Global Vision International, 2010 Report Series No.


GVI Ecuador
Rainforest Conservation and Community Development

Friday 2


Phase Report 103 July – Friday 10th September

GVI Ecuador/Rainforest Conservation and Community Development Expedition Report 103 ` Submitted in whole to Global Vision International Yachana Foundation Museo Ecuatoriano de Ciencias Naturales (MECN) Produced by Chris Beirne – Field Manager Caroline Acton – Field Staff Oliver Burdekin – Field Staff Jennifer Sinasac – Field Staff and
Edwin Vaca Samuel Allen Melanie Forbes Ignatius Portieger Ryan Manders Tracy Sonneman Ian Young
Edward Berrill

Scholar Intern Intern Intern Intern (short-term) Intern (short-term) Intern (short-term) Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer

Alan Hunton

Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer
Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Volunteer Pasante Pasante Pasante Pasante

Emily Jones Louise Kristensen Sophie Lentzos Sam Matthew Amanda Meehan Amy Miller Fabian Mühlberger Daniel Oates
Solgil Oh Oliver Parker

Rachel Boyle Gavin Cameron
Ramzi Cherad

Nick Denvil Carl Dixon Jack Dyer Haitham El-Ghawanmeh Ted Faust Matthew Fayle Steve Guidos Caoimhe Hanley Diana Holder

Konrad Romero Stephanie Therrien Charlotte Tyrrell Dale Uvino Erin Wilson
Henry Roger Grefa Cristian Royes Falcones Henry Jose Grefa Angela Galarza Egas

Edited by Karina Berg – Country Director GVI Ecuador/Rainforest Conservation and Community Development Address: Casilla Postal 17-07-8832 Quito, Ecuador Email: Web page: and

Executive Summary
This report documents the work of Global Vision International’s (GVI) Rainforest Conservation and Community Development Expedition in Ecuador’s Amazon region and run in partnership with the Yachana Foundation, based at the Yachana Reserve in the province of Napo. During the third phase of 2010 from Friday 2nd July to Friday 10th September, GVI has:

Added 12 new species to the reserve list; Sunbittern (Eurypyga helias), Blue-and-yellow

Macaw (Ara ararauna), Buff-throated Foliage-gleaner (Automolus ochrolaemus), Amazonian Barred Woodcreeper (Dendrocolaptes certhia), Gray-cheeked Thrush (Catharus minimus), Opal-rumped Tanager (Tangara velia), Andersons Gray four-eyed Opossum (Philander andersoni), Silky Anteater (Cyclopes didactylus), Brown Vine Snake (Oxybelis aeneus), Amazon Scarlet Snake (Pseudoboa coronata), Butterflies (Coenophlebia fabius), (Memphis phantes) and (Nessaea obrina).   Continued assesseing the effect of habitat change in understory bird communities. Continued to collect data on the effect of structural habitat change on the amphibian and

reptile communities, using pitfall trapping and visual encounter surveys.  Continued with a project investigating the effects of disturbance from the road upon

butterfly communities.   Conducted English classes each Saturday as part of a summer school. Welcomed pasantes (work experience students) from the Yachana Technical High

School to join the expedition, in order to exchange language skills, knowledge and experience.  Visited Yasuní National Park and Sumak Allpa, an island reserve and school run by a

local conservationist.



List of Figures ................................................................................................................. 5 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 6 2 Avian Research ......................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Avian Mistnetting................................................................................... 9 3 Mammal Incidentals ................................................................................................. 15 4 Herpetological Research.......................................................................................... 16 The Effect of Structural Habitat Change on Herpetofaunal Communities ..... 16 5 Butterfly Research ................................................................................................... 22 5.1 Assessment of Antropogenic Disturbance on Butterfly Communities .. 22 6 Community Development Projects ........................................................................... 27 6.1 Colegio Técnico Yachana (Yachana Technical High School) .............. 27 6.2 TEFL at Puerto Rico............................................................................ 27 6.3 English Classes at Puerto Salazar ...................................................... 27 7 Future Expedition Aims ............................................................................................ 29 8 References .............................................................................................................. 30 8.1 General References ............................................................................ 30 8.2 Field Use References.......................................................................... 31 8.3 Avifuanal References .......................................................................... 32 8.4 Amphibian References ........................................................................ 36 8.5 Butterfly References............................................................................ 38 9 Appendices ................................................................................................................ 40 9.1 Yachana Reserve Species List ............................................................ 40 Class Aves.................................................................................................. 40 Class Mammalia ......................................................................................... 45 Class Sauropsida ........................................................................................ 47 Class Amphibia ........................................................................................... 48 Class Arachnida.......................................................................................... 49 Class Insecta .............................................................................................. 49 9.2 GVI Amazon Yachana Reserve Trail Map .............................................. 53


List of Figures
Figure 1.1. Map showing the GVI Amazon location in Ecuador.

Figure 2.1.1. Map showing the location of each mist netting site

Figure 2.1.2. Summary data from Phase 103

Figure 2.1.3. Summary data for the whole project to date

Figure 4.1.1 Number of individuals found in pitfalls in Phase 103

Figure 4.1.2 Number of individuals found on visual encounter surveys in Phase 103 Figure 4.1.3 Number of individuals found in pitfall traps in total in the project so far

Figure 4.1.4 Number of individuals found in total for visual encounter surveys in the project so far Figure 4.1.5 Distribution of species diversity at each pitfall trap

Figure 5.1.1 The new standardised dot codes introduced in week six of phase 101 and used consistently through Phase 103

Figure 5.1.2 Individual butterfly numbers as distributed in trap sites along the road, on the trail and in the forest for Frontier and Columbia Trails

Figure 5.1.3 Species diversity indicated by number of species collected at each of the disturbance levels – road, trail and forest for Frontier and Columbia Trails during Phase 103.




The Rainforest Conservation and Community Development Expedition operated by Global Vision International (GVI) is located in the Yachana Reserve in the Napo province (0° 50' 45.47"S/ -77° 13' 43.65"W; 300-350m altitude), Amazonian region of Ecuador. The reserve is legally-designated a Bosque Protector (Protected Forest) consisting of approximately 1000 hectares of predominantly primary lowland rainforest, as well as abandoned plantations, grassland, riparian forest, regenerating forest and a road. The Yachana Reserve is owned and managed by the Yachana Foundation. It is surrounded by large areas of pasture land, small active cacao farms and currently un-mapped disturbed primary forest. The road within the Yachana Reserve is a large stone and gravel based road which dissects the primary forest to the north and the abandoned cacao plantations and grassland areas to the south.

GVI Amazon Rio Napo, Napo Province

Figure 1.1 Map showing GVI Amazon location in Ecuador


The Yachana Foundation is dedicated to finding sustainable solutions to the problems facing the Ecuadorian Amazon region. The foundation works with rainforest communities to improve education, develop community-based medical care, establish sustainable agricultural practices, provide environmentally sustainable economic alternatives, and conserve the rainforest. The Yachana Reserve is the result of the foundation’s efforts to purchase blocks of land for the purpose of conservation. The Yachana Foundation has a long-term plan of sustainable management for the reserve according to International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) protected forest guidelines and guidelines laid out by the Ministerio del Ambiente (Ecuadorian Ministry of the Environment). One of GVI’s main roles at the reserve is to provide support where deemed necessary for the development of the management plan. This includes reserve boundary determination, baseline biodiversity assessments, visitor information support, and research centre development.

GVI also works closely with the Yachana Technical High School, a unique educational facility for students from the surrounding region. The high school provides students with meaningful education and practical experience in sustainable agriculture, animal husbandry, conservation, eco-tourism, and small business operations. As part of their experiential learning program, students use the Yachana Reserve and GVI’s presence as a valuable educational tool. As part of their conservation curriculum, the students visit the reserve to receive hands on training in some of GVI’s research methodology, as well as familiarization with ecological systems. On a rotational basis, students spend time at the reserve where they participate in the current research activities, and receive conversational English classes from GVI volunteers.

GVI additionally conducts TEFL classes (Teaching English as a Foreign Language) at the nearby village of Puerto Rico, twice a week. Classes are prepared the day before and last for one hour. Groups of two or three volunteers conduct the classes, covering relevant topics to the local school children. This allows GVI to integrate with the local community, whilst giving volunteers the opportunity to experience firsthand involvement in community development through teaching English. This is also currently laying the foundation to introduce environmental education programmes to the Puerto Rico community in the future. GVI also works with local research institutions. The Museo Ecuatoriano de Ciencias Naturales, MECN, (Ecuadorian Museum for Natural Sciences) provides technical assistance with field research and project development. The museum is a government research institution which houses information and conducts research on the presence and distribution of floral and faunal species throughout Ecuador. GVI obtains their investigation permit with the support of MECN for the collection of specimens. The data and specimens collected by 7

GVI are being lodged with the MECN in order to make this information nationally and internationally available, and to provide verification of the field data. MECN technicians are continuously invited to the Yachana Reserve to conduct in-field training and education for GVI and Yachana students, as well as explore research opportunities otherwise unavailable. A major goal for GVI’s research is to shift focus from identifying species in the reserve to collecting data for management concerns and publication. In collaboration with all local and international partners, GVI focuses its research on answering ecological questions related to conservation. With this in mind, several key goals have been identified:          

Cataloguing species diversity in the Yachana Reserve in relation to regional diversity. Conducting long-term biological and conservation based research projects. Monitoring of biological integrity within the Yachana Reserve and the immediate surrounding area. Publication of research findings in primary scientific literature. Solicitation of visiting researchers and academic collaborators. Identification of regional or bio-geographic endemic species or sub-species. Identification of species that are included within IUCN or Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) appendices. Identification of keystone species important for ecosystem function. Identification of new species, sub-species, and range extensions. Identification of charismatic species that could add value in promoting the Yachana Reserve to visitors.

In order to achieve the key goals, volunteers participate in five or ten weeks of each phase and are trained by GVI personnel to conduct research on behalf of the local partners in support of their ongoing work. This report summarises the scientific research and community-based programmes conducted during the ten-week expedition from Friday 2nd July to Friday 10th September 2010, at the Yachana Reserve.



Avian Research
Avian Mistnetting

Introduction As human populations grow, an understanding of anthropogenic change is essential to understand the conservation of the natural world. Habitat loss is undoubtedly one of the greatest threats facing tropical forest diversity (Hawes et al. 2008), with over half the potential tropical closed-canopy forest, defined as tree crown coverage exceeding 60%, having already been removed and put to other use (Wright 2005). However, there is hope. Despite deforestation reaching alarming levels, 15% of the land deforested in the 1990s has been reclaimed by natural secondary succession (Wright 2005). This large scale expansion of secondary landscapes may have important implications for long-term conservation of wildlife (Faria et al, 2007). The total coverage of non-native and native regeneration will most probably rise further in the near future due to private investment in carbonsequestration projects in the tropics and increased interest in bio fuels and timber (Barlow et al. 2006).

Several studies have optimistically concluded that this expansion of secondary forest will offset the loss of worldwide biodiversity through destruction of primary habitat (Wright 2005; Wright and Muller–Landau 2006). Stating that, the observed time lags between habitat destruction and species extinctions are of sufficient length to allow secondary forest to mature and regenerate into suitable habitat (Brooks et al; 2002). Dunn (2004) states that; regenerating tropical secondary forests recover sufficiently in 20-40 years to recover faunal species diversity, but support lesser tree diversities than old growth forests. Species

compositions of flora and fauna communities often differ between secondary and primary habitats (Blake and Loiselle 2000). The value of regenerating secondary forest will be

context and species dependant. There is a growing consensus that there is currently a lack of empirical evidence to support the theories that regenerating disturbed habitats will be sufficient to conserve most forest species in the future (Gardner et al. 2007). Undoubtedly further research needs to be performed before the true value of secondary regenerating forest can be unequivocally determined.

