Institute of Biodiversity and Environmental ConservationCommunity Ecology of Urban Birds in Suburban Areas of Kuching andKota Samarahan, SarawakArleen HongMaster of Science2021

Community Ecology of Urban Birds in Suburban Areas of Kuching and KotaSamarahan, SarawakArleen HongA thesis submittedIn fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science(Zoology)Institute of Biodiversity and Environmental ConservationUNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SARAWAK2021

DECLARATIONI declare that this work, submitted as a thesis for the Master of Science in Universiti MalaysiaSarawak, is the result of my own investigations and all references and works of otherresearchers have been acknowledged. No portion of the work referred to in this dissertationhas been submitted in support of an application for another degree of qualification of this orany other academic institution.Arleen HongFaculty of Resource Science and TechnologyUniversiti Malaysia Sarawak (UNIMAS)March 2021i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTI would like to acknowledge the people who helped in my master study. This research wassupported by Ministry of Higher Education NRGS/1088/2013(02).First of all, I would like to give the utmost gratitude to my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. MohdAzlan Jayasilan Abd. Gulam Azad for constant advice, guidance, comments, suggestionsand support throughout my study. I am deeply appreciate for his patience as well, the bestsupervisor ever. I am grateful to Dr. Siti Rubiah for the training and guidance on vegetationsurvey. Deeply appreciate for her personally train and assistance in species identification. Iam thankful to Prof. Dr. Andrew Alek Tuen for comments on earlier draft.Besides, I would like to give a special thanks to Ms. Sally Soo, Ms. Phang Sing Tyan andMs. Audrey Voon for the encouragement and assistance throughout the study. Sincerelythankful for the guidance of Ms. Shikeen who taught me a lot in bird survey andidentification. Of course, I am heartily thankful to my parent, Mr. and Mrs. Hong for theirencouragement, advice, support and unconditional love that was really important to me. Mybrother and sister also my friend Mr. Kung who spent time and accompany during thosesampling days. I am thankful to these people that made this thesis possible.ii

ABSTRACTUrbanisation dramatically changes the structure of bird communities, resulting in increasingof biotic homogenization as same species, “generalists” are widespread and ubiquitous inurban landscapes. The aim of the study was to investigate the potential relationship ofdetailed component of urban form (i) vegetation heterogeneity, (ii) housing density and (iii)carnivore density (cats and dogs) with birds in suburb residential. Numerous studies of birdshave been carried out in urban landscapes, yet most of the studies have been carried out inthe temperate regions, little is known in the tropic regions. This study examines the birdspecies diversity in suburban area including their feeding guilds, how vegetationheterogeneity and housing density influence bird diversity. A further aim was to investigatethe influence of cats Felis catus and dogs Canis familiaris on bird occurrences and survival.The density of birds and carnivores, and vegetation richness were examined in thirteensuburb residential areas of Kuching and Kota Samarahan divisions from February 2016 toFebruary 2017 using line transects. A total of 7,851 bird observations were made, involving34 species that representing 22 families. Six generalist species were encountered in allsurveyed residential areas and four were introduced. These generalist species were eitheromnivores or granivores that dominated the urban bird species composition. Bird density(7.5 ind. ha-1) was elevated by the abundance of these species. This study found that birdspecies richness was positively related to vegetation richness and tree species richness (R2 0.39; R2 0.41, respectively). However, this vegetation richness was not significantlyinfluence on bird density (R2 0.01). Housing density was not an important variable ininfluencing birds in suburban habitat (P 0.91). Similarly, bird species assemblage foundno significant association with carnivore density neither cats nor dogs (R2 0.25; R2 0.11,respectively). These findings are important and relevant for urban land use planning whereiii

vegetation richness is needed to be considered in order to enhance a balance habitat for thecoexistence of human and avian assemblage in urban habitats.Keywords: Urbanisation, urban bird, suburban residential, vegetation heterogeneity,housing density, carnivore density.iv

Ekologi Komuniti Burung Bandar di Kawasan Pinggir Bandar Kuching dan KotaSamarahanABSTRAKUrbanisasi secara dramatis mengubah struktur masyarakat burung, mengakibatkanpeningkatan homogenisasi biotik seperti spesies yang sama, "generalis" tersebar luas danterdapat di mana-mana kawasan lanskap bandar. Tujuan kajian ini adalah untuk mengkajipotensi hubungan komponen terperinci bentuk bandar (i) heterogenitas tumbuh-tumbuhan,(ii) kepadatan perumahan dan (iii) kepadatan karnivora (kucing dan anjing) dengan burungdi kediaman pinggir bandar. Banyak kajian mengenai burung telah dilakukan di lanskapbandar, namun kebanyakan kajian telah dilakukan di daerah beriklim sederhana, sedikityang diketahui di kawasan tropika. Kajian ini mengkaji kepelbagaian spesies burung dikawasan pinggir bandar termasuk kumpulan makanan mereka, bagaimana heterogenitasvegetasi dan kepadatan perumahan mempengaruhi kepelbagaian burung. Tujuanselanjutnya adalah untuk mengkaji pengaruh kucing Felis catus dan anjing Canis familiaristerhadap kejadian dan kelangsungan hidup burung. Kepadatan burung dan karnivor, dankekayaan tumbuh-tumbuhan telah diperiksa di tiga belas kawasan perumahan pinggirbandar di Kuching dan Kota Samarahan dari Februari 2016 hingga Februari 2017menggunakan transek garis. Sebanyak 7,851 pemerhatian burung dibuat, melibatkan 34spesies yang mewakili 22 keluarga. Enam spesies generalis ditemui di semua kawasankediaman yang disurvei dan empat diperkenalkan spesies bukan asli. Spesies generalis iniadalah omnivora atau granivora yang mendominasi komposisi spesies burung bandar.Ketumpatan burung (7.5 ind. ha-1) meningkat kebanyakan dari spesies ini. Kajian inimendapati bahawa kekayaan spesies burung secara positif berkaitan dengan kekayaantumbuh-tumbuhan dan kekayaan spesies pokok (R2 0.39; R2 0.41 masing-masing).Walau bagaimanapun, kekayaan tumbuh-tumbuhan ini tidak banyak mempengaruhiv

kepadatan burung (R2 0,01). Kepadatan perumahan bukanlah pemboleh ubah pentingdalam mempengaruhi burung di habitat pinggir bandar (P 0.91). Begitu juga, kumpulanspesies burung tidak menemui kaitan yang signifikan dengan kepadatan karnivor sama adakucing ataupun anjing (R2 0.25; R2 0. 11 masing-masing). Penemuan ini penting danrelevan untuk perancangan penggunaan tanah bandar di mana kekayaan tumbuh-tumbuhanperlu dipertimbangkan untuk meningkatkan keseimbangan habitat untuk wujudnyakumpulan manusia dan burung di habitat bandar.Kata kunci: Urbanisasi, burung bandar, kediaman pinggir bandar, heterogen vegetasi,kepadatan perumahan, kepadatan

TABLE OF iiABSTRAKvTABLE OF CONTENTSviiLIST OF TABLESxiLIST OF FIGURESxiiCHAPTER 1: GENERAL INTRODUCTION11.1 Urban Birds and its Ecosystem11.2 Urbanisation31.3 Objectives61.4 Outline of Thesis6CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW72.1 Factors Influence Birds in Urban Setting72.2 Food Provision Benefits Exotic Species82.3 Avian Guilds Respond to Urbanisation92.4 Effects of Surrounding Vegetation on Bird Structure102.5 Urban Birds Response to Exotic Plant Species112.6 Bird Species Richness and Abundance Relating to Housing Density122.7 Correlation of Birds and Carnivore Density122.8 Species Accumulation and Rarefaction Curve152.9 Species Richness and Diversity16vii

CHAPTER 3: GENERAL METHODOLOGY173.1 Sampling Sites173.2 Study Sites173.3 Data Collection193.3.1 Distance Sampling, the Line Transect Method193.3.2 Bird Census Techniques203.3.3 Carnivore Census Techniques213.3.4 Vegetation Diversity223.4.5 Housing Density22CHAPTER 4: THE DIVERSITY AND BIRD SPECIES ASSEMBLAGE23IN SUBURB RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF KUCHING ANDKOTA SAMARAHAN4.1 Introduction234.2 Materials and Methods264.2.1 Study Sites264.2.2 Bird Census Techniques264.2.3 Classification of Feeding Guilds284.2.4 Bird Activity during Wet and Dry Seasons284.2.5 Species Accumulation Curve and Rarefaction Curve284.2.6 Density Estimation294.2.7 Species Diversity and Evenness304.3 Results314.3.1 Community Composition of Birds in Suburb Residential Areas334.3.2 Guild Richness and Abundance in Suburb Residential Areas38viii

4.3.3 Bird Activity during Dry and Wet Seasons394.4 Discussion41CHAPTER 5: THE INFLUENCE OF VEGETATION45HETEROGENEITY ON BIRD SPECIES RICHNESS,DIVERSITY AND DENSITY IN SUBURB RESIDENTIALAREAS OF KUCHING AND KOTA SAMARAHAN5.1 Introduction455.2 Materials and Methods485.2.1 Vegetation Survey Techniques485.2.2 Test of Correlation with Vegetation Diversity and Urban Bird49Assemblage5.3 Results495.3.1 Vegetation Diversity in Suburb Residential Areas495.3.2 The Influence of Surrounding Vegetation Diversity on Birds in55Suburb Residential Areas5.3.35.4The Influence of Housing Density on Bird Species AssemblageDiscussion5757CHAPTER 6: THE INFLUENCE OF URBAN PREDATION ON BIRD62COMMUNITY IN SUBURB RESIDENTIAL AREAS OFKUCHING AND KOTA SAMARAHAN6.1 Introduction626.2 Materials and Methods646.2.1 Carnivores Survey Techniques646.2.2 Density Estimation65ix

6.2.3 Test of Correlation with Carnivore Density and Urban Bird Density66and Diversity6.3 Results666.3.1 The Influence of Housing Density on Carnivore Density696.3.2 The Influence of Carnivore on Urban Bird Density and Diversity706.4 Discussion72CHAPTER 7: GENERAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION757.1 Significance of the Study757.2 Recommendations797.3 Limitations79REFERENCES81APPENDICES101x

LIST OF TABLESPageTable 3.1Study sites in Kuching and Samarahan divisions with area (ha)18and land-use type provided.Table 4.1Ten most abundant bird species in 13 urban landscape in33Kuching and Samarahan divisions.Table 4.2Bird species observed throughout the study with guild35assignments and their conservation status according to SarawakWildlife Protection Ordinance (SWLPO) (1998).Table 4.3Bird density and diversity for each 13 sampling sites in urban37residential areas of Western Sarawak. Acronyms for sites aregiven below the table.Table 4.4Cumulative species richness and relative abundance of birds of39different feeding guilds.Table 5.1Species diversity index of plants in 13 suburb residential areas of50Kuching and Kota Samarahan.Table 5.2Plant species richness and basic quantitative attributes of plants54in 13 suburb residential sites of western Sarawak. Acronyms forsites are given below.Table 5.3Number of plant species recorded according to growth form55along the transect survey in 13 residential sites.Table 6.1Carnivore density for each 13 sampling sites in urban residentialareas of Western Sarawak. Acronyms for sites are given belowthe table.xi68

LIST OF FIGURESPageFigure 1.1Main stresses on globally threatened bird species worldwide.5Figure 3.1Measurements taken for each individual sighted along transect.21Figure 4.1Cumulative species as the bird survey increased for all sites and31each of the study area. Acronyms: *TBP, Tabuan Park; SA,Samajaya Apartments; SI, Stutong Indah; MU, Medan Universiti;TDI, Taman Desa Ilmu; UG, Unigarden; ML, Midway Link; RV,Riveria; TJB2, Tabuan Jaya Baru 2; TP, Taman Polarwood; TS,Taman Sarmax; TT, Taman Timberland; TO, Taman Orchid.Figure 4.2Rarefaction curve of bird species recorded in suburb residential32throughout the sampling period. Vertical bars describe standarddeviation of species estimated.Figure 4.3Cumulative species observed and estimated species richness32based on sample-based estimators (Abundance-base CoverageEstimator, Chao 1 and Jack 1) over 26 surveys period.Figure 4.4Pie chart showing the percentage of guild species richness.38Figure 4.5Curve showing the number of birds and bird species along 1340months survey period.Figure 5.1DBH distribution of measured trees in 13 suburb residential52sites.Figure 5.2Regression plots of bird species richness and density againstvegetation variables.xii56

Figure 5.3Plot of regression for bird species richness and housing density57showing no significant relationship (F1,12 0.01, R2 0.001, P 0.93).Figure 6.1The monthly average number of carnivores measured between69year 2016 and 2017 in 13 suburb study sites.Figure 6.2Regression plot for the relationship between housing density and70carnivore density.Figure 6.3Simple linear regression plots for birds against carnivore densityin all study sites with equation and explanatory power provided.Relationships of (a) bird density and cat density, (b) bird densityand dog density, (c) bird species richness and cat density, (d)bird species richness and dog density, (e) bird diversity and catdensity, and (f) bird diversity and dog density.xiii71

CHAPTER 1GENERAL INTRODUCTION1.1 Urban Birds and its EcosystemUrban environments tend to be very similar (Clergeau et al., 2001). It is welldeveloped with high density of human structures such as houses, commercial buildings,roads, bridges and railways. Although the world becomes increasingly urbanised, rural placeis still considered to have richer biodiversity compared to urban place. Moreover, ruralplaces are believed to be more natural environments that is capable of fitting most speciesand play an important role in conservation (Turner et al., 2004; Evans et al., 2009).Urban ecosystem is complex, heterogenic and dynamic (Rodrigues et al., 2018), andplays a vital role in supporting the biodiversity. However, they are often the prime locationsfor the spread of invasive species (Menon & Mohanraj, 2016). A few invasive species arethose common bird species that are normally seen in urban and they pose a threat tobiodiversity (Menon & Mohanraj, 2016).Birds are the largest group (MacKinnon, 1993) with more than 10,000 extant speciesdistributed in the world (Brusatte et al., 2015). Birds range in size from the thumb-sizedhummingbirds to ostriches (Brusatte et al., 2015). According to BirdLife International(2019), there are 718 bird species recorded in Malaysia, 64 globally threatened species andeight endemic species. Indonesia has the highest total of threatened species (117 species),followed by China (78 species), India (73 species) and Philippines (70 species) (BirdLifeInternational, 2001). Urban adapted species like myna, sparrow and dove rapidly multiplyin areas associated with anthropogenic activities.1

Birds perform essential ecological functions like seed dispersal and pest control(Sekercioglu, 2006). However, they are sensitive to habitat changes. They occur in all majorhabitat types, though forest being particularly important (BirdLife International, 2008). Lossof habitat and fragmentation are the primary causes of bird declines worldwide (BirdLifeInternational, 2008). So far, forest are the most important habitats for threatened species inAsia (BirdLife International, 2001). Conversely, habitat changes favour generalists andbehaviorally flexile species (Moller, 2009). Landscapes with tall trees are often the nesting,foraging roosting and hiding site for many bird species. Urban-dwelling birds often choosetall trees, landscapes with greater shrub cover and areas with varies species of trees (Menon& Mohanraj, 2016).Urban landscapes have more anthropogenic food resource and the climate of urbanoften warmer than rural environments (Gilbert, 1989). These changes in urban environmentshave forced birds either to avoid or adapt to it. Many of the species are able to adapt to urbanlandscapes by undergoing behavioral or physiological changes to survive (Shochat et al.,2010). Urban habitats favor species that are more tolerated to toxic substances in cities, ableadapt to artificial light, noise of traffic and able to breed on human built structures (Ehrlichet al., 1988). Some birds are tolerant to noise but not all (Paton, 2013) and urban birds havewider environmental tolerance (Bonier et al., 2007). These studies showed that urban birdshave wider environmental tolerance compared to rural birds. Urban birds have betteradaptations to urban environment even when they are introduced to a novel environment.Many of the species that thrive in urban settings undergo behavioral andphysiological adaptations (Shochat et al., 2010). However, there are many factors present incities bringing negative effects on urban birds. Although the food density is high in urbansettings, yet those anthropogenic food resources are low in quality and in the long term may2

