A simple tool for calculating egg shape, volume and surface area from digital images

Ibis

Volumn 156, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 874-878

  Troscianko, Jolyon ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Parus major; Blue Tit; Cyanistes caeruleusdigital photography; Egg measurement; Egg metrics; Field techniques; Great Tit; Museum techniques

Indexed keywords

AVES; CYANISTES; PARUS MAJOR;

EID: 84927578610     PISSN: 00191019     EISSN: 1474919X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ibi.12177     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Boersma, P.D. 1982. Why some birds take so long to hatch. Am. Nat. 120: 733-750.
2. Boersma, P.D. & Rebstock, G. 2010. Calculating egg volume when shape differs: when are equations appropriate? J. Field Ornithol. 81: 442-448.
3. Bridge, E.S., Boughton, R.K., Aldridge, R.A., Harrison, T.J.E., Bowman, R. & Schoech, S.J. 2007. Measuring egg size using digital photography: testing Hoyt's method using Florida Scrub Jay eggs. J. Field Ornithol. 78: 109-116.
4. Hoyt, D. 1979. Practical methods of estimating volume and fresh weight of bird eggs. Auk 96: 73-77.
5. Lovell, P.G., Ruxton, G.D., Langridge, K.V. & Spencer, K.A. 2013. Egg-laying substrate selection for optimal camouflage by quail. Curr. Biol. 23: 260-264.
6. Mänd, R., Nigul, A. & Sein, E. 1986. Oomorphology: a new method. Auk 103: 613-617.
7. Mónus, F. & Barta, Z. 2005. Repeatability analysis of egg shape in a wild Tree Sparrow (Passer montanus) population: a sensitive method for egg shape description. Acta Zool. Acad. Sci. H. 51: 151-162.
8. Narushin, V.G., Romanov, M.N. & Bogatyr, V.P. 2002. Relationship between pre-incubation egg parameters and chick weight after hatching in layer breeds. Biosyst. Eng. 83: 373-381.
9. Paganelli, C.V., Olszowka, A. & Ali, A. 1974. The avian egg: surface area, volume, and density. Auk 91: 132-138.
10. R Core Team 2012. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
11. Redondo, A.J. & Arias-de-Reyna, L. 2002. A photographic method for measuring eggs. J. Field Ornithol. 73: 197-198.
12. Reid, W.V. & Boersma, P.D. 1990. Parental quality and selection on egg size in the Magellanic Penguin. Evolution 44: 1780-1786.
13. Schneider, C.A., Rasband, W.S. & Eliceiri, K.W. 2012. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods 9: 671-675.
14. Smart, I.H.M. 1991. Egg shape in birds. In Deeming, D.C. & Ferguson, M.W.J. (eds) Egg Incubation: Its Effects on Embryonic Development in Birds and Reptiles: 101-113. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Spottiswoode, C.N. & Stevens, M. 2010. Visual modeling shows that avian host parents use multiple visual cues in rejecting parasitic eggs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107: 8672-8676.
16. Stoddard, M.C. & Stevens, M. 2010. Pattern mimicry of host eggs by the common cuckoo, as seen through a bird's eye. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 277: 1387-1393.
17. Williams, T.D. 1994. Intraspecific variation in egg size and egg composition in birds: effects on offspring fitness. Biol. Rev. 69: 35-59.