There is currently a lack of consensus between many studies examining the impacts of habitat change on bird communities. Despite birds being the most studied and understood taxa in the Neotropics, a recent review of literature found that, pre-2008; only 17 studies examined the value of secondary forest for tropical birds (Barlow et al. 2006). The majority of studies conducted to date have concluded that secondary forests can support equivalent 9

or high levels of species richness compared to primary or relatively undisturbed forest (Barlow et al, 2006). Despite these encouraging results, there are a whole host of problems with the existing studies which make a strong conclusion of the value of secondary forest for Neotropical birds impossible to determine (Gardner et al. 2006). For example, several of the studies attribute the high species richness to the close proximity of primary habitat, resulting in primary species being transiently recorded in secondary habitat. Several studies also lacked a good primary forest baseline with which to compare their results (Barlow et al. 2006). This aims to address the problems highlighted by Gardner et al (2007), to compare understory bird communities in the disturbed secondary patches of the Yachana Reserve with the relatively undisturbed patches. Method Study Plots Four net locations were established around the reserve; two in relatively disturbed areas, two in relatively undisturbed areas. The net locations were no closer than 500m apart at their nearest point as Barlow and Peres (2004) concluded, based on recaptures of marked individuals, that plots 500m apart were spatially independent. The net locations are

restricted to trails within the reserve, as the hilly topography makes establishing nets in other locations impossible without destroying large areas of native vegetation. Plots are random with respect to tree fall gaps, fruiting trees or other factors which may influence capture rates. Mistnetting Understory mistnetting was used to examine the avifauna at each of the four sites within the reserve. Each site was sampled for 69 to 70 hours between the 13th July 2010 and the 3rd September 2010. Four 12 x 2.5m mist nets with 10-40m spacing (to allow for difficult

topography) were established at each site. All nets could be checked within a 10-15min period. Captured birds were then released away from the net locations from an established banding station. Nets were opened between 6.30am and 11.10am for four successive days, allowing extra hours or days to account for periods of persistent wind or heavy rain. Nets were checked every 30 minutes. All captures were placed in a bird bag and returned to the banding station where they were be identified to species, banded, weighed, measured and sexed whenever possible. All birds were banded to identify recaptures, except

hummingbirds, which have extremely delicate legs.


Figure 2.1.1. Map showing the location of each mist netting site

The pink dots represent the ‘less disturbed’ sites of Laguna and Frontier, whilst the green dots represent the ‘more disturbed’ sites of Cascada and Ficus. The blue circles represent required site separation outlined by Barlow and Perez (2004) to ensure the sites are independent.

Vegetation Mapping Around each mist-netting site six 100m transects were assessed. Each transect started 200m away from the mist-netting center point and ended 100m away from the center point, and were spaced evenly to avoid psuedoreplication. The transects were stratified and

placed randomly with regard to topography and habitat. Along each transect, five canopy coverage estimations were made by two independent observers and the dominant type of canopy was noted (Absent, Low, Middle and High). All Melostomatacae, Heliconidae and plantation plants within 5m either side of the transect line were counted. All trees >30cm Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) were measured within 5m either side of the transect line. The presence or absence of trees of the genus Theobroma and coffee plants were also noted. Results Vegetation Profiling On the basis of vegetation mapping results from phases 094 (October-December 2009) through to 103 (July-September 2010), Cascada and Ficus are classified as ‘more disturbed’ and Laguna and Frontier are classified as ‘less disturbed’. 11

Avifaunal Sampling In Phase 103 (Figure 2.1.2), 101 birds were captured in 271 hours of mist-netting between the dates of the 13th July 2010 and the 3rd September 2010. Individuals caught at each site varied from eleven individuals to 35. Each site was subjected to between 61 hours and 72 hours 40 minutes net hours of sampling. The total number of individuals captured in the ‘more disturbed’ areas was 32, whereas the total number of individuals captured in the ‘less disturbed’ areas was 69. The number of species captured at the ‘less disturbed’ sites was also lower than captured in the ‘more disturbed’ sites (see Figure 2.1.2). The understory birds caught at each of the ‘more disturbed’ areas represented only six different bird families at each site, where as birds caught at the ‘less disturbed’ areas each represented by eight and nine different bird families. Capture efficiencies, represented by number of individuals per mist net hour, where also higher in the ‘less disturbed’ sites (0.24 and 0.28 indiv.h-1) in comparison to the ‘more disturbed’ sites (0.21 and 0.12 indiv.h-1). Figure 2.1.2 Summary date from Phase 103 Frontier Laguna Cascada Ficus Total Net Hours 67.10 70.1 61.00 72.40 271.00 Number of Individuals 34 35 21 11 101 -1 Individuals hour 0.51 0.5 0.34 0.15 0.37 Total Num. of species 19 17 13 9 30 -1 Species hour 0.28 0.24 0.21 0.12 0.11 Total Num. of famillies 8 9 6 6 9 UID Birds 1 1 0 0 2 Recaptures 2 3 0 0 5 (Figure 2.1.3) shows summary data for all of the mist netting sessions to date. All locations have been subjected to between 268 and 278 hours of sampling. Frontier appears to be the most diverse site, with 43 species recorded, followed by Laguna with 37. Cascada has produced 31 species whereas Ficus has recorded only 17. Frontier and Laguna have recorded many more individuals than Cascada and Ficus too. In terms of families the ‘less disturbed’ sites of Frontier and Laguna support 14 and 15 respectively, whereas the ‘more disturbed’ Cascada and Ficus have recorded twelve and nine respectively. Figure 2.1.3. Summary data for whole project to date. Frontier Laguna Cascada Ficus Total Net Hours 268.00 277.40 267.44 278.20 1091.44 Number of Individuals 149 122 81 46 398 -1 Individuals hour 0.56 0.44 0.30 0.17 0.36 Total Num. of species 43 37 31 17 67 Species hour-1 0.16 0.13 0.12 0.06 0.06 Total Num. of families 14 15 12 9 23 -1 Total Number of famillies hour 0.052 0.054 0.045 0.032 0.021 12

Figure 2.1.4. Long Term Trend in Capture Rates 0.8 0.7 0.6 Individuals per net hour

Individuals per net hour at each site

0.5 Frontier
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 1 2 Phase 3 4 5 Laguna Cascada

All Sites

Figure 2.1.4 shows the long term trends in capture rates hour-1 currently observed in the project. Capture rates were at their highest across all sites on the first phase of the project, 094. After this point, in Phase 101, all sites showed a marked reduction in gross individuals caught, but have subsequently been recovering from Phase 102 to 103. The observed trend may relate to weather patterns and food availability, with the drop in numbers currently correlating with the onset of the rainy season. However other differences cannot yet be excluded. Discussion Understory Mist-netting Several differences between the ‘less disturbed’ and ‘more disturbed’ sites have been observed. These include: number of species caught, number of individuals caught, number of families represented, and percentage of individuals of a given family caught at each site. However, the current sample size of 398 birds is prohibitive of any statistically relevant analysis. The differences observed could be due to, but not limited to: genuine differences in understory bird community richness and structure in each area, seasonal variations in bird foraging patterns, different weather conditions, or simply a function of the low number of birds in the data set. The only way to begin to address these potential factors is to increase


the size of data set through repeated sampling at each study site until enough data is obtained. Until that point, any conclusions will be simply speculation.

Looking at the summary data from the project as a whole, it would appear that the quality of sites is currently as follows: Frontier>Laguna>Cascada>Ficus. When related to the current vegetation mapping classifications of each site, the data suggests that ‘less disturbed’ sites are able to support more individuals, more species, and more bird families than ‘more disturbed’ sites. Again, this is currently just a suggestion. More data is needed before firm statistically significant conclusions can be made. Future Work Both the understory mist-netting and vegetation mapping will be continued in their current form as they appear to be functioning effectively. Point count work will be carried out in the following phase in order to compliment the data collected through mist-netting and in an attempt to find out more about the bird communities within the Yachana Reserve.



Mammal Incidentals

Introduction GVI continues to document mammal species activity in the reserve predominately through incidental mammal and track sightings. This is confined to incidental recordings due to the low occurrence of conspicuous diurnal mammals. Methods All mammal species encountered outside of specific mammal surveys were recorded. Incidental sightings can take place during any of the other survey or project work within the reserve, or during long walks into the forest. At the occurence of each incidence, the time, location, date, species and any other key characteristics, or notes are taken and later entered into a database in camp. Sightings During this phase various mammal species were recorded incidentally, whilst groups were participating in other survey work or walks in the forest. Incidental sightings included encounters with the Amazon Red Squirrel (Sciurus sp.), Black Agouti (Dasyprocta fuliginosa), Black-mantled Tamarins (Saguinus nigricollis), Coatis (Nasua nasua), Kinkajou (Potos flavus), Common Opossum (Didelphis marsupialis), Andersons Gray four-eyed Opossum (Philander andersoni), Silky Anteater (Cyclopes didactylus), Water Rat (Nectomys squamipes), Red Brocket Deer (Manzama Americana), Paca (Agouti paca) and Whitefronted Capuchin (Cebus allifrons).



Herpetological Research

The Effect of Structural Habitat Change on Herpetofaunal Communities Introduction One of the key drivers of worldwide species loss is habitat change; defined as habitat deforestation, fragmentation and deterioration (Urbina-Cardona, 2008). The rapid rate of forest conversion in the Neotropics has been offset by large-scale expansion of secondary forest, plantation and pastureland (Wright SJ, 2005; Gardner et al. 2007b). Despite the increasingly dominant role of these degraded habitats in the tropical landscape, there is little consensus within the scientific community about the extent of its conservation value (Gardner et al. 2007c, Lo-Man-Hung1, et al. 2008). Wright & Muller-Landau (2006) predict that the future loss of primary forest will be offset by regenerating secondary forest and consequently suggest that the predicted loss of species due to habitat change may be premature. However, there is currently a lack of empirical evidence to support the theory that regenerating forests can fully support native forest species (Gardner 2007c).

Two recent multiple taxa assessments, conducted on the cubraca cacao plantations of Bahia, Brazil (Pardini et al. IN PRESS) and eucalyptus plantations of the Jari forestry project, Brazil (Barlow et al. 2007), found that responses to structural habitat change were taxon specific. Barlow et al. (2007) found that four of the fifteen taxa analysed (trees and lianas, birds, fruit feeding butterflies, and leaf litter amphibians) were found to decrease in species richness with increasing habitat disturbance. However, five taxa (large mammals, epigiec arachnids, lizards, dung beetles and bats) exhibit idiosyncratic responses to habitat change (Barlow et al. 2007). Both studies concluded that responses to structural habitat change will be species specific, not simply taxon specific. Analysis of a generalised taxon response is likely to hide a higher level of species specific disturbance responses which are important when designing conservation strategies (Barlow et al 2007; Pardini et al. 2009). These studies highlight the importance of performing multiple taxa assessments that are species specific relating to the conservation value of secondary and plantation forests. Problem Statement The Neotropics are estimated to contain nearly 50% of the worlds amphibians (IUCN, 2007) and 32% of the worlds reptiles (Young et al. 2004), this equates to over 3000 species of each taxon. Within the continental Neotropics, the 17 countries in Central and South

America, there are 1685 species of amphibian and 296 species of reptiles considered endangered. Amphibians and reptiles are considered to be the most threatened groups of terrestrial vertebrates (J. Gardner 2007b). There have been many factors implicated in 16

threatening populations of amphibians and reptiles, including habitat loss and change, the virulent Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis pathogen, climate change (Whitfield et al. 2007), ultraviolet-B radiation (Broomhall et al. 2000), and agrochemical contaminants (Bridges et al. 2000). Current State of Amphibian and Reptile Research Amphibians and reptiles are important primary, mid-level and top consumers in Neotropical ecosystems; therefore, it is important to understand the responses of these organisms to structural habitat change (Bell et al. 2006). Despite its apparent severity, the amount of research time given to studying the impacts of habitat change on amphibian and reptile populations is relatively low. This is especially true in the Neotropics which, despite an estimated 89% of threatened species being affected by habitat loss, has only been the subject of 10% of the world’s herpetological studies (Gardner et al 2007a). There is a general consensus amongst herpetologists that the effect of structural habitat change on determining amphibian and reptiles and distributions is limited (Pearman, 1997; Krishnamurthy, 2003; Urbina-Cardona, 2006; Gardner et al, 2007b).

