SPECIES DIVERSITY, RELATIVE ABUNDANCE AND HABITAT ASSOCIATION OF

BIRDS IN LOKA ABAYA NATIONAL PARK, SIDAMA ZONE,

SOUTHERN ETHIOPIA

M.Sc. THESIS

AYALEW DEMEKE DIRESIE

HAWASSA UNIVERSITY, WONDO GENET, ETHIOPIA

MAY, 2018
SPECIES DIVERSITY, RELATIVE ABUNDANCE AND HABITAT ASSOCIATION OF

BIRDS IN LOKA ABAYA NATIONAL PARK, SIDAMA ZONE,

SOUTHERN ETHIOPIA

AYALEW DEMEKE DIRESIE

A THESIS SUMMITED TO THE

SCHOOL OF WILDLIFE AND ECOTOURISM,

WONDO GENET COLLEGE OF FORESTRY AND NATURAL RESOURCE, SCHOOL OF

GRADUATE STUDIES,

HAWASSA UNIVERSITY

WONDO GENET, ETHIOPIA

IN PARIAL FULFULIMENT OF THE

REQUIRMENTS

FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

MAY, 2018

ii
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this MSc thesis is my orginal work and has not been presented for a degree

in any other university, and all resources of material used for this thesis have been duly

acknowledged.

Name: ___________________________________________________

Signature: ____________________________________________

i
Approval Sheet-1

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Species Diversity, Relative Abundance and Habitat

Association of Birds in Loka Abaya National Park, Sidama Zone, Southern Ethiopia” is

submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in

Wildlife Management, the Graduate Program of the School of Wildlife and Ecotourism and has

been carried out by Ayalew Demeke Id. No MSc/WLM/R/004/09, under my supervision.

Therefore, I recommend that the student has fulfilled the requirements and hence hereby can

submit the thesis to the School.

______________________________ ___________________ __________________

Name of advisor Signature Date

ii
Approval Sheet-2

We, the undersigned, members of the board of examiners of the final open defense by Ayalew

Demeke have read and evaluated his thesis entitled “Species Diversity, Relative Abundance and

Habitat Association of Birds in Loka Abaya National Park, Sidama Zone, Southern Ethiopia”

and examined the candidate. This is, therefore, to certify that the thesis has been accepted in

partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of master of science in Wildlife

Management.

___________________________ _______________ __________________

Name of Chairperson Signature Date

___________________________ _______________ ___________________

Name of Advisor Signature Date

___________________________ ________________ __________________

Name of Internal Examiner Signature Date

___________________________ ________________ __________________

Name of External Examiner Signature Date

___________________________ ________________ __________________

SGS Approval Signature Date

iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Above all I would like to thank the almighty God for his guidance throughout my life. I would

like to express my sincere and special gratitude to my advisor Girma Mengesha (Ph. D.) for his

intellectual comment, advice, constructive guidance, suggestion and encouragement throughout

this research, in which I had the opportunity to grasp more knowledge concerning the thesis

work. I would like to thank NORALD project for financial support to accomplish this research

work. I greatly appreciate field materials support including Binocular, GPS and Bird Guide Book

from the Loka Abaya National Park administration office. My deepest gratitude and appreciation

goes to the rangers of the Loka Abaya National Park for their immense support during field data

collection. I would thank my father Demeke Diresie and my mother Beteha Kefyalew for

financial and moral support during my university life up to completion of this study. Last but not

list, I forward my deepest gratitude to my classmates for their positive approach to share the idea

during the thesis work.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENT................................................................................................................ iv

LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................... x

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... xi

1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background of the Study ....................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Statement of Problem ............................................................................................................ 3

1.3 Objectives of the Study.......................................................................................................... 5

1.3.1 General objective............................................................................................................. 5

1.3.2 Specific objectives........................................................................................................... 5

1.4 Research Questions................................................................................................................ 6

1.5 Significance of the Study....................................................................................................... 6

2. LITRATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................................. 7

2.1 Bird Species Diversity and Abundance ................................................................................. 7

2.2. Factors Affecting Bird Species Diversity and Abundance .................................................. 8

2.2.1 Habitat type and features ................................................................................................. 8

2.2.2 Seasons ............................................................................................................................ 9

2.2.3 Elevation........................................................................................................................ 10

v
 2.2.4 Human activities ............................................................................................................ 10

2.2.5 Livestock grazing .......................................................................................................... 12

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS .............................................................................................. 14

3.1 Description of the Study Area ............................................................................................. 14

3.1.1 Geographical location and size ..................................................................................... 14

3.1.2 Topography ................................................................................................................... 15

3.1.3 Land use ........................................................................................................................ 16

3.1.4 Vegetation ..................................................................................................................... 16

3.1.5 Wild animals ................................................................................................................. 17

3.2 METHODS .......................................................................................................................... 18

3.2.1 Preliminary survey ........................................................................................................ 18

3.2.2 Sampling design ............................................................................................................ 18

3.2.3 Data collection............................................................................................................... 20

3.2.4 Data analysis ................................................................................................................. 20

4. RESULTS ................................................................................................................................. 24

4.1 Species Diversity ................................................................................................................. 24

4.2 Species Similarity among Habitat Types............................................................................. 25

4.3 Species Relative Abundance ............................................................................................... 26

4.4 Species Habitat Association ................................................................................................ 32

5. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................... 34

vi
6. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 39

6.1 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 39

6.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 39

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 41

vii
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Encounter rates used to give a crude ordinal scale of abundance................................... 22

Table 2: Avifaunal diversity among the three habitat types during wet and dry seasons ............. 25

Table 3: Species similarity of birds among the three habitat types during wet and dry seasons .. 26

Table 4: Relative abundance of the recorded bird species in Loka Abaya National Park ............ 26

Table 5: Habitat association of birds during wet and dry seasons ................................................ 33

viii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Location map of the study area ..................................................................................... 15

Figure 2: Transect line layout ....................................................................................................... 19

ix
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ANOVA Analysis of Variance

EWCA Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority

EWNHS Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History Society

GPS Global Positioning System

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

LANP Loka Abaya National Park

QGIS Quantum Geographic Information System

SNNPR Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Region

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Science

SZBCT Sidama Zone Bureau of Culture and Tourism

x
ABSTRACT

The current study was carried out to investigate species diversity, relative abundance and
habitat association of birds in Loka Abaya National Park, Sidama Zone, Southern Ethiopia.
Based on satellite image and preliminary survey, the study area was stratified into three habitat
types: Riverine forest, Wooded grassland and Wetland. In all the habitat types, a total of 46
blocks (4km by 4km) was established and 20% of each was sampled. Transect line count method
was employed to collect data from August 2017 to February 2018 during wet and dry seasons.
The length of transect lines was 1km in riverine forest, 4km in wooded grassland and wetland.
Biodiversity indices were used to calculate the bird species diversity and encounter rate to
determine relative abundance of birds. Two-way ANOVA was used to analyze the effect of
habitat type and season on abundance bird species and chi-square analysis was used to test
association of birds and their habitats. A total of 134 bird species belonging to 53 families and
18 orders were recorded during the whole study period. Culumbidae (11 species) was the most
abundant family followed by Accipitridae and Ploceidae, each 8 species. The highest bird
species diversity was recorded from the riverine forest (H' = 3.98) and the lowest was from the
wetland (H' = 3.43). The number of Individuals of species during the wet and dry seasons was
not significantly different (F 1, 340 = 0.36, P = 0.54), but there was a significant difference among
habitat types (F 2, 340 = 8.40, P = 0.00). The relative abundance of birds of the area revealed that
most of the recorded bird species was categorized under frequent (45 species), rare (32 species)
and uncommon (30 species). There was high significant difference between the bird species and
habitat usage (χ2 214 = 62715.66, P < 0.05). Birds showed strong interaction with wooded
grassland during both seasons. The result of the present study indicates that the park harbors
diverse species of birds. Hence, to sustain the diversity of birds of the area, conservation
measure and other long-term studies on bird communities of the park is recommended.

Keywords/phrase: Birds, Diversity, Habitat association, Loka Abaya National Park, Relative
abundance

xi
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Among the elements of the diversity of nature, birds are both visually and acoustically

conspicuous organisms of most ecosystems and the best known class of organisms (Sekercioglu,

2012). They are also an integral part of ecosystem and occupies many trophic levels in a food

chain ranging from consumers to predators and play roles in ecosystem functioning and socio-

economic contributions (Sekercioglu et al., 2004). Birds have been used as environmental health

indicator, plant pollinators and seed dispersal as well as pest controller (Hadley et al., 2012;

Ramchandra, 2013). Moreover, they provide opportunities for enjoyment to our lives because of

their distinctive colours, songs and calls. Birds are usefull organisms, and the reduction in their

abundance and species richness are likely to have comprehensive ecological consquences, with

diverse societal impacts ranging from the spread of diseases and loss of agricultural pest controll

to plant extinctions and trophic cascades (Gaston et al., 2000; Sekercioglu et al., 2004; Whelan

et al., 2008; Bibi and Ali, 2013; Galetti et al., 2013).

Species diversity is a measurment of richness and evenness of species, meaning it takes into

account not only how many species are present but also how evenly distributed in numbers

(Turchi et al., 1995; Mulder et al., 2004; Colwell, 2009; Tuomisto, 2010; Leinster and Cobbold,

2012). Diversity and habitat selection of birds can be influenced by landscape features and

natural hetrogeneity of many parts of the forest structure (Hepinstall-Cymerman and Parrish,

2012; Naka and Cintra, 2012). Bird species diversity have been affected by a number of

variables within a landscape. For example, environmental heterogeneity in the form of spatial

1
variation in habitat features and in local climate can affect species distributions (Veech and Crist,

2007). Change in structural and compositional diversity of native vegetation would alter

composition of bird community (Acevedo and Aide, 2008; Harish and Hosetti, 2009).

Relative abundance of species refers to how common or rare a species is relative to other species

in a defined location. It is the percentage composition of species of a particular kind relative to

the total number of species in the area (McGill et al., 2007; Walag and Canencia, 2016). The

relative abundance of birds in a given area might be related to the availability of food, habitat

condition and breeding season of species. Abundance of many bird species are determined by the

composition of the vegetation that comprises a major element of their habitats (lee and

Rotenberry, 2005). The relative abundance of species has no relation with IUCN species

category criteria rather it is useful to know the abundance of species in a particular area

(Shimelis Aynalem and Afework Bekele, 2009).

Some wild animals might use the whole habitat type equally and others might use certain habitat

types. According to Girma Mengesha and Afework Bekele (2008), those animals which use the

whole habitat equally do not show association with habitat types of the area. Although some can

occupy more than one habitat type, birds exhibit specific habitat (Burgess et al., 2002). Birds

may use certain habitat types and display variation in their interaction (Girma Mengesha, 2005).

Habitat type refers only to type of vegetation association in an area and it is not equivalent to the

resources and conditions of an area that produce occupancy by a given organism (Hall et al.,

1997).

Ethiopia is one of the most well-known countries in Africa, in terms of its avifauna. The country

is home to an impressive number of species of birds that vary from residents to breeding birds,

2
migrants to wintering birds (Lepage, 2006). Currently, 926 bird species have been listed for the

country of which 24 species are endemic and 19 are globally threatned (Lepage, 2013). The

country has numerous stop over sites for millions of migratory birds crossing the Sahara desert

(Sekercioglu, 2012). Forests, wetlands and riverine systems are important sites for wintering or

passage migrant birds. Hence, the availability of different habitat types contribute for the

diversity of birds in Ethiopia. Seventy three important bird areas encompassing the already

existing protected areas and many other additional sites have been identified in the country

(Mengistu Wonderfrash, 2003).

Ethiopia has estabilished many national parks and other protected areas for preservation and

conservation of fauna and flora, recreation and education (EWCA, 2016). The country is one of

few countries where the establishments of protected areas are increasing. Currently, Ethiopia has

more than 55 protected areas (including 21 National Parks) to protect and conserve the natural

ecosystems and wildlife heritage of the country (Alemneh Amare, 2015). Loka Abaya National

Park (referred to as LANP in this thesis) is one of the newly established National Parks found in

Sidama zone, Ethiopia. It was established in 2009 and it has an area of 500 km2. The park is

fortunate in possessing diverse vegetation and a number of water basins that are important for the

existence of variety of birds. Thus, the present study is proposed to investigate the diversity,

relative abundance and habitat association of birds in the Park.

1.2 Statement of Problem

Globally, wildlife is highly threatened by various natural and anthropogenic factors. As a result,

the loss of biodiversity in general and wild fauna in particular is a comprehensive global

environmental challenge (Cardinale et al., 2012; Krause and Zambonino, 2013). Habitat loss,

3
over-exploitation of wildlife and forest resources and climate change are major causes of

biodiversity loss (Brooks et al., 2002). The condition is most severe in the tropical regions

(Leuschaner et al., 2013). Human population growth, particularly in developing countries, has

intense effects on consumption patterns of land and wild resources, which is considered as an

indirect driver of biodiversity loss (Kideghesho, 2009). In the tropics including Ethiopia, habitat

losses and habitat degradation are causing rapid decline in bird species, which in turn caused

reductions in ecosystem processes, services and benefits (Sekercioglu et al., 2012).

Despite the presence of diversified fauna including birds in Ethiopia, many populations of wild

animals have been declining with some have become locally extinct. Some of the major

problems impacting wild animals of Ethiopia include habitat degradation or loss, overgrazing by

livestock, settlement, agricultural expansion, deforestation, uncontrolled fire, land-use conflicts

with local communities, and poaching. Although the country has established many National

Parks and other protected areas, almost all of these areas are facing problems (Daszak et al.,

2000; Ho et al., 2007; Alemneh Amare, 2015).

Loka Abaya National Park is a newly established Park in Ethiopia with little information on

ecology of avifauna. Although the Park is believed to have varieties of wild faunas, it is evident

that wild animals are at present under heavy human pressure. According to the survey report of

LANP prepared by Sidama Zone Bureau of Culture and Tourism (SZBCT) in 2009, the major

prevailing threats of wildlife diversity in the park include poaching, cultivation, uncontrolled fire

and livestock grazing as well as forest clearing for fire wood and charcoal productions. Unless

these conservation problems are controlled properly, the survival of wildlife diversity will be

grim in the future.

4
Accordingly, it is essential to formulate a wildlife development and protection strategy to avert

the looming danger on wild animals and conserve them for posterity. Hence, data about avian

diversity, abundance and their habitat use is very essential for the development of sound

management plan for a given protected area. The ornithological data is also used to indicate the

effects of environmental change on biodiversity (Salahudeen et al., 2013), and this emphasizes

the need to study their abundance and diversity to monitor these changes. Given this need,

different studies on avian diversity have been carried out in different ecosystems of Ethiopia

particularly emphasize on National Parks and other protected areas (e.g., Girma Mengesha and

Afework Bekele, 2008; Megersa Tsegaye et al., 2016; Agarnesh Desalegn and Subramanian,

2015; Weldemariam Tesfahunegny et al., 2016; Zerihun Girma et al., 2017). However, LANP

has been receiving little attention. Information on avian diversity of the park and their asociation

with habitat types is virtually scarce. Therefore, this research was intended to fill this information

gap in the study area with the below listed objectives.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

1.3.1 General objective

To assess species diversity, relative abundance and habitat association of birds in Loka Abaya

National Park and to contribute to the conservation of the species in the area

1.3.2 Specific objectives

 To examine bird species diversity of the study area

 To determine relative abundance of birds of the Park

 To investigate association of birds with habitat types of the study area

5
1.4 Research Questions

 How diverse is birds of the Loka Abaya National Park?

 Which of the birds of the park are abundant, common, frequent, and rare in the study area?

 How is bird species of the park associated with different habitat type of the area?

1.5 Significance of the Study

The results of this study could contribute to understanding of the diversity, relative abundance

and association of birds with habitat type and thereby can assist in setting conservation priorities.

In addition, the findings are also important for decision and policy makers in providing base line

information for the development of a comprehensive bird management plan. Besides, the

findings of this research could be used as a base line for further and detail study on diversity,

abundance and habitat association of birds. Finally, the report contributes to the pool of bird

conservation knowledge and hence, it is useful to the academic fraternity and to those interested

in bird conservation.

6
2. LITRATURE REVIEW

2.1 Bird Species Diversity and Abundance

Birds evolutionary history date back to more than 150 million years (Ali, 2002). Birds are

considered to be taxonomically well known group, with estimated number of more than 95% of

their global diversity has been described. According to the taxonomic view point, the number of

known living bird species varies anywhere from 9,800 to 10,050 (Clements, 2007). Birds inhabit

ecosystems across the globe, from the Arctic to the Antarctic occupying a wide range of

ecological habitats (Sekercioglu, 2006). Bird species diversity and distributions along the

landscape is not uniform (Bibby et al., 1992). Patterns of species composition and diversity are

the results of historical, evolutionary and ecological processes, which influence in shaping such

patterns vary across geographical regions and temporally within each region (Barrantes and

Sandoval, 2009).

The distribution of birds in a particular area depends on various factors which primarily include

availability of suitable food, roosting and nesting sites (Whittingham and Evans, 2004). A

number of variables have been found to influence bird species diversity within a landscape.

Patterns of birds are intensely associated to environmental factors such as climate, topography,

habitats and human interventions which determine bird species diversity and abundance

(Jankowiski, et al., 2009). The abundance and distribution of birds are also influenced by scale-

dependent hierarchical processes that disturb the links between habitat suitability and their

numbers (Telleria et al., 2009).

7
2.2. Factors Affecting Bird Species Diversity and Abundance

2.2.1 Habitat type and features

Since birds select habitats that fit their resource requirements to complete their life cycle, the

diversity of bird species is influenced by habitat types (Vickery and Arlettaz, 2012). Particularly,

birds find a suitable nesting place in close proximity to good foraging locations that provide food

to chicks during reproductions (Low et al., 2010). Although there are some generalist species

that may utilize several habitats, many bird species differ in their resource requirement which

causes specificity on habitat preference (Buckley and Freckleton, 2010). Some species require

special habitat resources and will be absent if the resources are not present. For instance, the

abundance of White-browed Sparrow-Weaver (Plocepasser mahali) is higher in woodland than

grassland habitat type since woody plants provide variety of placement for nests, protection

against predation, supply of food and conducive microclimate for this species (Ngongolo, 2013),

whereas Mountain plover (Charadrius mountainus) prefers habitat type with short grasses as it

uses ground for nesting and feeds mainly on insects (Goguen, 2012).

There are several habitat features that influence avian diversity, abundance and their distribution.

The diversity and distribution of birds are associated with habitat structure complexity, habitat

floristic and physiognomic textures and habitat heterogeneity (Marone, 1991; Whittingham and

Evans, 2004; Pennington and Blair, 2011). Bird species diversity is linearly related to habitat

complexity and heterogeneity. Greater habitat complexity and heterogeneity facilitate higher bird

species diversity (Kelaher and Castilla, 2005; Hinsley et al., 2009). For example, in freshwater

systems it has been frequently demonstrated that macrophyte complexity is positively associated

with faunal richness and abundance (Mormul et al., 2011). Avian diversity is positively

8
associated with foliage height and percent vegetation cover (Popotnik and Giuliano, 2000). Thus,

habitat heterogeneity and vegetation structure determine bird species diversity since they provide

food, nesting material and cover for predators (Thinh, 2006). However, several studies found that

bird species richness is not associated with habitat complexity and vegetation structure. For

example, according to Kim et al. (2007), Girma Mengesha et al. (2011) and Hadis Tadele et al.

(2014), bird richness is higher in disturbed area (simple in vegetation structure) than undisturbed

one (complex in vegetation structure). Therefore, the association of birds with habitat resources

is varied in different sites of the globe.

2.2.2 Seasons

Seasons impose contrasting demands on animal species, which must respond with behavioral and

physiological adaptations, including shifting resource use or migration to other geographical

areas with tolerable or more adequate conditions (Sua´rez-Seoane et al., 2008). Both migrants

and year-round resident species shifts between habitat types depending on their needs, the

availability of food and cover. Time of year determines when a species is found in a particular

habitat. Compositions and species richness of birds is associated not only with habitat structure

but also with abiotic factors such as temperature and precipitation that are directly related to

primary productivity (Honkanen et al., 2010). For instance, during the winter period when food

resources are much scarce and weather conditions unpredictable, birds adopt a vagabonding

lifestyle exploring a greater variety of habitats over larger areas to track the spatiotemporal

distribution of food availability (Wiktander et al., 2001; Murgui, 2010). Thus, habitat

associations of birds may change during wet and dry seasons. Generally, when the quantity, type

and distribution of habitat components change, so do the type of wildlife species found within

9
the habitat. However, the effect of season or the role of climate may be negligible on bird species

composition. This may depend on the extended time of inundation of the area during different

seasons (Shimelis Aynalem and Afework Bekele, 2008).

2.2.3 Elevation

Several factors change predictably with increasing elevation. For example, temperature and air

pressure decrease with increasing elevation. On the other hand, solar radiation increases with

increasing elevation. Precipitation also has complex relationship to elevation. The most common

elevational pattern is increasing precipitation with increasing elevation (Barry, 2008). The

highest altitude sites are likely to be affected by colder conditions than the lowest sites,

particularly in winter. Because of this energetic constraint, birds inhabiting cold regions will be

more willing to move toward warmer sites during winter (Telleria et al., 2008). Cloud cover and

soil quality are other important abiotic determinants of species richness that vary with elevation.

Vegetation structure also varies along the environmental gradient associated with elevation

(Grytnes et al., 2006). Elevation with other primary topographic factors such as aspect and slope

can alter microclimate conditions and indirectly affect the growth and distribution of land cover

and the kinds and amount of resources available for breeding and foraging activities. Thus, bird

species richness and abundance generally changes along an altitudinal gradient (McCain, 2009;

Zerihun Girma et al., 2017).

2.2.4 Human activities

Patterns of relationship between humans and biodiversity typically show positive, negative, or

negative quadratic relationships and can be described by 3 hypotheses (productivity,

10
intermediate-disturbance and ecosystem stress). The productivity hypothesis states that more

productive systems support more species and more people. There is a positive correlation

between species richness and human population since more productive landscapes attracting both

humans and other species due to productivity gradients caused by varying energy availability

(Gaston, 2005). This hypothesis is supported by Gaston and Evans (2004) and Luck et al. (2004)

who reported that species richness increases with human population density.

The intermediate-disturbance hypothesis states that biodiversity peaks at intermediate levels of

human influence. Landscapes under moderate levels of human impact have higher habitat and

resource diversity compared with human-dominated landscapes. This higher resource diversity

leads to higher species diversity and forms a negative quadratic relationship between species

richness and human influence (McDonnell and Pickett, 1990). This hypothesis was supported by

Lepczyk et al. (2008) who documented that native avian richness and the relative abundance of

many species peaked at intermediate housing densities and levels of anthropogenic land cover.

The ecosystem-stress hypothesis states that biodiversity decreases monotonically with increasing

human activities and thus predicts a negative relationship between species richness and human

influence (Rapport et al., 1985). Changes in land-use due to anthropogenic activities have

transformed continuous forests into a myriad of small patches (Melo et al., 2013; Laurance et al.,

2014). As a result of this massive habitat loss and fragmentation, there are striking changes in

species composition in the ecological assemblages of small and isolated forest patches, with

sensitive species being replaced by a proliferation of disturbance-adapted species (Supp and

Ernest, 2014; Morante-Filho et al., 2016). These changes are in part a consequence of the

11
increasing penetration of edge effects, which may change microclimate conditions (such as

temperature and humidity) as well as the local vegetation structure (Prieto, 2014).

Biodiversity is influenced by forest loss and fragmentation (Murphy and Romanuk, 2014).

Urbanization and forest loss through logging are likely responsible for decreasing bird species

richness (Durães et al., 2013; Yu and Guo, 2013). Anthropogenic activities such as vegetation

clearing, burning and habitat modification reduce individual population in many ways. Cutting

trees and clearing vegetation for cultivation and fire wood production could make highest

number of species of birds uncommon (Shimelis Aynalem and Afework Bekele, 2009).

Generally, bird diversity often declines as a result of land-use changes (Bregman et al., 2014).

As a result, the ecological functions performed by them are also likely to be altered. For instance,

seed dispersal is one of the most important ecological processes carried out by birds in tropical

forests that have been modified by land-use changes (Şekercioğlu et al., 2015). In some tropical

forests, up to 90% of the tree species are dispersed by animals, mainly mammals and birds

(Markl et al., 2012). Therefore, loss of seed dispersers, such as frugivorous birds, can affect plant

regeneration and impact heavily on forest structure and the phenotypic and genetic

characteristics of plants species (Galetti et al., 2013). However, there is poor understanding of

the effects of this biodiversity loss on species interactions and of the pervasive consequences to

ecosystem functions (Bregman et al., 2014; Mitchell et al., 2015; Valiente-Banuet et al., 2015).

2.2.5 Livestock grazing

Habitat structure is a major determinant of bird species diversity (Tews et al., 2004). One process

by which habitat structure is altered is livestock grazing, the most extensive land use across most

continents (Tara et al., 2007). Livestock grazing alters structure and composition of vegetation

12
through a combination of trampling, changes in nutrient fluxes and loss or altered recruitment.

Generally, shrubs are removed, establishment of tree seedlings is inhibited, saplings are trampled

and browsed, and the grass layer is grazed in a heterogeneous manner or, when grazing pressure

is heavy, the grass sward becomes homogeneous (Johnson et al., 2012; Ranellucci et al., 2012).

Grazing activities can affect grassland birds by altering the vegetation structure and creating

disturbance during the nesting season. Direct disturbance by grazing cattle at nest sites of

grassland song birds can affect the overall success of population. Cattle can directly affect nests

by trampling, in some cases depredation and by inducing abandonment. The majority of cattle

disturbances at a nest will result in nest failure, and include nests being crushed by hooves, noses

and during bedding, eggs and young kicked out by cattle movements and nests being defecated

on. Grazing can reduce hiding cover, leading to greater losses from predation (With et al., 2008;

Fuhlendrof et al., 2012; Bleho et al., 2014).

However, Livestock grazing impacts on birds vary with the type of livestock operation, region

of the country and other factors. Not all livestock related changes have negative consequences

for all bird species. For some birds, the effects of livestock grazing are very little or neutral. For

example, Klute et al. (1997) found no significance difference between the reproductive success

of grassland birds on idle conservation reserve pastures versus grazed pastures. Similarly, Koper

and Schmiegelow (2007) and Lusk and Koper (2013) found that grazing had very little effect on

the nesting survival of grassland passerines in the arid mixed-grass prairie of Southern Canada.

13
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Description of the Study Area

Description of the study area is mainly based on the survey report of the LANP prepared by

Sidama Zone Bureau of Culture and Tourism (SZBCT) in 2009. Relevant information such as

the location, topography, vegetation, wildlife and the communities living adjacent to the park are

described in the subsequent sub-titles. However, the soil and climate of the study area is not

present due to lack of information on them.

3.1.1 Geographical location and size

Loka Abaya National Park, which is established in 2009, is found in Loka Abaya Woreda in

Sidama Zone of South Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’ Region (SNNPR). The park is named

after the name of the woreda where it is found (i.e., Loka Abaya Woreda which is one of the 19

woredas of Sidama Zone). The park encompasses an area of approximately 500 km2 of which 52

km2 is water body (northern portion of Lake-Abaya), located at 70 km south west of Hawassa

and 340 km from Addis Ababa between 6°27'0''- 6°45'0''N latitude and 37°54'30''- 38°15'0''E

longitude (Fig. 1). The park is situated on the northern side of the Lake Abaya, where two rivers

originating from Sidama Zone (i.e., Gidawo River and Kola River) flowing in the park. The park

is bounded to the west by Bilate River, which also flows through the park and joins Lake Abaya.

14
Figure 1: Location map of the study area

3.1.2 Topography

According to the survey report of the park documented by SZBCT (2009), the prominent

topographic features of the proposed park area are characterized by highly heterogeneous and

hilly train. Large proportion of the study area is highly undulating and rolling interspersed with

different valley floors, purely drained bottom land and punctuated by different hills. The LANP

has different Scenic features such as mountains, highlands and lowland gorges etc. The park is

fortunate in possessing a number of water basins that drains to Lake Abaya which is the largest

lake in the Ethiopian rift valley system. Most of the boundaries of the park are natural objects

like river, lake and valleys. Bilate, Derba, Gidabo, Loka and Mencha are the major five river

15
basins of the park which finally feed Lake Abaya inside the park. Among these rivers, Derba,

Loka and Mencha Rivers are seasonal. The amount of water of Bilate river is also highly reduced

by irrigational scheme during non-rainy season. There are also more than ten hot springs in

LANP. Accordingly, Lake Abaya, Bilate River and Gidawo River and hot springs are the usual

source of fresh water, which are important to sustain wildlife in the park.

3.1.3 Land use

The principal communities found in and around LANP are exclusively belongs to Sidama

nationality. The Sidama nationals in the area are dominantly Christians, mainly followers of

protestant religion. The land use types practiced by these communities are variable and might be

related to the difference in climatic conditions and resource types in the sites. In the northern and

north eastern highland areas, communities traditionally practice agricultural land use that

combines inset, root crops, cereal cultivation and trees with livestock rearing simultaneously.

Hence, it can be said that the Sidamas living adjacent to the park practice a mixed agricultural

activity although there are few communities living in lowland areas (Abaya Zuria and Bukitu

kebele) who dominantly practice traditional animal husbandry as well as river bank irrigation

cultivation.

3.1.4 Vegetation

The study area harbors different vegetation types that include wooded grassland, hilly scrubland,

riverine forest and wetland vegetation. According to the survey report from the Sidama Zone

Bureau of Culture and Tourism (2009), the wooded grassland areas are mainly dominated by

Comberetum spp., Acacia drepanolobium, Acacia melifera, Acacia seyal, Acacia tortilies,

16
Acacia Senegal, Acacia albida, Acacia nilotica, Acacia olifera, Acacia nubica, Aloe vera,

Euophorbia tirucalli, Ricinus communes, Caparis tomoentosa, Balanites aegypitica and

Balanites routindifolia. The trees in LANP are associated with a wide range of grasses, shrubs

and herbs. Riverine forest comprises tree species like Ficus sur, Ficus vasta, Petrolatum

stelatium, Trechlea Sp., Zizihpus spina-christi and Tamarindus indica. The western area of

undulating lands of the reserve including river banks of Bilate and Derba River are highly

deforested for fire wood and charcoal production by the local communities, whereas the eastern

areas of the park relatively in a better condition with thick woody species.

3.1.5 Wild animals

The SZBCT (2009) reported that the Park holds a significant variety of larger and medium sized

mammals and birds in the different habitats of the park. The most conspicuous and observed

mammals of the park include Lesser Kudu (Tragelaghus imberbis), Defassa Waterbuck (Kobus

defassa), Common Bushbuck (Tragelaghus scriptus), Lion (Pantera leo) Leopard (Pantera

pardus) and African Wild Dog (Lycaon pictus). The park is home for diverse species of birds

such as Helmeted Guinea fowl (Numida meleagris), Northern Carmine Bee-eater (Merops

nubicus), Long-crested Eagle (Lophaetus occipitalis), Black Kite (Milvus migrans), Fork-tailed

Drongo (Dicrurus adsimilis), Crested Francolin (Francolinus sephana), White-headed Buffalo

Weaver (Dinemillia denemelli), Common Bulbul (Pycnonotus barbautus), Red and Yellow

Barbet (Tachyphonus erythrocephalus).

17
3.2 METHODS

3.2.1 Preliminary survey

A Preliminary survey was conducted from August 15 to 25, 2017. During this period, all

available literatures were reviewed concerning the accessibility, vegetation, fauna, topography

and infrastructures of the park. The physical features of the overall landscapes of the study area

were assessed. Type of each of the habitats of wild animals was observed and the coordinates of

boundaries of each study site was also identified using GPS (Garmin 72) (Shimelis Aynalem and

Afework Bekele, 2008; Hadis Tadele et al., 2014).

3.2.2 Sampling design

Based on satellite image and preliminary survey, the study area was stratified in to habitat types

following Girma Mengesha and Afework Bekele (2008). Accordingly, three habitat types were

identified for bird survey based on vegetation types: wooded grassland, riverine forest and

wetland (Fig. 2). In all the habitat types, a total of 46 blocks (4km by 4km grid) was established

on the map of LANP. The number of sampling blocks was varied in each habitat type based on

the size and the type of vegetation cover in the Park. To make the sample representative, 20 % of

the area was considered (Bibby et al., 1992). Accordingly, 11 sampling blocks 6 from wooded

grassland, 3 from riverine forest and 2 from wetland was proportionally selected at random.

Transect lines were laid out systematically in the selected blocks following the method of

Nomani et al. (2012). The length and number of transect lines established was determined based

on the size of selected grids of each habitat type. Thus, 68 transect lines in wooded grassland, 54

in riverine forest, and 2 in wetland were established on each of the selected sampling block. The

18
length of transect lines was 1km in riverine forest, 4km in wooded grassland and wetland. The

sighting distance (transect width) varied depending on the detection difficulties of birds in each

habitat type due to size and nature of habitat. Thus, sighting distance was (sum from the right

and left) was 200m in wooded grassland and wetland and 150m in riverine forest. Transect lines

ware 200-300m apart from each other to reduce double counting (Hostler and Martin, 2006).

Quantum GIS computer software (version 2.18) was applied to accomplish all activities from

habitat type stratification to transect line establishment.

Figure 2: Transect line layout

19
3.2.3 Data collection

Field data collection was carried out from August to October, 2017 for wet season and from

December to February, 2018 for dry season. Data were collected by walking along transect lines.

The speed of walking on the transect lines depended on the number of birds present and

difficulties to record them. In wooded grassland and wetland habitat type, a speed of about

2km/h and riverine forest 1km/h was followed (Bibby et al., 1992). GPS was used to find the

position of each transect line. Each established transect line was surveyed eight times (four times

during the wet and four times during the dry season). Data was collected early in the morning

from 6:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m and the late afternoon 3:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. following Megersa

Tsegaye et al. (2016). During the survey, name of bird species and number of individuals was

recorded by direct observation. Estimated perpendicular distance from transect lines and time

taken to accomplish each transect was recorded. Bird identification was aided by binoculars

(8x30 and 8x40) and standard bird field guides (Redman et al., 2009). Photograph of birds was

also taken using digital camera for further confirmation. Birds were also identified based on their

calls.

3.2.4 Data analysis

Biodiversity indices were used to analyze the bird species diversity. Shannon-Weiner diversity

index (H') was used to evaluate the bird species diversity in different habitat types based on the

abundance of the species recorded. Shannon-Weiner diversity index (H') was calculated as:

H' = ∑ (Pi *lnPi) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- equation (1)

Where:

20
H' = Shannon-Weiner diversity index

Pi = proportion of the ith species

ln = Natural logarithm

The value of Shannon-Weiner index usually falls between 1.5 and 3.5, only rarely it surpasses

4.5. A value near 4.6 would indicate that the numbers of individuals are evenly distributed

between all the species (Bibi and Ali, 2013). Shannon-Wiener index was chosen for diversity

calculation since it provides an account for both abundance and evenness. It also does not

disproportionately favor some species over the others as it counts all species according to their

frequencies (Lou, 2006).

