Do Carolina chickadees (Poecile carolinensis) and tufted titmice (Baeolophus bicolor) attend to the head or body orientation of a perched avian predator?

2016 ◽  
Vol 130 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven C. Kyle ◽  
Todd M. Freeberg
Keyword(s):  
Body Orientation ◽  
Avian Predator ◽  
Poecile Carolinensis ◽  
Carolina Chickadees

scholarly journals Field Metabolism and Water Flux of Carolina Chickadees During Breeding and Nonbreeding Seasons: A Test of the “Peak-Demand” and “Reallocation” Hypotheses

The Condor ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. 370-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul F. Doherty ◽  
Joseph B. Williams ◽  
Thomas C. Grubb
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Energy Expenditure ◽  
Breeding Season ◽  
Water Flux ◽  
Doubly Labeled Water ◽  
Peak Demand ◽  
Nonbreeding Season ◽  
Poecile Carolinensis ◽  
Northern Edge ◽  
Carolina Chickadees

AbstractWe tested the “peak-demand” and “reallocation” hypotheses of seasonal energy expenditure which predict, respectively, that energy expenditure is greatest during the breeding season or varies little seasonally. We tested these predictions by utilizing the doubly labeled water technique to estimate energy expenditure and water flux of Carolina Chickadees (Poecile carolinensis) in both the breeding and nonbreeding seasons. Similar to Weathers et al. (1999), we did not find support for either of these hypotheses, finding instead that energy expenditure was greater during the nonbreeding season. The fact that our study site was at the northern edge of the species' range, where winters are severe, may have influenced this result. Comparisons with other parid studies were equivocal because body size was an important factor in explaining seasonal energetics, and only the larger species have been examined during the breeding season.

Note types and coding in parid vocalizations. III: The chick-a-dee call of the Carolina chickadee (Poecile carolinensis)

2005 ◽  
Vol 83 (6) ◽  
pp. 820-833 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie L Bloomfield ◽  
Leslie S Phillmore ◽  
Ronald G Weisman ◽  
Christopher B Sturdy
Keyword(s):  
Acoustic Communication ◽  
Comparative Studies ◽  
Individual Recognition ◽  
Poecile Atricapillus ◽  
Poecile Carolinensis ◽  
Carolina Chickadee ◽  
Carolina Chickadees

Species of the genus Poecile Kaup, 1829 (the chickadees) are well suited to comparative studies of acoustic communication because their songs and calls occur in similar contexts and are acoustically similar. Here we provide careful, reliable descriptions and spectrographic exemplars for seven note types observed in the chick-a-dee calls of the Carolina chickadee, Poecile carolinensis (Audubon, 1834). The note types include A, C, and D notes similar to those found in the chick-a-dee calls of the black-capped chickadee, Poecile atricapillus (L., 1766), a complex of three B-note subtypes (B1, B2, and B3) and a rare note type previously identified as high-tee-chick. In common with black-capped chickadees, the organization of note types in Carolina chickadees follows a stringent syntax; the position of note types within a call is fixed. In contrast with black-capped chickadees, the chick-a-dee call syntax of the Carolina chickadee includes a B-note complex composed of three acoustically distinct subtypes of B notes, and follows a strict syntax: A→(B1→B2→B3)→C→D. Analysis of call variability suggests that the B-note complex (in particular, the most commonly sung note, B2) and the D note may provide reliable cues for species and individual recognition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document