Talk:Oxpecker

Birds High‑importance

Oxpecker is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Birds To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Endemic birds of Papua New Guinea (more)
Cleanup : Bullfinch • Vesper sparrow • Bird flight • Bird bath (more)
Copyedit : Plushcap • Magpie duck • Saker falcon (more)
Expand : Phalarope • Nidicolous • Gouldian finch • Cathartes • Cnemophilidae • Avian malaria (more)
NPOV : Debeaking • Driven grouse shooting • Abu Dhabi Falcon Hospital (more)
Stubs : Cathartiformes • Semiplumbeous hawk • Rainbow-bearded Thornbill • Sunda scops owl (more)
Update : Coal tit • Scottish crossbill • New Caledonian lorikeet • Operation Migration (more)
Verify : Argus (bird) • Blyth's frogmouth • Nik Borrow • Pytilia • Fregata • Chestnut-headed tesia • Darter • Pallid scops owl • Starling (more)
Wikify : Ninox boobook ocellata • The Institute for Bird Populations (more)
Other : Add photos to bird articles needing photos (search Flickr for free images). Add taxonomic authorities to genus articles.

More outstanding tasks at the project's cleanup listing, Category:Birds articles needing attention, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Todo.

Parasitic:

I just learned in my evolution class of a paper published that indicates that the relationship between oxpecker's and tetrapods is more parasitic than mutual. I don't have the ref, but I can look it up later.--FUNKAMATIC 17:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Funkamatic (talk • contribs)

I've seen this as well. 134.84.199.55 (talk) 02:45, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Parasitism v. mutualism: removed impala claim

Removed the following claim: "However one study of impalas found that impalas which were used by oxpeckers spent less time grooming themselves suggesting a reduction in parasite load." The study didn't show that they spent less time grooming themselves. It observed that oxpeckers fed on ticks in areas that the impalas could not reach, where consequently the ticks were thick, and argued that oxpeckers were therefore important to tick control. Further, the presumable source of this statement ([1]) discounts the study, saying that it shows only that impalas are more effective at removing their own ticks than oxpeckers since areas that could be groomed were not so heavily infested. Richigi (talk) 19:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dates?

How was the genus circumscribed in 1760 but its only two species were described in 1766 and 1814? Umimmak (talk) 04:52, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]