New Wilson's-type petrel (1 Viewer)

Aleix Comas said:

And furthermore, "seno" in Spanish, apart from the geographical feature (sound) means also "breast"... so Puerto Montt Storm-Petrel, as read earlier seems a "sounder" idea.

Cheers,

Aleix Comas

Click to expand...

Richard Klim said:

Harrison, Sallaberry, Gaskin, Baird, Jamarillo [sic], Metz, Pearman, O'Keeffe, Dowdall, Enright, Fahy, Gilligan & Lillie (in press). A new storm petrel species from Chile. Auk. [abstract]

• Oceanites pincoyae (ex-'O australis')

Click to expand...

Melanie said:

Is someone here who already has the Auk article about Oceanites pincoyae?

Click to expand...

Richard Klim said:

Alvaro's Adventures, 19 Feb 2013: The Pincoya Storm Petrel dances out into reality!

Harrison, Sallaberry, Gaskin, Baird, Jaramillo, Metz, Pearman, O'Keeffe, Dowdall, Enright, Fahy, Gilligan & Lillie 2013. A new storm-petrel species from Chile. Auk 130(1): 180–191. [pdf]

Click to expand...

Richard Klim said:

Harrison, Sallaberry, Gaskin, Baird, Jamarillo [sic], Metz, Pearman, O'Keeffe, Dowdall, Enright, Fahy, Gilligan & Lillie (in press). A new storm petrel species from Chile. Auk. [abstract]

• Oceanites pincoyae (ex-'O australis')

Wikipedia: "The Pincoya is, according to local mythology, a female "water spirit" of the Chilotan Seas. The Pincoya is said to have long blond hair, be of incomparable beauty, be cheerful and sensual, and rise from the depths of the sea."

Click to expand...

Peter Kovalik said:

Proposal (721) to SACC:

Treat Pincoya Storm-Petrel (Oceanites pincoyae) as a valid new species

Click to expand...

mb1848 said:

Coming out May 15 2018 is a photoguide to the birds of Chile by Schmitt and Howell.
https://www.amazon.com/Birds-Chile-Steve-N-Howell/dp/0691167397

Click to expand...

cajanuma said:

It's already out and my copy arrived a few days ago. It treats Pincoya Storm-Petrel as Oceanites [chilensis] pincoyae, so it doesn't stake out a clear taxonomic position as to whether it should be a full species or a ssp of Fuegian Storm-Petrel, which for a field guide is a very sensible approach, I think. It's an excellent little book, and highlights a number of other potential splits.

Click to expand...

DMW said:

This might be a silly question, but if the authors are avoiding staking-out a clear taxonomic position, shouldn't it be Oceanites [oceanicus] pincoyae?

Click to expand...

Neomorphus said:

That's because H & S take the stance that "Fuegian SP" chilensis is distinct from oceanicus. Using square parenthesis means you split the bird (in theory at least) without publishing a paper on it. Shirihai seemed to have started this trend in earnest and I think it's catching on.

So now we have:-

Oceanites pincoyae
Oceanites [oceanicus] pincoyae
Oceanites [chilensis] pincoyae
Oceanites [gracilis] pincoyae

Click to expand...

DMW said:

Thanks for the answer. That's a lot of pincoyaes!

I hadn't realised H&S had gone ahead and split Fuegian SP from Wilson's.

Click to expand...

Peter Kovalik said:

Proposal (721) to SACC:

Treat Pincoya Storm-Petrel (Oceanites pincoyae) as a valid new species

Click to expand...

DID NOT PASS

Click to expand...

Additional comments from Jaramillo: “I realized that in my comments post Howell and Schmitt, I may have given too much detail and perhaps hid some key issues (buried the lead!). Perhaps the most important is this one:

Although we do not have the exact breeding areas yet, as they are unknown, we are certain of the following based on birds found inland during the nesting season. Typical dark bellied birds (Wilson’s Storm-Petrel) obviously nest to the south of the range of pincoyae, but they also nest to the NORTH of pincoyae. So, this oddball, and I should repeat, most distinctive of ALL Oceanites, is sandwiched between populations of typical looking Wilson’s. So, if anyone is considering that this may be a clinal oddity in the north of the distribution of Wilson’s, it is not. If anyone is considering that this may be clinal with the similarly white-bellied gracilis (Elliot’s SP) of the north, it is not. It is a unique-looking form that remains largely in the sounds and fjords of Chile particularly inside of Chiloe Island, unlike the more truly pelagic Wilson’s. It is sandwiched to the north and south by dark bellied (Wilson’s SP). Although there are few (now four) specimens, 12 birds were captured and measured. Hundreds have been photographed in the core range, and there, variation is minimal as Mark mentions.

Additional comments from Areta: “"After reading through the publication by Howell & Schmitt (2016) and additional comments by Mark and Alvaro, I still think that pincoyae must be afforded full species status. While H&S found more variation than hitherto recognized in several birds (including pincoyae and oceanicus), I do not find a convincing explanation in their work to account for it. Both Mark and Alvaro point out how birds are, so far, known to be structured geographically and indicate the consistent features of pincoyae in its core area. This might be a good chance to show pictures of birds in the hand that were measured by Harrison et al., to clarify the amount of variation seen locally (I am surprised that reviewers of the original description of pincoyae did not ask for this, or if they did, that the editor did not enforce this need). A massive supplementary material section would have been very helpful. Finally: if pincoyae is not a valid species, then what is it?"

Comments from Robbins: “After getting clarifications and additional information from both Alvaro and Mark Pearman, I’m changing my vote from No to YES in recognizing pincoyae as a species.”

Comments from Remsen: “After going through Mark and Alvaro’s comments, I am also changing my vote to YES, but with strong reservations.”

Click to expand...