DOCSLIB.ORG

Hatching Dates for Common Sandpiper <I>Actitis Hypoleucos</I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hatching Dates for Common Sandpiper <I>Actitis Hypoleucos</I Hatching dates for Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos chicks - variation with place and time T.W. Dougall, P.K. Holland& D.W. Yalden Dougall,T.W., Holland,P.K. & Yalden, D.W. 1995. Hatchingdates for CommonSandpiper Actitishypoleucos chicks - variationwith place and time. WaderStudy Group Bull. 76: 53-55. CommonSandpiper chicks hatched in 1990-94between 24 May (year-day146) and 13 July (year-day196), butthe averagehatch-date was variablebetween years, up to 10 days earlier in 1990 than in 1991. There are indicationsthat on average CommonSandpipers hatch a few days earlierin the Borders,the more northerlysite, butthis may reflecta changein the age structureof the Peak Districtpopulation between the 1970sand the 1980s- 1990s,perhaps the indirectconsequence of the bad weatherof April 1981. Dougall,T. W., 29 LaudstonGardens, Edinburgh EH3 9HJ, UK. Holland,P. K., 2 Rennie Court,Brettargh Drive, LancasterLA 1 5BN, UK. Yalden,D. W., Schoolof BiologicalSciences, University, Manchester M13 9PT, UK. INTRODUCTION Yalden(1991a) in calculatingthe originalregression, and comingfrom the years 1977-1989 (mostlythe 1980s). CommonSandpipers Actitis hypoleucos have a short We also have, for comparison,the knownhatch dates for breedingseason, like mostwaders; arriving back from 49 nestsreported by Hollandet al. (1982), comingfrom West Africa in late April, most have laid eggs by mid-May, various sites in the Peak District in the 1970s. which hatch around mid-June. Chicksfledge by early July, and by mid-Julymost breedingterritories are Ringingactivities continue through the breedingseason at deserted(Holland et al. 1982). The timingof the breeding both sites, and chickscan be at any age from 0 to 19 days season seems constantfrom year to year, but there are old when caught (thoughyoung chicks are generally few data to quantifythis impression.It is difficultto locate easier to find). Where severalchicks of a broodwere an adequatesample of nestsin any one year to provide caught,a singledate for hatchingwas entered. Older an adequateindication of the timingof the season,let chicks sometimessuggested hatchingdates two or three alone do so over several years. days apart, and the mean was usedfor the latter,the earlierdate (i.e. the apparenthatch date of the older The demonstrationby Holland& Yalden (1991) that bill chick)for the former. One mightexpect a broodof four lengths(and masses)of CommonSandpiper chicks are youngto take 1 - 1Y2days to hatch, so causing some stronglycorrelated with age offersan indirectapproach. inherentvariation and, of course,their growth rates may Reversingthe calculation,given bill lengthand the date of differ a little. ringing,the age and thereforethe hatch-dateof each chick couldbe estimated. Enoughchicks, at a range of ages The sampleof hatchdates is stronglyskewed in all throughthe breedingseason, can be caughteach season samples,so non-parametrictests (Meddis1984) have to allowcomparisons between sites and years. been usedto comparethe mean hatchdates for each sample(site or year). Hatch-datesare presentedas year- days, so that 1 June is year-day 152, or 153 in a leap MATERIALS AND METHODS year. Holland& Yalden (1991a) showedthat bill length,y (in mm) was relatedto age, x ( in days ) as y = 0.56x + 9.9; RESULTS thus age shouldbe relatedto bill lengthas x = (y-9.9)/0.56 and we have usedthis formulato producea standard For the years 1990-1994, we were able to calculate81 table of age for each half millimetrelength of bill from 10 hatch-dates for the Borders and 99 for the Peak District. mm (age 0) to 21 mm (19.8 days, = 20 days). These rangedfrom year-day146 (24 May) to 196 (13 July), but the mean hatchingdates for the differentyears For the years 1990-1994, we have data for 8-23 broods and sitesclustered in the period6-18 June (year-days from the Borders(mostly Leithen Water and Dewar 159-171). In each year, the mean hatchdate in the Water, southof Edinburgh,collected by T.W.D.) and for Borderswas earlierthan in the Peak District,by 1-5 days, 10-25 broodsfrom the Peak District(mostly the but this differencewas not quite statisticallysignificant LadybowerReservoir system, but also fromthe River (Meddis'H = 2.84, p = 0.088, d.f. = 1). However,the Ashop,collected by D.W.Y.). Forthe Peak District,we differencein hatch-datesbetween years, allowing for any have reworkedthe data for 63 broodsused by Holland& differencebetween sites, was highlysignificant (H = 53 12.81, p = 0.012, d.f. = 4), and moreoverfitted best the Yalden (1991), at year-day167.6 (14-15 June). However, hypothesisthat 1990 was the earliestyear, 1991 was the the hatch-dates for the known nests of Robson eta/. latest,and the otherthree years were equal (Z ---3.51, p < (1982), fromthe 1970s, averagedthree days earlier 0.001). Hatch-dateswere around 10 days earlier in 1990 (Table3), and this resultwas statisticallysignificant than in 1991 (Table 1). (Meddisspecific test, with no a pr/or/expectationof directionof change,Z = 1.985, p = 0.046). Table 1. Hatch-datescalculated for CommonSandpiper chicks in the Peak District and in the Borders, 1990-1994. DISCUSSION PEAK 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 DISTRICT Despitethe impressionof synchronyin breedingseason Mean hatch 160.5 170.8 168.3 167.0 167.1 from year to year, our resultsindicate the variationin date S.D. 1.7 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.6 average hatch-datebetween years. We have n 10 25 22 25 17 demonstratedthat the growthrates of CommonSandpiper Earliest 152 160 157 150 152 chickswere faster in 1992, a warm, dry June, and slower Latest 173 196 195 188 187 in 1991 whichwas cold and sunless(Yalden & Dougall 1994). Hatchdates were clearlysimilarly affected by BORDERS differentweather conditions,and May was also cool in Mean hatch 159.3 165.3 165.4 163.6 166.3 1991, while it was warm in 1990. date S.D. 3.4 4.9 2.6 1.8 2.7 The indicationthat the breedingseasons were somewhat n 10 8 18 23 22 Earliest 149 146 15O 146 1 50 earlier in the Borders,280 km north of the Peak District, Latest 187 192 185 182 195 was surprisingand counter-intuitive.There is no differencein altitudebetween the studysites (bothrange (Differencebetween years, Meddis H = 12.8, p = 0.012) 700-1000 ft, 210-300 m), so one would expectthe (Differencebetween places, Meddis H = 2.8, p = 0.088) northern site to be later. Such a result could occur if one site (Peak District)were studiedmore persistently than the Althoughthe difference in hatch-dates between the other(Borders); however, the discrepancyis particularly Bordersand Peak Districtstudy sites was not quite the absenceof early (May) hatchdates, at the time when formallysignificant, there were distinctlymore hatch-dates surveyors'enthusiasm is greatest. in May in the Borders,and, conversely,more dates in July in the Peak District;analysed this way, there was a A clue may be given by the somewhatearlier hatch-dates significantdifference between the areas(X 2 = 12.3,p = in the Peak District in the 1970s, which show the same 0.003) (Table 2). mean hatch-date(year-day 164) as the recent Borders sample. Hatch-datesseem to have slippedback in the Table2. Numberof hatch-datesin May, Juneand Julyin the two Peak District around 1980, but to have been stable since study areas, 1990-94 combined. then. This differencemight have been causedby the differencein methodology(known hatch dates, versus May June July Total calculatedhatch dates from chickscaptured for ringing), Peak District 5 83 11 99 but, assumingthat it is genuine,the impactof the late Borders 18 58 5 81 Aprilsnowstorms of 1981 mightbe the cause. We have documentedthe sharpdecline that year of our Peak (•2 = 12.35,p = 0.003) Districtstudy population (from 22 pairsin 1980 to 14 pairs in 1981) (Holland& Yalden 1991b),and we suspectthat Table 3. Variationin mean hatch-date in the Peak District, older,well-established and moreexperienced birds comparingpre-1980 data from Holland et al. (1982)with1980-89 sufferedheavier mortality than youngerbirds, in part data fromHolland & Yalden(1991a) and the recentsample from becausewe expectthem to returnto their territoriesmore 1990-94. promptlyat the startof the season (Holland& Yalden 1995). However,the 1981 snowstormwas a localrather pre-1980 1980-1989 1990-1994 than a nationalphenomenon, and had no effectin the Borders area. Mean 164.7 167.6 167.6 S.D. 1.4 1.1 1.0 Our resultsclearly indicatethe sensitivityof the timingof n 49 63 99 the breedingseason in CommonSandpipers to the Earliest 149 152 150 Latest 198 192 196 weather,just as the growthrate of the chicksis similarly sensitive.The shortbreeding season, particularly its curtailmentin July, suggeststhat it is criticalfor the young (Meddisspecific test, pre-1980 earlier than others, Z = 1.99,p = 0.046) to fledgeas early as possible,either because the food supplyon the breedinggrounds declines through July (Yalden1986) or perhapsbecause the fledglingshave to Withinthe Peak District,the average hatch-datefor the grow further and accumulatefat for their southerly aggregate 1990-94 sample is identicalto that for the migration.Presumably the changeindicates that laying 1977-1989 sampleof chicksmeasured by Holland& dates, and thereforethe start of incubation,are delayed in 54 6 PEAK DISTRICT pre-1980 6 PEAK DISTRICT 1980-89 4 4 6t•40 145 !150 •155 160 J165 Ii170 175 BORDERS180 1851990-94 190 195 200 Year - Day Figure1. Frequencydistribution of hatch-datesfor CommonSandpipers Actitis hypoleucos. The hatchdates for 49 knownnests reported by Hollandet al. (1982) ("PeakDistrict pre-1980") are comparedwith dates calculated back from the age of chickscaught for ringingby Holland& Yalden(1991) ("Peak District 1980-89"), caught more recently in the Peak District,and in the Borders.Hatch-dates are givenas year-days(152 = 1 June, or 31 May in a leap year). "later"years, and this must reducethe opportunitiesfor REFERENCES replacementclutches to be laid if the firstclutch is lost. The tail of later dates (Figure1),those after year-day175 Cuthbertson,E.I., Foggitt,G.T.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Species Account
    SPOTTED SANDPIPER Actitis macularius non-breeding visitor, vagrant monotypic Spotted Sandpipers breed across n. N America and winter as far south as c. S America (AOU 1998). The status of this species in the Pacific and the Hawaiian Islands is confused by its similarity to Common Sandpiper, a Eurasian counterpart (Dement'ev and Gladkov 1951c, Cramp and Simmons 1983), that has reached the Hawaiian Islands on at least two occasion and possibly others (David 1991). Records of this pair, unidentified to species, have been reported throughout the Pacific (E 41:115, Clapp 1968a, Pyle and Engbring 1985, Pratt et al. 1987) while confirmed Spotted Sandpipers have been recorded from Clipperton, the Marshall, Johnston, and the Hawaiian Is (Amerson and Shelton 1976, Howell et al. 1993, AOU 1998). David (1991) analyzed records of the two species of Actitis sandpipers in the Southeastern Hawaiian Islands and concluded that, between 1975 and 1989, 6 of 12 birds (1983-1989) could be confirmed as Spotted Sandpipers based on descriptions and photographs while the remaining six (1975-1983) could not be identified. Prior to this, Pyle (1977) listed only the species pair (Spotted/Common Sandpiper) for the Hawaiian Islands. Since this analysis and through the 2000s there have been 25 additional records of Actitis, 18 of which we consider confirmed Spotted Sandpipers while 7 did not include enough descriptive notes to separate them from Common Sandpiper. Because 24 of 37 records in the Southeastern Islands have been confirmed as Spotted Sandpipers and only one has been confirmed as a Common Sandpiper, we assume that the following summary of Actitis sandpipers reflects the status of Spotted Sandpiper, the more expected species in the Southeastern Islands.
    [Show full text]
  • <I>Actitis Hypoleucos</I>
    Partial primary moult in first-spring/summer Common Sandpipers Actitis hypoleucos M. NICOLL 1 & P. KEMP 2 •c/o DundeeMuseum, Dundee, Tayside, UK 243 LochinverCrescent, Dundee, Tayside, UK Citation: Nicoll, M. & Kemp, P. 1983. Partial primary moult in first-spring/summer Common Sandpipers Actitis hypoleucos. Wader Study Group Bull. 37: 37-38. This note is intended to draw the attention of wader catch- and the old inner feathersare often retained (Pearson 1974). ers to the needfor carefulexamination of the primariesof Similarly, in Zimbabwe, first-year Common Sandpipers CommonSandpipers Actiris hypoleucos,and other waders, replacethe outerfive to sevenprimaries between December for partial primarywing moult. This is thoughtto be a diag- andApril (Tree 1974). It thusseems normal for first-spring/ nosticfeature of wadersin their first spring and summer summerCommon Sandpipers wintering in eastand southern (Tree 1974). Africa to show a contrast between new outer and old inner While membersof the Tay Ringing Group were mist- primaries.There is no informationfor birdswintering further nettingin Angus,Scotland, during early May 1980,a Com- north.However, there may be differencesin moult strategy mon Sandpiperdied accidentally.This bird was examined betweenwintering areas,since 3 of 23 juvenile Common and measured, noted as an adult, and then stored frozen un- Sandpiperscaught during autumn in Morocco had well- til it was skinned,'sexed', andthe gut contentsremoved for advancedprimary moult (Pienkowski et al. 1976). These analysis.Only duringskinning did we noticethat the outer birdswere moultingnormally, and so may have completed primarieswere fresh and unworn in comparisonto the faded a full primary moult during their first winter (M.W. Pien- and abradedinner primaries.The moult on both wingswas kowski, pers.comm.).
    [Show full text]
  • Purple Sandpiper
    Maine 2015 Wildlife Action Plan Revision Report Date: January 13, 2016 Calidris maritima (Purple Sandpiper) Priority 1 Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) Class: Aves (Birds) Order: Charadriiformes (Plovers, Sandpipers, And Allies) Family: Scolopacidae (Curlews, Dowitchers, Godwits, Knots, Phalaropes, Sandpipers, Snipe, Yellowlegs, And Woodcock) General comments: Recent surveys suggest population undergoing steep population decline within 10 years. IFW surveys conducted in 2014 suggest population declined by 49% since 2004 (IFW unpublished data). Maine has high responsibility for wintering population, regional surveys suggest Maine may support over 1/3 of the Western Atlantic wintering population. USFWS Region 5 and Canadian Maritimes winter at least 90% of the Western Atlantic population. Species Conservation Range Maps for Purple Sandpiper: Town Map: Calidris maritima_Towns.pdf Subwatershed Map: Calidris maritima_HUC12.pdf SGCN Priority Ranking - Designation Criteria: Risk of Extirpation: NA State Special Concern or NMFS Species of Concern: NA Recent Significant Declines: Purple Sandpiper is currently undergoing steep population declines, which has already led to, or if unchecked is likely to lead to, local extinction and/or range contraction. Notes: Recent surveys suggest population undergoing steep population decline within 10 years. IFW surveys conducted in 2014 suggest population declined by 49% since 2004 (IFW unpublished data). Maine has high responsibility for wintering populat Regional Endemic: Calidris maritima's global geographic range is at least 90% contained within the area defined by USFWS Region 5, the Canadian Maritime Provinces, and southeastern Quebec (south of the St. Lawrence River). Notes: Recent surveys suggest population undergoing steep population decline within 10 years. IFW surveys conducted in 2014 suggest population declined by 49% since 2004 (IFW unpublished data).
    [Show full text]
  • Actitis Hypoleucos
    Actitis hypoleucos -- Linnaeus, 1758 ANIMALIA -- CHORDATA -- AVES -- CHARADRIIFORMES -- SCOLOPACIDAE Common names: Common Sandpiper; Chevalier guignette 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., Van den Bossche, W., Wheatley, H. & Wright, L. Assessment Rationale European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC) EU27 regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT) In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence <20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size is extremely large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >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 in Europe. In the EU27 the species has undergone moderately rapid declines and is therefore classified as Near Threatened under Criterion A (A2abc+3bc+4abc). Occurrence Countries/Territories of Occurrence Native: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czech Republic; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Ireland, Rep.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Habitat Plan
    WILDLIFE HABITAT PLAN City of Novi, Michigan A QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY WILDLIFE HABITAT PLAN City of Novi, Michigan A QUALIlY OF LIFE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY JUNE 1993 Prepared By: Wildlife Management Services Brandon M. Rogers and Associates, P.C. JCK & Associates, Inc. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS City Council Matthew C. Ouinn, Mayor Hugh C. Crawford, Mayor ProTem Nancy C. Cassis Carol A. Mason Tim Pope Robert D. Schmid Joseph G. Toth Planning Commission Kathleen S. McLallen, * Chairman John P. Balagna, Vice Chairman lodia Richards, Secretary Richard J. Clark Glen Bonaventura Laura J. lorenzo* Robert Mitzel* Timothy Gilberg Robert Taub City Manager Edward F. Kriewall Director of Planning and Community Development James R. Wahl Planning Consultant Team Wildlife Management Services - 640 Starkweather Plymouth, MI. 48170 Kevin Clark, Urban Wildlife Specialist Adrienne Kral, Wildlife Biologist Ashley long, Field Research Assistant Brandon M. Rogers and Associates, P.C. - 20490 Harper Ave. Harper Woods, MI. 48225 Unda C. lemke, RlA, ASLA JCK & Associates, Inc. - 45650 Grand River Ave. Novi, MI. 48374 Susan Tepatti, Water Resources Specialist * Participated with the Planning Consultant Team in developing the study. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii PREFACE vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY viii FRAGMENTATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES " ., , 1 Consequences ............................................ .. 1 Effects Of Forest Fragmentation 2 Edges 2 Reduction of habitat 2 SPECIES SAMPLING TECHNIQUES ................................ .. 3 Methodology 3 Survey Targets ............................................ ., 6 Ranking System ., , 7 Core Reserves . .. 7 Wildlife Movement Corridor .............................. .. 9 FIELD SURVEY RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS , 9 Analysis Results ................................ .. 9 Core Reserves . .. 9 Findings and Recommendations , 9 WALLED LAKE CORE RESERVE - DETAILED STUDy.... .. .... .. .... .. 19 Results and Recommendations ............................... .. 21 GUIDELINES TO ECOLOGICAL LANDSCAPE PLANNING AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION.