Species evenness was used to measure the pattern of distribution of bird population present in the

area. It was evaluated using Shannon-Wiener evenness index (E) as follows. The value of "E"

ranges from 0 to 1, in which 1 indicates complete evenness.

E = H' /Hmax ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- equation (2)

Where:

E = Shannon-Wiener evenness index

H' = Shannon-Wiener diversity index

Hmax = ln(S) =natural logarithm of the total number of species

Simpson's similarity index (SI) was used to determine the similarity of bird species between two

different habitate types by the following formula.

SI = 2C/A+B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ equation (3)

21
Where:

SI = Simpson’s similarity index

A = number of species that occur in habitat type A

B = number of species that occur in habitat type B

C = Number of common species that occur in habitat type A and B

The relative abundance of avian species was identified using encounter rates that give crude

ordinal scales of abundance. Encounter rate incorporates field hours for each observer and the

number of individuals of each species observed. Thus, an encounter rate was calculated as:

Encounter rate = *100 ---- equation (4)

The relative abundance of each bird species was identified based on the ordinary scale of rare,

uncommon, frequent, common and abundant based on the abundance categories. Encounter rate

was used to give a crude ordinal scale of abundance (Bibby et al., 1998) as given in Table 1.

Table 1: Encounter rates used to give a crude ordinal scale of abundance

Abundance category Abundance score Relative abundance

< 3.04 1 Rare

3.04-6.08 2 Uncommon

6.38-30.43 3 Frequent

30.70-122 4 Common

above 122 5 Abundant

22
All calculations of diversity indices and encounter rate were performed using Microsoft excel

computer software (version 16).

SPSS computer program (version 16) was also applied to analyze the data. The chi-square test

was used to investigate association of birds with habitat type following Fowler and Cohen (1990)

as cited by Girma Mengesha (2005). Two-way ANOVA was used to analyze the effect of habitat

type and season on abundance of birds. Means for variables whose F-values showed a

significance difference were compared using Tukey’s Multiple Comparison Test. Differences

were considered statistically significant at 5 and 1% levels. Finally, all results were presented

using tables.

23
4. RESULTS

4.1 Species Diversity

A total of 134 species of birds belonging to 53 families and 18 orders were recorded during the

study period. Of the recorded bird species, 109 species were recorded during the wet season

while 120 species during the dry season. Ninety-five bird species were common to both seasons,

but 14 and 25 species were exclusive to the wet and dry season, respectively. The Culumbidae

family consisted the highest (11 species) number of species followed by Accipitridae and

Ploceidae, each 8 species (Appendix 1).

The highest number of species was recorded from riverine forest (87) and the lowest from

wooded grassland (59) during the entire seasons (Table 2). The number of individuals of species

during the wet and dry seasons was not significantly different (F 1, 340 = 0.36, P = 0.54), but there

was a significant difference among habitat types (F 2, 340 = 8.40, P = 0.00). However, season and

habitat interaction was not significant (F 2, 340 = 1.29, P = 0.28). Tukey Multiple Comparison Test

showed that the mean number of individuals of species did not differ significantly between

wetland (25.08+8.73, N = 111) and riverine forest (34.75+7.66, N = 142), but the mean in

wooded grassland (75.10+9.49, N = 93) was significantly differ from the two habitat types.

Bird diversity was highest in riverine forest during wet (H' = 3.92) and dry (H' = 3.89) seasons.

During the wet season, the wetland habitat (H' = 3.19) and during the dry season, the wooded

grassland (H' = 3.01) had the least bird species diversity. When both seasons’ data was

combined, highest and lowest diversity of birds was obtained in riverine forest (H' = 3.98) and

wetland (H' = 3.43) during both seasons, respectively (Table 2).

24
Table 2: Avifaunal diversity among the three habitat types during wet and dry seasons

Habitat type Season Species richness Abundance H' E

Wetland Wet 48 1099 3.19 0.83

Dry 63 1717 3.40 0.82

Both 71 2816 3.43 0.80

Wooded grassland Wet 51 4587 3.60 0.92

Dry 42 2531 3.01 0.81

Both 59 7118 3.44 0.84

Riverine forest Wet 67 2087 3.92 0.93

Dry 75 2876 3.89 0.90

Both 87 4963 3.98 0.89

4.2 Species Similarity among Habitat Types

During the wet season, bird species similarity ranged from 0.24 Simpson similarity index to 0.61.

The strongest similarity (0.61) was recorded in between wooded grassland and riverine forest

while the lowest (0.24) was recorded between wetland and wooded grassland. Habitat types with

strongest and lowest similarity of bird species during the dry season was not different from wet

season. The strongest similarity was recorded between wooded grassland and riverine forest

(0.44), whereas the lowest was between wetland and wooded grassland with a value of 0.36

(Table 3).

25
Table 3: Species similarity of birds among the three habitat types during wet and dry seasons

Habitat type Season Simpson's similarity index (SI)

Wetland Wooded grassland Riverine forest

Wetland Wet - 0.24 0.38

Dry - 0.36 0.43

Both - 0.37 0.49

Wooded grassland Wet - - 0.61

Dry - - 0.44

Both - - 0.56

4.3 Species Relative Abundance

The result showed that 45 species were frequent, 32 species rare, 30 species uncommon, 20

common and 7 abundant (Table 4).

Table 4: Relative abundance of the recorded bird species in Loka Abaya National Park

Number of individuals per Abundance Relative

Species common name 100 field hours score abundance

Abyssinian Ground-Hornbill 18.29 3 Frequent

Abyssinian Roller 1.03 1 Rare

African Black-headed Oriole 16.49 3 Frequent

African Darter 1.54 1 Rare

26
African Fish-Eagle 10.31 3 Frequent

African Gray Hornbill 31.44 4 Common

African Jacana 18.04 3 Frequent

African Openbill 1.03 1 Rare

African Paradise-Flycatcher 1.54 1 Rare

African Pipit 3.61 2 Uncommon

African Spoonbill 0.26 1 Rare

Bare-faced Go-away-bird 6.44 3 Frequent

Beautiful Sunbird 10.31 3 Frequent

Black Crake 6.03 2 Uncommon

Black Goshawk 0.52 1 Rare

Black Kite 4.64 2 Uncommon

Black-billed Woodhoopoe 6.02 2 Uncommon

Black-crowned Tchagra 7.22 3 Frequent

Black-headed Batis 17.53 3 Frequent

Black-headed Heron 3.61 2 Uncommon

Black-winged Pratincole 22.16 3 Frequent

Black-winged Stilt 6.01 2 Uncommon

Blue-breasted Bee-eater 3.61 2 Uncommon

Blue-cheeked Bee-eater 9.79 3 Frequent

Blue-headed Coucal 6.96 3 Frequent

Blue-spotted Wood-Dove 4.12 2 Uncommon

Bruce's Green-Pigeon 3.09 2 Uncommon

27
Cardinal Woodpecker 1.55 1 Rare

Cattle Egret 44.33 4 Common

Common Bulbul 54.38 4 Common

Common Sandpiper 2.58 1 Rare

Crested Francolin 446.65 5 Abundant

Crowned Lapwing 52.32 4 Common

Double-toothed Barbet 5.41 2 Uncommon

Dusky Turtle-Dove 7.21 3 Frequent

Eastern Plantain-eater 4.12 2 Uncommon

Egyptian Goose 13.40 3 Frequent

Emerald-spotted Wood-Dove 171.63 5 Abundant

Eurasian Hoopoe 5.67 2 Uncommon

Fan-tailed Raven 6.01 2 Uncommon

Fawn-breasted Waxbill 8.25 3 Frequent

Fork-tailed Drongo 57.47 4 Common

Gabar Goshawk 0.56 1 Rare

Giant Kingfisher 1.03 1 Rare

Goliath Heron 2.58 1 Rare

Gray Heron 4.38 2 Uncommon

Gray Kestrel 0.26 1 Rare

Gray Wagtail 4.12 2 Uncommon

Gray-backed Fiscal 39.18 4 Common

Great Egret 1.55 1 Rare

28
Great White Pelican 1.55 1 Rare

Greater Blue-eared Starling 81.44 4 Common

Greater Honeyguide 2.32 1 Rare

Grosbeak Weaver 13.66 3 Frequent

Hadada Ibis 16.49 3 Frequent

Hamerkop 9.78 3 Frequent

Helmeted Guinea fowl 494.59 5 Abundant

Hemprich's Hornbill 18.04 3 Frequent

Hooded Vulture 6.03 2 Uncommon

Kittlitz's Plover 6.70 3 Frequent

Laughing Dove 56.19 4 Common

Lesser Jacana 7.22 3 Frequent

Lilac-breasted Roller 2.06 1 Rare

Little Bee-eater 2.06 1 Rare

Little Ringed Plover 5.15 2 Uncommon

Little Stint 6.70 3 Frequent

Little Weaver 28.35 3 Frequent

Long-crested Eagle 5.67 2 Uncommon

Marabou Stork 44.84 4 Common

Mariqua Sunbird 18.04 3 Frequent

Marsh Sandpiper 8.25 3 Frequent

Mountain Wagtail 4.12 2 Uncommon

Mourning Collared-Dove 22.16 3 Frequent

29
Namaqua Dove 8.50 3 Frequent

Northern Black-Flycatcher 255.15 5 Abundant

Northern Carmine Bee-eater 48.45 4 Common

Nubian Woodpecker 4.12 2 Uncommon

Pied Kingfisher 2.57 2 Uncommon

Pied Wheatear 5.67 2 Uncommon

Pin-tailed Whydah 2.06 1 Rare

Rameron Pigeon 4.12 2 Uncommon

Red-and-yellow Barbet 5.41 2 Uncommon

Red-bellied Parrot 2.84 1 Rare

Red-billed Buffalo-Weaver 18.04 3 Frequent

Red-billed Firefinch 13.40 3 Frequent

Red-billed Oxpecker 7.21 3 Frequent

Red-cheeked Cordonbleu 55.67 4 Common

Red-eyed Dove 103.61 4 Common

Red-headed Weaver 10.31 3 Frequent

Red-shouldered Cuckooshrike 1.55 1 Rare

Red-winged Starling 32.47 4 Common

Ring-necked Dove 25.00 3 Frequent

Rock Kestrel 0.51 1 Rare

Rufous-crowned Roller 12.88 3 Frequent

Rüppell's Griffon 8.25 3 Frequent

Rüppell's Starling 17.26 3 Frequent

30
Rüppell's Weaver 12.88 3 Frequent

Sacred Ibis 15.46 3 Frequent

Saddle-billed Stork 0.52 1 Rare

Scaly-throated Honeyguide 1.55 1 Rare

Senegal Thick-knee 41.75 4 Common

Siberian Stonechat 5.93 2 Uncommon

Slate-colored Boubou 1.55 1 Rare

Slender-billed Starling 3.61 2 Uncommon

Speckled Mousebird 82.21 4 Common

Speckled Pigeon 7.23 3 Frequent

Spur-winged Goose 3.61 2 Uncommon

Spur-winged Lapwing 136.08 5 Abundant

Squacco Heron 53.61 4 Common

Superb Starling 51.80 4 Common

Swainson's Sparrow 12.37 3 Frequent

Three-banded Courser 3.61 2 Uncommon

Three-banded Plover 6.05 2 Uncommon

Village Indigobird 10.82 3 Frequent

Village Weaver 12.11 3 Frequent

Von der Decken's Hornbill 25.26 3 Frequent

Wattled Ibis 1.03 1 Rare

Wattled Lapwing 18.29 3 Frequent

Wattled Starling 19.07 3 Frequent

31
Western Yellow Wagtail 32.21 4 Common

White Helmetshrike 2.32 1 Rare

White-backed Vulture 37.63 4 Common

White-bellied Bustard 5.67 2 Uncommon

White-bellied Go-away-bird 129.64 5 Abundant

White-browed Coucal 1.03 1 Rare

White-browed Sparrow-Weaver 280.15 5 Abundant

White-cheeked Turaco 0.26 1 Rare

White-faced Whistling-Duck 1.55 1 Rare

White-headed Buffalo-Weaver 25.77 3 Frequent

White-rumped Shrike 17.78 3 Frequent

Woodchat Shrike 2.06 1 Rare

Woodland Kingfisher 2.84 1 Rare

Woolly-necked Stork 2.58 1 Rare

Yellow-necked Francolin 106.70 4 Common

4.4 Species Habitat Association

During the wet season, avian habitat association showed significant difference between birds and

their habitat types (χ2 = 28464.83, P < 0.05). Highest association of birds was obtained in
163

wooded grassland and lowest in wetland during wet season. The dry season data also indicated

significant difference in habitat association between the different species of birds and their

habitats (χ2 = 18052.40, P < 0.05). During dry season, Highest association of birds was
177

32
obtained in riverine forest and lowest in wetland. When both seasons’ data combined, avian

species showed high significance difference in the use of their habitat type (χ2 214 = 62715.66, P <

0.05). Birds showed strong association with wooded grassland during both seasons (Table 5).

Table 5: Habitat association of birds during wet and dry seasons

Habitat types Seasons χ2 Df P-value

Wetland Wet 2743.75 47 0.00

Dry 3867.25 62 0.00

Both 8581.06 70 0.00

Wooded grassland Wet 17537.47 50 0.00

Dry 6001.57 41 0.00

Both 29213.72 58 0.00

Riverine forest Wet 8183.58 66 0.00

Dry 12033.93 74 0.00

Both 24920.91 86 0.00

33
5. DISCUSSION

The different types of vegetation of the study area, possession of water bodies and other wetland

habitat could be the reason for the existence of these varieties of avian species in the park. This

could provide birds with different array of foraging opportunities and nesting sites. Various

studies indicated that diversity of vegetation within a habitat is one of the most important factors

influencing the distribution of bird species (MacArthur and MacArthur, 1961; James, 1971;

Cody; 1981; Radford et al., 2005; Soka et al., 2013). The park is rich with mosaic ecosystem that

include rivers, lake, forest, wetland and swampy areas as well as moist and wet savannas

(SZBCT, 2009) that attracted groups of birds. Birds of all types are drawn to open water for

drinking, bathing, roosting and protection. Temporary and permanent waters including ponds,

burrowed pits, swamps, and lakes are important sites for so many birds (Jennings, 1975: Klem,

1990). In Ethiopia, the Rift Valley lake system is among the places with plenty of bird

population (Mengistu Wonderfrash, 2003).

The highest diversity of birds in riverine forest could be related to the presence of sufficient

amount of food and availability of nesting materials. Studies on birds indicated that bird species

diversity is a factor of better foraging opportunities and nesting sites (Storch et al., 2003;

Shimelis Aynalem and Afework Bekele, 2009; Yosef Mamo et al., 2016; Zerihun Girma et al.,

2017). Moreover, the highest avian diversity could be due to the diversity of vegetation strata

that provides heterogeneous habitat for different avian species. The complexity of the riverine

forest could be characterized by multiple vertical layers of vegetation that provide dense

understory, midstory and canopy strata (Jones, 2014). Structurally complex habitats could harbor

more species than sites with simple structure because there are more niches providing different

34
types of nesting and foraging resources (MacArthur and MacArthur, 1961; Radford et al., 2005;

Thinh, 2006; Pennington and Blair, 2011; Soka et al., 2013). This could be the reason for the

highest bird species in the riverine vegetation. Studies found out that habitat structural

complexity along riverine forest was a very important driver of bird distribution (Scott et

al.,2003; Rumble and Gobeille, 2004; Fletcher and Hutto, 2008).

The decline in the diversity of birds in wooded grassland during dry season compared to wet

season might be due to the decrease in vegetation productivity, reduction of food availability and

sometimes low quality of nesting sites for birds. During non-rainy period, there is no availability

of water for birds in wooded grassland. Various studies indicated that seasonal changes results in

seasonal variation in the availability of food and water resources, and as a result, birds shift

between habitat types depending on their needs and availability of food and cover (Gaston et al.,

2000; Chace and Walsh, 2006; Sua´rez-Seoane et al., 2008). In contrast, diversity of birds

increased in wetland during dry season. This could be related to availability of water and food

resources for birds in the wetland during dry season. Lake Abaya is an important source of water

for wild animals during dry season. The lake could provide foraging ground for variety of bird

species, with small fish, tadpoles, frogs, insect larvae and other invertebrates and edible aquatic

plants.

The highest mean number individuals in wooded grassland is due to high number of individuals

of some species in this habitat type. Helmeted Guinea fowl (Numida meleagris), White-browed

Sparrow-Weaver (Plocepasser mahali), Crested Francolin (Dendroperdix sephaena), Northern

Black-flycatcher (Melaenornis edolioides) and Yellow-necked Francolin (Pternistis leucoscepus)

were some species with high number of individuals in wooded grassland. The vegetation

35
structure of wooded grassland could be important for these species to be dominant in the area.

The tree species in wooded grassland is associated with a wide range of grasses, shrubs and

herbs. The upper storey mainly contains different species of Acacia tree (SZDCT, 2009). Many

birds are also habitat specific (Burgess et al., 2002). For example, Helmeted guinea fowl prefers

this kind of habitat since the species prefer open, dry grassland and savannah with scattered trees

or shrubby cover and avoid thick forest, marshes and bare land (Smith, 1992 cited in Zerihun

Girma et al., 2017). The highest mean number individuals in wooded grassland could be also

related to the more area coverage of wooded grassland compared to riverine forest and wetland.

More number of individuals of species is likely to be recorded in large areas. This is probably

because more space gives more room for birds and larger opportunities for foraging

(Chamberlain et al., 2007). Studies have indicated that size of an area has significant effect on

the composition of bird species (Donnelly and Marzluff, 2004; Antos et al., 2006).

The number of individuals of bird species during wet and dry season was not significantly

different. This is probably due to the negligible contrasting effect of season on number of

individuals. The inundation of the area during different seasons may not be so hard. Therefore,

birds simply could move from habitat to habitat rather than leaving the area during the harsh

period. According to Shimelis Aynalem and Afework Bekele (2008), the extended time of

inundation of the aera during wet and dry season could contribute to the negligeble effect of

season on bird communities.

The strongest similarity of bird species between wooded grassland and riverine forest is probably

due to the similarity of vegetation structure between the two habitat types. The two habitat types

could provide similar foraging opportunities and nesting sites due to nature of similarity in

36
vegetation types. In line with this, studies have indicated that vegetation cover has a strong

influence on bird species diversity (Estades, 1997; Lee et al., 2005; Fahrig et al., 2011). In

addition, the adjacent occurrence of the two habitat types could be an important source of

similarity. Habitat types that are close to one another can share the same number of species.

According to Morand (2000), two areas may share the same number of species not because they

are similar in area and/or in vegetation diversity, but because they are geographically close

which allows individuals to move easily from one island to another.

The result showed that Helmeted Guinea fowl (Numida meleagris) is the most abundant species

using encounter rate. This could be related with the social and gregarious behavior of the species

during foraging (Smith, 1992 cited in Zirhun Girma et al., 2017). This is most likely to boost the

species abundance relative to the effort made during the survey as compared to many other

solitary species in the study area. According to the study conducted in South Africa, helmeted

guinea fowl must live in group so as to survive in the wild, specially where habitat disturbance is

a common phenomenon and the number of predators is high (Van Niekerk, 2010).

The large number of rare and uncommon species than abundant and common species occurrence

could be associated with habitat condition and behavior of bird species. Rarity of several species

appeared to be related with habitat condition (Wilson and Comet, 1996). Moreover, species that

are constantly rare have either large home range or patchily distributed (Thiollay, 1994). Girma

Mengesha (2005) suggested that rarity of bird species is associated with grazing activities by

large number of livestock. Breeding nature, large home range, niche of the species and

degradation of habitat could be a reason for the species to be uncommon (Ryan and Owino,

2006). Shimelis Aynalem and Afework Bekele (2009) suggested that habitat degradation might

37
make most species of birds uncommon. According to SZBCT (2009), Cutting trees for fire wood

and charcoal production and livestock grazing were common in the present study area. These

activities lead to disturbances of birds during reproductive and feeding activities and results in

the decrease in individual bird species. As human disturbance increases, birds move away from

the area (Blumstein et al., 2005). Human activities were also observed during the study period.

The significance difference between bird species and habitat usage could be due to the

preference of birds for certain habitat types based on their feeding habit and behavior. Many bird

species differ in their resource requirement which causes specificity on habitat preference

(Buckley and Freckleton, 2010). Although some can occupy more than one habitat type, birds

are habitat specific (Burgess et al., 2002). A study carried out in Alatish National Park indicated

that birds prefer certain habitat types rather than using the whole habitat type equally (Girma

Mengesha, 2005). Birds showed strong association with wooded grassland during both seasons.

This was probably due to the availability unique nesting site and foraging resources in wooded

grassland for birds adapted evolutionary to live in. Birds show positive correlation with habitat

features that provide food, nesting material and cover for predator (Whittingham and Evans,

2004).

38
6. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusion

The present study showed that Loka Abaya National Park supports high diversity of bird species

including rare and migratory species. This indicates that the park is rich in avian fauna and it can

be considered as one of the important bird areas in Ethiopia. In terms of avian richness and

diversity, riverine forest is the most diversified area. But, in terms of abundance, wooded

grassland is the most abundant in its bird species as compared to riverine forest and wetland. It is

likely that riverine forest and wooded grassland are more important for bird species of the area.

The presence of rare (32) and uncommon (30) species is an indication of the areas priority for

bird conservation in the area. The present study has also shown that birds did not use the whole

habitat type equally. This implies the more utilization of one habitat type than other by birds.

6.2 Recommendations

Based on the result of the present study, the following suggestions are forwarded:

 The LANP is an important bird area as it consists of rare species. Therefore, there is a

need for urgent conservation measures for the species.

 Continuous revegetation effort such as planting native species on the degraded habitat

may be a useful method for maintain avian richness and diversity in the area. The people

should also realize that the vegetation cover of the park helps them in maintaining the

ecological conditions through regulating climate, maintaining water resource quality and

providing fresh air. Therefore, the locals should help and work with the responsible

bodies in all conservation areas.

39
 To understand the response of birds to continuous anthropogenic activities, long term

studies linking birds with different aspects of human activities is needed.

 Detail study of bird species interaction with vegetation cover is essential to comprehend

their relation with habitat complexity and heterogeneity.

 Other few bird species that are not identified and recorded during the present study can

occur in and around the areas. Seasonal and continuous assessment will further reveal

more species in the park.

40
REFERENCES

Acevedo, M. A. and T. M. Aide. 2008. Bird community dynamics and habitat associations in

Karst, Mangrove and Pterocarpus forest fragment in an urban zone. Caribbean Journal of

Science 44: 402-416.

Agarnesh Desalegn and C. Subramanian. 2015. Studies on avian diversity in Angereb forest and

adjacent farm land with reference to rainy and post rainy seasons, North western

Ethiopia. International Journal of Pure and Applied Zoology 3: 219-225.

Alemneh Amare. 2015. Conservation Challenges of Gibe Sheleko National Park, South western

Ethiopia. Natural Resource 6: 286-289.

Ali, S. 2002. The Book of Indian Birds. 3rd ed. Oxford University Press, New Delhi. 326p.

Antos, M. J., J. A. Fitzsimons, G. C. Palmer and J. G. White. 2006. Introduced birds in urban

remnant vegetation: Does remnant size really matter? Australian Journal of Ecology 31:

254-261.

Barrantes, G. and L. Sandoval. 2009. Conceptual and statistical problems associated with the use

of diversity indices in ecology. International Journal of Tropical Biology 57: 451-460.

Barry, R. G. 2008. Mountain Weather and Climate. 3rd ed. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge. 532p.

Bibby, C., J. Burgessand and H. David. 1992. Bird census techniques. Academic Press, London.

257p.

