Studies on different behavioral activities of Indian peafowl (Pavo Cristatus) in agricultural areas of Punjab

Transcription

1 2017; 5(5): E-ISSN: P-ISSN: JEZS 2017; 5(5): JEZS Received: Accepted: Sandaldeep Kaur Ph.D. Student, Department of Zoology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India Tejdeep Kaur Kler Senior Ornithologist, Department of Zoology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India Studies on different behavioral activities of Indian peafowl (Pavo Cristatus) in agricultural areas of Punjab Sandaldeep Kaur and Tejdeep Kaur Kler Abstract The present study was carried out to assess the behavioral activity patterns of Indian Peafowl in location I (Punjab Agricultural University Campus, Ludhiana) and I (Village Baranhara, Ludhiana) from February 2016 to January Different behavioral activities of Indian peafowl were recorded using scan sampling. The results revealed that Indian Peafowl (male as well as female) devoted maximum proportion of the day in feeding followed by standing, walking, running, roosting and calling. Observations were taken at the time spend in other activities such as display, preening and flying in different seasons. Overall, males and females spent different proportions of time on different behavioral activities varied during the breeding and non breeding season. The initiation of display activity was related to breeding season and seemed to be unaffected by the presence of the opposite sex. Dust bathing and preening was observed more in males as compared to females. Roosting was noted on indigenous trees at location I as compared to buildings/ roofs at location II. Keywords: Indian Peafowl, breeding behavior, time-activity budget, behavioral activities, agricultural areas 1. Introduction The Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) is the largest among the pheasants and belongs to the family Phasianidae and order Galliformes ; inhabits mostly semi- arid conditions [1]. Indian Peafowl is a polygamous avian species [2, 3]. Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) is distributed in the states of Gujarat, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh [4, 5]. It serves as a flagship species for wildlife conservation, particularly outside protected areas. India declared the Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) as the National Bird of India in Pheasants are important indicator species since their presence or absence in an area is a good indicator of the health of the bionetwork [6].The population of Indian Peafowl is facing a severe threat due to habitat destruction, poaching, and contamination of its food source, even though it is protected under Schedule I of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 [7]. Behavioral observations of Indian Peafowl in the agricultural area will provide valuable insight into sex based behavioral activities, which is targeted by natural and sexual selection [8]. Therefore, the study was designed to observe in situ behavioral activity patterns of males and females throughout the year in agricultural areas of Ludhiana (Punjab). Correspondence Tejdeep Kaur Kler Senior Ornithologist, Department of Zoology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India 2. Materials and Methods 2.1 Study area In the present study, the field observations on the behavioral activity patterns of Indian Peafowl were carried out from February 2016 to January The survey sites included Punjab Agricultural University Campus i.e, and Village Baranhara (District Ludhiana) i.e I. The university is situated on the outskirts of Ludhiana city towards west and lies at latitude of N and longitude of E and 244 m above the mean sea level. The campus has a large stretch of agricultural fields spread in an area of more than 550 hectares. The village Baranhara is a medium size village located at Ludhiana West and lies at latitude of N and longitude of E. The field area is distributed under different categories of crops such as wheat, maize, rice, vegetables, fodder and orchards. In addition, there is a rich diversity of trees in the and I. The method of scan sampling was followed [9]. Scan sampling is a technique of observing and recording animal behavior with time intervals. The activities of individuals were recorded at pre selected time intervals. In this case, two types of data recording were carried out. ~ 294 ~

2 Each behavioral activities of Indian Peafowl was noted like feeding, standing, walking, running, display, preening, calling, flying and roosting in both the selected areas. First, continuous monitoring of Indian Peafowl was carried out for 30 minutes and recorded for activity and time budget; secondly, survey was carried out during early morning and early evening hours. All the sightings of peafowl were recorded on data sheet. The male and female Indian Peafowl was distinguished by their neck color appearance, i.e., males recognized by blue neck and female recognized by green neck. 2.2 Statistical Analysis Student s t-test was carried out on time budget activity of Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) at both the said locations. 3. Results and Discussion In the present study, the estimated population count of Indian Peafowl was 120 individuals with 35% males and 65% females at and 70 individuals with 75% males and 25% females in I respectively. The reason behind bias sex ratio at location I and II could not be ascertained. Observations from and II showed that males were recorded spending more time on activities like feeding, standing, walking, running, roosting, calling; some activities were restricted like display, preening and flying. Females consumed most of the observed activity time in feeding, standing, walking followed by other activities like running, roosting, flying, calling, display and preening in both the said locations (Table 1 and 2). Indian Peafowl are ground foragers and they were found to spend more time in feeding as compared to other activities. The time spent in foraging activities was more in early morning when they come out from their nocturnal roosting sites and also in late afternoon in the study areas. At location I and II males used to spend an average time of five minutes in feeding activity. The most common activity of Indian Peafowl was feeding followed by standing and walking. Foraging females spent an average of two minutes in and an average of 3.8 minutes in I (figure I a and I b). During breeding season, Indian Peafowl spent more time in standing, roosting, and displaying and less time in walking than in later days. Standing seemed to be an important behavioral state for a predominantly ground living bird like Indian Peafowl, as it enabled the bird to be invigilant from predators and human disturbance. This posture may have enabled the adult males to locate groups of females from a distance. At fluctuation was observed in standing activity (figure II a). I showed that males spent above an average time of four minutes and females spent an average time of three minutes in standing activity (figure II b). Males spent their maximum time in walking, calling, displaying in open areas to attract females. Males and females did not show any trend of walking activity in relation to the months at both the locations (figure III a and III b). When disturbed, they usually escape by running and rarely take flight. At location I the trend of running activity of males and females was different from each other throughout the year (figure IV a). Males and females spent above two minutes on an average in running activity at location II (figure IV b). Sharma described the similar results that Indian Peafowl spent their maximum time in foraging, roosting and resting activities [10]. According to Johnsingh females while foraging did not show any interest in displaying males [11]. Dawkins had also reported that Indian Peafowl spent only about one quarter of their daily time budgets on feeding, but more than one-fifth on resting and further mentioned that adult males ~ 295 ~ spent only about half as much time as females in feeding [12]. The most common activity of Indian Peafowl was feeding followed by standing and walking [13]. Walther had also mentioned that Indian Peafowl spent 42 % of their daily time budgets for standing, often on an elevated perch from which they surveyed their surroundings and called regularly [14]. Walther had also emphasized that females spent most of the time in walking as compared to males [15]. Verma and Verma also had corresponding results about the population status, sex structure and habitat use of Indian Peafowl and found to be influenced by age and sex [16]. According to Harikrishnan, males and females spent different proportion of time in different activities and varied during breeding and nonbreeding season [17]. It was further reported that females showed significant variation only in the proportion of time spent in feeding and walking. Display activity was observed after sunrise even without the presence of females, the female arrived to the spot soon. Displays were more frequent during the morning than afternoon. The majority of the females approached the displaying males from the back and gradually moved towards various positions in front of the male irrespective of the day. The display activity was high in August at both the locations. Fanning of feathers was observed in the month of March by females at both the locations (figure V a and V b). Displays were made both in open and shaded areas. Calling activity was infrequently recorded during the display time. Calls were generally made very loud, sharp and repeated five to six times in quick succession in non-display hours. While in display, calls were not in succession but often with gaps. Calls during display were of may-awe type, often made at the beginning of the display and rarely during the middle and late display. At location I, no clear cut trend in calling was seen as agricultural area was influenced by human activities (figure VII a). Activity of calling seemed to alarm their flock members and they used to spend an average time of two minutes. Females spent an average time above one minute in calling activity at location II (figure VII b). Preening was observed in early morning before the foraging activity in the ploughed fields. At location I the activity of preening and dust bathing of males was seen to be maximum in the month of August and September; females spent maximum time in preening in the month of March (figure VI a). Males spent maximum time in preening and dust bathing in the month of October at location II. Preening activity was not seen in females at location II (figure VI b). Both preening and dust bathing seemed to be critical activities for the conditioning of their feathers and removal of feather-degrading bacteria / external parasites. Flying activity was observed in relation to human disturbance and predators in both the said locations (figure VIII a and VIII b). Indian Peafowl flies when pressed by a predator or when retreating to their evening roosts. At the location I, Indian Peafowl roosted on dense trees at noon time and in open fields at evening time. Indian Peafowl choose those trees which are either having large canopies cover to hide from the predators and also to get enough space with their long train-feathers (figure IX a). These results are in accordance with the results of Ali and Ripley, Galusha and Redd, Trivedi [18-20]. Indian Peafowl also used some trees species for roosting which had spines on their branches; as the presence of spines/ thorns might be advantageous to deter predators like reptiles/cats. At location II, they were observed to roost on roof tops/ buildings and on trees (figure IX b).there is no significant relationship between the behavioral activities of males and females at the selected locations.

