DOCSLIB.ORG

Perdix Perdix

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Perdix perdix -- (Linnaeus, 1758) ANIMALIA -- CHORDATA -- AVES -- GALLIFORMES -- PHASIANIDAE Common names: Grey Partridge; Gray Partridge; Partridge European Red List Assessment European Red List Status LC -- Least Concern, (IUCN version 3.1) Assessment Information Year published: 2015 Date assessed: 2015-03-31 Assessor(s): BirdLife International Reviewer(s): Symes, A. Compiler(s): Ashpole, J., Burfield, I., Ieronymidou, C., Pople, R., Wheatley, H. & Wright, L. Assessment Rationale European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC) EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC) At both European and EU27 scales this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27. Occurrence Countries/Territories of Occurrence Native: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Czech Republic; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Ireland, Rep. of; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of; Moldova; Montenegro; Netherlands; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; Russian Federation; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Turkey; Ukraine; United Kingdom Vagrant: Cyprus Population The European population is estimated at 1,380,000-2,670,000 pairs, which equates to 2,750,000-5,340,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 1,030,000-2,030,000 pairs, which equates to 2,060,000-4,060,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see Supplementary PDF. Trend In Europe and the EU27 the population size is estimated to be decreasing by less than 25% in 11.7 years (three generations). For details of national estimates, see Supplementary PDF. Habitats and Ecology The species is found in the temperate zone, steppe regions and open arable landscapes (McGowan & Kirwan 2013). Its preferred habitat is open, low-intensity mixed farmland with small fields and hedges on grassy banks (Potts 1986, Birkan & Jacob 1988). It is found in large tracts of grassland, or other ground cover that is only slightly taller than the bird itself with some dense shrubby patches at intervals such as hedgerows. Laying occurs from late April in the U.K., early May to June in central Europe and late May to June in Sweden with re-nesting until August or September (McGowan & Kirwan 2013). It typically lays 15–17 eggs in the first clutch but fewer eggs when re-nesting. The nest is a shallow depression lined with plant material at the base of a hedge or other thick vegetation (Madge and McGowan 2002). It feeds on seeds of grains and weeds, cereals and clover and grass leaves as well as insects. The species is mainly sedentary however it is partially migratory in eastern Europe and performs altitudinal migration in the Caucasus moving to the foothills in October and November (McGowan & Kirwan 2013). Habitats & Altitude Habitat (level 1 - level 2) Importance Occurrence Artificial/Terrestrial - Arable Land suitable resident Grassland - Temperate suitable resident Shrubland - Temperate suitable resident Altitude max. 2600 m Occasional altitudinal limits Threats Since the early part of the 20th century, the species may have declined in all 31 countries in which it is found. In the U.K., the reduction in numbers is believed to be as high as 80%; causes probably include factors such as loss of nesting cover, predation, herbicides (chick survival rates in U.K. declined from 49% to 32% once their use became widespread) and pesticides that reduce insect abundance in the spring. All of these factors are the consequences of intensification of agricultural practices (McGowan and Kirwan 2013). Threats & Impacts Threat (level 1) Threat (level 2) Impact and Stresses Agriculture & Agro-industry Timing Scope Severity Impact aquaculture farming Ongoing Whole (>90%) Unknown Unknown Stresses Ecosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation Invasive and other Unspecified species Timing Scope Severity Impact problematic Ongoing Whole (>90%) Unknown Unknown species, genes & diseases Stresses Species mortality Pollution Herbicides and Timing Scope Severity Impact pesticides Ongoing Whole (>90%) Unknown Unknown Stresses Ecosystem degradation; Species mortality Conservation Conservation Actions Underway Mace Lande: Safe. EU Birds Directive Annex II and III, Perdix perdix italica and Perdix perdix hispaniensis Annex I. A national Species Management Plan for the Italian Grey Partridge (P. p. italica) was published in 1999 (Palumbo and Gallo-Orsi 1999). In the U.K., supplementary winter feeding is also being attempted to benefit this, and other declining granivorous birds, on farmland (McGowan and Kirwan 2013). Conservation Actions Proposed Specific recommendations to address these problems include: provision of good-quality nesting cover; reduction of nest predation by controlling impact of foxes, stoats and feral cats and improving insect abundance in spring so that chicks have sufficient prey items (McGowan and Kirwan 2013). Bibliography Birkan, M. and Jacob, M. 1988. [The Grey Partridge.] Paris: Hatier. (In French.) Madge, S. and McGowan, P. 2002. Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London. McGowan, P.J.K. and Kirwan, G.M. 2013. Grey Partridge (Perdix perdix). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., Sargatal, J., Christie, D.A. and de Juana, E. (eds.) 2013. Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. (retrieved from http://www.hbw.com/node/53427 on 1 October 2014). Palumbo, G. and Gallo-Orsi, U. 1999. Management Statement Italian Grey Partridge Perdix perdix italica. BirdLife. Potts, G.R. 1986. The Partridge: pesticides, predation and conservation. London: Collins. Tucker, G.M. and Heath, M.F. 1994. Birds in Europe: their conservation status. BirdLife Conservation Series no. 3, BirdLife International, Cambridge. Map (see overleaf) .
Recommended publications
  • 1471-2148-10-132.Pdf

