Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 August 2019 | 11(10): 14279–14291

Diversity and temporal variation of the bird community in paddy fields of Kadhiramangalam, Tamil Nadu, India

Chaithra Shree Jayasimhan ¹ & Padmanabhan Pramod ²

^1,2 Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Anaikatty (Post), Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641108, India.

¹ chaithrashree89@gmail.com (corresponding author), ² neosacon@gmail.com

Abstract: Paddy, a major food crop of India, provides a variety of habitats in a short period of time and supports diverse organisms. Paddy fields also harbour many birds with varying species composition across the different cultivation phases of paddy. This study, conducted in the paddy fields of Kadhiramangalam, Tamil Nadu, India, recorded the bird community composition there during the various cultivation phases of paddy. The bird community data was analysed and a total of 87 bird species were recorded from the study area belonging to 41 families and 13 orders. The growth phase (PS 3) is the most diverse phase. The bird composition showed a significant variation across the paddy cultivation phases with overall average dissimilarity of 71.41%. The patterns shown by graphs of bird species composition across the paddy cultivation phases is based on guild, habitat usage and order overlap and elucidates that the change in bird community composition temporally can be attributed to the niche variability across the paddy cultivation phases. The major species contributing to these changes observed are Black-headed Munia, Baya Weaver, Common Sandpiper, Barn Swallow, Common Myna, and Black Drongo in this region.

Keywords: Agro-ecosystems, aves, habitat usage, paddy cultivation phases, rice fields.

doi: https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4241.11.10.14279-14291 | ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:FF009FC1-A917-41C1-B349-FE608E48ADC9

Editor: Anonymity requested. Date of publication: 26 August 2019 (online & print)

Manuscript details: #4241 | Received 08 May 2018 | Final received 15 June 2019 | Finally accepted 29 July 2019

Citation: Jayasimhan, C.S. & P. Pramod (2019). Diversity and temporal variation of the bird community in paddy fields of Kadhiramangalam, Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 11(10): 14279–14291. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4241.11.10.14279-14291

Copyright: © Jayasimhan & Pramod 2019. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this article in any medium by adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publication.

Funding: None.

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Author details and contribution: J. Chaithra Shree is a PhD Scholar in Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History. All field studies, data collection and preparation of manuscript in the prescribed format was done by her. The work is part of her doctoral thesis. Dr. P. Pramod is Principal Scientist at Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History and Head of Nature Education Division. The study was conceptualised and planned by him.

Acknowledgements: The authors are grateful to Mr. Ramamoorthy and family of SVR Organic Way Farm , Kadhiramangalam and the villagers of Kadhiramangalam for their support and co-operation during the field studies. The authors would also like to thank Dr. Rajah Jaypal, Ornithology division, SACON for help in identifying bird species. The authors would like to thank Director of SACON for his support and encouragement throughout the study.

Introduction

Birds are known to play a dual role as pests and as bio-controllers of pests in various agro-ecosystems (Borad et al. 2000). But, for decades the focus on birds in agro-ecosystems has been to study their foraging effects on crop yield and their control (Beri et al. 1968; Jotwani et al. 1969; Chahal et al. 1973; Jain & Prakash 1974; Bhatnagar 1976; Dhindsa & Toor 1980; Dhindsa et al. 1984; Parashaya et al. 1986; Subramanya 1987; Saini & Toor 1991). A few studies exist on the beneficial role of birds in agro-ecosystems (Chakravarthy 1988; Parashaya et al. 1994; Asokan & Ali 2010). The attitude on wildlife conservation became inclusive of large man-managed ecosystems (Bambaradeniya et al. 2004; Edirisinghe & Bambaradeniya 2006). Since then, the biodiversity associated with paddy fields is being considered in the light of conservation (Bambaradeniya et al. 1998; Edirisinghe & Bambaradeniya 2008; Elphick et al. 2010). Many studies on the bird use of paddy fields with focus on wetland species have been undertaken in the last two decades worldwide (Elphick et al. 2010; Sicemore & Maine 2012; Nam et al. 2015; Marco-Mendez et al. 2015).

India, being an agrarian economy, produces 21.2% of world’s paddy in an area of 3.85 million hectares (Agristat 2016), making it the second largest producer of rice in the world. This large area under paddy cultivation throughout India is known to support 351 bird species (Gopisundar & Subramanya 2010). The bird species using the paddy fields are seen to vary regionally. Paddy fields are dynamic habitats and go through different habitats in a single crop cycle. This temporal variation in biodiversity during a paddy crop cycle is successive (Bambaradeniya et al. 2004). The habitat variations also lead to changes in resource availability for birds. This will have an impact on the bird community composition. As such, the bimodality in the activity pattern of birds in paddy fields during a day is known (Sridhara et al. 1983). In studying the ecological importance of birds in paddy field ecosystems, the understanding of this temporal variability in bird community would be useful. This paper aims to discern the patterns of temporal variation of bird community composition in paddy fields and explores the probable causes for the patterns observed.

