The Early History of the Turkey (Meleagris Gallopavo) in the Czech Republic

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Early History of the Turkey (Meleagris Gallopavo) in the Czech Republic Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-019-00891-8 ORIGINAL PAPER The early history of the turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) in the Czech Republic René Kyselý1 & Petr Meduna2 Received: 11 October 2018 /Accepted: 20 June 2019 # Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract The article evaluates all early archaeological osteological finds of turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) dated to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries AD in what is today the Czech Republic and offers an analysis and discussion of written historical sources. Altogether, 45 bones of turkey (Meleagris) from ten archaeological sites and a further six bones probably also of turkey (cf. Meleagris) are known from both sub-regions of the Czech Republic, that is, Bohemia and Moravia, and from a variety of contexts. Many of the bones originate from contexts of high social status (especially those from Prague Castle); interestingly, four of the ten contexts represent a clerical or monastic setting. The extensive sample from a range of geographical and socio- cultural contexts enables various analyses. Osteometrically, the early Czech turkeys, which probably weighed between 3 and 9 kg, resemble their wild ancestor. The management of breeding and slaughtering is reflected in the variety of ages and sexes. Cut marks undoubtedly suggest butchering and subsequent eating. The written sources from the end of the sixteenth and in the seventeenth century prove that turkey was on the menu of those of high social class, which we see from the earliest reliable written Czech record from 1578, which describes a festal menu for the wedding of Vilém of Rožmberk (Rosenberg), one of the most powerful men in Bohemia. Different sources suggest that either 450 or 600 turkeys were served at the feast. From as early as 1583, we have a written record, although an isolated one, which suggests the early spread of the turkey into the rural environment and among the lower nobility. Considering archaeological dating, historical records from 1578, and their absence from earlier records, the domestic turkey was probably introduced to and spread across the Czech lands as late as between the 50s and 80s of the sixteenth century. The history of the peacock—although later it would be replaced on the dining table by turkey—is longer; the first written record of its being bred in Bohemia dates from around 1125–1140. According to other records, the pheasant, another imported Galliform bird, was known in Bohemia in 1330. The keeping of the wild form of turkey is documented much later; certainly in 1801, but very probably already in 1781. Keywords Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) . Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) . Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) . Bone finds . Osteometry . Diet . Historical sources Introduction: turkey in a wider context Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-019-00891-8) contains supplementary The turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), a large Galliform bird, was material, which is available to authorized users. domesticated or semi-domesticated before Christopher Columbus reached America; several subspecies of its wild * René Kyselý [email protected] ancestor were spread across a large area from southern Canada to southern Mexico (Crawford 1984, 1992; Petr Meduna Thornton 2016). Later—like the Muscovy duck, another do- [email protected] mestic bird of American origin—it spread across the world to become a significant source of domestic poultry in many 1 Institute of Archaeology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, countries. The turkey was brought to Europe quite soon after v.v.i., Letenská 4, 118 01 Prague, Czech Republic the discovery of the Americas by Europeans. It is supposed 2 Center for Theoretical Study, Joint Research Institute of Charles first to have been introduced into Spain, and later spread to the University and the Czech Academy of Sciences, Jilská 1, 110 other royal houses of Europe. The first reliable written 00 Prague, Czech Republic Archaeol Anthropol Sci reference to the turkey in Spain is from 1511 and in England particularly descriptions of the menus (the carte du jour) from 1541, although earlier references have also been sug- from the tables of the higher social classes. In an early gested (1497 in England, 1498 in Spain, and other dates) study, Kokeš (1974) suggested the likely presence of tur- (Kokeš 1974;Crawford1984, 1992;LefèvreandMarinval- key in central Europe as early as 1534, but we have found Vigne 1992; Plouvier 1995; Serjeantson 2009; Yalden and no support for such an early date in written records from Albarella 2009;Poole2010; Corona-M. 2013). A white feath- Czech