Below are a number of ideas for your research projects, including some relevant references for each. These by no means are all that can be done, just some ideas to get you started thinking about different possibilities for projects.

Another approach to designing a project is to do so by observing concentrations of birds for a period of time, and generating testable hypotheses about their behavior, feeding, spacing, or other things. Suggestions for where to find good concentrations of birds would be any of the parks in town that have both water and picnic areas (for example Reid Park, Columbus Park, Ft. Lowell Park; plenty of grackle groups!), at other nearby locations or parks (Sweetwater wetlands, Madera Canyon, Saguaro Nat. Park), or at feeding stations (either already established, or one that you establish yourself).

The following sections of the book cover Project-friendly topics: Pp. 143-145, 165-168, 216-223, 234-237, 242-243, 250-251, 335-342, 389-391, Figure 16-1, 512-513.

If you have ideas you wish to discuss, please come and talk to one of us.

 


1.  Contextual Variation in song delivery.

	Many birds exhibit temporal and contextual variation in their delivery of songs, 
and in their responsiveness to the songs of members of their species. These variations 
include short-term changes, such as locations in their territory, proximity to conspecifics,
and longer-term variations, such as with phase of the nesting cycle, time of day or season, 
and even in relation to weather conditions such as temperature. They also show variation in 
their responses to playback of songs, both in the long- and short-term, mimicking their more 
natural responsivity to the presence or absence of singing by other birds.
	Many potential projects can make use of this variation, either studies designed to 
quantify changes in song behavior at different nesting stages, different photoperiods 
(dates), or in response to mates. We can also construct various types of tapes to broadcast 
songs to individuals, and their responses to these tapes can be measured.

Duguay, J.P. and G. Ritchison. 1998. A contextual analysis of singing behavior in male 
	Tufted Titmice. J. Field Ornithol. 69:85-94.

Hayes, J. P., J. R. Probst, and D. Rakstad 1986. Effect of mating status and time of day 
	on Kirtland's warbler song rates. Condor 88: 386-388.

Kowalski, M.P. 1983. Factors affecting the performance of flight songs and perch songs 
	in the common yellowthroat. Wilsons Bull. 95: 140-142.

Logan, C.A. 1983. Reproductively-dependent song cyclicity in mated male mockingbirds 
	(Mimus polyglottos). Auk. 100: 404-413.

Strain, J.G. and R.L. Mumme 1988. Effects of food supplementation, song playback, and 
	temperature on vocal territorial behavior of Carolina wrens. Auk 105: 11-16.

Yahner, R.H. and D.R. Bradley. 1995. Seasonal response of wood thrushes to taped-playback 
	song. Wilson Bull. 107: 738-741.



2.  Relationships between habitat variables and nest density

	The density or abundance of both number of birds of a particular species as well 
as the number of nests of that species is often directly related to characteristics of the 
habitat. At a broad level, most species show specific preferences for habitat types, 
which upon inspection can be found to be determined by some aspect of the habitat, including 
food resources that relate to foraging style, or availability of potential nest sites. Many 
studies can be designed to examine the relation between a species' abundance or nest abundance 
and some aspects of habitat. Species for which nests might be easy to find and identify 
include verdins, phainopeplas, cactus wrens, nest cavities in saguaros (of gila or other woodpeckers, 
or elf owls), or curve-billed thrashers. Habitat variables might include density of particular 
plant species (e.g. cholla or saguaro cactus) or some estimate of average plant height. The 
number of individuals of a particular bird species can also be related to plant species 
density.

Anderson, S.H. and K.J. Gutzwiller. 1996. Habitat evaluation methods, p. 592-606 In 
	T.A Bookhout [Ed.], Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. 
	The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD.

Bailey, F.M. 1922. Cactus wrens' nest in Southern Arizona. Condor. 24: 163-168.

Brawn, J.D. and R.P. Balda 1988. Population biology of cavity nesters in 
	Northern Arizona: Do nest sites limit breeding densities? Condor 90: 61-71.

Cody, M.L. (ed) 1985. Habitat selection in birds. Academic Press, New York.

Conner, R.N. 1975. Orientation of entrances to woodpecker nest cavities. Auk. 92: 371-374.

Preston, F.W. and A.T. Norris. 1947. Nesting heights of breeding birds. Ecology. 28: 240-273.

McAuliffe, J.R. and P. Hendricks. 1988. Determinants of vertical distributions of 
	woodpecker nest cavities in the Sahuaro cactus. Condor 90: 791-801.

Rodrigues, R. 1994. Microhabitat variables influencing nest-site selection by tundra 
	birds. Ecol. Appl. 4: 110-116.



3.  Behavioral responses to the presence of predators

	As a way to avoid predators, birds learn to recognize their appearance and the 
sounds they produced.  Being able to recognize predators is the first step to escape from 
them. Once birds discover the presence of a predator they could respond by hiding, 
reducing vocal communication, escaping from the area, or even attacking the predator.  
Their responses will depend on the species of bird, the type of predator, they are facing, 
their age and experience facing predators, or the stage of their annual cycle they are in 
(breeding, molting).
	The use of visual decoys and playbacks of predator sounds allow us to measure 
behavioral responses to predators in an experimental way.  Comparisons between species, 
habitats, and nesting vs. non nesting individuals are just some examples of different 
projects that can be done in relation to this topic. 


Chandler, C.R. and R.K. Rose. 1988. Comparative analysis of the effects of visual and 
	auditory stimuli on avian mobbing behavior. Journal of Field Ornithology 59:269-277.

Shedd, D.H. 1982. Seasonal variation and function of mobbing and related antidepredator 
	behaviors of the American Robin (Turdus migratorius). The Auk 99:342-346. 

Verner, J. and M.M. Milligan. 1971. Responses of male white-crowned sparrows to playback 
	of record songs. The Condor 73:56-64.



4.  Plasticity in the use of nest building materials.

	Birds tend to show preferences for material when building their nests.  In some 
species individual birds tend to use the same materials to build their nests even if their 
nesting sites show differences in the availability of these materials. Other species show 
considerable plasticity in the use of building materials, resulting in a noticeable 
variation in the structure of their nests. Changes in the use of different nest building 
materials is usually related with the availability of material in the nesting sites. 
	Different research question can be asked in relation to the differences in nest 
building materials used by birds. Do desert birds living in urban areas use the same 
materials to build their nests?  Are nest materials present in nests correlated with the 
abundance of materials in the nesting territory? 

Baicich, P.J. and C.J.O. Harrison. 1997. A guide to the nests, eggs, and nestlings of 
	North American birds. Second edition. Academic Press.

Collias, N. and E. Collias. 1984. Nest building and nest behavior. Princeton.

Nores A.I. AND M. Nores. 1994. Nest-building and nesting-behavior of the brown 
	cacholote. Wilson Bulletin 106(1):106-120.


5.  Nest predation experiments using artificial nests and eggs

	Nest predation is common and drastically reduces breeding success in birds.  
It accounts for up to 88 percent of nest loses in some temperate and tropical habitats.  
Because nest predation is a powerful force that can control population size, birds 
tent to camouflage both their nests and eggs to protect them. To understand the pressures 
imposed by predation on nesting birds several experiments have been conducted using 
artificial nests and eggs.  
	The use of artificial eggs allows use to answer different type of question. 
They allow to have big sample sizes to compare nest predation rates among habitats, 
compare day vs. night predation rates, or the role of microhabitats in nest predation.  
The use of eggs made of modeling mass help to identify predators by looking at the marks 
they left on the surface of the artificial eggs.  By painting eggs with different colors 
and patterns, it is possible to evaluate the importance of egg marks as camouflage. 

Gibbs, J.P. 1991. Avian nest predation in tropical wet forest: an experimental 
	study. Oikos 60:155-161.

Martin, T.E. 1987 Artificial nest experiments: effect of nest appearance and type 
	of predator. The Condor 89:925-928.

Seltz, L. and D.A. Zegers. 1993. An experimental study of nest predation in adjacent 
	deciduos, coniferous and successional habitats. The Condor 95:297-304.

Vacca, M.M. and C.M. Handel. 1988. Factors influencing predation associated with 
	visits to artificial goose nests. Journal of Field Ornithology 59:215-223.

Yahner, R.H. and C.A. Delong. 1992. Avian predation and parasitism on artificial 
	nests and eggs in two fragmented landcapes. The Wilson Bulletin 104:162-168.



6.  The Effect of Sugar Concentration on Hummingbird Feeding

Hummingbirds are small nectarivorous birds with high mass-specific metabolic rates. In 
order to meet their metabolic demands, hummingbirds rely on frequent meals of 
sugar-containing floral nectars. Choosing optimal sugar concentrations to balance 
energetic and osmoregulatory demands is essential for survival and successful migration 
and reproduction. Therefore, it is important that these birds show a rapid behavioral 
and physiological response to fluctuations in food availability and environmental 
perturbations. It has been shown that when sugar concentration (i.e. energy density) in 
artificial nectars is experimentally increased, nectar-feeding birds decrease their 
volumetric food intake. Researchers have suggested that this is a compensatory response 
to maintain a constant level of energy intake, possibly subject to limitations on sugar 
hydrolysis and absorption (at high concentrations) or water processing (at low 
concentrations).
	Many potential projects can make use of this behavioral response to food energy 
density. For example: Given a choice, will hummingbirds always choose the most concentrated 
nectar, or will they choose a concentration close to that produced by most ornithophilous 
plants (approximately 23% wt/vol sucrose)? Is there a nectar concentration above or below 
which hummingbirds will not feed?

López-Calleja, M. V., F. Bozinovic and C. Martínez del Rio. 1997. Effects of sugar 
	concentration on hummingbird feeding and energy use. Comparative Biochemistry 
	and Physiology 118A: 1291-1299.

McWhorter, T. J. and M. V. López-Calleja. 2000. The integration of diet, physiology, 
	and ecology of nectar-feeding birds. Revista Chilena de Historia 
	Natural 73: 451-460.

McWhorter, T. J. and C. Martínez del Rio. 2000. Does gut function limit hummingbird 
	food intake? Physiological and Biochemical Zoology 73: 313-324.



7.  Are plumage characteristics an indicator of dominance in male birds?

Plumage characteristics are regarded as outward displays of male dominance or body 
condition, and therefore possibly reproductive success, in many avian species. For 
example, dominance rank and aggressiveness of male house sparrows are positively related 
to the circulating level of plasma testosterone at the establishment of dominance 
relationships within flocks. It is though that the best morphological predictor of 
dominance rank of male house sparrow is the size of their black throat patch (i.e. badge), 
and males appear to use their badge for signaling their status in aggressive encounters 
with other males. Rufous bush chats (found in the Old World) show a conspicuous tail color 
pattern during nest defense, aggression, and courtship. Certain characteristics of these 
color patterns appear to be associated with dominance, mate choice, and likelihood of nest 
predation. Another example is provided by the mascot out our local NFL franchise: dominance 
appears to be associated with the redness of a male cardinal's plumage, both during the 
breeding and non-breeding seasons.
	Many potential projects can make use of observations of plumage characteristics. 
These projects, potentially examining the relationship of plumage and male dominance, 
interactions with females, or possibly even observations of pairing would be based on 
qualitative plumage and behavior scoring because you will not be able to capture birds. 
House sparrows are abundant on campus, and northern cardinals (and congeneric pyrrhuloxias) 
are easily found in Catalina State Park just north of Tucson. In addition, house sparrows, 
cowbirds, starlings and house finches are abundant at the UA Dairy Barn facility.

Alvarez, F. 2000. Relationship between tail color pattern and reproductive success, 
	mate acquisition and nest predation in rufous bush chats. Condor 102: 708-712

Liker, A. and Z. Barta. 2001. Male badge size predicts dominance against females in 
	house sparrows. Condor 103: 151-157.

McGraw, K.J. and G.E. Hill. 2000. Plumage brightness and breeding-season dominance in 
	the house finch: a negatively correlated handicap? Condor 102: 456-461.

Whitekiller, R.R. et al. 2000. Badge size and extra-pair fertilizations in the house 
	sparrow. Condor 102: 342-348.

Wolfenbarger, L.L. 2000. Is red coloration of male northern cardinals beneficial 
	during the nonbreeding season? A test of status signaling. Condor 101: 655-663