DOCSLIB.ORG

Interspecific Preening Invitation Display of Parasitic Cowbirds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Interspecific Preening Invitation Display of Parasitic Cowbirds THE AUK A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY VOL. 78 OC•'OBER,1961 NO. 4 INTERSPECIFIC PREENING INVITATION DISPLAY OF PARASITIC COWBIRDS ROBERtK. SELA•DERA•D CHARLESJ. LA RUE, JR. BROODparasitism holds special interest for the student of behavior, sinceadoption of this highly specializedway of life, which has evolved independentlyin five avian families (Miller, 1946), involvesnot only the lossof nestingand parentalbehavior but also the developmentof a complexof new patternsof behavioradapting the parasiteto the host. Specializationfor parasitismis most marked in the European Cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) and related forms of the subfamily Cuculinae (Chance, 1940) and perhapsleast so in the cowbirds(Icteridae) of the New World, which have very closelyrelated, nonparasitic relatives and havehad a comparativelyshort evolutionaryhistory as parasites(Fried- mann, 1929, 1955). A considerablevolume of informationon cowbirds has beenprovided by the pioneerwork of Frledmann (1929) and later studiesby Nice (1943), Harm (1941), Norris (1947), Laskey (1950), Mayfield (1960, 1961a and b), and others,but we are still far short of an adequateunderstanding of the biologyof thesebirds. In particu- lar, the complex behavioral interactions occurring between parasite and host, both at the time of egg laying by the cowbird and during the course of developmentof the cowbird in the care of the foster parents, are essentiallyunknown. Early in the courseof studieson the behaviorof the Brown-headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater), beginningin February 1959, we noted that captive cowbirds persistently approached individuals of certain other speciesof birds and invited heteropreeningof the head and neck by adopting a special head-bowedposture (Figure 1). Surprisingly enough, repeated presentationof this display was often effective in inducingother speciesto preen the cowbirds'plumage. Subsequently, we obtained a number of field records of this behavior in Brown-headed Cowbirds,and a similar displaywas seenin captiveRed-eyed Cowbirds (Tangavius aeneus). It would seem, therefore, that heteropreening invitation is a regular, althoughhitherto unstudied,part of the behavioral 473 [ .Auk. 474 SELANDERAND LA RUE,Preening7 Display of Cowbirds [Vol.78 repertoire of these parasitic icterids. The behavior is all the more unusualin that cowbirdsonly infrequentlydirect the invitationaldisplay to membersof their own speciesand do not themselvesindulge in social heteropreening. The presentreport dealsalmost entirely with preeninginvitation in the Brown-headed Cowbird, and, unless otherwise indicated, the term "cowbird" refers to that species. It is our hope that this paper will stimulateother workers to observeand report further instancesof the use of this displayby cowbirdsin the field, sincethe significanceof this behaviorcan be judgedonly when an abundanceof field recordsis available. DISCOVERY OF TIlE DISPLAY The display was first seen on 27 February 1959, while we were observinga group of 22 Brown-headedCowbirds in a large, outdoor aviary. A malecowbird approached a femalecowbird and displayed,at which point the femaleflew. Later in the day, a male directeddisplay to another male resting on a perch; and, as the displayingbird ap- proached,the resting bird peckedit away. When this behavior was first observed,we suspectedthat it repre- sentedan intraspecificdisplay in someway associatedwith courtship or pair formation. However, this suppositionproved to be erroneous, and the normal use of the displaybecame apparent when other species of birds were placedin the aviary with the cowbirds. On 3 March, a few minutes after a meadowlark (Sturnella) was introduced, several cowbirdsapproached it and displayed. At first the meadowlarksimply retreated to a new position, often flying to another perch, at the ap- proach of the cowbirds; but, later the same day, we •oted that the meadowlarkwas less prone to flee and now often remainedin a fixed position,pecking at the cowbirdsas they displayed. Next day, the meadowlarksometimes responded to the displayby preeningthe cow- birds rather than fleeing from them. And for a period of two weeks during which the meadowlarkwas confinedwith the cowbirds,preening becamethe usualresponse of the meadowlarkto any cowbirdin display. As a consequence,the meadowlarkwas "victimized"to the extent that it spentseveral hours each day in this activity. In late March, several female Red-winged Blackbirds (.4gelaius phoeniceus)were placed in the aviary, where they remained through the summer and fall. A day or two after their introduction, they were seen to preen displayingcowbirds, and this behavior was noted hundreds of times in the following months. Octoberl1961 .I SELANI)ERANI) LA RUE,Preening Display o! Cowbirds 475 DESCRIPTION OF THE DISPLAY We have usedthe term "display"for this behaviorsince it involves distinctivepostures and movementshaving obvious communication function,inducing, normally, flight, attack, or heteropreeningin the individualto which it is directed,hereafter called the recipient. display (Figures 1A, lB, and 1D), the head is bowedto a point at which the bill is directedeither verticallydownward or in toward the cowbird'sbody. The feathersof the head and nape are conspicuously ruffed, but other body plumage is generally slightly compressedor sleeked. The wings and tail are held in normal resting position,and the cowbirdis often slightlycrouched. Assumptionof the head-bowedposture is accompaniedor shortly followedby a movementof the cowbird toward the recipient. This may be a sidling motion along a perch or a direct head-onapproach. Usually the cowbird halts when its head is about one inch from the recipient,but the approachmay continueuntil the top of the cowbird's headis actuallyplaced against the breastof the recipient (Figure 1A). Orientationof the cowbird'sbody with respectto the recipient'sposi- tion varies: frequentlythe body is oriented along a perch as frontal Figure 1A. Male eowbird gives preening invitation to female Red-winged B!aekbird. 476 SELi•DER,•D L^ RUE,Pree•i•9 Display o] Cowbirds tVol.[ Au•. 78 ,I Figure lB. Female cowbird invites preening from a Shell Parakeet. ½ Fi&•re IC. Displayingfemale cowbirddodges peek by Shell Parakeet. October]1961 J SELANDERAN• L^ RUE,Preening Display of Cowbirds 477 presentationof the head is made (Figure lB), but cowbirdsalso posturewith the body at an angle,often about45 ø , to the recipient. Or the cowbirdmay perchside-by-side with the recipient,bowing the head and cockingit toward the recipient. Oblique presentationsare most likely to be usedwhen the recipientis in the habit of peckingat the displayingcowbird; this permitsthe cowbirdto dodgethe blows by turning rapidly away (Figure 1C). Regardlessof the orientationof the displayingcowbird's body, the cowbirdpostures in a positionin whichthe occipitalregion of the head is directedtoward the head of the recipient. While presentingthe fluffedfeathers of the head,the cowbirdmaintains a rigid pose,avoiding rapid or suddenmovement; and it avoidsdirect visualfixation of the recipient. In the displayingcowbird, the eyeshave a characteristic "glassy"appearance. The displayis not accompaniedby vocalizations. Displayis givenon perches,on the ground,or whileboth the recipient and the cowbird cling to the wire sides of an aviary or cage. If heteropreeningis induced,the cowbirdmaintains the bowedposture and continuesto avoid suddenmovement, although it may make slight changesin positionof the head,as if to encouragethe respondingre- cipientto preen particularregions. THE DISPLAY IN CAPTIVE ]•IRDS All our observationsof the preeninginvitation display in cowbirds confinedto aviariesand cageshave involvedadult and first-year indi- Figure 1D. Male cowbird displays to dummy V•hite-crowned Sparrow. 478 $•^NDERAXeD LA RyE,Preening Display o] Cowbirds Vol.Auk.78 viduals capturedin the spring in the Austin region, Texas. We have not yet had an opportunityto study this behaviorin juveniles or in immature individualsless than six monthsold; but JamesBaird (pers. comm.) has observedthe display in a two-month-oldjuvenile female held in a cage with a female Red-wingedBlackbird. INTRASPECIFIC PRESENTATION As we have indicatedpreviously, a cowbirdonly occasionallydirects the displayto anothermember of its own species. In severalhundred hoursof observationof severalgroups of cowbirdsconfined to aviaries and cagesin the absenceof individualsof other species,we have noted intraspecificpresentation of the displayon no more than 25 occasions. Our records indicate that it is most likely to occur among cowbirds that have beendeprived of contactwith other speciesfor long periods. Also, the frequencyof intraspecificpresentation usually rises for a brief period following the introductionof an individual of another species. In all recorded instancesof intraspecificpresentation, the display was given only a singletime and invariably resultedin withdrawal or Figure IE. Agoniztic behavior of two male cowbirds, each intent on soliciting preening from d•mn•y •Vhite-crowned Sparrow. The bird on the left is beginning ruff-out display as the other bird gives head-up display; both displays have threal function. Octoberl1961 I SF_.LAI•DERA•V I• RuE,Preening Display of Cowbirds 479 Figure IF. Male cowbird at height of ruff-out display to dummy White- crowned Sparrow. attack on the part of the recipient cowbird. Most frequently the recipient cowbird pecked at the displaying cowbird as it approached, and this brought an end to the episode. In no instance did intra- specificpresentation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Behavior and Attendance Patterns of the Fork-Tailed Storm-Petrel
    BEHAVIOR AND ATTENDANCE PATTERNS OF THE FORK-TAILED STORM-PETREL THEODORE R. SIMONS Wildlife Science Group, Collegeof Forest Resources, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195 USA ABSTRACT.--Behavior and attendance patterns of breeding Fork-tailed Storm-Petrels (Ocea- nodromafurcata) were monitored over two nesting seasonson the Barren Islands, Alaska. The asynchrony of egg laying and hatching shown by these birds apparently reflects the influence of severalfactors, including snow conditionson the breedinggrounds, egg neglectduring incubation, and food availability. Communication between breeding birds was characterized by auditory and tactile signals.Two distinct vocalizationswere identified, one of which appearsto be a sex-specific call given by males during pair formation. Generally, both adults were present in the burrow on the night of egg laying, and the male took the first incubation shift. Incubation shiftsranged from 1 to 5 days, with 2- and 3-day shifts being the most common. Growth parameters of the chicks, reproductive success, and breeding chronology varied considerably between years; this pre- sumably relates to a difference in conditions affecting the availability of food. Adults apparently responded to changes in food availability during incubation by altering their attendance patterns. When conditionswere good, incubation shifts were shorter, egg neglectwas reduced, and chicks were brooded longer and were fed more frequently. Adults assistedthe chick in emerging from the shell. Chicks became active late in the nestling stage and began to venture from the burrow severaldays prior to fledging. Adults continuedto visit the chick during that time but may have reducedthe amountof fooddelivered. Chicks exhibiteda distinctprefledging weight loss.Received 18 September1979, accepted26 July 1980.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural History and Breeding Behavior of the Tinamou, Nothoprocta Ornata
    THE AUK A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY VoL. 72 APRIL, 1955 No. 2 NATURAL HISTORY AND BREEDING BEHAVIOR OF THE TINAMOU, NOTHOPROCTA ORNATA ON the high mountainous plain of southern Peril west of Lake Titicaca live three speciesof the little known family Tinamidae. The three speciesrepresent three different genera and grade in size from the small, quail-sizedNothura darwini found in the farin land and grassy hills about Lake Titicaca between 12,500 and 13,300 feet to the large, pheasant-sized Tinamotis pentlandi in the bleak country between 14,000 and 16,000 feet. Nothoproctaornata, the third species in this area and the one to be discussedin the present report, is in- termediate in size and generally occurs at intermediate elevations. In Peril we have encountered Nothoproctabetween 13,000 and 14,300 feet. It often lives in the same grassy areas as Nothura; indeed, the two speciesmay be flushed simultaneouslyfrom the same spot. This is not true of Nothoproctaand the larger tinamou, Tinamotis, for although at places they occur within a few hundred yards of each other, Nothoproctais usually found in the bunch grassknown locally as ichu (mostly Stipa ichu) or in a mixture of ichu and tola shrubs, whereas Tinamotis usually occurs in the range of a different bunch grass, Festuca orthophylla. The three speciesof tinamous are dis- tinguished by the inhabitants, some of whom refer to Nothura as "codorniz" and to Nothoproctaas "perdiz." Tinamotis is always called "quivia," "quello," "keu," or some similar derivative of its distinctive call. The hilly, almost treeless countryside in which Nothoproctalives in southern Peril is used primarily for grazing sheep, alpacas,llamas, and cattle.
    [Show full text]
  • Uropygial Gland in Birds
    UROPYGIAL GLAND IN BIRDS Prepared by Dr. Subhadeep Sarker Associate Professor, Department of Zoology, Serampore College Occurrence and Location: • The uropygial gland, often referred to as the oil or preen gland, is a bilobed gland and is found at the dorsal base of the tail of most psittacine birds. • The uropygial gland is a median dorsal gland, one per bird, in the synsacro-caudal region. A half moon-shaped row of feather follicles of the upper median and major tail coverts externally outline its position. • The uropygial area is located dorsally over the pygostyle on the midline at the base of the tail. • This gland is most developed in waterfowl but very reduced or even absent in many parrots (e.g. Amazon parrots), ostriches and many pigeons and doves. Anatomy: • The uropygial gland is an epidermal bilobed holocrine gland localized on the uropygium of most birds. • It is composed of two lobes separated by an interlobular septum and covered by an external capsule. • Uropygial secretory tissue is housed within the lobes of the gland (Lobus glandulae uropygialis), which are nearly always two in number. Exceptions occur in Hoopoe (Upupa epops) with three lobes, and owls with one. Duct and cavity systems are also contained within the lobes. • The architectural patterns formed by the secretory tubules, the cavities and ducts, differ markedly among species. The primary cavity can comprise over 90% of lobe volume in the Oilbird (Steatornis caripensis) and some woodpeckers and pigeons. • The gland is covered by a circlet or tuft of down feathers called the uropygial wick in many birds.
    [Show full text]
  • REGUA Bird List July 2020.Xlsx
    Birds of REGUA/Aves da REGUA Updated July 2020. The taxonomy and nomenclature follows the Comitê Brasileiro de Registros Ornitológicos (CBRO), Annotated checklist of the birds of Brazil by the Brazilian Ornithological Records Committee, updated June 2015 - based on the checklist of the South American Classification Committee (SACC). Atualizado julho de 2020. A taxonomia e nomenclatura seguem o Comitê Brasileiro de Registros Ornitológicos (CBRO), Lista anotada das aves do Brasil pelo Comitê Brasileiro de Registros Ornitológicos, atualizada em junho de 2015 - fundamentada na lista do Comitê de Classificação da América do Sul (SACC).
    [Show full text]
  • Why Preen Others? Predictors of Allopreening in Parrots and Corvids and Comparisons to 2 Grooming in Great Apes
    1 Why preen others? Predictors of allopreening in parrots and corvids and comparisons to 2 grooming in great apes 3 Short running title: Allopreening in parrots and corvids 4 Alejandra Morales Picard1,2, Roger Mundry3,4, Alice M. Auersperg3, Emily R. Boeving5, 5 Palmyre H. Boucherie6,7, Thomas Bugnyar8, Valérie Dufour9, Nathan J. Emery10, Ira G. 6 Federspiel8,11, Gyula K. Gajdon3, Jean-Pascal Guéry12, Matjaž Hegedič8, Lisa Horn8, Eithne 7 Kavanagh1, Megan L. Lambert1,3, Jorg J. M. Massen8,13, Michelle A. Rodrigues14, Martina 8 Schiestl15, Raoul Schwing3, Birgit Szabo8,16, Alex H. Taylor15, Jayden O. van Horik17, Auguste 9 M. P. von Bayern18, Amanda Seed19, Katie E. Slocombe1 10 1Department of Psychology, University of York, UK 11 2Montgomery College, Rockville, Maryland, USA 12 3Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Medical University 13 Vienna, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 14 4Platform Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Austria. 15 5Department of Psychology, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA 16 6Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert Curien, University of Strasbourg, 23 rue Becquerel 67087 17 Strasbourg, France 18 7Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UMR 7178, 67087 Strasbourg, France 19 8Department of Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria 20 9UMR Physiologie de la Reproduction et des Comportements, INRA-CNRS-Université de Tours 21 -IFCE, 37380 Nouzilly, France 22 10School of Biological & Chemical Sciences, Queen
    [Show full text]
  • P0483-P0485.Pdf
    SHORT COMMUNICATIONS The Condor 86:483-485 was seen in any of the unparasitizednests, including two 0 The Cooper Ornithological Society 1984 that were checked on the day prior to hatching. No damage was seen on the two infertile host eggsin DAMAGED WESTERN FLYCATCHER parasitized nests (Table 1). One of these eggsremained in EGGS IN NESTS CONTAINING the nest after the cowbird chick had fledged, still without sign of damage. BROWN-HEADED COWBIRD The severity of damage was correlated with the age of CHICKS the cowbird chick (Table 1). Small nicks were present on an egg in a nest with a cowbird as young as two days old, but extensivedamage was not seenuntil the chick was five PATRICIA M. DOLAN days old. In no case did flycatcher young remain in the nest AND with the cowbird chick for as long as two days after host PHILIP L. WRIGHT hatching. Most of the host eggsdisappeared within a day or two after they showed signs of hatching. We assumed them to have producedyoung that subsequentlydied and The young of many brood parasitesbehave in ways that were removed by the parents. harm the host young with which they share a nest. By ejecting or injuring their nestmates, they reduce compe- DISCUSSION tition for parental care. To our knowledge,no specificanti- We can offer severalpossible explanations for the damage host behavior has been reported for chicks of the Brown- observed. headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater). Instead, the young par- (1) Visitorsto the nest.Animals visiting the nest would asite’s advantage over nestmates is usually attributed to have an opportunity to damage eggs.Possible visitors in- its hatchingearlier than the hosts,to the preferential treat- cludeoredators and adult female cowbirds(Mavfield 1961).
