
==== Front
Mov Ecol
Mov Ecol
Movement Ecology
2051-3933
BioMed Central London

504
10.1186/s40462-024-00504-7
Research
Offshore vagrancy in passerines is predicted by season, wind-drift, and species characteristics
Brooks William E. willbrooks.0@gmail.com

12
1 https://ror.org/02jqj7156 grid.22448.38 0000 0004 1936 8032 George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030 USA
2 https://ror.org/02jqj7156 grid.22448.38 0000 0004 1936 8032 Department of Biology, George Mason University, Science and Technology Campus, 10900 University Boulevard, Manassas, VA 20110 USA
12 9 2024
12 9 2024
2024
12 6418 5 2023
4 9 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Background

Migratory birds accomplish remarkable feats of long-distance navigation. Vagrants, few individuals who migrate to incorrect locations, reveal conditions where orientation and navigation fail. Studies of vagrancy on a continental scale reveal the importance of external factors such as strong winds driving birds off course, clouds obscuring migratory landmarks, and natural disruptions in the Earth’s magnetic field interfering with migratory orientation. Species may also possess characteristics that make them more prone to vagrancy. The external drivers of vagrancy on a smaller scale are less understood.

Methods

I used eBird, a community science dataset comprising millions of bird observations, to study land passerines observed over the Pacific Ocean, here termed offshore vagrants. These data present the opportunity to study a particular case of vagrancy: small-scale displacement into highly inhospitable areas. I modeled how season, wind, lack of visibility, interference with magnetoreception, and species differences may predict offshore vagrancy. Then, I modeled how species vagrancy likelihood is predicted by morphological and life history traits.

Results

Vagrancy was more common in the fall and positively associated with stronger tail winds in the spring. Species with greater preference for understory foraging habitat were less likely to occur as vagrants. Species vagrancy likelihood was higher in birds with a longer migration distance and rounded wings, but the relationship was weaker in birds with a pointed wings. Brown-headed Cowbirds were the most common offshore species in terms of absolute number of records and proportional to onshore frequency.

Conclusions

Offshore community science records proved revealing of mechanisms for small scale vagrancy in passerines. Offshore vagrancy can be driven by wind drift in the spring, but not in the fall despite higher overall levels of vagrancy. Life history characteristics like foraging habitat preference and migration duration may make some species more vulnerable to the effects of wind drift. Species with longer migrations may have more time to encounter vagrancy causing events, but greater aerodynamic efficiency may counteract this effect.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40462-024-00504-7.

Keywords

Vagrancy
Wind drift
Seasonal migration
Passerine
Community science
Brown-headed cowbird
issue-copyright-statement© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcBackground

Migratory birds possess remarkable navigational adaptations which allow them to precisely return to breeding territories after migrating thousands of miles. Over 60 years of study continue to unravel sensory, physiological, and genetic adaptations for migratory orientation and navigation [1]. Many birds appear to use magnetic cues to follow genetically coded migration directions over great distances [2–4], eventually using learned visual landmarks to find territories with pinpoint accuracy [5]. This remarkable philopatry benefits some birds with increased reproductive success [6, 7].

Bird navigation is not perfect: migratory birds occasionally experience vagrancy, defined as a species straying outside its normal range. Vagrancy can impact birds on a population and community scale. Vagrants may perish in hostile environments [8], expand a species’ range by founding new populations [9, 10] possibly cauing speciation, or they may establish new migration routes [11]. Numerous hypotheses for vagrancy have been proposed including mutations in route encoding genes [12] and even brain parasites distorting orientation senses [13]. Best supported are external factors like weather and geomagnetism interfering with migration. Vagrancy may arise from strong winds driving birds off course [14–16], called wind-drift. Cloud or fog cover may obscure landmarks, causing disorientation [9, 12, 17, 18]. Recent study suggests disruptions in the Earth’s magnetic field driven by geomagnetic storms may cause misorientation in free-flying birds in North America [8, 19, 20]. However, increased radiomagnetism from increased solar activity may disrupt avian magnetoreception possibly masking the effects of geomagnetic disturbance, allowing birds to migrate with other cues [8].

Population, life history, and evolutionary characteristics may make vagrancy more common in some species. In vagrant wood warblers in the western United States, population size and migration distance impacts vagrancy likelihood [21]. Species with larger population sizes have more individuals and thus more opportunities for vagrancy. Similarly, species that migrate further may have a higher cumulative probability of vagrancy during their longer migration duration. In a study of offshore vagrants in California, nocturnal migrants may be more prone to vagrancy than diurnal migrants because nocturnal migrants may be unable to see the coastline, thus more easily wandering offshore [17]. The extent to which characteristics make species more prone to vagrancy remain poorly understood.

Defining vagrancy can often prove difficult [10]. The rarity of a species at any given location is often based on observation data limited by low sampling density (e.g., survey or banding data) or inconsistent effort (e.g., community science data). Species abundance is often patchy, making it easy for local range fragments to be overlooked. Any birds dispersing from unknown range fragments may be erroneously identified as vagrants [10]. Additionally, vagrants may represent the extremes of a normal curve of migration orientation, rather than true misorientation [21]. To provide a clear index of vagrancy, I chose to study migratory passerines lost offshore (Fig. 1). While some migratory routes cross bodies of water [22], flying over the open ocean can result in exhaustion and death for a small passerine. Offshore vessels document these passerines, presenting an opportunity to study vagrancy [23]. These vagrants also represent a different scale of vagrancy to many studies, rather than being far outside their normal range [e.g. 8, 21], these represent short distance vagrancy into inhospitable territory. Some studies from islands or peninsulas have attempted to characterize the conditions under which offshore vagrancy occurs [17], but as land-based studies these results are biased to birds that survive water crossings. A geographically broad study of birds observed offshore from boats may provide insight into what drives offshore vagrancy.Fig. 1 Offshore vagrancy documented from a cruise ship 80 km off the coast of Washington State. a A yellow-rumped warbler flies low over the Pacific Ocean. b A yellow-rumped warbler, Wilson’s warbler, and Lincoln’s sparrow take refuge in an artificial plant. c Two deceased Wilson’s Warblers lay on the deck. d An unwell yellow-rumped warbler perches in an artificial plant. All photographs by Steve Kelling, used with permission

I studied common migratory passerines in the Western United States lost over the Pacific Ocean. I asked the questions: [1] to what extent are patterns in offshore vagrancy explained by external factors or species differences? And [2] what characteristics make a species more likely to experience vagrancy? My analysis revealed that season, wind, and to a lesser extent solar activity, may influence offshore vagrancy. However, the greatest variation in offshore vagrancy occurred between species. Variation between species was best predicted by migration distance and wing pointedness. Brown-headed Cowbirds were a notable outlier, occurring offshore more often than any other species.

Methods

Data acquisition and filtering

The Pacific ocean off western North America is an ideal region to study rarely observed offshore passerines due to its extensive spatial and temporal coverage from birdwatching pelagic trips, repositioning cruises, and research vessels. Observations from these vessels are often submitted by reliable observers to eBird [24], a community science platform for birdwatchers to submit observation data. eBird data is entered in georeferenced checklists containing tallies of species linked to effort data including transect distance, number of observers, and time.

I chose common coastal migratory passerine species to study factors driving offshore vagrancy. Non-migratory and rare species were omitted because there are too few offshore records for analysis. I selected study species by visually inspecting eBird records from reference counties encompassing the West-facing slope of the coastal range in California (Orange, Santa Cruz, Humboldt, and Del Norte), Oregon (Curry, Coos, Lincoln, Tillamook, and Clatsop) and Washington (Pacific and Grays-harbor). I ignored interior counties to avoid introducing extraneous, non-coastal species to the analysis. I selected species reported in > 2% of eBird checklists in any county, a threshold chosen to include all regular species in the region based on prior knowledge. Additionally, I only included species if they have different breeding and non-breeding range in Birds of the World [25] range maps, thus being migratory. This resulted in a set of 49 common costal migratory passerines with a variety of migration distances, diel migration timings, and morphology.

I downloaded the “basic” eBird dataset containing all eBird checklists submitted prior to November 2023, and filtered it only include the 49 study species using a custom AWK script. I then “zero filled” records for all species using the package auk in R v4.3.2 [26, 27]. “Zero-filling” interpolates absences of species left unreported in complete eBird checklists. The function also removes duplicate observations produced when eBird users share their checklists with fellow observers. The resulting dataset contained eBird checklists with each focal species marked as either present “1” or absent “0”.

I thoroughly filtered the raw eBird data to produce a dataset appropriate for studying offshore migration. I selected offshore eBird checklists submitted from southern California to southern British Columbia (32.5–48° latitude) from 10 to 470 km offshore (Western boundary − 130° longitude), removing records within 10 km of land because observers occasionally combine harbor and nearshore data into one eBird checklist. I also selected onshore records up to ~ 10 km inland as a comparison. Within 2.5° latitude slices of the onshore data (width based on weather covariate scales), I calculated observation frequency for each species on each day. Observation frequency is a standard eBird statistic calculated as the percent of all checklists in an area that contain a report of at least one individual of a species [28–30]. I then excluded all offshore records (either presence or absence) of species that had an on-land frequency of zero. This ensured I was studying the conditions during the migratory period of that species, avoiding inflating my dataset with uninformative absences when a species isn’t migrating. Additionally, I only included data submitted in March–May and August–November to omit the breeding and non-breeding season of most passerines.

Lastly, I acquired descriptive aspects of the dataset. eBird checklists hold valuable descriptive data entered by users, including various tags and a free text field where users may enter observation comments [31, 32]. I extracted keywords from observation comments and age tags to determine the relative proportion of adults and juveniles offshore. These are only available when noted by the observers, so the relative proportions of each are not necessarily representative of the population.

External drivers of offshore vagrancy

I selected predictors to evaluate four hypotheses for offshore vagrancy. (Hypothesis 1) Vagrancy may be more common in the fall, possibly because naïve juveniles navigate poorly. I included season as a predictor. (Hypothesis 2) Wind-drift may drive birds offshore. I included u-wind (east/west wind vectors) to test if strong east winds drive birds offshore and an interaction between v-wind (north/south wind vectors) and season to account for the different migratory directions during spring and fall migration. I also inlcuded an interaction between u-wind and v-wind to assess the impacts of wind direction and speed simulatenously. (Hypothesis 3) Low visibility caused by fog or low cloud cover may prevent birds from seeing landmarks like the coastline. I used relative humidity as a proxy for fog and low cloud cover because they are generally correlated [33]. I extracted wind and relative humidity NCEP/NCAR weather Reanalysis 1 data from offshore locations using the R package RNCEP [34]. I averaged hourly weather data for an entire 24-h day for each checklist, because weather may have affected birds before the time of observation. (Hypothesis 4) Global changes in geomagnetism or radiation may interfere with magnetoreception. Following Tonelli et al. [8], I included two predictors relating to interference with magnetoreception: geomagnetic disturbance and solar activity. I included geomagnetic disturbance because geomagnetic events may cause misorientation [8, 19, 20]. I downloaded Kp (an average magnetic index from 13 globally distributed geomagnetic observatories) geomagnetic data between 1968-01-01 and 2023-01-01 from the International Service of Geomagnetic Indices (https://isgi.unistra.fr/data_download.php). I then converted Kp to ap, a numeric magnetic index more suitable for statistics. Additionally, radiomagnetism from solar activity may disrupt magnetoreception [8]. I used daily sunspot number as a proxy for solar activity [35]. I downloaded ‘American Relative Sunspot Number-Daily’ data between 1968-01-01 and 2023-02-05 from Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (https://lasp.colorado.edu/lisird/data/american_relative_sunspot_number_daily/). I also included two predictors to control for other aspects of the data. I included latitude as a predictor because vagrancy may vary geographically. Additionally, the number of offshore vagrants likely varies with the overall number of birds migrating on a given day. To control for migrant abundance, I included daily on-land species frequency, which should scale with the number of migrants. I inspected all possible explanatory variables for outliers and multicollinearity with VIF and plot-correlation matrices. I also checked for missing values.

I fit binomial generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) with the R package lme4 [36] to evaluate the relative role of external drivers and species differences in offshore vagrancy. A binomial GLMM was chosen to fit the binary presence and absence response variable. I chose a mixed effects modeling framework for two reasons. First, I wanted to evaluate the relative contribution of external factors and species differences to offshore vagrancy. To meet this aim, I included species as a random effect. Second, there is inherent non-independence in the eBird dataset. Each checklist has presence and absence of all studied species, so those observations have the same predictor values and are not independent. Additionally, birdwatchers on a single vessel will often submit multiple checklists throughout the day, so passerines riding on board may be reported multiple times. Lastly, some days may have high levels of vagrancy, so checklists from that day may have inflated numbers of offshore passerines. To test the best random effect structure to remedy non-independence, I fit five global models (all fixed effects included) with differing random effect structures (Supplementary Materials). A random intercept for observation date compensated for all three levels of non-independence and had clear support when compared to other random effect structures with AICc. Thus, I opted for a crossed random effect structure with intercepts for species and observation date.

I fit 17 binomial GLMMs with different combinations of eight predictors chosen a prioi to test different hypotheses for offshore vagrancy. To ensure good model fit, I randomly subsampled absences to have the same number as presences. Resampling techniques are commonly used to correct for class imbalance in GLMM and machine learning models across disciplines [12–14]. Subsampling was an effective approach to correct for class imbalance when estimating species distribution in a similar community science dataset [37]. I scaled all continuous predictors to ensure model convergence and allow effect size comparison. I fit univariate models to evaluate the individual contribution of all seven predictors and an intercept only model to act as a null hypothesis. I then fit combinations of my overall migration abundance predictor, on-land species frequency, and the most likely predictors based on previous research [17, 21], season, v-wind, and an interaction between v-wind and season. After evaluating model performance, I used the model with these three predictors and interaction as my base model from which to build models testing all combinations of the other five predictors. Models with more than 6 fixed effects were overfit and would not converge. This resulted in 21 candidate models which I compared with AICc. I chose the best model as having the lowest AICc, but any model within 2 values of the best model was considered in the results. I also conducted model averaging with the full model set to assess the importance of each predictor and similarity to estimates in the best model with MuMIn [38]. In the best model, I evaluated the importance of fixed and random effects with conditional and marginal R2. As a model diagnostic check, I confirmed the centrality and normality of model residuals by comparing mean residuals to 0, plotting simulated residuals with the R package DHARMa [39], and plotting random effect residuals with the R package sjPlot [40]. I also plotted binned residuals against all predictors, both those included and excluded from the model. I evaluated influential points and dates with cooks distance.

Species characteristics affecting offshore vagrancy likelihood

To evaluate traits that may increase vagrancy I studied interspecific differences in vagrancy likelihood. The frequencies of each species may be heavily influenced by their overall population size. To generate a metric of offshore vagrancy likelihood corrected for differences in relative commonness, I calculated species average of offshore frequency weighted by one minus the daily on-land frequency. Thus, common species on land would have a lower adjusted offshore frequency.

I tested whether morphological and life history traits drive species differences in offshore vagrancy likelihood. I downloaded hand-wing index (HWI) and mass data from the AVONET dataset [41]. HWI is a measure of wing pointedness, calculated as the factor of the longest primary and secondary feather length. I included HWI because it is widely considered a proxy for aerodynamic efficiency [42–44], thus possibly impacting migratory ability. I included mass to consider an additional morphological trait. I downloaded Elton traits to extract foraging habitat trait data [45]. Species occupying habitats with different levels of exposure may be differently impacted by wind and other weather events. I included foraging preference for understory, midstory, canopy, and aerial strata, which are expressed as a percentage of time spent foraging in that habitat. Ground foraging preference was omitted as it was highly negatively collinear with understory and midstory foraging preference. I retrieved migration traits from Birds of the World [25]. I recorded if birds migrated during the day, night, or both. To estimate migration distance, I averaged both breeding and non-breeding latitude and longitude on range maps, and then calculated spherical distance in km between the points. I included migration distance because birds that migrate further tend to be more prone to vagrancy [21]. I fit 15 multiple linear regression models using adjusted vagrancy likelihood as a response variable, normalized with a log transformation. In the initial modeling phases, I tested all four combinations of HWI and migration distance, including an interaction term between HWI and migration distance to test if birds with greater aerodynamic efficiency may be more able to compensate with the vagrancy causing events. This initial phase revealed the importance of including the interaction between HWI and migration distance, which I used as the base model for future models. Later, I added the other five variables in univariate models and combined with the base model. I verified the normality of the best model residuals and checked influential points with Cook’s distance.

I conducted a phylogenetic analysis to test if related species had similar vagrancy likelihood due similar life history characteristics. I downloaded 1000 phylogenetic tree subsets with a Hackett backbone from birdtree.org and generated a 50% majority-rule consensus tree [46]. I made the tree ultrametric and dichotomous to meet the assumptions of standard phylogenetic analyses and tested for phylogenetic signal of offshore vagrancy likelihood with Blomberg’s K using the R package phytools [47, 48].

Results

I downloaded 15,804 offshore eBird checklists from 1968 to 2023, comprising 23,492.03 observation hours and 310,630.7 km of travel distance. Roughly 27% of checklists were submitted at 13 heavily used offshore eBird locations, the rest being distributed over 8,992 locations. Offshore passerine vagrants occurred on just 2.74% of offshore eBird checklists totaling ~ 1606 individual birds (Fig. 2). Mean distance offshore was 41.0 (± 27.1) km, but the furthest offshore vagrant was observed 202.7 km offshore. In observer comments, juveniles were noted 33.33% more than adults (species frequencies in Supplementary materials Table S3).Fig. 2 Offshore eBird data used in this study. a The raster grid shows the sampling coverage of eBird data, with the color of each cell representing the number of eBird checklists in that cell. Each triangle is a single offshore observation of a passerine. b A histogram depicts the distribution of records in terms of distance from shore

External drivers of offshore vagrancy

The best model explained much of the variance in the dataset (Conditional R2 = 0.741), however little of this predictive power was due to the fixed effects (Marginal R2 = 0.137). Species identity and observation date were large sources of non-independence in the dataset. Variance in offshore vagrancy between dates was 5.10 and between species was 2.59. On-land species frequency, solar activity, season, v-wind, and the interaction between v-wind and season, were included as fixed effects in the best model (Fig. 3, Table S2). Higher on-land observation frequency had a large effect size and was positively correlated with probability of offshore vagrancy. The interaction between v-wind and season also had a large effect size. Stronger south winds (positive v-wind) correlated with higher vagrancy probability in the spring, but there was no relationship in the fall. Season had a large effect size, with more vagrants occurring in the fall (Fig. 4). Solar activity had a small effect size, with slightly more vagrants occurring under high relative sunspot abundance. Five other models were within 2 AICc values of the best model (Table 1). These models also included on-land species frequency, season, v-wind, and an interaction between v-wind and season. Geomagnetic disturbance, wind, visibility, and latitude all appeared in one to two of the other top models. A model with no additional predictor had the second lowest AICc value and the fewest predictors. The model averaged parameter estimates closely match those from the best model, apart from solar radiation, which was lower than the best model additionally suggesting it is not an important predictor.Fig. 3 External drivers of offshore vagrancy. Predicted offshore vagrancy probability response curves and 95% confidence intervals are shown under the studied range of each predictor in the best model (a–c). Binned frequencies of the raw data are included as points with standard deviation bars to show model fit. Predicted level of vagrancy in spring and fall are shown with separate curves and binned frequencies are separated by season for the interaction with season and v-wind (c). The model was built from subsampled data to ensure model fit, so all observation frequency values are rescaled to match the probabilities of the full dataset. The effect size of each predictor in the best model is shown with a caterpillar plot (D). On-land observation frequency (land obs freq), season, and the interaction between v-wind and season had large effect sizes. Solar activity (Ra) and v-wind had relatively small effect sizes. The model averaged effects sizes are similar to the best model (E)