A recent global scale review of the state of amphibian and reptile research regarding structural habitat change highlighted several serious deficiencies; i) there is currently a strong study bias away from the Neotropics towards North America and Australia, ii) published studies report contradictory responses of amphibian and reptile populations to habitat change, iii) there are several common limitations in study methodology and analysis (Gardner et al. 2007a). Aims of the Research  Assess the ability of secondary forest (abandoned cacao plantation) to preserve leaflitter herpetofaunal richness, distribution and abundance in comparison to primary forest habitat.   Understand the effects of structural habitat change within the Neotropics. Identify the responses of different herpetofaunal groups/species to structural habitat change. Methods In Phase 103, pitfall data was collected for 20 days (July 12 th to July 22nd and August 23rd to September 1st 2010) and ten visual encounter surveys were conducted from July 20 th to September 6th 2010. This data will be used to supplement data from the previous

herpetological project (ending Phase 102, July 2010). 17

Nocturnal Visual Encounter Surveys Twelve 75m transects in both the primary and secondary locations were established. Ten additional transects have been added for phase 103. Care was taken to space transects sufficiently to avoid psuedoreplication. Transects were marked with coloured transect tape to avoid unnecessary habitat modification. Where possible, the transects were located at least 10m from streams and 100m from forest edges to avoid biases resulting from increases in species richness and abundance, which could result in confusion about the true effect of structural habitat change on amphibian and reptile diversity.

Visual encounter surveys have been shown to be one of the most effective methods for sampling tropical herpetofaunas (Bell et al, 2006). They have been repeatedly shown to yield greater numbers of individuals per effort than other sampling methods in recent publications (Ernst and Rodel, 2004; Donnelly et al 2005) and GVI’s own preliminary investigations. Each transect was searched by six observers (strip width = 6m, duration = 1h 30m). Pitfall Trapping Twelve pitfall arrays were also established in both primary and secondary forest with a further twelve being added in Phase 103. Each array consists of four 25L buckets with 8m long by 50cm high plastic drift fence connecting them in linear shaped design. When open, the pitfalls were checked once a day.

Particular care was taken to ensure that sampling effort is equal for both primary and secondary habitats. This ensures maximum comparability in the resultant data sets.

Any amphibians or reptiles encountered through either method were identified in the field using available literature and released. Any individual which could not be identified was taken back to the GVI base camp for further analysis. A small proportion of the captured individuals, including those that could not be identified, were anaesthetised with Lidocaine and fixed with 10% formalin. All preseserved specimens are stored at the Museo

Ecuatoriano de Ciencias Naturales (MECN). Surveying primary rainforest habitat is a privileged opportunity; however there is the potential to negatively affect the ecosystem by passing infections between sites and species. Good practices were strictly adhered to so as to ensure transmissions were not possible. This is achieved by systematic cleaning of tools, equipment, and sterile bags are changed when 18

handling different individuals. Under no circumstances did amphibians or reptiles come in contact with exposed human skin tissue. Results Species Encountered in 103 During this phase, 248 identified reptile and amphibian individuals were encountered, comprising of 16 species of amphibian and eight species of reptile. Pitfalls in Phase 103
Figure 4.1.1 Number of individuals found in pitfalls in Phase 103
Amphibians and reptiles Total 137 Amphibians 122 Reptiles 15

Visual Encounter Surveys in Phase 103
Figure 4.1.2 Number of individuals found on visual encounter surveys in Phase 103
Amphibians and reptiles Total
(approx 90 observer hours total)

Amphibians 104

Reptiles 7


Species Encountered Overall in the Project So Far: During the whole project to date (both the initial project and the supplementary data collection completed this phase), 1924 identified reptile and amphibian individuals have been encountered. Pitfalls
Figure 4.1.3 Number of individuals found in pitfall traps in total in the project so far

Amphibians and reptiles Total 899





Visual Encounter Surveys
4.1.4 Number of individuals found in total for visual encounter surveys in the project so far

Amphibians and reptiles Total 1025






Figure 4.1.5 Distribution of species diversity (amphibians) with Shannon index applied. Pitfall and VES (first 12 months of data only)

Pitfall species diversity was projected onto a map of the Yachana Reserve. The projection shows clearly that there appears to be higher species diversity at the ‘less disturbed’, primary sites as opposed to the secondary sites. Discussion The amphibian and reptile work continues to provide a wealth of species which shows that some species are more prevalent than others and there are certainly some differences in the numbers and types of species found within different areas of the reserve. The amphibians Ameerga bilinguis, Pristimantis kichwarum, Pristimantis lanthanites, Bolitoglossa peruvianus (Dwarf-climbing Salamander) and the lizard Lepsoma parietale are still found in greater numbers than other species at various habitat types around the reserve. The diversity

projection (Fgure 4.1.5) appears to work well, in future reports this will be expanded to include all trapping techniques and surveys.

Data collection for the original sites is now complete. The sites have been surveyed for one full year. Phase 103 (July-September 2010), saw the introduction of twelve new pitfall sites and ten new visual encounter survey sites. These were set up to gather additional data to add to the original sites. The new sites include riparian areas, less disturbed area, old cacao plantation and grassland areas.


As data collection is now complete further analysis can begin. This may involve multivariate analysis such as principal component analysis in addition to decision tree analysis that may be applied to the development of a model used to determine the types of amphibians and reptiles found in specific habitat types.



Butterfly Research
Assessment of Antropogenic Disturbance on Butterfly Communities

Introduction Butterflies are widely regarded as important ecological indicators due to dependence of the larval stage on a specific host plant, combined with adult pollinating roles (Ehrlich and Raven, 1965). Herbivorous species are considered to indicate the diversity and health of their habitats as they may closely reflect patterns of diversity in, as well as disturbances to, plant species (DeVries and Walla, 1999; Sparrow et al. 1993). Due to this, they may be used to predict patterns in other taxonomic groups.

Road systems sharply define and fragment forest ecosystems, resulting in changes to plant species composition and structure from road edges to the surrounding interior (Bennett, 1991). The presence of roads and trails opens up the forest canopy, creating light gaps, modifying plant communities and resources available for other species. Butterfly

communities have been shown to be sensitive to environmental variables, such as sunlight, gaps and edges (Ramos, 2000). Sparrow et al. (1994) found 74% more butterfly species along a road transect than in undisturbed forest.

The Yachana Reserve comprises of approximately 1000 hectares of predominantly primary lowland rainforest in addition to a matrix of abandoned plantations, grassland, riparian and regenerating forest. A road 15m wide runs through the middle of the reserve, connecting it to the surrounding agricultural landscape. In addition to this, there are a number of trails on either side of the road which are walked regularly by individuals and groups of up to eight volunteers. This presents an excellent opportunity to investigate the effects of disturbance from the road, in addition to making paired comparisons between disturbed trails and nearby undisturbed forest transects. Sparrow et al. (1994) recommend including both disturbed and undisturbed habitat types in monitoring programs investigating butterfly community variation. Methods Data collection continued on the established series of 200m transects on the Columbia and Frontier Trails. The same sampling sites located every 50m continued to be monitored. The Columbia and Frontier Trails run roughly perpendicular to the road and receive heavy usage from GVI volunteers, Yachana tourists and locals. Each sampling site was paired with an undisturbed site located 75m perpendicular to the trail in the forest to assess the impact of the trails on fruit-feeding nymphalid butterfly communities. Trap sites 1-10 were located on Frontier while traps 11-20 were on Columbia. Trap sites 1, 2, 11 and 12 were located 22

alongside the well used road in proximity to the two trails. The remaining odd numbered traps were on the trails while the even-numbered traps were in the forest.

As in the previous phases of the study, two baited traps were suspended at each trap site approximately five metres apart with the base hanging approximately 1.5m above the ground at each sampling site. The traps were baited with mashed, fermented bananas, was

prepared following the methods of DeVries and Walla (1999). New bait was added to the traps every three days of sampling. Traps were checked daily in the afternoon and maintained for 14 consecutive days for two sampling periods, July 13-26th and August 19September 1st, 2010 for a total of 28 days of sampling.

Captured butterflies were identified to species in the field by GVI volunteers and staff. When identification in the field was not possible, photos of the specimen where taken for further study. During previous phases of study butterflies had been marked on the hindwing with non-toxic permanent marker and replaced in the traps in order to measure escape rates.

Although marking in order to measure recapture rates has continued since the initiation of the project, the dot codes used to refer to different traps have been inconsistent, rendering a long period of recapture data unusable. A standardized dot-code was developed in the latter half of Phase 101, and was continuously used through Phase 103 to effectively mark butterflies (Figure 5.1.1). Since Nymphalidae and other detritivorous families can have a life span of three to six months (Florida Museum Of Natural History, 2010; Turner 1971) recapture data should be considered unsafe for the next phase and carefully monitored until no further discrepancies from the new dot codes are noted.
Figure 5.1.1. The new standardised dot codes introduced in week six of Phase 101 and used consistently through Phase 103.


It is worth noting that although specific, dot-code data is unreliable unless all butterflies caught continued to be marked before release. However, butterflies were not marked if they were too small (ie. smaller than Tigridia acesta), or their wings showed dramatic effects of wear (e.g. if there were pieces of wing missing), in order to prevent further damage to the wings. Despite this, it will still be possible to differentiate between recaptures and newlycaught individuals and hence avoid any pseudo-replication.

Light levels, relative humidity and temperature were assessed at each sampling site. However, this was inconsistent in phase 103; a malfunctioning weather data collector only allowed for partial weather data to be collected. Therefore, weather data pertaining to this survey is incomplete for this sampling set.

Since data collection to explore escape rates and the nymphalid-vegetation relationship had both been undertaken at the outset of the project, it was not necessary to undertake further vegetation mapping or escape experiments during Phase 103. Results Overall, 355 individual butterflies of 51 positively-identified species were trapped during two 14-day sampling periods, (Figure 5.1.2). Of those, twenty three individuals are still pending identification. No new species were identified for the Yachana Reserve species list; however those still awaiting identification may produce new species to the reserve. There were no major differences in the number of individuals found at the three disturbance levels; slightly fewer individuals (105) were collected at the road sites compared to the trail and forest trap sites (Figure 5.1.2). Only slight variations were found otherwise and

individuals collected on the trail and forest sites for both Frontier and Columbia Trails were comparable (Figure 5.1.2).

A preliminary analysis of species diversity by assessing the number of species shows that there was no difference in the number of species collected in the road and trail disturbance sites, both with 31 species found at each area over the 28 days sampling period (Figure 5.1.3). However, the preliminary species found at each site differed; Archaeoprepona

demophon (Charaxinae: Preponini), Opsiphanes invirae (Satyrinae: Brassolini) and Colobura annulata (Nymphalinae: Nyphalini) were predominantly found at the highly-disturbed road sites. Tigridia acesta (Nymphalinae: Nymphalini), Nessaea hewitsonii (Biblidinae: Epicaliini), Colobura annulata (Nymphalinae: Nymphalini) and Nessaea obrina (Biblidinae: Epicaliini) were predominantly found along semi-disturbed trail sites. 24

Figure 5.1.2 Individual butterfly numbers as distributed in trap sites along the road, on the trail and in the forest for Frontier and Columbia Trails.

Frontier Road Trail Forest Total 65 59 63 187

Columbia 40 63 65 168

Total 105 122 128 355

‘Less disturbed’ forest trap sites which encompassed more surrounding vegetation and higher canopy cover demonstrated a higher species diversity overall with 38 species found collectively at forest trap sites (Figure 5.1.3). Tigridia acesta (Nymphalinae: Nymphalini), Nessaea hewitsonii (Biblidinae: Epicaliini), Archaeoprepona demophon (Charaxinae: Preponini) and Caligo idomeneus (Satyrinae: Brassolini), were predominantly found at in forest traps. Of those 38, 15 species (39%) were only found at forest sites, including Caligo eurilochus (Satyrinae: Brassolini), Cithaerias aurora (Satyrinae: Haeterini) and Pyrrhogyra otoldis (Biblidinae: Epiphilini).
Figure 5.1.3. Species diversity indicated by number of species collected at each of the disturbance levels – road, trail and forest for Frontier and Columbia Trails. Total number of species for the three disturbance levels are indicated in the final “Frontier and Columbia” column.

