Evidence for the Survival of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker (1 Viewer)

Neil Grubb · Nov 10, 2005

This is all getting far too personal and is inappropriate for a forum such as this. Please stick to the topic of the debate and do not let this degenrate into a slanging match. I hope the mods feel it appropriate to intervene at this point.

StonecoldBirder · Nov 10, 2005

Buck and Tommy:

Birds of one genus and can breed out of thier own genus. For example there are sight records of a Common Goldeneye X Hooded Merganser, There is a warbler banded in Michigan that was identified as a Chestnut-sided Warbler X Black and White Warbler. There is a paper written on hydrizing in warblers where the auther says that warblers species in one genus is most likely to hybrize with other warblers outside of thier own genus. There is a sight record of a Junco X White-throated Sparrow in US. So Buck your claim is not true.

Absolutely then a Pileated Woodpecker could in fact breed with a Ivory-billed Woodpecker. PERIOD lol Again I am not saying a Common Loon could mate with Red-eyed Vireo but a Ivory-billed could indeed mate with a Plieated.

Also if there is a local population of aberrant Pileateds near the Cache River area or in the refuge (?) I have yet to see photos of these birds on the net. Also how many birds are we talking about? Do they all have the same exact plumage as the one video in the Luneau video? ( if the bird is indeed a aberrant pileated ) So if you believe there are several aberrant pileateds roaming a certain part of the refuge and they all have the same wing aberrant wing pattern as the one pictured in the Luneau video, where on earth can you find a population bird species or genus of bird that have the same aberrant plumage? I suspect no where!

MH

choupique1 · Nov 10, 2005

there is a good deal of evidence that has still not been released to the general public

Andrew Rowlands · Nov 10, 2005

Neil Grubb said:
This is all getting far too personal and is inappropriate for a forum such as this. Please stick to the topic of the debate and do not let this degenrate into a slanging match. I hope the mods feel it appropriate to intervene at this point.

I think Neil has said what most of the Membership feels about this thread.

Let's leave the personal stuff out please guys - the Thread is getting far too unwieldy with all the o/t stuff as it is.

I don't want to start chopping Posts about but if this continues you'll leave me with no other option.

Thanks,

Andrew Rowlands.

Birdforum Moderator.

hgr389 · Nov 10, 2005

StonecoldBirder said:
Absolutely then a Pileated Woodpecker could in fact breed with a Ivory-billed Woodpecker.

Here's what Julie Weston, a wildlife ecologist and geneticist specializing in
mammals and birds, said on Carolinabirds on May 10, 2005:
----
To address other comments from the list-serv,
cross-fostering with pileated woodpeckers is likely to
never work, in part because these two species are in
different genera and are not only too distantly
related to interbreed, they are possibly too distantly
related to raise the young successfully.
-----

Please show me something from a highly-qualified person that argues that Ivory-bills and Pileateds CAN interbreed.

StonecoldBirder said:
Also if there is a local population of aberrant Pileateds near the Cache River area or in the refuge (?) I have yet to see photos of these birds on the net. Also how many birds are we talking about? Do they all have the same exact plumage as the one video in the Luneau video? ( if the bird is indeed a aberrant pileated ) So if you believe there are several aberrant pileateds roaming a certain part of the refuge and they all have the same wing aberrant wing pattern as the one pictured in the Luneau video, where on earth can you find a population bird species or genus of bird that have the same aberrant plumage? I suspect no where!

Please read the information here:
http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2005/10/abnormal-pileateds.html

1. I'd like to see Cornell's photos of abnormal Pileateds as well.
2. I don't think the Luneau bird is an abnormal Pileated--I see nothing inconsistent with a normal Pileated.
3. No one is arguing that all the aberrant Pileateds have the same wing pattern.

AmpelisChinito · Nov 10, 2005

Ok, people want to believe that the IB still exists. People think that possibilities, myths, and legends are more extraordinary than fact.
Consider these two scenarios:
1. You are in an alternate earth and have no idea about whales. One day on the news you see a picture of a flipper of a whale and you are astonished and think to yourself "What if there really ARE these 50ft creatures swimming around the ocean?"
2. You grow up knowing the fact that there IS a small race of plesiosaur-like creatures living in the Loch Ness Lake.

Now, with the supplied evidence of IBs still living, is it more that there IS a small race, or that people WANT to believe that there still are some left?

