• 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.

Spectacular news!! - Bogota Sunangel (1 Viewer)

For the record, as I've had several enquiries from Colombia requesting further information, could you please note that I only posted this after seeing it on the Internet Bird Collection, I do not know the photographer or the locality of the birds.
 
Last edited:
Great news! If it resembles other species more than expected perhaps it has been overlooked by other people before?

Steve Lister said:
Welsh Peregrine said:
hope that confirmation of its taxonomic status will not damage its population size
Click to expand...

Or putting it another way lets hope that some museum worker does not feel the need to shoot a few specimens.
Click to expand...

The pros and cons of collecting have been discussed many times before and I do not wish to ignite the discussion. I am only asking for a citation that documents significant damage to the population size of any vertebrate species because of specimens collected by biologists in the last 30 years.
 
Please stick to the sunangel guys. If there is somebody who has contact details of any of the discoverers, please let me know.
 
lashinala said:
Why vertebrate? Shelta cave crayfish might be example.
Click to expand...

Because a recent birdforum discussions made me search for scientific articles about collection and one said they had searched for documented cases in vertebrates in last decades and found nothing. That the argument was purely theoretical in modern vertebrate biology.

lashinala said:
Alabama cavefish (from Key cave) would qualify. 9 collected bringing total population well below 100.
Click to expand...

The 9 were collected over several years. Do you have documentation, like I asked about, that this resulted in significant damage to the population size? The outdooralabama page says its life expectancy is low, less than 10 years. Of the 9 the last to be collected was also about 40 years ago according to its description. In my last post I said within the last 30 years. Specimens of the Shelta cave crayfish were also earlier, the last in 1968 according to its description. The big discussions and general awareness of potential problems in collection started in the late 1970´s to early 1980´s. I am still looking for a citation that documents significant damage to the population size of any vertebrate species because of specimens collected by biologists in the last 30 years. If you know of one please send it to me in a private message. That way it won´t interfere more with the thread about

the great sunangel news
 
Roy'N said:
I am still looking for a citation that documents significant damage to the population size of any vertebrate species because of specimens collected by biologists in the last 30 years.
Click to expand...

Why would such a formal citation exist? The very fact that some scientists consider the issue means it is a tangible problem eg the new Iguana in the Galapagos, Begun Liocihla etc. The fact that some others don't appear to give consideration to the issue before they get the gun out is to their shame.

Having been to a small patch of cloud forest in Ecuador that was systematically stripped of most birds in the early 1990s, I have annectdotal evidence of the effects BUT haven't published it. Only professional scientists are paid to do that. Can you see the problem?

cheers, alan
 
Let us not spoil this thread of such fantastic news of a potential rediscovery over issues of collection. We already have threads that have dealt with the issue, which is very polarized and for which neither side is willing to find middle ground.

Let us not sour a potentially joyous occasion with bitter argument.

I have nothing to add to what has already been said about the Bogota Sunangel, other than to express happiness that it is potentially extant! I look forward to hearing more great news from Colombia.

Carlos
 
The only photograph I have been able to look at does look very convincing indeed with a small white postocular spot and straight bill as per Graves' original paper. Otherwise it looks like Royal Sunangel. The tail is the right length, but I can't make out the shape. Bear in mind that the DNA sequencing paper shows that this taxon is not a Heliangelus, but is more closely allied to Aglaiocercus and Taphrolesbia. Given the recent precedent, it appears that those who have refound the bird want to make sure they get a change to organise their information (and get the credit due). Wonderful news!
 
I have heard that as there are others involved in this rediscovery who want to publish a press release and a scientific note, the images will be re-released when all is ready.
Intriguing stuff.
 
I have seen all previously published 6 photographs and so far as i can juge from the photogrpahs for me it tuns out not to be "heliangelus" zusii. To me it looks like a Ramphomicron Lesbia hybrid.

To be sure we need some specimen to be secured or at least something we can get DNA samples from
Best
Tom
 
don_colibri said:
I have seen all previously published 6 photographs and so far as i can juge from the photogrpahs for me it tuns out not to be "heliangelus" zusii. To me it looks like a Ramphomicron Lesbia hybrid.

To be sure we need some specimen to be secured or at least something we can get DNA samples from
Best
Tom
Click to expand...

You are judging both the male and female birds that were on the pictures as a hybrid?
 
Very exciting news. Gunnar has posted a blog about this and he mentions that James Currie considers the bird that he's filmed in the last few days is some peculiar violet imm. male Long-tailed Sylph. However the significant finding of the aDNA work (Kirchman et al 2009) was that Bogota Sunangel was not a Heliangelus, but closer to Aglaiocercus, hence might be expected to look more like a sylph in the flesh. The fact it does should not automatically rule out this bird being the same as the holotype. Doubtless this will be thoroughly investigated soon, but it seems pretty exciting to me.

Cheers

Rob Martin
 
Nice one Rob, was just about to post the same...

Hadn't seen the skin image for comparison

I agree, exciting stuff.

" a big prize; a compensation for the constant work that started in 1982 with the environmental restoration of this land"
 
Last edited:
Check out the perched plate of the Sunangel (with Sylphs) in the original Auk paper. I would provide a link but easily found using Google images. It really does look a look a Sylph in jizz and tail shape rather than our traditional concept of a "Sunagel" - and of course it isn't one! Based on that plate and tail structure, I feal sure the photographed bird must be the Bogota Sunangel. Perhaps a name change to Bogota Violet Sylph is in order though!

cheers, alan
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 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.

Similar threads

J
Messy Taxonomy
Replies
15
Views
3K
James Lowther
J
Taphrospilus
Cometes mossia Gould, 1853
Replies
2
Views
577
mb1848
mb1848
J
Minor shift in Richardson eponyms
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
Björn Bergenholtz
Björn Bergenholtz
Fred Ruhe
Rhodonessa caryophyllacea
Replies
1
Views
504
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe
Troubador
Interview with Head of Zeiss Sports Optics UK and their Official Repairer
Replies
7
Views
5K
Troubador
Troubador

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top