H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63
Biodiversity in Urban environments of Ordu City and Nearby Areas: Mammals, Birds, Reptiles and Amphibians
Ordu Şehri ve Yakın Çevresinde Biyoçeşitlik: Memeliler, Kuşlar, Sürüngenler ve İkiyaşamlılar Research Article
Hasan Sevgili1*, Ahmet Karataş2, Onur Candan1 1Ordu University, Faculty of Art and Science, Department of Biology, Ordu. 2Niğde University, Faculty of Art and Science, Department of Biology, Niğde.
ABSTRACT
he present paper provides the first species list of the fauna of terrestrial vertebrates of Ordu, Turkey. A Tsurvey for determination of the fauna was conducted between 2011 and 2015 in Ordu and the immediate vici- nity. The field studies were made using several different techniques including; visual, wildlife photography and passive infrared camera traps. Previous records and wildlife observations around Ordu city published by pro- fessional wildlife photographers were also included. Overall, we determined 219 terrestrial vertebrate species (168 birds, 40 mammals, 7 reptiles, and 4 amphibians), some of them being low conservation concern. Among the most remarkable species from the conservation point of view, Emys orbicularis (Reptilia), Aythya nyroca, Puffinus yelkouan, Pelecanus crispus, Saxicola maurus, Tetrax tetrax (Aves), Rhinolophus euryale, Miniopterus schreibersii, Lutra lutra (Mammalia) come into prominence. The third record of the Rustic Bunting (Emberiza rustica) for Turkey is made in this study. In the Blacksea region of Turkey, although the most records of Roe Deer (Capreolus capreolus) is largely confined to mountainous regions, it was captured by the photo-traps in the urban areas. Our results suggest that biodiversity of terrestrial vertebrates in Ordu and immediate vicinity is still rich, and adjacent environments between urban and wild habitats are important in terms of conservation of the urban biodiversity.
Key Words Terrestrial Fauna, mammals, birds, herptiles, Ordu province, Turkey.
ÖZET
u çalışmada Ordu ilinin karasal omurgalı türleri ilk kez listelenmiştir. Arazi çalışması Ordu şehri ve yakın Bçevresinde 2011-2015 yılları arasında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Arazi çalışmaları doğrudan gözlem, fotoğraflama, fotokapan ve video kullanılarak farklı yöntemlerle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Tür listesi Ordu şehri ve civarında yapılmış çalışmalardan elde edilen kayıtlar ve profesyonel doğa fotoğrafçılarının gözlemlerini de yansıtmaktadır. Genel olarak, toplamda 219 adet karasal omurgalı türü (168 kuş, 40 memeli, 7 sürüngen, 4 kurbağa) tespit edilmiş ve bunların çok az bir kısmının tehlike altında olduğu anlaşılmaktadır. Koruma statüleri bakımından dikkat çeken türler olarak; Emys orbicularis, Aythya nyroca, Puffinus yelkouan, Pelecanus crispus, Saxicola maurus, Tetrax tetrax, Rhinolophus euryale, Miniopterus schreibersii, Lutra lutra verilebilir. Akkaşlı Kirazkuşunun (Emberiza rustica), Türkiye’den 3. kaydı bu çalışma ile verilmektedir. Karadeniz bölgesinde Karaca (Capreolus capreolus)’nın birçok kaydının daha çok dağlık bölgelerle sınırlı kalmasına rağmen, bu çalışmada şehirleşen alanda da fotokapan ile tespit edilmiştir. Bu çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlar, Ordu şehri ve yakın civarının karasal omurgalı çeşitliliğinin hala yüksek olduğu ve şehir ile doğal yaşam habitatları arasındaki çevrelerin şehir biyoçeşitliliğinin korunmasında önemli olduğuna işaret etmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler Karasal Fauna, Memeli, Kuş, Herptil, Ordu şehri, Türkiye.
Article History: Received: Jan 7, 2016; Revised: Feb 10, 2016; Accepted: Mar 12, 2016; Available Online: Apr 01, 2016. DOI: 10.15671/HJBC.20164417566 Correspondence to: H. Sevgili; Ordu University, Faculty of Art and Science, Department of Biology, Ordu, Turkey. Tel: +90 452 234 50 10 Fax: +90 452 233 91 49 E-Mail: [email protected] 48 H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63
INTRODUCTION create agricultural fields in particular, habitats s of 2014, it is estimated that 54% of the of birds and other terrestrial vertebrates were Aworld population live in cities, and this rate rapidly devastated. In addition to increasing will rise up to 66% by 2050 [1]. According to the urbanization, the usage of the estuary of Melet address-based population registration system as garbage dump for many years remarkably data, 23% of the population of Turkey lives in polluted the area. In addition, the bird species rural areas, whereas the remaining 77% lives in visiting the area had significantly dropped. Our urban areas [2]. A modification of the natural observations in a small wetland which has been distribution areas of organisms into farmlands, able to still survive, but partly-impaired and urbanization and growth of the human population polluted in Durugöl, which is totally occupied have a strong impact on biodiversity [3,4]. The by the buildings today showed that the water migration from the countryside to city engenders bird species (Anatidae, water hens, herons etc.), an utilization of new lands for housing, resulting hinting that the species richness of the area in the in a separation of the present habitats into a period which the wetland was not polluted. As it fragmented structure or a complete eradication can be seen in the study results, an observation of the ecosystem. There are three main aspects of mammals like Roe Deer (Capreolus capreolus) of biodiversity: species diversity, genetic diversity near urban areas, supports this thesis. and ecosystem diversity. A devastation of the habitats is considered as “habitat loss” for many Turkey, when compared to other Palearctic species, which results in a pollution, infestation geographical regions, has a richer habitat variety. of invasive species and other adversities. In The fact that endemic taxa in a proportional sense conclusion, of the increase in the urbanization is higher in comparison with other countries rate, and exploitation of land for agriculture indicates that terrestrial, nautical, and freshwater appear to be the main threats of continuity of biodiversity is greater [6]. Turkey’s avifauna like local species [5,6]. mammal and reptile faunas have been thoroughly studied, and a precise list is mostly established. It This study aimed to determine the terrestrial is also known that Turkey’s avifauna mostly have vertebrates observed in Ordu and the immediate been photographed in the web sources created vicinity. Ordu city was established in 400 BC by by professional and amateur photographers [10, the name Kotyora [7]. Residential life quickly 11]. Kirwan et al. [12] have compiled and listed formed after the establishment of the Republic numerous studies concerning with Turkey’s bird of Turkey. Means of livelihood include traditional fauna, and reported 453 species. It has been fishing and, hazelnut cultivation that has been determined that most of these bird species is recently popularized [8]. In mid 1960s, 15% of commonly found throughout the year and very the population had lived in cities while this rate few of them (approximately 56) are migratory increased to 45% in 2012. birds [13]. Later studies [14] also confirmed that approximately 460 species were reported from As known, the East and the West Black Sea Turkey. The list of birds in Turkey have been geographical regions are separated by the updated, and with the recent records, the list river Melet. Until recent years, the river basins; contains 483 species [10,15]. Durugöl, Melet, and Turnasuyu have been intact habitats, as understood from the records. The The Kızılırmak Delta (Samsun), which is the geological formation of the River Basin, Melet, closest habitat to the presently studied area as indicates the presence of these natural habitats well as the best preserved and biggest wetland [9]. According to Gürgen [9], powerful streams in the Blacksea Region, contains more than 340 such as Melet, Civil, and Turnasuyu generated determined bird species [16]. In a study done the delta formed from the vast Pleistocene and in Artvin, situated on a bird migration route, Holocene alluvial fillings on the coasts in the west a total of 216 bird species including 87 local of Boztepe. However, after 1950 these basins and species was determined [17]. Except for a few wetlands were opened for settlement, dried to records, there is no avifauna studies in Ordu and H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63 49 immediate vicinity. However, in a report prepared Sea region [e.g.26], a complete herpetofauna by the Provincial Directorate of Environment of list has not been established yet. According to Ordu, a list of mammal, bird and reptile species the results of the only herpetofaunistic study to determined in Ordu is provided [18]. According include Ordu and Giresun provinces in the study to this list, 62 birds, 19 reptiles and 31 mammals area, with 3 salamenders (Urodela), 6 frogs species were listed in Ordu. Interestingly, the (Anura), and 4 lizards, 4 serpentes, a total of 17 same list was repeated in 2013. species were determined (Kumlutaş et al., 1998). A study in Middle and East Black Sea regions A study listing Turkey and Cyprus’s mammal reported 7 amphibians, 2 tortoises, 12 lizards, and fauna reviewed the studies on mammal fauna in 5 serpentes species [27,28]. Turkey and listed over 140 species [19]. According to the list, a significant amount of mammal MATERIAL AND METHOD species in Turkey consists of rodents with 43%, while 24% consists of bats, 13,5% carnivores, This study includes data collected irregularly and 12% insectivores. Devastation of habitats between 2011-2015. The bird species in the list and the rapid urbanization negatively effects were determined in Cumhuriyet campus and the not only bird faunas, but also mammal faunas immediate vicinity of Ordu University, Melet River [20,21]. In the present study, since large mammal estuary, inner-city, coastal region, and Turnasuyu observations rather than small mammals were estuary. The birds were determined in all seasons made around the university campus with photo- by photography and observations irregular done trap method, potential small mammals, and bats in irregular intervals. Photography was done were not determined. using Canon EOS-1D Mark IV, 50D and 7D Mark II cameras and Canon EF 400 mm f5.6 and Canon As noted above, Turkey also has a herpetofauna 600 f/4 lenses. While determining some species, that is quite diverse in terms of reptile (Reptilia) binoculars were also used (Bushnell Powerview and amphibian (Amphibia) groups due to different 12x50 mm). Especially while observing and geographic areas and an intercontinental photographing on riversides, camouflage was bridge. Numerous studies have reported a rapid used. decrease in the distribution and abundance of reptiles and amphibians after the second half of Reptile and amphibian determination was the 20th century [22,23]. Despite the fact that made in the university campus and the immediate a consensus on taxa have not been reached in vicinity. Samples were caught by hand, and then terms of species status, there are 21 species of identified. amphibians, 8 of them are salamenders (urodela), and 13 of them are frogs (Anura) in Turkey [24]. Photo-traps (Bushnell Trophy Cam HD Max) In the same book, a total of 108 reptile species were used in order to identify mammal species. including 9 tortoises, 58 lizards, and 41 serpentes This study does not include the determination were listed. In our country, reptile observation of small mammal fauna with the use of photo- and photography and relevant science-based traps. Mammal species captured by photo-traps internet sources have recently started to become were identified using the videos and photographs common. According to the data of Anonymous acquired by the traps. Photo-traps were mounted [25], one of the most important of the sources, around the campus. The photo trap data were a total of 34 amphibian species including 17 examined every two weeks. Extensive sources salamenders (Urodela), and 17 frogs (Anura), and [11,19,29-37] were utilized for the listing of the a total of 132 reptile species including 11 tortoises mammal species. and 65 lizards, 56 serpentes have been listed. The reasons of different number of species from Visual Encounter Survey (VES) was used to the Baran’s list [24] are the addition of new taxa determine the species in the Herpetofauna [38]. in the list or other taxonomic changes. Except for The VES is based on the systematic observation of some local faunistic studies related to the Black animals at a specified time in the field study. This 50 H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63
observation method is appropriate for assembling RESULTS AND DISCUSSION inventory and observation studies of the species in an aquatic or terrestrial habitat. The VES is used A total of 168 bird species belonging to 50 families to determine species richness in a region, create a and 20 orders were listed from the city center species list, and estimate the relative abundance and adjacent parts of Ordu (Table 1). Although of the species in a habitat. In the implementation two species from Columbidae (COLUMBIFORMES) of this method, observing species themselves by family have been known to distribute in neighbor advancing in random transects in a particular areas through Giresun, they were not able field, or indirect observations such as slough and to be recorded in the study area. These are: left traces are carried out. In this study, species Streptopelia turtur (European Turtle Dove) and lists were created by making direct observations S. decaocto (Collared Dove). Apus apus (Swift) in Ordu University campus and the immediate and Tachymarptis melba (Alpine Swift) from vicinity, in 2011 and in 2015 in fall and spring. Apodidae (APODIFORMES) family were registered in KuşBank [41] and recorded from Ordu, but Species conservation status were organized were not included in the list since they cannot according to the IUCN, BERN, and CITES [39,40] be verified. Similarly Cisticola juncidis (Fan-tailed criterias. Warbler) from Cisticolidae (PASSERIFORMES), mostly seen in our Mediterranean and Aegean coasts, was also excluded from the list.
Table 1. The list of birds of Ordu city. ORDO Family 2014 Feb 2014 Feb 2013 June Names of taxa 2013-2014 MAK IUCN BERN CITES Species
Turkeys, grouse, GALLIFORMES chickens, pheasants
Pheasants and Phasianidae partridges
Coturnix coturnix Common quail LC III III
Screamers, ANSERIFORMES ducks, geese, swans
Anatidae Ducks, Geese
Greater white- Anser albifrons LC III III fronted goose
Cygnus olor Mute swan LC III I
Cygnus cygnus Whooper swan LC II I
Tadorna ferruginea Ruddy shelduck LC II I
Common Tadorna tadorna LC II I shelduck
Eurasian Anas penelope LC III III Wigeon
Anas platyrhynchos Mallard LC III III
Northern Anas clypeata LC III II shoveler
Anas acuta Northern pintail LC III III H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63 51
Table 1. The list of birds of Ordu city (Continue).
Anas querquedula Garganey LC III III
Anas crecca Eurasian teal LC III III
Red-crested Netta rufina LC III III pochard
Common Aythya ferina LC III III pochard
Ferruginous Aythya nyroca NT III I duck
Aythya fuligula Tufted duck LC III III
Common Bucephala clangula LC II III goldeneye
Mergellus albellus Smew LC II I
Red-breasted Mergus serrator LC III II merganser
GAVIIFORMES Loons
Gaviidae Loons
Black-throated Gavia arctica LC II II loon
Seabirds PROCELLARIIFORMES (Petrels, shearwaters,...)
Procellariidae Shearwaters
Yelkouan Puffinus yelkouan VU II I shearwater
PODICIPEDIFORMES Grebe
Podicipedidae Grebes
Tachybaptus ruficollis Little grebe LC II I
Great crested Podiceps cristatus LC III I grebe
Black-necked Podiceps nigricollis LC II I grebe
CICONIIFORMES Storks
Ciconiidae Storks
Ciconia nigra Black stork LC II II I
Ciconia ciconia White stork LC II I
Ibises, PELECANIFORMES Spoonbills
Ibises, Threskiornithidae Spoonbills
Plegadis falcinellus Glossy ibis LC II I
Eurasian Platalea leucorodia LC II II I spoonbill 52 H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63
Table 1. The list of birds of Ordu city (Continue).
Ardeidae Herons, Bitterns
Botaurus stellaris Eurasian bittern LC II I
Ixobrychus minutus Little bittern LC II I
Black-crowned Nycticorax nycticorax LC II I night heron
Ardeola ralloides Squacco heron LC II I
Bubulcus ibis Cattle egret LC II I
Ardea cinerea Grey heron LC III II
Ardea purpurea Purple heron LC II I
Great white Casmerodius albus LC II I egret
Egretta garzetta Little egret LC II I
Pelecanidae Pelicans
Great white Pelecanus onocrotalus LC II I pelican
Dalmatian Pelecanus crispus VU II I I pelican
Cormorants, SULIFORMES Shags
Phalacrocoracidae Cormorants
Pygmy Phalacrocorax pygmeus LC II I cormorant
Phalacrocorax carbo Karabatak LC III II
Phalacrocorax European shag LC II I aristotelis
FALCONIFORMES Falcons
Falconidae Falcons
Falco tinnunculus Common kestrel LC II II I
Falco subbuteo Eurasian hobby LC II II I
Falco peregrinus Peregrine falcon LC II I I
Hawks, Ospreys, ACCIPITRIFORMES Eagles, Buzzards
Pandionidae Ospreys
Pandion haliaetus Osprey LC II II I
Accipitridae Hawks
European Pernis apivorus LC II II I honey-buzzard
Short-toed Circaetus gallicus LC II II I snake eagle H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63 53
Table 1. The list of birds of Ordu city (Continue).
Western marsh- Circus aeruginosus LC II II I harrier
Circus cyaneus Hen harrier LC II II I
Eurasian Accipiter nisus LC II II I sparrohawk
Buteo buteo Buzzard LC II II I
Long-legged Buteo rufinus LC II II I buzzard
Lesser spotted Aquila pomarina LC II II I eagle
Hieraaetus pennatus Booted eagle LC II II I
OTIDIFORMES Bustard
Otididae Bustards
Tetrax tetrax Little bustard NT II II I
GRUIFORMES Crakes, Rails
Rallidae Rails and crakes
Rallus aquaticus Water rail LC III II
Crex crex Corn crake LC II I
Porzana parva Little crake LC II I
Porzana porzana Spotted crake LC II I
Purple Porphyrio porphyrio LC II I swamphen
Common Gallinula chloropus LC III II moorhen
Fulica atra Eurasian coot LC III III
Grus grus Common crane LC II II I
Waders, gulls, CHARADRIIFORMES auks
Haematopodidae Oystercatchers
Eurasian Haematopus ostralegus LC III II oystercatcher
Avocets and Recurvirostridae stilts
Black-winged Himantopus himantopus LC II I stilt
Plovers and Charadriidae lapwings
Northern Vanellus vanellus LC III II lapwing
Little ringed Charadrius dubius LC II I plover 54 H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63
Table 1. The list of birds of Ordu city (Continue).
Snipe-like Scolopacidae waders
Gallinago gallinago Common snipe LC III III
Black-tailed Limosa limosa NT III II Godwit
Numenius phaeopus Whimbrel LC III II
Common Tringa totanus LC III II redshank
Tringa ochropus Green sandpiper LC II I
Tringa glareola Wood sandpiper LC II I
Common Actitis hypoleucos LC II I sandpiper
Calidris alba Sanderling LC II I
Calidris alpina Dunlin LC II I
Laridae Gulls
Larus canus Common gull LC III II
Larus cachinnans Caspian gull LC III
Yellow legged Larus michahellis LC III II gull
Lesser black- Larus fuscus LC II backed gull
Larus ichthyaetus Pallas’s gull LC III II
Black-headed Larus ridibundus LC III II gull
Slender-billed Larus genei LC II I gull
Mediterranean Larus melanocephalus LC II I gull
Larus minutus Little gull LC II I
Sternidae Terns
Sterna caspia Caspian tern LC II I
Sterna sandvicensis Sanwich tern LC II I
Chlidonias hybrida Whiskered tern LC II I
White-winged Chlidonias leucopterus LC II I tern
Stercorariidae Skuas
Stercorarius parasiticus Parasitic jaeger LC III II
COLUMBIFORMES Pigeons
Columbidae Pigeons, Doves
Columba livia Rock dove LC III III H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63 55
Table 1. The list of birds of Ordu city (Continue).
