Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T06:02:16.813Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fruit resource tracking by hornbill species at multiple scales in a tropical forest in India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2015

Rohit Naniwadekar ,
Charudutt Mishra  and
Aparajita Datta
Rohit Naniwadekar
Affiliation:
Nature Conservation Foundation, 3076/5, IV Cross, Gokulam Park, Mysore – 570002, Karnataka, India Manipal University, Manipal – 576104, Karnataka, India
Charudutt Mishra
Affiliation:
Nature Conservation Foundation, 3076/5, IV Cross, Gokulam Park, Mysore – 570002, Karnataka, India Snow Leopard Trust, 4649, Sunnyside Ave N, Suite 325, Seattle, WA 98103, USA
Aparajita Datta*
Affiliation:
Nature Conservation Foundation, 3076/5, IV Cross, Gokulam Park, Mysore – 570002, Karnataka, India
*
1 Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

The fruit-tracking hypothesis predicts a positive association between frugivores and fruit abundance over space and time. We documented hornbill diets and examined the relationship between fruit abundance and abundance of three hornbill species (Buceros bicornis, Rhyticeros undulatus and Aceros nipalensis) in the Eastern Himalaya from 2009–2012. The study was carried out at three scales: at the largest scale of the study area (15 km2), at the intermediate scale – eight 3-ha patches within the study area and at the smallest scale of individual fruiting trees. Ninety-one per cent of the 64 foraging sightings of the great hornbill were on figs while more than 50% of the foraging sightings of the wreathed (83) and rufous-necked hornbills (87) were on non-fig fruits. At the largest scale, wreathed hornbill abundance and ripe fruit abundance peaked in the non-breeding season. At the intermediate scale, wreathed hornbill abundance was positively associated with non-fig fruit availability while rufous-necked hornbill abundance was negatively associated with non-fig fruit availability. At the smallest scale, great and rufous-necked hornbill abundances were correlated with fig and non-fig fruit crop sizes, respectively. The three hornbill species track fruit availability at different scales based on diet, which has implications for their role in seed dispersal.

Keywords

Aceros nipalensisArunachal PradeshBuceros bicornisEastern Himalayafrugivoryfruit abundancefruit crop sizenorth-east IndiaRhyticeros undulatus
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 31 , Issue 6 , November 2015 , pp. 477 - 490
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