    1471-2148-10-132.Pdf

    Shen et al. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2010, 10:132 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/10/132 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access AResearch mitogenomic article perspective on the ancient, rapid radiation in the Galliformes with an emphasis on the Phasianidae Yong-Yi Shen1,2,3, Lu Liang1,2,3, Yan-Bo Sun1,2,3, Bi-Song Yue4, Xiao-Jun Yang1, Robert W Murphy1,5 and Ya- Ping Zhang*1,2 Abstract Background: The Galliformes is a well-known and widely distributed Order in Aves. The phylogenetic relationships of galliform birds, especially the turkeys, grouse, chickens, quails, and pheasants, have been studied intensively, likely because of their close association with humans. Despite extensive studies, convergent morphological evolution and rapid radiation have resulted in conflicting hypotheses of phylogenetic relationships. Many internal nodes have remained ambiguous. Results: We analyzed the complete mitochondrial (mt) genomes from 34 galliform species, including 14 new mt genomes and 20 published mt genomes, and obtained a single, robust tree. Most of the internal branches were relatively short and the terminal branches long suggesting an ancient, rapid radiation. The Megapodiidae formed the sister group to all other galliforms, followed in sequence by the Cracidae, Odontophoridae and Numididae. The remaining clade included the Phasianidae, Tetraonidae and Meleagrididae. The genus Arborophila was the sister group of the remaining taxa followed by Polyplectron. This was followed by two major clades: ((((Gallus, Bambusicola) Francolinus) (Coturnix, Alectoris)) Pavo) and (((((((Chrysolophus, Phasianus) Lophura) Syrmaticus) Perdix) Pucrasia) (Meleagris, Bonasa)) ((Lophophorus, Tetraophasis) Tragopan))). Conclusions: The traditional hypothesis of monophyletic lineages of pheasants, partridges, peafowls and tragopans was not supported in this study.
  • Wild Turkey Education Guide

    Wild Turkey Education Guide

    Table of Contents Section 1: Eastern Wild Turkey Ecology 1. Eastern Wild Turkey Quick Facts………………………………………………...pg 2 2. Eastern Wild Turkey Fact Sheet………………………………………………….pg 4 3. Wild Turkey Lifecycle……………………………………………………………..pg 8 4. Eastern Wild Turkey Adaptations ………………………………………………pg 9 Section 2: Eastern Wild Turkey Management 1. Wild Turkey Management Timeline…………………….……………………….pg 18 2. History of Wild Turkey Management …………………...…..…………………..pg 19 3. Modern Wild Turkey Management in Maryland………...……………………..pg 22 4. Managing Wild Turkeys Today ……………………………………………….....pg 25 Section 3: Activity Lesson Plans 1. Activity: Growing Up WILD: Tasty Turkeys (Grades K-2)……………..….…..pg 33 2. Activity: Calling All Turkeys (Grades K-5)………………………………..…….pg 37 3. Activity: Fit for a Turkey (Grades 3-5)…………………………………………...pg 40 4. Activity: Project WILD adaptation: Too Many Turkeys (Grades K-5)…..…….pg 43 5. Activity: Project WILD: Quick, Frozen Critters (Grades 5-8).……………….…pg 47 6. Activity: Project WILD: Turkey Trouble (Grades 9-12………………….……....pg 51 7. Activity: Project WILD: Let’s Talk Turkey (Grades 9-12)..……………..………pg 58 Section 4: Additional Activities: 1. Wild Turkey Ecology Word Find………………………………………….…….pg 66 2. Wild Turkey Management Word Find………………………………………….pg 68 3. Turkey Coloring Sheet ..………………………………………………………….pg 70 4. Turkey Coloring Sheet ..………………………………………………………….pg 71 5. Turkey Color-by-Letter……………………………………..…………………….pg 72 6. Five Little Turkeys Song Sheet……. ………………………………………….…pg 73 7. Thankful Turkey…………………..…………………………………………….....pg 74 8. Graph-a-Turkey………………………………….…………………………….…..pg 75 9. Turkey Trouble Maze…………………………………………………………..….pg 76 10. What Animals Made These Tracks………………………………………….……pg 78 11. Drinking Straw Turkey Call Craft……………………………………….….……pg 80 Section 5: Wild Turkey PowerPoint Slide Notes The facilities and services of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources are available to all without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, national origin or physical or mental disability.
  • Than a Meal: the Turkey in History, Myth

    Than a Meal: the Turkey in History, Myth

    More Than a Meal Abigail at United Poultry Concerns’ Thanksgiving Party Saturday, November 22, 1997. Photo: Barbara Davidson, The Washington Times, 11/27/97 More Than a Meal The Turkey in History, Myth, Ritual, and Reality Karen Davis, Ph.D. Lantern Books New York A Division of Booklight Inc. Lantern Books One Union Square West, Suite 201 New York, NY 10003 Copyright © Karen Davis, Ph.D. 2001 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of Lantern Books. Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data For Boris, who “almost got to be The real turkey inside of me.” From Boris, by Terry Kleeman and Marie Gleason Anne Shirley, 16-year-old star of “Anne of Green Gables” (RKO-Radio) on Thanksgiving Day, 1934 Photo: Underwood & Underwood, © 1988 Underwood Photo Archives, Ltd., San Francisco Table of Contents 1 Acknowledgments . .9 Introduction: Milton, Doris, and Some “Turkeys” in Recent American History . .11 1. A History of Image Problems: The Turkey as a Mock Figure of Speech and Symbol of Failure . .17 2. The Turkey By Many Other Names: Confusing Nomenclature and Species Identification Surrounding the Native American Bird . .25 3. A True Original Native of America . .33 4. Our Token of Festive Joy . .51 5. Why Do We Hate This Celebrated Bird? . .73 6. Rituals of Spectacular Humiliation: An Attempt to Make a Pathetic Situation Seem Funny . .99 7 8 More Than a Meal 7.
  • Reproductive Ecology of Tibetan Eared Pheasant Crossoptilon Harmani in Scrub Environment, with Special Reference to the Effect of Food

    Reproductive Ecology of Tibetan Eared Pheasant Crossoptilon Harmani in Scrub Environment, with Special Reference to the Effect of Food

    Ibis (2003), 145, 657–666 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Reproductive ecology of Tibetan Eared Pheasant Crossoptilon harmani in scrub environment, with special reference to the effect of food XIN LU1* & GUANG-MEI ZHENG2 1Department of Zoology, College of Life Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China 2Department of Ecology, College of Life Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China We studied the nesting ecology of two groups of the endangered Tibetan Eared Pheasants Crossoptilon harmani in scrub environments near Lhasa, Tibet, during 1996 and 1999–2001. One group received artificial food from a nunnery prior to incubation whereas the other fed on natural food. This difference in the birds’ nutritional history allowed us to assess the effects of food on reproduction. Laying occurred between mid-April and early June, with a peak at the end of April or early May. Eggs were laid around noon. Adult females produced one clutch per year. Clutch size averaged 7.4 eggs (4–11). Incubation lasted 24–25 days. We observed a higher nesting success (67.7%) than reported for other eared pheasants. Pro- visioning had no significant effect on the timing of clutch initiation or nesting success, and a weak effect on egg size and clutch size (explaining 8.2% and 9.1% of the observed variation, respectively). These results were attributed to the observation that the unprovisioned birds had not experienced local food shortage before laying, despite spending more time feeding and less time resting than the provisioned birds. Nest-site selection by the pheasants was non-random with respect to environmental variables. Rock-cavities with an entrance aver- aging 0.32 m2 in size and not deeper than 1.5 m were greatly preferred as nest-sites.
  • Specimen Record of a Long-Billed Murrelet from Eastern Washington, with Notes on Plumage and Morphometric Differences Between Long-Billed and Marbled Murrelets

    Specimen Record of a Long-Billed Murrelet from Eastern Washington, with Notes on Plumage and Morphometric Differences Between Long-Billed and Marbled Murrelets

    SPECIMEN RECORD OF A LONG-BILLED MURRELET FROM EASTERN WASHINGTON, WITH NOTES ON PLUMAGE AND MORPHOMETRIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN LONG-BILLED AND MARBLED MURRELETS CHRISTOPER W. THOMPSON, WashingtonDepartment of Fish and Wildlife, 16018 Mill Creek Blvd., Mill Creek, Washington98012, and Burke Museum,Box 353100, Universityof Washington,Seattle, Washington 98195 KEVIN J. PULLEN, ConnerMuseum, Washington State University, Pullman, Wash- ington 99164 RICHARD E. JOHNSON, Conner Museumand School of BiologicalSciences, WashingtonState University,Pullman, Washington 99164 ERICB. CUMMINS, WashingtonDepartment of Fishand Wildlife, 600 CapitolWay North, Olympia,Washington 98501 ABSTRACT:On 14 August2001, RobertDice found a Brachyramphusmurrelet approximately12 mileseast of Pomeroyin easternWashington state more than 200 milesfrom the nearestmarine waters. The bird died later that day. It had begun definitiveprebasic body molt, but not flightfeather molt. Necropsy indicated that the birdwas a female,probably in her secondcalendar year. Johnson and Thompson identifiedthe birdas a Long-billedMurrelet, Brachyramphus perdix, on the basisof plumageand measurements;it is the firstspecimen of thisspecies for Washington state. Contrary to many recent publicationsstating that Long-billedand Marbled Murreletshave white and brownunder wing coverts, respectively, we confirmedthat bothspecies typically have white under wing coverts prior to definitiveprebasic molt andbrown under wing coverts after this molt. Absence of anyextensive storm systems in the North Pacificin
  • Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management

    Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management

    Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment for the Use of Wildlife Damage Management Methods by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Chapter I Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management MAY 2017 Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) Program completed Risk Assessments for methods used in wildlife damage management in 1992 (USDA 1997). While those Risk Assessments are still valid, for the most part, the WS Program has expanded programs into different areas of wildlife management and wildlife damage management (WDM) such as work on airports, with feral swine and management of other invasive species, disease surveillance and control. Inherently, these programs have expanded the methods being used. Additionally, research has improved the effectiveness and selectiveness of methods being used and made new tools available. Thus, new methods and strategies will be analyzed in these risk assessments to cover the latest methods being used. The risk assements are being completed in Chapters and will be made available on a website, which can be regularly updated. Similar methods are combined into single risk assessments for efficiency; for example Chapter IV contains all foothold traps being used including standard foothold traps, pole traps, and foot cuffs. The Introduction to Risk Assessments is Chapter I and was completed to give an overall summary of the national WS Program. The methods being used and risks to target and nontarget species, people, pets, and the environment, and the issue of humanenss are discussed in this Chapter. From FY11 to FY15, WS had work tasks associated with 53 different methods being used.
  • Hybridization & Zoogeographic Patterns in Pheasants

    Hybridization & Zoogeographic Patterns in Pheasants

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Paul Johnsgard Collection Papers in the Biological Sciences 1983 Hybridization & Zoogeographic Patterns in Pheasants Paul A. Johnsgard University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/johnsgard Part of the Ornithology Commons Johnsgard, Paul A., "Hybridization & Zoogeographic Patterns in Pheasants" (1983). Paul Johnsgard Collection. 17. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/johnsgard/17 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Papers in the Biological Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Paul Johnsgard Collection by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. HYBRIDIZATION & ZOOGEOGRAPHIC PATTERNS IN PHEASANTS PAUL A. JOHNSGARD The purpose of this paper is to infonn members of the W.P.A. of an unusual scientific use of the extent and significance of hybridization among pheasants (tribe Phasianini in the proposed classification of Johnsgard~ 1973). This has occasionally occurred naturally, as for example between such locally sympatric species pairs as the kalij (Lophura leucol11elana) and the silver pheasant (L. nycthelnera), but usually occurs "'accidentally" in captive birds, especially in the absence of conspecific mates. Rarely has it been specifically planned for scientific purposes, such as for obtaining genetic, morphological, or biochemical information on hybrid haemoglobins (Brush. 1967), trans­ ferins (Crozier, 1967), or immunoelectrophoretic comparisons of blood sera (Sato, Ishi and HiraI, 1967). The literature has been summarized by Gray (1958), Delacour (1977), and Rutgers and Norris (1970). Some of these alleged hybrids, especially those not involving other Galliformes, were inadequately doculnented, and in a few cases such as a supposed hybrid between domestic fowl (Gallus gal/us) and the lyrebird (Menura novaehollandiae) can be discounted.
  • Trichostrongylus Cramae N. Sp. (Nematoda), a Parasite of Bob-White Quail (Colinus Virginianus) M.-C

    Trichostrongylus Cramae N. Sp. (Nematoda), a Parasite of Bob-White Quail (Colinus Virginianus) M.-C

    Ann. Parasitol. Hum. Comp., Key-words: Trichostrongylus. Birds. Europe. USA. Trichos- 1993, 68 : n° 1, 43-48. trongylus tenuis. T. cramae n. sp. Lagopus scoticus. Pavo cris- tatus. Perdix perdix. Phasianus colchicus. Colinus virginianus. Mémoire. Mots-clés : Trichostrongylus. Oiseaux. Europe. USA. Trichos­ trongylus tenuis. T. cramae n. sp. Lagopus scoticus. Pavo cris- tatus. Perdix perdix. Phasianus colchicus. Colinus virginianus. TRICHOSTRONGYLUS CRAMAE N. SP. (NEMATODA), A PARASITE OF BOB-WHITE QUAIL (COLINUS VIRGINIANUS) M.-C. DURETTE-DESSET*, A. G. CHABAUD*, J. MOORE** Summary ---------------------------------------------------------- Cram (1925, 1927) incorrectly identified as T. pergracilis (now the cuticular striation, the relative distances between the second, a synonym of T. tenuis) what was in reality an undescribed spe­ third and fourth bursal papillae and the configuration of the dorsal cies in Colinus virginianus. ray. Red grouse (Lagopus scoticus), the type host of T. pergra­ Trichostrongylus cramae n. sp. is proposed for T. pergracilis cilis, was in fact found to be parasitized by T. tenuis, confirming sensu Cram, 1927 nec Cobbold, 1873 from C. virginianus from the synonymy of T. pergracilis and T. tenuis. USA. It differs from T. tenuis (Mehlis in Creplin, 1846) as regards Résumé : Trichostrongylus cramae n. sp. (Nematoda) parasite de Colinus virginianus. Cram (1925, 1927) a identifié par erreur comme étant T. per­ Il se différencie de T. tenuis (Mehlis in Creplin, 1846) par la gracilis, maintenant considéré comme un synonyme de T. tenuis, striation cuticulaire, les distances relatives entre les papilles bur- ce qui était en réalité une espèce non décrite parasite de Colinus sales 2, 3 et 4, et par la configuration de la côte dorsale.
  • THE MOLTS of YOUNG WILD and DOMESTIC TURKEYS by A

