(Lonchura bicolor subsp.)

by Roddy GabelSilver Spring, Maryland

Breeding

Rufous..backed Mannikins

In the fall of 1988, I was in a localpet shop and spotted an odd, unfamil­iar bird in a cage of Bronze-wingedMannikins (Lonebura eueullata).After returning home, with mentalnotes on the bird' s coloration andmarkings for reference, I searchedthrough Goodwin's (1982) EstrildidFinebes of tbe World until I found thespecies whose description matchedthe bird in the shop - the Rufous­backed Mannikin. I promptlyreturned to the shop and purchasedthe bird, which was sold as a "minia­ture Tri-colored Nun;' which, indeed,they do resemble. By August 1989, Ihad managed to obtain four more ofthese birds at another shop.

Bates and Busenbark (1970) indi­cated that the Rufous-backed Man­nikin was rarely imported into theUnited States and gave this speciesonly cursory treatment in their book.Similarly, other general aviculturaltexts give only a brief mention of thisbird (Rogers, 1975; Martin, 1983).Goodwin (1982) provided somenotes on captive breeding thatoccurred in Germany, but the mostextensive descriptions of courtshipbehavior, nesting and other breedingcharacteristics, as well as manage­ment of this species, were providedby Borlase (1987), based on his breed­ing success in New Zealand.

Here I describe my own experiencein breeding this species, which mayconstitute a first U.S. breeding.

Taxomony and DistributionAccording to Goodwin (1982),

Rufous-backed Mannikins includethree subspecies: L. b. nigrieeps, L. b.woltersi, and L. b. minor. The lattertwo are distinguished from the firstby a darker coloration and smallersize, respectively. These subspeciesshare species status with the Blackand White Mannikins, L.b.bieolor, L. b. POfJnsis, aQd L. b. stig­matotborax, which resemble theRufous-backed Mannikin except thatblack replaces all brown coloration.Other close relatives are the Bronze­winged Mannikin and the muchlarger Magpie Mannikin, L. fringil-

24 April/May 1991

loides.Rufous-backed Mannikins generally

inhabit open areas such as grasslands,marshes, and other clearings, al­though they may be found in palmgroves and forested areas adjacent toopen areas. Geographically, theyextend from southern Somalia andKenya southward to South Africa ineastern Africa. Lonebura bieolornigrieeps is more widely distributedthan the other two subspecies(Goodwin, 1982). Although it is mostlikely that my birds belong to thenigrieeps subspecies, this is not acertainty.

DescriptionThe Rufous-backed Mannikin is

slightly over three inches long and issimilar in size and shape to the morecommon Bronze-winged Mannikin.The mantle, back, wing coverts, andparts of the secondaries are a dark,rich, chestnut brown. Wing covertshave straw-colored streaks along thefeather shafts that vary in intensityfrom bird to bird. The exposed edgesof the secondaries are barred withdull white, reminiscent of the wingcoloration of the Owl Finch (Poe­pbila biebenovii). The head, upperbreast, and tail are black, and thelower breast, abdomen, and vent areaare white. The flanks are scalloped inblack and white. The irides are darkbrown. Legs and feet are blackish, andthe bill is blue-grey, almost silvery inappearance. Sexes are alike. Beforethey molt into adult plumage, juve­niles are a grey-buff color on theunderparts and brown above; flightfeathers and the tail are an evendarker brown. The bill of young birdsis also a dull black rather than theadult color.

DietThe birds receive a diet of a stan­

dard, commercial finch seed mix andan eggfood mixture. The eggfoodconsists of three hard-boiled (ormicrowaved) eggs, three slices ofwhole-wheat bread, two heaping tea­spoons of 95% soy protein powder,and two teaspoons of Vionate pow-

dered vitamin supplement. Theseingredients are combined andchopped to a fine, crumbly consis­tency in a food processor. Cuttleboneand crushed oyster shell are both pro­vided as sources of calcium for layingfemales and are available at all times.Fresh water is provided daily and isavailable continuously.

BreedingThe greatest difficulty in breeding

Rufous-backed Mannikins is distin­guishing the sexes. Although themales do sing and perform a court­ship ritual in the presence of thefemales, these activities can be diffi­cult to observe and may not be exhib­ited by the birds in the presence ofhumans. I have attempted to sex thebirds on the basis of bill size - malemannikins reputedly have a stouter,larger bill, although this can be diffi­cult to distinguish in birds this small.A female in breeding condition canalso look fuller in the abdominal area,indicating the expansion of the repro­ductive tract in preparation for egg­laying. However, these indicators arenot always reliable, and a presumedpair may never lay because they aretwo males, or may lay lots of infertileeggs because they are both females.

The breeding cage I used was alarge, wire-fronted, box-type cagewith a 20-watt fluorescent light in thetop. The cage measures four feet wideby three feet high by two feet deep.The light is on a timer set for 15 hoursof light per day (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.)year-round. Juniper branches wereplaced in one end to provide coverand potential nest sites. Large andsmall domed wicker nests were alsoplaced in the cage to provide addi­tional nest sites. Fine dried grassesand strands of burlap were placed inthe cage for nesting material. Thecage bottom was covered with aboutone inch of small, hardwood chips.

Three wild-caught birds wereplaced in the cage together in the fallof 1989. I believed these to be twomales and a female. After a couple ofweeks, one of the males appeared tobe harassing the other male, and thesubordinate male was removed. Theremaining birds promptly began nest­building and constructed a nest in thejuniper branches. The nest was essen­tially a grass shell lined with burlapand was covered over with anentrance hole on one side.

A clutch of four eggs was laid inearly December; all four were infer­tile. The birds produced five moreeggs in the last week of December

This photo shows the parent bird alongwith four fledged young Rufous-backedMannikins. This breeding was submittedas a possible U. S. first breeding.

1989. These eggs were all fertile andall hatched on January 13, 1990. Thechicks were reared without any livefood or additional supplements otherthan those described above. Fourchicks fledged at about 20 days ofage, but returned to the nest to roostboth during the day and at night, s~they may have actually fledged a dayor two earlier. The chicks becamevery active and inquisitive, and grad­ually destroyed the "roof" of theirnest, although they continued toroost in the open-topped, cup-shapedplatform that remained. While thechicks remained with them, theparents attempted to re-Iay twice, inmid- and late February, but both timesthe chicks destroyed the nests andeggs because of their constant activityand tendency to pick and tug oneverything in the cage. These chickswere removed from the parents onMarch 3 and were already showingsigns of molting into adult plumage.By April 13, they had completelymolted and had acquired their adultcoloration.

Once the chicks were removed, theparents immediately renested, thistime in one of the small wicker nestswhich I had wedged in some junipe;branches. They laid a single egg,which they failed to incubate. Thiswas removed, and beginning onMarch 20, six eggs were laid, whichwere all fertile. All six hatched (thefirst on April 6), and five chicks werereared and fledged at 21 days. Theyhad been closed-banded at two weeks

of age, which caused no disruption totheir care and feeding.

Another chick was later raised bythe original pair while they werehoused with a pair of Gouldians and apair of Shafttails in a cage similar tothe original breeding cage. At thetime of this writing (December,1990), a female from the secondbrood and the subordinate male fromthe original three birds have bred andare rearing an unknown number ofyoung. They built a nest in juniperbranches in the back upper corner ofthe cage so that the top of the cageforms the top of the nest. They, too,are rearing their young with no livefood or supplements outside of thebasic breeding diet described earlier.

Final CommentsRufous-backed Mannikins appear to

be relatively easy to breed and toler­ate normal disturbances such as nestchecks and closed-banding of chicks.They do well on a fairly simple diet.They can be somewhat aggressivetoward one another, however, andmust be watched for signs of fighting.Subordinate birds must be separated,and often only two birds may behoused together at one time. Thisaggression appears to only be aimedat others of the same species. Evensmall waxbills (e.g., Gold-breasted,Amandava subflava) do not seem tobe bothered by them in group cages.

I encourage others to breed thesebirds and other species that have beenneglected in American aviculturebecause of their low cost. Whenimportations of such species arehalted, what a loss it will be if wehave failed to establish them in ouraviaries!

ReferencesBates, H., and R. Busenbark. 1970. Finches and

Softbilled Birds. T.F.H. PublicationsNeptune City, New Jersey. '

Borlase, S. 1987. The Rufous-backed Man­nikin. National Finch and Softbill SocietyBulletin 4(2): 36-39.

Goodwin, D. 1982. Estrildid Finches of theWorld. Cornell University Press, Ithaca,New York.

Martin, R.M. 1983. Encyclopedia of Avicul­ture. Arco Publishing, Inc., New York.

Rogers, C.H. 1975. Encyclopedia of Cage andAviary Birds. Macmillan Publishing Co.,Inc., New York. •

Editor's Note: This breeding of the Rufous­backed Mannikin was submitted to the AFA 'sAvy Awards Committee as a possible Us. firstbreeding. Any person having any knowledgeof a previous successful breeding~ please con­tact Dale R. Thompson, Chairman, AvyAwards Committee, through the AFA homeoffice in Phoenix, Arizona.•

afa WATCHBIRD 25