BLENDINGER, P. G. & VILLEGAS, M. 2011. Crop size is more important than neighborhood fruit availability for fruit removal of Eugenia uniflora (Myrtaceae) by bird seed dispersers. Plant Ecology 212:889–899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BLENDINGER, P. G., LOISELLE, B. A. & BLAKE, J. G. 2008. Crop size, plant aggregation and microhabitat type affect fruit removal by birds from individual melastome plants in the Upper Amazon. Oecologia 158:273–283.Google Scholar
BUCKLAND, S. T., ANDERSON, D. R., BURNHAM, K. P. & LAAKE, J. L. 2003. Distance sampling: estimating abundance of biological populations. Chapman and Hall, London. 446 pp.Google Scholar
BURNHAM, K. P. & ANDERSON, D. R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer-Verlag, New York. 488 pp.Google Scholar
BURNS, K. C. 2002. Seed dispersal facilitation and geographic consistency in bird-fruit abundance patterns. Global Ecology and Biogeography 11:253–259.Google Scholar
BURNS, K. C. 2004. Scale and macroecological patterns in seed dispersal mutualisms. Global Ecology and Biogeography 13:289–293.Google Scholar
DATTA, A. 2001. An ecological study of sympatric hornbills and fruiting patterns in a tropical forest in Arunachal Pradesh. PhD Dissertation. Saurashtra University, Rajkot, Gujarat, India.Google Scholar
DATTA, A. 2009. Observations on rufous-necked Aceros nipalensis and Austen's Brown Anorrhinus austeni hornbills in Arunachal Pradesh: natural history, conservation status and threats. Indian Birds 5:108–117.Google Scholar
DATTA, A. & RAWAT, G. S. 2003. Foraging patterns of sympatric hornbills during the nonbreeding season in Arunachal Pradesh, Northeast India. Biotropica 35:208–218.Google Scholar
DATTA, A. & RAWAT, G. S. 2004. Nest-site selection and nesting success of three hornbill species in Arunachal Pradesh, north-east India: Buceros bicornis, Aceros undulatus and Anthracoceros albirostris . Bird Conservation International 14:249–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DAVIDAR, P. & MORTON, E. S. 1986. The relationship between fruit crop size and fruit removal rates by birds. Ecology 67:262–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ELSTON, D. A., MOSS, R., BOULINIER, T., ARROWSMITH, C. & LAMBIN, X. 2001. Analysis of aggregation, a worked example: numbers of ticks on red grouse chicks. Parasitology 122:563–569.Google Scholar
GALE, G. A. & THONGAREE, S. 2006. Density estimates of nine hornbill species in a lowland forest site in Northern Thailand. Bird Conservation International 16:57–69.Google Scholar
GARCIA, D. & ORTIZ-PULIDO, R. 2004. Patterns of resource tracking by avian frugivores at multiple spatial scales: two case studies on discordance among scales. Ecography 27:187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GARCIA, D., ZAMORA, R., GOMEZ, J. M. & HODAR, J. A. 2001. Frugivory at Juniperus communis depends more on population characteristics than on individual attributes. Journal of Ecology 89:639–647.Google Scholar
GUITIAN, J. & MUNILLA, I. 2008. Resource tracking by avian frugivores in mountain habitats of northern Spain. Oikos 117:265–272.Google Scholar
HADIPRAKARSA, Y.-Y. & KINNAIRD, M. F. 2004. Foraging characteristics of an assemblage of four Sumatran hornbill species. Bird Conservation International 14:53–62.Google Scholar
HERRERA, C. M. 1998. Long-term dynamics of Mediterranean frugivorous birds and fleshy fruits: a 12-year study. Ecological Monographs 68:511–538.Google Scholar
JOHNSON, J. B. & OMLAND, K. S. 2004. Model selection in ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19:101–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
KINNAIRD, M. F. & O’BRIEN, T. G. 2007. The ecology and conservation of Asian hornbills: farmers of the forest. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 315 pp.Google Scholar
KITAMURA, S. 2011. Frugivory and seed dispersal by hornbills (Bucerotidae) in tropical forests. Acta Oecologica 37:531–541.Google Scholar
KNEITEL, J. M. & CHASE, J. M. 2004. Trade-offs in community ecology: linking spatial scales and species coexistence. Ecology Letters 7:69–80.Google Scholar
KOTLER, B. P. & BROWN, J. S. 1988. Environmental heterogeneity and the coexistence of desert rodents. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 19:281–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NANIWADEKAR, R. 2014. Seed dispersal by hornbills, conservation status and the consequences of their decline in tropical forests of Arunachal Pradesh. PhD Dissertation. Manipal, Karnataka, India.Google Scholar
NANIWADEKAR, R. & DATTA, A. 2013. Spatial and temporal variation in hornbill densities in Namdapha Tiger Reserve, Arunachal Pradesh, north-east India. Tropical Conservation Science 6:734–748.Google Scholar
PEREZ-TRIS, J. & TELLERIA, J. L. 2002. Regional variation in seasonality affects migratory behaviour and life-history traits of two Mediterranean passerines. Acta Oecologica 23:13–21.Google Scholar
REY, P. J. 1995. Spatio-temporal variation in fruit and frugivorous bird abundance in olive orchards. Ecology 76:1625–1635.Google Scholar
SARACCO, J. F., COLLAZO, J. A., GROOM, M. J. & CARLO, T. A. 2005. Crop size and fruit neighborhood effects on bird visitation to fruiting Schefflera morototoni trees in Puerto Rico. Biotropica 37:80–86.Google Scholar
SHANAHAN, M., SO, S., COMPTON, S. G. & CORLETT, R. 2001. Fig-eating by vertebrate frugivores: a global review. Biological Review 76:529–572.Google Scholar
TELLERIA, J. L. & PEREZ-TRIS, J. 2003. Seasonal distribution of a migratory bird: effects of local and regional resource tracking. Journal of Biogeography 30:1583–1591.Google Scholar
TIFONG, J., CHIMCHOME, V., POONSWAD, P. & PATTANAVIBOOL, A. 2007. Home range and habitat use of rufous-necked hornbill (Aceros nipalensis) by radio tracking in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Uthai Thani Province. Thailand Journal of Forestry 26:28–39.Google Scholar
VAN SCHAIK, C. P., TERBORGH, J. & WRIGHT, S. J. 1993. The phenology of tropical forests: adaptive significance and consequences for primary consumers. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 24:353–377.Google Scholar
ZEILEIS, A., KLEIBER, C. & JACKMAN, S. 2007. Regression models for count data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 27:1–25.Google Scholar
ZUUR, A. F., IENO, E. N., WALKER, N. J., SAVELIEV, A. A. & SMITH, G. M. 2009. Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer-Verlag, New York. 574 pp.Google Scholar