Berlepsch’s Six-Wired Bird of Paradise (1 Viewer)

Always nice to hear of a BOP being rediscovered:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1-2028502,00.html

Sounds an amazing place even by PNG's standards.

ce

Edit : see also http://www.conservation.org/xp/frontlines/species/02070601.xml

Ce,
Here's another shot of the Smoky Honeyeater sp.nov.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/02/07/papua.species.reut/index.html

fantastic news

I can't wait until the day i finally get to see some of those BOPs

Tim

Say Steve,

What do you think of this Berlepsch Parotia ? Is it a full species or a subspecies of Carola's ? It looks quite different to me in colouration and in morphology of the head feathers. Compare the photograph with that of the Carola's from Tabubil on the surfbird site. In fact, these two guys look just as different from each other than the Yellow-fronted does from the Macgregor's Gardnerbird. After Diamond rediscovered the females he was wondering about the (sub)specific status of this population too.
And then this new honeyeater. Doesn't it come close to the Macgregor's "Honeyeater"/used-to-be-Bird-of Paradise ?
This is all very exciting, isn't it ?

Indeed Hidde, if it hadn't been because the habitats/altitudes usually (but not always) separate the two groups, one could easily believe that some mimicry was involved betweem Macgregor's Honeyeater (or whatever people call it now) and the Smoky's. As for Berlepsch Parotia; it certainly does look different from the "typical" subspecies of Carola's, but simple morphology is not exactly a reliable tool for species recognition (at least not when talking BSC). I would, however, be very interesting to see the article I presume Bruce Beehler will publish on their findings - especially some notes on voice as well as the display; both of which can be rather effective isolation mechanisms (although that isn't the case always). From some of the comments in the articles, Beehler seemingly is convinced it is a species and he knows as much about the Birds-of-Paradise as anyone.

Hidde,
Really I know nothing more about it than Rasmus has just responded. I know it has been treated as a race of Carola's in the past, and that there is controversy on this treatment. I would have to see some peer-reviewed publications giving me something to have a valid opinion about. Regards the Honeyeater sp.nov., rather than Macgregoria, it looks closely like something from Melipotes to me.

It surely is a few remarkable discoveries, they havent only found a new honeyeater and rediscovered a BOP, they have also found a new tree kangaroo, 20 new frogs + a lot of new plants and taken the first photo of the Gfbw, the Fojas is surely a place that I now NEED to visit sometime in the following months.

Papuan birder said:

they have also found a new tree kangaroo

Click to expand...

Actually, there seem to be a few minor probs in that. First, it is not a new species, it was described by Flannery in 1993 as a subspecies of Goodfellow's Tree-kangaroo (D. goodfellowi pulcherrimus). Furthermore, it was already known from that area as it clearly is shown on the map and also mentioned in the text on pp. 129 and 130 in Flannery's "Mammals of New Guinea" from 1995. Regardless, even if it already was known from the area and it isn't a new species it is still nice to get an update + the other animals & plants of course.

Rasmus Boegh said:

Actually, there seem to be a few minor probs in that. First, it is not a new species, it was described by Flannery in 1993 as a subspecies of Goodfellow's Tree-kangaroo (D. goodfellowi pulcherrimus). Furthermore, it was already known from that area as it clearly is shown on the map and also mentioned in the text on pp. 129 and 130 in Flannery's "Mammals of New Guinea" from 1995. Regardless, even if it already was known from the area and it isn't a new species it is still nice to get an update + the other animals & plants of course.

Click to expand...

Well its still excellent news as this subspecies has a population on around 100 animals?, so its good to see that it still persist in this place as most other populations of this subspecies lives in areas which is very accesible and from what I have heard most others populations is almost eliminated, I have seen a photo in flannerys book and I must say that its the most beutiful type of tree kangaroo, a protection of this place would help this mammal to survive as most of the other new species recently found here

Steve and Rasmus,

As far as the Parotia is concerned, it would be interesting to compare it to the Carola's population which lives closest to the Foya birds. That must be chalcothorax from the, equally underexplored, Doorman Mountains. This race has also a bronzy sheen on the upperparts (and underparts) and, just as berlepschi has the dark brown loral feathering. I have never seen a picture of this subspecies so I don't know how great the resemblance is but judging from the descriptions both birds come pretty close. However, the Foya birds must have been separated from chalcothorax and the other Carola populations for a long, long time. Long enough to have evolved into a distinct species. But I guess genetic research will tell, one day. Perhaps next autumn when they return. If it is a subspecies. I can very well live with that.
Now for the new honeyeater. You're right Steve, I think, that it belongs in Melipotes. At least that's the first impression. Could wind up in its own genus as well though. If that will be the case then I think it's the closest thing to Macgregoria. I really don't think it's close to Melipotes fumigates, the Smoky Honeyeater. It seems like a larger bird and it definitely is a lot darker in colouration. So, it approaches Melipotes ater, the Spangled Honeyeater much more. This is a species from another outlying mountain complex on the Huon Peninsula. These two birds also share the large wattle around the eye, which the Smoky has less elaborate.
But I've just found the most interesting thing about the Smoky Honeyeater. That was already known from the Foya's. It was found by Diamond to be plentiful there. In a book called "Birds of New Guinea and Tropical Australia" by Bill Peckover and Win Filewood the Smoky Honeyeater is also treated. And the distribution map includes the Foya's ! This book was published in 1976. That's three years before Diamond visited this mountain range as the very first westerner. So how could Filewood have known that the Smoky Honeyeater lives there ?
New Guinea and unanswered questions. New Guinea and undescribed birds. New Guinea and no end.

PS I'll send my email address in a minute, Steve.

Hidde Bruinsma said:

Now for the new honeyeater. You're right Steve, I think, that it belongs in Melipotes. At least that's the first impression. Could wind up in its own genus as well though. If that will be the case then I think it's the closest thing to Macgregoria. I really don't think it's close to Melipotes fumigates, the Smoky Honeyeater. It seems like a larger bird and it definitely is a lot darker in colouration. So, it approaches Melipotes ater, the Spangled Honeyeater much more. This is a species from another outlying mountain complex on the Huon Peninsula. These two birds also share the large wattle around the eye, which the Smoky has less elaborate.

Click to expand...

Actually, if your earlier post was regarding its closests relatives, it looks like a fairly typical member of the Smoky group. Any similarities with Macgregoria are, as I see it from the photos released of the new taxon, purely superficial. There are some rather fundamental differences in shape of head (e.g. frontal tufts) and shape of wattle (rounded and smooth in Macgregoria). When placing the two photos of the new taxon next to photos I have in my database of the three other Melipotes spp. (Spangled, Common Smoky & Arfak/Western Smoky) it doesn't stand out in any way (but of course; I haven't seen any photos that show the rear half of the bird). Indeed, the differences that are visible on the photos of the new taxon compared to e.g. M. fumigatus are of a magnitude where I strongly suppose there are other things that support the claim of it being a new species rather than "just" a new subspecies. A minor difference in the wattle-shape (and in this genus it can, btw, be modified both in shape & colour by the bird itself depending on its mood) is hardly convincing evidence for species recognition and I doubt any biologist would accept that arguments as valid - unless combined with additional evidence (but I'm sure that is no problem; Beehler is certainly not a novice in the game of biology). The colours (with the usual reservation when to having to rely on a photo; indeed it appears almost black on the head close-up which it clearly isn't as visible on the other side-view photo) are extremely close to what can be seen on some of the photos I have of M. fumigatus. In any case hues of colours have been shown to be poor indicators of species recognition in numerous cases. Total size (contrary to e.g. proportions), unless speaking about very significant differences, is also of limited use when it comes to taxonomy at the level of genera. Anyway, we'll see. As noted earlier there can be no doubts that Beehler is a pro and I am sure he has plenty of evidence to support his claims on taxonomy; both for the Honeyeater and the Parotia (+ there are a number of other scientists that clearly could learn something about publicity here). One can only wonder what's waiting in one of the numerous corners of New Guinea that still haven't been visited by scientists.

I am waiting with amazement for new species which will be discovered in NG in the next years. Who knows what may be there?

I wonder how well it is possible to predict places of unknown species using map - and picking eg. isolated unexplored mountains, or isolated valleys. They could hold new species...

I hope for something absolutely mind-blowing. Maybe a new, very localised species of cassowary (if there is a new tree kangaroo, why not?) or maybe a group of surviving diprotodons or megalanias (don't know if they ever lived in NG).

Rasmus,

There is no doubt that the new Foya honeyeater is a full species. It's certainly not a subspecies of anything. It's a typical member of the genus Melipotes as far as "ater" is a typical member of that genus. Indeed, too bad we can't see the rear parts of the bird but I bet it has the same proportions as "ater". Of course I can't be sure but the size and development of the wattle and the colour of the feathers come so close to "ater", as I see it, that I can't but assume that its body shape and size is quite similar to "ater" too. That would make perfect sence. The two astrapia's "nigra" and "rothschildi" are two members of the same genus, both living on mountain ranges separated from the central cordillera and widely seperated from each other. But they are remarkably alike in colouration and shape of body and tail. So, the same must be happening here with these two honeyeaters that are not even living as far apart as the astrapia's do. The bodily proportions of "ater" are quite different from "fumigates". Of course it's a much larger bird but it also has a more elongated body and a longer tail compared to its body.
The wattles of the Foya birds and that of "ater" are, in my vision, much more developed than in "fumigates". Even if "fumigates" can change its wattles in shape and colour by mood or when its hanging upside down during feeding I doubt if they would expand into the shape and size of the former species.
Before this new taxon was discovered "fumigates" was believed to occur in mountain ranges were other Melipotes members were absent. But now its known to live together with another Melipotes on a single mountain chain. So how closely related does that make them ?
All in all I think the Foya bird is a magnificent new species, perhaps deserving its own genus together with "ater", but that may just be wishful thinking on my behalf.
Finally, I wouldn't dream of placing it in Macgregoria. What I wanted to make clear is if Macgregoria is a honeyeater then the Foya birds and the Spangled Honeyeater may be the closest things near it. Even if they are still distantly related.
All of the above may be proven as rubbish, off course, when they visit the Nimboran Range or the Doorman Mountains or the Muller Range or the Thurnwald Range or the Dap Range or the Blucher Range or the very large Central Range. These are exemples of totally unexplored mountain ranges in New Guinea which must have birds just as fantastic as in the Foya's. And then they say we shouldn't go to find out.

Hidde Bruinsma said:

But now its known to live together with another Melipotes on a single mountain chain. So how closely related does that make them ?

Click to expand...

Indeed, this leads to what, from a taxonomical point of view, may the single most interesting question. Are there really any M. fumigatus on that mountain range or have earlier visitors claiming views of this species actually seen the taxon now discovered? This would hardly be surprising as there are numerous cases where such has happened. Indeed, it is no more than a week ago a perfect example was described; Aratinga hockingi. And if both species really are found on the same mountain are they parapatric (perhaps separated by altitude and/or habitat)? Without knowing the exact phylogony in this genus I guess the three species already known form a superspecies. Obviously, if there is sympatry between this new taxon and M. fumigatus it couldn't be part of this superspecies and would, presumably, be more distantly related. If this proves to be the case, it will be interesting to see how distantly related they are, i.e. if the new species would make Melipotes polyphyletic. My guess is that no true sympatry occcurs between M. fumigatus and the new taxon as they probably would have to be more diverged to be able to live in sympatry (at least M. fumigatus is notoriously pugnacious). Anyway, this is nothing but speculations and probably nonsense to a fair percentage of the BF users. For people not knowing how M. fumigatus (Common Smoky Honeyeater) looks here are two photos:

1) http://bird.incoming.jp/38/7370.html
2) http://www.surfbirds.com/media/gallery_photos/20050928123428.jpg

As people may note the most obvious difference compared to the new taxon is that it lacks the pendulous appendage to the wattle, as can be seen here on the two photos of the new taxon:

1) http://www.conservation.org/ImageCa...ontent/v1/image/3/smokyhoneyeater_5f200px.jpg
2) http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/TECH/science/02/07/papua.species.reut/story.indon.bird.ap.jpg

Yes, Rasmus, rest assured and praise the Lord for I must have seen the light.
After I placed my last post I took a closer look at a photograph of the Foya honeyeater Steve had sent me. It showed the bird in a much more complete and clear way. This was enough for me to change my perspective on it. It does show fumigates-like characters as far as the colour of the upperparts is concerned (light edges on the flight feathers and so on) and now I do believe it is not so bulky as the Spangled.
So, indeed the question arises whether there are two closely related Melipotes members in the Foya's ? That can't be. The birds described as a new population of "fumigates" by Diamond must be this bird. It was discovered during Beehlers expedition in no time. That means the bird is quite plentiful in that range. Diamond visited the Foya's twice. No way he could have overlooked it. He just wasn't aware of its distinctiveness, I guess.
There is something else related to this matter. Diamond also found a Melipotes in the Bewani Mountains which he believed to be M. fumigates goliathi, which is otherwise known from the central cordillera except for the southeastern part, where the nominate form lives. He describes it as a larger and darker bird than the nominate. Maybe Diamond failed to notice the distinctiveness of this taxon as well. I have a more than slight suspicion that the Bewani bird actually belongs to the Foya bird as in a superspecies group or as a subspecies. The Bewani Mountains are directly east to the Foya-Nimboran Mountain complex, so as far as distribution is concerned this is quite possible. By the way, there are no Melipotes members found (yet)further east in the Torricelli and Prince Alexander Mountains. Which leaves "fumigates" predominantly (if not completely) restricted to the main central range of New Guinea.
All this means that Beehler and Co. did not, strictly speaking, discover the Foya honeyeater. That was done in 1979 by Diamond. He had even found a nest. But the last expedition did point out that this bird was something else and gave us a lot to speculate, eh Rasmus ?

I just took down a pic of an Aegotheles sp. from the same zone. Right now I'm at work and away from my books. Anyone know what ranges?

Hi Steve,

This is another interesting issue. No owlet-nightjars were known from the Foya's up to now. They were not found there by Diamond. My best guess is a Mountain Owlet-Nightjar (A. albertisi). This species is known to occur in a few outlying mountain ranges, including the ones on the Huon Peninsula. The Feline (A. insignis) is the species occuring in between in the North Coastal Ranges, but that one looks very different. The Archbold's (A. archboldi) looks quite similar but only lives in the central ranges. Of course, this bird may be a new species as well.

If it's the photo I've seen there's absolutely no chance of ID'ing it with any amount of confidence. What can be seen of the bill would give Archbold's a slight lead over Mountain, but as some Mountain are essentially identical, that can hardly be considered conclusive evidence (we're basically talking statistics). Indeed, I am not even sure I can exclude Wallace's for certain from that photo as the underparts/throat barely are visible and individuals as brown as this one occasionally have been reported. As noted by Hidde there are no previous reports of Owlet-nightjars from that mountain range, although Barred probably is found at low elevations in the area (and we have no way of knowing what altitude this individual was captured at). I presume Bruce Beehler would have annouced it as such if he thought it was a new species.

Yes, I am sure we have seen the same photo - basically all open mouth and little else. I looked around if there was any altitudinal info - nada. So little information in general on the genus - so we'll just have to wait and see if any other info is forthcoming from Beehler's team about it.

Lads and lasses,

There are some magnificent new photographs published from the Foya expedition including a smashing parotia. Look and weep:
www.ornithomedia.com/pratique/voyages/voyage_art110_2.htm.