DOCSLIB.ORG

Avian Diversity, Abundance, and Nest Success Among Managed Prairies and Agricultural Plots in Oklahoma and Texas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Avian Diversity, Abundance, and Nest Success Among Managed Prairies and Agricultural Plots in Oklahoma and Texas University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln The Prairie Naturalist Great Plains Natural Science Society 12-2017 Avian Diversity, Abundance, and Nest Success among Managed Prairies and Agricultural Plots in Oklahoma and Texas Phillip J. Leonard Douglas R. Wood Wayne E. Meyer Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tpn Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Botany Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Systems Biology Commons, and the Weed Science Commons This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Great Plains Natural Science Society at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Prairie Naturalist by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. 48 The Prairie Naturalist • 49(2): December 2017 Avian Diversity, Abundance, and Nest Success among Managed Prairies and Agricultural Plots in Oklahoma and Texas PHILLIP J. LEONARD, DOUGLAS R. WOOD, and WAYNE E. MEYER Department of Biological Sciences, Southeastern Oklahoma State University, Durant, OK, USA 74701 (PJL, DRW) Biology Department, Austin College, Sherman, TX, USA 75090 (WEM) ABSTRACT Over the last 50 years, grassland birds experienced rapid declines due to habitat loss and degradation as a result of agricultural practices. Our objective was to document the diversity, abundance, and nest success of bird communities using managed prairie and agricultural plots at the Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in southern Oklahoma and Hagerman NWR in northern Texas. From April 1 to July 15, 2013–2014, point count surveys, nest searches, nest monitoring, and vegetation sampling were conducted among three habitat treatments: managed prairie, unharvested wheat, and fallow agricultural plots. Species richness values for potential nesting species were higher in managed prairies at both refuges, whereas species abundance rates varied among treatments. Nest success rates were low at both refuges due to nest abandonment and predators. Due to vegetation diversity, species were more likely to nest in managed prairies compared to agricultural plots with more homogenous vegetation at both refuges. Managed prairies at both refuges were relatively small and fragmented resulting in edge effects, such as increased nest predation and brood parasitism. We recommend increasing the area of managed prairies to provide more habitat for bird species at both refuges. KEY WORDS Agriculture, grassland birds, nest success, Oklahoma, prairie, Texas. Since the 1960s, the North American Breeding Bird agricultural plots on grassland bird species’ abundance, Survey (hereafter BBS) has quantified the population trends diversity, density, and nest success (Winter et al. 2006, Ribic of grassland bird species and found them to be declining et al. 2009b). This management strategy is employed by the more rapidly than any other bird community in North USFWS to a complex of refuges in the Midwest region. Due to America (Robbins et al. 1986, Johnson and Igl 2001, Vickery management paradigm shifts and funding, National Wildlife and Herkert 2001, Ribic et al. 2009a, Sauer et al. 2014). Refuges are exploring converting agricultural plots to native Breeding bird survey trend data for Oklahoma show that prairie plots in order to meet new management objectives. species such as field sparrow (Spizella pusilla) and dickcissel Our primary objectives were to 1) document the diversity, (Spiza americana) have experienced declines in breeding relative abundance, and density of bird communities using populations (–2.52 %/year, and –0.14 %/year, respectively) managed prairie, unharvested wheat, and fallow agricultural since 1966 (Sauer et al. 2014). Currently, only 4% of the plots at the Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge (hereafter historical 68 million ha of prairie remain (Steinauer and Tishomingo NWR) in southern Oklahoma and the Hagerman Collins 1996, Herkert et al. 2003). The primary causes of National Wildlife Refuge (hereafter Hagerman NWR) in these declines were the loss and degradation of grassland northern Texas, 2) determine avian nest success among habitats, specifically, agroconversion of native prairies treatments, and 3) use a conservation index score to rank the (Askins et al. 2007, Noss et al. 1995, Vickery and Herkert value of each treatment type for grassland bird species. 2001). As a result of agroconversion, grassland birds were forced to use agricultural plots as an alternative to historical STUDY AREA prairies. Agricultural fragmentation reduces both the occurrence and density of breeding birds in small habitat The 6,663 ha Tishomingo NWR was located in southern fragments leading to sink populations (Herkert 1994, Vickery Oklahoma (14S 717068 E, 3786016 N) and provided a diverse et al. 1994, Winter and Faaborg 1999, Herkert et al. 2003). landscape for wildlife species including managed prairies and Habitat fragmentation also exposes birds to increased nest agricultural fields (Diggs and Wood 2010). Agricultural plots predation and brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) brood were established to provide forage for wintering waterfowl, parasitism. Birds nesting in agricultural plots are subject whereas managed prairies were intended to provide nesting to anthropogenic disturbances such as pesticides and crop habitat for resident and migrant grassland bird species (U.S. harvest (Nocera et al. 2011). Fish and Wildlife Service 2010). Hagerman NWR in northern The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereafter USFWS) Texas (14S 708300 E, 3735651 N) was a 4,856-ha refuge solicited regional field research to determine the impacts managed similarly to Tishomingo NWR. Although habitat of site-specific management of prairie restoration and management schemes were similar, Hagerman NWRs Leonard et al • Avian Abundance in Managed Prairies 49 agricultural plots were structurally and compositionally 11.3, 17.5, 20.6 ha respectively), whereas fallow plots totaled different than agricultural plots at Tishomingo NWR. Seven 145.7 ha (6.1, 6.5, 10.7, 11.4, 25.5, 85.5 ha respectively). loam or sandy soil types occurred within the research plots Unharvested wheat fields consisted of winter wheat (Triticum selected at both refuges (Natural Resources Conservation aestivum), arrowleaf clover (Trifolium vesiculosum), hairy Service 2014). We selected nine research plots at each refuge. vetch (Vicia villosa), and common sunflower (Helianthus Three habitat management types: managed prairies, fallow annua), whereas fallow fields consisted of a variety of row plots, and unharvested wheat plots were assigned to three crops, grasses, and herbaceous vegetation (Leonard 2015). plots each. Managed prairies totaled 83.4 ha (10, 10, 12, 12.5, 18.7, 20.2 At Tishomingo NWR, we selected three agricultural fields ha respectively). Vegetation in managed prairies included that were divided into two halves with half assigned to the Kaw big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), Cimarron little Leonardunharvested et al. • Avian wheat Abundance treatment and in the Managed other half Prairies assigned to the bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), Cheyenne indiangrass20 fallow treatment. At Hagerman NWR, 3 plots were selected (Sorghastrum nutans), Blackwell switchgrass (Panicum that had fallow (unplanted for 2–6 yr) or unharvested wheat virgatum), El Reno sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula), patches. Unharvested