affect bird health and growth (Shochat et al., 2010). Other than that, Zannin et al. (2006)stated that chemical pollution negatively affects urban bird health and growth. Chemicalcomponents emit in urban environment can accumulate in bird’s tissues and harm their body(Bonier et al., 2007). Another stressor for urban birds is noise pollution. This interferencecan influence birds in urban as they use vocalizations to warn of danger, defend for territoryas well as attract mates (Shochat et al., 2010), and thus study have shown that noise in urbansettings influence bird distribution (e.g., Rheindt, 2003; Parris & Schneider, 2009).The increase in urban bird density is often related to food abundance and reductionin predation pressure. Birds in urban are often dominated by fewer species that are highlyabundant and thrive well in human habitations, and these species are often thought toinfluence the abundance of many species in urban (Parsons et al., 2006). For instance, theaggressive and exotic Common Myna Acridotheres tristis that are abundant in cities mayaffect the ability of other species (e.g., Black Headed Munia) to co-exist in urban habitatthrough competition for niche resources (Pell & Tidemann, 1997; Sze et al., 2018). Theymay also compete for nest hollows with native species (e.g., Oriental Magpie Robin) thatnest in tree holes (Sze et al., 2018).1.2 UrbanisationUrbanisation has been defined as conversion of natural habitats into areas partlycovered by buildings, heavily fragmented and with high level of edge effects (Moller, 2009).Urbanisation has played a vital role in wildlife extinction (McKinney, 2006) as urbanecosystem is important in supporting biodiversity. Rapid expansion of urban and suburbandevelopments associate with habitat modification and landscape changes. Urbanisationcause habitat loss (McKinney, 2002) that changes landscape structure (Litteral & Wu, 2012)leading to species endangerment, including local extinctions in avian assemblages3

(McKinney, 2002). According to BirdLife International (2008), habitat destruction anddegradation affect 1,146 (93%) threatened bird species (Figure 1.1). Urbanisation invariablycause the loss of bird species present before development, especially ground-nesting species,habitat specialists and species that require large areas of intact habitat (Evans et al., 2009).Furthermore, change of landscape structure has negative impact on bird diversity whosediversity correlate with vegetation complexity and plant species richness (Savard et al., 2000)as urban landscapes often characterized with high non-native species (McKinney, 2006).Therefore, urbanisation has become one of the major threats to biodiversity.Rate of urbanisation increases as the population increases because the conversion ofnatural habitat to other land uses increase. With high rate of urbanisation, urban areas arenow a challenging ecosystem for sustaining biotic communities and diversity (Shochat et al.,2010). According to the report of East Asia’s Changing Urban Landscape (The World Bank,2015a), Malaysia is among the most urbanized countries of East Asia after Japan, Republicof Korea and Singapore. From year 2000 to 2010, the urban land in Malaysia grew fromabout 3,900 km2 to 4,600 km2 (average growth rate of 1.5%) and population is increasingrapidly from 10.2 million to 15 million (The World Bank, 2015b).Urbanisation decreasing bird species richness while increasing overall populationdensity (McKinney, 2006; Shochat et al., 2010). Menon & Mohanraj (2016) stated thatenvironmental changes favor the spread of invasive species, thereby reducing accessibleareas for native species, leading to uniform bird communities (generalists) in urban placethat dominated by relatively few species whilst promoting biotic homogenization (Bezzel,1985; Chace & Walsh, 2006; McKinney, 2006; Chong et al., 2012). Overall, urbanisationextirpates native species while favor the spread of non-native species (McKinney, 2006).4

