The Feather Holes on the Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica and Other Small Passerines are Probably Caused by Brueelia Spp. Lice

Vas, Zoltán; Csörgő, Tibor; Møller, Anders Pape; Rózsa, Lajos

doi:10.1645/ge-1542.1

Cited by 36 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Kose et al [61] studied preferences of the louse Machaerilaemus malleus (synonym: Hirundoecus malleus), in the family Menoponidae, whose members often feed on blood and feathers [63]. The holes in Barn Swallow tail feathers appear to be caused by members of the genus Brueelia [64], in the family Philopteridae, whose members typically feed on feathers and dead skin. The experiments performed by Kose et al [61] need to be repeated using Brueelia.…”

Section: Feather Toughnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Birds Combat Ectoparasites

Clayton¹,

Koop²,

Harbison³

et al. 2010

TOOENIJ

222

211

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Birds are plagued by an impressive diversity of ectoparasites, ranging from feather-feeding lice, to featherdegrading bacteria. Many of these ectoparasites have severe negative effects on host fitness. It is therefore not surprising that selection on birds has favored a variety of possible adaptations for dealing with ectoparasites. The functional significance of some of these defenses has been well documented. Others have barely been studied, much less tested rigorously. In this article we review the evidence -or lack thereof -for many of the purported mechanisms birds have for dealing with ectoparasites. We concentrate on features of the plumage and its components, as well as anti-parasite behaviors. In some cases, we present original data from our own recent work. We make recommendations for future studies that could improve our understanding of this poorly known aspect of avian biology.

show abstract

Section: Feather Toughnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Birds Combat Ectoparasites

Clayton¹,

Koop²,

Harbison³

et al. 2010

TOOENIJ

222

211

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Feather holes represent damage to the plumage of birds and are probably produced by chewing lice (order Phthiraptera; Møller , Vas et al . ), although other causes are possible (Vágási et al . ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Uropygial gland size, feather holes and moult performance in the House SparrowPasser domesticus

Moreno‐Rueda

2014

Ibis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Feather holes represent damage to the plumage of birds and are correlated with delayed moult. Uropygial gland size is negatively correlated with feather holes. Consequently, it was predicted that birds with smaller uropygial glands would have more feather holes, and that this would affect moult performance. I examined this prediction in the House Sparrow Passer domesticus. Individuals with smaller uropygial glands had more feather holes, and those with more feather holes moulted later and faster. Therefore, uropygial gland size seemed to affect moult performance via its effect on feather holes. Uropygial gland size may have a positive effect on plumage quality, through a negative effect on feather holes, and therefore on moult timing and speed.

show abstract

“…Vas et al . () reported that feather holes of small passerines are probably caused by Brueelia spp. lice, but in a previous study we found that House Sparrows from the same population were not infested by Brueelia spp.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…), whereas feather holes are small defects (diameter 0.5–1 mm) of the vane (Vas et al . , Vágási ). Feather structural damage could decrease flight feather quality and/or create asymmetry in the wing and tail.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feather‐degrading bacteria, uropygial gland size and feather quality in House SparrowsPasser domesticus

Fülöp

Czirják

Pap

et al. 2016

Ibis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2Feathers are dead integumentary structures that are prone to damage and thus show gradual degradation over the course of a year. This loss of quality might have negative fitness consequences. Feather-degrading bacteria are some of the most prevalent featherdegrading organisms, yet the relationship between feather-degrading bacteria load and flight feather quality has rarely been assessed. We studied this relationship in free-living House Sparrows during breeding and non-breeding annual lifecycle stages. We also considered the size of the uropygial gland, given the antimicrobial function of its secretions, and the effect of body condition. The number of feather holes was positively associated with feather-degrading bacteria load and was negatively related to uropygial gland size and body condition during the breeding season in both sexes. In the non-breeding season we found the same relationships, but only in females. The degree of feather wear was unrelated to any of the variables measured during the breeding season, whereas it was negatively associated with uropygial gland size and positively with feather-degrading bacteria load in the non-breeding season, but only in females. Our results suggest that feather-degrading bacteria may induce the formation of feather holes, but play only a minor role in the abrasion of flight feathers.

show abstract

The Feather Holes on the Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica and Other Small Passerines are Probably Caused by Brueelia Spp. Lice

Cited by 36 publications

References 15 publications

How Birds Combat Ectoparasites

How Birds Combat Ectoparasites

Uropygial gland size, feather holes and moult performance in the House SparrowPasser domesticus

Feather‐degrading bacteria, uropygial gland size and feather quality in House SparrowsPasser domesticus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About