• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Crossbills (1 Viewer)

Sorry viator, I'm not that familiar with Asian Crossbills. I do know of a recording of an Asian Crossbill in the Borror Lab of Bioacoustics that showed quite the resemblance to Type 1 in North America. There appears to be a finite number of different flight calls that Red/Common Crossbills give, and therefore you find similarities between flight calls from continent to continent. I'm not saying they are exact matches, but they can be quite similar.
 
Last edited:
Spain

Edelaar, Alonso, Lagerveld, Senars & Björkland (in press). Population differentiation and restricted gene flow in Spanish crossbills: not isolation-by-distance but isolation-by-ecology. J Evol Biol. [abstract]
 
I’ve read through this thread with great interest. My understanding of the arguments are:

It is proposed that the use of different types of conifers for foraging can result in the formation of subspecies/species of crossbills by limiting opportunities for gene flow. The idea is that birds with different sized beaks are better adapted at extracting seeds from some types of cones than others – big beaks for tough pine cones, slender beaks for little larch cones etc. By foraging in flocks Crossbills can feed more efficiently. This efficiency for an individual is increased if the other members of your flock have similar sized beaks and feed on the trees that best suit your beak size. Breeding success is increased if your mate has a similar beak size. Birds with different sized beaks tend to have different types of calls. The distinct calls allow Crossbills to form flocks and pairs with birds that have a similar sized beak and conifer preference. Consequently gene flow between birds with different sized beaks is limited. Additional factors such as coning patterns of tree species also influences the opportunity for forming mixed flocks/pairs – eg cyclic coning patterns of spruces (promoting nomadic behaviour) v. regular coning of pines (promoting sedentary behaviour). So, there is evidence that differences in feeding ecology could lead to adaptations that result in breeding isolation from other Crossbills living in the same region that have a different feeding ecology. At the extreme ends of the beak-size range the extent of interbreeding (gene flow) is so limited that they are regarded as full species (Parrot v Common Crossbill). In the middle of beak size range is the ‘Scottish Crossbill’.

To me, identifying Crossbill species by call and beak size seems to be fraught with problems. I’m not so sure how easy it is to categorize Crossbills in terms of beak size or call type. Variation in Crossbill calls may simply be a physical consequence of beak size and syrinx size (this has been shown in Darwin’s Finches). If so, call types may also show continuous variation (like beak size) and they may not be easily categorised as one type or another. How distinctive are these named Crossbill call types? Are some calls intermediate types? Furthermore, calls may be learned to a greater or lesser extent (and the ability to match call types could be constrained by beak/syrinx size). Nor do we know how constant specific call types are over time – do they ‘evolve’ at a rapid rate – changing within the lifetime of a bird, over years, decades?

The Scottish Crossbill is classified as a full species on the basis that it supposedly has a diagnostic call i.e., there is a call only given by birds with a beak size that is intermediate (but overlapping) on the scale from small (Common) to large (Parrot). Birds with this diagnostic call apparently do not breed with larger and smaller beaked birds that do not possess this call (though the evidence for this claim seems fairly weak). It is certainly interesting that no such intermediate-sized Crossbills occur in Scandinavia where Parrots and Commons co-exist. Or is this because nobody has looked yet?

Subspecies are the result of geographic separation (which could also involve ecological separation). In animals geographical separation is implicit in the definition of a subspecies. So differentiation based solely on ecology, as in the case of Crossbills, creates a taxonomic problem. This is compounded when the degree of separation is not so clear (as in the case of Scottish Crossbill). So whatever you decide to call them – species, subspecies, call-types – it seems to me the problem for birdwatchers/taxonomists is that it is difficult (impossible?) to categorize the continuous variation that is exhibited by Crossbills in terms beak size, call variations and degree of gene flow. Evolutionary biologists don't really need to categorize the different Crossbill types - they just need to demonstrate the process of adaptation/isolation. Personally, I think I’ll stick with Parrot, Common and Two-barred as being ‘species’ in the Palearctic – with the rest being intermediate, locally adapted subspecies of the Common Crossbill.
 
In the middle of beak size range is the ‘Scottish Crossbill’.

Not so. mean Scottish Crossbill bill depths are closer to Common Crossbill


To me, identifying Crossbill species by call and beak size seems to be fraught with problems. I’m not so sure how easy it is to categorize Crossbills in terms of beak size or call type.

Not if they are taken together and combined with ecological behavioural parameters. As I have said on here before, moult is also a useful indicator of species as is the temporal presence of streaked juveniles (with adult birds that are feeding them).

Variation in Crossbill calls may simply be a physical consequence of beak size and syrinx size (this has been shown in Darwin’s Finch.If so, call types may also show continuous variation (like beak size) and they may not be easily categorised as one type or another. How distinctive are these named Crossbill call types? Are some calls intermediate types?

Plenty of papers available on the categorization of calls. Some are distinct, some are variable but with experience (in the field) they can mostly be described and assigned to type, especially by correlating flight calls with alarm call. Darwins finches as a group have huge variability in bill structures whereas Crossbills don't (relatively), so not sure I buy your argument.


Nor do we know how constant specific call types are over time – do they ‘evolve’ at a rapid rate – changing within the lifetime of a bird, over years, decades?

Some calls have remained stable in Deeside over 30 plus years, others appear to have "shifted". I am going through recordings of Alan Knox from the 70's to early 90's and the calls for most types are the same (so far). Have sound recorded colour ringed Pine crossbills in the field, or retrapped, and the calls were all the same. On the flip side I have released Common Crossbills that give 3 versions of a call.

It is certainly interesting that no such intermediate-sized Crossbills occur in Scandinavia where Parrots and Commons co-exist. Or is this because nobody has looked yet?

There is no overlap in museum crossbill specimens from Scandanavia. Scotland is a small country with a large mosiac of conifer species in relatively close proximity.

it seems to me the problem for birdwatchers/taxonomists is that it is difficult (impossible?) to categorize the continuous variation that is exhibited by Crossbills in terms beak size, call variations and degree of gene flow.

I disagree. It is actually easy to categorize these things, it is just that we may not have categorized it correctly ( cf the 'real' Scottish Crossbill ) ! Whilst Scottish Crossbills that I have recorded (and caught and measured) appear to have a different call from those previously described by others (?), they are all 'Scottish Crossbills' on bios, breeding behaviour, ecological factors. In other words we are still describing birds consistent with 'Scottish Crossbill'.

The relict Caledonian Pine Crossbill, IMO, would be consistent with what we call Parrot Crossbill here in Scotland today - it is the only type that can survive on closed Scots Pine Cones in mid winter and at one point in the not too distant past that was all that was available. Scottish Crossbills (today) prefer Larch in Autumn, Winter and early Spring. The planting of millions of Larches in Scotland in the 18th Century possibly selected for smaller billed native birds which could then breed on them. Common Crossbills irrupting to Scotland would also be able to breed in Autumn and Winter as well as Summer on Scots Pine. Thus the Scottish Crossbill 'soup' may have started.

More stuff and pics of the Scottish types here http://pinemuncher.blogspot.com

LC
 
Two-barred/White-winged Crossbill

Benkman 2012. White-winged Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera). BNA Online 027 (revised 17 Feb 2012).
Relationships within Loxia are muddy chiefly because species limits within the L. curvirostra complex are controversial. That aside, it is clear that there are two species complexes in the genus: the L. curvirostra complex, which contains between one and ten (or more) species, and the L. leucoptera complex, which contains between one and three species, in the latter case with species limits corresponding to named subspecies. Loxia megaplaga Riley, 1916, the Hispaniolan Crossbill, was considered a subspecies of L. leucoptera for many decades, but on the basis of vocal, morphological, and genetic divergence (Benkman 1994, Smith 1997, Parchman et al. 2006, 2007), the taxon generally is treated as a species now (e.g., Banks et al. 2003). Loxia megaplaga diverged from L. leucoptera roughly 550,000 years ago (Parchman et al. 2007). Given marked differences in voice (Elmberg 1993), coupled with morphological (and posited ecological) differences, Old World and New World L. leucoptera also may be species rather than subspecies.

Hybrids between species groups are unknown in the wild. A male L. leucoptera caged with a female L. curvirostra produced two broods of three young each (H. B. Tordoff pers. comm.). A resultant male hybrid, which had wing bars and bill size intermediate to its parents, was backcrossed with a female L. curvirostra. The offspring "appeared essentially like" L. curvirostra (H. B. Tordoff pers. comm.).
 
Common Crossbill irruptions

Marquiss, Newton, Hobson & Kolbeinsson 2012. Origins of irruptive migrations by Common Crossbills Loxia curvirostra into northwestern Europe revealed by stable isotope analysis. Ibis 154(2): 400–409. [abstract]
 
More on irruptions

Alonso & Arizaga (in press). The impact of vagrants on apparent survival estimation in a population of Common Crossbills (Loxia curvirostra). J Ornithol. [abstract]

Not taxonomy, but perhaps some further insight into the crossbill puzzle...
 
Assortative flocking

Smith, Sjoberg, Mueller & Benkman (in press). Assortative flocking in crossbills and implications for ecological speciation. Proc R Soc B. [abstract]
 
North American Red Crossbill Types

Some relevant articles from North American Birds have been posted on the ABA website...
  • Young 2010. Type 5 Red Crossbills (Loxia curvirostra) in New York: first confirmation east of the Rocky Mountains. NAB 64(2): 2–5. [pdf]

  • Young, Blankenship, Westphal & Holzman 2011. Status and distribution of Type 1 Red Crossbill (Loxia curvirostra): an Appalachian Call Type? NAB 65(3): 554–560. [pdf]

  • Young, Fifield, Thomas & Montevecchi 2012. New evidence in support of a distinctive Red Crossbill (Loxia curvirostra) Type in Newfoundland. NAB 66(1): 2–7. [pdf]
 
Apparently Matt Young is our very own crossbill7 whose interesting colloquy in 2011 with bombycilla on this thread caused David Sibley to bigfoot hisself on our forum!