Fig. 4 Species vagrancy likelihood by season. Two versions of offshore observation frequency are shown for each passerine species: raw observation frequency and adjusted for on-land species commonness (adjusted observation frequency). Observation frequency is the percentage of all eBird checklists that contain a report of a given species. Proportion of observations in spring and fall migration are overlaid. Note the high frequency of brown-headed cowbirds, particularly in the fall

Table 1 Candidate external vagrancy models ranked by AICc value

Model names	K	AICc	Delta_AICc	ModelLik	AICcWt	LL	Cum.Wt	
land_obs_freq + vwind * season + Ra	8	1,817.20	0	1	0.24	 − 900.57	0.24	
land_obs_freq + vwind * season	7	1,817.79	0.59	0.74	0.17	 − 901.87	0.41	
land_obs_freq + vwind * season + relh	8	1,817.93	0.73	0.70	0.16	 − 900.93	0.57	
land_obs_freq + vwind * season + latitude	8	1,818.39	1.19	0.55	0.13	 − 901.16	0.70	
land_obs_freq + vwind * season + ap_mean	8	1,818.53	1.33	0.51	0.12	 − 901.23	0.82	
land_obs_freq + vwind * season + uwind + relh	9	1,819.06	1.86	0.39	0.09	 − 900.49	0.92	
land_obs_freq + vwind * season + uwind	8	1,819.28	2.08	0.35	0.08	 − 901.60	1.00	
land_obs_freq + vwind + season	6	1,836.07	18.87	0.0001	0.0000	 − 912.02	1.00	
land_obs_freq + uwind * vwind + season	8	1,839.51	22.31	0.0000	0.0000	 − 911.72	1.00	
land_obs_freq + vwind	5	1,843.21	26.01	0.0000	0.0000	 − 916.59	1.00	
land_obs_freq + uwind * vwind	7	1,846.31	29.11	0.0000	0.0000	 − 916.13	1.00	
land_obs_freq + season	5	1,847.64	30.44	0.0000	0.0000	 − 918.80	1	
land_obs_freq	4	1,855.53	38.33	0	0	 − 923.76	1	
vwind	4	1,916.42	99.22	0	0	 − 954.20	1	
uwind	4	1,920.22	103.02	0	0	 − 956.10	1	
season	4	1,921.20	104.00	0	0	 − 956.59	1	
Ra	4	1,923.75	106.55	0	0	 − 957.87	1	
Intercept only	3	1,924.62	107.42	0	0	 − 959.30	1	
ap_mean	4	1,925.69	108.49	0	0	 − 958.84	1	
latitude	4	1,925.95	108.76	0	0	 − 958.97	1	
relh	4	1,925.97	108.77	0	0	 − 958.97	1	
All predictor combinations were chosen a priori to test specific vagrancy hypotheses. On-land species observation frequency was included to account for differences in overall daily abundance of migrants. The model with the lowest AICc values was considered the best model, but the four models within 2 AICc values were considered in the results

Species characteristics affecting offshore vagrancy likelihood

Offshore vagrancy likelihood varied dramatically between species (Fig. 4), mirroring the importance of the species random effect in the external driver GLMM. There was clear AICc support for a multiple linear regression including understory foraging preference and the interaction between migration distance and HWI (Table 2). The best model moderately explained species variance in offshore vagrancy likelihood (Fig. 5; Multiple linear regression, R2 = 0.165, F4, 55 = 3.616, p = 0.0072): understory foraging preference was positively correlated (β =  − 0.008, t = –2.227, p = 0.0301), HWI and migration distance were both positively correlated (β = 0.03, t = 1.629, p = 0.1089; β = 0.0006, t = 2.954, p = 0.0046), and HWI and migration distance had a significant negative interaction (t =  − 2.589, p = 0.0123). For birds with less pointed wings, a longer migration distance increased the likelihood of vagrancy. For birds with more pointed wings, vagrancy was only slightly more likely with longer migration distances. Vagrancy propensity was not predicted by phylogenetic structure. A Blomberg’s K of 0.246 indicates phylogenetic repulsion, where related species are more different than expected under Brownian Motion (K = 1), however the relationship was not significant (Blomberg’s test, P = 0.262; Supplementary materials Figure S1).Table 2 Candidate species models ranked by AICc value

Model names	K	AICc	Delta_AICc	ModelLik	AICcWt	LL	Cum.Wt	
ForStrat.understory + Hand_wing * Migration_dist	6	138.17	0	1	0.46	 − 62.29	0.46	
ForStrat.understory	3	140.49	2.32	0.31	0.14	 − 67.03	0.61	
Hand_wing * Migration_dist	5	140.88	2.71	0.26	0.12	 − 64.88	0.73	
ForStrat.midhigh + Hand_wing * Migration_dist	6	142.51	4.34	0.11	0.05	 − 64.46	0.78	
mass + Hand_wing * Migration_dist	6	143.31	5.14	0.08	0.04	 − 64.86	0.81	
ForStrat.aerial + Hand_wing * Migration_dist	6	143.33	5.16	0.08	0.03	 − 64.87	0.85	
ForStrat.canopy + Hand_wing * Migration_dist	6	143.35	5.18	0.08	0.03	 − 64.88	0.88	
Null	2	143.83	5.66	0.06	0.03	 − 69.81	0.91	
Migration_dist	3	143.90	5.73	0.06	0.03	 − 68.73	0.94	
ForStrat.canopy	3	145.34	7.17	0.03	0.01	 − 69.46	0.95	
ForStrat.midhigh	3	145.60	7.43	0.02	0.01	 − 69.59	0.96	
Hand_wing	3	145.74	7.57	0.02	0.01	 − 69.66	0.97	
mass	3	145.91	7.74	0.02	0.01	 − 69.74	0.98	
ForStrat.aerial	3	146.00	7.83	0.02	0.01	 − 69.79	0.99	
Hand_wing + Migration_dist	4	146.19	8.02	0.02	0.01	 − 68.73	1	
All predictor combinations were chosen a priori to test specific vagrancy hypotheses. The best model had a lower AICc value by over 2 values

Fig. 5 Species-wise vagrancy likelihood in response to hand-wing index (HWI) and migration distance. Each point represents a different species. Vagrancy likelihood was calculated as the observation frequency offshore divided by the observation frequency on land, normalized with a log transformation. The independent effects of understory foraging preference (a) and HWI, a measure of wing pointedness which correlates to aerodynamic efficiency (b), are shown. The effect of migration distance is shown with its interaction with HWI (c). In birds with a pointed wing shape (high HWI, demonstrated by a Horned Lark wing), the effects of migration distance are reduced. In birds with a rounded wing shape (low HWI, demonstrated by a Wilson’s warbler), longer migration was strongly correlated with increased vagrancy likelihood

Brown-headed cowbirds were more common offshore than all other studied species both in absolute number of records and proportional to onshore frequency (Fig. 4). A group of three Brown-headed Cowbirds also represented the passerine recorded furthest offshore at 202.7 km off the coast of British Columbia. Juveniles represented 4 of the 7 Brown-headed Cowbirds records where observers noted age (Table S3).

Discussion

I found strong support for two vagrancy hypotheses, season and wind-drift, and weak support for solar activity. Consistent with prior research, I found that vagrancy is more common in the fall [17, 21]. Additionally, wind appears to be an important factor, again supporting previous research [14–16]. South winds in the spring were associated with more vagrancy, perhaps because tailwinds encourage more migration. However, no such relationship with vagrancy occurs in the fall. I found a trend with low model support of greater offshore vagrancy during periods of higher solar activity, but the small effect size and absence in most top models suggests this may not be a real effect.

Differences with previous research may be reflective of differences in migration scale. Relative humidity, which is expected to correlate with fog and low cloud cover, had no impact on vagrancy, despite previous studies finding clouds to reduce visibility and increase vagrancy [9, 17]. Similarly, increased geomagnetic activity produced no change in vagrancy, in contrast to Tonelli et al. [8]. Most studies focus on species detected 100 s of km out of range [8, 21], not 10 s of km as in this study. DeSante’s analysis of landbirds on the Farallon Islands is more similar in vagrancy scale, as these are birds that had to displace ~ 30 km offshore to arrive on the island [17]. Drivers of offshore vagrancy in common landbirds appear similar in this analysis, DeSante hypothesized these birds are responding small changes in weather and electromagnetic disturbance [17]. As most offshore landbirds were within 25 km of land, perhaps due to wind, it raises the question of whether passerines observed from boats are in the process of returning to land. Surveillance radar data suggests that migratory birds can compensate for wind drift, reorienting to land in morning flight [49, 50].

I found clear evidence of species differences in vagrancy likelihood. Species differences in offshore vagrancy appear related to an interaction between migration distance and wing pointedness. Birds that migrate further tend to be more prone to vagrancy [21], likely because more time spent migrating provides more opportunities to encounter vagrancy causing factors. However, the impact of migration distance was reduced in birds with more pointed wings and exaggerated in birds with more rounded wings. It is possible that the increased aerodynamic efficiency conferred by pointed wings [42–44] makes species more resilient to factors like wind. Another possible explanation is that lower aerodynamic efficiency makes species less able to maintain altitude, thus dropping lower where observers on boats are more likely to see them. Species with preference for understory foraging strategy were less likely to occur as vagrants. Preference for ground foraging was removed because it was negatively correlated with understory preference, but this also suggests that vagrancy is positively related to ground foraging. These results may suggest that species in more protected habitats are less exposed to winds. Additionally, foraging strategy may be correlated with dispersal ability or migration behavior. Crucially, there was much variance in species offshore vagrancy likelihood left unexplained by the species model, suggesting there may be other characteristics that make species more prone to vagrancy.

It is possible the passerines detected offshore are not vagrants, but instead birds undertaking over-water migration. Birds may undertake over-water migration to shorten their journey, as seen in birds crossing the Gulf of Mexico or North Sea [22, 51]. Given the abundance of offshore records in Southern California, where over-water migration gives no opportunity for a short cut, this seems a poor explanation for this system. Additionally, greater occurrence of juveniles and increased vagrancy in species with long migrations are results in common with other vagrancy studies [10].

Brown-headed Cowbirds were an intriguing outlier in my dataset, occurring offshore more than other passerines, even when correcting for on land frequency. Greater vagrancy likelihood in juveniles could result from high post-natal dispersal, but this explanation may not fit Brown-headed Cowbirds as they show equivalent levels of natal philopatry to other North American passerines [52]. Brown-headed Cowbirds are unique in our dataset as brood parasites, meaning females lay eggs in other species nests allowing that species to rear their offspring for them. It is possible that their brood parasitism relates to vagrancy likelihood in Brown-headed Cowbirds, however such a relationship requires direct study.

Conclusions

Records from offshore community science have revealed mechanisms for small-scale vagrancy in passerines. Taken together, external factors, life-history, and morphological traits may influence vagrancy likelihood of passerines. Vagrancy is more common in the fall and during strong wind conditions in the spring. Preference for understory habitat is associated with lower vagrancy. Migration distance and HWI appear to contribute to how prone a species is to vagrancy. Species with longer migrations may encounter more vagrancy-causing events, though greater aerodynamic efficiency might mitigate this effect. Intriguingly, offshore vagrancy appears to be more common in Brown-headed Cowbirds than any other passerine.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Material 1

Abbreviations

GLMM Generalized linear mixed model

HWI Hand-wing index

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank all birders who upload their observations to eBird, Dr. Mark Hauber for his insight into mechanisms for Brown-headed Cowbird vagrancy, Dr. Haw Chaun Lim for comments on the manuscript, and Steve Kelling for contributing photos of his remarkable observation of large-scale offshore vagrancy.

Author contributions

WEB is the sole author and contributed all elements of this study.

Funding

No funding was required for this research.

Availability of data and materials

All eBird data is available for download from www.eBird.org. The R scripts for generated for this study are available in a GitHub repository (https://github.com/willbrooks0/Offshore-vagrancy).

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable, this studied uses publicly available observational data.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Holland RA True navigation in birds: from quantum physics to global migration J Zool 2014 293 1 1 15 10.1111/jzo.12107
Holland RA. True navigation in birds: from quantum physics to global migration. J Zool. 2014;293(1):1–15.10.1111/jzo.12107
2. Liedvogel M Åkesson S Bensch S The genetics of migration on the move Trends Ecol Evol 2011 26 11 561 569 10.1016/j.tree.2011.07.009 21862171
Liedvogel M, Åkesson S, Bensch S. The genetics of migration on the move. Trends Ecol Evol. 2011;26(11):561–9.21862171 10.1016/j.tree.2011.07.009
3. Åkesson S Bakam H Martinez Hernandez E Ilieva M Bianco G Migratory orientation in inexperienced and experienced avian migrants Ethol Ecol Evol 2021 33 3 206 229 10.1080/03949370.2021.1905076
Åkesson S, Bakam H, Martinez Hernandez E, Ilieva M, Bianco G. Migratory orientation in inexperienced and experienced avian migrants. Ethol Ecol Evol. 2021;33(3):206–29.10.1080/03949370.2021.1905076
4. Wynn J Leberecht B Liedvogel M Burnus L Chetverikova R Döge S Naive songbirds show seasonally appropriate spring orientation in the laboratory despite having never completed first migration Biol Let 2023 19 2 20220478 10.1098/rsbl.2022.0478
Wynn J, Leberecht B, Liedvogel M, Burnus L, Chetverikova R, Döge S, et al. Naive songbirds show seasonally appropriate spring orientation in the laboratory despite having never completed first migration. Biol Let. 2023;19(2):20220478.10.1098/rsbl.2022.0478
5. Mouritsen H Long-distance navigation and magnetoreception in migratory animals Nature 2018 558 7708 50 59 10.1038/s41586-018-0176-1 29875486
Mouritsen H. Long-distance navigation and magnetoreception in migratory animals. Nature. 2018;558(7708):50–9.29875486 10.1038/s41586-018-0176-1
6. Part T Philopatry pays: a comparison between collared flycatcher sisters Am Nat 1991 138 3 790 796 10.1086/285252
Part T. Philopatry pays: a comparison between collared flycatcher sisters. Am Nat. 1991;138(3):790–6.10.1086/285252
7. Bensch S Hasselquist D Nielsen B Hansson B Higher fitness for philopatric than for immigrant males in a semi-isolated population of great reed warblers Evolution 1998 52 3 877 883 10.2307/2411282 28565235
Bensch S, Hasselquist D, Nielsen B, Hansson B. Higher fitness for philopatric than for immigrant males in a semi-isolated population of great reed warblers. Evolution. 1998;52(3):877–83.28565235 10.2307/2411282
8. Tonelli BA Youngflesh C Tingley MW Geomagnetic disturbance associated with increased vagrancy in migratory landbirds Sci Rep 2023 13 1 414 10.1038/s41598-022-26586-0 36624156
Tonelli BA, Youngflesh C, Tingley MW. Geomagnetic disturbance associated with increased vagrancy in migratory landbirds. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):414.36624156 10.1038/s41598-022-26586-0
9. Lees AC Gilroy JJ Bird migration: When vagrants become pioneers Curr Biol 2021 31 24 R1568 R1570 10.1016/j.cub.2021.10.058 34932963
Lees AC, Gilroy JJ. Bird migration: When vagrants become pioneers. Curr Biol. 2021;31(24):R1568–70.34932963 10.1016/j.cub.2021.10.058
10. Dufour P Åkesson S Hellström M Hewson C Lagerveld S Mitchell L The yellow-browed warbler (Phylloscopus inornatus) as a model to understand vagrancy and its potential for the evolution of new migration routes Mov Ecol 2022 10 1 59 10.1186/s40462-022-00345-2 36517925
Dufour P, Åkesson S, Hellström M, Hewson C, Lagerveld S, Mitchell L, et al. The yellow-browed warbler (Phylloscopus inornatus) as a model to understand vagrancy and its potential for the evolution of new migration routes. Mov Ecol. 2022;10(1):59.36517925 10.1186/s40462-022-00345-2
11. Dufour P Lees AC Gilroy J Crochet PA The overlooked importance of vagrancy in ecology and evolution Trends Ecol Evol 2024 39 1 19 22 10.1016/j.tree.2023.10.001 37945456
Dufour P, Lees AC, Gilroy J, Crochet PA. The overlooked importance of vagrancy in ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol. 2024;39(1):19–22.37945456 10.1016/j.tree.2023.10.001
12. Alerstam T Ecological causes and consequences of bird orientation Experientia 1990 46 4 405 415 10.1007/BF01952174
Alerstam T. Ecological causes and consequences of bird orientation. Experientia. 1990;46(4):405–15.10.1007/BF01952174
13. Bensch S Duc M Valkiūnas G Brain parasites and misorientation of migratory birds Trends Parasitol 2024 40 369 371 10.1016/j.pt.2024.02.008 38443303
Bensch S, Duc M, Valkiūnas G. Brain parasites and misorientation of migratory birds. Trends Parasitol. 2024;40:369–71.38443303 10.1016/j.pt.2024.02.008
14. Van Doren BM Horton KG Stepanian PM Mizrahi DS Farnsworth A Wind drift explains the reoriented morning flights of songbirds BEHECO 2016 27 4 1122 1131 10.1093/beheco/arw021
Van Doren BM, Horton KG, Stepanian PM, Mizrahi DS, Farnsworth A. Wind drift explains the reoriented morning flights of songbirds. BEHECO. 2016;27(4):1122–31.10.1093/beheco/arw021
15. Baird J Nisbet ICT Northward fall migration on the atlantic coast and its relation to offshore drift Auk 1960 77 2 119 149 10.2307/4082347
Baird J, Nisbet ICT. Northward fall migration on the atlantic coast and its relation to offshore drift. Auk. 1960;77(2):119–49.10.2307/4082347
16. Able KP The orientation of passerine nocturnal migrants following offshore drift Auk 1977 94 2 320 330 10.1093/auk/94.2.320
Able KP. The orientation of passerine nocturnal migrants following offshore drift. Auk. 1977;94(2):320–30.10.1093/auk/94.2.320
17. DeSante DF Annual variability in the abundance of migrant landbirds on Southeast Farallon island, California Auk 1983 100 4 826 852 10.1093/auk/100.4.826
DeSante DF. Annual variability in the abundance of migrant landbirds on Southeast Farallon island, California. Auk. 1983;100(4):826–52.10.1093/auk/100.4.826
18. Flack A Aikens EO Kölzsch A Nourani E Snell KRS Fiedler W New frontiers in bird migration research Curr Biol 2022 32 20 R1187 R1199 10.1016/j.cub.2022.08.028 36283388
Flack A, Aikens EO, Kölzsch A, Nourani E, Snell KRS, Fiedler W, et al. New frontiers in bird migration research. Curr Biol. 2022;32(20):R1187–99.36283388 10.1016/j.cub.2022.08.028
19. Gulson-Castillo ER Van Doren BM Bui MX Horton KG Li J Moldwin MB Space weather disrupts nocturnal bird migration Proc Natl Acad Sci 2023 120 42 e2306317120 10.1073/pnas.2306317120 37812699
Gulson-Castillo ER, Van Doren BM, Bui MX, Horton KG, Li J, Moldwin MB, et al. Space weather disrupts nocturnal bird migration. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2023;120(42): e2306317120.37812699 10.1073/pnas.2306317120
20. Moore FR Geomagnetic disturbance and the orientation of nocturnally migrating birds Science 1977 196 4290 682 684 10.1126/science.854743 854743
Moore FR. Geomagnetic disturbance and the orientation of nocturnally migrating birds. Science. 1977;196(4290):682–4.854743 10.1126/science.854743
21. Ralph CJ Wolfe JD Factors affecting the distribution and abundance of autumn vagrant New World warblers in northwestern California and southern Oregon PeerJ 2018 6 e5881 10.7717/peerj.5881 30595974
Ralph CJ, Wolfe JD. Factors affecting the distribution and abundance of autumn vagrant New World warblers in northwestern California and southern Oregon. PeerJ. 2018;6: e5881.30595974 10.7717/peerj.5881
22. Brust V Hüppop O Underestimated scale of songbird offshore migration across the south-eastern North Sea during autumn J Ornithol 2022 163 1 51 60 10.1007/s10336-021-01934-5
Brust V, Hüppop O. Underestimated scale of songbird offshore migration across the south-eastern North Sea during autumn. J Ornithol. 2022;163(1):51–60.10.1007/s10336-021-01934-5
23. Hernandez MM Pretelli MG Webb J Seco Pon JP Vessels as an opportunity to track vagrant non-marine birds in the southwestern South Atlantic Wilson J Ornithol 2022 134 2 327 333 10.1676/21-00002
Hernandez MM, Pretelli MG, Webb J, Seco Pon JP. Vessels as an opportunity to track vagrant non-marine birds in the southwestern South Atlantic. Wilson J Ornithol. 2022;134(2):327–33.10.1676/21-00002
24. Sullivan BL Wood CL Iliff MJ Bonney RE Fink D Kelling S eBird: A citizen-based bird observation network in the biological sciences Biol Cons 2009 142 10 2282 2292 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.05.006
Sullivan BL, Wood CL, Iliff MJ, Bonney RE, Fink D, Kelling S. eBird: A citizen-based bird observation network in the biological sciences. Biol Cons. 2009;142(10):2282–92.10.1016/j.biocon.2009.05.006
25. Billerman SM Keeney BK Rodewald PG Schulenberg TS Birds of the world 2022 Ithaca, NY, USA Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology
Billerman SM, Keeney BK, Rodewald PG, Schulenberg TS. Birds of the world. Ithaca, NY, USA: Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology; 2022.
26. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Internet]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2023. Available from: https://www.R-project.org/
27. Strimas-Mackey M, Miller E, Hochachka W. Auk: eBird data extraction and processing with AWK. R package version. 2018.
28. Hurlbert AH Liang Z Spatiotemporal variation in avian migration phenology: citizen science reveals effects of climate change PLoS ONE 2012 7 2 e31662 10.1371/journal.pone.0031662 22384050
Hurlbert AH, Liang Z. Spatiotemporal variation in avian migration phenology: citizen science reveals effects of climate change. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(2): e31662.22384050 10.1371/journal.pone.0031662
29. Chu JJ Gillis DP Riskin SH Community science reveals links between migration arrival timing advance, migration distance and wing shape J Anim Ecol 2022 91 8 1651 1665 10.1111/1365-2656.13755 35668666
Chu JJ, Gillis DP, Riskin SH. Community science reveals links between migration arrival timing advance, migration distance and wing shape. J Anim Ecol. 2022;91(8):1651–65.35668666 10.1111/1365-2656.13755
30. Mayor SJ Guralnick RP Tingley MW Otegui J Withey JC Elmendorf SC Increasing phenological asynchrony between spring green-up and arrival of migratory birds Sci Rep 2017 7 1 1902 10.1038/s41598-017-02045-z 28507323
Mayor SJ, Guralnick RP, Tingley MW, Otegui J, Withey JC, Elmendorf SC, et al. Increasing phenological asynchrony between spring green-up and arrival of migratory birds. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):1902.28507323 10.1038/s41598-017-02045-z
31. Slager DL Seasonal and directional dispersal behavior in an ongoing dove invasion J Avian Biol 2020 10.1111/jav.02332
Slager DL. Seasonal and directional dispersal behavior in an ongoing dove invasion. J Avian Biol. 2020. 10.1111/jav.02332.10.1111/jav.02332
32. Brooks W Boersma J Paprocki N Wimberger P Hotaling S Community science for enigmatic ecosystems: using eBird to assess avian biodiversity on glaciers and snowfields J Field Ornithol 2023 10.5751/JFO-00218-940106
Brooks W, Boersma J, Paprocki N, Wimberger P, Hotaling S. Community science for enigmatic ecosystems: using eBird to assess avian biodiversity on glaciers and snowfields. J Field Ornithol. 2023. 10.5751/JFO-00218-940106.10.5751/JFO-00218-940106
33. Wallace JM Hobbs PV Atmospheric science: an introductory survey 2006 The Netherlands Elsevier 507
Wallace JM, Hobbs PV. Atmospheric science: an introductory survey. The Netherlands: Elsevier; 2006. p. 507.
34. Kemp MU Emiel Van Loon E Shamoun-Baranes J Bouten W RNCEP: global weather and climate data at your fingertips Methods Ecol Evol 2012 3 1 65 70 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011.00138.x
Kemp MU, Emiel Van Loon E, Shamoun-Baranes J, Bouten W. RNCEP: global weather and climate data at your fingertips. Methods Ecol Evol. 2012;3(1):65–70.10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011.00138.x
35. Blanter EM Mouël JLL Perrier F Shnirman MG Short-term correlation of solar activity and sunspot: evidence of lifetime increase Sol Phys 2006 237 2 329 350 10.1007/s11207-006-0162-x
Blanter EM, Mouël JLL, Perrier F, Shnirman MG. Short-term correlation of solar activity and sunspot: evidence of lifetime increase. Sol Phys. 2006;237(2):329–50.10.1007/s11207-006-0162-x
36. Bates D Mächler M Bolker B Walker S Fitting linear mixed-effects models Using lme4 J Stat Softw 2015 67 1 48 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models Using lme4. J Stat Softw. 2015;67:1–48.10.18637/jss.v067.i01
37. Robinson OJ Ruiz-Gutierrez V Fink D Correcting for bias in distribution modelling for rare species using citizen science data Divers Distrib 2018 24 4 460 472 10.1111/ddi.12698
Robinson OJ, Ruiz-Gutierrez V, Fink D. Correcting for bias in distribution modelling for rare species using citizen science data. Divers Distrib. 2018;24(4):460–72.10.1111/ddi.12698
38. Bartoń K. MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2024 Jun 28]. p. 1.47.5. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn
39. Hartig F, Lohse L. DHARMa: residual diagnostics for hierarchical (Multi-Level/Mixed) Regression Models [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2024 Mar 18]. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/DHARMa/index.html
40. Lüdecke D, Bartel A, Schwemmer C, Powell C, Djalovski A, Titz J. sjPlot: data visualization for statistics in social science [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2024 Mar 18]. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/sjPlot/index.html
41. Tobias JA Sheard C Pigot AL Devenish AJ Yang J Sayol F AVONET: morphological, ecological and geographical data for all birds Ecol Lett 2022 25 3 581 597 10.1111/ele.13898 35199922
Tobias JA, Sheard C, Pigot AL, Devenish AJ, Yang J, Sayol F, et al. AVONET: morphological, ecological and geographical data for all birds. Ecol Lett. 2022;25(3):581–97.35199922 10.1111/ele.13898
42. Claramunt S Wright NA Using museum specimens to study flight and dispersal The extended specimen 2017 Boca Raton CRC Press
Claramunt S, Wright NA. Using museum specimens to study flight and dispersal. In: The extended specimen. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2017.
43. Pennycuick CJ Modelling the flying bird 2008 The Netherlands Elsevier 495
Pennycuick CJ. Modelling the flying bird. The Netherlands: Elsevier; 2008. p. 495.
44. Sheard C Neate-Clegg MHC Alioravainen N Jones SEI Vincent C MacGregor HEA Ecological drivers of global gradients in avian dispersal inferred from wing morphology Nat Commun 2020 11 1 2463 10.1038/s41467-020-16313-6 32424113
Sheard C, Neate-Clegg MHC, Alioravainen N, Jones SEI, Vincent C, MacGregor HEA, et al. Ecological drivers of global gradients in avian dispersal inferred from wing morphology. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):2463.32424113 10.1038/s41467-020-16313-6
45. Wilman H Belmaker J Simpson J de la Rosa C Rivadeneira MM Jetz W EltonTraits 1.0: species-level foraging attributes of the world’s birds and mammals Ecology 2014 95 7 2027 2027 10.1890/13-1917.1
Wilman H, Belmaker J, Simpson J, de la Rosa C, Rivadeneira MM, Jetz W. EltonTraits 1.0: species-level foraging attributes of the world’s birds and mammals. Ecology. 2014;95(7):2027–2027.10.1890/13-1917.1
46. Jetz W Thomas GH Joy JB Hartmann K Mooers AO The global diversity of birds in space and time Nature 2012 491 7424 444 448 10.1038/nature11631 23123857
Jetz W, Thomas GH, Joy JB, Hartmann K, Mooers AO. The global diversity of birds in space and time. Nature. 2012;491(7424):444–8.23123857 10.1038/nature11631
47. Blomberg SP Garland TJR Ives AR Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile Evolution 2003 57 4 717 745 12778543
Blomberg SP, Garland TJR, Ives AR. Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution. 2003;57(4):717–45.12778543
48. Revell LJ phytools: an R package for phylogenetic comparative biology (and other things) Methods Ecol Evol 2012 3 2 217 223 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011.00169.x
Revell LJ. phytools: an R package for phylogenetic comparative biology (and other things). Methods Ecol Evol. 2012;3(2):217–23.10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011.00169.x
49. Van Doren BM Horton KG Stepanian PM Mizrahi DS Farnsworth A Wind drift explains the reoriented morning flights of songbirds BEHECO 2016 27 4 1122 1131 10.1093/beheco/arw021
Van Doren BM, Horton KG, Stepanian PM, Mizrahi DS, Farnsworth A. Wind drift explains the reoriented morning flights of songbirds. BEHECO. 2016;27(4):1122–31.10.1093/beheco/arw021
50. Horton KG Van Doren BM Stepanian PM Hochachka WM Farnsworth A Kelly JF Nocturnally migrating songbirds drift when they can and compensate when they must Sci Rep 2016 6 1 21249 10.1038/srep21249 26879152
Horton KG, Van Doren BM, Stepanian PM, Hochachka WM, Farnsworth A, Kelly JF. Nocturnally migrating songbirds drift when they can and compensate when they must. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):21249.26879152 10.1038/srep21249
51. Deppe JL Ward MP Bolus RT Diehl RH Celis-Murillo A Zenzal TJ Fat, weather, and date affect migratory songbirds’ departure decisions, routes, and time it takes to cross the Gulf of Mexico Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2015 112 46 E6331 6338 10.1073/pnas.1503381112 26578793
Deppe JL, Ward MP, Bolus RT, Diehl RH, Celis-Murillo A, Zenzal TJ, et al. Fat, weather, and date affect migratory songbirds’ departure decisions, routes, and time it takes to cross the Gulf of Mexico. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(46):E6331-6338.26578793 10.1073/pnas.1503381112
52. Hauber ME Heath SK Tonra CM Direct estimates of breeding site fidelity and natal philopatry in brood parasitic brown-headed cowbirds Molothrus ater Ardea 2020 108 2 129 137 10.5253/arde.v108i2.a6
Hauber ME, Heath SK, Tonra CM. Direct estimates of breeding site fidelity and natal philopatry in brood parasitic brown-headed cowbirds Molothrus ater. Ardea. 2020;108(2):129–37.10.5253/arde.v108i2.a6