41
Bibby, C., M. Jones and S. Marsden 1998. Expedition Field Techniques: Bird Surveys. 2nd ed.

Royal Geographical Society, London. 134p.

Bibi, F. and Z. Ali. 2013. Measurement of diversity indices of avian communities at taunsa

barrage wildlife sanctuary, Pakistan. The Journal of Animal and Plant science 23(2): 469-

474.

Bleho, B. I., N. Koper and C. S. Machtans. 2014. Direct effects of cattle on grassland birds in

Canada. Conservation Biology 28: 724-734.

Blumstein, D. T., E. Fernandez Juricic, P. A. Zollner and S. C. Garity. 2005. Inter-specific

variation in avian response to human disturbance. Journal of Applied Ecology 42: 943-

953.

Bregman, T. P., C. H. Sekercioglu and J. A. Tobias. 2014. Global patterns and predictors of bird

species responses to forest fragmentation: Implications for ecosystem function and

conservation. Biological Conservation 169: 372-383.

Brooks, T. M., R. A. Mittemeier, C. G. Mittemeier and G. A. Fonseca. 2002. Habitat loss and

extinction in the hotspots of biodiversity. Conservation Biology 16: 909-923.

Buckley, H. L. and R. P. Freckleton. 2010. Understanding the role of species dynamics in

abundance-occupancy relationships. Journal of Ecology 98: 645-658.

Burgess, N. D., N. Doggart and J. Lovett. 2002. The Uluguru Mountains of Eastern Tanzania:

the effect of forest loss on biodiversity. Oryx 36: 140-152

42
Cardinale, B. J., J. E. Duffy, A. Gonzalez, D. U. Hooper, C. Perrings, P. Venail, A. Narwani, G.

M. Mace, D. Tilman and D. A. Wardle. 2012. Biodiversity loss and its impact on

humanity. Nature 486: 59-67.

Chace, J. F. and J. J Walsh. 2006. Urban effects on native avifauna: a review. Landscape and

Urban Planning 74: 46-69.

Chamberlain, D. E., S. Gough, H. Vaughan, J. A. Vickery and G. F. Appleton. 2007.

Determinants of bird species richness in public green spaces. Bird Study 54: 87-89.

Clements, J. F. 2007. The Clements Checklist of Birds of the World. 6th ed. Cornell University

Press, Ithaca. 843p.

Cody, M. L. 1981. Habitat selection in birds: the role of vegetation structure, competitors and

productivity. Bioscience 31; 107-113.

Colwell, R. K. 2009. Biodiversity: Concepts, Patterns and Measurement. In: Simon, A. L. (ed.),

The Princeton Guide to Ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton. pp. 249-263.

Daszak, P., A. A. Cunningham and A. D. Hyatt. 2000. Emerging infectious diseases of wildlife

threats to biodiversity and human health. Science 287: 443-449.

Donnelly, R and J. M. Marzluff. 2004. Importance of reserve size and land scape to urban bird

conservation. Conservation Biology 18: 733-745.

Durães, R., L. Carrasco, T. B. Smith and J. Karubian. 2013. Effects of forest disturbance and

habitat loss on avian communities in a Neotropical biodiversity hotspot. Biological

Conservation 166: 203-211.

43
Estades, C. F. 1997. Bird-habitat relationships in a vegetation gradient in the Andes of Central

Chile. Condor 99: 719-727.

EWCA. 2016. Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority. Retrived from

http://www.ewca.gov.et/en/about_us on 20/09/ 2017.

Fahrig, L., J. Baudry, L. Brotons, F. G. Burel and T. O. Crist, R. J. Fuller, C. Sirami, G. M.

Siriwardena and J. L. Martin. 2011. Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal

biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Ecology Letters 14: 101-112.

Fletcher, R. J. and R. L. Hutto. 2008. Partitioning the multi-scale effects of human activity on the
occurrence of riparian forest birds. Landscape Ecology 23: 727-739.

Fowler, J. and L. O. Cohen. 1990. Statistics for Ornithologists, 2nd ed. British Trust for

Ornithology, Leicester. 176p.

Fuhlendorf, S. D., D. M. Engle, D. R. Elmore, R. F. Limb, and T. G. Bidwell. 2012.

Conservation of pattern and process: developing an alternative paradigm of rangeland

management. Rangeland Ecology and Management 65:579-589.

Galetti, M., R. Guevara, M. C. Cortes, R. Fadini, S. Von Matter, A. B. Leite, F. Labecca, T.

Ribeiro, C. S. Carvalho, R. G. Collevatti, M. M. Pires, P. R. Guimaraes, P. H.

Brancalion, M. C. Ribeiro and P. Jordano. 2013. Functional extinction of birds drives

rapid evolutionary changes in seed size. Science 340:1086-1090.

Gaston, K. J. 2005. Biodiversity and extinction: species and people. Progress in Physical

Geography 29: 239-247.

44
Gaston, K. J. and K. L. Evans. 2004. Birds and people in Europe. Proceedings of the Royal

Society of London B 271 :1649-1655.

Gaston, K. J., T. M. Blackburn, J. D. Greenwoodx, R. D. Greroryx, M. Q. Rachel and J. H.

Lawton. 2000. Abundance-occupancy relationships. Journal of Applied Ecology 37: 39-

59.

Girma Mengesha and Afework Bekele. 2008. Diversity and Relative Abundance of Birds of

Alatish National Park, North Gondar, Ethiopia. International Journal of Ecology and

Environmental Science 34 (2): 15-22.

Girma Mengesha, Yosef Mamo and Afework Bekele. 2011. A comparison of terrestrial bird

community structure in the undisturbed and disturbed areas of the Abijata Shalla Lakes

National Park, Ethiopia. International Journal of Biodiversity Conservation 3: 389-404.

Girma Mengesha. 2005. Diversity, distribution, relative Abundance and habitat association of the

larger mammalian and avian fauna of Alatish, Ethiopia. M.Sc. Thesis. Addis Ababa

University, Addis Ababa. 76p.

Goguen, C. 2012. Habitat use by Mountain Plovers in Prairie Dog Colonies in North eastern

New Mexico. Journal of Field Ornithology 83: 154-165.

Grytnes, J. A., E. Heegaard and P. G. Ihlen. 2006. Species richness of vascular plants,

bryophytes, and lichens along an altitudinal gradient in western Norway. Acta

Oecologica 29: 241-246.

Hadis Tadele, Afework Bekele and Addisu Asefa. 2014. Comparison of avifaunal assemblage

and their association with plant cover in protected and unprotected montane grassland

45
 ecosystems in bale mountains national park, Ethiopia. SINET: Ethiopian Journal of

Science 37(2): 105-112.

Hadley, S. J., Hadley, A. S. and Betts, M. 2012. Acoustic classification of multiple simultaneous

bird species: A multi-instance multi-label approach. Journal of Acoustical Society of

America 131 (6): 4640-4650.

Hall, L. S., P. R. Krausman and M. L. Morrison. 1997. The habitat concept and a plea for

standard terminology. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25: 173-182.

Harisha, M. N. and B. B. Hosetti. 2009. Diversity and distribution of avifauna of lakkavalli range

forest, Bhadra Wildlife Sanctuary, western Ghat, India. Ecological Society 16: 21-27.

Hepinstall-Cymerman, J. and C. M. Parrish. 2012. Associations between multi-scale landscape

characteristics and breeding bird abundance and diversity across urban-rural gradients in

northeastern Georgia, USA. Urban Ecosystems 15: 559-580.

Hinsley, S. A., R. A. Hill, R. J. Fuller, P. E. Bellamy, P. Rothery. 2009. Bird species distribution

across woodland canopy structure gradients. Community Ecology 10: 99-110.

Ho, S. S., D. Brossard and D. A. Scheufele. 2007. Public reactions to global health threats and

infectious diseases. Public Opinion Quarterly 71: 671-692.

Honkanen, M., J. M. Roberge, A. Rajasarkka and M. Monkkonen. 2010. Disentangling the

effects of area, energy and habitat heterogeneity on boreal forest bird species richness in

protected areas. Global Ecological Biogeography 19: 61-71.

46
Hostler M. and M. Martin. 2006. Florida monitoring program: transect method for surveying

avian. University of Florida, Florida. 8p.

James, F. C. 1971. Ordinations of habitat relationships among breeding birds. Wilson Bulletin 83:

215-236.

Jankowski, J. E., A. L. Ciecka, N. Y. Meyer and K. N. Rabenold. 2009. Beta diversity along

environmental gradient: implications of habitat specialization in tropical montane

landscapes. Journal of Animal ecology 78: 315-327.

Jennings, T. J. 1975. Studying birds in garden. Program Press Ltd., Oxford. 234p.

Johnson, T. N., P. L. Kennedy, and M. A. Etterson. 2012. Nest success and cause specific nest

failure of grassland passerines breeding in prairie grazed by livestock. Journal of Wildlife

Management 76:1607-1616.

Jones, D. 2014. Avian-Habitat Relationships: A Literature Review and Assessment. Final

Report. Montana Audubon. http://www.mtaudubon.org/about/publications.html.

Kelaher, B. P. and J. C. Castilla. 2005. Habitat characteristics influence macro faunal

communities in coralline turf more than mesoscale upwelling on the coast of northern

Chile. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 63: 155-165.

Kideghesho, J. R. 2009. The potentials of traditional African cultural practices in mitigating

overexploitation of wildlife species and habitat loss: experience of Tanzania.

International Journal of Biodiversity Science and Management 5: 83-94.

47
Kim, J., J. Chae and T. H. Koo. 2007. Variation in bird diversity in relation to habitat size in the

urban landscape of Seoul, South Korea. Acta Ornithology 42: 39-44.

Klem, D. 1990. Collisions between birds and windows: mortality and prevention. Journal of

Field Ornithology 61: 120-128.

Klute, D. S., R. J. Robe, and K. E. Kemp. 1997. Will conversion of Conservation Reserve

Program (CRP) lands to pasture be detrimental for grassland birds in Kansas? American

Midland Naturalist 137: 206-212.

Koper, N. and F. K. A. Schmiegelow. 2007. Does habitat management for duck productivity

affect songbird nesting success? Journal of Wildlife Management 71: 2249-2257.

Krause, T. and H. Zambonino 2013. More than just trees-animal species diversity and

participatory forest monitoring in the Ecuadorian Amazon. International Journal of

Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management 9: 225-238.

Laurance, W. F., J. Sayer and K. G. Cassman. 2014. Agricultural expansion and its impacts on

tropical nature. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 29: 107-116.

Lee, P. Y. and J. T. Rotenberry. 2005. Relationship between bird species and tree species

assemblage in forest habitat of eastern north America. North American Journal of

Biogeography 32: 1139-1150.

Leinster, T. and C. A. Cobbold. 2012. Measuring diversity: the importance of species similarity.

Ecology 93(3): 477-489.

Lepage, D. 2006. Avibase-Checklists of the World-Ethiopia. Retrieved from http://www.bsc-

eoc.org on 25/09/2017.

48
Lepage, D. 2013. Avibas e-Bird Checklists of the World-Ethiopia. Retrieved from

http://Avibase.bsc- eoc.org/checklist.jsp? regio=et&list=elements on 24/09/2017.

Lepczyk, C. A., C. H. Flather, V. C. Radeloff, A. M. Pidgeon, R. B. Hammer, and J. Liu. 2008.

Human Impacts on Regional Avian Diversity and Abundance. Conservation Biology

22(2): 405-416.

Leuschner, C., G. Moser, D. Hertel, S. Erasmi, D. Leitner, H. Culmsee, B. Schuldt and L.

Schwendenmann. 2013. Conversion of tropical moist forest into cacao agro forest:

consequences for carbon pools and annual carbon sequestration. Agroforestry Systems 87:

1173-1187.

Lou, J. 2006. Entropy and Diversity. Oikos 113(2): 363-375.

