Main Article Content
The aim of this study was to analyze the avian species diversity, abundance and feeding guilds in rural area of Udaipur district. A total 12560 birds were recorded; they were belonging to 115 species and 55 families. The Accipitridae and Anatidae was the most dominant families with seven species and 27 families were limited to one species only. The maximum avian species richness were observed in uncultivated habitat (Margalef’s Richness index= 10.283) while lowest richness was observed in agricultural habitat (Margalef’s Richness index= 6.759). The greatest species evenness was recorded in agricultural habitat (Shannon evenness = 0.789) and lowest species evenness were recorded in wetland habitat (Shannon=0.715). According to birds abundance was maximum observed in wetland habitat (Berger-parker index= 0.249) due to availability of food and water resources while minimum abundance of birds were recorded in agricultural habitat (Berger-parker index= 0.145) due to anthropogenic and cultivated activities in this habitat. Pesticide and insecticide may be reason of restriction of bird’s abundance in agricultural habitat. The Simpson diversity index was highest observed in wetland habitat (0.100) followed by agricultural (0.067) and uncultivated habitat (0.060). The resemblances among three habitats were calculated from Jacard index (0.3571) and Sorenson index (0.5263) was recorded during study periods. The study clearly specified the wetland habitat is important in providing food materials, water, shelters, roosting, and nesting side for large number of avian species, But due to anthropogenic activities and water pollution reduces fitness and its survival. Udaipur district have numerous number of water bodies, if we protect water bodies birds diversity and abundance may be significantly increase. The results shows maximum species were belongs to insectivore (36.52%) followed by omnivore (28.69%), carnivore (24.34%), granivore (6.08%), frugivore (3.47%) and minimum guilds was observed by nectivore (0.86%) recorded.
Grimett R, Inskipp C, Inskipp T. Birds of the Indian subcontinent (second edition). Oxford University Press, India; 2011.
Blair Robert B. Birds and butterflies along an urban gradient: Surrogate taxa for assessing biodiversity? Ecological Application. 1999; 9(1):164-170.
Ali S, Ripley SD. Compact handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan. 2nd Edn., Oxford University Press, Delhi, India. 1987;737.
[ISBN- 13: 978-0195620634]
Hubalek Z. An annotated checklist of pathogenic microorganisms associated with migratory birds. Journal of Wildlife Disease. 2004;40:639-659.
Abulreesh HH, Goulder R, Scott GW. Wild birds and human pathogens in the context of ringing and migration. Ringing Migration. 2007;23:193-200.
Wiens JA. The ecology of the bird's communities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1989;2.
Gracia CM, Carcia RR, Rendon M, Xaview NF, Lucena J. Hydrological cycle and inter annual variability of the aquatic community in temporary saline (Fuente de piedra, Southern spain), Hydrobiologia. 1997;345:131-134.
Caziani S, Derlindati EJ. Abundance and habitat of high Andes flamingos in northwestern Argentina. Water Birds. 2000;23: 121-133.
Terborgh J, Robinson S. Guilds and their utility in ecology. In Kikkawa, J. and Anderson, D.J. (Eds.), community ecology. Pattern and Process. Blackwell Sci. Pub; 1986.
Root RB. Guilds. In: Encyclopedia of biodiversity, S. A. Levin (Ed.). San Diego: Academic Press. 2003;1295-302.
Wells DR. The birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsular: Non-passerines, London: Academic Press. 1999;2.
Diaz S, Tilman D, Fargione J, Chapin FS, Dirzo R. Biodiversity regulation of ecosystem services. In ecosystems and human well being: Current state and trends. Millennium ecosystem assessment; 2005.
Wells DR. The birds of Thai-Malay Peninsular: Passerines. London: Academic Press. 2007;1.
Robson, E. (2008). Mathematics in Ancient Iraq. Princeton University Press.
Goldsmith FB. The evaluation of ecological resources in the countryside for conservation purposes. Biol. Conser. 1975;8:89-96.
Everett RD. The wildlife preferences shown by countryside visitors. Biol. Conser. 1978;14: 75-84.
Rafe RW, Usher MB, Jefferson RG. Birds on reserves: The influence of area and habitat on species richness. J. Applied Ecol. 1985;22:327-335.
Robertson PA, Liley D. Assessment of sites: Measurement of species richness and diversity. In: Expedition field techniques: Bird Surveys, Bibby, C., M. Jones and S. Marsden (Eds.). Royal Geographical Society, London. 1998; 80-101.
Gutzwiller J. Estimating winter species richness with tmlimlted-distance point counts. Auk. 1991;108:853-862.
Smitiuw P, Twedt DJ, Wiedenfeu DA, Hamel PB, Ford RP, Cooper RJ. Point counts of birds in bottomland hardwood forests of the mississippi alluvial valley: Duration, minimum sample size and points versus visits. USDA For. Ser. Res. Southern For. Exp. Stn., Diane Publishing Co., New Orleans, Louisiana; 1993.
Dawson DR, Smith DVR, Robbins CS. Point count length and detection of forest neotropical migrant birds. In: Monitoring Bird Population by Point Counts, Ralph, C.J., J.R. Sauer and S. Droege (Eds.). USDA For. ser. Gen Tech Rep. PSW-GTR-149, Pacific Southwest Res. Stn., Albany, California; 1995.
Lymclu JF. Effects of point count duration, time of day and aural stimuli on delectability of migratory and resident bird species in Quintana Roo, Mexico. In: Monitoring Bird Populations by Point Counts, Ralph, C.J., J.R. Sauer and S. Droege (Eds.). Diane Publishing co., USDA For. ser. Res., For. Exp. sm., New Orlea IF, Louisiana. 1995;1-6.
Petit DR, Petit LJ, Saab VA, Martin TE. Fixed Radius Point Counts in Forests: Factors Influencing Effectiveness and Efficiency. In: Monitoring Bird Populations by Point Counts, Ralph, C.J., J.R. Sauer and S. Droege (Eds.). USDA For. Ser. Res. Southern For. Exp. Diane Publishing co., New Orleans, Louisiana. 1995; 49-56.
Jiménez JE. Effect of sample size, plot size and counting time on estimates of avian diversity and abundance in a Chilean rainforest. J. Field Ornith. 2000;71:66-88 .
Lee DC, Marsden SJ. Adjusting count period strategies to improve the accuracy of forest bird abundance estimates from point transect distance-sampling surveys. Ibis. 2008;1(50): 315-325.
Vyas R. Birds of Rajasthan. BNHS and Oxford University Press. 2013;XIV:326.
Weller NW. Management of freshwater marshes for wildlife. In: Fresh Water Wetlands: Ecological Processes and Management Potential, Good, R.E., D.F. and R.L. Simpson (Eds.). Academic Press, New York. 1978;267-284.
Puttick GM. Foraging and activity pattems in wintering shorebirds. In: Behavior of Marine Animals, Shorebirds: Migration and Foraging Behaviour, Burger, J. and B.L. Olla (Eds.). Plenum Press, New York, Londcu; 1984.
Caldwell GS. Predation as a selective force on foraging herons: Effects of plumage colour and flocking. Auk. 1986;103:494- 505.
Butler RW, Vennesland RG. Integrating climate change and predation risk with wading bird conservation research in North America. Water birds. 2000;23:535-540 .
Rivers JW. Northern harrier predation of white-faced ibis. Wilson Bull. 2000;112:416-417.
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2018-1; 2018.
[Cited 28 Oct 2018]
Ludwig JF, Reynolds JF. Statistical ecology: A primer on methods and computing. 1st Edn., John Wiley and Sons, New Yark; 1988.
Henderson PA, Seaby RMH. Community analysis package 4.0. Pisces Conservation Ltd., Lymington, UK; 2007.