Factors Affecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India
Avifaunal diversity in eight different habitats of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur was studied in order to find factors affecting the occurrence of bird species. Bird populations were sampled in different agro-ecosystems such as farm fields (experimental and organic), wetland, aba...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Zoodiversity (Vestnik Zoologii) |
|---|---|
| Date: | 2022 |
| Volume: | 56 |
| Issue: | 1 |
| ISSN: | 2707-7268 |
| Author Affiliations: |
|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Publishing House "Akademperiodyka" of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
2022
|
| Online Access: | https://ojs.akademperiodyka.org.ua/index.php/Zoodiversity/article/view/259 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Journal Title: | Zoodiversity |
| Download file: |
|
Institution
Zoodiversity| _version_ | 1874092703086542848 |
|---|---|
| author | Kottawa-Arachchi, J. D. Thakur, G. Dwivedi, A. Tshering, R. Samimi, H. M. Chaudhary, Y. Chaudhary, H. K. |
| author_facet | Kottawa-Arachchi, J. D. Thakur, G. Dwivedi, A. Tshering, R. Samimi, H. M. Chaudhary, Y. Chaudhary, H. K. |
| author_institution_txt_mv | [
{
"author": "J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi",
"institution": "Tea Research Institute of Sri Lanka, Talawakelle, Sri Lanka",
"orcid": "0000-0001-8498-0728"
},
{
"author": "G. Thakur",
"institution": "Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Collage of Agriculture, Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India",
"orcid": ""
},
{
"author": "A. Dwivedi",
"institution": "Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Collage of Agriculture, Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India",
"orcid": ""
},
{
"author": "R. Tshering",
"institution": "National Veterinary Hospital, Motithang, Thimphu",
"orcid": ""
},
{
"author": "H. M. Samimi",
"institution": "Ahmad Shah Baba Mena, Kabul, Afghanistan",
"orcid": ""
},
{
"author": "Y. Chaudhary",
"institution": "Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Collage of Agriculture, Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India",
"orcid": "0000-0003-4652-3467"
},
{
"author": "H. K. Chaudhary",
"institution": "Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Collage of Agriculture, Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India",
"orcid": ""
}
] |
| author_orcid_str_mv | 0000-0001-8498-0728 0000-0003-4652-3467 |
| author_sort | Kottawa-Arachchi, J. D. |
| baseUrl_str | https://ojs.akademperiodyka.org.ua/index.php/Zoodiversity/oai |
| collection | OJS |
| container_end_page | |
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | |
| container_title | Zoodiversity (Vestnik Zoologii) |
| container_volume | 56 |
| datestamp_date | 2026-08-20T12:37:19Z |
| description | Avifaunal diversity in eight different habitats of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur was studied in order to find factors affecting the occurrence of bird species. Bird populations were sampled in different agro-ecosystems such as farm fields (experimental and organic), wetland, abandoned tea plantation, administration area, playground, secondary forest and stream vegetation. A total of 125 species of birds belonging to 51 families, including 33 winter visitors and 27 summer visitors have been recorded. Among them, 78 insectivores followed by 18 carnivores were recorded. The abandoned tea field was a diverse habitat that maintained the highest species richness recording 50 species, followed by stream vegetation and organic farm. Seasonal variations and habitat heterogeneity play crucial role in shaping species richness. Plant diversity, vegetation structure and microhabitats support different feeding guilds, temporary refuge and migratory route which result in increased bird diversity. Based on different categories of birds, the cluster analysis revealed three distinct clusters of habitats, first cluster containing administration area and secondary forest habitats, experimental farm and wetland grouped in cluster II, whereas cluster III contained habitats viz. abandoned tea plantation, playground, organic farm and stream vegetation. Several conservation measures such as increasing plant diversity, conducting regular and long-term systematic studies, introducing bird friendly management plan are recommended to conserve and enhance avifaunal diversity in the university. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.15407/zoo2022.01.067 |
| first_indexed | 2025-07-17T12:35:54Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
UDC 598.2:(2-22:540.13)
FACTORS AFFECTING AVIFAUNAL DIVERSITY IN SELECTED
AGRO-ECOSYSTEMS OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AGRICULTURAL
UNIVERSITY, PALAMPUR, HIMACHAL PRADESH, INDIA
J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi1,2*, G. Th akur2, A. Dwivedi2, R. Tshering3, H. M. Samimi4,
Y. Chaudhary5, H. K. Chaudhary2
1Tea Research Institute of Sri Lanka, Talawakelle, Sri Lanka
2Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Collage of Agriculture, Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University,
Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India
3National Veterinary Hospital, Motithang, Th imphu, Bhutan
4Ahmad Shah Baba Mena, Kabul, Afghanistan
5School of Engineering, University of Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
*Corresponding author
E-mail: jeevan.dananjaya@gmail.com
J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8498-07)
G. Th akur (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4054-2176)
H. K. Chaudhary (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3125-7795)
Factors Aff ecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Acosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural
University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India. Kottawa-Arachchi, J. D., Th akur, G., Dwivedi, A.,
Tshering, R., Samimi, H. M., Chaudhary, Y., Chaudhary, H. K. — Avifaunal diversity in eight diff erent
habitats of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur was studied in order to fi nd factors
aff ecting the occurrence of bird species. Bird populations were sampled in diff erent agro-ecosystems
such as farm fi elds (experimental and organic), wetland, abandoned tea plantation, administration
area, playground, secondary forest and stream vegetation. A total of 125 species of birds belonging to
51 families, including 33 winter visitors and 27 summer visitors have been recorded. Among them,
78 insectivores followed by 18 carnivores were recorded. Th e abandoned tea fi eld was a diverse habitat
that maintained the highest species richness (50 species), followed by stream vegetation and organic farm.
Seasonal variations and habitat heterogeneity play crucial role in shaping species richness. Plant diversity,
vegetation structure and microhabitats support diff erent feeding guilds and provide temporary refuge
and migratory route which result in increased bird diversity. Based on diff erent feeding guilds, the cluster
analysis revealed two distinct clusters of habitats. Th e fi rst cluster containing playground, experimental
farm and wetland whereas cluster II contained habitats viz. abandoned tea plantation, organic farm,
stream vegetation, administration area and secondary forest. Several conservation measures such as
increasing plant diversity, conducting regular and long-term systematic studies, introducing bird friendly
management plan are recommended to conserve and enhance avifaunal diversity in the university.
Key words : Biodiversity, habitat complexity, Himachal Pradesh, stream vegetation, tea plantation.
Zoodiversity, 56(1): 67–82, 2022
DOI 10.15407/zoo2022.01.067
68 J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi, G. Th akur, A. Dwivedi, R. Tshering, H. M. Samimi, Y. Chaudhary et al.
Introduction
Birds are suitable taxa to study for understanding the response of animals to anthropogenic disturbance
because they are sensitive to it (Chazdon et al., 2009). Birds are key players in ecosystems by providing
important ecosystem services (MEA, 2005), such as controlling populations of invertebrate and vertebrate pests,
pollinating fl owers and dispersing plant seeds, scavenging carcasses and waste, aff ording cultural services, being
ecosystem engineers etc. Recent studies confi rmed the concept of “using birds as indicators for recognizing
land ecosystems rich in biological diversity” (O’Connell et al., 2000; Niemi & McDonald 2004) and landscape
disturbance (Morelli, 2015). It is well recognized that the protected areas including world heritage sites, wildlife
sanctuaries, national parks, biodiversity and nature reserves are critical to support biodiversity and play a key
role in essential ecological functions (Sekercioglu, 2006).
