Hanebrink, Earl L.

Lowery, Robert

English

UARK (University of Arkansas )

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 21 Article 8 1967 Subspecies and Ecology of Meadowlarks in Northwest Arkansas Robert Lowery Arkansas State University Earl L. Hanebrink Arkansas State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas  Part of the Ornithology Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Lowery, Robert and Hanebrink, Earl L. (1967) "Subspecies and Ecology of Meadowlarks in Northwest Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 21 , Article 8. Available at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol21/iss1/8 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu. Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol.21, 1967THE SUBSPECIES AND ECOLOGY OF MEADOWLARKSIN NORTHEASTERN ARKANSASRobert Lowery and Earl L. HanebrinkArkansas State UniversityINTRODUCTIONTkck j^l-\ior-ti\/c»c <~*-f tl-ilr- c+ii/-Jw \a/oko +/"». / 1 \ rlotorminc tko c+n+i r<- r\f26The objectives of this study were to: ( ) deter ine the status ofthe eastern and southern subspecies of meadowlarks in northeasternArkansas: Sturnella magna magna and Sturnella magna argutularespectively, (2) determine the status of the western meadowlarkSturnella neglecta neglecta, and (3) compare the habitat preference andrelative abundance of meadowlark species on Crowley's Ridge with thatof the adjacent western delta region.Although statements have appeared in the past literature concern-ing the status of the meadowlarks in the northern part of Arkansas,some were found conflicting and others were based on sight observa-tions and not on prepared skins. The findings of Howell (1911) indicatethat Sturnella magna magna does not breed in Arkansas, although hisconclusions were based upon specimens taken only from Blytheville,Stuttgart, Conway, and near Mammoth Springs. All of the specimenswere identified as Sturnella magna argutula. Pindar (1924) relates thatthat the eastern meadowlark was common in Phillips County, Arkansasbut rare in the more northern Poinsett County during the fall and winterof 1888-89. This was by inference and not actually determined byexamination of specimens. Wheeler (1924) states that Sturnella magnamagna breeds in Arkansas, thinking that he was quoting Howell's find-ings and not realizing that he had mis-read Howell. Wheeler waspuzzled by Howell's phrase "exclusive of the "Ozarks" and substitutedthe words "mountainous area" for "Ozark Region". Wheeler simplyerrored through misinterpretation. He thought Sturnella magna argutulawas confined to parts of Arkansas south of the ozarks and his rangemap for this form indicates as such. However, Wheeler contradicts hisrange map in his written description of the range of Sturnella magnaargutula. Black (1935) considers all breeding meadowlarks in theWinslow Region of the Ozark Mountains to be Sturnella magna argutulabut comments that they were "radically" different from specimenscollected 50 miles south. Although suggesting an area of sympatricdistribution for the two subspecies, Black still considered the meadow-larks in the area more closely related to Sturnella magna argutula thanto Sturnella magna magna. Deaderick (1935) from sight observationsincludes Sturnella magna argutula in his preliminary list of birds for HotSprings, Arkansas, and states its status as a common permanent residentbut less common during the winter months. He found the westernmeadowlark Sturnella neglecta neglecta a "rare transient" in the HotSprings area. Baerg (1951) mentions that Sturnella magna magna is26Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 196727The Meadowlark in Northeast Arkansasnot known definitely to nest in the state but could probably nest in theOzark Mountains of Arkansas. Collins (I960) records one westernmeadowlark Sturnella neglecta neglecta in her study of birds in north-eastern Arkansas. Hanebrink (1965) found the western meadowlark atransient and not common in that area. James and James (1964)record the western meadowlark from October 18 as the earliest fall dateuntil April 30 as the last spring date for the state while indicating theeastern meadowlark a permanent resident. From an ecological stand-point, Grinnell (1927) states the western and eastern meadowlarksdiffer in their tolerance of humidity,tion occurs, the western subspecieseastern subspecies the moist swalesmay come into contact and live sideIn areas where sympatric distribu-favors the drier hillsides and thebelow,- however, the two speciesby side. Ecological aspects of thesympatric distribution of meadowlarks in the north-central states as wellas territoriality have been discussed by Lanyon (1956a, 1956b, and1962). Hybridization of the eastern and western species has beenreported by Sutton and Dickson (1965), and Lanyon (1966).ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe authors wish to express their appreciation to Dr. W. E. Lanyon,Associate Curator, Department of Ornithology, American Museum ofNatural History for assistance in determining the subspecies of meadow-larks obtained for this study and to Frances C. James, Department ofZoology, University of Arkansas for her valuable suggestions concerningthis study.METHODSThe method of field observations employed in taking bird censusesin each of the two habitat types was to identify each bird to speciesby either sight or sound. Care was taken not to cover the same groundand record the same bird twice. Neither the route traversed nor thetime spent in the habitat type was constant, but the majority of countswere made during the morning hours. The one hour unit of timeremained constant, however, so that comparisons could be made. Inrecording information for this study, a field sheet was used whichincluded information on the location, habitat type, date, time, tempera-ture, weather conditions, mileage, and number of meadowlarks observed.The second method used in this study was the roadside census firstused by Nice and Nice (1921) to measure bird populations of Oklahomain 1920. Since then it has been used by a number of other workers.Kendeigh (1944) evaluated the roadside census in relation to othertypes of censuses. Howell (1951) used the roadside census method asa means of measuring bird populations in Tennessee. The roadsidecensus in this study was employed as a method of determining relativeabundance and not absolute abundance. The roadside counts wereconducted on secondary roads in two major habitat types: namely,Crowley's Ridge and the adjacent western delta farm areas. The auto-mobile was driven between 15 and 20 miles per hour, and meadowlarks27Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol21/iss1/828Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedingswere recorded as they appeared before the observer. Field glasses of7 x 50 power were used for all field and roadside census work.To determine the subspecies composition of meadowlark popula-tions, several specimens were taken periodically throughout the year inthe study area and identified by a recognized authority. Specimenswere taken with a twelve-gauge shotgun using a light-load cartridge.Care was taken so that the birds would not be damaged beyonrecognition. As the skins were prepared for identification, each speci-men was assigned a field number. Information concerning the habitatfrom which collected, the date, and the sex were recorded for eachspecimen and placed on a card which was attached to the individualprepared skin.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONFourteen meadowlarks were collected, skins prepared, identified,and placed in the Arkansas State University Museum (Table 1). Six ofthe birds were identified as Sturnella magna magna apparently havingcome down from breeding populations to the north, as all were collectedduring the fall, winter and early spring in the study area. Numbers1, 2, 4, 6, and 11 were males, and number 3 was a female.Two birds of the total collected were identified as western meadow-larks Sturnella neglecta neglecta presumably from breeding populationsto the north or northwest of this area. Specimen number 13 wasidentified as a first-year female collected on February 14, and thespecimen number 12 was identified as a first-year male. James andJames (1964) record October 18 as the earliest fall date for the occur-rence of the western meadowlark. Specimen number 12 was takenfrom the Crowley's Ridge habitat on October 16; therefore, it extendedthe previously known record for its occurrence by two days. The latestspring date recorded for Arkansas was