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/503/1/012097

A vision of sustainable development can be discerned in contemporary green area management and
planning [19]. This has been a neostructural trend in urban planning and management since the early
twenty-first century as the State has resumed its organisational functions and assumed its
environmental and social dimensions more actively, at the same time as it has distanced itself from
neoliberalism [20,21].

4. Urban ecology in Chile

More than 40 studies have been published about the urban ecology of big cities in southern Chile [22];
however, most of them report research related to pollution and the loss of ecosystem services, focusing
on atmospheric pollution and aquatic systems. In the city of Concepción (southern Chile), research
was carried out into the changes in land use in the city between 1975 and 2000. This showed a net loss
resulting from urbanisation of 1734 ha of wetlands (23% of the original) and 1417 ha (9%) of
agricultural, forestry and shrubland. The authors also documented 113 species of exotic plants in the
city, while only a few native species were managing to survive [23]. This decrease in native plant
species and increase in exotic plants has also been documented in southern Chile in Valdivia [24] and
Punta Arenas [25].
A 1975 publication documenting the presence of native birds in cities in central Chile was a
pioneer study in the country [26]. In Santiago, 17 species of birds have been recorded in squares [27],
and 27 species in parks [28]. Other studies recorded 25 native bird species in “island hills” (remnant
fragments of native vegetation) within the urban radius, with nine nesting species [29], similar to the
22 species and eight nesting species documented in nearby rural ecosystems [30]. Island hills have
more native vegetation than parks (68.8% vs. 27.4%), and the percentage of native vegetation
correlates positively with bird richness. There is a significant preference for native species [29], which
has also been documented in Chile by other authors [31,32,33]. A large sampling campaign in
Santiago recorded 36 species of birds in parks, island hills and vacant sites [33].

5. Comparing bird diversity in cities in southern Chile

Studies of bird diversity in four cities of southern Chile were included in the meta-analysis (Table 1).
The structures of bird populations in each city for which there was information were characterised as
follows: (a) Shannon-Wiener index, using the following formula: Hʹ = - Σ (pi × log2 pi), where pi is the
proportion of the total number of individuals in the sample corresponding to the species. The values
ranged between zero when there was only one species and the maximum (H′max) corresponding to
log2 S (S=species richness). The Pielou index (J) was also calculated, using the equation: J = Hʹ /
H′max. This index describes the species uniformity within a community. It therefore measures the
proportion of diversity observed (Hʹ) in relation to the maximum expected diversity (H'max). Its
values fluctuate between 0 (minimum heterogeneity) and 1 (maximum heterogeneity, that is to say the
species are equally abundant) [34]. (b) β diversity (between cities) is represented by a dissimilarity
dendrogram based on the Bray-Curtis index [35], and by the unweighted pair group method with
arithmetic mean (UPGMA). The level of significance (p = 0.05) of the results of the dendrogram was
determined by calculating the 95% percentile of similarity pseudoranges obtained by bootstrapping
with 10,000 iterations. These indices are calculated based on the frequencies provided in the
publications analysed.
In Concepción, 27 species were documented but the study was limited to a university campus [36],
with 10 census sites and the results grouped by human traffic, vegetation cover and the presence of
water bodies. The diversity was higher in sites with little human presence, with micro wetlands and
with trees and bushes. In Temuco, bird diversity was studied in squares, parks and the median strips of
wide avenues (Figure 1). Significant differences were found between these types of green space, with
a negative correlation with areas of bare soil and a positive correlation with the size of the green areas
and the native origin of the bushes. No correlation was found with vehicle flow [32].

3
SBE: urban planning, global problems, local policies IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 503 (2020) 012097 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/503/1/012097

Figure 1. Habitat types studied in the city of Temuco in southern Chile

In Valdivia, 23 bird species were registered in squares [37], and guilds were studied according to
habitat use. It was established that the most frequent species were those that used trees as sites for
nesting and perching and fed on the ground or among the foliage. This city is close to the Pacific
Ocean and surrounded by wetlands and fragments of native forest, which explains the presence of
some birds from aquatic environments [38]. It is to be hoped that the diversity is greater than that
documented as the research did not include all of the extensive urban wetlands in the city. In Osorno
34 species of birds were registered in two urban parks (squares were not included in the census). Both
parks border a river and therefore have riverside habitats; one has a fragment of original native forest.
This explains the occurrence of aquatic bird species (e.g. ducks, egrets) and the fact that some of them
nest, although the authors unfortunately did not report on this topic in depth [39]. A review of the
urban-rural gradients for each city is needed to put the results into context [40,41,42].
A few species dominate in each of the four cities, such as rufous-collared sparrows Zonotricia
capensis, austral thrushes Turdus falklandii, southern lapwings Vanellus chilensis, house sparrows
Passer domesticus, rock pigeons Columba livia and chimango caracaras Milvago chimango. The
Shannon-Wiener and Pielou indices show low evenness in the three cities, i.e. within the guild of birds
there are a few species with high frequency and many species with low frequency. The city with the
greatest evenness is Valdivia (J= 0.78) (Table 1)

4
 SBE: urban planning, global problems, local policies IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 503 (2020) 012097 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/503/1/012097

Richness of
Surface Period of
No. squares/ native / Diversity Most abundant species (> 5%)
City area the year of Source
parks/island hills exotic indices
(in ha) the census
species

Austral thrush Turdus falklandii 28.8%

Rock pigeon Columba livia* 19.4%
Black-chinned siskin Carduelis barbata 9.9%
Concepció 6 urban areas and 4 January to
n/i 41/3 n/i Southern lapwing Vanellus chilensis 6.3% [36]
n green spaces December
Green-backed firecrown Sephanoides sephaniodes
5.1%
House sparrow Passer domesticus* 5,0%
House sparrow Passer domesticus* 35.5%
5 squares H’= 3.06 Southern lapwing Vanellus chilensis 6.3%
September
Temuco 2 parks 49.6 36/3 Hmax= 4.91 Austral thrush Turdus falklandii 9.0% [32]
to August
2 median strips J= 0.62 Chimango caracara Milvago chimango 8.9%
Grassland yellow-inch Sicalis luteola 6.6%
House sparrow Passer domesticus* 23.3%
H’= 3.56
15 squares Black-faced ibis Theristicus melanopis 13.6%
Valdivia n/i November 23/2 Hmax= 4.52 [37]
Rock pigeon Columba livia* 12.7%
J= 0.78
Chimango caracara Milvago chimango 10.0%
Southern lapwing Vanellus chilensis 24.7%
Chilean swallow Tachycineta meyeni 10.9%
H’= 3.81 Black-faced ibis Theristicus melanopis 9.7%
June to
Osorno 2 parks 20.2 34/2 Hmax= 5.00 Yellow-billed pintail Anas geórgica 9.1% [39]
February
J= 0.76 Chimango caracara Milvago chimango 8.4%
Blue-and-white swallow Pygochelidon cyanoleuca
5.8%
Table 1. Bird diversity in four cities in southern Chile.
*= exotic species. n/i= no information.

 diversity is low (Figure 2) as the four cities show similarity greater than 50%. The cluster of
Valdivia and Temuco has a similarity of 75.4%. Osorno is the city with the greatest dissimilarity; it is
closest to Valdivia with 58.2% similarity.

Figure 2. Bird diversity similarity/dissimilarity in four cities in southern Chile

5
SBE: urban planning, global problems, local policies IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 503 (2020) 012097 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/503/1/012097

6. Conclusions
(a) In the cities studied, a few species dominate (low evenness); (b) The four cities have many
species in common, with few differences (low β diversity); (c) The diversity is greater in large areas
(parks versus squares); (d) Birds prefer native species of bushes and trees; (e) Birds reject paved areas
in squares and prefer herbaceous areas, bushes and trees; (f) Bird diversity varies significantly by type
of ecosystem (e.g. squares, parks, hills, wetlands, streets), and areas with trees and bushes and with
bodies of water nearby are preferred; (g) The majority of these studies analyse the frequency,
abundance and diversity of birds and their relationship with factors like area, the proportion of native
versus exotic vegetation, vegetation diversity and proximity to the sources of organisms (mountains,
water courses); (h) There is scant knowledge about reproductive aspects of birds, their relationship
with the vegetation and the degree of urbanization of green spaces; (i) These studies did not consider
all the ecosystems present in the cities, nor did they analyse the effect of suburban ecosystems or those
that are close to very natural areas.

7. Recommendations
Several authors in Chile have made recommendations that are rarely considered [30]. Some of the
following recommendations have been selected from previous works, while others have been added
for application in the practical sphere and the short term: (a) Reforest squares, parks, front and back
yard, and public gardens with native species of bushes and trees originally from that area; (b)
Maintain and increase native plants and trees with flowers and fruit that are eaten by fauna; (c)
Maintain existing large, leafy trees and limit how much they are pruned. If necessary, demand that
electricity cables be run underground. Retain cavities as refuges; (d) Carry out an urban environmental
education programme to motivate citizens to intervene in their front and back gardens with native
species and devices for fauna (e.g. nesting boxes, perches).
When researching urban ecosystems, the following are recommended: (a) Standardise research
methods so they are comparable; (b) Carry out long-term research that considers what habitat
resources are available and their use, the preference or avoidance of environments and the effect of the
urban-rural gradient; (c) Carry out research into the landscape connections between rural, suburban
and urban areas, considering the presence of regional green corridors and green areas with high/dense
vegetation that offer a real or potential habitat for fauna.