Stigmatopelia Laughing dove LC III II senegalensis
CUCULIFORMES Cuckoos
Cuculidae Cuckoos
Cuculus canorus Common cuckoo LC III I
STRIGIFORMES Owls
Strigidae Owls
Strix aluco Tawny owl LC II II I
Athene noctua Little owl LC II II I
Kingfishers, CORACIIFORMES Bee-eaters
Alcedinidae Kingfishers
Common Alcedo atthis LC II I kingfisher
Meropidae Bea-eaters
European bee- Merops apiaster LC II I eater
Hornbills, BUCEROTIFORMES Hoopoes
Upupidae Hoopoes
Common Upupa epops LC III I hoopoe
PICIFORMES Woodpeckers
Picidae Woodpeckers
Eurasian Jynx torquilla LC II I Wryneck
Middle spotted Dendrocopos medius LC II I woodpecker
Syrian Dendrocopos syriacus LC II I woodpecker
PASSERIFORMES Songbirds
Laniidae Shrikes
Red-backed Lanius collurio LC II I shrike
Lanius nubicus Masked shrike LC II I
Old World Oriolidae orioles
Eurasian golden Oriolus oriolus LC II I oriole
Corvidae Crows
Garrulus glandarius Eurasian jay LC III 56 H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63
Table 1. The list of birds of Ordu city (Continue).
Western Corvus monedula LC III jackdaws
Corvus frugilegus Rook LC III
Corvus cornix Hooded crow UR III
Corvus corax Common raven LC III II
Paridae Tits
Parus major Great tit LC II I
Parus caeruleus Eurasian blue tit LC II I
Hirundinidae Swallows
Hirundo rustica Barn swallow LC II I
Common house Delichon urbicum LC II I martin
Aegithalidae Long-tailed tits
Aegithalos caudatus Long-tailed tit LC III II
Alaudidae Larks
Galerida cristata Crested lark LC III II
Alauda arvensis Eurasian skylark LC III II
Cettiidae Bush warblers
Cettia cetti Cetti’s warbler LC III I
Acrocephalidae Warblers
Acrocephalus Sedge warbler LC III I schoenobaenus
Acrocephalus Eurasian reed LC III I scirpaceus warbler
Acrocephalus palustris Marsh warbler LC III I
Acrocephalus Great reed LC III I arundinaceus warbler
Phylloscopidae Willow warblers
Phylloscopus trochilus Willow warbler LC III I
Common Phylloscopus collybita LC III I chiffchaff
Phylloscopus sibilatrix Wood warbler LC III I
True warblers Sylviidae and parrotbills
Eurasian Sylvia atricapilla LC II I blackcap
Sylvia borin Garden warbler LC II I
Common Sylvia communis LC II I whitethroat
Lesser Sylvia curruca LC II I whitethroat H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63 57
Table 1. The list of birds of Ordu city (Continue).
Sylvia nisoria Barred warbler LC II I
Sardininan Sylvia melanocephala LC II I warbler
Regulidae Kinglets, Crests
Regulus regulus Goldcrest LC II I
Common Regulus ignicapilla LC II I firecast
Troglodytidae Wrens
Troglodytes troglodytes Eurasien wren LC II I
Sturnidae Starlings
Common Sturnus vulgaris LC II starling
Turdidae Thrushes
Common Turdus merula LC III III blackbird
Turdus philomelos Song thrush LC III II
Muscicapidae Flycatchers
Erithacus rubecula European robin LC II I
Thrush Luscinia luscinia LC II I nightingale
Luscinia svecica Bluethroat LC II I
Phoenicurus ochruros Black redstart LC II I
Phoenicurus Common LC II I phoenicurus redstart
Saxicola rubetra Whinchat LC II I
Common Saxicola torquatus LC II I stonechat
Siberian Saxicola maurus NR III stonechat
Oenanthe oenanthe Wheatear LC II I
Isabelline Oenanthe isabellina LC II I wheatear
Spotted Muscicapa striata LC II I flycatcher
Red-breasted Ficedula parva LC II I flycatcher
Cinclidae Dippers
White-throated Cinclus cinclus LC II I dipper
Passeridae Sparrows
Passer domesticus House sparrow LC III 58 H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63
Table 1. The list of birds of Ordu city (Continue).
Eurasian tree Passer montanus LC III II sparrow
Prunellidae Accentors
Prunella modularis Dunnock LC III I
Motacillidae Wagtails, Pipits
Motacilla alba White wagtail LC III I
Motacilla citreola Citrine wagtail LC III I
Motacilla flava Yellow wagtail LC II I
Motacilla cinerea Grey wagtail LC II I
Anthus pratensis Meadow pipit LC II I
Anthus spinoletta Water pipit LC II I
Fringillidae Finches
Common Fringilla coelebs LC III II chaffinch
European Carduelis chloris LC III I greenfinch
Carduelis spinus Eurasian siskin LC III I
Carduelis carduelis Goldfinch LC III I
Carduelis cannabina Common linnet LC III I
Emberizidae Buntings
Miliaria calandra Corn bunting LC III II
Emberiza cia Rock bunting LC III I
Emberiza rustica Rustic bunting LC III I
Emberiza schoeniclus Reed bunting LC III I
Table 2. The list of the mammals of Ordu city.
ORDO Family Name of taxa IUCN BERN CITES Species
ERINACEOMORPHA Hedgehogs
Erinaceidae Hedgehogs
Erinaceus concolor White-chested hedgehog LC
SORICOMORPHA Shrew
Soricidae Shrews
Sorex raddei Radde’s shrew LC III
Transcaucasian water Neomys teres LC III shrew
Crocidura Lesser shrew NE III gueldenstaedtii H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63 59
Table 2. The list of the mammals of Ordu city (Continue).
Lesser white-toothed Crocidura suaveolens LC III shrew
Talpidae Moles
Talpa levantis Levant mole LC
CHIROPTERA Bats
Rhinolophidae Horseshoe bats
Rhinolophus Gretaer horseshoe bats LC II ferrumequinum
Rhinolophus Lesser horseshoe bats LC II hipposideros
Mediterranean Rhinolophus euryale NT II horseshoe bat
Vespertilionidae Vesper bats
Myotis myotis Greater mouse-eared bat LC II
Myotis blythii Lesser mouse-eared bat LC II
Nyctalus leisleri Lesser noctule LC II
Eptesicus serotinus1 Serotine bat LC II
Pipistrellus pipistrellus Common pipistrelle LC III
Miniopteridae Long-winged bats
Miniopterus schreibersii Common bent-wing bag NT II
LAGOMORPHA Lagomorphs
Leporidae Hares
Euopean hare/Brown Lepus europaeus LC III hare
RODENTIA Rodents
Sciuridae Squirrels
Sciurus anomalus Caucasian squirrel LC II
Cricetidae Voles, hamsters
Cricetulus migratorius Gray dwarf hamster LC
Myodes glareolus Bank vole LC
Microtus levis Southern vole LC
Microtus subterraneus Common pine vole LC
Microtus majori2 Major’s pine vole LC
Muridae Mouse, Rats
Broad-toothed field Apodemus mystacinus LC mouse
Apodemus flavicollis Yellow-necked mouse LC
Apodemus witherbyi Steppe field mouse LC
Rattus rattus Black rat LC 60 H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63
Table 2. The list of the mammals of Ordu city (Continue). Rattus norvegicus Brown rat LC
Mus musculus House mouse LC domesticus
Mus macedonicus Macedonian mouse LC
Gliridae Dormouses
Dryomys nitedula3 Forest dormouse LC III
Muscardinus Hazel dormouse LC III avellanarius
CARNIVORA Carnivore
Canidae Foxes, Jackals
Canis aureus Golden jackal LC
Vulpes vulpes Red fox LC
Mustelidae Martens, Weasels
Mustela nivalis Least weasel LC III
Martes martes European pine marten LC III
Martes foina Stone marten LC III
Lutra lutra4 Lutra NT II I
Felidae Kedigiller
Felis silvestris Yaban Kedisi LC II II
ARTIODACTYLA Even-toed ungulate
Suidae Pigs, Boars
Sus scrofa Wild boar LC
Cervidae Deers
Capreolus capreolus Roe deer LC III
1Recorded from Bulancak (Giresun), very close to Ordu city (A. Karataş, unpublished data), therefore this species is added in to the list. 2Although there is no record from Ordu city, the species is known from Ulubey town, very close to Ordu [43, cf. 44]. Thus, we added the species to the current list of the city. 3It is recorded from Bulancak (Giresun) (A. Karataş, unpublished data). 4L. lutra, we did not find from Ordu although it is observed from two different localities in Bulancak (Giresun) (A. Karataş, unpublished data).
Table 3. Species list of the Herpetofauna of Ordu city. ORDO Family Name of taxa IUCN BERN CITES Species
SQUAMATA Scaled reptiles
Anguidae Glass lizards
Anguis fragilis Slow worm, Blindworm III
Lacertidae Lizards
Lacerta viridis Green lizard LC II
Darevskia rudis Spiny-tailed lizard LC III
SERPENTES Snakes H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63 61
Table 3. Species list of the Herpetofauna of Ordu city (Continue).
Colubridae Colubrids
Coronella austriaca Smooth snake II
Natrix natrix Grass snake LC III
Elaphe longissima Aesculapian snake LC II
TESTUDINATA Turtles
Emydidae Pond/Mars turtles
Emys orbicularis European pond turtle NT II
URODELA Newts and Salamanders
Salamandridae Salamenders
Balkan-Anatolian Triturus ivanbureschi LC II crested newt
ANURA Frogs
Hylidae Tree frogs
Oriental tree frog, Hyla orientalis III Green frog
Ranidae True frogs
Rana dalmatina Agile frog LC III
Pelophylax ridibundus Marsh frog LC III -
40 species of mammals belonging to 16 list since they are assessed as extinct in Ordu families and 7 orders were listed (Table 2). Despite (central district). Similarly, Rupicapra rupicapra a few of these species were not recorded in the (Chamois) records given from Ordu by the same study area, they were included in the list because author are likely to be misidentification of Capra of their high possibility of existence in the area aegagrus (Wild Goat). Indeed, this species is for distributing in adjacent parts and sharing mostly distributed in the high mountains of the almost the same habitat type (see footnotes in Eastern Black Sea. Table 3). In addition, some species like Microtus socialis (Social vole, Doğu Kırfaresi) given from A total of 17 herptile species, including 3 inner parts as from Gölköy and Mesudiye were salamanders (Urodela), 6 frogs (Anura), 4 lizards also not included in the list. These districts are and 4 snakes were recorded according to the located in the Central Anatolia border of Ordu results of the only herpetofaunistic study carried and are different from the study area which out in Ordu and Giresun which also covers the shows boreal characteristics in both ecological present study area [27]. However in this study, and zoogeographical terms. a total of 11 species were identified, including one salamanders (Urodela), 3 frogs (Anura), one On the other hand, Monachus monachus turtle, 3 lizards and 3 snakes (Table 3). (Mediterranean monk seal) has been regarded as extinct (RE) in all the Black Sea after been ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding was provided by Ordu University, Turkey observed (N= 1) in the early 1980 [42] in (Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit, Project Perşembe. Ursus arctos (Brown Bear) and Cervus no: AR-1223). We would likte to thank Ömer Furtun, elaphus (Red Deer) records which were given by Ömer Kulaçoğlu, Mehmet Özcan, Arslan Kezer, Dr. Kiraz Kumerloeve [35], has not been verified by the Erciyas and Nizamettin Yavuz providing some their field observation data. recent observations and were not added to the 62 H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63
References 22. A.J. Hamer, M.J. McDonnell, The response of herpetofauna to urbanization: Inferring patterns of persistence from wildlife databases, Austral. Ecol., 35, 1. Anonim. United Nations, http://www.un.org Accessed (2010) 568-580. 27.10.2015. 23. T.J.C. Beebee, R.A. Griffiths, The amphibian decline 2. Anonim. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, http://www.tuik. crisis: A watershed for conservation biology?, gov.tr Accessed 27.10.2015. Biological Conservation, 125 (2005) 271-285. 3. J.R. Miller, Biodiversity conservation and the 24. İ. Baran. Türkiye Amfibi ve Sürüngenleri. TÜBİTAK extinction of experience, Trends Ecol. Evol., 20 Popüler Bilim Kitapları, 207, Ankara. 2008. (2005) 430-434. 25. Anonim. AdaMerOs Herptil Türkiye: Türkiye Kurbağa 4. K. Szlavecz, P. Warren, S. Pickett, Biodiversity on ve Sürüngenleri Gözlemciliği ve Fotoğrafçılığı the Urban Landscape. USA, Springer-Verlag Berlin Topluluğu, http://www.turkherptil.org Accessed Heidelberg. (2011), Number of 75-101 p. 02.12.2015. 5. M.L. McKinney, Urbanization, biodiversity, and 26. İ. Baran, M. Tosunoğlu, U. Kaya, Y. Kumlutaş, On the conservation, Bioscience, 52 (2002) 883-890. Herpetofauna of the Vicinity of Çamlıhemşin, Turkis 6. C.H. Sekercioglu, S. Anderson, E. Akcay, R. Bilgin, O.E. Journal of Zoology, 21 (1997) 399-408. Can, G. Semiz, C. Tavsanoglu, M.B. Yokes, A. Soyumert, 27. Y. Kumlutaş, V. Tok, O. Türkozan, The Herpetofauna of K. Ipekdal, I.K. Saglam, M. Yucel, H.N. Dalfes, Turkey’s the Ordu Giresun Region, Turkish Journal of Zoology, globally important biodiversity in crisis, Biological 22 (1998) 199-201. Conservation, 144 (2011) 2752-2769. 28. İ. Baran, İ. Yılmaz, R. Kete, Y. Kumlutaş, H. Durmuş, 7. N. Demir, Ordu ilinin eski adı “Kotyora” ve tarihi alt Herpetofauna of west and middle Black Sea region, yapısı, Turkish Studies/Türkoloji Araştırmaları, 2 Turkish Journal of Zoology, 16 (1992) 275-288. (2007) 179-184. 29. A. Karataş. Türkiye Yarasaları. Niğde Universitesi, 8. S. Trak, Giresun-Ordu ve ardülkesinde beşeri BAP Birimi, No: 01.FEB.09, Niğde, 2009. coğrafya araştırmaları, Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve 30. A. Karataş, M. Sözen, Contribution to karyology, Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi, 1 (1943) 145-155. distribution and taxonomic status of the Long- 9. G. Gürgen, PhD, Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler winged Bat, Miniopterus schreibersii (Chiroptera: Enstitüsü, Doktora tezi, Ankara, 1993. Vespertilionidae), in Turkey, Zoology in the Middle 10. Anonim. TRAKUŞ (Türkiye’nin Anonim Kuşları), http:// East, 33 (2004) 51-64. www.trakus.org Accessed 01.12.2015. 31. A. Karataş, M. Sözen, Karyology of three Vespertilionid 11. Anonim. TRAMEM (Türkiye’nin Anonim Memelileri), bats (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) from Turkey, Acta http://www.tramem.org Accessed 01.12.2015. Zoologica Academiae Scientarium Hungaricae, 53 12. G.M. Kirwan, R.P. Martins, G. Eken, P. Davidson, (2007) 185-192. A Checklist of the Birds of Turkey, Sandgrouse, 32. B. Krystufek, V. Vohralik. Mammals of Turkey and Supplement, 1 (1998) 1-29. Cyprus: Introduction Checklist Insectivora. Koper, 13. C. Bilgin, PhD Thesis, METU, Ankara (1994). 2001. 14. G.M. Kirwan, K.A. Boyla, P. Castell, B. Demirci, M. Özen, 33. B. Krystufek, V. Vohralik. Mammals of Turkey and H. Welch, T. Marlow. The Birds of Turkey. Christopher Cyprus: Rodentia I: Scuidae, Dipodidae, Gliridae, Helm., London, UK, 2008. Arvicolinae. Koper, Zgodovinsko drustvo za juzno 15. Anonim. Doğal Hayat, http://www.dogalhayat.org Primorsko Znanstveno-raziskovalno sredisce Accessed 28.11.2015. Republike Slovenije. 2005. 16. S. Barış, Ö. Sağlam, K. Erciyas, N. Yavuz, A.C. Özsemir. 34. H. Kumerloeve, Zur Verbreitung Kleinasiatischer Önemli bir doğa mirası: Kızılırmak Deltası kuşları. Raub- und Huftiere sowie eineger Großnager, Doğa ve Yaban Hayatı Koruma Derneği (DYDK), Sonderdruck aus Säugetierkd. Mitt., 15 (1967) 337- Samsun, 2010. 409. 17. T. Göktürk, T. Artvinli, F. Bucak, Artvin kuş faunası, 35. H. Kumerloeve, Die Saugetierte (Mammalia) der Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi, Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 9 Turkei, Veröff. Zool. Staatssamlung München., 18 (2008) 33-43. (1975) 69-158. 18. S. Aydın, U. Duman, B. Gönül, A. Kır, A.B. Bağran. 36. F. Spitzenberger, Zur Verbreitung und Systematik 2004 yılı Ordu il çevre durum raporu. T. C. Ordu türkischer Crocidurinae (Insectivora, Mammalia), Valiliği İl Çevre ve Orman Müdürlüğü, 183 pp, Ordu, Ann. Naturhistor. Mus. Wien, 74 (1968) 233-252. 2005. 37. N. Yiğit, E. Çolak, M. Sözen, A. Karataş. Rodents of 19. B. Krystufek, V. Vohralik. Mammals of Turkey and Türkiye. Meteksan, Ankara, 2006. Cyprus: Introduction, Checklist, Insectivora. Knjiznica 38. M.L. Crump, NJ. Scott, Visual Encounter Surveys. Annales Majora, Koper, Slovenia, 2001. Washington, Smithsonian Inst. Press., (1994), Number 20. N.R. Villasenor, D.A. Driscoll, M.A.H. Escobar, P. of 84-92 p. Gibbons, D. B. Lindenmayer, Urbanization Impacts on 39. Anonim. IUCN Red List, http://www.iucnredlist.org Mammals across Urban-Forest Edges and a Predictive Accessed 25.20.2015. Model of Edge Effects, Plos One, 9 (2014). 40. Anonim. CITES, http://www.cites.org Accessed 21. R. Lopucki, I. Mroz, L. Berlinski, M. Burzych, Effects of 11.10.2015. urbanization on small-mammal communities and the 41. Anonim. Kuşbank, www.kusbank.org Accessed population structure of synurbic species: an example 01.12.2015. of a medium-sized city, Can. J. Zool., 91 (2013) 554- 42. B. Mursaloğlu, How to save the Monk seal, 561. Communications Faculty of Science University of Ankara, Series C: Biology, 6 (1988) 227-233. H. Sevgili et al. / Hacettepe J. Biol. & Chem., 2016, 44 (1), 47–63 63
43. F. Spitzenberger, H. Steiner, Über Insectenfresser 44. M. Çağlar, Türkiye’nin gömülgen fareleri (Microtin), (Insectivora) und Wühlmause (Microtinae) der Türk Biyoloji Dergisi, 17 (1967) 103-118. Nordosttürkischen feuchtwalder, Bonner Zoological Bulletin, 4 (1962) 284-310.