Mitchell et al. • DICKCISSEL NESTLING PROVISIONING 
307 
in the early (2009) and middle (2008 and 2009) 
pans of the nesting season. Third, helping may be 
more advantageous to the male al later nest ages 
because the nest's reproductive value increases 
dose to fledging (Igl and Best 2001 and references 
(herein). We observed male helping on days 
4 through 7 but. because we only filmed during 
those days, we cannot say whether male helping 
increased at >7 days of the nestling period or was 
absent prior to day 4. Fourth, male provisioning 
could be favored in lower quality habitats (lgl and 
Best 2001), but there is no evidence that old field 
habitats and field buffers in which male helping has 
been observed (Igl and Best 2001. this study) are 
low quality for Dickcissels. Fifth, male helping 
may be unique to specific individual Dickcissels or 
local populations (Maddox and Bollinger 2(MX). Igl 
and Best 2001). However, 14 of 21 locations where 
this behavior has been observed (including our 
study) are in the core breeding range of Dickcissels 
(Igl and Best 2001). Males may be more likely to 
help w'hen there are few females (Sejberg et al. 
7000. Igl and Best 2001) because, in polygynous 
systems, monogamous males (or those w ith fewer 
females) have more time available to help 
compared to males with multiple females (Sejberg 
et al. 2000). We did not mark birds and cannot 
address this hypothesis. 
CONSERVATION IMPLICATIONS 
Accessible and nutritional arthropod prey lot- 
grassland birds is a key factor for conservation of 
grassland species that use conservation set-aside 
lands (Whittingham and Evans 2004). Native 
grass held buffers in our study provided nestling 
t( »d resources similar to or better in quality (e.g., 
I'iotnass and prey taxa) compared to surrounding 
habitats. Native grass habitats (like CP33 buffers) 
may typically provide habitat for more farmland 
h, rds compared to clean-farming practices (e.g., 
Hellenes et al. 2003); greater structural com¬ 
ity on a landscape level may attract more 
birds overall (Rodenhouse and Best 1994. Jones 
el a|, 2005). Agri-environmental practices which 
support arthropod populations and decrease per- 
eeived and actual predation risk may improve 
foraging rates and survival (Whittingham and 
Ev ans 2004). More research on nestling provi¬ 
sioning by grassland birds should be conducted in 
intensively managed agricultural landscapes and 
native prairies, particularly prey selection and 
foraging success of adults away from the nest. 
Continuous video documentation of nest activity 
allows well-concealed activities to be directly 
observed and better quantified. More intensive 
video documentation of Dickeissel nesting behav¬ 
ior should be conducted with other populations to 
understand the true frequency of male helping and 
identify its causes. 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 
We thank the USDA-NRCS Agricultural Wildlife 
Conservation Center, College of Forest Resources. Mis¬ 
sissippi Agricultural and forestry Experiment Station, and 
the Forest anti Wildlife Research Center for funding. We 
thank B. Bryan Farms Inc. for allowing us to work on 
private property. II. L. Adams. K K. Armstrong. J. R. 
Bradford. A. S. Brown. J Ci. Dollar. A. B. DiNuovo, S. L. 
Male, R. A. Hicks, W. H. Mitchell II. and A. A. Workman 
helped collect data. W. If Mitchell II and N. A. Stukey 
helped process videosand enter data, h D. Doxon reviewed 
an earlier version of our manuscript. I he use of trade names 
or products does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. 
Government. 
LITERATURE CITED 
Adams, 11. L. 2011. Agricultural conservation buffers for 
breeding grassland birds in eastern Mississippi. 
Dissertation. Mississippi State University. Mississippi 
State, USA. 
ANDERSSON, M. 1981. Central place foraging in the 
Whinchat, Saxicoln rubetra. Ecology 62:538-544. 
ANDERSSON. M., .1. WaLLANPER. AND D. lSAKSSON. 2009. 
Predator perches: a visual search perspective. Func¬ 
tional Ecology 23:373-379. 
Bizi.. P., A. Roulin, L. F. Bersier. D. Pfluger, and H. 
RjCHNI-.k. 2003. Parasitism and developmental plastic¬ 
ity in Alpine Swift nestlings. Journal of Animal 
Ecology 72:633-639. 
Brennan. L. A. and W. P. Kuvleskv Jr. 2005. North 
American grassland birds: an unfolding conservation 
crisis? Journal of Wildlife Management 69:1 13. 
Brickle. N. W.. D. G. C. Harper, N. .1. AEmsrutR, and 
S. H. COCKAYNE. 2000. Effects of agricultural 
intensification on the breeding success of Corn 
Buntings Miliaria calandra. Journal ol Applied 
Ecology 37:742-755. 
BRITSCHGI, A.. K. SPAAR. and R. ARl.f.TI AZ, 2006, Impact 
of grassland farming intensification on the breeding 
ecology of an indicator insectivorous passerine, the 
Whinchat Saxicola rubetra : lessons For overall alpine 
meadowland management. Biological Conservation 
130:193-205. 
BRYANT. D. M. and K. R. Westerterp. 1983. Time and 
energy limits to brood size in House Martins 
<Delichon urbica). Journal of Animal Ecology 52: 
905-925. 
Clinchy. M.. L. Zanette, R. Boonstra, J. C. Wingfield, 
and J. N. M. Smith. 2004. Balancing food and 
predator pressure induces chronic stress in songbirds. 
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B 
271:2473-2479. 
