The Journal of Threatened Taxa (JoTT) is dedicated to building evidence for conservaton globally by publishing peer-reviewed artcles OPEN ACCESS online every month at a reasonably rapid rate at www.threatenedtaxa.org. All artcles published in JoTT are registered under Creatve Commons Atributon 4.0 Internatonal License unless otherwise mentoned. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproducton, and distributon of artcles in any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publicaton.
Journal of Threatened Taxa Building evidence for conservaton globally www.threatenedtaxa.org ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print) Communication
Nest tree preference shown by Ring-necked Parakeet Psittacula krameri (Scopoli, 1769) in northern districts of Tamil Nadu, India
M. Pandian
26 April 2021 | Vol. 13 | No. 5 | Pages: 18189–18199 DOI: 10.11609/jot.5991.13.5.18189-18199
For Focus, Scope, Aims, and Policies, visit htps://threatenedtaxa.org/index.php/JoTT/aims_scope For Artcle Submission Guidelines, visit htps://threatenedtaxa.org/index.php/JoTT/about/submissions For Policies against Scientfc Misconduct, visit htps://threatenedtaxa.org/index.php/JoTT/policies_various For reprints, contact
The opinions expressed by the authors do not refect the views of the Journal of Threatened Taxa, Wildlife Informaton Liaison Development Society, Zoo Outreach Organizaton, or any of the partners. The journal, the publisher, the host, and the part- Publisher & Host ners are not responsible for the accuracy of the politcal boundaries shown in the maps by the authors.
Member
Threatened Taxa
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print) OPEN ACCESS htps://doi.org/10.11609/jot.5991.13.5.18189-18199
#5991 | Received 14 April 2020 | Final received 17 February 2021 | Finally accepted 01 April 2021
COMMUNICATION
Nest tree preference shown by Ring-necked Parakeet Psitacula krameri (Scopoli, 1769) in northern districts of Tamil Nadu, India
M. Pandian
No. F1901, AIS Housing Complex, Natesan Nagar West, Virugambakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600092, India. [email protected] Tamil Abstract RUf;fk;: tl jkpHfj;jpd; VG khtl;lA;fspy; cs;s 71 fpuhkA;fspy; gr;irf;fpspfspd; TL fl;o thGk; thHplA;fs;, fpspfspd; vz;zpf;if, gr;irf;fpspfSf;Fk; BtW rpw;wpdA;fSf;fpilBaa[k; cs;s bjhlu;g[fs; kw;Wk; mrhjhuzkhd/ FiwghL gz;g[fs; gw;wp ne;j mwpf;ifapy; tptupf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ. Ie;J FLk;gk;, MW Bgupdk; kw;Wk; vl;L rpw;wpdA;fsisr; Bru;e;j 284 kuA;fspYk;, 13 Bfhapy;fs;/fl;llA;fspYk; 797 TLfs; (500 gadpy; cs;s TL kw;Wk; 297 gadpy; ny;yhj TL) kw;Wk; 1119 gr;irf;fpspfs; fzf;bfLf;fg;gl;ld. mjpfg;goahf 320 TLfSk;, 469 fpspfSk; gid kuj;jpy; nUe;jJ. mjw;F mLj;jgoahf bjd;id, thif, nYg;ig, Nr;rk; kw;Wk; MykuA;fspy; mjpfkhd TLfSk;, fpspfSk; nUe;jJ. ne;j gr;irf;fpspfs; TLfl;l capUs;s kuA;fistpl nwe;j kuA;fisBa mjpfk; Bju;t[ bra;fpwJ. 63.4% TLfs; (n=505) kw;Wk; 65.1% vz;zpf;ifapyhd fpspfs; (n=729) nwe;j gid, bjd;id kw;Wk; Nr;rkuA;fspy; fhzg;gl;lJ. Abstract:gr;irf;fpspfs; ThisbghJthf paper tptrha pertains epyA;fs;, to ePu;epiyfs;, the nestng kdpju;fs; aspects trpg;gplk; of Bghd;wtw;wpw;FPsitacula kramerimUfhikapy; with cs;s specifc kuA;fisa[k; reference kw;Wk; Bfhapy;/fl;llA;fisa[k; to nestng-related TLfl;Ltjw;F habitats, Bju;t[number bra;fpwJ. of individualsgpau;rdpd; it tu;f;fr;encountered, Brhjidapy; gr;irf;fpspfs;inter-specifc Fwpg;gpl;l interactons, nlA;fisBa TLfl;Ltjw;Fand abnormalites Bju;t[ bra;fpwJ in 71 vd villagesbjupate;Js;sJ. covering gr;irf;fpspfSf;Fk;, seven northern BtW rpw;wpdA;fSf;fshd districts of Tamilg[wh, Me;ij, Nadu. ne;jpa Ad; Buhtu;, kuA;bfhj;jp Mfpa gwitfSf;Fk; TLfl;LtJ rk;ke;jkhf Jisfs; gA;fPL bra;tjpy; Bghl;o epyt[fpwJ. fpspfspd; myF, +f;fpd; Bky; cs;s jir Mfpatw;wpy; FiwghLfSk;, rpy totalfpspfspd; of rpwfpd; 797 epwk;nests kw;Wk; (500 rpl;lhrpd; actve vd;w and Beha[k; 297 fz;lwpag;gl;ld. non-actve nests) and 1,119 individuals were enumerated on 284 trees and 13 temples/buildings belonging to eight species, seven genera, and fve families. The highest number of nests (320) and birds (469) occurred on Borassus fabellifer L., followed by Cocos nucifera L., Albizia lebbeck (L.) Benth., Madhuca longifolia J.F.Gmel., Phoenix sylvestris (L.) Roxb., and Ficus Tamil Abstract RUf;fk:; tl jkpHfj;jpd; VG khtl;lA;fspy; cs;s 71 fpuhkA;fspy; gr;irf;fpspfspd; TL fl;o thGk; thHplA;fs;, fpspfspd; vz;zpf;if, gr;irf;fpspfSf;Fk; benghalensisBtW rpw;wpdA;fSf;fpilBa L. This speciesa[k; cs;s prefersbjhlu;g[fs; dead kw;Wk; trees mrhjhuzkhd than living/ FiwghL trees for gz;g[fs; nestng. gw;wp Thene;j study mwpf;ifapy; reveals tptupf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ. that 