Geographical variation in bill size across bird species provides evidence for Allen's rule

Allen’s rule proposes that the appendages of endotherms are smaller, relative to body size, in colder climates, in order to reduce heat loss. Empirical support for Allen’s rule is mainly derived from occasional reports of geographical clines in extremity size of individual species. Interspecific evidence is restricted to two studies of leg proportions in seabirds and shorebirds. We used phylogenetic comparative analyses of 214 bird species to examine whether bird bills, significant sites of heat exchange, conform to Allen’s rule. The species comprised eight diverse taxonomic groups—toucans, African barbets, Australian parrots, estrildid finches, Canadian galliforms, penguins, gulls, and terns. Across all species, there were strongly significant relationships between bill length and both latitude and environmental temperature, with species in colder climates having significantly shorter bills. Patterns supporting Allen’s rule in relation to latitudinal or altitudinal distribution held within all groups except the finches. Evidence for a direct association with temperature was found within four groups (parrots, galliforms, penguins, and gulls). Support for Allen’s rule in leg elements was weaker, suggesting that bird bills may be more susceptible to thermoregulatory constraints generally. Our results provide the strongest comparative support yet published for Allen’s rule and demonstrate that thermoregulation has been an important factor in shaping the evolution of bird bills.

Predicting migratory flight altitudes by physiological migration models

Using the altitudinal profiles of wind, temperature, pressure, and humidity in three flight models, we tried to explain the altitudinal distributions of nocturnal migrants recorded by radar above a desert in southern Israel. In the simplest model, only the tailwind component was used as a predictor of the most preferred flight altitude (T model). The energy model (E model) predicted flight ranges according to mechanical power consumption in flapping flight depending on air density and wind conditions, assuming optimal adjustment of airspeed and compensation of crosswinds, and including the influence of mass loss during flight. The energy-water model (EW model) used the same assumptions and parameters as the E model but also included restrictions caused by dehydration. Because wind was by far the most important factor governing altitudinal distribution of nocturnal migrants, differences in predictions of the three models were small. In a first approach, the EW model performed slightly better than the E model, and both performed slightly better than the T model. Differences were most pronounced in spring, when migrants should fly high according to wind conditions, but when climbing and descending they must cross lower altitudes where conditions are better with respect to dehydration. A simplified energy model (Es model) that omits the effect of air density on flight costs explained the same amount of variance in flight altitude as the more complicated E and EW models. By omitting the effect of air density, the Es model predicted lower flight altitudes and thus compensated for factors that generally bias height distributions downward but are not considered in the models (i.e. climb and descent through lower air layers, cost of ascent, and decrease of oxygen partial pressure with altitude). Our results confirm that wind profiles, and thus energy rather than water limitations, govern the altitudinal distribution of nocturnal migrants, even under the extreme humidity and temperature conditions in the trade wind zone.