WILD BIRD DISTRIBUTION, DIVERSITY AND VIRAL SURVEILLANCE IN INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TROPICAL AGRICULTURE, IBADAN BY TAIYE ADENIYI, ADEYANJU [B. Sc. Biology (Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria), M.Sc. Conservation Biology (University of Jos)] A Thesis in the Department of Wildlife and Ecotourism Management Submitted to the Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY of the UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN MARCH 2014 i UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN COVER WILD BIRD DISTRIBUTION, DIVERSITY AND VIRAL SURVEILLANCE IN INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TROPICAL AGRICULTURE, IBADAN TAIYE ADENIYI ADEYANJU ii UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN ABSTRACT The distribution and abundance of niche specific bird species tend to narrow and decline due to habitat fragmentation and alteration attributed to human development. Nonetheless, the proximity of free ranging poultry to Wild Birds (WB) hotspots provide increased opportunity for interaction and disease transmission between wild and domestic birds. However, the diversity and viral prevalence of WB have not been fully documented in Nigeria. Therefore, diversity indices and viral prevalence of some WB species in International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria were investigated. Line transects and mist-netting techniques were used for the WB survey. Complete randomised design was used to assign nine transects 1 km each in forest, farm and dam. Habitat variables were measured in 200m sections. The habitat types were subdivided into ten types of land-use namely; forest, forest edge, cassava, maize, maize-cassava, citrus-cassava-maize, dam-grassland, dam-gallery forest, rice-paddy and ponds. Transects were surveyed monthly and birds trapped quarterly over 22 months. Surveys were carried out from 5.30 am-12.00 noon and 3.00-6.30 pm. Birds seen or heard were identified to species level with the aid of Helmsfield guide of Western Africa and collection of bird calls. Trapped birds were ringed and biometric measurements taken. Cloacal, oropharyngeal and faecal swabs were collected into virus transport medium. Viral RNA was extracted from swabs and reverse transcription PCR performed to test for some viruses. Bird Species Abundance (BSA), Bird Species Richness (BSR), Bird Species Evenness (BSE), Shannon-Wiener diversity index (H), Simpson’s diversity index (D) and iii UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Viral Prevalence (VP) were determined. Data was analysed using descriptive statistics and ANOVA at p=0.05. A total of 985 WB in 66 species were trapped with a recapture of 15.3%, while IITA yielded a species richness of 238 species of WB in 61 families. Highest capture from forest, farm and dam were Bleda canicapillus (135), Ploceus nigricollis (38) and Actophilornis africana (12) with recapture of 35.6%, 0% and 8.3% respectively. Streptopelia semitorquata had the highest seasonal sighting index of 36.2±6.7 birds. The BSA (73.5±167.8) was highest in dam, while D (0.3±0.2) was highest in farm. The BSR (9.0±4.5), BSE (0.9±0.1) and H (1.9±0.5) were highest in forest. Conversely, BSA (18.6±13.2) and D (0.1±0.1) were lowest in the forest. In addition, BSR (6.8±4.3) and H (1.4±0.6) were lowest in farm, while BSE (0.8±0.2) was lowest in the dam. Pooling all data, BSR (morning: 8.6±0.4, evening: 7.4±0.8) and H (morning: 1.6±0.1, evening: 1.49±0.2) were higher in the morning, while BSA (morning: 55±13.5 birds, evening: 66.5±45.5 birds) and D (morning: 0.2±0.1, evening: 0.4±0.1) were higher in the evening. The investigated viruses and their prevalence were Newcastle disease, avian influenza, rotavirus, infectious bronchitis, chicken astrovirus, turkey astrovirus I and II with 9.5%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 0% and 0% respectively. Habitat diversity was responsible for the high bird species diversity. Monocultures such as farms and ponds did not support high levels of diversity and richness of wild bird species. Bird species increased with habitat diversity. Viral prevalence among wild birds was low, suggesting low possibility of disease transmission from them to domestic birds. Keywords: Bird diversity, Viral prevalence, Wild bird recapture, Land-use Word count: 500 iv UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN DEDICATION This research is dedicated with praise and thanksgiving to the Almighty God who is the essence of my being and living. v UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I give thanks and adoration to Almighty God for His grace, mercies and glory through the period of this study. I express my profound gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. G. A. Lameed for his contribution toward the successful completion of this project. I also show my appreciation to the co- supervisor Dr. A. A. Owoade for granting me access to the use of his laboratory for this project. I am grateful to the entire staff of the Institute of Immunology especially the virology team at the Laboratoire national De Sante for the support and funding for a major part of this project. To Prof. Dr. C. Mueller, Miss C. Snoeck, and Miss Carole Weiss, I say thanks a million for your care, support, throughout the course of this study. I am grateful to the entire Leventis Project Office at IITA for their support especially Dr. J. Peacock and Mrs. D. Bown. I am also grateful to APLORI staff, (research associates now too many to name) for their collaboration. My thanks also go to Dr. U. Ottosson, for his kind support, criticisms and contribution that have added up to make this research work complete. I also say a big thank you to Dr. G. S. Mwansat, and Prof. A.U. Ezealor (Former APLORI Directors) and Dr. S. A. Manu (the current Director) for their support, counsels throughout my course of study there and during this study. vi UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN I thank Professor I. A. Ayodele, Head of Department and other members of staff of Department of Wildlife and Ecotourism Management, University of Ibadan for their pieces of advice and support towards the successful completion of this study I express my affectionate love and unreserved gratitude to my wife, friend and co- researcher, Mrs. T.E Adeyanju for her understanding, care, counselling and support during this study. To my elder brothers and sisters I appreciate you dearly. Thanks for being there for me. My appreciation also goes to my family, immediate and extended, you have all been there. I love you all. I also thank the leadership of the Music departments and members of First Baptist Church Akwanga, Life and Power Assembly, Jos, Scripture Pasture Christian Centre, Samonda, Ibadan for their prayer and counselling throughout the period of this study. vii UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN CERTIFICATION We certify that this research work was carried out by Mr T. A. Adeyanju in the Department of Wildlife and Ecotourism Management, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. The work has not been presented elsewhere for the award of a higher degree, diploma or certificate. Supervisor G. A. Lameed B.Sc., M.Sc., Ph.D. (Ibadan) Associate Professor, Department of Wildlife and Ecotourism Management University of Ibadan, Nigeria Co-Supervisor A. A. Owoade DVM., M.V.Sc., Ph.D. (Ibadan) Associate Professor, Department of Veterinary Medicine University of Ibadan, Nigeria viii UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE OF THESIS………………………………………………………… i COVER…………………………………………………………………….. ii ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………. iii DEDICATION……………………………………………………………. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………. vi CERTIFICATION……………………………………………………….. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………… ix LIST OF PLATES……………………………………………………….. xiv LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………….. xv LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………… xvi LIST OF APPENDICES………………………………………………….. xviii ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………….. xix CHAPTER ONE/INTRODUCTION…………………………………… 1 1.0 GENERAL INTRODUCTION………………………………… 1 1.1 JUSTIFICATION……………………………………………… 3 1.2 MAIN OBJECTIVE…………………………………………… 3 1.3 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES……………………………………… 3 CHAPTER TWO/ LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………… 5 2.1.0 DEFINITION OF A FOREST………………………………… 5 2.1.1 TROPICAL FOREST STATUS……………………………… 6 2.1.2 INLAND WATER AREAS…………………………………… 9 2.1.3 NIGERIA’S BIODIVERSITY 10 2.1.4 PROTECTED AREAS………………………………………… 11 2.1.4.1 UN CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (CBD)………………………………………………….. 12 2.1.4.2 UNITED NATIONS MILENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (UN-MDG)…………………………………… 13 ix UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 2.1.4.3 UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITES……………… 13 2.1.4.4 UNESCO MAN AND THE BIOSPHERE RESERVES… 14 2.1.4.5 THE RAMSAR CONVENTION ON WETALNDS…….. 14 2.1.4.6 IMPORTANT BIRD AREAS IN NIGERIA……………… 14 2.1.4.7 CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES (CITES)………………………. 17 2.1.5 WHAT ARE BIRDS WORTH? ..................................................... 18 2.1.6 WETLAND BIRDS……………………………………………… 23 2.2.0 FACTORS AFFECTING BIRD SPECIES DISTRIBUTION AND DENSITY………………………………………………. 24 2.2.1 EFFECTS OF HABITAT TYPE AND VEGETATION VARIABLES………………………………………………… 25 2.2.2 WILD BIRDS AND VIRUSES………………………………… 26 2.2.3 MIGRATORY BIRDS AND VIRUSES………………………. 28 2.3.0 AVIAN INFLUENZA VIRUS…………………………………… 28 2.3.1 PREVALENCE OF VIRUSES…………………………………… 29 2.4.0 WEST NILE VIRUS……………………………………………… 30 2.5.0 NEWCASTLE DISEASE VIRUS………………………………… 31 2.6.0 TRANSMISSION OF VIRUSES………………………………… 33 2.6.1 FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR TRANSMISSION OF SOME VIRUSES………………………………………………………… 33 2.6.1.1 INTEGRATED INDOOR COMMERCIAL POULTRY…… 34 2.6.1.2 LIVE POULTRY MARKETS (LPM)……………………… 34 2.6.1.3 BACKYARD POULTRY…………………………………… 35 2.6.1.4 GAME HUNTING AND COLLECTION…………………… 36 2.6.1.5 CLIMATE…………………………………………………… 36 2.6.1.6 ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING OF POULTRY………………… 37 2.6.1.7 MANURE…………………………………………………… 37 2.7.0 POLYCROMASE CHAIN REACTION (PCR)…………………… 37 2.8.0 CAPTURE TECHNIQUES FOR WILD BIRDS………………… 38 2.8.1 MIST NETTING………………………………………………… 39 x UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 2.8.2 BIRD HANDLING AND RINGING…………………………… 40 2.8.3 VIRUS SURVEILLANCE……………………………………… 41 2.9.0 BIRD DIVERSITY INDICES………………………………… 43 CHAPTER THREE/MATERIALS AND METHODS………………… 46 3.1.0 DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION OF STUDY AREA…… 46 3.2.0 CENSUS METHOD………………………………………… 49 3.3.1 DATA COLLECTION………………………………………. 49 3.3.2 SURVEY OF WILD BIRDS………………………………… 49 3.3.3 MEASURING HABITAT VARIABLES…………………… 50 3.3.4 SAMPLE COLLECTION FROM BIRDS………………….. 50 3.3.4 SAMPLE STORAGE AND PRECAUTIONS……………… 53 3.4.1 RNA ISOLATION, AMPLIFICATION AND ANALYSIS…. 53 3.4.2 RNA ISOLATION…………………………………………… 53 3.4.3 DETECTION PCR………………………………………….. 55 3.4.3.1 RT-PCR……………………………………………….. 55 3.4.3.2 PCR REACTION…………………………………….. 58 3.4.4.0 DETERMINATION OF POSITIVE SAMPLES………. 61 3.4.4.1 GEL CASTING………………………………………… 61 3.4.4.2 GEL LOADING AND ELECTROPHORESIS………… 61 3.4.4.3 DNA BAND DETECTION……………………………. 61 3.4.4.4 DNA SEQUENCING…………………………………. 62 3.5.0 STATISTICAL DATA ANALYSIS………………………… 63 3.5.1 POSSIBLE BIASES IN METHODOLOGY……………….. 64 CHAPTER FOU /RESULTS…………………………………………. 65 4.0 BIRD SPECIES INVENTORY……………………………… 65 4.1.0 TESTS OF NORMALITY…………………………………… 74 4.1.1 BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY……………………………….. 74 4.1.2 BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS……………………………….. 76 4.1.3 BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE……………………………. 77 4.1.4 BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS……………………………….. 78 4.2.0 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ACROSS HABITATS………………… 79 xi UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.2.1 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY… 79 4.2.2 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES 81 RICHNESS…… 4.2.3 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE 82 4.2.4 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS…. 83 4.3.0 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY POOLING ALL 84 HABITATS…………… 4.3.1 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY…. 84 4.3.2 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS…. 86 4.3.3 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE 87 4.3.4 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS… 88 4.4.0 EFFECT OF QUARTERS OF THE YEAR ON DIVERSITY INDICES ACROSS HABITATS……………………………………. 89 4.4.1 EFFECT OF QUARTERS OF THE YEAR ON BIRD SPECIES. . DIVERSITY……………………………………………………… 89 4.4.2 EFFECT OF SEASON ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS………. 92 4.4.3 EFFECT OF SEASON ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE……. 93 4.4.4 EFFECT OF SEASON ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS………… 94 4.5.0 EFFECT OF LAND USE…………………………………………….. 95 4.5.1 EFFECTS OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY BASED ON TRANSECTS…………………………………........ 95 4.5.2 EFFECT OF LAND-USE ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS…….. 98 4.5.3 EFFECT OF LAND-USE ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE…. 99 4.5.4 EFFECT OF LAND-USE ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS……. 100 4.6.0 SPECIES EFFORT CURVE………………………………………….. 101 4.7.0 WILDBIRD VIRUS SURVEILLANCE……………………………… 103 CHAPTER FIVE/DISCUSSION………………………………………………. 111 5.1.0 INVENTORY OF BIRD FAMILIES IN THE IITA………………… 111 5.1.1 BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY IN RELATION TO HABITAT STRUCTURE…………………………………………. 131 5.1.2 BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS IN RELATION TO HABITAT xii UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN STRUCTURE………………………………………………….. 132 5.1.3 BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE IN RELATION TO HABITAT STRUCTURE ………………………………………………… 134 5.1.4 BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS IN RELATION TO HABITAT STRUCTURE …………………………………………………. 135 5.2.0 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY INDICES ACROSS HABITATS……………………………………. 136 5.2.1 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY INDICES, POOLING DATA OF ALL HABITATS…………………. 137 5.3.0 EFFECT OF SEASON ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY INDICES ACROSS HABITATS…………………………………….. 138 5.4.0 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY INDICES 139 5.4.1 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY BASED ON TRANSECTS……………………………………….. 140 5.4.2 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS BASED ON TRANSECTS……………………………………….. 141 5.4.3 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE BASED ON TRANSECTS……………………………………….. 142 5.4.4 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS BASED ON TRANSECTS……………………………………….. 143 5.5.0 WILDBIRD SPECIES ACCUMULATION CURVE……………… 143 5.6.0 WILDBIRD VIRUS SURVEILLANCE………………………………. 144 CHAPTER SIX/CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS …………..... 148 6.1 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………….. 148 6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………….. 153 REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………… 156 xiii UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIST OF PLATES Plate 1: Macrosphenus kempi Kemp’s Longbill……………………………. 66 Plate 2: Cossypha cyanocampter Blue-shouldered Robin Chat…………….. 66 Plate 3: Phyllastrephus baumanni Baumann’s Greenbul……………………… 67 Plate 4: Alcedo cristata Malachite Kingfisher………………………………. 67 Plate 5: Ploceus nigricollis Black-necked Weaver…………………………… 68 Plate 5: Cisticola erythrops Red-faced Cisticola……………………………… 68 Plate 6: Halcyon senegalensis Woodland Kingfisher…………………………. 69 Plate 7: Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove………………………….. 69 Plate 8: Cinnyris minullus Tiny Sunbird……………………………………… 70 Plate 9: Terpisiphone rufiventer Red-bellied Paradise Flycatcher……………. 71 Plate 10: Dyaphorophyia castanea Chestnut Wattle-eye………………………. 71 Plate 11: Halcyon malimbica Blue-breasted Kingfisher……………………… 72 Plate 12: Ptilopsis leucotis Northern White-faced Owl…………………………… 72 Plate 13: Ploceus cucullatus Village Weaver Colony………………………….. 73 Plate 14: Saxicola rubetra Whinchat, a Palearctic migrant…………………… 73 xiv UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIST OF TABLES Table 3.0.1: Composition of the viral transport medium………………….. 52 Table 3.1: RT-PCR mixture 1 and 2……………………………………… 57 Table 3.2: Primers required for running PCR templates …………………… 59 Table 3.3: General PCR plate set-up………………………………………. 60 Table 4.1: Bird species diversity, abundance, richness and evenness index 65 across habitats………………………………………………….. Table 4.2: Viral prevalence among sampled birds in IITA environs………. 104 xv UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.2: Location of Important bird Areas in Nigeria and their sizes…. 16 Figure 3.1: Map of Nigeria showing location of Ibadan in Oyo State…… 47 Figure 3.2: IITA West Bank and forest trails…………………………….. 48 Figure 3.3: 1kb DNA Ladder…………………………………………….. 62 Figure 4.1: Bird species diversity across habitats (Shannon’s index)…… 75 Figure 4.2: Bird species diversity across habitats (Simpson’s index)…… 75 Figure 4.3: Bird species richness across habitats…………………………. 76 Figure 4.4: Bird species abundance across habitats………………………. 77 Figure 4.5: Bird species evenness across habitats…………………………. 77 Figure 4.6: Bird species diversity and time of day (Simpson’s index)…….. 80 Figure 4.7: Bird species diversity and time of day (Shannon’s index)…….. 80 Figure 4.8: Bird species richness and time of day…………………………. 81 Figure 4.9: Bird species abundance against time of day…………………. 82 Figure 4.10: Bird species evenness against time of day…………………… 83 Figure 4.11: Shannon’s bird species diversity index against time of day (Pooled data)……………………………………………….. 84 Figure 4.12: Simpson’s bird species diversity index against time of day (Pooled data)……………………………………………….. 85 Figure 4.13: Bird Species richness against time of day (Pooled data)…….. 86 Figure 4.14: Bird Species abundance against time of day (Pooled data)…… 87 Figure 4.15: Evenness index against time of day (Pooled data)…………… 88 Figure 4.16: Bird species diversity against season in the various habitats for the two years (Shannon’s index)………………………………. 90 Figure 4.17: Bird species diversity against season in the various habitats for the two years (Simpson’s index)……………………………. 91 Figure 4.18: Bird species richness against season in the various habitats….. 92 xvi UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Figure 4.19: Bird species abundance against season in the various habitats... 93 Figure 4.20: Bird species evenness against season in the various habitats…. 94 Figure 4.21: Bird species diversity in land-use systems (Shannon’s index)… 96 Figure 4.22: Bird species diversity in land-use systems (Simpson’s index)… 97 Figure 4.23: Bird species richness in land-use systems……………………. 98 Figure 4.24: Bird species abundance in land-use systems………………….. 99 Figure 4.25: Bird species evenness index in land-use systems……………… 100 Figure 4.26: Bird Species effort curve for all transects…………………… 101 Figure 4.27: Species effort curve for habitats and all birds………………… 102 xvii UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1: Sighting frequency of bird species per 100 sections across seasons and landuse types…………………………………… 170 Appendix 2: Composition of bird species observed within IITA environs……………………………………………………… 177 Appendix 3: Composition of bird species trapped within IITA environ……………………………………………………….. 182 Appendix 4: Birds of IITA campus recorded in the present study, plus other recent and earlier records from IITA (sources underlined) and from the Ibadan area………………………………………….. 185 Appendix 5: LSD Multiple Comparisons of Overall bird species diversity, abundance, richness and evenness indices....................... 193 Appendix 6: Descriptive and ANOVA of bird species diversity, abundance, richness and evenness indices across habitat....................... 194 Appendix 7: Multiple Comparisons of bird species diversity across habitat using LSD…………………………………………………… 196 Appendix 8: Multiple Comparisons of abundance, richness and evenness indices across habitat using LSD............................................ 201 xviii UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN ABBREVIATIONS AFRING : African Ringing scheme AIV: Avian Influenza Virus APLORI : A.P Leventis Ornithological Research Instirute APMV: Avian paramyxovirus type 1 AVL: Lysis buffer CITES: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species CBD; Convention on Biological Diversity DAMGAL: Dam Gallery Forest DAMGRA: Dam Grassland dNTP: Deoxy Nitro Tri Phosphate FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization FOREDGE: Forest Edge GCRF: Guinea Congolian Rain Forest HPAI: Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza IBA: Important Bird Area IBV: Avian Infectious Bronchitis IITA: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture IUCN: International Union for the Conservation of Nature LBM: Life Bird Market LPAI: Low Pathogenic Avian Influenza LPM: Live Poultry markets MAZECASS: Maize and Cassava NDV: Newcastle Disease Virus xix UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN NTFP: Non Timber Forest Products OIE: Office International des Epizooties PBS: Phosphate Bovine Saline PCR: Polycromase Chain Reaction RNA: Ribonucleic Acid RT-PCR: Reverse Transcription Polycromase chain reaction SGRS: Sudan Guinea Restricted Species UI: University of Ibadan UNDP: United Nations Development Programme UNICEF: United Nations Children Fund VP: Viral Prevalence WHO: World Health Organization WNV: West Nile Virus xx UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.0 GENERAL INTRODUCTION Wild birds play beneficial roles as insectivores, granivores, nectarinivores and scavengers. They also serve in biological control of some pests, dispersal of seeds, pollination of plants, cleaning, recycling for ecosystem sustenance and ecosystem engineering (Kelly et al., 2004). They are regarded as the best known class of vertebrate animals that occur worldwide in nearly all habitats (Whelan et al., 2008). There are therefore, no controversies in stating that the African continent is endowed with rich biodiversity. Presently, 1,230 sites across 58 states and associated islands of Africa have been described as Important Bird Areas (IBAs) of global importance for wild birds (Fishpool and Evans, 2001). However, birds with affinity for wetland habitats make up 60 percent of wild species infected with highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) and account for a better proportion of wildlife casualties from avian influenza (AI) epidemics. Cases of epizootics of HPAI among wild birds in Asia in 2005 led to the death of thousands of waterfowl; yet this does not simply imply that wild birds are the source of the outbreak (Georg et al., 2006). Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is also widely accepted among virologists as being resident in African bird populations. However, virological and epidemiological information concerning NDV strains circulating within western and central regions of Africa are extremely scarce (Cattoli et al., 20010; Snoeck et al., 2009). 1 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN The term “wetland” encompasses a variety of inland fresh water and marine coastal habitats that share one common feature; soil and substrates that are at least periodically covered with water. (Ramsar Convention Bureau, 1997). Wild birds have been quick to adapt to altered habitats, and they are commonly seen at water reservoirs, flooded agricultural fields, poultry farms, residential premises and also in all natural landscapes. As the most frequently detected hosts of pathogenic influenza virus, wetland birds represent an appropriate target for active disease surveillance. The Anatidae family, also known as water birds is well studied; they are the only group in which avian influenza virus has been found all year round. (Tankersley and Orvis, 2003; Gaidet et al., 2008; Sims and Narrod, 2008). The host source of viral infection resulting in continuous epidemics of viruses has been a long-term debate among supporters of wild birds; as well as those in favour of domestic and commercial poultry. Wild birds have in general been indicted as serving as a host for avian influenza but human beings could potentially acquire and or transport infection to local poultry or to wild birds through contaminated equipment and animals (Peiris et al., 2007). The challenge is whether our treasured biodiversity hotspots are serving as reservoirs for pathogenic viral strains? Wild birds of various groups occupy altered landscapes and are the best known tool for interpreting the effects of land use(s) on our ecosystem. Varying types of land use occur all around Nigeria; from backyard farms to large scale plantations, residential houses, schools, hospitals, dams and irrigation projects. In addition, wild birds are an invaluable resource and challenges are arising in the race to conserve quality and viable habitats for wildlife as a result of land use and developmental decisions. The value of these services becomes pronounced when some species of wild birds become extinct or populations get threatened and human community have to provide an 2 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN alternative surrogate to ensure the continual discharge of these services. In addition, careful monitoring of wild bird species composition and abundance data is important because deforestation and agricultural intensification are still ongoing. This study has brought to light such bird groups occupying IITA environs, which is a secondary forest reserve. It monitored the change in distribution of bird groups through the two years of the study and determined the incidence and prevalence of some viruses in wild birds using Reverse Transcription Polycromase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR). 1.1 JUSTIFICATION This study is important because results give evidence on answers that are sought in respect to host reservoir of viruses such as AI and NDV. Inventory of bird species present at the reservoir has provided a working database for monitoring bird distributions throughout the year. This study has outlined some effects of land use on ecosystem processes and services; in general the results can be applied in managing future epidemics and environmental issues on a wider scale. 1.2 MAIN OBJECTIVE To monitor and compare bird species distribution, diversity, viral incidence and determine possible transmission routes between wild and domestic birds in the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) environs. 1.3 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES i. To identify bird groups at the study site, determine species abundance, species richness and diversity at IITA environs during each month of the year ii. To investigate zoonotic viral incidence and virus prevalence in wild birds and domestic poultry around the IITA environs. To determine the possible 3 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN transmission pathways of viruses between domestic and wild waterfowl around the study site. 4 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1.0 DEFINITION OF A FOREST There has been confusion about forested protected areas or areas of forest falling within protected areas and in particular what counts as a protected area in a forest biome, particularly when such information is incorporated into wider data collection about forest resources (Dudley, 2008). The following definition draws on that of UNECEF/FAO and adds interpretation from International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). A forest is land with tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level) of more than 10 percent and area of more than 0.5 ha. The trees within should be able to reach a minimum height of 5m at maturity in situ. A forest may consist either of closed forest formations where trees of various storeys and undergrowth cover a high proportion of the ground, or open forest formations with a continuous vegetation cover in which tree crown cover exceeds 10 percent. Young natural stands and all plantations established for forestry purposes which have yet to reach a crown density of 10 percent or tree height of 5 m are included under forest, as are areas normally forming part of the forest area which are temporarily unstocked as a result of human intervention or natural causes but which are expected to revert to forest. It includes forest nurseries and seed orchards that constitute an integral part of the forest, forest roads, cleared tracts, firebreaks and other small open areas; forest of special scientific, historical, cultural, religious interest; windbreaks and shelterbelts of trees with an area of more than 0.5 ha and width of more than 20 m; plantations primarily used for 5 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN forestry purposes. However, it excludes land predominantly used for agricultural purposes. Other areas of land covered with vegetation not able to meet these requirements are classified as wooded land or woodland. The definition should be used in relation to forest being protected for the sustenance of biodiversity and therefore plantation forests whose principal aim is for industrial roundwood, gum or fruit should not be counted as forested protected areas. Nonetheless, land being restored to natural forest should be counted if the principal objective is the maintenance and protection of biodiversity and associated cultural values as is the case of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture Forest Reserve, Ibadan. In contrast however is the case where exotic plantations within protected areas are counted as forest. This is wrong as the former do not provide habitat suitable for indigenous biota. 2.1.1 TROPICAL FOREST STATUS Tropical forests have assumed a status of global significance out of the World’s entire habitat in recent years. Although the tropical forest account for a relatively small 2 proportion of global land average (about 7% or 10.9 million km ), they accommodate a very high proportion of species in all major groups. African forests, for example are estimated to hold about 84% of the continent’s primates species, 66% of butterflies and about 8,000 species of plants (BirdLife International, 2000). The World Bank (2009) estimates that the fastest rate of forest loss in the world between 1990 and 2005 was the Sub Saharan African region (7.1%), followed closely by Latin America (7.0). Deforestation which is the complete removal of forest cover and replacement with other forms of land use and forest degradation (the impoverishment of the structure and composition of the forest) result in the reduction of potentials of flora and fauna to provide and support environmental processes (FAO, 2007b). Also FAO 6 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN (2004) reports that Cape Verde produces industrial supply of hardwood and round wood that top the Sub Saharan region, Nigeria tops the list of countries which produce wood charcoal (2.54 MT). Recent data show that only 8 countries in SSA have the Maputo target of 10% of public expenditure allocated to the agricultural and rural sectors. In addition, the yield per hectare of food crops is less than the average level in developing countries; most of the land is depleted while fertilizers are scares and expensive (APP, 2009). Therefore curbing the speed of deforestation and degradation of forest ecosystem in general is made difficult because livelihood of the dependents of the remaining forest areas are threatened (UNDP-GEF, 2008). The result is that Millennium Development Goals and targets cannot be met in time. Consequently, alternatives that need to be provided for communities surrounding protected area cannot be supplied and or well maintained, the result is continual dependence upon protected areas for supplementation of livelihood. Loss of habitat and degradation are the major causes of endangerment in birds, threatening a total of 1,008 birds (85% of all). Of these, 74 % are affected by recent loss of tropical forest. Of the 902 threatened birds that use the forests, 93% occur entirely in the tropics and 82% of these in moist forests. As a result of this, a total of 1,186 bird species (about 12%) of all bird species have a real risk of becoming extinct in the next 100 years because of habitat loss. Most disturbingly, 182 are critically endangered, meaning that, they have only an estimated 50% chance of surviving over the next 10 years, a further 31 are endangered, 680 are vulnerable and 727 (Near Threatened) are close to qualifying as threatened (BirdLife International, 2000). 7 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Africa’s forest area is distributed in the order; Central Africa, 37.1%; East Africa, 12.1%; North Africa, 12.1%; Southern Africa, 27%; and West Africa 11.7% (FAO, 2007b). Large areas of natural forests are being exploited for tree species such as the mahoganies, Nauclea diderrichii (opepe), Terminalia ivorensis (Odigbo), Terminalia superba (Afara), Triplochiton sceleroxylon (Obeche) and others known in th international market (Nigeria’s 4 Biodiversity Report, 2010). High intensity of logging and illegal exploitation of these and other species has continued to pose serious threats to the country’s forest resources. Non-timber forest products (NTFPs) are used for food, medicines, oil, resin, tannin, household equipment, fuel wood and furniture and building materials. The subsistence rural dwellers have continued to exploit these products for income generation. Varieties of NTFPs of other economic uses include the rattan cane (Laccosperma sedndiflora), chewing sticks (Garcinia manii), wrapping leaves such as Thaumatococcus danielli which also produces fruits that are sweeter than sugar. Triplochiton sceleroxylon is known to be the host of the larvae of Enaphae venata, a moth species which apart from producing cocoons that are good material for local silk (“Sanyan”) are also good sources of animal protein to both the urban poor and rural dwellers. There has been a trend of increasing use of medicinal plants amongst both urban and rural dwellers. This trend has grave consequences on the survival of some plant species. This is because of the unsustainable manner in which many species are harvested. Furthermore, the downturns in the national economy and inflationary trend have led to the excessive harvesting of non-timber forest products. Some of the species are now threatened. Examples are Hymenocardia acida, Kigelia africana and th Cassia nigricans (Nigeria’s 4 Biodiversity Report, 2010). 8 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 2.1.2 INLAND WATER AREAS Inland water ecosystems occupy only a small area of the planet but are perhaps the most heavily impacted and threatened by human activities of all biomes and habitats (Dudley, 2008). Several efforts have been made by governments and the conservation community in general to conserve inland water species and habitats, but unavoidably these commitments and goals have not been realized fully. In conserving quality habitats, surrounding communities are provided with services especially in areas where there is a shortage of portable water. The term inland waters (inland wetlands), freshwater systems, and simply wetlands are often used interchangeably, but there are some differences. Inland water or inland wetlands refer to non-marine aquatic systems; and whether transitional systems like estuaries are included is a matter of interpretation. Nevertheless, inland wetland is the term used by the CBD. Freshwater is technically defined as “of, relating to, living in, or consisting of water that is not saline”. But in practice the term is often used as equivalent to inland wetland (Dudley, 2008). Wetlands are unique biotic communities involving diverse plants and animals that are adapted to shallow and often dynamic water regimes. The Convention on Wetlands of International importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat, commonly called the “Convention on Wetlands” Ramsar, signed in Ramsar, Iran, 1971, defines wetlands as “areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water, the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meters” (Ramsar Convention Bureau, 1996). In addition, the convention provides that wetlands “may incorporate marine, riparian and coastal zones adjacent to the wetlands and island or bodies of marine water deeper than six meters at low tide lying within the wetland”. 9 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN There are also man-made wetlands such as fish and shrimp ponds, farm ponds, irrigated agricultural land, salt pans, reservoirs, gravel pits, sewage pits, sewage farms, and canals (Ramsar Convention Bureau, 1996; Weller, 1999; Amezaga et al., 2002; Dudley, 2008). Nonetheless, natural inland wetlands include permanent and temporary rivers and streams, permanent lakes; seasonal lakes, marshes, and swamps, including floodplains, forested wetlands, marshes, and swamps; alpine and tundra wetlands; springs, oases and geothermal wetlands; and underground wetlands, including caves and groundwater systems. 2.1.3 NIGERIA’S BIODIVERSITY Nigeria is rich in biodiversity. A country report published by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (FEPA) indicates that Nigeria possesses more than 5,000-recorded species of plants and over 22,000 species of animals. These species include about 20,000 insects, about 1,000 birds, about 1,000 fishes, 247 mammals and135 reptiles. Of these animals about 0.14% is threatened while 0.22% is endangered including insects. It estimated that 0.4% of the plant species are threatened and 8.5 % th endangered (Nigeria’s 4 Biodiversity Report, 2010). Though, Nigeria is known as a global hotspot for primate species, a great proportion of this diversity is found in the Gulf of Guinea forests of Cross River State. Cross River among others states is also a key hotspot area for amphibian biodiversity. Some of the endemic species include three monkeys, the white throated monkey (Cercopithecus erythrogaster), Sclater’s guenon (Cercopithecus sclateri) and the Niger Delta red colobus (Procolobus pennantii epieni) and four bird species, the Anambra waxbill (Estrilda poliopareia), the Ibadan malimbe, (Malimbus ibadanensis), the Jos Plateau indigo-bird (Vidua maryae) and the Rock Fire-Finch 10 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Lagonosticta sanguinodorsalis. The most endangered gorilla subspecies on earth, the Cross River gorilla (Gorilla gorilla diehli) with an estimated population of less than 250 individuals is found in a couple of protected areas in Cross-River State, south th eastern Nigeria and in Cameroon (Nigeria’s 4 Biodiversity Report, 2010). The Nigerian government recognizes the need to conserve its biological diversity and has made a commitment to conserve 25% of Nigeria’s total forest area. Emphasis is placed on in situ conservation of biodiversity within protected areas such as Forest Reserves, Game Reserves, National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries. In situ conservation outside protected areas is encouraged to complement conservation of biological diversity inside protected areas, to secure Nigeria’s biodiversity for future generations. Priority attention is placed on conservation of unique ecological characteristics and ecosystems such as mountain, mangrove, wetlands, savannah, rainforests and transit sites for migratory species. The Plan contains specific priority setting and actions for ex situ conservation of various species of plants and animals of economic importance, including re-introduction of locally extinct animals, lost crops, and conservation of threatened or endangered species. The administrative and policy reforms contained in the Plan provide a vehicle for achieving our biodiversity th conservation goals and objectives. (Nigeria’s 4 Biodiversity Report, 2010) 2.1.4 PROTECTED AREAS These could be either national or internationally recognised areas, however nationally designated protected areas are those that are recognised, supported and designated by national legislation and or authority while international sites are areas that are recognised and protected by international agreements, such as treaties or conventions. 11 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN However, the collective responsibility of calling nations to the responsibility of protection of important sites in terms of conventions and treaties is thought to assure a greater or stronger protection status than when national governments or their subsidiaries do the same. Funding is however, a key issue and international status does command more attention than local or single government designations such as National Parks and game reserves. 2.1.4.1 UN CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (CBD) The objectives of the convention are outlined in Article 1 of the CBD is the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources, including by appropriate access to genetic resources and by appropriate transfer of relevant technologies, taking into account all rights over those resources and to technologies, and appropriate funding’ (CBD, 2014). This convention was established in 1992, the Earth summit held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, with the aim of bringing nations together to reach global agreement of sustainable development. Today, there are 191 contracting parties to the CBD. The conference of parties is the governing body of the convention and meets every two years to consider the state of implementation of the convention (UNEP-WCMC, th 2008; Nigeria’s 4 Biodiversity Report, 2010). Nigeria launched her National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan in 1997. The goal of the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) is to develop appropriate framework and programme instruments for the conservation of Nigeria’s Biological Diversity and enhance its sustainable use by integrating biodiversity 12 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN consideration into national planning, policy and decision-making processes. This strategy is part of our national commitments under the Convention on Biological Diversity and a testimony of our responsibilities to future generations. The NBSAP established an adaptive process that institutes national goals, sets priorities, and provides frameworks for addressing biodiversity conservation; sustainable use of biological resources, equitable sharing of benefits; conservation of agro-biodiversity; th biosafety; and biodiversity–industry interface. (Nigeria’s 4 Biodiversity Report, 2010). 2.1.4.2 UNITED NATIONS MILENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (UN-MDG) These are basically eight goals to be achieved by 2015 in response to the world’s main development challenges. The MDGs are drawn from the actions and targets contained in the United Nations Millennium declaration, adopted by 189 nations and signed by 147 heads of state and government’s during the UN Millennium summit in September 2000. Protected areas are an explicit part of MDG goal 7, which ensures environmental sustainability and this goal has two targets; firstly, to integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes, and reverse the loss of environmental resources, and secondly, to reduce biodiversity loss, achieving by 2010 a significant reduction in the rate of loss (UNEP-WCMC, 2008; UN-MDG, 2014). 2.1.4.3 UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITES The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) World Heritage Programme seeks to ‘encourage the identification, protection and preservation of cultural and natural heritage around the world considered to be of outstanding value to humanity.’ The Convention encourages the designation of 13 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN biological and cultural heritage sites as adopted by UNESCO in 1972 and has been ratified by 185 state parties (UNEP-WCMC, 2008). 2.1.4.4 UNESCO MAN AND THE BIOSPHER RESERVES UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere Programme’s (MAB) overriding aim is to improve the global relationship of people with their environment. This was launched in 1970, and its biosphere reserve concept was launched in 1974. Biosphere reserves have three interconnected functions; firstly, conservation of landscapes, ecosystems, species and genetic variation, and secondly, development, economic, human and culturally adapted, and thirdly logistic support by providing research, monitoring, environmental education and training (UNEP-WCMC, 2008; UNESCO-MAB, 2014). 2.1.4.5 THE RAMSAR CONVENTION ON WETALNDS The convention on wetlands was signed in Iran, in 1971. It aims to conserve and wisely use all wetlands through local, national and regional cooperation in concert with sustainable development. A broad definition of wetlands is used, with protected habitats including lakes, rivers, marshes, peatlands, near-shore marine areas, coral reefs, mangroves, and similar human-made areas such as rice paddies (UNEP- WCMC, 2008; Ramsar Convention Bureau, 1997). The Nguru Lake (and Marma Channel) complex in the Hadejia-Nguru wetlands was designated the first Ramsar Site for Nigeria. 2.1.4.6 IMPORTANT BIRD AREAS IN NIGERIA Twenty-seven Important Bird Areas (IBAs) have been identified (Figure 2.1, Ezealor 2001), covering about 31,118 km² or 3.4% of the land area of the country, although the area of three sites is undefined. Fourteen are legally protected, two are privately- owned, six are partially protected, and five have no form of legal protection. It should 14 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN be noted that none of Nigeria’s endemic birds have been found to occur in National Parks or other legally protected areas (Ezealor, 2001). Twelve sites qualify under the A1 criterion, for species of global conservation concern, and three sites do so for both the Cameroon and Gabon lowlands EBA and the Cameroon mountains EBA, holding respectively, all three and all 18 restricted- range species of the EBAs known from Nigeria (Ezealor, 2001). For the biome- restricted assemblages, three sites were designated for the Sahel biome (A03), at which nine of the 13 biome-restricted species were recorded nationally, 12 sites qualify for the Sudan–Guinea Savanna biome (A04) which collectively hold 40 of the 42 species in Nigeria, 14 sites qualify for the Guinea–Congo Forests biome (A05) (holding 182 of the 187 species) and three do so for the Afrotropical Highlands biome (A07). 15 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Figure 2.2: Location of Important bird Areas in Nigeria and their sizes. Source: Ezealor, 2001 {1. Obudu Plateau (Cross River) 2. Gashaka-Gumti National Park (Adamawa and Taraba) 3. Ngel-Nyaki Forest (Taraba) 4. Chad basin National Park- Chingurmi-Duguma Sector (Borno) 5. Afi River Forest Reserve (Cross River) 6. Okomu National Park (Edo) 7. Cross River National Park-Oban Division (Cross River) 8. Omo Forest Reserve (Ogun) 9. Pandam Wildlife Park (Plateau) 10. Cross River National Park-Okwango Division (Cross River) 11. IITA Forest Reserve, Ibadan (Oyo) 12. Lower Kaduna-Middle Niger Flood-plain (Niger) 13. Kagoro- Nindam Forest Reserves (Kaduna) 14. Donga River Basin Forests (Taraba) 15. Upper Orashi Forests (Rivers) 16. Biseni Forests (Rivers) 17. Akassa forests (Bayelsa) 18. Yankari Game Reserve (Bauchi) 19. Kainji Lake National Park (Kwara) 20. Amurum Woodlands-Taboru (Plateau) 21. Hadejia-Nguru Wetlands (Yobe, Jigawa and Bauchi) 22. Kamuku National Park (Kaduna) 23. Assop Falls and Hills (Plateau) 24. Sambisa Game Reserve (Borno) 25. Falgore and Lama Burra Game Reserves (Bauchi and Kano) 26. Sunvit Farm (Edo) 27. Ebot-Kabaken (Cross River)} 16 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 2.1.4.7 CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES (CITES) The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) was established as a response to growing concerns that over- exploitation of wildlife through international trade was contributing to the rapid decline of many species of plants and animals around the world. The Convention was signed by representatives from 80 countries in Washington, DC, US, on 3 March 1973, and entered into force on 1 July 1975 (IISD, 2011). There are currently 175 parties to the Convention and the primary aim of CITES is to ensure that international trade in wild animal and plant species does not threaten their survival. CITES parties regulate wildlife trade through controls and regulations on species listed in three appendices. Appendix I lists species threatened with extinction, permitting such trade only in exceptional circumstances. Appendix II species are those that may become endangered if their trade is not regulated, thus requiring controls aimed at preventing unsustainable use, maintaining ecosystems and preventing species from entering Appendix I. Appendix III species are those for which a party requests the cooperation of other parties to control international trade in specimens of the species. In order to list a species in Appendix I or II, a party needs to submit a proposal for approval by the CoP, supported by scientific and technical data on population and trade trends. The proposal must be adopted by a two-thirds majority of parties present and voting. As the trade impact on a species increases or decreases, the CoP decides whether or not the species should be transferred among or removed from the appendices. 17 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN There are approximately 5,000 fauna species and 28,000 flora species protected under the three CITES appendices (IISD, 2011). Parties regulate the international trade of CITES species through a system of permits and certificates that are required before specimens listed in the Convention’s appendices are imported, exported or introduced from the sea. Each party is required to adopt a national legislation and to designate two national authorities, namely a Management Authority responsible for issuing permits and certificates based on the advice of the second national body, the Scientific Authority. These two national authorities also assist with CITES enforcement through cooperation with customs, police and other appropriate agencies. Parties maintain trade records that are forwarded annually to the CITES Secretariat, thus enabling the compilation of statistical information on the global volume of international trade in appendix-listed species. The operational bodies of CITES include the Standing Committee and two scientific committees: the Plants Committee (PC) and the Animals Committee (AC). 2.1.5 WHAT ARE BIRDS WORTH? Birds are the best known class of vertebrates; they occur worldwide in nearly all habitats and provide lots of services that benefit human society (Whelan et al, 2008). To most ornithologists, birds are an invaluable resource due to the rising challenges and enormous resources utilized in conservation of quality and viable habitats for wildlife. The awareness of the need for wildlife conservation is spreading very fast but this needs to be converted into policy, decision making and not left basically as a research. This is because such decisions will not yield desired effects on land-use projects which threaten the existence of pristine biodiversity. 18 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Ecosystem services are divided into four categories by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Whelan et al., 2008); provisioning services referring to products harnessed from wildlife which are used directly as food, clothing and medicines; cultural services which are indirectly harnessed by their presence such as recreational opportunities and inspiration, arts and music; supporting services which are a direct consequence of wild bird foraging behaviour and these are pollination, seed dispersal, nutrient cycling; and recycling services which are a consequence of foraging behaviour offer pest control services (also termed biological control). The value of these services becomes pronounced when some vital constituents of wildlife become extinct and human community has to provide an alternative to ensure continual discharge of these services. Each constituent of the ecosystem is important and through much enlightenment has been carried out on other components of the ecosystem such as watershed and pollination by insects, wild birds must take their place as an integral component of the ecosystem (Wenny et al., 2011). Many wild birds are insectivorous, (over 50 percent of bird species) and nearly 75 percent prey on invertebrates occasionally (Sekercioglu, 2006a).The beneficial role of birds as insectivorous is well summarized by Whelan et al., 2008. To this support, plants respond with higher crop yields. The 1958 extermination of Tree Sparrows (Passer montanus) ultimately unleashed an insect pest outbreak rather than improved rice yield (Becker, 1996). Though birds have been widely publicized as pests in agricultural land-use systems, they (granivores) also control weeds by feeding on the seeds (Wenny et al., 2011). Nearly 33 percent of bird species disperse seeds primarily through foraging and also through scatter-hoarding of nuts (Sekercioglu, 2006b). Therefore by offering this 19 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN service, numerous numbers of plants benefit from bird seed dispersal in terms of colonization of open sites and enhanced germination (Tomback and Linhart, 1990). Some of these plants serve as source of timber, medicine and food; yet the interaction linking birds and plants is poorly understood (Whelan et al., 2008). Decline in richness of frugivorous birds will lead to negative effects on plants and indirectly man. The result is an increase in the number of large-seeded plants or fruit trees with few or no dispersers. Though fewer birds participate in nectar feeding and associated bird pollination mutualism, the effects on plants will be adverse if bird population mutualism fails and or population decline considerably. The simple result will be the failure of trees to produce seeds. (Wenny et al., 2011). Scavenging birds are generally unappreciated, though they are a good channel for recycling carrion biomass. Vultures are on the decline as a result of human involvement in their indiscriminate trafficking and use for rituals. It is a common sight for extant vultures to command high prices in our local markets; for example in Bode Market Ibadan Nigeria, a living vulture could demand between 10-15 thousand naira and about 9 thousand naira for a dead or dried one. But the actual value of having thriving populations of these scavenging birds far supersedes these market prices and there is no doubt that numbers have declined though demand for them is still on the increase. By scavenging, vultures, crows and other vertebrates contribute to nutrient cycling and disease regulation. By carrying out this function also, some of the wild birds have contacted viral diseases and perished. Birds contribute to nutrient cycling especially in wetland, nesting and roosting sites where they may congregate in large numbers. They process large amounts of food and release nutrients rich in phosphate-rich droppings 20 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN which contribute in no small way to the fertility of wetlands and surrounding communities. The removal of such congregating birds may affect the ecosystem adversely (Whelan et al., 2008). Ecosystem engineering is a process whereby birds utilize wide variety of available materials such as; twigs, feathers, plastic-bags, and timber snags to construct nests. Nest burrows are excavated by many taxa, for example kingfishers and swallows, which in the aftermath provide cover for frogs, lizards and snakes. These nests also positively alter soil properties and this affects nutrient cycling. Their mere presence displayed naturally for spectators also provides opportunistic tourist attraction for example; the giant nests of the colonial breeding Buffalo weaver, the massive nest of the solitary Hammerkop are very beautiful engineering models offered by these two species of birds and the list is almost endless. Case studies have been made to try to estimate the value of some of the services which people benefit from birds and these include the case of the Coffee Berry Borer which is said to be the world’s most damaging insect pest of coffee. Birds boosted farm income by about $75-310per hectare each year by foraging on the borers. (Whelan et al., 2008). The replacement cost for the seed dispersal services of Eurasian Jays in Stockholm National Park was estimated by Hougner et al. (2006). It is a keystone species that supports unique communities of insects, lichens, mosses and fungi as well as provides nesting space for birds. The minimum replacement cost of a pair of Eurasian Jays was between 4-22,000 dollars depending on whether seeds or saplings were to be planted respectively per hectare for forest regeneration. 21 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Clark’s Nutcracker (Nucifraga Columbiana) is involved in scatter-hoarding seeds of White-bark pine (Pinus albicaulus). The cones of White-bark pine do not open so this conifer depends obligatorily on nutcrackers for its seed dispersal (Tomback and Linhart, 1990). The plant is precisely endangered due to the invasive fungi pathogen. (Tomback and Linhart, 1990). Replacing nutcrackers would cost the U.S Forest Service management a minimum of 2,190 dollars per hectare in two natural forests. However, it would take only 5-6 years in the Yellowstone area for nutcrackers to produce 440 White-bark pine seedlings per hectare. Lastly, as birds carry out their foraging activity they may come in contact with backyard farms and poultry remains that are contaminated with viruses such as the West Nile virus and Avian Influenza virus. The birds are only carrying out their daily or seasonal foraging activities of which a great percentage contributes positively to the human community as outlined in previous paragraphs. It is important therefore that active surveillance studies be carried to determine the ecological links between birds and viruses to ensure that ecosystem services supplied by birds continue to be harnessed by human communities. It is been recorded that birds harboring pathogenic strains of viruses are not capable of travelling over long distances due to stress related issues caused by the virus, however it has been recorded by Gaidet et al. (2007b) that a bird with H5N2 did travel some distance before it died. Millions of dollars have already been spent in Africa in trying to understand the interrelationships between the three levels i.e. birds, viruses and the ecosystem. When birds are observed or detected to harbour viruses; what should be the response of authorities towards the birds? The previous paragraphs have outlined the benefits 22 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN accruing from ecosystem services obtained from birds, while some of the birds involved might be threatened, utmost care must therefore be taken in control measures. 2.1.6 WETLAND BIRDS The Convention on Wetlands, thus describes “Waterfowl” as species of birds that are ecologically dependent upon wetlands, and ‘water bird’ as being synonymous with ‘waterfowl’ (Wetlands International, 2002). Wetland International, the coordinator of the African Waterbird Census has grouped birds based on their dependence on water to fulfil their ecological nitch and these are:- Grebes, Pelicans, Cormorants and Darters, Herons and Egrets, Storks, Ibises, Spoonbills and Hammerkop, Flamingos, Cranes, Finfoot and Jacanas, Geese and Ducks, Rails, Gallinules and Coot, Waders and Shorebirds, Gulls, Terns and Skimmer, Kingfishers and Birds of prey (Wetlands International, 2002). Wetlands are among the world’s most productive environments. They are cradles of biological diversity, providing the water and primary productivity upon which countless species of plants and animals depend for survival. Wetlands provide many vital functions which includes: water storage, storm protection, shoreline stabilization, ground water recharge and discharge and water purification and offer tremendous values such as water supply, fisheries, agriculture and serve as special attributes as part of the cultural heritage to humanity, they are related to religious and cosmological beliefs, provide wildlife sanctuaries, and form the basis of important local traditions (Ramsar Convention Bureau, 1996). Though wetlands are key habitats, the birds around these wetlands are among the prominent attractions. Wetland birds thus fulfil a very important role as being the 23 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN main link maintaining a biotic connection between catchments for aquatic plants and invertebrates (Amezaga et al., 2002). Birds are indicators of the state of the environment (Bibby et al., 2000). If a wetland is in jeopardy, the birds will be among the first indicators of dangers ahead for such wetland; and they are also important as agents of dispersal. Spores and seeds with adhesive structures may be transported externally, though internally in the digestive tract also seems to be most efficient (Green et al., 2002). 2.2.0 FACTORS AFFECTING BIRD SPECIES DISTRIBUTION AND DENSITY One of the most interesting qualities of biodiversity is that it is not evenly distributed. Each species has its own unique range, determined by the interactions among existing ecological conditions and the species’ evolutionary history. The distribution of biodiversity is influenced by ecological factors such as temperature, moisture and soil, as well as seasonality and the amount of variation in topography and prevailing climatic conditions. Besides natural factors, anthropogenic factors that alter natural habitats also influence the pattern of distribution of biodiversity (Strattersfield et al., 1998). The number of species that occur in an area is strongly correlated with the spatial heterogeneity of the area (Strattersfield et al., 1998). Birds provide an excellent example of the relationship between species richness and diversity and habitat diversity. For example, high bird species richness has been found to coincide with areas of high habitat diversity and steep topography (Strattersfield et al., 1998; Fishpool and Evans, 2001; Luoto et al., 2004). Many studies of biological populations require estimates of density or size that could be used to measure population change over time. Population density estimates also allow direct comparisons to be made between different species within a habitat, and 24 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN between same species in different habitats, providing a better understanding of the habitat requirements of different species necessary for their management. Population density estimates vary over space in response to environmental factors (Buckland et al., 2001). Among other factors (e.g. altitude, season), habitat type affects the population density of species. 2.2.1 EFFECTS OF HABITAT TYPE AND VEGETATION VARIABLES Habitats are often identified and defined by their principal vegetation types, which are in turn products of adaptation by plants to temperature, rainfall, soil and other environmental factors (Maclean, 1990). Habitat type has been shown to be the most important factor determining species distribution (Davidar et al., 2001). The physical structure (physiognomy) of vegetation is considered an important habitat component for birds both directly through the provision of food, shelter and nesting resources and, indirectly, in providing potential cues about the onset of conditions suitable for successful breeding (Karr and Roth, 1971; Weins and Rotenberry, 1981; Adeyanju et al., 2011). Bird species density and diversity have been related to various aspects of vegetation structure (Mills et al., 1991; Manu et al., 2007). As the structural complexity of the habitat (especially the vegetation component) increases in terrestrial environments, the number of many animal groups including birds increases (Karr and Roth, 1971). The distribution of birds in an area is affected by the horizontal variation in the structure and floristic composition of the vegetation, which results in different habitat types. Several studies have compared bird communities in different habitat types to demonstrate the effect of habitat on their composition (Sallabanks et al., 2000; Shochat et al., 2001) 25 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 2.2.2 WILD BIRDS AND VIRUSES Birds with affinity for wetland habitats make up nearly 60 percent of the wild bird species infected with H5N1 virus and also account for a better proportion of wildlife causalities from Avian Influenza epidemics (Ramsar Convention Bureau, 1996). Wild birds are quick to adapt to altered wetlands and are commonly seen at water reservoirs, salt ponds, and flooded agricultural fields such as wet poultry farm and aquaculture ponds. As the most frequently detected hosts of the H5N1 virus, waterbirds represent an appropriate target for disease surveillance (FAO, 2007a). Ducks, geese and swans of the family Anatidae, collectively known as waterfowl are well studied. They are the only group in which the virus has been detected all year round. Waterfowl have a long history of exploitation by humans both as a wild game and as a domesticated poultry (swans and mallards). A few species, most notably Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and Greylag goose (Anser anser), have been raised as domesticated birds for many years. They are gregarious and converge in sizeable flocks on wetlands, foraging grounds and even in the tropics where some are resident for example the White-faced whistling duck (Dendrocygna viduata), Spur-winged goose (Plectropterus gambensis). Waterfowl chicks are highly precocial. They are well developed, active and alert at hatching and are capable of foraging with parents a few hours after hatching. All waterfowl undergo a brief post-breeding flightless period in which flight feathers are shed (molted) simultaneously. During these periods they congregate in wetland areas relatively safe from predators. They are categorized as either “divers, grazers or dabblers” depending on their foraging strategy. White-faced whistling duct is a dabbler while Spur-winged goose is a grazer. Shorebird (waders) chicks are also pre- 26 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN cocial. In herons egrets and storks, the H5N1 virus has been found in at least four heron and egret species. They are primarily carnivorous and wade through shallow water; stalking prey with imperceptible movement and their strikes are very precise. Gallinules are solitary birds and stalk in heavily vegetated wetlands and are very shy. All Rallidae species are generalist feeders. Dabbling ducks forage at or below the surface depending on the length of their necks and they feed in shallow water. Diving ducks dive below the surface to forage deeper than the dabblers. Grazing water birds are characterized by upland foraging. Shorebirds and Waders belong to the families of the order Charadriiformes, a large order that includes plovers, pratincoles, and sandpipers. Only one species has so far been detected with H5N1, the Green sandpiper (Tringa ochropus). They are adapted to feeding in mudflats and shallow water along the margins of wetlands. Examples are Common sandpiper, Black-winged stilt and Spur-winged plover. They are gregarious outside the breeding season and congregate in wetland areas to forage in non-breeding season. Their elongated bills are slender and are adapted for probing for invertebrates in damp substrata. Cormorant are diving birds and considered to be often infected with Newcastle virus (Paramyxoviridae), which form little or no interaction with poultry. Chicks are altricial and require continous parental care for several weeks after hatching. They are generally covered with a dark morph and extended necks bearing a medium sized head with hooked bills. Raptors are birds of prey such as the kestrels, falcons and eagles from the order Falconiformes. They are predators and scavengers of other bird species which make them vulnerable to viruses through consumption and exposure when foraging. They 27 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN can get the virus by either feeding on sick birds or tissues from carcasses of infected birds that are not properly disposed of during disease outbreaks. Prey varies with the size of the raptor; the females are sometimes up to twice the size of males (sexual dimorphism). They are solitary and are monogamous and have altricial chicks. With respect to epidemiology, “Bridge species” are groups of birds which generally have no affinity for wetlands but have a high preference for human settlements and have been known to be infected with viruses. Some members of this group are the Pied crow, Laughing dove and Northern grey-headed sparrow. Open back-yard farms expose these birds to incidence of viruses and because they are generalist foraging birds, they occupy a wide range of habitats and could serve as a link between domestic poultry and wild bird groups not known to the human settlements. 2.2.3 MIGRATORY BIRDS AND VIRUSES During the early outbreaks of AI in poultry, there was little or no link between migratory birds and domestic poultry in south-east Asia in 2003-2004. The movement of infected birds was isolated as specifically a trade phenomenon. In 2004, raptors smuggled into Belgium were the first H5N1 infected birds detected in Europe. The discoveries of such birds in Europe in 2005/06 suggested that wildbirds could play a role which is still not fully understood. (Krauss et al., 2007) 2.3.0 AVIAN INFLUENZA VIRUS AIV is an RNA virus with a segmented genome, occurring in different subtypes and genetic lineages. There are presently 16 haemagluttinin (HA) and 9 neuraminidase (NA) glycol-proteins that are used to characterize the various subtypes of avian influenza virus (Webster et al., 1992; Fouchier et al., 2005; Olsen et al., 2006). Each virus has one HA and one NA antigen, apparently in any combination. i.e. H1N1and 28 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN H7N3. A respiratory disease of birds is caused by the low pathogenic AIV whereas the high mortality epizootic or complicated infection (resulting in up to 100 percent mortality among poultry) is initiated by the highly pathogenic AIV, a condition commonly called “bird flu” and formerly “fowl plague”. This infection was first isolated in the 1930’s but has now become a global phenomenon (Webster et al., 1992). The precursor protein HAO in low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) is known to have a single basic amino acid at its cleavage site and another at -4 or -3 position from the cleavage site (Steinhauer, 1999; Vey et al., 1992), whereas the HPAI possesses multiple basic amino acids at its cleavage site possibly as a result of insertion or substitution (Vey et al., 1992; Wood et al., 1993). Cleavage therefore ensures that the HA take up a structure that is best suitable for fusion; though it is not the only factor determining virulence (Bowes et al., 2004; Villareal, 2006; Londt et al., 2007). The detection of HPAI in free living wild birds (mostly waterfowl) over the last decade does complicate the present understanding of the ecology of the virus; as this results in a modified eco-epidemiology and increased zoonotic potential of the virus (Capua and Alexander, 2006; Chen et al., 2006 a, b; Salzberg et al., 2007; Sims and Narrod, 2008). In 2007, avian influenza spread to 8 new countries and reoccurred in 23 countries and the number of reported human cases has kept on soaring (Uiprasertkul et al., 2007; World Health Organization, 2008). 2.3.1 PREVALENCE OF VIRUSES Measurements of avian influenza virus prevalence in wild birds in Africa provide new insights into the host ecology of avian influenza viruses in tropical regions. LPAI viruses were detected in both Palearctic and Afrotropical water birds in several 29 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN sampling sites, reflecting that viruses were possibly circulating in Africa during the Northern Winter (November to March in Nigeria) (Gaidet et al., 2007b). Thus the presence of the virus in tropical regions in both Afro-tropical and Palearctic wintering birds show that there is a circulation of LPAI viruses prior to Northern Spring migration (April to June in Nigeria). There is thus a persistence of the virus in wild birds all year round. Extensive surveillance of wild ducks in the Northern Hemisphere have revealed high LPAI virus prevalence primarily in juvenile birds, with a peak in early fall just prior to the southbound migration. However, little is known about the prevalence of influenza viruses in wild ducks in the southern hemisphere or potential transmission between the two hemispheres. It is however argued that some birds remain in their breeding continent all year round (Olsen et al., 2006). The Blue-winged teal is one of the few North American species that has a winter distribution that includes South America, there are other ducks that could serve as hosts of influenza virus in South America (Alexander, 2000) but surveillance data is lacking. The Garganey (Anas quequerdula) and Northern Pin-tail (Anas acuta) are among few of the ducks that have over one million birds wintering in sub-saharan Africa. However none of the 22 breeding Anatid species breeding in the African continent spend the winter outside the continent though they do migrate within the continent (Olsen et al., 2006). 2.4.0 WEST NILE VIRUS The West Nile virus belongs to the flavivirus family Flaviviridae, and is related to the viruses that cause Yellow fever and Dengue fever. Affected animals, and humans, can develop encephalitis which can be fatal. Its distribution and host range in nature is not fully known, but the virus has been detected in both tropical and temperate regions. West Nile Virus is vector borne, primarily through mosquitoes, but possibly also 30 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN ticks, and mainly infects birds, although a range of mammals are recorded as accidental hosts. The recovery of infectious WNV from the brain of a hawk in New York, during a period of mosquito inactivity, raised questions as to potential persistent infection within the hawk, or alternatively, oral transmission to the hawk via consumption of persistently infected prey, probably a rodent or bird (Garmendia et al., 2000). Further evidence of a non-mosquito source of transmission during cold periods in a temperate region, again New York, was the detection of lethal infections among communally roosting crows (Dawson et al., 2007). The principal mechanism for annual spring emergence and initiation of WNV transmission remains unknown (Nemeth et al., 2009). Only recently, it has been associated with an increasing number of outbreaks of encephalitis in humans and equines as well as an increasing number of infections in vertebrates of a wide variety of species (van der Meulen et al., 2005) 2.5.0 NEWCASTLE DISEASE VIRUS Newcastle disease is a highly contagious and fatal viral disease affecting most species of birds (Owoade et al., 2006). Because chickens are the most susceptible birds, the disease is frequently responsible for devastating losses in poultry (Alexander, 2000, 2001). For this reason, isolation of a virulent strain requires reporting to the ‘Office International des Epizooties’ (OIE) (Alexander, 1997). This avian disease is caused by Newcastle disease virus (NDV), an avian paramyxovirus that has recently been assigned to the new genus Avulavirus within the family Paramyxoviridae (Mayo, 2002a, 2002b). The aetiological agent is a single stranded, non-segmented negative- sense RNA virus. 31 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Newcastle disease (ND) is an OIE listed disease caused by virulent avian paramyxovirus type 1 (APMV-1) strains, which affect many species of birds and may cause severe economic losses in the poultry sector. The disease has been officially and unofficially reported in many African countries and still remains the main poultry disease in commercial and rural chickens of Africa. Unfortunately, virological and epidemiological information concerning ND strains circulating in the Western and Central regions of Africa is extremely scarce (Cattoli et al., 20010; Snoeck et al., 2009) This genus contains the 9 serogroups of avian paramyxoviruses (APMV-1–9) described so far. According to their virulence in poultry, APMV-1 isolates may be classified as highly virulent (velogenic), intermediate (mesogenic) or non-virulent (lentogenic). This classification is based on the results of the mean death time in chicken eggs (Beard and Hanson, 1984; Aldous et al., 2003; Abolnik et al., 2004). The clinical signs of a highly virulent NDV infection in chickens can be extremely different depending on the strain of virus. Virulent strains that cause diarrhoea and frequently haemorrhagic intestinal lesions are called viscerotropic velogenic. Strains that cause respiratory and neurotropic signs are called neurotropic velogenic (Alexander, 1997). The non-segmented single-stranded, negative-sense RNA genome encodes six proteins. Like many other RNA viruses that have an RNA polymerase that lacks proof-reading, APMV-1 has evolved into genetically highly diverse lineages (Domingo and Holland, 1997). Aldous et al. (2003) proposed 6 phylogenetic lineages, further subdivided into 13 sublineages. Lineages 1 and 6 contain mainly avirulent viruses, while most virulent viruses are found in lineages 3, 4 and 5. Lineage 2 includes both avirulent and virulent strains. While some lineages seem to be 32 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN geographically constrained, others circulate worldwide (Aldous et al., 2003). On the African continent, outbreaks are rampant, but only a few strains from Mozambique, South Africa and Uganda have ever been investigated (Herczeg et al., 1999, Otim et al., 2004). 2.6.0 TRANSMISSION OF VIRUSES The mechanisms by which viruses pass from one bird to the other and bring about infection are poorly understood (Olsen et al., 2006). It has been proposed that the little understanding of the role wild birds’ play in influenza transmission and or spread will limit the incorporation of wild birds in preventative strategies to basically keeping domestic birds away from wild birds. (BirdLife International, 2008; Olsen et al., 2006; Dodman and Diagana, 2007; Sims and Narrod, 2008). 2.6.1 FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR TRANSMISSION OF SOME VIRUSES A lot of factors come into play in bringing about viral transmission such as environmental factors, bird species, and the strain of the virus, presence of susceptible vectors/reservoirs, poor bio-security/bio-safety, mechanical transport of infected particles/contaminated water, contact between wild /domestic livestock with either or both wild and domestic livestock infected, delay in reporting/detecting outbreaks and refusal to report outbreaks (Sim and Narrod, 2008). Therefore given the right environment, HPAI can thrive and possibly result in the much feared human pandemic if genetic reassortment between avian and human viruses does occur. Yet, HPAI is known to spread directly from poultry to humans and this is evident in the human cases and associated mortalities experienced so far (FAO/OIE/WHO, 2005; Normile, 2008; World Health Organization, 2008). 33 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN We should therefore be prudent and take the necessary actions to strengthen bio- security in poultry production at all levels, prevent contact of poultry with wild birds as much as possible, utilize vaccines to increase resistance to HPAI in both humans and birds (although there are varying views regarding this option, the opposing view being that use of vaccines will increase frequency of false positive detection of viruses) and finally share information available on outbreaks. 2.6.1.1 INTEGRATED INDOOR COMMERCIAL POULTRY Though contentions arise as to whether or not the actual source of avian influenza is poultry, it has been noted that whenever there is an epizootic of HPAI, large scale losses are experienced in this sector. The reduction in diversity of commercial poultry stocks has been proposed as the fundamental reason for such losses in the industry; millions of birds are being generated from the same stocks or parental strains. Hence, very little or no resistance (immunity) can be developed against the presence of HPAI (EMPRES WATCH, 2006; GRAIN, 2006). Mechanical transmission from contaminated equipment used in one farm when transferred to others could result in the spread of infection. Bio-safety levels are thus very low and this is evident in some areas in Nigeria. The operation of non-licensed commercial hatcheries and the illegal imports by some citizens has also been suggested as a potential source of the introduction of AIV (GRAIN, 2006). 2.6.1.2 LIVE POULTRY MARKETS (LPM) Live poultry markets are a source of comparatively cheap animal protein and also a source of supplementing the livelihood of many traders, farmers and villagers (Sims and Narrod, 2008); various types of domestic livestock are bought and sold on a daily 34 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN basis in the LPM. However, the poor bio-safety measures often applied in these markets have continually been a source of concern (Mounts et al., 1999). In Hanoi, Vietnam in 2001, 4 HP avian influenza viruses were isolated from healthy ducks and two from healthy geese suggesting that waterfowl do not always show symptoms of infection (Nguyen et al., 2005; FAO/OIE/WHO, 2005). It is common practice in LPM for live birds of varied species to be kept in the same cages thereby facilitating the spread of avian influenza virus to potential susceptible species (Sims and Narrod, 2008; Webster, 2004). Of contention is the daily introduction of birds possibly infected with avian influenza viruses into the LPM (Mounts et al., 1999). These markets (LPM) very often serve to support backyard poultry farms in many rural areas. 2.6.1.3 BACKYARD POULTRY Small-scale poultry production is critical to the livelihood and food-security of millions of people in developing nations and also practiced even within developed nations. Part of the genetic diversity of commercial poultry is being preserved in backyard poultry (CBN, 2004; GRAIN, 2006). It is common for domestic poultry to be let loose in the extensive system of farming; hence contact of domestic birds with wild birds is increased permitting spread of infection from either wild bird to domestic birds or vice-versa. However, supporters of rural stakeholders have opposed this notion, proposing that backyard poultry possess higher immunity to HPAI and that this method of rearing poultry is cheaper and affordable (GRAIN, 2006). Most rural areas are located in areas of relatively high biodiversity, offering a higher encounter rate of domestic poultry with wild birds. Backyard poultry farms in Asia account for almost 70% of the poultry population in Asia and most of the outbreaks in 35 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 2006 were in this sector (EMPRES WATCH, 2006). Backyard poultry farms often practice little or no bio-security measures and are vulnerable to HPAI. Access to veterinary services is limited and low compensation schemes could prevent locals from reporting sudden outbreaks among local poultry (Capua and Alexander, 2006; Peiris et al., 2007). Opposition to mass culling of birds is also on the increase among backyard poultry farmers who have very little resources to re-establish their source of livelihood due to the believed misappropriation of funds set aside for their compensation post-culling. 2.6.1.4 GAME HUNTING AND COLLECTION Birds are targeted by hunters and gamers who see hunting as a source of pleasure or a means of livelihood. There have been reports of HPAI virus isolation from free living parrots being trafficked into Europe from Thailand and captive caged birds (Mountain Hawk-eagle, Spizaetus nipalensis) held in quarantine in England from Taiwan in 2004 (Borm et al., 2005). Studies reveal that game hunters and professionals exposed to wild birds have a high chance of contacting avian influenza. Surveillance studies have concentrated efforts on wild bird populations and domestic poultry, there is therefore need to conduct more extensive studies on risk assessments of illegal and legal wildlife trade within Nigeria. It is noted that trade in wild animals is relatively higher in developing countries where biodiversity is often exploited illegally. The illegal trade continues unabated, and very rarely are hunters served a full blow of the laws that are supposed to protect and preserve such biodiversity. 2.6.1.5 CLIMATE The detection of avian influenza (both HPAI and LPAI) in various parts of the tropics may give evidence that climate does not prevent perpetuation of avian influenza 36 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN among waterfowl resident in Africa, though it does limit epizootics to particular seasons. Low-pathogenic AIV have been detected and isolated in several species of wild birds from major wetlands of northern, western and eastern Africa, and this points out that Afrotropical ecosystems are favourable for the persistence and transmission of AIV (Gaidet et al., 2007a; b). 2.6.1.6 ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING OF POULTRY International trade in birds both legal and illegal have been pointed to as being responsible for some of the major outbreaks of avian influenza (BirdLife International, 2008). Lapses by border patrols could serve as bases for the infiltration of products from Asia into Europe and possibly Africa, some of which have been confiscated and proven to be H5N1 positive. 2.6.1.7 MANURE The frequent use of waste from poultry houses to serve as natural fertilizers and feed for fish and pigs is said to be a high risk activity, Birdlife International has called for research into the potential transmission of avian diseases via poultry waste (BirdLife International, 2008; Capua and Alexander, 2006). The greatest threat in the spread of avian influenza viruses is by the mechanical transfer of infected faeces, in which viruses may be present in high concentrations and survive longer than 44 days (Utterback, 1984). 2.7.0 POLYCROMASE CHAIN REACTION (PCR) PCR for many virus detections have already been described for many clinically relevant viruses. The sensitivity and specificity is however determined by the choice of the primer sequences. Data shows that the newly designed PCR offer more 37 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN sensitive and faster tool for the diagnosis of influenza virus than virus isolation (Fouchier et al., 2005). The use of molecular techniques to directly detect virus in samples from animals facilitates the rapid identification and genetic characterization of avian influenza A viruses (AIV) (WHO, 2002). Beyond these molecular techniques, Polymerase Chain amplification using a thermostable Taq DNA polymerase is very sensitive and is able to identify virus genetic material in a lot of different samples, including oral and feacal swabs. Positive and negative controls are included to ensure reliability of the results. All samples are tested for presence of avian influenza virus by a real-time RT- PCR targeting the matrix (M) gene. Haemaglutinin (HA or H) and neuraminidase (NA or N) subtypes of the positive influenza samples are determined by the use of specific primer pairs. Nucleotide sequences are obtained after specific PCR products sequencing and then compared to available sequences in the Genetic Bank database. 2.8.0 CAPTURE TECHNIQUES FOR WILD BIRDS Extensive reviews of capture techniques have been carried out, but the health and welfare of the captured birds is most important. Presently, there are few, if any bird species that cannot be captured. Traps often utilize lures, recorded calls to attract birds to the trapping site while others use baits. It is advised that the equipment capable of inflicting damage to the birds should not be used or should be avoided at all costs. Traps are always checked at regular intervals and when not in use should be folded and closed to avoid birds being trapped unintentionally. Trapping of birds should also be conducted only when weather is favourable to prevent excessive cold or dehydration to the birds. 38 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 2.8.1 MIST NETTING This is the most widely utilized method of capturing birds and it is also used for other flying vertebrates for example, bats. The principle basically is placing an inconspicuous net vertically on poles and fitted or positioned in areas where bird activity is very high. Mist nets are available in many different lengths, mesh sizes and fiber quality. This is determined by the size of the target species or group of birds to be captured. Short nets are very good for forest undercover while long nets are good for cleared areas. The nets are designed to slowly decelerate birds on impact with the net. Mist nets have at least 3 to 5 pockets or shelves running along the length of the net on to which the bird drops when it makes contact or impact with the net which it obviously did not previously notice. The mounting poles are mostly made from bamboo or metal but in any case should be thin and strong and light for ease of transportation in the field. Mist nets should be place where they are concealed i.e shaded sites are preferable to sun lit areas. Activity in birds is highest at dawn and dusk and these time regimes should be targeted for the best bird capture results. A good knowledge of the species or group of species to be trapped is fundamental to a good capture as this will serve as a guide to placement of traps. Sighting of a location spacious enough to contain the length of nets to be used to keep the nets taught at both ends and the poles upright. The ease with which the mist nets can be set up has also provided lots of modifications and as such floating nets mounted on boats, submerged nets and even canopy nets with pulley system have now been designed to capture a wide array of birds. 39 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Silence is always maintained at mist net sites and this prevents birds from being suspicious of where the trap is located. Bird extraction from the net should be done carefully, firstly detecting the route with which the bird enters the net, picking out its feet by the tarsus and carefully then removing the net from over the body, wings and finally the head. Extracted birds are quickly placed in bird bags which vary depending on the size of the bird captured. The use of mist-nets requires training by licensed individuals and after mastering its use, it can easily be deployed for use. Other methods available for trapping include the duck trap, cannon netting, coral taps and dive in traps. 2.8.2 BIRD HANDLING AND RINGING Depending upon the objective of trapping birds in the field, lots of research techniques including ringing, banding, biometric measurement, sample collection for laboratory analysis, radio tagging can be carried out and this involves handling birds without allowing the bearer nor the bird be harmed. The general acceptable methods of holding a bird is termed ringer’s grip. The use of this grip ensures minimal stress to the bird and therefore after release the bird returns to its foraging activity normally. The use of personal protective equipment appropriate for the level of risk is strongly advised even when clinical signs are not obvious. (FAO, 2006; FAO, 2007a). Generally tools used during ringing include the following; rings to fit the bird group of interest, ringing pliers, needle nosed pliers for removing improperly fitted rings, data notebook and pencil for recording, veneer callipers, stopped ruler, tail ruler, bird guide, weighing scale, weighing bags and nylon fishing line. The AFRING organization is responsible for ringing data in Africa. Rings possess unique number code systems which ensure that birds are properly identified when 40 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN trapped or retrapped or sighted (mostly with colour rings) the placing of rings on birds involve a ringing license and should not be carried out by amateurs as data collected would be inaccurate and out of precision and this will reduce the integrity of the ringing system. 2.8.3 VIRUS SURVEILLANCE Proper specimen collection is essential for providing samples that ensure reliable isolation and identification of any pathogens found present. Tracheal and cloacal swabs are taken from the birds’ trachea and cloaca (vent). They can be used for viral cultures or RNA extracted and used in reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction RT-PCR to test for the presence of many viral pathogens. Research reveals that AI subtypes replicate to high levels and longer periods in the respiratory tract compared to the intestinal tract (Sturm-Ramirez et al., 2004). Tracheal and cloacal swabs are currently the preferred samples for H5N1 surveillance in wild birds (FAO, 2006; FAO, 2007a). The sampling of wildbirds also requires training and should only be carried out by trained personnel. Cryovials (about 1.5 ml tubes) containing viral transport medium can be prepared locally and should be stored at low temperatures (< 4ºC) in the field before use. Faecal sampling is a less expensive way of collecting large number of samples especially when trapping the target bird is not feasible. It is also called an environmental sample. The poultry meat trade in Egypt depends heavily upon the live bird markets (LBM) because of insufficient slaughtering houses, lack of market infrastructure, cultural 41 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN preference for consumption of freshly slaughtered poultry (Abdulwahab, 2010). There are two types of LBM in Egypt, retail shops and traditional LBM where minimal or no food safety standards are implemented. Surveillance of LBM resulted in 12.5 percent of 573 LBM being positive for H5N1. This poses a threat to public health and poultry industry. The LBM in Egypt had three categories of birds with waterfowl sold as a solitary species contributing to 70.4 percent of the market, waterfowl mixed with chicken contributing 26.8 percent and turkey sold separately contributing 2.8 percent. Higher incidence was detected during the cold month of Febuary. The role of LBM has been extensively studied during the last decade. Several attempts have been made to eradicate AI from LBMs with limited success and AI remains endemic in Egypt. It has been opined that cleaning and disinfection should be carried out weekly to reduce the spread of viral transmission. The epidemiological role of LBM involves collection of various species of waterfowl from various sources which could serve as a medium for the transmission. It is possible that mutational changes as a result of recombination of various strains occur at this phase and lastly the birds are then sold to buyers who could also decide to begin to rear such animals in the backyard farms. Individuals who are exposed to infected animals also stand a chance of harboring the viruses. Women and children are often a higher percentage when censuses are made at such markets. In Egypt presently, legislation has been made to ban the trade of wildbirds in LBM because sufficient slaughter houses have not been available. Also, compensation for infected products is not forth coming and as a result, traders are involved in smuggling of live birds into the markets where they are concealed to prevent their confiscation by local authorities (Abdulwahab, 2010). Joanis et al. (2008) detected only 12 cases of H5N1 from 13,597 within Nigeria. Studies on LBM are well 42 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN documented (Nguyen et al., 2005, Chen et al., 2004, Li et al., 2004, Feare, 2007, and Amonsin et al., 2008). There are three hypotheses concerning the epidemiology of viruses in wild birds. Firstly, they could be carried by wild birds asymptomatically, secondly they could be carried for some periods before death and thirdly virus remains very lethal and hence wildbirds die at the spot of contacting infection because they get very sick. In the first scenario, wildbirds will be able to spread the virus to every location they get to and this would be traceable to their migratory routes. Domestic birds and other wild vertebrates obtain the virus from such locations. In the second scenario, wildbirds die in their migratory routes and there would be evidence of deaths of several birds along the routes and poultry infection would be evident along the routes. In the last scenario, wildbirds would not be able to carry the infection once they get infected. Laboratory bred geese all died 7 days post–infection (Chen et al., 2006a). Most wild birds died at their wintering sites or during breeding season when their movement was hindered, indicating that they may have contacted infection from that point where they died. There was however, no poultry disease outbreak where they died. 2.9.0 BIRD DIVERSITY INDICES The concept of diversity, including biodiversity itself as well as the narrower concept of species diversity, is a human derived term and has no mathematical meaning (Wilson and Peter, 1988; Magurran, 2004; Colwell, 2009). Although the simplest measurement of species diversity is species richness, evenness is also as important. An area containing ten species in which only one species occupies about 95 % of the territory cannot be said to be as rich or diverse as another with the same number of species but with an averagely even number of individuals contributing to the 43 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN diversity. However, diversity indices are mathematical functions that combine both richness and evenness in a single measure, although not explicitly (Rosenzweig, 1995, Colwell, 2009). Diversity indices include Shannon diversity, Simpson diversity and Fisher’s alpha diversity, though there are other indices also used in ecology. Both Shannon and Simpson diversities increase as richness increases, for a given pattern of evenness, and increase as evenness increases, for a given richness (Maguran, 2004; Colwell, 2009). However the two indices do not always rank areas being compared in the same way. The Simpson’s diversity index is the probability that two individuals sighted or observed in a given sample are not from the same species or group; therefore values with lower values show that with less effort more species are observed, the Simpson’s index range between zero and one with values closer to zero having a higher diversity and those closer to one having less diversity. Simpson diversity is more partial to evenness and less to richness when compared with Shannon diversity which is even more partial to evenness than the Simpson diversity. Another diversity index is the Berger-Parker index which is the inverse of the proportion of individuals in the community that belong to the single most common species. However, because rare species may be missing from smaller samples, the sensitivity of this index to correctly measure diversity depends on its sensitivity to species richness. Fisher’s alpha diversity on the other hand depends only on species richness and abundance but nevertheless, depends on substantial computation because iterative methods must be used. It is much less sensitive to rare species and the relative abundance computation is too conservative. 44 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Species richness is a measure of the number of species (of birds) in a given sample and is not affected or does not show any relationship to the number of individuals in either group of species. A site with higher number of species might not necessarily have a higher number of individuals but more value is placed here on variety of species present in the sample. Bird species diversity was calculated using Shannon- Weiner diversity index, H and Simpson’s diversity index D (Begon et al., 1996). S H  Pi ln Pi i1 Where: Pi = proportion of individual species, S is the total number of species in the community (Number seen plus number heard), ln = natural logarithm i = ith species and Ds = S(ni(ni -1)/N(N-1)) Where: Ds = Bias corrected form for Simpson Index n th i = number of individuals of from the i species N = Total number of species in the community 45 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN CHAPTER THREE MATERIALS AND METHODS 3.1.0 DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION OF STUDY AREA. The IITA is located along the old Oyo road in Moniya, Ibadan at longitude 07° 30΄N and latitude 03° 55΄E (see Figure 3.1). IITA is an Important Bird Area (IBA) in Nigeria (Ezealor, 2002) and falls within the moist semi-deciduous forest zone, characterized by two annual rainfall seasons and a dry season. The annual rainfall for the year is 1500-2000 mm (Ezealor, 2002) but records from 2003-2008 puts the average annual rainfall between 1,000 to 1400 mm (IITA Meteorological station). The length of the John Craig Lake, which receives inflow from the Awba River, is 2.6 km, while the length of the embankment is 359.7 m. The surface area of the lake at full capacity is 70 Ha (175 acres) (IITA Meteorological station). The lake was created for irrigation of farmland meant for research purpose and secondarily for domestic use. This lake provides food, water supply and serves as roosting site for both migratory (of which Dendrocygna viduata is the most numerous) and resident water birds such as Phalacrocorax africanus, Actophilornis africana, and Adeola ralloides. The forest is located on the west bank of the lake (See Figure 3.2). It consists of secondary forest and derived savannah vegetation as a result of the deterioration of a previous evergreen tropical forest of the south-western region of the country (Ezealor, 2002). The forest consists of tree species such as Anitaris toxicaria, Cola nitida, Sterculia trangacantha, Milicia excelsa, Ficus vogeliana, Ficus exasperata and Morinda lucida. It is rich in fauna, which include reptiles, duikers, squirrels, bats, and 46 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN provides cover and food for the fauna. The forest serves as habitat for the endemic and critically endangered Ibadan malimbe (Malimbus ibadanensis). Figure 3.1: Map of Nigeria showing location of Ibadan in Oyo State. 47 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Figure 3.2: IITA West Bank and forest trails 48 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 3.2.0 CENSUS METHOD Line transects were cut along the perimeter of water bodies, farmland and forest habitats as Bibby et al. (2000) showed it to be the most efficient method in terms of data gathered per unit effort. 3.3.1 DATA COLLECTION A complete random design (CRD) was used in this study. Nine transects of 1000 m length each were cut around the John Craig lake, forest reserve and farm lots. 3.3.2 SURVEY OF WILD BIRDS a. Census of all bird species was taken from vantage points around the lake, rice paddies each month and when taking faecal samples from roosting birds. b. Line transects were visited 2 times each month of the year (in the mornings between 0600 hrs and 1200 hrs and evenings 1500 hrs and 1900 hrs). Birds seen outside these time schedules and transects were included in species list (Borrow and Demey, 2001). c. All birds observed (both seen and heard) were identified to species level, counted and recorded in a field notebook and this was carried out with the aid of a field guide, (Borrow and Demey, 2008), a pair of binoculars (magnification 10 × 42) and a telescope. d. A combination of wader nets (used for waterbirds) and mist nets (forest birds) with playbacks (to serve as lure) were used to trap wild birds. e. Most of the birds trapped were ringed and biometric records and measurements were taken of age, sex, wing length, fat score, moult score, head moult, body moult, pectoral muscle and brood patch. 49 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN f. Hip-waders, life jacket and rain boots were used to have access to areas of the wetland that were wet. 3.3.3 MEASURING HABITAT VARIABLES Within each 200 m section of each transect a 20 X 20 m quadrat was laid out. All trees within the quadrat were counted and recorded. Within the 20 X 20 m quadrat, four 2 X 2 m quadrats were laid out. Within these quadrats the following measurements were taken following Manu et al. (2007) and Manu and Imong (2006). a. The number of saplings and small trees (diameter <1 cm and at least 1 m tall, 1-10 cm, and >10 cm). b. The percentage canopy cover (to the nearest 5%) estimated by looking through the objective lens of a pair of binoculars. This gives a small view area of the canopy allowing an assessment of cover to be made. c. The percentage ground cover by ocular estimation (to the nearest 5%). d. Number of lianas or woody climbers. e. Grass height (<0.5 m tall, 0.5-1.0 m tall, and > 1 m tall) 3.3.4 SAMPLE COLLECTION FROM BIRDS a. Oropharyngeal and Cloacal Sampling were done according to the Food and Agricultural Organization standards (FAO, 2006; FAO, 2007a) by securing the bird in one hand, taking a sterile cotton swab in the other, opening the bill of the bird carefully, wiping the throat of the bird (oropharyngeal swabbing) and then turning the bird upside down and taking a swab of its cloaca (cloacal swabbing). Swabs were placed in a virus transport medium (in screw capped vials) and the base of the swab was cut with a scissors. Gloves were not used 50 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN during ringing as it slows the down processing of trapped birds; however when faecal samples were being taken a pair of gloves was used. b. Faecal swabs were taken after identifying and stalking large resting flocks of waterfowl; surrounding vegetation was searched carefully for deposits of faeces. Sterile cotton swabs were used to gently wipe faeces found. After taking a faecal sample, the faecal deposit was trampled upon with the aid of my field boot as a precaution, to prevent me taking the same sample twice. c. All vials (1.5 mm cryovials) were labeled to ensure that samples taken from each bird or faecal deposit align with recorded information taken on each visit. d. Samples were placed in a transport medium called isotonic phosphate buffered saline (PBS), pH 7.0-7.4, consisting of antibiotics and antimycotics (Penicillin 10,000 U/ml, Streptomycin 1mg/ml, Nystatin 1000 μ/ml and Gentamycin 250 μg/ml) supplemented with 20% Glycerol (see Table 3.0.1 for alternative Virus Transport Medium). e. All swabs were taken to university of Ibadan avian disease detection laboratory of the Department of Veterinary Medicine (laboratory) where I carried out detection PCR for viruses present in the samples and PCR products were taken to the Laboratory National De Santé in Luxembourg for sequencing. f. Communities surrounding IITA were visited and at each settlement, permission was taken from District Chiefs and household heads to carry out sampling of domestic poultry. 51 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Table 3.0.1: Composition of the viral transport medium. 52 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 3.3.4 SAMPLE STORAGE AND PRECAUTIONS a. Prior to sampling, vials were stored in a freezer from which they were transferred into a cool box with ice packs when transported to the field. The sample vials were taken out of the cool box during sampling, and placed back after sampling to maintain a cold chain. b. The sample vials were transported back to the laboratory where they were ° stored in -20 C freezers until analysis was carried out. c. Data collected on each sampling day were inputted into a computer when back at the base station. d. Precautions against zoonotic disease transmission were taken in the field during sample collection by use of facemasks, hand gloves, detergents and antiseptics during and after sampling. 3.4.1 RNA ISOLATION, AMPLIFICATION AND ANALYSIS RNA were extracted at the laboratory with an RNA virus kit and eluted into 50 μl nuclease free H2O according to the protocols outlined below. 3.4.2 RNA ISOLATION Ribonucleic acids (RNAs) of the samples collected where extracted using Qiamp Viral RNA minikit and eluted into 50 μl nuclease free H2O. Extraction was carried out in an extraction hood, and other necessary precautions to prevent contamination of samples were taken. The AVL (lysis buffer) was prepared by adding 1ml of AVL buffer to a carrier RNA red tube and mixed properly to re- suspend the powder. The solution was then transferred into the AVL bottle and the red tube was then rinsed with 1ml of AVL buffer and again transferred into the 53 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN AVL bottle and the carrier RNA was added on the bottle lid. Aliquot of the solution (AVL + carrier) were made into 1.5ml eppendorf: 560µl/tube and labelled AVL; this was then stored at 4°C. Ethanol was added to the buffers AW1 and AW2, all in preparation for the extraction. The samples were decontaminated by placing on tissue paper and spraying with Virkon, wiped with tissue paper and labelled appropriately. The samples were equilibrated at room temperature and vortexed. The AVL buffer aliquots were then removed and re-dissolved (5min at 80°C with the heater block) and allowed to cool to room temperature before it was used. This was to dissolve any crystals that were formed from the freezing. 140µl of the samples were added each to 560µl of AVL and mixed properly by pulse vortexing for 15 seconds and incubated for 10 minutes at room temperature to lyse the virus. The mixture was spined to remove drops from the lids and 560µl of Ethanol was added and vortexed for 15 seconds. The mixture was spined and 630µl of the mixture was transferred into the labelled spin columns and spined in a centrifuge at 8000 rpm for 1 minute. The collection tubes were then discarded and replaced with new ones. The remaining 630µl of the mixture (140µl of sample + 560µl of AVL + 560µl of ethanol) were transferred into the same labelled spin columns and spined at 8000rpm for 1 minute and the collection tubes were again discarded and replaced with new ones. After this repeated process, 500µl of AW1 wash buffer was added to the spin column and then transferred to a centrifuge and spined at 8000rpm for 1 minute, and the collection tubes were changed. 500µl of AW2 wash buffer was then added to the spin columns, placed in the centrifuge again and spined at 13000rpm for 3 minutes and the tubes changed. The labelled spin columns were then spined for 1 minute at 13000rpm in a centrifuge and collection tubes were discarded once more. Each labelled spin columns was then 54 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN placed on a 1.5ml labelled eppendorf tube and to it, 60µl of elution buffer was added to the centre of each column and incubated at room temperature for 1 minute and then spined at 8000rpm for another 1 minute. The labelled spin columns were then discarded and the RNA was stored at -20°C. 3.4.3 DETECTION PCR 3.4.3.1 RT-PCR RNA was then screened for the presence of genomic nucleic acid from types A AIV, NDV, IBV, Rota, Astro 1 and 2 by means of reverse transcription RT- PCR optimized with respect to primer sets (Table 3.1), enzymes, and concentration of reagents (Table 3.2) as well as cycling parameters (Spackman et al., 2002). Amplification was then st carried out on cDNA followed by 1 round and in the case of IBV and NDV detection, nested PCRs or directly on RNA, with One-step PCR protocol followed by nested PCRs. Reverse transcription was then carried out for 80min at 55°C in a 20µl TM reaction containing 200U of superScript III Reverse Transcriptase, 40 U of TM RNaseOUT recombinant Ribonuclease Inhibitor, 5mM DTT, 1x First-Strand Buffer, 0.5mM dNTP mix, 7.5mg/L of random nucleotide hexamers (Invitrogen, Merelbeke, Belgium), 2µl of distilled water and 5µl of extracted RNA. st All 1 round and nested PCR reactions were performed on a mastercycler gradient (eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany) in a total volume of 25µl. A premix containing 17.3 µl of ddH20, 2.5µl of 10X Buffer, 2 mM dNTPs and 1U Platinum Taq (Invitrogen, Merelbeke, Belgium) and 0.5µl of cDNA or first round PCR product. PCR reactions were carried out using the same cycling conditions for each virus type, for example for AIV detection the conditions were as in Table 3.2: initial denaturation at 95°C for 55 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN five min, five cycles of amplification at 95°C for 30s, 58°C for 30s and 72°C for one min, 40 cycles of amplification at 95°C for 30s, 56°C and 72°C for one min, five cycles of amplification at 95°C for 30s, 53°C for 30s and 72°C for one min and a final extension at 72°C for 10min. PCR product sizes were visualized by UV + illumination Agarose gels stained with syber safe as compared to the 1kb size marker (Invitrogen, Merelbeke, Belgium). Step by step procedure for Reverse transcription using Superscript III  Prepared mix one (see Table 3.1)  Added 8μl of mix one in each well  Added 5μl of RNA  Mixed (vortex or by pipeting) and spinned down  Denaturation : 10min at 72°C  Chilled directly on ice  Prepared mix two (see Table 3.1)  Added 7μl of mix two in each well  Incubated for 80min at 50°C  Inactivation for 15min at 70°C (see Table 3.1) Step by step procedure for Reverse transcription using MMLV  Diluted the RNA 1:1  Prepared the mix one (Table 3.1)  Added 7ul of mix one to each PCR tube  Added 5ul of extracted and diluted RNA  Incubated at 65°C for 5mins  Chilled on ice (i.e. Quickly place tubes on ice block) 56 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN  Prepared Mix two (Table 3.1)  Added 7ul of mix two to each of the PCR tubes from mix one  Incubated at 37°C for 2mins  Added 1ul of M-MLV to the mix (then task to PCR machine)  Incubated at 25°C for 10mins Continuous  Performed reverse transcription at 37°C for 50mins program in PCR  Then 70°C for 15 mins machine Table 3.1: RT-PCR mixture 1 and 2 Superscript S uperscript M MLV M MLV Reagents Mix 1 Mix 2 Mix 1 Mix 2 Primer (RP 0,03 ug/ul) (1:100) 5ul 5ul 10 mM dNTP Mix 1ul 1ul Sterile, distilled water 2ul 1ul 5X first-strand buffer 4ul 4 ul 0.1 M DTT 1ul 2ul RNase OUT (40 U/ml) 1ul 1ul Superscript III (200U/ml) 1ul 0ul MMLV 0ul 1ul Total volume per sample 8ul 7ul 7 ul 8ul Note: denaturation 72°C, 10 m in and quick on ice, before adding M ix two for either superscript or MMLV. Mix one and two for either superscript or MMLV make up 15ul to which 5ul of diluted extracted RNA is added 57 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 3.4.3.2 PCR REACTION PCR reaction was carried out for various virus types using laid down procedures (see Table 3.2). The PCR mixes and the thermal cycles used were as optimized at the Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ibadan and Institute of Immunology, Luxembourg. The PCR mix was vortexed and 23l was transferred into each PCR tube, 2l of the DNA was added to the PCR mix and was vortexed and put in the thermocycler to undergo PCR thermal procedure. Nested PCR (nPCR) was performed for NDV and IBV on the product of the first round PCR using primers specific for each of the virus types. An agarose gel electrophoresis and stain (5 μl /sample) followed. Sybersafe was used instead of the Ethidium Bromide to highlight dsDNA on an agarose gel. The Although Sybersafe is less carcinogenic, the same precautions were taken when handling Sybersafe. I always wore gloves, discarded them immediately afterwards, and tried not to touch anything with my gloves, like the computer, the desk. 58 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Table 3.2: Primers required for running PCR templates 59 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Table 3.3: General PCR plate set-up 1 2 3 4 5 6 10 11 12 A 1 9 17 25 33 41 49 B 2 10 18 26 34 42 50 C 3 11 19 27 35 43 RTNC D 4 12 20 28 36 44 PCRNC E 5 13 21 29 37 45 F 6 14 22 30 38 46 G 7 15 23 31 39 47 H 8 16 24 32 40 48 Where RTNC= RT negative control, PCRNC= PCR negative control and each well has a unique code for e.g. A1 to A49 60 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 3.4.4.0 DETERMINATION OF POSITIVE SAMPLES 3.4.4.1 Gel Casting Thirty milliliter (30ml) of 2% agarose gel was prepared by adding 0.6g of Agarose (Invitrogen) into 30ml of 0.5% TBE, boiled for 1 minute in the microwave to melt the agarose. It was allowed to cool and 3l of SYBR Safe was added, rocked gently and poured into the gel rack containing combs (14 slots “Horizon 58 by Life technologies”) which formed wells in the gel and was allowed to solidify. The comb was removed and the gel placed in an electrophoresis tank containing 0.5% TBE. 3.4.4.2 Gel Loading and Electrophoresis The first and the last well of each lane of the gel were loaded with 5l of ladder. Each sample (5l) was mixed with 1l of loading dye and was into the well. This was done using a single channel micropipette without breaking up the gel. The electrophoresis tank was connected to the power pack (Consort E455) and was run by applying constant current at 120V for 30 minutes. 3.4.4.3 DNA band detection The DNA band was viewed by placing the gel on a UV transilluminator (UVP TS-20) beneath a Kodak camera connected to a computer. The image displayed was captured with the Kodak camera and viewed on the display unit of the connected computer. A 1kb DNA ladder was used (Figure 3.3). 61 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Figure 3.3: 1kb DNA Ladder 3.4.4.4 DNA SEQUENCING In this study, no positive samples were detected for H5 and H7 subtype (Spackman et al., 2002; Slomka et al., 2007). The obtained sequences were then aligned together with contemporary and sequences (Bio Edit and Seqscape) and their phylogenetic relationship inferred using the Neighbor-Joining algorithm (MEGA 4.0; 1,000 bootstrapping) (Ducatez et al., 2006). Sequences were then deposited in a public database. 62 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 3.5.0 STATISTICAL DATA ANALYSIS i. Species-effort curve was plotted for the first survey in each of the sites, to determine if survey effort was sufficient. ii. The birds observed (seen and heard) during the survey were pooled and an estimate was made of bird species abundance, richness, evenness and diversity for each habitat. iii. Bird species diversity was calculated using Shannon-Weiner diversity index, H and Simpson’s diversity index D (Begon et al., 1996). S H  Pi ln Pi i1 where: Pi = proportion of individual species, S is the total number of species in the community (Number seen plus number heard), ln = natural logarithm th i = i species and Ds = (ni(ni -1)/N(N-1)) where: Ds = Bias corrected form for Simpson Index th ni = number of individuals of the i species N = Total number of species in the community 63 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN iv. Prevalences of virus types and subtypes (AIV, NDV) were calculated as a ratio of the number of positive samples to the total samples screened. v. Data was tested with One-sample Kolmogorov test to determine whether or not the data are normally distributed and Homogeneity of variances was tested using Levine’s test. vi. Tests of correlation were used to determine significant associations between habitat variables and mean bird diversity, abundance and richness. vii. Comparison was made to determine differences between bird species richness, abundance and diversity indices across seasons, habitat and time of day using One way Anova (ANOVA). viii. A post hoc test was used to determine where differences come from. ix. Descriptive statistics were also used. 3.5.1 POSSIBLE BIASES IN METHODOLOGY From bird census methods reviewed, it is apparent that no single bird survey or vegetation sampling technique is perfect. Therefore, all bird species in the study area may not be recorded and number of species recorded may vary with time (Manu, 2002). The possible biases are effects of variation in survey effort, effect of time of day on species number, biases due to the observer, landscape or the nature of the habitat, the birds themselves, duration of study, season, weather, and the equipment used. During this survey, the effect of variation in effort was checked by allocating equal amount of time to the survey of each transect. 64 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS 4.0 BIRD SPECIES INVENTORY A total of 398 bird species from at least 71 families is now recorded for the Ibadan area, of which the IITA campus holds at least 269 species (68%) from 64 families, of which 75 species have been mist-netted during our study between Febuary 2010 and November 2012 (See Plates 1 to 15; Appendix 3; Appendix 4). Bird species richness, abundance, Shannon and Simpson’s diversity indexes and evenness index are presented in the Table 4.1. The forest site had the highest mean bird species richness per section with the lake and farmland having relatively less number of species per section. The number of species per sample is a measure of richness. The more species present in a sample, the 'richer' the sample. Table 4.1: Bird species diversity, abundance, richness and evenness index across habitats Forest S.E SD Lake S.E SD Farm S.E SD N=Sections 220 240 184 Diversity(Shannon’s) 1.888* 0.034 0.509 1.466 0.038 0.583 1.370 0.046 0.606 Diversity(Simpson’s’) 0.114* 0.007 0.096 0.297 0.015 0.237 0.295 0.018 0.241 Abundance 18.562 0.892 13.229 73.514* 10.831 167.791 56.124 13.345 176.034 Richness 8.964* 0.303 4.490 8.304 0.285 4.407 6.868 0.327 4.313 Evenness index 0.913* 0.006 0.088 0.746 0.016 0.242 0.779 0.017 0.220 65 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Plate 1: Macrosphenus kempi Kemp’s Longbill* Plate 2: Cossypha cyanocampter Blue-shouldered Robin Chat* 66 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Plate 3: Phyllastrephus baumanni Baumann’s Greenbul* Plate 4: Alcedo cristata Malachite kingfisher 67 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Plate 5: Ploceus nigricollis Black-necked Weaver Plate 5: Cisticola erythrops Red-faced Cisticola 68 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Plate 6: Halcyon senegalensis Woodland Kingfisher Plate 7: Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove 69 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Plate 8: Cinnyris minullus Tiny Sunbird 70 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Plate 9: Terpisiphone rufiventer Red-bellied Paradise Flycatcher* Plate 10: Dyaphorophyia castanea Chestnut Wattle-eye* 71 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Plate 11: Halcyon malimbica Blue-breasted Kingfisher Plate 12: Ptilopsis leucotis Northern White-faced Owl 72 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Plate 13: Ploceus cucullatus Village Weaver Colony Plate 14: Saxicola rubetra Whinchat, a Palearctic migrant 73 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.1.0 TESTS OF NORMALITY Variances were equal for bird species diversity for Levine’s test and F (68,577) =1.059, P>0.05, but variances were not equal for bird species richness abundance. Levine’s test for bird species richness and abundance were F (68,577) =1.92 and 3.31, respectively and P<0.05. 4.1.1 BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY For the Shannon’s index, bird species diversity was highest in the forest and comparison with other habitats showed a significant difference in comparison with bird species diversity in the Lake site (P<0.05). The difference in bird species diversity for lake site was not significant in comparison with the farm site P=0.074 (See Figure 4.1 and 4.2). Simpson’s diversity index also gave similar results with forest being significantly lower for the indices (Simpsons) therefore interpreted as highest bird species diversity compared to the lake site and farm area P<0.05 (See Figure 4.1 and 4.2). Simpsons bird species diversity was relatively higher in 2010 than in 2011 for both farm and lake habitats (See Figure 4.1 and 4.2). 74 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.1: Bird species diversity across habitats (Shannon’s index). LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.2: Bird species diversity across habitats (Simpson’s index). 75 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.1.2 BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS Bird species richness was highest in the forest, with a significant difference in comparison with bird species richness in the Lake site P<0.05 and there was also significant difference on comparison with the farm site P<0.001. Bird species richness was relatively higher in 2010 than in 2011 for both the lake site and forest habitats, while bird species richness was higher in 2011 in comparison with 2010 for the farm site as displayed in Figure 4.3. There were averagely 9, 8 and 7 birds in each section respectively for forest, lake and farm habitats as seen in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.3. However, overall species accumulation over the first 40 transects showed a relatively higher species richness in 2011 (See Figure 4.26). . LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.3: Bird species richness across habitats 76 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.1.3 BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE Bird species abundance was highest at the lake. Comparison with other habitats showed a significant difference in bird species abundance relative to the forest P<0.05 and was close to significance on comparison with the farm site P=0.05 (See Figure 4.4). Bird species abundance was relatively higher in the first year (2010) in all the habitats (farm, lake and forest; See Figure 4.4). Averagely, bird species abundance per section for the three habitats was 18, 73 and 56 respectively for forest, lake and farm; See Table 4.1. Figure 4.4: Bird species abundance across habitats. 77 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.1.4 BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS Bird species were relatively more evenly distributed in the forest site as compared to the other two habitats, lake and farm (P<0.05). Bird species evenness was relatively higher in the first year 2010 as compared to the second year 2011 for the lake and the forest habitats, but the reverse was the case for the farm habitat (See Figure 4.5). Averagely, the evenness index for all three habitats were as follows; 0.90, 0.75 and 0.78 for the forest, lake and farmland habitats respectively (see Table 4.1 and Figure 4.5). Figure 4.5: Bird species evenness across habitats. 78 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.2.0 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ACROSS HABITATS 4.2.1 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY Bird species diversity was not significantly affected by time of day in the three habitats. Comparison of the differences in the Simpson’s index for bird species diversity for the two time periods (morning and evening) is displayed in the Figure 4.6 and 4.7. Relatively higher variances were however observed during the evening surveys. Differences in bird species diversity between time periods of survey was significant using the Shannon’s diversity index for the farm and lake habitats between morning and evening survey periods as displayed in Figure 4.6 and 4.7. Bird species diversity using Shannon’s diversity index was relatively higher in the morning survey period as when compared to evening for the lake site. For the farm habitat there was relatively higher bird species diversity in the evening survey period as compared to the morning. The forest habitat showed no relative difference in bird species diversity for the two time periods but variance was relatively higher for the evening survey period (see Figure 4.6 and 4.7). Comparison of bird species diversity using Shannon’s diversity index showed that although differences in bird species diversity between the morning survey period for lake and farm habitats showed a relative difference with the former having a higher diversity index. The differences in bird species diversity between the evening survey periods for lake and farm habitats showed no relative difference (see Figure 4.6 and 4.7). However, bird species diversity using the Shannon’s index was relatively higher in the forest on comparison with either lake or farm for the two time periods (See Figure 4.6 and 4.7). 79 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.6: Bird species diversity and time of day (Simpson’s index). LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.7: Bird species diversity and time of day (Shannon’s index). 80 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.2.2 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS Relatively higher bird species richness was observed in the morning survey period as compared to the evening surveys for the lake habitat (Figure 4.8), but the opposite relation was observed in the farm and forest habitats where evening surveys yielded higher bird species richness. LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.8: Bird species richness and time of day. 81 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.2.3 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE Bird species were relatively higher in abundance during the morning survey period as compared to the evening for the lake habitat as shown in Figure 4.9, but farm habitat showed a relatively higher bird species abundance in the evening survey period. The difference in abundance of birds per section was not relatively different for the forest habitat. LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.9: Bird species abundance against time of day 82 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.2.4 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS Birds showed relatively higher evenness in the evening surveys period for the lake habitats as compared to the morning surveys as shown in Figure 4.10, whereas the forest and farm habitats showed a relatively higher evenness index for the morning survey period (Table 4.1). For both time periods, the forest habitat showed significantly higher evenness index as compared with either of the other two habitat (see Figure 4.10). LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.10: Bird species evenness against time of day 83 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.3.0 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY POOLING ALL HABITATS 4.3.1 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY Pooling all bird diversity data together as observed in Figure 4.11 and 4.12, evening survey had relatively lower mean bird species diversity as compared to the morning survey, irrespective of habitat. 1.70 1.60  1.50  1.40 1 2 Tim e of Day Figure 4.11: Shannon’s bird species diversity index against time of day (Pooled data). Note: 1=Morning and 2= Evening 84 UNIVER Bird Species DiversitySITY OF IBADAN 0.300 0.275  0.250  0.225 0.200 1 2 Tim e Figure 4.12: Simpson’s bird species diversity index against time of day (Pooled data). Note: 1=Morning and 2= Evening 85 UNIVER Bird Species DiversitySITY OF IBADAN 4.3.2 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS Bird species richness was relatively higher in the morning as compared to the evening survey as observed in Figure 4.13. Mean species richness per section was about 8 birds per section and about 7 birds for the evening survey. 9  8  7 1 2 Tim e Figure 4.13: Bird Species richness against time of day (Pooled data). Note: 1=Morning and 2= Evening 86 UNIVER Bird Species RichnessSITY OF IBADAN 4.3.3 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE Bird species abundance was relatively higher in the evening as shown in Figure 4.14. 100 75   50 25 1 2 Tim e Figure 4.14: Bird Species abundance against time of day (Pooled data). Note: 1=Morning and 2= Evening 87 UNIVER Bird Species AbundanceSITY OF IBADAN 4.3.4 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS When all data were pooled, evenness was relatively higher in the morning survey (see Figure 4.15). 0.85 0.83   0.80 0.78 0.75 1 1 2 2 3 Tim e Figure 4.15: Evenness index against time of day (Pooled data). Note: 1=Morning and 2= Evening 88 UNIVER Eveness indexSITY OF IBADAN 4.4.0 EFFECT OF QUARTERS OF THE YEAR ON DIVERSITY INDICES ACROSS HABITATS 4.4.1 EFFECT OF QUARTERS OF THE YEAR ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY The study area experiences two major seasons (wet and dry seasons) during each year. The wet season spans the period of March to October and the dry season November to Febuary of every year. However, for the purpose of this study, a year has been divided into four seasons, namely season one: January to March or late dry season, season two: April to June or early rain season, season three: July to September or late rain season; and season four: October to December or early dry season. Bird species diversity using the Shannon’s and Simpson’s diversity index was compared across seasons for the two years as displayed in Figure 4.16 and 4.17. For the first year, bird species diversity for season one (January-March) had a relatively higher bird species diversity than the other three seasons for the lake and farm habitats see figure; while season two (April-June) showed a relatively higher bird species diversity for the forest habitat. For all seasons and in the two years, bird species diversity was relatively higher in the forest habitat as compared to either of the other two habitats. The overall difference in bird species diversity between season one and either of season two (April-June) and four (Oct-Dec) were significantly different P<0.05, but bird species diversity was not significantly different on comparison of season one with season three P=0.246. Bird species diversity was relatively higher in season three as compared to season two for year 2010. 89 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.16: Bird species diversity against season in the various habitats for the two years (Shannon’s index). Note: January-March=Late dry season, April-June=Early wet season, July- September=Late wet season and October-December=Early dry season 90 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.17: Bird species diversity against season in the various habitats for the two years (Simpson’s index). Note: January-March=Late dry season, April-June=Early wet season, July- September=Late wet season and October-December=Early dry season 91 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.4.2 EFFECT OF SEASON ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS Bird species richness across season was significantly higher in season one than all the other seasons for the lake and farm habitat, and for the two years with P<0.001. For the forest habitat, season two had relatively higher species richness compared to the other seasons for the year 2010 alone. This relationship is illustrated in Figure 4.18. LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.18: Bird species richness against season in the various habitats. Note: January-March=Late dry season, April-June=Early wet season, July- September=Late wet season and October-December=Early dry season 92 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.4.3 EFFECT OF SEASON ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE Bird species abundance was relatively higher in season one than in all other seasons for the lake habitat in both years (see Figure 4.19). Farm and forest habitat had season two with a relatively higher abundance than all other seasons for the first year. LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.19: Bird species abundance against season in the various habitats. Note: January-March=Late dry season, April-June=Early wet season, July- September=Late wet season and October-December=Early dry season 93 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.4.4 EFFECT OF SEASON ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS Bird species evenness was relatively higher in season three for the lake and farm habitats, while the forest habitat had season one highest in bird species evenness in the first year (See Figure 4.20). The second year showed a relatively higher bird species evenness in season two than in all other seasons for the lake habitat. Farm habitat showed relatively higher bird species evenness for season three as compared to seasons one and four. Forest habitat showed a higher bird species evenness for the fourth season. LAKE FARM FOREST Area Figure 4.20: Bird species evenness against season in the various habitats. Note: January-March=Late dry season, April-June=Early wet season, July- September=Late wet season and October-December=Early dry season 94 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.5.0 EFFECT OF LAND USE 4.5.1 EFFECTS OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY BASED ON TRANSECTS Bird species diversity was significantly higher in the forest habitat than in all the other land use systems (P<0.05). Bird species diversity was also significantly higher in the forest edge than in all the other land use systems with the exception of the forest, (P<0.05). The pond showed the least bird species diversity as seen in Figure 4.21. Forest and forest edge had mean bird species diversity of higher than 3.0 for Shannon’s bird diversity and between 0 and 0.1 for Simpson’s diversity index. Other land-use types in the exception of the lake gallery forest (LAKEGAL which had about 2.6 for Shannon’s bird diversity and 0.17 for Simpson’s index) had a mean bird species diversity of less than 2.0 for Shannon’s bird diversity and between 0.2-0.4 for Simpson’s index. Pond had mean bird diversity of less than 1.0 for Shannon’s bird diversity and above 0.6 for Simpson’s index (Figure 4.21). 95 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Figure 4.21: Bird species diversity in land-use systems (Shannon’s index). Note: DAMGAL= Lake gallery forest areas, DAMGRA= Lake grassland areas, FOREDGE= Forest edge areas, MAZECASS= Maize cassava plots, AGRO= Orchard containing citrus, CASSava= Cassava farm plots, MAIZE= Maize farm plots, RICE= Rice paddy plots, POND= Ponds 96 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Figure 4.22: Bird species diversity in land-use systems (Simpson’s index). Note: DAMGAL= Lake gallery forest areas, DAMGRA= Lake grassland areas, FOREDGE= Forest edge areas, MAZECASS= Maize cassava plots, AGRO= Orchard containing citrus, CASSava= Cassava farm plots, MAIZE= Maize farm plots, RICE= Rice paddy plots, POND= Ponds 97 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.5.2 EFFECT OF LAND-USE ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS Forest edge had the highest bird species richness and differences when compared with other land-use systems were significant, P>0.05. Forest edge had a mean bird species richness of 45 birds per transect, while “lake-gallery” and lake grassland had a species richness of 40 birds per transect (see Figure 4.23). Agro and rice land-use types had a species richness of only 10 birds per transect each. Figure 4.23: Bird species richness in land-use systems. Note: DAMGAL= Lake gallery forest areas, DAMGRA= Lake grassland areas, FOREDGE= Forest edge areas, MAZECASS= Maize cassava plots, AGRO= Orchard containing citrus, CASSava= Cassava farm plots, MAIZE= Maize farm plots, RICE= Rice paddy plots, POND= Ponds 98 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.5.3 EFFECT OF LAND-USE ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE Bird species abundance was relatively higher in the lake-grassland, and differences were significant in comparison with Lake-gallery, forest, forest edge, maize-cassava and cassava land-use systems (see Figure 4.24). Comparison of bird species abundance between with maize, P=0.61; difference with Agro land use system were also not significant P=0.214. Forest habitat had the least abundance when compared with the other land-use systems. Figure 4.24: Bird species abundance in land-use systems. Note: DAMGAL= Lake gallery forest areas, DAMGRA= lake grassland areas, FOREDGE= Forest edge areas, MAZECASS= Maize cassava plots, AGRO= Orchard containing citrus, CASSava= Cassava farm plots, MAIZE= Maize farm plots, RICE= Rice paddy plots, POND= Ponds 99 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.5.4 EFFECT OF LAND-USE ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS Forest and forest-gallery had relatively higher species evenness (above 0.9) when compared with other land-use categories and evenness was lowest in the pond land- use category (0.4). Mean bird species evenness of lake-gallery, maize-cassava, Agro, cassava, maize and rice land-use categories were all within 0.6 and 0.8 (see Figure 4.25). Lake-grassland had a mean bird species evenness of 0.5. Figure 4.25: Bird species evenness index in land-use systems. Note: DAMGAL= Lake gallery forest areas, DAMGRA= Lake grassland areas, FOREDGE= Forest edge areas, MAZECASS= Maize cassava plots, AGRO= Orchard containing citrus, CASSava= Cassava farm plots, MAIZE= Maize farm plots, RICE= Rice paddy plots, POND= Ponds 100 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.6.0 SPECIES EFFORT CURVE Birds were steeply added to the list at the beginning of the survey with the first six transects yielding about 100 and 80 bird species for the years 2010 and 2011 respectively as shown in Figure 4.26. The slope began to get gentle after about 40 transect monitorings with about 150 bird species being accumulated already. After 116 transect only about 170 bird species had been accumulated showing that only 20 more bird species were added to the original 150 after an additional 76 transect monitorings were conducted in the year 2011. This relationship and trend can be observed in Figure 4.26. The first transect showed that more birds were seen in the order of forest, lake and farm (see Figure 4.27). Figure 4.26: Bird Species effort curve for all transects Note: Transect= number of transects monitored, and Bird species= Number of bird species accumulated 101 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Figure 4.27: Species effort curve for habitats and all birds Note:Transect= number of transects monitored, and Bird species= Number of bird species accumulated 102 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 4.7.0 WILDBIRD VIRUS SURVEILLANCE Prevalence of viruses that cause avian influenza was zero for all wild bird samples collected. It was also negative for all samples collected and tested for rota, Chicken astrovirus I and II, Turkey astrovirus and IBV. Nevertheless, a prevalence of 9.5% was observed for Newcastle Disease Virus. Positive samples originated from domestic poultry and waterfowl (White-faced whistling ducks). Samples originating from the waterfowl were all field samples (Faecal swabs). Table 4.2 shows the viral prevalence among wildbird species sampled in the environs of the IITA. 103 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Table 4.2: Viral Prevalence among sampled birds in IITA environs 104 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 105 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 106 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 107 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 108 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 109 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 110 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION 5.1.0 INVENTORY OF BIRD FAMILIES IN THE IITA A total of 398 bird species from at least 71 families is now recorded for the Ibadan area, of which the IITA campus holds at least 269 species (68%) from 64 families, of which 75 species have been mist-netted during our study, while the IBA forest reserve holds at least 138 species, of which 36 species have been mist-netted there during our study. Twenty-five species plus 13 vagrants are new to the IITA campus, having not been detected on the site prior to 2002 (See Appendix 4). However, 68 species plus an additional 62 vagrant species reported in the Ibadan area or in IITA by earlier studies have not been detected on the site recently. In general, the diversity of some groups of large birds (e.g. Anatidae) has declined, although many of these were vagrants, whereas many forest edge or generalist species (e.g. Francolinus bicalcaratus) have increased in abundance and range. Forest specialists, including many Pycnonotidae and Bucerotidae, appear to have declined. The use of mist-nets aided the detection of several species previously unknown from the IITA campus, including Indicator maculatus, Campethera nivosa, Smithornis rufolateralis, Andropadus gracilis, Neocossyphus poensis, Macrosphenus kempi, M. concolor and Cinnyris minullus. Ezealor (2001) listed 67 species restricted to the Guinea Congo Rain Forest (GCRF) biome and 7 restricted to the Sudan Guinea Savanna Biome (SGSB) for the site. Biome restricted species was defined as species having 70 percent or more of their range within a particular biome (Fishpool and Evans 2001, see Appendix 4). This study reports an additional 29 biome-restricted species to the previous known 74 for Ibadan, of which 27 belong to the GCRF (17 occur in the IBA) and two to the SGSB, 111 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN bringing the total GCRF species in the Ibadan area to 94 (84 in the IBA plus 10 without), although nine (plus five classed as vagrants) of the GCRF species mentioned by Ezealor (2001) as occurring in the IBA have not been sighted recently (i.e. Pteronetta hartlaubii, Gymnobucco peli, G. calvus, Melichneutes robustus, Dendropicos gabonensis, Coracina azurea, Ixonotus guttatus, Phyllastrephus icterinus, Criniger ndussumensis, Cisticola anonymus, Muscicapa tessmanni and Cinnyris superbus, and the SGSB species Musophaga violacea and Hirundo leucosoma). These changes, if genuine losses occurred over little more than a decade. Ten GCRF species, observed in Ibadan by earlier studies but not at the IBA by Ezealor (2001), have not been sighted recently in Ibadan either, i.e. Francolinus lathami, Columba iriditorques, Prodotiscus insignis, Erythrocercus mccallii, Megabyas flammulatus, Illadopsis puveli, Turdoides reinwardtii, Anthreptes rectirostris, Plocepasser superciliosus and Nigrita luteifrons. Nonetheless, the loss of these species depicts the importance of conserving sites such as IITA where their forest habitat is being preserved and now extended. Many of the forest fragments mentioned by Elgood & Sibley (1964) are now a shadow of their former selves, with some now occupied by plantations of fast-growing exotics such as Gmelina, Tectona and Eucalyptus species. The 17 new GCRF species now occurring at the IBA are Bubo poensis, Pogoniulus atroflavus, Indicator maculatus, Campethera nivosa, Smithornis rufolateralis, Andropardus gracilis, Cossypha cyanocampter, Neocossyphus poensis, Macrosphenus kempi, M. concolor, Sylvietta denti, Fraseria ocreata, Muscicapa olicascens, Cinnyris minullus, Oriolus brachyrhynchus, Dicrurus atripennis and Nigrita fusconotus The two new SGSB species are Eremomela pusilla and Ptilostomus afer. The apparent arrival of these species at the site might be attributed 112 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN to genuine colonisation or to their having been overlooked in previous surveys. The identification of most of these species was confirmed by mist netting, with ringing data available for verification. Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded 266 species for the Ibadan area and this area was defined as within a 10 mile radius of Mapo Hall at the centre of the city, and more particularly those found within and adjacent to the extensive grounds of the University of Ibadan (UI). It is important to note that during their study neither IITA nor IBA now enshrined within had been defined and therefore not mentioned in their records (Elgood and Sibley, 1964) though IITA is mentioned in Elgood et al. (1994). The IITA and UI environs are within 7 km, separated by communities though tracts of vegetation capable of linking the two areas are present. Nonetheless, some birds are capable of flying between the two communities daily as observed for the Cattle Egrets Bubulcus ibis and White-faced Whistling Ducks Dendrocygna viduata which roost at UI and IITA respectively. The number of bird species recorded over time at the site is evidence that the IITA environs is an ornithological important site. Nonetheless, several bird species from previous surveys such as Elgood and Sibley (1964) and Phill Hall pers. comm. (An avid bird watcher who has carried out bird viewing for over 30 years in and around Ibadan; see Adeyanju et al., 2014; subsequently PH) have not been recorded in recent times (Appendix 4). Comparisons of records from recent studies on the avifauna of IITA in the last decade show that about 59 species are now probably lost from the site (Appendix 4) though it is much easier to prove presence than absence of a species within a site. Reasons advanced for some of these discrepancies in observation include the fact that some of these species are typically high forest forms and are not usually found outside this habitat. Many others are conspicuous and will therefore not 113 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN be easily overlooked in the study site though a few may often return as vagrants (Elgood et al., 1994). Our study confirms this as some of the most notable species at IITA are vagrants while many others are Rare or very cryptive in habit and able to evade detection (Elgood and Sibley, 1964; Elgood et al., 1994). A good number are also migrants and therefore recorded seasonally. The use of mist-nets aided the detection of several species of which some were previously unknown from the site and they include: Buff-spotted Woodpecker Campethera nivosa, Little Grey Greenbul Andropadus gracilis, Cameroon Sombre Greenbul A. montanus, Kemp's Longbill Macrosphenus concolor, Grey Longbill M. flavicans, Tiny Sunbird Cinnyris minullus, and Velvet-mantled Drongo Dicrurus modestus. The comparisons of this survey with those of Elgood and Sibley (1964), Ezealor (2001) and PH. reveal significant changes have taken place in the avifaunal composition of the IITA and environs. Some of these changes might not be directly attributed to the immediate surroundings of the IBA but also due to the ongoing destruction of forest patches outside the IITA area (preventing recolonization or gene flow). The city of Ibadan is expanding and many of the areas that were patches of forests around the reserve are now being replaced by houses or housing projects, and corridors are thinning out. Environmental changes are not a wholly modern development, they have been occurring over time due to the practice of subsistence agriculture and other human-biotic interference. Also, the extent of the derived savanna outside the IBA has permitted an increasing number of birds formally unknown to forest area (Elgood and Sibley, 1964, Elgood et al., 1994). I now present an overview of all the bird families observed at the site, and draw inferences about their present status as compared with that reported in literature. 114 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Phalacrocoracidae: The Long-tailed Cormorant Phalacrocorax africanus is frequent to the site and one to two birds may be seen around the lake. They were observed in each year of this study as well as other previous studies (Elgood and Sibley, 1964, PH). Anhingidae; Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded the African darter Anhinga rufa for Ibadan environs as frequent though, but it has not been resighted around the IBA. Ardeidae: Resident birds in this family are frequent while migrants are occassional (Appendix 4.). Species that have not been sighted recently include the Dwarf Bittern Ixobrychus sturmii (rare by Elgood and Sibley 1964) and Eurasian Bittern Botaurus stellaris which have not been resighted recently though sighted by PH in 1998 and 2001.Black Heron Egretta ardesiaca recorded on three occasions from 1993-95 by PH has not been recorded since. Black-crowned Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax observed recently included juveniles which indicate they are successfully fledging young. Over 600 individuals of the Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis are known to roost in UI environs. Elgood and Sibley (1964) also recorded the White-backed Night Heron N. leuconotus once in the Ibadan area but has not been resighted since. Scopidae: The only member of the group Hammerkop Scopus umbretta is uncommon. Nonetheless, it occurs frequently at Ilorin (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). Ciconiidae: Abdim’s Stork Ciconia abdimii (Elgood and Sibley 1964, passing visitor) and Wooly-necked Stork Ciconia episcopus are visitors to the area with the former possibly using the area as a stopover site during migration. White Stork Ciconia Ciconia was observed by PH in 1998 and 2000. The African Openbill Stork Anastomus lamelligerus was observed by Elgood and Sibley (1964) who recorded it as sporadic, and it has not since been resighted. 115 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Threskiornithidae: The Hadada Ibis Bostrychia hagedash is common and favors the small lake area beside the Golf course in IITA. The Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus was recorded once in 2010 and included a group of about 6 birds. The Sacred Ibis Ibis ibis was recorded as a rare vagrant for Ibadan by Elgood and Sibley (1964) though not resighted since. Anatidae: White-faced Whistling ducks are present all year round though numbers were previously observed to increase in the dry season, they have been observed in large flocks in the rains of 2011 and 2012. Little Grebe Pluvianus aegyptius was observed once by Gus Huk pers. comm. in 2012, sporadic in habit (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). Spur-winged Goose was observed breeding in 2009. PH also observed them in 1995 but breeding status was not confirmed. However, numbers are few and in 2010 and 2011 only a single individual was observed. PH has however observed several other members of this group which have not been sighted recently and therefore viewed as locally lost (Appendix 4) and they include Hartlaub's Duck Pteronetta hartlaubii. A pair was recorded once in 1995. Knob-billed Goose Sarkidiornis melanotos was recorded on 3 occasions in 1987, 1993 and 1995. African Pygmy Goose Nettapus auritus were sporadically present from 1987 to 1995 (Elgood and Sibley, 1964 also recorded it as sporadic). Common Teal Anas crecca, a pair present in January 1994. Pintail A. acuta recorded on two occasions in 1989 and 1998. Garganey A. Querquedula was recorded on two occasions in 1993 and 1994. Pandionidae: The Osprey Pandion haliaetus is an uncommon seasonal visitor to the site. It is a monospecific family. Few individuals recorded from 2009 to 2012 and earlier by Elgood and Sibley (1964). 116 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Accipitridae: Nineteen species now recorded for this IBA with two species ringed (Appendix 4). A pair of Bat Hawks Macheiramphus alcinus is present and possesses a nest within the IBA but sightings of young have not been made. Some members of this group sighted only by PH include Honey Buzzard Pernis apivorus with one record in May 2010 and African Hawk-Eagle Hieraetus spilogaster recorded on one occasion. Others are observed occasionally with the Black Kite Milvus migrans being the most common of the group and include both resident and migratory populations (Appendix 4). Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded 12 species including the Black Sparrow Hawk Accipiter melanoleucus which have not been resighted. Falconidae: Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus pairs have been observed in the IBA during this study on very high trees (>40 m). Other members of the group are common (Appendix 4). Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded all four in the Ibadan area (Appendix 4). Numinididae: The Helmeted Guinefowl Numida meleagris is the only member of the group known to occur around the environs of IITA, in farm and bushes. Juveniles have been observed among the flocks. It has not been recorded within the IBA and as it’s obviously a savanna species (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). They are always observed in groups sometimes flushed while moving along trails. Feathers are very common around the Cassava farm plots in the IITA fields. Phasianidae: There are only three species of the group known to occur in the IBA with the Double-spurred Francolin Francolinus bicalcaratus being Abundant. It is now observed very close to forest edge. Ahanta Francolin F. ahantensis is only observed frequently in the forest interior while Scaly Francolin F. squamotus has been recorded from the forest on the West Bank by PH. However, Elgood and Sibley 117 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN (1964) recorded Latham’s Francolin Latham francolin once in forest area in Ibadan and Stone Partridge Ptilopachus petrosus (rare) in Ojoo Hills within 2 km of the IBA; though the latter has not been sighted in IITA since. Rallidae: Lesser Moorhen Gallinula angulata has been ringed at IITA and other members are more common (Appendix 4). African Finfoot Podica senegalensis has been recorded breeding in Aug 1999 and has not been resighted at IITA since, though a single individual is been reported by TEA from Awba lake in UI in 2009. The Buff- spotted Flufftail Sarothrura elegan observed by Swedish team has not been resighted yet. Two other members of the group were observed by PH include Spotted Crake Porzana porzana with one record in Feb 1996 (with a pair present on two occasions) and Purple Gallinule Porphyrio porphyrio with a few sightings in 1999 and 2000. Three of the species were reported by Elgood and Sibley, (1964) in the Ibadan area (Appendix 4). Jacanidae: They are very abundant in the lake and rice paddies around IITA and the only member of the group confirmed to be present (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). Juveniles have been observed in early rains. Burhinidae: The only member of the group known to occur is the Senegal Thicknee Burhinus senegalensis (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). They are observed in mixed flocks of plovers at the Generator house area of IITA Lake. Recurvirostridae: The most common of the group is the Greater painted-Snipe Rostratula benghalensis (Appendix 4). A few individuals are resident all year round and breeding at IITA (Appendix 4). However Elgood and Sibley, (1964) recorded them as African Migrants in Ibadan area between March and June. Glareolidae: The two species known to occur in the study area are vagrants with only a single individual sighted. They are the Grey Praticole Glareola cinerea observed by 118 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN PH in Sept 1994 and Much earlier by Elgood and Sibley, (1964 and the Collared Pratincole G. pratincola observed in Jan 2011 during this study. Charadriidae: Seven species are recorded for this family in IITA (Appendix 4). The most abundant, is the Spur-winged Lapwing Charadrius senegalus.. Two others not sighted recently but observed by PH include Little Ringed Plover C. dubius of which a few birds were present during the dry season in every year of 1987-1995 and the Ringed Plover C. hiaticula, one present in Sept 1994. Elgood and Sibley (1964) observed that the former was frequent while the latter was rare. The Egyptian Plover was also rated as vagrant though occasional by PH, Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded it as rare. Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus recorded by Elgood and Sibley (1964) as rare is classified in this study as an occasional visitor at IITA. Scolopacidae: These are mainly Palearctic Migrants with 11 species recorded for the family in IITA (Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded 5 species). The common visitors include the Wood Sandpiper Tringa glareola and Common Sandpiper T. hypoleucos with the latter consisting of resident population throughout the year. Numbers generally increase during the dry season. Temminck’s Stint Calidris temminckii was observed by Demey et al. (2003) but has not been resighted since then. Those sighted by PH include Curlew Sandpiper C. ferruginea recorded once in September 1994, Turnstone Arenaria interpres one record in September 1991, Ruff Philomachus pugnax recorded once in Oct 1996, Marsh Sandpiper T. stagnatilis two recorded in October 1994. PH refers to some others as regular dry season visitors and they include Spotted Redshank T. erythropus, common Redshank T. tetanus and Green Sandpiper T. ocherous. It is thus possible that some of the visitors use the site as a stop-over for 119 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN very short periods hence could be termed vagrants (Appendix 4). Eurasian Curlew was sighted once by Elgood and Sibley (1964). Sternidae: No member of the group has been recorded recently. PH has recorded Gull-billed Tern Gelochelidon nilotica with one record in October 1994 and White- winged Tern Chlidonias leucopterus recorded in 1988, 1989 and October 2000. Laridae: The only record of members of the group at the site is from Demey et al. (2003) of the Black-backed Gull Larus ridibundus. Though Elgood and Sibley (1964) and Elgood et al. (1994) both recorded one individual of African Skimmer Rynchops flavirostris once for Ibadan area and IITA respectively, they have since not been resighted at the site. They are therefore vagrants at the site . Turnicidae: Only one record of a member of this group for Ibadan by Elgood and Sibley (1964) of the Little Button Quail Turnix sylvatica. Columbidae: Red-eyed Dove Streptopelia semitorquata still remains the most abundant and conspicuous member of the group. It can be observed in all habitat types present in the study site. Laughing Dove S. senegalensis is restricted to residential areas. PH recorded Blue-headed Wood-Dove Turtur brehmeri infrequently in the West Bank and heard Bronze-naped Pigeon Columba iriditorques uncommonly during the rains in 2000. They have both not been re-recorded during the most recent surveys and were not recorded by Elgood and Sibley (1964) for Ibadan. Vinaceous Dove S. vinacea (a savanna species) is now occasionally sighted in IITA environs, giving further evidence to the changing environment around Ibadan. It will thus be important to know if it is more common outside the reserve as Elgood and Sibley (1964) noted that it was abundant at Ilorin. Psittacidae: Only the Senegal Parrot Poicephalus senegalus has been recorded for the site (Ezealor 2001), It is a savanna species (Elgood and Sibley, 1964) and this is the 120 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN possible reason for the infrequent sighting within this forest IBA. It could not easily have been overlooked due to its conspicuous calls. However it has been sighted a few kilometres out of the reserve once during this study. Musophagidae: Only three members of the group are recorded for IITA, of which Violet Tauraco Musophaga violacea was recorded by Ezealor (2001) but was not resighted during our study (Appendix 4). It is common in Ilorin (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). Cuculidae: Black-throated Coucal Centropus leucogaster which is listed by Elgood and Sibley (1964) and Ezealor (2001) was resighted in this study. PH had few sightings of Red-chested Cuckoo Cuculus solitarius during the rains, one record of Common Cuckoo C. canorus in May 1998 and occasional records of African Cuckoo C. gularis throughout the dry season. The latter is common in Ilorin (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). A possible reason for not meeting with it during this study could be its tendency to be quieter outside its breeding season. The black variant of Senegal Coucal C. senegalensis epomidis is present around IITA environs.Elgood and Sibley (1964) note that the latter is restricted to south western Nigeria. Tytonidae: The Barn Owl Tyto alba is rare within IITA environs though sighted by Elgood and Sibley (1964) as frequent and indifferent in habitat association for Ibadan. PH recorded it in 1991. Strigidae: Elgood and Sibley (1964) record six species of this form for Ibadan. I observed four of these for IITA environs (Appendix 4). The Pearl-spotted Owlet Glaucidium perlatum was observed last in 2000 by in which a pair was calling throughout the rains, while Frazer’s Eagle Owl Bubo poensis was recorded in this study in 2011. Others known for Ibadan include savanna species such as European 121 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Scops Owl Otus scops and Spotted Eagle Owl B. africanus both recorded as rare (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). Caprimulgidae: Five species (all migratory but possessing resident populations for Long-tailed Nightjar Caprimulgus climacurus, Appendix 4) has been recorded for the site. The Black-shouldered Nightjar C. nigriscapularis and Plain Nightjar C. inornatus are recorded throughout dry season with the former restricted to the West Bank area (PH). One sighting of the European Nightjar C. europaeus was made in 2010. Elgood and Sibley (1964) noted the initial three. Apodidae: Five species recorded at IITA (Appendix 4). PH recorded a flock of ten European Swifts Apus apus and a pair of breeding White-rumped Swift A. caffer in October 1990. Alcedinidae: Nine species recorded, with the Woodland Kingfisher Halcyon. senegalensis being the most abundant at IITA. Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded the Stripped Kingfisher H. chelicuti as occasional and seven others which also been recorded during this study (See Appendix 4). H. chelicuti has however not been resighted in IITA possibly because it is a savanna loving species. The African Dwarf Kingfisher Ceyx lecontei was observed once during the study. Meropidae: We recorded only two species in IITA, both being African migrants and one being a GCRF restricted species (Appendix 4). Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded two other species which are savanna loving in Ibadan the Little Bee-eater Merops pusillus and Northern Carmine Bee-eater M. nubicus, though this has not been resighted in this area. Coraciidae: The species were recorded for IITA (Appendix 4) one of which is restricted to the GCRF (Ezealor 2001). Though Elgood and Sibley (1964) had earlier 122 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN earlier recorded these and an additional two for Ibadan area, the Abyssinia Roller Coracias abyssinica once (vagrant) and European Roller C. garrulus (rare). Phoeniculidae: One species recorded for this IBA (Appendix 4) though Elgood and Sibley (1964) had earlier recorded this and White-headed Wood Hoopoe Phoeniculus bollei. The latter though a forest species has not been resighted at IITA. Bucerotidae: Four species recorded for this group of birds with two restricted to GCRF (Appendix 4, Ezealor 2001). PH recorded a few individuals of Piping Hornbill Ceratogymna fistulator between January and March 1999 and October 2000. Elgood and Sibley (1964) earlier recorded all four with the Red-billed Dwarf Hornbill Tockus camurus occasional. African Pied Hornbill T. fasciatus has remained the most abundant member for over 50 years. However Piping Hornbill Bycanistes fistulator and T. camurus have not been resighted since, though both are forest birds; rather the Grey Hornbill T. nasutus, a migratory savannah species is seen. Hornbills are majorly very good indicators of true forest ecosystem (Elgood and Sibley, 1964) and the absence of the larger species could be due to increasing environmental inadequacy (more of savanna and less of high forest) and or poaching by hunters. Capitonidae: Eight species recorded, six of which are restricted to the GCRF (Ezealor 2001, Appendix 4), one of which Red-rumped Tinkerbird Pogoniulus atroflavus is new to the IBA. Though mostly forest birds, an exception is the Vieillots Barbet Lybius vieilloti (a savanna species). Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded the Double-toothed Barbet L. bidentatus in forest as frequent. However it has not been observed on site, but in relicts of forests in Ibadan about 1km from UI. The Naked-faced Barbet Gymnobucco calvus was recorded as frequent by Elgood and Sibley (1964) and as a common breeding bird in the 1990’s by PH though it has not been resighted since. 123 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Indicatoridae: Three species were recorded. Spotted Honeyguide Indicator maculatus a GCRF species (Appendix 4) has been resighted and individuals ringed. Others are Lesser Honeyguide I. minor of which a pair was observed parasitizing Naked-faced Barbet nests in February 1995 by PH and Lyre-tailed Honeyguide Melichneutes robustus (Ezealor 2001). Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded four species for Ibadan area three of which were rare (not yet recorded at IITA) and I. minor frequent. Picidae: Five species recorded of which two have been resighted (Appendix 4). PH recorded one Green-backed Woodpecker Campethera cailliautii in May 1998, a pair of Gabon Woodpecker Dendropicos gabonensis feeding chicks in August 1999 and two records of Grey Woodpecker D. goertae in 1987 and 1988 respectively. Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded five species with Gabon Woodpecker observed as a savanna species and Buff-spotted Woodpecker C. nivosa as rare though we have observed them as frequent at IITA with six ringed individuals and two retraps (Appendix 4). The latter was not sighted by Ezealor (2001) or PH but is also one of the GCRF restricted species. They also observed Fine-spotted Woodpecker C. punctuligera a savanna species occasionally and C. permista both of which have not been resighted in IITA (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). Eurylamidae: Only one member recorded, Rufous-sided Broadbill Smithornis rufolateralis a GCRF restricted species, though not recorded by Ezealor (2001) or Elgood and Sibley (1964). Hirundinidae: Eight species recorded, Pied-winged Swallow Hirundo leucosoma was recorded by Elgood and Sibley (1964) and then Ezealor (2001) as a SGSB restricted species but has not been resighted. Sand Martin Riparia riparia was recorded by PH on 2 occasions in March 1992 and October 1994 while the Mosque 124 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Swallow H. senegalensis was recorded regularly year round by PH and Elgood and Sibley (1964). Elgood and Sibley (1964) also recorded seven species, of which all have been resighted at the IBA with the exception of the Wire-tailed Swallow H. smithii. Motacillidae: Seven species recorded (Appendix 4) of which only four have been resighted by the recent survey as well as Elgood and Sibley (1964). Two were observed during the dry season by PH. These are the Tree Pipit Anthus trivialis uncommon and Red-throated Pipit A. cervinus which is fairly common, while Long- legged Pipit A. pallidiventris was sighted in 2012. Campephagidae: Two species recorded, one has been sighted recently (an African migrant Elgood and Sibley 1964, Appendix 4) while the other Coracinea azurea a GCRF species not resighted after Ezealor (2001). Pycnonotidae: Twenty species recorded of which fourteen are GCRF restricted species (Ezealor 2001, Appendix 4). All except Bearded Bulbul Criniger barbatus, Icterine Greenbul Phyllastrephus icterinus and White-bearded Bulbul C. ndussumensis (recorded by Ezealor 2001, Appendix 4) have been sighted recently during this study, with the Yellow-whiskered Greenbul Andropadus latirostris remaining the most conspicuous and possibly most abundant from the group. Yellow- throated Leaflove Chlorocichla flavicollis a savanna species was observed as common by Elgood and Sibley (1964) in the Ibadan area. However only a single pair was observed in 2011 around the Bush/Farm by the side of the lake in IITA. Red-tailed Greenbul Criniger calurus was recorded as Occasional by Elgood and Sibley (1964) but has not been resighted. Slender-billed Greenbul A. gracilirostris are also much more common; though rated rare by Elgood and Sibley (1964). 125 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Turdidae: Eight species recorded, with Nightingale Luscinia megarhynchos occasionally seen during the dry season and Finsch's Flycatcher-Thrush Neocossyphus finschi was sighted sporadically in the forest throughout the year 2000 by PH (Appendix 4). However it is possible to confuse the later with White-tailed Ant-thrush N. poensis. L. megarhynchos is a Palearctic migrant and was recorded as rare by Elgood and Sibley (1964). Other rare migrants not recorded in this study but recorded by Elgood and Sibley (1964) are Wheatear Oenanthe oenanthe and Redstart Phoenicurus phoenicurus both in the Ibadan environs. Blue-shouldered Robin Chat Cossypha cyanocampter a GCRF restricted species was not recorded by Ezealor (2001) and Elgood (1964) is also present frequently in interior forest and we have 5 individuals ringed presently. Forest Robin Stiphrornis erythrothorax is more frequent though recorded earlier by Elgood and Sibley (1964) as rare. Sylviidae: Twenty-three species recorded (Appendix 4) out of which 18 have been sighted recently. Two are new GCRF restricted species Grey Longbill Macrophenus concolor (Elgood and Sibley (1964) rare in Ibadan area) and Kemp’s Longbill M. kempi while Senegal Eremomela Eremomela pusilla a SGSB restricted species was sighted once. Chattering Cisticola Cisticola anonymus was recorded for the IBA by Ezealor 2001, while Melodious Warbler Hippolais polyglotta an uncommon dry season visitor, Whistling Cisticola C. lateralis fairly common, Winding Cisticola C. galactotes uncommon in reed-beds and Zitting Cisticola C. juncidis fairly common have been recorded by PH. Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded 20 species of which two savanna species have not been resighted by us, Red-winged Warbler Heliolais erythroptera and Singing Cisticola C. cantans (recorded as frequent and rare for Ibadan respectively Elgood and Sibley (1964)). 126 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Muscicapidae: Six species have been recorded for the site of which four have been sighted recently (Appendix 4). Spotted Flycatcher Muscicapa striata is an uncommon visitor during the dry season by PH. Northern Black Flycatcher Melaenornis edolioides frequent in 2009 but now uncommon while one sighting of the Olivaceous Flycatcher was made in this study in 2011. Ezealor (2001) also had the Tessman’s Flycatcher Muscicapa tessmanni for the IBA but it has not been resighted by during this study. The entire species of the group seem to be uncommon in the site and are not usually trapped in the mist-nets except for one Dusky-blue Flycatcher M. comitata in 2012, last observed by Ezealor (2001) as a restricted GCRF species. Elgood and Sibley (1964) had both Dusky-blue and Northern Black Flycatchers recorded for Ibadan area but observations during this study has not resighted two others from their list at IITA, Spotted and Cassin’s Flycatcher Alseonax cassini. Monarchidae: Four species recorded of which two are frequent to abundant at the site (Appendix 4). The two others Chestnut-capped Flycatcher Erythrocercus mccallii, several sightings during 1999 and 2000 and African Paradise Flycatcher Terpsiphone viridis fairly common have been recorded by PH and previously by Elgood and Sibley (1964). Though very unlikely the latter in non-breeding plumage might be confused with the Red-bellied Flycatcher T. rufiventer, otherwise we would have trapped it by mist nets. Platysteridae: Four species known with one Black-and-white Shrike-Flycatcher Bias musicus, being uncommon observed on several occasions in mixed-bird parties by PH (Appendix 4) and previously by Elgood and Sibley (1964). It is however unlikely to still be present otherwise it would have been trapped or at least sighted because of its conspicuous habits, and its being an edge species. Shrike Flycatcher Megabyas 127 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN flammulatus was recorded by Elgood and Sibley (1964) for Ibadan area but has not been sighted recently. Timaliidae: Three species are recorded; observed Pale-breasted Illadopsis Illadopsis rufipennis as a common member of mixed bird parties, more often heard than seen. It is plausible that its call was initially confused for Brown Illadopsis I. fulvescens which is common on the site. Ezealor (2001) recorded two species for the IBA which are GCFR restricted species (Appendix 4). Elgood and Sibley (1964) include the record of a rare Blackcap Babbler Turdoides reinwardti for Ibadan which was not been recorded in this study. Paridae: Two species recorded. PH recorded Yellow White-eye Zosterops senegalensis as fairly common in IITA as did Elgood and Sibley (1964) for the Ibadan area. PH also recorded several Tit-Hylia Pholidornis rushiae from the West bank of the IBA. Nectariniidae: Twelve species recorded, with three being GCRF restricted species (Appendix 4). PH recorded Blue-throated Brown Sunbird Nectarinia cyanolaema as fairly common on the West Bank, though it seems to be much more less common. One juvenile was trapped from the site in this study. Elgood and Sibley (1964) record ten species for the Ibadan area of which Superb Sunbird N. superba was confirmed for the site by Ezealor (2001). Scarlet-chested Sunbird Chalcomitra senegalensis and Tiny Sunbird Cinnyris minullus are newly sighted for the area though the former is rare. It was found to be much more common in Ilorin by Elgood and Sibley (1964). 128 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Laniidae: Two species recorded (Appendix 4), Elgood and Sibley (1964) also record the same for Ibadan area, with Woodchat Shrike Lanius senator recorded as a fairly common dry season visitor by PH. Prionopidae: Only one species recorded (Ezealor 2001) and recently resighted in our surveys (Appendix 4), Elgood and Sibley (1964) record two species (occassional) with the addition of White-helmet Shrike Prionops plumatus for the Ibadan area. Malaconotidae: Five species are now recorded from this group, of which two species are GCRF restricted (Appendix 4). PH recorded Fiery-breasted Bush-Shrike Telephorus cruentus fairly common on the West Bank and has been recorded less frequently recently (Just one sighting of a group in the West bank. Tropical Boubou Laniarius aethiopicus was recorded as new to the site. Elgood and Sibley (1964) record 6 species for Ibadan area with the addition of a savanna species Sulphur- breasted Bush-shrike Malaconotus sulphureopectus and L. ferrugineus. Oriolidae: Three species recorded of which two members are GCRF restricted (Appendix 4, Ezealor 2001); PH recorded African Golden Oriole Oriolus auratus a savanna species also recorded by Elgood and Sibley (1964) fairly common. Elgood and Sibley 1964 recorded two of the species observed re-recorded in this study (see Appendix 4). Dicruridae: All four species now recorded for the site. Two have been ringed so far (Appendix 4) and voices of the Drongos were observed to be different on the site (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). Shinning Drongo Dicrurus atripennis a GCRF restricted species was sighted. Elgood and Sibley (1964) record only two of the species from this group (the Fork-tailed Drongo D. modestus adsimilis and Square-tailed Drongo D. sharpie, now D. ludwigii) for the Ibadan area, and they argued that there is an indeterminate population for modestus in Ibadan due to less contrast between the 129 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN degree of glossiness of the crown and mantle than one would expect in the hand (Elgood and Sibley, 1964). Corvidae: Only one species recorded. The Piac Piac Ptilostomus afer is sporadic outside the environs of the reserve though it was not observed by Elgood and Sibley (1964) in Ibadan. Sturnidae: Five species now recorded, PH recorded Violet-backed Starling Cinnyricinclus leucogaster in the dry season of 1999 but there has since been no resighting at the IBA (Appendix 4). It is therefore more likely vagrant to the area as described by Elgood and Sibley (1964). The Long-tailed Glossy Starling Lamprotornis caudates was observed in 2009, during this study. Passeridae: One species recorded in IITA as well as by Elgood and Sibley (1964) (Appendix 4). Ploceidae: Thirteen species recorded with seven being restricted GCRF species (Appendix 4). PH recorded Crested Malimbe Malimbus malimbicus as fairly common on the West Bank. Elgood and Sibley (1964) also recorded thirteen species for this group in Ibadan though their records include one species Compact Weaver Pachyphantes superciliosus not resighted here The Northern Red Bishop Euplectes franciscanuswas recorded as new to the site during this study. Estrildidae: Ten species recorded; PH recorded African Fire-Finch Lagonosticta rubricata in small flocks often seen and this study recorded the White-breasted Negrofinch Nigrita fusconota as new to the IBA (Appendix 4, closest observation was at Gambari forest by Elgood and Sibley, 1964), as it was not reported by Ezealor (2001) It is also a GCRF restricted species.. Elgood and Sibley recorded eight species 130 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN for this group in the Ibadan area but this study did not resight the Pale-fronted Negrofinch N. luteifrons a forest species in the IBA. Viduidae; Two species recorded; PH recorded the Village Indigobird Vidua chalybeata as fairly common. Elgood and Sibley (1964) recorded these two species, but opined that only one species was available in Ibadan though difficult to tease apart. Fringillidae: Only one species the Yellow-fronted Canary Serinus mozambicus recorded to date for the IBA, infrequently by PH. . In comparison, Elgood and Sibley (1964) only recorded Cabanis Bunting Emberiza cabanisi, a rare savanna species. 5.1.1 BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY IN RELATION TO HABITAT STRUCTURE The structurally richer habitats supported higher bird species diversity than structurally less diverse systems like the farm. Imong and Manu (2011) and Adeyanju et al. (2011) reported significantly higher species diversity within forest areas in comparison to disturbed areas. Bird species diversity was lowest in farmed areas, showing that it offers least resources for sustaining a high diversity of bird species. The group that contributed most to the diversity of farm habitats were granivores (comprising of Ploceus cucullatus Village weavers, Streptopelia semitorquata Red- eyed dove, Francolinus bicalcaratus Double-spurred francolin). These take advantage of the large amount of cereals during harvest periods. They also cause serious havoc to cereals cultivated in the site. On the other hand the forest specialists contributed to the diversity of both forest ecosystem and most of the time could only be detected in areas in close proximity with their preferred forest habitat. The forest ecosystem is made up of an open canopy in some areas and very few areas of closed canopy as the 131 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN forest is still regenerating after long periods of deforestation and degeneration that were halted about 50 years ago when the area became protected. Bird species diversity at the lake was also strongly boosted by waterbirds such as herons, waders and a common duck species (Dendrocygna viduata). However, the lake is bordered to the west bank by a gallery forest which has also added greatly to increasing the diversity of the lake. As a result of reduced detection due to cover, assessing species richness was most difficult in the forest as compared to farm and lake which are open. The use of bird calls and mist nets were however efficient over time in aiding detection of most bird species. Farm areas close to forest cover also showed a higher bird species diversity as bird species could easily move between forest fragments and farm, thereby increasing bird diversity of the farm. Farm transect 3 had the highest bird species diversity when comparison is made between farms. The forest edge also had significant effect on bird species diversity. Bird species diversity was higher in forest than in edge and more forest specific species were found within the forest than in sections close to the periphery of forest. 5.1.2 BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS IN RELATION TO HABITAT STRUCTURE Species richness is the number of species of a particular taxon or life form that characterize a particular community, habitat or ecosystem type. The high bird species richness in IITA could be attributed to the availability of several habitat types all interspersed and juxtaposed in an area, surrounded by areas inhospitable to most bird species in general. The maintenance of the ecological integrity of this matrix is essential because of its intrinsic ability to support biological diversity and maintain the viability of the embedded protected areas (Hunter, 2005). 132 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Bird species richness though difficult to measure because of some less known species which are either shy or rare and therefore not quickly easily detected for inclusion in species lists during sampling. While some birds are large and conspicuous with either colourful plumage or loud calls, others are very small or inconspicuous and not easily teased apart from other conspecifics (e.g., sunbird females). However the use of bird calls improved to a great extent the identification of bird species during this survey e.g., Trochocercus nitens Blue-headed crested Flycatcher. Also the use of mist nets aided the capture and identification of several birds that were not initially detected or known to occur in the reserve such as the Phyllastrephus baumanni Bauman’s Greenbul. In addition though nets quickly added species to the list, some birds became accustomed to nets and soon began evading them. Therefore the combination of both transect walks and mist-netting of birds improves bird species richness detection and measurement in this study. Mist netting alone detected sixty six (66) bird species, five of which were never seen during transect walks as they occur in the ground layer of the forest and or savannah area of the IITA site. In general over 260 species have been detected in the site (Adeyanju et al., 2014 in press). Some of the species sighted by other researchers during previous studies were however not observed revealing that some of the species have either moved or no longer known to occur in the reserve. Some species known to be common about twenty years ago are no longer known to occur. Plausible reasons for their appeared disappearance include hunting and the reduction of preferred habitat outside of the IITA environs. This quickly made IITA an ecological island. Furthermore, the distance of other forest patches from IITA makes it, making it difficult for species to move between the different sites. 133 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 5.1.3 BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE IN RELATION TO HABITAT STRUCTURE The species that characterize any natural community differ in relative abundance, usually with a few species quite common and most species much less so. In other words most individuals in a community belong to a group of vey common species. A rank abundance of perfect evenness would be flat instead of declining, indicating that all species in the distribution possess the same abundance. Rare species are important because they are more vulnerable to changes in the ecosystem. Nonetheless some species that are rare in one ecosystem or habitat type are very common in others, because of species specific needs in the ecosystem. Most of the waterbirds in this survey are partial to the water logged (rice paddies, lake) areas though some sometimes venture outside these areas, when in search of food or roosting sites or when in movement from roosts to other sites. Nonetheless, some others are generally uncommon and this indicates that the species possible either has a large territory, i.e. raptors or their representatives are low in density at the site. Ecologically it could also mean that the preferred habitat of the species have been seriously disturbed, thus confining it to the last remaining sites that can support its existence. This appears to be the case for the Ibadan Malimbe. Though other congeners (Malimbes) are common throughout the forest area, the Ibadan malimbe remains a very rare bird. Other species that are very common are mostly colonial; or live and roost in groups or a gregarious and therefore feed in groups; some examples of such species include the Quelea erythrops Red-headed Quelea and Ploceus cucullatus Village weavers. Nonetheless some of these species are only gregarious during part of their life history, and this includes but is not limited to the migratory waders and ducks. The mix of habitats in the riparian zone attracts more species in 134 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN comparison to other habitats. Wymenga and Zwarts (2010) suggested that the high bird numbers in wet areas during the dry season is an ecological compensation for the loss of other wetlands. The rice fields at IITA were not cultivated throughout the year as observed during this study and as a result, field were sometimes overgrown with grasses, so waterbirds which could not adjust to this left. Birds like the Tringa hypoleucos Common Sandpiper, and Rostratula benghalensis Greater Painted-snipe all love areas that are marshy and cleared, where they can easily have access to mudflats. Once this habitat type is succeeded by another, their numbers fall drastically. They also tend to concentrate in mudflats that are at low tide. 5.1.4 BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS IN RELATION TO HABITAT STRUCTURE Evenness is a measure of the relative abundance of the different species making up the richness of an area. The higher the evenness the less likely it is to find two birds simultaneously on transect or at a point belonging to the same species. The forest area supported a high evenness of bird species meaning that species abundance was well distributed over the survey area. This can be attributed to the high number of specialists in the forest habitat. The number of birds seen per unit time is also much less than that obtained in either farm or lake as the latter two habitats are more open. Visibility in the forest is mainly between 5 and 20 metres while in the lake and farm habitats, detection could rise to over 100. Tree density is higher in the forest whereas in farm and lake most trees have been removed to create this sort of land use system. In addition very few forest birds aggregate in large flocks as observed in farm and lake where some species aggregate into groups numbering up to >500 individuals e.g., 135 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN the White-faced whistling Ducks and Village Weavers in lake and farm habitat respectively. 5.2.0 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY INDICES ACROSS HABITATS Time of day was significant in bringing about differences in diversity indices across habitat types. Bird activity is generally known to rise in the morning and decline through the day and finally rise again in the evening (Manu and Cresswell, 2007). Activities carried out in the morning include feeding in order to replenish the lost or burnt up energy used in respiration through the night when most birds are at rest (with the exception of nocturnes and crepuscular species such as Ptilopsis leucotis Northern White-faced Owl and Macheiramphus alcinus Bat Hawk respectively). Others are territory defence, mating and courtship behaviours. As a result of increased activity, higher bird species diversity was observed in most habitat types when morning and evening surveys were compared. This is supported by reports from Adeyanju et al. (2011) and Manu and Creswell (2007), where bird species diversity was generally higher in the morning across four sites. Similarly, bird species richness was higher in the morning when compared to evening. The greater activity translated into more birds becoming more conspicuous as they moved out of hiding to search. Some got trapped in nets while others were observed in pursuit of prey. At other times of the day when temperature got higher and environment got warmer, birds tended to remain under cover to reduce the amount of energy loss due to evaporation and increased metabolic activity. However some raptor species were only seen when the sun was up, as they used thermals to soar and reduce 136 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN energy loss due to wing flapping over long distances in search of prey or in movement from place of roost to areas where food is available. However, in all habitats and at either time of the day bird species richness was still higher in areas that had high habitat complexity. In this survey, birds species richness was highest in the forest when compared to other habitats in either the morning or evening. Wild bird abundance was highest in the lake and farm habitats with abundance being least in forest habitat. In the evenings when activity rose because birds took the last meals before going to roost. Activity may continue until dark for some generalists such as the Village weavers. At first light activity began again. Abundance was highest in the lake because the Weavers, Quealeas and White-faced whistling Ducks utilized these areas for roosting and their large numbers shifted the abundance in favour of the lake. Bird species evenness remained highest in the forest as time of day changed from morning to evening. This possible reveals that habitat is much more an ultimate factor in determining bird species evenness and abundance than time of day. 5.2.1 EFFECT OF TIME OF DAY ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY INDICES, POOLING DATA OF ALL HABITATS Overall bird species diversity indices compared across time of day showed significant differences. Bird species diversity was relatively higher in the morning than in the evening, the variations were higher in the evening than in the morning showing that diversity was more constant in the morning when compared in the evening. Shannon’s and Simpsons diversity indices revealed the same trend. Bird species richness was significantly higher in the morning in comparison with the evening data. 137 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Bird species abundance remained relatively higher in the evening when compared with the morning survey and the same reason can be given which remains that birds move out to take advantage of the last meal before it get dark. Bird species evenness remained higher in the morning on comparison with the evening data across all habitat types. Food availability usually changes between seasons, and correspondingly, the bird species diversity. In the evenings, birds generally tend to increase activity and eat as much as possible to accumulate energy reserve for the long night without food. Nonetheless, this only affects birds that are diurnal and therefore active during the day time. There are however different schools of thought on the period that supports higher activity for wild birds, morning or evening? Though food is required for making up lost energy during the day time and night when energy is used up, Birds calls and movement are observed to be lower in the evenings than in the morning. This could be as a result of birds having to rest wherever the night meets up with them (during bad weather) or their need to challenge for territory. It could also be because predators are readily active during the day and night than during the mornings. 5.3.0 EFFECT OF SEASON ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY INDICES ACROSS HABITATS Bird species diversity was relatively higher in farm and lake in season one (late dry season) for the first year which fell between January and March and this season was the period of peak Parlearctic migration. All Palearctic migrants had arrived at this stage and contributed additional diversity to the resident (non-migrant) bird population in the farm and lake. Some of the species which added to the diversity during that period include Whinchat, Wood warbler, Osprey, and Yellow wagtail. 138 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN They were only recorded in this survey in the farm and lake and never in forest. Nonetheless, forest bird species diversity remained highest in both years for all seasons. Bird species diversity in the farm habitat was least in the fourth season (Early dry season) which fell between October and December and this was the end of the rains. Most farm fields were dried up at this point and had very little to offer birds. Bird species richness was relatively higher in the dry season for the two years of the study consecutively for both farm and lake. The forest habitat was not affected by the Palearctic migrants’ introduction in the dry season as the farm and lake known to be occupied by them. In season one (late dry season) which fell between January and March, bird species richness was highest for forest in the rainy season (season two or early rains and three or late rains) which fell between April to June and July to September respectively. However more detailed analysis would be required to tease out the feeding guilds which contributed to the differences in richness across season. Bird species abundance remained higher in the lake and farm in comparison with forest area in both years and in all seasons. However abundance in year one was higher than in year two for lake in season one and this could be attributed to the number of White-faced whistling Ducks that roosted in the lake in that year (about 3000 birds). Evenness remained higher for the forest habitat than other habitats in both years and in all seasons. This reveals that seasonal effects were sufficient enough to contribute more birds to other habitats to upset the earlier significance of habitat. 5.4.0 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY INDICES Major changes in land use, water management and infrastructure development are lowering the conditions of fresh water ecosystems and by association, hindering food production, harming human health (MEA, 2005; UNDP, 2007; Sutherland et al., 139 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 2009). Removal of forest ecosystem inadvertently affects the fresh water ecosystem on which three quarters of the global poor depend upon for their water supply, and global demands are rising by four-fold over the last 50 years (MEA, 2005). Halle (1990) stated about 22 years ago “there is no doubt that primary rainforests are vanishing and that we are now living through the last decades of vegetation dating back as far as 300 million years”. The consistent conversion of tropical forests of which presently there cannot be said to be any pristine primary forest in Nigeria into various land use systems has heavy consequences which are in general negative for distribution, community structure and population characteristics of flora and fauna (Waltert et al., 2004, Bobo et al., 2006). In order for this trend to be reversed or halted, it becomes crucial to redesign anthropogenic habitats so that their use is in congruence with the need of many other wild species (reconciliation ecology). Rather than solely protecting some areas from human use, human modified areas need to embrace reconciliation ecology to ensure sustenance of a great majority of our wild species (Rosenzweig, 2003). In Cameroon, reports from Zapfack et al. (2003) also support that farmlands have the poorest plant species rich habitat which support other biota such as wild birds in this study. Walter et al. (2005) and Schulze et al. (2004) also agree with with the findings of this study when they averred that there are strong correlations between tree diversity and diversity of birds and other forest dependent biota. 5.4.1 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES DIVERSITY BASED ON TRANSECTS Bird species diversity was significantly highest in forest and forest edge compared with the other eight land use types. The gallery forest (LAKEGAL) also showed a 140 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN higher bird species diversity as compared to the lake grassland (LAKEGRA). This further supports the trend that as habitat heterogeneity or complexity increases, more species diversity is supported. Also with increase in cover, more bird species are supported. 5.4.2 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS BASED ON TRANSECTS The Agro and rice land use systems supported the least number of bird species while habitats possessing greater cover and complexity such as the forest and lake gallery supported significantly the highest amount of bird species richness in the study. This further indicates the need for providing areas of cover in order to maintain bird richness. The benefits of maintaining populations of native bird species in the countryside are twofold. Firstly this diversity is likely to supply valuable resources for surrounding population of communities and these include pollination, seed dispersal, biological control (of pests) for the maintenance of vegetation cover. Secondly since there is no substitute for forest (native), the conservation of forest plots will provide reserves for biodiversity to keep thriving. Intensification agriculture is needed for increase in food production but landscape management needs to be integrated into agricultural policy making to ensure the conservation of biological diversity for future generations. Agricultural plots with a mixture of cultivated and natural woodlands or agricultural plots in close proximity to forests, wetlands can support high number of species of both flora and fauna composition. However, the composition might only be as a result of source and sink interrelationships with neighbouring fragmented native habitats (Greenberg et al., 1997). 141 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Hughes et al. (2002) and Adeyanju et al. (2011) support the view that plantations with annual crops do not generally support high number of bird species richness. Waltert et al. (2003) concurs with result from this study that species richness in land-use systems was lower than in nearby primary and secondary forest for all bird species observed, including endemic birds, frugivorous/nectar feeding birds and insectivorous birds. The ability of forest specialists to persist over the long term in secondary habitats depends on the availability of nesting sites, availability of food fruits, insects, nectar, sizeable prey, competition, predation for which only generalized inferences can presently be made. 5.4.3 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES ABUNDANCE BASED ON TRANSECTS Bird species abundance was relatively highest in the lake grassland, further revealing the guilds responsible for increased abundance at the lake. However, maize land-use areas supported high bird species abundance and this can be attributed to the gregarious groups of weavers and queleas that move in the grasses that surround the Maize plots. Rice paddies had relatively high bird species abundance and this is of course due to the year round production of rice by the Africa Rice network making ample amount of food to be available for Weavers and Queleas. Crop depreciation by the birds is a source of conflict between the farm unit and the Afforestation unit. Though relatively smaller in size when compared to the other land use areas, large numbers of birds congregated at rice paddies daily for food. 142 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 5.4.4 EFFECT OF LAND USE ON BIRD SPECIES EVENNESS BASED ON TRANSECTS Bird species evenness remained highest in Forest in comparison with other land use types and evenness was relatively higher in forest compared to forest edge. It was also significantly higher in areas around lake gallery, in comparison to areas around lake grassland. Bird species evenness was highest in agro land use revealing that again habitats that are more complex offer more for wild birds than the other single crop land use systems 5.5.0 WILDBIRD SPECIES ACCUMULATION CURVE Number of bird species generally increased steadily with increase in the number of transects monitored and began slowing down as the curve peaked. This shows that the curve did not level off, meaning that more species could still be added as more transects were sampled in each of the sites in the survey. However most of the species were recorded as only singletons were now being added. The first ten transects resulted in over 100 species for the 2010 survey and about 80 for the 2011 survey, however it took about 40 additional transects to record an additional 50 species. This shows that efficiency was reducing and more effort was required to give rise to more of new species. This could be as a result of the source sink relationship that is present in any given population. At any given time some individuals or species are moving into the population and others are leaving while some remain indefinitely (Manu et al., 2007). For the forest site it can be seen from Figure 4.27, that more new species were added faster than in the other two sites and this is definitely because the forest possess a lot more niches for a varying number of species of birds, the multiplier effect of edge 143 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN effect also means bird species resident in other habitats may decide to take advantage of some of the resources available in the forest or forest edge. The first transect in both the forest and lake sites resulted in over 45 bird species while that of the farm resulted in only about 15 bird species. This shows that relatively the forest and lake sites supported and potentially were home to more species given equal number of transects are surveyed in all the three sites. 5.6.0 WILDBIRD VIRUS SURVEILLANCE In a sero-epidemiology study carried out between 2002 and May 2004 in 65 south- west Nigerian commercial chicken farms, approximately 1000 birds were tested for antibodies against six virus types including avian influenza virus. No antibodies were confirmed against AIV, though sero-prevalence for other viruses were high (Owoade et al, 2004). Though the study provided zero percent prevalence for AIV, it is a sign that either the virus loads in the wild were low or there was actually no AIV circulating in the investigated bird populations as at the time of that study. On the contrary in the northern hemisphere, surveillance of wild ducks has revealed a high LPAI virus prevalence primarily in juvenile birds and where HPAI subtypes have been involved in outbreaks in poultry, wildbirds have shown very low or no incidence (Chen et al. 2006). Prevalence in North America falls from about 60% in ducks sampled at marshalling sites close to the Canadian breeding areas in early fall, from 0.4 to 0.2% at the wintering grounds in the southern U.S.A and 0.25 % on the ducks returning to the breeding grounds in spring (Olsen et al., 2006). The most common of the AIV subtypes in North America and Europe have been H3, H4 and H6 (Olsen et al., 2006). Prevalence in Northern Europe can be significantly higher (up to 6.5%), while that of nesting grounds of ducks in Siberia before winter 144 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN migration revealed the presence of influenza viruses in up to 8% of birds (Gaidet et al., 2007b, Olsen et al., 2006). It has been argued that the high temperature and environmental conditions in the tropics might be able to hinder the rapid acclimatization and residency of this virus group which is very sensitive to temperature. Gaidet et al. (2007a) however, supported the opposite view when they gave evidence of LPAI circulating in both Eurasian and Afro-tropical ducks which they termed possible ‘reservoirs’. They suggested that Eurasian ducks could carry AIV during their northern spring migration but also raised the possibility that AIV could persist in the tropical region and be disseminated over Africa through intra- African migratory ducks. This survey supports that wildbirds in the study site do not harbour high prevalence of viruses since several surveys carried out from 2009 to 2012 have found no evidence of HPAI in Forest areas in Nigeria. It is like in the temperate region, where it is thought that the infectious influenza viruses could be preserved in frozen lakes which ensures the continual existence of infective agents for the virus to keep circulating (Webster et al., 1992). In conclusion though LPAI can be found in numerous wild birds outside Nigeria, it is still unclear in which of these species ‘AIV is endemic’ and in which it is a temporary pathogen. AIV prevalence has been generally low in Nigeria (Joanis et al., 2008). Large scale surveillance in 2008 in Africa in sites very close to Nigeria, screened 4,553 waterbirds, both Eurasian migrants and Afrotropical birds, for the presence of AIV. The prevalence of positive birds reached 3.5% and different LPAI AIV subtypes were identified namely: H8N4, H5N3, H11N9, H12N5 and H1N1 (Gaidet et al. 2007a and b). One of the ducks which was sampled (Dendrocygna viduata) showed a 3.2% prevalence. Our sampling showed zero prevalence in this species for AIV even though 379 faecal samples from this species was screened over two years. A 145 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN subsequent surveillance in Nigeria revealed a general prevalence ten times lower than that reported by Gaidet et al. (2007b) and Snoeck et al. (2011), but positive birds have been found in Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal and Ethiopia (Gaidet et al., 2007a; Stroud et al., 2004; Fouchier et al., 2003). However the high prevalence of NDVs in the White-faced Whistling Duck and in domestic poultry still showed that some viruses may still be in circulation in the wild as well as in our domestic poultry. Nonetheless all birds sampled during this study appeared to be healthy except for one sick domestic chicken which was, nevertheless, negative for AIV. The assumption that wildbirds can undertake long-distance movements while carrying and shedding HPAIV and are thus likely to be agents of international spread though proven, still needs to be interpreted with caution. This survey included within its surveillance both high risk species (Waterbirds), bridge species and forest birds which are known to be of little or no risk. The acquisition of an infectious agent stimulates the host immune system, and when there are no antibodies existing prior to an infection large reservoirs of energy is needed by the invaded host to stamp out the intrusion and or maximise immune response. If the host fails to halt the pathogen, reserves will be depleted, leading to inability of the host to meet its daily requirements, i.e moulting, reproduction, feeding, flying and escape from predators. Aggregation also increases the risk of infectious agents, and this behaviour is often observed in migratory birds whether Intra African or Parlearctic (Feare, 2007). Generally though the survey turned out with no positive for AIV, there is still need for active surveillance as this provides information on LPAIV circulation, including H5 and H7 subtypes that have the potential to become highly pathogenic. The erroneous or uncertain implication of wildbirds as the source of outbreaks of viral infections such as AIV needs to be done with caution. This is because some of these calls have 146 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN deteriorated into wanton culling of wildbirds and destruction of roosting or breeding areas in a bid to halt spread of virus. Such action will only lead to conservation and adverse environmental issues and or consequences. Investigations should be made at the sites of outbreaks and possible avenues for introduction should be checked and the risk of speculation should be avoided as it holds serious costs if the real source of infection is not discerned. Very few wildbirds have been reported dead or infected with the HPAI virus in Africa and especially Nigeria, even during periods of global scares of avian influenza outbreaks (Olsen et al., 2006; Gaidet et al., 2007a; Snoeck et al., 2011). With most of the reports in wild birds being of LPAI, though this is also in line with the absence of the H5N1 virus reports and or very limited detection rate from healthy wild bird populations (Chen et al., 2006b) from past surveillance programs in European countries (EFSA, 2006, Gaidet et al., 2007a). The use of vaccinations by some poultry farmers is also thought to be resulting in the possible generation of strains that have progressively drifted away from the original antigenic profile (Lee et al., 2004). Nonetheless, it is unclear how the immunological pressure generated by the variety of seed strains contained in the applied vaccines end up affecting the antigenic properties of isolates (Capua and Alexander, 2006). The sample swabs on which this study was based for PCR detection comprise of diverse sample types; namely Cloacal, Oropharyngeal, Feacal, and Cloacal/Oropharyngeal in the manner of (Gaidet et al., 2007b). Therefore, viruses could not have escaped detection as concentrations are known to be higher in trachea than in cloaca (Sturm-Ramirez et al., 2004, Hulse-Post et al., 2005). Nevertheless logistic constraints in Nigeria including unexpected long periods of electricity outages in the lab could have been responsible for the low detection, even when liquid Nitrogen was used. 147 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 CONCLUSION The Ibadan area still holds many bird species, although some 68 species (plus 62 vagrants) recorded prior to 2002 have not been recorded recently and now appear to be missing from the area. Reasons may include the fact that some of these are inconspicuous species of high forest, not usually found outside this habitat. However, many others are conspicuous and would therefore not be easily overlooked. A few others may return as vagrants, while a good number are migrants and therefore recorded seasonally. Protected areas suffer from numerous threats such as poaching, invasive non–native species and expansion of human settlements. This means that the Ibadan area has on the average lost a bird species each year since the last comprehensive survey in the 1960’s. This figure refers only to wild birds and does not include the vast diversity of other fauna and flora that also exist in this site, or elsewhere in Nigeria. Protected areas like the IITA reserve provide one of the best tools for education and research, necessitating that our management of human modified landscape must improve rapidly to prevent incessant loss of species diversity. The comparison of recent with earlier records reveals significant changes in the avifauna of the IITA campus and the surrounding Ibadan area. Some of these changes might not be directly attributed to changes within the campus but rather to the ongoing destruction of forest patches outside it. The city of Ibadan is expanding and many of the patches of forest around the reserve have now been replaced by housing, and natural corridors are thinning out. On the other hand, the extension of the derived 148 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN savanna up to the edges of the campus and IBA, as a result of farmland degradation and clearance of forest and bush, has permitted colonization by an increasing number of birds formerly unknown to the area when it was forested. Although the IITA campus is protected by a fence from cattle grazers and loggers, the farming activities of the research institute itself are beginning to encroach into forest reserve areas. Reasons given for this include low productivity from old farm plots, therefore new sites for farm plots are often taken from areas formerly covered by secondary forest. In support of conservation on the site, reforestation over the last four years has begun increasing the area covered by forest though it has not been made clear whether the forest is primarily managed to improve the productivity of soils for agriculture or to conserve soil and wildlife. The benefits of maintaining populations of native bird species in the countryside are twofold. Firstly this diversity is likely to supply valuable resources for surrounding population of communities and these include pollination, seed dispersal, biological control (pest control) for the maintenance of vegetation cover. Secondly, since there is no substitute for forest (native). Hence, the conservation of forest plots will provide reserves for biodiversity to keep thriving. Agricultural intensification is needed for increase in food production but landscape management needs to be integrated into agricultural policy formulation to ensure the conservation of biological diversity for future generations. Agricultural plots with a mixture of cultivated and natural woodlands or agricultural plots in close proximity to forests, wetlands can support high number of species of both flora and fauna composition. However, the composition might only be as a result of source and sink interrelationships with neighboring fragmented native habitats. 149 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN There is however the need to maintain wildlife diversity within farmland and concurrently allow support for agricultural production. Nonetheless, the ability of forest specialists to persist over the long term in secondary habitats depends on the availability of nesting sites, availability of food fruits, insects, nectar, sizeable prey, competition, predation for which only generalized inferences can presently be made. Therefore focus should be given to species specific interrelationships within land use areas so that effects can be more easily identified. Habitat type is important in determining the distribution of wild birds in IITA environs and each habitat type is important for the sustenance of habitat specialists which cannot survive outside such nitches. Terrestrial ecosystems are where most people live and where most food, fiber and biofuels are produced, consumed and disposed of. Multiple use of land such as agriculture, aesthetics are governed by a high diversity of legal systems. The rise in competition for land for other uses will keep increasing to satisfy the need for human occupation and production, therefore, there is a need for improved understanding of how to develop our management of land use to yield the much desired dividends. Agricultural practices must be developed and managed to contribute positively to conserving overall biodiversity and thereby reduce pressure on conversion of natural ecosystems. The IITA area is important for bird watchers from all around the world as the IITA management have provided an accommodating atmosphere that meets International standards. The record of over 260 bird species for IITA, in an area of less about 1000 hectares means the site is still rich and supports a good representative of wild bird species occurring in south west Nigeria. Bird diversity is very high early in the morning just after sun rise depending on prevailing weather. However in open areas such as rice paddies it is possible to view birds even in the warm afternoons as 150 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN waterbirds take shade from the growing plants. In the evenings bird diversity rises due to conspicuous activity and again nature lovers can have fun at sighting rare to common species as they quickly disperse to take up a last meal before sunset. The rain and dry season both support high diversity of bird species. Nonetheless, during the early dry season there is an influx of Palearctic migrants which add to the diversity present on the site. Though more bird species are recorded during the dry season, tourists and bird lovers still have lots of birds to decipher when they visit the site. The Ibadan malimbe (Malimbus ibadanensis) continues to be a species of international interest at the site. The Endemic and endangered M. ibadanensis is native to south western Nigeria; more importantly, its low population has contracted significantly due to fragmentation of its preferred secondary forest. The species possesses a maximum projected population of 2,469 individuals and its envisaged that effects of climate change and replacement of required nitch will gain ground. Its presence is however tied to the remaining forest relics of the south west, this area centres on Ibadan area of which IITA has been known to be a stronghold for the species. However, its rare sighting during the previous years including during this study calls for another comprehensive survey to bring out new information concerning the species present distribution and density. Natural and man-made threats, socio-cultural problems as well as direct and indirect consequences of socio-economic development have contributed to the erosion of biodiversity at all levels. Within the last 25 years, it is believed that about 43% of the forest ecosystem has been lost through human activities. Nigeria, with a population of over 140 million people constitutes nearly a quarter of the total population of sub- 151 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Saharan Africa. A population growth rate of more than 3% and increasing poverty (especially in rural areas) has put severe demand on the country’s natural resources and the institutional structures and the resources available to manage them. There has been a general institutional weakness and lack of technical capacity to effectively tackle the nation’s environmental issues, including threat to biological diversity. Although Nigeria derives about 80% of its external earnings from the oil sector, agriculture contributes about 38% of the GDP. More importantly, about 70% of the population derives their means of livelihood from agriculture, and the economy is characterized by a large rural based traditional sector. Most of the rural poor derive their livelihood from wild species of biodiversity. The urban population also benefit from the exploitation of the country’s biological resources, particularly in the construction industry. The viability of the agricultural sector is crucial to the growth and development of the nation. The agriculture sector strongly impacts food security, industrialisation efforts, quality of life, economic growth, political stability and, to a certain extent, a nation’s position in international relations and trade. The sustainability of this important sector should, therefore, be of paramount importance. Consequently, it is essential to establish a balance between efficient agricultural enterprise and environmental protection. The emphasis should be on the promotion of ecologically sound and profitable farming systems and suitable rural development programmes principally aimed at small scale farmers. In order to increase agricultural productivity, vigorous 152 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN programmes have to be established and supported to ensure proper use of natural resources and judicious application of agricultural inputs. Low incidence of viral diversity among wildbirds investigated in this study reveal that none of indeed one of more of our important bird areas does not support the conclusion that wild birds are reservoirs of viruses in general. Nevertheless, the presence of Newcastle disease virus among wild birds, especially waterfowl does necessitate that wild birds should be monitored to keep a check on association with domestic poultry. The results from this study support strongly that wild birds do possess one of the viruses investigated but with a low prevalence. 6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS A balance between land use and biological diversity needs to be agreed upon to ensure continuous support for biodiversity at the site. Further studies are needed to monitor changes in avifaunal diversity along land use gradients including outside the IITA campus, and longer-term studies are required to monitor bird populations within the IBA. Within the IITA vicinity an afforestation programme has been ongoing for the last four years by the Leventis-IITA forest project and now IITA forest project. About 300 hectares of agriculturally disturbed areas are being replanted with indigenous trees (Deni Bown per. comm.). A nursery has also been established to serve as source of raising trees to serve for the project and other external needs. It is vital that this project is encouraged and used to feed communities around the vicinity in order to reduce forest isolation indices which have been indicated to affect the density and distribution of the Ibadan Malimbe. This is because Community based forests were 153 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN the only surviving forests where Ibadan Malimbe was observed over ten years ago by Manu et al. (2005). Ringing program at the site should be encouraged and this can be maintained by fostering a good relationship between the A. P Leventis Ornithological Research Institute and the University of Ibadan’s Department of Wildlife and Ecotourism Management and the Zoology Department. Students from these educational units should be encouraged to take interest in the field of ornithology, and the site used as a platform for developing such interests. Secondary forest is becoming increasingly difficult to protect as the demand of land for agricultural production increases. Building materials sourced from indigenous forest are also rising in demand therefore, policy on protection of forests need to be upgraded because sites such as the IITA area will become increasingly isolated. This will decrease habitat suitable for our endangered but endemic Malimbus ibadanensis. Though the survey turned out with no positive samples for AIV, there is still need for active surveillance as that will provide information on LPAIV circulation, including H5 and H7 subtypes which have the potential to become highly pathogenic. Nonetheless funding is required to carry this out, though others have opined for passive surveillance of die-offs as the best means of detecting HPAIV in wild birds. Monitoring of wildbird population at lower thresh holds of management decision will bring to open view more of the effects of management decisions than large-scale monitoring. Also effects on wild bird population and on individuals are different and the final decision should be what is good for the population and not only the individual. This is both cheaper and cost effective in the long run. 154 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Piles of weed removed from the dam should not be left at the edges of the dam as this not only inhibit view of tourists but also serve as seed banks for increasing the dispersal of weeds across the dam. Water weeds are good in removing excess nutrients from water bodies but leaving them at the edges only serves to backstab the previous effort in the first place. The reforestation of the edges of the dam should be encouraged as this will provide windbreaks, prevent siltation of the dam and also provide shade for nature viewing tourists 155 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN REFERENCES Abdelwahab, E. M., Arafa, A., Selim, A., Shereen, W. H,. and Kilany, W. H.2009. Highly pathogenic avain influenza in H5N1 in Egypt: current situation and th challenges. In Proceedings of the 5 International meeting of the Working Group 10 (Turkey) of WPSA, Berlin, Germany, May 28-30. H. M. Hafez, ed. Mensch and Buch verlag, Berlin, Germany. 308-316. Adeyanju, A. T., Manu, S. and Ottosson, U. 2011. Effects of introduced tree plantations on the density and diversity of bird species in some parts of the Jos Plateau, Nigeria. ROAN The Journal of Conservation Foundation. 5.1:63-75. Adeyanju, T. E. and Adeyanju, T. A. 2012. Avifauna of University of Ibadan rd Environs Ibadan, Nigeria Proceedings of 3 Annual Seminar of Nigerian Tropical Biological Association. pp 27-34. Africa Progress panel (APP). 2009. An agenda for progress at a time of global crisis. A call for African leadership, Annual report for the African progress panel. 47pp. Akin, A., Lin, T. L., Wu, C. C., Bryan, T. A., Hooper, T. and Schrader, D.2001. Nucleocapsid protein gene sequence analysis reveals close genomic relationship between turkey coronavirus and avian infectious bronchitis virus. Acta Virol 45, 31–38. Aldous, E. W., Mynn, J. K., Banks, J. and Alexander, D. J. 2003. A molecular epidemiological study of avian paramyxovirus type 1 (Newcastle disease virus) isolates by phylogenetic analysis of a partial nucleotide sequence of the fusion protein gene. Avian Pathology 32:239–256. Alexander, D. J. 1997. Newcastle disease and other paramyxovirus infections. In Diseases of Poultry, pp. 541–569. Edited by M. S. Hofstad. Iowa: Iowa State University Press. ____________. 2000. A review of avian influenza in different bird species.Veterinary Microbiology 74:3-13. _____________. 2001. Newcastle disease. British Poultry Science 42:5–22. Amezaga, J. M., Santamaria, L. and Green, A. L. 2002. Biotic wetland connectivity supporting a new approach for wetland policy. Acta Oecologica 23: 213-223. Amonsin, A., Choatrakol, C., Lapkuntod, J., Tantilertcharoen, R. and Thanawongnuwech, R. 2008. Influenza virus (H5N1) in live bird markets and food markets, Thailand. Emerging Infectious Diseases 14:1739-1742. 156 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Ash, J. S. 1990. Additions to the avifauna of Nigeria, with notes on distributional changes and breeding. Malimbus 11: 104–116. Ashford, R. W. 1968. Hirundine records from University of Ibadan campus. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 5: 48. ____________. 1969. Two species new to Ibadan and associated records. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 6: 30–31. ____________ and Parker, R.W. 1968. Reed warblers at Ibadan: two species new to the area. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 5: 96. Bannerman, D. A. 1930–51. The Birds of Tropical West Africa, vols 1–8. Crown Agents, London. Bass, H.G.M. 1967. Notes on birds at Ibadan and elsewhere. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 4(13): 31–35. Beard, C. W., and Hanson, R. P. 1984. Newcastle disease. Diseases of Poultry. M. S. Hofstad. Ed. Iowa: Iowa State University Press.452–470. Becker, J. 1996. Hungry Ghosts. Mao’s Secret Famine. The Free Press. New York, NY. Begon, M., Harper, J. L. and Townsend, C. R. 1996. Ecology: Individuals, Populations and Communities. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd. Bibby, C. J., Burgess, N. D., Hill, D. A. and Mustoe S. H. 2000. Bird Census Techniques. Academic Press, London. BirdLife International. 2000. Threatened Birds of the World. Barcelona and Cambridge, UK: Lynx Edicions and Bird Life International. ________________. 2008. The H5N1 avian influenza virus: a threat to bird conservation, but indirectly. Presented as part of the BirdLife State of the world's birds website. Available from: http//www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/176. Accessed: 11/03/2014. Bobo, K.S., Waltert, M., Sainge, M., Njokagbor, J. and Muhlenberg, M. 2006. From forest to farmland: species richness patterns of trees and understory plants along a gradient of forest convertion in Southwestern Cameroon. Biodiversity and conservation 15:4097-4117. Borm, S. V., Thomas, I., Hanquet, G., Lambrecht, B. and Boschmans, M. 2005. Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus in Smuggled Thai Eagles, Belgium. Emerging Infectious Diseases 11:702-705. Borrow, N., and Demey, R. 2008. Field Guide to the Birds of Western Africa. Christopher Helm, London. 157 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Bowes, V. A, Ritchie, S. J, Byrne, S., Sojonky, K. and Bidulka, J. J. 2004. Virus Characterization, Clinical Presentation, and Pathology Associated with H7N3 Avian Influenza in British Columbia Broiler Breeder Chickens in 2004. Avian Diseases 48:928. Broadbent, J.A. 1972. Interesting records for the Ibadan area. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 8: 54–58. Buckland S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L. and Borchers, D. L. 2001. Introduction to distance sampling: estimating abundance of biological populations, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Button, J.A. 1965. Harlequin Quail at Illaro and Ibadan. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 2: 53. Cattoli. G., Fusaro, A., Monne, I., Molia. S., Le Menarch, A., Maregeya, B., Nchare, A., Bangana, I., Maina, A.G., N’Goran, K.J.-N., Thiam, H., Bezeid, O.E.M.A., Salviato, A., Nisi, R., Terregino, C., and Capua, I. 2010. Emergence of a new genetic lineage of Newcastle disease virus in West and Central Africa- Implications for diagnosis and control. Veterinary Microbiology. 142:168-176 Capua, I. and Alexander, D. J. 2006. Avian influenza infections in birds- a moving target. Influenza 10:1750-2659. Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). 2004. Annual Report and Statement of Account. Abuja: Central bank of Nigeria. Chen, H., Deng, Z., Li, G., Tian, Y., and Li, P. 2004. The evolution of H5N1 influenza viruses in ducks in Southern China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 101:10452-10457. ________, Li, Y., Li, Z., Shi, J. and Shinya K.. 2006a. Properties and Dissemination of H5N1 Viruses Isolated during an Influenza Outbreak in Migratory Waterfowl in Western China. Journal of virology 80:5976. ________, Smith, G. J. D., Li, K. S., Wang, J, and Fan, X. H.. 2006b. Establishment of multiple sublineages of H5N1 influenza virus in Asia: Implications for pandemic control. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103:2845-2850. Colwell, R. K. 2009. Biodiversity: concepts, patterns, and measurement. Pages 257- 263 in S. A. Levin, editor. The Princeton Guide to Ecology. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2014. The Convention on Biological Diversity. The CBD website. www.cbd.int/convention/ Accessed on 13/3/2014. 158 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Davidar, P., Yoganand, K., and Ganesh, T. 2001. Distribution of Forest Birds in the Andaman Islands: Importance of Key Habitats. Journal of Biogeography, 28 (5):663-671. Dawson, J. R., Stone, W. B., Ebel, G. D., Young, D. S., and Galinski, D. S. 2007. Crow deaths caused by West Nile virus during winter. Emerging Infectious Diseases 13:1912–1914. Demey, R., Dowsett-Lemaire, F. and Dowsett, R.J. 2003. Notable bird observations from Nigeria, including the first records of Spot-breasted Ibis Bostrychia rara and Yellow Longbill Macrosphenus flavicans. Malimbus 25: 85–94. ________. 2006. Recent Reports. Bull. Afr. Bird Club 13: 228. th Dodman, T. Waterbird family estimates in Africa. Waterbird population estimates. 4 edition (the Netherlands): Wetlands International. In Gaidet et al., 2007 Avian influenza Viruses in Water birds, Africa. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 43:22- 28. _______. and Diagana, C. H. 2007. Movements of waterbirds within Africa and their conservation implications. Ostrich 78 (2): 149-154. Domingo, E. and Holland, J. J. 1997. RNA virus mutations and fitness for survival. Annual Reviews in Microbiology 51:151–178 Dranzoa, C. 1998. The Avifauna 23 years after logging in Kibale National park, Uganda. Biodiversity and Conservation 7:777-797. Ducatez, M. F., Olinger, C. M., Owoade, A. A., De Landtsheer, S. and Ammerlaan, W. Niesters, H. G., Osterhaus, A. D., Fouchier, R. A. and Muller, C. P. 2006. Avian Flu: Multiple introductions of H5N1 in Nigeria. Nature 442:37-37. Dudley, N. (Ed). 2008. Guidelines for applying protected area management categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. x + 86. EFSA. 2006. EFSA Scientific report on Migratory Birds and their Possible Role in the Spread of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza. Adopted by written procedure 12 May 2006. EFSA-Q-2005-243. Annex to The EFSA Journal (2006) 357, 1- 46. European Food Standards Agency, Milan. Elgood, J.H. and Sibley, F.C. 1964. The tropical forest edge avifauna of Ibadan, Nigeria. Ibis 106: 221–241. ______., Fry, C. H. and Dowsett, R. J. (1973) African migrants in Nigeria. Ibis: 115:375-409 159 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN ______., Heigham, J. B., Moore, A. M., Nason, A. M., Sharland, R. E. and Skinner, N. J. 1994. The Birds of Nigeria. Checklist 4, 2nd ed., British Ornithologists’ Union, Tring. EMPRES WATCH. 2006. Updated situation of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Asia. http://www.fao.org/eims/secretariat/empres/eims_search/simple_s_result.asp?t opic_docrep=174. Accessed on 11/03/2014. Ezealor, A.U. 2001. Nigeria. In Important Bird Areas in Africa and associated islands: Priority sites for conservation. L.D.C. Fishpool and M.I. Evan. Eds. Newbury and Cambridge, UK: Pisces Publications and BirdLife International BirdLife Conservation Series No.11. 661-692. Enserink, M. 2006. Avian Influenza: H5N1 Moves Into Africa, European Union, Deepening Global Crisis. Science 311:932-940. Feare, C. J. 2007. The role of Wild Birds in the spread of HPAI H5N1. Avian Diseases 51:440-447. Fishpool, L. D. C. and Evans, M. E. 2001. Important Bird Areas in Africa and associated islands: Priority sites for Conservation. Cambridge, UK: Pisces publication and BirdLife International. Food and Agricultural Association (FAO). 2004. Selected forest products. Table B.10, Rome Italy. www.http:/fao.org/ess/yearbook/vol1pdf/bio.pdf. Accessed January, 12 2012. ___________________________________. 2006. Wild bird HPAI Surveillance: sample collection from healthy, sick and dead birds. Rome, Italy.1-55. _________________________________________. 2007a. Wild Birds and Avian Influenza: An instruction to applied field research and disease sampling techniques. D. Whiteworth., S. H Newman., T. Mundkur and P. Harris. Eds. FAO Animal Production and Health manual, No 5. Rome. __________________________________________.2007b. Africa, state of the worlds forests, FAO, Rome, Italy. 4-13. FAO/OIE/WHO (Food and Agricultural Organization/Office International des Epizooties/World Health Organization). (2005). consultation on avian influenza and human health: risk reduction measures in producing, marketing, and living with animals in Asia. Rome. FAO. Fouchier , R. A. M., Bestebroer, T. M., Herfst, S., van der Kemp, L., Rimmelzwaan, G. F. and Osterhaus, A. D. M. E. 2000. Detection of influenza A viruses from different species by PCR amplification of conserved sequences in the matrix gene. J. Clin. Microbiology. 38, 4096-4101. 160 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN ________________., Munster, V., Wallensten, A., Bestebroer, T. M, and Herfst, S. 2005. Characterization of a Novel Influenza A Virus Hemagglutinin Subtype (H16) Obtained from Black-Headed Gulls. Journal of Virology 79:2814-2822. _______________., Olsen, B., Bestebroer, T. M., Herfst, S., van der Kemp, L, and Rimmelzwaan, G. F. 2003. Influenza A virus surveillance in wild birds in northern Europe in 1999 and 2000. Avian Diseases 47:857-860. Gaidet N., Dodman T, Caron A., Balanca G., Desvaux S., and Goutard F. 2007a. J Influenza Surveillance in Wild Birds in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa: Preliminary Results from an Ongoing FAO-led Survey. Journal of Wildlife Disease 43:22-28. ________, __________, ________, ________, ___________, and _______.. 2007b. Avian Influenza Viruses in Water Birds, Africa. Emerging Infectious Diseases 13: (4) 626-629. ________, Newman, S.H., Hagemeijer., W., Dodman, T., and Cappelle, J. 2008. Duck Migration and Past Influenza A (H5N1) Outbreak Areas. Emerging Infectious Diseases 14. Garmendia, A. E., Van Kruiningen, H. J., French, R. A., Anderson, J. F., and Andreadis, T. G. 2000. Recovery and identification of West Nile virus from a hawk in winter. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 38:3110–3111. Georg, B., René, G., Lutz, G, Timm, C. H. and Christian, H. 2006. Influenza Report 2006. S. K Bernd, H. Christian, P. Wolfgang, Eds. www.InfluenzaReport.com; 1-255. Globig, A., Staubach, C., Beer, M., Koeppen, W., and Fidler, V. 2009. Anatidae migration in the western paleartic and spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 of Asian origin in wildbirds in Germany, 2006 and 2007. Transboundary Emerging Diseases 56:57-72. GRAIN. 2006. Fowl play: The poultry industry's central role in the bird flu crisis, GRAIN Briefing, Febuary 2006. http//www.grain.org/briefings/?id=194 Accessed 11/03/2014. Green, A. J., Figueroa, J. and Sanchez, M. I. 2002. Implications of waterbird ecology for the dispersal of aquatic organisms. Acta Oecologica 23: 201-213. Greenberg, R., Bichier, P., Cruz Angon, A. and Reitsma, R. 1997. Bird populations in shade and sun cofee plantations in central Guatamala. Conservation Biology. 11:448-459. Halle, F. 1990. Tropical rain forests: structure and growth dynamics relative to utilization by birds. In Biogeography and Ecology of Forest Bird 161 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Communities. A. Keast. Eds. SPB Academic Publishing by The Hague, The Netherlands. 27-33. Hanson, B. A., Stallknecht, D. E., Swayne, D. E., Lewis, L. A. and Senne, D. A. 2003 in Olsen, B., Munster, V. J., Wallensten, A., Waldenstrom, J., and Osterhaus, A. D. M. E. 2006. Global Patterns of Influenza A Virus in Wild Birds. Science 312:384-388. Herczeg, J., Wehmann, E., Bragg, R. R., Dias, P. M., and Hadjiev, G.. 1999. Two novel genetic groups (VIIb and VIII) responsible for recent Newcastle disease outbreaks in Southern Africa, one (VIIb) of which reached Southern Europe. Archives of Virology 144:2087–2099. Hougner, C., Colding, J, and Soderqvist, T. 2006. Pages 1-14 in Perspectives in Ornithology, the need to quantify ecosystem services provided by birds. Wenny, D. G., DeVault, T. L., Johnson, M. D., Cagan, D. K., and Sekercioglu, C. H. 2011. The Auk 128.1:1-14. Hughes, J. B., G. C. Daily. and Ehrlich. P. R. 2002. Conservation of tropical forest birds in countryside habitats. Ecology Letters 5:121-129. Hulse-Post, D. J., Sturm-Ramirez, J. H., Seiler, P., Govorkova, S. K., Scholtissek, P. P. 2005. Role of domestic ducks in the propagation and biological evolution of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza viruses in Asia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States 102:10682-10687. Hunter, M. L., Jr. 2005. A Mesofilter complement to coarse and fine filters. Conservation Biology 19:1025-1029. IISD, 2011. Annual report. Earth Negotiations Bulletin 2011:Vol 21 (70):1-15. th Downloaded on 30 April 2013 from http://www.iisd.ca/cites/sc61/, Imong, S. I and Manu, S. A. 2011. Effects of habitat types and antropogenic disturbance on the density and disatribution of bird species in the Sankwala Mountains, Cross River State, Nigeria. Roan 5 (1): 50-62. Joanis, T. M., Meseko, C. A., Oladokun, A. T., Ularamu, H. G., and Egbuji, A. N. 2008. Serologic and virologic surveillance of avain influenza in Nigeria, 2006- 2007. European Surveillance 13:1-4. Karr, J. R. and Roth, R. R. 1971. Vegetation Structure and Avian Diversity in Several New World Areas. The American Naturalist 105.945:423-435. Kelly, D., Ladley, J. J. and Robertson, A. W. 2004. Is dispersal easier than pollination? Two tests in new Zealand Loranthaceae. New Zeal. J. Bot. 42: 89– 103. 162 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Kho, C. L., Mohd Azmi, M. L., Arshad, S. S and Yusoff, K.2000. Performance of an RT-nested PCR ELISA for detection of Newcastle disease virus. J. Virol. Meth., 86: 71-83. Krauss, S., Obert, C. A., Frank, H., Walker, D., and Jones, K. 2007. Influenza in Migratory Birds and and Evidence of Limited Intercontinental Virus Exchange. PLOS Pathogens 3:1687-1693. Lee, C. W., Senne, D. A., Suarez, D. L. 2004. Effect of vaccine use in the evolution of Mexican lineage H5N2 avain influenza virus. Journal of Virology 78:8372- 8381. Li, K. S., Guan, Y., Li, K. S., Wang, J., and Smith G. J. D.. 2004. Genesis of a highly pathogenic and potentially pandemic H5N1 influenza virus in eastern Asia. Nature 430:209-213. Londt, B., Banks, J., and Alexander, D. 2007. Highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses with low virulence for chickens in in vivo tests. Avian Pathology 36:347. Luoto, M., Virkkala, R., Heikkinen, R. K. and Rainio, K. 2004. Predicting bird species richness using remote sensing in boreal agricultural-forest mosaics. Ecological Applications 14. 6:1946-1962. Maclean, G. L. 1990. Ornithology for Africa. University of Natal Press, Pietermaritzburg. Magurran, A. E. 2004. Measuring Biological Diversity. The standard reference for conceptual and quantitative aspects f diversity measurement. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Manu, S. 2002. Effects of habitat fragmentation on the distribution of forest Birds in South Western Nigeria with Particular reference to Ibadan malimbe and other malimbes. PhD Thesis, Edward Grey Institute, Oxford University, UK. _______., Peach, W. and Cresswell, W. 2005. Notes on the natural history of the Ibadan Malimbe Malimbus ibadanensis, a threatened Nigerian endemic. Malimbus 27: 33–39. ________. and Cresswell, W. 2007. Addressing sampling bias in counting forest birds: a West African case study. Ostrich 78 (2): 281-286. _______ and Imong I. S.. 2006. An ornithological survey of the Cameroon Highlands in Cross River state, Nigeria: Afi mountain wildlife sanctuary, Cross River National Park, Mbe Mountains and Sankwala Mountains. A survey report submitted to NCF-WCS Biodiversity Research Programme. 163 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN _______, Peach, W., and Cresswell, W. 2007. The effects of edge, fragment size and degree of isolation on avian species richness in highly fragmented forest in West Africa. Ibis 149 (2):287. Mayo, M. A. 2002a. Virus taxonomy. Archives of Virology 147:1071–1076. _________. 2002b. A summary of taxonomic changes recently approved by ICTV. Archives of Virol. 147. 1655–1663. _________________________________2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washinton. D.C. Mills, G. S., Dunning Jr, J. B., and Bates, J. M. 1991. The relationship between breeding bird density and vegetation volume. Wilson Bull. 103.3:468-479. Mounts, A. W., Kwong, H., Izurieta, H. S. 1999. Case-control study of risk factors for avian influenza A (H5N1) disease, Hong Kong. Journal of Infectious Diseases :505-508. Nemeth, N., Young, G., Ndaluka, C., Bielefeldt-Ohmann, H., and Komar, N. 2009. Persistent West Nile Virus infection in the House Sparrow (Passer domesticus). Archives of Virology 154:783-789. Nguyen, D. C., Uyeki, T. M., Jadhao, S., Maines., T, and Shaw, M. 2005. Isolation and Characterization of Avian Influenza Viruses, Including Highly Pathogenic H5N1, from Poultry in Live Bird Markets in Hanoi, Vietnam, in 2001. Journal of Virology. 79:4201-4212. th Nigeria's 4 Biodiversity Report. 2010. http//www.cbd.int/doc/world/ng/ng-nr-04- en.pdf. Accessed 11/03/2014. Normile, D. 2008. Flu Virus Research Yields Results But No Magic Bullet for Pandemic. Science 319:1178-1179. Olsen, B., Munster, V. J., Wallensten, A., Waldenstrom, J., and Osterhaus, A. D. M. E. 2006. Global Patterns of Influenza A Virus in Wild Birds. Science 312:384- 388. Otim, M. O., Christensen, H., Jorgensen, P. H., Handberg, K. J., and Bisgaard, M. 2004. Molecular characterization and phylogenetic study of Newcastle disease virus isolates from recent outbreaks in eastern Uganda. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 42:2802–2805. Owoade, A. A., Oluwayelu, D. O., Fagbohun, O. A., Ammerlean, W., Mulders, M. N. and Muller, C. P. 2004. Serologic evidence of chicken infectious anemia in commercial chicken flocks in southwest Nigeria. Avian Diseases 48:202-205. 164 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN ___________., Ducatez, M. F. and Muller, C. P. 2006. Seroprevalence of Avian Influenza Virus, Infectious Bronchitis Virus, Reovirus, Avian Pneumovirus, Infectious Laryngotracheitis Virus, and Avian Leukosis Virus in Nigerian Poultry. Avian Diseases 50:222-227. Parker, R. H. 1967. Additions to local avifaunas Ibadan. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 4(15): 16. __________. 1968. Two interesting migrants at Ibadan Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 5: 96. __________. 1970. Additions to the local avifauna — Ibadan. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 7: 38. Peiris, J. S. M., De Jong, M. D., and Guan, Y. 2007. Avian Influenza Virus (H5N1): a Threat to Human Health. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 20:243-267. Pettet, A. 1968a. Miscellaneous bird records for the Ibadan area. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 5: 52. ________. 1968b. New records for the Ibadan area. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 5: 51. ________. 1975. Breeding behavior of Clamator glandarius at Ibadan in southern Nigeria. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 11: 34–40. th Ramsar Convention Bureau. 1996. www.ramsar.org downloaded 14 March 2010. _______________________. 1997. A guide to the convention on wetlands (Ramsar, nd Iran, 1971). (Ed) Blasco. D., 2 edition. Switzerland: Ramsar Convention Bureau. Robinson, D. M. 1966. Wood Ibis at Ibadan. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 3: 13. Robinson, N. 1970. A bird bath in an Ibadan compound: Jericho reservation. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 7: 27–30. Rosenzweig, M. 1995. Species Diversity in Space and Time. An overview and analysis of the geography of species richness, especially species-area relations. New York: Cambridge University Press. __________. 2003. Reconciliation ecology and the future of species diversity. Oryx 37: 194-205. Sallabanks, R., Walters, J. R., and J. A. Collazo. 2000. Breeding bird abundance in bottomland hardwood forests: habitat, edge, and patch size effects. The Condor 102. 4:748-758. Salzberg, S., Kingsford, C., Cattoli, G., Spiro, D., and Janies, D. 2007. Genome analysis linking recent European and African influenza (H5N1) viruses. Emerging Infectious Diseases 13:713-718. 165 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Schulze, C. H., Waltert, M., Kessler, P. J.A, Pitopang, R., Shahabuddin, V.M.. 2004. Biodiversity indicator groups of tropical land-use systems: comparing plants, birds and insects. Ecological Applications 14:1321-1333. Sekercioglu, C. H. 2006a. Ecological significance of bird populations. Page 1-14 in Perspectives in Ornithology, the need to quantify Ecosystem services provided by birds. Wenny, D. G., DeVault, T. L., Johnson, M. D., Cagan, D. K., and Sekercioglu, C. H. 2011. The Auk 128.1:1-14. ________________. 2006b. Increasing awareness of avian ecological function. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21: 464–471. Serle, W. 1950. Notes on the birds of south-western Nigeria. Ibis 92: 84–94. Shochat, E., Abramsky, Z., and Pinshow, B. 2001. Breeding bird species diversity in the Negev: effects of scrub fragmentation by planted forests. Journal of Applied Ecology 38:1135-1147. Sims, L. and Narrod C. 2008. Understanding avian influenza. FAO Animal Production and Health Division. Slomka, M.J., Pavlidis, T., Banks, J., Shell, W., and McNally, A. 2007. Validated H5 Eurasian realtime reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction and its application in H5N1 outbreaks in 2005–2006. Avian Diseases 51. (1 Suppl): 373-377. Snoeck, C. J., Ducatez, M. F., Owoade, A. A., Faleke, O. O., Alkai, B. R., Tahita, Snoeck, C. J., Adeyanju, A. T., De Landtsheer, S., Ottosson, U., Manu, S., Hagemeijer, W., Mundkur, T. and Muller, C. P. 2011. Reassortant low- pathogenic avian influenza H5N2 viruses in African wild birds. J Gen Virol 92, 1172-1183. Spackman, E., Senne, D. A., Myers, T. J., Bulaga, L. L., and Garber, L. P. 2002. Development of a Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase PCR Assay for Type A Influenza Virus and the Avian H5 and H7 Hemagglutinin Subtypes. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 40: 3256-60. Steinhauer, D. A. 1999. Role of Hemagglutinin Cleavage for the Pathogenicity of Influenza Virus. Virology 258:1-10. Strattersfield, A. J., Crossby, M. J., Long, A. J. and Wege, D. C. 1998. Endemic Bird areas of the World: Priorities for Biodiversity Conservation., Cambridge, UK, BirdLife International. Stroud, D. A., Davidson, N. C., West, R., Scott, D. A., Haanstra, L., and Thorup, O. 2004. (compilers, on behalf of the international wader Study Group 2004). 166 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Status of migratory wader populations in Africa and western Eurasia in the 1990s. International Wader Studies. 15: 1-259, Sturm-Ramirez, K. M., Ellis, T., Bousfield, B., Bissett, L., Dyrting, K., Rehg, J. E. 2004. Reemerging H5N1 influenza viruses in Hong Kong in 2002 are highly pathogenic to ducks. Journal of Virology 78: 4892-4901. _____________., Hulse-Post, D.J., Govorkova, E. A, Humberd, J., and Seiler, P. 2005. Are Ducks Contributing to the Endemicity of Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus in Asia? Journal of virology 79:112-169. Sutherland, W.J., Alakes, W. M., Aronson, R. B., Aveling, R., Blackburn, T.M., and Broad, S. 2009. One hundred questions of importance to the conservation of global Biological Diversity. Conservation Biology 23.3:557-567. Tarnagda, M. C., Z., Ouedraogo, J. B, Maikano, I., Mbah, P. O., Kremer, J. R. and Muller, C. P.. 2009. Newcastle disease virus in West Africa: New virulent strains identified in non-commercial farms. Archives of Virology 154: 24-54. Tankersley, Jr. R. and Orvis, K. 2003. Modelling the Geography of Migratory Pathway and Stopover habitats for neotropical Migratory Birds. Conservation Ecology 7:7-15. Thibault, M., Defos du Rau, P. and Welch, S. 2012. First records of Long-legged Pipit Anthus pallidiventris for Nigeria and Benin. Bull. Afr. Bird Club 19: 206–208. Tomback, D.F and Linhart, Y.B. 1990. Dispersal of Whitebark pine seeds by Clark’s nutcracker: a mutualism hypothesis. Journal of Ecology 51: 451–467. Uiprasertkul, M., Kitphati, R., Puthavathana, P., Kriwong, R., and Kongchanagul, A. 2007. Apoptosis and pathogenesis of avian influenza A (H5N1) virus in humans. Emerging Infectious Diseases 13:708-712. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2007. Human development report 2007/2008. Fighting climate change: human solidarity in a divided world. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. UNDP-GEF 2008. Biodiversity: Delivery results. UNDP-GEF. Global Environment facility Unit, UNDP, New York, USA. United Nations-Millennium Development Goals (UN-MDG) 2014. The United Nations Millennium Goals. The website of the UN Millenium goals. www.un.org/milleniumgoals/. Accessed on 13/03/2014 UNEP-WCMC 2008. State of the worlds protected areas: an annual review of global progress. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. 167 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN UNESCO-MAB, 2014. (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) Man and Biospere Reserve. The website of UNESCO-MAB. www.unesco.org/mab/. Accessed on 13/03/2014. Utterback, W. 1984. Update on avian influenza through febuary 21, 1984 in Pennsylvania and Virginia. In the 33rd Western Poultry Disease Conference. (Davis CA, ed). University of California. pp 4-7. van der Meulen, K. M., Pensaert, M. B., and Nauwynck, H. J. 2005. West Nile Virus in the Vertebrate world Review. Arch. Virol. 150:637-657. Vey, M., Orlich, M., Adler, S., Klenk, H. D., Rott, R., and Garten, W. 1992. Hemagglutinin activation of pathogenic avian influenza viruses of serotype H7 requires the protease recognition motif R-X-K/R-R. Virology 188:408-416. Villareal, C. L. 2006. Control and eradication strategies of avian influenza in Mexico: In Understanding Avian Influenza by {Sims, 2008 #118} Developments in Biology (Basel) 124:125-126. Waltert, M., Lien, F.K., and Muhlenberg, M. 2004. Effects of land use on bird species richness in Sulawesi, Indonesia. Conservation Biology 18:1339-1346. ________., Bobo, K.S., Sainge, M.N., Fermon, H. and Muhlenberg, M. 2005. From forest to farmland; habitat effects on afrotropical forest bird diversity. Ecological Applications. 15.4: 1351-1366. Webster, R. G., Bean, W. J., Gorman, O. T., Chambers, T. M., and Kawaoka, Y. 1992. Evolution and ecology of influenza A viruses. Microbiology Molecular Biological Reviews 56:152-179. ____________. 2004. Wet markets a continuing source of severe acute respiratory syndrome and influenza? Lancet (British edition) 363:234. Weins J. A. and J. T. Rotenberry, J. T. 1981. Habitat associations and community structures of birds in scrub-steep environments. Ecological Monographs 51:21-41. Weller, M. W. 1999. Wetland Birds: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Wells. D.R. 1966a. A Striped Crake Porzana marginalis at Ibadan. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 3: 13. _________. 1966b. Migrant Scops Owls Otus scops at Ibadan. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 3: 10–11. _________. 1967. Additions to local avifaunas, Ibadan. Bull. Nig. Orn. Soc. 4(13/14): 41. 168 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Wenny, D. G., de Vault, T. L., Johnson, M. D., Cagan, D. K., and Sekercioglu, C. H. 2011. Perspectives in Ornithology, the need to quantify ecosystem services provided by birds. The Auk 128.1:1-14. Wetlands International. 2002. www.wetlands.org/.../RamsarConventiononWetlands40th\ __________________. 2005. Wetlands International Position Statement on Avian meeting. Influenza. In update per 4/11/05. Whelan, C. J., Wenny, D. G, and Marquis, R. J. 2008. Ecosystem services provided by birds New York Academy of Sciences 1134:25-60. 2008. Wilson, E.O., and Peter, F.M. (Eds.) 1988. Biodiversity. An important collection of papers that launched public awareness of biodiversity and its importance. Washinton, DC. National Academy Press. Willoughby, R. W. H. 1949. Birds of Ibadan Reservoir. Niger. Field 14: 142–145. Wood, G. W., McCauley, J. W., Bashiruddin, J. B., and Alexander, D. J. 1993. Deduced amino acid sequences at the haemagglutinin cleavage site of avian influenza A viruses of H 5 and H 7 subtypes. Archives of Virology 130:209- 216. World Bank, 2009. Global monitoring report 2009. A development Emergency of the World Bank. Washinton D. C., U.S.A. World Health Organization. 2002. WHO manual on Aniamal Influenza Diagnosis and Surveillance. 2 ed. WHO Geneva, Department of Communicable Disease Surveillance and control. _____________________. 2008. Cumulative Number of Confirmed Human Cases of Avian Influenza A? (H5N1) Reported to WHO. 19/06/08. http//www.who.int/influenza/surveillance_monitoring/updates/latest. Accessed 11/03/2014. Wymenga E. and Zwarts L. 2010. Use of Rice fields by Birds in Africa. Waterbirds 33:97-104. 169 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Appendix 1: Sighting frequency of bird species per 100 sections across seasons and landuse types 1 Phalacrocorax africanus Long-tailed Cormorant 3.5 3.85 2.48 4.96 7.32 7.46 1.04 * * * * * * 2 Ixobrychus minutus Little Bittern * 5.77 2.48 0.83 6.1 5.97 * * * * * * * 3 Nycticorax nycticorax Black-crowned Night Heron 3.5 4.49 * 5.79 4.88 7.46 4.17 * * * * * * 4 Ardeola ralloides Squacco Heron 30.77 31.41 7.44 14.05 31.71 56.72 12.5 * * * * * 25 5 Bubulcus ibis Cattle Egret 16.78 7.05 1.65 11.57 10.98 18.66 4.17 * 4.55 12.5 2.94 5.66 25 6 Butorides striata Green-backed Heron 0.7 5.77 8.26 5.79 13.41 8.96 2.08 * * * * 3.77 * 7 Egretta garzetta Little Egret 6.29 0.64 * 2.48 2.44 5.97 * * * * * * 25 8 Egretta intermedia Intermediate Egret 11.19 12.18 3.31 4.96 8.54 23.88 1.04 * 2.27 * * 1.89 12.5 9 Ardea purpurea Purple Heron 11.89 12.18 4.96 3.31 19.51 12.69 12.5 0.95 * * * * * 10 A. cinerea Grey Heron 9.79 4.49 1.65 6.61 12.2 5.22 9.38 * * 4.17 2.94 1.89 * 11 A. melanocephala Black-headed Heron 4.2 3.21 * 9.92 1.22 7.46 3.13 * 4.55 8.33 * 1.89 37.5 12 Ciconia abdimii Abdim’s Stork * * * 0.83 * * * * * * 2.94 * * 13 Bostrychia hagedash Hadada Ibis 2.8 * 2.48 4.13 3.66 1.49 5.21 * * * 2.94 1.89 * 14 Dendrocygna viduata White-faced Whistling Duck 12.59 24.36 8.26 10.74 15.85 37.31 4.17 0.95 * * * 3.77 25 15 Pandion haliaetus Osprey 0.7 * 4.13 0.83 * 2.99 2.08 * 2.27 * * * * 16 Elanus caeruleus Black-shouldered Kite 0.7 5.77 3.31 * * 2.99 * * 6.82 * * 7.55 37.5 17 Milvus migrans Yellow-billed Kite 31.47 12.18 2.48 32.23 23.17 18.66 15.63 8.57 15.91 33.33 26.47 28.3 25 18 Gypohierax angolensis Palm-nut Vulture 3.5 6.41 4.13 3.31 9.76 2.24 8.33 2.86 4.55 * * 1.89 12.5 19 Polyboroides typus African Harrier Hawk 2.8 1.92 * 0.83 * 0.75 6.25 0.95 * * * * * 20 Circus aeruginosus Eurasian Marsh Harrier 3.5 0.64 * 1.65 1.22 3.73 1.04 * * * * 1.89 * 21 Micronisus gabar Gabar Goshawk * 2.56 0.83 * 1.22 0.75 1.04 2.86 * * * 1.89 * 22 Accipiter tachiro African Goshawk 7.69 6.41 9.92 5.79 7.32 0.75 16.67 38.1 * * * 1.89 * 23 A. badius Shikra 1.4 1.92 * 2.48 1.22 * 2.08 0.95 2.27 8.33 2.94 * * 24 Kaupifalco monogrammicus Lizard Buzzard 3.5 0.64 3.31 3.31 2.44 * 8.33 1.9 4.55 * * * * 170 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 25 Buteo auguralis Red-necked Buzzard 0.7 * * * * * * 2.86 * * * * * 26 Lophaetus occipitalis Long-crested Eagle * * 1.65 0.83 1.22 * 2.08 * * * * * * 27 Falco tinnunculus Common Kestrel * 1.28 1.65 0.83 * * * * 2.27 * 2.94 5.66 * 28 F. ardosiaceus Grey Kestrel 3.5 1.28 4.13 5.79 2.44 4.48 1.04 * 9.09 4.17 * 7.55 12.5 29 F. biarmicus Lanner Falcon * 1.28 * * * * 1.04 * * * * 1.89 * 30 F. ahantensis Ahanta Francolin * 1.28 0.83 2.48 1.22 * 3.13 1.9 * * * * * 31 F. bicalcaratus Double-spurred Francolin 16.08 25.64 19.01 23.14 3.66 11.94 6.25 3.81 31.82 70.83 55.88 58.49 37.5 32 Numida meleagris Helmeted Guineafowl 1.4 1.92 3.31 * * * * * 2.27 * 14.71 5.66 * 33 Crex egregia African Crake 0.7 0.64 * * 1.22 0.75 * * * * * * * 34 Amaurornis flavirostra Black Crake 6.99 11.54 5.79 12.4 18.29 13.43 13.54 * 2.27 * * * 25 35 Porphyrio alleni Allen’s Gallinule 1.4 11.54 14.05 3.31 12.2 14.93 9.38 * * * * 3.77 * 36 Gallinula chloropus Common Moorhen 2.1 5.77 2.48 1.65 9.76 5.22 * * * * * * 25 37 Actophilornis africanus African Jacana 37.76 48.08 26.45 40.5 53.66 97.01 22.92 0.95 * * * 1.89 75 38 Rostratula benghalensis Greater Painted-snipe 0.7 1.28 0.83 1.65 * 2.99 * * * * * * 25 39 Himantopus himantopus Black-winged Stilt 0.7 * * 1.65 * 2.24 * * * * * * * 40 Burhinus senegalensis Senegal Thick-knee 12.59 15.38 2.48 9.92 12.2 29.1 4.17 * * 4.17 * 3.77 12.5 41 Glareola pratincola Collared Pratincole 0.7 * * * * * * * * * * * 12.5 42 Charadrius forbesi Forbes’s Plover 1.4 * * 1.65 * * * * * * * 7.55 * 43 Vanellus albiceps White-headed Lapwing 6.99 7.69 8.26 10.74 28.05 11.94 3.13 * * * * * * 44 V. spinosus Spur-winged Lapwing 25.17 40.38 9.09 33.88 14.63 88.06 1.04 * 6.82 8.33 5.88 11.32 75 45 Gallinago gallinago Common Snipe 4.2 * * 3.31 * 6.72 * * * * * * * 46 G. media Great Snipe * * * 0.83 * 0.75 * * * * * * * 47 Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank 0.7 * * * * 0.75 * * * * * * * 48 T. glareola Wood Sandpiper 6.29 1.92 0.83 4.13 2.44 8.96 1.04 * * * * * 25 49 T. hypoleucos Common Sandpiper 13.29 1.92 3.31 25.62 13.41 31.34 * * 2.27 * * * 25 50 Treron calvus African Green Pigeon * 1.28 0.83 1.65 1.22 * 2.08 2.86 2.27 * * * * 51 Tutur tympanistria Tamborine Dove 3.5 1.28 1.65 4.96 4.88 0.75 5.21 9.52 2.27 * * * * 52 T. afer Blue-spotted Wood Dove 14.69 27.56 19.83 20.66 17.07 3.73 43.75 51.43 13.64 4.17 11.76 24.53 25 171 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 53 Columba guinea Speckled Pigeon 0.7 4.49 * * * 1.49 4.17 2.86 * 4.17 * * * 54 Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove 39.16 63.46 49.59 48.76 30.49 35.07 79.17 102.86 56.82 25 47.06 52.83 37.5 55 S. senegalensis Laughing Dove * 0.64 0.83 * * * * * 2.27 * 2.94 * * 56 Tauraco persa Green Tauraco 5.59 10.26 9.92 2.48 * * 10.42 63.81 * * * * * 57 Crinifer piscator Western Grey Plantain-eater 8.39 5.77 5.79 9.92 9.76 1.49 14.58 2.86 9.09 4.17 2.94 13.21 * 58 Oxylophus jacobinus Jacobin Cuckoo 0.7 * * * * * 1.04 * * * * * * 59 O. levaillantii Levaillant’s Cuckoo * 1.92 1.65 * 2.44 * 2.08 2.86 * * * * * 60 Clamator glandarius Great Spotted Cuckoo * 1.28 * * * * 1.04 * * * * 1.89 * 61 C. clamosus Black Cuckoo 0.7 1.28 2.48 * 3.66 * * 2.86 * * * 3.77 * 62 Chrysococcyx klaas Klaas’s Cuckoo 1.4 5.77 2.48 * 2.44 * 6.25 1.9 4.55 * 2.94 1.89 * 63 C. caprius Didric Cuckoo 0.7 7.05 9.09 1.65 6.1 3.73 5.21 2.86 11.36 * 2.94 3.77 * 64 Ceuthmochares aereus Yellow bill 11.89 13.46 17.36 9.09 8.54 0.75 23.96 83.81 2.27 * * * * 65 Centropus grillii Black Coucal 2.1 1.92 * 0.83 1.22 1.49 * 0.95 * * * 1.89 12.5 66 C. senegalensis Senegal Coucal 24.48 54.49 36.36 29.75 28.05 14.93 53.13 73.33 38.64 37.5 47.06 47.17 62.5 67 C. monachus Blue-headed Coucal 0.7 1.28 0.83 0.83 * 0.75 1.04 2.86 * * 2.94 * * 68 Telacanthura ussheri Mottled Spinetail 2.1 1.92 5.79 2.48 4.88 1.49 1.04 1.9 6.82 * * 3.77 * 69 Halcyon leucocephala Grey-headed Kingfisher * * * 1.65 * 1.49 * * * * * * * 70 H. malimbica Blue-breasted Kingfisher 0.7 1.92 2.48 0.83 1.22 * 2.08 11.43 * * * 1.89 * 71 H. senegalensis Woodland Kingfisher 16.08 22.44 19.83 14.88 30.49 5.97 34.38 37.14 18.18 12.5 * 11.32 * 72 Ceyx lecontei African Dwarf Kingfisher 0.7 * * * 1.22 * * * * * * * * 73 Alcedo cristata Malachite kingfisher 4.9 2.56 1.65 8.26 15.85 7.46 * * * * * * * 74 Megaceryle maxima Giant Kingfisher * * * 0.83 * 0.75 * * * * * * * 75 Ceryle rudis Pied Kingfisher * 3.21 * * 1.22 2.99 * * * * * * * 76 Merops albicollis White-throated Bee-eater 7.69 1.92 * 6.61 10.98 * 7.29 8.57 2.27 * * * * 77 M. malimbicus Rosy Bee-eater 4.2 * * * 3.66 * 3.13 * * * * * * 78 Eurystomus glaucurus Broad-billed Roller 4.9 5.77 1.65 0.83 * * 9.38 16.19 2.27 * * 1.89 12.5 79 Phoeniculus purpureus Green Wood-hoopoe * * * 0.83 * 0.75 * * * * * * * 80 Tropicranus albocristatus White-crested Hornbill * * 0.83 * * * * 0.95 * * * * * 172 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 81 Tockus fasciatus African Pied Hornbill 22.38 27.56 28.1 28.93 28.05 5.97 46.88 111.43 20.45 8.33 * 5.66 12.5 82 T. nasutus African Grey Hornbill 11.89 8.33 * 9.09 12.2 7.46 10.42 16.19 * 4.17 * 3.77 * 83 Pogoniulus scolopaceus Speckled Tinkerbird * 1.92 0.83 0.83 * * 3.13 1.9 * * * * * 84 P. atroflavus Red-rumped Tinkerbird 0.7 * * 3.31 1.22 * 2.08 3.81 * * * * * 85 P. subsulphureus Yellow-throated Tinkerbird * 0.64 * * * * 1.04 * * * * * * 86 P. bilineatus Yellow-rumped Tinkerbird 2.8 1.28 2.48 * * * 5.21 3.81 4.55 * * * * 87 Tricholaema hirsuta Hairy-breasted Barbet * 1.28 * * 1.22 * 1.04 * * * * * * 88 Lybius vieilloti Vieillot’s Barbet * 0.64 * * * 0.75 * * * * * * * 89 Trachyphonus purpuratus Yellow-billed Barbet 0.7 1.28 * * * * 1.04 3.81 * * * * * 90 Campethera nivosa Buff-spotted Woodpecker 0.7 0.64 1.65 0.83 1.22 * 2.08 5.71 * * * * * 91 Dendropicoss pyrrhogaster Fire-bellied Woodpecker 1.4 * 3.31 0.83 1.22 * 2.08 9.52 * * * * * 92 Smithornis rufolateralis Rufous-sided Broadbill * 0.64 0.83 * 1.22 * * 2.86 * * * * * 93 Hirundo semirufa Rufous-chested Swallow * 3.21 * * * 0.75 * * 4.55 * * * 12.5 94 H. abyssinica Lesser Striped Swallow 0.7 1.92 3.31 0.83 3.66 2.24 * * 4.55 * * 1.89 * 95 H. fuligula Rock Martin * 0.64 * * * * * * * * * * 12.5 96 H. aethiopica Ethiopian Swallow 0.7 6.41 2.48 * 1.22 1.49 * * 2.27 * 8.82 5.66 25 97 H. rustica Barn Swallow 2.1 0.64 * 3.31 2.44 2.24 * * 4.55 * * 1.89 * 98 Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail 11.19 * * 6.61 2.44 10.45 * * * 12.5 * 7.55 * 99 M. aguimp African Pied Wagtail * 1.92 * 0.83 * 2.99 * * * * * * * 100 Anthus leucophrys Plain-backed Pipit 7.69 8.97 3.31 12.4 1.22 13.43 * * 4.55 25 * 32.08 * 101 Macronyx croceus Yellow-throated Longclaw 6.29 7.05 7.44 6.61 * 7.46 * * 9.09 25 8.82 20.75 25 102 Campephaga phoenicea Red-shouldered Cuckoo- 0.7 * * * * * * 0.95 * * * * * 103 sAhnrdikreo padus virens Little Greenbul 40.56 34.62 19.01 17.36 29.27 0.75 64.58 126.67 20.45 * * 5.66 * 104 A. gracilirostris Slender-billed Greenbul 1.4 3.85 4.96 0.83 1.22 * 6.25 17.14 * * * * * 105 A. latirostris Yellow-whiskered Greenbul 4.2 4.49 10.74 8.26 3.66 * 9.38 64.76 * * * * * 106 Baeopogon indicator Honeyguide Greenbul 0.7 0.64 0.83 0.83 * * 3.13 2.86 * * * * * 107 Chlorocichla simplex Simple Leaflove 9.09 5.13 5.79 4.96 4.88 0.75 17.71 1.9 9.09 * 8.82 3.77 * 108 C. flavicollis Yellow-throated Leaflove * * 0.83 * * 0.75 * * * * * * * 173 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 109 Thescelocichla leucopleura Swamp-palm Bulbul 0.7 2.56 0.83 2.48 1.22 * 5.21 3.81 2.27 * * * * 110 Pyrrhurus scandens Leaflove 5.59 10.26 8.26 9.09 15.85 2.99 15.63 22.86 * * * 1.89 * 111 Phyllastrephus baumanni Baumann’s Greenbul * * * 0.83 * * * 2.86 * * * * * 112 P. albigularis White-throated Greenbul * * 1.65 * * * * 5.71 * * * * * 113 Bleda canicapillus Grey-headed Bristlebill 2.1 1.28 1.65 4.96 1.22 * 2.08 28.57 * * * * * 114 Pycnonotus barbatus Common Bulbul 30.07 28.85 24.79 25.62 39.02 13.43 39.58 20.95 29.55 29.17 26.47 28.3 12.5 115 Nicator chloris Western Nicator 0.7 3.21 1.65 0.83 * * 3.13 13.33 * * * * * 116 Stiphrornis erythrothorax Forest Robin 1.4 0.64 * 0.83 1.22 * * 5.71 2.27 * * * * 117 Cossypha cyanocampter Blue-shouldered Robin Chat 0.7 * * * * * * 2.86 * * * * * 118 C. niveicapilla Snowy-crowned Robin Chat 3.5 6.41 3.31 4.13 1.22 1.49 3.13 5.71 13.64 4.17 2.94 15.09 * 119 Saxicola rubetra Whinchat 29.37 3.85 * 19.01 * 17.91 1.04 * 27.27 25 20.59 33.96 25 120 Turdus pelios African Thrush 9.79 16.67 13.22 8.26 3.66 5.97 11.46 3.81 27.27 20.83 23.53 30.19 * 121 Melocichla mentalis African Moustached Warbler 1.4 1.92 0.83 0.83 * 0.75 * * 9.09 * 2.94 1.89 * 122 Acrocephalus arundinaceus Great Reed Warbler 4.9 * 3.31 1.65 * 4.48 * * 6.82 4.17 2.94 3.77 * 123 Cisticola erythrops Red-faced Cisticola 9.79 22.44 11.57 10.74 1.22 5.97 * * 36.36 25 32.35 52.83 62.5 124 C. brachypterus Short-winged Cisticola 0.7 6.41 7.44 2.48 * 5.22 * * 4.55 8.33 17.65 11.32 * 125 Prinia subflava Tawny-flanked Prinia 0.7 * 0.83 0.83 1.22 * * * * * * 1.89 12.5 126 Camaroptera brachyura Grey-backed Camaroptera 19.58 32.05 13.22 4.96 15.85 2.99 35.42 22.86 25 12.5 26.47 16.98 12.5 127 C. superciliaris Yellow-browed Camaroptera 4.2 6.41 9.92 14.05 6.1 * 19.79 52.38 * * * * * 128 C. chloronota Olive-green Camaroptera 0.7 * 2.48 3.31 1.22 * 1.04 10.48 * * * 1.89 * 129 Eremomela pusilla Senegal Eremomela * 0.64 * * * * * 2.86 * * * * * 130 Sylvietta virens Green Crombec 5.59 12.18 15.7 14.05 12.2 * 30.21 40 4.55 * 2.94 1.89 * 131 S. denti Lemon-bellied Crombec * 0.64 * * * * * 2.86 * * * * * 132 Phylloscopus sibilatrix Wood Warbler 4.2 * * 2.48 2.44 1.49 3.13 2.86 2.27 * * * * 133 Hypergerus atriceps Oriole Warbler 2.1 1.28 1.65 * 1.22 * * 2.86 2.27 * 2.94 5.66 * 134 Sylvia borin Garden Warbler 0.7 * * * * * * * * * * 1.89 * 135 Hylia prasina Green Hylia 4.9 7.69 5.79 5.79 4.88 * 11.46 38.1 * * * * * 136 Muscicapa olivascens Olivaceous Flycatcher 0.7 * * * * * * * 2.27 * * * * 174 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 137 Trochocercus nitens Blue-headed Crested Flycatcher 1.4 1.92 1.65 1.65 * * * 25.71 * * * * * 138 T. rufiventer Red-bellied Paradise Flycatcher 16.08 20.51 19.01 13.22 17.07 0.75 23.96 116.19 6.82 4.17 * 3.77 * 139 Dyaphorophyia castanea Chestnut Wattle-eye * 1.28 0.83 0.83 * * * 11.43 * * * * * 140 D. blissetti Red-cheeked Wattle-eye 2.8 0.64 0.83 0.83 * * 1.04 7.62 * * * * * 141 Platysteira cyanea Common Wattle-eye 0.7 * * * * 0.75 * * * * * * * 142 Illadopsis fulvescens Brown Illadopsis * * 0.83 0.83 * * 1.04 2.86 * * * * * 143 Phyllanthus atripennis Capuchin Babbler 2.1 0.64 3.31 2.48 2.44 * * 21.9 * * * * * 144 Cyanomitra verticalis Green-headed Sunbird * 3.85 * * * * 1.04 1.9 4.55 * * * * 145 C. obscura Western Olive Sunbird 4.9 7.69 4.96 4.96 3.66 * 8.33 22.86 4.55 4.17 5.88 5.66 * 146 Chalcomitra adelberti Buff-throated Sunbird * 0.64 * * * * * * * 4.17 * * * 147 C. senegalensis Scarlet-chested Sunbird 4.2 1.92 * * 2.44 * 2.08 12.38 * * * * * 148 Hedydipna collaris Collared Sunbird 27.97 28.85 23.97 27.27 28.05 0.75 63.54 77.14 15.91 12.5 8.82 18.87 * 149 Cinnyris chloropygius Olive-bellied Sunbird 0.7 4.49 4.96 7.44 6.1 * 13.54 7.62 2.27 * * * * 150 C. minullus Tiny Sunbird 1.4 2.56 0.83 2.48 3.66 0.75 6.25 * * * * * * 151 C. venustus Variable Sunbird 0.7 * * * * * * * 2.27 * * * * 152 C. coccinigastrus Splendid Sunbird 4.9 7.69 6.61 5.79 6.1 * 8.33 4.76 22.73 8.33 * 11.32 * 153 C. cupreus Copper Sunbird 2.8 5.77 10.74 4.96 * 0.75 1.04 2.86 11.36 8.33 23.53 26.42 * 154 Corvinella corvina Yellow-billed Shrike 0.7 2.56 7.44 1.65 * 1.49 * * 6.82 12.5 5.88 11.32 * 155 Malaconotus multicolor Many-coloured Bush-Shrike * 1.28 0.83 * * * 2.08 0.95 * * * * * 156 Dryoscopus gambensis Northern Puffback 0.7 * * * * * * 2.86 * * * * * 157 Laniarus aethiopicus Tropical Boubou 4.9 2.56 1.65 1.65 2.44 1.49 3.13 17.14 * * * 3.77 * 158 Prionops caniceps Red-billed Helmet-shrike 0.7 0.64 0.83 * * * 1.04 0.95 * * 2.94 * * 159 Oriolus nigripennis Black-winged Oriole 0.7 0.64 0.83 1.65 2.44 * 2.08 0.95 * * * * * 160 O. brachyrhynchus Western Black-headed Oriole 2.8 5.13 5.79 3.31 2.44 * 11.46 17.14 * * * * * 161 Dicrurus ludwigii Square-tailed Drongo * 2.56 * 0.83 2.44 * 2.08 0.95 * * * * * 162 D. atripennis Shining Drongo 2.1 1.92 0.83 4.13 2.44 * 4.17 9.52 * * * * * 163 D. modestus Velvet-mantled Drongo 2.1 5.77 9.09 2.48 6.1 * 9.38 20 2.27 4.17 * 1.89 * 164 D. adsimilis Fork-tailed Drongo 9.09 5.77 6.61 6.61 10.98 0.75 10.42 27.62 2.27 * * 3.77 * 175 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 165 Corvus albus Pied Crow 16.08 26.92 19.01 19.83 21.95 22.39 10.42 15.24 11.36 33.33 20.59 43.4 * 166 Poeoptera lugubris Narrow-tailed Starling * 1.92 0.83 * * * * 6.67 * * 2.94 * * 167 Lamprotornis purpureus Purple Glossy Starling 2.1 * 5.79 1.65 3.66 1.49 4.17 3.81 2.27 * * * * 168 Passer griseus Northern Grey-headed Sparrow * 0.64 * * * * * * * * * 1.89 * 169 Ploceus nigricollis Black-necked Weaver 1.4 3.85 3.31 * * * 3.13 * 9.09 * 2.94 7.55 * 170 P. nigerrimus Vieillot’s Black Weaver 2.8 1.28 * * 2.44 * * * 4.55 * * 1.89 * 171 P. cucullatus Village Weaver 23.78 25.64 8.26 11.57 8.54 24.63 14.58 0.95 18.18 16.67 8.82 39.62 75 172 P. tricolor Yellow-mantled Weaver 4.9 7.69 6.61 0.83 4.88 * 4.17 16.19 9.09 * 2.94 3.77 * 173 Malimbus nitens Blue-billed Malimbe 6.99 12.18 19.83 14.05 18.29 * 41.67 16.19 4.55 * * 3.77 * 174 M. scutatus Red-vented Malimbe 5.59 3.85 0.83 2.48 3.66 * 7.29 9.52 9.09 * * * * 175 M. rubricollis Red-headed Malimbe 8.39 10.26 9.09 8.26 12.2 0.75 17.71 29.52 9.09 * * 3.77 * 176 Quelea erythrops Red-headed Quelea * 8.33 3.31 2.48 * 3.73 * * 6.82 4.17 8.82 13.21 12.5 177 Euplectes franciscanus Northern Red Bishop * * * 0.83 * * * * * * 2.94 * * 178 E. macroura Yellow-mantled Widowbird * * 1.65 * * * * * * * 5.88 * * 179 Nigrita canicapillus Grey-crowned Negrofinch * 1.28 1.65 0.83 1.22 * 3.13 * * * * 1.89 * 180 N. luteifrons Pale-fronted Negrofinch * 2.56 * * * * 3.13 0.95 * * * * * 181 N. bicolor Chestnut-breasted Negrofinch 2.1 2.56 * * 3.66 * 1.04 3.81 2.27 * * * * 182 Spermophaga haematina Western Bluebill * * * 4.96 * * 3.13 5.71 2.27 * * * * 183 Estrilda melpoda Orange-cheeked Waxbill 15.38 19.23 20.66 19.83 7.32 18.66 14.58 1.9 25 16.67 41.18 35.85 50 184 Spermestes cucullatus Bronze Mannikin 13.99 9.62 10.74 18.18 4.88 11.94 3.13 * 34.09 16.67 23.53 28.3 50 185 Spermestes bicolor Black-and-White Mannikin 9.79 2.56 3.31 0.83 1.22 4.48 8.33 1.9 2.27 * 5.88 3.77 * 186 Vidua macroura Pin-tailed Whydah 0.7 3.21 4.13 9.92 * 5.22 1.04 * 9.09 20.83 5.88 5.66 12.5 Note: * represents absence of species along those sections 176 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Appendix 2: Composition of bird species observed within IITA environs No Species Family Order 1 Phalacrocorax africanus Long-tailed Cormorant Phalacrocoracidae Pelecaniformes 2 Ixobrychus minutus Little Bittern Ardeidae Ciconiformes 3 Nycticorax nycticorax Black-crowned Night Heron Ardeidae Ciconiformes 4 Ardeola ralloides Squacco Heron Ardeidae Ciconiformes 5 Bubulcus ibis Cattle Egret Ardeidae Ciconiformes 6 Butorides striata Green-backed Heron Ardeidae Ciconiformes 7 Egretta garzetta Little Egret Ardeidae Ciconiformes 8 E. intermedia Intermediate Egret Ardeidae Ciconiformes 9 Ardea purpurea Purple Heron Ardeidae Ciconiformes 10 A. cinerea Grey Heron Ardeidae Ciconiformes 11 A. melanocephala Black-headed Heron Ardeidae Ciconiformes 12 Ciconia abdimii Abdim’s Stork Ciconiidae Ciconiformes 13 Bostrychia hagedash Hadada Ibis Threskiornithidae Ciconiformes 14 Dendrocygna viduata White-faced Whistling Duck Anatidae Anseriformes 15 Pandion haliaetus Osprey Pandionidae Falconiformes 16 Elanus caeruleus Black-shouldered Kite Accipitridae Falconiformes 17 Milvus migrans Yellow-billed Kite Accipitridae Falconiformes 18 Gypohierax angolensis Palm-nut Vulture Accipitridae Falconiformes 19 Polyboroides typus African Harrier Hawk Accipitridae Falconiformes 20 Circus aeruginosus Eurasian Marsh Harrier Accipitridae Falconiformes 21 Micronisus gabar Gabar Goshawk Accipitridae Falconiformes 22 Accipiter tachiro African Goshawk Accipitridae Falconiformes 23 A. badius Shikra Accipitridae Falconiformes 24 Kaupifalco monogrammicus Lizard Buzzard Accipitridae Falconiformes 25 Buteo auguralis Red-necked Buzzard Accipitridae Falconiformes 26 Lophaetus occipitalis Long-crested Eagle Accipitridae Falconiformes 27 Falco tinnunculus Common Kestrel Falconidae Falconiformes 28 F. ardosiaceus Grey Kestrel Falconidae Falconiformes 29 F. biarmicus Lanner Falcon Falconidae Falconiformes 30 F. ahantensis Ahanta Francolin Phasianidae Galliformes 31 F. bicalcaratus Double-spurred Francolin Phasianidae Galliformes 32 Numida meleagris Helmeted Guineafowl Numididae Galliformes 33 Crex egregia African Crake Rallidae Gruiformes 34 Amaurornis flavirostra Black Crake Rallidae Gruiformes 35 Porphyrio alleni Allen’s Gallinule Rallidae Gruiformes 36 Gallinula chloropus Common Moorhen Rallidae Gruiformes 37 Actophilornis africanus African Jacana Jacanidae Charadriformes 38 Rostratula benghalensis Greater Painted-snipe Rostratulidae Charadriformes 39 Himantopus himantopus Black-winged Stilt Recurvirostridae Charadriformes 40 Burhinus senegalensis Senegal Thick-knee Burhinidae Charadriformes 41 Glareola pratincola Collared Pratincole Glareolidae Charadriformes 42 Charadrius forbesi Forbes’s Plover Charadriidae Charadriformes 43 Vanellus albiceps White-headed Lapwing Charadriidae Charadriformes 177 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 44 V. spinosus Spur-winged Lapwing Charadriidae Charadriformes 45 Gallinago gallinago Common Snipe Scolopacidae Charadriformes 46 G. media Great Snipe Scolopacidae Charadriformes 47 Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank Scolopacidae Charadriformes 48 T. glareola Wood Sandpiper Scolopacidae Charadriformes 49 T. hypoleucos Common Sandpiper Scolopacidae Charadriformes 50 Treron calvus African Green Pigeon Columbidae Columbiformes 51 Tutur tympanistria Tamborine Dove Columbidae Columbiformes 52 T. afer Blue-spotted Wood Dove Columbidae Columbiformes 53 Columba guinea Speckled Pigeon Columbidae Columbiformes 54 Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove Columbidae Columbiformes 55 S. senegalensis Laughing Dove Columbidae Columbiformes 56 Tauraco persa Green Tauraco Musophagidae Cuculiformes 57 Crinifer piscator Western Grey Plantain-eater Musophagidae Cuculiformes 58 Oxylophus jacobinus Jacobin Cuckoo Cuculidae Cuculiformes 59 O. levaillantii Levaillant’s Cuckoo Cuculidae Cuculiformes 60 Clamator glandarius Great Spotted Cuckoo Cuculidae Cuculiformes 61 Cuculus clamosus Black Cuckoo Cuculidae Cuculiformes 62 C. klaas Klaas’s Cuckoo Cuculidae Cuculiformes 63 C. caprius Didric Cuckoo Cuculidae Cuculiformes 64 Ceuthmochares aereus Yellow bill Cuculidae Cuculiformes 65 Centopus grillii Black Coucal Cuculidae Cuculiformes 66 C. senegalensis Senegal Coucal Cuculidae Cuculiformes 67 C. monachus Blue-headed Coucal Cuculidae Cuculiformes 68 Telacanthura ussheri Mottled Spinetail Apodidae Apodiformes 69 Halcyon leucocephala Grey-headed Kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 70 H. malimbica Blue-breasted Kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 71 H. senegalensis Woodland Kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 72 Ceyx lecontei African Dwarf Kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 73 Alcedo cristata Malachite kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 74 Megaceryle maxima Giant Kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 75 Ceryle rudis Pied Kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 76 Malimbicus albicollis White-throated Bee-eater Meropidae Passeriformes 77 M. malimbicus Rosy Bee-eater Meropidae Passeriformes 78 Eurystomus glaucurus Broad-billed Roller Coraciidae Coraciformes 79 Phoeniculus purpureus Green Wood-hoopoe Phoeniculidae Upupiformes 80 Tropicranus albocristatus White-crested Hornbill Bucerotidae Coraciformes 81 Tockus fasciatus African Pied Hornbill Bucerotidae Coraciformes 82 T. nasutus African Grey Hornbill Bucerotidae Coraciformes 83 Pogoniulus scolopaceus Speckled Tinkerbird Capitonidae Passeriformes 84 P. atroflavus Red-rumped Tinkerbird Capitonidae Passeriformes 85 P. subsulphureus Yellow-throated Tinkerbird Capitonidae Passeriformes 86 P. bilineatus Yellow-rumped Tinkerbird Capitonidae Passeriformes 87 Tricholaema hirsuta Hairy-breasted Barbet Capitonidae Passeriformes 88 Lybius vieilloti Vieillot’s Barbet Capitonidae Passeriformes 89 Trachyphonus purpuratus Yellow-billed Barbet Capitonidae Passeriformes 178 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 90 Campethera nivosa Buff-spotted Woodpecker Picidae Piciformes 91 Dendropicos pyrrhogaster Fire-bellied Woodpecker Picidae Piciformes 92 Smithornis rufolateralis Rufous-sided Broadbill Eurylamidae Passeriformes 93 Hirundo semirufa Rufous-chested Swallow Hirundinidae Passeriformes 94 H. abyssinica Lesser Striped Swallow Hirundinidae Passeriformes 95 H. fuligula Rock Martin Hirundinidae Passeriformes 96 H. aethiopica Ethiopian Swallow Hirundinidae Passeriformes 97 H. rustica Barn Swallow Hirundinidae Passeriformes 98 Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail Motacillidae Passeriformes 99 M. aguimp African Pied Wagtail Motacillidae Passeriformes 100 Anthus leucophrys Plain-backed Pipit Motacillidae Passeriformes 101 Macronyx croceus Yellow-throated Longclaw Motacillidae Passeriformes 102 Campephaga phoenicea Red-shouldered Cuckoo-shrike Campephagidae Passeriformes 103 Andropadus virens Little Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 104 A. gracilirostris Slender-billed Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 105 A. latirostris Yellow-whiskered Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 106 Baeopogon indicator Honeyguide Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 107 Chlorocichla simplex Simple Leaflove Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 108 C. flavicollis Yellow-throated Leaflove Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 109 Thescelocichla leucopleura Swamp-palm Bulbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 110 Pyrrhurus scandens Leaflove Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 111 Phyllastrephus baumanni Baumann’s Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 112 P. albigularis White-throated Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 113 Bleda canicapillus Grey-headed Bristlebill Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 114 Pycnonotus barbatus Common Bulbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 115 Nicator chloris Western Nicator Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 116 Stiphrornis erythrothorax Forest Robin Turdidae Passeriformes 117 Cossypha cyanocampter Blue-shouldered Robin Chat Turdidae Passeriformes 118 C. niveicapilla Snowy-crowned Robin Chat Turdidae Passeriformes 119 Neocossyphus poensis White-tailed Ant Thrush Turdidae Passeriformes 120 Saxicola rubetra Whinchat Turdidae Passeriformes 121 Turdus pelios African Thrush Turdidae Passeriformes 122 Melocichla mentalis African Moustached Warbler Sylviidae Passeriformes 123 Acrocephalus arundinaceus Great Reed Warbler Sylviidae Passeriformes 124 Cisticola erythrops Red-faced Cisticola Sylviidae Passeriformes 125 C. brachypterus Short-winged Cisticola Sylviidae Passeriformes 126 Prinia subflava Tawny-flanked Prinia Sylviidae Passeriformes 127 Camaroptera brachyura Grey-backed Camaroptera Sylviidae Passeriformes 128 C. superciliaris Yellow-browed Camaroptera Sylviidae Passeriformes 129 C. chloronota Olive-green Camaroptera Sylviidae Passeriformes 130 Eremomela pusilla Senegal Eremomela Sylviidae Passeriformes 131 Sylvietta virens Green Crombec Sylviidae Passeriformes 132 S. denti Lemon-bellied Crombec Sylviidae Passeriformes 133 Phylloscopus sibilatrix Wood Warbler Sylviidae Passeriformes 134 Hypergerus atriceps Oriole Warbler Sylviidae Passeriformes 135 Sylvia borin Garden Warbler Sylviidae Passeriformes 179 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 136 Hylia prasina Green Hylia Sylviidae Passeriformes 137 Muscicapa olivascens Olivaceous Flycatcher Muscicapidae Passeriformes 138 Trochocercus nitens Blue-headed Crested Flycatcher Monarchidae Passeriformes 139 T. rufiventer Red-bellied Paradise Flycatcher Monarchidae Passeriformes 140 Dyaphorophyia castanea Chestnut Wattle-eye Platysteiridae Passeriformes 141 D. blissetti Red-cheeked Wattle-eye Platysteiridae Passeriformes 142 Platysteira cyanea Common Wattle-eye Platysteiridae Passeriformes 143 Illadopsis fulvescens Brown Illadopsis Timaliidae Passeriformes 144 Phyllanthus atripennis Capuchin Babbler Timaliidae Passeriformes 145 Cyanomitra verticalis Green-headed Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 146 C. obscura Western Olive Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 147 Chalcomitra adelberti Buff-throated Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 148 C. senegalensis Scarlet-chested Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 149 Hedydipna collaris Collared Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 150 Cinnyris chloropygius Olive-bellied Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 151 C. minullus Tiny Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 152 C. venustus Variable Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 153 C. coccinigastrus Splendid Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 154 C. cupreus Copper Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 155 Corvinella corvina Yellow-billed Shrike Laniidae Passeriformes 156 Malaconotus multicolor Many-coloured Bush-Shrike Malaconotidae Passeriformes 157 Dryoscopus gambensis Northern Puffback Malaconotidae Passeriformes 158 Laniarus aethiopicus Tropical Boubou Malaconotidae Passeriformes 159 Prionops caniceps Red-billed Helmet-shrike Prionopidae Passeriformes 160 Oriolus nigripennis Black-winged Oriole Oriolidae Passeriformes 161 O. brachyrhynchus Western Black-headed Oriole Oriolidae Passeriformes 162 Dicrurus ludwigii Square-tailed Drongo Dicruridae Passeriformes 163 D. atripennis Shining Drongo Dicruridae Passeriformes 164 D. modestus Velvet-mantled Drongo Dicruridae Passeriformes 165 D. adsimilis Fork-tailed drongo Dicruridae Passeriformes 166 Corvus albus Pied Crow Corvidae Passeriformes 167 Poeoptera lugubris Narrow-tailed Starling Sturnidae Passeriformes 168 Lamprotornis purpureus Purple Glossy Starling Sturnidae Passeriformes 169 Passer griseus Northern Grey-headed Sparrow Passeridae Passeriformes 170 Ploceus nigricollis Black-necked Weaver Ploecidae Passeriformes 171 P. nigerrimus Vieillot’s Black Weaver Ploecidae Passeriformes 172 P. cucullatus Village Weaver Ploecidae Passeriformes 173 P. tricolor Yellow-mantled Weaver Ploecidae Passeriformes 174 Malimbus nitens Blue-billed Malimbe Ploecidae Passeriformes 175 M. scutatus Red-vented Malimbe Ploecidae Passeriformes 176 M. rubricollis Red-headed Malimbe Ploecidae Passeriformes 177 Quelea erythrops Red-headed Quelea Ploecidae Passeriformes 178 Euplectes franciscanus Northern Red Bishop Ploecidae Passeriformes 179 E. macroura Yellow-mantled Widowbird Ploecidae Passeriformes 180 Nigrita canicapillus Grey-crowned Negrofinch Estrildidae Passeriformes 181 N. luteifrons Pale-fronted Negrofinch Estrildidae Passeriformes 180 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 182 N. bicolor Chestnut-breasted Negrofinch Estrildidae Passeriformes 183 Spermophaga haematina Western Bluebill Estrildidae Passeriformes 184 Estrilda melpoda Orange-cheeked Waxbill Estrildidae Passeriformes 185 Spermestes cucullatus Bronze Mannikin Estrildidae Passeriformes 186 Spermestes bicolor Black-and-White Mannikin Estrildidae Passeriformes 187 Vidua macroura Pin-tailed Whydah Viduidae Passeriformes 181 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Appendix 3. Composition of bird species trapped within IITA environ Percentage trapped Percentage No Species Family Order Trapped Retrap (N=985) retrapped 1 Ixobrychus minutus Little Bittern Ardeidae Ciconiformes 1 x 0.1 x 2 Accipiter tachiro African Goshawk Accipitridae Falconiformes 5 x 0.51 x 3 Kaupifalco monogrammicus Lizard Buzzard Accipitridae Falconiformes 1 x 0.1 x 4 Amaurornis flavirostra Black Crake Rallidae Gruiformes 3 x 0.3 x 5 Porphyrio alleni Allen’s Gallinule Rallidae Gruiformes 4 1 0.41 25 6 Gallinula chloropus Common Moorhen Rallidae Gruiformes 2 x 0.2 x 7 G. angulata Lesser Moorhen Rallidae Gruiformes 1 x 0.1 x 8 Actophilornis africanus African Jacana Jacanidae Charadriformes 16 1 1.62 6.25 9 Rostratula benghalensis Greater Painted-snipe Rostratulidae Charadriformes 13 x 1.32 x 10 Vanellus spinosus Spur-winged Lapwing Charadriidae Charadriformes 4 x 0.41 x 11 Tutur tympanistria Tamborine Dove Columbidae Columbiformes 2 x 0.2 x 12 Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove Columbidae Columbiformes 1 x 0.1 x 13 Ceuthmochares aereus Yellow bill Cuculidae Cuculiformes 1 x 0.1 x 14 Halcyon malimbica Blue-breasted Kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 2 x 0.2 x 15 H. senegalensis Woodland Kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 6 1 0.61 16.67 16 Ceryl pictus African Pygmy Kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 1 x 0.1 x 17 Alcedo cristata Malachite kingfisher Alcedinidae Coraciformes 3 x 0.3 x 18 Pogoniulus scolopaceus Speckled Tinkerbird Capitonidae Passeriformes 3 x 0.3 x 19 Indicator maculatus Spotted Honeyguide* Indicatoridae Passeriformes 2 1 0.2 50 20 Campethera nivosa Buff-spotted Woodpecker Picidae Piciformes 6 x 0.61 x 21 Smithornis rufolateralis Rufous-sided Broadbill Eurylamidae Passeriformes 1 x 0.1 x 22 Andropadus virens Little Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 70 13 7.11 18.57 23 A. curvirostris Cameroon Sombre Greenbul* Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 18 3 1.83 16.67 182 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 24 A. latirostris Yellow-whiskered Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 134 25 13.6 18.66 25 Chlorocichla simplex Simple Leaflove Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 1 x 0.1 x 26 Pyrrhurus scandens Leaflove Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 1 x 0.1 x 27 Phyllastrephus baumanni Baumann’s Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 10 1 1.02 10 28 P. albigularis White-throated Greenbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 47 21 4.77 44.68 29 Bleda canicapillus Grey-headed Bristlebill Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 135 48 13.71 35.56 30 Pycnonotus barbatus Common Bulbul Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 3 x 0.3 x 31 Nicator chloris Western Nicator Pycnonotidae Passeriformes 7 x 0.71 x 32 Stiphrornis erythrothorax Forest Robin Turdidae Passeriformes 15 5 1.52 33.33 33 Cossypha cyanocampter Blue-shouldered Robin Chat Turdidae Passeriformes 7 2 0.71 28.57 34 Neocossyphus poensis White-tailed Ant Thrush Turdidae Passeriformes 5 1 0.51 20 35 Turdus pelios African Thrush Turdidae Passeriformes 5 x 0.51 x 36 Acrocephalus arundinaceus Great Reed Warbler Sylviidae Passeriformes 2 x 0.2 x 37 Cisticola erythrops Red-faced Cisticola Sylviidae Passeriformes 3 1 0.3 33.33 38 Camaroptera brachyura Grey-backed Camaroptera Sylviidae Passeriformes 8 1 0.81 12.5 39 C. superciliaris Yellow-browed Camaroptera Sylviidae Passeriformes 2 x 0.2 x 40 C. chloronota Olive-green Camaroptera Sylviidae Passeriformes 64 12 6.5 18.75 41 Macrosphenus kempi Kemp’s Longbill* Sylviidae Passeriformes 5 x 0.51 x 42 M. concolor Grey Longbill* Sylviidae Passeriformes 2 x 0.2 x 43 Sylvietta virens Green Crombec Sylviidae Passeriformes 3 2 0.3 66.67 44 Hylia prasina Green Hylia Sylviidae Passeriformes 11 x 1.12 x 45 Trochocercus nitens Blue-headed Crested Flycatcher Monarchidae Passeriformes 1 x 0.1 x 46 T. rufiventer Red-bellied Paradise Flycatcher Monarchidae Passeriformes 48 7 4.87 14.58 47 Dyaphorophyia castanea Chestnut Wattle-eye Platysteiridae Passeriformes 1 x 0.1 x 48 D. blissetti Red-cheeked Wattle-eye Platysteiridae Passeriformes 22 1 2.23 4.55 49 Platysteira cyanea Common Wattle-eye Platysteiridae Passeriformes 1 x 0.1 x 50 Illadopsis fulvescens Brown Illadopsis Timaliidae Passeriformes 15 1 1.52 6.67 51 Phyllanthus atripennis Capuchin Babbler Timaliidae Passeriformes 2 x 0.2 x 52 Cyanomitra obscura Western Olive Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 80 11 8.12 13.75 53 Hedydipna collaris Collared Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 33 1 3.35 3.03 183 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 54 Cinnyris chloropygius Olive-bellied Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 1 x 0.1 x 55 C. minullus Tiny Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 5 x 0.51 x 56 C. coccinigastrus Splendid Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 4 x 0.41 x 57 C. cupreus Copper Sunbird Nectariniidae Passeriformes 2 x 0.2 x 58 Dicrurus. atripennis Shining Drongo Dicruridae Passeriformes 2 x 0.2 x 59 D. modestus Velvet-mantled Drongo Dicruridae Passeriformes 1 x 0.1 x 60 Ploceus nigricollis Black-necked Weaver Ploecidae Passeriformes 38 x 3.86 x 61 P. cucullatus Village Weaver Ploecidae Passeriformes 11 x 1.12 x 62 Malimbus nitens Blue-billed Malimbe Ploecidae Passeriformes 19 2 1.93 10.53 63 Quelea erythrops Red-headed Quelea Ploecidae Passeriformes 6 x 0.61 x 64 Pyrenestes ostrinus Black-bellied Seedcracker Ploecidae Passeriformes 1 x 0.1 x 65 Spermophaga haematina Western Bluebill Estrildidae Passeriformes 47 9 4.77 19.15 66 Spermestes cucullatus Bronze Mannikin Estrildidae Passeriformes 9 x 0.91 x 184 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Appendix 4. Birds of IITA campus recorded in the present study, plus other recent and earlier records from IITA (sources underlined) and from the Ibadan area. Early records: Ban = Bannerman (1930–51); Wil = Willoughby (1949); S = Serle (1950); ES = Elgood & Sibley (1964); EFD= Elgood et al., (1973); EE/EE = Elgood et al., (1994); JB = Button (1965); DR = Robinson (1966); W = Wells (1966a, 1966b, 1967); B = Bass (1967); RP = Parker (1967, 1968, 1970); AP = Ashford & Parker (1968); P = Pettet (1968a, 1968b, 1975); A = Ashford (1968, 1969); NR = Robinson (1970); BB = Broadbent (1972); JA/JA = Ash (1990); AE = Ezealor (2001). Recent records: D = Demey et al., (2003); M = Manu et al., (2005); DB = D. Bengtsson (in Demey, 2006); TEA = Adeyanju & Adeyanju (2012); JP = J. Peacock (pers. comm.); GH = G. Huk (pers. comm.); TH = Thibault et al., (2012); TAA = T.A. Adeyanju observations outside IITA. Records from P. Hall (PH) span a long period and each record is classed according to its precise date. “Gained” = species recorded in the Ibadan area since 2002 but not before; “lost” = species recorded before 2002 but not since. * = species restricted to Guinea–Congo Rainforest biome; ** = species restricted to Sudan–Guinea Savanna biome (Ezealor, 2001); † = species observed in this study within the IBA. [ ] = unconfirmed records. Observed Netted Other recent Early Gained Lost this studythis study records records Podicepididae Tachybaptus ruficollis Little Grebe GH (2012) ES (sporadic), B, BB Phalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax africanus Long-tailed Cormorant F1 ES Anhingidae Anhinga rufa African Darter ES X Ardeidae Botaurus stellaris Great Bittern PH (2001), EE V Ixobrychus minutus Little Bittern F 1 ES, BB I. sturmii Dwarf Bittern PH (1998), ES X Gorsachius leuconotus White-backed Night Heron ES (once) V Nycticorax nycticorax Black-crowned Night Heron F2 BB Ardeola ralloides Squacco Heron A ES Bubulcus ibis Cattle Egret A4 ES, B Butorides striata Green-backed Heron C ES Egretta ardesiaca Black Heron PH3 X E. gularis Western Reef Heron EE V E. garzetta Little Egret U ES E. intermedia Intermediate Egret C ES, EE E. alba Great Egret C ES Ardea purpurea Purple Heron† C ES A. cinerea Grey Heron C ES A. melanocephala Black-headed Heron C ES Scopidae Scopus umbretta Hamerkop PH, JP (2011) ES, P Ciconiidae Mycteria ibis Yellow-billed Stork ES, DR V Anastomus lamelligerus African Openbill Stork ES V Ciconia abdimii Abdim’s Stork V ES C. episcopus Woolly-necked Stork R RP C. ciconia White stork PH (1998, 2000) V Threskiornithidae Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis V5 V Bostrychia hagedash Hadada Ibis C6 X Threskiornis aethiopicus Sacred Ibis ES V Anatidae Dendrocygna viduata White-faced Whistling Duck A7 Ban, EE Plectropterus gambensis Spur-winged Goose F8 PH, Wil Pteronetta hartlaubii Hartlaub’s Duck* PH (1995, a pair), AE V Sarkidiornis melanotos Knob-billed Goose PH (1987, 1993, 1995), Wil V Nettapus auritus African Pygmy Goose PH (until 1995), ES, ASH, EE X Anas penelope Eurasian Wigeon Ban, EE V A. crecca Common Teal PH (Jan 1994, a pair), EE V A. acuta Northern Pintail PH (1989, 1998) V 185 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN A. querquedula Garganey PH (1993, 1994), Ban, EE V Aythya nyroca Ferruginous Duck P V Pandionidae Pandion haliaetus Osprey† U ES, BB Accipitridae Aviceda cuculoides African Cuckoo Hawk† U PH ES, EE Pernis apivorus European Honey Buzzard† PH (May 2010) V Macheiramphus alcinus Bat Hawk† U9 ES Elanus caeruleus Black-shouldered Kite F ES Milvus migrans Yellow-billed Kite† A ES, W Gypohierax angolensis Palm-nut Vulture† F ES Polyboroides typus African Harrier Hawk† U ES Circus macrourus Pallid Harrier Ban V C. aeruginosus Eurasian Marsh Harrier† U BB Micronisus gabar Gabar Goshawk F X Accipiter tachiro African Goshawk† C 5 ES, NR A. badius Shikra F ES, B, NR A. erythropus Red-thighed Sparrowhawk*† PH AE A. minullus Little Sparrowhawk ES X A. melanoleucus Black Sparrowhawk PH, ES X Urotriorchis macrourus Long-tailed Hawk*† PH, D AE Kaupifalco monogrammicus Lizard Buzzard† C 1 ES Buteo auguralis Red-necked Buzzard† F ES Aquila rapax Tawny Eagle EE V Hieraaetus spilogaster African Hawk-Eagle† U PH (one) X Lophaetus occipitalis Long-crested Eagle† F PH ES, BB Falconidae Falco tinnunculus Common Kestrel C ES, EE F. ardosiaceus Grey Kestrel† F ES F. cuvierii African Hobby† F ES, BB, NR F. biarmicus Lanner† U10 ES Phasianidae Coturnix delegorguei Harlequin Quail JB, EE V Ptilopachus petrosus Stone Partridge ES (rare, Ojo Hills) X Francolinus lathami Latham’s Francolin* ES (once) V F. squamatus Scaly Francolin PH13 V F. ahantensis Ahanta Francolin*† C12 AE, Ban F. bicalcaratus Double-spurred Francolin† VA14 ES Numididae Guttera pucherani Crested Guineafowl EE V Numida meleagris Helmeted Guineafowl F11 X Turnicidae Turnix sylvatica Little Buttonquail ES (once) V Rallidae [Sarothrura elegans Buff-spotted Flufftail DB (Oct 2005) V] Crex egregia African Crake U ES, W Porzana porzana Spotted Crake PH (pair, Feb 1996) V Aenigmatolimnas marginalis Striped Crake ES, W X Amaurornis flavirostra Black Crake C 3 ES Porphyrio alleni Allen’s Gallinule C 3 ES, EE P. porphyrio Purple Swamphen PH (1999, 2000) V Gallinula chloropus Common Moorhen C 2 Ban G. angulata Lesser Moorhen R 1 ES Heliornithidae Podica senegalensis African Finfoot TEA PH15, ES, BB, W Otididae Lissotis melanogaster Black-bellied Bustard W V Jacanidae Actophilornis africanus African Jacana VA16 15 ES Rostratulidae Rostratula benghalensis Greater Painted-snipe C17 13 ES, EE Recurvirostridae 186 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Himantopus himantopus Black-winged Stilt F ES, BB Burhinidae Burhinus senegalensis Senegal Thick-knee C18 ES Glareolidae Pluvianus aegyptius Egyptian Plover V PH, ES, EE Glareola pratincola Collared Pratincole V (one, Jan 2011) V G. cinerea Grey Pratincole PH (Sep 1994), ES, EE V Charadriidae Charadrius dubius Little Ringed Plover PH20, ES (frequent) X C. hiaticula Common Ringed Plover PH (one, Sep 1994), ES (rare) V C. forbesi Forbes’s Plover F ES, EE Vanellus senegallus African Wattled Lapwing V V V. albiceps White-headed Lapwing C ES V. spinosus Spur-winged Lapwing A 5 EE Scolopacidae Calidris temminckii Temminck’s Stint D V C. ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper PH (one, Sep 1994) V Philomachus pugnax Ruff PH (one, Oct 1996), EE (flock, Oct) V Lymnocryptes minimus Jack Snipe U X Gallinago gallinago Common Snipe U 2 ES, P, BB, EE G. media Great Snipe U X Numenius arquata Eurasian Curlew ES (once) V Tringa erythropus Spotted Redshank PH Ban, W T. totanus Common Redshank W V T. stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper PH (two, Oct 1994) V T. nebularia Common Greenshank V W T. ochropus Green Sandpiper PH ES T. glareola Wood Sandpiper F ES T. hypoleucos Common Sandpiper C21 ES Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone PH (one, Sep 1991) V Laridae Larus ridibundus Black-headed Gull D V Sternidae Gelochelidon nilotica Gull-billed Tern PH (one, Oct 1994) V Chlidonias leucopterus White-winged Tern PH (1988, 1989, 2000), EE V Rhynchopidae Rynchops flavisrostris African Skimmer EE (one) V Columbidae Treron calvus African Green Pigeon† C ES Turtur brehmeri Blue-headed Wood Dove*† PH23 AE T. tympanistria Tambourine Dove† C 2 ES T. afer Blue-spotted Wood Dove† A ES, NR Columba iriditorques Western Bronze-naped Pigeon* PH22 X C. guinea Speckled Pigeon C EE23a X Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove† A24 1 ES S. vinacea Vinaceous Dove R25 PH X S. senegalensis Laughing Dove C26 ES, NR Psittacidae Poicephalus senegalus Senegal Parrot**† R TAA AE, ES, EE Agapornis pullarius Red-headed Lovebird BB X Musophagidae Tauraco persa Green Tauraco*† C M AE, ES Musophaga violacea Violet Tauraco** AE, P V Crinifer piscator Western Grey Plantain-eater† C ES, JA Cuculidae Oxylophus jacobinus Jacobin Cuckoo† U X O. levaillantii Levaillant’s Cuckoo† U M ES, B Clamator glandarius Great Spotted Cuckoo U ES, B, P Cuculus solitarius Red-chested Cuckoo PH (few, rains) X C. clamosus Black Cuckoo† U X 187 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN C. canorus Common Cuckoo PH (one, May 1998) V C. gularis African Cuckoo† PH27 W, BB Chrysococcyx cupreus African Emerald Cuckoo† U M ES C. klaas Klaas’s Cuckoo† F ES, NR C. caprius Didric Cuckoo† F ES, NR Ceuthmochares aereus Yellowbill† C 1 M ES Centropus leucogaster Black-throated Coucal* R AE, ES C. grillii Black Coucal† U X C. senegalensis Senegal Coucal† A28 ES, NR C. monachus Blue-headed Coucal† F ES Tytonidae Tyto alba Barn Owl U PH ES Strigidae Otus scops European Scops Owl ES, W, BB, EE X Ptilopsis leucotis Northern White-faced Owl† C41 1 ES Bubo africanus Spotted Eagle Owl ES X B. poensis Fraser’s Eagle Owl*† C (2011) ES, EE Glaucidium perlatum Pearl-spotted Owlet TAA PH29, ES Strix woodfordii African Wood Owl C ES Caprimulgidae Caprimulgus climacurus Long-tailed Nightjar C ES, BB C. nigriscapularis Black-shouldered Nightjar* PH30 AE, Ban, ES C. inornatus Plain Nightjar PH (dry season) ES C. europaeus European Nightjar (once, 2010) EE Macrodipteryx longipennis Standard-winged Nightjar U ES, BB M. vexillarius Pennant-winged Nightjar RP X Apodidae Telacanthura ussheri Mottled Spinetail† C P Cypsiurus parvus African Palm Swift C ES Apus pallidus Pallid Swift P X A. apus Common Swift PH (flock of 10), ES X A. caffer White-rumped Swift PH31 X A. affinis Little Swift U ES Alcedinidae Halcyon leucocephala Grey-headed Kingfisher R ES H. malimbica Blue-breasted Kingfisher† C 2 ES, NR H. senegalensis Woodland Kingfisher† A 5 ES, NR H. chelicuti Striped Kingfisher ES X Ceyx lecontei African Dwarf Kingfisher (once) JA, EE C. pictus African Pygmy Kingfisher R 1 ES, NR Alcedo cristata Malachite kingfisher C 3 ES Megaceryle maxima Giant Kingfisher R ES Ceryle rudis Pied Kingfisher F ES Meropidae Merops pusillus Little Bee-eater ES V M. albicollis White-throated Bee-eater† C ES, NR M. apiaster European Bee-eater P, EE V M. malimbicus Rosy Bee-eater*† F PH AE, ES, P M. nubicus Northern Carmine Bee-eater ES V Coraciidae Coracias abyssinicus Abyssinian Roller ES (once), BB V [C. garrulus European Roller ES (rare), P, BB (possible) V] Eurystomus gularis Blue-throated Roller*† R AE, ES E. glaucurus Broad-billed Roller† F M EE Phoeniculidae Phoeniculus bollei White-headed Wood-hoopoe ES, EE X P. purpureus Green Wood-hoopoe† F ES, NR, EE Rhinopomastus aterrimus Black Wood-hoopoe W, EE X Bucerotidae Tropicranus albocristatus White-crested Hornbill*† U M AE, ES, S Tockus camurus Red-billed Dwarf Hornbill ES X T. fasciatus African Pied Hornbill*† A AE, ES 188 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN T. nasutus African Grey Hornbill† C ES Bycanistes fistulator Piping Hornbill PH32, ES X Capitonidae Gymnobucco peli Bristle-nosed Barbet* AE X G. calvus Naked-faced Barbet*† M PH, AE, ES X33 Pogoniulus scolopaceus Speckled Tinkerbird*† C 3 AE, EE P. atroflavus Red-rumped Tinkerbird*† C EE P. subsulphureus Yellow-throated Tinkerbird*† C AE, ES P. bilineatus Yellow-rumped Tinkerbird† C X P. chrysoconus Yellow-fronted Tinkerbird EE X Tricholaema hirsuta Hairy-breasted Barbet*† F M AE, ES, EE Lybius vieilloti Vieillot’s Barbet† U ES, EE L. bidentatus Double-toothed Barbet TAA, TEA ES, EE Trachyphonus purpuratus Yellow-billed Barbet*† U AE, ES Indicatoridae Prodotiscus insignis Cassin’s Honeyguide* ES X Melichneutes robustus Lyre-tailed Honeyguide* AE X Indicator maculatus Spotted Honeyguide*† C 1 X I. indicator Greater Honeyguide ES, EE X I. minor Lesser Honeyguide TAA (2013) PH34, ES I. exilis Least Honeyguide ES X Picidae Campethera punctuligera Fine-spotted Woodpecker ES, EE X C. cailliautii Green-backed Woodpecker PH (one, May 1998) V C. nivosa Buff-spotted Woodpecker*† F 6 ES (rare), EE Dendropicos gabonensis Gabon Woodpecker* PH35, AE V D. fuscescens Cardinal woodpecker EE X D. pyrrhogaster Fire-bellied Woodpecker*† F 2 PH AE, ES, EE D. goertae Grey Woodpecker TAA PH (1987, 1988), ES Eurylaemidae Smithornis rufolateralis Rufous-sided Broadbill*† F 1 X Pittidae Pitta angolensis African Pitta W X Hirundinidae [Riparia paludicola Plain Martin A, EE V] R. riparia Common Sand Martin F TAA (2013) PH (Mar 1992, Oct 1994), BB, A, EE [R. cincta Banded Martin A (one) V] Hirundo semirufa Rufous-chested Swallow F ES, NR, A, EFD H. sengalensis Mosque Swallow PH (frequent all year), ES, A, EFD, EE X H. abyssinica Lesser Striped Swallow C ES, A, EFD H. fuligula Rock Martin F X H. smithii Wire-tailed Swallow ES X H. leucosoma Pied-winged Swallow* AE, ES, EE X H. aethiopica Ethiopian Swallow C ES, A H. rustica Barn Swallow F ES, A Delichon urbicum House Martin ES X Motacillidae Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail F ES, B, A, NR M. aguimp African Pied Wagtail C ES, NR Anthus leucophrys Plain-backed Pipit C ES, EFD A. pallidiventris Long-legged Pipit TH (2012) V A. trivialis Tree Pipit PH, P, BB X A. cervinus Red-throated Pipit PH, P, BB, A X Macronyx croceus Yellow-throated Longclaw F ES, EE Campephagidae Campephaga phoenicea Red-shouldered Cuckoo-shrike† U M ES, B, BB, EFD Coracina azurea Blue Cuckoo-shrike* AE X Pycnonotidae Andropadus virens Little Greenbul*† A 57 ES A. gracilis Little Grey Greenbul† U 2 M ES A. curvirostris Cameroon Sombre Greenbul*† F 15 AE 189 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN A. gracilirostris Slender-billed Greenbul† C ES (rare), EE A. latirostris Yellow-whiskered Greenbul† A 109 ES Baeopogon indicator Honeyguide Greenbul*† F 4 AE, ES Ixonotus guttatus Spotted Greenbul* AE, EE X Chlorocichla simplex Simple Leaflove*† C 1 AE, ES C. flavicollis Yellow-throated Leaflove† U36 ES Thescelocichla leucopleura Swamp-palm Bulbul*† C AE, ES Pyrrhurus scandens Leaflove*† C 1 AE, ES Phyllastrephus baumanni Baumann’s Greenbul*† U 10 AE, ES P. icterinus Icterine Greenbul* AE X P. albigularis White-throated Greenbul*† F 26 AE, ES Bleda syndactylus Red-tailed Bristlebill† P, EE X B. canicapillus Grey-headed Bristlebill*† C 87 AE, ES Criniger barbatus Western Bearded Greenbul*† M Ban, AE, EE C. calurus Red-tailed Greenbul* U M AE, ES C. ndussumensis White-bearded Greenbul* AE X Pycnonotus barbatus Common Bulbul† A 3 M ES, NR Nicator chloris Western Nicator*† F 7 ES Turdidae Stiphrornis erythrothorax Forest Robin*† C 15 AE, ES (rare), BB Luscinia megarhynchos Common Nightingale PH (occasional) ES, P, A, EE L. svecica Bluethroat A V Cossypha cyanocampter Blue-shouldered Robin Chat*† F 5 Ban, EE C. niveicapilla Snowy-crowned Robin Chat† C 2 ES, NR, EFD Neocossyphus poensis White-tailed Ant Thrush† F 4 X Stizorhina finschi Finsch’s Flycatcher Thrush PH, ES X Phoenicurus phoenicurus Common Redstart ES, A X Saxicola rubetra Whinchat C ES, A Oenanthe oenanthe Northern Wheatear ES V Monticola solitarius Blue Rock Thrush W V Turdus pelios African Thrush† A 5 ES, NR, EFD Sylviidae Melocichla mentalis African Moustached Warbler F ES Acrocephalus schoenobaenus Sedge Warbler A, BB X A. scirpaceus European Reed Warbler EE V A. baeticatus African Reed Warbler AP, A, BB, EE X A. arundinaceus Great Reed Warbler F 2 ES, AP, A, BB Hippolais polyglotta Melodious Warbler PH ES, B, A, BB H. icterina Icterine Warbler RP, BB X Cisticola erythrops Red-faced Cisticola A 2 ES, A C. lateralis Whistling Cisticola PH, ES X C. anonymus Chattering Cisticola* AE X C. galactotes Winding Cisticola PH X C. brachypterus Short-winged Cisticola F ES, A C. juncidis Zitting Cisticola PH X Prinia subflava Tawny-flanked Prinia F PH, ES Heliolais erythropterus Red-winged Warbler ES X Camaroptera brachyura Grey-backed Camaroptera A 7 D ES, S C. superciliaris Yellow-browed Camaroptera*† C 2 AE, ES C. chloronota Olive-green Camaroptera*† A 49 D ES Macrosphenus kempi Kemp’s Longbill*† F 5 X M. concolor Grey Longbill*† U 2 ES Eremomela pusilla Senegal Eremomela** U AE, ES Sylvietta brachyura Northern Crombce EE V S. virens Green Crombec*† C 3 AE, ES S. denti Lemon-bellied Crombec*† F X Phylloscopus trochilus Willow Warbler F PH ES, A, NR P. sibilatrix Wood Warbler† F ES Hypergerus atriceps Oriole Warbler**† F AE, ES Sylvia borin Garden Warbler U ES, A, B, RP S. communis Common Whitethroat BB V Hylia prasina Green Hylia*† C 9 AE, ES Muscicapidae 190 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Fraseria ocreata Fraser’s Forest Flycatcher*† M X Melaenornis edolioides Northern Black Flycatcher† U (F in 2009) B Muscicapa striata Spotted Flycatcher PH, ES X M. olivascens Olivaceous Flycatcher*† (once) X M. comitata Dusky-blue Flycatcher*† U 1 AE, ES, B M. tessmanni Tessmann’s Flycatcher* AE X Ficedula hypoleuca Pied Flycatcher PH ES Monarchidae Erythrocercus mccallii Chestnut-capped Flycatcher* PH (several, 1999, 2000), ES X Trochocercus nitens Blue-headed Crested Flycatcher*† F 1 AE, ES Terpsiphone viridis African Paradise Flycatcher† PH, M ES, EFD T. rufiventer Red-bellied Paradise Flycatcher*† A 41 M ES, NR Platysteiridae Megabyas flammulatus Shrike Flycatcher* ES X Bias musicus Black-and-White Flycatcher PH37, ES X Dyaphorophyia castanea Chestnut Wattle-eye*† F 1 AE, ES D. blissetti Red-cheeked Wattle-eye*† C 21 AE, ES, BB Platysteira cyanea Common Wattle-eye† F 1 ES, NR Batis senegalensis Senegal Batis ES X Timaliidae Illadopsis rufipennis Pale-breasted Illadopsis† U PH38 I. fulvescens Brown Illadopsis*† C 14 AE, ES, BB I. puveli Puvel’s Illadopsis S, EE X Turdoides plebejus Brown Babbler ES V T. reinwardtii Blackcap Babbler ES X Phyllanthus atripennis Capuchin Babbler*† F 4 AE, ES Remizidae Pholidornis rushiae Tit-hylia PH (several, W Bank) X Nectariniidae Anthreptes rectirostris Green Sunbird* Ban X Cyanomitra verticalis Green-headed Sunbird U ES, NR C. cyanolaema Blue-throated Brown Sunbird* U39 1 PH, AE, ES, B C. obscura Western Olive Sunbird† C 75 ES Chalcomitra adelberti Buff-throated Sunbird*† U AE, ES C. senegalensis Scarlet-chested Sunbird R X Hedydipna collaris Collared Sunbird† A 32 M ES Cinnyris chloropygius Olive-bellied Sunbird† F 1 ES, NR C. minullus Tiny Sunbird*† U 5 X C. venustus Variable Sunbird F ES, NR, EFD C. superbus Superb sunbird* AE, ES X C. coccinigastrus Splendid Sunbird*† C 5 AE, ES, EFD C. cupreus Copper Sunbird C 2 ES, NR Zosteropidae Zosterops senegalensis Yellow White-eye PH & ES (common), NR X Laniidae Lanius senator Woodchat Shrike PH, ES X Corvinella corvina Yellow-billed Shrike* F AE, ES, A, EE Malaconotidae Malaconotus cruentus Fiery-breasted Bush-Shrike*† (one group) PH (common), AE, ES, B, NR M. multicolor Many-coloured Bush-Shrike† U D ES, NR, EE M. sulfureopectus Sulphur-breasted Bush-shrike† GH (2013) ES, EFD Antichromus minutus Marsh Tchagra ES, EE X Tchagra senegalus Black-crowned Tchagra ES, B X Dryoscopus sabini Sabine’s Puffback*† U M AE, ES D. gambensis Northern Puffback TAA (2013) ES, NR Laniarus aethiopicus Tropical Boubou† F EE Prionopidae Prionops plumatus White Helmet-shrike ES X P. caniceps Red-billed Helmet-shrike*† U M AE, EE Oriolidae Oriolus nigripennis Black-winged Oriole*† F M AE, ES 191 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN O. brachyrhynchus Western Black-headed Oriole*† F M O. auratus African Golden Oriole† PH (fairly common) ES, EFD O. oriolus Eurasian Golden Oriole JA V Dicruridae Dicrurus ludwigii Square-tailed Drongo† F 2 ES D. atripennis Shining Drongo*† F X D.adsimilis Fork-tailed Drongo JA X D. modestus Velvet-mantled Drongo†40 C 1 M ES, NR Corvidae Corvus albus Pied Crow A ES, EFD Ptilostomus afer Piapiac** TAA V Sturnidae Poeoptera lugubris Narrow-tailed Starling† F X Onychognathus fulgidus Forest Chestnut-winged Starling*†F AE, ES, NR Lamprotornis purpureus Purple Glossy Starling ES X L. splendidus Splendid Glossy Starling C ES L. caudatus Long-tailed Glossy Starling V (2009) V Cinnyricinclus leucogaster Violet-backed Starling PH (dry season 1999), ES (once) V Passeridae Passer griseus Northern Grey-headed Sparrow C ES, NR Ploecidae Plocepasser superciliosus Chestnut-crowned Sparrow-Weaver* Ban X Ploceus nigricollis Black-necked Weaver C 38 NR P. nigerrimus Vieillot’s Black Weaver* U AE P. cucullatus Village Weaver† VA 50 ES P. tricolor Yellow-mantled Weaver*† C D, M AE, ES Malimbus nitens Blue-billed Malimbe*† A 17 M AE, ES M. malimbicus Crested Malimbe*† PH (frequent), M, TAA (2013) AE, ES M. ibadanensis Ibadan Malimbe*† R M PH, AE, ES, JA M. scutatus Red-vented Malimbe*† C M AE, ES, NR M. rubricollis Red-headed Malimbe*† C M AE, ES, B Quelea erythrops Red-headed Quelea F 10 ES, BB Euplectes hordeaceus Black-winged Bishop Ban X E. franciscanus Northern Red Bishop R EE E. macroura Yellow-mantled Widowbird U ES, EFD, EE Amblyospiza albifrons Grosbeak Weaver R ES, B, BB Estrildidae Nigrita canicapillus Grey-crowned Negrofinch† F M ES N. luteifrons Pale-fronted Negrofinch* ES X N. bicolor Chestnut-breasted Negrofinch*† F 1 AE, ES N. fusconotus White-breasted Negrofinch*† F X Pyrenestes ostrinus Black-bellied Seedcracker U 1 ES, EE Spermophaga haematina Western Bluebill*† C 38 AE, ES, BB Mandingoa nitidula Green Twinspot Ban X Lagonosticta rufopicta Bar-breasted Firefinch*† U AE, ES L. rubricata Blue-billed Firefinch PH (frequent) X Estrilda melpoda Orange-cheeked Waxbill† A ES, B, BB, EFD Spermestes cucullatus Bronze Mannikin† C 10 ES S. bicolor Black-and-White Mannikin† F ES Viduidae Vidua chalybeata Village Indigobird PH (frequent) ES V. macroura Pin-tailed Whydah C ES Fringillidae Serinus mozambicus Yellow-fronted Canary PH (uncommon) EE Emberizidae Emberiza cabanisi Cabanis’s Bunting ES X 71 families, 398 spp. (269 in IITA campus, 138 in IBA) 233 75 74 361 25(13)68(62) 192 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Appendix 5 : LSD Multiple Comparisons of Overall bird species diversity, abundance, richness and evenness indices Dependent Variable (I) Area (J) Area Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Lower Bound Shannon’s Bird Species Diversity Dam Farm 0.11209 0.05825 0.055 For -.44328(*) 0.05505 0 Farm Dam -0.11209 0.05825 0.055 For -.55537(*) 0.05957 0 For Dam .44328(*) 0.05505 0 Farm .55537(*) 0.05957 0 Simpson’s Bird Species Diversity Dam Farm 0.00771 0.02091 0.712 For .18718(*) 0.01977 0 Farm Dam -0.00771 0.02091 0.712 For .17946(*) 0.02135 0 For Dam -.18718(*) 0.01977 0 Farm -.17946(*) 0.02135 0 Bird Species Abundance Dam Farm 17.63022 13.50468 0.192 For 53.57952(*) 12.76212 0 Farm Dam -17.63022 13.50468 0.192 For 35.94931(*) 13.81175 0.009 For Dam -53.57952(*) 12.76212 0 Farm -35.94931(*) 13.81175 0.009 Bird Species Richness Dam Farm 1.607(*) 0.436 0 For -0.802 0.415 0.054 Farm Dam -1.607(*) 0.436 0 For -2.409(*) 0.446 0 For Dam 0.802 0.415 0.054 Farm 2.409(*) 0.446 0 Eveness index Dam Farm -0.02548 0.01929 0.187 For -.16128(*) 0.01809 0 Farm Dam 0.02548 0.01929 0.187 For -.13580(*) 0.01966 0 For Dam .16128(*) 0.01809 0 Farm .13580(*) 0.01966 0 *The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. 193 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Appendix 6: Descriptive and ANOVA of bird species diversity, abundance, richness and evenness indices across habitat N Mean Std. Std. Sum of df Mean F Sig Deviation Error Squares Square . Shannon’s Dam 93 1.5582 0.64067 0.06643 Betwee 43.719 7 6.246 18.19 0 index gallery n 6 Groups Dam 15 1.3615 0.5851 0.04746 Within 218.983 63 0.343 grasslan 2 Groups 8 d Forest 10 1.7577 0.53088 0.05132 Total 262.702 64 7 5 forest 11 1.9937 0.49191 0.04607 edge 4 Maize 47 1.402 0.70151 0.10233 Cassava Agro or 26 1.145 0.56633 0.11107 citrus orchard Cassava 41 1.2128 0.52081 0.08134 Maize 66 1.4083 0.68842 0.08474 Simpson’s Dam 91 0.2491 0.2162 0.02266 Betwee 5.43 7 0.776 17.32 0 Index gallery n 8 Groups Dam 15 0.3391 0.26029 0.02111 Within 28.471 63 0.045 grasslan 2 Groups 6 d Forest 10 0.1319 0.1416 0.01369 Total 33.901 64 7 3 Forest 11 0.1054 0.07617 0.00713 edge 4 Maize- 48 0.2977 0.26657 0.03848 Cassave Agro or 24 0.2798 0.23758 0.0485 citrus orchard Cassava 42 0.2928 0.23864 0.03682 Maize 66 0.3073 0.25659 0.03158 Bird Dam 93 45.178 82.20713 8.52448 Betwee 538699.7 7 76957.1 4.101 0 Species gallery 3 n Abundanc Groups e Dam 15 88.517 199.7236 16.1997 Within 11970991 63 18763.31 grasslan 2 5 2 Groups 8 d Forest 10 15.063 9.78893 0.94633 Total 12509690 64 194 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 7 9 5 Forest 11 21.699 15.17212 1.421 edge 4 6 maize- 47 40.266 60.97521 8.89415 cassava Agro or 26 39.384 105.0557 20.6031 citrus 6 2 orchard Cassava 41 34.097 95.75099 14.9537 6 9 Maize 66 83.090 262.4175 32.3013 9 7 Bird Dam 94 8.37 4.52 0.466 Betwee 1063.564 7 151.938 7.801 0 Species gallery n Richness Groups Dam 15 7.97 4.491 0.364 Within 12542.22 64 19.475 grasslan 2 Groups 4 d Forest 10 7.78 3.982 0.385 Total 13605.79 65 7 1 Forest 11 10.01 4.725 0.443 edge 4 Maize- 49 7.29 5.504 0.786 cassava Agro or 26 5.69 4.231 0.83 citrus orchard Cassava 42 4.98 2.858 0.441 Maize 68 7.24 4.154 0.504 Eveness Dam 91 0.7978 0.20418 0.0214 Betwee 3.637 7 0.52 13.91 0 index gallery n 1 Groups Dam 14 0.73 0.25548 0.02093 Within 23.382 62 0.037 grasslan 9 Groups 6 d Forest 10 0.9191 0.08465 0.00822 Total 27.019 63 6 3 Forest 11 0.915 0.08589 0.00804 edge 4 Maize- 45 0.763 0.22241 0.03316 cassava Agro or 24 0.7994 0.20947 0.04276 citrus orchard Cassava 41 0.8059 0.20172 0.0315 Maize 64 0.7713 0.23807 0.02976 195 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Appendix 7: Multiple Comparisons of bird species diversity across habitat using LSD Dependent Variable (I) Land use (J) Land use Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval Upper Lower Bound Bound Shannon’s Bird Species Diversity DAMGAL DAMGRA .19662(*) 0.07713 0.011 0.0452 0.3481 FOREST -.19957(*) 0.08306 0.017 -0.3627 -0.0365 FOREDGE -.43554(*) 0.08186 0 -0.5963 -0.2748 MAZECASS 0.15616 0.10485 0.137 -0.0497 0.362 AGRO .41318(*) 0.12997 0.002 0.158 0.6684 CASSAVA .34535(*) 0.10983 0.002 0.1297 0.561 MAIZE 0.14989 0.09429 0.112 -0.0353 0.335 D AMGRA DAMGAL -.19662(*) 0.07713 0.011 -0.3481 -0.0452 FOREST -.39619(*) 0.07393 0 -0.5414 -0.251 FOREDGE -.63216(*) 0.07259 0 -0.7747 -0.4896 MAZECASS -0.04047 0.09778 0.679 -0.2325 0.1515 AGRO 0.21656 0.12434 0.082 -0.0276 0.4607 CASSAVA 0.14873 0.1031 0.15 -0.0537 0.3512 MAIZE -0.04674 0.08636 0.589 -0.2163 0.1229 FOREST DAMGAL .19957(*) 0.08306 0.017 0.0365 0.3627 DAMGRA .39619(*) 0.07393 0 0.251 0.5414 FOREDGE -.23597(*) 0.07886 0.003 -0.3908 -0.0811 MAZECASS .35573(*) 0.10252 0.001 0.1544 0.557 AGRO .61275(*) 0.1281 0 0.3612 0.8643 CASSAVA .54492(*) 0.10761 0 0.3336 0.7562 MAIZE .34946(*) 0.0917 0 0.1694 0.5295 196 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN FOREDGE DAMGAL .43554(*) 0.08186 0 0.2748 0.5963 DAMGRA .63216(*) 0.07259 0 0.4896 0.7747 FOREST .23597(*) 0.07886 0.003 0.0811 0.3908 MAZECASS .59170(*) 0.10156 0 0.3923 0.7911 AGRO .84872(*) 0.12733 0 0.5987 1.0988 CASSAVA .78089(*) 0.10669 0 0.5714 0.9904 MAIZE .58543(*) 0.09062 0 0.4075 0.7634 M AZECASS DAMGAL -0.15616 0.10485 0.137 -0.362 0.0497 DAMGRA 0.04047 0.09778 0.679 -0.1515 0.2325 FOREST -.35573(*) 0.10252 0.001 -0.557 -0.1544 FOREDGE -.59170(*) 0.10156 0 -0.7911 -0.3923 AGRO 0.25703 0.14319 0.073 -0.0242 0.5382 CASSAVA 0.18919 0.1252 0.131 -0.0567 0.435 MAIZE -0.00627 0.11182 0.955 -0.2258 0.2133 A GRO DAMGAL -.41318(*) 0.12997 0.002 -0.6684 -0.158 DAMGRA -0.21656 0.12434 0.082 -0.4607 0.0276 FOREST -.61275(*) 0.1281 0 -0.8643 -0.3612 FOREDGE -.84872(*) 0.12733 0 -1.0988 -0.5987 MAZECASS -0.25703 0.14319 0.073 -0.5382 0.0242 CASSAVA -0.06783 0.14688 0.644 -0.3563 0.2206 MAIZE -0.2633 0.13565 0.053 -0.5297 0.0031 C ASSAVA DAMGAL -.34535(*) 0.10983 0.002 -0.561 -0.1297 DAMGRA -0.14873 0.1031 0.15 -0.3512 0.0537 FOREST -.54492(*) 0.10761 0 -0.7562 -0.3336 FOREDGE -.78089(*) 0.10669 0 -0.9904 -0.5714 MAZECASS -0.18919 0.1252 0.131 -0.435 0.0567 AGRO 0.06783 0.14688 0.644 -0.2206 0.3563 197 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN MAIZE -0.19546 0.1165 0.094 -0.4242 0.0333 M AIZE DAMGAL -0.14989 0.09429 0.112 -0.335 0.0353 DAMGRA 0.04674 0.08636 0.589 -0.1229 0.2163 FOREST -.34946(*) 0.0917 0 -0.5295 -0.1694 FOREDGE -.58543(*) 0.09062 0 -0.7634 -0.4075 MAZECASS 0.00627 0.11182 0.955 -0.2133 0.2258 AGRO 0.2633 0.13565 0.053 -0.0031 0.5297 CASSAVA 0.19546 0.1165 0.094 -0.0333 0.4242 S impson’s Bird Species Diversity DAMGAL DAMGRA -.09002(*) 0.02804 0.001 -0.1451 -0.035 FOREST .11720(*) 0.03017 0 0.058 0.1764 FOREDGE .14369(*) 0.02974 0 0.0853 0.2021 MAZECASS -0.04863 0.03774 0.198 -0.1227 0.0255 AGRO -0.03073 0.04855 0.527 -0.1261 0.0646 CASSAVA -0.04367 0.03947 0.269 -0.1212 0.0338 MAIZE -0.05822 0.03421 0.089 -0.1254 0.009 DAMGRA DAMGAL .09002(*) 0.02804 0.001 0.035 0.1451 FOREST .20723(*) 0.0267 0 0.1548 0.2597 FOREDGE .23371(*) 0.02621 0 0.1822 0.2852 MAZECASS 0.0414 0.03503 0.238 -0.0274 0.1102 AGRO 0.0593 0.04647 0.202 -0.032 0.1506 CASSAVA 0.04635 0.03688 0.209 -0.0261 0.1188 MAIZE 0.03181 0.03119 0.308 -0.0294 0.0931 FOREST DAMGAL -.11720(*) 0.03017 0 -0.1764 -0.058 DAMGRA -.20723(*) 0.0267 0 -0.2597 -0.1548 FOREDGE 0.02648 0.02848 0.353 -0.0294 0.0824 MAZECASS -.16583(*) 0.03676 0 -0.238 -0.0937 198 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN AGRO -.14793(*) 0.04779 0.002 -0.2418 -0.0541 CASSAVA -.16087(*) 0.03853 0 -0.2365 -0.0852 MAIZE -.17542(*) 0.03312 0 -0.2404 -0.1104 FOREDGE DAMGAL -.14369(*) 0.02974 0 -0.2021 -0.0853 DAMGRA -.23371(*) 0.02621 0 -0.2852 -0.1822 FOREST -0.02648 0.02848 0.353 -0.0824 0.0294 MAZECASS -.19232(*) 0.0364 0 -0.2638 -0.1208 AGRO -.17441(*) 0.04752 0 -0.2677 -0.0811 CASSAVA -.18736(*) 0.03819 0 -0.2624 -0.1124 MAIZE -.20190(*) 0.03273 0 -0.2662 -0.1376 MAZECASS DAMGAL 0.04863 0.03774 0.198 -0.0255 0.1227 DAMGRA -0.0414 0.03503 0.238 -0.1102 0.0274 FOREST .16583(*) 0.03676 0 0.0937 0.238 FOREDGE .19232(*) 0.0364 0 0.1208 0.2638 AGRO 0.0179 0.05289 0.735 -0.086 0.1218 CASSAVA 0.00496 0.0447 0.912 -0.0828 0.0927 MAIZE -0.00959 0.04014 0.811 -0.0884 0.0692 AGRO DAMGAL 0.03073 0.04855 0.527 -0.0646 0.1261 DAMGRA -0.0593 0.04647 0.202 -0.1506 0.032 FOREST .14793(*) 0.04779 0.002 0.0541 0.2418 FOREDGE .17441(*) 0.04752 0 0.0811 0.2677 MAZECASS -0.0179 0.05289 0.735 -0.1218 0.086 CASSAVA -0.01294 0.05414 0.811 -0.1193 0.0934 MAIZE -0.02749 0.05043 0.586 -0.1265 0.0715 CASSAVA DAMGAL 0.04367 0.03947 0.269 -0.0338 0.1212 DAMGRA -0.04635 0.03688 0.209 -0.1188 0.0261 FOREST .16087(*) 0.03853 0 0.0852 0.2365 199 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN FOREDGE .18736(*) 0.03819 0 0.1124 0.2624 MAZECASS -0.00496 0.0447 0.912 -0.0927 0.0828 AGRO 0.01294 0.05414 0.811 -0.0934 0.1193 MAIZE -0.01455 0.04176 0.728 -0.0966 0.0675 MAIZE DAMGAL 0.05822 0.03421 0.089 -0.009 0.1254 DAMGRA -0.03181 0.03119 0.308 -0.0931 0.0294 FOREST .17542(*) 0.03312 0 0.1104 0.2404 FOREDGE .20190(*) 0.03273 0 0.1376 0.2662 MAZECASS 0.00959 0.04014 0.811 -0.0692 0.0884 AGRO 0.02749 0.05043 0.586 -0.0715 0.1265 CASSAVA 0.01455 0.04176 0.728 -0.0675 0.0966 * The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. 200 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Appendix 8: Multiple Comparisons of abundance, richness and evenness indices across habitat using LSD 95% Confidence Dependent Variable (I) Land use (J) Land use Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Interval Upper Lower Bound Bound Bird Species Abundance DAMGAL DAMGRA -43.33923(*) 18.03327 0.017 -78.751 -7.9275 FOREST 30.11445 19.41942 0.121 -8.0193 68.2482 - FOREDGE 23.47875 19.14018 0.22 14.1066 61.0641 - MAZECASS 4.91236 24.5148 0.841 43.2271 53.0518 - AGRO 5.7937 30.38785 0.849 53.8786 65.466 - CASSAVA 11.08075 25.67874 0.666 39.3443 61.5058 - MAIZE -37.9126 22.04651 0.086 81.2051 5.3799 D AMGRA DAMGAL 43.33923(*) 18.03327 0.017 7.9275 78.751 FOREST 73.45368(*) 17.28586 0 39.5096 107.3977 FOREDGE 66.81798(*) 16.97154 0 33.4911 100.1448 MAZECASS 48.25159(*) 22.86181 0.035 3.3581 93.1451 AGRO 49.13293 29.07075 0.091 -7.953 106.2188 CASSAVA 54.41998(*) 24.10569 0.024 7.0839 101.7561 - MAIZE 5.42663 20.19246 0.788 34.2251 45.0783 - FOREST DAMGAL -30.1145 19.41942 0.121 68.2482 8.0193 DAMGRA -73.45368(*) 17.28586 0 - -39.5096 201 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 107.398 - FOREDGE -6.6357 18.43769 0.719 42.8416 29.5702 - MAZECASS -25.2021 23.97034 0.293 72.2724 21.8682 - AGRO -24.3208 29.95035 0.417 83.1339 34.4924 - CASSAVA -19.0337 25.15949 0.45 68.4391 30.3717 - MAIZE -68.02705(*) 21.43946 0.002 110.128 -25.9266 - FOREDGE DAMGAL -23.4788 19.14018 0.22 61.0641 14.1066 - DAMGRA -66.81798(*) 16.97154 0 100.145 -33.4911 - FOREST 6.6357 18.43769 0.719 29.5702 42.8416 - MAZECASS -18.5664 23.74468 0.435 65.1936 28.0608 - AGRO -17.6851 29.77005 0.553 76.1442 40.7741 - CASSAVA -12.398 24.94458 0.619 61.3814 36.5854 - MAIZE -61.39135(*) 21.18686 0.004 102.996 -19.7869 - MAZECASS DAMGAL -4.91236 24.5148 0.841 53.0518 43.2271 - DAMGRA -48.25159(*) 22.86181 0.035 93.1451 -3.3581 - FOREST 25.20209 23.97034 0.293 21.8682 72.2724 202 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN - FOREDGE 18.5664 23.74468 0.435 28.0608 65.1936 - AGRO 0.88134 33.47962 0.979 64.8622 66.6249 - CASSAVA 6.1684 29.27219 0.833 51.3131 63.6499 - MAIZE -42.825 26.14406 0.102 94.1638 8.5139 AGRO DAMGAL -5.7937 30.38785 0.849 -65.466 53.8786 - DAMGRA -49.1329 29.07075 0.091 106.219 7.953 - FOREST 24.32075 29.95035 0.417 34.4924 83.1339 - FOREDGE 17.68505 29.77005 0.553 40.7741 76.1442 - MAZECASS -0.88134 33.47962 0.979 66.6249 64.8622 - CASSAVA 5.28705 34.34104 0.878 62.1481 72.7222 - MAIZE -43.7063 31.71684 0.169 105.988 18.5757 - CASSAVA DAMGAL -11.0808 25.67874 0.666 61.5058 39.3443 - DAMGRA -54.41998(*) 24.10569 0.024 101.756 -7.0839 - FOREST 19.0337 25.15949 0.45 30.3717 68.4391 - FOREDGE 12.398 24.94458 0.619 36.5854 61.3814 MAZECASS -6.1684 29.27219 0.833 - 51.3131 203 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 63.6499 - AGRO -5.28705 34.34104 0.878 72.7222 62.1481 - MAIZE -48.9934 27.23847 0.073 102.481 4.4945 MAIZE DAMGAL 37.91259 22.04651 0.086 -5.3799 81.2051 - DAMGRA -5.42663 20.19246 0.788 45.0783 34.2251 FOREST 68.02705(*) 21.43946 0.002 25.9266 110.1275 FOREDGE 61.39135(*) 21.18686 0.004 19.7869 102.9958 MAZECASS 42.82495 26.14406 0.102 -8.5139 94.1638 - AGRO 43.70629 31.71684 0.169 18.5757 105.9883 CASSAVA 48.99335 27.23847 0.073 -4.4945 102.4812 B ird Species Richness DAMGAL DAMGRA 0.399 0.579 0.491 -0.74 1.54 FOREST 0.597 0.624 0.339 -0.63 1.82 FOREDGE -1.636(*) 0.615 0.008 -2.84 -0.43 MAZECASS 1.087 0.778 0.163 -0.44 2.61 AGRO 2.680(*) 0.978 0.006 0.76 4.6 CASSAVA 3.396(*) 0.819 0 1.79 5 MAIZE 1.137 0.703 0.106 -0.24 2.52 DAMGRA DAMGAL -0.399 0.579 0.491 -1.54 0.74 FOREST 0.198 0.557 0.722 -0.9 1.29 FOREDGE -2.035(*) 0.547 0 -3.11 -0.96 MAZECASS 0.688 0.725 0.343 -0.74 2.11 AGRO 2.281(*) 0.937 0.015 0.44 4.12 CASSAVA 2.997(*) 0.769 0 1.49 4.51 204 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN MAIZE 0.738 0.644 0.252 -0.53 2 FOREST DAMGAL -0.597 0.624 0.339 -1.82 0.63 DAMGRA -0.198 0.557 0.722 -1.29 0.9 FOREDGE -2.233(*) 0.594 0 -3.4 -1.07 MAZECASS 0.49 0.761 0.52 -1 1.98 AGRO 2.083(*) 0.965 0.031 0.19 3.98 CASSAVA 2.800(*) 0.804 0.001 1.22 4.38 MAIZE 0.54 0.684 0.43 -0.8 1.88 FOREDGE DAMGAL 1.636(*) 0.615 0.008 0.43 2.84 DAMGRA 2.035(*) 0.547 0 0.96 3.11 FOREST 2.233(*) 0.594 0 1.07 3.4 MAZECASS 2.723(*) 0.754 0 1.24 4.2 AGRO 4.316(*) 0.959 0 2.43 6.2 CASSAVA 5.033(*) 0.797 0 3.47 6.6 MAIZE 2.773(*) 0.676 0 1.45 4.1 MAZECASS DAMGAL -1.087 0.778 0.163 -2.61 0.44 DAMGRA -0.688 0.725 0.343 -2.11 0.74 FOREST -0.49 0.761 0.52 -1.98 1 FOREDGE -2.723(*) 0.754 0 -4.2 -1.24 AGRO 1.593 1.071 0.137 -0.51 3.7 CASSAVA 2.310(*) 0.928 0.013 0.49 4.13 MAIZE 0.05 0.827 0.951 -1.57 1.67 A GRO DAMGAL -2.680(*) 0.978 0.006 -4.6 -0.76 DAMGRA -2.281(*) 0.937 0.015 -4.12 -0.44 FOREST -2.083(*) 0.965 0.031 -3.98 -0.19 FOREDGE -4.316(*) 0.959 0 -6.2 -2.43 MAZECASS -1.593 1.071 0.137 -3.7 0.51 205 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN CASSAVA 0.716 1.101 0.516 -1.45 2.88 MAIZE -1.543 1.018 0.13 -3.54 0.46 CASSAVA DAMGAL -3.396(*) 0.819 0 -5 -1.79 DAMGRA -2.997(*) 0.769 0 -4.51 -1.49 FOREST -2.800(*) 0.804 0.001 -4.38 -1.22 FOREDGE -5.033(*) 0.797 0 -6.6 -3.47 MAZECASS -2.310(*) 0.928 0.013 -4.13 -0.49 AGRO -0.716 1.101 0.516 -2.88 1.45 MAIZE -2.259(*) 0.866 0.009 -3.96 -0.56 MAIZE DAMGAL -1.137 0.703 0.106 -2.52 0.24 DAMGRA -0.738 0.644 0.252 -2 0.53 FOREST -0.54 0.684 0.43 -1.88 0.8 FOREDGE -2.773(*) 0.676 0 -4.1 -1.45 MAZECASS -0.05 0.827 0.951 -1.67 1.57 AGRO 1.543 1.018 0.13 -0.46 3.54 CASSAVA 2.259(*) 0.866 0.009 0.56 3.96 E veness index DAMGAL DAMGRA .06774(*) 0.02571 0.009 0.0173 0.1182 FOREST -.12135(*) 0.02762 0 -0.1756 -0.0671 FOREDGE -.11725(*) 0.02717 0 -0.1706 -0.0639 MAZECASS 0.03475 0.03522 0.324 -0.0344 0.1039 AGRO -0.00165 0.04435 0.97 -0.0887 0.0854 CASSAVA -0.00815 0.03635 0.823 -0.0795 0.0632 MAIZE 0.02647 0.03153 0.401 -0.0354 0.0884 DAMGRA DAMGAL -.06774(*) 0.02571 0.009 -0.1182 -0.0173 FOREST -.18910(*) 0.02456 0 -0.2373 -0.1409 FOREDGE -.18499(*) 0.02405 0 -0.2322 -0.1378 MAZECASS -0.03299 0.03287 0.316 -0.0975 0.0316 206 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN AGRO -0.06939 0.04251 0.103 -0.1529 0.0141 CASSAVA -.07589(*) 0.03408 0.026 -0.1428 -0.009 MAIZE -0.04127 0.02888 0.154 -0.098 0.0154 FOREST DAMGAL .12135(*) 0.02762 0 0.0671 0.1756 DAMGRA .18910(*) 0.02456 0 0.1409 0.2373 FOREDGE 0.00411 0.02608 0.875 -0.0471 0.0553 MAZECASS .15610(*) 0.03439 0 0.0886 0.2236 AGRO .11970(*) 0.04369 0.006 0.0339 0.2055 CASSAVA .11321(*) 0.03554 0.002 0.0434 0.183 MAIZE .14783(*) 0.03059 0 0.0877 0.2079 FOREDGE DAMGAL .11725(*) 0.02717 0 0.0639 0.1706 DAMGRA .18499(*) 0.02405 0 0.1378 0.2322 FOREST -0.00411 0.02608 0.875 -0.0553 0.0471 MAZECASS .15200(*) 0.03402 0 0.0852 0.2188 AGRO .11560(*) 0.0434 0.008 0.0304 0.2008 CASSAVA .10910(*) 0.03519 0.002 0.04 0.1782 MAIZE .14372(*) 0.03019 0 0.0844 0.203 MAZECASS DAMGAL -0.03475 0.03522 0.324 -0.1039 0.0344 DAMGRA 0.03299 0.03287 0.316 -0.0316 0.0975 FOREST -.15610(*) 0.03439 0 -0.2236 -0.0886 FOREDGE -.15200(*) 0.03402 0 -0.2188 -0.0852 AGRO -0.0364 0.04885 0.456 -0.1323 0.0595 CASSAVA -0.0429 0.04173 0.304 -0.1248 0.039 MAIZE -0.00828 0.0376 0.826 -0.0821 0.0656 AGRO DAMGAL 0.00165 0.04435 0.97 -0.0854 0.0887 DAMGRA 0.06939 0.04251 0.103 -0.0141 0.1529 FOREST -.11970(*) 0.04369 0.006 -0.2055 -0.0339 207 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN FOREDGE -.11560(*) 0.0434 0.008 -0.2008 -0.0304 MAZECASS 0.0364 0.04885 0.456 -0.0595 0.1323 CASSAVA -0.0065 0.04967 0.896 -0.104 0.091 MAIZE 0.02812 0.04626 0.543 -0.0627 0.119 CASSAVA DAMGAL 0.00815 0.03635 0.823 -0.0632 0.0795 DAMGRA .07589(*) 0.03408 0.026 0.009 0.1428 FOREST -.11321(*) 0.03554 0.002 -0.183 -0.0434 FOREDGE -.10910(*) 0.03519 0.002 -0.1782 -0.04 MAZECASS 0.0429 0.04173 0.304 -0.039 0.1248 AGRO 0.0065 0.04967 0.896 -0.091 0.104 MAIZE 0.03462 0.03866 0.371 -0.0413 0.1105 M AIZE DAMGAL -0.02647 0.03153 0.401 -0.0884 0.0354 DAMGRA 0.04127 0.02888 0.154 -0.0154 0.098 FOREST -.14783(*) 0.03059 0 -0.2079 -0.0877 FOREDGE -.14372(*) 0.03019 0 -0.203 -0.0844 MAZECASS 0.00828 0.0376 0.826 -0.0656 0.0821 AGRO -0.02812 0.04626 0.543 -0.119 0.0627 CASSAVA -0.03462 0.03866 0.371 -0.1105 0.0413 * T he mean difference is significant at the .05 level. 208 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Table 3.0.1: Composition of the viral transport medium. Reagent Initial concentration Amount Final concentration Medium 199 500ml 500ml mixture 100x penstrep 200mg/L 10ml 200U Pen + 200mg/km 100x fungizone 2.5mg/ml 10ml 2.5ug/ml Pennicillin G 2x1066U/L 540ml 1800U/ml dissolved in 10ml me dium 199 Polymixin B 2x1066U/L 230mg 2000U/ml dissolved in 10ml medium199 Gentamycin 250mg/L 125mg 250ug/ml dissolved in 10ml medium 199 Oflocacin HCL 60mg/L 30mg 60ug/ml dissolve in 1ml 1NaOH Sulphamethoxalole 0.2g/L 100mg 200ug/ml dissolve in 1ml 1N NaOH Note: filter and sterilize 52 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Table 3.2: Primers required for running PCR templates Annealing Sensitivity Temperatu MgCl2 Primer Amplified Virus re (50mM) Primer sequence Primer source volume fragment Remarks 0,75 25 uM One IBV 55°C ul/sample Fwd: N784: 5' AATTTTGGTGATGACAAGATGA 3' Akin et al. (2001) solution: 402 bp round Rev: N1145: 5' CATTGTTCCTCTCCTCATCTG 3' Akin et al. (2001) 0.5 ul/sample 25 uM NDV 58°C 2ul/sample Fwd: FOP1: 5' TACACCTCATCCCAGACAGGGTC 3' Kho et al. (2000) solution: 532 bp 1st round Rev: FOP2: 5' AGGCAGGGGAAGTGATTTGTGGC 3' Kho et al. (2000) 0.1 ul/sample Fwd: ChenF(M52C)*: 5' CTTCTAACCGAGGTCGAAACG Fouchier et al. 25 uM On e AIV-A 60°C 1ul/sample 3' (2000) solution: 250 bp round Rev: ChenR(M253R)*: 5' Fouchier et al. AGGGCATTTTGGACAAAKCGTCTA 3' (2000) 0.5 ul/sample 0,7 5 25 uM IBV 54°C ul/sample Fwd: N791: 5' GTGATGACAAGATGAATGAGGA 3' Akin et al. (2001) solution: 380 bp nested 1.00E-03 Rev: N1129: 5' CAGCTGAGGTCAATGCTTTATC 3' Akin et al. (2001) 0.5 ul/sample 25 uM NDV 58°C 2 ul/sample Fwd: FIP1: 5' TACTTTGCTCACCCCCCTT 3' Kho et al. (2000) solution: 280 bp nested 3.00E-08 Rev: FIP2: 5' CATCTTCCCAACTGCCACT 3' Kho et al. (2000) 0.5 ul/sample 59 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 3° 53΄30΄΄ 3° 53΄ 30΄΄ 3° 54 ΄0΄΄ 7° 30΄ 30΄΄ 7° 30΄ 30 ΄΄ 7° 30΄ 0΄΄ 7° 30΄ 0΄΄ 7° 30΄ 0΄΄ 7° 29΄ 30΄΄ 7° 29΄ 30΄΄ 7° 29΄ 30΄΄ 7° 29΄ 0΄΄ 7° 29΄ 0΄΄ 7° 29΄ 0΄΄ 3° 53΄ 0΄΄ 3° 53΄ 30΄΄ 3° 54΄ 0΄΄ Legend Transect Mist netting locations Figure 3.2: IITA West Bank and forest trails 48 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Table 4.1: Bird species diversity, abundance, richness and evenness index across habitats Forest S.E SD Dam S.E SD Farm S.E SD N 220 240 184 Diversity(Shannon’s) 1.888* 0.034 0.509 1.466 0.038 0.583 1.370 0.046 0.606 Diversity(Simpson’s’) 0.114* 0.007 0.096 0.297 0.015 0.237 0.295 0.018 0.241 Abundance 18.562 0.892 13.229 73.514* 10.831 167.791 56.124 13.345 176.034 Richness 8.964* 0.303 4.490 8.304 0.285 4.407 6.868 0.327 4.313 Evenness index 0.913* 0.006 0.088 0.746 0.016 0.242 0.779 0.017 0.220 Note (*) This signifies the highest value 93 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Table 4.2: Viral Prevalence among sampled birds in IITA environs Chicken Turkey Turkey No. Common name Age Cl Cl/OR FE OR GT NDV AIV IBV Rota Astro Astro 1 Astro 2 1 Accipiter tachiro African Goshawk 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 African Goshawk Total 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Actophilornis africanus African Jacana 4 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 African Jacana Total 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Turdus pelios African Thrush 4 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 African thrush Total 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Porphyrio alleni Allen’s Gallinule 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Allen's Gallinule Total 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Bates sunbird 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bates sunbird Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Phyllastrephus baumanni Baumann’s Greenbul 4 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Baumans greenul Total 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 Amaurornis flavirostra Black Crake 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4?? 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black crake Total 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Pyrenestes ostrinus Black-bellied Seedcracker 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black-bellied seedcracker Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 Ploceus nigricollis Black-necked Weaver 4 27 1 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black-necked Weaver Total 37 1 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 Halcyon malimbica Blue-breasted Kingfisher 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Blue-breasted Kingfisher Total 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 11 Malimbus nitens Blue-billed Malimbe 4 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Blue-billed Malimbe Total 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 Trochocercus nitens Blue-headed Crested Flycatcher 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Blue-headed Crested flycatcher Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 Cossypha cyanocampter Blue-shouldered Robin Chat 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Blue-shouldered Robin chat Total 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 Spermestes cucullatus Bronze Mannikin 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bronze Mannikin Total 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Illadopsis fulvescens Brown Illadopsis 4 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Brown Illadopsis Total 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 Campethera nivosa Buff-spotted Woodpecker 4 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Buff-spotted Woodpecker Total 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 Andropadus curvirostris Cameroon Sombre Greenbul 4 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cameroon Sombre Greenbul Total 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 Phyllanthus atripennis Capuchin Babbler 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Capuchin Babbler total 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 Dyaphorophyia castanea Chestnut Wattle-eye 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chestnut Wattle-eye Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Hedydipna collaris Collared Sunbird 4 26 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Collared sunbird Total 31 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 Pycnonotus barbatus Common Bulbul 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Common Bulbul Total 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 Gallinula chloropus Common Moorhen 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Common Moorhen Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 23 Platysteira cyanea Common Wattle-eye 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Common Wattle-eye Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 Cinnyris cupreus Copper Sunbird 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Copper Sunbird Total 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 Domestic chicken 4 36 36 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 Domestic chicken Total 36 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 Stiphrornis erythrothorax Forest Robin 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Forest Robin Total 14 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 Acrocephalus arundinaceus Great Reed Warbler 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Great Reed Warbler Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 Rostratula benghalensis Greater Painted-snipe 4 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Greater Painted-snipe Total 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 Sylvietta virens Green Crombec 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Green Crombec Total 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 Hylia prasina Green Hylia 4 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Green Hylia Total 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 Macrosphenus concolor Grey Longbill 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grey Longbill Total 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 Camaroptera brachyura Grey-backed Camaroptera 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grey-backed Camaroptera Total 10 1 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 33 Bleda canicapillus Grey-headed Bristlebill 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 88 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grey-headed Bristlebill Total 108 108 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 Macrosphenus kempi Kemp’s Longbill 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kemp's longbill Total 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 Pyrrhurus scandens Leaflove 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Leaflove Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 Gallinula angulata Lesser Moorhen 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lesser Moorhen Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 Andropadus virens Little Greenbul 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 51 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Little Greenbul Total 1 59 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 Kaupifalco monogrammicus Lizard Buzzard 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lizzard Buzzard Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 Alcedo cristata Malachite Kingfisher 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Malachite kigfisher Total 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 Camaroptera chloronota Olive-green Camaroptera 4 2 39 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Olive-green Camaroptera Total 2 45 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 Cyanomitra obscura Western Olive Sunbird 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 44 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Olive Sunbird Total 1 63 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 Cinnyris chloropygius Olive-bellied Sunbird 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Olive-bellied Sunbird Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 Ceryl pictus African Pygmy Kingfisher 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pygmy Kingfisher total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 Terpsiphone rufiventer Red-bellied Paradise Flycatcher 4 27 1 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Red-bellied Paradise Flycatcher Total 39 1 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 Dyaphorophyia . blissetti Red-cheeked Wattle-eye 4 1 7 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Red-cheecked Wattle-eye Total 1 12 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Red-eyed Dove Total 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 Cisticola erythrops Red-faced Cisticola 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Red-faced Cisticola Total 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 Quelea erythrops Red-headed Quelea 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (blank) 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Red-headed Quelea Total 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 Smithornis rufolateralis Rufous-sided Broadbill 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rufous-sided Broadbill Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 Burhinus senegalensis Senegal Thick-knee 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Senegal Thick-knee Total 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 Chlorocichla simplex Simple Leaflove 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Simple Leaflove Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 Pogoniulus scolopaceus Speckled Tinkerbird 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Specked Tinkerbird Total 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 Cinnyris coccinigastrus Splendid Sunbird 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN Splendid sunbird Total 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 Indicator maculatus Spotted Honeyguide 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spotted honeyguide Total 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 Vanellus spinosus Spur-winged Lapwing 4 2 55 57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spur-winged Lapwing Total 3 55 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 Square-tailed Drongo 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 Tutur tympanistria Tamborine Dove 4 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tamborine Dove Total 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 Cinnyris minullus Tiny Sunbird 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tiny sunbird Total 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 Unknown (Label removed from vile) 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (blank) 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unknown Total 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 Dicrurus modestus Velvet-mantled Drongo 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Velvet-mantled Drongo Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 Ploceus cucullatus Village Weaver 4 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Village Weaver Total 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 Spermophaga haematina Western Bluebill 4 34 1 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Western Bluebill Total 37 1 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 Nicator chloris Western Nicator 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Western Nicator Total 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 Dendrocygna viduata White-faced Whistling Duck 4 1 378 379 113 0 0 0 0 0 0 White-faced whistling duck Total 1 378 379 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN 65 Vanellus albiceps White-headed Lapwing 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White-headed lapwing Total 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 Neocossyphus poensis White-tailed Ant Thrush 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White-tailed Ant Thrush Total 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 Phyllastrephus albigularis White-throated Greenbul 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 27 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White-throated Greenbul Total 40 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 Halycyon senegalensis Woodland Kingfisher 4 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Woodland Kingfisher Total 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 Ceuthmochares aereus Yellow bill 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yellow bill Total 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 Camaroptera superciliaris Yellow-browed Camaroptera 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yellow-browed Camaroptera Total 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 Andropadus latirostris Yellow-whiskered Greenbul 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 82 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 23 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yellow-whiskered Greenbul Total 3 112 115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grand total 10 844 439 5 115 123 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percentage 0.8% 65.00% 33.8% 0.4% 1298 100% 9.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 110 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN