You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Diversity
Download PDF
  • Review
  • Open Access

20 October 2022

The Paradox of Shorebird Diversity and Abundance in the West Coast and East Coast of India: A Comparative Analysis

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
and
1
Department of Zoology, Wildlife Biology Division, Farook College PO, Kozhikode 673632, India
2
Department of Zoology, MES Ponnani College, Ponnani, Malappuram 679577, India
3
Centre for Advanced Study in Marine Biology, Annamalai University, Parangipettai 608502, India
4
Department of Zoology, Govt College, Madappally, Kozhikode 673102, India
Diversity2022, 14(10), 885;https://doi.org/10.3390/d14100885
This article belongs to the Special Issue Spatiotemporal Bird Distribution and Conservation
Version Notes
Order Reprints
Review Reports

Abstract

Migratory shorebirds that move across continents along their flyways are undergoing a drastic decline globally. A greater proportion of them that regularly winter along the Indian coasts within the Central Asian Flyway (CAF) are also undergoing severe declines. However, the mechanisms underlying the population trends in these areas remain little understood. This study investigated the diversity, abundance, population dynamics and distribution patterns of shorebirds along the Indian coasts based on the available literature. The west coast of India is relatively less studied than the east coast in the CAF. Further, we observed that the diversity, abundance, population dynamics and distribution pattern of the shorebirds follow different trends on the west coast compared to the east coast. These variations are in accordance with the differences in topography and biotic and abiotic factors between the coasts. Anthropogenic activities have far-reaching effects on the survival and persistence of shorebirds along the coasts. The west coast is evidently more productive than the east coast at every trophic level and thus the west coast is expected to account for more abundance and diversity of shorebirds. Paradoxically, we found that the east coast supports a greater abundance and diversity of shorebirds than the west coast. The west coast, therefore, requires further investigations to obtain a better understanding of the causes of apparent differences in abundance and diversity as well as the observed declines in shorebirds, compared to the east coast of India.

1. Introduction

Shorebirds constitute a highly diverse group of migrant species that require a high amount of energy in association with their long-distance migration [1,2,3,4,5]. They are documented in nearly all shorelines of the world except Antarctica. The seasonal migration of shorebirds is an important biological event [6], characterized by long-distance travel among breeding, stopover and wintering sites driven by seasonal influences on resources [3,7,8,9].
Shorebird populations are declining worldwide. The drastic decline of shorebird populations in Eastern Canada and the north-eastern United States over the past few decades has been attributed to habitat degradation [10]. Out of the 25 shorebird species of the East Asian-Australasian Flyway (EAAF), 22 have undergone widespread decline and seven have been included in the IUCN Red List as Threatened or Near Threatened [11]. An overall decline in the population of Common Greenshank (Tringa nebularia), Temminck’s Stint (Calidris temminckii), Wood Sandpiper (T. glareola) and Pacific Golden Plover (Pluvialis fulva) along the EAAF has been reported [12]. Similarly, significant declines in many shorebird populations along the Central Asian Flyway (CAF) have been linked to environmental factors, habitat loss or alteration influencing various trophic levels [13,14,15].
Although shorebirds that migrate along the Central Asian, South Asian Flyways, East Asian-Australian and Western Pacific Flyways use the Indian subcontinent as their primary wintering grounds [16,17], studies on shorebirds along coastal regions of India are very limited. India hosts major and key wintering grounds, stop-over sites, staging sites and over-summering sites for the migratory shorebirds along the Central Asian Flyway [14,15,16,17]. Further, they provide breeding grounds for Kentish Plovers, Black-Winged Stilts and Great Thick-knees. India, being a highly populated country, is significantly vulnerable to habitat degradation and loss due to anthropogenic activities and climatic changes.
Diversity patterns of waders including shorebirds have been studied in the Kole wetlands of Thrissur, a wintering site on the west coast of India, from 1998 to 2001 [18]. Spatio-temporal patterns of shorebirds at mangroves, mudflats and sandy beaches in Sindhudurg district, Maharashtra on the west coast [19] have also been studied. However, none of these studies have analyzed the population dynamics of shorebirds in depth. One study [14] documented the abundance of 15 migratory shorebird species over more than a decade at the Kadalundi-Vallikkunnu Community Reserve (KVCR), a coastal wetland in western India, which is a stopover and wintering area for many shorebirds species. This work highlighted the importance and the influence of relative humidity, air temperature, water temperature, salinity and invertebrate prey abundance on the departure dates of several shorebird species [14]. Furthermore, long-term changes in the nutrient content were found to be linked with prey abundance and induced declines in shorebirds in this region.
As the habitat characteristics are different between the east and west coast of India, the dominant shorebird species also vary [13,16,18,19,20,21]. For example, the dominant shorebird species found in Vedaranyam (Point Calimere), located along the east coast, were Lesser Sand Plover (Charadrius mongolus), Marsh Sandpiper (T. stagnatilis), Little Stint (C. minuta) and Curlew Sandpiper (C. ferruginea) [22] whereas those in the KVCR, located along the west coast, the dominant species were Plovers followed by Common Greenshanks and Common Redshanks (T. totanus) [13]. On the east coast of India, species composition, relative abundance and distribution patterns of shorebirds over two years from mudflats, tidal flats and freshwater habitats in the entire Pulicat Lake of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu [16] highlighted important threats encountered by shorebirds.
Species abundance of shorebirds on their wintering and stopover sites is influenced by local habitat characteristics, including vegetative structure, cover patterns, moisture and biomass associated with invertebrate prey [23,24,25,26]. Shorebirds use both natural and artificial habitats in winter as the shallow water at both coastal and inland wetlands provides a suitable habitat for them [27]. Tidal flats, especially mudflats, were recorded with higher density, diversity and richness of shorebirds in all seasons on the east coast [14,19,28]. Migratory shorebirds were attracted to prey species directly and to nutrients indirectly, which in turn was under the influence of rhythmic changes in tidal patterns. Higher shorebird density, diversity and species richness were documented during the migratory season than in other seasons on the east coast [14,19,28].
The uniqueness of distinct geographical regions, which includes food availability, nature and quality of the substrate, water quality, and other ecological features, determines the shorebird species composition, abundance and distribution [1,29]. Tremendous anthropogenic pressures like trapping, lime shell mining, pesticide contamination, alterations of coastal wetlands, short-term environmental changes, and long-term global climate change exert devastating pressures on these habitats and hence on the shorebird populations [30,31,32], particularly in Indian wintering grounds [16,17].
Studying the abundance and spatiotemporal patterns of shorebird populations is absolutely crucial in managing ecosystems [6] and hence is fundamentally important to conduct extensive studies to identify all the crucial wintering and stopover sites, seasons and habitats of shorebirds along the Indian coast in addition to the previously reported sites [19]. In India, the Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI) along with the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate change, Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) along with other relevant Indian institutions now facilitate and coordinate shorebird survey projects both nationally and globally. Every year, the shorebird counting program on world shorebird day (6 September) takes place between 2-6 September. It is an effort to raise awareness about the importance of regular shorebird monitoring and counting as the core element for the protection of bird populations and habitat conservation [11]. However, at present, studies on the population of shorebirds along the Indian coast have been carried out in only a few areas and a large part is yet to be explored.
The present study aims to carry out a comparative analysis, by a systematic literature review, of the diversity, abundance, population dynamics and distribution pattern of shorebirds on the west and east coast of India (Figure 1). The results aid in understanding the productivity of the coasts, which is functional in developing blueprints for conservation methods.
Figure 1. Map showing that major study conducted on shorebirds at west and east coasts of India.

4. Over-Summering Shorebirds on the East and West Coast of India

Limited information is available regarding Indian coasts on over-summering shorebirds. However, seven over-summering species were documented from KVCR over a 14-year study from 2005 to 2018, which include Lesser Sand Plover, Whimbrel, Greater Sand Plover, Kentish Plover, Common Sandpiper, Ruddy Turnstone and Pacific Golden-Plover [17]. Some of these species have also been over-summering in the coastal zone of Sindhudurg district, Maharashtra such as Lesser Sand Plover, Greater Sand Plover, Common Redshank, Common Greenshank, Whimbrel and Common Sandpiper [19]. Species such as the Black-tailed Godwit, Common Sandpiper, Wood Sandpiper, Marsh Sandpiper and Pacific Golden Plover were reported to be over-summering in Changaram wetland, Kerala during June and July [34]. Mudflats were found with the highest mean abundance, species richness, species diversity and evenness of over-summering species when compared to mangroves and sand beaches [17].
Grey Plover, Lesser Sand Plover, Whimbrel, Eurasian Curlew, Common Redshank, Common Greenshank, Terek Sandpiper, Curlew Sandpiper and Broad-Billed Sandpiper are a few species that regularly over-summer in Point Calimere, east coast [95]. The over-summering of Ruff, Pied Avocet and Common Sandpiper is in the first summer records from South India. Similarly, the record of Red Knot at Point Calimere is the first summering record from India [95]. Further, Grey Plover, Lesser Sand Plover, Whimbrel and Eurasian Curlew are a few species that are over-summering in Chilika Lake [83]. Over-summering species registered from Pulicat Lake are the Pacific Golden Plover, Eurasian Curlew, Black-tailed Godwit, Marsh Sandpiper and Common Sandpiper [16]. As the intertidal zones of the islands of the GoM offer ideal foraging sites throughout the year for migratory shorebirds, a small population of 12 species of shorebirds spends the summer as well [75].