63.4% nests Ie;J (n= FLk;gk;, 505) andMW 65.1%Bgupdk; birdskw;Wk; (n=vl;L 729) rpw;wpdA;fsisr; were found Bru;e;j on dead284 kuA;fspYk;, trees of 13B . fabelliferBfhapy;fs;/fl;llA;fspYk;, C. nucifera 797, and TLfs; P. sylvestris(500 gadpy;. Theycs;s generallyTL kw;Wk; prefer 297 gadpy; to build ny;y hjnests TL) on kw;Wk; trees 1119situated gr;irf; nearfpspfs; agriculturalfzf;bfLf;fg;gl;ld. lands, mjpfg;goahf followed 320by thoseTLfSk;, near 469 fpspfSk;water bodies,gid kuj;jpy; human nUe;jJ. setlements, mjw;F mLj;jgoahf and temples/buildings. bjd;id, thif, nYg;ig, Pearson’s Nr;rk; chi-squarekw;Wk; MykuA;fspy; test indicates mjpfkhd thatTLfSk;, the birdsfpspfSk; showed nUe;jJ. preference ne;j gr;irf;fpspfs; towards TLfl;l certain capUs;s nestng kuA;fistpl sites/nestng nwe;j species. kuA;fisBa Inter-specifc mjpfk; Bju;t[ interactons bra;fpwJ. 63.4% occurred TLfs; between(n=505) kw;Wk;P. krameri 65.1% vz;zpf;ifapyhd fpspfs; (n=729) nwe;j gid, bjd;id kw;Wk; Nr;rkuA;fspy; fhzg;gl;lJ. gr;irf;fpspfs; bghJthf tptrha epyA;fs;, ePu;epiyfs;, kdpju;fs; trpg;gplk; andBghd;wtw;wpw;F Blue Rock mUfhikapy; Pigeon, Spotedcs;s kuA;fisa[k; Owlet, Indiankw;Wk; Bfhapy;/fl;llA;fisa[k;Roller, and Black-rumped TLfl;Ltjw;F Flameback Bju;t[ bra;fpwJ. for sharing gpau;rdpd; of cavites/holesit tu;f;fr; Brhjidapy; for constructon gr;irf;fpspfs; of Fwpg;gpl;l nests. AbnormalitesnlA;fisBa TLfl;Ltjw;F in bird’s beak, Bju;t[ cere,bra;fpwJ colour vd of bjupate;Js;sJ.feathers, and agr;irf;fpspfSf;Fk;, suspected psitacine BtW beakrpw;wpdA;fSf;fshd & feather diseaseg[wh, Me;ij, (PBFD) ne;jpa wered; Buhtu;,observed. kuA;bfhj;jp Mfpa gwitfSf;Fk; TLfl;LtJ rk;ke;jkhf Jisfs; gA;fPL bra;tjpy; Bghl;o epyt[fpwJ. fpspfspd; myF, +f;fpd; Bky; cs;s jir Mfpatw;wpy; FiwghLfSk;, rpy fpspfspd; rpwfpd; epwk; kw;Wk; rpl;lhrpd; vd;w Beha[k; fz;lwpag;gl;ld. Keywords: Actve nests, beak deformity, inter-specifc competton, nestng trees.
Tamil Abstract RUf;fk;: tl jkpHfj;jpd; VG khtl;lA;fspy; cs;s 71 fpuhkA;fspy; gr;irf;fpspfspd; TL fl;o thGk; thHplA;fs;, fpspfspd; vz;zpf;if, gr;irf;fpspfSf;Fk; BtW rpw;wpdA;fSf;fpilBaa[k; cs;s bjhlu;g[fs; kw;Wk; mrhjhuzkhd/ FiwghL gz;g[fs; gw;wp ne;j mwpf;ifapy; tptupf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ. Ie;J FLk;gk;, MW Bgupdk; kw;Wk; vl;L rpw;wpdA;fsisr; Bru;e;j 284 kuA;fspYk;, 13 Bfhapy;fs;/fl;llA;fspYk; 797 TLfs; (500 gadpy; cs;s TL kw;Wk; 297 gadpy; ny;yhj TL) kw;Wk; 1119 gr;irf;fpspfs; fzf;bfLf;fg;gl;ld. mjpfg;goahf 320 TLfSk;, 469 fpspfSk; gid kuj;jpy; nUe;jJ. mjw;F mLj;jgoahf bjd;id, thif, nYg;ig, Nr;rk; kw;Wk; MykuA;fspy; mjpfkhd TLfSk;, fpspfSk; nUe;jJ. ne;j gr;irf;fpspfs; TLfl;l capUs;s kuA;fistpl nwe;j kuA;fisBa mjpfk; Bju;t[ bra;fpwJ. 63.4% TLfs; (n=505) kw;Wk; 65.1% vz;zpf;ifapyhd fpspfs; (n=729) nwe;j gid, bjd;id kw;Wk; Nr;rkuA;fspy; fhzg;gl;lJ. gr;irf;fpspfs; bghJthf tptrha epyA;fs;, ePu;epiyfs;, kdpju;fs; trpg;gplk; Bghd;wtw;wpw;F mUfhikapy; cs;s kuA;fisa[k; kw;Wk; Bfhapy;/fl;llA;fisa[k; TLfl;Ltjw;F Bju;t[ bra;fpwJ. gpau;rdpd; it tu;f;fr; Brhjidapy; gr;irf;fpspfs; Fwpg;gpl;l nlA;fisBa TLfl;Ltjw;F Bju;t[ bra;fpwJ vd bjupate;Js;sJ. gr;irf;fpspfSf;Fk;, BtW rpw;wpdA;fSf;fshd g[wh, Me;ij, ne;jpad; Buhtu;, kuA;bfhj;jp Mfpa gwitfSf;Fk; TLfl;LtJ rk;ke;jkhf Jisfs; gA;fPL bra;tjpy; Bghl;o epyt[fpwJ. fpspfspd; myF, +f;fpd; Bky; cs;s jir Mfpatw;wpy; FiwghLfSk;, rpy fpspfspd; rpwfpd; epwk; kw;Wk; rpl;lhrpd; vd;w Beha[k; fz;lwpag;gl;ld.
Editor: V. Gokula, Natonal College, Tiruchirappalli, India. Date of publicaton: 26 April 2021 (online & print)
Citaton: Pandian, M. (2021). Nest tree preference shown by Ring-necked Parakeet Psitacula krameri (Scopoli, 1769) in northern districts of Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(5): 18189–18199. htps://doi.org/10.11609/jot.5991.13.5.18189-18199
Copyright: © Pandian 2021. Creatve Commons Atributon 4.0 Internatonal License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproducton, and distributon of this artcle in any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publicaton.
Funding: None.
Competng interests: The author declares no competng interests.
Author details: M. Pandian has completed MSc, PhD in Botany, and BLIS from University of Madras and Bachelor of Educaton (BEd) from Annamalai University. His area of interest is the ecology of birds and published a few papers on house sparrows and waver birds. He is serving in Tamil Nadu Police Department.
Acknowledgements: I thank D. Balaji (Villupuram), S. Kamarajan (Minnal), & V. Sumathi (Chennai) for assistance in data collecton, S. Suresh, assistant professor (University of Madras), and A. Giridharan (Minnal) for help with data analysis & photography.
18189 J TT Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian INTRODUCTION because its populaton appears to be increasing but in view of its popularity as a pet and control by farmers The Ring-necked Parakeet or Rose-ringed Parakeet due to its invasiveness, this has reduced its numbers in Psitacula krameri (Scopoli, 1769) (Aves: Psitaciformes: its natve range (BirdLife Internatonal 2018). Except the Psitaculidae) is a natve of the Indian subcontnent and above few works, no literatures are available on the study Sub-Saharian Africa and now occurs in 35 countries of the nestng habitats and abnormalites of P. krameri (Menchet et al. 2016) such as Britain, Belgium, the in Tamil Nadu. Hence, this study was carried out to fll Netherlands, Germany, and Spain (Braun & Wink 2013). the gaps. The objectves of this study are to assess the A subspecies P. krameri manilensis is distributed in nestng tree preference of P. krameri, and identfcaton southern India and Sri Lanka (BirdLife Internatonal 2018). of the nestng sites. Intensive trade, accidental or deliberate release of this species into new environments and its adaptaton has led to the establishment of viable populatons outside MATERIALS AND METHODS its natve range (Strubbe & Mathygen 2009; Neo 2012). Tolerance to human presence, an omnivorous diet and a Study area great reproductve rate (Thabethe et al. 2013) make them The present study was carried out in 71 villages in successful invasive alien species and are even considered seven districts of northern Tamil Nadu, viz., Chennai, pests in the introduced European countries (Strubbe & Thiruvallur, Ranipet, Kancheepuram, Chengelpet, Mathygen 2007). Many bird species use cavites as Villupuram, and Kallakurichi spread over 17,680km2 (Fig. nestng sites, as it reduces the risk of predaton more 1). Agriculture is the primary occupaton in these areas than other nest sites (Nice 1957; Cody 1985; Newton except Chennai City and adjoining areas. The major 1994). Psitacula krameri depends on trunk holes/ crops in the study area are Oryza satva L., Sorghum cavites for their reproducton. They compete with other bicolor (L.) Moench, Pennisetum glaucumi (L.) R.Br., birds for nest-cavites due to their aggressive behaviour Eleusine coracana Gaertn., Setaria italica (L.) P.Beauvois., in Mauritus (Jones 1980) and Belgium (Strubbe & Saccharum ofcinarum L. (Poaceae), Vigna radiata (L.) Mathyen 2009). In India, they widely inhabit several R.Wilczek., and Arachis hypogaea L. (Fabaceae). Small- habitats (Rasmussen & Anderton 2005) and breeding scale cultvaton of ornamental fowers, vegetables, occurs during December–May. In northern India, about and fruits also occurs. The maximum and minimum 15% of P. krameri populatons build their nests in wall temperatures of these districts are 37oC and 28oC, holes or crevices in buildings (Grandi et al. 2016). In view respectvely. The average annual rainfall of the state is of the limited resources of nest-cavites, inter-specifc 907mm (Tamil Nadu 2020). compettons exist between P. krameri and other birds (Wesolowski 2007; Cornelius 2008). This species is considered a major agricultural pest in METHODS its natve range (Khan 2002b) and in countries where it has invaded (Schackermann et al. 2014). The birds consume Three informants from villages who were traditonally dry & feshy fruits and seeds (Ali & Ripley 1968, 1987); engaged in farming and well acquainted with the locaton they cause considerable damage to agricultural crops of tall trees, groves, and birds in the study districts were such as corn (Zea mays L.), sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) selected. Along with them areas were identfed that Moench), paddy (Oryza satva L.), safower (Carthamus had considerable populatons of P. krameri and their tnctorius L.), sunfower (Helianthus annus L.), fruits, and nestng sites in 71 villages covering seven districts in stored grains (Shivanarayan et al. 1981; Dhindsa & Saina the northern region of Tamil Nadu. The determined 1994; Mukherjee et al. 2000; Shivashankar & Subramanya nestng sites were surveyed during the breeding season 2008). Abnormalites/deformites in beak, cere, and from 01 November 2019 to 31 March 2020 between colour were observed among P. krameri individuals due 06.00 & 09.00 h and 15.00 & 18.00 h when the birds to various reasons (Low 1992; Zwart 1995; Butler 2003; are usually actve. The individuals and number of nests Kanwar 2019). Gokula et al. (1999) observed intra- were determined using total count method (Bibby et specifc diferences between Psitacula cyanocephala al. 2000). P. krameri usually follow communal roostng and P. columboides in Siruvani of Tamil Nadu. during non-breeding periods and in the breeding season The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species has the fock splits and moves to various habitats searching evaluated the status of this bird as ‘Least Concern’ for cavites to construct nests. Hence, the movements
18190 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian J TT
Figure 1. Study area, a—India with Tamil Nadu State highlighted | b—seven districts that are the study sites in Tamil Nadu | c—seven northern districts. of birds, the nestng trees, excavatng cavites on the 0.05. Photographs and videos were taken using Nikon trunks, holes and crevices in temples/buildings, entry and P1000 digital camera. exit of birds from such cavites, number of nests, actve/ non-actve nests, and inter-specifc interactons with other birds for sharing nestng sites were observed using RESULTS binoculars without causing any disturbance to the birds. The actve nest cavites were ascertained by watching the Psitacula krameri individuals and their preference of frequent visits of birds to the cavites, carrying nestng nestng sites materials: prolonged presence of any one of the pair in In the present study, a total of 284 trees belonging the cavity was presumed as the birds incubatng eggs, to fve families, seven genera, and eight species were and prey delivery to hatchlings. Non-actve/abandoned found with nests of P. krameri, of which Borassus cavites were ascertained by non-visitng of birds to the fabellifer L. harboured the maximum numbers of nests cavites during the study period afer excavatng cavites. (n= 164; 55.2%), followed by Cocos nucifera L. (n= 90; The eggs and other breeding actvites were not studied. 30.3%), Albizia lebbeck (L.) Benth. (n= 10; 3.4%), and Locatons of the nestng trees and temples/buildings Madhuca longifolia J.F.Macbr. (n= 9; 3%). Temples/ were determined using GPS. Pearson’s chi-square test buildings shared about 4.4% of nestng sites. A total of was applied to determine whether Ring-necked Parakeet 797 nests (500 actve nests and 297 non-actve nests) individuals select trees, temples/buildings equally across and 1,119 individuals of P. krameri were enumerated on the study area for constructon of nests using SPSS the 297 nestng sites (nestng trees -284 and temples/ (Statstcal Package for Social Sciences) version 25.0 buildings-13) in seven districts (Table 1). Maximum of 72 sofware. The test of signifcance was assessed at p< nests and 88 birds were observed in Gadavari Kandigai
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 18191 J TT Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian
Figure 2. Distributon of P. krameri populaton and their nests in various habitats.
Village and in four villages no nests were counted but test revealed that there exists statstcally signifcant individuals of P. krameri were enumerated. The details associaton between nestng sites (trees/temples/ of villages containing nests and birds are given in Table 2. buildings) and the number of birds (p< 0.05), nests (p< Of the total B. fabellifer trees (164) enumerated in 0.05), actve nests (p< 0.000) and non-actve nests (p< the study area, 158 were dead and six were living trees. 0.05) in the study area. Among B. fabeliifer, maximum of 98.1% nests (n= 314) and 96.2% birds (n= 451) were found on dead trees Preference of habitats for nestng and only 1.9% nests (n= 6), and 3.8% birds (n= 18) were The study also tested the relatonship between the enumerated on living B. fabellifer trees. selecton of nestng sites and surrounding habitats such Out of 797 nests enumerated, 63.4% nests (n= 505) as agricultural lands, water bodies, human setlements, were found on dead trees of B. fabellifer, C. nucifera, and temples/buildings by P. krameri populatons (Fig. 2). and P. sylvestris. Similarly out of 1,119 birds counted, About 39.4% of nestng sites (n= 117), 29.1% nests (n= 65.1% birds (n= 729) were observed on these dead trees. 234), and 33% birds (n= 369) occurred near agricultural About 26% nests (n= 208) and 16.8% birds (n= 188) were lands. Thirty-fve per cent of nestng sites (n= 104), counted on temples and buildings. The remaining 10.3% 22.8% nests (n= 182), and 24.3% birds (n= 272) occurred nests (n= 84) and 16.4% birds (n= 184) were found on the adjacent to water bodies such as bunds of lakes, ponds, living trees of B. fabellifer, M. longifoia, F. religiosa, F. rivers, or canals. About 22.2% nestng sites (n= 66), 28.3% benghalensis, A. indica, and A. lebbeck. Except roostng nests (n= 226), and 28.1% birds (n= 314) were found near of birds, no nests were found on F. religiosa and A. indica. human setlement areas; 19.5% nests (n= 155), and 14.6% Out of total nests (797) enumerated during the current birds (n= 164) were counted on 13 temples/buildings breeding season, 62.7% (n= 500) were actve nests and (3.4%). The study also revealed that a maximum of actve the remaining 37.3% nests (n= 297) were non-actve nests 35.2% (n= 176) were found on trees located in the nests. The study reveals that the birds constructed 72.2% agricultural areas, followed by 26.6% actve nests (n= 133) of actve nests (n= 361) on the trunk cavites of three near water bodies, 24.6% nests (n= 124) in the human palm species, followed by 17.4% actve nests (n= 87) on setlement areas, and 12.6% nests (n= 63) on temples/ temples/buildings and 10.4% actve nests (n= 52) on living buildings (Image 1). Statstcally a signifcant associaton trees, viz., B. fabellifer, M. longifolia, F. benghalensis, exists between the type of habitats such as agricultural and A. lebbeck. lands, water bodies, residental areas, temple & number Chi-square test was used to determine whether of birds (p< 0.05), nests (p< 0.05), actve nests (p< 0.05), any signifcance existed between the type of nestng and non-actve nests (p< 0.05). Hence, all four types of sites such as trees, temples/ buildings and the number habitats had an impact on the number of birds and nests of birds, nests, actve nests and non-actve nests. The in the study area.
18192 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian J TT Observaton of inter-specifc interactons A pair of P. krameri competed with a pair of Blue % 3.7% 7.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Rock Pigeon Columba livia (Aves: Columbiformes: Columbidae) that had occupied one hole in a temple wall at Thiruvalangadu Village (13.1307°N & 79.7747°E), Non-actve nests Non-actve 0 0 0 0 11 21 fnally they chased away the blue rock pigeons, occupied Count the hole and contnued breeding. Similar incidents of P. krameri competng with a Black-rumped Flameback Dinopium benghalense (Aves: Piciformes: Picidae), % 3.2% 0.0% 1.2% 5.8% 0.2% 0.0% a Spoted Owlet Athene brama (Aves: Strigiformes: Strigidae), and an Indian Roller Coracias benghalensis (Aves: Coraciiformes: Coraciidae) in Gadavarikandigai Actve nests Actve 0 6 1 0 Village (13.1300°N & 79.6226°E) for sharing trunk cavites 16 29 Count were observed (Image 2).
Observaton on abnormalites % 0.0% 3.4% 0.8% 0.1% 6.3% 0.0% In the present study, one male bird with beak deformity was observed on the compound wall of a temple in Thiruvalangadu Village (Thiruvallur District). The upper mandible of this bird was found elongated, 0 6 1 0 Total No. of Nests Total 27 50 Count curved and this colourless over grown part of the beak had elongated up to the neck. One female bird with swollen and distorted cere and a big nostril was observed
% in Gadavarikandigai Village (Ranipet District). Another 0.5% 1.1% 1.6% 3.8% 1.6% 23.8% 185 23.2% 129 25.8% 56 18.9% bird with colour abnormality, i.e., yellow feathers on its back and four individuals (three females and one male) with loss of feathers and wart like skin on their Total No. of birds Total 6 12 18 42 18 266
Count heads were observed in Gadavarikandai Village. During the entre study period, they had the same symptoms without regeneraton of new feathers on their heads
% (Image 3a–d). 0.3% 1.0% 4.4% 188 16.8% 208 26.1% 87 17.4% 121 40.7% 1.0% 3.0% 1.3% 3.4% 100 8.9%
studied DISCUSSION 1 3 3 9 4 90 30.3% 13 10 297 100.0% 1119 100.0% 797 100.0% 500 100.0% 297 100.0% 164 55.2% 469 41.9% 320 40.2% 232 46.4% 88 29.6% Count No. of nestng trees/sites trees/sites No. of nestng Psitacula krameri individuals and their preference of nestng sites In the present study, it was observed that P. krameri individuals selected a variety of trees for nestng, but they showed a preference towards palms (Arecaceae): B. fabellifer, C. nucifera and P. sylvestris. Among the 5 Moraceae Family Arecaceae Arecaceae - Moraceae Sapotaceae Arecaceae Meliaceae Fabaceae palms, they prefered B. fabellifer (55.2%; n= 164) in the study area since 40.1% of nests (n= 320) and 41.9% birds (n= 469) occurred on them. The present observaton of maximum number of nests and birds were found on B. fabellifer trees. The present study also reveals that they largely preferred dead palm trees for constructon of nests. Except six B. fabellifer trees, all the palm trees Ficus religiosa Nestng trees / temples / / temples trees Nestng buildings Cocos nucifera nucifera Cocos Phoenix sylvestris Ficus benghalensis Madhuca latfolia Madhuca Borassus fabellifer Azadiracta indica Azadiracta
Albizia lebbeck (n= 158) that bore nests were dead trees. It suggests that the birds selected dead tree trunks for easy excavaton 5 2 3 9 buildings Temples/ 6 4 1 7 8 Total
Table 1. Details of nestng sites, nests, non-actve nests and birds counted in seven districts of Tamil Nadu. of Tamil districts in seven counted and birds nests non-actve nests, sites, of nestng 1. Details Table of cavites using their powerful beaks. Once they select
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 18193 J TT Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian
Table 2. List of villages where nests of individuals of Psitacula krameri were counted.
Total no. of nests Total no. of the birds District Name of the village counted counted 1 Tiruvallur 15 10
2 Pugathur 13 22
3 Chinna Kadambur motur 6 8 Tiruvallur 4 Sembedu 4 6
5 Periya Kadambur motur 7 10
6 Mambakkam 8 12
7 Thiruvalanggadu 54 70
8 Egmore DPI 7 20
9 Chennai Egmore 19 26 10 LIC 6 10
11 Anna Salai EB ofce 1 2
12 Nanthiveduthangal 10 14
13 Soganur 3 7
14 Gadavari kandigai 72 88
15 Mathimangalam 4 16
16 Kunnathur 3 6
17 Pallakunnathur 6 10
18 Pazhayapalayam 10 14
19 Pazhayapalayam motur 1 2
20 Minnal 13 18
21 Marankandigai 8 8
22 Ranipet Chinna Vailambadi 17 29
23 Paranji 2 14
24 Gangai motur 21 32
25 Melandurai 23 37
26 Kizhanthurai 8 12
27 Poiyappakkam 1 2
28 Kumpinipet 4 8
29 Melakadu 21 56
30 Arumpakkam 16 28
31 Paruthiputhur 1 2
32 Nagavedu 15 24
33 Padi 8 18
34 Kanchipuram East 6 8 Kanchipuram 35 Baluchetchatram 2 5
36 Padalam 16 24
37 Otvakkam 17 14
38 Chengalpatu Maduranthangam 0 2 39 Palur 4 2
18194 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian J TT
Total no. of nests Total no. of the birds District Name of the village counted counted 40 Mailam 3 4
41 Kolliyangunam 5 8
42 Nallamur 4 6
43 Thenkalavai 13 14
44 Kiledayalam 20 30
45 Nedimozhiyanur 14 28
46 Vilangambadi 24 44
47 Thenkolapakkam 5 10
48 Kuteripatu 26 24
49 Sozhiyasorkulam 6 12
50 Thenputhur 6 12
51 Kenipatu 10 12
52 Thiruvakkarai 1 2
53 Kanniyam 1 2
54 Konamangalam 3 6
55 Thazhuthali 4 4
56 Perumbakkam 0 6
57 vanur 11 18
58 Villupuram Aurovile 1 2
59 Veedur 2 2
60 Siruvai 11 24
61 Pombur 6 6
62 Thenkodipakkam 4 6
63 Gingee 60 44
64 Thiruvamathur 11 4
65 Tindivanam 0 12
66 kodukur 1 2
67 Tirumangalam 0 0
68 Tirukkovilur 38 26
69 Kizhayur 30 20
70 Kallakuruchi Koduvur 1 2
71 Thirumangalam 0 1
Total 7 71 797 1119
a dead palm tree, both male and female individuals Ali & Rilpey (1969) reported that in India, apart from were involved in excavatng holes in the tree trunks. In the cavites of trees this bird also utlizes existng crevices Tamil Nadu indiscriminate felling of B. fabellifer trees in buildings for constructon of nests. In Pakistan, this bird for frewood and due to urbanizaton, widening of roads, selected holes in trees as well as crevices in buildings for and constructon of buildings have been reported (M. constructon of nests (Jahan et al. 2018). Breeding of P. Pandian pers. obs.). The study further reveals that the krameri in buildings is very common in Britain, Germany, birds utlized the already existng cavites in living trees Belgium, and Japan (Braun 2004, 2007). Some breeding such as M. longifolia, F. benghalensis, and A. lebbeck pairs build nests in wall holes or crevices of buildings in for building nests. No incident of excavaton of cavites north India and Spain. In Pavia (northern Italy), the entre on the above three tree species was notced during the populaton breeds in scafold holes of the Viscont castle study period. and towers (Grandi et al. 2016). The present study reveals
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 18195 J TT Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian
Image 1. Nestng habitats of Psitacula krameria: a—a pair of birds roostng on temple wall | b—female individual in wall hole in temple | c— male individual in a cavity of dead B. fabellifer trunk | d—a pair engaged in excavaton of cavity on B. fabellifer trunk | e—female individual in a trunk cavity, and | f—a matng pair. © M. Pandian.
that 26% nests (n= 208) and 16.8% birds (n= 188) were the birds preferred to breed in agricultural areas where counted on 10 temples and three buildings in the study abundant food materials are available. Another 22.8% area. The present observaton of successful utlizaton of nests (n= 182) and 24.3% birds (n= 272) were found on available holes/crevices in the temple and buildings for trees located near water bodies. Maximum nests of constructon of nests by P. krameri populaton matches P. krameri were found in the areas where cultvaton the fndings of Ali & Rilpey (1969), Jahan et al. (2018), and of crops occurs and near water bodies in Punjab (Khan Braun (2004, 2007). 2002a) and Hawaii (Paton et al. 1982). In the present study, occurrence of 51.9% nests (n= 416) and 57.3% birds Preference of habitats for nestng (n= 641) in agricultural lands and close to water bodies As a social bird, P. krameri generally prefers to build in rural villages clearly indicates that the birds selected nests on trees situated near agricultural lands. Occurrence nestng sites in agrarian landscapes ensuring availability of 29.1% nests (n= 234) and 33% birds (n= 369) on the of abundant food material. Hence it matches with the trees situated near the agricultural lands prove that observatons of Khan (2002a) and Paton et al. (1982).
18196 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian J TT
Image 2. Inter-specifc competton: a—male parakeet fghtng with a pair of Blue Rock Pigeons | b—nestlings of Spoted Owlet | c—Indian Roller guarding its nest on top of dead B. fabellifer tree, and | d—Black-rumped Flameback excavatng cavity. © M. Pandian.
Image 3. Abnormalites in Psitacula krameria: a—male bird with beak deformity | b—female bird with cere deformity | c—female bird with suspected infecton of psitacine beak & feather disease | d—female bird with colour abnormality. © M. Pandian.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 18197 J TT Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian This bird also preferred trees near human setlements One female bird with swollen and distorted cere with a and holes/crevices of temples/buildings for constructon big nostril was observed. Cornifcaton and keratnizaton of nests. It suggests that the birds tolerate the presence of the cere can progress to close up the nostrils. These of human. abnormalites in cere might have been caused by the mite, Knemidokoptes pilae (Zwart 1995). The study Observaton of inter-specifc interactons reveals that one female bird with similar symptoms of Cavity nesters pose a unique habitat problem. swollen and distorted cere with big opening was found. Obligate cavity nesters are associated with intra and The observed symptoms matched the fndings of Zwart inter-specifc competton for nest sites (Collias & Collias (1995). 1984; Nilsson 1984). Jones (1980) had stated that Colour mutatons in P. krameri such as yellow incidents of competton between P. krameri and mynas (Bhargava & Hanfee 1996), white-rose (Mahabal et al. Acridotheres trists for sharing nest cavites in trees was 2015), albinism (Mahabal et al. 2016), and cinnamon reported in Mauritus. In view of the limited availability green (Kushwaha & Kumar 2018) have been reported in of nest-holes, inter-specifc competton usually occurs India. In U.K., many colour mutatons have occurred in between secondary cavity nestng birds in human altered captve birds (Low 1992; Butler 2003). Hence, the present landscapes (Cornelius 2008). They compete with natve observaton of yellow colour mutaton of feathers in the birds for sharing trunk-holes in Belgium also (Strubbe & study area corroborates the fndings of the aforesaid Mathysen 2009). In the present study too P. krameri authors. competed with a Blue Rock Pigeon, for sharing a hole Pass & Perry (1984) and Ritchie et al. (1991) had stated in a temple, with a Spoted Owlet, an Indian Roller and that psitacine beak & feather disease (PBFD) caused by a a Black-rumped Flameback for sharing trunk holes in B. virus has emerged as a major threat to the wild parakeet fabellifer trees during the breeding period. Hence, the populatons. The observed four P. krameri individuals present observaton of inter-specifc competton with with similar symptoms of feather loss and warty skin on other birds for sharing nestng sites corroborates with the their heads are suspected to have PBFD. fndings of Jones (1980) and (Strubbe & Mathysen 2009).
Observaton of abnormalites CONCLUSION Beak abnormalites may occur due to various causes such as malnutriton, infectons, injury, mutatons, The present study was confned to a small geographical defectve bone growth, tear of rhamphotheca, and area covering 71 villages in seven northern districts of misalignment of maxilla & mandible (Oslen 2003; Handel Tamil Nadu. Since a total of 1,119 individuals and 797 et al. 2010; Zylberberg et al. 2018). Deformed beaks nests were enumerated in this region, it is considered a take many forms with upper/lower mandibles elongated, hotspot for breeding of this species. A systematc survey curved or mandibles crossed and are more prevalent in of the entre state would throw more light on the status passerines (Craves 1994). Pomeroy (1962) has observed and distributon of Ring-necked Parakeets in the state, and that abnormal bills in wild birds are rare with an estmated help in drafing an acton plan to conserve their habitats frequency of less than 0.5%. Britsh Trust for Ornithology in and around villages and also in the urban areas. (BTO 2014) has recorded 36 species with beak deformites including ring-necked parakeets. In India, Kasambe et al. (2009) and Soni et al. (2019) have reported bill deformites REFERENCES in Yellow-billed Blue Magpie, Crow, and Common Myna. Ali, S. & S.D. Ripley (1968). Handbook of the Birds of India and Pakistan, Kanwar (2019) has recorded beak abnormality in Ring- Vol 3. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 380pp. necked Parakeets in Chandigarh. In the present study, the Ali, S. & S.D. Ripley (1987). Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan, upper mandible of one male bird was found colourless, Compact Editon. Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 278pp. Bhargava, R. & H. Hanfee (1996). Sightngs of a Yellow Rose-ringed curved and elongated up to its neck. This type of beak Parakeet. Newsleter for Birdwatchers 36: 81. deformity may cause hardship to the bird while foraging Bibby, C.J., N.D. Burgess, D.A. Hill & S.H. Mustoe (2000). Birds Census nd and feeding chicks. Out of 1,119 birds studied, only one Techniques, 2 Editon. Academic Press, New York, 302pp. BirdLife Internatonal (2018). The IUCN Red List of Threatened individual, i.e., 0.09% had a bill deformity. Hence, it Species. Accessed on 01 April 2020. htps://iucnredlist.org/ confrms the view of Pomeroy (1962) that abnormal bills species/22685441/132057695 in wild birds are rare with an estmated frequency of less BTO (2014). Britsh Trust for Ornithology. Species Afected, Garden Bird Survey. bto.org. Accessed on 15 December 2019. than 0.5% Braun, M. (2004). Alien species in urban habitats: Ecology and niche
18198 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 Nest tree preference by Ring-necked Parakeet Pandian J TT expansion of Ring-necked Parakeets (Psitacula krameri Scopoli, Menchet, M., E. Mori & F.M. Angelici (2016). Efects of the recent 1769) in Heidelberg, Germany: Marburg University, 127pp. world invasion by ring-necked parakeets Psitacula krameri, pp. 253– Braun, M. (2007). How does thermal insulaton on buildings as a result 266. In: Angelici, F.M. (ed.). Problematc wildlife. A Cross-disciplinary of EU climate protecton-afect the breeding biology of tropical Ring- Approach. Springer, New York, xvi+603pp. necked Parakeets (Psitacula krameri) in temperate Central Europe?. Mukherjee A., C.K. Board & B.M. Parasharya (2000). Damage of rose- Ornithol Jahresh Baden-Wurt 23: 39–56. ringed parakeet, Psitacula krameri Bordeat, to safower, Carthamus Braun, M.P. & M. Wink (2013). Nestng development of ring-necked tnctorius L. Pavo 38: 15–18. parakeets (Psitacula krameri) in a nest box populaton. The Open Neo, M.L. (2012). A review of three alien parrots in Singapore. Nature Ornithology Journal 6: 9–24. in Singapore 5: 241–248. Butler, C.J. (2003). Populaton biology of the introduced Rose-ringed Newton, I. (1994). The role of nest sites in limitng the numbers of hole- Parakeet Psitacula krameri in the UK. Thesis, Department of Zoology, nestng birds: a review. Biological Conservaton 70: 265–276. University of Oxford, 312pp. Nice, M.M. (1957). Nestng success in altricial birds. Auk 74: 305–321. Cody, M.L. (1985). Habitat selecton in the Sylviine Warblers of Western Nilsson, S.G. (1984). The evoluton of nest-site selecton among hole- Europe and North America, 86–129 pp. In: Cody, M.L. (ed.) Habitat nestng birds. The importance of nest predaton and competton. selecton in Birds. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida, New York, 558pp. Ornis Scand 15: 167–175. Collias, N.E & E.C. Collias (1984). Nest building and bird behaviour. Oslen, G.H. (2003). Oral biology and beak disorder of birds. Veterinary Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 336pp. Clinics of North America. Exotc Animal Practce 6(3): 505–521. Cornelius, C. (2008). Spatal variaton in nest-site selecton by a Pass, D.A. & R.A. Perry (1984). The pathogens of psitacine beak and secondary cavity-nestng bird in a human-altered landscape. The feather disease. Australian Veterinary Journal 61: 69–74. Condor 110(4): 615–626. Paton, P., C. Grifn & L. Grifn (1982). Rose-ringed parakeet nestng in Craves, J.A. (1994). Passerines with deformed bills-North American Hawaii: A potental agricultural threat. Elepaio 43(5): 37–39. Birds. Banders 19(1): 14–18. Pomeroy, D.E. (1962). Birds with abnormal birth. Britsh Birds 55: 49–72 Dhindsa M.S. & H.K. Saina (1994). Agricultural Ornithology: an Indian Rasmussen, P.C. & J.C. Anderton (2005). Birds of South Asia: The Ripley perspectve. Journal of Bioscience 19: 391–402. Guide. 2 vols. Smithsonian Insttuton & Lynx Editons, Washington Gokula, V., C. Venkataraman, S. Saravanan & S. Swaminathan (1999). D.C. & Barcelona, 378pp. Inter and intraspecifc variaton in the resource use of Blossom- Ritchie, B.W., F.D. Niasro, K.S. Latmer, W.L. Stefens, D. Pest & P.D. headed and Blue-winged parakeets in Siruvani, Tamil Nadu, India. Lukert (1991). Haemagglutnaton by psitacine beak & feather Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 96(2): 225–231. disease virus and use of haemagglutnaton inhibiton for detecton Grandi, G., M. Menchet & E. Moris (2016). Use of putlog holes of antbodies against the virus. American Journal of Veterinary of Viscont Castle by breeding ring-necked parakeets (Psitacula Research 52: 1810–1815. krameri) in Pavia (northern Italy). In: At del III Congresso Nazionale Schackermann, J., H.V. Wehrden, N. Weiss & A. Klein (2014). High trees Fauna Problematca, Cesena., Palazzo del Ridoto, 24–26 November increase sunfower predaton by birds in an agricultural landscape. Vol 2016: 90—91. 2. Fronters in Ecology and Evoluton 2: 35. htps://doi.org/10.3389/ Handel, C.M., L.M. Pajot, S.M. Matsuka, C.V. Hement, J. Terenzi, S.L. fevo.2014.00035 Talbot, D.M. Mulcahy, C.V. Meteyer & K.A. Trust (2010). Epizootc of Shivanarayan, N., K.S. Babu & M.H. Ali (1981). Breeding biology of beak deformites among wild birds in Alaska: an emerging disease in Rose-ringed Parakeet, Psitacula krameri at Maruteru. Pavo 19: 92– North America? The Auk 127 (4): 882–898. 96. Jahan, I., S. Begum, M. M. Feeroz, D.K. Das & A.K. Data (2018). Nestng Shivashankar, T. & S. Subramanya (2008). Preventon of Rose-ringed patern of birds in Jahangirnagar University Campus, Bangladesh. parakeet Psitacula krameri damage to Sunfower Helianthus annus. Journal of Threatened Taxa 10(5): 11618–11635. htps://doi. Indian Birds 4(2): 60–65. org/10.11609/jot.2799.10.5.11618-11635 Soni, S., N.K. Sahi & T.K. Kler (2019). Records of beak deformites in Jones, C.G. (1980). The parrots on the way of extncton. Oryx 15: 350– Punjab, India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 116: 354. 52–53. Kanwar, K. (2019). Beak Deformites in Birds: Special on World Strubbe, D. & E. Mathyen (2007). Invasive Ring-necked Parakeets Parrot Day. Babushahi.com/trends.php?id=87473 Accessed on 15 Psitacula krameri in Belgium: habitat selecton and impact on natve December 2019. birds. Ecogeography 30(4): 578–588. Khan, A.K. (2002a). Breeding habitats of the rose-ringed Parakeet Strubbe, D. & E. Mathyen (2009). Establishment success of natve (Psitacula krameri) in the cultvatons of central Punjab. Internatonal Ring-necked and Monk Parakeets in Europe. Journal of Biogeography Journal of Agriculture & Biology 4(3): 401–403. 36(12): 2264–2278. Khan, H. (2002b). Foraging, feeding, roostng and nestng behavior of Tamil Nadu (2020). Government of Tamil Nadu website www.tn.gov.in. the rose-ringed parakeet (Psitacula krameri) in the cultvatons of Accessed on 13 April 2020. central Punjab. Pakistan Journal of Biological Science 1: 37–38. Thabethe, V., L. Thompson, L. Hart & M. Brown (2013). Seasonal efects Kasambe, R., A. Joshi & S. Meppayur (2009). Bill deformites in House on the thermoregulaton of invasive rose-ringed parakeets (Psitacula Crow Corvus splendens and Large-billed Blue Magpie Urocrissa krameri). Journal of Thermal Biology 38(8): 553–559. htps://doi. favirostris in India. Newsleter for Birdwatchers 49(5): 73–77. org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.2013.09.006 Kushwaha, S. & A. Kumar (2018). Report on cinnamon green Rose- Wesolowski, T. (2007). Lessons from long-term hole-nester studies in ringed Parakeet, Psitacula krameri (Scopoli 1769) (Aves: Psitacula) a primeval temperate forest. Journal of Ornithology 148: 395–405. from Jhansi, India. Journal of Wildlife Research 6(3): 34–36. Zwart, P. (1995). Diseases of the respiratory tract in Psitacine birds. Low, R. (1992). Parrots. Their breeding and care, Blandford, London, UK, Veterinary Quarterly 17(1): 52–53. 432pp. Zylberberg, M., C.V. Hemert, C.M. Handel & J.C. Derisi (2018). Avian Mahabal, A., R.M. Sharma & A. Sayyed (2015). Colour aberratons in keratn disorder of Alaska Black-capped Chickadees is associated with Indian Birds. Birding ASIA 24: 119–121. Poecivirus infecton. Virology Journal 15(1): 100. Mahabal, A., H.V. Grouw, R.M. Sharma & S. Takkur (2016). How common is albinism really? Colour aberratons in Indian birds reviewed. Dutch Birding 38: 301–309. Threatened Taxa
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2021 | 13(5): 18189–18199 18199 The Journal of Threatened Taxa (JoTT) is dedicated to building evidence for conservaton globally by OPEN ACCESS publishing peer-reviewed artcles online every month at a reasonably rapid rate at www.threatenedtaxa.org. All artcles published in JoTT are registered under Creatve Commons Atributon 4.0 Internatonal License unless otherwise mentoned. JoTT allows allows unrestricted use, reproducton, and distributon of artcles in any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publicaton.
