Changes in bird communities following conversion of lowland forest to oil palm and rubber plantations in southern Thailand

This paper describes changes in bird communities following the conversion of lowland forest to commercial oil palm and rubber plantations. Conversion of forest to plantations resulted in a reduction in species richness of at least 60%, with insectivores and frugivores suffering greater losses than more omnivorous species. Of the 128 species recorded across all habitats, 84% were recorded in forest, and 60% were recorded only in that habitat. Of the 16 Globally Threatened or Near-Threatened species recorded in the study, 15 were recorded only in forest. Species occurring in plantations were significantly more widespread in Thailand than species recorded only in forests and had a tendency towards smaller body size. Species richness in plantations was unaffected by plantation age or distance from nearest forest edge, but was significantly greater where undergrowth was allowed to regenerate beneath the crop trees. Bird communities in oil palm and rubber plantations were extremely similar, and there was a strong positive correlation across species in their relative abundance in each plantation type. The results indicate that a high proportion of species formerly present in the region are unable to adapt to conversion of forest to oil palm and rubber plantations, resulting in large losses of bird species and family richness and the replacement of species with restricted ranges and high conservation status by those with extensive ranges and low conservation status. Initiatives that reduce pressure to clear new land for plantations, for example by increasing productivity in existing plantations and improving protected area networks, are likely to be more effective in conserving threatened forest birds than initiatives to improve conditions within plantations, though both should be encouraged.

[1]  N. Collar,et al.  The future for Sundaic lowland forest birds: long-term effects of commercial logging and fragmentation , 2002 .

[2]  M. Hartley,et al.  Rationale and methods for conserving biodiversity in plantation forests , 2002 .

[3]  Robert H. Kushler,et al.  Statistical Computing: An Introduction to Data Analysis Using S-PLUS , 2003, Technometrics.

[4]  Kevin J. Gaston,et al.  Abundance–occupancy relationships , 2000 .

[5]  J. Scharlemann,et al.  Land‐use trends in Endemic Bird Areas: global expansion of agriculture in areas of high conservation value , 2004 .

[6]  Allen Jeyarajasingam.  The Birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Volume One (Non-Passerines) David R. Wells Philip Burton Geoffrey Davison R. David Digby Dana Gardner Peter Hayman Ian Lewington David Quinn Chris Rose , 2000 .

[7]  Zhao-lu Wu,et al.  Rubber cultivation and sustainable development in Xishuangbanna, China , 2001 .

[8]  G. Schroth,et al.  Increasing the profitability of traditional, planted rubber agroforests at the Tapajós river, Brazilian Amazon , 2004 .

[9]  S. Freeman,et al.  On the use of Timed Species Counts to estimate avian abundance indices in species‐rich communities , 2003 .

[10]  P. Hammond,et al.  The diversity of beetle assemblages in different habitat types in Sabah, Malaysia. , 2000, Bulletin of entomological research.

[11]  Jason W. Clay,et al.  World agriculture and the environment: a commodity-by-commodity guide to impacts and practices. , 2004 .

[12]  P. Fearnside,et al.  Commodities and Conservation: The Need for Greater Habitat Protection in the Tropics , 2004 .

[13]  G. Schroth,et al.  Rubber agroforests at the Tapajós river, Brazilian Amazon—environmentally benign land use systems in an old forest frontier region , 2003 .

[14]  Brian G. Wolff,et al.  Forecasting Agriculturally Driven Global Environmental Change , 2001, Science.

[15]  K. Gaston,et al.  Explanations of commonness and rarity in British breeding birds: separating resource use and resource availability , 2000 .

[16]  C. Robson.  A Field Guide to the Birds of Thailand , 2000 .

[17]  K. Ickes,et al.  Hyper-abundance of Native Wild Pigs (Sus scrofa) in a Lowland Dipterocarp Rain Forest of Peninsular Malaysia1 , 2001 .

[18]  Paul F. Donald,et al.  Biodiversity Impacts of Some Agricultural Commodity Production Systems , 2004 .

[19]  M. van Noordwijk,et al.  Technological change and biodiversity in the rubber agroecosystem of Sumatra. , 2003 .

[20]  Andrew Balmford,et al.  Avian endemism and forest loss , 1994, Nature.

[21]  M. Fogden.  THE SEASONALITY AND POPULATION DYNAMICS OF EQUATORIAL FOREST BIRDS EST SARAWAK , 2008 .

[22]  Marina Wong,et al.  Trophic Organization of Understory Birds in a Malaysian Dipterocarp Forest , 1986 .

[23]  Distribution-abundance relationship for passerines breeding in Tunisian oases: test of the sampling hypothesis , 2004, Oecologia.

[24]  Andrew Balmford,et al.  Farming and the Fate of Wild Nature , 2005, Science.

[25]  Kevin J. Gaston,et al.  On species occupancy-abundance models , 2002 .

[26]  C. Vaughan,et al.  White-faced monkey (Cebus capucinus) ecology and management in neotropical agricultural landscapes during the dry season. , 2001, Revista de biologia tropical.

[27]  Frédéric Achard,et al.  Global tropical forest area measurements derived from coarse resolution satellite imagery: a comparison with other approaches , 1998, Environmental Conservation.

[28]  A. Mardiastuti,et al.  Effects of Land Use on Bird Species Richness in Sulawesi, Indonesia , 2004 .