• 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.

Isabelline / Turkestan Shrikes, various countries (1 Viewer)

Valéry Schollaert

Respect animals, don't eat or wear their body or s
Hi all,

I'm sorting some old photos, some are even from a time where Turkestan and Isabelline Shrikes were considered as the same species.

I'm not sure about their identity and hope to learn from your comments.

1 - March, Qatar
2 - November, Tanzania
3 - March, Qatar
4 - March, UAE
5 - March, UAE

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • lanius_sp_1_bfQT.jpg
    lanius_sp_1_bfQT.jpg
    113.9 KB · Views: 88
  • lanius_sp_1_bfTZ.jpg
    lanius_sp_1_bfTZ.jpg
    110.2 KB · Views: 80
  • lanius_sp_3_bfQT.jpg
    lanius_sp_3_bfQT.jpg
    123.8 KB · Views: 72
  • lanius_sp_4_bfUAE.jpg
    lanius_sp_4_bfUAE.jpg
    129.8 KB · Views: 71
  • lanius_sp_5_bfUAE.JPG
    lanius_sp_5_bfUAE.JPG
    198 KB · Views: 67

Nutcracker

Stop Brexit!
I'll hazard a guess on phoenicuroides for #2, and isabellinus for ##1, 3, 4 and perhaps 5. Probably wrong on some or all of them . . .
 

andyb39

Well-known member
I'm not a specialist on these but I'll have a go. Valery, if you have any more images of any of these birds, could you post them?

1. I'm undecided - it looks a bit like female Turkestan at first glance, but the super isn't broad enough, the upperparts are a bit too pale and the underparts don't look clean white enough. Also lacks a dark tip to the bill.
2. Classic male Turkestan.
3. Another difficult bird - two-tone bill and clean white underparts and throat with faint chevrons suggest Turkestan, but more images needed.
4. Isabelline - too pale on the underparts and too buff on the underparts, so there's a lack of contrast.
5. Probably Isabelline, despite the gingery crown and very broad eyestripe, as the underparts are too warmly-coloured - I think it's a general rule of thumb that any buff wash on the underparts should be restricted to the flanks on Turkestan. I would like to see more images though.
 

Valéry Schollaert

Respect animals, don't eat or wear their body or s
I'm not a specialist on these but I'll have a go. Valery, if you have any more images of any of these birds, could you post them?

1. I'm undecided - it looks a bit like female Turkestan at first glance, but the super isn't broad enough, the upperparts are a bit too pale and the underparts don't look clean white enough. Also lacks a dark tip to the bill.
2. Classic male Turkestan.
3. Another difficult bird - two-tone bill and clean white underparts and throat with faint chevrons suggest Turkestan, but more images needed.
4. Isabelline - too pale on the underparts and too buff on the underparts, so there's a lack of contrast.
5. Probably Isabelline, despite the gingery crown and very broad eyestripe, as the underparts are too warmly-coloured - I think it's a general rule of thumb that any buff wash on the underparts should be restricted to the flanks on Turkestan. I would like to see more images though.

Thank you Andy, I will look for more images, I'm just having a new laptop and I've to solve some technical details before going into my 6400 folders with 158,000 photos... ;)
 

Valéry Schollaert

Respect animals, don't eat or wear their body or s
Hi Andy and all,

Well after much administrative problems in Jakarta following the technical issues, I'm now ok, based in Eastern Turkey for a few months.

I don't have much different photos ; here are other shots of birds 1 and 3.

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • lanius_sp_3_bfQT_bis.JPG
    lanius_sp_3_bfQT_bis.JPG
    231.5 KB · Views: 14
  • lanius_sp_1_bfQT_bis.JPG
    lanius_sp_1_bfQT_bis.JPG
    272.8 KB · Views: 11

andyb39

Well-known member
I think the new image of no.1 (in your original post) tips the balance in favour of Turkestan, but I'm still undecided about no.3. It does have a two-tone bill and some scales/chevrons on the flanks, so it could be Turkestan, but I can't judge the underpart coloration or assess the contrast between the underparts and upperparts. I wish I could see it from the rear.
 

Valéry Schollaert

Respect animals, don't eat or wear their body or s
I think the new image of no.1 (in your original post) tips the balance in favour of Turkestan, but I'm still undecided about no.3. It does have a two-tone bill and some scales/chevrons on the flanks, so it could be Turkestan, but I can't judge the underpart coloration or assess the contrast between the underparts and upperparts. I wish I could see it from the rear.

Thanks, Andy, I learned a lot from this thread !
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top