Abstract ∙ Little is known about the nesting behavior of the Gray-breasted Flycatcher (Lathrotriccus griseipectus), a species listed as Vulnerable by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. In order to add fundamental information on the life history of this species, we recorded parental behavior at a nest in February–March 2010 in the Jorupe Reserve in southwestern Ecuador. Recordings were made on a tripod-mounted video camera and took place during part of the incubation and nestling stages. Both adults provisioned nestlings. We recorded 7.1 feeds per nestling-hour, with the highest average provisioning rates occurring from 12:00–13:00 h. Nestlings produced an average of 0.8 fecal sacs per nestling-hour. Nestlings fledged in quick succession shortly before 12:00 h on nestling-day 14.Resumen ∙ El cuidado parental del Mosquero Pechigrís (Lathrotriccus griseipectus) en el suroeste del Ecuador La biología reproductiva del Mosquero Pechigrís (Lathrotriccus griseipectus), una especie catalogada como “Vulnerable” por la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza, es poco conocida. Con el fin de añadir datos básicos sobre la historia de vida del Mosquero Pechigrís, utilizamos una cámara de video para realizar observaciones de un nido ubicado en la Reserva Jorupe en el suroeste de Ecuador, entre febrero y marzo de 2010. Las grabaciones tuvieron lugar durante parte de las etapas de incubación y polluelo. Ambos adultos aprovisionaron polluelos. Registramos 7.1 alimentaciones de polluelo por hora, siendo las tasas de aprovisionamiento más altas de 12:00–13:00 h. Los polluelos produjeron un promedio de 0.8 sacos fecales por hora y polluelo. Los polluelos emplumaron en rápida sucesión poco antes del mediodía 14 días luego de la eclosión

Edwards, David A.

Greeney, Harold F.

Kirkpatrick, William H.

McGee, Matthew R.

Sheldon, Kimberly S.

English

Ornitología Neotropical (E-Journal)

  (2018) 29: 367–370 Matthew R. McGee1 ∙ David A. Edwards1 ∙ William H. Kirkpatrick1 ∙ Harold F. Greeney2 ∙ Kimberly S. Sheldon1   1 Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, 569 Dabney Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA.  2 Yanayacu Biological Station & Center for Creative Studies, Cosanga, Ecuador, c/o 721 Foch y Amazonas, Quito, Ecuador. E-mail: Kimberly S. Sheldon ∙ ksheldon@utk.edu  Abstract ∙ Little is known about the nesting behavior of the Gray-breasted Flycatcher (Lathrotriccus griseipectus), a species listed as Vulnera-ble by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. In order to add fundamental information on the life history of this species, we recorded parental behavior at a nest in February–March 2010 in the Jorupe Reserve in southwestern Ecuador. Recordings were made on a tripod-mounted video camera and took place during part of the incubation and nestling stages. Both adults provisioned nestlings. We record-ed 7.1 feeds per nestling-hour, with the highest average provisioning rates occurring from 12:00–13:00 h. Nestlings produced an average of 0.8 fecal sacs per nestling-hour. Nestlings fledged in quick succession shortly before 12:00 h on nestling-day 14.  Resumen ∙ El cuidado parental del Mosquero Pechigrís (Lathrotriccus griseipectus) en el suroeste del Ecuador  La biología reproductiva del Mosquero Pechigrís (Lathrotriccus griseipectus), una especie catalogada como “Vulnerable” por la Unión Interna-cional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza, es poco conocida. Con el fin de añadir datos básicos sobre la historia de vida del Mosquero Pechigrís, utilizamos una cámara de video para realizar observaciones de un nido ubicado en la Reserva Jorupe en el suroeste de Ecuador, entre febrero y marzo de 2010. Las grabaciones tuvieron lugar durante parte de las etapas de incubación y polluelo. Ambos adultos aprovi-sionaron polluelos. Registramos 7.1 alimentaciones de polluelo por hora, siendo las tasas de aprovisionamiento más altas de 12:00–13:00 h. Los polluelos produjeron un promedio de 0.8 sacos fecales por hora y polluelo. Los polluelos emplumaron en rápida sucesión poco antes del mediodía 14 días luego de la eclosión.  Key words: Dry forest ∙ Natural history ∙ Nestlings ∙ Tropics ∙ Tumbesian region ∙ Tyrannidae   INTRODUCTION  The Tumbesian region of southwestern Ecuador and northwestern Peru contains both humid forest and some of the most  imperiled tropical dry forest in South America (Best & Kessler 1995, Knowlton & Graham 2011). The region is home to a large number of endemic bird species – 30% are found nowhere else (Parker et al. 1995, Flanagan et al. 2005). Because tropical dry forests are understudied compared to tropical rainforests (Miles et al. 2006), the biology of many birds endemic to the Tum-besian region remains poorly known. Among these is the Gray-breasted Flycatcher (Lathrotriccus griseipectus), a small tyrannid that lives below 2200 m a.s.l. in both humid and dry forests of the Tumbesian region on the western slope of the Andes in  Ecuador and northern Peru (Ridgely & Greenfield 2001, Farnsworth et al. 2018, Freile & Restall 2018). Due to its small range and ongoing habitat degradation in the region, L. griseipectus is listed as Vulnerable by the International Union for Conserva-tion of Nature (Collar et al. 1992, Knowlton & Graham 2011, BirdLife International 2016, IUCN 2017), and bird surveys in the region have reported only rare, localized observations of the species (Ridgely & Tudor 1994, Clements & Shany 2001, Barrio et al. 2015, Athanas & Greenfield 2016). Until recently, basic information on its breeding biology was unknown, and behavior at the nest has not been described (Heming et al. 2013, Greeney 2014). Here we present behavioral observations from a nest of  L. griseipectus discovered at Jorupe Reserve in southwestern Ecuador (04°23’S, 79°57’W; 600 m a.s.l.).   METHODS  The nest was active from 10 February 2010 to 15 March 2010 and was described by Greeney (2014) as being located “1 m above ground in a shallow, upward-opening cavity in the buttress root of a canopy-emergent Ceiba tree.” We used a tripod-mounted video camera (Sony video Hi8) to record behaviors at the nest. We made video recordings twice during the incuba-tion stage, from 06:20 to 12:00 h on 12 February and from 06:00 to 19:30 h on 18 February. During the nestling stage, we  BREEDING BEHAVIOR OF THE GRAY-BREASTED FLYCATCHER (LATHROTRICCUS GRISEI-PECTUS) IN SOUTHWESTERN ECUADOR Receipt 27 July 2018 ∙ First decision 23 October 2018 ∙ Acceptance 18 December 2018 ∙ Online publication 22 December 2018 Communicated by Kaspar Delhey © Neotropical Ornithological Society 367 ORNITOLOGÍA NEOTROPICAL (2018) 29: 367–370 368   recorded the nest on six days (9–12 March and 14–15 March) from c. 06:00 to 18:20 h each day with the exception of 12 March, when we only filmed from 06:30 to 11:30 h. The nestlings fledged by 12:00 h on 15 March, ending the observation period.  RESULTS  Incubation. During the 5.5 h of recording on 12 February, only one egg was in the nest. We observed incubation for 2.3 h that day, but no adult spent the night on the nest. Previ-ously, Greeney (2014) suggested incubation began on 13 February with the laying of the second egg and ended when the nestlings hatched on 1 March, for a total of 16 days of incubation. However, the videotaped observations on 12 February suggest that an adult incubated when only one egg was present, increasing the incubation period to 17 days.  On 18 February, five days after the second egg had been laid, an adult was on the nest when recording began at 05:55 h, and the adult incubated for a further 0.6 h before leaving. An adult was on the nest when observations concluded at 19:20 h, and the eggs were incubated for 9.5 h of the 13.5 h-observation window on 18 February.   Nestling period. The nestlings hatched by early afternoon on 1 March and fledged by 12:00 h on 15 March for a total of 14 nestling-days (Greeney 2014). Our behavioral observations began on nestling-day 8 (where hatch day is nestling-day 0) and ended on nestling-day 14 when the young fledged. Adults visited the nest 826 times over the 54.3 h of recorded nestling time. Brooding occurred during only 0.8 h of the 54.3 h of rec-orded nestling time. Due to logistical reasons, recording dur-ing the nestling period did not begin until nestling-day 8, and the last observed brooding occurred on nestling-day 10. Thus, it is possible we missed a majority of the brooding time, which likely occurred when the nestlings were younger (e.g., Sheldon et al. 2014). We observed brooding on three occasions: the evening of nestling-day 8 (for 0.2 h until it was too dark to see), the beginning of nestling-day 10 (for 0.5 h), and for 2.3 min starting at 08:01 h on nestling-day 10. In some cases, we suspect the adult was likely on the nest for longer than the observed times, perhaps spending the night on the nest.   Nestling provisioning. Lathrotriccus griseipectus is a sexually monomorphic species; however, Greeney (2014) surmised that, at the nest we videotaped, only the female incubated, but both parents were observed feeding the nestlings. In our study, adults fed nestlings on 93% of observed visits and rarely stood at the nest for more than a few seconds after provisioning nestlings. We saw two adults at the nest on only a few occasions and only for a few seconds; adults almost always arrived and fed nestlings one after the other. Most of the food items were too small to identify, but occasionally we observed adults provisioning nestlings with large insects.  We observed adults feeding nestlings a total of 770 times over the course of 54.3 h for an overall rate of 7.1 feeds per nestling-hour. Average feeding rates were highest in the ear-ly afternoon from 12:00–13:00 h (8.6 feeds per nestling-hour) and 13:00–14:00 h (8.5 feeds per nestling-hour) (Figure 1). Adults also exhibited high feeding rates in the early morn-ing (8 feeds per nestling-hour from 07:00–08:00 h) and in  the late evening (8.1 feeds per nestling-hour from 17:00–18:00 h). Feeding rates were lowest from 16:00–17:00 h and  08:00–09:00 h, with 5.6 and 6.3 feeds per nestling-hour,  respectively. On a daily basis, feeding rate was lowest on nestling-day 8 (5.6 feeds per nestling-hour) and highest on nestling-day 10 (8.6 feeds per nestling-hour) and the day of fledging (7.7 feeds per nestling-hour).   Sanitation. The two nestlings produced a total of 86  fecal sacs for a rate of 0.8 fecal sacs per nestling-hour. Fecal sac production was lowest on the first day of observation (0.5 fecal sacs per nestling-hour) and highest on the last day of observation (1.3 fecal sacs per nestling-hour). Nestlings tended to defecate more in the afternoon, with four of the five highest hourly rates coming after 12:00 h. On average, the highest hourly rates of 1.3 and 1.2 fecal sacs per nestling-hour came just before sunset (17:00–18:00 h) and just after sunrise (06:00–07:00 h), respectively, and the lowest hourly rate of 0.3 fecal sacs per nestling-hour was in the mid-afternoon (14:00–15:00 h).  On all but one occasion, nestlings defecated in the pres-ence of adults and the adults carried the fecal sacs from the nest. Just prior to fledging, a nestling deposited a fecal sac over the rim of the nest in the absence of an adult. We never observed adults eating fecal sacs, though it is possible they did earlier in the nestling period.      Fledging. Fledging occurred shortly before noon on nestling-day 14. After being provisioned at 11:54 h, one nestling defe-cated over the rim of the nest, perched on the rim for 20 s, then flew from the rim at 11:55 h. The second nestling re-mained in the nest for the next 47 s before abruptly flying out. Neither fledgling returned to the nest in the 1 h we rec-orded post-fledging. An adult came to the nest a few minutes after the nestlings fledged and removed a fecal sac. Approximately 0.5 h after fledging, an adult made four trips to the nest within 17 min, carrying food on three of these trips.  DISCUSSION   We filmed the nest of L. griseipectus during 2 days of the 17-day incubation stage and 6 of the last 7 days of the 14-day nestling stage. We did not find trends in feeds or fecal sacs per nestling-hour across the nestling period, but a study that covers the entire nestling period would be necessary to as-certain trends in parental behavior.  Lathrotriccus griseipectus shares many similarities in breeding biology with its only congener, Euler’s Flycatcher (L. euleri), including nest construction and placement and egg coloration (Sick et al. 1997, Aguilar et al. 1999, Aguilar & Ma-rini 2007, Marini et al. 2007, Greeney 2014). Observations of L. euleri show the same 17-day incubation period we found in L. griseipectus and a 15-day nestling period (Aguilar et al. 1999, Auer et al. 2007), which is one day longer than the nestling period we observed in L. griseipectus (Greeney 2014).  In L. euleri and L. griseipectus, both adults provision nest-lings (Auer et al. 2007). However, unlike L. griseipectus, L. euleri tends to have three eggs per nest (Belcher & Smooker 1937, Greeney 2014, Farnsworth et al. 2018). Auer et al.              BREEDING OF GRAY-BREASTED FLYCATCHER 369   (2007) found a mean feeding rate of 21.5 ± 2.8 feeds per hour for L. euleri, which exceeds both the average feeding rate of L. griseipectus (14.0 feeds per hour) and the highest feeding rate on any day during our observation period (17.2 feeds per hour on nestling-day 10). The higher feeding rate of L. euleri is likely due to the higher average brood size (2.6 ± 0.1 young per nest; Auer et al. 2007) relative to L. griseipectus; total feeding rates have been shown to increase in other Tyrannidae with increasing brood size (Morehouse & Brewer 1968, Conrad & Robertson 1992).  Two other studies have examined nestling feeding rates of passerines in Jorupe Reserve. Two nestlings of Watkins’s Antpitta (Grallaria watkinsi) were provisioned on two differ-ent days at 1.2 and 1.3 feeds per nestling-hour (Greeney et al. 2009). These rates are much lower than what we ob-served in L. griseipectus. Observations of a Slaty Becard (Pachyramphus spodiurus) nest yielded feeding rates of 18.2 feeds per hour (combined parental rate) for two nestlings, which is slightly higher than the 14.1 feeds per hour we ob-served in L. griseipectus (Gelis et al. 2009). However, when only one nestling was present at the nest of P. spodiurus, the feeding rate was reduced to 10.1 feeds per hour (Gelis et al. 2009). Two additional studies from southwestern Ecuador (Buenaventura Biological Reserve; 03°39’S, 79°46’W) both showed much lower rates of nestling provisioning than we observed in L. griseipectus. At a nest of the Ochraceous Attila (Attila torridus) that contained three nestlings, two days of filming uncovered provisioning rates of 0.2 and 0.5 feeds per nestling-hour (Greeney 2006). Based on 336 h of recording at the nest of a Long-wattled Umbrellabird (Cephalopterus pen-duliger), mean rate of nestling provisioning for a single nestl-ing was 1.0 feeds per nestling-hour, and no daily feeding rate was greater than 1.9 feeds per nestling-hour (Greeney et al. 2012). Overall, we observed higher average feeding rates in L. griseipectus than in all but one of the comparable studies from the same region.  Lathrotriccus griseipectus is thought to be in decline due to deforestation and habitat degradation caused by rural activities like livestock grazing, and less than 5% of the re-gion’s native forest remains (Best & Kessler 1995, Parker et al. 1995, Knowlton & Graham 2011). Climate change will like-ly exacerbate these issues, as predicted drier conditions in the region may result in the spread of arid scrubland into areas currently occupied by tropical dry forests (Miles et al. 2006, Knowlton & Graham 2011). We hope that this study will provide critical natural history knowledge for a species which remains at risk, and we encourage further research of the little-studied and imperiled avifauna of the Tumbesian region.  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  We thank the Jocotoco Foundation for access to the Jorupe Reserve. This work was funded in part by the Population  Biology Foundation, John V. Moore, Matt Kaplan, and Field Guides Inc.  Figure 1. Average feeds per nestling-hour of Gray-breasted Flycatcher (Lathrotriccus griseipectus) nestlings (n = 2) based on time of day (h). Data are from a nest discovered at Jorupe Reserve in southwestern Ecuador (04°23’S, 79°57’W; 600 m a.s.l.) that was active from 10 Febru-ary 2010 to 15 March 2010. The data cover 54.3 h of recording during six of the last seven days of the nestling stage .  ORNITOLOGÍA NEOTROPICAL (2018) 29: 367–370 370   REFERENCES  Aguilar, TM & MÂ Marini (2007) Nest and nest-site reuse within and between breeding seasons by three Neo-tropical flycatchers (Tyrannidae). Brazilian Journal of Biology 67: 537–540. Aguilar, TM, LO Leite & MÂ Marini (1999) Biologia da nidificação de Lathrotriccus euleri (Cabanis, 1968) (Tyrannidae) em fragmentos de mata de Minas Gerais. Ararajuba 7: 125–133. Athanas, N & P Greenfield (2016) Birds of western Ecuador: a photographic guide. Princeton Univ. Press, Prince-ton, New Jersey, USA. Auer, SK, RD Bassar, JJ Fontaine & TE Martin (2007) Breeding biology of passerines in a subtropical montane for-est in northwestern Argentina. The Condor 109:  321‒333. Barrio, J, D García-Olaechea & A More (2015) The avifauna of El Angolo Hunting Reserve, north-west Peru: natural history notes. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club 135: 6–20. Belcher, C & GD Smooker (1937) XXV. — Birds of the Colony of Trinidad and Tobago. Part VI. Ibis  79: 504–550, doi:10.1111/j.1474-919X.1937.tb02188.x  Best, BJ & M Kessler (1995) Biodiversity and conservation in Tumbesian Ecuador and Peru. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. BirdLife International (2016) Species factsheet: Lathrotriccus griseipectus. Available at http://www.birdlife.org [Accessed 17 October 2017]. Clements, JF & N Shany (2001) A field guide to the birds of Peru. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Collar, NJ, LP Gonzaga, N Krabbe, A Madroño Nieto, LG Na-ranjo, TA Parker & DC Wege (1992) Threatened birds of the Americas: the ICBP/IUCN Red Data Book. International Council for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK. Conrad, KF & RJ Robertson (1992) Intraseasonal effects of clutch manipulation on parental provisioning and residual reproductive value of Eastern Phoebes (Sayornis phoebe). Oecologia 89: 356–364. Farnsworth, A, D Lebbin & E de Juana (2018) Gray-breasted Flycatcher (Lathrotriccus griseipectus). In del Hoyo, J, A Elliott, J Sargatal, DA Christie & E de Juana  (eds). Handbook of the birds of the world alive.  Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Available at http://www.hbw.com [Accessed 6 April 2018].  Flanagan JN, I Franke & L  Salinas (2005) Aves y endemismo en los bosques relictos de la vertiente occidental andina del norte del Perú y sur del Ecuador. Revista Peruana de Biología 12: 239–248. Freile, JF & R Restall (2018) Birds of Ecuador. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. and C. Helm, London, UK. Gelis, RA, HF Greeney & ET Miller (2009) Further observa-tions of nesting Slaty Becard Pachyramphus spo-diurus. Cotinga 31: 70‒71. Greeney, HF (2006) The nest and eggs of the Ochraceous Attila Attila torridus in south-west Ecuador with notes on parental care. Cotinga 25: 56‒58. Greeney, HF (2014) Breeding biology of the Gray-breasted Flycatcher Lathrotriccus griseipectus in south-west Ecuador. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club 134: 14–18. Greeney, HF, GM Kirwan & ET Miller (2012) Nesting biology of the Long-wattled Umbrellabird Cephalopterus penduliger. Part II: Nestling provisioning. Cotinga 34: 24‒27. Greeney, HF, ET Miller & RA Gelis (2009) Observations of parental care and fledging of Watkins’s Antpitta (Grallaria watkinsi). Ornitología Neotropical 20:  619‒622. Heming, NH, HF Greeney & MÂ Marini (2013) Breeding biolo-gy research and data availability for New World fly-catchers. Natureza & Conservação 11: 54‒58. IUCN (2017) The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Ver-sion 2017-2. Available at http://www.iucnredlist.org [Accessed 17 October 2017]. Knowlton, JL & CH Graham (2011) Species interactions are disrupted by habitat degradation in the highly threatened Tumbesian region of Ecuador. Ecological Applications 21: 2974–2986. Marini, MÂ, TM Aguilar, RD Andrade, LO Leite, M Anciães, CEA Carvalho, C Duca, M Maldonado-Coelho, F Sebaio & J Gonçalves (2007) Biologia da nidificação de aves do sudeste de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Ornitologia 15: 367–376. Miles, L, AC Newton, RS DeFries, C Ravilious, I May, S Blyth, V Kapos & JE Gordon (2006) A global overview of the conservation status of tropical dry forests. Journal of Biogeography 33: 491–505. Morehouse, EL & R Brewer (1968) Feeding of nestling and fledgling Eastern Kingbirds. The Auk 85: 44‒54. Parker, TA, TS Schulenberg, M Kessler & WH Wust (1995) Natural history and conservation of the endemic avifauna in northwest Peru. Bird Conservation Inter-national 5: 201–231. Ridgely, RS & PJ Greenfield (2001) The birds of Ecuador: sta-tus, distribution and taxonomy. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, New York, USA.   Ridgely, RS & G Tudor (1994) The birds of South America. Univ. of Texas Press, Austin, Texas, USA. Sheldon KS, HF Greeney & RC Dobbs (2014) Nesting biology of the Flame-faced Tanager (Tangara parzudakii) in northeastern Ecuador. Ornitología Neotropical 25: 397‒406. Sick, H (1997) Ornitologia brasileira. Ed. Nova Fronteira, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 

BREEDING BEHAVIOR OF THE GRAY-BREASTED FLYCATCHER (LATHROTRICCUS GRISEIPECTUS) IN SOUTHWESTERN ECUADOR

https://journals.sfu.ca/ornneo/index.php/ornneo/article/download/411/ON%2029%20%282018%29%20367-370.pdf

BREEDING BEHAVIOR OF THE GRAY-BREASTED FLYCATCHER (LATHROTRICCUS GRISEIPECTUS) IN SOUTHWESTERN ECUADOR

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Ornitología Neotropical (E-Journal)