• P-ISSN 0974-6846 E-ISSN 0974-5645

Indian Journal of Science and Technology

Article

Waterbird Density and Habitat Utilisation Pattern in Wular Lake, Kashmir, India
  • VIEWS 2209
  • PDF 840

Indian Journal of Science and Technology

DOI: 10.17485/IJST/v14i19.1781

Year: 2021, Volume: 14, Issue: 19, Pages: 1545-1553

Original Article

Waterbird Density and Habitat Utilisation Pattern in Wular Lake, Kashmir, India

Ishfaq Nazir Wani1*, Mustahson Farooq Fazili2, Bilal Ahmad Bhat3, Jahangir Ahmad Dar1, Mohmad Muzafar Sheikh1

1Ph.D. Scholar, Department of Zoology, University of Kashmir, Srinagar, 190006, Jammu and
Kashmir, India
2Associate Professor, Department of Zoology, University of Kashmir, Srinagar, 190006,
Jammu and Kashmir, India
3Assistant Professor, Department of Zoology, University of Kashmir, Srinagar, 190006,
Jammu and Kashmir, India

*Corresponding Author
Email: [email protected]

Received Date:30 September 2020, Accepted Date:24 November 2020, Published Date:29 May 2021

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Background: Understanding abundance, diversity and density of waterbird species along with detailed description of habitat utilization pattern is significant to understand species ecology and consequently for management and conservation. Waterbird density and their utilisation pattern of different habitats in Wular lake was investigated during study period from 2017-2019. Methods: Population estimation of waterbirds was carried out by point count and line transect method. Length of the transect varied from 50-100 meters. Waterbird density was estimated using Reynolds formula in a circular plot. Radius of circle varied from 45- 50 meters. Pattern of habitat utilisation was calculated by Ivlev’s index. Findings: Twenty-five (25) species of waterbirds belonging to eighteen (18) genera, seven families (7) and six orders (6) were recorded. Mean population of 628193874.20 during mid-winter and 420.58142.10 individuals during post winter was observed. Mean density of 810.81387.3 birds ha-1 during mid-winter and 71.291.33 birds ha-1 during post winter was recorded. Of all the habitats, open water had highest waterbird density (630.3258.32 birds ha-1) while as paddy fields had lowest waterbird density (0.440.08 birds ha-1) during mid-winter. During post winter also open water habitat was the most densely populated habitat (30.24.85 birds ha-1) but marshes were least densely populated habitat (0.410.05 birds ha-1) during this season. Open water habitat was most preferred habitat and peatlands the most avoided one. Variation in densities among different habitats was statistically significant (p<0.05). Novelty: Anthropogenic threats like agricultural conversion, habitat degradation and pollution greatly affect the utilisation of different habitats by waterbirds. Knowledge indicating the density and diversity of waterbirds along with their preference and avoidance towards different habitats will help in managing those habitats as well as framing conservation policies for survival of waterbirds inhabiting them.

Keywords: Habitat utilisation; Density; Population; Ramsar; Waterbirds; Wetlands; Wular

References

  1. Zedler JB, Kercher S. WETLAND RESOURCES: Status, Trends, Ecosystem Services, and Restorability. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 2005;30(1):39–74. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144248
  3. Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG. Wetlands. New York. Van Nostrand Academy Press. 2000.
  4. AS. The Book of Indian Birds. India. The Bombay Natural History Society. 1979.
  5. Guillemain M, Pöysä H, Fox AD, Arzel C, Dessborn L, Ekroos J, et al. Effects of climate change on European ducks: what do we know and what do we need to know? Wildlife Biology. 2013;19(4):404–419. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2981/12-118
  6. Green AJ, Elmberg J. Ecosystem services provided by waterbirds. Biological Reviews. 2014;89(1):105–122. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/brv.12045
  7. Arzel C, Rönkä M, Tolvanen H, Aarras N, Kamppinen M, Vihervaara P. Species Diversity, Abundance and Brood Numbers of Breeding Waterbirds in Relation to Habitat Properties in an Agricultural Watershed. Annales Zoologici Fennici. 2015;52(1-2):17–32. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.5735/086.052.0202
  8. Guareschi S, Abellan P, Laini A, Green AJ, Sanchez-Zapata JA, Velasco J, et al. Cross- taxon congruence in wetlands: assessing the value of waterbirds as surrogates of macroinvertebrate biodiversity in Mediterranean Ramsar sites. Ecological Indicators. 2015;49:204–215. Available from: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.10.012
  9. Rahman F, Ismail A. Waterbirds: An important bioindicators of ecosystem. Pertanika Journal of Scholarly Research Reviews. 2018;4(1). Available from: https://pjsrr.upm.edu.my/index.php/pjsrr/article/download/121/117
  11. Gleason RA, Euliss NH, Tangen BA, Laubhan MK, Browne BA. USDA conservation program and practice effects on wetland ecosystem services in the Prairie Pothole Region. Ecological Applications. 2011;21(1):S65–S81. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1890/09-0216.1
  14. Lyons MN, Halse SA, Gibson N, Cale DJ, Lane JAK, Walker CD, et al. Monitoring wetlands in a salinizing landscape: case studies from the Wheatbelt region of Western Australia. Hydrobiologia. 2007;591(1):147–164. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10750-007-0805-4
  16. Odum EP. Ecology. New Delhi. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. 1975.
  17. Dinsmore SJ. Wildlife habitat relationships; concepts and applications. Journal of Range Management. 2007;57(4):980–981. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1650/0010-5422(2007)109[980:WRCAA]2.0.CO;2
  18. Glading B, Biswell HH, Smith CF. Studies on the Food of the California Quail in 1937. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 1940;4(2):128–144. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3795650
  19. Bellrose FC, Anderson HG. Preferential ratings of duck food plants. Illinois Natural History Survey Bulletin. 1943;22(5):417–433. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/2142/102181
  20. Block WM, Brennan LA. The habitat concept in ornithology: theory and applications. In: In: Power, O.M. Current Ornithology. (Vol. 11) New York. Plenum Press. 1993.
  21. Klopfer PH. Habitats and territories: A study of the use of space by animals. New York. Basic Books. 1969.
  22. Wiens JA. On Competition and variable environments. American Scientist. 1977;65:590–597.
  24. Hussain A, Rao RJ, Singh H. Diversity of waterbird in Wular lake Jammu and Kashmir. India. Advances in Bioresearch. 2012;3(3):81–86.
  25. Marchowski D, Jankowiak Ł, Ławicki Ł, Wysocki D. Waterbird counts on large water bodies: comparing ground and aerial methods during different ice conditions. PeerJ. 2018;6:e5195. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.5195
  26. Urfi A, Sen M, Kalam A, Meganathan T. Counting waterbirds in India: Methodolgies and trends. Current Science. 2005;89(12):1997–2003.
  28. Bibby CJ, Burgess ND, Hill DA, Mustoe S. Bird census techniques. Elsevier. 2000.
  29. Gregory R, Gibbons D, Donald P. Bird census and survey techniques. In: Sutherland WJ, Newton I, Green R., eds. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques. (pp. 17-55) 2004. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198520863.003.0002
  32. Fazili M. On some breeding parameters in a colony of Indian Pond herons (Ardeolagrayii) International journal of Environmental Sciences. 2014;3(2):60–64.
  33. Grimmett R, Inskipp C, Inskipp T. Birds of Indian Subcontinent. Oxford Press. 2016.
  34. Buckland ST, Marsden SJ, Green RE. Estimating bird abundance: making methods work. Bird Conservation International. 2008;18(S1):S91–S108. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0959270908000294
  35. Fazili MF, Bhat BA, Ahangar FA. Avian diversity of Anchar Lake. New York Science Journal. 2017;10:92–97. Available from: http://www.sciencepub.net/newyork/ny100117/15_31593nys100117_92_97.pdf
  36. Reynolds RT, Scott JM, Nussbaum RA. A Variable Circular-Plot Method for Estimating Bird Numbers. The Condor. 1980;82(3):309. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1367399
  37. Marcum CL, Loftsgaarden DO. A Nonmapping Technique for Studying Habitat Preferences. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 1980;44(4):963. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3808336
  38. Ivlev VS. Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes. New Haven, Connecticit. Yale University Press. 1961.
  39. Lovari S, Cuccus P, Murgia A, Murgia C, Soi F, Plantamura G. Space use, habitat selection and browsing effects of red deer in Sardinia. Italian Journal of Zoology. 2007;74(2):179–189. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/11250000701249777
  40. Neu CW, Byers CR, Peek JM. A Technique for Analysis of Utilization-Availability Data. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 1974;38(3):541. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3800887
  42. Jamwal KS. Wetlands Kashmir. 1991.
  43. Pearson R. A pantropical comparison of bird community structures on six lowland forest sites. The Condor. 1977;79:232–244. Available from: 10.2307/1367167
  44. Patterson JH. The Role of Environmental Heterogeneity in the Regulation of Duck Populations. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 1976;40(1):22–23. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3800152
  45. Crowe O, Austin GE, Colhoun K, Cranswick PA, Kershaw M, Musgrove AJ. Estimates and trends of waterbird numbers wintering in Ireland, 1994/95 to 2003/04. Bird Study. 2008;55(1):66–77. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/00063650809461506
  46. McNicol DK, Wayland M. Distribution of Waterfowl Broods in Sudbury Area Lakes in Relation to Fish, Macroinvertebrates, and Water Chemistry. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 1992;49(S1):122–133. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1139/f92-307
  48. Horváth Z, Ferenczi M, Móra A, Vad CF, Ambrus A, Forró L. Invertebrate food sources for waterbirds provided by the reconstructed wetland of Nyirkai-Hany, northwestern Hungary. Hydrobiologia. 2012;697(1):59–72. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10750-012-1170-5
  49. IGH, DMH. Bird distribution and habitat structure on Lake Naivasha, Kenya. African Journal of Ecology. 1992;30(3):223–232. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2028.1992.tb00497.x
  50. Froneman A, Mangnail MJ, Little RM, Crowe TM. Waterbird assemblages and associated habitat characteristics of farm ponds in the western cape, South Africa. . Biodiversity and Conservation. 2001;10:251–270. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1008904421948
  52. Sánchez-Zapata JA, Anadón JD, Carrete M, Giménez A, Navarro J, Villacorta C, et al. Breeding waterbirds in relation to artificial pond attributes: implications for the design of irrigation facilities. Biodiversity and Conservation. 2005;14(7):1627–1639. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-0534-1
  55. VanRees-Siewert KL, Dinsmore JJ. Influence of wetland age on bird use of restored wetlands in Iowa. Wetlands. 1996;16(4):577–582. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf03161348
  57. Ma Z, Cai Y, Li B, Chen J. Managing wetland habitats for waterbirds: An international perspective. Waterbirds. 2009;30(1).
  58. Murphy RC. MacMillan Company. 1936. Available from: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/45089#page/5/mode/1up
  59. Kullenberg B. Uber Vorbreitung and warderungen Von vier Sterna-Arten Sive. Vetenskapsakad. Ark. Zoology. 1946;38A(17):1–80.
  62. Ayers CR, Hanson‐Dorr KC, O'Dell S, Lovell CD, Jones ML, Suckow JR, et al. Impacts of colonial waterbirds on vegetation and potential restoration of island habitats. Restoration Ecology. 2015;23(3):252–260. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rec.12169
  63. Wiens JA. Population Responses to Patchy Environments. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 1976;7(1):81–120. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.07.110176.000501
  66. Shearer LA, Jahn BJ, Lenz L. Deterioration of Duck Foods When Flooded. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 1969;33(4):1012–1015. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3799340
  69. Ringleman JK. The breeding ecology of the black duck in southcentral Maine. University of Maine thesis
  70. Parker GR, Petrie MJ, Sears DT. Waterfowl Distribution Relative to Wetland Acidity. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 1992;56(2):268–274. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3808822
  71. Mcknight DE, Low JB. Factors affecting waterfowl production on a spring-fed salt marsh in Utah. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference. 1969;35:307–314.
  72. Wani IN, Fazili MF, Bhat BA, Ahmad J. Variations in abundance and diversity of waterbirds along spatiotemporal gradient in Shallabugh wetland. India. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research. 2020;9(4):2025–2029.
  75. Hoffman W, Heinemann D, Wiens JA. The ecology of seabird feeding flocks in Alaska. The Auk. 1981;98(3):437–456. Available from: 10.1093/auk/98.3.437
  77. Murkin HR, Kaminski RM, Titman RD. Responses by dabbling ducks and aquatic invertebrates to an experimentally manipulated cattail marsh. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 1982;60(10):2324–2332. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1139/z82-299
  80. Fazili MF, Shah GM, JU, Bhat BA. Some aspects of nesting biology of Little grebe Tachybaptusruficolis at Wular Lake, Kashmir. Indian Birds. 2008;4(4):127–129. Available from: http://indianbirds.in/pdfs/IB.4.4.127-129.pdf
  82. McKinney RA, McWilliams SR, Charpentier MA. Waterfowl–habitat associations during winter in an urban North Atlantic estuary. Biological Conservation. 2006;132(2):239–249. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2006.04.002
  85. Petersen B, Exo K. Predation of waders and gulls on Lanice conchilega tidal flats in the Wadden Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 1999;178:229–240. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.3354/meps178229
  88. Sherry TW, Holmes RT. Dispersion patterns and habitat responses of birds in northern hardwoods forests. Habitat selection in birds. (pp. 283-309) New York. Academic Press. 1985.
  89. Martin TE, Finch DM. Ecology and management of Neotropical migratory birds. A synthesis and review of critical issues. New York. 480pp. Oxford University Press. 1995.

Copyright

© 2021 Wani et al.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Published By Indian Society for Education and Environment (iSee)

  • 29 May 2021

Year: 2021, Volume: 14, Issue: 19

Article Metrics


Post Graduate Fellowship in Research Communication

More articles

DON'T MISS OUT!

Subscribe now for latest articles and news.