DOCSLIB.ORG

Commentaries

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Commentaries COMMENTARIES The Water Repellency of Water-bird Feathers ARIE M. RIJKE• Elowson (1984) analyzed the physico-chemical or, by incorporatingEq. 1: principles involved in the water repellency of textile fabrics.Based partly on measurementsof the feather Ws, = %a (1 + cos 0). (2a) structureof 14 water-bird species,she concludedthat Adam (1956) pointed out that if a surfaceis rough or the "textile model" cannot be applied reliably to porous,large contactangles may causedrops to en- feathers, and does not account for the spread-wing trap air in the hollows and interstices,thereby form- behavioral differencesamong water birds. I present ing additional air-liquid interfaces.This will causea a rebuttal to Elowson's critique centering on three considerableincrease in contact angle becausethe main issues. work of adhesion between liquid and air is essen- First,the physicalprinciples of the water repellen- tially negligible. The work of adhesionbetween a cy of porous surfaces,originally applied to treated liquid and a poroussurface, W•, is analogousto Eq.2: textile fabricsto explain the mechanismof water re- pellency,generally have been acceptedin the orni- Wps,= f•(3'• - %,) + (1 - f2)3'•, (3) thologicaland textile-processingliterature (Moilliet 1963;Clark 1969; Kennedy 1969, 1972; Siegfried et where f• is the area of solid-liquid interface and f• al. 1975;Mahoney 1984). Elowson argued that textile that of liquid-air interface per unit macroscopicsur- fabrics and feather substructure are too dissimilar to face area. Substitutionof Eqs. 1 and 2a then yields justify comparison.More specifically,Elowson con- (Cassie and Baxter 1944): sideredthe conditionof parallel, perfectly cylindri- cal rows of rami and barbules essential for the valid- cos0^ = f•cos0 - f•, (4) ity of the "textile model" to predict the water where 0a is now the apparent contact angle as in- repellencyof feathers.Because the rami and barbules creasedby the formation of air-liquid interfaces. are not circularin crosssection, Elowson implicitly Equation4 has been derived solely from basicphys- rejectedthe applicability of the physicsof porous ico-chemical principles without reference to param- surfacesto feather structures, and, indeed, stopped eterspertaining specifically to textile fabricsor feath- just short of stating that feather structureis not a er structure.In addition, the values of f• and f2 are relevant factorin the water repellencyof the feather determined only by the solid-liquid and liquid-air coat. interfaces per unit of macroscopicsurface areas, When a drop of liquid is placedon a smooth,solid without dictating the shape, curvature, or configu- surface, the liquid either spreads into a continuous ration of theseinterfaces. The validity of Eq. 4, there- film or covers a limited area, with the liquid taking fore, extendsto any poroussurface that is coveredby the shapeof part of a sphere. In the latter case,the liquid for finite values of 0, i.e. larger than about 10ø. equilibrium positionof dropsis determinedby: Thesepremises have been testedexperimentally and found to be correctby Cassieand Baxter(1944) and cos 0 = ('rs - 'rs•)/'r,a, (1) by Rijke (1965)using paraffinated(0 = 114ø) and un- where 0 is the contactangle betweenthe tangent to coated(0 = 0) stainlesssteel wire cagesand grids. For the curved water surfaceat the point of contactwith these specificmodels, composedof parallel rows of the solid surface,measured through the liquid. perfectly cylindrical wires, a simple calculationfor %•, and 3•aare the solid-air, solid-liquid, and liquid- the values of f• and f2 can be made: air interfacialenergies per unit area (Moilliet 1963). Alternatively, the work of adhesion(W), i.e. the f• = [•rr/(r + d)] [1 - (0/180ø)] work required to separatea unit area of solid-liquid f2 = 1 - r sin O/(r + d), (5) interface into a solid-air and a liquid-air interface, can be expressedas: where r is the radius of the circular wires with their Ws•= 3'• + %a- %•, (2) axes 2(r + d) apart. Similar expressionscan be cal- culated if the cross section of the wires are assumed to be elliptical, square,rectangular, etc. without af- fecting the validity of Eq. 4. • Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, The contribution of the wire structure to the values University of Virginia, Charlottesville,Virginia 22908 of f• and f2 is determinednot by the absolutevalue USA. of the radii of the wires and their distancesapart, but 140 January1987] Commentaries 141 by the ratio (r + d)/r only. Large values of this ratio ized in raindropstrickling down a dirty window pane, imply large f2 and small f• values,which increasethe but this is incorrectas gravitationalforce dispropor- apparent contactangle in the manner describedby tionately increasesthe advancingfront and decreases Eq.4 and are independentof the cross-sectionalshape the following tail of the drop. An advancingangle is of the wires. established in the initial contact of water with the In the caseof feathers, there is an additional reason feather surface and also when water penetrates be- why conformityto a circularcross section of the rami tween the rami and barbules and, therefore, deter- and barbules is not critical. When a drop of water is mines the water repellency and resistanceto water placed on a smoothsurface covered with a thin film penetration.The recedingangle determines the bead- of preening oil such as a rachisor a prepared micro- ing and eventualshedding of water drops. scopicslide, a contactangle of approximately 90ø is The ability of feathersto prevent water from pen- obtained. Inserting this value for the contact angle etrating to the skin is at least as important as water in Eq. 4 reducesthe first term on the right-hand side repellencyalone. A mathematicalexpression for the to zero or nearly so.As a result, the apparent contact pressurerequired to force water between the rami angle 0^ is essentiallydetermined by the value of f2 and barbules has been derived on premises similar alone. This conclusionis reachedwithout specifying to the ones referred to above (Baxter and Cassie 1945, the dimensions of the ramus-water or air-water in- Rijke 1970).Here, the absolutevalue of 2r and, there- terfaces.Its validity, therefore, extends to any such fore, the scale of the feather substructure come into interfaces irrespective of the cross-sectionalshape. effect, in addition to the ratio (r + d)/r and contact As in the caseof circular crosssections, it is easy to angle 0. Elowson claimed that the inherent assump- show that if the cross section of the rami would be tion of a zero pressuregradient acrossthe feather both continuousand elliptical, or square,or any in- surface at depth h is flawed becauseit ignores the termediate shape,the air-water interfacesunder zero considerablehydrostatic pressure, P = h x D x G (D hydrostatic pressurewould lie in the plane of the is the density of water and G is the gravitationalcon- long axes of the rami when 0 is 90ø. The term f2 is stant),to which the diving bird is exposed.This ar- then equal to d/(r + d), where 2r is the width of the gument, however, fails to take into accountthat the ramus as measured in the plane of the air-water in- air between the feather coat and skin, as well as air terface. The values of (r + d)/r range between 2.1 in the air sacs and respiratory tract, will be com- (penguins)and 6.0 (ducks).This meansthe apparent pressedso asto balancethe hydrostaticpressures sur- contact angle would vary between about 120ø and rounding the diving bird. Elowson'scase would be 150ø . This differencehas been advancedas the prox- valid if the air would communicate and the hydro- imate causeof a penguin'swet appearanceon the one staticpressures equilibrate, by meansof a tube for hand and the proverbial behavior of water drops on instance, with the atmospheric pressure above the a duck'sback on the other (Rijke 1970). water surface.The differencebetween Elowson'spre- I submit that Eq. 4 representsan expressionfor the sentation and a diving water bird is exactly why behavior of water drops on porous surfaces,deter- snorkelerscannot submerge much deeperthan 60 cm mined by contactangle and the relative areasof sol- below the water surface (provided the length of id-liquid and liquid-air interfaces,and basedon gen- snorkeling tube would permit this) without severe eral physico-chemical principles. When these respiratoryproblems, whereas pearl diversare known principlessubsequently are appliedto specificmodels, to function well at a depth of 20 m or more. such as feathers,certain simplifying assumptionsmay Finally, Elowson considered my 1968 and 1970 be helpful in estimatingthe values for f• and f2, but samplesizes too small and without sufficientelabo- thesedo not detractfrom the generalvalidity of Eq.4. ration on methods and measurements to permit a Second,in her discussionof water penetration and meaningful conclusion. In fact, as reported in the water repellency of the porous feather structure, 1970paper, feathers of at leastone speciesof 45 dif- Elowsonchose to distinguishbetween advancing and ferent aquaticfamilies were examinedand compared receding contactangles as two different entities, but with thoseof anotherspecimen or speciesof the same there is no physical basis for this. When a small family to ascertainthat the observedvalues were rep- quantity of water is added to a drop on a repellent resentative of the family. I included a total of 133 surface,the water-solidinterface will expandslightly different speciesand 426 different specimens.Of each and advancewith a contactangle that is larger than specimen,the dorsal and ventral aspectsof at least the recedingcontact angle observedwhen the water three breast feathers were examined for the dimen- is withdrawn. This difference reflectsany changesin sions of the rami and their distances apart, each at surfaceenergies from selectiveabsorption and con- nine different locations on the vane. The results were tamination of the water surfaceby selectivedissolu- compared with those of terrestrial birds. The data tion. It is usually small and unimportant in the ab- recently were analyzed statistically,and the differ- senceof absorptionor contamination,as for mercury encesbetwen the two groups were statisticallysig- drops on a glassslide.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 17A a STUDY.Pdf
