[mou-net] Golden Winged Warblers 'fled day before US tornadoes' April 2014

2014-12-22 Thread Gordon Andersson
from BBC News.  Days after arriving from Columbia to Appalachia TN, 5 GWWA's
flew south to the Gulf and missed numerous tornadoes.  They then returned to
their nest sites.  Also note an apparent 50% mortality of the 20 study birds
in one year.   This article is excerpted from the journal  Current Biology.


Birds 'fled day before US tornadoes'

Tracking data reveals that golden-winged warblers fled one day before the
April 2014 US tornado outbreak, probably because they heard it coming.

Read more:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-30531060

---
Gordon Andersson
St Paul


Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net
Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html


[mou-net] Duluth birds

2014-12-22 Thread Malcolm Gold
Common Eider,  California Gull, Glaucous Gull and Golden-Crowned Sparrow
all seen this morning in Duluth at previously reported locations. Sparrow
was half block south 4402 Regent associating with White-Throated Sparrow.
Found by listening for WTSP.

Good birding, Malcolm Gold
Kansas City (visiting Wadena County for holidays.)


Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net
Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html


[mou-net] Golden-winged Warbler Clarification

2014-12-22 Thread Refsnider
I want to clarify an earlier post today regarding Golden-winged Warblers 
(GWWA) which contained a link to a brief, but very interesting, BBC 
piece on temporarynesting areaabandonment to avoid tornadic activity.  
Gordon Andersson mentioned an apparent 50% mortality [unrelated to the 
tornadoes] of the 20 study birds [carrying geolocators] in one year.  
This is not quite correct.


The researchers resighted 10 of the 20 geolocator-bearing study birds a 
year after the attachment of geolocators and color bands. One bird 
already had dropped the geolocator somewhere, so if he is excluded from 
analysis, 9 of the 19 geolocator birds--47%--were resighted.  This means 
the SURVIVAL RATE of that group was a MINIMUM of 47%, but could be as 
much as 100%, because there is no way to know what happened to the 10 
birds that were not resighted.  Geolocators are quite different from 
radio-transmitters or satellite-tracked devices that can be remotely 
relocated by signal receivers.  Geolocators do not transmit radio 
signals, so birds carrying them must be resighted to determine if they 
survived.  (The birds must be recaptured to download the geolocator's 
data.)  If a geolocator-carrying bird isn't seen in the area being 
searched it isn't correct to assume that it died.  It may simply be 
nesting a few miles away, but beyond the perimeter of the study area.  
With geolocators one can't simply hop in a plane and fly over a large 
area and listen for the appropriate ping on a receiver to refind more  
study birds.


What the study actually showed was a 47% RETURN RATE of the 
geolocator-carrying birds to their previous nesting area, rather thana 
one-year survival rate.  All things considered, being able to resight 
47% of the study population a year later is pretty darn impressive.


Importantly, as this was a pilot study to assess the feasibility of 
using newer, lighter-weight, geolocators on GWWAs, there also was a 
control group.  Of those GWWAs that were color-banded only (no 
geolocators), 42% were resighted a year later.  Though it's probably not 
a statistically significant difference, the geolocator birds actually 
showed a slightly higher return rate than the control birds.  A return 
rate around 50% is quite normal for small passerine species.


Finally, I want to thank Gordon, and urge him to continue his ongoing 
valuable service of using MOU-net to post links to interesting avian 
publications.  There are a lot of important research findings being 
published every week, and Gordon does a better job than most of us 
keeping up with them.  We all benefit from his efforts, and he probably 
doesn't often get thanked for doing it.


Disclaimer:  I am related to the lead author of this study.  And I'm 
probably being overly nit-picky here.  But I'm fascinated with the 
knowledge that might come from increased use of lightweight tracking 
devices like these. It's important to understandthat they're now so 
light as to be safely worn by some of our smallest birds during 
round-trip migrations.


---Ron Refsnider


Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net
Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html


Re: [mou-net] Golden-winged Warbler Clarification

2014-12-22 Thread Paul Budde
And I'd like to add that the research was done out of the University of 
Minnesota, as part of the GWWA study that was presented at the recent paper 
session, and the Univ. Of Tennessee, though the lead author has moved onto UCB.

Paul

Paul Budde
pbu...@earthlink.net

div Original message /divdivFrom: Refsnider 
refsn...@umn.edu /divdivDate:12/22/2014  5:18 PM  (GMT-05:00) 
/divdivTo: MOU-NET@LISTS.UMN.EDU /divdivSubject: [mou-net] 
Golden-winged Warbler Clarification /divdiv
/divI want to clarify an earlier post today regarding Golden-winged Warblers 
(GWWA) which contained a link to a brief, but very interesting, BBC 
piece on temporarynesting areaabandonment to avoid tornadic activity.  
Gordon Andersson mentioned an apparent 50% mortality [unrelated to the 
tornadoes] of the 20 study birds [carrying geolocators] in one year.  
This is not quite correct.

The researchers resighted 10 of the 20 geolocator-bearing study birds a 
year after the attachment of geolocators and color bands. One bird 
already had dropped the geolocator somewhere, so if he is excluded from 
analysis, 9 of the 19 geolocator birds--47%--were resighted.  This means 
the SURVIVAL RATE of that group was a MINIMUM of 47%, but could be as 
much as 100%, because there is no way to know what happened to the 10 
birds that were not resighted.  Geolocators are quite different from 
radio-transmitters or satellite-tracked devices that can be remotely 
relocated by signal receivers.  Geolocators do not transmit radio 
signals, so birds carrying them must be resighted to determine if they 
survived.  (The birds must be recaptured to download the geolocator's 
data.)  If a geolocator-carrying bird isn't seen in the area being 
searched it isn't correct to assume that it died.  It may simply be 
nesting a few miles away, but beyond the perimeter of the study area.  
With geolocators one can't simply hop in a plane and fly over a large 
area and listen for the appropriate ping on a receiver to refind more  
study birds.

What the study actually showed was a 47% RETURN RATE of the 
geolocator-carrying birds to their previous nesting area, rather thana 
one-year survival rate.  All things considered, being able to resight 
47% of the study population a year later is pretty darn impressive.

Importantly, as this was a pilot study to assess the feasibility of 
using newer, lighter-weight, geolocators on GWWAs, there also was a 
control group.  Of those GWWAs that were color-banded only (no 
geolocators), 42% were resighted a year later.  Though it's probably not 
a statistically significant difference, the geolocator birds actually 
showed a slightly higher return rate than the control birds.  A return 
rate around 50% is quite normal for small passerine species.

Finally, I want to thank Gordon, and urge him to continue his ongoing 
valuable service of using MOU-net to post links to interesting avian 
publications.  There are a lot of important research findings being 
published every week, and Gordon does a better job than most of us 
keeping up with them.  We all benefit from his efforts, and he probably 
doesn't often get thanked for doing it.

Disclaimer:  I am related to the lead author of this study.  And I'm 
probably being overly nit-picky here.  But I'm fascinated with the 
knowledge that might come from increased use of lightweight tracking 
devices like these. It's important to understandthat they're now so 
light as to be safely worn by some of our smallest birds during 
round-trip migrations.

---Ron Refsnider


Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net
Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html


[mou-net] Common Eider

2014-12-22 Thread lmsirvio
The Common Eider was seen today (Dec 22) on the harbor side of Canal Park in 
Duluth in the vicinity of 8th St and Minnesota Ave. 
A link to a photo on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lsirvio/15465227313/

Larry Sirvio


Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net
Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html