DOI: 10.1002/vms3.

1340

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Sex determination in budgerigars using radiographic

pelvimetry

Osman Yilmaz1 Davut Koca2 Mustafa Eren Sahin3 Talha Avcilar4

1
Department of Anatomy, Faculty of
Veterinary Medicine, Van Yuzuncu Yil Abstract
University, Van, Turkey
Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the pelvimetric values obtained
2
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Van Yuzuncu
from radiographic pelvis images of budgerigars in terms of sexual dimorphism. The
Yil University, Van, Turkey objectives included determining linear osteometric and angle measurements of the
3
Vetorka Veterinary Clinic, Bursa, Turkey pelvis, as well as calculating the length-to-width ratios among different pelvimetric
4
Beta Veterinary Clinic, Bursa, Turkey measurements. Additionally, the study aimed to reveal the correlations between age

Correspondence
Osman Yilmaz, Department of Anatomy,
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Van Yuzuncu
Yil University, Van, Turkey.
Email: osman_40_5@hotmail.com
and body weight with both the pelvimetric measurements and ratio measurements in
these animals.
Methods: In this study, measurements of linear distance, angle and length-to-width
ratios were obtained from ventrodorsal images of the pelvis in a sample of 60 budgeri-
gars, consisting of 30 males and 30 females. Subsequently, the statistical analysis of the
obtained measurement values was performed.
Results: When analysing the morphometric measurement values based on sex, it was
observed that all linear measurements (L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, L6, L7, L8, L9, L10 and L11)
were higher in males, whereas the angle measurements (A1, LA2 and RA2) were found
to be significantly greater in females (p < 0.05). Additionally, both male and female
budgerigars exhibited a greater pre-acetabular length of the ilium compared to the
post-acetabular length. Moreover, there were mostly positive significant correlations
between age and body weight with the pelvic measurement values in both sexes
(p < 0.05).
Conclusions: The obtained biometric measurement values from pelvimetric X-ray
images in budgerigars were analysed to assess sexual dimorphism. Furthermore, this
study presents fundamental morphometric data that can be valuable for clinical,
taxonomic, phylogenetic, ornithological, allometric and characterization studies of
budgerigars.

KEYWORDS
bird, morphometric parameters, pelvis, sexual dimorphism, X-ray

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
© 2023 The Authors. Veterinary Medicine and Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Vet Med Sci. 2024;10:e1340. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/vms3 1 of 12

https://doi.org/10.1002/vms3.1340

2 of 12
1 INTRODUCTION
Budgerigars, a type of parrot species, are a domesticated bird species
that originated in Australia and have spread across the world. These
birds are characterized by their small size, long tails, patterned wings
and vibrant colours. Due to their striking appearance, budgerigars are
widely bred as pets worldwide. They have gained immense popularity
as pets due to their ease of care, trainability, availability and afford-
ability. Budgerigars typically measure around 18–20 cm in length and
weigh between 30 and 40 g, with an average lifespan of 6–8 years. Fur-
thermore, it is worth mentioning that these birds possess the ability to
mimic speech (Kılıcarslan, 2012; Kubiak, 2020).
Birds possess a pelvic girdle comprising three distinct bones: os
ilium, os pubis and os ischii. These bones fuse together, creating the os
coxae, which subsequently connects with the synsacrum. Among the
three pelvic bones, the ilium stands as the largest. It can be further
divided into the preacetabular wing, the body and the postacetabular
wing. The ischium consists of the body and the wing of the ischium. The
pubis assumes the ventral position among the three pelvic bones. Its
body completes the ventral part of the acetabulum. Continuing cau-
dally from the body, it forms a shaft known as the scapus pubis. At
the caudal end of the shaft, one can observe a slightly thickened and
palpable apex, referred to as the apex pubis. Similar to mammals, the
acetabulum is formed by the combined contributions of the ilium, pubis
and ischium (Dursun, 2007; König et al., 2016).
Imaging methods are essential in diverse fields of veterinary
medicine (Farhad et al., 2022). Among these methods, radiography
holds particular importance (Klever et al., 2022). Radiography finds
extensive application in poultry as well as many other animals (Reddy &
Sivajothi, 2018; Rosen, 2012; Sathyamoorthy et al., 2020). It is widely
used in the diagnosis of many cases, such as hernia, tumours, ectopic
eggs, fractures, lipoma, ovarian cystic hyperplasia, oophoritis and egg
retention in pet birds (Durmus, 2022; Kılıcarslan, 2012; König et al.,
2016; Krautwald-Junghanns et al., 2011; Kubiak, 2020). Furthermore,
this imaging method proves valuable in determining the sex of ani-
mals (Celimli et al., 2008; Leão et al., 2022; Monteiro et al., 2013;
Pinheiro et al., 2016; Silva et al., 2020; Szara et al., 2022). To the best of
our knowledge, there is currently no research available regarding the
application of this method in determining the sex of budgerigars.
The objectives of the current study were as follows: first, to delin-
eate a protocol for conducting morphometric assessments of the pelvis
(including length and angle) using radiographs; second, to establish the
ratios among these measured values; and finally, to compare and con-
trast the discrepancies in these pelvimetric measurements between
a sample of male and female budgerigars, shedding light on potential
sex-related differences in pelvic morphology.
2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1 Selection and description of subjects
This study was an anatomic study, retrospective, and with and obser-
vational design. All research protocols for the prospective study had
20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
YILMAZ ET AL.
been approved by the Veterinary Office of the BETA (approval number
BETA/RI-1). The study was conducted in accordance with the deci-
sion of the Van YYU Animal Experiments Local Ethics Committee (VAN
YUHADYEK), dated 31/01/2023, and numbered 2023/03-06.
Retrospectively, the obtained images were evaluated as part of
routine clinical examination procedures. The study included clinically
healthy budgerigars devoid of any anatomical abnormalities, neoplas-
tic conditions, infectious diseases, congenital anomalies or traumatic
skeletal system irregularities. Radiographic images of the pelvis from
a total of 60 budgerigars were utilized in this study. This sample com-
prised 30 males, divided into 2 age groups: 1–2 years (n: 15) and 3–4
years (n: 15), as well as 30 females, also divided into 2 age groups: 1–2
years (n: 15) and 3–4 years (n: 15).
These images were sourced from private veterinary clinics located
in Turkey’s Bursa Province, between 2018 and 2023, after obtaining
the necessary permissions. Radiographic measurements were evalu-
ated by expert veterinarians working in the Beta and Vetorka vet-
erinary clinic (T.A., M.E.S., PhD student), working at Van Yüzüncü Yıl
University (Van YYU), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of
Obstetrics and Gynecology (D.K., Dr., PhD) and an academician, radio-
logical anatomy lecturer, working at Van Yüzüncü Yıl University (Van
YYU), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Anatomy (O.Y.,
Dr., PhD).
2.2 Data recording and analysis
All image analyses were performed using open-source image analysis
software (Horos v3.3.6, https://horosproject.org/, MacPro Quad Core,
Apple, Inc.). The X-ray examinations of male and female budgerigars
were conducted using the Vet 838R X-ray device. The birds were posi-
tioned in the ventrodorsal position on a disposable cover placed on
the X-ray table. During the imaging process, the film-focus distance
was set at 10–20 cm, and the exposure parameters of the X-ray device
were determined as 50–90 kV, 15–30 mA s and 0.1–6.3 s. This con-
figuration ensured clear visualization of the anatomical structures in
the ventrodorsal images of the budgerigar pelvis. The measurements
of the images were taken using the electronic calipers within the soft-
ware programme, taking into account the anatomical reference points
in Figure 1 and Table 1.
All the budgerigars were carefully positioned using a dorsal recum-
bency method within the positioning device, ensuring consistency
across all ventrodorsal radiological images. To maintain an upright pos-
ture, the birds’ necks were supported by a guillotine-like apparatus.
A slight, gentle sway of the wings was observed in all specimens. The
pelvic limbs were cautiously extended caudally and secured, thus stan-
dardizing the ventrodorsal alignment for all budgerigars. By adhering
to these meticulous parameters, the objective was to achieve homo-
geneity, thereby ensuring the precision of the measurements across all
stances. To ensure measurement reproducibility, each pelvis measure-
ment of the male and female budgerigars was taken three times by the
same anatomist, and the average of these values was considered for
analysis.
 20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
YILMAZ ET AL. 3 of 12