history, and the date probably refers to the founda- er from one of the earliest turkeys imported into Italy in the tion of the Royal Garden at Prague Castle by Ferdinand I sixteenth century suggests the keeping of fully domesticated where the turkeys were kept, but obviously much later (cf. birds (Serjeantson 2009, 290). The earliest mention in France “house for Indian birds” from 1601, see below). The first is from 1534 (Serjeantson 2009, 290). In the mid-sixteenth completely reliable record refers to the year 1578, when, century, the turkey spread rapidly across the western regions depending on the source, either 450 or 600 (!) turkeys were of Europe (Zeuner 1963;Crawford1984, 1992). It is said to used in a huge banquet in Český Krumlov, South Bohemia, have been practically unknown in Germany before 1530, but for the marriage of Vilém of Rožmberk (Rosenberg), one by 1571, flocks were being reared on the Lower Rhine of the most powerful men in Bohemia and a candidate for (Zeuner 1963, 459). Its arrival in western, central and northern the Polish throne, to Anna Maria of Baden (Winter 1892, Europe as early as the sixteenth century is also confirmed by 80; Beranová 2007, 230–231). In 1587, at another wedding archaeological osteological finds from Britain (Albarella and feast for this aristocrat, 200 turkeys were served (Winter Thomas 2002;Poole2010), Hungary (Bartosiewicz and Gál 1892, 80). Although these two early cases may represent 2018), Germany (Benecke 1994a, 1994b;Küchelmann2014) brought animals, the frequency of further written evidence and Sweden (Tyrberg 2002). Later finds are documented in (see below) suggests that the bird was well known, and its other countries of central Europe such as Austria (seventeenth breedingprobablywellestablishedintheregioninthelast century; Adam and Kunst 1999) and Slovakia (tentatively quarter of the sixteenth century. However surprising these dated to the eighteenth century; Bielichová et al. 2019). The large numbers may appear, these particular turkeys com- earliest osteo-archaeological record from Germany is dated to prised only a small fraction (1.2% and 2.6% respectively) the first half of the sixteenth century (Benecke 1994a,188– of the total number of birds consumed at each feast 189, 381, tab. 51; 1994b, 392–394). These early imports in all (49,680 at the first; 7630 at the second). In the same year likelihood originated in Mexico; any potential imports from (1587), Stanislav Pavlovský, the bishop of Olomouc, North America could not have begun until at least the seven- hosted Prince Maximilian (the future emperor) in Vyškov teenth century, after that territory had been colonised. in Moravia, where five turkeys were served. This Problems surrounding the analysis of the introduction and accounted for almost half (45%) of the 11 birds consumed breeding of the turkey are complicated by the fact that not at the feast (Havlová 2009, 80). It is no surprise that tur- only domesticated birds, but also wild turkeys might have keys appeared in the court of Emperor Rudolf II Habsburg, been brought from America, but it is believed that the earliest as he is known for having been a collector of various exotic European archaeological finds represent the bred species at Prague Castle (such as lions, tigers, cheetahs, (domesticated) form, especially those finds located far from wisents, flamingos, ostriches, parrots, dodo, etc.). In the places of original importation. 1600, the emperor sent an unknown number of these birds, Although the basic scenario is well known, further details and others, to the ambassador of Florence (Havlová 2009, concerning the bird’s regional history are rare and very much 46). A year later, a special house for Indian birds is docu- needed. In this paper, we present an analysis of the early his- mented in the Royal Garden at Prague Castle (Bašeová tory of the turkey in the Czech lands based on archaeological 1991, 37), where they were presumably used as decorative osteological evidence and written sources. The paper provides birds. This was undoubtedly a house for turkeys since the a complete review of Czech osteological finds, including ma- turkey was called the “Indian”, “Indian bird” or “Indian terial yet to be published. cock” (in Czech, “indián”, “indiánský pták”, “indiánská slepice”, “indiánský kot”) in the Czech lands in the Early Modern Ages (Beranová 2007, 96). The locality Prague Historical records of the domestic turkey Castle–Riding School (Table 1) is close to this house and in the Czech lands and related topics to the pheasantry of Rudolf II, founded before 1600, so there could be some connection. Nonetheless, during the The earliest records of the domestic turkey, the “bird Rudolf’s reign, their presence was something of an excep- of the rich” tion; in the financial records of the imperial estates from the years 1603–1702,
Recommended publications
  • Nogth AMERICAN BIRDS
    CHECK-LIST OF NOgTH AMERICAN BIRDS The Speciesof Birds of North America from the Arctic through Panama, Including the West Indies and Hawaiian Islands PREPARED BY THE COMMITTEE ON CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS' UNION SEVENTH EDITION 1998 Zo61ogical nomenclature is a means, not an end, to Zo61ogical Science PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS' UNION 1998 Copyright 1998 by The American Ornithologists' Union All rights reserved, except that pages or sections may be quoted for research purposes. ISBN Number: 1-891276-00-X Preferred citation: American Ornithologists' Union. 1983. Check-list of North American Birds. 7th edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. Printed by Allen Press, Inc. Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A. CONTENTS DEDICATION ...................................................... viii PREFACE ......................................................... ix LIST OF SPECIES ................................................... xvii THE CHECK-LIST ................................................... 1 I. Tinamiformes ............................................. 1 1. Tinamidae: Tinamous .................................. 1 II. Gaviiformes .............................................. 3 1. Gaviidae: Loons ....................................... 3 III. Podicipediformes.......................................... 5 1. Podicipedidae:Grebes .................................. 5 IV. Procellariiformes .......................................... 9 1. Diomedeidae: Albatrosses .............................
    [Show full text]
  • Health Risk Assessment for the Introduction of Eastern Wild Turkeys (Meleagris Gallopavo Silvestris) Into Nova Scotia
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre: Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center Newsletters & Publications for April 2004 Health risk assessment for the introduction of Eastern wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) into Nova Scotia A.S. Neimanis F.A. Leighton Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmccwhcnews Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Neimanis, A.S. and Leighton, F.A., "Health risk assessment for the introduction of Eastern wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) into Nova Scotia" (2004). Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre: Newsletters & Publications. 48. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmccwhcnews/48 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre: Newsletters & Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Health risk assessment for the introduction of Eastern wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) into Nova Scotia A.S. Neimanis and F.A. Leighton 30 April 2004 Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre Department of Veterinary Pathology Western College of Veterinary Medicine 52 Campus Dr. University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, SK Canada S7N 5B4 Tel: 306-966-7281 Fax: 306-966-7439 [email protected] [email protected] 1 SUMMARY This health risk assessment evaluates potential health risks associated with a proposed introduction of wild turkeys to the Annapolis Valley of Nova Scotia. The preferred source for the turkeys would be the Province of Ontario, but alternative sources include the northeastern United States from Minnesota eastward and Tennessee northward.
    [Show full text]
  • In Honor of Turkeys by John Morton
    Refuge Notebook • Vol. 17, No. 48 • November 27, 2015 In honor of turkeys by John Morton Simplified anatomy of the structural components used in bird flight. If you prefer eating white meat at Thanksgiving, you’re eating the turkey’s pectoralis and supracoracoideus muscles (credit: Wikipedia). Did you know that you were not alone yesterday By 1601, turkeys were so common in England in eating turkey? According to the National Turkey that Shakespeare wrote “contemplation makes a rare Federation, 95 percent of Americans eat turkey on turkey-cock of him: how he jets under his advanced Thanksgiving, consuming 675 million pounds from 45 plumes” in describing someone in the comedy Twelfth million birds. It certainly goes a long way towards ex- Night. The now fully domesticated turkey circled back plaining that gastric discomfort we experienced last to the New World when English and Dutch colonists night. Here are some facts you might not know about brought them to Virginia in the early seventeenth cen- the biology and history of turkeys. tury. Carl Linnaeus, despite being the father of the mod- Turkeys were originally domesticated for their ern taxonomic naming system, incorrectly named wild plumage, not their meat. While Aztecs did use turkeys turkeys Meleagris gallopavo because he thought they for meat and eggs, it was their feathers that were were related to the African guineafowl (Numida me- in demand for decoration. It wasn’t until the 1900s leagris). that turkeys were selectively bred for meat produc- Our domestic turkey did NOT originate from tion, specifically for big breasts and thighs.
    [Show full text]
  • What Type of Turkey Is Best for Small and Backyard Poultry Flocks?
    eXtension What type of turkey is best for small and backyard poultry flocks? articles.extension.org/pages/65434/what-type-of-turkey-is-best-for-small-and-backyard-poultry-flocks Written by: Dr. Jacquie Jacob, University of Kentucky Technically, only one breed of turkey exists, but many varieties of turkey are available. If you are interested in raising turkeys, it is important to choose a variety that meets your particular needs. An important distinction to understand is the difference between a commercial-type variety and a heritage variety. Commercial-type varieties have been bred specifically for commercial producers to address consumer preferences and production efficiency. Heritage varieties retain the characteristics of turkey varieties bred long ago in Europe and the early United States. Commercial Varieties Turkeys are used primarily for meat production. Most U.S. consumers prefer the breast meat, or white meat, of a turkey. To accommodate this preference, producers have carried out generations of genetic selection that have resulted in broad-breasted turkey varieties. These commercial-type varieties also have rapid growth rates and high feed efficiency. Many small flock owners raise commercial-type turkeys because of their high breast meat yield, fast growth, and high feed efficiency. The most popular varieties for small flock production are the commercial varieties Broad-Breasted Bronze (also called Bronze) and Broad-Breasted White (also called Large White). The Broad-Breasted Bronze has plumage resembling that of a wild turkey, and the Broad-Breasted White has been selected for white feathering and fast growth. Although both types are good for small flock production, a disadvantage of the Broad-Breasted Bronze is that dark pin feathers sometimes remain on the meat after processing.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Turkey Education Guide
    Table of Contents Section 1: Eastern Wild Turkey Ecology 1. Eastern Wild Turkey Quick Facts………………………………………………...pg 2 2. Eastern Wild Turkey Fact Sheet………………………………………………….pg 4 3. Wild Turkey Lifecycle……………………………………………………………..pg 8 4. Eastern Wild Turkey Adaptations ………………………………………………pg 9 Section 2: Eastern Wild Turkey Management 1. Wild Turkey Management Timeline…………………….……………………….pg 18 2. History of Wild Turkey Management …………………...…..…………………..pg 19 3. Modern Wild Turkey Management in Maryland………...……………………..pg 22 4. Managing Wild Turkeys Today ……………………………………………….....pg 25 Section 3: Activity Lesson Plans 1. Activity: Growing Up WILD: Tasty Turkeys (Grades K-2)……………..….…..pg 33 2. Activity: Calling All Turkeys (Grades K-5)………………………………..…….pg 37 3. Activity: Fit for a Turkey (Grades 3-5)…………………………………………...pg 40 4. Activity: Project WILD adaptation: Too Many Turkeys (Grades K-5)…..…….pg 43 5. Activity: Project WILD: Quick, Frozen Critters (Grades 5-8).……………….…pg 47 6. Activity: Project WILD: Turkey Trouble (Grades 9-12………………….……....pg 51 7. Activity: Project WILD: Let’s Talk Turkey (Grades 9-12)..……………..………pg 58 Section 4: Additional Activities: 1. Wild Turkey Ecology Word Find………………………………………….…….pg 66 2. Wild Turkey Management Word Find………………………………………….pg 68 3. Turkey Coloring Sheet ..………………………………………………………….pg 70 4. Turkey Coloring Sheet ..………………………………………………………….pg 71 5. Turkey Color-by-Letter……………………………………..…………………….pg 72 6. Five Little Turkeys Song Sheet……. ………………………………………….…pg 73 7. Thankful Turkey…………………..…………………………………………….....pg 74 8. Graph-a-Turkey………………………………….…………………………….…..pg 75 9. Turkey Trouble Maze…………………………………………………………..….pg 76 10. What Animals Made These Tracks………………………………………….……pg 78 11. Drinking Straw Turkey Call Craft……………………………………….….……pg 80 Section 5: Wild Turkey PowerPoint Slide Notes The facilities and services of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources are available to all without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, national origin or physical or mental disability.
    [Show full text]
  • Tinamiformes – Falconiformes
    LIST OF THE 2,008 BIRD SPECIES (WITH SCIENTIFIC AND ENGLISH NAMES) KNOWN FROM THE A.O.U. CHECK-LIST AREA. Notes: "(A)" = accidental/casualin A.O.U. area; "(H)" -- recordedin A.O.U. area only from Hawaii; "(I)" = introducedinto A.O.U. area; "(N)" = has not bred in A.O.U. area but occursregularly as nonbreedingvisitor; "?" precedingname = extinct. TINAMIFORMES TINAMIDAE Tinamus major Great Tinamou. Nothocercusbonapartei Highland Tinamou. Crypturellus soui Little Tinamou. Crypturelluscinnamomeus Thicket Tinamou. Crypturellusboucardi Slaty-breastedTinamou. Crypturellus kerriae Choco Tinamou. GAVIIFORMES GAVIIDAE Gavia stellata Red-throated Loon. Gavia arctica Arctic Loon. Gavia pacifica Pacific Loon. Gavia immer Common Loon. Gavia adamsii Yellow-billed Loon. PODICIPEDIFORMES PODICIPEDIDAE Tachybaptusdominicus Least Grebe. Podilymbuspodiceps Pied-billed Grebe. ?Podilymbusgigas Atitlan Grebe. Podicepsauritus Horned Grebe. Podicepsgrisegena Red-neckedGrebe. Podicepsnigricollis Eared Grebe. Aechmophorusoccidentalis Western Grebe. Aechmophorusclarkii Clark's Grebe. PROCELLARIIFORMES DIOMEDEIDAE Thalassarchechlororhynchos Yellow-nosed Albatross. (A) Thalassarchecauta Shy Albatross.(A) Thalassarchemelanophris Black-browed Albatross. (A) Phoebetriapalpebrata Light-mantled Albatross. (A) Diomedea exulans WanderingAlbatross. (A) Phoebastriaimmutabilis Laysan Albatross. Phoebastrianigripes Black-lootedAlbatross. Phoebastriaalbatrus Short-tailedAlbatross. (N) PROCELLARIIDAE Fulmarus glacialis Northern Fulmar. Pterodroma neglecta KermadecPetrel. (A) Pterodroma
    [Show full text]
  • The Eco-Ethology of the Karoo Korhaan Eupodotis Virgorsil
    THE ECO-ETHOLOGY OF THE KAROO KORHAAN EUPODOTIS VIGORSII. BY M.G.BOOBYER University of Cape Town SUBMITIED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE (ORNITHOLOGY) UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN RONDEBOSCH 7700 CAPE TOWN The copyright of this thesis vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derived from it is to be published without full acknowledgement of the source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non- commercial research purposes only. Published by the University of Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author. University of Cape Town University of Cape Town PREFACE The study of the Karoo Korhaan allowed me a far broader insight in to the Karoo than would otherwise have been possible. The vast openness of the Karoo is a monotony to those who have not stopped and looked. Many people were instrumental in not only encouraging me to stop and look but also in teaching me to see. The farmers on whose land I worked are to be applauded for their unquestioning approval of my activities and general enthusiasm for studies concerning the veld and I am particularly grateful to Mnr. and Mev. Obermayer (Hebron/Merino), Mnr. and Mev. Steenkamp (Inverdoorn), Mnr. Bothma (Excelsior) and Mnr. Van der Merwe. Alwyn and Joan Pienaar of Bokvlei have my deepest gratitude for their generous hospitality and firm friendship. Richard and Sue Dean were a constant source of inspiration throughout the study and their diligence and enthusiasm in the field is an example to us all.
    [Show full text]
  • Spring Has Sprung! in What Should Be One of the Coldest Months of the Year, We Are Having Near Record Highs and Buds Are Starting to Break
    Spring has sprung! In what should be one of the coldest months of the year, we are having near record highs and buds are starting to break. Luckily we have been receiving plenty of moisture in the Pineywoods and from what I can tell from recent browse surveys, we are going into Spring in pretty good shape. In this edition of the Pineywoods Post we will take a look at some of the Pineywoods latest inhabitants, the white winged dove, one of our prettiest plants. a native hibiscus, and get a Eastern Turkey research update from District Leader Gary Calkins. Inside This Edition Page 2 Critter Corner Page 3 Biologist Bio Page 4 Plant Profile Page 6 Outdoor Snapshots Page 7 Research Update If you would like to unsubscribe to this newsletter or if you received this e-mail from someone other than TPWD and would like to subscribe, please send an e-mail indicating such to [email protected] 2 Pineywoods Post Critter Corner Recent Arrivals to the Pineywoods July and August, and biologists are asked to band a certain quota Sean Willis TPWD Wildlife Biologist (Lufkin) for their area. In the past 4 years, District 6 has banded approxi- Doves are one of the most common species of birds found in mately one thousand mourning doves. Bands returned by hunters Texas, and are sought after by more Texas hunters (400,000) than allow us to gain valuable information on migration habits, harvest any other species except deer (600,000). Doves are also one of rates and longevity of the birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Than a Meal: the Turkey in History, Myth
    More Than a Meal Abigail at United Poultry Concerns’ Thanksgiving Party Saturday, November 22, 1997. Photo: Barbara Davidson, The Washington Times, 11/27/97 More Than a Meal The Turkey in History, Myth, Ritual, and Reality Karen Davis, Ph.D. Lantern Books New York A Division of Booklight Inc. Lantern Books One Union Square West, Suite 201 New York, NY 10003 Copyright © Karen Davis, Ph.D. 2001 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of Lantern Books. Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data For Boris, who “almost got to be The real turkey inside of me.” From Boris, by Terry Kleeman and Marie Gleason Anne Shirley, 16-year-old star of “Anne of Green Gables” (RKO-Radio) on Thanksgiving Day, 1934 Photo: Underwood & Underwood, © 1988 Underwood Photo Archives, Ltd., San Francisco Table of Contents 1 Acknowledgments . .9 Introduction: Milton, Doris, and Some “Turkeys” in Recent American History . .11 1. A History of Image Problems: The Turkey as a Mock Figure of Speech and Symbol of Failure . .17 2. The Turkey By Many Other Names: Confusing Nomenclature and Species Identification Surrounding the Native American Bird . .25 3. A True Original Native of America . .33 4. Our Token of Festive Joy . .51 5. Why Do We Hate This Celebrated Bird? . .73 6. Rituals of Spectacular Humiliation: An Attempt to Make a Pathetic Situation Seem Funny . .99 7 8 More Than a Meal 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Epidemiology of Influenza Virus H5n1 in Islamabad Capital Territory by Zahida Fatima (2005-Va-246) a Thesis Submitted in the Pa
    EPIDEMIOLOGY OF INFLUENZA VIRUS H5N1 IN ISLAMABAD CAPITAL TERRITORY BY ZAHIDA FATIMA (2005-VA-246) A THESIS SUBMITTED IN THE PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PUBLIC HEALTH UNIVERSITY OF VETERINARY & ANIMAL SCIENCES, LAHORE (2015) To The Controller of Examinations, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore. We, the supervisory committee, certify that the contents and form of the thesis, submitted by ZAHIDA FATIMA, Regd. No. 2005-VA-246 been found satisfactory and recommend that it be processed for the evaluation by the External Examiner(s) for the award of the degree. PROF. DR. MUHAMMAD ATHAR KHAN _______________________ SUPERVISOR DR. KHALID NAEEM _______________________ CO-SUPERVISOR PROF.DR. MANSOOR UD DIN AHMAD _______________________ MEMBER PROF.DR. KHUSI MUHAMMAD ______________________ MEMBER DEDICATED TO MY LATE FATHER MAY HIS SOUL REST IN BEST PEACE (AAMEEN) i () In the name of Allah the most magnificent and the most beneficent. All praise for ALLAH All Mighty who has the control and command of each and every thing. It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. But those firms in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.
    [Show full text]
  • Hybridization & Zoogeographic Patterns in Pheasants
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Paul Johnsgard Collection Papers in the Biological Sciences 1983 Hybridization & Zoogeographic Patterns in Pheasants Paul A. Johnsgard University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/johnsgard Part of the Ornithology Commons Johnsgard, Paul A., "Hybridization & Zoogeographic Patterns in Pheasants" (1983). Paul Johnsgard Collection. 17. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/johnsgard/17 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Papers in the Biological Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Paul Johnsgard Collection by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. HYBRIDIZATION & ZOOGEOGRAPHIC PATTERNS IN PHEASANTS PAUL A. JOHNSGARD The purpose of this paper is to infonn members of the W.P.A. of an unusual scientific use of the extent and significance of hybridization among pheasants (tribe Phasianini in the proposed classification of Johnsgard~ 1973). This has occasionally occurred naturally, as for example between such locally sympatric species pairs as the kalij (Lophura leucol11elana) and the silver pheasant (L. nycthelnera), but usually occurs "'accidentally" in captive birds, especially in the absence of conspecific mates. Rarely has it been specifically planned for scientific purposes, such as for obtaining genetic, morphological, or biochemical information on hybrid haemoglobins (Brush. 1967), trans­ ferins (Crozier, 1967), or immunoelectrophoretic comparisons of blood sera (Sato, Ishi and HiraI, 1967). The literature has been summarized by Gray (1958), Delacour (1977), and Rutgers and Norris (1970). Some of these alleged hybrids, especially those not involving other Galliformes, were inadequately doculnented, and in a few cases such as a supposed hybrid between domestic fowl (Gallus gal/us) and the lyrebird (Menura novaehollandiae) can be discounted.
    [Show full text]
  • Ectoparasites of the Laughing Dove Streptopelia Senegalensis (Linnaeus, 1766) (Aves: Columbidae) in Zaria, Nigeria
    Lundiana 9(1):67-71, 2008 © 2009 Instituto de Ciências Biológicas - UFMG ISSN 1676-6180 Ectoparasites of the Laughing Dove Streptopelia senegalensis (Linnaeus, 1766) (Aves: Columbidae) in Zaria, Nigeria 1Lucas K. Adang, 2Sonnie J. Oniye, 2Augustine U. Ezealor, 3Paul A. Abdu, 4Joseph O. Ajanusi & 1Kennedy P. Yoriyo 1 Department of Biological Sciences, Gombe State University, Gombe, Nigeria. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Department of Biological Sciences, 3 Department of Surgery and Medicine, 4 Department of Veterinary Parasitology and Entomology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria. Abstract A survey of ectoparasites of the Laughing Dove (Streptopelia senegalensis Linnaeus, 1766) was carried out in Zaria, Nigeria, to determine the prevalence, intensity and mean intensity of infestation. A total of 382 (231 males and 151 females) doves trapped from different locations in Zaria, Nigeria, were examined through plumage brushing. Eighty-eight (23.0%) of the birds were infested by the following six species of ectoparasites: lice – 32 (8.4%) Menopon gallinae Linnaeus, 1758, 37 (9.7%) Columbicola columbae Linnaeus, 1758, and 18(4.7%) Goniodes sp.; flies – 19 (5.0%) Pseudolynchia canariensis Macquart, 1840; ticks – 12 (3.1%) Argas persicus Oken, 1818; and mite: 1 (0.23%) Dermanyssus gallinae (Degeer, 1778). The frequency of single infestations (59 – 15.4%), was higher than that of double (27 – 7.1%) and triple (2 – 0.52%) infestations, though the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The males had a higher prevalence (55 – 23.8%) than the females (33 – 21.9%). However, this difference was also not significant (p > 0.05). Ectoparasites were collected from the birds through out the year, with highest prevalence (60.0%) in November.
    [Show full text]