The widespread use of artificial nestboxes has led to significant advances in our knowledge of the ecology, behaviour and physiology of cavity nesting birds, especially small passerines. Nestboxes have made it easier to perform routine monitoring and experimental manipulation of eggs or nestlings, and also repeatedly to capture, identify and manipulate the parents. However, when comparing results across study sites the use of nestboxes may also introduce a potentially significant confounding variable in the form of differences in nestbox design amongst studies, such as their physical dimensions, placement height, and the way in which they are constructed and maintained. However, the use of nestboxes may also introduce an unconsidered and potentially significant confounding variable due to differences in nestbox design amongst studies, such as their physical dimensions, placement height, and the way in which they are constructed and maintained. Here we review to what extent the characteristics of artificial nestboxes (e.g. size, shape, construction material, colour) are documented in the 'methods' sections of publications involving hole-nesting passerine birds using natural or excavated cavities or artificial nestboxes for reproduction and roosting. Despite explicit previous recommendations that authors describe in detail the characteristics of the nestboxes used, we found that the description of nestbox characteristics in most recent publications remains poor and insufficient. We therefore list the types of descriptive data that should be included in the methods sections of relevant manuscripts and justify this by discussing how variation in nestbox characteristics can affect or confound conclusions from nestbox studies. We also propose several recommendations to improve the reliability and usefulness of research based on long-term studies of any secondary hole-nesting species using artificial nestboxes for breeding or roosting.Peer Reviewe

Some bird species place in their nests fresh green plant materials, e.g. leaves, sprigs or branches of herbs, shrubs and trees, which are not a part of the basic nest structure. These additional materials are often characterised by a high content of volatile secondary metabolites and constitute a non-random, small fraction of plants available in the habitat. Several non-mutually exclusive hypotheses have been proposed to explain the function of green material in avian nests with three of them attracting the most attention. The courtship hypothesis proposes that green material is used by males in order to attract females to nesting sites. The nest protection hypothesis posits that birds place in the nest green material rich in volatile compounds to reduce the abundance of parasites and pathogens which, in turn, should mitigate their negative impact on the host. According to the drug hypothesis green material directly positively affects the health and development of nestlings, e.g. through stimulation of some components of the nestlings’ immune system. Here, we present an overview of hypotheses explaining the phenomenon of green material in avian nests with a thorough description of three most frequently tested hypotheses and suggest the directions for future studies.

The integration and synthesis of the data in different areas of science is drastically slowed and hindered by a lack of standards and networking programmes. Long‐term studies of individually marked animals are not an exception. These studies are especially important as instrumental for understanding evolutionary and ecological processes in the wild. Furthermore, their number and global distribution provides a unique opportunity to assess the generality of patterns and to address broad‐scale global issues (e.g. climate change). To solve data integration issues and enable a new scale of ecological and evolutionary research based on long‐term studies of birds, we have created the SPI‐Birds Network and Database (www.spibirds.org)—a large‐scale initiative that connects data from, and researchers working on, studies of wild populations of individually recognizable (usually ringed) birds. Within year and a half since the establishment, SPI‐Birds has recruited over 120 members, and currently hosts data on almost 1.5 million individual birds collected in 80 populations over 2,000 cumulative years, and counting. SPI‐Birds acts as a data hub and a catalogue of studied populations. It prevents data loss, secures easy data finding, use and integration and thus facilitates collaboration and synthesis. We provide community‐derived data and meta‐data standards and improve data integrity guided by the principles of Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR), and aligned with the existing metadata languages (e.g. ecological meta‐data language). The encouraging community involvement stems from SPI‐Bird's decentralized approach: research groups retain full control over data use and their way of data management, while SPI‐Birds creates tailored pipelines to convert each unique data format into a standard format. We outline the lessons learned, so that other communities (e.g. those working on other taxa) can adapt our successful model. Creating community‐specific hubs (such as ours, COMADRE for animal demography, etc.) will aid much‐needed large‐scale ecological data integration.

Nests are structures built to support and protect eggs and/or offspring from predators, parasites, and adverse weather conditions. Nests are mainly constructed prior to egg laying, meaning that parent birds must make decisions about nest site choice and nest building behavior before the start of egg‐laying. Parent birds should be selected to choose nest sites and to build optimally sized nests, yet our current understanding of clutch size‐nest size relationships is limited to small‐scale studies performed over short time periods. Here, we quantified the relationship between clutch size and nest size, using an exhaustive database of 116 slope estimates based on 17,472 nests of 21 species of hole and non‐hole‐nesting birds. There was a significant, positive relationship between clutch size and the base area of the nest box or the nest, and this relationship did not differ significantly between open nesting and hole‐nesting species. The slope of the relationship showed significant intraspecific and interspecific heterogeneity among four species of secondary hole‐nesting species, but also among all 116 slope estimates. The estimated relationship between clutch size and nest box base area in study sites with more than a single size of nest box was not significantly different from the relationship using studies with only a single size of nest box. The slope of the relationship between clutch size and nest base area in different species of birds was significantly negatively related to minimum base area, and less so to maximum base area in a given study. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that bird species have a general reaction norm reflecting the relationship between nest size and clutch size. Further, they suggest that scientists may influence the clutch size decisions of hole‐nesting birds through the provisioning of nest boxes of varying sizes.