Blyth's Reed? (1 Viewer)

Taken in NE Turkey (Black Sea coast) a week ago by a friend. Short pp, dark outer half of outer mandible, cold olive tones, supercilium ending behind eye, grey legs, banana posture... Blyth's?
More photos available if needed.

Looks good to me?

Andy

100% Blyth's.

Thanks. First record this year I believe.

How many primary tips are you counting in this photo? I count 8, instead of 6. Is alula color Correct? I can't see the dark lower mandibule tip. Leg colors are too pale. General coloration, especiallay breast sides are far from ideal. Forehead sloping, pale eye ring, supercilium length shoul be compared with least known subspecies of similar species before deciding.

Ok, so what do you think this is? It can't be Reed; no rusty colours, too short pp, alula and tertials too plain, lower mandible had darkness, supercilium is too strong.
Can't be Marsh; legs are grey not yellow, pp too short and there are no white tips to pp, darknes is lower mandible.
Can't be Paddyfield; supercilium is too short and crown too plain, also pp is too long.
Definitely not an Iduna or Hippolais, for obvious reasons.
So, what is it? A new species to science? Or maybe - just maybe - Blyth's Reed Warbler, which seems to be the only species to fit the bill?

Maybe you should check another source.

Ok, so what do you think this is? It can't be Reed; no rusty colours, too short pp, alula and tertials too plain, lower mandible had darkness, supercilium is too strong.


Are you aware of fuscus subspecies of Reed Warbler (Caspian Reed Warbler)(I am not saying it is)? It has no rusty brown but grey brown coloration. Underparts are whiter. As I wrote, I can't see any darkness on lower mandibule in this photo. In Roselaar 95, supercilium and eye ring is defined as "stongly white" for fuscus subspecies. In Handbook of Western Palearctic body color of reed warbler is described as "brown olive to grey" For alula and tertials, please notice the attached picture.



Can't be Marsh; legs are grey not yellow, pp too short and there are no white tips to pp, darknes is lower mandible.


Please check the laricus and turcomana (not valid) subspecies.


Can't be Paddyfield; supercilium is too short and crown too plain, also pp is too long.


Bill length, iris and wing formula resembles (!) paddyfield, but coloration does not fit. On the other hand a few books indicates that some induviduals may lack rusty coloration. If the photographer would arrange the exposure two stops lesser, you could't talk about the superciliums shortness.


Definitely not an Iduna or Hippolais, for obvious reasons.


Agreed.



So, what is it? A new species to science? Or maybe - just maybe - Blyth's Reed Warbler, which seems to be the only species to fit the bill? Maybe you should check another source.



Some sources talk about hybrid birds. One of them is "the Handbook of Bird Idetification for Europe and WP" I recommend you not to try to fit the existing bill in every case. Sometimes some features fit, some don't. Identifiying a species from a mediochre photo, is always open to misidentification. Before deciding such problematic species, birders should check all features of all similar species and subpecies i. e. iris color depending on age, legg color depending on age, moulting, age dependent body proportions, bill coloration depending on age etc. For me the number of obvious primary tips (6 in Bluth's vs. 8 in Marsh) is important as well as wing formula. The first mentioned does not fit the Blyth's.

Lets see what others will say..

You do realise that number of primaries seen depends on the birds stance, right? So if the bird is in a posture where it shows more fanned out primaries (such as this) 7 or 8 primaries are normal. If you check Google you can see plenty with more than 6 primaries seen. This bird has lowered one primary and as its wing is lowered tertials don't cover the primaries that much. If you saw the same bird in a different pose you would maybe see 6 primaries.
Also, the lower mandible IS dark. You apparently can't see it but there is a dark smudge there.

Muratfaik said:

How many primary tips are you counting in this photo? I count 8, instead of 6.

Click to expand...

If the image was a little sharper, you would actually be able to count all the primary tips with the wing in that position (as it is held dropped down).

You do realise that number of primaries seen depends on the birds stance, right? So if the bird is in a posture where it shows more fanned out primaries (such as this) 7 or 8 primaries are normal.

According to what? Your experience? Any printed material? What is your referance? There are two chicken races called Barbu d'Watermael and Sultan. Dropped wings are typical for the first one. "Vulture hooks" are typical for the second one. It is hard to photograph these birds without these characteristics. And the birds can not hide their breed characteristics by changing their posture or stance.

Closed wing formula is one of the most important identification characteristics for acrocephalus warblers. Please check the wing formulas and feather length differences in milimeters carefully.


If you check Google you can see plenty with more than 6 primaries seen.

Google is not a source for me. One misidentified photo effects tousands of birders. There are many well known sources prepared by life time birders.

This bird has lowered one primary and as its wing is lowered tertials don't cover the primaries that much. If you saw the same bird in a different pose you would maybe see 6 primaries.

I understand you have more photos. Please share..

Aditionally, lowering first primary and tertials at the same time can only be in flight action or wing beat. Do you think such a mediochre photo can stop a wing beat? How much shuter speed is needed? Why is is so noisy?


Also, the lower mandible IS dark. You apparently can't see it but there is a dark smudge there.

I am looking throug Ipad mini. Tomorrow I will adjust the exposure and contrast in my mac.

What does a chicken have to do with this? I don't think you even understand the difference between the number of primaries seen behind tertials and total number of primaries on a bird. You obviously just don't understand what I'm saying. I'm done discussing this with you, it's a Blyth's, end of story. Good night.

Tib78 said:

If the image was a little sharper, you would actually be able to count all the primary tips with the wing in that position (as it is held dropped down).

Click to expand...

I wish.. That is why I asked the number of counted primary tips. I try to count pale and dark areas on tips of primaries to identiy each primary.

Muratfaik said:

Closed wing formula is one of the most important identification characteristics for acrocephalus warblers. Please check the wing formulas and feather length differences in milimeters carefully.

Click to expand...

Well that won't be easy based on that picture, will it? Then again you can see that P2 is quite short...

kuzeycem said:

What does a chicken have to do with this? I don't think you even understand the difference between the number of primaries seen behind tertials and total number of primaries on a bird. You obviously just don't understand what I'm saying. I'm done discussing this with you, it's a Blyth's, end of story. Good night.

Click to expand...

My young friend it is an anology.

I have given the example from chicken breeds to exibit the fact that genetic characteristics related to postures can not be hidden by the position of wings or how the bird stance.

Yes I don't understand what you mean by "primaries seen behind tertials" I can not discuss with such terms. But I understand tryin to add a new species to your regions fauna to help some commercial birding activities. Good night.

This article may help understanding such a problematic species:

https://birdingbytrain.wordpress.com/tag/wing-formula/

Muratfaik said:

My young friend it is an anology.

I have given the example from chicken breeds to exibit the fact that genetic characteristics related to postures can not be hidden by the position of wings or how the bird stance.

Yes I don't understand what you mean by "primaries seen behind tertials" I can not discuss with such terms. But I understand tryin to add a new species to your regions fauna to help some commercial birding activities. Good night.

Click to expand...

I find the whole tone of your comments quite insulting and to end by accusing this young man of seeking commercial profit by adding one species to his list is surprising as he stated that it as new for the year, not like he just described a whole new species!

I suggest you stick to chickens.

A

And, to be clear, I didn't even see this bird. So there is no possible profit or commercial value here for me.

andyadcock said:

I find the whole tone of your comments quite insulting and to end by accusing this young man of seeking commercial profit by adding one species to his list is surprising as he stated that it as new for the year, not like he just described a whole new species!

I suggest you stick to chickens.

A

Click to expand...

Telling me to stick with my chicken and ignoring all the scientific referancea and comments I made, is what I would call insulting. And please note that I have only made that "commerce related" comment after seeing the wrong, non scientific approach that claimed the bird was "Blyth". I allways take the comments from tour guides with some scientific suspection. On the other hand, if you don't understand chicken genetics, you can not understand at all the hybridisation of wild bird species. I recommend you to spend more time to read and understand these instead of spending your time on bird tours. I believe that adding one false identified species to the "do see list" is just creating false hope and in the long run would not serve Turkey's bird tourism. I wonder if you write the above comment only because you attended one of the tours (or several) organized by these people or not. One must also question if these tours are organized on a legal basis and if they pay their taxes properly.

Muratfaik said:

Telling me to stick with my chicken and ignoring all the scientific referancea and comments I made, is what I would call insulting. And please note that I have only made that "commerce related" comment after seeing the wrong, non scientific approach that claimed the bird was "Blyth". I allways take the comments from tour guides with some scientific suspection. On the other hand, if you don't understand chicken genetics, you can not understand at all the hybridisation of wild bird species. I recommend you to spend more time to read and understand these instead of spending your time on bird tours. I believe that adding one false identified species to the "do see list" is just creating false hope and in the long run would not serve Turkey's bird tourism. I wonder if you write the above comment only because you attended one of the tours (or several) organized by these people or not. One must also question if these tours are organized on a legal basis and if they pay their taxes properly.

Click to expand...

What 'tours' do you refer to and are you suggesting that this bird is a hybrid, has hybridization ever been suspected let alone proved in Acrocpehalus Warblers???

You sound like an academic with little field experience outside of ringing and measuring to me. To question an ID is one thing but this is not the way to do it.

No one afaik has mentioned tours here, most contributors, like myself, are independent and most have much experience, not with chickens I admit, unless you count curry.

And just so you know, I see Blythe's Reed Warbler daily in the summer where I live and not in a net.

A

Haha, hilariously bad tempered thread!