    [Show full text]
  • Species at Risk Act
    Consultation on Amending the List of Species under the Species at Risk Act Terrestrial Species November 2011 Information contained in this publication or product may be reproduced, in part or in whole, and by any means, for personal or public non-commercial purposes, without charge or further permission, unless otherwise specified. You are asked to: Exercise due diligence in ensuring the accuracy of the materials reproduced; Indicate both the complete title of the materials reproduced, as well as the author organization; and Indicate that the reproduction is a copy of an official work that is published by the Government of Canada and that the reproduction has not been produced in affiliation with or with the endorsement of the Government of Canada. Commercial reproduction and distribution is prohibited except with written permission from the Government of Canada’s copyright administrator, Public Works and Government Services of Canada (PWGSC). For more information, please contact PWGSC at 613-996-6886 or at [email protected]. Cover photo credits: Olive Clubtail © Jim Johnson Peacock Vinyl Lichen © Timothy B. Wheeler Cerulean Warbler © Carl Savignac Title page photo credits: Background photo: Dune Tachinid Fly habitat © Sydney Cannings Foreground, large photo: Dwarf Lake Iris © Jessie M. Harris Small photos, left to right: Butler’s Gartersnake © Daniel W.A. Noble Hungerford’s Crawling Water Beetle © Steve Marshall Barn Swallow © Gordon Court Spring Salamander © David Green Available also on the Internet. ISSN: 1710-3029 Cat. no.: EN1-36/2011E-PDF © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of the Environment, 2011 Consultation on Amending the List of Species under the Species at Risk Act Terrestrial Species November 2011 Please submit your comments by February 8, 2012, for terrestrial species undergoing normal consultations and by November 8, 2012, for terrestrial species undergoing extended consultations.
    [Show full text]
  • Feather Destructive Behaviour
    FEATHER DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOUR Feather destructive behaviour (FDB) is a common presentation in pet and aviary birds, although it is not usually seen in their wild counterparts. It often has a multi-factorial aetiology, and can be a complex and challenging condition to treat. This article will give an outline of the potential causes of FDB and suggests an approach to its investigation and management in pet parrots. What is FDB? Birds are unique amongst the animal kingdom in possessing feathers. Feathers have a number of functions; providing a means for flight, being involved in thermoregulation, and acting as a means of communication, especially for reproductive purposes. FDB occurs when a bird plucks out or damages its feathers. It may progress from feather picking, where a bird may just chew on its feathers, to a more severe form that involves self-trauma to the skin or underlying structures. Why do birds pick their feathers? The causes of FDB can be divided into two main categories: medical and behavioural. Stress, in some form, is often part of the cause. It is important to investigate and rule out medical causes of FDB before considering a behavioural aetiology. Medical causes of FDB may directly relate to the skin and feathers, or may relate to stressors from a primary disease process elsewhere in the body. Factors such as an inadequate diet, infection (bacterial/viral/fungal/parasitic), access or exposure to toxins or allergens, and internal metabolic or endocrine disease may all result in birds displaying FDB and/or self- mutilating. In some birds mild irritation from over-preening moulting feathers may trigger an itch-chew cycle and progress to FDB.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Preening Behavior of Wild-Caught Canada Geese and Mallards.- Comfort Movements Have Been Described for Many Birds (C.F., Goodwin, Br
    690 THE WILSON BULLETIN - Vol. 95, No. 4, December 1983 of winter above that in the preceding spring, depending upon over-all productivity, mortality in other habitats and wintering areas, and other factors. It is impossible for a single team of observers to adequately census all habitats in a region within the time limitations required, but studies that do not cover all of the habitats used by the winter species are likely to be misleading on questions of population change during the season. Habitat availability must also be considered in such studies, but data on availability of even gross (vs micro) habitat types are generally lacking. Two patterns that seem clear from this and our previous (1979) study is that notable declines occur over winter in natural habitats in mild as well as in severe winters, and that the steepness of the decline is related especially to the size of the starting population. The observation that bird populations declined through the winter in both mild and severe winters is important to those who census winter birds. The seasonal limits designated for Audubon winter bird studies is 20 December-10 February (Robbins, Studies in Avian Biology 6:52-57, 1981). The results would differ according to the pattern of censusing in that period- early censuses indicating high populations, later censuses lower populations. Fortunately the dates of censuses are usually presented, but the rules of censusing may need to be more precisely delineated, as Robhins (1981) has suggested. Acknowledgments.-We are indebted to Richard E. Warner and Glen C. Sanderson of the Illinois Natural History Survey for helpful suggestions on the original manuscript.-JEAN W.
    [Show full text]
  • TAS Trinidad and Tobago Birding Tour June 14-24, 2012 Brian Rapoza, Tour Leader
    TAS Trinidad and Tobago Birding Tour June 14-24, 2012 Brian Rapoza, Tour Leader This past June 14-24, a group of nine birders and photographers (TAS President Joe Barros, along with Kathy Burkhart, Ann Wiley, Barbara and Ted Center, Nancy and Bruce Moreland and Lori and Tony Pasko) joined me for Tropical Audubon’s birding tour to Trinidad and Tobago. We were also joined by Mark Lopez, a turtle-monitoring colleague of Ann’s, for the first four days of the tour. The islands, which I first visited in 2008, are located between Venezuela and Grenada, at the southern end of the Lesser Antilles, and are home to a distinctly South American avifauna, with over 470 species recorded. The avifauna is sometimes referred to as a Whitman’s sampler of tropical birding, in that most neotropical bird families are represented on the islands by at least one species, but never by an overwhelming number, making for an ideal introduction for birders with limited experience in the tropics. The bird list includes two endemics, the critically endangered Trinidad Piping Guan and the beautiful yet considerably more common Trinidad Motmot; we would see both during our tour. Upon our arrival in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago’s capital, we were met by the father and son team of Roodal and Dave Ramlal, our drivers and bird guides during our stay in Trinidad. Ruddy Ground-Dove, Gray- breasted Martin, White-winged Swallow and Carib Grackle were among the first birds encountered around the airport. We were immediately driven to Asa Wright Nature Centre, in the Arima Valley of Trinidad’s Northern Range, our base of operations for the first seven nights of our tour.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Ecology of Petrels
    M o le c u la r e c o lo g y o f p e tr e ls (P te r o d r o m a sp p .) fr o m th e In d ia n O c e a n a n d N E A tla n tic , a n d im p lic a tio n s fo r th e ir c o n se r v a tio n m a n a g e m e n t. R u th M a rg a re t B ro w n A th e sis p re se n te d fo r th e d e g re e o f D o c to r o f P h ilo so p h y . S c h o o l o f B io lo g ic a l a n d C h e m ic a l S c ie n c e s, Q u e e n M a ry , U n iv e rsity o f L o n d o n . a n d In stitu te o f Z o o lo g y , Z o o lo g ic a l S o c ie ty o f L o n d o n . A u g u st 2 0 0 8 Statement of Originality I certify that this thesis, and the research to which it refers, are the product of my own work, and that any ideas or quotations from the work of other people, published or otherwise, are fully acknowledged in accordance with the standard referencing practices of the discipline.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds and Mammals)
    6-3.1 Compare the characteristic structures of invertebrate animals... and vertebrate animals (...birds and mammals). Also covers: 6-1.1, 6-1.2, 6-1.5, 6-3.2, 6-3.3 Birds and Mammals sections More Alike than Not! Birds and mammals have adaptations that 1 Birds allow them to live on every continent and in 2 Mammals every ocean. Some of these animals have Lab Mammal Footprints adapted to withstand the coldest or hottest Lab Bird Counts conditions. These adaptations help to make Virtual Lab How are birds these animal groups successful. adapted to their habitat? Science Journal List similar characteristics of a mammal and a bird. What characteristics are different? 254 Theo Allofs/CORBIS Start-Up Activities Birds and Mammals Make the following Foldable to help you organize information about the Bird Gizzards behaviors of birds and mammals. You may have observed a variety of animals in your neighborhood. Maybe you have STEP 1 Fold one piece of paper widthwise into thirds. watched birds at a bird feeder. Birds don’t chew their food because they don’t have teeth. Instead, many birds swallow small pebbles, bits of eggshells, and other hard materials that go into the gizzard—a mus- STEP 2 Fold down 2.5 cm cular digestive organ. Inside the gizzard, they from the top. (Hint: help grind up the seeds. The lab below mod- From the tip of your els the action of a gizzard. index finger to your middle knuckle is about 2.5 cm.) 1. Place some cracked corn, sunflower seeds, nuts or other seeds, and some gravel in an STEP 3 Fold the rest into fifths.
    [Show full text]