Study Area

This study was conducted in Kadhiramangalam Village, Thiruvidaimarudur Taluk, Thanjavur District, Tamil Nadu (11.4’42.63”–11.4’58.24” ⁰N & 79.31’18.729”–79.31’59.247” ⁰E). Tamil Nadu is one of the top five rice producing states in India with 2.04 million hectares (4.7% of India’s paddy cultivar land) under paddy cultivation, producing 7.65% of India’s rice (Agristat 2016). In Kadhiramangalam, the whole of the low lying plains are intensive agricultural areas with the major crop being paddy interspersed with very small patches of sugarcane and timber wood. The main source of water for these paddy fields is from bore wells although it is a part of the fertile Cauvery delta. Farmers used to harvest three crops in the past. In recent years, they harvest only a single crop due to unavailability of water. The fields are flooded before land preparation and later irrigated as required. Chemical fertilizers and urea are used in 80% of the fields. Pesticides are used at the farmer’s discretion.

Methods

Field Methodology

To understand the bird species composition, strip-transect method (Sutherland 2000) was used. Two study sites (A and B) (Images 1–4), that were more than 2-km apart, were selected in the study area. A transect of 1-km was marked in each study site. Bird data was collected for two cropping seasons of paddy cultivated from August 2016 to January 2017 and September 2017 to March 2018 from both sites. Data collected included the bird species, numbers encountered and the field variables such as field conditions (wetland, wet and dry land) and also the paddy cultivation phases.

The data has been compartmentalised into seven phases of paddy cultivation to quantify the variations in bird composition over time (Bambaradeniya et al. 1998; Paliwal & Bhandarkar 2014). The seven paddy cultivation phases identified are

Land preparation and sapling phase (paddy stage - PS 1*) – Tilling and levelling are done and seed dispersed for saplings. Inundated wetlands. Around 15 days.

Transplantation phase (PS 2) – This stage includes transplantation and crop growth up to one foot in height. Inundated wetlands. Around 20 days.

Growth phase (PS 3) – From one ft grown crop till complete growth before flowering. Inundated wetlands. Around 30 days.

Flowering phase (PS 4) – Panicle formation and flowering. Wet fields. Pockets of wetlands. Around 10 days.

Milking phase (PS 5) – During the milking period. Wet/ dry fields. Around 15 days.

Maturing phase (PS 6) – The panicles get mature. Wet/ dry fields. Around 15 days.

Drying and harvesting phase (PS 7) – The crop starts drying. Later harvested. Dry/wet fields. Pockets of wetlands.

(* Following cultivation phases of paddy will be denoted as PS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 respectively).

Analytical Methodology

Data compiled, tabulated and subjected to basic descriptive statistics for studying the community characteristics. Pair-wise ANOSIM (Analysis of similarity) (Clarke & Green 1988) with Bray-Curtis index was used to test the significance and understand the extent of variation in the bird species composition between the paddy cultivation phases. To explore the species-wise contribution to dissimilarity, SIMPER (Similarity percentage) was used. Richness and diversity indices (Magurran 1988; Morris et al. 2014) were used to understand the temporal variation in the diversity. All these analyses were performed with PAST 3.1 (Hammer et al. 2001). The patterns in temporal variations in bird species composition, feeding guild composition and habitat usage were analysed by constructing relative abundance graphs using MS Excel 2007.

Results

a) Bird Community Composition and Diversity

Eighty-seven bird species belonging to 13 orders and 41 families were recorded from the study area (Figs. 1a & b). Overall data shows that the passerines were the most abundant birds both in terms of species and population abundance. All species are in the Least Concern category of the IUCN Red List except Black-headed Ibis Threskiornis melanocephalus and Red-necked Falcon Falco chicquera that are in the Near Threatened category. The basic descriptive statistics of the data compiled are summarized in Tables 1 & 2. The maximum variance and standard deviation is observed in PS 5.

The change in relative abundance of the birds as per their taxonomic order (Fig. 2a), broad feeding guild (Fig. 3a) and habitat dependency (Fig. 4a) shows significant patterns.

As the growth of paddy proceeds, a steady decline in the number of birds of Charadriiformes, Pelecaniformes and Coraciiformes was observed. Similarly an increase and steep decline of the birds of Accipitriformes and Falconiformes was also observed with time. A steep increase in Passeriformes and Psittaciformes after PS 4 was seen. Strigiformes increased after PS 3. Galliformes and Gruiformes remained steady across the stages (Fig. 2a).

Diversity and Species Richness indices (Table 3) show that PS 3 (growth phase) is the most diverse with 60 species although PS 4 (flowering phase) has highest species richness and PS 2 (transplanted paddy phase) seems to be the most even. These indices also show that PS 5 (milking phase) is the least diverse with low evenness and high dominance.

The R value of ANOSIM (at 95% confidence) shows that there is a significant difference in the bird species composition between the seven phases of paddy cultivation cycle (Table 4). The average dissimilarity among the seven phases was 71.41% (SIMPER). The R values between two consecutive stages were significant except PS 5 and PS 6 ranging from 0.16 to 0.21. Between two non-consecutive stages the values ranged from 0.21 to 0.71.

Ninety percent of this change is accounted for by 29 species of the total 87 bird species recorded (Appendix 1). The major contributors to this change are, Lonchura malacca (19.67%) followed by Ploceus philippinus (11.16%), Actitis hypoleucos (8.06%), Hirundo rustica (6.554%), Acridotheres tristis (3.86%), and Dicrurus macrocercus (3.499%) (Figs. 5 a & b) contributing to over 50% of the variations seen.

b) Feeding guilds and the temporal variation

The birds were categorised into eight broad feeding guilds based on their feeding preferences in Ali & Ripley (1978) (Figs. 1c & d), viz. insectivores, granivores, carnivores, nectarivores, omnivores, aquatic carnivores (species that feed on aquatic vertebrates and invertebrates), frugivores + insectivores, and aquatic carnivores + insectivores. Considering species richness as the factor, insectivorous guild dominates (32%) as in any terrestrial habitat. Dominance of the gregarious granivorous birds is evident in the abundance pattern showing 41% of total encounters of the granivores.

The relative abundance of these guilds (based on encounter rate) across the paddy growth phases showed a four times increase in granivores from PS 3 to PS 4 (Fig. 3a). More than 50% of the omnivores declined from PS 3 to PS 4. Carnivores also declined from PS 2 onwards. The frugivores are negligible in paddy field ecosystem. The insectivores and aquatic carnivores+insectivores were observed to increase in PS 3, decrease in PS 4 and PS 5 (40% decrease) and again increase in PS 6, probably an artefact of this miscellaneous classification.

c) Wetland birds in paddy fields

Bird community of paddy fields were analysed as per their known habitat association. The 87 bird species recorded from the study area were classified into three categories, viz., Waterbirds (wetland birds), wetland-dependent birds, and terrestrial birds; and their response to the changes in paddy stages was analysed. Of these, 28 bird species (relative abundance - 20%) are wetland associated, belonging to seven orders and 13 families. Twenty of these 28 bird species are true water-birds belonging to three orders, viz., Charadriiformes – 6 species (5 families), Gruiiformes – 2 species (1 family), Pelecaniformes – 12 species (4 families). Eight species are wetland dependent belonging to 6 orders, viz., Charadriiformes – 1 species (1 family), Pelecaniformes – 1 species (1 family), Coraciiformes – 3 species (1 family), Accipitriformes – 1 species (1 family), Gruiformes- 1 species (1 family). The rest are terrestrial (Figs. 1 e & f). The relative abundance of these birds across paddy stages shows more than 80% decrease in water-birds and wetland dependent species from PS 2 to PS 6 with a 50% drop between PS 3 and PS 4 (Fig. 4).

Twenty-two species are migrants (25.2%) of which 12 species (54.5%) are wetland dependent. Nineteen species are partial migrants (21.8%) of which 10 species (52.6%) are wetland dependent.

Discussion

According to Subramanya (1987), the bird community in paddy fields are bimodal across paddy cultivation phases with peaks during the tilling/levelling phase and growth phase of paddy. This pattern was observed by considering only the species richness in each of the stages. Along with the species richness the number of birds in each of the species (population abundance) is also a significant factor to explore and understand the bird life of paddy fields. Since availability of prey is known to affect bird abundance in paddy fields (Bambaradeniya et al. 1998), it is the feeding guilds and the opportunity provided by the changing ecosystem as a substratum for feeding in the paddy fields that determine the life of birds in this ecosystem. Hence, for the better understanding of temporal variation and its significance, the abundance of each species is important along with the species richness in the paddy fields.

The number of passerines increased across the cultivation phases from PS 1 till PS 5 and reduced in PS 6 and PS 7. Simultaneously, birds belonging to Charadriiformes, Pelecaniformes and Coraciiformes decreased from PS 1 through PS 5 and recovered slightly from PS 6 to PS 7. Columbiiformes showed a fourfold increase from PS 5 to PS 6 and Psittaciformes also showed a threefold increase from PS 5 to PS 7 (Fig. 2a). These results coincide with the trends observed in the guild composition variations where aquatic carnivores and insectivores + aquatic carnivores decreased through PS 2 to PS 5 with peak in PS 2. The same trends can be visualised in the wetland and wetland dependent species from PS 1 through PS 7 (Fig. 4a). The granivores showed a drastic increase from PS 3 with a peak in PS 5 and decreased in PS 6 and 7. The insectivores maintained a minimal of 15% across all the stages although the number increases which denotes their rise in abundance also across PS 1 and PS 7 (Fig. 3a).

Thus, the current study shows that there is a linear (table 3) significant change in bird community composition temporally in paddy fields along with the changes in paddy phases. This change is gradual. The richness (Table 2) did not show significant variation between the seven paddy cultivation phases considered here. So, during a cropping cycle of paddy a variety of niches are available that are also dynamic in nature. Hence, the temporal variation in bird community is due to niche variability across the different paddy cultivation phases.

The differences in bird community observed between two consecutive phases among PS 1–PS 2 and PS 3–PS 4 with R values at 0.178– 0.21 (Table 3) indicate the changes of available niches in the same area during that time frame. This may be because of the sudden change in habitat; (a) in case of PS 1 and PS 2, the presence of transplanted paddy in an open wetland kind of ecosystem, (b) in the case of PS 3 and PS 4, the changes in crop density and start of panicles and drying of lands, opens avenues for new available niches. Simultaneously the process displaces a few niches already present. Increase in granivores till PS 5 and decrease only 50% till PS 7 seems to coincide with the increase in Columbidae and Psittaculidae that are seen to flock to feed on fallen grains after harvest.

The best examples of the dependency on the availability and accessibility of niches can be seen in PS 5 (milking phase) and PS 3 (growth phase). The high dominance Index value in the milking phase of paddy can be attributed to the increase in relative abundance of Passeriformes especially granivores and decrease of aquatic carnivores + insectivores (Figs. 2a & 3a). The low evenness may also be because of drastic increase in two species—Lonchura malacca and Ploceus philippinus. The steep decline in omnivores may be due to loss of open wetland conditions (Nam et al. 2015) and the crop density hinders the activities of raptors like Milvus migrans and Haliastur indus. Insectivores and mixed feeders maintain 20% of the overall abundance across the stages although there is an increase in total encounters. This shows there is an increase in the abundance of insectivores and aquatic carnivores + insectivores along the paddy stages which follow the arthropod abundance in rice fields (Bambaradeniya 1998) and changes with the habitat variations (Fig. 3a).

It can be concluded that there is a significant change in the paddy field bird composition temporarily with peak diversity during the plant growth phase (PS 3) of paddy cultivation phases. This change in bird community composition can be attributed to the dynamic habitat variability happening during paddy cultivation. Twenty-nine bird species contribute to 90% of the bird community changes seen in Kadhiramangalam region. The major contributing species are Black-headed Munia, Baya Weaver, Common Sandpiper, Barn Swallow, Common Myna, and Black Drongo in this region. All these except Black Drongos are colonial/ flocking birds. Hence, their presence or absence gives the major contributions. The temporal variability in the microhabitats of the paddy fields provide varied substratum in support of various bird species of different feeding guilds. This makes paddy fields a good candidate to be considered as a ‘keystone habitat’ for bird communities.

Table 1. Bird community in paddy fields summary. Descriptive statistics based on species richness.

Paddy growth phases	Species richness	No. of transects	Total encounters	Mean	Standard deviation	Co-efficient of variance in %age	Minimum species/ transect	Maximum species/ transect
PS 1	53	14	2106	19.71	±3.47	17.61	12	27
PS 2	55	16	2536	21.13	±2.7	12.8	15	27
PS 3	60	15	2097	21.86	±4.03	18.44	16	31
PS 4	65	15	3591	25.33	±3.59	14.21	19	32
PS 5	58	10	4296	24.8	±4.75	19.18	18	33
PS 6	62	14	3871	25	±3.78	15.14	20	32
PS 7	54	10	1125	21	±6.43	30.61	9	31

Table 2. Bird community in paddy fields summary. Descriptive statistics based on total encounters.

Paddy growth phases	Species richness	No. of transects	Total encounters	Mean	Standard deviation	Co-efficient of variance in %age	Minimum encounters/ transect	Maximum encounters/ transect
PS 1	53	14	2106	150.42	±68.14	45.2	71	304
PS 2	55	16	2536	158.5	±48.44	30.5	97	264
PS 3	60	15	2097	139.8	±54.33	38.86	88	246
PS 4	65	15	3591	239.4	±149.79	62.56	111	659
PS 5	58	10	4296	429.6	±308.37	71.78	105	1065
PS 6	62	14	3871	276.5	±179.91	65.06	75	784
PS 7	54	10	1125	112.5	±63.07	56.62	32	216

Table 3. Richness and diversity indices of birds across paddy growth stages. The highest values of the indices are in bold and the least underlined. * is the most diverse.

	PS 1	PS 2	PS 3	PS 4	PS 5	PS 6	PS 7	Total
Taxa_S	53	55	60*	65	58	62	54	87
Individuals	2106	2536	2097	3591	4296	3871	1125	19622
Dominance_D	0.0915	0.0720	0.0606*	0.1294	0.2419	0.1943	0.0601	0.0884
Simpson_1-D	0.9085	0.9279	0.9393	0.8706	0.7581	0.8057	0.9399	0.9116
Shannon_H	2.885	3.039	3.181	2.7	2.065	2.514	3.234	3.073
Evenness_e^H/S	0.3379	0.3796	0.4011*	0.2289	0.136	0.1992	0.4702	0.2483
Menhinick	1.155	1.092	1.31	1.085	0.8849	0.9965	1.61	0.6211
Equitability_J	0.7267	0.7583	0.7768	0.6468	0.5086	0.609	0.8108	0.688
Berger-Parker	0.2023	0.1447	0.1283	0.2927	0.3638	0.4141	0.1653	0.2283

Table 4. R values of one-way ANOSIM (Bray-Curtis) between pairs of paddy growth stages. Permutation N = 9999, R= 0.3357, p= 0.0001. p value is less than 0.05 between all pairs in bold.

	PS1	PS2	PS3	PS4	PS5	PS 6
PS2	0.1787
PS3	0.2151	0.1635
PS4	0.2768	0.3761	0.2106
PS5	0.5038	0.6299	0.5546	0.1823
PS6	0.4555	0.6366	0.445	0.0877	0.1128
PS 7	0.3778	0.7102	0.5028	0.2252	0.3781	0.1641

For figures & images - - click here

References

Agristat (2016). Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmer’s welfare, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and farmer’s welfare, Directorate of Economics and Statistics. pp. 73–216, 322–344. DOA: 6th March 2018. http://eands.dacnet.nic.in/PDF/Glance-2016.pdf

Ali, S.& D. Ripley (1978). Handbook of birds of India and Pakistan 2^nd Edition, Vols. 1–10, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2060pp.

Asokan, S. & A.M.S. Ali (2010). Foraging behaviour of selected insectivorous birds in Cauvery delta region of Nagapattinam District, Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2(2): 690–694. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o2201.690-4

Bambaradeniya, C.N.B., J.P. Edirisinghe, D.N. De Silva, C.V.S. Gunatilleke, K.B. Ranawana & S. Wijekoon (2004). Biodiversity associated with an irrigated rice agro-ecosystem in Sri Lanka. Biodiversity and Conservation 13: 1715–1753; https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOC.0000029331.92656.de

Bambaradeniya, C.N.B., K.T. Fonseka & C.L. Ambagahawatte (1998). A preliminary study on fauna and flora of a rice field in Kandy, Sri Lanka. Ceylon Journal of Science (Biological Sciences) 25: 1–22.

Beri, Y.P., M.B. Jotwani, S.S. Misra & D. Chander (1968). Studies on relative bird damage to different experimental hybrids of bajra. Indian Journal of Entomology 31: 68–71.

Bhatnagar, R.K. (1976). Bird pests of agriculture and their control. Proceedings of National Academy of Science India B. 46: 249–261.

Borad, C.K., A. Mukherjee & B.M. Parashaya (2000). Conservation of the avian biodiversity in paddy (Oryza sativa) crop agroecosystem. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 70(6): 378–381.

Chahal, B.S., G.S. Simwat & H.S. Brar (1973). Bird pests of crops and their control. Pesticides 7(5): 18–20.

Chakravarthy, A.K. (1988). Bird predators of pod borers of field bean. Tropical Pest Management 34: 395–398.

Clarke, K.R. & R.H. Green (1988). Statistical design and analysis of biological effects study. Marine Ecology Progress Series 46: 213–226.

Dhindsa, M.S. & H.K. Saini (1994). Agricultural ornithology: An Indian perspective. Journal of Biological Sciences 19(4): 391–402.

Dhindsa, M.S. & H.S. Toor (1980). Extent of bird damage to rice nurseries and its control in Punjab. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 50: 715–719.

Dhindsa, M.S., H.S. Toor & P.S. Sandhu (1984). Community structure of birds damaging pearl millets and sorghum and estimation of grain loss. Indian Journal of Ecology 11: 154–159.

Edirisinghe, J.P. & C.N.B. Bambaradeniya (2006). Rice fields: An ecosystem rich in biodiversity. Journal of National Science Foundation, Sri Lanka 34(2): 57–59.

Edirisinghe, J.P. & C.N.B. Bambaradeniya (2008). Composition, structure and dynamics of arthropod communities in a rice agro-ecosystem. Ceylon Journal of Science (Biological Sciences) 37(1): 23–48.

Elphick, C.S., K.C. Parsons, M. Fasola & L. Mugica (eds.) (2010). Ecology and Conservation of Birds in Rice Fields: A global Review - Waterbirds 33(special publication 1): 246pp.

Gopisundar, K.S. & S. Subramanya (2010). Bird use of rice fields in the Indian subcontinent. Waterbirds 33(sp1): 44–70. https://doi.org/10.1675/063.033.s104

Hammer, Ø., D.A.T. Harper & P.D. Ryan (2001). PAST: Paleontological StatisticsSoftware Package for Education and Data Analysis. Paleontologia Electronica 4: 9.

Jain, M.B. & I. Prakash (1974). Bird damage in relation to varietal differences in bajra crop. Annals of Arid Zone 13: 139–144.

Jotwani, M.B., Y.P. Beri & K.K. Verma (1969). A note on bird damage to millets. Allahabad farmer 43: 43–44.

Magurran, A.E. (1988). Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, i–x+179pp.

Marco-Mendez, C., P. Prado, L.M. Ferrero- Vicente, C. Ibanez & J.L. Sanchez- Lizaso (2015). Rice fields used as feeding habitats for waterfowl throughout the growing season. Waterbirds 38(3): 238–251.

Morris, E.K. , T. Caruso, F. Buscot, M. Fischer, C. Hancock, T.S. Maier, T. Meiners, C. Muller, E. Obermaier, D. Prati, S.A. Socher, I. Sonnemann, N. Waschke, T. Wubet, S. Wurst & M.C. Rillig (2014). Choosing and using diversity indices: insights for ecological applications from the German biodiversity Exploratories. Ecology and Evolution 4(18): 3514–3524. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece.3.1155

Nam, H., Y. Choi & J. Yoo (2015). Distribution of waterbirds in rice fields and their use of foraging habitats. Waterbirds 38(2): 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1675/063.038.0206

Parashaya, B.M., J.F. Dodia , D.N. Yadav & R.C. Patel (1986). Sarus Crane damage to paddy crop. Pavo 24: 87–90.

Parashya, B.M., J.F. Dodia, K.L. Mathew & D.N. Yadav (1994). Natural regulation of White-grub (Holotrichiaesp: Scarabidae) by birds in agroecosystem. Journal of Biological Sciences 19(4): 381–389.

Praveen J., R. Jayapal & A. Pittie (2016). A checklist of the birds of India. Indian Birds 11(5&6): 113–170.

Saini, H.K. & H.S. Toor (1991). Feeding ecology and damage potential of feral pigeons Columba livia in agricultural habitat: Gerfaut 81: 195–206.

Sicemore, G.C. & M.B. Maine (2012). Quality of flooded rice and fallow fields as foraging habitat for little blue herons and great egrets in the Everglades agricultural area, U.S.A. Waterbirds 35(3): 381–393.

Sridhara, S., M.V.V. Subramanyam & R.V. Krishnamoorthy (1983). Bird foraging and its economic effect in the paddy fields of Bangalore (India). Birds Control Seminars Proceedings 246: 151–159.

Subramanya, S. (1987). Studies on birds of rice fields with special reference to certain pest species. PhD Thesis. Department of Entomology. University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, viii+173pp. http://krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/handle/1/2049702

Sutherland, W.J. (2000). The Conservation Handbook: Research, Management and Policy. Chapter 4: 36–49.

Appendix 1. Checklist of birds in Paddy fields of Kadhiramangalam (Praveen et al. 2016).

	Scientific name	Common name	Move-ment	Feeding guild	Habitat	IUCN status	% age contribution to overall dissimilarity (SIMPER)	Relative abundance (%)
I	Order Galliformes
	Family Phasianidae
1	Francolinus pondicerianus	Grey Francolin	R	G	T	LC	0.1729	0.112
2	Pavo cristatus	Indian Peafowl	R	O	T	LC	0.04625	0.02
II	Order Columbiformes
	Family Columbidae
3	Columba livia	Rock Pigeon	R	G	T	LC (dec)	2.88	2.461
4	Streptopelia decaocto	Eurasian Collared Dove	R	G	T	LC (inc)	0.127	0.076
5	Streptopelia senegalensis	Laughing Dove	PM	G	T	LC	0.1919	0.097
6	Streptopelia chinensis	Spotted Dove	R	G	T	LC (inc)	0.9167	0.993
III	Order Cuculiformes
	Family Cuculidae
7	Eudynamys scolopaceus	Asian Koel	PM	O	T	LC	0.2126	0.178
8	Hierococcyx varius	Common Hawk Cuckoo	PM	I	T	LC	0.09703	0.046
9	Centropus sinensis	Greater Coucal	R	C	T	LC	0.0452	0.046
10	Clamator jacobinus	Pied Cuckoo	M	I	T	LC	0.1241	0.071
IV	Order Gruiformes
	Family Rallidae
11	Gallinula chloropus	Common Moorhen	M	O	WB	LC	0.05449	0.035
12	Zapornia fusca	Ruddy-breasted Crake	PM	O	WD	LC (dec)	0.06516	0.046
13	Amaurornis phoenicurus	White-breasted Waterhen	R	O	WB	LC	0.2928	0.245
V	Order Pelecaniformes
	Family Ciconiidae
14	Anastomus oscitans	Asian Openbill	PM	AC	WB	LC	1.895	1.844
	Family Ardeidae
15	Ixobrychus flavicollis	Black Bittern	PM	I+AC	WB	LC (dec)	0.05399	0.04
16	Bubulcus ibis	Cattle Egret	PM	I	WD	LC (inc)	0.5555	0.377
17	Ixobrychus cinnamomeus	Cinnamon Bittern	PM	I+AC	WB	LC	0.03129	0.015
18	Ardea intermedia	Intermediate Egret	PM	I+AC	WB	LC (dec)	2.691	1.926
19	Ardeola grayii	Indian Pond Heron	R	I+AC	WB	LC	3.057	2.84
20	Ixobrychus minutus	Little Bittern	PM	I+AC	WB	LC (dec)	0.02426	0.02
21	Egretta garzetta	Little Egret	PM	I+AC	WB	LC (inc)	2.249	1.849
22	Ardea purpurea	Purple Heron	M	AC	WB	LC	0.07015	0.056
	Family Threskiornithidae
23	Platalea leucorodia	Eurasian Spoonbill	M	AC	WB	LC	0.008825	0.005
24	Plegadis falcinellus	Glossy Ibis	M	AC	WB	LC (dec)	0.1489	0.122
25	Threskiornis melanocephalus	Black-headed Ibis	PM	AC	WB	NT (dec)	1.437	1.019
	Family Phalocrocaracidae
26	Microcarbo niger	Little Cormorant	PM	AC	WB	LC	0.4764	0.28
VI	Order Charadriiformes
	Family Recurvirostridae
27	Himantopus himantopus	Black- winged Stilt	M	O	WB	LC (inc)	1.522	0.958
	Family Charadriidae
28	Charadrius dubius	Little Ringed Plover	M	I+AC	WB	LC	0.3769	0.28
29	Vanellus indicus	Red-wattled Lapwing	R	I+AC	WD	LC	1.591	1.554
	Family Rostratulidae
30	Rostratula benghalensis	Greater Painted Snipe	M	AC	WB	LC (dec)	0.01222	0.01
	Family Scolopacidae
31	Actitis hypoleucos	Common Sandpiper	M	I+AC	WB	LC (dec)	8.067	6.38
32	Gallinago gallinago	Common Snipe	M	AC	WB	LC (dec)	0.6628	0.464
	Family Laridae
33	Chlidonias hybrida	Whiskered Tern	M	I+AC	WB	LC	0.02225	0.01
VII	Order Accipitriformes
	Family Accipitridae
34	Milvus migrans	Black Kite	R	O	T	LC	0.7647	0.724
35	Haliastur indus	Brahminy Kite	R	AC	WD	LC (dec)	0.6436	0.591
36	Elanus caeruleus	Black-winged Kite	R	I	T	LC	0.2424	0.204
37	Accipiter badius	Shikra	R	C	T	LC	0.0268	0.025
38	Butastur teesa	White- eyed Buzzard	R	C	T	LC	0.009357	0.005
VIII	Order Strigiformes
	Family Strigidae
39	Athenebrama	Spotted Owlet	R	C	T	LC	0.251	0.224
IX	Order Piciformes
	Family Picidae
40	Dinopium benghalense	Lesser Golden-backed Woodpecker	R	I	T	LC	0.09068	0.061
	Family Ramphastidae
41	Psilopogon haemacephalus	Coppersmith Barbet	R	F/I	T	LC (inc)	0.2115	0.102
X	Order Coraciiformes
	Family Meropidae
42	Merops philippinus	Blue-tailed Bee -eater	PM	I	T	LC	0.039	0.015
43	Merops orientalis	Green Bee-eater	PM	I	T	LC (inc)	0.2097	0.158
	Family Coraciidae
44	Coracias benghalensis	Indian Roller	PM	I	T	LC (inc)	0.2962	0.183
	Family Alcedinidae
45	Ceryle rudis	Pied Kingfisher	R	AC	WD	LC	0.2425	0.183
46	Alcedo atthis	Common Kingfisher	PM	AC	WD	LC	0.1167	0.076
47	Halcyon smyrnensis	White-throated Kingfisher	R	I+AC	WD	LC	2.207	5.172
XI	Order Falconiformes
	Family Falconidae
48	Falco chicquera	Red-necked Falcon	R	C	T	NT (dec)	0.02114	0.01
XII	Order Psittaciformes
	Family Psittaculidae
49	Psittacula krameri	Rose-ringed Parakeet	R	G	T	LC (inc)	1.93	1.824
XIII	Order Passeriformes
	Family Oriolidae
50	Oriolus oriolus	Eurasian Golden Oriole	M	F/I	T	LC (inc)	0.161	0.132
	Family Artamidae
51	Artamus fuscus	Ashy Woodswallow	R	I	T	LC	0.4899	0.326
	Family Dicruridae
52	Dicrurus macrocercus	Black Drongo	R	I	T	LC	3.499	5.407
	Family Laniidae
53	Lanius cristatus	Brown Shrike	M	I	T	LC (dec)	0.07865	0.051
	Family Corvidae
54	Corvus splendens	House Crow	R	O	T	LC	0.2367	0.158
55	Dendrocitta vagabunda	RufousTreepie	R	O	T	LC	0.375	0.362
56	Corvus macrorhynchos	Large-billed Crow	R	O	T	LC	0.6461	0.189
	Family Monarchidae
57	Terpsiphone paradisi	Asian Paradise Flycatcher	M	I	T	LC	0.01098	0.005
	Family Nectariniidae
58	Leptocoma zeylonica	Purple-rumped Sunbird	R	N	T	LC	0.01199	0.01
	Family Ploceidae
59	Ploceus philippinus	Baya Weaver	R	G	T	LC	11.16	12.491
	Family Estrildidae
60	Lonchura malacca	Black-headed Munia	R	G	T	LC	19.67	22.826
61	Euodice malabarica	Indian Silverbill	R	O	T	LC	0.09012	0.066
62	Amandava amandava	Red Munia	R	G	T	LC	0.1149	0.076
63	Lochura punctulata	Scaly-breasted Munia	R	G	T	LC	0.1346	0.107
64	Lonchura striata	White-rumpedMunia	R	G	T	LC	0.2203	0.153
	Family Passeridae
65	Gymnoris xanthocollis	Yellow-throated Sparrow	PM	O	T	LC	0.2035	0.138
	Family Motacillidae
66	Motacilla cinerea	Grey Wagtail	M	I+AC	WD	LC	0.01241	0.01
67	Anthus rufulus	Paddyfield Pipit	R	I	T	LC	0.6765	0.464
68	Motacilla maderaspatensis	White-browed Wagtail	R	I	T	LC	0.2047	0.132
	Family Alaudidae
69	Mirafra affinis	Jerdon'sBushlark	R	O	T	LC	0.5862	0.418
	Family Cisticolidae
70	Prinia socialis	Ashy Prinia	R	I	T	LC	1.079	0.902
71	Orthotomus sutorius	Common Tailorbird	R	I	T	LC	0.01861	0.01
72	Prinia hodgsonii	Grey-breasted Prinia	R	I	T	LC	0.02298	0.01
73	Prinia inornata	Plain Prinia	R	I	T	LC	1.592	1.391
74	Cisticola juncidis	Zitting Cisticola	R	I	T	LC	2.917	2.899
	Family Acrocephalidae
75	Acrocephalus dumetorum	Blyth's reed Warbler	M	I	T	LC (inc)	0.6365	0.499
76	Iduna rama	Syke's Warbler	M	I	T	C	0.008166	0.01
77	Acrocephalus agricola	Paddyfield Warbler	M	I	T	LC (dec)	1.595	1.386
	Family Hirundinidae
78	Hirundo rustica	Barn Swallow	M	I	T	LC (dec)	6.554	5.422
79	Cecropis daurica	Red-rumped Swallow	M	I	T	LC	2.49	1.62
	Family Pycnonotidae
80	Pycnonotus cafer	Red-vented Bulbul	R	F/I	T	LC (inc)	0.8179	0.958
	Family Leiothrichidae
81	Turdoides affinis	Yellow-billed Babbler	R	O	T	LC	1.961	1.804
	Family Sturnidae
82	Sturnia pagodarum	Brahminy Starling	R	F/I	T	LC	0.3347	0.245
83	Acridotheres tristis	Common Myna	R	O	T	LC (inc)	3.858	4.907
	Family Muscicapidae
84	Luscinia svecica	Bluethroat	M	I	T	LC	0.01241	0.01
85	Saxicola maurus	Siberian Stonechat	M	I	T	LC	0.002521	0.005
86	Copsychus saularis	Oriental Magpie Robin	R	I	T	LC	0.009394	0.005
87	Saxicola caprata	Pied Bushchat	PM	O	T	LC	0.01659	0.01

Movement: M— Migrant | PM— Partial Migrant | R— Resident. Habitat: WB—Waterbird | WD—Wetland dependent bird | T— Terrestrial bird. Guild: AC—Aquatic Carnivore | I—Insectivore | F—Frugivore | G—Granivore | C—Carnivore | N—Nectarivore | O—Omnivore. IUCN Status: LC— Least Concern | (dec)—decrease in population | (inc)—increase in population; NT—Near Threatened.