Foraging and Aggressive Behaviour of the Regent Honeyeater <i>Xanthomyza phrygia</i> in Northern New South Wales

Ford, Hugh; Davis, William E.; Debus, Stephen; Ley, Andrew; Recher, Harry F.; Williams, Beth

doi:10.1071/mu9930277

Cited by 27 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our observations of shared parental provisioning of chicks has been reported for other honeyeater species in the wild [Clarke, 1988;Davis and Recher, 1993;Franklin, personal communication;Poiani, 1992;Smales, personal communication] and in captivity [Atchison, 19921. Chick care by single individuals occasionally happens in wild nests [D. Franklin, personal communication].…”

Section: Discussion Provisioning Ratessupporting

confidence: 56%

Provisioning by captive yellow‐tufted honeyeaters (Lichenostomus melanops gippslandicus) acting as foster parents for helmeted honeyeater chicks (L. m. cassidix)

Miller

1994

Zoo Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A captive breeding program is being conducted with the endangered helmeted honeyeater (Lichenostomus melanops cassidix). Establishment of breeding stock involved cross fostering helmeted honeyeater chicks to breeding yellow-tufted honeyeaters (Lichenostomus melanops gippslandicus). Data were collected on provisioning rates and food preferences of the foster parents in feeding chicks of the helmeted subspecies. Feeding rates vaned from 5-6 each hour per chick in the first week to 8-10 per chick in week 3 and were similar for both one-and two-chick broods. Chicks were considered independent by 6 weeks. Provisioning by the foster parents was evenly divided between the sexes. Insects were the main food item fed to nestlings (89.9%). Moths and mealworms were the two most frequently selected items and were the two largest items available. The continued increase of the captive population may provide individuals for release to the wild population, and techniques developed through captive management will help conserve wild populations.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Provisioning Ratessupporting

confidence: 56%

Provisioning by captive yellow‐tufted honeyeaters (Lichenostomus melanops gippslandicus) acting as foster parents for helmeted honeyeater chicks (L. m. cassidix)

Miller

1994

Zoo Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The importance of nectar in this species' diet has been demonstrated in a number of studies under natural conditions (Franklin et al 1989;Ford et al 1993;Geering and French 1998;Oliver 2000). In this study, consumption of nectar revealed a significant seasonal pattern.…”

Section: Seasonal Changes In Food Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 70%

“…A number of studies have investigated the foraging and food preference of the regent honeyeater (Franklin et al 1989;Ford et al 1993;Oliver 1998Oliver , 2000Munro et al 2003). These studies have almost exclusively been conducted between August and February when birds are congregated into recognised breeding grounds (Ford et al 1993;Oliver 1998Oliver , 2000.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Food consumption, body mass and fat deposition in captive regent honeyeaters, Xanthomyza phrygia (Meliphagidae), during the non-breeding season

Munro

McFadden

2004

J Ornithol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The regent honeyeater (Xanthomyza phrygia) is a large endangered honeyeater from eastern and south-eastern Australia. Little is known about the ecology of this bird during the autumn-winter period, when it is absent from its breeding areas. In this study, food consumption and body condition of captive regent honeyeaters were studied during this period. Nectar was the dominant component of the regent honeyeaters' diet and varied significantly throughout the study, peaking in early July. Fruit and mealworm consumption also showed significant seasonal shifts with maxima in late June and early March, respectively. In general, immature birds consumed significantly more protein-rich food than adults. The average body mass of the male birds varied significantly with season. Female birds did not show a significant seasonal change in body mass but, similarly to males, attained their highest mass in late April. Fat deposition changed significantly over months, with highest levels of fat recorded from late April until late June. These seasonal trends, independent of food abundance, may suggest that body condition within this species is controlled endogenously.

show abstract

“…We obtained a relatively high detectability estimate for regent honeyeaters by commencing surveys during the early stages of their breeding season. During this period, regent honeyeaters are largely sedentary, highly vocal, and aggressive while establishing and defending small breeding territories (Ford et al ). Thus, difficulties associated with their mobile life history are largely negated during this period as nesting birds become central place foragers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An occupancy approach to monitoring regent honeyeaters

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation of rare and highly mobile species is frequently limited by a lack of monitoring data. Critically endangered regent honeyeaters (Anthochaera phrygia, population 350–400) pose a substantial conservation challenge because of their high mobility and irregular settlement throughout their estimated 600,000‐km2 range. Given an ongoing population decline, enhanced monitoring efforts to inform population management are needed. We conducted an occupancy survey of regent honeyeaters and other nectarivores over 880 km2 of the species' core range in New South Wales, Australia, during spring 2015. We located approximately 70 regent honeyeaters, potentially representing 20% of the population. Presence of regent honeyeaters was best predicted by high local nectar abundance. Detectability of regent honeyeaters when breeding (0.59) was similar to common, co‐occurring nectarivores and was sufficient to distinguish absence from non‐detection. For rare and highly mobile species, monitoring approaches that prioritize sampling extent over site visit duration and explicitly accommodate their life‐history attributes can provide valuable population data, with subsequent benefits for conservation. © 2017 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Foraging and Aggressive Behaviour of the Regent Honeyeater Xanthomyza phrygia in Northern New South Wales

Cited by 27 publications

References 15 publications

Provisioning by captive yellow‐tufted honeyeaters (Lichenostomus melanops gippslandicus) acting as foster parents for helmeted honeyeater chicks (L. m. cassidix)

Provisioning by captive yellow‐tufted honeyeaters (Lichenostomus melanops gippslandicus) acting as foster parents for helmeted honeyeater chicks (L. m. cassidix)

Food consumption, body mass and fat deposition in captive regent honeyeaters, Xanthomyza phrygia (Meliphagidae), during the non-breeding season

An occupancy approach to monitoring regent honeyeaters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About