Category Archives: Bibleworld Adventures

Clarifying Confusion about Eagles Wings

by

7

Clarifying Confusion about Eagles Wings

Dr. James J. S. Johnson

“As an Eagle stirreth vp her nest, fluttereth ouer her yong, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings:”

Deuteronomy 32:11 (KJV translation, with AD1611 spellings)
GOLDEN EAGLES nesting

Based upon a verse in Deuteronomy, 32:11, many expect that an eagle mother, in the wild, sometimes “carries” her young eaglets “on their wings”. Yet that behavior is not observed, in the wild (or in captivity), so Bible skeptics allege this discrepancy as a so-called Bible “error”—but is this a straw-man accusation, based upon a translation confusion? Yes, a less-than-literal translation (form Hebrew into English) has caused confusion with this verse.

To recognize what is true, careful observations are needed, both when studying God’s Word and when studying God’s world (Johnson, 2014).  So, when Scripture refers to the world of wildlife, as it often does, due diligence should be given to the Biblical exegesis and to the “science”.

QUESTION:  Does the text of Deuteronomy 32:11 actually say that an eagle mother “carries” young eaglets “upon her wings”?

ANSWER:  No.  Many English translations and paraphrases confuse the literal meaning of this Biblical Hebrew text.

The first problem in the puzzle: English Bible translations (that are popularly available) do not clearly matched the singulars to the plurals, and other literal aspects of the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy 32:11. Also, even grammatical gender information is sometimes garbled in translation.

In particular, the literal Hebrew indicates that it is God Who carries on His wings, not the eagle parent. To a large degree, the confusion is rooted to imprecise translations of the English text of Deuteronomy 32:11, particularly where “her” is sometimes translated for “him”, as well as twice “them” for “him”.  This confusion-clearing clarification—by looking at the actual Hebrew text of Deuteronomy 32:11—was buttressed by the analysis of Hans-Georg Wünch (Wünch, 2016), which specially scrutinized the pertinent Hebrew nouns and verbs.  Details on this follow.

Although the King James Version of the English Bible is usefully very literal (and precise), in those very rare situations where the King James Version mistranslates the underlying Hebrew text’s words, it is likely to be with those KJV Bible verses that describe wildlife. In other words, in the English text of the KJV you are more likely to have imprecise/non-literal translations – perhaps due to the historical life experiences (and priorities) of the King James translators (working in the early A.D. 1600s, finishing in A.D.1611).

In short, the KJV text of Deuteronomy 32:11 is suggesting that eagle parents “carry” eaglets “upon their wings”. However, the Biblical Hebrew text (i.e., the Masoretic Text of Deuteronomy 32:11), interpreted within the immediate context of verses 9-13, is anthropomorphically recalling how God historically “took” and “carried” Jacob (i.e., both “Jacob” the man, as well as the Jewish nation that is ethnically descended from Jacob, i.e., “Israel”). This is comparable to how the Lord Jesus Christ compared His willingness to protect Jews to a mother hen’s protectiveness, in Matthew 23:37 and also in Luke 13:34.

However, the most important key (to solving the puzzle of this confusing-on-the-surface passage), to properly understanding this verse, is to recognize that the subject noun of most (if not all) of the contextual sentences, is God, not a mother bird — although you must look back to Deuteronomy 32:9 to see that Deuteronomy 32:11’s subject noun is “the LORD” [Hebrew YHWH], i.e., God. (Notice also the action verbs in the Biblical context – most of these verbs refer to God only.)

Also, the relevant bird (translated “eagle” in King James Version) is mentioned in a way that is best translated “like an eagle” (or “like a vulture”, depending on how you translate NESHER, which is Hebrew noun for the bird in question). Careful context reading is needed, to recognize how much of the verse applies to the simile phrase “like an eagle”, because not all of the activities that are part of Deuteronomy 32:9-13 correspond to eagle behavior comparison.

BALD EAGLES near Skagway, Alaska

Therefore, let us look at the overall context, i.e., Deuteronomy 32:9-13). Below I have inserted, using brackets, clarifying nouns (or pronouns), to match the literal meaning of the specific Scripture verbs and pronouns.

Also, keep in mind that “the LORD” [YHWH] is masculine, “Jacob” [Ya‘aqōb] is masculine, and “eagle” [nesher] is also masculine, so matching each pronoun to its proper noun requires some context-based interpretation. This is further complicated by a mistranslation in the English phrase “her nest” because the Hebrew literally says “his nest”, i.e., the Hebrew word for “nest” [qēn] has a masculine singular suffix.

In other words, Deuteronomy 32:11 is literally saying “his nest”. The same English mistranslation appears in the English phrase “her young” (which literally says “his young” in the Hebrew). Likewise, the same English mistranslation appears twice in the English phrase “her wings” (which twice literally says “his wings” in the Hebrew).

Confusingly, the Hebrew-to-English translation plot thickens.

In the English translation, of Deuteronomy 32:11, the plural pronoun “them” appears twice where it should say “him”, because the Hebrew pronominal suffix is a 3rd person singular, not a 3rd person plural.
This is, in my opinion, the most important clue, in conjunction with the plural noun “young”, for solving this puzzle, because the “taking” action – as well as the bearing action – has “him” as its (singular) direct object, yet the noun translated “young” is plural, so the taking and bearing action did not happen to young birds — rather, the taking and bearing action happened to “him”, which the overall context (of Deuteronomy 32:9-13) indicates is “Jacob”.

In other words, because a plurality of hatched birds would need a plural suffix, it is not the hatched young birds that were “taken” and “carried” in Deuteronomy 32:11. Rather, God is providing these caring actions (“taking” and “bearing”) to Jacob/Israel, because “Jacob” is a 3rd person singular masculine person, so “Jacob” can be the direct object “him”.

9 For the LORD’s portion is His [i.e., God’s] people; Jacob [whom God later re-named “Israel”, so this name refers to both the man Jacob and to his descendants who became the nation “Israel”] is the lot of His [i.e., God’s] inheritance.

10 He [God – notice that God is the subject noun of this Hebrew sentence, which is a sentence that actually continues beyond verse 10] found him [i.e., Jacob, a/k/a Israel] in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness; He [i.e., God] led him [i.e., Jacob, a/k/a Israel] about, He [i.e., God] instructed him [Jacob, a/k/a Israel], He [i.e., God] kept him [i.e., Jacob, a/k/a Israel] as the apple of His [i.e., God’s] eye.


11 As an eagle [some say this should be translated “hawk” or “vulture” – it means a large-winged carrion-eating bird], [“he” or “He”] stirs up her [actually the Hebrew says “his”, which might mean “His”] nest; [“he” or “He”] flutters over her [actually the Hebrew says “his”, which might mean “His”] young [i.e., “young ones”, since this noun is plural]; [“he” or “He”] spreads abroad her [actually the Hebrew says “his”] wings; [“he” or “He”] takes them [literally “him” — actually this is a 3rd person singular masculine suffix, functioning as a direct object of the action verb]; [“he” or “He”] bears them [literally “him” — actually this is a 3rd person singular masculine suffix, functioning as a direct object of the action verb] on her [actually the Hebrew says “his”] wings:

12 So the LORD alone did lead him [i.e., Jacob, a/k/a Israel], and there was no strange god with him [this “him” seems to mean “Jacob”, though it more likely refers to God, because it is “the LORD alone” Who accomplished this shepherding care over Jacob].

13 He [i.e., God] made him [i.e., Jacob, a/k/a Israel] ride on the high places of the earth, that he [i.e., Jacob, a/k/a Israel] might eat the increase of the fields; and He [i.e., God] made him [i.e., Jacob, a/k/a Israel] to suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock.

[Deuteronomy 32:9-13 (KJV, with JJSJ clarification inserts]

This is a confusing Hebrew mistranslation problem, so many readers of the Bible (using English translations or paraphrases) have stumbled in trying to discern its literal meaning. Because wildlife observers do not see mother eagles carrying young eaglets “on their wings”, it is no surprise that many folks have been puzzled by this verse (Lacey, 2019).

According to the literal Hebrew text, analyzed grammatically—with special attention to singular-vs.-plural and masculine-vs.-feminine details, this verse (i.e., Deuteronomy 32:11) is talking about God’s providential care of His people, with only some of God’s actions being comparable to an eagle/hawk/vulture.

Moreover, some of the other caring actions listed (in Deuteronomy 32:11) do not match bird behavior, regardless of whether the Hebrew noun nesher should be translated as “eagle”, or “hawk”, or “vulture” (Wigram, 1874).  So the complicated part (for interpreting Deuteronomy 32:11’s text) is accurately distinguishing:


(a) which phrases fit God only (even if those phrases are anthropomorphic, like Matthew 23:37 & Luke 13:34),
(b) which phrases apply to the nesher bird only, and
(c) which phrases apply to both God and the nesher bird.

In sum, here is my pronoun-interpreting understanding (and exegesis), of what I think the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy 32:9-13 is saying:

9 For the LORD’s portion is God’s people; Jacob/Israel is the lot of God’s inheritance.

10 God found Jacob/Israel in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness; God led Jacob/Israel about; God instructed him Jacob/Israel; God kept him Jacob/Israel as the apple of God’s eye.

11 Like an eagle, God stirs up God’s nest; God flutters over God’s young ones; God spreads abroad God’s wings; God takes/was taking Jacob/Israel; God bears/was bearing (i.e., carrying)  Jacob/Israel on God’s wings;

12 So the LORD alone led Jacob/Israel, and there was no strange god with Him.

13 God made-to-ride Jacob/Israel upon the high places of the earth, so that Jacob/Israel might eat the increase of the fields; and God caused-to-suck Jacob/Israel honey [from] out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock.

[Deuteronomy 32:9-13, with JJSJ’s inserted pronoun-clarifying interpretive nouns]

In sum, many interpreters have misidentified the subject noun of that verse, by stretching the comparative noun (nesher, which can/could be translated as “eagle”, “hawk”, or “vulture”, though it likely means “eagles” in Deuteronomy 32:11) in a way that causes the nesher bird to supplant God as the subject noun of the sentence.In other words, instead of the eagle (nesher bird) being comparable to some things that God does, many have interpreted the verse as if every action verb applies to the bird when actually that is not the case.

Having processed the precise parts of this puzzle, which parts should not be studied apart from the big-picture message of the passage, I conclude with a comparison to Psalm 23:1a, which says “the LORD is my shepherd”—that is the main message of Deuteronomy 32:9-13—i.e., it is God Himself Who carries us through all of life’s risks and challenges.

Golden Eagle (NET NS-WildlifeZone photo credit)

REFERENCES

Johnson, James J. S. 2014. A Hart for God. Acts & Facts. 43(7), posted at https://www.icr.org/article/hart-for-god .

Lacey, Troy. 2019. Does an Eagle Carry its Young on its Wings? Answers in Genesis (August 13, 2019), posted at https://answersingenesis.org/contradictions-in-the-bible/does-eagle-carry-young-on-wings/ .

Wigram, George V. 1874. The Englishman’s Hebrew Concordance of the Old Testament (Hendrickson reprint, 2001), pages 849-850.

Wünch, Hans-Georg. 2016. Like an Eagle Carries its Young. Hervormde Teologiese Studies/HTS Theological Studies. 72(3):a3249, posted (by African Online Scientific Information Systems) at https://hts.org.za/index.php/HTS/article/view/3249 .

SCISSOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER: the Texas Bird of Paradise

by

2

SCISSOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER: the Texas Bird of Paradise

Dr. James J. S. Johnson

And the LORD shall make thee the head, and not the tail [zânâb]; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the LORD thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them.

(Deuteronomy 28:13)

Usually we think of “head” as being valuable and important, but “tail” not so much. Being a “head” is desirable; being a “tail” not so — as Moses indicated in Deuteronomy 28:13, quoted above. (See also, indicating likewise, Deuteronomy 28:44 & Isaiah 9:15.) However, when God made birds, on Day #5 of Creation Week (Genesis 1: 20-23), God made them with feathered tails that blend practical traits (such as aerodynamic rudder functionality) with beauty (such as the extravagant tail of a peacock).

Among the “tyrant” flycatchers, certainly there is no better example of this blending, of beauty and bioengineering, than the Scissor-tailed Flycatcher, famous for eating flies on the fly.

SCISSOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER perching on fence
Texas Parks & Wildlife Dep’t photo credit

Earlier this month [June A.D.2022], on 2 different occasions, I saw Scissor-tailed Flycatchers (Tyrannus forficatus) in my neighborhood.  One was larger than the other, so those must have been different Scissortails, because the size difference would not have occurred in just 3 days’ time! 

SCISSOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER flying
Ken Slade / BirdNote.org photo credit

Scissor-tailed Flycatchers are beautiful squeaky-voiced birds with long-streaming split tail plumage that looks like long scissor blades. The Scissortail’s head and most of their plumage (neck, upper back, and breast) is soft-looking ivory-white (to very light grey), plus white-edged black on wings and tail feathers, with sides (flanks) and underwings that feature salmon-like orange-pink.

14” [long, including tail feathers.]  Very long split tail; pale gray body; pinkish wash on flanks.  In flight: Underwings bright pinkish orange.  …  Feeding: Flies from perch to catch insects on the ground [such as grasshoppers or beetles] or in the air [such as flies and dragonflies].

[Quoting from Donald Stokes & Lillian Stokes, “Scissor-tailed Flycatcher (Tyrannus forficatus)”, STOKES FIELD GUIDE TO BIRDS: WESTERN REGION (Boston: Little, Brown & Company, 1996), page 312.

This flycatcher (which also eats lots of grasshoppers) is well established throughout Texas, the Lone Star State, which is itself quite a range.  The Scissortail’s breeding range also includes Oklahoma (where it is the official state bird — a fact that I learned from Christian attorney Don Totusek!), as well as large parts of Kansas, Missouri, western Arkansas, western Louisiana, and small parts of eastern Colorado and Nebraska.  Probably the best places to see them during breeding season are Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas.  As migrants, these kingbirds fly south of the USA for the winter, e.g., into Mexico—although some are observed over-wintering in southern Florida. [See, accord, Robert C. Tweit, “Scissor-tailed Flycatcher”, in Texas A&M AgriLife Research’s TEXAS BREEDING BIRD ATLAS, posted at https://txtbba.tamu.edu/species-accounts/scissor-tailed-flycatcher/ .]

SCISSOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER perching
Texas A&G AgriLife.org photo credit

If you have ever seen a Scissor-tailed Flycatcher you won’t forget it—Scissortails are unlike any bird you have ever seen, unless you have seen their shorter-tailed cousin called Mexico’s Fork-tailed Flycatcher (Tyrannus savanna, known in French as le tyran á queue fourchue = “the tyrant of the fork-tail”), with whom Scissortails can mate.  In fact, Scissortails are also known to hybridize with Couch’s Kingbird (Tyrannus couchii), as well as with Western Kingbirds (Tyrannus verticalis), which themselves hybridize with Eastern Kingbirds (Tyrannus tyrannus) — so there are many “cousins” within the greater kind-family of aggressive insectivores we call “tyrant kingbirds”. [See Eugene M. McCarthy, HANDBOOK OF AVIAN HYBRIDS OF THE WORLD (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2006), pages 203-204; see also Alexander J. Worm, Diane V. Roeder, Michael S. Husak, Brook L. Fluker, & Than J. Boves, “Characterizing Patterns of Introgressive Hybridization Between Two Species of Tyrannus Following Concurrent Range Expansion”, IBIS (International Journal of Avian Science), 161(4):770-780 (October 2019).]

SCISSOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER flying
eBird.org photo credit

One Scissortail (that I saw recently) was flying between trees on the side of a golf course.  The other Scissortail was flying from a residential lawn, that had a few trees and bushes, to another residential lawn, that also had a few trees and bushes. 

No surprise there, because Scissortails prefer to hunt insects in areas that mix open fields with trees and shrub cover, such as the semi-open country of grassy prairies, farm fields, suburb clearings, and ranchlands sporadically dotted with honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) trees.

Scissor-tailed Flycatchers (Tyrannus forficatus) are Neotropical migrants that breed throughout the south-central United States with the highest breeding densities in southern Oklahoma and northern Texas, corresponding to the core of the breeding range …  In their breeding range, they occupy open areas that provide adequate hunting perches and nesting sites including savannahs, prairies, brush patches, agricultural fields and pastures. … Scissor-tailed Flycatchers require trees for nesting and hunting perches to support their foraging strategy given that they are sit-and-scan foragers that utilize perches such as shrubs, trees, utility wires and fences, while they scan for insect prey …. Most prey are captured in the air [“hawking”] a short distance from the perch [citation omitted] which further indicates the need for open habitat to facilitate foraging.

[Quoting from Erin E. Feichtinger & Joseph A. Veech, “Association of Scissor-Tailed Flycatchers (Tyrannus forficatus) with Specific Land-Cover Types in South-Central Texas”, WILSON JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY, 125(2):314-321 (2013), at page 314.]

In other words, Scissortails prefer habitats with ecotones where open-field and forest-cover micro-habitats overlap, i.e., preferring to nest and hunt “in landscapes (linear transects 0.8-40.2 km in length and 2.4 km wide) with a mix of “open country” and “closed forest” than in landscapes comprise mostly of either of these two general cover types.” [Quoting from Feichtinger & Veech, page 314.]

SCISSORTAILED FLYCATACHER perching
Bird-Sounds.net photo credit

Scissortails perch and wait, watching for their next prey to move into capture range. Their method of hunting, called “hawking”, involves an aerial dash (with a sudden spurt of speed) toward a soon-to-be-seized target.  In more casual flight, however, this beautiful kingbird is easier to see and to appreciate.

The scissor-tailed flycatcher, with its namesake long, forked tails, is one of the most recognizable bird species on the Katy Prairie and throughout southeast Texas’s coastal prairie ecosystem. The male’s tail can reach up to 15 inches long while the female’s tail can reach about 10.5 inches, making the scissor-tailed flycatcher a spectacular sight to see.  The species name forficata, not surprising, derives from the Latin word for ‘scissors’ (forfex). The scissortail is a member of the Tyrannus, or ‘tyrant-like’ genus. This genus earned its name because several of its species are extremely aggressive on their breeding territories, where they will attack larger birds such as crows, hawks, and owls.

During the reproduction season between April and August, the male [Scissortail] performs a spectacular aerial display during courtship, sharply rising and descending in flight, its long tail streamers opening and closing, while the bird gives sharp calls. He may even perform backwards somersaults in the air.

[Quoting from Andy Goerdel, “State of the Species: Scissor-tailed Flycatcher (Tyrannus forficatus)”, COASTAL PRAIRIE CONSERVANCY (January 31, A.D.2022), posted at www.coastalprairieconservancy.org/blog/state-of-the-species-scissor-tailed-flycatcher .]

“Somersaults in the air”?  That reminds me of when I did flips, in the air, on a neighbor’s trampoline, more than a half-century ago.  But those days are over.  (At least I hope they are!) 

Nowadays I’d be happy to see a Scissor-tailed Flycatcher do aerial somersaults, as I sit comfortably in an Adirondack chair.  A glass of iced tea would help the birdwatching experience. Maybe, too, I could better appreciate looking, at a Scissortail’s salmon-colored underwings and flanks, as I snack on some smoked salmon.

But I digress.

SCISSOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER perching
National Audubon Society photo credit

 

What An Honor – Top 100 Bird Blogs and Websites

by

10

Snowy Egret in Mating Plumage by Dan at Gatorland

Top 100 Bird Blogs and Websites For Ornithologists and Bird Lovers

This blog has been selected “by our panelist as one of the Top 100 Bird Blogs on the web.” Wow! What an honor and totally unexpected.

I received an email from the Founder of this list, Anuj Agarwal.

“I personally give you a high-five and want to thank you for your contribution to this world. This is the most comprehensive list of Top 100 Bird Blogs on the internet, and I’m honored to have you as part of this!”

When I looked through the list, Lee’s Birdwatching Adventures Plus is #20! Wow!

Here is a list of the first 21 blogs or websites out of 100:

  1. Audubon

  2. The Cornell Lab of Ornithology – All About Birds

  3. BirdLife International News

  4. Surfbirds | The World Birding Website

  5. BirdWatching

  6. 10,000 Birds

  7. British Trust for Ornithology | BTO

  8. Bird Note Podcast

  9. Bird Watching HQ

  10. Wild Birds Unlimited

  11. World Birds

  12. Bird Feeder Hub

  13. BirdGuides

  14. Bird Watcher’s Digest | Out There With the Birds Blog

  15. Bird Spot

  16. International Bird Rescue

  17. FeederWatch Blog

  18. Ornithology – The Science of Birds

  19. Outside My Window

  20. Lee’s Birdwatching Adventures Plus

  21. Travels With Birds

  22. And the list goes on to 100

(P.S. This list seems to change. Sometimes it’s 19th or 20th. I’ve seen it change. Not sure how often it is updated.)

Lee with Laughing Kookabura at Brevard Zoo by Dan

Please check out this list of really great and interesting sites of information about our wonderful Avian Wonders!

Seems like I’ll be busy for awhile checking out some fantastic information on all sorts of birdwatching topics.

“But now ask the beasts, and let them teach you; And the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you.” (Job 12:7 NASB)

“Who teaches us more than the beasts of the earth And makes us wiser than the birds of the heavens?'” (Job 35:11 NASB)

Hyacinth Macaw (Anodorhynchus hyacinthinus) ©Ian Montgomery

Hyacinth Macaw ©Ian Montgomery

Thank you, readers, for visiting this blog for all these 13+ years. Especially, thank you to all of those who have written articles for the blog.

Ian’s Bird of the Week

James J. S. Johnson

Bibleworld Adventures (Golden Eagle)

Emma’s Stories

William Wise

Great Blue Heron; Walton County, Georgia birding photogaphy blog by williamwisephoto.com

Plus, Thank you to our many previous writers like a j mithra, Dottie Malcolm, and others. Also, all the fantastic photographers who have given us permission to use their photos over the years. Especially, my husband, Dan.

The biggest Thanks and Praise goes to the Lord for giving me the idea and inspiration to begin this journey of writing about His Fantastic Avian Creations!

Hummingbirds See Colors Over (Beyond) the Rainbow

by

3

Hummingbirds See Colors Over (Beyond) the Rainbow

Dr. James J. S. Johnson

The hearing ear, and the seeing eye, the LORD hath made even both of them.  [ Proverbs 20:12 ]

God has equipped hummingbirds with a range of color vision that exceeds that of humans, so it’s fair to say that hummingbirds see over—or beyond—the rainbow.

This “beyond-the-rainbow” vision helps birds to see food, predators, nectar-producing plants, potential mates, and 3D objects within their physical environment. Recent research corroborates this amazing fact.(1),(2)

Humans have three types of color-sensitive cones in their eyes—attuned to red, green and blue light—but birds have a fourth type, sensitive to ultraviolet light. “Not only does having a fourth color cone type extend the range of bird-visible colors into the UV, it potentially allows birds to perceive combination colors like ultraviolet+green and ultraviolet+red—but this has been hard to test,” said [Dr. Mary Caswell] Stoddard. …  Stoddard and her colleagues designed a series of experiments to test whether hummingbirds can see these nonspectral colors. Their results appear June 15 [2020] in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.(1)

[ see Princeton University citation below ]

Nonspectral colors are perceived when nonadjacent cone types (sensitive to widely separated parts of the light spectrum) are predominantly stimulated. For humans, purple (stimulation of blue- and red-sensitive cones) is a nonspectral color; birds’ fourth color cone type creates many more possibilities.(2)

[ see Stoddard , Eyster, et al. citation below ]

For years, literally, Dr. Stoddard and her team tested and quantified how wild hummingbirds see colors beyond the spectrum of white light that humans see.

To investigate how birds perceive their colorful world, Stoddard and her research team established a new field system for exploring bird color vision in a natural setting. Working at the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL) in Gothic, Colorado, the researchers trained wild broad-tailed hummingbirds (Selasphorus platycercus) to participate in color vision experiments. … [using] a pair of custom “bird vision” LED tubes programmed to display a broad range of colors, including nonspectral colors like ultraviolet+green. Next they performed experiments in an alpine meadow frequently visited by local broad-tailed hummingbirds, which breed at the high-altitude site.(1)

[ see Princeton University citation below ]

The experiment was sweet, as one would expect with hummingbirds.(3)

Each morning, the researchers rose before dawn and set up two feeders: one containing sugar water and the other plain water. Beside each feeder, they placed an LED tube. The tube beside the sugar water emitted one color, while the one next to the plain water emitted a different color. The researchers periodically swapped the positions of the rewarding and unrewarding tubes, so the birds could not simply use location to pinpoint a sweet treat. … Over the course of several hours, wild hummingbirds learned to visit the rewarding color. Using this setup, the researchers recorded over 6,000 feeder visits in a series of 19 experiments.(1)

[ see Princeton University citation below ]
See the source image
The results were—one might say—colorful. Unlike human eyes that can see one “nonspectral” color, purple, hummingbird eyes apparently see five “nonspectral” colors.

Stoddard’s team was particularly interested in “nonspectral” color combinations, which involve hues from widely separated parts of the color spectrum, as opposed to blends of neighboring colors like teal (blue-green) or yellow (green-red). For humans, purple is the clearest example of a nonspectral color. Technically, purple is not in the rainbow: it arises when our blue (short-wave) and red (long-wave) cones are stimulated, but not green (medium-wave) cones. While humans have just one nonspectral color—purple, birds can theoretically see up to five: purple, ultraviolet+red, ultraviolet+green, ultraviolet+yellow and ultraviolet+purple.(1)

[ see Princeton University citation below ]

Birds have four color cone types in their eyes, compared to three in humans. In theory, this enables birds to discriminate a broad range of colors, including many nonspectral colors. … We trained wild hummingbirds to participate in color vision tests, which revealed that they can discriminate a variety of nonspectral colors, including UV+red, UV+green, purple, and UV+yellow. Additionally, based on an analysis of ∼3,300 plumage and plant colors, we estimate that birds perceive many natural colors as nonspectral.(2)

[ see Stoddard, Eyster, et al. citation below ]

Also, the research team studied minute differences in color, as they are featured in plant material and bird feathers—there is a lot more to color that is appreciated by most human eyes!

Finally, the research team analyzed a data set of 3,315 feather and plant colors. They discovered that birds likely perceive many of these colors as nonspectral, while humans do not … [due to the birds’] four color-cone visual system.(1)

[ see Princeton University citation below ]

How colorful the world must be to hummingbirds!

Dr. Stoddard’s team were not the first to study the beyond-the-rainbow vision of birds. Previous studies have been reported, using finches and sparrows, indicating that diet is important for avian eyesight.

The ability of finches, sparrows, and many other birds to see a visual world hidden to us is explained in a study published in the journal eLife. Birds can be divided into those that can see ultraviolet (UV) light and those that cannot. Those that can live in a sensory world apart, able to transmit and receive signals between each other in a way that is invisible to many other species. … The study reveals two essential adaptions that enable birds to expand their vision into the UV range: chemical changes in light-filtering pigments called carotenoids and the tuning of light-sensitive proteins called opsins. Birds acquire carotenoids through their diets and process them in a variety of ways to shift their light absorption toward longer or shorter wavelengths.(4)

[ see PhysOrg citation below ]

If that seems complicated and mathematically challenging, it is!(4),(5)

The researchers characterized the carotenoid pigments from birds with violet vision and from those with UV vision and used computational models to see how the pigments affect the number of colors they can see. … The study also revealed that sensitivity of the violet/UV cone and the blue cone in birds must move in sync to allow for optimum vision. Among bird species, there is a strong relationship between the light sensitivity of opsins within the violet/UV cone and mechanisms within the blue cone, which coordinate to ensure even UV vision.(4)

[ see PhysOrg citation below ]

The more-technical description of the research is even more challenging, to read, but the implications are “clearly seen”—God has given birds amazing eyesight.

Color vision in birds is mediated by four types of cone photoreceptors whose maximal sensitivities (λmax) are evenly spaced across the light spectrum. … SWS1 [shortwave-sensitive cone] opsin is accompanied by a corresponding short-wavelength shift in the spectrally adjacent SWS2 cone.(5)

[ see Toomey, Lind, et al. citation below ]

Hummingbird eyesight is facilitated by some really technical details!

Here, we show that SWS2 cone spectral tuning is mediated by modulating the ratio of two apocarotenoids, galloxanthin and 11’,12’-dihydrogalloxanthin, which act as intracellular spectral filters in this cell type. We propose an enzymatic pathway that mediates the differential production of these apocarotenoids in the avian retina, and we use color vision modeling to demonstrate how …  spectral tuning is necessary to achieve even sampling of the light spectrum and thereby maintain near-optimal color discrimination.(5)

[ see Toomey, Lind, et al. citation below ]

At the practical level, how can Christians benefit from knowing about avian eyesight? Or, what about other features—like wings, feathers, and motion-regulating software—that God has designed and installed into the world’s hummingbirds? Are we missing an opportunity to appreciate God if we ignore what He has done to enable hummingbirds to live as they do?

Hummingbird beaks, bones, and feathers differ from those of all other living or extinct bird kinds. Their wings don’t fold in the middle. Instead, they have a unique swivel joint where the wing attaches to the body so that the wings rotate in a figure-eight pattern. And they move fast! They have to beat their wings rapidly to hover, levitating with level heads as they extract nectar from flowers for hours per day. Scientists still need to discover the bird’s mental software that coordinates information about the location of a flower’s center with muscle motion that expertly stabilizes the hummingbird’s little head as it drinks.(6)

[ see Thomas citation below ]

Astonishing! What a stupendous and beauty-broadcasting imagination our God has—how can we see His busy, busy hummingbirds without admiring His technical genius and His bioengineering power?(7)

[ see Sherwin citation below ]

Yet every hummingbird alive today is a descendant from the originals made by God on Day 5 of Creation Week.

Their size, flight characteristics and patterns, metabolism, all point to our magnificent Creator who designed these amazing animals and created them on Day Five.(8)

References

  1. Staff writer, Princeton University. 2020. Spectacular bird’s-eye view? Hummingbirds see diverse colors humans can only imagine. PhysOrg (June 15, 2020), posted athttps://phys.org/news/2020-06-spectacular-bird-eye-view-hummingbirds-diverse.html .
  2. Stoddard, M. C., H. N. Eyster, et al. 2020. Wild Hummingbirds Discriminate Nonspectral Colors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (June 15, 2020), posted at  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1919377117 .  
  3. Mitchell, E. 2014. Our Creator’s Sweet Design for Hummingbird Taste (Answers in Genesis: News to Know, September 6, 2014), posted https://answersingenesis.org/birds/our-creators-sweet-design-hummingbird-taste/ (with a link, in Footnote #1, to video footage of hummingbird sugar consumption).
  4. Staff writer, eLife. 2016. How Birds Unlock their Super-Sense, Ultraviolet Vision.PhysOrg (July 12, 2016), posted at https://phys.org/news/2016-07-birds-super-sense-ultraviolet-vision.html?utm_source=TrendMD&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Phys.org_TrendMD_1 .
  5. Toomey, M. B., O. Lind, et al. 2016. Complementary shifts in photoreceptor spectral tuning unlock the full adaptive potential of ultraviolet vision in birds. eLife Sciences / Biochemistry, Chemical Biology, Neuroscience (July 12, 2016), posted at https://elifesciences.org/articles/15675 ; doi: 10.7554/eLife.15675 . 
  6. Thomas, B. 2016. Hummingbirds! Acts & Facts. 45(4), posted at https://www.icr.org/article/hummingbirds .
  7. Sherwin, F. 2006. Hummingbirds at ICR. Acts & Facts. 35(9), posted at https://www.icr.org/article/hummingbirds-at-icr .  
  8. Dreves, D. 1991. The Hummingbird: God’s Tiny Miracle. Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal. 14(1):10-12.  

Not Deer or Bovine, So It Must Be An ‘Antelope’

by

4

Bibleworld Adventures has chosen to close down his website, due to a very busy schedule with work and his church ministries. We have decided to move his articles here. Baron has written articles here as Golden Eagle. This will preserve his and Dr. Johnson’s articles for us to enjoy. They are not about birds, but are all very interesting. Most are about a variety of our Creator’s amazing animals. [Will have a link to these pages in the sidebar as Bible World Adventures.]

Originally posted 2017/12/19

NOT DEER OR BOVINE, SO IT MUST BE AN ‘ANTELOPE’

Dr. James J. S. Johnson

The hart, and the roebuck, and the fallow deer, and the wild goat, and the pygarg [dîshōn], and the wild ox, and the chamois.   (Deuteronomy 14:5)

Addax-Morocco.Haytem93-photo

ADDAX male [photo credit: Haytem93]

Most likely the “Pygarg” [dîshōn] is what today is called an ADDAX.  An ADDAX is a desert-dwelling member of the ANTELOPE family.  [See George Cansdale, ALL THE ANIMALS OF THE BIBLE LANDS (Zondervan, 1976), page 85, saying “Among several quaint animal names found only in the AV [i.e., KJV] is the Pygarg, from Heb. dishon; this is merely a transliteration of the [LXX] Gr. Word meaning ‘white-rumped’, by which [Greeks] had long ago described an antelope. … [The reference in Deuteronomy 14:5] between two animals that are probably desert species, coupled with a long-standing tradition, suggests that this is the Addax, Addax nasomaculatus, a desert antelope classified between the oryx and hartebeests”.]antelope-family.jjsj-PPTslide

But, what is an antelope?

Antelope, and antelope-like animals, live in many different parts of the world—except not in Australia or Antarctica. For examples, pronghorns live mostly in America’s Western prairie states. The oryx live in Israel and many of the Arabian deserts.  The Dorcas gazelle lives in the top half of Africa.  Impalas live in eastern and southern Africa.

Serengeti-migraton-wildebeest-zebra.ZambesiSafari-photo

Wildebeests and Zebras migrate through Serengeti  /  Zambesi Safari photo

The blue wildebeest (also called “gnu”) are famous for their huge migratory herds, that often mix with zebras, that seasonally travel through Tanzania’s Serengeti.  Tibetan antelope, of course, live in Tibet, as well as in neighboring parts of Asia.  The Indian antelope (also called “blackbuck”) lives in India, Pakistan, and Nepal.

GreatMigration-Serengeti.Pinterest

Great Migration (Serengeti & Masai Mara)  image credit: Pinterest

These plant-eating mammals (animals that give mother’s milk to their babies) are different from other four-legged mammals – such as deer, cattle, horses, camels, sheep, goats, pigs, cats, and dogs.

In many ways antelope (and antelope-like animals, like the pronghorns of America’s prairies) are like deer. But unlike deer, which have antlers (that grow and shed each year, then regrow the next year, and are later shed, etc.), antelopes have horns (like cattle, bison, sheep, and goats), which continue to slowly grow out from their heads, anchored to bony roots.

Impala-w-oxpecker.jjsj-PPTslide

Antelopes often live in flat grasslands (such as the grassy prairies of America’s West), where their plant-food is plentiful. However, in grasslands there are usually very few trees, so antelopes cannot hide in forests from other animals (such as mountain lions or wolves), so it is good that God made them to have great speed for running across flat land.  And that is what antelopes (and pronghorns, which are antelope-like animals) often do–with great speed!–when they run away from predators at high speeds—sometimes as fast as 55 miles/hour for a mile, or 42 miles/hour for 2 miles, or 35 miles/hour for 3 miles.Gazelle-foraging.jjsj-PPTslide

Dorcas is the Greek word for a gazelle, which is a member of the antelope family. Because gazelles are graceful and beautiful animals it is unsurprising that girl babies have been named Dorcas, including one who is mentioned in Scripture, in Acts chapter 9.Dorcas-philology.jjsj-PPTslide

Dorcas-Acts-chapter9.jjsj-PPTslide

In North America the primary antelope-like mammal is the PRONGHORN. To learn about this beautiful, graceful, and extremely speedy animals, see “Geography Matters, Illustrated by Pronghorns, Mountain Goats, and Old Testament Warfare”, posted at https://bibleworldadventures.com/2016/08/17/geography-matters-illustrated-by-pronghorns-mountain-goats-and-old-testament-warfare/ .

pronghorn-coming-fast.closeup-turning

When we see beauty, grace, strength, and speed — displayed in antelope (and antelope-like pronghorns) — we are reminded, by these living exhibits of God’s making, that God Himself is amazingly beautiful, graceful, strong, and quick, beyond our comprehension.

India’s Shrimp ‘Ranching’ Needs Re-set

by

0

India’s Shrimp ‘Ranching’ Needs Re-set

Dr. James J. S. Johnson

And God created great whales, and every living creature that moves, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind … and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:21)

The Aquaculturists: 20/10/2017: Shrimp farming in India

India may be looking to America for a jump-start to revitalize its shrimp aquaculture industry, according to recent report (May 11, 2020) in the Hindu Business Line.

The report, which was issued by the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) looks into a range of measures to improve the export potential of the aquaculture sector. Around 90 % of India’s aquaculture production is generally exported. And, although exports have plummeted since the COVID-19 pandemic, the report warns that producers may struggle to meet demand once the movement of goods and people returns to normal . . . (1)

India’s shrimp-farming operations have two major vulnerabilities—dependence on outside (i.e., outside of India, which now includes lockdown/shutdown facts not previously present in the global marketplace) sources for breeding shrimp and for the kind of food that shrimp larva need to eat, so that they can grow into mature shrimp of marketable size.

The Confederation of Indian Industry has recommended measures to improve the export potential of the aquaculture sector in order to capture a major share of the global market. …  The lion’s share of Indian aquaculture comprises shrimp, for which both broodstocks and larval feeds are imported. With the global lockdown situation, the supply of these has been stalled, which will have a significant impact on production, CII said in its report.(2)

But for restarting India’s shrimp-farming operations, some adjustments to “business-as-usual” will be necessary, both logistically and legally.

To reduce the lag time in the supply of broodstock, CII has recommended re-establishing import of broodstock by expediting air transportation from the US by arranging special cargo flights. It is pointed out that the RGCA [Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Aquaculture] quarantine facility in Chennai is shut and its holding capacity is not sufficient for large consignments. Hence, the imported broodstock should be allowed to be taken to hatcheries directly and thereafter sampling can be done by RGCA. On approval, hatchery owners can be allowed to use the broodstock.(2)

India-freshwater-shrimp-farming

What a huge undertaking—revitalizing this part of India’s fisheries/aquaculture industry is truly a “big deal”, in the global marketplace. As a fish/seafood exporter India has very serious competition—for almost 20 years China has been the world’s #1 producer of fish and seafood exports.(3)

India is the world’s second-largest [sic] fish producer with a total production of 13.7 million tonnes in 2018-19 of which 65 % was from inland fishing. Almost 50 % of inland fish production is from culture fisheries, which constitutes 6.5 % of global fish production. Shrimp accounts for a majority share of India’s aquaculture, which is growing at a CAGR [compound annual growth rate] of 17.4 % over the past 3 years.(2)

Providing affordable (and available) protein-rich food is a worldwide need.  Harvesting oceanic fish and shellfish—including shrimp—can contribute much to feeding peoples of the world.(4),(5)  Aquaculture (which is comparable to “ranching” sea creatures–like shrimp–as livestock), however, can supplement oceanic finfish and shellfish, for the benefit of many hungry humans.(6),(7)

May God bless America to recover its own economic health—and to do so with such strength that it can once again bless India, and other nations of the world, such as by helping India to jump-start their own now-vulnerable aquaculture industry.(8)

Farmers making a fortune in shrimp farming

References

  1. Staff writer. 2020. Why India’s Shrimp Sector Must Become More Self-Sufficient. The Fish Site. Posted (May 12, 2020) at https://thefishsite.com/articles/why-indias-shrimp-sector-must-become-more-self-sufficient – accessed may 15, 2020.
  2. Kumar, V. S. 2020. CII Chalks Out Steps to Boost Aquaculture Exports. Hindu Business Line. Posted (May 11, 2020) at https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/economy/agri-business/cii-chalks-out-steps-to-boost-aquaculture-exports/article31555206.ece# — accessed May 15, 2020.
  3. Nag, O. S. 2017. Top Fish and Seafood Exporting Countries. Posted (April 25, 2017) at https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/top-fish-and-seafood-exporting-countries.html —  accessed May 15, 2020.
  4. According to the Lord Jesus, fish are good food. Matthew 7:9-11; Luke 11:11-13..
  5. Incorporating actuarial biology insights (pioneered by marine biologist Johan Hjort) has enabled the world’s shrimp industry, including shrimp-farming, to economically maximize productivity. See Johnson, J. J. S. 2019. Northern Prawns, Baltic Prawns, and Brown Shrimp, Illustrating Genesis 1:22 (including Johan Hjort’s Actuarial Biology Research on Pandalus borealis). Nordic Legacy Series (Norwegian Society of Texas, Fort Worth, Texas, February 24, 2019), 15 pages.
  6. Aquaculture now faces new challenges from pandemic politics. See Johnson, J. J. S. 2020. Fish Farming Feeds Scots, But It’s Not Getting Easier.  COVID-19 News. Posted April 21, 2020) at https://www.icr.org/article/fish-farming-feeds-scots-but-not-getting-easier .
  7. Fish-farming, using managed coast water net-pens is one aquaculture method useful in fulfilling the Genesis Mandate. See Johnson, J. J. S. 2013. Fulfilling the Genesis Mandate while Helping the Poor. Acts & Facts. 42(12):19, posted at https://www.icr.org/article/fulfilling-genesis-mandate-while-helping .
  8. Acts 20:35.