Journal of Threatened
Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 May 2026 | 18(5): 28784–28806
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.10073.18.5.28784-28806
#10073 | Received 04 August 2025 | Final received 03 April 2026| Finally
accepted 28 April 2026
Avian richness and habitat
selection patterns in Jhilmil Jheel Conservation Reserve, Uttarakhand, India
Ankita Das 1 ,
Soumya Dasgupta 2 &
Ramesh Krishnamurthy 3
1–3 Wildlife Institute of India, Post
Box 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun, Uttarakhand 248001, India.
1 mohantydasankita.91@gmail.com
(corresponding author), 2 dgsoumya84@gmail.com, 3 ramesh@wii.gov.in
Abstract: A survey of avifauna was carried out
in Jhilmil Jheel Conservation Reserve (JJCR) of Haridwar Forest Division,
Uttarakhand, during 2018–2020. The point count method was used to count birds
in six habitats, viz.: plantation, mixed deciduous forest, riverine habitat, scrub forest,
grasslands, and agricultural field. Ten replications each were done in the
summer and winter seasons. The sampling effort across the six habitats, namely,
plantation, mixed deciduous forest, scrub forest, riverine, grassland, and
agricultural field, was 280, 150, 120, 250, 210, and 150 man minutes,
respectively, resulting in a total effort of 1,160 man-minutes. There were 110
bird species in summer season and 131 bird species in winter season and a
richness index of 17.73. Muscicapidae family had the highest relative
diversity, followed by Accipitridae and Cuculidae. Rank abundance curve showed
dominance of a few birds during winter season. Using the resource selection
function (RSF), we examined seasonal habitat preferences of avian communities
in the JJCR landscape. A total of 48 bird species in summer and 71 bird species
in winter exhibited 100% habitat selection for specific habitat types. Riverine
habitats showed the highest ecological significance, with 20 and 30 species
exhibiting complete selection during summer and winter, respectively. Among the
170 recorded species, habitat specialists (103) outnumbered generalists (63),
though the latter were more abundant. The remaining four species are human
commensals. Riverine habitats supported the maximum number of specialists due
to their distinct riparian vegetation and transitional features. Grassland
specialists such as the White-tailed Stonechat, Yellow-bellied Prinia, Striated
Grassbird, and Bristled Grassbird (Vulnerable) highlight the conservation
importance of grasslands. PERMANOVA confirmed significant seasonal and vertical
variations in species composition (p = 0.0001), while indicator species
analysis identified 60 and 64 key indicator species for summer and winter,
respectively. The strong habitat specialization observed in riverine and
grassland ecosystems underscores the need for prioritized management within
this Important Bird and Biodiversity Area (IBA).
Keywords: Bird diversity, habitat
heterogeneity, habitats, indicator species, microhabitats, rank abundance
curve, relative abundance, resource selection function, terai grasslands,
wetland.
Editor: H. Byju, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India. Date
of publication: 26 May 2026 (online & print)
Citation: Das,
A., S. Dasgupta & R. Krishnamurthy (2026). Avian
richness and habitat selection patterns in Jhilmil Jheel Conservation Reserve,
Uttarakhand, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 18(5): 28784–28806. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.10073.18.5.28784-28806
Copyright: © Das et al. 2026. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this article in
any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of
publication.
Funding: This study was funded by the Ministry of Environment,
Forest and Climate Change,
Government of
India (Grant No. F.No. J.22012/61/2009-CS(W)).
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Author details: Dr. Ankita Das is an independent researcher and consultant
specializing in wildlife and forestry, natural resource management,
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), and climate action. A former
PhD scholar and Project Associate at the Wildlife Institute of India, her work focuses on bird community ecology, urban and agroforestry systems,
restoration ecology, and traditional ecological knowledge. Dr. Soumya Dasgupta is an independent researcher and
consultant specializing in biodiversity, forestry, and natural resource management. Formerly a Project Scientist at the Wildlife Institute of India,
he led research under the NMSHE and NRCD funded projects. His expertise spans
terrestrial ecology, human ecology, climate vulnerability, and animal behaviour
studies.
Dr. K. Ramesh is a senior scientist, heading the Department
of Landscape Level Planning and Management at the Wildlife Institute of India,
Dehradun, and has been Adjunct Professor at the University of British Columbia,
Canada. He specialises in landscape ecology, species recovery
strategies, and conservation technology integration. He serves as Vice
President of the International Association for Landscape Ecology.
Author contribution: AD was responsible for conceptualizing and designing the study,
conducting field data collection, organizing and analyzing the
data, and drafting the manuscript. SD assisted with data analysis and
contributed to the writing and refinement of the manuscript. RK provided
overall supervision, strategic guidance, and critical review of the manuscript.
Data Availability Statement: The detailed data and the code is available with the first author and
will be shared with the legitimate request made to the same.
Acknowledgement: The present study was a part of the
project ‘Developing conservation plans for select IBAs of India’ funded
by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. We are thankful to
SACON (Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History) and WII (Wildlife
Institute of India) for providing various facilities to work in the field. We also express our gratitude to the Uttarakhand Forest
Department for giving us permission to work in Jhilmil Conservation Reserve,
Haridwar.
Introduction
The diverse habitats and microhabitats
of forest ecosystems are home to the majority of the world’s terrestrial species
(Ozanne et al. 2003). But these biologically diverse systems are increasingly threatened
by deforestation and forest degradation (Singh et al. 2001; Dirzo & Raven 2003).
To monitor changes in forest biodiversity, indicators, which are surrogate
measures of other components of forest biodiversity, are increasingly used
(Boutin et al. 2009). They have also been described as ecological indicators of
community or habitat types or indicators of environmental changes.
Birds are one of the best-studied
taxonomic groups (Roberge & Angelstam 2006), and they are considered good
indicators of biodiversity since they are present in almost all types of
environments and sensitive to changes. The management of many bird species can
be eased by considering only a group of indicator species, as monitoring the
status of all species is difficult (Báldi 2003), so many natural resource
managers want to monitor any focal species (Lambeck 1997) so that the impact of
management can be understood. Habitat specialists reflect faster changes in a
habitat than generalists, and resident species can also be used for year-round
monitoring (Hilty & Merenlender 2000). They indicate the biological
condition of the environment, thus considered as ecological disturbance
indicator species (EDIS) as they have a strong association with their habitat.
The bird species assemblage of
any particular location remains dynamic (Sinha et al. 2019). Species
composition and abundance vary across the seasons and habitats (Lee & Kang
2019; Byju et al. 2025a). Spatial and temporal fluctuations in species richness
and abundance are characteristic of most bird communities (Robinson et al 2000;
Malizia 2001; Byju et al. 2025b). Therefore, understanding the spatio-temporal
variations in bird species richness, diversity, and abundance from small
habitat patches is equally important (Archana et al. 2024). Multiple factors
influence the bird community composition spatially: habitat structure,
vegetation strata, proximity of the surrounding patches, and temporally: season
and other anthropogenic disturbances (Byju et al. 2025c; Naveen et al. 2025).
The seasonal variation in temperature and rainfall, spatial and temporal
microhabitat conditions affect the availability of food for birds (Aggarwal et
al. 2023), the breeding success and survival of bird species (Kim et al. 2022;
Byju et al. 2025d). Processes acting in breeding and wintering grounds
determine the patterns and habitat occupancy and seasonal abundance in
migratory bird species (García-Macía et al. 2025).
Birds select specific
micro-habitats that may vary seasonally (Berlusconi 2025), and such habitat
selection enables species coexistence (Bai et al. 2021). Resource Selection
Functions (RSFs) help understand these patterns by comparing “used” versus
“available” habitats (Jain & Balakrishnan 2011). RSFs estimate the
probability of habitat use (Manly et al. 2002) and are widely applied to assess
species distribution, abundance, and diversity (Boyce & McDonald 1999;
Nielsen et al. 2003, 2005). Identifying selected resources provides insights
into species’ survival requirements (Manly et al. 2002).
The objective of the study was to
assess the general pattern of bird assemblage and the resource selection
function of birds in different habitats and identify the indicator bird species
of different habitats in the summer and winter seasons. The research questions
addressed in this study are: (i) What is the resource selection function of
birds in different habitats? (ii) What is the general pattern of bird
assemblage in different microhabitats? (iii) Is there any difference in the
bird composition of different vertical strata in different habitats? (iv) Which
are the indicator bird species of different habitats in the summer and winter
seasons?
By assessing the general patterns
of bird assemblage in different habitats, the study will contribute to our
understanding of how avian communities are distributed across various habitats
within the study area. This information is crucial for habitat conservation and
management strategies.
Study area
Jhilmil Jheel Conservation
Reserve (JJCR) is a saucer-shaped wetland located in the Rasiyabaad forest
range in Haridwar, Uttarakhand (Image 1). It lies between 29.53º–29.83º N and
78.00º–78.25º E with an elevation ranging 200–250 m. It is spread over 37 km2.
It is comprised of various habitats such as grasslands, moist deciduous forests
(mixed forest), scrub forest, riverine habitat, plantation, and agriculture
field. The texture of the soil varies from sand to clay. It is rich in floral
and faunal diversity. JJCR has 24
species of mammals, 20 reptile species, seven species of amphibians, 35 fish
species, and 67 species of butterflies (Sinha et al. 2011).
