Nova Publishers
My Account Nova Publishers Shopping Cart
HomeBooksSeriesJournalsReference CollectionseBooksInformationSalesImprintsFor Authors
            
  Top » Catalog » Books » Environment » Wetlands: Ecology, Management and Conservation chapters » My Account  |  Cart Contents  |  Checkout   
Quick Find
  
Use keywords to find the product you are looking for.
Advanced Search
What's New? more
Theory of Literature
$270.00
Shopping Cart more
0 items
Information
Shipping & Returns
Privacy Notice
Conditions of Use
Contact Us
Notifications more
NotificationsNotify me of updates to Interactions of Structural Marsh Management, Salinity, and Water Depth on Wintering Waterbird Communities (pp. 109-128)
Tell A Friend
 
Tell someone you know about this product.
Interactions of Structural Marsh Management, Salinity, and Water Depth on Wintering Waterbird Communities (pp. 109-128) $100.00
Authors:  (François Bolduc, Alan D. Afton, School of Renewable Natural Resources, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA, and others)
Abstract:
Substantial hydrologic changes occurred during the last century in coastal marshes of southwestern Louisiana, which provide vital habitats for wintering waterbirds of North America. As a result, structural marsh management (levees, water control structures and impoundment; SMM) has been widely implemented for conservation purposes. Our previous research on marsh ponds in this area indicated that SMM mostly decreased biomass of small nematoda and secondarily increased that of ostracoda. We also found that invertebrate communities of impounded freshwater (IF), oligohaline (IO), and mesohaline (IM) marshes differed primarily in biomass of oligochaeta. However, the above invertebrate taxa are not likely major prey of waterbirds. Consequently, we predicted that waterbird species that differentiate communities (1) of IM and unimpounded mesohaline (UM) marshes, and (2) of IF, IO, and IM marshes would not be invertebrate-feeding species. We tested these two predictions by comparing waterbird densities among marsh types using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). We computed standardized canonical coefficients from MANOVA to evaluate contributions of waterbird species to differences in communities among marsh types. We used corrected bird densities (Bolduc and Afton 2008) to remove the confounding effects of water level variation among sampling periods and sites on our comparisons. In contrast to our first prediction, several waterbird species that consume invertebrates contributed most to differences in waterbird communities between ponds of IM and UM marshes
(American avocets Recurvirostra americana, northern shovelers Anasclypeata, and willets (Catoptrophoruss emiplamatus). However, consistent with our second prediction, species that consume vegetation contributed most to differences in waterbird communities among ponds of IF, IO, and IM marsh ponds (common moorhens Gallinulachloropus, American coots Fulicaamericana, gadwalls A. strepera). Most waterbird species had highest observed densities in IF marshes when water depth was lower than on average, whereas American avocets, northern shovelers, and willets mainly used ponds of UM marshes. We conclude that (1) maintenance of water depths preferred by various waterbirds, (2) promoting hydrological diversity at the landscape level, and (3) the preservation of UM and IF marshes would be most beneficial for the conservation of wintering waterbird populations. 


Available Options:
Version:
This Item Is Currently Unavailable.
Special Focus Titles
01.Violent Communication and Bullying in Early Childhood Education
02.Cultural Considerations in Intervention with Women and Children Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence
03.Chronic Disease and Disability: The Pediatric Lung
04.Fruit and Vegetable Consumption and Health: New Research
05.Fire and the Sword: Understanding the Impact and Challenge of Organized Islamism. Volume 2

Nova Science Publishers
© Copyright 2004 - 2021

Interactions of Structural Marsh Management, Salinity, and Water Depth on Wintering Waterbird Communities (pp. 109-128)