Frontier Road Trail Forest 23 17 27

Columbia 19 26 24

Frontier and Columbia

31 31 38

Discussion A total of 187 individuals were collected in the traps; 355 individuals in this phase accounts for a 53% increase in the number of individuals trapped in the same 28-day sampling period. This increase can be a result of a number of factors. The seasonality of lowland rainforest could affect the number of butterflies. Seasonal effects in the feeding and reproductive cycles of butterflies can account for an increase at various times of the year. However, this 25

study will need to be continued for over a year to gain the effects of annual trends in the butterflies feeding and breeding cycles. This increase could also be an effect of the quality of the bait used; however, no deviations were made in the process and fermentation times allotted for the preparation of the bait.

A higher number of species at forest trap sites, including species found only at forest sites and lacking at trail and road sites, indicates that a majority of Nymphalidae butterflies prefer ‘less disturbed’ habitats. These sites have much less human traffic than the other two types of sites; GVI staff and volunteers only enter these site areas when the project is running, and for very short periods of time. Trail sites are used more heavily on a regular basis by GVI personnel and locals, and the road is highly active by vehicle traffic. This indicates that human activity could have a negative effect on the Nymphalidae butterfly communities on the Yachana Reserve. A higher species diversity at the forest trap sites could also be attributed to the preference of light levels that reach these sites, as canopy cover is higher and less light reaches the forest floor, perhaps a preference among many nymphalid species. This may affect the amount of natural food sources for these butterflies, as well as plant diversity and host plants for many species, since plant diversity would be assumed to be higher in the ‘less disturbed’ forest away from the trails and road. Future Work This project will continue using the same methods as initially set out in the project proposal (Brimble, 2009) next phase to acquire a larger sample size. Specimens and photos of the unidentified species have been retained for future identification.



Community Development Projects
Colegio Técnico Yachana (Yachana Technical High School) Four current

GVI continues to work closely with the Yachana Technical High School.

students from the Yachana Technical High School joined the expedition for a period of four weeks each. They participated in all aspects of the expedition, including survey work, camp duty and satellite camps. Conversation sessions for language exchange were also arranged between the students and GVI volunteers and/or staff.

The students are of great assistance during field work, sharing their knowledge about local uses for plants as well as helping with the scheduled project work. They share their culture with volunteers and allow a greater insight into their background, teaching traditional basketweaving, traditional achiote-painting. The benefits to the students are large, as they learn about the realities of conserving and managing a reserve first-hand, along with the techniques used for monitoring different speices. They also get to practise and improve their conversational English language skills for an extended period of time, not only during the field work, but also around base camp. This sort of shared practical learning experience is invaluable and those students who have the opportunity and interest to join GVI for a period of time make great progress in their English language, as well as having the opportunity to experience inter-cultural exchange with native English speakers from different parts of the globe. It is hoped that these exchanges will continue in the future as they are beneficial to GVI volunteers, staff and of course to the students themselves. 6.2 TEFL at Puerto Rico

No English classes were given a Puerto Rico this phase as the school was closed for the summer. One conservation class was given as part of the leadership BTEC programme consisting of a puppet show based on environmental issues, focusing on defortestation. 6.3 English Classes at Puerto Salazar

Summer School, in the form of English classes were given at the community of Puerto Salazar on Saturday afternoons. The feedback from both the children and the volunteers was fantastic. We hope to continue and expand on these classes in the future, however we are somewhat tied to time and resources given that Puerto Salazar is approximately 45 minutes walk away from GVI base camp in the Yachana Reserve.

GVI is aiming to support the communities around the reserve as much as possible, but also very aware of the limitations due to fluctuations in numbers of volunteers and therefore do 27

not want to over-commit to programmes with the communities when there are high numbers of volunteers on base, to then find that if the numbers drop GVI is unable to maintain the local commitments. For this reason the work with Puerto Salazar will continue on the

occasions when it is convenient to both the local community and the GVI Amazon schedule. GVI hopes to continue to teach each Saturday afternoon where possible.

The English classes at Puerto Salazar are given on an informal basis and open to anyone that would like to participate (both children and adults). Currently the number of participants change from week to week In order to try and encourage the interests of the community, GVI attempts to make the classes more appealing by having a football game afterwards involving all volunteers and community members who may be available.



Future Expedition Aims
The biodiversity programme will be continued, opportunistically re-surveying sites, and expanding the survey areas within the reserve.

 

Avian research will continue, including point counts and mist netting. Herpetological research will continue, repeating some of the pitfall trapping to extend the secondary habitat data and visual encounter surveys, and incorporating the collection of environmental data (temperature, humidity, air flow and light levels) at each of the surveying sites, so that specific climatic conditions can be compared.

The butterfly project will continue but the focus will change to edge effects of the road and so new sites will need to be established.

GVI will continue to participate in exchanges with the Yachana Technical High School. We also hope to increase the contact with the students by having groups join the project for a day.

TEFL at Puerto Rico will resume with a defined focus for each ten week block, for each age group and the aim is to encourage students to put their learning into practise and get them conversing in English.

Simple environmental lessons will be continued at the school in Puerto Rico (to be given in Spanish) and Puerto Salazar, where possible.

An expansion of teaching will branch out with weekend lessons at the local community of Puerto Salazar. These lessons will be the basis for a future opportunity of more

structured teaching times within this community.



General References

Allen, T., Ginkbeiner, S.L., and Johnson, D.H., 2004. Comparison of detection rates of breeding marsh birds in passive and playback surveys at Lacreek National Wildlife refuge, South Dakota. Waterbirds 27, 277-281.

Bennett, A. F., 1991. Roads, roadsides and wildlife conservation: A review. In: Saunders, D. A., Hobbs, R. J. (eds.). Nature Conservation 2: The role of corridors. Chipping Norton, NSW, Australia: Surrey Beatty 99-118.

Daszak, P., Berger, L., Cunningham, A.A., Hyatt, A.D., Green, D.E., Speare. R., 1999. Emerging infectious diseases and amphibian population declines. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 5, 735-48.

Ehrlich, P. R., Raven, P. H., 1965. Butterflies and plants: A study in co-evolution. Evolution 18: 586-608.

Gardner T.A., Fitzherbert E.B., Drewes R.C., Howell K.M., Caro T., 2007. Spatial and temporal patterns of abundance and diversity of an east African leaf litter amphibian fauna. Biotropica 39(1):105-113.

Heyer W.R., Donnelly M.A., McDiarmid R.W., Hayek L.A.C., Foster M.S., 1994. Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity - Standard Methods for Amphibians. Kroodsma, D.E., 1984. Songs of the Alder Flycatcher (Empidonax alnorum) and Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii) are innate. Auk 101, 13-24.

Lacher, T., 2004. Tropical Ecology, Assessment, and Monitoring (TEAM) Initiative: Avian Monitoring Protocol version 3. Conservation International, Washington, DC.

Menendez-Guerrero P.A., Ron S.R. and Graham C.H., 2006. Predicting the Distribution and Spread of Pathogens to Amphibians. Amphibian Conservation 11:127-128.

Ridgely, R.S., Greenfield, P.J., 2001. The birds of Ecuador. Volume I. Status, Distribution, and Taxonomy. Cornell University Press, New York. 30

Sutherland, W.J., 1996. Ecological census techniques: a handbook. University press, Cambridge.

Weldon, C., du Preez, L.H., Hyatt, A.D., Muller, R., Speare, R., 2004. Origin of the amphibian chytrid fungus. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 10 (Issue 12). 8.2 Field Use References

Bartlett, R.D., Bartlett, P., 2003. Reptiles and amphibians of the Amazon. An ecotourist’s guide. University Press of Florida, Gainsville.

Bollino, M., Onore G., 2001. Butterflies & moths of Ecuador. Papilionidae. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador, Quito.

Volume 10a. Familia:

Carrera, C., Fierro, K., 2001. Manual de monitoreo los macroinvertebrados acuáticos. EcoCiencia, Quito.

Carrillo, E., Aldás, S., Altamirano, M., Ayala, F., Cisneros, D. Endara, A., Márquez, C., Morales, M., Nogales, F, Salvador, P., Torres, M.L., Valencia, J., Villamarín, F., Yánez, M., Zárate, P., 2005. Lista roja de los reptiles del Ecuador. Novum Milenium, Quito.

de la Torre, S., 2000. Primates of Amazonian Ecuador. SIMBIOE, Quito.

DeVries, P.J., 1997. The butterflies of Costa Rica and their natural history. Volume II: Riodinidae. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Duellman, W.E., 1978. The biology of an equatorial herpetofauna in Amazonian Ecuador. The University of Kansas, Lawrence.

Eisenberg, J.F., Redford, K.H., 1999. Mammals of the Neotropics: The central Neotropics. Volume 3 Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Brazil. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Emmons, L.H., Feer, F., 1997. Neotropical rainforest mammals. A field guide, second edition. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Moreno E., M., Silva del P., X., Estévez J., G., Marggraff, I., Marggraff, P., 1997. Mariposas del Ecuador. Occidental Exploration and Production Company, Quito. 31

Neild, A.F.E., 1996. The butterflies of Venezuela. Meridain Publications. London.

Ridgely, R.S., Greenfield, P.J., 2001. The birds of Ecuador. Volume I. Status, distribution and taxonomy. Christopher Helm, London.

Ridgely, R.S., Greenfield, P.J., 2001. The birds of Ecuador. Volume II. A field guide. Christopher Helm, London.

Tirira S., D., 2001. Libro rojo de los mamíferos del Ecuador. SIMBIOE/EcoCiencia, Quito. 8.3 Avifuanal References

Mist Netting Barlow, Luiz A.M. Mestre, Toby A. Gardner, Carlos A. Peres (2006) The value of primary, secondary and plantation forests for Amazonian birds Biological Conservation 136(2): 21223

Blake and Loiselle (2000) Diversity of birds along an elevational gradient in the Cordillera Central, Costa Rica The Auk (3)663-686

Blake and Loiselle (2001) Bird assemblages in second and old growth forests costa rica, persepectives from mist nets and point counts The Auk 118(2): 304-326

Blake and Loiselle (2009) Species Composition of Neotropical Understory Bird Communities: Local Versus Regional Perspectives Based on Capture Data Biotropica 41( 1): 85-94

Brooks, T.M. et al. (2002) Habitat loss and extinction in the hotspots of biodiversity. Conserv. Biol. 16, 909–923

Dunn, R.R. (2004) Recovery of faunal communities during tropical forest regeneration. Conservation. Biology. 18, 302–309 Faria D., Mateus Luı´s Barradas Paciencia, Marianna Dixo, Rudi Ricardo Laps, Julio Baumgarten, (2007) Ferns, frogs, lizards, birds and bats in forest fragments and shade cacao plantations in two contrasting landscapes in the Atlantic forest, Brazil Biodiversity Conservation 16:2335–2357


Gardner, Jos Barlow, Luke W. Parry, and Carlos A. Peres (2007) Predicting the Uncertain Future of Tropical Forest Species in a Data Vacuum BIOTROPICA 39(1): 25–30

Hawes J., Jos Barlow, Toby A. Gardner, Carlos A. Peres (2008) The value of forest strips for understorey birds in an Amazonian plantation landscape Biological Conservation 141(9): 2262-2278

Loiselle and Blake (1992) Population Variation in a Tropical Bird Community BioScience 42 (11): 838-845

Wright S. J. (2005) Tropical forests in a changing Environment TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution 20(10) 553-560

Wright and Muller-Landau (2006) The Future of Tropical Forest Species Biotropica 38(3): 287–301 Point Counts Alldredge, M., W., Simons, T., R., Pollock, K., H., Factors Affecting Aural Detections of Songbirds Ecological Applications, 17:3 (Apr., 2007), pp. 948-955

Barlow J., Mestre, L., Gardner, T., A., Peres, C., A., 2007 The value of primary, secondary and plantation forests for Amazonian birds Biological Conservation, Biological Conservation 136:2 pp 212-231

BirdLife International 2000 Threatened birds of the world. Lynx Edicions/BirdLife International.

Blake, J., G., and Loiselle, B., A., 2001 Bird Assemblages in Old-growth and Second-growth Forests, Costa Rica: Perspectives From Mist-nets and Point Counts The Auk 118(2):304-326

Colwell, R., K., Mao, C., X., Chang, J., Interpolating, Extrapolating and Comparing Incidencebased Species Accumulation Curves Ecology, 85(10), 2004, pp. 2717–2727

Edwards , D., P., Hodgson, J., Hamer, K.,C, , Mitchell, S., L., Ahmad A., H., Cornell S., J., Wilcove D., S., 2010 Wildlife-friendly oil palm plantations fail to protect biodiversity effectively Conservation Letters March 2010


Farnsworth, G., L., Pollock, K., Nichols J., D., Simons T., R., Hine J., E., Sauer J., R., A Removal Model For Estimating Detection Probabilities The Auk 119(2):414–425, 2002

Flather C., H., Fitting Species-Accumulation Functions and Assessing Regional Land Use Impacts on Avian Diversity Journal of Biogeography, 23:2 (Mar., 1996), pp. 155-168

Garson, J., Aggarwal A., and Sahotra S., Birds as surrogates for biodiversity: An analysis of a data set from southern Québec Journal of Biosciences 27:4

Gaston, K., J., Blackburn T., M., Goldewijk, K., K., 2003 Habitat conversion and global avian biodiversity loss, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 2003 270, 1293-1300

Grossman, E., Blake, R., and Kim C. 2004 Learning to See Biological Motion: Brain Activity Parallels Behavior Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16:9, pp 1669–1679

Hannaford, M., J., Barbour, M., T., Resh, V., H., 1997 Training reduces observer variability in visual-based assessments of stream habitat Society 16: 853-860. Dec 1997. Journal of the North American Benthological

Johnson, D. H. 1995. Point counts of birds: What are we estimating? Pages 117–123 in Monitoring bird populations by point counts (C. J. Ralph, J. R. Sauer, and S. Droege, Eds.). United States Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-GTR-

K., J., Blackburn T., M., and Goldewijk K., K., 2003 Habitat conversion and global avian biodiversity loss Proceedings Of The Royal Society 270: 1521 1293-1300

Lawton, J., H., Bignell, D., E., Bolton, B., Bleomers G., F., Egleton P., Hammon P., N., Hodda M. Holt R.,

Larsen, T., B., Mawdsley N., A., Stork N., E., Srivastava D., S.,Watt, A.,D., Biodiversity inventory, indicator taxa and effects of habitat modification in tropical forest Nature 931: Jan 1999

Lees A., C., Peres C., A., Rapid avifaunal collapse along the Amazonian deforestation frontier Biological Conservation 133 ( 2006 ) 198 –211


Lees, A., C., and Peres C., A., Gap-crossing movements predict species occupancy in Amazonian forest fragment, Oikos, 118: 2, (2009) , pp. 280-290(11)

Miller J., M., Dixon M., M., Turner M., G.,Response of Avian Communities in Large-River Floodplains to Environmental Variation at Multiple Scales Ecological Applications, 14: 5 (Oct., 2004), pp. 1394-1410

Moore, J., E., Scheiman D., M., Swihart R., K., Field Comparison Of Removal And Modified Double-observer Modelling For Estimating Delectability and Abundance Of Birds The Auk; Jul 2004; 121, 3

Nichols J., D., Hines, J., E., Sauer J., R., Frederick W., Fallon, J., E., Heglund, P., J., 2000 A Double-observer Approach For Estimating Detection Probability And Abundance From Point Counts. The Auk 117(2):393–408, 2000

Rodrigues A., S., L., and Brooks T., M., Shortcuts for Biodiversity Conservation Planning: The Effectiveness of Surrogates Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics Vol. 38: 713-737

Rosenstock, S., S., Anderson D., R. Giesen K., M., Luekerin, T., Carter M., F., Landbird Counting Techniques: Current Practices an Alternative The Auk 119(1):46–53, 2002

Royle J., A., Nichols J., D., Abundance From Repeated Presence-Absence Data Or Point Counts Ecology, 84(3), 2003, pp. 777–790 2003 by the Ecological Society of America

Sala O., E., Chapin F., S., et al., 2000 Global Biodiversity Scenarios for the Year 2100 Science 287, 1770 (2000)

Scholes R., J., & Biggs, R., 2005 A biodiversity intactness index Nature 434: March 2005

Shiu H., and Lee P., Assessing Avian Point-count Duration and Sample Size Using Species Accumulation Functions Zoological Studies 42(2): 357-367 (2003)

Simons, T., R., Alldredge M., W., Pollock K., H., Wettroth J., M., Experimental Analysis Of The Audio Detection Process On Avian Point Counts The Auk 124(3):986-999. 2007


Sodhi, N., S., Liow, L., H., and Bazzaz F., A., Avian Extinctions from Tropical and Sub-tropical Forest Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 38: 713-737

Schlesinger, W., H., Simberloff, D., Swackhamer, D., 2001 Forecasting Agriculturally Driven Global Environmental Change Science 292: 5515, pp. 281 - 284

Vassiliki , K., Devillers, P., Dufrene, M., Legakis, A., Vokou D., Lebrun, P., 2004 Testing the Value of Six Taxanomic Groups as Biodiversity At A Local Scale Cons. Bio.18:3 (July 2004) pp 667 – 675

Wilson E., O., Peter., F., M., Smithsonian Institution 1998

Biodiversity Vol. 1 National Academy of Sciences (U.S.),

Year Out Group, 2010 2010. 8.4 Amphibian References

J. Barlow, T. A. Gardner, I. S. Araujo, T. C. Avila-Pires, A. B. Bonaldo, J. E. Costa, M. C. Esposito, L. V. Ferreira, J. Hawes, M. I. M. Hernandez, M. S. Hoogmoed, R. N. Leite, N. F. Lo-Man-Hung, J. R. Malcolm, M. B. Martins, L. A. M. Mestre, R. Miranda-Santos, A. L. Nunes-Gutjahr, W. L. Overal, L. Parry, S. L. Peters, M. A. Ribeiro-Junior, M. N. F. da Silva, C. da Silva Motta, and C. A. Peres (2007) Quantifying the biodiversity value of tropical primary, secondary, and plantation forests PNAS vol. 104 no. 47 18555–18560

Beebee, T.J.C., Griffiths, R.A., (2005). The amphibian decline crisis: A watershed for conservation biology? Biological Conservation 125, 271–285.

K. E. Bell and M. A. Donnelly (2006) Influence of Forest Fragmentation on Community Structure of Frogs and Lizards in Northeastern Costa Rica Conservation Biology Volume 20, No. 6, 1750–1760

Bridges, C.M., Semlitsch, R.D., (2000). Variation in pesticide tolerance of tadpoles among and within species of Ranidae and patterns of amphibian decline. Conservation Biology 14, 1490–1499.


Broomhall, S.D., Osborne, W.S., Cunningham, R.B. (2000). Comparative effects of ambient ultraviolet-B radiation on two sympatric species of Australian frogs. Conservation Biology 14, 420–427.

Samuel A. Cushman (2006) Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on amphibians: A review and prospectus Biological Conservation 128; 231 –240

Donnelly, M. A., M. H. Chen, and G. C.Watkins. (2005) Sampling amphibians and reptiles in the Iwokrama Forest ecosystem. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 154:55–69.

Toby A. Gardner*, Jos Barlow, Carlos A. Peres (2007a) Paradox, presumption and pitfalls in conservation biology: The importance of habitat change for amphibians and reptiles Biological Conservation 138; 166–179

T. A. Gardner, M.A.Ribeiro-Junior, J. Barlow, T. S. Avila-Pires, M.S. Hoogmeod and C. A. Peres (2007b) The Value of Primary, Secondary, and Plantation Forests for a Neotropical Herpetofauna Conservation Biology Vol 21, 3; 775–787

T. A. Gardner, J. Barlow, L. W. Parry, and C. A. Peres (2007c) Predicting the Uncertain Future of Tropical Forest Species in a Data Vacuum BIOTROPICA 39(1): 25–30 2007

Gibbons, J. W., Scott, D. E., Ryan, T. J., Buhlmann, K. A., Tuberville, T. D., Metts, B. S., Greene, J. L., Mills, T., Leiden, Y., Poppy, S. and C. T. Winne. 2000. The global decline of reptiles, deja-vu amphibians. Bioscience 50: 653–667.

S.V. Krishnamurthy (2003) Amphibian assemblages in undisturbed and disturbed areas of Kudremukh National Park, central Western Ghats, India Environmental Conservation 30 (3): 274–282

P. B. Pearman (1997) Correlates of Amphibian Diversity in an Altered Landscape of Amazonian Ecuador Conservation Biology, Volume 11, No. 5 Pages 1211–1225

R. Pardini, D. Faria, G. M. Accacio, R. R. Laps, E. Mariano-Neto, M. L.B. Paciencia, M. Dixo, Julio Baumgarten (2009) The challenge of maintaining Atlantic forest biodiversity: A multi-taxa conservation assessment of specialist and generalist species in an agro-forestry mosaic in southern Bahia Biological Conservation 142; 1170-1182 37


Sala, O.E., Chapin, F.S.I., Armesto, J.J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R., HuberSanwald, E., Huenneke, L.F., Jackson, R.B., Kinzig, A., Leemans, R., Lodge, D.M., Mooney, H.A., Oesterheld, M., Poff, N.L., Sykes, M.T., Walker, B.H., Walker, M., Wall, D.H., (2000). Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287, 1770–1774.

Stuart, S.N., Chanson, J.S., Cox, N.A., Young, B.E., Rodrigues, A.S.L., Fischman, D.L. and Waller, R.W. (2004). Status and trends of amphibians declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 306: 1783-1786.

J. N. Urbina-Cardona, M. Olivares-Pe´rez, V. H. Reynoso (2006) Herpetofauna diversity and microenvironment correlates across a pasture–edge–interior ecotone in tropical rainforest fragments in the Los Tuxtlas Biosphere Reserve of Veracruz, Mexico Biological Conservation 132; 61–75

J. N. Urbina-Cardona (2008) Conservation of Neotropical Herpetofauna: Research Trends and Challenges Tropical Conservation Science Vol.1(4):359-375

Wright SJ (2005) Tropical forests in a changing environment Trends Ecol Evol 20:553–560.

Whitfield SM, Pierce MSF (2005) Tree buttress microhabitat use by a neotropical leaf-litter herpetofauna. Journal of Herpetology 39:192-198.

Whitfield SM, Bell KE, Philippi T, Sasa M, Bolanos F, Chaves G, Savage JM, DonnellyMA (2007) Amphibian and reptile declines over 35 years at La Selva, Costa Rica Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:8352–8356.

Young, B.E., Stuart, S.N., Chanson, J.S., Cox, N.A., Boucher, T.M., 2004. Disappearing Jewels: The Status of New World Amphibians. Natureserve, Arlington, VA. 8.5 Butterfly References

Bennett, A. F., 1991. Roads, roadsides and wildlife conservation: A review. In: Saunders, D. A., Hobbs, R. J. (eds.). Nature Conservation 2: The role of corridors. Chipping Norton, NSW, Australia: Surrey Beatty pp. 99-118. 38

Cottam, G., Curtis, J.T., 1956. The use of distance measures in phytosociological sampling. Ecology 37: 451-460.

DeVries, P. J., Walla, T. R., 1999. Species diversity in spatial and temporal dimensions of fruit-feeding butterflies from two Ecuadorian rainforests. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 68: 333-353.

Ehrlich, P. R., Raven, P. H., 1965. Butterflies and plants: A study in co-evolution. Evolution 18: 586-608.

Ramos, A. F., 2000. Nymphalid butterfly communities in an Amazonian forest fragment. Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera 35:29-41.

Sparrow, H. R., Sisk, T. D., Ehrlich, P. R., Murphy, D. D., 1994. Techniques and guidelines for monitoring neotropical butterflies. Conservation Biology. 8: 800-809.


9 Appendices 9.1 Yachana Reserve Species List Class Aves
Order Tinamiformes Tinamidae Crypturellus bartletti Crypturellus cinereus Crypturellus soui Crypturellus undulatus Crypturellus variegatus Tinamus major Tinamous Bartlett's Tinamou Cinereous Tinamou Little Tinamou Undulated Tinamou Variegated Tinamou Great Tinamou

Leucopternis melanops Leucopternis albicollis Spizaetus ornatus

Black-faced Hawk White Hawk Ornate Hawk-eagle Osprey Osprey

(Updated September 2010). ** New additions to the list Phase 103.

Pandionidae Pandion haliaetus

Falconidae Daptrius ater Ibycter americanus Milvago chimachima Herpetotheres cachinnans Falco rufigularis

Falcons and Caracaras Black Caracara Red-throated Caracara Yellow-headed Caracara Laughing Falcon Bat Falcon Lined Forest-Falcon Collared Forest-Falcon

Order Ciconiformes Ardeidae Ardea cocoi Bubulcus ibis Butorides striatus Egretta caerulea Egretta thula Tigrisoma lineatum Herons and Egrets Cocoi Heron Cattle Egret Striated Heron Little Blue Heron Snowy Egret Rufescent Tiger-Heron

Micrastur gilvicollis Micrastur semitorquatus

Order Galliformes Cracidae Ortalis guttata Penelope jacquacu Nothocrax urumutum Curassows, Guans, and Chachalacas Speckled Chachalaca Spix's Guan Nocturnal Curassow New World Quails Marbled Wood-Quail

Cathartidae Cathartes aura Cathartes melambrotus Coragyps atractus Sarcoramphus papa

American Vultures Turkey Vulture Greater Yellow-headed Vulture Black Vulture King Vulture

Odontophoridae Odontophorus gujanensis Gruiformes Rallidae Anurolimnatus castaneiceps Aramides cajanea

Rails, Gallinules, and Coots Chestnut-headed Crake Gray-necked Wood-Rail

Order Falconiformes Eurypygidae Accipitridae Elanoides forficatus Ictinia plumbea Leptodon cayanensis Harpagus bidentatus Accipiter superscilious Buteo magnirostris Buteo polyosoma Kites, Eagles, Hawks Eurypyga helias** Swallow-tailed Kite Plumbeous Kite Gray-headed Kite Scolopacidae Double-toothed Kite Actitis macularia Tiny Hawk Tringa solitaria Roadside Hawk Recurvirostridae Variable Hawk Hoploxypterus cayanus Plovers and Lapwings Pied Plover Solitary Sandpiper Spotted Sandpiper Sandpipers, Snipes and Phalaropes Order Charadriiformes Sunbittern ** Sunbittern


Order Columbiformes Columbidae Claravis pretiosa Columba plumbea Geotrygon montana Leptotila rufaxilla Pigeons and Doves Blue Ground Dove Plumbeous Pigeon Ruddy Quail Dove Gray-fronted Dove

Megascops watsonii Glaucidium brasilianum Lophostrix cristata Pulsatrix perspicillata

Tawny-bellied Screech Owl Ferruginous Pygmy Owl Crested Owl Spectacled Owl

Order Caprimulgiformes Nyctibiidae Potoos Long-tailed Potoo Great Potoo Common Potoo Nightjars and Nighthawks Pauraque Ocellated Poorwill

Order Psittaciformes Psittacidae Ara ararauna** Ara severa Amazona farinosa Amazona ochrocephala Brotogeris cyanoptera Aratinga leucophthalmus Aratinga weddellii Pyrrhura melanura Pionites melanocephala Pionopsitta barrabandi Pionus menstruus Pionus chalcopterus Parrots and Macaws Blue-and-Yellow Macaw** Chestnut-fronted Macaw Mealy Amazon Yellow-crowned Amazon Cobalt-winged Parakeet** White-eyed Parakeet Dusky-headed Parakeet Maroon-tailed Parakeet Black-headed Parrot Orange-cheeked Parrot

Nyctibius aethereus Nyctibius grandis Nyctibius griseus

Caprimulgidae Nyctidromus albicollis Nyctiphrynus ocellatus

Order Apodiformes Apodidae Chaetura cinereiventris Streptoprocne zonaris Swifts Grey-rumped Swift White-collared Swift

Trochilidae Blue-headed Parrot Glaucis hirsuta Bronze-winged Parrot Phaethornis bourcieri Phaethornis hispidus Order Cuculiformes Phaethornis malaris Opisthocomidae Opisthocomus hoazin Hoatzin Phaethornis ruber** Hoatzin Thrrenetes niger Coccyzidae Piaya cayana Piaya melanogaster Cuckoos Squirrel Cockoo Black-bellied Cuckoo Eutoxeres condamini Heliothryx aurita Amazilia franciae cyanocollis Amazilia fimbriata Anthracothorax nigricollis Campylopterus largipennis Campylopterus villaviscensio Typical Owls Tropical Screech Owl Eriocnemis vestitus Thalurania furcata

Hummingbirds Rufous -breasted Hermit Straight-billed Hermit White-bearded Hermit Great-billed Hermit Reddish Hermit** Pale-tailed Barbthroat Buff-tailed Sicklebill Black-eared Fairy Andean Emerald Hummingbird Glittering-throated Emerald Black-throated Mango Grey-breasted Sabrewing Napo Sabrewing Glowing Puffleg Fork-tailed Woodnymph

Crotophagidae Crotophaga ani Crotophaga major Order Strigiformes Strigidae Megascops choliba

Anis Smooth-billed Ani Greater Ani


Floriduga mellivora Heliodoxa aurescens

White-necked Jacobin Gould's Jewelfront

Chelidoptera tenebrosa

Swallow-winged Puffbird

Capitonidae Capita aurovirens

New World Barbets Scarlet-crowned Barbet Gilded Barbet Lemon-throated Barbet

Order Trogoniformes Trogonidae Pharomachrus pavoninus Trogon melanurus Trogon viridis Trogon collaris Trogon rufus Trogon violaceus Trogon curucui Order Coraciiformes Trogons and Quetzals Pavonine Quetzal

Capita auratus Eubucco bourcierii

Ramphastidae Black-tailed Trogon Pteroglossus azara
Amazonian White-tailed Trogon

Toucans Ivory-billed Aracari Chestnut-eared Aracari Lettered Aracari Many-banded Aracari Channel-billed Toucan White-throated Toucan Golden-collared Toucanet

Pteroglossus castanotis Pteroglossus inscriptus Pteroglossus pluricinctus Ramphastos vitellinus

Collared Trogon Black-throated Trogon
Amazonian Violaceous Trogon

Blue-crowned Trogon Ramphastos tucanus Selenidera reinwardtii

Motmotidae Baryphthengus martii Electron platyrhynchum Momotus momota

Motmots Picidae Rufous Motmot Dryocopus lineatus Broad-billed Motmot Blue-crowned Motmot Kingfishers Celeus elegans Chestnut Woodpecker Cream-coloured Woodpecker Scale-breasted Woodpecker Spot-breasted Woodpecker Yellow-tufted Woodpecker Lafresnaye's Piculet Smoky-brown Woodpecker] Little Woodpecker Amazon Kingfisher Celeus flavus Green Kingfisher Celeus grammicus Green and Rufous Kingfisher Ringed Kingfisher Chrysoptilus punctigula Melanerpes cruentatus Picumnus lafresnayi Campephilus melanoleucos Campephilus rubricollis Lineated Woodpecker Crimson-crested Woodpecker Red-necked Woodpecker Woodpeckers and Piculets

Cerylidae Chloroceryle amazona Chloroceryle americana Chloroceryle inda Megaceryle torquata Order Piciformes Galibulidae Jacamerops aureus Galbula albirostris

Jacamars [Veniliornis fumigatus Great Jacamar Veniliornis passerinus Yellow-billed Jacamar Puffbirds White-necked Puffbird Chestnut-capped Puffbird Striolated Puffbird** White-chested Puffbird Yellow-billed Nunbird White-fronted Nunbird Black-fronted Nunbird Automolus ochrolaemus** Philydor pyrrhodes
Buff-throated Foliage-Gleaner** Cinammon-rumped Foliage-gleaner

Bucconidae Notharchus macrorynchos Bucco macrodactylus Nystalus striolatus** Malacoptila fusca Monasa flavirostris Monasa morphoeus Monasa nigrifrons

Order Passeriformes Furnariidae Ancistrops strigilatus Phylidor erythropterum Automolus rubiginosus Ovenbirds Chestnut-winged Hookbill

Chestnut-winged Foliage-gleaner

Ruddy Foliage-gleaner


Xenops minutus Sclerurus caudacutus Sclerurus mexicanus Sclerurus rufigularis

Plain Xenops Black-tailed Leaftosser

Cercomacra cinerascens Hypocnemis cantator

Gray Antbird Warbling Antbird

Tawny-throated Leaftosser Short-billed Leaftosser Woodcreepers Hylophylax poecilinota Black-banded Woodcreeper Dichrozona cincta Schistocichla leucostigma Myrmeciza hyperythra Myrmeciza immaculata Myrmeciza melanoceps Pithys albifrons Lineated Woodcreeper Gymnopithys leucapis Bicoloured Antibird Scale-backed Antbird Banded Antbird Hypocnemis hypoxantha Hylophlax naevia Yellow-browed Antbird Spot-backed Antbird

Dendrocolaptidae Dendrocolaptes picumnus Dendrocolaptes certhia** Dendrexetastes rufigula Dendrocincla fuliginosa Glyphorynchus spirurus Lepidocolaptes albolineatus Xiphorhynchus guttatus Xiphorhynchus ocellatus Xiphorhynchus picus

Amazonian Barred-Woodcreeper**

Spot-winged Antbird Plumbeous Antbird

Cinnamon-throated Woodcreeper

Plain Brown Woodcreeper

Sooty Antbird

Wedge-billed Woodcreeper

White-shouldered Antbird White-plumed Antbird

Buff-throated Woodcreeper

Phlegopsis erythroptera Phlegopsis nigromaculata Myrmornis torquata

Reddish-winged Bare-eye

Ocellated Woodcreeper Straight-billed Woodcreeper

Black-spotted Bare-eye Wing-banded Antbird

Thamnophilidae Frederickena unduligera Thamnophilus schistaceus Thamnophilus murinus Megastictus margaritatus Thamnomanes ardesiacus Myrmotherula brachyura Myrmotherula axillaris Myrmotherula hauxwelli Myrmotherula longipennis Myrmotherula obscura Myrmotherula ornata Hersilochmus dugandi

Typical Antbirds Formicariidae Undulated Antshrike Formicarius analis Plain-winged Antshrike Chamaeza nobilis Myrmothera campanisona Mouse-colored Antshrike Tyrannidae Pearly Antshrike Zimmerius gracilipes Dusky-throated Antshrike Tyrannulus elatus Mionectes oleagineus Leptopogon amaurocephalus Hemitriccus zosterops Todirostrum chrysocrotaphum Rhynchocyclus olivaceus Tolmomyias poliocephalus Tolmomyias viridiceps Slender-footed Tyrannulet Yellow-crowned Tyrannulet Ochre-bellied Flycatcher Tyrant Flycatchers Black-faced Antthrush Striated Antthrush Thrush-like Antpitta Antthrushes and Antpittas

