Comparisons of Foraging Behavior and Energetics by Great Egrets (<i>Ardea alba</i>) and Snowy Egrets (<i>Egretta thula</i>) Across Three Microhabitats

Harper, Abigail C.; Maccarone, Alan D.

doi:10.1660/062.121.0222

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They are purple heron (Ardea purpurea), little egret (Egretta garzetta), great egret (Ardea alba), and lesser adjutant stork (Leptoptilos javanicus). They eat opportunistically in the various mudflat and fish-shrimp ponds: shrimp, crab, and fish (Subaraj and Lok 2009;Nedjah et al 2010;Katz et al 2013;Harper and Maccarone 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Waterbird Foraging Habitat Selection in Balikpapan Bay: Water Depth and Patch Area as Important Factors

Putera

Perwitasari-Farajallah

Mulyani

et al. 2021

HAYATI J Biosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Balikpapan Bay is one of the wetlands providing potential foraging habitat for waterbirds in Indonesia. Potential habitat loss due to oil industry expansion, recent waterbird occurrence, and co-occurrence of two closely related species with similar foraging characteristics led to habitat selection. Habitat selection could be affected by food as an intrinsic factor and extrinsic factor, for example, accessibility to the physical and biological components of the habitat. This study aimed to measure the foraging habitat selection, identify significant habitat quality parameters for the habitat selection and predict the foraging habitat selection model. We used one-zero sampling for collecting foraging habitat selection data, corer sampling for prey data, and collecting the abiotic environment, and Generalized Linear Modelling (GLM) to build the model. We identified four species as the migrant Little Egret (Egretta garzetta), Great Egret (Ardea alba), Purple Heron (Ardea purpurea), and Lesser Adjutant (Leptoptilos javanicus). All species, except Purple Heron, selected foraging habitats. A simple mathematic model of foraging habitat selection was significantly affected by two factors: water depth and patch area. A large patch area may provide primary prey abundance for waterbirds, while a low water depth level may give easy access to the prey.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Waterbird Foraging Habitat Selection in Balikpapan Bay: Water Depth and Patch Area as Important Factors

Putera

Perwitasari-Farajallah

Mulyani

et al. 2021

HAYATI J Biosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As aves forrageiam sistematicamente variando as técnicas empregadas para evitar buscas aleatórias e ineficientes, maximizando a obtenção de energia (Rodgers 1983), as quais refletem na eficiência de captura, no tamanho médio das presas capturadas e na seleção do microhabitat de forrageio (Renken et al 2016), variando conforme fatores bióticos, como a morfologia de cada espécie e disponibilidade de presas, e fatores abióticos, como profundidade da água e tipo de substrato (Harper & Maccarone 2018, Lantz et al 2010. Em nove espécies de garça foram registrados mais de 30 métodos de forrageio conforme diferenças interespecíficas como tamanho corporal, sociabilidade e hábitos alimentares (Kelly et al 2003).…”

unclassified

“…As observações e contagens foram realizadas com auxílio de uma luneta (Bushnell ® ) e binóculos (Vortex ® , 8,5 x 32). As observações tinham duração máxima de duas horas por dia de forma a reduzir a probabilidade de recontagem (Harper & Maccarone 2018).…”

unclassified

Comparação Da Eficiência De Forrageio Das Garças Egretta Caerulea E Egretta Thula No Estuário De Paranaguá, Paraná, Sul Do Brasil

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The foraging efficiency of birds may vary according to local conditions as a result of the balance between energy consumption and expenditure. The foraging efficiency of Egretta thula (adults n=11) and Egretta caerulea (adults n=69 and juveniles n= 17) was compared in Paranaguá city estuary, in Paraná, Brazil. In 14 hours of observation divided into 2 minutes sessions per individual, were recorded foraging site (mud or shallow water), number of steps, total peckings and successful peckings, and were calculated the success rates, energy effort and capture efficiency. In shallow water E.thula was more efficient than E. caerulea. There was no intraspecific differences in E. thula regarding environments. Adults of E. caerulea were more efficient than juveniles, with greater efficiency in mud than in shallow waters environments. Differences in foraging efficiency between species may be related to the type of foraging according to feeding location.

show abstract

Abundance and behavior of little egrets (Egretta garzetta) near an onshore wind farm in Chongming Dongtan, China

Zhao

Song

et al. 2021

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparisons of Foraging Behavior and Energetics by Great Egrets (Ardea alba) and Snowy Egrets (Egretta thula) Across Three Microhabitats

Cited by 3 publications

References 21 publications

Waterbird Foraging Habitat Selection in Balikpapan Bay: Water Depth and Patch Area as Important Factors

Waterbird Foraging Habitat Selection in Balikpapan Bay: Water Depth and Patch Area as Important Factors

Comparação Da Eficiência De Forrageio Das Garças Egretta Caerulea E Egretta Thula No Estuário De Paranaguá, Paraná, Sul Do Brasil

Abundance and behavior of little egrets (Egretta garzetta) near an onshore wind farm in Chongming Dongtan, China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About