Proposal (1066) to South American Classification Committee

 

 

Revise the English names of the Heterocercus manakins.

 

 

The SACC has requested this proposal in notes 17a, 18, and 19 in the Manakins section of its list of species (https://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCBaseline08.htm).

 

Currently the SACC and eBird/Clements (Clements et al. 2025) use “crowned” in the English names the three Heterocercus species:

 

*Orange-crowned manakin (H. aurantiivertex)

*Yellow-crowned manakin (H. flavivertex)

*Flame-crowned manakin (H. linteatus)

 

The IOC (Gill et al. 2024) and BirdLife International (HBW/BLI 2025) use “crested” in the three names. Previous authors also did so, for example Ridgely and Tudor (1994) and Kirwan and Green (2011). Field guides to Ecuador (Ridgely and Greenfield 2001) and Venezuela (Hilty 2003) do so as well.

 

The AviList team (Avilist Core Team 2025) intentionally did not attempt to provide official English names in 2025. Their listed names mirror those of the IOC where their taxonomies match, which is the case with Heterocercus. The AviList spreadsheet includes the Clements and HBW/BLI English names as well (though it cites the 2024 lists, they were unchanged in 2025). AviList intends to work towards official names in future versions and to possibly expand to include additional widely used English names. The “official” names will not be mandated.

 

The basic (non-eBird) Clements spreadsheet has no alternate names, but the full list of common names in other languages (including regionalized versions of English or English names for other global taxonomies) can be downloaded here: https://support.ebird.org/en/support/solutions/articles/48000804865-bird-names-in-ebird#download-common-names. The reflect the name choices available in eBird Preferences, whereby users can choose an English naming convention that meets their needs (US English, Australian English, etc., as well as AviList English).

 

Although “crested” has a long and widespread history of use, many observers equate the word with a bird like a Curl-crested Jay, which has a visible, usually raised, crown feature. Male Heterocercus manakins have a crest but apparently raise it only during courtship display or perhaps if agitated, so for the overwhelming majority of their life they appear crestless.

 

“Crowned” is more descriptive of these manakins. It mirrors the usage in Ruby-crowned and Golden-crowned kinglets among others who also seldom raise the eponymous feature.

 

So:

 

Should the SACC replace “crowned” with “crested” in the names of the three species? A “yes” vote changes the names. A “no” vote retains “crowned” and replaces the current requests for proposals with a statement that SACC declined to change the names. I recommend a “no” vote.

 

I owe thanks to J. V. Remsen and Marshall Iliff for very helpful comments on an earlier draft of this proposal.

 

Literature cited:

 

AviList Core Team. 2025. AviList: The Global Avian Checklist, v2025. https://doi.org/10.2173/avilist.v2025

 

Clements, J. F., P. C. Rasmussen, T. S. Schulenberg, M. J. Iliff, J. A. Gerbracht, D. Lepage, A. Spencer, S. M. Billerman, B. L. Sullivan, M. Smith, and C. L. Wood. 2025. The eBird/Clements checklist of birds of the world: v2025. Downloaded from https://www.birds.cornell.edu/clementschecklist/download/

 

Gill, F, D Donsker, and P Rasmussen (Eds). 2024. IOC World Bird List (v 15.1). Doi 10.14344/IOC.ML.15.1. http://www.worldbirdnames.org/

 

HBW and BirdLife International (2025). Handbook of the Birds of the World and BirdLife International digital checklist of the birds of the world. Version 10. Available at: https://datazone.birdlife.org/about-our-science/taxonomy#birdlife-s-taxonomic-checklist

 

Hilty, S. L. 2003. Birds of Venezuela, 2nd ed. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 878 pp.

 

Kirwan, G., and G. Green.  2011. Cotingas and Manakins.  Princeton Univ. Press, New Jersey, 624 pp.

 

Ridgely, R. S., and P. J. Greenfield.  2001. The Birds of Ecuador. Vol. I. Status, Distribution, and Taxonomy. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 848 pp.

 

Ridgely, R. S., and G. Tudor.  1994. The birds of South America, Vol. 2. University Texas Press, Austin.

 

 

Craig Caldwell, November 2025

 

 

 

 

Vote tracking chart:

https://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCPropChart1044+.htm

 

Comments from Remsen: “NO.  As noted in the proposal, ‘crested’ in this case refers only to when males erect their crown patch during display.  Otherwise, the bird in the field is as flat-headed as any other tyrannoid called ‘crowned’ with color patches no more visible than in several species called ‘crowned’.

 

“Ridgely & Tudor (1989) changed the ‘crowned’ to ‘crested’ with the following rationale:

 

“Only the coronal patch (or crest) is colored in males of the genus, not the entire crown. Under normal field conditions the color is actually barely visible. We thus suggest a sight modification of each species’ English name so as to indicate that the color does not encompass the entire crown (as for example, in the White-crowned and Blue-crowned Manakins).

 

“Regardless, I think that when bird people read “crested”, they are expecting something with a prominent tuft of feathers on the head, not a semi-concealed crown patch erected only during display. Also, this assumes that the use of “crown” refers to the entire top of the head … which is dead wrong in birds.  Just as frequently, it refers to minor ornamentation on top of the head, e.g., widespread familiar North American species such as White-crowned Sparrow, Ruby-crowned Kinglet, and Orange-crowned Warbler.  If crown were inaccurate, where is the outcry to change to “Ruby-crested Kinglet”?

 

“The use of ‘crest’ in bird names typically refers to head plumage that is elevated above or behind the crown, not an erectile crown patch.  For example, birds in the SACC area with “crested” in their names include the Crested-Tinamous, Crested Guan, Wire-crested Thorntail, Rufous-crested Coquette, Erect-crested Penguin, Crested Eagle, Crested Owl, Crested Quetzal, Crimson-crested Woodpecker, Hairy-crested Antbird, Crested Gallito, Crested Hornero, Black-crested Tit-Tyrant, Crested Doradito, Crested Black-Tyrant, Plush-crested Jay, Crested Ant-Tanager, Flame-crested Tanager, Crested Finch, Black-crested Finch, Red-crested Cardinal, etc.). In other cases, when the crest is not normally held erect, at least one can see the flattened crest because of its color or elongated feathers, which may alter the head profile (e.g., Red-crested Cotinga, Long-crested Pygmy-Tyrant, White-crested Elaenia).  On the other hand, I can think of at least three cases that are reasonably comparable to Heterocercus: Saffron-crested Tyrant-Manakin, Orange-crested Flycatcher and Crested Oropendola.

 

“From at least 1929 (Hellmayr) through Meyer de Schauensee (1966, 1970) through at least 1986 (Hilty, Colombia), these species were known as ‘crowned’ manakins.  50+ years of stability.  Then, after Ridgely and Tudor (1989), many sources adopted ‘crested’, but many did not (e.g., Restall et al. 2006, Schulenberg et al. Peru 2007, Herzog et al. Bolivia 2016, Dickinson-Christidis 2014), including SACC.  What a mess.  All because of what I consider an unusual interpretation of what a ‘crest’ is in birds.

 

Comments from Mario Cohn-Haft (guest voter): “NO on calling the Heterocercus manakins “crested”.  A crest is almost always imagined as being a notable projection on the top or back of the head of a bird, visible in profile, even in silhouette. In tyrannoids, on the other hand, the “semi-concealed crown patch” (also sometimes called ‘coronal" = crown = “-vertex" of their scientific names), such as found in these guys, is such a familiar wording and phenomenon that it’s practically an expectation. It’s true that there are plenty of examples of crown and crest being used in common names in inconsistent and conflicting ways, so it’s certainly not a huge issue. But I can’t see any advantage in calling these crests, let alone going out of the way to change long-established names that were actually better than the ‘newbies’.

 

“On the other hand, I’ve long been impressed at how different this genus is from other manakins in plumage pattern and body shape, and iI like the idea of their having a (genus-level) common name to distinguish them. But that would be a different proposal altogether: something like “swallow-manakin” (you heard it here first) in allusion to their long wings and even longish tails and above-canopy, sweeping aerial flight displays and so on. We can save that for another day. But meanwhile, seems worth sticking to our guns on these ‘crowned’ manakins.”

 

Comments from Gary Rosenberg (voting for Claramunt): “NO. In my opinion, NEITHER name is really correct - and we don’t have a name for a concealed “crown patch” - but I don’t see the utility to changing a long-established name (s) to something different, yet not any more accurate. I agree that this is just meddling with common names because someone thinks it is better - yet in this case, it is not an obvious improvement. I agree that the members of this genus have relatively flat (or rounded) crowns that I have not seen show a “crest,” so I think it would be wrong to change it just to go along with a change.”

 

Comments from Gary Graves (voting for Naka): “NO. Common names, in any language, exist for practical reasons—communication, accessibility, and usability. They allow people without taxonomic training to discuss organisms in a consistent, mutually understandable way. Scientific names shift regularly as new phylogenetic work appears, but common names are comparatively stable and provide continuity for field guides, checklists, conservation programs, and long-term datasets. That stability is the primary value, far more important than fine-grained preferences among near-synonymous descriptive terms.

 

“Hellmayr (1929) used “crowned” for the Heterocercus species, and de Schauensee (1966, 1970) retained it in the reference works that served as the standard for South American bird names from the late 1960s through the 1980s. Sibley and Ahlquist (1990) disrupted this stability by introducing “crested” for the same species, and several subsequent authors followed suit without any formal consensus process. The result was unnecessary churn in terminology that had been stable for more than fifty years. Besides, “crowned” is the more descriptively accurate term.”

 

Comments from Donsker (voting for Bonaccorso): “I vote NO for the proposal to alter the English names for the three Heterocercus manakins from "crowned" to "crested" as has been adopted by some others. 

 

“As has been pointed out by Van, the use of "crowned" for species in this genus with this type of coronal patch has a long-established history in the western ornithological literature dating back to Hellmayr and to Meyer de Schauensee. True, the IOC adopted the adjective "crested" following Ridgely (as he explained in his Birds of Ecuador), but, in my opinion, "crest" isn't a clear improvement. On the other hand, the use of "crest" is hardly as wrong as some have argued. There is a cross-Atlantic difference in opinion as the appropriate term for this type of erectile crown patch in the genus Regulus. All North American kinglets are "crowned" but in the Old World the members of Regulus are all "crests" of some type (i.e. firecrest, goldcrest, flamecrest). 

 

“Nonetheless, I am firmly of the opinion that we should stand by our current use of "crowned" for members of Heterocercus as has been the longer tradition in the Western Hemisphere.”