Low, M, D. Arlt, S. Eggers and T. Part. 2010. Habitat-specific differences in adult survival rates

and its links to parental work load and on-nest predation. Journal of Animal Ecology 79:

214-224.

Luck, G. W., T. H. Ricketts, G. C. Dailyand M. Imhoff. 2004. Alleviating spatial conflict

between people and biodiversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the

United States of America 101: 182-186.

Lusk, J. and N. Koper. 2013. Grazing and songbird nest survival in southwestern Saskatchewan.

Rangeland Ecology and Management 66: 401–409

MacArthur, R. H. and J. W. MacArthur. 1961. On bird species diversity. Ecology 42: 594-598.

49
Markl, J. S., M. Schleuning, P. M. Forget, P. Jordano, J. E. Lambert, A. Traveset, S. J. Wright

and K. Böhning-Gaese. 2012. Meta-Analysis of the effects of human disturbance on seed

dispersal by animals. Conservation Biology 26:1072-1081.

Marone, L. 1991. Habitat features affecting bird spatial distribution in the Monte Desert

Argentina. Austral Ecology 1: 77-86.

McCain, C. M. 2009. Global analysis of bird elevation diversity. Global Ecology and

Biogeography 18: 346-360.

McDonnell, M. J. and S. T. A. Pickett. 1990. Ecosystem structure and function along urban rural

gradients: an unexplained opportunity for ecology. Ecological Applications 71: 1232-

1237.

McGill, B. J., R. S. Etienne, J. S. Gray, D. Alonso, M. J. Anderson, H. K. Benecha, M. Dornelas,

B. J. Enquist, J. L. Green, F. He, A. H. Hurlbert, A. E. Magurran, P. A. Marquet, B. A.

Maurer, A. Ostling, C. U. Soykan, K. L. Ugland and E. P. White. 2007. Species

abundance distributions: moving beyond single predictions theories to integrations within

an ecological framework. Ecology Letters 10: 995-1015.

Megersa Tsegaye, Tsegaye Gadisa and Gelaye G/Micchael. 2016. Avian Diversity in Dhati

Walel National Park of Western Ethiopia. International Journal of Molecular Evolution

and Biodiversity 6(1): 1-12.

Melo, F. P. L., V. Arroyo-Rodríguez, L. Fahrig, M. Martínez-Ramos and M. Tabarelli. 2013. On

the hope for biodiversity-friendly tropical landscapes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution

28: 461-468.

50
Mengistu Wonderfrash. 2003. Wetlands, Birds and important bird areas of Ethiopia: In Yilma

Abebe and K. Geheb (eds), Wetlands of Ethiopia. Proceedings of Seminar on the

Resource and Status of Ethiopia’s Wetlands. International Union for conservation for

conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. pp. 25-36.

Mitchell, M. G. E., A. F. Suarez-Castro, M. Martinez-Harms, M. Maron, C. McAlpine, K. J.

Gaston, K. Johansen and J. R. Rhodes. 2015. Reframing landscape fragmentation's

effects on ecosystem services. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 30:190-98.

Morante-Filho, J. C., V. Arroyo-Rodríguez and D. Faria. 2016. Patterns and predictors of β-

diversity in the fragmented Brazilian Atlantic forest: a multiscale analysis of forest

specialist and generalist birds. Journal of Animal Ecology 85: 240-250.

Morland, S. 2000. Geographic distance and the role of island and habitat diversity in the species

–area relationships of four Antillean faunal groups: Complementary note to Ricklefs and

Lovette. Journal of Animal Ecology 69: 1117-1119.

Mormul, R. P., S. M. Thomaz, A. M. Takeda and R. D. Behrend. 2011. Structural complexity

and distance from source habitat determine invertebrate abundance and diversity.

Biotropica 43: 738-745

Mulder, C. P., E. Bazeley-White, P. G. Dimitrakopoulos, A. Hector, M. Scherer-Lorenzen and B.

Schmid. 2004. Species evenness and productivity in experimental plant communities.

Oikos 107: 50-63.

Murgui, E. 2010. Seasonality and nestedness of bird communities in urban parks in Valencia, Spain.

Ecography 33: 979-984.

51
Murphy, G. E. P. and T. N. Romanuk. 2014. A meta-analysis of declines in local species

richness from human disturbances. Ecology and Evolution 4: 91-103.

Naka, N. L. and R. Cintra. 2012. Spatial variation in bird community composition in relation to

topographic gradient and forest heterogeneity in a central Amazonian rainforest.

International Journal of Ecology 11: 37-43.

Ngongolo, K. 2013. Abundance, Nesting and Habitat for White-browed Sparrow-Weaver

(Plocepasser mahali) in North eastern Selous Game Reserve, Tanzania. International

Journal of Fauna and Biological Studies 1 (1): 47-51

Nomani, S. Z., M. K. Oli and R. R. Carthy. 2012. Line Transects by Design: The Influence of

Study Design, Spatial Distribution and Density of Objects on Estimates of Abundance.

The Open Ecology Journal 5: 25-44.

Pennington, D. N. and B. R. Blair. 2011. Habitat selection of breeding riparian birds in an urban

environment: Untangling the relative importance of biophysical element and spatial scale.

Diversity and Distribution 17: 506-518.

Popotnik, G. J. and W. M. Giuliano. 2000. Response of birds to grazing of riparian zones.

Journal of Wildlife Management 64: 976-982.

Prieto, P. V., J. B. B. Sansevero, M. L. Garbin, J. M. A. Braga and P. J. F. P. Rodrigues. 2014.

Edge effects of linear canopy openings on understory communities in a lowland Atlantic

tropical forest. Applied Vegetation Science 17:121-128

Radford, J. Q., A. F. Bennet and G. J. Cheers. 2005. Landscape-level threshholds of habitat

cover for woodland-dependent birds. Biological conservation 124: 317-337.

52
Ramchandra, A. M. 2013. Diversity and richness of bird species in newly formed habitats of

Chandoli National Park in Western Ghats, Maharashtra State, India. Biodiversity Journal

4 (1): 235-242.

Ranellucci, C. L., N. Koper, and D. C. Henderson. 2012. Twice-over rotational grazing and its

impacts on grassland songbird abundance and habitat structure. Rangeland Ecology and

Management 65:109-118.

Rapport, D. J., H. A. Regierand T. C. Hutchinson. 1985. Ecosystem behavior under stress. The

American Naturalist 125: 617-640.

Redman, R., T. Stevenson and J. Fanshawe. 2009. Birds of the Horn of Africa: Helm Field

Guides. 2nd ed. Christopher Helm press, London. 512p.

Rumble, M. A. and J. E. Gobeille. 2004. Avian use of successional cottonwood (Populus

Ryan, G. and A Owino. 2006. Habitat association of papyrus specialist birds at three papyrus

swamps in western Kenya. African Journal of Ecology 44: 438-443.

Salahudeen, M., E. Saranya, C. Gunasekaran and C. Vadivalagan. 2013. Studies on the

abundance and distribution of birds in Three different habitats of Karur District, South

India. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 1: 57-63.

Scott, M. L., S. K. Skagen and M. F. Merigliano. 2003. Relating geomorphic change and grazing
to avian communities in riverine forests. Conservation Biology 17: 284-296.

Sekercioglu, C. 2012. Bird functional diversity and ecosystem services in tropical forests,

agroforests and agricultural areas. Journal of Ornithology 53: 153-161.

53
Sekercioglu, C. H. 2006. Increasing awareness of avian ecological function. Trends in Ecology
and Evolution 21: 464-471.

Sekercioglu, C. H. 2012. Promoting community-based Bird-monitouring in the tropics:

Conservation, research, environmental education, capacty building, and local incomes.

Biological Conservation 150: 69-73.

Sekercioglu, C. H., G. C. Daily and P. R. Ehrlich. 2004. Ecosystem consequences of bird

declines. Proceedings of the national Academy of Science of the United States of America

101: 18042-18047.

Şekercioğlu, Ç. H., S. R. Loarie, F. Oviedo-Brenes, C. D. Mendenhall, G. C. Daily and P. R.

Ehrlich. 2015. Tropical countryside riparian corridors provide critical habitat and

connectivity for seed-dispersing forest birds in a fragmented landscape. Journal of

Ornithology 156: 343-353.

Shimelis Aynalem and Afework Bekele. 2008. Species composition, relative abundance and

distribution of bird fauna of riverine and wetland habitats of Infranz and Yiganda at

southern tip of Lake Tana, Ethiopia. Tropical Ecology 49: 99-209.

Shimelis Aynalem and Afework Bekele. 2009. Species composition, relative abundance and

habitat association of the bird fauna of the montane forest of Zegie peninsula and nearby

Islands, Lake Tana, Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Science 32: 45-56.

Sidama Zone Bureau of Culture and Tourism (SZBCT). 2009. A report on the boundary

demarcation and biological survey of the proposed Loka Abaya National Park of Sidama

Zone. Unpublished Report. Sidama, Hawassa. 24p.

54
Smith, R. L. 1992. Elements of Ecology. 3rd ed. Harper Collins Publishers Ltd., London. 704p.

Soka, G. E, P. K. T. Munishi and B. Magina. 2013. Species diversity and abundance of avifauna

in and around Hombolo wetland in central Tanzania. International Journal of

Biodiversity Conservation 5: 782-790.

Storch, D., M Konvicka, J. Benes, J. Martinkova and K. G. Gaston. 2003. Destribution patterns

in butterflies and birds of the Czech Republic: separating effect of habitat and

geographical position. Journal of Biogeography 30: 1195-1205.

Sua´rez-Seoane, S., E. L. Garcı´a de la Morena, M. B. Morales Prieto, P. E. Osborne and E. de

Juana. 2008. Maximum entropy niche-based modelling of seasonal changes in little

bustard (Tetrax tetrax) distribution. Ecological Model 219: 17-29.

Supp, S. R. and S. K. M. Ernest. 2014. Species-level and community-level responses to

disturbance: a cross-community analysis. Ecology 95: 1717-1723.

Tara, G. M., and S. Mcintyre. 2007. Impacts of livestock grazing and tree clearing on birds of

woodland and riparian habitats. Conservation Biology 21: 505-514.

Tellería, J. L., Á. Ramírez, A. G. CarbonelL, J. Pérez-tris and T. Santo. 2008. Geographical,

landscape and habitat effects on birds in northern Spanish farmlands: Implications for

Conservation. Ardeola 55(2): 203-219.

Telleria, J. L., A. Ramirez, A. Galarza, R. Carbonell, J. Perez- Tris and T. Santos. 2009. Do

migratory pathways affect the regional abundance of wintering birds? A test in northern

Spain. Journal of Biogeography 36: 220-229.

55
Tews, J., U. Brose, V. Grimm, K. Tielborger, M. C. Wichman, M. Schwager and F. Jeltsch.

2004. Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity: the importance

of keystone structures. Journal of Biogeography 31: 79-92.

Thinh, T. V. 2006. Bird richness and diversity in relation to vegetation in Bavi National Park,

Vietnam. Ornithological Science 5: 121-125.

Thiollay, J. 1994. Structure, density and rarity in Amazonian Rainforest bird community.
Journal of Tropical Ecology 10: 449-481.

Tuomisto, H. 2010. A consistent terminology for quantifying species diversity. Yes, it does exist.

Oecologia 4: 853-860.

Tuomisto, H. 2010. A diversity of beta diversities: straightening up a concept gone awry. Part 1.

Defining beta diversity as a function of alpha and gamma diversity. Ecography 33: 2-22.

Turchi, G. M., P. L. Kennedy, D. Urban and D. Hein. 1995. Bird species richness in relation to

isolation of aspen habitats. Wilson Bulletin 107: 463-474.

Valiente-Banuet, A., M. A Aizen, J. M. Alcántara, J. Arroyo, A. Cocucci, M. Galetti, M. B.

García, D. García, J. M. Gómez, P. Jordano, R. Medel, L. Navarro, J.R. Obeso, R.

