Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

Comparative Analysis of the Diversity of Bird Species in Rural and Urban Areas of the
Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu
I Viji Margaret 1*, L Jeyapraba2*, M.I. Delighta Mano Joyce 3*and M Balasaraswathi 4*
1
Corresponding author*: Assistant Professor and Head, PG Department of Zoology, Sarah
Tucker College (Autonomous),
2
Associate Professor and Head, Zoology Department and research Centre, Sarah Tucker College
(Autonomous)
3
Assistant Professor and Head, PG Department of Zoology, Sadakathullah Appa College
(Autonomous)
4
Research Scholar (full time), Department of Zoology, Sadakathullah Appa College
(Autonomous)
(Affiliated to Manonmaniam Sundaranar University,Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu, India.)

Abstract

Bird species richness and community structure differed from region to region. Urban
development leads to changes in habitat structure and resource base. A total of 31 species of
birds belonging to 26 families and 13 orders were recorded from the two study sites (urban and
rural area). Among these, 13 species were passerines and 18 species non passerine birds. Species
diversity in Ariyapuram was (28 species) significantly higher than that of Sarah Tucker College
campus (21 species).Six feeding guilds were assessed by the study and insectivores were the
most dominant group. The insectivorous feeding guild was mostly composed of species from
families Apodidae and Hirundidae. The results of this study suggest that higher bird diversity is
found in rural areas than in urban areas. To save the urban avifauna, now-a-days reforestation is
necessary to create some natural habitat like gardens, parks and lakes besides the human
habitation to facilitate the foraging, sheltering and breeding for birds. Therefore, a conservation
plan should be under taken by the government to save the rural and urban species of birds and
their sustainable population. Additionally, people are more likely to take action to conserve
biodiversity if they have direct contact with nature.

Keywords: Bird diversity, Urban, Rural, Feeding guilds, Conservation.

Introduction

Biodiversity is essential for human survival and economic wellbeing and for the ecosystem
function and stability [1]. Biodiversity is the variety of life in all its forms, levels, and

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 47

Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

combinations; including plants, animals, micro-organisms and ecosystems. This simple measure
of biodiversity, based solely on the number of different species in a given area, is also called
species richness by ecologists [2]. In many large-scale biogeographical studies, biodiversity is
synonymous with species richness. Species are the elementary units of biological association,
and any change in the species diversity may alter to some extent ecosystem functions and
services [3]. Species diversity, species richness and biodiversity are widely used terms
(sometimes interchangeably) in ecology and natural resource management. Birds are some of the
most prominent species of the Earth’s biodiversity and being sensitive to environmental changes
they act as key indicators for assessing the status of ecosystem health [4]. Assessing the bird
diversity of a habitat over time and space is one of the key issues for avian community
ecologists. Richness, abundance and community composition are often used by ecologists to
understand the diversity of species in their natural occurrence [5].

The avian fauna of India includes 1300 species of which 42 are endemic and 26 are rare or
accidental [6]. 82 species are globally threatened [7]. Among them, 900 are resident species and
the rest are migratory [8, 9]. The Avian fauna habituated throughout the tropical plains and in all
elevations of the mountain covered with various tropical forest types [10]. Each bird species has
its own preferences and requirements in terms of food, roosting, and nesting [11]. The more
diverse the vegetation, greater is the variety of birdlife. There is a direct relationship between
vegetation diversity and bird diversity [12]. Hence, the present study was set out to obtain
information on the presence, richness, diversity and activities of various bird species in rural and
urban area of Tirunelveli District

Methodology

Bird survey
Data on bird community structure was taken from December 2017 to March 2018 at 2 locations
viz: urban (Sarah Tucker College campus) and rural areas (Ariyapuram) of Tirunelveli District.
Point count method was used and birds were identified using field guides and books [13]. Birds
of different species were identified during the data collection from all the two locations. The bird
counts were carried out in the morning from 6.00 am to 8.00 am. and in the evening from 4.00
pm to 6.00 pm. Photographs of identified bird species were also taken during the study.

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 48

 Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

S.no Zoological name Family Order name Ariya puram Sarah Status Feeding
Tucker Guilds
Data analysis
College
1. iviaodiversi tC
Columba lB yoilnudmibciedsaemay bCeolcuomm fourtmeeds bas e√d on the recom√mendations R[e1s4id, e1n5t ].
bip The dIantsaectivorous,
collected, giving pa rticulars on th e total number of families, gene ra, species an d individuals i ngaralilnivorous
2. Spilopelia chinensis Columbidae Columbiformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,
the microhabitats studied may be pooled together and processed.
insectivorous,

i) Species richness: It is the total number of species reco rded in a pa rticular area. grainivorous
3. Alcedo azurea Alcedinidae Coraciiformes √ √ Migrant Frugivorous,

ii) Species diversity: Species diversity was calculated by Shannon-Weiner Index (H‟)
as

H’=Σ pi In pi

Where: H = the Shannon diversity index, Pi = fraction of the entire population made up of
species i, S = numbers of species encountered, Σ = sum from species 1 to species S.
Statistical Analysis

One way ANOVA (Analysis of variance) was used to test the relationship of bird abundance and
richness across the two habitats at 5% significance level. Data obtained for number of birds in
each habitat was first tested for normality and transformed using square root method since it was
count data. Multiple comparison test (Tukey HSD) was used to further establish significant
difference between the two habitats.

Results and discussion

Bird species richness and community structure differed from region to region. Studies reported
that species is found with greatest frequency and abundance in the habitats to which it is best
adapted [15]. Species richness in an area is dependent on the availability of food, climate,
evolutionary history and predation pressure.

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 49

 Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

insectivorous
4. Merops apiaster Meropidae Coraciiformes √ √ Migrant Insectivorous
5. Eudynamys Cuculidae Cuculiformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,
scolopacea insectivorous
6. Pavo cristatus Phasianidae Galliformes √ √ Resident Insectivorous,
grainvorous
7. Cotumix coutumix Phasianidae Galliformes √ √ Migrant Grainivorous,
insectivorous
8. Corvus Corvidae Passeriformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,
brachyrhynchos insectivorous,
grainvorous
9. Corvus Corvidae Passeriformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,
macrorhynchos insectivorous,
grainvorous
10. Cinnyris asiaticus Nectariniidae Passeriformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,
nectarivorous
11. Acridotheres tristis Strunidae Passeriformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,
insectivorous
12. Turdoies striata Leiothrichidae Passeriformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,
nectarivorous,
insectivorous,
grainivorous
13. Passer domesticus Passeridae Passeriformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,
insectivorous
14 Oriolus oriolus Oriolidea Passeriformes √ - Resident Frugivorous,
nectivorous,
insectivorous
15 Ficedula nigrorufa Muscicapidae Passeriformes √ - Resident Insectivorous
16 Artamus Artamidae Passeriformes √ - Resident Insectivorous
leucorynchus
17 Dicrurus Dicruridae Passeriformes √ √ Migrant Frugivorous,
macrocercus insectivorous
18 Pycnonotus cafer Pycnonofidae Passeriformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,
insectivorous
19 Lonchura punctual Hirundinidae Passeriformes √ - Resident Insectivorous
20 Hirundo smithii Hirundinidae Passeriformes √ - Resident Frugivorous,
insectivorous

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 50

 Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

21 Veniliornis kirkii Picidae Piciformes √ √ Resident Frugivorous,

insectivorous,
grainivorous
22 Loriculus vemalis Psittaculidae Psittaciformes √ √ Resident Insectivorous
grainivorous
23 Athene noctua Strigidae Strigiformes √ √ Migrant Insectivorous
24 Ardeola grayii Ardeidae Pelecaniformes - √ Resident Insectivorous
25 Pseudibis papillosa Threskiornithi Pelecaniformes √ - Resident Insectivorous,
dae grainvorous
26 Ardea alba Ardeidae Pelecaniformes √ - Resident Insectivorous
27 Egretta garzetta Ardeidae Pelecaniformes √ - Resident Insectivorous
28 Amaurornis Rallidae Gruiformes √ √ Migrant Insectivorous
phoenicurus
29 Halistur Indus Acciptridae Acciptriformes √ - Resident Insectivorous
30 Mycteria Ciconiidae Ciconiiformes √ √ Migrant Insectivorous
leucocephala
31 Upupa epops Upupidae Bucerotiformes √ √ Resident Insectivorous

Table 1. Bird species diversity in the study area

Species composition

In this study bird species richness and abundance was highest in the rural areas. A total of 31
species of birds belonging to 26 families and 13 orders were recorded from the two study sites
(urban and rural area) (Table 1). Among these, 13 species were passerines and 18 species non
passerine birds.
Table 2: Bird species richness and distribution in ariyapuram and sarah tucker college
campus

S.no Place Richness Shannon-Weiner Index

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 51

Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

1. Ariyapuram 331 2.862

2. Sarah Tucker College 265 2.710

Species diversity and relative abundance between study sites

Species diversity in Ariyapuram was (28 species) significantly higher than that of Sarah
Tucker College campus (21 species) (χ2 = 4.0, p<0.05, df = 1). Among the avifauna, 26 species
were resident and 5 species were migratory. In Ariyapuram area, a total of 28 species of birds
belonging to 24 families under 8 orders were recorded. Regarding the resident status, 25 species
(89.2%) were resident and 3 species (10.7%) migrants. Among rural avifauna most common one
in the Asia are common crow, house sparrow, myna and egrets. These are found to be more
commensally as they always try to live near human settlements and keep control of insect pests.

In contrast, in Sarah Tucker College campus, a total of 21 species of birds belonging to 18

families under 10 orders were recorded. Among the avifauna, 16 species were resident and 5
species were migratory. The highest density was found for house crow followed by common
myna and jungle babbler.In both study sites house crow (Corvus splendens) was most dominant
species. The number of bird species which was fairly common and rarely found were
significantly different between two ecological sites (Tukey HSD, p<0.05).

Table 3 shows Bird species richness and distribution in Ariyapuram and Sarah Tucker
College campus. In Shannon-Weinner diversity index was higher in Ariyapuram (2.862) than in
Sarah Tucker college campus (2.710). (ANOVA on Shannon-Wiener index; F = 0.0464, P =
0.981).

The results of this study suggest that higher bird diversity is found in rural areas than in
urban areas. The rural areas examined in this study is described as a mixture of tall, large fruit-
bearing trees with a wide canopy cover, and the greater diversity of birds in this habitat may be
influenced by the presence of important resources that allow birds to tolerate disturbance due to
change in land use. Most of the species identified in this habitat were residents, and few were
migrants.

Feeding Guilds

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 52

Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

The foraging habits of the identified birds were assessed to explore the variation in
avifaunal composition among habitat types; according to Pearman (2002), variation in vegetation
structure affects the distribution of bird foraging guilds [17].

Figure 1 shows the observed bird species diversity in feeding type. Six feeding guilds were
assessed by the study and insectivores were the most dominant group. The insectivorous feeding
guild was mostly composed of species from families Apodidae and Hirundidae.

25

20
No.of Species

15

10

0
FRUGIVOROUS FRUGIVOROUS AND INSECTIVOROUS INSECTIVOROUS GRAINIVOROUS NECTARIVOROUS
NECTARIVOROUS AND FRUGIVOROUS

Figure 1 Observed bird species diversity in feeding type

Next to insectivores, frugivores birds were the second most abundant group, particularly in rural
areas. The abundance and richness of fruiting plants is important and associated with the
diversity of frugivorous bird species and foraging behaviours in certain habitat types [18]. The
tolerance of frugivorous species to degraded landscapes is important during initial forest
succession and restoration in tropical regions. Finally, nectarivores were the least abundant in all
of the areas. Waltert et al. (2005) found fewer species of nectarivores in agroecosystems as the
intensity of land modification increased [19]. This study provided information about the diversity
and structure of bird communities in different land-uses in Tirunelveli district, and the results
suggest that the availability of diverse food sources and foraging and roosting sites are essential
factors for the diversity and abundance of bird species in certain habitat types. Furthermore, this

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 53

Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

suggests that to conserve native, endemic and migrant species in all land-use systems, important
food sources and habitat structure for a variety of bird species must be maintained.

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest that higher bird diversity is found in rural areas than in urban
areas. To save the urban avifauna, now-a-days reforestation is necessary to create some natural
habitat like gardens, parks and lakes besides the human habitation to facilitate the foraging,
sheltering and breeding for birds. Plantation of fruit trees within residential area can attract many
frugivorous and insectivorous birds to live there. It is well known that birds are friends of human
as they destroy lot of harmful insects and mosquitoes from the environment. Therefore, a
conservation plan should be under taken by the government to save the rural and urban species of
birds and their sustainable population. Additionally, people are more likely to take action to
conserve biodiversity if they have direct contact with nature.

Acknowledgement

I thank the Department of Zoology and Research Centre, Sarah Tucker College for providing all
facilities for this research work.

References

1. Thakur As Khar PK 2008.Species Diversity and composition of forest Vegetation of Sagar

District in central India.Indian Foreter 801-813
2. MacDonald G 2003. Biogeography: introduction to space, time and life. John Wiley and Sons,
Inc pp 406-407.
3. You M Vasseur L Regniere J. and Zheng Y 2009. The Three Dimensions of Species Diversity.
The Open Conservation Biology Journal 3, 82-88.

4. Taper M L K Bohning-Gaese and J H Brown 1995.Individualistic responses of bird species to

environmental change. Oecologia101: 478–486.

5. Magurran A E 2004. Measuring biological diversity. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 54

Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

6. Mennechez K 2006. Riparian bird response to vegetation structure: a multiscale analysis using
LiDAR measurements of canopy height. Ecol Appl 19:1848-57

7. Wadatakar S 2001. Effect of development on bird species composition of two urban forested
wetlands in Staten Island, New York. J Field Ornithol 63:455–61

8. Jayson E A and D N Mathew 2000. Diversity and species–abundance distribution of birds in

the tropical Forests of Silent Valley, Kerala. JBNHS.97 (3).Pp:390-399.

9. Singh S 2008. Garden birds of Delhi, Agra and Jaipur.wisdom tree,Daraya ganjm,new delhi,
pp.111.

10. Ali Salim and Sidney Dhillon Ripley 1983. A Compact Handbook of the Birds of India and
Pakistan Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

11. Ricklefs R E 2003. Global variation in the diversification rate of passerine birds. Ecology
87:2468–2478.

12. Ericson P G P,Irestedt M and Johansson U S 2003 Evolution, biogeography, and patterns of
diversification in passerine birds. J Avian Biol. 34:3–15

13. Ali Z 2012. Comparative avian faunal diversity of Jiwani Coastal Wetlands and Taunsa
Barrage Wildlife Sanctuary, Pakistan. The J. Anim. Plant Sci., 21(2 Suppl.): 381-387

14. Ludwig J B and Reynolds J F 1988. Statistical Ecology: A primer on methods and
computing. John Wiley and Sons. New York

15. Southwood T R E and P A Henderson. 2000. Ecological methods. Blackwell Science,

Oxford.

16. Pearson D L 1975. The relation of foliage complexity to ecological diversity of three
Amazonian bird communities. Condor.77: 453–466

17. Pearman P B 2002. The scale of community structure: habitat variation and avian guilds in
tropical forest understory. Ecological Monographs. 72(1):19–39

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 55

Positif Journal Issn No : 0048-4911

18. Moegenburg S M and Levey D J 2003. Do frugivores respond to fruit harvest? An

experimental study of short-term responses. Ecology. 84(10):2600–2

19. Waltert M, Bobo K S, Sainge N M, Fermon H and Muhlenberg M 2005. From forest to
farmland: Habitat effects on afrotropical forest bird diversity. Ecological Applications.
15(4):1351–1366

10

Vol 23, Issue 1, 2023 Page No : 56