Talk:Macaroni penguin

Trivia?

It might be interesting to add that Cody and Big Z from the movie Surf's Up appear to be famous Macaroni penguins. 67.85.122.235 17:16, 9 June 2007 (UTC)Molly

Cody is a Rockhopper Penguin..belatedly. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

text removed, to be readded if possible

Text added to page, which overwrote references and was duplicated [1]. Was a copyvio from the following [2]. Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC) The Macaroni Penguin (Eudyptes chrysolophus)

Hello

Hey, I'm now working on editing this article for a AP Biology class project. If there is any interest in this topic, contact me! The banner at the top has all the info and links to the project page. :)--LNG123 (talk) 14:49, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

The reference list was to be posted on this talk page; not added to the article. At least until they are actually used in the text.--JimmyButler (talk) 05:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

List of potential references / per project assignment

1. "List Of Threatened Species".
2. "Animal Bytes - Macaroni Penguin".
3. "Penguins Around the World".
4. "Birdlife Species Factsheet".
5. "Macaroni Penguin Images".
6. "Antartic Connection".
7. "PenguinWorld.com".
8. "International Penguin Conservation Work Group".
9. "Animal Diversity Web".
10. "Journal of Experimental Biology".
11. "Macaroni Penguin".
12. "BBC Science and Nature".
13. "Heard Island-Macaroni Penguin Fact File".
14. "MarineBio".
15. "Answers.com".
16. "70 South".
17. "Macaroni Penguins".
18. "Center for Biological Diversity".
19. "Merriam Webster Online".
20. "Faulklands.net".
21. "British Anarctic Survey".
22. "The Animal Files".
23. "ThinkQuest".
24. "Animal Pictures Archive".
25. "Macaroni Penguin Facts".
26. "Avian Web-Penguin Facts".
27. "Detroit Zoo".
28. "Species Accounts-Macaroni Penguin".
29. "Faulklands Conservation".
30. "Macaroni Penguin".
31. "Penguins of the Faulkland Islands".
32. "Macaroni Penguins".
33. "From Macaroni to Macaroni Penguins".
34. "Eudyptes Chrysolophus".
35. "Animal Corner".
36. "WhaleTimes-Penguin Facts".
37. "Greg Lasley-Macaroni Penguin".
38. "Penguins In Anarctica".
39. "Anarctica:Macaroni Penguins".
40. "Jungle Walk".
41. "Everything:Macaroni Penguins".

---

Graded --JimmyButler (talk) 21:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

You might find this useful as well. Green et al (1998). "FORAGING ECOLOGY AND DIVING BEHAVIOUR OF MACARONI PENGUINS EUDYPTES CHRYSOLOPHUS AT HEARD ISLAND". Marine Ornithology 26: 27-34. Harder going than the references you've listed above, but full of information and many reviewers like journal and book citations as opposed to web references. If you wish to access other journal articles I can email them to your teacher if you want, and feel free to ask for any help. Sabine's Sunbird talk 23:28, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

And here are some more journal articles available on-line at http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/search.php, or SORA—the Searchable Ornithological Research Archive. They too will probably be a little harder to digest, but should contain some good information.

• Daily Body-mass Loss and Nitrogen Excretion During Molting Fast of Macaroni Penguins
• Annual Variation in Return Rate, Mate and Nest-Site Fidelity in Breeding Gentoo and Macaroni Penguins
• Diving Patterns in Relation to Diet of Gentoo and Macaroni Penguins at South Georgia
• TRAVELING SPEED AND FORAGING RANGE OF MACARONI AND ROCKHOPPER PENGUINS AT MARION ISLAND
• Macaroni Penguins: Comment on Mistaken King George Island Breeding Record and Southerly Range Extension
• New Southerly Record for the Macaroni Penguin (Eudyptes Chrysolophus) on the Antarctic Peninsula
• OFFSPRING REDUCTION IN MACARONI AND ROCKHOPPER PENGUINS
• Feather Replacement in the Macaroni Penguin, Eudyptes Chrysolophus (Brandt)

I hope they're useful! MeegsC | Talk 22:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Bird articles

Well done ofr having a go. Luckily there is a penguin article which is one of wikipedia's featred articles - Emperor Penguin. Thus there is a good template to work from. This will also give an idea on how comprehensive to make it. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll check out the Emperor Penguin article to use as a possible template. It will surely help. --LNG123 (talk) 17:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Another cool thing which helps folks read entries is to indent your comments after other peoples - see how I did it to your comment above? Welcome aboard :) I'll drop in and help out. Any questions, just ask. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Ha, thanks! (I indented!) Thanks for offering the help...if I have any questions I'll be sure to ask!--LNG123 (talk) 22:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I strongly suggest citing your additions to content as you go; rather than an after-the-fact effort to clean it up for GA. I'll make it my mission to share options on how to do that in class tomorrow. Nice to see you have started editing the text! --JimmyButler (talk) 03:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Agree that is prudent; citing afterwards can be tricky. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks. I think I'm going to start my citing...if I can actually get to what Max showed us in class today..--LNG123 (talk) 22:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

References and credibility. The Antarctic connection web site that you referenced is a retail store / travel agency. I'm not sure about Wikipedia - but I'm certain I would never allow that as a reference for a research paper in my class. Granted it is a very cool website - but perhaps you can get closer to a primary source than that. If you noticed on the template you inserted ... most of the data fields were left blank - author being a primary one. Try to avoid references which make no claim of ownership. Try a Google Scholar Search and see if you can find out what the little buggers eat! Keep the faith! --JimmyButler (talk) 01:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Try this one: [3] Diet - Which upon reading verifies that they eat krill(euphausiids), fish, and squid! Plug in all the data into the template form that Alexis couldn't get to open!

The food samples collected T. gaudichaudii, E. vallentini and 41.4% fish by mass. Fifty food samples were collected in batches of 10 over the chick-rearing season of 1993. The mass

of these samples averaged 67.1±50.1 g and they normally consisted of a well-digested soup of euphausiids and fish such that the two could not be easily separated with certainty. The amount of euphausiids, mainly E. vallentini, as measured by undigested eyes in each sample, fell steadily through the chick-rearing period from nearly 4000 eyes per sample to less than 150. Fish increased proportionately in the diet as E. vallentini fell from a high of 78% to 5% by number over the season, however, was no compensatory increase in fish otolith numbers (Table 1) and the difference was made up by an increased proportion of unidentified semi-digested material. Squid beaks were small and were not identifiable.--JimmyButler (talk) 01:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Citations ?

I revisited to see if you had any success in adjusting your format and selection. I'm perplexed in that you removed the marginal reference; however, I see no evidence of it being replaced with anything. I though you might have a go at the one I provided for you?--JimmyButler (talk) 18:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I had edited it thinking I had saved it, but apparently not??? I don't know how I managed to do that..but now there's a citation using the reference you gave me...--LNG123 (talk) 18:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Picture

I stuck in a picture that I found in the Commons. You might want to play around with it a bit, give it a better description and whatnot. It's better to "stagger" the pictures on both sides of the article, but it looked funky when it was on the left...--Yohmom (talk) 01:22, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thank you soooo much. I've been looking for more pictures like crazy, but apparently not in the right place. And I'm sure I can play around with it to make it look alright...--LNG123 (talk) 13:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

A model.

You may chose to address the citation issues raised by FoodPuma and resubmit for a second attempt at GA. The distinct lack of citations is a problem; albeit, having one of our own pull the trigger is a bit painful. Perhaps because Wikipedia is open source editing; there is an extreme need to verify every fact with credible source. What I noticed was a sudden rush of GA attempts by the class for articles that are no where close to GA status. Perhaps in hope for a miracle. Fortunately, in your case there is an article already at FA status on which you can model your own efforts. I suggest using the Emperor Penguin as template for format and content and reattempt after serious attention to the actual criteria for GA are addressed. Remember, the grade is based on reaching GA - failing on the first attempt is irrelevant to your average - so no harm done. JimmyButler (not logged in apparently) --66.56.205.235 (talk) 01:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Stuff that may not seem important but is...

• The references have an inconsistent date format (Retrieved on 3 December 2008 vs. Retrieved on 2009-01-10). This is usually due to a combination of templates being used in the article. To fix it, you probably just need to re-plug in the ref. information into the template that is used the most.

• I actually only see one that has a different format (#2, Chao) but the template thing is probably something you want to keep in mind to avoid future problems. (Unless you want to be like me and have to sift through 18 citations.)

• Ok, so they keep switching around the templates, which is causing the dates to go all wonky, so even if the same template is used, differing outcomes are possible. Moral of the story: You still need to use the same template for references.

If you have been using Magnus' tool (which I suspect you have been) you should be fine and can probably ignore this. --Yohmom (talk) 03:58, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

• "The Macaroni Penguin is.." and "They are distributed..."

Try to keep your subject the same. "The Macaroni Penguin" indicates one, while "They" indicates many.

• The article states that "The Macaroni Penguin is the most abundant among all the world's penguins, in terms of numbers, with about 12 million pairs in existence... The population of Macaroni Penguins, however, is decreasing," however, your source #11 (Reynolds) states: "Macaroni penguin population status is stable and increasing. They are among the most numerous penguin species in the world with a population of approximately 9 million".

The difference between 9 and 12 million pairs (so 24 million birds?) is HUGE, so you probably want to search around and see which source (if either) is actually correct.

• The entire paragraph under "Distribution and Habitat" is attributed to reference #6 (Curry). The paragraph states that there are 12 million pairs of birds worldwide; however, the actual reference states "estimates over 11 million birds." How did estimates over 11 million birds turn into 12 million pairs???

• In the "Predators" section, the article states: "Leopard Seals and Antarctic Fur Seals are their main predators on land. Leopard Seals take some adult penguins, usually unexpectedly, just as they enter the water. Birds, especially "skuas and sheathbills, prey on Macaroni Penguin eggs and dead chicks." This sentence is cited as being derived from ref. # 12.

Ref. 12 gives this information on predators:

• Leopard Seals are the main predator when the adults are in the water.
• Sheathbills steal many eggs.
• Skuas prey upon young chicks.

From what reference does the bolded text come from???? The article implies the Sukas and Sheathbills are scavengers since they are apparently eating "dead" chicks. Are the penguins only vulnerable to the Leopard Seals when they are "just entering" the water, or are they in potential danger the entire time they are swimming?? It is also important to specify which predator does which action, or else I am left believing that Skuas eat dead young chicks and steal eggs. If it does both, a different ref. must support the claim.

• I don't believe that the following sentence is pertinent to this article: "The genus Eudyptes includes the following six living species of penguins known as crested penguins: Rockhopper Penguins, Erect-crested Penguins, Fiordland Penguins, Royal Penguins, Snare's Island Penguins, and Macaroni Penguins."

It would probably be better to say something along the lines of: The Macaroni penguin is one of the six species of penguins in the genus Eudyptes. --Yohmom (talk) 05:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

• The middle paragraph under "Taxonomy" would make more sense under "Description."
• What is the meaning of "chrysolophus?"

When I was reading through the article, I also inserted some hidden comments that may/may not be listed here. Some fact tags are also in the article where citations are lacking or by information that can be easily challenged. Just make sure that you remove everything after you have addressed it. Good luck with the revisions. --Yohmom (talk) 02:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

(Late to the party) I now have the monograph on penguins and will be able to help out soon. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

• You wikilink the genus Eudyptes once, however this wikilink appears later on in the article instead of in the introduction. As a general rule of thumb, wikilinking should be used in both the introduction and in section in which the technical term applies as some readers may stop at the introduction its'self.
• Could you please add what their size/wait is in Imperial units please? I don't know what an 11 kilogram bird weighs in pounds off the top of my head (being the ignorant americana that I am)
• Do they use their wings as a means of propulsion when diving such as the Atlantic puffin? If you write this, be sure to have a verifiable source included
• perhaps more than you wanted to know about penguin anatomy and reproduction...
• "The common name was given to the species by English explorers" - Who?! Names and (if possible) dates are preferable. Remember, citations necessary as always
• There is an awkward spacing between the title "Taxonomy" and the sub-title "Discovery"...
• I don't understand why you put information about this species' relation to the Royal Penguin under "Discovery." Should the common name (purportedly founded by unknown English explorers as you yourself say) be under "Discovery?" Or should the information presented there be moved and the sub-title removed altogether? Your call
• Wikilink "bill" please... the average person doesn't know that you are referring to the bird's beak...
• "depths of 15 meters to 70 meters, but have been recorded diving down to 100 meters on occasions." (in "Diet" under "Behavior"): this can be rewritten as "depths of 15–100 meters." You have to use an En Dash
• "three meters to six meters in depth" in same section: fix accordingly to above rule
• "a process called Incubation." (under "Reproduction"): why is incubation capitalized? Is it a proper noun?
• "Macaroni Penguins leave their breeding colony by April or May." May I suggest you add "typically" before "leave?" Also, is Penguin a proper noun? (should it really be capitalized?)

These and the questions I left on your GA reveiw constitute all that I can ask/fix at this point in time (with my limited knowledge of the subject). It's getting late now and I am off to bed, but if you want any more help, critizism or suggestions just ask in class... I am always more than ready! Hope these pointers/problems help guide you in the direction of GA... I might get back on to see how you are doing in a week and give another short analysis. Keep up the good work. Food_Puma 05:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

You need sources, these are sources!

• A great physical description with a bit of history that I didn't find in your article!
• The only images you will be able to use on flickr (after non-commerical and non-derivative works was filtered out)
• Good information with image licesening information at the bottom

• Note: They say here that Royal Penguins and Macaroni Penguins are conspecific (of the same species)... thus this picture can be used...

• Pubmed endocrinology
• Info on diving: Do they control their metabolic rate (etc) to dive further?
• More info on penguins' cold-water adaptations/ability
• Study on food consumption when compared to other penguin species
• Mercury concentrations in several species of penguin

And there are always more out there... :-) Food_Puma 21:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Above it says that Royal Penguins and Macaroni Penguins are the same species. However, I don't believe that that is recognized by any major sources, and Wikipedia has two different articles. Be careful using that source and you shouldn't use the picture. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 21:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Yea, after posting that I went to the Royal Penguin page to see if there was any mention of it being closely related to the Macaroni Penguin, only to realize that it's play as a possible sub-species is debated. Perhaps just a mention, then, that they are known to interbreed with other penguins? Not really sure what/how to do this... Check me out! Food_Puma 22:11, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and I am confident that the Tree of Life Web Project is an accurate source. They cited a research journal from authors Christidis & Boles that was published recently in 2008, so don't be so quick to say it's a false claim: most of the "major sources" are probably (more) outdated. That being said, I agree the picture would cause much confusion and until the two penguin species are more broadly accepted as one (or one a sub-species of the other) it should remain only on the Royal Penguin article. Cheers! Food_Puma 22:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I've done some more poking around and C&B have recently decided that the Royal Penguin is a subspecies of the Macaroni. Wikipedia is fairly conservative in bird taxonomy, and as it is only one source probably won't become solid fact, but it definately deserves a mention that some authors consider the Royal Penguin a subspecies. This is another source based off of C&B. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 22:24, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Status of Macaroni Penguin and Royal Penguin

These two taxa are closely related, so much so that the Royal is considered a subspecies of the Macaroni in the latest checklist of Australian Birds (christidis and boles 2008), due to the low level of divergence in DNA and difficulties separating them (some macaronis have pale faces as well). The older Penguin monograph book still lists them as separate...so what shall we do? I need to sleep now but other sources say....what? Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

D'oh!! Just saw above post! Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

PS: C & B 2008 has a good summary as to why these should be treated as subsp. so can be a good discussion point, but I need to sleep...Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Whether treated as separate species or subspecies (something that can easily change with new information or shifting taxonomic paradigm) they are distinct (e.g. appearance, breeding range) taxa, with sufficient available information on both of them, to warrant two articles. There is no reason why distinct subspecies should not have separate articles, and there are several examples in Wikipedia already. Maias (talk) 23:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Good point, I was thinking along those lines myself. C&B report majority of authorities consider them species. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

After reading C & B, I have to agree with them that these two are one single species. Just counting number of references is not the best way to judge taxonomy, and the option of C & B is rapidly accepted (see IOC for example, generally conservative). -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 03:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Another Ref

You may want to visit here. Among other things, it says that there are 18 million in existance, rather than the 12 million pairs mentioned in the lead, and it is a highly accurate source. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 00:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Good pick-up. Reading onwards, this is a more up-to-date reference than what I have (1993), and the page goes on to explain that there has been a decrease. We can expand and add that. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

More suggestions

The following are suggestions that you may or may not want to implement.

• Move one sentence in the lead so that population size and conservation status come together. They are closely related.
• flattened in flippers, flattened into flippers (evolutionary process), flattened and formed as flippers
• Penguins in genus Eudyptes are usually distinguished by ... This statement is about the genus but the article is supposed to be about a species. Maybe formulate as in the following sentence Like all ..., but then it will be boringly repetitititive.
• They species epithet (obvious)

--Ettrig (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

A few questions/comments

• The lead says that "Adult Macaroni Penguins average about 5.5 kg (12 lb) in weight and 71 cm (28 in) in length." Yet in the Description section we're told that: "The adult Macaroni Penguin may reach a length of around 71 cm (28 in) and weigh around 5.5 kg (12 lb)." Your definition of "average" isn't one that I'm familiar with.

• The leads tells us that "They moult once a year before returning to their colonies to mate", but it doesn't tell us that they ever went away from their colonies. Where do they spend their time between matings? At sea?

• "Both the male and female penguins keep the egg warm in long shifts ...". Where do they get these long shifts from? Do they wear them to keep warm?

Male and female parent take turns keeping the egg warm. How long is long? --Ettrig (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

• "Although the number of Macaroni Penguins is currently high ...". When is "currently? This year? Last year? Five years ago? Best to say something like "as of 200?".

--Malleus Fatuorum 14:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Shifts, like in working a shift in a mine. I figured the other was pretty obsolete. I have a monograph that can help fix the other stuff up...and there is more stuff to get in for a tilt at FAC at some stage. I added some stuff but this is part of a wikiproject so I took a back seat a bit. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Get away, you learn something new every day. ;-) Actually I was hoping to see something specific like 24-hour shifts, or however long they may be. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

The best I could determine the 5 - week session is divided up into 3 nearly equal sized dresses - although in the female it tends to be rather low-cut despite the cold temperatures. I also attempted to address some other issues that were brought up. I will check with my student to see if she is going to take the GA accomplishment and run. As in "Away"! I've set a deadline to attempt the FA (May 1). Those who made it to GA have the option to walk away. I should know by 3/16--JimmyButler (talk) 22:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I think it would probably need quite a bit of work to get through FAC (she can ask Food Puma and Yohmom about that), so I guess it depends on her schedule. GA is a really good achievement anyway though, and one she should feel proud of. Lots of editors would kill to have a GA under their belt. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 01:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I am, in fact, going to take the GA and "run". I'm no longer actively editing, so thanks for all the feedback and contributions to the article.

) --LNG123 (talk) 21:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

CE

I’ve made these changes which include standardising spelling, which was a random mix of BE and AE

• Why is “cited text” a subheading of “conservation” (absolutely no idea, maybe it was a wiki-poltergeist)
• I’d prefer “Williams (2005) p. 100” etc to the current non-standard reference form (good point. done)
• Is there really only one book with info on this species? (It is a monograph-like book on the penguins, but I was musing on this myself and going to scour for more recent developments)
• Some refs have author's surname first, some have it after first name/initials (thanks. minimised variations now)
• Two date styles in refs (fixed)
• why is zipcode zoo a reliable source? (removed)

Still needs a thorough CE and checking jimfbleak (talk) 12:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I must say I have found starting from scratch easier than getting a well-developed on polished up prose-wise...anyway, onward and upward. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:31, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Viral predator

I was unsure whether this should warrant a mention in the "predator" section, especially since it involves captive specimens, so I'll just put the info here and let someone else decide. Sasata (talk) 06:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

In 2002, the avian birnavirus infectious bursal disease virus (known to cause an immunosuppressive disease in chickens and turkeys) was isolated from Macaroni penguins that had died in an UK zoo.

Aargh - tricky as it doesn't sit well anywhere - having seen some refs, it appears that several penguin species have had zoo specimnes die of something similar, which might not be a natural problem in the wild. I am tempted to leave it out for the moment. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:10, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

They are not a new species. They have been around for years.

--24.175.221.208 (talk) 03:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC) I want to know just who said that the Macaroni Penguin was a new Species? That is further from the truth.