What would be more incredible: having ALMOST no doubt evidence of IBs but not enough to prove their existance, or knowing about them all your life and not being bigger of a deal than a Pileated Woodpecker?

Wompoo Dove · Nov 11, 2005

undefined

hgr389 said:

Here's what Julie Weston, a wildlife ecologist and geneticist specializing in
mammals and birds, said on Carolinabirds on May 10, 2005:
----
To address other comments from the list-serv,
cross-fostering with pileated woodpeckers is likely to
never work, in part because these two species are in
different genera and are not only too distantly
related to interbreed, they are possibly too distantly
related to raise the young successfully.
-----

Please show me something from a highly-qualified person that argues that Ivory-bills and Pileateds CAN interbreed.

Click to expand...

hgr389 said:
What do we do with this literature on hybrids then?
Gray Hawk Asturina nitida and Red shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus
Lasley G. W. , Sexton C.
Title The spring season March 1 - May 31, 1989. Texas region
Editor -- Journal American Birds

Common Merganser mergus merganser and Common GoldeneyeBucephalus clangula
Authors Foulkes R. Title Hybrid Goosander x Goldeneye, Audenshaw Reservoirs, 15th January Editor -- Journal Birds In Greater Manchester

Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus and Bucephala clangula Common Goldeneye
Authors Ball S. C. Title Hybrid ducks, including descriptions of two crosses of Bucephala and Lophodytes Editor Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History - Yale University - Bulletin 3 - 26pp

Black Crowned Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax and Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor
Sibley D. Title Finding and Identifying Hybrid Birds
Editor -- Journal Birding

Yellow Headed Blackbird Xanthocephalus Xanthocephalus
and Brewers Blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus
Panov E. N. Title Natural hybridisation and ethological isolation in birds [Russian] Editor Nauka, Moskva Journal -- Year Volume Number Starting Page Ending Page
1989 --

Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus and Ring Necked Pheasant
Phasianus colchicus
Sibley C. G. Title The Evolutionary and Taxonomic Significance of Sexual Dimorphism and Hybridization in Birds Editor -- Journal Condor
Year Volume Number Starting Page Ending Page 1957

It might be wise to look at this quote from author Frank B. Gill

The Auk
A Quarterly
Journal of Ornithology
Vol. 115 No. 2 April 1998
The Auk 115(2):281-283, 1998
OVERVIEWS
HYBRIDIZATION IN BIRDS
FRANK B. GILL •
National Audubon Society, 700 Broadway, New •brk, New York 10003, USA

HYBRID.
"The word itself immediately evokes
the powerful concepts of novelty, strength, and
sterility. Hybrids symbolize both inferiority
and superiority. Hybrids violate racial purity
and clan identity. Hybrids challenge breeders,
defy taxonomists, and fascinate ornithologists..."

hgr389 · Nov 11, 2005

Wompoo Dove said:
What do we do with this literature on hybrids then?

Those look like fine articles and quotes, but I don't see that anyone mentions Ivory-bills anywhere.

The excellent "Birds of North America" accounts contain extensive information on known hybrids for each species. (The known hybrids are listed in the Systematics sections). I don't see any known hybrids for either Pileated or Ivory-billed Woodpecker.

Again, if you can find something from a highly-qualified person that argues that Ivory-bills and Pileateds can or did interbreed, please let me know.

Wompoo Dove · Nov 11, 2005

hgr389 said:
Those look like fine articles and quotes, but I don't see that anyone mentions Ivory-bills anywhere.

The excellent "Birds of North America" accounts contain extensive information on known hybrids for each species. (The known hybrids are listed in the Systematics sections). I don't see any known hybrids for either Pileated or Ivory-billed Woodpecker.

Again, if you can find something from a highly-qualified person that argues that Ivory-bills and Pileateds can or did interbreed, please let me know.

HGR Respectively this is what you posted:

To address other comments from the list-serv,
cross-fostering with pileated woodpeckers is likely to
never work, in part because these two species are in
different genera and are not only too distantly
related to interbreed, they are possibly too distantly
related to raise the young successfully.

I provided literature proving that distantly related species can and do interbreed. So potentially if you look at other species then how can one conclude that this is impossible for these 2 species?

hgr389 · Nov 11, 2005

Wompoo Dove said:
I provided literature proving that distantly related species can and do interbreed. So potentially if you look at other species then how can one conclude that this is impossible for these 2 species?

