National Finchand Softbill Society
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Rare Birds in Iran in the Late 1960S and 1970S
Podoces, 2008, 3(1/2): 1–30 Rare Birds in Iran in the Late 1960s and 1970s DEREK A. SCOTT Castletownbere Post Office, Castletownbere, Co. Cork, Ireland. Email: [email protected] Received 26 July 2008; accepted 14 September 2008 Abstract: The 12-year period from 1967 to 1978 was a period of intense ornithological activity in Iran. The Ornithology Unit in the Department of the Environment carried out numerous surveys throughout the country; several important international ornithological expeditions visited Iran and subsequently published their findings, and a number of resident and visiting bird-watchers kept detailed records of their observations and submitted these to the Ornithology Unit. These activities added greatly to our knowledge of the status and distribution of birds in Iran, and produced many records of birds which had rarely if ever been recorded in Iran before. This paper gives details of all records known to the author of 92 species that were recorded as rarities in Iran during the 12-year period under review. These include 18 species that had not previously been recorded in Iran, a further 67 species that were recorded on fewer than 13 occasions, and seven slightly commoner species for which there were very few records prior to 1967. All records of four distinctive subspecies are also included. The 29 species that were known from Iran prior to 1967 but not recorded during the period under review are listed in an Appendix. Keywords: Rare birds, rarities, 1970s, status, distribution, Iran. INTRODUCTION Eftekhar, E. Kahrom and J. Mansoori, several of whom quickly became keen ornithologists. -
Phylogeography of Finches and Sparrows
In: Animal Genetics ISBN: 978-1-60741-844-3 Editor: Leopold J. Rechi © 2009 Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Chapter 1 PHYLOGEOGRAPHY OF FINCHES AND SPARROWS Antonio Arnaiz-Villena*, Pablo Gomez-Prieto and Valentin Ruiz-del-Valle Department of Immunology, University Complutense, The Madrid Regional Blood Center, Madrid, Spain. ABSTRACT Fringillidae finches form a subfamily of songbirds (Passeriformes), which are presently distributed around the world. This subfamily includes canaries, goldfinches, greenfinches, rosefinches, and grosbeaks, among others. Molecular phylogenies obtained with mitochondrial DNA sequences show that these groups of finches are put together, but with some polytomies that have apparently evolved or radiated in parallel. The time of appearance on Earth of all studied groups is suggested to start after Middle Miocene Epoch, around 10 million years ago. Greenfinches (genus Carduelis) may have originated at Eurasian desert margins coming from Rhodopechys obsoleta (dessert finch) or an extinct pale plumage ancestor; it later acquired green plumage suitable for the greenfinch ecological niche, i.e.: woods. Multicolored Eurasian goldfinch (Carduelis carduelis) has a genetic extant ancestor, the green-feathered Carduelis citrinella (citril finch); this was thought to be a canary on phonotypical bases, but it is now included within goldfinches by our molecular genetics phylograms. Speciation events between citril finch and Eurasian goldfinch are related with the Mediterranean Messinian salinity crisis (5 million years ago). Linurgus olivaceus (oriole finch) is presently thriving in Equatorial Africa and was included in a separate genus (Linurgus) by itself on phenotypical bases. Our phylograms demonstrate that it is and old canary. Proposed genus Acanthis does not exist. Twite and linnet form a separate radiation from redpolls. -
Australia's Biodiversity and Climate Change
