DOCSLIB.ORG

Urbanization and Nest-Site Selection of the Black-Billed Magpie (Pica Pica

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Urbanization and Nest-Site Selection of the Black-Billed Magpie (Pica Pica University of Lapland This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version usually differs somewhat from the publisher’s final version, if the self-archived version is the accepted author manuscript. Urbanization and nest-site selection of the Black-billed Magpie (Pica pica) populations in two Finnish cities Jokimäki, Jukka; Suhonen, Jukka; Vuorisalo, Timo; Kövér, László; Kaisanlahti-Jokimäki, Marja-Liisa Published in: Landscape and Urban Planning DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.08.001 Published: 01.01.2017 Document Version Version created as part of publication process; publisher's layout; not normally made publicly available Citation for pulished version (APA): Jokimäki, J., Suhonen, J., Vuorisalo, T., Kövér, L., & Kaisanlahti-Jokimäki, M-L. (2017). Urbanization and nest- site selection of the Black-billed Magpie (Pica pica) populations in two Finnish cities: From a persecuted species to an urban exploiter. Landscape and Urban Planning, 157, 577-585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.08.001 Document License Unspecified Download date: 03. Oct. 2021 1 1 Abstract 2 Urbanization is an important ecological factor that modifies the living conditions of species at 3 multiple levels. Urbanization is also influenced by human-animal relationships. We studied the 4 effects of human-related factors on nest site selection of the Eurasian Magpie (Pica pica) by 5 using both historical and contemporary data on the nest sites of the Magpie both at landscape and 6 micro-habitat levels in Finland. The nest site data on the Magpie were collected by searching old 7 nest site data as well as by collecting data from current nest sites in two Finnish towns. Our 8 results indicate that the population densities of the Magpie have increased in both study areas 9 during 1950-2010, and that the actual adjustment to urban conditions began around 1980. The 10 relative nest height of Magpies has decreased in urban, but no in rural habitats. The Magpie 11 preferred breeding sites with great green area cover and less built-up areas. Moreover, Magpies 12 preferred ever-green coniferous trees over deciduous tree species as their nest sites. The Magpie 13 made its nest in the upper parts of the tree canopies, regardless of the tree species. Our results 14 give support that urbanization by the Magpie is related to both changes in human disturbance, 15 and in the species-specific habitat needs. Planting coniferous trees may promote the breeding of 16 the Magpie in urban environments in northern area. We suggest that, the Magpie, as a common 17 and well-known species, may be a good candidate to monitor the state of the urban environment. 18 Introduction 19 Currently, more people live in urban than in rural areas, and urban built-up areas are increasing 20 at an even greater rate than the urban population (UN, 2014). Urbanization involves one of the 21 most extreme forms of land-use alteration, and generally leads to a nearly complete restructuring 22 of vegetation and species composition (Francis & Chadwic, 2013). Urban areas differ in many 2 23 ways from natural environments. For example, urban environments are characterized by a high 24 level of predictable anthropogenic food resources, high levels of human-caused disturbances, a 25 milder microclimate, and with only remnants of the original habitat persisting (Francis & 26 Chadwic, 2012, 2013). Despite these challenging conditions, several species have been able to 27 colonize urban environments (e.g. Bezzel, 1985; Erz, 1966; Fey et al., 2015; Kövér et al., 2015; 28 Shochat et al., 2006; Vuorisalo et al., 1992, 2003, 2014). 29 Urbanization has created a number of new ecological niches (Erz, 1966), which benefit some 30 bird species possessing specific traits (Croci et al., 2008; Jokimäki et al., 2014; Kark et al., 31 2007). Because urbanization may act as a filter on species’ traits, urbanized bird species may 32 share a suite of biological traits that explain their success in tolerating the impact of humans 33 (Croci et al., 2008; Kark et al., 2007). In general, bird species have been shown to have wider 34 environmental niches and greater tolerance of disturbance factors in urban centers than in non- 35 urban areas (Blair, 1996; Chace & Walch, 2006). 36 Evans et al. (2010) identified three successive stages in the species’ urbanization process: (i) 37 arrival, (ii) adjustment, and (iii) spread. Arrival refers to the initial dispersal to an urban area, 38 adjustment refers to the processes whereby individuals manage to cope with a markedly different 39 new environment, and spread refers to the colonization of new urban areas by populations 40 already adjusted to the urban environment. Particularly human attitudes and species´ ecological 41 traits influence the rate of progress through each stage (Clucas & Marzluff, 2012; Evans et al., 42 2010). Different factors may operate in different phases of the urbanization process. For 43 example, a high population density in original habitat and good dispersal ability of species are 44 important factors during the arrival phase, whereas ecological and behavioral plasticity of 3 45 species play important role during the adjustment phase, and lastly, high reproductive success is 46 one key factor for the further spread of the species (Evans et al., 2010). 47 48 The Black-billed Magpie (Corvidae; Pica; hereafter Magpie) populations have grown 49 dramatically in urban areas in Europe during the last 50 years (Jerzak, 2001; Luniak, 2004). The 50 Magpie has several traits, such as generalist habitat choice and omnivorous diet, that have been 51 found to promote bird species urbanization (e.g. Croci et al., 2008; Evans et al., 2010; Jokimäki 52 et al., 2014; Kark et al., 2007; see review Chace & Walsh, 2006). Generally, finding a suitable 53 nest site is a major factor for birds to be able to settle and reproduce successfully, especially in 54 urban environments where suitable nesting sites are usually reduced (Antonov & Atanasova, 55 2002; Kövér et al., 2015; Tatner, 1982). Tree nesters, like the Magpie, would find nest sites in 56 urban woodlots, parks, and private gardens as well as in rows of trees along the streets. 57 In addition to the possible changes in habitat structure in the course of urbanization, also changes 58 in human behavior (e.g. hunting pressure) may impact on species’ occurrence in urban areas. 59 Species considered harmful may be directly or indirectly persecuted. This has been the case with 60 the Feral Pigeon in many cities worldwide (Johnston & Janiga, 1995). According to Tatner 61 (1982) and Cramp and Perrins (1994), the colonization of suburban and urban habitats, and the 62 reoccupation of areas of former occurrence by the Magpie may have resulted from a decrease in 63 persecution by humans. However, this topic has been almost totally ignored in earlier studies 64 related to landscape and urban planning (but see Vuorisalo et al., 2003, 2014). 65 The Magpie usually breeds in association to human activities in Finland (von Haartman et al., 66 1963-1972; Mela, 1882; Palmgren, 1935). The Magpie was classified as a pest species in Finland 67 already in the Imperial Hunting Decree of 1898 (Hunting Decree, 1898), and was therefore 4 68 persecuted by hunters. The relative late onset of urbanization during late 1950´ and 1960’s was 69 probably due to its persecution in densely populated areas (Tenovuo, 1967). The most probable 70 reason for the widespread persecution was the questionable reputation of the Magpie as nest 71 predator of songbirds and game birds (Renwall, 1896). The situation with regard to persecution 72 has probably been rather similar elsewhere in Europe (e.g. Tatner, 1982). 73 Eden (1985) suggested that hatching success of urban Magpies might be higher in urban than in 74 rural areas because of the reduced human persecution. In some areas, Magpies prefer coniferous 75 trees over deciduous trees in their nest placement (Antonov & Atanasova, 2002; Dhindsa et al., 76 1989; von Haartman, 1969), whereas in some other areas, deciduous trees are favored over 77 conifers (Dulisz, 2005; Meissner & Żółkoś, 2010; Tatner, 1982; Zbyryt & Banach, 2014). 