• 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.

Nong Song Hong, Thailand - Freckle-breasted Woodpecker quite sure, Robson gives only Fulvous-breasted? (1 Viewer)

Bertus

Well-known member
Netherlands
eBird and several other sites give for the Fulvous-breasted ( Dendrocopos Macei) a range map outside Thailand. And instead I find Freckle-breasted (Dendrocops Analis), not in Robson's book, having a range map that shops obs exactly here. I have seen this woodpecker many times now, is not shy at allDSC06034 copy.JPG, quite small, scattered trees in open country. How could Robson give a map of a species that does not occur in Thailand? or...?DSC06149 copy.JPG
 
Tnx for that, my Robson's edition is of 2016. So before it was one species, that is understandable. So that is why Robson does not mention the species I guess. But then still the range map of the Fulvous-breasted in Robson's does not ring a bell with me. The map in Ebird is completely different. Robson's map for the Fulvous-breasted does not match either species range maps in eBird. That is https://ebird.org/species/fubwoo2/ against https://ebird.org/species/frbwoo1/ for the Freckle-breasted. What I see wrong?
 
The species has been split
Originally I believe it was lumped with Fulvous-breasted Woodpecker D. macei but the SE population (analis group) was split and initially named Spot-breasted (Pied) Woodpecker D. analis which it is listed as in Robson 3rd Edn (2015). Since then, it was renamed Freckle-breasted Woodpecker, presumably, to avoid confusion with Spot-breasted Woodpecker of C & S America.

Grahame
 
(Also to note, even if not relevant in this particular case. There is no single accepted taxonomy which is everyone follows. Field guides are usually written by people who are experts on the fauna of the area. Their views of what is or isn't a species may be different to the various authorities like Clements. This will be true even if many of the main lists come to a common understanding. You should not necessarily expect different sources to agree)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top