Australia’s Biodiversity and Climate Change A strategic assessment of the vulnerability of Australia’s biodiversity to climate change A report to the Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council commissioned by the Australian Government. Prepared by the Biodiversity and Climate Change Expert Advisory Group: Will Steffen, Andrew A Burbidge, Lesley Hughes, Roger Kitching, David Lindenmayer, Warren Musgrave, Mark Stafford Smith and Patricia A Werner © Commonwealth of Australia 2009 ISBN 978-1-921298-67-7 Published in pre-publication form as a non-printable PDF at www.climatechange.gov.au by the Department of Climate Change. It will be published in hard copy by CSIRO publishing. For more information please email [email protected] This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the: Commonwealth Copyright Administration Attorney-General's Department 3-5 National Circuit BARTON ACT 2600 Email: [email protected] Or online at: http://www.ag.gov.au Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Australian Government or the Minister for Climate Change and Water and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts. Citation The book should be cited as: Steffen W, Burbidge AA, Hughes L, Kitching R, Lindenmayer D, Musgrave W, Stafford Smith M and Werner PA (2009) Australia’s biodiversity and climate change: a strategic assessment of the vulnerability of Australia’s biodiversity to climate change. -
21 Sep 2018 Lists of Victims and Hosts of the Parasitic
version: 21 Sep 2018 Lists of victims and hosts of the parasitic cowbirds (Molothrus). Peter E. Lowther, Field Museum Brood parasitism is an awkward term to describe an interaction between two species in which, as in predator-prey relationships, one species gains at the expense of the other. Brood parasites "prey" upon parental care. Victimized species usually have reduced breeding success, partly because of the additional cost of caring for alien eggs and young, and partly because of the behavior of brood parasites (both adults and young) which may directly and adversely affect the survival of the victim's own eggs or young. About 1% of all bird species, among 7 families, are brood parasites. The 5 species of brood parasitic “cowbirds” are currently all treated as members of the genus Molothrus. Host selection is an active process. Not all species co-occurring with brood parasites are equally likely to be selected nor are they of equal quality as hosts. Rather, to varying degrees, brood parasites are specialized for certain categories of hosts. Brood parasites may rely on a single host species to rear their young or may distribute their eggs among many species, seemingly without regard to any characteristics of potential hosts. Lists of species are not the best means to describe interactions between a brood parasitic species and its hosts. Such lists do not necessarily reflect the taxonomy used by the brood parasites themselves nor do they accurately reflect the complex interactions within bird communities (see Ortega 1998: 183-184). Host lists do, however, offer some insight into the process of host selection and do emphasize the wide variety of features than can impact on host selection. -
Second Supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-List of North American Birds
A O U Check-listSupplement The Auk 117(3):847-858, 2000 FORTY-SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS' UNION CHECK-LIST OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS This first Supplementsince publication of the 7th Icterusprosthemelas, Lonchura cantans, and L. atricap- edition (1998)of the AOU Check-listof North American illa); (3) four speciesare changed(Caracara cheriway, Birdssummarizes changes made by the Committee Glaucidiumcostaricanum, Myrmotherula pacifica, Pica on Classification and Nomenclature between its re- hudsonia)and one added (Caracaralutosa) by splits constitutionin late 1998 and 31 January2000. Be- from now-extralimital forms; (4) four scientific causethe makeupof the Committeehas changed sig- namesof speciesare changedbecause of genericre- nificantly since publication of the 7th edition, it allocation (Ibycter americanus,Stercorarius skua, S. seemsappropriate to outline the way in which the maccormicki,Molothrus oryzivorus); (5) one specific currentCommittee operates. The philosophyof the name is changedfor nomenclaturalreasons (Baeolo- Committeeis to retain the presenttaxonomic or dis- phusridgwayi); (6) the spellingof five speciesnames tributional statusunless substantial and convincing is changedto make them gramaticallycorrect rela- evidenceis publishedthat a changeshould be made. tive to the genericname (Jacameropsaureus, Poecile The Committee maintains an extensiveagenda of atricapilla,P. hudsonica,P. cincta,Buarremon brunnein- potential actionitems, includingpossible taxonomic ucha);(7) oneEnglish name is changedto conformto -
Ethnomedicinal and Cultural Practices of Mammals and Birds in the Vicinity of River Chenab, Punjab-Pakistan
Altaf et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine (2017) 13:41 DOI 10.1186/s13002-017-0168-5 RESEARCH Open Access Ethnomedicinal and cultural practices of mammals and birds in the vicinity of river Chenab, Punjab-Pakistan Muhammad Altaf1*, Arshad Javid2, Muhammad Umair3, Khalid Javed Iqbal4, Zahid Rasheed5 and Arshad Mehmood Abbasi6* Abstract Background: Although, use of animal species in disease treatment and culture practices is as ancient as that of plant species; however ethnomedicinal uses and cultural values of animal species have rarely been reported. Present study is the first report on the medicinal uses of mammals and bird species in Pakistan. Methods: Questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were applied to collect qualitative and quantitative data from local informants (N = 109). Relative frequency of mention (RFM), fidelity level (FL), relative popularity level (RPL), similarity index (SI) and rank order priority (ROP) indices were used to analyzed the data. Results: One hundred and eight species of animals, which include: 83% birds and 17% mammals were documented. In total 30 mammalian and 28 birds’ species were used to treat various diseases such as rheumatic disorders, skin infections and sexual weakness among several others. Fats, flesh, blood, milk and eggs were the most commonly utilized body parts. Bos taurus, Bubalus bubalis, Capra aegagrus hircus, Felis domesticus, Lepus nigricollis dayanus and Ovis aries (mammals) and Anas platyrhynchos domesticus, Columba livia, Coturnix coturnix, Gallus gallus and Passer domesticus (birds) were the highly utilized species. Medicinal and cultural uses of 30% mammals and 46% birds were reported for the first time, whereas 33% mammals and 79% birds depicted zero similarity with previous reports. -
Biodiversity Observations
Biodiversity Observations http://bo.adu.org.za An electronic journal published by the Animal Demography Unit at the University of Cape Town The scope of Biodiversity Observations consists of papers describing observations about biodiversity in general, including animals, plants, algae and fungi. This includes observations of behaviour, breeding and flowering patterns, distributions and range extensions, foraging, food, movement, measurements, habitat and colouration/plumage variations. Biotic interactions such as pollination, fruit dispersal, herbivory and predation fall within the scope, as well as the use of indigenous and exotic species by humans. Observations of naturalised plants and animals will also be considered. Biodiversity Observations will also publish a variety of other interesting or relevant biodiversity material: reports of projects and conferences, annotated checklists for a site or region, specialist bibliographies, book reviews and any other appropriate material. Further details and guidelines to authors are on this website. Paper Editor: Doug Harebottle BIRDS AND ANIMALS USING WEAVERS NESTS H. Dieter Oschadleus Recommended citation format: Oschadleus HD 2017. Birds and animals using weavers nests. Biodiversity Observations, Vol 8.28: 1-17 URL: http://bo.adu.org.za/content.php?id=323 Published online: 20 June 2017 Appendix added: 26 June 2017 – ISSN 2219-0341 – Biodiversity Observations 8.28: 1-17 1 PHOWN (PHOtos of Weaver Nests) Methods BIRDS AND ANIMALS USING WEAVERS NESTS The PHOWN database began in mid July 2010 and the data for this analysis was extracted up to 2 February 2017, providing 6.5 years of H. Dieter Oschadleus data collection. Records with Nest Use were marked so that they could be easily extracted. -
Catalogue of Protozoan Parasites Recorded in Australia Peter J. O
1 CATALOGUE OF PROTOZOAN PARASITES RECORDED IN AUSTRALIA PETER J. O’DONOGHUE & ROBERT D. ADLARD O’Donoghue, P.J. & Adlard, R.D. 2000 02 29: Catalogue of protozoan parasites recorded in Australia. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 45(1):1-164. Brisbane. ISSN 0079-8835. Published reports of protozoan species from Australian animals have been compiled into a host- parasite checklist, a parasite-host checklist and a cross-referenced bibliography. Protozoa listed include parasites, commensals and symbionts but free-living species have been excluded. Over 590 protozoan species are listed including amoebae, flagellates, ciliates and ‘sporozoa’ (the latter comprising apicomplexans, microsporans, myxozoans, haplosporidians and paramyxeans). Organisms are recorded in association with some 520 hosts including mammals, marsupials, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates. Information has been abstracted from over 1,270 scientific publications predating 1999 and all records include taxonomic authorities, synonyms, common names, sites of infection within hosts and geographic locations. Protozoa, parasite checklist, host checklist, bibliography, Australia. Peter J. O’Donoghue, Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, The University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia; Robert D. Adlard, Protozoa Section, Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane 4101, Australia; 31 January 2000. CONTENTS the literature for reports relevant to contemporary studies. Such problems could be avoided if all previous HOST-PARASITE CHECKLIST 5 records were consolidated into a single database. Most Mammals 5 researchers currently avail themselves of various Reptiles 21 electronic database and abstracting services but none Amphibians 26 include literature published earlier than 1985 and not all Birds 34 journal titles are covered in their databases. Fish 44 Invertebrates 54 Several catalogues of parasites in Australian PARASITE-HOST CHECKLIST 63 hosts have previously been published. -
Host Plant Relationship of Birds Species in Jhalawar Region of Rajasthan, India
Int. J. Adv. Res. Biol. Sci. (2020). 7(10): 152-155 International Journal of Advanced Research in Biological Sciences ISSN: 2348-8069 www.ijarbs.com DOI: 10.22192/ijarbs Coden: IJARQG (USA) Volume 7, Issue 10 -2020 Research Article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22192/ijarbs.2020.07.10.015 Host Plant Relationship of Birds Species in Jhalawar Region of Rajasthan, India Firdous Khan*, Anchal Sharma**, I. B. Maurya*** *Research Scholar, Dept. of Wildlife Management, CH&F, Jhalawar **Assistant Professor Dept. of Wildlife Management, CH&F, Jhalawar. ***Professor & Dean, CH&F, Jhalawar College of Horticulture & Forestry, Jhalarapatan, Jhalawar (Raj.)-326023 *Corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract The present study was carried out to know about the avian nesting behavior in relation to different host trees/ shrubs/ housing structures at different study sites in and around the Jhalawar area, from July 2019- April 2020. Total 17 bird’s species belonging to 15 families were found nesting on 22 different plant / tree species on different study sites. It was observed that different bird species prefer different trees for nesting. During the study, it was observed that Acacia species were the most favoured host tree by birds for building nesting because of their thorny branches which were found to be beneficial for hiding their nests from the predators. Other than trees, some birds were found to build their nests at unusual sites. This study has generated the relation between the birds species with their specific host plants, as conservation of host plant is must in order to do the conservation of the bird species. -
The Status of Threatened Bird Species in the Hunter Region
!"#$%&$'$()*+#(),-$.+$,)/0'&$#)1$2+3') !"$)4"+,&5$#)!"#$%&%'6)789:) The status of threatened bird species in the Hunter Region Michael Roderick1 and Alan Stuart2 156 Karoola Road, Lambton, NSW 2299 281 Queens Road, New Lambton, NSW 2305 ) ;%'<)*+#(),-$.+$,)5+,&$()%,)=05'$#%*5$>)?'(%'2$#$()3#)@#+&+.%55<)?'(%'2$#$()A.355$.&+B$5<)#$C$##$()&3)%,) !"#$%&"%'%()*+,'(%$+"#%+!"#$%&$'$()*+$,-$.)/0'.$#1%&-0')2,&)3445)ADE4F)have been recorded within the Hunter Region. The majority are resident or regular migrants. Some species are vagrants, and some seabirds) #$205%#5<) -#$,$'&) %#$) '3&) #$5+%'&) 3') &"$) 1$2+3') C3#) ,0#B+B%5G) !"$) %0&"3#,) "%B$) #$B+$H$() &"$) #$2+3'%5),&%&0,)3C)%55),-$.+$,>)H+&")-%#&+.05%#)C3.0,)3')&"$)#$,+($'&,)%'()#$205%#)B+,+&3#,G)!"$).3',$#B%&+3') ,&%&0,)C3#)$%."),-$.+$,)+,)2+B$'>)+'.50(+'2)H"$#$)#$5$B%'&)&"$),&%&0,)0'($#)&"$)Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) review. R$.$'&)#$.3#(,)C3#)&"$)1$2+3')%#$).3I-%#$()H+&")-#$B+30,)-$#+3(,>)53.%5)&"#$%&,) %#$)#$B+$H$()%'()&"$)30&533J)C3#)$%."),-$.+$,)+,)(+,.0,,$(G)) ) ) INTRODUCTION is relevant. The two measures of conservation status are: The Threatened Species Conservation (TSC) Act 1995 is the primary legislation for the protection of The Environment Protection and Biodiversity threatened flora and fauna species in NSW. The Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 is the NSW Scientific Committee is the key group equivalent threatened species legislation at the responsible for the review of the conservation Commonwealth level. status of threatened species, including the listing of those species. More than 100 bird species are A measure of conservation status that can also listed as threatened under the TSC Act, and the be applied at sub-species level was developed Scientific Committee supports the listing of by the International Union for Conservation of additional species. -
NESTLING MOUTH Marklngs It '" "' of OLD WORLD FINCHES ESTLLU MIMICRY and COEVOLUTION of NESTING
NESTLING MOUTH MARklNGS It '" "' OF OLD WORLD FINCHES ESTLLU MIMICRY AND COEVOLUTION OF NESTING r - .. ;.-; 5.i A&+.FINCHES .-. '4 AND THEIR VIDUA BROOD PARASITES - . , , . :.. - i ' -, ,' $*.$$>&.--: 7 -.: ',"L dt$=%>df;$..;,4;x.;b,?b;.:, ;.:. -, ! ,I Vt .., . k., . .,.-. , .is: 8, :. BY ERT B. PAYNE MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATIONS MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, NO. 194 Ann ntwi day, 2005 lSSN 0076-8405 PUBLICATIONS OF THE MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN NO. 194 J. B. BLJR(.H,Editor JI.:NNIFERFBLMLEE, Assistcint Editor The publications of the Museum of Zoology, The University of Michigan, consist primarily of two series-the Mi.scel/aneous Pziblications and the Occa.siona1 Papers. Both series were founded by Dr. Bryant Walker, Mr. Bradshaw H. Swales, and Dr. W.W. Newcomb. Occasionally thc Museum publishes contributions outside of these series; beginning in 1990 thcsc arc titled Special Publications and arc numbered. All submitted manuscripts to any of the Museum's publications receive external review. The Occasional Papers, begun in 1913, serve as a medium for original studies based principally upon the collections in the Museum. They arc issued separately. When a sufficient number of pages has been printed to make a volume, a title page, table of contents, and an index are supplied to libraries and individuals on the mailing list for the series. The Miscellaneotls Pt~hlication.~,initiated in 1916, include monographic studies, papers on field and museum techniques, and other contributions not within the scope of the Occasional Papers, and are published separately. It is not intended that they be grouped into volurnes. Each number has a title page and, when necessary, a table of contents. -
Review of Rare Birds in Iran, 1860S–1960S
Podoces, 2009, 4(1): 1–27 Review of Rare Birds in Iran, 1860s–1960s CEES S. ROSELAAR 1* & MANSOUR ALIABADIAN 2 1. Zoological Museum & Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam PO Box 94766, 1090 GT Amsterdam, THE NETHERLANDS 2. Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, IRAN * Correspondence Author. Email: [email protected] Received 27 March 2009; accepted 7 October 2009 Abstract: Based on original literature reports covering the period 1860 –1969, details of 362 records of 102 bird species considered rare in Iran are presented. This fills a gap in knowledge of Iran’s birds from a period between research by Gmelin and Hablizl in the 1770s (reviewed by Mlikovsky 2008) and an overview of the observations of rare birds in Iran in the 1960s and 1970s (presented by Scott 2008). Attention is drawn to two new species for Iran (Eastern Marsh Harrier Circus spilonotus and Blue Whistling Thrush Myophonus caeruleus ). Published details validate the records of Light-bellied Brent Goose Branta hrota , Upland Buzzard Buteo hemilasius , Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris , and Oriental Cuckoo Cuculus saturatus , formerly considered as of dubious occurrence in Iran. Information on six species (Yellow-breasted Tit Cyanistes cyanus flavipectus , Falcated Duck Anas falcata , Indian Nightjar Caprimulgus asiaticus , Güldenstädt’s Redstart Phoenicurus erythrogaster , Cirl Bunting Emberiza cirlus and Eurasian Nutcracker Nucifraga caryocatactes) was considered insufficient or unreliable and the occurrence of these species in Iran has been rejected. We recommend that these species be omitted from the last revised checklist of the birds of Iran (Scott & Adhami 2006).