The Indian Peafowl or Blue Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) is a large and brightly coloured bird of the pheasant family native to South Asia, but introduced and semi-feral in many other parts of the world. The species was first named and described by Linnaeus in 1758. The name Pavo cristatus is still in use now. The male peacock is predominantly blue with a fan-like crest of spatula-tipped wire-like feathers and is best known for the long train made up of elongated upper-tail covert feathers which bear colourful eyespots. These stiff and elongated feathers are raised into a fan and quivered in a display during courtship. The female lacks the train, has a greenish lower neck and a duller brown plumage. The Indian Peafowl is found mainly on the ground in open forest or on land under cultivation where they forage for berries, grains but will also prey on snakes, lizards, and small rodents. Their loud calls make them easy to detect, and in forest areas often indicate the presence of a predator such as a tiger. They forage on the ground in small groups and will usually try to escape on foot through undergrowth and avoid flying, though they will fly into tall trees to roost. The bird is celebrated in Indian and Greek mythology and is the national bird of India. The Indian Peafowl is listed as of Least Concern by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
Taxonomy and naming
The Indian Peacock was one of the many species originally described by Linnaeus in his work in 1758 and it still bears its original name of Pavo cristatus.Peacocks are believed to be echoic in their origin and based on the usual call of the bird. The species name cristatus refers to the crest.
The earliest usage of the word in written English is from around 1300 and spelling variants include pecok, pekok, pecokk, peacocke, peocock, pyckock, poucock, pocok, pokok, pokokke, and poocok among others. The current spelling was established in the late 17th century. The word to refer to a proud and ostentatious person in his simile"proud a pekok" in book
The male, known as a peacock, is a large bird with a length from bill to tail of 100 to 115 cm (40 to 46 inches) and to the end of a fully grown train as much as 195 to 225 cm (78 to 90 inches) and weigh 4–6 kg (8.8-13.2 lbs). The females, or peahens, are smaller at around 95 cm (38 inches) in length and weigh 2.75–4 kg (6-8.8 lbs). Indian Peafowl are among the largest and heaviest representatives of the Phasianidae. Their size, colour and shape of crest make them unmistakable within their native distribution range. The male is metallic blue on the crown, the feathers of the head being short and curled. The fan-shaped crest on the head is made of feathers with bare black shafts and tipped with blush-green webbing. A white stripe above the eye and a crescent shaped white patch below the eye are formed by bare white skin. The sides of the head have iridescent greenish blue feathers. The back has scaly bronze-green feathers with black and copper markings. The scapular and the wings are buff and barred in black, the primaries are chestnut and the secondaries are black. The tail is dark brown and the "train" is made up of elongated upper tail coverts (more than 200 feathers, the actual tail has only 20 feathers) and nearly all of these feathers end with an elaborate eye-spot. A few of the outer feathers lack the spot and end in a crescent shaped black tip. The underside is dark glossy green shading into blackish under the tail. The thighs are buff coloured. The male has a spur on the leg above the hind toe.
The adult peahen has a rufous-brown head with a crest as in the male but the tips are chestnut edged with green. The upper body is brownish with pale mottling. The primaries, secondaries and tail are dark brown. The lower neck is metallic green and the breast feathers are dark brown glossed with green. The remaining underparts are whitish. Downy young are pale buff with a dark brown mark on the nape that connects with the eyes. Young males look like the females but the wings are chestnut coloured.
The most common calls are a loud pia-ow or may-awe. The frequency of calling increases before the Monsoon season and may be delivered in alarm or when disturbed by loud noises. In forests, their calls often indicate the presence of a predators such as the tiger. They also make many other calls such as a rapid series of ka-aan..ka-aan or a rapid kok-kok.
Mutations and hybrids
There are several colour mutations of Indian Peafowl. These very rarely occur in the wild, but selective breeding has made them common in captivity. The Black-shouldered or Japanned mutation was initially considered as a subspecies P. c. nigripennis (or even a species), and was a topic of some interest during Darwin's time. It is however only a case of genetic variation within the population. In this mutation, the adult male is melanistic with black wings. Young birds with the nigripennis mutation are creamy white with fulvous tipped wings. The gene produces melanism in the male and in the peahen it produces a dilution of colour with creamy white and brown markings. Other variations include the pied and white forms all of which are the result of allelic variation at specific loci.
