| OVERVIEW. This bird largely resembled Broad-tailed Hummingbird,
except for the gorget color and skewed molt. The bird strangely appeared to
have retained all immature remiges and retrices, suggesting a molt pattern that
was (scientifically speaking) totally out of whack. The question is, is this
bird a hybrid, or just a genetically goofed up trochilid? Most other hybrids show characters intermediate between the two parents. If that remains true in this bird, then one parent is clearly Broad-tailed (body shape, back coloration, gorget, etc., all suggest BTLH...). Determining the other parent is problematic. The atypical molt schedule (for Idaho hummingbirds, anyway) might suggest a union with a summer-molting species, such as a Calypte. But little if any additional information supports such a combination. ?? Maybe??? Then again, maybe it's just an oddball. What else would explain it??? Hermaphrodite? :-) |
|
 |
Figure 1. This bird exhibited
superficial features of Broad-tailed Hummingbird when first observed in the
trap, but closer inspection revealed a significantly different gorget color
(and pattern). This color appeared at first glance to be more closely aligned
with Rufous, with tinges of green as shown. The upper throat has a larger
portion of non-irridescence than than normal Broad-tailed photographed the same
day (right). The gorget of this bird lacked any of the elongaged feathers
associated with Costa's, Anna's (to some degree), and Calliope. |
 |
Figure 2. The frontal portion of
the crown had a distinct patch of older, worn, brownish feathers, similar to as
I saw in an immature male Costa's which wintered in Idaho this past winter
(right). This feature, however, is seen regularly in other species
(Black-chinned in particular in my experience) when the birds are in body
molt. |
 |
Figure 3. The tail was
interesting. R1 was worn and nearly transparent. The white tips to R3-5 suggest
immature bird (or adult female, which this bird likely wasn't based on the full
gorget)! The tail length (30.5 mm) was longer than expected for most species,
but is less than expected in adult male Broad-taileds (33.4 mm; n=26) and
pretty much right on for immature male Broad-taileds that I've banded (mean:
30.9 mm; n=8). This is expected since the feathers appear to be
immature-plumaged feathers. The amount of basal rust on r5 (not shown here, but present), r4, and r3 is noticeably less than photographed on a HY-M BTLH in Idaho in August 2004 (below left). That same photo shows more rust in r2 than is shown on this bird in question. The below right photo shows a more pointed and dark-tipped r2 on the HY-M BTLH (same bird as small photo at left) than is shown on the problem bird. The tail feathers to me don't point well to immature BTLH -- at least a pure one. R2 shape doesn't appear much like "pure" ones shown below right.  Could this simply be due to wear and feather age (retained
immature feathers this late in the season? |
 |
Figure 4. The wings of this bird were simliarly very worn and old. Again, the tip of r2 looks atypical for HY-M BTLH to me. |
 |
Figure 5. The wing shape (p10) is clearly not adult male Broad-tailed. These feathers are also very old and worn. They appear fairly consistent with the shape of immature male Broad-taileds, in my limited experience. (There is not a break between p6 and p5 -- it was just the way I was holding the wing). |
 |
Figure 6. The side view of the bird in question. |
 |
Figure 7. The primaries and secondaries both exhibited significant wear. Is the secondary shape/width relative to the rest of the wing consistent with BTLH? My experience is limited. |
If you have information that supports or refutes the information posted above, I'm very interested in hearing what you have to say. Please write your thoughts to: SJPeterson@aol.com
Return to HumGuide