|Scientific Name:||Turdus philomelos Brehm, 1831|
|Taxonomic Source(s):||del Hoyo, J., Collar, N.J., Christie, D.A., Elliott, A., Fishpool, L.D.C., Boesman, P. and Kirwan, G.M. 2016. HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Volume 2: Passerines. Lynx Edicions and BirdLife International, Barcelona, Spain and Cambridge, UK.|
|Red List Category & Criteria:||Least Concern ver 3.1|
|Reviewer(s):||Butchart, S. & Symes, A.|
|Facilitator/Compiler(s):||Butchart, S., Ekstrom, J., Symes, A., Ashpole, J|
This species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence <20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). The population size is extremely large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern.
|Previously published Red List assessments:|
Native:Albania; Algeria; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Bahrain; Belarus; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czech Republic; Denmark; Djibouti; Egypt; Eritrea; Estonia; Ethiopia; Faroe Islands; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Gibraltar; Greece; Hungary; Iran, Islamic Republic of; Iraq; Ireland; Israel; Italy; Jordan; Kazakhstan; Kuwait; Kyrgyzstan; Latvia; Lebanon; Libya; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of; Malta; Mauritania; Moldova; Montenegro; Morocco; Netherlands; Norway; Oman; Palestinian Territory, Occupied; Poland; Portugal; Qatar; Romania; Russian Federation (Central Asian Russia, Eastern Asian Russia, European Russia); Saudi Arabia; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sudan; Sweden; Switzerland; Syrian Arab Republic; Tunisia; Turkey; Turkmenistan; Ukraine; United Arab Emirates; United Kingdom; Uzbekistan; Yemen
Introduced:Australia; New Zealand
Vagrant:Chad; Japan; Mali; Senegal; Svalbard and Jan Mayen
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
|Population:||In Europe, the breeding population is estimated to number 24,400,000-38,400,000 pairs, which equates to 48,800,000-76,800,000 mature individuals (BirdLife International 2015). Europe forms c.65% of the global range, so a very preliminary estimate of the global population size is 75,000,000-118,000,000 individuals, although further validation of this estimate is needed.|
Trend Justification: In Europe the overall trend from 1980-2013 was increasing (EBCC 2015).
|Current Population Trend:||Increasing|
|Habitat and Ecology:||This species breeds in almost all types of temperate forest and woodland, generally in lowlands and valleys but reaching the tree-line in Switzerland and Russia. It requires patches of trees and bushes with small areas of open moist ground supporting abundant invertebrate fauna. It has also adapted well to modern lowland agricultural and urban landscapes, breeding in small woodlots, parkland, orchards, mature hedgerows, overgrown railway embankments, roadsides, cemeteries, and suburban gardens with some tall trees. In non-breeding areas in the south of its range habitats are somewhat drier. In western Europe breeding occurs mainly from mid-March to mid-August but can start a month later in central and northern Europe. The nest is a neat cup of grass, twigs and moss with a thick hard lining of clay, mud, dung or rotten wood, often mixed with leaves. It is usually placed in a bush, shrub or tree, often against the trunk, but can also be in a creeper on wall, in a bank or on a ledge. Clutches are three to five eggs (Collar 2015). It feeds on a wide range of invertebrates, especially earth worms, as well as fruit as it is available through the year (Snow and Perrins 1998). The species is mainly migratory, although southern and western populations are mostly sedentary, partial migrants or short-distance movers over the winter period (Collar 2015).|
|Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat:||Unknown|
|Generation Length (years):||5.3|
|Movement patterns:||Full Migrant|
|Major Threat(s):||Local declines are thought to be due to changes in agricultural practices which may have caused a major reduction in availability of key summer food resources on lowland farmland, as well as the loss of hedgerows, scrub and permanent grassland with livestock, and the wide-scale installation of under-field drainage systems, which causes early soil drying and thus a loss of topsoil earthworms. Pesticides and predators may also be a threat (Collar 2015). The species has been subject to hunting for many decades in the Mediterranean, but there is no clear evidence this has caused a decline (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997, Collar 2015). Adverse weather is also known to negatively affect this species (Robinson et al. 2004).|
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex II. The species is listed as red in the national U.K. red list (Eaton et al. 2015). Research is being undertaken in Europe to examine the ecology of this species and the causes of its decline.
Conservation Actions Proposed
In the U.K., where the species is declining, management for this species should include the planting and restoration of hedgerows to provide nesting and feeding sites and this should be implemented along with sympathetic field margin management. Incentives are needed to encourage mixed farming, damper soil conditions and small, uncropped features, In addition it would likely benefit from the creation and maintenance of ditches, which remain damper for longer during summer, preferably with hedge cover or close to scrub and raised water levels on grass fields (Peach et al. 2004). Future studies should focus on the relationships between species’s survival and environmental variables (Robinson et al. 2004).
BirdLife International. 2004. Birds in Europe: population estimates, trends and conservation status. BirdLife International, Cambridge, U.K.
BirdLife International. 2015. European Red List of Birds. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Collar, N. 2015. Song Thrush (Turdus philomelos). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., Sargatal, J., Christie, D.A. and de Juana, E. (eds), Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive, Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.
Eaton, M., Aebischer, N., Brown, A., Hearn, R., Lock, L., Musgrove, A., Noble, D., Stroud, D. and Gregory, R. 2015. Birds of Conservation Concern 4: the population status of birds in the UK, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. British Birds 108: 708-746.
EBCC. 2015. Pan-European Common Bird Monitoring Scheme. Available at: http://www.ebcc.info/index.php?ID=587.
Gordo, O.; Sanz, J. J. 2005. Phenology and climate change: a long-term study in a Mediterranean locality. Oecologia 146: 484-495.
Hagemeijer, E.J.M. and Blair, M.J. 1997. The EBCC atlas of European breeding birds: their distribution and abundance. T. and A. D. Poyser, London.
Hüppop, O.; Hüppop, K. 2003. North Atlantic Oscillation and timing of spring migration in birds. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 270: 233-240.
IUCN. 2016. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016-3. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 07 December 2016).
Jenkins, D.; Watson, A. 2000. Dates of first arrival and song of birds during 1974-1999 in mid-Deeside, Scotland. Bird Study 47: 249-251.
Jenni, L. and Kery, M. 2003. Timing of autumn bird migration under climate change: advances in long-distance migrants, delays in short-distance migrants. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 270(1523): 1467-1471.
Peach, W.J., Robinson, R.A., and Murray, K. A. 2004. Demographic and environmental causes of the decline of rural Song Thrushes Turdus philomelos in lowland Britain. Ibis 146(s2): 50-59.
Robinson, R.A., Green, R.E., Baillie, S.R., Peach, W.J., and Thomson, D.L. 2004. Demographic mechanisms of the population decline of the song thrush Turdus philomelos in Britain. Journal of Animal Ecology 73(4): 670-682.
Sinelschikova, A.; Kosarev, V.; Panov, I.; Baushev, A. N. 2007. The influence of wind conditions in Europe on the advance in timing of the spring migration of the song thrush (Turdus philomelos) in the south-east Baltic region. International Journal of Biometeorology 51: 431-440.
Snow, D.W. and Perrins, C.M. 1998. The Birds of the Western Palearctic, Volume 2: Passerines. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Tøttrup, A. P.; Thorup, K.; Rahbek, C. 2006. Patterns of change in timing of spring migration in North European songbird populations. Journal of Avian Biology 37: 84-92.
Tryjanowski, P.; Kuzniak, S.; Sparks, T. H. 2005. What affects the magnitude of change in first arrival dates of migrant birds? Journal of Ornithology 146: 200-205.
Vähätalo, A. V.; Rainio, K.; Lehikoinen, A.; Lehikoinen, E. 2004. Spring arrival of birds depends on the North Atlantic Oscillation. Journal of Avian Biology 35: 210-216.
Zalakevicius, M., Bartkeviciene, G., Raudonikis, L., and Janulaitis, J. 2006. Spring arrival response to climate change in birds: a case study from eastern Europe. Journal of Ornithology 147: 326-343.
|Citation:||BirdLife International. 2016. Turdus philomelos. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T22708822A87875705.Downloaded on 24 October 2017.|
|Feedback:||If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided|