A dictionary of birds

Newton, Alfred F.; Gadow, Hans; Lydekker, Richard

doi:10.5962/bhl.title.168963

Cited by 124 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The symphysis (5 synostosis interclavicularis 5 apophysis furculae sensu Baumal and Witmer, 1993) is located at the midline and represents the area of fusion of the two primary clavicles. Some taxa including many parrots, owls, Buceros, and Alcedo never ossify the symphysis; instead, the symphysis is either cartilage or fibrous tissue (Newton, 1896;Baumel and Witmer, 1993). The epicleidium (5 extremitas omalis claviculae 5 extremital scapularis) refers to the dorsal expansion of the furcula ramus proximally.…”

Section: Background Anatomical Terminologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The theropod furcula

Nesbitt

Turner

Spaulding

et al. 2009

Journal of Morphology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The furcula is a structure formed by the midline fusion of the clavicles. This is the element which is unique to theropods and is important for understanding the link between birds and other theropods. New specimens from basal theropods suggest that the furcula appeared very early in theropod history. We review furcula development, function, and morphology, as well as the anatomical terminology applied to it. Furcular morphology is highly variable in crown-group avians but is rather conserved among nonavian theropods. Here we review, or describe for the first time, the furculae in many nonavian theropods. Furculae occur in nearly all major clades of theropods, as shown by new theropod specimens from the Early Cretaceous of China and a close inspection of previously collected specimens. Informative phylogenetic characters pertaining to the furcula occur throughout Theropoda, though care should be take to consider taphonomic effects when describing furcular morphology.

show abstract

Section: Background Anatomical Terminologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The theropod furcula

Nesbitt

Turner

Spaulding

et al. 2009

Journal of Morphology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, it appears that many or all of the tropical flocks commented upon include species that seldom, if ever, capture insects on the wing. Newton ( 1896), Moreau (1948), and Slud ( 1960) have all suggested that foraging in a flock results in a more efficient method of finding food, though they present little quantitative information to support such an interpretation. Both Miller ( 1922) and Short ( 1%1) point out that the spacing maintained in these assemblages lessens the probability that an individual will forage in the same station that another one has just utilized.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological Aspects of Some Mixed‐Species Foraging Flocks of Birds

Morse¹

1970

Ecological Monographs

434

296

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mixed—species flocks of birds composed of chickadees, titmice, woodpeckers, nuthatches, creepers, kinglets, and wood warblers were studied in several habitats in Louisiana, Maryland, and Maine. Chickadees and titmice usually led these groups. Both the size of the flock and density of birds varied with the habitat. An inverse relation existed between the density of birds in a habitat and the percentage of them that were species participating in flocks. Individuals of species regularly participating in flocks sometimes were found away from them. The tendency for such an individual to be in a flock was inversely related to the density of birds in the habitat. Hostile interactions were infrequent in flocks, being mostly of an intraspecific nature. A dominance hierarchy existed between the different species in flocks. A definite distance was maintained between individuals. As flock size increased the area occupied per individual decreased. The larger flocks were, the faster they usually moved. Each species favored certain parts of the habitat when foraging, though overlap existed between almost all pairs of species. The commonest species (Chickadees, titmice, kinglets) overlapped heavily. Subordinate species foraging in the presence of dominant species changed their areas of foraging, but little or no tendency was seen for subordinates to affect the foraging of dominants. Subordinates might either spread out over alternative foraging areas or concentrate their activities more strongly in a few areas. Most flock members responded markedly to predators; however, few predators were observed during the study. Many of the responses seen were delivered to inappropriate stimuli. Several factors suggest a direct relationship between population density and food supply. Flocking appears to be an effective adaptation to difficult conditions. If a species adjusts its foraging in the presence of another species, possibilities of hostilities should be minimized. Subordinate species usually moved to parts of the habitat to which they were well—adapted. If dominant species are absent, however, opportunism by the subordinate may allow it to take advantage of otherwise unused resources. Dominants may obtain a more predictable portion of the food supply by participating in flocks that if solitary. Constant movement may insure that birds obtain the most readily available food. Large flocks may move rapidly because their individuals are more crowded than those in small flocks. With this restriction either increased speed or more concentrated foraging would be predicted. The low frequency of predators suggests that evasive responses of flock members may have been more advantageous than at present.

show abstract

“…The broadbills (Eurylaimidae) are a group of eight genera and 14 species of suboscine passerines confined to the Old World tropics. Newton (1896) credits Baron de Selys-Longchamps with first recognising the eurylaimids as a distinct family in 1842. However, the passerine affinities of the group were not immediately appreciated and in early works it was variously placed near the Caprimulgidae, in or near the Coraciidae, in the Todidae, Muscicapidae, Pipridae or Cotingidae (cf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taxonomic Comments on the Eurylaimidae

Olson

1971

Ibis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY On the basis of supposed differences in the shape of the spina externa of the sternum, the number of cervical vertebrae, the deep plantar tendons, the quadrato‐jugal articulation, and the size of the hallux, the Eurylaimidae were put in a separate suborder, the Eurylaimi. All of these characters are now shown to be variable within the family or shared with other suboscine families. It is recommended that the subordinal designation “Eurylaimi” be abandoned and that the family be included in the suborder Tyranni. A number of characters point to the Cotingidae as the nearest possible extant relatives of the Eurylaimidae. The Eurylaimidae consist of a number of unrelated genera with several relict species, and probably represent the remains of an ancient, once more widespread group that became isolated and gave rise to the suboscine fauna in South America while being largely replaced by oscines in the Old World. Recognition of subfamilies within the Eurylaimidae is discouraged. Smitkornis should be considered the most advanced of the eurylaimids. The sequence of suboscine families is discussed and a rearrangement is suggested.

show abstract

A dictionary of birds

Cited by 124 publications

References 0 publications

The theropod furcula

The theropod furcula

Ecological Aspects of Some Mixed‐Species Foraging Flocks of Birds

Taxonomic Comments on the Eurylaimidae

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About