Birds of the man-made ecosystems: the plantations
One-hectare plots were sampled for bird species diversity in the Uttara Kannada district. These plots represented well-preserved evergreen/semievergreen forests, secondary/moist deciduous forests showing different levels of degradation by man and plantations of teak, eucalypts and betelnut. It was found that the betelnut plantation and the evergreen/semievergreen forests had the least bird species diversity ofH′ = 2.58 and 2.61 respectively. The eucalypt and teak plantations hadH′ = 2.69 and 2-92 respectively. In the secondary/moist deciduous forests it ranged from 2.80–3.39. Despite the apparent increase in diversity in the man-modified vegetation types, it was found that there was a gradual displacement of the bird species composition from what was typical to the evergreen forests to those of more urban and scrubby habitats in these man-modified vegetation types. This was particularly so in the eucalypt plantation.
KeywordsWestern ghats birds plantations
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Ali S and Ripley S D 1983Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan Compaet edition (Delhi: Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
- Daniels R J R 1989A conservation strategy for the birds of the Uttara Kannada district, PhD. thesis, Indian Institute of Science, BangaloreGoogle Scholar
- Nature Conservancy (1983)Natural heritage program Operations manual, USAGoogle Scholar
- Pascal J P 1982Vegetation map of south India (Pondicherry: Karnataka Forest Department and French Institute)Google Scholar
- Pascal J P 1984Vegetation map of south India (Pondicherry: Karnataka Forest Department and French Institute)Google Scholar
- Pascal J P 1986Explanatory booklet on the forest maps of south India (Pondicherry: French Institute)Google Scholar
- Pielou E C 1975Ecological diversity (New York: John Wiley and Sons)Google Scholar
- Usher M B (ed.) 1986 Wildlife conservation evaluation: attributes, criteria and values; inWildlife conservation evaluation (London: Chapman and Hall) pp 3–44Google Scholar