TA B L E 1 Measurement parameters and definitions of the pelvis in budgerigars.

Parameter Definition
Linear distances (cm)
L1 Cranial ilium width: Horizontal distance greatest width between the cranial
end of the os ilium
L2 Preacetabular tubercle width: Horizontal distance greatest width between
the preacetabular tubercle
L3 Acetabula width: Horizontal distance between greatest width between the
both acetabula (pelvis width)
L4 Middle pubis width: Horizontal distance between greatest width between
the middle pubis
L5 Caudal pubis width: Horizontal distance between greatest width between
the caudal end of the os pubis
L6 Caudal ischium width: Horizontal distance between smallest width between
the caudal end of the os ischii
L7 Left iliopubic length: Distance between the cranial end of the left ilium and
caudal end of the left pubis
L8 Right iliopubic length: Distance between the cranial end of the right ilium
and caudal end of the right pubis
L9 Synsacrum length: Distance between the cranial and caudal end of the
synsacrum
L10 Preacetabular ilium length: Distance between the cranial end of the right
ilium and the cranial end of the acetabula
L11 Postacetabular ilium length: Distance between the caudal end of the
acetabula and the caudal end of the os ilium
Angle measurements (◦ )
A1 Iliac arch: The angle between the cranial ilium arch
RA2 Right ischiopubic angle: The angle between the caudal point of the right
ischium with the right pubis in the ventrodorsal röntgen image
LA2 Left ischiopubic angle: The angle between the caudal point of the left ischium
with the left pubis in the ventrodorsal röntgen image
Ratio (length/width) measurements (total 19 parameters)
L7/L1: Left iliopubic length/cranial ilium width
L7/L2: Left iliopubic length/preacetabular tubercle width
L7/L3: Left iliopubic length/acetabula width
L7/L4: Left iliopubic length/middle pubis width
L7/L5: Left iliopubic length/caudal pubis width
L7/L6: Left iliopubic length/caudal ischium width
L8/L1: Right iliopubic length/cranial ilium width
L8/L2: Right iliopubic length/preacetabular tubercle width
L8/L3: Right iliopubic length/acetabula width
L8/L4: Right iliopubic length/middle pubis width
L8/L5: Right iliopubic length/caudal pubis width
L8/L6: Right iliopubic length/caudal ischium width
L9/L1: Synsacrum length/cranial ilium width
L9/L2: Synsacrum length/preacetabular tubercle width
L9/L3: Synsacrum length/acetabula width
L9/L4: Synsacrum length/middle pubis width
L9/L5: Synsacrum length/caudal pubis width
L9/L6: Synsacrum length/caudal ischium width
L10/L11: Preacetabular ilium length/postacetabular ilium length

4 of 12
F I G U R E 1 Ventrodorsal radiograph, pelvis measurements of male (a) and female (b and c) budgerigars, measurements: L1 (cranial ilium width),
L2 (preacetabular tubercle width), L3 (acetabula width), L4 (middle pubis width), L5 (caudal pubis width), L6 (caudal ischium width), L7 (left iliopubic
length), L8 (right iliopubic length), L9 (synsacrum length), L10 (preacetabular ilium length), L11 (postacetabular ilium length), A1 (iliac arch), RA2
(right ischiopubic angle), LA2 (left ischiopubic angle).
The morphometric measurements were conducted using measure-
ment points specified in the literature (Von den Driesch, 1976). The
anatomical reference points utilized in the measurements were named
according to Nomina Anatomica Avium (Baumel, 1993). The ventrodor-
sal images of the budgerigar pelvis were used to obtain various linear
measurements. These measurements included the width of the cra-
nial ilium width (L1), preacetabular tubercle width (L2), acetabula width
(L3), middle pubis width (L4), caudal pubis width (L5), caudal ischium
width (L6), left iliopubic length width (L7), right iliopubic length (L8),
synsacrum length (L9), preacetabular ilium length (L10) and postac-
etabular ilium length (L11). Furthermore, three angle measurements
were taken: the iliac arch (A1), the right ischiopubic angle (RA2) and
the left ischiopubic angle (LA2). Lastly, the length-to-width ratios
were calculated between the linear measurement parameters obtained
from the ventrodorsal X-ray images of the pelvis in male and female
budgerigars.
The linear measurements in the pelvis were expressed in centime-
tres (cm), whereas the angle measurements were expressed in degrees
(◦ ). Table 1 provides the measurement parameters and definitions for
the pelvis in budgerigars. The reference points utilized for osteometric
measurements of the pelvis are depicted in Figure 1a–c.
2.3 Statistical analysis
Descriptive and statistical analyses were selected by a statistician
using statistical analysis SPSS software (IBM SPSS for Windows,
ver.26). Analysis of statistical data was performed by a statistician, vet-
erinary anatomist (O.Y.), obstetrics and gynaecology specialist (D.K.).
The sample size for this study, which aimed to determine the radio-
20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
YILMAZ ET AL.
graphic pelvimetry of budgerigars according to sex, was calculated
considering a Power (power of the test) of at least 80% and a type
1 error rate of 5% for each variable. The Shapiro–Wilk test (for
cases with n < 50) was employed to assess the normal distribution of
continuous measurements. As the measurements were generally not
normally distributed, nonparametric tests were utilized. Descriptive
statistics, including mean, standard deviation, median and range, were
employed to summarize continuous variables in the study. The Mann–
Whitney U test was conducted to compare measurements among
different groups. Spearman correlation coefficients were computed to
examine the relationships between measurement values. A statistical
significance level (α) of 5% was considered in all calculations.
3 RESULTS
Table 2 provides the age and body weight measurement values for the
budgerigars included in the study. There were statistically significant
differences between age groups in both male and female budgerigars
(p < 0.05; Table 2). Furthermore, although there was no notable dispar-
ity between the sexes in the mean age measurement values (p > 0.05;
Table 2), a statistically significant difference was observed between
males and females in regard to body weight (p < 0.05; Table 2).
The ventrodorsal radiological images of the pelvis in budgerigars
of both sexes were utilized to obtain linear pelvimetric measurements
from 11 parameters. Additionally, three angle measurements, namely
the iliac arch, right ischiopubic angle and left ischiopubic angle, were
derived. Furthermore, 19 parameter ratio measurements were calcu-
lated based on the length and width measurements of the budgerigars’
pelvises. These pelvis measurements were subjected to statistical
 20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
YILMAZ ET AL. 5 of 12

