Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 5224195

Inability to predict geographic origin of Yellow-headed Blackbirds, Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus, during migration

Abstract

Yellow-headed Blackbirds (Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus) collected at different breeding locations in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and North Dakota exhibit clearly discernable morphometric differences with larger bodied birds found at more northern and western locations. We reduced eight skeletal measurements and body length from adult female and male Yellow-headed Blackbirds to their first two principal components. Principal component scores progressively increased at more northwestern locations. Principal component scores were also derived from measurements of birds collected in central North Dakota throughout summer and fall. We hypothesized an increase in principal component scores of Yellow-headed Blackbirds from summer through fall within central North Dakota as larger bodied migrants arrived and displaced local breeding birds. However, we were unable to detect an increase in principal component scores from mid-June though mid-September over two years of study. Discriminant models that were developed to distinguish birds breeding in Canada from those breeding in the USA were poor predictors of the migratory status of Yellow-headed Blackbirds. Thus, we were unable to exploit the morphometric differences inherent among Yellow-headed Blackbirds breeding at different geographic locations to quantify the timing or the magnitude of their migration through central North Dakota.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D.J. Twedt, G.M. Linz, W.J. Bleier. 2001. Inability to predict geographic origin of Yellow-headed Blackbirds, Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus, during migration. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/5224195

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) recolonization failure: A Minnesota case study

During the past few decades, Gray Wolves ( Canis lupus ) have recolonized many areas in the United States and Europe. In many other cases, however, although dispersing wolves reached areas with adequate prey, a population failed to recolonize. Herein, we provide a case study detailing how a wolf pack attempted for three years to recolonize an area 55 km from a long-established population and within 25 km of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota, but failed. The pack produced three litters of pups and at one time included 11–19 members, but it preyed on livestock and dogs and, consequently, was lethally removed. The history of this pack’s attempt to recolonize an area long devoid of wolves exemplifies the issues that have prevented earlier recolonizations in non-wild lands in Minnesota and elsewhere and that promise to do so well into the future.

Minnesota

Extinguishing a learned response in a free-ranging gray wolf (Canis lupus)

A free-ranging Gray Wolf (Canis lupus), habituated to human presence (the author) on Ellesmere Island, Canada, learned to anticipate experimental feeding by a human, became impatient, persistent, and bold and exhibited stalking behaviour toward the food source. Only after the author offered the wolf about 90 clumps of dry soil over a period of 45 minutes in three bouts, did the wolf give up this behaviour. To my knowledge, this is the first example of extinguishing a learned response in a free-ranging wolf and provides new insight into the learning behaviour of such animals.

Ellesmere Island

White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) subsidize gray wolves (Canis lupus) during a moose (Alces americanus) decline: A case of apparent competition?

Moose ( Alces americanus ) in northeastern Minnesota have declined by 55% since 2006. Although the cause is unresolved, some studies have suggested that Gray Wolves ( Canis lupus ) contributed to the decline. After the Moose decline, wolves could either decline or switch prey. To determine which occurred in our study area, we compared winter wolf counts and summer diet before and after the Moose decline. While wolf numbers in our study area nearly doubled from 23 in winter 2002 to an average of 41 during winters 2011–2013, calf:cow ratios (the number of calves per cow observed during winter surveys) in the wider Moose range more than halved from 0.93 in 2002 to an average of 0.31 during 2011–2013. Compared to summer 2002, wolves in summers 2011–2013 consumed fewer Moose and more White-tailed Deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ). While deer densities were similar during each period, average vulnerability, as reflected by winter severity, was greater during 2011–2013 than 2002, probably explaining the wolf increase. During the wolf increase Moose calves remained a summer food item. These findings suggest that in part of the Moose range, deer subsidized wolf numbers while wolves also preyed on Moose calves. This contributed to a Moose decline and is a possible case of apparent competition and inverse-density-dependent predation.

Canadian Field-Naturalist