About swallow nest, swiftlet, edible bird’s nest

FOOD DELIVERIES AT SWALLOW-TAILED KITE NESTS IN SOUTHERN FLORIDA

www.bioone.org
Kenneth D. Meyer, Steven M. McGehee, and Michael W. Collopy
Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611

We studied the diets of nesting Swallow-tailed Kites (Elanoides forficatus) at eight nests in 1988–1989 in southern Florida, where the species reaches its greatest abundance in the United States. Males fed females during the incubation stage an average of 2.1 ± 0.8 times per day. The adults averaged 10.9 ± 4.5 deliveries daily during the nestling stage, and 10.3 ± 12.5 deliveries to young daily following nest departure.

Vertebrates comprised 97% of the biomass for the 1092 identifiable prey items delivered to nests. Frogs accounted for 56%, birds 30%, and reptiles 11% of all prey. Numerically, frogs made up 83% of the reptile and amphibian prey. The relative proportions of prey types varied substantially among nests within years, and significantly more snakes and insects were delivered in 1989. Total biomass delivered in 1988 did not differ from that in 1989. Bird biomass, however, was greater in 1988 and insect biomass was greater in 1989. Anoles and snakes were brought to nests in larger numbers during the morning and evening hours; and birds were delivered mainly from midmorning to midafternoon.

Entregas de Alimentos en Nidos de Elanoides forficatus en el Sur de Florida

Resumen.Durante 1988 y 1989 estudiamos la dieta de los polluelos de Elanoides forficatus en ocho nidos localizados en el sur de la Florida, donde la especie alcanza su mayor abundancia de nidificacion dentro de los Estados Unidos. Durante la incubación, los machos alimentaron a las hembras un promedio de 2.1 ± 0.8 veces por día. Durante la etapa de polluelos, los adultos hicieron un promedio de 10.9 ± 4.5 entregas diarias y un promedio de 10.3 ± 12.5 entregas diarias después de abandonar el nido. Los vertebrados comprendieron el 97% de la biomasa de las 1092 presas identificables entregadas en los nidos. Las ranas constituyeron el 56%, las aves el 30% y los reptiles el 11% del total de las presas. Numéricamente, las ranas constituyeron el 83% de la herpetofauna depredada. Las proporciones relativas de los tipos de presa variaron substancialmente entre los nidos a través de los años, y considerablemente más serpientes e insectos fueron entregados en 1989. La biomasa total entregada durante 1988 no difirió de la observada en 1989. Sin embargo, la biomasa de las aves fue mayor en 1988, mientras que la de los insectos fue mayor en 1989. Las lagartijas y serpientes fueron entregadas a los nidos en mayor cantidad durante las horas de la mañana y de la tarde, mientras que las aves fueron entregadas principalmente desde la mitad de la mañana hasta la mitad de la tarde.

Add comment December 28th, 2007

Bird’s Nest in Chinese Cuisine

chinesefood-recipes.com
Edible Bird’s nest?? I can’t imagine how one can transform twigs and grasses into a gourmet food.

The nests in making bird’s nest soups are exclusively those of swiflets, the birds from the family of common swallow. These highly prized nests are built and clung to the ceiling of the caves as high as 70m by the birds mostly of seaweed that is mixed by their own saliva, making the process of harvesting an ordeal and expensive. Swiflets nests are mostly found on cliffs in areas along the Southern Chinese coast and South East Asia .

Bird’s nests are available in two forms – complete piece (cup shaped) which is better in quality, or broken pieces; and in two conditions -clean (often pale yellowish unless it’s another variety called “bloody bird’s nest” which is reddish in color) or unclean (blackish, contaminated with feathers and twigs). The best kind is devoid of pinfeathers and foreign particles and in good shape. The preparation of unclean bird’s nests can be a very tedious task. First you need to soak them for at least a day. It will expand, loosening most impurities to float to the top. Wash the nests under running water and repeat the process if necessary until nothing comes loose by itself anymore. The remaining stubborn impurities stuck in the nests will have to be patiently hand picked using a pair of tweezers aided by a pair of sharp eyes, which explains why, despite the price difference, very few people would go for the unclean nests. For clean nests, soak in cold water for about 3 hours or until soft, then clean them under running water and they are ready to go.

It’s expensive, difficult to prepare and not to mention, made from spit??!! Give me really good reasons why I should even think of trying it.

Rich in protein, calcium, iron and other nutrients, bird’s nest is good for all, young and old, men and women, the sick and mother-to-be. T he Chinese have been relishing bird’s nest as medicinal gourmet food for centuries and believe it replenishes and nourishes the internal organs, speed up recovery from illness, and boosts overall well being. Of all, the most widely known benefit of consuming bird’s nest is its ability to rejuvenate, restore youthfulness and ensure glowing and wrinkle-free complexion, the one reason sufficient to explain why it is such a hot commodity and luxury to the Chinese women. Last but not least, it tastes good too!

OK, now I have spent 12 hours cleaning the bird’s nest and know all the good things it can do to my skin, how do I cook them??!
Although it is a gourmet food, cooking bird’s nest is relatively simple, employing very few other ingredients and methods in cooking them. In most occasions, if not all, bird’s nests are either served in soup with chicken, ham or quail eggs and seasoned with salt; or as dessert where they are double-boiled with water and rock sugar. The texture of cooked bird’s nests is like that of strings of agar-agar or jelly. Alternatively, one can easily buy ready made “Bird’s Nest with Rock sugar” in bottles in Chinese specialty stores and some supermarkets with Asian sections.

Add comment December 27th, 2007

NATURE: Getting sidetracked by swallows

Waterbury Republican American, CT - Nov 30, 2007
All the talk has been about birds from the far north. Common redpolls, northern shrikes and a handful of other boreal species have Connecticut birders on high alert.

I got into the act Sunday afternoon when a short drive by the Southbury Training School Farm turned up a beautiful adult northern shrike at the corner of Cassidy and Purchase Brook roads. The afternoon sun lit up its pale plumage like a beacon.

But I’ve been much more fascinated during the past week by the swallows.

The mild microclimate created by a sewage treatment plant on the east shore of New Haven harbor has attracted an unseasonable group of insect-eaters. At least six swallows have been there all week, finding plenty of flying insects above the sewer beds.

The group consist of three cave swallows and three northern rough-winged swallows. Cave swallows, which nest in the Southwest, were unknown in Connecticut little more than a decade ago, but they’ve since established a pattern that carries post-breeding birds to the Great Lakes region and then south again into the New England and Middle Atlantic States in November.

The rough-winged swallows, although common breeders in Connecticut, historically cleared out of our region by late summer or early fall. However, in the last few years they’ve begun to show a tendency to linger, sometimes in large numbers.

The Niagara Falls region has hosted large flocks in the past couple years, and the birds right now in Connecticut suggest this is an emerging trend.

It might be impossible to prove, but it’s tempting to think that the late season rough-winged swallows are coming from the Southwest, following the same weather systems tied to the remarkable movements of the cave swallows.

Add comment December 26th, 2007

Effects of feather lice on flight behavior of male Barn Swallows (Hirundo rustica)

findarticles.com
Auk, The,  Jan 2002  by Barbosa, A,  Merino, S,  de Lope, F,  Moller, A P

ABSTRACT.-Parasites may affect host behavior in a number of ways, including their locomotory performance. We investigated whether the number of holes produced by the feather louse (Myrsidea rustica) affected flight behavior in adult male Barn Swallows (Hirundo rustica) by video-taping flight performance of individuals during escape and level flight.

Percentage of time spent flapping during foraging flight was positively related to number of holes, but not to other flight parameters such as wingbeat frequency. These results suggest indirect effects of feather lice on host performance that must be considered together with effects of thermoregulation and feather breakage. This is the first report of an effect of parasite load on flight behavior.RESUMEN.-Los parasitos pueden afectar el comportamiento de sus hospederos de diferentes maneras entre las que se incluye la locomocion. Investigamos si el numero de agujeros en el plumaje producidos por el piojo de pluma Myrsidea rustica afecta el comportamiento de vuelo de machos adultos de Hirundo rustica durante el escape y la alimentation. El numero de agujeros producidos por los piojos estuvo relacionado positivamente con el porcentaje de tiempo empleado en vuelo batido, pero no se encontro ninguna relacion con otros parametros de vuelo tales como la frecuencia de batido de las alas. Estos resultados sugieren la existencia de efectos indirectos de los piojos de pluma sobre sus hospederos que deben considerarse junto con sus efectos sobre la termorregulacion y el plumaje. Esta es la primera vez que se encuentra un efecto de un parasito sobre el comportamiento de vuelo.

Parasites have numerous effects on behavior, life history, and ecology of their hosts (e.g. Price 1980, Clayton and Moore 1997). Many studies have shown that parasites can change host behavior and thereby influence host fitness (Price 1980, Dobson 1988, Poinar 1991). However, most studies of host-parasite interactions have focused on life-history components such as reproductive success, quality of offspring or survival (see review in Moller 1997), sexual selection (Hamilton and Zuk 1982, Read 1988, Clayton 1991), dispersal (Brown and Brown 1992), and habitat selection (Emlen 1986, Chapman and George 1991). All those effects of parasites on host fitness are mediated by behavioral mechanisms that cause differences in performance. However, only very few studies have investigated the direct effect of parasites on locomotor performance of hosts, and those studies have exclusively been done on reptiles (Daniels 1985, Oppliger et al. 1996). This lack of information is all the more surprising given the importance of locomotion in efficient foraging and successful escape from predators (Webb 1986, Barbosa and Moreno 1999). As far as we know, effects of parasites on flight performance in birds have never been studied, although flight performance is one of the main ecological factors affecting bird life (Norberg 1990).

The feather louse (Myrsidea rustica) is abundant on adult and nestling Barn Swallows (Hirundo rustica; Moller 1994). This feather louse produces small holes in feathers causing damage to the plumage (Clayton 1991, Kose and Moller 1999). Feather lice have no effect on reproductive success of their hosts due to their vertical transmission and hence low level of virulence (Clayton and Tompkins 1995, Tompkins et al. 1996). However, feather lice have been found to indirectly affect thermoregulation and feather quality of avian hosts (Booth et al. 1993, Kose and Moller 1999). Although it has been suggested that parasites potentially may affect flight performance of avian hosts (Moller 1994), that possibility has not yet been tested.

The aim of this paper is to investigate whether the number of holes produced by the Myrsidea rustica affected flight behavior in adult male Barn Swallows. The Barn Swallow is a good model to test those relationships because it spends a large amount of time in flight while foraging.

Methods.-The study was carried out during the breeding season in 1997 in a colony of Barn Swallows located in the surroundings of Badajoz (38 deg 50′N, 6 deg 59′W), Spain, where colonies are located in rural buildings. Barn Swallows were captured in mist nets and we measured a number of morphological characters including length of outermost tail feathers, wingspan, and body mass.

During spring 1997, we filmed 25 male Barn Swallows released by hand (see Jones 1986 for a similar approach). Birds were previously captured and color-marked with color rings to provide easy identification. Several aspects of flight behavior were measured: (a) time taken to reach level flight (escape flight); (b) wingbeat frequency during escape flight until level flight was reached; (c) wingbeat frequency during level flight (foraging flight); and (d) percentage of total time flapping during foraging flight.

Timing of different kinds of flight mode (flapping and gliding) and wingbeat frequency was carried out in a magnetoscope using the frame by frame utility. Wingbeat frequency was determined by counting number of wingbeat cycles and measuring time taken (see Pennycuick 1990, Warrick 1998). Flight parameters (see below) were similar to those published by other authors (20% gliding flight; Turner 1980; 8.18 Hz wingbeat frequency; Warrick 1998), indicating reliability of our measurements of flight behavior. Moreover, when birds reached level flight, they immediately began to forage indicating that measurements during level flight were a reliable measure of foraging flights.
Myridisea rustica were counted on the basis of the number of holes in tail feathers. Estimated number of holes produced by lice in the tail is strongly positively related to the total load of lice obtained from extraction with chloroform vapor, indicating that holes in feathers provide a reliable estimate of Mallophaga abundance (Moller 1991).

Results.-The raw data of flight of male Barn Swallows are as follows: time to take-off (x(overscore) = 5.39 s, SE = 0.27), wingbeat frequency during take-off (x(overscore) = 8.06 Hz, SE = 0.20), wingbeat frequency during level flight (x(overscore) = 6.51 Hz, SE = 0.16), percentage of time flapping (x(overscore) = 88.2, SE = 1.82), and percentage of time gliding (x(overscore) = 11.8, SE = 1.82). Feather lice were present on 13 (52%) of the birds sampled with a mean number of holes = 9.6, SE = 1.58.

No significant relationship was found between number of holes produced by lice and the morphological variables measured (wingspan, F = 0.17, df = 1 and 23, r^sup 2^ = 0.007, P = 0.68; tail length, F = 2.68, df =land 23, r^sup 2^ = 0.10, P = 0.11).Results showed a positive and significant relationship between percentage of time in flapping flight and number of holes produced by lice (F = 5.35, df = 1 and 23, r^sup 2^ = 0.17, P = 0.03,). Other flight variables did not show any significant relationship with number of holes (time to take-off, F = 0.01, df = 1 and 23, r^sup 2^ = 0.0004, P = 0.91; wingbeat frequency at take-off, F = 0.06, df = 1 and 23, r^sup 2^ = 0.0025, P = 0.79; wingbeat frequency at level flight, F = 0.003, df = 1 and 23, r^sup 2^ = 0.0001, P = 0.95). As flight behavior could also be affected by variation in morphology among individuals (A. Barbosa unpubl. data), we performed a stepwise multiple regression analysis between percentage of time flapping and morphological variables (tail, wingspan, and body mass) and number of holes produced by lice. We found that only body mass and number of holes showed significant positive relationships with percentage of time flapping flight (partial correlation, body mass, r = 0.67, P

Discussion.-As far as we know, this is the first study investigating the relationship between parasites and flight performance in birds. Our results showed that individuals with high number of holes produced by lice spent a higher proportion of time in flapping flight during level flight, but no significant relationship was found between number of holes and wingbeat frequency or with flight behavior during escape flight. These results suggest that holes produced by lice did not produce mechanical constraints to flight. Variation in flight behaviour could be due to indirect effects.

The main effect of feather lice on their bird hosts is feather damage (Clayton 1991). Feather damage caused by Mallophaga can cause feather breakage (Kose and Moller 1999), which also may affect flight. However, none of the birds in our sample suffered from feather breakage when filmed, and effects of Mallophaga on flight behavior through breakage can therefore be excluded as an explanation for our results.Another effect of feather damage is increase of thermoregulation costs (Clayton 1991, Booth et al. 1993). Booth et al. (1993) found that Rock Doves (Columba livia) with high parasite loads suffered a reduction in body mass, and they suggested that fat reserves were used to cope with elevated metabolic rates of individuals with high parasite loads. If that were also the case in Barn Swallows, individuals with a high parasite load would have to increase their foraging efficiency through an increase in flapping flight to balance the extra metabolic cost due to Mallophaga. Barn Swallows forage on the wing, selecting large actively flying Diptera, which constitute their optimal diet (Turner 1982). Barn Swallows use flapping flight to capture such optimal prey (Turner 1980), whereas gliding is used mainly to save energy during flight, as in other birds (Norberg 1990).

On the other hand, lice load could indicate a poor condition of birds due to other factors (Potti and Merino 1995). In such cases birds could also increase foraging efficiency by trying to increase their condition. Changes in foraging behavior to increase foraging efficiency have been reported in parasitized fishes, even to the point of increasing predation risk (Milinski 1993).

Our study recorded a novel indirect effect of feather lice on their hosts, because abundance of feather lice estimated by the number of holes produced was related to flight behavior. This does not preclude direct effects of Mallophaga on the flight behavior of hosts through feather breakage, although that possibility remains to be tested.Acknowledgments.-A.B. was supported by a Marie Curie grant from the European Union and by a grant from the Direccion General de Ensenanza, Universidades e Investigation from the Junta de Extremadura (TEM98212) during field work and by Direction General de Ensenanza Superior project PB 98-0506 during writing. S.M. was supported by a postdoctoral grant of the Spanish Ministry of Education. Ed.L. was supported by grants for the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology BOS 2000-0293 and Junta de Extremadura IPR00A021, and A.PM. was supported by an ATIPE BLANCHE from Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.

LITERATURE CITED

BARBOSA, A., AND E. MORENO. 1999. Hindlimb morphology and locomotor performance in waders. An evolutionary approach. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 67:313-330.

BOOTH, D. T., D. H. CLAYTON, AND B. A. BLOCK. 1993. Experimental demonstration of the energetic cost of parasitism in free-ranging hosts. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B 253:125-129.

BROWN, C. R., AND M. B. BROWN. 1992. Ectoparasitism as a cause of natal dispersal in Cliff Swallows. Ecology 73:1718-1723.

CHAPMAN, B. R., AND J. E. GEORGE. 1991. The effects of ectoparasites on Cliff Swallow growth and survival. Pages 69-92 in Bird-Parasite Interac

tions: Ecology, Evolution, and Behaviour (J. E. Loye and M. Zuk, Eds.). Oxford University Press, Oxford.

CLAYTON, D. H. 1991. The influence of parasites on host sexual selection. Parasitology Today 7:329– 334.
CLAYTON, D. H., AND J. MOORE. 1997. Host-Parasite Evolution. General Principles and Avian Models. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

CLAYTON, D. H., AND D. M. TOMPKINS. 1995. Comparative effects of mites and lice on the reproductive success of Rock Doves (Columba livia). Parasitology 110:195-206.

DANIELS, C. B. 1985. The effect of infection by a parasitic worm on swimming and diving in the water skink. Journal of Herpetology 19:160-162.

DOBSON, A. P. 1988. The population biology of parasite-induced changes in host behavior. Quarterly Review of Biology 63:139-365.

EMLEN, J. T. 1986. Responses of breeding Cliff Swallows to nidicolous parasite infestations. Condor 88:110-111.

HAMILTON, W. D., AND M. ZUK. 1982. Heritable true fitness and bright birds: A role for parasites? Science 218:384-387.

JONES, G. 1986. Sexual chases in Sand Martins (Riparia riparia): Cues for males to increase their reproductive success. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 19:179-185.

KOSE, M., AND A. P. MOLLER. 1999. Sexual selection, feather breakage and parasites: The importance of white spots in the tail of the Barn Swallow. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 45:430436.

MILINSKI, M. 1993. Predation risk and feeding behavior. Pages 285-305 in Behavior of Teleost Fishes (T. J. Pitcher, Ed.). Chapman and Hall, London.

MOLLER, A. P. 1991. Parasites, sexual ornaments, and mate choice in the Barn Swallow. Pages 328-348 in Bird-Parasite Interactions: Ecology, Evolution, and Behaviour (J. E. Loye and M. Zuk, Eds.). Oxford University Press, Oxford.MOLLER, A. P. 1994. Sexual Selection and the Barn Swallow. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

MOLLER, A. P. 1997. Parasitism and the evolution of host life history. Pages 105-127 in Host-Parasite Evolution. General Principles and Avian Models (D. H. Clayton and J. Moore, Eds.). Oxford University Press, Oxford.

NORBERG, U. M. 1990. Vertebrate Flight. SpringerVerlag, Berlin.

OPPLIGER, A., M. L. CELERIER, AND J. CLOBERT. 1996.

Physiological and behavioral changes in common lizards parasitized by haemogregarines. Parasitology 113:433-438.

PENNYCUICK, C. J. 1990. Predicting wingbeat frequency and wavelength of birds. Journal of Experimental Biology 150:171-185.

PONAR, G.O., JR. 1991. Hairworm (Nematomorpha: Gordioidea) parasites of New Zealand wetas (Orthoptera: Stenopelmatidae). Canadian Journal of Zoology 69:1592-1599.

POTTI, J., AND S. MERINO.1995. Louse loads of Pied Flycatchers: Effects of host’s sex, age condition and relatedness. Journal of Avian Biology 26: 203-208.

POTTI, J., AND S. MERINO. 1995. Louse loads of Pied Flycatchers: Effects of host’s sex, age conditon and relatedness. Journal of Avain Biology 26: 203-208.

PRICE, P.W. 1980. Evolutionary Biology of Parasites. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

READ, A.F. 1988. Sexual selection and the role of parasites. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 3:97– 102.

TOMPKINS, D.M., T. JONES, AND D.H. CLAYTON. 1996. Effect of vertically transmitted ectoparasites on the reproductive success of Swifts (Apus apus). Functional Ecology 19:733-740.

TURNER, A.K. 1980. The use of time and energy by aerial feeding birds. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom.TURNER, A.K. 1982. Optimal foraging by the swallow: Prey size selection. Animal Behaviour 30: 862-872.

WARRICK, D.R. 1998. The turning- and linear- maneuvering performance of birds: The cost of efficiency for coursing insectivores. Canadian Jouranl of Zoology 76:1063-1079.

WEBB, P. W. 1986. Locomotion and predator-prey relationships. Pages 24-41 in Adaptation (G.V. Lauder and M.E. Feder, Eds.) University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Received 27 November 2000, accepted 17 July 2001.

Associate Editor: F. Moore

A. BARBOSA,1,5 S. MERINO,2 F. DE LOPE,3 AND A.P. MOLLER4

1Estacion Experimental de Zonas Aridar, CSIC, C/General Segura, 1, E-04001 Alemeria, Spain;

2Department de Ecologia Evolutia, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, CSIC, C/Jose Gutierrez AbasCal, 2, E-28006 Madrid, Spain;

3Departmento de Biologia Animal, Facultad de Biologia, Universidad de Extremadura, Avda de Elvas s/n, E-06071 Badajoz, Spain; and

4Laboratorie d’ Ecologie, CNRS-URA 258, Universite Pierre et Marie Curie, Bat A 7e etage, 7 quai St. Bernard, Case 237, F-75252 Paris Cedex 05, France

5E-mail: barbosa7eeza.csic.es

Copyright American Ornithologists’ Union Jan 2002
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved
• Growth and development of prefledging Canada Geese and Lesser Snow Geese: Ecological adaptation of physiological constraint?
by Badzinski, Shannon S
• Energetic consequences of clutch temperature and clutch size for a uniparental intermittent incubator: The Starling
by Reid, J M
• Importance of seed ingestion to an avian frugivore: An experimental approach to fruit choice based on seed load
by Stanley, Margaret C
• Diagnosability versus mean differences of Sage Sparrow subspecies
by Patten, Michael A
• Orientation of nocturnally migrating Swainson’s Thrush at dawn and dusk: Importance of energetic condition and geomagnetic cues
by Sandberg, Roland
• Elliott Coues Award, 2001: Raymond A. Paynter, Jr., and Melvin A Traylor, Jr
• Raptor migration in Israel and the Middle East: A summary of 30 years of field research
by Lott, Casey A
• Manakins (Pipridae) in second-growth and old-growth forests: Patterns of habitat use, movement, and survival
by Blake, John G
• Landbird counting techniques current practices and an alternative
by Rosenstock, Steven S
• Seabird supertrees: Combining partial estimates of procellariiform phylogeny
by Kennedy, Martyn
• Marion Jenkinson AOU Service Award, 2001: Ned K. Johnson
• Effects of hardwood reduction on winter birds in northwest Florida longleaf pine sandhill forests
by Provencher, Louis
• Towards reliable bird surveys: Accounting for individuals present but not detected
by Thompson, William L
• Bird Station Manual
by Pyle, Peter
• Double sampling to estimate density and population trends in birds
by Bart, Jonathan
• Maternal condition and nestling sex ratio in House Wrens
by Whittingham, Linda A
• Habitat use and breeding distribution of Magellanic Penguins in Northen San Jorge Gulf, Patagonia, Argentina
by Borboroglu, Pablo Garcia
• Brown-headed Cowbird parasitism of Ovenbirds in suburban forest fragments
by Hersek, Marta J
• Plasma amino acid concentrations as an indicator of protein availability to breeding Herring Gulls (Larus argentatus)
by Hebert, Craig E
• Composition and growth of King Eider ducklings in relation to egg size
by Anderson, Vanessa R
• Birds of British Columbia, Volume 4–Wood-Warblers through Old World Sparrows
by Walters, Eric L
• On grassland bird conservation in the northeast
by Norment, Christopher
• Continuous laying and clutch-size limitation in Mallards
by Arnold, Todd W
• Scales of food availability for an endangered insectivore, the Hawaii Akepa
by Fretz, J Scott
• Takahe: Fifty Years of Conservation Management and Research, The
by Wallace, George E
• Birds of New Guinea and the Bismarck Archipelago. A Photographic Guide
by LeCroy, Mary
• Density-dependent mass gain by Wilson’s Warblers during Stopover
by Kelly, Jeffrey F
• Trogons and Quetzals of the World
by Wenny, Dan
• William Brewster Memorial Award, 2001: Stephen I Rothstein
• Nocturnal heterothermy and torpor in the Malachite Sunbird (Nectarinia famosa)
by Downs, Colleen T
• Patterns of consumption and diet differentiation for three breeding warbler species during a spruce budworm outbreak
by McMartin, B
• Wood thrush movements and habitat use: Effects of forest management for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers
by Lang, Jason D
• Annual survival rates of wintering sparrows: Assessing demographic consequences of migration
by Sandercock, Brett K
• Bird Conservation on Golf Courses: A Design and Management Manual / Managing Wildlife Habitat on Golf Courses
by Main, Martin B
• Patterns of egg laying and breeding success in Humboldt Penguins (Spheniscus humboldti) at Punta San Juan, Peru
by Paredes, Rosana
• Effects of feather lice on flight behavior of male Barn Swallows (Hirundo rustica)
by Barbosa, A
• Why ornithologists should care about the theropod origin of birds
by Prum, Richard O
• Genetic parentage and mate guarding in the arctic-breeding Western Sandpiper
by Blomqvist, Donald
• Body condition and parental decisions in the Snow Petrel (Pagodroma nivea)
by Tveraa, Torkild
• 100 years ago in The American Ornithologists’ Union

Add comment December 19th, 2007

Doubts over Chernobyl wildlife recovery

[28.11.2007 12:29]  By Michael Hopkin, Nature
UNIAN News Agency, Ukraine - Nov 28, 2007
An argument has erupted over the environmental health of the area surrounding the Chernobyl nuclear reactor that exploded catastrophically more than two decades ago.

Humans are still forbidden to live within 30 kilometres of the site of the 1986 accident, described as the worst environmental disaster of all time. But this evacuation zone is still home to many bird and animal species. Some research has determined that this wildlife is still suffering the effects of the disaster; other ecologists have declared that the area`s ecosystem is thriving and that the radiation has had no lasting effect on wildlife.
A debate is now simmering in the pages of the journal Biology Letters over the specific issue of birds in the area. Researchers who believe that detailed census data show that bird populations have been affected by the radioactivity of the landscape are butting heads with another who thinks that this conclusion is flawed.
Swallows and barns
In July this year, Anders Møller of the Université Pierre et Marie Curie in Paris and Timothy Mousseau of the University of South Carolina in Columbia reported1 that, in regions where radiation remains highest, bird abundance and population density is reduced. But Jim Smith of the University of Portsmouth, UK, now criticizes2 that research. He argues that the effects could be due to declines in species such as barn swallows (Hirundo rustica ) that rely on the presence of humans to thrive.
More than 330,000 people were evacuated from the exclusion zone, which covers the Chernobyl region of Ukraine, and a large swathe of neighbouring Belarus, where prevailing winds blew much of the radioactive matter. Abandonment of farms by the evacuees could be the real reason why birds such as barn swallows now seem to be suffering, Smith argues.
“I don`t think they`ve proved there`s been damage to barn swallows [as a result of radioactivity],” says Smith. “It annoys me when I see people casting doubt on [ecosystem recovery] on the basis of a study of barn swallows.”
Møller, Mousseau and their colleagues respond in the same issue of the journal3, arguing that barn swallows commonly breed in wild sites as well as farms.
Keeping tabs
The argument highlights the fact that, Møller`s team argues, no proper effort has been made to monitor Chernobyl`s ecosystems. It claims that international organizations such as the World Health Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency have relied on “anecdotal evidence”.
“Why has there been no concerted effort to monitor the long-term effects of Chernobyl on free-living organisms and humans?” Møller and his colleagues write. Although there are no plans to repopulate the exclusion zone, an estimated 5 million people still live on land contaminated by the accident.
Smith argues that the biggest impacts of the accident on humans have clearly been “social and psychological”, as a result of the trauma of evacuation. He admits that published research on ecological impacts, in Western journals at least, is scant. But he points to evidence that rare and threatened species are colonizing the zone. And he notes that the Belarusian government has declared a large chunk of the zone as a “state radioecological reserve”.
Smith adds that the Russian-language literature contains many more detailed accounts of the health of Chernobyl`s wildlife. Many of these accounts, he says, suggest that wildlife is indeed bouncing back.
“We need to be coming to a consensus about whether this is true or not,” he says. “Ecosystems are complicated, and it`s very difficult to test hypotheses. It`s not an easy thing to do adequately.”
The debate comes just days after the United Nations declared an end to the `emergency phase` of the disaster. In a resolution adopted last week at its New York headquarters, it declared that efforts should now focus on recovery and sustainable development of those displaced by the evacuation, rather than treating them as victims in need of emergency aid. The report did not address wildlife remaining within the zone.
References
Møller, A. P. & Mousseau, T. A. Biol. Lett. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2007.0226 (2007).
Smith, J. T. Biol. Lett. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2007.0430 (2007).
Møller, A. P., Mousseau, T. A., de Lope, F. & Saino, N. Biol. Lett. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2007.0528 (2007).
By Michael Hopkin, Nature

Add comment December 18th, 2007

The status and conservation of the Edible-nest Swiftlet (Collocalia fuciphaga) in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands

linkinghub.elsevier.com
R. Sankaran
Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Anaikatty PO, Coimbatore 641 108, India
Received 19 January 1999; revised 18 June 1999; accepted 22 June 2000. Available online 12 December 2000.

Abstract

The nests of the Edible-nest Swiftlet (Collocalia fuciphaga) rank amongst the world’s most expensive animal products, which has resulted in high levels of exploitation of its nests in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, India. The population of the Edible-nest Swiftlet was assessed through nest counts, and declines in population were estimated through changes in nest yields. The minimum breeding population of C. fuciphaga was estimated to be 13,260 birds, and the species currently bred in 291 caves, and had abandoned 31 caves. Nest collection in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands had taken place in 95% of breeding sites. Less than 2% of the nests counted had either eggs or chicks in them. The decline in swiftlet nest yields in the Andaman islands, between the present and 5–8 years ago (195 caves) has been 61%, and between the present and over 10 years ago (45 caves) has been 83%. Depending on the patterns of nest collection, declines in yield in the Nicobar Islands range between 40 and 95%, with only one cave apparently not having undergone a significant loss. The Edible-nest Swiftlet is critically threatened (IUCN criteria A1c) in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, as it has undergone a reduction in numbers greater than 80% over the last 10 years. To arrest continuing declines, protective measures need to be urgently implemented. Concomitantly, the house farming of the Edible-nest Swiftlet, as has been established in Indonesia, needs to be developed as an ex-situ conservation measure in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

Author Keywords: Swiftlet; Andaman and Nicobar Islands; Conservation; Sustainable exploitation

Add comment December 17th, 2007

About Swiftlet

www.ediblebirdnest.com
Edible bird nest, also known as swiftlet nest, is made by certain species of the swiftlet family. The nest sometimes was known as Swiftlet nest. During breeding season, the male swiftlet construct their nest with glutinous strands of starched like saliva produced by a pair of large, salivary glands under their tongue. The nest looks like a cupped hand or a half cut bowl about 3-5 inches in diameter.

There are many species of swiftlet family around the world but not all species of swiftlet can produce edible nest. Only 5 species from the family of Apodidae known scientifically as Collocalia Fuciphaga (White-nest Swiftlet), Collocalia Maxima (Black-nest Swiftlet), Collocalia Esculenta (Grass-nest Swiftlet), Collocalia Vanikorensis (Mossy-nest Swiftlet), and Collocalia Brevirostris (Himalayan Swiftlet) can construct edible nest. Only the first three main edible nest producing swiftlet will be mentioned.

Collocalia Fuciphaga Species

Also known scientifically as Aerodromus Fuciphagus, this specie is popularly known as the White Nest or House Nest swiftlet. They construct their nests with a glutinous nest-cement produced by a pair of large, lobed salivary glands under the tongue. It is this nest-cement that constitutes the raw material of bird’s nest soup and renders the nest its commercial importance. The glutinous strands content in the nest of this species is about 85-97% in its unprocessed form, making it the most sought after in the market as well as commanding the highest price. Most if not all bird’s nest farm cultivate this particular specie.
C.Fuciphaga measures about 12 cm in its entire length and weighs about 15 to 18 gm. This swiftlet has a band of brownish gray feathers across the rump with dark brown eyes, black beak and feet. Eggs are laid 2 at a time, slightly oval in shape and white in colour.

Collocalia Maxima Species

Also known scientifically as Aerodromus Maxima, this species’ popular name is Black-nest Swiftlet because it uses its brown feather together with its glutinous strands as cement for making its nest, thereby making its nest blackish in colour. Its feet have feathers all over and thus contribute in the formation of its nest. The glutinous strands content in this nest is only 5-15% in its unprocessed form. This nest is very popular in making bottled or canned bird’s nest, and sold most popularly in cake form or as strips and crumbs.

C.Maxima is larger than the Fuciphaga measuring averagely at 13 cm and weighs about 28 gm. At a glance this 2 specie might look the same but on closer examination they are quite different. The distinguishing difference is its lower leg grows a row of small feathers. This swiftlets nests can be the red-legged or white-legged form and usually lays one egg.

Collocalia Esculenta Species

Its popular name is Grass Nest as it uses grass with its glutinous strands as cement for making its nest. The nest is normally brownish in colour with the glutinous strands content at about 5-15% in its unprocessed form. This swiftlet nest is highly demanded for restaurant consumption and is sold most popularly as strips or in crumbs and cake form.
C.Esculenta has a glossy, darkish blue-black colour and is smaller than C.Fuciphaga and C.Maxima measuring only about 10 cm in length.

All these species has slightly parted tails. Good quality nests from these species can be distinguished by the firm, white basal attachments and a comparatively large proportion of nest-cement with few feathers or grasses in the nest-cup, a thick body and in perfect shape, form as well as colour.

Add comment December 14th, 2007

Occurrence of a nonsulfated chondroitin proteoglycan in the dried saliva of Collocalia swiftlets (edible bird’s-nest)

glycob.oxfordjournals.org

Hiroki Nakagawa3,4, Yoichiro Hama4, Toshihisa Sumi4, Su-Chen Li3, Karol Maskos3,7, Kittiwan Kalayanamitra2,5, Shuji Mizumoto5,6, Kazuyuki Sugahara5,6 and Yu-Teh Li1,3

3 Department of Biochemistry, Tulane University Health Sciences Center School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA 70112
4 Department of Applied Biological Sciences, Saga University, Saga 840-8502, Japan
5 Department of Biochemistry, Kobe Pharmaceutical University, Higashinada-ku, Kobe 658-8558, Japan
6 Laboratory of Proteoglycan Signaling and Therapeutics, Faculty of Advanced Life Science, Hokkaido University, Frontier Research Center for Post-Genomic Science and Technology, Kita 21-jo, Nishi 11-choume, Kita-ku, Sapporo 001-0021, Japan

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed; Tel.: (504)-988-2451; Fax: (504)-988-2739; e-mail: yli1@tulane.edu

Received on June 19, 2006; revised on September 27, 2006; accepted on September 29, 2006

Despite their wide occurrence, proteoglycans (PGs) have never been isolated from the saliva of higher animals. We found that the Collocalia glycoproteins isolated from edible birds’-nests (the dried forms of regurgitated saliva of male Collocalia swiftlets) were rich in a PG containing nonsulfated chondroitin glycosaminoglycans (GAGs). We have devised a method to isolate a PG from the water extract of the white nest built by Aerodramus fuciphagus (white nest swiftlets) with a yield of 2-mg PG per gram nest. This PG contained 83% of carbohydrates, of which 79% were GalNAc and GlcUA (D-glucuronic acid) in an equimolar ratio. By using chondroitin AC lyase, the structure of GAGs in this PG was established to be chondroitin ( 4GlcUAĂź1 3GalNAcĂź1 )n chains. The average molecular mass of the chondroitin chain was estimated to be 49 kDa by gel filtration. We have isolated a linkage region hexasaccharide, HexUA1 3GalNAcĂź1 4GlcUAĂź1 3GalĂź1 3GalĂź1 4Xyl, from this PG by chondroitinase ABC digestion to show that the GAGs in this PG are also linked to the core protein through the common tetrasaccharide linker, GlcUAĂź1 3GalĂź1 3GalĂź1 4Xyl, found in various PGs. As water was not effective in extracting uronic acid-containing glycoconjugates from the black nest built by black nest swiftlets (A. maximus), we used 4 M guanidium chloride and anion-exchange chromatography in the presence of urea to extract and isolate about 30 mg of a chondroitin PG preparation from 10 g of the desialylated black nest. As the biological significance of chondroitin is still not well understood, bird’s nest should become a convenient source for preparing this unique GAG to study its biological functions.

Key words: chondroitin / proteoglycan / glycosaminoglycan / bird’s nest / saliva

2 Present address: Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand

7 Deceased, March 29, 2004.

None declared.

Add comment December 13th, 2007

Occurrence of a nonsulfated chondroitin proteoglycan in the dried saliva of Collocalia swiftlets (edible bird’s-nest)

glycob.oxfordjournals.org

Hiroki Nakagawa3,4, Yoichiro Hama4, Toshihisa Sumi4, Su-Chen Li3, Karol Maskos3,7, Kittiwan Kalayanamitra2,5, Shuji Mizumoto5,6, Kazuyuki Sugahara5,6 and Yu-Teh Li1,3

3 Department of Biochemistry, Tulane University Health Sciences Center School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA 70112
4 Department of Applied Biological Sciences, Saga University, Saga 840-8502, Japan
5 Department of Biochemistry, Kobe Pharmaceutical University, Higashinada-ku, Kobe 658-8558, Japan
6 Laboratory of Proteoglycan Signaling and Therapeutics, Faculty of Advanced Life Science, Hokkaido University, Frontier Research Center for Post-Genomic Science and Technology, Kita 21-jo, Nishi 11-choume, Kita-ku, Sapporo 001-0021, Japan

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed; Tel.: (504)-988-2451; Fax: (504)-988-2739; e-mail: yli1@tulane.edu

Received on June 19, 2006; revised on September 27, 2006; accepted on September 29, 2006

Despite their wide occurrence, proteoglycans (PGs) have never been isolated from the saliva of higher animals. We found that the Collocalia glycoproteins isolated from edible birds’-nests (the dried forms of regurgitated saliva of male Collocalia swiftlets) were rich in a PG containing nonsulfated chondroitin glycosaminoglycans (GAGs). We have devised a method to isolate a PG from the water extract of the white nest built by Aerodramus fuciphagus (white nest swiftlets) with a yield of 2-mg PG per gram nest. This PG contained 83% of carbohydrates, of which 79% were GalNAc and GlcUA (D-glucuronic acid) in an equimolar ratio. By using chondroitin AC lyase, the structure of GAGs in this PG was established to be chondroitin ( 4GlcUAĂź1 3GalNAcĂź1 )n chains. The average molecular mass of the chondroitin chain was estimated to be 49 kDa by gel filtration. We have isolated a linkage region hexasaccharide, HexUA1 3GalNAcĂź1 4GlcUAĂź1 3GalĂź1 3GalĂź1 4Xyl, from this PG by chondroitinase ABC digestion to show that the GAGs in this PG are also linked to the core protein through the common tetrasaccharide linker, GlcUAĂź1 3GalĂź1 3GalĂź1 4Xyl, found in various PGs. As water was not effective in extracting uronic acid-containing glycoconjugates from the black nest built by black nest swiftlets (A. maximus), we used 4 M guanidium chloride and anion-exchange chromatography in the presence of urea to extract and isolate about 30 mg of a chondroitin PG preparation from 10 g of the desialylated black nest. As the biological significance of chondroitin is still not well understood, bird’s nest should become a convenient source for preparing this unique GAG to study its biological functions.

Key words: chondroitin / proteoglycan / glycosaminoglycan / bird’s nest / saliva

2 Present address: Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand

7 Deceased, March 29, 2004.

None declared.

Add comment December 13th, 2007

Stewed Bird’s nest with Fresh Fruit

ediblebirdnest.com

Ingredients :
113 g soaked superior bird’s nest (not yet stewed)
94 rock sugar
suitable amount of water melon balls
suitable amount of honey-dew melon balls
2 cups water

Method :
1. Drain superior bird’s nest.

2. Put rock sugar (crushed) into a pot.
Add 2 cups of water. Cook over low heat until the sugar has dissolved.
Strain.

3. Pour Syrup into a steaming pot. Add superior bird’s nest. Stew over boiling water for 30 minutes. When bird’s nest and syrup cool, add fruit balls.
Serve.

Add comment December 11th, 2007