5. Conservation Importance of Shorebirds in the Indian Coasts

Since migratory shorebirds connect different countries around the globe, they are considered the ideal ecological indicators at global, regional and local scales [39,96]. In India, though they use diverse habitats, migratory shorebirds prefer coastal zones as their wintering grounds as the population abundance of their key prey species is higher in marine habitats than freshwater habitats and also the freshwater bodies may dry up during spring. The increasing decline in the diversity and abundance of shorebirds can be attributed to innumerable disturbances such as habitat deterioration, prey depletion and predation pressure across the flyways, particularly at the wintering and stop-over sites [19,39,96,97].
Shorebirds wintering on the west coast of India encounter serious environmental issues, particularly caused by anthropogenic activities such as the dumping of organic and plastic wastes, indiscriminate application of weedicides and pesticides, and extensive sand mining [19,33,34]. The anthropogenic debris like glass, plastics, discarded fishing gear nets, and metal rings cause injuries to shorebirds, restricting their way back to breeding grounds and are consequently doomed to death either by predation or by decreased intake of food upon the injury [16,98,99]. The removal of nutrient-rich topsoil during sand mining which contains polychaetes, the major prey of shorebirds, can cause them to disappear from the area and further, the declining abundance of phytoplankton and zooplankton, which has far-reaching effects on higher trophic levels, particularly shorebirds [15].
KVCR, though an important stop-over and wintering ground for shorebirds along the west coast, witnessed a drastic decline in the diversity of shorebirds over years, which can be attributed to crucial factors like incursion of mangroves, changes in sediment quality, expansion of sand bed, shrinking of mudflat and decreasing mudflat thickness [39]. Moreover, the dumping of organic waste materials attracts House crows, Brahminy Kites and Jackals, which are the major predators of shorebirds, enhancing the risk of predation on them [33,100].
Thane Creek is yet another productive wintering habitat for shorebirds along the west coast which is severely contaminated with both household and industrial garbage and seeks immediate conservation actions to support thousands of birds including migratory shorebirds who still depend on this habitat [36].
The unchecked spreading of grass and other weeds like Salicornia into the mudflats along with unscientific dredging of Nalabana Island of Chilika is a major cause of habitat degradation and it should be addressed properly and with utmost importance. The incursion of mangroves and the new vegetative structures in and around the Manoli islands of the Gulf of Mannar reduced the area of mudflats considerably over three decades [72]. Developmental activities and ecotourism at Dhanushkodi lagoon are also having a negative impact on the population of shorebirds in GoM. The continuous extreme siltation which converts shallow areas into sandflats, the 630 MW North Chennai thermal power station (NCTPS), Ennore satellite Port Project and Petrochemical Park are serious threats to the Pulicat Lake ecosystem and to the shorebirds as well [16].
There are several shorebird species that are common to both coasts while some others are confined to a particular coast. Many of these are categorized by the IUCN as endangered species. According to our case studies at two potential wintering sites—KVCR [14,99] (Figure 3) and Gulf of Mannar [72] (Figure 5) from the west and east coast, respectively, an overall decline in the population of shorebirds has been observed. However, KVCR is facing a catastrophic steep declining trend in population over a decade (Figure 3) whereas the declining rate of shorebirds at the Gulf of Mannar is steady (Figure 5), which points out how seriously the shorebirds are affected by various environmental issues along the west coast. Shorebirds are considered ecosystem indicators since they can react even to the narrow changes undergoing in the environment [101,102]. Systematic monitoring of the population status, spatio-temporal distribution patterns and habitat use of shorebirds can shed light on the altering environmental parameters and their impacts on the ecosystem, which will be instrumental in implementing issue-specific management plans, particularly on the west coast where the shorebirds are severely affected and are least explored compared to the east coast. Hence, the west coast demands more and extensive scientific investigation as well as conservation strategies to protect the shorebird community and their habitats [19,33,103].
The shallow waters of the west coast facilitate better penetration of sunlight helping the plankton community to flourish, which is reflected in higher trophic levels as well. The intense southwest monsoon also plays a key role in increasing the productivity of the west coast as evidenced by the diversity and abundance of the shorebird species. Nevertheless, in the case of the east coast, deep waters hinder sunlight penetration, which adversely affects the plankton community, bringing down the population on all trophic levels. Furthermore, frequent natural calamities add to the habitat degradation on the east coast and this should be reflected in the diversity and abundance of the shorebird species being the top predators (Figure 6). However, the east coast appears to have a higher diversity and abundance of shorebird species than the west coast [14,16,19,81,82]. Thus, extensive systematic studies should be carried out on the west coast to explore its productivity.
Figure 6. Ecosystem components, environmental variables and population trends in shorebirds species in the west and east coast of India.

