Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2019 | 11(6): 13782–13785

Study of nesting behaviour of Asian Paradise Flycatcher Terpsiphone paradisi (Aves: Passeriformes: Monorchidae)from southern West Bengal, India

Nilemesh Das ¹ & Shuvadip Adhikari ²

1 ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, Kolkata, West Bengal 700120, India.

2 Ecotoxicology Project Laboratory, Government College of Engineering and Leather Technology, Block LB, Sector III, Salt Lake, Kolkata, West Bengal 700106, India.

2 Department of Zoology, The University of Burdwan, Golapbag, Burdwan, West Bengal 713104, India.

1 dasnilemesh16@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 shuvaadhikari90@gmail.com

Abstract: The Asian Paradise Flycatcher has always been a flamboyant passerine to be photographed quite often throughout the Gangetic Bengal in India, but hardly any behavioural documentation is enlisted till date.  The nesting behaviour of the subject bird encompassing its parental behaviours was studied on a wetland stretch of Ishapore, southern Gangetic Bengal.  The present study mainly deals with the nesting behaviour, incubation activities, hatching, and parental care to fledging of a wild pair.  The behavioural changes at par with the changing weather conditions and the neighbouring species too were studied.

Keywords:Barti Beel, behaviour, brooding, courting, fledging, hatching, incubation, Ishapore, parental care, Passeriformes.

The Asian Paradise Flycatcher Terpsiphone paradisi is a medium-sized passerine bird that inhabits forests and well-wooded habitats in different parts of Asia.  It is a widespread resident in the Indian subcontinent and migrates seasonally.  In West Bengal State in India, however, the species is a summer visitor (Grimmett et al. 2011; Rasmussen & Anderton 2012).  Asian Paradise Flycatcher exhibits sexual dimorphism.  Breeding pairs are monogamous.  Being socially monogamous, both male and female take part in nest-building, incubation, brooding, and feeding of the young (Mizuta & Yamagishi 1998).  It is relatively robust to habitat loss, evident from its appearance in forest edges and urban green spaces.  Combined with its extraordinarily widespread distribution, it is not locally nor globally threatened and is currently rated as Least Concern (LC) by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN 2019).  Studies on the courtship, nesting, and feeding behaviour are available sparsely (Mizuta & Yamagishi 1998; Gokula & Vijayan 2003).  Many sightings of this passerine variety were noted throughout the state but no information on its biology, ecology, or behaviour is available from the lower Gangetic plain despite a good number of photographic records.  The present work aimed to study the behavioural aspects of the Asian Paradise Flycatcher in relation with courtship, nesting, and parental care from the southern part of West Bengal.

Study site

The study area was located near a wetland named Barti Beel (Bengali: lake; 22.782°N & 88.391°E) in Ishapore, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal.  It is an isolated place with very less human activities or disturbances.  The forest covered a long range of mostly bamboo vegetation, with mango and guava trees lining a narrow mud path.  Agricultural fields, ponds, and the wetland area are flooded during the monsoon.

Behaviour study

Observations were carried out from 05 June to 19 July 2017 on a single nest.  The observations were made from a safe hide-out with proper camouflaged clothing and ambience.  A considerable distance from the nest was maintained to avoid disturbances during observation.  A pair of Olympus 8×40 DPS I binoculars and Nikon Coolpix P600 camera was used for documentation.  Tree and nest heights and distances were measured by TruPulse 300 laser range finder.  The girth of the tree at chest height was measured using a measuring tape.  The birds were not marked, the size of the clutch was not measured, the and nest was not touched or brought down for measurement purposes even after being deserted by birds as chances remained for another couple to use the same.

Results and Discussion

The nest was built at a height of 4.15m in the branch of a Mango Tree Mangifera indica (height 6.35m, girth 179cm).  The nest was chiefly made with twigs and spider webs on the end of a short branch.  The nest was located on the third day of the observation period (Table 1).  Initially, due to the height at which the nest was located and the tendency of the observers to not disturb the ambience and the condition of the nest, it was not approached directly.  Hence, the presence of eggs was not confirmed in one go.  A safe hideout at a distant bush resulted in locating/recording the repeated visits of the couple to the nest, with alternate (mostly, the female was engaged in the incubation process) intervals of sitting (assumed to be incubating the eggs), which confirmed the presence of eggs in the nest, though the number could not be confirmed then.  Being socially monogamous, both male and female took part in nest-building, incubation, brooding, and feeding of the young.  A sudden heavy rain on the 11th day of the observation period showed the fact that both the parents guarded the nest sitting at its edges spreading their wings.  A stroll along the circumferential area where the nest was spotted confirmed the presence of nests of a few other species, namely Lineated Barbet Megalaima lineate, Coppersmith Barbet M. haemacephala, and Black-hooded Oriole Oriolus xanthornus.  On the 27th day of the observation period, the peeping of a chick was observed inside the nest.  The act of feeding the juvenile by the parents in alteration, mostly again by the female, facilitated the documentation.  Right after six days (i.e., on the 33rd day of the observation period) from the first observation of the chick, two more chicks were observed inside.  Since the nest was not hampered or no attempt was made to have an eye-level view of the nesting, the exact clutch size could not be determined; however, the number of chicks (here, three in number) could possibly give an overview of the same.  The feeding behaviour was observed prior to fledging, even when the chicks were capable of coming out of the nest to the nearby twigs/branches.  Feeding mostly comprised of ants, small insects, and damselflies torn into parts.

The breeding season of the species lasts from May to July; in this study, it started in June and ended by the end of July.  The incubation period lasts 14–16 days and the nestling period 9–12 days (Mizuta & Yamagishi 1998), though our study recorded 23–26 days of incubation.  Three eggs were laid in the neat cup nest on the end of a low branch.  Chicks hatched in about 21–23 days.

In general, most of the studies showed lower breeding success in tree cavities compared to nest boxes (van Balen et al. 1982; Nilsson 1986; East & Perrins 1988; Alatalo et al. 1990; Lundberg & Alatalo 1992).  Contrary to these studies, Mitrus (2003) and Czeszczewik (2004) reported higher breeding success in tree cavities than in nest boxes.  In our study, reproductive success was 100% as we could observe the juveniles grow up to their adulthood and hovering around, though further such documentation or spotting was not carried out.

The site selection for nesting plays a crucial role in the success of the progeny.  Nests built in the close proximity of a breeding pair of predatory birds like treepies and drongos often results in a significant reproductive success, where predation poses one of the major threats to the chicks (Nolan 1963; Ricklefs 1969).  In our study, the nestlings of Lineated Barbet and Coppersmith Barbet pairs were seen at an approximate circumference of 60m and that of a Black-hooded Oriole at about 150m.

The breeding season for the non-migratory subspecies  affinis is March–July, while for the migratory species incei it is May–July.  Males are highly territorial and do not tolerate intruders.  Breeding pairs are monogamous and the nest is build together but mainly by the female, who lays three to four eggs in the nest (Mizuta & Yamagishi 1998).  In our study, however, we found that though both the parents were involved in nest-making, the feeding part was mostly carried out by the female, with the intervention of the male occasionally.  During a sudden torrential rain, both the parents were seen guarding the nest and the chicks with their wings wide open.

The Asian Paradise Flycatcher primarily consumes small winged insects such as flies, bugs, and beetles, but is known to occasionally feed on spiders as well as larger insects such as Praying Mantises, moths, and butterflies by battering them to death and consuming the thorax and abdomen (Gokula & Vijayan 2003).  The present study observed a similar set of pieces of damselflies, ants, and larvae being fed to the chicks by the parent birds.  The birds usually perch high on a shade-covered branch, sallying out to catch insects on the wing and returning to the perch to consume them, often singly or in pairs (del Hoyo et al. 2006).  Here, the nest was constructed on a twig which was about 50% shade-covered, with the parent birds perching on the edges of the brim of the nest.

Table 1. Chronology of the breeding cycle of Asian Paradise Flycatcher at Barti Beel in West Bengal, India.

For images – click here

References

Alatalo, R.V., C. Glynn & A. Lundberg (1990). Singing rate and female attraction in the Pied Flycatcher: an experiment. Animal Behaviour 39(3): 601–603.

Czeszczewik, D. (2004). Breeding success and timing of the Pied Flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca nesting in natural holes and nest-boxes in the Białowieża Forest, Poland. Acta Ornithologica 39(1): 15–20.

del Hoyo, J., A. Elliott & D.A. Christie (eds.) (2006). Handbook of the Birds of the World, Vol. II. Old World Flycatchers to Old World Warblers. Lynx Edicions, 798pp.  

East, M.L. & C.M. Perrins (1988). The effect of nestboxes on breeding populations of birds in broadleaved temperate woodlands. Ibis 130(4): 393–401.

Gokula, V. & L. Vijayan (2003). Foraging and nesting behaviour of Asian Paradise Flycatcher Terpsiphone paradise in Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary, Tamil Nadu, India. Forktail 19: 142–144.

Grimmett, R., C. Inskipp & T. Inskipp (2011). Birds of the Indian Subcontinent. Helm Field Guide - 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press, India, 528pp.

IUCN (2019). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2019-1 <http://www.iucnredlist.org>

Lundberg, A. & R.V. Alatalo (1992). The Pied Flycatcher. T & AD, Poyser, London, 267pp.

Mitrus, C. (2003). A comparison of the breeding ecology of Collared Flycatchers nesting in boxes and natural cavities. Journal of Field Ornithology 74(3): 293–299.

Mizuta, T. & S. Yamagishi (1998). Breeding biology of monogamous Asian Paradise Flycatcher Terpsiphone paradisi (Aves: Monarchinae): a special reference to colour dimorphism and exaggerated long tails in male. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 46(1): 101–112.

Nilsson, S.G. (1986). Evolution of hole-nesting in birds: on balancing selection pressures. The Auk 103(2): 432–435.

Nolan, V. Jr. (1963). Reproductive success of birds in a deciduous scrub habitat. Ecology 44(2): 305–313.

Rasmussen, P.C. & J.C. Anderton (2012). Birds of South Asia: The Ripley Guide, 2^nd Volume, II Edition. Smithsonian Institution, Michigan State University & Lynx Edicions, Washington DC, Michigan & Barcelona, 688pp.

Ricklefs, R.E. (1969). An analysis of nesting mortality in birds. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 1–48.

van Balen, J.H., C.J.H. Booy, J.A. van Franeker & E.R. Osieck (1982). Studies on hole-nesting birds in natural nest sites. Ardea 55(1–2): 1–24.