Advertisement

The Importance of Field Feeding to the Survival of Wintering Male and Female Curlews NumeniusArquata on the Tees Estuary

  • D. J. Townshend
Part of the Marine Science book series (MR, volume 15)

Abstract

Curlews, Numenius arquata, wintering on the Tees estuary use two feeding habitats, the mudflats and the adjacent fields. In mid winter, numbers feeding on intertidal areas fall, but numbers counted on and around the estuary at high water are unchanged. This paper describes the seasonal changes in use of the two habitats shown by individual Curlews. The role of the weather in determining the changes is considered. Differences in behaviour between male (short-billed) and female (long-billed) Curlews are discussed in relation to the depth distribution of their prey. These behavioural strategies are related to the different energy requirements of the sexes.

Keywords

Supplementary Feeding Standard Metabolic Rate Deep Snow Bill Length Feeding Habitat 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bainbridge, I.P. and Minton, C.D.T. 1978. The migration and mortality of the Curlew in Britain and Ireland. Bird Study 25: 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bannerman, D.A. 1961. The Birds of the British Isles, Vol. IX. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh and London.Google Scholar
  3. Davidson, N.C. 1980. Seal Sands Feasibility Study: An investigation into the possibility of developing alternative areas in compensation for the eventual loss of the remaining areas of Seal Sands, Teesmouth. Unpublished report to Cleveland County Council and the Nature Conservancy Council.Google Scholar
  4. Elphick, D. 1979. An inland flock of Curlews Numenius arquata in mid-Cheshire, England. Wader Study Group Bulletin 26: 31–35.Google Scholar
  5. Ens, B. 1979. Territoriality in Curlews Numenius arquata. Wader Study Group Bulletin 26: 28–29.Google Scholar
  6. Evans, A.C. and Guild, W.J. 1947. Studies on the relationships between earthworms and soil fertility. I. Biological studies in the field. Annals of Applied Biology 34: 307–330.Google Scholar
  7. Gerard, B.M. 1967. Factors affecting earthworms in pastures. Journal of Animal Ecology 36: 235–252.Google Scholar
  8. Hogstad, 0. 1978. Sexual dimorphism in relation to winter foraging and territorial behaviour of the Three-toed Woodpecker Picoides tridactylus and three Dendrocopus species. Ibis 120: 198–203.Google Scholar
  9. Knights, P.J. 1979. Effects of changes in land use on some animal populations. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Durham.Google Scholar
  10. Lasiewski, R.C. and Dawson, W.R. 1967. A re-examination of the relation between standard metabolic rate and body weight in birds. Condor 69: 13–23.Google Scholar
  11. Muus, B.J. 1967. The fauna of Danish estuaries and lagoons, distribution and ecology of dominating species in the shallow reaches of the mesohaline zone. Meddelelser fra Danmarks Fiskeri og Havundersgelser 5: 1–316.Google Scholar
  12. Newton, I. 1967. The adaptive radiation and feeding ecology of some British finches. Ibis 109: 33–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Newton, I. 1979. Population Ecology of Raptors. T A. D. Poyser, Berkhamsted.Google Scholar
  14. Pienkowski, M.W. 1973. Feeding activities of wading birds and Shelducks at Teesmouth and some possible effects of further loss of habitat. Unpublished report to Coastal Ecology Research Station, Institute of Terrestrial Ecology.Google Scholar
  15. Prater, A.J. 1973. BTO/RSPB Birds of Estuaries Enquiry. Report for 1971–72. Tring: British Trust for Ornithology.Google Scholar
  16. Prater, A.J. 1974. Ditto, Report for 1972–73.Google Scholar
  17. Prater, A.J. 1976. Ditto, Report for 1973–74.Google Scholar
  18. Prater, A.J. 1977. Ditto, Report for 1974–75.Google Scholar
  19. Prater, A.J., Marchant, J.H., Vuorinen, J. 1977. Guide to the identification and ageing of Holarctic Waders. BTO Guide 17.Google Scholar
  20. Ratcliffe, P.J. 1979. An ecological study of the intertidal invertebrates of the Humber estuary. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Hull.Google Scholar
  21. Reynolds, R.T. 1972. Sexual dimorphism in accipiter hawks: a new hypothesis. Condor 74: 191–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Selander, R.K. 1966. Sexual dimorphism and differential niche utilization in birds. Condor 68: 113–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith, P.H. and Greenhalgh, M.E. 1977. A four-year census of wading birds on the Ribble estuary, Lancashire/Merseyside. Bird Study 24: 243–258.Google Scholar
  24. Townshend, D.J. 1981. The use of intertidal habitats by shorebird populations, with special reference to Grey Plover (Pluvialis squatarola) and Curlew (Numenius arquata). Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Durham.Google Scholar
  25. Wilson, J. 1973. Wader populations of Morecambe Bay, Lancashire. Bird Study 20: 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Witherby, H.F., Jourdain, F.C.R., Ticehurst, N.F. and Tucker, B.W. 1945. The Handbook of British Birds, Vol. IV. H.F. & G. Witherby, London.Google Scholar
  27. some British finches. Ibis 109: 33-98. Newton, I. 1979. Population Ecology of Raptors. T. & A.D. Poyser, Berkhamsted.Google Scholar
  28. Pienkowski, M.W. 1973. Feeding activities of wading birds andGoogle Scholar
  29. Shelducks at Teesmouth and some possible effects of further loss of habitat. Unpublished report to Coastal Ecology ResearchGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. J. Townshend
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of Durham Science LaboratoriesDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations