Journal of Forest and Environmental Science

Institute of Forest Science, kangwon National University (강원대학교 산림과학연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Characteristics of Wintering Bird Communities in the Moeyungyi Wetland Wildlife Sanctuary, Myanmar

  • Aung, Hsu Sandar (Department of Forest Resources, Yeungnam University) ;
  • Kim, Hankyu (Research Associate, Zuckerberg Lab, Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison) ;
  • Lee, Yohan (Department of Forest Resources, Yeungnam University)
  • Received : 2022.07.27
  • Accepted : 2022.08.17
  • Published : 2022.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Gaining an understanding of bird communities in different habitat types is essential for the conservation of ecologically important habitats. Wetlands possess different types of habitats and provide an important environment for wintering waterbird communities. This study compares avian communities in five different habitat types in the Moeyungyi Wetland Wildlife Sanctuary (MWWS), Myanmar. From December 2014 to the first week of February in 2015, bird and habitat data were collected from representative areas of five habitat types (i.e., short grassland, tall grassland, lotus fields, open water areas, and rice fields) at MWWS. We established nine sampling plots in each habitat type, and used the point quadrat method to survey habitats and the point count method to survey birds in the habitats. Simple one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc tests were used to determine differences between bird communities. We made 95 detections during 19 daily visits to each of the five habitat types. During the survey period, we recorded a total of 10,389 individuals belonging to 52 different bird species, based on 7-min observations at each of the 45 point count stations. Furthermore, we detected significant differences by habitat structure (i.e., vegetation coverage, height, and density; water depth; and plant species diversity) as well as bird communities (i.e., species richness, abundance, and diversity indices). In addition, the detailed analysis of 52 avian species revealed significant differences among 45 species with respect to the mean numbers of observed individuals in the survey habitats. The findings of this study revealed significant differences in the structure and composition of waterbird communities among the five assessed habitat types. Because natural marshes provide preferable habitats for a larger number and greater diversity of birds, relative to rice fields, natural marshes should be prioritized for conservation and restoration in Moeyungyi Wetland Wildlife Sanctuary.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

We appreciate anonymous reviewers who provide valuable comments. Hsu Sandar Aung was supported by Asian-Korean Environmental Cooperation Project (AKECOP) and Seoul National University for her master's thesis. Staff members at Moyungyi Wetland Wildlife Sanctuary, Bago, Myanmar provided tremendous help with locomotion, field logistics, plant and bird identification and data collection. We are grateful to Dr. Eun-Jae Lee, Dr. Chang-Yong Choi and Dr. Woo-shin Lee for their supports and advice on the study design and overall project supervision. This work was supported by 2020 Yeungnam University Research Grant.

References

  1. Adamus P, Brandt K. 1990. Impacts on Quality of Inland Wetlands of the United States: A Survey of Indicators, Techniques, and Applications of Community-Level Biomonitoring Data. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
  2. Aoyagi K, Tsuyuki S, Phua MH, Teo S. 2012. Mapping Distribution of Dipterocarpus in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. J For Environ Sci 28: 179-184.
  3. Assandri G, Bogliani G, Pedrini P, Brambilla M. 2016. Diversity in the monotony? Habitat traits and management practices shape avian communities in intensive vineyards. Agric Ecosyst Environ 223: 250-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.03.014
  4. Aung HS. 2015. Characteristics of wintering bird communities in different habitat types in the Moeyungyi Wetland Wildlife Sanctuary, Myanmar. MS thesis. Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea. (in English)
  5. Barbier EB. 1993. Sustainable use of wetlands valuing tropical wetland benefits: economic methodologies and applications. Geogr J 159: 22-32. https://doi.org/10.2307/3451486
  6. Barbier EB. 1994. Valuing environmental functions: tropical wetlands. Land Econ 70: 155-173. https://doi.org/10.2307/3146319
  7. Blanco DE, Lopez-Lanus B, Dias RA, Azpiroz A, Rilla F. 2006. Use of Rice Fields by Migratory Shorebirds in Southern South America: Implications for Conservation and Management. Wetlands International, Buenos Aires, pp 56.
  8. Brown D. 1954. Methods of Surveying and Mesauring Vegetation. CAB, Farnham Royal.
  9. Bryan GG. 1990. Species abundance patterns and productivity of birds using grassed waterways in Iowa rowcrop fields. MS thesis. Iowa State University, Ames, USA. (in English)
  10. Bryan GG, Best LB. 1991. Bird Abundance and Species Richness in Grassed Waterways in Iowa Rowcrop Fields. Am Midl Nat 126: 90-102. https://doi.org/10.2307/2426153
  11. Chatterjee A, Adhikari S, Pal S, Mukhopadhyay SK. 2020. Foraging guild structure and niche characteristics of waterbirds wintering in selected sub-Himalayan wetlands of India. Ecol Indic 108: 105693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105693
  12. Chettri N, Deb DC, Sharma E, Jackson R. 2005. The relationship between bird communities and habitat: a study along a trekking corridor in the Sikkim Himalaya. Mt Res Dev 25: 235-243. https://doi.org/10.1659/0276-4741(2005)025[0235:TRBBCA]2.0.CO;2
  13. Chettri N, Sharma E, Deb DC. 2001. Bird community structure along a trekking corridor of Sikkim Himalaya: a conservation perspective. Biol Conserv 102: 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(01)00092-1
  14. Cockayne L. 1926. Tussock grassland investigation in New Zealand. In: Aims and Methods in the Study of Vegetation (Tansley AG, Chipp TF, eds). Crown Agents for the Colonies, London, pp 349-361.
  15. Colwell MA, Taft OW. 2000. Waterbird communities in managed wetlands of varying water depth. Waterbirds 23: 45-55.
  16. Davidson NC, Max Finlayson C. 2018. Extent, regional distribution and changes in area of different classes of wetland. Mar Freshw Res 69: 1525-1533. https://doi.org/10.1071/mf17377
  17. Davies J, Sebastian AC, Chan S. 2004. A Wetland Inventory for Myanmar. Ministry of the Environment, Tokyo.
  18. Elphick CS. 2000. Functional equivalency between rice fields and seminatural wetland habitats. Conserv Biol 14: 181-191. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98314.x
  19. Elphick CS. 2004. Assessing conservation trade-offs: identifying the effects of flooding rice fields for waterbirds on non-target bird species. Biol Conserv 117: 105-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00264-7
  20. Elphick CS, Oring LW. 1998. Winter management of Californian rice fields for waterbirds. J Appl Ecol 35: 95-108. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.1998.00274.x
  21. Elphick CS, Oring LW. 2003. Conservation implications of flooding rice fields on winter waterbird communities. Agric Ecosyst Environ 94: 17-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(02)00022-1
  22. Erwin RM. 2002. Integrated management of waterbirds: beyond the conventional. Waterbirds 25: 5-12.
  23. Farago S, Hangya K. 2012. Effects of water level on waterbird abundance and diversity along the middle section of the Danube River. Hydrobiologia 697: 15-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-012-1166-1
  24. Fasola M. 1986. Resource use of foraging herons in agricultural and nonagricultural habitats in Italy. Colon Waterbirds 9: 139-148. https://doi.org/10.2307/1521206
  25. Fasola M, Ruiz X. 1996. The value of rice fields as substitutes for natural wetlands for waterbirds in the Mediterranean region. Colon Waterbirds 19: 122-128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1521955
  26. Finch DM. 1989. Habitat use and habitat overlap of riparian birds in three elevational zones. Ecology 70: 866-880. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941355
  27. Gilmer DS, Miller MR, Bauer RD, LeDonne JR. 1982. California's Central Valley wintering waterfowl: concerns and challenges. In: 47th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference; Portland, USA; March 26-31, 1982. pp 441-452.
  28. Goodall DW. 1952. Some considerations in the use of point quadrats for the analysis of vegetation. Aust J Sci Res B 5: 1-41. https://doi.org/10.1071/BI9520001
  29. Gopi Sundar KS. 2006. Flock size, density and habitat selection of four large waterbirds species in an agricultural landscape in Uttar Pradesh, India: implications for management. Waterbirds 29: 365-374. https://doi.org/10.1675/1524-4695(2006)29[365:FSDAHS]2.0.CO;2
  30. Green AJ. 1996. Analyses of globally threatened Anatidae in relation to threats, distribution, migration patterns, and habitat use. Conserv Biol 10: 1435-1445. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10051435.x
  31. Hattori A, Mae S. 2001. Habitat use and diversity of waterbirds in a coastal lagoon around Lake Biwa, Japan. Ecol Res 16: 543-553. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1703.2001.00416.x
  32. Hostetler ME, Main MB. 2001. Florida Monitoring Program: Point Count Method to Survey Birds. University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agriculture Sciences, EDIS, Gainesville, FL.
  33. Isola CR, Colwell MA, Taft OW, Safran RJ. 2000. Interspecific differences in habitat use of shorebirds and waterfowl foraging in managed wetlands of California's San Joaquin Valley. Waterbirds 23: 196-203.
  34. Kercher SM, Frieswyk CB, Zedler JB. 2003. Effects of sampling teams and estimation methods on the assessment of plant cover. J Veg Sci 14: 899-906. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2003.tb02223.x
  35. Khaliq I, Arshad MI, Gill AH, Chaudhry AA, Maan MA, Iqbal MA, Akbar M, Bowler DE. 2019. Long-term changes of a waterbird community over 26 years at a Pakistani Ramsar Site. Wetlands Ecol Manag 27: 363-376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-019-09665-4
  36. Li C, Zhang Y, Zha D, Yang S, Huang ZYX, de Boer WF. 2019. Assembly processes of waterbird communities across subsidence wetlands in China: a functional and phylogenetic approach. Divers Distrib 25: 1118-1129. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12919
  37. Li D, Chen S, Guan L, Lloyd H, Liu Y, Lv J, Zhang Z. 2011. Patterns of waterbird community composition across a natural and restored wetland landscape mosaic, Yellow River Delta, China. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 91: 325-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2010.10.028
  38. Losito MP, Baldassarre GA. 1995. Wetland use by breeding and postbreeding female mallards in the St. Lawrence river valley. Wilson Bull 107: 55-63.
  39. Ma Z, Gan X, Choi C, Jing K, Tang S, Li B, Chen J. 2007. Wintering bird communities in newly-formed wetland in the Yangtze River estuary. Ecol Res 22: 115-124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-006-0193-7
  40. MacArthur R, Recher H, Cody M. 1966. On the relation between habitat selection and species diversity. Am Nat 100: 319-332. https://doi.org/10.1086/282425
  41. MacArthur RH, MacArthur JW. 1961. On bird species diversity. Ecology 42: 594-598. https://doi.org/10.2307/1932254
  42. Matsuoka SM, Handel CM, Ruthrauff DR. 2001. Densities of breeding birds and changes in vegetation in an Alaskan boreal forest following a massive disturbance by spruce beetles. Can J Zool 79: 1678-1690. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjz-79-9-1678
  43. Mills GS, Dunning JB Jr, Bates JM. 1991. The relationship between breeding bird density and vegetation volume. Wilson Bull 103: 468-479.
  44. Nisbet ICT. 2000. Disturbance, habituation, and management of waterbird colonies. Waterbirds 23: 312-332.
  45. Ntiamoa-Baidu Y, Piersma T, Wiersma P, Poot M, Battley P, Gordon C. 1998. Water depth selection, daily feeding routines and diets of waterbirds in coastal lagoons in Ghana. Ibis 140: 89-103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919x.1998.tb04545.x
  46. Nudds TD, Sjoberg K, Lundberg P. 1994. Ecomorphological relationships among palearctic dabbling ducks on Baltic coastal wetlands and a comparison with the Nearctic. Oikos 69: 295-303. https://doi.org/10.2307/3546150
  47. O'Connell TJ, Jackson LE, Brooks RP. 2000. Bird guilds as indicators of ecological condition in the central Appalachians. Ecol Appl 10: 1706-1721. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1706:BGAIOE]2.0.CO;2
  48. Park JM, Seo HS, Lee JS. 2011. A Study on the Spatial and Environmental Characteristics of Forest Biology using GIS: A Case Study of Baekdudaegan area, Gyeongsangbuk-do and Chungcheongbuk-do. J For Environ Sci 27: 169-181.
  49. Pease ML, Rose RK, Butler MJ. 2005. Effects of human disturbances on the behavior of wintering ducks. Wildl Soc Bull 33: 103-112. https://doi.org/10.2193/0091-7648(2005)33[103:EOHDOT]2.0.CO;2
  50. Pyrovetsi M, Papastergiadou E. 1992. Biological conservation implications of water-level fluctuations in a wetland of international importance: Lake Kerkini, Macedonia, Greece. Environ Conserv 19: 235-244. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900031039
  51. Rajpar MN, Zakaria M. 2011. Effects of water level fluctuation on waterbirds distribution and aquatic vegetation composition at natural wetland reserve, Peninsular Malaysia. Int Sch Res Not 2011: 324038.
  52. Raman TRS. 2001. Effect of Slash-and-Burn Shifting Cultivation on Rainforest Birds in Mizoram, Northeast India. Conserv Biol 15: 685-698. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.015003685.x
  53. Remsen JV, Swan MM, Cardiff SW, Rosenberg KV. 1991. The importance of the rice-growing region of south-central Louisiana to winter populations of shorebirds, raptors, waders, and other birds. J La Ornithol 1: 35-47.
  54. Sekercioglu CH. 2006. Increasing awareness of avian ecological function. Trends Ecol Evol 21: 464-471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.05.007
  55. Shannon CE, Weaver W. 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL, pp 1-117.
  56. Shuford WD, Page GW, Kjelmyr JE. 1993. Distribution, Abundance and Habitat Use of Shorebirds in California's Central Valley in Winter 1992-1993. Point Reyes Bird Observatory, Stinson Beach, CA.
  57. Shuford WD, Page GW, Kjelmyr JE, Hickey CM. 1994. Seasonal Abundance and Habitat Use of Shorebirds in California's Central Valley, November 1993 to August 1994. Point Reyes Bird Observatory, Stinson Beach, CA.
  58. Simpson E. 1949. Measurement of Diversity. Nature 163: 688. https://doi.org/10.1038/163688a0
  59. Tanalgo KC, Pineda JA, Agravante ME, Amerol ZM. 2015. Bird diversity and structure in different land-use types in lowland south-central Mindanao, Philippines. Trop Life Sci Res 26: 85-103.
  60. Tourenq C, Bennetts RE, Kowalski H, Vialet E, Lucchesi JL, Kayser Y, Isenmann P. 2001. Are ricefields a good alternative to natural marshes for waterbird communities in the Camargue, southern France? Biol Conserv 100: 335-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(01)00037-4
  61. Traill LW, Brook BW. 2011. An aggregative response of the tropical Australian magpie goose (Anseranas semipalmata) to seasonal floodplains. J Trop Ecol 27: 171-180. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467410000672
  62. Treca B. 1994. The diet of Ruffs and Blacktailed Godwits in Senegal. Ostrich 65: 256-263. https://doi.org/10.1080/00306525.1994.9632685
  63. Velasquez CR. 1992. Managing artificial saltpans as a waterbird habitat: species' responses to water level manipulation. Colon Waterbirds 15: 43-55. https://doi.org/10.2307/1521353
  64. Weber LM, Haig SM. 1996. Shorebird use of South Carolina managed and natural coastal wetlands. J Wildl Manag 60: 73-82. https://doi.org/10.2307/3802042
  65. Wiens JA. 1969. An approach to the study of ecological relationships among grassland birds. Ornithol Monogr 8: 1-93. https://doi.org/10.2307/40166677
  66. Wiens JA. 1992. The Ecology of Bird Communities. Vol 1, Foundations and Patterns. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.