“Greg Budney and I recorded the first Type 5 east of the Rockies in 2006....published that in North American Birds in 2010.” Crossbill7 9/15/11 birdforum.
 
Also:

North American Ornithological Conference – Vancouver 2012
PS2.19

Hynes, Doug, (Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Canada);
Miller, Ted (Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NF, Canada)

VOCALIZATIONS OF RED CROSSBILLS (LOXIA CURVIROSTRA) IN NEWFOUNDLAND

It has long been assumed that Newfoundland is home to a single well marked form of Red Crossbill, the endemic Loxia curvirostra percna. On this basis, L. c. percna is currently listed as endangered in Provincial legislation due to habitat loss and population decline. However, evidence is lacking about (a) persistence of percna and (b) the possible presence of other Red Crossbill forms on the island. We studied vocalizations of Red Crossbills in Newfoundland to help resolve these questions. Based on knowledge of Red Crossbill vocal differentiation in continental North America and Europe, and we predicted that vocalizations in Newfoundland would differ from mainland populations and would be uniform throughout the island if percna and only percna is present. If percna was not present in samples, we predicted that vocalizations would resemble those described for mainland forms. Finally, if both percna and other forms were present we expected a mixture of vocalizations, some distinctive and previously undescribed: these could be from percna. This study is the first quantitative analysis of Red Crossbill vocalizations from Newfoundland. We analyzed over 1200 calls from ~ 85 individuals, from >1000 minutes of recordings. Calls often exhibited rapid frequency modulation, fell within the 1.2-5.5 kHz frequency band, and were 35-71 ms in duration. Differences between individuals, accounted for most of the variation, but some calls were uniform across both individuals and sites. Newfoundland and mainland calls were acoustically differentiable. At least 4 Red Crossbills had pair-specific calls similar to those Red Crossbill forms from mainland areas, suggesting that multiple forms of Red Crossbill occur in Newfoundland. Some vocalizations were distinctly different from mainland samples, so percna may (a) be present and (b) be acoustically distinct. We encountered many juvenile and adult Red Crossbills during the study suggesting a recent population increase. However, questions remain about the demographic status and Provincial distribution of Newfoundland Red Crossbills. These topics plus analysis of vocalizations from other areas (e.g. Maritime Provinces, off shore islands) are needed to extend our findings and determine the status of the Newfoundland Red Crossbill.
 
When directional selection reduces variation

Benkman & Parchman (in press). When directional selection reduces geographic variation in traits mediating species interactions. Ecol Evol. [abstract] [pdf]
 
Hi, do you know if any further work has been published on Eurasian Crossbills yet, 'Wandering', 'Bohemian', 'Phantom', 'Glip' etc, as well as more traditional forms from Cyprus, Himalayas etc?
 
Hi, do you know if any further work has been published on Eurasian Crossbills yet, 'Wandering', 'Bohemian', 'Phantom', 'Glip' etc, as well as more traditional forms from Cyprus, Himalayas etc?

I don't think any members of the Sound Approach are actively working on Crossbill vocalisations, much recent activity seems to be directed towards the upcoming owl book.

Ian
 
Europe

Björklund, Alonso & Edelaar (in press). The genetic structure of crossbills suggests rapid diversification with little niche conservatism. Biol J Linn Soc. [abstract] [supp info]
 
Last edited:
Himalaya

On OrientalBirding today...
[OB] Appeal for information, Himalayan Crossbills

Hello there,
There is some evidence to indicate that there may be at least two distinct varieties of crossbills in the Himalaya, one associated with Himalayan Hemlocks Tsuga dumosa and other with Chinese Larch Larix potaninii (Edelaar, P. 2008, Ibis 150: 405-408; see also Kannan's review of the paper in Indian BIRDS 4(1), pp. 35-36, 2008). I Anant Deshwal and my Professor Dr. Douglas James, plan to make a formal study to investigate this as part of my Ph.D. programme at the University of Arkansas. We wish to study song dialects and habitat associations, and, if possible, morphometric measurements, in the various crossbill populations. We want to compare these data between populations associated with various conifers. We plan to include areas with only Hemlocks, areas with only Larches, and areas where both the conifers overlap in distribution. This is an appeal for information.

Anyone who has encountered crossbills in the Himalaya is encouraged to contact me with information regarding numbers, dialects, dates, altitude, conifers in the area, and any other pertinent information. This information will be invaluable in the planning of the study. Since the birds seem to be present exclusively in high altitude regions (2500-4000m) they seem to be missed by most casual birders. It is important for us to know where they occur and in what numbers to plan field sites and other logistics. All information will be gratefully acknowledged.

Anant Deshwal
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville AR 72701, USA
e-mail: adeshwal AT uark.edu
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top