• 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.

Lineated Woodcreeper (1 Viewer)

Richard Klim

-------------------------
Rodrigues, Aleixo, Whittaker & Naka 2013. Molecular systematics and taxonomic revision of the Lineated Woodcreeper complex (Lepidocolaptes albolineatus: Dendrocolaptidae), with description of a new species from southwestern Amazonia. HBW SV: 248–252. [supp info]
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) albolineatus - Lineated Woodcreeper
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) duidae - Duida Woodcreeper
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) fatimalimae sp nov - Inambari Woodcreeper
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) fuscicapillus - Rondônia Woodcreeper (incl madeirae)
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) layardi - Layard's Woodcreeper
AOU-SACC Proposal #620 (Batista & Aleixo, Dec 2013): Recognize newly described Lepidocolaptes fatimalimae and split Lepidocolaptes albolineatus into four species.

Marantz et al 2003 (HBW 8).
 
Last edited:

thomasdonegan

Former amateur ornithologist
We accepted these splits when updating the Colombian checklist this year. For reasons why, follow the link or see the recent comments in the proposal on the SACC website:

Reference: Donegan, T.M., McMullan, W.M, Quevedo, A. & Salaman, P. 2013. Revision of the status of bird species occurring or reported in Colombia 2013. Conservacion Colombiana 19: 3-10. [PDF]
 

Peter Kovalik

Well-known member
Slovakia
Rodrigues, Aleixo, Whittaker & Naka 2013. Molecular systematics and taxonomic revision of the Lineated Woodcreeper complex (Lepidocolaptes albolineatus: Dendrocolaptidae), with description of a new species from southwestern Amazonia. HBW SV: 248–252. [supp info]
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) albolineatus - Lineated Woodcreeper
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) duidae - Duida Woodcreeper
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) fatimalimae sp nov - Inambari Woodcreeper
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) fuscicapillus - Rondônia Woodcreeper (incl madeirae)
  • Lepidocolaptes (albolineatus) layardi - Layard's Woodcreeper
AOU-SACC Proposal #620 (Batista & Aleixo, Dec 2013): Recognize newly described Lepidocolaptes fatimalimae and split Lepidocolaptes albolineatus into four species.

Marantz et al 2003 (HBW 8).

IOC Update Diary Jul 22 Accept Lineated Woodcreeper splits

Species Update Version 4.3 Draft
 

Peter Kovalik

Well-known member
Slovakia
TiF Update July 22:
Based on Rodrigues et al. (2013), the Lineated Woodcreeper, Lepidocolaptes albolineatus, has been is split into 5 species. The others are:

Duida Woodcreeper, Lepidocolaptes duidae;
Inambari Woodcreeper, Lepidocolaptes fatimalimae (new taxon);
Rondonia Woodcreeper, Lepidocolaptes fuscicapillus (includes madeirae);
Layard's Woodcreeper, Lepidocolaptes layardi.
 

Fred Ruhe

Well-known member
Netherlands
SACC...


Quote:

Revised species limits not yet implemented pending proposal on English names.

Very good, only English names are accepted, no mater how you pronounce them, what you include in them, let's make English the worlds language! (Ooh, must it be English English, American English, Australian English or whatever ?)

We have Latin names, they should be enough !!!

Fred
 

Richard Klim

-------------------------
We have Latin names, they should be enough !!!
Yes, I'm a bit surprised that SACC has deferred update of the classification just to allow review of the suggested English names. It would arguably be better to provisionally use the names proposed by Rodrigues et al, and adjust them later if anyone has serious objections. But SACC is evidently reluctant to even temporarily give additional traction to the suggested names before review.

Other recent taxonomic revisions have been implemented as soon as a voting quorum was reached, and then followed up by (relatively unimportant) proposals to finalise the common names where deemed necessary. I hope that SACC isn't entering an era where the establishment of agreed English common names is considered to be of such importance that accepted changes to systematics/taxonomy should be postponed.
 
Last edited:

njlarsen

Gallery Moderator
Opus Editor
Supporter
Barbados
If you read the comments you will find this
BUT – I am very concerned about using Lineated Woodcreeper as the English Name of one of these forms. I think it is worth creating a new name for albolineatus (White-lined Woodcreeper? Maybe there are better options).

I agree

Niels
 

Fred Ruhe

Well-known member
Netherlands
Quote:

BUT – I am very concerned about using Lineated Woodcreeper as the English Name of one of these forms. I think it is worth creating a new name for albolineatus (White-lined Woodcreeper? Maybe there are better options).

The best option is albolineatus, everybody than knows what we are talking about. And if albolineatus must be split, the type will keep the name albolineatus, and for the others we can name them after our mother in law, as long as we do it in a correct Latin way and what English speaking persons do with it is their concern, not the concern of the rest of the world, and it should not be discussed on this intenational forum.

Fred
 
Last edited:

James Jobling

Well-known member
I agree with Fred. I am puzzled that so many people and organisations who should know better become exercised over the common English names of birds. Linnaeus devised the binominal system to simplify and do away with the plethora of substantive names that had clogged up the international exchange of scientific information. English names cannot be subjected to rules, and to set up committees to try and mirror taxonomy (for example, by the use or otherwise of a hyphen, or the continued use of a name for a split species!!) is bureaucratic and pointless, when we already have the Linnaean archetype. The underlying problem appears to be ignorance of and an unwillingness to learn the scientific names of birds. I wonder if the Chinese or the Spaniards wring their hands over common names, whether they should be Mandarin or Wu, Catalan or Castilian?
 

Mysticete

Well-known member
United States
SACC...determining English names is nothing new. They have been doing so since the inception. It strikes me that complaining about that is a bit missing the point.

As for why they don't use binomials, check out almost every thread on this forum. Common names tend to be the default in discussion amongst birders, conservation agencies, etc, and if you want to change that, you should probably invent a time machine and nip it in the bud before it began, way back at the dawn of birding.

There is a secondary point as well: In the age of molecular taxonomies, common names might be more stable than scientific ones. Sad but true
 

Richard Klim

-------------------------
SACC...determining English names is nothing new. They have been doing so since the inception.
It's true that SACC spends a lot of time discussing English names – and even the insertion or removal of hyphens! But, from recollection (and I might be wrong), this case seems slightly unusual. One of SACC's most impressive features has been the rapid update of its classification to reflect published taxonomic decisions, although provisional common names are often later revised via follow-up proposals. However, in this case, the taxonomic update has actually been deferred awaiting a secondary proposal on English names. Probably no big deal – a proposal will hopefully be submitted and voted on very soon...
There is a secondary point as well: In the age of molecular taxonomies, common names might be more stable than scientific ones. Sad but true
A valid point that I've mentioned elsewhere several times before. In particular, frequent wholesale generic reassignments (and to a lesser extent grammatical tweaks and retrospective spelling corrections) are great fun for us taxonomy addicts, but the result is an absence of of commonality and stability in the scientific names used by different authorities and authors. Sadly, I have to agree with Morgan that, despite the sometimes unnecessarily trivial bickering, for ordinary birders common names often provide a rare strand of continuity amid the turmoil of increasingly ephemeral scientific binomials.
 
Last edited:

thomasdonegan

Former amateur ornithologist
It probably takes 3-4 years to write a new species description and do related research if a project is prioritised and with a fair wind, maybe 1-2 years more for peer review, revision, waiting for a journal slot etc., 1 year for someone to bother to write a SACC proposal, 1 year plus for SACC to consider the paper, 1 year for BirdLife to spot the change has been made, 1 year for BirdLife to consult on new threat status, maybe another year to pend the consultation and several months for IUCN to list the change once BirdLife adopts the threat status change; and innumerate years for conservation decision makers to spot anything has changed. This is not a situation which facilitates a human response to prioritising the protection of threatened but long-unrecognised species in southern Amazonia.

Anything to shorten the process is better, be it use of pending names or no vernacular names.

Self-trust in the SACC English name process here is also quite quaint. It is important to get English names right, but then these are the same people who brought you Redstarts for Whitestarts, Such's Antthrush, "Neotropic" Cormorant, Northern Schiffornis, Perija Brush-Finch (when in use for another species), "Lacrimose" Mountain-Tanager, Zimmer's Antbird (actually, anything if it is a patronym), more hyphens, fewer hyphens ...
 

James Jobling

Well-known member
Morgan may have missed the point that Fred and I were trying to make. Our comments are not complaints. I remain unmoved if the SACC, NACC, BOU, BBC, ITV, Uncle Tom Cobbleigh and the acronyms wish to ruminate about English names until the cows come home. Do we have to give them room on the Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature Forum? Why not transfer them to the Bird Name Etymology Subforum or set up a separate English Names Subforum where they can hyphenate to their hearts' delight?
 

Mysticete

Well-known member
United States
Why not? Because discussion of common names is often tightly interwoven with discussion of splits and lumps. Check out for instance the various AOU checklist proposal threads. It's almost impossible to keep common name discussion separate from whether some bird species is best represented by one, two, or three species. And personally, I would rather have everything in one thread than have to juggle back and forth between two forums to get that info.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top