Skip to main content
Log in

Preservation agents influence UV-coloration of plumage in museum bird skins

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Ornithology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Plumage colour has always been a major criterion when describing and distinguishing bird taxa. Today, the use of reflection spectrophotometry is the most commonly used technique to study plumage coloration. A major advantage of this method is the opportunity of observing reflection beyond the human colour vision range—including the UV-waveband. Traditional taxonomic and phylogenetic research is often based on bird skins held in collections in natural history museums worldwide. Different agents for preservation have been used to prevent skins from being damaged by arthropod pests. Sometimes, parts of the plumage have been contaminated with stains from preservation agents. When dried, they are almost invisible to the human eye under normal sunlight conditions and cause no obvious change to feather coloration. However, some preservation agents contain fluorescent components which show up brightly when illuminated with UV-light. Furthermore, undetectable to the human eye, stains from these agents annihilate UV-reflection, preventing accurate data collection based on the UV-reflection of bird feathers. Measuring plumage parts which have been accidentally stained will lead to a relative underestimate of UV-reflection. In studying 20,000 samples, we found fluorescent stains in some 300 bird skins of varying ages (1913–2004) in museum collections throughout Europe and the USA. Different preservation agents have been evaluated for their fluorescence properties.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andersson S, Örnborg J, Andersson M (1998) Ultraviolet sexual dimorphism and assortative mating in blue tits. Proc R Soc Lond B 265:445–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnold EK, Owens IPF, Marshall NJ (2002) Fluorescent signalling in parrots. Science 295:92

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett ATD, Cuthill IC, Partridge JC, Lunau K (1997) Ultraviolet plumage colors predict mate preferences in starlings. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:8618–8621

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boles WE (1990) Glowing parrots—need for a study of hidden colours. Birds Int 3:76–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkhardt D (1989) UV vision: a bird’s eye view of feathers. J Comp Physiol A 164:787–796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Church SC, Bennett ATD, Cuthill IC, Partridge JC (1998) Ultraviolet cues affect the foraging behaviour of blue tits. Proc R Soc Lond B 265:1509–1514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuthill IC, Partridge JC, Bennett ATD, Church SC, Hart NS, Hunt S (2000) Ultraviolet vision in birds. Adv Stud Behav 29:159–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endler JA, Théry M (1996) Interacting effects of lek placement, display behavior, ambient light, and color patterns in three neotropical forest-dwelling birds. Am Nat 148:421–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg L (1996) A history of pest control measures in the anthropology collections, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. J Am Inst Conserv 35:23–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausmann F, Arnold KE, Marshall NJ, Owens IPF (2002) Ultraviolet signals in birds are special. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:61–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawks CA, Von Endt DW (1990) Mercury and mercury compounds in natural history collections: an annotated bibliography. Nat Hist Conserv 5:4–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawks CA, Williams SL (1986) Arsenic in natural history collections. Leather Conserv News 2:1–4

    Google Scholar 

  • Huth H-H, Burkhardt D (1972) Der spektrale Sehbereich eines Violettohr-Kolibris. Naturwissenschaften 59:650

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maier EJ (1993) To deal with the “invisible”: on the biological significance of ultraviolet sensitivity in birds. Naturwissenschaften 80:476–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearn SM, Bennett ATD, Cuthill IC (2001) Ultraviolet vision, fluorescence and mate choice in a parrot, the budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:2273–2279

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to sincerely thank K.-L. Schuchmann for his creative advice and his support. We would also like to thank Joel L. Cracraft, Paul R. Sweet, Shannon Kenney and Peter Capainolo from the American Museum of Natural History in New York and Nate Rice and Leo Joseph from the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia and Peter Jones from the Natural History Museum in Tring, UK, for their support and for allowing access to the collections. We are also grateful to Alexander Mullen and Frank Steinheimer for their critical review of the manuscript. This study was made possible by grants from the Heinrich Hertz Foundation of the State Department of Science and Research of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany and the Collection Study Grant of the American Museum of Natural History.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Georg Pohland.

Additional information

Communicated by F. Bairlein

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pohland, G., Mullen, P. Preservation agents influence UV-coloration of plumage in museum bird skins. J Ornithol 147, 464–467 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-005-0038-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-005-0038-0

Keywords

Navigation