TA B L E 2 Age and body weight measurement values in budgerigars according to sex.

Male Female

1–2 years (n: 15) 3–4 years (n:15) Overall (n:30) 1–2 years (n:15) 3–4 years (n:15) Overall (n:30)
Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D *p Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D *p **p
Age 16.47 ± 3.34 43.73 ± 4.15 30.10 ± 14.35 0.001 18.53 ± 3.42 41.00 ± 3.74 29.77 ± 11.96 0.001 0.994
W (g) 34.20 ± 2.21 48.00 ± 1.77 41.10 ± 7.29 0.001 27.67 ± 1.40 35.33 ± 2.29 31.50 ± 4.32 0.001 0.001

Note: Age: Shows the monthly age of budgerigars. W: Shows the body weight of budgerigars.
*p < 0.05; Mann–Whitney U test (shows differences between age groups).
**p < 0.05; Mann–Whitney U test (shows the difference between the female and male).

TA B L E 3 Descriptive statistics and comparison of the pelvimetric measurement values in budgerigars according to sex.

Male Female

1–2 years (n:15) 3–4 years (n:15) Overall (n:30) 1–2 years (n:15) 3–4 years (n:15) Overall (n:30)
Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D *p Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D *p
L1 (cm) 0.94 ± 0.08 1.17 ± 0.03 1.05 ± 0.13 0.001 0.84 ± 0.02 0.97 ± 0.09 0.91 ± 0.09 0.001
L2 (cm) 1.17 ± 0.03 1.30 ± 0.07 1.23 ± 0.09 0.001 0.97 ± 0.09 1.19 ± 0.03 1.08 ± 0.13 0.001
L3 (cm) 1.30 ± 0.07 1.52 ± 0.10 1.41 ± 0.14 0.001 1.19 ± 0.03 1.33 ± 0.07 1.26 ± 0.09 0.001
L4 (cm) 1.52 ± 0.10 1.84 ± 0.11 1.68 ± 0.19 0.001 1.33 ± 0.07 1.55 ± 0.09 1.44 ± 0.14 0.001
L5 (cm) 1.13 ± 0.03 1.43 ± 0.07 1.28 ± 0.16 0.001 1.11 ± 0.12 1.15 ± 0.04 1.13 ± 0.09 0.835
L6 (cm) 1.33 ± 0.05 1.64 ± 0.08 1.48 ± 0.17 0.001 1.15 ± 0.04 1.36 ± 0.05 1.25 ± 0.12 0.001
L7 (cm) 3.60 ± 0.06 4.61 ± 0.06 4.11 ± 0.52 0.001 2.82 ± 0.07 3.64 ± 0.07 3.23 ± 0.42 0.001
L8 (cm) 3.62 ± 0.06 4.62 ± 0.06 4.12 ± 0.51 0.001 2.85 ± 0.04 3.64 ± 0.07 3.24 ± 0.41 0.001
L9 (cm) 2.67 ± 0.10 3.68 ± 0.10 3.18 ± 0.52 0.001 2.13 ± 0.04 2.69 ± 0.10 2.41 ± 0.30 0.001
L10 (cm) 1.40 ± 0.06 1.89 ± 0.05 1.65 ± 0.26 0.001 1.10 ± 0.02 1.44 ± 0.08 1.27 ± 0.18 0.001
L11 (cm) 1.27 ± 0.06 1.78 ± 0.07 1.53 ± 0.27 0.001 1.03 ± 0.02 1.25 ± 0.07 1.14 ± 0.12 0.001
◦
A1 ( ) 108.07 ± 3.11 111.73 ± 2.12 109.90 ± 3.21 0.001 112.93 ± 3.39 113.20 ± 3.03 113.07 ± 3.16 0.917
LA2 (◦ ) 111.73 ± 2.28 114.87 ± 2.03 113.30 ± 2.65 0.001 115.87 ± 1.85 125.93 ± 1.91 120.90 ± 5.44 0.001
◦
RA2 ( ) 114.80 ± 2.34 118.53 ± 3.23 116.67 ± 3.36 0.003 117.53 ± 1.36 128.27 ± 3.45 122.90 ± 6.04 0.001

*p < 0.05; Mann–Whitney U test.

analysis to assess sexual dimorphism, and the results are presented
in Tables 3–6 and Figures 2 and 3. Statistically significant differences
were observed among the measurement values.
All linear measurement values (L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, L6, L7, L8, L9,
L10 and L11) were statistically significantly higher in male budgeri-
gars compared to female budgerigars (p < 0.05; Figure 2). However,
the angle measurement values (A1, LA2 and RA2) were found to be
statistically significantly higher in females (p < 0.05; Figure 2).
The morphometric measurement values of the pelvis were signifi-
cantly higher in 3–4-year-old male budgerigars compared to 1–2-year-
old males (p < 0.05; Table 3). When examining the measurement values
of the pelvis in females across age groups, it was generally found that
all linear and angle measurement values were higher in the 3–4-year-
old group compared to the 1–2-year-old group. However, there was a
statistically significant difference in measurement values (L1, L2, L3, L4,
L6, L7, L8, L9, L10, L11, LA2 and RA2) between these groups (p < 0.05;
Table 3), whereas there was no statistically significant difference in the
measurement values of L5 and A1 (p > 0.05; Table 3).
All ratio measurements, with the exception of the L10/L11
ratio, were statistically significantly higher in males compared to
females (p < 0.05; Figure 3). However, it was observed that there
was no statistically significant difference in the mean L10/L11
measurement values between males and females (p > 0.05;
Figure 3).
In general, the average ratio measurements were higher in both
male and female budgerigars in the 3–4-year-old groups compared
to the 1–2-year-old groups (Table 4). Specifically, in male budgeri-
gars, significant differences were found among the mean ratio mea-
surement values of L7/L2, L7/L3, L7/L4, L8/L2, L8/L3, L8/L4, L9/L1,
L9/L2, L9/L3, L9/L4, L9/L5, L9/L6 and L10/L11 (p < 0.05; Table 4). In
female budgerigars, significant differences were observed in the mean
ratio measurement values of L7/L1, L7/L2, L7/L3, L7/L4, L7/L5, L7/L6,
L8/L1, L8/L3, L8/L4, L8/L5, L8/L6, L9/L1, L9/L3, L9/L4, L9/L5, L9/L6
and L10/L11. These differences were found to be statistically signifi-
cantly higher in the 3–4-year-old groups compared to the 1–2-year-old
groups (p < 0.05; Table 4).
 20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
6 of 12 YILMAZ ET AL.

TA B L E 4 Descriptive statistics and comparison the ratios of the pelvimetric measurement values in budgerigars according to sex.

Male Female

1–2 years (n:15) 3–4 years (n:15) Overall (n:30) 1–2 years (n:15) 3–4 years (n:15) Overall (n:30)
Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D *p Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D Mean ± S.D *p
L7/L1 (cm) 3.86 ± 0.36 3.95 ± 0.11 3.91 ± 0.27 0.443 3.35 ± 0.11 3.77 ± 0.39 3.56 ± 0.36 0.001
L7/L2 (cm) 3.09 ± 0.09 3.56 ± 0.24 3.32 ± 0.30 0.001 2.92 ± 0.32 3.06 ± 0.10 2.99 ± 0.24 0.049
L7/L3 (cm) 2.78 ± 0.19 3.04 ± 0.21 2.91 ± 0.24 0.001 2.37 ± 0.11 2.75 ± 0.19 2.56 ± 0.25 0.001
L7/L4 (cm) 2.38 ± 0.17 2.51 ± 0.17 2.44 ± 0.18 0.019 2.13 ± 0.14 2.36 ± 0.16 2.25 ± 0.19 0.001
L7/L5 (cm) 3.21 ± 0.10 3.23 ± 0.17 3.22 ± 0.14 0.967 2.58 ± 0.28 3.17 ± 0.12 2.88 ± 0.37 0.001
L7/L6 (cm) 2.72 ± 0.12 2.82 ± 0.14 2.77 ± 0.14 0.054 2.46 ± 0.12 2.68 ± 0.12 2.57 ± 0.16 0.001
L8/L1 (cm) 3.88 ± 0.37 3.96 ± 0.12 3.92 ± 0.27 0.419 3.39 ± 0.12 3.78 ± 0.39 3.58 ± 0.34 0.002
L8/L2 (cm) 3.10 ± 0.10 3.57 ± 0.24 3.34 ± 0.30 0.001 2.95 ± 0.30 3.07 ± 0.10 3.01 ± 0.23 0.078
L8/L3 (cm) 2.79 ± 0.19 3.05 ± 0.22 2.92 ± 0.24 0.001 2.40 ± 0.06 2.75 ± 0.19 2.58 ± 0.23 0.001
L8/L4 (cm) 2.39 ± 0.17 2.52 ± 0.18 2.45 ± 0.18 0.019 2.15 ± 0.11 2.36 ± 0.16 2.26 ± 0.17 0.001
L8/L5 (cm) 3.22 ± 0.11 3.24 ± 0.17 3.23 ± 0.14 0.852 2.61 ± 0.30 3.18 ± 0.12 2.89 ± 0.37 0.001
L8/L6 (cm) 2.73 ± 0.12 2.83 ± 0.14 2.78 ± 0.14 0.065 2.49 ± 0.09 2.68 ± 0.12 2.58 ± 0.14 0.001
L9/L1 (cm) 2.87 ± 0.31 3.15 ± 0.14 3.01 ± 0.28 0.006 2.53 ± 0.08 2.80 ± 0.32 2.66 ± 0.27 0.017
L9/L2 (cm) 2.29 ± 0.12 2.84 ± 0.20 2.57 ± 0.32 0.001 2.20 ± 0.22 2.27 ± 0.12 2.24 ± 0.18 0.178
L9/L3 (cm) 2.06 ± 0.15 2.43 ± 0.18 2.24 ± 0.24 0.001 1.79 ± 0.05 2.04 ± 0.14 1.91 ± 0.16 0.001
L9/L4 (cm) 1.76 ± 0.13 2.00 ± 0.14 1.88 ± 0.18 0.001 1.61 ± 0.10 1.75 ± 0.13 1.68 ± 0.13 0.002
L9/L5 (cm) 2.38 ± 0.10 2.58 ± 0.15 2.48 ± 0.16 0.001 1.95 ± 0.22 2.35 ± 0.11 2.15 ± 0.27 0.001
L9/L6 (cm) 2.02 ± 0.10 2.25 ± 0.13 2.13 ± 0.16 0.001 1.86 ± 0.07 1.98 ± 0.10 1.92 ± 0.10 0.001
L10/L11(cm) 1.06 ± 0.05 1.11 ± 0.06 1.08 ± 0.06 0.029 1.06 ± 0.03 1.15 ± 0.09 1.11 ± 0.08 0.007

*p < 0.05; Mann–Whitney U test.

TA B L E 5 Correlation between the pelvimetric measurement values with age and body weight in budgerigars according to sex.

Male (n:30) Female (n:30)

Age Body weight (g) Age Body weight (g)

Age R 1.000 1.000
Body weight (g) R 0.979** 1.000 0.971** 1.000
L1 (cm) R 0.719** 0.705** 0.580** 0.612**
L2 (cm) R 0.507** 0.473** 0.715** 0.706**
L3 (cm) R 0.543** 0.525** 0.530** 0.536**
L4 (cm) R 0.609** 0.587** 0.565** 0.562**
L5 (cm) R 0.668** 0.649** -0.079 -0.062
L6 (cm) R 0.661** 0.635** 0.677** 0.712**
L7 (cm) R 0.852** 0.830** 0.846** 0.812**
L8 (cm) R 0.841** 0.824** 0.739** 0.739**
L9 (cm) R 0.726** 0.746** 0.755** 0.752**
L10 (cm) R 0.766** 0.777** 0.727** 0.720**
L11 (cm) R 0.702** 0.721** 0.803** 0.805**
◦
A1 ( ) R 0.427* 0.425* 0.033 0.154
LA2 (◦ ) R 0.622** 0.622** 0.704** 0.718**
◦
RA2 ( ) R 0.443* 0.502** 0.799** 0.793**

Note: R: Spearman correlations coefficients (%); spearman’s correlation analysis.

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01
 20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
YILMAZ ET AL. 7 of 12

F I G U R E 2 Distribution of the morphometric measurements of the pelvis in budgerigars according to sex. *p < 0.05, Mann–Whitney U test.
Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval. Measurements: L1 (cranial ilium width), L2 (preacetabular tubercle width), L3 (acetabula width), L4
(middle pubis width), L5 (caudal pubis width), L6 (caudal ischium width), L7 (left iliopubic length), L8 (right iliopubic length), L9 (synsacrum length),
L10 (preacetabular ilium length), L11 (postacetabular ilium length), A1 (iliac arch), RA2 (right ischiopubic angle), LA2 (left ischiopubic angle).
 20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
8 of 12 YILMAZ ET AL.

TA B L E 6 Correlation between the ratios of the pelvimetric measurement values with age and body weight in budgerigars according to sex.

Male (n:30) Female (n:30)

Age Body weight (g) Age Body weight (g)

Age R 1.000 1.000
Body weight (g) R 0.979** 1.000 0.971** 1.000
L7/L1 (cm) R 0.192 0.210 0.642** 0.592**
L7/L2 (cm) R 0.868** 0.896** 0.400* 0.393*
L7/L3 (cm) R 0.709** 0.754** 0.848** 0.823**
L7/L4 (cm) R 0.596** 0.623** 0.787** 0.776**
L7/L5 (cm) R 0.224 0.257 0.811** 0.792**
L7/L6 (cm) R 0.518** 0.570** 0.777** 0.730**
L8/L1 (cm) R 0.205 0.224 0.539** 0.505**
L8/L2 (cm) R 0.859** 0.887** 0.326 0.333
L8/L3 (cm) R 0.705** 0.751** 0.800** 0.789**
L8/L4 (cm) R 0.593** 0.621** 0.713** 0.720**
L8/L5 (cm) R 0.191 0.225 0.767** 0.748**
L8/L6 (cm) R 0.491** 0.550** 0.695** 0.668**
L9/L1 (cm) R 0.439* 0.462* 0.435* 0.404*
L9/L2 (cm) R 0.794** 0.834** 0.210 0.237
L9/L3 (cm) R 0.776** 0.815** 0.773** 0.774**
L9/L4 (cm) R 0.696** 0.744** 0.652** 0.654**
L9/L5 (cm) R 0.646** 0.661** 0.720** 0.714**
L9/L6 (cm) R 0.722** 0.758** 0.678** 0.638**
L10/L11 (cm) R -0.242 -0.266 0.378* 0.392*

Note: R: Spearman correlations coefficients (%); spearman’s correlation analysis.

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01

There was a statistically significant positive correlation between age
and body weight with all average morphometric measurement values
of the pelvis, in male budgerigars (p < 0.05; Table 5). Similarly, in female
budgerigars, positive correlations were found between age and body
weight with both these variables and the measurement values of L1,
L2, L3, L4, L6, L7, L8, L9, L10, L11, LA2 and RA2 (p < 0.05; Table 5). How-
ever, a negative correlation was observed between the measurement
value of L5 with age and weight in female budgerigars, although this
correlation was not statistically significant (p > 0.05; Table 5). Addition-
ally, a statistically insignificant positive correlation was found between
the measurement value of A1 with age and body weight in female
budgerigars (p > 0.05; Table 5).
Table 6 presents the correlation between age and body weight with
the pelvic ratio measurement values in budgerigars by sex. In males,
significant positive correlations were found between age and body
weight with the following ratio measurements: L7/L2, L7/L3, L7/L4,
L7/L6, L8/L2, L8/L3, L8/L4, L8/L6, L9/L1, L9/L2, L9/L3, L9/L4, L9/L5 and
L9/L6 (p < 0.05). However, a weak correlation was observed between
the L10/L11 ratio measurement value with age and body weight in
males, but it was not statistically significant (p > 0.05; Table 6). In
female budgerigars, statistically significant positive correlations were
found between age and body weight with all morphometric ratio mea-
surements, except for the L8/L2 and L9/L2 ratios. Weak correlations
were also observed between these two ratio measurements with age
and body weight, but they were not statistically significant (p > 0.05;
Table 6). Overall, the table data indicates mostly positive and signifi-
cant correlations between age and body weight with pelvimetric ratio
measurement values in both males and females (p < 0.05; Table 6).
4 DISCUSSION
Osteometric data from animal pelvises are commonly utilized for
taxonomic classification, examining morphological variations within
species, and identifying sexual dimorphism traits. Moreover, these
obtained osteometric data offer significant insights into crucial sci-
entific fields, including evolutionary studies, developmental research
and forensic sciences (Pitakarnnop et al., 2017; Yilmaz & Demircioglu,
2021). It is especially important to examine the morphometric and mor-
phological features of the pelvis in birds, to determine the phylogenic
and allometric characteristics of bird species, to reveal their locomo-
tor behaviour, to determine their ecological diversity, to control the
healthy laying of eggs and to evaluate various congenital or acquired
pathological changes related to the pelvis region (Frank et al., 2022;
 20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
YILMAZ ET AL. 9 of 12

F I G U R E 3 Distribution of the ratios of the pelvimetric measurement values in budgerigars according to sex. *p < 0.05, Mann–Whitney U test.
Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval. Measurements: L7/L1 (left iliopubic length/cranial ilium width), L7/L2 (left iliopubic
length/preacetabular tubercle width), L7/L3 (left iliopubic length/acetabula width), L7/L4 (left iliopubic length/middle pubis width), L7/L5 (left
iliopubic length/caudal pubis width), L7/L6 (left iliopubic length/caudal ischium width), L8/L1 (right iliopubic length/cranial ilium width), L8/L2 (right
iliopubic length/preacetabular tubercle width), L8/L3 (Right iliopubic length/acetabula width), L8/L4 (right iliopubic length/middle pubis width),
L8/L5 (right iliopubic length/caudal pubis width), L8/L6 (right iliopubic length/caudal ischium width), L9/L1 (synsacrum length/cranial ilium width),
L9/L2 (synsacrum length/preacetabular tubercle width), L9/L3 (synsacrum length/acetabula width), L9/L4 (synsacrum length/middle pubis width),
L9/L5 (synsacrum length/caudal pubis width), L9/L6 (synsacrum length/caudal ischium width), L10/L11 (preacetabular ilium length/postacetabular
ilium length).

