Hybridization between House and Tree Sparrow (Passer domesticus,P. montanus)

1993 ◽  
Vol 134 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro J. Cordero ◽  
J. Denis Summers-Smith
Keyword(s):  
Passer Domesticus ◽  
Tree Sparrow

scholarly journals The Use Of Nest-Boxes By Two Species Of Sparrows (Passer Domesticus And P. Montanus) With Opposite Trends Of Abundance – The Study In Warsaw

2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej Węgrzynowicz
Keyword(s):  
House Sparrow ◽  
Passer Domesticus ◽  
Breeding Period ◽  
Specific Rate ◽  
Tree Sparrow ◽  
Urbanization Gradient ◽  
Nest Box ◽  
Nest Sites ◽  
Nest Boxes ◽  
Housing Estates

Abstract The occupation of nest-boxes by House- and Tree Sparrow in Warsaw was investigated in 2005-2009 and in 2012. Riparian forests, younger and older parks in downtown, and housing estates were included in the study as 4 types of habitats corresponding to the urbanization gradient of Warsaw. 1035 inspections of nest-boxes suitable for both species (type A) were carried out during the breeding period and 345 nest-boxes of other types were inspected after the breeding period. In order to determine the importance of nest-boxes for both species on different plots, obtained data were analyzed using Nest-box Importance Coefficient (NIC). This coefficient describes species-specific rate of occupation of nest-boxes as well as the contribution of the pairs nesting in them. Tree Sparrow occupied a total of 33% of A-type nest-boxes, its densities were positively correlated with the number of nest-boxes, and seasonal differences in occupation rate were low for this species. The NIC and the rate of nest-box occupation for Tree Sparrow decreased along an urbanization gradient. House Sparrow used nest-boxes very rarely, only in older parks and some housing estates. Total rate of nest-box occupation for House Sparrow in studied plots was 4%, and NIC was relatively low. However, locally, installation of nest-boxes limited House Sparrow decline caused by reduced availability of its typical nest sites. Both species used only A-type nest boxes. The rate of nest-box occupation by House Sparrow decreased sharply since 1980s, and opposite trend was observed for Tree Sparrow. These alterations are consistent with the general changes in both species populations in Warsaw in recent decades: decrease in House Sparrow and increase in Tree Sparrow number. The presented results suggest that loss of nest sites may not be the main reason of decrease in House Sparrow population in Warsaw. Additionally, House Sparrow decline leads to increase in nest sites (including nest-boxes) available for Tree Sparrow, what may contribute to the expansion of the latter species.

scholarly journals Insect parasites inhabiting Passer domesticus (linnaeus, 1758) and P. Montanus (linnaeus, 1758) (aves: passeriformes) nests in Voronezh

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-131
Author(s):  
R.T. Tewelde ◽  
◽  
S.P. Gaponov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Dominant Species ◽  
House Sparrow ◽  
Passer Domesticus ◽  
Black Soil ◽  
Flea Species ◽  
Tree Sparrow ◽  
Chewing Lice ◽  
Black Soil Region ◽  
First Time ◽  
Insect Parasites

In Voronezh, 14 species of parasitic insects were found in sparrows and their nests during 2017–2020. It was found 6 species of chewing lice: Menacanthus eurysternus Giebel, 1874, Ricinus fringillae De Geer, 1778, Sturnidoecus ruficeps Giebel, 1866, Brueelia subtilis Giebel, 1874, B. borini Lunkaschu, 1970, and Philopterus montani Zlotorzycka, 1964. Among them, Menacanthus eurysternus was the dominant species for the House Sparrow (dominance 21.70 %, prevalence 10.00) while B. subtilis (dominance 18.60 %, prevalence 8.00) and B. borini (dominance 16.29 %, prevalence 6.00) were subdominant. For the European Tree Sparrow, the dominant species were B. borini (dominance 22.07 %, prevalence 8.00) and Ph. montani (dominance 22.07 %, prevalence 10.6). All six chewing lice species were observed for the first time in Voronezh and the Central Black Soil Region of Russia. Three species of fleas – Ceratophillus gallinae (Schrank, 1803), C. fringillae Walker, 1856, and C. tribulus Jordan, 1926) – were registered. The dominant flea species was C. gallinae (for the House Sparrow, dominance was 67.13 %, prevalence 45.00; for the Tree Sparrow, dominance was 66.47 %, prevalence 73.33). Abundance of fleas for House Sparrow nestlings was 0.724, and 1.153 for Tree Sparrow nestlings. Parasitic flies were represented by five species: Ornithomya avicularia (Linnaeus, 1758), O. fringillina Curtis, 1836, O. chloropus Bergroth 1901 (Hippoboscidae), Protocalliphora azurea Fll., 1817, and Trypocalliphora braueri (Hendel, 1901) (Calliphoridae). Among louse flies O. avicularia was the dominant species (for House sparrow, dominance was 85.93 %, prevalence 53.00; for Tree Sparrow, dominance was 68.64 %, prevalence 20.00). Larvae of P. azurea were found in 13.00 % of House Sparrow nests and in 15.00 % of Tree Sparrow nests. For House Sparrow nestlings, intensity was 3.42 % with abundance 0.30, while for Tree Sparrow nestlings, intensity was 0.15 % with abundance 2.05. Larvae of T. braueri were found in 31.00 % of House Sparrow nests and in 40.00 % of Tree Sparrow nests. For House Sparrow nestlings, intensity was 0.164 with abundance 0.088. For Tree Sparrow nestlings, intensity was 0.106 with abundance 0.220. Significant fluctuations of prevalence and abundance of the larvae in different years were found.

Fertile House Ssparrow X Tree Sparrow (Passer domesticus XPasser montanus) hybrids?

2000 ◽  
Vol 141 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erling Johan Solberg ◽  
Thor Harald Ringsby ◽  
Andreas Altwegg ◽  
Bernt-Erik Sæther
Keyword(s):  
Passer Domesticus ◽  
Tree Sparrow

Three hundred years of House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) persecution in Germany

2007 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. SEITZ
Keyword(s):  
Rural Areas ◽  
House Sparrow ◽  
Bird Species ◽  
Passer Domesticus ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Population Increase ◽  
World War ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Urban And Rural Areas ◽  
Second World

Modernization of agriculture, economic development and population increase after the end of the Thirty Years' War caused authorities in many parts of Germany to decree the eradication of so-called pest animals, including the House Sparrow. Farmers were given targets, and had to deliver the heads of sparrows in proportion to the size of their farms or pay fines. At the end of the eighteenth century German ornithologists argued against the eradication of the sparrows. During the mid-nineteenth century, C. L. Gloger, the pioneer of bird protection in Germany, emphasized the value of the House Sparrow in controlling insect plagues. Many decrees were abolished because either they had not been obeyed, or had resulted in people protecting sparrows so that they always had enough for their “deliveries”. Surprisingly, various ornithologists, including Ernst Hartert and the most famous German bird conservationist Freiherr Berlepsch, joined in the war against sparrows at the beginning of the twentieth century, because sparrows were regarded as competitors of more useful bird species. After the Second World War, sparrows were poisoned in large numbers. Persecution of sparrows ended in Germany in the 1970s. The long period of persecution had a significant but not long-lasting impact on House Sparrow populations, and therefore cannot be regarded as a factor in the recent decline of this species in urban and rural areas of western and central Europe.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document