Dan and NFC-ers,

Dan -- thanks for the note. I've found your papers on NFCs very 
valuable, and I've made good use of your spectrogram table. I found it 
particularly reassuring to see that you lumped species that I've always 
had trouble distinguishing. I'd recommend the table from your earlier 
paper to anyone struggling to get a handle on flight call categorization.

One question about your handling of calls in the dark/light site study: 
How did you handle same-species calls withing a short time period? My 
apologies if that's in the methods explanation. I did look for it, but 
missed it if it's there.

Thanks for your work.


Laura Gooch
Research Associate
Cleveland Museum of Natural History

On 4/29/2016 6:28 AM, Daniel Joshua Mennill wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
> It is nice to find renewed interest in the NFC-L list.
> Thank you, Laura, for posting this information about the article my 
> research team published in /Condor: Ornithological Applications/, 
> concerning ground-level lights and NFCs.  I thought I would provide a 
> brief explanation of our research.  My students and I conducted 
> simultaneous NFC recordings at adjacent "dark sites" (no artificial 
> lights) and "light sites" (sights with a low-level artificial light, 
> such as a porch light or a street light). We found significantly 
> higher numbers of NFCs above the light sites compared to the dark 
> sites; on average, we found three times the number of NFCs about the 
> light sites (on average, 31 NFCs per night above light sites compared 
> to 11 NFCs per night above dark sites).  We also found a greater 
> diversity of species producing NFCs about light sites, but this 
> difference was not significant (on average, 6.5 species or 
> species-groups above light sites compared to 4.5 species or 
> species-groups above dark sites).  We conducted these recordings at 16 
> pairs of sites in southern Ontario, north of Lake Erie.
> The take-away message from this paper: ground-level lights influence 
> the behaviour of birds passing overhead in migration, even low-level 
> lights like the lights in our backyards.  We don't know if this is 
> because birds are lowering their altitude in response to lights, or 
> changing the course of their migration to pass over the lights, or 
> being induced to call more often over lights compared to dark sites.  
> I plan to try to study these alternatives, going forward.
> I'd be happy to share my "author's copy" of our /Condor/ paper to 
> anyone who wants to read it; please email me off the list.  I'd also 
> like to point out that my website has a set of spectrograms of NFCs 
> (LINK 
> <http://web2.uwindsor.ca/courses/biology/dmennill/pubs/2014Condor371supp.pdf>)
> from 40 different species or species-groups, based on recordings we've 
> made in Ontario over the last few years (it is a supplement from a 
> previous paper that we published in /Condor/, showing that the number 
> of NFCs is a good predictor of the timing and magnitude of migration 
> of birds through the Great Lakes).
> Happy NFC listening to all on this list!
> Dan
> Dan Mennill
> Associate Professor
> Chair, Biology Graduate Program
> Department of Biological Sciences
> University of Windsor
> Email: dmenn...@uwindsor.ca <mailto:dmenn...@uwindsor.ca>
> Web: www.uwindsor.ca/dmennill <http://www.uwindsor.ca/dmennill>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Laura C. Gooch <lgo...@alum.mit.edu 
> <mailto:lgo...@alum.mit.edu>> wrote:
>     Folks,
>     In the spirit of recent discussions from Geoff, John, and Chris, I
>     thought list members might be interested in this from the May 2016
>     issue of /The Condor/:
>       Anthropogenic light is associated with increased vocal activity
>       by nocturnally migrating birds
>     *Matthew J. Watson ^1,
>     <http://aoucospubs.org/doi/abs/10.1650/CONDOR-15-136.1#aff1>^a
>     <http://aoucospubs.org/doi/abs/10.1650/CONDOR-15-136.1#n101>*
>     <http://aoucospubs.org/doi/abs/10.1650/CONDOR-15-136.1#cor1>,
>     David R. Wilson ^1,
>     <http://aoucospubs.org/doi/abs/10.1650/CONDOR-15-136.1#aff1>^b
>     <http://aoucospubs.org/doi/abs/10.1650/CONDOR-15-136.1#n102>, and
>     Daniel J. Mennill ^1
>     <http://aoucospubs.org/doi/abs/10.1650/CONDOR-15-136.1#aff1>*
>     <http://aoucospubs.org/doi/abs/10.1650/CONDOR-15-136.1#cor1>*
>     http://aoucospubs.org/doi/abs/10.1650/CONDOR-15-136.1
>     These results certainly suggest that comparing call numbers from
>     urban and rural sites is problematic. It's not clear to me what
>     impact an isolated light might have.
>     Yours,
>     Laura Gooch
>     P.S. If you need a hand with getting access to the full article,
>     let me know off of the list.
>     --
>     *NFC-L List Info:*
>     Welcome and Basics <http://www.northeastbirding.com/NFC_WELCOME>
>     Rules and Information <http://www.northeastbirding.com/NFC_RULES>
>     Subscribe, Configuration and Leave
>     <http://www.northeastbirding.com/NFC-L_SubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm>
>     *Archives:*
>     The Mail Archive
>     <http://www.mail-archive.com/nfc-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html>
>     Surfbirds <http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/NFC-L>
>     BirdingOnThe.Net <http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/NFCL.html>
>     *Please submit your observations to eBird
>     <http://ebird.org/content/ebird/>!*
>     --


NFC-L List Info:

1) http://www.mail-archive.com/nfc-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html
2) http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/NFC-L
3) http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/NFCL.html

Please submit your observations to eBird:


Reply via email to