DOCSLIB.ORG

Nest Attendance of Parent Birds in the Painted Snipe (Rostratula Benghalensis)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nest Attendance of Parent Birds in the Painted Snipe (Rostratula Benghalensis) NEST ATTENDANCE OF PARENT BIRDS IN THE PAINTED SNIPE (ROSTRATULA BENGHALENSIS) SHIGEMOTO KOMEDA Laboratoryof AnimalSociology, Faculty of Science,Osaka City University, Sugimoto,Sumiyoshi-ku, Osaka 558, Japan ABSTRACT.--Iobserved 15 pairs of Painted Snipes (Rostratulabenghalensis) in Japanfor 24-h periods in order to compare the nest attendance behavior of males and females and to documentchanges in their behavior during the laying period. From a few days before the laying of the first egg until the day the secondegg was laid, the male and female consorted with eachother (stayedwithin 5 m of each other) more than 90% of the observationtime. They visited the nest repeatedlyon the first and seconddays of laying. On the third day, the consortingratio decreasedto 58.5%, and the male typically started to incubate. He continuedto incubate that night. After laying the third egg, the female usually did not visit the nest exceptto lay the fourth and last egg. The male continuedincubation, and the female met her mate only when she laid the last egg. The absenceof female incubationand the early termination of consortingbehavior are consistentwith the possibility that Painted Snipe femalesare polyandrous.Received 12 January1982, accepted4 October1982. AMONG the polyandrous charadriiform qualis), and cudweed (Gnaphaliumaffine), grew species, comprehensive studies of pair-bond sparselyin theseabandoned fields. The water depth maintenancehave been conductedon only four in this area varied from 0 to 15 cm. species, the Northern Jacana(Jacana spinosa; The main study was conducted in Toyo City, northwestern Shikoku Island, Japan (133ø03'E, Jenni and Collier 1972, Jenni and Betts 1978), 33ø57'N),from March to August1979 (excluding May) the SpottedSandpiper (Actitisrnacularia; Hays and from June to July 1980 (Toyo area). This 40-ha 1972, Oring and Knudson 1972, Maxson and study area of reclaimedland facesthe JapaneseIn- Oring 1980),the Red-neckedPhalarope (Phal- land Sea. A quarter of the area was used as paddy aropuslobatus; Hild6n and Vuolanto 1972),and fields, and the rest was marshy grasslandthat was the Red Phalarope(Phalaropus fulicaria; Scha- plowed onceor twice a year, usuallyin Juneand July. mel and Tracy 1977).Although a detailedstudy The study area was traversedby six parallel roads of the Painted Snipe (Rostratulabenghalensis) 200m apartand by anotherroad that intersected them has not been conducted, sex role reversal and at right angles.This poorly drained areawas always an apparentlyunbalanced sex ratio suggestthe covered with water. Until it was plowed, dense reed (Phragmitescommunis) or bulrush (Scirpusplanicul- possibility of polyandry in this species(Beven mis) grew there every year. After it was plowed, the 1913, Baker 1935, Lack 1968, Hays 1972, Oring grassesgrew only patchilyor sparselybefore Sep- and Knudson 1972,Jenni 1974).The objectives tember. The Toyo area is about 300 km west of the of this study were (1) to compare the nest at- Biwa area. tendance of male and female Painted Snipes, Most data for the field study were obtained by con- (2) to measurethe amount of time the members tinuous observations. Observations that started after of the pair spend together (consortingratio) 1800 are identified as "nocturnal observations" and during laying and incubationperiods, and (3) were made with the aid of a flashlight.Behavior was to considerthe evidence for polyandry. observedwith binoculars(9x) and a spotting scope (15x). Behavioral actswere recorded in seconds,and the data were later converted to minutes for calcu- STUDY AREAS AND METHODS lations. Of 27 birds observed, 4 males and 2 females Field observations were made in two areas. The were marked with neck bands. Because no other birds preliminary study was done in Chuzu Town, south- of the same sexes as the banded individuals were east of Lake Biwa, central Japan(136ø02'E, 35ø08'N), observedentering their nests, any male or female from May to June1978 (Biwa area). Nest observations who entered a nest was consideredthe progenitor of were conductedin 20-ha abandonedfields among the eggsin the nest. paddy fields at an elevation of about 85 m. Marshy All observationsreported here were made at nests plants, mainly buttercup(Ranunculus quelpaertensis), with four eggs.The four eggswere laid on consec- bitter cress(Cardamine lyrata), foxtail (Alopecurusae- utive days,and the daysof layingwere identifiedas 48 The Auk 100: 48-55. January1983 January1983] NestAttendance in Painted Snipes 49 T^BLE1. The lengthof visitsto the nestduring the layingperiod (minutes + SD).Numbers in parentheses indicate nocturnal visits. Day I Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Female Lengthof egg-layingvisits 35.5 + 17.5 62.3 + 33.4 32.8 + 7.4 15.9 + 1.9 Number of egg-layingvisits 2 4 5 6 Length of other visits 3.6 + 3.7 6.1 + 5.2 5.7 + 5.3 I -- Number of other visits 43 50 36 I Male Length of visits 3.6 + 8.0 8.0 + 12.8 22.6 + 31.7 43.4 + 52.8 (21.6 + 15.1) (36.1 + 10.2) Percentageof stayslonger than 2.0 6.8 26.2 46.8 30 min (35.3) (76.9) Number of visits 99 85 92 47 (17) (13) Number of nests 4 7 9 8 (1) (1) day 1, day 2, and so on. Thesefour dayscomprise During the laying period, a female laid an egg the layingperiod. A spanof a few daysbefore day every morning between 0700 and 1100(Fig. 1). I is referred to as the prelaying period. The incu- She stayedon the nestfar longerwhen coming bationperiod extends from the day afterday 4 until to lay an eggthan at other times(Table 1). The hatching. female was on the nest for a much shorter du- The percentageof time during which the two ration when she laid the fourth egg (2 = 15.7 membersof a pair stayedwithin 5 m of eachother was termedthe consortingratio. Consortingbehav- min) than when she laid the earlier eggs (2 = ior was studiedat the Toyo areafor a total of 17 days 44.0 min). All other visits to the nest by the (162.0h). Other observationswere madeat both the female during the laying period were much Toyo and Biwa areas. shorter(2 = 5.1 min); 88.5% of thesevisits were Nest-related behavior in the Biwa area was ob- less than 10 min. served from blinds about 10 m from the nests. Four On four additional days when the 1st, 2nd, nestswere observedfor a total of 17 days (190.8 h). or 3rd eggs were laid but egg laying was not Observationswere made at the Biwa area during two observed,females stayed on the nest for 39, 42, nights(22.6 h) of the incubationperiod. All diurnal 46, and 47 min between 0800 and 1210 (Fig. 1; observationsat the Toyoarea were made from a blind 22 June 1979, 21 June 1978, 3 June 1978, and 12 on a carroof 1.5 m abovethe ground.By driving the car alongthe roads,I was able to follow the birds June 1979, respectively).These four stayswere whenthey left their nests.Nine pairswere observed the only long stay on thosedays. It is assumed at the Toyoarea for a total of 36 days(368.7 h) Two that egg laying occurredduring theselong vis- of thesenine pairsabandoned their nestsduring the its. Egg laying was not seen at two nests on layingperiod, so the datafrom thesenests were ex- day 4, but the females entered the nests only cluded from the results(total 7 days).Two nestswere once, and it is assumed that they laid during observeda total of four nights (47.0 h) during the thesevisits (Fig. 1; 30 March 1979 and 21 July layingperiod. Activity at night at the Toyoarea was 1979). observed at intervals of 1 min from about 20 m when Nestvisitation on eachlaying day.•On day 1, a flashlightwas switched on for about5 s and off for about 55 s. both sexesentered the nest frequently during the morning (Fig. 1), but they often left it for RESULTS a long time during the afternoon. They re- turned to the nest in the evening. The male Clutch size and time of laying.•Of 33 nests stayedabout the samelength of time (Table 1) found, 2 had 3-egg clutches,30 held 4 eggs, and enteredthe nest about as frequentlyas the and only 1 held 5 eggs.Accordingly, the nor- female did. No observations were made on the mal clutch size in this speciesis consideredto night of day 1. be four. On day 2, the duration of diurnal visits in- The time of laying was recorded 17 times. creased but the number of visits decreased 50 $HIGEMOTOKOMEDA [Auk,Vol. 100 TIME OF DAY DAYTIME ACTIVITY 6 9 12 15 18 DAY DATE NEST , I 12• JUN '79'78 62 2 AUG ' 79 9 9 .N.JG '79 I0 4JUN '78 2 15 JUN '78 :• 20 JUN '78 4 28 MAR ' 79 5 13 JUN ' 79 6 22 JUN '79 7 3' AUG ' 79 9 I5 MAY '78 I 5 JUN '78 2 16 JUN '78 3 21 JUN '78 4 29 MAR '79 5 I 4 JUN ' 79 6 23, JUN '79 7 4 AUG '79 9 I I AUG '79 I I 16MAY '78 I 6 JUN '78 :• 17 JUN '78 '• 22 JUN '78 4 :30 MAR '79 5 2[ JUL '79 8 5 AUG '79 9 12 AUG '79 I I NIGHTTIME ACTIVITY 18 21 0 3 6 DAY DATE NEST 2 i8-19 JUN'80 14 2 24-25JUL '80 15 • 25-26JUL '80 15 4 26-27JUL '80 15 Fig. 1. Activity during laying period. Male is shown in upper and female in lower belt of each pair. Blackband shows time spenton nestand shadedband out of nest.Small dot shows the time of egglaying. Day 1 is the first day of egg laying and day 4 the last day.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Draft Version Target Shorebird Species List
    Draft Version Target Shorebird Species List The target species list (species to be surveyed) should not change over the course of the study, therefore determining the target species list is an important project design task. Because waterbirds, including shorebirds, can occur in very high numbers in a census area, it is often not possible to count all species without compromising the quality of the survey data. For the basic shorebird census program (protocol 1), we recommend counting all shorebirds (sub-Order Charadrii), all raptors (hawks, falcons, owls, etc.), Common Ravens, and American Crows. This list of species is available on our field data forms, which can be downloaded from this site, and as a drop-down list on our online data entry form. If a very rare species occurs on a shorebird area survey, the species will need to be submitted with good documentation as a narrative note with the survey data. Project goals that could preclude counting all species include surveys designed to search for color-marked birds or post- breeding season counts of age-classed bird to obtain age ratios for a species. When conducting a census, you should identify as many of the shorebirds as possible to species; sometimes, however, this is not possible. For example, dowitchers often cannot be separated under censuses conditions, and at a distance or under poor lighting, it may not be possible to distinguish some species such as small Calidris sandpipers. We have provided codes for species combinations that commonly are reported on censuses. Combined codes are still species-specific and you should use the code that provides as much information as possible about the potential species combination you designate.
    [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]
  • Wilson's Phalarope in Cornwall.—Early on the Morning of 15 Th June 1961 J.E.B
    Notes Wilson's Phalarope in Cornwall.—Early on the morning of 15 th June 1961 J.E.B. came across an unfamiliar medium-sized wader with plain brown upper-parts and a dull white rump and tail, on Marazion Marsh, Cornwall. He contacted Dr. G. Allsop and between them they continued... 183 BRITISH BIRDS watched the bird for about five hours. N. R. Phillips was then told and he and R. Khan saw it that evening. Two days later it was found independently by W.R.P.B. and J.L.F.P., and subsequently a number of other observers went to see it. It was last recorded with certainty on 4th July. It was recognised as a species of phalarope by its charac­ teristic position when swimming and by the delicate proportions of its head, neck and bill, while its relatively large size, comparatively drab coloration and distinctive face-pattern together proclaimed it a male Wilson's Phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor). The detailed descrip­ tion which follows is based mainly on that obtained by W.R.P.B. and J.F.L.P. on 17th June, but the notes made by J.E.B. and others agree well with it: An unusuaEy large, long-legged, long-billed phalarope, perhaps approximating in size to a small Reeve {Philomachus pugnax) or a Wood Sandpiper (Tringa glanold), and behaving rather like those species, feeding mainly by wading along the shore rather than swimming, and having a loose, erratic, wavering flight. Forehead, crown and hind-neck ash-grey with an inconspicuous paler longitudinal patch on the nape.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Salt Lake FAQ June 2013 Natural History Museum of Utah
    Great Salt Lake FAQ June 2013 Natural History Museum of Utah What is the origin of the Great Salt Lake? o After the Lake Bonneville flood, the Great Basin gradually became warmer and drier. Lake Bonneville began to shrink due to increased evaporation. Today's Great Salt Lake is a large remnant of Lake Bonneville, and occupies the lowest depression in the Great Basin. Who discovered Great Salt Lake? o The Spanish missionary explorers Dominguez and Escalante learned of Great Salt Lake from the Native Americans in 1776, but they never actually saw it. The first white person known to have visited the lake was Jim Bridger in 1825. Other fur trappers, such as Etienne Provost, may have beaten Bridger to its shores, but there is no proof of this. The first scientific examination of the lake was undertaken in 1843 by John C. Fremont; this expedition included the legendary Kit Carson. A cross, carved into a rock near the summit of Fremont Island, reportedly by Carson, can still be seen today. Why is the Great Salt Lake salty? o Much of the salt now contained in the Great Salt Lake was originally in the water of Lake Bonneville. Even though Lake Bonneville was fairly fresh, it contained salt that concentrated as its water evaporated. A small amount of dissolved salts, leached from the soil and rocks, is deposited in Great Salt Lake every year by rivers that flow into the lake. About two million tons of dissolved salts enter the lake each year by this means. Where does the Great Salt Lake get its water, and where does the water go? o Great Salt Lake receives water from four main rivers and numerous small streams (66 percent), direct precipitation into the lake (31 percent), and from ground water (3 percent).
    [Show full text]
  • Mate Guarding, Copulation Strategies and Paternity in the Sex-Role Reversed, Socially Polyandrous Red-Necked Phalarope Phalaropus Lobatus
    Behav Ecol Sociobiol (2004) 57:110–118 DOI 10.1007/s00265-004-0825-2 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Douglas Schamel · Diane M. Tracy · David B. Lank · David F. Westneat Mate guarding, copulation strategies and paternity in the sex-role reversed, socially polyandrous red-necked phalarope Phalaropus lobatus Received: 1 January 2004 / Revised: 7 June 2004 / Accepted: 23 June 2004 / Published online: 11 August 2004 Springer-Verlag 2004 Abstract In a recent review, Westneat and Stewart tempts were usually thwarted by the female. Paired males (2003) compiled evidence that extra-pair paternity results sought extra-pair copulations with females about to re- from a three-player interaction in which sexual conflict is enter the breeding pool. Multilocus DNA fingerprinting a potent force. Sequentially polyandrous species of birds showed that 6% of clutches (4/63) each contained one appear to fit this idea well. Earlier breeding males may chick sired by a male other than the incubator, producing attempt to use sperm storage by females to obtain pater- a population rate of these events of 1.7% (n=226 chicks). nity in their mate’s subsequent clutches. Later-breeding Male mates had full paternity in all first clutches (n=25) males may consequently attempt to avoid sperm compe- and 15 of 16 monogamous replacement clutches. In con- tition by preferring to pair with previously unmated fe- trast, 3 of 6 clutches of second males contained extra-pair males. Females may bias events one way or the other. young likely fathered by the female’s previous mate. We examined the applicability of these hypotheses by Previously mated female phalaropes may employ counter- studying mating behavior and paternity in red-necked strategies that prevent later mating males from discrim- phalaropes (Phalaropus lobatus), a sex-role reversed, inating against them.