Pygmy Antwren White-flanked Antwren

Sepia-capped Flycatcher White-eyed Tody-tyrant

Plain-throated Antwren

Long-winged Antwren Short-billed Antwren Ornate Antwren Dugand's Antwren

Yellow-browed Tody-Flycatcher

Olivaceous Flatbill

Gray-crowned Flatbill Olive-faced Flatbill


Platyrinchus coronatus Terenotriccus erythrurus Myiobius barbatus Contopus virens Ochthornis littoralis Colonia colonus Attila spadiceus Rhytipterna simplex Myiarchus tuberculifer Myiarchus ferox Pitangus sulphuratus Megarynchus piangu Myiozetetes similis Myiozetetes granadensis Myiozetetes luteiventris Conopias cinchoneti Conopias parva Myiodynastes maculatus Myiodynastes luteiventris Legatus leucophaius Griseotyrannus aurantioatrocristatus Tyrannus melancholicus Tyrannus tyrannus Tyrannus savana Pachyramphus marginatus Pachyramphus viridis Tityra inquisitor Tityra semifasciata Tityra cayana

Golden-crowned Spadebill

Iodopleura isabellae Lipaugus vociferans Cotinga cayana Cotinga maynana

White-browed Purpletuft Screaming Piha Spangled Cotinga Plum-throated Cotinga Bare-necked Fruitcrow Purple throated Fruitcrow Manakins Golden-headed Manakin White-crowned Manakin Blue-crowned Manakin Blue-backed Manakin White-bearded Manakin Striped Manakin Green Manakin Dwarf Tyrant Manakin

Ruddy-tailed Flycatcher Whiskered Flycatcher Eastern Wood-Pewee

Gynnoderus foetidus Drab Water-Tyrant Long-tailed Tyrant Bright-rumped Attila Grayish Mouner Dusky-capped Flycatcher Short-crested Flycatcher Great Kiskadee Boat-billed Flycatcher Social Flycatcher Querula purpurata

Pipridae Pipra erythrocephala Dixiphia pipra Lepidothrix coronata Chiroxiphia pareola Manacus manacus Machaeropterus regulus Chloropipo holochlora

Gray-capped Flycatcher

Tyranneutes stolzmanni

Dusky-chested Flycatcher Lemon-browed Flycatcher Yellow-throated Flycatcher

Corvidae Cyanocorax violaceus

Crows, Jays, and Magpies Violaceous Jay

Vireonidae Streaked Flycatcher Vireo olivaceus

Vireos Red-eyed Vireo Thrushes Gray-cheeked Thrush** Swainson's Thrush White-necked Thrush Lawrence's Thrush

Sulphur-bellied Flycatcher Piratic Flycatcher

Turdidae Catharus minimus** Catharus ustulatus

Crowned Slaty Flycatcher Turdus albicollis Tropical Kingbird Eastern Kingbird Fork-tailed Flycatcher Turdus lawrencii

Hirundinidae Tachycineta albiventer Atticora fasciata Neochelidon tibialis Stelgidopteryx ruficollis

Swallows and Martins White-winged Swallow White-banded Swallow White-thighed Swallow
Southern rough-winged Swallow

Black-capped Becard White-winged Becard Black-crowned Tityra Masked Tityra Black-tailed Tityra

Troglodytidae Donacobius atricapillus Campylorhynchus turdinus

Wrens Black-capped Donacobius Thrush-like Wren White-breasted Wood-wren

Cotingidae [Ampelioides tschudii

Cotingas Scaled Fruiteater]

Henicorhina leucosticta


Microcerculus marginatus Thryothorus coraya

Southern Nightingale-Wren Coraya Wren

Ramphocelus nigrogularis Piranaga olivacea Piranaga rubra Habia rubica Tachyphonus cristatus

Masked Crimson Tanager Scarlet Tanager Summer Tanager Red-crowned Ant-Tanager Flame-crested Tanager Fulvous-crested Tanager Fulvous Shrike-Tanager Magpie Tanager

Polioptilidae Microbates cinereiventris

Gnatcatchers and Gnatwrens

Tawny-faced Gnatwren New World Warblers Yellow Warbler

Parulidae Dendroica aestiva

Tachyphonus surinamus Lanio fulvus

Dendroica striata Dendroica fusca Wilsonia canadensis Basileuterus fulvicauda

Blackpoll Warbler Blackburnian Warbler Canada Warbler Cissopis leveriana

Cardinalidae Cyanocompsa cyanoides Saltator grossus

Saltators, Grosbeaks etc Blue-black Grosbeak Slate-colored Grosbeak Buff-throated Saltator

Buff-rumped Warbler

Thraupidae Cyanerpes caeruleus Chlorophanes spiza Dacnis lineata Dacnis flaviventer Hemithraupis flavicollis Euphonia laniirostris Euphonia rufiventris Euponia xanthogaster Euphonia chrysopasta Euphonia minuta Tangara callophrys Tangara velia** Tangara chilensis Tangara nigrocincta Tangara mexicana Tangara schrankii Tangara xanthogastra Creugops verticalis Tersina viridis Thraupis episcopus Thraupis palmarum Ramphocelus carbo

Tanagers Saltator maximus Purple Honeycreeper Green Honeycreeper Emberizidae Black-faced Dacnis Yellow-bellied Dacnis Yellow-backed Tanager Thick-billed Euphonia Rufous-bellied Euphonia Orange-bellied Euphonia White-lored Euphonia White-vented Euphonia Opal-crowned Tanager Opal-rumped Tanager** Paradise Tanager Masked Tanager Psarocolius viridis Turquoise Tanager Molothrus oryzivorous Green-and-gold Tanager Yellow-bellied Tanager Rufous-crested Tanager Swallow Tanager Blue-gray Tanager Palm Tanager Silver-beaked Tanager Icterus croconotus Gymnomystax mexicanus Giant Cowbird Orange-backed Troupial Oriole Blackbird Green Oropendola Icteridae Cacicus cela Cacicus solitaries Clypicterus oseryi Psarocolius angustifrons Psarocolius decumanas American Orioles, and Blackbirds Yellow-rumped Cacique Solitary Cacique Casqued Oropendola Russet-backed Oropendola Crested Oropendola Fringillidae Carduelis psaltria Cardueline Finches Lesser Goldfinch Ammodramus aurifrons Oryzoborus angloensis Emberizine Finches Yellow-browed Sparrow Lesser Seed-Finch

Class Mammalia
Order Marsupialia Didelphidae Caluromys lanatus Opossums Western Woolly Opossum


Chironectes minimus Didelphis marsupialis Marmosa lepida Micoureus demerarae Philander andersoni**

Water Opossum Common Opossum Little-rufous Mouse Opossum Long-furred Woolly Mouse Opossum

Uroderma pilobatum Vampyrodes caraccioli

Tent-making Bat Great Stripe-faced Bat

Phyllostominae Macrophyllum macrophyllum Mimon crenulatum

Spear-nosed Bats Long-legged Bat Hairy-nosed Bat Spear-nosed Bat Vespertilionid Bats Little brown Bat

Anderson’s Gray Four-eyed Opossum**

Phyllostomus hastatus

Vespertilionidae Order Xenarthra Myrmecophagidae Cyclopes didactylus** Anteaters Order Primates Silky Anteater** Callitrichidae Megalonychidae Choloepus diadactylus Two-toed sloths Southern Two-toed Sloth Saguinus nigricollis Myotis nigricans


Black-mantled Tamarin

Cebidae Allouatta seniculus Red Howler Monkey Night Monkey White-fronted Capuchin

Dasypodidae Cabassous unicinctus Dasypus novemcinctus

Armadillos Southern Naked-tailed Armadillo Nine-banded Armadillo Order Carnivora Procyonidae Carnivores Raccoon South American Coati Kinkajou Aotus sp. Cebus albifrons

Order Chiroptera Carollinae Carollia brevicauda Carollia castanea Carollia perspicullatus Rhinophylla pumilio Short-tailed Fruit Bat Little Fruit Bat Short-tailed Fruit bats

Nasua nasua Potos flavus

Mustelidae Eira barbara Lontra longicaudis

Weasel Tayra Neotropical Otter

Desmodontinae Desmodus rotundus

Vampire bats Common Vampire Bat Sac-winged/Sheath-tailed Bats White-lined Bat Long tongued Bats Long tongued Bat Spear-nosed Long-tongued Bat

Felidae Herpailurus yaguarundi Leopardus pardalis Puma concolor

Cat Jaguarundi Ocelot Puma Even-toed Ungulates Deer Red brocket deer

Emballonuridae Saccopteryx bilineata

Order Artidactyla Cervidae

Glossophaginae Glossophaga soricina Lonchophylla robusta

Mazama americana

Tayassuidae Stenodermatidae Artibeus jamaicensis Artibeus lituratus Artibeus obscurus Artibeus planirostus Chiroderma villosum Sturrnia lilium Sturnria oporaphilum Neotropical Fruit bats Large Fruit-eating Bat Large Fruit Bat Large Fruit Bat Large Fruit Bat Big-eyed Bat Hairy-legged Bat Yellow-shouldered Fruit Bat Order Rodentia Echimyidae Dactylomys dactylinus Nectomys squamipes Proechimys semispinosus Tayassu tajacu

Peccaries Collared Peccary


Amazon Bamboo Rat Water Rat Spiny Rat


Sciuridae Sciurus sp. Sciurillus pusillus

Squirrels Amazon Red Wquirrel Neotropical Pygmy Squirrel

Mabuya nigropunctata

Black-spotted Skink

Dasyproctidae Dasyprocta fuliginosa Myoprocta pratti

Agoutis Black Agouti Green Acouchy

Tropiduridae Tropidurus (Plica) plica Tropidurus (plica) umbra ochrocollaris

Collared Tree Runner Olive Tree Runner

Teiidae Kentropyx pelviceps Tupinambis teguixin Forest Whiptail Golden Tegu

Agoutidae Agouti paca

Paca Paca

Snakes Erethizontidae Coendou bicolor Porcupines Bi-color spined Porcupine Colubridae Atractus elaps Atractus major Hydrochaeridae Hydrochaeirs hydrochaeirs Capybara Atractus occiptoalbus Capybara Chironius fuscus Chironius scurruls Olive Whipsnake Rusty Whipsnake Musarana Tawny Forest Racer Ornate Snail-eating Snake Big-headed Snail-eating Snake Amazon egg-eating Snake Common glossy Racer Banded South American Water Snake Spotted Water Snake Common Blunt-headed Tree Snake Amazon Blunt-headed Tree Snake Common Cat-eyed Snake Brown Parrot Snake White-lipped Swamp Snake Brown Vine Snake** Common Swamp Snake Yellow-headed Calico Snake Black-headed Calico Snake Banded Calico Snake Amazon Scarlet Snake** Common Bird Snake Giant Bird Snake Red-vine Snake Tiger Rat Snake Black-headed Snake Common False Viper Giant False Viper Green-striped Vine Snake Earth Snake sp2 Earth Snake sp3 Earth Snake

Class Sauropsida
Lizards Gekkonidae Gonatodes concinnatus Gonatodes humeralis Pseudogonatodes guianensis

Clelia clelia clelia Dendriphidion dendrophis Dipsas catesbyi Dipsas indica Drepanoides anomalus Drymoluber dichrous Helicops angulatus Amazon Pygmy Gecko Helicops leopardinus Imantodes cenchoa Black-bellied Forest Lizard Reticulated Creek Lizard Imantodes lentiferus Leptodeira annulata annulata Leptophis cupreus Liophis miliaris chrysostomus Common Forest Lizard Common Streamside Lizard Elegant-eyed Lizard White-striped eyed Lizard Oxybelis aeneus** Liophis reginae Oxyrhopus formosus Oxyrhopus melanogenys Oxyrhopus petola digitalus Pseudoboa coronata** Pseustes poecilonotus polylepis Amazon Forest Sragon Pseustes sulphureus Sphlophus compressus Spilotes pullatus Tantilla m. melanocephala Xenedon rabdocephalus Xenedon severos Xenoxybelis argenteus

