Invasive Species Compendium

Detailed coverage of invasive species threatening livelihoods and the environment worldwide

Datasheet

Psittacula krameri
(rose-ringed parakeet)

Toolbox

Datasheet

Psittacula krameri (rose-ringed parakeet)

Summary

  • Last modified
  • 27 September 2018
  • Datasheet Type(s)
  • Invasive Species
  • Pest
  • Natural Enemy
  • Host Animal
  • Preferred Scientific Name
  • Psittacula krameri
  • Preferred Common Name
  • rose-ringed parakeet
  • Taxonomic Tree
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •   Kingdom: Metazoa
  •     Phylum: Chordata
  •       Subphylum: Vertebrata
  •         Class: Aves
  • Summary of Invasiveness
  • P. krameri is a common, medium-sized (± 40 cm) bird found in a variety of forested and other habitats such as light secondary forest, riparian woodland, mangroves, savanna grasslands, open farmlands with scattere...

Don't need the entire report?

Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.

Generate report

Pictures

Top of page
PictureTitleCaptionCopyright
Close-up of adult male ring-necked parakeet.
TitleAdult male
CaptionClose-up of adult male ring-necked parakeet.
CopyrightFrank Adriaensen/University of Antwerp
Close-up of adult male ring-necked parakeet.
Adult maleClose-up of adult male ring-necked parakeet.Frank Adriaensen/University of Antwerp
Adult male ring-necked parakeet.
TitleAdult male
CaptionAdult male ring-necked parakeet.
CopyrightFrank Adriaensen/University of Antwerp
Adult male ring-necked parakeet.
Adult maleAdult male ring-necked parakeet.Frank Adriaensen/University of Antwerp
Adult male ring-necked parakeet.
TitleAdult male
CaptionAdult male ring-necked parakeet.
CopyrightFrank Adriaensen/University of Antwerp
Adult male ring-necked parakeet.
Adult maleAdult male ring-necked parakeet.Frank Adriaensen/University of Antwerp
Copulation, involving a subadult male ring-necked parakeet.
TitleCopulation
CaptionCopulation, involving a subadult male ring-necked parakeet.
CopyrightFrank Adriaensen/University of Antwerp
Copulation, involving a subadult male ring-necked parakeet.
CopulationCopulation, involving a subadult male ring-necked parakeet.Frank Adriaensen/University of Antwerp

Identity

Top of page

Preferred Scientific Name

  • Psittacula krameri (Scopoli)

Preferred Common Name

  • rose-ringed parakeet

Other Scientific Names

  • Psittacus krameri Scopoli, 1769

International Common Names

  • English: (Indian) ringneck; Abyssinian ring-necked parakeet; African ring-necked parakeet; boreal ring-necked parakeet; Indian ring-necked parakeet; Neumann's ring-necked parakeet; ring-necked parakeet
  • Spanish: cotorra de Kramer
  • French: perruche à collier

Local Common Names

  • Belgium: halsbandparkiet
  • Germany: Halsbandsittich; kleiner Alexandersittich

Summary of Invasiveness

Top of page

P. krameri is a common, medium-sized (± 40 cm) bird found in a variety of forested and other habitats such as light secondary forest, riparian woodland, mangroves, savanna grasslands, open farmlands with scattered trees and parks and gardens in urban areas (Forshaw, 1978; Juniper and Parr, 2003). In its natural range, P. krameri is known to cause considerable agricultural damage (Dhindsa and Saina, 1994). Due in large part to its popularity as a cage bird, it has succeeded in establishing feral populations almost worldwide, but especially in Europe (Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a). Population sizes range from only a few tens of birds to several thousands and although several populations are growing exponentially, the rate of spatial spread seems to be rather slow (Butler, 2003; Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a). In Europe, P. krameri is known to compete for nesting cavities with native hole-nesting birds (Strubbe and Matthysen, 2007; Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009b). P. krameri is included in the DAISIE list of 100 of the worst invaders in Europe (DAISIE, 2009) and is considered a pest species in Western Australia (Kirkpatrick and Marting, 2005).

Taxonomic Tree

Top of page
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •     Kingdom: Metazoa
  •         Phylum: Chordata
  •             Subphylum: Vertebrata
  •                 Class: Aves
  •                     Order: Psittaciformes
  •                         Family: Psittacidae
  •                             Genus: Psittacula
  •                                 Species: Psittacula krameri

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

Top of page

There are currently four recognized Psittacula krameri subspecies (Juniper and Parr, 2003), two of them originating from Africa (P. krameri krameri and P. krameri parvirostris ) and two from Asia (P. krameri borealis and P. krameri manillensis). In older literature and on the internet, the following names are sometimes used to describe the subspecies:

P. k. krameri: African ring-necked parakeet
P .k. parvirostris: Abyssinian ring-necked parakeet
P. k. borealis: boreal ring-necked parakeet, Neumann's ring-necked parakeet
P. k. manillensis: Indian ring-necked parakeet
 
A recent phylogenetic study (Groombridge et al., 2004) indicates that the echo parakeet (Psittacula eques; also known as P. echo) from Mauritius is more closely related to the Asiatic P. krameri subspecies than to the African subspecies, and the echo parakeet probably needs to be placed between the African and Asian subspecies. However, these results must be treated with caution as the power of this study was limited by the absence of DNA sequences for related but extinct species such as the Seychelles (Psittacula wardi) and Rodrigues parakeets (Psittacula exsul).
 
P. krameri is common in aviculture and several color mutations are known: Lutino (yellow), Cinnamon or Isabelle (light green), Blue (blue), Par Blue (blue-green), Fallow (somewhat darker than Cinnamon), Grey and Albino (Low, 1992). Both in captivity and in feral populations in the introduced range (in Düsseldorf, Germany), fertile hybrids with the Alexandrine Parakeet (Psittacula eupatria) have occurred (Krause, 2004). P. eupatria and P. krameri have similar plumage patterns and colors, but P. eupatria has a body weight more than twice that of P. krameri, and molecular phylogeny indicates that these species in fact have a very different evolutionary history and are not closely related (Groombridge et al., 2004).

Description

Top of page

This section is based on information from Forshaw (1978), Cramp (1985), Butler (2003) and Juniper and Parr (2003).

P. krameri krameri: Generally pale green; chin black and continuing black across lower cheek; rose-pink collar on hindneck, nape with some blue; tail darker green with central feathers bluish, tipped yellow-green; mantle and back pale green with olive tinge; rump and upper tail coverts slightly brighter; lesser and median upper wing coverts bright green (darker than body); greater coverts dark green; primaries and secondaries dark green with darker (almost black) margin to inner webs; underside of flight feathers grey; underwing coverts yellowish-green. Upper mandible red, tipped black, lower mandible blackish-red. Female lacks black neck and cheek, pink collar and bluish suffusion on neck and has shorter central tail feathers. Immature similar to female but bill slightly paler, iris grayish; male acquires pink collar in third year.

 
Geographical variation:
P. krameri parvirostris: Head and cheek less yellowish than nominate subspecies. Bill smaller and upper mandible bright red, less blackish towards tip.
P. krameri borealis: Larger than nominate subspecies, with wholly red upper mandible and black markings on lower mandible.
P. krameri manillensis: Larger than other races, slightly paler and yellower than borealis; lower mandible black.
 
Measurements:
 
Table 1: Wing, tail and bill measurements for the four subspecies of Psittacula krameri based on three published sources (data gathered by and taken from Butler, 2003). Values in brackets indicate the extreme ranges, except for those from Pithon (1998), where they indicate the 95% confidence intervals.
 
 
P. k. krameri
P. k. parvirostris
P. k. borealis
P.k. manillensis
author
wing male (mm)
150 (144 - 157)
*
178 ( 172 - 187)
165 ( 160 - 169)
Cramp, 1985
 
150 (144 - 157)
153 (146 - 160)
174 (170 - 175)
170 ( 162 - 180)
Forshaw, 1978
 
152 (150 - 154)
155 (149 - 160)
177 ( 176 - 178)
163 ( 160 - 165)
Pithon, 1998
wing female (mm)
148 (143 - 152)
*
173 ( 168 - 178)
158 (154 - 160)
Cramp, 1985
 
148 ( 143 - 152)
153 (146 - 160)
172 ( 170 - 175)
163 ( 153 - 167)
Forshaw, 1978
 
146 (144 - 148)
152 (124 - 180)
169 ( 167 - 171)
157 ( 150 - 163)
Pithon, 1998
tail male (mm)
231 ( 194 - 278)
*
253 ( 229 - 279)
205 ( 182 - 235)
Cramp, 1985
 
231 ( 194 - 278)
234 (215 - 246)
239 (226 - 253)
219 ( 203 - 235)
Forshaw, 1978
tail female (mm)
198 (177 - 240)
*
221 ( 204 - 238)
178 ( 164 - 188)
Cramp, 1985
 
198 (177 - 240)
196 ( 184 - 218)
220 ( 211 - 230)
193 ( 174 - 210)
Forshaw, 1978
bill male (mm)
19.6 ( 18.0 - 21.0)
*
23.8 (23.2 - 26.4)
24.2 ( 23.1 - 25.4)
Cramp, 1985
 
19.6 ( 18.0 - 21.0)
19.6 (19.0 - 21.0)
23.2 ( 22.0 - 25.0)
23.3 ( 22.0 - 25.0)
Forshaw, 1978
 
22.0 (21.8 - 22.2)
22.0 (21.0 - 22.9)
27.0 (26.6 - 27.4)
25.8 ( 25.0 - 26.4)
Pithon, 1998
 
19.8 ( 18.0 - 21.0)
*
22.6 (20.8 - 24.4)
22.5 ( 22.2 - 22.8)
Cramp, 1985
bill female (mm)
19.8 (18.0 - 21.0)
19.6 ( 19.0 - 21.0)
23.0 ( 21.0 - 24.0)
22.6 ( 21.0 - 24.0)
Forshaw, 1978
 
22.0 (21.8 - 22.2)
22.0 ( 21.0 - 22.9)
27.0 (26.6 - 27.4)
25.8 ( 25.0 - 26.4)
Pithon, 1998
 
     * no data available.
 
Table 2: A summary of the biometrics for P. krameri trapped in the UK (Butler, 2003).
 

 

 
male
female
wing (mm)
178.1 ( 169.0 - 189.0)
168.9 (162.0 - 174.0)
tail (mm)
225.8 ( 157.0 - 284.0)
188.3 ( 142.0 - 242.0)
mass (g)
142.2 ( 124.0 - 166.0)
140.4 ( 124.0 - 180)
bill (mm)
26.1 ( 23.0 - 27.6)
25.1 ( 24.0 - 26.3)

 

Distribution

Top of page

For details of distribution, see tables (and for certain European countries, the ‘History of Introduction’ section). Reports of captive parakeets in zoos are not included in the tables.

Invasiveness: Although many sources (e.g. Cramp, 1985; Pithon, 1998; Butler, 2003) speculate on the possible impacts that feral parakeet populations might have on agriculture and native birds, there is a scarcity of studies in the published literature supporting this. However, in one of the few studies that have actually investigated the possible impact of parakeets on native biota, Strubbe and Matthysen (2007, 2009b) found that, in Belgium, P. krameri competes for nesting cavities with native nuthatches (Sitta europaea). For hole-nesting birds, suitable nesting cavities are a key resource and as tree cavities are often in short supply (Newton, 1994), P. krameri will probably compete with native hole-nesters in areas where the parakeets are (or will become) abundant, but these Belgian results have not yet been confirmed in other countries. In the UK, the species can be considered as invasive as there are known reports of substantial agricultural damage (Butler, 2003).
 
Afghanistan
Most sources mention Afghanistan as part of the native distribution of P. krameri, although the country is not included in the range maps published in these publications (Forshaw, 1978; Cramp, 1985; Juniper and Parr, 2003). There are several observations of flocks of parakeets, notably in Kabul and Jalalabad (Cramp, 1985). This datasheet follows Cramp (1985), Forshaw (1974) and Birdlife International (2009) and considers P. krameri to be native in Afghanistan, but there is uncertainty whether these are truly native populations or possibly (ancient?) introductions. The species is certainly not widespread in the country.
 
China
Populations are known only in Macau and Hong Kong. Although several sources clearly mention that parakeets have been released in these areas (e.g. Forshaw, 1978), P. krameri is sometimes considered native to China (e.g. by BirdLife International, 2009). This must be a mistake and this datasheet considers the species as introduced to China.
 
China - Macau
Cramp (1985) cites Forshaw (1978): "...that they were introduced some time between 1903 and 1910."
 
China - Hong Kong
Leven and Cortlett (2004) report that flocks of up to 87 birds were recorded during the 1970s and 1980s, but that the population has declined substantially and is now restricted to a limited urban area on Hong Kong Island. The population at the time of the study consisted of < 20 birds (Leven and Cortlett, 2004).
 
Iraq
Lever (2005) mentions that P. krameri was present in Baghdad, but that the population apparently became extinct. However, BirdLife International (2009) mentions P. krameri as a breeding bird of the Al Jadriyah and Umm Al Khanazeer islands (Tigris river, south-west Baghdad).
 
Congo Democratic Republic (Zaire)
The fact that the species is considered as a protected bird suggests that it is native to (parts of) Congo, although the country is seldom included in the native range (Forshaw, 1978; Cramp, 1985; Juniper and Parr, 2003).
 
Egypt
Birdlife International (2009) mentions P. krameri as native to Egypt, but this must be a mistake as it has clearly been introduced to Egypt (Forshaw, 1978).
 
Kenya
P. krameriis present in Nairobi National Park. Forshaw (1978) cites Cunningham-Van Someren (1969), who believes that the parakeets are introduced and descend from Indian birds. Forshaw (1978) however mentions that they belong to the African subspecies P. k. krameri, and that their occurrence in Kenya might represent an eastern extension of their natural range.
According to Butler (2003), the P. krameri population in Nairobi has become extinct. BirdLife International (2009), however, lists the species as present in Kenya.
 
Mauritius
P. krameri is reported to be widespread in Mauritius, where it competes for nesting cavities with the endangered Echo parakeet (P. eques, also known as P. echo) (J. Malham, Mauritian Wildlife Foundation, Vacoas, Mauritius, personal communication, 2005)
 
Venezuela
BirdLife International mentions P. krameri as present in 2009, but this population has apparently become extinct (M. Braun, Institute of Pharmacy and Molecular Biotechnology, University of Heidelberg, Germany, personal communication, 2009).
 
Puerto Rico
Birdlife International (2009) mentions P. krameri as present in Puerto Rico, but there appear to be no other publications or even informal birding reports supporting this.
 
France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, United Kingdom
See History of Introduction.

Distribution Table

Top of page

The 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.

Continent/Country/RegionDistributionLast ReportedOriginFirst ReportedInvasiveReferenceNotes

Asia

AfghanistanPresent, few occurrencesNative Not invasive Cramp, 1985; BirdLife International, 2009
BahrainWidespreadIntroduced1953Low, 2003; Lever, 2005; BirdLife International, 2009
BangladeshWidespreadNativeJuniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
BhutanWidespreadNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
ChinaPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-Hong KongLocalisedIntroduced1903 Not invasive Leven and Corlett, 2004; BirdLife International, 2009
-MacauWidespreadIntroduced1903-1913Cramp, 1985; BirdLife International, 2009
IndiaPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-Andaman and Nicobar IslandsAbsent, formerly presentIntroduced1867Cramp, 1985Several pairs were released at Port Blair. Most of them were supposedly recaptured, but some were said to have flown off into the jungle
-Andhra PradeshWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-Arunachal PradeshWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-AssamWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-BiharWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-ChandigarhWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-Dadra and Nagar HaveliWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-DamanWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-DelhiWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-DiuWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-GoaWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-GujaratWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-HaryanaWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-Himachal PradeshWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-Indian PunjabWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-Jammu and KashmirWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-JharkhandWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-KarnatakaWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-KeralaWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-LakshadweepWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-Madhya PradeshWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-MaharashtraWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-ManipurWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-MeghalayaWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-MizoramWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-NagalandWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-OdishaWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-RajasthanWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-SikkimWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-Tamil NaduWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-TripuraWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-Uttar PradeshWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-UttarakhandWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
-West BengalWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
IranLocalisedIntroduced<1981Butler, 2003; Lever, 2005; BirdLife International, 2009
IraqLocalisedIntroduced1938Lever, 2005; BirdLife International, 2009
IsraelWidespreadIntroduced1960 Invasive Hatzofe and Yom-Tov, 2002; BirdLife International, 2009
JapanPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-HonshuLocalisedIntroduced Not invasive Eguchi and Amano, 2004; BirdLife International, 2009Locally common around Tokyo
-KyushuPresent2005IntroducedLever, 2005Miyazaki prefecture
-ShikokuPresent2005IntroducedLever, 2005Ehime prefecture
JordanLocalisedIntroduced<1996Butler, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009Amman and Al'Aqabah (introduced before 1996)
KuwaitLocalisedIntroduced1970Lever, 2005; Haavisto and Karlsson, 2007; BirdLife International, 2009In Kuwait City
LebanonPresentButler, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
MaldivesAbsent, formerly present1988Introduced1956Anderson and Baldock, 2001On Male Atoll
MyanmarWidespreadNativeJuniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
NepalWidespreadNativeJuniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
OmanLocalisedIntroduced1950Lever, 2005; BirdLife International, 2009Established in Suwaiq (introduced 1950), Dhofar (introduced 1977), Muscat (date unknown), Salalah (date unknown). Introduced but fate of the population unknown at the moment: Batah (date unknown)
PakistanWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
QatarLocalisedIntroduced1986Lever, 2005; BirdLife International, 2009Dohar (introduced 1986)
Saudi ArabiaLocalisedIntroduced1960Lever, 2005; BirdLife International, 2009Established populations in Dhahran (introduced 1960), Hijaz (date unknown), Jeddah (introduced 1972) and Riyadh (1973)
SingaporePresentIntroduced1951Cramp, 1985; BirdLife International, 2009According to Cramp (1985) the current status of this population is unclear, but BirdLife International (2009) lists them as present
Sri LankaWidespreadNative Invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
ThailandPresent2005Introduced Invasive Robson, 2005Bangkok area
TurkeyLocalisedIntroduced1976Boyla et al., 1998; BirdLife International, 2009Established populations in Istanbul (introduced 1990) and Izmir (introduced 1992). Introduced but status at the moment unclear in Adana (introduced 1996), Oren (introduced 1997), Terkos Golu (date unknown) and Ankara (introduced 1976)
United Arab EmiratesWidespreadIntroduced1970BirdLife International, 2009; Jennings, 20091500-2000 breedig pairs in Dubai-Abu Dhabi
YemenLocalisedIntroduced1947BirdLife International, 2009; Jennings, 2009Established populations in Crater (date unknown), Ma'alla (date unknown). Sanaa (introduced 1983), Shayk Uthman (date unknown). Introduced but fate of the population unclear at the moment: Aden (introduced 1947)

Africa

AlgeriaLocalised2004Introduced1988 Not invasive Bendjoudi et al., 20056 to 8 birds escaped from Hamma Trial Garden in Algiers. About 200 parakeets present in 2004. Distribution: Algiers City, Algiers Sahel and Mitidja lowlands. Currently only marginal damage to fruit crops
BeninWidespreadNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
Burkina FasoWidespreadNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
CameroonLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In northern part of the country
Cape VerdeAbsent, formerly present1909IntroducedForshaw, 1978One individual was collected on the island of Sao Tiago in 1909, but there are no further records of this species there
Central AfricaLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In northern part of the country
ChadLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In southern part of the country
Congo Democratic RepublicPresentHecketsweiler, 1990; Sibley and Monroe, 1991
Côte d'IvoireLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In northern part of the country
DjiboutiWidespreadNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
EgyptLocalisedIntroduced1901Lever, 2005; BirdLife International, 2009First occurences in Giza Zoo (Cairo), now locally common there and in parts of the Nile delta
EthiopiaLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In northern part of the country
GambiaWidespreadNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
GhanaLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In northern part of the country
GuineaWidespreadNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
Guinea-BissauWidespreadNativeJuniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
KenyaLocalisedCunningham-van Someren, 1969; Forshaw, 1978; Butler, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In Nairobi National Park
LibyaAbsent, unreliable recordIntroducedAfrican Bird Club, 2007Unconfirmed reports: 5 parakeets at Tripoli, 1 at Sabha
MaliLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In the southern part of the country
MauritaniaPresent, few occurrencesNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In the southern part of the country
MauritiusLocalisedIntroduced1886 Invasive Cramp, 1985; BirdLife International, 2009Released from an aviary in Grand Port
MoroccoPresent2004IntroducedBergier et al., 2009One pair in a public garden at Melilla
NigerLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In the southern part of the country
NigeriaLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In northern part of the country
SenegalWidespreadNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
SeychellesLocalised2003Introducedmid 1970sButler, 2003+/- 30 birds at Mahe Island
SomaliaPresent, few occurrencesNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003Vagrant in Somalia
South AfricaLocalisedIntroducedRowan, 1983; Newman, 2002; Roche and Bedford-Shaw, 2008
Spain
-Canary IslandsPresent2008Introduced1983Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009aPresent on Tenerife (date unknown), Gran Canaria (introduced 1983), Fuerteventura (date unknown)
SudanWidespreadNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009Not present in northern part of country
TanzaniaAbsent, formerly presentBaker, 1990Failed introductions
-ZanzibarWidespreadIntroducedCramp, 1985Present already in 1936 but introduction date unknown. No recent reports known.
TogoWidespreadNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009
UgandaLocalisedNative Not invasive Juniper and Parr, 2003; BirdLife International, 2009In western part of the country

North America

USAPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-AlabamaPresent2003IntroducedFlorida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 2003Observed flying free on Dauphin Island
-CaliforniaLocalisedIntroducedHardy, 1964; Hardy, 1973; Hardy, 1973; Mabb, 1997; Mabb, 2002; City of Bakersfield, 2009
-FloridaLocalisedIntroducedOwre, 1973; Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 2003; Lever, 2005; Lever, 2005
-HawaiiPresentIntroducedSibley and Monroe, 1991; Sheehey and Mansfield, 2009
-LouisianaPresent2002IntroducedSheehey and Mansfield, 2009Small population in Metarie, LA
-New YorkAbsent, formerly presentIntroducedBull, 1973; Roscoe et al., 1976; Lever, 1987
-TexasPresent2002Sheehey and Mansfield, 2009Small population at San Antonio, TX
-VirginiaPresent1989Introduced1973Forshaw, 1978Present at Hampton, Virginia

Central America and Caribbean

CubaPresent2000IntroducedKirwan, 2000Observation of a pair of rose-ringed parakeets in Cuba
Puerto RicoAbsent, formerly present1990IntroducedPerez-Riviera, 20013 rose-ringed parakeets near Lago Cidra (east-central Puerto Rico)

South America

VenezuelaAbsent, formerly presentIntroducedM. Braun, Inst. of Pharmacy and Molecular Biotech., Univ. of Heidelberg, Germany, pers. comm., 2009; Nebot, 1999; BirdLife International, 2009Parque del Este population has become extinct

Europe

AustriaAbsent, formerly presentIntroduced1970Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009aVienna (introduced 1970, extinct), Innsbruck (introduced 1978, extinct)
BelgiumLocalisedIntroduced1966 Invasive Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a; BirdLife International, 2009
CroatiaAbsent, formerly presentIntroduced1981Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009aIntroduced to Dubrovnik
DenmarkPresent2006IntroducedSkriver, 2006Possible breeding in Copenhagen
FranceLocalised2008Introduced1970Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a
GermanyLocalisedIntroduced1967Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a; BirdLife International, 2009
GreeceLocalised2008Introducedbefore 1996Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009aEstablished in Crete (date unknown), Agina Island (introduced 1996), Athens (introduced 1995), Leros Island (introduced 1996), Patra (introduced before 1996), Dodecanese Islands (date unknown), Rhodes (date unknown). Extinct populations on Paros Island (date unknown)
ItalyLocalisedIntroduced1974Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a; BirdLife International, 2009
NetherlandsLocalisedIntroduced1968Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a; BirdLife International, 2009
PortugalLocalisedIntroduced1980Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a; BirdLife International, 2009
-AzoresPresent2008IntroducedStrubbe and Matthysen, 2009a
SloveniaPresentIntroducedStrubbe and Matthysen, 2009a; BirdLife International, 2009
SpainLocalisedIntroduced1976Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a; BirdLife International, 2009
-Balearic IslandsPresent2008IntroducedStrubbe and Matthysen, 2009aIntroduced to Ibiza, but fate of the population unclear at the moment. Established on Mallorca (date unknown)
SwitzerlandAbsent, formerly presentIntroduced1983Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009aExtinct in Ligornetto (1985), Mendrisio (1983) and Monthey (1991)
UKWidespread2008Introduced1855 Invasive Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a

Oceania

AustraliaPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-Western AustraliaPresent2005Kirkpatrick and Marting, 2005

History of Introduction and Spread

Top of page

For the majority of the introduction events, there is no direct information available concerning the mode or history of the introduction. However, P. krameri is only kept and bred as a pet, and it is unlikely that it has any other uses. Thus, most introductions originate from escapees, or deliberate releases by people who got tired of their noisy pet.

In France, P. krameri has become established in Aix-en-Provence (introduced 1999), Marseille (introduced 1996), Ares, Nancy (introduced 2005), Villeneuve-d'Asque (introduced 2002), Frejus (introduced 1999), La Garde (introduced 2001), L'Isle-sur-Sorgues (introduced 2002), Wissous (introduced 1984), Drancy (introduced 1990), Nogent-sur-Marne (introduced 1993), Jagny-sous-Bois (introduced 1970), Lille (introduced 1990) and Strasbourg (introduced 1999). There were populations, now extinct, in La Roche de Glun (introduced 1983) and Saint-Gilles (introduced 1990). The species has been introduced but the fate of the population is unclear at the moment in Cannes (introduced 2003), Sigean (introduced 2003), Montpellier (introduced 2007) and Mercues (introduced 2007) (Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a).

In Germany it has become established in Bonn (introduced 1979), Düsseldorf (introduced 1983), Frankenthal (introduced 1985), Heidelberg (introduced 1972), Koln (introduced 1967), Neckarhausen (introduced 1973) and Wiesbaden-Mainz (introduced 1974). There were populations, now extinct, in Berlin (introduced 1991), Beverungen (introduced 1980), Bruhl (introduced 1975), Dortmund (introduced 1988), Gonsbachtal (introduced 1970), Hamburg (introduced 1984), Hannover (introduced 1999), Kassel (introduced 1994), München (introduced 1998) and Oberhausen (introduced 1998). The species has been introduced but the fate of the population is unclear at the moment in Minden (introduced 2000) (Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a).

In Italy it has become established in Firenze (introduced 1986), Bologna (introduced 1999), Casalbuttano (introduced 1984), Catania (introduced 1990), Genoa (introduced 1977), Messina (introduced after 2000), Naples (introduced 1994), Palermo (introduced 1990), prov. di Imperia (date and exact locality unknown), prov. di Lecce (date and exact locality unknown), Rome (introduced 2002), Syracuse (1990), Triestino (date unknown), Udine (introduced 1984), Verbania (introduced 1985). There were populations, now extinct, in Caorle (introduced 1983), Muggia (introduced 1974), Rome (introduced 1977) and Vailate (introduced 1984). The species has been introduced but the fate of the population is unclear at the moment in Alvanio (introduced 2002) and San Liberato (introduced 2000) (Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a).

In the Netherlands it has become established in Aerdenhout (introduced 1977), Amsterdam (introduced 1973), Den Haag (introduced 1968) and Rotterdam (introduced 1973). There were populations, now extinct, in Apeldoorn (introduced 1993), Groede (introduced 1978), Maarn (introduced 1978 and 1990), Prosperpolder (introduced 1975), Terneuzen (introduced 1978 and 1986), Vogelwaarde (1978) and Westerbork (1989)(Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a).

In Spain it has become established in Barcelona (1976), Madrid (date unknown), Malaga (introduced 1985), Sevilla (date unknown), Valencia (date unknown), Castellon (date unknown), Alicante (date unknown), Gijón (date unknown) and San Roque (date unknown). There was a population, now extinct, in Murcia (date unknown). The species has been introduced but the fate of the population is unclear in Santander (introduced 2006), Almeria (date unknown), Granada (date unknown), Albacete (date unknown), Ciudad Real (date unknown), Toledo (date unknown), La Rioja (date unknown), Gipuzkoa (date unknown), Llanes (date unknown) and Zaragoza (date unknown) (Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a).

In the United Kingdom P. krameri has spread throughout most of south-east England. Populations have become established in the Marlow area (introduced 1972), Studland (introduced late 1980s), Brighton (introduced 1975), Margate (introduced 1972), Claygate-Esher (introduced 1970), and Croydon (introduced 1969). There were failed introductions in Gresford (introduced 1979), Herstmonceux (introduced 1975), Epping Forest (introduced 1930), Higham Parks – Woodford Green (introduced 1971), Thundersley (introduced 1974 or 1975), Stockport (introduced 1974), Southfleet (introduced 1969), Liverpool (introduced 1980), Northrepps (introduced 1855), Edinburgh (introduced before 2005), Avon (introduced 1997), Chichester (introduced 1974), West Yorkshire (introduced 1974), Kensington Gardens (London, introduced 1925) and Lilford (introduced 1931).

Introductions

Top of page
Introduced toIntroduced fromYearReasonIntroduced byEstablished in wild throughReferencesNotes
Natural reproductionContinuous restocking
Belgium   Intentional release (pathway cause)Devillers et al. (1988) Loacation: Adinkerke. Several ring-necked parakeets released by Meli Zoo
Belgium   Intentional release (pathway cause) Yes Devillers et al. (1988) Location: Brussels. 40 ring-necked parakeets released by Meli Zoo
Germany   Intentional release (pathway cause) Yes Kahl-Dunkel and Werner (2002) Location: Köln. A group of parakeets were released by Köln Zoo. This is however disputed; some sources mention that a bird trader released 20-30 parakeets
Israel Egypt   Self-propelled (pathway cause) Yes Hatzofe and Yom-Tov (2002) Although Dvir (1980) mentions the introduction of parakeets into Israel, Hatzofe and Yom-Tov (2002) think it might also be possible that they spread to Israel from the nearby feral populations in Egypt
Mauritius   Escape from confinement or garden escape (pathway cause) Yes Cramp (1985) Escape from aviary
Turkey 1997 Pet trade (pathway cause) Yes Boyla et al. (1998) 150 escaped at Istanbul airport
UK  1868 Acclimatization societies (pathway cause) No Buxton (1868) Lord Buxton tried to acclimatize ring-necked parakeets to his Northrepps home
UK 1970s Intentional release (pathway cause) Yes Cramp (1985) Aviculturalist with a free flying homing colony of parakeets. This was quite common in the 1970s in the UK
USA 1997 Escape from confinement or garden escape (pathway cause) Yes City of Bakersfield (2009) 2 breeding pairs escaped after roof of aviary was torn off during a storm

Risk of Introduction

Top of page

The pet trade is the only pathway by which P. krameri is likely to establish feral populations. It can either:

     a) escape during transport
     b) escape from aviaries or cages/be released by pet owners
     c) spread from currently established populations
 
Escape during transport can lead to the establishment of feral populations. For example, Jennings (in prep.) suggests that most of the Arabian populations originate from parakeets that escaped during transport, as the Arabian peninsula is an important stop for ships coming from the Indian region. Although a feral parakeet population was already present in Istanbul, Turkey, in 1990, the escape of about 150 parakeets at Istanbul airport in 1997 doubtless increased the survival prospects of the Istanbul population (Boyla et al., 1998). Even today, large numbers of wild-caught P. krameri are being transported for the pet trade (Low 2003; UNEP-WCMC, 2010), and this trade remains a risk. However, the European Union recently decided to ban the wild bird trade permanently, and at least in Europe, escape during transport might be eliminated as a risk of introduction.
 
Escape from aviaries and/or release by pet owners are the most important factors promoting the establishment of new feral populations. Although in the majority of cases the exact origin of a feral population is unknown, P. krameri is one of the most popular cage birds (Low, 1992), and there is little doubt that repeated releases/escapes have contributed to its widespread nonnative distribution (Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009a). In the 1970s, there were a number of instances where captive animal facilities such as zoos released P. krameri in order to increase visitor numbers, although increased knowledge about invasive alien species makes this less likely to happen nowadays. However, as recently as 2005, a zoo in the Netherlands repeatedly released monk parakeets Myiopsitta monachus, but recaptured the birds after complaints about damage to fruit and ornamental trees. Currently, the widespread occurrence of P. krameri in private aviaries is the largest risk for the establishment of new feral populations.
 
Spread from currently established populations: In Europe alone, there are at least 65 established P. krameri populations, with population sizes up to the thousands. A comparison of breeding bird atlases from the 1960s to the present day shows that established populations are increasing their range in (at least) the UK, Germany (mainly the Rhine Valley), the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain (D. Strubbe, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium, unpublished data). In Belgium, Strubbe and Matthysen (2009c) used ecological niche modeling methods to assess the amount of suitable habitat for P. krameri, and found that there is ample habitat available for it to spread into. Thus, future population growth and spatial spread are to be expected.
 
P. krameri is included in the DAISIE list of 100 of the worst invaders in Europe, but it is only in Western Australia that it is considered a pest species (Kirkpatrick and Marting, 2005; DAISIE, 2009).

Habitat

Top of page

P. krameri is a common, medium-sized (± 40 cm) bird found in a variety of forested and other habitats such as light secondary forest, riparian woodland, mangroves, savanna grasslands, open farmlands with scattered trees and parks and gardens in urban areas (Forshaw, 1978; Juniper and Parr, 2003).

Habitat List

Top of page
CategoryHabitatPresenceStatus
Littoral
Mangroves Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Terrestrial-managed
Cultivated / agricultural land Principal habitat Harmful (pest or invasive)
Cultivated / agricultural land Principal habitat Natural
Disturbed areas Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Managed forests, plantations and orchards Principal habitat Harmful (pest or invasive)
Managed forests, plantations and orchards Principal habitat Natural
Urban / peri-urban areas Principal habitat Natural
Terrestrial-natural/semi-natural
Natural forests Principal habitat Natural

Hosts/Species Affected

Top of page

Although in Africa there are only a few reports of damage to agriculture (e.g. Manikowski and Da Camara-Smeets, 1978), in much of its Asiatic range, P. krameri is viewed by farmers as the most serious local avian pest, as it inflicts heavy damage on agricultural crops and stored grains. It has been found to forage on the following agricultural crops: maize (Zea mays), mustard (Brassica juncea), pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum), rice (Oryza sativa), sunflower (Helianthus annuus), almonds (Prunus dulcis), ber (Ziziphus mauritiana), date palm (Phoenix dactylifera), guava (Psidium sp.), peach (Prunus persica), papaya (Carica papaya), sorghum (Sorghum sp.), sesame (Sesamum indicum), wheat (Triticum sp.), grapes (Vitis sp), jambolana (Syzygium cumini), barley (Hordeum vulgare) and pomegranates (Punica granatum) (Brooks et al., 1988; Dhindsa and Saina, 1994 and references therein). Khan et al. (2004) mention that, in its native Asian range, P. krameri has benefited from agricultural development. Whereas much of the Central Punjab region was originally covered by tropical thorn forest, the introduction of irrigation and subsequent intensification of agriculture, accompanied by the introduction of larger trees not native to the area, have provided food and nesting opportunities. In the invaded range, there is currently only one serious report of damage to vineyards in the UK (Butler, 2003).

Host Plants and Other Plants Affected

Top of page
Plant nameFamilyContext
Elaeis guineensis (African oil palm)ArecaceaeOther

Growth Stages

Top of page Fruiting stage

List of Symptoms/Signs

Top of page
SignLife StagesType
Fruit / external feeding

Biology and Ecology

Top of page

Reproductive biology

P. krameri attains maturity at three years of age, although subadult males (younger than 3 years) have been observed breeding in the UK (Butler, 2003) and Belgium (D. Strubbe, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium, unpublished data). Shwartz et al. (2009) summarized all available knowledge on P. krameri reproductive biology (Table 3). Their results show that, while clutch size (i.e. number of eggs laid per nest) did not differ between native (India) and invaded ranges (the UK and Israel), there were significant differences in reproductive success, as breeding success in the UK was significantly lower than in Israel or (native) India. In India, predation was the main factor responsible for breeding failure; there was almost no predation in the invaded ranges. In the UK, however, breeding success was lower because of a high rate of egg infertility (i.e. eggs that do not hatch), probably caused by the lower temperatures compared to Israel or India (Shwartz et al., 2009).
 
Table 3: Reproductive success parameters (means ± standard error) of P. krameri in the native range (India) and in two non-native regions (the UK and Israel)
 

 
India
UK
Israel
Clutch size
3.83 ± 0.07
3.75 ± 0.13
4.05 ± 0.18
number of nestlings
3.11 ± 0.20
1.87 ± 0.15
3.35 ± 0.23
number of fledglings
2.59 ± 0.24
1.80 ± 0.12
2.25 ± 0.20
 
 
 
 

 
Physiology and phenology
 
The breeding season varies from August to November in Africa and from December to May in India. In the UK and Israel, it varies from February to May (in the UK first egg laid on 27 February, in Israel 25 February, Shwartz et al., 2009). Shwartz et al. (2009) found that the distribution of laying dates in the UK had a heavier tail compared to Israel, suggesting that some of the UK parakeets breed later than the bulk of the population and are thus undergoing an adaptation process.
 
Nutrition
 
P. krameri forages on a variety of cereals, weed and tree seeds, fruit, flowers and nectar, but it also readily makes use of food provided at bird feeders (e.g. peanuts). For a detailed list of plant species that the species is known to forage on, see Butler (2003) and Franz (2009).
 
Environmental requirements
 
See Environmental Requirements table for further information.
 
The approximate latitudinal range for native populations, based on digitized versions of the parakeet range maps presented in Juniper and Parr (2003), is from 4.5 to 17.5 degrees north in Africa, and from 6.5 to 33.5 degrees north in Asia. Introduced populations are found considerably further north.
 
Air temperature and precipitation: This information was obtained by mapping records of occurrence of the species and using ArcGIS 9.3 to extract the required data from the WORLDCLIM dataset (Hijmans et al., 2005).
 
Absolute minimum temperature (°C): Michael Braun (Institute for Pharmacy and Molecular Biotechnology, University of Heidelberg, Germany, personal communication, 2009) reports that in 2005, a male P. krameri was able to survive for a prolonged time in the German village of Furth im Wald, where the temperature was about -15.0 °C for several weeks. This parakeet had, however, easy access to food provided at bird feeders.
 
Rainfall regime and dry season duration: For the African and Asiatic native ranges, monthly precipitation data was extracted from the WORLDCLIM dataset. The raw data is given below in Table 4.
 
Table 4. Mean monthly precipitation over the whole of the native ranges (obtained by digitizing the range maps in Juniper and Parr (2003) and extracting data from the WORLDCLIM dataset).
 

 
Africa
Asia
January
1.96
16.54
February
4.64
13.4
March
14.88
20.22
April
31.25
28.44
May
62.15
58.8
June
95.72
157.61
July
152.09
287.6
August
179.46
262.77
September
124.37
178.2
October
51
84.43
November
8.28
27.79
December
2.38
15.61

Climate

Top of page
ClimateStatusDescriptionRemark
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]))
As - Tropical savanna climate with dry summer Tolerated < 60mm precipitation driest month (in summer) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25])
Aw - Tropical wet and dry savanna climate Preferred < 60mm precipitation driest month (in winter) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25])
BS - Steppe climate Preferred > 430mm and < 860mm annual precipitation
BW - Desert climate Tolerated < 430mm annual precipitation
Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year Tolerated Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year
Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer Preferred Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers
Cw - Warm temperate climate with dry winter Preferred Warm temperate climate with dry winter (Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry winters)
Dw - Continental climate with dry winter Tolerated Continental climate with dry winter (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, dry winters)

Air Temperature

Top of page
Parameter Lower limit Upper limit
Absolute minimum temperature (ºC) -15
Mean annual temperature (ºC) 8.3 29.7
Mean maximum temperature of hottest month (ºC) 20.2 43
Mean minimum temperature of coldest month (ºC) -2.8 22.7

Rainfall

Top of page
ParameterLower limitUpper limitDescription
Mean annual rainfall54377mm; lower/upper limits

Rainfall Regime

Top of page Summer

Natural enemies

Top of page
Natural enemyTypeLife stagesSpecificityReferencesBiological control inBiological control on
Accipiter gentilis Predator All Stages not specific
Accipiter nisus Predator All Stages not specific
Buteo buteo Predator All Stages not specific
Falco peregrinus Predator All Stages not specific
Falco subbuteo Predator All Stages not specific
Falco tinnunculus Predator All Stages not specific
Milvus milvus Predator All Stages not specific
Sciurus carolinensis Predator Juvenile not specific

Notes on Natural Enemies

Top of page

In its native range, P. krameri can suffer heavily from predation by crows, snakes and lizards (Varanus) and several birds of prey, although the exact identity of these natural enemy species is largely unknown (Lamba, 1996; Franz, 2006; Shwartz et al., 2009). Note that the studies of Shwartz et al. (2009) and Franz (2006) relate to Asia, as there is no (published) information on natural enemies in Africa. As far the author is aware, none of the known natural predators of P. krameri have been introduced to areas where the species is non-native. In the introduced range (Europe), there are anecdotal reports of nests being robbed by grey squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), or parakeets being preyed upon by sparrowhawks (Accipiter nisus), northern goshawks (Accipiter gentilis), kestrels (Falco tinnunculus), hobbies (F. subbuteo), peregrine falcons (F. peregrinus) red kites (Milvus milvus) and buzzards (Buteo buteo) (Butler, 2003; Franz, 2006). However, at least currently, this predation pressure does not seem large enough to cause a significant reduction in population growth (Shwartz et al., 2009).

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Top of page

The pet trade is the only pathway by which P. krameri is likely to establish feral populations. It can either: a) escape during transport; b) escape from aviaries or cages/be released by pet owners; or c) spread from currently established populations.

There is little information on dispersal distances of the species. Distances flown daily between roost and feeding sites have been reported up to 15 km (Kahl-Dunkel and Werner, 2002).
 
For more detail, see the ‘risk of introduction’ section.

Impact Summary

Top of page
CategoryImpact
Cultural/amenity Positive and negative
Economic/livelihood Negative
Environment (generally) Negative
Human health Negative

Economic Impact

Top of page

As outlined under ‘invasiveness’ in the Distribution section, in its Asiatic range, P. krameri is considered the worst avian agricultural pest (Cramp, 1985; Dhindsa and Saina, 1994). However, in the introduced ranges, fears for agricultural damage have, so far at least, failed to materialize, and the only serious claim about parakeet damage comes from a British vineyard, where the species is claimed to reduce the annual productivity from about 5000 bottles of wine to 3000 (Butler, 2003). For more detail on the impact on crops, see ‘Hosts/species affected’ in the ‘Biology and Ecology’ section.

Environmental Impact

Top of page

Impact on biodiversity

Strubbe and Matthysen (2007, 2009b) examined the relationship between P. krameri numbers and the abundance of several common native hole-nesting birds. Correlative as well as experimental evidence indicates that the parakeets compete for nesting cavities with native nuthatches (Sitta europaea L.), but no interactions were found with other cavity-nesters. Strubbe et al. (2010) used species distribution modeling techniques to predict the potential distribution and abundance of P. krameri in Belgium and found that it could potentially become one of the most common cavity-nesters in Belgium. The total impact on nuthatches, however, will be only moderate (a maximum of one third of the nuthatch population is at risk), which probably follows from the fact that nuthatches are smaller than parakeets and can, as a last resort, use cavities that are too small for parakeets to enter.
 
Newson et al. (2011) found no evidence for a significant impact on cavity-nesting birds in the UK, but could not rule out the possibility of competitive exclusion at a minority of sites where availability of nest cavities was limiting; this could become important if the numbers and range of the parakeets continue to increase.

Threatened Species

Top of page
Threatened SpeciesConservation StatusWhere ThreatenedMechanismReferencesNotes
Sitta europaea (nuthatch)LC (IUCN red list: Least concern) LC (IUCN red list: Least concern)BelgiumCompetition - monopolizing resourcesStrubbe and Matthysen, 2007; Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009b

Social Impact

Top of page

Positive: the general attitude of the public towards P. krameri is positive. A lot of people find that the parakeets "bring colour to the city", or like observing them at backyard bird feeders.

Negative: Some people, especially in areas where P. krameri has become abundant, express fear for negative impacts on native birds, or complain about damage to ornamental and/or fruit trees.
 
Negative: In 1997 and 1998, H9N2 influenza A viruses were isolated from the respiratory organs of Indian ring-necked parakeets (Psittacula krameri manillensis) that had been imported from Pakistan to Japan (Mase et al., 2001). Thus, P. krameri could potentially be infected with influenza A viruses and transmit these to humans. Psittaciformes in general are also sensitive to the Newcastle disease and psittacosis (caused by Chlamydophila psittaci) (Kaleta et al., 2007).

Risk and Impact Factors

Top of page Invasiveness
  • Invasive in its native range
  • Proved invasive outside its native range
  • Has a broad native range
  • Abundant in its native range
  • Highly adaptable to different environments
  • Is a habitat generalist
  • Pioneering in disturbed areas
  • Highly mobile locally
  • Benefits from human association (i.e. it is a human commensal)
  • Has high reproductive potential
  • Gregarious
Impact outcomes
  • Negatively impacts agriculture
  • Threat to/ loss of native species
Impact mechanisms
  • Competition - monopolizing resources
  • Pest and disease transmission
  • Interaction with other invasive species
  • Rapid growth
Likelihood of entry/control
  • Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
  • Highly likely to be transported internationally illegally

Uses

Top of page

Economic value

As noted in other sections, P. krameri is a very popular cage bird.

Uses List

Top of page

General

  • Botanical garden/zoo
  • Pet/aquarium trade

Detection and Inspection

Top of page

P. krameri is easily recognizable.

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

Top of page

P. krameri is distinguished from all congeners by the combination of green or green-bluish head, pale grass-green body plumage, absence of maroon shoulder patches and black and pink collar markings (Juniper and Parr, 2003). Despite these differences, a less experienced observer might confuse P. krameri with P. eupatria, as the two species co-occur in several cities. P. eupatria, however, is much larger (51 – 58 cm), has a broad black stripe across the lower cheek patch and has a conspicuous dark purple-red patch on the wing shoulder (Juniper and Parr, 2003).

Prevention and Control

Top of page

Rapid response

As is the case for all biological invasions, a rapid response increases the chances of success of any eradication or control program. When groups of P. krameri are first observed, a rapid response is recommended: the birds should be caught as fast as possible to prevent the establishment of a rapid-growing and spreading population.
 
Public awareness
 
People should be better informed about the possible adverse effects of invasive alien species. For charismatic vertebrate species such as P. krameri this is more difficult, as a lot of people like observing them in gardens and (city) parks.
 
Eradication
 
Eradication is feasible when populations are small, but difficult when they are large and widespread. P. krameri is gregarious and gathers each night at several immense roost sites (Cramp, 1985; Juniper and Parr, 2003). This might be a chance to eliminate large groups of parakeets at once, however care must be taken, as disturbing the roost sites could cause to the parakeets to abandon them, and the population could fall apart into a larger number of smaller roost sites scattered throughout the region.
 
Containment/zoning
 
Given the high mobility of these birds, this is not an option.
 
Control
 
Cultural control and sanitary measures
P. krameri benefits greatly from food offered by humans (Pithon, 1998; Butler, 2003) and reducing the amount of anthropogenic food available might lead to lower abundance in cities. However, given the immense popularity of bird feeding (Robb et al., 2008) this is difficult to achieve.
 
Physical/mechanical control
Catching parakeets at roost sites could be a possibility (but see above under 'Eradication'). Hunting is much more difficult as the bulk of the parakeet populations occur in densely populated suburban and suburban areas (Pithon, 1998; Butler, 2003; Strubbe and Matthysen, 2009c).
 
Chemical control
In order to reduce agricultural damage in the native range, several chemicals have been tried but none have achieved satisfactory results (see Brooks et al., 1988 and references therein).

Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs

Top of page

Competition: Evidence for competition between P. krameri and native hole-nesting species is currently only available for Belgium, which is also the only country where interactions with native birds have been studied in detail, and there is a need for similar studies in other regions in order to confirm the results of Strubbe and Matthysen (2007, 2009b).

P. krameridistribution and possible effects on agriculture: Strubbe and Matthysen (2009c) and Strubbe et al. (2010) showed that in Belgium, there is ample habitat for the species to spread into and that it could become one of the most abundant cavity-nesters in the region. There is a need for similar predictive models of distribution and abundance in other regions where it is currently present. Based on the outcome of these models, future risk for agriculture could be assessed, for example by overlaying the predicted distribution with maps of crops known to be preferred by the species.

References

Top of page

African Bird Club, 2007. African Bird Club news. African Bird Club news. unpaginated. http://www.africanbirdclub.org/countries/Libya/news.html

Aliyev J, 2004. Chapter 6. Existing measures and programmes for biodiversity conservation. In: Country study on biodiversity of the Republic of Azerbaijan. First national report to the convention on biological diversity [ed. by Aliyev J]. Baku, Azerbaijan: Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences, 136 pp.

Anderson RC; Baldock M, 2001. New records of birds from the Maldives, with notes on other species. Forktail, 17:67-73.

Baker NE, 1990. Three deletions from the avifauna of Tanzania. Scopus, 14:34-35.

Bendjoudi D; Voisin JF; Doumandji S; Baziz B, 2005. [English title not available]. (Installation de la perruche à collier Psittacula krameri (Aves, Psittacidae) dans l'algerois et premières données sur son écologie trophique dans cette région.) Alauda, 73(3):329-334.

Bergier P; Franchimont J; Thevenot M, 2009. Rare birds in Morocco: report of the Moroccan Rare Birds Committee (2004-2006). ABC Bulletin, 16(1):23-36.

BirdLife International, 2009. Species factsheet: Psittacula krameri. unpaginated. http://www.birdlife.org

Boyla K; Aydemir G; Eken G, 1998. The status and distribution of ring-necked parakeet Psittacula krameri in Turkey. Turna, 1(1):24-27.

Brooks JE; Hussain I; Ahmad E, 1988. A partial research bibliography of the rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri). Islamabad, Pakistan: National Agricultural Research Centre, 16 pp. [Technical Report No. 15.]

Bull J, 1973. Exotic birds in the New York City area - Part I. Wilson Bulletin, 85(4):505.

Butler CJ, 2003. Population biology of the introduced rose-ringed parakeet Psittacula krameri in the UK. Oxford, UK: University of Oxford, unpaginated.

Buxton C, 1868. Acclimatization of parrots at Northrepps Hall. The Annals and Magazine of Natural History.

City of Bakersfield, 2009. Beale Park. Bakersfield, California, USA: City of Bakersfield, unpaginated. http://www.ci.bakersfield.ca.us/recreation/Parks/beale.htm

Cramp S, 1985. Birds of the Western Palearctic: handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. Vol. 4: Terns to woodpeckers. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 960 pp.

Cunningham-van Someren GR, 1969. Escapes of Psittacula krameri and Agapornis spp. breeding in Kenya. Bull. Br. Orn. Club, 89:137-139.

DAISIE, 2009. Handbook of alien species in Europe. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 400 pp.

Devillers P; Roggeman W; Tricot J; Marmol P; Kerwijn C; Anselin A, 1988. Atlas van de Belgische Broedvogels. Brussels, Belgium: Koninklijk Belgisch Instituut voor Natuurwetenschappen, 395 pp.

Dhindsa MS; Saina HK, 1994. Agricultural ornithology: an Indian perspective. Journal of Biosciences, 19(4):391-402.

Dvir E, 1988. Far from the cages - ring-necked parakeets (Psittacula krameri) are settling in our area. Torgos, 7:57-67.

Eguchi K; Amano HE, 2004. Invasive birds in Japan. Global Environmental Research, 8(1):29-39.

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 2003. Florida's breeding bird atlas: a collaborative study of Florida's birdlife. Tallahassee, Florida, USA. unpaginated. http://myfwc.com/bba

Forshaw JM, 1978. Parrots of the world, 2nd edn., UK: David and Charles, 616 pp.

Franz D, 2006. European outdoor parrots as prey of raptors. (Europaische Freilandpapageien als Beute von Greifvogeln.) Papageien, 10:386-393.

Franz D, 2009. [Parrots at the door - ring-necked parakeets in Wiesbaden]. (Papageien vor der Haustür - Halsbandsittiche in Wiesbaden.) unpaginated. http://www.papageien.org/df/

Groombridge JJ; Jones CG; Nichols RA; Carlton M; Bruford MW, 2004. Molecular phylogeny and morphological change in the Psittacula parakeets. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 31(1):96-108.

Haavisto S; Karlsson S, 2007. Kuwait bird trip report March 19th-31st, 2007. unpaginated. http://www.alsirhan.com/Kuwait_bird_trip_report_2007%20Swedish%20Group%20by%20Seppo%20Haavisto%20&%20Sven%20Karlsson.pdf

Hardy JW, 1964. Ringed parakeets nesting in Los Angeles, California. The Condor, 66:445-447.

Hardy JW, 1973. Feral exotic birds in Southern California. The Wilson Bulletin, 85(4):506-512.

Hatzofe O; Yom-Tov Y, 2002. Global warming and recent changes in Israel's avifauna. Israel Journal of Zoology, 48:351-357.

Hecketsweiler P, 1990. La conservation des ecosystèmes forestiers du Congo (Conservation of forest ecosystems in Congo.). Gland, Switzerland: UICN - L'Alliance Mondiale pour la Nature, vi + 187 pp.

Hijmans RJ; Cameron SE; Parra JL; Jones PG; Jarvis A, 2005. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology, 25(15):1965-1978.

Jennings MC, 2009. Atlas of the breeding birds of Arabia. unpaginated. http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/arabian.birds/

Juniper T; Parr M, 2003. Parrots - a guide to the parrots of the world. London, UK: Christopher Helm Publishers Ltd., 584 pp.

Kahl-Dunkel A; Werner R, 2002. Winter distribution of the ring-necked parakeet Psittacula krameri in Cologne. (Winterverbreitung des Halsbandsittichs Psittacula krameri in Köln.) Die Vogelwelt, 123(1):17-20.

Kaleta EF; Blanco Peña KM; Yilmaz A; Redmann T; Hofheinz S, 2007. Avian influenza A viruses in birds of the order Psittaciformes: reports on virus isolations, transmission experiments and vaccinations and initial studies on innocuity and efficacy of oseltamivir in ovo. Deutsche Tierärztliche Wochenschrift, 114(7):260-267. http://www.schaper-verlag.de

Khan HA; Beg MA; Khan AA, 2004. Breeding habits of the rose-ringed parakeet Psittacula krameri in the cultivations of central Punjab. Pakistan Journal of Zoology, 36(2):133-138.

Kirkpatrick W; Marting G, 2005. Indian ringneck parakeet. Pestnote, 3:1-2.

Kirwan GM, 2000. Rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri) recored in the West Indies. El Pitirre, 13:42.

Krause T, 2004. [English title not available]. (F1- und F2- Hybriden zwischen Alexandersittich Psittacula eupatria und Halsbandsittich P. krameri im Volksgarten in Düsseldorf.) Charadrius, 10(1):7-12.

Lamba BS, 1996. Nidification of some common Indian birds: 10. The rose-ringed parakeet, Psittacula krameri scopoli. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 19:77-85.

Lee KS; Lau MWN; Chan BPL, 2004. Wild animal trade monitoring at selected markets in Guangzhou and Shenzhen, South China, 2000-2003. Hong Kong, China: Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden, 40 pp.

Leven MR; Corlett RT, 2004. Invasive birds in Hong Kong, China. Ornithological Science, 3(1):43-55.

Lever C, 1987. Ring-necked parakeet (Psittacula krameri). In: Naturalized Birds of the World [ed. by Lever C]. London, UK: Longman Scientific and Technical, 261-268.

Lever C, 2005. Rose-ringed parakeet (ring-necked parakeet) Psittacula krameri. In: Naturalized Birds of the World [ed. by Lever C]. London, UK: T and AD Poyser, 124-130.

Li W; Wang H, 1999. Wildlife trade in Yunnan Province, China, at the border with Vietnam. TRAFFIC Bulletin, 18(1):21-30.

Low R, 1992. Parrots. Their breeding and care. London, UK: Blandford, 432 pp.

Low R, 2003. The worldwide trade in wild-caught parrots. In: Proceedings of the International Aviculturists Society [ed. by Porter R]. Memphis, USA: International Aviculturists Society, unpaginated.

Mabb KT, 1997. Nesting behavior of Amazona parrots and rose-ringed parakeets in the San Gabriel Valley, California. Western Birds, 28:209-217.

Mabb KT, 2002. Naturalized (wild) parrots in California: a current assessment. In: Symposium Proceedings of the Gabriel Foundation 2002. Feb 7-10, San Diego, California, USA. unpaginated.

Manikowski S; Camara-Smeets M da, 1978. Estimating bird damage to sorghum and millet in Chad. Journal of Wildlife Management, 43(2):540-544.

Mase M; Imada T; Sanada Y; Etoh M; Sanada N; Tsukamoto K; Kawaoka Y; Yamaguchi S, 2001. Imported parakeets harbor H9N2 influenza A viruses that are genetically closely related to those transmitted to humans in Hong Kong. Journal of Virology, 75(7):3490-3494.

Nebot JC, 1999. First report of the rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri) in Venezuela and preliminary observations on its behavior. Ornitologia Neotropical, 10:115-117.

Newman K, 2002. Newman's birds of Southern Africa. London, UK: New Holland, 528 pp.

Newson SE; Johnston A; Parrott D; Leech DI, 2011. Evaluating the population-level impact of an invasive species, Ring-necked Parakeet Psittacula krameri, on native avifauna. Ibis (London), 153(3):509-516. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1474-919X

Newton I, 1994. Population limitation in birds. London, UK: Academic Press, 597 pp.

Owre OT, 1973. A consideration of the exotic avifauna of southeastern Florida. The Wilson Bulletin, 85(4):491-500.

Perez-Riviera R, 2001. Comments on Kirwan's first record of the rose-ringed parakeets (Psittacula krameri) in the West-Indies. El Pitirre, 14(1):9.

Pithon J, 1998. The status and ecology of the ring-necked parakeet Psittacula krameri in Great Britain. York, UK: University of York.

Robb GN; McDonald RA; Chamberlain DE; Bearhop S, 2008. Food for thought: supplementary feeding as a driver of ecological change in avian populations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 6(9):476-484. http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/060152

Robson C, 2005. New Holland field guide to the birds of south-east Asia. London, UK: New Holland, 304 pp.

Roche C; Bedford-Shaw A, 2008. Escapee cage birds in suburbs of Johannesburg. Birds Numbers, 14:2-3.

Roscoe DE; Stone WB; Petrie L; Renkavinsky JL, 1976. Exotic psittacines in New York State. New York Fish and Game Journal, 23:99-100.

Rowan MK, 1983. The doves, parrots, louries and cuckoos of Southern Africa. Cape Town, South Africa: David Philip, 480 pp.

Sheehey A; Mansfield B, 2009. Wild rose-ringed parakeets Psittacula krameri. Nature Alley. Weldon, California, USA: Nature Alley, unpaginated. http://www.natureali.org/roserings.htm

Shwartz A; Strubbe D; Butler CJ; Matthysen E; Kark S, 2009. The effect of enemy-release and climate conditions on invasive birds: a regional test using the rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri) as a case study. Diversity and Distributions, 15(2):310-318. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/loi/ddi

Sibley CG; Monroe BJ, 1991. Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the world. Yale, USA: Yale University Press, 11360 pp.

Skriver J, 2006. [English title not available]. (Sma papegøjer breder sig i Nordvesteuropa.). unpaginated. http://www.dof.dk/index.php?id=nyhederands=nyhederandm=visningandnyhed_id=255

Strubbe D; Matthysen E, 2007. Invasive ring-necked parakeets Psittacula krameri in Belgium: habitat selection and impact on native birds. Ecography, 30(4):578-588. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/loi/eco

Strubbe D; Matthysen E, 2009. Establishment success of invasive ring-necked and monk parakeets in Europe. Journal of Biogeography, 36(12):2264-2278. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/loi/jbi

Strubbe D; Matthysen E, 2009. Experimental evidence for nest-site competition between invasive ring-necked parakeets (Psittacula krameri) and native nuthatches (Sitta europaea). Biological Conservation, 142(8):1588-1594. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00063207

Strubbe D; Matthysen E, 2009. Predicting the potential distribution of invasive ring-necked parakeets Psittacula krameri in northern Belgium using an ecological niche modelling approach. Biological Invasions, 11(3):497-513. http://www.springerlink.com/content/nnw78qq86kx0j671/?p=2e85770c8d884ec89fb065c7701ad87e&pi=2

Strubbe D; Matthysen E, 2011. A radiotelemetry study of habitat use by the exotic Ring-necked Parakeet Psittacula krameri in Belgium. Ibis (London), 153(1):180-184. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1474-919X

Strubbe D; Matthysen E; Graham CH, 2010. Assessing the potential impact of invasive ring-necked parakeets Psittacula krameri on native nuthatches Sitta europeae in Belgium. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(3):549-557. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123349083/HTMLSTART

UNEP-WCMC, 2010. CITES trade database. unpaginated. http://www.unep-wcmc.org/citestrade/

Links to Websites

Top of page
WebsiteURLComment
Belgian Forum on Invasive Specieshttp://ias.biodiversity.be/ias/species/show/23
DAISIE species fact sheet : Psittacula kramerihttp://www.europe-aliens.org/speciesFactsheet.do?speciesId=50460
Detlev Franz - Papageien vor der Hausturhttp://www.papageien.org/df/
GB Non-native Species Information Portalhttps://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/nonnativespecies/factsheet/index.cfm

Organizations

Top of page

Europe: DAISIE - Delivering Alien Invasive Species Inventories for Europe, Web-based service, http://www.europe-aliens.org

Contributors

Top of page

10/07/09 Original text by:

Diederik Strubbe, University of Antwerp, Evolutionary Ecology Group,, Dept. of Biology, Univ. of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 171, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium

Distribution Maps

Top of page
You can pan and zoom the map
Save map