Emberiza citrinella -- Linnaeus, 1758 ANIMALIA -- CHORDATA -- AVES -- PASSERIFORMES -- EMBERIZIDAE Common names: ; European Red List Assessment European Red List Status LC -- Least Concern, (IUCN version 3.1) Assessment Information Year published: 2015 Date assessed: 2015-03-31 Assessor(s): BirdLife International Reviewer(s): Symes, A. Compiler(s): Ashpole, J., Burfield, I., Ieronymidou, C., Pople, R., van Kleunen A., Wheatley, H. & Wright, L. Assessment Rationale European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC) EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).

For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27. Occurrence Countries/Territories of Occurrence Native: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czech Republic; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Ireland, Rep. of; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of; Moldova; Montenegro; Netherlands; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; Russian Federation; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Turkey; Ukraine; United Kingdom Vagrant: Faroe Islands (to DK); Malta; Svalbard and Jan Mayen (to NO); Gibraltar (to UK) Population The European population is estimated at 18,300,000-28,000,000 pairs, which equates to 36,600,000-56,000,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 12,800,000-19,900,000 pairs, which equates to 25,500,000-39,700,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see Supplementary PDF. Trend In Europe and the EU27 the population size is estimated to be decreasing by less than 25% in 11.1 years (three generations). For details of national estimates, see Supplementary PDF. Habitats and Ecology This is a characteristic species of the transition zone between woodland and open country, such as (extensively managed) farmland with hedges, forest clearings, young plantations, scrubs, heath and natural grasslands. The species can occur op to 2,100 m Asl. The species is completely migratory in the northern part of its breeding range; elsewhere it is partially migratory or sedentary. During winter it gathers in flocks, often in farmland on stubble fields or other weedy habitats (Hagemeijer & Blair 1997, Copete 2011). Normally the breeding season starts in April and late broods may even be started in September. The nest is built by the female. It is placed on the ground, often in field boundaries or ditches, well hidden among the vegetation, or in hedges or isolated bushes. The clutch, usually three to five eggs, is normally incubated by the female alone. The chicks hatch after 12–14 days. They are brooded by the female, the male delivering food. The nestling period is 11–13 days (Bradbury et al. 2000, Copete 2011). The species mainly takes seeds and other plant materials from a variety of tree, herb and grass species. During the breeding season it shifts to invertebrates, which it feeds to nestlings (Copete 2011). Habitats & Altitude Habitat (level 1 - level 2) Importance Occurrence Artificial/Terrestrial - Arable Land suitable resident Artificial/Terrestrial - Pastureland suitable resident Forest - Boreal suitable breeding Forest - Temperate suitable resident Grassland - Temperate suitable resident Shrubland - Boreal suitable breeding Shrubland - Temperate suitable resident Altitude max. 2100 m Occasional altitudinal limits Threats The population is suspected to be in decline owing to a reduction in cultivation of cereal crops and the intensification of farmland management. Agricultural efficiency measures such as removal of hedgerows, filling or clearing of ditches and grazing or ploughing right up to the field edge are likely to have adversely affected the species (Bradbury et al. 2000, BirdLife International 2015). Furthermore the species suffers indirectly from the use of insecticides and herbicides, as these reduce the abundance of arthropods and the availability of weedy patches rich in seeds (Perkins et al. 2002, Morris 2005, Hart et al. 2006). The species interbreeds with Emberiza leucocephalos in the contact zone of both species in the most western part of its range. According to Panov et al. (2003) the hybridisation process will intensify in the contact zone of both species as they are very similar in behaviour and habitat choice. The long-term impact of this process is unclear (Hagemeijer & Blair 1997, Copete 2011, BirdLife 2015). Threats & Impacts Threat (level 1) Threat (level 2) Impact and Stresses Agriculture & Agro-industry Timing Scope Severity Impact aquaculture farming Ongoing Majority (50-90%) Slow, Significant Medium Impact Declines Stresses Ecosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation Invasive and other Yellowhammer Timing Scope Severity Impact problematic (Emberiza citrinella) Ongoing Minority (<50%) Unknown Unknown species, genes & diseases Stresses Hybridisation Pollution Herbicides and Timing Scope Severity Impact pesticides Ongoing Majority (50-90%) Slow, Significant Medium Impact Declines Stresses Indirect ecosystem effects Conservation Conservation Actions Underway There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed Implement agro-environmental schemes that effectively support beneficial management of field margin habitats and retention of winter-feeding sites (set-aside fields, manure heaps) such as stubbles (Bradbury et al. 2000, Perkins et al. 2002, Whittingham et al. 2005, Orlowksi et al. 2014). Ban or minimise the application of insecticides and herbicides. In particular minimise the applications of persistent broad-spectrum insecticides from March to June, or provide alternative unsprayed foraging habitat. Advice on mitigating indirect effects of pesticides should be given to advisers and users (Morris et al. 2005). Bibliography BirdLife International (2015) Species factsheet: Emberiza citrinella. Downloaded from http:// www.birdlife.org on 31/03/2015. Bradbury, R.B., Kyrkos, A, Morris, A.J., Clark, S.C., Perkins, A.J. & Wilson, J.D. 2000. Habitat associations and breeding success of on lowland farmland. Journal of Applied Ecology 37: 789-805. Copete, C.L. 2011. Yellowhammer (Emberiza citrinella). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Christie D.A. (eds.) 2014. Handbook of the of the World. Vol 16. Tanagers to New World Blackbirds. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Copete, C.L. 2011a. (Emberiza leucocephalos). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Christie D.A. (eds.) 2014. Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol 16. Tanagers to New World Blackbirds. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Hagemeijer, E.J.M. & Blair, M.J. (eds) 1997. The EBCC Atlas of European Breeding Birds: Their Distribution and Abundance. T & A D Poyser, London. Hart, J.D., Milsom, T.P., Fisher, G., Wilkins, V., Moreby, S.J., Murray, A.W.A. & Robertson, P.A. 2006. The relationship between yellowhammer breeding performance arthropod abundance and insecticide applications on arable farmland. Journal of Applied Ecology 2006: 43, 81-91 Morris, A.J., Wilson, J.D., Whittingham, M.J. & Bradbury, R.B. 2005. Indirect effects of pesticides on breeding yellowhammer (Emberiza citrinella). Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 106: 1–16. Orlowski, G., Czarnecka, J. & Golawski, A. 2014. Winter diet of Yellowhammers Emberiza citrinella on contemporary farmland: the different contribution of forbs, wild grasses and cereals in semi-natural and agricultural habitats. Study 61: 484-495. Panov, E.N., Roubtsov, A.S. & Monzikov, D.G. 2003.Hybridization between Yellowhammer and Pine Bunting in Russia. Dutch Birding 25 (1): 17-31. Perkins, A.J., Whittingham, M.J., Morris, A.J. &Bradbury, R.B. 2002. Use of field margins by foraging yellowhammers Emberiza citrinella. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 93: 413–420. MARK J. WHITTINGHAM,*t RUTH D. SWETNAM,I JEREMY D. WILSON,? DAN E. CHAMBERLAIN? and ROBERT P. FRECKLETON. 2005. Habitat selection by yellowhammer Emberiza citronella on lowland farmland at two spatial scales: implications for conservation management. Journal of Applied Ecology 2005 42, 270-280 Map (see overleaf)