In addition to natural ecosystems, several agroforestry systems such as agrisilviculture, silvipasture,
agrisilvipasture, homegardens, tea gardens, shelterbelts, forested riparian buff ers support avifauna (Harvey &
Villalobos, 2007; Ulman et al., 2016). Th ese ecosystems provide many opportunities to sustainable bird life by
contributing nesting sites, temporary refuge and migratory route, protective or escape cover against predators,
access to breeding territory and food resources in all seasons (Griffi th, 2000; Buck et al., 2004; Maas et al.,
2015). Presently, they are confronting various threats from climate change and human interferences such as
loss of habitat through infl ow of domestic and industrial effl uents, agricultural runoff s, degradation of wetlands,
agricultural expansion, overgrazing of the grasslands, and urbanization leading to deforestation (Scharlemann
et al., 2004; Aratrakorn et al., 2006).
Himachal Pradesh, India, the mountainous state is well known for its natural wealth. It is situated between
30°22’40» to 33°12’40» N latitude and 75°45’55» to 79°04’20» E longitude in the Western Himalayas. Various
environmental factors have a profound infl uence on the biological diversity and distribution, especially in the
Himalayas with extreme climatic conditions (Mahabal & Sharma, 1992). In the complex folded mountain chain
like Himalayas the altitudinal variations, topographical and climatic conditions have greatly infl uenced the
biological diversity and its distribution. Th e state is mountainous (ranging between 460 and 6600 m a. s. l.),
drained by a number of snow-fed perennial rivers. It has a complex geography and habitats and encompasses
a rich temperate fl ora and fauna (Kumar, 2018). Th ere are six major forest types in Himachal Pradesh: tropical
dry deciduous, sub-tropical pine, sub-tropical dry evergreen, Himalayan moist temperate, Himalayan dry
temperate, and subalpine and alpine. Himachal Pradesh is extremely important for the protection of many
species of pheasants and forest birds (Narwade et al., 2006).
During the last few decades, a number of studies have been carried out by various workers on various
aspects of avifauna of the region especially their diversity, threatened status, conservation measures in addition
to geographical and altitudinal distribution pattern. Th e birds of Himachal Pradesh have been well studied
by Ali and Ripley, (1983) including areas like Shimla, Dalhousie, Dharamshala. Previous avifaunal studies
recorded 77 and 103 species in Khajjiar lake and catchment of Ravi river in district Chamba, Himachal Pradesh
respectively (Singh, 2011; Singh & Banyal, 2013). Total of 169 and 95 species were recorded in two wetland
ecosystems in Kangra and Mandi districts, respectively (Singh et al., 2014; Sharief et al., 2018).
Even though several studies have been conducted on birds in and around protected areas in Kangra district,
Himachal Pradesh, the role of human-modifi ed land uses in conservation of birds has not been thoroughly studied
in an agricultural landscape. Th e present study aims to identify the habitats, which are benefi cial to bird life in
agro-ecosystems, quantify the present status of avifaunal diversity, behavioural patterns and identify the factors
aff ecting the distribution of avifauna in Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur. Th is information
could be of importance in formulating eff ective strategies to conserve the agro-ecosystems, to develop further
studies and in particular to understand the factors aff ecting the natural avifaunal diversity in agricultural landscape.
Study area and methods
S t u d y a r e a
Th e study area is located in Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, India (32.103° N and
76.551° E) and comprises about 397 hectares of undulating terrain (fi g. 1). Th e average elevation is 1250 m a. s. l.
Th e agro-ecosystems in the university are dominated by agricultural experimental fi elds with various fi eld cops
such as rice, wheat, maize, legumes and forages followed by secondary forests, abandoned tea plantations with
high shade trees Grevillea robusta, Pinus spp. and Eucalyptus spp. in addition to small orchards under multi-
species of fruits including apple, peaches, kiwi fruit, nectarine. Th ere are segments of land with multi-species
cultivation of vegetables managed by various departments of the university. Several stream vegetation patches
observed along seasonal streams dominated with non-deciduous trees and bamboo species. Callistemon
viminalis, Salix babylonica, Cedrus deodara and Jacaranda mimosifolia dominated roadsides as ornamental
trees. Trees belonging to genus Pinus, Albizia procera, Jacaranda mimosifolia, Acacia leucophloea and Grevillea
robusta have been planted surrounding the playground as shade trees. Local climate is classifi ed as subtropical,
and shows well-marked winter (October–February), summer (March–June) and monsoon (July–September)
seasons throughout the year. Th e minimum temperature is 5 °C in January (winter) and maximum 40 °C in June
(summer). Th e annual rainfall in this zone varies from 1500 mm to 1800 mm.
69Factors Aff ecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural ...
A thorough fi eld survey was undertaken to identify diff erent habitats in the University and based on the
complexity of habitat structure, eight habitats (organic farm (OF), experimental farm (EF), administration
area (AA), playground (PG), secondary forest (FR), wetland (WT), stream vegetation (SV) and abandoned tea
plantation (AT)) were chosen for the present study.
Sampling Procedure
Th e fi eld survey was conducted from January 2019 to April 2020 covering three distinct seasons, winter
(October–February), summer (March–June) and monsoon (July–September). Line transect of 100 m length
and 20 m width on either side of centre line was marked in all selected habitats for bird count (Javed & Kaul,
2002). Th e intensity of observations was two days per month and 20 minutes was spent at each habitat. Th e
fi eld surveys were done for three hours starting from 06h00 or 07h00 and 15h30 or 15h00 depending on the day
length in summer and winter seasons, respectively. Th e time of monitoring of each habitat was planned in such
a way to ensure that each habitat was monitored both in the morning as well as in the evening. During the fi eld
work, birds were recorded by species, number, food preferences and type of habitat used in the fi eld by fi eld
binocular (8 × 40). Th e identifi cation of species was carried out with the help of the fi eld guide on the birds of
Northern India by Grimmett and Inskipp (2003) besides using call and song notes from online bird database
HBW Alive (2021). A pre-designed data sheet was used for the purpose of recording.
Th e checklist of the birds of the study was prepared according to the last version of BirdLife International-
HBW list of the birds of the world (http://datazone.birdlife.org). Conservation status of the species has been
incorporated in the study (IUCN 2014). Birds sighted during the survey have been categorized based on their
migratory nature according to the literatures with presence/absence method as follows: R = resident, SV =
summer visitor, WV = winter visitor, WV/PM = winter visitor and passage migrant.
Feeding gui ld c lass i f icat ion
Based on their food preferences, bird species were categorized into insectivorous, carnivorous,
omnivorous, granivorous, nectarivorous and frugivorous. Th e feeding guilds were classifi ed exclusively for the
type of food consumed as their principal diet. Besides, habitat preferences and behaviour of the birds such as
perching, feeding, nesting, and mating were recorded.
Stat is t ica l Analys is
Species diversity parameters such as total abundance, species richness, species heterogeneity using
Shannon-Wiener diversity index (H’), Simpson’s index and Fisher alpha were calculated using PAST 3
soft ware. Meanwhile, the Pielou’s evenness index was used to estimate similarities in habitat utilization based
on presence/absence of each taxon in each habitat type. To assess degree of similarity in bird communities
among habitat types surveyed, Sorensen similarity index was used. A heatmap was generated based on feeding
guilds data for clustering diff erent habitats using ClustVis, freely available online soft ware at http://biit.cs.ut.ee/
clustvis. Th e data was ln (x+1) transformed, and similarity assessment for clustering was based on the Euclidean
distance and Ward’s linkage clustering method.
Fig. 1. Location of the study area. Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, India.
70 J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi, G. Th akur, A. Dwivedi, R. Tshering, H. M. Samimi, Y. Chaudhary et al.
Results and discussion
Avian species divers i ty
During the study period, a total of 125 species of birds belonging to 51 families have
been recorded (Supplementary table 1). Th e most dominant family which is famous for
its migratory nature was Muscicapidae which represents 16 species, followed by family
Accipitridae which represents 7 species and family Phylloscopidae and Cisticolidae with
6 species each. Results revealed that 81 species (64.8 % of the total recorded) were passerine
(Order Passeriformes) birds belonging to 32 families, comprised of various groups such
as shrikes, minivets, babblers, drongos, crows, fl ycatchers, tits, bulbuls, warblers, prinias,
redstarts, thrushes, starlings, sunbirds, pipits and sparrows. Th ree bird species, Alexandrine
Parakeet (Palaeornis eupatria), Great Tit (Parus major) and Himalayan Bulbul (Pycnonotus
leucogenys), were observed in all eight habitats and the most common bird species was
the Alexandrine Parakeet. Among the birds recorded during the survey, single sighting
of Egyptian Vulture (Neophron percnopterus) and Lesser Fish-eagle (Icthyophaga humilis)
were recorded. Th ose two species are belonging to endangered (EN) and near threatened
(NT) categories, respectively.
Diversity and species composition parameters showed a considerable variation among
eight diff erent habitats selected (table 1). Th e results indicated that abandoned tea fi eld is
a diverse habitat that maintains the highest species richness, comprising 50 bird species
that represent 40 % of all species recorded in the survey (H’ = 3.19, Fisher alpha = 13.87,
Simpson’s index (1-D) = 0.935). Although both Shannon (H’) and Simpson’s index (1-
D) consider the proportional abundance of species, H’ is more sensitive to rare species,
whereas 1-D puts emphasis on the common species (Roy et al., 2011). Besra (Accipiter
virgatus), Yellow-bellied Fairy-fantail (Chelidorhynx hypoxanthus), Grey-headed Canary-
fl ycatcher (Culicicapa ceylonensis), Green-backed Tit (Parus monticolus), Ashy-throated
Warbler (Phylloscopus maculipennis), Whistler’s Warbler (Seicercus whistleri), Rusty-tailed
Flycatcher (Ficedula rufi cauda), Slaty-blue Flycatcher (Ficedula tricolor) and Crimson
Sunbird (Aethopyga siparaja) were restricted to the abandoned tea fi eld.
Stream vegetation is the second most diverse habitat where 42 species were recorded
(H’ = 3.06, Fisher alpha = 13.57). Black Drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus), Crow-billed
Drongo (Dicrurus annectens), Jungle Prinia (Prinia sylvatica), Blue-throated Blue-
fl ycatcher (Cyornis rubeculoides), Little pied Flycatcher (Ficedula westermanni), Plumbeous
Water-redstart (Phoenicurus fuliginosus), White-capped Water-redstart (Phoenicurus
leucocephalus) and Chestnut-tailed Starling (Sturnia malabarica) were recorded only in
this habitat.
A total of 40 bird species was recorded in organic farm (H’ = 3.02, Fisher alpha = 9.59).
Great Barbet (Psilopogon virens), Alexandrine Parakeet, Himalayan bulbul and Indian
White-eye (Zosterops palpebrosus) were very common in this habitat whereas Collared
Owlet (Glaucidium brodiei) and White-tailed Nuthatch (Sitta himalayensis) observed as
single record each.
T a b l e 1 . Avifaunal richness and diversity indices of diff erent habitats surveyed
Parameters OF EF AA PG FR WT SV AT
No. of species 40 38 22 35 29 33 42 50
Individuals 611 489 440 599 237 300 286 496
Shannon (H’) 3.02 2.86 2.53 2.68 2.61 2.81 3.06 3.19
Simpson 1-D 0.927 0.915 0.899 0.902 0.885 0.912 0.926 0.935
Pielou’s Evenness (J) 0.819 0.793 0.831 0.755 0.775 0.805 0.818 0.817
Fisher alpha 9.593 9.292 4.592 8.110 8.673 9.462 13.571 13.872
Note . OF — organic farm, EF — experimental farm, AA — administration area, PG — playground,
FR — secondary forest, WT — wetland, SV — stream vegetation, AT — abandoned tea plantation.
71Factors Aff ecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural ...
Banded bay Cuckoo (Cacomantis sonneratii), Yellow-billed blue Maqpie (Urocissa
fl avirostris), Asian Brown Flycatcher (Muscicapa dauurica) and Blue-fronted Redstart
(Phoenicurus frontalis) were observed only in the secondary forest habitat. Although
secondary forest habitat comprised of diverse tree species, a smaller number of bird species
were observed. Low visibility due to more canopy cover, less open places for various
feeding guilds than surrounding farm fi elds could be the reasons for detecting low avifaunal
diversity (29 species, H’ = 2.61, Fisher alpha = 8.67). Small birds such as warblers and
white-eyes preferred this habitat for their feeding and hiding place during day time.
Th e administration area demonstrated the lowest species abundance (22 species) and
Shannon index (H’ = 2.53), but the highest evenness (J = 0.831) was observed in the habitat.
Common bird species including Rock Dove (Columba livia), House Swift (Apus nipalensis),
Great Barbet, Alexandrine parakeet, Large-billed Crow (Corvus macrorhynchos), Barn
Swallow (Hirundo rustica), Red-rumped Swallow (Cecropis daurica) and House Sparrow
(Passer domesticus) are recorded in higher numbers. Th ey were sighted either perched on
buildings or perched on Cedrus deodara, Jacaranda mimosifolia and Pinus trees. A total of
35 bird species was recorded in playground habitat. Most of the birds were sighted either
as fl ocks of diff erent species or perched on Jacaranda mimosifolia, Albizia procera, and
Grevillea robusta trees. In addition to the lowest tree diversity in both these habitats, human
disturbances around this area have resulted in the lowest bird diversity.
Although, the diversity of shade trees is low, the experiment farm fi eld hosted 38 avian
species. In addition to higher numbers of insectivores, raptors such as Egyptian Vulture,
Oriental Honey-buzzard (Pernis ptilorhynchus), Lesser Fish-eagle (Ichthyophaga humilis),
Mountain Hawk-eagle (Nisaetus nipalensis) were observed only in this habitat.
Th e wetland habitat is a hydrologically infl uenced woodland, which is prone to
regular fl oods during the monsoon. A total of 33 bird species was recorded in this habitat.
White-breasted Waterhen (Amaurornis phoenicurus), Indian Cormorant (Phalacrocorax
fuscicollis) were recorded at this site regularly. Common Sandpiper (Actitis hypoleucos),
Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea), Great White Egret (Ardea alba), Brown Dipper (Cinclus
pallasii) and White-breasted Kingfi sher (Halcyon smyrnensis) were restricted to the
wetland. Th e species richness was low during winter while it gradually increased during
early summer (March–April) and reached its maximum value in summer.
Th e Sorensen’s similarity index (SI) gives greater weight to matches in species
composition between the two samples than mismatches. Sorensen’s similarity indices
depicted higher similarity between habitats AT and OF (Cs = 0.605) followed by habitats
SV and OF (SI = 0.540) indicating higher than half of their species in common (table 2).
Habitat OF showed higher Sorensen’s indices with PL, SF, SV and AT indicating more
common species shared between these habitats. Th e most distinct habitat was the EF
compared with SV (SI = 0.112) and FR (SI = 0.149), indicating for a very high dissimilarity,
implying further that these habitat types have quite distinct species composition.
