Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus Scientific name definitions

The Red Junglefowl is a name used for both the ancestral stock of the domestic chicken and for feral populations derived from introduced domestic chickens. Smaller in size and slimmer than most chicken breeds, the Red Junglefowl has buffy or bronze neck feathers extending down over the back and a metallic blue to green arching tail. Native of southeast Asia from India through southern China and down to Indonesia, it has become feral in several regions around the world including Hawaii and the Caribbean. Feral birds are often very difficult to distinguish from free-ranging domestics and frequently both inhabit the same island, though feral birds are often secretive and difficult to see. In the Caribbean there are feral populations in Hispaniola, Puerto Rico, Guadeloupe, and the Grenadines.

Male 65–78 cm (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ), 672–1450 g; female 41–46 cm (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ), 485–1050 g. Male differs from that of G. lafayettii in form of comb and by absence of heavy streaking. In non-breeding plumage (Jun–Sept), which was apparently unknown in extreme E populations (2 Peterson, A.T. and Brisbin, I.L. (1998). Genetic endangerment of wild Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus? Bird Conservation International. 8(4): 387–394. Close ), male sheds golden hackles (thus feathers of head and neck are dull black, short and blunt) and elongated tail feathers, has reduced and paler comb, but retains rufous in wings (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ); however, such eclipse plumages have been gradually lost among wild populations, apparently due to genetic introgression with domesticated birds (2 Peterson, A.T. and Brisbin, I.L. (1998). Genetic endangerment of wild Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus? Bird Conservation International. 8(4): 387–394. Close ). Female differs from those of G. sonneratii and G. lafayettii by absence of bold pattern on underparts; and from those of G. lafayettii and G. varius by lack of bold pattern on flight feathers. Bare parts: bill horn (almost pale pinkish when breeding), irides pale orange to reddish brown (male) or brown (female) and legs grey or brownish grey; male has single, long spur, female none or only a very short spur (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ). Recent studies of free-living captive birds have found that some male characters, e.g. the spur and or head adornments (comb etc.) may develop asymmetically, but significance of this yet to be fully understood (3 Kimball, R.T., Ligon, J.D. and Merola-Zwartjes, M. (1997). Fluctuating asymmetry in red junglefowl. Journal of Evolutionary Biology. 10(4): 441–457. Close ). First-year male similar to adult male, but is overall duller with shorter hackles (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ). Juvenile is much like adult female , but has darker underparts; young male soon develops reddish-yellow hackles and some red on back, and has blacker tail than female (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ). Variation between races is most noticeable in colour, length and shape of male’s hackles during breeding season: redder, shorter and rounded in bankiva, which race is most like spadiceus (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ); pointed and with dark shaft-streaks in <em>murghi</em> , which has paler orange hackles on rump, smaller and white ear-lappets  , and female  is paler than in other races (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ); race <em>jabouillei</em> is somewhat intermediate, with smaller all-red lappets (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ) and comb and (golden-yellow) (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ) hackles, and female <em>jabouillei</em> is generally rather darker than nominate female; while race <em>spadiceus</em> has neck-hackles shorter and more golden-yellow than in nominate (in which they are golden-orange to bright red), while the ear-lappets are small and all red (large and white in nominate gallus) (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ). Identifying wild versus domesticated (yet feral) populations can be very difficult in some regions, but body feathers (in genetically pure birds, all black in males, mottled brown in females), tail size (relatively short, not exceptionally elongated) and colour (all black in males, brown in females), legs (slender and dark, not thick and yellow), wing colour (all black in males or brown in females), comb (small and simple, not large and elaborate), hackle colour (bright orange), spurs (relatively small and short), and collar colour (black in males or brown in females) provide some level of reliability, especially in combination (4 Peterson, A.T. and Brisbin, I.L. (2005). Phenotypic status of Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus populations introduced on Pacific islands. Bull. Brit. Orn. Club. 125(1): 59–61. Close ).

Editor's Note: This article requires further editing work to merge existing content into the appropriate Subspecies sections. Please bear with us while this update takes place.

Occurs also in Philippines, Sulawesi and parts of Lesser Sundas, where probably introduced. Introduced or feral in many areas, including throughout Micronesia, Melanesia and Polynesia; Reunion and the Grenadines; probably also New Zealand and South Africa.

---

SUBSPECIES

Gallus gallus murghi Scientific name definitions

Distribution

Kashmir and N and NE India, adjacent Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh.

---

SUBSPECIES

Gallus gallus spadiceus Scientific name definitions

Distribution

extreme N India (E Arunachal Pradesh, E Assam), Myanmar, S China (SW Yunnan), Thailand (except E), Peninsular Malaysia and N Sumatra.

---

SUBSPECIES

Gallus gallus jabouillei Scientific name definitions

Distribution

S China (SE Yunnan, Guangxi and Hainan I), N Laos and N Vietnam.

---

SUBSPECIES

Gallus gallus gallus Scientific name definitions

Distribution

E Thailand through Cambodia and C and S Laos to C and S Vietnam.

---

SUBSPECIES

Gallus gallus bankiva Scientific name definitions

Distribution

S Sumatra, Java and Bali.

Editor's Note: Additional distribution information for this taxon can be found in the 'Subspecies' article above. In the future we will develop a range-wide distribution article.

Throughout extensive range, occupies most tropical and subtropical habitats, including mangroves, from sea-level up to c. 2000 m (in Bhutan (6 Spierenburg, P. (2005). Birds in Bhutan: Status and Distribution. Oriental Bird Club, Bedford, UK. Close ), Malaysia and SW China) (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ) and even 2400 m in NE India (7 Katti, M., P. Singh, N. Manjrekar, D. Sharma, and S. Mukherjee (1992). An ornithological survey in eastern Arunachal Pradesh, India. Forktail 7:75–89. Close ). Even within introduced range, e.g. on Samoa, ranges to at least 1200 m (8 McAllan, I.A.W. and Hobcroft, D. (2005). The further spread of introduced birds in Samoa. Notornis. 52(1): 16–20. Close ). Appears to prefer flat or gently sloping terrain, and edge or secondary habitats over forest, although in Arunachal Pradesh densities are clearly greater in unlogged forest (9 Datta, A. (2000). Pheasant abundance in selectively logged and unlogged forests of western Arunachal Pradesh, northeast India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society. 97(2): 177–183. Close ) and on Palawan denstities were at least twice as high in old-growth forest versus cultivation and early and advanced second-growth habitats (10 Mallari, N. A. D., N. J. Collar, D. C. Lee, P. J. K. McGowan, R. Wilkinson, and S. J. Marsden (2011). Population densities of understorey birds across a habitat gradient in Palawan, Philippines: implications for conservation. Oryx 45(2):234–242. Close ). Nevertheless, in some areas, e.g. Bhutan, it regularly enters scrub near villages and even fields, to feed (6 Spierenburg, P. (2005). Birds in Bhutan: Status and Distribution. Oriental Bird Club, Bedford, UK. Close ). Clear habitat segregation in areas of overlap with G. varius, with latter favouring more open areas, while in India, where sympatric with G. sonneratii, the present species is closely associated with moister sal (Shorea robusta) forest, whereas sonneratii prefers drier teak (Tectona grandis) forest (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ).

None described and presumably none undertaken, as extremes of climate are limited in most of range; nevertheless, in N Thailand, birds apparently descend to lower altitudes in winter.

Opportunistic and omnivorous; probably shows seasonal preferences, depending upon availability. Gut contents of 37 birds in India contained seeds of 30 species and many invertebrate taxa; plant genera taken include Trichosanthes (Cucurbitaceae), Rubus (Rosaceae), Carissa (Apocynaceae), Zizyphus (Rhamnaceae) and Shorea (Dipterocarpaceae); only cultivated plant species was rice (Oryza, Poaceae). Similarly wide range of food items found in 23 crops from Thailand, including Euphorbiaceae fruits, bamboo seeds and Zizyphus fruits. Insects recorded include ants, beetles and termites (nearly 1000 Macrotermes carbonarius in one crop) (11 Wells, D. R. (1999). The Birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Volume 1. Non-passerines. Academic Press, London, UK. Close ) and their eggs. Food procured by scratching ground and picking at items (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ). Visits more open areas in early morning and evening to feed, and waterholes on daily basis during dry periods (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ). Usually seen in small groups , especially in winter, often comprising a male with several females (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ), and is sometimes observed joining groups of Lophura diardi in C Thailand (12 Praditsup, N., Naksathit, A. and Round, P. (2007). Observations on the Siamese Fireback Lophura diardi in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand. Forktail. 23: 125–128. Close ). Groups said to congregate at seeding bamboo in some areas. May also associate with mammals, wild and domestic, taking insects flushed by them or attracted to their dung, once even observed taking maggots in a head-wound to an animal (11 Wells, D. R. (1999). The Birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Volume 1. Non-passerines. Academic Press, London, UK. Close ).

Male advertising call , mainly given at dusk or dawn close to roost, is similar to but shriller then well-known “cock-a-doodle-do” of village chicken, as well as having a more strangulated finale; in Bhutan, mostly heard mid Feb to mid May (6 Spierenburg, P. (2005). Birds in Bhutan: Status and Distribution. Oriental Bird Club, Bedford, UK. Close ). Large number of different calls (c. 30) including many clucks (“bok-bok-bok...bok-ber...”) (13 Rasmussen, P. C., and J. C. Anderton (2005). Birds of South Asia: the Ripley Guide. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Close ) and cackling sounds in alarm (an explosive “KERCH!-ERCH!-ERCH!-ERCH!” that falls away) (13 Rasmussen, P. C., and J. C. Anderton (2005). Birds of South Asia: the Ripley Guide. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Close ) and when feeding (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ).

Mar–May, during dry season, in India, although eggs found Jan–Oct in different parts of country; Mar–Jun in Bangladesh; Dec–Jun and Aug in Thai-Malay Peninsula (11 Wells, D. R. (1999). The Birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Volume 1. Non-passerines. Academic Press, London, UK. Close ); and Feb–May in China, where earliest records are from S Yunnan. Polygamous, with the number of females associated with a given male appearing to increase as breeding season advances, but monogamy also reported and may be reasonably frequent in some areas (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ). Nest-sites varied, but typically a shallow scrape in dense secondary growth or bamboo forest, lined with dry grass, palm fronds and bamboo leaves (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ), and sited under bushes or in clumps of bamboo, but sometimes in tree fork (13 Rasmussen, P. C., and J. C. Anderton (2005). Birds of South Asia: the Ripley Guide. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Close ). Usually 5–6 white, or pale buff to pale reddish-brown (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ) eggs (range 4–12) (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ), size 45–49 mm × 36 mm (Malaysia) (11 Wells, D. R. (1999). The Birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Volume 1. Non-passerines. Academic Press, London, UK. Close ), incubated 18–21 days (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ), by female alone, for which visual clues are extremely important in determining incubation behaviour and thus clutch size (14 Meijer, T. (1995). Importance of tactile and visual stimuli of eggs and nest for termination of egg laying of Red Junglefowl. Auk. 112(2): 483–488. Close ) (experiments in captivity suggest that incubation becomes continuous only with final egg (14 Meijer, T. (1995). Importance of tactile and visual stimuli of eggs and nest for termination of egg laying of Red Junglefowl. Auk. 112(2): 483–488. Close ) and that females that are heavier produce larger eggs, more male offspring and lay earlier, but do not produce larger clutches) (15 Parker, T.H. (2002). Maternal condition, reproductive investment, and offspring sex ratio in captive Red Junglefowl (Gallus gallus). Auk. 119(3): 840–845. Close ); chicks (able to fly at c. 1 week) (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ) have maroon-brown down above, whitish buff below  , browner on breast; tended by female alone (11 Wells, D. R. (1999). The Birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Volume 1. Non-passerines. Academic Press, London, UK. Close ). In captivity, a dominant male is able to copulate with more females than subordinate individuals (16 Johnsen, T.S. and Zuk, M. (1998). Parasites, morphology, and blood characters in male Red Jungle Fowl during development. Condor. 100(4): 749–752. Close ) while breeding success is positively correlated with a female’s dominance within the flock, lifespan and year of hatching (17 Collias, N., Collias, E. and Jennrich, R.I. (1994). Dominant Red Junglefowl (Gallus gallus) hens in an unconfined flock rear the most young over their lifetime. Auk. 111(4): 863–872. Close ). Females prefer males with longer and redder combs, but apparently pay little heed to other plumage characters in their mate choice (18 Zuk, M., Johnsen, T.S. and Maclarty, T. (1995). Endocrine–immune interactions, ornaments and mate choice in red jungle fowl. Proc. Royal Soc. London (Ser. B Biol. Sci.). 260: 205–210. Close ), and in captivity produce more eggs in response to being paired with preferred mates (19 Parker, T.H. (2003). Genetic benefits of mate choice separated from differential maternal investment in Red Junglefowl (Gallus gallus). Evolution. 57(9): 2157–2165. Close ). It also appears from experiments conducted in captivity that laying behaviour (egg output) may differ between females in potentially monogamous pairings and those that frequent harems (14 Meijer, T. (1995). Importance of tactile and visual stimuli of eggs and nest for termination of egg laying of Red Junglefowl. Auk. 112(2): 483–488. Close ). At least in captivity, males become sexually mature when 5–8 months old; infection prior to this age with the intestinal parasite Ascaridia galli (which affects both domestic chickens and wild birds) can lead to males having smaller combs, and at some ages, lower body mass and shorter tarsi (16 Johnsen, T.S. and Zuk, M. (1998). Parasites, morphology, and blood characters in male Red Jungle Fowl during development. Condor. 100(4): 749–752. Close ).

Not globally threatened (Least Concern). Mace Lande: safe. Distributed over large range (c. 5,100,000 km²) and occurs in varied habitats, including secondary vegetation and anthropogenic sites, such as rubber and oil-palm plantations. In Thailand, considered widespread and common, with estimated population in hundreds of thousands, despite relentless persecution; still more or less common in Peninsular Malaysia (11 Wells, D. R. (1999). The Birds of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Volume 1. Non-passerines. Academic Press, London, UK. Close ). Last remaining habitat in Singapore under severe threat (20 Poole, C. (1995). Threats to Pulau Ubin. Bull. Oriental Bird Club. 22: 19. Close ). In Indonesia, still widespread but declining due to habitat loss and degradation, as well as hunting; not particularly common on Java, Sulawesi (where heavily hunted and declines > 50% have been reported even inside reserves) (21 O’Brien, T.G. and Kinnaird, M.F. (1996). Changing populations of birds and mammals in North Sulawesi. Oryx. 30(2): 150–156. Close ) or Lesser Sundas, but rather common on Sumatra. Not protected by Indonesian law. In India, numbers considered stable in protected areas, but declining elsewhere due to habitat degradation and overhunting for food, e.g. in Nagaland (22 Choudhury, A. (2001). Some bird records from Nagaland, north-east India. Forktail 17:91–103. Close ), and overall the species is known from fewer localities than it was historically, although there is no evidence for a contraction in range (23 Fernandes, M., Sathyakumar, M.S., Kaul, R., Kalsi, R.S. and Sharma, D. (2009). Conservation of red junglefowl Gallus gallus in India. Int. Journal Galliform Conserv. 1: 94–101. Close ). Locally common in Nepal, where known from several localities, e.g. Sukla Phanta, Bardia, Chitwan and Kosi Tappu, but few records elsewhere, and is believed to have declined recently, being apparently been shot out in some areas. Known from at least 190 protected areas across India alone (23 Fernandes, M., Sathyakumar, M.S., Kaul, R., Kalsi, R.S. and Sharma, D. (2009). Conservation of red junglefowl Gallus gallus in India. Int. Journal Galliform Conserv. 1: 94–101. Close ) and at least 100 elsewhere throughout range (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ). Widely introduced in domesticated form—the species was already domesticated in Indus Valley by c. 2500 BC and had been introduced to C & NW Europe by 1500 BC (24 Lever, C. (2005). Naturalised Birds of the World. T. & A.D. Poyser, London, UK. Close ). Elsewhere feral populations occur or have occurred as follows: Cocos (Keeling) and Christmas Is, Borneo, the Lesser Sundas (including Lombok, Roti (25 Trainor, C. R. (2005). Birds of Tapuafu Peninsula, Roti Island, Lesser Sundas, Indonesia. Forktail 21:121–131. Close ), Timor, Lembata (26 Trainor, C.R. (2003). The birds of Lembata (Lomblen), Lesser Sundas. Kukila 12:39–53. Close ) and Wetar ), various of the Philippines , including Palawan (from c. 1521), Mindoro (27 Dutson, G. C. L., T. D. Evans, T. M. Brooks, D. C. Asane, R. J. Timmins, and A. Toledo (1992). Conservation status of birds on Mindoro, Philippines. Bird Conservation International 2(4):303–325. Close ), Negros (28 Brooks, T. M., T. D. Evans, G. C. L. Dutson, G. Q. A. Anderson, D. C. Asane, R. J. Timmins, and A. G. Toledo (1992). The conservation status of the birds of Negros, Philippines. Bird Conservation International 2(4):273–302. Close ), Siquijor (where apparently extinct) (29 Evans, T. D., P. Magsalay, G. C. L. Dutson, and T. M. Brooks (1993). The conservation status of the forest birds of Siquijor, Philippines. Forktail 8:89–96. Close ), Bohol (30 Brooks, T., Dutson, G., King, B. and Magsalay, P.M. (1996). An annotated check-list of the forest birds of Rajah Sikatuna National Park, Bohol, Philippines. Forktail 11:121–134. Close ) and Cebu (where once thought extinct) (31 Paguntalana, L. M. J., and P. G. Jakosalem (2008). Significant records of birds in forests on Cebu island, central Philippines. Forktail 24:48–56. Close ), Balabac, Sulawesi, the Togian (32 Indrawan, M., S. Somadikarta, J. Supriatna, M. D. Bruce, Sunarto, and G. Djanubudiman (2006). The birds of the Togian Islands, central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Forktail 22:7–22. Close ) and Banggai Is (33 Indrawan, M., Y. Masala, and L. Pesik (1997). Recent bird observations from the Banggai Islands. Kukila 9:61–70. Close ), Papua New Guinea (e.g., introduced in Bismarck archipelago at least c. 2700 years ago) (34 Steadman, D.W. and Kirch, P.V. (1998). Biogeography and prehistoric exploitation of birds in the Mussau Islands, Bismarck Archipelago, Papua New Guinea. Emu. 98(1): 13–22. Close ), Easter I (prior to 1770) (35 Marín, M., and P. Cáceres (2010). Sobre las aves de Isla de Pascua. Boletín del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural (Chile) 59:75–95. Close ), Latin America (from Mexico to Chile and the Galápagos Is; perhaps brought to mainland South America from China in 15th century), the West Indies (Little San Salvador I, Dominican Republic, Mona and possibly Culebra, and the Grenadines), Hawaii (suspected to have been brought from E Asia, by 500 AD, but also imported from the mainland USA in 1963) and very widely in Polynesia (introduced from E Asia c. 3000 years (24 Lever, C. (2005). Naturalised Birds of the World. T. & A.D. Poyser, London, UK. Close ), although Caroline Is population shows no phenotypic evidence of being domesticated) (4 Peterson, A.T. and Brisbin, I.L. (2005). Phenotypic status of Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus populations introduced on Pacific islands. Bull. Brit. Orn. Club. 125(1): 59–61. Close ). Speculated that G. gallus could have introduced exotic diseases that caused decline of some endemic bird species in Polynesia (8 McAllan, I.A.W. and Hobcroft, D. (2005). The further spread of introduced birds in Samoa. Notornis. 52(1): 16–20. Close ). Because of the widespread prevalance of domestic stock, including throughout much of the species’ native range, concerns have been raised that extensive hybridization with domestic or feral chicken populations is swamping ‘wild type’ genomes, leading to loss of original genotypes (4 Peterson, A.T. and Brisbin, I.L. (2005). Phenotypic status of Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus populations introduced on Pacific islands. Bull. Brit. Orn. Club. 125(1): 59–61. Close ) (e.g., in Peninsular Malaysia) (1 Madge, S., and P. McGowan (2002). Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse, including Buttonquails, Sandgrouse and Allies. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Close ). One signal of this collapse in genetic integrity has been the loss of eclipse (non-breeding) male plumage; this indicator of the pure wild genotype certainly originally occurred in populations in western and central portions of the species’ range, but probably disappeared from extreme SE Asia and the Philippines prior to the 1860s and has not been observed in Malaysia and neighbouring countries since the 1920s, but did persist in NE India until as late as the 1960s (2 Peterson, A.T. and Brisbin, I.L. (1998). Genetic endangerment of wild Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus? Bird Conservation International. 8(4): 387–394. Close ).