Reddy & Sivajothi, 2018; Rosen, 2012; Shatkovska et al., 2018). In
recent years, significant advancements in computer technologies have
led to the utilization of various medical imaging techniques for examin-
ing the anatomical structures of exotic pet animals. These techniques
include radiography, which encompasses contrast studies, as well as
ultrasound, which involves both contrast imaging and echocardiogra-
phy. These imaging modalities have proven valuable in diagnosing and
evaluating the efficacy of treatment for various pathological conditions
in birds, small mammals and reptiles. Additionally, advanced medical
imaging methods such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI) have gained widespread usage in this field
(Krautwald-Junghanns et al., 2011). In addition to the aforementioned
techniques, the radiological imaging method, in particular, is routinely
employed in the examination of morphological and morphometric char-
acteristics of various osteological structures, including the pelvis, in
birds. This method is inexpensive and easy to use, and images can
be obtained quickly (Cavinatto et al., 2016; Harcourt-Brown, 2001;
Silva et al., 2020; Smith & Smith, 1992). In this study, the ventrodorsal
radiographic images of budgerigars were utilized to determine linear
osteometric measurements and angle values of the pelvis. Addition-
ally, height-to-width ratios between pelvimetric measurements were
assessed, and correlations were examined among age, body weight,
pelvimetric measurements and ratio measurements in these animals.
Furthermore, these pelvimetric values were evaluated in terms of
sexual dimorphism.
Numerous studies have been conducted to investigate the anatom-
ical, morphological and osteometric characteristics of the pelvis and
other bony structures in the pelvic limb region of birds, specifically
focusing on sexual dimorphism (Abdul-Rahman et al., 2015; Frigot,
2019; Schnell et al., 1985; Silva et al., 2020; Szara et al., 2022). Fur-
thermore, studies have reported that the majority of measurement
parameters obtained from the pelvis tend to be higher in males com-
pared to females. However, the angle measurement parameters of
the pelvis are generally found to be higher in females (Celimli et al.,
2008; Monteiro et al., 2013; Pitakarnnop et al., 2017; Yilmaz et al.,
2020). Consistent with the information provided, our study revealed
that all linear measurement values (L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, L6, L7, L8, L9,
L10 and L11) exhibited statistically significant differences between
the sexes, with male budgerigars showing higher values compared to
female budgerigars (p < 0.05). Conversely, angle measurement values
of A1, LA2 and RA2 were found to be statistically significantly higher in
females (p < 0.05). Based on these findings, we can conclude that the
pelvis of budgerigars tends to be larger in males compared to females.
Moreover, the higher angle measurements observed in females suggest
that they possess anatomical adaptations that facilitate comfortable
egg-laying or spawning.

10 of 12
In the conducted studies, the measurement value of ‘pre-acetabular
ilium length/post-acetabular ilium length’ was determined as 1:1 in
common hawk-cuckoo (Hierococcyx varius) and as 3:2 in yellow-billed
babbler (Argya affinis), respectively (Supriya et al., 2020). Furthermore,
in ostrich (Struthio camelus), emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae), domestic
fowl (Gallus gallus domesticus) and duck (Anas platyrhynchos domesti-
cus), the values for ‘pre-acetabular ilium length/post-acetabular ilium
length’ were determined as 1:2.22, 1:1.58, 1:1.21 and 1:1.44, respec-
tively (Rajani et al., 2019). In the literature, various measurements have
been reported for the pre- and post-acetabular lengths of the ilium
in different bird species. In the blue and yellow macaw (Ara ararauna),
Sathyamoorthy et al. (2019) measured these lengths as 4.5 and 4.0 cm,
respectively. For the Chinese goose (Anser cygnoides), the measure-
ments were reported as 6.80 and 7.2 cm, respectively (Sathyamoorthy
et al., 2020). Nickel et al. (1977) measured these lengths as 6 and
5 cm, respectively, in pigeons. In the case of the emu (Dromaius novae-
hollandiae), Sridevi et al. (2020) reported the lengths as 10.8 and
18.2 cm, respectively. Deshmukh et al. (2016) measured the lengths
in peacocks as 7.5 ± 0.058 cm (pre-acetabular) and 5.0 ± 0.058 cm
(post-acetabular), and in peahens as 8 ± 0.058 cm (pre-acetabular) and
5.4 ± 0.058 cm (post-acetabular). For Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix
japonica), the lengths were reported as 2.20 ± 0.11 cm (pre-acetabular)
and 1.5 ± 0.06 cm (post-acetabular) (Mehta et al., 2014). In the cur-
rent study, the pre-acetabular length measurements were found to
be 1.65 ± 0.26 and 1.27 ± 0.18 cm, whereas the post-acetabular
length measurements were 1.53 ± 0.27 and 1.14 ± 0.12 cm, for male
and female budgerigars, respectively. Additionally, the ‘pre-acetabular
ilium length/post-acetabular ilium length’ ratios were calculated as
1.08 ± 0.06 for males and 1.11 ± 0.08 for females in budgerigars. These
findings indicate that the pre-acetabular length is greater than the
post-acetabular length in budgerigars.
In the reviewed literature, no measurement parameter regarding
the length/width ratio of the bird pelvis was found. However, stud-
ies in the literature have demonstrated the use of height/width ratio
measurements in other animals. For example, in dogs (Campos et al.,
2019), cats (Celimli et al., 2008; Monteiro et al., 2013), lynxes (Morend
et al., 2022) and agouti (Dasyprocta prymnolopha) bred under human
care (Ferraz et al., 2022), height/width ratio measurement parame-
ters have been derived using linear measurement values obtained from
pelvimetric X-ray images. In the current study, it was observed that
all length/width ratio measurements, except for the L10/L11 ratio,
were significantly higher in males compared to females. The lower
length/width ratios in female budgerigars suggest that the pelvic canal
is wider transversely in females. This anatomical difference is believed
to facilitate comfortable egg-laying, spawning and ovulation in females.
Age and body weight play a significant role in evaluating osteo-
metric measurement parameters of the pelvis. Previous studies have
indicated a positive correlation between morphometric measurements
of the pelvis with the age and body weight of both male and female
animals (Campbell & Marcus, 1992; Campos et al., 2019; Celimli
et al., 2008; Dobak et al., 2018; Nahkur et al., 2011; Yilmaz et al.,
2020). Furthermore, in a study conducted by Campos et al. (2019),
on dogs, positive correlations were observed in all pelvic parameters,
20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
YILMAZ ET AL.
except for pelvic ratios. Similarly, in a study by Yilmaz and Demir-
cioglu (2020) on the morphometric measurements of the pelvis in Van
cats, mostly positive correlations were found among the pelvic mea-
surements. Although positive correlations are commonly observed in
the majority of studies on pelvic measurements, there are instances
where negative correlations have been reported. For example, Leão
et al. (2022) found mostly positive correlations among pelvic measure-
ments in Tamandua tetradactyla, and Pinheiro et al. (2016) reported
similar findings in the common marmoset. However, it should also
be noted that there are slightly negative correlations among pelvis
measurements in these animals. Additionally, in a study conducted
by Anten-Houston et al. (2017), on pelvis dimensions in 146 bird
species, positive relationships were found between body weight and
pelvic measurements, with the exception of PAR and ACD measure-
ment values. In our study, we found significant positive correlations
between age and body weight with the pelvic measurement values
in both male and female subjects (p < 0.05). These findings suggest
that osteometric measurements and their correlations have poten-
tial utility in future studies encompassing taxonomic classification,
phylogenetic analysis, ornithology, allometry and characterization. Fur-
thermore, these measurements can contribute to the understanding of
locomotive behaviours and external body measurements of the studied
population.
Our study had some limitations. First, the morphometric measure-
ments were taken from ventrodorsal images of the pelvis of only 60
budgerigars, specifically from 2 age groups (1–2-year old and 3–4-year
old) for both males and females. To enhance the study’s robustness,
measurements could have been obtained from a larger sample size
and additional age groups using comparative measurements or latero-
lateral and dorsoventral projections. However, due to limitations in
available resources, we were restricted to this particular age group
and the use of ventrodorsal radiographic images. Another limitation of
our study is that the measurements were obtained solely from X-ray
images. It would have been beneficial to collect pelvimetric measure-
ments from multiplanar sections (sagittal, dorsal and transverse) using
advanced medical imaging techniques such as MRI or CT. However,
these imaging methods could not be used due to the fact that these
devices are expensive and require specialized personnel.
5 CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, this study utilized X-ray images to determine linear
osteometric measurements of the pelvis and calculate length/width
ratios in budgerigars. The analysis focused on examining the biomet-
ric differences of these measurements in relation to sexual dimorphism
across different age groups. The findings of this study provide essen-
tial morphometric data that can be valuable for various applications,
including taxonomic classification of budgerigars, distinguishing dif-
ferences between species, studies in the field of zooarchaeology, and
aiding veterinarians in clinical practice. These findings contribute to the
existing knowledge base and offer practical implications for different
areas of research and professional practice.
 20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
YILMAZ ET AL. 11 of 12

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS determining their relationship in the French bulldog. Journal of Veterinary
Conception and design; analysis and interpretation of data; drafting the arti- and Animal Research, 2, 105.
Cavinatto, C. C., Armando, A., Cruz, L. K. S., Lima, E. M. M., & Santana, M.
cle; revising article for intellectual content; final approval of the completed
I. S. (2016). Descrição anatômica de esqueletos de papagaios do gênero
article: Osman Yilmaz and Davut Koca. Acquisition of data; revising arti- Amazona através da utilização de radiografias. Pesquisa Veterinária
cle for intellectual content; final approval of the completed article: M. Eren Brasileira, 36(2), 123–130.
Sahin and Talha Avcilar. Celimli, N., Intas, D. S., Yilmazbas, G., Intas, K. S., Keskin, A., Kumru, I. H.,
& Kramer, M. (2008). Radiographic pelvimetry and evaluation of radio-
graphic findings of the pelvis in cats with dystocia. Tierärztliche Praxis
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Ausgabe K: Kleintiere/Heimtiere, 36(4), 277–284.
The authors would like to thank for providing radiological imaging to Deshmukh, S. K., Karmore, S. K., Gupta, S. K., Kodape, S., & Prakash, R.
Vetorka and Beta Veterinary Clinics, Bursa, Turkey. In addition, we (2016). Comparative biometrical studies on the os-coxae and synsacrum
of peacock and peahen. Veterinary Practitioner, 17(1), 41–42.
would like to thank Dr. Sadi Elasan (statistician, assoc. prof, Ph.D.) for
Dobak, T. P., Voorhout, G., Vernooij, J. C. M., & Boroffka, S. (2018). Com-
his assistance in the selection and evaluation of statistical tests. puted tomographic pelvimetry in English bulldogs. Theriogenology, 118,
144–149.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT Durmus, I. (2022). Evcil Kuşlarda Kitlelerin Klasifikasyonu ve Lezyonlu Alan-
ların Histogram Analizi Ankara University, Institute of Health Sciences,
The authors declare that there were no conflicts of interest in the
Department of Surgery, Master’s Thesis, Ankara, Türkiye.
realisation of this study. Dursun, N. (2007). Evcil Kuşların Anatomisi. Medisan Publishing.
Farhad, A., Masoud, S., & Shervin, B. (2022). Effect of citric acid versus
FUNDING INFORMATION EDTA on radiographic root development in regenerative endodontic
treatment: An animal study. Journal of Endodontics, 48(4), 535–541.
There is no financial support.
Ferraz, M. S., Santos, E. M., Rocha, D. G., de Souza Neto, M. F., Pessoa, G. T.,
Albuquerque, D. M. N., Pires, L. C., & Carvalho, M. A. M. (2022). Pelvimet-
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT ric caracteristics in agoutis (Dasyprocta prymnolopha) bred in captivity.
The data sets generated for this study are available on request to the Revista Brasileira de Ciência Veterinária, 29(3), 135–141.
Frank, T. M., Dodson, P., & Hedrick, B. P. (2022). Form and function in the
corresponding author.
avian pelvis. Journal of Morphology, 283(6), 875–893.
Frigot, R. A. (2019). Morphological variation in the avian pelvis [PhD Thesis].
ETHICS STATEMENT Johns Hopkins University.
All procedures were performed with the approval of the Van YYU Ani- Harcourt-Brown, N. (2001). Radiographic morphology of the pelvic limb
of Falconiformes and its taxonomic implications. Netherlands Journal of
mal Experiments Local Ethics Committee, approval number 2023/03-
Zoology, 51(2), 155–178.
06 and dated: 31/01/2023.
Kılıcarslan, R. (2012). Papağangil ve Ötücü Kafes Kuşu Hastalıkları (Vol. 259).
Nobel Matbacılık.
ORCID Klever, J., de Motte, A., Meyer-Lindenberg, A., & Brühschwein, A. (2022).
Osman Yilmaz https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2013-9213 Evaluation and comparison of self-made and commercial calibration
markers for radiographic magnification correction in veterinary digital
Davut Koca https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7962-6959
radiography. Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology,
Mustafa Eren Sahin https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1985-2345 35(1), 10–17.
Talha Avcilar https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7034-9644 König, H. E., Korbel, R., & Liebich, H. G. (2016). Avian anatomy textbook and
colour atlas (2nd ed.). 5m Publishing, Schattauer GmbH.
Krautwald-Junghanns, M. E., Pees, M., Reese, S., & Tully, T. (2011). Diagnostic
PEER REVIEW
imaging of exotic pets: Birds, small mammals, reptiles. Schlütersche.
The peer review history for this article is available at Kubiak, M. (2020). Budgerigars and cockatiels. In Handbook of exotic pet
https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/ medicine (Vol. 297, pp. 141–164). Wiley-Blackwell.
10.1002/vms3.1340. Leão, A. P., Lima, A. R. D., Coutinho, L. N., D’Angiolella, A. B., Romagnolli, P.,
Lima, E., & Branco, É. (2022). Radiographic pelvimetry in the Tamandua
tetradactyla. Ciência Rural, 53, e20210847.
REFERENCES Mehta, S., Guha, K., Shalini, S., & Kumar, C. (2014). Gross anatomical stud-
Abdul-Rahman, I. I., Awumbila, B., Jeffcoate, I. A., Robinson, J. E., & Obese, F. ies on the os coxae and synsacrum of Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix
Y. (2015). Sexing in guinea fowls (Numida meleagris). Poultry Science, 94(2), japonica). Indian Journal of Veterinary Anatomy, 26(2), 126–127.
311–318. Monteiro, C. L. B., Campos, A. I. M., Madeira, V. L. H., Silva, H. V. R., Freire, L.
Anten-Houston, M. V., Ruta, M., & Deeming, D. C. (2017). Effects of phy- M. P., Pinto, J. N., de Souza, L. P., & da Silva, L. D. (2013). Pelvic differences
logeny and locomotor style on the allometry of body mass and pelvic between brachycephalic and mesaticephalic cats and indirect pelvimetry
dimensions in birds. Journal of Anatomy, 231(3), 342–358. assessment. Veterinary Record, 172(1), 16.
Baumel, J. J. (1993). Handbook of avian anatomy: Nomina anatomica avium Morend, F., Lang, J., Vidondo, B., & Ryser-Degiorgis, M. P. (2022). Radio-
(2nd ed.). Publications of the Nuttall Ornithological Club (USA). graphic pelvimetry in free-ranging Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx carpathicus)
Campbell, K. E., & Marcus, L. (1992). The relationship of hindlimb bone from Switzerland. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 68(4), 48.
dimensions to body weight in birds. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles Nahkur, E., Ernits, E., Jalakas, M., & Järv, E. (2011). Morphological charac-
County Science Series, 36, 395–412. teristics of pelves of Estonian Holstein and Estonian native breed cows
Campos, A. I. M., Uchoa, D. C., Monteiro, C. L. B., da Silva, T. F. P., & da Silva, from the perspective of calving. Anatomia, Histologia, Embryologia, 40(5),
L. D. M. (2019). Establishing a body and pelvic biometric standard and 379–388.

12 of 12
Nickel, R., Schummer, A., & Seiferle, E. (1977). Anatomy of the domestic birds
(Vol. 2). Verlag Paul Parey.
Pinheiro, L. L., Lima, A. R., Bombonato, P. P., Castro, P. H. G., Silva, G. A., Vaz,
M. G. R., & Branco, E. (2016). X-ray pelvimetry in common marmoset (Cal-
lithrix jacchus-LINNAEUS, 1758). Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária
e Zootecnia, 68, 695–701.
Pitakarnnop, T., Buddhacha, K., Euppayo, T., Kriangwanich, W., &
Nganvongpanit, K. (2017). Feline (Felis catus) skull and pelvic mor-
phology and morphometry: Gender-related difference? Anatomia,
Histologia, Embryologia, 46(3), 294–303.
Rajani, C. V., Patki, H. S., Wilson, H. M., & Surjith, K. (2019). Compara-
tive morphological studies of the pelvic limb bones in ostrich (Struthio
camelus), emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae), domestic fowl (Gallus gallus
domesticus) and duck (Anas platyrhynchos domesticus). Indian Journal of
Animal Research, 53(11), 1445–1449.
Reddy, B. S., & Sivajothi, S. (2018). Egg binding in budgerigar (Melopsitta-
cus undulatus) an emergency condition. International Journal of Avian &
Wildlife Biology, 3(5), 352–353.
Rosen, L. B. (2012). Avian reproductive disorders. Journal of Exotic Pet
Medicine, 21(2), 124–131.
Sathyamoorthy, O. R., Churchil, R. R., & Karunakaran, N. (2019). Gross
anatomical studies on the pelvic girdle of blue and yellow macaw (Ara
ararauna). Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 7(6), 694–698.
Sathyamoorthy, O. R., Chruchil, R. R., & Dhamotharan, S. (2020). Morpho-
logical and morphometric studies on the pelvic girdle of Chinese Goose
(Anser cygnoides). Indian Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences Research,
49(4), 1–9.
Schnell, G. D., Worthen, G. L., & Douglas, M. E. (1985). Morphometric assess-
ment of sexual dimorphism in skeletal elements of California gulls, The
Condor, 87(4), 484–493.
Shatkovska, O. V., Ghazali, M., Mytiai, I. S., & Druz, N. (2018). Size and shape
correlation of birds’ pelvis and egg: Impact of developmental mode,
habitat, and phylogeny. Journal of Morphology, 279(11), 1590–1602.
Silva, I. A., Vieira, L. C., Mancini, V. R. M., Faillace, A. C. L., & Santana, M. I.
S. (2020). Radiographic anatomy of the cockatiel (Nymphicus hollandicus)
20531095, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.1340 by Cochrane Mexico, Wiley Online Library on [11/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
YILMAZ ET AL.
axial and appendicular skeleton. Anatomia, Histologia, Embryologia, 49(2),
184–195.
Smith, B. J., & Smith, S. A. (1992). The humeroscapular bone of the great
horned owl (Bubo virginianus) and other raptors. Anatomia, Histologia,
Embryologia, 21(1), 32–39.
Sridevi, P., Rajalakshmi, K., & SivaKumar, M. (2020). Gross morphological
and morphometrical studies on the pelvic girdle of emu (Dromaius novae-
hollandiae). Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 8(2), 271–274.
Supriya, B., Bharath Kumar, M. L., & Jamuna, K. V. (2020). Compara-
tive morhological study of os coxae and synsacrum bones of Common
Hawk Cukoo (Hierococcyx varius) and Yellow Billed Babbler (Argya affinis).
International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 9(10),
1284–1288.
Szara, T., Gündemir, O., Günay, E., Gün, G., Avanus, K., & Pazvant, G.
(2022). Sex determination in domestic rock pigeons (Columba livia) using
radiographic morphometry. Acta Zoologica, 105(1), 38–45.
Von den Driesch, A. (1976). A guide to the measurement of animal bones from
archaeological sites (Vol. 1). Peabody Museum Press.
Yilmaz, O., Soyguder, Z., Yavuz, A., & Dundar, I. (2020). Three-dimensional
computed tomographic examination of pelvic cavity in Van cats and its
morphometric investigation. Anatomia Histologia Embryologia, 49(1), 60–
66.
Yilmaz, O., & Demircioglu, I. (2021). Computed tomography-based morpho-
metric analysis of the hip bones (Ossa coxae) in Turkish Van cats. Kafkas
Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(1), 7–14.
How to cite this article: Yilmaz, O., Koca, D., Sahin, M. E., &
Avcilar, T. (2024). Sex determination in budgerigars using
radiographic pelvimetry. Veterinary Medicine and Science, 10,
e1340. https://doi.org/10.1002/vms3.1340