New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Two New Toxic Birds Discovered

Here’s how newfound “spicy” birds resist their potent neurotoxin

A Rufous-naped Bellbird on grass.

Rufous-naped Bellbird

Martin Willis/Minden Pictures

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Locals in Papua New Guinea called the birds spicy. When University of Copenhagen evolutionary ecologist Kasun Bodawatta handled feathers from the Regent Whistler and the Rufous-naped Bellbird, his eyes teared up and itched like he was chopping onions. It was the ecologist's first experience with toxic birds.

The island's toxic birds were first described scientifically in 1992, and researchers have since identified a few more species. Their feathers and skin all carry the same type of potent neurotoxin found in South American poison dart frogs. If these substances, called batrachotoxins, bind to neurons' sodium-channel proteins, they cause the neurons to fire nonstop. High-enough doses can cause muscle paralysis and death.

In a paper in Molecular Ecology, Bodawatta, ecologist Knud Jønsson of the Natural History Museum of Denmark and their colleagues identify two new species of toxic birds and show that each independently evolved resistance to batrachotoxins' effects via mutations that change the proteins where they bind. Like how fish and whales separately evolved fins, these birds have “arrived at the same way of dealing with” the toxins, Jønsson says.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


California Academy of Sciences ornithologist Jack Dumbacher first pinned batrachotoxins as the source of birds' toxicity three decades ago. At the time batrachotoxins had been found only in poison dart frogs, half a world away. Researchers now hypothesize that the birds acquire batrachotoxins by eating poisonous beetles of the genus Choresine, like the frogs do—but no one is certain.

Whatever the source, storing the toxin in skin and feathers may help protect the birds against parasites, Jønsson says. Of course, for this strategy to work, the birds must avoid poisoning themselves. And just as toxins are common in biology, so is resistance to them, says University of California, Berkeley, ecologist Rebecca Tarvin.

Using computer simulations, the researchers studied how each species had evolved different variations in the neuron binding site—the same part of the protein altered in poison dart frogs—to thwart the toxin. But Tarvin isn't convinced yet. She pointed to a 2021 study in frogs in which sodium-channel mutations did not demonstrate protection from batrachotoxins in some species, although Jønsson notes that the species tested had lower than average levels of the toxins among Papua New Guinean birds. Tarvin says the new study highlights the variation among sodium channels, but there remains much to learn about toxin resistance in general.

“Understanding biodiversity and the diversity of adaptations, especially these extreme phenotypes,” she says, “can give us really great ideas for medicine, for agriculture and for understanding how animals adapt to pollution.”

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe