• 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.

Lark Sp. (1 Viewer)

Dorna Mojab

Well-known member
United States
I captured these photos about a year ago on April 2019, Gorgan Rud Protected Area in Golestan Province, Iran. Gorgan Rud is near Gomishan City and East of Caspian Sea.
I was wondering what kind of Short-toed Lark can be? or maybe something else!
 

Attachments

  • 157010331.jpg
    157010331.jpg
    311.2 KB · Views: 119
  • 157010361.jpg
    157010361.jpg
    300.5 KB · Views: 66
  • 157010421.jpg
    157010421.jpg
    294.3 KB · Views: 108
I captured these photos about a year ago on April 2019, Gorgan Rud Protected Area in Golestan Province, Iran. Gorgan Rud is near Gomishan City and East of Caspian Sea.
I was wondering what kind of Short-toed Lark can be? or maybe something else!

The photos clearly show a species of the Lesser Short-toed Lark complex. Stubby bill, streaks on the breast and primaries clearly much longer than the tertials.

I guess the key question is whether it is a Lesser Short toed Lark, namely Alaudala rufescens persica or an Asian Short-toed Lark Alaudala cheelensis leucophaea?

This is not helped by leucophaea being recognised by some parties as a being part of rufescens.

I am not familiar with either form. The only guide I can find seems to suggest that the overall yellowish bill (without any darkening on the culmen) and the extent of white on r6 is suggestive of leucophaea. However the bird looks overall darker in tones than I was expecting as both are listed as sandy almost "frosted" in appearance

As I understand it, the location is out of range for either as listed, A r persica being further in the south of Iran, and A c leucophaea being listed as further north in Turkmenistan.

Perhaps someone who s familiar with this area can comment.
 
The photos clearly show a species of the Lesser Short-toed Lark complex. Stubby bill, streaks on the breast and primaries clearly much longer than the tertials.

I guess the key question is whether it is a Lesser Short toed Lark, namely Alaudala rufescens persica or an Asian Short-toed Lark Alaudala cheelensis leucophaea?

This is not helped by leucophaea being recognised by some parties as a being part of rufescens.

I am not familiar with either form. The only guide I can find seems to suggest that the overall yellowish bill (without any darkening on the culmen) and the extent of white on r6 is suggestive of leucophaea. However the bird looks overall darker in tones than I was expecting as both are listed as sandy almost "frosted" in appearance

As I understand it, the location is out of range for either as listed, A r persica being further in the south of Iran, and A c leucophaea being listed as further north in Turkmenistan.

Perhaps someone who s familiar with this area can comment.

From the distributions given in IOC10.1, A. r. pseudobaetica would seem the most likely candidate...
MJB
 
From the distributions given in IOC10.1, A. r. pseudobaetica would seem the most likely candidate...
MJB

My understanding is that pseudobaetica is restricted to the NW and that in the remainder of the country (SW & E) persica is the resident taxon while heini and, possibly (?) leucophaea, occur in winter.

With regards amount of white in the tail the views are too restricted to ascertain the precise pattern IMO as only the outer web of r6 is visible.

Suggest we will have to wait for the publication of Donald & Alstrom's forthcoming monograph to get a clearer picture regarding taxonomic and identification issues.

Grahame
 
And its probably worth adding in Shirihai and Svensson's 'Handbook of Western Palearctic Birds' (Vol 1) the two plates at the top of p73 labelled persica are considered more likely Sand Larks (Ganpule 2019)
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338117126_Field_identification_of_Sand_Lark_Alaudala_raytal_and_LesserAsian_Short-toed_Lark_Alaudala_rufescenscheleensis_An_unacknowledged_pitfall Further, I would suggest the upper part tone + strength of streaking of the OP look closest to heini based on plate 124b in Ganpule's paper notwithstanding identification to taxon should always be based on a full suite of characters including plumage and structural.



Grahame
 
Last edited:
See posts 56 & 57 relevant to the discussion above https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=260323&page=3 seems MJB is correct since persica will disappear under proposed arrangement.

Grahame

This would appear to suggest that field identification isn't, possible without a biological sample?

'we tentatively suggest that at least four species should be recognized, although we stress the need for an approach integrating molecular, morphological and other data that are not yet available.'

Can we as birders, really embrace this? Science has gone beyond what is practical or possible for the average field observer and some species are already ticked on range alone by many.
 
Last edited:
See posts 56 & 57 relevant to the discussion above https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=260323&page=3 seems MJB is correct since persica will disappear under proposed arrangement.

Grahame

Re persica, from Ghorbani et al 2020, persica is in Clade A, the heinei Clade. The other taxa in this group are aharonii, pseudobaetica & beicki. Some samples previously identified as beicki registered in Clade D, the cheelensis Clade, which comprises just cheelensis & tuvinica. Either the birds in what had previously been considered the beicki distribution include a different, but as yet unidentified taxon, or the original ID of one part of the distribution was an error...?
MJB
 
Last edited:
Re persica, from Ghorbani et al 2020, persica is in Clade A, the heinei Clade. The other taxa in this group are aharonii, pseudobaetica & beicki. Some samples previously identified as beicki registered in Clade D, the cheelensis Clade, which comprises just cheelensis & tuvinica. Either the birds in what had previously been considered the beicki distribution include a different, but as yet unidentified taxon, or the original ID of one part of the distribution was an error...?
MJB

Yes I can see persica in the heinei clade (Fig 2) but why then is it omitted from the species tree (Fig 3) which is reproduced by Will in his post 57?

Grahame
 
Last edited:
Yes I can see persica in the heinei clade (Fig 2) but why then is it omitted from the species tree (Fig 3) which is reproduced by Will in his post 57?

Grahame

The concatenated tree in Figure 3 is the applicable Figure; it includes heinei near top right and has a very helpful summary small tree (bush?) top left.
MJB
(Sorry about the stickies obscuring slightly!)
 

Attachments

  • S-tL & Sand L species tree.jpg
    S-tL & Sand L species tree.jpg
    91.2 KB · Views: 18
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