海南原鸡繁殖期夜栖地的选择

原鸡Gallus gallus在繁殖期的日常活动趋向于以夜栖地为中心,因此夜栖地的研究对原鸡的繁殖和保育具有重要意义.2008年2～5月在海南大田自然保护区,采用野外观察和样方调查相结合的方法,对原鸡的夜栖地利用进行了研究,共记录到15个夜栖地.结果表明: 1) 原鸡在繁殖期多结成2～6只(3.3±1.5, n=13)的繁殖群,在同一棵树或邻近几棵树上集群夜栖; 2) 落叶季雨林和灌丛草地是原鸡繁殖期夜栖的主要植被类型; 3)原鸡多以小刺竹Bambusa bambos作为夜栖树,占53.3%,其次是厚皮树Lannea coromandelica,占20.0%; 4)原鸡倾向于选择灌木生长茂密、地面草本稀疏的生境作为夜栖地,并栖息在胸径均值为8.4 cm±3.5 cm的乔木或灌木的枝条上,栖枝均高为4.4 m±0.8 m; 5)主成分分析表明,影响原鸡夜栖地选择的主要因子依次为:栖树高、栖枝高度、栖树胸径、栖枝层盖度、草本层盖度、栖枝下方盖度和栖枝上方盖度.据此分析认为:繁殖期原鸡警惕性高,夜栖地多选择易于隐蔽和转移的生境.     

Factors influencing perch selection by communally roosting Turkey Vultures

ABSTRACT Many birds roost communally during at least part of their annual cycle, suggesting that for them the advantages of living in a group outweigh the disadvantages. However, perch sites within a roost may vary in quality because of differences in degree of exposure to the elements, predators, and fecal droppings. Individuals should select perches in the roost that minimize costs while enabling them to experience the benefits of communal roosting. We studied communally roosting Turkey Vultures (Cathartes aura) in northeastern Iowa (USA) from late August to mid‐October, when hatching‐year (HY) birds had joined the roost and were distinguishable from after‐hatching‐year (AHY) birds. On 82 d during our 4‐yr study (2004–2007), we noted the age class and perch position of vultures on two communication towers used as a preroost site. Perches used by vultures were classified as top‐level (with no perches above them) or lower‐level (with other perches above them). Top‐level perches were preferred by Turkey Vultures. Of 1713 birds recorded, 71% were on top‐level perches, even though only 39% of available perches were top‐level. Vultures did not use lower perches if top perches on that tower were unoccupied. The percentage of birds using lower perches increased as the number of vultures present increased, suggesting that top‐level perches were occupied first. AHY birds used top‐level perches more often than expected and HY birds used top‐level perches less often than expected, implying that age‐related dominance affected perch selection. On 61 of 82 d (74%), top‐level perches of both towers were occupied and, on 8 d (10%), only top perches on one tower were occupied. However, on 13 d (16%), both top‐level and lower‐level perches were occupied on one tower while no vultures perched on the other tower, suggesting that social attraction to other vultures can override a general preference for top‐level perches. Thus, our results provide evidence that social attraction, age‐related dominance, and preference for higher perches are proximate factors influencing perch selection in communally roosting Turkey Vultures. Ultimate factors that may be responsible for Turkey Vultures preferring higher roosting perches are reduced risk of predation, less exposure to fecal droppings that might reduce their plumage quality, and better visual information for locating food sources.     

