• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Costa Rica Thrush (1 Viewer)

AdrianB70

Well-known member
Pocosol Biological Station, Alajuela, Costa Rica, March 15, 2019

Observed this thrush which I noted had a yellowish bill and eyering, dark slaty cap and back, and pale underparts. I got these poor photos. Structurally looks like a Turdus to me rather than a Catharus nightingale thrush, and yellow bare areas observed are consistent with White-throated Thrush, but I don't trust my ability to discern yellow from orange or red in the poor rainforest light to distinguish from the nightingale thrushes. Additionally I thought maybe the bright white vent might be a good mark for White-throated Thrush. I'd appreciate others' thoughts on this bird.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4657.jpg
    IMG_4657.jpg
    86.5 KB · Views: 28
  • IMG_4656.jpg
    IMG_4656.jpg
    87.8 KB · Views: 28
  • IMG_4655.jpg
    IMG_4655.jpg
    86.6 KB · Views: 26
  • IMG_4654.jpg
    IMG_4654.jpg
    83.6 KB · Views: 30

Andy Adcock

Well-known member
England
Sorry, shots aren't good enough IMO for a clear ID.

One thing I will say and it's very subjective, is that it has very skinny legs for a Turdus?
 

THE_FERN

Well-known member
Pocosol Biological Station, Alajuela, Costa Rica, March 15, 2019

Observed this thrush which I noted had a yellowish bill and eyering, dark slaty cap and back, and pale underparts. I got these poor photos. Structurally looks like a Turdus to me rather than a Catharus nightingale thrush, and yellow bare areas observed are consistent with White-throated Thrush, but I don't trust my ability to discern yellow from orange or red in the poor rainforest light to distinguish from the nightingale thrushes. Additionally I thought maybe the bright white vent might be a good mark for White-throated Thrush. I'd appreciate others' thoughts on this bird.

>>yellow bare areas
Agree structurally more like turdus (thinning of legs an artefact, I think). However, if we can believe any of the colours in the photo, legs appear yellow- orange which I think rules out white-throated (pinkish). If the bill is yellow orange, and if the cap you saw was not a distinct one (but just dark head), perhaps orange-billed nightingale thrush, otherwise maybe black - headed nightingale thrush with a bill towards the yellow end of the spectrum (web photos suggest they vary a bit). You could try playing with gimp /photoshop to see if you can bring anything more from these...
 

Andy Adcock

Well-known member
England
>>yellow bare areas
Agree structurally more like turdus (thinning of legs an artefact, I think). However, if we can believe any of the colours in the photo, legs appear yellow- orange which I think rules out white-throated (pinkish). If the bill is yellow orange, and if the cap you saw was not a distinct one (but just dark head), perhaps orange-billed nightingale thrush, otherwise maybe black - headed nightingale thrush with a bill towards the yellow end of the spectrum (web photos suggest they vary a bit). You could try playing with gimp /photoshop to see if you can bring anything more from these...

You say that shape is better for a Turdus but Nightingale Thrushes aren't Turdidae.
 

THE_FERN

Well-known member
You say that shape is better for a Turdus but Nightingale Thrushes aren't Turdidae.

Thanks. I didn't say they were. I am making the point that it looks like a Turdus in shape terms, but the described colours don't match the presumed thrush species. Other "thrushes" (nightingale-thrushes) match the colour pattern better and I make some suggestions. But I'm sure the OP understood this.
 

Andy Adcock

Well-known member
England
The genus Catharus (Nightingale-Thrushes) is in Turdidae. Maybe you meant not in Turdus.
Andy

Correct.

In a case such as this where the shot is no more than a silouhette, the finder is the only one who can decide the ID, based on the field marks observed at the time.
 

THE_FERN

Well-known member
Correct.

In a case such as this where the shot is no more than a silouhette, the finder is the only one who can decide the ID, based on the field marks observed at the time.

I broadly agree, but note there are some colours (vent, bill, legs, hint of eye ring) which are visible. If you play with Gimp or other similar software it might be possible to bring more up. [Not volunteering - better to work with the original anyway.]
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top