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)
April 2021 | Vol. 13 | No. 5 | Pages: 18099–18410 Date of Publicaton: 26 April 2021 (Online & Print) www.threatenedtaxa.org DOI: 10.11609/jot.2021.13.5.18099-18410
Artcles Legumes (Angiosperms: Fabaceae) of Bagalkot District, Karnataka, India – Jagdish Dalavi, Ramesh Pujar, Sharad Kambale, Varsha Jadhav-Rathod & Shrirang Yadav, Pp. Spatotemporal movement patern of Asian Elephants Elephas maximus Linnaeus, 1758 in 18283–18296 Sindhudurg District, Maharashtra, India – Milind Digambar Patl, Vinayak Krishna Patl & Ninad Avinash Mungi, Pp. 18099–18109 Indigenous knowledge of ethnomedicinal plants by the Assamese community in Dibrugarh District, Assam, India Conservaton ecology of birds in Mt. Hilong-hilong, a Key Biodiversity Area on Mindanao – Pranat Gogoi & Namita Nath, Pp. 18297–18312 Island, the Philippines – Arturo G. Gracia Jr., Alma B. Mohagan, Janezel C. Burlat, Welfredo L. Yu Jr., Janine Mondalo, Short Communicatons Florfe M. Acma, Hannah P. Lumista, Riah Calising & Krizler Cejuela Tanalgo, Pp. 18110–18121 Marine mammal strandings in the northern Palk Bay from 2009 to 2020 Nestng and hatching behaviour of Olive Ridley Turtles Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscholtz, – Vedharajan Balaji & Veeramuthu Sekar, Pp. 18313–18318 1829) (Reptlia: Cryptodira: Cheloniidae) on Dr. Abdul Kalam Island, Odisha, India – P. Poornima, Pp. 18122–18131 First distributon record of the Asiatc Toad Bufo gargarizans Cantor, 1842 from India — Dibang Valley in Arunachal Pradesh Communicatons – Sahil Nijhawan, Jayanta Kumar Roy, Iho Mitapo, Gata Miwu, Jibi Pulu & M. Firoz Ahmed, Pp. 18319–18323 Feeding ecology of Walia Ibex Capra walie (Mammalia: Artodactyla: Bovidae) in Simien Mountains Natonal Park, Ethiopia A checklist of fshes of Telangana State, India – D. Ejigu, A. Bekele & L. Powell, Pp. 18132–18140 – Kante Krishna Prasad & Chelmala Srinivasulu, Pp. 18324–18343
Assessment of crop and property damage caused by Semnopithecus vetulus nestor Report on the stngless bees of Bhutan (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Meliponini) (Bennet, 1833) (Mammalia: Primates: Cercopithecidae) in Gampaha District, Sri Lanka – Tshering Nidup, Pp. 18344–18348 – Sunil Wijethilaka, Lakshani S. Weerasekara, Saumya Bandara & Kithsiri B. Ranawana, Pp. 18141–18147 New records of six termite (Blatodea: Termitdae) species from Kerala, India – Poovoli Amina & K. Rajmohana, Pp. 18349–18354 Habitat preference of the Indian Pangolin Manis crassicaudata inhabitng Margalla Hills Natonal Park, Islamabad, Pakistan Status, abundance, and seasonality of buterfy fauna at Kuvempu University Campus, – Tariq Mahmood, Shaista Andleeb & Faraz Akrim, Pp. 18148–18155 Karnataka, India – M.N. Harisha & B.B. Hoset, Pp. 18355–18363 The endangered Himalayan Red Panda: frst photographic evidence from its westernmost distributon range Observatons on buterfies of non-protected areas of Titabar, Assam, India – Saroj Shrestha, Sony Lama, Ang Phuri Sherpa, Sonam Tashi Lama & Dinesh Ghale, Pp. – Abhijit Konwar & Manashi Bortamuly, Pp. 18364–18377 18156–18163 Three new distributon records of Conidae (Gastropoda: Neogastropoda: Conoidea) from Ecological niche modelling predicts signifcant impacts of future climate change on two the Andaman Islands, India endemic rodents in eastern Africa – Jayaseelan Benjamin Franklin & Deepak Arun Apte, Pp. 18378–18384 – Aditya Srinivasulu, Alembrhan Assefa & Chelmala Srinivasulu, Pp. 18164–18176 A new record of an endangered and endemic rare Rein Orchid Habenaria rarifora from Avian diversity in a fragmented landscape of central Indian forests (Bhopal Forest Circle) Gujarat, India – Amit Kumar, Yogesh Dubey & Advait Edgaonkar, Pp. 18177–18188 – Mital R. Bhat, Pp. 18385–18389
Nest tree preference shown by Ring-necked Parakeet Psitacula krameri (Scopoli, 1769) in Glimpse of climber diversity in Saharanpur District, Utar Pradesh, India northern districts of Tamil Nadu, India – Lalita Saini, Archasvi Tyagi, Inam Mohammad & Vijai Malik, Pp. 18390–18397 – M. Pandian, Pp. 18189–18199 First report of the feshy mushroom Trichaleurina javanica (Rehm) M. Carbone et al. Two new species of Euphaea Selys, 1840 (Odonata: Zygoptera: Euphaeidae) from northern (Ascomycota: Pezizales: Chorioactdaceae) from southern India Western Ghats, India – Munuswamy Kumar, Sekar Nithya & Antony Agnes Kayalvizhi, Pp. 18398–18402 – Shriram Dinkar Bhakare, Vinayan P Nair, Pratma Ashok Pawar, Sunil Hanmant Bhoite & Kalesh Sadasivan, Pp. 18200–18214 Notes
Two new light atracted rove beetle species of Astenus Dejean, 1833 (Coleoptera: Photographic record of Temminck’s Tragopan Tragopan temminckii (Gray, 1831) (Aves: Staphylinidae: Paederinae) from Kerala, India Galliformes: Phasianidae) from eastern Bhutan: an evidence of its westward range – P. Sreevidhya, S.V. Akhil & C.D. Sebastan, Pp. 18215–18226 expansion – Tshering Dorji, Kinley Kinley, Letro Letro, Dawa Tshering & Prem Nanda Maidali, Pp. A new distributon record of mason wasp Pison punctfrons Shuckard, 1838 (Hymenoptera: 18403–18405 Sphecidae: Larrinae) from Noida, Utar Pradesh, India – Rajiv K. Singh Bais & Aakash Singh Bais, Pp. 18227–18236 The Malay Cardamom Meistera aculeata (Roxb.) Škorničk. & M.F. Newman (Zingiberaceae: Alpinioideae) from the Palghat gap: a new record to Kerala, India Diversity of freshwater molluscs from the upper Brahmaputra Basin, – Vadakkeveedu Jagadesh Aswani, Manjakulam Khadhersha Jabeena & Maya Assam, India Chandrashekaran Nair, Pp. 18406–18410 – Jyotsh Sonowal, Munmi Puzari & Devid Kardong, Pp. 18237–18246
Diversity of understory fowering plants in the forest patches of Marilog District, Philippines – Florfe M. Acma, Noe P. Mendez, Noel E. Lagunday & Victor B. Amoroso, Pp. 18247–18256 Publisher & Host Legumes of Kerala, India: a checklist – Anoop P. Balan & S.V. Predeep, Pp. 18257–18282
Member
Threatened Taxa