6. Conclusions

Of the 215 shorebird species (belonging to 14 families) identified in the world, the east and the west coast of India support 48 and 41 species, respectively (Table 1 and Table 2). The varying diversity and abundance of shorebirds along the Indian coast might be due to the distinctive topographical as well as biotic and abiotic factors characterizing the east and west coast of India.
Table 1. List of shorebirds documented from east and west coast of India.
Table 2. Documentation of uncommon shorebird species from the west and east coast of India.
The west coast of India claims a greater proportion (71.1%) of the continental shelf but a lesser proportion of the coastline (42.8% in length) compared to the east coast. Along with the shallow continental shelf, the southwest monsoon plays a critical role in altering the local environmental features of the west coast by influencing its temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen and nutrients; and is more productive than the east coast in terms of primary, secondary and tertiary productivity. Consequently, the west coast is rich in biodiversity and abundance than the east coast and it is primarily reflected in the phytoplankton diversity especially in diatoms and dinoflagellates, as well as in fish populations and finally in top predators including shorebirds.
Macrobenthic polychaetes, which are important prey for shorebirds, are most abundant along the nutrient-rich west coast, as a result of south-west monsoon wind-driven up-welling, the loose texture of sediment due to the high content of sand and the high-saline waters. Hence the high productivity of the west coast at every trophic level must be reciprocated by high species abundance and diversity of shorebird populations on the west coast than the east coast, which is frequently affected by various natural calamities such as cyclones, floods and tsunamis. However, from the available literature, it is deduced that the east coast has more diversity and abundance than the west coast (Table 1), which proves to be a paradox when the productivity of the west coast is taken into account. Hence there is a demand for more systematic and extensive, long-term investigations to unravel the spatial and temporal variations in the productivity parameters along the coastal zones of India from the shorebird diversity and abundance perspective.
Further research regarding anthropogenic interventions, which affect the ecosystem health that can eventually be a death knell to the shorebirds on the west coast, must be encouraged for a thorough understanding of the detrimental factors and for developing biodiversity conservation plans and waste management plans. Considering the east and west coast of India, implementing habitat-specific management plans at all the habitats along the coastal lines based on the observed pivotal threats to shorebird populations in the wintering sites may attract more diverse shorebird species, which in turn helps in biodiversity conservation.

Author Contributions

A.P.R.: writing, K.J.: writing, H.B.: writing, C.T.S.: writing, J.A.: writing, K.V.: writing, Y.X.: overall supervision, A.N.: overall supervision, S.B.M.: editing and supervision, K.M.A.: conceptualization, editing and overall supervision, K.A.R.: writing, editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work is financially supported by Program for Advanced Research of UAE University (Grant no 31R463).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge all the field assistants at Kadalundi-Vallikkunnu Community Reserve and Gulf of Mannar sites, helping to better understand how shorebird populations and habitats change over time.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Skagen, S.K.; Knopf, F.L. Toward conservation of Midcontinental Shorebird migrations. Conserv. Biol. 1993, 7, 533–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Gutierrez, J.S.; Masero, J.A.; Abad-Gomez, J.M.; Villegas, A.; Sanchez-Guzman, J.M. Understanding the energetic costs of living in saline environments: Effects of salinity on basal metabolic rate, body mass and daily energy consumption of a long-distance migratory shorebird. J. Exp. Biol. 2011, 214, 829–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Aarif, K.M.; Prasadan, P.K. Silent Shores: Population Trend of Migrant Shorebirds & Conservation Issues of Habitat; Partridge Publishing: Gurgaon, India, 2015; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  4. Zhao, M.; Christie, M.; Coleman, J.; Hassell, C.; Gosbell, K.; Lisovski, S.; Minton, C.; Klaassen, M. Time versus energy minimization migration strategy varies with body size and season in long-distance migratory shorebirds. Mov. Ecol. 2017, 5, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Canham, R.; Flemming, S.A.; Hope, D.D.; Drever, M.C. Sandpipers go with the flow: Correlations between estuarine conditions and shorebird abundance at an important stopover on the Pacific Flyway. Ecol. Evol. 2021, 11, 2828–2841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Gourley, S.; Liu, R.; Wu, J. Spatiotemporal Distributions of Migratory Birds: Patchy Models with Delay. SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst. 2010, 9, 589–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  7. Jackson, M.V.; Carrasco, L.R.; Choi, C.Y.; Li, J.; Ma, Z.; Melville, D.S.; Mu, T.; Peng, H.B.; Woodworth, B.K.; Yang, Z.; et al. Multiple habitat use by declining migratory birds necessitates joined-up conservation. Ecol. Evol. 2019, 9, 2505–2515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Henrique, E.P.; de Oliveira, M.A.; Paulo, D.C.; Pereira, P.; Dias, C.; de Siqueira, L.S.; de Lima, C.M.; Miranda, D.A.; do Rego, P.S.; Araripe, J.; et al. Contrasting migratory journeys and changes in hippocampal astrocyte morphology in shorebirds. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2021, 54, 5687–5704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zhang, Z.; Yang, Z.; Zhu, L. Gut microbiome of migratory shorebirds: Current status and future perspectives. Ecol. Evol. 2021, 11, 3737–3745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bart, J.A.; Manning, A.; Thomas, S.; Wightman, C. Preparation of Regional Shorebird Monitoring Plans; General Technical Report PSW-GTR-191; U.S. Department of Agriculture: Albany, CA, USA, 2005.
  11. Hua, N.; Tan, K.; Chen, Y.; Ma, Z. Key research issues concerning the conservation of migratory shorebirds in the Yellow sea region. Bird. Conserv. Int. 2015, 25, 38–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Xi, X.; Xie, Y.; Qi, K.; Luo, Z.; Wang, X. Detecting the Response of Bird Communities and Biodiversity to Habitat Loss and Fragmentation Due to Urbanization. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 62415, 1561–1576. [Google Scholar]
  13. Aarif, K.M.; Muzaffar, S.B.; Babu, S.; Prasadan, P.K. Shorebird assemblages respond to anthropogenic stress by altering habitat use in a wetland in India. Biodivers. Conserv. 2014, 23, 727–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Aarif, K.M.; Nefla, A.; Nasser, M.; Prasadan, P.K.; Athira, T.R.; Muzaffar, S.B. Multiple environmental factors and prey depletion determine declines in abundance and timing of departure in migratory shorebirds in the west coast of India. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2021, 26, e01518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Athira, T.R.; Nefla, A.; Shifa, C.T.; Shamna, H.; Aarif, K.M.; AlMaarofi, S.S.; Rashiba, A.P.; Reshi, O.R.; Jobiraj, T.; Thejass, P.; et al. The impact of long term environmental change on zooplankton along the southwestern coast of India. Environ Monit. Assess. 2022, 194, 316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Kannan, V.; Pandiyan, J. Shorebirds (Charadriidae) of Pulicat Lake, India with special reference to conservation. J. Zool. 2012, 7, 178–191. [Google Scholar]
  17. Aarif, K.M.; Sara, K.; Aymen, N.; Sama, A. Over-summering abundance, species composition, and habitat use patterns at a globally important site for migratory shorebirds. J. Ornithol. 2020, 132, 165–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jayson, E. Ecology of Wetland Birds in the Kole Lands of Kerala; KFRI Research Report No. 244; Kerala Forest Research Institute: Peechi, India, 2002; pp. 15–42. [Google Scholar]
  19. Rao, B.; Santhanakrishnan, B.; Quadros, G. Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Shorebird Assemblages in Select Estuaries along India’s West Coast. Ornithol. Sci. 2022, 21, 199–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chowdhury, S.; Diyan, M.; Zöckler, C.; Foysal, M.; Lemke, H. A survey of shorebirds in the sundarbans of Bangladesh. Stilt 2014, 66, 10–13. [Google Scholar]
