Journal of Threatened Taxa

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

Bird composition, diversity and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study from eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Yashmita-Ulman & Manoj Singh

26 July 2021 | Vol. 13 | No. 8 | Pages: 19011–19028 DOI: 10.11609/jot.7089.13.8.19011-19028

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.

Threatened Taxa

Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print) OPEN ACCESS htps://doi.org/10.11609/jot.7089.13.8.19011-19028

#7089 | Received 15 January 2021 | Final received 14 May 2021 | Finally accepted17 June 2021 COMMUNICATION

Bird compositon, diversity and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study from eastern Utar Pradesh, India

Yashmita-Ulman 1 & Manoj Singh 2

1 Department of Silviculture & Agroforestry, College of Hortculture & Forestry, Acharya Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Ayodhya, Utar Pradesh 224229, India. 2 Department of Zoology, Kalinga University, Naya Raipur, Chhatsgarh 492101, India. 1 [email protected], 2 [email protected] (corresponding author)

Abstract: Birds have a signifcant role in maintaining the ecological balance of agro-ecosystems. But yet there is no documentaton related to bird diversity in the agricultural landscapes of eastern Utar Pradesh. This study was conducted from March 2019 to February 2020 using fxed radius point count method in Ayodhya district of eastern Utar Pradesh. A total of 139 bird species belonging to 107 genera, 49 familiesHindi: पा#र%&थितक+ and 15 तं-orders के पा#र%&थितक were recorded संतुलन को fromबनाए रखनेthe म8study प%9य; area. क+ मह=वपूणA Passeriformes भूिमका होती wasहै लेEकन the अभी most तक पूवGdominant उIर Jदेश orderके कृ N ष प#रPQयwith 28 म8 प9ीfamilies NवNवधता and से संबंिधत76 species. कोई भी Accipitridaeशोध उपलTध नहUं and है। यह Muscicapidae अVययन पूवG उIर were Jदेश केthe अयोVया most %जले diverse म8 िन%Xत families N-Yया Nबंदwith ु गणना 11 speciesप[ित का उपयोग each andक र के RDiमाचA value2019 से ofफरवरU 7.91. 2020 Among तक आयो%जत the recorded Eकया गया थाbird। अVययन species, 9े- 105 species (76%) were resident, 29 species (21%) were winter visitors and only 5 species (4%) were summer visitors. According to the से 107 वंशो 49 कु ल ; 15 गणो से संबंिधत कु ल 139 प9ी Jजाितय; को दजA Eकया गया था। 28 कु ल ; और 76 Jजाितय; के साथ पैसेरUफािमAस सबसे Jमुख गण था, ए&सीNप`UडU और म&सीकैNपडU feeding guilds, omnivores (46 species, 33%) were highly represented, followed by insectvores (31%), carnivores (25%), granivores (6%), 11 7.91 105 21% frugivoresसबसे अिधक NवNवधता (4%) andवाले nectarivoresकु ल थे %जनम8 से J=येक (1%).म8 TheJजाितयां Sohawalथी और tehsilआरडUआई wasमान found toथा। haveदजA क+ theगई प9ी highestJजाितय; speciesम8 Jजाितयां richness&थानीय and थीa Shannon-WeinerJजाितयां शीतकालीन diversityआगंतुक indexथी और (133,के व ल 5 4.30).Jजाितयां Aquila Nवषम कालीन nipalensis आगंतुक and थी। Neophronफ+Eडंग िगcड केpercnopterus अनुसार 40 Jजाितयां were सवाAहारU the two थी इ स‘Endangered’ के बाद 21% क+टभ9ी species,, 25% मांसाहारU Antgone, 6% antgoneदानाभ9ी, 4% and फलभ9ी Clanga और 1%hastata मकरंद wereआहारU theथी। सोहावल two ‘Vulnerable’ तहसील म8 उfचतम species Jजाित and समृN[ Ciconia और शैनन episcopus Nवनर NवNवधता, Gyps सूचकांक himalayensis, (133,4.30) पाया Mycteria गया। ए%gवला leucocephala िनपाल8िसस औरand िनयोhान Psitacula पiोनोjटेरस eupatria दो संकटk&त were the Jजाितयां four ‘Nearथी, एंटUगोन Threatened’ और gलlगा ह&तटा species दो सुभेm found (वलनेरे inबरल this) Jजाितयां region. थी In और additon िसकािनया to एNप&कोपस this, the, %जjस region Eहमालय8िसस also supported, माgटे#रया cयूकोसेफला 31 species और (22%)ि स ट ा कु ल whose ा यूपेE`या globalचार संभाNवत populaton संकटk&त trendJजाितयां is थी decreasing. जो इस 9े- म8 पाईThis जाती study है। इ सprovides के अलावा इसa baseline 9े- म8 पाई जानेdata वाली on Jजाितय; the bird म8 सेdiversity ३१ Jजाित presentऐसी भी थीं in%जनक+ agricultural वै%qक जनसंrया landscapes लगातार कम of होthis रहU region.है। यह अVययन Based कृ on N ष whichप#रPQय furtherम8 प%9य; studies क+ NवNवधता should को beसमझने designed के िलए to भNवtय understand के अनुसंधानो the factorsके िलए infuencingएक मह=वपूणA theसाधन diversity साNबत हो of सकताbirds हैin, theseNवशेषकर agricultural उन 9े-; के landscapesिलए जो मानव which जिनत are contnuously subjected to anthropogenic pressures. दबाव; का सामना कर रहे हl।

Keywords: Ayodhya, Avifauna checklist, community parameters, feeding guilds, relatve diversity, species richness.

Hindi: पा#र%&थितक+ तं- के पा#र%&थितक संतुलन को बनाए रखने म8 प%9य; क+ मह=वपूणA भूिमका होती है लेEकन अभी तक पूवG उIर Jदेश के कृ N ष प#रPQय म8 प9ी NवNवधता से संबंिधत कोई भी शोध उपलTध नहUं है। यह अVययन पूवG उIर Jदेश के अयोVया %जले म8 िन%Xत N-Yया Nबंद ु गणना प[ित का उपयोग क र के माचA 2019 से फरवरU 2020 तक आयो%जत Eकया गया था। अVययन 9े- से 107 वंशो 49 कु ल ; 15 गणो से संबंिधत कु ल 139 प9ी Jजाितय; को दजA Eकया गया था। 28 कु ल ; और 76 Jजाितय; के साथ पैसेरUफािमAस सबसे Jमुख गण था, ए&सीNप`UडU और म&सीकैNपडU सबसे अिधक NवNवधता वाले कु ल थे %जनम8 से J=येक म8 11 Jजाितयां थी और आरडUआई मान 7.91 था। दजA क+ गई प9ी Jजाितय; म8 105 Jजाितयां &थानीय थी 21% Jजाितयां शीतकालीन आगंतुक थी और के व ल 5 Jजाितयां Nवषम कालीन आगंतुक थी। फ+Eडंग िगcड के अनुसार 40 Jजाितयां सवाAहारU थी इ स के बाद 21% क+टभ9ी, 25% मांसाहारU, 6% दानाभ9ी, 4% फलभ9ी और 1% मकरंद आहारU थी। सोहावल तहसील म8 उfचतम Jजाित समृN[ और शैनन Nवनर NवNवधता सूचकांक (133,4.30) पाया गया। ए%gवला िनपाल8िसस और िनयोhान पiोनोjटेरस दो संकटk&त Jजाितयां थी, एंटUगोन और gलlगा ह&तटा दो सुभेm (वलनेरेबरल) Jजाितयां थी और िसकािनया एNप&कोपस, %जjस Eहमालय8िसस, माgटे#रया cयूकोसेफला और िसटाकुला यूपेE`या चार संभाNवत संकटk&त Jजाितयां थी जो इस 9े- म8 पाई जाती है। इ स के अलावा इस 9े- म8 पाई जाने वाली Jजाितय; म8 से ३१ Jजाित ऐसी भी थीं %जनक+ वै%qक जनसंrया लगातार कम हो रहU है। यह अVययन कृ N ष प#रPQय म8 प%9य; क+ NवNवधता को समझने के िलए भNवtय के अनुसंधानो के िलए एक मह=वपूणA साधन साNबत हो सकता है, Nवशेषकर उन 9े-; के िलए जो मानव जिनत दबाव; का सामना कर रहे हl।

Editor: Hem S. Baral, Charles Sturt University, Albury, Australia. Date of publicaton: 26 July 2021 (online & print)

Citaton: Yashmita-Ulman & M. Singh (2021). Bird compositon, diversity and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study from eastern Utar Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(8): 19011–19028. htps://doi.org/10.11609/jot.7089.13.8.19011-19028

Copyright: © Yashmita-Ulman & Singh 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: Self-funded.

Competng interests: The authors declare no competng interests.

For Author details and Author contributons see end of this artcle

Acknowledgements: The authors are thankful to the Dean, College of Hortculture and Forestry, ANDUAT, for permitng to carry out this feld research. Our special thanks to Mr. Abhishek Kumar Pandey for translatng the abstract in Hindi.

19011 J TT Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh INTRODUCTION study the impacts of agricultural mechanizaton on birds, it is important to frst record the bird diversity present in Agriculture is the most dominant land use in the this most dominant land use system of Utar Pradesh. It tropical and sub-tropical regions of the world. In India, is also important that the birds which act as bio-control nearly 60.45% of the total land is under agriculture agents and bio-indicators of the agro-ecosystems should (Anonymous 2021a). Even if the area under protected area be conserved in these landscapes. This study, therefore, is as small as 15.40% globally (Anonymous 2021b) and aims to produce a checklist of birds associated with 5.00% (Anonymous 2021c) in India, the conservatonists agricultural felds which can then be further used as a have always concentrated on natural forests or protected baseline for detailed investgaton and research. areas for species conservaton. But lately, the focus has The avian diversity in agricultural landscapes has been been slowly changing to conservaton outside protected studied by diferent authors in diferent states of India. areas. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of Work has been done on bird compositon and diversity in human-dominated agroforestry systems and agricultural the agricultural felds of Punjab (Malhi 2006), Karnataka landscapes in conservaton of common to globally (Basavarajappa 2006), Maharashtra (Abdar 2014), West concerned vertebrates and invertebrates (Athreya et Bengal (Hossain & Aditya 2016), Utarakhand (Elsen et al. 2010; Sundar & Subramanya 2010). Birds play a al. 2016), Odisha (Mukhopadhyay & Mazumdar 2017), vital role in maintaining the ecological balance in agro- Telangana (Narayana et al. 2019) and Haryana (Kumar & ecosystems (Haslem & Bennet 2008). An agricultural Sahu 2020). Studies have also been conducted on bird system provides food like grains, seeds, fruits, green diversity in paddy felds (Borad et al. 2000; Jayasimhan vegetaton, plants, grasses, insects, arthropods and & Pramod 2019). Sundar (2006, 2009), Sundar & rodents to the birds (O’Connor & Shrubb 1986; Asokan Subramanya (2010), Sundar & Kitur (2012, 2013) have et al. 2009). Birds, therefore, play a dual role of pests studied bird compositon in agricultural felds and their by feeding on grains and seeds as well as of bio-control use by birds in western Utar Pradesh. Studies have also agents by feeding on insect pests of agricultural crops been undertaken on bird diversity in wetlands and bird (Borad et al. 2000). Thus, they act as both friend and foe sanctuaries (Kumar & Kanaujia 2016; Mishra et al. 2020), of farmers. In additon to this, birds also have functonal and protected areas (Javed & Rahmani 1998; Iqubal et al. roles of seed dispersal, pollinaton, scavenging, nutrient 2003, Khan et al. 2013) in Utar Pradesh. However, there depositon etc. (Dhindsa & Saini 1994; Whelan et al. 2008; has been no study on the bird diversity in agricultural Sekercioglu 2012) making them benefcial to nature and landscapes of eastern Utar Pradesh. In this context, the thus humans. The occurrence of birds in agricultural present study is designed to document the bird species systems is infuenced by many factors such as the crop compositon and diversity in the agricultural landscapes type, structural complexity, i.e., vertcal stratfcaton of Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Pradesh. formed by the grasses, shrubs and trees, type of management and landscape compositon (Taf & Haig 2006; Bruggisser et al. 2010; Wretenberg et al. 2010). MATERIALS AND METHODS Most of the agricultural lands are intermingled with agroforestry & hortcultural trees, wetlands, remnant Study area vegetaton, natural forest fragments, grasslands and This study was conducted in fve tehsils namely, poultry farms infuencing the bird diversity positvely. Sohawal, Rudauli, Milkipur, Sadar and Bikapur of Utar Pradesh is the top most producer of food grains Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Pradesh (Figure 1). The in the country and also is one of the most intensively details of each tehsil are given in Table 1. Two study sites cultvated regions of the world (Ramankuty & Foley were chosen in each tehsil (Figure 1). Ayodhya district is 1998). This State has undergone various developments situated between 26.7730 °N and 82.1458 °E. It has an and mechanizatons in its farming systems due to elevaton of 93 m above mean sea level and has an area rapid urbanizaton and industrializaton. Some of them of 2,764 km2 (Anonymous 2021d). The net cultvated include excessive use of pestcides and fertlizers, area in the district is 1,710 km2 and the total forest area intensive agriculture, very good network of irrigaton is 3,038 km2 (Anonymous 2021d). The city of Ayodhya etc. which have altered the agro-ecosystems as well as is situated on the banks of the river Saryu. The climate the bird compositon. Some studies show evidences that is humid subtropical (Kumar 2018) experiencing three the existence of birds in agricultural lands depends on major seasons, i.e., summers (March to June), rainy (July low-intensity agricultural practces (Doxa et al. 2010). To to October) and winters (November to February) (Sundar

19012 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh J TT

Figure 1. The study area and locatons of selected agricultural landscapes of Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Pradesh, India.

& Kitur 2012). The district receives annual rainfall of was laid in each of the two sites and fve permanent 1,067 mm. The average temperature during summers is point counts were marked at every 250 m distance on 32 0C and in winters is 16 0C (Anonymous 2021d). The area each transect. So, in each tehsil 10 point counts were also experiences heat and cold waves at tmes (Kumar marked, making a total of 50 point counts in Ayodhya 2018). The topography of the district is plain. The soil district. The birds were recorded in 30 m radius from the varies from clay soil to sandy soil across the district and point count. At every point count, a fve minutes setling is suitable for raising hortcultural and agricultural crops. down tme was given before recording the birds. Species Agriculture is dependent on rain, tube-wells and canals were recorded for 10 minutes at every point count. Each for irrigaton. This region is inhabited by small, marginal point count was surveyed 24 tmes during the entre and landless farmers. The main cropping system of the study period. Birds were recorded directly using a pair area is rice-wheat cropping system (Anonymous 2021d). of feld binoculars (Nikon 7x35). On sightng the birds, Saccharum ofcinarum is the main cash crop grown the species name, number of individuals and habitat which serves as the raw material for the jaggery and were recorded. Birds fying across were not counted. sugar industries in Sadar tehsil. Apart from this, crops The opportunistc counts during the other tme of the like Cajanus cajan, Vigna mungo, Vigna radiata, Cicer day were also included. Bird identfcaton was done arietnum, Sorghum bicolor, Zea mays, Hordeum vulgare, following Grimmet et al. (2011). Praveen et al. (2020) Brassica sp., vegetable (e.g., Solanum tuberosum), fruit was followed for the taxonomic positon (order and crops (Mangifera indica, Psidium guajava) and fodder family), common names and scientfc names of species crops are also grown (Anonymous 2021d). observed. According to the observatons made in the feld and following Ali & Ripley (1987), the species were also Method classifed into six major feeding guilds, i.e., insectvorous In each tehsil, two sites were selected randomly. Bird (feeds exclusively on insects), carnivorous (feeds surveys were conducted using fxed radius, point-count mainly on non-insect invertebrates and vertebrates), method (Bibby et al. 2000) in selected sites on a monthly granivorous (feeds mainly on grains/seeds), frugivorous basis between 0600h to 0830h from March 2019 to (feeds mainly on fruits), nectarivores (feeds mainly on February 2020. In every tehsil, a transect of 1 km in length nectar) and omnivorous (feeds on both plant and animal

Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 19013 J TT Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh parts). The IUCN Red List (2021) was followed to compile dominant orders with one family and one species each the global populaton trend (decreasing, increasing, (Figure 2). According to the residental status of the birds, stable, unknown) of the recorded species. 105 bird species (76%) were resident, 29 bird species Species richness was calculated as total number of (21%) were winter visitors and only 5 bird species (4%) bird species recorded in the study area. were summer visitors (Figure 3). As far as the feeding The following community parameters were guilds were concerned, six foraging guilds were found in calculated using the below given formulae at each tehsil: the study area. Omnivores (46 species, 33%) were highly [i] Relatve diversity of bird families (RDi) (Torre- represented, followed by insectvores (31%) whereas, Cuadros et al. 2007) nectarivores (1 species, 1%) was the least represented guild (Figure 4). Number of bird species in a family RDi = ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– x 100 Accipitridae and Muscicapidae were the most Total number of species diverse families (11 species each, RDi= 7.91), followed [ii] Shannon Weiner index (Shannon & Weiner 1963) by Ardeidae, Columbidae and Cuculidae (7 species s H’ = Σ i =1piInpi each, RDi= 5.04). On the other hand, 18 families

where, pi is ofen the proporton of individuals namely, Aegithinidae, Bucerotdae, Coraciidae, belonging to the ‘i’th species in the dataset and ‘s’ is the Dicaeidae, Dicruridae, Falconidae, Glareolidae, species richness. The values usually lies between 1 and 4 Gruidae, Monarchidae, Nectariniidae, Paridae, Rallidae, where 1 shows less diversity and 4 shows high diversity. Sitdae, Stenostridae, Turdidae, Upupidae, Vangidae [iii] Simpson’s index (Simpson 1949) & Zosteripidae were least represented (1 species each, This was calculated according to Simpson (1949) to RDi= 0.72) (Table 3). measure the concentraton of dominance (CD) of bird Sohawal tehsil had the highest species richness and species. Shannon-Weiner diversity index (133, 4.30), followed s 2 CD = Σ i =1(pi) by Rudauli (126, 4.28), Milkipur (119, 4.25) and Bikapur where pi is the proporton of the IVI of the ‘i’th species (114, 4.23) (Table 4). Whereas the lowest species and IVI of all the species (ni/N). The values of Simpson’s richness and Shannon-Weiner diversity index was found index is limited to 1 where 1 shows dominance by a in Sadar (98, 3.86) (Table 4). The Simpson’s Dominance single species. index indicated that all sites were highly diverse in terms [iv] Pielou’s evenness index (Pielou 1966)=H’/ of bird species and no single bird species was dominant

log10N(S) (Table 4). The Pielou’s Evenness index was the highest in where H’ is the Shanon Weiner diversity index and ‘S’ Bikapur (0.89), followed by Rudauli and Milkipur (0.88 is the total number of species. This index ranges from 0 each), Sohawal (0.87) and the lowest in Sadar (0.84). (no evenness) to 1 (complete evenness). This index highlighted that the bird communites in each [v] Sorenson’s similarity coefcient (Sorenson 1948) tehsil was nearly even i.e. all the species were equally represented (Table 4). The Sorenson’s Similarity index 2C Sorenson similarity coefcient = –––– indicated that all the sites were almost similar in diversity A+B (Table 5). The highest similarity existed between the sites where C is the number of species common to both of Rudauli and Milkipur (0.94), followed by Sohawal and sites, A is the total number of species in site A and B is the Rudauli (0.93) and the lowest similarity existed between total number of species in site B. Sorenson’s coefcient the sites of Sohawal and Sadar (0.82) (Table 5). gives a value between 0 and 1, the closer the value is to Of the 139 species recorded, two species (1.44%) were 1, the more the communites have in common. ‘Endangered’, two species (1.44%) were ‘Vulnerable’, four species (2.88%) were ‘Near Threatened’ and the rest (131 species, 94.24%) were ‘Least Concern’ according to RESULTS the IUCN Red List (Table 2). With regard to the global populaton trend, this area supported 66 globally stable A total of 139 species of birds belonging to 107 bird species (48%), 31 globally decreasing species (22%), genera, 49 families and 15 orders were recorded from 28 globally increasing species (20%) and 14 species (10%) the study area (Table 2). Passeriformes was the most whose global populaton trend was unknown (Figure 5). dominant order with 28 families and 76 species followed In additon to this, 15 species recorded from this area by Accipitriformes (1 family and 11 species) (Figure were listed in Appendix II of CITES and one species was 2). Falconiformes and Bucerotformes were the least under Appendix III of CITES (Table 2). According to the

19014 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh J TT Table 1. General characteristcs of the selected agricultural landscapes in Ayodhya District, eastern Utar Pradesh, India.

Name of tehsil Co-ordinates Features Rice-wheat cropping system along with mustard and sugarcane dominates in the area. The area has orchards of Mangifera 26.6940N, Sohawal indica. Trees of Eucalyptus sp. and Tectona grandis are planted on the feld boundaries in agroforestry systems. The area 81.9740E has large to small sized wetlands. The main source of water is the tube wells. Rice-wheat is the major cropping system in this area. Mustard, vegetables, fruits are also grown in this area. The study 26.6980N, area is adjacent to Rudauli Forest Reserve. Apart from this, the area has orchards and agroforestry systems in which Rudauli 81.6110E Eucalyptus sp. is planted on the boundaries of the felds. It has very few small sized water bodies. Agricultural actvites are dependent upon tube wells. 26.6320N, Wheat, mustard, sugarcane, rice, bajra are grown in this area. This area has good patches of tall wooded trees, plantatons, Milkipur 81.9100E orchards, agroforestry systems, grasses and wetlands. The irrigaton is done through canals and tube wells. 26.6160N, Wheat, mustard and rice are the major crops grown in this area. There are some orchards and few small sized water Bikapur 82.1940E bodies available in this area. Tube wells are used for irrigaton purpose. 26.7930N, Wheat, rice and sugarcane are the major crops grown in this area. There are many jaggery and sugar industries located Sadar 82.1580E in this area. There are some orchards and wetlands available in this area. This area is mostly infuenced by urbanizaton.

Figure 4 Guild-based classifcaton of avian species recorded in Figure 2. Compositon of avian community in selected agricultural agricultural landscapes of Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Pradesh, landscapes of Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Pradesh, India. India.

Figure 5. Comparison of global status of avifaunal species recorded in selected agricultural landscapes of Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Figure 3. Seasonal status of avian species recorded from agricultural Pradesh, India. landscapes of Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Pradesh, India.

IWPA (1972), out of 139 species, 11 species were under DISCUSSION Schedule I, one species was in Schedule V and the rest were in Schedule IV (Table 2). Agricultural landscape is the preferred habitat for 45% of the birds of the Indian subcontnent (Sundar & Subramanya 2010), however some species are known to visit this landscape only occasionally (Sekercioglu et al. 2012). This might be one of the reasons for fnding 139 bird species in the agricultural landscapes of Ayodhya

Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 19015 J TT Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh 2c 1c 2h No. Image Image × × × × 2g √ × × √ √ × × √ √ × × × × Sites × × √ × × × √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ SHW RDL MKP BKP SDR ? ? ↓ √ → √ √↓ √→ √→ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ → √↓→ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ ↑ √ √ √ → √ √ √ √ √ status Global IV → √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV IV → √ √ √ IV IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IWPA IWPA (1972) -I ------II I II I IIIIII I I I II I II I II I II I CITES CITES (2012) Conservaton status Conservaton LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC NT EN EN VU IUCN (2021) I I I C C C C C C C C C C C C G O O O status Feeding Feeding R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R WV WV WV status Residental Residental (Boddaert, 1783) (Gray, 1829) (Gray, (Linnaeus, 1758) (Hume, 1869) (Gmelin, 1788) (Hodgson, 1833) (Gmelin, 1788) (Boddaert, 1783) (Latham, 1790) (Latham, (Boddaert, 1783) (Franklin, 1831) (Franklin, (Gray, 1830) (Gray, Milvus migrans (Desfontaines, 1789) (Desfontaines, Elanus caeruleus R (Lesson, 1831) Clanga hastata badius Accipiter gallicus Circaetus Aquila nipalensis Gyps himalayensis Gyps Spilornis cheela Circus aeruginosus (Linnaeus, Neophron percnopterus 1758) Butastur teesa Butastur (Scopoli, 1786) (Scopoli, birostris Ocyceros Scientfc name Scientfc Cypsiurus balasiensis Cypsiurus Apus afnis (Linnaeus, 1758) Upupa epops Vanellus indicus Vanellus Vanellus malabaricus Vanellus (Frivaldszky, (Frivaldszky, decaocto Streptopelia 1838) (Temminck, 1820) (Temminck, Glareola lactea Black Kite Black-winged Kite Black-winged Eagle Indian Spoted Shikra Eagle Snake Short-toed Eagle Steppe Crested Serpent Eagle Serpent Crested Western Marsh-harrier Western White-eyed Buzzard White-eyed Indian Grey Hornbill Indian Grey Order/Family/Common Order/Family/Common name Asian Palm Swif Asian Palm Common Hoopoe Red-watled Lapwing Red-watled Yellow-watled Lapwing Yellow-watled Eurasian Collared Dove Collared Eurasian Small Pratncole 1 2 6 7 8 9 3 5 Vulture Himalayan 4 Vulture Egyptan 10 11 12 13 14 Indian House Swif 15 16 17 19 18 Accipitriformes Accipitriformes Accipitridae (11) Bucerotformes Bucerotformes (1) Bucerotdae Caprimulgiformes Apodidae (2) Upupidae (1) Charadriiformes Charadriiformes (2) Charadriidae Columbiformes Columbiformes Columbidae (7) Glareolidae (1) Glareolidae Table 2. Checklist and status of avifauna recorded in agricultural landscapes of Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Pradesh, India. Pradesh, Utar eastern district, of Ayodhya landscapes in agricultural recorded of avifauna and status 2. Checklist Table

19016 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh J TT 1a 2e 2b No. Image Image √ × × × × × Sites × × × × × × × × √ √ √ √ √ SHW RDL MKP BKP SDR ? → √ √ √ √ √ status Global IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ IV ↓ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV → √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IWPA IWPA (1972) ------II III I CITES CITES (2012) Conservaton status Conservaton LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC IUCN (2021) I I I F C C C C G G G G G O O O O O O O O status Feeding Feeding R R R R R R R R R R R R R SV SV SV SV WV status Residental Residental (Linnaeus, (Vahl, 1797) (Vahl, (Lesson, 1830) (Linnaeus, 1758) R (Latham, 1790) (Latham, WV (Scopoli, 1786) (Scopoli, (Boddaert, 1783) (Linnaeus, 1767) (Vahl, 1797) (Vahl, (Stephens, 1815) (Stephens, (Latham, 1801) (Latham, (Linnaeus, 1758) (Gmelin, 1789) (Linnaeus, 1758) Streptopelia senegalensis Streptopelia 1766) Scientfc name Scientfc Streptopelia orientalis Streptopelia Streptopelia tranquebarica (Hermann, tranquebarica Streptopelia 1804) Columba livia Streptopelia chinensis Streptopelia (Latham, 1790) (Latham, phoenicopterus Treron R Alcedo athis Alcedo (Linnaeus, 1758) Halcyon smyrnensis Coracias benghalensis Merops philippinus Merops Merops orientalis Merops (Linnaeus, scolopaceus Eudynamys 1758) Hierococcyx varius Hierococcyx Centropus sinensis Centropus Cacomants passerinus Cacomants Cuculus micropterus (Gould, 1838) Cuculus micropterus Clamator jacobinus Clamator Taccocua leschenaulti Taccocua Falco tnnunculus Falco (Gmelin, pondicerianus Francolinus 1789) (Linnaeus, 1758) cristatus Pavo Laughing Dove Order/Family/Common Order/Family/Common name Oriental Turtle Dove Turtle Oriental Red Collared Dove Collared Red Rock Pigeon Rock Yellow-footed Green Green Yellow-footed Pigeon Common Kingfsher White-throated Kingfsher White-throated Indian Roller Green Bee-eater Green Asian Koel Common Hawk Cuckoo Common Hawk Greater Coucal Greater Pied Cuckoo Sirkeer Malkoha Sirkeer Common Kestrel Grey Francolin Grey 20 21 22 23 24 Dove Spoted 25 26 27 28 29 Bee-eater Blue-tailed 30 31 32 33 34 Cuckoo Grey-bellied 35 Indian Cuckoo 36 37 38 39 40 Indian Peafowl Coraciiformes Coraciiformes Alcedinidae (2) Coraciidae (1) Coraciidae Meropidae (2) Meropidae Cuculiformes Cuculiformes Cuculidae (7) Falconiformes Falconiformes (1) Falconidae Galliformes Galliformes Phasianidae (2)

Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 19017 J TT Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh 1b No. Image Image × 1h √ × √ × × × × × Sites √ √ × × × × √ √ √ √ √ × × ×√ × √ × √ √ √ SHW RDL MKP BKP SDR ? ? status Global V → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ IV IV ↑ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ IV ↓ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IWPA IWPA (1972) ------CITES CITES (2012) Conservaton status Conservaton LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC IUCN (2021) I I I I I I I I O VU O O O O O O O O O O status Feeding Feeding R R R R R R R R R R R R R R WV WV status Residental Residental (Linnaeus, (Pennant, (Pennant, (Latham, 1790) (Latham, R (Bangs & Phillips, (Bangs & Phillips, (Wagler, 1827) (Wagler, R (Pennant, 1769) (Pennant, (Rafnesque, 1810) (Rafnesque, (Linnaeus, 1758) (Sykes, 1832) (Sykes, (Linnaeus, 1758) antgone Antgone (Blyth, 1849) dumetorum Acrocephalus WV Amaurornis phoenicurus 1769) (Lichtenstein, 1823) (Lichtenstein, Iduna caligata Scientfc name Scientfc Aegithina tphia 1786) griseus (Scopoli, Eremopterix (Horsfeld, 1840) (Horsfeld, Mirafra assamica (Linnaeus, 1758) Galerida cristata (Blyth, 1845) Alaudala raytal (Lesson, 1831) Coracina macei 1914) Pericrocotus ethologus Pericrocotus Pericrocotus cinnamomeus Pericrocotus 1766) Prinia socialis Orthotomus sutorius Orthotomus (Sykes, 1832) (Sykes, Prinia inornata Cistcola juncidis Cistcola Corvus splendens (Vieillot, 1817) Corvus macrorhynchos Dendrocita vagabunda Dendrocita Sarus Crane Order/Family/Common Order/Family/Common name Common Iora Sparrow- Ashy-crowned Lark Small Minivet 41 43 Warbler Blyth's Reed 42 Waterhen White-breasted 44 Warbler Booted 45 46 47 Bushlark Bengal 48 Lark Crested 49 Sand Lark 50 Cuckooshrike Large 51 Minivet Long-tailed 52 53 Prinia Ashy 54 Common Tailorbird 55 Plain Prinia 56 Zitng Cistcola 57 House Crow 58 Crow Large-billed 59 Treepie Rufous Gruiformes Gruiformes Gruidae (1) Passeriformes Passeriformes (2) Acrocephalidae Rallidae (1) Aegithinidae (1) Alaudidae (4) Campephagidae (3) Cistcolidae (4) Cistcolidae Corvidae (3) Dicaeidae (1) Dicaeidae

19018 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh J TT 1d No. Image Image √ × × × × √ √ × × √ √ × × × Sites × × × × √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ SHW RDL MKP BKP SDR ? ? status Global IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV IVIV → → √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ IV → √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IWPA IWPA (1972) ------CITES CITES (2012) Conservaton status Conservaton LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC IUCN (2021) I I I I I I I I I I C C C C C G O O O O O O status Feeding Feeding R R R R R R R R R R R R R SV WV WV WV WV WV WV status Residental Residental (Blyth, 1855) (Linnaeus, 1758) R (Linnaeus, 1758) (Pallas, 1776) (Pallas, (Tunstall, 1771) (Tunstall, (Leach, 1818) (Linnaeus, 1758) (Vieillot, 1818) (Linnaeus, 1758) (Tickell, 1833) (Tickell, (Linnaeus, 1758) Dicaeum agile Dicaeum (Vieillot, 1817) Dicrurus macrocercus (Linnaeus, 1758) malabarica Euodice Scientfc name Scientfc Amandava amandava (Linnaeus, 1758)Lonchura punctulata R (Linnaeus, 1758) Hirundo rustca (Vieillot, 1817) Riparia paludicola (Laxmann, 1769) (Laxmann, Cecropis daurica Petrochelidon fuvicola Petrochelidon Hirundo smithii (Valenciennes, 1826) (Valenciennes, Lanius vitatus (Linnaeus, 1758) Lanius cristatus Lanius schach (Dumont, 1823) (Dumont, Argya caudata (Dumont, 1823) (Dumont, Argya striata Argya earlei (Blyth, 1844) Terpsiphone paradisi Terpsiphone Motacilla citreola Motacilla Motacilla cinerea Motacilla Anthus rufulus Anthus Motacilla fava Motacilla Motacilla alba Motacilla Thick-billed Flowerpecker Thick-billed Black Drongo Order/Family/Common Order/Family/Common name Red Munia Red Scaly-breasted Munia Scaly-breasted Plain Martn Red-rumped Swallow Red-rumped Streak-throated Swallow Streak-throated Wire-tailed Swallow Wire-tailed Bay-backed Shrike Shrike Bay-backed Brown Shrike Brown Long-tailed Shrike Long-tailed Jungle Babbler Striated Babbler Striated Indian Paradise-fycatcher Citrine Wagtail Grey Wagtail Grey Paddyfeld Pipit Paddyfeld Western Yellow Wagtail Yellow Western White Wagtail White 60 61 62 Indian Silverbill 64 65 Barn Swallow 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 Common Babbler 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 Dicruridae (1) Estrildidae (3) Estrildidae 63 Hirundinidae (5) Laniidae (3) Leiothrichidae (3) Monarchidae (1) Monarchidae Motacillidae (6) Motacillidae

Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 19019 J TT Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh 1e No. Image Image × × √ × × × √ √ × × × × √ × × × × × Sites × × × × √ × × × × × × √ √ √ √ × SHW RDL MKP BKP SDR ? status Global IV → √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ IV → √ IV → √ √ √ IV → √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ IV → √ IWPA IWPA (1972) ------CITES CITES (2012) Conservaton status Conservaton LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC IUCN (2021) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I C C N O O O O status Feeding Feeding R R R R R R R R R R R R WV WV WV WV WV WV WV WV status Residental Residental (Sundevall, (Sundevall, (Burton, 1838) (Burton, (Gmelin, 1774) WV (Brooks, 1878) (Brooks, (Linnaeus, 1758) (Linnaeus, 1758) (Latham, 1790) (Latham, (Blyth, 1843) (Pallas, 1811) (Pallas, (Pallas, 1773) (Pallas, (Pallas, 1776) (Pallas, (Sykes, 1832) (Sykes, (Gmelin, maderaspatensis Motacilla 1789) Phoenicurus ochruros Scientfc name Scientfc (Linnaeus, 1758) Luscinia svecica (Blyth, 1851) fusca Oenanthe (Linnaeus, 1766) fulicatus Copsychus Copsychus saularis Copsychus (Linnaeus, 1766) caprata Saxicola (Bechstein, 1792) parvaFicedula (Bechstein, Calliope calliope Saxicola maurus Saxicola Ficedula albicilla Ficedula Cyornis tckelliae Cinnyris asiatcus Cinnyris Oriolus xanthornus Parus cinereus (Vieillot, 1758) Parus Oriolus kundoo (Linnaeus, 1758) domestcus Passer Gymnoris xanthocollis Gymnoris Seicercus reguloides (Blyth, 1842) Seicercus Phylloscopus collybita (Vieillot, 1817) collybita Phylloscopus WV Phylloscopus trochiloides Phylloscopus 1837) Phylloscopus humei Phylloscopus White-browed Wagtail White-browed Black Redstart Order/Family/Common Order/Family/Common name Bluethroat Indian Robin Oriental Magpie Robin Oriental Pied Bushchat Red-breasted Flycatcher Red-breasted Siberian Rubythroat Taiga Flycatcher Taiga Tickell's Blue Flycatcher Tickell's Cinereous Tit Cinereous Indian Golden Oriole House Sparrow Yellow-throated Sparrow Yellow-throated Blyth's Leaf Warbler Blyth's Leaf Common Chifchaf Greenish Warbler Greenish Hume's Warbler 82 83 84 85 Rockchat Brown 86 87 88 89 90 91 Siberian Stonechat 92 93 94 Purple Sunbird 95 Oriole Black-hooded 97 96 98 99 100 101 102 103 Muscicapidae (11) Muscicapidae Nectariniidae (1) Nectariniidae Oriolidae (2) Paridae (1) Paridae Passeridae (2) Passeridae Phylloscopidae (4) Phylloscopidae Ploceidae (2)

19020 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh J TT No. Image Image × × 1g √ × √ × × Sites √ √ √ √ √ 1f √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ SHW RDL MKP BKP SDR ? ? ? ? ? status Global IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV IV IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IWPA IWPA (1972) ------CITES CITES (2012) Conservaton status Conservaton LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC IUCN (2021) I I I C C C C G O O O O O O O O O O O O status Feeding Feeding R R R R R R R R R R R R R WV WV WV status Residental Residental (Latham, 1790) (Latham, R (Temminck, (Temminck, (Swainson, 1820) (Swainson, WV (Linnaeus, 1758) R (Linnaeus, 1758) (Gmelin, 1789) (Linnaeus, 1766) (Jarocki, 1819) (Jarocki, (Linnaeus, 1766) (Linnaeus, 1758) (Sykes, 1832) (Sykes, (Linnaeus, 1758) (Linnaeus, 1758) Ploceus philippinus Ploceus Ploceus benghalensis Ploceus Pycnonotus cafer Scientfc name Scientfc Pycnonotus jocosus Culicicapa ceylonensis Culicicapa (Lesson, 1830) castanea Sita (Linnaeus, 1758) contra Gracupica Acridotheres ginginianus Sturnia pagodarum (Linnaeus, 1766) Acridotheres trists Sturnus vulgaris (Wagler, 1827) Acridotheres fuscus (Wagler, Turdus atrogularis Turdus (Gmelin, pondicerianus Tephrodornis 1789) Zosterops palpebrosus Zosterops 1824) (Linnaeus, 1758) nyctcorax Nyctcorax R Bubulcus ibis Ardea cinerea Ardeola grayii (Wagler, 1827) (Wagler, Ardea intermedia Red-vented Bulbul Red-vented Order/Family/Common Order/Family/Common name Red-whiskered Bulbul Red-whiskered Grey-headed Canary- Grey-headed fycatcher Indian Nuthatch Asian Pied Starling Bank Myna Common Starling Jungle Myna Black-throated Thrush Black-throated Common Woodshrike Indian White-eye Black-crowned Night Night Black-crowned Heron Catle Egret Catle Grey Heron Grey Indian Pond Heron Indian Pond Intermediate Egret Intermediate 104 Weaver Baya 105 Weaver Black-breasted 106 107 109 108 110 111 112 Starling Brahminy 113 Common Myna 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 Pycnonotdae (2) Pycnonotdae Stenostridae (1) Stenostridae Sitdae (1) Sturnidae (6) Turdidae (1) Turdidae Vangidae (1) Vangidae Zosteropidae (1) Zosteropidae Pelecaniformes Pelecaniformes (7) Ardeidae

Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 19021 J TT Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh 1h No. Image Image × × × × × × × 2a √ × × × 2d √ √ √ Sites √ × × × × × × × × √ √ √ √ √ 2f × SHW RDL MKP BKP SDR ? status Global IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV IV ↓ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV → √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ IV → √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ IV ↓ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↑ √ √ √ √ √ IV ↓ √ IV → √ IV → √ √ √ √ IWPA IWPA (1972) ------II II II II II CITES CITES (2012) Conservaton status Conservaton LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC NT NT NT IUCN (2021) I F F F F F C C C C C C C C O O status Feeding Feeding R R R R R R R R R R R R R status Residental Residental (Linnaeus, (Linnaeus, 1758) R (Pennant, 1769) (Pennant, WV (Gmelin, 1788) (Gmelin, 1788) (Linnaeus, 1766) (Vigors, 1832) (Vigors, (Linnaeus, 1766) (Linnaeus, 1766) garzeta Egreta Ardea purpurea Scientfc name Scientfc (Boddaert, 1783) oscitans Anastomus Mycteria leucocephala Mycteria (Boddaert, 1783) episcopus Ciconia Dinopium benghalense Yungipicus nanus Yungipicus (Latham, 1801) (Latham, Leiopicus mahratensis R Psilopogon zeylanicus (Muller, (Muller, Psilopogon haemacephalus 1776) Psitacula eupatria Psitacula 1766) Psitacula cyanocephala Psitacula (Scopoli, 1769) krameri (Scopoli, Psitacula Ketupa zeylonensis Ketupa (Lesson, 1839) Strix ocellata (Temminck, 1821) brama (Temminck, Athene Order/Family/Common Order/Family/Common name Asian Openbill Painted Stork Painted Woolly-neck Stork Woolly-neck Black-rumped Flameback Black-rumped Brown-capped Pygmy Pygmy Brown-capped Woodpecker Yellow-fronted Yellow-fronted Woodpecker Brown-headed Barbet Brown-headed Rose-ringed Parakeet Rose-ringed Brown Fish Owl Brown Motled Wood Owl Motled Wood Spoted Owlet Spoted 124 Litle Egret 125 Purple Heron 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 Barbet Coppersmith 134 Parakeet Alexandrine 135 Plum-headed Parakeet 136 137 138 139 Ciconiidae (3) Ciconiidae Piciformes Piciformes Picidae (3) Ramphastdae (2) Ramphastdae Psitaciformes Psitaciformes (3) Psitaculidae Strigiformes Strigiformes Strigidae (3) IUCN: Internatonal Union for Conservaton of Nature and Natural Resources; CITES: Conventon on Internatonal Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora; IPWA: Indian Wildlife Protecton Act; R: Resident, WV: Winter Winter WV: Act; R: Resident, Protecton Indian Wildlife IPWA: and Flora; Species of Wild in Fauna Endangered Trade on Internatonal Conventon CITES: Resources; and Natural of Nature Conservaton Union for IUCN: Internatonal species of II: Appendix-II CITES Near Threatened; NT: country VU: Vulnerable; Concern; EN: Endangered; Least the LC: by N: Nectarivore; G: Granivorous; trade F: Frugivorous; I: Insectvorous; O: for Omnivorous; C: Carnivorous; Summer Visitor; SV: regulated already Visitor, are which species those are CITES of species Appendix-III III: controlled; closely is trade unless so become may but extncton with now threatened necessarily not are that ones the are CITES and that needs the of cooperaton I: other Schedule unsustainable and countries to prevent - illegal exploitaton; IWPA I (high species priority of species); Schedule IWPA IV: - low IV (relatvely priority species species); of V: IWPA Schedule - V species (vermin of - IWPA species which are harmful to crops, livestock and perceived as causing problems for the society); ?: Unknown; →: Stable; ↑: Increasing; ↓: Decreasing; SHW: Sohawal; RDL: Rudauli; MKP: in the site. ×: Species not recorded in the site; SDR: Sadar; √: Species recorded Milkipur; BKP: Bikapur;

19022 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh J TT district, eastern Utar Pradesh, India (Table 2). Similar Table 3. Relatve diversity (Rdi) of various avian families in agricultural studies in agricultural landscapes have reported 144 landscapes of Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Pradesh, India. Number of species species in Burdwan, West Bengal (Hossain & Aditya Avian family Rdi value 2016), 128 species in Nalgonda District, Telangana recorded Accipitridae 11 7.91 (Narayana et al. 2019) and 107 species in Assam Muscicapidae 11 7.91 (Yashmita-Ulman et al. 2021a). In India, Passeriformes Ardeidae 7 5.04 is the most dominant order (Praveen et al. 2016) and Columbidae 7 5.04 was found to be the most dominant order with 28 Cuculidae 7 5.04 families and 76 species (Figure 2) in this study also. Motacillidae 6 4.32 This fnding is also consistent with the study of Kumar Sturnidae 6 4.32 & Sahu (2020). Most species that have been recorded Hirundinidae 5 3.60 during our study are residents followed by winter and Alaudidae 4 2.88 summer visitors (Figure 3). Hossain & Aditya (2016) in Cistcolidae 4 2.88 West Bengal, Narayana et al. (2019) in Tamil Nadu and Phylloscopidae 4 2.88 Kumar & Sahu (2020) in Haryana have also found that Campephagidae 3 2.16 the majority of the birds recorded from agricultural Ciconiidae 3 2.16 landscapes were resident in nature, followed by winter Corvidae 3 2.16 visitors and summer visitors. Utar Pradesh being a part Estrildidae 3 2.16 of the Central Asian Flyway serves as a wintering site Laniidae 3 2.16 for the migratory birds travelling from northern part of Leiothrichidae 3 2.16 Asia and parts of Europe. The migratory birds usually Picidae 3 2.16 prefer areas having congenial environment, enormous Psitaculidae 3 2.16 food availability and safe and secure sites as wintering Strigidae 3 2.16 grounds (Mukhopadhyay & Mazumdar 2017). Most of Acrocephalidae 2 1.44 the tehsils in Ayodhya district are blessed with seasonal Alcedinidae 2 1.44 and perennial wetlands that atract a large populaton Apodidae 2 1.44 of migratory birds (pers. obs.). This is one of the reasons Charadriidae 2 1.44 Meropidae 2 1.44 for encountering such high numbers of migrants in the Oriolidae 2 1.44 study area. Passeridae 2 1.44 Six foraging guilds are found in the study area, Phasianidae 2 1.44 omnivores being the most dominant (Figure 4). This Ploceidae 2 1.44 result contradicts those of other studies (e.g., Narayana Pycnonotdae 2 1.44 et al. 2019; Kumar & Sahu 2020) who have reported Ramphastdae 2 1.44 insectvores to be the most dominant feeding guild in Aegithinidae 1 0.72 agricultural landscapes. Out of all the avifauna recorded, Bucerotdae 1 0.72 87 bird species (63%) were found in all the study sites, Coraciidae 1 0.72 whereas 52 bird species (37%) are recorded only in Dicaeidae 1 0.72 some study sites (Table 2). The fact that the bird species Dicruridae 1 0.72 observed in the study area were mainly omnivores and Falconidae 1 0.72 a majority of them were found in all the study sites, Glareolidae 1 0.72 indicates that the bird species occurring in agricultural Gruidae 1 0.72 felds are generalists in nature. They might have adopted Monarchidae 1 0.72 themselves to the instability of food (felds are cultvated Nectariniidae 1 0.72 only for some parts of the year) and therefore feed on Paridae 1 0.72 both plant and animal mater. Family Muscicapidae Rallidae 1 0.72 is known to be the most diverse family in India Sitdae 1 0.72 (Manakadan & Pite 2001) and our results also indicate Stenostridae 1 0.72 that Muscicapidae along with Accipitridae are the most Turdidae 1 0.72 diverse families (11 species each, RDi= 7.91) (Table 3), Upupidae 1 0.72 conforming to this statement. Vangidae 1 0.72 In the present study, Sohawal tehsil recorded the Zosteropidae 1 0.72

Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 19023 J TT Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh

Table 4. Measurements of avian diversity and richness at agricultural Table 5. Sorenson’s Similarity Index of avian species between landscapes of Ayodhya District, eastern Utar Pradesh, India. selected agricultural landscapes of Ayodhya district, eastern Utar Pradesh, India. Species Tehsil (Study sites) SWI SDI PEI richness Sohawal Rudauli Milkipur Bikapur Sadar Sohawal 133 4.3 0.01 0.87 Sohawal 0.00 Rudauli 126 4.28 0.01 0.88 Rudauli 0.93 0.00 Milkipur 119 4.25 0.01 0.88 Milkipur 0.92 0.94 0.00 Bikapur 114 4.23 0.01 0.89 Bikapur 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.00 Sadar 98 3.86 0.03 0.84 Sadar 0.82 0.86 0.84 0.84 0.00 SWI—Shannon-Weiner Diversity Index | SDI—Simpson’s Dominance Index | PEI—Pielou’s Evenness Index. having a good bird diversity but not at par with Sohawal tehsil. On the other hand, Sadar tehsil mostly forms the highest species richness and Shannon-Weiner diversity heart of the Ayodhya city, having large areas occupied index (133, 4.30) (Table 4). The bird species richness and by buildings, setlements and industries. The study community structure depends upon the availability of sites in this tehsil are, therefore, adversely afected by food, roostng and nestng sites (Narayana et al. 2019), urbanizaton and higher anthropogenic disturbances. anthropogenic pressure (Yashmita-Ulman et al. 2020), The urban development leads to habitat alteraton thus geographical area & size, topographical features & reducing the availability of suitable habitats for birds climatc conditons of the area. The agricultural felds in (Mukhopadhyay & Mazumdar 2017). This might be Sohawal ofer food in the form of rice & wheat grains & the reason for fnding the lowest bird diversity in Sadar mustard seeds from tme to tme. This tehsil also has a (Species richness= 98, Shannon Weiner diversity index= presence of very diverse habitats. It is interspersed by 3.86) as compared to that of other selected sites. small to large water bodies, agroforestry systems (trees Overall eight species of global conservaton like Eucalyptus sp. or Tectona grandis planted on farm importance namely, Aquila nipalensis, Neophron bunds), plantatons of Eucalyptus sp. or Tectona grandis percnopterus (Endangered), Antgone antgone, and orchards of Mangifera indica or Psidium guajava Clanga hastata (Vulnerable), Ciconia episcopus, Gyps making the landscape heterogeneous in nature. Due to himalayensis, Mycteria leucocephala, Psitacula eupatria this, the area ofers very diverse food supply catering to (Near Threatened) have been reported in the study the needs of birds belonging to diferent foraging guilds. area (Table 2). This region also supported, 31 species Sundar and Kitur (2013) have reported that agricultural (22%) whose global populaton trend is decreasing felds having wetlands in vicinity support diverse bird (Figure 5) and 16 species which came under Appendix species. Yashmita-Ulman et al. (2018) have suggested II and Appendix III of CITES (Table 2). These fndings that the presence of trees on bunds or blocks increases are consistent with the study of Kumar & Sahu (2020). the bird diversity in agricultural felds. All these factors The agricultural lands with diverse species compositon might have contributed to the bird diversity positvely (Yashmita-Ulman 2021c), fruitng and fowering for this site to have a high bird diversity. patern (Yashmita-Ulman 2021a), structural diversity In the current study, the second highest species and management actvites (Peterjohn 2003) prove as richness (126) is reported from Rudauli tehsil. The sites suitable breeding and foraging grounds for bird species. selected in Rudauli have Rudauli Reserve Forest in the Many bird species such as Ploceus philippinus (Yashmita- vicinity and the agricultural felds have patches of trees Ulman et al. 2017) and Antgone antgone (Sundar either planted on bunds or in the form of orchards 2009) are conserved in human-dominated landscapes and plantatons which might have infuenced the bird due to the religious and traditonal beliefs of the local diversity positvely. Yashmita-Ulman et al. (2021b) in communites. These beliefs immensely contribute in their study have concluded that agro-ecosystems in the supportng species of conservaton concern and species vicinity of forests have higher diversity. But at the same whose global populaton trend is decreasing in these tme, these selected sites have very few water bodies agricultural landscapes. which might have had a negatve impact on the bird diversity. Bird species richness and diversity increase in accordance to presence of vegetaton and water bodies (Shih 2018). All these might be the reasons of

19024 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh J TT CONCLUSION CITES (The Conventon on Internatonal Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) (2012). htps://cites.org/eng/disc/species. php Accessed on 2nd January 2021. The present study is the frst documentaton of the Dhindsa, M.S. & H.K. Saini (1994). Agricultural ornithology: bird diversity found in agricultural landscapes of Ayodhya an Indian perspectve. Journal of Bioscience 19(4): 391–402. htps://doi.org/10.1007/BF02703176 district, Utar Pradesh. It is evident from this study that Doxa, A., Y. Bas, M.L. Paracchini, P. Pointereau, J.M. Terres & F. the agricultural landscapes are a potental habitat for the Jiguet (2010). Low-intensity agriculture increases farmland bird rare, globally threatened and near-threatened birds as abundances in France. Journal of Applied Ecology 47: 1348–56. htps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01869.x well as various other migratory and resident birds. Thus, Elsen, P.R., R. Kalyanaraman, K. Ramesh & D.S. Wilcove (2016). The this paper lends an insight that agricultural landscapes importance of agricultural lands for Himalayan birds in winter. can be harnessed for their conservaton values. But such Conservaton Biology 31(2): 416–426. htps://doi.org/10.1111/ cobi.12812 habitats are under constant threats due to anthropogenic Grimmet, R., C. Inskipp & T. Inskipp (2011). Birds of the Indian actvites. Therefore, such landscapes must be regularly Subcontnent. Oxford University Press & Christopher Helm, London, assessed for their bird diversity and populatons. Further 528pp. Haslem, A. & A.F. Bennet (2008). Birds in agricultural mosaics: the detailed studies should be conducted to understand the infuence of landscape patern and countryside heterogeneity. factors infuencing the diversity of birds in agricultural Ecological Applicatons 18: 185–196. htps://doi.org/10.1890/07- landscapes and the role these landscapes play in 0692.1 Hossain, A. & G. Aditya (2016). Avian Diversity in Agricultural providing feeding, nestng, roostng and breeding sites Landscape: Records from Burdwan, West Bengal, India. Proceedings for birds. of Zoological Society 69(1): 38–51. htps://doi.org/10.1007/s12595- 014-0118-3 Iqubal, P., P.J.K. McGowan, J.P. Carroll & A.R. Rahmani (2003). Home range size, habitat use and nestng success of swamp francolin REFERENCES Francolinus gularis on agricultural land in northern India. Bird Conservaton Internatonal 13: 127–138. htps://doi.org/10.1017/ S0959270903003113 Abdar, M.R. (2014). Seasonal diversity of birds and ecosystem services IUCN (Internatonal Union for Conservaton of Nature) (2021). in agricultural area of Western Ghats, Maharashtra state, India. htps://www.iucnredlist.org/ Accessed on 27 March 2021. Journal of Environmental Science, Toxicology and Food Technology IWPA (Indian Wildlife Protecton Act) (1972). htps://legislatve.gov. 8(1): 100–105. in/sites/default/fles/A1972-53_0.pdf Accessed on 2 January 2021. Ali, S. & S.D. Ripley (1987). Compact handbook of the birds of India Javed, S. & A.R. Rahmani (1998). Conservaton of the avifauna of and Pakistan together with those of Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Dudwa Natonal Park, India. Forktail 14: 57–66. Sri Lanka. Oxford University Press, Delhi, 737pp. Jayasimhan, C.S. & P. Pramod (2019). Diversity and temporal variaton Anonymous (2021a). Trading Economics. Accessed on 02 January of the bird community in paddy felds of Kadhiramangalam, Tamil 2021. htps://tradingeconomics.com/india/agricultural-land- Nadu, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 11(10): 14279–14291. percent-of-land-area-wb-data.html#:~:text=Agricultural%20 htps://doi.org/10.11609/jot.4241.11.10.14279-14291 land%20(%25%20of%20land%20area)%20in%20India%20was%20 Khan, M.S., A. Afab, Z. Syed, A. Nawab, O. Ilyas & A. Khan (2013). reported,compiled%20from%20ofcially%20recognized%20sources Compositon and conservaton status of avian species at Hastnapur Anonymous (2021b). UNEP-WCMC Accessed on 02 January 2021. Wildlife Sanctuary, Utar Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa https://www.unep-wcmc.org/featured-projects/mapping-the- 5(12): 4714–4721. htps://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o3419.4714-21 worlds-special-places Kumar, A. & A. Kanaujia (2016). A fourishing breeding colony of Asian Anonymous (2021c). ENVIS. Accessed on 02 January 2021. htp:// Openbill Stork (Anastomus oscitans) in Nawabganj Bird Sanctuary, www.wiienvis.nic.in/Database/Protected_Area_854.aspx Utar Pradesh. Internatonal Journal of Extensive Research 10: 1-4. Anonymous (2021d). Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Ayodhya. Accessed on 02 Kumar, P. & S. Sahu (2020). Compositon, diversity and foraging January 2021. htps://ayodhya.kvk4.in/district-profle.html guilds of avifauna in agricultural landscapes in Panipat, Haryana, Asokan, S., A.M.S. Ali & R. Manikannan (2009). Diet of three India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 12(1): 15140–15153. htps://doi. insectvorous birds in Nagapatnam District, Tamil Nadu, India: org/10.11609/jot.5267.12.1.15140-15153 a preliminary study. Journal of Threatened Taxa 1(6): 327–330. Kumar, S. (2018). Cultural landscape and heritage of Ayodhya-Faizabad: htps://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o2145.327-30 A geographical analysis. PhD Thesis submited to Department of Athreya, V., M. Odden, J.D.C. Linnell & K.U. Karanth (2010). Geography, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Utar Pradesh. Translocaton as a tool for mitgatng confict with leopards in Malhi, C.S. (2006). Status of avifauna in agricultural habitat and other human-dominated landscapes of India. Conservaton Biology 25: associated sub-habitats of Punjab. Environment and Ecology 24(1): 133–141. htps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01599.x 131–143. Basavarajappa, S. (2006). Avifauna of agro-ecosystems of maidan area Manakadan, R. & A. Pite (2001). Standardized common and scientfc of Karnataka. Zoo’s Print Journal 21(4): 2217–2219. htps://doi. names of the birds of the Indian subcontnent. Buceros 6(1): 1–37. org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1277.2217-9 Mishra, H., V. Kumar & A. Kumar (2020). Populaton structure and Bibby, C.J., D.A. Hill, N.D. Burgess & S. Mustoe (2000). Bird Census habitat utlizaton of migratory birds at Bakhira Bird Sanctuary, Utar Techniques. 2nd Editon. Academic Press, London, 302pp. Pradesh, India. Pakistan Journal of Zoology 52(1): 247–254. htps:// Borad, C.K., A. Mukherjee & B.M. Parashaya (2000). Conservaton of doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/2020.52.1.247.254 the avian biodiversity in paddy (Oryza satva) crop agroecosystem. Mukhopadhyay, S. & S. Mazumdar (2017). Compositon, diversity and Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 70(6): 378–381. foraging guilds of avifauna in a suburban area of southern West Bruggisser, O.T., Schmidt-Entling, M.H. & S. Bacher (2010). Efects Bengal, India. Ring 39: 103–120. htps://doi.org/10.1515/ring- of vineyard management on biodiversity at three trophic levels. 2017-0004 Biological Conservaton 143: 1521–8. htps://doi.org/10.1016/j. Narayana, B.L., V.V. Rao & V.V. Reddy (2019). Compositon of birds in biocon.2010.03.034 agricultural landscapes Peddagatu and Sherpally area: a proposed

Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 19025 J TT Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh

a b

c d

e f

g h

19026 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh J TT

a b

c d

g h

Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028 19027 J TT Bird compositon, diversity, and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study Yashmita-Ulman & Singh

uranium mining sites in Nalgonda, Telangana, India. Proceedings of Taf, O.W. & S.M. Haig (2006). Landscape context mediates infuence Zoological Society 72(4): 355–363. htps://doi.org/10.1007/s12595- of local food abundance on wetland use by wintering shorebirds in 018-0276-9 an agricultural valley. Biological Conservaton 128: 298–307. htps:// O’Connor, R. & M. Shrubb (1986). Farming and birds. Cambridge: digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstafpub/575 Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 539pp. Torre-Cuadros, M.D.L.A.L., S. Herrando-Perez & K.R. Young (2007). Peterjohn, B.G. (2003). Agricultural landscapes: can they support Diversity and structure paterns for tropical montane and premontane healthy bird populatons as well as farm products. The Auk 120: forests of central Peru, with an assessment of the use of higher- 14–19. htps://doi.org/10.1642/0004-8038(2003)120[0014:ALCTS taxon surrogacy. Biodiversity and Conservaton 16: 2965–2988. H]2.0.CO;2 htps://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-007-9155-9 Pielou, E.C. (1966). The measurement of diversity in diferent types of Whelan, C.J., D.G. Wenny & R.J. Marquis (2008). Ecosystem services biological collectons. Journal of Theoretcal Biology 13: 131–144. provided by birds. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences htps://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(66)90013-0 11343: 25–60. htps://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1439.003 Praveen, J., R. Jayapal & A. Pite (2016). A Checklist of the birds of Wretenberg, J., T. Part & A. Berg (2010). Changes in local species India. Indian Birds 11(5&6): 113–172. richness of farmland birds in relaton to land-use changes and Praveen, J., R. Jayapal & A. Pite (2020). Taxonomic updates to the landscape structure. Biological Conservaton 143: 375–81. htps:// checklists of birds of India, and the South Asian region – 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.11.001 Indian Birds 16(1): 12–19. Yashmita-Ulman, A. Kumar & M. Sharma (2017). Traditonal Ramankuty, N. & J.A. Foley (1998). Characterizing paterns of global homegarden agroforestry systems: Habitat for conservaton of Baya land use: an analysis of global croplands data. Global Biogeochemical Weaver Ploceus philippinus (Passeriformes: Ploceidae) in Assam. Cycles 12: 667–685. htps://doi.org/10.1029/98GB02512 India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 9(4): 10076–10083. htps://doi. Sekercioglu, C.H. (2012). Bird functonal diversity and ecosystem org/10.11609/jot.3090.9.4.10076-10083 services in tropical forests, agroforests and agricultural areas. Yashmita-Ulman, M. Sharma & A. Kumar (2018). Agroforestry systems Journal of Ornithology 153(Suppl. 1): S153–S161. htps://doi. as habitat for avian species: assessing its role in conservaton. org/10.1007/s10336-012-0869-4 Proceedings of Zoological Society 71: 127–145. htps://doi. Shannon, C.E. & W.W. Wiener (1963). The mathematcal theory of org/10.1007/s12595-016-0198-3 communicatons. University of Illinois, Urbana, USA. Yashmita-Ulman, M. Singh, A. Kumar & M. Sharma (2020). Negatve Shih, W.Y. (2018). Bird diversity of greenspaces in the densely human-wildlife interactons in traditonal agroforestry systems in developed city centre of Taipei. Urban Ecosystem 21: 379-393. Assam, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 12(10): 16230–16238. htps://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-017-0720-z htps://doi.org/10.11609/jot.5754.12.10.16230-16238 Simpson, E.H. (1949). Measurement of diversity. Nature 163: 688 Yashmita-Ulman, M. Singh, A. Kumar & M. Sharma (2021a). htps://doi.org/10.1038/163688a0 Conservaton of wildlife diversity in agroforestry systems in eastern Sorenson, T. (1948). A method of establishing groups of equal Himalayan biodiversity hotspot. Proceedings of Zoological Society amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species and 74: 171–188. htps://doi.org/10.1007/s12595-021-00361-x its applicaton to analyses of the vegetaton on Danish commons. Yashmita-Ulman, M. Singh, A. Kumar & M. Sharma (2021b). Biologiske Skrifer/ Kongellege Danske Videnskabernes Selskab 5 Agroforestry systems: a boon or bane for mammal conservaton in Sundar, K.S.G. & S. Kitur (2012). Methodological, temporal and Northeastern India? Proceedings of Zoological Society 74: 28–42. spatal factors afectng modeled occupancy of resident birds in the htps://doi.org/10.1007/s12595-020-00335-5 perennially cultvated landscape of Utar Pradesh, India. Landscape Yashmita-Ulman, M. Singh, A. Kumar & M. Sharma (2021c). Ecology 27: 59–71. htps://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-011-9666-3 Conservaton of plant diversity in agroforestry systems in a Sundar, K.S.G. & S. Kitur (2013). Can wetlands maintained for human biodiversity hotspot region of northeast India. Agricultural Research use also help conserve biodiversity? Landscape-scale paterns of (in press) htps://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-020-00525-9 bird use of wetlands in an agricultural landscape in north India. Biological Conservaton 168: 49–56. htps://doi.org/10.1016/j. biocon.2013.09.016 Sundar, K.S.G. & S. Subramanya (2010). Bird use of rice felds in the Author details: Dr. Yashmita-Ulman, is an Assistant Professor at Department of Indian subcontnent. Waterbirds 33 (Special Publicaton 1): 44–70 Silviculture & Agroforestry, ANDUAT, Ayodhya. She has been involved in research Sundar, K.S.G. (2006). Flock size, density and habitat selecton of on wildlife. Her current interests include plant-animal interactons in agroforestry four large waterbirds species in an agricultural landscape in Utar systems and forests. Dr. Manoj Singh is an Assistant Professor at Department Pradesh, India. Waterbirds 29(3): 365–374. of Zoology, Kalinga University, Chhatsgarh. He is involved in research related to bird acoustcs and wildlife conservaton using GIS. Sundar, K.S.G. (2009). Are rice paddies suboptmal breeding habitat for Sarus Cranes in Utar Pradesh, India? Condor 111: 611–623. Author contributons: Y-U was involved in data collecton. Both the authors were htps://doi.org/10.1525/cond.2009.080032 involved in data compilaton, analysis, manuscript writng, editng and fnalizing the manuscript.

