500

Abstract:FeedingbehaviouroftheMarbledTeal,Marmaronettaangustirostris,Mallard,Anasplatyrhynchos,Garganey,

Anasquerquedula,andFerruginousDuck,Aythyanyroca,intheGöksuDelta,Turkey,wascomparedfrom10Julyto

6August1995.Almostall individualsobservedwerepostbreedingadultsandjuveniles.MarbledTealfedclosesttothe surface(meandepthwithinthewatercolumn8.4cm),chieflybybilldipping(66%)andgleaning(14%).Garganeyfedata meandepthof 9.1 cm, mainlybybilldipping(57%)andneckdipping(35%).Mallardsfedatgreaterdepths(mean31.8cm), mainlybyupending(tipping 46%)andneckdipping(41%).FerruginousDucksfedatthegreatestdepths(mean38.4cm), chieflybydiving(76%).MarbledTealmovedmostfrequentlybetweenfeedingeventsandMallardsmovedleastfrequently. Asinpreviousstudiesofdabblingducks,thelargestspecies(Mallard)upendedmoreandfeddeeperinthewatercolumn. However,Mallardsusedshallowermicrohabitatsthansmallerdabblingducks.Dabblinganddiving duckguilds werenot discerniblein eitherhorizontal(feeding habitat)orvertical(feedingbehaviour)nichedimensions,and theMallardand FerruginousDuckwererelatedinbothdimensions.Nicheoverlapsbetweenspeciespairsalongthetwodimensionswere negativelycorrelated(r —0.71,P 0.12),supportingnichecomplementarity.

Résumé:Lecomportementalimentaireaétécomparechezquatre espècesde canards, laMarmaronettemarbrée, Marmaronettaangustirostris,leCanardcolvert,Anasplaryrhynchos,laSarcelled’été,Anasquerquedula,etleFuligule nyroca,Aythyanyroca,dansledeltadeGöksu,Turquie,du10juilletau6aoüt1995.Laplupartdescanardsobservesdtaient desadultespost-reproducteursetdesjuveniles.CesontlesMarmaronettesmarbréesqui senourrissentleplusensurface (profondeurmoyennede8,4cmdanslacolonne d’eau),surtoutparimmersiondubec(66%) et pargrappillage(14%).Les

Sarcellesd’étdsenourrissentauneprofondeurmoyennede9,1 cm,surtoutparimmersiondubec(57%) etimmersionducou

(35%).LesCanards colvertssenourrissentplusprofondément(31,8cmenmoyenne),surtoutparbasculement(46%)etpar

immersionducou(41%).LesFuligulesnyrocasontlescanardsquisenourrissentauxplusgrandesprofondeurs(38,4cmen moyenne),surtoutparplongée(76%).CesontlesMarrnaronettesmarbréesqui se déplacentleplussouvententrelessessions d’alimentationetlesCanards colvertsquise déplacentlemomssouvent.Commel’ontdémontréd’autresetudessurles canardsbarboteurs,laplusgrandeespèce(leCanardcolvert)aplusrecoursaubasculementet senourritplusprofondément dansIacolonne d’eau.Cependant,leCanardcolvertutiliselesmicrohabitatsd’eaumomsprofondequelescanardsbarboteurs pluspetits.Laguilde descanardsbarboteursetcelledescanardsplongeursne differentpasd’aprèslesdimensionshorizontales(habitatalimentaire)ouverticales(comportementalimentaire)deleursnichesrespectivesetlesCanardscolvertsetlesFuligulesnyrocasont semblablesdanslesdeuxdimensions.Les partiessuperposéesdesnichesdepairesd’espèceslelongdesdeuxdimensionssontencorrelationnegative(r =—0,71,P=0,12),ce quiappuiel’hypothèsedelacomplémentarité desniches.

[Traduitpar la Redaction]

Introduction

Various studies of habitat use by duck communities have shown niche separationbetweenspeciesinhorizontaldimen­ sions such as wetland size, vegetation characteristics, and water chemistry (Bengston 1971; Weller 1975; White and James1978;Amat 1982;Toft et al. 1982;Andersonand Ohmart1988;Monda andRatti1988;Bergan andSmith1989; Nummi and Pöysä 1993; Nudds et al. 1994). Some studies have addressedvertical partitioninginforagingmethodsand in the depths in the water columnat which feedingoccurs (DanellandSjoberg1982;Thomas1980,1982).However,few

.

A.J.Green.EstaciónBiológicadeDoflana,AvenidaMaria Luisas/n,Pabellóndel Perd,41013Sevilla,Spain(e-mail: ).

studies haveaddressedtheseissues simultaneouslytoidentify therelationshipbetweenhorizontalandvertical partitioningin duckcommunities.Amat(1984a)showed thattheRed-crested Pochard,Netta rufina, andCommonPochard,Aythya ferina, used differenthabitatsbutshared feedingmethodsinwinter, thenshared thesamehabitat butuseddistinct feedingmethods in spring.Poysä (1983a,1983b)found that partitioning of feedingmethods wasmoreimportant indabblingducks, while partitioningoffeedinghabitatswasmore importantindiving ducks. Pöysä (1987) found anonsignificantnegativecorrela­ tionbetweennichebreadth inthehorizontal(feedingsites)and vertical (feedingmethod)resourceaxesfordabblingducksand Amat(1984b)obtainedasimilarresultfordivingducks.These findingssupport nichecomplementarity(Schoener1974).

Inthisstudy Icomparethefeedingbehaviourinlatesum­

meroffour species intheGöksu Delta, Turkey:theMarbled Teal, Marinaronettaangustirostris,the Mallard, Anas platy­ rhynchos,theGarganey,Anasquerquedula,andtheFerruginous

Green501

Duck,Aythya nyroca.Strongpartitioninginhabitatuseoccurs betweenspeciesinthiscommunity(Green1996’,Green1998). HereIconsidertherelationshipbetweenhorizontalpartition­ inginfeedinghabitatandverticalpartitioning infeedingbe­ haviour.Iaskhowfeedingdepthisrelatedtothedepthof microhabitatsexploitedbyeachspecies.Iconsiderwhether the dabblinganddivingducksformseparateguildsinthis community andItest fornichecomplementarity.Ialsocon­ sidertherelationshipbetweenfeedingbehaviourandbodysize indabblingducksinthelightoftheresultsofpreviousstudies suggestingthatlarger speciesfeedlowerinthewatercolumn (Poysa 1983a;Nudds1992).

TheMarbled TealandFenuginousDuckareglobally threatenedspecies(Collaretal.1994;TuckerandHeath1994; Green1996),andthisisthemostdetailedstudytodateoftheir foragingecology(butseeAmatandSonguer1982;Navarro andRobledano1995). TheGarganeyhasbeenstudiedat breedingsites(Poysä1983a,1983b,1986),butasfarasIam aware,thisisthefirstecologicalstudyofpostbreedingmigra­ tion.TheMarbledTealwaslongconsidereda typicalsurface- feeding duck,but isnowconsideredthelivingmemberofthe Aythyini(pochards)thatbearstheclosestresemblancetothe ancestor ofthistribe(Johnsgard1961; Livezey1996).Inthis studyIconsidertheMarbledTealtobea“dabblingduck,” usingtheterm intheecologicalratherthanthetaxonomic sense.

Studyarea

TheGdksuDeltaislocatedontheTurkishMediterraneancoast(see

DHKD 1992;Green 1996’;for adetaileddescriptionseeGreen

1998).ItisaRamsarsite(Frazier1996),a SpeciallyProtectedArea,

andanImportantBirdArea(MagninandYarar1997),andsupports

internationally important breeding populations of Marbled Teal

(Ca.50pairs) andFerruginousDucks(Ca.30pairs),aswellasabout

50pairsofMallards.Garganeysusethedeltaonpostbreedingpas­

sage,beginningtoarriveinearlyJuly,withnumberspeakingat

3000—5000inlateAugust(Green1996’). Breedingandpostbreeding ducksarehighlyconcentrated atLakeAkgol,apermanent,well-. vegetated, freshwater tobrackisheutrophiclake(1400ha)with extensivebedsofPhragmitesaustralis, Typhasp.,Scirpus(=Schoeno­ plectu.s)litoralis,andPotamogetonpectinatus.

ThisstudywasconductedwhenMallardshadcompletedbreeding andlargenumbersofpostbreedersfromotherareaswerepresent. MarbledTealandFerruginousDuckswereattheendoftheirbreeding season,andsomebroodshadnotyetfledgedwhenthisstudybegan. However,ducklingswereexcludedfromthisstudyandalmostall individualsincludedwerepostbreedingadultsorjuveniles.

Methods

From10Julyto 6August1995inclusive,Akgoland otherwetlands inthedelta(seeGreen19961;fordetailssee Green1998)weresys­ tematicallysurveyedthree timesforAnatidae.AllareasofLakeAk­ golaccessiblebycanoeweresurveyedoverseveraldays.Fieldwork wasconductedfromfirstlight(06:45localtime)andwasusually completedby14:00.ThreecompletesurveysofLakeAkgolwere

A.J.Green.1996.ThesummerecologyoftheMarbled Teal Marmaronettaangustirostris,FerruginousDuckAythyanyroca andotherducksin theGöksuDelta,TurkeyinI995. Unpublishedreport,EstaciónBiologicadeDoñana,Seville, Spain.

conductedovertheperiods18—23July,24—28July,and30July—

5August,datesinclusive.

Duckswere observedwithatelescopeduringatotalof150hof

fieldwork.AllmaleMallardsandGarganeyswereineclipseplumage.

Breedingandeclipseplumages couldnotconsistentlybedistin­ guishedfortheMarbledTealorFerruginousDuck,althoughsome adultsofbothspecieswereclearlymolting.SomeflightlessGar­

ganeyswereobserved.Owingtothedistancesandlightconditionsin whichobservationsweremade,itwasrarelypossible todistinguish thesexes,oradultsfromjuveniles,soallobservationswerepooledfor eachspecies.

Thebehaviourofeachduckfeedingatthetimeofinitialobserva­ tionwasrecordedasoneofthefollowing:dive;upend(tipping);neck dip(partorallofnecksubmerged);headdip(eyesubmerged);billdip (partorallofthebillsubmerged);glean(billheldintheplaneofthe watersurfacewithonlythelowermandiblesubmerged,straining itemsfromthewatersurface).Feedingbirdsweredescribedasmobile orstatic,mobilebirds beingthosemovingduringmore than50%of interdiveintervalsorintervalsbetweenotherforagingevents(upends, dips,etc).

ForeachindividualMallard,MarbledTeal,andFerruginousDuck seenfeeding,thefollowingdetailsofitspositionatthetimeofinitial observationwererecorded:distancetothenearestemergentvegeta­ tion(estimatedvisually inmetres);species ofemergentvegetation; presenceorabsenceofsubmergedmacrophytesatthe surfacelayer. Suspectedrepeatedobservationsofthe sameindividualonthe same daywerediscarded.Garganeyswereobservedinlargeflocksofupto severalhundred, andtheabovedatawere recordedforarandom sampleoffeedingindividuals.

Adipstickwasusedtomeasurewater depthatlocationswhere Marbled TealandFerruginousDuckswerefeeding.Althoughsome speciesofAythyinidonotalwaysfeedonthebottomwhendiving (TomeandWrubleski 1988),diving depthforfeedingwasassumed tobewaterdepth,sinceobservationsofbillcontentsandbehaviour uponsurfacing,combinedwithgrabandnetsampling,suggestedthat alldivingbirdswerefeedingonbenthicseedsorCharavulgaris, whichwasconfinedtothebottomofthewatercolumn.Feedingdepth forgleaningwasconsideredtobe1cmandforotherfeedingmethods wasestimatedusingmorphologicalmeasurementsfrommuseum specimens(Appendix)followingPoysa(l983a): forupendthiswas

3/5xbodylength+necklength;forneckdipitwasnecklength;for headdipitwasskulllength;andforbilldipitwasbilllength.

Nicheorganizationforfeedingbirdswascomparedforthehori­ zontal(habitatuse)andvertical(feedingbehaviour)axes.Percent nicheoverlapbetweenresourcecategories(Krebs1989)wasusedto calculateoverlapforeachspeciespair forthefollowinghabitat-use variables:nearest emergentvegetationtype;distancetonearestemer­ gentvegetation;presenceorabsenceofP.pectinatusinthesurface layer(Table1).Sincethesethreevariableswerenotindependent, mean nicheoverlapwascalculatedasanoverallmeasureofhonzontal partitioning(seePoysa1983b;MondaandRatti1988).Likewise, mean nicheoverlapforfeedingbehaviourwascalculatedusingfeed­ ingmethodanddepthdata(seeFigs.I and2).Clusteranalysiswas usedtoproducedendrogramsbasedoninterspecificdistancesinthe horizontalandverticaldimensions(UPGMAmethod;Krebs1989).

Results

Feedingbehaviour

Strong differencesinfeedingmethodwereobserved between duck species (Fig.1).MarbledTealfedmainlybymobilebill dippingandweretheonlyspeciesobservedgleaningandthe onlydabblingduckobserveddiving.Divetimesforjuvenile MarbledTealwererecordedon30July,whentheywerediving toadepthof49cm (n=17,range2—7s,4.9±1.5s(mean±

Table1.Percentage offeedingduck observationsbycategoryamongthreehabitat variablesinLakeAkgol.

Mallard
(n=ll0) / Garganey
(n=70) / MarbledTeal
(n=24) / Ferruginous
Duck(n=41)
Nearestemergent
vegetation
Scirpuslitoralis / 38.2 / 33.9 / 70.8 / 45.0
Phragmitesoustralis / 26.4 / 8.1 / 25.0 / 35.0
Typhasp. / 35.5 / 58.1 / 4.2 / 20.0

Distancetoemergent

vegetation(m)

0 / 3.6 / 0 / 8.3 / 0
20.9 / 6.5 / 0 / 27.5
2—5 / 43.6 / 9.7 / 58.3 / 42.5
6—10 / 21.8 / 12.9 / 16.7 / 5.0
11—50 / 10.0 / 61.3 / 16.7 / 25.0

>50

P.pectinatusatsurface?

09.700

Yes / 95.4 / 94.3 / 75.0 / 75.6
No / 4.6 / 5.7 / 25.0 / 24.4

Table2.Feeding-nicheoverlaps betweenduckspeciesfor horizontal(above thediagonal)andvertical(beneaththediagonal) resourceaxes.

neck-dippingoneswereprobably feedingatthelakebottom (Green,seefootnote1;Green1998). Lake depth atfeeding sitesusedbyMarbledTeal(n=16,range31—66cm,47.9±

10.3cm)andFerruginousDucks(n=9,range30—51cm,

MallardGarganey

Marbled

teal

Ferruginous

Duck

46.3 ±7.0cm)withinLakeAkgolwereverysimilar(two- tailedtwo-samplettest,t=0.44,22df,P=0.66).Maximum

MarbledTeal

Ferruginous

Duck

0.140.67

0.290.22

0.30

0.79

MarbledTealmovedmoreoftenbetween foragingevents thantheotherspecies did(Fig.1).Excluding unknowns,

92.0%offeedingMarbledTeal(n 50),45.5%ofFerruginous

Note:Horizontaloverlapsaremeansofthreedimensions(nearest emergentvegetation;distancetoemergentvegetation;presenceorabsence ofsubmergedvegetation).Verticaloverlapsaremeansoftwodimensions (feedingmethod;feedingdepth).

SD)).FerruginousDucksfedmainlybydiving,whilstMal­ lardsfedchieflybystaticupending(tipping)andneckdipping (Fig.1).Garganeysfedlargely bystaticbillandneckdipping (Fig. 1).Differencesinfeedingmethodamongspecieswere

highlysignificant(x2=429, 15df,P0.0001),even when

Ferruginous Ducks were excluded (x2=193,10df,P<

0.0001).