    THE MOLTS of YOUNG WILD and DOMESTIC TURKEYS by A

    July, 1943 133 THE MOLTS OF YOUNG WILD AND DOMESTIC TURKEYS By A. STARKER LEOPOLD The molts and plumage sequences of many gallinaceous birds have by now been adequately described. Experiments with the domestic fowl have yielded some of our best information on the physiology of molt and feather growth. But the molts of turkeys (MeZeagris guZZ@zvo) have never been fully worked out, and since the family Meleagrididae is probably phylogenetically more or less isolated from other families in the order Galliformes, it is not surprising to find in turkeys certain peculiarities of molt which are not characteristic of the fowls in general. The main purpose of the present work is to describe the various molts and plumages of the young turkey from the time of hatching to the attainment of sexual maturity in the first winter. Notes on the annual and prenuptial molts of adult turkeys are added, but insufficient material is available to describe these in detail. In addition, within this speciessome differences in the molting procedures of young Eastern Wild Turkeys (M. g. &vest&) and domestic Bronze Turkeys are shown, and evidence as to the nature and origin of these molting differences is presented. This report is an outgrowth of a study of hybridization between wild and domestic turkeys in the Ozark region of southern Missouri. Data on molting have been collected through two seasons, 1941 and 1942. A considerable part of this material comes from a flock of confined turkeys, raised at Lost Trail Game Farm, Reynolds County, Mis- souri, for sale as wild stock suitable for releasing.
  • Ruffed Grouse Seek NATURE NOTEBOOK Shelter in Deep Snowdrifts During Harsh Winter Weather

    Ruffed Grouse Seek NATURE NOTEBOOK Shelter in Deep Snowdrifts During Harsh Winter Weather

    In northern states, ruffed grouse seek NATURE NOTEBOOK shelter in deep snowdrifts during harsh winter weather. In areas with lesser snowfall, There are 12 species of grouse native to North such as Kentucky, ruffed grouse shelter in America, with the ruffed grouse being one of the thick stands of pine or other conifers. smallest in the group. Weighing between 17-25 ounces, it is slightly larger than a pigeon. Ruffed grouse are forest Ruffed Grouse dwelling birds. They spend most of their time on the ground and Adult male ruffed grouse can be Kentucky’s undercover bird prefer thick cover. Areas logged territorial. To defend its property and for timber 8-10 years prior make attract female companions, the male excellent ruffed grouse habitat grouse “drums” on a log. The drumming Story by Ben Robinson and Zak Danks because of the thick new growth. sounds like a car trying to start. The grouse creates this sound by beating its Illustrations by Rick Hill wings against the air. Many people affectionately know the ruffed grouse by its other names: woods chicken, mountain pheasant or partridge. The ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) has one of the largest distributions of any North American game bird. Its range spans from Canada to north Georgia. In Kentucky, ruffed grouse call the rugged Appalachian Mountains home. Look closely at the toes of a ruffed Kentucky grouse feed grouse and you will opportunistically on a variety find small finger- of foods throughout the year. like projections. Grouse chicks depend on a high- These projections are protein diet of insects in the early believed to act like weeks of life, then shift to vegetation mini-snowshoes to as the summer progresses.
  • The Native Partridges of Turkey

