26.03.2013 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Table 3.6 Life history <strong>of</strong> individuals that were born into this colony <strong>and</strong> b<strong>and</strong>ed as fledglings. No<br />

data for breeding was recorded in 2006. Bred here is defined as individuals that<br />

attempted breeding, but didn’t necessarily fledged chicks.<br />

2007 2008 2009 2010<br />

No. hatched 54 43 39 26<br />

No. fledged 49 41 23 23<br />

No. b<strong>and</strong>ed 23 34 16 18<br />

No. sighted in autumn 40 31 17 22<br />

No. bred as yearling - 0 2 0<br />

No. bred - 0 2 1<br />

No. helpers - 0 7 0<br />

Table 3.7 shows <strong>the</strong> estimated number <strong>of</strong> adults <strong>and</strong> juveniles present in <strong>the</strong> colony between 2006<br />

<strong>and</strong> 2010. This estimation is based on <strong>the</strong> re-sighting rate (p) obtained from MARK analysis <strong>of</strong><br />

adult <strong>and</strong> juvenile survival <strong>and</strong> recapture (re-sighting) rates (Fig. 3.15). The st<strong>and</strong>ard error for this<br />

estimation is high, resulting in a wide confidence interval (CI), especially in 2009 for adults <strong>and</strong><br />

2008 for juveniles. The formula estimates are higher (Table 3.7) in 2008 <strong>and</strong> 2009 compared to<br />

visual estimations (Table 3.5).Only in 2010 was <strong>the</strong> formula estimation comparable to <strong>the</strong> visual<br />

estimation. Around 20 non-breeding birds left <strong>the</strong> colony in 2009 <strong>and</strong> were <strong>the</strong>n not sighted again<br />

that season (B Gantulga, pers. comm.), hence <strong>the</strong> lower number in September 2009 than in May<br />

2009.<br />

Table 3.7 Estimation <strong>of</strong> number <strong>of</strong> adults, <strong>and</strong> juveniles in <strong>the</strong> colony each year, from 2006 to<br />

2010 using <strong>the</strong> methodology following Davidson & Armstrong (2002). There was no<br />

breeding data for 2006, hence only total number <strong>of</strong> adults in colony was estimated.<br />

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010<br />

Estimated adults 19 31 35 63 10<br />

95%CI (Lower, Upper) (12.89, 25.11) (21.01, 40.99) (23.90, 46.10) (43.02, 82.98) (6.67, 13.33)<br />

Estimated juveniles - 35 52 24 27<br />

95% CI (Lower, Upper) - (23.33, 46.67) (34.75, 69.26) (15.88, 32.12) (17.87, 36.14)<br />

Estimated total colony<br />

size<br />

19<br />

(12.89, 25.11)<br />

66<br />

(44.34, 87.66)<br />

45<br />

87<br />

(58.65, 115.36)<br />

87<br />

(58.90, 115.1)<br />

37<br />

(24.54, 49.47)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!