Science Shots: Bird, More Birds, then Hitchcock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

It’s spring in northern California. In the past week, birdsong has appeared after a couple of months of near silence. That’s earlier than I’ve heard it before. Meanwhile new record high temperatures are being set. Scanning the science journals, I find these interesting papers on bird populations, climate change, and speciation:

  • In the current issue of Proceedings of the Royal Society B, a paper assessing how the earlier onset of spring has affected 117 European migratory bird species during the past past five decades. There’s concern in the world of conservation biology that the ever earlier arrival of spring may be costing migrants their traditional livelihoods because they’re arriving too late on their breeding grounds. This phenomenon is called ecological mismatch. It occurs, say, when migrants arrive after the insects they need to feed their young have already hatched and dispersed. Or after the flowers they feed on have already bloomed and wilted. The authors used accumulated winter and spring temperatures (degree-days) as a proxy for the timing of spring biological events. They found that migrants, particularly those wintering in sub-Saharan Africa, now arrive at higher degree-days, accumulating a ‘thermal delay.’ Species with greater thermal delays have suffered larger population declines. From the paper:

[T]his evidence was not confounded by concomitant ecological factors or by phylogenetic effects. These findings provide general support to the largely untested hypotheses that migratory birds are becoming ecologically mismatched and that failure to respond to climate change can have severe negative impacts on their populations.

Aquatic warbler (Acrocephalus paludicola). Photo by S. Seyfert, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.Aquatic warbler (Acrocephalus paludicola). Photo by S. Seyfert, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

 

  • A new paper in Polar Biology summarizes what we currently know about the numbers of emperor penguins—those March of the Penguins birds—who breed in the dead of winter in Antarctica. There’s a lot we don’t know. We’re still discovering where all their colonies are located. The total number of breeding pairs is unknown, as is the total population. Yet the IUCN Red List categorizes the species as ‘least concern,’ claiming the global population appears to be stable. The author notes the fail:

[This paper] examines what is known about the state of various colonies and demonstrates that currently available data are inadequate for a trend assessment of the global population.

 Life cycle of emperor penguins. Image: Zina Deretsky, National Science Foundation.Life cycle of emperor penguins. Image: Zina Deretsky, National Science Foundation.

 

  • In another paper in the current Proceedings of the Royal Society B, the authors examine differences in the genes and the appearances of magnificent frigatebirds—those huge sailors of the tropical seas. In particular the researchers investigated whether the frigatebirds of the Galapagos Islands have become genetically isolated from others of their kind, or if ocean highways have kept them connected. The data showed plenty of genetic mixing among magnificent frigatebirds of Central and South America, “even across the Isthmus of Panama, which is a major barrier to gene flow in other tropical seabirds:”

In contrast, individuals from the Galapagos were strongly differentiated from all conspecifics, and have probably been isolated for several hundred thousand years. Our finding is a powerful testimony to the evolutionary uniqueness of the taxa inhabiting the Galapagos archipelago and its associated marine ecosystems. 

 Magnificent frigatebird (Fregata magnificens). Photo by  John Picken, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.Magnificent frigatebird (Fregata magnificens). Photo by John Picken, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

 

Finally, in The Birds, Alfred Hitchcock never really told us what was pissing off the gulls and crows of Bodega Bay. He based the film on a 1952 novella by Daphne du Maurier, in which she implied the birds were riled by the East Wind, a metaphor for communism. Here’s a 100-second recut of The Birds. Judge for yourself what’s annoying them. I think it’s the whistling.

 

The papers:

  • Nicola Saino, et al. Climate warming, ecological mismatch at arrival and population decline in migratory birds. 2011. Proc. R. Soc. B.
  • Frank Hailer, et al. Long-term isolation of a highly mobile seabird on the Galapagos. 2011. Proc. R. Soc. B.  DOI:

 

 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate