International Journal of Zoology Studies ISSN: 2455-7269; Impact Factor: RJIF 5.14 Received: 14-12-2020; Accepted: 17-01-2021; Published: 18-02-2021 www.zoologyjournals.com Volume 6; Issue 1; 2021; Page No. 26-34 Aquatic bird diversity in Kondakarla Ava Lake wet land at Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India Amaravathi D1, Rama Rao K2, Rajasekher PS3 Chaitanya Educational Society, Parawada, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India 2 Department of Zoology, Govt. Degree College, Tekkali, Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India 3 Department of Environmental Sciences, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India 1 Abstract In the present investigation 65 species of water birds belonging to 8 orders, 21 families and 45 genera were recorded during the study period from June 2015 to May 2018 at Kondakarla Freshwater Lake. Orders, Charadriiformes were found to be the most dominant with 19 species followed by Ciconiiformes represented with 16 species, Anseriformes with 9 species, Passeriformes with 8 species, Gruiformes with 6 species, Coraciiformes with 4 species, Pelecaniformes with 2 species, Podicipediformes and Columbiformes were represented to one species each. The parentage of species composition was revealed that the abundance of avifauna was highest record, 39 species were common and occupied 60.00% in the total population, followed by the uncommon birds are 21 contributed to 32.31%, five species were rare category contributed to 7.68%. An average yearly population diversity was resulted that richness of species was 41.92, Shannon-Wiener diversity Index (H) was 1.56, Maximum possible diversity ln (S) 3.73 and Evenness (E) 0.42. Keywords: bird fauna, population diversity, seasonal diversity, monsoon, shannon-wiener diversity index, richness and evenness Introduction Birds are ubiquitous animals that frequent both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and they have fantastic ability to move and most species are found only in particular regions. The birds are widespread due to their adaptability and feasibility of movements. The living species of birds are grouped into 27 Orders and these in turn have been grouped into 155 families (Kazmierczak and Van perto, 2000) [31]. Twelve percent of the bird species are threatened with extinction all over the world Rosser and Mainka, 2000 [39, 40] . Birdlife International, 2001 [14, 15]. Collar et al., 1994) [17]. Some people even destroying nests to discourage migratory birds from nesting the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972. Wetlands occupy 18.4% of the countries area (excluding river) of which 70% are under paddy cultivation. In India, it has been estimated that 4.1 million hectares are wetlands (excluding paddy fields, rivers, and streams), whereas 1.5 million hectares are natural and 2.6 million hectares are manmade. The coastal wetlands occupy 6750 sq.km and are largely determined by mangrove vegetation. Management of wetlands both fresh water and coastal, is more important as these areas have traditional values for fish, wildlife and man. A systematic management plan has to be drawn in an integrated way to recognize the user relationship between biological and physical components and seek to maximize the benefits that can be obtained from sustainable multiple uses. The various reservoirs, shallow ponds and numerous tanks support wetland biodiversity and add to the countries wetland wealth. It is estimated that freshwater wetlands alone support 20 per cent of the known range of biodiversity in India (Deepa and Ramachandra, 1999) [18]. Wetlands in India occupy 58.2 million hectares, including areas under wet paddy cultivation (Directory of Indian Wetlands). The aim of the present study is to population of migratory and residence aquatic birds in Kondakarla Lake. Methodology Study area Kondakarla Lake is the second largest natural fresh water lake in Andhra Pradesh located at a distance of 42 km from Visakhapatnam and 7 km from Anakapalle. It is located north-east of Kondakarla village, lies between latitudes 17°35'30" and 17°36'02" N, and longitudes 82°59̕ 27˝ and 83°1̕ 0˝ E. Four stations were selected for the study to the collection of bird diversity during the period June 2015 to May 2018. The field sites were selected based on heterogeneity of the lake habitat and its integration as principal components of the wetland. Data collection Field data information was collected using three methods i.e., transect walk, point transects and direct observations. Most of surveys on the wetland’s avifauna were conducted between June 2015 to May 2018 using a transect line approach (Bibby et al., 1992 and 1996) [10, 11, 13] to extensively survey throughout the wetland area so as to assess the avifauna species and abundance. Line Transect method proved most efficient in terms of data collection per unit effort (Yallop et al., (2003) [46]. Rosenstock (2002) [38]. Woodcock, (1996) [45]. India based on direct observations i,e road side counts (Burnham et al., (1980); Simpson (1949) [43]. A total of 72 visits (2 visits per month) were spent in the field observing the bird diversity. Birds were observed from 6 a.m to 10 a.m and 4 p.m to 6.30 p.m the avifauna of the habitats was also 26 International Journal of Zoology Studies observed seasonally by using binoculars of focal length 10 x 50x and 8x X 40 x (Emlen, 1974) [19]. Identification of the bird species has been done as per descriptions in ornithological publications catalogues pictorial diagrams of various authors Krishnan (1981) [32]. McKinnonm and Philips, (1993) [35]. Ali and Ripley (1993) [2]; Woodcock, (1996) [45]; Greywall (1995) [22]. Ali (1996) [1]; Grimmett et al., (2001) [23]. Grewal et al., (2002) [21]. The nomenclature used here which was given by Manakkadan, and Pittie, (2001) [34] and Ali (1996) [1]. Standardised English common names of the birds were presented and identification was conformed from the descriptions Manakadan et al., (1998) [33]. The mean monthly variation was also calculated for all the water birds by employed mean, Standard deviation, range and coefficient of variation. Density of birds per hectare is calculated by dividing the total estimate of the population of each month by the total aquatic area of different tanks. The percentage of dominant waterfowl, composition of Herons, Egrets and Bitterns were calculated and estimated. Status and mean monthly variation of different waterfowl families were shown in graphical representation. The relative abundance of a species was obtained by dividing the abundance of a species by the total abundance of all species combined based on the assumption that the frequently seen the species the more abundant it is (Bibby et al., (1992 and 2000) [10, 11, 12]. Rosenstock et al., (2002) [38]. Birds’ diversity was calculated by using Shannon-Weiner diversity Index ‘H’ was calculated (Shannon and Wiener 1949) [42]. Results In the present study 65 species of water birds belonging to 8 orders, 21 families and 45 genera were recorded during the study period from June 2015 to May 2018 at Kondakarla Freshwater Lake. List of birds including their order, family, genus, species, distribution status, habitat, food habits, abundance, IUCN (2019-2) and W(P)A status were recorded and presented in Table 1and 2. Among the orders, Charadriiformes were found to be the most dominant with 19 species followed by Ciconiiformes represented with 16 species, Anseriformes with 9 species, Passeriformes with 8 species, Gruiformes with 6 species, Coraciiformes with 4 species, Pelecaniformes with 2 species, Podicipediformes and Columbiformes were represented to one species each. Avifaunal Percentage Composition Represented In Different Orders during the Study Period from 20152018 Population diversity of order Anseriformes During the study period the total of 9 species in two families, order Anseriformes were 5.91% highest in 201516, followed by 5.90% in 2016-17, 5.12% lowest in 2017-18 (Table 5, Fig 3). In Dendrocygnidae family the lesser whistling ducks were highest and the Comb ducks were lowest percentage was observed in the Anatidae family population. Population diversity of order Ciconiiformes During the study period the total 16 species in 3 families of order Ciconiiformes were highest 64.55% in 2015-16, followed by 67.00% in 2016-17, 67.64% in 2017-18 (Table 5, Fig 3). In Ardeidae family the Cattle egrets were highest www.zoologyjournals.com percentage and the Reef egrets were lowest percentage in the total population. Population diversity of order Charadriiformes During the study period the total 19 species in 5 families of order Charadriiformes were highest 10.95% in 2015-16. Followed by 10.06% in 2016-17 and lowest was 9.15% in 2017-18 (Table 5, Fig 3). The Pheasant-tailed jacanas were highest percentage in the Jacanidae family and the Kentish plovers were lowest percentage in the Charadriidae family population. Population diversity of order Coraciiformes During the study period the total 4 species in 5 families of order Coraciiformes were contributed to highest 0.05% in 2015-16. Followed by 0.02% during 2016-17 and lowest was noted 0.04% in 2017-18 (Table 5, Fig 3). In Alcedinidae family the Small blue kingfisher were contributed to highest and the Swallows were lowest percentage contributed to in Hirundinidae family population. Population diversity of order Gruiformes During the study period the total 6 species in one family of order Gruiformes were highest 9.52% in 2015-16. Followed by 9.21% during 2016-17 and lowest was noted 9.64% in 2017-18 (Table 5, Fig 3). In Rallidae family the Indian Moorhen hens were highest and the Slaty breasted rails were lowest percentage in the total population. Population diversity of order Passeriformes During the study period the total 8 species in 3 families of order Passeriformes were highest 4.97% in 2015-16. Followed by 4.41% during 2016-17 and lowest was noted 5.24% in 2017-18 (Table 5, Fig 3). In Dicruridae family the Black drongos were contributed to highest and the large pied Wagtail were lowest in Motacillidae family population. Population diversity of order Pelecaniformes During the study period the total 2 species in two families of order Pelecaniformes were highest 41.60% in 2015-16. Followed by 31.56% during 2016-17 and lowest was noted 26.84% in 2017-18 (Table 5, Fig3). In Phalacrocoracidae family the little cormorants were highest and the Darters were lowest Anhingidae family in the total population. Population diversity of order Podicipediformes During the study period the total one species of little grebes in one Podicipedidae family of order Podicipediformes was highest (0.90%) in 2015-16. Followed by (0.59%) during 2016-17 and lowest was recorded 0.71% in 2017-18 (Table 5, Fig 3). The study results were observed the population of bird species in their number were gradually declined from 20152018 (Fig 4). Avifaunal abundance at Kondakarla Freshwater Lake The parentage of species composition was revealed that the abundance of avifauna was highest record, 39 species were common and occupied 60.00% in the total population, followed by the uncommon birds are 21 contributed to 32.31%, five species were rare category contributed to 7.68%. The percentage of species dominance exhibit that Common > UN Common > Rare (Table 26, Fig20). 27 www.zoologyjournals.com International Journal of Zoology Studies Avifaunal IUCN (2019-2) and W (P) A status – 1972 According to IUCN (2019.2), fifty eight species were contribute to highest (89.23%) are least concerned (LC), six species (09.23%) are near threaten (NT), the lowest one species is vulnerable (1.54%) (VU) in the total avifauna (Table 27, Fig 21). According to Wild life Protection Act (1972), 63 species were highest represented to 96.92% Schedule- IV category, one species represented (1.54%) in Schedule- I category and data deficient (Table 27, Fig 22). Avifauna population diversity index average from 20152018 Shannon-Wiener average diversity indices of fish species in Kondakarla freshwater lake found variation from 2015 to 18. The population index clearly indicated that the highest index shows in monsoon period and lowest in pre-monsoon period. Shannon-wiener diversity (H) was highest in November with 2.31 and lowest in May with 1.36. Species richness was highest in November with 54.00 and lowest in May with 34.33. The maximum diversity (ln(S) was recorded highest in November with 3.99 and the lowest was recorded 3.54 in May. The bird species diversity evenness (e) is highest 0.58 in November and lowest was 0.39 in May (Table 31, Fig 26). The diversity index was more in post monsoon and lowest in pre monsoon periods. The comparisons and analysis of three consequent years result was exhibited that the avian population number gradually declined the richness of bird species, Shannon-Wiener diversity Index (H), the maximum possible diversity ln (S) and Diversity Evenness (E) clearly indicated that in various months from 2015 to 2018. Avifaunal seasonal diversity index from 2017 to 2018 The average seasonal population diversity index was from 2017 to 2018 represented in Table 37, Fig 32. The richness of species was highest contributed to 48.00 during postmonsoon period, followed by monsoon 39.00 and the lowest population was indicated in pre-monsoon 38.75. ShannonWiener diversity Index (H) results indicated that the highest 1.85 during post-monsoon period, followed by monsoons and pre-monsoons which contributed to each with 1.42. The maximum possible diversity ln (S) was highest 3.87 during post-monsoon period, followed by monsoons which contributed to 3.66 and the lowest population was indicated in pre-monsoons 3.65. Avian population Evenness (e) was highest 0.48, during post-monsoon period, followed by monsoon and pre-monsoons contributed to each with 0.39. Average yearly population diversity was resulted that richness of species was 41.92, Shannon-Wiener diversity Index (H) was 1.56, Maximum possible diversity ln (S) 3.73 and Evenness (E) 0.42. Table 1: List of Birds recorded at Kondakarla Freshwater Lake Order Anseriformes Family Dendrocygnidae Anatidae Ciconiiformes Ardeidae Ciconiidae Threskiornithidae Charadriiformes Jacanidae Recurvirostridae Charadriidae Sl. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Common Name Lesser whistling duck Brahminy duck Pintail duck Common teal Shoveller Wigeon Gargeny Cotton teal Comb duck Grey heron Purple heron Pond heron Cattle egret Large egret Little egret Reef egret Median egret Cinnamon bittern Yellow bittern Night heron Open billed stork Lesser adjutant stork Painted stork Large whistling teal Black-headed ibis Pheasant-tailed jacana Bronze winged jacana Redwattled lapwing River lapwing Yellow-wattled lapwing Black winged stilt Spotted sandpiper Little ringed plover Kentish plover Little stint Common snipe Spotted red shank Scientific Name Dendrocygna javanica Tadorna ferruginea Anas acuta Anas crecca Anas clypeata Anas Penelope Anas querquedula Nettapus coromandelianus Sarkidiornis melanotos Ardea cinerea Ardea purpurea Ardeola grayii Bubulcus ibis Casmerodius alba Egretta Grarzetta Egretta gularis Egretta intermedia Ixobrychus cinnamoneus Ixobrychus sinensis Nycticorax nycticorax Anastomus oscitans Leptoptilos javanices Mycteria leucocephala Dendrocygna bicolor Threskiornis melanocephalus Hydrophasianus chirurgus Metopidius indicus Vanellus indicus Vanellus duvaucalii Vanellus malabaricus Himantopus himantopus Actitis macularius Charadrius dubius Charadrius alexandrinus Calidris minutus Gallinago gallinago Tringa erythropus 28 www.zoologyjournals.com International Journal of Zoology Studies Burhinidae Laridae Coraciiformes Gruiformes Alcedinidae Cerylidae Halcyonidae Hirundinidae Rallidae Passeriformes Dicruridae Motacillidae Pelecaniformes Podicipediformes Ploceidae Phalacrocoracidae Anhingidae Podicipedidae 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 Wood sandpiper Common sandpiper Marsh sandpiper Stone curlew Brown headed gull Black headed gull River tern Small blue kingfisher Pied kingfishser White breasted kingfisher Swallow White breasted waterhen Common Coot Slaty breasted rail Water cock Indian moorhen Purple moorhen Black drongo Whitebellied drongo Paddyfield pipit Grey wagtail Large pied wagtail Brown shrike Long tailed shrike Baya weaver bird Little cormorant Snake bird/ Darter Little grebe Tringa glareola Tringa.hypoleucos Tringa stagnatilis Burhinus oedicnemus Larus brunnicephalus Larus rudibundus Sterna aurantia Alcedo atthis Ceryle rudis Halcyon smyrnensis Hirundo rustica Amaurornis phoenicurus Fulica atra Rallus striatus Gallicrex cinerea Gallinula chloropus Porphyrio porphyrio Dicrurus adsimilis Dicrurus caerulescens Anthus novaeseelandiae Motacilla caspica Motacilla madaraspatensis Lanius cristatus Lanius Schach Ploceus philippinus Phalacrocorax niger Anhinga rufa Podiceps ruficollis Table 2: Avifaunal distribution, habitat, food habitat, abundance, and IUCN and W (P) A status Sl. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Scientific Name Lesser whistling duck Brahminy duck Pintail duck Common teal Shoveller Wigeon Gargeny Cotton teal Comb duck Grey heron Purple heron Pond heron Cattle egret Large egret Little egret Reef egret Median egret Cinnamon bittern Yellow bittern Night heron Open billed stork Lesser adjutant stork Painted stork Large whistling teal Black-headed ibis Pheasant-tailed jacana Bronze winged jacana Redwattled lapwing River lapwing Yellow-wattled lapwing Black winged stilt Spotted sandpiper Little ringed plover Kentish plover Little stint Common snipe Distribution Status WV/LM Br.V WV/ LM/R WV/ LM WV WV WV WV/ LM WV WV R/LM R/LM R/ LM R/LM R/LM R/LM R/LM R/LM R/LM R/ LM R/LM R/LM Br.V R/LM/Br.V R/LM/Br.V WV/ Br.V R/LM/ WV Br.V R R R/ LM R/ LM R/ LM R/ LM Br.V WV/LM/R WV/LM/R R/ WV/ LM WV/ R LM/ WV Food Habits Veg/Pis Veg/Pis Veg/ Inc Veg Cru/Inc Veg Veg/ Aqu.inc Veg Veg/ Aqua. Inc Pis/ Ins Pis Pis Inc/ Car Pis/ Car Pis/ Cru/ Ins Ins /Moll/Pis Ins /Moll/Pis Pis/ Moll/ Ins/Car Pis/ Car Pis/ Car Moll/Inc Moll/Pis Pis/Snk/fro Aqua. Veg/Pis/Moll Pis/ Aqu.Inc Veg/ Inc/ Moll Veg/Inc/ Moll Inc/ Moll Inc/ Moll Inc/ Moll Moll /Inc Car/ Inc/Cru/Moll Car/ Inc/Cru/Moll Cru/ Inc Moll/ Crus/ Inc Inc/Moll/ Se Abundance IUCN Com LC Com LC Com LC Com LC UnCom LC Com LC Com LC UnCom NT UnCom LC Com LC Com LC Com LC Com LC Com LC Com LC UnCom LC UnCom LC Com LC UnCom LC Com LC Com LC Uncom VU Com NT UnCom NT Com NT Com LC Com LC Com LC UnCom LC Com LC UnCom LC UnCom NT UnCom LC UnCom LC R LC Com LC W(P)A status Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-I Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV 29 www.zoologyjournals.com International Journal of Zoology Studies 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 Spotted red shank Wood sandpiper Common sandpiper Marsh sandpiper Stone curlew Brown headed gull Black headed gull River tern Small blue kingfisher Pied kingfishser White breasted kingfisher Swallow White breasted waterhen Coot Slaty breasted rail Water cock Indian moorhen Purple moorhen Black drongo Whitebellied drongo Paddyfield pipit Grey wagtail Large pied wagtail Brown shrike Long tailed shrike Baya weaver bird Little cormorant Snake bird/ Darter Little grebe WV WV WV/ R WV/ R WV/ R WV WV LM/ R R R R LM/R WV WV WV R/LM R/LM R R R/LM R WV/LM R/ WV R R R/LM R/LM R/LM R/LM A. Distribution Status: Br.V- Breeding Visitors, LM Local Migrant, R - Resident, WV - Winter Visitor B. Food habits: Pis – Piscivorous, Ins – Insectivorous, Gra – Grainivorous, Veg – Vegetarian, Aqu.inc Aquatic Insects, Aqu.Veg - Aquatic Vegetation, Cru – Crustaceans, Moll – Molluscs C. Abundance: Com – Common, R – Rare, UnCom - Un Common, SC – Scarce Moll/ Cru/Inc Moll/ Inc/ Pis Cru/Aqu.Inc Cru/Aqu.Inc Cru/Aqu.Inc Pis /Cru Pis Pis/ Aqua. Inc/Cru Pis/ Inc Pis/ Inc Pis/ Inc Inc Inc/mol/Aq.we Inc/mol/Aq.we Inc/mol/Omn Inc/mol/Veg/Omn Inc/moll/Veg/Omn Veg/ Moll/ Inc Inc/Car/ Inc Inc Inc Inc/Moll/Se Inc Inc Gra/Se/Inc Pis/Cru Pis Pis UnCom R Com R UnCom Com UnCom Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com UnCom Com UnCom UnCom UnCom UnCom Com Com R R LC LC LC LC LC LC LC NT LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV DD Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV Sch-IV W (P) A: 1972 updated up to 2010. Protected birds listed in Schedule-I and IV of the Wildlife Act and Schedule - IV refer to genera, many of which have several species. Many birds are legally protected. Wildlife (Protection) Act - 1972: Schedule - I, Schedule- IV, Schedule -V D. IUCN Status (2019-2) LC: Least Concern, VU: Vulnerable, NT: Near Threatened Table 3: Avifaunal percentage composition in different Orders during the study period from June 2015- May 2018 Orders Anseriformes Ciconiiformes Charadriiformes Coraciiformes Gruiformes Passeriformes Pelecaniformes Podicipediformes 2015-16 (%) 5.91 64.55 10.95 0.05 9.52 4.97 3.14 0.90 2016-17 (%) 5.90 67.00 10.06 0.02 9.21 4.41 2.79 0.59 2017-18 (%) 5.12 67.64 9.15 0.04 9.64 5.24 2.064 0.71 Fig 1: Avifaunal percentage composition from 2015- 2018 30 www.zoologyjournals.com International Journal of Zoology Studies Table 4: Avifaunal abundance at Kondakarla Freshwater Lake Abundance Com - Common Un Com - Un Common R – Rare No. of species 39 21 05 % of species composition 60.00 32.31 07.69 Table 5: Avifaunal IUCN (2019-2) and W (P) A status – 1972 IUCN Status (2019-2) W(P)A status – 1972 Red List Least Concern (LC) Near Threatened (NT) Vulnerable (VU) Category Schedule - IV Schedule- I DD No. of species 58 06 01 No. of species 63 01 01 % of species 89.23 09.23 01.54 % of species 96.92 01.54 01.54 Fig 2: Avifaunal abundance Fig 3: Avifaunal IUCN (2019-2) staus Fig 4: Avifaunal W (P) A status 1972 Table 6: Birds population diversity index average from 2015-2018 Diversity Species richness H ln(S) Evenness E Monsoon Post monsoon Pre monsoon Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May 39.00 41.00 43.00 45.00 50.00 54.00 52.00 49.00 46.00 44.67 41.33 34.33 1.47 1.55 1.6 1.7 2.00 2.31 2.17 2.02 1.78 1.62 1.51 1.36 3.66 3.71 3.76 3.80 3.91 3.99 3.95 11.67 3.83 3.78 3.72 3.54 0.40 0.42 0.42 0.45 0.51 0.58 0.55 0.52 0.46 0.43 0.41 