78 Antonov and Atanasova (2002) indicated that the breeding of urban Magpies starts earlier in 79 conifers than in deciduous trees, because of permanent and thick foliage cover in coniferous trees 80 during the starting phase of the breeding. Several studies have also indicated that the nest height 81 of Magpie increased with urbanization (Antonov & Atanasova, 2002; Dhindsa et al., 1989; 82 Mérő, et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2008; Zbyryt & Banach, 2014) probably because the greater nest 83 height in urban environments might decrease the probability that the nest will be destroyed by 84 humans or nest predators. According to Antonov and Atanosova (2002) Magpie nests located in 85 preferred tree species and nests located higher above the ground are more successful (hatching 86 and fledging success) than nests located in avoided tree species and lower part of the tree. 87 In this paper, we investigate the urban colonization processes and nest site selection of the 88 Magpie in Finland during the period 1950-2010 using both historical and current data sets. 89 Considering the rapid global urbanization process, large-scale temporal analyses are needed to 90 understand species’ colonization and habitat selection patterns in urban environments (Marzluff 5 91 et al., 2001; Vuorisalo, 2010). However, long-term studies in urban environments are extremely 92 rare (Marzluff et al., 2001; Parlange, 1998; Vuorisalo et el., 2003). 93 We assumed that the adjustment phase of urban colonization (sensu Evans et al., 2010) of 94 Magpies should be reflected to its nesting habits in trees and shrubs (Cramp & Perrins, 1994; von 95 Haartman et al., 1963-1972). Thus, as it occurs for corvids (Antanov & Atanasova, 2002; 96 Dhindsa et al., 1989; Kövér et al., 2015; Vuorisalo et al., 1992; Wang et al., 2008), 97 characteristics of trees (e.g.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • BSTE744 2020.Pdf
    Science of the Total Environment 744 (2020) 140895 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Science of the Total Environment journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv Revisiting an old question: Which predators eat eggs of ground-nesting birds in farmland landscapes? Carolina Bravo a,b,⁎, Olivier Pays b,c, Mathieu Sarasa d,e, Vincent Bretagnolle a,f a Centre d'Etudes Biologiques de Chizé, UMR 7372, CNRS and La Rochelle Université, F-79360 Beauvoir-sur- Niort, France b LETG-Angers, UMR 6554, CNRS, Université d'Angers, 49045 Angers, France c REHABS International Research Laboratory, CNRS-Université Lyon 1-Nelson Mandela University, George Campus, Madiba drive, 6531 George, South Africa d BEOPS, 1 Esplanade Compans Caffarelli, 31000 Toulouse, France e Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, 92136 Issy-les-Moulineaux cedex, France f LTSER “Zone Atelier Plaine & Val de Sèvre”, CNRS, 79360 Villiers-en-Bois, France HIGHLIGHTS GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT • Predation probability in artificial nests decreased with camera trap presence. • Corvids might perceive differently plas- ticine and natural eggs. • Camera trap and plasticine eggs combi- nation are recommendable for identify- ing predator. • Corvid predation increased with the abundance of corvid breeders. • Considering social status of corvids is es- sential when assessing corvid abun- dance impact. article info abstract Article history: Nest predation is a major cause of reproductive failure in birds, but predator identity often remains unknown. Ad- Received 12 May 2020 ditionally, although corvids are considered major nest predators in farmland landscapes, whether breeders or Received in revised form 9 July 2020 floaters are involved remains contentious. In this study, we aimed to identify nest predators using artificial nests, Accepted 9 July 2020 and test whether territorial or non-breeders carrion crow (Corvus corone) and Eurasian magpie (Pica pica) were Available online 17 July 2020 most likely involved.
    [Show full text]
  • Hungary & Transylvania
    Although we had many exciting birds, the ‘Bird of the trip’ was Wallcreeper in 2015. (János Oláh) HUNGARY & TRANSYLVANIA 14 – 23 MAY 2015 LEADER: JÁNOS OLÁH Central and Eastern Europe has a great variety of bird species including lots of special ones but at the same time also offers a fantastic variety of different habitats and scenery as well as the long and exciting history of the area. Birdquest has operated tours to Hungary since 1991, being one of the few pioneers to enter the eastern block. The tour itinerary has been changed a few times but nowadays the combination of Hungary and Transylvania seems to be a settled and well established one and offers an amazing list of European birds. This tour is a very good introduction to birders visiting Europe for the first time but also offers some difficult-to-see birds for those who birded the continent before. We had several tour highlights on this recent tour but certainly the displaying Great Bustards, a majestic pair of Eastern Imperial Eagle, the mighty Saker, the handsome Red-footed Falcon, a hunting Peregrine, the shy Capercaillie, the elusive Little Crake and Corncrake, the enigmatic Ural Owl, the declining White-backed Woodpecker, the skulking River and Barred Warblers, a rare Sombre Tit, which was a write-in, the fluty Red-breasted and Collared Flycatchers and the stunning Wallcreeper will be long remembered. We recorded a total of 214 species on this short tour, which is a respectable tally for Europe. Amongst these we had 18 species of raptors, 6 species of owls, 9 species of woodpeckers and 15 species of warblers seen! Our mammal highlight was undoubtedly the superb views of Carpathian Brown Bears of which we saw ten on a single afternoon! 1 BirdQuest Tour Report: Hungary & Transylvania 2015 www.birdquest-tours.com We also had a nice overview of the different habitats of a Carpathian transect from the Great Hungarian Plain through the deciduous woodlands of the Carpathian foothills to the higher conifer-covered mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • Bird Damage to Pistachios
    The extent of damage to pistachios by some birds that knock nuts to the ground, where they hull, shell, and eat them, can be measured. Losses to birds that pluck nuts from the tree and fly off to eat them else- where can only be estimated. counties to the south. District I1 (Central) is Merced, Madera, Fresno, and Kings Bird damage to nistachios counties. District I11 (Northern) is Monte- rey, San Benito, Inyo, and all counties to the north of Merced County. Terrell P. Salmon 0 A. Charles Crabb 0 RexE.Marsh Scope of the problem We received 105 responses (23 percent) from the 458 surveys mailed. Thirteen (12.7 percent) were excluded from analy- Crows are the primary culprits sis, because the orchards represented followed by ravens and jays were not in production, were outside Cali- fornia, or were managed by another per- son. The remaining 92 indicated they had pistachio losses due to one or more bird species. Bird damage was widespread through- out the state, as indicated by surveys re- turned from 18 counties. These 18 coun- ties represent 98 percent of the bearing pistachio acreage in California. The infor- mation we report here is based on the sur- vey returns and does not account for bird Various bird species are pests to a step in defining the problem and evaluat- damage and control that undoubtedly oc- number of California crops. Nut crops ing current bird control methods. cur but were not reported. Our estimates such as pistachios, almonds, and walnuts The major focus of the survey was to should therefore be considered conserva- are particularly hard hit, although infor- identify the bird species involved, the ex- tive.
    [Show full text]
  • A Fossil Scrub-Jay Supports a Recent Systematic Decision
    THE CONDOR A JOURNAL OF AVIAN BIOLOGY Volume 98 Number 4 November 1996 .L The Condor 98~575-680 * +A. 0 The Cooper Omithological Society 1996 g ’ b.1 ;,. ’ ’ “I\), / *rs‘ A FOSSIL SCRUB-JAY SUPPORTS A”kECENT ’ js.< SYSTEMATIC DECISION’ . :. ” , ., f .. STEVEN D. EMSLIE : +, “, ., ! ’ Department of Sciences,Western State College,Gunnison, CO 81231, ._ e-mail: [email protected] Abstract. Nine fossil premaxillae and mandibles of the Florida Scrub-Jay(Aphelocoma coerulescens)are reported from a late Pliocene sinkhole deposit at Inglis 1A, Citrus County, Florida. Vertebrate biochronologyplaces the site within the latestPliocene (2.0 to 1.6 million yearsago, Ma) and more specificallyat 2.0 l-l .87 Ma. The fossilsare similar in morphology to living Florida Scrub-Jaysin showing a relatively shorter and broader bill compared to western species,a presumed derived characterfor the Florida species.The recent elevation of the Florida Scrub-Jayto speciesrank is supported by these fossils by documenting the antiquity of the speciesand its distinct bill morphology in Florida. Key words: Florida; Scrub-Jay;fossil; late Pliocene. INTRODUCTION represent the earliest fossil occurrenceof the ge- nus Aphelocomaand provide additional support Recently, the Florida Scrub-Jay (Aphelocoma for the recognition ofA. coerulescensas a distinct, coerulescens) has been elevated to speciesrank endemic specieswith a long fossil history in Flor- with the Island Scrub-Jay(A. insularis) from Santa ida. This record also supports the hypothesis of Cruz Island, California, and the Western Scrub- Pitelka (195 1) that living speciesof Aphefocoma Jay (A. californica) in the western U. S. and Mex- arose in the Pliocene. ico (AOU 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Scrub-Jay Forages on Back of White-Tailed Deer’
    422 SHORT COMMUNICATIONS SCHLEIDT,W. M. 1973. Tonic communication: con- STRAUCH,J. G. 1978. The phylogeny of the Char- tinual effects of discrete signsin animal commu- adriiformes (Aves): a new estimateusing the meth- nication systems.J. theor. Biol. 42:359-386. od of charactercompatibility analysis.Trans. Zool. SIBLEY, C. G., ANDJ. E. AHLQUIST. 1990. Phylogeny Sot. Lond. 34:263-345. and classificationof birds. A study in molecular VEP~UNTSEV,B. N. 1982. Birds of the Soviet Union: evolution. Yale Univ. Press. New Haven. CT. a soundguide. Three long-playingdiscs. Melodiya, STEPANYAN, L. S. 1970. (Non-morphological criteria All-Union Studio for Recorded Sound. Moscow. and their utilization for classification[Burhinidae (Narration in Russian) (Aves) taken as an example]). Z. obshch. biol. 3 1: WILEY, R. H., AND D. G. RICHARDS. 1982. Adapta- 29 l-301. (In Russian) tions for acousticcommunication in birds: sound STEPANYAN,L. S. 1979. (Possible relations of Zbi- transmissionand signaldetection, p. 13l-l 8 1. In dorhynchastruthersii and notes on the history of D. E. Kroodsma and E. H. Miller [eds.], Acoustic the family Haematopodidae). Zool. Zh. 58:167 l- communication in birds, Vol. 1. Academic Press. 1679. (In Russian) NY. The Condor98:422-423 0 The CooperOrnithological Society 1996 FLORIDA SCRUB-JAY FORAGES ON BACK OF WHITE-TAILED DEER’ JOHNW. F~~~PA~~IcK~AND GLENE. WOOLFENDEN ArchboldBiological Station, P.O. Box 2057, Lake Placid, FL 33862-2057 Key words: Foraging; mammals; cleaningstation; is based on careful study of his video, a copy of which symbioses;tameness; Florida Scrub-Jay;Aphelocoma is depositedin the archivesat Archbold Biological Sta- coerulescens.
