} a re Pad tS care coppers? wforet, Sweet le tr lt as 1 S4tt e weet hgkeeet dt a aaahateae! 4 righ! H ; ae | oy wet wee Ferere ial J dj au at i ech. me grays a ts Pave Dee hes: ste ; . “ata | a nis +) ' = 4 : mh ase ‘a : : bi Dae . Aen ia hh : pL me 4 British J Ornithologists’ Club 27 Volume 121 No.1 March 2001 MEETINGS are held in the Sherfield Building of Imperial College, South Kensington, London, SW7. The nearest Tube station is at South Kensington; a map of the area-will be sent to members on request. (Limited car parking facilities can be reserved, on prior application to the Hon. Secretary). The cash bar is open from 6.15 pm, and a buffet supper, of two courses followed by coffee, is served at 7.00 pm. (A vegetarian menu can be arranged if ordered at the time of booking). Dinner charges are £17.00. Informal talks are given on completion, commencing at about 8.00 pm. FORTHCOMING MEETINGS - 3 April - 900th Meeting. Robert McCracken Peck - “John James Audubon in the American West: The Last Expedition”. Mr Bob Peck, a Fellow of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, is a distinguished historian and naturalist, the author of the the BBC book “Land of the Eagle: A Natural History of North America’, and a consulting curator for the exhibition “Audubon in the West” now touring the USA. Using slides of Audubon’s western paintings and artefacts gathered during his expedition in 1843, Bob will describe Audubon’s last great adventure and put its accomplishments into the broader context of its time. A fully illustrated catalogue, with essays by Mr Peck and others, accompanies the exhibition, and will be available for purchase at this meeting. Applications to the Hon. Secretary by 20 March please. Tuesday 1 May. ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING AT 6.p.m., followed by a Club Social Evening. There will be no speaker, but Members are invited to bring along one or two slides (or a specimen!) of a bird of topical interest, and to speak for not more than 5-10 minutes about it. The aim will be to generate discussion, and to facilitate the exchange of information between Members. Applications to the Hon. Secretary by 17 April, please, including subjects to be raised, and any special facilities required. 3 July - Frank D. Steinheimer* “Undiscovered Cambodia - the endemics of the Cardamom Mountains.” Frank was born in 1971 in Nuremberg, Germany, and studied zoology at Vienna University 1994-98, during which time he made field trips to foreign countries (Europe, Borneo, Thailand, Malaysia). He also gained experience working for the Bird Department of the Vienna Museum, also in Paris Museum. Since September 1998, Frank has been employed in the Bird Group of The Natural History Museum,Tring, working mainly with the wet anatomical and historically important collections (e.g. Darwin). In spring 2000 he took part in an expedition to west Cambodia. *This talk was postponed from 16 January 2001 Applications to the Hon. Secretary by 19 June please. Future meetings - advance notice 25 September - Phil Cannings - The work of a Police Wildlife Liaison Officer. 6 November - to be arranged. 4 December - John Sparks - Experiences of a Wildlife Film-maker. Overseas Members visiting Britain are especially welcome at these meetings, and the Hon. Secretary would be very pleased to hear from anyone who can offer to talk to the Club, giving as much advance notice as possible - please contact: Michael Casement, Dene Cottage, West Harting, Petersfield, Hants. GU31 SPA. UK. Tel/FAX:01730-825280 (or Email: mbcasement@aol.com). FRONT COVER ILLUSTRATION As the Bulletin is launched into the new millennium, a more dynamic Sacred Ibis has been chosen for our cover. This has been drawn by BOC member Julian Pender Hume and incorporated into a new cover design by Marc Dando of Fluke Art. We are grateful to Julian and Marc for the creation of this new active image for the Bulletin. Ed. X.C. 2001 121(1) CLUB Vol. 121 No. 1 Published 16 March 2001 EDITORIAL The publication of papers involving collecting The British Ornithologists’ Club has a long tradition of publishing papers on avian taxonomy and distribution in its Bulletin. Research in these areas depends strongly on collecting and the use of museum specimens, and as a result many, if not most, of the papers that have appeared incorporate reference to such material. This very much remains the case, but one which increasingly needs to be interpreted against the backdrop of inexorably growing threats to the long-term survival of bird species throughout the world and commensurate increases in the range of legislation having the aim, if not always the effect, of preventing their demise. This in turn places obligations on all concerned with the practice and publication of such research to demonstrate that any new collecting can be shown to have been undertaken in both a legal and ethical manner. Legal requirements should be straightforward to comply with in principle, but in practise may pose considerable complexities, perhaps most acutely in understanding the range of permissions, from national to local, that law and custom may require in any particular country or region. Additionally, international requirements for the movement of specimens around the world must be respected. Ethical requirements are even more problematical, but a sound framework within which to interpret them is now in place thanks to the constructive reviews of Remsen (1995) and Collar (2000). Prospective authors are also encouraged to look at the British Ornithologists’ Union’s statement on ethics. A delicate balance must be struck between the needs of scientific advancement, especially for conservation, and the need for (further) specimens. Procurement of these specimens (including parts and blood samples) should be undertaken in a humane way, and museum specimens should be securely housed where they will be accessible to future workers. The Editor will retain his final discretion as to what is acceptable for publication in the Bulletin, but authors submitting papers should incorporate clear evidence that their research has taken into account these legal and ethical requirements. References: British Ornithologists’ Union. http://www.bou.org.uk/boupolicy.html Collar, N.J. 2000. Collecting and conservation: cause and effect. Bird Conserv. Internatn. 10: 1-15. Remsen, J.V. 1995. The importance of continued collecting of bird specimens to ornithology and bird conservation. Bird Conserv. Internatn. 5: 145-180. SPECIAL OFFER BIRDS, DISCOVERY AND CONSERVATION [1992], edited by David Snow This anthology celebrates 100 years of the Bulletin and contains fascinating and historically important extracts from papers published during that period. LIMITED FINAL STOCK AVAILABLE AT £7.50 + £3 POSTAGE PER COPY FROM THE HON. PUBLICATIONS OFFICER, J A Jobling, 14 The Valley Green, Welwyn Garden City, Herts AL8 7DQ, UK. Club Notices 2 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) The following is the full text of the revised Rules approved at the Special General Meeting held on 31 October 2000 - see Bulletin 120 (4) page 201. 122 sie RULES OF THE CLUB (Approved 31 October 2000) TITLE AND OBJECTS The objects of the British Ornithologists’ Club (“the Club”) are the promotion of scientific discussion between Members of the British Ornithologists’ Union and others interested in ornithology, and to facilitate the dissemination of scientific information concerned with ornithology. The Club shall maintain its special interest in avian systematics, taxonomy and distribution. MEMBERSHIP Any individual interested in promoting the objects of the Club may become a Member on payment of the appropriate annual subscription, under the terms of Rule 21, and subject to confirmation by the Committee at its next meeting. A Member who has an unbroken membership of the Club for fifty years shall become a Life Member and shall not be required to pay any further subscriptions. THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE There shall be a Management Committee (“the Committee”), elected from amongst the Members, which shall be responsible for the general control and management of the Club. The Committee shall consist of four Officers, namely a Chairman and a Vice-Chairman each elected for a term of four years, an Honorary Secretary and an Honorary Treasurer each elected for a term of one year, and five other Members, each of whom shall be elected for a term of four years. At least five of the nine Members of the Committee shall be Members of the British Ornithologists’ Union. The Members of the Committee are legally trustees of the Club. The Officers and the other five Members of the Committee shall be elected by a simple majority of those Members of the Club present and voting at an Annual or Special General Meeting. With the exception of the Honorary Secretary and Honorary Treasurer, the Officers and other Members of the Committee shall be ineligible for re-election to the same office or position on the Committee for one year after completion of their elected term. A Co-opted Member appointed under Rule 17 and retiring at an Annual General Meeting shall be eligible for immediate re-election. . For the purposes of Rules 5 and 9, a year shall be reckoned from the close of one Annual General Meeting until the next or, in the case of an Officer or Member of Committee elected at a Special General Meeting, from the close of that Special General Meeting until the next Annual General Meeting. . A quorum of the Committee shall be any five Members of the Committee at least two of whom shall be Officers. NOMINATIONS FOR THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE The Committee shall nominate members to be Officers or Members of the Committee. The names of proposed Officers and other proposed Members of the Committee nominated by the Committee shall be circulated to the membership at least three weeks before the relevant Annual or Special General Meeting. Club Notices 3 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) 14. 15. (a) (b) (c) 16. ye cA 22. zs. 24. Zo. 26. 27. Any Member wishing to nominate a candidate shall forward the nomination to the Honorary Secretary in writing signed by the nominating Member and five other Members, with confirmation that the candidate has agreed to be nominated. To be valid, such nomination shall reach the Honorary Secretary not less than 14 days before the relevant Annual or Special General Meeting. APPOINTMENTS BY THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE At its first meeting following each Annual General Meeting the Committee may appoint: A Publications Sub-committee to administer the production and sales of Club publications, other than the Bulletin, and to assist the Editor of the Bulletin as may be required. An ex-officio Publications Officer, to be a member of the Publications Sub-committee with responsibility for overseeing the sales of Club publications and other products. An ex-officio Archivist to be curator of the Club’s historic records. The Committee may appoint additional sub-committees, ex-officio officers and members to advise on and administer specific activities of the Club. The Committee may co-opt a Member (“the Co-opted Member’) onto the Committee to fill temporarily, until the closure of the following Annual General Meeting, any vacancy that may occur on the Committee. Not more than three Co-opted Members are permitted at any one time. . There shall be an Editor of the Bulletin, appointed by the Committee for a term not exceeding four years. The Editor shall be eligible for re-appointment. . The Committee shall, when necessary, appoint Trustees of the Herbert Stevens Trust in accordance with the terms of the relevant Trust Deed. . The Chairman and Members of Sub-Committees, Trustees, and all ex-officio officers or members may attend meetings of the Committee, by invitation of the Chairman or the Committee, but without the right to vote on any issue. SUBSCRIPTIONS AND INSTITUTIONAL SUBSCRIBERS The annual subscription rate for Members shall be determined by the Committee from time to time. The rate shall be discounted for any Member who is also a member of the British Ornithologists’ Union. The Committee shall determine the annual subscription rate to be paid by institutions and other organisations (“Institutional Subscribers”) wishing to receive the Bulletin. The annual subscriptions under both Rules 21 and 22 shall be due for payment on the first day of January in every year. The Committee shall be entitled to terminate the membership of any Member whose subscription has not been paid within six months of falling due, provided that such Member has been given written notice calling for payment of the subscription, and that notice has not been complied with within one month of its date. When any Member, who is not an Officer or other Member of the Committee, has rendered or is rendering the Club any service, the Committee may, if it deems appropriate, waive the subscription due from that Member for any year, or years. MEETINGS The Club shall meet not less than four times a year at times and places to be arranged by the Committee, in furtherance of the Objects of the Club. Members may introduce guests at any ordinary meeting of the Club, except that no former Member, whose membership has been terminated for any cause and who has not been reinstated, shall be allowed to attend a meeting without the permission of the Chairman or, in his absence, the Vice-Chairman. Club Notices < Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) 28. ee) 7) (a —s (b ~— ~ =s (a) (b _— ~— (c) The Annual General Meeting of the Club shall be held not later than 30th June every year on a date to be fixed by the Committee. At this meeting the business to be transacted shall be to receive and consider the Report of the Committee and the accounts of the preceding calendar year, the regulation of matters having reference to the Bulletin, the election of Officers and other Members of the Committee, and any other business of which notice in writing shall have been given to the Honorary Secretary prior to 31st January in the same year. . Notice of at least three weeks shall be given by the Committee of every Annual General Meeting. . A Special General Meeting may be called by the Committee for any purpose which it deems to be of sufficient importance or at the instance of a requisition signed by at least 15 Members, stating the purpose for which the Meeting is being requisitioned, and sent to the Honorary Secretary. Notice of at least three weeks shall be given to Members of a Special General Meeting and the notice convening it shall state the purpose of the Meeting; no other business may be transacted at the Meeting. ‘BULLETIN’ OF THE CLUB . A journal under the title of the “Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club” shall be published not less than four times per year and one copy shall be distributed gratis to every member and Institutional Subscriber who has paid the appropriate current annual subscription. . The Editor may receive an annual honorarium for such work, which shall be determined by the Committee from time to time, and may attend any meeting of the Committee, as an ex-officio Member in accordance with Rule 20 above, for the purposes of offering advice on all editorial matters, but executive authority rests with the Members of the Committee as Trustees of the Club. . No communication, the whole or any part of which has already been published elsewhere, shall be eligible for publication in the Bulletin, except at the discretion of the Editor. MANAGEMENT OF TRUST FUNDS . Subject to the terms of any bequest or gift, any stocks, shares, other securities, money or other property (whether real or personal) from time to time belonging to the Club may be vested in Trustees for the Club, if the Club shall by a Special Resolution so decide. Such Special Resolution shall appoint Trustees, and shall specify the trusts under which the property is to be held. CONDUCT OF MEMBERS . If the conduct of any Member shall be deemed by not less than five members of the Committee present at a meeting of the Committee, to be prejudicial to the interests of the Club, that Member shall be; so informed by a letter from the Honorary Secretary, and, given an opportunity of appearing in person before the Committee to explain the conduct in question. . The Committee may then terminate that Member’s membership forthwith if; at a meeting of the Committee attended by that Member, not less than five Members of the Committee are dissatisfied with the explanation given. the Member does not appear before the Committee in person, but gives an explanation which not less than five Members of the Committee deem to be unsatisfactory. or, no explanation has been received from the Member within twenty-eight days of the despatch of the Honorary Secretary’s letter under Rule 35(a). Club Notices 5 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) 32. 38. bE . 40. (a) (b) 41. 42. 43. 45. The decision of the Committee shall be communicated to the Member by the Honorary Secretary within three weeks of the relevant Committee Meeting. COMPLAINTS A Member wishing to complain of the manner in which affairs of the Club are conducted must communicate the complaint in writing to the Chairman or Honorary Secretary who will raise the complaint as soon as practicable at a meeting of the Committee for a decision or, if the recipient of the complaint considers the matter of urgency, will call a meeting of the Committee specially to consider it. The decision of the Committee shall be communicated to the Member by the Honorary Secretary within three weeks of the relevant Committee Meeting. CHANGES TO THE RULES Proposals to change the rules, or any part thereof, shall be set out in a Special Resolution which shall; be decided at an Annual General Meeting, or at a Special General Meeting especially convened for that purpose, and be published in the Bulletin, together with details of the Agenda for the Annual or Special General Meeting, at least three months before the date of the meeting at which the resolution is to be decided. Members may vote on resolutions to change the rules, or any part thereof, either by notifying the Honorary Secretary accordingly in writing, to be received no later than three days before, or by attendance and voting at, the meeting at which the resolution is to be decided. No amendment shall be made to the rules if it would have the effect of making the Club cease to be a charity at law. INDEMNITY INSURANCE The Committee shall be entitled, subject to prior approval of the Charity Commissioners, to take out policies of insurance covering their individual or joint liability for any negligence, default, breach of duty or breach of trust in relation to the Club and pay any premium for such cover out of the Club’s finances, providing that such insurance or indemnity shall not extend to any act or omission which the Committee or any member thereof knew to be a breach of duty or a breach of trust or which was committed by the Committee or any member thereof in reckless disregard of whether it was a breach of duty or breach of trust or not. INCOME AND PROPERTY . The income and property of the Club, whencesoever derived shall be applied solely towards the promotion of the objects of the Club as described under Title and Objects in these rules, and no portion thereof shall be paid or transferred directly or indirectly by way of dividend, gift, remuneration, division, bonus or otherwise by way of profit to any member of the Club. Provided that nothing herein shall prevent the payment of an honorarium to the Editor of the Bulletin in accordance with Rule 32, or reimbursement in good faith of any expenses legitimately incurred by any Member in furthering the activities of the Club, or payment to any Member or non-member for any professional services rendered to the Club, or for materials or other services supplied. DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY ON DISSOLUTION If upon winding up or dissolution of the Club there remains, after satisfaction of all debts and liabilities, any property whatsoever, the same shall not be paid or distributed amongst Members Club Notices 6 Bull. B.O.C. 20OV AZAD of the Club, but shall be given or transferred to some charitable institution having objects similar to the objects of the Club, such institution to be determined by Members at or before the time of disssolution, or in default therof by a Judge of the High Court having jurisdiction in regard to charitable funds and in default of such determination, to some ornithological charitable object. INTERPRETATION 46. “Member” means a Member of the Club, unless the context otherwise requires. 47. “Special Resolution” means a resolution passed by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the votes cast at an Annual or Special General Meeting for which due notice in accordance with Rules 29, 30 or 40, as appropriate, had been given specifying the Resolution as a Special Resolution. CLUB NOTES The 896th meeting of the Club was held on Tuesday 31 October 2000, at 6.45 pm, following the Special General Meeting. 27 Members and 10 guests attended. Members present were: The Rev. T.W. GLADWIN (Chairman), Miss H. BAKER, P.J. BELMAN, Cdr M.B. CASEMENT RN, Dr R.J. CHANDLER, Professor R.A. CHEKE (Speaker), Dr W.H. DAVISON, A. GIBBS, F.M. GAUNTLETT, D. GRIFFIN, C.A.R. HELM, Dr J.P. HUME, G.P. JACKSON, R.H. KETTLE, Dr C.F. MANN, D.J. MONTIER, Mrs A.M. MOORE, R-G: MORGAN, P.J. OLIVER, Dr R.P. PRYS-JONES, N.J. REDMAN, R.E. SCOTT, P.J. SELLAR, Dr D.W. SNOW, C.W.R. STOREY, N.H.F. STONE and Dr D.H.THOMAS. Guests attending were: R. ALLEN, Mrs C.R. CASEMENT, Dr J.A. COLES, T. COLES, Mrs M.H. GAUNTLETT, Mrs J.M. GLADWIN, Mrs M. MONTIER, P.J. MOORE, R.J. PRYTHERCH, and Mrs S. STONE. At the invitation of the Chairman, Mrs Amberley Moore gave a brief account of the reception held at Cambridge to mark the publication of the fourth of the Club’s series of Occasional Publications. C.W.Benson’s Type Specimens of Bird Skins in the University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge, United Kingdom was published in December last year in association with University Museum of Zoology at Cambridge. Con Benson was a member of the Club, he became Editor of the Bulletin from 1969 to 1974, and had contributed over 130 papers to it from 1936 until his death in 1982. His association with Cambridge began when he was invited to curate the ornithological collections held in the U.M.Z.C. on his retirement, after 33 years, from the Overseas Civil Service in East Africa. He prepared the catalogue of type specimens during this time at Cambridge, but sadly he was not able to complete the final draft, or to see it published. To celebrate the long awaited publication Professor Michael Akam F.R.S., Director of the U.M.Z.C., hosted a reception on Tuesday 10 October 2000, for past and present staff of the Museum, and for members of the Club who had been concerned with the preparation of the manuscript for press. Julian Hume, Amberley Moore and Robert Prys-Jones attended as members of the Club. The reception gave the opportunity to thank all those who had helped in the publication and it was particularly pleasing that Miss Rosemary Benson and Mrs Diana Chamberlain, daughters of Con and Molly Benson, were able to be present for the occasion. After dinner, the meeting was addressed by Professor Robert A. Cheke on Aspects of the Biology of Sunbirds. His talk was based on a forthcoming book Sunbirds: a Guide to the Sunbirds, Flowerpeckers, Spiderhunters and Sugarbirds of the World, co-written with Dr Clive F. Mann and illustrated by Richard Allen, both of whom were at the meeting, to be published by Christopher Helm early in 2001. Current classifications of the Nectariniidae included the sugarbirds in the Club Notices 7 Bull..B:0.C. 200VAZMT) subfamily Promeropinae with the Nectariniinae, comprising the flowerpeckers in the tribe Dicaeini and the sunbirds and spiderhunters in the Nectariniini. The false sunbirds or sunbird-asities of Madagascar, Neodrepanis spp., which had been included within the Nectariniidae by Delacour (1944), were now excluded. Delacour had reduced the sunbirds and spiderhunters to the four genera Anthreptes, Nectarinia, Aethopyga and Arachnothera, but Irwin (1999) had recently revised the family and recognised the four genera above plus Deleornis, Anabathmis, Dreptes, Anthobaphes, Cyvanomitra, Chalcomitra, Leptocoma, Hedydipna, Cinnyris and Hypogramma. To these were now added Chalcoparia and Drepanorhynchus. Illustrations of representatives of these genera and sonograms of their vocalizations were presented, together with information on tongue structures in support of the new generic groupings. Co-adaptations between sunbirds and their principal food-plants were illustrated and discussed in the context of pollination and ecosystem maintenance, mostly with examples from the African continent. The habit of many species to “rob” nectar by piercing flowers and bypassing their pollen-bearing parts was also described and illustrated. Aspects of the breeding biology of sunbirds, including the diversity of their nest shapes and the materials used to construct them, a few examples of promiscuous behaviour, and brood parasites were described. In conclusion, some observations were made on the physiology, blood parasites, economic importance and conservation of sunbirds. References: Delacour, J. (1944) A revision of the Family Nectariniidae (Sunbirds) Zoologica: New York Zoological Society 29:17-38. Irwin, M. P. S. (1999) The genus Nectarinia and the evolution and diversification of sunbirds: an Afrotropical perspective. Honeyguide 45: 45-58. Members present warmly applauded this very scholarly presentation, and concluded the lively discussion period wishing the speaker and his co-authors every success with the eagerly awaited publication of this important book. The 897th meeting of the Club was held on Tuesday 28 November 2000, at 6.15 pm. 21 Members and 9 guests attended. Members present were: The Rev. T.W. GLADWIN (Chairman), Sir David BANNERMAN Bt., P.J. BELMAN, D.R. CALDER, Dr M.J. CARSWELL, Cdr M.B. CASEMENT RN, Professor R.A. CHEKE, Dr. R.A.F. COX, D. GRIFFIN, Dr C.F. MANN, D.J. MONTIER, R.G. MORGAN, Dr R.P. PRYS-JONES, N.J. REDMAN, Dr D.E. POMEROY (Speaker), R.E. SCOTT, P.J. SELLAR, S.A.H. STATHAM, N.H.F. STONE, Dr D.H. THOMAS and M.W. WOODCOCK. Guests attending were: Lady BANNERMAN, Mrs C.R. CASEMENT, J.H.W. CHITTY, Professor J.E. COOPER, Mrs J.M. GLADWIN, Mrs S. GRIFFIN, Mrs M. MONTIER, Ms J.M. SCHULZ and Mrs B.J. WOODCOCK. Request for information on Vultures. Before the formal lecture, Professor John Cooper made a brief announcement: The decline in India of vultures, especially Gyps species, has caused considerable concern; if an infectious disease is involved, this may spread to Gyps vultures in other parts of the world. A project has therefore started in East Africa with the aim of monitoring vulture populations and studying factors that could contribute to a reduction in their numbers. At the same time, data on the health and diseases of both free-living and captive vultures in Europe and elsewhere is being sought in order to build up a database for future reference in these and other studies. Please contact: Prof. John E. Cooper, DIVM, FRCPath, FIBiol, FRCVS, Wildlife Health Services, PO Box 153 Wellingborough, Northants NN8 2ZA UK. Email: NGAGI@compuserve.com. Club Notices 8 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) The Hon. Secretary announced the recent death of D.A. Holmes, (Member 1973-2000). Derek had worked in SE Asia for over 30 years, and was widely recognised for his bird identification skills, and his contribution to conservation. He was the main force behind the Indonesian journal “Kukila” and will be sorely missed. Dr Derek Pomeroy then gave a presentation about the forthcoming Bird Atlas of Uganda, which is being sponsored by the BOC, together with the BOU and support from the RSPB and other organisations. The joint authors are Margaret Carswell, Derek Pomeroy, Jake Reynolds and Herbert Tushabe, the first two being members of the Club. The following is a brief synopsis: - Atlases, so common in Europe, are relatively scarce in the tropics. With the publication of the Uganda atlas, the coverage for the whole of the Afrotropical region will still be less than a third. And the long-term prospects of a high-resolution atlas for the whole region are not helped by their variety of formats and contents; for example, some indicate breeding whilst others (including that for Uganda) do not. Uganda’s birds have been recorded over the past 100 years or so by many people, although the number of recorders in the country at any one time has been relatively low. Many birders, both residents and visitors, have favoured visiting the same places. Consequently, although nearly 50,000 records are available for the Uganda atlas, they are distributed rather unevenly within the country. This led the authors to devise a means of predicting areas of the country where suitable habitats of a species were likely to be found - and hence the species itself - even though many of the areas had not been visited. Many computer models were tried, and eventually one based upon rainfall and vegetation was selected as best. This used data from all the points where a species had been recorded, and used these to locate all other places in the country with the same combinations of rainfall and vegetation type. However, the model could only be applied to species with enough records; and waterbirds were omitted because so many have linear distributions, for example along shorelines of the large lakes. The atlas maps show the predicted areas, together with the actual records. This improves the overall representation of species’ distributions, but it works better for some species than others. The predicted areas for all species are, in effect, hypotheses waiting to be tested. In compiling the atlas data, big differences were found in the proportions of recent compared to older (post-1990) records for different groups of species. For example, residents had higher proportions than Palaearctic migrants; and of the latter, less common species fared worst. This observation, although preliminary, suggests a topic deserving closer attention. Uganda has an extensive system of National Parks, as well as Forest and other Reserves, but very limited resources mean that, in practice, some are better managed than others. Computerisation of records helps in conservation planning; for example, in the prediction of areas which are likely to be most significant for Red Data species. Armed with such information, it is possible to press for their better conservation. The talk concluded with a brief discussion and question period. ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING The Annual General Meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club will be held in the Sherfield Building, Imperial College, London SW7 at 6.00 pm on Tuesday 1 May 2000. AGENDA 1. Minutes of the 2000 Annual General Meeting (see Bull. Br. Orn. Cl. 120(2): 144-145) 2. Chairman’s report Club Notices 9 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) 3. Report of the Committee and Accounts for 2000 (both to be distributed at the meeting) 4. The Bulletin 5. The election of Officers. The Committee proposes that the following should be elected: (i) Dr C F Mann as Chairman vice Revd T W Gladwin (ii) Mrs M N Muller vice Mr D Griffin (iii) Mr PG W Salaman vice Mr N J Redman (iv) Mr D J Montier be re-elected as Hon. Treasurer (v) Commander M B Casement, OBE, RN be re-elected as Hon. Secretary 6. Any other business of which notice shall have been given in accordance with Rule (12) BOC-ONLINE The British Ornithologists” Club now has its own website. For information and news log on to: www.boc-online.org BOOK RECEIVED del Hoyo, J., Elliot, A., & Sargatal, J. (eds). 1999. Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol 5, Barn-owls to Hummingbirds. Pp 759, 75 colour plates, c.400 colour photographs, 756 distribution maps, c.8,000 bibliographical references. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. ISBN 84-87334-25-3. £110. Lynx Edicions, in conjunction with BirdLife International, have produced another marvellous, comprehensive and consistent volume in the HBW series. With this volume, nearly half of the families in the class Aves have now been covered within the first seven years of publication of the project (the whole targeted for completion within the next ten years). Vol. 5 begins with an extensive Foreward, by N. J. Collar, on Risk Indicators and Status Assessment in Birds. Risk Indicators are discussed in relation to distribution, population and ecology; Status Assessment refers to the new IUCN criteria (evaluation of probability of a taxon becoming extinct), problems of data quality and consistency of judgement, and future prospects including the survival of protected areas. The Introduction to this volume briefly mentions the overall concept of the project as detailed in Vol. 1 of the series, together with additional points of interest given in Vols. 2-4, and also to BirdLife’s rapidly expanding database which permits an increasingly accurate status assessment for every bird species (as outlined in the Foreward). This volume details the three Orders Strigiformes, Caprimulgiformes and Apodiformes, classified into the families Barn-owls, Typical owls, Oilbird, Owlet - nightjars, Frogmouths, Potoos, Nightjars, Swifts, Tree-Swifts and Hummingbirds. The extensive family accounts are described under the headings of Systematics, Morphological Aspects, Habitat, General Habits, Voice, Food and Feeding, Breeding, Movements, Relationships with Man, Status and Conservation, followed by a General Bibliography. The individual species accounts following a particular family account include notes on taxonomy, distribution (including maps), status and conservation, and a further particular bibliography. The volume includes the recently erected species Otus alius (Nicobar Scops-owl) (Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 118(3): 141-153) and Otus collari (Sangihe Scops-owl) (Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 118(4): 204-217). As in previous volumes, the editors acknowledge the great importance of the extensive assistance given to the project by many museums, libraries, sound archives and individuals. All the c.8,000 references indicated throughout the text are also given in full in a General Bibliography at the end of the volume, requiring some 55 pages of text. Weighing in at about 4kg, this volume raises the series weight so far to a healthy 19kg - may your bookshelves never complain! S J Farnsworth Fonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 10 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) A new species of Laughingthrush (Passeriformes: Garrulacinae) from the Central Highlands of Vietnam by fonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames Received 21 September 2000 Mount Kon Ka Kinh (14°19'N, 108°24'E) at 1,748 m is the highest point in Gia Lai province and one of the highest mountains in the Central Highlands (Central Highlands is synonomous with Western Highlands, which 1s a literal translation of the Vietnamese Tay nguyen). Central Highlands is itself a misnomer, since the area is composed of two isolated massifs between which lies an inclined plateau, which forms part of the Mekong basin. To the north lies the Kon Tum plateau which extends across c. 10,000 km? in Kon Tum and Gia Lai provinces, and includes Mount Ngoc Linh, which at 2,598 m is the second highest mountain in Vietnam. To the south lies the Da Lat plateau, which extends across approximately 6,000 km’, the highest point of which is the outlying Mount Chu Yang Sin (2,244 m). Mount Kon Ka Kinh is located in Kon Ka Kinh Nature Reserve, in the southern part of the Kon Tum plateau and lies 95 km from Mount Ngoc Linh, which is located within the two adjoining sectors of Ngoc Linh Nature Reserve (Figs. | and 2). From the geographical isolation of the mountain, its height and the lack of earlier ornithological exploration, we expected to make interesting findings on Mount Kon Ka Kinh. It was therefore selected for survey as part of an ongoing project between BirdLife International and the Forest Inventory and Planning Institute (FIPI) which aims to ensure that all internationally important areas for biodiversity conservation are included within the revised system of protected areas of Vietnam (Wege et al. 1999). Along the summit ridge of Mount Kon Ka Kinh on | April 1999, JCE mist-netted and collected an unfamiliar laughingthrush Garrulax sp. Subsequently JCE collected a fledged juvenile on 23 April and mist-netted another adult on 29 April from different sites at the same locality. Examination of holotypes of four races of Garrulax rufogularis (G. r. assamensis, G. r. intensior, G. r. occidentalis and G. r. rufiberbis) in the American Museum of Natural History, New York, and comparison with skins of six races of G. rufogularis (G. r. rufogularis, G. r. assamensis, G. r. intensior, G. r. occidentalis, G. r. rufiberbis and G. r. rufitinctus), G. cineraceus and G. lunulatus at The Natural History Museum, Tring, U.K., showed that this bird represents a new distinctive taxon of Garrulax, which we name: Chestnut-eared Laughingthrush Garrulax kRonkakinhensts, sp. nov. Holotype. Deposited at the Natural History Museum, Tring (BMNH No. 1999.31.1), adult male (gonad condition not noted) collected on Mount Kon Ka Kinh Jonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 1] Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) (14°19'N,108°24'E), Gia Lai province, Vietnam, at c. 1,700 masl. on | April 1999 (Plate 1; Figs. 3a-d). Diagnosis. Garrulax konkakinhensis has four unique plumage features that are not shown by any race of G. rufogularis. In G. konkakinhensis, all the rectrices are tipped white (Fig. 3a); the remiges are bluish grey and lack a black band across them (Fig. 3b); the fore-crown is grey streaked with black and a grey supercilium extends above and behind the eye (Fig. 3c); and the vent is rich buff and extends onto the belly (Fig. 3a). Garrulax konkakinhensis additionally shows an extreme degree of chestnut on the ear-coverts (Fig. 3c), an off-white throat, and extensive black tips to the tertials and scapulars. These features are not shown to the same extent, are shown irregularly, or are not shown in similar combination, by G. rufogularis. Garrulax konkakinhensis most closely resembles G. rufogularis occidentalis and G. r. rufitinctus in its general plumage pattern but differs from these two taxa in reduced levels of rufous in the plumage. All three taxa share, to a varying extent, chestnut ear- coverts, black on the crown, and the colour of the mantle, wing-coverts and breast. Additionally, G. konkakinhensis shares three plumage features with G. cineraceus and G. /unulatus: white tips to the rectrices, the absence of a black band across the remiges, and the vent and belly are buff. 25 5 Kilometres KON TUM PROVINCE et aed GIA LAI PROVINCE KON KA KINH GIA LAI #0008486! Figure 1. Location of Kon Ka Kinh Nature Serub Re serve Broadleaf Evergreen Forest below 900 m Grassland Broadleaf Evergreen Forest above 900 3 Agncultural Land Secondary Vegetation Degraded Evergreen Forest GEOGRAPHICAL FEATURE orest —-- Provincial Boundary Nature Reserve Boundary LEGEND ame National Border me Provincial Border BD Protected Area (1) Proposed Protected Area Wo Kon Ka Kinh Nature Reserve Figure 2. Land-use in Kon Ka Kinh Nature Reserve Fonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 12 Bull. B.O.C, 2001120) Plate 1. Holotype adult male Chestnut-eared Laughingthrush Garrulax konkakinhensis (lower) and Rufous-chinned Laughingthrush Garrulax rufogularis intensior (upper). Original watercolour painting by Charles Eames. os Fonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) Figure 3a. Ventral view of the holotype of Chestnut-eared Laughingthrush Garrulax konkakinhensis adult male, trapped and photographed on the summit ridge of Mount Kon Ka Kinh, Gia Lai province, Vietnam, on | April 1999. Figure 3b. Profile of the holotype. Figure 3c. Head detail of the holotype. Photographs by J. C. Eames. Figure 3d. Profiles of the holotype (middle) and two paratypes (juvenile top and female bottom) of Chestnut-eared Laughingthrush Garrulax konkakinhensis Fonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 14 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) Tibet occidentalis G. r. assamensis Bramaputra River a Uttar Pradesh ey G. r. rufiberbis China G. r. intensior \“Sa Pa e Laos Vietham Thailand Bay of Bengal Mt. Kon Ka Kinh Cambodia } ¢ G/konkakinhensis 0 ma «a oO Kilometer Figure 4. The approximate geographical ranges of Garrulax rufogularis and G. konkakinhensis In the following description a quantitative judgment of colour has been made, wherever possible, using Smithe (1975) whose colour descriptions and numbers appear in parentheses following our own subjective determination. The feathers of the forehead are grey (Medium Neutral Gray 84) with black (Jet Black 89) tips and central shaft streaks. The black tips and central shaft streaks become broader on the crown and nape. The grey (Medium Neutral Gray 84) supercilium merges with the sides of the crown, extending from above to behind the eye. The ear- coverts are chestnut (Kingfisher Rufous 240). A black (Jet Black 89) malar stripe extends in an unbroken line from the gape, bordering the chestnut ear-coverts and merges with the black feathers on the sides of the throat. The lores are pale buff (Pale Pinkish Buff 121D), with blackish feathering immediately in front of the eye. The chin and throat are off-white, faintly tinged buff (Pale Pinkish Buff 121D), grading to a slightly richer buff on the sides of the chin and throat. The feathers of the chin and throat irregularly show faint blackish centres, which are narrowly fringed black, which extend onto the sides of the throat and neck. The upper breast is pale grey (Glaucous 80) washed buff (Light Drab 119C) and is narrowly fringed black and with narrow black central shaft streaks. The belly and flanks are pale orange-buff (Clay Color 26) becoming rich buff (Antique Brown 37) on the vent. The mantle, and lesser, median and greater wing coverts are olive-buff (Dark Drab 119B) becoming a warmer brown (Raw Umber 123) on the back, rump and scapulars, and are fringed black, broadly so on the mantle, greater coverts and scapulars. The upperparts are thus boldly and irregularly barred. The alula is black but with a grey basal half to the outer web. The primary coverts are blackish-brown (Sepia 119). The outer webs of the outermost Fonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 15 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) seven primaries are fringed bluish-white, forming an indistinct pale wing panel. This bluish white panel grades to olive-brown (Ground Cinnamon 239) on the inner primaries and secondaries, including the tertials. The inner webs of the primaries and secondaries are light blackish-brown (Blackish Neutral Gray 82). The tips of the outer webs of the innermost three primaries and all the secondaries are black with a narrow white fringe. This pattern gradually becomes more extensive across the secondaries so that tertials are very broadly tipped black with pronounced white fringes. The upper tail coverts are rufous-brown (Antique Brown 37). There are 12 rectrices which are mid-brown (Raw Umber 23) and which grade to a less rufous and more olive brown towards their tips. All rectrices have very broad sub-terminal black bands and are broadly tipped white. On the outermost two pairs, the black extends almost halfway along their entire length, whereas on the innermost pair, the black extends for 20 mm. The underside of the tail is blackish-brown (Blackish Neutral Gray 82) and all feathers are broadly tipped white. Bare parts: bill - upper mandible dark horn with a pale horn lower mandible; legs flesh horn with yellow soles; iris brown. Measurements of type (mm): maxilla (tip to skull) 24.5; tarsus 40; wing (max. chord) 99; tail 123. Paratypes. Two additional specimens were collected on Mount Kon Ka Kinh and are currently held at BirdLife International in Hanoi (Fig. 3d). A female collected on 29 April 1999 atc. 1,650 m, No.1945.2.11; anda juvenile male collected on 23 April 1999 at c. 1,600 m, No.1945.2.12. Their measurements (mm) are, respectively: maxilla 23.5, 21.5 (tip to skull); tarsus 41, 39; wing (max. chord) 98, 95; tail 116, 112. Specimen No. 1945.2.11 had a dark brown iris; bill with a dark horn upper mandible and a pale horn lower mandible; legs flesh horn. Specimen No. 1945.2.12 had a bill with a dark horn upper mandible and a pale horn lower mandible; legs flesh horn. Iris colour was unrecorded. The condition of the gonads in these two specimens was not noted. Paratype variation. The adult female appears very similar to the male holotype but shows slightly broader white tips to the tertials and buffish tips to the outer webs of the innermost primary and the secondaries. The tips to the underside of the rectrices are off-white. The fledged juvenile shows characteristically soft and under-developed plumage and a black crown with only a small amount of grey evident behind the eye. No other significant plumage differences are apparent with the holotype (Fig. 3d). Ecology and behaviour. The only field observation relates to a flock of at least three birds from amongst which JCE collected a juvenile male on 23 April 1999 at c. 1,600 m. This flock was observed moving rapidly through bamboo undergrowth. On Mount Kon Ka Kinh, G. konkakinhensis occurs sympatrically with Red-tailed Laughingthrush G. milnei from c. 1,600 m to the summit. Garrulax konkakinhensis may occur at lower elevations but determination of this was difficult to verify because the species was not heard singing or indeed making any vocalizations during March and April. Pairs of G. milnei were recorded singing and holding territory during the same period. The lower altitude limit of G. kKonkakinhensis has not been determined; if it extends to c. 1,500 m it would overlap the range of Black-hooded Laughingthrush G. mill/eti, which Fonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 16 Bull. B.O.C, 200b AZ was recorded commonly up to c. 1,500 m. The closely related Garrulax rufogularis is noted to also be a skulker, more often heard than seen and doubtless overlooked. Garrulax rufogularis keeps in pairs or small family parties, haunting low bushes and feeding mostly on the ground. It takes to the wing with reluctance and flight is weak and ill-sustained (Ali & Ripley 1972). Habitat. On Mount Kon Ka Kinh, G. konkakinhensis was found in the undergrowth of primary upper montane evergreen forest (as defined by Whitmore 1992). The holotype was collected from the narrow summit ridge where bamboos, including Arundinaria baviensis and Schizostachyum sp., were predominant in the undergrowth. Both the holotype and the type series were collected from upper montane evergreen forest, dominated by broadleaf tree species from the families Fagaceae, Lauraceae, Magnoliaceae, Hamamelidaceae, Theaceae, Ericaceae, Myrtaceae and Araliaceae. This forest was being logged for large, emergent Fokienia hodginsii and in many places the canopy was broken and there were many clearings. On Mount Kon Ka Kinh, from c.1,600 to the summit at 1,748 m, the forest canopy height was c. 10-15 m, with 20 m trees in flatter areas of the summit plateau. In the Indian subcontinent Garrulax rufogularis has been noted to occur from 600-1,900 m in dense thickets, scrub jungle, dense undergrowth in oak and rhododendron forest, forest edge and especially secondary growth near cultivation (Ali & Ripley 1972). In northern Vietnam G. r. intensior 1s known to occur from 1,500 m to 2,500 m (Delacour & Jabouille 1931). Distribution. Garrulax konkakinhensis was discovered on Mount Kon Ka Kinh (Gia Lai province) in the Central Highlands of Vietnam and is currently known only from this site (Figs.1 and 2). It is likely to occur to the north in adjacent Kon Tum province and could conceivably occur in Laos, because forest habitat within the species’ altitudinal range extends across the provincial and international borders. In this context, it is worth mentioning sightings of a laughingthrush, seen in the Phou Ahyon area of south-east Laos between 1,350-1,450 m in May 1996, which showed some similarities to G. rufogularis (Duckworth et al. 1999). Whilst noting some plumage features which are also shown by G. konkakinhensis, the observer noted red remiges and a black wing bar which are absent in this new species. On the basis of these sightings, the species in question was provisionally identified as Spotted Laughingthrush G. ocellatus (R. Timmins in /itt. 1996). In the absence of any voucher specimen, we believe this sight record is best judged as Garrulax sp. Etymology. We name this species after the type locality, Mount Kon Ka Kinh (Figs. 1 and 2). This little-studied area was recently gazetted as a nature reserve and this is the first bird species to be named for the site. Taxonomic considerations Within the genus Garrulax, there are several species groups that are here defined as monophyletic subsets of species (Amadon & Short 1992). An example of a species group within this genus are G. erythrocephalus, G. ngoclinhensis and G. yersini (Eames et al. 1999). Garrulax konkakinhensis comprises a species group together 121(1) 2001 Bull. B.O.C. 17 ames ’ 4“ Jonathan C. Eames & Charles E juasqy JUdSaIg JUdSaIg }UdSaIg JUdSaIg JUdSOId JUASOId jaund BUI, Jynqg xed uoweuuly) yiep Alo uoweuUuls ye qd uMO1G -d5ULIO uoweuUld yieqd umMoIQ -a3uUeIO uoweuuly judas STI MA (uel) uMOIQ -d5uUeIO (uel) UMOIQ -ddUeIO (uel) uMOIQ -5UeIO UMOIQ -d5ULIO (uel) uMOIQ -d3uUeIO (uel) uMOIQ -d5UPIO dij ]10] jnujsoy.) uMOIQ “SATTO™ YTTM poxiupe yoryq Io yorlg yor|q poddy UMOIQ-9AIIO asuvi0 -jnujsoyo [nq yor|q poddy UMOIQ-IAIIO asuevi0 -jnuysoyy poxiuipe UMOIg “SAT[O YIM SOWI}IWIOS soujuoo Aouad ayed YIM yoriq “org SJADAOI-ADY Syeoas yyeys jeajuad §=yoryq YIM YoR[q posury AJMOlIeu ‘AIS -JAIJO poysem yng yoe{q payeos AJIAB OY Adis yieg ye] q pojeos ‘Aaip yor|q payeos AJ MOJI@U Jynqg-Aoip yor|q poyeos A[MOAIRU Jjng-Ka19 yoviq poyeos ‘OAI[O pur Adis 10 Adin yoriq payeos “OAI[O pur Adis 10 Adi ISDAAG yor|g poyeos UMO1IG-dAI1O yor|q payeos UMOIG yIeq yor|q payeos ‘UMOIG-IAITO yoryq payeos UMO1IQ-IATTO yor[q pojeos “UMOIQ-IAITO ORT poyeos uMolg -OAI[O [ed yoriq payeos UMOIG-9ATO a]// UDP yory|q uMold “pury -yoryq poddiy umolo -910J AIH yoryq 10 yor|q poddny UMOIG “UMOIG Ye yor|q payeos A[peroiq UMOIQ-IATTO 1P1E yorjq poddn uMOIG -dAI[O ayed A[[BUOIsedd0 “yor g yor|q poddy UMOIG-dAI]O A]]BUOISRdI0 ‘yor g uMmMOd) O}IYM-JJO SOWTIWOS) Syeois yyeys yorjq duly ‘aspo ye Jyng Apiyst]s “OHYM JJO }eo1y) ayiyM fury UMOIG-dI5ULIO ay M-AIIH UMOIG-I5URIO UMOIG-I5ULIO ROI] SOWIIWOS ‘eo1y} pure uryo UMOIG-IdURIO ay M-AI3 }eory] s(quasqe uly UMOIG IdULICO JDOdA Yl P uD uly SISUIYULYDYUOY 4o1suajul SIQIaqiyni snjouijijna SISUIWDSSD S1]DJUIP1IIO wD siippnsojna sLipjnsofna 2 UOXD] SISUAYULYDYUOY “OH pue s1ApjNsofNa XVINAMDH JO Sainjyeay asevwin|d lL a TeV Fonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 18 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) with three other Sino-Himalayan species, G. rufogularis, G. cineraceus and G. lunulatus. Here we present the case for affording specific rank to G. konkakinhensis based on its morphology in comparison with G. rufogularis, with which it shows a strong similarity. Based on plumage, G. cineraceus and G. lunulatus show far fewer similarities and, by analogy, would be placed further away in the phylogeny. Deignan (1964) recognized seven subspecies within Garrulax rufogularis, distributed as follows: G. 1 occidentalis extends through the Himalayas from Pakistan eastward to north-western Uttar Pradesh in India; G. grosvenori is known from Rekcha, Dailekh District in west Nepal; G. 7. rufogularis occurs from central Nepal eastward, through Bhutan into the Indian state of Assam, north of the River Brahmaputra; G. r assamensis is known from Margherita in north-eastern Assam; G. r. rufitinctus is known from the hill tracts of Assam south of the Brahmaputra River; G. r. rufiberbis is known from Kachin State in northern Burma, and G. r. intensior is known only from its type locality at Sa Pa in north-western Vietnam (Fig. 4). Subsequently, Ripley placed G. 7. grosvenori in synonomy with G. r. occidentalis and therefore this form has not been considered further in this review (Ripley 1982). The distributions of these taxa are imperfectly known and the species has been predicted to occur in the Chumbi valley (Yadong) and in the Medog area of south and south-east Xizang province, China (Tibet) (MacKinnon & Phillipps 2000). On 11 March 1999, the species was observed at Ruili, in south-west Yunnan province (China) (Dymond & Thompson 2000). Throughout its range, G. rufogularis is very variable, with variation in plumage characters in some cases clinal and in others abrupt and mosaic. All seven subspecies of G. rufogularis show rufous tips to the rectrices, a black wing panel across the remiges and black on the forecrown to a variable degree. Furthermore, all subspecies show a variable extent of orange on the chin and throat. For example, the holotype of G. r. rufiberbis shows only a small extent of orange on the chin, whereas in G. r occidentalis, G. r. rufitinctus and G. r. assamensis the orange is more extensive. Other characteristics, such as the colour of the upperparts, which vary from light TABLE 2 Summary of plumage features of Garrulax konkakinhensis, G. rufogularis, G. cineraceus and G. lunulatus Taxon Wing Orange-brown Grey forehead Buff vent panel tips to rectices and supercilium and belly Garrulax konkakinhensis - - + - G. rufogularis rufogularis a = 2 = G. r. occidentalis + és 3 G. r assamensis =f - E J G. r. rufitinctus + - : Z G. r. rufiberbis af - = G. r. intensior + - s G. cineraceus - - 2 + G. lunulatus - = - - Jonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 19 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) TABLE 3 Comparison of biometrics amongst Garrulax rufogularis and G. konkakinhensis based on specimens in The Natural History Museum, Tring. In each cell, the biometric range is given, followed by the mean, standard deviation and finally the sample size. All measurements are in mm. Taxon Maxilla (tip to skull) Tarsus Wing (max. chord) — Tail Sex G.rufogularis —-24,25,24,24,24.5, 33.5,36.5,36,34.5,38, 95,95,92,98,94,93, 106,110.5,108,111,104, 2m, 8? rufogularis 23.,24.5,22,25,22 36,37,35,36.5,36.5 96,91,95,89 (93.8) 105.5,113,100.5,106,102.5 (23.9) {1.081} [10] (36.0) {1.3013[10] {2.616} [10] (106.7) {3.945} [10] G.r intensior 26,25,24.5(25.2) 38.5,35,37(36.8) _97,98,95(96.7) 110,113,110 2m, If ‘0.764}(3] (1.7563 [3] 1.528} [3] (111.0){1.732} [3] G.rrufiberbis 24.5 (24.5) [1] 34 (34.0) [1] 93 (93.0) [1] 101 (101.0) [1] Im G.roccidentalis 23,22.22,2223.5, _ 33.5,36,33,34,35.5, 93,96,99.92,91,91, 107.5,113,106,111,117, 2f1m,7? 24.23,24.2427.5 34,34,36.34,34.5 90, 98,94,93 (93.7) 106,115,115,110,109 (23.0) {0.8510} (34.5) {1.0393[10] {3.057} [10] (111.0) {3.933} [10] Grngitincus —-23.5,broken,18.5 ——36,37,34(35.7) 95,92,86 (91.0) 116,113,98 (109.0) 1f,2 (21.0) {3.536}(2] {1.52833 4.583} [3] (9.644}(3] G.konkakinhensis 24.5,23.5.21.5 40,41,39 (40.0) 99,98,95 (97.3) 123,116,112(117.0) (23.2){1.528 [3] {1.0003(3] (2.082\[3] 5.568} [3] 2m,If olive-brown to dark brown, and the colour of the vent, which varies from cinnamon to a dark cinnamon, show clinal variation. Upperpart and vent colouration become progressively darker and browner as one moves eastwards and in the easternmost G. r. intensior black and dark browns show their greatest expression. Other features, such as the chestnut ear-coverts, show a mosaic expression since only two of the subspecies of G. rufogularis, which do not all have allopatric ranges (G. 1 occidentalis and G. 1: rufitinctus), show this feature. Thus, the westernmost form, G. ” occidentalis, bears the closest resemblance to G. konkakinhensis in the extent of orange on the ear-coverts and in general plumage colouration, whereas G. 7 intensior, which has the closest geographic proximity, bears the least resemblance to G. konkakinhensis. Table | details the general morphology of all seven forms of G. rufogularis, and G. konkakinhensis, based on an examination of four holotype specimens and additional skins of G. rufogularis taxa in the American Museum of Natural History and at The Natural History Museum. Although bearing strong resemblance to the western races of G. rufogularis, G. konkakinhensis is morphologically sufficiently distinct to warrant specific treatment because it shows four unique plumage features that are not shown by any subspecies of G. rufogularis. Table 2 summarises these features, and also includes the related G. cineraceus and G. lunulatus. The possession of white tips to the rectrices, the absence of a black band across the remiges, and a buff vent and belly are plumage features that G. konkakinhensis shares with G. cineraceus and G. lunulatus, indicating a shared ancestry with these taxa. The distinctive morphology of G. konkakinhensis and G. rufogularis indicates that the level of genetic variation between them is greater than that among the seven described subspecies of G. Fonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 20 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) rufogularis. In comparison with the G. rufogularis taxa in Table 3, there is overlap in bill, tail and wing lengths but tarsus, wing and tail lengths are, on average, longer. The tarsus measurements for G. konkakinhensis lie beyond the range of G. rufogularis. Although the sample sizes are small, analysis comparing G. konkakinhensis with G. rufogularis (all five subspecies lumped together) using one- way analysis of variance, shows there is no significant difference in maxilla length (p=0.44) or wing length (p=0.06), but tarsus length (p<<0.01) and tail length (p=0.01) are significantly different. Under the phylogenetic species concept, a species is defined as an irreducible (basal) cluster of organisms, diagnosably distinct from other such clusters and within which there is a parental pattern of ancestry and descent (Cracraft 1989). The possession of only one diagnostic character would have been sufficient for the new taxon to be considered a species under the phylogenetic species concept and, with four, G. konkakinhensis easily meets that definition. We prefer, however, to approach the question of appropriate taxonomic rank for this taxon using a refined version of the biological species concept. Under the biological species concept, species are systems of populations: the gene exchange between these systems is limited or prevented by a reproductive isolating mechanism or perhaps by a combination of several such mechanisms (Dobzhansky 1937). Applying the biological species concept, G. rufogularis is considered to comprise a single species by Deignan (1964), Sibley & Monroe (1990) and Inskipp et al. (1996). For birds, the biological species definition has recently been broadened to the comprehensive biological species concept (CBSC). Under the CBSC, “a bird species is a system of populations representing an essentially monophyletic, genetically cohesive, and genealogically concordant lineage of individuals that share a common fertilization system through time and space, represent an independent evolutionary trajectory, and demonstrate essential but not necessarily complete reproductive isolation from other such systems” (Johnson et al. 1999). The taxonomic ranking of allopatric populations of taxa has been a long recognized problem for the obvious reason that no test of sympatry is possible. This is indeed the case with G. konkakinhensis and G. rufogularis intensior which are only currently known from their respective type localities that are c. 1,000 km apart (Fig.4). Given that both localities are situated amongst more extensive forested montane areas, it seems unlikely that these taxa are confined to their type localities and that their respective ranges extend over wider areas. However, we presently lack sufficient data on the extent of their geographic ranges to demonstrate whether they may be sympatric or parapatric. Their taxonomic status must, therefore, be considered as if they were allopatric. Within the genus Garrulax, species have evolved unique combinations of wing and tail markings that seem likely to act as signaling mechanisms to facilitate recognition by members of the same species. The species in question, G. konkakinhensis and G. rufogularis, have each evolved a distinctive and unique tail and wing pattern. These features demonstrate (but do not prove) essential reproductive isolation, whether their ranges prove subsequently to be Jonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 21 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) allopatric, parapatric or sympatric. Applying the CBSC, this is a key defining trait of specific rank. In conclusion, our case for the validity of G. Konkakinhensis as a good biological species rests on its distinctive morphology. Its reproductive isolation from G. rufogularis can only be inferred on the basis of our current knowledge. However, given that G. konkakinhensis exhibits a range of plumage features, including those which may assist in species recognition, to have described G. konkakinhensis as a mere subspecies of G. rufogularis, would have added another and significant level of variability to a highly variable taxon, which itself requires further taxonomic revision. Conservation Kon Ka Kinh Nature Reserve was included on a list of proposed protected areas decreed by the government of Vietnam in 1986. This decree indicated the intent of the government to establish protected areas at a number of sites without defining exact areas or boundaries and without specifying a timescale. In 1999, BirdLife International and FIPI began researching a project investment document for the establishment of a nature reserve at this site which was subsequently published in English (Le Trong Trai et al. 2000). The forests within the proposed Kon Ka Kinh Nature Reserve comprise a mosaic of primary and seral forest formations, and, on the evidence of shifting cultivation, indicate a long history of human utilization (Fig. 2). During fieldwork in 1999, there was much evidence of recent and continuing commercial logging of Fokienia hodginsii. It is difficult to imagine that this was occurring without the compliance of the provincial authorities. Following consultation with Gia Lai Provincial People’s Committee, their endorsement was gained for the establishment of a 41,710 ha nature reserve (Anon. 1999). This proposal has now been endorsed by central government. The boundary includes the three sites on Mount Kon Ka Kinh where the holotype and paratypes of Garrulax konkakinhensis were collected. Since the proposed boundary of the protected area encompasses extensive areas at higher elevation, it is felt that, if successfully established, the future of this population of G. Konkakinhensis will be secured. The current absence of data on population size, trend and distribution, indicate that Garrulax konkakinhensis must be categorised as Data Deficient (IUCN 1994). The species is currently known only from a narrow altitudinal range at a single site, so efforts should be directed to determining its conservation status. Its occurrence in logged forest indicates some tolerance for disturbed habitat. Acknowledgements In Hanoi, we thank Dr Nguyen Huy Phon, Vice-director of FIPI, Dr Nguyen Huu Dong, Director of the Forest Resources and Environment Centre of FIPI. At the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, we thank Le Van Minh Director of the International Cooperation Department, Dr Nguyen Ba Thu, Director of the Forest Protection Department, and Tran Quoc Bao, Head of the Nature Conservation and Environment Division. In Gia Lai province we thank Le Vi Ha, Chairman of the provincial people’s committee, and Tran Quang Khanh, Director and Tran Van Jonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 22 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) Hieu, Vice-director, of the provincial Forest Protection Department. We would also like to thank the leaders of K’Bang and Mang Yang districts for providing support to us in the field. In New York, thanks are due to Paul Sweet at the American Museum of Natural History for permitting access to type material of Garrulax rufogularis. At The Natural History Museum, Tring, U.K., Dr Robert Prys-Jones permitted access to the bird collection. Further assistance was provided by Mark P. Adams, Frank D. Steinheimer, Harry Taylor and Mrs F. E. Warr. We are grateful for comments made by Dr Sebastian Buckton, Dr Nigel Collar, Edward C. Dickinson, Dr Jon Fjeldsa, Dr Frank Lambert, Le Trong Trai, Dr Pamela Rasmussen, Craig R. Robson and Andrew W. Tordoff. The maps were produced by Mai Ky Vinh, Ha Quy Quynh, Andrew W. Tordoff and Nguyen Duc Tu. This manuscript was peer reviewed by Edward C. Dickinson. - A final word of thanks to our colleagues Le Trong Trai, Le Van Cham, Tran Quang Ngoc, and Tran Hieu Minh of FIPI, Nguyen Van Sang (Institute of Ecology and Biological Rescources), Alexander L. Monastyrskii (Russian/Vietnam Tropical Centre), Benjamin D. Hayes, and Nguyen Van Tan, Do Ba Khoa and Nguyen Van Hai of Gia Lai Forest Protection Department, who were a source of inspiration and good company during fieldwork. Fieldwork in 1999 comprised a component of the joint BirdLife International and FIPI Project entitled “Expanding the Protected Areas Network in Vietnam for the 21st Century”, Contract VNM/B7-6201/1B/96/005, funded by the Commission of European Communities (DG1), and BirdLife International. References: Ali, S. & Ripley, S. D. 1972. Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan together with those of Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan and Ceylon. Volume 7. Oxford Univ. Press. Bombay, India. Amadon, D & Short, L. L. 1992. Taxonomy of lower categories - suggested guidelines. Bull. Br. Orn. Cl. Centenary Supplement. 112A: 11-38. Anon. 1999. An investment plan for Kon Ka Kinh Nature Reserve: a contribution to the management plan [in Vietnamese]. BirdLife International Vietnam Programme and FIPI, Unpubl. report to Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Hanoi. Cracraft, J. 1989. Speciation and its ontology: the empirical consequences of alternative species concepts for understanding patterns and processes of speciation. In Otte, D. & Endler, J. A. (eds.) Speciation and its consequences. Pp 28-59. Sinauer Associates. Sunderland, Mass. Deignan, H. G. 1964. Subfamily Timaliinae. In Mayr, E. & Paynter, R. A. (eds.), Check-list of the birds of the world. Vol. 10. Pp. 240-427. Museum of Comparative Zoology. Cambridge, Mass. Delacour, J. & Jabouille, P. 1931. Les oiseuax de |'Indochine Francaise. Vol. 3. Paris: Exposition Coloniale Internationale. Dobzhansky, T. 1937. Genetics and the origin of species. Columbia Univ. Press. New York. Duckworth, J. W., Salter, R. E. & Khounboline, K. 1999. Wildlife in Lao PDR: 1999 Status Report. Y'UCN: The World Conservation Union/Wildlife Conservation Society, Centre for Protected Areas and Watershed Management. Vientiane, Laos. Dymond, N. & Thompson, P. 2000. Rufous-chinned Laughingthrush Garrulax rufogularis: a new species for China. Forktail 16:183. Eames, J. C., Le Trong Trai & Nguyen Cu 1999. A new species of laughingthrush (Passerformes: Graculacinae) from the Western Highlands of Vietnam. Bul/. Brit. Orn. Ci. 119:4-15. Inskipp, T., Lindsey, N., & Duckworth, J. W. 1996. An annotated checklist of the birds of the Oriental Region. Oriental Bird Club. Sandy, U.K. IUCN. 1994. JUCN Red list categories. \UCN. Gland, Switzerland. Johnson, N. K. Remsen Jr., T. V. & Cicero, C. 1999. Resolution of the debate over species concepts in ornithology: a new comprehensive biologic species concept. In Adams, N. J. & Slotow. R. H., (eds.) Proc. 22 Int. Ornithol. Congr., Durban. Pp. 1,470-1,482. BirdLife South Africa. Johannesburg. Le Trong Trai, Le Van Cham, Tran Quoc Ngoc, Tran Hieu Minh, Nguyen Van Sang, Monastyrskii, A. L., Hayes, B. D., & Eames, J. C. (2000) An investment plan for Kon Ka Kinh Nature Jonathan C. Eames & Charles Eames 23 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) Reserve, Gia Lai Province, Vietnam: A contribution to the management plan. BirdLife International Vietnam Programme, Hanoi, Vietnam. MacKinnon, J. R. & Phillipps, K. 2000. A field guide to the birds of China. Oxford Univ. Press. Ripley, S. D. 1982. A svnposis of the birds of India and Pakistan. 2 edition. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc./Oxford Univ. Press. Sibley, C. G. & Monroe Jr., B. L. 1990. Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the world. Yale Univ. Press, Newhaven and London. Smithe, F. B. 1975. Naturalists color guide. American Museum of Natural History, New York. Wege, D. C., Long, A. J., Mai Ky Vinh, Vu Van Dung & Eames, J. C. 1999. Expanding the protected areas network in Vietnam for the 21“ Century: an analysis of the current system with recommendations for equitable expansion. BirdLife International Vietnam Programme, Hanoi, Vietnam. Whitmore, T. C. 1992. An introduction to tropical rainforests. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Addresses: Jonathan C. Eames, Programme Manager, BirdLife International Vietnam Programme, 11 Lane 167, Tay Son, Dong Da, Hanoi, Vietnam. Charles Eames, 77 Stoughton Road, Oadby, Leicester LE2 4FQ, United Kingdom. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 First records, noteworthy observations and new distributional data for birds in Paraguay by David R. Capper, Robert P Clay, Alberto Madrono N., Juan Mazar Barnett, Ian Ff. Burfield, Estela Z. Esquivel, Corinne P Kennedy, Mirna Perrens & Robert G. Pople Received 24 December 1998 The Rio Paraguay divides Paraguay into two distinct regions. The relatively flat Chaco in the west is characterised by seasonally flooded palm savannas in the south-east, semi-arid thorn scrub forest in the west, and subhumid forests in the north-east. The Oriente in the east combines several distinct ecosystems and its avifauna is correspondingly diverse (Hayes 1995): cerrado in the north, natural grasslands and marshes in the south and humid Interior Atlantic Forest in the east. From July to December 1997 we carried out ornithological fieldwork in a variety of habitats at three sites in the Chaco and three in the Oriente. Our work focused on two of the seven geographical regions identified by Hayes (1995): Matogrosense in the Chaco, and Central Paraguay in the Oriente. Additional short spells of fieldwork were conducted at sites in the Alto Chaco and Alto Parana regions. Noteworthy records from additional fieldwork conducted by AMN and RPC are also included, as are a few observations from 1994-95, omitted from previous publications (e.g. Lowen ef al. 1997a,b; Madrono N. & Esquivel 1997). From these surveys we present noteworthy observations on 30 species. David R. Capper et al. 24 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) Site details In Matogrosense we worked at Estancia 42 (= Campo Limon), 35 km north-west of Puerto Bahia Negra, from 5-12 September 1997. Although the region is characterised by subhumid, medium-height forest (10-20 m), within the estancia few areas remained with a closed canopy above 10-15 m. We surveyed the Rio Paraguay north of Concepcion from 2-4 September and the Rio Negro on 14 September, and conducted additional observations in the vicinity of Puerto Bahia Negra on 5 and 12-16 September 1997. This area of extensive wetlands forms part of the Pantanal with adjacent Brazil and Bolivia. Although palm savannas are present along the river, these are more extensive further south. In Central Paraguay we worked at Aguara Nu, Reserva Natural del Bosque Mbaracayu, Dpto. Canindeyu from 24 July to 20 December 1997 and Reserva Natural Privada Tapyta, Dpto. Caazapa from 25 October to 1 November 1997. Aguara Nu is a c.5,500 ha. low plateau of cerrado-type vegetation on the eastern edge of one of the largest remaining blocks of Interior Atlantic Forest in Paraguay. It consists mainly of “Yata’i” palm (Butia paraguayensis) savanna and campo sujo grassland. A more detailed site description of Aguara Nu appears in Lowen et al. (1996). Tapyta consists of rolling campo sujo and campo limpo grasslands, interspersed with low, seasonally wet grasslands and marshes, and surrounded by Interior Atlantic Forest. The gallery 4 re =e e J Bolivia 5 e38 5 10 12 / Paraguay a ie \) Ss ® > =] Qo S ec 2S x e ze Argentina 100 200 kilometres Figure 1. Map showing localities of all sites mentioned in text. Numbers refer to site locations in Appendix 1. David R. Capper et al. 25 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) forests along the Arroyo Tayay that runs through Tapyta form the only remaining forested connection between Parque Nacional Caaguazu and Parque Nacional San Rafael (Madrono, N. ef a/. 1997a,b). Additional short spells of fieldwork were conducted at two sites in the Alto Chaco region, and at one site in the Alto Parana region. In the Chaco, we conducted fieldwork at Estancia Campo Grande and Estancia Kamba Aka, close to the Bolivian border, c.80 km north-west of Puerto Bahia Negra. These sites are at the eastern limit of the Alto Chaco region, in the transition zone with Matogrosense. The vegetation cover is a ‘monte alto’, a taller xerophytic thorn scrub with more mesophytic elements than is typical of the Alto Chaco. At Estancia Campo Grande the forest cover was broken by extensive areas of grassland and some palm savanna. In the Alto Parana region fieldwork was conducted at Reserva Natural Privada Ypeti, which protects a 10,000 ha tract of Atlantic Forest and wetlands bordering the Rio Monday within Estancia La Golondrina, Dpto. Caazapa. Further details of this site are provided in Lowen ef a/. (1996). The geographical locations of all sites are given in Appendix I and plotted on Fig. 1. Definitions, abbreviations and conventions We define the parameters of this paper as follows: (a) first country records; (b) species whose occurrence in Paraguay is treated as ‘hypothetical’ by Hayes (1995): (c) first reliable records for the Oriente or the Chaco; (d) first observations in geographical regions within Paraguay. Our records are categorised according to Hayes (1995) and subsequent pubications (e.g. Lowen et a/. 1997a, Ericson & Amarilla 1997) are cited where relevant. Where possible, records were formally documented (e.g. good quality photograph or tape-recording) and this is indicated in the text. No specimens were taken. We distinguish single and multi-observer records, listing up to three observers in alphabetical order. Authors are indicated by their initials; other observers are named in full. We use ‘ef a/.’ to indicate that more than three observers were involved. All sight/aural records are supported by extensive field notes. For mist-netted birds, full biometric data and a blood sample were taken before being photographed and released. Photographs and biometrics are available from the authors. Blood samples have been deposited with the Centre for Tropical Biodiversity, Copenhagen. Unless otherwise stated, tape-recordings have been deposited at the National Sound Archive, Wildlife Section, London. Photographs have been archived at the BirdLife International Secretariat in Cambridge, U. K. Taxonomy and nomenclature follow Clements (1991, 1994) for non-passerines and Ridgely & Tudor (1989, 1994) for passerines. In each account, we give the species’ global status (if listed in Collar ef a/. 1994) and its status in Paraguay (according to Hayes 1995). We follow this with our records and summarise their significance. In certain cases, we include a brief discussion of status or identification features. Appendix | lists co-ordinates of all localities mentioned. All sites are at a low altitude (100-300 m). Certain abbreviations are used throughout the text. These are: Dpto. - David R. Capper et al. 26 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) Departamento (Department); RNBM - Reserva Natural del Bosque Mbaracayu (Mbaracayu Forest Nature Reserve); PN - Parque Nacional (National Park); RNP - Reserva Natural Privada (Private Nature Reserve); RB - Refugio Bioldgico (Biological Refuge); RVS - Refugio de Vida Silvestre (Wildlife Refuge). Species accounts TATAUPATINAMOU Crypwirellus tataupa Reported as ‘common’ in all geographical regions of Paraguay except the Alto Chaco (‘uncommon’) and Matogrosense (not listed) (Hayes (1995). We recorded the first observations of this species for the Matogrosense geographical region. Several were heard at Puerto Maria Auxiliadora, Dpto. Alto Paraguay on 5-6 July 1993 (AMN). In addition, one was heard on 7 September and two on | 1 September 1997 at Estancia 42 (DRC, RPC). All were calling from dense understorey in medium height subhumid forest. As predicted by Hayes (1995: 140), further fieldwork in the Matogrosense region has resulted in new records of ground-dwelling non-passerines (e.g. Ericson & Amarilla 1997). UNDULATED TINAMOU Cry pturellus undulatus Crypturellus undulatus is \isted for the Central Paraguay, Campos Cerrados, Bajo Chaco and Matogrosense regions (Hayes 1995). Several C. undulatus calling at Estancia Trébol, Dpto. Alto Paraguay on 25 June 1993 (AMN) are the first records for the Alto Chaco region. These birds were heard in dense xerophytic thorn scrub, with some mesophytic elements more typical of habitat closer to the Rio Paraguay. GREEN IBIS Mesembrinibis cayennensis Listed as ‘rare’ in all geographical regions except the Alto Chaco (not listed) (Hayes 1995). However, there are only three records for the Chaco (1938, 1939 and 1990), and Hayes (1995: 45) discussed in detail his reasons for treating the locality of the 1939 specimen as doubtful. A single seen, and a second heard on 16 September 1997 ina small marsh at the edge of deciduous medium-height thorn scrub-forest at Estancia Campo Grande (RPC) constitute the first record for the Alto Chaco region and the third or fourth for the Chaco. Although probably more common in the Oriente, this species clearly occurs at very low densities throughout much of Paraguay (Hayes 1995). WHITE-FACED WHISTLING-DUCK Dendrocygna viduata Hayes (1995) listed Dendrocygna viduata as occurring in all geographical regions except Alto Parana. However, there are recent sightings from at least three sites in this region. At RNP Ypeti, Dpto. Caazapa, 59 D. viduata were seen on 10 July 1994 (L. Bartrina, R. Villalba). There have been two subsequent records: one seen on 5 December 1995 (RPC) and a minimum of three on 1 October 1997 (RPC). Anon. (1993) listed the species as common in the Itakyry area, Dpto. Alto Parana, and Pérez & Colman (1995) documented two records of this species at RB Mbaracayu, Dpto. Canindeyu. David R. Capper et al. 27 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) PLUMBEOUS KITE /ctinia plumbea A northern austral migrant that breeds in Paraguay but is absent in the austral winter (Hayes ef al. 1994) and listed for all geographical regions except Matogrosense (Hayes 1995). Single birds were observed in the Matogrosense region on 4 September 1997 near Km 1,200 on the Rio Paraguay, Dpto. Alto Paraguay (RPC, DRC), and on 7 September 1997 at Estancia 42 (RPC). The bird on 7 September was with three Swallow- tailed Kites Elanoides forficatus (see below). SWALLOW-TAILED KITE Elanoides forficatus Hayes (1995) only listed this northern austral migrant for the Oriente. We recorded it on four occasions in the Matogrosense region: four birds at Fuerte Olimpo on 4 September 1997 (RPC, RGP); three to the north of Fuerte Olimpo on 4 September 1997 (1JB, DRC); three on 7 September 1997 at Estancia 42 (RPC); and a further bird at Puerto Bahia Negra on 12 September 1997 (DRC et a/.), all Dpto. Alto Paraguay. These are the first records for the Chaco and all presumably refer to birds migrating south. GREY-BELLIED GOSHAWK Accipter poliogaster Near-threatened (Collar et a/. 1994). There are ten records of Accipter poliogaster for Paraguay, six before 1938 and four more recently (F. E. Hayes in /itt. 1996, Lowen et al. 1996, 1997a). The more recent records are all from RNP Itab6o, Dpto. Canindeyu in October 1995 and are presumed to refer to the same two birds (Lowen et al. 1996, 1997a). Additionally, Anon. (1993) listed the species as rare in two reserves managed by Itaipu Binacional (RB Limoy and RB Itabo, both Dpto. Alto Parana) in the Alto Parana region. At RNP Tapyta, an adult male was seen well in flight and perched in Interior Atlantic Forest on 25 October 1997 (DRC). This is the first observation of this species in the Central Paraguay region, and suggests that a small population of this low-density raptor may exist in the forest complex comprising PN San Rafael, PN Caaguazu and PNR Tapyta in south-east Paraguay. ASH-THROATED CRAKE Porzana albicollis Hayes (1995) listed this species for four regions, all 1n eastern Paraguay. P. albicollis was recorded in small numbers on 6-9 November 1995 at Estancia La Golondrina, Dpto. Presidente Hayes (JMB, B. Lopez Lanus, J. C. Lowen, M. Pearman and MP). These are the first records for both the Bajo Chaco region and the Paraguayan Chaco. Although the species is apparently common in wetlands close to the Rio Paraguay, it is presumably absent from the drier parts of the Chaco. GREEN-CHEEKED PARAKEET Pyrrhura molinae Two questionable or uncertain records exist for Paraguay: a specimen without locality, and a sight record 50 km west of Ciudad del Este, Dpto. Alto Parana. However, Hayes (1995: 128) discussed in detail his reasons for treating the occurrence of P. molinae in Paraguay as ‘hypothetical’. Certainly the sight record in Dpto. Alto Parana is far from the species’ known range and seems likely to refer to either escaped cagebirds or David R. Capper et al. 28 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) confusion with Reddish-bellied Parakeet P. frontalis. At Estancia 42, we observed small flocks of up to five birds daily, flying over medium-height subhumid forest and perched in treetops (DRC et a/.). On 16 September 1997 small flocks of P. molinae were recorded twice in thorn scrub-forest c.75 km north-west of Puerto Bahia Negra, Dpto. Alto Paraguay (RPC ef al.). These birds represent the first records from a specified locality in Paraguay which is close to the species’ known range (Forshaw 1989, Hayes 1995). All P. molinae seen well showed all-green upperparts apart from a brown forehead and crown, and blue primary coverts and outer web to the primaries. The brown of the crown extended down to the eyes and ear-coverts, though the latter were a paler, more greyish-brown. There was a quite indistinct and restricted area of green on the cheeks. The sides of the neck, throat and breast were light beige with each feather tipped brown, giving a barred appearance. The rest of the underparts were green apart from a few reddish spots on the belly centre. Upper- and undertail were brownish- red, with the base of each feather greenish. This description clearly eliminates the two possible confusion species known to occur in Paraguay (Blaze-winged Parakeet P. devillei and P. frontalis), and most closely resembles the subspecies P. molinae sordida. This subspecies occurs in southern Mato Grosso, Brazil and easternmost Bolivia, and is the most likely to occur in the Matogrosense region of Paraguay (Forshaw 1989, del Hoyo et al. 1997). PEARLY-BREASTED CUCKOO Coccyzus euleri A single C. euleri seen on 11 January 1996, and a pair on 28 October 1996 (AMN) in tall humid subtropical forest in the ‘Bosque Encantado’ (c.2 km east of Jejui-mi within the RNBM, Dpto. Canindeyt) are the first documented records of this species for Paraguay. All birds clearly lacked the rufous in the wing that is characteristic of the otherwise very similar (but not yet recorded from RNBM) Yellow-billed Cuckoo C. americanus. The pair seen on 28 October 1996 were observed to copulate (one bird approaching the other with a small twig prior to copulation), suggesting local breeding. A more detailed description of the habitat is provided in Madrono, N. & Esquivel (1997) and a tape-recording deposited at Library of Natural Sounds, Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology has yet to receive a recording number. Further sightings of Coccyzus cuckoos on 17 August 1995 and 19 October 1996 (AMN) were either C. euleri or americanus. LITTLE CUCKOO Piaya minuta Hayes (1995) did not list Piaya minuta for Paraguay and, according to Armonia (1995), it does not occur in either of the two Bolivian lifezones immediately to the north of Paraguay (Cerrado/Bosque Chiquitano and Chaco). The nearest known populations are in the Amazonia lifezone in the northern half of Bolivia (Armonia 1995), and Mato Grosso and Goias in west-central Brazil (Sick 1993). On 14 September 1997, two closely associating P. minuta (presumably a pair) were seen in riverside scrub on the eastern bank of the Rio Negro, Dpto. Santa Cruz, c.0.5 km north of its mouth into the Rio Paraguay (RPC et a/.). Both birds were seen well and photographed David R. Capper et all. 29 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) (see Clay et a/. 1998). Although this locality lies within Bolivia, many sections of the Rio Negro are not very wide ( mn ‘PROVIDENCE =, © | sis s -10° Farquhar b NAVs 7 if Vagalega IN 7 F a < | —m | Ng ; . V Tromelin dp; St Brandon Madagascar | | ; uF 20 ——————— on, — Rodriguez Mauritius Reunion MASCARENES Figure 1. Past and present distribution of booby colonies in the western Indian Ocean (omitting Europa, Mozambique Channel). Solid diamond - colony increased; Solid triangles - no known change in colony size; Open triangles - colony extinct; split triangles - colony reduced. Species codes: a - Sula abbotti, d — S .dactylatra, | — S .leucogaster, s - S. sula . Adapted and updated from Feare (1978). Seychelles/Aldabra area data unadjusted apart from S. leucogaster (no longer occurs on Desnoeufs Island, Amirantes, and probably no longer occurs on Farquhar Atoll — Feare, pers. comm.) and S. su/a which has increased on Aldabra (A. Burger pers. comm.), Mascarene area data from this paper & Le Corre (1996 - Tromelin). Anthony Cheke 73 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) recognised that Tafforet’s description of the ‘boeuf’ best fitted Abbott’s Booby S. (Papasula) abbotti, which was confirmed later (Cheke 1987) by further study of old texts (Tafforet 1726, Pingré 1763) not fully available to Nelson. In the meantime Bourne (1976) had tentatively referred an illustration of a subfossil bone of a large booby from Rodrigues, originally ascribed to the Red-footed Booby (Milne- Edwards 1873) to Abbott’s Booby; the actual bone “cannot be traced” (Bourne, /oc. cit.). The last recorded occurrence of a ‘boeuf’ was in 1832, when a specimen was collected for Col. Dawkins on behalf of Charles Telfair (Telfair 1833) - however, on being exhibited at the Zoological Society in London it was identified as “the lesser gannet of Dr. Latham, the Sula candida, Briss. and Pelecanus piscator, Linn.” (editor’s note following Telfair, ibid. - 1.e. a white-morph Red-footed Booby). The name ‘boeuf’ comes from the resemblance of the bird’s call to that of cattle (Tafforet 1726, Pingré 1763); only Abbott’s Booby has a mooing call of this kind (Nelson 1974, 1978, Cheke 1982). Two early travellers described the ‘tra-tra’ in sufficient detail for identification to be attempted. The first was Leguat (1707), who described only one species which he called by the standard French name ‘fou’ (= booby or gannet, but often used in the past for other easily caught seabirds, Cheke 1982). After recounting how they were regularly robbed by Frigate Birds Fregata sp., he described the ‘fous’ as “having the back chestnut and the belly white, the beak pointed, four inches long, very large at the head end and a little toothed along the edges, the legs short, the feet more or less as a duck’s and pale yellow”. Tafforet (1726), wrote that “the tra-tra, so-called because it always calls in that way, is a bird which is not as big as the boeuf and has a beak similar to the boeuf ‘s, and is coloured grey a bit white on the belly; they perch and make their nests in the trees and incubate in turns but they are in bigger quantity than boeufs, when they are little they are all white with the beak all black, and when they are big [=adult] they are grey and the beak greenish” [my translation]. The French astronomer Guy Pingré, on the island for the transit of Venus in 1761 (Pingré 1763), whose account of the ‘boeuf’ was very accurate (Cheke 1987), unfortunately only described nestling ‘tra-tras’, so his account adds nothing on the question of colour morphs. “Fous’/boobies were reported by numerous subsequent visitors (e.g. Gardyne 1846, a recently discovered account), but none, including Newton (1865) or Slater (1975), gave a plumage description. There are only three extant specimens: two collected in 1845, labelled as from Col. M. Lloyd but probably collected by Thomas Corby (Cheke 1987: 51) are in Cambridge: one is white, the other brown (dark head & belly, white tail, possibly sub-adult; R.P. Prys-Jones pers. comm., M. de L. Brooke in litt. ). The remaining specimen, collected by Slater in 1874 (Sharpe 1879), in The Natural History Museum collection in Tring, is another white morph adult (pers. obs.). The brown bird is exactly like one of the Bewsher specimens allegedly from Mauritius (see below). Brooke (1976, 1978) claimed that Layard had collected both Red-footed Boobies and Masked Boobies on Sandy Is., Rodrigues in 1856 - however, Layard was in fact collecting on Tromelin, then also known as ‘Sandy Island’, as Brooke himself (1981) later acknowledged. By 1916 Red-footed Boobies no longer bred on Rodrigues (Cheke 1987). Anthony Cheke 74 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) It is clear from Tafforet’s account that his ‘tra-tras’ were brown morph Red- footed Boobies, clearly contrasted with the larger, rarer ‘boeuf’ (Abbott’s Booby). Leguat’s description is confusing, even suggesting Brown Boobies S. leucogaster (C. Feare in /itt.). However a few sentences earlier he noted that ‘fous’, frigates, and tropic-birds ( Phaethon spp. ) nested up trees, whereas other seabirds nested on the sand - eliminating Brown Boobies. That three of the four known specimens are (or were) white is perhaps not surprising. Telfair’s collectors were seeking a “boeuf” (a white booby) so either accidentally obtained a white-morph Red-footed Booby, or the name had by then transferred to that form, Abbott’s Booby having died out; his specimen is lost (see Wheeler 1997). Corby (a surveyor, not an ornithologist) probably saw two sorts, so collected one of each. Slater was keen, but no expert, and may have collected a white bird assuming it to be the fully adult version of the boobies he saw; 1n his own notes (Slater 1875) he used the name ‘ S. dactylatra ‘ (1.e. Masked Booby) although he clearly described them nesting in trees, and the specimen itself is labelled ‘Anous stolidus Booby’ (pers. obs.)! Redressing the balance, I argue below that two brown-morph birds collected by Bewsher were obtained in Rodrigues and not Mauritius as labelled. Rodrigues should therefore be added to the list of colonies with brown morphs predominating. It may be significant that, apart from Europa (22°S), this colony at 20°S was the most southerly in the western Indian Ocean. Mauritius Nelson (1978) did not mention Mauritius in his discussion of Red-footed Booby distribution, but Hartlaub (1877), Oustalet (1897), Meinertzhagen (1912), Rountree et al. (1952), Newton (1958), Watson et al. (1963) and Feare (1978), followed by Le Corre (1999), asserted that Red-footed Boobies used to breed on islets around Mauritius. There is no real evidence for this (Cheke 1987), but I will re-examine the claims here in more detail. Although there were dozens of reports of the land fauna, only one early visitor to Mauritius reported boobies. In 1668 John Marshall saw a pair of probable Abbott’s Boobies nesting up a tall tree, and in neighbouring seas saw ‘boobos’ “as big as a kite with a long bill and are of a reddish greene and some part white colour’. These could, at a stretch, have been Red-footed Boobies (Cheke 1987). Bourne (1976) re- examined sub-fossil bones from Mauritius that Newton & Gadow (1893) had simply called ‘gannet’, and identified them as Abbott’s Booby (undiscovered when the material was first studied). In the 18th (La Caille 1763) and early 19th centuries (Desjardins, in Oustalet 1897) the French word ‘fou’ was used interchangeably with ‘fouquet’, to describe, not boobies, but petrels or shearwaters (Cheke 1982, 1987), causing confusion to later writers. Oustalet (1897) thought Desjardins was referring to boobies, despite the birds described “nesting in holes under rocks” (i.e. Wedge-tailed Shearwaters Puffinus pacificus, Cheke 1987). Following Milne-Edwards (1882), Oustalet also assumed Quoy & Gaimard’s (1824) ‘fous’ seen off Mauritius in 1818 were Red-footed Boobies, but Anthony Cheke 75 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) they had only reported birds ‘similar’ to European and South African gannets (i.e. white Su/a with dark wing-tips). Their birds thus remain unidentified, though they were probably Masked Boobies, the Indian Ocean species closest in appearance to true gannets (“Morus spp.). Meinertzhagen (1912) confused Ile Plate in the Seychelles with Flat Island off Mauritius and, citing Oustalet’s (1897) remarks about Ile Plate, claimed that Red-footed Boobies nested on Flat island - this is despite having visited the islet twice himself and finding no seabirds (details in his diaries kept at Rhodes House, Oxford). Hartlaub (1877) noted a ‘young’ Red-footed Booby from Mauritius in Vienna, but the specimen in fact comes from Agalega (Cheke & Lawley 1983, and below). Guérin (1940-53) blithely added the other northern islets (Serpent, Round, Gunner’s Quoin) to the alleged breeding sites of Red-footed Boobies and, as late as 1950, Rountree (1951) said they ‘probably bred’. Guérin (1940-53) also asserted that there were four Red-footed Booby specimens in the Mauritius Institute museum; Rountree ef a/. (1952) quietly (and correctly, pers. obs.) reassigned them to Masked Boobies. Finally in 1952, Rountree ef a/. (1952), following his co-author Jean Vinson’s visit to the islets (Vinson 1950), confirmed that they ‘probably no longer nest on any of these islets today’. In fact no observer at any time ever actually saw or reported Red-footed Boobies nesting in or around Mauritius (Cheke 1987). There are however three further museum specimens listed as having been collected in Mauritius. The first, in Paris, presented by Delisse in 1837, is mentioned without further detail by Milne-Edwards (1882), Oustalet 1897 and Rountree et a/. (1952). This specimen, accessioned on 6 June 1837, is labelled as from ‘Ile de France’, i.e. Mauritius (C. Jouanin in /itt.). Theodore Delisse was one of the party that accompanied Bojer on his visit to Agalega in 1835 (Pourcelet 1994, and see below), and it seems most probable that that is where he collected the booby. A list of birds presented to the Paris museum in June 1837 by a M ‘Delisle’ consists largely of seabirds, but also includes two ‘ibis vert’, all allegedly from Mauritius (Jouanin in /itt.). There have never been any ibises breeding in Mauritius (Cheke 1987), but there is a small colony of Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus on Agalega (Cheke & Lawley 1983). The rest of the list includes (all in French, not Latin) frigate birds sp., boobies (‘fou blanc’), noddy sp., another tern (“sterne dos noir =? Sterna fuscata ) and two migrant waders. All the seabirds in the list would, in 1835, have been easily obtained on Agalega, but not on Mauritius, where frigates no longer bred and terns and boobies (only Masked) could have been procured only on Serpent Island, on which there is no recorded landing before 1844 (Lloyd 1846, Vinson 1950). M ‘Delisle’ and M Delisse seem likely to have been one and the same person, and I suggest all the birds were collected in Agalega in 1835, with the specimens being imprecisely labelled as was not unusual at that time. The other two specimens, in The Natural History Museum at Tring, are from bird and snail collector C.E. Bewsher, who had supplied them originally to the The Shelley Museum (George Shelley’s collection). They are undated but must be 1868- 79, when Bewsher was based in Mauritius (limiting dates of mentions in the Transactions of the Royal Society of Arts & Sciences of Mauritius). One is an adult Anthony Cheke 76 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) brown morph, the other a sub-adult (white tail, but brown head & belly) also of the brown morph (pers. obs.). While Bewsher could somehow have collected a couple of vagrants around Mauritus, it is more likely that he procured the birds on his visit to Rodrigues (in 1874, Bouton 1875, Griffiths 1994). The ex-Shelley Museum accession includes (pers. obs.) a frigate bird F. arie/, one each of the two noddies and a Sooty Tern. All five species were readily obtainable in Rodrigues, while only the terns could have been collected, with difficulty, on Mauritius (Serpent Island; see above). Finally Layard (1863) collected an unidentified *gannet’ egg, allegedly on Round Island. The egg no longer survives (Brooke 1978), but there are two Masked Booby skins from the same collecting trip (Brooke 1976), so the egg was presumably from a Masked Booby, and actually collected on Serpent Island. On present evidence Mauritius should be deleted from the breeding distribution of the Red-footed Booby. There is only one confirmed record of a vagrant: Temple (1976) saw a single bird off the coast in June 1973. The Masked Boobies from Serpent Island can regularly be seen at sea around the northern islets of Mauritius (pers. obs. 1973-1999), and along the west coast (Temple 1976); 50 pairs were estimated in November 1992 (Safford 1993), while 200 birds were counted in September 1993 (Bell et al. 1993). Reunion Watson et al. (1963) unnaccountably listed as occurring on Réunion both Masked (‘possibly breeds’) and Red-footed Boobies (‘apparently does not breed ... grey- phase adults have been recorded’). Nelson (1978) and Feare (1978) were wisely cautious about this - in fact until 1976 no boobies of any species had been recorded, let alone bred, in Réunion (Gruchet 1976, Barré 1983). Gruchet (1976) correctly identified an immature sulid captured off the town of St. Paul, and photographed alive on 10 March 1976, as a Cape Gannet Sula (Morus) (bassana) capensis, though Barré ( Joc. cit. ) and Probst (1997) thought it was a young Masked Booby. Despite his earlier reference, Barré et al. (1996) omitted this record from the Réunion handbook. Probst ( Joc. cit. ) reported sight records of Masked Boobies off Le Port in 1995. It would appear that Watson er a/. (1963) accidentally transposed information from Mauritius, though they also gave the expected information under that island; their book contains no references. Agalega Scientists rarely visit Agalega, and detailed information on its original biota is minimal (Cheke & Lawley 1983, Guého & Staub 1983). Although several early visitors and colonists mentioned the (then) abundant ‘fous’ and their behaviour (ibid. ), no plumage descriptions were given, but the birds were always stated to nest up trees. There are no records after 1848 (ibid.). The only sulid labelled as taken on the island is a Red- footed Booby left to the Vienna museum by the botanist Wenceslas Bojer, who visited the island in 1835 (Cheke & Lawley, /oc. cit.). In 1844 Bojer presented a Anthony Cheke 77 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) series of birds, including a ‘fou’, to the Société d’ Histoire Naturelle de l’ile Maurice (Bouton 1846), but this specimen has not survived (pers. obs. in the Mauritius Institute museum). However, I believe the 1837 Paris specimen also originated in Agalega, as the collector, Delisse, was with Bojer on the island in 1835 (Pourcelet 1994, see above). Le Corre (1999) gave Cheke & Lawley (1983) as the source in his table where he claimed Agalega was inhabited by largely (80%+) white morph birds; in fact we did not mention colour morphs at all. When researching the biological history of the island (ibid.), | examined all the known literature and manuscripts pertaining to it; visitors never mentioned more than one kind of ‘fou’, nor their colour. The Vienna specimen was originally identified as an immature and labelled ‘Sula alba’, suggesting that Bojer considered that adults were white; however the bird is in fact a brown morph adult (F. Steinheimer in /itt.). The Delisse bird in Paris is an adult white morph (C. Jouanin in /itt.). The evidence is too poor to assess the proportion of brown-morph birds, so the colony should be treated as ‘unknown’ in that respect. Staub (Guého & Staub 1983) suggested Abbott’s Booby might also have nested on Agalega, but this, while possible, is entirely speculative; without hard evidence Agalega should not be included in the former distribution of this species. St. Brandon (=Cargados Carajos) These atolls lie between Rodrigues and Tromelin, well south of Agalega, so might have been expected to have a high proportion of brown-morph birds in the Red- footed Booby colony. Newton (1956, 1958) is the only visitor who counted the proportions of brown and white morph before the birds on Ile Albatros disappeared - reporting one (1956) or 2 (1958) brown morph pairs amongst 25 active nests in January 1956. The nests were heavily predated by cats (Newton 1958), and the birds had ceased to breed by 1964 despite the eradication of cats (Staub & Guého 1968). No birds were seen at Albatros, not even at sea, during visits in 1965 (Staub & Guého loc. cit.), 1971 (Williams & Rowlands 1980) or 1975 (Newlands 1976). However a single pair was nesting on Grande Capitaine islet in 1968 (Staub 1976: ‘1958’ in error, F. Staub in Jitt.), so the birds may yet recolonise, possibly from Tromelin, the nearest surviving colony. None were seen in 1996 (Swinnerton ef al. 1996). The colony of Masked Boobies on Ile du Nord used to number around 200 pairs (Newton 1958, Staub & Guého 1968, Staub 1976, Williams & Rowlands 1981), but in 1996 Swinnerton ef al. (1996) only saw around 30 pairs. Predation on all local seabirds by Seychellois fishermen was causing concern in the mid-1970s (Newlands 1976), and was still a serious problem in 1996, with deep ocean fishing boats also implicated (Swinnerton Joc. cit.). Discussion Historical data indicate that white-tailed brown morph birds were predominant in the now extinct Rodrigues colony of Red-footed Boobies, and that they were also present in the extinct Agalega population, but in an unknown proportion. There was Anthony Cheke 78 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) no Red-footed Booby colony on or around Mauritius. These results do not alter Le Corre’s conclusion that Indian Ocean populations are or were genetically isolated from each other; indeed they emphasize it, in that the St. Brandon colony, with a very low proportion of brown birds, is now seen to have been midway between two colonies with high percentages of brown morphs (Tromelin and Rodrigues). Le Corre also considered the darker morph might be a protection against kleptoparasitism by frigate-birds and skuas Catharacta (skua) antarctica. There were large colonies of frigates at Rodrigues, St. Brandon and Agalega (Staub 1973, Staub & Guého 1968, Cheke & Lawley 1983), but their colour morph ratios were very different. Skuas are regular but scarce winter visitors (Staub 1976, pers. obs.), but must always have been too rare, relative to the frigate populations, to have had much effect. Oceanographic factors, only touched on by Le Corre, may be of greater significance. According to Pocklington (1979), Europa and Rodrigues are in a zone where warm water in the austral summer is replaced by cooler southern water in the winter, whereas St. Brandon and Tromelin are in a zone of mixed water in winter; around Agalega the water is permanently warm and of ‘intermediate salinity’. Summary details of other booby populations on these islands update the reviews by Feare (1978) and Stoddart (1984). Abbott’s Booby has been extinct in the Mascarenes for at least two centuries, while the Masked Booby hangs on at two colonies, that on Serpent Island (Mauritius) being small but stable, while the St. Brandon colony is declining and under threat from human predation. Acknowledgements Robert Prys-Jones kindly let me examine boobies and other seabirds in his care at The Natural History Museum (Tring, UK) and allowed me to consult the accessions register; he also commented on a draft of this paper. Mike Brooke and Frank Steinheimer gave me details of specimens in the Cambridge and Vienna museums respectively. France Staub made useful comments on a draft and gave me a very helpful lead; Christian Jouanin checked specimens in Paris, and located some key material in the museum’s archives. Roger Safford helped with recent low-circulation reports from Mauritius. The editor persuaded me that my case was made without a long digression into 18th century usage of the word ‘fou’ in Mauritius. References: Barré, N. 1983. Oiseaux migrateurs observés a la Réunion. Oiseau 53: 323-333. Barré, N., Barau, A. & Jouanin, C. 1996. Oiseaux de la Réunion . 2nd rev. ed. Editions du Pacifique, Paris. 207pp. Bell, B.D., Dulloo, E. & Bell, M. n.d. (1993). Mauritius offshore islands survey report and management plan. Wildlife Management International Ltd, Wellington, NZ. 176pp. Bourne, W.R.P. 1968. Birds of Rodriguez. /bis 110: 338-344. Bourne, W.R.P. 1976. On subfossil bones of Abbott’s Booby Su/a abbotti from the Mascarene Islands, with a note on the proportions and distribution of the Sulidae. /bis 118: 119-123. Bouton, L. (ed.) 1846. Procés-verbaux de la Société d'Histoire Naturelle de l’Ile Maurice du 6 oct.1842 au 28 aout 1846 . Société d’Histoire Naturelle, Port Louis, Mauritius. Bouton, L. 1875. Report of the Secretary to the Royal Society of Arts and Sciences, 3 May 1873 to 10 October 1874. Trans. Roy. Soc. Arts Sci. Mauritius NS 8: i-xxiiit. Brooke, R.K. 1976. Layard’s extralimital records in his Birds of South Africa and in the South African Museum. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 96: 75-80. Brooke, R.K. 1978. XIX Century Indian Ocean seabirds eggs in the South African Museum. Bull. Anthony Cheke 79 Bull. BiO:GeZ00 ini 2k) Brit. Orn. Cl. 98: 75-80. Brooke, R.K. 1981. Layard’s bird hunting visit to Tromelin or Sandy Island in December 1956. Atoll Res. Bull. 255: 73-82. Cheke, A.[S.] 1982. Les noms créoles des oiseaux dans les iles francophones de l’Océan Indien Institut International des Ethnosciences, Paris. 63pp. Cheke, A.S. & Lawley, J.C. 1983. Biological history of Agalega, with special reference to birds and other land vertebrates. Afol/ Res. Bull. 273: 65-108. Cheke, A.S. 1987. An ecological history of the Mascarene Islands, with particular reference to extinctions and introductions of land vertebrates. Pp. 5-89 in Diamond, A.W. (ed.) Studies of Mascarene Island Birds . Cambridge Univ. Press. Feare, C.J. 1978. The decline of booby (Sulidae) populations in the western Indian Ocean. Biol. Conserv. 14: 295-305. Gardyne, A. 1846. The shipwreck of the bark Trio at Rodrigues . MS, ed. & pub. n.d. (c.1999) by J.Brouard, Mauritius. 6Spp. Griffiths, O. 1994. A review of the land snails of Rodrigues Island (Indian Ocean) with notes on their status. J. Conchol., Lond. 35: 157-166. Gruchet, H. 1976. Capture d’un fou du Cap, Sula capensis Lichtenstein, prés des cdtes de la Réunion. Info Nature, Ile Réunion 14: 49-50 Gueého, J. & Staub, [J.J.] F. 1983. Observations botaniques et ornithologiques a l’atoll d’Agaléga. Proc. Roy. Soc. Arts Sci., Mauritius 4(4): 16-110. Guerin, R. 1940-53. Faune ornithologique ancienne et actuelle des iles Mascareignes, Seychelles, Comores et des iles avoisinantes . 3 vols. General Printing & Stationery Co, Port Louis, Mauritius. Hartlaub, G. 1877. Die V dgel Madagascars und der benachbarten Inselgruppen . H.W.Schmidt, Halle. 425pp. La Caille, N.L., Abbé de. 1763. Journal historique du voyage faite au Cap de Bonne Espérance par feu M. Il’Abbé de la Caille . Guillyn, Paris. Layard, E.L. 1863. Ornithological notes from the antipodes. /bis 5: 241-250. Le Corre, M. 1996. The breeding seabirds of Tromelin Island (western Indian Ocean): population sizes, trends and breeding phenology. Ostrich 67: 155-169. Le Corre, M. 1999. Plumage polymorphism of red-footed boobies ( Su/a sula ) in the western Indian Ocean: an indicator of biogeographic isolation. J. Zool., Lond. 249: 411-415. Leguat de la Fougere, F. 1707 (‘1708’). Voyage et avantures de Francois Leguat et de ses compagnons en deux tles désertes des Indes Orientales . J.L. de Lorme, Amsterdam. 2 vols. [reprinted 1995: Editions de Paris, Paris. 269pp.] Lloyd, J.A. 1846. [letter read to the society on 2.10.1845 on the subject of Round & Serpent Islands.] P V. Soc. Hist. Nat., Ile Maurice 6.10.1842- 28.8.1846: 154-162. Meinertzhagen, R. 1912. On the birds of Mauritius. bis 9: 82-108. Milne-Edwards, A. 1873. Recherches sur la faune ornithologique ancienne des iles Mascareignes. Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool. 5(19)3: 1-31 & pp. 117-147 in Recherches sur la faune ornithologique éteinte des iles Mascareignes et de Madagascar . Masson, Paris. Milne-Edwards, A. 1975. Nouveaux documents sur l’époque de la disparition de la faune ancienne de Vile Rodrigue. Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool. 6(2)4: 1-20. Milne-Edwards, A. 1882. Recherches sur la faune des régions australes. 3. Bib. Ecole hautes études, Sci. Nat. 26(2): 1-64 & Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool. 6(13)4. Nelson, J.B. 1974. The distribution of Abbot’s Booby Sula abbotti, Ibis 116: 9-10. Nelson, J.B. 1978. The Sulidae - gannets and boobies . Oxford Univ. Press. Newlands, W.A. 1976. A piece of the rock - can seabirds survive on ‘uninhabited’ islands ? Animal Kingdom 79(3): 2-9. Newton, E. 1865. Notes of a visit to the island of Rodriguez. /bis n.s. 1: 146-153. Newton, E. & Gadow, H. 1893. On additional bones of the dodo and other extinct birds of Mauritius obtained by Mr Theodore Sauzier. Trans. Zool. Soc., Lond. 13: 281-302. Newton, R. 1956. Bird islands of Mauritius. /bis 98: 296-302. Newton, R. 1958. Ornithological notes on Mauritius and the Cargados Carajos archipelago. Proc. Anthony Cheke 80 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(1) Roy. Soc. Arts. Sci., Mauritius 2: 40-71. Oustalet, E. 1897. Notice sur la faune ornithologique ancienne et moderne des Iles Mascareignes, et en particulier de |’Ile Maurice, d’aprés des documents inédites. Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool. 8(3): 1- 128. Pingré, [A-] G. 1863. [MS on Rodrigues in the Bibliotheque Ste. Genevieve, Paris, partly published 1993 in: Courser Venus: fragments du journal de voyage de |’Abbé Pingré. Editions de 1’Océan Indien, Rose Hill, Mauritius. 123pp.] Pocklington, R. 1979. An oceanographic interpretation of seabird distributions in the Indian Ocean. Marine Biology 51: 9-21. Pourcelet, F. (ed. & commentary) 1994. Galéga (1827-1839), Poivre, Desroches, Saint-Joseph (1842- 1851). Mémoires d’Auguste Leduc, planteur dans 1’Océan Indien. Publications de |’ Université de Provence, Aix-en-Provence. 303pp. Probst, J-M. 1997. Animaux de la Réunion. Guide d’identification des oiseaux, mammiféres, reptiles et amphibiens . Azalées Editions, Sainte-Marie, Réunion. 167pp. Quoy [ ] & Gaimard P. 1824. Remarques sur les oiseaux pelagiens. Ch. 6 in Zoologie. Part 3 of Freycinet, L. de (ed.) Voyage autour du Monde... Pillet ainé, Paris. [many vols., variously bound] [the same text also published in Ann. Sci. Nat. 5: 123-155 (1825)] Rountree, F.R.G. 1951. Some aspects of bird life in Mauritius. Proc. Roy. Soc. Arts Sci., Mauritius1: 83-96. Rountree, F.R.G., Guérin, R., Pelte, S. & Vinson, J. 1952. Catalogue of the birds of Mauritius. Mauritius Inst. Bull. 3: 155-217. Safford, R.J. 1993. Serpent Island in 1992. Proc. Roy. Soc. Arts Sci., Mauritius 5(3): 33-39. Sharpe, R.B. 1879. Birds [of Rodrigues, collected by the Transit of Venus expedition]. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., Lond. 168: 459-469. Slater, H.H. n.d. (c. 1875). Notes on the birds of Rodrigues . MS in bound quarto vol. entitled Indian Ocean 3: Madagascar-Mascarene Islands (MSS). Newton Library, Cambridge University Zoology Dept. Staub, [J.J.] F. & Guého, J. 1968. The Cargados Carajos Shoals or St. Brandon: resources, avifauna and vegetation. Proc. Roy. Soc. Arts Sci., Mauritius 3: 7-46. Staub, [J.J.] F. 1973. Birds of Rodriguez Island. Proc. Roy. Soc. Arts Sci., Mauritius 4: 18-59. Staub, [J.J.] F. 1976. The birds of the Mascarenes & St. Brandon . Organisation Normale des Entreprises, Port Louis, Mauritius. 110pp. Stoddart, D.R. 1984. Breeding seabirds of the Seychelles and adjacent islands. Pp. 575-592 in Stoddart, D.R.(ed.) Biogeography & ecology of the Seychelles Islands . W. Junk, The Hague. 69lpp. Swinnerton, K., Chapman, M. & Vardapanaiken, B. 1996. A report on a visit to St. Brandon by the Mauritian Wildlife Fund, 22 Jan-07 Feb 1996 . [unpublished report] Mauritian Wildlife Foundation, Port Louis, Mauritius. Tafforet. 1726. Relation de lisle Rodrigue. [ed. & annotated by J.F. Dupon]. Proc. Roy. Soc. Arts Sci., Mauritius 4: 1-16 [complete text in the original orthography] Telfair, C. 1833. [letter dated 8 Nov. 1832 to the Zoological Society of London, on Rodrigues] Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. [1833]: 31-2. Temple, S.A. 1976. Observations of seabirds and shorebirds on Mauritius. Ostrich 47: 117-125. Vinson, J. 1950. L’Ile Ronde et l’Ile aux Serpents. Proc. Roy. Soc. Arts Sci., Mauritius 1: 32-52. Watson, G.E., Zusi, R.L. & Storer, R.E. 1963. Preliminary field guide to the birds of the Indian Ocean . Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. 214pp. Wheeler, A. 1997. Zoological collections in the early British Museum - The Zoological Society’s museum. Arch. Nat. Hist. 24: 89-126. Williams, A.J. & Rowlands, B.W. 1980. Seabirds of the Cargados Carajos Shoals, July-August 1971. Cormorant 8: 43-48. Address : 139 Hurst St., Oxford OX4 1HE, UK. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS Authors are invited to submit papers on topics relating to the broad themes of taxonomy and distribution of birds. Descriptions of new species of birds are especially welcome and will be given priority to ensure rapid publication, subject to successful passage through the normal peer review procedure; they may be accompanied by colour photographs or paintings. On submission, two copies of manuscripts, typed on one side of the paper, double spaced and with wide margins, should be sent to the Editor, Prof. Chris Feare, 2 North View Cottages, Grayswood Common, Haslemere, Surrey GU27 2DN, UK. Note that electronic versions are not required on first submission. Where appropriate half- tone photographs may be included and, where essential to illustrate important points, the Editor will consider the inclusion of colour plates (if possible, authors should obtain funding to support the inclusion of such colour plates). When papers are accepted, revisions should be returned to the Editor as both a hard copy, as outlined above, and also on a3.S” disk, as Word or Wordperfect files for PC. At this stage authors should send their email addresses, as completion of the editing process and proof reading will be undertaken electronically. Papers should follow the general style: Title — lower case, centred, bold Author(s) — lower case, centred, italics Introductory section without a heading Primary headings — lower case, centred, bold Secondary headings — left justified, lower case, italics, bold English names of animals should begin with capitals. Numerals — thousands separated by commas, e.g. 12,000 Units of measurement, SI. Space between values and unit, e.g. 12.1 g Statistical tests in the form: (723 = 3.12, P< 0.01). (X’?;=7.31, ns.) Citations to references in text: Author (Date); Author & Author (Date); if three or more authors — Author ef al. (Date); or (Author(s) Date) etc. References: Author, A. (or Author, A. & Author, B. etc.) Date. Title of paper. Title of journal in italics. Volume: pages. Author, A. Date. Title of book in italics. Publisher, place of publication. Author, A. Date. Title of paper/chapter. Jn Editor, A & Editor, B. (Eds.) Title of book/proceedings in italics. Pages. Publisher, place of publication. Address(es): addresses of authors, including emails if desired. Format for tables (to be typed on separate sheets at end of paper): TABLE n Description of table contents, including any abbreviations Column A Column B Row 1 Data Data Row 2 Data Data Legends for figures to be typed on one sheet at end of paper, in the form: Figure n. Text of legend, including key to symbols etc. On a separate sheet, authors should provide an abstract of no more then 150 words. This will be placed on the British Omithologists’ Club website. Authors are entitled to 10 free offprints (16 if 2 or more authors) of the pages in which papers appear. Additional offprints may be ordered when revisions of manuscripts are returned. Letters confirming acceptance of papers will be accompanied by a form on which authors must assign copyright of their paper to the British Ornithologists’ Club, and a reprint order form which gives approximate costs of additional offprints. Authors may be charged for any corrections that they request after their papers have been sent to the page-maker. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club ISSN 0007-1595 Edited by Professor Chris Feare Volume 121, Number 1, pages 1 - 80 CONTENTS CEUB NOTICES oc ccninesincegcesas Pacific Pees saucerrottei/cyanifrons 1000 m 100 km g : Ecuador = \ ? falRica i= Fig. 1: Geographical distribution of Saucerottia saucerrottei (Colombia, Costa Rica) and S. cyanifrons (Colombia), and type locality of S. alfaroana (Costa Rica), based on examined skins. A.-A. Weller 101 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) habitats, it is found mainly in the lowlands and submontane zone. The distribution of the subspecies can be summarized as follows: S. s. warscewiczi - N and N central Colombia; S. s. braccata - Andes of Merida, Venezuela; S. s. saucerrottei - Andean slopes and valleys of NW Colombia; S. s. hoffmanni: S Nicaragua to central Costa Rica. All races occupy well-defined geographical ranges, in particular the last form that is broadly isolated from the South American ones. S. s. warscewiczi seems to occur regularly along the western slope of the Eastern Andes to the mid Magdalena valley where it is probably sympatric with S. cyanifrons in the vicinity of Ocana, Norte de Santander (08°15’N, 73°20’ W; Fig. 1). Another sight record of S. saucerrottei from the upper Magdalena valley (Hilty & Brown 1986) may also refer to this race, perhaps indicating seasonal sympatry with S. cyanifrons. The status and taxonomy of S. s. hoffmanni (Cabanis & Heine, 1860) are controversial. Beginning with Gould (1861), several authors considered this taxon as a separate species and erroneously applied the name Saucerottia (or Amazilia) sophiae to it (e.g., Salvin 1892, Hartert 1900, Ridgway 1911). More recently, Stiles et al. (1989) regarded it an allospecies based on bioacoustic differences from S. saucerrottei. By contrast, the absence of significant habitat differences compared with the South American populations, as well as strong similarities in morphology (e.g., biometric data, see Table 1; tail colouration), may argue against specific distinctness. Morphology of Saucerottia cyanifrons and S. saucerrotte1 Like other members of the genus, S. cyanifrons and S. saucerrottei are medium-sized trochilids (c. 8-11 cm in length, 4-7 g) with relatively straight, blackish bills with TABLE 1. Biometric characters of Saucerottia cyanifrons and S. v. viridigaster compared with Eriocnemis incultus, based on examined skins; ranges (sample sizes), means, and standard deviations are given. Rectrix 5 length (mm) Rectrix 1 length (mm) Taxon Bill length Wing length (mm) (mm) S. cyanifrons 3: 18.0-21.5 (39) 50.0-57.5 (35) 25.0-28.5 (39) 30.0-35.5 (39) 19.7+0.8 SS) SHEN ED 26.7+£0.8 32.4+1.3 2: 18.5-22.5 (20) 49.5-54.0 (17) 25.5-28.0 (19) 29.5-32.5(16) 20 321A Sy aioe) eS, 26.9+0.8 31.041.0 E. incultus 3: 19.0 (1) 53.0-53.5 (2) 26.0-27.5 (2) 30.5-32.5 (2) 2: 20.0-20.5 (2) 51.5-54.0 (2) 26.0-28.0 (2) 28.5-29.5 (2) S. viridigaster 3: 18.0-21.0 (28) 48.5-56.5 (26) 24.5-28.5 (28) 26.0-33.5 (26) 19.7+0.9 53.1+1.8 26.8+1.0 31.1+1.6 2: 17.0-21.0 (25) 49.0-54.5 (19) 23.0-28.5 (24) 27.5-32.5 (24) 19.7#1.1 52.2+1.7 26.3+1.3 29.8+1.4 A. -A. Weller 102 Bull. B.O.C. ZOOPM200) reddish at the base of the lower mandible, and a golden green basic plumage with a glittering crown and gorget. The tail is Blue Black (90) in both species or steel- to violet-blue (~ Cyanine Blue, 74) in S. saucerrottei and slightly forked in each taxon. The discs of the undertail coverts either resemble in colouration the rectrices (S. s.) or vary from bluish to Olive-Brown (28, S. c.). Males of S. cyanifrons are most readily distinguished from S. saucerrottei by their deep blue instead of golden green glittering crown that becomes more turquoise towards the hindneck. In females and immature males, the turquoise colouration also extends to the crown area. Unlike S. saucerrottei, the uppertail coverts of S. cyanifrons show golden green feather bases and the undertail coverts have pronounced greyish- brown margins. Considering biometric characters (Fig. 2), I found no significant differences between the biogeographically closely related taxa S. cyanifrons and S. s. saucerrottei except in wing length (p < 0.01). S. s. hoffmanni differs strongly from the nominate race in several characters. Wings and innermost rectrices are significantly longer (p < 0.001) in hoffmanni whereas the bill is on average shorter (p < 0.001) than in S. s. saucerrottei. 2a 2b 23 60 oe e@ e aD = 58 = ° E21 ' ° E 56 ° ot: c 2s ’ DB 20 , Sd; : ° 5 e 2 = 19 m 52 x = = 18 ° ° = 50 e e 17 48 S.C. S.S.S. S.s.h. S.a. Se. S.S.S. S.s.h. S.a. 2c 2d 30 37 — e =—= E 29 : 35 % =— e — =S 28 s 33 ’ e e be oD e e oH & 27 ' 5 31 * - w e 26 a 29 So o ° = 25 e ‘ e & 27 és 24 25 Sic S.s.S. S.s.h. S.a. S.c. S.Ss.S. S.s.h. S.a. Fig. 2: Biometric characters of Saucerottia cyanifrons (S. c., n = 27), S. s. saucerrottei (S.s.s., 0 = 45), S. saucerrottei hoffmanni (S.s.h., n = 34), and the type specimen of S. alfaroana (S.a.), based on examined skins; means, standard deviations and ranges are shown. Note that the two wing length measurements for S. alfaroana are due to different sizes of the left and right wing (see also text). A.-A. Weller 103 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) Distribution and morphology of Saucerottia alfaroana The type locality and only collecting site of S. alfaroana is \ocated at the southern slope of Volcan Miravalles in Cordillera de Guanacaste, northwestern Costa Rica, where the bird “was taken at a pretty high point“ (Underwood 1896: 441; according to the author, altitude between c. 450-600 m: 432). Unfortunately, Underwood did not record the habitat, and therefore we have no information whether it was collected in forest or not. AOU (1983) and Stiles et a/. (1989) considered that S. alfaroana is unlikely to result from hybridization of any two local species occuring at Volcan Miravalles. Moreover, the type specimen exhibits certain plumage characters either typical of all taxa of Saucerottia, or at least found in several congeners. The underparts have a glittering dark golden green colouration. Tail and tail coverts differ strongly from dorsal and ventral plumage, respectively. The uppertail coverts are dark violet, thus contradicting Underwood (1896) who described this character as in S. s. hoffmanni (where the colouration is actually steel-blue). Likewise, the discs of undertail coverts have a violet-blue shine and whitish margins. The rectrices are shining deep steel- blue, a character also present in S. cyanifrons and some subspecies of S. saucerrottei (S. s. braccata, S. s. hoffmanni). The tail bifurcation (6 mm) is similar to that of male S. cyanifrons. Nevertheless, S. alfaroana exhibits unique plumage features that are not referable to any other congener. The type has an iridescent turquoise-bluish cap, less well- defined than in S. cyanifrons, and a bluish-green back, the latter very different from other representatives of the genus which either show an inconspicuous greenish or a strongly bronzish to copperish back. For example, the latter colour pattern occurs in S. saucerrottei hoffmanni as well as in several races of S. edward (Panama) and S. cupreicauda (Pantepui region of Venezuela, Guyana, Brazil). S. alfaroana was initially sexed as a female (as indicated on the specimen label), most probably due to its crown colouration that resembles female S. cyanifrons (but here reduced). However, other plumage characters indicate that the type was wrongly sexed. First, the absence of conspicuous whitish subterminal bars in the chin and gorget (as present in females) is characteristic of males of all Saucerottia taxa. Second, biometric data of the wings and rectrices are referable to both male S. cvanifrons and S. saucerrottei although on average they are closer to those found in the latter species (Fig. 2). In particular, the length of wings (left one: 56.5 mm, right one: 54 mm; difference possibly due to preparation) and of the outermost rectrices (r5) in alfaroana almost matches the mean values found for S. s. hoffmanni (Fig. 2b-c). As an exception, the bill is longer than in males of S. cyanifrons and those of S. s. hoffmanni but falls just within the upper range of male S. s. saucerrottei (Fig. 2a). Taxonomy and morphology of Eriocnemts incultus The holotype of E. incultus (AMNH collection + 38888) was first described by Elliot (1889) and placed in the genus Eriocnemis, distant from Saucerottia species. Based A.-A. Weller 104 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) on colour differences from other Eriocnemis species, Salvin & Hartert (1895) doubted its generic position. Among subsequent taxonomists, Simon (1897, 1921), Hartert (1900), Peters (1945), and Greenway (1978) included EF. incultus in the nominate race of S. viridigaster. As indicated by Simon (1897), the subsequently described taxon Saucerottia nunezi, originating from Colombia (Boucard 1892), should be regarded as synonymous to E. incultus. Considering morphological aspects, the main character of E. incultus and S. nunezi is the dull body plumage which can be generally described as Sepia Brown (119), becoming slightly lighter towards the rump and belly (119A; c.f Greenway 1978). Uppertail coverts and rectrices are Jet Black (89), the undertail coverts have brownish centres with greyish-white fringes. The bill is blackish with a paler base of the lower mandible, fairly straight, and medium-long (Table 1). Altogether, these characters indicate that E. incultus represents a melanistic form of a Saucerottia species (e.g., Simon 1897, 1921; Hartert 1900). Contrary to previous classifications, this study suggests that E. incultus is probably a melanistic variation of S. cvanifrons rather than of S. viridigaster. All five E. incultus specimens examined are Bogota trade skins and their collection site is unknown. As a result, conclusions on the taxonomic identity can be drawn only from details in colouration. Males and females show a very dull greenish-black cap, resembling in shape the dark violet blue one in S. cyanifrons (e.g., extending to the neck in male incultus). As typical for Saucerottia, females have also whitish to greyish subterminal bars in the gorget. Morphometrically, FE. incultus is neither distinct irom S. cyanifrons nor from S. v. viridigaster (Table). Another aberrant specimen of S. cyanifrons (ZFMK # 7207), labeled as a melanistic variety, probably male, closely resembles in morphology E. incultus but reveals slight differences in detail. The wings are shorter than in males of the latter whereas the other mensural data almost agree with them (Table 1); the body plumage is Sepia coloured (119) with a deep Vinaceous (most similar to Color 4) shine on the gorget and lower throat, becoming very dark purplish towards the flanks and belly (see also Simon 1897); and the uppertail coverts and rectrices are purplish black. The undertail coverts show brownish centres, similar to E. incultus, thus differing from typical representatives of S. cyanifrons. Additionally, this bird has an almost blackish cap of a similar extension as in males of S. cyanifrons and E. incultus. Speciation model in Saucerottia The current distribution and plumage patterns of S. cyanifrons and S. saucerrottei suggest that both taxa are most likely derived from a common ancestor and differentiated northwest of the Andes, thus being of recent, probably Pleistocene origin (Weller 1998). Moreover, based on recent habitat preferences it is postulated that S. saucerrottei originated in the Caribbean lowland dry forest of present northwestern Colombia whereas S. cyanifrons evolved in the submontane, more humid forest zone, presumably along the eastern Andean slope of the Magdalena valley. Subsequently, populations of S. saucerrottei colonized not only central and A.-A. Weller 105 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) western Andean valleys (S. s. saucerrottei), the Andes of Mérida (S. s. braccata), and the Santa Marta region (S. s. warscewiczi) but also the Central American land- bridge where S. s. hoffmanni could establish along the volcanic belt raising from the Pacific lowlands of Costa Rica and Nicaragua. Similar to other submontane Andean forest birds (e.g.. Haffer 1967, 1970), refuges may have played an important role effecting intrageneric speciation and subspeciation events in Saucerottia. Based on plumage and morphometric patterns and biogeographical evidence, S. alfaroana most likely represents a separate species, with closer affinities to S. saucerrottei (Walters, pers. comm.). The former occurrence of S. alfaroana is most likely referable to the invasion of S. saucerrottei descendants than to any westward- directed spread of S. cvanifrons. Under the first assumption, it remains speculative whether isolation events or altitudinal segregation split the Costa Rican population of S. saucerrottei into the precursors of S. s. hoffmanni and S. alfaroana, or alfaroana originated subsequently from the hoffmanni population. Obviously, due to interspecific exclusion the once connected population of S. cvanifrons was disrupted by S. saucerrottei populations invading the central Andean valleys, leaving back an isolated subpopulation of the former taxon in the uppermost Cauca valley. Against this competitive background and in view of ecological adaptations, it is much less plausible that a hypothetical precursor of S. alfaroana derived from S. cvanifrons that once invaded the volcanic belt of Costa Rica across the Caribbean and Panamanian lowlands. Considering morphological affinities, the similar crown colouration of S. alfaroana and S. cyanifrons could be interpreted as a “leapfrog* pattern (cf. Rensch 1929, Remsen 1984), interrupted by the less contrasted bronzy greenish crown of S. saucerrottei. Moreover, the latter species shares several phenotypic features with S. cyanifrons and the east Andean congeners S. viridigaster and S. tobaci, e.g., the dark bluish to violet tail and the darkish golden green, iridescent body plumage. In terms of phylogeny, both colour patterns can be considered as plesiomorphic intrageneric characters, indicating that the evolutionary centre of the genus was located in northwestern South America ( Weller 2000). However, for biogeographical reasons the western Andean and the eastern Andean species group are considered to have evolved independently (Weller 1998). Therefore, each of them represents a superspecies, with the western one comprising S. saucerrottei, S. cvanifrons, and perhaps the extinct S. alfaroana (in view of previous allopatry or parapatry with S. s. hofjmanni), and the eastern one consisting of S. viridigaster, S. cupreicauda, and S. tobaci (Weller 2000). Due to their proposed common monophyletic origin, allopatric occurrence, and ecological replacement, both groups may form a second order superspecies sensu Haffer (1986). Acknowledgements I thank the curators and scientific staff of the following institutions for assistance and support during my studies: American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), New York; The Academy of Natural Sciences (ANSP), Philadelphia; Field Museum of Natural History (FMNH), Chicago: Natural History Museum of L.A. County (LACMNH), Los Angeles; Museum of Zoology, Louisiana A.-A. Weller 106 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) State University (LSUMZ), Baton Rouge; Museum of Comparative Zoology (MCZ), Cambridge; The Natural History Museum (BMNH), Tring; Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg (SM), Frankfurt/ Main; National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution (NMNH), Washington D.C.; Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology (WFVZ), Camarillo; Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum A. Koenig (ZFMK), Bonn. This study profited from the following grants and awards: Frank Chapman Collection Study Grant (AMNH), Jessup Award (ANSP), Field Museum Grant, Ernst Mayr Grant (MCZ), and Smithsonian Short-term Visitor Grant (USNM). I am grateful for critical comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript by M. Walters, BMNH, and K.-L. Schuchmann, ZFMK. References: American Ornithologists‘ Union (AOU) 1983. Check-list of North American birds, 6th edition. Allen Press, Inc. Lawrence, Kansas. Berlioz, J. 1933. Révision critique des Trochilidés du genre Saucerottia (1) Bp. Oiseau 3 (n.s.): 793-807. Bonaparte, C. L. J. L. 1850. Saucerottia. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sciences 30: 381. Bourcier, J. 1843. Oiseaux-Mouches nouveaux. Rev. Zool. 6: 99-104. Boucard, A. 1892. Genera of humming birds. Humming Bird 2: 1-56. Cabanis, J. & Heyne, F. 1860. Museum Ornithologicum Heineanum, Theil 3. Halberstadt. Carriker, M. A., Jr. 1910. An annotated list of the birds of Costa Rica, including Cocos Island. Ann. Carnegie Mus. 6: 314-915. Delattre, A. & Bourcier, J. 1846. Oiseaux-Mouches nouveaux. Rev. Zool. 9: 305-311. Elliot, D. G. 1889. Descriptions of supposed new species of hummingbirds belonging to the genera Amazilia and Eriocnemis. Auk 6: 209-210. Gould, J. 1861. An introduction to the Trochilidae, or family of humming-birds. Taylor & Frances, London. Greenway, J. C., Jr. 1978. Type specimens of birds in the American Museum of Natural History. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 161: 1-305. Haffer, J. 1967. Speciation in Colombian forest birds west of the Andes. Amer. Mus. Novit. 2294: EST: Haffer, J. 1970. Entstehung und Ausbreitung nord-andiner Bergvogel. Zool. Jahrb. Syst. 97: 301- 33.7% Haffer, J. 1986. Superspecies and species limits in vertebrates. Z. Zool. Syst. Evol. Forsch. 24: 169-190. Hartert, E. 1900. Trochilidae. In: Reichenow, A. (ed.), Das Tierreich. 9. Lieferung. Deutsche Zoologische Gesellschaft, Berlin. Hilty, S. L. & Brown, W. L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Lesson, R. P. 1843. Echo du Monde Savant 10, col. 757. Johnsgard, P. A. 1997. The hummingbirds of North America, 2nd edition. Christopher Helm, A & C Black. London. Munves, J. 1975. Birds of a highland clearing in Cundinamarca, Colombia. Auk 92: 307-321. Nicéforo Maria, H. 1940. Los Troquilidos del Museo del Instituto de La Salle. Rev. Acad. Colomb. Cienc. Bogota 3: 314-322. Paynter, R. A., Jr. 1997. Ornithological gazetteer of Colombia, 2nd edition. Museum of Comparative Zoology. Cambridge, Mass. Peters, J. L. 1945. Check-list of birds of the world, Vol. 5. Harvard Univ. Press. Cambridge, Mass. Remsen, J. V., Jr. 1984. High incidence of “leapfrog” patterns of geographical variation in Andean birds: implication for the speciation process. Science 224: 171-173. Rensch, B. 1929. Das Prinzip der geographischen Rassenkreise und das Problem der Artbildung. Borntrager. Berlin. Ridgway, R. 1911. The birds of North and Middle America, Vol. 5. - Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus. 50. A.-A. Weller 107 BU eBrOrG> 2001 I27) Salvin, O. 1892. Catalogue of the Picaric in the collection of the British Museum. Upupe, Trochili. 1-433. Trustees of the British Museum (Natural History), London. Sibley, C. G. & Monroe, B. L., Jr. 1990. Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the world. Yale Univ. Press. New Haven. Simon, E. 1897. Catalogue des espéces actuellement connues de la famille des Trochilides, Vol. 8. Paris. Simon, E. 1921. Histoire naturelle des Trochilidés (synopsis and catalogue). Encylopédie Roret, L. Mulo. Paris. Slud, P. 1964. The birds of Costa Rica. Distribution and ecology. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 128. Smithe, F B. 1975. Naturalist‘s color guide. American Museum of Natural History. New York. Snow, D. W. & Snow, B. K. 1980. Relationships between hummingbirds and flowers in the Andes of Colombia. Bull. Br. Mus. nat. Hist. (Zool.) 38: 105-139. Stiles, F G., Skutch, A. F & Gardner, D. 1989. A guide to the birds of Costa Rica. Christopher Helm, Bromley. London. Underwood, C. F. 1896. A list of birds collected or observed on the lower, southern, and southern western slopes slopes of the Volcano of Miravalles and on the lower lands extending to Bagaces in Costa Rica, with a few observations on their habits. /bis 38: 431-451. Warren, R. L. M. 1966. Type-specimens in the British Museum (Natural History), Vol. 1. Non- Passerines. Trustees of the British Museum (Natural History). London. Weller, A.-A. 1998. Biogeographie, geographische Variation und Taxonomie der Gattung Amazilia (Aves, Trochilidae). Unpubl. Ph.D. thesis, Rhein. Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitat. Bonn. Weller, A.-A. 1999. Genus Saucerottia. 602-605. In: del Hoyo, J., A. Elliot & J. Sargatal (eds.), Handbook of the birds of the world, Vol. 5. Lynx Edicions. Barcelona. Weller, A.-A. 2000. A new hummingbird subspecies from southern Bolivar, Venezuela, with notes on biogeography and taxonomy of the Saucerottia viridigaster-cupreicauda species group. Ornitol. Neotrop. 11: 143-154. Address: A.-A. Weller, Research Group “Biology and Phylogeny of Neotropical Birds“, Ornithology, Alexander Koenig Research Institute and Museum of Zoology, Adenauerallee 160, 53113 Bonn, Germany. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Brood hosts of Oriental Cuckoo Cuculus saturatus in Sabah, Malaysia by Robert G. Moyle, Alim Biun, Benedict Butit & David Sumpongol Received 26 April 2000 Wells & Becking (1975) and Becking (1975) used several lines of evidence to examine the specific affinity of a race of Cuculus resident in Malaya, Sumatra, Java, and the Lesser Sundas. Plumage, bill and eggshell structure, vocalizations, and brood hosts indicated that this race (/epidus) was a subspecies of Oriental Cuckoo Cuculus saturatus and not a subspecies of Lesser Cuckoo Cuculus poliocephalus, as previously believed. Because of incomplete data, a Bornean form (insulindae) was Robert G. Moyle et al. 108 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) only tentatively transferred from C. poliocephalus to C. saturatus. Wells (1982) used vocalizations from Mt. Kinabalu, Sabah, to support this decision. At that time no brood hosts were known for the Bornean form. During May 1999 at Kinabalu National Park, the authors observed juvenile Cuculus cuckoos on a nest or being tended by host parents. The brood hosts in all observations were either Mountain Leaf Warbler Phylloscopus trivirgatus or Yellow-breasted Warbler Seicercus montis. All observations were within | km of the park headquarters and c. 1,600 m above sea level. On 20 April 1999, a Mountain Leaf Warbler nest was found that contained one large brown-spotted, chalk-white cuckoo egg (19 x 10 mm) in addition to two of the host’s eggs. Although an egg with these dimensions is extremely long and narrow, C. saturatus eggs are quite variable in size and shape. Becking (1975) measured six eggs of C. s. Jepidus and found average dimensions of 21.1 x 13.7 mm. However, Madoc (1956) collected two eggs at Fraser’s Hill in Malaysia that were much closer to the dimensions we observed (19.0 x 11.8 mm and 18.2 x 11.3 mm). The nest was a shallow cave in a trail embankment that measured 39 cm in diameter, 35.5 cm in height and was lined with dried leaves. All three eggs were present until 3 May 1999, when the cuckoo egg hatched and the other two eggs were found on the ground near the nest. The juvenile was dark brown, weighed 3 g, and was fed by at least one Mountain Leaf Warbler. By 17 May, the juvenile was covered in a grey. plumage with dark banding and was identified as Cuculus saturatus. The juvenile had fledged by 22 May. Several sightings of Mountain Leaf Warblers feeding fledgling cuckoos in the vicinity of the nest in late May were presumed to be this individual. When Yellow-breasted Warblers were observed as brood hosts, single fledglings were being fed by a pair of adults. These observations occurred on 25, 26, and 28 May. The juvenile cuckoo sat motionless for long periods of time. Upon return of a host parent to the area the juvenile began a thin, high begging call and was quickly fed. We are uncertain if the three separate observations of Yellow-breasted Warbler as a brood host are independent because the sightings were within a four day span and within 0.5 km of each other. During late May in Kinabalu Park, adult Oriental Cuckoos were quite abundant. Individuals were observed on two occasions and the “boop, boop-boop” calls described by Wells (1982) were heard throughout the day. The plumage of the juvenile cuckoos is not consistent with any other cuckoos in the mountains of Borneo and agrees with Becking’s (1975) description of C. s. lepidus. The underparts of the Kinabalu birds were barred, not streaked. The upperparts were dark with lighter bars, more brownish than grey on the wings. The entire head was barred to varying degrees, most distinctly on the crown. The crown feathers were often puffed out, making the head appear quite large. There was no plumage eye-ring, but the eyelid colour was lighter than surrounding plumage. The tail was short, lightly barred and tipped with white. Tarsi and toes were a light pinkish orange and irides were dark brown. The gape on the nestling was a bright reddish orange. Large Hawk Cuckoo Hierococcyx sparverioides is the only other cuckoo found close to this altitude in the Bornean mountains that is liable to cause identification problems Robert G. Moyle et al. 109 Bull. BIOE.52001 127) (Sheldon et a/. 2001). However, Large Hawk Cuckoo juveniles have streaked, not barred, underparts. Photographs of the Oriental Cuckoos on the Mountain Leaf Warbler nest and being fed by Yellow-breasted Warblers were taken by RGM and support this identification. Mountain Leaf Warbler was mentioned as a brood host for C. s. lepidus (Becking 1975) from Java, and from Borneo by Hitoshi et a/. (1996). There has been one other description of a juvenile cuckoo close to Kinabalu Park Headquarters (Phillipps 1970). This bird was identified tentatively as either a Large Hawk Cuckoo or Hodgson’s Hawk Cuckoo Hierococcyx fugax. The description (speckled black and white) is vague, but it is conceivable that this was in fact a juvenile Oriental Cuckoo. Mountain Leaf Warbler and Yellow-breasted Warbler are not unexpected brood hosts for a resident race of Oriental Cuckoo on Borneo. Phylloscopus and Seicercus warblers are well known as hosts for Oriental Cuckoo throughout its range (Table 1). In contrast, although a variety of hosts has been reported (see Payne 1997), Lesser Cuckoo generally parasitizes the nests of Ceftia species. The two host species that we observed are the only representatives of their genera that breed in montane forests of Borneo. Sunda Bush Warbler Cettia vulcania 1s resident above 1,500 m on Mt. Kinabalu, but there are no records of it being the object of nest parasitism. These observations of brood hosts add further support to the Wells (1982) and Wells and Becking (1975) decision to place this Bornean cuckoo as a subspecies of C. saturatus. Acknowledgements RGM is grateful to the Malaysian EPU, Sabah Parks Department and Kinabalu Park for permission to carry out research. In particular, Datuk Lamri Ali, Francis Liew, Dr. Jamili Nais, and Maklarin TABLE el Brood Hosts of Oriental Cuckoo and Lesser Cuckoo Taxon Region Hosts Source Cuculus poliocephalus' Himalayas, Myanmar Cettia fortipes Becking (1981) Sikkim Cettia pallidipes Becking (1981) Amur, Japan Cettia diphone Neufeldt (1971, in Becking 1981) Yamashina (1961) Cuculus saturatus Kashmir Phylloscopus occipitalis Becking (1981) Himalayas Phylloscopus reguloides Becking (1981) C s. lepidus Malaya Seicercus castaniceps Madoc (1956) Java Seicercus grammiceps Becking (1975) Phylloscopus trivirgatus Becking (1975) C. s. insulindae Borneo Seicercus montis this paper Phylloscopus trivirgatus this paper Hitoshi et al. (1996) I see Payne (1997) for other possible hosts. Robert G. Moyle et al. 110 Bull. B.O.C. 20015 124@) Lakim were very helpful in planning the research program. Helpful comments on the manuscript were provided by F. H. Sheldon, C. Feare, and D. R. Wells. RGM was supported by the American Ornithologists’ Union and the LSU Museum of Natural Science. References: Becking, J. H. 1975. New evidence of the specific affinity of Cuculus lepidus Muller. Ibis 117: 275-84. Becking, J. H. 1981. Notes on the breeding of Indian cuckoos. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 78: 201- D3 le Hitoshi, N., Asama, S, & Biun, A. 1996. A photographic guide to the birds of Mt. Kinabalu, Borneo. Bun-ichi Sogoshuppan, Tokyo. Madoc, G. C. 1956. Observations on two Malayan Cuckoos. Malay. Nat. J. 10: 97-103. Payne, R. M. 1997. Family Cuculidae (Cuckoos). Pp. 508-610 in: del Hoyo, J., Elliot, A., & Sargatal J. eds. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 4 Sandgrouse to Cuckoos. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Phillipps, Q. 1970. Some important nesting notes from Sabah. Sabah Soc. J. 5: 141-144. Sheldon, F. H., Moyle, R. G., & Kennard, J. 2001. Ornithology of Sabah: history, gazetteer, annotated checklist, and bibliography. Ornith. Monogr. 52: 1-278. Wells, D. R. 1982. A confirmation of the specific relations of Cuculus saturatus indulindae Hartert. Bull, Brit. Orn, Cl, 102: 62-3. Wells, D. R. & Becking, J. H. 1975. Vocalizations and status of Little and Himalayan Cuckoos, Cuculus poliocephalus and C. saturatus, in Southeast Asia. /bis 117: 366-71. Yamashina, Y. 1961. Birds of Japan. A field guide. Tokyo News Service Ltd., Tokyo. Addresses: Robert G. Moyle, Department of Biological Sciences and Museum of Natural Science, Louisiana State University, 119 Foster Hall, Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA, e-mail: rmoyle@Isu.edu; Alim Biun, Benedict Butit, and David Sumpongol, Research and Education Division, Sabah Parks, P.O. Box 10626, 88806 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 A review of the neotropical nightjar species group Caprimulgus maculosus, C. nigrescens and C. whitely1 by Fohan Ingels Received 2 May 2000 Three South American nightjars, the Cayenne Nightjar Caprimulgus maculosus, the Blackish Nightjar C. nigrescens and the Roraiman Nightjar C. whitelyi, form a species group. The Blackish Nightjar is widespread throughout the Amazon basin and the Guianan plateau. Ingels & Ribot (1983), Ingels et al. (1984) and Roth (1985) have documented its life history in Suriname and southwestern Brazil respectively. Both the other nightjars have a very limited distribution (Cleere 1998). The Cayenne Nightjar is known from one specimen only, a male collected in French Guiana. The Roraiman Nightjar is restricted to the subtropical zone of the Pantepui region in the border area Fohan Ingels 111 Bull, B.O-E. 2001 121@) of Venezuela, Guyana and Brazil. Nothing is known about the natural history of the Cayenne Nightjar, and knowledge of the Roraiman Nightjar is limited to its habitat choice (Meyer de Schauensee & Phelps Jr. 1978). This paper presents a review of the nomenclature, physical characters and preferred habitats of these closely related Caprimulgus species. Material C. maculosus: | examined the only known specimen of this species, the holotype (CMNH 60854, male), collected by Samuel M. Klages at Saut Tamanoir, French Guiana (05° 09’ N, 53° 45’ W) on the Mana River, c. 10 km above its confluence with the Kokioko (or Cockioco) River and now in the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, U.S.A. I compared it with eight male C. nigrescens specimens in the same collection. One of these (CMNH 61919) was collected at the same locality where the C. maculosus specimen was collected. During 24 August —4 September 1974 and 1- 3 May 1979, I visited the coastal area between Saint-Laurent-du-Maroni and Cayenne where habitats similar to those at Saut Tamanoir are found. C. nigrescens: | examined 166 specimens (85 males, 74 females, 7 unsexed) in the following museums: Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, Los Angeles, U.S.A. (4); Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, U.S.A. (14); American Museum of Natural History, New York, U.S.A. (102); Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum, Leiden, Holland (18) and The Natural History Museum, Tring, U.K. (28). I spent 425 hours studying C. nigrescens in the field in Suriname (Ingels & Ribot 1983) during three visits of four weeks each (6 April — 5 May 1979, 30 March — 28 April 1980 and 12 October — 8 November 1981). C. whitelyi: | examined the male holotype (BMNH 1888.8.1.96) and the female (BMNH 1888.8.1.97) described and mentioned by Salvin (1885) and now in The Natural History Museum (Tring, U.K.). In addition, I received mensural data of eight specimens (4 males, 4 females) in the Coleccion Ornithologica Phelps (Caracas, Venezuela) and details of three spirit specimens in the National Museum of Natural History (Washington, U.S.A.). Results and Discussion Nomenclature In the original description of Cayenne Nightjar, Nyctipolus (now Caprimulgus) maculosus, Todd (1920) presented no etymological grounds for his choice of the specific name maculosus, meaning « speckled » or « spotted », from the Latin maculae = « spots ». Whether the name refers to the white markings in the wings and tail, or to the distinct, broad, blackish mesial streaks on the pileum, is not clear. C. nigrescens Fohan Ingels 112 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) and Antrostomus (now Caprimulgus) whitelyi had been described earlier by Cabanis (1848) and Salvin (1885) respectively. White markings in the wings and tail are found in males of all three species, whereas distinct black mesial streaks on the pileum are typical for C. maculosus only (see Description). The Blackish Nightjar was first collected in 1842, by Robert Schomburgh, on the lower Essequibo River, Guyana, at 06° 59’ N, 58° 23’ W. It is indeed the darkest coloured of all neotropical caprimulgids. However the choice by Cabanis (1848) of the specific name nigrescens, i.e. the present participle of the Latin verb nigrescere = « to become black », should rather have been nigricans, 1.e. the present participle of the Latin verb nigricare = « to be black(ish) ». The first specimens of the Roraiman Nightjar (Roraima Nightjar in Meyer de Schauensee 1966) were collected in 1883 by Henry Whitely on the Cerro (or Monte = hill, mount) Roraima (Estado Bolivar, Venezuela; 05° 12’ N, 60° 44’ W). This is a steep- sided tabletop mountain in the highlands at the junction of Venezuela, Guyana and Brazil (Paynter 1982). Salvin (1885) named the species after the collector, Henry Whitely. The correct specific name is therefore whitelyi (Peters 1940, Meyer de Schauensee & Phelps Jr. 1978, Howard & Moore 1980), not whiteleyi (Meyer de Schauensee 1970, Gruson 1976, Clements 1978, Walters 1980) or whitleyi (Meyer de Schauensee 1966). Description The mean wing chord lengths (mm) of males are 139 (N = 1) for C. maculosus, 138 (132-141, S.D.=3, N= 18) for C. nigrescens and 156 (154-162, S.D.=4, N =4) for C. whitelyi. Total body length of C. maculosus and of C. nigrescens is c. 20 cm; C. whitelyi is slightly longer, c. 22 cm. The cryptic colour patterns of caprimulgids are hard to describe. Personal experience, with C. nigrescens specimens in museums and with live C. nigrescens in the field, shows that the extent to which the white throat patch is visible depends largely on the preparation of the skin, or on the live bird’s posture e.g. roosting, incubating, excited. The “large white patch on either side of the lower throat” and the “very narrow, indistinct tawny collar, barred brown” of C. maculosus (Cleere 1998) is largely a consequence of preparation of the unique skin. The elongated form of skins “enlarges” the throat and neck areas and exaggerates the white throat patch and the tawny collar. In the field these distinctive characters would hardly be visible in a roosting C. maculosus. Males of all three species have white markings in the wings and tail but the locations vary between species (Table 1). In primaries, the white patches are situated where the outer web broadens. C. whitelyi has markings in the form of a narrow bar, rather than spots as in C.nigrescens and C.maculosus. In rectrices, the white patches are found at the tips. Although there is some variation in the amount of white in the tail and in the wings, probably an age-related phenomenon (Ingels & Ribot 1982), the general pattern is species related. Fohan Ingels [3 Ball. B.O.C. 2001 124) Females of C.nigrescens and C.whitelyi have the same general colour pattern as males, except for the pattern of wing and tail patches. The female of C. maculosus appears to be unknown, so whether she has a pattern of white or rufous-buff wing and tail markings is therefore uncertain. An unidentified nightjar was caught by hand and later released by Dujardin (pers. comm. 1986) in 1982, near Saiil (03° 35’ N, 53° 12’ W) in the interior of French Guiana. The 10th and 9th primaries had a yellowish- brown and a yellowish-white patch in the outer and inner web respectively. The 8th and 7th primaries had a whitish patch on both outer and inner web. The tail showed whitish tips to both the 4th and 3rd rectrices. Although Dujardin first thought this bird to be a male C. nigrescens with an aberrant pattern of yellowish-white and yellowish-brown wing patches, he later referred to the bird he caught as having been a female C. maculosus (Collar et al. 1992). However, nightjars generally moult their primaries descendantly, i.e. outwards, and immature males often have tawny, buff or buffish-white primary markings instead of the white markings of adults. Thus the unidentified nightjar could have been a moulting young male C.maculosus having TABLE 1 Pattern of white wing and tail patches in male Caprimulgus maculosus, C. nigrescens and C. whitelyi. Primaries and rectrices are counted from inside outwards. A patch is present when indicated with an x. C. maculosus C. nigrescens C. whitelyi N=1 N = 29 N=4 WING PATCHES Primaries Web 10th Outer xX Inner XxX X 9th Outer XxX XxX Inner x XxX xX 8th Outer xX XxX XxX Inner xX 4 xX 7th Outer Xx XxX Inner D4 Xx TATL. TIPS Rectrices Web 5th Outer xX Inner X XxX 4th Outer xX X Inner X X xX 3rd Outer xX XxX Inner X xX 2nd Outer XxX X Inner xX Fohan Ingels 114 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) white adult markings in the moulted 7th and 8th primaries and yellowish immature ones in the unmoulted 9th and 10th primaries. The females of C. nigrescens have no white markings at all in the wings and tail, while the females of C. whitelyi have a pattern of narrow tawny bars in the primaries and whitish tips to the tail, similar to that of males. Habitats C. maculosus: a male only of this species was collected. No details about the habitat in which the type specimen was found are known. Dujardin’s presumed female was caught on the road from the village to the aerodrome of Saul in typical C. nigrescens habitat (Pelletier pers. comm.). The Mana River, with many boulder-strewn rapids, is a river typical for the Guianan plateau. There are two types of habitat in the vicinity : an “open habitat” along the river itself, and a nearby “forest habitat”. The open habitat is provided by large boulders and sand banks in the river, by sandy or stony riverbanks and by rare small savannah-like areas on the river banks. The forest habitat is formed by closed- canopy forest with scarce undergrowth, and with tree-fall openings and sometimes small, man-made clearings. Although caprimulgids are known to occur wherever appropriate habitat occurs and to invade newly created surroundings that meet their low demands of suitability (Ingels et al. 1999), they normally occupy species-specific habitats. The two habitats described above where C. maculosus can be expected are found throughout French Guiana and the Guianan plateau. It is therefore surprising that only one specimen has ever been collected and that the species has not yet been observed in the field. The grounds for Meyer de Schauensee’s statement (1970) that the preferred habitat of this species is “dry open country” are unknown and probably speculative. C. nigrescens: this nightjar prefers roadsides and sandy, gravelly or rocky open places in three particular biotopes: savannahs, forests and rivers. It is less common along sandy roads in more open savannahs with scattered bushes and more common along gravelly laterite roads through forest. It is also common on rocks or sandy islands in, and sandy banks along, rivers and on large granite outcrops in forests. C. nigrescens has two fundamental requirements to its habitat: it must be open and it must have scattered low vegetation and bushes, close to which it likes to roost and breed. It is therefore not found in grassy or densely overgrown savannahs or in the interior of primary or secondary forest. This nightjar is widespread throughout the tropical part of the Amazon basin wherever appropriate habitat is available. It is a most successful coloniser, invading newly created surroundings that meet its low demands of habitat suitability e.g. recently opened roads (Ingels & Ribot 1983) and airstrips (Dick et al. 1984). Klages collected both C. maculosus and C. nigrescens at or near Saut Tamanoir. Three specimens (CMNH 60854 of C. maculosus and CMNH 61919 and 62254 of C. Fohan Ingels BES Bull BeOzr€. 200Y 1202) nigrescens) prove that both species can occur at least in the same locality, but not necessarily in the same habitat. C. whitelyi: It prefers humid terrain with scattered and dense vegetation between 1,300 and 1,800 m altitude in the subtropical zone on the slopes and summits of the tepuis or tabletop mountains in the Guianan highlands (Meyer de Schauensee & Phelps Jr. 1978). It shows a preference for open places (tree-falls, clearings) (Lentino pers. comm. ). It has been collected on the Cerros Roraima, Duida, Jaua, Urutani and Ptaritepui (specimen COP 26899). Thus, C. whitelyi is a species endemic to the higher slopes and summits of the tepuis. It may be more common than the few specimens suggest as few tepuis have been explored well. In the tropical zone between 100 and 1,100 m altitude on the lower slopes of these same tabletop mountains, C. nigrescens has also been collected e.g. specimen COP 32344 on Cerro Ptaritepui (05° 46’ N, 61° 46’ W) (Perez pers. comm.). However, although both species do occur on slopes of the same fepuis, their habitats are clearly separated by altitude. Acknowledgements I thank N.Cleere and C.Feare who respectively as reviewer and editor made useful comments on this paper. For their help in various ways, I am indebted to: J.PAngle, J.A.Dick, J.-L.Dujardin, H.D.Jackson, L.E.Kiff, W.E.Lanyon, M.Lentino R., G.F Mees, A.J.Mobbs, K.C.Parkes, V.Pelletier, L.A.Perez Ch., W.H.Phelps Jr., J.-H.Ribot, PRoth, R.W.Schreiber, K.-L.Schuchmann, B.Thomas Trent and O.Tostain. References: Cabanis, J. 1848. In Schomburgh, R. (ed.), Reisen in British Guiana in den Jahren 1840-1844, VolLIIT (Birds, pp.533-1260). Verlagshandlung J.J.Weber, Leipzig. Cleere, N. 1998. Nightjars. A guide to nightjars and related nightbirds. Pica Press. Nr. Robertsbridge. Clements, J.F. 1978. Birds of the world: a check list. Two Continents Publishing Group Ltd. New York. Collar, N.J., Gonzage, L.P., Krabbe, N., Madrofio Nieto, A., Parker, T.A. & Wege, D.C. 1992. Threatened birds of the Americas : the ICBP/IUCN Red Data Book. International Council for Bird Preservation. Cambridge (UK). Dick, J.A., McGillivray, W.B. & Brooks, D.J. 1984. A list of birds and their weights from Saul, French Guiana. Wilson Bull. 96: 347-365. Gruson, E.S. 1976. A checklist of the birds of the world. Collins. London. Howard, R. & Moore, A. 1980. A complete checklist of the birds of the world. Oxford Univ. Press. Ingels, J. & Ribot, J.