  21. Sampath, K.; Krishnamurthy, K. Shorebirds of the Pichavaram mangroves, TamilNadu, India. Wader Study Group Bull. 1990, 58, 24–27. [Google Scholar]
  22. Sampath, K.; Krishnamurthy, K. Shorebirds of the salt ponds at the Greater Vedaranyam Salt Swamps, Tamil Nadu, India. Stilt 1989, 15, 20–23. [Google Scholar]
  23. Taft, O.; Haig, S.M. Importance of wetland landscape structure to shorebirds wintering in an agricultural valley. Landsc. Ecol. 2006, 21, 169–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Cunningham, J.A.; Kesler, D.C.; Lanctot, R.B. Habitat and social factors influence nest site selection in Arctic Breeding shorebirds. Auk 2016, 133, 364–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Fairbairn, S.E.; Dinsmore, J.J. Local and landscape-level influences on wetland bird communities of the Prairie Pothole Region of Lowa, USAS. Wetlands 2001, 21, 41–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Saalfeld, D.T.; Matz, A.C.; McCaffery, B.J.; Johnson, O.W.; Bruner, P.; Lanctot, R.B. Inorganic and organic contaminants in Alaskan shorebird eggs. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2016, 188, 276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Masero, J.A.; Pérez-Hurtado, A.; Castro, M.; Arroyo, G.M. Complementary use of intertidal mudflats and adjacent salt pans by foraging waders. Ardea 2000, 88, 177–191. [Google Scholar]
  28. Pandiyan, J.; Asokan, S. Habitat use pattern of tidal mud and sand flats by shorebirds (charadriiformes) wintering in southern India. J. Coast. Conserv. 2016, 20, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Manikannan, R.; Asokan, S.; Ali, A.M.S. Abundance and Factors Affecting Population Characteristics of Waders (Charadriiformes) in the Great Vedaranyam Swamp of Point Calimere Wildlife Sanctuary, South-east Coast of India. Int. J. Ecosyst. 2012, 2, 6–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Goss-Custard, J.D.; Jones, R.E.; Newbery, P.E. The ecology of the Wash. I. Distribution and diet of wading birds (Charadrii). J. App. Ecol. 1977, 14, 681–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Davidson, N.; Evans, P.R. The role and potential man-made and man-modified wetlands in the enhancement of survival of overwintering shorebirds. Colon. Waterbirds 1986, 9, 176–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Goss-Custard, J.D.; Moser, M.E. Rates of change in the numbers of Dunlin, Calidris alpina, wintering in British estuaries in relation to the spread of Spartina Anglica. J. Appl. Ecol. 1988, 25, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Aarif, K.M.; Prasadan, P.K.; Santhanakrishnan, B. Conservation significance of the Kadalundi-Vallikkunnu Community Reserve. Curr. Sci. 2011, 101, 717–718. [Google Scholar]
  34. Jasmine, A.; Byju, H.; Nefla, A.; Abhijith, S.; Aarif, K.M. Conservation significance of Changaram wetlands—A key wintering site for migratory shorebirds and other waterbirds in the west coast of Kerala. J. Threat. Taxa, 2022; in press. [Google Scholar]
  35. Urfi, A.J. Waders and other wetland birds on Byet Dwarka Island, Gulf of Kutch, western India. Wader Study Group Bull. 2002, 99, 31–34. [Google Scholar]
  36. Chaudhari-Pachpande, S.; Pejaver, M.K. A preliminary study on the birds of Thane Creek, Maharashtra, India. J. Threat. Taxa 2016, 8, 8797–8803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Baidya, P.; Bhagat, M. A checklist of the birds of Goa, India. Indian Birds 2018, 14, 1–31. [Google Scholar]
  38. Aarif, K.M.; Prasadan, P.K.; Hameed, A.S.V.; Ravindran, R. Avian fauna of kadalundi-vallikkunnu community reserve, west coast of india. Stilt 2017, 71, 25–32. [Google Scholar]
  39. Aarif, K.M.; Mussammilu, K.K. Pivotal reasons for the declining of shorebirds in Kadalundi-Vallikkunnnu Community Reserve, a key stop-over site in the West Coast of India. Asian J. Conserv. Biol. 2018, 7, 46–50. [Google Scholar]
  40. Aarif, K.M. Some Aspects of Feeding Ecology of Lesser Sand Plover in Three Different Zones in the Kadalundi Estuary, Kerala, South India. Podoces 2009, 4, 100–107. [Google Scholar]
  41. Aarif, K.M. Ecology and Foraging Behavior of Some Migrant Shorebirds in the Kadalundi-Vallikkunnu Community Reserve, West Coast of India. Ph.D. Thesis, Kannur University, Kannur, India, 2014; 219p. [Google Scholar]
  42. Nair, R.P.V. Primary productivity in the Indian seas. Bull. Cent. Mar. Fish. Res. Inst. 1970, 22, 29–35. [Google Scholar]
  43. Musale, A.S.; Desai, D.V. Distribution and abundance of macrobenthic polychaetes along the South Indian coast. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2011, 178, 423–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Khacher, L. The birds of Gujarat—A Salim Ali centenary overview. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 1996, 93, 331–373. [Google Scholar]
  45. Islam, M.Z.; Rahmani, A.R. Important Bird Areas in India: Priority Sites for Conservation; Bombay Natural History Society: Mumbai, India; Bird Life International: Cambridge, UK, 2004; pp. 1–1200. [Google Scholar]
  46. Munjpara, S.; Joshi, K.; Joshi, J.; Kamboj, R.D.; Salvi, H. Status of Extra-Limits Migrating Avifauna and their Stopover in the Gulf of Kachchh, Gujarat. Res. Rev. J. Life Sci. 2019, 9, 34–41. [Google Scholar]
  47. Bhuva, V.J.; Soni, V.C. Wintering Population of Four Migratory Species of Waders in the Gulf of Kachchh and Human Pressures. Wader Study Group Bull. 1998, 86, 48–51. [Google Scholar]
  48. Vala, D.; Parmar, H.; Dal, P.; Parihar, A.; Parmar, D.; Parihar, V.; Khandla, Y. Diversity and distribution of birds in Jamnagar, Gujarat, India. Int. J. Fauna Biol. 2020, 7, 35–43. [Google Scholar]
  49. Kurve, P.N. Habitat-dependent avifaunal diversity along the coastline of Raigad district, Maharashtra, India. Int. J. Fauna Biol. 2017, 4, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  50. Abdulali, H. The birds of Goa. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. 1980, 76, 507–510. [Google Scholar]
