DOCSLIB.ORG

Gull-Billed Tern (Gelochelidon Nilotica) in North America

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gull-Billed Tern (Gelochelidon Nilotica) in North America U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Status Review and Conservation Recommendations for the Gull-billed Tern (Gelochelidon nilotica) in North America Biological Technical Publication BTP-R1013-2010 Larry Ditto© U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Status Review and Conservation Recommendations for the Gull-billed Tern (Gelochelidon nilotica) in North America Biological Technical Publication BTP-R1013-2010 Kathy C. Molina1 R. Michael Erwin2 Eduardo Palacios3 Eric Mellink4 Nanette W. H. Seto5, 6 1 Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 3 Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada (CICESE Unidad La Paz), Pronatura Noroeste, A.C., La Paz, B.C.S. México 4 Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada (CICESE), Ensenada, B.C., México 5 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Birds and Habitat Programs, Portland, OR 6 Current Address: Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, VA Cover image: Gull-billed Tern Photo credit: Larry Ditto© i Author contact information: For additional copies or information, contact: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Kathy C. Molina Pacific Southwest Region, Migratory Birds Program Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 2800 Cottage Way Section of Ornithology Sacramento, CA 95825 900 Exposition Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90007 Recommended citation: Phone: (213) 763-3368 Molina, K. C., R. M. Erwin, E. Palacios, E. Mellink, E-mail: [email protected] and N. W. H. Seto. 2010. Status review and conservation recommendations for the Gull-billed R. Michael Erwin Tern (Gelochelidon nilotica) in North America. U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Service, Biological Technical Publication, FWS/ Department of Environmental Sciences BTP-R1013-2010, Washington, D.C. University of Virginia 291 McCormick Rd. Series Senior Technical Editor: Charlottesville, VA 22904 Phone: (434) 924-3207 Stephanie L. Jones E-mail: [email protected] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6 Nongame Migratory Bird Coordinator Eduardo Palacios P.O. Box 25486 Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Denver Federal Center Superior de Ensenada Denver, Colorado 80225-0486 (CICESE Unidad La Paz) Pronatura Noroeste A.C., Miraflores 334 e/ Mulegé y La Paz. Fracc. Bella Vista La Paz, B.C.S. 23050 México Phone: (612) 121-3031, Ext. 111 E-mail: [email protected] Eric Mellink Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada (CICESE) Km 107 Carr. Tijuana-Ensenada Ensenada, B.C. México U.S. Mailing Address: P. O. Box 434844 San Diego, CA 92143-4844 Phone: (646) 175-0500 E-mail: [email protected] Nanette W. H. Seto (Current Address): U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Migratory Bird Management 4401 N Fairfax Drive, MBSP 4107 Arlington, VA 22203 Phone: (703) 358-1835 E-mail: [email protected] ii Status Review and Conservation Recommendations for the Gull-billed Tern Table of Contents List of Figures v List of Tables vi Executive Summary viii Acknowledgments ix Taxonomy 1 Legal Status 2 United States 2 Mexico 2 Central America and West Indies 2 Description 3 Geographic Distribution 4 Breeding 4 Gelochelidon nilotica aranea 4 Gelochelidon nilotica vanrossemi 4 Subspecies undetermined 4 Wintering 4 Gelochelidon nilotica aranea 4 Gelochelidon nilotica vanrossemi 5 Subspecies undetermined 5 Migration and Vagrancy 5 Gelochelidon nilotica aranea 5 Gelochelidon nilotica vanrossemi 5 Summer Non-breeding 5 Natural History 6 Breeding 6 Colonies, nests, and nest spacing 6 Reproductive phenology 6 Breeding site fidelity 6 Demography and limiting factors 6 Predators 7 Diet 7 Foraging Behavior 7 Post-breeding Dispersal 7 Population Estimates and Trends 8 Estimates 8 Gelochelidon nilotica aranea 8 Gelochelidon nilotica vanrossemi 8 Trends 10 Gelochelidon nilotica aranea 10 Gelochelidon nilotica vanrossemi 10 Monitoring Activities 11 Breeding Bird Survey 11 Regional and State Surveys 11 Table of Contents iii Habitat Requirements 12 Breeding Season 12 Winter and Summer Non-breeding Seasons 12 Threats 13 Habitat Loss and Degradation 13 Overutilization 13 Disease and Predation 14 Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms 14 Other Natural or Manmade Factors 14 Storm events and other natural disturbances 14 Pesticides or other contaminants 14 Population size and colony distribution 15 Introduced species 15 Conflicts with other species 15 Other interspecific interactions 15 Other conflicts 16 Disturbance to nesting sites 16 Management and Conservation 17 Habitat Management 17 Predator Management 17 Artificial Nesting Habitat 18 Education 18 Conservation Recommendations 19 Monitoring 19 Habitat Management and Protection 19 Research 20 Conclusion 20 Literature Cited 21 Appendix A. State and Regional Summaries of Gelochelidon nilotica aranea Status within the Breeding Range in the U.S., Mexico, and Caribbean 26 United States 26 Alabama 26 Delaware and Maryland 27 Florida 28 Georgia 30 Louisiana 31 Mississippi 34 New Jersey and New York 35 North Carolina 38 South Carolina 42 Texas 45 Virginia 53 Caribbean 55 Mexico 56 Literature Cited, Appendix A 57 Appendix B. State Summaries of Gelochelidon nilotica vanrossemi Status within the Breeding Range in the U.S. and Mexico 61 Mexico Baja California and Baja California Sur 61 Colima, Nayarit, Sinaloa, and Sonora 63 United States California 65 Literature Cited, Appendix B 67 Appendix C. State and Regional Contacts and Contributors 69 iv Status Review and Conservation Recommendations for the Gull-billed Tern List of Figures Figure 1. North American distribution of the Gull-billed Tern 1 Figure A-1. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in Alabama, 2004 27 Figure A-2. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in Florida, 2000 29 Figure A-3. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in Georgia, 2003 30 Figure A-4. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in Louisiana, 2001 33 Figure A-5. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in Mississippi, 2003 33 Figure A-6. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in New Jersey, 2001 37 Figure A-7. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in New York, 2003 37 Figure A-8. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in North Carolina, 2001 38 Figure A-9. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies South Carolina, 2003 44 Figure A-10. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in the upper coast of Texas, 2003 45 Figure A-11. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in central coast of Texas, 2003 48 Figure A-12. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in the lower coast of Texas, 2003 51 Figure A-13. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in Virginia, 2003 55 Figure B-1. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in coastal northwest Mexico, 2003 62 Figure B-2. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in coastal southwest Mexico, 2003 63 Figure B-3. Locations and sizes of Gull-billed Tern colonies in California, 2003 65 List of Figures v List of Tables Table 1. State agency status of Gull-billed Terns in North America (continental United States only), and National Heritage Status (NatureServe Explorer 2006). “No status” indicates that the state has not it given the species a specific conservation status. 2 Table 2. Number of breeding pairs and colony sites of G. n. aranea in the continental United States for years in which comprehensive state-wide censuses were conducted. 9 Table 3. Number of breeding pairs and colony sites of G. n. vanrossemi in the Pacific Coast of the United States and Mexico in years surveys were conducted. 