0.39 31 www.zoologyjournals.com International Journal of Zoology Studies Fig 5: Birds population average diversity index from 2015-2018 Table: 7: Average seasonal population diversity index 2017-2018 Seasons pre-monsoon (Summer) Monsoon (Rainy) post-monsoon (Winter) Average Species richness 38.75 39.00 48.00 41.92 H 1.42 1.42 1.85 1.56 Maximum diversity possible ln(S) 3.65 3.66 3.87 3.73 Evenness E 0.39 0.39 0.48 0.42 Fig 6: Avifunal average seasonal population diversity index 2017-2018 Discussion In the present study 65 species of birds belonging to 8 orders, 21 families and 45 genera were recorded during the study period from June 2015 to May 2018 at Kondakarla Freshwater Lake. Jagatheeswari (2014) [29] documented a total of 68 species of Avifauna noted during the survey period, its belonging to 31 Families were noted among these, 35 species of birds are aquatic habitats and 33 species of birds were terrestrial habitats at Kondakarla lake. The similar observation were recorded by various investigators like Tirumala Tulasi et al., (2017) [44] reported104 species of birds belonging to 29 families and 11 orders were recorded Tatipudi reservoir. In this study recorded species out of 65, Ardeidae was dominant with 11 which contribute to 16.92% indicating the wetland moderately supports shorebirds. Bharatha Lakshmi et al (2001) [9] observed 120 number of terrestrial and aquatic avifauna with 32 families recorded at Kondakarla Lake. Rathore and Sharma (1999) [37] explained 32 International Journal of Zoology Studies Anatidae to be dominating family with 12 species in Sarsai Nawar in UP. Sekhar, Basavarajappa (2006) [6] described 27 species of water birds belonging to 13 families in the agro ecosystem of Maidan area of Karnataka which provided congenial habitat for the survival of water birds. Jagadeswari (2016) mentioned a total of 68 species of birds during the survey belongs to 31 Familes were noted. Among these 68 species of birds, 35 species of birds are aquatic habitats and 33 species of birds were terrestrial. Geofrey et al., (2013) [20] observed that the species diversity and abundance of Avifauna in and around Hombolo Wetland. Family Ploceidae had the highest 9 number of bird species followed by Charadriidae. The similar observations were reported by Bharata Lakshmi and Rao, 2003 [8]. Ishwara Bhat et al., 2009 [8]. Harisha et al., 2011 [11]. Hai, 2012 [24]. The similar observations were reported by various investigators on avifaunal populations in India and other countries (Medhi1 and Suraj Sharma, 2017) [36]. Bellrose and Trudeau (1988) [7] observed the wetlands and their relationship to migrating on winter populations of waterfowls. Aparna and Raja Sekhar (2016) [4] observed that the wetland resident category in highest dominance (62.7%) associated to these habitats most of the time for feeding, nesting and shelter. Kondakarla Lake plays an important role in the annual cycle of the migratory and non-migratory birds and serves as wintering ground for the migrant species and breeding grounds for several resident birds. Breeding residents responded to annual measures of energy availability while breeding migrants and the winter assemblage responded more strongly to seasonal measures. (Scott and Pool, (1989) [41] . The migratory birds are mostly seen in large flocks or small parties and in mixed flocks around Kondakarla Lake. The study focused on the population characteristics of the dominant birds over a period of three years. The highest species diversity was observed during the post monsoon wet period. The large group of water birds consists mainly of ducks, diving birds like Grebes, Rails, Coots and Moorhens, other birds with aquatic life style and a variety of ducks and waders are visit to the freshwater lake. The population of family Anatidae was the maximum among the winter migrants. The rare and endangered species of are now threatened throughout Europe and Asia Birdlife International, (2001) [14, 15]. Wading birds include Avocets, Curlews, Godwits, Plovers, Sandpipers, Snipes, Lapwings, Shanks, Stilts, Stints, etc. The long legged birds that wade in shallow waters include Herons, Storks, Ibises, Bitterns and Spoonbills. The lake is frequented by the wetland dependent birds which include Kingfishers, Swallows, and Wagtails etc. The population of many species has declined alarmingly. Extremely rare species and rare winter visitors (Spoon bills, Adjutant storks, etc., White