Habitat use and population dynamics of the Azure-Winged Magpie ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 3.4 List of plant species observed utilised by C. cyanus and the presence/ absence of each species in each area. 1 = present; 0 = absent. Bp = Betula platyphylla, Pa = Padus asiatica, P = Poa spp., C = Carex spp., Ls = Larix sibirica, Ps = Pinus sibirica, Pl = Populus laurifolia, S = Salix spp., Ra = Rosa acicularis, Rr = Ribus rubrus, Cs = Crataegus sanguinea, Up = Ulmus pumila, Bf = Betula fusca, M = Malus spp. Areas Bp Pa P C Ls Ps Pl S Ra Rr Cs Up Bf M Kassel 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Betula Woodland 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 Khonin Nuga 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 Main Breeding Area 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 Padus Patch 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 Sharlan Meadows 3.2 Radio tracking 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 I deployed Transmitter 1 on the 16/06/2010 on an adult male 7785313 that was breeding. The transmitter fell off the bird the next day. I suspected the transmitter got snagged on a tree branch and was dropped as I found the transmitter on a branch of the P. asiatica bush with the tail feather still attached. Transmitter 3 was deployed on the same adult male (7785313) on 18/06/2010. Apart from detecting a faint signal on the 30 th June, no signals were detected otherwise from this transmitter. The transmitter was never recovered. Transmitter 5 was deployed on the 18/07/2010 on a juvenile. No signals were received from the transmitter for 11 days and it was confirmed dropped from bird on 07/08/2010. It had dropped under a few dense P. asiatica bushes with dense undergrowth. I was unable to retrieve this transmitter. Transmitter 7 was deployed onto a juvenile (7785366) on the 13/08/2010. This transmitter was still transmitting at the end of fieldwork on the 30 th August 2010. This transmitter was not removed, as juveniles undergo another stage of moulting in autumn, and would shed the tail feather that had the transmitter on it. Overall, radio-tracking was not successful. Out of 79 sessions, I only detected signals 31 times. Two transmitters that were deployed were known to have fallen off the bird and one was never detected. 42
3.3 Population Dynamics 3.3.1 Frequency of nest predation and species responsible I monitored four active nests between 12 June 2010 and 19 July 2010. Two (N1 & 2; Fig. 3.5) already had nestlings in them, and the other two (P1 & P2; Fig. 3.6b) were in the process of being built. Overall, four out of seven (57.1%) known nesting attempts were successful (i.e. at least one chick fledged from the nest). Nest N1 had eight young nestlings (no feathers and their eyes were still shut) on 15 June 2010. All nestlings fledged successfully on 26 June 2010. Nest N2 had nine young nestlings on 16 June 2010. On 27 June 2010, this nest only had eight nestlings, with downy feathers. I think predation in this case is unlikely as only one nestling was missing. Furthermore, the nest was “full to the brim”. It is possible that the lost nestling was actively or accidentally pushed out of the nest by its nest-mates. The remaining eight chicks fledged successfully. Nest P1 had four eggs on the 15 June 2010 but all were predated four days later. This nest was abandoned by the parents after the nest was predated. Nest P2 was built on the 15 June 2010. There were seven eggs in this nest on 4 July 2010. On 6 July 2010, Nest P2 had one nestling and three eggs in the nest. The other three eggs were most likely predated. Four days later there were three nestlings. It could be possible that the female bird had ejected the fourth egg or if the egg had hatched, perhaps the nestling was weak and died, therefore the parents removed it. On the 13 July 2010, there was only one nestling left, the other two possibly predated, although the species responsible was undetermined. The remaining nestling fledged successfully. Additionally, there were two other nests—Nest 3 and 4 (Fig. 3.5), which had been predated and were abandoned by the parents before I started nest monitoring. I found nest P3 (Fig. 3.6b), containing six chicks with downy feathers, on 30 July 2010. I did not succeed in locating this nest earlier as it was well hidden in amongst the dense Padus asiatica bushes and I only found it by chance. I suspected that this nest was built by the breeding pair of nest P1 that failed. All nestlings from nest P3 fledged successfully. 43
Page 1 and 2:
Copyright Statement Lincoln Univers
Page 3 and 4: The Azure-winged Magpie Cyanopica c
Page 5 and 6: proportions of banded adults and ju
Page 7 and 8: Table of Contents Abstract ........
Page 9 and 10: List of Tables Table 2.1 Definition
Page 11 and 12: Figure 3.9 Proportion of time spent
Page 13 and 14: 1.1 Impact and effects of fire Chap
Page 15 and 16: In contrast to the arguments above,
Page 17 and 18: capacity will result in increased i
Page 19 and 20: The subject of this study, Cyanopic
Page 21 and 22: Chapter 2 Methods 2.1 General Infor
Page 23 and 24: The extreme disjunct distribution o
Page 25 and 26: The IUCN lists Cyanopica cyanus as
Page 27 and 28: Clutches range from four to eleven
Page 29 and 30: logging set up a makeshift camp ca.
Page 31 and 32: 2.2.2 Cyanopica cyanus in Khonin Nu
Page 33 and 34: 2.3 Methods 2.3.1 Data collection H
Page 35 and 36: If the group moved on to another ar
Page 37 and 38: Population Dynamics Nest predation
Page 39 and 40: I investigated the similarities of
Page 41 and 42: I performed a Chi-Square Test of As
Page 43 and 44: Figure 3.2 Home range of Cyanopica
Page 45 and 46: Kassel The area used by the birds i
Page 47 and 48: 2007. It is also the primary night
Page 49 and 50: (a) (b) Figure 3.6 Detailed map of
Page 51 and 52: significantly from 9% in 2009 to 15
Page 53: observed individuals in Betula plat
Page 57 and 58: Table 3.6 Life history of individua
Page 59 and 60: Number of individuals 60 50 40 30 2
Page 61 and 62: Proportion (%) of individuals re-si
Page 63 and 64: 3.3.4 Breeding individuals Out of t
Page 65 and 66: 3.3.5 Pair-bond retentions Due to t
Page 67 and 68: Table 3.12 Banded females and known
Page 69 and 70: Proportion (%) of individuals 80 70
Page 71 and 72: coordinate system. However, the res
Page 73 and 74: (Dendrocopus spp. and Picus canus)
Page 75 and 76: also be useful for further studies
Page 77 and 78: Cyanopica cyanus respond to aerial
Page 79 and 80: e explained by the formula which us
Page 81 and 82: Breeding individuals, pair-bonds, s
Page 83 and 84: UNICEF, 2010). This event and the f
Page 85 and 86: (Bayartaa et al., 2007). In Norther
Page 87 and 88: This study provides a baseline for
Page 89 and 90: BirdLife International. (2009). Cya
Page 91 and 92: Ford, H.A. (1989) Ecology of Birds:
Page 93 and 94: Kirkpatrick, C. & Conway, C. (2010)
Page 95 and 96: Pryde, M.A. (2003) Using Program 'M
Page 97 and 98: Valendik, E.N., Ivanova, G.A., Chul
Page 99 and 100: Appendix A Datasheet for observatio
Page 101 and 102: Gypsy Moth, Lymantria dispar larvae
Page 103 and 104: The author coming back from a day i
Page 105:
Dense Padus asiatica form a ‘cano
show all

Habitat use and population dynamics of the Azure-Winged Magpie ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?