Threatened Taxa

19028 Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 19011–19028

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)

July 2021 | Vol. 13 | No. 8 | Pages: 18959–19190 Date of Publicaton: 26 July 2021 (Online & Print) www.threatenedtaxa.org DOI: 10.11609/jot.2021.13.8.18959-19190

Communicatons A preliminary checklist of dragonfies and damselfies (Insecta: Odonata) of Vakkom Grama Panchayath, Thiruvanthapuram District, Kerala, India Distributon and habitat preferences of the Chinese Pangolin Manis pentadactyla (Mammalia: – J. Arunima & P.O. Nameer, Pp. 19125–19136 Manidae) in the mid-hills of Nepal – Suman Acharya, Hari Prasad Sharma, Rajeev Bhatarai, Beeju Poudyal, Sonia Sharma & Suraj Diversity patern of buterfy communites (Lepidoptera) in diferent habitat types of Nahan, Upadhaya, Pp. 18959–18966 Himachal Pradesh, India – Suveena Thakur, Suneet Bahrdwaj & Amar Paul Singh, Pp. 19137–19143 On the occurrence of the Himalayan Wolf Canis lupus, L. 1758 (Mammalia: Carnivora: Canidae) in the Gaurishankar Conservaton Area, Nepal; its existence confrmed through sign and visual Descriptons of the early stages of Vagrans egista sinha (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) with notes on evidence in Rolwaling Valley its host plant Xylosma longifolia Clos from the western Himalaya of India – Bishnu Prasad Pandey, Shankar Man Thami, Rabin Shrestha & Mukesh Kumar Chalise, Pp. 18967– – Pranav Gokhale & M.A. Yathumon, Pp. 19144–19148 18974 Notes Group size, crowding, and age class compositon of the threatened Sambar Rusa unicolor (Kerr, 1792) (Mammalia: Cetartodactyla: Cervidae) in the semi-arid regions of northeastern Rajasthan, First photographic record of Mishmi Takin Budorcus taxicolor taxicolor and Red Goral India Nemorhaedus baileyi from Kamlang Tiger Reserve, Arunachal Pradesh, India – Deepak Rai & Kalpana, Pp. 18975–18985 – Cheshta Singh & Deept Gupta, Pp. 19149–19152

Study on the impacts of LULC change on the wildlife habitat and the livelihood of people in and Utlisaton of honey trap method to ensnare a dispersing sub-adult Bengal Tiger Panthera tgris around Dampa Tiger Reserve, Mizoram, India tgris L. in a human dominated landscape – Sushanto Gouda, Janmejay Sethy, Netrapal Singh Chauhan & Harendra Singh Bargali, Pp. 18986– – Gobind Sagar Bhardwaj, Balaji Kari & Arvind Mathur, Pp. 19153–19155 18992 First camera trap photographs of Indian Pangolin Manis crassicaudata (Mammalia: Pholidota: Characterisaton of breeding habitat of Grizzled Giant Squirrel Ratufa macroura (Mammalia: Manidae) from Pakistan Sciuridae) in Chinnar Wildlife Sanctuary, Western Ghats, India – Misbah Bint Riaz, Faraz Akrim, Siddiqa Qasim, Syed Afaq Bukhari, Asad Aslam, Muhammad – Kiran Thomas & P.O. Nameer, Pp. 18993–19001 Waseem, Rizwana Imtaz & Tariq Mahmood, Pp. 19156–19158

Seasonal prey availability and diet compositon of Lesser Asiatc Yellow House Bat Scotophilus Photographic record of Lesser Flamingo Phoeniconaias minor (Aves: Phoenicopteridae) in kuhlii Leach, 1821 Ramganga river, Bareilly, India – Shani Kumar Bharty & Vadamalai Elangovan, Pp. 19002–19010 – Pichaimuthu Gangaiamaran, Afab A. Usmani, G.V. Gopi, S.A. Hussain & Khursid A. Khan, Pp. 19159–19161 Bird compositon, diversity and foraging guilds in agricultural landscapes: a case study from eastern Utar Pradesh, India Total length and head length relatonship in Mugger Crocodiles Crocodylus palustris (Reptlia: – Yashmita-Ulman & Manoj Singh, Pp. 19011–19028 Crocodilia: Crocodylidae) in Iran – Asghar Mobaraki, Elham Abtn, Malihe Erfani & Colin Stevenson, Pp. 19162–19164 Identfcaton of a unique barb from the dorsal body contour feathers of the Indian Pita Pita brachyura (Aves: Passeriformes: Pitdae) First record of the hoverfy genus Spilomyia Meigen (Diptera: Syrphidae) for Pakistan – Prateek Dey, Swapna Devi Ray, Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, Padmanabhan Pramod & Ram Pratap – Muhammad Asghar Hassan, Imran Bodlah, Riaz Hussain, Azan Karam, Fazlullah & Azaz Ahmad, Singh, Pp. 19029–19039 Pp. 19165–19167

Moths of the superfamily Gelechioidea (Microlepidoptera) from the Western Ghats of India Rediscovery of Watson’s Demon Stmula swinhoei swinhoei (Elwes & Edwards, 1897) – Amit Katewa & Prakash Chand Pathania, Pp. 19040–19052 (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae: Hesperiinae) in Meghalaya, India afer 60 years – Suman Bhowmik & Atanu Bora, Pp. 19168–19170 On the diversity and abundance of riparian odonate fauna (Insecta) of the midstream Chalakkudy River, Kerala, India A record of Ourapteryx dierli Inoue, 1994 (Lepidoptera: Geometridae: Ennominae) from the – C. Nitha Bose, C.F. Binoy & Francy K. Kakkassery, Pp. 19053–19059 Garhwal Himalaya, India – Arun P. Singh & Lekhendra, Pp. 19171–19172 Species diversity and abundance paterns of epiphytc orchids in Aralam Wildlife Sanctuary in Kerala, India Report of Bradinopyga konkanensis Joshi & Sawant, 2020 (Insecta: Odonata) from Kerala, India – Jis Sebastan, Durairaj Kathiresan & Giby Kuriakose, Pp. 19060–19069 – Muhammed Haneef, B. Raju Stven Crasta & A. Vivek Chandran, Pp. 19173–19176

Status and conservaton needs of Cycas pectnata Buch.-Ham. in its natural habitat at A new distributon record of Bianor angulosus (Karsch, 1879) (Araneae: Saltcidae) from Kerala, Baroiyadhala Natonal Park, Bangladesh India – M.K. Hossain, M.A. Hossain, S. Hossen, M.R. Rahman, M.I. Hossain, S.K. Nath & M.B.N. Siddiqui, – Nishi Babu, John T.D. Caleb & G. Prasad, Pp. 19177–19180 Pp. 19070–19078 Notes on lectotypifcaton of the Assam Ironwood Mesua assamica (King & Prain) Kosterm. Review (Calophyllaceae) – Prantk Sharma Baruah, Sachin Kumar Borthakur & Bhaben Tant, Pp. 19181–19184 Limitatons of current knowledge about the ecology of Grey Foxes hamper conservaton eforts – Maximilian L. Allen, Alexandra C. Avrin, Morgan J. Farmer, Laura S. Whipple, Emmarie P. Alexander, On the rediscovery of a rare root parasite Gleadovia ruborum Gamble & Prain (Orobanchaceae) Alyson M. Cervantes & Javan M. Bauder, Pp. 19079–19092 from Utarakhand, western Himalaya, India – Amit Kumar, Navendu V. Page, Bhupendra S. Adhikari, Manoj V. Nair & Gopal S. Rawat, Short Communicatons Pp. 19185–19188

On the freshwater fsh fauna of Krishna River, Sangli District, Maharashtra, India Occurrence of vivipary in Ophiorrhiza rugosa Wall. (Rubiaceae) – Suresh M. Kumbar, Shrikant S. Jadhav, Swapnali B. Lad, Abhijit B. Ghadage, Satyawan S. Patl & – Birina Bhuyan & Sanjib Baruah, Pp. 19189–19190 C. Shiva Shankar, Pp. 19093–19101

Diversity and distributon of the large centpedes (Chilopoda: Scolopendromorpha) in the Phia Oac - Phia Den Natonal Park, Vietnam Publisher & Host – Le Xuan Son, Nguyen Thi Tu Anh, Tran Thi Thanh Binh, Thu Anh T. Nguyen & Anh D. Nguyen, Pp. 19102–19107

Diversity of ants in Aarey Milk Colony, Mumbai, India – Akshay Gawade & Amol P. Patwardhan, Pp. 19108–19117

First record of ghost shrimp Corallianassa couterei (Nobili, 1904) (Decapoda: Axiidea: Callichiridae) from Indian waters – Piyush Vadher, Hitesh Kardani, Prakash Bambhaniya & Imtyaz Beleem, Pp. 19118–19124

Threatened Taxa