  51. Halliday, J.B.; Curtis, D.J.; Thompson, D.B.A.; Bignal, E.M.; Smyth, J.C. The abundance and feeding distribution of Clyde Estuary shorebirds. Scott. Birds 1982, 12, 65–72. [Google Scholar]
  52. Iwamatsu, S.; Suzuki, A.; Sato, M. Nereid Polychaetes as the Major Diet of Migratory Shorebirds on the Estuarine Tidal Flats at Fujimae -Higata in Japan. J. Zool. Sci. 2007, 24, 676–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Duijns, S.; Hidayati, N.A.; Piersma, T. Bar-tailed Godwits Limosa lapponica eat polychaete worms wherever they winter in Europe. Bird Study 2013, 60, 509–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  54. Sivaperuman, C.; Jayson, E.A. Population fluctuations of shore birds in the Kole wetlands, Kerala, India. Ann. For. 2012, 20, 129–144. [Google Scholar]
  55. Kathiresan, K. Mangrove forests of India. Curr. Sci. 2018, 114, 976–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Thompson, P.M.; Harvey, W.G.; Johnson, D.L.; Millin, D.J.; Rashid, S.M.A.; Scott, D.A.; Stanford, C.; Woolner, J.D. Recent notable bird records from Bangladesh. Forktail 1993, 9, 13–44. [Google Scholar]
  57. Zockler, C.; Balachandran, S.; Bunting, G.C.; Fanck, M.; Kashiwagi, M.; Lappo, E.G.; Maheswaran, G.; Sharma, A.; Syroechkovski, E.E.; Webb, K. The Indian Sundebans: An important wintering site for Siberian waders. Wader Study Group Bull. 2005, 108, 42–46. [Google Scholar]
  58. Sharma, A. First records of Spoon-billed sandpiper, Calidris pygmeus in the Indian Sundarbans delta, West Bengal. Forktail 2003, 19, 136–137. [Google Scholar]
  59. Zockler, C.; Bunting, G.C. Bangladesh 2006 Expedition Report; Unpublished Report to the Deutshe Ornitologen Gesellschaft (D-OG); Arcoana Ecological Consulting: Cambrigde, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  60. Bird, J.P.; Lees, A.C.; Chowdhury, S.U.; Martin, R.; Ul Haque, E. A survey of the critically Endangered spoon-billed sandpiper, Eurynorhynchus pygmeus in Bangladesh and key future research and conservation recommendations. Forktail 2010, 26, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  61. Chowdhury, S.U.; Foysal, M.; Das, D.K.; Mohsanina, S.; Diyan, M.A.A.; Alam, A.B.M.S. Seasonal occurrence and site use by shorebirds at Sonadia Island, Cox‘s Bazar, Bangladesh. Wader Study Group Bull. 2011, 118, 77–81. [Google Scholar]
  62. Payra, A. Avifauna of adjoining coastal areas of Purba Medinipur district, southern West Bengal, India: Additional records and updated list. Cuad. De Biodivers. 2020, 59, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Balachandran, S.; Rahmani, A.R.; Sathyaselavam, P. Habitat Evaluation of Chilika Lake with Special Reference to Birds as Bio-Indicators. Final Report (2001–2005); Bombay Natural History Society: Mumbai, India, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  64. Balachandran, S. The decline in wader populations along the east coast of India with special reference to Point Calimere, south-east India. In Waterbirds Around the World; Boere, G.C., Galbraith, C.A., Stroud, D.A., Eds.; The Stationery Office: Edinburgh, UK, 2006; pp. 296–301. [Google Scholar]
  65. Pandav, B. Birds of Bhitarkanika Mangroves, eastern India. Forktail 1997, 12, 9–20. [Google Scholar]
  66. Rao, P.; Mohapatra, K.K. Occurrence of the knot (Calidris canuta) from Andhra Pradesh. J. Bombay Nat. His. Soc. 1993, 90, 509. [Google Scholar]
  67. CMS (Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species). The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds. Report. 2008. Available online: https://www.cms.int/en/publication/conference-parties-proceedings-9th-meeting (accessed on 5 September 2022).
  68. Jagadheesan, R.; Pandiyan, J. Seasonal Variations of Small Wading Birds in the Pichavaram Mangrove Forest, India. Curr. World Environ. 2021, 16, 399–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Balachandran, S. Shorebirds of the Gulf of Mannar Marine National Park, Tamil Nadu. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 1995, 92, 303–313. [Google Scholar]
  70. Byju, H.; Raveendran, N.; Ravichandran, S. Distribution of avifauna in twenty-one islands of the Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve, South East India. J. Threat. Taxa, 2022; in press. [Google Scholar]
  71. Byju, H. Interesting foraging behaviour of Crab Plover in Manali Island, Gulf of Mannar, India. Bird-o-soar #63. Zoos Print 2020, 35, 25–28. [Google Scholar]
  72. Byju, H.; Balachandran, S.; Ravichandran, S. Long-term population trends of migratory shorebirds—A case study from Manoli Island, the Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve, India. Ornis Svec. 2022; in press. [Google Scholar]
  73. Cross, S.S.R.T.; Mohanraj, T.; Shanmugavel, S. Diversity and distribution of shore birds in the Tuticorin coastal area of Gulf of Mannar. Adv. Appl. Sci. Res. 2015, 6, 45–49. [Google Scholar]
  74. Asha, P.S.; Diwakar, H.; Sivanesh, K.V. Habitat depended on coastal and avian faunal characteristics of Tuticorin, Gulf of Mannar. J. Exp. Zool. India 2019, 22, 209–214. [Google Scholar]
  75. Balachandran, S. Studies on the Coastal Birds of Mandapam and the Neighbouring Islands (Peninsular India). Ph.D. Thesis, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, India, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  76. Hanski, I.; Gilpin, M.E. Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics and Evolution; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  77. Preiszner, B.; Csörgő, T. Habitat preference of Sylviidae warblers in a fragmented wetland. Acta Zool. Acad. Sci. Hung. 2008, 54 (Suppl. 1), 111–122. [Google Scholar]
  78. Monaghan, P.; Uttley, J.D.; Burns, M.D.; Thaine, C.; Blackwood, J. The relationship between food supply, reproductive effort and breeding success in Arctic Terns Sterna paradisaea. J. Anim. Ecol. 1989, 58, 261–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Robinson, R.A.; Clark, N.A.; Lanctot, R.; Nebel, S.; Harrington, B.; Clark, J.A.; Gill, J.A.; Meltofte, H.; Rogers, D.I.; Rogers, K.G.; et al. Long term demographic monitoring of wader populations in non-breeding areas. Wader Study Group Bull. 2005, 106, 17–29. [Google Scholar]
  80. Hussain, S.A.; Mohapatra, K.K.; Ali, S. Avifauna Profile of Chilika Lake. A case of Conservation. Technical Report 4. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. 1984, 1–67. [Google Scholar]
  81. Davidson, N.C. Status of wader populations on the Central/South Asain Flyway. Wader Study Group Bull. 2003, 101–102, 14–15. [Google Scholar]
  82. Sandilyan, S.; Thiyagesan, K.; Nagarajan, K. Major decline in species-richness of waterbirds in the Pichavaram mangrove wetlands, southern India. Wader Study Group Bull. 2010, 117, 91–98. [Google Scholar]
  83. Balachandran, S.; Sathiya Selvam, P.; Sudarasan, P. Bird Atlas of Chilika; Bombay Natural History Society: Mumbai, India; Chilika Development Authority: Bhubaneswar, India, 2009; pp. 1–325.
  84. Ali, S.; Hussain, S.A. Studies on the movement and population structure of Indian Avifauna. Annual Report 1. J. Bombay Nat. Hist 1987, 1–47. [Google Scholar]
  85. Mohapatra, K.K.; Rao, P. Some wader records from coastal Andhra Pradesh. J. Bombay Nat. His. Soc. 1993, 89, 250–251. [Google Scholar]
  86. Ali, S.; Ripley, S.D. Compact Handbook of the Birds of India and Pakistan Together with Those of Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, and Sri Lanka, 2nd ed.; Oxford University Press: Bombay, India, 1983. [Google Scholar]
  87. Balachandran, S. Bird Migration Studies in India, (1980–1992); 5pr. II, 3 pr. II, 1–142; Bombay Natural History Society: Mumbai, India, 1998; pp. 1–177. [Google Scholar]
  88. Cramp, S.; Simmons, K.E.L. The Birds of the Western Palaearctic; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1983; Volume 3, pp. 1–452. [Google Scholar]
  89. Balachandran, S.; Tuhina, K.; Ranjith, M. Indian Bird Migration Atlas; Bombay Natural History Society: Mumbai, India; Oxford University Press: New Delhi, India, 2018; pp. 1–216. [Google Scholar]
  90. Siddiqui, P.J.; Farooq, S.; Shafique, S.; Farooqi, Z. Conservation and management of biodiversity in Pakistan through the establishment of marine protected areas. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2008, 51, 377–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Prater, B.L.; David, R.B.; John, H.O. New sampler for shallow-water benthic macroinvertebrates. The Progressive Fish-Culturist. 1977, 39, 57–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Ali, S. Point Calimere as a refuge for wintering shorebirds. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 1963, 60, 458–460. [Google Scholar]
  93. Islam, M.Z.; Rahmani, A.R. Important Bird Areas of India; IBCN; Bombay Natural History Society: Mumbai, India, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  94. Islam, M.Z.; Rahmani, A.R. Potential and Existing Ramsar Sites in India; IBCN; Bombay Natural History Society: Mumbai, India, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  95. Balachandran, S.; Amutha, P.; Dalia, G.D. Restoration of Point Calimere (The Great Vedaranyam Swamp), a Designated Ramsar Site, for the Benefit of Fisheries and Migrant Waterbirds. Annual Report—I (June 2006–March 2007); Bombay Natural History Society: Mumbai, India, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  96. Balachandran, S.; Uttar Pradesh State Biodiversity Board. Avian Diversity in Coastal Wetlands of India and their Conservation Needs. 2012. Available online: https://www.upsbdb.org/pdf/Souvenir2012/ch-19.pdf (accessed on 2 September 2022).
  97. Vincent, S.G.T.; Owens, K.A. Coastal wetlands of India: Threats and solutions. Wetl. Ecol. Manag. 2021, 29, 633–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Aarif, K.M.; Prasadan, P.K. Injured migratory shorebirds and gulls in the Kadalundi-Vallikkunnnu Community reserve. J. Environ. Biol. 2014, 35, 243–246. [Google Scholar]
  99. Aarif, K.M.; Nefla, A.; Athira, T.R.; Prasadan, P.K.; Muzaffar, S.B. The costs of migration: Injuries in migratory waterbirds along the west coast of India. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 28, 6030–6039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Aarif, K.M. Intervention of House Crow on migratory shorebirds in the Kadalundi Estuary. Biosystamatica 2008, 2, 81–83. [Google Scholar]
  101. Koskimies, P. Birds as a tool in environmental monitoring. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 1989, 26, 153–166. [Google Scholar]
  102. Rajpar, M.N.; Zakaria, M. Birds of Wetlands in Peninsular Malaysia; Universiti Putra Malaysia Press: Seri Kembangan, Malaysia, 2014; ISBN 9789673444244. [Google Scholar]
  103. Aarif, K.M.; Prasadan, P.K. Conservation issues of KVCR, the wintering ground and stop-over site of migrant shorebirds in south west coast of India. Biosystematica 2014, 8, 51–57. [Google Scholar]
  104. IUCN. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2022-1. Available online: https://www.iucnredlist.org (accessed on 21 September 2022).
  105. Chandrakasan, S.; Jayson, E. Birds of Kole wetlands, Thrissur. Zoos Print J. 2001, 10, 334–349. [Google Scholar]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
The First 3 Years: Movements of Reintroduced Plains Bison (Bison bison bison) in Banff National Park
Previous
Glyptothorax (Teleostei: Sisoridae) from the Middle East: An Integrated Molecular and Morphological Insight into Its Taxonomic Diversity
Next