Remarks on the taking and recording of biometric measurements in bird ringing
Ringing operations hold opportunities for introducing error into biometric recording. This situation needs to be addressed by field workers, data processors and archivists. Avoidable error may be systematic and/or random, and adds "noise" to random error from natural variation. Handling techniques and measuring equipment are responsible for introducing systematic errors in fieldwork. This aspect requires an increased level of professionalism among ringers to correct it. Analysis of data can induce further random error, e.g. when generating indices from measurements. Analysts also need to be aware of pitfalls inherent in field data, especially that collected historically.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
Gosler A. G. Greenwood J. J. D. Baker J. K. King J. R. 1995. A comparison of wing length and primary length as size measures for small passerines: a report to the British Ringing Committee.Ring. & Migr. 16: 65-78.
Gosler A. G. Greenwood J. J. D. Baker J. K. Davidson N. C. 1998. The field determination of body size and condition in passerines: a report to the British Ringing Committee.Bird Study 45: 92-103.
Harper D. G. C. 1994. Some comments on the repeatability of measurements.Ring. & Migr. 15: 84-90.
Lougheed S. C. Arnold T. W. Bailey R. C. 1991. Measurement error of external and skeletal variables in birds and its effect on Principal Component Analysis.Auk 108: 432-436.
Maitav A. Izhaki I. 1994. Stopover and fat deposition by Blackcap Sylvia atricapilla following spring migration over the Sahara.Ostrich 65: 160-166.
Morgan J. H. Shirihai H. 1997. Blackcap. In: Morgan J. H. Shirihai H. Yosef R. (Eds). Passerines and Passerine Migration at Eilat.IBCE Tech. Publ. 6 1: 39-40.
Sokal R. R. Rohlf F. J. 1995. Biometry. Freeman New York.
Svensson L. 1992 Identification Guide to European Passerines. Stockholm.