Viewing page 32 of 114

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Cyanerpes, Jan. 20, 1958, III 32

more apt to give more HCN's than are visiting ♀'s. Could the ♂ of this species be more gregarious than the ♀?

Cyanerpes,I January 23, 1958
Barro Colorado

There have been very few visitors the last few days. This would seem to indicate that the relatively large flock that was around on the 19th-20th has moved on. Which would mean that these non-breeding flocks are mobile [[rather?]] than territorial.
Well - I take this back a little (although I still think the flocks of this species tend to be mobile at this time). We have had a couple of wild ♂'s, in complete [[seuptial?]] plumage, and one wild ♀ visiting this [[noon]]. Much as usual - HCN's the usual pattern. But the ♀ did [[St.?]] with the Wh Notes on top of the cage. Apparently directed at the birds inside the cage - as the wild ♂'s were rather far away from her at the time. This is about the first time I have seen this.

Cyanerpes,I January 25, 1958
Barro Colorado
The younger of the 2 captive juvenile ♂'s suddenly went into quite full display, for a very brief period, when the adult ♂ came near him. St & CR & BL & Wh Notes - but none of the other "Wh complex components). This would seem to be a further indicator that most, at least, of this complex is non-sexual.