• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Paddyfield or Richard's Pipit, Malaysia (1 Viewer)

Dave B

Dave B

Well-known member
I'm assuming this is Paddyfield Pipit based on the curvature of the hind claw, but am wondering if anyone can shed any light on separation of these two species?

Call is the feature most quoted, but Paddyfield has such a range of calls, some of them more explosive than others. Size and tail length are such difficult things to judge on a lone bird. Paddyfield is the default common resident species in Malaysia. Richard's is supposedly a migrant, but no idea what the status is.

Can anyone help?

Thanks

Dave
 

Attachments

  • Paddyfield Pipit_Malim Nawar_201007_PICT0099.jpg
    Paddyfield Pipit_Malim Nawar_201007_PICT0099.jpg
    225.2 KB · Views: 421
Dave....

Good question, I agree, these two species are very problematic.

Looking at your bird, is it missing a central tail feather? This could explain for the relatively short tail. Using a combination of features; very upright stance, hindclaw looks long and noticeably curved to me, dark mantle that lacks the greyish ground colour, more richly coloured along with two features I find quite reliable in the field - wholly dark ear-coverts and buffish base to the supercillium I would maybe lean towards Richard's.


Richard's Pipit
showing the long hindclaw of a similar length and buffish flanks
http://www.orientalbirdimages.org/s...esult&Bird_ID=2077&Bird_Family_ID=&pagesize=1

Apparently a Richard's photographed in Malaysia
http://www.orientalbirdimages.org/s...esult&Bird_ID=2077&Bird_Family_ID=&pagesize=1

Paddyfield Pipit
showing straightish hindclaw
http://www.orientalbirdimages.org/s...esult&Bird_ID=2085&Bird_Family_ID=&pagesize=1

Going through OBI, some of the identifications I would say are tentative at best, particularly the Richard's Pipit photographed in Thailand in March.

I encounter large numbers on the Tonle Sap floodplains in Cambodia on a regular basis, they are both present in numbers here. I find call difficult, as you say, Paddyfield has a range of calls, some explosive, but I find it's one of those things - when you hear a Richard's Pipit, you just 'know' that's a Richard's.

Note that Robson (2000) indicates that Richard's Pipit does not occur in Malaysia.

More fun than swiftlets!
 
Last edited:
Difficult these two Paddyfield /malayensis) Richard´s (sinensis)!
The quite obvious dark lore of the subject bird is by far more frequent in Paddyfield than Richard´s.

JanJ
 
Last edited:
I'd go for Richard's, and not paddyfield.

I noticed that the birds in Hong Kong 'sinensis' seemed smaller and shorter-tailed than the birds I have seen in the UK or Japan 'Richardii', which would make ID even trickier.

Certainly seems to be very buffy on the flanks and breast and overall color is more buffy too.

Never seen Paddyfield, but I can say lores are usually dark on Ricahrd's, not sure it is more a paddyfield feature.

The hindclaw does seem very long, and would favour Richard's.

Sorry I seem to be repeating most of what James already said.

Sean

Hiroshima
 
lostinjapan said:
I'd go for Richard's, and not paddyfield.


I should perhaps say that there was nothing about this bird in the field that made it stand out from other Paddyfield Pipits; it was only when I noticed the hindclaw on the photos that I began to wonder. Actually I misread Robson 2000. When he says that the hindclaw is 'straighter, less arched' on Richard's, he's comparing it to Blyth's, not Paddyfield! The dangers of speed-reading!

It's behaviour was typical of Paddyfield - ie tame and not bothered about flying any distance. It didn't call.

In response to James, yes, I had had a look at some of the 'Richard's' on OBI. I assume that most taken in Malaysia are mislabelled Paddyfields, especially as the split wasn't widely known over here till fairly recently.

I don't have Alstrom's Pipits and Wagtails book. Can anyone enlighten me on plumage distinctions between Paddyfield and Richard's??

Thanks

Dave
Click to expand...
 
I may be way behind the latest information on this subject or Sean may be talking about different subspecies to those I am used to - but I always thought Richard's was generally supposed to have pale lores, or at least to NOT have a distinct dark loral stripe. Has this changed ?!

Cheers,

lostinjapan said:
Never seen Paddyfield, but I can say lores are usually dark on Ricahrd's, not sure it is more a paddyfield feature.
Click to expand...
 
This pipit seems "little" (look at the size of the eye, for example) and the lores are way too dark for Richard's, aren't they? Isn't Paddyfield about Rock Pipit size?
 
The size of Paddyfield Pipit is closer to Blyth’s Pipit, but the general appearance is perhaps closer to Richard’s Pipit. Some individuals can cause difficulties due to moulting stage or/and age. However I have studied these two species again and I have to change my mind. This bird is after all Paddyfield and I based my opinion on the follow features, e.g.:

* rather clear, entire, dark loral stripe
> notice that the dark bases of short loral feathers is visible rather often in Richard's

* the shape of the bill is rather sharp
> the tip of upper mandible curves rather strongly in Richard's

* the outer web of median wing coverts are widely pale and the centres are not so uniformly dark
> Richard's has not so widely pale tips in the median wing coverts,
often typically buffish and the centres are uniformly dark

* tail length is rather difficult to estimate reliable from this pic, but the tail looks relatively short
 
hannu said:
The size of Paddyfield Pipit is closer to Blyth’s Pipit, but the general appearance is perhaps closer to Richard’s Pipit. Some individuals can cause difficulties due to moulting stage or/and age. However I have studied these two species again and I have to change my mind. This bird is after all Paddyfield and I based my opinion on the follow features, e.g.:

* rather clear, entire, dark loral stripe
> notice that the dark bases of short loral feathers is visible rather often in Richard's

* the shape of the bill is rather sharp
> the tip of upper mandible curves rather strongly in Richard's

* the outer web of median wing coverts are widely pale and the centres are not so uniformly dark
> Richard's has not so widely pale tips in the median wing coverts,
often typically buffish and the centres are uniformly dark

* tail length is rather difficult to estimate reliable from this pic, but the tail looks relatively short
Click to expand...

Thanks to one and all, this is very helpful. I'll keep looking (and listening!)

Dave
 
Dave,
Paddy has often a rather long hindclaw, so it does not help to differ these species quite often.
(> But I don't know is this situation in every subspecies).
There are also some minor differences also in the streaks of mantle, but you can meet some problematic individuals because of wear of feathers.
 
Last edited:
I just want to clarify, when I said dark lores, I meant darker than Paddyfiled, at least that is my impression from the illustrations and pics in the Pipits book and my observations in the field of Richard's.

I was not referring to the loral stripe...

Of course I am no expert and willing to admit that what I wrote was misleading or wrong...indeed I might be misunderstanding where the lores actually are!

As I already said I think the color of the bird is important, as I said more buffy brown in Richards and more greyish tones in paddyfield.

I am pretty sure the race of Richards 'sinensis' is comparable in size to Blyth's and Paddyfield.

Dave, did you hear the call?

Anyway, as usual I bow to those with greater experience in these matters.

Sean

Hiroshima
 
Warning! This thread is more than 18 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

01101001
Kostrzyn river valley Natura 2000 site (Poland), 21.09 (mostly birds of prey)
Replies
7
Views
2K
01101001
01101001
J
Do theories regarding the mechanisms for Vagrancy stand scrutiny, and what does vagrancy tell us about migration?
Replies
19
Views
10K
Jon.Bryant
J
E
Pipit Species Sri Lanka
Replies
2
Views
794
Earnest lad
E
Paul Chapman
Paddyfield Pipit - Sennen, Cornwall - 03.11.19
Replies
13
Views
7K
Paul Chapman
Paul Chapman
wolfbirder
Morocco Marvels and Meanderings 21 - 28 March 2023
2 3
Replies
41
Views
14K
wolfbirder
wolfbirder

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top