T a b l e 2 . Pairwise Sorensen index depicts the species similarities among habitats
OF EF AA PG FR WT SV AT
OF 1
EF 0.301 1
AA 0.329 0.356 1
PL 0.481 0.255 0.453 1
FR 0.425 0.149 0.306 0.293 1
WT 0.365 0.347 0.272 0.259 0.238 1
SV 0.540 0.112 0.233 0.374 0.468 0.262 1
AT 0.605 0.218 0.309 0.300 0.430 0.349 0.485 1
Note . OF — organic farm, EF — experimental farm, AA — administration area, PG — playground,
FR — secondary forest, WT — wetland, SV — stream vegetation, AT — abandoned tea plantation.
72 J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi, G. Th akur, A. Dwivedi, R. Tshering, H. M. Samimi, Y. Chaudhary et al.
Factors aff ecting avian diversity
Habitat complexi ty
In an agro-ecosystem, bird diversity is more strongly associated with crop or landscape
diversity (Kleijn et al., 2006; Poggio et al., 2010). Even though the numbers of bird species
observed in organic farm and experimental farm are very close, the number of individuals
is signifi cantly higher for organic farm. Conventional agricultural management involving
use of inorganic nitrogen fertilizers, regular re-seeding, early and repeated mowing, fewer
species and less structural diversity, provides poorer food resources and reduced nesting
opportunities for a few bird species (Vickery et al., 2004). Conversely, the organic farms
tended to hold higher densities of birds than conventional farms (Chamberlain et al.,
1999). Organic management typically employs crop rotations involving nitrogen-building
leys to maintain soil fertility. Pest and weed control are sought through careful use of
mechanical techniques. Organic farms may thus be expected to support higher densities
of birds associated with the management system such as non-crop habitats, hedge rows,
ponds, cattle shelters, green manure crops, compost yards etc. Present study has indicated
that farming practices which are characteristic of organic agriculture such as crop rotation,
zero usage of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers would benefi t bird communities more than
conventional system (experimental farm).
Abandoned tea plantations off er opportunities for understanding ecological processes
in modifi ed forest ecosystems (Chetana & Ganesh, 2012). Unlike monoculture plantations,
tea is maintained as a shrub with various shade trees. Th e abandoned tea fi eld is heterogeneous
with diff erent high shade species like Albizia procera, Grevillea robusta, woody lianas and
understory species but mainly the tea plants Camellia sinensis, that provided more niches
and food sources for birds. Several studies reported higher abundance of birds in the tea
gardens in India as compared to that of the surrounding forests and agroforestry habitats
(Sidhu et al., 2010; Ahmed & Dey 2014; Ulman et al., 2016).
Increasing plant diversity could be considered as a good boost to enhance avian species
diversity, because the habitat diversity is associated with an increase of niche availability for the
bird species (Morelli, 2015). Th e secondary forest is a well wooded habitat but the lowest number
of individuals and moderate diversity values (both Shannon and Fisher alpha) were recorded
in this habitat among all habitats. Th is contradicts the idea that is given by several avifaunal
surveys, as it provides high degree of species richness and biodiversity when vegetation cover
is denser (Raman, 2006; Roy et al., 2011). Possible causes for the lowest diversity observed in
the present study could be low visibility and thick understory in forest habitat. Th e stream
vegetation is structured with numerous microhabitats like tall shade trees with decaying
branches, fallen trees, bank vegetation along streams and understory vegetation with several
species of grasses. Hence, wide variation of microhabitats is vital for foraging, feeding, nesting
and breeding grounds of birds. Similarly, Bellanthudawa et al. (2019) observed an increase in
the detection of more bird species in ecosystems with wide varieties of microhabitats.
Ding et al., (2019) found that the habitat heterogeneity had a large infl uence on the
richness pattern. Present study indicates that the habitat heterogeneity plays crucial role
in shaping species richness, probably because a greater structural complexity in vegetation
can yield more resources and therefore support a larger number of species.
Distr ibut ion of feeding gui lds
Th e richness of animal species is determined by the abundance, distribution and
diversity of food resources. Th e present study shows a good representation of all categories
of feeding guilds. Th is is expected because of the represented diverse habitats of the agro-
ecosystems, providing structural and compositional complex of tree species, scattered
fruiting and shade trees, annual crops, water sources, etc. which off er food resource
for birds belonging to various feeding guilds. among 125 species recorded in the study
period, insectivores contributed the maximum (78 species, 62.4 %) followed by carnivores
73Factors Aff ecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural ...
(18 species, 14.4 %), omnivores (11 species, 8.8 %), and granivores (9 species, 7.2 %).
Frugivores (8 species, 6.4 %) and nectarivores (1 species, 0.8 %) contributed the least (fi g. 2).
Similarly, out of 89 species of the birds, 38 insectivores followed by 16 omnivorous species
were recorded in Dhauladhar Nature Park, Himachal Pradesh (Chandel et al., 2014). When
compared sitewise, insectivores dominated the study area while carnivores preferred open
areas including farmlands and aquatic ecosystems. Omnivores, frugivores and granivores
were more or less equally distributed. Nectarivores were confi ned to abandoned tea land
during the study period.
Insectivores emerged as dominant feeding guild in most of the study sites followed by
either omnivores or carnivores (fi g. 2). Similar trends observed in several other studies from
diff erent ecosystems including agroforestry, agricultural fi elds, suburban-farmland, tea
plantation, wetlands in Indian subcontinent (Hossain & Aditya, 2016; Kottawa-Arachchi
& Gamage, 2015; Mukhopadhyay & Mazumdar, 2019; Sohil & Sharma, 2020; Ulman et al.,
2016) and Himachal Pradesh (Singh et al., 2014; Singh & Banyal, 2013) specifi cally. Th e
facilitative role of shade trees in the tea plantation in attracting canopy insectivores and
frugivores is important in terms of densities of shade trees (Chetana & Ganesh, 2012). Th e
high record of insectivorous species in abandoned tea plantation is probably due to the
high availability of insects and pests which serve as a food resource for the birds in the study
area. Granivores and ground-feeding species demonstrated stronger associations with
open habitats such as experimental farm, where plants showed high rates of reproduction
and produced large seed crops. A recent study found a positive interaction between habitat
heterogeneity and insectivore richness, and a negative interaction with the richness of
ground-feeding birds (Ding et al., 2019).
Carnivores including raptors (hawks, eagles and kites) were found to be the second
largest guild in wetland and experiment farm whereas omnivores and frugivores were
associated with well wooded habitats such as stream vegetation and secondary forest.
Similarly, Barlow et al. (2007) observed an increase in the detection of canopy frugivores
and seed predators during the peak fl owering and fruiting in primary forests.
Pattern of seasonal dis tr ibut ion of avi fauna
Himalayan mountain range is an important destination for migratory birds and
stopover for a number of passage migrants, owing to its geographical position and
supporting habitats. Status of migratory birds of the region is documented by several
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Study sites
OF EF AA PG FR WT SV AT
Sp
ec
ie
s n
um
be
r
Insectivorous
Omnivorous
Carnivorous
Granivorous
Frugivorous
Nectarivorous
Fig. 2. Feeding guilds in the order of dominance.
74 J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi, G. Th akur, A. Dwivedi, R. Tshering, H. M. Samimi, Y. Chaudhary et al.
researchers in Jammu, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand states. During summer, some
species which are migrating from other parts of the country, mainly from southern India,
eastern India and Gangetic plains to breed in Western Himalayas were treated as summer
migrants (Kumar, 2018). During winter, some species which are moving from high altitude
to low elevation due to snowfall were treated as winter visitors or altitudinal migrants.
