Cited by 23melanin and skin pigmentationAvian ecology and behaviorAnimal Behavior and Reproduction

A large‐scale survey of bird plumage colour aberrations reveals a collection bias in Internet‐mined photographs

Zbyryt, Adam, Mikula, Peter, Ciach, Michał, Morelli, Federico, Tryjanowski, Piotr·2021·Ibis

Abstract

Birds with plumage colour aberrations are of interest to both the general public and scientists. However, due to their rarity in nature, information on the presence of colour aberrations is rarely found in the peer‐reviewed literature. Exploration of public observations using modern information technologies such as Internet‐based search engines could facilitate cost‐effective and rapid broad‐scale collection of data on phenotypic aberrations in animals but may also be prone to the same problems as fieldwork, including systematic collection bias. We used Google Images and also asked birdwatchers and ornithologists, via naturalists' forums and social media, to collate a unique dataset of photographs of 936 aberrantly coloured birds of 74 species from Poland. Phylogenetically informed analyses, which included species both with and without reported colour aberrations, revealed that the number of colour aberrations was higher in species with larger populations in Poland, those with larger body size, and those associated with human settlements. Colour aberrations were also more often reported for species with a wider habitat breadth and those which do not migrate over long distances. Habitat openness and diet type were not related to the number of colour aberrations across species in multivariate models. Our study emphasizes not only the power of novel sources to collect large datasets on relatively rare phenotypic aberrations in animals but also the importance of vigilance when using data mined from public sources because the observed patterns may reflect collection bias rather than the nature of the studied phenomena.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ibi.12872

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Individuals may be more inclined to report individuals with charismatic coloration compared to those of regular coloration when contributing to community-gathered data.

    “However, we caution the use of community-gathered data as individuals may be more inclined to report individuals with charismatic coloration compared to those of regular coloration (Husby, 2017;Zbyryt et al., 2021;Carlen et al. 2024).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zbyryt, A., Mikula, P., Ciach, M., Morelli, F., & Tryjanowski, P.
Affiliations
  • The Polish Society for Bird Protection (PTOP) Ciepła 17 Białystok 15‐471 Poland
  • Charles University (CZ)
  • University of Agriculture in Krakow (PL)
  • Czech University of Life Sciences Prague (CZ)
Corresponding author
Tryjanowski, Piotr
Venue
Ibis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-09-19
Volume
163
Issue
2
Pages
566-578
ISSN
  • 0019-1019 (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-919X
OpenAlex
W3047740593
Cited by
23
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ibis (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › melanin and skin pigmentation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
Keywords
data collection bias, Google Images, birdwatchers, social media data, population size, body size, habitat breadth, migration, human settlement, Poland

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review