Magnetoreception in birds: no intensity window in “fixed direction” responses

Under 502 nm turquoise light combined with 590 nm yellow light and in total darkness, European robins, Erithacus rubecula, no longer prefer their migratory direction, but exhibit so-called fixed direction responses that do not show the seasonal change between spring and autumn. We tested robins under these light conditions in the local geomagnetic field of 46 μT, a field of twice this intensity, 92 μT, and a field of three times this intensity, 138 μT. Under all three magnetic conditions, the birds preferred the same easterly direction under turquoise-and-yellow light and the same northwesterly direction under dark, while they were oriented in their seasonally appropriate direction under control conditions. “Fixed direction” responses are thus not limited to a narrow intensity window as has been found for normal compass orientation. This can be attributed to their origin in the magnetite-based receptor in the upper beak, which operates according to fundamentally different principles than the radical pair mechanism in the retina mediating compass orientation. “Fixed direction” responses are possibly a relict of a receptor mechanism that changed its function, now mainly providing information on magnetic intensity.     

Magnetic compass orientation of migratory birds in the presence of a 1.315 MHz oscillating field

The radical pair model of magnetoreception predicts that magnetic compass orientation can be disrupted by high frequency magnetic fields in the Megahertz range. European robins, Erithacus rubecula, were tested under monochromatic 565 nm green light in 1.315 MHz fields of 0.48 T during spring and autumn migration, with 1.315 MHz being the frequency that matches the energetic splitting induced by the local geomagnetic field. The birds responses depended on the alignment of the oscillating field with respect to the static geomagnetic field: when the 1.315 MHz field was aligned parallel with the field lines, birds significantly preferred northerly directions in spring and southerly directions in autumn. These preferences reflect normal migratory orientation, with the variance slightly increased compared to control tests in the geomagnetic field alone or to tests in a 7.0 MHz field. However, in the 1.315 MHz field aligned at a 24° angle to the field lines, the birds were disoriented in both seasons, indicating that the high frequency field interfered with magnetoreception. These finding are in agreement with theoretical predictions and support the assumption of a radical-pair mechanism underlying the processes mediating magnetic compass information in birds.     

Navigational strategies of homing pigeons at familiar sites: do landmarks reduce the deflections induced by clock-shifting?

To analyze the navigational strategy of homing pigeons at familiar sites in view of a possible role of local landmarks, two groups of pigeons—one familiar to the release site, the other unfamiliar—were released with their internal clock shifted 6 h fast, with untreated birds of both groups serving as controls. The two groups showed median deflections of 67% and 57%, respectively, of the expected size, with no consistent difference in the size of the deflection between familiar and unfamiliar birds. This clearly shows that familiarity with the release site and with the local landscape features does not affect the size of the deflections induced by clock-shifting. Obviously, pigeons familiar with the release site do not change their navigational strategy, but still continue to determine their home course solely as a compass course. General problems with orientation by landmarks are discussed; however, landmarks may help birds to recognize a site and recall the respective course.

---

When does bearing magnets affect the size of deflection in clock-shifted homing pigeons?

Pigeons whose internal clock is shifted by 6 h show deflections from the direction of untreated controls, yet these deflections are often smaller than predicted. Magnets temporarily disabling the magnetic compass increased these the deflections significantly (R. Wiltschko and Wiltschko 2001), indicating a compromise between sun compass and magnetic compass. – Recently, Ioalé et al. (2006) claim that they could not replicate our findings. The reason lies in a difference in the behavior of the clock-shifted pigeons without magnets: in the study of Ioalè et al. (2006), their deflections was already almost as large as that of our pigeons carrying magnets. This difference is probably caused by the limited experience of the pigeons of Ioalè et al. (2006): Their birds, in contrast to ours, had not used their sun’ compass during extended homing flights at various times of the year and, not having been faced with the necessity to compensate the saisonal changes of the sun’s arc, gave the sun compass more weight than our birds did.A comment to the paper by Ioalè, Odetti and Gagliardo (2006) Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60: 516–521.     

Orientation behavior of homing pigeons at the Gernsheim anomaly

Pigeons were released at four release sites within the Gernsheim anomaly, a magnetic 'hill' with a peak 199 nT above the regional reference field and gentle 'slopes' to all sides, situated 44 km south of the Frankfurt loft. Local magnetic conditions at the sites differed in total intensity and in direction and steepness of the intensity gradient. At all sites, the pigeons were well oriented, showing counterclockwise deviations from the home directions that were most pronounced in the western part of the anomaly. There was no systematic difference in orientation behavior or homing performance between the sites within the anomaly and a control site outside. No effect of the local gradient direction was found, nor did the difference in intensity between home loft and the release site affect behavior. This argues against the use of magnetic navigational factors. However, pigeons released for the first time within the anomaly tended to have longer mean vectors with increasingly steeper gradients, which could mean that the birds might somehow have realized the anomalous nature of the local magnetic conditions and ignored them, relying on non-magnetic cues instead.Communicated by R. Gibson     

Pigeon homing: Olfactory orientation—a paradox

Summary In order to find out whether the different ways that pigeons are raised and maintained at the various lofts affect their orientation behavior, especially the selection of navigational factors, a group of birds was raised according to the procedures of our Italian colleagues in a wind-exposed loft on the roof. The behavior of these R-birds was then compared with that of G-birds living in a garden loft, raised and trained according to the normal Frankfurt procedure. When R-birds were made anosmic by closing the nostril with cotton during transportation and a local anesthetic was used at release, their reaction was similar to that of Italian pigeons: the deviation of their vanishing bearings from the home direction increased significantly, leading to a marked decrease in homeward orientation. In contrast, the orientation of the anosmic G-birds did not differ from that of their controls; their directional selections agreed with those of the controls of the R-group. These data indicate that the conditions of raising and maintaining homing pigeons may be of crucial importance in determining the pigeons' attitude toward olfactory input. Finally, olfactory orientation is discussed; the paradoxical finding that the G-birds, not using olfaction, oriented like the controls of the R-group that did use olfactory input, leads to the question of whether olfactory input really conveys navigational information to the birds.