Evaluation of two methods for quantifying passeriform lice

Two methods commonly used to quantify ectoparasites on live birds are visual examination and dust‐ruffling. Visual examination provides an estimate of ectoparasite abundance based on an observer's timed inspection of various body regions on a bird. Dust‐ruffling involves application of insecticidal powder to feathers that are then ruffled to dislodge ectoparasites onto a collection surface where they can then be counted. Despite the common use of these methods in the field, the proportion of actual ectoparasites they account for has only been tested with Rock Pigeons ( Columba livia ), a relatively large‐bodied species (238–302 g) with dense plumage. We tested the accuracy of the two methods using European Starlings ( Sturnus vulgaris ; ∼75 g). We first quantified the number of lice ( Brueelia nebulosa ) on starlings using visual examination, followed immediately by dust‐ruffling. Birds were then euthanized and the proportion of lice accounted for by each method was compared to the total number of lice on each bird as determined with a body‐washing method. Visual examination and dust‐ruffling each accounted for a relatively small proportion of total lice (14% and 16%, respectively), but both were still significant predictors of abundance. The number of lice observed by visual examination accounted for 68% of the variation in total abundance. Similarly, the number of lice recovered by dust‐ruffling accounted for 72% of the variation in total abundance. Our results show that both methods can be used to reliably quantify the abundance of lice on European Starlings and other similar‐sized passerines.