April 30 for the westernmeadowlark. This record can now be extended to May 21 as a westernmeadowlark was heard and seen singing for several hours on this dateat Jonesboro in 1966.The remaining specimens collected during the breeding season fromlocal populations, or at least from some locality not far north of thisarea, were assigned to Sturnella magna argutula. Number 14 is ajuvenile closer to the southern subspecies than to Sturnella magnamagna. Numbers 5, 7, 9, and 10 are males, intermediate in size andcoloration but more closely related to Sturnella magna argutula. Number8 is a female, again intermediate, but closer to the southern form.Apparently, the breeding birds become larger and somewhat lighterin plumage not far to the north of this area. Northeastern Arkansasappears to be close to the shift from Sturnella magna magna toSturnella magna argutula (Lanyon, 1966, personal communication).Field and roadside observations indicate a greater relative abun-dance of meadowlark species on Crowley's Ridge (Tables II— V) thanon the delta during the spring and summer. During the fall and28Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 196729The Meadowlark in Northeast Arkansaswinter the converse of this occurred. Chi square analysis of the censusesshowed that these population differences were highly significant. Thisseasonal habitat preference could possibly correlate with the shift fromthe breeding Sturnella magna argutula population to the over-winteringSturnella magna magna population from the north.The western meadowlark Sturnella neglecta neglecta appearedonly as a rare winter resident or transient and was not common in thestudy area at any time. The extreme dates for the western meadowlarkranges from October 16 to May 21. This species can be identified byits voice in the field. The extend of yellow on the cheek, amount ofwhite on the rectricies, and the general lighter coloration of the crownand back are useful and reliable in identifying the western species fromthe other forms (Lanyon, 1966). Findings indicate that a decidedpreference was shown by the western species in its habitat preference.Nine western meadowlarks were identified by voice during the study,and all were associated with feed-lots on Crowley's Ridge.TableMeadowlarks collected in northeastern ArkansasField CollectedHabitatNo. Sub-species Sex Date1 Sturnella m. magna Male Crowley's Ridge Nov. 13,19652 Sturnella m. magna Male Delta Dec. 18,19653 Sturnella m. magna Female Delta Jan. 8,19664 Sturnella m. magna Male Crowley's Ridge Feb. 2,19665 Sturnella m. argutula Male6 Sturnella m. magna Male7 Sturnella m. argutula Male8 Sturnella m. argutula Female9 Sturnella m. argutula MaleTO Sturnella m. argutula Male1 1 Sturnella m. magna MaleCrowley's Ridge Mar. 20,1966Delta Apr. 6,1966Delta May 7,1966Crowley's Ridge June 12, 1966Delta July 10, 1966Crowley's Ridge Aug. 13,1966Crowley's Ridge Sept. 18,1966!2 Sturnella n. neglecta Male Crowley's Ridge Oct. 16,1966!3 Sturnella n. neglecta Female Crowley's Ridge Feb. 14,1965!4 Sturnella m. argutula Juvenile Delta July 7,196629Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol21/iss1/830Arkansas Academy of Science ProceedingsTable IIComparison of Meadowlark Populations Based on Roadside Censuses(Fall and Winter)No. of Individual Total Ave. No. of Total No.Habitat Types Trips Miles Birds Per Mile of BirdsCrowley's Ridge 20 382 0.56 212Delta Area 20 340 0.74 250Table IIIComparison of Meadowlark Populations Based on Roadside Censuses(Spring and Summer)No. of Individual Total Ave. No. of Total No.Habitat Types Trips Miles Birds Per Mile of BirdsCrowley's Ridge 20 386 1.18 456Delta Area 20 340 0.45 153T ¦ ,_ ,WTable IVComparison of AAeadowlark Populations Based on Field Censuses(Fall and Winter)Total Hours Ave. No. Birds Total No.Habitat Types in Field Per Hour of BirdsCrowley's Ridge 10 34.60 346Delta Area 10 45.30 453Table VComparison of Meadowlark Populations Based on Field Censuses(Spring and Summer)Total Hours Ave. No. Birds Total No.Habitat Types in Field Per Hour of BirdsCrowley's Ridge 10 36.80 368Delta Area 10 25.50 25530Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 196731The Meadoivlark in Northeast ArkansasSUMMARYFourteen meadowlarks were collected from different months of theyear, and skins were prepared and placed in the Arkansas State Uni-versity Museum.Census work was conducted in three counties of northeasternArkansas, and comparisons were made in two unlike habitat types bothby means of numbers recorded per hour of field observations and byconducting roadside censuses in two unlike habitat types comparingnumbers of meadowlarks seen per mile.Finding from a limited study indicate that the subspecies ofmeadowlarks nesting in this area are Sturnella magna argutula whichare intermediate in form but more closely identifiable to Sturnella magnaargutula. The wintering population is a different group of birds pre-sumably nesting to the north of this area and are of the subspeciesSturnella magna magna. The western meadowlark Sturnella neglectaneglecta appears only as a transient or rare winter resident.The records of the state have been extended for the westernmeadowlark from October 16 to May 21. The western meadowlarkSturnella neglecta neglecta can best be identified in the field by itsvoice.Findings indicate a greater relative abundance of meadowlarkspecies on Crowley's Ridge during the spring and summer with greaternumbers occuring in the delta area during the fall and winter. Using2x2 contingency tables the field census data yields a chi square valueof 34.80 and the roadside census a chi square of 93.58. The prob-ability is less than 0.001 that these chi square values will obtain withno real population differences. Thus, in both cases there is a significantdifference between the populations occurring in different areas at dif-ferent seasons. This seasonal habitat preference seems to correlatewith a shift from breeding of Sturnella magna argutula in summer tothe over-wintering Sturnella magna magna population from the north.There is a decided preference shown by the western meadowlarkto the drier ridges associated with feed-lots within the study area.LITERATURE CITEDBaerg, W. J. 1951. Birds of Arkansas. Univ. Ark. College Agri. Bull.258: 1-188.Black, J. D. 1935. Birds of the Winslow, Arkansas region. Am. Midi.Nat. 16: 154-176.Collins, Kathryn. 1960. Winter and breeding season populations ofupland and bottom land forest birds in northeast Arkansas. M. S.thesis, Univ. of Ark. 68 pp.Deaderick, William H. 1938. A preliminary list of the birds of HotSprings National Park and vicinity. Wilson Bull. 50: 257-273.31Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol21/iss1/8Ii32Arkansas Academy of Science ProceedingsGrinnell, Joseph. 1927. The designation of bird ranges. Auk 44:322-324.Hannebrink, Earl L. 1965. A study of bird populations in selectedhabitats of northeast Arkansas. A doctoral dissertation, OklahomaState University. 88 pp.Howell, A. H. 1911. Birds of Arkansas. U. S. Dept. Agri. Biol.Surv.Bull. 38: 1-100.Howell, Joseph C. 1951. The roadside census as a method of measur-ing bird populations. Auk 68: 334-357.James, Douglas and Frances C. James. 1964. The seasonal occurrenceof Arkansas birds. Proc. Ark. Acad. Sci. 18: 20-30.Kendeigh, S. Charles. 1944. Measurements of bird populations. Ecol.AAonogr. 14: 69-106.Lanyon, W. E. 1956a. Ecological aspects of the sympatric distributionof meadowlarks in the northcentral states. Ecology 37: 98-108.1956b. Territory of the meadowlarks. Genus Sturnella.Ibis 98: 485-4891962. Specific limits and distribution of meadowlarks >of the desert grasslands. Auk 79: 183-207.1966. HybridizationMus. of Nat. Hist. 134, N. Y.,of meadowlarks. bull, of the Am.25 pp.Nice, Margaret M., and L. B. NiceBulletin 33: 113-123.1921. The roadside census WilsonPindar, L. Otley. 1924. Winter birds in eastern Arkansas. WilsonBulletin 36: 201-207. )Sutton, George M. and Gerald W. Dickson. 1965. Interbreeding of theeastern and western meadowlarks in central Oklahoma. South-western Naturalist 10: 307-310.Wheeler, H. E. 1924. Birds of Arkansas, A Preliminary Report. Ark.Bur. of Mines, Manuf. and Agri., Little Rock, Ark. 177 pp.i32Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1967

Subspecies and Ecology of Meadowlarks in Northwest Arkansas

ScholarWorks@UARK

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of ScienceVolume 21 Article 81967Subspecies and Ecology of Meadowlarks inNorthwest ArkansasRobert LoweryArkansas State UniversityEarl L. HanebrinkArkansas State UniversityFollow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaasPart of the Ornithology Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology CommonsThis article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able toread, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking priorpermission from the publisher or the author.This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academyof Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu, ccmiddle@uark.edu.Recommended CitationLowery, Robert and Hanebrink, Earl L. (1967) "Subspecies and Ecology of Meadowlarks in Northwest Arkansas," Journal of theArkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 21 , Article 8.Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol21/iss1/8Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol.21, 1967THE SUBSPECIES AND ECOLOGY OF MEADOWLARKSIN NORTHEASTERN ARKANSASRobert Lowery and Earl L. HanebrinkArkansas State UniversityINTRODUCTIONTkck j^l-\ior-ti\/c»c <~*-f tl-ilr- c+ii/-Jw \a/oko +/"». / 1 \ rlotorminc tko c+n+i r<- r\f26The objectives of this study were to: ( ) deter ine the status ofthe eastern and southern subspecies of meadowlarks in northeasternArkansas: Sturnella magna magna and Sturnella magna argutularespectively, (2) determine the status of the western meadowlarkSturnella neglecta neglecta, and (3) compare the habitat preference andrelative abundance of meadowlark species on Crowley's Ridge with thatof the adjacent western delta region.Although statements have appeared in the past literature concern-ing the status of the meadowlarks in the northern part of Arkansas,some were found conflicting and others were based on sight observa-tions and not on prepared skins. The findings of Howell (1911) indicatethat Sturnella magna magna does not breed in Arkansas, although hisconclusions were based upon specimens taken only from Blytheville,Stuttgart, Conway, and near Mammoth Springs. All of the specimenswere identified as Sturnella magna argutula. Pindar (1924) relates thatthat the eastern meadowlark was common in Phillips County, Arkansasbut rare in the more northern Poinsett County during the fall and winterof 1888-89. This was by inference and not actually determined byexamination of specimens. Wheeler (1924) states that Sturnella magnamagna breeds in Arkansas, thinking that he was quoting Howell's find-ings and not realizing that he had mis-read Howell. Wheeler waspuzzled by Howell's phrase "exclusive of the "Ozarks" and substitutedthe words "mountainous area" for "Ozark Region". Wheeler simplyerrored through misinterpretation. He thought Sturnella magna argutulawas confined to parts of Arkansas south of the ozarks and his rangemap for this form indicates as such. However, Wheeler contradicts hisrange map in his written description of the range of Sturnella magnaargutula. Black (1935) considers all breeding meadowlarks in theWinslow Region of the Ozark Mountains to be Sturnella magna argutulabut comments that they were "radically" different from specimenscollected 50 miles south. Although suggesting an area of sympatricdistribution for the two subspecies, Black still considered the meadow-larks in the area more closely related to Sturnella magna argutula thanto Sturnella magna magna. Deaderick (1935) from sight observationsincludes Sturnella magna argutula in his preliminary list of birds for HotSprings, Arkansas, and states its status as a common permanent residentbut less common during the winter months. He found the westernmeadowlark Sturnella neglecta neglecta a "rare transient" in the HotSprings area. Baerg (1951) mentions that Sturnella magna magna is26Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 196727The Meadowlark in Northeast Arkansasnot known definitely to nest in the state but could probably nest in theOzark Mountains of Arkansas. Collins (I960) records one westernmeadowlark Sturnella neglecta neglecta in her study of birds in north-eastern Arkansas. Hanebrink (1965) found the western meadowlark atransient and not common in that area. James and James (1964)record the western meadowlark from October 18 as the earliest fall dateuntil April 30 as the last spring date for the state while indicating theeastern meadowlark a permanent resident. From an ecological stand-point, Grinnell (1927) states the western and eastern meadowlarksdiffer in their tolerance of humidity,tion occurs, the western subspecieseastern subspecies the moist swalesmay come into contact and live sideIn areas where sympatric distribu-favors the drier hillsides and thebelow,- however, the two speciesby side. Ecological aspects of thesympatric distribution of meadowlarks in the north-central states as wellas territoriality have been discussed by Lanyon (1956a, 1956b, and1962). Hybridization of the eastern and western species has beenreported by Sutton and Dickson (1965), and Lanyon (1966).ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe authors wish to express their appreciation to Dr. W. E. Lanyon,Associate Curator, Department of Ornithology, American Museum ofNatural History for assistance in determining the subspecies of meadow-larks obtained for this study and to Frances C. James, Department ofZoology, University of Arkansas for her valuable suggestions concerningthis study.METHODSThe method of field observations employed in taking bird censusesin each of the two habitat types was to identify each bird to speciesby either sight or sound. Care was taken not to cover the same groundand record the same bird twice. Neither the route traversed nor thetime spent in the habitat type was constant, but the majority of countswere made during the morning hours. The one hour unit of timeremained constant, however, so that comparisons could be made. Inrecording information for this study, a field sheet was used whichincluded information on the location, habitat type, date, time, tempera-ture, weather conditions, mileage, and number of meadowlarks observed.The second method used in this study was the roadside census firstused by Nice and Nice (1921) to measure bird populations of Oklahomain 1920. Since then it has been used by a number of other workers.Kendeigh (1944) evaluated the roadside census in relation to othertypes of censuses. Howell (1951) used the roadside census method asa means of measuring bird populations in Tennessee. The roadsidecensus in this study was employed as a method of determining relativeabundance and not absolute abundance. The roadside counts wereconducted on secondary roads in two major habitat types: namely,Crowley's Ridge and the adjacent western delta farm areas. The auto-mobile was driven between 15 and 20 miles per hour, and meadowlarks27Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol21/iss1/828Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedingswere recorded as they appeared before the observer. Field glasses of7 x 50 power were used for all field and roadside census work.To determine the subspecies composition of meadowlark popula-tions, several specimens were taken periodically throughout the year inthe study area and identified by a recognized authority. Specimenswere taken with a twelve-gauge shotgun using a light-load cartridge.Care was taken so that the birds would not be damaged beyonrecognition. As the skins were prepared for identification, each speci-men was assigned a field number. Information concerning the habitatfrom which collected, the date, and the sex were recorded for eachspecimen and placed on a card which was attached to the individualprepared skin.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONFourteen meadowlarks were collected, skins prepared, identified,and placed in the Arkansas State University Museum (Table 1). Six ofthe birds were identified as Sturnella magna magna apparently havingcome down from breeding populations to the north, as all were collectedduring the fall, winter and early spring in the study area. Numbers1, 2, 4, 6, and 11 were males, and number 3 was a female.Two birds of the total collected were identified as western meadow-larks Sturnella neglecta neglecta presumably from breeding populationsto the north or northwest of this area. Specimen number 13 wasidentified as a first-year female collected on February 14, and thespecimen number 12 was identified as a first-year male. James andJames (1964) record October 18 as the earliest fall date for the occur-rence of the western meadowlark. Specimen number 12 was takenfrom the Crowley's Ridge habitat on October 16; therefore, it extendedthe previously known record for its occurrence by two days. The latestspring date recorded for Arkansas was April 30 for the westernmeadowlark. This record can now be extended to May 21 as a westernmeadowlark was heard and seen singing for several hours on this dateat Jonesboro in 1966.The remaining specimens collected during the breeding season fromlocal populations, or at least from some locality not far north of thisarea, were assigned to Sturnella magna argutula. Number 14 is ajuvenile closer to the southern subspecies than to Sturnella magnamagna. Numbers 5, 7, 9, and 10 are males, intermediate in size andcoloration but more closely related to Sturnella magna argutula. Number8 is a female, again intermediate, but closer to the southern form.Apparently, the breeding birds become larger and somewhat lighterin plumage not far to the north of this area. Northeastern Arkansasappears to be close to the shift from Sturnella magna magna toSturnella magna argutula (Lanyon, 1966, personal communication).Field and roadside observations indicate a greater relative abun-dance of meadowlark species on Crowley's Ridge (Tables II— V) thanon the delta during the spring and summer. During the fall and28Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 196729The Meadowlark in Northeast Arkansaswinter the converse of this occurred. Chi square analysis of the censusesshowed that these population differences were highly significant. Thisseasonal habitat preference could possibly correlate with the shift fromthe breeding Sturnella magna argutula population to the over-winteringSturnella magna magna population from the north.The western meadowlark Sturnella neglecta neglecta appearedonly as a rare winter resident or transient and was not common in thestudy area at any time. The extreme dates for the western meadowlarkranges from October 16 to May 21. This species can be identified byits voice in the field. The extend of yellow on the cheek, amount ofwhite on the rectricies, and the general lighter coloration of the crownand back are useful and reliable in identifying the western species fromthe other forms (Lanyon, 1966). Findings indicate that a decidedpreference was shown by the western species in its habitat preference.Nine western meadowlarks were identified by voice during the study,and all were associated with feed-lots on Crowley's Ridge.TableMeadowlarks collected in northeastern ArkansasField CollectedHabitatNo. Sub-species Sex Date1 Sturnella m. magna Male Crowley's Ridge Nov. 13,19652 Sturnella m. magna Male Delta Dec. 18,19653 Sturnella m. magna Female Delta Jan. 8,19664 Sturnella m. magna Male Crowley's Ridge Feb. 2,19665 Sturnella m. argutula Male6 Sturnella m. magna Male7 Sturnella m. argutula Male8 Sturnella m. argutula Female9 Sturnella m. argutula MaleTO Sturnella m. argutula Male1 1 Sturnella m. magna MaleCrowley's Ridge Mar. 20,1966Delta Apr. 6,1966Delta May 7,1966Crowley's Ridge June 12, 1966Delta July 10, 1966Crowley's Ridge Aug. 13,1966Crowley's Ridge Sept. 18,1966!2 Sturnella n. neglecta Male Crowley's Ridge Oct. 16,1966!3 Sturnella n. neglecta Female Crowley's Ridge Feb. 14,1965!4 Sturnella m. argutula Juvenile Delta July 7,196629Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol21/iss1/830Arkansas Academy of Science ProceedingsTable IIComparison of Meadowlark Populations Based on Roadside Censuses(Fall and Winter)No. of Individual Total Ave. No. of Total No.Habitat Types Trips Miles Birds Per Mile of BirdsCrowley's Ridge 20 382 0.56 212Delta Area 20 340 0.74 250Table IIIComparison of Meadowlark Populations Based on Roadside Censuses(Spring and Summer)No. of Individual Total Ave. No. of Total No.Habitat Types Trips Miles Birds Per Mile of BirdsCrowley's Ridge 20 386 1.18 456Delta Area 20 340 0.45 153T ¦ ,_ ,WTable IVComparison of AAeadowlark Populations Based on Field Censuses(Fall and Winter)Total Hours Ave. No. Birds Total No.Habitat Types in Field Per Hour of BirdsCrowley's Ridge 10 34.60 346Delta Area 10 45.30 453Table VComparison of Meadowlark Populations Based on Field Censuses(Spring and Summer)Total Hours Ave. No. Birds Total No.Habitat Types in Field Per Hour of BirdsCrowley's Ridge 10 36.80 368Delta Area 10 25.50 25530Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 196731The Meadoivlark in Northeast ArkansasSUMMARYFourteen meadowlarks were collected from different months of theyear, and skins were prepared and placed in the Arkansas State Uni-versity Museum.Census work was conducted in three counties of northeasternArkansas, and comparisons were made in two unlike habitat types bothby means of numbers recorded per hour of field observations and byconducting roadside censuses in two unlike habitat types comparingnumbers of meadowlarks seen per mile.Finding from a limited study indicate that the subspecies ofmeadowlarks nesting in this area are Sturnella magna argutula whichare intermediate in form but more closely identifiable to Sturnella magnaargutula. The wintering population is a different group of birds pre-sumably nesting to the north of this area and are of the subspeciesSturnella magna magna. The western meadowlark Sturnella neglectaneglecta appears only as a transient or rare winter resident.The records of the state have been extended for the westernmeadowlark from October 16 to May 21. The western meadowlarkSturnella neglecta neglecta can best be identified in the field by itsvoice.Findings indicate a greater relative abundance of meadowlarkspecies on Crowley's Ridge during the spring and summer with greaternumbers occuring in the delta area during the fall and winter. Using2x2 contingency tables the field census data yields a chi square valueof 34.80 and the roadside census a chi square of 93.58. The prob-ability is less than 0.001 that these chi square values will obtain withno real population differences. Thus, in both cases there is a significantdifference between the populations occurring in different areas at dif-ferent seasons. This seasonal habitat preference seems to correlatewith a shift from breeding of Sturnella magna argutula in summer tothe over-wintering Sturnella magna magna population from the north.There is a decided preference shown by the western meadowlarkto the drier ridges associated with feed-lots within the study area.LITERATURE CITEDBaerg, W. J. 1951. Birds of Arkansas. Univ. Ark. College Agri. Bull.258: 1-188.Black, J. D. 1935. Birds of the Winslow, Arkansas region. Am. Midi.Nat. 16: 154-176.Collins, Kathryn. 1960. Winter and breeding season populations ofupland and bottom land forest birds in northeast Arkansas. M. S.thesis, Univ. of Ark. 68 pp.Deaderick, William H. 1938. A preliminary list of the birds of HotSprings National Park and vicinity. Wilson Bull. 50: 257-273.31Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol21/iss1/8Ii32Arkansas Academy of Science ProceedingsGrinnell, Joseph. 1927. The designation of bird ranges. Auk 44:322-324.Hannebrink, Earl L. 1965. A study of bird populations in selectedhabitats of northeast Arkansas. A doctoral dissertation, OklahomaState University. 88 pp.Howell, A. H. 1911. Birds of Arkansas. U. S. Dept. Agri. Biol.Surv.Bull. 38: 1-100.Howell, Joseph C. 1951. The roadside census as a method of measur-ing bird populations. Auk 68: 334-357.James, Douglas and Frances C. James. 1964. The seasonal occurrenceof Arkansas birds. Proc. Ark. Acad. Sci. 18: 20-30.Kendeigh, S. Charles. 1944. Measurements of bird populations. Ecol.AAonogr. 14: 69-106.Lanyon, W. E. 1956a. Ecological aspects of the sympatric distributionof meadowlarks in the northcentral states. Ecology 37: 98-108.1956b. Territory of the meadowlarks. Genus Sturnella.Ibis 98: 485-4891962. Specific limits and distribution of meadowlarks >of the desert grasslands. Auk 79: 183-207.1966. HybridizationMus. of Nat. Hist. 134, N. Y.,of meadowlarks. bull, of the Am.25 pp.Nice, Margaret M., and L. B. NiceBulletin 33: 113-123.1921. The roadside census WilsonPindar, L. Otley. 1924. Winter birds in eastern Arkansas. WilsonBulletin 36: 201-207. )Sutton, George M. and Gerald W. Dickson. 1965. Interbreeding of theeastern and western meadowlarks in central Oklahoma. South-western Naturalist 10: 307-310.Wheeler, H. E. 1924. Birds of Arkansas, A Preliminary Report. Ark.Bur. of Mines, Manuf. and Agri., Little Rock, Ark. 177 pp.i32Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 21 [1967], Art. 8Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1967

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3064&context=jaas

Subspecies and Ecology of Meadowlarks in Northwest Arkansas

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UARK (University of Arkansas )

ScholarWorks@UARK