10 Table A-1. Number of Gull-billed Tern breeding pairs at colonies in Mobile County, Alabama, 1988–2004 (R. B. Clay, pers. comm.). Dash (—) indicates data are insufficient to discern site availability, occupancy, or extent of survey coverage for a particular site and year. 26 Table A-2. Number of breeding pairs of Gull-billed Terns at colonies in Florida 1973–1977, 1979, 1985, 1995, 1998–2000a. Dash (—) indicates data are insufficient to discern site availability, occupancy, or extent of survey coverage for a particular site and year. Data from Clapp et al. 1983, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission 2003, Loftin and Sutton 1979, Ogden 1974, 1975, 1979, Portnoy et al. 1981, Smith and Alvear 1997. 29 Table A-3. Numbers of breeding pairs of Gull-billed Terns in McIntosh County, Georgia 1993, 1995, 1999 and 2003 (B. Winn, pers. comm.). 30 Table A-4. Number of breeding pairs of Gull-billed Terns at colonies along the coast of Louisiana, 1976, 1990–1999 and 2001. Dash (—) indicates data are insufficient to discern site availability, occupancy, or extent of survey coverage for a particular site and year. Topographic quad names follow the Louisiana Natural Heritage Program (LNHP) colony identification numbers. Data from Martin and Lester 1990, Michot et al. 2004, Portnoy 1977, G. D. Lester, pers. comm. 32 Table A-5. Number of Gull-billed Tern breeding pairs at colonies in Jackson County, Mississippi, 1988–2004 (M. P. Stevens, pers. comm.). Dash (—) indicates data are insufficient to discern site availability, occupancy, or extent of survey coverage for a particular site and year. 34 Table A-6. Number of breeding pairs of Gull-billed Terns at colonies in New Jersey, 1977, 1985, 1995, and 2001 (Erwin and Korschgen 1979, R. Andrews and C. D. Jenkins, pers. comm.). 35 Table A-7. Number of breeding pairs of Gull-billed Terns at colonies in New York, 1975, 1984–1999, and 2001–2003. Dash (—) indicates data are insufficient to discern site availability, occupancy, or extent of survey coverage for a particular site and year. Data from Buckley et al. 1975, Sommers et al. 1994, 2001, M. R. Wasilco, pers. comm. 36 vi Status Review and Conservation Recommendations for the Gull-billed Tern Table A-8.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Order CHARADRIIFORMES: Waders, Gulls and Terns Suborder LARI
    Text extracted from Gill B.J.; Bell, B.D.; Chambers, G.K.; Medway, D.G.; Palma, R.L.; Scofield, R.P.; Tennyson, A.J.D.; Worthy, T.H. 2010. Checklist of the birds of New Zealand, Norfolk and Macquarie Islands, and the Ross Dependency, Antarctica. 4th edition. Wellington, Te Papa Press and Ornithological Society of New Zealand. Pages 191, 223 & 227-228. Order CHARADRIIFORMES: Waders, Gulls and Terns The family sequence of Christidis & Boles (1994), who adopted that of Sibley et al. (1988) and Sibley & Monroe (1990), is followed here. Suborder LARI: Skuas, Gulls, Terns and Skimmers Condon (1975) and Checklist Committee (1990) recognised three subfamilies within the Laridae (Larinae, Sterninae and Megalopterinae) but this division has not been widely adopted. We follow Gochfeld & Burger (1996) in recognising gulls in one family (Laridae) and terns and noddies in another (Sternidae). The sequence of species for Stercorariidae and Laridae follows Peters (1934) and for Sternidae follows Bridge et al. (2005). Family LARIDAE Rafinesque: Gulls Laridia Rafinesque, 1815: Analyse de la Nature: 72 – Type genus Larus Linnaeus, 1758. Genus Larus Linnaeus Larus Linnaeus, 1758: Syst. Nat., 10th edition 1: 136 – Type species (by subsequent designation) Larus marinus Linnaeus. Gavia Boie, 1822: Isis von Oken, Heft 10: col. 563 – Type species (by subsequent designation) Larus ridibundus Linnaeus. Junior homonym of Gavia Moehring, 1758. Hydrocoleus Kaup, 1829: Skizz. Entw.-Gesch. Eur. Thierw.: 113 – Type species (by subsequent designation) Larus minutus Linnaeus. Chroicocephalus Eyton, 1836: Cat. Brit. Birds: 53 – Type species (by monotypy) Larus cucullatus Reichenbach = Larus pipixcan Wagler. Gelastes Bonaparte, 1853: Journ. für Ornith.
    [Show full text]
  • Beaufort Seas West To
    71° 162° 160° 158° 72° U LEGEND 12N 42W Ch u $ North Slope Planning Area ckchi Sea Conservation System Unit (Offset for display) Pingasagruk (abandoned) WAINWRIGHT Atanik (Abandoned) Naval Arctic Research Laboratory USGS 250k Quad Boundaries U Point Barrow I c U Point Belcher 24N Township Boundaries y 72° Akeonik (Ruins) Icy Cape U 17W C 12N Browerville a Trans-Alaska Pipeline p 39W 22N Solivik Island e Akvat !. P Ikpilgok 20W Barrow Secondary Roads (unpaved) a Asiniak!. Point s MEADE RIVER s !. !. Plover Point !. Wainwright Point Franklin !. Brant Point !. Will Rogers and Wiley Post Memorial Whales1 U Point Collie Tolageak (Abandoned) 9N Point Marsh Emaiksoun Lake Kilmantavi (Abandoned) !. Kugrua BayEluksingiak Point Seahorse Islands Bowhead Whale, Major Adult Area (June-September) 42W Kasegaluk Lagoon West Twin TekegakrokLake Point ak Pass Sigeakruk Point uitk A Mitliktavik (Abandoned) Peard Bay l U Ikroavik Lake E Tapkaluk Islands k Wainwright Inlet o P U Bowhead Whale, Major Adult Area (May) l 12N k U i i e a n U re Avak Inlet Avak Point k 36W g C 16N 22N a o Karmuk Point Tutolivik n U Elson Lagoon t r !. u a White (Beluga) Whale, Major Adult Area (September) !. a !. 14N m 29W 17W t r 17N u W Nivat Point o g P 32W Av k a a Nokotlek Point !. 26W Nulavik l A s P v a a s Nalimiut Point k a k White (Beluga) Whale, Major Adult Area (May-September) MEADE RIVER p R s Pingorarok Hill BARROW U a Scott Point i s r Akunik Pass Kugachiak Creek v ve e i !.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphological Variation Among Herring Gulls (Larus Argentatus) and Great Black-Backed Gulls (Larus Marinus) in Eastern North America Gregory J
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of New England University of New England DUNE: DigitalUNE Environmental Studies Faculty Publications Environmental Studies Department 4-2016 Morphological Variation Among Herring Gulls (Larus Argentatus) And Great Black-Backed Gulls (Larus Marinus) In Eastern North America Gregory J. Robertson Environment Canada Sheena Roul Environment Canada Karel A. Allard Environment Canada Cynthia Pekarik Environment Canada Raphael A. Lavoie Queen's University See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://dune.une.edu/env_facpubs Part of the Ornithology Commons Recommended Citation Robertson, Gregory J.; Roul, Sheena; Allard, Karel A.; Pekarik, Cynthia; Lavoie, Raphael A.; Ellis, Julie C.; Perlut, Noah G.; Diamond, Antony W.; Benjamin, Nikki; Ronconi, Robert A.; Gilliland, Scott .;G and Veitch, Brian G., "Morphological Variation Among Herring Gulls (Larus Argentatus) And Great Black-Backed Gulls (Larus Marinus) In Eastern North America" (2016). Environmental Studies Faculty Publications. 22. http://dune.une.edu/env_facpubs/22 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Environmental Studies Department at DUNE: DigitalUNE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Environmental Studies Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DUNE: DigitalUNE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Gregory J. Robertson, Sheena Roul, Karel A. Allard, Cynthia Pekarik, Raphael A. Lavoie, Julie C. Ellis, Noah G. Perlut, Antony W. Diamond, Nikki Benjamin, Robert A. Ronconi, Scott .G Gilliland, and Brian G. Veitch This article is available at DUNE: DigitalUNE: http://dune.une.edu/env_facpubs/22 Morphological Variation Among Herring Gulls (Larus argentatus) and Great Black-Backed Gulls (Larus marinus) in Eastern North America Author(s): Gregory J.
    [Show full text]
  • First Record of a California Gull for North Carolina
    General Field Notes LYNN MOSELEY EIS M. OSYE rth Crln Edtr Sth Crln Edtr prtnt f l prtnt f l Glfrd Cll h Ctdl Grnbr, C 240 Chrltn, SC 240 OICE Publication of any unusual sightings of birds in the Field Notes or Briefs for the Files does not imply that these reports have been accepted into the official Checklist of Birds records for either North or South Carolina. Decisions regarding the official Checklists are made by the respective State Records Committees and will be reported upon periodically in THE CHAT. rt rd f Clfrn Gll fr rth Crln Stephen J. Dinsmore John O. Fussell Jeremy Nance 2600 Glen Burnie 1412 Shepard Street 3259 N 1st Avenue Raleigh, NC 27607 Morehead City, NC 28557 Tucson, AZ 85719 At approximately 1400 h on 29 January 1993, we observed an adult California Gull (Larus californicus) at the Carteret County landfill, located southwest of Newport, North Carolina. We were birding the northwest corner of the landfill when Fussell called our attention to a slightly darker-mantled gull resting with hundreds of other gulls, mostly Herring Gulls (L. argentatus). We immediately recognized the bird as an adult California Gull. We were able to observe and photograph the bird for the nest half hour at distances of 75-100 m. At 1430 the bird suddenly flew south over the dump and we were not able to relocated it over the next 2 hours. Sprn 6 The following is a detailed description of the bird, much of it written immediately after the sighting. The bird was slightly smaller and slimmer than the numerous Herring Gulls surrounding it.
    [Show full text]
  • LEAST TERN Scientific Name: Sternula Antillarum Lesson Other
    Common Name: LEAST TERN Scientific Name: Sternula antillarum Lesson Other Commonly Used Names: Little tern, silver turnlet, sea swallow, minute tern, little striker, and killing peter Previously Used Names: Sterna antillarum Family: Laridae Rarity Ranks: G4/S3 State Legal Status: Rare Federal Legal Status: Interior population listed as endangered. Other populations are not federally listed. Federal Wetland Status: N/A Description: Georgia's smallest tern at about 23 cm (9 in) in length with a 50 cm (20 in) wingspread, the least tern is white with pale gray feathers on the back and upper surfaces of the wings, except for a narrow black stripe along the leading edge of the upper wing feathers. The least tern has a black cap with a small patch of white on the forehead. In summer, the adult has a yellow bill with a black tip and yellow to orange feet and legs. Its tail is deeply forked. In winter, the bill, legs and feet are black. The juvenile has a black bill and yellow legs, and the feathers of the back have dark margins, giving the bird a distinctly "scaled" appearance. The least tern's small size, white forehead, and yellow bill serve to distinguish it from other terns. Similar Species: The adult sandwich tern (Thalasseus sandvicensis) is the most similar species to the adult least tern, but is much larger at about 38 cm (15 in) in length and has a black bill with a pale (usually yellow) tip and black legs. Juvenile least terns and sandwich terns look very similar in appearance.
    [Show full text]
  • Nesting Populations of California and Ring-Billed Gulls in California
    WESTERN BIR Volume 31, Number 3, 2000 NESTING POPULATIONS OF CLwO AND RING-BI--F-r GULLS IN CALIFORNIA: RECENT SURVEYS AND HISTORICAL STATUS W. DAVID SHUFORD, Point Reyes Bird Observatory(PRBO), 4990 Shoreline Highway, StinsonBeach, California94970 THOMAS P. RYAN, San FranciscoBay Bird Observatory(SFBBO), P.O. Box 247, 1290 Hope Street,Alviso, California 95002 ABSTRACT: Statewidesurveys from 1994 to 1997 revealed33,125 to 39,678 breedingpairs of CaliforniaGulls and at least9611 to 12,660 pairsof Ring-billed Gullsin California.Gulls nested at 12 inland sitesand in San FranciscoBay. The Mono Lake colonywas by far the largestof the CaliforniaGull, holding 70% to 80% of the statepopulation, followed by SanFrancisco Bay with 11% to 14%. ButteValley WildlifeArea, Clear Lake NationalWildlife Refuge, and Honey Lake WildlifeArea were the only othersites that heldover 1000 pairsof CaliforniaGulls. In mostyears, Butte Valley, Clear Lake, Big Sage Reservoir,and Honey Lake togetherheld over 98% of the state'sbreeding Ring-billed Gulls; Goose Lake held9% in 1997. Muchof the historicalrecord of gullcolonies consists of estimatestoo roughfor assessmentof populationtrends. Nevertheless, California Gulls, at least,have increased substantially in recentdecades, driven largely by trendsat Mono Lake and San FranciscoBay (first colonizedin 1980). Irregularoccupancy of some locationsreflects the changing suitabilityof nestingsites with fluctuatingwater levels.In 1994, low water at six sites allowedcoyotes access to nestingcolonies, and resultingpredation appeared to reducenesting success greatly at threesites. Nesting islands secure from predators and humandisturbance are nestinggulls' greatest need. Conover(1983) compileddata suggestingthat breedingpopulations of Ring-billed(Larus delawarensis)and California(Larus californicus)gulls haveincreased greafiy in the Westin recentdecades. Detailed assessments of populationstatus and trends of these speciesin individualwestern states, however,have been publishedonly for Washington(Conover et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnolia Plantation and Gardens Birdwalk Newsletter 5.7.2017 Walks Conducted by Perry Nugent Articles Written by Jayne J Matney All Owl Photos by Guenter Weber
    Magnolia Plantation and Gardens BirdWalk Newsletter 5.7.2017 Walks Conducted by Perry Nugent Articles Written by Jayne J Matney All Owl Photos By Guenter Weber “The owl,” he was saying, “is one of the most curious creatures. A bird that stays awake when the rest of the world sleeps. They can see in the dark. I find that so interesting, to be mired in reality when the rest of the world is dreaming. What does he see and what does he know that the rest of the world is missing?” M.J. Rose Barred Owls: Strix varia Owls capture our curiosity at an early age because of their unique characteristics and the mystery that seems to surround them. Being mostly nocturnal and highly camouflaged, sighting an owl in the day is fairly rare and is very exciting when it happens. Owls in general range in sizes and coloration. Here on our plantation, especially during mating and nesting season, sightings are made and amazing photos have been turned in for our pleasure. The Barred Owl sightings and photos have been the inspiration for the article this week. Barred Owls are large owls (40 to 64 cm long or 16 to 26 inches), native to eastern United States, and named after their distinct bar coloration on their feathers of the chest and belly. The bars on the chest are horizontal, while the bars on the belly are vertical. The rest of the body is mostly a mottled gray-brown. They possess a pale face with dark rings radiating about the eyes, and incredible dark brown eyes unlike other owls that have yellow eyes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Herring Gull Complex (Larus Argentatus - Fuscus - Cachinnans) As a Model Group for Recent Holarctic Vertebrate Radiations
    The Herring Gull Complex (Larus argentatus - fuscus - cachinnans) as a Model Group for Recent Holarctic Vertebrate Radiations Dorit Liebers-Helbig, Viviane Sternkopf, Andreas J. Helbig{, and Peter de Knijff Abstract Under what circumstances speciation in sexually reproducing animals can occur without geographical disjunction is still controversial. According to the ring species model, a reproductive barrier may arise through “isolation-by-distance” when peripheral populations of a species meet after expanding around some uninhabitable barrier. The classical example for this kind of speciation is the herring gull (Larus argentatus) complex with a circumpolar distribution in the northern hemisphere. An analysis of mitochondrial DNA variation among 21 gull taxa indicated that members of this complex differentiated largely in allopatry following multiple vicariance and long-distance colonization events, not primarily through “isolation-by-distance”. In a recent approach, we applied nuclear intron sequences and AFLP markers to be compared with the mitochondrial phylogeography. These markers served to reconstruct the overall phylogeny of the genus Larus and to test for the apparent biphyletic origin of two species (argentatus, hyperboreus) as well as the unex- pected position of L. marinus within this complex. All three taxa are members of the herring gull radiation but experienced, to a different degree, extensive mitochon- drial introgression through hybridization. The discrepancies between the mitochon- drial gene tree and the taxon phylogeny based on nuclear markers are illustrated. 1 Introduction Ernst Mayr (1942), based on earlier ideas of Stegmann (1934) and Geyr (1938), proposed that reproductive isolation may evolve in a single species through D. Liebers-Helbig (*) and V. Sternkopf Deutsches Meeresmuseum, Katharinenberg 14-20, 18439 Stralsund, Germany e-mail: [email protected] P.
    [Show full text]
  • Laughing Gulls Breed Primarily Along the Pacific Coast of Mexico and the Atlantic and Caribbean Coasts from S
    LAUGHING GULL Leucophaeus atricilla non-breeding visitor, regular winterer L.a. megalopterus Laughing Gulls breed primarily along the Pacific coast of Mexico and the Atlantic and Caribbean coasts from s. Canada to Venezuela, and they winter S to Peru and the Amazon delta (AOU 1998, Howell and Dunn 2007). It and Franklin's Gull were placed along with other gulls in the genus Larus until split by the AOU (2008). Vagrant Laughing Gulls have been reported in Europe (Cramp and Simmons 1983) and widely in the Pacific, from Clipperton I to Wake Atoll (Rauzon et al. 2008), Johnston Atoll (records of at least 14 individuals, 1964-2003), Palmyra, Baker, Kiribati, Pheonix, Marshall, Pitcairn, Gambier, and Samoan Is, as well as Australia/New Zealand (King 1967; Clapp and Sibley 1967; Sibley and McFarlane 1968; Pratt et al. 1987, 2010; Garrett 1987; Wragg 1994; Higgins and Davies 1996; Vanderwerf et al. 2004; Hayes et al. 2015; E 50:13 [identified as Franklin's Gull], 58:50). Another interesting record is of one photographed attending an observer rowing solo between San Francisco and Australia at 6.5° N, 155° W, about 1400 km S of Hawai'i I, 1-2 Nov 2007. They have been recorded almost annually as winter visitors to the Hawaiian Islands since the mid-1970s, numbers increasing from the NW to the SE, as would be expected of this N American species. The great majority of records involve first-year birds, and, despite the many records in the S Pacific, there is no evidence for a transient population through the Hawaiian Islands, or of individuals returning for consecutive winters after departing in spring.
    [Show full text]
  • Fuscus and Larus Affixis
    542 Dwight, Larus fuscus and Larus affinis. [q^ THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE GULLS KNOWN AS LARUS FUSCUS AND LARUS AFFIXIS. BY JONATHAN DWIGHT, M. D. Plates XX and XXI. \n approaching many of the problems in modern systemic ornithology, one is confronted with the necessity of steering a middle course between the Scylla of imperfect knowledge on the one hand and the Charybdis of nomenclature on the other. Either may bring us to shipwreck; but mindful of those who have pre- ceded me in writing about the Lesser Black-backed Gull (Larus fuscus), and the Siberian Gull (Larus affinis), I venture with some hesitancy to take up the tangled question of the relationship of these birds and make another endeavor to fix the proper names upon them. Larus fuscus, an abundant European species, was described in 1758 by Linnaeus, and has never been taken on the American side of the Atlantic. L. affinis, however, has stood as a North American ' species in the A. O. U. Check-Lists ' on the strength of a single specimen, the type taken in southern Greenland and described by Reinhardt in 1853 (Videnskab-Meddel, p. 78). Until 1912 these two gulls were recognized as two full species, and then Lowe (Brit. Birds, VI, no. 1, June 1, 1912, pp. 2-7, pi. 1) started the ball rolling by restricting the name fuscus to Scandi- navian birds and describing the paler bird of the British Isles subspecifically as brittanicus. A few months later Iredale (Brit. Birds, VI, no. 12, May 1, 1913, pp. 360-364, with pi.), borrowing the type of affinis from the Copenhagen Museum, where it had rested for half a century, and comparing it with British specimens, found it to be identical with them; but not content with synonymyzing brittanicus with affin is, he reached the conclusion that the Siberian bird was larger and therefore required a new name — antelius.
    [Show full text]
  • Pelagic Birds of West Coast -Udupi and Mangalore- Harish Bhat R1, Shivashankar M2, Vineeth Kumar K3 & Karthik Bhat P4
    Pelagic Birds of West Coast -Udupi and Mangalore- Harish Bhat R1, Shivashankar M2, Vineeth Kumar K3 & Karthik Bhat P4. 1 Energy and Wetlands Research Group, Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012 2 Sarasvath nagar, Karkala 576117, Karnataka 3 Department of Applied Zoology, Mangalore University, Mangalore 574199 4 #27/1, Jayadeep Nivas, Kudvas Compound, Kuntalpady, Karkala 574104 • Any water in a sea or lake that is neither close to the bottom nor near the shore can be said to be in the pelagic zone. • Pelagic birds, also called oceanic birds, live on the open sea, rather than around waters adjacent to land or around inland waters. • These birds migrant from far distance during winter from temperate to tropics to escape the harsh weather. • Their arrival also indicates the change in climatic condition at the temperate countries. Their presence supports the favourable environment with less disturbances. Black Headed Gull Brown Headed Gull Gull-billed tern Black Headed Specific • Breeds in Coastal Specific • Breeds in the high Brown Canada, Europe plateaus of central Gull ations and Asia. ations Asia from Tajikistan Gull • 38–44 cm long to Ordos in Inner with a 94–105 cm Mongolia. wingspan. • Pale brown head, • Leading edge to the lighter than that of wing is a good field black-headed, a pale mark. grey body, and red • Chocolate-brown bill and legs, black head, pale grey tips to the primary body, black tips to wing, underwing is the primary wing grey with black feathers, and red flight feathers bill and legs • Brown hood is lost Chroicocephalus • Bold and Gelochelidon in winter, leaving Chroicocephalus opportunistic just dark vertical ridibundus feeder.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Beach-Nesting Bird Report, 2005-2008
    Florida Beach-nesting Bird Report Summary of FWC’s Beach-nesting Bird Database from 2005-2008 Prepared by Chris Burney FWC Shorebird Partnership Coordinator [email protected] FLORIDA BNB REPORT 2005-2008 2 3 1 Florida Beach-nesting Bird Report A look back at the data collected from 2005 to 2008 and a look forward at considerations for the future. INTRODUCTION we cannot interpret these data in the same way we would those For those of you regularly submitting data online to the Florida from a systematic survey. This means that you should use a great Beach-nesting Bird (BNB) database, you are probably very fa- deal of caution in interpreting the tables and maps presented in miliar with the activity on your stretch of beach but not sure how this report. For instance, we definitely can not draw conclusions the birds and sites you monitor factor into the bigger picture. In about population status and trends (e.g. how many Least Terns view of this, we have produced the following report which sum- nest in Florida, and whether or not they are declining) from such marizes the data compiled in the BNB database from 2005 to assorted data. Despite these limitations, the BNB database does 2008. We hope that it will provide you, our contributors, a more function as a resource for current information about the distri- statewide perspective. These data would certainly not be avail- bution (i.e. where birds are nesting) and relative abundance (i.e. able if not for the dedicated work of our partners from federal, how many pairs are nesting compared to other sites) of beach- state, and local governments to private conservation organiza- nesters and provides valuable information for developing re- tions and individuals.
    [Show full text]