Alan G. Knox

Feather protein as a source of avian taxonomic information

Abstract 1. 1. Reduced and carboxymethylated barbs (SCMK) from the feathers of a number of species were examined electrophoretically. 2. 2. Differences were found between all the species studied. There was no significant intra-individual or intra-specific variation. 3. 3. There was a correlation between the similarity of the electrophoretic patterns and the closeness of the relationship between species. 4. 4. The results, and the ready availability of samples, indicate that feather protein has considerable potential as a source of taxonomic information.

The first foreign recovery of a British-ringed bird and the first single-species ringing projects

Celebration of the centenary of ‘modern’ bird ringing in Britain in 2009 led to a number of publications on the history of ringing in Britain; these listed various milestones in the scheme. The first foreign recovery of a British-ringed bird is often quoted as a Common Tern Sterna hirundo ringed in Cumbria on 30 July 1909 and found exhausted in northwest Spain on 21 September 1909 (eg Balmer et al 2008, Anonymous 2009a and, by timing and implication, Anonymous 2009b). There is, however, an earlier recovery of a Eurasian Wigeon Anas penelope, one of a brood of five ducklings ringed at the head of Loch Brora, in Sutherland, on 19 June 1909 under the auspices of the Aberdeen University Bird-Migration Inquiry. It was caught subsequently on 3 September 1909 in a duck decoy at Westpolder, Ulrum, Groningen, in the Netherlands (as reported in several publications, eg Thomson 1909, 1911a, 1911b, 1912, 1921). Another from this distinguished brood of ducks was shot on about 2 January 1911 on the Nottinghamshire Trent. It is curious that such a well-published record as the Wigeon should have been overlooked, especially as it was thought that all the British ring-recovery data had been computerised and used in the Migration Atlas (Wernham et al 2002). In discussions with staff at the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO), it emerged that some of the older recoveries from the Aberdeen Inquiry were not on the database. Although much of the recovery data from Aberdeen had been transferred, ultimately, to the BTO, some of the very earliest records were apparently missing. Fortunately, most of these were published individually (Thomson 1912, 1913, 1915) and it should be possible to assemble the data for computerisation. In Britain, large-scale, collaborative ringing, using uniquely numbered rings bearing return addresses, began in 1909 with Landsborough Thomson’s Aberdeen Inquiry and Harry Witherby’s scheme operated through British Birds (Greenwood 2009). There had been earlier small ringing projects on, for example, Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris, Northern Gannet Morus bassanus and Eurasian Woodcock Scolopax rusticola, usually using rings that were not uniquely numbered, and mainly without addresses (see Thomson 1911a). The first collaborative, single-species special ringing enquiry using ‘modern’ methods is often thought to have targeted Sand Martins Riparia riparia in 1962–68 (Greenwood 2009). Fifty years earlier than this, in a pioneering collaboration between ringing and business, ‘An influential body of owners and tenants of Scottish grouse [Willow Ptarmigan Lagopus lagopus] moors [came] to the conclusion that a number of questions of vital importance to grouse can only be decided by placing rings on a large number of birds’ (Graham 1913). Witherby, as organiser of the British Birds scheme, was appointed to manage the project, which issued rings with the word ‘grouse’ stamped on the inside, and a unique number and Witherby’s High Holborn address on the outside. The rings were distributed mainly to moor owners, and keepers were encouraged to check shot birds for rings. Witherby’s trespass into the home territory of Landsborough Thomson’s Aberdeen Inquiry quickly drew fire from Eagle Clarke (Clarke 1913). The first, and apparently only, published report from the grouse inquiry indicated that over 1,000 birds had been ringed and 75 recovered, of which only three were not from the moors where they had been ringed (Witherby 1913, see also Witherby 1914 for a further recovery). It was hoped that more birds would be ringed the following year but the Inquiry faltered, presumably with the loss of keepers to the war effort (see eg Tapper 1992). This project is probably little known to ornithologists today because it was advertised only in newspapers and The Field. It is surprising that Witherby failed to refer to it in British Birds. There have been no fewer than three grouse-ringing inquiries, reflecting the economic importance of the species; all pre-date the Sand Martin scheme and the latter two originated in Aberdeen. The second grouse scheme ran from 1931 to the start of the Second World War. It was organised by Professor James Ritchie while he was employed at Aberdeen and run from Marischal College in Aberdeen until 1936, after which he took the scheme with him when he moved to Edinburgh University. While at Aberdeen, rings were numbered up to 22,140. At Edinburgh the final ring number in a new sequence was 12,743, though I am not aware how many * Email: a.g.knox@abdn.ac.uk