References
[1] Pickett S T, Cadenasso M L, Grove J M, Boone C G, Groffman P M, Irwin E, and Pouyat R V
2011 Urban ecological systems: Scientific foundations and a decade of progress. J Environ
Manage 92 331–362
[2] Amaya C A 2005 El ecosistema urbano: simbiosis espacial entre lo natural y lo artificial. Rev
For Latinoam 37 1–17
[3] Faggi A, and Caula S 2017 ‘Green’ or ‘Gray’? Infrastructure and Bird Ecology in Urban Latin
America. In: MacGregor-Fors I, Escobar-Ibáñez J editors Avian Ecology in Latin American
Cityscapes. (Cham: Springer). DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63475-3_5
[4] Chapin F S III, Matson P A, and Mooney H A 2002 Principles of terrestrial ecosystem
ecology. (New York: Springer-Verlag)
[5] Grimm N B, Faeth S H and Golubiewski N E et al 2008 Global change and the ecology of
cities. Science 319 756–760
[6] Dooling S, Gray B J, and Greye A 2007 Response to Young and Wolf: goal attainment in urban
ecology research. Urban Ecosyst 10 339–347
[7] Beardsley K, Thorne J H, Roth N E, et al 2009 Assessing the influence of rapid urban growth
and regional policies on biological resources. Landsc Urban Plan 93 172–183
[8] Sukopp H 1998 Urban Ecology. Scientific and Practical Aspect. In: Breuste J, Feldmann H, and
Uhlmann O editors. Urban Ecology (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer). p 3–16
[9] Deelstra T 1998 Towards ecological sustainable cities: strategies, models and tools. In: Breuste

6
SBE: urban planning, global problems, local policies IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 503 (2020) 012097 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/503/1/012097

J, Feldmann H, and Uhlmann O Urban Ecology. (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer) p 17–22

[10] Angeoletto F, Essy C, Ruiz J P, Fonseca da Silva F, Massulo R, Maciel S, and Jeater W 2015
Ecología Urbana: la Ciencia Interdisciplinaria del Planeta Ciudad. Desenvolvimento em
Questão 13 6-20
[11] Sanders R A, Stevens J C 1984 Urban forest of Dayton, Ohio: a preliminary assessment. Urban
Ecology 8 91-98
[12] Reyes-Paecke S, and Meza L 2011 Jardines residenciales en Santiago de Chile: Extensión,
distribución y cobertura vegetal. Rev Chil Hist Nat 84 581–592
[13] Davies R G, Barbosa O, and Fuller R A 2008 City-wide relationships between green spaces,
urban land use and topography. Urban Ecosystems 11 269–287
[14] [Mcpherson E 1992 Accounting for benefits and costs of urban greenspace. Landsc Urban Plan
22 41-51
[15] [Mòrtberg U 2001 Resident bird species in urban forest remnants; landscape and habitat
perspectives. Landsc Ecol 16 193–203
[16] Chace J and Walsh J 2006 Urban effects on native avifauna: a review. Landsc Urban Plan 74
46-69
[17] Ortega-Álvarez R, and MacGregor-Fors I 2011 Dusting off the file: A review of knowledge on
urban ornithology in Latin America. Landsc Urban Plan 101 1–10
[18] Botkin D B and Beveridge C E 1997 Cities as environments. Urban ecosystems 1 3–19
[19] Flores-Xolocotzi R 2012 Incorporando desarrollo sustentable y gobernanza a la gestión y
planificación de áreas verdes urbanas. Frontera norte 24 165–190
[20] Steinberg F 2005 Strategic urban planning in Latin America: Experiences of building and
managing the future. Habitat International 29 69–93
[21] Barton J 2006 Sustentabilidad urbana como planeación estratégica. Rev Eure 32 27–45
[22] Cursach J A, Rau J R, Tobar C N, and Ojeda J A 2012 Estado actual del desarrollo de la
ecología urbana en grandes ciudades del sur de Chile. Rev Geogr Norte Grande 52: 57–70
[23] Pauchard A, Aguayo M, Peña E, and Urrutia R 2006 Multiple effects of urbanization on the
biodiversity of developing countries: The case of a fastgrowing metropolitan area
(Concepción, Chile). Biol Conservation 127: 272–281
[24] Finot V, and Ramírez C 1996 Fitosociología de la vegetación ruderal de la ciudad de Valdivia
(X región-Chile). 1. Vegetación nitrófila. Studia Botanica 15: 159–170
[25] Rozzi R, Massardo F, Silander J, Dollenz O, Connolly B, Anderson C, and Turner N 2003
Árboles nativos y exóticos en las plazas de Magallanes. An Inst Patagonia 31: 27-32
[26] Solar V, and Hoffmann R 1975 Las aves de la ciudad. Colección Expedición a Chile, (Santiago
de Chile: Editora Nacional Gabriela Mistral)
[27] Estades C F 1995 Aves y vegetación urbana: el caso de las plazas. Bol Chil Ornitol 2: 7-13
[28] Urquiza A, and Mella J E 2002 Riqueza y diversidad de aves en parques de Santiago durante el
periodo estival. Bol Chil Ornitol 9: 12–21
[29] Mella J E, and Loutit A 2007 Ecología comunitaria y reproductiva de aves en cerros islas y
parques de Santiago. Bol Chil Ornitol 13: 13–27
[30] Lazo I and Anabalon J 1992 Dinámica reproductiva de un conjunto de aves passeriformes de la
sabana de espinos de Chile central. Ornitol Neotropical 3: 57–64
[31] Díaz I and Armesto J J 2003 La conservación de las aves silvestres en ambientes urbanos de
Santiago. Ambiente y Desarrollo 19 31–38
[32] Muñoz-Pedreros A, M González, F Encina-Montoya and HV Norambuena 2018 Bird diversity
in green areas in a city in southern Chile. Effect of vegetation strata and human disturbance.
Avian Research 9: 38. doi.org/10.1186/s40657-018-0130-9
[33] Muñoz C E , Undurraga M, Saratscheff T, Rannou T and Celis-Diez J L 2018 Diversidad y
conocimiento de las aves urbanas por habitantes de Santiago, Chile. En: Figueroa J and
Lazzoni I (eds) Biodiversidad urbana en Chile: Estado del arte y los desafíos futuros
(Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Universidad Central de Chile) p 283–315

7
SBE: urban planning, global problems, local policies IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 503 (2020) 012097 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/503/1/012097

[34] Maurer B A and McGill B J 2011 Measurement of species diversity. In: Magurran A E and
McGill B J, editors. Frontiers in measurement and assessment. (Oxford: Oxford University
Press)
[35] Bray J R and Curtis J T 1957 An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern
Wisconsin. Ecol Monogr 27: 325–49
[36] Hinojosa-Sáez A, Valenzuela-Dellarossa G, and González-Acuña D 2007 Avifauna del Barrio
Universitario de Concepción. Bol Chil Ornitol 13 42–46.
[37] Díaz I A, Chávez C, and Godoy-Güinao J 2018 Historia natural y uso del hábitat de las aves de
paisajes urbanos en Santiago y Valdivia. En: Figueroa J and I Lazzoni editores Biodiversidad
urbana en Chile: Estado del arte y los desafíos futuros: 245-281. (Santiago de Chile:
Ediciones Universidad Central de Chile)
[38] Silva C P, García C E, Estay S A, and Barbosa O 2015 Bird richness and abundance in response
to urban form in a Latin American city: Valdivia, Chile as a case study. PLoS One, 10(9)
e0138120
[39] Cursach J, and Rau J 2008 Avifauna presente en dos parques urbanos de la ciudad de Osorno,
sur de Chile. Bol Chil Ornitol 14 98-103
[40] Pauchard A, Aguayo M Y, and Alaback P 2006 Cuantificando la fragmentación del paisaje: las
métricas y sus significados ecológicos. En: Grez A, Simonetti J and Bustamante R editores.
Biodiversidad en ambientes fragmentados de Chile: patrones y procesos a diferentes
escalas (Santiago de Chile: Editorial Universitaria) p 41–67
[41] Vergara G, and Ibarra T 2019 Paisajes en transición: gradientes urbano-rurales y antropización
del bosque templado andino del sur de Chile. Rev Geogr Norte Grande 73 93-111
[42] Torres-Gómez M, Delgado L, Marín V, and Bustamante R 2009 Estructura del paisaje a lo largo
de gradientes urbano-rurales en la cuenca del río Aisén (Región de Aisén, Chile). Rev Chil
Hist Nat 82 73–82