Asaresult ofthedifferencesinfeedingmethod,eachspe­ cieswas feedingatdifferentdepthswithinthewatercolumn (Fig.2).MarbledTealwereingestingfoodattheshallowest depths (range1—49cm,8.4±12.1cm),followedbyGar­ ganeys (range4—18cm,9.1±6.7cm)andthenMallards (range6—41 cm,31.8±10.3cm).FerruginousDuckswere feedingatthegreatestdepthsofall(range4—50cm,38.4±

17.6cm).Differencesinfeedingdepthamongspecieswere

highlysignificant(Kruskal—Wallis test, H=190,3df,P

0.0001).

WhereasMarbledTealandGarganeys inLakeAkgolfed mainly inthetophalfofthewatercolumn,amongstbedsof P.pectinatusthatfilledthesurfacelayer(Table1),Ferrugi­ nousDucksfedmainlyatthelakebottom.Mallardwereinter­ mediate, but most upending birds and many of the

Ducks(n=44),16.0%ofGarganeys(n=81),and only5.3%

ofMallards(n=113)weremobile.Thesedifferencesamong specieswerehighlysignificant(x2= 138,3df,P0.0001),

andremainedsimilarwhentheanalysiswasconfinedto those behaviours(bill,head,andneckdipping)exhibitedbyallfour species(90.5%ofMarbledTeal(n=42),53.8% ofFerrugi­ nousDucks(n=13),16.0%ofGarganeys(n=81),and 7.8% ofMallards(n=64)weremobile;x2=96,3df,P0.0001).

Nichesegregation

Therewasanonsignificantnegativecorrelationbetweenniche

overlapsshownbetweenspeciespairsalongthevertical(feed­

ingbehaviour)andhorizontal(feedinghabitat)resourceaxes (Table2;r=—0.705,P=0.12). This correlationisstrongly affectedbythe MarbledTeal— Garganeypair,whichhadthe mostsimilarverticalnichesandtheleastsimilarhorizontal niches(Table 2).Clusteranalysisshowedthatalongtheverti­ calresourceaxis,theMarbled TealandGarganeywere very similar,whilsttheMallardandFerruginousDuckwererelated toeachother,butwithmuchlesssimilarity (Fig.3a).Along thehorizontalresource axis,theMallardandFerruginous Duckwere againgroupedtogether,butwith muchgreater similarity(Fig.3b).TheGarganeywasisolatedfromtheother three species inhorizontalniche space (Fig.3b).

Discussion

Markeddifferencesinfeedingmethodwerefoundbetweenthe

reen503

rig.1.ProportionsofMallards(n=134)(a),Gaganeys(n=Si)(b),MarbledTeal (n=58)(c),andFerruginousDucks(n=62)(d)using lifferentfeedingmethodsintheGöksuDelta.SeeMethodsforafulldescriptionoffeedingmethods.Birds“notrecorded”arethoseforwhich hedistinctionbetween“mobile”and“static”feedingwas notmade. DataexcludeducklingsbutincludeoneadultMarbled Teal(billdip)and neadultFerruginousDuck(headdip)accompanyingbroods.

(a)

U,

I

a0)

0

C

0

0

0

0.

(c)

0

0

0

Ca) U a)

(b)

U,

0

a,

a,

-a

a,

0

Ia-,

0

0Static

Mobile

NotRecorded

(d)

Cl,

0

a,

0)

a,

a, C) a,

Glean Bill HeadNeckUpendDiveGlean Bill HeadNeckUpendDive dip dipdipdipdip dip

©1998NRCCanada

Fig.2.FeedingdepthsusedbyduckspeciesintheGöksuDelta.SeeFig.1forsamplesizes.These figuresrefertothedepthwithinthewater columnatwhichingestionoccurred,whichwasoftenmuchlessthenthetotaldepthofthewatercolumn (seeMethods).

0.

Percentage of Birds

CMailard

0Garganey

JFerruginousDuck

•MarbledTeal

fourduckspeciesstudied,resultinginclearverticalseparation offeedingactivityinthewatercolumn.Thiscomplements differences inhabitatuseanddiet(Green,seefootnote 1; Green1998).Marbled Tealfedclosesttothewatersurface, whichconfirmsthatthisspeciesisadabblingduckinecologi­ calterms, despiteitstaxonomicpositionintheAythyini (Livezey 1996).NotsurprisinglyforanAythyaspecies,Per­ ruginousDucksfedatthegreatestdepths,althoughtheiraver­ age feedingdepthwasonly21%morethanthatofMallards. Indeed, MallardsshowedgreateroverlapwithFerruginous Ducksin thedepthrangesutilized(23%accordingto Fig.2) thanwith theothertwo dabblingduckspecies(14%with the MarbledTealand9%with theGarganey).Similarly,theMar­ bledTealandGarganeyshowed muchmoreoverlapwitheach other(67%)thanwitheitheroftheothertwo species.

Amongstpreviousstudiesofdabblingducks,largerspecies

(e.g.,Mallard,NorthernPintail,Anasacute)fedlowerinthe watercolumnthansmallerspecies(e.g.,GarganeyandGreen-

wingedTeal, Anascrecca), partlybecause theyshowed a greatertendency toupend(Danelland Sjoberg1982;Thomas

1980,1982;POysa1983a,1983b;Nudds1992).Theresultsof thepresentstudy,whichincludedthepreviouslyunstudied, relativelysmallMarbledTeal,confirmthispattern.Ittherefore seemstobeafairlyuniversal rulethatlargerdabblingducks upendmore,andPUysd(1983a)proposedthatthisisbecause itismore energeticallyefficientforthemtodoso,sincethey canremainsubmerged longer.Heproposedthatsmallerspe­ ciesare selectedtofeedmainlyatthe surface,partlybecause theirlowerenergyrequirementsareeasiertomeetwithout upending.Alternatively,Iproposethatthisupending rulemay beexplained bydiminishingbenefits ofupendingforsmaller species,owingtothesmallerincreaseinaccessibledepths(see Fig.8inThomas1982andFig.IinPoysa1983a).

Thedifferencesinfeedingmethodobservedinthisstudy

wereconnectedwithdifferencesinfoodselection,althoughall fourspeciesfedmainlywithindensebedsofP.pectinatus (Table1).GleaningMarbledTealwere feedingondense, floatingconcentrationsofrelativelysmallS. litoralisseeds, whilstthosefeeding inotherwaysweretakingmainlyinsects. MallardswerefeedingmainlyonthebasalpartsofP. pecti­ natusandoncharophytes(Charavulgaris)(Green,see foot­ note1).Garganeyswereprobablyconsumingmainlytheupper parts of P.pectinatus, whereas Ferruginous Ducks were probablydivingtofeedon theseedsofP.pectinatus,Potamo­ getonpanormitanus,and S.litoralisabundantinthebenthos, andtakingP.pectinatusseedswhenfeedingbyothermethods (CrampandSimmons1977;Green,seefootnote 1;Kear and Wildfowland WetlandsTrust1998).

Owingtotheirphysicaladvantagewhenfeedingatgreater depths,largerdabblingduckspeciesmayoftenexploitdeeper habitats(e.g.,EulissandHarris1987).However, Poysa (1983a) foundonlyaweak,nonsignificantpositivecorrelation betweennecklengthandthemeandepthoffeedinghabitat, andWhiteandJames(1978)foundthatMottled Ducks, Anasfulvigula, usedshallower habitatsthansixsmallerAnas species. IntheGoksuDelta,therewasanegativerelationship betweenfeedingdepthanddepthofthehabitatused,since MallardsmademostuseofshallowerpartsofLakeAkgOland MarbledTealmademostuseofdeeperparts(Green,seefoot­ note1;Green1998).Theresultsofthecurrentstudyshowthat therewasnodifferenceinlakedepthbetween areasselected forforagingbyMarbledTealandFerruginousDucks,inspite ofthemajordifferenceinfeedingdepth.Thiswaslargelya consequenceofthedensebedsofP.pectinatusin thesurface layerof relativelydeeppartsofthelake,providingplantand invertebrate foodforducksclosetothewatersurface.Ina lake where submerged vegetation wasonly available to­ wardsthebottomofthewatercolumn,Poysa(l983a)found

Fig.3.Dendrogramsshowingsimilarity(Euclideandistances)betweenduckspeciesinfeedingbehaviour(verticalpartitioning)(a)and feedinghabitat(horizontalpartitioning)(b)intheGöksuDelta.FD,FerruginousDuck;Gar,Garganey;Mal,Mallard;MT,MarbledTeal.

(a)

1.2

1.1

1-

O 0.8-

a,

0)

a,.-

C

J 0.6 -

0.5-

0.4

(b)

0.55-

0.5-

0

0.45-

)0.4-

Ca

.5 035-

GarMTEDMal

thatMallardsfedindeeperpartsthanGarganeys.Similarly,in sitesinSpainwheresubmergedvegetationwasrareandducks foragedin thesediments,MarbledTealfedinshallower areas than largerduckssuchasMallards(A.J.Green,unpublished data).

Unfortunately,datacollectedinthisstudyaretoolimited toreflectthevariationinfeedingbehaviourshownbyducks inresponseto differencesinseason,sex,age,depthfluctua­ tion,andeventimeofday(Danell and Sjoberg1982;Thomas

1982;Amat1984a;Jacobsen 1991;Battetal.1992).Some of theapparentdifferencesamongspeciescouldhavebeenpartly

theresultofdifferencesin therelativeproportionofsexesand

age-classes,althoughthesame istrueofthemajorityofcom­ parativestudiesofduckecology.DatafromSpainandMo­ roccoconfirmthatMarbledTealfeedpredominantlyatornear thesurfacethroughouttheannualcycle,andthatupendingand divingarerarelyobserved(NavarroandRobledano1995;A.J. Green,unpublisheddata).Inthecurrentstudy,divingwasre­ corded innewlyfledgedjuvenileMarbledTealbutnotin adults.Divingwasalsoobservedinclassha(LarsonandTaber

1980)ducklings(Green,seefootnote1).Although these observationsareofnote,giventhe classificationofMarbled TealwithintheAythyini,divingisoccasionallyobservedina broadrangeofAnatini(KearandJohnsgard1968;Brodsky andWeatherhead1985).Inprevious studies,Ferruginous Ducksfedmainlyby diving,butupending, headdipping,or billdippingwasfrequentlyobserved(CrampandSimmons

1977;AmatandSoriguer1982;Dvoraketal.19962).Pöysä

(1983a,1983b)foundthatfromMaytoAugust,Garganeysfed mainlybygleaning(39%),bill dipping(38%),andneck dipping(17%).

Evenwhenusingthesamebasicfeedingmethod,duckspe­ ciesdifferinthedurationoffeedingeventsandspeedofmove­ ment(Eadieetal.1979).Thefailuretorecordthespeedof movementoffeedingbirdsinthisstudyunderemphasizesthe

2 M.Dvorak,E.Nemeth,S.Tabbich,M.Rössler,andK.Busse.

1996.Bestand,Okologie undHabitatwahischilfbewohnender

VogelArteninderNaturzonedesNationalparks

Neusiedlersee-Seewinkel.Unpublishedreport,BirdLifeAustria,

Vienna.

©1998NRCCanada

extenttowhichMarbledTealweremoreactivefeedersthan MallardsorGarganeys.Whereasthelattertwospecieswere almostcompletelystationarybetweenforagingevents,Mar­ bledTealtypicallyswamalmostcontinuouslywiththeneck outstretchedandtheheadturneddownatanangleofCa.45°, occasionallydippingtheirbillorheadrapidlyintothewater totakeinvertebratesnearthesurface(Green,seefootnote1).

WhereasPoysa(1983b)foundaclearseparationbetween divingduckanddabblingduckguildsinbothfeedinghabitat andfeedingmethods,thiswasnotthecaseinthecurrentstudy. TheFerruginousDuckwasnotecologicallyisolatedfromdab­ blingducksineitherhabitatuseorfeedingbehaviour,andwas relatedto theMallardalongbothaxes ofnichespace(Fig.3). Furtherworkisrequiredtoestablishifthesimilaritybetween thesetwo species is confined to the postbreeding period (e.g., owingtosimilarrequirementsduringmoult).Norwas thereanyseparationbetweenAnatiniandAythyinispeciesin thisstudy.Similarly,MondaandRatti(1988)foundthatRing- neckedDuck,Aythya collaris,broodsshowedgreaterniche overlapwithdabblingducksthanwithotherdivingducks.This shows theimportanceofstudyingthetwogroupssimultane­ ously andbringsintoquestiontheassumptionoftenmade (e.g.,Nuddsetal.1981;Nudds1983; NuddsandWickett

1994)thatdabblinganddivingducksformtwoneatguildsand thatinterspecificinteractionswithinthemaremuchmoreim­ portantthanthosebetweenthem.

Whenmore thanoneresource dimensionisconsidered, competition theorypredictsthatspeciessimilaralongonedi­ mensionshoulddifferfromeachotheralonganotherdimen­ sion(nichecomplementarity;Schoener1974;Nudds1992). Pdysa(193b)foundanonsignificantnegativecorrelationbe­ tweennicheoverlapsalongthehorizontal(feedinghabitat)and vertical(feeding methods)axesinacommunityofducks, grebes,and coots.Likewise,inthepresent study,therewas a negativecorrelationbetweennicheoverlapsalongthehorizon­ taland verticalaxes,providingTypeIIevidenceforcompeti­ tionbetweenduckspecies(seeNudds1992).Anotherformof nichecomplementarity canoccurifspeciesfeeding insimilar ways differindietaryspecialization.Differencesinlocomo­ tionwhenfeedingareconnectedwithdifferencesinselection ofpreyitems(Eadieetal.1979;NuddsandBowlby1984),and therewasanonsignificantnegativecorrelation(r —0.278,P=

0.59)betweennicheoverlapinfeedingmethod/depth(from

Table2)andoverlapinfeedingmobility(from Fig.1).The MarbledTealandGarganeyweremostsimilarinfeeding methodanddepth, yet theMarbledTealwasmuchmoremo­ bile(Fig. 1).

Thisstudy addstoagrowingbodyofevidencethatinter­ specificinteractionshaveanimportantinfluenceonnicheor­ ganizationinduckcommunities(Nudds1992).Theevidence itprovides fornichecomplementarityisnotstatisticallysig­ nificant,butthisisalmostinevitableinacommunityoffour species.Lnanycase,instudieswhereanalysesofoverlaps amongspeciespairsaresignificant(e.g.,Eadieetal.1979; NuddsandWickett1994),thevalidityofthesestatisticsis questionable, sincethesamedataforeachspeciesarerepre­ sentedrepeatedly,causingnon-independence.Morestudiesof differentduckcommunitiesarerequiredtoassesswhether nichecomplementarityalongthehorizontalandverticalaxes isageneralrule.As far asIamaware, thisisthefirststudyof anessentiallypostbreedingcommunity.Garganeyswereonly

presentonpostbreedingmigration,butinsuchrelativelyhigh numbersthattheymaypotentiallyimposenicheshifts onthe speciesbreedingin theGdksuDelta(seePdysä1986).Further researchisrequiredtocomparenicheorganization during breeding andpostbreedingperiodsinthis andotherMediter­ raneanduck communities.

Acknowledgements

Thisprojectwasfinancedbyapostdoctoralgrantfromthe SpanishMinistryofEducationandScienceundertheprogram “Estancias TemporalesdeCientIficosyTecnólogosExtran­ jerosenEspafla”;theConsellerladeMedioAmbiente,Junta deAndalucIa;theMinistryofAgriculture,NatureManage­ mentandFisheries,theNetherlands;andtheRoyalSocietyfor theProtectionofBirds.Thefieldworkwas conductedaspart oftheNetherlands’contributiontotheEuropeanCommunity fundedGdksuDeltaproject(TurkishSocietyfortheProtection ofNature,DHKD)onintegratedmanagement,with theper­ missionoftheAuthorityfortheProtection ofSpecialAreas. TheDHKDhelpedto organize theproject. TheWildfowland WetlandsTrustprovidedessentialequipment.Specialthanks areextendedtoGuneinAydemir, VincentvandenBerk, KeremBoyla,HasanGunen,BorjaHeredia,FernandoHiraldo, SühendanKarauz,RosarioPintos,LaurenceRose, Gurdoar Sarigul,JaninevanVessem,andMuratYarar. Helpfulcom­ mentsonearlierdraftsofthemanuscriptwereprovidedby Juan A.Amat,Vincent vanden Berk,JoanCaries Dolz, Jean-François Giroux,TommyMichot,HannuPoysa, andan anonymousreviewer.HannuPdysaprovidedthe morpho­ metricmeasurementsforMallardsandGarganeys.Datafor MarbledTealandFerruginousDucksweretakenfromthecol­ lectionoftheEstaciónBiológicadeDoñana.

References

Amat,J.A.1982.ThenestingbiologyofducksintheMarismasofthe

Guadalquivir, south-westernSpain.Wildfowl,33:94—104.

Amat,J.A.I984a.Ecologicalsegregationbetween Red-crestedPo­ chardNetta rufinaandPochardAythyaferinainafluctuating en­ vironment.Ardea,72:229—233.

Amat,J.A.1984b.Interaccionesentrelospatosbuceadoresenuna

lagunameridionalespaflola.DoflanaActaVertebrata,11:

105—123.

Amat,J,A.,andSoriguer,R.C.1982. Datossobreseleccióndehabitat yecologIaalimenticiadelPorrónPardo(Aythyanyroca).Donana ActaVertebr.9:388—394.

Anderson,B.H.,and Ohmart, R.D.1988.Structureofthewinterduck communityonthelowerColoradoRiver:patternsandprocesses. InWaterfowlinwinter.EditedbyMW.Weller.Universityof MinnesotaPress,Minneapolis.pp.191—236.

Bait, B.D.J., Afton, A.D., Anderson, MG., Ankney, CD., Johnson,D.H.,Kadlec,J.A.,andKrapu,G.L.(Editors).1992.Ecol­ ogyandmanagementofbreedingwaterfowl.UniversityofMinnesota Press,MinneapolisandLondon.

Bengston,S.A.1971.HabitatselectionofduckbroodsinLakeMy­

vatnArea,North-EastIceland.OrnisScand.2:17—26.

Bergan,J.F.,andSmith,L.M.1989.Differentialhabitatusebydiving duckswinteringinSouthCarolina.J.Wildl.Manage.53:1117—1126. Brodsky,L.M.,andWeatherhead,P.J.1985.Divingbywintering BlackDucks:anassessmentofatypical foraging.Wildfowl,36:

72—76.

Collar,N.J.,Crosby, M.J.,andStattersfield,A.J.1994.Birdsto

watch 2.Theworldlistofthreatenedbirds.BirdLifeConservation

Ser.No.4.BirdLifeInternational,Cambridge,England.

Cramp,S.,andSimmons,K.E.L.1977.Handbookofthebirdsof Europe,MiddleEastandNorthAfrica.Vol.1.OxfordUniversity Press,Oxford.

Danefi,K.,andSjoberg,K.1982.Seasonalanddielchangesinthe feedingbehaviour ofsomedabblingduckspeciesonabreeding lakeinnorthernSweden.OrnisScand.13:129—134.

DHKD.1992.TowardsintegratedmanagementintheGdksuDelta,a

ProtectedSpecialAreainTurkey,feasibilityreport,September

1992.TurkishSocietyfortheProtection ofNature(DHKD),

Istanbul.

Eadie,J.McA.,Nudds,T.D.,andAnkney,CD. 1979.Quantifying interspecificvariationinforagingbehaviorofsyntopicAnas(Ana­ tidae).Can.J.Zool.57:412—415.

Euliss,N.H.,andHarris,SW. 1987.Feedingecologyofnorthern pintails andgreen-wingedtealwinteringinCalifornia.J.Wildi. Manage.51: 724—732.

Frazier,S.1996.Anoverviewoftheworld’sRamsar sites.Wetlands InternationalPubl.No.39.WetlandsInternational,Slimbridge,U.K. Green,A.J.1993.ThestatusandconservationoftheMarbledTealMar­ maronettaangustirostris.IWRBSpec.PubI.No.23,International

WaterfowlandWetlandsResearchBureau,Slimbridge,U.K.

Green,A,I.1996.Analyses ofgloballythreatenedAnatidaeinrela­ tiontothreats,distribution,migrationpatternsandhabitatuse. Conserv.Biol.10:1435—1445.

Green,A.J.1998.Habitat selectionbytheMarbledTeal (Marmaro­ nettaangustirostris),FerruginousDuck(Aythyanyroca)andother ducksintheGöksuDelta,Turkeyinlatesummer.Rev.Ecol.Terre Vie.Inpress.

Jacobsen, O.W.1991.FeedingbehaviourofbreedingWigeonAnas penelopeinrelation toseasonal emergenceandswarmingbehav­ jourofchironomids. Ardea,79:409—418.

Johnsgard,P.A.1961.ThesystematicpositionoftheMarbledTeal.

Bull.Br.Ornithol.Club,81:37—43.

Kear,J.,andJohnsgard,P.A.1968.Foragingdivesby surface- feedingducks.WilsonBull.80:231.

Kear,J.,andWildfowlandWetlandsTrust(Editors).1998.Bird families oftheworki:ducks,geese,swansandscreamers.Oxford UniversityPress,Oxford.Inpress.

Krebs,C.J.1989.Ecologicalmethodology.HarperandRow,New

York.

Larson,J.S.,andTaber,R.D.1980.Criteriaofsexandage.InWildlife

managementtechniquesmanual.4thed.EditedbyS.D.Schemnitz.

TheWildlifeSociety,Washington,D.C.pp.143—202.

Livezey,B.C.1996.Aphylogeneticanalysisofmodernpochards

(Anatidae:Aythyini).Auk,113:74—93.

Magnin,G.,andYarar,M.1997.ImportantbirdareasinTurkey.

DHKD(TurkishSocietyfortheProtectionof Nature),Istanbul.

Monda,M.J.,andRatti,J.T.1988.Nicheoverlapandhabitat useby sympatncduckbroodsineasternWashington.I.WildI.Manage.

52:95—103.

Navarro,ID,,andRobledano,F.(Coordinators).1995.LaCerceta

PardillaMarmaronettaangustirostrisenEspana.ICONA-MAPA

ColecciónTécnica,InstitutoNacionalparaIaCouservacidndela

Naturaleza,Madrid.

Nudds,T.D.1983.Variationinrichness,evennessanddiversityin divinganddabblingduckguildsinprairiepotholehabitats.Can. J. Zool.61:1547—1550.

Nudds,T.D.1992.Patternsinbreedingwaterfowlcommunities.In Ecologyandmanagementofbreedingwaterfowl.Edited by B.D.J. Batt, A.D. Afton, M.G. Anderson, CD. Ankney, D.H.Johnson, l.A.Kadlec,andG.L.Krapu.UniversityofMinne­ sota Press,MinneapolisandLondon.pp.540—567.

Nudds,T.D.,andBowlby,J.N.1984.Predator-preysizerelationships inNorthAmericandabblingducks.Can.J.Zool.62:2002—2008. Nudds,T.D.,andWickett,R.G.1994.Bodysizeandseasonalcoex­ istenceof NorthAmericandabblingducks.Can.I. Zool.72:

779—782.

Nudds,T.D.,Abraham,K.F.,Ankney,CD., andTebbel,P.D.1981.

Aresizegapsindabbling-andwading-birdarraysreal?Am.Nat.

118:549—553.

Nudds,T.D.,Sjoberg,K.,andLundberg,P.1994.Ecomorphological relationshipsbetweenPalearcticdabblingducksonBalticcoastal wetlandsandacomparisonwith theNearctic.Oikos, 69:295—303. Nummi,P.,andPoysh,H.1993.Habitatassociationsofducksduring

phasesofthebreedingseason.Ecography,16:319—328.

Pdysa,H.1983a.Morphology-mediatednicheorganizationinaguild ofdabblingducks.OrnisScand.14:317-326.

Poysä,H.I983b.Resourceutilizationpatternandguildstructureina waterfowlcommunity.Oikos,40:295—307.

Pdysa,H.1986.Foragingnicheshiftsinmultispeciesdabblingduck (Anusspp.)feedinggroups:harmfulandbeneficialinteractions betweenspecies.OrnisScand.17:333—346.

Pdysh,H.1987.Ecologyofforagingbehaviourindabblingducks (Anasspp.). University of Joensuu Publications in Sciences No.10,Universityof Joensuu,Joensuu,Finland.

Schoener,T.W.1974.Resourcepartitioninginecologicalcommuni­

ties.Science(Washington,D.C.),185:27—39.

Thomas,G.J.1980.TheecologyofbreedingwaterfowlattheOuse

Washes,England.Wildfowl,31:73—88.

Thomas,G.J.1982.Autumnandwinterfeedingecologyofwaterfowlat theOuseWashes,England.].Zool.(1965—1984),197:131—172.

Toft,C.A., Trauger,D.L,,andMurdy,H.W. 1982.Testsforspecies

interactions: breedingphenologyand habitatuseinsubarctic ducks.Am.Nat.120:586—613.

Tome,M.W.,andWrubleski,D.A.1988.Underwater foragingbe­

haviorofcanvasbacks,lesserscaups,andruddyducks.Condor,

90:168—172.

Tucker,G.M.,andHeath,M.F.(Editors).1994.BirdsinEurope:their conservationstatus.BirdLife ConservationSer.No.3,BirdLife International,Cambridge,U.K.

Weller,M.W.1975. HabitatselectionbywaterfowlofArgentineIsla

Grande.WilsonBull.87:83—90.

White,D.H.,andJames,D.1978. Differentialuseoffreshwateren­

vironmentsbywinteringwaterfowlofcoastalTexas.WilsonBull.

90:99—111.

Appendix

TableAl.Meanmorphologicalmeasurements(cm)usedtocalculatefeedingdepths. ValuesfortheMallardandGarganeyarethoseusedbyPdysh(1983a).

Mallard
(n 57) / Garganey
(n=21) / MarbledTeal
(n=8) / Ferruginous
Duck(11 8)
Bodylength / 19.5 / 15.5 / 16.0 / 16.0
Necklength / 29.1 / 18.2 / 19.8 / 19.2
Skulllength / 11.5 / 7.9 / 9.0 / 8.6
Billlength / 5.7 / 3.8 / 4.5 / 3.9

i1998NRCCanada