-H. 1982. Variations in the white markings of the Blackish Nightjar Caprimulgus nigrescens. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 102: 119-122. Ingels, J. & Ribot, J.-H. 1983. The Blackish Nightjar, Caprimulgus nigrescens, in Suriname. Gerfaut 73: 127-146. Ingels, J., Ribot, J.-H. & de Jong, B.H.J. 1984. Vulnerability of eggs and young of the Blackish Nightjar (Caprimulgus nigrescens) in Suriname. Auk 101: 388-391. Ingels, J., Oniki, Y. & Willis, E.O. 1999. Opportunistic adaptations to man-induced habitat changes by some South American Caprimulgidae. Rev. Bras. Biol. 59: 563-566. Meyer de Schauensee, R. 1966. The species of birds of South America. Livingston Publishing Co. Wynnewood (PA). Fohan Ingels 116 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) Meyer de Schauensee, R. 1970. A guide to the birds of South America. Livingston Publishing Co. Wynnewood (PA). Meyer de Schauensee, R. & Phelps, W.H. Jr 1978. A guide to the birds of Venezuela. Princeton Univ. Press. Paynter, R.A.Jr. 1982. Ornithological gazetteer of Venezuela. Mus.Comparative Zoology, Cambridge (MA). Peters, J.L. 1940. Check-list of birds of the world, Vol.IV. Mus.Comparative Zoology, Cambridge (MA). Roth, P. 1985. Breeding biology of the Blackish Nightjar, Caprimulgus nigrescens, in western Brazil. Gerfaut 75: 253-264. Salvin, O. 1885. A list of birds obtained by Mr. Henry Whitely in British Guiana. /bis 3: 195-219. Todd, W.E.C. 1920. Descriptions of apparently new South American birds. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington 33: 71-76. Walters, M. 1980. The complete birds of the world. David & Charles. London. Address: Galgenberglaan 9, B-9070 Destelbergen, Belgium. E-mail: johan.ingels@village.uunet.be. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 An early contribution to the avifauna of Parana, Brazil. The Arkady Fiedler expedition of 1928/29 by Christoph Hinkelmann & fFiirgen Fiebig Received 5 May 2000 Among Brazilian states, Parana possesses one of the best-studied avifaunas (e.g. Straube & Bornschein 1995, Anjos & Schuchmann 1997). Only recently, Scherer- Neto & Straube (1995) published a comprehensive summary of its ornithological history together with a detailed list of all bird species credibly recorded for the state. A major contribution to this knowledge was supplied by Polish ornithologists in the first two decades of the 20th century. Tadeusz Chrostowski (1878-1923) conducted field work from December 1910 to January 1911 and again in the last months of 1913. Together with Tadeusz Jaczewski and S. Borecki, Chrostowski again went to Parana, and between 1921 and 1924 (after 1923 only Jaczewski), they collected specimens of c. 260 species and subspecies of birds (Gebhardt 1964, Scherer-Neto & Straube 1995). The ornithological results of their expeditions were edited by Chrostowski (1912, 1921, 1922-1923), and later by Jaczewski (1925), Domaniewski (1925), Sztoleman (1926a, 1926b), and Sztoleman & Domaniewski (1927). While these data are properly documented, the work of Arkady Fiedler appears to have been neglected. Born in Poznan (named Posen and located in the Prussian province of the same name in Germany at that time) on 28 November 1894, he started a versatile career as a poet. In 1927, he began to travel to many countries in all continents. Collecting zoological specimens for natural history museums, he Christoph Hinkelmann & Fiirgen Fiebig it? Bulle BiO.C. 2008, 121(2) considered himself a researcher and became an author of travel reports. Beginning in 1935, he published several books, some of which became very popular in Poland and were translated to other languages. In September 1939 he stayed in Tahiti, but soon returned to Europe to fight with Polish troops supporting the western allies. In 1946, he returned to Poland and wrote most of his exciting adventure reports. He died in 1985 (details from Wielka Encyklopedia Powszechna 1963 and Nowa Encyklopedia Powszechna 1995). In November 1928, Arkady Fiedler and Antoni Wisniewski, a zoological preparator, travelled to Parana to continue the investigations made by Tadeusz. Chrostowski, who had died of malaria on 4 April 1923, while heading an expedition to the river Ivai (Gebhardt 1964). Fiedler and Wisniewski collected at four major localities (Fig. 1, and described in more detail below) and gathered c. 1,150 birds, 100 mammals, reptiles and amphibians as well as more than 6,000 insects. In addition, they collected valuable ethnological material before leaving Parana in May 1929. Unfortunately, their expedition ’s notes provide only very scant information (colouration of irides, legs, and bills, as well as tail measurements of some 25 individuals; Museum of Natural History, Berlin, unpublished records on Fiedler’s expedition). The ornithological collection, or at least its largest portion, is preserved at the Museum fur Naturkunde (Museum of Natural History) in Berlin, but it was never adequately examined after Erwin Stresemann undertook a preliminary determination of the bird specimens in 1946/47. Today, 1,014 specimens collected by Fiedler and Wisniewski in Parana are present in the Berlin collection (see Appendix). Twenty one specimens noted by Stresemann are missing, so that if the preliminary record of 1,150 bird specimens was correct, only 10% of the original collection is preserved in other museums, or lost. Unfortunately, however, the quality of almost all remaining specimens is low due to poor skill of preparation. Localities The following data are included in the unpublished expedition records preserved at the Museum of Natural History, Berlin. Localities | to 4 are indicated in Fig. 1. Note that since Fiedler’s and Wisniewsk1’s collecting much natural forest habitat in Parana has been destroyed. 1. Candido de Abreu. A settlement indicated by Fiedler as the westernmost point of (European Brazilian) civilization at that time, as the borderline between culturally initiated habitat shift and primary forest inhabited only by Indians. Located 40 km NW of Teresa Cristina (Fiedler: Teresina), Fiedler and Wisniewski established their expedition’s base there in December 1928, and stayed until March 1929. The settlement’s population comprised c. 900 Poles, 600 Germans and 200 Brazilians. The mixed forest consisted of a natural composition of deciduous trees and conifers. Several collecting localities in the very close vicinity used by Fiedler and Wisniewski were all situated between 400 and 800 ma.s.l. Christoph Hinkelmann & fiirgen Fiebig 118 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) 2. Faxinal da Boa Vista (Fiedler: Fachinal de Pedrao). Located S of Candido Abreu and c. 30 km SW of Teresa Cristina at c. 600 m a.s.1. The expedition visited the site in early 1929, probably in February. Due to the proximity to Candido Abreu, Fiedler and Wisniewski spent only a short time at Faxinal and returned to their expedition’s base. Fiedler gave no indication on vegetation, habitats or habitat shift due to human exploitation at this collecting site. 3. Barra Branca. An area located 2 km from Morretes, E of the Serra do Mar mountain ridge. Fiedler and Wisniewski collected here from 24 March to 27 April 1929. They experienced the locality (c. 20 m a.s.l.) as the warmest region of Parana, and described the landscape as swampy with a few dry hills, stocked with forest, whereas the lowlands were characterised by only solitary trees. 4. Campininha. Located c. 30 km SE of Curitiba and c. 1,000 m a.s.1. in the Serra do Mar mountain ridge, Fiedler indicated the vicinity as belonging to the savannah region S of Piraquara, a grassland landscape interrupted by swampy areas and gallery forests. He spent 2 weeks there from 29 April to 14 May 1929. Mato Grosso — Sado Paulo Curitiba jos Santa Catarina Fig. 1: Collecting localities of Arkady Fiedler and Antoni Wisniewski in the Brazilian state of Parana, 1928/29. 1 = Candido de Abreu, 2 = Faxinal da Boa Vista, 3 = Barra Branca, 4 = Campininha. Christoph Hinkelmann &© fFiirgen Fiebig 119 BUN eBIOKG.. 200U A2ZU() Results A complete list of all species and the number of specimens collected by Fiedler and Wisniewski 1928/29 in Parana, which are preserved at the Museum of Natural History, Berlin, is given in the Appendix. In the following, we merely provide some information on species and specimens which deserve a particular treatment as rare or little-observed etc. UNIFORM CRAKE Amaurolimnas concolor In general surveys (Taylor, in del Hoyo et al. 1996, Taylor & van Perlo 1998), the species is listed as occurring in Parana. Its occurrence in this state is indicated by the distribution map by Taylor (in del Hoyo et al. 1996) and is mentioned in the species account, for race castaneus, in Taylor & van Perlo (1998). However, Sick (1993) indicated the states of Espirito Santo and Sao Paulo as the southern limit of this species’ distribution, and it was not mentioned by Scherer-Neto & Straube (1995). The single specimen collected by Fiedler and Wisniewski in Barra Branca (No. 46.340) may thus be the first confirmed or published record of this species for the state of Parana, although the bird is often overlooked due to its secretive habits (Taylor & van Perlo 1998). SCALED PIGEON Columba speciosa Fiedler and Wisniewski collected a single specimen of the Scaled Pigeon at Barra Branca (No. 2000.36) and thus provided another registration for Parana of this obviously rare species (Straube & Bornschein 1995, Scherer-Neto & Straube 1995). GOLDEN-CAPPED PARAKEET Aratinga auricapilla Three specimens collected by Fiedler and Wisniewski in the vicinity of Candido de Abreu (Nos. 46.425, 2000.37, 2000.38) and thus confirmed another of very few records of this threatened species for Parana (Collar et al. 1992, Scherer-Neto & Straube 1995). There appear to be very few, if any, recent records of the Golden-capped Parakeet in the state (Guy Kirwan, pers. comm.) VINACEOUS AMAZON Amazona vinacea A single specimen of this endangered parrot was collected by Fiedler and Wisniewski in the vicinity of Candido de Abreu. The collectors’ spare notes gave no details of this species, and they thus did not notice any particularities about its frequency, appearance in flocks, close relationship to forests dominated by Parana Pine Araucaria angustifolia etc. The specimen was identified by Erwin Stresemann but it is no longer present in the collection of the Museum of Natural History in Berlin. OCHRE-COLLARED PICULET Picumnus temminckii Although the White-barred Piculet P cirratus also occurs in Parana (Anjos & Schuchmann 1997) and freely interbreeds with the Ochre-collared Piculet (Winkler ez al. 1995), all specimens (846, 132, 1 imm.; Nos. 2000.39-2000.60) collected by Christoph Hinkelmann ©& fFiirgen Fiebig 120 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) Fiedler and Wisniewski clearly belong to P temminckii. Due to frequent hybridisation with neighbouring congeners, Scherer-Neto & Straube (1995) listed both White- barred and Ochre-collared Piculets under P cirratus. VARIABLE ANTSHRIKE Thamnophilus caerulescens Two subspecies of this impressive thamnophilid occur in Parana, nominate caerulescens in the west and gilvigaster, the Tawny-bellied Antshrike, in eastern parts of the state (Sibley & Monroe 1990). They are still considered as conspecific, although Meyer de Schauensee (1966) and Wolters (1975-1982) indicated that both caerulescens and gilvigaster may be turn out to be distinct biological species. The specimens obtained by Fiedler and Wisniewski at the same localities (caerulescens: 1 3 from Candido de Abreu, 2 6 from Barra Branca, Nos. 46.393, 46.418, 46.557; gilvigaster: 2 5 and 2 ¢ from Candido de Abreu, 3 d and 4 2 from Barra Branca, Nos. 46.359, 46.499, 46.558, 47.8, 2000.61-2000.66) provide evidence that they should be considered as two separate species. The taxonomic situation in these birds is very complicated and still unresolved. The taxa should be considered as subspecies of 7! caerulescens until more analysis is undertaken; it is highly likely that more than one subspecies is involved (under both the Biological and Phylogenetic species concepts), but it is very difficult to determine the limits and diagnosability of different populations (Mort Isler, pers. comm.). Recently, at least two studies in Bolivia and Parana, Brazil, are in progress to shed light on this taxonomic puzzle. YELLOW-BELLIED SEEDEATER Sporophila nigricollis Scherer-Neto & Straube (1995) indicated that this species was merely observed (no published record, no scientific specimen in collections) in the Itaipu Reserve, close to the border to Argentina. A single specimen, a 2 collected by Fiedler and Wisniewski in Barra Branca (No. 2000.67) may thus be the first published record of a specimen collected in Parana although its occurrence there should be expected with regard to the distribution map published by Ridgely & Tudor (1989), as well as the indication of its occurrence in Parana by Armani (1985). Acknowledgements Thanks are due to Dr Sylke Frahnert, head of the Ornithological Department of the Museum of Natural History, Berlin, for every support of our studies. Katarzyna Berner translated Fiedler’s expedition notes and an accompanying letter from the Polish, and Dr. Eugeniusz Nowak and Siegfried Eck provided valuable information on Fiedler’s biography. J. Fernando Pacheco and Guy Kirwan kindly reviewed an earlier version of our manuscript, and Mort Isler provided important considerations on the taxonomy of Thamnophilus caerulescens. References: Anjos, L. dos & Schuchmann, L.-L. 1997. Biogeographical affinities of the avifauna of the Tibagi river basin, Parana drainage system, southern Brazil. Ecotropica 3: 43-65. Armani, G. 1985. Guide des passereaux granivores. Embérizines. Societe Nouvelle des Editions Boubee, Paris. Christoph Hinkelmann & fiirgen Fiebig at lex tox (COL(ES PAO MANO), Chrostowski, T. 1912. Kolekcja ornitologiczna ptakow paranskich. Compt. Rend. Soc. Scient. Varsov. 5: 452-500. Chrostowski, T. 1921. On some rare or little known species of South-American birds. Ann. Zool. Mus. Polon. Hist. Nat. 1: 31-40. Chrostowski, T. 1922-1923. Polska Ekspedycja Zoologiczna. Swit 19, 32 (1922), 2, 14, 15 (1923'). Collar, N., Gonzaga, L. P., Krabbe, N., Madrono Nieto, A., Naranjo, L. G., Parker, T. A. & Wege, D. C. 1992. Threatened birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data Book. 3rd edition, pt. 2. ICBP, Cambridge, U.K. Domaniewski, J. 1925. Ubersicht der Formen der Gattung Picumnus Temm. Ann. Zool. Mus.Polon. Hist. Nat. 4: 287-308. Gebhardt, L. 1964. Die Ornithologen Mitteleuropas. Ein Nachschlagewerk. Brihlscher Verlag, GieBen. Jaczewski, T. 1925. The Polish Zoological Expedition to Brazil in the years 1921-1924. Itinerary and brief reports. Ann. Zool. Mus. Polon. Hist. Nat. 4: 326-351. Meyer de Schauensee, R. 1966. The Species of birds of South America and their distribution. Livingston Publishing, Narberth, Pennsylvania. Nowa Encyklopedia Powszechna PWN. 1995. vol. 2, D-H, Warszawa. Ridgely, R. S. & Tudor, G. 1989. The birds of South America. Vol. 1. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Scherer Neto, P. & Straube, F. C. 1995. Aves do Parana. Historia, Lista anotada e Bibliografia. Curitiba. Sibley, C. G. & Monroe, B. L. 1990. Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the world. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven & London. Sick, H. 1993. Birds in Brazil. A natural history. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Straube, F C. & Bornschein, M. R. 1995. New or noteworthy records of birds from northwestern Parana and adjacent areas (Brazil). Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 115: 219-225. Sztoleman, J. 1926a. Etude des collections ornithologiques de Parana. Ann. Zool. Mus. Polon. Hist. Nat. 5: 107-196. Sztoleman, J. 1926b. Revision des oiseaux neotropicaux de la collection du Musée d’Histoire Naturelle a Varsovie. I. Ann. Zool. Mus. Polon. Hist. Nat. 5: 197-235. Sztoleman, J. & Domaniewski, J. 1927. Les types d’oiseaux au Musée Polonais d’Histoire Naturelle. Ann. Zool. Mus. Polon. Nat. Hist. 6: 95-136. Taylor, B. 1996. Family Rallidae (Rails, Gallinules and Coots). Pp. 108-209 in: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (Eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 3. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Taylor, B. & van Perlo, B. 1998. Rails. A guide to the rails, crakes, gallinules and coots of the world. Pica Press, Sussex. Wielka Encyklopedia Powszechna PWN. 1963. Vol. 3: Dep-Franc. Warszawa. Winkler, H., Christie, D. A. & Nurney, D. 1995. Woodpeckers. A guide to the woodpeckers, piculets and wrynecks of the world. Pica Press, Sussex. Wolters, H. E. 1975-1982. Die Vogelarten der Erde. Paul Parey, Hamburg & Berlin. Address: Dr. Christoph Hinkelmann and Jurgen Fiebig, Museum fur Naturkunde, Institut fur Systematische Zoologie, Invalidenstr. 43, D-10115 Berlin, Germany. Present address of C.H.: Radbrucher Weg 60, D-21357 Bardowick, Germany. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Christoph Hinkelmann & Fiirgen Fiebig APPENDIX 122 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) Species collected by Arkady Fiedler and Antoni Wisniewski in Parana 1928/29, number of specimens preserved at the Museum of Natural History, Berlin, and localities 1 = Candido de Abreu and its vicinity; 2 = Faxinal da Boa Vista, 3 = Barra Branca, 4 = Campininha Localities No. of specimens 1 Tinamidae Crypturellus obsoletus ] Crypturellus tataupa ] Nothura maculosa Podicipedidae Tachybaptus dominicus Phalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax brasilianus Ardeidae Syrigma sibilatrix Butorides striatus l Cathartidae Coragyps atratus 3 Cathartes aura Accipitridae Elanoides forficatus 1 Ictinia plumbea 6 Buteo magnirostris 2 Buteo leucorrhous Falconidae Micrastur ruficollis Falco femoralis Falco sparverius 5 Daptriidae Milvago chimachima Polyborus plancus Cracidae Ortalis guttata Penelope obscura ] Penelope superciliaris ] Phasianidae Odontophorus capueira Rallidae Aramides saracura 8 Amaurolimnas concolor Jacanidae Jacana jacana 4 without Christoph Hinkelmann & fFiirgen Fiebig Charadriidae Charadrius collaris Columbidae Columba speciosa Columba plumbea Columbina talpacoti Leptotila verreauxi Geotrygon montana Psittacidae Propyrrhura maracana Aratinga leucophthalmus Aratinga auricapilla Pyrrhura frontalis Forpus xanthopterygius Brotogeris tirica Pionopsitta pileata Pionus maximiliani Coccyzidae Coccyzus melacoryphus Piaya cayana Crotophagidae Crotophaga major Crotophaga ani Guira guira Strigidae Otus choliba Glaucidium brasilianum Athene cunicularia Strix virgata Nyctibiidae Nyctibius griseus Caprimulgidae Podager nacunda Macropsalis forcipata Apodidae Streptoprocne zonaris Trochilidae Ramphodon naevius Phaethornis eurynome Phaethornis squalidus Campylopterus cirrochloris Melanotrochilus fuscus Anthracothorax nigricollis Stephanoxis lalandi Chlorostilbon aureoventris Thalurania glaucopis “SW W — BulleeBsOsEo 200 4212) Christoph Hinkelmann & fFiirgen Fiebig 124 Leucochloris albicollis Agyrtria versicolor Polyerata fimbriata Calliphlox amethystina Trogonidae Trogon surrucura Alcedinidae Megaceryle torquata Chloroceryle amazona Chloroceryle americana Momotidae Baryphthengus ruficapillus Bucconidae Notharchus macrorhynchos Nystalus chacuru Malacoptila striata Ramphastidae Baillonius bailloni Ramphastos dicolorus Picidae Picumnus temminckii Melanerpes flavifrons Veniliornis spilogaster Piculus flavigula Piculus aurulentus Colaptes melanochloros Colaptes campestris Celeus flavescens Dryocopus galeatus Dryocopus lineatus Campephilus robustus Dendrocolaptidae Sittasomus griseicapillus Xiphocolaptes albicollis Dendrocolaptes platyrostris Lepidocolaptes squamatus Lepidocolaptes fuscus Campyloramphus falcularius Furnariidae Synallaxis ruficapilla Cranioleuca obsoleta Syndactyla rufosuperciliata Philydor atricapillus Philydor rufus Automolus leucophthalmus Cichlocolaptes leucophrus BRDrRe NNN Ne nN N —_— i Dee Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) 5 28 16 l 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 ] ] ] 2 1 l l Christoph Hinkelmann &© fFiirgen Fiebig Heliobletus contaminatus Xenops minutus Sclerurus scansor Lochmias nematura Thamnophilidae Hypoedaleus guttatus Mackenziaena leachii Mackenziaena severa Thamnophilus caerulescens Dysithamnus mentalis Myrmotherula unicolor Drymophila ferruginea Drymophila squamata Pyriglena leucoptera Myrmeciza squamosa Formicariidae Formicarius colma Conopophagidae Conopophaga lineata Conopophaga melanops Rhinocryptidae Psilorhamphus guttatus Tyrannidae Phyllomyias fasciatus Phyllomyias virescens Camptostoma obsoletum Myiopagis viridicata Elaenia obscura Serpophaga nigricans Capsiempis flaveola Mionectes rufiventris Leptopogon amaurocephalus Phylloscartes kronei Myiornis auricularis Tolmomyias sulphurescens Platyrinchus mystaceus Myiobius barbatus Myiophobus fasciatus Contopus cinereus Cnemotriccus fuscatus Pyrocephalus rubinus Xolmis cinerea Heteroxolmis dominicana Colonia colonus Attila phoenicurus Attila rufus — UO me LU eS NO NO SS eS Ball BO2€> 2008 121@) Christoph Hinkelmann ©& fFiirgen Fiebig 126 Bull. B.O.C: 2001 121Q) Sirystes sibilator l Myiarchus swainsoni l Tyrannus savana 3 Tyrannus melancholicus 4 1 Empidonomus varius 4 Megarynchus pitangua 3 Conopias trivirgata 1 Myiodynastes maculatus 10 l Myiozetetes similis ] 4 Legatus leucophaius 2 Pitangus sulphuratus 3 1 Pachyramphus viridis ] Pachyramphus polychopterus Schiffornis virescens Tityra cayana ae NT oy — N Tityra inquisitor Pipridae Manacus manacus 1 3 Chiroxiphia caudata 1 1S ] Piprites chloris l Cotingidae Phibalura flavirostris 2 3 Carpornis cucullatus 3 Pyroderus scutatus 2 Procnias nudicollis 2 1 Oxyruncus cristatus 5 Hirundinidae Tachycineta albiventer 1 Notiochelidon cyanoleuca yD) ] Stelgidopteryx fucata 1 Motacillidae Anthus lutescens 2 Troglodytidae Thryothorus longirostris 4 Troglodytes aedon 2 Muscicapidae (Turdidae) Platycichla flavipes Turdus rufiventris 4+ 1 Turdus amaurochalinus 1 Turdus albicollis Emberizidae (Thraupidae) Zonotrichia capensis 2 5) 1 Oo em WO \O Haplospiza unicolor 1 Poospiza lateralis 2 Sicalis flaveola Volatinia jacarina 2 aN = to Christoph Hinkelmann &© fFiirgen Fiebig Sporophila caerulescens Sporophila nigricollis Oryzoborus angolensis Amaurospiza moesta Coryphospingus cucullatus Pitylus fuliginosus Cissopis leveriana Hemithraupis ruficapilla Tachyphonus coronatus Tachyphonus cristatus Trichothraupis melanops Thraupis sayaca Thraupis cyanoptera Thraupis palmarum Ramphocelus bresilius Pipraeidea melanonota Euphonia violacea Euphonia chalybea Euphonia pectoralis Tangara seledon Tangara cyanocephala Tangara preciosa Dacnis cayana Tersina viridis Coereba flaveola Conirostrum speciosum Parulidae Parula pitiayumi Geothlypis aequinoctialis Basileuterus culicivorus Basileuterus leucoblepharus Basileuterus rivularis Vireonidae Cyclarhis gujanensis Vireo chivi Hylophilus poicilotis Icteridae Cacicus haemorrhous Cacicus chrysopterus Gnorimopsar chopi Molothrus bonariensis Corvidae Cyanocorax caeruleus Cyanocorax chrysops oN Se a Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) Andrew W. Kratter et al. 128 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) Reproductive condition, moult, and body mass of birds from Isabel, Solomon Islands by Andrew W. Kratter, David W. Steadman, Catherine E. Smith & Christopher E. Filardi Received 30 May 2000 With 61 species confined to the archipelago, the Solomon Islands (including Bougainville) have one of the world’s most distinctive avifaunas (Stattersfield et al. 1998). Despite this uniqueness, the natural history of Solomon Island birds remains poorly known. Although recent treatments by Webb (1992) and Kratter et al. (in press) have substantially increased our knowledge of the avifauna on Isabel Island, one the main islands in the archipelago, nothing has been published about the timing of breeding and moult in birds on Isabel, as is largely the case throughout the Solomons (but see Sibley 1951 and Schodde 1977). Body masses from some widespread Solomon Island species that occur on Isabel were given by Galbraith & Galbraith (1962), Schodde (1977), and Dunning (1993), yet most of these data were based on small samples from other islands. Aside from a small collection made in 1995 (H.P. Webb & M. LeCroy, pers. comm.), birds have not been collected on Isabel since the Whitney South Seas expedition in 1927, which obtained series of skins for most species on Isabel but did not preserve skeletal specimens, tissue samples or spread wings. Locality data were imprecise at best. The most recent techniques in specimen preparation (including saving skin, skeleton, and tissues samples from the same individual) and data recording (see Winker 2000) have opened up new avenues for research into fields including phenology (e.g., moult, reproduction, fat levels), blood parasites (Steadman et al. 1990), food habits (Franklin & Steadman 1991), prehistoric extinctions (e.g., Steadman 1995), and systematics (e.g., inferring relationships from sequencing DNA). These developments have led to a much-improved ecological, taxonomic, and historical basis for identifying conservation priorities in Oceania. In 1997-98, we visited several sites on Isabel, as well as four islets just off the main island. We made detailed observations of the avifauna and prepared specimens collected by local hunters. In a sister paper (Kratter et a/. in press), we focus on community patterns of the avifauna at a lowland forest site (Garanga River), including some new records for the island and discussion of conservation issues. In this paper, we present data on reproductive condition, moult, and body mass of Isabel’s birds. Study sites and methods Isabel, the third largest island in the Solomon archipelago (3995 km’), is a long (199 km) and narrow (in most places 20-25 km wide) island (Fig. 1). Our field research in east-central Isabel in 1997 and 1998 was undertaken at the following sites (Fig. 1): Andrew W. Kratter et al. 129 Bull. 2B. O14» 2001 A242) I) 2) 3) 4) 5) lowland portions of the Garanga River (8°S, 159°E), described 1n detail in Kratter et al. (in press); 9-23 July 1997 and 22—29 June 1998. Fera Island (8°05.5'S, 159°35'E), 123 ha islet 2.5 km north of Buala; 4 July 1997, 6, 9- 10 July 1998. A grass airstrip is along the western edge of this flat island. The vegetation is rather dense with a low (< 25 m) canopy. Sulei Island (8°04.5'S, 159°32'E), 87 ha islet, separated from the mainland by a narrow (c. 100 m wide) channel and 4 km northwest of Fera Island; 6, 9-10 July 1998. The vegetation on Sulei is much more developed than on Fera, with tall forest (canopy > 30 m) covering much of this slightly hilly island. Mangrove forests dominate the island’s periphery. Kiaba Island (8°00'S, 159°27'E), c. 2 ha islet, 2 km east of the mouth of the Garanga River; 6 July 1997, 21, 26 June 1998. The island is dominated by scrubby forest. Hakelake Island (7°53'S, 159°14'E), a tiny islet (c. 1 ha); 8 July 1998. Coconut palms and scrubby forest ring the island, with a thicket of dense shrubs in the centre. Longedo’u River (8°10.5'S, 159°35.0'E), middle elevation forest at 500 m; 1-4 July 1998. The hills in this area are covered in dense forest, with occasional small (< 1 ha) clearings for farm plots. Stands of bamboo (Bambusa sp.) up to 10 cm diameter occur adjacent to several farms. Epiphytic growth is much more pronounced than in lowland forests along the Garanga River. The Longedo’u River, c. 10 m wide at this elevation, is fast-running, with several short cascades. = Bougainville ——— 0 50 100 km oHakelake Rock <.*e = G: New Georgia _ Fig. 1. Map of Ghoveo “00! Isabel and offshore islets, showing study sites. GARANGA RIVER ;. ° ° km ELEVATION OVER 600 m 159°15'E Andrew W. Kratter et al. 130 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) Our visits coincided with the April to September dry season of the Solomon Islands (Cain & Galbraith 1956, Blaber 1990). In general, the weather was mild to hot and humid, with partly cloudy to cloudy skies. Some rain occurred on most field days (7 days in 1997 and 5 days in 1998), including a series of storms from 15-18 July 1997. Winds were generally light. Most birds were collected with shotguns by local hunters. Mark Hafe, an Isabel islander, hunted in both years and was thoroughly familiar with the plumages, vocalizations, and behaviour of all bird species on Isabel. To a much lesser extent, we also used ground-level mist nets at our Garanga River and Longedo’u River sites to collect birds in interior forest or across rivers. Specimens are housed at the Florida Museum of Natural History (UF), University of Washington Burke Museum (UWBM), and Solomon Islands National Museum (SINM). Tissues preserved in lysis buffer are stored at UWBM. Specimen tag data include sex, reproductive condition, moult scoring (remiges, rectrices, and body), soft part colours, subdermal fat levels, stomach contents (when present, saved and stored at UF), skull ossification, presence/absence of bursa, and habitat. Results We collected a total of 433 specimens, representing 70 species, in our two sessions of fieldwork on Isabel. Of these 70 species, 66 are residents, representing 87% of the 76 resident landbird species known from Isabel (Kratter et a/. in press). The four non- resident or marine species were a shorebird migrant from the north (Actitis hypoleucos — vernacular names of all species are given in Table 1), two landbird migrants from the south (Chrysococcyx lucidus and Halcyon sancta), and a near-shore marine tern (Sterna bergii). The specimens of two species (Amaurornis molucannus and Eudynamys scolopacea) were the first to be collected on Isabel. Most of the specimens (317, 73% of the birds collected) were collected at the Garanga River site (Kratter et al. in press). The others were distributed as follows: Longedo’u River, 44 specimens; Sulei Island, 29; Fera Island, 18; Kiaba Island, 17; and Hakelake Island, 8. Specimens collected on the islets are the first we know of from these locales. Breeding Although our sample represents only a fraction of the yearly cycle, there are few or no published data on breeding and moult cycles for almost all species of Solomon Island birds. Evidence of reproductive activity (in males, cloacal protuberance, enlarged testes, and/or enlarged seminal vesicles; in females, developing ova, presence of brood patch, and/or wide and convoluted oviduct) was found in 30 of the 63 species for which we collected adult specimens. Among the 27 species with five or more adult specimens (Table 1), 17 had at least one reproductively active individual (classified as “enl” in Table 2). These consisted of nine of 12 non-passerines and eight of 15 passerines. The only species with all (N=11) adult specimens in breeding condition was Pachycephala pectoralis, which is more territorial than most other Andrew W. Kratter et al. iS Bull, B.OIes 2001 V2) local passerines. At least some gonadal evidence of reproductive activity was found in 23 of the 25 specimens for the highly frugivorous columbid genera (Ptilinopus and Ducula), 15 of 16 adult specimens for the three species of Rhipidura, and 26 of 43 adult specimens for the three species of Monarcha. Evidence of breeding activity was rare, on the other hand, in starlings and mynas (1 of 30 adult specimens), parrots (2 of 36), kingfishers (3 of 35), and cuckoo-shrikes (4 of 27). Three of these four groups (two of four starlings and mynas, parrots, and kingfishers) are predominantly cavity nesters. However, the hornbill (Acervos plicatus), one of the two other cavity nesters at our site, was reproductively active. Both of our specimens of Eurystomus orientalis, the other cavity nester, are immatures, and thus we cannot assess reproductive activity for this species. Moult Intraspecific moult data were extremely variable (Table 2), suggesting that some species have protracted moult schedules, as is common in tropical birds (e.g., in Sarawak; Fogden 1972). Two groups of birds did not conform to this overall pattern. First, wing and tail moult was absent or nearly so in most or all adult individuals of Ptilinopus viridis, Chalcopsitta cardinalis, Micropsitta finschii, Aceros plicatus, Coracina tenuirostris, Rhipidura cockerelli, Aplonis grandis, A. metallica, and Dicaeum aeneum. Second, wing and/or tail moult were found in most or all individuals of Nesoclopeus woodfordi, Cacatua ducorpsii, Monarcha castaneiventris, Mino dumontii, and Corvus woodfordi. We see no clear pattern here in either a taxonomic sense or by feeding guild. To assess moult schedule more rigorously on a species by species basis, larger samples of specimens from throughout the annual cycle are needed. Body mass Our body mass data are the first to be published for four species (Nesoclopeus woodfordi, Nesasio solomonensis, Pitta anerythra, and Monarcha cinerascens). In addition, we report the first body mass data for the Solomon Islands for three other species (xobrychus flavicollis, Amaurornis moluccanus, and Caloenas nicobarica). For the 45 species where we have data from both adult males and females (Table 1), we found no obvious (1.e., < 7.5%) sexual difference in body mass in 26 species (Anas superciliosa, Aviceda subcristata, Megapodius [freycinet] eremita, Ptilinopus viridis, Ducula pistrinaria, Cacatua ducorpsii, Trichoglossus haematodus, Collocalia esculenta, Hemiprocne mystacea, Alcedo atthis, Halcyon sancta, H. saurophaga, Coracina papuensis, C. tenuirostris, C. holopolia, C. caledonica, Rhipidura cockerelli, Monarcha castaneiventris, M. barbata, M. cinerascens, Myiagra ferrocyanea, Pachycephala pectoralis, Aplonis cantoroides, A. grandis, Dicaeum aeneum, and Zosterops metcalfii). Males averaged larger than females in 13 species (Nesoclopeus woodfordi, Porphyrio porphyrio, Ptilinopus superbus, Chalcopsitta cardinalis, Micropsitta finschii, Aceros plicatus, Coracina lineata, C. papuensis, C. holopolia, Rhipidura leucophrys, Aplonis metallica, Mino dumontii, Andrew W. Kratter et al. 132 Bull. B.OsC. 2001 120@) TAB EE Specimen data for birds collected on Isabel. Age: imm = juvenal or immature (subadult plumage, and/or bursa present, and/or skull <100% ossified, the latter for doves through passerines only); adult = adult plumage and/or no bursa present and/or skull 100% ossified. Sites: GR = Garanga River, LR = Longodo’u River, FI = Fera Island, HI = Hakelake Island, SI= Sulei Island, KI = Kiaba Island; number of specimens of each class given for each site. * species or subspecies endemic to the Solomon archipelago. FAMILY & species sites age é& sex GR, LR SI Fe Kel HI mass (g) ARDEIDAE Egretta sacra sacra Pacific Reef-Egret adult 2 - - - - - 380, 440 Nycticorax caledonicus mandibularis Rufous Night-Heron adult ¢ It - - - - - 750 Ixobrychus flavicollis *woodfordi Black Bittern adult it - - - - - sa7/ imm 6 | - - - - - 320 Butorides striatus solomonensis Striated Heron adult ] - - - - - 226 ANATIDAE Anas superciliosa pelewensis Pacific Black Duck adult ¢ l - - - - - 642 adult 2 - - - - - 560, 640 imm 3 3 - - - - - 5907 6155635 ACCIPITRIDAE Aviceda subcristata *gurneyi Pacific Baza adult 3 4 - - - - - 285, 298, 37.350 adult pp - - - - - 3197330 imm ¢ 1 - - - - - 303 Haliastur indus *flavirostris Brahminy Kite adult d it - - - - - 606 Haliaeetus *sanfordi Sanford’s Fish-Eagle subad 6 It - - - - - 1980 Accipiter novaehollandiae *rufoschistaceus Gray Goshawk adult d 2 - - - - - 172, 187 adult @ l - - - - - 245 imm ¢ it - - - - - 182 imm ¢ - - - - - 207 Accipiter *imitator Imitator Sparrowhawk adult d 1 - - - - - 208 Andrew W. Kratter et al. 133 Bull B Ove, 20011212) 810 795, 860 229 670, ? AT075305533,969, 571 457, 575, 623, 640 486 MEGAPODIDAE Megapodius [freycinet] eremita Melanesian Scrubfowl adult ¢ i - - - - adult l . - 1 - RALLIDAE Amaurornis moluccanus *nigrifrons Rufous-tailed Bush-hen adult ¢ - - - - Nesoclopeus *woodfordi immaculatus Woodford’s Rail adult ¢ 2 - - - - adult 5 - - - - imm d 4 - - - - imm @ 1 - - - - chick @ 1 - - - - ehick sex? | - - - - Porphyrio porphyrio samoensis Purple adult 3 1 - - - - adult ¢ 1 - - - - SCOLOPACIDAE Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper imm ° 1 - - - - Swamphen 56 62 918 615 33.3 29K 76, 94, 100, 103 LARIDAE Sterna bergii cristata Crested Tern imm do - - 1 - - COLUMBIDAE Macropygia mackinlayi *arossi Mackinlay’s Cuckoo-Dove adult ¢ - 2 1 1 - imm 3 > 1 - ] - Chalcophaps stephani *mortoni Stephan’s Dove adult 1 - - - - Ptilinopus s. superbus Superb Fruit-Dove adult ¢ - 2 - - - adult @ 1 3 - - - Ptilinopus viridis lewisii Claret-breasted Fruit-Dove adult 3 3 = s 5 4 adult @ 5 1 = = = O55 (75 I Sy Os Ody oe), SY 123 [Sdes9 2 2 24132 IDA 255 135 LIDS A SS 22 Ducula rubricera *rufigula Red-knobbed Imperial-Pigeon adult 3 3 - - - - adult @ 4 - 1 - - Ducula p. pistrinaria Island Imperial-Pigeon adult d - - - - 1 adult 2 - - 1 - 1 Caloenas n. nicobarica Nicobar Pigeon adult ¢ - - 1 - - 560, 612, 638 610, 651, 655, 660, 765 520 S015 525 675 Andrew W. Kratter et al. 134 Bull. BiOvrG,- 2001 12) PSITTACIDAE Chalcopsitta *cardinalis Cardinal Lory adult 3 7 - - - - - 220, 231, 234, 235, 240, 267, 268 adult ° ] - - - - - P73) imm 6 1 - - - - - 220 Trichoglossus haematodus massena Rainbow Lorikeet adult 3 1 - - - - - 109 adult @ 2 ] - - - - Jey ates LILI Cacatua *ducorpsii Ducorps’s Cockatoo adult 3 4 - - - - - 383, 386, 402, 410 adult @ ?) - - - - - 365, 386 Micropsitta finschii *nanina Finsch’s Pygmy-Parrot adult 3 2 - - - - - ITL.1, 11.9, 12.4, 12:5, 130i 13.5, 13.6, 14, 14.1, 14.2, 15 adult @ 2 - - - - - les, WS imm 3 2 - - - - - aii WZ! imm 2 - 2, - - - - ie Wale Eclectus roratus solomonensis Eclectus Parrot adult d 3 1 - - - - 395, 405, 406, 440 imm 6 - Nt - - - - 375 Geoffroyus heteroclitus heteroclitus Singing Parrot adult @ - l - - - - 169 CUCLIDAE Chrysococcyx lucidus lucidus Shining Bronze Cuckoo imm 6 l - - - - - 20.0 imm @ 3 | - - - - ZO DDS Dale 2 nes Cacomantis variolosus *addendus Brush Cuckoo imm & - - - - - 49 Eudynamys scolopacea *alberti Asian Koel imm 3 I - - - - - 140 STRIGIDAE Ninox *jacquinoti jacquinoti Solomon Islands Hawk-Owl adult d 2 - - - - - 253, 260 adult @ it - - - - - Did Nesasio *solomonensis Fearful Owl adult @ - 1 - - - - 1155 PODARGIDAE Podargus ocellatus*inexpectatus Marbled Frogmouth adult ¢ - 1 - - - - L7s APODIDAE Collocalia vanikorensis lugubris Uniform Swiftlet adult 2 - - - 1 - - eZ Collocalia esculenta *?becki Glossy Swiftlet adult 3 1 - - - - - q3 adult ¢ - l - - - - Ts Andrew W. Kratter et al. 135 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) HEMIPROCNIDAE Hemiprocne mystacea woodfordiana Moustached Treeswift adult ¢ l - - - - - 57 adult 2 1 - - - - . 59 ALCEDINDAE Alcedo atthis *salomonensis Common Kingfisher adult ¢ 5 - - - - - 25:85 292 O'S, 3547 adult 2 4 - - - - - 28.5, 30532, 33 Ceyx lepidus *meeki Variable Kingfisher adult 3 3 1 - - - - 15, 16, 16.5, 18.1 adult 2 1 2 - - - - 16.7, 20.0, 22.5 imm ° 1 - - - - - 19.4 Halcyon *leucopygia Ultramarine Kingfisher adult 3 i! 1 - - - - 42.5, 45, 45.5, 45.7, 46, 47, 48, 49.1 adult 2 2 - 1 - - - 42,49, 61 imm 6 - - - 1 - - 49 Halcyon sancta Sacred Kingfisher adult ¢ 1 - - - - - 42 adult 2 - - 1 - - - 43 imm ¢ 2 - - - - - 43, 48.7 imm ° 1 - - - - - 40 Halcyon chloris *alberti Collared Kingfisher adult 3 1 - - 1 2 - 67, 68, 70, 72 adult 2 - - - 1 - - 102 Halcyon s. saurophaga Beach Kingfisher adult ¢ - - - - 2 1 104, 118, 137 adult 2 - - - - - ] 127 CORACIDAE Eurystomus orientalis *solomonensis Dollarbird imm ¢ 1 - - - - - 152 imm 2 1 - - - - - 15 BUCEROTIDAE Aceros plicatus *harterti Blyth’s Hornbill adult 3 3 - - - - - 1680, 1760, 1890 adult 2 1 - - - - - 1450 PITTIDAE Pitta *anerythra anerythra Black-faced Pitta adult 3 - 2 - - - - 83, 89 HIRUNDIDIDAE Hirundo tahitica subfusca Pacific Swallow imm 3 1 - - - - - 14.6 imm ©@ l = = - = z 15.8 Andrew W. Kratter et al. 136 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) CAMPEPHAGIDAE Coracina lineata *nigrifrons Yellow-eyed Cuckoo-shrike adult ¢ 2 ] l - - - 56, 60, 64.5, 71 adult @ 5 - 1 - - - 49.6, 51.5, 57, 60, 60.6, 62.5 imm @ I - - - - - 53.5 Coracina papuensis *perpillada White-bellied Cuckoo-shrike adult 3 3 - - - - - 66, 68, 69.5 adult ° 2 - - - - - SE Ol imm 3 1 - - - - - 67.2 imm @ 1 - - - - - 61 Coracina tenuirostris *saturatior Slender-billed Cicadabird adult ¢ 1 - - - - - 5)5) adult @ 2 1 - - - - Soy 974 56.5 imm 6 D) - - - - - S555) Ol imm @ i - - - - - 62 Coracina *holopolia holopolia Solomon Islands Cuckoo-shrike adult 3 3 1 - - - - 41.2, 48, 51, 63 adult @ 1 - - - - - 47.0 imm ¢ p. - - - - - 49, 52 Coracina caledonica *welchmani Melanesian Cuckoo-shrike adult ¢ 1 - 1 - - - 156, 163 adult ¢ 1 - - - - - 165 RHIPIDURIDAE Rhipidura leucophrys melaleuca Willie Wagtail adult 3 3 - - 1 | - 33, 34.4; 36, 38, 39 adult 5 - - - - - 28.55 33/4033. 5) 98-95 S885 imm 6 2 - - - - - 20:39 imm @ l - - - - - 29.1 Rhipidura rufifrons *commoda Rufous Fantail adult ¢ 1 1 - - - - IDO imm <6 1 - - - - - 12.0 imm @ ] - - - - - 9.7 Rhipidura *cockerelli interposita White-winged Fantail adult ¢ 1 1 = - = = 16.0, 17 adult 2 2 - - - - - Alles imm 2 2 - - - - - 14.5, 15.3 MONARCHIDAE Monarcha *c. castaneiventris Chestnut-bellied Monarch adult 6 1] 1 4 1 - - 2A.5225:0) 25525:3), 2559255326 26.5, 27.15. 27.55.2755 285) 28,2 D8-4> 30:5) S32 adult 2 3 - 2 1 - - 22, 23. 25:5, 265. 2) le 2s imm 6 l l l 1 - - 2392416; 259255 imm @ 1 - - - - - 24.8 Monarcha *barbata barbata Black-and-white Monarch adult 3 6 - l - - - 20:8, 22,22: 39225, 23 5024 ea Andrew W. Kratter et al. Monarcha cinerascens impediens \slet Monarch Myiagra *f. ferrocyanea Steel-blue Flycatcher 5 ] Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) 20:8, 2.1, 9523.0, 233 23:5) 24 22.5, 24.5 17.5 23.2, 23.5, 24.0, 24, 24.5, 25.5, 27 23:3 22.5, 23.5, 23.8, 24.0, 24.5, 24.5 ZED; 2210; 221) 22.8, 2350, 235,24 Late tes ee 13.0 be5 Pachycephala pectoralis *orioloides Golden Whistler Aplonis *grandis grandis Brown-winged Starling Aplonis metallica nitidus Metallic Starling adult 3 3 2 imm ? 2 - imm 2 1 = adult ¢ - - adult 2 - - imm 6 - - imm @ - - adult ¢ 3 = adult 2 1 = imm 6 - 1 PACHYCEPHALIDAE adult 3 6 3 adult 2 1 1 STURNIDAE adult d y) = adult 2 5 = adult ¢ 4 = adult 2 6 = imm 2 - - Aplonis cantoroides Singing Starling adult d - - adult 2 - - imm 6 - - imm 2 = - 1 — SS —& NO Mino dumontii kreffti Yellow-faced Myna adult d 5 adult 2 5 adult ? l 1 Corvus *woodfordi vegetus White-billed Crow Myzomela *lafargei Scarlet-naped Myzomela imm 92 CORVIDAE adult ° 3 imm d 1 imm 2 1 MELIPHAGIDAE adult d 1 imm @2 - ze 45, 47, 48, 49, 52, 54, 54.5, 56, 57.5 41.5, 56.5 1705190 ISI, 156, 178, 182, 7 50:25, S51, 58; 62, 64 ATG; SOS, SES, S35, Ie55 SS 56 51, 54.5 55 54 48 194, 239, 246, 250, 262 190, 205, 221, 236, 242 215 202 555, 563, 568 615 560 12521218923; 130 12.5 Andrew W. Kratter et al. 138 Bull. B.O:Cx2001 128) NECTARINITDAE Nectarinia jugularis flavigaster Olive-backed Sunbird adult 3 5 - - - - l 8.8,,9.1;,9.5, 9.7,.10.0; LONE ees adult 3 - - - - - TS £9 imm 6 2 - - - : = F(a eam) imm ¢ 2 - l - - - 1eONSL0; Sal DICAEIDAE Dicaeum *aeneum aeneum Midget Flowerpecker adult ¢ 5 - - - - - TAME T2558) 9578-55 Oeo adult Zz - - - - - 8355,2 imm ¢ 5 - - - - - W505. 9 lou OL Ono imm ¢ 5 - - - - - FONT Seal 6. 7205.84 ZOSTEROPIDAE Zosterops *metcalfii metcalfii Yellow-throated White-eye adult ¢ 5 2 - - - - 12, 13.5; 14.5,14.5, 145, 1S0r adult 2 - - - - - 13.8, 14.4 imm ¢ 2 - : - - - 11.6, 14.7 imm & 3 - - - - - 12.1394 imm ? ] - - - - - 13e5 TOTAL 317. 44° 29 "18 17 8 433 SPECIMENS TOTAL as 26 For 9 6 3 70 SPECIES and Nectarinia jugularis). Females averaged larger than males in six species, all non-passerines (Accipiter novaehollandiae, Ducula rubricera, Ninox jacquinoti, Ceyx lepidus, Halcyon leucopygia, and H. chloris). Given the small sample sizes, however, only one species showed a statistically significant difference between the sexes in body mass (Rhipidura leucophrys, t=2.42, p=0.04, n=8). Discussion Although our collections include one species listed as “near-threatened” (Corvus woodfordi), two species listed as “vulnerable” (Haliaeetus sanfordi, Pitta anerythra) and two others (Accipiter imitator, Nesoclopeus woodfordi) listed as “endangered” (Collar et al. 1994), the population levels suggested by our fieldwork indicate that these classifications are exaggerated for all five species (Kratter ef a/. in press). Our collecting had no impact on local or island-wide populations of birds. In no case do the specimens approach 1% of the individuals of that species on Isabel, and for the majority of species, our collections represent less than 0.01% of the population. Our data are the first on breeding and moult phenology for birds on Isabel. Only two other studies in the main archipelago of the Solomon Islands have assessed Andrew W. Kratter et al. nag Bull. B.O:G>2001 1A21@Q) breeding cycles for entire avifaunas. On Bougainville, Schodde (1977) made an extensive collection of birds during a dry season visit (July — September) to a mid- elevation site. Sibley (1951) made a wet season visit (October — February) to the New Georgia group. We have found no data on breeding and moult in Solomon Island birds between February and late June. Schodde detected some breeding activity in 57 of 70 species he collected on Bougainville. As was the case on Isabel, Schodde recorded little breeding activity in cuckoo-shrikes (5 of 15 specimens) and kingfishers (8 of 41 specimens). In contrast to our findings, however, he found significant breeding activity in parrots (23 of 51 specimens) and starlings (20 of 24 specimens). As Schodde’s study continued for two months further into the dry season than ours, it seem likely that many parrots and starlings initiate breeding late in the dry season. On New Georgia, Sibley (1951) found 31 of 63 specimens (49%) of adult residents with enlarged gonads; 17 of the 63 (27%) were moulting. We found fewer specimens with enlarged gonads (96 of 320, or 30% of adult specimens), although including the slightly enlarged category (91 of 320 adult specimens; Table 2) yields a percentage, 58%, similar to Sibley’s. Our more detailed scoring of moult in Table 2 precludes direct comparison with Sibley’s data. The high percentage of breeding birds found in both the dry (Schodde 1977, herein) and early wet seasons (Sibley 1951) suggests that the breeding season is protracted in Solomon Island birds. Assuming that the avifaunas from different islands share a similar phenology, which seems likely given the similar climate regimes, the primary breeding season of Solomon Island birds probably continues from at least the beginning of the dry season (June) far into the wet season (February?). To the southeast and west, respectively, Vanuatu and New Guinea share a similar wet and dry seasonality with the Solomon Islands, as well as many conspecific or closely related bird taxa. In Vanuatu, the principal breeding season of landbirds is from August to December (Marshall & Harrison 1941, Bregulla 1992). In various places in both highland and lowland New Guinea, breeding activity increases during the dry season (June - November) in most places and reaches a peak at the beginning of the rainy season (December-January), although some breeding occurs all year (Ripley 1964, Rand & Gilliard 1968, Diamond 1972, Beehler et al 1986). Our data suggest that a similar generalization may apply in the Solomon Islands. Acknowledgements Field research was supported by the University of Florida College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (grant RDA-1-23 95-86 to DWS) and by Hugh Fergusson, Eddy fellowships, and the Ornithology Endowment of the University of Washington Burke Museum (to CEF and CES). Museum-based research and manuscript preparation were supported by the National Science Foundation (grant EAR-9714819 to DWS). Terry Taylor helped to prepare specimens. In Honiara, Moses Biliki, Joe Horako, Lawrence Foanaota, and Audrey Rusa graciously provided logistical support and research permits from the national government of the Solomon Islands. On Isabel, Price Webb, Amos Gigini, Mark Hafe, Austel Ruumana, and William, Veronica, and Roger Manehage supplied companionship, local research permits, access to the site, and immeasurable help in the field. Andrew W. Kratter et al. 140 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) TABLE 2 Reproductive condition and moult data for birds collected on Isabel. Number of specimens are indicated for each age/sex class (“-“* = none collected in that class). Gonads: “enl” = testes enlarged or well-developed ova or eggs; “se” = testes or ovary slightly enlarged, ova slightly enlarged; oviduct convoluted; “ne” = testes not enlarged or ovary undifferentiated. Moult (sexes combined within age categories): remiges & rectrices: “pr” = moult present (1+ feathers sheathed), “ab” = moult absent; body moult: “hm” = heavy or moderate moult; “Im” = light or trace moult; “ab” = moult absent. See Table | for criteria on which age determined, subspecies, English names, and site localities. MOULT GONADS remiges rectrices body FAMILY & species age&sex enl se ne pr ab pr ab hm Im ab ARDEIDAE Egretta sacra adult 1 1 - 2 - 1 1 1 1 Nycticorax caledonicus adult 3 - 1 - - 1 - - - - - Ixobrychus flavicollis adult 2 ] - - - 1 - 1 - - l imm 36 - - ] - ] - 1 - - 1 Butorides striatus adult ° - ] - 1 - 1 - 1 - - ANATIDAE Anas superciliosa adult ¢ - l - - 3 2 1 2 1 - adult 2 2 - - imm 6 - - 3 - 3 - 2 1 - ACCIPITRIDAE Aviceda subcristata adult 3 - 2 2 - 3 2 1 1 - 2 adult ° ] - ] imm @ - - ] - 1 - ] - - 1 Haliastur indus adult ¢ - - 1 - 1 - 1 - - | Haliaeetus sanfordi subad 3 - - ] 1 - - 1 - - 1 Accipiter novaehollandiae adult ¢ l - 1 1 2 ] 2 1 1 1 adult 2 - 1 - imm ¢ - - 1 - 2 - 1 - ] - imm @ - - 1 Accipiter imitator adult 3 1 - - - 1 - 1 - - ] MEGAPODIDAE Megapodius eremita adult d | - - adult 2 2 - - 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 RALLIDAE Amaurornis moluccanus adult ¢ - 1 - - ] - 1 ] = - Nesoclopeus woodfordi adult ¢ - 1 1 4 3 5 ] - yw) - adult 2 3 pi - imm 6 - 4 2 - 2 3 2 2 - imm @ - - 1 chick @ - - ] chick sex? Porphyrio porphyrio adult 3 - ] - - 2 - 2 1 1 - adult 2 - l - SCOLOPACIDAE Actitis hypoleucos imm 2 - - l - l - 1 - - 1 LARIDAE Sterna bergii imm ¢ . - ] - l - ] - | - Andrew W. Kratter et al. 141 Bull, BO: E> 2001 A242) COLUMBIDAE Macropygia mackinlayi adult 3 - 2 Zz 2: 2 2: l l 2 - imm 6 - - 7 3 3 2 4 - 2 3 Chalcophaps stephani adult 2 1 - - - I - 1 - - | Ptilinopus superbus adult 3 ps - - - 6 - 6 2, 4 - adult 2 4 - - Ptilinopus viridis adult ¢ - 2 - 2 7 - 8 I 7 - adult 2 3 2 1 Ducula rubricera adult ¢ - 2 1 4 4 3 4 - 4 3 adult 2 5 - - Ducula pistrinaria adult 3 1 - - adult 2 1 - 1 2 1 2 - 2 1 Caloenas nicobarica adult 2 - ] - 1 - l - ] - - PSITTACIDAE Chalcopsitta cardinalis adult 3 - - 7 - 7 2 5 - 1 6 adult - 1 - imm 6 - 1 - 1 - 1 - - Trichoglossus haematodus adult 3 - - 1 - 4 1 3 1 - 33 adult 2 - 1 2 Cacatua ducorpsii adult d I - 3 4 2 2 4 2 2 ] adult 2 - 1 1 Micropsitta finschii adult ¢ - Z 10 4 10 1 13 - 6 6 adult 2 - 1 1 imm 6 - - 2 - 3 - 3 - 1 1 imm 2 - - 2 Eclectus roratus adult 3 - 2 1 3 1 2 2 1 2 1 imm 6 - 1 1 - - 1 1 - - Geoffroyus heteroclitus adult 2 ] - - - 1 - 1 ] - - CUCLIDAE Chrysococcyx lucidus imm 6 - - 1 2 2 2 2 1 - 1 imm 2 - - 3 Cacomantis variolosus imm 2 - - 1 ] - - ] ] - - Eudynamys scolopacea imm 3d - - 1 ] - - 1 1 - - STRIGIDAE Ninox jacquinoti adult ¢ - - 2 1 1 1 2 - 2 1 adult 2 - 1 Nesasio solomonensis adult 2 1 - - - 1 - 1 - 1 - PODARGIDAE Podargus ocellatus adult - 1 - - 1 - 1 - 1 - APODIDAE Collocalia vanikorensis adult 2 - - 1 1 - ] - - 1 - Collocalia esculenta adult 3 - - 1 - l - ] - 1 - adult - - 1 - 1 - 1 1 - - HEMIPROCNIDAE Hemiprocne mystacea adult ¢ - - ] ] ] - 2 - ] 1 adult 2 ] - - ALCEDINDAE Alcedo atthis adult 3 - 2 3 2 6 ] 7 2 2 4 adult 2 - 1 3 Ceyx lepidus adult 3 - - 4 6 1 3 3 2 2 3 adult 2 1 2 - imm 2 - Andrew W. Kratter et al. 142 Bull. B.O:C> 2001 120@) Halcyon leucopygia adult 3 - ] 7 4 7 4 7 ] =) 5 adult 2 l 2 - imm 3d - - l 1 - 1 - - 1 - Halcyon sancta adult 3 - - 1 - 2 2 - 1 ] - adult 2 - - ] imm 6 - - 2 1 2 2 - 2 | - imm @ - - 1 Halcyon chloris adult ¢ - 1 3 2 3 1 - ] - 2 adult | - Halcyon saurophaga adult 3 - l 1 Z 2 2 jd 1 1 2 adult 9 - - 1 CORACIDAE Eurystomus orientalis imm ¢ - ] - - 2 - 2 - 1 - imm @ - - 1 BUCEROTIDAE Aceros plicatus adult ¢ 3) - - - 4 - 4 - 1 - adult 2 1 - - PITTIDAE Pitta anerythra adult d - - Z 1 1 - 2 - - 1 HIRUNDIDIDAE Hirundo tahitica imm @ - - l Ds - 2 - - - - imm 6 - - 1 CAMPEPHAGIDAE Coracina lineata adult d - 1 3 4 6 3 7 2 7 - adult 2 - 5 1 imm @ - - 1 I - - 1 - 1 - Coracina papuensis adult 3 - - 3 1 4 - 5 2 ] - adult 2 - 1 | imm 6 - - 1 1 1 - 2 2 - - imm @ - - 1 Coracina tenuirostris adult ¢ - - 1 - 4 1 3 ] 2 - adult 2 2 1 - imm 6 - - 1 - 3 1 2 - 2 - imm & - Coracina holopolia adult ¢ - - 4 - B) 1 4 2 2 1 adult 2 1 - - imm ¢ - - 1 1 1 1 1 2 - - Coracina caledonica adult 3 - l 1 - 3 1 ] 1 adult 2 1 - - RHIPIDURIDAE Rhipidura leucophrys adult 3 = - 1 4 6 5 5 1 1 6 adult 2 3 2, - imm 6 - 1 1 2 1 2 1 - 2 imm @ - - l Rhipidura rufifrons adult ¢ ] ] - - 2 - 2 - - ] imm 6 - - l 1 l 1 1 - l - imm 2 - - l Rhipidura cockerelli adult ¢ 2 - - - 4 - 4 . - 4 adult 2 1 ] - imm 2 - - 2 - 2 - ji - - 2 MONARCHIDAE Monarcha castaneiventris adult 3 9 2 5 1] 12 7 15 9 1 11 adult ° 1 1 4 Andrew W. Kratter et al. Monarcha barbata Monarcha cinerascens Myiagra ferrocyanea PACHYCEPHALIDAE Pachycephala pectoralis STURNIDAE Aplonis grandis Aplonis metallica Aplonis cantoroides Mino dumontii CORVIDAE Corvus woodfordi MELIPHAGIDAE Myzomela lafargei NECTARINIIDAE Nectarinia jugularis DICAEIDAE Dicaeum aeneum ZOSTEROPIDAE Zosterops metcalfii imm 6 imm 2 adult d adult © imm 6 imm @ adult 3 adult 2 imm 3 imm 2 adult 3 adult 2 imm 36 adult ¢ adult © adult 3 adult © adult 3 adult © imm @ adult ¢ adult 2 imm 6 imm @ adult ¢ adult 2 adult ? imm & adult 2 imm 6 imm 2 adult 3 imm 2 adult d adult 2 imm ¢ imm 2 adult d adult © imm 3 imm 2 adult 3 adult 2 imm 3 imm 2 imm ? fi pokes 7 1 (not sexed) 1 (not sexed) mis i) — 1 Oo 143 Bend}! =H pW B CD a OB Oh OO PO — Whe 1 Mmm NY Nn OW ht NM bo o>) 1] 1] Noe Nn Bull. B.O.C. 2001 1S) 10 Nn Nn Lo 121(2) Lo Lvs) Nn Andrew W. Kratter et al. 144 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(2) References: Beehler, B. M., Pratt, T. K. & Zimmerman, D. A. 1986. Birds of New Guinea. Princeton Univ. Press, New Jersey. Blaber, S. J. M. 1990. A checklist and notes on the current status of the birds of New Georgia, Western Province, Solomon Islands. Emu 90:205-214. Bregulla, H. L. 1992. Birds of Vanuatu. Anthony Nelson, Shropshire, U. K. Cain, A. J., & Galbraith, I. C. J. 1956. Field notes on birds of the eastern Solomon Islands. Jbis 98: 100-134. Collar, N. J., Crosby, M. J. & Stattersfield, A. J. 1994. Birds to Watch 2. BirdLife Conservation Series No. 4. Diamond, J. M. 1972. Avifauna of the eastern highlands of New Guinea. Publ. Nuttall Orn. Club 12. Dunning, J. B., Jr. 1993. CRC Handbook of avian body masses. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida. Fogden, M. P. L. 1972. The seasonality and population dynamics of equatorial forest birds in Sarawak. Jbis 114: 307-343. Franklin, J.. & D. W. Steadman. 1991. The potential for conservation of Polynesian birds through habitat mapping and species translocation. Conservation Biology 5: 506-521. Galbraith, I. C. J. & Galbraith, E. H. 1962. Land birds of Guadalcanal and the San Cristoval group, eastern Solomon Islands. Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hit.), Zool. 9: 1-86. Kratter, A. W., Steadman, D. W., Smith, C. E., Filardi, C. E. & Webb, H. P. In press. The avifauna of a lowland forest site on Isabel, Solomon Islands. Auk. Marshall, A. J. & Harrison, T. H. 1941. The comparative economy of closely related birds on an island and a continent. Emu 40: 310-318. Rand, A. L. & Gilliard, E. T. 1968. Handbook of New Guinea birds. Natural History Press, Garden City, New York. Ripley, S. D. 1964. A systematic and ecological study of birds in New Guinea. Peabody Mus. Nat. Hist. Bull. 19. Schodde, R. 1977. Survey of birds of southern Bougainville Island, Papua New Guinea. Contributions to Papuasian ornithology V1. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Australia. Sibley, C. G. 1951. Notes on the birds of New Georgia, central Solomon Islands. Condor 53: 81- 2 Stattersfield, A. J., Crosby, M. J., Long, A. J. & Wege, D. C. 1998. Endemic bird areas of the world. BirdLife International, Cambridge, U. K. Steadman, D. W. 1995. Prehistoric extinction of Pacific island birds: biodiversity meets zooarchaeology. Science 267: 1123-1131. Steadman, D. W., Greiner, E. C. & Wood, C. S. 1990. Absence of blood parasites in indigenous and introduced birds from the Cook Islands, South Pacific. Conservation Biology 4: 398-404. Webb, H. P. 1992. Field observations of the birds of Santa Isabel, Solomon Islands. Emu 92: 52- SEE Winker, K. 2000. Obtaining, preserving, and preparing bird specimens. J. Field Ornithology 71: 250-297. Addresses: Andrew W. Kratter, and David W. Steadman, Florida Museum of Natural History, P. O. Box 117800, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA (email for AWK: kratter@flmnh.ufl.edu); Catherine E. Smith & Christopher E. Filardi, Burke Museum, University of Washington, P. O. Box 353010, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 MEMBERSHIP See also website: http://www.boc-online.org Following the approval of the changes to the Rules of the Club at the Special General Meeting on 31st October 2000, Membership of the Club was extended to non-Members of the British Ornithologists’ Union. Subscription rates, as from | January 2001 are now: BOU Members £12.00 US$ 23.00 Non-BOU Members £18.00 US$ 33.00 All paid-up Members of the Club receive (postage free) four quarterly issues of the Bulletin, and the annual index. Applications for Membership, enclosing the annual subscription, should be made to the Hon. Secretary (address as below). Subscription reminder leaflets are enclosed with this issue. The Membership List 2001 is available, free of charge to all requesting a copy, on application to the Hon. Secretary (address below). This list shows addresses (including E-mail addresses, where known), for all paid-up Members as at 31 December 2000. Members are requested to inform the Hon. Secretary of all corrections or changes, without delay, for despatch of the Bulletin. To offset the cost of postage, any contribution, or a stamped and addressed (A5-sized) envelope will be gratefully accepted. INSTITUTIONAL SUBSCRIBERS & APPLICATIONS FOR BACK NUMBERS OR OTHER PUBLICATIONS The Bulletin, together with annual index, may be purchased (postage free) by Institutional Subscribers, on payment of an annual subscription of £25 (or US$45) on application to: The Hon. Publications Officer, J.A. Jobling, 14 The Valley Green, Welwyn Garden City, Herts. AL8 7DQ, UK. Single issues and back numbers of the Bulletin, and also books in the BOC Occasional Publications series may similarly be obtained on request to him. PAYMENTS All amounts quoted are net and should be paid in £ sterling, if possible. Payments in other currencies must include a further £4 for UK bank charges (except for annual rates in US dollars, which are inclusive). All cheques or drafts should be made payable to the British Ornithologists’ Club. If preferred, remittances may be made by bank transfer direct to the Club’s bank account - Barclays Prime Account, Dale House, Wavertree Boulevard, Liverpool L7 9PQ, UK. (Sort Code 20-00-87 Account No. 10211540), with confirmation to the Hon. Treasurer, D.J. Montier, Eyebrook, Oldfield Road, Bickley, Bromley, Kent. BR1 2LF. CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence on membership, changes of address and all other matters should be addressed to: Hon. Secretary, Cdr M.B. Casement, OBE, RN, Dene Cottage, West Harting, Petersfield, Hants. GU31 SPA, UK. (or E-mail: mbcasement@aol.com). For details of Club Meetings see inside front cover. UK Data Protection Act. In order to keep records up to date, and to facilitate despatch of the Bulletin, names and addresses of Members and Subscribers, and the dates of subscription renewal, (but no other personal information) are held on computer disk. If there is any objection to this, please advise the Hon. Secretary, in writing, so that these records can be deleted from the disk. _COMMITTEE Dr. C.F. Mann (Chairman) (2001) R.E. Scott (1998) Vice-Chairman - to be agreed. J.A. Jobling (1999) Cdr. M.B. Casement, OBE., R.N. (Hon. Secretary) (1996) Professor R.A. Cheke (2001) D.J. Montier (Hon. Treasurer) (1997) Mrs M.N. Muller (2001) P.G.W. Salaman (2001) Hon. Editor: Professor C.J. Feare Chairman of Publications Subcommittee: Revd. T.W. Gladwin (as from May 2001) Hon. Publications Officer: J.A. Jobling Registered Charity No. 279583 Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club ISSN 0007-1595 Edited by Professor Chris Feare Volume 121, Number 2, pages 81 - 144 CONTENTS FA EI io occ cms owiowe 0a canna dd nmntaven snecaiaivntes memeuyiednmbdlpiov api Hasse tases aoe aaa 81 KING, B. F. & YONG, D. An unknown scops-owl Otus sp. from Sumba, Indonesia................... 91 VAN BALEN, S. Note on the occurrence of Finsch’s Bulbul on Sumatra ..............cccccceceeeeeeeeeeeees 94 WELLER, A.-A. On types of trochilids in the Natural History Museum, Tring. III. Amazilia alfaroana Underwood (1896), with notes on biogeography and geographical variation in Saucerottia saucerottei SUPETSPECCIES ................0:...c-s-n0iensdesee0nevenesueessnnueaumes cone nee 98 MOYLE, R. G., BIUN, A., BUTIT, B. & SUMPONGOL, D. Brood hosts of Oriental Cuckoo Cuculus saturatus in Sabah, Malaysia ....;.........:0.0s0s.s-0s0asseceneneessssonsnacensnsenoasedeeeeeeeeeen 107 INGELS, J. A review of the neotropical nightjar species group Caprimulgus maculosus, C. nigrescens and C. WRILCEYL ............cc0rceocseecsnsenivencesesanionwensur=hasnbin tel ewaneecceveneses pune 110 HINKELMANN, C. & FIEBIG, J. An early contribution to the avifauna of Parana, Brazil. The Arkady Fiedler expedition of 1928/2399 ..............-.c.sse--sesenesseseesesesssaouncesenssenenestecasennnenannn 116 KRATTER, A. W., STEADMAN, D. W., SMITH, C. E. & FILARDI, C. E. Reproductive condition, — moult, and body mass of birds from Isabel, Solomon Islands ..............ccccecseeesseeeneceeneeeeneeeees 128 Authors are invited to submit papers on topics relating to the broad themes of taxonomy and distribution of birds. Descriptions of new species of birds are especially welcome and will be given priority to ensure rapid publication, subject to successful passage through the normal peer review procedure; they may be accompanied by colour photographs or paintings. On submission, two copies of manuscripts, typed on one side of the paper, double spaced and with wide margins, should be sent to the Editor, Prof. Chris Feare, 2 North View Cottages, Grayswood Common, Haslemere, Surrey GU27 2DN, UK. Note that electronic versions are not required on first submission. Where appropriate half-tone photographs may be included and, where essential to illustrate important points, the Editor will consider the inclusion of colour plates (if possible, authors should obtain funding to support the inclusion of such colour plates). When papers are accepted, revisions should be returned to the Editor as both a hard copy, as outlined above, and also on a 3.5” disk, as Word or Wordperfect files for PC. At this stage authors should send their email addresses, as completion of the editing process and proof reading will be undertaken electronically. Fore instructions on style, see the inside rear cover of Bulletin 121 (1) or the BOC website: www.boc-online.org © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Apart from single copies made for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under UK law, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means, except with prior permission of the publishers. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the Editor; for address see inside rear cover. The Bulletin is despatched from the printer on publication and is sent by Surface Saver Postal Services to all European destinations outside the UK and by Air Saver Postal Services to destinations outside Europe. Those whose subscriptions have not been received by the beginning of a month of publication will have their copies despatched by surface mail, after their current subscription has been paid. Printed on acid-free paper. Published by the BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS’ CLUB Typeset by Alcedo Publishing of Colorado Springs, USA, and printed by Crowes of Norwich, UK Bc? j 71 Zoo? Bi RD he British fh Ornithologists’ Club Volume 121 No.3 September 2001 MEETINGS are held at Imperial College, South Kensington, London, SW7, usually in the Sherfield Building. The nearest Tube station is at South Kensington; a map of the area will be sent to members, on request. (Limited car parking facilities can be reserved, on prior application to the Hon. Secretary). See also website: http://www.boc-online.org The cash bar is‘open from 6.15 pm, and a buffet supper, of two courses followed by coffee, is served at 7.00 pm. (A vegetarian menu can be arranged if ordered at the time of booking). Dinner charges are currently £17.00. Informal talks are given on completion, commencing at about 8.00 pm. FORTHCOMING MEETINGS 25 September Inspector Phil Cannings - The work of a Police Wildlife Liaison Officer. Phil Cannings is an Officer serving with Bedfordshire Police with a deep personal interest in natural history - he is a BTO ‘A’ ringer and a Member of the BOU. He chairs a government sub-committee looking at wildlife legislation and will talk about the work of Police Liaison Officers, and developments in the legal and forensic field, with some examples of the use of forensic science in recent wildlife related cases. Applications to the Hon. Secretary by 11 September please. 6 November Frank D. Steinheimer - Undiscovered Cambodia - the endemics of the Cardamom Mountains. Frank was born in 1971 in Nuremberg, Germany, and studied zoology at Vienna University 1994-98, during which time he made field trips to foreign countries (Europe, Borneo, Thailand, Malaysia). He also gained experience working for the Bird Department of the Vienna Museum, also in Paris Museum. Since September 1998, Frank has been employed in the Bird Group of The Natural History Museum, Tring, working mainly with the wet anatomical and historically important collections (e.g. Darwin). In spring 2000 he took part in an expedition to west Cambodia. Applications to the Hon. Secretary by 23 October please. 4 December Dr. John Sparks Ph.D.FZS, FLS - BIRD QUEST - bringing birds to the TV screen. John has had a lifelong interest in birds, especially waders, wildfowl and seabirds, and has spent 35 years film-making for the BBC Natural History Unit, of which he was appointed Head of the department, in 1983. He has made a number of series (many with Tony Soper), including The Discovery of Animal Behaviour, and as a Producer of Attenborough’s Life on Earth. This filming work has taken him all over the world, and he has also been a tour leader or lecturer aboard several cruise liner and expedition ships to the Antarctic and elsewhere. John is a Scientific Fellow of the Zoological Society and Linnean Society and is greatly in demand as a lecturer. Applications to the Hon. Secretary by 20 November please. Advance notice - Meetings programme for 2002. Provisional bookings have been made for eight dinner meetings on the following Tuesdays: 15 January, 26 February, 16 March, 30 April (AGM), 25 June, 24 September, 5 November and 3 December. Details of speakers will be published when known. Overseas Members visiting Britain are especially welcome at these meetings, and the Hon. Secretary would be very pleased to hear from anyone who can offer to talk to the Club, giving as much advance notice as possible - please contact: Michael Casement, Dene Cottage, West Harting, Petersfield, Hants. GU31 SPA. UK. Tel/FAX:01730-825280 (or Email: mbcasement@aol.com). Club Notices Bulletin of the BRITISH ORNITHOLQGISTS’ CVUB Vol. 121 No.3 Published 17 September 2001 CLUB NOTES The 901st meeting of the Club was held on Tuesday 1 May 2001 at 6.30pm, following the Annual General Meeting. 19 Members and 8 guests attended. Members present were: Dr C.F. MANN (Chairman), Miss H. BAKER, I.R. BISHOP, Cdr M.B. CASEMENT KN, Dr. R.J. CHANDLER, D.J. FISHER, F.M. GAUNTLETT, The Rev. T.W. GLADWIN, D. GRIFFIN, K. HERON, S. LOWE, J.A. JOBLING, D.J. MONTIER, Mrs M.N. MULLER, M.L. PALING, R.C. PRICE, Dr R.P. PRYS-JONES, P.G.W. SALAMAN, and P.J. SELLAR. Guests attending were: Ms G. BONHAM, Mrs C.R. CASEMENT, Mrs M.H. GAUNTLETT, Mrs J.M. GLADWIN, Mrs J.A. JONES, Mrs M. MONTIER, Dr. P.C. RASMUSSEN, and M. WALTON. After dinner, a series of short talks was given by Members on subjects of topical interest; the following is a brief synopsis of the main points presented: Recent discoveries from Serrania de San Lucas, northern Colombia - Paul Salaman gave a brief summary of the highlights of his recent work, illustrated with high quality slides: Serrania de San Lucas is an isolated and biologically-unknown mountain range, rising from sea level to 2,500m in the departments of Antioquia and Bolivar, northern Colombia. As part of the Colombian Evaluation of Biodiversity in the Andes (EBA) Project, ornithological surveys were conducted in the subtropical forest in March 2001. The expedition recorded over 200 bird species with 481 bird captures, which included several threatened and endemic species: White-mantled Barbet Capito hypoleucus, Sooty Ant-Tanager Habia gutturalis, and Saffron-headed Parrot Pionopsitta pyrilia. Three-striped Warbler Basileuterus tristriatus captures may relate to a new subspecies for science, whilst a Sharpbill Oxyruncus cristatus capture represents a new species (monotypic family) for Colombia. The San Lucas massif is unprotected and has been heavily deforestated and colonised in recent years with gold mining activities and coca cultivation, thus greatly hampering potential conservation activities. The political situation in the region is also highly conflictive, with many areas land-mined. This complicates fieldwork, but perhaps this may be the only reason why any forest is remaining at all. Future studies will be conducted at higher elevations in an extensive tract of cloud forest. A new owl in Sri-Lanka. David Fisher reported that a new species of owl had recently been discovered in Sri Lanka by Deepal Warakagoda, one of Sri Lanka’s most active and knowledgeable field ornithologists. A Sunbird tour group, that included David, had seen the bird while with Deepal during a visit to the island in February 2001, and David had made some recordings of its vocalizations. Deepal had been hearing a mystery call for nearly six years and suspected it to be a new species to science. He had obtained recordings of the bird and sent them to Dr. Pamela Rasmussen, who had agreed that it was almost certainly an undescribed species. (By chance, Dr. Rasmussen was present as a guest at the meeting). Deepal finally confirmed that the calls were made by a small owl on 23 January 2001 when he saw the bird for the first time. Shortly afterwards he returned with a colleague who obtained photographs, one of which was published in The Island newspaper on 25 February along with an announcement of the bird’s discovery. David presented copies of the newspaper article for examination, and played the recordings that he had made of the new owl. He suggested that its quiet and infrequent call may have contributed to Club Notices 146 Bull. B.O.C, 200M 2a the species being overlooked for so long - quite remarkable on an island with such a long history of ornithological studies. Deepal Warakagoda is about to start a research project to learn more about the new owl and to try to establish its exact status. To date he has only been able to locate three individuals. An announcement about the new owl is to appear shortly in the Bulletin of the Oriental Bird Club, The Forktail, and Deepal intends to describe the new species in due course in a paper to be co- authored with Dr. Rasmussen. “Long-billed Vulture” Gyps indicus. Pamela Rasmussen presented a short slide show on work she and Steven Parry have done on the taxonomic status of this. They found that the vulture taxa that have been treated as two subspecies under this species throughout the 20th Century are actually highly divergent and are probably not even sister species. The form occurring along the base of the Himalayas and into SE Asia, tenuirostris, has a great many characters (many of which are paedomorphic) that differ from adults of other species of Gyps, while the form from the Indian plains and peninsula, indicus, is a typical Gyps with only a few, minor novel characters. In brief, tenuirostris and indicus have a differently shaped bill, head, and nares; very different distribution and type of feathering on the head and neck; different soft part colours; a clearly distinct flight silhouette; very distinct shape and distribution of contour feathers; different tarsal and pedal proportions and scutellation; and different nestling and juvenile plumages. Differences in egg structure and in nesting substrate are also evident. Osteological specimens were lacking but bones recovered from one skin specimen of each confirm differences observable in skins. DNA sequences recovered from skin samples by Rob Fleischer await study. Based on morphology, these are unquestionably good species that were long ago lumped without careful study due to the allopatric nature of their distributions. Gyps tenuirostris lacks obvious close relatives, while Gyps indicus is, based on morphology, probably most closely related to the very similar Gyps africanus. We suggest the common names “Slender-billed Vulture” and “Indian Vulture” for tenuirostris and indicus, respectively. _ Age class differences _. indicus tenuiro juveniles adults oy eee - ub * ' ay ¢ : ate SEO Photographs showing plumage differences between adult and juvenile Gyps indicus and G. tenuirostris. Club Notices 147 (iE, TEROKOR PAVE VATE) Madagascar Plover Charadrius thoracicus. David Griffin showed some slides of this near- threatened species, taken on a visit to Madagascar in October 2000. One slide showed a bird in an unusual position - sitting with the full length of the tarsus on the ground, and tibia upright. Richard Chandler gave a presentation to illustrate the Plumages of the various taxa of Stilts Himantopus himantopus. Stilts H. himantopus are usually regarded as having five different races; at different times it has been suggested that some or all might be worthy of specific status. The forms with plumages distinguishable in the field are “Black-winged Stilt” Himantopus h. himantopus of Europe and Asia, “Black-necked Stilt” H. h. mexicanus of North America, “White-backed Stilt” H. h. melanurus of South America, “Pied Stilt” H. h. leucocephalus of Australasia and “Hawaiian Stilt” H. h. knudseni. Richard showed a series of colour transparencies (taken in the field) showing the range of plumages exhibited by H. h. himantopus, H. h. mexicanus and H. h. leucocephalus. He concluded that, with the latter two taxa, once adult plumage was attained there appears to be very little variation in plumage, irrespective of age, breeding status or sex. In contrast, the nominate taxon shows a considerable range of different plumage patterns, particularly of head and neck, varying with age, breeding status and sex. These patterns are far more variable from bird to bird than with H. h. mexicanus and H. h. leucocephalus. Two different examples of H. h. himantopus were shown that had head and neck patterns recalling those of H. h. knudseni Clive Mann described how a Sunda Frogmouth Batrachostomus cornutus nested in a garden in Brunei three times in just over a year despite a number of mishaps such as being washed under a garden tap, having its nest and egg pulled from its feet, and a hide or blind falling on it. At one point the adult, a male (the female was never seen) flew from the top of the nesting tree carrying its half-grown young in to a patch of secondary forest. Slides showed the remarkable effectiveness of camouflage in these birds. Martin Gaunlett entertained the meeting with a spirited insight into the vagaries of zoological nomenclature, highlighting mistakes and anomalies of the present binominal system such as Zenaida asiatica, Turnagra capensis, and Telophorus zeylonus. He made a case for dispensing with this, replacing scientific epithets with English names. But his arguments ignored the utter confusion which the Linnaean system was originally designed to replace, and seemed to challenge the purpose of the current ICZN. James Jobling comments that it has long been appreciated that scientific names, like our own surnames, are merely labels, and need not reflect the details of plumage, habits, or geographical distribution of any particular species. What happened to the Bird Collection of the Museum of the Army Medical Department? Robert Prys-Jones said the beginnings of the natural history collection of the Army Medical Department (AMD) date from 1815, when James McGrigor became the AMD Director-General. In 1838, when Edward Burton produced “A Catalogue of the Collection of Mammalia and Birds in the Museum of the Army Medical Department, at Fort Pitt, Chatham’, it comprised nearly 10,000 zoological specimens and included representatives of c. 1,000 taxa of birds. Among the latter were numbers of type specimens described by Burton and John Gould. Following the retirement of Andrew Smith as AMD Director- General in 1858, the natural history component of the museum entered into a period of prolonged decline, during which time it moved with the AMD to Netley, Hampshire, in the early 1860s and then back to Millbank, London, just after the turn of the century. A move to produce an updated catalogue in the 1880s proved abortive, and by 1908 the AMD was disposing of a variety of natural history material to the British Museum (Natural History), although no birds appear to have been included. Subsequently, the AMD museum suffered serious flooding in 1928 and was virtually gutted by air attack in 1940. It seems likely that its important bird collection either decayed or was destroyed, but definitive evidence appears lacking and it is possible some part could survive. Club Notices 148 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) If any reader can throw light on the collection’s fate, please contact Robert Prys-Jones, Bird Group, The Natural History Museum, Akeman St, Tring, Herts HP23 6AP, U.K.; e-mail: R.Prys- Jones@nhm.ac.uk”. ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING The Annual General Meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club was held in the Sherfield Building, Imperial College, London SW7 on Tuesday 1 May 2001 at 6 p.m. with The Reverend T.W. Gladwin in the Chair. Apologies had been received from Professor Chris Feare (Hon. Editor), Francis Stone (Hon. Archivist), Captain Sir Thomas Barlow Bt., Amberley Moore, Bob Scott, Paul Salaman and Nigel Redman. 17 Members were present. The Minutes of the Annual General Meeting held on 2 May 2000, which had been published (Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 120: 144-145), were approved and signed by the Chairman. Chairman’s report. Against the background of the review he had presented last year (see Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 120: 138-41), the year 2000 was essentially one of consolidation and new opportunities for the Club to increase its contribution to ornithology. The millennium year saw a major milestone in the Club’s history. The adoption of the new Rules opened the membership to non-members of the British Ornithologists’ Union (the Union), whilst continuing to recognise the Club’s historic links which it continues to enjoy with the Union. The widening of the voting rights should further secure the Club’s objectives. The Club has agreed in principle to become co-publishers of the Union’s Checklist series. In essence, there will be an equal partnership in which the Union will edit, and the Club will partly finance, the publications. At a personal level he believed there are other areas in which mutual co-operation between the Club and the Union would result in significant benefits to ornithology, as well as to our respective organisations. The Club’s net assets increased to nearly £323,000 in 2000 and it is right that these should be partly applied for the benefit of ornithology in this way. The Bulletin continues to improve and the expected savings resulting from changes to the arrangements for its production and printing were achieved. Some years ago, and in order to distinguish it from the Union, the Club decided that its logo should take the form of a flying, rather than a standing ibis, and the Club’s tie was redesigned accordingly. The new cover of the Bulletin, which now also depicts ibis in flight, seems to have gained majority approval. The Club has established an excellent Website (http://www.boc.online,org), and the Hon. Secretary can be contacted via e-mail (mbcasement@aol.com). In accordance with the system of rotation he, also David Griffin, and Nigel Redman, will be standing down from the Committee this year. As a result, next year’s Committee will show at least four changes. In addition, Dr Robert Prys-Jones had recently advised that, due to pressures of work, he is unable to continue as Chairman of the Publications Sub-Committee. After all that has been achieved over the past few years he suggested this is a good time for significant changes to be made. In addition, James Jobling succeeded John Farnsworth as Publications Officer from Ist January 2001, although the smooth handover of these duties had already been progressed in stages throughout the year. Hitherto, the Publications Sub-Committee has been able to conduct much of its required business relatively informally. With the increasing publications commitments this Sub-Committee will now be meeting regularly, and all its business minuted for communication to, and approval by, the Committee. He had enjoyed serving on the Club’s Committee for the last eleven years, and wished especially to thank all who have worked so hard for the Club during his four year term as Club Notices 149 Bull BOC, 2001213) Chairman. In respect of this last year, he recorded his thanks to Michael Casement (Hon. Secretary), David Montier (Hon. Treasurer), Dr Robert Prys-Jones (Vice-Chairman, and Chairman of the Publications Sub-Committee), members of the Committee and Publications Sub-Committee, Professor Chris Feare (Hon. Editor of the Bulletin), and Mary Muller for preparing the indexes to the Bulletin; the Hon. Publications Officers, John Farnsworth (to 31st December) and James Jobling (from Ist January); Francis Stone (Hon. Archivist), Paul Salaman for setting up the Club’s Website and agreeing to become its manager; the trustees of the Herbert Stevens Trust Fund; and Imperial College for the provision of facilities for Club meetings and dinners. The Annual Report of the Committee for 2000. The Hon. Secretary pointed out that this was now an integral part of the Annual Accounts, copies of which were before all Members present, and would be published in the June issue of Bulletin 121 (2). He drew attention to some of the highlights of this report, and called for any questions. There were none. Concerning Membership, he warned that he expected there may be a net loss at year-end. Despite formal reminders, the high number of resignations and unpaid subscriptions currently still outstanding was disappointing; when these non-payers are removed, in accordance with Rule (24), there will be a significant drop in membership. Although the change in Rules, the re-design of the Bulletin and the wide publicity on the website should all facilitate an increase in applications to join, the initial response to these measures suggested that the number of new members was unlikely to balance this shortfall. The Annual Accounts for 2000. The Hon. Treasurer presented the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2000, and drew attention to the salient features, which were detailed in the paragraphs on finance in the Trustees’ Report of Activities and Review of the Year Bulletin 121: 85-86. The adoption of the Accounts was proposed by Mrs Mary Muller, seconded by David Griffin, and approved by all present. The Bulletin. In the absence of Chris Feare, Michael Casement said that the Hon. Editor had asked him to state that he had nothing significant to add to the text of the Annual Report; he confirmed that 61 papers had been received, of which 37 had been accepted, and the steady flow of papers had continued with another two received in the last month. The Editor thanked all those who had completed the reader’s survey questionnaire, but regretted that he had been too pre-occupied yet to produce his analysis of the results. Election of Officers and Committee. The Chairman said that the Committee’s proposals had been published in Bul/. B.O.C. 121 (1): 8:- Dr C.F. Mann to be elected to succeed him, as Chairman; Mrs M.N. Muller vice Mr D. Griffin; Mr P.G.W. Salaman vice Mr N.J. Redman, and Professor R.A. Cheke vice Dr C.F. Mann (on assuming the Chairmanship). There being no other nominations to the offices of Secretary and Treasurer, Commander M.B. Casement was re- elected Hon. Secretary, and D.J. Montier re-elected as Hon. Treasurer. These changes were proposed by Revd. T.W. Gladwin, seconded by Mr. J.A. Jobling, and approved nem. con. Following the resignation of Robert Prys-Jones as Chairman of the Publications Sub-Committee, and as Vice-Chairman of the Club, the vacancy of Vice-Chairmanship would be filled, as decided by the Committee, at the next opportunity. James Jobling proposed a vote thanks to Tom Gladwin for all his help over the past eleven years, which was enthusiastically supported by all present. No other items for discussion had been notified in accordance with Rule (12), and the meeting closed at 6.32 p.m. Club Notices 150 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 1248) BOOKS RECEIVED Marshall, J.T. 2001. The Gray-cheeked Thrush, Catharus minimus, and its New England Subspecies, Bicknell s Thrush, Catharus minimus bicknelli. Pp. 136, 2 colour plates, two black and white photographs, sonograms and 5 maps. Publications of the Nuttall Ornithologicual Club, No. 28, published by National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. No price given. ISBN 1-877973-40-8. This is a delightful, though possibly long-winded, treatise on whether Catharus bicknelli is a full species or a clinal subspecies of the Grey-cheeked Thrush C. minimus. The book, which the author refers to as a report, re-examines the material, mostly consisting of museum specimens (all listed in an appendix) and vocal patterns and concludes that G. J. Wallace who, as far back as 1939, considered it a subspecies of Grey-cheeked, got it right. In addition he goes on to catalogue the destruction of the nesting habitat since Wallace’s day. Like the late A R Phillips before him, and in style not that dissimilar but less provocative or fanciful, Marshall leaves no stone unturned in his quest for what he sees as a wrong needing to be put right - bicknelli is a species too far. Whilst re-examination of the material is a very laudable aim, it is clear from the outset that Marshall has a fairly good idea of the outcome and as such lacks a certain objectivity. The lengthy prognosis of the late Henri Ouellet, with whom Marshall discussed Catharus taxonomy (but clearly came to different conclusions), is regrettably and rather unceremoniously dismissed. The basis of his argument is that major subspecies are readily recognisable from the diverse set of plumage and vocal characteristics they display, and in this he cites such species as Slate- coloured Junco Junco hyemalis. Minor differences are considered clinal. However, there is no mention of modern species concepts (most of the references cited are pre-1998) and the increasing tendency towards creating new species by splitting existing ones is treated largely with disdain. This is an interesting book, though one likely to attract-only the most avid student of thrush taxonomy. This is a pity as there should always be a place for books like this, written from the heart and not for any commercial imperative. Peter Clement BirdLife International 2000. Threatened birds of the world. Pp 864; 1186 Globally Threatened species accounts, distribution maps, illustrations. 727 Near Threatened species accounts. References. Lynx Edicions and BirdLife International. Barcelona and Cambridge. ISBN 0 94688 39 6 (UK), 84 87334 28 8 (Spain). £70. The disturbing but very clearly explained thrust of this joint BirdLife International and Lynx Edicions publication is the potential extinction of more than a hundred bird species in the short- term (perhaps just 10 years) and potentially over a thousand species in the longer term. The introduction to the threatened species accounts discusses extinction risk and opportunities for action, documentation and assessment of extinction risk and categorisation of threat status. Each of the 1186 species thus determined as Globally Threatened and 3 as Conservation Dependent is allocated a half page A4 text but with concise summaries on degree of threat, identification, range and population, ecology, threats, conservation, targets, references, a distribution map and full colour illustration. A further 77 pages are devoted to 727 Near Threatened species and other lower risk categories (Least Concern, Data Deficient, Not Evaluated, Extinct). 69 pages then summarise all threat categories for all species discussed in the main text, as listed by territory. References include full citations for the summary references given in the threatened species accounts. An appendix lists all the artists used and the original sources for their illustrations. This is an essential publication for all concerned with the future welfare of bird species whether in terms of protection, habitat conservation, the environment, field research and project funding. S. J. Farnsworth Club Notices ly Bull BiOC.€. 20011216) Zalles, J. 1. & Bildstein, K. L., (eds.) 2000. Raptor Watch: A global directory of raptor migration sites. Pp. xviii + 419. £37.00. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International; and Kempton, PA, USA: Hawk Mountain Sanctuary (BirdLife Conservation Series No. 9) The migration of raptors at watchpoints throughout the world has fascinated bird-watchers, scientists and conservationists for years The contents of this book are fascinating and impressive; and they will form a background source of knowledge to build upon and develop in future years. Over 800 “raptor biologists” contributed to the 10 year project that identified 388 “raptor-migration watchsites or hot spots”. Introductory chapters deal with the “conservation opportunity”, a global analysis and regional introductions, before the book’s meat of 316 pages packed with site information. European migration watchers will be familiar with Falsterbo, Sweden and the Bosphorus, Turkey, whilst in North America Hawk Mountain, Pennsylvania will be a well known name. Amongst the detailed descriptions of the 388 sites, however, are some less familiar names and one is left wondering as to the criteria used to justify inclusion. How is it that Sweden has only one watchsite identified (not surprisingly Falsterbo) whilst a similar number of sites for the United Kingdom identifies (surprisingly?) Calf of Man. This first edition can only be looked upon as a start to a programme that has still some way to go. The gaps appear large, but they have been identified. North America and Europe/Middle East are well recorded, but there are still many blanks in Africa (particularly central and west) and Asia from the Tien Shen mountains through to the Indian subcontinent. The world’s raptor migration enthusiasts need have no fear that it has all been done — there is plenty out there still to be discovered, but don’t try to discover it without first consulting this magnificent directory. Hawk Mountain Sanctuary and BirdLife International are to be congratulated on the production of a volume packed with so much essential information. Bob Scott Skerrett, A. & Bullock, I. 2001. Birds of Seychelles. 320 pp., 53 colour plates by Tony Disley, line illustrations in text by Mark Andrews and Tony Disley. Christopher Helm/A & C Black, London. ISBNO-7136-3973-3 (pbk). £25. This excellent new Helm guide is the first guide to the birds of Seychelles to appear since 1974. Since then, major advances in knowledge of endemic landbirds, breeding seabirds and migrant visitors to the Seychelles have been made. This book illustrates and describes the 242 species that have been accepted by the Seychelles Bird Records Committee or who’s status in the islands is uncertain, but in terms of the comprehensive treatment of the 66 breeding species this guide is more of an up-to-date handbook. For these species, descriptions of the birds are followed by accounts of behaviour, breeding biology, range, threats and conservation. Migrants receive detailed description together with diagnostic features of possible confusion species. Brief introductory sections describe the island groups within the Seychelles, their climate and important bird- watching sites, the work of the Seychelles Bird Records Committee and a check-list of species currently accepted, and a summary of the origins of the Seychelles avifauna. The illustrations are generally superb; I particularly like the illustration of an adult Sooty Tern showing turquoise underparts — this effect is produced by reflection from the sea, but causes much confusion among tourists and has not, to my knowledge, been depicted before. To ornithologists with interests in endemic birds and breeding seabirds and their conservation, and to birdwatchers planning to visit the islands, this book is an essential and attractive companion. Visitors should prepare themselves for the unexpected, however — many migrants, from Eurasia, the Afrotropics and the Oriental region find their way there, and the colonisation of some islands by Black-crowned Night Herons during the last decade illustrates the dynamic nature of the avifauna. Chris Feare F. W Duckworth et al. 152 Bull. B-O.C. ZOOL V2} A new species of wagtail from the lower Mekong basin by F.W. Duckworth, Per Alstrom, PR Davidson, T. D. Evans, C. M. Poole, Tan Setha & R. Ff. Timmins Received 12 March 2001 On 13 December 1972, Kitti Thonglongya collected two black-and-white wagtails from Ubon Ratchathani Province, Thailand, now held in the Thailand Institute of Scientific and Technological Research, Bangkok, Thailand (TISTR). These formed the basis for Lekagul & Round’s (1991) illustration of ‘Motacilla alba alboides’. Wagtails broadly fitting this picture of ‘M. a. alboides’ were found locally in south Laos in February 1993, but generated minimal interest because they (apparently) fitted a recognised taxon, as portrayed in an excellent field guide. Intensive bird surveys across Laos up to 2000 (Duckworth 1996, Thewlis et al. 1996, 1998, Davidson et al. 1997, Evans & Timmins 1998, Duckworth et al. 1998a, 1999, in press, Round 1998, Showler et al. 1998, Evans et al. 2000, Evans in press, WCS Lao Program unpublished data) recorded the same wagtail only in the south of the country. In 1997, these wagtails were suspected to breed in far southern Laos. This would be a major extension of known range; M. a. alboides, from the Himalayas and central China, breeds no closer than northern Vietnam (Vaurie et a/. 1960) and north Laos (Duckworth er al. 1998a, 1999; R. J. Tizard in litt. 2001). The first intensive bird survey of riverine habitat in Cambodia, in 1998, found this wagtail (‘M. a. alboides’) breeding widely across the Mekong tributaries of the north-east of the country (Timmins & Men Soriyun 1998). In February 1999, F. Goes, N. J. van Zalinge & CMP travelled fresh parts of the north-east, and again found it breeding widely, as did N. J. van Zalinge, JWD & CMP in February 2000. Robson’s (2000) field guide to South-east Asian birds illustrates accurately M. a. alboides, and shows it to be a very different bird from the breeding wagtail of southern Indochina. Examination of specimens of all possible confusion taxa in TISTR, the Natural History Museum, Tring, UK (BMNH), and the American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA (AMNH) during 2000 confirmed the distinctness of what we previously thought to be ‘M. a. alboides’. On 9-16 February 2001, PA, JWD, PD, CMP & TS visited the Mekong, San and Kong rivers in the vicinity (upstream) of Stung Treng, Stung Treng Province, northeast Cambodia, observed well over 100 individuals of the unknown wagtail in adult and second calendar-year plumages, and collected 3 adult males, 3 adult females and 2 first-adult (second calendar-year) females (see Appendix 1). Juveniles were observed and photographed around Kampi, Kratie province, on 14-15 April 2001 by PD. Collected birds were kept in alcohol until they were prepared as specimens; one remains in alcohol. Six specimens were prepared with the right wing detached and spread, so that details of the wings can be more easily studied. PA compared 6 of these specimens, plus photographs of the other two, directly with specimens of possible confusion JF. W Duckworth et al. I S13) Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) taxa, in particular African Pied Wagtail Motacilla a. aguimp (4 on loan from BMNH) and M. aguimp vidua (11 on loan from BMNH; 11 in the Swedish Museum of Natural History, Stockholm, Sweden [NRM]; and one in the Museum of Evolution, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden), having previously studied large series of all possible confusion taxa in e.g. BMNH and AMNH. JWD and TDE compared specimens of the unknown wagtail with large series of specimens of possible confusion taxa in BMNH. The following measurements were taken on all individuals caught: wing length (maximum chord) and tail length (ruler inserted under the undertail-coverts) to the nearest 0.5 mm; bill length (to skull), tarsus length (to the last complete scutum before the toes), and hind-claw length (to the thin skin at the base) to the nearest 0.1 mm. Wing formula was described with primaries (P) numbered descendantly and secondaries (S) numbered ascendantly. Total length (bill tip to tail tip) was measured to the nearest mm on 4 specimens by placing the specimens on their backs on a ruler. All measurements were taken by PA on the day of collection, except total length, which was taken by Anders Hansson just before the specimens were prepared. In the description, rectrix is abbreviated R, and the rectrices are numbered from inner to outer; greater covert is abbreviated GC, and they are numbered ascendantly. In addition to the birds caught, 10 were filmed using a Sony DCR-TR7100E camcorder through a Swarovski AT 80 HD telescope, and 4 were photographed. The video footage and photographs were compared with photographs of possible confusion taxa, in particular M. aguimp vidua (n=15). Songs and calls of many birds were heard, and songs of at least 12 males and calls of c. 20 individuals were tape-recorded using a Sony DAT recorder TCD-D8 and a Telinga Pro parabolic reflector/microphone. Sonograms were made of “simple’ songs from 10 individuals, ‘complex’ songs from 4 individuals, and calls from 13 individuals, using the software Canary 1.2.4 (Mitchell et al. 1995). The tape recordings and sonograms were compared with possible confusion taxa, in particular M@. aguimp vidua (n=11) assembled from various sources. In the following text, topography, age, moult and voice terminology follow Alstrom et al. (in press). First-adult refers to the immature plumage obtained through the post-juvenile moult when there is no pre-breeding moult (and accordingly no difference between first-winter and first-summer); first-‘winter’ and first-‘summer’ are used for M. aguimp to indicate that these plumages are not so strongly related to the seasons as in Eurasian wagtails; first-year refers collectively to juvenile, first-“winter’ and first-‘summer’, or juvenile and first-adult. In the voice descriptions, an e/ement is a discrete, unbroken unit in a sonogram; a note is a discrete sound which, however, does not necessarily consist of a single element; a phrase refers to a series of two or more different notes that is given twice (rarely more times) in succession; a rattle is a multiple, fast repetition of either a single very short element or a phrase of very short elements; and a strophe is an uninterrupted series of notes that is separated from other strophes by silent pauses. Original descriptions and/or type specimens of most of the available names listed in Sharpe (1885) and all those in Vaurie et al. (1960) were studied, and literature was searched for taxa described subsequently. J. W Duckworth et al. 154 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) The south Indochinese wagtail (Plate 1, 2) is a distinctive, hitherto unnamed, taxon, for which we propose the name: Mekong Wagtail Motacilla samveasnae sp. nov. Holotype The Natural History Museum, Tring, UK, BMNH reg. no. 2001.8.1, field no. JWDKHO09, adult male, San river (‘Se San channel’ on original label), Stung Treng province, Cambodia, 13°32'28"N, 106°04'12"E, c.50maz.s.1., 13 February 2001. Collected by PA and JWD, prepared by Anders Hansson (Plate 2). Diagnosis Adult and first-adult: Plumage lacks green or yellow. Distinguished from White- browed Wagtail Motacilla maderaspatensis by all-white throat and white patch on side of neck. Told from all taxa in the White Wagtail M. alba complex by blackish central stripe on the forehead (extending to the base of the bill, and including the bases of the feathers) and all-blackish ear-coverts, from all except VM. a. subpersonata, M. a. ocularis and M. a. lugens also by blackish lores, and from M. a. alboides and M. a. personata also by white sides of neck. Told from Japanese Wagtail M. grandis by all-white throat, white patch on side of neck and blackish central stripe on the forehead. Further separated from M. maderaspatensis, many M. grandis and all taxa in the M. alba complex (except some first-year /ugens) by, from above, dark remiges with all- white bases to the outer and inner webs of the secondaries and inner primaries, forming a white bar (most pronounced on inner primaries in first-adult female). Closely resembles African Pied Wagtail M. a. aguimp and M. aguimp vidua; most safely distinguished by the pattern of the remiges, in particular the more extensive white outer edges to P1—P5 (see below). Juvenile: Plumage mostly brownish-grey and white. Differs from M. maderaspatensis, M. grandis, M. alba ssp. and M. aguimp by combination of pale throat with dark malar stripes, dark ear-coverts and a dark loral stripe (can be restricted to proximal lores), and rather extensively dark-centred median and greater coverts. Description of holotype Plumage: Forehead (to base of bill, and including basal parts of feathers), crown and nape blackish (very faint brown tinge to central and rear crown and nape). Long, broad white supercilium from base of bill to slightly beyond rear of ear-coverts; supercilium so broad that blackish on forehead reduced to narrow stripe, hardly visible from side view, even in the hand. Lores show tapering, ‘triangular’ blackish stripe. Ear-coverts blackish, with thin white crescent (broken eye-ring) below eye. Broad blackish, slightly U-shaped, breast-band, which reaches onto lower part of otherwise white throat; border between blackish and white on throat slightly mottled and not clear-cut. Breast-band connected by broad blackish ‘spur’ to lower rear end of ear-coverts and by thinner blackish ‘spur’ to junction of nape/mantle/scapulars, thereby isolating prominent white patch on sides of neck. Colour of crown and nape F.W Duckworth et al. LSS Bull nBsO: Ce 2001 s1210(3)) Plate 1. Motacilla samveasnae. (a, ¢, e) different adult (?) males; (b, d) different adult females, the one in b paired to the male in a; (f) juvenile. The white patch on the side of the neck appears unusually large in e. (a—e) from Stung Treng Province, Cambodia, mid-February 2001, (f) from Kratie province, Cambodia, mid-April 2001. Photographs: Pete Davidson (a, b, f) and Per Alstrom (c, d, e; from video). % W. Duckworth et al. 156 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Plate 2. Six of the specimens in the type series. (a, b) from left to right: Adult male BMNH 2001.8.1 (holotype), adult female BMNH 2001.8.3, first-adult female NRM 20016100, adult female BMNH 2001.8.2, first-adult female BMNH 2001.8.4 and adult male BMNH 2001.8.5. (c) top row: BMNH 2001.8.5, BMNH 2001.8.1, BMNH 2001.8.2; bottom row: BMNH 2001.8.3, BMNH 2001.8.4, NRM 20016100. Photographs: Goran Frisk (a, b) and Lars-Erik Jonsson (c). 5. W Duckworth et al. S57 BUN BIO, 2001.12 1(3)) merges with blackish-brown mantle and scapulars. Back, rump and proximal median uppertail-coverts similar to mantle, although slightly tinged greyish. Proximal lateral uppertail-coverts blackish with broad whitish outer edges and greyish-white inner edges. Distal lateral uppertail-coverts tinged more brownish. Breast below blackish breast-band, flanks, belly and undertail-coverts white, slightly tinged greyish (especially on flanks, but here largely concealed by folded wings). Lesser coverts blackish with brown tinge. Median coverts: outers mainly white with brownish-tinged blackish bases; progressively more extensively blackish, especially on inner webs, towards body; innermost feather mainly blackish with white tip and edges, broadest on outer web. GC1 blackish-brown with c. 2 mm white tip to outer and inner webs, c. 1 mm white edge to outer web, and white edge to inner web c. | mm wide distally and c. 2.5 mm wide basally; GC2—GC7 show progressively more white on inner (except on GC6—GC7) and especially outer webs, outer web being mainly white with only indistinct grey-brown smudges on GC6—GC7; GC8—GC10 largely blackish-brown (presumably with quite broad white edge to outer web of GC8 when fresh, but now almost completely worn off) (Plate 2). Tertials blackish-brown, with very indistinct, narrow paler edges; longest tertial has white basally on outer web (concealed by greater coverts). Primary coverts blackish with brown tinge, with narrow whitish edges basally to outer webs, and prominent whitish patches basally on inner webs (extending more than halfway towards tips). Alula feathers blackish, with progressively broader white fringes from largest to smallest feather. Carpal covert blackish with c. 1 mm white fringe. P1 white basally with dark brown shaft and c. 25 mm-long brown-tinged blackish distal portion, latter with progressively narrower white edges to both webs (extending very narrowly to tip of feather on outer web and to c. 18 mm from tip of feather on inner web). P2—P4 show slightly shorter white outer and inner edges and progressively more extensive dark distal portions; on P5—P8 dark distal portion extends narrowly along shaft to base on inner web, and white base to outer web and edge to the same progressively become less extensive (white base entirely covered by primary coverts on P7—P8); P9 dark on outer web with very narrow white edge throughout length (widest at base); P10 (minute) all white. S1 white basally with brown-tinged blackish shaft and c. 28 mm long distal portion; broad white edge to outer web, progressively narrower towards tip and very narrowly surrounds tip and narrowly reaches up on inner web (broadens towards base). S2—S4 show progressively more white basally and on edges and tips, whereas amount of white on S5—S6 decreases progressively. White bases to remiges form a broad white band on upperwing when spread, broadest on central—outer secondaries and inner primaries (Plate 2). On the folded wing, the white outer edges to the secondaries form a uniform white bar along the wing (while the white outer edges to the inner primaries are concealed) (Plate 2). Underwing-coverts white with mainly concealed grey bases to the primary and secondary coverts; underwing looks largely white with dark tips to the remiges. RI—R4 blackish with a faint brown tinge (left R4 shows a thin white stripe, c. 7 mm long, basally on inner web). R5—R6 white (including shaft) with blackish base to outer web and extensively blackish along edge of inner web. Feathers on tibia whitish with blackish centres. % W. Duckworth et al. 158 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Condition of plumage: Most of plumage worn, especially median coverts, inner greater coverts, tertials and rectrices. A few scattered feathers on the forehead, crown (mainly sides) and nape have been renewed later than the rest of the plumage. Due to wear, it is not possible to judge e.g. how broad the pale edges to the tertials and inner greater coverts were when they were fresh; whether the primary coverts had distinct pale edges along their entire lengths when they were fresh; or to what extent the brown tinge above is the result of wear and bleaching. The colour contrast between the forehead and sides of the crown, on the one hand, and the mantle, on the other hand, may be due to the fact that the former parts have fresher feathers than the latter parts. The distal uppertail-coverts are browner than the proximal uppertail- coverts, presumably because the former are generally more exposed than the latter. It seems likely that most of the dark feathers were at least marginally blacker when fresh, as is generally the case in wagtails (Alstrom ef al. in press). Bare parts: Bill black. Iris dark brown. Very thin orbital ring dark grey. Tarsus, toes and claws greyish-black; soles rather pale grey with faint buffish tinge. Measurements: Total length 175; wing 86.5; tail 78.0; bill 19.3; tarsus 20.7; hind claw 6.4. Wing formula: WP=P7—P8, P9 —2, P6—1.5, P5 —8, P4—14, P3 -18, P2 21, Pl —23; emarginations to P6—P8; lacks distinct notches. Paratypes Plumage: All7 paratypes (see Appendix 1), except adult male AMNH skin 833352, were directly compared with the holotype. Adult male AMNH skin 833352 and adult female BMNH A/2001.6.1 were not directly compared with each other, nor with any other paratype, although colour photographs taken at collection were compared with the rest of the type series. Accordingly, exact differences in colour hues between these two specimens and the others are unclear. Adult male BMNH 2001.8.5 is slightly paler and browner above than the holotype (Plate 2), and judging from photographs and field notes, adult male AMNH skin 833352 seems to be even marginally paler (mantle and scapulars described as dark greyish-brown in the field). The four females compared directly resemble each other in the colouration above (Plate 2), as apparently (from photographs and field notes) does adult female BMNH A/2001.6.1. Females are clearly paler and greyer on the upperparts than the males, with more contrast between the grey-brown mantle/ scapulars and blackish ear-coverts and forehead/crown (at least anterior parts and sides of crown blackish) (Plates 2). In females, newly moulted feathers on the upperparts (see below) are greyer, less brown-tinged, than worn feathers. The width of the blackish breast-band varies individually (Plate 2). The holotype has the most black. On most individuals it extends onto the lowermost part of the throat, but at least in BMNH 2001.8.4 the entire throat is white. The wing pattern varies individually, with age, and to a lesser extent sex (Plate 2). Lesser coverts are blackish with a brown tinge in both males (as in the holotype), but they are slightly paler and tinged more grey-brown in the females. The centrally placed median coverts of BMNH 2001.8.5 show less dark on the inner webs (reduced F. W Duckworth et al. [59 BuIBsOiC, 2001 121(3) to an isolated dusky spot) than on any other specimen, which are all rather similar to each other and to the holotype. In adult male AMNH skin 833352, GC3—GC7 show more white, especially on the outer webs (all-white outer web on GC 6). Adult male BMNH 2001.8.5 shows even more white on the greater coverts than AMNH skin 833352 (e.g., GC5—GC7 have all-white outer webs). Pattern of the greater coverts varies only slightly in the females. They show less white basally on the outer webs, especially, and inner webs than the males. All except one have extensively dark outer webs to GC1—GC7, with just a little whitish basally (well concealed by the median coverts); in BMNH A/2001.6.1, GC6 is nearly all white on the outer web, with an indistinct dusky smudge. The patterns of the alula feathers, carpal covert and primary coverts are rather similar in all adults. The two first-adult females, however, have narrower and less distinct whitish tips and outer edges to the smallest and central alula feathers, BMNH 2001.8.4 also to the carpal covert. In contrast to the adults, the two first-adult females lack a distinct whitish edge to the inner web of the central alula feather, BMNH 2001.8.4 also lacks a distinct whitish edge to the inner web of the carpal covert. The primary coverts of the two first-adult females are browner, more worn, more pointed and have more frayed tips than in the adults, and they lack the adults’ very thin whitish edges to the bases of the outer webs of the outer feathers and their distinct whitish patch along the edge basally of the inner webs. Compared with the holotype, adult male BMNH 2001.8.5 shows longer and broader white outer edge to P9; all-white outer web basally to P8 (equal to tip of longest primary covert); all-white outer web basally to P7 (reaching 2 mm beyond tip of longest primary covert); and white outer web basally to P6 reaches 3 mm beyond tip of longest primary covert. Adult female BMNH 2001.8.2 and adult male AMNH skin 833352 resemble the holotype on P6—P9, whereas adult female BMNH 2001.8.3 and the two first-adult females lack white on the outer web of P6 beyond the tip of the corresponding primary covert. The two first-adult females also show marginally less white on the outer webs of P1—P5, compared with the holotype and the other adults. The pattern of the secondaries is basically similar in all adults, although in no paratype are the white edges to the distal portion of the inner webs quite so distinct as in the holotype. AMNH skin 833352, BMNH 2001.8.3 and BMNH 2001.8.5 have slightly narrower white outer edges to the secondaries than the holotype and the other two adult paratypes, possibly because of greater wearing. In both first-adult females, the dark on the outer webs of the secondaries is so extensive that very little or no white is visible on the bases of the outer webs beyond the tips of the greater coverts, resulting in less distinct white bar on the upper surface of the secondaries on the spread wing than in adults (Plate 2). Moreover, the whitish edges and tips to the outer webs are narrow and indistinct in the two first-adults (except on two newer feathers in NRM 20016100), giving the impression of mainly dark secondaries on the folded wing in the first-adult females, unlike in all of the adults, in which they forma white bar (Plate 2). On the inner webs, the extent of white is rather similar in the first- adults and the adults, although the dark distal portions have insignificant whitish tips and edges in the first-adults. F. W Duckworth et al. 160 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Bare parts: No variation noted. Measurements: See Tables 1 and 2 for summaries. Etymology The specific name honours the late Sam Veasna (pronounced ‘Sam Veeshna’), one of Cambodia’s leading ornithologists and conservationists, who died, tragically young, on 3 December 1999 of malaria, contracted during fieldwork in northern Cambodia. The English name indicates that it is the only wagtail breeding in the lower Mekong catchment, to which on current knowledge it is restricted. Moreover, it draws attention to the major, yet desperately fragile, geographic feature of this bird’s very restricted range. Sexing, ageing and moult Sexing All specimens were sexed tentatively, based on colouration of upperparts, behaviour immediately prior to capture, and cloacal protuberance/brood patch. Sex was later confirmed internally (except, yet, for AMNH skin 833352 and BMNH A/2001.6.1). Females are distinctly paler and greyer on the crown, nape, mantle, scapulars, back, rump and lesser coverts than males, and show more pronounced contrast between these parts and the blackish lores, ear-coverts and breast-band than males (Plates 1-2). Sexing was possible in the field, often even when birds were seen singly, but plumage differences are slight and experience is needed to use them. Moreover, there may be some overlap in the colouration of the upperparts, especially between first-adult male and adult female, as is the case in other black-and-white wagtails (Alstrom ef a/. in press). In our specimens, females are more extensively dark on the greater coverts than males, but we suspect that a larger sample would reveal considerable overlap between the sexes in this respect. Males are larger than females (Table 1), the sample showing no overlap. Males showed a prominent cloacal protuberance, but no trace of a brood patch, while females showed less of a cloacal protuberance and a more swollen abdomen next to the cloaca; two birds (BMNH 2001.8.3 and 2001.8.2) had begun to develop a brood patch. Only birds matching males in upperparts colouration were definitely heard singing ‘simple’ song; the only possible record of a female in song concerned a bird giving ‘complex’ song once, that appeared to match a female in colour above; seen under poor conditions, it may in fact have been a first-adult male. Ageing Juvenile plumage (Plate 1) is easily distinguished from subsequent plumages by the relatively pale brownish-grey upperparts, less distinct head pattern, and diffuse dark grey or brownish-grey patch on the central breast. The median and greater coverts show more extensive dark centres and more diffuse off-white or buffish outer edges than in adult (but detailed pattern unknown). JF. W Duckworth et al. 161 Bull. ab O.C. 200 1213) TABLE 1 Measurements of M. samveasnae and M. aguimp. Numbers in brackets refer to, in sequence, mean, standard deviation and sample size. M.samveasnae Male Female Wing 86.5—87.0 (86.7; 0.29; 3) 80.0—83.0 (81.4; 1.19; 5) Tail 78.0—81.5 (79.5; 1.80; 3) 75.0—78.0 (76.6; 1.25; 4) Bill NO 197 6n(19R4- 012 1:73) LOO 92 (19a: 0.085, 5) Tarsus D207 (20:5; 10.25% 3) 18.6—20.4 (19.8; 0.74; 5) Hind-claw 6.3-6.4 (6.4; 0.06; 3) 5.9-6.4 (6.1; 0.19; 5) M. a. vidua (adult and first-year) Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia (Cramp 1988) Male Female Wing 93.0—102.0 (96.4; 3.07; 10) SS.0—960m less 2-395 iil) Tail 86.0—92.0 (90.0; 3.52; 10) S520 —93n0N (Si eles3- oO. Wh) Bill 17.6-19.1 (18.3; 0.48; 10) NG Sy (CS OaTays 1b) Tarsus 23.9-26.4 (25.2; 0.90; 9) 23.2—25.6 (24.2; 0.94; 11) M. a. vidua (adult and first-year) Kenya and Uganda (Alstrom ef al. in press) Male Female Wing 86-101 (93.0; 3.64; 43) 84-92 (88.8; 2.08; 29) M. a. aguimp (adult) South Africa (Alstrom ef al. in press) Male Female Wing 9870-9 970(95-9; 2-415 7) 86.0—89.0 (87.5; 1.29; 4) Two female specimens (NRM 20016100 and BMNH 2001.8.4) are taken as first- adult, because, compared with other specimens, they have browner and more-worn remiges, primary coverts and alula, and slightly differently shaped and textured primary coverts (Plate 2). These features are universally useful for ageing in Eurasian Motacillidae (Alstrém ef al. in press). Moreover, they show less white on these feathers than the presumed adults, as is the case also in M. aguimp (remiges only), M. grandis and M. alba lugens (Alstrém et al. in press). All the male specimens are similar to the adult females in these respects, and are therefore considered to be adult. Since we have not seen any definite first-adult males, we do not know whether or not they differ from adult males in the wing pattern. Moult This species either lacks or has just a very limited pre-breeding moult, as in M. maderaspatensis and M. grandis, but unlike M. aguimp (at least vidua) and all subspecies of M. alba (Alstrém et al. in press). All the specimens are worn. Males have either no or just a few scattered newer feathers, on the forehead, crown (mainly sides) and nape. The females have a few scattered newer feathers on the forehead, especially, crown (mainly sides), nape, mantle and scapulars. In addition, NRM 20016100 has new R1-R2 (right R2 still growing) and right S1 and S6, and the carpal % W. Duckworth et al. 162 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) covert in the right wing appears newer than the greater coverts (Plate 2). All birds studied closely in the field showed overall worn plumage, without any fresh secondary coverts or tertials (except for two females, one adult and one first-adult based on the appearance of the secondaries, which had the longest tertial in one wing new). The two first-adults do not differ from adults in pattern and/or degree of wear of any median and greater coverts or tertials (Plate 2). We therefore assume that all of these feathers had been renewed during the post-juvenile moult (as is usually the case in M. maderaspatensis and M. grandis; in M. aguimp and the different taxa in the M. alba complex the number of median and greater coverts and tertials replaced during the post-juvenile moult is variable, ranging from none to all; Alstrém ef al. in press). Morphological comparisons with other species Adult and first-adult Motacilla samveasnae is easily distinguished from all Eurasian wagtail taxa by head pattern, with blackish or dark greyish lores, ear-coverts and central stripe on forehead (to bill, and including bases of feathers), long, broad white supercilitum, and white throat and patch on sides of neck. All taxa in the M. alba complex have white forehead, and none has all dark ear-coverts; in addition, all except three taxa have white lores, two taxa have black sides of the neck, and most taxa have black throat in summer plumage. Two aberrant individuals of M. alba show dark feathering running down the forehead to the bill: Motacilla frontata Swinhoe, BMNH 1898.10.20.436 (which we consider most likely to be an aberrant M. alba leucopsis), and M. alba yarrellii BMNH registration no. 1965-M-8789. However, both these have white bases to the anterior dark feathers on the midline of the forehead (as is typical in all subspecies of M. alba), and moreover the dark area remains broad to its anterior edge, not forming a fine line as in VM. samveasnae. M. maderaspatensis has the forehead, lores, ear- coverts and supercilium patterned as in M. samveasnae, but has black throat and sides of neck. M. grandis is similar to M. samveasnae in the pattern of the lores and ear-coverts, but has mainly white forehead (dark does not reach the bill, except occasionally as a dotted dark line), slightly narrower and shorter supercilium, mostly black throat and black sides of neck. M. samveasnae also differs from M. maderaspatensis, many M. grandis and all taxa in the M. alba complex except some lugens by the, from above, white bases to the outer and inner webs of the secondaries and inner primaries (visible as a white band on the spread wing; in first-adult female M. samveasnae, mainly on the inner primaries). M. maderaspatensis can have extensively white inner webs and usually has broad white edges to the outer webs, but never shows all-white bases to the outer webs; in all taxa in the M. alba complex except some first-year /ugens, the white bases to the remiges are so restricted that no white band is created; adult male M. a. Jugens and M. grandis show white primaries with dark tips and all-white or mostly white secondaries, and adult females of these species and first adult males and females of the latter species have white remiges with dark tips to the primaries and variably prominent dark tips to the secondaries. JF. W Duckworth et al. 163 Bull. B:O:C. 2001, 1216) TABLE 2 Wing formulae of M. samveasnae (except BMNH 2001.8.2, which was too worn to measure; P6 unmeasurable on two further birds) and M. aguimp vidua (the latter from Alstrém ef al. in press). Distances from wing tip (mm). E stands for emargination; number in brackets is the mean. M. samveasnae P4 BS P6E PTE P8E P9 11.0-16.0(13.7) 6.5-9.0 (7.9) 1.0-1.5 (1.2) 0 0 1.5-2.5 (2.1) M. a. vidua (7 males, 4 females, adult) P4 PS P6E PTE PSE P9 13.0-19.0(15.2) 6.5-14.0 (8.7) 0.52.0 (1.2) 0-1.0(0.3) 0-1.5 (0.1) 1.0-3.0(1.8) M. samveasnae is very similar to M. aguimp but is on average smaller, with proportionately longer bill (Table 1; sexes should be compared separately due to dimorphism in size). Unlike M. aguimp, the blackish breast-band of M. samveasnae usually reaches onto the lower throat. Accordingly, the white throat patch is generally smaller in M. samveasnae than in M. aguimp, and the blackish ‘spur’ that extends from the breast-band to the ear-coverts generally appears broader and more ‘continuous’ with the breast-band than in VM. aguimp. Moreover, the upper border to the blackish breast-band is frequently ragged and blotched in M. samveasnae, whereas in M. aguimp it is usually rather clear-cut. On average, the white patch on the side of the neck is smaller and reaches less high up behind the ear-coverts, and accordingly looks less elongated, in M. samveasnae than in M. aguimp; however, the appearance of the white patch varies considerably both individually and depending of the posture of the bird. The upperparts average paler in VM. samveasnae than in M. aguimp (comparison controlled for sex, age and plumage wear). Male M. samveasnae are generally more similar to adult female ‘summer’ M. aguimp, and we suspect that M. samveasnae is never so jet black above as are most adult males and some adult female M. aguimp in ‘summer’ plumage. However, we have only seen M. samveasnae in worn plumage. Conversely, adult female ‘summer’ M. aguimp is only rarely so pale above as most female M. samveasnae (though in ‘winter’ plumage, adult female . aguimp can be rather greyish above; Alstrom ef al. in press). The greater coverts show more dark on the outer webs in M. samveasnae than in M. aguimp, though there is overlap (Fig. 1). Although the greater coverts of M. samveasnae frequently appear mostly white in the field, more commonly they show prominent dark centres. In contrast, the greater coverts of M. aguimp usually look all or mostly white in the field (though concealed blackish patterns on inner webs often shine through as pale grey shadows; Alstr6m et al. in press). In M. aguimp, juvenile greater coverts have on average more extensive dark on the outer webs than post- juvenile ones, and are thus more like those of M. samveasnae than are adult feathers; at least some juvenile outer greater coverts are frequently retained in first-*winter’ and first-‘summer’ M. aguimp (Alstr6m et al. in press). F. W Duckworth et al. 164 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) The pattern of the remiges, especially primaries, differs significantly, although rather subtly, between M. samveasnae and M. aguimp (Fig. 2, Table 3). In M. samveasnae the white on the outer webs of P1—PS5 extends far towards the tips of the feathers as a progressively narrower white edge (Fig. 2, Table 3); also P6 shows a prominent white outer edge in 5 of the 8 specimens (indistinct in one adult female and both first-adult females), and P7—P9 show very narrow whitish outer edges. In contrast, in M. aguimp the white on the outer webs of the primaries only reaches slightly or not at all beyond where the dark portion ends basally (Fig. 2, Table 3). Patterns on inner webs of primaries differ between the species in a similar though less pronounced way (Fig. 2; Table 3). On P6—P8, M. samveasnae shows on average considerably less white on the outer webs basally than M. aguimp (Table 4); in M. samveasnae the bases to the primaries on the folded wing appear dark with, at the most, small white markings (and very narrow white edges), whereas M. aguimp usually shows a rather prominent white patch basally on the primaries on the folded wing (most pronounced in adult male, least so in first-year female; Alstrom ef al. in press). P10 (very small and difficult to locate; concealed by primary covert No. 9) is all white or shows a thin dark streak along the centre of the feather in M. samveasnae, while it is blackish with a narrow white outer edge and tip in M. aguimp. On S1—S5 (S1—S4 in two birds) the dark portion on the outer web tapers rather gradually towards the base in M. samveasnae, while in M. aguimp the dark portion on the outer web of the secondaries usually ends rather bluntly at the base (Fig. 2); on S6 (and S5 in two M. samveasnae) the pattern is similar in both species. Occasionally, first-year M. aguimp resembles M. samveasnae in this respect, but no specimen of M. samveasnae shows a pattern on S1—S3 reminiscent of typical M. aguimp. On the inner webs of the secondaries, the dark portion tapers rather gradually towards the base in M. samveasnae, while it ends more abruptly in M. aguimp; in M. samveasnae, but not in M. aguimp, the white on the base of the secondaries sometimes reaches to the feather-tip along the edge (Fig. 2, Table 3). All specimens of M. samveasnae show narrow whitish outer edges basally to the primary coverts (perhaps also distally when fresh), whereas M. aguimp usually lacks whitish edges to the primary coverts, or shows thin whitish outer edges distally. The inner webs of the primary coverts show more prominent white bases in M. samveasnae than in M. aguimp. In adult M. samveasnae the central alula feather shows distinct white tip and edges to the outer and inner webs (widest basally on the inner web). In contrast, in adult VM. aguimp the white on the central alula feather is often very insignificant and is usually mainly or entirely restricted to the distal portion of the outer web and tip to the inner web (can be lacking on tip of inner web). In first-year birds of both species, the patterns are more similar to each other (having indistinct pale tips and lacking white edges to inner webs), although it seems that M. samveasnae may show more distinct outer edge than M. aguimp (although the sample of the former is too small for conclusive evaluation). J. W@ Duckworth et al. 165 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) f ond Figure 1. Top row: Right GC1 of Motacilla aguimp (a—c) and M. samveasnae (d—e). Bottom row: Right GC4 of M. aguimp (fh) and M. samveasnae (i—k). For each species, the commonest type is shown to the left and the rarest to the right. Drawing: Per Alstrom. Il i a Te A, py REY oe oe Figure 2. Top row: Right P3 of Motacilla aguimp (a—c) and M. samveasnae (d-f). Bottom row: Right S3 of M. aguimp (g—j) and M. samveasnae (k—m). The holotype of M. samveasnae is illustrated in d and k: f and m show first-adult female WM. samveasnae (NRM 20016100): and j has only been seen in first-year M. aguimp. Numbers show where the measurements in Table 3 were taken. Drawing: Per Alstrém. F. W Duckworth et al. 166 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Both R5 and R6 show a dark edge to the inner webs in our specimens of M. samveasnae. In M. aguimp vidua R6 is usually all- or nearly all white, and occasionally RS is all white or shows a much reduced dark edge (25%; n=24); in M. a. aguimp, R5— R6 are more similar in pattern to M. samveasnae. In M. samveasnae R4 is all blackish, while in M. aguimp R4 sometimes shows white outer web basally and/or a white tip. In the present specimens of VM. samveasnae, R1 is entirely blackish, although it is not possible to say whether it had had white edges when fresh. M. aguimp frequently shows rather wide white edges to R1 when fresh. In all except two of the M. samveasnae that we observed, the tertials were worn and showed very indistinct pale edges. However, we are unable to say whether fresh tertials have such prominent white edges as in M. aguimp. Juvenile M. samveasnae most closely resembles juveniles of some M. alba subspecies: alba, yarrellii, baicalensis and subpersonata. However, it differs from these by showing a dark loral stripe (at least on proximal part of lores; distal lores can be whitish), darker and more uniform ear-coverts and more prominent supercilium. None of the juvenile M. samveasnae observed showed a prominent dark ‘brow’ over the supercilium that is often shown by juveniles of these M. alba subspecies. M. samveasnae differs from TABLES Amount of white on P4 and S3. See Fig. 2 for explanation of I-VI. M. samveasnae n=2 adult males, 2 adult females, 2 Ist-year females; M. aguimp aguimp n=2 \st-year males, 2 Ist-year females; M. aguimp vidua n=3 adult males, 4 adult females, 3 lst-year males. Numbers refer to range and, in brackets, mean, standard deviation and sample size. P4 8 I II Ill IV V VI M. samveasnae 8-15 16-22 11-16 21-23 0-15 10-26 (112-2726) (19.8; 2.7; 6) (14.2; 1.9; 6) (22.0: 0.63; 6) (11.7; 5.8; 6) (15.2; 5.8; 6) M. aguimp 21-35 39 414 2631 22-28 2-10 (26.4;3.3;14) (6.1; 2.0; 14) (7.7;2.8;13) (28.5;1.56;13) (24.9: 1.6; 15) (Gages TABLE 4 Amount of white visible on the outer web beyond the tip of the longest primary covert (No. 8) on the outer primaries in M. samveasnae and M. aguimp vidua (measured along the shaft, accordingly excluding narrow white outer edges). Measurements of M. aguimp from Alstrom et al. (in press). Numbers refer to range and, in brackets, mean and sample size. M. samveasnae M. aguimp vidua Adultmale Adultfemale Ist-yearfemale Adultmale § Adultfemale Ist-yearmale Ist-year female P8 0 0 0 0-3.5(1.4;7) O4(1.0;4) 045(1.1;7) 02.5(0.8;3) P7 0-2 (1.0; 2) 0 0 0-7(4.5:14) 1-6(3.6;14) 0-7(2.6;21) = 0-5(2.2; 11) P6 1-3(2.0;2) 0-1(0.5;2) 0 5-10.5(8.0;14) 3-9(6.2;14) = 1-9(4.5;21) — 1-7.5(4.0; 11) J. W Duckworth et al. 167 Bull wprO se P2001 1203) M. alba ocularis and M. a. lugens by darker and more uniform ear-coverts and more prominent supercilium, from the latter also by more extensive dark centres to especially the median coverts (mostly white with thin dark shaft-streaks in /ugens); from M. a. leucopsis by overall much darker sides of the head and distinct dark malar stripes (entire sides of head and throat pale in /eucopsis); and from M. a. alboides and M. a. personata by dark lores, pale sides of the neck, lack of a pale area below the eye, and dark malar stripes; personata and alboides often show rather uniformly dark throat. M. samveasnae can be distingusihed from M. maderaspatensis and M. grandis by paler throat with dark malar stripes and pale sides of the neck; from the latter also by more prominent supercilium and extensive dark centres to the median and greater coverts (all-white median coverts and largely white greater coverts in M. grandis). M. samveasnae can be told from M. aguimp by the distinct dark malar stripes and more extensively dark centres to the greater and, especially, median coverts (latter mostly white with thin dark shaft-streaks in M. aguimp). Vocalizations M. samveasnae has two main types of song, a ‘simple’ song, which is the commonest type, and a ‘complex’ song, which is given rather sporadically; these two song types grade into each other. Both types of song are probably used in territory defence and mate attraction. Males usually responded more strongly to playback of ‘complex’ song than to ‘simple’ song. ‘Complex’ song was also heard several times when males were agitated, e.g. when Large-billed Crows Corvus macrorhynchos flew over the wagtail’s territory. It was once heard from a bird that appeared to be a female on plumage. The ‘simple’ song consists of short, quick strophes of mostly rather high-pitched, thin, often slightly harsh, notes; the strophes are interspersed by pauses of c. 4-6 sec., sometimes longer (Fig. 3, Table 5). Usually, all elements (notes) in a certain strophe differ from each other, and phrases and rattles are rare. The same strophe 1s often repeated several times (exceptionally, one bird gave the same strophe 11 times in succession, the length of the recording). However, most males appear to have a rather large repertoire of strophes (e.g. 39% unique strophes and another 20% more or less modified strophes, e.g. combinations of strophes, out of 54 strophes in one male; however, most individuals are less variable). The ‘simple’ song 1s most similar to the ‘simple’ song of M. grandis (Fig. 3), but usually contains fewer harsh notes TABLE 5 Measurements of various aspects of ‘simple’ song of M. samveasnae. Duration of No. elements/ Bottom Top Frequency range strophes (s) strophe frequency (kHz) frequency (kHz) of strophes (kHz) 0.3—-1.5 (mean 0.59; 1-12 (mean 5.3; 68 1.8-2.8 (mean 2.31; 6.4-7.9 (mean 7.28; 4.2-6.2 (mean 4.95; 66 str.; 5 inds) unique el.; 5 inds) 66 str.; 5 mds) 66 str.; 5 inds) 66 str.; 5 inds) % W. Duckworth et al. 168 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) than that species. ‘Simple’ song of M. maderaspatensis (Fig. 3) contains a much higher proportion of drawn-out, harsh, rolling notes than the ‘simple’ song of M. samveasnae, and phrases are common. ‘Simple’ song of VM. aguimp differs clearly from ‘simple’ song of M. samveasnae in having more frequent phrases and rattles and usually a fuller, clearer voice. The ‘advertising call’ of M. alba ssp. (which appears to have the same function as ‘simple’ song in the other black-and-white wagtails; see Alstrém et a/. in press) usually consists of a single note that is repeated many times, and is accordingly much simpler than ‘simple’ song of M. samveasnae. The ‘complex’ song of M. samveasnae (Fig. 4) is a drawn-out (3-18 s in our recordings), rapid ramble of notes, many which are similar to those of ‘simple’ song, but also includes a high proportion of harsh, frequently markedly drawn-out, notes and drawn-out buzzing sounds; harmonics are common. This type of song may recall the song of Eurasian Siskin Carduelis spinus (especially the drawn-out buzzing, wheezing notes). It bears little resemblance to any other wagtail song, but there are some similarities to the ‘complex’ song of M. grandis (Fig. 4), although it is more kHz ‘ \y 4 : re % v.\ a \y \y IV ‘\ i aYUry \! \\ iN Ww Ag yNyh "y hh. ah ,l ‘eg Me ah Ar 2 4 6 s Figure 3. Simple songs’. (a, b) Motacilla samveasnae. Five and eight, respectively, strophes of two different individuals, Stung Treng Province, Cambodia, mid-February 2001. Tape recordings by Per Alstrém. (c) M. aguimp vidua. Four strophes, Zimbabwe, October. Tape recording by Guy Gibbon. (d) M. grandis. Four strophes, Japan. Tape recording by T. Kabaya. (e) M@. maderaspatensis. Four strophes, Rajasthan, India, April. Tape recording by Per Alstrém. Sonograms in c, d and e from Alstrém ef al. (in press). Pauses between strophes have been artificially shortened in all sonograms. J. W Duckworth et al. 169 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) varied and complex, with more harmonics and fewer phrases. The drawn-out harsh notes gives it some resemblance to the ‘complex’ song of M. maderaspatensis which, however, is quite different, e.g. in being more ‘organised’ due to a large proportion of phrases. The ‘complex’ song of M. aguimp (Fig. 4) is quite different, having more phrases, fewer harsh notes and harmonics, usually more varied speed, and a generally richer and clearer voice. Excited song of M. alba ssp. is somewhat reminiscent of the ‘complex’ song of M. samveasnae, especially in having complex harmonics. The flight call of M. samveasnae (Fig. 5) is a short, sharp, harsh dzeer, which is sometimes doubled or, when excited, repeated several times. Slightly softer and lower- pitched versions are also given, both when perched and in flight (when undisturbed). The flight call recalls flight calls of Water Pipit Anthus spinoletta and Rock Pipit Anthus petrosus. Among wagtails, it is closest to the flight call of M. grandis (Fig. 5), but is lower-pitched and less ‘clipped’. It is very different from the calls of M. aguimp (Fig. 5), M. maderaspatensis (Fig. 5) and M. alba ssp. Other calls given mainly by Figure 4. Complex’ songs. (a, b) Motacilla samveasnae. One strophe each from two different individuals (different ones from Fig. 3), Stung Treng Province, Cambodia, mid-February 2001. Tape recordings by Per Alstrém. (c) M. aguimp vidua. Three strophes, Gabon, November. Tape recording by Claude Chappuis. (d) M. grandis. Three strophes, Japan. Tape recording by Toshiaki Hirano. (e) M. maderaspatensis. One strophe, Rajasthan, India, April. Tape recording by Per Alstr6m. Sonograms in c, d and e from Alstrém ef a/. (in press). Pauses between strophes have been artificially shortened (marked by dashed lines) in c and d. F. W Duckworth et al. 170 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) O3's 0.5 s Figure 5. Calls. (a—j) Motacilla samveasnae. Flight calls (a—d) and calls from perched birds (e-), Stung Treng Province, Cambodia, mid-February 2001. Tape recordings by Per Alstrém. (k-0) M. aguimp vidua. At least 1 and m flight calls, n and o probably from perched bird, Cameroon, December, tape recordings by Claude Chappuis (a, b, d, e); Tanzania, January, tape recordings by Claude Chappuis (c). (p) M. grandis. Flight call, Japan, October. Tape recording by Per Alstrém. (q) M. maderaspatensis. Flight call, Rajasthan, India, March. Tape recording by Richard Ranft/ National Sound Archive. Sonograms in k-q from Alstrém ef-a/. (in press). perched birds are short, thin, soft tsip, tsiup, tsiep, tseeup, tsriu, or similar (Fig. 5): some resemble calls of northwestern subspecies of Motacilla flava. We do not have a sufficiently large sample of equivalent calls of other black-and-white wagtails to evaluate similarities and differences. Systematics Five of the 10 recognised species of wagtail have mainly grey, black and white plumages: Mountain Wagtail M. clara, M. aguimp, M. alba, M. maderaspatensis, and M. grandis. Excluding M. clara, this group is thought to be monophyletic (Alstrom et al. in press, PA and Anders Odeen, unpublished). M. alba is polytypic, and some of the nine distinct taxa are often treated as separate species (see Alstrém ef al. in press for a review). M. aguimp has two rather subtly different subspecies, whereas M. maderaspatensis and M. grandis are monotypic (Vaurie et al. 1960, Keith ef al. 1992, Alstr6m ef al. in press). On plumage, M. samveasnae and M. aguimp resemble each other considerably more than do some taxa generally treated as subspecies of M. alba. For this reason, it might seem most appropriate to consider samveasnae a subspecies of M. aguimp (alternatively to treat the various distinct taxa in the M. alba complex as separate species). Under a ‘phylogenetic’ species concept sensu e.g. Cracraft (1989), F.W Duckworth et al. 171 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Plate 3. Breeding habitat of Motacilla samveasnae, Stung Treng Province, Cambodia, mid-February 2001. Photographs: Pete Davidson. % W. Duckworth et al. 172 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) samveasnae is a species, since it is diagnosably different from M. a. aguimp and M. a. vidua. Under the ‘biological’ species concept (Mayr 1942), the taxonomic rank of samveasnae is debatable, since it is allopatric with aguimp and vidua. However, unlike the taxa in the M. alba complex, which have basically similar songs and calls (Alstro6m ef al. in press), the songs and calls of samveasnae and vidua (we lack information on aguimp) are very different. Moreover, according to mitochondrial DNA data (PA and Anders Odeen, unpublished), the difference between samveasnae and M. a. vidua is greater than between samveasnae and any of the other black-and- white wagtail taxa; larger than between, e.g., M. grandis and M. maderaspatensis, or between these two and any of the taxa in the M. alba complex; and much greater than between any of the taxa in the M. alba complex. Actually, the molecular data suggest that VM. samveasnae shares a more recent common ancestor with M. grandis, M. maderaspatensis and the M. alba complex than with M. aguimp (which is the most basal taxon). These facts, together with the widely disjunct distributions of samveasnae and M. aguimp, argue for the treatment of samveasnae as a species separate from M. aguimp. The differences in moult and habitat choice between M. samveasnae and M. aguimp further add to the distinctness of the former taxon. Habitat Almost all records of M. samveasnae come from the breeding season. All are from within or close to a specific form of river channel habitat, referred to as ‘channel mosaic’ by Duckworth et al. (in press) (Plate 3). Flow in the Mekong is strongly seasonal, reflecting the marked dry—wet season climatic regime (e.g. at Kratie, maximum discharges are approximately 54 times minimum discharges; UNECAFE 1966). In the low-flow season (roughly November—May), a typical mosaic stretch is in a broad, lowland river, the stream-bed exposed to provide rocky outcrops and bushland, often with gravel shoals and/or sand bars, tufted grasses and annual dicotyledons. Fast-flowing streamlets cross the sediment and rock bars. The bushes suffer prolonged annual submersion, and at least some species seem not to grow on the adjacent floodplain. Homonoia riparia Lour. (Euphorbiaceae) dominates, with Pittosporum sp. (Pittosporaceae; particularly on deep sand), Syzygium ripicola (Craib) Merr. & L. M. Perry (Myrtaceae; infrequent), Combretum trifoliatum Vent. (Combretaceae; infrequent), Telectadium edule Baill. (Asclepiadaceae; especially on rocks) and others admixed. Breeding M. samveasnae is strongly associated with swift- flowing braided sections with many rocks and bushes. In 2001, birds were frequently observed where bushes stuck out of the water, but no land was exposed; this presumably reflected atypically high water levels in that year. In the extensive sections of flooded forest along the Mekong, M. samveasnae was not found among the trees, but was, as usual, amid bushes and rocks. Sandbar-dominated stretches of channel mosaic may support resident M. samveasnae: one extensive sandbar with only one rock-bar, outcropping intermittently, and supporting only a few bushes, formed a pair’s territory. This pair fed frequently on the sand surface, but most pairs had little or no F. W Duckworth et al. i Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) unconsolidated sediment in their territories. Breeding birds only rarely use the earthen banks at the channel margins or those higher islands with vegetation resembling that of the floodplain. Most records come from wide rivers (>100 m across); the minimum width for the species is unknown. All known localities lie below 110 maz.s.1. The only record outside a channel is of two at a pool, within 200 m of a river (Nong Puler; Appendix 2). Many river surveys (notably Timmins & Men Soriyun 1998) checked floodplain pools extensively in areas where M. samveasnae occurs, but did not record it. The habitat choice and highly specific breeding habitat is unique among Eurasian wagtails, while M. aguimp shows much wider habitat use (see Keith et al. 1992). During high-flow season, channel mosaic is submerged, to greatest depth in August-September. Some tributaries sometimes fill by early May; some channels remain high well into October, possibly even December, in some years. Observations of riverine birds in Indochina have strongly focussed upon December—May, and river channel specialists’ high-flow season location is poorly known. The sole high- flow season record of M. samveasnae comes from a breeding area, and was of a bird perched on bush-tops protruding above the floodwaters (Appendix 2). Breeding and behaviour Like other South-east Asian river-channel passerines, M. samveasnae breeds in the latter part of the low-flow season. Observed breeding behaviour includes singing, sexual chasing and the carrying of nest material in mid-February (2000 and 2001), food-carrying to nestlings, and (separately) a juvenile on 23 April (2000), to juveniles in mid-April (2001) and in mid- and late May (1997 and, many, 1998). Two females collected (BMNH 2001.8.2 and 2001.8.3) had developing brood patches, well advanced in the former, which had a well-developed egg in its oviduct (Anders Hansson, pers. comm.). Breeding must cease by May or June, when water levels rise rapidly. In mid- February 2001, apparently just prior to egg-laying, most birds were in pairs (only one bird believed to be single was seen), and usually remained together also when approaching the speaker in response to playback of song. Sometimes neighbouring males were apparently counter-singing, but territorial exclusion seemed rather weak. On several occasions, a bird was observed to display momentarily to another individual by pointing its bill upwards, highlighting the conspicuous throat/breast pattern. This display appeared to be a sign of dominance. Males usually sang from atop a bush or boulder, less commonly from flat ground. Unlike other wagtails, M. samveasnae fed regularly within emergent bushes, walking along branches and picking small food items from these or from the leaves. Bushes were also used as shaded loafing places. In several observations of M. samveasnae and M. a. leucopsis feeding in the same general area, sometimes only feet from each other, no interaction was observed. If flushed, the two tended to depart independently. F.W Duckworth et al. 174 Bull. B.O.C; 2001 12s Known distribution In the breeding season, birds occupy a substantial length of the Cambodian Mekong upstream from Kampi (the downstream extent of channel mosaic habitat) into southern Laos. The upstream limit remains unclear. Lengthy stretches (apparently, wherever channel mosaic habitat occurs) of the Mekong tributaries the Kong (Cambodia and Laos), San (Cambodia) and Srepok (Cambodia) rivers are also occupied. In optimal habitat, linear densities reach many pairs per kilometer. The one wet-season record so far concerns a bird in a breeding area; the Thai specimens are also from the non- breeding season but lack precise site data. Similar habitat searched in north and central Laos was devoid of M. samveasnae, as were rivers or stretches in the range of the species, but lacking channel mosaic habitat. Sites are plotted on Fig. 6 and precise locations are given in Appendix 2. Birds apparently M. samveasnae (but lacking the white neck patch) are illustrated, as M. a. alboides, in two field guides for China (Viney et al. 1994, MacKinnon & Phillips 2000); this presumably reflects secondary use of Lekagul & Round’s (1991) illustration, rather than Chinese records of the taxon. Conservation Numbers of M. samveasnae are certainly healthy in Cambodia; they cannot yet be assessed in Laos. While many other river channel birds are under intense regional threat (Lekagul & Round 1991, Duckworth 1996, Duckworth et al. 1998b, 1999, in press, Evans et al. 2000, Evans in press), the mosaic areas upon which the wagtail depends are less vulnerable to most human-induced changes than are purely sedimentary features (which can be washed or excavated away), the species is too small to be hunted specifically, and territories right next to towns, e.g. Stung Treng, indicate a high tolerance of human presence. Large dams, notably for hydroelectric power, are the most likely threat, because they may involve trans-basin diversions and/or big storage head-ponds, where water is collected during the wet season and released during the dry. Dams on low-gradient rivers, which flood the channel (including the species’ only breeding habitats) a substantial way upstream are probably, given the habitat within its range, the main threat to the wagtail; many such projects are proposed for the Mekong. M. samveasnae occurs in several protected areas: Xe Pian and (provisionally) Phou Xiang Thong National Biodiversity Conservation Areas (NBCA) in Laos, Lomphat Wildlife Sanctuary in Cambodia, and potentially Pha Taem and perhaps Kaeng Tana National Parks in Thailand. However, little channel mosaic habitat is within, rather than abutting, protected areas and, moreover, because water flow characteristics depend upon distant upstream activities, protected areas cannot directly ensure the species’ survival. The species occurs mainly in Laos and Cambodia, but events in Thailand, Vietnam and China also influence stream flow. Active conservation measures for this species, as for the entire riverine biodiversity (itself in 5. W Duckworth et al. LTS Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) = Xiangkhok Luangphabang Figure 6. Known distribution of Motacilla samveasnae, (a) Indochina, showing surveyed areas; (b) enlargement of occupied area. Bold line, national boundary, except where formed by a marked river Arrowed line, river mentioned in text, with direction of flow Hatched river stretch, confirmed records of M. samveasnae Dotted river stretch, at least moderately well surveyed with no records of M. samveasnae Dashed line, boundary of protected or proposed protected area DHS Dong Hua Sao National Biodiversity Conservation Area DKT_ Dong Khanthung proposed National Biodiversity Conservation Area KT Kaeng Tana National Park PXT Phou Xiang Thong National Biodiversity Conservation Area Per Pha Taem National Park R river uP Xe Pian National Biodiversity Conservation Area YD Yok Don National Park J. W Duckworth et al. I3N CAMBODIA kongR. * en ee 176 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Bolaven Ban Keng Luang Plateau Namnoy R. -f} Be {Kaman R. eae ee Sibaliw 80 = Bulanao / Cre i Figure 1. Map of Panay, Philippines showing the locations mentioned in the text. E. Cuno et al. 185 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Plate 1. Photograph of Asian Stubtail Urosphena squameiceps captured at Sibaliw, Panay on 9 Hamtang (PESCP fieldwork; March-April 1995 and March 1996; 11°08'N, #2 2°EI"E) Hamtang is a forested mountain valley encompassing elevations from 900 to 1.100 m, located on the western slope of the Central Panay Mountains, west of Mt Baloy and southwest of Mt Sonogong (1.474 maz.s.].). The nearest village, to the south, is Sitio Nawili, Barangay Igsoro, Bugasong, Antique Province, located at 180 ma.s.]. Barangay Pandanan is halfway between Nawili and the town of Valderama, Antique. The vegetation is tall, primary upland transition forest with significant proportions of Casuarina at lower, and Podocarpus at upper elevations. This forest supports moderate epiphyte and moss cover, and understorey vegetation density. In most places, the moderately open canopy exceeds 20 m, with the tallest emergents reaching above 40 m. Large fig Ficus trees are ceeds common. In the vicinity of the study area, very little forest is left below 900 m. The forest is bordered by non-native cogon Imperata cylindrica grasslands and steep hillsides on three sides, but is contiguous with remaining tracts of forest on the higher slopes and ridges towards the north and northeast. These are again connected to the forests around Mt Baloy. The topography is rugged, yet the valley itself possesses more accessible terrain. Unless noted specifically in the species accounts, bird records are from 950 + 20 m elevation. E. Curio et al. 186 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) College of Agriculture and Forestry Forest Reserve (PESCP fieldwork; 22/23 February 95; 11°3'N, 122°29'E) A small isolated forest reserve (c. 1 km’) at the eastern foothills of Mt Baloy, comprising disturbed lowland forest bordered by agricultural areas. The reserve is part of the College of Agriculture and Forestry of West Visayas State University, near Barangay Bayoyo, Lambunao, Iloilo. Northwest Panay Peninsula The mountain range of the NW Panay peninsula harbours what must be considered the last relatively significant remnant (c. 5,000-7,000 ha) of low elevation forest in the West Visayas, yet this has only recently come to the attention of the conservation community in the Philippines. Forest in some sections starts as near to the sea as 2 km and at elevations as low as 200 m. The highest peak of the inland mountain range, Mt Tinayunga, reaches 915 m. The forest area consists of two major contiguous blocks: the western quarter with the last significant stands of tall “lawa-an” Shorea forests, and an eastern portion of open forest on limestone with various levels of dominance by climbing bamboo (Dinochloa sp., the only species of this type in the Philippines, Haeupler pers. comm.). In the latter the tops of most of the higher ridges are dominated by impenetrable climbing bamboo; in addition, ridgetop open-canopy mossy forest occurs with a dense understorey, slightly stunted and heavily clad in moss layers and epiphytes. Hakot (PESCP fieldwork; May 1996; 11°47' N, 122°02' E) Accessed from Sitio Malumpati, Barangays Guia and Kandari, Pandan, Antique, and located towards the centre of the mountain range, at 600 to 750 m, Hakot mountain valley is located amidst primary submontane forest of intermediate stature, with broken canopy, fairly dense understorey, and covered in moss layers and vascular epiphytes (including Nepenthes pitcher plants). The primary forest is dominated by “Bankalawan” trees, with various species of palms, including rattans, while on the valley floor, is an area of c. 3-5 ha of 8-10 m tall secondary forest, dominated by “Balante” (Homalanthus sp.) and large treeferns (Cyathea sp.). Only a few prominent fig trees were found within the study area. Cubay/Bulanao (PESCP fieldwork; 11°45'N, 121°58'E) Two neighbouring coastal Barangays of Libertad, Antique, consisting mostly of rice and corn fields, coconut groves, and some sections of secondary growth. Lahang (PESCP fieldwork; November 1996, March-April 1997; 11°48' N, 121°59'E) Selectively logged primary forest on limestone, with some secondary forest at elevations from 450 to 500 m, accessed from Barangays Cubay/Bulanao, Libertad, Antique. E. Curio et al. 187 Bull BeO.C..2001 A213) Sibaliw (PESCP fieldwork; from April 1997; 11°49'N, 121°59'E) Towards the western edge of the peninsular forest block, fairly extensive primary forest (including tall lawa-an dipterocarp) at the heads of Buruanga and Bulanao Rivers. One area of c. 20 ha between the rivers holds secondary forest and scrub, formerly farmed but mostly abandoned for the last twenty years. This area, part of Barangay Tag-osip, Buruanga, Aklan, has been the long-term research site of PESCP since April 1997, at elevations from 400-650 m. Southeast Panay Pedada and Canal Bays are large, sheltered soft shore bays with extensive exposed mudflats at low water. Both have large mature mangroves, but few young plants due to grazing by herds of goats. Immediately inland there are saline fish and shrimp ponds. Human activity on the seashore is common, mainly fishing and collecting of shellfish, and hunting occurs, but is not excessive. This type of coastline is common along the eastern shore of Panay. Talangban is a hill on the southern edge of the semi-contiguous group of degraded forest patches known as Malayuan (Evans et al. 1993). The hill receives some protection locally due to superstitions. Hunting occurs, but is apparently not excessive as Long-tailed Macaques Macaca fascicularis and Visayan Warty Pigs Sus barbatus cebifrons both still occur (PA). Two to three teams of charcoal burners work the area, mainly harvesting trees 5-10 years old of c. 10 cm girth. Culasi and Barotac Nuevo are areas with a variety of different habitats: dry hill grassland and scrub with patches of bamboo, degraded secondary forest patches, dry and wet paddy, paddy stubble, and irrigation canals, along with houses, market- gardens, duck ponds, etc. Sampunong Bolo Bird Sanctuary is a relatively well-protected reserve close to the town of Sara, holding 18 ha of forest (Evans ef a/. 