Foraging ecology and time budgets of non-breeding shorebirds in coastal Cuba

Nol, Erica; MacCulloch, Kate; Pollock, Lisa; McKinnon, Laura

doi:10.1017/s0266467414000182

Cited by 17 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, the unique geography of hundreds of islands combined with dozens of different political institutions poses a challenge to coordinated monitoring and reporting efforts. Third, few studies investigate shorebird use of Caribbean islands, and those that do tend to focus mainly on southern Puerto Rico (e.g., Parks, Collazo & Ramos-Alvarez, 2016a ; Parks, Collazo & Ramos-Alvarez, 2016b ; Wunderle, Waide & Fernandez, 2009 ) and Cuba (e.g., Nol et al, 2014 ), or specifically on Piping Plover (e.g., Johnson et al, 2018 ; Gratto-Trevor et al, 2016 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of priority shorebird conservation areas in the Caribbean

Cañizares

Reed

2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite being geographically central to the Atlantic Americas Flyway for migratory birds, the Caribbean is often overlooked or underappreciated when addressing the conservation of North American shorebirds. To our knowledge, this is the first Caribbean-wide assessment of shorebird use in the region. We analyzed 211,013 shorebird species observations in the insular Caribbean from 2010–2019, representing 78,794 eBird checklists and cumulative total of 2.1 million shorebirds of 45 species. We conclude that priority areas for shorebird conservation include Humedal Sur de Pinar del Río (Humedal Sur de Los Palacios) in Cuba, and Monte Cristi in the Dominican Republic as they each likely support more than 20,000 shorebirds annually, and they host large abundances of geographic populations for particular taxa. Specifically, the former site hosts >10% of Short-billed Dowitchers (Limnodromus griseus griseus/hendersoni), and >1% of Black-bellied Plovers (Pluvialis squatarola cynosurae) and Wilson’s Plovers (Charadrius wilsonia wilsonia), while the latter site supports large numbers of Black-necked Stilts (Himantopus mexicanus). We also identified at least 15 additional sites that likely cross the 1% population threshold for one or more shorebird taxa. These sites may qualify for special international designations such as Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas or as part of the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network; 11 of the 17 sites we identified do not hold either of these titles. Data on subspecific or geographic distributions of three species, Snowy Plover (C. nivosus), Black-necked Stilt, and Killdeer (C. vociferous), are insufficient to reveal if the sites with the highest abundances were mostly comprised of Caribbean populations or migrants, but the limited information suggests that they also likely exceed 1% thresholds on several islands. Based on our results, we recommend more extensive systematic surveys of shorebirds in the Caribbean, including research on turnover rates and movements between islands, as well as assimilation of shorebird survey data not yet included in the eBird portal.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of priority shorebird conservation areas in the Caribbean

Cañizares

Reed

2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Day length was very similar between the Netherlands and Ghana during our study period, averaging 11.25 and 11.95 h, respectively. As night foraging is common amongst shorebirds ( Robert & McNeil, 1989 ; Nol et al, 2014 ), we extrapolated all estimates of foraging time and energy intake over a 24 h period. Foraging efficiency at night may be lower for visual foragers such as Sanderlings, but we could not take this into account, as no estimates are available.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prey type and foraging ecology of SanderlingsCalidris albain different climate zones: are tropical areas more favourable than temperate sites?

Grond

Ntiamoa‐Baidu

Piersma

et al. 2015

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sanderlings (Calidris alba) are long-distance migratory shorebirds with a non-breeding range that spans temperate and tropical coastal habitats. Breeding in the High Arctic combined with non-breeding seasons in the tropics necessitate long migrations, which are energetically demanding. On an annual basis, the higher energy expenditures during migration might pay off if food availability in the tropics is higher than at temperate latitudes. We compared foraging behaviour of birds at a north temperate and a tropical non-breeding site in the Netherlands and Ghana, respectively. In both cases the birds used similar habitats (open beaches), and experienced similar periods of daylight, which enabled us to compare food abundance and availability, and behavioural time budgets and food intake. During the non-breeding season, Sanderlings in the Netherlands spent 79% of their day foraging; in Ghana birds spent only 38% of the daytime period foraging and the largest proportion of their time resting (58%). The main prey item in the Netherlands was the soft-bodied polychaete Scolelepis squamata, while Sanderlings in Ghana fed almost exclusively on the bivalve Donax pulchellus, which they swallowed whole and crushed internally. Average availability of polychaete worms in the Netherlands was 7.4 g ash free dry mass (AFDM) m−2, which was one tenth of the 77.1 g AFDM m−2 estimated for the beach in Ghana. In the tropical environment of Ghana the Sanderlings combined relatively low energy requirements with high prey intake rates (1.64 mg opposed to 0.13 mg AFDM s−1 for Ghana and the Netherlands respectively). Although this may suggest that the Ghana beaches are the most favourable environment, processing the hard-shelled bivalve (D. pulchellus) which is the staple food could be costly. The large amount of daytime spent resting in Ghana may be indicative of the time needed to process the shell fragments, rather than indicate rest.

show abstract

“…In addition, while water cover significantly below 100% is likely preferred across most shorebird species, optimum water depth differs by species (Rogers et al, 2015) and sizeclass (i.e., leg length) has been used as a predictor affecting shorebird numbers at different water levels on artificial supratidal habitats elsewhere (e.g., Green et al, 2015). Future research could usefully explore whether foraging activity at supratidal sites in Rudong is negatively related to body size, as has been documented elsewhere (e.g., Nol, MacCulloch, Pollock, & McKinnon, 2014). If smaller species are more likely than larger ones to forage during the high tide period when artificial supratidal habitats are being occupied, then managers should regulate water levels to optimum depth for shorter-legged species.…”

Section: Management Of Artificial Supratidal Habitatsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Multiple habitat use by declining migratory birds necessitates joined‐up conservation

Jackson

Carrasco

Choi

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many species depend on multiple habitats at different points in space and time. Their effective conservation requires an understanding of how and when each habitat is used, coupled with adequate protection. Migratory shorebirds use intertidal and supratidal wetlands, both of which are affected by coastal landscape change. Yet the extent to which shorebirds use artificial supratidal habitats, particularly at highly developed stopover sites, remains poorly understood leading to potential deficiencies in habitat management. We surveyed shorebirds on their southward migration in southern Jiangsu, a critical stopover region in the East Asian Australasian Flyway (EAAF), to measure their use of artificial supratidal habitats and assess linkages between intertidal and supratidal habitat use. To inform management, we examined how biophysical features influenced occupancy of supratidal habitats, and whether these habitats were used for roosting or foraging. We found that shorebirds at four of five sites were limited to artificial supratidal habitats at high tide for ~11–25 days per month because natural intertidal flats were completely covered by seawater. Within the supratidal landscape, at least 37 shorebird species aggregated on artificial wetlands, and shorebirds were more abundant on larger ponds with less water cover, less vegetation, at least one unvegetated bund, and fewer built structures nearby. Artificial supratidal habitats were rarely used for foraging and rarely occupied when intertidal flats were available, underscoring the complementarity between supratidal roosting habitat and intertidal foraging habitat. Joined‐up artificial supratidal management and natural intertidal habitat conservation are clearly required at our study site given the simultaneous dependence by over 35,000 migrating shorebirds on both habitats. Guided by observed patterns of habitat use, there is a clear opportunity to improve habitat condition by working with local land custodians to consider shorebird habitat requirements when managing supratidal ponds. This approach is likely applicable to shorebird sites throughout the EAAF.

show abstract

Foraging ecology and time budgets of non-breeding shorebirds in coastal Cuba

Cited by 17 publications

References 33 publications

Identification of priority shorebird conservation areas in the Caribbean

Identification of priority shorebird conservation areas in the Caribbean

Prey type and foraging ecology of SanderlingsCalidris albain different climate zones: are tropical areas more favourable than temperate sites?

Multiple habitat use by declining migratory birds necessitates joined‐up conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About