Appearance:

Gives a bulkier impression than Skylark, with longer bill, heavier head and body, and broader tail. In flight broad wings and short tail prominent. Lacks white edges on wings. Orange buff underwings. Crest on rear crown spiky and uneven. Outer tail feathers rufous, not white. Occasional song-flight. Slower wing-beats than skylark. Very similar to Thekla Lark, and identification can be very difficult in areas where both species occur. The much used streaked-breast character is not always relevant because of regional variations. Then habitat, behaviour and voice becomes important to identification, and a combination of structural and plumage character should be used. Bill appears curved (because of straight lower mandible), crest spikier than Thekla, belly deeper, back less heavily streaked , tail coverts less rusty-brown, upper breast usually with less defined streaking. Eye-stripe buffish, rather than white behind eye. Less prone to perch on top of scrubs or bushes than Thekla, and prefers lower altitude .

Sound:

Song: a mix of long whistling, fluting sounds, trills and mimicry. Full song quite similar to Thekla Lark. Rudiments of song are often heard and includes more melancholic whistling than Thekla. Contact call/alarm-call: May be the best characteristic to separate it from Thekla Lark where both species occur. Crested Lark call with 2-4 syllables, of which one is extended and fairly flat. The phrase has a less "bouncing" feel to it than Thekla Lark, lacking the accented rapid rise and fall in pitch of the extended note of Thekla Lark.

Song:

Distribution:

Wikipedia: map (se also Xeno-canto below)

Ecology:

Birdlife ecology

Links:

Observation.org Latest observations

Video IBC

Image search Flickr NB! May give other species

Sound search at Xeno-canto

Featherbase

CC

CC-sound:Peter Boesman, Licence,Link.

Appearance:

Most likely to be confused with Little Crake (P. parva). Most important field characters is the very short primary projection and lack of red base of bill. Some caution should be taken as missing or unorderly tertials can be confusing with regards to the projection, and immature Little Crake may sometimes also lack red base of bill. Flanks and belly more extensively barred than P. parva. Upperparts richer brown with white spots. Sexes alike, but females often with paler throat. Brown cheeks occurs in both sexes. Legs dirty olive colour and bill greenish. Immature even more easily confused with P. parva, but apart from the missing projection, note warmer brown upperparts and more heavily barred underparts, even on breast. Crown less evenly coloured than P. parva, with blackish speckles.

Sound:

Rich repertiore. Male song easily overlooked due to similarity to The edible frog Pelophylax esculentus., and to being audible only a few hundred meters. The sound, a rolling "trrrrrrrr", differs from frogs in being drier and more stable in pitch. Sometimes the pitch rises slightly in the beginning of the call, but then remains stable also at the end. The call is uttered in 1-2 seconds intervals and each call is 2-3 seconds long. Some overtone modulation is common (stable pitch but change of vocal "ooeeii"). Unmated female sings with a more hurried "wirrr". Alarm call a series of nasal, hoarse "weeat" or a sharp "kriik".

Male song:

Distribution:

Wikipedia: map (se also Xeno-canto below)

Ecology:

Birdlife ecology

Links:

Observation.org Latest observations

Video IBC

Image search Flickr NB! May give other species

Sound search at Xeno-canto

CC

CC-sound:Edmunds Racinskis, Licence,Link.

CC-photo:Peter Jacobs Photos, Licence,Link.

CC-photo:gilgit2, Licence,Link.

CC-photo:Marc Herremans, Licence,Link.

CC-photo:Marc Herremans, Licence,Link.