    The Native Partridges of Turkey

    The native partridges of Turkey ALPER YILMAZ * and CAFER TEPELI Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Selcuk, 42031, Selçuklu, Konya, Turkey. *Correspondence author - [email protected] Paper presented at the 4 th International Galliformes Symposium, 2007, Chengdu, China. Abstract Turkey provides a wide range of natural habitat for numerous bird species. Partridges constitute an important part of the native birds of Turkey. There are five native partridge species in Turkey, which are chukar partridge, rock partridge, grey partridge, see-see partridge and Caspian snowcock. In recent years, intensive rearing and releasing of gamebirds has become popular in Turkey and rock partridges are an important component to this activity. Breeding units for the species are widespread in many parts of the country. There are also some breeding units for rock partridges that are supported by the National Ministry of the Forest. The units produce and release partridges to bolster the wild population, but also to provide birds for hunting and tourism. In this paper the geographical distribution, characteristics and contemporary state of the native partridges of Turkey is presented. Keywords Distribution, partridges, status, Turkey. Introduction Urfa (south east of Turkey) is thought to be over 2500 years old (FIG . 1) (T.C. Şanlı Urfa Turkey occupies a unique geographical location, Valiliği İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü, 2007). connecting Europe and Asia, and is a country with a rich and varied historical past. The country’s rich history, geography and nature are entwined and are a part of everyday life. The total number of bird species within Turkey is equal to the number within the whole of Europe due in part to the Anatolian region’s diversity of habitats, including lakes, swamps, mountains, woodlands, and its location on major bird immigration routes (Anonymous, 1986; Boyla, 1995; Somçağ, 2005).
  • Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (And 113 Non-Species Taxa) in Accordance with the 62Nd AOU Supplement (2021), Sorted Taxonomically

    Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (And 113 Non-Species Taxa) in Accordance with the 62Nd AOU Supplement (2021), Sorted Taxonomically

    Four-letter (English Name) and Six-letter (Scientific Name) Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (and 113 Non-Species Taxa) in accordance with the 62nd AOU Supplement (2021), sorted taxonomically Prepared by Peter Pyle and David F. DeSante The Institute for Bird Populations www.birdpop.org ENGLISH NAME 4-LETTER CODE SCIENTIFIC NAME 6-LETTER CODE Highland Tinamou HITI Nothocercus bonapartei NOTBON Great Tinamou GRTI Tinamus major TINMAJ Little Tinamou LITI Crypturellus soui CRYSOU Thicket Tinamou THTI Crypturellus cinnamomeus CRYCIN Slaty-breasted Tinamou SBTI Crypturellus boucardi CRYBOU Choco Tinamou CHTI Crypturellus kerriae CRYKER White-faced Whistling-Duck WFWD Dendrocygna viduata DENVID Black-bellied Whistling-Duck BBWD Dendrocygna autumnalis DENAUT West Indian Whistling-Duck WIWD Dendrocygna arborea DENARB Fulvous Whistling-Duck FUWD Dendrocygna bicolor DENBIC Emperor Goose EMGO Anser canagicus ANSCAN Snow Goose SNGO Anser caerulescens ANSCAE + Lesser Snow Goose White-morph LSGW Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Lesser Snow Goose Intermediate-morph LSGI Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Lesser Snow Goose Blue-morph LSGB Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Greater Snow Goose White-morph GSGW Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Greater Snow Goose Intermediate-morph GSGI Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Greater Snow Goose Blue-morph GSGB Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Snow X Ross's Goose Hybrid SRGH Anser caerulescens x rossii ANSCAR + Snow/Ross's Goose SRGO Anser caerulescens/rossii ANSCRO Ross's Goose