Among 125 bird species, 65 species (52 %) were categorized as resident, followed by
winter visitors (33 species, 26 %) and summer visitors (27 species, 22 %). Present studies
show similar results with the earlier works of Sharief et al. (2018) and Singh & Banyal (2013)
from diff erent biogeographical regions in Himachal Pradesh. Interestingly, the percentage
of total migratory species (48 %) recorded in this study exactly tally with the results of
recent study in Western Himalayas (Kumar, 2018).
Th e resident birds showed irregular trend of sighting and population fl uctuations
throughout the period. During January–February in both years (2019 and 2020) higher
number of the species of resident birds were recorded whereas in October–November the
lowest number was recorded (fi g. 3). Several resident bird species move locally according
to availability of food, rather than temperature. Present investigation revealed that higher
number of species of winter visitors was recorded while summer visitors were near zero
in winter and spring seasons (October–March) and vice versa for summer and monsoon
seasons (April–September). In monsoon, the richness and the diversity of birds were low.
Th is was due to the high rainfall which decreases the activity of birds and the nesting
behaviour (Panda et al., 2021).
Agro-ecosystems in the university supported bird species of three resident/migratory
statuses in diff erential pattern of abundance (fi g. 4). Th e high number of resident species was
recorded in abandoned tea plantation, experimental farm and organic farm whereas more
species of winter visitors was observed in stream vegetation and abandoned tea plantation.
All study sites provide more or less equal support to summer visitors than winter visitors.
Experimental farm and administration area showed the lowest number of species of winter
visitors,single species each. Winter visitors such as fl ycatchers (Family Muscicapidae) and
warblers (Family Phylloscopidae and Cettiidae) were observed in higher numbers in stream
vegetation and abandoned tea plantation regularly.
Th e diff erent feeding guilds were used to determine the diversity of habitats by
hierarchical cluster analysis. Considering the heatmap generated using Euclidean distance
and Ward’s linkage clustering method, habitats studied were grouped into two main
clusters (fi g. 5). Among eight selected habitats, PG, EF and WT were grouped in cluster I
whereas cluster II represented habitats AT, OF, SV, AA and FR, indicating the similarity of
Pattern of seasonal variations
Month:January-2019 to April-2020
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
10
N
um
be
r o
f s
pe
ci
es
Resident
Summer-visitors
Winter-visitors
20
30
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
10
202
3033
Fig. 3. Distribution pattern of resident/migratory status of avifauna across seasons during the study period from
January 2019 to April 2020.
75Factors Aff ecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural ...
habitat types. Th e carnivores and granivores contributed positively for grouping of habitats
in cluster I. Further, insectivores, omnivores and frugivores contributed positively for
grouping of habitats in cluster II.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Study sites
OF EF AA PG FR WT SV AT
Sp
ec
ie
s n
um
be
r
Insectivorous
Resident
Summer-visitors
Winter-visitors
Fig. 4. Comparative resident/migratory status and relative abundance of birds at Himachal Pradesh Agricultural
University study site.
PG EF W
T
AT O
F
SV AA FR
Insectivores
Omnivores
Carnivores
Granivores
Frugivores
Nectarivores
-2
-1
0
1
2
Fig. 5. Th e heatmap transformed data shows the contributions of diff erent feeding guilds of bird species for
clustering of habitats. Blue colour represents negative contribution while red represents positive contribution.
76 J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi, G. Th akur, A. Dwivedi, R. Tshering, H. M. Samimi, Y. Chaudhary et al.
Conservat ion issues and implicat ions
Increased anthropogenic activities resulting in habitat destruction, degradation and
fragmentation are some of the major threats to avian diversity in diff erent ecosystems
(Datta, 2011). Particularly, habitats associated with water bodies (like permanent and
seasonal wetland and stream vegetation) support higher number of avian species in this
area. Although, the university is maintaining an appreciable environment conservation
policy, several anthropogenic activities were observed.
Th e accumulation of plastic and polythene is a serious threat to the wetland and
stream vegetation habitats which can negatively infl uence the feeding ground of birds. Th e
abandoned tea plantation is facing anthropogenic disturbances due to adjacent residential
area and accumulation of garbage inside the habitat, which can greatly infl uence the
structure of bird community. Regular human movement and noises from vehicles may
have aff ected the behaviour of forest birds in secondary forest and stream vegetation.
Th e various agro-ecosystems of the university support high number of avifauna and,
therefore, might be considered as a promising focus for ornithological research. Th e results
revealed that the key habitats such as organic farm, abandoned tea plantation, stream
vegetation and secondary forest support higher number of avian species. Th ose habitats
host a number of winter visitors, summer visitors and passage migrants. An increase in
plant diversity with native species and fruit-bearing plants in identifi ed areas, home gardens
and road side could contribute to the rise of avifaunal diversity.
Conclusion
Th e present study is an eff ort towards the assessment of avian species richness in
relation to habitat, within an agro-ecosystem of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University,
India. Out of the eight habitats selected for this study at Himachal Pradesh Agricultural
University, abandoned tea plantation stand out as the best site for birds, followed by the
stream vegetation and organic farm. Th is study would serve as an important baseline to
assess the impact of habitat diversity and complexity, seasonal change on avifauna by
comparing the gathered data with the results of future surveys on species richness in those
habitats of the university. Th erefore, the results revealed the importance of regular and long-
term systematic studies on the avifauna emphasizing their conservation status, feeding and
breeding ecology and resource use pattern in diff erent habitats to foster sustainable and
bird friendly management plan for the university.
Declarations
Th e authors declare no confl ict of interests.
S u p p l e m e n t a r y T a b l e 1 . List of bird species recorded at Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University
with their status
No. Family and Common name Scientifi c name Feeding Status OF EF AA PG FR WT SV AT
Order Galliformes
Family Phasianidae
1 Black Francolin Francolinus francolinus O R + +
2 Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus O R + +
Order Suliformes
Family Phalacrocoracidae
3 Indian Cormorant Phalacrocorax fuscicollis C R + +
77Factors Aff ecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural ...
Order Pelecaniformes
Family Ardeidae
4 Grey Heron Ardea cinerea C SV +
5 Indian Pond-heron Ardeola grayii C R +
6 Great White Egret Ardea alba C SV +
7 Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis C SV + + + +
Order Accipitriformes
Family Accipitridae
8 Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus C R/EN +
9 Oriental Honey-buzzard Pernis ptilorhynchus C R +
10 Lesser Fish-eagle Icthyophaga humilis C R/NT +
11 Mountain Hawk-eagle Nisaetus nipalensis C R +
12 Shikra Accipiter badius C R + +
13 Besra Accipiter virgatus C R +
14 Black Kite Milvus migrans C R + + + + +
Order Gruiformes
Family Rallidae
15 White-breasted
Waterhen
Amaurornis
phoenicurus
C R + +
Order Charadriiformes
Family Charadriidae
16 Red-wattled Lapwing Vanellus indicus C R + +
Family Scolopacidae
17 Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos I SV +
Order Columbiformes
Family Columbidae
18 Rock Dove Columba livia G R + +
19 Grey-capped Emerald Dove Chalcophaps indica G R + + +
20 Oriental Turtle-dove Streptopelia orientalis G R +
21 Eastern Spotted Dove Spilopelia chinensis G R + + + +
Order Cuculiformes
Family Cuculidae
22 Banded Bay Cuckoo Cacomantis sonneratii I SV +
23 Common Hawk-cuckoo Hierococcyx varius I SV +
24 Indian Cuckoo Cuculus micropterus I SV +
25 Western Koel Eudynamys scolopaceus F SV + +
26 Greater Coucal Centropus sinensis I R + +
Order Strigiformes
Family Strigidae
27 Asian Barred Owlet Glaucidium cuculoides C R + + + +
28 Collared Owlet Glaucidium brodiei C R +
Order Apodiformes
Family Apodidae
29 House Swift Apus nipalensis I R +
Order Coraciiformes
Family Alcedinidae
30 White-breasted
Kingfi sher
Halcyon smyrnensis C R +
Family Meropidae
31 Blue-tailed Bee-eater Merops philippinus I SV +
Family Upupidae
32 Common Hoopoe Upupa epops I R + +
Family Bucerotidae
33 Indian Grey Hornbill Ocyceros birostris O R + + + + +
Order Piciformes
Family Megalaimidae
34 Blue-throated Barbet Psilopogon asiaticus F R + + + + + +
78 J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi, G. Th akur, A. Dwivedi, R. Tshering, H. M. Samimi, Y. Chaudhary et al.
35 Coppersmith Barbet Psilopogon
haemacephalus
F R + + +
36 Great Barbet Psilopogon virens F R + + + + + +
Family Picidae
37 Speckled Piculet Picumnus innominatus I R + + +
38 Fulvous-breasted Woodpecker Dendrocopos macei I R + + +
39 Grey-capped
Woodpecker
Picoides canicapillus I R + + + +
40 Grey-faced Woodpecker Picus canus I R + + +
41 Scaly-bellied
Woodpecker
Picus squamatus I R + +
Order Falconiformes
Family: Falconidae
42 Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus C SV +
Order Psittaciformes
Family Psittacidae
43 Alexandrine Parakeet Palaeornis eupatria F R + + + + + + + +
44 Plum-headed Parakeet Himalayapsitta
cyanocephala
F R + +
Order Passeriformes
Family Pittidae
45 Indian Pitta Pitta brachyura I SV + +
Family Campephagidae
46 Long-tailed Minivet Pericrocotus ethologus I R +
47 Scarlet Minivet Pericrocotus fl ammeus I R + +
48 Small Minivet Pericrocotus
cinnamomeus
I R + +
Family Laniidae
49 Brown Shrike Lanius cristatus I SV + + +
50 Long-tailed Shrike Lanius schach I R +
Family Dicruridae
51 Ashy Drongo Dicrurus leucophaeus I SV + + +
52 Black Drongo Dicrurus macrocercus I R +
53 Crow-billed Drongo Dicrurus annectens I SV +
54 Hair-crested Drongo Dicrurus hottentottus I SV + + + + + +
Family Rhipiduridae
55 White-throated Fantail Rhipidura albicollis I R + + +
Family Stenostiridae
56 Yellow-bellied Fairy-
fantail
Chelidorhynx
hypoxanthus
I WV +
57 Grey-headed Canary-
flycatcher
Culicicapa ceylonensis I SV +
Family Monarchidae
58 Indian Paradise-
fl ycatcher
Terpsiphone paradisi I SV + + + +
Family Corvidae
59 Black-headed Jay Garrulus lanceolatus I WV +
60 Red-billed blue Magpie Urocissa erythroryncha O R + + + + +
61 Yellow-billed blue
Magpie
Urocissa fl avirostris O WV +
62 Large-billed Crow Corvus macrorhynchos O R + + + + +
Family Alaudidae
63 Indian Bushlark Mirafra erythroptera I R +
64 Oriental Skylark Alauda gulgula I R + +
Family Hirundinidae
65 Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica I SV + + +
66 Red-rumped Swallow Cecropis daurica I SV + +
79Factors Aff ecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural ...
Family Paridae
67 Black-lored Tit Machlolophus
xanthogenys
I WV + +
68 Great Tit Parus major I R + + + + + + + +
69 Green-backed Tit Parus monticolus I WV +
Family Aegithalidae
70 Black-throated Tit Aegithalos concinnus I WV + + +
Family Sittidae
71 White-tailed Nuthatch Sitta himalayensis I WV +
Family Certhiidae
72 Bar-tailed Treecreeper Certhia himalayana I WV + + +
Family Cinclidae
73 Brown Dipper Cinclus pallasii I WV +
Family Pycnonotidae
74 Black Bulbul Hypsipetes leucocephalus O R + + +
75 Himalayan Bulbul Pycnonotus leucogenys F R + + + + + + + +
76 Red-vented Bulbul Pycnonotus cafer F SV + + + +
Family Cettiidae
77 Brownish-fl anked Bush-
warbler
Horornis fortipes I WV + + +
78 Grey-sided Bush-warbler Cettia brunnifrons I WV + + +
Family Phylloscopidae
79 Ashy-throated Warbler Phylloscopus maculipennis I WV +
80 Blyth’s leaf Warbler Phylloscopus reguloides I WV/
PM
+ +
81 Grey-hooded Warbler Phylloscopus
xanthoschistos
I WV + + + +
82 Greenish Warbler Phylloscopus
trochiloides
I WV/
PM
+ +
83 Lemon-rumped Leaf-
warbler
Phylloscopus
chloronotus
I WV + + +
84 Whistler’s Warbler Phylloscopus whistleri I WV +
Family Acrocephalidae
85 Blyth’s Reed-arbler Acrocephalus
dumetorum
I WV/
PM
+ +
Family Cisticolidae
86 Common Tailorbird Orthotomus sutorius I R + + +
87 Ashy Prinia Prinia socialis I R + + +
88 Grey-breasted Prinia Prinia hodgsonii I R + + +
89 Jungle Prinia Prinia sylvatica I R +
90 Plain Prinia Prinia inornata I R +
91 Striated Prinia Prinia crinigera I R +
Family Paradoxornithidae
92 Yellow-eyed Babbler Chrysomma sinense I R +
Family Timaliidae
93 Black-chinned Babbler Cyanoderma pyrrhops I R + +
Family Leiothrichidae
94 Rufous Sibia Heterophasia capistrata O WV + +
Family Zosteropidae
95 Indian White-eye Zosterops palpebrosus I R + + + + +
Family Muscicapidae
96 Asian Brown Flycatcher Muscicapa dauurica I SV +
97 Rusty-tailed Flycatcher Ficedula rufi cauda I WV +
98 Blue-throated Blue-
fl ycatcher
Cyornis rubeculoides I WV +
99 Little pied Flycatcher Ficedula westermanni I WV +
80 J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi, G. Th akur, A. Dwivedi, R. Tshering, H. M. Samimi, Y. Chaudhary et al.
