2004
DOI: 10.1093/condor/106.4.873
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Summer Diet of the Peregrine Falcon in Faunistically Rich and Poor Zones of Arizona Analyzed with Capture-Recapture Modeling

Abstract: We collected prey remains from 25 Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) territories across Arizona from 1977 to 1988 yielding 58 eyrie-years of data. Along with 793 individual birds (107 species and six additional genera), we found seven mammals and nine insects. In addition, two nestling peregrines were consumed. We found a larger dependence upon White-throated Swifts (Aeronautes saxatalis) and birds on migration in northern Arizona, while in southeastern and central Arizona average prey mass was greater and co… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although we could not quantify prey preferences due to a lack of information on overall prey availability or unused prey, commonly taken prey species were abundant residents (e.g., turtle-doves), migratory birds (e.g., thrushes), and colonial seabirds (e.g., murrelets) of the biomass range 100-200 g in this region. The heaviest prey items in our study were Herring Gulls, Mallards, and Chinese Spot-billed Ducks, all of which are at the approximate upper limit (1036-1100 g) for regularly taken prey of Peregrine Falcons (Ellis et al 2004, Olsen et al 2008.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although we could not quantify prey preferences due to a lack of information on overall prey availability or unused prey, commonly taken prey species were abundant residents (e.g., turtle-doves), migratory birds (e.g., thrushes), and colonial seabirds (e.g., murrelets) of the biomass range 100-200 g in this region. The heaviest prey items in our study were Herring Gulls, Mallards, and Chinese Spot-billed Ducks, all of which are at the approximate upper limit (1036-1100 g) for regularly taken prey of Peregrine Falcons (Ellis et al 2004, Olsen et al 2008.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…Remains of prey that could not be positively identified in the field were brought to the laboratory and identified by examining the remaining parts such as heads, wings, legs, and feathers; some of the remains were compared to reference collections, live birds in bird banding stations, and to our own specimens from the study areas for identification (Oro andTella 1995, Ellis et al 2004). To avoid counting an individual bird twice, we cleaned the prey remains and feathers from the perching site or nests after sample collection, and used only diagnostic parts of prey to conservatively estimate the minimum number of individuals present (Oro and Tella 1995, Ellis et al 2004, Probst et al 2007, Olsen et al 2008. Because feathers in pellets were typically highly digested and abraded, only a few prey items with unique coloration and marks (such as the Black-naped Oriole [Oriolus chinensis]) were recognizable.…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mammalian hosts acquire E. aerophilus by preying on infected earthworms (Anderson, 2000). Earthworms have not been recorded in the diet of Peregrine Falcons, which feed mostly on birds and occasionally on mammals and insects (Ellis et al, 2004). We speculate that the falcon could have become infected after preying on a bird that recently consumed earthworms.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Grebence & White , Olsen & Olsen ,b, Ellis et al . , Brambilla et al . ), we made predictions to test relationships between these parameters and biotic and abiotic covariates, specifically climate, topography, previous year's productivity (as an index of site quality; hereafter referred to as productivity), area of surrounding prey habitat, competition and year (Table S1).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%