• 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.

Costa Rica Thrush (1 Viewer)

AdrianB70

Well-known member
United States
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
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?
 
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...
 
>>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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.]
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 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