Ibis, Black winged Stilts, Glossy Ibis, Cormorants, Herons, variety of Ducks, Variety of Waders along with other miscellaneous groups. Sand Pipers, Lapwings, Avocets, Curlews, Whimbrels, Reef herons, Jacanas, Water cocks, Water hens are reduced due to environmental conditions. Depletion of bird diversity and population can be ascribed to the shrinkage of habitat and various threats in the lake which is used to visit Kondakarla Lake slowly disappeared and the diversity as well as population size have reduced which is observed during the study period. According to IUCN (2019.2) [28], fifty eight species were contribute to highest 89.23% are least concerned (LC), six www.zoologyjournals.com species contribute to 09.23% are near threaten (NT), the lowest one species is vulnerable 1.54% (VU) in the total avifauna. Islam and Rahmani (2004) [27] represented threatened birds of India as per IUCN 1990, IUCN 2010, Anon (1974) [3]. The present investigation concentrated on Wildlife Protection Act revealed that 63 species were highest represented to 96.92% Schedule- IV category, one species were represented to each with 1.54% Schedule- I category and data deficient was observed most of the literature (Arora, 2003) [5]. Harisha (2016) [26] reported Black-headed Ibis, Darter, Black-tailed and River terns have a protected status under the schedule IV of Indian Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. Conclusion The avifauna population showed significant variations at every successive year from 2015 to 2018. The biodiversity indices were also exhibit down trend of migratory bird species at year wise successive period from 2015 to 2018. Acknowledgment The authors would like to thank to the Head, Dept. of Environmental Sciences for the support and facilities provided for conducting this research study. References 1. Ali S. “The Book of Indian Birds, 13thedition, Bombay Natural History Society & Oxford University Press, Bombay” (1941). 1996; 1-412. 2. Ali S, SD. Ripley. Hand Book of the birds of India and Pakistan. Compact Edition. Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1993. 3. Anon. Ramsar Convention” The Final Act of the International Conference on the Conservation of Weltlands and Waterfowl. IUCN Bulletin 2. Special Supplement. 1974; 14. 4. Aparna S, Raja Sekhar PS. Status of avifaunal diversity in saline marsh and swampy habitats of Visakhapatnam coastal environments. International Journal of Fauna and Biological Studies. 2016; 3(5):01-06. 5. Arora K. Forest Laws. The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 as amended by the Wild (Protection) Amendment Act, 2002. Professional Book Publishers, New Delhi. 2003; 85. 6. Basavarajappa S. Avifauna of agro ecosystems of Maidan area of Karnataka. Zoos Print Journal. 2006; 21 (4):2117-2119. 7. Bellrose FC, Trudeau NM. Wetlands and their relationship to migrating and winter populations of waterfowl, v. I: Portland, Oreg. Timber Press. 1988; 183-194. 8. Bharata Lakshmi B, Rao BT. Avifauna of Uppalapadu Wetland near Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. J. Nat. Ishwara Bhat P, S.S. Cristopher and B.B. Hosetti, 2009. Avifaunal diversity of Anekere wetland, Karkala, Udupi district, Karnataka, India. Journal of Environmental Biology. 2003; 30(6):1059-1062. 9. Bharatha Lakshmi B, Rao BT, LM. Rao. Avifauna of Kondakarla Lake near Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. J. Nacton. 2001; 13(1):107-115. 10. Bibby CJ, Burgess ND, Hill DA. Bird Census Techniques. Academic Press. London. 1992; 251. 11. Bibby CJ, Burgess ND, Hill DA. Bird Census Techniques. Academic Press. 1992; 251. 33 International Journal of Zoology Studies 12. Bibby CJ, Burgress ND, Hill DA, Mutoe S. Bird census Techniques. British trust for ornithological and royal society for protection of birds. 2nd ed. Academic press, London. 2000; 317. 13. Bibby CJ, Jones M, Mardeson S. “Bird Surveys: Expedition Field Techniques”. Academic Press, London, 1996. 14. Birdlife International. “Threatened Birds of Asia” The Birdlife International Red Data Book. 2001; 2(1). st Ed. 15. Birdlife International. “Threatened Birds of Asia” The Birdlife International Red Data Book. 2001; 2(1). st ed,. 16. Burnham K, David R. Anderson' and Jeffrey L. Laake. Line Transect Estimation of Bird Population density using A Fourier Series Studies in Avian Biology. 1981; (6):466-482. 17. Collar NJ, Crosby MJ, Staffersfield AJ. “The World List of Threatened Birds” Birdlife Conservation. 1994; 4. Birdlife International, Cambridge. 18. Deepa RS, TV Ramachandra. Impact of Urbanization in the Interconnectivity of Wetlands. Paper presented at the National Symposium on Remote Sensing Applications for Natural Resources: Retrospective and Perspective (XIX-XXI 1999), Indian Society of Remote Sensing, Banglore, 1999. 19. Emlen JJ. An Urban Bird Community in Tucosan, Arizona: Diversity, Structure and Regualtion condor. 1974; 76:184-194. 20. Geofrey E. Soka Pantaleo, KT Munishi, Mgina B. Thomas. Species diversity and abundance of Avifauna in and around Hombolo Wetland in Central Tanzania. International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation. 2013; 5(11):782-790. 21. Grewal B, Harvey, Pfister O. Birds of India, A & C Black Publishers Limited, London, 2002. 22. Greywall B. Birds of the Indian subcontinent (Revised edition), Guide Book Company Ltd. Honkong. 1995; 190. 23. Grimmett RC. Inskipp T Inskipp. “Birds of Indian Subcontinent” Oxford University Press. Delhi. 2001; 384. 24. Hai 1 A, M Jeelani, S Patil, R Ahmad. Bird Diversity in Shallabug Wetland (Kashmir), India. Int. J. En. Rehab. & Con. 2012; 3(2):33-37. 25. Harisha MN, Hosetti BB, Shahnawaz A. Wetland Avifauna of Kundavada Lake, Davanagere dist., Karnataka. Current Biotica. 2011; 5(3):351-358. 26. Harisha MN. Assessment of status, diversity and threats of wetland birds of Bathi Lake, Doddabathi Village, Davanagere District, and Karnataka, India. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies. 2016; 4(4):586-590. 27. Islam MZ, Rahmani AR. “Threatened Birds of India” Buceros. 2004; 7(1-2):1-102; 28. IUCN Red List of threatened species, version 2019; 1. www.iucnredlist.org down loaded on Nov 2019. 29. Jagatheeswari J. A study on habitat evaluation and associated avi faunal diversity of kondakarla fresh water lake ecosystem of Visakhapatnam, andhra pradesh, India. Ecology, Environment and Conservation. 2014; 20(4):1629-1638. 30. Jagatheeswari J, B Kishore, PS Rajasekhar. Fish diversity and conservation aspects in an aquatic ecosystem, Kondakarla fresh water lake, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India. International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies. 2016; 4(1):20- www.zoologyjournals.com 23 31. Kazmierczak K, Van perto B. Field Guide to the Birds of the Indian Subcontinent, 2000. 32. Krishnan M. “Birds of Southern India” 1981; 3(2)23:26-31. 33. Manakadan Rl, JC Daniel, AR Rahmani, M Inamdar, G Ugra. “Standardized English Common names of the birds of the Indian subcontinent - a proposal, Bombay Natural History Society, Mumbai, Buceros. 1998; 3(2):55. 34. Manakkadan R, A Pittie. Standardized common and scientific names of the birds of the Indian subcontinent. Buceros. 2001; 6(1):1-37. 35. McKinnonm, Philips. A field guide to the birds of Sumatra, Java and Bali. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 1993. 36. Medhi1 Trishna, Suraj Sharma. Avifaunal Diversity and Abundance of Jalikhara and Etila Beel (wetland) of Kamrup (metro) District, Assam, India. International Journal of Science and Research. 2017; 6(6):739-742. 37. Rathore Sharma. Avifauna of a Lake in district Etawah, Uttar Pradesh, India. Zoos’ Print J. 1999; 15(6):275278. 38. Rosenstock SS, Anderson DR, Giesen KM, Leukering T, Carter MF. “Land bird counting techniques” Current Practices and an alternative. Auk. 2002; 119:46-53. 39. Rosser AM. Mainka SA. “Overexploitation and species extinctions” 85 Conserv. Biol. 2000; 16:584-586. 40. Rosser AM. Mainka SA. “Overexploitation and species extinctions” 85 Conserv. Biol. 2000; 16:584-586. 41. Scott DA. & Poole CMA Status Overview of Asian Wetlands. Asian Wetland Bureau Publication No. 53. AWB, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 1989. 42. Shannon CE, Wiener W. “The mathematical theory of communication”, Illinois University Press, Urban. 1949; 12(1):121. 43. Simpson EH. Measurement of Diversity, Nature, 1949; 163:688. 44. Tirumala Tulasi P, B Bharatha Lakshmi P, Laxmikanth P Srinivas. Biodiversity conservation of tatipudi reservior with reference to avifauna. Int. J Plant Ani & Env Sci. 2017; 7(1):45-55. 45. Woodcock M. “Hand Guide to the birds of Indian subcontinent” Collenis, Londonpgs. 1996; 1-450. 46. Yallop ML, Connell MJ, Bullock R. Water birds Herbivory on a newly created wetland complex: Potential mplication for site management and habitat creation. Wetl. Ecol. Manage. 2003; 12:395-408. 34