3 Table 1 Time budget activity of Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) at Loacation I during March 2016 to January 2017 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016 May 2016 June2016 July 2016 Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) Feeding 6.86± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±2.96 Standing 3.73± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±2.04 Walking 2.96± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±1.62 Running 2.37± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.16 Display ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± Preening ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.06 Calling 4.06± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.67 Flying 2.52± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.27 Roosting 2.96± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.38 August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 November 2016 December 2016 January 2017 Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) Feeding 3.52± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.35 Standing 3.66± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.08 Walking 2.75± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.30 Running 1.18± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.18 Display 1.54± ± ± ± ± ± Preening 1.66± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.32 Calling 2.15± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.29 Flying 2.83± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.11 Roosting 2.68± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.37 Table 2: Time budget activity of Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) at Loacation II during March 2016 to January 2017 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016 May 2016 June2016 July 2016 Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) Feeding 5.37± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.20 Standing 4.62± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.14 Walking 4.57± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.20 Running 2.16± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.24 Display ± ± ± ± ± ± Preening 0.08± ± ± ± ± ± Calling 2.54± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.12 Flying 1.66± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.28 Roosting 4.20± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.13 August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 November 2016 December 2016 January 2017 Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Males Females Females(Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) (Minutes) Feeding 5.00± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.47 Standing 4.25± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.37 Walking 3.75± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.37 Running 3.12± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.35 Display 0.25± Preening 0.07± ± ± Calling 2.12± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.26 Flying 1.50± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.26 Roosting 1.87± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±0.12 ~ 296 ~

4 Feeding activity of male and female at and I I Fig I a Fig I b Standing activity of male and female at and I I Fig II a Fig II b Walking activity of male and female at and I I Fig III a Fig III b ~ 297 ~

5 Running activity of male and female at and I I Fig IV a Fig IV b Display activity of male and female at and I I Fig IV a Fig IV b Preening activity of male and female at and I I Fig IV a Fig IV b ~ 298 ~

6 Calling activity of male and female at and I Fig VII a Fig VII b Flying activity of male and female at and I I Fig VIII a Fig VIII b Roosting activity of male and female at and I I Fig IX a Fig IX b According to Johansguard about 2% of the time was spent on than sub-adult males and females [15]. Dakin & Mongomerie preening and this is much lower than the percent time had reported a similar pattern in their study that majority of recorded in previous studies [21]. Petrie et al found that call the displays started without the presence of females [23]. signifies the fitness of caller and their frequency influence Harikrishnan et al studied that Indian Peafowl spent most of female visitation [22]. Walther reported that displaying took up the time standing in the display courts and suggested that about 7% of the total time budget, and was the most absorbing reduced feeding and increased display activity are behavior as no feeding or maintenance behavior was energetically costly for a male, and therefore, ensure that only performed during displays [14]. Walther and Clayton had stated the fittest males are able to keep vigil and display for long that Indian Peafowl spent significantly more time in preening periods of time, resulting in greater mating success [17]. It was ~ 299 ~

7 further mentioned that calling and display were not observed together. Rajeshkumar had noticed that the flight was occurred mainly before moving to a roosting site, or from the roosting site, when disturbed by predators [7]. Gokula and Muthurkrishnan had observed that males displayed even in the absence of females, the presence of females influenced the display duration of males [24]. 4. Conclusion It could be inferred that the time spent by Indian Peafowl in feeding activity was greater as compared to other activities at both the locations. Display activity was found to be related with breeding season and was not triggered by a female. The initiation of display seemed to be unrelated to the female s presence. In the present study, preening was noticed to be location specific. Indian Peafowl preferred roof tops/ buildings in villages as compared to the dense trees in crop fields at the location I. No significant relationship was found between the behavioral activities performed by males and females at both the locations. The present study emphasizes the need for habitat specific, sex specific and season specific in situ behavioral activities of Indian Peafowl in agricultural areas. 5. Acknowledgement Authors are grateful to Prof. & Head, Department of Zoology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana for providing necessary facilities. 6. References 1. Roberts TJ. The Birds of Pakistan. Non- Passeriformes. Oxford University Press Inc. Karachi. 1991, Grimmett R, Inskipp C, Inskipp T. Birds of India: Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, and the Maldives. Princeton University Press, Mushtaq-Ul-Hassan M, Ali Z, Arshad M, Mahmood S, Mahmood-Ul-Hassan M. Effects of mating sex ratios in Indian Peafowl (Pavo Cristatus) on production performance at Wildlife Research Institute, Faisalabad (Pakistan). Iranian Journal of Veterinary Research. 2012; 13: Chopra G, Kumar T. Study of daily activities of Blue Peafowl, Pavo Cristatus Linnaeus, 1758 In Kurukshetra, Haryana (India). An International Quarterly Journal of Environmental Science. 2015; 2: Kler T, Kumar M. Avian fauna in agricultural habitats of Punjab state. Agricultural Research Journal. 2015; 52: It could be inferred that the time spent by Indian Peafowl in feeding 6. Kushwaha S, Kumar A. A Review on Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) Linnaeus, Journal of Wildlife and Research. 2016; 4: Rajeshkumar N, Balasubramanian P. Habitat use and food habits of Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus in Anaikatty Hills, Western Ghats Indian Birds. 2012; 7: Irschick DJ, Herrel A, Vanhooydonck B, Damme RV. A functional approach to sexual selection. Functional Ecology. 2007; 21: Altmann J. Observational Study of Behaviour: Sampling Methods. Behaviour. 1974; 49: Sharma K. Social and Sexual Behavior of Peafowl. Environmental Aware. 1978; 1: Johnsingh AJT, Murali S. The ecology and behaviour of Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus) of Injar. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society. 1978; 75: ~ 300 ~ 12. Dawkins MS. Time budgets in red junglefowl as a baseline for the assessment of welfare in domestic fowl Applied Animal Behavior Science. 1989; 24: Galusha J, Hill J. A Study of the behavior of Indian Peacocks (Pavo Cristatus) On Protection Island, Jefferson County. Washington, USA. Pavo. 1996; 34: Walther BD. Peacocks Devote Maintenance Time To Their Ornamental Plumage? Time Budgets of Male Blue Peafowl Pavo Cristatus Lundiana. 2003; 4: Walther B, Clayton D. Elaborate Ornaments Are Costly To Maintain: Evidence for High Maintenance Handicaps. Behavioral Ecology. 2005; 16: Verma L, Verma A. Population status, structure and habitat use of peafowl Pavo cristatus in and around Keoladeo National Park: implications for management. Annual Research Seminar. Keoladeo National Park, Harikrishnan S, Vasudevan K, Sivakumar K. Behavior of Indian Peafowl Pavo Cristatus Linn during the mating period in a natural population. The Open Ornithology Journal. 2010; 3: Ali S, Ripley SD. (eds.). Compact Handbook of the Birds of India and Pakistan together with those of Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, And Sri Lanka. Oxford University Press Inc. Delhi, 1987, Galusha J, Redd J. Population Structure and daytime behavior of Indian Peafowl (Pavo Cristatus) on Protection Island, Jefferson County, Washington. Pavo. 1992; 30: Trivedi P. Habitat selection by Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus Linn.) in Gir Forest. M.Sc dissertation, Saurashtra University, India, Johnsguard P. Arena Birds: Sexual Selection and Behavior. Washington Dc: Smithsonian Institution Press, Petrie M, Cotgreave P, Stewart I. Variation in the train morphology of the Peacocks. Journal of Zoology. 1996; 23: Dakin R, Montgomerie R. Peacocks orient their courtship displays towards the sun. Behavioural Ecology and Socio-biology. 2009; 63: Gokula V, Muthukrishnan V. Display Behaviour of Indian Peafowl Pavo Cristatus (Aves: Galliformes) during the mating season in Viralimalai, Tamilnadu, India Taprobanica. 2015; 7:8-13.