    [Show full text]
  • Corvids of Cañada
    !!! ! CORVIDS OF CAÑADA COMMON RAVEN (Corvus corax) AMERICAN CROW (Corvus brachyrhyncos) YELLOW-BILLED MAGPIE (Pica nuttalli) STELLER’S JAY (Cyanocitta stelleri) WESTERN SCRUB-JAY Aphelocoma californica) Five of the ten California birds in the Family Corvidae are represented here at the Cañada de los Osos Ecological Reserve. Page 1 The Common Raven is the largest and can be found in the cold of the Arctic and the extreme heat of Death Valley. It has shown itself to be one of the most intelligent of all birds. It is a supreme predator and scavenger, quite sociable at certain times of the year and a devoted partner and parent with its mate. The American Crow is black, like the Raven, but noticeably smaller. Particularly in the fall, it may occur in huge foraging or roosting flocks. Crows can be a problem for farmers at times of the year and a best friend at other times, when crops are under attack from insects or when those insects are hiding in dried up leftovers such as mummified almonds. Crows know where those destructive navel orange worms are. Smaller birds do their best to harass crows because they recognize the threat they are to their eggs and young. Crows, ravens and magpies are important members of the highway clean-up crew when it comes to roadkills. The very attractive Yellow-billed Magpie tends to nest in loose colonies and forms larger flocks in late summer or fall. In the central valley of California, they can be a problem in almond and fruit orchards, but they also are adept at catching harmful insect pests.
    [Show full text]
  • Best of the Baltic - Bird List - July 2019 Note: *Species Are Listed in Order of First Seeing Them ** H = Heard Only
    Best of the Baltic - Bird List - July 2019 Note: *Species are listed in order of first seeing them ** H = Heard Only July 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th 15th 16th 17th Mute Swan Cygnus olor X X X X X X X X Whopper Swan Cygnus cygnus X X X X Greylag Goose Anser anser X X X X X Barnacle Goose Branta leucopsis X X X Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula X X X X Common Eider Somateria mollissima X X X X X X X X Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula X X X X X X Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator X X X X X Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo X X X X X X X X X X Grey Heron Ardea cinerea X X X X X X X X X Western Marsh Harrier Circus aeruginosus X X X X White-tailed Eagle Haliaeetus albicilla X X X X Eurasian Coot Fulica atra X X X X X X X X Eurasian Oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus X X X X X X X Black-headed Gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus X X X X X X X X X X X X European Herring Gull Larus argentatus X X X X X X X X X X X X Lesser Black-backed Gull Larus fuscus X X X X X X X X X X X X Great Black-backed Gull Larus marinus X X X X X X X X X X X X Common/Mew Gull Larus canus X X X X X X X X X X X X Common Tern Sterna hirundo X X X X X X X X X X X X Arctic Tern Sterna paradisaea X X X X X X X Feral Pigeon ( Rock) Columba livia X X X X X X X X X X X X Common Wood Pigeon Columba palumbus X X X X X X X X X X X Eurasian Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto X X X Common Swift Apus apus X X X X X X X X X X X X Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica X X X X X X X X X X X Common House Martin Delichon urbicum X X X X X X X X White Wagtail Motacilla alba X X
    [Show full text]
  • Magnificent Magpie Colours by Feathers with Layers of Hollow Melanosomes Doekele G
    © 2018. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd | Journal of Experimental Biology (2018) 221, jeb174656. doi:10.1242/jeb.174656 RESEARCH ARTICLE Magnificent magpie colours by feathers with layers of hollow melanosomes Doekele G. Stavenga1,*, Hein L. Leertouwer1 and Bodo D. Wilts2 ABSTRACT absorption coefficient throughout the visible wavelength range, The blue secondary and purple-to-green tail feathers of magpies are resulting in a higher refractive index (RI) than that of the structurally coloured owing to stacks of hollow, air-containing surrounding keratin. By arranging melanosomes in the feather melanosomes embedded in the keratin matrix of the barbules. barbules in more or less regular patterns with nanosized dimensions, We investigated the spectral and spatial reflection characteristics of vivid iridescent colours are created due to constructive interference the feathers by applying (micro)spectrophotometry and imaging in a restricted wavelength range (Durrer, 1977; Prum, 2006). scatterometry. To interpret the spectral data, we performed optical The melanosomes come in many different shapes and forms, and modelling, applying the finite-difference time domain (FDTD) method their spatial arrangement is similarly diverse (Prum, 2006). This has as well as an effective media approach, treating the melanosome been shown in impressive detail by Durrer (1977), who performed stacks as multi-layers with effective refractive indices dependent on extensive transmission electron microscopy of the feather barbules the component media. The differently coloured magpie feathers are of numerous bird species. He interpreted the observed structural realised by adjusting the melanosome size, with the diameter of the colours to be created by regularly ordered melanosome stacks acting melanosomes as well as their hollowness being the most sensitive as optical multi-layers.
    [Show full text]
  • Collation of Brisson's Genera of Birds with Those of Linnaeus
    59. 82:01 Article XXVII. COLLATION OF BRISSON'S GENERA OF BIRDS WITH THOSE OF LINNAEUS. BY J. A. ALLEN. CONTENTS. Page. Introduction ....................... 317 Brisson not greatly indebted to Linnaeus. 319 Linneus's indebtedness to Brisson .... .. ... .. 320 Brisson's methods and resources . .. 320 Brisson's genera . 322 Brisson and Linnaeus statistically compared .. .. .. 324 Brisson's 'Ornithologia' compared with the Aves of the tenth edition of Lin- naeus's 'Systema'. 325 Brisson's new genera and their Linnwan equivalents . 327 Brisson's new names for Linnaan genera . 330 Linnaean (1764 and 1766) new names for Brissonian genera . 330 Brissonian names adopted. by Linnaeus . 330 Brissonian names wrongly ascribed to other authors in Sharpe's 'Handlist of Birds'.330 The relation of six Brissonian genera to Linnlean genera . 332 Mergus Linn. and Merganser Briss. 332 Meleagris Linn. and Gallopavo Briss. 332 Alcedo Linn. and Ispida Briss... .. 332 Cotinga Briss. and Ampelis Linn. .. 333 Coracias Linn. and Galgulus Briss.. 333 Tangara Briss. and Tanagra Linn... ... 334 INTRODUCTION. In considering recently certain questions of ornithological nomenclature it became necessary to examine the works of Brisson and Linnaeus in con- siderable detail and this-examination finally led to a careful collation of Brisson's 'Ornithologia,' published in 1760, with the sixth, tenth, and twelfth editions of Linnaeus's 'Systema Naturae,' published respectively in 1748, 1758, and 1766. As every systematic ornithologist has had occasion to learn, Linnaeus's treatment of the class Aves was based on very imperfect knowledge of the suabject. As is well-known, this great systematist was primarily a botanist, secondarily a zoologist, and only incidentally a mammalogist and ornithol- ogist.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chough in Britain and Ireland
    The Chough in Britain and Ireland /. D. Bullock, D. R. Drewett and S. P. Mickleburgh he Chough Pyrrhocoraxpyrrhocorax has a global range that extends from Tthe Atlantic seaboard of Europe to the Himalayas. Vaurie (1959) mentioned seven subspecies and gave the range of P. p. pyrrhocorax as Britain and Ireland only. He considered the Brittany population to be the race found in the Alps, Italy and Iberia, P. p. erythroramphus, whereas Witherby et al. (1940) regarded it as the nominate race. Despite its status as a Schedule I species, and general agreement that it was formerly much more widespread, the Chough has never been adequately surveyed. Apart from isolated regional surveys (e.g. Harrop 1970, Donovan 1972), there has been only one comprehensive census, undertaken by enthusiastic volunteers in 1963 (Rolfe 1966). Although often quoted, the accuracy of the 1963 survey has remained in question, and whether the population was increasing, stable or in decline has remained a mystery. In 1982, the RSPB organised an international survey in conjunction with the IWC and the BTO, to determine the current breeding numbers and distribution in Britain and Ireland and to collect data on habitat types within the main breeding areas. A survey of the Brittany population was organised simultaneously by members of La Societe pour 1'Etude et la Protection de la Nature en Bretagne (SEPNB). The complete survey results are presented here, together with an analysis of the Chough's breeding biology based on collected data and BTO records, along with a discussion of the ecological factors affecting Choughs. Regional totals and local patterns of breeding and feeding biology are discussed in more detail in a series of regional papers for Ireland, the Isle of Man, Wales and Scotland (Bullock*/al.
    [Show full text]
  • Pica Pica L.) - an Assessment with the Classification Methods
    Kirazli et al.: The relationship between parental defense intensity and nest site characteristics in Eurasian magpie - 1293 - THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PARENTAL DEFENSE INTENSITY AND NEST SITE CHARACTERISTICS IN EURASIAN MAGPIE (PICA PICA L.) - AN ASSESSMENT WITH THE CLASSIFICATION METHODS KIRAZLI, C.1* – KAN KILINÇ, B.2 – YAMAÇ, E.3 1Abant İzzet Baysal University, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Sciences, Department of Wildlife Ecology and Management, 14280 Bolu, Turkey 2Anadolu University, Science Faculty, Department of Statistics, 26470 Eskişehir, Turkey e-mail: [email protected] 3Anadolu University, Science Faculty, Biology Department, 26470 Eskişehir, Turkey e-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author e-mail: [email protected] (Received 16th Jan 2017; accepted 20th Mar 2017) Abstract. Nest defense behavior varies among species and depends on different factors. However little is known of the influence of urbanization and nest characteristics on the nest defense intensity as parental investment of the bird species. We observe the Eurasian magpie Pica pica nests to evaluate their nest defense behavior among those factors including urbanization degree of habitat, and nest characteristics such as nest volume, presence/absence of roof, offspring size and the number of offspring reduction for each breeding stages (incubation, early brooding and post brooding stage). To investigate the relationship between the nest defense behavior of Eurasian magpie and a set of those factors we used classification trees, binary logistic regression and random forest. According to our results nest defense strategies can be temporally changed primarily according to the nest volume with the auxiliary agents mostly a reduction of offspring number, which indicates parental capacities and offspring conditions could shape strongly their own nest defense strategies.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Beijing's Common Birds
    A Guide To Beijing’s Common Birds The author birding in the Temple of Heaven Park, one of the best sites in central Beijing, especially during migration season. Beijing is a brilliant place to watch birds. More than 460 different types have been recorded in the Chinese capital. And, even inside the 2nd Ring Road, birds can be found! Here is a short guide to 26 of the most common birds that can be found in central Beijing’s parks and green spaces. During migration season (Spring and Autumn), many more species will be possible. 1. Eurasian Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus, 红隼) Eurasian Kestrel. Breeds in small numbers in the city. Eats small rodents (mice, voles) and small birds. Can see ultra-violet! 2. Spotted Dove (Streptopelia chinensis, 珠颈斑鸠) Spotted Dove is common in parks and gardens. Often on the ground. 3. Hoopoe (Upupa epops, 戴胜) The Hoopoe is one of Beijing’s most spectactular birds. It raises its crest when excited or alarmed. 4. Grey-capped Pygmy Woodpecker (Yungipicus canicapillus, 星头啄木鸟) Grey-capped Pygmy Woodpecker is Beijing’s smallest woodpecker. 5. Great Spotted Woodpecker (Dendrocopos major, 大斑啄木鸟) Great Spotted Woodpecker. Common in and around Beijing. 6. Grey-headed Woodpecker (Picus canus, 灰头绿啄木鸟) The Grey-headed Woodpecker is common in open woodland and parks. Likes to feed on the ground. Ants are its favourite food! 7. Azure-winged Magpie (Cyanopica cyanus, 灰喜鹊) The Azure-winged Magpie is sociable and often seen in small noisy flocks. 8. Red-billed Blue Magpie (Urocissa erythrorhyncha, 红嘴蓝鹊) The spectacular Red-billed Blue Magpie is a resident in some of the larger parks.
    [Show full text]