Cross between a male Green Peafowl, Pavo muticus and a female Indian Peafowl, P. cristatus, produces a stable hybrid called a "spalding", named after Mrs. Keith Spalding, a bird fancier in California. There can be problems if birds of unknown pedigree are released into the wild, as the viability of such hybrids and their offspring is often reduced (see Haldane's Rule and outbreeding depression).
Distribution and habitat
The Indian Peafowl is a resident breeder across the Indian subcontinent and is found in the drier lowland areas of Sri Lanka. In South Asia, it is found mainly below an altitude of 1,800 metres (1.1 mi) and in rare cases seen at about 2,000 metres (1.2 mi). It is found in moist and dry-deciduous forests, but can adapt to live in cultivated regions and around human habitations and is usually found where water is available. In many parts of northern India, they are protected by religious practices and will forage around villages and towns for scraps. Some have suggested that the peacock was introduced into Europe by Alexander the Great, while others say the bird had reached Athens by 450 BC and may have been introduced even earlier. It has since been introduced in many other parts of the world and has become feral in some areas.
Behaviour and ecology
Peafowl are best known for the male's extravagant display feathers which, despite actually growing from their back, are thought of as a tail. The "train" is in reality made up of the enormously elongated upper tail coverts. The tail itself is brown and short as in the peahen. The colours result not from any green or blue pigments but from the micro-structure of the feathers and the resulting optical phenomena. The long train feathers (and tarsal spurs) of the male develop only after the second year of life. Fully developed trains are found in birds older than four years. In northern India, these begin to develop each February and are moulted at the end of August. The moult of the flight feathers may be spread out across the year.
Peafowl forage on the ground in small groups, known as musters, that usually have a cock and 3 to 5 hens. After the breeding season, the flocks tend to be made up only of females and young. They are found in the open early in the mornings and tend to stay in cover during the heat of the day. They are fond of dust-bathing and at dusk, groups walk in single file to a favourite waterhole to drink. When disturbed, they usually escape by running and rarely take to flight.
Peafowl produce loud calls especially in the breeding season. They may call at night when alarmed and neighbouring birds may call in a relay like series. Nearly seven different call variants have been identified in the peacocks apart from six alarm calls that are commonly produced by both sexes.
Peafowl roost in groups during the night on tall trees but may sometimes make use of rocks, buildings or pylons. In the Gir forest, they chose tall trees in steep river banks. Birds arrive at dusk and call frequently before taking their position on the roost trees. Due to this habit of congregating at the roost, many population studies are made at these sites. The population structure is not well understood. In a study in northern India (Jodhpur), the number of males was 170-210 for 100 females but a study involving evening counts at the roost site in southern India (Injar) suggested a ratio of 47 males for 100 females.
The colours of the peacock and the contrast with the much duller peahen were a puzzle to early thinkers. Charles Darwin wrote to Asa Gray that the "sight of a feather in a peacock’s tail , whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick!" as he failed to see an adaptive advantage for the extravagant tail which seemed only to be an encumbrance. Darwin tried to develop a second principle of "sexual selection" to resolve the problem. American artist Abbott Handerson Thayer tried to show, from his own imagination, the value of the eyespots in camouflage in a 1907 painting. It was only in the 1970s that this apparent contradiction was resolved based on the evolution of honest signalling and the handicap principle of Amotz Zahavi, though the actual mechanism may be less straightforward than it seems – the cost arising perhaps from the fact that the hormones that enhances feather development depress the immune system.
The ornate train is believed to be the result of female sexual selection as males raise the feathers into a fan and quiver them as part of courtship display. However, several recent studies have failed to find a relation between the displayed eyespot numbers with mating success. Although the removal of eyespots makes males less successful in mating, this result is questionable because eyespot removal substantially changes the appearance of male peafowls. It is likely that females mistake these males for sub-adults or perceive that they have experienced severe physical hazards. Moreover, in a feral peafowl population, there is little variation in the number of eyespots in adult males. It is normally rare for male adults to lose a significant number of eyespots in such populations. Therefore, females’ selection might depend on other sexual traits of males’ trains. Many studies have suggested that the quality of train is an honest signal of the condition of males and that peahens select males on the basis of their plumage. A recent study on a natural population of Indian peafowls in the Shivalik area of India has proposed a “high maintenance handicap” theory. It states that only the fittest males can afford the time and energy to maintain a long tail. Therefore, the long train is an indicator of good body condition, which results in greater mating success. While train length seems to positively correlate to MHC diversity in males, females do not appear to use train length to choose males. A study in Japan also suggests that peahens do not choose peacocks based on their ornamental plumage, including train length, number of eyespots and train symmetry. Another study in France brings up two possible explanations for the conflicting results that exist. The first explanation is that there might be a genetic variation of the trait of interest under different geographical areas due to a founder effect and/or a genetic drift. The second explanation suggests that “the cost of trait expression may vary with environmental conditions,” so that a trait that is indicative of a particular quality may not work in another environment.
There are two theories regarding to the evolution of male ornamental plumage, i.e. the train. One is the Fischer’s runaway model, which postulates a positive feedback relationship between female preference for elaborate train and the elaborate train itself. This model assumes that the male train is a relatively recent evolutionary adaptation. However, a molecular phylogeny study on peacock-pheasants shows the opposite; the most recently evolved species is actually the least ornamented one. This finding suggests a chase-away sexual selection, in which “females evolve resistance to male ploys”. A study in Japan goes on to conclude that “peacocks’ train is an obsolete signal for which female preference has already been lost or weakened”.
Peacocks are polygamous, and the breeding season is spread out but appears to be dependent on the rains. Peafowls usually reach sexual maturity at the age of 2 to 3 years old.  Several males may congregate at a lek site and these males are often closely related.
Males at lek appear to maintain small territories next to each other and they allow females to visit them and make no attempt to guard harems. Females do not appear to favour specific males. The males display in courtship by raising the upper-tail coverts into an arched fan. The wings are held half open and drooped and it periodically vibrates the long feathers producing a ruffling sound. The cock faces the hen initially and struts and prances around and sometimes turns around to display the tail. Males may also freeze over food to invite a female in a form of courtship feeding. Males may display even in the absence of females. When a male is displaying, females do not appear to show any interest and usually continue their foraging. The peak season in southern India is April to May, January to March in Sri Lanka and June in northern India. The nest is a shallow scrape in the ground lined with leaves, sticks and other debris. Nests are sometimes placed on buildings and in earlier times have been recorded using the disused nest platforms of the White-rumped Vultures. The clutch consists of 4-8 fawn to buff white eggs which are incubated only by the female. The eggs take about 28 days to hatch. The chicks are nidifugous and follow the mother around after hatching. Downy young may sometimes climb on their mothers' back and the female may carry them in flight to a safe tree branch. An unusual instance of a male incubating a clutch of eggs has been reported.
Peafowl are omnivorous and eat seeds, insects, fruits, small mammals and reptiles. They feed on small snakes but keep their distance from larger ones. In the Gir forest of Gujarat, a large percentage of their food is made up of the fallen berries of Zizyphus. Around cultivated areas, peafowl feed on a wide range of crops such as groundnut, tomato, paddy, chilly and even bananas. Around human habitations, they feed on a variety of food scraps and even human excreta. In the countryside, it is particularly partial to crops and garden plants.
Adult peafowl can usually escape ground predators by flying into trees. Large animals such as leopards, dholes and tigers can sometimes ambush them however, and in some areas such as the Gir forest, peafowl are fairly common prey for such formidable predators. Foraging in groups provides some safety as there are more eyes to look out for predators. They are also sometimes hunted by large birds of prey such as the Crested Hawk-Eagle and Rock Eagle-owl. Chicks are somewhat more prone to predation than adult birds. Adults living near human habitations are sometimes hunted by domestic dogs or by humans in some areas (southern Tamil Nadu) for folk-remedies involving the use of "peacock oil".
In captivity, birds have been known to live for 23 years but it is estimated that they live for only about 15 years in the wild.
Conservation and status
Indian Peafowl are widely distributed in the wild across South Asia and protected both culturally in many areas and by law in India. Conservative estimates of the population put them at more than 100,000. Illegal poaching for meat however continues and declines have been noted in parts of India. However, outside India eating peacock is legal. In China, a very profitable industry has been developed in peacock feeding, breeding, hatching, promotion, recovery, commodity processing, export and so on. Jiangxi Zong Technology Co. Ltd., which was established in 1998, currently, has the world's largest breeding stock of peacocks (about ten thousand peacocks) and is known as the "Peacock King" in China.
Poaching of peacocks for their meat and feathers and accidental poisoning by feeding on pesticide treated seeds are known threats to wild birds. Methods to identify if feathers have been plucked or have been shed naturally have been developed as Indian law allows the collection of feathers that have been shed.
In parts of India, the birds can be a nuisance to agriculture as they damage crops. Its adverse effects on crops,however, seem to be offset by the beneficial role it plays by consuming prodigious quantities of pests such as grasshoppers. They can also be a problem in gardens and homes where they damage plants, attack their reflections breaking glass and mirrors, perch and scratch cars or leave their droppings. Many cities where they have been introduced and gone feral have peafowl management programmes. These include educating citizens on how to prevent the birds from causing damage while treating the birds humanely.
Prominent in many cultures, the peacock has been used in numerous iconic representations, including being designated the national bird of India in 1963. The peacock, known as Mayura in Sanskrit, has enjoyed a fabled place in India since and is frequently depicted in temple art, mythology, poetry, folk-music and traditions. A Sankrit derivation of mayura is from the root mi for kill and suggested as meaning killer of snakes. Many Hindu deities are associated with the bird, Krishna is often depicted with a feather in his headband, while worshippers of Shiva associate the bird as the steed of the God of war, Karthikeya (also known as Skanda or Murugan). A story in the Uttara Ramayana describes the head of the Devas, Indra, who unable to defeat Ravana, sheltered under the wing of peacock and later blessed it with a "thousand eyes" and fearlessness from serpents. Another story has Indra who after being cursed with a thousand ulcers was transformed into a peacock with a thousand eyes. In Buddhist philosophy, the peacock represents wisdom. Peacock feathers are used in many rituals and ornamentation. Peacock motifs are widespread in Indian temple architecture, old coinage, textiles and continue to be used in many modern items of art and utility. In Greek mythology the origin of the peacocks plumage is explained in the tale of Hera and Argus. The main figure of the Kurdish religion Yezidism, Melek Taus, is most commonly depicted as a peacock. Peacock motifs are widely used even today such as in the logos of the US NBC television network and the Sri Lankan Airlines.
These birds were often kept in menageries and as ornaments in large gardens and estates. A reference in the Bible mentions a peacock owned by King Solomon (I Kings, chapt X 22 and 23). In medieval times, knights in Europe took a "Vow of the Peacock" and decorated their helmets with its plumes. Feathers were buried with Viking warriors and the flesh of the bird was said to cure snake venom and many other maladies. Numerous uses in Ayurveda have been documented. Peafowl were said to keep an area free of snakes. In 1526, the legal issue as to whether peacocks were wild or domestic fowl was thought sufficiently important for Cardinal Wolsey to summon all the English judges to give their opinion, which was that they are domestic fowl.
In Anglo-Indian usage of the 1850s, to peacock meant making visits to ladies and gentlemen in the morning. In the 1890s, the term "peacocking" in Australia referred to the practice of buying up the best pieces of land ("picking the eyes") so as to render the surrounding lands valueless. The English word "peacock" has come to be used to describe a man who is very proud or gives a lot of attention to his clothing.
- BirdLife International (2009). "Pavo cristatus". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2009.2. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/141357. Retrieved 2010-02-15.
- Whistler, Hugh (1949). Popular handbook of Indian birds (4 ed.). Gurney and Jackson, London. pp. 401–410. ISBN 1-4067-4576-6. http://www.archive.org/stream/popularhandbooko033226mbp#page/n458/mode/1up/.
- Blanford, WT (1898). The Fauna of British India, Including Ceylon and Burma. Birds. 4. Taylor and Francis, London. pp. 681–70. http://www.archive.org/stream/birdsindia04oaterich#page/68/mode/1up.
- Baker, ECS (1928). The Fauna of British India, Including Ceylon and Burma. Birds. Volume 5 (2 ed.). Taylor and Francis, London. pp. 282–284. http://www.archive.org/stream/BakerFbiBirds5/BakerFBI5#page/n304/mode/1up/.
- Ali, S & S D Ripley (1980). Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan. 2 (2 ed.). Oxford University Press. pp. 123–126. ISBN 0-19-562063-1.
- Johnsingh,AJT; Murali,S (1978). "The ecology and behaviour of the Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) Linn. of Injar". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 75 (4): 1069–1079.
- Sclater PL (1860). "On the black-shouldered peafowl of Latham (Pavo nigripennis)". Proc. Zool. Soc. London: 221–222. http://www.archive.org/stream/lietuvostsrmoksl60liet#page/221/mode/1up.
- Seth-Smith, D (1940). "Peafowl". Avicultural Magazine 5: 205–206.
- Somes, RG Jr. and R. E. Burger (1991). "Plumage Color Inheritance of the Indian Blue Peafowl (Pavo Cristatus): Blue, Black-Shouldered, Cameo, and Oaten". Journal of Heredity 82: 64–68. doi:10.1093/jhered/82.1.64. http://jhered.oxfordjournals.org/content/82/1/64.extract.
- Somes, RG Jr. and R. E. Burger. "Inheritance of the White and Pied Plumage Color Patterns in the Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus)". J. Hered. 84: 57–62.
- Jackson, CE (2006). Peacock. Reaktion Books, London. pp. 10–11. ISBN 978-1-86189-293-5.
- Haldane, J. B. S. (1922). "Sex ratio and unisexual sterility in hybrid animals". J. Genet. 12: 101–109. doi:10.1007/BF02983075.
- Leimu, R.; Fischer, M. (2010). Bruun, Hans Henrik. ed. "Between-Population Outbreeding Affects Plant Defence". PLoS ONE 5 (9): e12614. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012614. PMC 2935481. PMID 20838662. //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2935481/.
- Dodsworth, PTL (1912). "Occurrence of the Common Peafowl Pavo cristatus, Linnaeus in the neighbourhood of Simla, N.W. Himalayas". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 21 (3): 1082–1083.
- Whitman, CH (1898). "The birds of Old English literature". The journal of Germanic Philology 2 (2): 40. http://www.archive.org/stream/cu31924031439544#page/n43/mode/1up/.
- Nair, P. Thankappan (1974). "The Peacock Cult in Asia". Asian Folklore Studies 33 (2): 93–170. doi:10.2307/1177550. JSTOR 1177550. http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/publications/afs/pdf/a272.pdf.
- Blau, S.K. (2004). "Light as a Feather: Structural Elements Give Peacock Plumes Their Color". Physics Today 57 (1): 18–20. doi:10.1063/1.1650059. http://www.aip.org/pt/vol-57/iss-1/p18.html.[dead link]
- Sharma, IK (1974). "Ecological Studies of the Plumes of the Peacock (Pavo cristatus')". The Condor 76 (3): 344–346. doi:10.2307/1366352. JSTOR 1366352. http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Condor/files/issues/v076n03/p0344-p0346.pdf.
- Marien, Daniel (1951). "Notes on some pheasants from southwestern Asia, with remarks on molt". American Museum novitates 1518: 1–25. http://hdl.handle.net/2246/3909.
- Takahashi M & T Hasegawa (2008). "Seasonal and diurnal use of eight different call types by Indian peafowl ( Pavo cristatus )". Journal of Ethology 26 (3): 375–381. doi:10.1007/s10164-007-0078-4.
- Trivedi,Pranav; Johnsingh,AJT (1996). "Roost selection by Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) in Gir Forest, India". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 93 (1): 25–29.
- Parasharya,BM; Mukherjee, Aeshita (1999). "Roosting behaviour of Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 96 (3): 471–472.
- Navaneethakannan,K (1984). "Activity patterns in a colony of Peafowls (Pavo cristatus) in nature". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 81 (2): 387–393.
- Boynton, Mary Fuertes (1952). "Abbott Thayer and Natural History". Osiris 10 (1): 542–555. doi:10.1086/368563.
- Zahavi, Amotz; Avishag Zahavi, Amir Balaban, Melvin Patrick Ely (1999). The handicap principle: a missing piece of Darwin's puzzle. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-512914-8.
- Ros, Albert; Correia, Maria; Wingfield, John; Oliveira, Rui (2009). "Mounting an immune response correlates with decreased androgen levels in male peafowl, Pavo cristatus". Journal of Ethology 27 (2): 209–214. doi:10.1007/s10164-008-0105-0.
- Dakin, R & R Montgomerie (2011). "Peahens prefer peacocks displaying more eyespots, but rarely". Animal Behaviour 82 (1): 21–28. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.03.016.
- Harikrishnan, S.; Vasudevan, K.; Sivakumar, K. (2010). "Behavior of Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus Linn. 1758 During the Mating Period in a Natural Population". The Open Ornithology Journal 3: 13–19.
- Hale, M.L.; Verduijn, M.H.; Moller, A.P.; Wolff, K.; Petrie, M. (2009). "Is the peacock’s train an honest signal of genetic quality at the major histocompatibility complex?". Journal of Evolutionary Biology 22: 1284–1294. doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01746.x.
- Takahashi, M.; Arita, H., Hiraiwa-Hasegawa, M., Hasegawa, T. (2008). "Peahens do not prefer peacocks with more elaborate trains". Animal Behaviour 75 (4): 1209–1219. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.10.004.
- Loyau, A.; Petrie, M.; Jalme, M.S.; Sorci, G. (2008). "Do peahens not prefer peacocks with more elaborate trains?". Animal Behaviour 76: e5-e9. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.07.021.
- Kimball, R.T.; Braun, E.L.; Ligon, J.D.; Lucchini, V.; Randi, E. (2001). "A molecular phylogeny of the peacock-pheasants (Galliformes: Polyplectron spp.) indicates loss and reduction of ornamental traits and display behaviours". Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 73: 187–198. doi:10.1006/bijl.2001.0536.
- Davies, N.B.; Krebs, J.R.; West, S.A. (2012). Introduction to Behavioural Ecology (Fourth Edition ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. pp. 179–222.
- "Common (Indian) Peafowl". Rolling Hills Wildlife Adventure. http://www.rollinghillswildlife.com/animals/p/peafowl/. Retrieved 26 December 2012.
- Petrie M, Krupa A, Burke T. (1999). "Peacocks lek with relatives even in the absence of social and environmental cues". Nature 401 (6749): 155–157. doi:10.1038/43651. http://www.nbb.cornell.edu/neurobio/BioNB427/READINGS/Sherman1999.pdf.
- Rands, M.R.M.; M.W. Ridley, A.D. Lelliott (1984-08). "The social organization of feral peafowl". Animal Behaviour 32 (3): 830–835. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(84)80159-1.
- Stokes, AW & H. Warrington Williams (1971). "Courtship Feeding in Gallinaceous Birds". The Auk 88 (3): 543–559. http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Auk/v088n03/p0543-p0559.pdf.
- Vyas,R (1994). "Unusual breeding site of Indian Peafowl". Newsletter for Birdwatchers 34 (6): 139.. http://www.archive.org/stream/NLBW34_6#page/n21/mode/1up.
- Singh, H (1964). "Peahens flying up with young". Newsletter for Birdwatchers 4 (1): 14. http://www.archive.org/stream/NLBW4#page/n14/mode/1up.
- Shivrajkumar,YS (1957). "An incubating Peacock (Pavo cristatus Linn.)". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 54 (2): 464.
- Johnsingh,AJT (1976). "Peacocks and cobra". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 73 (1): 214.
- Trivedi,Pranav; Johnsingh,AJT (1995). "Diet of Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus Linn. in Gir Forest, Gujarat". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 92 (2): 262–263.
- "Tigers". SeaWorld/Busch Gardens Animal Information Database. http://www.seaworld.org/infobooks/tiger/diettiger.html.
- Arviazhagan, C.; Arumugam, R.; Thiyagesan, K. (2007). "Food habits of leopard (panthera pardus fusca), dhole (cuon alpinus) and striped hyena (hyaena hyaena) in a tropical dry thorn forest of southern India". Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 104: 178–187. http://www.catsg.org/catsglib/recordetail.php?recordid=6263.
- Yasmin,Shahla; Yahya,HSA (2000). "Group size and vigilance in Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus (Linn.), Family: Phasianidae". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 97 (3): 425–428.
- Dhanwatey, Amrut S (1986). "A Crested Hawk-Eagle Spizaetus cirrhatus (Gmelin) killing a Peafowl Pavo cristatus Linnaeus". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 83 (4): 202.
- Tehsin,Raza; Tehsin,Fatema (1990). "Indian Great Horned Owl Bubo bubo (Linn.) and Peafowl Pavo cristatus Linn". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 87 (2): 300.
- Flower, M.S.S. (1938). "The duration of life in animals - IV. Birds: special notes by orders and families". Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London: 195–235.
- Madge S & P McGowan (2002). Pheasant, partridges and grouse, including buttonquails, sandgrouse and allies. Christopher Helm, London.
- Ramesh, K. & P. McGowan (2009). "On the current status of Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus (Aves: Galliformes: Phasianidae): keeping the common species common". Journal of Threatened Taxa 1 (2): 106–108. http://threatenedtaxa.org/ZooPrintJournal/2009/February/o184526ii09106-108.pdf.
- ""Peacock King": China, Jiangxi Zong Technology Co. Ltd.". http://www.zgtyy.com/company.asp.
- Alexander JP (1983). "Probable diazinon poisoning in peafowl: a clinical description". Vet Rec. 113 (20): 470.
- Sahajpal, V., Goyal, S.P. (2008). "Identification of shed or plucked origin of Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) tail feathers: Preliminary findings". Science and Justice 48 (2): 76–78. doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2007.08.002. PMID 18700500.
- "La Canada, California, City Council, Peafowl Management Plan Update". http://www.lacanadaflintridge.com/city/council/agendaitems/2009/120709/item8.pdf.[dead link]
- "East Northamptonshire plan". http://www.east-northamptonshire.gov.uk/downloads/Peafowl_Peacocks.pdf.
- "Living with peafowl. City of Dunedin, Florida". http://www.dunedingov.com/docs/leisureservices/livingwithpeafowl.pdf.[dead link]
- Fitzpatrick J (1923). "Folklore of birds and beasts of India". J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 28 (2): 562–565.
- Lal, Krishna (2007). Peacock in Indian art, thought and literature. Abhinav Publications. pp. 11,26,139. ISBN 81-7017-429-5. http://books.google.com/books?id=wuotb7YyrigC.
- Anonymous (1891). Ramavijaya (The mythological history of Rama). Bombay: Dubhashi & Co.. p. 14. http://www.archive.org/stream/ramavijayathemyt00unwkuoft#page/n27/mode/1up/.
- Choskyi, Ven. Jampa (1988). "Symbolism of Animals in Buddhism". Buddhist Hiamalaya 1 (1). http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-BH/bh117490.htm.
- Empson, RHW (1928). The cult of the peacock angel. HF & G Witherby, London. http://www.archive.org/details/MN40203ucmf_2.
- Springett, BH (1922). Secret sects of Syria and the Lebanon. George Allen & Unwin Ltd, London. http://www.archive.org/details/secretsectsofsyr032392mbp.
- Tyrberg T (2002). "The archaeological record of domesticated and tamed birds in Sweden". Acta zoologica cracoviensia 45: 215–231. http://www.isez.pan.krakow.pl/journals/azc_v/pdf/45/16.pdf.
- "Letter from the Desk of David Challinor, November 2001". Smithsonian Institution. http://si-pddr.si.edu/dspace/bitstream/10088/1193/1/November_2001.pdf.
- Gwyn, Peter The KIng's Cardinal-the rise and fall of Thomas Wolsey Pimlico 2000 p.113
- Partridge, E & Paul Beale (2002). A dictionary of slang and unconventional English. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-29189-5.
- "Advanced Learners Dictionary". Cambridge University Press. http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/peacock.
- Galusha,JG; Hill,LM (1996) A study of the behaviour of Indian Peacocks Pavo cristatus on Protection Island, Jefferson County, Washington, USA. Pavo 34(1&2):23-31.
- Ganguli,U (1965) A Peahen nests on a roof. Newsletter for Birdwatchers. 5(4):4-6.
- Prakash,M (1968) Mating of Peacocks Pavo cristatus. Newsletter for Birdwatchers. 8(6), 4-5.
- Rao,MS; Zaki,S; Ganesh,T (1981) Colibacillosis in a Peacock. Current Science 50(12):550-551.
- Sharma,IK (1969) Habitat et comportment du Pavon (Pavo cristatus). Alauda 37(3):219-223.
- Sharma,IK (1970) Analyse ecologique des parades du paon (Pavo cristatus). Alauda 38(4):290-294.
- Sharma,IK (1972) Etude ecologique de la reproduction de la paon (Pavo cristatus). Alauda 40(4):378-384.
- Sharma,IK (1973) Ecological studies of biomass of the Peafowl (Pavo cristatus). Tori 22(93-94):25-29.
- Sharma,IK (1974) Notes ecologique sur le paon bleu, Pavo cristatus. Les Carnets de Zoologie 34:41-45.
- Sharma,IK (1981) Adaptations and commensality of the Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) in the Indian Thar Desert. Annals Arid Zone. 20(2):71-75.
- Shrivastava,AB; Nair,NR; Awadhiya,RP; Katiyar,AK (1992) Traumatic ventriculitis in Peacock (Pavo cristatus). Indian Vet. J. 69(8):755.