wheat plots totaled 69.9 ha (6.5, 6.5, 7.5, Texoka buffalo grass (Buchloe dactyloides), and Sabine 435 Table 1. Mean number of detections per point (± SD) of bird species among treatment plots at Tishomingo and Hagerman Table 1. Mean number of detections per point (± SD) of bird species among treatment plots at Tishomingo and Hagerman NWRs, 436 2013–2014.NWRs, 2013–2014. Managed Managed Unharvested Unharvested Prairie Prairie Fallow Fallow Wheat Wheat Species (Tishomingo) (Hagerman) (Tishomingo) (Hagerman) (Tishomingo) (Hagerman) Wild Turkey - 0.05 (0.19) 0.02 (0.08) - - - Killdeer 0.03 (0.04) - 0.01 (0.03) - - 0.01 (0.03) Mourning Dove 0.13 (0.12) 0.20 (0.18) 0.18 (0.17) 0.12 (0.13) 0.20 (0.23) 0.12 (0.13) Yellow-billed Cuckoo 0.02 (0.04) 0.01 (0.02) 0.01 (0.03) - 0.02 (0.04) - Ruby-throated Hummingbird 0.03 (0.03) 0.03 (0.04) 0.05 (0.07) 0.01 (0.04) 0.13 (0.08) - Western Kingbird 0.01 (0.02) 0.03 (0.01) 0.01 (0.02) 0.01 (0.02) 0.03 (0.07) 0.01 (0.02) Eastern Kingbird 0.01 (0.02) 0.01 (0.05) 0.09 (0.15) - 0.03 (0.06) 0.01 (0.02) Scissor-tailed Flycatcher 0.04 (0.05) 0.05 (0.08) 0.14 (0.20) 0.06 (0.08) 0.09 (0.20) 0.08 (0.11) White-eyed Vireo 0.01 (0.02) - - - - - Bell's Vireo 0.03 (0.09) - - - - - Carolina Wren - 0.004 (0.01) 0.01 (0.03) - - - Bewick’s Wren - 0.01 (0.02) - - - - Blue-gray Gnatcatcher 0.17 (0.19) 0.15 (0.18) 0.002 (0.01) 0.01 (0.02) - 0.01 (0.04) Eastern Bluebird 0.05 (0.03) 0.11 (0.17) 0.03 (0.09) 0.47 (0.38) 0.24 (0.57) 0.14 (0.16) Gray Catbird 0.01 (0.02) - - - - - Northern Mockingbird 0.03 (0.05) 0.02 (0.05) 0.01 (0.03) - - - Brown Thrasher 0.01 (0.02) - 0.002 (0.01) - 0.01 (0.02) - Common Yellowthroat 0.01 (0.02) - 0.01 (0.03) - 0.02 (0.04) - Yellow-breasted Chat 0.06 (0.09) - - - - - Field Sparrow 0.01 (0.02) 0.004 (0.01) 0.01 (0.03) - - - Leonard et al. • Avian Abundance in Managed Prairies 0.004 21 Lark Sparrow 0.01 (0.02) 0.004 (0.01) 0.02 (0.05) 0.01 (0.02) - (0.01) Grasshopper Sparrow 0.02 (0.05) 0.01 (0.02) 0.03 (0.05) 0.13 (0.16) 0.02 (0.04) 0.01 (0.02) Northern Cardinal 0.22 (0.18) 0.29 (0.23) 0.02 (0.04)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Predation by Gray Catbird on Brown Thrasher Eggs
    March 2004 Notes 101 PREDATION BY GRAY CATBIRD ON BROWN THRASHER EGGS JAMES W. RIVERS* AND BRETT K. SANDERCOCK Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 (JWR) Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 (BKS) Present address of JWR: Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 *Correspondent: [email protected] ABSTRACT The gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis) has been documented visiting and breaking the eggs of arti®cial nests, but the implications of such observations are unclear because there is little cost in depredating an undefended nest. During the summer of 2001 at Konza Prairie Bio- logical Station, Kansas, we videotaped a gray catbird that broke and consumed at least 1 egg in a brown thrasher (Toxostoma rufum) nest. Our observation was consistent with egg predation because the catbird consumed the contents of the damaged egg after breaking it. The large difference in body mass suggests that a catbird (37 g) destroying eggs in a thrasher (69 g) nest might risk injury if caught in the act of predation and might explain why egg predation by catbirds has been poorly documented. Our observation indicated that the catbird should be considered as an egg predator of natural nests and that single-egg predation of songbird nests should not be attributed to egg removal by female brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) without additional evidence. RESUMEN El paÂjaro gato gris (Dumetella carolinensis) ha sido documentado visitando y rompien- do los huevos de nidos arti®ciales, pero las implicaciones de dichas observaciones no son claras porque hay poco costo por depredar un nido sin defensa.
    [Show full text]
  • Catbird, Gray
    Mockingbirds and Thrashers — Family Mimidae 449 Mockingbirds and Thrashers — Family Mimidae Gray Catbird Dumetella carolinensis Though the Gray Catbird breeds west almost to the coast of British Columbia, it is only a rare vagrant to California—the bulk of the population migrates east of the Rocky Mountains. But the species is on the increase: of 107 reports accepted by the California Bird Records Committee 1884–1999, one third were in just the last four years of this interval. Similarly, of the 20 records of the Gray Catbird in San Diego County, 10 have come since initiation of the field work for this atlas in 1997. Migration: Half of San Diego County’s known cat- Photo by Anthony Mercieca birds have been fall migrants, occurring as early as 24 September (1976, one at Point Loma, S7, K. van Vuren, Cabrillo National Monument, Point Loma 11–17 July 1988 Luther et al. 1979). Besides eight fall records from Point (B. and I. Mazin, Pyle and McCaskie 1992) certainly was. Loma, there is one from the Tijuana River valley 7–8 November 1964 (the only specimen, SDNHM 35095), Winter: Three wintering Gray Catbirds have been report- one from a boat 15 miles off Oceanside 26 October 1983 ed from San Diego County, from Balboa Park (R9) (M. W. Guest, Bevier 1990), and two from Paso Picacho 16 December 1972 (P. Unitt) and from Point Loma 7 Campground (M20) 29 October 1988 (D. W. Aguillard, November 1983–13 March 1984 (V. P. Johnson, Roberson Pyle and McCaskie 1992) and 17 November 2002 (T. 1986) and 31 October 1999–21 January 2000 (D.
    [Show full text]
  • Visual Displays and Their Context in the Painted Bunting
    Wilson Bull., 96(3), 1984, pp. 396-407 VISUAL DISPLAYS AND THEIR CONTEXT IN THE PAINTED BUNTING SCOTT M. LANYON AND CHARLES F. THOMPSON The 12 species in the bunting genus Passerina have proved to be a popular source of material for studies of vocalizations (Rice and Thomp- son 1968; Thompson 1968, 1970, 1972; Shiovitz and Thompson 1970; Forsythe 1974; Payne 1982) migration (Emlen 1967a, b; Emlen et al. 1976) systematics (Sibley and Short 1959; Emlen et al. 1975), and mating systems (Carey and Nolan 1979, Carey 1982). Despite this interest, few detailed descriptions of the behavior of any member of this genus have been published. In this paper we describe aspects of courtship and ter- ritorial behavior of the Painted Bunting (Passerina ciris). STUDY AREA AND METHODS The study was conducted on St. Catherines Island, a barrier island approximately 50 km south of Savannah, Georgia. The 90-ha study area (“Briar Field” Thomas et al. [1978: Fig. 41) on the western side of the island borders extensive salt marshes dominated by cordgrasses (Spartina spp.). The tracts’ evergreen oak forest (Braun 1964:303) consists primarily of oaks (Quercus spp.) and pines (Pinus spp.), with scattered hickories (Carya spp.) and palmettos (Sabal spp. and Serenoe repens) also present. Undergrowth was scanty so that buntings were readily visible when on the ground. As part of a study of mating systems, more than 1800 h were devoted to watching buntings during daily fieldwork in the 1976-1979 breeding seasons. In 1976 and 1977 observations commenced the third week of May, after breeding had begun, and continued until breeding ended in early August.
    [Show full text]
  • Loggerhead Shrike
    EFFECTS OF MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON GRASSLAND BIRDS: LOGGERHEAD SHRIKE Grasslands Ecosystem Initiative Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center U.S. Geological Survey Jamestown, North Dakota 58401 This report is one in a series of literature syntheses on North American grassland birds. The need for these reports was identified by the Prairie Pothole Joint Venture (PPJV), a part of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. The PPJV recently adopted a new goal, to stabilize or increase populations of declining grassland- and wetland-associated wildlife species in the Prairie Pothole Region. To further that objective, it is essential to understand the habitat needs of birds other than waterfowl, and how management practices affect their habitats. The focus of these reports is on management of breeding habitat, particularly in the northern Great Plains. Suggested citation: Dechant, J. A., M. L. Sondreal, D. H. Johnson, L. D. Igl, C. M. Goldade, M. P. Nenneman, A. L. Zimmerman, and B. R. Euliss. 1998 (revised 2002). Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Loggerhead Shrike. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND. 19 pages. Species for which syntheses are available or are in preparation: American Bittern Grasshopper Sparrow Mountain Plover Baird’s Sparrow Marbled Godwit Henslow’s Sparrow Long-billed Curlew Le Conte’s Sparrow Willet Nelson’s Sharp-tailed Sparrow Wilson’s Phalarope Vesper Sparrow Upland Sandpiper Savannah Sparrow Greater Prairie-Chicken Lark Sparrow Lesser Prairie-Chicken Field Sparrow Northern Harrier Clay-colored Sparrow Swainson’s Hawk Chestnut-collared Longspur Ferruginous Hawk McCown’s Longspur Short-eared Owl Dickcissel Burrowing Owl Lark Bunting Horned Lark Bobolink Sedge Wren Eastern Meadowlark Loggerhead Shrike Western Meadowlark Sprague’s Pipit Brown-headed Cowbird EFFECTS OF MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON GRASSLAND BIRDS: LOGGERHEAD SHRIKE Jill A.
    [Show full text]
  • Belize), and Distribution in Yucatan
    University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland Institut of Zoology Ecology of the Black Catbird, Melanoptila glabrirostris, at Shipstern Nature Reserve (Belize), and distribution in Yucatan. J.Laesser Annick Morgenthaler May 2003 Master thesis supervised by Prof. Claude Mermod and Dr. Louis-Félix Bersier CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1. Aim and description of the study 2. Geographic setting 2.1. Yucatan peninsula 2.2. Belize 2.3. Shipstern Nature Reserve 2.3.1. History and previous studies 2.3.2. Climate 2.3.3. Geology and soils 2.3.4. Vegetation 2.3.5. Fauna 3. The Black Catbird 3.1. Taxonomy 3.2. Description 3.3. Breeding 3.4. Ecology and biology 3.5. Distribution and threats 3.6. Current protection measures FIRST PART: BIOLOGY, HABITAT AND DENSITY AT SHIPSTERN 4. Materials and methods 4.1. Census 4.1.1. Territory mapping 4.1.2. Transect point-count 4.2. Sizing and ringing 4.3. Nest survey (from hide) 5. Results 5.1. Biology 5.1.1. Morphometry 5.1.2. Nesting 5.1.3. Diet 5.1.4. Competition and predation 5.2. Habitat use and population density 5.2.1. Population density 5.2.2. Habitat use 5.2.3. Banded individuals monitoring 5.2.4. Distribution through the Reserve 6. Discussion 6.1. Biology 6.2. Habitat use and population density SECOND PART: DISTRIBUTION AND HABITATS THROUGHOUT THE RANGE 7. Materials and methods 7.1. Data collection 7.2. Visit to others sites 8. Results 8.1. Data compilation 8.2. Visited places 8.2.1. Corozalito (south of Shipstern lagoon) 8.2.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds of the East Texas Baptist University Campus with Birds Observed Off-Campus During BIOL3400 Field Course
    Birds of the East Texas Baptist University Campus with birds observed off-campus during BIOL3400 Field course Photo Credit: Talton Cooper Species Descriptions and Photos by students of BIOL3400 Edited by Troy A. Ladine Photo Credit: Kenneth Anding Links to Tables, Figures, and Species accounts for birds observed during May-term course or winter bird counts. Figure 1. Location of Environmental Studies Area Table. 1. Number of species and number of days observing birds during the field course from 2005 to 2016 and annual statistics. Table 2. Compilation of species observed during May 2005 - 2016 on campus and off-campus. Table 3. Number of days, by year, species have been observed on the campus of ETBU. Table 4. Number of days, by year, species have been observed during the off-campus trips. Table 5. Number of days, by year, species have been observed during a winter count of birds on the Environmental Studies Area of ETBU. Table 6. Species observed from 1 September to 1 October 2009 on the Environmental Studies Area of ETBU. Alphabetical Listing of Birds with authors of accounts and photographers . A Acadian Flycatcher B Anhinga B Belted Kingfisher Alder Flycatcher Bald Eagle Travis W. Sammons American Bittern Shane Kelehan Bewick's Wren Lynlea Hansen Rusty Collier Black Phoebe American Coot Leslie Fletcher Black-throated Blue Warbler Jordan Bartlett Jovana Nieto Jacob Stone American Crow Baltimore Oriole Black Vulture Zane Gruznina Pete Fitzsimmons Jeremy Alexander Darius Roberts George Plumlee Blair Brown Rachel Hastie Janae Wineland Brent Lewis American Goldfinch Barn Swallow Keely Schlabs Kathleen Santanello Katy Gifford Black-and-white Warbler Matthew Armendarez Jordan Brewer Sheridan A.
    [Show full text]
  • L O U I S I a N A
    L O U I S I A N A SPARROWS L O U I S I A N A SPARROWS Written by Bill Fontenot and Richard DeMay Photography by Greg Lavaty and Richard DeMay Designed and Illustrated by Diane K. Baker What is a Sparrow? Generally, sparrows are characterized as New World sparrows belong to the bird small, gray or brown-streaked, conical-billed family Emberizidae. Here in North America, birds that live on or near the ground. The sparrows are divided into 13 genera, which also cryptic blend of gray, white, black, and brown includes the towhees (genus Pipilo), longspurs hues which comprise a typical sparrow’s color (genus Calcarius), juncos (genus Junco), and pattern is the result of tens of thousands of Lark Bunting (genus Calamospiza) – all of sparrow generations living in grassland and which are technically sparrows. Emberizidae is brushland habitats. The triangular or cone- a large family, containing well over 300 species shaped bills inherent to most all sparrow species are perfectly adapted for a life of granivory – of crushing and husking seeds. “Of Louisiana’s 33 recorded sparrows, Sparrows possess well-developed claws on their toes, the evolutionary result of so much time spent on the ground, scratching for seeds only seven species breed here...” through leaf litter and other duff. Additionally, worldwide, 50 of which occur in the United most species incorporate a substantial amount States on a regular basis, and 33 of which have of insect, spider, snail, and other invertebrate been recorded for Louisiana. food items into their diets, especially during Of Louisiana’s 33 recorded sparrows, Opposite page: Bachman Sparrow the spring and summer months.
    [Show full text]
  • Henslow's Sparrows: an Up-Date by Madeline J.W
    59 Henslow's Sparrows: An Up-Date by Madeline J.W. Austen Introduction Knapton 119821 reported that only In Canada, Henslow's Sparrow 17 individuals in seven widely (Ammodramus henslowiil has been scattered areas across southern known to breed in Ontario and in Ontario were detected during the southwestern Quebec. In recent 1981 breeding season. In 1983, the years, Henslow's Sparrow has been known Ontario population of known to breed only in Ontario, with Henslow's Sparrows was 25 to 29 the majority of nesting sites in the individuals at 13 sites (Ontario mid-1980s being located in the Breeding Bird Atlas; Risley 19831. southern part of Hastings, Lennox­ During the Atlas of the Breeding Addington, and Frontenac Counties, Birds of Ontario, the Henslow's and in Prince Edward County. It also Sparrow was found in only 38 has occurred in Grey, Bruce, and squares, and in only 8% of these was Dufferin Counties. Figure 1 shows breeding confirmed (Cadman et al. the breeding distribution of 19871. At this time, it was unlikely Henslow's Sparrow in Ontario, based that the total provincial population on data from the Breeding Bird Atlas exceeded 50 pairs in any given year and the Ontario Rare Breeding Bird (Knapton 1987). The ORBBP received Program (ORBBPI. information on only 23 Henslow's This article provides an up-date Sparrow sites, seven of which were on the status of Henslow's Sparrow active during the 1986 to 1991 period. and summarizes the results of survey However, breeding site information efforts since Knapton (19861. from the Kingston area was not reported to the ORBBP.
    [Show full text]
  • Provisional List of Birds of the Rio Tahuauyo Areas, Loreto, Peru
    Provisional List of Birds of the Rio Tahuauyo areas, Loreto, Peru Compiled by Carol R. Foss, Ph.D. and Josias Tello Huanaquiri, Guide Status based on expeditions from Tahuayo Logde and Amazonia Research Center TINAMIFORMES: Tinamidae 1. Great Tinamou Tinamus major 2. White- throated Tinamou Tinamus guttatus 3. Cinereous Tinamou Crypturellus cinereus 4. Little Tinamou Crypturellus soui 5. Undulated Tinamou Crypturellus undulates 6. Variegated Tinamou Crypturellus variegatus 7. Bartlett’s Tinamou Crypturellus bartletti ANSERIFORMES: Anhimidae 8. Horned Screamer Anhima cornuta ANSERIFORMES: Anatidae 9. Muscovy Duck Cairina moschata 10. Blue-winged Teal Anas discors 11. Masked Duck Nomonyx dominicus GALLIFORMES: Cracidae 12. Spix’s Guan Penelope jacquacu 13. Blue-throated Piping-Guan Pipile cumanensis 14. Speckled Chachalaca Ortalis guttata 15. Wattled Curassow Crax globulosa 16. Razor-billed Curassow Mitu tuberosum GALLIFORMES: Odontophoridae 17. Marbled Wood-Quall Odontophorus gujanensis 18. Starred Wood-Quall Odontophorus stellatus PELECANIFORMES: Phalacrocoracidae 19. Neotropic Cormorant Phalacrocorax brasilianus PELECANIFORMES: Anhingidae 20. Anhinga Anhinga anhinga CICONIIFORMES: Ardeidae 21. Rufescent Tiger-Heron Tigrisoma lineatum 22. Agami Heron Agamia agami 23. Boat-billed Heron Cochlearius cochlearius 24. Zigzag Heron Zebrilus undulatus 25. Black-crowned Night-Heron Nycticorax nycticorax 26. Striated Heron Butorides striata 27. Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis 28. Cocoi Heron Ardea cocoi 29. Great Egret Ardea alba 30. Cappet Heron Pilherodius pileatus 31. Snowy Egret Egretta thula 32. Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea CICONIIFORMES: Threskiornithidae 33. Green Ibis Mesembrinibis cayennensis 34. Roseate Spoonbill Platalea ajaja CICONIIFORMES: Ciconiidae 35. Jabiru Jabiru mycteria 36. Wood Stork Mycteria Americana CICONIIFORMES: Cathartidae 37. Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura 38. Lesser Yellow-headed Vulture Cathartes burrovianus 39.
    [Show full text]
  • Aou Alpha Codes for Wayne National Forest Birds 1
    AOU ALPHA CODES FOR WAYNE NATIONAL FOREST BIRDS Species AOU Species AOU Alpha Alpha Code Code Acadian Flycatcher ACFL Dickcissel DICK Alder Flycatcher ALFL Double-crested Cormorant DCCO American Black Duck ABDU Downy Woodpecker DOWO American Coot AMCO Eastern Bluebird EABL American Crow AMCR Eastern Kingbird EAKI American Goldfinch AMGO Eastern Meadowlark EAME American Kestrel MAKE Eastern Phoebe EAPH American Redstart AMRE Eastern Screech Owl EASO American Robin AMRO Eastern Tufted Titmouse ETTI American Woodcock AMWO Eastern Wood-pewee EWPE Bald Eagle BAEA European Starling EUST Baltimore Oriole BAOR Field Sparrow FISP Bank Swallow BANS Golden-winged Warbler GWWA Barn Swallow BARS Grasshopper Sparrow GRSP Barred Owl BAOW Gray Catbird GRCA Bay-breasted Warbler BBWA Great Blue Heron GBHE Belted Kingfisher BEKI Great Crested Flycatcher GCFL Black Vulture BLVU Great Horned Owl GHOW Black-and-white Warbler BAWW Great Horned Owl GHOW Black-billed Cuckoo BBCU Green Heron GRHE Black-capped Chickadee BCCH Hairy Woodpecker HAWO Black-crowned Night-Heron BCNH Henslow’s Sparrow HESP Blackpoll Warbler BLPW Hermit Thrush HETH Black-throated Green Warbler BTNW Hooded Merganser HOME Blue Grosbeak BLGR Hooded Warbler HOWA Blue Jay BLJA Horned Lark HOLA Blue-gray Gnatcatcher BGGN House Finch HOFI Blue-winged Warbler BWWA House Sparrow HOSP Bobolink BOBO House Wren HOWR Broad-winged Hawk BWHA Indigo Bunting INBU Brown Thrasher BRTH Kentucky Warbler KEWA Brown-headed Cowbird BHCO Killdeer KILL Canada Goose CAGO Louisiana Waterthrush LOWA Carolina Chickadee
    [Show full text]
  • Field Checklist (PDF)
    Surf Scoter Marbled Godwit OWLS (Strigidae) Common Raven White-winged Scoter Ruddy Turnstone Eastern Screech Owl CHICKADEES (Paridae) Common Goldeneye Red Knot Great Horned Owl Black-capped Chickadee Barrow’s Goldeneye Sanderling Snowy Owl Boreal Chickadee Bufflehead Semipalmated Sandpiper Northern Hawk-Owl Tufted Titmouse Hooded Merganser Western Sandpiper Barred Owl NUTHATCHES (Sittidae) Common Merganser Least Sandpiper Great Gray Owl Red-breasted Nuthatch Red-breasted Merganser White-rumped Sandpiper Long-eared Owl White-breasted Nuthatch Ruddy Duck Baird’s Sandpiper Short-eared Owl CREEPERS (Certhiidae) VULTURES (Cathartidae) Pectoral Sandpiper Northern Saw-Whet Owl Brown Creeper Turkey Vulture Purple Sandpiper NIGHTJARS (Caprimulgidae) WRENS (Troglodytidae) HAWKS & EAGLES (Accipitridae) Dunlin Common Nighthawk Carolina Wren Osprey Stilt Sandpiper Whip-poor-will House Wren Bald Eagle Buff-breasted Sandpiper SWIFTS (Apodidae) Winter Wren Northern Harrier Ruff Chimney Swift Marsh Wren Sharp-shinned Hawk Short-billed Dowitcher HUMMINGBIRDS (Trochilidae) THRUSHES (Muscicapidae) Cooper’s Hawk Wilson’s Snipe Ruby-throated Hummingbird Golden-crowned Kinglet Northern Goshawk American Woodcock KINGFISHERS (Alcedinidae) Ruby-crowned Kinglet Red-shouldered Hawk Wilson’s Phalarope Belted Kingfisher Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Broad-winged Hawk Red-necked Phalarope WOODPECKERS (Picidae) Eastern Bluebird Red-tailed Hawk Red Phalarope Red-headed Woodpecker Veery Rough-legged Hawk GULLS & TERNS (Laridae) Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Gray-cheeked Thrush Golden
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology, Morphology, and Behavior in the New World Wood Warblers
    Ecology, Morphology, and Behavior in the New World Wood Warblers A dissertation presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy Brandan L. Gray August 2019 © 2019 Brandan L. Gray. All Rights Reserved. 2 This dissertation titled Ecology, Morphology, and Behavior in the New World Wood Warblers by BRANDAN L. GRAY has been approved for the Department of Biological Sciences and the College of Arts and Sciences by Donald B. Miles Professor of Biological Sciences Florenz Plassmann Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 ABSTRACT GRAY, BRANDAN L., Ph.D., August 2019, Biological Sciences Ecology, Morphology, and Behavior in the New World Wood Warblers Director of Dissertation: Donald B. Miles In a rapidly changing world, species are faced with habitat alteration, changing climate and weather patterns, changing community interactions, novel resources, novel dangers, and a host of other natural and anthropogenic challenges. Conservationists endeavor to understand how changing ecology will impact local populations and local communities so efforts and funds can be allocated to those taxa/ecosystems exhibiting the greatest need. Ecological morphological and functional morphological research form the foundation of our understanding of selection-driven morphological evolution. Studies which identify and describe ecomorphological or functional morphological relationships will improve our fundamental understanding of how taxa respond to ecological selective pressures and will improve our ability to identify and conserve those aspects of nature unable to cope with rapid change. The New World wood warblers (family Parulidae) exhibit extensive taxonomic, behavioral, ecological, and morphological variation.
    [Show full text]