    ISSN: 2319-8753 International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization) Vol. 3, Issue 1, January 2014 A STUDY OF AVIFAUNAL DIVERSITY AND INFLUENCES OF WATER QUALITY IN THE UDHAYAMARTHANDAPURAM BIRD SANCTUARY, TIRUVARUR DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU, INDIA V. Ramamurthy1, R. Rajakumar2 Assistant Professor, P.G. and Research Department of Biochemistry, Marudupandiyar College, Thanjavur – 613 403, Tamil Nadu, India1 Assistant Professor, P.G. and Research Department of Biotechnology, Marudupandiyar College, Thanjavur – 613 403, Tamil Nadu, India2 Abstract: The diversity of wetlands is intermediary zones between permanently aquatic and dry terrestrial eco-systems. Wetlands require collaborated research involving natural, social and inter disciplinary studied to understanding the various components such as monitoring of water quality, socio-economic dependency, biodiversity and other activities as an indispensable tool for formulating long term conservation strategies. The physico-chemical parameters of one of the major habitats for birds, the wetlands are known to influence congregation of migratory and resident species of birds. The present study deals with the interactions between these abiotic factors and bird diversity of the Udhayamarthandapuram bird sanctuary, Tamil Nadu, India for a period of August 2011 to March 2012. During these study periods the water birds were grouped into five categories namely diving birds, swimming birds, small waders, large waders and aerial foragers. During each visit waterfowl survey was carried out and water samples were also collected to document the seasons. The variations in bird aggregations as well as physico-chemical factors are discussed. Most of the abiotic factors were significantly influenced for the density, diversity and richness of the water bird groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Impact Report
    ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SUPPLEMENT TO THE REPORT ON THE ENVIROMENTAL IMPACT OF THE “CONSTRUCTION OF THE KARCINO-SARBIA WIND FARM (17 WIND TURBINES)” OF 2003 Name of the undertaking: KARCINO-SARBIA Wind Farm (under construction) Contractor: AOS Agencja Ochrony Środowiska Sp. z o.o. based in Koszalin Arch. No. 52/OŚ/OOS/06 Koszalin, September 2006 Team: Bogdan Gutkowski, M.Sc.Eng.– Expert for Environmental Impact Assessment Appointed by the Governor of the West Pomerania Province Marek Ziółkowski, M.Sc. Eng. – Environmental Protection Expert of the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Natural Resources and Forestry; Environmental Protection Consultant Dagmara Czajkowska, M.Sc. Eng. – Specialist for Environmental Impact Assessment, Specialist for Environmental Protection and Management Ewa Reszka, M.Sc. – Specialist for the Protection of Water and Land and Protection against Impact of Waste Damian Kołek, M.Sc.Eng. – Environmental Protection Specialist 2 CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 5 II. GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROJECT ..................................................... 9 1. Location and adjacent facilities....................................................................................................... 9 2. Modifications to the project .......................................................................................................... 10 3. Technical description of the project ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • (USDA) Forest Service Working with Partners for Bird Conservation
    U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service Appendix A Working with Partners for Bird Conservation Bird Conservation Accomplishments Published 2004 This appendix lists the bird conservation accomplishment projects by USDA Forest Service Deputy Areas: National Forest Systems, Research and Development, State and Private and International Programs. This is not a complete set of the many bird conservation actions that have been or are currently being implemented across Forest Service Deputy Areas. It represents bird conservation accomplishment projects from the administrative units that replied at the time of the request. Projects started before fiscal year 2000 that are ongoing or conducted annually (beyond 2002) are reported as “ongoing” or “annually”, with the date of inception included (when known). I. National Forest Systems Region 1 (R-1): Northern Region Regionwide Accomplishments Partnership Enhancement • Partners in Flight (PIF) and Bird Conservation Region (BCR) Plans. Forest Service biologists throughout the Northern Region participated in the development of PIF and BCR plans for Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Active participation is ongoing with PIF working groups, BCR coordinators, joint venture meetings, and other activities that promote bird conservation. Partners in these efforts include the American Bird Conservancy (ABC), Montana Fish, Wildlife, & Parks (MFWP), Idaho Department of Fish and Game 1 (Idaho Fish & Game), U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Potlatch Corp., Plum Creek Timber Co., local Audubon Society Chapters, and the Universities of Montana and Idaho. Ongoing since FY1993. • Montana Sage Grouse and Sagebrush Conservation Strategy. The Northern Region participated in the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks-led effort to develop a statewide sage grouse and sagebrush conservation strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Restoration Plan for Common Loon and Other Birds Impacted by the Bouchard Barge 120 (B-120) Oil Spill, Buzzards Bay Massachusetts and Rhode Island
    FINAL RESTORATION PLAN for COMMON LOON (Gavia immer) and OTHER BIRDS IMPACTED BY THE BOUCHARD BARGE 120 (B-120) OIL SPILL BUZZARDS BAY MASSACHUSETTS and RHODE ISLAND June 2020 Prepared by: United States Fish and Wildlife Service Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Lead Administrative Trustee) Executive Summary In April 2003, the Bouchard Barge‐120 (B‐120) oil spill (the Spill) affected more than 100 miles of Buzzards Bay and its shoreline and nearby coastal waters in both Massachusetts (MA) and Rhode Island (RI). Birds were exposed to and ingested oil as they foraged, nested, and/or migrated through the area. Species of birds estimated to have been killed in the greatest numbers included common loon (Gavia immer), common and roseate terns (Sterna hirundo and Sterna dougallii), and other birds such as common eider (Somateria mollissima), black scoter (Melanitta americana), and red‐throated loon (Gavia stellata). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) (acting through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]), the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (acting through the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs [EEA]), and the State of Rhode Island serve as the natural resource Trustees (Trustees) responsible under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) (33 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq.) for ensuring the natural resources injured from the Spill are restored. As a designated Trustee, each agency is authorized to act on behalf of the public under State1 and/or Federal law to assess and recover natural resource damages, and to plan and implement actions to restore, rehabilitate, replace, or acquire the equivalent of the natural resources or services injured or lost as a result of an unpermitted discharge of oil.
    [Show full text]
  • For Creative Minds
    For Creative Minds The For Creative Minds educational section may be photocopied or printed from our website by the owner of this book for educational, non-commercial uses. Cross- curricular teaching activities, interactive quizzes, and more are available online. Go to www.ArbordalePublishing.com and click on the book’s cover to explore all the links. Loon Fun Facts A loon is a large water bird that looks something like a duck, but is not related to a duck at all. Loons belong to a family of ancient birds, at least 20 million years old. The best-known species is the common loon (Gavia immer). The common loon is the state bird of Minnesota. Loons spend almost all of their lives on water, and come on land only to mate, build their nest, and to incubate their eggs. Scientists think loons may live as long as 30 years. Who do you know who is about 30 years old? Does that seem old to you? The common loon Is that a long time is famous for the for a bird? black and white pattern of its summer feathers, and its many eerie, unmistakable calls. Loons eat small fish, insects, snails, crayfish, frogs, and salamanders. Underwater, loons almost always use their feet to move, not their wings. What parts of your body do you use to swim? Loons’ webbed feet (adapted for swimming) are set so far back on their bodies that it is difficult for them to walk on land. Loons are able to fly at speeds of 60 to 90 miles (96.5 to 145 km) per hour.
    [Show full text]
  • CMS/CAF/Inf.4.13 1 Central Asian Flyway Action Plan for Waterbirds and Their Habitat Country Report
    CMS/CAF/Inf.4.13 Central Asian Flyway Action Plan for Waterbirds and their Habitat Country Report - INDIA A. Introduction India situated north of the equator covering an area of about 3,287,263 km2 is one of the largest country in the Asian region. With 10 distinctly different bio geographical zones and many different habitat types, the country is known amongst the top 12 mega biodiversity countries. India is known to support 1225 species of bird species, out of these 257 species are water birds. India remains in the core central region of the Central Asian Flyway (CAF) and holds some crucial important wintering population of water bird species. India is also a key breeding area for many other water birds such as Pygmy cormorant and Ruddy-shelduck, globally threatened water birds such as Dalmatian Pelican, Lesser White-fronted Goose, Siberian crane, oriental white stork, greater adjutant stork, white winged wood duck etc. Being located in the core of the CAF, and several important migration routes the country covers a large intra-continental territory between Arctic and Indian Ocean. Being aware of the importance of the wetlands within the geographic boundary of the India for migrating avifauna, India has developed a wetland conservation programme. India currently has 19 RAMSAR sites. India has identified more than 300 sites which has the potential to be consider as the RAMSAR sites. However, being the second most populus nation in the world with agricultural economy, wetlands are one of the most used habitat with water bird and human interface. Much of the Indian landmass also being dependent to the normal monsoonal rainfall for precipitation is also subjected to extremes of drought and flood making the wetlands vulnerable to drastic ecological changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds of the Nebraska Sandhills
    Sandhills Region Bird Viewing Tips Lark Sparrow 1. Stay quiet and calm. Chondestes grammacus 2. Be discreet — wear muted Size: L: 6.0 - 7.6 in., WS: 11 in. Description: Chestnut and cream clothing and limit fragrances. head, streaked brown above, 3. Use your ears! Listen for bird songs pale below, black “mustache” and calls. and spot on chest, long tail with white corners. 4. Use binoculars to get a closer Diet: Seeds look, always keep a respectful Habitat: Grasslands Viewing: Spring-fall, statewide distance from wildlife. The Sandhills region in Nebraska contains 5. Be patient. Grasshopper Sparrow the largest area of stabilized grass covered 6. Go to where the habitat is — visit Ammodramus savannarum dunes in the western hemisphere. Of the state parks and other public lands. Size: L: 4.3 - 4.7 in., WS: 8.0 - 8.5 in. 13 million acres, over a million of these are 7. Do your homework — learn what Birds Description: Streaky sparrow with brown above, buff below, white wetlands. There are 1,600 Sandhill lakes, species of birds live in the area. eye ring, yellow lore, short tail. comprising around 80,000 surface acres of Diet: Insects water. These wetland areas are important Habitat: Grasslands of the Viewing: Spring-fall, statewide for migratory shorebirds and waterfowl, providing much-needed habitat. This area Beaks as Tools also sits directly atop the Ogallala aquifer, for which the wetlands play an important role Nebraska Dark-eyed Junco in retaining and filtering the water. Junco hyemalis This area receives 17 - 23 inches of water Size: L: 5.5 - 6.3 in., WS: 7 - 9.8 in.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol XVI No 6
    AUSTRALIAN NATURAL HISTORY Published Quarterly by the Australian Museum, College Street, Sydney Editor: F. H. TALilOT, Ph.D .• F.L.S. Annual ub cri ption, $1.40 po t~d A sistan t Editor: P. F. Cou IS Single copy, 30c (35c posted) \'OL. 16, NO. 6 J U E 15. 1969 CONTENTS P AGL HO\ 0 AMiLRO S IS THE M ORA Y ELL ?- John £. Ra/1(/a/1 177 THJ: A STRAliAl\ BIRD-BA!'IDJ (, SCJil.MJ D. Purchase 183 TJJF T ALCiAI CRANI UM: T111 YAL 1 01 ARCIII\ I.:S N. W. G. /1/acintosh 1 ~9 BooK RE 11 ws 195 THE A USTRALASIAN SUBA TARCTIC I SLAi\DS (PART 2) J. C. Ya/dll'\'11 196 SOCIAL BIIIAVIOUR A D IT [VOL Tl O'-- Jiro Kikkmm 200 M1 1 UTC MOLLU CA- W . F. Ponder 205 M ECT O UR CONI RIB TORS 20~ e FRO~T COVER: The Wedge-tailed Eagle (Aqui/a audax). of u<; lralia and Ta mania. has a "ing-span of from 6 feet 3 inche to 7 feet 3 inche..., \\ith H Tasmanian pccimen h:ning a record of 9 feet ~ inches. lt \\eighs about 8! pounds. Like it rclathel> the Golden Eagle • it has ah~a~s been accused of taking ~·oung lambs. Thi · problem i no" being ime tig:lled by member of the Wildlife Research Dhision of the CSIRO. They have found that the bird's diet is ' er) varied and may con il>t of young kangaroo!>. ratl>. possums, cro\1 ·, frogmouth , and large lizards.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Situation Regarding Lead Exposure in Birds in Japan (2015–2018); Lead Exposure Is Still Occurring
    FULL PAPER Toxicology Current situation regarding lead exposure in birds in Japan (2015–2018); lead exposure is still occurring Chihiro ISHII1), Yoshinori IKENAKA1,2), Shouta M.M. NAKAYAMA1), Takeshi KURITANI3), Mitsuhiro NAKAGAWA3), Keisuke SAITO4), Yukiko WATANABE4), Kohei OGASAWARA4), Manabu ONUMA5), Atsushi HAGA5) and Mayumi ISHIZUKA1)* 1)Laboratory of Toxicology, Department of Environmental Veterinary Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Hokkaido University, Kita18, Nishi9, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido 060-0818, Japan 2)Water Research Group, Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, 11 Hoffman Street, Potchefstroom, 2531, South Africa 3)Graduate School of Science, Hokkaido University, Kita10, Nishi8, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido 060-0810, Japan 4)Institute for Raptor Biomedicine Japan, 2-2101 Hokuto, Kushiro-shi, Hokkaido 084-0922, Japan 5)National Institute for Environmental Studies, 16-2 Onogawa, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8506, Japan ABSTRACT. Birds of a number of species have died as a result of lead (Pb) poisoning, including many Steller’s sea eagles (Haliaeetus pelagicus) and white-tailed sea eagles (Haliaeetus albicilla) in Hokkaido, the northernmost island of Japan. To address this issue, the use of any type of Pb ammunition for hunting of large animals was prohibited in Hokkaido in 2004. However, Pb poisoning is still being reported in this area, and there are few regulations regarding the use of Pb ammunition in other parts of Japan, where it has been reported that eagles and water birds have been exposed to Pb. This study was performed to accurately determine the current level of Pb exposure of birds found dead in the field or dead in the wild bird centers in Japan (June 2015–May J.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Birds
    Oregon Birds Journal of Oregon Birding and Field Ornithology Volume 35 2009 Contents of Oregon Birds Volume 35 Birding Oregon I.D. Note: Storms and Wrecked Phalaropes Dave Irons 7 Local News and Notes Don Munson, Forrest English, Alan Contreras, Hendrik Herlyn 3 New Generations: Oregon's Young Birders Karl Fairchild 4 Field Notes: Summer 2008-Dec. 2009 South Coast - Tim Rodenkirk 11 North Coast - Wink Cross 18 Portland Metro - Christopher and Adrian Hinkle 23 Willamette Valley - Tom Mickel 28 Rogue-Umpqua - selected photos 31 Central Oregon - Chuck Gates 33 Klamath-Lake - Kevin Spencer 39 Harney-Malheur - selected photos 43 Umatilla - Aaron Skirvin 45 Aberrant leucistic plover: three photos by Anne Heyerly 1 7 Oregon listing report for 2009 compiled by Paul Sullivan 50 Recent Research Use of Himalayan Blackberry Patches by Wintering Birds in Western Oregon Noah K. Strycker, Jonathan V. Boydston, Jasmine D. Graves, Laci L. Bristow, Bruce D. Dugger 57 Lewis's Woodpecker Nesting Study in Central Oregon Kirk Hardie 61 A Brief History of Seabird Research on Southern Oregon's Saddle Rock Annie Pollard 67 A Note on the Feeding Behaviors of Wintering Mergansers Ron Larson 74 Front Cover: Cedar Waxwings. Photo by Knute Andersson (Langlois) Back Cover: Red-naped Sapsucker. Photo by Rowan Heglie (Ashland) Contact OB Editor Alan Contreras at [email protected] Coming in Oregon Birds 36(1) - deadline July 1, 2010 Motorless birding by Vjera Thompson Site Guide: Chukar Park by David Smith A Truly Big Year in Coos County by Tim Rodenkirk Oregon's First Record of White-eyed Vireo by Alan Contreras and Graham Floyd and more...
    [Show full text]
  • WING-SPREADING BEHAVIOUR of the CORMORANT Phalacrocorax Carbo
    27 WING-SPREADING BEHAVIOUR OF THE CORMORANT Phalacrocorax carbo ROBIN M. SELLERS ABSTRACT This paper describes an investigation into the factors influ­ encing the occurrence and duration of the wing-spreading behaviour of the Cormorant. It was found to occur only after a period in the water (that is, when the plumage was wet), and its duration to be inversely related to wind speed and the length of time spent in the water. In addition birds tended to face into the wind during wing-spreading and, at low wind speeds, away from the sun. The extent to which the wings were spread was also inversely related to, wind speed. The results are discussed with respect to five proposed functions of wing-spreading (wing-drying, thermoregulation, balancing, intraspecific signalling and as an aid to swallow fish) and it is concluded that they support overwhelmingly the wing-drying (or more generally plumage-drying) explanation, with the ultimate goal of conserv­ ing metabolic energy. Rose Cottage, Ragnall Lane, Walkley Wood, Nailsworth, Glos. GL6 ORU, United Kingdom. INTRODUCTION the wind than to the sun, and concluded that the behaviour was associated with wing-drying. Wing-spreading is one of the most characteristic Winkler's study, carried out in Sri Lanka, concern­ features of the behavioural repertoire of cormo­ ed the Little Cormorant P. niger. He too found rants Phalacrocoracidae. Its function has long that wing-spreading occurred only after a period been a matter of conjecture, explanations ranging in the water and that its duration was correlated from wing-drying (Berry 1976, Clark 1969, with the time spent in the water and inversely McAtee & Stoddard 1945, Rijke 1967, 1968, 1970, with the temperature and the humidity deficit, and Siegfried et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Defying-Extinction.Pdf
    Defying Extinction PartnershiPs to safeguard global biodiversity EDITED BY LISA FITZPATRICK FOREWORD BY MONIQUE BARBUT • INTRODUCTION BY GUSTAVO A. B. da FONSECA Of all environmental ills, biodiversity loss is the only one likely to be irreversible. Unfortunately, biodiversity is being lost today at a scale that will threaten the life-support systems that sustain societies and economies, particularly in the developing world. The Global Environment Facility was established as the financial mechanism of the Convention on Biological Diversity, helping developing and transition countries to meet their bold commitments before this international accord. Since 1991, the GEF has invested over $2.9 billion, leveraging $8.3 billion in co-financing, to support implementation of more than 1000 projects in more than 155 countries, to conserve and sustainably use biodiversity. Copyright © 2010 by EIFE/iLCP Global Environment Facility All rights reserved. Except for brief passages quoted in newspaper, magazine, radio, television, or online reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Published in the United States by Earth in Focus Editions 2011 Crystal Drive, Suite 500 Arlington, VA 22202 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 ISBN 978-0-9841686-5-1 Defying Extinction: Partnerships to Safeguard Global Biodiversity Edited by Lisa Fitzpatrick www.ilcp.com Publisher/Director: Abbie Williams, Earth in Focus Editions–A Division of iLCP Designer: Stefan Gutermuth Senior Editor/Writer: Lisa Fitzpatrick Text copyright © 2010 Earth in Focus Editions–iLCP Published in partnership with the GEF and its respective partners and agencies.
    [Show full text]