Oviedo, N. Ramírez, P. J. Rey, A. Traveset, M. Verdú and R. Zamora. 2015. Beyond

species loss: the extinction of ecological interactions in a changing world. Functional

Ecology 29:299-307.

Van Niekerk, J. H. 2010. Social organization of a flock of Helmeted Guineafowl (Numida

meleagris) at the Grugersdorp Game Reserve, South Africa. Chinse Birds 1: 22-29.

56
Veech, J. A. And T. O. Crist. 2007. Habitat and climate heterogeneity maintain beta diversity of

birds among landscapes within ecoregions. Global Ecological Biogeography 16: 650-

656.

Vickery, J. and R. Arlettaz. 2012. The importance of habitat heterogeneity at multiple scales for

birds in European agricultural landscapes. In: Fuller R. J. (eds.), Birds and Habitat-

Relationships in Changing Landscapes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. PP.

178-204.

Walag, A. M. and M. O. Canencia. 2016. Physio-chemical parameters and micro benthic

invertebrates of the intertidal zone of Gusa, Cagayan de Oro city, Philippines.

International Journal of the Bioflux Society 8: 71-82.

Weldemariam Tesfahunegny, Tesfu Fekensa and Getachew Mulualem. 2016. Avifauna Diversity

in Kafa Biosphere Reserve: Knowledge and Perception of Villagers in Southwest

Ethiopia. Ecology and Evolutionary Biology 1(2): 7-13.

Whelan, C. J., D. G. Wenny and R. J. Marquis. 2008. Ecosystem services provided by birds. Annals

of the New York Academy of Sciences 1134: 25-60.

Whittingham, M. J. and L. K. Evans, K. L. 2004. The effects of habitat structure on predation

risk of birds in agricultural landscapes. Ibis 146(2): 210-220.

Wiktander, U., O. Olsson and S. G. Nilsson. 2001. Seasonal variation in home-range size, and

habitat area requirement of the lesser spotted woodpecker (Dendrocopos minor) in

southern Sweden. Biological Conservation 100: 387-395.

57
Wilson, M. F. and T. A. Comet. 1996. Bird communities of northern forests: patterns of diversity
and abundance. Condor 98: 337-349.

With, K., A. King, and W. Jensen. 2008. Remaining large grasslands may not be sufficient to

prevent grassland bird declines. Biological Conservation 141: 3152-3167.

Yosef Mamo, Addis Asefa and Grima Mengesha. 2016. Effect of livestock grazing on

Afromontane grassland bird community in the Bale mountain of Ethiopia. African

Journal of Ecology 54: 328-335.

Yu, T. and Y. Guo. 2013. Effects of Urbanization on Bird Species Richness and Community

Composition. Pakistan Journal of Zoology 45(1): 59-69.

Zerihun Girma, Girma Mengesha and Tyon Asfaw. 2017. Diversity, relative abundance and

distribution of avian fauna in and around Wondo Genet forest, South-central Ethiopia.

Research Journal of Forestry 11:1-12

Zerihun Girma, Yosef Mamo, Girma Mengesha, Ashok Vermal and Tsyon Asfaw. 2017.

Seasonal abundance and habitat use of bird species in and around Wondo Genet Forest,

south-central Ethiopia. Ecology and Evolution 7: 3397-3405.

58
Appendix

Appendix 1: Recorded bird species of LANP (♣ refers species recorded only wet season, * refers

species recorded only dry season)

Common name scientific name Family

Abyssinian Ground-Hornbill Bucorvus abyssinicus Bucorvidae

*Abyssinian Roller Coracias abyssinicus Coraciidae

African Black-headed Oriole Oriolus larvatus Oriolidae

African Darter Anhinga rufa Anhingidae

African Fish-Eagle Haliaeetus vocifer Accipitridae

African Gray Hornbill Lophoceros nasutus Bucerotidae

African Jacana Actophilornis africanus Jacanidae

♣African Openbill Anastomus lamelligerus Ciconiidae

♣African Paradise-Flycatcher Terpsiphone viridis Monarchidae

♣African Pipit Anthus cinnamomeus Motacillidae

♣African Spoonbill Platalea alba Threskiornithidae

Bare-faced Go-away-bird Corythaixoides personatus Musophagidae

Beautiful Sunbird Cinnyris pulchellus Nectariniidae

Black Crake Zapornia flavirostra Rallidae

*Black Goshawk Accipiter melanoleucus Accipitridae

Black Kite Milvus migrans Accipitridae

Black-billed Woodhoopoe Phoeniculus somaliensis Phoeniculidae

Black-crowned Tchagra Tchagra senegalus Malaconotidae

59
 Continued

Appendix 1

Black-headed Batis Batis minor Platysteiridae

Black-headed Heron Ardea melanocephala Ardeidae

*Black-winged Pratincole Glareola nordmanni Glareolidae

Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus Recurvirostridae

♣Blue-breasted Bee-eater Merops variegatus Meropidae

*Blue-cheeked Bee-eater Merops persicus Meropidae

Blue-headed Coucal Centropus monachus Cuculidae

*Blue-spotted Wood-Dove Turtur afer Culumbidae

♣Bruce's Green-Pigeon Treron waalia Culumbidae

♣Cardinal Woodpecker Dendropicos fuscescens Picidae

Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis Ardeidae

Common Bulbul Pycnonotus barbatus Pycnonotidae

♣Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos Scolopacidae

Crested Francolin Dendroperdix sephaena Phasianidae

Crowned Lapwing Vanellus coronatus Charadriidae

Double-toothed Barbet Lybius bidentatus Lybiidae

Dusky Turtle-Dove Streptopelia lugens Culumbidae

Eastern Plantain-eater Crinifer zonurus Musophagidae

Egyptian Goose Alopochen aegyptiaca Anatidae

Emerald-spotted Wood-Dove Turtur chalcospilos Culumbidae

Eurasian Hoopoe Upupa epops Upupidae

60
 Continued

Appendix 1

Fan-tailed Raven Corvus rhipidurus Corvidae

Fawn-breasted Waxbill Estrilda paludicola Estrildidae

Fork-tailed Drongo Dicrurus adsimilis Dicruridae

*Gabar Goshawk Micronisus gabar Accipitridae

Giant Kingfisher Megaceryle maxima Alcedinidae

Goliath Heron Ardea goliath Ardeidae

Gray Heron Ardea cinerea Ardeidae

*Gray Kestrel Falco ardosiaceus Falconidae

*Gray Wagtail Motacilla cinerea Motacillidae

Gray-backed Fiscal Lanius excubitoroides Laniidae

Great Egret Ardea alba Ardeidae

*Great White Pelican Pelecanus onocrotalus Pelecanidae

Greater Blue-eared Starling Lamprotornis chalybaeus Sturnidae

♣Greater Honeyguide Indicator indicator Indicatoridae

Grosbeak Weaver Amblyospiza albifrons Ploceidae

Hadada Ibis Bostrychia hagedash Threskiornithidae

Hamerkop Scopus umbretta Scopidae

Helmeted Guinea fowl Numida meleagris Numididae

Hemprich's Hornbill Lophoceros hemprichii Bucerotidae

Hooded Vulture Necrosyrtes monachus Accipitridae

Kittlitz's Plover Charadrius pecuarius Charadriidae

61
 Continued

Appendix 1

Laughing Dove Streptopelia senegalensis Culumbidae

Lesser Jacana Microparra capensis Jacanidae

*Lilac-breasted Roller Coracias caudatus Coraciidae

♣Little Bee-eater Merops pusillus Meropidae

Little Ringed Plover Charadrius dubius Charadriidae

*Little Stint Calidris minuta Scolopacidae

Little Weaver Ploceus luteolus Ploceidae

Long-crested Eagle Lophaetus occipitalis Accipitridae

Marabou Stork Leptoptilos crumenifer Ciconiidae

Mariqua Sunbird Cinnyris mariquensis Nectariniidae

Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis Scolopacidae

Mountain Wagtail Motacilla clara Motacillidae

Mourning Collared-Dove Streptopelia decipiens Culumbidae

Namaqua Dove Oena capensis Culumbidae

Northern Black-Flycatcher Melaenornis edolioides Muscicapidae

Northern Carmine Bee-eater Merops nubicus Meropidae

Nubian Woodpecker Campethera nubica Picidae

Pied Kingfisher Ceryle rudis Alcedinidae

*Pied Wheatear Oenanthe pleschanka Muscicapidae

Pin-tailed Whydah Vidua macroura Viduidae

♣Rameron Pigeon Columba arquatrix Culumbidae

62
 Continued

Appendix 1

Red-and-yellow Barbet Trachyphonus erythrocephalus Lybiidae

*Red-bellied Parrot Poicephalus rufiventris Psittacidae

Red-billed Buffalo-Weaver Bubalornis niger Ploceidae

Red-billed Firefinch Lagonosticta senegala Estrildidae

Red-billed Oxpecker Buphagus erythrorhynchus Buphagidae

Red-cheeked Cordonbleu Uraeginthus bengalus Estrildidae

Red-eyed Dove Streptopelia semitorquata Culumbidae

Red-headed Weaver Anaplectes rubriceps Ploceidae

*Red-shouldered Cuckooshrike Malaconotus blanchoti Compephagidae

Red-winged Starling Onychognathus morio Sturnidae

Ring-necked Dove Streptopelia capicola Culumbidae

*Rock Kestrel Falco rupicolus Falconidae

Rufous-crowned Roller Coracias naevius Coraciidae

Rüppell's Griffon Gyps rueppelli Accipitridae

Rüppell's Starling Lamprotornis purpuroptera Sturnidae

Rüppell's Weaver Ploceus galbula Ploceidae

Sacred Ibis Threskiornis aethiopicus Threskiornithidae

♣Saddle-billed Stork Ephippiorhynchus senegalensis Ciconiidae

♣Scaly-throated Honeyguide Indicator variegatus Indicatoridae

Senegal Thick-knee Burhinus senegalensis Burhinidae

*Siberian Stonechat Saxicola maurus Muscicapidae

63
 Continued

Appendix 1

*State-colored Boubou Laniarius funebris Malaconotidae

*Slender-billed Starling Onychognathus tenuirostris Sturnidae

Speckled Mousebird Colius striatus Coliidae

Speckled Pigeon Columba guinea Culumbidae

*Spur-winged Goose Plectropterus gambensis Anatidae

Spur-winged Lapwing Vanellus spinosus Charadriidae

Squacco Heron Ardeola ralloides Ardeidae

Superb Starling Lamprotornis superbus Sturnidae

Swainson's Sparrow Passer swainsonii Passeridae

Three-banded Courser Rhinoptilus cinctus Glareolidae

Three-banded Plover Charadrius tricollaris Charadriidae

Village Indigobird Vidua chalybeate Viduidae

Village Weaver Ploceus cucullatus Ploceidae

Von der Decken's Hornbill Tockus deckeni Bucerotidae

*Wattled Ibis Bostrychia carunculata Threskiornithidae

Wattled Lapwing Vanellus senegallus Charadriidae

*Wattled Starling Creatophora cinerea Sturnidae

Western Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava Motacillidae

*White Helmetshrike Prionops plumatus Vangidae

White-backed Vulture Gyps africanus Accipitridae

White-bellied Bustard Eupodotis senegalensis Otididae

64
 Continued

Appendix 1

White-bellied Go-away-bird Corythaixoides leucogaster Musophagidae

*White-browed Coucal Centropus superciliosus Cuculidae

White-browed Sparrow-Weaver Plocepasser mahali Ploceidae

*White-cheeked Turaco Tauraco leucotis Musophagidae

♣White-faced Whistling-Duck Dendrocygna viduata Anatidae

White-headed Buffalo-Weaver Dinemellia dinemelli Ploceidae

White-rumped Shrike Eurocephalus ruppelli Laniidae

*Woodchat Shrike Lanius senator Laniidae

Woodland Kingfisher Halcyon senegalensis Alcedinidae

Woolly-necked Stork Ciconia episcopus Ciconiidae

Yellow-necked Francolin Pternistis leucoscepus Phasianidae

65
66