    [Show full text]
  • First Record of Long-Billed Curlew Numenius Americanus in Peru and Other Observations of Nearctic Waders at the Virilla Estuary Nathan R
    Cotinga 26 First record of Long-billed Curlew Numenius americanus in Peru and other observations of Nearctic waders at the Virilla estuary Nathan R. Senner Received 6 February 2006; final revision accepted 21 March 2006 Cotinga 26(2006): 39–42 Hay poca información sobre las rutas de migración y el uso de los sitios de la costa peruana por chorlos nearcticos. En el fin de agosto 2004 yo reconocí el estuario de Virilla en el dpto. Piura en el noroeste de Peru para identificar los sitios de descanso para los Limosa haemastica en su ruta de migración al sur y aprender más sobre la migración de chorlos nearcticos en Peru. En Virilla yo observí más de 2.000 individuales de 23 especios de chorlos nearcticos y el primer registro de Numenius americanus de Peru, la concentración más grande de Limosa fedoa en Peru, y una concentración excepcional de Limosa haemastica. La combinación de esas observaciones y los resultados de un estudio anterior en el invierno boreal sugiere la posibilidad que Virilla sea muy importante para chorlos nearcticos en Peru. Las observaciones, también, demuestren la necesidad hacer más estudios en la costa peruana durante el año entero, no solemente durante el punto máximo de la migración de chorlos entre septiembre y noviembre. Shorebirds are poorly known in Peru away from bordered for a few hundred metres by sand and established study sites such as Paracas reserve, gravel before low bluffs rise c.30 m. Very little dpto. Ica, and those close to metropolitan areas vegetation grows here, although cows, goats and frequented by visiting birdwatchers and tour pigs owned by Parachique residents graze the area.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilson's Snipe
    Wilson’s Snipe (Gallinago delicate) Torrey Wenger Monroe Co., MI. 4/10/2007 © Allen Chartier (Click to view a comparison of Atlas I to II) Wilson’s Snipe is a victim of the lumpers and dwelling sandpiper was reported in 23% of Michigan’s townships; in MBBA II, they were splitters. In 1945, Wilson’s Snipe was reported in only 14.5%, a drop of nearly 40%. combined with other snipe species worldwide as The most significant decrease occurred in the the Common Snipe, Gallinago gallinago (AOU SLP: Wilson’s Snipe were found in almost 60% 1945). In 2002, based on behavioral and fewer townships and were not found in 14 structural differences, it was split off again counties where they were previously (Banks et al. 2002). While this frustrates casual documented. birders and competitive listers alike, the bird itself certainly does not care. This on-again, Some of this decline may be caused by observer off-again status is not the origin of the infamous bias. First, snipe are most detectable during “snipe hunt”, where children are sent into the their early mating season, as males make bushes searching for a non-existent bird. “winnowing” flights above their territories – if observers delayed the start of their fieldwork, All snipe feed by using their long bills to probe they missed this species. Second, the snipe is a for small insects and larvae in mud and moist habitat specialist, preferring wetlands with low soils. A snipe can open just the tip of its bill, herbaceous vegetation, sparse shrubs, and enabling it to capture and swallow small prey scattered trees (Mueller 1999) – if observers items without removing its bill from the soil.
    [Show full text]
  • SHOREBIRDS (Charadriiformes*) CARE MANUAL *Does Not Include Alcidae
    SHOREBIRDS (Charadriiformes*) CARE MANUAL *Does not include Alcidae CREATED BY AZA CHARADRIIFORMES TAXON ADVISORY GROUP IN ASSOCIATION WITH AZA ANIMAL WELFARE COMMITTEE Shorebirds (Charadriiformes) Care Manual Shorebirds (Charadriiformes) Care Manual Published by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums in association with the AZA Animal Welfare Committee Formal Citation: AZA Charadriiformes Taxon Advisory Group. (2014). Shorebirds (Charadriiformes) Care Manual. Silver Spring, MD: Association of Zoos and Aquariums. Original Completion Date: October 2013 Authors and Significant Contributors: Aimee Greenebaum: AZA Charadriiformes TAG Vice Chair, Monterey Bay Aquarium, USA Alex Waier: Milwaukee County Zoo, USA Carol Hendrickson: Birmingham Zoo, USA Cindy Pinger: AZA Charadriiformes TAG Chair, Birmingham Zoo, USA CJ McCarty: Oregon Coast Aquarium, USA Heidi Cline: Alaska SeaLife Center, USA Jamie Ries: Central Park Zoo, USA Joe Barkowski: Sedgwick County Zoo, USA Kim Wanders: Monterey Bay Aquarium, USA Mary Carlson: Charadriiformes Program Advisor, Seattle Aquarium, USA Sara Perry: Seattle Aquarium, USA Sara Crook-Martin: Buttonwood Park Zoo, USA Shana R. Lavin, Ph.D.,Wildlife Nutrition Fellow University of Florida, Dept. of Animal Sciences , Walt Disney World Animal Programs Dr. Stephanie McCain: AZA Charadriiformes TAG Veterinarian Advisor, DVM, Birmingham Zoo, USA Phil King: Assiniboine Park Zoo, Canada Reviewers: Dr. Mike Murray (Monterey Bay Aquarium, USA) John C. Anderson (Seattle Aquarium volunteer) Kristina Neuman (Point Blue Conservation Science) Sarah Saunders (Conservation Biology Graduate Program,University of Minnesota) AZA Staff Editors: Maya Seaman, MS, Animal Care Manual Editing Consultant Candice Dorsey, PhD, Director of Animal Programs Debborah Luke, PhD, Vice President, Conservation & Science Cover Photo Credits: Jeff Pribble Disclaimer: This manual presents a compilation of knowledge provided by recognized animal experts based on the current science, practice, and technology of animal management.
    [Show full text]
  • Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (And 113 Non-Species Taxa) in Accordance with the 62Nd AOU Supplement (2021), Sorted Taxonomically
    Four-letter (English Name) and Six-letter (Scientific Name) Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (and 113 Non-Species Taxa) in accordance with the 62nd AOU Supplement (2021), sorted taxonomically Prepared by Peter Pyle and David F. DeSante The Institute for Bird Populations www.birdpop.org ENGLISH NAME 4-LETTER CODE SCIENTIFIC NAME 6-LETTER CODE Highland Tinamou HITI Nothocercus bonapartei NOTBON Great Tinamou GRTI Tinamus major TINMAJ Little Tinamou LITI Crypturellus soui CRYSOU Thicket Tinamou THTI Crypturellus cinnamomeus CRYCIN Slaty-breasted Tinamou SBTI Crypturellus boucardi CRYBOU Choco Tinamou CHTI Crypturellus kerriae CRYKER White-faced Whistling-Duck WFWD Dendrocygna viduata DENVID Black-bellied Whistling-Duck BBWD Dendrocygna autumnalis DENAUT West Indian Whistling-Duck WIWD Dendrocygna arborea DENARB Fulvous Whistling-Duck FUWD Dendrocygna bicolor DENBIC Emperor Goose EMGO Anser canagicus ANSCAN Snow Goose SNGO Anser caerulescens ANSCAE + Lesser Snow Goose White-morph LSGW Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Lesser Snow Goose Intermediate-morph LSGI Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Lesser Snow Goose Blue-morph LSGB Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Greater Snow Goose White-morph GSGW Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Greater Snow Goose Intermediate-morph GSGI Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Greater Snow Goose Blue-morph GSGB Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Snow X Ross's Goose Hybrid SRGH Anser caerulescens x rossii ANSCAR + Snow/Ross's Goose SRGO Anser caerulescens/rossii ANSCRO Ross's Goose
    [Show full text]
  • British Birds VOLUME 69 NUMBER IO OCTOBER I976
    British Birds VOLUME 69 NUMBER IO OCTOBER I976 Distinguishing Great Snipe from Snipe D. I. M. Wallace Records of the Great Snipe Gallinago media are among the hardest to prove. The Rarities Committee has harped upon this theme and observers unfamiliar with the species and lacking The Handbook in their libraries are not given more than a few pointers to the possi­ bilities of its identification. This paper is therefore concerned with restating and clarifying the differences between it and the Snipe G. gallinago. GROUND CHARACTERS The Great Snipe is the largest of the three species in western Europe, but it does not exceed the Snipe in all standard measurements. It is 5% to 10% longer- and broader-winged and about 10% longer- legged, but 10% shorter-billed and marginally shorter-tailed. It is bulkier, primarily because of its stouter bill, larger head, greater girth and broader wings. The second last difference gives it more of a ball shape on the ground. In the ideal circumstances of Snipe being present for comparison, these differences are obvious. Subtle but constant plumage differences are not restricted to the usually invisible tail markings and merit full discussion. General plumage pattern The Great Snipe is more barred than the Snipe, both above, where the individual feather patterns are very intricate, and below, where the markings are strong and numerous, extending in all plumages [Brit. Birds, 6g: 377-383, October 1976] 377 378 Great Snipe and Snipe over a wider area. This increased complexity reduces the clarity of the back stripes and the prominence of the white belly, which is virtually invisible in immatures.
    [Show full text]
  • 54971 GPNC Shorebirds
    A P ocket Guide to Great Plains Shorebirds Third Edition I I I By Suzanne Fellows & Bob Gress Funded by Westar Energy Green Team, The Nature Conservancy, and the Chickadee Checkoff Published by the Friends of the Great Plains Nature Center Table of Contents • Introduction • 2 • Identification Tips • 4 Plovers I Black-bellied Plover • 6 I American Golden-Plover • 8 I Snowy Plover • 10 I Semipalmated Plover • 12 I Piping Plover • 14 ©Bob Gress I Killdeer • 16 I Mountain Plover • 18 Stilts & Avocets I Black-necked Stilt • 19 I American Avocet • 20 Hudsonian Godwit Sandpipers I Spotted Sandpiper • 22 ©Bob Gress I Solitary Sandpiper • 24 I Greater Yellowlegs • 26 I Willet • 28 I Lesser Yellowlegs • 30 I Upland Sandpiper • 32 Black-necked Stilt I Whimbrel • 33 Cover Photo: I Long-billed Curlew • 34 Wilson‘s Phalarope I Hudsonian Godwit • 36 ©Bob Gress I Marbled Godwit • 38 I Ruddy Turnstone • 40 I Red Knot • 42 I Sanderling • 44 I Semipalmated Sandpiper • 46 I Western Sandpiper • 47 I Least Sandpiper • 48 I White-rumped Sandpiper • 49 I Baird’s Sandpiper • 50 ©Bob Gress I Pectoral Sandpiper • 51 I Dunlin • 52 I Stilt Sandpiper • 54 I Buff-breasted Sandpiper • 56 I Short-billed Dowitcher • 57 Western Sandpiper I Long-billed Dowitcher • 58 I Wilson’s Snipe • 60 I American Woodcock • 61 I Wilson’s Phalarope • 62 I Red-necked Phalarope • 64 I Red Phalarope • 65 • Rare Great Plains Shorebirds • 66 • Acknowledgements • 67 • Pocket Guides • 68 Supercilium Median crown Stripe eye Ring Nape Lores upper Mandible Postocular Stripe ear coverts Hind Neck Lower Mandible ©Dan Kilby 1 Introduction Shorebirds, such as plovers and sandpipers, are a captivating group of birds primarily adapted to live in open areas such as shorelines, wetlands and grasslands.
    [Show full text]
  • Shorebird Habitat Conservation Strategy
    Upper Mississippi River and Great Lakes Region Joint Venture Shorebird Habitat Conservation Strategy May 2007 1 Shorebird Strategy Committee and Members of the Joint Venture Science Team Bob Gates, Ohio State University, Chair Dave Ewert, The Nature Conservancy Diane Granfors, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bob Russell, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bradly Potter, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mark Shieldcastle, Ohio Department of Natural Resources Greg Soulliere, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Cover: Long-billed Dowitcher. Photo by Gary Kramer. i Table of Contents Plan Summary................................................................................................................... 1 Acknowledgements...................................................................................................... 2 Background and Context ................................................................................................. 3 Population Status and Trends ......................................................................................... 6 Habitat Characteristics .................................................................................................. 11 Biological Foundation..................................................................................................... 14 Planning Framework.................................................................................................. 14 Migration and Distribution........................................................................................ 15 Limiting
    [Show full text]