Methods
Bird sampling
From March 2018 to March 2020,
bird sampling was conducted in different habitats of JJCR during both summer
(mid-March–June) and winter (November–mid-February) (Bird list in Appendix
Table 1). To count the birds in each habitat, the point count method (Bibby et
al. 2000) was employed. Point count stations with a fixed width of 50-m radius
were placed along existing forest trails in the six habitats: plantation (28),
mixed forest (15), scrub forest (12), riverine (25), grassland (21), and
agricultural fields (15) (Appendix Table 2). In total, 116 point count stations
were utilized for the bird surveys, with a distance of 200 m between each
station. Each point count station was visited 20 times, 10 times in summer and
10 times in winter (Appendix Table 3). The sampling effort across the six
habitats, namely plantation, mixed deciduous forest, scrub forest, and riverine
was 280, 150, 120, 250, 210, and 150 man minutes, resulting in a total effort
of 1,160 man-minutes (Appendix Table 3). The surveys took place at 0530–0830 h
during the summer and at 0800–1030 h during the winter. The observer recorded
all birds seen or heard within a 10-minute period at each point count station,
excluding birds in flight. Surveys were not conducted during unfavourable
weather conditions. Individual birds were identified using standard field
guides (Grimmett et al. 2011).
Data analysis
Richness index and diversity
The data analysis was based on
the sum of 20 repeated observations. The survey data was used to calculate the
various diversity indices. The richness index was computed as Margalef’s
richness index (Margalef 1958).
R = (S-1) (1)/Ln(N)
Where: R = Index of species
richness.
S = Number of species observed.
N = Number of individuals (all
species observed).
Ln = Natural logarithm value.
There are three classifications
of Margalef richness index values, namely low species richness (R < 2.5),
medium species richness (2.5 > R < 4) and high species
richness (R > 4).
Bird species diversity in both
seasons was computed using Shannon-Weiner index (Shannon & Weaver 1963) as
follows:
H = Species diversity
Pi = Proportion of abundance of
species i
S = Total number of species in
the habitat
Rank abundance
Once abundance data for each
species had been collected, it was organized by listing each species and its
corresponding count. Then, the species were ranked in descending order of
abundance, from the most common to the rarest. On the graph, the rank of each
species was represented on the x-axis, with the most abundant species being
assigned rank 1, the next rank 2, and so forth. The abundance of each species
was represented on the y-axis and was expressed as the raw number of
individuals or as relative abundance, which is the proportion of each species’
individuals to the total. To construct the curve, data points were plotted on
the graph, with the rank of each species on the x-axis and its abundance on the
y-axis. Finally, the plotted points are connected with a line to create the
rank abundance curve.
Resource Selection Function
RSF was calculated following
Jain & Balakrishnan (2011):
- Proportional use of habitat by species =
number of individuals of species found in habitat /total number of individuals
of species sampled
- Proportional availability of habitat =
average surface area contributed by habitat / total area available (summed
across all habitats)
- Resource selection function = Proportion used
/ Proportion available
- The standardisation is carried out as
follows:
for s = 1 to S, where S is the
total number of species and H is the total number of habitats.
Based on RSF, birds were
classified into habitat specialists if bird species were specifically
preferring one or two habitats, habitat generalists if they were present in
more than two habitats and human commensal, i.e., the birds which live in close
proximity to human habitation (Pal et al. 2019).
Based on our field observations,
birds were classified into different microhabitats, based on their perching and
feeding height into vertical strata such as upper canopy, middle canopy, lower
canopy, understorey, and ground-dwelling birds. Bird species which were either
waterbirds or water-dependent were categorized as ‘aquatic’, while those which
are adapted to air were categorized as ‘aerial’. The diversity of different
vertical strata was calculated through Shannon-Wiener diversity. PERMANOVA test
(Anderson 2001) was performed to assess the difference in bird community
assemblage in different strata in different seasons and habitats.
Indicator species analysis was
done in R software using the package Indval, which measures the importance of
habitat for a particular bird species. The indicator value index is the product
of two components, called ‘A’ and ‘B’ (Dufrêne & Legendre 1997; Cáceres
& Legendre 2009). Component ‘A’ is a sample estimate of the probability
that the surveyed site belongs to the target site group, given the fact that
the species has been found. This conditional probability is called the
specificity or positive predictive value of the species as an indicator of the
site group. Component ‘B’ is a sample
estimate of the probability of finding the species in sites belonging to the
site group. This second conditional probability is called the fidelity or sensitivity
of the species as an indicator of the target site group. This method combines
the faithfulness of occurrence of the species in a habitat with its abundance
in that habitat and the occurrence and abundance of the species in other
habitats. As such, it provides a measure of the importance of that habitat to
the species. Indicator value lies between 0 and 1, where 1 means 100% indicator
of a particular habitat.
Results
Richness index and diversity
A total of 170 bird species were
encountered during the survey period, which constitutes 23.94% of the total
number of species (710) reported from the state of Uttarakhand (Mohan &
Sondhi 2024). The available data reports a total of 387 bird species for the
region around JJCR.
In total, 110 and 131 bird
species were recorded in the study area during the summer and winter seasons,
respectively. The overall Margalef richness index was observed to be 17.7371,
which shows that JJCR has high species richness. Rarefaction curves by habitat
and season are mentioned in the Appendix Figures 1a,b. Family Muscicapidae had
the highest bird diversity, followed by Accipitridae and Cuculidae. The
diversity of bird species was found to be 3.8 and 3.9 in the summer and winter
seasons, respectively (Appendix Table 4).
Rank abundance curves (RAD)
Rank abundance curves are useful
tools to characterize and understand the structure of ecological communities.
The shape and distribution of the curve provide valuable insights into the
dynamics, health, and stability of the ecosystem, as well as the forces driving
species abundance and diversity. They yield significant insights into two
fundamental components of biodiversity: species richness, which denotes the
total number of species, and species evenness, which reflects the relative
abundance of those species. There are various RAD curves: 1) A log normal
distribution indicates a balanced community where most species have moderate
abundance, while a smaller number are either very abundant or very rare. This
is typical of diverse ecosystems. 2) A geometric series is characterized by a
few highly abundant species and many rare species. This pattern is often found
in environments with strong competition or disturbance. 3) The broken stick
model illustrates a hypothetical scenario where resources are perfectly
distributed among all species, resulting in an even abundance. However, this
idealized pattern is seldom found in real-world ecosystems.
There is less dominance and
moderate evenness of individuals within each species in the bird community
assemblage in the summer season within the study area (Figure 1a). Whereas, in
the community assemblage in the winter season, there was dominance of a few
species (Figure 1b), followed by even distribution of individuals of other
species.
Resource selection function
Resource election function (RSF)
helps to understand how animals choose habitats based on resource availability.
Proportional availability of plantation, mixed deciduous forest, scrub forest,
riverine habitat, grassland, and agriculture field-human settlement are 0.39%,
0.13%, 0.07%, 0.18%, 0.16%, and 0.07% respectively (Figure 2).
A total of 20 bird species had 100% selection
for riverine habitat during summer, and 30 during winter. In the grassland, 10
and 13 species had 100% RSF during the summer and winter, four (4) and 13 bird
species in summer and winter, respectively. Two and six bird species had 100%
RSF for mixed forest in summer and winter, respectively. Ten species had 100% RSF
for scrub forest in summer, and seven had 100% RSF in winter. Two species had
100% RSF for the agriculture field-human settlement in both summer and winter.
Riverine habitat had the highest RSF. So, in total, 48 bird species had 100%
selection for a particular habitat in summer (Table 1a) and 71 bird species had
100% selection for a particular habitat in winter (Table 1b).
Habitat specialist and generalist
Birds were grouped into
specialists or generalists based on their sighting in a particular habitat or
multiple habitats (Figure 3a). It was found that there are more habitat
specialists (103) than generalists (63) bird species in JJCR, and four were
commensals. The abundance of habitat generalist birds is more than that of
habitat specialists (Figure 3b). The bird community was dominated by
specialists (60.59%), followed by generalists (37.06%), while human commensal
species constituted only 2.35% of the total recorded species. In contrast to
species richness, total abundance was highest for generalists, followed by
specialists, whereas human commensals showed the lowest abundance. This
indicates that although specialists form the majority in terms of species
number, generalists dominate numerically in the community. Riverine habitat
supported the highest number of habitat specialists (51 species), followed by
scrub forest and plantation. Scrub forest (48 species), mixed forest (47
species), and plantation (46 species) showed higher numbers of generalists.
Grassland had a relatively balanced composition of specialists (31 species) and
generalists (34 species). Agriculture fields showed the lowest number of
specialists (5 species) but relatively higher generalists (22 species). Human
commensals were recorded in very low numbers across all habitats (0–4 species),
with slightly higher representation in agricultural fields.
Some of the most abundant
generalist birds in JJCR are Baya Weaver Ploceus philippinus, Jungle
Babbler Turdoides striata, Red-vented Bulbul Pycnonotus cafer,
Rose-ringed Parakeet Psittacula krameria, and Spotted Dove Spilopelia
chinensis. House Crow Corvus splendens, Rock Pigeon Columba livia,
House Sparrow Passer domesticus, and Common Myna Acridotheres tristis
are human commensals. Riverine habitat supported the maximum number of habitat
specialists as it is the transition between terrestrial and wetland
environments, having unique riparian vegetation and the river-created habitats
such as water-edge and sandbars, sandbar scrub, river-edge forests, leading to
more diversity of birds (Figure 3c).
Several birds in JJCR are habitat
specialists or near habitat specialists, found more or less restricted to their
habitats, making the conservation of each habitat vital for the long-term
sustenance of this IBA. The JJCR has many grassland birds such as Common
Stonechat Saxicola rubicola, White-tailed Stonechat Saxicola leucurus,
Red Avadavat Amandava amandava, Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis,
Sarus Crane Grus Antigone, Yellow-bellied Prinia Prinia flaviventris,
Bristled Grassbird Chaetornis striata, and Striated Grassbird Megalurus
palustris. Among these White-tailed Stonechat, Yellow-bellied Prinia,
Striated Grassbird, and Bristled Grassbird are considered grassland bird
specialists.
Bristled Grassbird and Sarus
Crane are ‘Vulnerable’. Notable waterbirds in the area include the River
Lapwing Vanellus duvaucelii, River Tern Sterna aurantia,
Black-bellied Tern Sterna acuticauda, and Little Tern Sternula
albifrons, while water-dependent species encompass the Pied Kingfisher Ceryle
rudis, Stork-billed Kingfisher Pelargopsis capensis, and Great
Thick-knee Esacus recurvirostris, with the River Lapwing and River Tern
classified as ‘Near Threatened’ and the Black-bellied Tern as ‘Endangered’ by
the IUCN Red List for Threatened Species. Some of the prominent scrub habitat
specialists are Black Francolin Francolinus francolinus and Grey
Francolin Ortygornis pondicerianus. In plantations of Eucalyptus and
Teak, a few birds favouring open woodland habitats were more frequent, such as
Black-hooded Oriole Oriolus xanthornus and Black Bulbul Hypsipetes
leucocephalus. Prominent bird species of mixed deciduous forests are Red
Junglefowl Gallus gallus and Grey Hornbill Ocyceros birostris.
Sarus Cranes are one of the notable species found in agricultural fields.
Bird composition in different
vertical strata (microhabitats)
The middle canopy had the highest
proportion of bird species and the highest Shannon diversity in JJCR, and the
upper canopy had the lowest number of bird species as compared to other
vertical strata (Figure 4a,b). There is a noticeable increase in bird species
in the middle canopy in winter (Figure 5). PERMANOVA result showed a
significant difference in bird composition in different vertical strata
(microhabitats) in different seasons (p = 0.0001). The bird composition
significantly differed across vertical strata in different habitats in the
summer (p = 0.0001) and winter seasons (p = 0.0001) (Appendix Table 5).
Indicator species
Indicator values of all bird
species were computed for every habitat type, and those species with
statistically significant values (P < 0.001) were considered as suitable
indicators for a particular habitat. High indicator values reflect high species
abundance and prevalence within a landcover type (Hayes 2020). In the summer
season, out of 110 species, 60 species were identified as indicator species.
Riverine habitat had 15 indicator species, mixed deciduous forest—12,
plantation—12, grassland—11 indicator species, scrub forest—seven indicator
species, and agriculture field-human settlement—three indicator species (Table
2a). In the winter season, out of 131 species, 64 were identified as indicator
species for different habitats. Grassland had 10 indicator species,
plantation—12, riverine—16, agriculture field-human settlement—three,
mixed—seven, and scrub forest—16 indicator species (Table 2b).
Habitat-wise detailed
description
Agriculture field and human
settlement: Rock Pigeon
and House Sparrow were significantly associated with agriculture and human
settlement in both seasons. Rock Pigeon had the highest indicator value (57%)
during summer, whereas Cattle Egret had the highest Indicator value (64.9%)
during winter.
Grassland: Paddyfield Pipit Anthus
rufulus, Common Stonechat, Red-wattled Lapwing Vanellus indicus,
Pied Buschat Saxicola caprata, and Yellow-bellied Prinia were strongly
associated with grasslands in summer. Species such as Common Stonechat,
Red-wattled Lapwing, Paddyfield Pipit, and White-tailed Stonechat were strongly
associated with grassland during the winter season. Paddyfield Pipit had the
highest indicator value (96.9%) in summer, whereas Common Stonechat had the
highest indicator value of 88.8% during winter.
Mixed deciduous forest: Baya Weaver, Red Junglefowl,
Rose-ringed Parakeet, Black-chinned Babbler Stachyris pyrrhops, Indian
Peafowl Pavo cristatus, Blue-tailed Bee-eater Merops philippinus,
and Chestnut-shouldered Petronia Gymnoris xanthocollis were strongly
associated with mixed deciduous forest during summer, while Red Junglefowl,
Oriental White-eye Zosterops palpebrosus, and Indian Grey Hornbill were
strongly associated during the winter season. Baya Weaver had the highest
Indicator value (91.4%) during summer and Red Junglefowl had the highest
Indicator value of 70% during winter.
Riverine habitat: River Lapwing, River Tern,
Little Egret Egretta garzetta, and Little Cormorant Microcarbo niger
had a strong association during summer and birds, namely Little Cormorant,
White Wagtail Motacilla alba, Citrine Wagtail Motacilla citreola,
and Pied Kingfisher have a strong association during the winter season. River
Lapwing had the highest indicator value 93.1% during the summer season and
Little Cormorant had the highest Indicator value of 77.5% during winter.
Plantation: Black-hooded Oriole, Indian
Paradise-Flycatcher Terpsiphone paradisi, Oriental Magpie-Robin Copsychus
saularis, and Indian Pitta Pitta brachyura had a strong association
with the plantation during summer, while Black-hooded Oriole, Black Bulbul,
Rose-ringed Parakeet, Taiga Flycatcher Ficedula albicilla, and Spangled
Drongo Dicrurus bracteatus had a strong association during the winter
season. Black-hooded Oriole had a strong association with the plantation, with
an indicator value of 92.8% and 81.9% during summer and winter, respectively.
Scrub forest: Indian Robin Copsychus
fulicatus, Purple Sunbird Cinnyris asiaticus, Spotted Dove Spilopelia
chinensis, and Green Bee-eater Merops orientalis were strongly
associated with scrub forest during summer, while Lesser Whitethroat Curruca
curruca, Indian Robin, Plain Prinia Prinia inornata, Spotted Dove,
and Purple Sunbird were strongly associated during the winter season. Indian
Robin had the highest indicator value (75%) during the summer season and Lesser
Whitethroat had the highest Indicator value of 83.5% during the winter season.
Discussion
The current study demonstrates
that JJCR has a high species richness and diversity of bird species. The JJCR
is home to a variety of habitat types that support numerous bird species.
Therefore, the significance and importance of the conservation reserve for
birdlife conservation is extensive. The favourable environmental conditions may
have contributed to the greater species richness and diversity in JJCR. More
number of bird species were found in the winter season because of the arrival
of many winter visitors.
We provide here a quantitative
demonstration of habitat selection in the natural assemblage of bird species
using a resource selection function based on proportional use and availability.
Using RSF, we found 48 bird species had 100% selection for a particular habitat
in summer, and 71 bird species had 100% selection for a particular habitat in
winter. There is more RSF in winter because of the presence of many winter
visitors. The riverine habitat had the highest RSF, possibly because of the
presence of many microhabitats attracting winter migrant waterbirds. Within the
bird community, some are generalists, and some are specialists in specific
habitats. A larger number of habitat specialist bird species could be because of
habitat heterogeneity (Surasinghe & Alwis 2010), while generalist birds
were more abundant as they can adapt to a variety of environmental conditions
and utilize a variety of resources. The dominance of specialists in species
richness suggests that the study area supports diverse and structurally complex
habitats capable of meeting specific ecological requirements. Specialist
species are often sensitive to habitat alteration; therefore, their higher
proportion indicates relatively good habitat quality and ecological integrity.
However, the greater abundance of
generalists reflects their ecological flexibility and competitive advantage in
heterogeneous or moderately disturbed landscapes. The riverine habitat emerged
as a critical refuge for specialist species, likely due to the availability of
diverse microhabitats and consistent water resources. A low number of human
commensals indicates that avian community composition is largely influenced by
natural habitat characteristics, including vegetation structure, canopy
stratification, and availability of natural food resources.
The JJCR is
rich in bird species, and vertical stratification is possibly one of the key
factors for promoting diversity, and the underlying concept has also been
stated in other studies on stratification by Bernard (2001); Molleman et al.
(2006), and Oliveira & Scheffers (2019). Vertical stratification has been
associated with major shifts in biotic communities, emphasizing the great
variety of niches and high species co-existence possible in tropical forests at
small scales (Brown 1981; Scheffers et al. 2017; Mottl et al. 2020). It is also
important to determine the most important strata that are used by the forest
bird community (Peh et al. 2006). The middle canopy had the highest proportion
of bird species in JJCR. This is also supported by other studies (Jayson &
Mathew 2003; Dinanti et al. 2018) showing similar results in Western Ghats,
India and West Java, Indonesia. Upper canopy had the lowest number of bird
species as compared to other vertical strata, which could be due to unfavourable
conditions, i.e. physical (rain, wind, heat, openness) and biological factors
(predators), and is energetically adverse for behaviours like feeding,
breeding, or roosting (Turton & Siegenthaler 2004). There was seasonal
variation in birds of different vertical strata, possibly because of the
arrival of many summer and winter visitors in their respective seasons.
The indicator bird species also
represented birds belonging to various strata of the forests, i.e., upper
canopy, middle canopy, lower canopy, understory, terrestrial and aquatic. The
bird species, namely Paddyfield Pipit, Red-wattled Lapwing, Common Stonechat,
White-tailed Stonechat, and Yellow-bellied Prinia, showed strong association
with the grassland habitat as indicator species. Paddyfield Pipit, Red-wattled
Lapwing, Common Stonechat, and Yellow-bellied Prinia (Manakadan 2014; Madge et
al. 2020) are commonly found in grasslands, and White-tailed Stonechat is an
obligate grassland bird (Roberts 1992; Baral 2001, 2004). They can be monitored
to understand the effect of management in grasslands. Subtropical grasslands in
the Indian subcontinent are of international significance for biodiversity and
are regarded as the most threatened habitat in the Indian subcontinent, and
many grassland birds are also threatened (Grimmett et al. 1998). Lesser
White Throat, Indian Robin, and Purple Sunbird were identified as indicator
species of scrub forest in JJCR. Lesser White throat (Aymí & Gargallo
2021), Indian Robin (Collar & Bonan 2020), and Purple Sunbird (Cheke &
Mann 2020) are usually found in scrub habitats and thus can be monitored
easily. Black-hooded Oriole, Black Bulbul, and Indian
Paradise-Flycatcher were obtained as indicator species in plantations in JJCR.
Black-hooded Oriole (Walther & Jones 2020) and Indian Paradise-Flycatcher
(Moeliker et al. 2020) are found in plantations and can be used as monitor species
in this habitat. House Sparrow and Rock Pigeon were reported as the indicator
species of agriculture and human settlements in JJCR. House Sparrow and Rock
Pigeon are human commensals and thus can be easily seen in and near human
settlements (Leveau & Leveau 2016). The lack of forest birds in
agricultural fields and human settlements could be attributed to pesticide
usage, chemical fertilizers, incompatible agricultural practices, and
semi-natural habitats. Rising levels of pesticides in agricultural fields have
negative impacts on invertebrate populations, which in turn leads to the
decline of the farmland bird population (Boatman et al. 2004; Hallmann
et al. 2014; Stanton et al. 2018). Unsustainable agricultural
practices pose threats to many forest-dependent birds (Naidoo 2004). Some of
the factors responsible for degradation in agricultural fields include changes
in cropping species and patterns, and the removal of semi-natural habitats
(Sundar & Kittur 2013; Redhead et al. 2018). Forest specialist birds
are sensitive to monoculture agricultural lands, and changes in vegetation
characteristics can impact bird assemblages (Schulze & Riedl 2008; Maas et
al. 2009). The intensification and expansion of agriculture threaten
biodiversity (Laurance et al. 2013). There has been a long history of
disturbance in the mixed deciduous forests of the Shiwalik region. Forests in
these regions are under pressure from an influx of people, expanding human
habitation, lopping, and grazing (Gautam et al. 2016). Baya Weaver, Red
Junglefowl, and Indian Grey Hornbill can be used as indicator species for
monitoring the mixed deciduous forest. Baya Weavers were observed engaging in
nesting activities within these forests, using Zizyphus mauritiana trees
for their nests. Moreover, the high indicator value of Red Junglefowl (Palei et
al. 2016) and Indian Grey Hornbill (Balasubramanian et al. 2005) within
deciduous forests is obvious, as, they are typically found within this habitat.
Among the indicator bird species from riverine habitats, River Lapwing, and
River Tern are species of conservation concern. River Lapwing is a near
threatened, and River Tern is vulnerable.
Our results provide important
baseline information for selecting which species to monitor as indicator
species for different habitats. The present study also states the importance of
vertical stratification as the ability of species to respond to canopy
characteristics may, therefore, be useful in predicting the effects of forest
management on bird communities (Hinsley et al. 2009). Such studies are useful in the broader
context of increasing anthropogenic pressure on tropical ecosystems and call
for action to prevent biodiversity loss (Barlow et al. 2018). Monitoring
the spatial and temporal changes of biodiversity is one of the prerequisites
for effective integration of biodiversity conservation in forest management
planning. This study demonstrates a significant link between the bird species
and the habitat. The indicator bird species, including the
threatened and habitat specialists, have definite preferences for long-term
monitoring of a particular habitat. All the habitats, including plantations,
have their own importance for birds. Understanding the link between indicator
species and habitat is important for habitat-specific management. Potential
indicator species reflect the on-site ecological conditions. The analysis is
based on data from six habitats representing different vegetation compositions,
so the determined indicator species can be used as bio-indicators for future
monitoring of the management of each habitat.
CONCLUSION
Regular monitoring of bird
populations, along with awareness programs focused on bird and habitat
conservation, is essential. Despite its small size, the study area supports a
remarkably rich and diverse avian community. Ongoing habitat management practices
should integrate measures for the conservation of key bird species. The
identified indicator species provide a valuable baseline for future monitoring
efforts. Understanding the population trends and dynamics of these species can
serve as an effective tool for assessing habitat and forest conditions and for
refining management and conservation strategies. Caveat of the study—Though
there is a possibility of non-detection of certain bird species in a particular
habitat, resulting in 100% selection of certain habitats, most of the birds
show multiple habitat selection through RSF analysis in the present study.
Table 1a.
Resource selection function during summer season (Proportion of selection for a
particular habitat by a bird species).
|
Bird species |
Agriculture |
Grassland |
Mixed Forest |
Plantation |
Riverine |
Scrub Forest |
|
Ashy-crowned Sparrow-Lark |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Ashy Prinia |
0.13 |
0.26 |
0.17 |
0.00 |
0.14 |
0.31 |
|
Asian Koel |
0.21 |
0.00 |
0.26 |
0.12 |
0.13 |
0.28 |
|
Indian Pied Starling |
0.43 |
0.57 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Barn Swallow |
0.00 |
0.73 |
0.27 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Bay-backed Shrike |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Baya Weaver |
0.10 |
0.02 |
0.76 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.12 |
|
Black-breasted Weaver |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Black-chinned Babbler |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.59 |
0.05 |
0.00 |
0.36 |
|
Black Drongo |
0.00 |
0.12 |
0.00 |
0.33 |
0.29 |
0.26 |
|
Black Francolin |
0.00 |
0.40 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.60 |
0.00 |
|
Black-hooded Oriole |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.12 |
0.83 |
0.05 |
0.00 |
|
Black Kite |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Blue tailed Bee-eater |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.74 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.26 |
|
Brahminy Starling |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.23 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.77 |
|
Bristled Grassbird |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Brown-headed Barbet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.83 |
0.00 |
0.17 |
|
Cattle Egret |
0.50 |
0.10 |
0.00 |
0.31 |
0.08 |
0.00 |
|
Changeable-Hawk Eagle |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.15 |
0.00 |
0.85 |
|
Chestnut-bellied Nuthatch |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Chestnut-shouldered Petronia |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.64 |
0.04 |
0.03 |
0.29 |
|
Common Cuckoo |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Common-Hawk Cuckoo |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.47 |
0.53 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Common Iora |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.38 |
0.02 |
0.00 |
0.60 |
|
Common Kingfisher |
0.00 |
0.53 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.47 |
0.00 |
|
Common Myna |
0.10 |
0.20 |
0.00 |
0.46 |
0.15 |
0.09 |
|
Common Stonechat |
0.00 |
0.92 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.08 |
0.00 |
|
Common Tailorbird |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.31 |
0.02 |
0.10 |
0.57 |
|
Coppersmith Barbet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.18 |
0.15 |
0.00 |
0.67 |
|
Crested Lark |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Crested Serpent-Eagle |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.67 |
0.33 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Drongo Cuckoo |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Eurasian Collared-Dove |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.35 |
0.00 |
0.33 |
0.32 |
|
Great Cormorant |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Green Bee-eater |
0.08 |
0.09 |
0.08 |
0.00 |
0.24 |
0.50 |
|
Grey-bellied Cuckoo |
0.00 |
0.69 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.31 |
0.00 |
|
Grey-breasted Prinia |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.47 |
0.03 |
0.00 |
0.51 |
|
Grey Bushchat |
0.28 |
0.72 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Grey Francolin |
0.00 |
0.36 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.64 |
0.00 |
|
Grey Heron |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Grey-hooded Warbler |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Gray Wagtail |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Himalayan Griffon |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
House Crow |
0.39 |
0.10 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.51 |
0.00 |
|
House Sparrow |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Indian Cuckoo |
0.13 |
0.00 |
0.22 |
0.38 |
0.00 |
0.27 |
|
Indian Grey Hornbill |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.38 |
0.45 |
0.17 |
0.00 |
|
Indian Paradise- Flycatcher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.28 |
0.72 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Indian Peafowl |
0.00 |
0.03 |
0.47 |
0.02 |
0.00 |
0.48 |
|
Indian Pitta |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.45 |
0.34 |
0.00 |
0.21 |
|
Indian Robin |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.03 |
0.97 |
|
Indian Roller |
0.00 |
0.02 |
0.30 |
0.11 |
0.35 |
0.22 |
|
Intermediate Egret |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Pied Cuckoo |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Jungle Babbler |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.41 |
0.32 |
0.00 |
0.26 |
|
Jungle Myna |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Jungle Owlet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Large-billed Crow |
0.00 |
0.16 |
0.15 |
0.03 |
0.66 |
0.00 |
|
Laughing Dove |
0.00 |
0.23 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.77 |
|
Lesser Goldenback |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.19 |
0.00 |
0.81 |
|
Lesser Whitethroat |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Little Cormorant |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Little Egret |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Little-ringed Plover |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Little Tern |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Long-tailed Shrike |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Oriental Honey- buzzard |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Oriental Magpie-Robin |
0.00 |
0.03 |
0.19 |
0.31 |
0.05 |
0.42 |
|
Oriental Skylark |
0.00 |
0.89 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.11 |
0.00 |
|
Oriental White-eye |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.38 |
0.13 |
0.00 |
0.49 |
|
Paddyfield Pipit |
0.00 |
0.99 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.01 |
0.00 |
|
Pale-billed Flowerpecker |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Pied Bushchat |
0.39 |
0.55 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.06 |
|
Pied Kingfisher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Plain Prinia |
0.15 |
0.35 |
0.00 |
0.04 |
0.08 |
0.39 |
|
Plum-headed Parakeet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.57 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.43 |
|
Pond Heron |
0.94 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.06 |
0.00 |
|
Purple Sunbird |
0.00 |
0.01 |
0.20 |
0.07 |
0.10 |
0.62 |
|
Red Junglefowl |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.63 |
0.06 |
0.00 |
0.31 |
|
Red-naped Ibis |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Red-vented Bulbul |
0.18 |
0.07 |
0.28 |
0.08 |
0.04 |
0.36 |
|
Red-wattled Lapwing |
0.08 |
0.69 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.24 |
0.00 |
|
Red-whiskered Bulbul |
0.14 |
0.10 |
0.29 |
0.11 |
0.00 |
0.36 |
|
Blyth’s Reed Warbler |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
River Lapwing |
0.00 |
0.05 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.95 |
0.00 |
|
River Tern |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Rock Pigeon |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Rose-ringed Parakeet |
0.13 |
0.00 |
0.65 |
0.19 |
0.00 |
0.03 |
|
Ruddy Shelduck |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Rufous Treepie |
0.28 |
0.00 |
0.49 |
0.23 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Sarus Crane |
0.46 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.54 |
0.00 |
|
Shikra |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.42 |
0.00 |
0.58 |
|
Short-toed Snake-eagle |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Small Minivet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.34 |
0.04 |
0.00 |
0.63 |
|
Small Pratincole |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Indian Spot-billed Duck |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Spotted Dove |
0.09 |
0.01 |
0.23 |
0.08 |
0.04 |
0.55 |
|
Streak-throated Woodpecker |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Striated Babbler |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Striated Grassbird |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Tawny-bellied Babbler |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
White-bellied Drongo |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.13 |
0.87 |
0.00 |
|
White-browed Wagtail |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
White-eyed Buzzard |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
White-tailed Stonechat |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
White-throated Kingfisher |
0.00 |
0.45 |
0.00 |
0.07 |
0.48 |
0.00 |
|
White Wagtail |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Yellow-bellied Prinia |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Yellow-wattled Lapwing |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Zitting Cisticola |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
Table 1b.
Resource selection function during winter season (Proportion of selection for a
particular habitat by a bird species, 100% selection for a particular habitat
is represented by value 1).
|
Bird species |
Agriculture |
Grassland |
mixed Forest |
Plantation |
Riverine |
Scrub forest |
|
Ashy Drongo |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Ashy Prinia |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.03 |
0.00 |
0.14 |
0.83 |
|
Asian Brown Flycatcher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.86 |
0.14 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Indian Pied Starling |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Bank Myna |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Bar-headed Goose |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Barn Swallow |
0.00 |
0.06 |
0.54 |
0.00 |
0.40 |
0.00 |
|
Bay-backed Shrike |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Black-bellied Tern |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Black Bulbul |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Black Drongo |
0.00 |
0.14 |
0.04 |
0.23 |
0.13 |
0.46 |
|
Black-hooded Oriole |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.36 |
0.62 |
0.03 |
0.00 |
|
Black-naped Monarch |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Brahminy Starling |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Bronze Drongo |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Brown-headed Barbet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.22 |
0.37 |
0.00 |
0.41 |
|
Brown Rock Chat |
0.53 |
0.47 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Cattle Egret |
0.94 |
0.04 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.03 |
0.00 |
|
Chestnut-bellied Rockthrush |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Cinereous Vulture |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Citrine Wagtail |
0.00 |
0.24 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.76 |
0.00 |
|
Common Greenshank |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Common Kingfisher |
0.00 |
0.27 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.73 |
0.00 |
|
Common Myna |
0.35 |
0.05 |
0.00 |
0.57 |
0.03 |
0.00 |
|
Common Sandpiper |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Common Stonechat |
0.00 |
0.92 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.08 |
0.00 |
|
Common Tailorbird |
0.30 |
0.00 |
0.33 |
0.00 |
0.15 |
0.23 |
|
Crested Serpent-eagle |
0.00 |
0.09 |
0.34 |
0.23 |
0.33 |
0.00 |
|
Crimson Sunbird |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.41 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.59 |
|
Egyptian Vulture |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Eurasian Collared-dove |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Eurasian Sparrowhawk |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Gadwall |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Golden-fronted Leafbird |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Goosander |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Great Barbet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Great Cormorant |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Great Egret |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Great Tit |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.46 |
0.37 |
0.00 |
0.17 |
|
Greater Coucal |
0.20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.80 |
|
Green Bee-eater |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.71 |
0.10 |
0.00 |
0.19 |
|
Greenish warbler |
0.00 |
0.02 |
0.10 |
0.24 |
0.04 |
0.61 |
|
Grey Bushchat |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Grey-headed Canary-Flycatcher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Grey-hooded Warbler |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Gray Wagtail |
0.52 |
0.09 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.38 |
0.00 |
|
Himalayan Bulbul |
0.00 |
0.02 |
0.11 |
0.13 |
0.00 |
0.74 |
|
Himalayan Griffon |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
House Crow |
0.25 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.37 |
0.38 |
0.00 |
|
House Sparrow |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Humes Warbler |
0.01 |
0.00 |
0.25 |
0.22 |
0.20 |
0.31 |
|
Indian Grey Hornbill |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.78 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.22 |
|
Indian Peafowl |
0.00 |
0.05 |
0.30 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.65 |
|
Indian Robin |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Indian Roller |
0.00 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
0.01 |
0.49 |
0.00 |
|
Indian Silverbill |
0.00 |
0.11 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.89 |
|
Intermediate Egret |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Jungle Babbler |
0.05 |
0.00 |
0.26 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
0.44 |
|
Jungle Owlet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.27 |
0.73 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Large-billed Crow |
0.00 |
0.23 |
0.11 |
0.38 |
0.13 |
0.16 |
|
Laughing Dove |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Lemon-rumped Warbler |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Lesser Goldenback |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
0.75 |
|
Lesser Whistling Duck |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Lesser Whitethroat |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.23 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.77 |
|
Little Cormorant |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Little Egret |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Little-ringed Plover |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Little Stint |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Long-tailed Shrike |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Maroon Oriole |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Northern Pintail |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Oriental Magpie-robin |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.34 |
0.15 |
0.00 |
0.51 |
|
Oriental Pied hornbill |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Oriental Skylark |
0.00 |
0.39 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.61 |
0.00 |
|
Oriental White-eye |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.42 |
0.02 |
0.00 |
0.57 |
|
Osprey |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Paddyfield Pipit |
0.00 |
0.72 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.28 |
0.00 |
|
Pallas Gull |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Pied Bushchat |
0.40 |
0.56 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.04 |
0.00 |
|
Pied Kingfisher |
0.00 |
0.07 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.93 |
0.00 |
|
Plain Martin |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Plain Prinia |
0.07 |
0.13 |
0.02 |
0.00 |
0.02 |
0.76 |
|
Plum-headed Parakeet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.45 |
0.10 |
0.05 |
0.41 |
|
Pond Heron |
0.45 |
0.07 |
0.00 |
0.07 |
0.41 |
0.00 |
|
Purple Sunbird |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.28 |
0.01 |
0.00 |
0.71 |
|
Red Avadavat |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Red-breasted Flycatcher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.37 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.63 |
|
Red-crested Pochard |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Red Junglefowl |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.65 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.35 |
|
Red-naped Ibis |
0.00 |
0.51 |
0.00 |
0.49 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Red-vented Bulbul |
0.03 |
0.07 |
0.21 |
0.04 |
0.03 |
0.61 |
|
Red-wattled Lapwing |
0.09 |
0.89 |
0.00 |
0.02 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Red-whiskered Bulbul |
0.10 |
0.02 |
0.35 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.54 |
|
River Lapwing |
0.00 |
0.39 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.61 |
0.00 |
|
River Tern |
0.00 |
0.09 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.91 |
0.00 |
|
Rock Pigeon |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Rose-ringed Parakeet |
0.25 |
0.00 |
0.23 |
0.42 |
0.08 |
0.03 |
|
Ruddy Shelduck |
0.01 |
0.01 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.98 |
0.00 |
|
Rufous-gorgeted Flycatcher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Rufous Treepie |
0.11 |
0.00 |
0.27 |
0.16 |
0.16 |
0.30 |
|
Rusty-cheeked Scimitar-Babbler |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Sarus Crane |
0.48 |
0.52 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Shikra |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Sirkeer Malkoha |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Slender-billed Vulture |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Small Minivet |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Small Niltava |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Small Pratincole |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Spangled Drongo |
0.00 |
0.01 |
0.11 |
0.46 |
0.00 |
0.42 |
|
Spotted Dove |
0.36 |
0.00 |
0.08 |
0.04 |
0.00 |
0.52 |
|
Stork-billed Kingfisher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Striated Grassbird |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Taiga Flycatcher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Temminck Stint |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
Thick-billed Flowerpecker |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Tickell's Blue Flycatcher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Tickell's Thrush |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Velvet-fronted Nuthatch |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Verditer Flycatcher |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
White-browed Wagtail |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
White-rumped Vulture |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
White-tailed Stonechat |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
White-throated Fantail |
0.00 |
0.09 |
0.05 |
0.26 |
0.14 |
0.46 |
|
White-throated Kingfisher |
0.00 |
0.51 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.49 |
0.00 |
|
White Wagtail |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.03 |
0.97 |
0.00 |
|
Woolly-necked Stork |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Yellow-bellied Prinia |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Yellow-footed Green-Pigeon |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
|
Yellow-wattled Lapwing |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Yellow-breasted Greenfinch |
0.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
Table 2a.
Indicator bird species in different habitats in summer season.
|
|
A |
B |
Indicator value |
P value |
Significance codes |
|
Agriculture and settlement |
|||||
|
Rock Pigeon |
1 |
0.3333 |
0.577 |
0.0002 |
*** |
|
House Sparrow |
1 |
0.2667 |
0.516 |
0.0006 |
*** |
|
Pond Heron |
0.9091 |
0.2 |
0.426 |
0.0075 |
** |
|
Grassland |
|||||
|
Paddyfield Pipit |
0.9868 |
0.9524 |
0.969 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Common Stonechat |
0.9237 |
0.619 |
0.756 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Red-wattled Lapwing |
0.7163 |
0.7619 |
0.739 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Pied Bushchat |
0.6593 |
0.6667 |
0.663 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Yellow-bellied Prinia |
1 |
0.381 |
0.617 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Oriental Skylark |
0.8972 |
0.3333 |
0.547 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Striated Grassbird |
1 |
0.2381 |
0.488 |
0.0015 |
** |
|
Zitting Cisticola |
1 |
0.2381 |
0.488 |
0.0015 |
** |
|
Striated Babbler |
1 |
0.1429 |
0.378 |
0.0162 |
* |
|
Yellow-wattled Lapwing |
1 |
0.1429 |
0.378 |
0.0128 |
* |
|
Grey Bushchat |
0.8108 |
0.1429 |
0.34 |
0.0453 |
* |
|
Mixed deciduous forest |
|||||
|
Baya Weaver |
0.8347 |
1 |
0.914 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Red Junglefowl |
0.6767 |
0.9333 |
0.795 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Rose-ringed Parakeet |
0.6235 |
0.9333 |
0.763 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Black-chinned Babbler |
0.6486 |
0.8 |
0.72 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Indian Peafowl |
0.5469 |
0.8 |
0.661 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Blue-tailed Bee-eater |
0.8077 |
0.5333 |
0.656 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Chestnut-shouldered Petronia |
0.6893 |
0.5333 |
0.606 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Red-vented Bulbul |
0.3347 |
1 |
0.578 |
0.0003 |
*** |
|
Rufous Treepie |
0.4802 |
0.4667 |
0.473 |
0.0051 |
** |
|
Oriental White-eye |
0.4158 |
0.4667 |
0.44 |
0.017 |
* |
|
Grey-breasted Prinia |
0.5499 |
0.3333 |
0.428 |
0.0081 |
** |
|
Jungle Myna |
1 |
0.1333 |
0.365 |
0.0447 |
* |
|
Plantation |
|||||
|
Black-hooded Oriole |
0.8928 |
0.9643 |
0.928 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Indian Paradise-flycatcher |
0.8069 |
0.6786 |
0.74 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Oriental Magpie-robin |
0.4737 |
0.8571 |
0.637 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Indian Pitta |
0.4856 |
0.8214 |
0.632 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Common Myna |
0.6393 |
0.5357 |
0.585 |
0.0006 |
*** |
|
Jungle Babbler |
0.4683 |
0.6071 |
0.533 |
0.002 |
** |
|
Brown-headed Barbet |
0.9205 |
0.2857 |
0.513 |
0.0018 |
** |
|
Black Drongo |
0.5058 |
0.5 |
0.503 |
0.002 |
** |
|
Common Hawk-cuckoo |
0.641 |
0.3571 |
0.478 |
0.0032 |
** |
|
Indian Grey Hornbill |
0.5855 |
0.3571 |
0.457 |
0.0059 |
** |
|
Jungle Owlet |
1 |
0.1786 |
0.423 |
0.0068 |
** |
|
Indian Cuckoo |
0.5687 |
0.25 |
0.377 |
0.032 |
* |
|
Riverine |
|||||
|
River Lapwing |
0.942 |
0.92 |
0.931 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
River Tern |
1 |
0.64 |
0.8 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Little Egret |
1 |
0.6 |
0.775 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Little Cormorant |
1 |
0.52 |
0.721 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
House Crow |
0.5904 |
0.6 |
0.595 |
0.0004 |
*** |
|
Spot-billed Duck |
1 |
0.24 |
0.49 |
0.0007 |
*** |
|
Little-ringed Plover |
1 |
0.2 |
0.447 |
0.0036 |
** |
|
Ruddy Shelduck |
1 |
0.2 |
0.447 |
0.0024 |
** |
|
White-browed Wagtail |
1 |
0.2 |
0.447 |
0.0048 |
** |
|
Pied Kingfisher |
1 |
0.16 |
0.4 |
0.0121 |
* |
|
White-bellied Drongo |
0.7706 |
0.2 |
0.393 |
0.0156 |
* |
|
Large-billed Crow |
0.622 |
0.24 |
0.386 |
0.0293 |
* |
|
Grey Heron |
1 |
0.12 |
0.346 |
0.0377 |
* |
|
Gray Wagtail |
1 |
0.12 |
0.346 |
0.0432 |
* |
|
Small Pratincole |
1 |
0.12 |
0.346 |
0.0408 |
* |
|
Scrub forest |
|||||
|
Indian Robin |
0.96 |
0.58 |
0.75 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Purple Sunbird |
0.5079 |
1.00 |
0.713 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Spotted Dove |
0.4453 |
1.00 |
0.667 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Green Bee-eater |
0.4531 |
0.9167 |
0.645 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Common Tailorbird |
0.4693 |
0.6667 |
0.559 |
0.0003 |
*** |
|
Common Iora |
0.4966 |
0.5833 |
0.538 |
0.0005 |
*** |
|
Laughing Dove |
0.7241 |
0.25 |
0.425 |
0.0059 |
** |
A—Specificity | B—Fidelity
Significant codes: 0 ‘***’ | 0.001 ‘**’ | 0.01 ‘*’ | 0.05 ‘.’ |
0.1 ‘ ’ | 1
Table 2b.
Indicator bird species in different habitats in winter season.
|
|
A |
B |
Indicator value |
P value |
Significance codes |
|
Agriculture and settlement |
|||||
|
Cattle Egret |
0.9023 |
0.4667 |
0.649 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
House Sparrow |
1 |
0.3333 |
0.577 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Rock Pigeon |
1 |
0.2 |
0.447 |
0.0047 |
** |
|
Grassland |
|||||
|
Common Stonechat |
0.9194 |
0.8571 |
0.888 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Red-wattled Lapwing |
0.901 |
0.7619 |
0.829 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Paddyfield Pipit |
0.736 |
0.9048 |
0.816 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
White-tailed Stonechat |
1 |
0.619 |
0.787 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Pied Bushchat |
0.6696 |
0.4762 |
0.565 |
0.0002 |
*** |
|
Indian Roller |
0.5043 |
0.381 |
0.438 |
0.0105 |
* |
|
Indian Pied Starling |
1 |
0.1905 |
0.436 |
0.0035 |
** |
|
White-throated Kingfisher |
0.5263 |
0.3333 |
0.419 |
0.0124 |
* |
|
Yellow-bellied Prinia |
1 |
0.1429 |
0.378 |
0.0142 |
* |
|
Yellow-wattled Lapwing |
1 |
0.1429 |
0.378 |
0.0198 |
* |
|
Mixed deciduous forest |
|||||
|
Red Junglefowl |
0.7368 |
0.6667 |
0.701 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Oriental White-eye |
0.5021 |
0.8667 |
0.66 |
0.0002 |
*** |
|
Indian Grey Hornbill |
0.8438 |
0.4667 |
0.627 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Red-whiskered Bulbul |
0.4462 |
0.6667 |
0.545 |
0.0009 |
*** |
|
Humes Warbler |
0.2558 |
0.8667 |
0.471 |
0.0258 |
* |
|
Plum-headed Parakeet |
0.4866 |
0.3333 |
0.403 |
0.0252 |
* |
|
Crimson Sunbird |
0.507 |
0.2667 |
0.368 |
0.0308 |
* |
|
Plantation |
|||||
|
Black-hooded Oriole |
0.7231 |
0.9286 |
0.819 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Black Bulbul |
1 |
0.5357 |
0.732 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Rose-ringed Parakeet |
0.6016 |
0.7143 |
0.656 |
0.0002 |
*** |
|
Taiga Flycatcher |
1 |
0.4286 |
0.655 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Spangled Drongo |
0.6497 |
0.6429 |
0.646 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Common Myna |
0.7851 |
0.3214 |
0.502 |
0.0017 |
** |
|
Grey-headed Canary Flycatcher |
1 |
0.2143 |
0.463 |
0.0027 |
** |
|
Jungle Owlet |
0.8108 |
0.25 |
0.45 |
0.0043 |
** |
|
White-throated Fantail |
0.4334 |
0.4643 |
0.449 |
0.01 |
** |
|
Large-billed Crow |
0.5384 |
0.3571 |
0.438 |
0.0224 |
* |
|
Jungle Babbler |
0.4063 |
0.4643 |
0.434 |
0.0304 |
* |
|
House Crow |
0.5744 |
0.3214 |
0.43 |
0.0251 |
* |
|
Riverine |
|||||
|
Little Cormorant |
1 |
0.6 |
0.775 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
White Wagtail |
0.9522 |
0.6 |
0.756 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Citrine Wagtail |
0.7489 |
0.68 |
0.714 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Pied Kingfisher |
0.9216 |
0.52 |
0.692 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Ruddy Shelduck |
0.9795 |
0.32 |
0.56 |
0.0009 |
*** |
|
River Lapwing |
0.592 |
0.52 |
0.555 |
0.0016 |
** |
|
Gray Wagtail |
0.466 |
0.48 |
0.473 |
0.0066 |
** |
|
Eurasian Collared-Dove |
1 |
0.2 |
0.447 |
0.0045 |
** |
|
Temminck Stint |
1 |
0.2 |
0.447 |
0.0047 |
** |
|
White-browed Wagtail |
1 |
0.2 |
0.447 |
0.0031 |
** |
|
Brahminy Starling |
1 |
0.16 |
0.4 |
0.0162 |
* |
|
Goosander |
1 |
0.16 |
0.4 |
0.0143 |
* |
|
Little Egret |
1 |
0.16 |
0.4 |
0.0149 |
* |
|
Little-ringed Plover |
1 |
0.16 |
0.4 |
0.0128 |
* |
|
Red-crested Pochard |
1 |
0.16 |
0.4 |
0.0139 |
* |
|
River Tern |
0.9023 |
0.16 |
0.38 |
0.021 |
* |
|
Scrub forest |
|||||
|
Lesser Whitethroat |
0.6966 |
1 |
0.835 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Indian Robin |
1 |
0.5833 |
0.764 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Plain Prinia |
0.7343 |
0.75 |
0.742 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Spotted Dove |
0.5063 |
0.8333 |
0.65 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Purple Sunbird |
0.6187 |
0.6667 |
0.642 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Small Minivet |
1 |
0.3333 |
0.577 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Ashy Prinia |
0.7937 |
0.4167 |
0.575 |
0.0001 |
*** |
|
Red-vented Bulbul |
0.5178 |
0.5833 |
0.55 |
0.0263 |
* |
|
Greenish Warbler |
0.463 |
0.5833 |
0.52 |
0.0021 |
** |
|
Yellow-footed Green-Pigeon |
1 |
0.25 |
0.5 |
0.0009 |
*** |
|
Indian Silverbill |
0.8596 |
0.25 |
0.464 |
0.0022 |
** |
|
Oriental Magpie-Robin |
0.3736 |
0.5 |
0.432 |
0.0193 |
* |
|
Indian Peafowl |
0.5571 |
0.3333 |
0.431 |
0.0103 |
* |
|
Red-breasted Flycatcher |
0.5294 |
0.3333 |
0.42 |
0.0103 |
* |
|
Lesser Goldenback |
0.5568 |
0.25 |
0.373 |
0.0438 |
* |
|
Greater Coucal |
0.8333 |
0.1667 |
0.373 |
0.0186 |
* |
A—Specificity | B—Fidelity
Significant codes: 0 ‘***’ | 0.001 ‘**’ | 0.01 ‘*’ | 0.05 ‘.’ |
0.1 ‘’ | 1.
For
image, figures & appendix - - click here for full PDF
REFERENCES
Anderson,
M.J. (2001). A new method
for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecology
26(1): 32–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2001.01070.pp.x
Aggarwal, K.,
R. Chanda, S. Rai, M. Rai, D.K. Pradhan, B. Munda & U. Srinivasan (2023). The effect of selective logging
on microclimates, arthropod abundance and the foraging behaviour of Eastern
Himalayan birds. Forest Ecology and Management 541: 121076.
Archana,
T.R., A. Nefla, H. Byju, S. Almaroofi, P.K. Prasadan, O.R. Reshi, A.S. Alatawi
& K.M. Aarif (2024). Effects of plant and avian frugivore interaction networks on landscape
patterns and seed dispersal functions in the southern Western Ghats, India. Ornithological
Science 23(1): 35–43. https://doi.org/10.2326/osj.23.35
Aymí, R.
& G. Gargallo (2021). Lesser Whitethroat (Curruca curruca), version 1.1. In: del Hoyo,
J., A. Elliott, J. Sargatal, D.A. Christie & E. de Juana (eds.). Birds
of the World. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.leswhi4.01.1
Bai, J., H.
Zhang, H. Zhou, S. Li, B. Gao, P. Chen, L. Ma, Z. Xu, Z. Zhang, C. Xu, L. Ruan
& G. Ge (2021). Winter coexistence
in herbivorous waterbirds: niche differentiation in a floodplain, Poyang Lake,
China. Ecology and Evolution 11: 16835–16848. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8314
Báldi, A.
(2003). Using higher
taxa as surrogates of species richness: a study based on 3700 Coleoptera,
Diptera, and Acari species in Central-Hungarian reserves. Basic and Applied
Ecology 4(6): 589–593. https://doi.org/10.1078/1439-1791-00193
Balasubramanian,
P., V.S. Vijayan, S.N. Prasad & R. Venkitachalam (2005). Status and Distribution of the
Hornbills in the Eastern Ghats. Project Report, Salim Ali Centre for
Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore, India, 32 pp.
Baral, H.S.
(2001). Community
structure and habitat associations of lowland grassland birds in Nepal. PhD
Thesis. Universiteit van Amsterdam / Cardiff University, 36 pp.
Baral, H.S.
(2004). Status,
distribution, ecology and behaviour of White-tailed Stonechat (Saxicola
leucura) in Nepal with reference to the Indian subcontinent. Newsletter
for Ornithologists 1(5): 66–67.
Barlow, J., F.
França, T.A. Gardner, C.C. Hicks, G.D. Lennox, E. Berenguer & N.A. Graham
(2018). The future of
hyperdiverse tropical ecosystems. Nature 559(7715): 517–526. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0301-1
Berlusconi, A.,
G. Castiglione, L.A. Wauters, A. Martinoli, E. Clerici, A. Mologni, M.
Morganti, A. Martinoli, A. Romano & D. Rubolini (2025). Habitat partitioning and spatial
segregation at multiple scales promotes year-round coexistence in a guild of
forest songbirds. Ibis 167: 912–926. https://doi.org/10.1111/ibi.13423
Bernard, E.
(2001). Vertical
stratification of bat communities in primary forests of Central Amazon, Brazil.
Journal of Tropical Ecology 17(1): 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467401001079
Bibby, C.J., N.D.
Burgess, D.A. Hill & S. Mustoe (2000). Bird Census Techniques, 2nd
edition. Academic Press, London, 257 pp.
Boatman, N.D.,
N.W. Brickle, J.D. Hart, T.P. Milsom, A.J. Morris, A.W. Murray & P.A.
Robertson (2004). Evidence for
the indirect effects of pesticides on farmland birds. Ibis 146: 131–143.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00347.x
Boutin, S., D.L.
Haughland, J. Schieck, J. Herbers & E. Bayne (2009). A new approach to forest
biodiversity monitoring in Canada. Forest Ecology and Management 258S:
S168–S175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.08.024
Boyce, M.S.
& L.L. McDonald (1999). Relating populations to habitats using resource selection functions. Trends
in Ecology and Evolution 14(7): 268–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(99)01593-1
Brown, J.H.
(1981). Two decades of
homage to Santa Rosalia: toward a general theory of diversity. American
Zoologist 21(4): 877–888. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/21.4.877
Byju, H., H.
Maitreyi, K.M. Aarif, K.A. Rubeena & S. Ravichandran (2025a). Diverging roles of natural and
artificial lagoons in supporting shorebird communities in the Gulf of Mannar,
southeast coast of India. Journal of Coastal Conservation 29(6): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-025-01163-5
Byju, H., H.
Maitreyi, R. Natarajan, R. Vijayan & B.A.V. Maran (2025b). The avifauna of Ramanathapuram,
Tamil Nadu, along the southeast coast of India: waterbird assessments and
conservation implications across key sanctuaries and Ramsar sites. PeerJ
13: e18899. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.18899
Byju, H., H.
Maitreyi, K.M. Aarif, K.A. Rubeena & S. Ravichandran (2025c). Temporal patterns in shorebird
diversity and abundance at Dhanushkodi Lagoon: a critical wintering ground
along India‘s southeast coast. Thalassas 41(3): 151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41208-025-00908-1
Byju, H., H.
Maitreyi, K.M. Aarif & N. Raveendran (2025d). Disappearing colonies: temporal
decline in abundance and nesting of waterbirds in a key Indian wetland. Wetlands
Ecology and Management 33(4): 47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-025-10067-y
Cáceres, M.D.
& P. Legendre (2009). Associations between species and groups of sites: indices and statistical
inference. Ecology 90(12): 3566–3574. https://doi.org/10.1890/08-1823.1
Cheke, R. &
C. Mann (2020). Purple Sunbird
(Cinnyris asiaticus), version 1.0. In: del Hoyo, J., A. Elliott, J.
Sargatal, D.A. Christie & E. de Juana (eds.). Birds of the World.
Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.pursun4.01
Collar, N. &
A. Bonan (2020). Indian Robin (Copsychus
fulicatus), version 1.0. In: del Hoyo, J., A. Elliott, J. Sargatal, D.A.
Christie & E. de Juana (eds.). Birds of the World. Cornell Lab of
Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.indrob1.01
Dinanti, R.V.,
N.L. Winarni & J. Supriatna (2018). Vertical stratification of bird
community in Cikepuh wildlife reserve, West Java, Indonesia. Biodiversitas
Journal of Biological Diversity 19(1): 134–139. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d190120
Dirzo, R. &
P.H. Raven (2003). Global state of
biodiversity and loss. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 28(1):
137–167. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.28.050302.105532
Dufrêne, M.
& P. Legendre (1997). Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible
asymmetrical approach. Ecological Monographs 67(3): 345–366. https://doi.org/10.2307/2963459
García-Macía,
J., C.A. Torralvo, G. Elias, J.F. Tomás, M.A. Ferrer & V. Morandini (2025). Climate, habitat availability and
human activity shape the wintering distribution of an increasing migratory
piscivorous raptor within the Mediterranean basin. Ibis 168: 687–700. https://doi.org/10.1111/ibi.70021
Gautam, M.K.,
R.K. Manhas & A.K. Tripathi (2016). Patterns of diversity and
regeneration in unmanaged moist deciduous forests in response to disturbance in
Shiwalik Himalayas, India. Journal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity 9(2):
144–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2016.01.004
Grimmett, R., C.
Inskipp & T. Inskipp (1998). Birds of the Indian Subcontinent. Oxford University Press, Delhi,
889 pp.
Grimmett, R., C.
Inskipp & T. Inskipp (2011). Birds of the Indian Subcontinent. 2nd edition. Oxford
University Press and Christopher Helm, London, 528 pp.
Hallmann, C.A.,
R.P. Foppen, C.A. Van Turnhout, H. De Kroon & E. Jongejans (2014). Declines in insectivorous birds are
associated with high neonicotinoid concentrations. Nature 511(7509):
341–343. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13531
Hilty, J. &
A. Merenlender (2000). Faunal indicator taxa selection for monitoring ecosystem health. Biological
Conservation 92(2): 185–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00052-X
Hinsley, S., R.
