Priority sites for conservation of maleos (Macrocephalon maleo) in central Sulawesi

Butchart, Stuart H. M.; Baker, Gillian C.

doi:10.1016/s0006-3207(99)00161-5

Cited by 23 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Sometimes the prioritizing task is designed only for the optimum potential preservation of a single species. For example, Butchart and Baker (2000) define the reserve network for the conservation of the maleo (an endemic megapod bird) in Sulawesi, while Stillman and Brown (1998) do the same for a relatively narrow group of bird taxa. Several spatial concepts such as gap analysis, complementarity, flexibility and irreplaceability, most of which are defined on the basis of algorithms, have arisen where it is multiple species that are the focus and examples of application of all these methods are abundant in the recent biogeographical literature.…”

Section: Patterns and Prioritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Biogeography: does theory meet practice?

Meadows

2001

Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I Introduction: millennial or centennial reflections?Whichever definition of the term millennium we care to accept (i.e. that a new one begins either -intuitively -at the commencement of year 2000 or -technically correct -at 2001), as I write this we are at the cusp. It has proved a popular, perhaps even overly common, pastime for academic reviewers (Nature, for example, has published an extensive series of 'millennium essays') to reflect on the problems and prospects of their various disciplines at this time. Reflecting on the millennium could be construed as mere intellectual navel-gazing, given that the 'event' itself, i.e., the change from one millennium to another, is purely arbitrary in the numerical sense and purely random in so far as we find ourselves alive on the planet at the time. As Gould (1997:104) notes '. . . do we not feast upon trivialities to divert attention from the truly portentous issues that engulf us?' It is tempting nevertheless to eschew the format of an 'annual' progress report and, instead, sweep across the broad history of biogeography, pick out a few obvious highlights and reflect on where the discipline stands at this 'culturally contingent' (Gould, 1997: 133) moment. However, the very logic of looking back on one or two millennia of developments in an academic discipline like biogeography is questionable. After all, its existence in an identifiable and formally named way is arguably somewhat less than one hundred years old. Accordingly, in attempting to write something meaningful about biogeography at the turn of the millennium, I restrict myself to a current perspective on the discipline in terms of what is arguably the key theoretical development of the later part of the century -island biogeography and its implications for conservation. This is not to undervalue the contributions to our science made by its practitioners prior to this; rather, to admit that developments in the recent past are part of our own proximal experience and, therefore, likely to be in clearer focus. In essence, then, this review

show abstract

Section: Patterns and Prioritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Biogeography: does theory meet practice?

Meadows

2001

Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Large swathes of habitat adjacent to the coast have been converted to cultivation, such as oil palm and coconut plantations, and this form of habitat degradation is increasing (Anon., 1998). Consequently, a significantly larger proportion of coastal than inland nesting grounds are now completely isolated from primary forest (23 (56.1 per cent) of 41 coastal sites versus 7 (19.4 per cent) of 36 inland sites, 2 = 6.56, PB0.02; data from Argeloo, 1994;Butchart & Baker, 2000)). Isolation of nesting grounds from foraging habitat is likely to have a detrimental effect on maleo populations (Dekker & McGowan, 1995).…”

Section: Habitat Degradationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nesting ground is still used for egg-laying by a considerable population of maleos, but is not considered safe for the future because of egg-collecting, adverse developments in the area or both Not yet Nesting ground still intact and freely accessible to maleos, with egg-collecting threatened absent or at a low level (1994), Prawiradilaga (1997), Baltzer (in litt.) and Butchart & Baker (2000). Dotted lines indicate the approximate locations of Lore Lindu National Park and Morowali Nature Reserve.…”

Section: Egg-harvestingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, the people of Sulawesi show a sincere interest in the plight of the maleo, and conservation initiatives should capitalize on this fact. The IUCN action plan for megapode conservation 2000-2004 highlights conserva-tion goals for the maleo and other megapodes. This document, being in English, may not reach the Indonesian researchers, conservationists and government departments working in the field.…”