1993). Its main feature is a large Purple Heron Ardea purpurea colony, the only one known in the country. Huge roosts of fruit bats occur periodically, but are sometimes disturbed by local hunters. Puruguan Falls is a local beauty spot close to the town of Sara, 2 km from Sampunong Bolo Bird Sanctuary, consisting mainly of scrub and second growth. Species accounts We follow the most conservative approach, leaving to further confirmation those records which appear not to be sufficiently substantiated. Mist-netted birds were ringed, measured, photographed, and released (PESCP) or, in some cases, collected (DENR-JWRC). Identification in the field was based on du Pont (1971) and King et al. (1975). Additional information was later taken from museum specimens, and Brown & E. Curio et al. 188 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Amadon (1968), Chantler & Driessens (1995), Hachisuka (1935), del Hoyo et al. (1994, 1996), Lekagul & Round (1991) and Svensson (1984). The taxonomy and order follow DKP. In most cases, the subspecies could not be established. We have specified where photographs were taken (photo), with copies available for inspection in the library of The Natural History Museum, Tring, UK. New species for the Philippines ASIAN STUBTAIL Urosphena squameiceps One individual (Plate1) was captured by hand at 1930 h inside Station Sibaliw on 9 October 1999 (EC), apparently attracted by the lights. Measurements were: length 97 mm, wing 52 mm, tail 28 mm, tarsus 16.9 mm, bill length to distal nostril 8.2 mm, width at base 3.6 mm and culmen 2.9 mm, (all measurements similar to those taken on specimens of this species in the BNHM collection at Tring, JH), mass 9.5 g. This is the first record for the Philippines of this species which breeds in Siberia, Korea and Japan and winters in southeast Asia. New species for Panay JAPANESE NIGHT-HERON Gorsachius goisagi An immature was mist-netted on 14 March 1995 in Hamtang (EC; photo), on a ridge above a dried-up river bed; identity was confirmed from a photograph by R.S. Kennedy (in litt.). This monotypic species is an uncommon winter visitor to the Philippines not previously recorded in March (DKP). Classed as Vulnerable, its status is declining in its East Asian breeding quarters (Collar et al. 1994). SCHRENCWK’S BITTERN Lxobrychus eurhythmus An individual flushed twice from wet paddy, where the rice was close to being harvested, in the valley floor of Malayu-an, on 10 March 1999. Identified by chestnut back, pale upperwing coverts and dark flight feathers (PA). A rare winter visitor to most major islands including Negros (DKP). OSPREY Pandion haliaetus Recorded in Aklan Province in Feb 1993 (DENR-JWRC); at least two, probably more, were at Culasi fishponds on 2 and 5 March 1999 and singles there on 8 March and 8- 14 April 1999 (PA). An uncommon, mainly northern winter visitor to most major islands (DKP). CRESTED GOSHAWK Accipiter trivirgatus A large hawk perched at Talangban on 7 March 1999 was observed through a telescope at full frame size. The size, thick dark brown barring on the underparts, streaking on the upper breast and thick mesial stripe, confirmed it to be Accipiter trivirgatus (PA). Two birds displaying over hills near to Culasi, on 9 March 1999, in a circular flight with sharp fast wing beats and undertail coverts fanned out to show the prominent E. Curio et al. 189 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) white colour, were also considered to be this species (PA), as was a large, dark brown accipiter near the northeast coast at Bulanao on 15 Nov 1997 (JH). An uncommon resident on most major islands except Luzon (DKP). JAPANESE SPARROWHAWK Accipiter gularis A small accipiter was mist-netted in Lahang on 30 March 1997 (photo). Its body mass (90 g) and short wing length (152 mm) are indicative of a male A. gularis (92-192.5¢g and 160-198 mm respectively for A. gularis, cf. 140 g and 185-209 mm for A. soloensis, Brown & Amadon 1968) or A. virgatus. A. virgatus confusus, resident on the Philippines, also has a short wing (152-185 mm, Brown & Amadon 1968) but can be ruled out by the palish grey upperparts of our bird, the presence of a bright yellow eye-ring and the absence of a mesial stripe. The species has been recorded on widely separated islands from Luzon down to Mindanao and Sibutu (DKP). Although not listed for Negros (DKP), we caught a male at Patag (Negros Occ.) in 1995 (identity confirmed from photo by R. S. Kennedy, in Jitt.). CHANGEABLE HAWK-EAGLE Spizaetus cirrhatus Single fledglings of the light morph were obtained in 1998 by B. Engerer (pers. comm., photo in Curio 1999) and in 1999 by EC (from a private residence). They had been taken as pulli from nests on Mt Madja-as and from the eastern forest block of the NW Panay peninsula, respectively. One of them is in the custody of the PESCP and is being prepared for release. A light morph adult and juvenile were observed close together for at least half an hour in the coastal forest at Barangay Bulanao, Antique Province on 27 October 1999 (EC). Identification was based on bulky size, very short crest, and wings reaching halfway down the length of the tail (versus reaching only to the base of tail in S. philippensis). These are the first records for Panay, and it has only been confirmed breeding elsewhere in the Philippines on Mindanao and Palawan (Gamauf et a/. 1998). The species has a wide distribution outside the Philippines. PHILIPPINE HAWK-EAGLE Spizaethus philippensis This species appears to have bred on Panay because two fledglings from the San Remigio area were acquired by Hon. Ezequiel Javier, the Governor of Antique Province, 3 or 4 years ago and the one still living is at his residence near San Jose (M. Ebreo, pers. comm.). A bird thought to be this species was observed perched at Sibaliw on 15 August 1997 (D. Allen, probable identity confirmed by A. Gamauf in /itt.). Recent records of this Philippine endemic come only from Luzon and Mindanao, with distinct subspecies specific to these islands (Gamauf ef a/. 1998), although formerly from other islands including Negros. The taxonomic status of the Panay birds is unknown. ORIENTAL HOBBY Falco severus A pair of dark falcons, too small for F. peregrinus, was observed on 4 March 1996 in rapid, buoyant flight between Sitios Pandanan and Nawili on the denuded southern approaches to Hamtang (JH). An uncommon resident in open country and at the E. Curio et al. 190 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) forest edge on many Philippine islands; only one race (F. s. severus) has been recorded (DKP). GREY PLOVER Plwvialis squatarola 12 flew south at Canal Bay on 8 March 1999 (PA). An uncommon passage migrant, rarer in winter, to most of the major islands (DKP). KENTISH PLOVER Charadrius alexandrinus 30 at Pedada Bay on 5 and 12 March 1999, with 100 on 8 March, and 300 spread out along several kms of coast at Canal Bay on 8 March (PA). An uncommon winter visitor to most of the major islands (DKP). EURASIAN CURLEW WNumenius arquata Four at Pedada Bay on 5 and 12 March and 20+ at Canal Bay on 8 March 1999 (PA). An uncommon passage migrant and winter visitor to most of the major islands (DKP). RUFOUS-NECKED STINT Calidris ruficollis Four at Pedada fishponds on 5 March and 20+ at Canal Bay on 8 March 1999 (PA). A common passage migrant and winter visitor to most of the major islands (DKP). TEMMINCB’S STINT Calidris temminckii Three at Canal Bay fishponds on 8 March 1999, identified by their similar size and gait to the 20+ C. ruficollis also present, their yellowish legs and greyish-buff upperparts and breast (PA). Although classed as a rare winter visitor by DKP, only known from Mindoro, Palawan and Luzon, it is doubtless a passage migrant too. BLACK-WINGED STILT Himantopus himantopus Six flew south of Culasi, Iloilo Province, on 14 March 1999 and 3 were at the same location on 24 March (PA). Uncommon, probably a winter visitor, reported from Mindoro, Palawan, Cebu, Negros, Mindanao and Luzon (DKP). ORIENTAL PRATINCOLE Glareola maldivarum One was at Barotac Nuevo on 21 June 1995 (PA). Fairly common, mainly as a passage migrant, but only on Luzon, Negros and Palawan of the major islands (DKP). ROSEATE TERN Sterna dougalli One was observed as close as 20 m flying north on the Panay side of the Guimaras Channel between Culasi, Panay and Victorias, Negros on 20 June 1995 (PA). It was in full breeding plumage with a red bill and rosy underparts. A rare breeder on Culion, Corregidor and Palawan, otherwise coastal and pelagic but no specific records mentioned (DKP). E. Curio et al. 191 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) WHISKERED TERN Chilidonias hybridus Four Whiskered Terns in breeding plumage were observed on 17 June 1995, with two on 21 June, on the northern outskirts of Barotac Nuevo (PA). These are the first records for Panay and very late compared to previous reports from elsewhere in the country (DKP). Large numbers of Chlidonias terns were seen along the east coast between | March and 8 April 1999, and 28 January to 26 February 2000, all of which were considered to be hybridus, with a maximum of 200+ at Barotac Viejo on 1 March 1999 and 18 February 2000 (PA). Several hybridus were seen on passage, with 15-20 White-winged Black Terns C. /Jeucopterus, above the Iloilo River from the beginning of April through to 25 May 1998 (A. Herzig, pers. comm.). Common coastal passage migrant to most of the major islands, recorded in every month except July and August (DKP). BLUE-CROWNED RACQUET-TAIL Prioniturus discurus This species was first recorded at Hanggod Tubig, Culasi, Antique Province, in December 1992 (DENR-JRWC). Several pairs at 900 — 1,100m in Hamtang Forest showed much activity in March 1996 at tree holes, including two woodpecker holes, one of which was also being investigated by White-bellied Woodpeckers Dryocopus jJavensis, and one broken branch (EC, YdS, JH photo). A pair took over a D. javensis nest-hole at Sibaliw in May 1998 (EC), and birds were frequently observed at Lahang (YdS). Two birds were confiscated from a market on the peninsula in 1998. Noted as fairly common up to c.1,500m on most islands (DKP). DRONGO CUCKOO Surniculus lugubris One perched in bamboo at Malayu-an on 10 March 1999 - all black apart from pale undertail markings and with a small bill (PA). A fairly common resident on Luzon, Mindoro, Negros and Palawan of the major islands (DKP). INDIAN CUCKOO Cuculus micropterus Freshly plucked feathers were found at Lahang where two Cuculus sp. individuals had been seen the day before (E. Klop). According to R.S. Kennedy (in Jitt.), the feathers are ‘with 95% probability’ from C. micropterus, a species known to occur on Negros and several other islands in the country (DKP). C. saturatus has also been recently recorded on Panay by us and Miranda et a/. (2000). BROWN HAWK-OWL Ninox scutulata One was seen at mid-day on 15 September 1995 in disturbed forest with climbing bamboo at 400 m above Alojipan (EC). An uncommon but widespread species with three endemic and two migrant forms known in the Philippines. ISLAND SWIFTLET Collocalia vanikorensis One was mist-netted at Hakot at 700 m on 7 May 1996 (YdS, LL photo), its identity being confirmed by R.S. Kennedy (in Jitt.) from our description and photograph. Tail E. Curio et al. 2 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) length (53 mm) and depth of fork (7-8 mm) also permit distinction from the visually similar C. mearnsi with 45-52 mm and 5.8-6.3 mm, respectively. Wing length (119 mm) does not (mearnsi 106-119.5 mm, vanikorensis 118-125 m) (Chantler & Driessens 1995). As expected, the specimen falls within the measurements of race C. v. amelis in regard to wing length, whilst tail dimensions do not allow distinction from the larger C. v. palawensis of Palawan, the only other Philippine race (Chantler & Driessens 1995). The bird weighed 12.7g. This constitutes the first record from the West Visayas, although the species is known from adjacent Luzon, Mindoro, Cebu, Bohol and Mindanao (DKP). PHILIPPINE NEEDLETAIL Mearnsia picina One was observed flying over Talangban on 20 June 1995 and sketched at the time (PA). A fairly common but local resident to Leyte, Mindanao, Cebu, Negros, Biliran and Samar (DKP). HOODED PITTA Pitta sordida One was heard and seen at Lahang in March 1997 and another found roosting on a branch c. 3 m up in Bulabog Putian Natural Park in December 1997 (S. Luft, photo). One was seen standing in front of an empty nest at Sampunong Bolo Bird Sanctuary on 3 July 1997 (PA). The nest, which probably belonged to this bird, was of a similar structure to that of Red-bellied Pitta Pitta erythrogaster (which also frequents this area), 1.e. Spherical with a hole on the side, and was at the base of a clump of bamboo. Presumably the nominate race, a locally common resident to most of the major islands except Palawan where there is a different race (DKP). ORIENTALSKYLARK Alauda gulgula This species appeared to be common in the southeast in dry and damp paddy areas, with singing birds noted throughout the period February — June (PA). Locally common resident to Bohol, Mindanao, Negros and Luzon of the major islands (DKP). SCALY GROUND-THRUSH Zoothera dauma One was flushed twice from the main trail above Sibaliw at 560 m on 28 November 1997, identified as a large thrush with scaly brown plumage and whitish outer tail tips (JH). Its presence coincided with the appearance of an Olive Tree-Pipit Anthus hodgsoni and snipe Gallinago sp. during heavy rain. Uncommon winter visitor, usually above 1,000m, only reported from Luzon, Mindoro and Palawan of the major islands (DKP). GOLDEN-BELLIED FLYEATER Gerygone sulphurea Noted as common in the mangroves of Pedada and Canal Bays since at least June 1995, with an adult feeding a juvenile on 21 June 1995 near Culasi, Iloilo Province (PA). Locally common but only on Luzon, Mindoro, Mindanao, Negros, Bohol and Cebu of the major islands (DKP). E. Curio et al. 193 Bull, BOC 2001213) LEMON-THROATED LEAF-WARBLER Phylloscopus cebuensis One bird was seen in the College of Agriculture and Forestry Forest Reserve, Lambunao, Iloilo Province, in February 1995 (EC). It was distinguished from P. trivirgatus, P. olivaceus and P. borealis by its yellow face, chin and throat, contrasting with the rest of the plumage. Common on Luzon and occurs less commonly on Cebu and Negros (DKP). NARCISSUS FLYCATCHER Ficedula narcissina Single female and immature males were mist-netted (photo) at Sibaliw on 21 and 24 November 1997, respectively, and an adult male seen on 25 November (JH). All appeared to be of the nominate race as they were clearly not elisae, which is visually distinctive, while the third race, owstoni, is confined to the southern Ryukyu Islands of Japan (Brazil 1991). A rare winter visitor, recorded on Luzon, Mindoro, Mindanao, Negros, Cebu and Palawan of the major islands (DKP). OLIVE TREE-PIPIT Anthus hodgsoni One was seen on several days from 13 March 1996 in a dry river bed at Hamtang, and presumably the same bird was mist-netted (photo) on 23 March (JH). A second individual was mist-netted (photo) in secondary growth at Sibaliw on 23 November 1997, and five days later another was observed there, apparently forced down by rain while migrating over (JH). Two subspecies are uncommon winter visitors in the Philippines, of which A. h. hodgsoni was previously known to occur on Negros (DKP). CRESTED MYNA Acridotheres cristatellus Recorded in the lowlands of Antique Province in December 1992 and Aklan Province in February 1993 (DENR-JRWC) but strangely not noted since. This species was introduced from Luzon and had spread to Negros by 1970 (Rabor et al. 1970). BICOLOURED FLOWERPECKER Dicaeum bicolor Recorded at Hanggod Tubig, Culasi, Antique Province in December 1992 and mist- netted in February 1993 in Aklan Province (DENR-JRWC). Several were observed at Sibaliw in May 1997 (B. King) and during the period 14 November — 5 December 1997 (JH). Fairly common in the Philippines, with 3 endemic races including viridissimum from Negros and Guimaras (DKP), which is presumably the race on Panay. EVERETT’S WHITE-EYE Zosterops everetti Singles at Talangban on 22 June 1996 and Puruguan Falls on 3 July 1997, identified by eye ring broken above lores, yellow on throat and belly, extending as a stripe to the yellow undertail coverts, and prominent grey flanks (PA). Common with five races but on the major islands only recorded on Cebu, Siquijor, Bohol, Leyte, Samar and Mindanao (DKP). Hence the race occurring on Panay is of interest. E. Curio et al. 194 Bull. B.O:C,. 2000420) GREEN-FACED PARROTFINCH Erythrura viridifacies Two all green Erythrura with red tails were mist-netted (photo) at Hakot at 700 m on 5 and 6 May 1996 (YdS) and at Sibaliw on 19 July 1997 (EC). The last bird had upper tail coverts and central rectrices red, but outer tail feathers green. There were no sightings during months of fieldwork at the latter site but two were seen at the Bulanao River near Cubay (open groves, bush and bamboo) in May 1998 (A. Herzig, PESCP). Described as uncommon on Luzon and Negros (DKP), and Endangered by Collar et al. (1994) on the basis of only three recent records (see also Allen 1999). Records of new species for Boracay EURASIAN KESTREL Falco tinnunculus A small falcon was observed in typical tinnunculus hovering flight over the golf course on Boracay Island on 8 December 1997 (JH). An uncommon winter and passage visitor with records from Luzon, Palawan, Busuanga, Batan and Mindanao (DKP). GREAT-EARED NIGHTJAR Eurostopodus macrotis One or two were calling at two locations and one was seen in flight on north Boracay on 7-8 December 1997 (JH). A fairly common local resident on Luzon, Mindanao, Mindoro, Leyte, Bohol and Samar, of the major islands, but not Negros (DKP). Additional observations of interest [BLACK BITTERN Jxobrychus flavicollis A heron, flushed from dense scrub by fishponds at Culasi, Iloilo Province, on 22 June 1996 appeared to be completely black on the upperparts and head, with dark legs and feet (PA). It flew low with frequent wing-beats like the small herons, rather than slower like egrets Egretta sp. It was thought to be xobrychus flavicollis, an uncommon and local resident on Cebu, Luzon, Mindanao, Samar, Mindoro, Batan, Siargao and Negros (DKP).] PEREGRINE FALCON Falco peregrinus Miranda et al. (2000) reported a single bird in flight on 28 February 1993, the first and only record for Panay. A pair was resident in March 1996 ona high cliff, at 950 ma.s.l., overlooking a steep mountain valley now mostly denuded and located immediately south of Hamtang (JH et al.). As these were very dark birds, they were probably F p. ernesti, the resident subspecies recorded widely throughout the country (DKP). PHILIPPINE FROGMOUTH Batrachostomus septimus Colour dimorphism is known for the subspecies B. septimus septimus and microrhynchus: ‘mottled’ and ‘chestnut’, with intermediates, at least for the former; its occurrence is not recorded in the third form, menagei, endemic to Negros and Panay (del Hoyo et al 1999). We mist-netted two individuals of an intermediate variety in which the grey/black vermiculation was replaced by beige/black, and E. Curio et al. 195 (NI, ILE, PANY WAG photographed a greyish bird, possibly an intermediate form, in the field at Sibaliw in 1999. One of the trapped birds was a male, with buffy scapulars throughout, and the other unsexed. This colour variation is not related to sex as differences in plumage have already been established for the two sexes (del Hoyo et al 1999). [ORIENTAL/ CLAMOROUS REED WARBLER Acrocephalus orientalis/stentoreus A large Acrocephalus warbler, observed singing in mangroves adjacent to fish- ponds at Pededo Bay on 12 March 1999, was of interest as neither of the possibilities, orientalis and stentoreus are known from Panay. It was thought to be stentoreus on the basis of short primary projection, long tail and buff underparts (PA). A. orientalis is a fairly common winter visitor to Luzon, Mindoro, Mindanao, Negros, Cebu and Palawan of the major islands but A. stentoreus is an uncommon resident, of endemic race harterii, and only recorded on Luzon, Mindoro, Mindanao, Bohol and Leyte, not Negros (DKP). | WHITE-THROATED JUNGLE-FLYCATCHER Rhinomyias albigularis One was mist-netted in Hamtang Forest at 900m on 4 March 1995 (EC photo) and 3 were trapped and ringed there at different sites at 920-960 m in March 1996 (JH photo). Seven were trapped at Sibaliw at 400-500 m between 17 November and 5 December 1997 (JH photo) and others seen there at different times of the year (D Allen, B King, P Morris pers. comm.). It therefore appears that there is a viable population at Hamtang and Sibaliw. Seven specimens were taken in the Central Panay mountains by Miranda ef al. (2000). Collar et al. (1994) described the species as ‘critically endangered’ because the only recent records were at two sites on Negros and it was thought to need forest below 900 m, which has virtually disappeared on Negros and Guimaras, the only islands from which it was known. Discussion Miranda et al. (2000) documented 37 new records of birds for Panay, of which we recorded 19 during our studies, in addition to the 35 new records reported here and one reported previously (Klop et al. 1998). Sixty-five of these 73 species are also known from Negros (DKP) and are therefore not unexpected. One, Gallicolumba keayi, is now so rare on Negros that it has been classified as ‘critically endangered’ (Collar et al. 1994), while Erythrura viridifacies has been moved from this category to ‘endangered’ in the light of our findings (Collar et al. 1999). The additional species reported here and by Miranda et al. (2000) increase the number of resident species known from Panay from 132 to 173, compared to 190 on Negros, with the number common to both islands rising from 135 to 172. Hence, the avifaunal similarity index (2 x C/(N+P), where C is the number of species common to both islands, N and P the number on Negros and Panay respectively - see Krebs 1972) for residents increases from 0.84 to 0.95. We consider that this comparison 1s most meaningful if restricted to resident species, i.e. if migrants, which could occur almost anywhere, are excluded. E. Curio et al. 196 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Five new Panay species have not been reported from Negros (nor have Falco tinnunculus and Eurostopodus macrotis from nearby Boracay), bringing the total of these to 16 including three reported by Miranda et al. (2000). Of these, Collocalia vanikorensis is wide-ranging, as are Falco tinnunculus and Eurostopodus macrotis, and therefore are not unexpected. Similarly, Urosphena squameiceps and Zoothera dauma, being winter visitors to southeast Asia, are not unexpected vagrants. Zosterops everetti has possibly been overlooked on Negros as it occurs on nearby Cebu and Siquijor. Given the small size of the remaining forest (some 500 km’), both hawk-eagles (Spizaetus philippensis, which does occur on Negros, and S. cirrhatus), although thought to be greatly under-recorded (D. Allen in. Jitt.), may be unable to sustain stable populations on Panay. Yet two breeding records of S. cirrhatus, each time ending in the robbery of one, probably the only, nestling, in different areas of Panay may indicate some permanence. Both our discoveries and those of Miranda et al. (2000) give some hope that the conservation status for some of the endangered species is not as acute as feared. This applies to Gallicolumba keayi (critically endangered), while Rhinomyias albigularis and Erythrura viridifacies have now been reclassified as ‘endangered’ (Collar et al.1999). These are elusive species that scarcely hold their ground on Negros. However, there is no reason for complacency since the taxonomic status, including the genetic differentiation of populations shared by the two islands, is still unexplored. Nonetheless, both the discoveries and the presence of critically endangered species, the two Visayan hornbills included (Klop et a/. 2000), will help catalyse the gazetting of natural park areas on Panay (Curio 2000). Acknowledgements The project was funded by the Frankfurt Zoological Society, with additional support from the Andreas-Stihl-Stiftung, the EU, the German Ornithologists’ Society, the Ministry of Science and Research of the land North Rhine Westfalia, and a generous donation from Prof. Dr Dr mult. h.c. Ernst Mayr, Cambridge, Mass. The Protected Area and Wildlife Bureau of the DENR (Director Wilfrido S. Pollisco, then Director R. C. Bayabos), the Negros Forest and Ecological Foundation (President Mr Gerry Ledesma), Raoul Geollegue (Regional Executive Director of DENR Reg. VI), West Visayas State University (President Dr Bernabe Cocjin) and Thorsten Hahn (address as EC) provided advice and support throughout. Helga Schulze helped ably with artwork and computer graphics. Stefan Luft provided the photographs of the Asian Stubtail. Robert Prys-Jones arranged for the archiving of photographs at Tring. We also thank DENR-JRWC (Arvin Diesmos) and Ben King for contributing valuable records, Edward Dickinson and Robert Kennedy for answering numerous queries, and Des Allen for useful comments on the manuscript and the record he contributed. References: Allen, D. 1999. Green-faced Parrotfinch Erythrura viridifacies in northern Luzon, Philippines. Forktail 15: 103. Bibby C. J., Collar N. J., Crosby, M. J., Heath, M. F., Imboden, C., Johnson, T. H., Long A. J., Stattersfield, A. J. & Thirgood, S. J., 1992. Putting biodiversity on the map: priority areas for global conservation. International Council for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK. Brazil, M. A. 1991. The birds of Japan. Christopher Helm, London, UK. Brown, L. & Amadon, D. 1968. Eagles, hawks and falcons of the world. Hamlyn Publishing Group Ltd., Middlesex, UK. 2 vols. E. Curio et al. OT Billo. OF 2001216) Chantler, P. & Driessens, G. 1995. Swifts. Pica Press, Sussex, UK. Collar, N. J., Crosby, M. J. & Stattersfield, A. J. 1994. Birds to watch 2. BirdLife Conservation Series 4, BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Collar, N. J., Mallari, N. A. D., & Tabaranza, Jr. 1999. Threatened birds of the Philippines. Bookmark, Makati City, Philippines. Curio, E., 1999. Fifth Annual Report. Unpublished Report, PESCP, Bochum. Curio, E., 2000. Sixth Annual Report. Unpublished Report, PESCP, Bochum. Del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.), 1994. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 2. Lynx Editions, Barcelona. Del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.), 1996. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 3. Lynx Editions, Barcelona. Del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.), 1999. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. S. Lynx Editions, Barcelona. Development Alternatives Inc. 1992. An aerial reconnaissance of closed canopy forests. Development Alternatives Inc., USAID/Philippines, DENR/Natural Resources Management Program. Unpublished Report (Program Document PI 7-92). Dickerson, R.E., 1928. Distribution of life in the Philippines. Monograph No. 21, Bureau of Science, Manila. Dickinson, E. C., Kennedy, R. S. & Parkes, K. C. 1991. The birds of the Philippines. British Ornithologists’ Union, Checklist 12, Tring, UK. du Pont, J. E., 1971: Philippine birds. Delaware Mus. Nat. Hist., Monograph Series No. 2, Greenville, Delaware. Evans, T. D., Dutson, G. C. L. & Brooks, T. M. 1993. Cambridge Philippines Rainforest Project 1991: final report. Birdlife International (Study Report 54), Cambridge, UK. Gamauf, A., Preleuthner M. & Pinsker, W. 1998. Distribution and field identification of Philippine birds of prey: 1. Philippine Hawk Eagle Spizaetus philippensis and Changeable Hawk Eagle Spizaetus cirrhatus. Forktail 14: 1-11. Hachisuka, M. 1935. The birds of the Philippine Islands. Vol.2, 11, Witherby, London. Harper, P. & Fullerton, L. 1994. Philippines Handbook. 2" edition. Moon Publications, Chico, USA. King, B. F., Woodcock, M. & Dickinson, E. C. 1993. Birds of South-East Asia. Harper Collins, London. Klop, E., Curio, E. & de Soye, Y. 1998. A new population of Bleeding-heart Pigeon (Gallicolumba sp.) and its conservation relevance on Panay, Philippines. J. Ornithol. 139: 76-77. Klop, E., Curio, E. & Lastimoza, L. L. 2000. Breeding biology, nest site characteristics and nest spacing of the Visayan Tarictic Hornbill Penelopides panini panini on Panay, Philippines. Bird Cons. Int. 10: 17-27. Krebs, C. J., 1972. Ecology. Harper & Row, New York. Lekagul, B., & Round, P.D. 1991. Birds of Thailand. Saha Karn Bhaet, Bangkok. Miranda, H. C., Kennedy, R. S., Sison, R. V., Gonzales, P. C. & Ebreo, M. F., 2000. New records of birds from the island of Panay, Philippines. Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl. 120: 266-280. Rabor, D. S., Alcala, A. C. & Gonzales, R. B. 1970. A list of the land vertebrates of Negros Island, Philippines. Silliman J. 17:297-316. Svensson, L., 1984. Identification guide to European passerines. 3" edition. Ugga, Stockholm. Addresses: E. Curio, Conservation Biology Unit (formerly Animal Behaviour Research Group), Ruhr-Universitat Bochum, Postfach 102148, 44780 Bochum, Germany. J. Hornbuckle, 35 Grove Road, Sheffield S7 2GY, U.K. Y. de Soye, Loro Parque Fundacion, 38400 Puerto de la Cruz, Tenerife, Spain. P. Aston 11 Garreglwyd, Pembrey, Llanelli, Carmarthenshire SA16 OUH, UK. L. L. Lastimoza, West Visayas State University, La Paz, Iloilo City 5000, Philippines. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Andrew Whittaker 198 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Notes on the poorly-known Buckley’s Forest Falcon Micrastur buckleyi including voice, range and first Brazilian records. by Andrew Whittaker Received 29 March 2000 Buckley’s Forest Falcon Micrastur buckleyi, also known as the Lesser Collared Forest Falcon, is one of the world’s least known raptors, represented by only eleven known museum specimens (Collar et al. 1992). The type specimen was collected in 1888 from Sarayacu, Pastaza, Ecuador. Poor taxonomic understanding led it to be initially described as a race of Collared Forest Falcon Micrastur melanoleucus (= semitorquatus). Swann (1919) separated it from nominate semitorquatus on the basis of its smaller wing and tarsus, with feet being smaller and weaker. However, Traylor (1948) confirmed that M. buckleyi was a valid species, not only being smaller than M. semitorquatus in all dimensions with proportionately a much shorter tarsus, but also that it occurred sympatrically. The scarcity in collections of M. buckleyi, most of which were obtained historically (only two recently in 1977-78), combined with it being virtually unknown to Neotropical field ornithologists and having a restricted distribution in western Amazonia, led it to be listed as “threatened” (Collar ef al. 1992). Here I present the first description of the species’ voice, information on plumage, insight into its biology and new distributional records including the first records for Brazil. Micrastur forest falcons are found exclusively in the Americas, inhabiting Neotropical rainforests ranging from Mexico south to northern Argentina (Brown & Amadon 1968, del Hoyo et al. 1994). Forest falcons are well adapted to their forested environments with long graduated tails and short rounded wings, allowing rapid flight and good manoeuvrability while hunting in thick undergrowth. Long strong legs allow greater agility within thick vegetation for running along branches or on the ground after prey (Thorstrom 1993). A combination of inhabiting dense forests, not known to soar or perform aerial displays and their elusive nature makes Micrasturs very inconspicuous, and therefore easily overlooked (Thiollay 1985). In fact Micrasturs are far more often heard than seen, vocal activity being principally around dawn and dusk. This habit is comparable to other rarely seen but regularly heard Neotropical forest dwellers, such as Tinamous, 7Jinamus and Crypturellus and Antpittas, Grallaria (pers obs). Taxonomy and identification The genus Micrastur currently consists of 6 species of forest falcon (Brown & Amadon 1989, Sibley & Monroe 1993, del Hoyo et al. 1994), which can be subdivided into two groups based on size. Large Micrasturs comprise Buckley’s Forest Falcon M. buckleyi, Collared Forest Falcon M. semitorquatus, and Slaty-backed Forest Andrew Whittaker 199 evil, Te OLE AVON WAT) Falcon M. mirandollei, and small ones are Lined Forest Falcon M. gilvicollis, Barred Forest Falcon M. ruficollis, and Plumbeus Forest Falcon M. plumbeus. Micrastur buckleyi is physically very similar to the larger M. semitorquatus but the lack of a large museum series, combined with a complete lack of any knowledge of the birds’ biology, have combined to cause the taxanomic confusion. Traylor (1948) discovered that M. buckleyi deserved full species status while identifying a collection made by José M. Schunke in 1946 from Yarinacocha, Lorento Peru. He based his conclusion on three skins, one in the Chicago Natural History Museum (CNHM), from Yarinacocha, Peru and two from the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), from eastern Ecuador, Rio Suno and San José. The main morphological features separating the two species are size, principally in wing length and a proportionately shorter tarsus. A comparison of measurements from eleven male and ten female M. semitorquatus from Peru, Brazil and Bolivia with 4 male and one female M. buckleyi illustrates this smaller size difference well (Table 1). The bill also seems to be smaller in M. buckleyi (culmen of type 16mm) than in M. semitorquatus, (average 20 mm; n= 11, range 19-21 mm, Amadon 1964). Given the striking similarities between M. buckleyi and M. semitorquatus in adult plumage, as well as poorly understood age-related plumage differences, great care is needed in field identification. Important field marks, e.g. the number of tail bars and the type and pattern of underpart markings, are highly variable in immature and subadult plumages of other Micrasturs. Also, M. semitorquatus shows great plumage variation with three distinct colour morphs in adult plumage: light morph (most common), rufous or buffy morph and a rare dark morph. No such colour morphs are yet known from M. buckleyi but with such a small sample this possibility remains to be determined. Amadon’s (1964) description of the first known female and immature plumages follows, with additional information I have noted from slides of specimens. The female (AMNH No. 230774) has conspicuous white marks on the scapulars. Two of these are near the tip of each feather and are oval in shape, while two others, half- concealed near the middle of the feather, are crescentric. There are also roundish white markings on the outer vanes of the secondaries and on a few of the upper wing coverts. M. semitorquatus never shows any white markings on scapulars and secondaries. The immature male (AMNH No. 181867) had the following distinctive TABEE Summary of biometrics of M. buckleyi, with its sister species M. semitorquatus. Each data set includes mean, range and sample size. Wing measurements are flattened chord. Species Wing Tarsus M. buckleyi (male) MZ DS DUGD=DiNG ea! SOs I/D OS-OH2 4! M. semitorquatus (male) DAT Os 23 IPS sedlal 87.0; 82-91; 11 M. buckleyi (female) PGE GSO M. semitorquatus (female) INOW AVS) WS) LEPRS We WM) 87.0; 82-94; 10 Andrew Whittaker 200 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) plumage characters separating it from immature M. semitorquatus. Chest uniform tawny, with vaguest suggestion of blackish marks near the tip of the feathers and no barring, whereas M. semitorqutus underparts are tawny or buffy and boldly barred with crescentric blackish marks. Immature M. buckleyi has a rufous nuchal collar (tawny or buff in M. semitorquatus) and chest with which it is continuous. Under wing coverts and linings white, washed with buff, and with only the slightest indication of dark markings, whereas M. semitorquatus has conspicuous black or dark brown cross markings. Useful field marks for M. buckleyi are its overall smaller size with a noticeably proportionately smaller head (pers. obs), and adults show three broad white tail bars, not including the buff/white pale terminal tail fringe. However, the number of tail bars can vary with age in M. buckleyi with sub-adults showing as many as 4 or as few as 2 broad white bars, not including terminal fringe. This field character can also be rendered difficult since wing tip projection can cover the uppermost tail bar, obscuring it from view in the field. VM. semitorquatus adults normally show 3 tail bars, while immatures have from 4 to 6 white/buff tail bars, not including the terminal tail fringe. Female M. buckleyi show diagnostic white spots on the scapulars and secondaries, as previously described. Immatures have a striking bright tawny upper breast band and nuchal collar and duller rufous upper breast band, contrasting with buff throat and lower underparts with 4-5 widely spaced bold brown bars onto lower breast; remaining lower underparts are unmarked or the barring is less bold but extends down the flanks and thighs, being absent from the centre of lower underparts, with browner/blackish tail and bolder buffier tail bars and terminal tail fringe. In Peru I noted the following description in the field from M. buckleyi: upperparts dark grey on both back and wings, contrasting with darker hood; tail slightly darker than back with 4 obvious white transverse tail bars, but upper band sometimes obscured by wing tips; tail with a terminal white fringe. Cere and lores yellow; bill dark grey/black, looking smaller in proportion to M. semitorquatus; eyes dark brown with bare yellow orbital skin and eyebrow. Underparts creamy white; yellow legs brighter than cere; white neck collar very broad and prominent; dull white ear coverts. This plumage most probably refers to a sub-adult male. Vocalizations The voice of M. buckleyi remained unknown to ornithologists until very recently, being confused with other Micrastur species, until Paul Coopmans (pers. comm.) tape-recorded the species’ voice on 20 November 1993 at Sacha Lodge, Rio Napo, Ecuador. Voice recognition of M. buckleyi since has increased field records of this little known forest falcon in the past decade. Here I present the first detailed description of M. buckleyi vocalizations and include spectograms of its vocal repertoire (Fig. 1). M. buckleyi, as with most Micrasturs, calls mainly c. 30 min leading up to dawn with a smaller peak around dusk (Thorstrom 1993). The pre-dawn calling period can be weather-dependent, dark skies often resulting in much less vocalization. This pattern of intense crepuscular vocal activity is clearly illustrated in M. gilvicollis in Andrew Whittaker 201 Bull, B:O.C, 2001 1213) Brazil, with 73% of all recorded calls between 0535-0555 h and 22% between 1745- 1808 h during 41 days of dawn to dusk observations on four different adults (Klein & Bierregaard 1988). Calls identified to date are: Territorial advertising song M. buckleyi’s “territorial advertising song” is the most commonly heard call and consists typically of 2 loud notes “EEOK, OOW” (Fig. 1, C & E) or 3 loud notes “EEOK, OOW., .....ow” (Fig. 1, A & B). This can be described as a 2- or 3-note loud nasal call with a somewhat echoing quality, the first note more emphatic than the second and there is a marked pause before the third, which is quieter. Fig. 1 shows slight individual variation between two different birds. The slight differences in pitch are probably related to sex, the smaller males producing higher frequency notes than the larger females (pers. obs). Pairs may sing a “territorial advertising song” perched either closely together or widely apart (several hundred metres), the first bird using the 2-note call, while its mate joins in with a 1-note call. This gives the impression (from a distance) that only one bird is producing the 3-note version of the call. The pair call antiphonally and can continue for well over a minute. Another variation involves both birds using the 2-note song type. Excited territorial calls These calls are usually given during intraspecific territorial conflict or are often solicited by tape playback to a lone bird or pair, similar to the behaviour of M. ruficollis (Thorstrom 1993). This call (Fig. 1, D &.F) is a fast series of regularly spaced short notes varying in number (12-30), which gain gradually in volume, ending with two emphatic loud notes with a pause between them. “............ uk-uk-uk-uk-uk CAHO’, ...OW”. The long string of call notes sound almost like week laughter and could possibly be confused with a Laughing Falcon Herpetotheres cachinnans, or a female M. semitorquatus at the nest site (Thorstrom et al. 2000a,b). The intensity and number of notes can vary greatly after repeated tape playback, with more agitated birds adding more notes (Fig. 1, F), but all series always end with the louder emphatic two notes. Territorial duet This vocalization (Fig. 1, G) is heard mostly around dawn, with one of the pair starting with “excited territorial calls”; then its mate joins in with the 3-note “territorial advertising song”. These calls are heard in territorial conflict, as well as being solicited by tape playback. Food Begging Calls of young These calls, recorded by J. Arwin, comprise of a persistently repeated series of short hollow notes “ow,ow,ow,OW,OW,OW,OW,OW,OW,OW,OW,OW,OW,ow, ow’. The number of notes in each series varied from 14-17, lasting 8 or 9 seconds, and was repeated every 15-18 seconds for extended periods of over a couple of minutes. Frequency (kHz) Andrew Whittaker 202 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) The “territorial advertising song” is the principal and most commonly heard vocalization of M. buckleyi, and is distinguished from all four other sympatric Micrastur species “territorial advertising songs” as follows: M. gilvicollis This species’ “territorial advertising song” is a repeated 2-note, rarely 3-note, lamenting bark “ar, ha”. Although M. buckleyi’s voice differs having longer phrases that are lower pitched, more widely spaced and much louder, M. gilvicollis is vocally the Hea seg | r - maa aohetie : neh Time (seconds) Figure 1. Spectograms of M. buckleyi vocalizations. All recordings by the author. (A) 3-note “Territorial advertising song” Rio Pichana, Lorento, Peru, 21 May 1998. (B) 3-note “Territorial advertising song” Rio Amonia, Acre, Brazil, 15 December 1995. (C) 2-note “Territorial advertising song” Rio Bajé, Acre, Brazil, 15 December 1995. (D) “Excited territorial call” Rio Amonia, Acre, Brazil, 15 December 1995. (E) 2-note “Territorial advertising song” Rio Amonia, Acre, Brazil, 15 December 1995. (F) “Excited territorial call” of single bird in response to tape playback, Rio Amonia, Acre, Brazil, 15 December 1995. (G) “Territorial duet” of a pair of birds, Rio Amonia, Acre, Brazil, 15 December 1995. Andrew Whittaker 203 BU BiOve 200 Ii2G) most readily confused Micrastur with M. buckleyi. However, M. buckleyi gives the diagnostic 3-note call with the distinct long pause before the last note (Fig 1, & B). M. semitorquatus The “territorial advertising song” is a slowly repeated single loud hollow note “cow...cow...cow...” (Hilty & Brown 1986). Although morphologically the most similar to M. buckleyi, this difference in call is diagnostic. M. mirandollei This species’ “territorial advertising song” is a series of 9-14 repeated, drawn out nasal notes, “ah, AAH, AAH, AAH, AAH, AAH, AAH, AAH, AHH”, strikingly different from M. buckleyi. M. ruficollis The “territorial advertising song” is a long repeated series of distinct sharp barks that are often tirelessly repeated at short intervals, “ow, ow, ow, ......... ”, diagnostically different. Distribution Previously, M. buckleyi was known to occur in the tropical lowlands of western Amazonia, east of the Andes in Amazonian Ecuador and Peru and with a single hypothetical record from southeastern Colombia north of the Amazon (Hilty & Brown 1986). Present records of M. buckleyi (Fig. 2) are exclusively from the lowland tropical rainforests. However, two skins in the British-Natural History Museum, Tring, collected by L. Gomez in 1938 from the Cordillera de Cutucu, labelled at 1,800 m, are dubious as regards locality and probably come from a collection point also within the lowlands (Robert Ridgely pers. comm.). The following observations confirm the occurrence of M. buckleyi in Brazil, all from the western-most Amazonian state of Acre and obtained during avian inventories along the Rio Jurua, between July 1991 and May 1995 (Whittaker & Oren 1999). I made tape recordings in the field using a Sony TCM 5000EM with a Senhiesser ME 60 directional microphone, and observations were carried out with 10X40 binoculars. All tape recordings will be deposited in the British Library National Sound Archive, London, UK. 1. An individual was tape-recorded at 0650 h (dawn) on 6 February 1992 at Porongaba, Acre on the east bank of the Rio Jurua. The bird was singing a “ territorial advertising song” c. 200 m from the river bank in mature lowland transitional forest. 2. An individual was tape-recorded and observed while singing the “territorial advertising song” at 0645 h on 15 May 1995 at Seringuerinho in terra firme forest on the Rio Bajé, an east bank tributary draining into the upper Rio Jurua. 3. An individual was tape-recorded on 15 December 1995 in the late afternoon on the Rio Amonia, a tributary on the west bank of the Rio Jurua. This bird remained Andrew Whittaker 204 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) hidden from view in a disturbed forest edge 250 m from the river. The terra firme forest here had a greater relief and large amounts of Guadua bamboo in the understorey. The following pre-dawn, at about 0630 h, I made another tape recording from the same locality and after tape playback a territorial pair of birds approached to within 100 m and I tape-recorded the pair dueting (Fig. 1 G). Figure 2. Geographical range of Micrastur buckleyi. Occurance at all points is shown by the following symbols: Voucher museum specimen = black square, voucher tape recording = black circle, hypothetical sight record = black triangle. 1- San José de Sumaco, Napo (Ecuador), 2- Rio Suno (Ecuador), 3-Type Pastaza (Ecuador), 4- Cordillera de Cutucu (Ecuador), 5-Orosa (Peru), 6-Kusu (Peru), 7-Rio Cenepa (Peru), 8- Perico(Peru), 9-Yarinacocha (Peru), 10-Hacienda Villacarmen (Peru) 11- La Selva Lodge (Ecuador), 12- Rio Pacuyacu (Ecuador), 13- Rio Napo, Sacha Lodge (Ecuador), 14-Tiputini (Ecuador), 15- Kapawi Lodge, Rio Pastaza (Ecuador), 16- Rio Pichana (Peru), 17-Iquitos, Amazonas (Peru), 18- Porongaba (Brazil), 19- Seringuerinho (Brazil), 20-Rio Armonia (Brazil) 21-Hacienda Amazonia, Atalaya (Peru), 22- Lago Agrio (Ecuador), 23- Lagartococha (Ecuador), 24-Rio Aguarico (Peru), 25- Rio Amacayacu (Colombia), 26- Boca de Manu (Peru). Andrew Whittaker 205 Bull. B-O.€.- 2001. 121G) 4. J. Minns and R. Parrini (pers. comm.) tape-recorded one unknown Micrastur species at 0605 h on 14 September 1999 at Foz do Breu, Rio Tejo, an east bank tributary of the Rio Jurua, Acre, which J later confirmed to be M. buckleyi. During fieldwork at Porongaba I recorded M. semitorquatus not only sympatric with M. buckleyi but syntopic, and at Quieto, along the Rio Amonia, I recorded all three large Micrastur species occurring sympatrically. The two smaller and more common Micrasturs, M. ruficollis and M. gilvicollis were also observed and tape- recorded from the extractive reserve, confirming that 5 species of Micrastur can be found sympatrically in Brazil in lowland terra firme forest along the upper reaches of the Rio Jurua. This I believe is the first documentation of a site containing five Micrastur species. In addition, I include two new sight records of M. buckleyi from Peru: 1. [heard a distant M. buckleyi at dawn, 0600 h, on 20 May 1998 singing its “territorial advertising song” (Fig. 1 A) from terra firme forest on the south bank of the Amazon near the mouth of the Rio Pichana, Lorento department. After recording the bird’s song and giving it c. 2 min of tape playback, I observed nothing until a group of Black-chested Moustached Tamarin Saguinus mystax gave their high- pitched alarm notes indicating an approaching predator. I then located a motionless forest falcon perched 25 m up on a dead snag in the canopy. After a short period a second bird, probably its mate, started to call from a concealed perch nearby. 2. At0600hon7 April 1999 I recorded the 3-note “territorial advertising song” of a bird on the north bank of the Amazon river, in secondary growth bordering terra firme forest in a sandy belt region, 15 km north of the city of Iquitos, Lorento department. These new records from Brazil extend the known range of M. buckleyi south of the Amazon east into Amazonian Acre, where it is confirmed as a territorial resident. However the exact eastward extent of its range within Brazil remains to be determined. M. buckleyi may well range further east into at least the upper Rio Purus drainage and possibly even extending into the Amazon of north western Bolivia. The published records of M. buckleyi for Brazil reported in Collar et. al (1992) were erroneous and subsequently withdrawn by Wege & Long (1995). After closer examination of the Acre specimen reported by Collar, comparing it with the type specimen of M. buckleyi, it was confirmed to represent a previously unknown subadult plumage of a female M. ruficollis concentricus (pers. obs). Behaviour Encounters in the field with M. buckleyi within its forested environment are rare; it is an inconspicuous and elusive raptor. The few observations I made were of calling individuals or pairs, particularly after tape playback around dawn. A typical response to tape playback entices a lone bird or a territorial pair to approach silently, out of view in the thick cover in the sub canopy. On a perch they remain still and silent, Andrew Whittaker 206 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) watching, and are therefore easily overlooked. However, after a delay from 10-15 minutes they sometimes start calling again, giving away their presence. One vocalizing bird, observed in early morning as it perched on top of a dead snag over 20 m high in the sub-canopy of terra firme forest at a man made edge, threw it’s head backwards c. 40 degrees each time it emitted the 3 note “territorial advertising song”, lowering its head to a normal position between calling bouts. Another individual, seen flying a short distance through the canopy, upon landing on a dead stump shook its long graduated tail and then pumped it downwards towards the body a few times while looking around. After settling down on the perch the bird held its tail down vertically and then pushed it c. 10-15 degrees towards its body, holding it in this position. J. Arwin (pers. comm), observed an adult M. buckleyi perched 1 m above an active army ant swarm at Tiputini, Ecuador. Other attendant obligate army ant birds, Sooty Antbirds Myrmeciza fortis and Goeldi’s Antbirds M. goeldii, were following the front of the swarm along with several woodcreepers (Dendrocolaptidae), and all ignored the raptor’s presence. This suggests that M. buckleyi was not hunting for birds but either reptiles or larger insects fleeing from the swarm. This behaviour has been noted for other forest falcons (Willis et al. 1983). Nothing is known of the breeding of M. buckleyi, although J. Arwin (pers. comm.), reported two or possibly three fledged young and two adults at Tiputini Biodiversity Center, Ecuador, in August 1995 but the nest was not seen. The fledglings gave distinct “food begging calls” from the canopy of emergent trees. The young did not respond to tape playback of their own calls, but playback of an adult “territorial advertising song” solicited a strong response, with one fledgling leaping down from perch to perch out of the canopy, through the mid storey until it perched in the understorey only a few metres above the recordist. The fledglings were heard calling over the following week from the same general area within the forest. The same food begging call of M. buckleyi was also heard by J. Arwin (pers. comm.) at Manu Lodge, Peru in August 1997. The nest of M. buckleyi remains to be discovered, but it may nest in tree cavities, as do its relatives M. semitorquatus and M. ruficollis (Mader 1979, Thorstrom et. al 2000a, Thorstrom et. al 2000b). Moult The only moult data come from a female (AMNH No. 230774), collected from Orosa, Peru in November and an immature male (AMNH No. 181867) from Rio Chinchipe, Peru obtained on 30 July, which were both in tail moult. Post breeding moult in the adult in November would tie into the little of what we know of the species’ breeding season, with fledged young still being fed at two different Peruvian sites in August. Conclusion Vocalizations of M. buckleyi remain not only the best form of identification currently available (due to identification difficulties with our current knowledge of plumage Andrew Whittaker 207 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) variations) but also the best method of locating this elusive species. However, observers’ familiarity with the voices of the commoner Micrastur species with which it is sympatric is essential. For many secretive and poorly-known Neotropical forest species vocal recognition is the most important key, for not only finding the species but also identification (Parker 1991, Whittaker 1998). Incorporating into survey work the method of “trawling” with tape playback of M. buckleyi “territorial advertising song” in suitable habitat at pre-dawn and dusk will greatly increase the possibility of finding this majestic forest falcon. Acknowledgments Financial support for part of my travelling was provided by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the National Geographic Society and Wildlife Conservation Society. For travelling opportunities in Peru I would like to thank Victor Emanuel Nature Tours Ltd. I thank Keith Brown for his help and encouragement in the field, often under difficult circumstances, and J. R. Malcom, J. Patton, M.N. da Silva and C. Gascon and Dionisio Pimentel Neto for their companionship. The manuscript was greatly improved by comments from Paul Salaman and Chris Feare to whom I am very thankful. Many thanks to the following for sharing personal unpublished observations and tape recordings: Paul Coopmans, John Arwin, Paul Greenfield, John V. Moore, Robert Ridgely, Martin Kelsey, Paul Salaman, Barry Walker and David C. Wege. A special thanks to Mort and Phyllis Isler who prepared the map and spectograms, to David Agro for allowing me to use his slides and Thomas Schulenberg for his constant help with locating manuscripts. Thanks especially to my wife Nadime Whittaker and my two children Steven and Luana for their constant support and encouragement in my work while I have been away from home for long periods. References: Amadon, D. 1964. Taxanomic notes on birds of prey. American Museum Novitates No. 2166. Brown, L. H. & Amadon, D. 1968. Eagles, hawks and falcons of the world. Country Life Books. London. Brown, L.H. & Amadon,1989. Eagles, hawks and falcons of the world. Wellfleet Press, Seacaucus, New Jersey. Collar N. J., Gonzaga L.P., Krabbe N., Madrono Nieto A., Naranjo, L.G., Parker, T. A II] & Wege, D.C. 1992. Threatened birds of the Americas. Smithosonian Institution Press. Washington and London. Del Hoyo, J.A. Elliot, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.) 1994. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol 2. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Hilty, S.L., & Brown, D L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia.Princeton Univ. Press. Mader, W. J. 1979. First nest description for the genus Micrastur (Forest Falcons). Condor 81: 320. Klein, B.C. & Bierregaard, R.O. 1988. Movement and calling behavior of the Lined Forest Falcon (Micrastur gilvicollis) in the Brazilian amazon. Condor 90: 497-499. Parker, T. A . III. 1991. On the use of tape recorders in avifaunal surveys. Auk 108: 443-444. Sibley, C.G. & Monroe, B. L. 1993. A world checklist of birds. Yale Univ. Press. New Haven, Connecticut. Swann, H. K. 1919. A synoptical list of the Accipiters. London. Wheldon and Wesley. Thiollay, J. M. 1985. Birds of prey in French Guiana a preliminary survey. Bull. World Working Group Birds of Prey 2: 11-15. Thorstrom, R., Ramos, J.D. & Castillo, J.M. 2000a. Breeding biology and behavior of the Collared Forest Falcon (Micrastur semitorquatus) in Guatemala. Ornitologia Neotropical PR I=h2: Andrew Whittaker 208 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Thorstrom, R., Ramos, J. D. & Castillo, J.M. 2000b. Breeding Biology of Barred Forest Falcons (Micrastur ruficollis) in Northeastern Guatemala. Auk 117: 781-786. Thorstrom, R. K., Turley, C. W., Ramirez, R. G. & Gilroy, B. A . 1990. Description of nests, eggs and young of the Barred Forest Falcon (Micrastur ruficollis) and of the Collared Forest Falcon (M. semitorquatus). Condor 92:237-239. Traylor, M. A., Jr. 1948. New birds from Peru and Ecuador. Fieldiana, Zool., 31:195-200. Wege, D. C. & Long, A. J. 1995. Key areas for threatened birds in the Neotropics. Birdlife International (Birdlife conservation series 5). Cambridge, UK. Whittaker, A. 1998. Observations on the behaviour, vocalizations and distribution of the Glossy-backed Becard Pachyramphus surinamus, a poorly-known canopy inhabitant of Amazonian rainforests. Arajuba 6: 37-41. Whittaker, A. & Oren, D.C. 1999. Important ornithological records from the Rio Jurua, western Amazonia, including twelve additions to the Brazilian avifauna. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 119: 235- 260. Willis, E. O., Wechsler, D.& Stiles, F.G. 1983. Forest Falcons, hawks, and a pygmy-owl as ant followers. Ver. Bras. Biol. 42:23-28. Address: Conjunto Acariquara, Alexio, Rua Samaumas 214, Manaus, Amazonas 69085-053, Brazil: e- mail: Birding@internext.com.br © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Vocal evidence of species rank for nominate Unicolored Tapaculo Scytalopus unicolor by Paul Coopmans, Niels Krabbe & Thomas S. Schulenberg Received 12 May 2000 Salvin (1895) named a new species, Scytalopus unicolor, based on three specimens from northern Peru, and this species was recognized by later authors (e.g., Cory & Hellmayr 1924). However, during a revision of the genus Scytalopus (which formed the basis for the classification of the genus in Peters 1951 and Meyer de Schauensee 1966), Zimmer (1939) combined unicolor with four other taxa (/atrans, subcinereus, intermedius, and parvirostris). Of this group, “unicolor” was the oldest name, and Zimmer’s polytypic species took the name Scytalopus unicolor. The songs of suboscine birds, such as Scytalopus, are believed to be entirely innate (Kroodsma 1982, 1984; see also Isler et al. 1998). Recent field studies (Whitney 1994, Krabbe & Schulenberg 1997) have shown that almost all Scytalopus taxa that were treated as subspecies by Zimmer (1939) should be elevated to species rank, primarily because of their diagnostically different vocalizations. Furthermore, Arctander & Fjeldsa (1994) found a positive correlation between vocal and genetic differences in Scytalopus, and showed that allopatry and parapatry are no evidence of close relationship. As part of a re-evaluation of the species limits of Scytalopus based on voice, Paul Coopmans et al. 209 Bull 1B. OC 2000 1216) Krabbe & Schulenberg (1997) showed that Scytalopus “unicolor” parvirostris differed dramatically in voice from Scytalopus “unicolor” latrans and S. “u.” subcinereus (see below), making it clear that parvirostris is a separate species. However, vocal data were lacking for wnicolor, and these authors left /atrans, subcinereus, and intermedius as subspecies of Scytalopus unicolor, which was a conservative approach. In 1998 PC obtained tape recordings of two individuals of nominate unicolor near Cajabamba (the type locality for unicolor), on the east slope of the Western Andes in southern Depto. Cajamarca, northern Peru. These recent tape recordings (as well as additional recordings of a single bird obtained by Richard Webster and Rose Ann Rowlett, also near Cajabamba, on 20 October 1996) reveal that both song and calls of nominate wnicolor differ strikingly from those of /atrans, subcinereus, and parvirostris (Figs. 1-2). Distribution The type series of S. unicolor consisted of a pair from Cajabamba (2,750 m), on the east slope of the Western Andes in southern Cajamarca, and of a female from Huamachuco (3,175 m), c. 20 km to the south, also on the east slope of the Western Andes, in La Libertad. Zimmer (1939) ascribed specimens from further south on the same slope in La Libertad (Succha, Soquian), at elevations ranging from 2,000 to 3,150 m, to this form, and also included five specimens from Chugur, on the Pacific slope in southern Cajamarca. In addition, Koepcke (1961) identified a male and a female from Sunchubamba, further south on the Pacific slope in Cajamarca, as nominate wnicolor. As Zimmer (1939) was well aware, its occurrence at Chugur is problematic, as this locality is north of and near Taulis, the type locality of subcinereus. Subcinereus ranges from 1,500 to 4,000 m in southwestern Ecuador, and also occurs on the Pacific slope in northern Peru south to southern Cajamarca (Nancho). In the vicinity of Huambos, southern Cajamarca, NK has tape-recorded it near the crest of the Western Andes, and apparently it also descends the adjacent east slope of the Western Andes, as two specimens from Cutervo seem to represent this form (see discussion in Krabbe & Schulenberg 1997). The plumage differences between subcinereus and unicolor are so slight that we hesitate to accept Pacific slope records of unicolor, at least until documented by voice. Intermedius occurs in the Utcubamba drainage in the northern Central Andes, Depto. Amazonas, Peru (type locality La Lejia, 2,743 m). No definite vocal data exist, but tape recordings from within its range (PC) suggest that it might be a distinct species as well. For the moment we leave intermedius as a subspecies of /atrans, which it resembles morphologically more than it does nominate unicolor. Latrans is widely distributed in the Andes of Ecuador, Colombia, and Venezuela, at elevations ranging from 1,500 to 4,000 m. At the type locality on Cerro Munchique in the Western Andes of Colombia, vocalizations are similar to those recorded in inter-Andean and western Ecuador and in the Central Andes of Colombia; birds from the Amazonian slope north of the Rio Maranon approach subcinereus in the male’s black plumage, and in their fairly similar vocalizations. Further studies are needed in Paul Coopmans et al. 210 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) order to delimit their range in Colombia and to establish whether Venezuelan birds belong with them. Identity of the modern tape-recordings from Cajabamba We were not able to obtain specimens of the tapaculos tape-recorded at Cajabamba. In view of the potential importance of these recordings to the taxonomy of Scytalopus (see below), and the difficulties of field identification of Scytalopus based on plumage characters, we here justify our identification of these birds as unicolor, with which they agreed in their uniform grey colour. Species diversity of Scytalopus on the western cordillera of the Andes of southwestern Ecuador and northwestern Peru is low. Throughout much of this region, from southern Loja south to Cajamarca, only a single taxon (swbcinereus) is found. Locally in Cajamarca there are records of affinis, which is also found farther south in Ancash (where it is the only Scytalopus recorded). We show below that the vocalizations of the Cajabamba population differ dramatically from those of subcinereus, making it very clear that these do not represent the same taxon. The vocalizations of affinis are also quite distinct from those of the Cajabamba population (see Figs. 30 and 31 in Krabbe & Schulenberg (1997)). B. Whitney, commenting on an earlier draft of this manuscript, suggested that, in the absence of a specimen compared directly to the type of wnicolor, we could not rule out the possibility that the tape recordings from Cajabamba represented not unicolor but instead “an undescribed species of Scytalopus”’. Indeed, in the absence of a specimen, we cannot rule out such a possibility (which, admittedly, even the author of this suggestion regarded as low). In view of the low species diversity of Scytalopus from the western cordillera of northern Peru, and in recognition that under any circumstances the probabilities would be extraordinarily small that two independent parties (Coopmans; and Webster and Rowlett) would happen upon a previously unknown species of Scytalopus at the type locality of unicolor, we believe that our equation of these tape recordings with uwnicolor is the only rational hypothesis. One might propose the existence of a virtually unlimited number of previously undetected taxa of Scytalopus, but our contention would be that such suggestions may safely be put aside unless and until such time as the notion is positively supported by tangible evidence, rather than speculation. Vocalizations Although our sample size is small (songs and calls of three individuals), the material is consistent. The song of nominate wnicolor (n = 3) (Fig. | D) is a simple phrase of 4-6 notes, the first overtone loudest, c. 2,400 Hz, the fundamental and higher overtones barely audible, each note becoming shorter and the pace increasing through the phrase, which lasts 0.3-0.5 s and is repeated at | s intervals. Both Jatrans (n = 55) and suwbcinereus (n = 49) have simple songs of single, Frequency (kHz) Paul Coopmans et al. 211 BU TBIOIE, 2001: 1203) endlessly repeated notes (Fig. | A-C), with at least three distinct harmonics, the fundamental and the first overtone being variously the loudest; east slope birds referred to latrans (n = 25) differ by always having the fundamental loudest and by having barely audible overtones. Songs of east slope birds and swbcinereus often begin with rhythmic phrases. These are occasionally repeated a number of times, but usually the phrases become increasingly longer and the intervals shorter, soon becomeing a repetition of a single note at constant pace, which varies from four to eight notes per s, fastest when the bird appears most excited. There is little or no geographical fa | ’ | ao, Pa Piss Pu a fA 24 ; x Ay A, N ee ee Zz } Bee ae 2 ~ — ———— = si wart (ual ts Ks Figure 1. Songs of Scytalopus tapaculos. (A) S. 1. latrans, Cotopaxi, w Ecuador; FS a (B) S. latrans, Napo, e Ecuador; (C) S. a z 5 mes Wer beL EH | latrans subcinereus, Loja, sw Ecuador; 24 | | (D)Nominate S$. unicolor, near _ Cajabamba (type locality), east slope | of West Andes, s Cajamarca, nw Peru; (E) S. acutirostris, Huanuco, c Peru; (F) S. parvirostris, Pasco, c Peru. A-C and E recorded by NK, D by PC, F by TSS: NS o Time (s) 1 Figure 2. Calls of Scytalopus tapaculos. (A) S. 1. latrans, Cotopaxi, w Ecuador; (B) S. latrans, Morona-Santiago/Azuay EE. boundary, se Ecuador; (C) S. latrans j subcinereus, Azuay, sw Ecuador; (D) S. latrans subcinereus, between Llama and Huambos, Pacific slope near crest of the Andes, s Cajamarca, nw Peru; (E) Nominate S. unicolor, near the type- locality in s Cajamarca, nw Peru. A-D recorded by NK, E by PC. Time (s) Paul Coopmans et al. 212 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) variation in the songs and calls of each of these forms. The song of unicolor (Fig. 1 D) is only slightly higher-pitched than that of high- pitched individuals of /atrans and subcinereus (Fig. 1 A-C), and is distinctly lower- pitched than songs of acutirostris and parvirostris (Fig. | E-F). The pace and rhythm remains fairly constant, even at high excitement such as after playback of song. The contact call of unicolor (n = 3) (Fig. 2 E) is a single note, rising and falling symmetrically like an inverted U, higher-pitched (loudest at 2.5-3 kHz) than calls of latrans (n= 40) (Fig. 2 A-B) and subcinereus (n = 18) (Fig. 2 C-D) (both loudest at 1.5-2.5 kHz), and lacks the slow rise in pitch to near the end of the note, so characteristic of calls of those taxa. Taxonomy On the basis of the strong vocal differences between unicolor and the other three taxa, we suggest that /atrans, subcinereus, and intermedius be ranked as a species, S. latrans (Blackish Tapaculo), distinct from a monotypic S. unicolor (Unicolored Tapaculo). We acknowledge (as did Krabbe & Schulenberg 1997:58) that birds we refer to as S. latrans might comprise two or more (allopatric or parapatric) species. The vocalizations of S. unicolor are so distinctive that they do not indicate which taxon might be its closest relative. There is a striking resemblance in pattern to the song of a population found on the east slope of the Andes in central Peru (Fig. | E). The nomenclature of the birds from central Peru is problematic; Fjeldsa & Krabbe (1990) referred to these birds as an “unnamed species”, although we follow the arguments outlined by Krabbe & Schulenberg (1997) for calling them acutirostris. Nomenclature aside, the resemblance in song between unicolor and acutirostris may be purely coincidental. We believe that determination of phylogenetic relationships among taxa of Scytalopus will best be resolved through the application of genetic studies. Acknowledgments We thank P. Van Gasse and B. M. Whitney for valuable comments on the manuscript. References: Arctander, P. & Fjeldsa, J. 1994. Andean tapaculos of the genus Scytalopus (Aves, Rhinocryptidae): a study of modes of differentiation, using DNA sequence data. Pp. 205-225 in V. Loeschcke, J. Tomiuk, and S. K. Jain (eds.), Conservation Genetics. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, Switzerland. Cory, C. B. & Hellmayr, C. E. 1924. Catalogue of birds of the Americas, Part III. Field Mus. Nat. Hist. Zool. Ser, 13 (Publ. 223). Fjeldsa, J. & Krabbe, N. 1990. Birds of the high Andes. Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen, and Apollo Books, Svendborg, Denmark. Isler, M. L., P. R. Isler, & Whitney, B. M. 1998. Use of vocalizations to establish species limits in antbirds (Passeriformes: Thamnophilidae). Awk 115:577-590. Koepcke, M. 1961. Birds of Western Andes. Amer. Mus. Novit. 2028. Kroodsma, D. E. 1982. Learning and the ontogeny of sound signals in birds. Pp. 1-23, in D. E. Kroodsma & E.H. Miller (eds.), Acoustic communication in birds, 2. Academic Press, New York. Kroodsma, D. E. 1984. Songs of the Alder Flycatcher (Empidonax alnorum) and Willow Flycatcher Paul Coopmans et al. 213 Bulls BO: C22001 1213) (Empidonax traillii) are innate. Auk 101:13-24. Krabbe, N. & Schulenberg, T. S. 1997. Species limits and natural history of Scytalopus tapaculos (Rhinocryptidae), with descriptions of the Ecuadorian taxa, including three new species. Pp. 47- 88 in J. V. Remsen (ed.) Studies in neotropical ornithology honoring Ted Parker. Ornithological Monographs No. 48, American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. Meyer de Schauensee, R. 1966. The species of birds of South America. Livingston Publ. Co., Narberth, Pennsylvania. Peters, J. L. 1951. Check-list of birds of the World, Vol. 7. Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Salvin, O. 1895. On birds collected in Peru by Mr. O.T. Baron. Nov. Zool. 2:1-20. Whitney, B. M. 1994. A new Scytalopus tapaculo (Rhinocryptidae) from Bolivia, with notes on other Bolivian members of the genus and the magellanicus complex. Wilson Bull. 106:585-614. Zimmer, J. T. 1939. Studies of Peruvian birds. Amer. Mus. Novitates No. 1044. Addresses: P. Coopmans, Snepkenshof 11, B-2460 Lichtaart, Belgium; e-mail coopmans@pi.pro.ec; Niels Krabbe, Zoological Museum University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100, Copenhagen, Denmark; present address Sucursal 21 Casilla 791, Quito, Ecuador; e-mail nkrabbe@pi.pro.ec; Thomas S. Schulenberg, Department of Zoology, Field Museum of Natural History, 1400 S. Lake Shore Dr., Chicago, IL 60605, USA; e-mail Schulenb@fmppr.FMNH.org. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 A note on the correct type of Macabra Bonaparte, 1854 (Strigidae) by Fohn M. Penhallurick & Steven M. S. Gregory Received 24 Fune 2000 Macabra as a generic (or subgeneric) name has been used recently by several authors. Wolters (1975-82: 71) listed Macabra as a genus including White-throated Screech- Owl Otus albogularis, Bare-shanked Screech-Owl Otus clarkii and Rufescent Screech- Owl Otus ingens. More recently, Konig et al. (1999: 35) stated: “We treat the American screech owls Otus as members of subgenera Megascops and Macabra, as they differ from Old World scops owls in having two songs.” They also listed Macabra albogularis as a synonym of Otus albogularis (1999: 279) The history of the name Macabra is complex. It was first used by Bonaparte (1854a: 112), where it is a nomen nudum. Bonaparte used it again in the same year (1854b: 541), on that occasion listing a number of species: “hylophila Temm.; fasciata Vieill.; swinda Vieill.; melanota Vieill.; cayanensis Gm.; and albigularis Cassin.” These names include species from several different modern genera — Strix in the case of Rusty-barred Owl Strix hylophila Temminck, 1825 (1825: pl. 373); Asio in the case of Strix suinda Vieillot, 1817 (1817: 34) (= Short-eared Owl subsp. Asio flammeus suinda); Pulsatrix in the case of “melanota Vieill.” (= Noctua melanota Tschudi, 1844 (1844: 266) = Band-bellied Owl Pulsatrix melanota); and Otus in the case of F. M. Penhallurick & S. M. S. Gregory 214 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(3) Syrnium albo-gularis Cassin, 1850 (1850:124) (= White-throated Screech-Owl Otus [Megascops] albogularis). The other two names — Strix fasciata Vieillot, 1817 (1817: 21) of “Martinique”[?]; and Strix cayennensis J. F. Gmelin, 1788 (1788: 296) are indeterminable.* Clearly, the use of Macabra by Wolters (1975-82: 71), and Konig et al. (1999: 279) reflects the inclusion of Otus albogularis (Cassin, 1850) among the names listed by Bonaparte. The obvious diversity of that list, however, necessitates the subsequent designation of a type species. Ridgway (1914: 759), under the synonymy of Ciccaba Wagler, 1832, listed Macabra Bonaparte, 1854 and stated: “Type, as fixed by Gray, Strix hylophila Temminck.” G. R. Gray (1855: 135) listed “Macabra Pr. B. 1853 (Strix cayanensis Gm.)”, but as we indicated above, Strix cayennensis J. F. Gmelin, 1788 is indeterminable. Thus this designation is invalid. Subsequently, G. R. Gray (1869: 49) listed “Macabra, Bp. 1853?” as a subgenus of “Syrnium, Sav.[igny] 1809” but did not list a type. This brings us to R. B. Sharpe (1875: 244) who listed Macabra under the synonymy of Syrnium Savigny, 1809, with “S. hylophilum” as the type. Thus it appears that the correct citation for Macabra Bonaparte should be: Macabra Bonaparte, 1854, Revue et Magasin de Zoologie pure et appliqueée, sét. 2, 6, p. 541. Type, by subsequent designation (R. B. Sharpe, 1875, Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, 2, Striges, p. 244), Strix hylophila Temminck, 1825. This invalidates the use of Macabra by Wolters (1975-82: 71) and K6nig et al. (1999: 35, 279) to refer to New World Otus species, notably Otus albogularis, Otus clarkii and Otus ingens, in each case better assigned to Megascops. Instead, Macabra Bonaparte, 1854 becomes a subjective junior synonym of Strix Linnaeus, 1758; or, if one accepts Wolters’ (1975-82: 71) treatment of subgenera under Strix Linnaeus, 1758, Macabra would become the monotypic subgenus for Strix hylophila Temminck, 1825, replacing Wolters’ TZacitathena Kelso & Kelso, 1937 (1937), an objective junior synonym of Macabra. Acknowledgements We wish to thank Michael Walters, Bird Group, The Natural History Museum, Tring, and James Dean, Division of Birds, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, for their generous help. References: Bonaparte, C. L. 1854a. Conspectus Systematis Ornithologie. Annales des Sciences Naturelles, Zoologie, Paris, sér. 4, 1. Bonaparte, C. L. 1854b. Tableau des Oiseaux de Proie, par S. A. le Prince. Revue et Magasin de Zoologie pure et appliquée, sér. 2, 6. Cassin, J. 1850. Description of Owls, presumed to be undescribed, specimens of which are in the collection of the Academy of Natural Scinces of Philadelphia. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Science of Philadelphia, 4 (1848). Gmelin, J. F. 1788. Systema Nature, ed. XIII, 1. Lipsiae. F. M. Penhallurick & S. M. S. Gregory Pa Ae) Bull .O:€. 2000 121) Gray, G. R. 1855. Catalogue of the genera and subgenera of birds contained in the British Museum. British Museum, London. Gray, G. R. 1869. Hand-list of the genera and species of birds, distinguishing those contained in the British Museum, |. British Museum, London. Kelso, L, & Kelso, E. H. 1937. Supplement to the synopsis of the American Wood Owls of the Genus Ciccaba. Biol. Leaflet, no. 7. Konig, C., Weick, F. & Becking, J.-H. 1999. Owls: a guide to the owls of the world. Pica Press, Sussex. Peters, J. L. 1940. Checklist of birds of the world, 4. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass. Ridgway, R. 1914. The Birds of North and Middle America: A Descriptive Catalogue. Bulletin of the United States National Museum, no. 50, part 6. Sharpe, R. B. 1875. Catalogue of the birds in the British Museum, vol. 2. British Museum, London. Temminck, C. J. 1825. Nouveau recueil de planches coloriées d’oiseaux, livr. 63. Tschudi, J. J. von 1844. Avium conspectus, quae in Republica Peruana reperiunter et pleraeque observatae vel collectae sunt in itinere. Archiv ftir Naturgeschichte, 10, bd. 1. Vieillot, L. P. 1817. Nouveau Dictionnaire d'Histoire Naturelle. nouv. éd., 17. Wolters, H. E. 1975-82. Die Vogelarten der Erde. Paul Parey, Hamburg. Addresses: John M. Penhallurick, Division of Communication & Education, University of Canberra, Canberra City, A.C.T. 2601, Australia. Steven M. S. Gregory, 35, Monarch Road, Northampton, Northamptonshire NN2 6EH, UK. *Ridgway (1914: 765) listed Strix fasciata Vieillot, 1817 in the synonymy of Ciccaba virgata virgata, but preceded it with “(??)”. Peters (1940: 162, footnote 1) said of Vieillot’s name: “a species never identified”. Of Strix cayennensis [nec cayanensis| J. F. Gmelin, 1788, Sharpe (1875: 272, footnote) stated: “The name of cayennensis is founded on a plate of Buffon’s, [= “Chat-huant de Cayenne” in Planches enluminées, in Histoire naturelle des oiseaux, pl. 442] which I find it impossible to recognize.” Michael Walters has pointed out to us that Gmelin’s name is pre-dated by Strix cayennensis P. L. S. Muller, 1776, Des Ritters Carl von Linné vollstdndiges Natursystem nach der zwolften Latinischen Aufgabe., suppl., p. 70, based on the same plate, and thus also, of course, indeterminable. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 The status of the genus Lugensa Mathews and the birds collected by Carmichael on Tristan da Cunha in 1816-1817 by WR.P Bourne Received 17 Ffuly 2000 Olson (2000) has recently suggested that since the name Procellaria lugens Kuhl 1820 appears to relate to a misidentified drawing of the Mottled Petrel Pterodroma inexpecta (Bourne & Elliott 1965), the generic name Lugensa bestowed on the Kerguelen Petrel, then known as Pterodroma lugens, by Mathews (1942), must also be invalid. He omitted to mention that when I pointed out some references to him I J. M. Penhallurick & S. M. S. Gregory 216 Bull. B.O.C, 2000424) disagreed with this conclusion, since despite the dubious status of the name Procellaria lugens Kuhl (1820, translated by Grant & Mackworth Praed 1954), Mathews (1942, quoted by Olson) also specifically stated that he wished to bestow the generic name Lugensa on the species “formerly known as Pterodroma brevirostris”, so clearly this should stand. In fact, while Kuhl may have included “Procellaria lugens Banks” in the synonymy of his equally mistaken “Proc. grisea L.”, it seems likely that he was actually referring to one or both of two early specimens of the Kerguelen Petrel that had not yet been safely lodged in national museums. The type of Procellaria brevirostris Lesson at the Museum National d’ Histoire Naturelle in Paris was supplied by Delalande in 1819 or 1820. Since it has bleached feet it seems most likely to have provided the basis for Kuhl’s description which included abnormal pale feet. The other was collected by Carmichael (1819) on Tristan da Cunha in 1816-17, and was apparentiy bought by W.E. Leach under the name Procellaria cinerea at the Bullock sale in 1819 (Sharpe 1906). It is still in The Natural History Museum, Tring. It should also be noted that while Stresemann (1953) thought that only the type of the Tristan Bunting Nesospiza acunhae in Berlin survives from the Carmichael collection, in addition to this Kerguelen Petrel there is also the type of Fregetta (tropica) melanoleuca Salvadori (1908, Bourne 2000) in Turin, so it might be worth looking for other missing specimens. References: Bourne, W.R.P.2000. The south Indo-Atlantic Fregatta (sic) Storm-petrels. Sea Swallow 49: 54- D0: Bourne, W.R.P & Elliott, H.F.I. 1965. The correct scientific name for the Kerguelen Petrel. /bis 107: 548-550. Carmichael, D. 1819. Some account of the island of Tristan da Cunha and its natural productions. Trans. Linn. Soc., Lond. 12: 483- 499. Grant, C.H.B. & Mackworth-Praed, C.W. 1954. Notes on some petrel names. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 74: 71-73. Kuhl, H. 1820. Beitrage zur Zoologie und vergleichenden Anatomie. Hermannschen Buchhandlung, Frankfurt am Mein. Mathews, G.M. 1942. New genus. Emu 41: 305. Olson, S.L. 2000. A new genus for the Kerguelen Petrel. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 120: 59-62. Salvadori, T. 1908. (Description of a new species.) Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 21: 79. Sharpe, R.B. 1906. Birds, in The History of the Collections contained in the Natural History Departments of the British Museum. British Museum, London. Stresemann, E.1953. Birds collected by Capt. Dugald Carmichael on Tristan da Cunha 1816- 1817. Ibis 95: 146147. Address: W.R.P. Bourne, Department of Zoology, Aberdeen University, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen AB24 2TZ, Scotland. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 MEMBERSHIP See also website: http://www.boc-online.org Following the approval of the changes to the Rules of the Club at the Special General Meeting on 31st October 2000, Membership of the Club was extended to non-Members of the British Ornithologists’ Union. Subscription rates, as from | January 2001 are now: BOU Members £12.00 US$ 23.00 Non-BOU Members £18.00 USS 33.00 All paid-up Members of the Club receive (postage free) four quarterly issues of the Bulletin, and the annual index. Applications for Membership, enclosing the annual subscription, should be made to the Hon. Secretary (address as below). The Membership List 2001 is available, free of charge to all requesting a copy, on application to the Hon. Secretary (address below). This list shows addresses (including E-mail addresses, where known), for all paid-up Members as at 31 December 2000. Members are requested to inform the Hon. Secretary of all corrections or changes, without delay, for despatch of the Bulletin. To offset the cost of postage, any contribution, or a stamped and addressed (A5-sized) envelope will be gratefully accepted. INSTITUTIONAL SUBSCRIBERS & APPLICATIONS FOR BACK NUMBERS OR OTHER PUBLICATIONS The Bulletin, together with annual index, may be purchased (postage free) by Institutional Subscribers, on payment of an annual subscription of £25 (or US$45) on application to: The Hon. Publications Officer, J.A. Jobling, 14 The Valley Green, Welwyn Garden City, Herts. AL8 7DQ, UK. Single issues and back numbers of the Bulletin, and also books in the BOC Occasional Publications series may similarly be obtained on request to him. PAYMENTS All amounts quoted are net and should be paid in £ sterling, if possible. Payments in other currencies must include a further £4 for UK bank charges (except for annual rates in US dollars, which are inclusive). All cheques or drafts should be made payable to the British Ornithologists’ Club. If preferred, remittances may be made by bank transfer direct to the Club’s bank account - Barclays Prime Account, Dale House, Wavertree Boulevard, Liverpool L7 9PQ, UK. (Sort Code 20-00-87 Account No. 10211540), with confirmation to the Hon. Treasurer, D.J. Montier, Eyebrook, Oldfield Road, Bickley, Bromley, Kent. BRI 2LF. CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence on membership, changes of address and all other matters should be addressed to: Hon. Secretary, Cdr M.B. Casement, OBE, RN, Dene Cottage, West Harting, Petersfield, Hants. GU31 SPA, UK. (or E-mail: mbcasement@aol.com). For details of Club Meetings see inside front cover. UK Data Protection Act. In order to keep records up to date, and to facilitate despatch of the Bulletin, names and addresses of Members and Subscribers, and the dates of subscription renewal, (but no other personal information) are held on computer disk. If there is any objection to this, please advise the Hon. Secretary, in writing, so that these records can be deleted from the disk. COMMITTEE Dr. C.F. Mann (Chairman) (2001) R.E. Scott (1998) Vice-Chairman - Revd. T.W. Gladwin (July 2001) J.A. Jobling (1999) Cdr. M.B. Casement, OBE., R.N. (Hon. Secretary) (1996) Professor R.A. Cheke (2001) D.J. Montier (Hon. Treasurer) (1997) Mrs M.N. Muller (2001) P.G.W. Salaman (2001) Hon. Editor: Professor C.J. Feare Chairman of Publications Sub-committee: Revd. T.W. Gladwin (as from May 2001) Hon. Publications Officer: J.A. Jobling Registered Charity No. 279583 Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club ISSN 0007-1595 Edited by Professor Chris Feare Volume 121, Number 3, pages 145 - 216 CONTENTS CLUB NOTICES .cciccscennecescucensemnersnnnnsiearennnnlocalpeelenvenaniiae teal eae eee tea 145 DUCKWORTH, J.W., ALSTROM, P., DAVIDSON, P., EVANS, T.D., POOLE, C.M., SETHA, T. & TIMMINS, R.J. A new species of wagtail from the lower Mekong basin ................:00++ 152 CURIO, E., HORNBUCKLE, J., DE SOYE, Y., ASTON, P. & LASTIMOZA, L.L. New bird records for the island of Panay, Philippines, including the first record of the Asian Stubtail Urosphena squameiceps for the Philippines .............000:ccceiscsessssssascesnsssnassanennadesaasu 183 WHITTAKER, A. Notes on the poorly-known Buckley’s Forest Falcon Micrastur buckleyi including voice, range and first Brazilian records ...........:..:c.-cecseacseneesenassencentesesuas eee 198 COOPMANS, P., KRABBE, N. & SCHULENBERG, T.S. Vocal evidence of species rank for nominate Unicolored Tapaculo Scytalopus unicolor ..........0...0.is0.0.2000s:0»00.ss408e 208 PENHALLURICK, J & GREGORY, S.M.S. A note on the correct type of Macabra Bonaparte, 1854 (Strigidae) .......2......0.ccseentacaashcastnaanenstsediionntentiensstneeeretaheoce-mesteeeaec te ee ea 213 BOURNE, W.R.P. The status of the genus Lugensa Mathews and the birds collected by Carmichael on Tristan da Cunha tn 1816-1817 ...0:.c..c:.s.ccsssennecnseceasseorscnncsuennentan dyenvnenctneansenneeea ann 215 Authors are invited to submit papers on topics relating to the broad themes of taxonomy and distribution of birds. Descriptions of new species of birds are especially welcome and will be given priority to ensure rapid publication, subject to successful passage through the normal peer review procedure; they may be accompanied by colour photographs or paintings. On submission, two copies of manuscripts, typed on one side of the paper, double spaced and with wide margins, should be sent to the Editor, Prof. Chris Feare, 2 North View Cottages, Grayswood Common, Haslemere, Surrey GU27 2DN, UK. Note that electronic versions are not required on first submission. Where appropriate half-tone photographs may be included and, where essential to illustrate important points, the Editor will consider the inclusion of colour plates (if possible, authors should obtain funding to support the inclusion of such colour plates). When papers are accepted, revisions should be returned to the Editor as both a hard copy, as outlined above, and also on a 3.5” disk, as Word or Wordperfect files for PC. At this stage authors should send their email addresses, as completion of the editing process and proof reading will be undertaken electronically. For instructions on style, see the inside rear cover of Bulletin 121 (1) or the BOC website: www.boc-online.org © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Apart from single copies made for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under UK law, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means, except with prior permission of the publishers. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the Editor; for address see inside above. The Bulletin is despatched from the printer on publication and is sent by Surface Saver Postal Services to all European destinations outside the UK and by Air Saver Postal Services to destinations outside Europe. Those whose subscriptions have not been received by the beginning of a month of publication will have their copies despatched by surface mail, after their current subscription has been paid. Printed on acid-free paper. Published by the BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS’ CLUB Typeset by Alcedo Publishing of Colorado Springs, USA, and printed by Crowes of Norwich, UK fo British Se Ornithologists’ Club 27 Volume 121 No. 4 December 2001 MEETINGS are held in the Sherfield Building of Imperial College, South Kensington, London, SW7. The nearest Tube station is at South Kensington; a map of the area will be sent to members, on request. (Limited car parking facilities can be reserved, on prior application to the Hon. Secretary). The cash bar is open from 6.15 pm, and a buffet supper, of two courses followed by coffee, is served at 7.00 pm. (A vegetarian menu can be arranged if ordered at the time of booking). Dinner charges were increased to £18.00, as from Ist January 2002. Informal talks are given on completion, commencing at about 8.00 pm. MEETINGS PROGRAMME FOR 2002 15 January — Dr Clemency Fisher: “The Earl & the Pussycat: the 13th Earl of Derby, his life and legacy”. Clem has been a curator at the Liverpoo! Museum since 1975. The museum was founded on the internationally important bird and mammal collections of the 13th Earl of Derby, of Knowsley Hall, and his legacy has been built on over the years. The bird collections at Liverpool are now ranked amongst the top 20 in the world. An exhibition in 2002 will reunite paintings in the Library at Knowsley with the specimens from which they were drawn, by the very best bird artists of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. These artists included John Gould, Joseph Wolf and, in particular, the Nonsense Poet Edward Lear. Applications to the Hon. Secretary by 3 January please. 26 February — Ruth Tingay: “T7hree-in-a-nest sex romp shocker: implications for the critically endangered Madagascar Fish Eagle.” Ruth began her career working at London Heathrow Airport, monitoring the legal and illegal trade in wildlife. She resigned in 1994 to pursue a more pro-active role in conservation, with a particular interest in raptors. She has conducted field research in the UK, Mauritius, Israel, Mexico, USA and Madagascar. She earned an MSc from Nottingham University in 2000, studying the unique breeding behaviour of the Madagascar Fish Eagle. She is currently undertaking her doctorate at Nottingham University, in association with The Peregrine Fund, continuing her research on the behavioural ecology and population dynamics of the critically endangered Madagascar Fish Eagle. Applications to the Hon. Secretary by 12 February please. 26 March — Nigel Redman: “Two decades of birding in the Soviet Union”. Nigel has been leading tours for Birdquest for 20 years, visiting every continent in the process. During this time he has made 14 trips to the former USSR, witnessing many political changes in the course of regular tours to Siberia, Central Asia, and the Caucasus. In recent years he has become a publisher of bird books, initially with Pica Press, and currently the Christopher Helm imprint of A&C Black for which he is Commissioning Editor. He still manages to lead two bird tours per year and in 2001 returned to Sakhalin and Ussuriland in far eastern Siberia. Applications to the Hon. Secretary by 12 March please. Future meetings - Tuesdays: 30 April — AGM and social evening 25 June — Clifford Frith on Birds of Paradise — precise title to be agreed. 24 September, 5 November, and 3 December — speakers not yet finalised. Overseas Members visiting Britain are especially welcome at these meetings, and the Hon. Secretary would be very pleased to hear from anyone who can offer to talk to the Club, giving as much advance notice as possible - please contact: Michael Casement, Dene Cottage, West Harting, Petersfield, Hants. GU31 5PA. UK. Tel/FAX:01730-825280 (or Email: mbcasement@aol.com). Club News 21 E 6 ull. BO. 2001 121(4) Bulletin of the es BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS’ CLUB Vol. 121 No. 4 Published 3 December 2001 CLUB NEWS Membership News It is with great regret that we report the recent deaths of the following Members: Eric Gorton (1953-2001), N.S. Malcolm, (1989-2001), P.B. Clarke (1992-2001), Dr P.A. Clancey (1938-2001, see obituary below) (Hon. Life Member), and M.L.R. Romer (1962-2001), (Committee 1964-68). Subscription Rates for 2002. These are unchanged for next year @ £18.00 p.a. but £12.00 only for paid-up Members of the BOU - see details inside rear cover. Please complete NOW the enclosed subscription renewal form, to avoid the need for subsequent reminders, thus saving administration costs. Members with Bankers Standing Orders in force,.or who have paid in advance for 2002, need take no further action. The BOC Website - http://www.boc-online.org This continues to expand and grow in usefulness. Do please look at it, and let us have your suggestions for improvement. Rolex awards for Enterprise The Hon Editor has been sent information about these awards, which can provide substantial funding for successful projects. For further details, visit www.rolexawards.com or email Janice Williams at janice.williams@mslpr.co.uk Obituary — Dr Phillip Alexander Clancey Dr Phillip Alexander Clancey was born on 26 September 1917 in Glasgow, Scotland. His family subsequently moved to London and then to Switzerland where he started school. By the age of seven he was back in Scotland where he attended several schools in the South Side of Glasgow before studying at the Glasgow School of Art as a young man. He served with the Allied forces in Sicily and Italy during World War II, escaping death by the narrowest of margins on several occasions and he was deafened in one ear for over two months by an artillery explosion. He was de-mobbed in 1946 and was employed by an engineering consortium in the north of England for a few years. Ornithology, however, remained his abiding passion and in 1948-1949 he accompanied Col. Richard Meinertzhagen on an ornithological expedition to eastern and southern Africa and the Middle East that included Yemen, Aden, Somali, Kenya and South Africa. He immigrated to South Africa in August 1950 to take up the post of Curator of the Natal Museum in Pietermaritzburg. He was appointed Director of the Durban Museum and Art Gallery on | January 1952 and held this post until his retirement over 30 years later on 25 September 1982. He remained a Research Associate of the Durban Natural Science Museum until the date of his passing. Dr Clancey is survived by two nieces who reside in Scotland. Dr Clancey was a prodigious scientific author on the subject of African birds, especially their taxonomy, with a particular interest in the identification of subspecies. Examples of his many catalogues and books include his Catalogue of the Birds of the South African subregion (1965- 1972), Handlist of the Birds of Southern Mozambique (1970-1972), for which he was awarded the prestigious Gill Memorial Medal of the Southern African Ornithological Society (now BirdLife South Africa), The Birds of Natal and Zululand (1964), The Gamebirds of Southern Africa Club News 218 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) (1967), The Rare Birds of Southern Africa (1985) and Kingfishers of Sub-Saharan Africa (1992). He was the chief editor of the $.A.O.S. Checklist of Southern African Birds (1980). Dr Clancey was a co-author of the second volume of the landmark Atlas of Speciation of African Birds, published by the British Museum (Natural History) during 1978. He also contributed as an author to The Atlas of Southern African Birds (1997). His list of other publications is even more impressive, running to a monumental total of over 530 scientific papers and associated articles. Indeed his legacy of taxonomic papers is unsurpassed and Dr Clancey named some 200 subspecies of southern African birds. Several avian subspecies have been named by others in his honour. He served as President of the Southern African Ornithological Society, was the long-standing Chairman of its List Committee, and was awarded Honorary Life Membership by this organisation. The American Ornithologists’ Union honoured him by appointing him as a Corresponding Fellow. He was also a long-standing Chairman of the Natal Bird Club (now BirdLife Port Natal) during the Club’s formative years and subsequently served as its President. In addition, he served as President of the Southern African Museums Association and was awarded a Fellowship by the Museums Association in London. The University of Natal conferred on him the degree of Doctor of Science honoris causa in 1981. He joined the British Ornithologists’ Club in 1958 and on the 50" anniversary of his joining he was elected an Honorary Life Member. Dr Clancey was almost single-handedly responsible for amassing the collection of some 40,000 bird study skins housed in the Durban Natural Science Museum. Dr Clancey’s skill in the preparation of bird skins was renowned and the Museum’s collection, the third largest in Africa, is widely acknowledged as the finest on the continent. Dr Clancey organised some 26 major expeditions in Africa during the course of compiling this collection. His trips to Mozambique were the most noteworthy and resulted in the largest collection of material in existence from this poorly known region. His discovery of the Lemon-breasted Canary Serinus citrinipectus, a species new to science, and of the southern Mozambique population of the Olive-headed Weaver Ploceus olivaceiceps were particular highlights of these Mozambique investigations. Dr Clancey’s success in placing the Museum at the forefront of African ornithology is reflected in the large number of eminent ornithologists that have served there during and after his tenure, including Walter Lawson, Richard Brooke, Clive Quickelberge, Ian Sinclair, Dr John Mendelsohn and Dr Aldo Berruti. His artist talents are evident in the many bird paintings presented in his books and in the dioramas on display in the Durban Natural Science Museum. Some of the dioramas were repainted up to six times until they matched his exacting standards. Several million visitors to the Museum have enjoyed these displays since their unveiling. His avian portraits remain in high demand by collectors of fine African art; for example his work has graced the boardrooms of companies such as Barlow Rand. Dr Clancey was a rare combination of outstanding scientist, author, artist and administrator. His immense contribution speaks for itself and the meticulous dedication characteristic of his life’s work serves as an example for others working in the various fields which this man so ably mastered. David Allen MEETINGS The 902nd meeting of the Club was held on Tuesday 7th July 2001, at 6.15 pm, in the Rector’s Residence, 170 Queensgate, Imperial College. It was attended by 24 Members and 8 guests. Members present were: Dr C.F. MANN (Chairman), Mrs P.E. BRADLEY, D.R. CALDER, Cdr M.B. CASEMENT RN, Dr R.J. CHANDLER, Professor R.A. CHEKE, Dr N.J. COLLAR, D. GRIFFIN, J.B. FISHER, C.A.R. HELM, J.A. JOBLING, R.H. KETTLE, D.J. MONTIER, Mrs A.M. MOORE, R.G. MORGAN, A.J. PITTMAN (Speaker), Dr R.P. PRYS-JONES, P.G.W. SALAMAN, R.E. SCOTT, Dr D.W. SNOW, S.A.H. STATHAM, N.H.F. STONE, C.W.R. STOREY and M.W. WOODCOCK. Club News 219 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Guests attending were: M.J. BRADLEY, Mrs J.B. CALDER, Mrs C.R. CASEMENT, A. JUNIPER, Mrs M. MONTIER, P.J. MOORE, .Mrs S. STONE and Mrs J.B. WOODCOCK. After dinner, Tony Pitmann gave a fascinating illustrated presentation entitled The Blue Macaws, which covered the Anodorhynchus group and Spix’s Macaw Cyanopsitta spixii. Macaws are divided into four genera - Anodorhynchus with three species, the Hyacinthine or Great Blue A. hyacinthinus, Lear’s A. leari and Glaucous A. glaucus Macaws; Ara has twelve species including the Scarlet A.macao, Blue and Yellow A. ararauna and Green-winged A. chloroptera Macaws, as well as small macaws such as Illiger’s Macaw A. maracana; Diopsittica, a recent re- classification, with one species; and Cyanopsitta, also monotypic, with Spix’s Macaw. Anodorhynchus hyacinthinus, first described by Latham in 1790, is 1 m long and weighs c.1.5 kg, making it the largest member of the parrot family. It inhabits savannah with palm groves and vegetation islands from northern Brazil through to the south-west and the border lands with Paraguay and Bolivia. Most of the 3,000—5,000 birds live in the Pantanal region of south-west Brazil. It is listed as endangered, the main constraint being a shortage of suitable nesting sites caused by ranchers’ logging, natural wastage and competition from other birds and animals. To rectify this, the Projeto Arara Azul, which has been in operation in the Pantanal for ten years, is achieving considerable success with nest boxes. Of 418 nest sites currently being monitored, 264 are natural and 154 artificial. In response to the conservation work the Hyacinthine Macaw population is increasing. Lear’s Macaw, c. 75 cm, occurs in a small remote region in the north-eastern Brazilian state of Bahia. It was first described by Prince Bonaparte in 1856 and named after Edward Lear, who illustrated it in the belief it was a Hyacinthine Macaw. Although traded throughout the 19" and early 20" centuries, its geographical distribution was only discovered at the end of 1978 by Helmut Sick. It is critically endangered with just 250 remaining in the wild. Most of the 30 in captivity have been confiscated from illegal traffickers. The smallest of the Anodorhynchus, the Glaucous Macaw was first described by Vieillot in 1816 and is considered extinct. The last reliable sighting of the species was in the early 1930s. It was rare even in historical times, although specimens found their way to Europe in the 19" and early 20" centuries. It occurred in Corrientes province in Argentina and neighbouring territories in Paraguay and Uruguay bordering the Parana, Paraguay and Uruguay rivers. A fourth blue macaw, A. purpurascens, from the Caribbean islands was described by Rothschild (1907) in Extinct Birds, but the speaker believes this was a Hyacinthine Macaw, which had been traded up from South America. Spix’s Macaw was first described by Wagler in 1832 and named after Spix, who led an expedition to Brazil from 1817-20 and first saw this species in northern Bahia. The sole remaining bird in the wild, a male paired with a female Illiger’s Macaw, was last seen on October 2000 and is now believed dead. The rarity of Spix’s Macaw led it to be sought after by wealthy collectors, resulting in its disappearance from the wild. Around 60 captive Spix’s Macaws survive in Tenerife, the Philippines, Switzerland, Qatar and Brazil. The Brazilian government wildlife agency took the unusual step ten years ago of agreeing to allow holders of the species to retain their livestock as long as they co-operated in a programme to re-establish the species in the wild. The Committee for the Recovery of the Spix’s Macaw was set up and field work, carried out in its former range northern Bahia, was largely financed by the Loro Parque Foundation. This Committee was dissolved in February 2001 after a disagreement about one of the holders, based in the Philippines, disposing of four captive-bred macaws to a collector in Qatar. The parties concerned are still trying to resolve this important issue so that a serious attempt can be made to re-introduce the species to the wild. Note. More information about the blue macaws can be gleaned from the Blue Macaws website at www.bluemacaws.org Club News 220 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) The 903rd meeting of the Club was held on Tuesday 25th September 2001, at 6.15 pm, in the Sherfield Building Annexe, Imperial College. It was attended by 18 Members and 5 guests. Members present were: Dr C.F. MANN (Chairman), Miss H. BAKER, Sir David BANNERMAN Bt, P.J. BELMAN, Cdr M.B. CASEMENT RN, Dr. R.J. CHANDLER; *Professor "RAG ] Gln A. GIBBS, Revd. T.W. GLADWIN, D. GRIFFIN, R.H. KETTLE, D.J. MONTIER, R.G. MORGAN, Mrs M.N. MULLER, A.J. PITTMAN, R.C. PRICE, N.J. REDMAN and R.E. SCOTT. Guests attending were: Det. Inspector P. CANNINGS (Speaker), Lady BANNERMAN, Mrs C.R. CASEMENT, Mrs J.M. GLADWIN, and Mrs M. MONTIER. Phil Cannings then gave an illustrated talk by on The work of a Police Wildlife Liaison Officer. The following is a brief synopsis: Since the late 1980’s, a network of Police Wildlife Liaison Officers has developed in the 43 police forces throughout Britain and Northern Ireland. In at least eight forces there are now full time wildlife officers, but for the majority the role is a part time one for officers who have other policing commitments. Most of these have a good personal knowledge and interest in wildlife - Phil is himself a qualified BTO ringer, and Member of the BOU - and the legislation protecting it. They act as a point of contact and expertise for colleagues and members of the public. The type of case they are called to advise upon is extremely varied, and to a certain degree seasonal. In early summer many complaints are received of land management affecting nesting birds, and building developments are a continual source of complaint, often from objectors playing the ‘wildlife card’, to prevent development and building work. The Police Wildlife Liaison Officer often has to take the role of referee when conflicting interests are raised. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 provides protection for all birds, certain animals such as the Great Crested Newt and Dormouse, and a small number of endangered plants. Since the passing of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act, the protection afforded has been strengthened with the introduction of powers of arrest and prison sentences for many offences. Wildlife offences range from the fairly straightforward - youths shooting at birds with airguns - to organised gangs who use very sophisticated methods to steal birds or their eggs which are then sold on for profit. Since January 2001, when powers of arrest became available for some wildlife related offences, sixteen people have been arrested, and of these one has subsequently been sentenced to four months imprisonment for stealing the eggs of Goshawks and Peregrine Falcons. Many other species receive protection under British law, and there are Acts of Parliament dealing with badgers, deer and seals, as well as legislation that sets out lawful trapping methods for vermin and pest species. The role of the Police Wildlife Officer is to be aware of the scope of the available legislation and to maintain the specialist contacts with organisations that can provide expert assistance and evidence when necessary. Many officers are themselves active in the natural history or conservation field. In addition to the so called ‘domestic’ protection legislation, since the advent of the single European market Police Wildlife Liaison Officers have also become responsible within the European Union for trade in endangered species under the Convention for International Trade in Endangered Species. This had led to seizures of items including rhino horn, elephant ivory and £700,000 worth of Shahtoosh shawls made from the rare Chiru Panthelops hodgsonii, a Tibetan antelope. A long-running operation against the Traditional Chinese Medicine trade called Operation Charm has led to the seizure of large quantities of traditional preparations containing such ingredients as bear bile and tiger bone - substances that are banned in trade. Police are increasingly harnessing the latest forensic techniques such as DNA testing and analysis of soils and other residues, and one police-led initiative is currently working on building a collection of feather samples from known vulnerable raptor nests, and this has already led to a conviction of a man who was found in possession of a bird taken from the wild. Police Wildlife Liaison Officers are now firmly established in Britain’s police service and the network is set to continue developing. Club News 221 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) BOOK RECEIVED D.T. Holyoak. 2001. Nightjars and their allies. 7th vol. in Bird Families of the World series. Pp 773, 23 colour plates and numerous in-text monochrome paintings by Martin Woodcock, distribution maps, figures and tables. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K. ISBN 0 19 854987 3. No jacket price; Natural History Book Service price, Sept. 2001, £50.00. Subtitled The Caprimulgiformes, this is a compendium of contemporary knowledge about the Oilbird (Steatornithidae), frogmouths (Podargidae), potoos (Nyctibiidae), owlet-nightjars (Aegothelidae) and nighthawks, nightjars and allies (Caprimulgidae). It is a handsome, weighty tome, written with scholarship and clarity, well illustrated, the text layout open and uncluttered. The book’s plan is spelt out in no less than six pages, followed by 90 pages of essays on biological topics ranging from evolution to moult. These chapters are very readable and very interesting; the text is complemented with explanatory maps, charts, sonograms and line drawings, and figures in a variety of styles. Individual accounts of the 118 species follow, uniformly treated with tabulated mensural data, reasonably large-scale maps showing subspecific boundaries, and monochrome paintings of Caprimulgidae to show wing and tail markings. It is extremely well researched, but lacks the personal authority that results from a lifetime’s field experience. With references cited throughout, listed at the end of each account (one nightjar with 270) and given fully in the 64-page bibliography, the reference system verges on the unwieldy. The index is also unwieldy, to the point of defeating its purpose. Introductory essays are more informative than those in Cleere & Nurney’s compact but excellent Nightjars, a guide to nightjars and related birds (1998, Pica Press) and species accounts are more comprehensive than those by Holyoak (Aegothelidae, Podargidae) and Cleere (Caprimulgidae) in the masterly Handbook of the birds of the world (Vol. 5, 1999, Lynx). Caprimulgids are notoriously difficult to paint, and portraits in these three works are often unrecognizable as of the same species, for example Caprimulgus cayennensis; in each book owlet-nightjars are made small-headed and often wrong-eyed; for reality, compare Plate 1 in this journal, 1998. What a great pity that here the paintings are not complemented by photographs, as they are in HBW. Ca iry, SPECIAL OFFERS The following British Ornithologists’ Club publications are offered at reduced prices: ¢ Birds, discovery and conservation, edited by David Snow, now only £5 plus postage. Avian eggshells: an atlas of scanning electron micrographs, by K.E. Mikhailov, now only £15 plus postage. While stocks last both available from the Publications Officer, James A. Jobling, 14 The Valley Green, Welwyn Garden City, Herts. AL8 7DQ Peter Clement & David Holman 222 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Passage records of Amur Falcon Falco amurenstis from SE Asia to southern Africa including first records from Ethiopia by Peter Clement & David Holman Received 18 Fune 1999, revision received 21 Fuly 2001 The Amur Falcon Falco amurensis is a long distance migrant from its breeding area north of the Himalayas to the wintering grounds in southern Africa (principally southern Zambia and southern Malawi south to the Transvaal, northern Cape Province and Natal and northeast Botswana) (Fig.1). Whilst the breeding and wintering areas are well-known, the passage movements are poorly documented or understood and, as Brown et al. (1982) commented, the routes are ‘still a mystery’ and ‘certainly the most remarkable of any raptor known.’ Although the supporting data are speculative Moreau (1972), Ali & Ripley (1968) and Brown et al. (1982) considered that most of the population crosses the western Indian Ocean in a single movement from western India to somewhere along the coast of East Africa. This paper examines the data in support of the transoceanic crossing, together with the records of birds seen moving overland, and presents recent new records from Ethiopia. Autumn departure from the breeding areas The breeding range of the Amur Falcon is from southern Siberia, east from the Yablonovy range along the Argun and Onon Rivers and north along the Amur to the confluence with the Gorin River, through northern and eastern Mongolia and south through Manchuria to northern Korea and Inner Mongolia, then south through eastern China to Honan and northern Anhwei (Fig. 1). La Touche (1925-34) and Cheng (1987) reported it as fairly common in the breeding range but rare elsewhere; this is supported by the sparsity of records of migrants anywhere in central China and its occurrence only as a vagrant (less than ten records per year in the southeastern provinces) in southern China and no accepted records at all in Hong Kong (Lewthwaite pers. comm.). In Siberia and northeastern China departure time from the breeding areas is during September ‘when it collects in large numbers before going south’ (Swinhoe 1871). Passage birds in NE China, at Beidaihe, on the Gulf of Bohai (and within the breeding area), between 1942 - 1944 and 1986 - 1990 were considered very common in summer and passage continued to the end of October; most birds migrated in small flocks of between 10 and 30 individuals and only occasionally did flocks exceed 100, but once over 200 (Williams et a/. 1992). Further south, in Shandong province Lefevre (1962) documented a flock of 500 near Weihsen on 1 October 15. Peter Clement & David Holman pee Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Southeast Asian records Smythies (1986) recorded the bird as a migrant through Myanmar (Burma) in flocks of up to 100 individuals, often soaring at an immense height ‘and looking like insects in the sky’, so it is reasonable to assume that it is most probably similarly numerous, though largely unnoticed and unrecorded, in Yunnan and elsewhere in central China at certain times of the year. Passage dates given by Smythies were November and April with occasional records in January and February. In Thailand it has been regarded as a rare vagrant with records in April and November, mostly of single birds or small flocks but in Chiang Mai province there were flocks of 30+ and 40-+ in early November Ry. pa rege IS Figure 1. Breeding (horizontal hatching) and wintering (vertical) distribution of Amur Falcon Falco amurensis, together with areas of occurrence on passage and probable route of most direct crossing of the western Indian Ocean. e less than 10 records; @ less than 100 individuals annually; WH regular occurrences of over 100 individuals. Peter Clement & David Holman 224 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) 2000 and 40-50 Amur Falcons over Doi Ang Khang on 21 April 2001 (P. Round and P Benstead pers. comm.) and it may be that it has simply been overlooked as a migrant through the north of the country. In Laos there is a single record of one at Houei Nhang forest reserve, Vientiane, October 1992, and in Vietnam, apart from a single bird in November 1999 near Cuc Phuong NP (W. Duckworth pers. comm), the only other records concern a large movement of at least 250 birds on several days near XaPa in November 1997 (F. Lambert pers. comm. ); the frequency or exceptionality of such records in such a vast under-watched area can only be guessed. Indian subcontinent records Throughout the Indian subcontinent it is considered a widespread but uncommon or rare autumn passage migrant with a few winter and spring records (Grimmett ef al. 1998). Ali & Ripley (1983) quote Baker (1894-1901) who considered it a casual breeding bird in N. Cachar, Assam and one pair may have bred in Bhutan in 1999 and 2000 (B. Fletcher pers. comm. ). In Arunachal Pradesh, NE India, Amur Falcon was not recorded until 1992 when ‘large numbers’ were observed in the last week of October (Singh 1994); in Corbett NP, northern Uttar Pradesh, it is an occasional passage migrant in the winter months; there is however, an undated record of between 150 - 200 at Dhikala (T. Inskipp pers. comm.). In Bengal the only known records refer to three individuals at 2,800 m along the Sandakphu trek in November 1983 (J. Hornbuckle pers. comm.). Prior to the breeding records above it had only been recorded in Bhutan in 1988 and 1991, witha flock of 14 in late October 1991 (Inskipp & Inskipp 1993). In Bangladesh it is regular in small numbers between October (earliest 22) and December through the central and northern areas and coastal areas around Chittagong. In Nepal it is generally regarded as an uncommon passage migrant in October and November, though in several autumns in the mid-1980s a sizeable flock roosted regularly near Pokhara; there are also records of small numbers in May and individuals in January, June and July (Inskipp & Inskipp 1991). Highest numbers recorded in autumn have been up to 220 at the Pokhara roost in October 1986 and a flock of 328 south of Kathmandhu in November 1985 (Martins 1986). Most records in India away from the NE are widely dispersed along the coast of the peninsula from the Rann of Kutch east to the Eastern Ghats; details of these records are somewhat patchy but Moreau (1972) reported it as a straggler at Bombay (19°N) and Ali & Ripley (1968) quote the following information from Butler (1881) ‘a huge flock numbering some thousands passing Belgaum’ (15°54’N, 74°36’E) and E. H. Aitken saw ‘large numbers’ in the same area in November (year not given). More recently there are records of small numbers, usually of less than 10 together, from Goa in November 1998 (van der Wielen pers. comm.) and in November 1999 (P. Milford, Y. Princen pers. comm.). In Gujarat one was present at the Gur Wildlife sanctuary in February 1984, and more intriguingly eight together near Madhaspur in January 1989; could these birds still have been on passage to Africa? It has also been recorded in Sri Lanka in December 1872, March 1932 (Phillips 1978) and December 1998 (Robson 2000). Davidson (1898), referring to North Kanara, Peter Clement & David Holman DLs Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Karnataka, noted that it ‘appears in some years in immense scattered flocks in November and December. All birds seen have been along the coast and the years 1891 and 1895 were years of great abundance.’ On this basis Ali & Ripley (1968) concluded that these records - which do not appear to have been repeated in more recent times - “suggest that the bulk of the migration between NE India and E Africa - at least in autumn - takes place across the Indian Ocean from somewhere in this area in a continuing NE-SW trend.’ Moreau (1972) further refined the area of departure to be concentrated mainly between 14°N and 16°N. Outside the Indian Peninsula there are even fewer records. Ali & Ripley (1968) referred to an observation of many falcons in northern Afghanistan on 24 April (no date given but was most probably 1937), which they presumed were amurensis. However, these were subsequently re-identified by Meinertzhagen (1938) as Red- footed Falcons F’ vespertinus, but the basis for changing the identification was not given. Surprisingly, and by way of contrast, there are no records from Pakistan (Roberts 1991). Indian Ocean records Perhaps not surprisingly, records from the few islands in the western Indian Ocean are as sparse as elsewhere along the route from NE Asia to southern Africa. Virtually the only records that exist are from the Seychelles and Maldives; on the latter islands it is a winter visitor in small numbers from November to March (Ash & Shafeeg 1994). In the Seychelles, including the Amirantes, the Seychelles Bird Records Committee have collected seven records involving up to eleven birds (mostly first winter) in the period late-November to early-March. These include up to four different birds during a ten-day period in December 2000 on Fregate and at least three records of birds remaining in the same territory for up to 3 months (Skerrett et al. 2001, A. Skerrett pers. comm.). By contrast, it has not been recorded on the Lakshadweep Islands which are further north and closer to the mainland of southern India (Kurup & Zacharias 1994) and there are no records from any of the islands closer to Africa - Comoros, Mauritius, Reunion and Madagascar (Brown et al. 1982, Sargeant 1992, Morris & Hawkins 1998). Middle east/Arabian records West of the Indian subcontinent it is regarded as either unknown (Pakistan) or a rare vagrant to the United Arab Emirates (two records July 1995 and March 2000, C Richardson pers. comm.). In Oman it is an irregular and uncommon spring migrant from mid-March to late-May and a rare autumn migrant from mid-October to late- December, and one record in winter. Most records are single birds or small flocks in spring with a maximum of 26 together in the Salalah area on 24 April 1992 (Eriksen & Sargeant 2000); in the same year a total of 201 birds were recorded between 23 April and 18 May (Ash & Nikolaus unpublished). In north Oman it is much less frequent with only three records: one collected at Sur 25 November 1901, male and female 16 April, and female 14 May 1997, both at Al Ansab Lagoons’ near Muscat. These Peter Clement & David Holman 226 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) observations suggest regular spring and autumn passage through Oman, with higher numbers in spring than in autumn. The winter record was a juvenile at Salalah 23 December 1983 to 24 January 1984 (Eriksen & Sargeant 2000). The spring migration route of birds through southern Arabia, almost entirely restricted to the Dhofar coast, suggests that they have crossed directly from the Horn of Africa and from here they cross to Asia at some unknown route which avoids north Oman, Masirah Island, Muscat and UAE; they may possibly cross the remote areas around Ras Madrakah or Ras al Hadd where few observations have been carried out during migration. Elsewhere in Arabia there has been a recent (November 1984) record of a single bird in south Yemen (Ash 1989). It appears to be a very rare vagrant to Saudi Arabia; included in the few records that exist are two birds taken by Meinertzhagen out of a flock of a hundred near Mecca in April (undated) and later verified by B.P. Hall. Whilst this could have been part of the normal migration pattern, Moreau (1972) commented that this could have been due to the birds following a swarm of locusts. Western Palearctic records The first record of this extreme vagrant to the Western Palearctic was in April 1995 at the Straits of Messina, southern Italy, a well-watched raptor migration point (Corso & Dennis 1998). This has subsequently been followed by 5 others, all at the same location, in May 1998 and May 1999. The similarity between the dates of occurrence with that in the passage records through the Middle East 1s particularly noteworthy. Arrival in Africa First arrivals in southern Africa are from late November (Brown et al. 1982) but the southernmost parts of the wintering range are not occupied until early December. In Malawi, the centre of the wintering range, Amur Falcons are present from December to March but not until January and February are peak numbers of birds present. There are, however, extremely few records of birds arriving at coastal locations anywhere in East Africa. Britton (1980) gave only three coastal records from East Africa and of those only one - two at Pemba 23 November 1937 (Pakenham 1979) - is within the arrival period. The other two are Mikindani, Tanzania, in March and Kilifi, Kenya, in April. : In Somalia, one of the least explored countries in Africa, Ash & Miskell (1998) published details of two November records, one of which, interestingly (dating back to 1937), is of two birds 160 km offshore. Ash & Miskell also reported two birds (both presumably collected), an adult male and immature, at the coastal location of Obbia in January 1931. More importantly it is from Somalia that most evidence comes for an overland return route, with April records, from three years in the period 1979 to 1983, of flocks of up to 250 together in the south of the country. There are no records from either Djibouti (Welch 1984, 1985) or Socotra (Kirwan 1998). In SE Kenya, southern and eastern Tanzania, Britton (1980) recorded the bird as a passage migrant in small numbers in November and December, and again in March Peter Clement & David Holman 227 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) and April. Britton gave few supporting details but included a record of over 1,000 which flew SSW over Dodoma (Tanzania) on 13 January 1956 (a late date for birds still en route to their wintering areas unless they had ‘stopped-off’ along the way. In addition, Britton (1980) reported that ‘thousands occur in Ruaha NP’ central Tanzania, though this record carries no date and it could be assumed to refer to passage times, since he goes on to mention only two other January records (from central Kenya and SW Tanzania), both without any numbers of birds involved. More recently Zimmerman et al. (1996) added that ‘large flocks pass through the Tsavo region on southward migration’ and that there are only a few records from northern Tanzania. An indication of the possible numbers of birds involved comes from a roost count of between 4,000 and 5,000 birds in Malawi in February 1951 (Benson 1951). In spring, Ash & Miskell (1989) recorded passage through Somalia as occurring mostly inland, suggesting that onward movement may also be overland. In support of this the very few coastal records in Tanzania and Kenya contrast with the many inland records from both countries, and also lends support for the theory of overland migration. New records from Ethiopia In November 1989 PC recorded at least three individuals between Dodola and Goba in the southeastern highlands of Ethiopia; these are the first substantiated records for the country (Ash pers. comm.). The species was looked for in the same area in subsequent years but it was not recorded again until November 1997 when DH saw 3 males and 4 females between Dodola and Adaba. This is an extensive plateau in the southeastern highlands extending c. 600 km north to south and c. 200 km at its widest point; the main habitat is short grassland, similar to that in the main wintering area further south. The plateau is well-known for its abundance of birds of prey since it is a particularly good area for Common Kestrels F! tinnunculus, Lanner Falcons F- biarmicus, Pallid Circus macrourus and Montagu’s Harriers C. pygargus. The only subsequent record of Amur Falcon from Ethiopia was a first-winter bird at Nekemte, Wolega Province on 26 November 1998 (I. Robertson & M. Mellor pers. comm.). Discussion The paucity of records from the vast area between the Himalayas and southern Africa suggests that these birds either move unseen, or along a broad front from Asia to Africa which involves overland, coastal and transoceanic flight. On the evidence available it could be assumed that the birds cross the western Indian Ocean to make landfall along the coast of southern Kenya or northern Tanzania. The few records from islands in the Indian Ocean, together with a lack of any similar concentrations of birds further south along the seaboard of East Africa, tends to support this. It appears that the bird is capable of moving large distances overland via central and western India or by a shorter sea crossing in an arc route to the horn of Africa completely undetected. Peter Clement & David Holman 228 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Since most of the passage movements of birds across India and within Africa, i.e. from Tanzania to the main wintering area south of Malawi, are similarly unnoticed, it is highly likely that most of these are above observable limits, similar to the birds on passage through northern Burma reported by Smythies (1986). Within the wintering area the bird becomes extremely conspicuous, hunting for grasshoppers, locusts and termites in large and loosely social groups of up to several hundred over large areas of open country, particularly grasslands with scattered trees. The evidence for a longer sea-crossing of the western Indian Ocean, from a departure point somewhere in southern India to Tanzania or northern Mozambique would be, on a direct crossing, in the region of 4,800 km and clearly be of several days duration. Whilst several other falcons move relatively long-distances, notably Eleonora’s Falcon F. eleonorae and Hobby F: subbuteo, regular movements across such an expanse of open sea are unique for a raptor. The weather over the Indian Ocean is generally favourable in October and November for transoceanic crossing. The SW monsoon moves southward from its most northerly position over Kutch in mid-September to around 12°N at the end of October, this is overlain by northeasterly winds (the inter-tropical convergence zone - ITCZ) which become progressively dominant so that by December they prevail at all levels over the whole of the Arabian Sea. During the monsoon airflow rises rapidly from ground level to reach the overlying north-easterlies which by September are c. 3 km altitude and this wind then extends all the way west to the horn of Africa (N. Elkins, pers. comm.). This sudden rise of air could easily facilitate the movement of a large number of migrant birds to altitudes above observable limits and set them on a heading between west and southwest. It would appear that the west coast of India north of about 13°N, particularly where the SW monsoon strikes the Western Ghats, is the most likely departure area; south of this area the airflow is more likely to carry them south into the Indian Ocean. Thus it would not be difficult for a migrant on a flight from India to Africa with a strong following wind at c. 3,000 m to make such a crossing. In support of this are the large number of November records in southern Kenya and NE Tanzania that suggest an arrival point of birds having made a direct crossing. Maintaining a high-level, long-distance flight across large stretches of open water is, in all probability, extremely energy consuming and a journey which is unlikely to be completed (certainly every year by the entire population) without occasional occurrences on any available landfall along the route. During the SW monsoon storms are a frequent characteristic of the climate and are generally the reason for regular occurrences of similar long-distance transoceanic migrants such as Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis fulva and Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereus on Seychelles and Mauritius. It would therefore not be surprising for a similar sized long-distance migrant to make at least occasional (or exceptional) appearances under similar circumstances. Whilst part of the population crossing the western Indian Ocean may undertake a direct high-level flight to the wintering area, it also seems equally likely that another Peter Clement & David Holman 229 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) part of the population undertakes a shorter, i.e. more northerly, sea-crossing. This is most likely on a heading between west and northwest from a departure point along the western coast of India with part of this population moving at height overland, borne aloft by the rapidly rising air currents ahead of the southwest monsoon. From the little that is known of the small number of records from Somalia, together with the growing number of records elsewhere in NE Africa and Arabia, these suggest that some birds make a shorter sea and/or partly overland crossing. The numbers of birds seen in Oman, particularly in spring, certainly suggest that a proportion of the birds return to the breeding area via a shorter sea crossing. Further work involving collation of detailed records and, in particular, satellite tracking of tagged individuals will clearly reveal more about the movements (including flight times and energy costs) and distances covered by these birds. Although the main wintering area lies in south-eastern Africa, as described in the introduction, small numbers are occasionally recorded wintering in India, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Seychelles, locations that are mainly along the postulated route followed by birds making the direct crossing of the western Indian Ocean. Acknowledgements We are extremely grateful to Dr John Ash, Tim and Carol Inskipp and Colin Richardson for their very helpful and constructive comments on an earlier draft of this paper. We would like to thank Tim Inskipp for clarifying details of the Indian subcontinent records; Iain Robertson for the third Ethiopian record; Jens Eriksen, Dave Sargeant and the Oman Bird Group for the detailed records from Oman; Phil Round for the records from Thailand, Richard Lewthwaite for southern China records and Adrian Skerret for providing details of the Seychelles records together with all those who kindly responded to the request for details of sightings along the passage routes. Norman Elkins was extremely helpful in commenting on and assisting with data on the pattern of the monsoon winds and the ITCZ, without which this paper would have greatly deficient. References Ali, S & Ripley, S.D. 1968. Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan. Vol.1. Oxford Univ. Press. Ash, J.S. 1989. Some observations in South Yemen in 1984 and a selected bibliography of the region. Sandgrouse 10: 85-90. Ash, J.S. & Miskell, J.E. 1989. Eastern Red-footed Falcons Falco amurensis and Red-footed Falcons F. vespertinus in Somalia and Ethiopia. Scopus 12: 61-64. Ash, J.S. & Miskell, J.E.1998. Birds of Somalia. Pica Press, Sussex. Ash, J.S. & Shafeeg, A. 1994. The birds of the Maldive Islands, Indian Ocean. Forktail 10: 3-31. Benson, C.W. 1951. A roosting rite of Eastern Red-footed Falcon Falco amurensis. Ibis 93: 467- 468. Britton P.L. (ed.). 1980. Birds of East Africa. East African Natural History Society, Nairobi. Brown, L.H., Urban, E.K. & Newman, K. 1982. The birds of Africa. Vol. 1. Academic Press, London. Butler, E.A., 1881. A tentative catalogue of the birds of the Deccan and south Mahratta country. Stray Feathers 9: 367-442. Cheng, T. 1987. A synopsis of the avifauna of China. Science Press, Beijing. Corso, A & Dennis, P. 1998. Amur Falcon in Italy, a new Western Palearctic bird. Birding World 11: 259-260. Peter Clement & David Holman 230 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Davidson, J. 1898. The birds of North Kanara. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 11: 652-679; 12: 43- Ts, Eriksen, J. & Sargeant, D. E. 2000. Oman bird list, Edition 5. Oman Bird Records Committee, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman. Grimmett, R., Inskipp, C & Inskipp, T. 1998. Birds of the Indian Subcontinent. Helm/A & C Black, London. Inskipp, C & Inskipp, T. 1991. A Guide to the Birds of Nepal. Second edition. London. Inskipp, C & Inskipp, T. 1993. Birds recorded during a visit to Bhutan in autumn 1991. Forktail 8. 9/2 Kirwan, G.M. 1998. Additions to the avifauna of Socotra and Abd Al-Kuri, with notes on the occurrence of some resident and migrant species. Bull. African Bird Club 5: 17-21. Kurup, D.N. & Zacharias, V.J. 1994. Birds of the Lakshadweep Islands, India. Forktail 10: 49-64. La Touche, J.D.D. 1925-34. A handbook of the birds of eastern China. Taylor and Francis, London. Lefevre, R.H. 1962. The birds of Northern Shantung Province. Privately published, no location given. Lewthwaite, R.W. 1995. Forest birds of Southeast China: observations during 1984-1996. Hong Kong Bird Report 1995: 150-303. Martins, R. 1986. Recent reports: Nepal. Oriental Bird Club Bulletin 3: 33. Meinertzhagen, R., 1938. On the birds of northern Afghanistan. /bis 14(2):480-520, 671-717. Moreau, R.E. 1972. The Palearctic-African bird migration systems. Academic Press, London. Morris, P. & Hawkins, F. 1998. Birds of Madagascar - a photographic guide. Pica Press, Sussex. Pakenham, R.H.W. 1979. The birds of Zanzibar and Pemba, an annotated check-list. BOU Check-list No.2. London. Phillips, W.W.A. 1978. Annotated checklist of the birds of Ceylon (Sri Lanka). Revised edition. The Wildlife and Nature Protection Society of Sri Lanka in association with the Ceylon Bird Club, Colombo. Roberts, T. J. 1991. The birds of Pakistan. Oxford Univ. Press. Robson, C. 2000. From the Field. Bull. Oriental Bird Club 31: 49-57. Sargeant, D. 1992. A birders guide to Mauritius and Reunion. Privately published report, no location given. Singh, P. 1994. Recent bird records from Arunachal Pradesh, India. Forktail 10: 65-73. Skerrett, A., Bullock, I & Disley, T. 2001. Birds of Seychelles. Helm/A & C Black, London. Smythies, B.E. 1986. The birds of Burma. 3rd edn. Oliver & Boyd, London. Swinhoe, R. 1871. A revised catalogue of the birds of China and its islands, with descriptions of new species, references to former notes, and occasional remarks. Proceedings of the Zoological Society 1871: 337-423. Welch, G & Welch, H. 1984. Birds seen on an expedition to Djibouti. Sandgrouse 6: 1-23. Welch, G & Welch, H. 1985. Djibouti IT Autumn ‘85. Privately published report. Williams, M.D. (ed.) 2000. Autumn bird migration at Beidaihe, China, 1986-1990 (incorporating the report on China Cranewatch 1986). Beidaihe International Birdwatching Society. Williams, M.D., Carey, G.J., Duff, D.G. & Weishu, X. 1992. Autumn bird migration at Beidaihe, China, 1986-1990. Forktail 7: 3-55. Zimmerman, D.A., Turner, D.A. & Pearson, D.J. 1996. Birds of Kenya and northern Tanzania. Helm/A & C Black, London. Addresses: Peter Clement, 69 Harecroft Road, Wisbech, Cambridgeshire PE13 1RL, UK; David Holman, 9 Salisbury Road, Norwich, Norfolk NR1 1TU, UK. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 % 4. Herholdt 231 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Observations on the nocturnal migration of the Kurrichane Buttonquail in northern South Africa by 7.7. Herholdt Received 6 Ffanuary 2000 The Kurrichane Buttonquail Turnix sylvatica occurs over most of sub-Saharan Africa, and is widespread in southern Africa except in the south and southwest (Colahan 1997, Maclean 1993). It avoids forests and deserts (Urban et al. 1986). It also occurs in southwest Europe, southern and south-eastern Asia, parts of Asia, Philippines, Sulus, Java and Bali (Urban et a/. 1986). The Kurrichane Buttonquail is considered to be an intra-African migrant (Urban et al. 1986) but little is known of its migration. Tarboton et al. (1987) and Irwin (1981) considered it to be nomadic in the Transvaal and Zimbabwe respectively. Wintle Study area Kennedy’s Vale Farmhouse Dwars River —» Flight route Figure 1. Map of the farm Kennedy’s Vale (20°51'S, 30°08'E) showing mountains and supposed flight-route (arrow) of the Kurrichane Buttonquails. FF. Herholdt ANI Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) (1975) thought it to be resident with local movements in the Matepatepa area of Zimbabwe. Herremans (1994) recorded concentrations where good rains had fallen in Botswana. During a period of exceptionally high rainfall in 1988 in the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park (formerly the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park), Kurrichane Buttonquails moved into the area in large numbers and the booming calls of displaying females could be heard all night (pers. obs.). This influx was quite abrupt, suggesting large scale and synchronized movement into the Park from elsewhere. This sudden influx of buttonquails was also evident by the large numbers of partially eaten carcasses found at nests of Barn Owls Tyto alba in the Park at that time (Herholdt 1993). Del Hoyo et al. (1996) described birds being attracted to and colliding with artificial lights, windows and lighthouses at night, particularly in fog after heavy rain. They thought that buttonquails are capable of long distance movements by night. In Nigeria, at Ibadan, a Kurrichane Buttonquail flew into a lighted room at night, suggesting migration (Elgood et al. 1973). In Tsavo, in southeast Kenya, a similar observation was made when a single Kurrichane Buttonquail flew to a lighted wall of a building at night (Moreau 1972). During the nights of 4 and 5 December 1999 observations on the nocturnal migration of Kurrichane Buttonquails were made at the farmhouse at Kennedy’s Vale (20° 51’S, 30° 08’E), Mpumalanga Province, South Africa (Fig. 1). Both nights were overcast with occasional light drizzle and lightning on the skyline. The night of 4 December was calm, but a light southeasterly breeze blew on the night of 5 December. The whole area had received good rain (119 mm were measured in the immediate vicinity for November) and were covered in green stands of grass. The first indication of Kurrichane Buttonquails was at 2300 h on 4 December, when a male was captured as it flew into the house. The outside neon light of the farmhouse and some interior lights in one room were on at the time. Nine dead buttonquails, which had been recently captured by domestic dogs, were found under the outside light. A torchlight search around the farmhouse revealed many buttonquails sitting all over the farmyard. By 0115 h on the morning of 5 December, 21 Kurrichane Buttonquails had been captured, and no more birds could be heard passing overhead. Dead birds were sexed and measured and captured birds were bagged and sexed, measured, ringed and released just after sunrise the same morning. In the hand buttonquails occasionally uttered a soft ““keoo” call, and at times the whole sky appeared to be filled with these soft calls, suggesting that the birds migrated in waves. Although the night was too dark to see the buttonquails in the sky, it was estimated that the birds must have been flying at 10 —20 m above ground level. Some buttonquails landed in the yard, while others came crashing through trees to land on the ground. Some remained in shrubby trees and only took off when the trees were shaken. The movement of calls indicated that the buttonquails flew in a northerly direction (Fig. 1), and most of those that landed took off again almost immediately, heading in % 4. Herholdt 233 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) the same direction. The mountains in the area may have funneled the buttonquails, resulting in the large numbers that flew over the Kennedy’s Vale farmhouse (Fig. 1). Five buttonquails landed in the swimming pool: three were able to immediately take off again, the other two were rescued and later released. Some landed far from the outside light where it was totally dark and some even landed on another farmhouse without outside lighting. It was evident, from the large amount of calling, that only a small percentage of the buttonquails that passed overhead landed around the farmhouse. The next night (5 December), buttonquails again passed northwards over the farmhouse from 1200 h— 0215 h, but in smaller numbers than on the previous night. The flights were few and far between and much less calling was heard. Only six birds were captured. Of the 36 buttonquails sexed and measured, only two were females. Males were lighter in weight than females (34.5 + 2.9 (SD) g vs. 45.5 and 48.0 g) and had shorter wings (78.1 2.1 (SD) mm vs 84 and 91 mm). Tail, tarsus and exposed culmen did not differ between the sexes. The females, apart from being larger, also had a much larger and richer rufous upper breast patch (Wintle 1975). Acknowledgements Dr. W.R. Tarboton, Dr. A.C Kemp and Mr. H. Chittenden are thanked for giving inputs and supplying literature, which helped to improve this paper. Mr. C.J. Smith is thanked for assisting with the ringing and measurements of the buttonquails. Mr. P.J. Grabe is thanked for assisting with the drawing of the map. InGherenices: Colahan, B.D. 1997. Kurrichane Buttonquail Turnix sylvatica. In: The atlas of southern African birds. Vol. 1: Non-passerines. Harrison, J.A., Allan, D.G.,Underhill, L.G., Herremans, M.,Tree, A.J., Parker, V. & Brown, C.J. (eds.), pp. 306-307. Birdlife South Africa, Johannesburg. Del Hoyo, J., Elliot, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.) 1996. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 3. Barcelona. Lynx Edicions. Elgood, J.H., Fry, C.H. & Dowsett, R.J. 1973. African migrants in Nigeria. /bis 115: 1-45, 375- 411. Herholdt, J.J. 1993. Reproductive output of Barn Owls Zyto alba in the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park, South Africa, during a period of high rainfall. Gabar 8: 21-23. Herremans, M. 1994. Fifteen years of migrant phenology records in Botswana; a summary and prospects. Babbler 28; 47-68. Irwin, M.P.S. 1981. The birds of Zimbabwe. Quest, Salisbury. Maclean, G.L. 1993. Roberts’ birds of southern Africa. John Voelcker Bird Book Fund: Cape Town. Moreau, R.E. 1972. The Palearctic-African bird migration system. London, Academic Press. Tarboton, W.R., Kemp, M.I. & Kemp, A.C. 1987. Birds of the Transvaal. Transvaal Museum. Pretoria. Urban, E.K., Fry, C.H. & Keith, S. 1986. The birds of Africa. Vol. Il. Academic Press, London. Wintle, C.C. 1975. Notes on the breeding habits of the Kurrichane Buttonquail. Honeyguide 82: 27-30. Address: P.O Box 4321, Lydenburg, 1120 Republic of South Africa. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Michael Walters 234 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) The correct scientific name of the White-bellied Heron by Michael Walters Received 5 Fune 2000 This species has been variously called Ardea insignis Hume (1878, based on a nomen nudum by Hodgson) or imperialis Baker (1928) and, in the light of the biography of Hodgson by Cocker & Inskipp (1988), in which no mention of the problem was made, it seems desirable to present facts that give Hodgson his full credit. Furthermore, the “evidence” on which the name insignis is currently accepted is confused and tenuous, and requires clarification. Biswas (1960) stated: “The name should be Ardea insignis Hume. Hume’s name is available, since its citation as a synonym of Ardea nobilis Blyth and Ardea sumatrana Raffles are [sic] based on misidentification”. Ripley (1982, p. 12) accepted the name insignis for the bird he had previously called imperialis, citing Biswas as his sole authority. Sibley & Monroe (1990, p. 304) also adopted insignis but without mentioning Biswas, remarking that Ripley had correctly resolved the issue. Inskipp ef al. (1996, p. 103) adopted insignis, citing Sibley & Monroe as their authority and without mentioning either Biswas or Ripley. Thus the question as to which name is correct appears to rest solely on the terse statement of Biswas. Was he correct? » The traditional scenario of the nomenclatural history of this bird is given by Hancock & Elliot (1978) as follows. In 1844 Hodgson used the name insignis for a heron “of which insufficient clues as to the identity were given”. The nomen nudum could have been used again by Hume when validating Hodgson’s name, but for the fact that Gray (1844 & 1871) had placed it in the synonymy of two other species, nobilis and sumatrana. Baker (1928) allegedly proposed that this invalidated Hume’s (1878) resuscitation of the name and proposed the substitute name imperialis. This assertion was denied by Biswas (1960). In fact, Baker’s account states that he was proposing the new name because Hume’s name was preoccupied by Hodgson’s, 1.e. that the earlier name referred to a different taxon from that of Hume. However, Hancock & Elliot considered that “no more than circumstantial evidence of errors on Gray’s part” was sufficient to “tip the balance” in favour of imperialis. Unfortunately, most of the arguments used here are wrong, for there is no question as to the correct identity of Hodgson’s bird. Hodgson did not first use the name in 1844. It previously appeared in his unpublished paintings, of which Hodgson (1844) is a catalogue. This painting was plate 61, fig. 2, based on specimen no. 645 in Hodgson’s collection. In 1844, Hodgson listed a specimen of A. insignis collected by himself, no. 645. This specimen, and another, are still in the Natural History Museum, Tring, collection, reg. nos. 1843.1.13.1236 and 1237. Their original Hodgson labels have been removed, but the register quite clearly gives the number of both specimens alongside the registration Michael Walters 235 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) numbers as 645. There can be no doubt, therefore, that these two birds are Hodgson’s “types”, and are also the adult and juvenile skins listed by Sharpe (1898) as from the Hodgson collection. The supposed relegation of insignis to the synonymy of nobilis by G.R. Gray (1844) is also based on a misconception. In this, Gray listed Hodgson’s two specimens of insignis, which he called the Great Indian Heron, and prefixed the name insignis with nobilis Blyth, giving the reference “Ann. of Nat. Hist, 1844, p. ” (i.e. witha space where the page number should be). In other words, the name nobilis had not been published at the time Gray went to press, thus nobilis was a nomen nudum at this point! Gray evidently thought that Blyth’s name would prove to be the same as Hodgson’s, and merely placed it first because Hodgson’s was a manuscript name. There was, however, no question as to the identity of Hodgson’s name. The same error occurred in Gray (1846). Here again, the page number of Blyth’s reference has been omitted, but in his own personal copy of this catalogue (now held in the Zoology Library, The Natural History Museum) Hodgson had written in “p. 500”. G.R. Gray (1871), having realised that Blyth’s nobilis was not the same as insignis, but was actually a synonym of Ardea goliath Cretzschmar, a bird hitherto known only from Africa, made the further error of placing insignis in the synonymy of A. sumatrana Raffles (1822). Much of this is, in fact, academic. Under the terms of ICZN (1999), a nomen nudum is not an available name, and therefore may be reused for the same or another taxon. There is no suggestion that the subsequent placing of the name in synonymy prevents its reuse. Biswas was therefore right in claiming that Hodgson’s (1844) name was available to Hume. Unfortunately, the publication of Hodgson’s name does not satisfy the provisions of Article 12.2 of the Code, since this specifically excludes a specimen as constituting an “indication” for a new species. This prevents the name insignis being credited to Hodgson. Notwithstanding the existence of the specimens and the plate, both of which are quite identifiable, the name remained a nomen nudum until resuscitated by Hume. The correct name is therefore Ardea insignis Hume. Acknowledgement I am grateful to Storrs Olson who discussed this paper with me at more than one stage of gestation, and made many helpful comments. References: Baker, E.C.S. 1928. [untitled] Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl, 49: 40. Biswas, B. 1960. Comments on Ripley’s A synopsis of the birds of India and Pakistan, J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 60: 680. Cocker, M. & Inskipp, C. 1988. A Himalayan ornithologist: the life and work of Brian Houghton Hodgson. Oxford Univ. Press. Gray, G.R. 1844. List of the specimens of birds in the collection of the British Museum: part 3, Gallinae, Grallae and Anseres, p. 76 (not p. 75, as cited by Sharpe). British Museum, London. Gray, G.R. 1871. Handlist of genera and species of birds, vol. 3, p. 27. London. Gray, J.E. 1846. Catalogue of mammals and birds of Nepal presented by Hodgson, p. 133 (not p. 143 as cited by Sharpe). London. Michael Walters 236 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Hancock, J & Elliot H. 1978. Herons of the world. London Editions Ltd., London. Hodgson, B.H. (no date) Icones ined. Grall, in library of British Museum, London. Hodgson, B.H. 1844. Catalogue of Nipalese birds, collected between 1824 and 1844. In J.E. Gray, 1831-44, Zoological Miscellany, 6: 86. Hume, A.O. 1878. A revised list of the birds of Tenasserim. Stray Feathers, 6: 470 [1-524]. Inskipp, T, Lindsay, N & Duckworth, W. 1996. An annotated check list of the birds of the Oriental Region. Oriental Bird Club, Sandy. International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Fourth edition. London. Raffles, S. 1822. Second part of the descriptive catalogue of a zoological collection made in the Island of Sumatra and its vicinity, Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, 13: 325 [227-340]. Ripley, S.D. 1982. A synopsis of the birds of India and Pakistan, second edition, Bombay Natural History Society. Sharpe, R.B. 1898. Catalogue of the birds in the British Museum, vol. 26, p. 70. London. Sibley, C. & Monroe, B. 1990. Distribution and taxonomy of the birds of the world. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven & London. Address: Michael Walters, Bird Group, The Natural History Museum, Tring, Herts HP23 6AP. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Monitoring populations of Red-footed Boobies Sula sula and frigatebirds Fregata spp. breeding on Aldabra Atoll, Indian Ocean by Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts Received 29 Fune 2000 Frigatebirds and boobies have experienced considerable persecution and disturbance in the western Indian Ocean over the past century, and during this time populations of both groups declined or disappeared on many islands (Feare 1978, Carboneras 1992, Orta 1992, Cheke 2001). Some colonies are now protected but the size and population trends are poorly known for most Indian Ocean colonies. We report counts of frigatebirds and boobies made on Aldabra Atoll in March-May 2000, and compare them with previous counts to assess population trends. We also make recommendations for future monitoring, and comment on the use of small boats as a censusing platform for seabirds nesting in mangroves. Aldabra Atoll supports the largest breeding population of frigatebirds in the Indian Ocean, and the second largest in the world, with c. 6,000 pairs of Lesser Frigatebird Fregata ariel and 4,000 pairs of Great Frigatebird F minor (Reville 1983). The only other breeding site in Seychelles is nearby Cosmoledo Atoll which supports 200-400 pairs of each species (Rocamora & Skerrett 2001). Despite their global Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts 230 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) importance the Aldabra frigatebird colonies have been censused only twice, in 1967 (Diamond 1971, 1975) and in 1976-1977 (Reville 1980, 1983). Aldabra also supports a large breeding population of Red-footed Boobies Sula sula, estimated at 6,000-7,000 breeding pairs (Diamond 1971, 1974). Within Seychelles and the western Indian Ocean this is exceeded only by the Cosmoledo population (10,000-12,000 pairs; Rocamora & Skerrett 2001). The Aldabra population has been censused only once, in 1967-1968 (Diamond 1974). This is the only booby species known to nest on Aldabra. Methods Between 12-20 March 2000 AEB visited Aldabra and censused all the known frigatebird colonies and most of the Red-footed Booby colonies, covering more than half of the lagoon shoreline of the atoll in a 4 m long ocean kayak (K-light fold-up, Feathercraft Ltd., Vancouver, Canada). The kayak permitted access to most of the small channels among the mangroves and between small islets. Between 20 March and 9 May 2000 MB surveyed the remaining lagoon shore using a small motor boat, and R. Wanless counted boobies around Ile aux Cedres. We generally remained 8-10 m away from the edge of the mangroves and shore, except where forced to pass through narrower channels, and plotted our locations on 1:25,000 orthophoto-maps as we moved along the shore. A hand-held tally counter was used to count frigatebird nests and, where common, booby nests. Binoculars were used to check and count a few nests which could not be approached within c. 30 m because of shallow water. Red-footed Boobies were in two stages of breeding, which were counted separately. Most nests contained an adult apparently incubating. We checked c. 20 nests and all contained eggs, but some other birds might have been brooding small chicks. Colonies also contained large nestlings or newly fledged juveniles from an earlier nesting stage (hereafter called fledglings) sitting in or near nests. These were separated from older second-year immature birds by appearance: the fledglings had duller, more uniform brown plumage, sometimes with traces of down, paler and duller pink feet and legs, and black bills (Diamond 1974). A few large downy chicks were present in March and included in the fledgling count. To include booby nests deep in the canopy, where adults on and off nests could not be distinguished from the boat, Diamond (1974) multiplied the total number of adults seen by an “incubating index”, which was the ratio of adults seen on nests (incubating or brooding) divided by those definitely not on a nest. We chose not to apply this correction for several reasons. Adults were often roosting in areas where there were no nests. The ratio would need to be re-calculated for each section of colony to account for spatial and temporal variations in the attendance of off-duty adults. We encountered relatively few situations where we could not determine whether an adult was on a nest or not, although this sometimes required minor shifts of the boat position and the use of binoculars. Consequently, we made no effort to estimate the nests which might have been associated with the small numbers of adult boobies Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts 238 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) - Aldabra Atoll Polymnie€ Gionnet Colony Figure 1. Map of Aldabra Atoll, showing islands and other features mentioned in the text, and the locations of the three frigatebird colonies (black areas). seen deep in the canopy. The numbers given are our actual counts of visibly occupied nests. From the boats we could usually see deep into the canopy and our subjective impression was that we missed fewer than 10% of the booby nests, except for the colonies in and near Bras Takamaka. Booby nests along the mangrove fringe in Bras Takamaka and around [le aux Aigrettes were counted using binoculars from the opposite shore, 0.8-1.2 km away, and were probably under-estimated. We were unable to visit all the small channels in the mangroves of Bras Takamaka (Figure 1), where Diamond (1974) had reported several hundred booby nests, but MB and experienced rangers collectively estimated that there were c. 100 nests there, based on their experience during several explorations over the past two years. At the time of the census both species of fngatebirds had large chicks. On Aldabra, fledglings of the two species can be distinguished using head colour (white or creamy in Great, and reddish in Lesser; Diamond 1975), but this takes experience (Reville 1983:69) and was not attempted. Counts of both species were pooled. About 1-2% of the nests contained an adult bird, which might have been shading a smaller chick (or less likely an egg) or in an empty nest. These were included in the total count. Reville (1983) estimated that boat counts recorded 80-90% of the frigatebird nests present, based on comparisons with counts from blinds inside colonies. Results and discussion Red-footed Booby This species shows plumage polymorphism in the Indian Ocean (Le Corre 1999, Cheke 2001), but we saw only white morph adults, and no white-tailed brown morphs. Boobies nested in small clusters of nests scattered along the mangrove fringe of the lagoon, with a few nests also in Pemphis acidula shrubs and other trees. Nearly all nests were on the lee shores of islands or inlets, sheltered from the SE wind (the Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts 239 Bull yBsO.C» 20011214) strongest winds). We counted 4,095 nests with a sitting adult and 838 fledglings (Table 1). Most of these (71% of the nests with adults and 54% of the fledglings) were in areas not used for nesting by frigatebirds. Those boobies which did nest within the frigatebird colonies usually chose trees or bushes with no frigatebird nests, but this was not quantified. The majority of boobies therefore nested apart from frigatebirds, although frigatebirds often roosted nearby. It is difficult to compare our counts with Diamond’s (1974) census in 1967-1968 because his counts were made at a different time of year (between October and February), and the scale of Diamond’s map makes it difficult to determine the boundaries of his count areas. The type of boat used for the counts (dinghy in Diamond’s study, kayak in ours) should not affect the counts. Diamond counted the “Main Colony”, RABE Iie Distribution and numbers of Red-footed Booby nests in March-May 2000, compared with data from Diamond’s (1974) census made between Oct 1967 and Feb 1968. This study 1967-1968 (Diamond 1974) Island Location Adults Fledglings Adults Calculated Fledglings Date of on and on no. of and Diamond’s nests juveniles nests nests juveniles survey Picard Lagoon and Grand Passe 28 7 ll 2 Pigs 25 Nov Malabar Gionnet frigate bird colony 10 20 0 0 4o** 11-12 Oct Malabar Gionnet to Camp Frigate colony 114 9 - - - - Malabar Camp Frigate frigatebird colony 628 164 159 187 2 31 Jan Malabar Camp Frigate to [le Verte 1,022 110 0 125 10 15 Feb Malabar [le Verte to Middle Camp colony*** — 965 156 | Malabar Middle Camp frigate bird colony*** 534 72) Dona apse al OY? 2,412 O13** 12 Feb Grand Terre Passe Houareau, Ile aux Cédres 569 172 8] 157 9 8 Nov & (west end) and un-named island 4 Jan Grand Terre ile aux Aigrettes and IVA -* - - - - (southwestend) outer Bras Takamaka Grand Terre Bras Takamaka 100* ae i 32 240** 13-14 Feb (southwestend) imner channels GrandTerre Gros Ilot Cavalier 0 0 13 3 l 8 Dec (east end) Total 4,095 838 2,277 2,958 919 Within frigatebird colonies 1,172 384 2,071 2,599 615 Outside frigatebird colonies 2,923 454 206 359 304 Malabar Island totals 3,273 659 2,161 2,724 667 * — Rough estimate of adults on nests, no estimate of fledglings ** Diamond’s count for these areas included all immatures, not just fledglings and juveniles ** Diamond’s “Main Colony” covers these two areas Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts 240 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) between Middle Camp and [le Verte, and the Bras Takamaka colonies twice, in October-November and again in February. He counted all other areas once, most in February. Considering only the February counts, which were closer to the months of our counts, Diamond’s total for Aldabra was 2,277 adults on nests which he estimated represented 2,958 nests, including those not visible in the canopy (Table 1). Our count of nests with adults in 2000 was thus 80% higher than the 1967-1968 count, if we apply no correction for invisible nests to either data set. Comparing only Malabar Island, which contains the bulk of the boobies and was well covered by both censuses, the count of 3,273 nests with adults in 2000 was 51% higher than in 1967-1968 (Table 1). Diamond’s (1974) February 1968 estimate for “Main Colony” (1,912 adults on nests with no correction for invisible nests) was higher than the 1,499 nests counted in March 2000 (Table 1), but this difference might be partly due to our interpretation of where the boundary of “Main Colony” lay. In 2000 there was no clear boundary of the colonies; small clusters of nests were scattered along most of the southern Malabar shore. The biggest difference between the two counts was in the west of Malabar, including the Gionnet and Frigate frigatebird colonies. We found 1,774 nests here whereas Diamond (1974), who explored the area thoroughly (pers. comm.), reported only 249 nests with sitting adults in 1967-1968. Red-footed Boobies have greatly expanded their colonies in this part of Malabar Island, probably as a result of the cessation of human exploitation and disturbance which was common there until 1967 (Diamond 1975, Reville 1980). The counts of fledglings appeared to be ee in 1967-1968 than in 2000 (Table 1). This comparison is not meaningful, however, because breeding success might have differed among the years; Diamond (1974) sometimes pooled data from fledglings and older, second-year immatures; and at the time of our March 2000 census some fledglings had already left the colonies to roost elsewhere and were not counted. We found no evidence of boobies nesting on Polymnie Island, Ile Moustique, Ile Esprit, Ile Michelle, Passe Dubois, along the southern lagoon shores of Grand Terre from Passe Dubois to Bras Takamaka, or on any islets in these areas (Figure 1). The small colony of 13 nests at Gros [lot Cavalier on the shore of Grand Terre in 1967-1968 (Table 1) was not occupied in 2000. Frigatebirds Frigatebirds were found in only three colonies on the lagoon shores of Malabar Island: Gionnet (which included Gros [lot Gionnet), Frigate, and Middle Camp (Figure 1). These were the only colonies active during Reville’s (1980, 1983) extensive research in 1976-1977. At that time all three colonies contained both species, but the bulk of the Great Frigatebirds nested at Middle Camp and the Lessers at Frigate (Table 2). We had insufficient time in 2000 to identify or count all the adult birds to confirm these distributions, except to note that the proportions of each species in the three colonies seemed similar to those in 1976-1977. In the 1960s frigatebirds also nested in Bras Takamaka in the southeast corner of the lagoon (Diamond 1971, 1975), but this area Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts 241 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) was not used in the 1970s (Reville 1980, 1983) or since then (MB, pers. obs.). In the 1960s the frigatebirds on Malabar Island, particularly in the Frigate colony, were frequently disturbed and predated by people, and Reville (1983) suggested that the low numbers in that colony, greater use of the Middle Camp colony and nesting in Bras Takamaka were all consequences of this disturbance. Since 1967 the colonies have been protected and human disturbance generally limited to occasional visits by tourists in boats, restricted to the Gionnet colony and supervised by the Aldabra staff. The Frigate colony expanded, apparently due to immigration of Lesser Frigatebirds from Middle Camp and Bras Takamaka, and the latter colony ceased to be used (Reville 1983). We counted 3,100 active frigatebird nests, nearly all containing large chicks (Table 2). It is difficult to make comparisons with previous counts in 1967 (Diamond 1975) and 1976-1977 (Reville 1983) because the counts were made at different times of year, and both of these authors used various factors to convert counts of adults or nests into the estimated total breeding population. We have used the least modified data, where possible, to compare with our counts (Table 2). Diamond (1975) did not count all the nests in the large Middle Camp colony, but sampled sections of mangroves and extrapolated the results to estimate the total colony. He provided no direct estimates of active nests, but stated that the count of adult females in trees corresponded closely with the number of nests, and this count is summarised in Table 2. Using various conversion factors, Diamond (1975) estimated the maximum nest count at 1820 Great and 5352 Lesser Frigatebirds, and we applied his conversion factors to estimate the numbers in the four colonies used at that time (Table 2). Reville (1980, 1983) did not use sampling or adult:nest ratios, but counted directly all the nests in each colony from a boat when there was maximum occupancy between August and November. He found little difference between 1976 and 1977 in the numbers and distribution of the two species in the three colonies (Table 2). The totals given in Reville (1983) are slightly higher than those given in his thesis (Reville 1980), and we assumed that the former are the revised, accurate counts. He found no significant difference between years in the breeding success of monitored sub- colonies of either species (Reville 1980). Consequently, we applied his fledgling:peak- nest-count ratio (0.67 for Great and 0.25 for Lesser; Reville 1983) to estimate the average number of fledglings in 1976 and 1977 (Table 2). This provides a crude estimate of the number of occupied nests expected late in the season, to compare with our March 2000 data. Our count was 29% higher than this estimate of fledglings for both species. The greatest numerical difference was in the Frigate colony. Reville (1983) concluded that there had been little change in the numbers of frigatebirds between 1967 and 1976-1977, and that the differences between his and Diamond’s (1975) estimates were due to differences in methods of counting nests and in estimating maximum nest counts. The distribution and relative proportions of the two species had, however, changed, and were explained by the cessation of human persecution, especially at the Frigate colony (Reville 1983). The relatively Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts Counts of frigatebirds at the Aldabra colonies in 1967 (Diamond 1975), 1976-1977 (Reville 1983) and March 2000 (this study). See the text for methods used to adjust 242 TABLE 2 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) previous counts to allow comparison with the March 2000 count. Date and measure Oct-Nov 1967: estimated nests from female count Great Frigatebird Lesser Frigatebird Both species % per colony Aug 1967: estimated maximum nest count Great Frigatebird Lesser Frigatebird Both species % per colony Aug-Nov 1976 and 1977: maximum nest count 1976 Great Fngatebird Lesser Frigatebird Both species 1977 Great Frigatebird Lesser Frigatebird Both species Mean 1976-1977 — Great Frigatebird Lesser Frigatebird Both species % per colony 1976-1977: estimated number of fledglings Mean 1976-1977 Great Frigatebird* Lesser Frigatebird** Both species % per colony March 2000: count of active nests Both species % per colony *Estimated number of fledglings assuming 67% breeding success in Great Frigatebirds (Reville 1983) **E stimated number of fledglings assuming 25% breeding success in Lesser Frigatebirds (Reville 1983) Gionnet Frigate 583 1,428 2,010 83.2 1,554 4.660 6,214 86.6 1,067 44.5 1,149 37.1 MiddleCamp Bras Takamaka S So oo eoccec c& Seco small differences between 1976-1977 and 2000 could be explained by variations in the proportion of adults breeding (see Reville 1980, 1983), or differences in breeding success prior to the fledgling census. Our conservative conclusion is that the numbers and distribution of frigatebirds in 2000 were similar to, or slightly higher than those in 1976-1977. Obviously, a more detailed investigation is needed to show if these populations are indeed stable. This Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts 243 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) should include identification of the species in each colony and ideally cover several years to account for variations in breeding success. The work of Diamond (1975) and Reville (1980, 1983) provides a valuable baseline for such comparisons. Changes in booby and frigatebird populations The available data do not permit firm conclusions about changes in the Aldabra populations of boobies and frigatebirds. The few counts used differing methods and sampled at different times in the breeding seasons. There are insufficient data to account for variations in the proportions of adults breeding and in breeding success. The number of pairs and the spatial distribution of Red-footed Boobies nesting during the NW monsoon season have both increased since 1967-1968. The area with the most complete coverage, Malabar Island, showed a 51% increase in adults incubating during the NW monsoon season (Table 1). Part, or maybe all, of this increase can be attributed to the cessation of predation and reduction of disturbance by people after 1967. Although Feare (1978) thought that humans were unlikely to have affected boobies on Aldabra, it is difficult to imagine that the boobies were spared the predation and disturbance from fishermen who were killing frigatebirds for food on Aldabra, especially on western Malabar (Diamond 1975, 1979, Stoddart 1984). Most of the colonies of Red-footed Boobies in the Indian Ocean have disappeared as a result of human disturbance, introduced predators, habitat change and direct predation (Feare 1978, Carboneras 1992). As discussed above, there were dramatic changes in the distribution and relative proportions of the frigatebird colonies between 1967 and 1976, but Reville (1983) concluded that the total breeding population had changed little during that interval. The differences between the 1976-1977 and 2000 censuses appear relatively minor and might be explained by variations in the proportions of adults breeding or in breeding success. It is surprising that the numbers of breeding frigatebirds have not increased noticeably since the period of exploitation and disturbance by humans in the 1960s. Recommendations for future monitoring Direct counts of both booby and frigatebird nests from a small boat provide an efficient censusing method. The complex sampling techniques used for both groups by Diamond (1974, 1975) are not necessary. Reville (1980, 1983) reached the same conclusion, and used direct counts of all nests to census frigatebirds. Estimates of the total breeding populations require extrapolations from nest counts to account for nests missed, asynchronous laying and laying of replacement clutches. Long-term monitoring, however, is best done using the actual nest counts, with minimal extrapolation or correction of data. With suitable planning, logistical support and tidal cycles, most of the booby and all the frigatebird nests in Aldabra Atoll can be simultaneously counted from a small boat in 10-14 days. Estimating year-round populations of boobies will require several counts to cover the different phases of Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts 244 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) breeding. Aerial photography of colonies has been used to census seabird colonies, with mixed success (Harris & Lloyd 1977, Buckley & Buckley 2000). This method might be suitable for frigatebirds and boobies on Aldabra, when aircraft are available at the landing strip on nearby Assumption Island. Simultaneous boat sampling will be needed to ground-truth aerial photographs and identify the ratios of breeding and non-breeding birds appearing in the photographs. Monitoring of Red-footed Boobies Laying appears to occur in at least two fairly synchronised pulses through the year on Aldabra. Some pairs have eggs while others have large chicks or dependent fledglings. Ideally one should count the numbers of nests during incubation in each breeding pulse. Monitoring of laying chronology will be needed to plan these censuses for the optimal date. At least one complete census can be done at the same time as the complete count of frigatebirds in mid-February through March (see below). Counts twice a year will also allow an index of breeding success to be calculated (ratio of large chicks or fledglings to the earlier count of nests with eggs). Counting roosting adults in proximity to the nests should be considered, but is not essential unless Diamond’s (1974) method of using nest:adult ratio is applied to estimate nests obscured by the tree canopy. When reporting census data a clear distinction should be made between direct counts and estimates made using this method. Monitoring of frigatebirds The most complete counts should be done at the peak of incubation, after laying is completed but before many nests have failed. For frigatebirds this raises the problem of disturbance, because during early incubation nests which are vacated are generally plundered by males seeking nesting material (Reville 1980). Clearly any census undertaken during this time should be limited to parts of the colony which can be counted from a boat 30 m or more from the nests to minimise disturbance and nest desertion. Counts made during the late chick-rearing stage, such as our count in March, are far less likely to cause nest failure because there are very few adults seeking nesting material at this time, and even if adults are flushed, the counts focus on the large chicks remaining in the nests. As a compromise we suggest the following protocol for monitoring both populations and breeding success of frigatebirds at Aldabra. The method can be adapted for use in other areas. First, make annual counts of nests during early incubation in sections (sub-colonies) of each of the three colonies. These sections should be selected to allow counting from a boat at least 30 m offshore to avoid disturbing the birds. Identify the species of adult in each nest during these incubation counts to monitor changes in the relative proportions in each colony. Second, repeat these counts of selected sub-colonies at intervals through the breeding season, or at least during the late chick-rearing phase, to provide an estimate of breeding success. Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts 245 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Third, make a complete annual count of large chicks in all three colonies during late chick-rearing (mid-February through March). This count can be converted to a total nesting population by applying the nest success in the selected sub-colonies, or can be compared with similar counts in other years without any conversions. Identify all adults present during the late chick-rearing census to confirm the distribution of species in the colonies. Monitoring the effects of tourists at the Gionnet colony should continue. Monitoring of the breeding chronology will be necessary to plan the timing of the census. Most laying in Great Frigatebirds occurs between mid-August and mid- November, but laying in Lesser Frigatebirds is more variable and prolonged, with most eggs laid between June and November (Reville 1983). Other seabirds, such as White Terns Gygis alba nesting in the mangroves, can be counted at the same time as the counts of boobies and frigatebirds, although additional effort will be needed to include tern nests not near these colonies. Using kayaks for censusing An ocean kayak proved to be an ideal platform for censusing frigatebirds and boobies nesting in mangrove trees. The shallow inlets and narrows around the colonies were easily negotiated with the kayak, which had a draught of 10-20 cm, and it could be towed or carried across shallower banks. The kayak could be used over a much wider tidal range than a larger boat with a deeper draught or motor, thus providing longer access to colonies. At low tides no boats could be used in Aldabra Atoll. The kayak could manoeuvre through the narrow channels around the colonies faster than a powered boat, reducing the time needed for censusing. A motor boat was used to carry the kayak to distant sites and provide a safety back-up. Finally, the kayak was virtually silent, greatly reducing the level of disturbance compared with a motor boat. Reville (1980) found that the noise of the motor was a significant cause of disturbance, and rowed or punted a dinghy around the frigatebird colonies to reduce disturbance. Wind and rough water can limit travel by kayak, even in the lagoon. Most of our censusing was done along sheltered shores but required travel across exposed or open water. An ocean kayak, with a covered deck and sealed spray-skirt, permitted travel in choppy water where an open canoe or small rowing boat would be risky. Kayaking experience, a two-way radio, and supporting motor boat are essential safety requirements for this work. Acknowledgements Research by AEB in Seychelles was funded by a grant from the Second Dutch Trust Fund to BirdLife Seychelles. MB was the warden of Aldabra, employed by the Seychelles Islands Foundation. We thank the following for their important contributions to this project: logistics manager Susan Barclay, boatman Philip Baccus, ranger Tony Jupiter, and other staff and volunteers on Aldabra for logistical support, boat transport, advice and friendship; Ross Wanless (University of Cape Town), Rachel Wiseman, and Jacques Harter for assistance and companionship at the field camp; Ross Wanless for help in counting boobies; David Rowat and the crew of the M.V. “Indian Ocean Explorer” for a very pleasant and rewarding voyage by AEB; the director, Nirmal Jivan Shah, Alan E. Burger & Michael Betts 246 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) project manager Kirsten Henri, and staff of BirdLife Seychelles for their support and encouragement; Lindsay Chong-Seng, the director of the Seychelles Islands Foundation, for permission for AEB to work on Aldabra and other assistance; and Anthony Cheke, Tony Diamond and Chris Feare for helpful comments on an earlier manuscript. References Buckley, P. A. & Buckley, F. G. 2000. The role of helicopters in seabird censusing. In Schreiber, E. A. & Lee, D. S. (eds.). Status and conservation of West Indian seabirds. Society of Caribbean Ornithology, Special Publication No. 1:134-147. Carboneras, C. 1992. Family Sulidae (Gannets and Boobies). In Del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world, Vol. 1. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, pp. 312-325. Cheke, A. S. 2001. Booby Sula colonies in the Mascarene area (Indian Ocean): extinctions, myths and colour morphs. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 121: 71-80 Diamond, A. W. 1971. The ecology of the sea birds of Aldabra. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 260: 561-571. Diamond, A. W. 1974. The Red-footed Booby on Aldabra Atoll, Indian Ocean. Ardea 62: 196- D ls: Diamond, A. W. 1975. Biology and behaviour of Frigatebirds Fregata SpP. on Aldabra Atoll. Jbis 1.17:302-323. Diamond, A. W. 1979. Dynamic ecology of Aldabran seabird communities. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 286:231-240. Feare, C. J. 1978. The decline of Booby (Sulidae) populations in the western Indian Ocean. Biol. Conservation 14:295-305. Harris, M. P. & Lloyd, C. S. 1977. Variations in counts of seabirds from photographs. Brit. Birds 70:200-205. Le Corre, M. 1999. Plumage polymorphism of red- fare boobies (Sula sula) in the western Indian Ocean: an indicator of biogeographic isolation. J. Zool., Lond. 249:411-415. Orta, J. 1992. Family Fregatidae (Frigatebirds). In Del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world, Vol. 1. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, pp. 362-372. Reville, B. J. 1980. Spatial and temporal aspects of breeding in the frigatebirds Fregata minor and F. ariel. Ph.D. thesis, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, U.K. Reville, B. J. 1983. Numbers of nesting frigatebirds, Fregata minor and F. ariel, on Aldabra Atoll Nature Reserve, Seychelles. Biol. Conservation 27:59-76. Rocamora, G. & Skerrett, A. 2001. Inventory of important bird areas of the Republic of Seychelles. In Fishpool, L. (ed.) Important Bird Areas of Africa. BirdLife International, Cambridge, U.K. Stoddart, D. R. 1984. Breeding seabirds of the Seychelles and adjacent islands. In Stoddart, D. R. (ed.). Biogeography and ecology of the Seychelles Islands. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, The Hague, pp 575-592. Addresses: Alan E. Burger, BirdLife Seychelles, P. O. Box 1310, Mont Fleuri, Mahé, Seychelles. Present address: Department of Biology, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, V8W 3N5, Canada. e-mail:aburger@uvic.ca. Michael Betts, Aldabra Research Station, Seychelles Islands Foundation, P. O. Box 853, Victoria, Mahé, Seychelles. Present address: 73 College Street, Cleethorpes, Lincolnshire, UK. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Louis Lefebvre et al. 247 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Novel food use by Grey Kingbirds and Red-necked Pigeons in Barbados by Louis Lefebvre, Simon M. Reader & Sandra 7. Webster Received 28 Fuly 2000 The frequency with which birds adopt feeding innovations may be a good operational measure of behavioural flexibility (Lefebvre et al. 1997), but its usefulness depends upon accurate recording of novel behaviour patterns and new food sources. We describe here two instances of feeding innovations in birds of Barbados: consumption of maize spillage at a harbour warehouse by Red-necked Pigeons Columba squamosa and “bread-hunting” by Grey Kingbirds Tyrannus dominicensis. The Red-necked Pigeon is a frugivorous West-Indian Columbid that, according to Goodwin (1983), is largely, if not entirely, an arboreal feeder. In over 15 years of field work in Barbados, we have never seen it join the ground-feeding Columbids that forage on seed and food scraps in urban and coastal areas (the Zenaida Dove Zenaida aurita and the Common Ground Dove Columbina passerina) or on grain spillage at the harbour (Z. aurita and the Feral Pigeon Columba livia)(Dolman et al. 1996). On 25 January 2000, a single adult C. sguamosa was observed perching in late afternoon on a warehouse ledge in the Barbados Mills compound, Deep Water Harbour, close to Zenaida Doves that roost there overnight. The Red-necked Pigeon was later seen perching on a barbed wire fence in front of the warehouse, then feeding on the ground on whole kernels of maize that had been spilled from a truck. Raffaele et al. (1998) stated that, aside from its dietary specialisation on arboreal frugivory, C. squamosa sometimes feeds opportunistically on the ground at dairy farms. This is the first report that such opportunistic ground feeding may include spillage at a harbour warehouse, a site that offers an abundant food source often exploited by Columbids (Murton et al. 1972; Lévesque & McNeil 1986), at the risk of frequent disturbance by humans and machinery, which the “very wary” (Devas 1970) Red- necked Pigeon normally avoids. Our second observation, “bread-hunting” by Grey Kingbirds, occurred at food patches set out to attract five other avian species in the field: Carib Grackles Quiscalus lugubris, Lesser-Antillean Bullfinches Loxigilla noctis, Shiny Cowbirds Molothrus bonariensis), Zenaida Doves and Common Ground Doves (Webster & Lefebvre in press). In urbanised coastal areas of Barbados, these five species feed together routinely on bread and other food scraps (Dolman et a/. 1996). Island birds sometimes have broader niches than their continental counterparts, with birds on many islands being relatively tame, allowing them to respond rapidly to new food sources. From 16 to 26 January 2000, we conducted field experiments that presented bread, rice and seed to these species at six sites in three adjacent areas of the parish of St- James, Barbados. Grey Kingbirds often feed in the vicinity of the five species but have never been seen to join them in over 15 years of similar field experiments. In the Louis Lefebvre et al. 248 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) January 2000 experiments, however, kingbirds were observed on 25 occasions to take bread from the patches, using their normal insect hunting technique. The kingbirds (usually one, but up to three individuals) typically perched on a low branch of the tree nearest to the patch, swooped down very rapidly to take a piece of bread without landing, and then flew back to the branch to eat the bread. Only larger (1 cm’) pieces were taken. On many trials, more than a dozen birds from the five usual species fed at the 30 cm diameter patch; kingbirds sometimes failed to feed on these trials, hovering over the food and swooping down without picking up bread, or simply perching on a nearby branch, looking down at the patch. On three occasions, a kingbird picked up bread that had been moved away from the patch by a grackle and on one occasion, in June 1999 (field experiments with similar patches; Webster & Lefebvre in press), the bread was clearly kleptoparasitised from a grackle’s beak. No attacks were seen at the patch itself, despite the interspecific aggression known to be frequently used by 7. dominicensis (Raffaele et al. 1998), but other species often appeared defensive during a kingbird swoop. Zenaida Doves, for example, directed raised wing threats at the swooping kingbird. Kingbirds were also seen (in March 2000) chasing a flying bullfinch and grackle that were carrying bread, swooping down on birds emerging from a baited trap and then retrieving the dropped bread, and (in April 2000) kleptoparasitising bread from a bullfinch. In April and May 2000, perching kingbirds were thrown bread and observed catching it in mid-air on several occasions. Kingbirds normally specialise on catching insects in flight, as well as taking other invertebrates, lizards, berries and, more rarely, small fish (ffrench 1991; Lefebvre & Spahn 1987; Raffaele et al. 1998). They are not reported to eat bread or other food scraps (Evans 1990; Raffaele et al. 1998; Voous 1983). In fact, the only interaction we could find in the literature between a Tyrannid flycatcher, an Eastern Wood Peewee Contopus virens, and bread specifically describes rejection of this food (Wyat & Stoneburner 1978). Our observation adds one more case to the large anecdotal literature on bread as a novel food type in birds (Baugniet et al. 1978; Bernard 1976, 1985, 1986, 1988; Hammer 1978; Hastwell 1975; Jacobs 1972; Kington 1975; Osborne 1981; Owen 1973; Reynolds 1974). Acknowledgements This work was funded by an NSERC grant to LL and a Commander C. Bellairs postdoctoral fellowship to SMR. We are grateful to Simran Kurir for her help with the German language literature. References: Baugniet, S., Lhoest, S. & van Esbroek, J. 1978. Curieux comportement d’une Fauvette a téte noire (Sylvia atricapilla). Aves 15: 33 Bernard, K. 1976. Rooks taking food from dust bins. Brit. Birds 69: 507 Bernard, K. 1985. Pied-billed grebe feeding on bread. Fla. Field Nat. 13: 19 Bernard, K. 1986. A Great egret feeding on bread. Fla. Field Nat. 14: 20 Bernard, K. 1988. Sanderlings flocking with Turnstone to take bread. Brit. Birds 81: 180 Devas, R. P. 1970. Birds of Grenada, St-Vincent and the Grenadines. Careenage Press, St- George’s. Louis Lefebvre et al. 249 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Dolman, C. S., Templeton, J. C. & Lefebvre. L. 1996. Mode of foraging competition is related to tutor preference in Zenaida aurita. J. Comp. Psychol. 110: 45-54. Evans, P. 1990. Birds of the Eastern Caribbean. Macmillan, London. ffrench, R. 1991. A Guide to the Birds of Trinidad and Tobago. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca. Goodwin, D.G. 1983. Pigeons and doves of the world, 3rd edition. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca. Hammer, U. 1978. Brotfiitterung fiir Alpenstrandlatifer. Ornithol. Mitteil. 30: 73. Hastwell, K. 1975. Food of White-throated treecreeper. Aust. Birdwat. 6: 132. Jacobs, H. 1972. Aufnahme von Brotkrumen durch steinwalzer (Arenaria interpres). Ornithol. Mitteil. 24: 199. Kington, B. C. 1975. Kittiwake taking bread from hand. Brit. Birds 68: 245. Lefebvre, L., Whittle, P., Lascaris, E. & Finkelstein, A. 1997. Feeding innovations and forebrain size in birds. Anim. Behav. 53:549-560. Lefebvre, L., & Spahn, D. 1987. Grey Kingbird predation on small fish (Poecilia spp) crossing a sandbar. Wilson Bull. 99: 291-292. Lévesque, H., & McNeil, R. 1986. Déplacements du pigeon biset (Columba livia) dans le Vieux- Port de Montréal. Nat. Can. 113: 47-54. Murton, R. K., Coombs, C. F. B., & Thearle, M. J. B. 1972. Ecological studies of the feral pigeon Columba livia var. I: Flock behaviour and social organisation. J. Appl. Ecol. 9: 875-899. Osborne, K. 1981. Adult Skylark feeding juvenile with bread. Brit. Birds 74: 98. Owen, C. 1973. Little Grebe eating bread. Brit. Birds 66: 227. Raffaele, H., Wiley, J., Garrido, O., Keith, A., & Raffaele, J. 1998. A guide to the birds of the West Indies. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton. Reynolds, J. F. 1974. White-fronted bee-eater apparently taking bread. E. Afr. Nat. Hist. Soc. Bull., September 1974: 115. Voous, K. H. 1983. Birds of the Netherlands Antilles. De Warlburg Pers, Utrecht. Webster, S. & Lefebvre, L. In press. Problem solving and neophobia in a Columbiforme- Passeriforme assemblage in Barbados. Anim. Behav. Wyat, R. & Stoneburner, A. H. 1978. Feeding and nesting behaviour of the Eastern Wood Pewee. The Chat 42: 59. Address: Louis Lefebvre, Simon M. Reader & Sandra J. Webster, Department of Biology, McGill University, 1205, avenue Docteur Penfield, Montréal, Québec, H3A 1B1 Canada. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Comments on George F. Gaumer and the provenance of a Giant Kingbird Tyrannus cubensis specimen from Mexico by R Wilham Smith Received 22 August 2000 The Giant Kingbird Tyrannus cubensis is currently considered a rare and endangered species endemic to Cuba (Collar et al. 1994, AOU 1998). In the 19" century it may have been commoner and more widespread. Prior to 1890 several specimens were collected in the southern Bahama islands (summarized by Buden 1987), and one was claimed for Isla Mujeres, off the eastern coast of the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico, by PR Wiliam Smith 250 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Salvin (1889) and other contemporaneous authors. The basis of the latter record is a specimen in The Natural History Museum, Tring, UK (BMNH 1888.1.1.1691) dated 25 February 1886, attributed to George F. Gaumer. This record has recently been considered “questionable” (e.g. AOU 1998). George F. Gaumer (1850-1929) was an American physician/naturalist, originally from Kansas, who resided primarily in the State of Yucatan, Mexico, during the latter part of the 19" and the early 20" centuries (Parkes 1970). According to his letters on file in the zoology library of The Natural History Museum, London, which I recently reviewed, Gaumer was commissioned in late 1885 by Osbert Salvin and Frederick Godman to undertake a collecting expedition to the Bay Islands of Honduras. Gaumer, who then practised medicine near Mérida, proposed to stop en route at various Mexican islands, particularly Holbox and Mujeres, from which little material had been collected previously. His party, including Gaumer’s wife and others, departed in November 1885 and was shortly beset by disease. They lingered on Isla Mujeres in December 1885, before heading for Isla Cozumel, where Gaumer had collected earlier in 1885 for Salvin and Godman, and where he had previously established a base. Gaumer hoped that his party could recuperate there before continuing. After returning to Isla Mujeres briefly in February 1886, his group continued on to Roatan in the Bay Islands, despite the fact that illness continued to dog them. Evidently, Gaumer had to spend more time during this period tending to himself and others than directly in collecting, although he did prepare the specimens, which included insects and plants as well as birds, brought to him by members of his party and others. In July 1886, he dispatched a batch of material to Salvin which included over 700 birds, 142 from Isla Mujeres. The birds each contained a tag rubber-stamped with Gaumer’s name, and the island and month where the specimen was collected or received and then prepared. A serial number, which evidently cross-referenced a separately enclosed log of the material, was also hand-written on the tags. Gaumer asked Salvin to identify the material item-by-item and offered more detailed notes as needed. Later, Gaumer dispatched additional material in a similar fashion. He remained based in the Bay Islands until 1887, and in 1888 he wrote to Salvin from Mexico thanking him for finally responding with identifications of the specimens he had sent. Salvin and Godman attached their own tags to each avian specimen, preprinted with the stamped information from Gaumer’s tags. For the specimens from Isla Mujeres, the date on the new tags was preprinted “December 1885” regardless of whether Gaumer’s tags were stamped “December” (1885, the vast majority) or “February” (1886, a minority). This discrepancy still remains on the tags of all February specimens that I examined, where Gaumer’s tag also remains attached, but for one. The single exception to this pattern that I noted involves the specimen of 7yrannus cubensis (then 7. magnirostris) mentioned above, which was accessioned in the Museum’s catalogue among a large batch of Gaumer’s material. This specimen’s tags differ from the others in that “December” is crossed out on Salvin and Godman’s tag, replaced by “Feb. 25, 1886”, and “25, iris brown” is hand-written after Gaumer’s “February” stamp. I found none of Gaumer’s other tags that still remain from that expedition so annotated. P William Smith 251 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Evidently, someone then recognized the significance of this particular specimen. That person is unlikely to have been Gaumer, whose correspondence shows little expertise in identification or avifaunal matters. Although Gaumer did collect in Cuba in the late 1870’s for A. Boucard, many of the specimens he secured there are now also in The Natural History Museum, Tring, and show relatively primitive preparation skills. They contain no examples of 7: cubensis. This specimen’s significance was most likely recognised by Salvin, Godman, or one of their associates after its arrival in England, the additional information being taken from Gaumer’s log or notes. Salvin’s (1889) paper about Gaumer’s collection states the date (Feb. 25, 1886), as well as the fact that the species is generally considered confined to Cuba, showing that the specimen’s importance was known at least shortly after its arrival at the museum. This record of T. cubensis for Mexico stood essentially unquestioned until Howell & Webb (1995) placed it in their hypothetical category, apparently based on Gaumer’s reputation among North American museum curators for careless and sloppy labelling (Parkes 1970). This is also presumably the basis for its recent questioning by AOU (1998), for they had not done so previously (AOU 1983). Gaumer’s questionable | reputation may have originated from remarks by Paynter (1955), who doubted the location of a number of Gaumer’s specimens, particularly those of the Plain Chachalaca Ortalis vetula from the various Mexican islands to which Gaumer attributed them. Yet, Paynter (1955) acknowledged that some of Gaumer’s unexpected locations had been confirmed by himself or other collectors (e.g. Black-throated Blue Warbler Dendroica caerulescens), and that some of Paynter’s own specimens (e.g. Ochre- bellied Flycatcher Mionectes oleagineus then Pipromorpha oleaginea) would not stand up to the level of scrutiny he applied to Gaumer’s. Inasmuch as Gaumer acknowledges in his correspondence that on this trip he prepared specimens brought to him by others, it seems reasonable to believe that some of them may have come from nearby locations. Although I failed to locate Gaumer’s log or his more detailed notes at The Natural History Museum, no good reason seems to exist to doubt the overall provenance of this specimen. If Gaumer’s 1885-6 collection contained other specimens of apparent Cuban origin, one might have more reason to be suspicious. One cannot be certain, however, that 1888.1.1.1691 was secured on Isla Mujeres itself rather than at some nearby place. Gaumer acknowledged that he did not collect many of his specimens himself during that period, and the month and location on his tags seem to reflect when and where the specimen was received and prepared, not necessarily collected. It seems improbable, however, that only this particular specimen would have been brought across the Yucatan Channel from Cuba, some 200 km to the northeast, in an unprepared state. Collectively, Gaumer’s letters suggest a man of integrity and honourable intentions, so deliberate fakery seems far-fetched. Furthermore, as Salvin (1889) recognized, T: cubensis by then had established a pattern of appearing in the southern Bahamas at least during the winter months (Buden 1987). Thus a record at that season directly across the Yucatan Channel from the Cuban mainland does not strain credulity. PR William Smith pap) Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Whilst history may not be kind to Gaumer because of the apparent lack of detail and precision on some of his labels (Parkes 1970), I believe that this record should stand as credible evidence of the Giant Kingbird’s once-wider range, to include the North American continent, even if the precise location where this particular specimen was taken is considered somewhat uncertain. Given the species’ modern rarity (Collar etal. 1994), itis unlikely to be known whether the Giant Kingbird formerly had a wider breeding range, or merely wandered beyond Cuba during the non-breeding season. Acknowledgements At The Natural History Museum, Ann Datta (London); Robert Prys-Jones, Michael Walters, and Effie Warr (Tring), provided considerable assistance throughout this project. Richard Banks and Steve Howell offered useful comments, and Joann Constantides of the Josselyn Van Tyne Memorial Library of the Wilson Ornithological Society secured needed literature. I thank them all. References: AOU. 1983. Check-list of North American birds, 6" ed. American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. AOU. 1998. Check-list of North American birds, 7" ed. American Ornihalor mts Union, Washington, D.C. Buden, D.W. 1987. The birds of the southern Bahamas. BOU Check-list No. 8, Tring. Collar, N.J., Crosby, M.J. & Stattersfield, A.J. 1994. Birds to watch 2: the world list of threatened birds. BirdLife Conservation Series No. 4, Cambridge, UK. Howell, S.N.G. & Webb, S. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and northern Central America. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford. Parkes, K.C. 1970. On the validity of some supposed “first state records” from Yucatan. Wilson Bull. 82: 92-95. Paynter, R.A., Jr. 1955. The ornithogeography of the Yucatan Peninsula. Bull. Peabody Mus. Nat. Hist. No. 9. Salvin, O. 1889. A list of the birds of the islands of the coast of Yucatan and the Bay of Honduras [based on a collection by George F. Gaumer]. Part 2. /bis 31: 359-379. Address: P.O. Box 1992, Ocean Shores, Washington 98569, USA © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 The Fawn-breasted Brilliant Heltodoxa rubinoides, a hummingbird species new to Bolivia by Swen C. Renner & Karl-L. Schuchmann Received 22 August 2000 The Fawn-breasted Brilliant Heliodoxa rubinoides is a polytypic medium-sized hummingbird (length 11-13 cm, body mass c. 7-10 g) without marked sexual dimorphism. It is widespread from the Andes of Colombia to Ecuador and Peru (Fig. 1). Swen C. Renner & Karl-L. Schuchmann 253 Bull BeOvEn 2001 1204) Here we report its first occurrence from Bolivia at Cocapata, c. 1,000 km south of its presently known range. Material and methods We studied 80% of the available scientific material, 1.e., 125 H. rubinoides specimens from Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and one recently discovered specimen from Bolivia. Morphometric measurements, e.g., bill length, wing length and fork of tail (difference between inner and outermost rectrix), taken with a digital caliper, were compared statistically (Man-Whitney U-test, p < 0.05). We analyzed plumage patterns by means of an illuminating magnifying glass (x 10) under constant artificial light conditions. Descriptions of colours (capitalized, numbers in brackets) refer to Smithe (1975). Description and distribution of Heliodoxa rubinoides subspecies Three subspecies of Heliodoxa rubinoides are presently recognized, showing the following differences: FH. r. rubinoides: Bill of males and females black, thick, almost straight. Males dorsally Parrot Green [160], rectrices and upper tail coverts Olive Green [48] with Cinnamon [39] rachis. Wings Sepia Brown [119] with Cinnamon secondaries and Parrot 50% \ distribution : Heliodoxa rubinoides rubinoides b> COLOMBIA. _WBNEZUELA : Heliodoxa r. aequatorialis } anh abe : Heliodoxa r. cervinigularis : : status unknown international border mountains > 1,000 ma.s.l. 400 km ! <<. ~Chanchamaye eS Aputinye BOLIVIA = Gocapata Figure |. Distribution of Heliodoxa rubinoides. The new location in Bolivia (Cocapata) and the formerly southernmost localities (Chanchamayo, Aputinye) in Peru are indicated by arrows. Swen C. Renner & Karl-L. Schuchmann 254 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) TABEEM Morphometric characters of the three subspecies of Heliodoxa rubinoides, showing mean + SD and sample size (in brackets). p: significance levels of the mensural characters between subspecies, ns: not significant, (a): aequatorialis, (r): rubinoides, (c): cervinigularis. All measurements in mm, body mass in g. Taxon Sex Billlength p Tail furcation p Wing p Body mass aequatorialis S$ 27.341.3(43) 0.01 (r) 10.542.6(38) 0.02 (r) 71.242.1(43) 0.01(r) 84 -9.2 (5) @ 29.12.83) 001 @), 5421625) ns) 66.222:1(24) sas 7.7 (1) rubinoides 6 2802174(15) ns) 922423) 0.01 (ey 68:225:2(15)5 vaste) 7.4 (1) 2 3181.04) 001@, 75205). 0036), 66.5225) amis - cervinigularis S 294+1.6(12) 0.01 (a) 12.042.6(10) 0.01 (a) 70.843.7(12) 0.01 (a) 7.2, 8.0 (2) 2°. 30.7£0.9(13) 0.01) 6341.6(8) mns(a) 644+24(12) us) 72 =o) Specimen from Bolivia 3 27.8 iy WS - Green wing coverts. Chin Parrot Green, throat centre with a small circular iridescent Vinaceous [3] patch. Ventral side Cinnamon, Parrot Green glittering discs on flank and chin. Immature females lack metallic throat patch, appearing with increasing age and always smaller than that of males. Chin and belly Cinnamon mostly without green discs. Immatures of both sexes similar to adult female but completely lack iridescent throat patch. H. r. aequatorialis: Similar to nominate race except wing coverts are Cinnamon. H. r. cervinigularis: Similar to nominate race, except for larger size and homogeneously Parrot Green flanks. Mensural characteristics and body masses of these subspecies are given in Table 1. Habitat and geographical distribution Heliodoxa rubinoides is found at Andean elevations between 1,500 and 2,700 m in Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. Records from the southwestern Cordillera in Colombia suggest vertical movements to altitudes below 1,000 m (Hilty & Brown 1986). H. rubinoides is uncommon and mostly local throughout its distributional range (Chapman 1917). The nominate race inhabits humid mountain ranges and paramos of Huila, Cauca, Santander, and forest fragments in Antioquia, Colombia. H. 1 aequatorialis occurs in cloud forests of the eastern Cordillera of Narifio, Colombia, and Sucumbios, Ecuador. H. r. cervinigularis is found in similar habitats throughout the western Cordillera of Ecuador and in parts of Pasco, Huanuco, Junin, and Cuzco, Peru. The two southernmost distribution records of H. r cervinigularis are from Chanchamayo, depto. Junin (11°03’S, 75°19’ W) (Hilty & Brown 1986, Fjeldsa & Krabbe 1990, Schuchmann 1999) and from Aputinye, depto. Cuzco (13°00’S, 72°32’W), both Swen C. Renner & Karl-L. Schuchmann 255 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) in Peru (one specimen, Senckenberg Museum Frankfurt, # 915, leg. J. Kalinowsk1, July 1890; sight records, Parker & O’Neill 1980). From Charles Cordier, Bolivia, our institute in Bonn obtained in 1982 a specimen of H. rubinoides from Cocapata (16°57’S, 66°43’W), north of Cochabamba (adult male, ZFMK # 84.113), Bolivia. The specimen is attributable to the subspecies cervinigularis since all morphological and mensural characters lie within the range of this taxon (Table 1). Charles Cordier collected this specimen at an elevation of c. 3,000 m in Polylepis forest. The Bolivian record signifies a considerable range extension (1,000 km south of Aputinye, Cuzco, Peru), and according to Remsen & Traylor (1989) and Remsen (pers. comm.) is the first for Bolivia (see Fig. 1). The apparent geographical discontinuity between the Peruvian and the Bolivian distribution is most likely due to low collecting activities along the western Andean ranges of these countries (Stephens & Traylor 1983, Paynter 1992). Acknowledgements For loaning specimens under their care we thank: N. Rice, The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Philadelphia; P. Sweet, The American Museum of Natural History, New York; D. Willard, The Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago; C. Cicero, Museum of Vertabrate Zoology Berkeley, Berkeley; M. Robbins, Natural History Museum Kansas, Kansas; J. Hinshaw, Museum of Zoology Michigan, Michigan; G. Mayr, Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuseum Senckenberg, Frankfurt; S. Frahnert, Museum fiir Naturkunde Berlin, Berlin; G. Veron, Museum Histoire Naturelle de Paris, Paris; M. Adams, Natural History Museum, Tring; R. Winkler, Naturhistorisches Museum Basel, Basel; C. Bracker, Zoologisches Museum Hamburg, Hamburg; and J. Fjeldsa, Zoologisk Museum, Kobenhaven. The American Museum of Natural History, New York, provided a Collection Study Grant to S. C. R. and K.-L. S, and the Jessup and McHenry Fund of The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, supported S.C. R References: Chapman, F. M. 1917. Distribution of bird-life in Colombia. American Museum of Natural History, New York. Fjeldsa, J.. & Krabbe, N. 1990. Birds of the high Andes. Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen. Hilty, S. L., & Brown, W. L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia. Princton University Press. Parker, T. A., & O’Neill, J. P. 1980. Notes on little known birds of the upper Urubamba Valley, southern Peru. Auk 97: 167-176. Remsen, J. V., & Traylor, M. A. 1989. An annotated list of the birds of Bolivia. Buteo Books, Vermillion, South Dakota. Schuchmann, K.-L. 1999. Family Trochilidae (Hummingbirds). Pp. 468-680 in: del Hoyo, J., Elliot, A., & J. Sargatal (eds.): Handbook of the birds of the world, Vol. V, Lynx, Barcelona. Smithe, F. B. 1975. Naturalist’s color guide. American Museum of Natural History, New York. Address: Swen C. Renner, Karl-L. Schuchmann (e-mail: kl.schuchmann.zfmk@un1i-bonn.de) Alexander Koenig Research Institute and Museum Zoology, Research Group: Biology and Phylogeny of Tropical Birds, Adenauerallee 160, 53113 Bonn, Germany. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Yoshika Ontki et al. 256 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Roosting site of the Sombre Hummingbird Campylopterus cirrochloris (Trochilidae) in southern Bahia, Brazil byYoshika Ontki, Karl-L. Schuchmann, Edwin O. Willis, Tomas Sigrist & Gérard Baudet Received 18 September 2000 Ornithologists have rarely discovered hummingbirds at their roosting sites. Trochilids of highland Andean regions (e. g., Oxypogon and Oreotrochilus sp., see Schuchmann 1999) shelter at night in caves or under overhanging vegetation. Sleeping places of the Rufous-tailed Hummingbird Amazilia tzacatl are protected by leaves (Skutch 1931), whereas the Long- billed Starthroat Heliomaster longirostris roosts on exposed thin twigs of treetops (Skutch 1972). Here we report on a nocturnal roosting site of the Sombre Hummingbird Campylopterus cirrochloris (taxonomy follows Schuchmann 1999) in southern Bahia, Brazil. During field work at Fazenda Jueirana, an area of evergreen lowland forest (c. 15° 17'S, 39° 04' W) and next to the Una Biological Reserve in southern Bahia, Brazil, at 1645 hon 16 February 2000, we saw a Sombre Hummingbird arrive on an isolated horizontal shoot of a vine c. 13 m above the ground, over a dirt road. Perching with head southwest, it gave a long (several minutes) and loud series of chipping notes. It then settled with its body at an angle of c. 30° above horizontal, with belly feathers covering its feet. The head was tilted up, with the bill 60° above horizontal (Fig. 1). A vine leaf near its head provided camouflage and, perhaps, some Figure 1. A Sombre Hummingbird Campylopterus protection from rain. Willis, Sigrist and cirrochloris roosting under leaves. Drawing by Baudet noted that the bird was still _ T. Sigrist. present when dark (1827 h). We returned to the place the next day at 1725 h. The hummingbird was already calling as before, perched a few centimeters out from the previous day. A vine leaf now sheltered the hummingbird from above. From 1752 h on the bird became silent and immobile with its head angled up. Another hummingbird (species unidentified) was still searching for food nearby. Yoshika Oniki et al. 257 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) When dark (1825 h) a Reddish Hermit Phaethornis ruber was still active. The rather early roosting of the Sombre Hummingbird could be related to the bird hunting habits of pygmy owls. We heard the Least Pygmy-Owl Glaucidium minutissimum calling nearby as early as 1729 h. Acknowledgements We thank the Volkswagen Foundation (grant no. I/70 451) for financial support of our field work, and the owner of Fazenda Jueirana, Mr. Antonio Leiva, and his workers for their hospitality. Publication no. 19 of the Institute for Studies of Nature, Rio Claro, Brazil. References: Schuchmann, K.-L. 1999. Family Trochilidae (Hummingbirds). Pp. 468-680 in: del Hoyo, J., Elliot, A. & Sargatal (eds.). Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 5. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Skutch, A. F. 1931. Life history of Rieffer’s Hummingbird (Amazilia tzacatl) in Panama and Honduras. Auk 48: 481-500. Skutch, A. F. 1972. Studies of tropical American birds. Publ. Nuttall Orn. Cl. 10. Cambridge, Mass. Addresses: Dr. E. O. Willis and Dr. Y. Oniki, Departamento de Zoologia, UNESP, C. P. 199, 13.506-900 Rio Claro, SP, Brazil; E. O. Willis, Y. Oniki, T. Sigrist and G. Baudet, Institute for Studies of Nature, Rua 2 no. 2272, 13.500-153 Rio Claro, SP. Brazil; Dr. K.-L. Schuchmann, Museum A. Koenig, Adenauerallee 160, D-53113 Bonn, Germany. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 A new subspecies of Red Knot Calidris canutus from the New Siberian islands by Pavel S. Tomkovich Received 20 September 2000 The Red Knot has a largely disjunct arctic breeding range, with different subspecies described from several of the mostly discrete breeding areas (e.g. Piersma & Davidson 1992, Engelmoer & Roselaar 1998). Red Knots breeding in the Palearctic generally have been assigned to only one, the nominate canutus (e.g. Vaurie 1965, Johnsgard 1981), or two subspecies: canutus from the Taimyr peninsula and rogersi from further east - Wrangel island (e.g. Kozlova 1962, Portenko 1972) and, more recently, also Chukotka (Stepanyan 1975, Kistchinski 1988). Tomkovich (1990, 1992) further separated the easterly populations, assigning birds from only Chukotka to rogersi, with Wrangel island birds being grouped with Alaska breeding birds as subspecies roselaari. This subspecies is believed to migrate to the Americas, whereas rogersi migrates to Australia and New Zealand. Pavel S. Tomkovich 258 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) The subspecific status of Red Knots breeding on the New Siberian (Novosibirskie) islands, geographically central between the other Siberian breeding areas, has been the subject of debate. Roselaar (in Cramp & Simmons 1983) was uncertain as to which subspecies these birds belonged, but mapped them as rogersi (Roselaar 1983). Their short bill and wing length (measured from museum specimens) indicated closer similarity to birds from Chukotka (rogers) than Taimyr (canutus) (Stepanyan 1990, Tomkovich 1990, 1992, Engelmoer & Roselaar 1998). Stepanyan (1990) and Engelmoer & Roselaar (1998) assigned Red Knots from the New Siberian islands to rogersi. However, Tomkovich (1990, 1992) found no plumage differences between specimens from Taimyr and New Siberian islands, but these birds did differ from the more easterly populations in having darker rufous on their upper body parts. On these grounds he retained New Siberian Island birds in canutus, but suggested that they migrate to the Pacific coasts of Asia/Australasia where they would co-occur with rogersi. Ringing data have recently confirmed that birds from the New Siberian islands spend their non-breeding season in north-western Australia (Lindstrom et al. 1999) and probably also New Zealand (Anon. 2000). This is in contrast to canutus from Taimyr which migrate through western Europe to West Africa (e.g. Piersma et al. 1992, Tomkovich et al. 2000). During the 1990s a larger number of study skins, along with a recovery of a ringed bird, from the New Siberian islands have become available. This permits a reappraisal TABLE 1 Bill length and wing length (mm) variation in three Siberian breeding populations of Red Knots, based on museum skins. Bill Wing Range Mean SDE, 7 an Range Mean S:Dag, Sn Males C. c. canutus Taimyr Peninsula 29.0 — 36.1 33.27 1.99 30 158 - 171 163.75).°°3307eee C. c. piersmai New Siberian Is. 29.0 — 317.6 30.19 0.86 13 150-166 157.45” S43GGRm C. c. rogersi Chukotka 28.7,—,33.5. 31.78 .. 1.54 105, 157 - 166 Gl: SOR Sele aee Females C. c. canutus Taimyr, Peninsula )e932-5¢5893h) 3535p aay ZeO0e a2 163-1735) 167.33. .%3.30 nee C. c. piersmai New Siberian Is. 330-1 34:49) 632.97) O28 OR R29 158: -9173) vh63107e 25723 eae C. c. rogersi Chukotka 3.1.6°=:35 3) S352). initia 9 162-170 165256 278 ee Pavel S. Tomkovich 259 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) of the subspecific status of Red Knots from the New Siberian islands. On the basis of plumage characteristics, morphometrics and migration routes differing from Taimyr canutus birds, and plumage and morphometric differences from Chukotka rogersi, this population is sufficiently distinct as to warrant separate subspecific status. The type specimen of the subspecies rogersi is an adult male in breeding plumage collected in spring from Shanghai, China (Japan at the time of description) (Mathews 1913). Since it is now known that birds breeding on both New Siberian islands and on Chukotka use this migration route there is some uncertainly as to which population this type specimen belongs. Tomkovich (1990) and Tomkovich & Serra (1999) confirmed that the original description of rogersi matches the plumage characteristics of the Chukotka population, contra the ‘preference’ of Engelmoer & Roselaar (1998) “to consider the Knots from New Siberian islands as rogersi’. Furthermore the original description of ‘hind-neck grey with dark shaft-lines’ agrees with the colouration pattern of Chukotka birds but not that of New Siberian birds. Specimens of Red Knots from the New Siberian islands held by the Zoological Museum of Moscow State University (ZMMU), Russia were used for detailed description of plumage characteristics. Comparisons of morphometrics were made using these specimens plus specimens in the Zoological Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia, measured previously by the author. Most specimens of Red Knots from the New Siberian islands are adults, collected in the period 5 June to 10 July. All plumage comparisons with other subspecies were made with birds collected during this same period of the year. Standard measurement techniques (e.g. Prater 1977) were used, with the exception that wing length was measured by pressing the wing against a ruler without straightening the wing (i.e. the flattened chord), so as to avoid risk of damage to the specimens. Sexes were compared separately since Red Knots have some sexual size and plumage dimorphism (e.g. Tomkovich 1992, Engelmoer & Roselaar 1998). Plumage colours were described according to Smithe (1974, 1975, 1981), with the number of each colour indicated in brackets in the following description. Calidris canutus piersmai subsp. nov. Holotype Specimen no. R-81642, ZMMU, preserved as a study skin: adult male collected on 5 June 1956 at Bolshoy Lyakhovsky island, New Siberian archipelago by V. D. Lebedev (Plate 1). Collector’s label contains the following information (in Russian): Phalaropus fulicarius male, island B. Lyakhovsky, southern coast, 5/V1.56. Coll. Lebedev V. Paratypes Nine specimens in ZMMU. Two adult females from the same locality as the holotype: R-81640 collected on 11 June 1956 by V. R. Filin and R-81641 collected on 14 June 1956 by V. D. Lebedev (sex of the latter bird with “?”’). One adult female (R-114065) collected on 2 August 1994 at SW Kotelny island by E. E. Syroechkovski, Jr. Four males (R- 114050-051, 066, 127) and two females (R-114052-053) collected on 10 July 1994 at western Faddeyevsky island by E. E. Syroechkovski, Jr. and Y. A. Red’kin. One Pavel S. Tomkovich 260 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) WECM Mseas 43 e balan Poona rmsecin Myse# Mocxoncroro Vunenepenrera ries ris Caniulus pb Plate 1. Holotype of Calidris canutus piersmai subsp. nov. Upper, dorsal and lower, ventral aspects Pavel S. Tomkovich 261 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) more specimen, male collected together with the latter birds on 10 July 1994 by Y. A. Red’kin, is deposited at The Natural History Museum, Tring (no. 2000.4.1). Description of holotype Crown, nape, mantle and scapulars mostly Sepia (119) with slight green and violet polish, mottled with Kingfisher Rufous (240), although some scapular feathers are Vandyke Brown (121) and some ‘rufous’ paired subterminal spots and edges are as light as Buff (124). Some mantle feathers have ‘rufous’ edges completely worn off. ‘Rufous’ on hindneck is slightly lighter than on the crown and mantle. Tertials are of the same pattern as other upperparts, but with almost no ‘rufous’ colour. Some rump and upper tail-coverts are coloured with ‘rufous’ of different tint. Supercilium, chin, throat, foreneck, breast and belly are Robin Rufous (340), whereas vent and undertail- coverts are about half and half white and ‘rufous’ with a few blackish spots on sides. Upper greater coverts of secondaries are a little bit darker than Olive Brown (28), greater coverts of primaries and lesser coverts are Vandyke Brown (121), median coverts are a mixture of feathers of these two colours. Many of the coverts, especially greater and inner, are fringed with white. Flight feathers are quite fresh. Bill 30.3 mm, wing 153 mm, tarsus 29.0 mm. Etymology The name is given in honour of Dr. Theunis Piersma, the Dutch ornithologist most deeply devoted to various worldwide studies of the Red Knot. Diagnosis The smallest in size among world subspecies of Red Knot. Differs from C. c. rogersi by more deeply rufous colour on both upper- and underparts, presence of rufous colour on hind-neck, more black on back and lesser development of white on belly, vent and undertail. Differs from C. c. canutus by absence of contrast between upper wing coverts and darker back feathers, and by more limited white on edges of median primaries. Size and plumage comparisons The difference in both bill and wing lengths (Table 1, and Tomkovich 1990, 1992) is the least with rogersi, being insignificant in females but significant in males (¢-test: p<0.01 for bill, p<0.05 for wing), while it is well expressed in comparison with canutus (p<0.01 for bill in females and p<0.001 for bill and wing in males). Colours on the upper- and underparts of the body are the same as in canutus from Taimyr, but differ from rogersi. ‘Rufous’ edges on the upper body feathers are smaller than in rogersi and, together with paired subterminal spots, are deeper in colour, varying from Buff (124) to Kingfisher Rufous (240) or Cinnamon-Rufous (40), most often being Cinnamon (39) and Tawny (38). In rogersi these edges and spots usually are Pale Horn (92) or Warm Buff (118), sometimes of Cinnamon (39). The dorsal “rufous” colour of some canutus and rogersi specimens can be very pale, Drab-Gray (119D), or even approach white, Pearl Gray (81), but this was true of none of the available piersmai specimens. Pavel S. Tomkovich 262 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) The ‘rufous’ colour on the hindneck is similar to the crown and back, being only slightly lighter, unlike rogersi in which the hindneck is typically without ‘rufous’ colour. The underparts vary in colour from occasional True Cinnamon (139) to more typical Robin Rufous (340), generally richer than in rogersi, which is usually True Cinnamon although varying from Pale Pinkish Buff (121D) to Robin Rufous (340). White on the belly, vent and undertail is less developed than in rogersi, and in males always with a varying number of Tawny (38) feathers among the undertail coverts (few rogersi birds have these). Apart from size, differs from Taimyr canutus by colouration of wing. Main colour of upper wing coverts (apart from greater coverts and a number of bright feathers which moulted in the pre-breeding period in some specimens) is usually Vandyke Brown (121) or sometimes paler Drab (27), thus being on average darker than the Glaucous (79) colour of most canutus birds (some may have Vandyke Brown). As a result, at least on the bent wing, it lacks contrast with the dark colour of the bird’s back, which is Sepia (119) fading to Fuscous (21), while it does contrast in canutus. In rogersi, the colour of the upper wing coverts varies a lot, but the contrast between these and the back feathers is absent even in specimens with light coloured upper wing coverts (Glaucous, 79) due to stronger light mottling of the birds’ backs. The white outer edges of inner primaries that protrude from under greater wing coverts are narrower than in canutus. A black-and-white photograph of a live adult male of piersmai, captured at a nest on Faddeyevski island on 10 July 1994, is published in Lindstrom et al. (1999). Distribution The new subspecies piersmai probably breeds on all large and most small islands of the New Siberian archipelago. Currently, breeding has been confirmed by the finding of nests or unfledged chicks on Faddeyevsky, Kotelny, Novaya Sibir and Bolshoy Lyakhovsky islands (Pleske 1928, Rutilevski 1958, Lindstrém et al. 1999). It is also very probable on Stolbovoi island, where a female was collected with an egg almost ready to be laid (Rutilevski 1963). In the non-breeding season, it can be found mostly on sea coasts of the East Asian-Australasian Flyway (Tomkovich 1990) south to Australia and, probably, New Zealand (Lindstrém et al. 1999, Anon. 2000, Tomkovich & Riegen 2000). Acknowledgements Eugeny E. Syroechkovski, Jr. and Yaroslav Red’kin collected a series of birds on New Siberian islands during the Swedish-Russian Tundra Ecology-Expedition-94 and made them available for this study. I am also thankful to Dr. V. M. Loskot and E. A. Shapoval for their permit and help in study of specimens in Zoological Institute in St. Petersburg, as well as to Eugeny A. Koblik for valuable comments on the early draft. I am grateful to Dr. Robert Prys-Jones for correcting my English and Dr. Nick Davidson for improvements to the manuscript. References: Anon. 2000. Wader recoveries. New Zealand Wader Study Group newsletter 15: | Cramp, S. & Simmons, K. E. L. (Eds.) 1983. Handbook of birds of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East: The birds of the Western Palearctic, Vol. 111. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford. Engelmoer, M. & Roselaar, C. S. 1998. Geographical variation in waders. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Pavel S. Tomkovich 263 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Dordrecht, Boston, London. Johnsgard, P. A. 1981. The plovers, sandpipers, and snipes of the world. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln & London. Kistchinski, A. A. 1988. Avifauna of North-East Asia: history and modern status. Nauka, Moscow. (in Russian). Kozlova, E. V. 1962. Charadriiformes. Suborder Limicolae. Pp. 1-433 in Ivanov, A.I. (ed.) Fauna of the USSR. Birds. Vol. 2, Issue 1, Part 3. The USSR Acad. Sci. Publ., Moscow & Leningrad. (In Russian). Lindstrém, A., Minton C. & Bensch S. 1999. First recovery of a Red Knot Calidris canutus involving the breeding population on New Siberian islands. Wader Study Group Bull. 89: 33- 351 Mathews, G. M. 1913. The birds of Australia, Vol. 3. Sydney. Piersma, T. & Davidson, N. (eds.) 1992. The migration of knots. Wader Study Group Bull. 64, Suppl. Pleske, Th. 1928. Birds of the Eurasian Tundra. Memoirs of the Boston Soc. of Nat. Hist. 6(3): 111-485. Portenko L. A. 1972. Birds of Chukchi Peninsula and Wrangel island. Part 1. Nauka, Leningrad. (In Russian). (English translation: Smithsonian Inst. and Nat. Sci. Found.). Prater, A. J., Marchant, J. H. & Vuorinen, J. 1977. Guide to the identification and aging of Holarctic waders. BTO Guide 17, Tring. Roselaar, C. S. 1983. Subspecies recognition in Knot Calidris canutus and occurrence of races in western Europe. Beaufortia 33: 97-109. Rutilevski, G. L. 1958. Birds of Bolshoy Lyakhovsky Island. Problemy Arctiki 4: 79-90. (In Russian). Rutilevski, G. L. 1963. Birds of Stolbovoi Island. Pp. 93-117 in Rutilevski, G. L. & Sisko R. K. (eds.) Novosibirskie Ostrova. Morskoi Transport Press, Leningrad. (In Russian). Smithe, F.B. 1974. Naturalist’s color guide supplement. American Museum of Natural History, New York. Smithe, F.B. 1975. Naturalist’s color guide. American Museum of Natural History, New York. Smithe, F.B. 1981. Naturalist’s color guide, part III. American Museum of Natural History, New York. Stepanyan, L. S. 1975. Composition and distribution of birds of the USSR fauna. Non- passeriformes. Nauka, Moscow. (In Russian). Stepanyan, L. S. 1990. Conspectus of the ornithological fauna of the USSR. Nauka, Moscow. (In Russian). Tomkovich, P. S. 1990. Analysis of geographical variability in Knot Calidris canutus (L.). Bull. Moscow Soc. Naturalists, Biol. Div. 95: 59-72 (in Russian). Tomkovich, P. S. 1992. An analysis of the geographic variability in Knots Calidris canutus based on museum skins. Wader Study Group Bull., 64, Suppl., p.17-23. Tomkovich, P.S. & Riegen, A.C. 2000. Mixing of Red Knot populations in Australasia: some thoughts. The Stilt 37: 25-27. Tomkovich, P.S. & Serra, L. 1999. Morphometrics and prediction of breeding origin in some Holarctic waders. Ardea 87: 289-300. Tomkovich, P. S., Lappo, E. G., Syroechkovski, E. E., Jr. 2000. Ringing and migratory links of Taimyr waders. Pp. 458-475 in Ebbinge, B., Mazurov, Y. L. & Tomkovich, P. S. (eds.) Heritage of the Russian Arctic: research, conservation and international cooperation. Ecopros Publishers, Moscow. Vaurie, C. 1965. The birds of the Palearctic fauna. Vol. 2, Non-passeriformes. Witherby, London. Address: P. 8. Tomkovich, Zoological Museum of Moscow Lomonosov State University, B. Nikitskaya Str., 6, Moscow, 103009, Russia. E-mail: tomkovic@1.zoomus.bio.msu.ru © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Michael Walters & Edward C. Dickinson 264 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) A reappraisal of the type specimens of Brachypodius tmmaculatus Sharpe, 1876 (Pycnonotidae) by Michael Walters & Edward C. Dickinson Received 27 September 2000 A thorough review of the scientific names given to Asian birds, and an attempt to locate relevant type specimens, is being conducted to provide a firm basis for future taxonomic studies. This review is all destined for a new series entitled “Systematic Notes on Asian Birds”, published in discrete issues of Zoologische Verhandelingen, Leiden. The first examples of papers on the type material of Asian taxa have appeared (Dekker et al, 2000; Dickinson et a/. 2000). An example of the relevance of such detailed work is the reminder (Decker et a/. 2000), that the name caudacuta from the combination Calyptomina [sic] caudacuta Swainson, 1838, must be used for the Malay peninsula race of Calyptomena viridis Raffles, 1822, the Green Broadbill, this name having many years priority over Calyptomena viridis continentis Robinson & Kloss, 1923. In preparation for a forthcoming paper on the family Pycnonotidae one of us noted that Sharpe (1876) appeared to list only one specimen of his new Brachypodius immaculatus, the Black-headed Bulbul, which he separated from “true melanocephalus from Malacca”. Brachypodius immaculatus Sharpe, 1876, is a junior synonym of Pycnonotus atriceps atriceps (Temminck, 1822) of which Lanius melanocephalus Gmelin, 1788, is a senior synonym but preoccupied (Deignan 1960). Sharpe’s name had been too long in synonymy for it to be listed in Deignan’s synonymy, which was required to complement not duplicate that given in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum. The one specimen Sharpe seems to discuss had been collected by Everett from Sibu in Sarawak. By contrast Sharpe (1881), who had by now submerged his immaculatus in Micropus melanocephalus, indicated that an adult Sumatran bird collected by Wallace was the type of immaculatus, despite listing Everett’s specimen as one deserving the same name. The purpose of this note is to record what we believe to have been the intent and process followed by Sharpe. In so doing we clarify the status of the specimens concerned. It is apparent from the original description that the Sibu bird (now BMNH 1875.8.16.19) was considered an immature and that Sharpe (1876) described the adult. It is also clear that the adult or adults described were from Sumatra, although the Sarawak bird was also assigned to this new form. No adult type was specified and indeed no adult specimens were listed, but the description is suffixed by the words “(Sumatra, Wallace)’, so it can only be presumed that Sharpe (1876) reviewed Wallace’s Sumatran specimens then in the British Museum. Of the specimens listed by Sharpe Michael Walters & Edward C. Dickinson 265 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) (1881, p. 66) only “k.” and “/.” qualify under this heading. No holotype was made clear. Nothing on the labels suggests that one was selected but never published. By not specifying a holotype Sharpe (1876) effectively made these two his syntypes. Sharpe (1881) listed specimen “/.” as “type of Brachypodius immaculatus”’. Under the term of Art. 74.5 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999), this must be taken to be the designation of a lectotype and specimen “7.” (BMNH1873.5.12.2463), previously segregated and listed by Warren & Harrison (1971) was the subject of that designation. Specimen “k.” (BMNH 1873.5.12.12) becomes a paralectotype. The specimen from Sibu, Sarawak, does not have type status, contra Warren & Harrison (1971), as by definition Sharpe excluded it by providing a deliberate description only of the adult. Acknowledgement We should like to thank Robert Prys-Jones for reading a draft of this paper and offering comments. References: Deignan, H. G. 1960. Family Pycnonotidae (Asian taxa) In: Mayr & Greenway (Eds.), Check- list of Birds of the World 9: 221-300. Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge, Mass. Dekker, R.W.R.J., Dickinson, E.C., Eck, S. & Somadikarta, S. 2000. Systematic notes on Asian birds. 3. Types of the Eurylaimidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden. 331: 77-88. Dickinson, E.C. Dekker, R.W.R.J., Eck S. & Somadikarta S. 2000. Systematic Notes on Asian Birds. 5. Types of the Pittidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden. 331: 101-126. Gmelin, J. F. 1788._Systema Naturae, per regna tria Natura: secundum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species, cum Characteribus, Differentiis, Synonymis, Locis. 13". Ed. 13. 1 (pt. 1): 1-500. Lugduni. I.C.Z.N. 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. 4 Ed. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London. Raffles, T.S. 1822. Second part of the descriptive catalogue of a zoological collection made in the island of Sumatra and its vicinity. Trans. Linn. Soc., London. 13: 277-331. Robinson, H.C. & Kloss, C.B. 1923. Eleven new Oriental Birds. J. Fed. Mal. St. Mus. 11: 53-57. Sharpe, R. B. 1876. Contributions to the Ornithology of Borneo. Pt. 1. Jbis (3) 6: 29-52. Sharpe, R. B. 1881. A Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. Vol. 6. Trustees of the British Museum (Nat. Hist.), London. Swainson, W. 1838. Animals in Menageries. Longman, Orme, Brown, Green & Longmans, London. Temminck, C. 1822. [Livr. 25, pl. 147.] In Temminck, C. & M. Laugier. 1820-1839. Nouveaux Receuil des Planches coloriJes d’Oiseaux. Levrault, Paris. Warren, R. M. & Harrison, C. J. O. 1971. Type-specimens of birds in the British Museum (Natural History). Vol. 2. Trustees of the British Museum (Nat. Hist.), London. Addresses: Michael Walters, Bird Group, The Natural History Museum, Akeman Street, Tring, Herts, HP23 6AP. Edward C. Dickinson, The Trust for Oriental Ornithology, Flat 3, Bolsover Court, 19 Bolsover Road, Eastbourne, BN20 7JG; e-mail: asiaorn@ftech.co.uk © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Edward C. Dickinson 266 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) The correct scientific name of the Palawan Peacock-pheasant is Polyplectron napoleonis Lesson, 1831 by Edward C. Dickinson Received 20 December 2000 During foundation work for a planned handbook of the birds of Asia it became clear that the scientific name of the Palawan Peacock-pheasant needed re-examination. Lesson (1831a) named this peacock-pheasant Polyplectrum Napoleonis on the basis of a specimen in the hands of Prince Victor Massena, Duc de Rivoli, who had it painted by Huet (Lesson 1831a). Massena (c. 1795-1863), a descendant of one of Napoleon Bonaparte’s marshals, was also 3™ Prince d’Essling and his collection, now at the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia (Stone 1899), is sometimes connected with each of the names Massena, Rivoli and Essling. Lesson (183 1a, p. 487) suggested that the bird was from “Inde” but provided no description. Two months later Lesson (1831b, p. 650) described the bird, although its true origin was unknown. The specific name of this peacock-pheasant has subsequently undergone several changes and my aim is to demonstrate that napoleonis remains correct. The same specimen, now reported it to be in the collection of the Prince d’Essling, was depicted, again by Huet, for pl. 540 in Temminck & Laugier (1820-39). Temminck named it Polyplectron emphanum. The British Museum acquired a specimen from Verreaux Freres some time before 1863 but again the true origin was unclear. Sclater (1863), under the emended name Polyplectron emphanes, suggested, doubtfully, Borneo and Gray (1867) the Moluccas. In January 1878, Alfred Everett collected specimens in Palawan that seemed to show that this was its real source (Tweeddale 1878). For a few years this was generally accepted and fresh specimens were taken in Palawan in 1887 by Whitehead (1890) and in 1888 by the Platens (Blasius 1888a). The Platens’ specimens in Braunschweig were eventually re-examined and described by Blasius (1891a, b) as Polyplectron Nehrkornae, who claimed that Palawan birds differed from napoleonis. The distinction, between the males, was in the character and extent of the white superciliary stripe. In nehrkornae the stripe was narrow, associated with a triangular white cheek patch and white ear-coverts, whereas in napoleonis the white superciliaries were wide and met on the nape (Ogilvie-Grant 1893). Ogilvie-Grant (1893) therefore listed both “species”, attributing Everett’s Palawan material to nehrkornae, not to napoleonis. The only material remaining assigned to napoleonis was thus the type, in Philadelphia since 1846, and the British Museum specimen, neither with a proven locality. Further specimens were obtained in Palawan by the Menage Expedition in 1887- 88 and Bourns & Worcester (1894) affirmed that the white facial markings differed Edward C. Dickinson 267 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) between individuals. The name napoleonis was therefore reinstated by Ogilvie-Grant (1897) and used by McGregor (1909) and Beebe (1922). This name was challenged by Lowe (1925), who considered Lesson’s name a nomen nudum on p. 487 in April, 1831, with a description in the addenda and corrigenda on p. 650 in June 1831 (Lowe 1925). Temminck’s name emphanum seemed to date from May 1831 and must, he considered, be accorded priority. This view was followed by Peters (1934) and Delacour (1951) and universally since then. Here I propose that Lowe’s case must fall in the face of fresh evidence. The correct date of Polyplectron emphanum Temminck The book in which the name emphanum appeared, Nouveau Receuil de Planches Coloriées (Temminck & Laugier 1820-1839), comprised 102 livraisons. The last contained the index, the first 101 contained 600 plates. These had been promised at the rate of 6 per livraison. The difficulties of dating the parts was recounted by Crotch (1869) and Sherborn (1898), but the inconsistency of needing 101 parts to issue 600 plates only attracted attention later (Zimmer 1926). Zimmer also suggested that the methods available for dating individual plates and their texts were not wholly reliable. First, there was sometimes uncertainty in which livraison a plate might appear, and secondly the livraison numbers at the foot of the text pages were sometimes not appropriate in the sense of chronological sequence. Some texts contained references to publications that occurred long afterward, indicating that these pages were later additions to their stated livraisons. Temminck, it seems, was already trying to order his material for eventual binding in systematic order. Dickinson (2001) resolved why some livraisons had less than six plates, identified the contents of each livraison, and largely corroborated the dating. Enough discrepancies were investigated to show that Temminck did put livraison numbers on text pages that have led later authors to date names without sufficient care and attention, as claimed by Zimmer (1926) and exemplified by this peacock-pheasant. The name emphanum appears in the text that should have been expected to accompany Plate 540 in Temminck & Laugier (1820-1839). At issue is when this plate appeared and also when the text did so. Ogilvie-Grant (1893) cited it as “PI. Col. v, pl. 18 [No. 540]”. This refers to volume 5, which is in accordance with the binding plan or index that Temminck provided in 1839, but pl. 18 is a lapsus for Livr. 88. However, although most texts carried a livraison number at their foot, the place of the number in this case is improbable; these numbers were anyway sometimes wrong, accidentally in some cases but deliberately so if it suited the binding plan. There were two editions with different page sizes. Where no substitutions took place accounts of each illustrated species seem to begin a fresh page, with the livraison number footnoted, and the texts have a blank space at the end if they are not long enough to fill the page. A comparison of the relevant text in the two editions Edward C. Dickinson 268 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) shows a different use of page space in the crowded style suggestive of text issued in the context of reissue after page suppression (Table 1). Comparison of leaf number and page number (Table 1) shows that discrete pages were used in the large format edition for each of the logical parts, except for the text for Polyplectron chalcurum, which is crammed into the back of the final page. In fact the plate for Polyplectron chalcurum was published in livraison 88 (14 May 1831, date fide Zimmer 1926), as no doubt was its original page of text, since suppressed. This, I believe, was the only part of these texts that did appear then. On the evidence of the large format edition alone it is possible that the introductory pages (leaf one) came out then, but in the small format edition the introduction continues on leaf two. This introduction mentions plates 539 and 540 (livraison 91, 20 December 1832, date fide Zimmer 1926) and the small format edition uses the rest of leaf two for text to plate 539, which would have appeared with that plate. Because Polyplectron chalcurum was the first subject to be depicted in livraison 88 it would not have been without text and that text would have begun at the top of its own page. Taken together, the evidence of the use of space for the introductory pages and the 18 month period between livraisons 88 and 91, show that the introduction appeared with the text for plate 539 as part of livraison 91. TAB BS A comparison of the text pages said to be part of Livraison 88 to show differences in the use of page space and the addition of the text for plate 519 out of sequence at the end. Leaf Page Content in large format edition Content in small format edition No No 1 1 Introduction to the genus Introduction to the genus (introduction mentions plate Nos. 519, 539 and 540) Introduction to the genus Introduction to the genus 2 3. ~~ Polyplectron chinquis (pl. 539) Introduction to the genus (top 6 lines); Polyplectron chinquis (rest of page) Polyplectron chinquis Polyplectron chinquis 3 5 Argus giganteus (not illustrated) Polyplectron chinquis (but page not begins a new page fully used) 6 Argus giganteus Argus giganteus + 7 Polyplectron emphanum (pl. Argus giganteus 540); begins a new page 8 Polyplectron emphanum (top 6 Argus giganteus (top half page); lines); Polyplectron chalcurum Polyplectron emphanum (rest of page) (rest of page) (pl. 519) 5) 9 Polyplectron emphanum 10 Polyplectron chalcurum Edward C. Dickinson 269 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) The two texts for 519 and 540 use the front and back of a single leaf in the large edition, and appear back-to-back on the second of the two leaves affected in the small edition. It has previously been argued that, because they mention livraison 88, these pages appeared in May 1831, 18 months ahead of plate 540; but in neither edition does the text for plate 519 appear first and the way the page-and-a-half of text for plate 540 is placed shows that binding cannot explain this. It is the date of the text that is important: the plates bear French vernacular names, while the scientific names are to be found in the associated text and date from that. The evidence shows that the inclusion of the text for Polyplectron chalcurum (plate 519), after the text of Polyplectron emphanum (pl. 540), was an afterthought. Temminck’s concern was to have these texts together when they were eventually bound. The evidence of the rather cramped pages, a clue to a case of substitution, is that there were costs to be saved and the use of one leaf less in the large edition may imply that the small appeared first and that greater savings were found for the larger edition. Plate 519 would, from its number, be expected to appear in Livraison 88. By contrast plate 540 should be expected in livraison 91. Temminck clearly issued fresh text, and suppressed his earlier text, and this implied the cancellation of the original text for plate 519 alone. My study of every plate in the book and usually the related text showed that Temminck did not publish any plates early. Furthermore, Temminck’s handwritten list of the plates issued in each livraison, held in Leiden, shows that Plates 539 and 540 were issued as part of livraison 91, and this dates both plates from December 1832, not from May 1831. When discussed by Tweeddale (1878) the dating of Livraison 88, which was taken from Crotch (1869), was no doubt presumed to relate to text and plate. Lowe (1925) was apparently unaware of the risks of substitution, to be mentioned by Zimmer (1926), and did not realise the significance of the sequence of texts in these pages. Dickinson (2001) found that Temminck issued a number of replacement pages, and sometimes these had livraison numbers on them that did not tally with their date of issue. In this and other contexts his replacements have additional text that was not on the original page. Thus the extant pages with the texts for plates 519 and 540 back- to-back are substitute pages issued with Livraison 91, and the text for each plate should accordingly be dated May 1831 and December 1832. The mention of livraison 88 at the foot of the first leaf reflects where Temminck wanted all these pages bound, and what was presumably on his text for plate 519; but it is accurate only in that plate 519, and its original text, did appear in livraison 88. The page layouts in both formats (Table 1) show that the reissue comprised all four (large format) or five (small format) leaves. The separate parts of Article 21 of the International Code Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999) do not precisely address this case, but in combination they confirm that at least for plate 540 it would be proper to date it from the date of livraison 91. Edward C. Dickinson 270 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Before listing the correct citations in chronological sequence of these names it is necessary to refer again to Blasius’s name. Polyplectron nehrkornae Blasius and its correct citation The name Polyplectron nehrkornae Blasius, 1891, is cited from Mitt. orn. Ver. Wien, p. 1 (Ogilvie-Grant 1893). This journal was also known as Die Schwalbe. Reference to that however shows that Blasius in fact named it at a meeting of the Braunschweig Verein fur Naturwissenschaft (Nat. Hist. Soc.) in December 1890 and that a report of that meeting appeared on 3 January 1891, in the Braunschweigischen Anzeigen (Blasius 1891la). The three syntypes are extant, one in Braunschweig and two in Berlin (Hinkelmann & Heinze 1990). Blasius had used this newspaper before to name Philippine, and other, birds and insisted that his names antedated those of Sharpe (Blasius 1888b). Rand (1955) eventually stated that the names in the Braunschweigischen Anzeigen must be accepted. Despite Rand’s statement that Blasius (1888b) had “resolved the confusion’, his names were not readily accepted in the first half of last century, since newspapers were not felt to be proper media for new scientific names. Since Rand (1955) they have been fully accepted. In firmly supporting all Blasitus’s names, Rand (1955) did not mention Polyplectron nehrkornae, presumably because it was by now in synonymy. Nonetheless the correct citation for this is Polyplectron Nehrkornae Blasius, 1891, Braunschweigischen Anzeigen, 2, p. 15. Conclusion Correctly arranged in chronological order these three names are therefore: Polyplectrum napoleonis Lesson (1831, June), Traité Orn., part 8, p. 650. Polyplectron emphanum Temminck (1832, Dec), in Temminck & Laugier (1820-1839), Pl. Col., Livr. 91, pl. 540. Polyplectron Nehrkornae Blasius, 1891, Braunschweigischen Anzeigen, 2, p. 15. Lesson on page 650 used only the French vernacular name, but he referred to page 437, where the scientific name napoleonis had appeared in April 1831 as a nomen nudum. This has previously been considered to meet the appropriate requirements for acceptance (Ogilvie-Grant 1893, 1897) and under present rules (ICZN 1999) still does. To sustain the resurrection of this prior name it is necessary to address Art. 23.9 of the Code (ICZN 1999), since it might be argued that the name Polyplectron emphanum is too well established to be rejected. This Article states that two conditions must be met if priority is to be over-ridden. First, it must be shown that the senior name has not been used as a valid name after 1899, and second it must be shown that the junior name has been used “‘in at least 25 works, published by at least 10 authors in the immediately preceding 50 years and encompassing a span of not less than 10 years”. Edward C. Dickinson 271 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) In this case the second condition can probably be met. Lowe’s use of emphanus (1925) was adopted by Peters (1932), and by subsequent literature pertaining to Philippine birds (Delacour & Mayr 1946, duPont 1971, Dickinson et al. 1991, Inskipp et al. 1996, Collar et al. 1999, Kennedy et al. 2000). Delacour (1951), and more recent works on pheasants (e.g. McGowan & Garson 1995), have also used this name. The first condition cannot be met. McGregor (1909), who explicitly agreed with Bourns & Worcester (1894) about the name nehrkornae, used the name Polyplectron napoleonis and, as stated above, that seems to have been unchallenged from 1897 until Lowe’s (1925) review. During this period napoleonis was used by Beebe (1922). It is therefore necessary to apply the name Polyplectron napoleonis citing Polyplectrum [sic] napoleonis Lesson, 1831 (June), Traité Orn., part 8, p. 650. Acknowledgements This paper derives from the broader study and thanks are due to René Dekker at the National Museum of Natural History, Leiden for agreeing that this highlight might be published separately. In the longer paper (Dickinson, 2001) will be found numerous other acknowledgements in connection with the overall report. The suggestion to publish this separately so that it might come to the attention of those engaged in pheasant breeding as well as ornithologists was made by Alain Hennache of the Parc Zoologique Clerés, France and endorsed by Richard Howard, Chairman of the World Pheasant Association. The Temminck manuscript in Leiden was not previously known but a search was suggested by Gerlof Mees after reading a draft of the overall study. For obtaining a copy of pages from the Braunschweigischen Anzeigen and for helping with the translation from German thanks are due to Norbert Bahr. For advice on the validity of Lesson’s name, in the context of its proposal, and for a discussion on the options available upon finding that it has priority, I am grateful to Philip Tubbs of the International Commission for Zoological Nomenclature. Early drafts of this have been read and commented upon by Norbert Bahr, Geoffrey Davison, René Dekker, Alain Hennache, Christoph Hinkelmann, Robert S. Kennedy and David Wells, to all of whom thanks are due. References: Beebe, W. 1922. Monograph of Pheasants Vol. 4. H.F. & G. Witherby, London. Blasius, W. 1888a. Die Vé6gel von Palawan. Ornis 4: 301-320. Blasius, W. 1888b. Letter to the Editor. [bis (5) 6: 373-375. Blasius, W. 1891la. Polyplectron nehrkornae nov. sp. Braunschweigischen Anzeigen 2: 14-15. Blasius, W. 1891b. Polyplectron nehrkornae nov. sp. Mitth. orn. Ver. Wien, p.1. Bourns, F.S. & Worcester, D.C. 1894. Preliminary notes on the birds and mammals collected by the Menage Scientific Expedition to the Philippine islands. Occas. Pap. Minn. Acad. Nat. Sci. 1: 1-64. Collar, N. C., Mallari, N. A. D. & Tablanza, B. R. 1999. Threatened birds of the Philippines. Bookmark Inc., Makati, Philippines. Crotch, G. R. 1869. Letter to the Editor. [bis (2) 5: 499-500. Delacour, J. 1951. The pheasants of the world. Country Life Ltd., London. Delacour, J. & Mayr, E. 1946. Birds of the Philippines. Macmillan, New York. Dickinson, E. C. 2001. Systematic notes on Asian birds. 9. The “Nouveau recueil de planches coloriées” of Temminck & Laugier (1820-1839). Zool. Verh., Leiden, 335: 7-56. Dickinson, E. C., Kennedy, R. S. & Parkes, K. C. 1991. The birds of the Philippines. B.O.U. Check-list No. 12, Tring. duPont, J.E. 1971. Philippine birds. Delaware Museum of Natural History, Greenville. Edward C. Dickinson Q72 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Gray, G. R. 1867. List of birds in the British Museum, Gallinae. British Museum, London. Hinkelmann, C. & Heinze, G-M. 1990. Die Typusexemplare der von Wilhelm Blaius beschriebenen Vogel. Braunschw. Naturkdl. Schr. 3: 609-628. Inskipp, T., Lindsey, N. & Duckworth, W. 1996. An annotated check-list of the birds of the Oriental Region. Oriental Bird Club, Sandy. ICZN. 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. 4. Edition. London. Kennedy, R. S., Gonzales, P. C., Dickinson, E. C., Miranda, H. C. & Fisher, T. H. 2000. A guide to the birds of the Philippines. Oxford Univ. Press. Lesson, R. P. 183la. (Apr.). Traité d’Ornithologie ou Tabeau Méthodique des ordres, sous- ordres, familles, tribus, genres, sous-genres et races d’oiseaux. Pt. 7, p. 487. Levrault, Strasbourg. Lesson, R. P. 1831b (Jun). Traité d’Ornithologie ou Tabeau Méthodique des ordres, sous-ordres, familles, tribus, genres, sous-genres et races d’oiseaux. Pt. 8, p. 650. Levrault, Strasbourg. Lowe, P. R. 1925. Some notes on the genus Polyplectron. Ibis (12) 1: 476-484. McGowan, P. J. K. & Garson, P. J. 1995. Status survey and conservation action plan 1995-1999 Pheasants. 1UCN, Gland. McGregor, R. C. 1909. A manual of Philippine birds. Pt. 1. Bureau of Science, Manila. Ogilvie-Grant, W. R. 1893. Catalogue of the birds in the British Museum. 22. Game Birds. Trustees of the British Museum, London. Ogilvie-Grant, W. R. 1897. A handbook to the Game-birds. Vol. 2. W. H. Allen & Co., London. Peters, J. L. 1934. Check-list of birds of the world. Vol. 2. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass. Rand, A. L. 1955. Philippine bird names of Blasius. Auk, 72: 210-212. Sclater, P. L. 1863. List of the species of Phasianidae. Proc. Zool. Soc., Lond. 31: 113-127. Sherborn, C. D. 1898. On the dates of Temminck and Laugier’s ‘Planches coloriées’. /bis, (7) 4: 485-488. Stone, W. 1899. A study of the type specimens of birds in the collection of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, with a brief history of the collection. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Philad. 51: 5-62. Temminck, C. J., [1831] 1832, in Temminck, C.J. & Baron Meiffren Laugier de Chartrouse. 1820-1839. Nouveau Receuil de Planches Coloriées. Dufour et d’Ocagne; Levrault, Paris. Tweeddale, Viscount. 1878. Contributions to the ornithology of the Philippines. No. IX. On the Collection made by Mr. A. H. Everett in the island of Palawan. Proc. Zool. Soc., Lond. 46: 611-624. Whitehead, J. 1890. Notes on the birds of Palawan. Jbis (6) 2: 38-61. Zimmer, J. T. 1926. Catalogue of the Edward E. Ayer Ornithological Library. Pt.2. Field Mus. Nat. Hist., Zool. 16 (2): 365-706. Address: Edward C. Dickinson, The Trust for Oriental Ornithology, Flat 3, Bolsover Court, 19 Bolsover Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex BN20 7JG. E-mail: asiaorn@ftech.co.uk © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Sebastian K. Herzog DTS Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) A re-evaluation of Straneck’s (1993) data on the taxonomic status of Serpophaga subcristata and S. munda (Passeriformes: Tyrannidae): conspecifics or semispecies? by Sebastian K. Herzog Received 27 December 2000 In 1993, R. J. Straneck published a paper entitled “Aportes para la unificacion de Serpophaga subcristata y Serpophaga munda, y \a revalidacion de Serpophaga griseiceps (Aves: Tyrannidae)”. As the title implies, Straneck concluded, based on field and museum studies, that the first two taxa are conspecific and that a third, often misidentified and specifically distinct taxon exists, namely Grey-crowned Tyrannulet S. griseiceps. However, as I will discuss in this paper, the article contains several methodological flaws, and a careful re-examination of the presented data using objective, quantitative and conservative criteria (Isler et al. 1997, 1998, 1999) must actually reach the opposite conclusion, namely that given the current knowledge, White-crested Tyrannulet S. subcristata and White-bellied Tyrannulet S. munda are valid biological species. I have field experience with both forms, but the present paper is based solely on Straneck’s (1993) account. The situation of S. griseiceps is less straightforward (e.g., Traylor 1982 considered the type specimens of S. griseiceps as juveniles of S. munda) and will be treated separately. Because Straneck’s (1993) conclusions have already been adopted by at least three recent publications (de la Pena & Rumboll 1998, Mayer 2000, Mezquida & Marone 2000), a word of caution regarding his paper seems timely. The genus Serpophaga contains five currently recognised species (Monroe & Sibley 1993, Ridgely & Tudor 1994), including subcristata and munda. Of the remaining three species, one is restricted to river islands of the Amazon and Orinoco systems and two are closely associated with water in the northern to central Andes and south-eastern South America, respectively (Ridgely & Tudor 1994). S. subcristata and S. munda are restricted to the southern half of the continent and show a basically parapatric distribution pattern, at least during the breeding season (Ridgely & Tudor 1994). Whereas subcristata is widely distributed in forest, woodland and scrub of south-eastern South America with its western limit in the Andean foothills, munda occurs in the eastern Andes from foothills up to about 3,000 m (in Cochabamba, Bolivia; J. A. Balderrama and S. K. Herzog, unpubl. data) in deciduous scrub and forest during the austral summer. In the austral winter, latitudinal and possibly altitudinal migrants are found in the lowlands (chaco) east of the Andean breeding grounds and well within the range of S. swbcristata (Fjeldsa & Krabbe 1990, Ridgely & Tudor 1994, Chesser 1997). Sebastian K. Herzog 274 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) The notion that the two taxa may be conspecific is not new (e.g., Zimmer 1955). However, rather than presenting a review of the older accounts on the topic, I re- evaluate the new data from Argentina published by Straneck (1993). Because that paper appeared in a relatively inaccessible journal, I will briefly summarise its content and point out major shortcomings in the appropriate places. Distribution Field observations and specimen collections were made during eight years (actual time period not stated) in ten provinces of northern and central Argentina (south to La Pampa and Buenos Aires; mainly austral spring to summer, year-round in four provinces) and supplemented with specimen examinations in four Argentinian museums. A map with the breeding distribution 1s presented, showing munda restricted to the western and subcristata to the eastern half of northern and central Argentina, which largely coincides with Ridgely & Tudor (1994) (except that no specimen records are shown south of La Pampa). Populations of both taxa are stated to be partially migratory. Whereas no overlap in the breeding ranges of the two taxa is evident, Straneck reported individuals intermediate between subcristata and munda from five localities in the contact zone of their respective ranges. However, no additional information is given on whether any hybrids were collected, how they differed from typical subcristata or munda and the frequency with which hybrids were observed at the five sites, 1.e., whether a narrow but defined hybrid zone exists (which would render the two forms megasubspecies of S. subcristata) or 1f gene flow between both populations occurs at only a low and local level (hybridization parapatry sensu Haffer F9S2)! Vocalizations and playback experiments Thirty-eight individuals of both swbcristata and munda were tape-recorded and 875 of their vocalizations analysed qualitatively. Sonograms of the four most common vocalizations of each taxon (without locality data) illustrate the main result, namely that “vocal differences between both forms are minimal and attributable only to individual or regional differences.” My main criticism here is that Straneck’s judgements were purely qualitative and that a careful examination of possible differences in specific vocal characters, including quantitative analysis, is required before any decision regarding species limits can be made (cf. Isler et al. 1998). This point is exemplified by well-known North American superspecies of small tyrannids such as the one composed of Empidonax traillii and E. alnorum, which are considered valid species (AOU 1998) despite only subtle vocal differences between them. To avoid confusion, it should be noted that Straneck considered J. V. Remsen’s (Remsen & Traylor 1989: 54) description of the song of subcristata to be erroneous and referable to S. griseiceps, the taxon Straneck intended to revalidate. New field evidence (cf. recordings by the author and others in Mayer 2000) appears to corroborate Straneck’s point of view. Sebastian K. Herzog ATS Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Additionally, Straneck conducted playback experiments (five each) in the breeding season to test for territorial responses, playing vocalizations of suwbcristata to munda and vice versa (although without specifying the detailed methodology and again without locality data). Reactions of all test birds were positive, i.e., they showed a strong behavioural response to the playback. However, positive responses to playback in nature are not as straightforward and unequivocal as they may seem. A number of antbird (Thamnophilidae) species, including sympatric species, such as Thamnophilus antshrikes, have been found to respond to each other’s song, a behaviour possibly related to interspecific territoriality (M. Isler, pers. comm.). J. Goerck (pers. comm.) observed a similar behaviour in Drymophila antbirds. Because interspecific territoriality might also be operating in the case of subcristata and munda, playback experiments need to be designed (cf. Kroodsma 1989a) and interpreted carefully, and a positive response (as opposed to a lack of response) is of limited value for resolving taxonomic questions. External morphology The known and obvious differences in plumage colouration between the two taxa (Ridgely & Tudor 1994) are mentioned briefly, and morphometric data are presented for 40 individuals of subcristata and 12 of munda; whether measurements were taken from specimens or live birds is not stated. Unfortunately, no clear conclusion can be drawn from these data by the reader (and Straneck makes no attempt to do so either) since only mean values for each of the seven measurements are given, lacking standard deviations and ranges. Also, only body mass was calculated separately for males and females, but sample sizes for each sex were not given. Differences between mean values of each taxon are minimal (<0.5 mm or g) except for tail length (2.0 mm longer in subcristata) and wingspan (2.8 mm wider in munda). The shorter tail in munda is contradictory to both Zimmer (1955) and Bo (1969), who found male munda to be longer-tailed than male subcristata, although with slight overlap in measurement ranges. Zimmer (1955) noted that the difference in tail length between the two taxa is less pronounced in females than it is in males; therefore, Straneck’s failure to present all morphometric data separated by sex may well explain his unexpected tail measurements. What do Straneck’s data really tell us? Straneck concluded that, based on identical vocalizations and despite differences in plumage colouration, S. subcristata and S. munda must be considered conspecific. Neither the similar measurements nor the existence of hybrids are mentioned or discussed any further, although these must certainly have influenced the author’s decision. Recent pioneering studies on species limits in another family of suboscine birds (Thamnophilidae) (Isler et a/. 1997, 1998, 1999), which likewise focused on vocalizations and external morphology, have developed objective criteria for establishing species limits in that family. Because the development of these criteria Sebastian K. Herzog 276 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) was initially derived from the convincing evidence that vocalizations in the family Tyrannidae are entirely innate (Kroodsma 1984, 1985, 1989b; Kroodsma & Konishi 1991), it is logical to apply the same criteria to species-level taxonomy of tyrant flycatchers. Isler et al. (1999) treat parapatric populations as valid species if they are “diagnosable by either morphology or vocalizations and with a lack of clinal intermediacy at the contact zone indicating that gene flow is absent or highly restricted.” In contrast, adjacent populations diagnosable by either morphology or vocalizations that have a contact zone where “intermediates occur in a steep, apparently stable cline” are treated as subspecies. These criteria illustrate the importance of the degree of gene flow and the geographic distribution of hybridization for determining species limits in adjacent populations of suboscines, to which Straneck pays only minimal attention. Because his data are not explicit, taking a conservative approach one must assume that intermediate individuals occur only locally and gene flow between both taxa is indeed highly restricted. Applying the above criteria, subcristata and munda must thus be considered valid species (semispecies, 1.e., taxa that replace each other geographically with only limited hybridization in the area of contact; Haffer 1992). The need to collect additional information is particularly relevant in view of several recent publications (e.g., Bierregaard et al. 1997, Zimmer et al. 2001) documenting the existence of cryptic biological species that had been overlooked due to the lack of data from contact zones between geographically representative forms. Whereas a detailed field study quantifying the extent of hybridization between subcristata and munda together with an appropriate analysis of vocal and morphometric characteristics may prove them to be conspecific, for the time being they are better treated as separate species. Acknowledegements I would like to thank Sjoerd Mayer for pointing out the existence of Straneck’s article and providing me with a copy; Juan Mazar Barnett for helpful discussions and additional information on the Argentinian distribution of the two taxa; and Jiirgen Haffer, Mort Isler and Van Remsen for valuable comments on the manuscript. References: AOU. 1998. Check-list of North American birds, 7th ed. American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. Bierregaard, R. O., M. Cohn-Haft & D. F. Stotz. 1997. Cryptic biodiversity: an overlooked species and new subspecies of antbird (Aves: Formicariidae) with a revision of Cercomacra tyrannina in northeastern South America. Pp. 111-128 in J. V. Remsen, Jr. (ed.), Studies in neotropical ornithology honoring Ted Parker. Ornithol. Monogr. 48. Bo, N. A. 1969. Acerca de la afinidad de dos formas de Serpophaga (Aves, Tyrannidae). Neotropica 15: 54-58. Chesser, R. T. 1997. Patterns of seasonal and geographical distribution of austral migrant flycatchers (Tyrannidae) in Bolivia. Pp. 171-204 in J. V. Remsen, Jr. (ed.), Studies in neotropical ornithology honoring Ted Parker. Ornithol. Monogr. 48. Sebastian K. Herzog 277 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) de la Pena, M. R. & M. Rumboll. 1998. Birds of southern South America and Antarctica. Harper Collins, London. Fjeldsa, J. & N. Krabbe. 1990. Birds of the high Andes. Apollo Books, Svendborg, Denmark. Haffer, J. 1992. The history of species concepts and species limits in ornithology. Pp. 107-158 in J. F. Monk (ed.), Avian sytematics and taxonomy. Bull. Br. Orn. Cl., Centenary Supplement 112A. Isler, M. L., P. R. Isler & B. M. Whitney. 1997. Biogeography and systematics of the Thamnophilus punctatus (Thamnophilidae) complex. Pp. 355-381 in J. V. Remsen, Jr. (ed.), Studies in neotropical ornithology honoring Ted Parker. Ornithol. Monogr. 48. Isler, M. L., P. R. Isler & B. M. Whitney. 1998. Use of vocalizations to establish species limits in antbirds (Passeriformes: Thamnophilidae). Auk 115: 577-590. Isler, M. L., P. R. Isler & B. M. Whitney. 1999. Species limits in antbirds (Passeriformes: Thamnophilidae): The Myrmotherula surinamensis complex. Auk 116: 83-96. Kroodsma, D. E. 1984. Songs of the Alder Flycatcher (Empidonax alnorum) and Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii) are innate. Auk 101: 13-24. Kroodsma, D. E. 1985. Development and use of two song forms by the Eastern Phoebe. Wilson Bull. 97: 21-29. Kroodsma, D. E. 1989a. Suggested experimental designs for song playbacks. Anim. Behav. 37: 600-609. Kroodsma, D. E. 1989b. Male Eastern Phoebes (Sayornis phoebe; Tyrannidae, Passeriformes) fail to imitate songs. J. Comp. Psych. 103: 227-232. Kroodsma, D. E. & M. Konishi. 1991. A suboscine bird (Eastern Phoebe, Sayornis phoebe) develops normal song without auditory feedback. Anim. Behav. 42: 477-487. Mayer, S. 2000. Birds of Bolivia 2.0 (CD-ROM). Bird Songs International, Westernieland, The Netherlands. Mezquida, E. T. & L. Marone. 2000. Breeding biology of Gray-crowned Tyrannulet in the Monte desert, Argentina. Condor 102: 205-210. Monroe, B. L., Jr. & C. G. Sibley. 1993. A world checklist of birds. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut. Remsen, J. V., Jr. & M. A. Traylor, Jr. 1989. An annotated list of the birds of Bolivia. Buteo Books, Vermillion, South Dakota. Ridgely, R. S. & G. Tudor. 1994. The birds of South America, vol. 2. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Straneck, R. J. 1993. Aportes para la unificacion de Serpophaga subcristata y Serpophaga munda, y la revalidacion de Serpophaga griseiceps (Aves: Tyrannidae). Revista del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia,” Zoologia 16: 51-63. Traylor, M. A., Jr. 1982. Notes on tyrant flycatchers (Aves: Tyrannidae). Fieldiana (Zool.) 13: 1-22. Zimmer, J. T. 1955. Further notes on tyrant flycatchers (Tyrannidae). Am. Mus. Nov. 1749: 1- 24. Zimmer, K. J., A. Whittaker & D. C. Oren. 2001. A cryptic new species of flycatcher (Tyrannidae: Suiriri) from the cerrado region of central South America. Auk 118: 56-78. Address: Sebastian K. Herzog, Institut fiir Vogelforschung “Vogelwarte Helgoland”, An der Vogelwarte 21, 26386 Wilhelmshaven, Germany; e-mail: skherzog@compuserve.com. © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Nigel Cleere 278 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) The validity of the genus Veles Bangs, 1918 (Caprimulgidae) by Nigel Cleere Received 27 January 2001 The Brown Nightjar Caprimulgus binotatus is a poorly known species endemic to the rainforests of western and central Africa (Fry et al. 1988, Cleere 1998, 1999). It has rarely been seen well by field ornithologists and there are few specimens in museum collections. Distinctive morphological and behavioural features suggest that its placement in the genus Caprimulgus requires reappraisal. Material I examined 13 specimens (8 males, 4 females, 1 unsexed) in the following museums : The Natural History Museum, Tring, U.K. (6); National Natuurhistorisch Museum, Leiden, Netherlands (1); Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France (1), Koninklijk Museum voor Midden-Afrika, Tervuren, Belgium (3); Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburg, U.S.A. (2). Discussion Described by Bonaparte (1850), a specimen at The Natural History Museum, Tring, was identified as ‘a very singular species with no near ally’ (Hartert 1892) and one at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard, was recognised as being different from Caprimulgus by Bangs (1918), who erected a new genus, Veles. Subsequent recognition of Veles varied, usually without further comment, and the last author to treat it as valid appears to have been Peters (1940). Morphological features that differentiate binotatus from Caprimulgus are: the small, weak rictal bristles; the slightly protruding ‘ridged’ crown feathers above the eye; the stiff, pale feathers on either side and to the rear of the crown which form very small ‘ear-tufts’; the wing tip reaching nearly to the end of the short tail; the curved, outer primaries; the stiff ‘boat-shaped’, vaulted or tented structure of the tail; the strong feet, and the short, fluffy under-tail coverts (Bangs 1918, Chapin 1939, Carroll & Fry 1987, Fry 1988, Fry etal. 1988, Dowsett-Lemaire & Dowsett 1998, Cleere 1998, 1999). Caprimulgus nightjars lack dense crown feathers that protrude above the eye, lack ‘ear-tufts’, have elongated rictal bristles, and possess straight outer primaries. Curved primaries are usually found in species that use their wings to produce mechanical sounds, other than wing-clapping, during courtship display flights, e.g. Eleothreptus. This type of display has so far not been recorded for the Brown Nightjar. The stiff ‘tented’ tail feathers of the Brown Nightjar are not present in other afrotopical nightjars, and their strong feet may be an adaptation for roosting and perching above Nigel Cleere 279 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) ground. Most nightjars are more terrestrial in their roosting and nesting habits, and therefore have somewhat weaker feet. Two other critical differences between the Brown Nightjar and Caprimulgus Species are that it probably nests on branches of trees (Carroll & Fry 1987), and it has a strange voice. Other nightjars lay their eggs on the ground, on leaf litter, bare soil, rocks or flat roofs. The strange metallic song is reminiscent of an Epomops bat (Dowsett-Lemaire & Dowsett 1998), and is quite unlike the churring or whistling songs of the afrotropical Caprimulgus species. Recognition of the genus Veles for the Brown Nightjar appears to be warranted on morphological, vocal and behavioural differences, although its relationship to other nightjars remains unclear. Until its true affinities can be determined by molecular studies, I propose the systematic placement of Veles between Eurostopodus and Nyctidromus. Acknowledgements For all their assistance, I would like to thank Robert Prys-Jones, Michael Walters, Mark Adams and Effie Warr at the Natural History Museum, Tring, U.K.; René Dekker (Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum, Leiden, Netherlands); Eric Pasquet (Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France); Michel Louette (Koninklijk Museum voor Midden-Afrika, Tervuren, Belgium) and Kenneth Parkes (Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburg). I also thank Francoise Dowsett-Lemaire for kindly sending me copies of photographs and recordings of birds they encountered in Cameroon and Claude Chappuis for supplying recordings from Ghana. , References : Bangs, 0.1918. A new genus of Caprimulgidae. Proc. New England Zool. Cl. 6: 91 — 92. Bonaparte, C.L. 1850. Conspectus Avium Vol. 1. Lugduni Batavorum, Academiae Typographum. Carroll, R.W. & Fry, C.H. 1987. A range extension and probable breeding record of the Brown Nightjar (Caprimulgus binotatus Bonaparte) in southwestern Central African Republic. Malimbus 9: 125. Chapin, J.P. 1939. The birds of the Belgian Congo. Vol 2. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 75: 1 - 632. Cleere, N. 1998. Nightjars. A guide to nightjars and related nightbirds. Pica Press, Sussex. Cleere, N. 1999. Family Caprimulgidae (Nightjars). Jn : del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds) Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 5. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Dowsett-Lemaire, F. & Dowsett, R.J. 1998. Vocal and other peculiarities of the Brown Nightjar Caprimulgus binotatus. Bull. Afr. Bird Cl. 5: 35 - 38. Fry, C.H.1988 Skulls, songs and systematics of African nightjars. Proc. VI Pan-African Orn. Congress: 105 - 131. Fry, C.H., Keith S. & Urban E.K. 1988. The birds of Africa. Vol. 3. Academic Press, London. Hartert, E. 1892. Catalogue of the birds in the British Museum. Vol. 16. British Museum, London. Peters, J.L. 1940. Check-list of birds of the world. Vol. 4. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. Address: Nigel Cleere, 2 Hawthorn House, Roundfield, Upper Bucklebury, Berks. RG7 6RQ. U.K. E-mail cleere@churr.freeserve.co.uk © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Peter E. Lowther 280 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) New name for the Bolivian Blackbird by Peter E. Lowther Received 7 March 2001 Extensive recent work on relationships among the Icteridae, based largely on mitochondrial DNA sequencing, indicate that 5 species of brood parasitic cowbirds comprise a natural and holophyletic group that does not include the sixth “cowbird” species — the Bay-winged Cowbird, usually treated as Molothrus badius (Lanyon 1992, Lanyon 1994, Johnson & Lanyon 1999, Lanyon & Omland 1999, Omland et al. 1999, Searcy et al. 1999, AOU 2000). The genus Molothrus Swainson 1832 is then defined as encompassing only the brood parasitic cowbirds (see AOU 2000). The Bay-winged Cowbird has now been shown to be part of a South American icterid clade which has the Bolivian Blackbird Oreopsar bolivianus as its sister taxon (Johnson & Lanyon 1999; see also Lanyon & Omland 1999). Similarities between these two species also exist in behavioral traits and vocalizations that also support this indication of relationship (Jaramillo & Burke 1999); the latter authors even suggest “Baywing” as a common name to remove the connotations of common descent implied by the name “cowbird.” The transfer of the Bay-winged Cowbird to Oreopsar (as Oreopsar badius) suggested by Johnson & Lanyon (1999) maintains Molothrus as monophyletic and recognizes the phylogenetic affinity of this species to the Bolivian Blackbird. However, including the Bay-winged Cowbird and Bolivian Blackbird in the same genus creates two nomenclatural problems. First, the genus Agelaiodes Cassin, 1866, of which badius is the type species (see Friedmann 1929), has priority over Oreopsar Sclater, 1939. Second, when these two species are placed in the same genus an instance of secondary homonymy is created due to the existence of the race Molothrus badius bolivianus Heilmayr, 1917. Thus, a new specific name would be required for the Bolivian Blackbird. I suggest Agelaioides oreopsar, nomen novum for the Bolivian Blackbird, if it and the Bay-winged Cowbird are retained in the same genus. The proposed specific name, oreopsar, is used as a noun in apposition and retains some element of recognition and association to Oreopsar bolivianus by which name this taxon has always been known in its otherwise simple taxonomic history. The choice to retain these two species in Agelaioides is supported by phylogenetic analyses showing low divergence in cytochrome-b: Bolivian Blackbird and Bay-winged Cowbird show 6.5% divergence (S. M. Lanyon, pers. comm.), somewhat intermediate between divergence value of 4.9% among brood parasitic cowbirds and 9.1% between Bay-winged Cowbird and brood parasitic cowbirds (Johnson & Lanyon 1999). I thank Scott M. Lanyon, Thomas Schulenberg, Gary Graves, Carla Cicero and an anonymous reviewer for consultation, discussions and comments regarding this aspect of icterid nomenclature. Peter E. Lowther 281 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) References: AOU. 2000. Forty-second supplement to the American Ornithologists’ Union Check-list of North American birds. Auk 117: 847-858. Cassin, J. 1866. A study of the Icteridae. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1866: 10 - 25. Friedmann, H. 1929. The cowbirds: A study in the biology of social parasitism. C. Thomas Publisher, Springfield, IL. Hellmayr, C. E. 1917. Beschreibung von sechs neuen neotropischen Vogelformen, nebst einer Bemerkung tber Ampelion cinctus (Tsch.). Verh. Orn. Gesell. Bayern 13: 106-110. Jaramillo, A. & Burke, P. 1999. New World blackbirds. The icterids. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Johnson, K. P. & Lanyon, S. M. 1999. Molecular systematics of the grackles and allies, and the effect of additional sequence (cyt b and ND2). Auk 116: 759-768. Lanyon, S. M. 1992. Interspecific brood parasitism in blackbirds (Icterinae): A phylogenetic perspective. Science 255: 77-79. Lanyon, S. M. 1994. Polyphyly of the blackbird genus Age/aius and the importance of assumptions of monophyly in comparative studies. Evolution 48: 679-693. Lanyon, S. M. & Omland, K. E. 1999. A molecular phylogeny of the blackbirds (Icteridae): Five lineages revealed by cytochrome-b sequence data. Auk 116:629-639. Omland, K. E., Lanyon, S. M. & Fritz, S. J. 1999. A molecular phylogeny of the New World orioles (Ucterus): The importance of dense taxon sampling. Molec. Phylogenet. Evol. 12: 224-239. Searcy, W. A., Yasukawa, K. & Lanyon, S. M. 1999. Evolution of polygyny in the ancestors of Red-winged Blackbirds. Auk 116: 5-19. Sclater, W. L. 1939. A note on some American Orioles of the family Icteridze. Jbis (14), 3: 140- 145. Address: Peter E. Lowther, The Field Museum, 1400 South Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, I[linois 60605-2496, USA. E-Mail: lowther@fieldmuseum.org © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 The correct name of the Iberian Chiffchaff Phylloscopus ibericus Ticehurst 1937, its identification and new evidence of its winter grounds by Lars Svensson Received 26 April 2001 The Iberian Chiffchaff, whether regarded as a subspecies of Common Chiffchaff Phylloscopus collybita or a separate species, has been known as both brehmii (Homeyer 1871) and ibericus Ticehurst 1937. The current ‘official’ name is the former; e.g. the Records Committee of the British Ornithologists’ Union lists it as Iberian Chiffchaff Phylloscopus brehmii (Homeyer) (B O U 2001). However, I demonstrate below that the correct name should be P. ibericus. In recent years, close study of the Iberian Chiffchaff has revealed reasons for it to be treated as a separate species, mainly due to the efforts of Marc Salomon (Salomon Lars Svensson 282 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) 1982, 1987, 1989, 1990, 1997, Salomon et al. 1992, 1997), and has indicated criteria for its identification. Salomon et al. (1997) described a morphometric formula for separating males of Iberian and Common Chiffchaffs (nominate race). I here propose a different biometric formula to facilitate identification in the hand; I believe this to be more effective and easier to use. Vocalizations are not treated here; good accounts appear in Glutz von Blotzheim & Bauer (1991), Urban et al. (1997), Clement & Helbig (1998), and Svensson et al. (1999). The wintering grounds of the Iberian Chiffchaff have either been largely unknown (Ticehurst 1938, Williamson 1962, Cramp 1992, Baker 1997) or variously given as ‘apparently mainly within Iberia at low altitudes’ (BOU 2001), ‘resident’ and ‘some move south in winter’ (Parmenter 1991). Other authors have suggested that it winters partly or entirely in Africa, though the extent of this was little known: ‘the real winter grounds appear to be Maghreb, possibly even further south’ (Glutz von Blotzheim & Bauer 1991), “several indirect lines of evidence suggest that [P. ibericus]| migrates further than nominate collybita’ (Salomon et al. 1997), ‘there are winter records from as far south as Mali and Burkina Faso’ (Clement 1995). I give some evidence and reasons for believing that the winter grounds are to be found predominantly in tropical Africa. Throughout this paper, mention of collybita or Common Chiffchaff should be taken to refer to nominate P. c. collybita, unless otherwise indicated. The scientific name E. F. von Homeyer’s original description (1871) of the Iberian Chiffchaff, under the name ‘Phyllopneuste Brehmii’, is insufficient and in several vital aspects erroneous, as pointed out by C. B. Ticehurst (1937). von Homeyer described the Iberian Chiffchaff as being considerably smaller than the Common Chiffchaff, with wing (‘ulna’) only ‘51-52’ (Iberian is actually on average slightly larger); with ‘an appearance to have a longer tail’ (it has a slightly shorter tail); substantially shorter tarsi (claimed by von Homeyer to be about 20% shorter, whereas, in reality, the two taxa have roughly same length tarsi); “weaker bill, although of same length’ (it has a very slightly stronger and longer bill); and to have ‘considerably darker olive-brown upperparts’ (classical Iberian are green above and lack brown tinges) and similar colours below as Common Chiffchaff (Iberian is on average cleaner lemon-yellow and white on the underparts). The second outermost primary was described to be short, ‘only slightly longer than the secondaries’ (it is on average slightly longer than on Common Chiffchaff, substantially longer than the secondaries). These shortcomings relate to almost every character described. As noted by Ticehurst (1937) this, together with the lack of information about its call or song, makes it impossible to accept the description as anything other than a Common Chiffchaff, even allowing for the brief and incomplete descriptions of the time. It is clear that von Homeyer was not aware of sexual size dimorphism in Chiffchaffs. The type description most certainly described a (small) female Common Chiffchaff. Lars Svensson 283 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Plate 1. a. Iberian Chiffchaff Phylloscopus ibericus, 7 April 2001, Der Kaoua Oasis, SE Morocco. Note green upperparts without brown tinge, yellow hue on sides of head, and vivid lemon supercilium above and in front of eye. The sixth outermost primary is clearly emarginated, separating it from Willow Warbler P. trochilus. (Lars Svensson). b. Common Chiffchaff P. c. collybita, 19 May 1999, near Auch, Gers, SW France. Note brown tinge on greyish-green upperparts, rather dusky sides of head, and lack of strong lemon on supercilium. (Lars Svensson). Lars Svensson 284 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) von Homeyer did not explicitly state that the description was based on just one type specimen, but it is the only possible way to understand the brief original description. He mentioned that he had received several interesting skins from Portugal through the dealer Mr W. Schliter in Halle, these having been collected by Dr Rey, and that among these was ‘a small leaf-warbler at a quick glance resembling the Common Chiffchaff in some aspects, only being hardly bigger than a Goldcrest’. Although three specimens have later been referred to as types, only one collected prior to the description is known. The brehm1i type specimen E. F. von Homeyer’s collection of skins, numbering nearly 7,000, was bequeathed to the Staatliches Naturhistorisches Museum in Braunschweig (SNMB), Germany, including the type of ‘Phyllopneuste Brehmii’. In July 1999, I visited Braunschweig and examined the type specimen, together with other relevant skins. Both plumage and measurements are involved in the separation of Iberian and Common Chiffchaffs and, due to the close resemblance between the two, as many characters as possible must be used in combination in order to obtain a reliable identification. The type (Braunschweig no. 1287) is without doubt a female Common Chiffchaff P. c. collybita. The upperparts have a strong brown wash to the dull green on crown and mantle, and the underparts are both quite dusky (instead of largely whitish in the centre) and slightly tinged brown, with buff on the sides of the head, breast, flanks, and even slightly on the throat. These features exclude the possibility of it being an Iberian Chiffchaff. The measurements (mm) of the brehmii type are: wing 54, tail 42, tarsus 18.6, bill (to skull) 10.8, bill depth (at feathering) 2.2. Wing formula: 1‘ (outermost) primary (P1) in relation to primary coverts (p.c.) +6.5, P2 in relation to wingtip (WT) —6.5 (and falling between P8/9, near P8), P3 -0.5, P40, PS -0.5, P6—1, P7 -4, P8—6, P10-8.5, I* (outermost) secondary (S1)—10. P1 < P2 21. The label, with black ink handwriting by von Homeyer (validated by Manfred Scholz, SNMB) reads: ‘Sylvia trochitrs Brehmii ad, Portugal, April 69. Dr. Rey.’, and in pencil ‘Hartert vind. 1869. typ.’. On the reverse side is printed: “Wilhelm Schluter. Naturalienhandlung in Halle a/S. Europa.’ In ink handwriting the following is added ‘1287’ and ‘2233’ and ‘1.’. In pencil is written “No 28’. Since both the description and the type of von Homeyer refer to P. c. collybita, the name Phylloscopus brehmii (Homeyer 1871) is asynonym of P. c. collybita, and the correct name for the Iberian Chiffchaff is Phylloscopus ibericus Ticehurst 1937. It remains here to comment on the examination of the brehmii type by G. Niethammer (1963), whose views have subsequently been followed by most authorities and authors. Niethammer did not put forward any convincing reasons for rejecting Ticehurst’s new name, and for upholding von Homeyer’s. He claimed that the type with its ‘saturated upperparts and the vividly yellow on underparts (wing-bend, thigh, undertail-coverts)’ was ‘typical for the Chiffchaffs of northern Spain’ (presumably in error for Portugal or ‘Northern Iberia’). Ticehurst’s opinion that the brehmii type is a Lars Svensson 285 Bull, B.O. C2001 1214) migrant collybita was based on the original description and an examination of the type by Dr Steinbacher in Braunschweig at the time. Both were disregarded by Niethammer without any further arguments. The brehmii type is far too brown and buff to be ibericus. Vivid yellow hues on the underparts can be found on both taxa. As will be shown below, the biometrics of the type convincingly show it to be collybita. We now know that both ibericus and collybita breed in northern Iberia, and probably did so in the late 19" century, too. Referring to the area of collection is therefore in itself no proof. The date (‘April’) does not exclude migrants, and the date as given on the label has been questioned— —not without reason—based on the rather fresh tips to the primaries (Ticehurst, loc. cit.), which are more typical of birds from late autumn or winter. Vaurie (1954) questioned if this specimen was really the type at all, although it is not clear whether he examined it himself. However, there is no reason to doubt that this specimen 1s the type. It is still kept in von Homeyer’s collection, it is the only one from the type locality Portugal, it has the correct provenance, and it was collected two years prior to the description. Other specimens referred to as brehmii types, or of direct relevance Two more specimens in the Braunschweig collection emanating from von Homeyer were later designated by E. Hartert as ‘duplicate types’ (apparently sensu syntype) for brehmii, and have sometimes been referred to as ‘types’ in the literature. However, I have not been able to establish why Hartert did this, since he did not accept brehmii as a valid taxon (Hartert 1910). SNMB, no. 6484, Morocco (?), 3 May 1884 The locality for this bird is Morocco according to Ticehurst (1937), though Niethammer (loc. cit.) says ‘apparently Portugal’. A label with von Homeyer’s handwriting in black ink reads: ‘P. Brehmii 6484’, and in pencil ‘Hartert vind. typ.’. On the reverse side is written in ink ‘Mor an works, 3/5/84, female’. In pencil is written ‘1884’. The specimen is in all respects a typical female collybita, with plumage very similar to von Homeyer’s brehmii type. Measurements: wing 54, tail 44, tarsus 18.8, bill (to skull) 11.0, bill depth (at feathering) 2.1. Wing formula: P1 in relation to p.c. +6, P2 in relation to WT -6 (and falling between P7/8), P3 to P5 0, P6—1, P7 -5, P8 —7, P10—9.5, S1 —10.5. mi P22(). Even if this bird had been an Iberian Chiffchaff, which it is not, it could not serve as a type since it was collected 13 years after von Homeyer published his original description of the taxon, and since the original type is still preserved. SNMB, no. 2971, Algiers, no date A label with von Homeyer’s handwriting in black ink reads: ‘Phyllopneuste rufa Brehmii Homeyer, Loche, Algier’, and in pencil by Hartert ‘Hartert vind. typ.’. Finally in pencil by someone else ‘Duplic.’. On the reverse side is printed “‘Zoologisches Comptoir. Nr.’ Lars Svensson 286 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) and ‘Gustav Schneider in Basel’, with ‘v. Homeyer’ stamped in blue ink, ‘Phyllopneuste rufa L, Alg’ written in pencil, and no ‘2971’ (or possibly ‘2971’) in ink. This bird is an Iberian Chiffchaff, apparently collected by a Mr. Loche in the Algerian capital. Most likely it is a worn spring or summer female (although no date or sex are given). It has green upperparts without a brown cast on the crown and mantle (or with the slightest tinge only), and it is dusky oily-grey or off-white below, and with yellow streaks lacking any buff or brown-grey tinge on the throat, breast or flanks. The undertail-coverts are very pale yellow and accordingly there is only a very slight contrast with the whitish centre of the belly (the bird is not entirely typical in this respect, although such variation does occur within ibericus). Tarsi are rather pale grey-brown, and the cutting edges of the bill are also pale brown. Measurements: wing 57.5, tail 43, tarsus 19.4, bill (to skull) 12.3, bill depth (at feathering) 2.6. Wing formula: P1 in relation to p.c. +5, P2 in relation to WT —6.5 (and falling between P6/7, near P7), P3 and P4 0, P5 —2, P6 -4.5, P7 —7, P8—8.5, P10—10.5, S1 —12. P1 < P2 22.5. Since von Homeyer specifically mentions that the type is from Portugal, this undated Algerian bird cannot be the type, although it is the correct taxon. This bird was identified as a Willow Warbler P. trochilus by both Steinbacher and, reputedly, Hartert (Ticehurst 1937, although the labels do not indicate this in the case of Hartert). I have more than once been struck by the superficial similarity between Willow Warbler and Iberian Chiffchaff, both in the field and in the hand. However, this particular bird 1s too small for Willow Warbler (in which a wing of less than 59 mm would be exceedingly rare), it has a distinct (although not deep) emargination on P6 on left wing (P6 of right wing is broken at the base), and the flight- feathers are rather dull brown-grey and worn, not darker and glossier grey with pale tips as usually found on Willow Warblers in most seasons, due to the two complete moults each year in this species. Although I have found a very few Willow Warblers with a slight hint of an emargination near the tip of P6, this bird has a more obvious emargination. Further, Willow Warblers have a longer primary projection, with S1 usually 16-19 mm shorter than wingtip (only 12 mm on this bird), P1p.c.). Wing length is measured according to ‘method 3’ (Svensson 1992), and the bill is measured to the skull. I deliberately avoided the use of tarsus length as a variable (contra Salomon et al. 1997) since I found this to be nearly the same in ibericus and collybita across its range (see Table | and 2). However, Common Chiffchaffs breeding in south-west France, i.e. closest to ibericus, tend to have slightly longer tarsi (mean 20.13 mm in ten males) than those in other parts of Europe (N France, Germany, mean 19.64 in 53 males), and indeed longer than in ibericus (mean 19.64 mm in 33 males). I therefore recommend that tarsus length should be included when comparing breeding ibericus with local Common Chiffchaffs. For males, the discriminant MCV is 73.2. 89% of ibericus males had values higher than 73.2, and all collybita males had lower values. The overlap area is 71.9—73.2, within which 11% of the males of both taxa combined fell. Even for females the MCV gave some guidance. I checked it against 16 ibericus and 39 collybita females. The discriminant value for females is 70.9. All the female collybita had values lower than 70.9, whereas nine of the 16 female ibericus (56%) had higher values. There is a large overlap area between 61.0—70.9 where 62% of the females of both taxa combined fell. For the present sample, this gives a far better separation than the formula of Salomon et al. (1997). MCV was calculated for the brehmii type specimen and shown to be 60.8. This confirms that the brehmii type is a collybita, the MCV falling just short of the minimum value for Iberian Chiffchaff females. Also, on the brehmii type, P2 falls between P8/9, which only occurs in Common Chiffchaff, not in Iberian Chiffchaff. The correct identity of the ibericus type as an Iberian Chiffchaff was also confirmed by its MCV of 77.7. It is worth noting that some females of the Fenno-Scandian Chiffchaff P c. abietinus can match the MCV and biometry of a male Iberian Chiffchaff. Particularly brightly coloured abietinus are therefore a potential pitfall. Generally, though, colouration should help avoid this mistake: abietinus has slightly paler and more greyish-green upperparts (not such a saturated moss green colour), some buff or brownish tinges on sides of head, neck and breast, less vividly yellow supercilium Lars Svensson 290 TABLE, Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Summary of biometry of Phylloscopus ibericus Ticehurst 1937. Measurements (mm): range, mean and sample size given for all data except wing formula and tail/wing and bill/wing ratios. Males Females Wing 56-64, 61.02, 33 54-59, 56.38, 16 Tail AD S=52, 47.926 O93 41-48, 44.22, 16 Tarsus 17.9-20.7, 19.64, 33 17.6-19.0, 18.51, 15 Bill (to skull) depth (at feathering) 10.4-13.3, 12.06, 31 2al 2-8) 2S 11 .1=22:3 Tiss 2:2-2.15 Due, 16 Pil>p-c- 2-8, 5.83, 33 4-6.5, 5.22, 16 =e 5-8, 6.48, 32 5.5-7.5, 6.34, 16 P= =7/8 44%, =6/7 32%, =7/8 46.5%, =8 33.5%, —) 970, 81070, —O'O7o =6/7 13.5%; =f Ga PB-WwWet 0-1 0-1.5. PSS Wt 0-1.5 0-2.5 P6=Wil 1. 5-6:5.4 35555 28 1.5-4, 2,5, 12 PTW Ti 4-8, 6.24, Dy 3.5-6.5, 5.46, 12 P8=WT 6-10, 8.46, 26 6-8.5, 7:33; 02 P10=WT 9:5-13%55 10:895-28 75-11, 988712 S1=WT 10-14, 12.20, 28 9.5-12.55,1d nse PAlp.c. +7, P2 p.c. +5.5, P2 < WT -—7 (and falling between P7/8), P3 and P4 0, PS —1.5, P6—3.5, P7-6, P8 —8, P1O—10, S1 —11.5. P1 < P2 27. Comments regarding plumage as for preceding specimen. MCV 835.3. In late March and early April 2001 I visited Morocco together with Andrew Lassey and Mike Pearson. In southern Morocco, we observed several migrant Iberian Chiffchaffs. These were identified on size, plumage and behaviour (see above). Only birds seen very close in good light and for longer periods are listed below. Several others were probably also Iberian Chiffchaffs but were not seen close or long enough to confirm identification. All birds could be compared with either or both Common Chiffchaff and Willow Warbler, and some with Western Bonelli’s Warbler P. bonelli. One Iberian Chiffchaff was trapped to confirm our identifications in the field (Plate 1). The birds seen were as follows: 27 Mar 2001, Marrakech, three Iberian Chiffchaffs seen; 4 Apr 2001, Der Kaoua oasis on the Erfoud—Merzouga track, SE Morocco, one Lars Svensson 294 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) male Iberian Chiffchaff trapped (Plate 1a), DNA analysis later confirmed the identification; 7 April 2001, Oued Massa, SW Morocco, two Iberian Chiffchaffs seen. These observations seem to support the view that the Iberian Chiffchaff is a long-distance migrant which winters primarily in tropical Africa. The migration through Morocco in late March and early April may prove to be regular with concerted observation. That some birds may spend the winter north of Sahara is indicated by a specimen in Paris (MNHN 1967.575) collected in Redeyef in west central Tunisia (west of Gafsa) on 12 Jan 1955. Some uncertainties regarding the wintering area obviously remain. Acknowledgements I thank Professor Alf Johnels for inspiring me (without the proper background) to attempt a few taxonomic works, and the Signhild Engkvist Fund for generous support. Thanks are due to the staffs at various museums who enabled me examine the relevant specimens: Per Ericson and Goran Frisk (Stockholm), Vladimir Loskot (St. Petersburg), Robert Prys-Jones and Frank Steinheimer (Tring), Manfred Scholz (Braunschweig), Paul Sweet (New York) and Claire Voisin (Paris). I am grateful to Andrew Lassey and Mike Pearson for company and help with fieldwork in Morocco. Urban Olsson, University of Gothenburg, kindly analysed several feather samples for DNA. Dr Alan Knox and Dr David Parkin read the first draft of the manuscript and suggested numerous improvements for which I am much indebted. References: Baker, K. 1997. Warblers of Europe, Asia and North Africa. Helm, London. British Ornithologists’ Union. 2001. British Ornithologists’ Union Records Committee: 27th Report (October 2000). /bis, 143: 171-175. Clement, P. 1995. The Chiffchaff- Hamlyn, London. Clement, P. & Helbig. A. J. 1998. Taxonomy and identification of chiffchaffs in the Western Palearctic. Brit. Birds, 91: 361-376. Cramp, S. (ed.) et al. 1992. The birds of the Western Palearctic. Vol. 6. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford. Dresser, H. E. 1872. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1872: 25-26. Glutz von Blotzheim, U. & Bauer, K. (eds.) 1991. Handbuch der Vogel Mitteleuropas. Vol. 12/2. Aula, Wiesbaden. Hartert, E. 1910. Die Végel der paldarktischen Fauna. Vol. 1. Berlin. Helbig, A. J., Martens, J., Seibold, I. Henning, F., Schottler, B. & Wink, M. 1996. Phylogeny and species limits in the Palearctic Chiffchaff Phylloscopus collybita complex: mitochondrial genetic differentiation and bioacoustic evidence. Jbis, 138: 650-666. von Homeyer, E. F. 1871. Uber portugiesische Végel. In: Erinnerngsschrift an die Vers. d. deutschen Ornithologen in Gorlitz im Mai 1870. Anlage C.: 46-48. Kipp, F. A. 1958. Zur Geschichte des Vogelzugs auf der Grundlage der Fliigelanpassungen. Vogelwarte, 19: 233-242. Niethammer, G. 1963. Zur Kennzeichnung des Zilpzalps der Iberischen Halbinsel. Journ. f. Orn., 104: 403-412. Parmenter, T. 1991. A guide to the warblers of the Western Palearctic. Illustrated by C. Byers. Bruce Coleman, Uxbridge. Purroy, F. J. (ed.) 1997. Atlas de las Aves de Espana (1975-1995). Lynx, Barcelona. Rensch, B. 1938. Einwirkung des Klima bei der Auspragung von Vogelrassen, mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung der Fliigelform und der Eizahl. Proc. 8th Int. Orn. Congr., p. 285-311. Oxford. Rufino, R. (ed.) 1989. Atlas das Aves que nidificam em Portugal Continental. CEMPA, Lisbon. Lars Svensson 295 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) Salomon, M. 1982. Etude d’u cas possible de spéciation allopatrique: le Pouillot véloce ibérique Phylloscopus collybita brehmii (Homeyer). Mémoire de D.E.A. Université Paris VII. Salomon, M. 1987. Analyse d’une zone de contact entre deux formes parapatriques: le cas des Pouillots véloces Phylloscopus c. collybita et P. c. brehmii. Rev. Ecol. (Terre et Vie), 42: 377-420. Salomon, M. 1989. Song as a possible reproductive isolating mechanism between two parapatric forms. The case of the chiffchaffs Phylloscopus c. collybita and P. c. brehmii in the Western Pyrenees. Behaviour, 111: 270-290. Salomon, M. 1990. Interpretation taxonomique de la distribution parapatrique des formes collybita et brehmii du Pouillot véloce (Phylloscopus collybita, Aves, Sylviidae). C. R. Soc. Biogéogr., 66: 75-84. Salomon, M. 1997. Quel statut taxinomique donner au Pouillot véloce Ibérique? Alauda, 65: 63- 81. Salomon, M. & Hemim, Y. 1992. Song variation in the chiffchaffs (Phylloscopus collybita) of the Western Pyrenees—The contact zone between the collybita and brehmii forms. Ethology, D2265-282: Salomon, M., Bried, J., Helbig, A. & Riofrio, J. 1997. Morphometric differentiation between male Common Chiffchaffs, Phylloscopus [c.] collybita Vieillot, 1817, and Iberian Chiffchaffs, P. [c.] brehmii Homeyer, 1871, in a secondary contact zone (Aves: Sylviidae). Zool. Anzeiger, 2362) 25-36. Svensson, L. 1992. Identification guide to European passerines. 4th ed. Lullula, Stockholm. Svensson, L., Mullarney, K., Zetterstrom, D. & Grant, P. J. 1999. Collins birdguide. HarperCollins, London. Thonnérieux, Y. 1983. Résultats préliminaires sur la présence dans le sud voltaique d’oiseaux migrateurs en provenance d’Europe. Inst. Rech. Biol. Ecol. trop., Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Ticehurst, C. B. 1937. Phylloscopus collybita ibericus subsp. nov. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl., 57: 63-64. Ticehurst, C. B. 1938. A systematic review of the genus Phylloscopus. British Museum (Nat. Hist.), London. Urban, E. K., Fry, C. H. & Keith, S. (eds.) 1997. The birds of Africa. Vol. 5. Academic Press, London. Vaurie, C. 1954. Systematic notes on Palearctic Birds. No. 9. Sylviinae: the Genus Phylloscopus. Am. Mus. Nov., no. 1685, p. 3-4. Williamson, K. 1962. Identification for ringers 2. The genus Phylloscopus. B.T.O., Oxford. Address: Sturegatan 60, S-114 36 Stockholm, Sweden. Email: lars.svensson-lullula@ebox.tninet.se © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Appendix 1 Examined specimens considered to be P. ibericus and used for this paper: BM(NBH), Tring: 1886.7.8.622 (Gibraltar 3 Apr); 1925.7.15.12 (Algarve, Portugal, 30 May); 1934.1.1.5028 (Coimbra, Portugal, 23 May); 1934.1.1.5029 (Coimbra 23 May); 1934.1.1.5030 (NW Spain 30 Sep); 1934.1.1.5043 (R’Hira Ammam, Algeria, 1 May); 1934.1.1.5044 (Algeciras, Spain, 30 March); 1934.1.1.5045 (near Coimbra 23 May; the type); 1934.1.1.5046 (Coimbra 23 May); 1934.1.1.5047 (N Portugal 27 May); 1934.1.1.5048 (Algarve 18 May); 1941.5.30.4795 (Sesombres, Portugal, 14 Apr); 1941.5.30.4796 (Coimbra 23 May); 1941.5.30.4797 (Galicia, Spain, 19 May); 1941.5.30.4798 (Jesus, Braga, Portugal, 27 Apr); 1941.5.30.4799 (Setubal, Portugal, 20 Apr); 1947.4.394 (Pau, France, 20 Apr); 1949.Wh.1.1.2.242 (Setubal 18 Apr); 1949.Wh.1.1.2.243 (Algarve 10 Apr); 1949.Wh.1.1.2.244 (S. Antonio 9 Apr); 1949.Wh.1.1.2.245 (Cizimbra, Portugal, 4 May); 1949.Wh.1.1.2.246 (Jesus 28.4); 1949.Wh.1.1.2.247 (Vigo, Spain, 8 May); 1965.M.14.232 (Gavarnie, France, 11 Sep); Lars Svensson 296 Bull. B.O.C. 2001 121(4) 1965.M.14.233 (St. Sauveur, France, 14 Apr). MNRBN, Paris: 1933.1977 (Massina, Mali, 4 Feb); 1967.575 (Redeyef, Tunisia, 12 Jan); 1978.1250 (Ibardin, France, 9 May); 1978.1251 (Ibardin 4 May); 1978.1252 (Ascain, France, 8 Jul); 1978.1254 (St. Jean de Luz, France, 3 May); 1978.1257 (St. Jean de Luz 6 Apr); 1978.1258 (St. Jean de Luz 24 May); 1978.1260 (St. Jean de Luz 17 May); 1978.1262 (St. Jean de Luz 15 Jun); 1978.1263 (Hendaye, France, 26 May); 1978.1269 (Ibardin 4 May); 1995.208 (Bamako, Mali, Dec); 1999.664 (Aya, Quiptzcoa, Spain, 20 May); 1999.665 (no loc., presumably autumn). AMNH, New York: 449.442 (Ahouraima, Spain, 3 Jun); 449.450 (Algeciras, Spain, 2 Jun); 449.451 (Algeciras 2 Jun); 449.452 (Algeciras 4 Jun); 449.453 (Algeciras 30 Apr); 449.454 (Algeciras 29 Apr). SNMB, Braunschweig: 2971 (Algiers, presumably spring). Specimens labelled ibericus (or brehmii) but either misidentified or considered not convincingly identified, and hence not included in this study as ibericus: SNMB 1287.20.1. Portugal, April 1869. P. c. collybita. Treated extensively in the main section. SNMB 6484. Morocco (?), 3 May 1884, female. P. c. collybita. Treated extensively in the main section. BM(NH) 1877.10.23.27. Morocco, no date, probably female. Identification uncertain, being very slightly tinged brown on a tiny portion of mantle (partly due to missing feathers so that the brown colour of the feather bases is more exposed), and on sides of breast. Also, biometry not diagnostic. Nevertheless, has a close similarity to female ibericus. MCV 64.2. BM(NH) 1881.5.1.856. Tangier, no date or sex. Identification uncertain due to faint buff hue on sides of breast and throat, but biometry and rest of plumage strongly favour normal ibericus. WCW Ge BM(NH) 1924.12.18.349. N Biskra, N Algeria, possibly 6 Jan 1912, but month ambiguously noted on label. A controversial bird, being very slightly tinged buff-brown on breast. Also, biometry is less typical. All the same, has a close similarity to female ibericus. MCV 64.2. BM(NH) 1949Wh.1.1.2.234. Gavarnie, French Pyrenees, 10 Oct 1929, female? Quite fresh, but tail feathers pointed and slightly worn. Plumage colours very close indeed to ibericus (but slight buff tinge to lower flanks/upper vent). MCV 65.2. AMNH 449.493. Canterets, C Pyrenees, France, May 1905, no sex but male according to size. Very similar to ibericus, but undertail-coverts not as deep yellow as in many (though certainly could pass for one), centre of belly not as pure white. Could be a hybrid, but biometry suggests ibericus. MCV 76.9. MNHN 1960.3931. Djasset, Sahara, 16 Nov 1959, female. Exact locality not identified. Not convincing, has faint buff tinge (including on breast) and rather pale greyish-green tinges above. If sex correct then probably abietinus. Wing 62. MCV 77.9. ZI, St. Petersburg 101.388. Spain, 27 May 1882, female. Biometry not conclusive for ibericus, and plumage intermediate: underparts without buff (except very slight tinge on sides of breast), streaked pale lemon on whitish ground. However, belly not whiter, and undertail-coverts not particularly strong lemon. Sides of head rather buffish-tinged. Crown and mantle greenish with a slight brown cast. This plumage could fit both taxa. MCV 65.3. ZI, St. Petersburg 101.389. Morocco, 16 May 1885, female. Identity uncertain; very slightly tinged buff-brown on sides of breast, and a faint brown hue on crown and mantle, although these are rather green and could fit ibericus. Biometry intermediate. Probably female ibericus, but perhaps best to add a question mark. (A Schliiter skin, thus provenance not entirely reliable.) MCV 61.8. ZM, Copenhagen 65.479. Almeria, S Spain, 11 Mar 1966, female. May be a pure ibericus, but comparison should be made with a series. Sides of head and flanks have a little grey-brown wash, else only white and lemon yellow beneath. Quite green above except that crown has faint brown tinge. MCV 68.9. MEMBERSHIP See also website: http://www.boc-online.org Following the approval of the changes to the Rules of the Club at the Special General Meeting on 31st October 2000, Membership of the Club was extended to non-Members of the British Ornithologists’ Union. Subscription rates, as from | January 2001 are now: BOU Members £12.00 US$ 23.00 Non-BOU Members £18.00 US$ 33.00 All paid-up Members of the Club receive (postage free) four quarterly issues of the Bulletin, and the annual index. Applications for Membership, enclosing the annual subscription, should be made to the Hon. Secretary (address as below). The Membership List 2001 is available, free of charge to all requesting a copy, on application to the Hon. Secretary (address below). This list shows addresses (including E-mail addresses, where known), for all paid-up Members as at 31 December 2000. Members are requested to inform the Hon. Secretary of all corrections or changes, without delay, for despatch of the Bulletin. To offset the cost of postage, any contribution, or a stamped and addressed (A5-sized) envelope will be gratefully accepted. INSTITUTIONAL SUBSCRIBERS & APPLICATIONS FOR BACK NUMBERS OR OTHER PUBLICATIONS The Bulletin, together with annual index, may be purchased (postage free) by Institutional Subscribers, on payment of an annual subscription of £25 (or US$45) on application to: The Hon. Publications Officer, J.A. Jobling, 14 The Valley Green, Welwyn Garden City, Herts. AL8 7DQ, UK. Single issues and back numbers of the Bulletin, and also books in the BOC Occasional Publications series may similarly be obtained on request to him. PAYMENTS All amounts quoted are net and should be paid in £ sterling, if possible. Payments in other currencies must include a further £4 for UK bank charges (except for annual rates in US dollars, which are inclusive). All cheques or drafts should be made payable to the British Ornithologists’ Club. If preferred, remittances may be made by bank transfer direct to the Club’s bank account - Barclays Prime Account, Dale House, Wavertree Boulevard, Liverpool L7 9PQ, UK. (Sort Code 20-00-87 Account No. 10211540), with confirmation to the Hon. Treasurer, D.J. Montier, Eyebrook, Oldfield Road, Bickley, Bromley, Kent. BRI 2LF. CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence on membership, changes of address and all other matters should be addressed to: Hon. Secretary, Cdr M.B. Casement, OBE, RN, Dene Cottage, West Harting, Petersfield, Hants. GU31 SPA, UK. (or E-mail: mbcasement@aol.com). For details of Club Meetings see inside front cover. UK Data Protection Act. In order to keep records up to date, and to facilitate despatch of the Bulletin, names and addresses of Members and Subscribers, and the dates of subscription renewal, (but no other personal information) are held on computer disk. If there is any objection to this, please advise the Hon. Secretary, in writing, so that these records can be deleted from the disk. COMMITTEE Dr. C.F. Mann (Chairman) (2001) R.E. Scott (1998) Revd. T.W. Gladwin (Vice-Chairman) (July 2001) J.A. Jobling (1999) Cdr. M.B. Casement, OBE., R.N. (Hon. Secretary) (1996) Professor R.A. Cheke (2001) D.J. Montier (Hon. Treasurer) (1997) Mrs M.N. Muller (2001) P.G.W. Salaman (2001) Hon. Editor: Professor C.J. Feare Chairman of Publications Subcommittee: Revd. T.W. Gladwin (as from May 2001) Hon. Publications Officer: J.A. Jobling Registered Charity No. 279583 Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club ISSN 0007-1595 Edited by Professor Chris Feare Volume 121, Number 4, pages 217 - 296 CONTENTS CLUB NOTES .-:cxdsconnecctnwncsesneetcinsndntaanwniaiseramsion dtinccigalies amish de elementals stiles 217 CLEMENT, P. & HOLMAN, D. Passage records of Amur Falcon Falco amurensis from SE Asia to southern Africa including first records from Ethiopia ...............:.cccecsceesceeseeereeeeeees 222 HERHOLDT, J.J. Observations on the nocturnal migration of the Kurrichane Buttonquail in northern South Africa) ..........2...-.0:.0-secssesenessenessencessnsssesnncinscetesuansenansdizenuanenasuaneet ean 231 WALTERS, M. The correct scientific name of the White-bellied Heron ...................cceeeeeececeeeeeeee 234 BURGER, A. E. & BETTS, M. Monitoring populations of Red-footed Boobies Sula sula and frigatebirds Fregata spp. breeding on Aldabra Atoll, Indian Ocean ..............:cccceecceeeseeeseeeeees 236 LEFEBVRE, L., READER, S. M. & WEBSTER, S. J. Novel food use by Grey Kingbirds and Red-necked Pigeons in BarbadO ................:0sescessessesossasneseseesssessnpnanasenernapeeneene eee 247 SMITH, P. W. Comments on George F. Gaumer and the provenance of a Giant Kingbird Tyrannus cubensis specimen from MEXICO ..................::0:+00sss0sseosensseq20enesensseseee en 249 RENNER, S. C. & SCHUCHMANN, K.-L. The Fawn-breasted Brilliant Heliodoxa rubinoides, a hummingbird species new to Bolivia ..................-00.-0-0s:ss01s:01a00ssse 252 ONIKI, Y., SCHUCHMANN, K.-L., WILLIS, E. O., SIGRIST, T. & BAUDET, G. Roosting site of the Sombre Hummingbird Campylopterus cirrochloris (Trochilidae) in southern Batbate, BBP 208 nooo sc seasinssnnensiniowses cosusuadicenues pup oc sionesey ob acoaisecs-n obs hace Lee eae 256 TOMKOVICH, P. S. A new subspecies of Red Knot Calidris canutus from the New Siberian DNAS sc wnndjacin ncsenncons sind menatinniet se cesiespinorte lesen emit ae 257 WALTERS, M. & DICKINSON, E. C. A reappraisal of the type specimens of Brachypodius _ immaculatus Sharpe, 1876 (Pycnonotidac) ................<.0<.-c--0rsue-t-e-as2asnanenussaeonsaneteaeee 264 DICKINSON, E. C. The correct scientific name of the Palawan Peacock-pheasant is Polyplectron napoleonis Lesson, 1831 ....:.....2:....s000secsesescses=seanees sndenanancuannseec-neeee 266 HERZOG, S. K. A re-evaluation of Straneck’s (1993) data on the taxonomic status of Serpophaga subcristata and S. munda (Passeriformes: Tyrannidae): conspecifics OF SCMUSPECIES? q....-ss.ccecceonceteniadannosnneinden eanchindncawsstu arlunnasnthannenlieseaeeebnce sets pee ee eee 273 CLEERE, N. The validity of the genus Veles Bangs, 1918 (Caprimulgidae) ...............c:eeeeseees 278 LOWTHER, P. E. New name for the Bolivian Blackbird ..................2.....<0.-.2:.0sscssapeeeee 280 SVENSSON, L. The correct name of the Iberian Chiffchaff Phylloscopus ibericus Ticehurst 1937, its identification and new evidence of its winter grounds ..............::::ccceeeeees 281 Authors are invited to submit papers on topics relating to the broad themes of taxonomy and distribution of birds. Descriptions of new species of birds are especially welcome and will be given priority to ensure rapid publication, subject to successful passage through the normal peer review procedure; they may be accompanied by colour photographs or paintings. On submission, two copies of manuscripts, typed on one side of the paper, double spaced and with wide margins, should be sent to the Editor, Prof. Chris Feare, 2 North View Cottages, Grayswood Common, Haslemere, Surrey GU27 2DN, UK. Note that electronic versions are not required on first submission. Where appropriate half-tone photographs may be included and, where essential to illustrate important points, the Editor will consider the inclusion of colour plates (if possible, authors should obtain funding to support the inclusion of such colour plates). When papers are accepted, revisions should be returned to the Editor as both a hard copy, as outlined above, and also on a 3.5” disk, as Word or Wordperfect files for PC. At this stage authors should send their email addresses, as completion of the editing process and proof reading will be undertaken electronically. For instructions on style, see the inside rear cover of Bulletin 121 (1) or the BOC website: www.boc-online.org © British Ornithologists’ Club 2001 Printed on acid-free paper. Published by the BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS’ CLUB Typeset by Alcedo Publishing of Colorado Springs, USA, and printed by Crowes of Norwich, UK A) aa sei ere i Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club Edited by Professor Chris Feare Index for Volume 121 (2001) Compiled by Mary N. Muller LIST OF AUTHORS AND CONTENTS ALSTROM, P. see DUCKWORTH, J.W. ASCANIO-ECHEVERRIA, D. see SHARPE, C.J. ASTON, P. see CURIO, E. BARNETT, J.M. see CAPPER, D.R. BETTS, M. see BURGER, A.E. BIUN, A. see MOYLE, R.G. BOOKS: RECEIVED secs ci chen oh Shek cco First recomes noteworthy observations and new distributional data for birds in Paraguay ..................::000000 23 CHEKE, A. Booby Sula colonies in the Mascarene area (Indian Ocean): extinctions, myths and colour morphs .......2.0.22..05:-ccscssedecessneeaaderascuesstesecuiessesssbene ieee ee = rrr 71 CHEKE, R.A. Confirmation of the position of the likely type-locality of Chalcomitra TUDESCENS SLANGETU 5.20. coieisdoncssnasnnuaneassadwde tenets 47 . 47 :: 50 _ 52 cs 124 5 128 Back cover Vol. 121 No. 2 ce ce ce 4 189 Ba 190 s 280 ce wallichi, Catreus 43 whitelyi, Caprimulgus 110-5 woodfordi, Corvus 131, 137-8, 143 —, Nesoclopeus 131, 133, 138, 140 Xanthomyza phrygia 47 xanthopterygius, Forpus 123 Xenicus longipes 46 Xenops minutus 125 Xenopsaris albinucha 33 Xiphocolaptes albicollis 124 Xolmis cinerea 125 yarrelli, Carduelis 48 yersini, Garrulax 16 Zebrilus undulatus 51 Zenaida asiatica 147 — aurita 247 zeylanicus, Pycnonotus 48 zeylonus, Telophorus 147 zonaris, Streptoprocne 31, 123 Zonotrichia capensis 126 Zoothera dauma 192, 196 Zosterops everetti 193, 196 — metcalfii 131, 138, 143 — strenuus 48 CORRECTIONS TO TEXT line 16 Accipiter not Accipter i 8 militaris not militarius x 18 smithii not smithi es 35 poecilopterus not poecilopters 3 34 Diomedea not Diomedia r 40 Cephalopterus not Cepalopterus i 7, textilis not textillis ‘a 32 Paradisaea not Paradisea a Zi) Cissopis not Cissops . 9 Rostrhamus not Rosthramus ze 38 Campylorhamphus not Campyloramphus “i 1 - no “,” after moult line J. saucerrottei not saucerottei 5 ls) no “,” after moult 27 Spizaetus not Spizaethus . 28 dougallii not dougalli fi ips Agelaioides not Agelaiodes Ty Ce ie a a Shae HEE IR PAY Le ss } tL ue rT) he’ a i rae \ ro i att Pe ri 6 i Ty syTEry “ees, oN Ae es ; Viet sae? + 3 ¢ : $ ted ye Tete tere - :