Kryštof Chmel, Samuel Jepi & Tania Areori

Yellow‐Billed Syma torotoro Common Tanysiptera galasea Outline

 Methods • Study Site • Field Methods • Data collection and analysis  RhResearch QQtiuestions  Results  Discussion Method

Study SteSite ‐ Waaganang 3

 Closed Primary Forest ‐ 8 Sites Field Methods Total of 178m nets

 4 sets with 3 Mist nets: • 1. understorey • 2. Mid level 5 m • 3. Top Level 10m  Each set was opened for 3‐4 days

 Nets checked 1hr and 30 min intervals  Opened nets: 6 am  Closed nets: after 5 pm  Study carried out on the 6th –14th August Data Collection  Species  Net height  Date and Time  Sex and Age  Moult, Brood Patch and Biometric measures  Nail Polish marking for recapture control Data AliAnalysis

 MS Excel 2007  Statistica 9  Repeated Measures ANOVA  Canoco 4.5  RDA ‐ Redundancy Analysis Questions 1. Are canopy mist nets more or less effective than ground nets?

2. Is the abundance of different between high (10m), Mid (5m) and ground level?

3. Is there a difference in the species composition between high (10m), Mid (5m) and ground mist nets? Results

• 178 m Nets; 7.5 Days • Total of 81 Birds • 29 Species 12 Species Caught in all 8 Sites 10

8 dividuals nn i

6 of

4 mber uu N 2

0 PtilPulc eliMega eryChry PtilCaer PitoFerr GallRufi onaGutt CiciRegi onaRubi onaChry oxoNova DicrBrac ymaToro ArseInsu oecHypo RhipRufi MicrPusi AiluBucc ChalStep MeliAnal CratMuri CeyxLepi AlceAzur TanyGala PomaIsid onaMana MelaNigr CollMega RhipThre GG TT MM SS PP MM MM MM M Number of captured birds did not differ in dependence on mist net height (F14 = 0.56720; p = 0.876864). Significant difference in number of captured birds among sites (F14 = 2.431; p = 0.049). Species preference

 Tanysiptera galatea 10

 Ceyx lepidus 8

 Melanocharis nigra 8

 Monarcha madanensis 5

 Meliphaga analoga 6

 Toxorhamphus novaeguineae 6 -1.0 1.0 101.0 -1.0 H2 TanyGala M eliAna H3 l ToxoNova M elaNi MonaMana grg CeyxLepi H1 Discussion

 Comparing with data of Katka Tvardikova  2010, November 18  200 m nets; 6 days 16  93 individuals; 21 species ls

aa 14 12 10 Individu

f oo

8 6 4 Number 2 0 igr uri irh ala sul epi nal aer eye zur oro ega ega ord ova acu isid ypo Flav hlor Rufi nn LL KK aa rr NN GG TT SS CC AA MM NN MM hh MM MM HH MM Gar Ptil Pitt Gall Pito Alce Poe Meli Crat Ceyx Tany Phil Mela Coll ArseI Mac Toxo Meli Syma Rhip GeryC Bird Species  Different Bird Species within the two studies.  15 species –SamTanKry  6 species ‐ Katka

6 Current Study Data 2.5 Katka Tvardikova's Study

5 2 ecies ecies pp 4 S

Sp

1.5 Bird Bird

3 of of

1 er er bb bb 2 Num Num 1 0.5

0 0 undrestorey midstorey canopy all levels understorey midstorey canopy all levels  No difference in the number of captured birds between net heights shows equal distribution of birds in the forest.

 There is a difference in the number of individuals between sites.  Food resources can be higher at various sites  Birds can follow certain flight‐routes

 No species preferences confirmed  Data set too insufficient  Distance between net heights were not far apart enough to show preference Thank you for your attention