Collared Forest Gecko Bridled Forest Gecko

Gymnophthalmidae Alopoglossus striventris Arthrosaura reticulata reticulata Cercosaurra argulus Cercosaura ocellata Leposoma parietale Neusticurus ecpleopus Prionodactylus argulus Prionodactylus oshaughnessyi

Iguanas Hoplocercidae Enyalioides laticeps

Polychrotidae Anolis fuscoauratus Anolis nitens scypheus Anolis ortonii Anolis punctata Anolis trachyderma Slender Anole Yellow-tongued Forest Anole Amazon bark Anole Amazon Green Anole Common Forest Anole



Viperidae Bothriopsis taeniata Bothriopsis bilineata bilineata Bothrops atrox Bothrocophias hyoprora Lachesis muta muta Speckled Forest Pit Viper Western-striped Forest Pit Viper Fer-de-lance Amazonian Hog-Nosed Lancehead

Cochranella resplendens

Glass Frog Poison Frogs

Dendrobatidae Ameerega bilinguis Ameerega ingeri Ameerega insperatus

Ruby Poison Frog

Amazon Bushmaster Ameerega parvulus Allobates zaparo Red-tailed Boa Common Boa Constrictor Amazon Tree Boa Peruvian Rainbow Boa Colostethus bocagei Colostethus marchesianus Dendrobates duellmani Sanguine Poison Frog

Boidae Boa constrictor constrictor Boa constrictor imperator Corallus enydris enydris Epicrates cenchria gaigei

Ucayali Rocket Frog Duellmans Poison Frog

Elapidae Micurus hemprichii ortonii Micrurus langsdorfii Micrurus lemniscatus Micrurus spixii spixxi Micurus surinamensis surinamensis

Orange-ringed Coral Snake Langsdorffs Coral Snake Eastern-ribbon Coral Snake Central Amazon Coral Snake Aquatic Coral Snake

Hylidae Cruziohyla craspedopus cf. Sphaenorhychus carneus Dendropsophus bifurcus Dendropsophus marmorata Dendropsophus rhodopeplus Dendropsophus triangulium Hemiphractus aff. Scutatus Hyla lanciformis

Tree Frogs Amazon Leaf Frog Pygmy hatchet-faced Tree Frog Upper Amazon Tree Frog Neotropical Marbled Tree Frog Red Striped Tree Frog Variable Clown Tree Frog Casque-headed Tree Frog Rocket Tree Frog

Crocodilians Alligatoridae Paleosuchus trigonatus Caimans Smooth-fronted Caiman

Hyla maomaratus Hylomantis buckleyi Hylomantis hulli

Class Amphibia
Order Gymnophiona Typhlonectidae Caecilia aff. tentaculata Caecilians

Hypsiboas boans Hypsiboas calcarata Hypsiboas punctatus Hypsiboas geographica Hypsiboas cinerascens** Osteocephalus cabrerai complex Osteocephalus cf. deridens Osteocephalus leprieurii Osteocephalus planiceps Trachycephalus resinifictrix Phyllomedusa tarsius Phyllomedusa tomopterna Phyllomedusa vaillanti Scinax garbei Scinax rubra Trachycephalus venulosus

Gladiator Tree Frog Convict Tree Frog Common Polkadot Tree Frog Map Tree Frog Rough-skinned Tree Frog** Forest bromeliad Tree Frog

Order Caudata Plethodontidae Bolitoglossa peruviana

Salamanders Lungless Salamanders Dwarf climbing Salamander

Common bromeliad Tree Frog Flat-headed bromeliad Tree Frog Amazonian Milk Tree Frog Warty Monkey Frog Barred Monkey Frog White-lined Monkey Tree Frog Fringe lipped Tree Frog Two-striped Tree Frog Common milk Tree Frog Sheep Frogs Bassler's Sheep Frog Rain Frogs Eyelashed Forest Frog

Order Anura Bufonidae Rhinella marina Rhinella complex margaritifer Rhinella dapsilis

Frogs and Toads Toads Cane Toad Crested Forest Toad Sharp-nosed Toad Leaf Toads Orange bellied Leaf Toad

Dendrophryniscus Dendrophryniscus minutus

Microhylidae Centrolenidae Centrolene sp. Cochranella anetarsia Cochranella midas Glass Frogs undescribed Glass Frog Glass Frog Glass Frog Leptodactylidae Edalorhina perezi Chiasmocleis bassleri


Engystomops petersi Leptodactylus andreae Leptodactylus knudseni Leptodactylus mystaceus Leptodactylus rhodomystax Leptodactylus wagneri Lithodytes lineatus Oreobates quixensis Vanzolinius discodactylus

Painted Forest Toadlet Cocha Chirping Frog Rose-sided Jungle Frog

Deltochilum howdeni Dichotomius ohausi Dichotomius prietoi Eurysternus caribaeus Eurysternus confusus

Moustached Jungle Frog Eurysternus foedus Wagneris Jungle Frog Eurysternus inflexus Painted Antnest Frog Eurysternus plebejus Common big headed Rain Frog Dark-blotched Whistling Frog Order Lepidoptera Papilionidae Battus belus varus Battus polydamas Papilio androgeus Amazonian Rain Frog Chirping Robber Frog Striped-throated Rain Frog Parides lysander Malkini's Rain Frog Parides pizarro Marti's rainfrog Parides sesostris Carabaya Rain Frog Broad-headed Rain Frog Variable Rain Frog Black-banded Robber Frog Broad-headed Rain Frog True Frogs Phoebis rurina Neotropical Green Frog Lycaenidae Pieridae Appias drusilla Dismorphia pinthous Eurema cf xanthochlora Perrhybris lorena Papilio thoas cyniras Parides aeneas bolivar

Strabomantidae Pristimantis acuminatus Pristimantis aff peruvianus Pristimantis altamazonicus Pristimantis conspicillatus Pristimantis lanthanites Pristimantis malkini Pristimantis martiae Pristimantis ockendeni complex Pristimantis sulcatus Pristimantis variabilis Hypnodactylus nigrovittatus Strabomantis sulcatus

Rain Frogs Green Rain Frog Peruvian Rain Frog

Ranidae Rana palmipes

Class Arachnida
Araneae Nephila clavipes Ancylometes terrenus Golden Silk Spider Giant Fishing Spider

Celmia celmus Janthecla sista Thecla aetolius Thecla mavors


Class Insecta
Order Grylloptera Panacanthus cuspidatus Spiny Devil Katydid

Amarynthis meneria Ancyluris endaemon Ancyluris aulestes Ancyluris etias Anteros renaldus

Order Hemiptera Dysodius lunatus Lunate Flatbug

Calospila cilissa Calospila partholon Calospila emylius

Order Coleoptera Euchroma gigantea Homoeotelus d'orbignyi Scarabaeidae Canthon luteicollis Giant Ceiba Borer Pleasing Fungus Beetle

Calydna venusta Cartea vitula Emesis fatinella Emesis lucinda Emesis mandana


Emesis ocypore Eurybia dardus Eurybia elvina Eurybia franciscana Eurybia halimede Eurybia unxia Hyphilaria parthenis Isapis agyrtus Ithomiola floralis Lasaia agesilaus narses Lasaia pseudomeris Leucochimona vestalis Livendula amaris

Historis acheronta Metamorpha elisa Metamorpha sulpitia Siproeta stelenes Smyrna blomfildia Tigridia acesta Colobura annulata Colobura dirce

Biblidinae Biblis hyperia Callicore cynosura Catonephele acontius Catonephele antinoe**

Livendula violacea Catonephele esite Lyropteryx appolonia Catonephele numilia Mesophthalma idotea Diaethria clymena Mesosemia loruhama Dynamine aerata Mesosemia latizonata Dynamine arthemisia Napaea heteroea Dynamine athemon Nymphidium mantus Dynamine gisella Nyphidium nr minuta Ectima thecla lerina Nymphidium lysimon Eunica alpais Nymphidium balbinus Eunica amelio Nymphidium caricae Eunica clytia Nymphidium chione Eunica volumna Pandemos pasiphae Hamadryas albicornus Perophtalma lasus Hamadryas arinome Pirascca tyriotes Hamadryas chloe Rhetus arcius Hamadryas feronia Rhetus periander Hamadryas laodamia Sarota chrysus Nessaea obrina** Sarota spicata Nessaea batesii Setabis gelasine Nessaea hewitsoni Stalachtis calliope Nica flavilla Stalachtis phaedusa Panacea prola Synargis orestessa Panacea regina Paulogramma peristera Nymphalidae Phrrhogyra amphiro Nymphalinae Pyrrhogyra crameri Anartia amathae Pyrrhogyra cuparina Anartia jatrophae Pyrrhogyra cf nasica Baeotus deucalion Pyrrhogyra otolais Eresia eunice Temenis laothoe Eresia pelonia Eresia (Phyciodes) plagiata Historis odius

Charaxinae Agrias claudina


Archaeoprepona amphimachus Archaeoprepona demophon Archaeoprepona demophon muson Archaeoprepona licomedes Consul fabius Hypna clytemnestra Memphis phantes** Memphis arachne Memphis oenomaus Memphis philomena Memphis offa Prepona eugenes Prepona dexamenus Prepona laertes Prepona pheridamas Zaretis isidora Zaretis itys Coenophlebia fabius**

Haeterini Cithaerias aurora Cithaerias menander Cithaerias pireta Haetera macleannania Haetera piera Pierella astyoche Pierella hortona Pierella lamia Pierella lena Pierella lucia Euptychiini Caeruleuptychia scopulata Chloreuptychia agatha Chloreuptychia herseis Euptychia binoculata Euptychia labe Euptychia myncea

Cyrestinae Marpesia berania Marpesia crethon Marpesia petreus

Euptychia renata Hermeuptychia hermes Magneuptychia analis Magneuptychia libye Magneuptychia ocnus Magneuptychia ocypete Magneuptychia tiessa Pareuptychia hesionides Pareuptychia ocirrhoe Taygetis cleopatra Cleopatra Satyr Echo Satyr

Apaturinae Doxocopa agathina Doxocopa griseldis Doxocopa laurentia Doxocopa linda

Limenitidinae Adelpha amazona Adelpha cocala Adelpha cytherea Adelpha erotia Adelpha iphicleola Adelpha iphiclus Adelpha lerna Adelpha melona Adelpha mesentina Adelpha naxia Adelpha panaema Adelpha phrolseola Adelpha thoasa Adelpha viola Adelpha ximena Satyrinae Satyrs and Woodnymphs

Taygetis echo Taygetis mermeria Taygetis sosis Morphini Antirrhea hela Antirrhea philoctetes avernus Morpho achilles Morpho deidamia Morpho helenor Morpho menelaus Morpho peleides Morpho polycarmes Brassolini Bia actorion Caligo eurilochus Caligo idomeneus idomeneides

Sosis Satyr Morphos

Common Brown Morpho


Caligo illioneus Caligo teucer Caligo placidiamus Catoblepia berecynthia Catoblepia cassiope Catoblepia generosa Catoblepia soranus Catoblepia xanthus Catoblepia xanthicles** Opsiphanes invirae

Methone cecilia Oleria gunilla Oleria ilerdina Oleria tigilla Tithorea harmonia

Heliconinae Acraeini Actinote sp. Heliconiini Dryas iulia Eueides eunice Eueides isabella Eueides lampeto Eueides lybia Heliconius erato Heliconius hecale Heliconius melponmene Heliconius numata Heliconius sara Heliconius xanthocles Heliconius doris Philaethria dido

Passion Vine Butterflies

Danainae Danaini Danaus plexippus Ithomiini Aeria eurimidea Ceratinia tutia Hypoleria sarepta Hyposcada anchiala Hyposcada illinissa Hypothyris anastasia Hypothyris fluonia Ithomia amarilla Ithomia salapia Mechanitis lysimnia Mechanitis mazaeus Mechanitis messenoides Methona confusa psamathe


9.2 GVI Amazon Yachana Reserve Trail Map


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful