The Secret Perfume of Birds: Uncovering the Science of Avian Scent

by Danielle J. Whittaker

The untold story of a stunning not only can birds smell, but their scents may be the secret to understanding their world. The puzzling lack of evidence for the peculiar but widespread belief that birds have no sense of smell irked evolutionary biologist Danielle Whittaker. Exploring the science behind the myth led her on an unexpected quest investigating mysteries from how juncos win a fight to why cowbirds smell like cookies. In The Secret Perfume of Birds ―part science, part intellectual history, and part memoir―Whittaker blends humor, clear writing, and a compelling narrative to describe how scent is important not just for birds but for all animals, including humans. Whittaker engagingly describes how emerging research has uncovered birds' ability to produce complex chemical signals that influence their behavior, including where they build nests, when they pick a fight, and why they fly away. Mate choice, or sexual selection―a still enigmatic aspect of many animals' lives―appears to be particularly influenced by smell. Whittaker's pioneering studies suggest that birds' sexy (and scary) signals are produced by symbiotic bacteria that manufacture scents in the oil that birds stroke on their feathers when preening. From tangerine-scented auklets to her beloved juncos, redolent of moss, birds from across the world feature in Whittaker's stories, but she also examines the smelly chemicals of all kinds of creatures, from iguanas and bees to monkeys and humans. Readers will enjoy a rare opportunity to witness the twisting roads scientific research can take, especially the challenging, hilarious, and occasionally dangerous realities of ornithology in the wild. The Secret Perfume of Birds will interest anyone looking to learn more about birds, about how animals and humans use our senses, and about why it can sometimes take a rebel scientist to change what we think we know for sure about the world―and ourselves.

Genres: Birds, Science, Nonfiction, Nature, Animals, Memoir, Audiobook

296 pages, Hardcover

First published March 1, 2022

Reviews

[Corvus · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was excited when I first discovered Danielle Whittakers book on avian scent- The Secret Perfume of Birds - in part because I was struck by how little I knew about the subject. There are many myths, old and new, surrounding birds ability, or inability, to smell. This book not only taught me a lot about this subject, but also helped me understand some things about myself and other humans. This book is well written, albeit in conflicting styles at times. It also functions in part as a memoir of an unintentional scientist. Whitaker had an unusual path to becoming a researcher, which adds an interesting element of storytelling. It also shows how people with diverse educational backgrounds often find important ways to collaborate with researchers from other fields. At times I felt like the switch between memoir and harder science made the book geared towards conflicting audiences. Sometimes this served the text, but others it did not.

One of the things that struck me early on about this book, that made me quite excited, was the author's discussion of social issues and how they pertain to sciences and the history of research on birds. In many texts, we learn information about great ornithologist of the past such as John James Audubon. Times have been changing, and some Audubon Societies have voted to shift their names to something other than a man who enslaved people and shot birds that are portrayed in his famous artwork in order to pose the dead bodies. It was interesting to see a text not only mentioned Audubon's history, but also call attention to one of the times that he really messed up in both his research methods and his conclusions. Due to his extremely faulty studies of turkey vultures (and through ineptitude mislabeled black vultures,) a myth was spread that birds do not have a keen sense of smell in his publication of his results. We now know the turkey vultures can smell carrion from miles away- they are one of the few species of birds whose evidence for keen sense of smell is widely accepted. Other ornithologists called him out on this. The issues remained.

When discussing the exclusion and oppression of women in sciences, the author draws the conclusion that the reason that smell was not given as much attention in ornithology and other research is that women like her were the ones studying it. I think this is a bit more complicated as she discusses men rebutting claims that birds could not smell early on. She bases much of this on personal (accurate, believable) experiences being shut down by men regarding her hypotheses and findings. It is also worth noting that the biggest beneficiaries of things like affirmative action are white women, but race is not discussed much until the end. She also discusses the myth that birds cannot smell you (being the reason that returning nestlings is ok.) While well intentioned, it is not true, and luckily many warnings have been updated to say returning baby birds to the nest even if they do smell like you isn't a problem. In my experience, most people working in bird and other animal rescue are women. So it seems the proliferation of the myths came for many sources. None of this is to say that we should not be aware of these biases as it is well known that women are over represented in many fields that involve the care of and understanding of other animals.

Another reason why the myth of birds having an inability to smell proliferated was due to incorrect hypotheses about brain size. You may have heard the phrase bird brain used to describe someone negatively. The reality is that while birds have smaller brains, the neurons within are much more densely packed. This is why we find out through research, and to be quite honest through observation of anyone with an open mind, that birds are able to think, feel, have culture, individual differences, and so on. We also learned through research like that of the authors that birds have keen senses of smell that are important in many aspects of their lives. Through her own and others research, the author has found evidence that smell influences birds' social lives, mate choices, health and well-being, traits of offspring, and even the proliferation of a healthy microbiome. I will not go into too much detail of these because I want to focus a little bit more on how science was written about in this book.

I did not have the same reaction that some other readers had to the science reporting in this book. There is more nuance to it for me. I believe that the biggest error is that this book seems to be written for the layman at times and at others is geared toward people with science and statistical backgrounds. As a result, when the author reports an observation and then refers to that observation as not being "statistically significant," folks with a science/statistics background know that this means that that result could be caused by chance (or human error/bias.) We know that this is something that needs to be studied further or something that may not exist at all as a result. People without any science or statistics background may read these passages and take away from them that the result was proof of a behavior. Whittaker choosing to mix many of her statistically significant results with other observations that may be caused by pure chance or coincidence can be seen as irresponsible with a mixed audience.

On the other hand, there is a large issue in science publication wherein only certain results that support certain hypotheses end up being published. However, it is very important for us to also publish when studies do not support the hypothesis, but these papers aren't as sexy and as a result, are not found in journals nearly as much. With this reality in mind, I found the author's humility regarding what she found in many of her studies to be refreshing. She discusses the results in a rather young field and admits when her team made mistakes, didn't find what they were looking for, or where the methodology even if it does provide a cause and effect result, may not tell the whole picture. The last point is extremely important and something that I find highly frustrating in a lot of science reporting on other animals. I thought the author did a good job of this provided that the reader understands what some of the terminology is ahead of time.

The ethics reporting in this book started off strong but ended up mixed or disappointing at times. While she did highlight some of the problems with researchers like Audubon and mentioned that some studies with birds are cruel, she goes on to discuss many of these things later to support her points. She does so not only without criticism, but with faulty euphemisms to turn off the reader's (and I assume her own) empathy and cognitive dissonance. I would honestly rather someone report on horrific abuse of animals in sciences without comment, than to do so in a way that falsely placates the warranted worries of the reader. I also found some of her descriptions of her own actions with birds to go against her assertion that research causes stress that must be accounted for and reduced as much as possible. None of this is unusual for science writing, but I expected better from an author claiming to go against the grain in terms of oppression in science. We need to accept that the idea of "no difference that humans chose to see" does not mean suffering did not occur. I believe anyone who's had brain surgery or injury can explain pretty definitively that is it is not like getting a paper cut yet it is always treated that way and text like these, and those are people who can actually grasp what has happened and why.

I believe her reporting regarding evolutionary advantages to certain aspects of avian scent to be frustrating at times. This is another thing that is very common in science texts and I don't really understand why. Perhaps it is the need to be able to streamline things into a simple conclusion, or just seeing what we want to see. We know from the entire study of evolution that traits existing currently in any living creature are not all entirely advantageous. We know the evolution is something that takes place over an extremely long amount of time with traits appearing randomly and some proliferating through selective breeding. However, since you cannot isolate or remove one aspect of anyone, other traits will proliferate with those some of them being advantageous in others being not at all- sickle cell anemia being protective of malaria infection for instance. There are also tons of individual differences especially psychologically. Whitaker goes out of her way a lot to talk about why every single thing birds do is due to evolutionary breeding advantages. Maybe birds sometimes just like having sex. Maybe some birds that are paired for the season, or especially for life, don't mind raising the young that is genetically sired by another bird because they like their partner. Or maybe they're just used to that partner and the comfort of staying there outweighs the need to genetically pass on information. Think about how many things humans do that are not evolutionarily advantageous. Other animals like humans are messy in this arena. I don't think we really need it as much time spent on evolutionary reasoning for results as they are interesting enough on their own.

The large section at the end of the book on microbiomes is where I learned the most. There was so much interesting information in there that I'd never heard before and the sections which included human information ended up making things more personal. I have hyperosmia. My sense of smell being so strong and my reactions to scents both ruin my life at times. Post-covid-19-lockdown era (covid is not over,) we know that many human beings have also experienced changes in both the scents they emit and what they can/not smell. I never realized how much physical distancing would have to do with that though until reading this book. Discussions on the combination of microbiomes through affection and socialization being important was extremely interesting. To folks wno commonly DNF books, even if you're familiar with things in the first chunks of the book I really recommend reading through the last part.

I realize that my review appears highly critical, but this is not because I did not enjoy nor get a lot out of this book. On the contrary, I learned a great number of things and this vastly expanded my understanding of birds. I now find myself thinking about avian scent research when I'm out birding, adding an entirely new aspect to the way I understand these birds' interactions and lives in general. I chose to focus critically on the writing based in part on how other reviewers discussed this book. All of this is to say that I recommend reading this book even with these criticisms in mind. Going into it already knowing to look out for some of these things enriched my experience and allowed me to focus on the things that I really wanted to learn. I would definitely read more by this author and I look forward to hearing about new advances in research on avian olfaction.

This was also posted to my blog and storygraph.

[Jenny · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great insights about birds and about women in science.

[Valerie · Rating 5 out of 5]

So much to love! Some of my all time favorite features in a book.

*nerdy bird facts that people might want to hear if I ever have to make small talk.
*non traditional path to a science career
*footnotes of a Terry Pratchett level of enjoyment
*a fantastic layout of scientific research being used to hone in on answers to some interesting questions.
*thoughtful birthday present from husband

If you enjoyed Braiding Sweetgrass, you will love this book.

[Louise · Rating 4 out of 5]

Maybe a bit technical in places for a non-scientist, but really good insight about how science works. It is important for non-scientists to see the toil, dead ends, triumphs, and how answering one question just leads to more questions. Also, it is good to see a science discipline evolves. So many science books give certainty in their answers. It is good to see the uncertainty and retrospective on previous work of both the scientist herself and others.

[Darrell · Rating 5 out of 5]

A good tale of the often indirect path science takes, and the many many inspirations and tribulations that can occur along the way. Throw in some well related science with good explanations, and you've got a fine book about avian olfactory prowess and science.

[Joana · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book describes science's efforts to contradict the long-held belief that birds don't rely much on their sense of smell. The author describes her own trajectory of thinking related to these issues and the book meanders between science experiments, a bit of chemistry, a bit of genetics, ecology and ethology. There are also some biographical sections but, for the most part, it is heavy on the science, it includes graphics of experiments but doesn't try to exclude non-scientists. I've learned a lot, even if I had to take a lot of breaks because the experiments and findings do get technical and a bit repetitive. I should also praise the author for always being authentic and showing us the hurdles and uncertainty of scientific progress.

[Rebecca · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was so satisfying on multiple levels. I loved the way the author takes us on a journey of scientific discovery, sharing how both insights and chance events led her from one step to the next in her research on olfactory communication in birds. I also loved learning what we know about this subject, and what we don't yet fully understand, through her pithy summaries of her studies and those of other researchers. But what really pulled it all together for me was her eclectic personal journey, from college plans to be a professor of medieval English literature to studying gibbons in Indonesia, from the agonies of the academic job market to the perfect job in a lab studying birds, from running a huge research center to simultaneously touring as a roller derby referee. This was a great read!

[Beth Reichard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Loved the scientific storytelling of an often neglected field of study- bird smell! Learned a lot and enjoyed the sprinkling of “life” moments throughout. It honestly made me want a whole book about the field misadventures of the Ketterson lab, but perhaps I’m biased!

[Ben · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is the memoir of an ordinary scientist, not one of the superstars rolling in prizes and grant money. As such, I really wanted to like it, and hoped to get a more honest and typical perspective on a scientific life. However, the book was a letdown. In my opinion, the science is not typical. Too much of it is low quality research. There are multiple instances of what seems to be "p-hacking." While it is nice to learn about research in progress, and not only the settled results, I do not have much faith in results that are essentially statistical noise (without significance) or that result from parsing and re-parsing a small dataset to find spurious correlations.

> in birds, only the left ovary develops, which reduces overall body weight

> brown-headed cowbirds smelled like freshly baked sugar cookies! I ran around the lab shoving the poor cowbird in everyone’s faces, demanding that they smell it. (Fun fact: People don’t like it when you thrust a largish songbird in their face, particularly one with a rather strong and pointy beak.)

> I expected that females would prefer the scent of males with more attractive plumage compared to less attractive males. But I was wrong again. Females seemed to prefer the scent of males with less tail white, although the differences between the two choices were not statistically significant.

> In animal behavior, when your predictions are all so spectacularly wrong, it’s time to take a long, hard look at your study and ask yourself what you are really testing. I designed the study with questions about mate choice in mind, but a bird in a plexiglass maze with some scented cotton balls is not choosing a mate. The bird is probably a bit stressed and confused and not interested in sex at all. Perhaps the birds’ choices were related to a different instinct, such as territoriality or fear. I went back and analyzed the characteristics of the males whose scents the females preferred, and I compared them to the rejected scents. Specifically, I compiled data on the males’ tail white (attractiveness), wing length (often used as a proxy for body size), and ratio of body mass to tarsus length (a measure of body condition—basically, how heavy the bird is relative to its body frame). A pattern emerged: whether choosing from within their own population or between their own and a different population, females preferred to be near the scent of smaller males, with shorter wings and lower mass to tarsus ratios. (There was no relationship at all with tail white.)

> Heterozygosity—meaning that the two paired chromosomes, one from each parent, each carry a different variant of a gene—is associated with better overall health. Many detrimental genes are only bad for you when you have two copies of them. Having one functional copy of the gene is sufficient for the body’s needs, and that second, inferior copy will then only be a problem if it is passed on to offspring who don’t get a functional copy from the other parent. Being heterozygous also indicates that there is less inbreeding in your background

> The researchers genotyped the males in their study at several neutral genetic markers called microsatellites (the same markers used in DNA paternity tests). These small, repeating stretches of DNA are commonly used as a proxy for measuring an individual’s overall genetic diversity. Because they are nonfunctional and do not produce any proteins or regulate any other genes, they are free to mutate more often than functional genes, resulting in high variation across individuals

> we found a significant relationship between heterozygosity and preen oil volatile compounds. Specifically, we found that genetic diversity was negatively correlated with the concentration of several volatile compounds, including 1-hexadecanol and 1-heptadecanol. Males with low heterozygosity had more of these compounds in their scent, while males with high heterozygosity had less.

> These results don’t tell us if females used the information present in odor to choose their mates, or if odor influenced whether they mated with an extra-pair male. But they do show that preen-oil-based odor predicts an individual’s potential quality and ability to produce and raise offspring. Testing whether odor alone influences such behavior would require conducting highly controlled experiments, with birds whose odors have been manipulated, and allowing the birds to mate and produce offspring. I haven’t done this work, nor do I currently plan to, mostly because I lack the necessary facilities and resources.

> the evolution of sociality itself could have been spurred by the fact that it increases access to beneficial microbes

> In species with complex social systems, including primates and carnivores, it has been suggested that certain social behaviors like grooming, food sharing, and kissing could have evolved because they transmit microbes. Other researchers have suggested that altruistic behavior—in which one individual helps another, incurring a cost to themselves with no apparent benefit—may have evolved as a way to transmit symbiotic bacteria.

> Unfortunately, my preliminary analysis on the relationship between MHC similarity and extrapair fertilizations in the UCSD and Laguna Mountain juncos is based on some shaky data and would not hold up to peer review at this point.

> Interestingly, the women showed the same preference, although it was not statistically significant.

> after decades of pioneering contributions, Bernice Wenzel sometimes shook her head and remarked how she had felt like a “lone voice in the wilderness” within the ornithological community, which was strongly influenced by the “old boys’ club” of leading ornithologists who were certain they already knew how birds perceived the world. Without diversity in the people who do science, monolithic perspectives can blind us. The fact that women’s discoveries have taken the lead in overturning the long-standing myth of avian anosmia—a myth perpetuated primarily by white men—clearly illustrates this principle

[The Inquisitive Biologist · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Secret Perfume of Birds is a research memoir chronicling 15 years of experiments that dismantled the idea that birds cannot smell, rewarding the reader with an insider's account of how science is done. Read my full review at https://inquisitivebiologist.com/2023...

[CatReader · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed reading Dr. Whittaker's book about her work studying avian scent as well as her career journey as a female scientist. Both stories were told in an engaging, accessible, thought-provoking manner, and I learned a lot from both.

Here are some other recommendations if you enjoyed this book and want to continue reading female scientists' stories:

Lab Girl by Hope Jahren (geobiology)
A Lab of One's Own: One Woman's Personal Journey through Sexism in Science by Rita Colwell (microbiology)
A Portrait of the Scientist as a Young Woman by Lindy Elkins-Tanton (planetary science)
Handprints on Hubble: An Astronaut's Story of Invention by Kathryn Sullivan (oceanography/astronomy)
The Last Stargazers: The Enduring Story of Astronomy's Vanishing Explorers by Emily Levesque (astronomy)

[James Biser · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the story of a study of dark eyed juncos and their use of smells to interact with each other. It is fascinating because it is widely accepted that birds cannot smell. This study shows that belief is untrue. It opens up a field of study that is untouched by ornithologists.

[Liz · Rating 3 out of 5]

A bit meandering, but it is pop science.

If you liked Why Fish Don't Exist, this is similar and much better written with more technical meat.

[Rob Saunders · Rating 5 out of 5]

My goodness. What a superb book. I loved: the subject matter, Dr. Whittaker's personal stories, experiences, and asides, the endeavors of research and discovery, the detailed explanations, and the deep hypotheses, implications, and conclusions - not just about birds as to whether or not, or for what reasons or purposes, they have a sense of smell - but all things related as applicable to many lifeforms, humans included. I really loved that this was a science book wrapped in plain-English prose. Brilliant. Be forewarned: There is some jargon, there are some big words, and concepts. But that's life. It's a big world. Dive in.

Of her research, Dr. Whittaker wrote:

[It] has led me on a surprising journey into not just beaks, bulbs, and behaviors but also immune systems, hormones, genes, and bacteria. I suspect all good scientists find themselves following unanticipated paths deeper into the mystery of life and the universe around us."

Indeed, scientists and non-scientists alike will enjoy reading about these mysterious and fascinating subjects.

Can birds smell? No spoiler here: The answer is yes.

Highly interesting subject matter, highly recommended reading. You'll learn stuff. I did. And if you're a birder - this is a must read. This book goes beyond the proverbial "birds and bees" talk. This book explains things deeply - the sheer wonder of it all - for the scientist in all of us.

Here are a few quotes from the book:

Dr. Whittaker wrote:

Exposure to the body odor of an ovulating woman can increase a man's testosterone levels, and men rate the scent of ovulating women as more attractive than the scent of non-ovulating women. The connections between unconscious odor preferences and sexual attraction may be unsettling, because they imply that we have less control over our mate choices then we believe....We enjoy thinking of ourselves as rational beings, not influenced by something so primal as scent. p. 20

[Junco] pairs work together to raise their offspring and defend their territory from other juncos. This social system, found in over 90% of birds, is what we call social monogamy: the male and female are pair bonded, at least for the season. Their social behavior reflects that bond; they spend most of their time near each other, and they will fight any would be suitors that show up. p. 29

...genetic monogamy is incredibly rare in any animal...This lack of faithfulness is extremely common across all birds. And humans! p. 30

I find that normal is only boring if you think you already know everything about [a subject]. And I think we are far from understanding the reasons why "normal" is normal in the first place. p. 30

Although alpha males are far more likely than beta males to reproduce, many more alpha males do not manage it at all. Achieving alpha male status is not a guarantee of success. p. 102

Clearly, behaviors that transmit beneficial bacteria among groupmates can be advantageous to the animals health and survival. In species with complex social systems, including primates and carnivores, it has been suggested that certain social behaviors like grooming, food sharing, and kissing could have evolved because they transmit microbes. Other researchers have suggested that altruistic behavior - in which one individual helps another, incurring cost to themselves with no apparent benefit - may have evolved as a way to transmit symbiotic bacteria. This fascinating hypothesis has a downright stunning implication - that it is not the animals themselves but the bacteria driving the evolution of their behavior...If microbes can manipulate the host's behavior, it would be advantageous to their genetic line to influence that host in ways that increase the survival or reproduction of other potential hosts. p. 165

I enjoy hearing about how much pleasure birders get out of spotting new species and behaviors, and I love to hear from them - this group of people is interested in the world around them and is open to learning new things. p. 224

The science of smell is an unusual field in many ways. It's difficult to understand because we can't see the molecules, or understand how another being senses them, or even accurately describe what we smell without highly specialized training. p. 226

I urge everyone reading these words to never underestimate the power of basic science, or of learning for its own sake. p. 227

[Jerry Hillyer · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a begrudging 4 stars. I'm probably closer to 3.5. First, I'm uncertain why the cover is not graced with juncos since they are the focal point of her research and of this time.

Second, I appreciate her concern for the need of more women to be involved in science, but I think she was a little melodramatic about it at the end of the book. The book would be a solid 4 or 4.5 stars if she hadn't got all woke about white men. It's boring at this point. I graduated in a class of barely a 100 people...four of the women I graduated with went on to become medical doctors (and thats just the four im aware of). That's a fairly good average in any town. Whining isn't productive; doing is. She's capable and can mentor young women in a positive manner instead of getting all itchy and scratchy in her writing.

Third, I liked the humor. She's funny, at times in a self deprecating way. She's aware of her flaws and was quite transparent. This kind of honesty is missing in many of the science books I read. I think I'd enjoy a beer with the author as she comes off as someone who doesn't mind an adult beverage. But seriously, I enjoyed the lightness of the book. The bit about roller derby was entertaining and probably my favorite part of the book.

Fourth, I was disappointed there wasn't more discussion about individual species of birds and how they smell and how they use their senses. The focus was mainly on juncos, nothing wrong with that, but there was a little too much this study and that study and this experiment and that experiment. Again, nothing wrong with that, but I wanted a more expansive natural history of bird scent and olfactory capabilities.

There's a lot to like about this book, but again, I think it needed better editing. The mini sermon she gave readers about women and science had nothing to do with bird olfactory capabilities and, in my opinion, was a waste of paper and ink.

Not a bad first effort and I hope she writes more; I'll read it.

Ps. One final note about science and scientists. It bores me to read how much of their research involves the death of animals they are studying. This is one of the worst parts of these books, and this book is no exception.

Pps. I didn't sense a great deal of religion in the book's author, but neither was she overtly hostile. I appreciate that too.

[Hannah Buschert · Rating 5 out of 5]

Danielle Whittaker’s The Secret Perfume of Birds is a fascinating read about birds and scent, which is much more complex than I ever realized. Her exploration into this field takes you through the early history of birds and sense of smell (or supposed lack there-of) and into the science of scent, glands, and biology. It had me recalling a lot of my college biology and chemistry courses and she worked out the mystery.

Besides the scientific interest in birds and scent, it’s also refreshing to read Whittaker’s take on breaking into academia and the different paths one may find themselves taking. I suspect many students have similar experiences and it is nice to see that reflected so honestly.

Whittaker flows from academia to biology of birds to roller derby so effortlessly throughout this book, at times I had to do a double-taking on what I was ready. But her book is an interesting read for biology fanatics, birders, and others interested in a career in science. I greatly appreciated the highlighting of so many women scientists from history and contemporary, as well.

[Christine Behringer · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this. It's interesting to see the research still in progress- a lot of the studies didn't give clear results, a lot of questions still haven't been explored. But this peek into one scientist's journey, their work specifically and the other works that have played a role in their studies was very fun. The author has a good sense of humor and I laughed several times throughout the book. And I appreciate the encouragement for everyone to get out there and do the things that interest them. Maybe it leads you to new scientific paths, maybe it leads you to roller derby, maybe it leads somewhere else. But curiosity is good and should be indulged and I liked seeing her story of chasing her own curiosity.

[Andrew Blok]

The idea of bird scents had never crossed my mind, even though I've spent a fair amount of time watching them. For a topic that delves into genetics, chemistry and other technical matters, the book was understandable and accessible. I learned a lot!

Besides covering the emerging science of bird scent, Whittaker covers her time as a woman on an unconventional path through academia, scientific research and roller derby. The science was more interesting to me, though I appreciated how the scientific and personal always seemed to feed one another, a point that was a great illustration of her point that greater diversity in science is good for the field.

[Mary Keen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I observe many fascinating behaviors in various wild birds as a volunteer for W Bluebird nest box monitoring so was hoping for more definitive information on birds' ability to smell.

For example, bill wiping, often seen and tho't to be only for cleaning, may also serve a scent-related purpose, but it's still being studied and not known yet. I really appreciate that Danielle Whittaker is studying things like this and will be following her.
I also admire her honesty in acknowledging how she could have made one of her studies more helpful, eg including females.

Very well organized with a Bibliography, an Index, and Notes from each Chapter, all appreciated. I especially love the useful Glossary --names for so many behaviors of birds.

I will definitely check it out again when i have more time and am grateful I can locate the title here --thanks, Goodreads! I do want to buy a used copy if/when the price comes down.

[Jess · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had hoped for more information about different species around the world and their sense of smell. But it seems mostly about the authors research on juncos. Why are juncos not on the cover??
Didn't enjoy how much was about humans, including annoying tangents into roller derby and misogyny. 🙄

Also infuriating the author says "kiwi birds" at the start and then kiwi and kiwis (plural is kiwi) later on. Why don't you call them junco birds then?? Ridiculous from someone interested in birds.

Overall, disappointing, i was so excited to read this and learn heaps. 😔

[Alexa Dickson · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an enjoyable read for scientists and the general public alike! Dr. Whittaker describes the state of research into the sense of smell in birds and highlights similarities and differences in various birds and mammals. Interestingly, she also describes the winding path that science often follows. The narrative is easy to read and engaging. I'd highly recommended this book to anyone interested in science, not just those interested in birds or scent.

[Rebecca Heisman · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you've come across (and maybe believed) the common misconception that birds can't smell, this book is for you! A deep dive into the author's research journey, with everything you could ever want to know about how birds generate scents and what the significance of those scents is. True bird nerds will love it.

[Ramprashanth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very informative book about the scent and sense of smell of birds.

[Georgia · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am really enjoying books written by scientists who also seem interested in telling their own story. Not sure what that minute genre would be called, but I'm all for it.

[Molly · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great information. Always enjoy learning more about olfaction, especially in birds. There were a few chapters that were more technical, though, which I enjoyed less.

[Sj · Rating 4 out of 5]

Written by a scientist who has spent most of her career studying scent production and scent detection by birds. Fascinating results

[anarcho-lesbian · Rating 3 out of 5]

My next disappointment of the year. :-( It started off so great but really, really petered out near the end... how unfortunate.

[jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

i really enjoyed this one! the author had a very nice, distinctive voice, and the book was a good balance of informative and digestible.

[Katie · Rating 5 out of 5]

super well written, really engaging, and I love her story

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

A wonderful nonfiction, with some awesome women scientists. A little bit oddly biographical in the beginning, but that stops quickly. Great topics, great science.