Foraging ecology of Black-necked Stork (Ephippiorhynchus ... · L2 Taxonomy and systematics 3-4 L3...

Foraging ecology of Black-necked Stork (Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus) in some

Important Bird Areas of western Uttar Pradesh, India

DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF

fflaittt of $tltlo9(op^p

Wildlife Science

BY

AHMAD MASOOD KHAN

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF

DR. SATISH KUMAR

DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE SCIENCES ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY

ALIGARH (INDIA)

2010

DS4230

2 2 JUL 2C]3

'*^ ^ ' ^ ' 'WSI

DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE SCIENCES CONSERVATION MONITORING CENTRE

ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, AUGARH-202 002

Phones:91-571-2701052 (0), 2700920;Ext 1700,01.02, Telefax;2701205, *-mail:wsi@sanchametln

Certificate

I certify that the Dissertation entitled, "Foraging ecology of Black-necked Stork {Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus) in some Important Bird Areas in western Uttar Pradesh, India" is an original research work carried out by Mr. Ahmad Masood Khan as a foil time research stideni under my supervision towards partial fulfillment of the award of Degree of Master of Philosophy in Wildlife Science. It is further certified that this research work has not been submitted for the award of any degree to any candidate of this or any other University.

SatishKiunar 13.12:2010 Supervisor

Developing quality human resource in wiidHfe is our mandate

Seeking scientific solutions to conservation problems is our mission

Contents Acknowledgements i-iii

List of Figures iv-v

List of Tables v

List of Appendices v

Chapter 1 Introduction 1-7

LI Basic description 3-3

L2 Taxonomy and systematics 3-4

L3 Conservation status 4-4

L4 Distribution 5-5

L5 Habitat 5-6

L6 Genesis of the study 6-7

L7 Objectives 7-7

Chapter! Study Area 8-17

2.1 Location and geography 8-9

2.2 Chmate 9-9

2.3 Flora and Fauna 9-10

2.4 Description of different study sites 12-17

2.4.1 Sheikha Jheel 12-12

2.4.2 Patna Bird Sanctuary 13-13

2.4.3 Sur Sarovar Bird Sanctuary 13-14

2.4.4 Saman Bird Sanctuary 15-16

2.2.5 Lakh-Bahosi Bird Sanctuary 16-17

Chapter 3 Methodology 18-21

Chapter 4 Results 22-38

Chapter 5 Discussion 39-43

References 44-49

Appendices I-V

Acknowledgements

First of all I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Satish Kumar, for his

constant guidance, co-operation and being a source of inspiration to me at every

moment, as it would not have been possible to complete this work without his

efforts.

I offer my sincere thanks to Dr. Jamal Ahmad Khan, Professor, Department of

Wildlife Sciences A.M.U., Aligarh for his guidance and support in field data

collection.

I am thankful to Dr. AffifuUah Khan, Chairman, Department of Wildlife

Sciences and Dr. H.S.A. Yahya, Professor, Department of Wildlife Sciences for

their encouragement during the study period. I am equally thankful to Dr. Orus

Ilyas and Dr. Faiza Abbasi for teaching me in post-graduate classes.

I am grateful to Dr. Asad R. Rahmani, Director, Bombay Natural History'

Society for discussions pertaining to 'Avian disease Project' and his valuable

guidance in the field.

I am thankful to Uttar Pradesh Forest Department staff, various Divisional Forest

Officers and Range Forest Officers especially Mr. Atul Kumar Aggarwal (DFO,

Aligarh), Mr. Vivek Gupta (RFO, Sheikha Jheel), Mr. R.B. Uttam (RFO, Sw

Sarovar Bird Sanctuary), Mr. U.S. Dhore (Wildlife Warden, Chambal Project),

Mr. V.N. Thakur (RFO, Lakh-Bahosi Bird Sanctuary), Mr. Ram Harak (RFO,

Patna Bird Sanctuary), Mr. D.P. Rai (RFO, Saman Bird Sanctuary) for their

continuous support for my work in Important Bird Areas (IBAs) of Uttar

Pradesh.

I am also thankful to Mr. B.K. Patnaik, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

(Chief Wildlife Warden of Uttar Pradesh) for issuing permit on time to visit all

the wetlands in western Uttar Pradesh.

The Forest Department extended all possible help during data collection trip to

the study sites. In particular, I would like to thank, Mr. Sunil Kumar (Forester,

Patna Bird Sanctuary), Mr. Amit Katiyar (Forester, Sur Sarovar Bird Sanctuary),

Mr. Narhsingh (Forester, Saman Bird Sanctuary), Mr. Rahul (Forest Guard,

Saman Bird Sanctuary), Mr. Karan Singh (Forest Guard, Lakh-Bahosi Bird

Sanctuary) and Mr. Ishaq (Forest Guard, Sheikha Jheel).

I am also thankful to Mr. Ramdas (Forester, Social Forestry Division) for

arranging accommodation in field in Etawah and Mainpuri districts. The work

was not possible without his kind support.

I wish to place on record my sincere thanks to Dr. Ehtisham Husaain Abbasi

(Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce, A.M.U., Aligarh), for his

constant support.

I also express my heartfeh gratitude to Dr. Kaleem Ahmad, Mr. Shamshad

Alam, Miss. Nisa Khatoon, Mr. Shah Mohd Belal, Research Scholars at

Department of Wildlife Sciences (DWS) for very useful discussions and

valuable suggestions.

I would like to thank my Hall mate Mr. Tajdar, Mr. Salman Hyder, Mr. Naseem,

Mr. Tariq Aziz, Mr. Rehan, Mr. Imran, Mr. Firoz for timely help at various

levels.

Last but not the least, I am thankful to all staff of DWS for their help and co

operation

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Location of study sites in western Uttar Pradesh

Figure 4.1 Mean number (± SD) of attempts by Male Blaclc-necked storks during

five minute observation bouts in breeding and non-breeding seasons

(2008-2010)

Figure 4.2 Mean number (± SD) of attempts by Female Black-necked storks

during five minute observation bouts in breeding and non-breeding

seasons(2008-2010)

Figure 4.3 Foraging success of Male Black-necked storks in breeding and non-

breeding seasons(2008-2010)

Figure 4.4 Foraging success of Female Black-necked storks in breeding and non-


Figure 4.5 Prey captured by Male Black-necked storks in breeding and non-


Figure 4.6 Prey captured by Female Black-necked storks in breeding and non-


Figure 4.7 Foraging in different water depths by Male Black-necked storks

during five minute observation bouts in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-

2010)

Figure 4.8 Foraging in different water depths by Female Black-necked storks


2010)

Figure 4.9 Successful attempts by BNS in relation to presence of other wading

birds during five minute observation bouts in western Uttar Pradesh

(2008-2010)

Figure 4.10 Successful attempts by BNS in response to disturbance factors


2010)

Figure 4.11 Prey species composition (%) for Black-necked Stork based on 145

successful observations in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

Figure 4.12 Different fish length classes taken by Male Black-necked storks in

western Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

Figure 4.13 Different fish length classes taken by Female Black-necked storks in


Figure 4.14 Different fish length classes taken by Black-necked storks in

breeding and non-breeding seasons in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-

2010)

Figure 4.15 Mode of foraging by Black-necked storks in breeding and non-

breeding seasons in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

Figure 4.16 Size of fish caught in relation to the water level by Male Black-

necked storks in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

Figure 4.17 Size offish caught in relation to the water level by Female Black-


List of Tables

Table 4.1 Summary of the wetland sites investigated for foraging of Black-

necked Stork in western Uttar Pradesh

Table 4.2 Result of fields survey on population status of Black-necked stork

conducted during monitoring of different wetland under the Avian

disease Project

Table 4.3 Pearson product moment correlation coefficient (r), between prey size,

handling time, peck rate and water depth for Black-necked Stork in


List of Appendices

Appendix I List of birds recorded during study period

Appendix II Photographs

Chapter 1 Introduction

The Black-necked Stork {Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus) is one of 19 species in

the family ciconiidae, commonly known as Stork family (Tyne and Berger

1959, Clancy 2009). The species has wide distribution range from Pakistan,

Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, which extends into Vietnam, and

the northern Malay Peninsula in Southeast Asia. Its distributional range extends

further through New Guinea across into the northern half of Australia

(Marchant and Higgins 1991, Elliot 1992, Hancock et al. 1992, del Hoyo

1992). In Australia, it is found as far south along the coast as Sydney and

formerly bred near the Shoalhaven River (Bell 1963). But despite having wide

distribution range its population estimate is only 10,000 to 21,000 individuals

in the wild (BirdLife International 2010). The Black-necked Stork is listed as

endangered in New South Wales in Australia (Clancy 2010).

In India, it is widely distributed in the west, central highlands and Gangetic

plains into the Assam valley and is rare in peninsular India and Sri lanka

(Rahmani 1989, Maheswaran et al. 2004). The species occurs mainly in water

reservoirs, protected or unprotected wetlands in agriculture-dominated

landscape as pairs in very low abundance or rarely a pair with juveniles of first

generation. The Black-necked Stork has been reported to be least abundant in

locations having a high diversity of waterbird species (Morton et al 1993,

Sundar 2004)

As mentioned by Ali and Ripley (1970), most of the Indian ornithologists have

limited their work on this species to its taxonomy whereas information

regarding food and feeding habits and other ecological aspects is lacking. An

ecological investigation of these aspects can provide information that may help

species survival on long-term basis and also understanding issues pertaining to

its management. Some studies have been conducted on few taxa of ciconiidae

in India such as foraging and nesting behaviour of Painted Stork {Myceteria

leucocephala) in Delhi region (Urfi et al. 2007, Kalam and Urfi 2008). The

species has been investigated for different ecological and behavioural aspects

such as group size and habitat use, flocking, and breeding biology in recent

years in agriculture-dominated landscape of southwestern part of Uttar Pradesh

(Sundar 2003, 2004, 2005, Sundar and Kaur 2001, Sundar et al, 2006). Some

more studies have been conducted on ecology of storks in Dudwa National

Park (Maheswaran and Rahmani 2001, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2008) and Keoladeo

National Park, Bharatpur (Ishtiaq 1998, Ishtiaq et al. 2010). Despite all scanty

information available on Storks in India, they have been widely investigated in

other regions of their distribution in the world such as Africa and North

America.

After conducting an extensive literature survey of the species and keeping

above facts in mind, I decided to collect baseline data on its foraging ecology

in some "'elect wetlands representing Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in western

Uttar Pradesh. The study aims to generate basic data on species' foraging

behaviour and feeding success. It also intends to investigate foraging in relation

to other large wading birds (such as herons, ibises, spoonbills and other Stork

species) and disturbance factors.

1.1 Basic description

The Black-necked Stork is a large wading bird that nests and forages in

wetland habitats. It is highly territorial and chases all other piscivorous

waterbirds which attempt to forage in the vicinity especially the other large

wading birds such as herons, spoonbills, ibises, and other stork species. They

are large, long-legged birds with a head to tail length of 129 to 150 cm

(Grimmet et al. 1998). Adults are black and white with huge black coloured

bill. In flight, wings appear white except for broad black band across coverts.

One of the apparent external morphological difference in male and female is

that Male has brown iris whereas it is yellow in female. A juvenile has fawn-

brown flight feathers and dark legs (Grimmet et al. 1998).

The social structure of Black-necked Storks is simple, with birds occurring

largely singly, in pairs or in loosely bound family flocks (Elliott 1992, Sundar

2004), and rarely in small parties consisting of adults and young (All and

Ripley 1971, Sundar e/ al. 2006).

1.2 Taxonomy and systematics

The Black-necked Stork has been recognized as having two subspecies:

Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus asiaticvs in the Oriental region of Asia and

Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus australis in Australia. The two subspecies were

proposed to be elevated to two different species, namely E. asiaticus or the

Green-necked Stork of the Oriental region and E. australis or the Black-necked

Stork of the Australian and New Guinean region (McAllan and Bruce 1989).

The proposition was founded on the basis of their disjunct distributions and the

differences in the glistening colouration of the neck which were considered by

the authours to signal different behavioural displays in the species. However,

this suggestion has not been followed because a subsequent study did not find

consistent differences in the colouring pattern of necks (Hancock et al. 1992).

However, in due course of time analysis of mitochondrial DNA (cytrochrome b

sequences) revealed significant genetic divergence in the two subspecies

(Slikas 1997). At present two subspecies of the Black-necked Stork are

recognised world over.

1.3 Conservation status

The Black-necked Stork is evaluated and listed as 'Near Threatened' in the Red

Data Book of the World Conservation Union due to its rapid population

reduction (lUCN 2008). It is also listed on Appendix-I of the CITES and

Schedule-I of the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. It has been recently

upgraded to Schedule-I from Schedule-IV to extend full protection to the

species (Rahmani 1989).

1.4 Distribution

In India, the Black-necked Stork is very widely but thinly distributed, with the

north and north-west regions forming its main strongholds (Rahmani 1989).

Populations appear to be declining in most parts of India except the Gangetic

plains of Uttar Pradesh and north-western India, especially Gujarat, where

populations are stable or marginally increasing. In Assam large numbers have

been reported in Kaziranga National Park, Manas, Orang and Pobitara Wildlife

Sanctuaries (Raj et al. 1989). Elsewhere, Black-necked Storks are present in

very low numbers (Maheswaran et al. 2004). The largest known breeding

population occurs in the largely cuhivated landscape of southwestern Uttar

Pradesh in India where density of about 0.099 birds per sq km has been

estimated in a mosaic of cultivated fields and wetlands (Sundar 2003).

Recent information indicates that most of the population of Black-necked Stork

and its breeding and nesting activities occur outside protected areas (Sundar

2003), in stark contrast to the previous belief that most of the population in

India is confined to protected areas (Elliott 1992, Benn et al. 1995, Sundar

2004).

1.5 Habitat

Black-necked Storks are known to utilize a wide variety of wetland habitats.

both freshwater and saline {.\\\ and Ripley 1971), but are thought to prefer

extensive, undisturbed, freshwater natural wetlands for foraging (Luthin 1987,

Elliott 1992, Sundar 2004).

Sundar (2004) has classified the habitat used by the Black-necked Stork into

the following broad types:-

1. Crop-fields: Rice and wheat fields are used by Black-necked Stork. As

wheat-fields are flooded intermittently to moisten the soil, particularly

immediately after the planting in the winter, but are without standing water at

all times. Rice-fields frequently had wetland plants including Nelumbo spp.,

many species of grasses and rarely Cyperus and Elaeocharis spp.

2. Fallow fields: The crop-fields that are left uncultivated (dry/inundated) after

the harvest of wheat in preparation for the monsoon before planting rice.

3. Natural wetlands: Natural wetlands are inundated seasonally (rainfall)

and/or perennially (rainfall and irrigation canals) and are characterized by

shallow water seldom exceeding 1 m, with the presence of vegetation including

species of Typha, Elaeocharis, Nymphaea, Nelumbo

4. Canals: Irrigation canals form a permanent feature of the landscape and

provide an excellent habitat for the Black-necked Stork (henceforth referred as

BNS).

5. Other habitats: These include saline wastelands, degraded scrub-forests,

grasslands, ravines, rivers and human habitation.

1.6. Genesis of the study

The present study was designed under the research project, "Migratory

movement of waterbirds through Uttar Pradesh and the surveillance of avian

diseases" funded by the U.P. Forest Department in 2008. The data was

collected for the dissertation work beside fulfilling objectives of the project.

1.7 Objectives

The following are the objectives of this study :-

1. To study foraging rates, success rates of Black-necked Stork (BNS) at

different study sites.

2. To assess the effect of disturbance factors on the foraging behaviour of

Black-necked Stork.

3. To study foraging behaviour of Black-necked Stork in relation to other

large wading birds.

Chapter 2 Study Area

2.1 Location and geography

Five Important Bird Areas (IBAs) of western Uttar Pradesh, namely Sheikha,

Patna, Sur Sarovar, Saman and Lakh-Bahosi were selected for conducting this

study (Figure 1.1). The total geographical area of Uttar Pradesh is 240928.00

sq km, which is about 7.3% of the land area of the country (MoEF 2001).

Uttar Pradesh comprises three physiographic regions namely, the sub-montane

region lying between the Himalaya and the plains, the vast alluvial Gangetic

Plains, and the southern hills and plateau. The state is fed by five major rivers,

the Ganga, the Yamuna, the Ramganga, the Gomati and the Ghaghra which

drain into the Bay of Bengal. All the rivers except the Gomati emerge from the

Himalaya. More than one-fourth of Uttar Pradesh lies within the Gangetic

Plains consisting of alluvial deposits brought down from the Himalaya by the

Ganga, the Yamuna and their tributaries. The southern hills form part of the

Vindhya range whose elevation rarely exceeds 300 m.

Uttar Pradesh is famous for its floodplain wetlands— the result of copious

rainfall in the Gangetic Plain, and also in the Himalaya from where most of the

rivers originate. Large areas are annually flooded, and when the flood recedes,

it leaves low-lying areas under water. These wetlands are extremely productive

in terms of vegetation biomass and avian diversity (Howes 1995). Of the 25

Important Bird Areas (IBAs) of Uttar Pradesh (Islam and Rahmani 2004), 18

qualify A4iii criterion (site known to hold, on regular basis more than 20,000

waterfowl each year). There are many more wetlands, which if properly

protected, would easily qualify this criterion. Twenty IBAs can be considered

as potential Ramsar sites (Islam and Rahmani 2008). Actually two more IBAs,

Dudwa National Park and Hastinapur Wildlife Sanctuary, also qualify the

Ramsar Criterion-2, but as they are mostly forested sanctuaries, particularly

Dudwa, they were not recommended for inclusion under the Ramsar sites

(Islam and Rahmani 2008).

2.2 Climate

The annual climatic cycle in the study area comprises four seasons, namely

summer (March to June), monsoon (July to mid September), post-monsoon

(mid September to October) and winter (November to February).

The state is located between 23°52'-30°24 north and 77°5'-84°38 east and has

a tropical climate with a wide temperature fluctuation from 2°C to 48°C. The

annual rainfall varies from 600mm to 2500mm.

2.3 Flora and Fauna

Uttar Pradesh is rich in flora and fauna since more than 500 species of birds are

recorded in the state, of which, many belong to endangered, vulnerable, near

threatened categories.

Some important birds are Bengal florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis), White-

rumped vulture {Gyps begalensis), Rufous rumped grass bird {Graminicola

begalensis) and Sarus Crane {Grus antigone). Out of the list of 78 threatened

bird taxa in India, 25 have been reported from the Important Bird Areas of

Uttar Pradesh (Islam and Rahmani 2004). Since the state is located in the Indo-

Gangetic Plains, it is extremely rich in wetland habitats, which serve as

important refuges for many resident and as well as migratory waterfowl.

10

• Sheikha Jheei • Patna Bird Sanctuary • Saman Bird Saitctuary

• Sur Sarovar Bird Sanctuary • i lch-Bahosi Bird Sanctuary

Figure 1.1 Location of the study sites in western Uttar Pradesh

BaaHBgaBBBB

11

2.4 Description of different study sites

2.4.1 Sheikha Jheel

Sheikha Jheel (27° 49' 00" N, 78° 10' 00" E) is located 17 km from Aligarh on

the Aligarh-Jalali road near Sheikha and Bhawan-Khera villages. It has an area

of about 1.5 sq km. It is presently divided into two parts due to construction of

Lower Ganga Canal. The vegetation chiefly consists of Hydrilla,

Ceratophyllum. Eichhornia, Vallisneria, Potamogeton, Salvinia, Azolla,

Nymphides spp. The terrestrial vegetation largely includes species such as

Adena, Acacia, Prosopis, Ficus and Dalbergia species. It receives water from

monsoon rains as well as seepage from an adjacent canal. During our

monitoring of this site, we identified about 112 species of birds in the Jheel and

estimated more than 20,000 migratory birds. A pair of Black-necked stork with

four juvenile used this wetland for foraging. Greylag Goose {Anser anser). Bar-

headed Goose {Anser indicus). Common Teal {Anas crecca). Common

Shelduck {Tadorna tadorna), Common Coot {Fulica atra), Ferruginous

Pochard {Aythya nyroca). Red-crested Pochard {Netta rufina), Tufted Duck

{Aythya fuligula). Ruddy Shelduck {Tadorna ferruginea). Northern Pintail

{Anas acuta). Northern Shoveller {Anas clypeata) and Gadwall {Anas strepera)

are some of the important migratory birds that visited the Jheel regularly.

12

2.4.2 Patna Bird Sanctuary

Patna Bird Sanctuary (27° 34' 60" N and 78° 45'60"E, 202 m) has an area of

1,09 sq km. This Sanctuary is located in Etah district on Sikandrarao-Jalesar

road, 6 km before Jalesar town. Patna is mainly fed by rainwater; however,

some temporary management of water regime is done by the Forest

Department by pumping additional water into it so that the wetland does not

become dry till March-April. The Sanctuary has some thickets of Date palm

{Phoenix silvestris) and is surrounded from all sides by agricultural fields. We

estimated more than 40,000 waterbirds in peak winter season from this

Sanctuary. The Black-necked stork breeds in the surrounding villages of the

Sanctuary and a pair of the same with three juveniles was seen throughout our

monitoring of the wetland from 2008 to 2010.

2.4.3 Sur Sarovar Bird Sanctuary

Sur Sarovar or Keetham lake (27° 00' 00'" N and 77° 45' 00" E) is spread over

an area of 7.83 sq km and is about 17 km from Agra. It was declared as a bird

Sanctuary in 1991 and the lake is owned by the Irrigation Department. Earlier,

drinking water was supplied to Agra from Keetham Lake, but now it is piped to

the Mathura Refinery, about 24 km away. The river Jamuna flows about 500 m

to the northeast. The Keetham Lake was named Sur Sarovar Bird Sanctuary,

after the great blind poet Surdas, who lived nearby nearly 500 years ago. The

surrounding area has dense thickets of Prosopis juliflora. A few troops of

Rhesus macaque {Macaca mulata) can often be seen in the Sanctuary and we

also recorded foot prints of Striped hyena {Hyaena hyaena) in the Sanctuary. A

rescue centre for Sloth bear {Melurus ursinus) has also been established around

the Sanctuary by SOS Wildlife and there are also reports of Indian python

{Python molurus).

The current management plan of the Sanctuary mentions 126 bird species

currently in it and most of them breed within the Sanctuary. Phalacrocoracidae

and Ciconidae are the most abundant among all the families recorded here.

Among resident Anatidae, Comb Duck {Sarkidiornis melanotos) and Spot-

billed Duck {Anas poeciloryncha) are most abundant.

Earlier, this wetland was covered with Water Hyacinth {Eichhornia crassipes)

but now the Sanctuary management removes the weed manually. This year

(i.e., winter 2008-2009) more than 1100-1200 Great White Pelican {Pelecamis

onocrotalus) and 450-500 Bar-headed Geese visited the Sanctuary. This

Sanctuary is also a habitat for many resident bird species. More than 10,000

birds nest in the Sanctuary including Cormorants, herons, and Eurasian

Spoonbill. Two pairs of the Black-necked Stork with two juveniles each forage

in the wetland throughout the year.

14

2.4.4 Saman Bird Sanctuary

Saman Bird Sanctuary (27° 04' 60" N, 79° 00' 00" E, 135.9 m) is located near

Saman village in the Bhogaun Tehsil of Mainpuri district. It was declared as a

bird Sanctuary in 1990 by a gazette notification. The area of the Sanctuary is

5.25 sq km. The wetland attracts many species of migratory and resident

waterbirds. Many species of resident birds such as Sarus crane, Rlack-neclced

stork, Painted stork, Spot-billed duck are seen throughout the year. The site is

very important for large wintering water bird congregations. Besides Saman

village, which is located within the Sanctuary, there are six more villages around

the Sanctuary.

It is a freshwater lake. The vegetation is mainly comprised of Nelumbo,

Cyperus, Phragmites, Typha species. The flora of the Sanctuar}' has not been

inventoried completely. Saman wetland is famous for large congregation

(>30,000) of water birds especially in winter. Two to five breeding pairs of

Sarus crane and one pair of Black-necked Stork with three juveniles are

resident in the Sanctuary that may be seen throughout the year.

About 100 years ago, Saman Jheel, along with Lakh-Bahosi (an IB A) in nearby

Farrukhabad district (now Kannauj), and other Jheels formed an important

habitat for the Siberian Crane (GA-M5 leucogeranus). The great ornithologist A. O.

Hume saw the Siberian Cranes in mdiuy jheels in Etawah and Mainpuri districts

15

between 1858 and 1867. Saman could have been one of the important sites,

although Hume did not mention it by name. The name 'Tuman' Jheels (26° 46'

N and 79° 02' E) is referred by Wilkinshaw, where W. E. Brooks shot three

Siberian Cranes in February 1871. It appears that Tuman is none other than

Saman jheel (Rahmani and Arora 1992).

The Wetland Division of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government

of India has identified Saman under the Wetland Conservation Programme. The

Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore has also

recommended this wetland to be declared as a Ramsar Site (Prasad et al. 2004).

Islam and Rahmani (2008) have also recommended Saman as a Ramsar Site.

2.4.5 Lakh-Bahosi Bird Sanctuary

The Lakh Bahosi Bird Sanctuary (26° 54' 57" N and 79° 38' 47" E, 115 m) is

about 38 km from the historic city of Kannauj. It falls in Indragarh Tehsil of

Kannauj district (earlier Farrukhabad). The Sanctuary is formed by two oxbow

Jheels near the village Bahosi. Both the Jheels, Lakh and Bahosi, are located

near the Lower Ganga Canal, so the overflow and seepage of water accumulates

in the Jheels, resulting in about 6 sq km of shallow wetlands perfectly suitable

for waterbirds. By winter, the waterspread is reduced by evaporation and

drainage. Nonetheless, at least 4 sq. km. in the deeper parts still retains enough

water to attract at least 50,000 waterfowl (Rahmani and Arora 1992). The total

16

area of the Sanctuary is 80.24 sq km and includes wetlands, usar land and

cultivated fields and lot of private land. The Lakh-Bahosi Bird Sanctuary was

declared in 1998 for conservation of migratory and resident water birds and their

habitat. Lakh and Bahosi villages are located within the Sanctuary. Three to five

breeding pairs of Sarus can be seen in the Sanctuary throughout the year. In

2008, we recorded about 90 Sarus Cranes in the wetland.

There is lot of movement of village people around Lakh and Bahosi wetlands as

they provide good pastures for their livestock. Apart from these twojheels, there

are numerous wetlands beside the canal in an area of about 8,000 ha.

Lakh-Bahosi wetlands have a very high potential for both migratory and resident

water birds. The area has been identified as an Important Bird Area due to the

presence of globally threatened species such as the Greater Spotted Eagle Aquila

clanga, Sarus crane and congregations of about 50,000 waterbirds (Islam and

Rahmani 2004). It has great potential to become a Ramsar Site as the site

qualifies R2 and R5 criteria (Islam and Rahmani 2008). The Wetland Division of

the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India has identified

Lakh-Bahosi under the Wetland Conservation Programme. The Salim Ali Centre

for Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore has also recommended this

wetland to be declared as a Ramsar Site (Prasad et al. 2004).

17

Chapter 3 Methodology

After locating individuals of the Black-necked Stork, observations were taken

on their foraging behaviour using focal animal sampling technique (Altmann

1974). Observations were made to record the starting and ending time of each

foraging bout, number of pecks or jabs, number of fish caught, fish size,

handling time and the mode of food capture at five minute intervals

(Maheswaran and Rahmani 2002).

A binocular (10x50) and a spotting scope (8x50) were used for this purpose.

Disturbance factors such as movement of people, cattle, vehicles, and sound

generated by vehicles were recorded while observing birds to investigate their

foraging behaviour.

After settling in the field, data was collected on the following parameters by

maintaining an appropriate distance from the Black-necked storks in the field

to avoid disturbance because of my presence.

1. Foraging attempt: Number of times the focal bird dipped its bill into

the water.

2. Foraging bout: Five minute observation whether a prey species was

captured by the storks or not.

3. Foraging success: Foraging attempts in which prey was captured and

consumed by Black-necked Stork.

18

4. Feeding rate: Total number of pecks or jabs in five minute observation.

5. Handling time: Handling time was estimated as the time (in seconds)

from the capture of the prey till it was swallowed by Black-necked

Stork.

6. Fish Size: Fish sizes were compared with Black-necked Stork bill length

and visually estimated with the help of binoculars.

7. Mode of Foraging: Whether the fish was caught by Black-necked Stork

by tactile or visual sense.

A. Tactile: by walking (slow/fast, sometimes running) here and there in

water and pecking the bottom of the wetland continuously until a

fish was caught.

B. Visual: standing still at one place where the bird can see the

movements of the fish underneath.

8. Water depth: Water depth was estimated by comparing the leg (tibia +

tarsus) length of Black-necked Stork at the foraging sites.

9. Wading bird abundance: Total counts were carried out to know the

abundance of wading birds at foraging sites of the Black-necked Stork.

10. Disturbance Factors: Disturbance factors such as movement of people,

cattle and other anthropogenic threat to the foraging storks.

Total numbers of other fish eating birds in the vicinity of Black-necked Storks

while foraging were also recorded at each site.

19

Fish abundance could not be assessed because I could not get permission from

the Uttar Pradesh Forest Department to catch fish in the wetlands at study sites.

Some of the prey items caught by the foraging Black-necked storks could not

be identified by looking through binoculars and were grouped as unidentified

prey items.

Data Analysis

Data segregation was done in relation to breeding and non-breeding seasons of

the species for all sites. The data was also segregated for foraging behaviour of

the species in the presence as well as absence of large wading birds. Pearson

product moment correlation co-eftlcient was performed on the data matrix

containing the variables namely, fish size, handling time, peck rate and water

depth using SPSS 6.1 version (Norusis 1994). All other statistical analysis and

tests were also performed in SPSS 6.1. Mann-Whitney U-test was performed

for comparing the peck rate of male and female individuals.

Percent foraging success Vv'as calculated as follows:

Successful observation (prey capture) Foraging success = — — x 100

Total observation (bouts)

20

The data on foraging was recorded for five sites (IBAs) (Table 4.1) during the

study period but the numbers of observations on different variables used for

foraging were very low. Therefore, all the data recorded for different variables

were pooled for meaningful analysis.

21

Chapter 4 Results

Black-necked Stork (BNS) was recorded from all the Important Bird Areas

(IBAs) that were investigated in western Uttar Pradesh for bird diseases

especially avian influenza viruses. The maximum (7-8) number of individuals

of BNS along with juveniles was recorded from the Sur Sarovar Bird

Sanctuary, Agra and the minimum (1-2) from Ama-Khera and Daupur wetland.

(Table 4.1). The population of BNS recorded during field surveys (Table 4.2)

that were conducted for monitoring waterbird population, bird ringing and

sampling blood samples in 11 wetlands under the Avian Diseases Project.

The data on foraging attempts indicated that there was a difference during

breeding and non-breeding seasons among male and female individuals of the

Black-necked Stork. The mean attempt rate/peck rate in the non-breeding

season was slightly higher (46.0 ±29.1, n=403) in comparison to the breeding

season (43.8 ± 26.4, n=305) for male Black-necked Stork (Figure 4.1). On the

other hand, mean attempt rate for female Black-necked Stork was slightly

higher (45.9 ± 25.6, n=238) during breeding season in comparison to the non-

breeding season (42.9 ± 24.1, n=124) (Figure 4.2). However, no difference

(Mann-Whitney [/-test statistic, NS) was found in peck rate of male and female

BNS.

22

The foraging success of both the sexes varied from 12.6 % in breeding to

14.1% in non-breeding season. Foraging success was higher in the non-

breeding season for both the individuals (Figure 4.3 and Figure 4.4).

Prey captured by male Black-necked Stork (n=57) was higher in non-breeding

season in comparison to breeding season (n=41). However, female Black-

necked Stork captured fewer (n=17) prey items in non-breeding season in

comparison to breeding season (n==30) (Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6).

Both the sexes preferred 21 to 40 cm water depth for foraging and more than

50% of the prey species were captured by both the sexes at this water depth

(Figure 4.7).

Female individuals of the Black-necked Stork used shallower sites for foraging

whereas deep waters were avoided by the both sexes for foraging. The

percentage of successful observation was almost equal in deep waters ranging

in depth from 41 to 60 for male (21.4 %) and female (23.4%) individuals

(Figure 4.7 and Figure 4.8).

All the data on presence and absence of wading birds were pooled for

meaningful comparisons. It was revealed that more than 50% of the

observations on successful prey capture (n=77) were in the absence of other

wading birds. Asian Openbill Stork Anastomus oscitans was chased by Black-

23

necked Stork during breeding season (n=3). No intra-specific aggression was

recorded during the whole study period (Figure 4.9). For instance, at one of the

study sites (Sur Sarovar Bird Sanctuary) there were seven to eight individuals

of BNS but they never showed any aggressive behaviour towards each other

while foraging at very close quarters.

The storks captured almost equal number of prey despite various disturbance

factors such as presence of human beings, cattle, and sound of vehicles. Among

all successful captures of prey, 54.5 % of the observations were in the absence

of disturbance factors, whereas remaining prey captures were carried out by

BNS in presence of all disturbance factors as mentioned above (Figure 4.10).

Fish was the most preferred prey item in the species dietary spectrum in both

breeding and non-breeding seasons, which accounted for about 89.6 % of the

diet. Frogs (n=2) and Little grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis (n=l) were captured

in the non-breeding season i.e„ during May and June (Figure 4.11).

Out of 87 fishes captured by the male BNS, medium-size (6-10 cm) individuals

were preferred (49.7%). On the other hand, small-size fishes (3-5 cm) taken

comprised 36 % and large fish (> 10 cm length) were consumed less number of

times (13%) (Figure 4.12).

24

A total of 43 fishes were captured by female individuals of the BNS in which

48.8 % were medium sized (6-10 cm) whereas the remaining 51.2 % were

consumed from small and large fish size classes (Figure 4.13).

Out of 130 successful attempts offish captures by male as well as female BNS,

small (3-5 cm) to medium (6-10 cm) size fishes were preferred by both the

sexes in breeding and non-breeding seasons (Figure 4.14).

Tactile mode of foraging was used predominantly by both the sexes in different

seasons. Almost equal number of fishes were caught by the storks in breeding

(n=52) and non-breeding (n=51) seasons by employing tactile mode of feeding

strategy. Visual mode of feeding accounted for only 18.8 and 22.7% in

breeding and non-breeding seasons respectively (Figure 4.15).

L Overall, 79.2% fishes were caught by the tactile mode while the remaioing

V

20.7% were caught by visual mode of foraging (Figure 4.15) ' ^^ ' ''

Male individuals were mostly successful in catching medium-size fish in

shallow and deep waters. However, the number of large-size fish (>10 cm

length) that were captured by either sex of the BNS decreased as the storks

moved towards deep waters (Figure 4.16 and Figure 4.17).

25

The female individuals of the Black-necked Stork caught 3-10 cm size-class

fishes in shallow waters and accounted for about 69.7% of their diet. The large-

size fishes on the other hand, were taken by the either sex in all water depth

classes (Figure 4.16 and Figure 4.17).

Pearson Correlation between prey size, handling time, water depth and peck

rate was performed on the data matrix of the above-mentioned variables and a

highly significant positive correlation (r=.271, P-.OOl) was found between

prey size and handling time (Table 4.3). Another positively correlated variables

that were highly significant (r=.293, P=.00\) were handling time and peck rate.

26

a

3

T3 C « u o

-a

u a> S

S o ec

'5i

a O

c: _OJD V ^ i «

>

43

C

s s 3

1—(

GO

d

'5 > 3

S

03

-a 3

' E l s o

a> • o 3

.J

E

5

cJ5

'^

-

-

w o o o o 0 0

o o CTs

o

i n

CO

op

<

u

0 0

—

m

-

-

W

o V D

>n 0 0 0

r--

o

0

OS O

• 4 — »

w

CO a • * - »

CJ

C

C3

CO

C • » - •

C3 < N

r n

CM

CM

W o o

o

o o o o o

r<-) oo

CO

<

cS 3

+-* o C CO

C/3

T 3

s CO > O

CO

C/D

u -

3

r o

< N

-

T —

o o o o o

r-

o

o o

CN

i r i

n. c

CO

3 • < — > o n CO

• o

s c CO

s CO

OO ^

(N

-

T —

w

oo

0

Z

i r i

o

s o

CO

C c CO

CO 3

o c CO

0 0 T J I -

o -3

CO

m i >o

CO

a

O Ml

'u o 'a o B tt _n 'u

3

0)

u 3 -a s o u o m

u a> C 1

« s t « 3

• * - ^

C3 «-» »3

C o

•4- t

« 3

O a c o >. o > 3 t »

" IS ^ M

o

^^ 3

« rv| T t

a> X5 rt H

o b.

&H

OJ »3 CS U t «

Q 3 « > < a>

L. u

•o s 3 («

• a

+ j

o '^

VI O

• • *

S 4> > 3 ^

U

« a <u

fe

01

« ^

a>

3

Kfl

6 Z v^

'ti-

X3

00

—'

ro

3 o c3

00 T 3

ffl G

flH

<N

m

3 o c

oo

S-H

O

3 00

ro

CM

o c

00

c

s 00

' ^

(N

+-» o c

o id CQ

C3

^

l O

o

C3 l-i

1

B <

^

(N

^

i—H

f 00

r-

^

c3

fc^

0 0

o

C3

U

a\

(N

C3

3 3 ;^

O

<N

C3

•3

00

r—t

50-1

. 45-S „ 1 40-

1 35-"S „ Z. 30-o J 25-1 20-i l 5 . c 1 - 0 -* 5-

n

43.8 i 26.4

B

<j^^| ^^H

reeding seaso

46.0 ± 29.1

^ 1

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ H

n hton-breeding season 1

Figure 4.1 Mean number (± SD) of attempts by Male Black-necked storks during

five minute observation bouts in breeding and non-breeding seasons (2008-2010)

45.9 ± 25.6 42.91 24.1

Breeding season Non-breeding season

Figure 4.2 Mean number (± SD) of attempts by Female Black-necked storks

during five minute observation bouts in breeding and non-breeding seasons

(2008-2010)

29

16-1

14 "

^ 12-m 8 10-u u g 8-

e

2-

13.4

Breeding seasc

14.1

m 1 I 1 4

>n Non-breeding season «

Figure 43 Foraging success of Male Blacic-necked stories in breeding and non-

breeding seasons (2008-2010)

Breeding season Mon-breeding season

Figure 4.4 Foraging success of Female Black-necked storks in breeding and non-


30

1

70-1

60-

50-

40-

30-

20-

10'

Ns41

Breeding seasc

N = 57

>n Ivion-breeding season

Figure 4.5 Prey captured by Male Black-necked storks in breeding and non-


Na30

N = 17


Figure 4.6 Prey captured by Female Black-necked storks in breeding and non-


31

N»S2

10-20 21-40

Foraging depth (cm) 41-60

Figure 4.7 Foraging in different water depths by Male Black-necked storks

during five minute observation bouts in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

" 1 | - 6 0 -

1 5°" 1 ' 1 " 1 20-

>5 10-

0 -

N > 9

N«27

N = 11

10-20 21-40

Foraging depth (cm)

41-60

Figure 4.8 Foraging in different water depths by Female Black-necked storks


32

60 n N«77

1-10 11-20 21-30

Presence of wading birds

N>10

>30

Figure 4.9 Successful attempts by BNS in relation to presence of other wading

birds during five minute observation bouts in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

N«79

N>25 N«22 N»19

No disturbance Cattle presense Human presense

Disturbance factors

Others

Figure 4.10 Successfiil attempts by BNS in response to disturbance factors


33

0.69 % 8.28 %

1.38%

89.66 %

Fish • Frog a Little grebe • Unidentifieci

Figure 4.11 Prey species composition (%) for Black-necked Stork based on 145

successful observations in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

34

N»43

3-5 6-10

Fish length (cm)

>10

Figure 4.12 Different fish length classes taken by Male Black-necked storks in


60 1

50-

| 4 0 -

S 30-« | 2 0 .

10-

0-

Ns21

N»14

Fish length (cm)

Figure 4.13 Different fish length classes taken by Female Black-necked storks in


35

70 1

BO'S 1 50-•g AG

'S 30-

10-

N>23

- . • . 2 £ » . S ^ N-16

3-5

mmim 1 g g ^ j 1

6-10

Fish length (cm)

Na13 H«11

>10

• Breeding season • Non-breeding season

Figure 4.14 Different fisli length classes taken by Black-necked storks in

breeding and non-breeding seasons in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

N^SI

5?


• Tactile feeding • Visual feeding

Fignre 4.15 Mode of foraging by Black-necked storks in breeding and non-

breeding seasons in western Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

36

HBhtongth • 3cmtoScm•6cmto 10cma>10cm

70 T

£ ^^' N-22 Hj

O H — i B m i — ' — I — ^ — ' — I — ^ — ' — I 10-20 21-40 41-60

Water depth (cm)

Figure 4.16 Size of fish caught iu reUtiou to the water level by Male Bbck-


nshtength • 3 c m to5 cm Becm to lOcm D>10cm

10-20 21-40

Water depth (cm)

41-60

Figure 4.17 Size offish cai^bt in relation to the water level by Female Black-


37

Table 4.3 Pearson product moment correlation coefficient (r), between prey size,

handling time, peck rate and water depth for Black-necked Stork in western

Uttar Pradesh (2008-2010)

Water level

Peck rate

Handling time

Prey size

**. Correlation is

Pearson Coefficients

Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tai!ed)

N

significant at the 0.01 le

Water level

]

145

.095

.300

121

-.056

.507

145

-.001

.988

145

vel (2-tailed).

Peck rate

.095

.300

121

1

121

.293"

.001

121

-.159

,081

121

Handling time

-.056

.507

145

.293"

.001

121

I

145

.271"

.001

145

Prey size

-.001

.988

145

-.159

.081

121

.271"

.001

145

1

145

38

Chapter 5 Discussion

The Black-necked Stork has been evaluated as a 'near-threatened' species in

the lUCN (2008) Red Data List. Therefore, data on all aspects of its behaviour

and ecology is important. The species population was detected to be declining

globally when the Asian Wetlands Bureau started conducting regular Asian

Waterbird Census (AWC) world over since 1987. Some of its ecological

aspects such as habitat use, alteration of habitat and its composition, critical

nesting requirements, dispersal of juveniles and adults from their natal areas

need to be examined critically for long-term survival of the species in its

natural habitat, which is under continuous threat due to various anthropogenic

factors. A radio-telemetry study in few select areas on this species may give

fine details of most of these parameters.

This study reveals that that Black-necked Stork is an exclusively fish-eating

bird and a tactile forager in contrast to a study conducted in Keoladeo National

Park, Bharatpur (Ishtiaq et al. 2010). They have reported Black-necked Stork to

be a generalist species foraging on a broad range of prey types and mainly

employed visual mode for foraging (68 %). However, Maheswaran and

Rahmani (2001) have also reported that BNS depends largely upon fish

comprising 95 % of its diet and largely used tactile (96 %) mode of foraging.

Foraging behavior is reported to be influenced by an array of extrinsic factors

such as prey availability, water level changes and presence and absence of

39

other wading birds (Maheswaran and Rahmani 2001, Kushlan 1978). Since the

present study was conducted in well protected areas of western Uttar Pradesh,

all of which support a rich density and diversity of fishes that were frequently

consumed by BNS. For instance, on most of occasions seven individuals of

BNS were observed foraging in Sur Sarovar Bird Sanctuary because the

reservoir supports a variety of fishes.

The BNS appears to be a generalist species in Keoladeo National Park because

during the last decade the rainfall has been very erratic or extremely low

because of which the wetlands may not be supporting and maintaining density

and diversity of fishes.

Prey items other than fish in the diet of BNS have also been frequently

recorded in some other areas in Etawah and Mainpuri (Gopi Sundar pers.

comm. 2010) outside the protected areas e.g., in flooded agricultural fields,

canals and fallow lands.

Foraging attempts of female BNS v/ere higher in breeding season possibly due

to participation of females in nesting activities. It has also been reported in this

species at Dudwa National Park that females spent more time in incubation and

nest guarding than males and they make more efforts to compensate for this by

putting more efforts in foraging attempts (Maheswaran and Rahmani 2005).

40

A similar foraging behavior has also been documented in Painted Stork in

Delhi region by Kalam and Urfi (2008). They have reported that the rate of

foraging attempts was higher in its breeding season because apart from its own

food requirements the birds would also be capturing fish to feed their nestlings,

leading thereby to a higher feeding rate in the breeding season.

In breeding season, prey captured by male BNS was higher in comparison to

females. A similar behavior has also been reported in males by Maheswaran

and Rahmani (2005) that they make more feeding trips than females for feeding

the Juveniles (Maheswaran and Rahmani 2005). So this may be a plausible

reason why males capture more fish in the breeding season than females.

Foraging success for both the sexes is recorded to be higher in this study in

non-breeding season of BNS (Figures 4.3 and 4.4). As it is evident that male

and female individuals of BNS spent almost equal amount of time in breeding

season to raise the chicks while in non-breeding season they forage

independently.

Selection for foraging between 21-40 cm water levels could be attributed to

medium-size fish captured by the Black-necked storks here, which was higher

for both male and female individuals or it may be due to higher fish abundance.

Fish size is positively correlated with handling time since larger fish take more

time in handling so the storks avoided foraging in deeper waters for

41

maximizing their net energy gain. In non-breeding season, on the other hand 6 -

10 cm fish were taken by BNS, which were higher among all size classes of

fish in comparison to breeding season.

The presences of other wading birds at the foraging sites of BNS have

profound effect on its foraging success. As the groups of wading birds

increased from 20 to 30 individuals, the successful capturing of prey items

decreased. A significant proportion (n=77) of observations was in the absence

of other large wading birds. Similar observations were also recorded during

foraging bouts of BNS in response to different disturbance factors. All the

foraging sites were closely associated with human habitation and there was

frequent movement of the people and their cattle in and around the wetlands. It

was observed frequently during the study period that Black-necked storks move

to other areas in the same wetland for foraging due to disturbance factors.

Kalam and Urfi (2008) have suggested that disturbance may be a serious

problem and needs to be factored into conservation polices of storks.

Disturbance causes a loss in the feeding time and frequent disturbance to the

foraging birds in the breeding season can be detrimental to their reproductive

fitness.

42

The strong significant positive correlation between prey size and handling time

indicates that BNS take more time to engulf or swallow large-size fishes than

those which are small or medium-sized. Similarly significant positive

correlation between prey handling time and peck rate for BNS may be because

with higher peck rate they may acquire or capture more number of fish than

those (BNS) which have lower peck rate. Once more number of fish are

captured, the handling time will also be higher.

Wood Storks in the Big Cypress Swamp have been reported characteristically

feeding in such locations where fish densities were high, usually because of

concentration during the dry season (Kahl 1964). Kushlan (1976) suggests that

differences in foraging habitat and availability of prey may determine the

foraging behavior and feeding eftlciency of birds. The seasonal variation in use

of habitat, foraging behavior and diet exhibited by Black-necked Stork ma>'

determine survivorship of fledglings, immature and adult storks may be

valuable in its conservation planning.

43

References

Altmann, J. (1974) Observational study of behaviour: sampling methods.

Behaviour, 49: 227-267

Ali, S. and Ripley, S.D. (1971) The Hand Book of Birds of India and Pakistan,

Compact Edition. (Oxford Univ. Press: Bombay)

Bell, H. L. (1963) Distribution of the Jabiru in south eastern Australia. Emu,

63: 201-206

Benn, G. A., Kemp, A. C. and Begg, K. S. (1995) The distribution, size and

trends of the saddlebilled stork Ephippiorhynchus senegalensis in South

Africa. S. Afr. J. Wildl. Res., 25: 98-105

BirdLife International (2010) Species factsheet: Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus.

<http://www.birdlife.org> (accessed 09.12.2010).

Clancy, G.P. (2009) The Black-necked Stork Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus: An

Overview Australian Field Ornithology 2009, 26:110-115 •

Clancy, G.P. (2010) The distribution of the Black-necked Stork

Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus australis in New South Wales since 1790.

Corella, 34(1): 7-10

Elliott, A. (1992) Family Ciconiidae (Storks), in 'Handbook of the Birds of the

World. Vol. 1. Ostrich to Ducks', (eds) J. del Hoyo, A. Elliott and J.

Sargatal (Lynx Edicions: Barcelona.) pp 436-^65

Grimmet, R., Inskipp, C. and Inskipp, T. (1998). Birds of Indian Subcontinent.

Oxford University Press, Delhi.

''''*'''''''''''''''"'''''''''''"''''P^

44

http://www.birdlife.org

Hancock, J. A., Kushlan, J. A. and Kahl, M. P. (1992) 'Storks, Ibises and

Spoonbills of the World'. (Academic Press: London)

Howes, J. R. (ed.) (1995) Conservation and sustainable use of Floodplain

Wetlands. Asian Wetland Bureau, Kuala Lumpur. 123 pp. (Proceedings

of the workshop on the conservation and sustainable use of floodplain

wetland, December 1993, Calcutta-AWB Publication No.l 13)

Ishtiaq, F. (1998) Comparative ecology and behaviour of Storks in Keoladeo

National Park, Rajasthan, India. Unpublished Ph D. thesis. Centre of

Wildlife and Ornithology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

Ishtiaq, F., Javed, S., Coulter, M.C. and Rahmani, A.R. (2010) Resource

Partitioning in three sympatric species of storks in Keoladeo National

Park, India Waterbirds, 33 (1): 41-49

Islam, M.Z. and Rahmani, A. R. (2004). Important Bird Areas in India:

Priorities sites for Conservation. IBCN, BNHS and Birdlife

International, UK. pp 1133.

Islam, M. Z. and Rahmani, A. R. (2008) Potential and Existing Ramsar sites in

India Indian Bird Conservation Network, Bombay Natural History Society,

Birdlife International and Royal Society for Protection of Birds, pp 592.

lUCN (2008) lUCN Red List of Threatened Species, <http://www.iucn.org>

(accessed 11.12.2010).

Kahal, M. P. (1964) Food ecology of the wood stork {Mycteria americana) in

Florida. Ecol. Monogr. 34:97-117

45

http://www.iucn.org

Kalam, A. and Urfi, A. J. (2008) Foraging behaviour and prey size of the

painted ^Xork Journal of Zoology, 274: 198-204

Kushlan, J. A. (1976) Wading bird predation in a seasonally fluctuating pond.

Auk, 24: 34-39

Kushlan J. A. (1978) Feeding ecology of wading birds; in Wading birds (eds)

A Sprunt IV, J Ogden and S Winckler (Nat. Audubon Soc.: New York)

pp 249-297

Luthin, C. S. (1987) Status of and conservation priorities for the world's stork

species. Col.Waterbirds, 10: 181-202

Maheswaran, G. (1998) Ecology and behaviour of Black-necked Stork

{Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus Latham, 1790) in Dudwa National Park,

Uttar Pradesh. Unpublished Ph D. thesis. Centre of Wildlife and

Ornithology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

Maheswaran, G. and Rahmani, A. R. (2001) Effects of water level changes and

wading bird abundance on the foraging behaviour of blacknecked storks

Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus in Dudwa National Park, India. J. Biosci.,

26(3): 373-382

Maheswaran, G. and Rahmani, A. R. (2002) Foraging behaviour and feeding

success of the black-necked Stork {Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus) in

Dudwa National Park, Uttar Pradesh, India. Journal of Zoology, 258:

189-195

Maheswaran, G., Rahmani, A.R. and Coulter, M.C. (2004) Recent records of

Black-necked Stork in India. Forktail, 20: 112-116

46

Maheswaran, G. and Rahmani, A. R. (2005) Breeding behaviour of the Black-

necked Stork Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus in Dudwa National park.

India. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc, 102(3), 305-312

Maheswaran, G. and Rahmani, A. R. (2007) Activity budget of the Black-

necked Stork Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus during non-breeding season in

India. Zoos' Print Journal, 22(11): 2875-2878

Maheswaran, G. and Rahmani, A. R. (2008) Foraging technique and prey-

handling time in black-necked stork {Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus).

Integrative Zoology, 3: 274-279

McAllan, I. A. W. and Bruce, M. D. (1989) The birds of the New South Wales:

A working list. Biocon. Research Group, Sydney.

Ministry of Environment and Forests (2001) Status of Forests of India. Forest

Survey of India. Dehradun.

Morton, S. R., Brennan, K. G. and Armstrong, M. D. (1993) Distribution and

abundance of Brolgas and Black-necked Storks in the Alligator Rivers

region. Northern Territory. Emu, 93: 88-92

Norusis; M. J. (1994) SPSS Advanced Statistics 6.1. SPSS Inc., Chicago.

Illinois.

Prasad. S. N.. Jaggi. A. K., Tiwari, A. K., Kaushik, P., Vijayan, L.

Muralidharan, S. and Vijayan, V.S. (2004). Inland Wetland of India-

Conservation Atlas. Salim Ali Center for Ornithology and Natural

Histoiy, Coimbatore, India.

47

Rahmaiii A.R. and Arora, V.M. (1992) Wetlands of iJltar Pradesh- Part-fl.

Newsleller for Bird IVu/chcrs. 32: 5-6

Rahmani, A. R. (1989) Status of the Black-necked Stork Ephippiorhyndms

asiaticiis in the Indian subcontinent. Forktail, 5: 99-110

Raj, M., Deka, J. and Bhattacharjee, P. C. (1989) Observations on the

behaviour of sub-adult Black-necked Storks at Dipor Beel, Assam.

Newsletter for Birdwatchers, 29(9 & 10): 7-8

Slikas, B. (1997) Phylogeny of the avian family Ciconiidae (Storks) based on

cytochrome b sequences and DNA-DNA hybridisation distances.

Molecular Phylugenetics and Evolution 8(3): 275-300

Sundar, K. S G. (2003) Notes on breeding biology of Black-necked Storks

Ephippiorhynchus asiaticiis in Etawah and Mainpuri districts. Uttar

Pradesh. India. Forktail. 19: 15-20

Sundar, K. S. G. (2004) Group size and habitat use by Black-necked Storks

Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus in an agriculture-dominated landscape in

IJuar Pradesh, India. Bird Conservation InternafionaL 14: 323-334

Sundar. K. S. G. (2005) Effectiveness of road transects and wetland visits for

siirxeying i^lack-iicckecl Storks Ephippiorhynchus c/siaiicus and Sarus

Cranes (jrus anligone in India. Forktail. 21: 27-32

Sundar. K. S. G., Kaur. J. and Choudhury. B.C. (2000) Distribution.

dcriiograp!i\ and cojiser\alion status of the Indian Sams Crane ((;/-.'/v

anligone anligone) in India. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc, 97: 319-339

48

Sundar. K. S. G. (2006) Flock Size, Density and Habitat Selection of Four

Large Waterbirds Species in an Agricultural Landscape in Uttar

Pradesh, India: Implications for Management. Walerhirds. 29: 365-374

Sundar, K. S. G. and Kaur, J. (2001) Distribution and nesting sites of the

Black-necked Stork Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus. J. Bombay Nat. Hist.

Soc, 98: 276-278

Sundar, K. S. G., Clancy P.G. and Shah. N. (2006) Factors affecting formation

of flocks of unusual size and composition in Black-necked Stork in

Australia and India. Emu, 106: 253-258

Tyne, V. and Berger (1959) Fundamentals of Ornithology. (John Wiley and

Sons Inc.: New York)

Urfi, .T. U., Meganathan. T. and Kalam, A (2007) Nesting ecology of the

Painted Stork Mycteria leucocephala at Sultanpur National Park.

Harvana, hidia. Forktail 23: 150-153

49

Appendix-I The list of birds recorded during the study period

S.No. Common Name

Family: Podicipedidae (Grebes)

1

2

Little Grebe

Great Crested Grebe

Family: Pelecanidae (Pelicans)

3 Great White Pelican

Family: Phalacrocoracidae (Cormorants and Shags)

4

5

6

Little Cormorant

Indian Shag

Great Cormorant

Family: Anhingidae (Darters)

7 Darter

Family: Ardeidae (Herons, Egrets)

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Little Egret

Grey Heron

Purple Heron

Large Egret

Median Egret

Cattle Egret

Indian Pond-Heron

Black-crowned Night-Heron

Family: Ciconiidae (Storks)

16

17

18

19

Painted Stork

Asian Openbill-Stork

White-necked Stork

Black-necked Stork

Family: Threskiornithidae (Ibises, Spoonbills)

20

21

22

23

Glossy Ibis

Oriental White Ibis

Black Ibis

Eurasian Spoonbill

Family: Phoenicopteridae (Flamingos)

24 Greater Flamingo

Family: Anatidae (Geese, Ducks)

25 Lesser Whistling-Duck

Scientific Name

Tachybaptus ruficollis

Podiceps cristatus

Pelecanus onocrotalus

Phalacrocorax niger

Phalacrocorax fuscicollis

Phalacrocorax carbo

Anhinga melanogaster

Egretta garzetta

Ardea cinerea

Ardea purpurea

Casmerodius albus

Mesophoyx intermedia

Bubulcus ibis

Ardeola grayii

Nycticorax nycticorax

Mycteria leucocephala

Anastomus oscitans

Ciconia episcopus

Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus

Plegadis falc inellus

Threskiornis melanocephalus

Pseudibis papillosa

Plalalea leucorodia

Phoenicopterus ruber

Dendrocygna javanica

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

Greylag Goose

Bar-headed Goose

Brahminy Shelduck

Common Shelduck

Comb Duck

Cotton Teal

Gadwall

Eurasian Wigeon

Mallard

Spot-billed Duck

Northern Shoveller

Northern Pintail

Garganey

Common Teal

Red-crested Pochard

Common Pochard

Ferruginous Pochard

Tufted Pochard

Family: Gruidae (Cranes)

44 Sarus Crane

Family: Rallidae (Moorhens, Coots)

45

46

47

48

White-breasted Waterhen

Purple Moorhen

Common Moorhen

Common Coot

Family: Jacanidae (Jacanas)

49

50

Pheasant-tailed Jacana

Bronze-winged Jacana

Family: Rostratulidae (Painted-Snipes)

5! Greater Painted-Snipe

Family: Charadriidae (Plovers, Lapwings)

52

53

54

55

56

57

Common Ringed Plover

Little Ringed Plover

Kentish Plover

River Lapwing

Red-wattled Lapwing

White-tailed Lapwing

Anser anser

Anser indicus

Tadornaferruginea

Tadorna tadorna

Sarkidiornis melanotos

Nettapus coromandelianus

Anas strepera

Anas penelope

Anas platyrhynchos

Anas poecilorhyncha

Anas clypeata

Anas acuta

Anas querquedula

Anas crecca

Rhodonessa rufina

Aythya ferina

Aythya nyroca

Aythya fuligula

Grus antigone

Amaurornis phoenicurus

Porphyria porphyria

Gallinula chloropus

Fulica atra

Hydrophasianus chirurgus

Metopidius indicus

Rostratula benghalensis

Charadrius hiaticula

Charadrius dubius

Charadrius alexandrinus

Vanellus duvaucelii

Vanellus indicus

Vanellus leuciirus

Family: Scolopacidae (Sandpipers, Stints, Snipes, Godwits)

58 Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

Jack Snipe

Black-tailed Godwit

Spotted Redshank

Common Redshank

Marsh Sandpiper

Common Greenshank

Spotted Greenshank

Green Sandpiper

Wood Sandpiper

Common Sandpiper

Little Stint

Temminck's Stint

Dunlin

Ruff

Family: Recurvirostridae (Avocets, Stilts)

73

74

Black-winged Stilt

Pied Avocet

Family: Laridae (Gulls, Terns)

75

76

Black-headed Gull

River Tern

Family: Accipitridae (Hawks, Eagles)

77

78

79

80

81

Brahminy Kite

Pallas's Fish-Eagle

Western Marsh-Harrier

Greater Spotted Eagle

Steppe Eagle

Family: Falconidae (Falcons)

82 Peregrine Falcon

Family: Strigidae (Owls)

83

84

85

Brown Hawk Owl

Short- eared Owl

Spotted Owlet

Family: Alcedinidae (Kingflshers)

86

87

88

Small Blue Kingfisher

V/hite-breasted Kingfisher

Greater Pied Kingfisher

Family: Hirundinidae (Swallows)

89

90

Common Swallow

Wire-tailed Swallow

Lymnocryptes minimus

Limosa limosa

Tringa erythropus

Tringa totanus

Tringa stagnatilis

Tringa nebularia

Tringa guttifer

Tringa ochropus

Tringa glareola

Actitis hypoleucos

Calidris minula

Calidris temminckii

Calidris alpina

Philomachus pugnax

Himanlopus himantopus

Recurvirostra avosetta

Larus ridibundus

Sterna aurantia

Haliastur indus

Haliaeetus leucoryphus

Circus aeruginosus

Aquila clanga

Aquila nipalensis

Falco peregrinus

Ninox scutulata

Asio flammeus

Athene brama

Alcedo atthis

Halcyon smyrnensis

Megaceryle lugubris

Hirundo rustica

Hirundo smithii , 1

III

Family: Motacillidae (Wagtails, Pipits)

91

92

93

94

White Wagtail

Citrine Wagtail

Yellow Wagtail

Paddy-field Pipit

Motacilla alba

Motacilla citreola

Motacilla flava

Anthus rufulus

Appeodix-II P^otographs

A foraging Female Black-necked Stork

Male and Female Black necked storks in flight

Foraging ecology of Black-necked Stork (Ephippiorhynchus ... · L2 Taxonomy and systematics 3-4 L3...

Documents

Transcript of Foraging ecology of Black-necked Stork (Ephippiorhynchus ... · L2 Taxonomy and systematics 3-4 L3...