My Pheasants
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Keeping Pheasants
KKKEEEEEEPPPIIINNNGGG PPPHHHEEEAAASSSAAANNNTTTSSS AAASSS AAA HHHOOOBBBBBBYYY Text and photos: Jan Willem Schrijvers Photo above: Siamese Fireback pheasant male(Lophura diardi). ORIGIN AND LIFESTYLE OF THE WILD PHEASANT Pheasants are wild gallinaceous birds all originating in Asia. One exception is the Congo peacock from Africa. (The pheasants also include game fowl and peacocks.) Each species has its own characteristics and life habits. There are species that live in tropical rain forests, but there are species that live in the mountains, on cold plains. This is something to take in account when housing our pheasants (with or without a night coop, with or without heating). Most species live in and around the mountains with a woodland vegetation, where they can find lots of berries, greens and seeds. It is of utmost importance to first consider the habits and living conditions of the species you want to keep. Only with proper housing will these beautiful birds show to their fullest, and reproduce. PHEASANTS IN AVIARIES In the past there were some "pheasant farms" which mainly bred the common pheasant (also known as ring-neck pheasant). The birds on these farms were bred for sport hunting. They were released en masse in the autumn in the fields and other areas to be shot for the sport. Some escaped from the hunters and that is why today we can see wild pheasants roam our fields and woods. These pheasants have also succeeded in reproducing themselves, even though they are not native birds. The birds are also kept for their colourful feathers. Each year I see Prince Carnival walk again with the beautiful feathers of the Reeves's Pheasant at his cocked hat. -
A Molecular Phylogeny of the Pheasants and Partridges Suggests That These Lineages Are Not Monophyletic R
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution Vol. 11, No. 1, February, pp. 38–54, 1999 Article ID mpev.1998.0562, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on A Molecular Phylogeny of the Pheasants and Partridges Suggests That These Lineages Are Not Monophyletic R. T. Kimball,* E. L. Braun,*,† P. W. Zwartjes,* T. M. Crowe,‡,§ and J. D. Ligon* *Department of Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131; †National Center for Genome Resources, 1800 Old Pecos Trail, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505; ‡Percy FitzPatrick Institute, University of Capetown, Rondebosch, 7700, South Africa; and §Department of Ornithology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, New York 10024-5192 Received October 8, 1997; revised June 2, 1998 World partridges are smaller and widely distributed in Cytochrome b and D-loop nucleotide sequences were Asia, Africa, and Europe. Most partridge species are used to study patterns of molecular evolution and monochromatic and primarily dull colored. None exhib- phylogenetic relationships between the pheasants and its the extreme or highly specialized ornamentation the partridges, which are thought to form two closely characteristic of the pheasants. related monophyletic galliform lineages. Our analyses Although the order Galliformes is well defined, taxo- used 34 complete cytochrome b and 22 partial D-loop nomic relationships are less clear within the group sequences from the hypervariable domain I of the (Verheyen, 1956), due to the low variability in anatomi- D-loop, representing 20 pheasant species (15 genera) and 12 partridge species (5 genera). We performed cal and osteological traits (Blanchard, 1857, cited in parsimony, maximum likelihood, and distance analy- Verheyen, 1956; Lowe, 1938; Delacour, 1977). -
Changes to Category C of the British List†
Ibis (2005), 147, 803–820 Blackwell Publishing, Ltd. Changes to Category C of the British List† STEVE P. DUDLEY* British Ornithologists’ Union, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK In its maintenance of the British List, the British Ornithologists’ Union Records Committee (BOURC) is responsible for assigning species to categories to indicate their status on the List. In 1995, the British Ornithologists’ Union (BOU) and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) held a conference on naturalized and introduced birds in Britain (Holmes & Simons 1996). This led to a review of the process of establishment of such species and the terms that best describe their status (Holmes & Stroud 1995) as well as a major review of the categorization of species on the British List (Holmes et al. 1998). The BOURC continues to review the occurrence and establishment of birds of captive origin in Britain. This paper sum- marizes the status of naturalized and introduced birds in Britain and announces changes to the categorization of many on the British List or its associated appendices (Categories D and E): Mute Swan Cygnus olor Categories AC change to AC2 Black Swan Cygnus atratus Category E* – no change Greylag Goose Anser anser Categories ACE* change to AC2C4E* Snow Goose Anser caerulescens Categories AE* change to AC2E* Greater Canada Goose Branta canadensis Categories ACE* change to C2E* Barnacle Goose Branta leucopsis Categories AE* change to AC2E* Egyptian Goose Alopochen aegyptiacus Categories CE* change -
A Study of Food and Feeding Habits of Blue Peafowl, Pavo Cristatus Linnaeus, 1758 in District Kurukshetra, Haryana (India)
International Journal of Research Studies in Biosciences (IJRSB) Volume 2, Issue 6, July 2014, PP 11-16 ISSN 2349-0357 (Print) & ISSN 2349-0365 (Online) www.arcjournals.org A Study of Food and Feeding Habits of Blue Peafowl, Pavo Cristatus Linnaeus, 1758 in District Kurukshetra, Haryana (India) Girish Chopra, Tarsem Kumar Department of Zoology, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra-136119 (INDIA) [email protected] Summary: Present study was conducted to determine the food and feeding habits of blue peafowl in three study sites, namely, Saraswati plantation wildlife sanctuary (SPWS), Bir Sonti Reserve Forest (BSRF), and Jhrouli Kalan village (JKAL). Point count method (Blondel et al., 1981) was followed during periodic fortnightly visits to all the three selected study sites. The peafowls were observed to feed on flowers, fruits, leaves of 11, 8 and 8 plant species respectively. These were sighted to feed on Brassica compestris (flowers, leaves), Trifolium alexandarium (flowers, leaves), Triticum aestivum (flowers, leaves, fruits), Oryza sativa (flowers, leaves, fruits), Chenopodium album (flowers, leaves, fruits), Parthenium histerophoresus (flowers, leaves), Pisum sativum (flowers, leaves, fruits), Cicer arientum (flowers, leaves, fruits), Pyrus pyrifolia (flowers, fruits), Ficus benghalensis (flowers, fruits), Ficus rumphii (flowers, fruits). They were also observed feeding on insects in all three study sites and on remains of the snake bodies at the BSRF and JKAL study site. The findings revealed that the Indian peafowl, on one hand, functions as a predator of agricultural pests but, on the other hand, is itself a pest on agricultural crops. Keywords: Blue peafowl, Food, Feeding Habits, Herbs, Shrubs, Trees. 1. INTRODUCTION Birds are warm-blooded, bipedal, oviparous vertebrates characterized by bony beak, pneumatic bones, feathers and wings. -
Reproductive Ecology of Tibetan Eared Pheasant Crossoptilon Harmani in Scrub Environment, with Special Reference to the Effect of Food
Ibis (2003), 145, 657–666 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Reproductive ecology of Tibetan Eared Pheasant Crossoptilon harmani in scrub environment, with special reference to the effect of food XIN LU1* & GUANG-MEI ZHENG2 1Department of Zoology, College of Life Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China 2Department of Ecology, College of Life Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China We studied the nesting ecology of two groups of the endangered Tibetan Eared Pheasants Crossoptilon harmani in scrub environments near Lhasa, Tibet, during 1996 and 1999–2001. One group received artificial food from a nunnery prior to incubation whereas the other fed on natural food. This difference in the birds’ nutritional history allowed us to assess the effects of food on reproduction. Laying occurred between mid-April and early June, with a peak at the end of April or early May. Eggs were laid around noon. Adult females produced one clutch per year. Clutch size averaged 7.4 eggs (4–11). Incubation lasted 24–25 days. We observed a higher nesting success (67.7%) than reported for other eared pheasants. Pro- visioning had no significant effect on the timing of clutch initiation or nesting success, and a weak effect on egg size and clutch size (explaining 8.2% and 9.1% of the observed variation, respectively). These results were attributed to the observation that the unprovisioned birds had not experienced local food shortage before laying, despite spending more time feeding and less time resting than the provisioned birds. Nest-site selection by the pheasants was non-random with respect to environmental variables. Rock-cavities with an entrance aver- aging 0.32 m2 in size and not deeper than 1.5 m were greatly preferred as nest-sites. -
Golden Pheasant Chrysolophus Pictus
Young Golden Pheasant Chrysolophus pictus What is the history of my relationship to man? The Golden Pheasant is commonly found in zoos and aviaries, but often as impure specimens that have the similar Lady Amherst's Pheasant in their lineage. Habitat / Climate Where am I from? dark young conifer forests The Golden Pheasant or "Chinese Pheasant",is a parrot like Map with sparse undergrowth gamebird of the order Galliformes. It is native to forests in mountainous areas of western China but feral populations have been established in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. Other family members: Caspian snowcock Who are my relatives? Gray partridge Silver Pheasant, Little chachalaca, Yellow- knobbed curassow and Western capercaillie the Turkey Breeding Potential How am I born? We lay 8-12 eggs at a time and will then incubate these for around 22-23 days. Clutch size 8 to 12 eggs When we hatch we are able to walk and look for food with in hours. By a few weeks we will loose our down and have our feathers in. How long does it take me to grow up and how long do I live Once we have gotten our feathers we will keep getting bigger. By 3 months we will be full Breeding Season grown, we might add a few pounds after that but wont get larger. We can live up to 6 years. J F M A M J J A S O N D A E A P A U U U E C O E N B R R Y N L G P T V C What kind of family life do I have? We are extremely territorial. -
Estimating Density of Secretive Terrestrial Birds (Siamese Fireback) in Pristine and Degraded Forest Using Camera Traps and Distance Sampling
Global Ecology and Conservation xx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Global Ecology and Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gecco Original research article Estimating density of secretive terrestrial birds (siamese fireback) in pristine and degraded forest using camera traps and distance sampling a,b,∗ b c Q1 Saranphat Suwanrat , Dusit Ngoprasert , Christopher Sutherland , Pongthep Suwanwaree a, Tommaso Savini b a School of Biology, Institute of Science, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand b Conservation Ecology Program, King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok, Thailand c Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, United States article info a b s t r a c t Article history: Tropical Asian Galliformes are secretive and difficult to survey. Many of these species Received 29 October 2014 are considered ``at risk'' due to habitat degradation although reliable density estimates Received in revised form 28 January 2015 are lacking. Using camera trapping and distance sampling data collected on the Siamese Accepted 28 January 2015 Fireback (Lophura diardi) in northeastern Thailand, we compared density estimates for Available online xxxx pristine and degraded lowland forest. Density was poorly estimated using distance sampling, likely due to small sample size arising from poor visibility in dense vegetation Keywords: and bird's sensitivity to observers. We analyzed camera trap data using both count-based Royle–Nichols model Binomial mixture model and presence/absence-based methods. Those density estimates had narrower confidence Beta-binomial mixture model intervals than those obtained using distance sampling. Estimated density was higher in dry −2 −2 Lophura diardi evergreen forest (5:6 birds km ), than in old forest plantations (0:2 birds km ), perhaps Galliformes because dense forest habitats provide Firebacks with more resources and refuge from Sakaerat Environmental Research Station predation. -
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. -
Europe's Huntable Birds a Review of Status and Conservation Priorities
FACE - EUROPEAN FEDERATIONEurope’s FOR Huntable HUNTING Birds A Review AND CONSERVATIONof Status and Conservation Priorities Europe’s Huntable Birds A Review of Status and Conservation Priorities December 2020 1 European Federation for Hunting and Conservation (FACE) Established in 1977, FACE represents the interests of Europe’s 7 million hunters, as an international non-profit-making non-governmental organisation. Its members are comprised of the national hunters’ associations from 37 European countries including the EU-27. FACE upholds the principle of sustainable use and in this regard its members have a deep interest in the conservation and improvement of the quality of the European environment. See: www.face.eu Reference Sibille S., Griffin, C. and Scallan, D. (2020) Europe’s Huntable Birds: A Review of Status and Conservation Priorities. European Federation for Hunting and Conservation (FACE). https://www.face.eu/ 2 Europe’s Huntable Birds A Review of Status and Conservation Priorities Executive summary Context Non-Annex species show the highest proportion of ‘secure’ status and the lowest of ‘threatened’ status. Taking all wild birds into account, The EU State of Nature report (2020) provides results of the national the situation has deteriorated from the 2008-2012 to the 2013-2018 reporting under the Birds and Habitats directives (2013 to 2018), and a assessments. wider assessment of Europe’s biodiversity. For FACE, the findings are of key importance as they provide a timely health check on the status of In the State of Nature report (2020), ‘agriculture’ is the most frequently huntable birds listed in Annex II of the Birds Directive. -
Why Do Eared-Pheasants of the Eastern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau Show So Much Morphological Variation?
Bird Conservation International (2000) 10:305–309. BirdLife International 2000 Why do eared-pheasants of the eastern Qinghai-Tibet plateau show so much morphological variation? XIN LU and GUANG-MEI ZHENG Summary It is known that White Eared-pheasants Crossoptilon crossoptilon drouyni interbreed widely with Tibetan Eared-pheasants C. harmani at the boundary of their ranges. A new hybrid zone has been found recently in eastern Tibet, far away from the boundary of the parental species’ ranges. Based on ecological observations of eared-pheasants and the geographical history and pattern of modern glaciers, we have attributed the complex morphological variation of eared-pheasants and the high biodiversity of the eastern Qinghai-Tibet plateau to its varied geography. Introduction The eared-pheasant genus Crossoptilon is endemic to China and includes four species. The Brown Eared-pheasant C. mantchuricum is found in northern China and the Blue Eared-pheasant C. auritum occurs on the plateau of northern Qinghai-Tibet. These species show no morphological variation and have no described subspecies. The White Eared-pheasant C. crossoptilon shows greater variations in plumage colour and four subspecies have been recognised: crossopti- lon in western Sichuan and south-eastern Tibet, lichiangense in north-western Yunnan, drouyni in the area between the Nujiang River and the Jinsha River, and dolani in Yushu of southern Qinghai. The Tibetan Eared-pheasant C. harmani is restricted to Tibet, north of the main axis of the Himalayas (Ludlow and Kinnear 1944). It was formerly treated as a subspecies of the White Eared-pheasant (Delacour 1977, Cheng et al. 1978), but more recently has been considered a full species (Sibley and Monroe 1990, Cheng 1994), mainly because of its dark blue- grey plumage, which is distinct from the predominately white plumage of the other subspecies. -
Habitat Use of Tibetan Eared Pheasant Crossoptilon Harmani
IBI_006.fm Page 17 Friday, November 30, 2001 2:01 PM ____________________________________________________________________________www.paper.edu.cn Ibis (2002), 144, 17–22 Blackwell ScienceHabitat Ltd use of Tibetan Eared Pheasant Crossoptilon harmani flocks in the non-breeding season XIN LU1* & GUANG-MEI ZHENG2 1Department of Zoology, College of Life Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China 2Department of Ecology, College of Life Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China Habitat use by Tibetan Eared Pheasant Crossoptilon harmani flocks in shrub vegetation was investigated in the Lhasa area of Tibet during the non-breeding season of 1995–1996. Home range composition varied considerably among flocks, but stream belts were consistently used as foraging grounds. Slope direction, altitude and vegetation had little effect on habitat selec- tion. In the absence of supplemental food, core range size was positively correlated with flock size, suggesting that food supplementation could support larger flocks. Flocks regularly roosted on the ground at midday at two or three relatively fixed sites within core ranges. At night they used patches of relatively tall, dense vegetation at the year-round sites in areas near cliffs or in hollows. The size of the night-roost site was related to flock size. Our results strongly suggested that both foraging and night-roosting habitats in the shrub environment are crucial to the birds. The Tibetan Eared Pheasant Crossoptilon harmani is and Xiongse) in the Lhasa mountains (29°32′N, endemic to Tibet and was originally treated as a 91°40′E), Tibet. The vegetation in the study area is subspecies of C. crossoptilon (Delacour 1977), but more mainly shrub and meadow. -
(Syrmaticus Reevesii) Lysozyme
Agric. Biol. Chem., 55 (7), 1707-1713, 1991 1707 The AminoAcid Sequence of Reeves' Pheasant (Syrmaticus reevesii) Lysozyme Tomohiro Araki,* MayumiKuramoto and Takao Torikata Laboratory of Biochemistry, Faculty of Agriculture, Kyushu Tokai University, Aso, Kumamoto 869-14, Japan Received November 13, 1990 The amino acid sequence of reeves' pheasant lysozyme was analyzed. Carboxymethylated lysozyme was digested with trypsin and resulting peptides were analyzed using the DABITC/PITCdouble coupling manual Edmanmethod. The established amino acid sequence had seven substitutions, Tyr3, Leul5, His41, His77, Ser79, ArglO2, and Asnl21, compared with hen egg-white lysozyme. Ser79 was the first found in a bird lysozyme. A substitution in the active site was found in position 102 which has been considered to participate in the substrate binding at subsites A-C. Lysozymeis one of the most characterized and concluded that the enhancement of the hydrolases, which cleave /M,4 linkage of transglycosylation was correlated with the TV-acetylglucosamine (GlcNAc) homopolymer binding of substrate at subsite A. The substrate or GlcNAc-7V-acetylmuramic acid hetero- binding at subsite A has further been polymer. This enzyme is composed of 129-130 investigated by an NMR study.6) The co- amino acids, and the tertiary structure of hen valently bound glucosamine on AsplOl at egg-white lysozyme (HEWL) has been eluci- subsite Acaused a change of the indole proton dated by X-ray refraction study.1} The of Trp62. This result strongly suggested that mechanism of catalytic reaction of this protein the amino acid at position 101 participates in has also been elucidated in detail. The enzyme the interaction between the substrate and contains six substrate binding subsites (A-F) substrate binding site of lysozyme.