• 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.

A Couple of Crackers - Argentina/Brazil (1 Viewer)

davetheman

Well-known member
Does anyone out there know their Hamadryas?

These 2 were photographed in August at Porto Iguazu, Argentina.

Close enough to the Brazilian border to be denizens of either, or both countries, and close to Iguazu falls.

The genus is extremely cryptic, particularly in the poses depicted, but I'm hoping that someone out there may have a level of familiarity that I don't possess.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • CrackerA4-4623.jpg
    CrackerA4-4623.jpg
    680.5 KB · Views: 21
  • CrackerA4-5068.jpg
    CrackerA4-5068.jpg
    773.9 KB · Views: 20
Thanks Andy,

I didn't think I was going to get any response...

I've already positively identified one of my pictures as H.epinome but these 2 looked sufficiently different (variable) as to cause me some doubt. By this I'm not intending to imply that they are NOT H.epinome, just that I can't be sure, although my own 'gut feeling' is the same as yours, pending something more definitive!

I'm having trouble determining the range of H.guatemalen as a possible contender. It has apparently been recorded in this area, but many sites give its' southern limit as Central America!

My other contenders (should the pictures not be H.epinome) are:-

H.februa
- Grey Cracker and
H.feronia - Variable Cracker

both of which I know are (fairly) common in this area.

I'm going to hold fire on this one for the moment, pending better source material (if I can find it). But your input is, as always, really appreciated.

Regards
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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