I'm not a geneticist, but I quoted one who said Pileated and Ivory-billed are "too distantly related to interbreed". Evidently, some species that are not too distantly related can interbreed, but for more distantly related species, interbreeding can no longer happen. If Ruffed Grouse and Ring-necked Pheasant can interbreed, it doesn't necessarily follow that Ostrich and Ruby-throated Hummingbird can do so.

I think the whole "maybe it was a hybrid?" discussion lacks some relevance, because Cornell clearly saw and photographed abnormal Pileateds in the search area, and I haven't heard them say a thing about possible hybrids.

timeshadowed · Nov 11, 2005

Wompoo Dove,

If you haven't already noticed, the playing field in this thread is unbalanced.

Buck and Tom (HGR) seem to think that others must 'prove' any statements that are posted here, but that THEY alone are exempt from this same requirement. They can (and do) raise questions but are NEVER required to 'prove' that their questions contain any validity.

The following quote by Tom is an excellent example of this attitude:
"Again, if you can find something from a highly-qualified
person that argues that Ivory-bills and Pileateds can or
did interbreed, please let me know."

Tom thinks that he can make an assumption and you are to 'prove' him wrong and if you can't come up with the 'asked for proof', that failure only 'proves' that his unsubstaniated assumption is correct!

TimeShadowed

Wompoo Dove · Nov 12, 2005

timeshadowed said:
Wompoo Dove,

If you haven't already noticed, the playing field in this thread is unbalanced.

Buck and Tom (HGR) seem to think that others must 'prove' any statements that are posted here, but that THEY alone are exempt from this same requirement. They can (and do) raise questions but are NEVER required to 'prove' that their questions contain any validity.

The following quote by Tom is an excellent example of this attitude:
"Again, if you can find something from a highly-qualified
person that argues that Ivory-bills and Pileateds can or
did interbreed, please let me know."

Tom thinks that he can make an assumption and you are to 'prove' him wrong and if you can't come up with the 'asked for proof', that failure only 'proves' that his unsubstaniated assumption is correct!

TimeShadowed

Greetings TimeShawdowed

Thanks for your comment. By the way I felt I entered into the debate with some good tools. I gave information on species that were very unrelated and with scientfic references as well, and even more unrelated in biological composition than ivory billed woodpecker and pileated woodpeckers. These were not my own observations but from several well respected sources.

If HGR was paying close attention he would have noted that I included several very unrelated examples. One of the most noteworthy I believe was the example of Common Goldeneye and Hooded Merganser. Unless my eyesight fails me both of these species have dramatically different bill structures and feeding habits. Breeding between these species has occured more than once and in natural circumstances. At least both woodpeckers have very similar designed bill structure!

I felt my examples offered proof that dramatically different species can and do interbreed. Comparing a breeding between pileated and ivorybill to ostrich and hummingbird while humorous, did little to offer me assurance that I had been taken seriously. A panel of fellow scientists are frequently invaluable in helping set things straight. I do respect Julie Weston's scientific opinion but I suggest that perhaps the circumstances upon which she was interviewed or some other factor that I am not aware of did not allow her to comment with full scientific data on the history of unrelated hybrids in mind. Since HGR has clearly stated that he is not a geneticist I see no accurate data available from that resource as well and thus with due respect has lost me as an audience.

Best Wishes and thanks for your comments.

Don Kimball

hgr389 · Nov 12, 2005

Wompoo Dove said:
A panel of fellow scientists are frequently invaluable in helping set things straight.

Agreed, but unlike your "panel", my geneticist commented on our specific interbreeding question.

To us laymen, superficial similarity/dissimilarity of the species may not be reliable in determining whether they can interbreed. Maybe the Chihuahua/Gray Wolf combo could work, while maybe the Sandhill Crane/Great Blue Heron combo won't work.

I've yet to see any highly-qualified person that argues that the Pileated/IBWO combo could work. If one surfaces, I'm happy to revisit this question.

timeshadowed · Nov 12, 2005

Wompoo Dove said:
Since HGR has clearly stated that he is not a geneticist I see no accurate data available from that resource as well and thus with due respect has lost me as an audience.
Don Kimball

Thanks for commenting Don, but please don't stop posting in this thread. Even though Buck and Tom may DIS your comments, I find them very interesting to read. I feel that you have very valuable information that needs to be posted. Just don't expect to play by Buck and Tom's lop-sided 'rules'.

TimeShadowed

gws · Nov 12, 2005

The man didn't say he was going to stop posting on this thread. He indicated that a certain poster had lost him as an audience. There is a difference.

Wise move, Don. Perhaps others could learn.

buck3m · Nov 14, 2005

Good Science

Actually, I think we've seen a good scientific exchange here recently.

I thought I "knew" that a species from one genus couldn't interbreed with species from a separate genus. I didn't check my facts properly. I was proven wrong. That's the way a good debate should work.

Although it appears genetically highly improbable that these two species have interbred, I think the topic has little value in this debate one way or another.

As far as lopsided rules go, some said it was unfair to suggest that maybe there were aberrant Pileated Woodpeckers there in Arkansas. It was wrong to even suggest the possibility because there was "no evidence." That unfair theory has been proven to be a fact.

It was suggested that it was unfair, due to "lack of proof," to suggest that maybe The Recordings were blue jays or other recordings or something else altogether. Now we know that there were little or no "controls" in the area so there's little way of knowing if it WAS recordings or blue jays (seen making kent-like calls there) or birders/hunters blowing modified blue-winged teal calls or what have you. It is not up to skeptics to provide solid proof that it was, in fact, blue jays or some other particular source, it is up to the believers to prove that the recordings could have been nothing other than living Ivory-Billed Woodpeckers.

It may seem unfair, but it's science.

Terry O'Nolley · Nov 15, 2005

hgr389 said:
Again, if you can find something from a highly-qualified person that argues that Ivory-bills and Pileateds can or did interbreed, please let me know.

By saying "can or did interbreed" you are (perhaps unintentionally) suggesting that unless a pair *did* interbreed, it means they *can't* interbreed.

This is faulted.

buck3m · Nov 15, 2005

Terry O'Nolley said:
By saying "can or did interbreed" you are (perhaps unintentionally) suggesting that unless a pair *did* interbreed, it means they *can't* interbreed.

This is faulted.

The odds that the two species COULD interbreed are very, very, low.

The odds that they DID interbreed are lower still.

The odds that there are living hybrid offspring that could reproduce are even lower.

What's the relevance of the whole issue, anyway? To be frank, it seems like it's a way to present the aberrant Pileated Woodpeckers as evidence of Ivory-bills, rather than the obvious explanation that some of these aberrant Pileateds were the source of many, if not all, of the brief, distant "Ivory-Bill" reports in the Cornell Paper.

affe22 · Nov 15, 2005

When the Cornell people said they had seen leucistic pilateds in the area, didn't they also say they saw none with the exact markings of an ivory-billed? In fact, didn't they say no one has ever seen a pileated with all the dorsal flight feathers with pigment problems? Was this just thrown out when the word leucistic was seen?

buck3m · Nov 15, 2005

affe22 said:
When the Cornell people said they had seen leucistic pilateds in the area, didn't they also say they saw none with the exact markings of an ivory-billed?

Cornell also didn't see an Ivory-Bill with all the marks of an Ivory-Bill.

And don't forget this quote from the Noel Snyder's book The Carolina Parakeet

The bird flew up to the vertical trunk of a pine only a few yards distant, and I could plainly see that it was a very large woodpecker with distinct large white secondary triangles on its folded wings, the most diagnostic field mark of the ivory-bill in distinguishing it from the somewhat similar Pileated Woodpecker.

Had the bird flown on immediately after I detected it, I would have been forever sure that I had seen a living Ivory-bill. But the bird remained perched on the pine trunk, giving me time to examine it more closely with binoculars. I soon determined that the white triangles on the bird's wings were in fact cream in color, not pure white, and in fact there were two black feathers intermixed with the cream-colored secondaries on the bird's left wing. Further, the bird lacked the huge white bill of an ivory-bill and instead had the much smaller black bill typical of a Pileated Woodpecker.

Mistakes are easy to make unless you get a good look at close range. Cornell didn't. They didn't get the kind of look that Noel Snyder did to prove he was seeing an aberrant Pileated and not an Ivory-Bill. He had to examine it CLOSELY at FIFTEEN YARDS WITH BINOCULARS to see what it was. That's a far cry from fleeting glimpses or fuzzy video.

Remember, there were aberrant Pileateds in the search area!!!

Evidence for the Survival of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Cedar Waxwing Chairman

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Time is a Shadow

Well-known member

Well-known member

Time is a Shadow

Guest

Well-known member

Cow-headed Jaybird

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread