생태와환경 (Korean Journal of Ecology and Environment)

  • 제52권2호
  • /
  • Pages.143-150
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 2288-1115(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-1123(eISSN)
한국수생태학회 (The Korean Society of Limnology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

은둔형 습지 조류의 효과적인 조사 방법 탐색을 위한 국외 프로토콜의 시범 적용

Application of Standardized North American Marsh Bird Monitoring Protocols to Survey Inconspicuous Marsh Birds in Korea

  • 이상연 (국립생태원 자연환경조사팀) ;
  • 성하철 (전남대학교 생물과학.생명기술학과)
  • Lee, Sang-Yeon (Team of National Ecosystem Survey, National Institute of Ecology) ;
  • Sung, Ha-Cheol (School of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Chonnam National University)
  • 투고 : 2019.04.05
  • 심사 : 2019.05.31
  • 발행 : 2019.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

은둔형 습지 조류는 습지 생태계를 구성하는 중요한 고차소비자임에도 불구하고, 눈에 잘 띄지 않는 습성과 신뢰도 있는 조사 방법의 부재로 인하여 국내에서는 서식 현황 및 개체군 경향성이 잘 알려져 있지 않다. 이에 본 연구는 조류 조사 시 가장 일반적으로 활용하는 수동적인 성격의 정점조사법과 탐지 효과를 증가시키는 것으로 알려진 음성조사법을 병행하는 방식의 은둔형 습지 조류를 대상으로 한 국외 프로토콜(Standardized North American Marsh Bird Monitoring Protocols; SNAMBMP)을 시범적으로 적용하였다. 그 결과, 흰눈썹뜸부기(Rallus indicus)와 쇠뜸부기사촌(Porzana fusca), 뜸부기(Gallicrex cinerea), 호사도요(Rostatula benghalensis) 4종이 탐지되었지만, 점유율이 매우 낮은 상태로 상당히 희귀한 개체군으로 판단된다. 다만, 흰눈썹뜸부기와 뜸부기의 경우 동종의 음성을 이용한 조사 방법이 다른 방법에 비해 효과적이라는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 국내에 서식하는 은둔형 습지 조류의 종 인벤토리 확보 및 개체군 경향성 파악을 위해서는 생물다양성 확보를 목적으로 한 전국 단위의 생태계 조사 사업 지침에 SNAMBMP 방식의 조사 세부 지침을 추가 수록함과 더불어 조사 시 전 과정에 대한 녹음을 통해 음성 파일 확보를 제안한다.

Although inconspicuous marsh birds are an indicator of marsh health, there is little understanding of their status and population trends due to their behavioral characteristics and lack of reliable survey methods in Korea. We applied the Standardized North American Marsh Bird Monitoring Protocols(SNAMBMP) already validated in North America for effective survey of the marsh birds. We selected 29 sites with emergent marshes, rice fields and riparian forests in Seocheon-gun, Buyeo-gun and Gunsan-si. We conducted the survey with a combination of passive 5 minute point-count and vocal survey method (30 seconds call-broadcasting+30 seconds silence) that was targeted eight species 2~7 times/site from March to July 2017. Four species, Brown-cheeked Rail(Rallus indicus), Ruddy-breasted Crake (Porzana fusca), Watercock (Gallicrex cinerea) and Greater Painted-snipe (Rostatula benghalensis), were detected at one site respectively (naïve occupancy rate=0.035). Vocal survey method with conspecific call-broadcasting provided better on Brown-cheeked Rail and Watercock than the others. We suggest a combination of passive point-count and vocal survey method like SNAMBMP to monitor inconspicuous marsh birds at nationwide scale and collection of sound files through recording of the entire process during the survey.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Adamus, P. 1998. Wetland bioassessment fact sheet: bird communities as indicators. Draft report. United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Standards, Washington D.C., USA.
  2. Allen, T., S.L. Finkbeiner and D.H. Johnson. 2004. Comparison of detection rates of breeding marsh birds in passive and playback surveys at Lacreek National Wildlife Refuge, South Dakota. Waterbirds 27: 277-281. https://doi.org/10.1675/1524-4695(2004)027[0277:CODROB]2.0.CO;2
  3. Burger, J. 1985. Habitat selection in temperate marsh-nesting birds, p. 253-282. In: Habitat selection in birds (Cody, M. ed.). Academic Press Inc, Florida, USA.
  4. Burnham, K.P. and D.R. Anderson. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd ed. Springer, New York, USA.
  5. Conway, C.J. 1995. Virginia Rail (Rallus limicola). In: The birds of North America. No. 173. (Poole, A., P. Stettenheim and F. Gill, eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
  6. Conway, C.J. and J.P. Gibbs. 2001. Factors influencing detection probabilities and the benefits of call-broadcast surveys for monitoring marsh birds. United States Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland, USA.
  7. Conway, C.J. 2002. Standardized marsh bird monitoring protocols. United States Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Tuscon, Arizona, USA.
  8. Conway, C.J., C. Sulzman and B.E. Raulston. 2004. Factors affecting detection probability of California Black Rails. The Journal of Wildlife Management 68: 360-370. https://doi.org/10.2193/0022-541X(2004)068[0360:FADPOC]2.0.CO;2
  9. Conway, C.J. and J.P. Gibbs. 2005. Effectiveness of call-broadcast surveys for monitoring marsh birds. The Auk 122: 26-35. https://doi.org/10.1093/auk/122.1.26
  10. Conway, C.J. 2009. Standardized North American Marsh Bird Monitoring Protocols. United States Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Tuscon, Arizona, USA.
  11. Conway, C.J. and C.P. Nadeau. 2010. Effects of broadcasting conspecific and heterospecific calls on detection of marsh birds in North America. Wetlands 30: 358-368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-010-0030-1
  12. Conway, C.J. 2011. Standardized North American Marsh Bird Monitoring Protocol. Waterbirds 34: 319-346. https://doi.org/10.1675/063.034.0307
  13. Dahl, T.E. 1990. Wetland losses in the United States 1780s to 1980s. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, Washington D.C., USA.
  14. Eddleman, W.R., F.L. Knopf, B. Meanley, F.A. Reid and R. Zembal. 1988. Conservation of North American rallids. Wilson Bulletin 100: 458-475.
  15. Fielding, A.H. and P.F. Haworth. 1995. Testing the generality of bird-habitat models. Conservation Biology 9: 1466-1481. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.09061466.x
  16. Gibbs, J.P. and S.M. Melvin. 1993. Call-response surveys for monitoring breeding waterbirds. Journal of Wildlife Management 52: 27-34. https://doi.org/10.2307/3808996
  17. Gill, F. and D. Donsker. 2019. IOC World Bird List (v9.1). doi: 10.14344/IOC.ML.9.1.
  18. Glahn, J.F. 1974. Study of breeding rails with recorded calls in north-central Colorado. The Wilson Bulletin 86: 206-214.
  19. Jeong, O.S. 2012. Bird survey guideline, p. 431-456. In: The fourth National Natural Environment Survey guideline (Hyun, J., H.R. Na, G. Park, J.W. Kim, H.T. Im, J.M. Hwang, Y.B. Cho, H.B. Song, S.C. Lee, O.S. Jeong and H.S. Oh. eds.). National Institute of Environmental Research, Incheon, Korea.
  20. Jonhson, D.H. 1995. Point counts of birds: What are we estimating? p. 117-124. In: Monitoring bird populations by point counts (Ralph, C.J., J.R. Sauer and S. Droege. eds.). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-GTR-149. Pacific South-West Research Station, Berkeley, California, USA.
  21. Kerlinger, P. and D.S. Wiedner. 1991. Vocal behavior and habitat use of Black Rails in south Jersey. Records of New Jersey Birds 16: 58-62.
  22. Lee, S.Y. and H.C. Sung. 2018. Application of the specific survey method to detect marsh birds. p. 22. In: 2018 OSK General Meeting and Spring Conference Excerpt Collection (Bing, G.C., Y.M. Yoo and W.S. Choi. eds.). The Ornithological Society of Korea, Daejeon, Korea.
  23. Lewis, C. and D.G. Casagrande. 1997. Using avian communities to evaluate salt marsh restoration, p. 204-236. In: Restoration of an Urban Salt Marsh (Casagrande, D.G. ed.). Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies Bulletin Series 100, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  24. Lor, S. and R.A. Malecki. 2002. Call-response surveys to monitor marsh bird population trends. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30: 1195-1201.
  25. Lynch, J. 1995. Effects of point-count duration, time-of-day, and aural stimuli on detectability of migratory and resident bird species in Quintana Roo, Mexico. p. 1-6. In: Monitoring bird populations by point counts (Ralph, C.J., J.R. Sauer and S. Droege. eds.). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-GTR-149. Pacific South-West Research Station, Berkeley, California, USA.
  26. MacKenzie, D.I., J.D. Nichols, G.B. Lachman, S. Droege, J.A. Royle and C.A. Langtimm. 2002. Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecology 83: 2248-2255. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2248:ESORWD]2.0.CO;2
  27. Newbold, S. and J.M. Eadie. 2004. Using species-habitat models to target conservation: a case study with breeding Mallards. Ecological Applications 14: 1384-1393. https://doi.org/10.1890/03-5193
  28. Paine, C.R. 1999. Effectiveness of marsh bird monitoring methods, p. 41-42. In: Proceedings of the Marsh Bird Monitoring Workshop (Ribic, C.A., S.J. Lewis, S. Melvin, J. Bart. and B. Peterjohn. eds.). United States Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Migratory Bird Management, Denver, Colorado, USA.
  29. Rehm, E.M. and G.A. Baldassarre. 2007. Temporal variation in detection of marsh birds during broadcast of conspecific calls. Journal of Field Ornithology 78: 56-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1557-9263.2006.00085.x
  30. Royle, J.A. and J.D. Nichols. 2003. Estimating abundance from repeated presence-absence data or point counts. Ecology 84: 777-790. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[0777:EAFRPA]2.0.CO;2
  31. Siegel, R.B., D.F. Desante and M.P. Nott. 2001. Using point counts to establish conservation priorities: how many visits are optimal? Journal of Field Ornithology 72: 228-235. https://doi.org/10.1648/0273-8570-72.2.228
  32. Soehren, E.C., J.W. Tucker and D.G. Crow. 2009. Effectiveness of call-broadcast surveys for breeding marsh birds along coastal Alabama. Southeastern Naturalist 8: 277-293. https://doi.org/10.1656/058.008.0207
  33. Sung, H.C., S.K. Kim, S.W. Cheong, S.R. Park, D.C. Roh, K.W. Baek, J.H. Lee and D.S. Park. 2006. Estimating detection probabilities and site occupancy rates of three anuran species using call surveys in Haenam Gun, Korea. Journal of Ecology and Field Biology 29: 331-335.
  34. Sutherland, W.J. 1995. Why census? p. 1-9. In: Ecological census techniques: a handbook (Sutherland, W.J. ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  35. Tango, P.J., G.D. Therres, D.F. Brinker, M. O'Brien, E.A.T. Blom and H.L. Wierenga. 1997. Breeding distribution and relative abundance of marshbirds in Maryland: evaluation of a tape playback survey method. Final report. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, USA.
  36. Tiner Jr, R.W. 1984. Wetlands of the United States: Current status and recent trends. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, Washington D.C., USA.
  37. Wetlands International. 2019. Waterbird Population Estimates. Retrieved from wpe.wetalnds.org on Saturday 2 Feb 2019.