Is the uncommon Black-chinned Honeyeater a more specialised forager than the co-occurring and common Fuscous Honeyeater?
G. W. Lollback A B , H. A. Ford A and S. C. Cairns AA School of Environment and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: glollbac@une.edu.au
Emu 108(2) 125-132 https://doi.org/10.1071/MU07035
Submitted: 6 June 2007 Accepted: 19 March 2008 Published: 1 May 2008
Abstract
In New South Wales (NSW), Australia, the Black-chinned Honeyeater (Melithreptus gularis) is uncommon in comparison with the co-occurring Fuscous Honeyeater (Lichenostomus fuscus), which is common. The relative rarity of the former may be because it specialises on a narrow range of resources that are not abundant. Alternatively, it may be excluded from more abundant food resources by other bird species, such as the Fuscous Honeyeater. We thus compared the foraging ecologies of these two species on the New England Tableland of NSW. Broad-scale quantitative analysis of foraging, using tree species, foraging height, height of tree species, and conventional categories of foraging manoeuvres (glean, probe, snatch, hawk and pounce) revealed only slight differences between the foraging ecology of the two species. However, when foraging was investigated using finer scale analysis of gleaning techniques, Black-chinned Honeyeaters were found to spend a greater proportion of effort probing between leaves that were bound together than did Fuscous Honeyeaters. This supports the hypothesis that Black-chinned Honeyeaters are less common than Fuscous Honeyeaters because they are more specialised in foraging and their food supply is uncommon. Aggression did not seem to inhibit foraging for either species.
Acknowledgements
Thank you to Damon Oliver for valuable insights into the Black-chinned Honeyeater and the Bundarra Downs. Veronica Doerr provided valuable knowledge on avian ecology and Shannon Butler assisted in fieldwork. We would also like to thank the contribution of two anonymous reviewers in their improvement of the manuscript. The study was conducted under appropriate scientific permits from the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation and animal ethics approval from the University of New England, Armidale, NSW.
Alatalo, R. V. , Gustafsson, L. , and Lundberg, A. (1986). Interspecific competition and niche changes in tits (Parus spp.): evaluation of nonexperimental data. American Naturalist 127, 819–834.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bock, W. J. , and Hiroyuki, M. (1971). Morphology and evolution of the ectethmoid-mandibular articulation in the Meliphagidae (Aves). Journal of Morphology 135, 13–50.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cale, P. (1994). Temporal changes in the foraging behavior of insectivorous birds in a sclerophyll forest in Tasmania. Emu 94, 116–126.
Hejl, S. J. , Verner, J. , and Bell, G. W. (1990). Sequential versus initial observations in studies of avian foraging. Studies in Avian Biology 13, 166–173.
Hodgson, P. , French, K. , and Major, R. E. (2006). Comparison of foraging behaviour of small, urban-sensitive insectivores in continuous woodland and woodland remnants in a suburban landscape. Wildlife Research 33, 591–603.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mac Nally, R. (1994). Habitat-specific guild structure of forest birds in South-Eastern Australia: a regional scale perspective. Journal of Animal Ecology 63, 988–1001.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Oliver, D. L. (2001). Activity budget of the Regent Honeyeater, Xanthomyza phrygia, in northern New South Wales. Australian Journal of Zoology 49, 695–712.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Slater, P. J. (1994). Niche overlap between three sympatric, short-billed honeyeaters in Tasmania. Emu 94, 186–192.
Woinarski, J. C. Z. , and Cullen, J. M. (1984). Distribution of invertebrates on foliage in forests of south-eastern Australia. Australian Journal of Ecology 9, 207–232.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |