Subject: Re: Cowbirds and RW Blackbirds (fwd)
Date: Aug 28 12:04:58 1997
From: Maureen Ellis - me2 at u.washington.edu
Dear Friends,
While the reported studies concerning cowbird parasitism advantages may
seem logical and neat, please be aware that the supporting data may have
been "cooked." Yes, the validity of the Nature article is questionable.
Please read the commentary below from the Univ of Maine Institute for
Field Ornithology. BTW, Jon D. is Jon Dunn, one of the chief consultants
for the Nat Geo Soc field guide.
Maureen Ellis me2 at u.washington.edu Univ of WA and Des Moines, WA
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 14:47:36 -0400
From: "Charles D. Duncan" <cduncan at acad.umm.maine.edu>
To: Maureen Ellis <me2 at u.washington.edu>
Cc: jld.cerwa at postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Subject: Re: Cowbirds and RW Blackbirds (fwd)
Maureen--
The issue is an interesting on on many counts. The original citation is:
Smith, Neal G. 1968. The advantage of being parasitized. Nature 219: 690-694.
I used to include it in my assigned course readings when I taught a
travel-study course to Trinidad entitled "The Tropical Environment." It has
also been widely summarized including in such influential places as R.
Rickleff's undergraduate text, "Ecology".
Unfortunately, it has been shown beyond any doubt that Smith has made "data"
up out of thin air. In particular his "study" of Thayer's Gulls at a
breeding colony in the high arctic was fraudulent. Among other things, he
claimed to have visited the colony on dates when satellite images show the
island entirely bound by sea ice, and utterly inaccessible. This
demonstration of fraud was published in Colonial Waterbirds (late 1980s?)
but I don't have the citation.
Of course this immediately cast doubt on Smith's other work. Many had
already questioned the "methodology" of the oropendola study. My memory is
that he said he cut down oropendola nests at night (they are large, hanging
structures, usually very high above the ground and usually with no branches
nearby). He then claimed that the nests were re-raised to their original
position and reattached. I believe he claimed to have done this for a dozen
or more nests in a night, but it has been a long time since I last read this
paper. Well every time I've looked at an oropendola nest, I've thought it
would take a very long time to remove, examine and reattach even one, even
in daylight. A dozen or more at night becomes incredible.
So we have this very neat story about cowbirds being advantageous to their
hosts, written by someone who has already been shown to have faked his data,
and using a methodology that on its face is improbable. I think most people
who are aware of the situation have decided that it's best not to base ANY
decision on Neal Smith's work unless it can be replicated by someone whose
integrity is spotless. Sadly, though, because the story is so neat, the
claimed oropendola-cowbird interaction has been widely circulated among
those who may have taken it at face value. After all it was published in
Nature!
Some people, such as Jon, have even taken time to write to the Smithsonian
and ask why an investigator who has committed the sin of science-faking
should be on the US taxpayers' payroll (Smith works at the Smithsonian
Tropical Research center in Panama.)
Hope this helps clarify a little. Jon may be able to give you better details.
--c
MY REQUEST TO CHARLES DUNCAN BELOW..................
At 10:28 08/28/1997 -0700, you wrote:
>Charles,
>We have an interesting thread going now on our ornithology-ecology
>newsgroup. In a chat this summer with Jon D. at the Warbler Workshop, it
>was revealed that some studies implicating potential survival benefits to
>a nest BECAUSE of cowbird parasitism were without valid supporting
>data (the original Nature article???!!!) If you have time to read the
>below, please comment.
>
>Looking forward to the Wintering Sparrows Workshop in Sierra Vista.
>
>Thank you and good cheer,
>Maureen Ellis me2 at u.washington.edu Univ of WA and Des Moines, WA
>*********************************
Large report recently posted was snipped.....................to save
space, retrieve it from Tweeters Archives if you need to see it again.