    [Show full text]
  • Biogeographical Profiles of Shorebird Migration in Midcontinental North America
    U.S. Geological Survey Biological Resources Division Technical Report Series Information and Biological Science Reports ISSN 1081-292X Technology Reports ISSN 1081-2911 Papers published in this series record the significant find­ These reports are intended for the publication of book­ ings resulting from USGS/BRD-sponsored and cospon­ length-monographs; synthesis documents; compilations sored research programs. They may include extensive data of conference and workshop papers; important planning or theoretical analyses. These papers are the in-house coun­ and reference materials such as strategic plans, standard terpart to peer-reviewed journal articles, but with less strin­ operating procedures, protocols, handbooks, and manu­ gent restrictions on length, tables, or raw data, for example. als; and data compilations such as tables and bibliogra­ We encourage authors to publish their fmdings in the most phies. Papers in this series are held to the same peer-review appropriate journal possible. However, the Biological Sci­ and high quality standards as their journal counterparts. ence Reports represent an outlet in which BRD authors may publish papers that are difficult to publish elsewhere due to the formatting and length restrictions of journals. At the same time, papers in this series are held to the same peer-review and high quality standards as their journal counterparts. To purchase this report, contact the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161 (call toll free 1-800-553-684 7), or the Defense Technical Infonnation Center, 8725 Kingman Rd., Suite 0944, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6218. Biogeographical files o Shorebird Migration · Midcontinental Biological Science USGS/BRD/BSR--2000-0003 December 1 By Susan K.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Shorebird Profiles
    List of Shorebird Profiles Pacific Central Atlantic Species Page Flyway Flyway Flyway American Oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus) •513 American Avocet (Recurvirostra americana) •••499 Black-bellied Plover (Pluvialis squatarola) •488 Black-necked Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus) •••501 Black Oystercatcher (Haematopus bachmani)•490 Buff-breasted Sandpiper (Tryngites subruficollis) •511 Dowitcher (Limnodromus spp.)•••485 Dunlin (Calidris alpina)•••483 Hudsonian Godwit (Limosa haemestica)••475 Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus)•••492 Long-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus) ••503 Marbled Godwit (Limosa fedoa)••505 Pacific Golden-Plover (Pluvialis fulva) •497 Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa)••473 Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres)•••479 Sanderling (Calidris alba)•••477 Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus)••494 Spotted Sandpiper (Actitis macularia)•••507 Upland Sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda)•509 Western Sandpiper (Calidris mauri) •••481 Wilson’s Phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor) ••515 All illustrations in these profiles are copyrighted © George C. West, and used with permission. To view his work go to http://www.birchwoodstudio.com. S H O R E B I R D S M 472 I Explore the World with Shorebirds! S A T R ER G S RO CHOOLS P Red Knot (Calidris canutus) Description The Red Knot is a chunky, medium sized shorebird that measures about 10 inches from bill to tail. When in its breeding plumage, the edges of its head and the underside of its neck and belly are orangish. The bird’s upper body is streaked a dark brown. It has a brownish gray tail and yellow green legs and feet. In the winter, the Red Knot carries a plain, grayish plumage that has very few distinctive features. Call Its call is a low, two-note whistle that sometimes includes a churring “knot” sound that is what inspired its name.
    [Show full text]
  • Ageing and Sexing the Common Sandpiper Actitis Hypoleucos
    ageing & sexing series Wader Study 122(1): 54 –59. 10.18194/ws.00009 This series summarizing current knowledge on ageing and sexing waders is co-ordinated by Włodzimier Meissner (Avian Ecophysiology Unit, Department of Vertebrate Ecology & Zoology, University of Gdansk, ul. Wita Stwosza 59, 80-308 Gdansk, Poland, [email protected]). See Wader Study Group Bulletin vol. 113 p. 28 for the Introduction to the series. Part 11: Ageing and sexing the Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos Włodzimierz Meissner 1, Philip K. Holland 2 & Tomasz Cofta 3 1Avian Ecophysiology Unit, Department of Vertebrate Ecology & Zoology, University of Gdańsk, ul.Wita Stwosza 59, 80-308 Gdańsk, Poland. [email protected] 232 Southlands, East Grinstead, RH19 4BZ, UK. [email protected] 3Hoene 5A/5, 80-041 Gdańsk, Poland. [email protected] Meissner, W., P.K. Holland & T. Coa. 2015. Ageing and sexing series 11: Ageing and sexing the Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos . Wader Study 122(1): 54 –59. Keywords: Common Sandpiper, Actitis hypoleucos , ageing, sexing, moult, plumages The Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos is treated as were validated using about 500 photographs available on monotypic through a breeding range that extends from the Internet and about 50 from WRG KULING ringing Ireland eastwards to Japan. Its main non-breeding area is sites in northern Poland. also vast, reaching from the Canary Islands to Australia with a few also in the British Isles, France, Spain, Portugal MOULT SCHEDULE and the Mediterranean (Cramp & Simmons 1983, del Juveniles and adults leave the breeding grounds as soon Hoyo et al. 1996, Glutz von Blotzheim et al.
    [Show full text]
  • First Record of the Terek Sandpiper in California
    FIRST RECORD OF THE TEREK SANDPIPER IN CALIFORNIA ERIKA M. WILSON, 1400 S. BartonSt. #421, Arlington,Virginia 22204 BETTIE R. HARRIMAN, 5188 BittersweetLane, Oshkosh,Wisconsin 54901 On 28 August 1988, while birding at Carmel River State Beach, MontereyCounty, California(36032 ' N, 121057' W), we discoveredan adult Terek Sandpiper (Xenus cinereus). We watched this Eurasian vagrantbetween 1110 and 1135 PDT; we saw it again,along with local birders, between 1215 and 1240 as it foraged on the open beach. Wilson observedthe bird a third time on 5 September 1988 between 1000 and 1130; otherssaw it regularlyuntil 23 September1988. During our first observationa light overcastsky resultedin good viewingconditions, without glare or strongshadows. The weather was mild with a slightbreeze and some offshorefog. We found the Terek Sandpiperfeeding in the Carmel River'sshallow lagoon, separated from the Pacific Ocean by sand dunes. Its long, upturnedbill, quite out of keepingwith any smallwader with whichwe were familiar,immediately attracted our attention. We moved closer and tried unsuccessfullyto photographit. Shortlythereafter all the birdspresent took to the air. The sandpiperflew out over the dunesbut curvedback and landedout of sighton the open beach. We telephonedRobin Roberson,and half an hour later she, Brian Weed, Jan Scott, Bob Tinfie, and Ron Branson arrived,the lattertwo armedwith telephotolenses. We quicklyrelocated the TerekSandpiper on the beach,foraging at the surfline. The followingdescription is basedon our field notes,with color names takenfrom Smithe(197.5). Our bird was a medium-sizedsandpiper resemblinga winter-plumagedSpotted Sandpiper (Actitis rnacularia)but distinguishedby bright yellow-orangelegs and an upturnedbill (Figure1). The evenlycurved, dark horn bill, 1.5 timesthe lengthof the bird'shead, had a fleshyorange base.
    [Show full text]
  • AVIAN PARAMYXOVIRUSES in SHOREBIRDS and Gulls
    journal Diseases, 46(2), 2010, pp. 481-487 \Vildlife Disease Association 2010 AVIAN PARAMYXOVIRUSES IN SHOREBIRDS AND GUllS laura l. Coffee,1,5 Britta A. Hanson,' M. Page Luttrell;' David E. Swa~ne,2 Dennis A. Senne,3 Virginia H. Goekjlan," lawrence J. Niles,4,6 and David E. Stallknecht1, 1 Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study, Departrnent of Population Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602, USA 2 Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, US Departrnent of Agriculture, Athens, Georgia 30605, USA 3 US Departrnent of Agriculture, Anirnal and Plant Health Inspection Service, National Veterinary Services Laboratories, Ames, Iowa 50010, USA 4 Endangered and Nongame Species Program, New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife, PO Box 400, Trenton, New Jersey 08625, USA 5 Current address: Cornell University, College of Veterinary Medicine, S2-118 Schurman Hall, Biomedical Sciences, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA 6 Current address: Conserve Wildlife Foundation, 516 Farnsworth Avenue, Bordertown, New Jersey 08505, USA 7 Corresponding author (email: [email protected]) ABSTRACT: There are nine serotypes of avian paramyxovirus (APMV), including APMV-1, or Newcastle disease virus. Although free-flying ducks and geese have been extensively monitored for APMV, limited information is available for species in the order Charadriiforrnes. From 2000 to 2005 we tested cloacal swabs from 9,128 shorebirds and gulls (33 species, five families) captured in 10 states within the USA and in three countries in the Caribbean and South America. Avian paramyxoviruses were isolated from 60 (0.7%) samples by inoculation of embryonating chicken eggs; isolates only included APMV-1 and APMV-2.
    [Show full text]
  • International Single Species Action Plan for the Conservation of the Spoon-Billed Sandpiper (Eurynorhynchus Pygmeus)
    CMS Technical Report Series No. 23 International Single Species Action Plan for the Conservation of the Spoon-billed Sandpiper (Eurynorhynchus pygmeus) Authors: Christoph Zöckler (ArcCona Ecological Consulting), Evgeny E. Syroechkovskiy Jr.(Russian Bird Conservation Union & Russian Academy of Sciences) , Gillian Bunting (ArcCona Ecological Consulting) Published by BirdLife International and the Secretariat of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) Citation: C. Zöckler, E.E. Syroechkovskiy, Jr. and G. Bunting. International Single Species Action Plan for the Conservation of the Spoon-billed Sandpiper (Eurynorhynchus pygmeus) 2010 BirdLife International Asia Division, Tokyo, Japan; CMS Secretariat, Bonn, Germany.52pages. Technical Report Series 23 © 2010 BirdLife International and CMS. This publication, except the cover photograph, may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational and other non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. BirdLife International and CMS would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purposes whatsoever without prior permission from the copyright holders. Disclaimer The contents of this volume do not necessary reflect the views of BirdLife International and CMS. The designations employed and the presentation do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of BirdLife International or CMS concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area in its authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Copies of this publication are available from the following websites BirdLife International: www.birdlife.org BirdLife International Asia Division: www.birdlife-asia.org/eng/about/index.html CMS Secretariat: www.cms.int BirdLife International, Wellbrook Court, Girton Road, Cambridge CB3 0NA, United Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • Calidris Himantopus (Stilt Sandpiper)
    UWI The Online Guide to the Animals of Trinidad and Tobago Behaviour Calidris himantopus (Stilt sandpiper) Family: Scolopacidae (Sandpipers) Order: Charadriiformes (Shorebirds and Waders) Class: Aves (Birds) Fig 1. Stilt sandpiper, Calidris himantopus http://www.arkive.org/stilt-sandpiper/calidris-himantopus/image-G86449.html TRAITS. Stilt sandpipers on average are 20.3 – 23 cm in length, weigh 55g and have a life expectancy of about 11 years. In general, the males are more slender than females and have a long neck with a thin, black decurved bill that droops at the tip and long, dull green legs (Hilty, 2002). Female stilt sandpipers are slightly larger than their male counterparts and possess a brown ventral barring (Fig. 1) (Jehl Jr 1973). The non-breeding plumage of these birds consists of the upper body part being mostly plain grey with a white patch on its rump while the lower part of the body is white. In addition, the fore neck and sides of the chest are smudged grey (Hilty, 2002). The breeding plumage differs from the non-breeding plumage. The upper body turns a greyish brown while the lower body turns a dirty white. Additionally, the crown and UWI The Online Guide to the Animals of Trinidad and Tobago Behaviour cheeks are reddish brown, there is the presence of a narrow white eyebrow stripe and the under parts of the body are black in colour (Hilty, 2002). Juveniles have an upper body that is scaled buff with the fore neck and sides of the chest containing fine grey streaks (Hilty, 2002). ECOLOGY.
    [Show full text]