High warning colour polymorphism in Heliconius hybrid zone roosts

1. Communal roosting behaviour has been documented among a wide range of taxa, particularly among groups of butterflies that display warning colourations. These aggregations of conspecifics and/or other species that share mimetic warning colour patterns can have a large impact on predator learning, and thus the survival of an aposematic form. Yet there has been limited investigation of communal roosting within areas where new and diverse warning colour forms are generated, such as hybrid zones. 2. Here, roosting behaviour was examined in a Heliconius erato hybrid zone in French Guiana between races with divergent warning colourations on their wings. In this hybrid zone, native individuals with nine distinct warning colourations, as well as individuals with altered forms that are not native in the French Guiana population, were marked and observed to determine if divergently coloured individuals participated in communal roosting, and if the proportions of colour pattern forms at roosts differed from the proportions that are found in the population. 3. The results demonstrated that divergently coloured individuals of the same species, including altered, non‐native forms, will readily and repeatedly participate in nocturnal communal roosting, often with extreme fidelity to specific perch locations. 4. These findings suggest that roosts composed of polymorphic warning patterns may be common in phenotypic transition zones, which could have major implications on predator training and selection dynamics in hybrid zones.     

云南蒙自钳嘴鹳夜栖地利用及夜栖树选择

动物对夜栖地选择的灵活程度是其分布和扩散的重要因素之一。钳嘴鹳(Anastomus oscitans)为中国新分布种,要了解其扩散趋势,掌握其夜栖地需求至关重要。2015年11月至2018年7月在云南蒙自坝区,使用卫星跟踪技术对6只钳嘴鹳进行了夜栖地利用和夜栖树选择研究,结果表明:(1)钳嘴鹳可以在多种生境中夜栖,包括林地、沼泽、岛屿等。从群体水平上分析,钳嘴鹳主要夜栖于沼泽中,利用率为(51.19±12.34)%,其次为林地(31.55±11.34)%和岛屿(17.26±5.70)%;从个体水平上来看,不同钳嘴鹳的夜栖地利用方式差异较大,其中4只主要利用沼泽,而另外2只主要利用林地;(2)随机森林分析表明:影响钳嘴鹳夜栖树选择的首要因子为距觅食地距离,其次为树高、地径和最低枝高度,而人为干扰因子的影响较弱。综合来看,钳嘴鹳对夜栖地类型以及夜栖树均表现出了极强的适应性和可塑性,这可能是其能够快速扩散的重要原因之一。同时也表明夜栖树并不能成为一个有力的限制因子,钳嘴鹳有可能继续向国内的南方湿地区扩散。     

贵州草海保护区钳嘴鹳种群动态

新分布种对当地生态系统的影响具有不确定性,掌握其种群动态对于制定相应的管理策略具有重要意义。钳嘴鹳(Anastomus oscitans)为我国新分布种,目前已扩散至云南、贵州、广西、四川等省(自治区),但对其种群数量及变化规律尚缺乏了解。2013年1月至2014年12月,采用夜栖地直接计数法对贵州省草海自然保护区钳嘴鹳的种群数量进行了监测。结果表明,1)钳嘴鹳主要在夏季出现,冬季数量较少,表现出明显的季节性差异(P0.001)。2)钳嘴鹳种群数量呈现逐年增加趋势,2013年的度夏期(5~10月份)平均数量为200.6只(SD=94.6,n=24),最高数量为427只;2014年的度夏期平均数量增长到356.0只(SD=180.3,n=25),最高数量为602只。3)钳嘴鹳为树上夜栖物种,调查中共发现5处夜栖地,其中位于保护区东南部的簸箕湾是主要夜栖地,在2013、2014年的统计中,该地钳嘴鹳分别占总数量的56.46%和63.53%。由于钳嘴鹳的游荡性较强,建议在其主要分布区开展同步监测,从而整体掌握其种群变化和分布情况。     

Can information sharing explain recruitment to food from communal roosts?

The debate over whether communal nests and roosts function primarilyas information centers (they facilitate the sharing of foraginginformation) remains unresolved. Here I use evolutionary gametheory to investigate the relative importance of this influentialhypothesis and an alternative: that roosts, in particular,function as recruitment centers (they facilitate aggregationat food patches). Basing my model on juvenile common raven (Corvus corax) behavior, I assume there is no net cost to beingat food patches in groups, and foragers roost communally. Moreover,one strategic outcome is the observed raven behavior: individualssearch independently and recruit from the roost once a patchis found (they play Search-and-Recruit, or SR). I investigatethe stability of this in two scenarios that differ in the magnitudeof the lost opportunity costs to mutants playing SR in populations of other strategies. When these costs only involve a chanceof not being in a group at a located carcass, SR is the onlyevolutionarily stable strategy under all conditions. However,when these costs also include missing opportunities to be sociallydominant, SR no longer enjoys exclusive dominance in the strategyset. Nevertheless, in both cases, there are conditions where group foraging benefits have no effect on the evolutionary stabilityof SR. Thus, contrary to assertions in the literature, theopportunity to share foraging information can be sufficientto drive the evolution and maintenance of recruitment to foodfrom communal roosts. However, I conclude that both informationand grouping benefits are likely to underlie communal roostingbehavior in my focal system.     

Comparative Roosting Ecology of Cynopterus (Chiroptera: Pteropodidae) Fruit Bats in Peninsular Malaysia1

Although the use of modified roosts has been reported in more than 20 species of bats in the tropics, comparative studies of the roosting ecology of congeneric tent‐roosting species are notably lacking. In the Paleotropics, this unique behavior has been described in two species belonging to the genus, Cynopterus: C. sphinx and C. brachyotis. However, it is not known whether tent roosting is an essential component of their roosting ecology, or whether the behavior is found in other members of the genus. In this study we characterize the roosting ecology of four sympatric species of Cynopterus in peninsular Malaysia and use these data to address two main questions. (1) Do all four species use modified roosts and, in those that do, is tent‐roosting obligate or opportunistic? (2) Do species pairs overlap in roost preferences and roosting habitat and, if so, is there evidence for interspecific interactions in relation to these resources? We radio‐tracked bats at two floristically distinct sites and located a total of 249 roosts. Interspecific roost niche overlap was minimal at both sites and we found no evidence for interspecific competition for roost resources at the local level. Species differences in roosting ecology were defined primarily by spatial separation of roosting habitats and secondarily by within‐habitat differences in roost selection. Importantly, we found that although periodic use of modified roosts was a characteristic shared by all four species, most roosts were unmodified, indicating that tent roosting is a facultative behavior in Malaysian Cynopterus.     

High ambient temperatures induce aggregations of chimney swifts Chaetura pelagica inside a roost

One proposed advantage of communal roosting in birds is a reduction in the costs of thermoregulation. As thermoregulatory benefits are directly linked to the distance between roosting birds, we examined whether temperature is related to inter‐bird spacing in roosting chimney swifts Chaetura pelagica. To test the hypothesis that huddling is used to reduce the costs of thermoregulation, we predicted that swifts would cluster more at colder temperatures. We mounted an all‐weather camera atop a 61 m tall industrial masonry chimney, one of the largest swift roosts in the study region. We deployed temperature loggers inside the chimney and obtained ambient air temperature from a nearby weather station. From 16 May–24 July 2013, we captured hourly images of the positions of roosting swifts at night. We used image analysis software to mark the angular positions of all roosting swifts, and calculated mean angles of orientation (preferred direction) inside the roost and the circular variance (i.e. the concentration of swifts around the mean angle). We used a Gamma regression to relate temperature inside and outside the roost to the clustering of swifts around the mean angle for 3 time periods (pre‐nesting, nesting, and post‐nesting). Converse to our prediction, swifts were closer together when ambient air temperatures were warmer in all periods (pre‐nesting (p < 0.001, n = 168), nesting (p < 0.001, n = 224), and post‐nesting (p < 0.001, n = 135)). Our findings suggest that swifts do not increase clustering intensity in response to colder temperatures, but instead they increase clustering intensity in response to the warmest ambient temperatures. This likely a metabolic response to reduced prey availability at higher temperatures and/or an attempt to reduce evaporative water loss. We suggest clustering may be used by chimney swifts as an energy saving mechanism during periods of lowered food availability.