Invasive birds belong to limited range of families which are Anatidae, Phasianidae,Psittacidae and Passeridae (Duncan et al., 2006; Kark & Sol, 2005).In addition, urbanisation tends to select several feeding guilds that are omnivorousand granivorous (Lim & Sodhi, 2004; Chace & Walsh, 2004) or species with broadenvironmental tolerance (Bonier et al., 2007). Frugivores have found to decline from theurban environment (Menon & Mohanraj, 2016). In order to maintain urban biodiversity,urban planners need to understand and know the factors that affect the distribution of birdspecies (Clergeau et al., 2001).Figure 1.1: Main stresses on globally threatened bird species worldwide. (Source: Analysisof data held in BirdLife’s World Bird Database, 2008)5

1.3 ObjectivesNumerous studies of birds have been carried out in urban landscapes, however, mostof the studies have been carried out in the temperate regions, so little is known in the tropicregions. This study was to examine the bird species diversity in suburban area including theirfeeding guilds, how vegetation diversity influence bird diversity as well as housing density.A further aim was to investigate the influence of cats Felis catus and dogs Canis familiarison bird occurrences and survival. The observed bird species and carnivore individual werecomputed for regression to see their correlation.The objectives were:i.To examine species diversity and feeding guilds of birds in suburb residential ofKuching and Kota Samarahan.ii.To investigate the factors that drive species assemblage in suburb residential ofKuching and Kota Samarahan.iii.To determine the influence of carnivores on bird community in suburb residentialof Kuching and Kota Samarahan.1.4 Outline of ThesisThis thesis examines the community ecology of birds in suburban in Kuching andKota Samarahan divisions of western Sarawak. Urban ecosystem is crucial for sustaining thebiodiversity including species-rich bird communities. Bird density and diversity areexamined, and latter tested with different factors that may influence bird species assemblagessuch as surrounding habitat, heterogeneity of plant species and predators (free-ranging catsand dogs).6

CHAPTER 2LITERATURE REVIEW2.1 Factors Influence Birds in Urban SettingIn urban landscape, bird communities are highly homogenized (McKinney, 2006;Chong et al., 2012) as cities expand, the same species that are adaptable to urban will beelevated and widespread (McKinney, 2006). Invasive urban species that inhabited urbanplace over a long period achieved the largest increases in population density compared totheir ancestral rural habitats, and this successful invasion was associated with gradualadaptation to these environments (Moller et al., 2012). It has been claimed that humanscreate homogenous bird communities in urban settings (McKinney, 2006). According toSmythies (1999), only few bird species can be found in urban habitats which are EurasianTree-sparrow, introduced mynas and pigeons. However, the introduced species mynas maydiffer in different town areas (Smythies, 1999).Lancaster and Rees (1979), in their study on bird communities and urban habitatstructure in Vancouver, USA, have noted that food provided by man has major effect on thebird density and distribution in urban areas while there are limited niches, like domesticpigeon, the well adapted species, that are easily being seen at the park with food feed byhuman.There are various factors that influence the urban bird communities. Urban placemakes up rich foraging ground for several bird species that normally provided by human,but natural food availability is significantly reduced due to the lack of native vegetation whileincrease in exotic plant species (Chace & Walsh, 2004). Thus, urban habitat is likely to favorspecies that are well adapted to the environment and able to use the food resources provided7

(Bonier et al., 2007). Vegetation characteristic significantly influence richness andabundance of birds. The abundance of certain forest species like woodpeckers (Dendrocoposspp.), Eurasian wryneck (Jynx torquilla) and tits (Parus spp.) can be affected by theavailability of tree cover (Paton, 2013). On the other hand, shrub cover can maintain highlevel of bird diversity because it can act as connector between gardens (Paton, 2013).In nature, predation often effects on prey populations. Domestic cats occur in highdensities in urban areas (Sims et al., 2008; Baker et al., 2008). Most of bird’s urban predatorsare free-ranging cats and dogs. Baker et al. (2005) suggested that cats are major cause ofmortality for some bird species. The abundance of cats and dogs in suburban is higher thanrural environment, this could be related to food supplied by humans in suburban is higherthan in rural (Campos et al., 2007). Cats in urban area may prey more on birds and mostowned cats spend most of the time outdoors (Woods et al., 2003; Baker et al., 2005). Publicremains unaware of this issue.2.2 Food Provision Benefits Introduced SpeciesBird population density is often positively related to abundance of foods (Emlen,1974; Shochat et al., 2010; Galbraith et al., 2015). Food availability is one of the fundamentalfactors that influence all animal populations (Martin, 1987; Newton, 1998). Urban birdsaccess the food resource obtained from human activities (Galbraith et al., 2015) which maybe from waste or fed by the public. The study from Galbraith et al. (2015) denoted that thefeeding practice increase the introduced bird abundance especially the House SparrowPasser domesticus and Spotted Dove Spilopelia chinensis, whereas negatively effect onnative bird abundance.8

Another study from Fuller et al. (2008) suggested that supplementary of food forbirds in urban area effects bird populations. They constructed regression models to test onthe relationship of feeder density (the density of gardens that birds are fed) on bird diversityand abundance. They found that the density of feeding stations elevates the abundance ofbirds that are present in the area while no effects on bird species richness.Several studies indicate that winter feeding is positively associated with birdpopulations with increased winter survival (Jansson et al., 1981; Brittingham and Temple,1988). Tryjanowski et al. (2015) stated that supplementary food provision using bird feedersis the best way to support birds in urban areas during winter, probably supporting 65% ofwintering birds in urban and rural. Their study also showed a significant difference in thenumber of bird feeders and number of bird feeders with food, both were higher in urban thanin rural places (Tryjanowski et al., 2015). Several reasons that caused the differencesbetween urban and rural places, this includes population size, structure of dwellings,economic status of people (Tryjanowski et al., 2015). In urban area, birds utilised fooddisposal of restaurant, cafeteria, school canteen, supermarket and in drainages.2.3 Avian Guilds Respond to UrbanisationSpecies from different guilds were shown to respond differently to urbanisation (Lim& Sodhi, 2004). Many introduced bird species in urban areas are dominated by omnivoresor granivores (Galbraith et al., 2015) that thrived well in urban habitat (Lim & Sodhi, 2004;Chace & Walsh, 2004). Lim and Sodhi (2004) found that insectivores, carnivores andfrugivores were affected in urbanised area while omnivores and granivores were the mostabundant. They stated that insectivorous and carnivorous were adversely affected in moreurbanised areas, probably due to availability of food. Besides, they also found that frugivores9

were favoured by low-housing density, and probably due to greater numbers of fruits andornamental plants in low housing density estates.2.4 Effects of Surrounding Vegetation on Bird StructureClergeau et al. (2001) stated that bird species richness could be influenced by localfeatures such as diversity and density of vegetation and habitat heterogeneity. The numberand type of vegetation shapes bird diversity in urban area (Chace & Walsh, 2004). Lancesterand Rees (1979) claimed that urban areas with high vegetation support higher bird speciesrichness. There is often a strong positive correlation between native vegetation density anddiversity and bird species richness (Mills et al., 1989; Day, 1995; Chace & Walsh, 2004).Landscapes with tall trees are often used as nesting, foraging, roosting and hiding site forbirds (Menon & Mohanraj, 2016). Urban-dwelling birds often choose tall trees, landscapeswith greater shrub cover and areas with variety of tree species (Menon & Mohanraj, 2016).A study in public gardens in cities of Israel found that bird species diversity ispositively related to shrub species richness as shrubs provide foods like insects, seeds andfruits and as cover from predator and extreme weather (Paker et al., 2014). Besides, Fontanaet al. (2011) claimed that vegetation structure especially trees is the most important habitatvariable that influence bird species assemblage.Fruiting trees frequently provide fruits for frugivore and omnivore and floweringplants to attract nec

(ii) kepadatan perumahan dan (iii) kepadatan karnivora (kucing dan anjing) dengan burung di kediaman pinggir bandar. Banyak kajian mengenai burung telah dilakukan di lanskap bandar, namun kebanyakan kajian telah dilakukan di daerah beriklim sederhana, sedikit yang diketahui di kawasan tropika. Kajian ini mengkaji kepelbagaian spesies burung di