Section: Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Threats to the maleo Macrocephalon maleo and recommendations for its conservation

Baker¹,

Butchart²

2000

ORX

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The maleo Macrocephalon maleo (Megapodiidae; Galliformes) is a megapode, endemic to Sulawesi, Indonesia, that lays its eggs communally in geothermally or solar-heated soil. The majority of maleo nesting grounds are threatened to some degree and over onethird of known sites have been abandoned. Maleos are severely threatened by habitat degradation and uncontrolled egg-collecting. Hunting of adult birds is also contributing to their decline in some areas. Conservation measures implemented so far have not been sufficiently effective in preventing maleo population declines. In order to safeguard the maleo from further declines we recommend that the laws protecting the maleo and its habitat be strengthened as a matter of urgency and that long-term community conservation and environmental awareness projects be implemented. To achieve these goals we advocate the formation of a collaborative network of international NGOs, Indonesian conservationists, government departments and local communities.

show abstract

“…Orange‐footed Scrubfowl also occur in beach forest, low‐stature, scrubby vegetation, mangrove forest, savannah woodland, and primary rainforest in lowlands and hills (Coates and Bishop 1997). Indonesia supports all but 5 of the 22 species of megapodes, including the threatened Phillipine Megapode ( M. cumingii ) and the Maleo ( Macrocephalon maleo ; MacKinnon 1981, Jones and Birks 1992, Dekker and McGowan 1995, Dekker et al 2000, Butchart and Baker 2002, Sinclair et al 2002, Gorog et al 2005). Orange‐footed Scrubfowl, considered at a low risk of extinction, have an extensive geographical range over which there is surprisingly little geographical variation, possibly indicating more gene flow among island populations than for other species (Jones et al 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Distribution, seasonal use, and predation of incubation mounds of Orange-footed Scrubfowl on Komodo Island, Indonesia

Imansyah¹,

Jessop²,

Sumner³

et al. 2009

Journal of Field Ornithology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Megapodes are unique in using only heat from the environment, rather than body heat, to incubate their eggs as well as the precocious independence of their chicks on hatching. Of 22 recognized species of megapodes, 9 are listed as threatened due to factors including habitat loss and fragmentation, and predation on eggs and chicks. Orange‐footed Scrubfowl (Megapodius reinwardt) are conspicuous components of the Oriental/Austral avifauna that inhabit the monsoon forests of the Lesser Sunda chain of islands in Indonesia. We examined the abundance, patterns of distribution, physical characteristics, seasonal activity, and predation risk of incubation mounds of Orange‐footed Scrubfowl on Komodo Island in eastern Indonesia. We surveyed 13 valleys on Komodo Island from April 2002 to January 2005 and located 113 tended and 107 untended incubation mounds. Densities of scrubfowl mounds in our study were similar to that reported by investigators during the 1970s, suggesting little change in the scrubfowl population since then. Most scrubfowl mounds were on sandy or loamy soils in open monsoon forest with little overhead shade, and placement of mounds in such areas may ensure adequate temperatures for egg incubation. Although some mounds were tended during all months, mound use peaked during the late wet season in March. During the dry season (April–November), only a few mounds were tended. Komodo dragons (Varanus komodoensis) and wild pigs (Sus scrofa) were the primary predators of scrubfowl eggs, with no indication of egg predation by humans. The valley with the largest number of untended mounds in our study also had the largest number of active Komodo dragon nests. This suggests an effect of Komodo dragons on scrubfowl numbers, but additional study is needed.

show abstract

Priority sites for conservation of maleos (Macrocephalon maleo) in central Sulawesi

Cited by 23 publications

References 8 publications

Biogeography: does theory meet practice?

Biogeography: does theory meet practice?

Threats to the maleo Macrocephalon maleo and recommendations for its conservation

Distribution, seasonal use, and predation of incubation mounds of Orange-footed Scrubfowl on Komodo Island, Indonesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About