100 Rufous-gorgeted Flycatcher Ficedula strophiata I WV + +
101 Slaty-blue Flycatcher Ficedula tricolor I WV +
102 Verditer Flycatcher Eumyias thalassinus I WV + +
103 Oriental Magpie-robin Copsychus saularis I R + + + + +
104 Blue-fronted Redstart Phoenicurus frontalis I WV +
105 Plumbeous Water-redstart Phoenicurus fuliginosus I WV +
106 White-capped Water-
redstart
Phoenicurus
leucocephalus
I WV +
107 Chestnut-bellied Rock-
thrush
Monticola rufi ventris I WV +
108 Blue whistling Th rush Myophonus caeruleus I R + +
109 Common Stonechat Saxicola torquatus I WV + +
110 Grey Bushchat Saxicola ferreus I R + + + +
111 Pied Bushchat Saxicola caprata I SV +
Family Turdidae
112 Grey-winged Blackbird Turdus boulboul I R + + +
Family Sturnidae
113 Chestnut-tailed Starling Sturnia malabarica O SV +
114 Common Myna Acridotheres tristis O R + + + +
115 Jungle Myna Acridotheres fuscus O R + + +
Family Nectariniidae
116 Crimson Sunbird Aethopyga siparaja N SV +
Family Motacillidae
117 Grey Wagtail Motacilla cinerea I SV + + + +
118 White Wagtail Motacilla alba I WV + +
119 Paddyfi eld Pipit Anthus rufulus I R +
120 Long-billed Pipit Anthus similis I R +
Family Fringillidae
121 Common Rosefi nch Carpodacus erythrinus G WV +
122 Yellow-breasted
Greenfi nch
Chloris spinoides G SV +
Family Passeridae
123 House Sparrow Passer domesticus G R + + +
124 Russet Sparrow Passer cinnamomeus G WV + + + +
Family Estrildidae
125 Indian Silverbill Euodice malabarica G SV +
Note . Feeding guilds: I — insectivores; C — carnivores; O — omnivores; G — granivores; F — frugivores;
N — nectarivores. Resident/migratory status: R — residents; SV — summer visitors; WV — winter visitors;
PM — passage migrant.
References
Ahmed, A., Dey, M. 2014. A checklist of the winter bird community in diff erent habitat types of Rosekandy tea
estate of Assam, India. Journal of Th reatened Taxa, 6 (2), 5478–5484.
Ali, S., Ripley, S. D. 1983. Compact handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan. Oxford University Press,
Bombay.
Aratrakorn, S., Th unhikorn, S., Donald, P. F. 2006. Changes in bird communities following conversion of
lowland forest to oil palm and rubber plantations in southern Th ailand. Bird Conservation International,
16 (1), 71–82.
Barlow, J., Mestrec, L. A. M., Gardner, T. A., Peres, C. A. 2007. Th e value of primary, secondary and plantation
forests for Amazonian birds. Biological Conservation, 136, 212–231.
Bellanthudawa, B. K. A., Nawalage, N. M. S. K., Subanky, S., Panagoda, P. A. B. G., Weerasinghe, H. W. G. A. S.,
Th araka, L. K. D. N., … Abeywickrama, M. S. J. 2019. Composition and diversity variation of avifauna,
along diff erent vegetative habitat types in a human-modifi ed area, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka.
International Journal of Zoology, 2019, Article ID 9727609.
81Factors Aff ecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural ...
Buck, L. E., Gavin, T. A., Lee, D. R., Uphoff , N. T., Behr, D. C., Drinkwater, L. E., … Werner, F. R. 2004.
Ecoagriculture: A review and assessment of its scientifi c foundations. Ithaca, Cornell University, USA.
Chamberlain, D. E., Wilson, J. D., Fuller, R. J. 1999. A comparison of bird populations on organic and
conventional farm systems in southern Britain. Biological Conservation, 88, 307–320.
Chandel, S., Kumar, V., Sharma, B. P., Patiyal, R. 2014. Bird diversity of Dhauladhar Nature Park-Gopalpur,
district Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. International Journal of Plant, Animal and Environmental Sciences, 4
(2), 236–244.
Chazdon, R. L., Peres, C. A., Dent, D., Sheil, D., Lugo, A. E., Lamb, D., … Miller, S. 2009. Th e potential for
species conservation in tropical secondary forests. Conservation Biology, 23, 1406–1417.
Chetana, H. C., Ganesh, T. 2012. Importance of shade trees (Grevillea robusta) in the dispersal of forest tree
species in managed tea plantations of southern Western Ghats, India. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 28 (2),
187–197. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467411000721
Datta, T. 2011. Human interference and avifaunal diversity of two wetlands of Jalpaiguri. Journal of Th reatened
Taxa, 3 (12), 2253–2262.
Ding, Z., Liang, J., Hu, Y., Zhou, Z., Sun, H., Liu, L., … Si, X. 2019. Diff erent responses of avian feeding guilds
to spatial and environmental factors across an elevation gradient in the central Himalaya. Ecology and
Evolution, 9 (7), 4116–4128. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5040
Griffi th, D. M. 2000. Agroforestry: A refuge for tropical biodiversity aft er fi re. Conservation Biology, 14, 325–326.
Grimmett, R., Inskipp, T. 2003. Birds of Northern India. Om Books International.
Harvey, C. A., Villalobos, J. A. G. 2007. Agroforestry systems conserve species-rich but modifi ed assemblages
of tropical birds and bats. Biodiversity and Conservation, 16, 2257–2292.
Hossain, A., Aditya, G. 2016. Avian diversity in agricultural landscape: records from Burdwan, West Bengal,
India. Proceedings of the Zoological Society, 69 (1), 38–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12595-014-0118-3
Javed, S., Kaul, R. 2002. Field methods for bird surveys. Bombay Natural History Society, India.
Kleijn, D., Baquero, R. A., Clough, Y., Díaz, M., Esteban, J., Fernández, F., … Yela, J. L. 2006. Mixed biodiversity
benefi ts of agri-environment schemes in fi ve European countries. Ecology Letters, 9 (3), 243–254. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00869.x
Kottawa-Arachchi, J. D., Gamage, R. N. 2015. Avifaunal diversity and bird community responses to man-
made habitats in St. Coombs Tea Estate, Sri Lanka. Journal of Th reatened Taxa, 7, 6878–6890. https://doi.
org/10.11609/JoTT.o3483.6878-90
Kumar, A. 2018. Avifauna of North West Himalaya. In: Sivaperuman, C., Venkataraman, K., eds. Indian
Hotspots, 151–194. Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
Maas, B., Tscharntke, T., Saleh, T., Putra, D. D., Clough, Y. 2015. Avian species identity drives predation success
in tropical cacao agroforestry. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12409
Mahabal, A., Sharma, T. R. 1992. Distribution patterns of Himalayan, birds of Kangra Valley (Himachal
Pradesh). Himalayan Journal of Environment and Zoology, 6 (2), 85–96.
MEA. 2005. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and Human Well-being. Synthesis, Island Press.
Morelli, F. 2015. Indicator species for avian biodiversity hotspots: Combination of specialists and generalists is
necessary in less natural environments. Journal for Nature Conservation, 27, 54–62.
Mukhopadhyay, S., Mazumdar, S. 2019. Habitat-wise composition and foraging guilds of avian community in
a suburban landscape of lower Gangetic plains, West Bengal, India. Biologia, 74 (8), 1001–1010. https://
doi.org/10.2478/s11756-019-00226-x
Narwade, S. S., Jathar, G. A., Rahmani, A. R. 2006. Bibliography of the birds of North India. Buceros, 11 (1),
1–144. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2121.5529
Niemi, G. J., McDonald, M. E. 2004. Application of ecological indicators. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution
and Systematics, 35 (1), 89–111.
O’Connell, T. J., Jackson, L. E., Brooks, R. P. 2000. Bird guilds as indicators of ecological condition in the central
Appalachians. Ecological Applications, 10 (6), 1706–1721.
Panda, B. P., Das, A. K., K, J. S., Mahapatra, B., Dash, A. K., Pradhan, A., Parida, S. 2021. Habitat heterogeneity
and seasonal variations infl uencing avian community structure in wetlands. Journal of Asia-Pacifi c
Biodiversity, 14 (1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2020.10.001
Poggio, S. L., Chaneton, E. J., Ghersa, C. M. 2010. Landscape complexity diff erentially aff ects alpha, beta, and
gamma diversities of plants occurring in fencerows and crop fi elds. Biological Conservation, 143 (11),
2477–2486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.06.014
Raman, T. R. S. 2006. Eff ects of habitat structure and adjacent habitats on birds in tropical rainforest fragments
and shaded plantations in the Western Ghats, India. Biodiversity and Conservation, 15, 1577–1607.
Roy, U. S., Pal, A., Banerjee, P., Mukhopadhyay, S. K. 2011. Comparison of avifaunal diversity in and around
Neora Valley National Park, West Bengal, India. Journal of Th reatened Taxa, 3 (10), 2136–2142.
Scharlemann, J. P. W., Green, R. E., Balmford, A. 2004. Land-use trends in Endemic Bird Areas: global expansion
of agriculture in areas of high conservation value. Global Change Biology, 10, 2046–2051.
Sekercioglu, C. H. 2006. Increasing awareness of avian ecological function. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 21
(8), 464–471.
82 J. D. Kottawa-Arachchi, G. Th akur, A. Dwivedi, R. Tshering, H. M. Samimi, Y. Chaudhary et al.
Sharief, A., Paliwal, S., Sidhu, A. K., Kubendran, T. 2018. Studies on bird diversity of pong dam wildlife
sanctuary, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, India. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 6 (4), 904–912.
Sidhu, S., Raman, T. R. S., Goodale, E. 2010. Eff ects of plantations and homegardens on tropical forest bird
communities and mixed-species bird fl ocks in the southern Western Ghats. Journal of the Bombay
Natural History Society, 107 (2), 91–108.
Singh, A. P. 2011. Birds of the upper catchment of Ravi River, Chamba district, Himachal Pradesh, India.
Indian BIRDS, 7 (4), 97–103.
Singh, J., Th akur, M. L., Banyal, H. S. 2014. Avifauna of Prashar Lake and its surrounding area in Mandi district
(Himachal Pradesh), India. Asian Journal of Biological Sciences, 7 (2), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.3923/
ajbs.2014.47.56
Singh, V., Banyal, H. S. 2013. Avian fauna of Khajjiar Lake, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, India.
Proceedings of the Zoological Society, 66 (2), 130–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12595-012-0049-9
Sohil, A., Sharma, N. 2020. Assessing the bird guild patterns in heterogeneous land use types around Jammu,
Jammu and Kashmir, India. Ecological Processes, 9 (1), 49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-020-00250-9
Ulman, Y., Sharma, M., Kumar, A. 2016. Agroforestry systems as habitat for avian Species : Assessing its role
in conservation. Proceedings of the Zoological Society, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12595-016-0198-3
Vickery, J. A., Bradbury, R. B., Henderson, I. G., Eaton, M. A., Grice, P. V. 2004. Th e role of agri-environment
schemes and farm management practices in reversing the declinev of farmland birds in England. Biological
Conservation, 119, 19–39.
Received 15 August 2021
Accepted
|
| id | oai:ojs.akademperiodyka.org.ua:article-259 |
| institution | Zoodiversity |
| issn | 2707-7268 |
| keywords_txt_mv | |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2026-08-21T01:01:17Z |
| publishDate | 2022 |
| publisher | Publishing House "Akademperiodyka" of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| record_format | ojs |
| resource_txt_mv | ojsakademperiodykaorgua/b4/882773e9c8753b7713d2b0a149b44cb4.pdf |
| spelling | oai:ojs.akademperiodyka.org.ua:article-2592026-08-20T12:37:19Z Factors Affecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India Kottawa-Arachchi, J. D. Thakur, G. Dwivedi, A. Tshering, R. Samimi, H. M. Chaudhary, Y. Chaudhary, H. K. Biodiversity Habitat complexity Himachal Pradesh Stream vegetation Tea plantation Avifaunal diversity in eight different habitats of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur was studied in order to find factors affecting the occurrence of bird species. Bird populations were sampled in different agro-ecosystems such as farm fields (experimental and organic), wetland, abandoned tea plantation, administration area, playground, secondary forest and stream vegetation. A total of 125 species of birds belonging to 51 families, including 33 winter visitors and 27 summer visitors have been recorded. Among them, 78 insectivores followed by 18 carnivores were recorded. The abandoned tea field was a diverse habitat that maintained the highest species richness recording 50 species, followed by stream vegetation and organic farm. Seasonal variations and habitat heterogeneity play crucial role in shaping species richness. Plant diversity, vegetation structure and microhabitats support different feeding guilds, temporary refuge and migratory route which result in increased bird diversity. Based on different categories of birds, the cluster analysis revealed three distinct clusters of habitats, first cluster containing administration area and secondary forest habitats, experimental farm and wetland grouped in cluster II, whereas cluster III contained habitats viz. abandoned tea plantation, playground, organic farm and stream vegetation. Several conservation measures such as increasing plant diversity, conducting regular and long-term systematic studies, introducing bird friendly management plan are recommended to conserve and enhance avifaunal diversity in the university. Publishing House "Akademperiodyka" of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine 2022-01-17 Article Article application/pdf https://ojs.akademperiodyka.org.ua/index.php/Zoodiversity/article/view/259 10.15407/zoo2022.01.067 Zoodiversity; Vol. 56 No. 1 (2022): Zoodiversity Zoodiversity (Vestnik Zoologii); Том 56 № 1 (2022): Zoodiversity 2707-7268 2707-725X 10.15407/zoo2022.01 en https://ojs.akademperiodyka.org.ua/index.php/Zoodiversity/article/view/259/147 Copyright (c) 2022 Zoodiversity |
| spellingShingle | Kottawa-Arachchi, J. D. Thakur, G. Dwivedi, A. Tshering, R. Samimi, H. M. Chaudhary, Y. Chaudhary, H. K. Factors Affecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India |
| title | Factors Affecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India |
| title_full | Factors Affecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India |
| title_fullStr | Factors Affecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India |
| title_full_unstemmed | Factors Affecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India |
| title_short | Factors Affecting Avifaunal Diversity in Selected Agro-Ecosystems of Himachal Pradesh Agricultural University, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, India |
| title_sort | factors affecting avifaunal diversity in selected agro-ecosystems of himachal pradesh agricultural university, palampur, himachal pradesh, india |
| topic_facet | Biodiversity Habitat complexity Himachal Pradesh Stream vegetation Tea plantation |
| url | https://ojs.akademperiodyka.org.ua/index.php/Zoodiversity/article/view/259 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT kottawaarachchijd factorsaffectingavifaunaldiversityinselectedagroecosystemsofhimachalpradeshagriculturaluniversitypalampurhimachalpradeshindia AT thakurg factorsaffectingavifaunaldiversityinselectedagroecosystemsofhimachalpradeshagriculturaluniversitypalampurhimachalpradeshindia AT dwivedia factorsaffectingavifaunaldiversityinselectedagroecosystemsofhimachalpradeshagriculturaluniversitypalampurhimachalpradeshindia AT tsheringr factorsaffectingavifaunaldiversityinselectedagroecosystemsofhimachalpradeshagriculturaluniversitypalampurhimachalpradeshindia AT samimihm factorsaffectingavifaunaldiversityinselectedagroecosystemsofhimachalpradeshagriculturaluniversitypalampurhimachalpradeshindia AT chaudharyy factorsaffectingavifaunaldiversityinselectedagroecosystemsofhimachalpradeshagriculturaluniversitypalampurhimachalpradeshindia AT chaudharyhk factorsaffectingavifaunaldiversityinselectedagroecosystemsofhimachalpradeshagriculturaluniversitypalampurhimachalpradeshindia |