• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Cotingas & Manakins (1 Viewer)

"...a suitable monospecific tag for unirufus. Any offers/thoughts?"
Plum in 2001 said "the type Lathria Swainson 1837 is Muscicapa plumbea Lichtenstein = Muscicapa vociferans
Wied which is also the type species of the genus Lipaugus."
The type of Lathria is L. cinerea which is Ampelis cinerea Vieillot or La Cotinga cendre of LeVaillant. Which is a synonom of vociferans
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/131541#page/279/mode/1up .
http://prumlab.yale.edu/sites/default/files/prum_2001_new_genus.pdf .
Sclater 1888 and others put unirufa in Lathria but it is not a good match with only unirufus. So a new genus is required.
 
Last edited:
In a doubtless vain attempt to clutter I have come across Poliochrus Reichenbach, 1850, Av. Syst. Nat., Ampelideae, pl. LXXXIX, which could be associated with Lipaugus. Although a nom. nud. (and etymologically unsound) is there any ICZN mechanism whereby this name could be pressed into service for Lipaugus unirufus? If not should Berv and Prum be encouraged to provide a new name?
 
"The only phylogenetically acceptable alternative [to subsuming Tijuca in Lipaugus] would be to split Lipaugus into at least three genera for: (1) unirufus alone, (2) lanioides alone, and (3) all other Lipaugus species." (Berv & Prum, 2014). I note that Turdampelis Lesson, 1844, is available for lanioides, but have yet to find a suitable monospecific tag for unirufus. Any offers/thoughts?


Hello James,

Why art thy so desirous of maintaining Tijuca? Admittedly atra would look like a bit of an oddball (sexually dimorphic) and Brazil would lose an endemic genus of decidedly curious etymology, but there are plenty of good reasons for not separating out unirufus and lanioides (beyond genetics). And, in any case, the oddness of atra is equally evident vis-à-vis condita as versus any of the species traditionally placed in Lipaugus. It was the late David Snow who already drew attention to the close relationship of condita and Lipaugus on the former’s description (Snow 1980: 215), admittedly species of the genus Snowornis were Lipaugus too back then!
 
Hello Guy,
Didn't you know I was Gregory Mathews in a former life!! Nonetheless, not wishing to clash with the experts, I am sure that you are right and that Tijuca should be merged with Lipaugus (although in ten years time some bright young thing will produce cogent evidence and reasons why Lipaugus should be split up again). My original enquiry was an exercise in semantics, in wanting to find a unique genus name for Lipaugus unirufus. I am no further forward in that search. However, since Tijuca is listed in H&M4, vol. 2, and in HBW, vol. 9, I shall maintain the entries in my MS and the HBWAlive Key for the time being. The Black-and-gold Cotinga is certainly a very different looking bird from the modest Lipaugi; perhaps Tijuca should be maintained for atra alone, and condita treated in Lipaugus?
Splittingly yours.
James
 
Hello Guy,
Didn't you know I was Gregory Mathews in a former life!! The Black-and-gold Cotinga is certainly a very different looking bird from the modest Lipaugi; perhaps Tijuca should be maintained for atra alone, and condita treated in Lipaugus?
Splittingly yours.
James



ha, ha, James, I look forward to you coining a genus name in oblique reference to yourself and the next Storrs Olson only spotting the fact long after your death!

Who knows, when we have more data concerning the life histories of these birds, it might well be the case that a strong argument could be made for treating atra and condita separately in the way that you suggest.

In the meantime, would it not be great to successfully elucidate the derivation of Tijuca for these cotingas?
 
"elucidate the derivation"
Richmond guessed:
http://www.zoonomen.net/cit/RI/Genera/T/t00468a.jpg .


However, it would have been somewhat strange for Tijuca atra to have been named for the Pico da Tijuca, as that mountain lies within the city limits of Rio de Janeiro, where the species has never been recorded (Maciel 2009). And, although the historical record is far from perfect, it’s also not as weak as you might think. In any case, even the highest point of the Pico da Tijuca is only just about as low as this species might descend in winter (and it would have had to have crossed lowlands to do so). Furthermore, between the 17th and the end of the first quarter of the 18th century, the area now encompassed by present-day Tijuca National Park was heavily deforested for the cultivation of coffee, and reforestation only recommenced upon the decree of Dom João in 1817, making it even less likely that Tijuca occurred there. All in all, Richmond’s guess was fairly natural, but I think it is unlikely to be the root of the generic name (or if it is then it’s a somewhat inappropriate one).
 
" I saw in Marcgrave Tijepiranga so a Piranga like finch?

I could be wrong, but I thought 'piranga' meant "red" in Tupi Guarani.

For example:
Ipiranga: (tupi) y: água ou rio + piranga: vermelho

source <http://dicionariotupiguarani.blogspot.com/2010/09/i.html>

Certainly makes sense with reference to the genus of tanager-cardinals.
 
In a doubtless vain attempt to clutter I have come across Poliochrus Reichenbach, 1850, Av. Syst. Nat., Ampelideae, pl. LXXXIX, which could be associated with Lipaugus. Although a nom. nud. (and etymologically unsound) is there any ICZN mechanism whereby this name could be pressed into service for Lipaugus unirufus?
For the sake of the exercise... ;)

Poliochrus Reichenbach 1850 [original publication].

The name was introduced in combination with an illustration, satisfying Art. 12.2.7; it is available (ie., not a nomen nudum); as it was introduced without any included nominal species, the first subsequently and expressly included nominal species will act as originally included species (Art. 67.2.2). Five years after the publication of the name, Gray 1855 included and designated as type "Muscicapa cinerea Pr. Max."; that is: Muscicapa cinerea apud Wied-Neuwied 1830 = Muscicapa cinerea Gmelin 1789 [OD], which thereby became the type species by subsequent designation and subsequent monotypy. This name is a junior primary homonym of Muscicapa cinerea Statius Müller 1776 [OD] (currently Ceblepyris cinereus or Coracina cinerea), and regarded as an invalid senior synonym of Attila rufus (Vieillot 1819) (see eg. Hellmayr 1929, Traylor 1979), which makes Poliochrus a junior subjective synonym of Attila Lesson 1831 [OD].

Under the present rules, so far as I know, there is only one way out of this that would not involve submitting a case to the Commission (there was none before 2000): if there is clear evidence that the designated nominal species represents a misidentification of the originally involved bird, an act is possible under Art. 70.2 to correct the identification. But the evidence should really be clear, as for such an act to be valid the newly selected type-species name must denote "the taxonomic species actually involved in the misidentification." In other words, to anybody disagreeing with the re-identification, the act would simply be void. (I'm pretty much convinced that the illustrated bird was not an Attila rufus. However, on simple etymological grounds, the wholly rufous Lipaugus unirufus seems to me still much less "Poliochrus" [= grey-coloured] than this species [which at least has a grey head!], and may therefore not be a better candidate...)
 
Last edited:
Procnias albus

Dantas, Miranda, Ravetta, Aleixo. 2017. A new population of the White Bellbird Procnias albus (Hermann, 1783) from lowland southern Brazilian Amazonia, with comments on genetic variation in bellbirds. Rev. Bras. Ornitol. 25:71-74.
[pdf]
 
Cock of the rocks predate on small birds

The Andean Cock-of-the-rock (Rupicola peruvianus) is a frugivorous bird predator
El gallito de la roca (Rupicola peruvianus) es un frugívoro depredador

Laura Mahecha Nickole Villabona Laura Sierra David Ocampo and Oscar Laverde-R.

Cotingas are considered essentially frugivorous, but a few records suggest they might include small vertebrates in their diet, mainly during the breeding season. In March 2015, we recorded a young male of an Andean Cock-of-the-rock (Rupicola peruvianus) chasing and eating an adult Canada Warbler (Cardellina canadensis) in Santa Maria, Boyacá (Colombia). The next day, we observed another adult male chasing a Swainson's Thrush (Catharus ustulatus), but we were unable to observe the end of the chase. Observations of hunting small vertebrates suggest this species may be omnivorous, not only during the breeding season but throughout its annual cycle. These may be rare cases, but notably both events involved migratory species that may not recognize these colorful birds as possible predators because they are not exposed to cotingas in the temperate zone. Predation on adult birds is difficult to observe in the wild, but this information is essential to better understand the life histories of birds and the different selection pressures acting on them.

http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1676/17-005.1
https://www.hbw.com/news/andean-cock-rock-can-predate-birds
 
Dantas, Miranda, Ravetta, Aleixo. 2017. A new population of the White Bellbird Procnias albus (Hermann, 1783) from lowland southern Brazilian Amazonia, with comments on genetic variation in bellbirds. Rev. Bras. Ornitol. 25:71-74.
[pdf]

Even if not a Taxonomy and Nomenclature question fits to Procnias albus

https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(19)31190-X?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS096098221931190X%3Fshowall%3Dtrue
 
Amie E.Settlecowski, Andrés M.Cuervo, José G.Tello, Michael G . Harvey, Robb T.Brumfield, Elizabeth P.Derryberry (2020) Investigating the utility of traditional and genomic multi-locus datasets to resolve relationships in Lipaugus and Tijuca (Cotingidae) Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
Available online 2 March 2020, 106779
In Press, Journal Pre-proof

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320300518

Highlights

The first completely sampled phylogeny of Lipaugus and Tijuca.


Genomic data settles relationships unresolved with Sanger sequence datasets.


The two Tijuca species are non-monophyletic within a clade of Lipaugus pihas.


An early burst of speciation characterizes Lipaugus/Tijuca evolutionary history.


Diversity is uneven across habitats and among species.


Abstract
Rapid diversification limits our ability to resolve evolutionary relationships and examine diversification history, as in the case of the Neotropical cotingas. Here we present an analysis with complete taxon sampling for the cotinga genera Lipaugus and Tijuca, which include some of the most range-restricted (e.g., T. condita) and also the most widespread and familiar (e.g., L. vociferans) forest birds in the Neotropics. We used two datasets: (1) Sanger sequencing data sampled from eight loci in 34 individuals across all described taxa and (2) sequence capture data linked to 1,079 ultraconserved elements and conserved exons sampled from one or two individuals per species. Phylogenies estimated from the Sanger sequencing data failed to resolve three nodes, but the sequence capture data produced a well-supported tree. Lipaugus and Tijuca formed a single, highly supported clade, but Tijuca species were not sister and were embedded within Lipaugus. A dated phylogeny confirmed Lipaugus and Tijuca diversified rapidly in the Miocene. Our study provides a detailed evolutionary hypothesis for Lipaugus and Tijuca and demonstrates that increasing genomic sampling can prove instrumental in resolving the evolutionary history of recent radiations
 
Amie E.Settlecowski, Andrés M.Cuervo, José G.Tello, Michael G . Harvey, Robb T.Brumfield, Elizabeth P.Derryberry (2020) Investigating the utility of traditional and genomic multi-locus datasets to resolve relationships in Lipaugus and Tijuca (Cotingidae) Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
Available online 2 March 2020, 106779
In Press, Journal Pre-proof

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320300518

Proposal (863) to SACC

Revise (A) generic classification and (B) linear sequence of Lipaugus and Tijuca
 
Amie E.Settlecowski, Andrés M.Cuervo, José G.Tello, Michael G . Harvey, Robb T.Brumfield, Elizabeth P.Derryberry (2020) Investigating the utility of traditional and genomic multi-locus datasets to resolve relationships in Lipaugus and Tijuca (Cotingidae) Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
Available online 2 March 2020, 106779
In Press, Journal Pre-proof

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320300518

Highlights

The first completely sampled phylogeny of Lipaugus and Tijuca.


Genomic data settles relationships unresolved with Sanger sequence datasets.


The two Tijuca species are non-monophyletic within a clade of Lipaugus pihas.


An early burst of speciation characterizes Lipaugus/Tijuca evolutionary history.


Diversity is uneven across habitats and among species.


Abstract
Rapid diversification limits our ability to resolve evolutionary relationships and examine diversification history, as in the case of the Neotropical cotingas. Here we present an analysis with complete taxon sampling for the cotinga genera Lipaugus and Tijuca, which include some of the most range-restricted (e.g., T. condita) and also the most widespread and familiar (e.g., L. vociferans) forest birds in the Neotropics. We used two datasets: (1) Sanger sequencing data sampled from eight loci in 34 individuals across all described taxa and (2) sequence capture data linked to 1,079 ultraconserved elements and conserved exons sampled from one or two individuals per species. Phylogenies estimated from the Sanger sequencing data failed to resolve three nodes, but the sequence capture data produced a well-supported tree. Lipaugus and Tijuca formed a single, highly supported clade, but Tijuca species were not sister and were embedded within Lipaugus. A dated phylogeny confirmed Lipaugus and Tijuca diversified rapidly in the Miocene. Our study provides a detailed evolutionary hypothesis for Lipaugus and Tijuca and demonstrates that increasing genomic sampling can prove instrumental in resolving the evolutionary history of recent radiations
IOC Updates Diary Dec 15:

Move Black-and-gold Cotinga and Grey-winged Cotinga from Tijuca to Lipaugus and requence Lipaugus.
 
Buffon's Piauhau is Querula purpurata, not a Lipaugus. Why is this name given to Lipaugus rather than its original species, if indeed Querula is its original species? What is the origin of the name Piauhau? according to Buffon, this would come from his cry. Why do those who draw up the lists (especially in French) in common language do they do anything?
 
What is the origin of the name Piauhau? according to Buffon, this would come from his cry.

This seems quite plausible.
Current use in French for Lipaugus/Snowornis may come from a mix-up with English "Piha" -- undoubtedly also onomatopoetic, and superficially similar (although the actual calls are certainly not).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top