Psittacula eupatria (Alexandrine parakeet)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Introductions
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat
- Habitat List
- Biology and Ecology
- Natural Food Sources
- Climate
- Latitude/Altitude Ranges
- Air Temperature
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Causes
- Impact Summary
- Economic Impact
- Environmental Impact
- Social Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses
- Uses List
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
- References
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Psittacula eupatria (Linnaeus, 1766)
Preferred Common Name
- Alexandrine parakeet
Other Scientific Names
- Palaeornis eupatria (Linnaeus, 1766)
- Psittacula eupatria avensis (Kloss, 1917)
- Psittacula eupatria eupatria (Linnaeus, 1766)
- Psittacula eupatria magnirostris (Ball, 1872)
- Psittacula eupatria nipalensis (Hodgson, 1836)
- Psittacula eupatria siamensis (Kloss, 1917)
- Psittacus eupatria Linnaeus, 1766
International Common Names
- Italian: parrocchetto Alessandrino
- Spanish: cotorra Alejandrina
- French: perruche Alexandre
- Russian: Aleksandriiskii popugai
- Arabic: Alksandrin albabagha
- Chinese: Yàlìshāndà yīngwǔ
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageThe Alexandrine parakeet, P. eupatria, is a common, large-sized (±60 cm) parrot species with red shoulder patches. Its native range includes a large part of Southern Asia, from eastern Afghanistan to the Himalayan ridge and through most of lowland forests of South Asia, to Indochina. Since the end of the last century, the Alexandrine parakeet, due to its popularity as a cage species, has established alien populations in Europe, parts of the Middle East and Far East countries such as Japan and Hong Kong. During the ongoing invasion process, the Alexandrine parakeet has considerably increased its ecological niche into colder climates (particularly in Europe), with respect to those attended in the native range. Interspecific facilitation with previously established ring-necked parakeets Psittacula krameri may have helped this niche expansion, as well as the establishment success of the Alexandrine parakeet. Despite this, its spread seems to be lower than that of the ring-necked parakeet in the introduced area. Both in the native and in the introduced range, the Alexandrine parakeet may represent a threat to cultivation, particularly orchards, and it may compete with native cavity-nesting birds. Species Distribution Models predict a high invasion risk across most areas where the species is currently not present, thus suggesting a high potential risk for further invasion and range expansion.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Chordata
- Subphylum: Vertebrata
- Class: Aves
- Order: Psittaciformes
- Family: Psittacidae
- Genus: Psittacula
- Species: Psittacula eupatria
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageFour subspecies are identified in the native range (Forshaw, 2010), confirmed by morphological and genetic markers (see Braun et al., 2019), with no genetic information on introduced populations:
Psittacula eupatria eupatria: Southern India and Sri Lanka;
Psittacula eupatria nipalensis: Eastern Afghanistan, Himalayan Pakistan, Northern and Central India, Nepal and Bhutan;
Psittacula eupatria avensis: Eastern India, Myanmar and Western Thailand;
Psittacula eupatria siamensis: Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam;
Psittacula eupatria magnirostris: Andamane Islands.
IUCN classified it under the genus Palaeornis (cf. Braun et al., 2019), but this reclassification is not yet globally accepted.
Description
Top of pagePsittacula eupatria is a large parrot species, with a body length of about 60 cm and a long tail. This species shows a massive red bill. The whole body is mostly green, with red shoulder patches. The species is sexually dimorphic. Adult males show a wide rose-pink collar encircling the hindneck and black stripes across lower cheeks, mauve-blue occipital areas and cheeks. Females and subadults lack head markings (Forshaw, 2010). F1 hybrids P. eupatria x P. krameri are smaller and show orange-to-yellowish shoulder patches (Krause, 2004; Postigo, 2016). In hybrid individuals, shoulder patches may be absent (Postigo, 2016).
Distribution
Top of pageFor details of distribution, see tables. Reports of captive parakeets in zoos and aviaries are not included in the tables.
Native Range (Forshaw, 2010 ; BirdLife International, 2017)
Afghanistan
It only occurs in the northeastern part of the country, i.e. around Kabul.
Pakistan
It occurs in the northern and central part of the country.
Nepal
Widespread throughout the country.
Bhutan
Widespread in the southern part of the country.
India
Widespread in the northernmost part of the country (Punjab, Uttar Pradesh), in the western coast, in the central regions and eastwards up to Assam and Manipur.
Sri Lanka
Widespread throughout the country.
Bangladesh
Quite rare, but mostly occurring in the Dhaka and Rajshahi divisions (Sourav et al., 2018).
Myanmar
Mostly present in the eastern and southern parts.
Thailand
Mostly present in the eastern and southern parts.
Cambodia
Only occurring in central and southern areas.
Laos
Only recorded in southernmost part of the country.
Vietnam
Very rare and only occurring only in north and central regions.
Introduced Range (cf. Ancillotto et al., 2016)
Europe
Germany
Psittacula eupatria in Germany occurs in the urban park of Wiesbaden, near Frankfurt, at Cologne, Mainz and Bonn. In Cologne, the population was estimated of near 200 individuals in 2011 (Ancillotto et al., 2016). A single individual has been observed in the surroundings of Berlin in 2021.
United Kingdom
The species is considered as a rare alien in the United Kingdom, occurring only with scattered individuals (1-3) in SE England, apart from a single adult male observed near Birmingham in 2020.
Belgium
Psittacula eupatria in Belgium occurs in Evere and Bruxelles, with an estimated population of several hundreds of birds in 2015 (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Netherlands
A population of Alexandrine parakeets is well established in an urban park in urban parks of Amsterdam and Groningen (Jonker, 2010 ; Klaassen and Hustings, 2010) and local counts estimated over 200 individuals in 2014 (Kleunen et al., 2014 ; Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Greece
Single individuals recorded in Rethymnon, near Arogi and in Acharnes.
Italy
Psittacula eupatria is present in Italy since 2008. Two reproductive populations are present, the largest one in Reggio Emilia with about 20 individuals (Viviano and Mori, 2021) and the other one in Rome, with 3-4 individuals (Ancillotto et al., 2016). Records of single free–ranging individuals occurred in other localities in northern (Mori et al., 2013) and central Italy, in one case being observed for several consecutive years (Genoa, 1994 -1998), but with no sign of breeding (Borgo et al., 2005).
Spain
In 2015-2016, three hybrid individuals of P. eupatria x P. krameri were recorded in Malaga (Postigo, 2016), suggesting a potential reproduction event. Other single records were detected in Canary Islands (1994) , Barcelona (2003) , Madrid (2005) , in Motril - Granada (a male in 2018 and 2020), in Marbella-Málaga (2019) and in Almeria (2021: JL Postigo, personal communication, 2021).
France
Two Alexandrine parakeets have been observed in Aubagne in the 1990s and in 2015, with no evidence of reproduction (Cottaz, 2016).
Poland
A single individual observed in Kuyavian-Pomeranian in 2016 (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Switzerland
Two individuals of Alexandrine parakeet observed in 2016-2017, with no evidence of reproduction.
Middle East and North Africa
Turkey
An established population is present in Istanbul with 23 counted nests in 2012 (Șahın and Arslangündoğdu, 2019). Other Alexandrine parakeets observed in Alhanli, Izmir and Ankara, with no reproduction confirmation (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Israel
Alexandrine parakeets were observed only twice, in the northern part of the country.
Bahrain
Possibly extinct (Jennings, 2004 ; 2010; Lever, 2005 ; Ancillotto et al., 2016).
United Arab Emirates
Two pairs of P. eupatria started breeding in Abu Dhabi in early 1990s (Jennings, 2010). Scattered individuals repeatedly observed in Dubai (since 1984), Fujairah (since 2005), Sharjah (since 2004), Zabeel (since 2004) and Ra’s al-Khaimah (in 2006).
Qatar
A breeding population is known for Ar Rayyan since 2012 (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Saudi Arabia
The Alexandrine parakeet is recorded as a breeding species in the city of Jeddah, with individuals occurring up to Makkah (Jennings, 2004 ; Lever, 2005).
Oman
Psittacula eupatria is rare in Oman (Jennings, 2010). Records of single individuals occur from the cities of Al Batinah (2008) , Ash Sharqiyah (2009) and Masqat (2012) .
Yemen
Possibly currently extinct (BirdLife International, 2017).
Kuwait
Possibly currently extinct (Jennings, 2010).
Iran
Alexandrine parakeet is well established in the area of Tehran, being reported in numerous parks and green areas, with a local population of some hundreds of individuals (Khaleghizadeh, 2004 ; Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Iraq
The Alexandrine parakeet has been observed for the first time in the wild in Iraq in 2019, in the Babylon archaeological site (Abed et al., 2020).
Algeria
Few individuals were observed since early 2000s and 3-4 breeding pairs present in the metropolitan area of Algiers (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Egypt
In 2021, a single male adult individual has been recorded in the northernmost part of Il Cairo.
Far East
Japan
First documented breeding of P. eupatria dates back to 2000, in Central Honshu (Lever, 2005 ; Kawakami and Kanouchi, 2012), where it is still present (Shiels and Kalodimos, 2019).
Hong Kong
Psittacula eupatria is present and breeding in Kowloon Park, Hong Kong, since at least 2008 (Shiels and Kalodimos, 2019).
China
An individual of P. eupatria was recorded in 2006 at Nongmo Hu (Ruili Lake).
Oceania
Australia
Occasional records the Australian subcontinent, mostly from the State of Victoria, possibly referring to single escaped individuals.
America
USA
Single records in 1959 (California), 1947 (Michigan), 1990 (Hawaii) (Runde et al., 2007). Recent records of single individuals occurred in 2002-2016, with no evidence of reproduction (Uehling et al., 2019).
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
Last updated: 17 Dec 2021Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa |
|||||||
Algeria | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2000 | ||||
Egypt | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2021 | Unpublished data from iNaturalist | |||
Asia |
|||||||
Afghanistan | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Bahrain | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2000 | Introduced | 2000 | Possibly extinct | ||
Bangladesh | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Bhutan | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Cambodia | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
China | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2006 | Introduced | 2006 | |||
Hong Kong | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2008 | ||||
India | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Andaman and Nicobar Islands | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Andhra Pradesh | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Arunachal Pradesh | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Assam | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Bihar | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Chandigarh | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Chhattisgarh | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Dadra and Nagar Haveli | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Daman and Diu | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Delhi | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Goa | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Gujarat | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Haryana | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Himachal Pradesh | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Jammu and Kashmir | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Jharkhand | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Karnataka | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Kerala | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Lakshadweep | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Madhya Pradesh | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Maharashtra | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Manipur | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Meghalaya | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Mizoram | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Nagaland | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Odisha | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Puducherry | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Punjab | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Rajasthan | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Sikkim | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Tamil Nadu | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Telangana | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Tripura | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Uttar Pradesh | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-Uttarakhand | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
-West Bengal | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Iran | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2003 | ||||
Iraq | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2019 | ||||
Israel | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2011 | Introduced | 2005 | |||
Japan | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2000 | ||||
-Honshu | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2000 | ||||
Jordan | Present | Introduced | 2008 | ||||
Kuwait | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | Possibly currently extinct | ||||
Laos | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Myanmar | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Nepal | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Oman | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2012 | Introduced | 2008 | |||
Pakistan | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Palestine | Present | Introduced | 2008 | ||||
Qatar | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2012 | ||||
Saudi Arabia | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2002 | ||||
Sri Lanka | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Thailand | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Turkey | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2005 | ||||
United Arab Emirates | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2006 | Introduced | 1990 | |||
Vietnam | Present, Widespread, Confirmed present by survey | Native | |||||
Yemen | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | |||||
Europe |
|||||||
Belgium | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 1998 | ||||
France | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2015 | Introduced | 1990 | No evidence of reproduction | ||
Germany | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2000 | ||||
Greece | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2015 | ||||
Italy | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2008 | ||||
Netherlands | Present, Localized, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 2000 | ||||
Norway | Present | Introduced | 2004 | ||||
Poland | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2016 | Introduced | 2016 | Single individual observed | ||
Spain | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 1994 | First reported in the Canary islands in 1994. First reported in mainland Spain in 2003. | |||
-Canary Islands | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced | 1994 | ||||
Switzerland | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2017 | Introduced | 2016 | No evidence of reproduction | ||
United Kingdom | Present | Introduced | 1996 | ||||
-England | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2020 | Introduced | 2000 | |||
North America |
|||||||
United States | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 2016 | Introduced | 1947 | |||
-California | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 1959 | Introduced | 1959 | |||
-Hawaii | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 1990 | Introduced | 1990 | |||
-Michigan | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | 1947 | Introduced | 1947 | |||
Oceania |
|||||||
Australia | Present, Few occurrences, Confirmed present by survey | Introduced |
History of Introduction and Spread
Top of pageEurope
Germany
The presence of P. eupatria in Germany was first reported in 1987, with one pair detected in the urban park of Wiesbaden, near Frankfurt. Three adult pairs and nine fledglings occurred in the same park in 1990. Breeding was certified at Cologne in 1993 (with eight breeding pairs in Schlosspark Stammheim) and at Mainz and Bonn since 2007 (Bauer and Woog, 2008). In Düsseldorf, one adult female and hybrids with the congeneric ring-necked parakeet Psittacula krameri were observed in 1999 (Krause, 2004). In Cologne, individuals of P. eupatria represent escapees from the local zoo; in 2011, the population was estimated to be 150-200 individuals. A single individual has been observed in the surroundings of Berlin in 2021.
United Kingdom
First scattered observations of Alexandrine parakeets in the UK date back to 1993, with very few individuals associated to flocks of P. krameri (Morgan, 1993). The first successful breeding events was recorded in 1998 in Merseyside (Butler, 2005 ; Parrot et al., 2008). The small flock (n=12) of Alexandrine parakeets in Fazackerley (Merseyside) was eradicated by direct shooting (Butler, 2002) and no recent record is available for recent years. Other reproductive events were recorded at Foots Cray Meadows in Sidcup in 2001 (Parrot et al., 2008) and in Bromley in 2008 (Arnold et al., 2017). Hybrids were observed breeding in Kent in 2001 and 2002 (Arnold et al., 2017). The species is considered as a rare alien in the United Kingdom, occurring only in SE England, apart from a single adult male observed near Birmingham in 2020. Only isolated breeding pairs or small flocks (one to three individuals) have been recorded so far, but it is possible that the species could be much more widespread, due to its similarity with P. krameri (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Belgium
The first detection of P. eupatria for Belgium is the sighting of three adult individuals within a flock of rose-ringed parakeets in Evere, in 1998 (Weiserbs et al., 2000). In 1999, six breeding pairs were recorded at two urban parks in Brussels (Scaillet, 1999) and nine pairs were recorded at the same sites in 2000. In 2004, 35-40 breeding pairs were counted (Weiserbs and Jacob, 2007). In 2015, the population was estimated to count several hundreds of birds (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Netherlands
The first individual of Alexandrine parakeets in the Netherlands was an adult individual observed several times in an urban park in Groningen (Noorderplantsoen) (Klaassen and Hustings, 2010) in 1996 and 1997. A population of Alexandrine parakeets is well established in an urban park in the city centre of Amsterdam since 2010 (Vondelpark) (Jonker, 2010 ; Klaassen and Hustings, 2010) and counts by local birdwatchers estimated around 60-100 individuals in 2010 (Ancillotto et al., 2016). In 2013, a breeding pair was recorded also in another urban park in Amsterdam (Oosterpark), 3 km away from the first site. Kleunen et al. (2014) reported near 210 Alexandrine parakeets in Amsterdam in 2014. Hybrids with P. krameri were observed in Vondelpark. In Haarlem, Klaassen (2014) observed three Alexandrine parakeets with no breeding confirmation. Several individuals have also been recorded in Groningen since 2015, but no population estimate is available.
Greece
An adult individual of P. eupatria and a hybrid with P. krameri were observed in 2002 in Rethymnon (Crete) (Ancillotto et al., 2016). Other single individuals have been recorded near Arogi in 2020 and in Acharnes in 2021.
Italy
First documented records of P. eupatria in Rome report a single adult male repeatedly observed in La Caffarella urban park in 2010 and 2011 (Ancillotto et al., 2016). Afterwards, two adults were recorded at the wildlife rescue centre of Rome in 2011-2012, both from La Caffarella urban park. In 2014, hybrids (P. eupatria x P. krameri) were reported, together with one adult male P. eupatria resident in the area, together with a flock of P. krameri . Reproduction of P. eupatria in Rome is recorded since 2015 (Angelici and Fiorillo, 2015 ; Ancillotto et al., 2016). Since 2008, the species is also present and breeding in Reggio Emilia, with 16 individuals and several hybrids P. eupatria x P. krameri occurring in 2020 (Viviano and Mori, 2021). Records of free–ranging individuals were also recorded in four other localities in northern (Bologna, Genoa and Turin: Mori et al., 2013) and central (Boccheggiano, Montieri) Italy, in one case being observed for several consecutive years (Genoa, 1994 -1998), with no sign of breeding though (Borgo et al., 2005).
Spain
Alexandrine parakeets were also observed in Spain, with three individuals, one in Canary Islands (1994) , one in Barcelona (2003) and one in Madrid (2005) . In 2015-2016, three hybrid individuals of P. eupatria x P. krameri have been observed in Malaga (Postigo, 2016), suggesting that a reproduction event has occurred in this city.
France
Two individuals have been recorded in Aubagne, 17 km east of Marseille, with no evidence of reproduction, in late 1990s and in 2015 (Cottaz, 2016).
Poland
An Alexandrine parakeet has been observed in Kuyavian-Pomeranian in 2016 (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Switzerland
Two individuals of Alexandrine parakeet have been observed near Cugnasco in 2016-2017, with no evidence of reproduction.
Middle East and North Africa
Turkey
An established population is present in Istanbul with 23 counted nests in 2012 (Șahın and Arslangündoğdu, 2019) with first reported records dating back to 1998, although the population probably established much earlier than this date (Per, 2017). Other individuals have been observed in Alhanli, Izmir and Ankara, where hybrids with P. krameri were also observed (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Israel
Alexandrine parakeets were observed only twice, in the northern part of the country. Two individuals were detected at a roost with P. krameri in Rehovot and Pardes Hanna in 2005; a pair was also observed in Rosh Pina, with no evidence of breeding (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Bahrain
First records of free-living Alexandrine parakeets in Bahrain date back to 1989. Many small flocks have been reported since early 1990s in Busaytin, Al Muharraq and Manama (Jennings, 2004 ; 2010; Lever, 2005 ; Ancillotto et al., 2016 ; BirdLife International, 2017).
United Arab Emirates
One or two pairs of P. eupatria started breeding in Abu Dhabi in early 1990s, where they have been observed since 1988 (Jennings, 2010). Other scattered individuals were also repeatedly observed in Dubai (since 1984), Fujairah (since 2005), Sharjah (since 2004) and Zabeel (since 2004). Two further records are also reported from Ra’s al-Khaimah, in 2006. The population of Alexandrine parakeets is increasing and expanding its range in this country, forming other small reproductive nuclei (Richardson, 1992 ; Jennings, 2004 ; 2010; Lever, 2005), accounting for less than 100 breeding pairs in 1996 (Jennings, 2010).
Qatar
First records dated back to 1982 (Jennings, 2010). A breeding population is known for the municipality of Ar Rayyan since 2012, but no data are available on population size or status (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Saudi Arabia
First records occurred in the Eastern Province in 1983 (Jennings, 2010). The Alexandrine parakeet was actually recorded as a breeding species in the city of Jeddah, with individuals occurring up to Makkah, since 1997 but no data about the size of this population is available (Jennings, 2004 ; Lever, 2005).
Oman
The first record of P. eupatria in Southern Oman dates back to 1994 and to 1997 in Northern Oman (Jennings, 2010). Currently, the species is considered ‘rare’ in this area (Jennings, 2010). Records of single individuals from the cities of Al Batinah (2008) , Ash Sharqiyah (2009) and Masqat (2012) suggest multiple releases, with no confirmation of established populations.
Yemen
The population of Alexandrine parakeet introduced in Yemen since 1983 (in Sana’a) (Jennings, 2010), but it may be currently extinct (BirdLife International, 2017).
Kuwait
No data confirm breeding events by Alexandrine parakeets recorded in Kuwait since 1995 (Jennings, 2010).
Iran
The first record of P. eupatria in Iran is of two individuals on Kharg Island in early 1970s (Scott et al., 1975). Other records are from around the city of Tehran since 1997 (Khaleghizadeh and Sehhati, 2004). In the early 2000s, about 25 individuals were counted in the Evin district of Tehran, with a single additional record from Karaj (Khaleghizadeh, 2004). The Alexandrine parakeet is well established in the area of Tehran, being reported in numerous parks and green areas, with a local population of 300-500 individuals in 2004 (Jalali, 2004 ; Khaleghizadeh, 2004 ; Khaleghizadeh and Sehhati, 2004).
Iraq
The Alexandrine parakeet was observed for the first time in the wild in Iraq in 2019, in the Babylon archaeological site (Abed et al., 2020).
Algeria
Fellous et al. (2005) recorded the presence of a single Alexandrine parakeet in Algiers. Few individuals have been observed since 2007 and 3-4 breeding pairs are currently present in this metropolitan area (Ancillotto et al., 2016), living in mixed colonies with ring-necked parakeets P. krameri ; hybrids were also present.
Egypt
In 2021, a single male adult individual has been recorded in the northernmost part of Cairo.
Far East
Japan
Single individuals have been observed in 1961 and 1982, but the first documented breeding of P. eupatria dates back to 2000, in Central Honshu (Tokyo) (Lever, 2005 ; Kawakami and Kanouchi, 2012). Eguchi and Amano (2004) confirmed the presence of this breeding species in Tokyo, but without population estimate (cf. also Shiels and Kalodimos, 2019).
Hong Kong
Psittacula eupatria is present and breeding in Kowloon Park, Hong Kong, at least since 2008; this population of unknown size shares the park with P. krameri and mixed-species pairs were observed (Shiels and Kalodimos, 2019).
China
An individual of P. eupatria has been observed at Nongmo Hu (Ruili Lake) in 2006 (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
Oceania
Australia
The few records for Australia are mostly from Southern areas, e.g. from the State of Victoria and may refer to individuals escaped from cages since the 1970s (Ancillotto et al., 2016).
America
USA
Three relatively old records are available for North America, probably being occasional escapees, in 1959 (California), 1947 (Michigan), 1990 (Hawaii) (Runde et al., 2007). Three more recent records of single individuals occurred in 2002-2016, with no evidence of reproduction (Uehling et al., 2019).
Introductions
Top of pageIntroduced to | Introduced from | Year | Reason | Introduced by | Established in wild through | References | Notes | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural reproduction | Continuous restocking | |||||||
Germany | 2000 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
UK | 2000 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Belgium | 1998 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Weiserbs (2000), Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Netherlands | 2000 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Jonker (2010), Klaassen and Hustings (2010), Kleunen (2014), Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
France | 1990 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016), Cottaz (2016) | |||
Italy | 2008 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Ancillotto et al. (2016), Viviano and Mori (2021) | |||
Spain | 1994 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Ancillotto et al. (2016), Postigo (2016) | |||
Poland | 2016 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Switzerland | 2016 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Turkey | 2005 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Ancillotto et al. (2016), Șahın and Arslangündoğdu (2019) | |||
Israel | 2005 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Bahrain | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Jennings (2004; 2010), Ancillotto et al. (2016) | ||||
United Arab Emirates | 1990 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Jennings (2010), Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Qatar | 2012 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Saudi Arabia | 2002 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Jennings (2004), Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Oman | 2008 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Jennings (2010), Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Yemen | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016), BirdLife International (2017) | ||||
Iran | 2003 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Khaleghizadeh (2004), Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Iraq | 2019 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Abed et al. (2020) | |||
Algeria | 2000 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Egypt | 2021 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | GBIF (2021) | Unpublished data from iNaturalist.org | ||
Japan | 2000 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Ancillotto et al. (2016), Shiels and Kalodimos (2019) | |||
Hong Kong | 2008 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | Yes | Shiels and Kalodimos (2019) | |||
China | 2006 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016) | |||
Australia | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016) | ||||
USA | 1947 | Pet trade (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | Ancillotto et al. (2016), Uehling et al. (2019) |
Risk of Introduction
Top of pageThe pet trade is the main pathway of introduction of P. eupatria. It can intentionally or unintentionally escape during transport, as well as from aviaries or cages. All these escapes may lead to the establishment of free-ranging populations, as happened in the city of Groningen, although most information of escapes from cages and aviaries derives from similar species, e.g. Psittacula krameri (Cardador et al., 2016; 2017). With regard to the possibility of spread from currently established populations: in the introduced range, there are still few established P. eupatria populations. However, Species Distribution Models by Ancillotto et al. (2016) predicted a high invasion risk across most areas outside the native range where the species is currently not present, therefore suggesting a potential high risk for further invasion and range expansion. The increasing popularity of free flying pet parrots, indicated by growing numbers of videos (e.g. on YouTube) showing this, may make their accidental release and spread more likely.
Habitat
Top of pagePsittacula eupatria is a typical species of forests and woodlands (including degraded ones), but it also occurs in cultivated areas and mangroves, as well as in urban and peri-urban parks, mostly below 900 m but locally up to 1600 m above sea level (Juniper and Parr, 1998; BirdLife International, 2017; Sourav et al., 2018).
Habitat List
Top of pageCategory | Sub-Category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Urban / peri-urban areas | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Cultivated / agricultural land | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Disturbed areas | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Natural |
Terrestrial | Managed | Managed forests, plantations and orchards | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Natural forests | Principal habitat | Natural |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Riverbanks | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Scrub / shrublands | Present, no further details | Natural |
Biology and Ecology
Top of pageGenetics
The genus Psittacula seems to represent a paraphyletic assemblage and P. eupatria may belong to the different genus Palaeornis (Braun et al., 2019), together with the extinct Seychelles parakeet Psittacula wardi , and it represents the sister group of Psittacula krameri . The Andamane Alexandrine parakeet P. eupatria magnirostris seems to be the first subspecies to diverge within this species, whereas the Siamese and the nominal subspecies represent well-supported sister groups (Braun et al., 2019). Hybridization between P. eupatria and P. krameri may occur, at least in the introduced range and at least F1 hybrids are fertile and show intermediate phenotypic features (Krause, 2004 ; Ancillotto et al., 2016 ; Postigo, 2016).
Reproductive Biology
Psittacula eupatria is known to nest in tree cavities and, very rarely, also in wall crevices and holes (Ali and Ripley, 1983 ; Angelici and Fiorillo, 2015). In Turkey, the most used plant species for breeding are Platanus acerifolia , Pinus pinea and Celtis australis (Șahın and Arslangündoğdu, 2019). Alexandrine parakeets use cavities higher than those used by the ring-necked parakeets, where coexisting (Șahın and Arslangündoğdu, 2019).
Physiology and Phenology
Psittacula eupatria attains sexual maturity at about 3 years of age and generally breeds from November to April, depending on geographic location, although in the introduced range the reproduction may occur also in late spring-early summer (Ali and Ripley, 1983 ; Ancillotto et al., 2016 ; Șahın and Arslangündoğdu, 2019). Inspections of tree cavities in the native range occurs in August-September and fledging in April (Sourav et al., 2018).
Longevity
The life expectancy of P. eupatria is about 20-30 years (in captivity). No data are available for longevity in nature.
Activity Patterns
Outside the breeding period, Alexandrine parakeets roost in common roosting areas in trees at night, gathering together at dusk and leaving at dawn. Breeding individuals feed chicks regularly between 10:00 to 17:30 once every 10-35 min by both the male and the female (Sourav et al., 2018). At night, only the female feeds the chicks, whereas males join other individuals at shared night-time roosts (Sourav et al., 2018). Non-breeding individuals spend the morning and the early evening close to nests. Nocturnal roosts may be peacefully shared with ring-necked parakeets both in the native and in the introduced ranges (Sourav et al., 2018 ; Viviano and Mori, 2021). The same roosting area may be used for tens of years (Sourav et al., 2018).
Population Size and Density
Very little is known on population size and density, as the Alexandrine parakeets use the same roost site as ring-necked parakeets, it is difficult to make reliable estimates. The species is classified as ‘declining’ in its native range. The district of Dhaka hosts about 70 individuals of P. eupatria (BirdLife International, 2017). Over 950 individuals currently occur in Europe and over 750 in the Middle East.
Nutrition
Alexandrine parakeets may feed on a wide range of wild and cultivated seeds, flowers, buds, nectar, grain, fruit and vegetables (Ali and Ripley, 1983 ; Juniper and Parr, 1998). In Pakistan, it is considered a serious crop pest with about 70% of its local diet in farmed areas (Juniper and Parr, 1998). In Bangladesh, Sourav et al. (2018) identified 16 tree species where parakeets foraged, preferring the Bengal almond (Terminalia catappa) and the ber (Ziziphus mauritiana). Seven species were consumed daily (Ziziphus mauritiana , Polyalthia longifolia , Spathodea campanulata , Acacia moniliformis [ Acacia auriculiformis ], Albizia saman [ Samanea saman ], T. catappa and Gmelina arborea), six were used often (two to four times in a week) (Neolamarckia cadamba , Putranjiva roxburghii , Melia azedarach , Tectona grandis , Albizia richardiana [ Albizia niopoides ] and Senna siamea) and three were rarely consumed (Lagerstroemia indica , Leucaena leucocephala and Psidium guajava). In this area, Alexandrine parakeets mostly feed on seeds taken from fruits, followed by flower buds. In Iran, the diet of introduced P. eupatria was mostly composed by seeds of Pinus pinea, Platanus orientalis , Cupressus sempervirens , Cydonia oblonga, Diospyros kaki and Pyrus communis (Khaleghizadeh, 2004). Persimmons (D. kaki) are also widely consumed in Italy (Viviano and Mori, 2021). Both in the native and in the introduced range, P. eupatria feeds together with P. krameri apparently without competition (Sourav et al., 2018 ; Viviano and Mori, 2021).
Natural Food Sources
Top of pageFood Source | Food Source Datasheet | Life Stage | Contribution to Total Food Intake (%) | Details |
---|---|---|---|---|
Acacia moniliformis [Acacia auriculiformis] | All Stages | Native range | ||
Albizia richardiana [Albizia niopoides] | All Stages | Native range | ||
Albizia saman [Samanea saman] | All Stages | Native range | ||
Gmelina arborea | All Stages | Native range | ||
Lagerstroemia indica | All Stages | Native range | ||
Leucaena leucocephala | All Stages | Native range | ||
Melia azedarach | All Stages | Native range | ||
Neolamarckia cadamba | All Stages | Native range | ||
Polyalthia longifolia | All Stages | Native range | ||
Psidium guajava | All Stages | Native range | ||
Putranjiva roxburghii | All Stages | Native range | ||
Senna siamea | All Stages | Native range | ||
Spathodea campanulata | All Stages | Native range | ||
Tectona grandis | All Stages | Native range | ||
Terminalia catappa | All Stages | Native and introduced range | ||
Ziziphus mauritiana | All Stages | Native range | ||
Ziziphus spina-christi | All Stages | Introduced range | ||
Diospyros kaki | All Stages | Introduced range | ||
Prosopis juliflora | All Stages | Introduced range | ||
Phoenix dactylifera | All Stages | Introduced range | ||
Cydonia oblonga | All Stages | Introduced range | ||
Cupressus sempervirens | All Stages | Introduced range | ||
Pyrus communis | All Stages | Introduced range | ||
Ulmus carpinifolia [Ulmus minor] | All Stages | Introduced range | ||
Platanus orientalis | All Stages | Introduced range | ||
Pinus eldarica [Pinus brutia] | All Stages | Introduced range |
Climate
Top of pageClimate | Status | Description | Remark |
---|---|---|---|
Af - Tropical rainforest climate | Tolerated | > 60mm precipitation per month | |
Am - Tropical monsoon climate | Tolerated | Tropical monsoon climate ( < 60mm precipitation driest month but > (100 - [total annual precipitation(mm}/25])) | |
Aw - Tropical savannah climate with dry winter | Preferred | ||
BSh - Steppe climate | Tolerated | > 430mm and < 860mm annual precipitation, low altitude, average temp. > 18°C | |
BSk - Steppe climate | Tolerated | > 430mm and < 860mm annual precipitation, mid altitude, average temp. < 18°C | |
BWh - Desert climate | Tolerated | < 430mm annual precipitation, low altitude, average temp. > 18°C | |
Cfb - Maritime temperate climate | Tolerated | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year, warmest month average temp. < 22°C | |
Csa - Mediterranean climate | Preferred | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers, warmest month average temp. > 22°C | |
Cwa - Humid subtropical climate | Preferred | Humid subtropical climate (Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry winters, warmest month average temp. > 22°C) | |
Cwb - Maritime temperate climate | Tolerated | Maritime temperate climate (Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry winters, warmest month average temp. < 22°C) | |
Dfb - Warm summer continental or hemiboreal climate | Tolerated | Warm summer continental or hemiboreal climate (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, wet all year, warmest month average temp. < 22°C) | |
Dwb - Warm summer continental or hemiboreal climate | Tolerated | Warm summer continental or hemiboreal climate (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, dry winters, warmest month average temp. < 22°C) |
Latitude/Altitude Ranges
Top of pageLatitude North (°N) | Latitude South (°S) | Altitude Lower (m) | Altitude Upper (m) |
---|---|---|---|
52.2394 | 0.1973 | 0 | 1600 |
Air Temperature
Top of pageParameter | Lower limit | Upper limit |
---|---|---|
Absolute minimum temperature (ºC) | 0 | 10 |
Mean annual temperature (ºC) | 10 | 20 |
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageVery little is known about natural enemies. In the native range, the house crow Corvus splendens represents an effective predator of chicks of P. eupatria (Sourav et al., 2018), whereas in the introduced areas, P. eupatria may be preyed on by peregrine falcons Falco peregrinus (E. Mori, unpublished).
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Top of pageAccidental Introduction The pet trade is the main pathway of introduction of P. eupatria. It can accidentally escape during transports, as well as from aviaries or cages.
Intentional Introduction It can be locally intentionally released by humans e.g. by Animal Right Groups.
Pathway Causes
Top of pageCause | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Pet trade | Near 58,000 individuals traded between 1981 and 2014 | Yes | Ancillotto et al. (2016) |
Impact Summary
Top of pageCategory | Impact |
---|---|
Biodiversity (generally) | Negative |
Crop production | Negative |
Native fauna | Negative |
Economic Impact
Top of pageIn the native range, P. eupatria is locally considered a serious crop pest, with about 70% of its diet composed of cultivated species (Juniper and Parr, 1998). In the introduced range, first data are available on consumption of persimmons (Diospyros kaki) and other fruits in urban areas (Khalegizadeh, 2004; Viviano and Mori, 2021), but densities are still too low to threaten a consistent economic impact. Potential range expansion may increase the risk for cultivated species.
Environmental Impact
Top of pageImpact on Biodiversity
The species seems to be expanding its range in Germany, some authors even suggesting a displacement of Psittacula krameri through competition in the areas where the two species occur in syntopy (Krause, 2004; Bauer and Woog, 2008).
Social Impact
Top of pageNo data are available for this species. Human tolerance towards a similar species, Psittacula krameri, declined sharply with increasing number of loud calls: any density increase of P. eupatria in the introduced range would result in a similar impact (cf. Mori et al., 2020).
Risk and Impact Factors
Top of page- Has a broad native range
- Abundant in its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Is a habitat generalist
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- Tolerant of shade
- Capable of securing and ingesting a wide range of food
- Highly mobile locally
- Benefits from human association (i.e. it is a human commensal)
- Long lived
- Fast growing
- Gregarious
- Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
- Conflict
- Increases vulnerability to invasions
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Negatively impacts human health
- Damages animal/plant products
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Competition (unspecified)
- Pest and disease transmission
- Interaction with other invasive species
- Pathogenic
- Interaction with mutualisms
- Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
- Highly likely to be transported internationally illegally
- Difficult/costly to control
Uses
Top of pageEconomic Value
Psittacula eupatria is commonly sold as a pet species for about 80-300 euros, depending on age and breeding typology.
Social Benefit
People usually are pleased to see parakeets in urban areas (Berthier et al., 2017; Mori et al., 2020; Ribeiro et al., 2021).
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pagePsittacula eupatria: A less-experienced observer may confuse P. eupatria with P. krameri, but the former is larger in size and it is the only green-headed Psittacula with black stripes across the lower cheek patch and pink collar markings showing red shoulder patches.
Prevention and Control
Top of pageDue to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
Prevention
Psittacula eupatria is listed within the CITES Annex 2. Further trade limitation (e.g. increases of costs, permission requirements) up to trade ban would reduce the potential of local escapes. Education campaigns should be organized to promote responsible pet ownership.
Eradication
A rapid response to the invasion of the Alexandrine parakeet would improve the success of any management practice (Postigo, 2016). When the first individuals are observed, immediate removal is recommended to prevent the establishment of any expanding population. For any eradication program, the general public should be well-informed on the negative effects of alien species and on the importance of these drastic management operations.
Control
Limitation of food provisioning by humans in urban parks may also limit the establishment success of this species. However, given the high appreciation of parakeets in European cities (Berthier et al., 2017 ; Mori et al., 2020 ; Ribeiro et al., 2021), this management strategy proposal would show poor success.
Monitoring and Surveillance (incl. remote sensing)
This lack of ecological information on Alexandrine parakeet in the introduced range may limit effective biosecurity surveillance and decision-making efforts. Passive and active surveillance methods should be used together in a combined approach with Species Distribution Models. Passive methods (included remote sensing) are useful to assess geographic variables to be used to predict parakeet invasion. Surveillance of high establishment areas also identified by Species Distribution Models (Ancillotto et al., 2016), e.g. those in the vicinity of human settlements (Viviano and Mori, 2021), where free ranging Alexandrine parakeets may affect agricultural production. At the same time, active surveillance by local researchers should be targeted to the areas of highest predicted potential risk.
Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
Top of pageEvidence of competition between introduced P. eupatria and native species, e.g. cavity nesting birds, are still lacking and would require further field investigations, particularly at the start of the breeding season or at the start of the local invasion process.
Similarly, most data on impacts on agriculture and human well-being in the introduced range derives from available information on the similar Psittacula krameri. Thus, further studies particularly for the largest introduced populations of the Alexandrine parakeet should be required.
References
Top of pageButler, C.J., 2002. Breeding parrots in Britain. British Birds, 95:345-348.
Eguchi, K., Amano, H.E., 2004. Invasive birds in Japan. Global Environmental Research, 8(1):29-39.
Forshaw, J.M., 2010. Parrots of the world. Helm Field Guides. London, UK. 328 pp.
Jalali, A., 2004. A view to parakeets in Tehran. B.Sc. Thesis. Iran: Shahid Beheshti University.
Jennings, M., 2004. Exotics breeding in Arabian cities. Phoenix, 20:2-5.
Jonker, R., 2010. Eén, twee, ... veel parkieten! De Gierzwaluw, 47:35-36.
Lever, C., 2005. Naturalised birds of the world. London, UK: T & AD Poyser.
Morgan, D.H., 1993. Feral rose-ringed parakeets in Britain. British Birds, 86:561-564.
Richardson, C., 1992. Escapes and introductions in the United Arab Emirates. Phoenix, 9:13-15.
Distribution References
BirdLife International, 2017. Psittacula eupatria (amended version of 2016 assessment).The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017. IUCN. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-1.RLTS.T22685434A110985466.en
Forshaw JM, 2010. Parrots of the world. London, UK: Helm Field Guides. 328 pp.
GBIF, 2021. Global Biodiversity Information Facility. Copenhagen, Denmark: GBIF Secretariat. http://www.gbif.org/species
Khaleghizadeh A, 2004. On the diet and population of the Alexandrine parakeet, Psittacula eupatria, in the urban environment of Tehran, Iran. Zoology of the Middle East. 27-32.
Uehling J, Tallant J, Pruett-Jones S, 2019. Status of naturalized parrots in the United States. Journal of Ornithology. 907-921.
Distribution Maps
Top of pageSelect a dataset
Map Legends
-
CABI Summary Records
Map Filters
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/