Hill, R. Fuller, P. Bellamy & P. Rothery (2009). Bird species distributions across woodland
canopy structure gradients. Community Ecology 10(1): 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.10.2009.1.12
Jain, M. &
R. Balakrishnan (2011). Microhabitat selection in an assemblage of crickets (Orthoptera: Ensifera)
of a tropical evergreen forest in Southern India. Insect Conservation and
Diversity 4(2): 152–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4598.2010.00118.x
Jayson, E.A.
& D.N. Mathew (2003). Vertical stratification and its relation to foliage in tropical forest
birds in Western Ghats (India). Acta Ornithologica 38(2): 111–116. https://doi.org/10.3161/068.038.0207
Kim, H., B.C.
McComb, S.J. Frey, D.M. Bell & M.G. Betts (2022). Forest microclimate and composition
mediate long-term trends of breeding bird populations. Global Change Biology
28(21): 6180–6193. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16353
Lambeck, R.J.
(1997). Focal species:
a multi-species umbrella for nature conservation. Conservation Biology
11: 849–856. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.96319.x
Laurance, W.F.,
J. Sayer & K.G. Cassman (2013). Agricultural expansion and its impacts on tropical
nature. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 29(2): 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2013.12.001
Lee, S.D. &
H.K. Kang (2019). Seasonal
fluctuations and changing characteristics of a temperate zone wetland bird
community. Journal of Ecology and Environment 43(1): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41610-019-0108-5
Leveau, L.M.
& C.M. Leveau (2016). Does urbanization affect the seasonal dynamics of bird communities in
urban parks? Urban Ecosystems 19(2): 631–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-016-0525-5
Maas, B., D.D.
Putra, M. Waltert, Y. Clough, T. Tscharntke & C.H. Schulze (2009). Six years of habitat modification
in a tropical rainforest margin of Indonesia do not affect bird diversity but
endemic forest species. Biological Conservation 142: 2665–2671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.06.018
Madge, S., J.
del Hoyo, G.M. Kirwan & N. Collar (2020). Yellow-bellied Prinia (Prinia
flaviventris), version 1.0. In: Billerman, S.M., B.K. Keeney, P.G. Rodewald
& T.S. Schulenberg (eds.). Birds of the World. Cornell Lab of
Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.yebpri1.01
Malizia, L.R.
(2001). Seasonal
fluctuations of birds, fruits, and flowers in a subtropical forest of
Argentina. The Condor 103(1): 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1093/condor/103.1.45
Manakadan, R.
(2014). The grassland
birds of Rollapadu Wildlife Sanctuary, Andhra Pradesh, India, with special
reference to the impact of grazing-free enclosures. Journal of the Bombay
Natural History Society 111(2): 81–92. https://doi.org/10.17087/jbnhs/2014/v111i2/71744
Manly, B.F.J.,
L. McDonald, D.L. Thomas, T.L. McDonald & W.P. Erickson (2002). Resource Selection by Animals:
Statistical Design and Analysis for Field Studies. 2nd edition. Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 222 pp. https://doi.org/10.2307/5247
Margalef, R.
(1958). Information
theory in ecology. General Systems 3: 36–71.
Moeliker, K.,
D.A. Christie & G.M. Kirwan (2020). Indian Paradise-Flycatcher (Terpsiphone
paradisi), version 1.0. In: del Hoyo, J., A. Elliott, J. Sargatal, D.A.
Christie & E. de Juana (eds.). Birds of the World. Cornell Lab of
Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.aspfly1.01
Mohan, D. &
S. Sondhi (2024). An Updated
Checklist and Bibliography of the Birds of Uttarakhand. 2nd edition.
Uttarakhand Forest Department, Dehradun, 57 pp.
Molleman, F., A.
Kop, P.M. Brakefield, P.J. De Vries & B.J. Zwaan (2006). Vertical and temporal patterns of
biodiversity of fruit-feeding butterflies in a tropical forest in Uganda. Biodiversity
and Conservation 15(1): 107–121.
Mottl, O., J. Yombai,
T.M. Fayle, V. Novotný & P. Klimeš (2020). Experiments with artificial nests
provide evidence for ant community stratification and nest site limitation in a
tropical forest. Biotropica 52(2): 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12684
Naidoo, R. (2004). Species richness and community
composition of songbirds in a tropical forest-agricultural landscape. Animal
Conservation 7: 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1367943003001185
Naveen K.S., R.
Muraleedharan, R. Kalyani, H. Maitreyi & H. Byju (2025). Avifaunal diversity of
Chinnavedampatti Lake: an urban wetland in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India. Journal
of Experimental Zoology India 28(2): 1383–1395. https://doi.org/10.51470/jez.2025.28.2.1383
Nielsen, S.E.,
M.S. Boyce, G.B. Stenhouse & R.H. Munro (2003). Development and testing of
phenologically driven grizzly bear habitat models. Ecoscience 10(1):
1–10.
Nielsen, S.E.,
C.J. Johnson, D.C. Heard & M.S. Boyce (2005). Can models of presence-absence be
used to scale abundance? Two case studies considering extremes in life history.
Ecography 28(2): 197–208.
Oliveira, B.F.
& B.R. Scheffers (2019). Vertical stratification influences global patterns of biodiversity. Ecography
42(2): 249. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.03636
Ozanne, C.M., D.
Anhuf, S.L. Boulter, M. Keller, R.L. Kitching, C. Körner & M. Yoshimura
(2003). Biodiversity
meets the atmosphere: a global view of forest canopies. Science
301(5630): 183–186. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1084507
Pal, M., P. Pop,
A. Mahapatra, R. Bhagat & U. Hore (2019). Diversity and structure of bird
assemblages along urban-rural gradient in Kolkata, India. Urban Forestry
& Urban Greening 38: 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.11.005
Palei, H.S.,
H.K. Sahu & A.K. Nayak (2016). Estimating the density of Red Junglefowl Gallus
gallus (Galliformes: Phasianidae) in the tropical forest of Similipal Tiger
Reserve, eastern India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 8(2): 8495–8498. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.2571.8.2.8495-8498
Peh, K.S.H.,
N.S. Sodhi, J. De Jong, C.H. Sekercioglu, C.A.M. Yap & S.L.H. Lim (2006). Conservation value of degraded
habitats for forest birds in southern Peninsular Malaysia. Diversity and
Distributions 12(5): 572–581.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2006.00257.x
Redhead, J.W.,
S.A. Hinsley, B.C. Beckmann, R.K. Broughton & R.F. Pywell (2018). Effects of agri-environmental
habitat provision on winter and breeding season abundance of farmland birds. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment 251(1): 114–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.09.027
Roberge, J.M.
& P. Angelstam (2006). Indicator species among resident forest birds — a cross-regional
evaluation in northern Europe. Biological Conservation 130(1): 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.12.008
Roberts, T.J.
(1992). The Birds of
Pakistan. Volume II. Oxford University Press, Karachi, 617 pp. https://doi.org/10.1093/auk/111.3.783
Robinson, W.D.,
J.D. Brawn & S.K. Robinson (2000). Forest bird community structure in
central Panama: influence of spatial scale and biogeography. Ecological
Monographs 70(2): 209–235. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9615(2000)070[0209:FBCSIC]2.0.CO;2
Scheffers, B.R.,
L. Shoo, B. Phillips, S.L. Macdonald, A. Anderson, J. VanDerWal, C. Storlie, A.
Gourret & S.E. Williams (2017). Vertical (arboreality) and horizontal (dispersal)
movement increase the resilience of vertebrates to climatic instability. Global
Ecology and Biogeography 26(7): 787–798. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12585
Schulze, C.H.
& I. Riedl (2008). Bird assemblages of forested and human-modified countryside habitats in
the Pacific lowlands of southern Costa Rica. Stapfia 88: 395–408.
Shannon, C.E.
& W. Weaver (1963). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press,
Urbana, 117 pp.
Singh, A., H.
Shi, T. Foresman & E.A. Fosnight (2001). Status of the world‘s remaining
closed forests: an assessment using satellite data and policy options. Ambio
30(1): 67–69. https://doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447-30.1.67
Sinha, S.P.,
B.C. Sinha & Q. Qureshi (2011). Management and Conservation of Jhilmil Jheel
Conservation Reserve: In Special Reference to its Flagship Species Swamp Deer (Rucervus
duvaucelii duvaucelii) in Uttarakhand State, India. LAP Lambert Academic
Publishing, 156 pp.
Sinha, A., H.
Hariharan, B.S. Adhikari & R. Krishnamurthy (2019). Bird diversity along riverine areas
in the Bhagirathi Valley, Uttarakhand, India. Biodiversity Data Journal 7: e31588. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.7.e31588
Stanton, R.L.,
C.A. Morrissey & R.G. Clark (2018). Analysis of trends and agricultural
drivers of farmland bird declines in North America: a review. Agriculture,
Ecosystems & Environment 254: 244–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.11.028
Sundar, K.S.G.
& S. Kittur (2013). Can wetlands maintained for human use also help conserve biodiversity?
Landscape-scale patterns of bird use of wetlands in an agricultural landscape
in north India. Biological Conservation 168: 49–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.09.016
Surasinghe, T.D.
& C. De Alwis (2010). Birds of Sabaragamuwa University campus, Buttala, Sri Lanka. Journal of
Threatened Taxa 2(5): 876–888. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o2113.876-88
Turton, S.M.
& D.T. Siegenthaler (2004). Immediate impacts of a severe tropical cyclone on the micro-climate of a
tropical rain forest canopy in northeast Australia. Journal of Tropical
Ecology 20: 583–586. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467404001750
Walther, B. & P. Jones (2020). Black-hooded Oriole (Oriolus
xanthornus), version 1.0. In: del Hoyo, J., A. Elliott, J. Sargatal, D.A.
Christie & E. de Juana (eds.). Birds of the World. Cornell Lab of
Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.blhori1.01