• 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.

Leaftossers (1 Viewer)

TiF Update April 27:
Tawny-throated Leaftosser, Sclerurus mexicanus is split into Tawny-throated Leaftosser, Sclerurus mexicanus (mexicanus + pullus) and Dusky Leaftosser, Sclerurus obscurior (andinus, obscurior, peruvianus, macconnelli, and bahiae) based on d'Horta et al., (2013).
 
Published online today...

d'Horta, Cuervo, Ribas, Brumfield & Miyaki (in press). Phylogeny and comparative phylogeography of Sclerurus (Aves: Furnariidae) reveal constant and cryptic diversification in an old radiation of rain forest understorey specialists. J Biogeogr. [abstract] [supp info]

Suggests recognition of five species within the current Tawny-throated Leaftosser Sclerurus mexicanus:
  1. S mexicanus (incl pullus)
  2. S obscurior
  3. S andinus
  4. S macconnelli (incl bahiae)
  5. S peruvianus
Ref: Remsen 2003 (HBW 8).


TiF Update July 23
Based on d'Horta et al., (2013) the Dusky Leaftosser, Sclerurus obscurior has been split into three species: Dusky Leaftosser, Sclerurus obscurior (monotypic), Andean Leaftosser, Sclerurus andinus (monotypic), and Amazonian Leaftosser, Sclerurus macconnelli (peruvianus, macconnelli, and bahiae)
 
Cooper, Cuervo. 2017. Vocal variation and species limits in the Sclerurus mexicanus complex. Wilson J Ornithol 129: 13-24.
[abstract]

Laurent, thanks for posting the link.

Quote: "The vocal distinctiveness patterns paralleled phylogeographic patterns and support a taxonomic scheme of treating S. mexicanus as five different species: S. mexicanus, S. pullus, S. obscurior, S. andinus, and S. macconnelli (including peruvianus and bahiae)."

cheers, alan
 
In the genetic analysis of the genus Sclerurus from 2013 to which they presumably refer, the conclusion was: "Therefore, we suggest the recognition of five species within the current S. mexicanus: (1) Sclerurus mexicanus of Central America, comprising the ranges of S. m. mexicanus and S. m. pullus; (2) Sclerurus obscurior of the Choco lowlands of Ecuador and Colombia; (3) Sclerurus andinus of the humid Andean slopes of western Ecuador, Colombia and western Venezuela; (4) Sclerurus macconnelli, comprising the Amazonian lowlands and, probably, the central Atlantic forest, corresponding to the ranges of subspecies Sclerurus mexicanus macconnelli and Sclerurus mexicanus bahiae, respectively; (5) Sclerurus peruvianus, comprising the populations of eastern Andean foothills from Bolivia to eastern Colombia, also reaching the lowlands and outlying ridges in north-western Amazonia."

The five suggested species are thus not exactly the same ones, "paralleled with" should therefore not be read as "concurred with"...

Looking forward to read the paper.
There is also my own short vocal analysis, see: http://www.hbw.com/sites/default/files/orni-notes/on76_tawny-throated_leaftosser.pdf , which concluded that voice of Central-American races is quite different, while vocal differences of South-American races are more subtle but indeed existent.

Cheers,
Peter
 
Proposal (752) to SACC

Split Sclerurus mexicanus into multiple species.

I. Split Sclerurus mexicanus into two species: Sclerurus mexicanus and Sclerurus obscurior PASSED (11 Feb 2020). Not yet implemented -- needs proposal on English names.

II. Split Sclerurus mexicanus into Sclerurus mexicanus and Sclerurus pullus Advisory only to NACC PASSED (11 Feb 2020)

IIB. Split Sclerurus obscurior into three species: Sclerurus obscurior, Sclerurus andinus, and Sclerurus macconnelli DID NOT PASS

III. Split Sclerurus macconnelli into two species: Sclerurus macconnelli and Sclerurus peruvianus DID NOT PASS
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 4 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top