Differences in the diurnal and nocturnal use of intertidal feeding grounds by Redshank Tringa totanus

19Citations
Citations of this article
59Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Capsule: Redshank used more sites and had larger ranges at night than during the day. Aims: To determine whether there were differences in how wintering Redshank used intertidal feeding grounds during the day and night. Methods: The movements of 38 Redshank caught and radiotagged at two neighbouring sites on the Severn Estuary were monitored during four different study periods between January 1997 and October 1999. Results: Individuals used a greater number of sites at night than in the day (on average, two as opposed to one). Kernel home range analyses also indicated that individuals used larger core areas and home ranges at night. In addition, there was a significant difference between the sizes of ranges of birds caught at two neighbouring sites. One foraging site was almost entirely avoided during the day, probably due to disturbance from an adjacent heliport, but was used by the majority of individuals at night when the heliport was unused. This site was rich in invertebrates as a result of the high organic and nutrient input from a sewage outfall pipe. Redshank also used riverine mudflats less during the night, preferring more open mudflats - perhaps to avoid nocturnal predators. Conclusions: Comparison with previous studies suggests that the importance of sites predominantly used at night and the total extent of the areas used by waders may be underestimated by studies that rely on daytime surveys alone. It is important, therefore, that information on nocturnal distributions should be available to inform decisions on site management and protection. © 2005 British Trust for Ornithology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Burton, N. H. K., & Armitage, M. J. S. (2005). Differences in the diurnal and nocturnal use of intertidal feeding grounds by Redshank Tringa totanus. Bird Study, 52(2), 120–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063650509461381

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free