| Literature DB >> 25768111 |
Chunlin Li1, Lizhi Zhou1, Li Xu2, Niannian Zhao3, Guy Beauchamp4.
Abstract
Due to loss and degradation of natural wetlands, waterbirds increasingly rely on surrounding human-dominated habitats to obtain food. Quantifying vigilance patterns, investigating the trade-off among various activities, and examining the underlying mechanisms will help us understand how waterbirds adapt to human-caused disturbances. During two successive winters (November-February of 2012-13 and 2013-14), we studied the hooded crane, Grus monacha, in the Shengjin Lake National Nature Reserve (NNR), China, to investigate how the species responds to human disturbances through vigilance and activity time-budget adjustments. Our results showed striking differences in the behavior of the cranes when foraging in the highly disturbed rice paddy fields found in the buffer zone compared with the degraded natural wetlands in the core area of the NNR. Time spent vigilant decreased with flock size and cranes spent more time vigilant in the human-dominated buffer zone. In the rice paddy fields, the birds were more vigilant but also fed more at the expense of locomotion and maintenance activities. Adult cranes spent more time vigilant and foraged less than juveniles. We recommend habitat recovery in natural wetlands and community co-management in the surrounding human-dominated landscape for conservation of the hooded crane and, generally, for the vast numbers of migratory waterbirds wintering in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River floodplain.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25768111 PMCID: PMC4359144 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118928
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Survey sites.
During two successive winters (November-February 2012–13 and 2013–14), we studied vigilance and activity time budget of the hooded crane in both the buffer zone and the core area of the Shengjin Lake National Nature Reserve (NNR), China.
Summary of focal observation samples of the hooded crane in the Shengjin Lake NNR, China.
| Area | Age | Number of observations | Total observation time (min) | Average group size | Range of group size |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012–2013 winter | |||||
| In core area | Adults | 27 | 205.4 | 5.2 ± 2.9 | 1–40 |
| Juveniles | 7 | 35.3 | |||
| In buffer zone | Adults | 35 | 251.6 | 16.9 ± 3.0 | 4–33 |
| Juveniles | 13 | 95.9 | |||
| 2013–2014 winter | |||||
| In core area | Adults | 248 | 2008.0 | 4.7 ± 0.5 | 1–34 |
| Juveniles | 86 | 675.5 | |||
| In buffer zone | Adults | 137 | 1133.6 | 11.5 ± 2.6 | 2–109 |
| Juveniles | 48 | 403.0 | |||
Activity time budget of the hooded crane wintering in the Shengjin Lake NNR, China.
| Area | Age | Foraging | Vigilance | Locomotion | Maintenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012–2013 winter | |||||
| In core area | Adults | 45.8% ± 6.4% | 34.7% ± 4.6% | 8.7% ± 1.7% | 10.7% ± 3.9% |
| Juveniles | 38.3% ± 14.9% | 29.5% ± 8.3% | 9.3% ± 3.6 | 21.9% ± 10.2% | |
| In buffer zone | Adults | 70.0% ± 5.8% | 20.3% ± 3.8% | 0.8% ± 0.3% | 8.8% ± 3.8% |
| Juveniles | 73.0% ± 7.4% | 20.4% ± 5.8% | 1.3% ± 0.8% | 5.0% ± 2.4% | |
| 2013–2014 winter | |||||
| In core area | Adults | 31.7% ± 1.7% | 18.8% ± 1.2% | 32.2% ± 1.7% | 16.8% ± 1.7% |
| Juveniles | 47.2% ±3.3% | 11.5% ± 1.7% | 27.8% ± 2.5% | 12.7% ± 2.5% | |
| In buffer zone | Adults | 70.7% ± 1.7% | 25.4% ±1.4% | 2.1% ± 0.4% | 1.7% ± 0.6% |
| Juveniles | 84.4% ± 2.4% | 14.1% ± 2.3% | 0.8% ± 0.2% | 0.7% ± 0.3% | |
Fig 2Percentage time spent vigilant as a function of flock size of the hooded crane in the core area A) and the buffer zone B) of the Shengjin Lake NNR, China.
Fig 3Scan rate A) and mean scan duration B) of the hooded crane wintering in the Shengjin Lake NNR, China: A1, adult cranes in the buffer zone; A2, adults in the core area; J1, juveniles in the buffer zone; J2, juveniles in the core area.