Proposal (1073) to South American Classification Committee

 

 

Use “Whitestart” as the English name for species of Myioborus

 

 

Consistent with the use of “Amazon” for Amazona and “Flatbill” for Tolmomyias, this recommendation is an attempt to bring about greater agreement between global bird lists and presents an opportunity to have a unique name (“Whitestart”) apply to a single well-defined genus (Myioborus). This name has been popular with field guide authors for more than two decades and claims that “Slate-throated Redstart” is the clear name choice based on prevailing usage are no longer correct. In fact, it seems that momentum favors Whitestart, with four major global checklists, multiple regional field guide authors, and even opinions of past “no” voters shifting towards Whitestart in recent years. The publication of AviList v2025 (AviList Core Team 2025) presents an opportunity for consensus on English names where possible—and the names of Myioborus would be an easy place to find agreement if NACC and SACC (along with eBird/Clements) agree to align around Whitestart.

 

 

Fig. 1: Species within the genus Myioborus, using English name preferences from AviList v2025 (within eBird and Birds of the World, users can select their preferred English names, including eBird/Clements names which would use “Redstart” here in alignment with AOS-NACC and SACC). https://birdsoftheworld.org/bow/species/paruli1/cur/species#genusMyioborus

 

Previous NACC and SACC proposals

 

Proposals on this issue have been raised four times before: twice for AOS-SACC and twice for AOS-NACC. Perhaps no other English name issue has been voted on so frequently without being changed, indicating strong preferences by many regarding the use of Whitestart.

 

The previous proposals are as follows:

 

·      October 2003, SACC 63: https://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCprop63.htm

·      2004, NACC (Banks et al. 2004)

·      March 2005, SACC 171: https://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCprop171.htm

·      March 2016, NACC 2016-A: https://americanornithology.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/2016-A.pdf and comments: https://americanornithology.org/about/committees/nacc/current-prior-proposals/2016-proposals/comments-2016-a/#2016-A-2

 

 

SACC 63: failed 3/6, but Jaramillo and (in Proposal 173) and Schulenberg (pers. comm.) both changed their minds on this issue.

 

SACC 171: failed 4/5; Robbins did not vote but had voted for Whitestart in SACC 63.

 

NACC 2016: 2 voted for Whitestart, 8 voted against (one indicating openness to a proposal that reframed the issue)

 

Most previous proposals and commentors have acknowledged the problems with the name Redstart, including:

 

1) The tails of Myioborus show flashes of white, not red;

2) 10/12 species in Myioborus are strikingly yellow and gray and only one (Painted Redstart), sometimes two (northern populations of Slate-throated Redstart), show red plumage (Fig 1);

3) Although all Myioborus are closely related and congeneric, they are no longer considered closely related to the other redstart in Parulidae (Setophaga ruticilla) and obviously are much more distantly related to Old World redstarts in Muscicapidae (Fig. 2)

 

The first SACC proposal acknowledged:

 

If we were "starting from scratch, I'd vote for "Whitestart." It is more accurate, and it nicely emphasizes that Setophaga and Myioborus are not sister genera.

 

But that proposal recommended a “no” vote on the change, citing a statement by Ridgely and Tudor (1989) that “we feel that the name “Redstart” is simply too well entrenched to be changed at this late date.” Those voting for Whitestart noted:

 

Stiles: Whitestarts - definitely a better name, the question is whether it is worth changing. This name has been around since a Nuttall monograph on social behavior of Andean birds by Moynihan (1980? [1979]), if not before. Redstart is definitely inappropriate for most Myioborus in a literal sense (not only no red in the tail, but no red anywhere), but finds its justification in the superficial similarity with Setophaga and in the fact that M. pictus, the only one to reach the US, does have a red breast. Redstart is the classic name, but a number of important new works do incorporate Whitestart.

 

Nores: Si. Este parece un problema más sentimental que ornitológico. Redstart es evidentemente inapropiado para especies que no tienen color rojo y por eso es mejor "Whitestart". Sin embargo, hay opiniones como la de Stotz que evidentemente están más relacionado con la costumbre de usar un nombre y con no ofender a las especies."

 

Furthermore, two of the voters (Zimmer and Jaramillo) mentioned that Painted Redstart would be hard to change, presumably because it is the one truly red Myioborus and because it is the most familiar one to US/Canadian birders.

 

The second proposal to SACC did not provide new arguments and seemed vituperative in tone. Notable comments were:

 

Jaramillo: YES - I still do not like the sound of Painted Whitestart, but my mind has changed on this subject. Yes, I do want name stability, but that is balanced by certain name changes here and there when the name is truly misleading. Calling something a Little Nightjar is fine even though it may not be the smallest Caprimulgid in the world. There is the other extreme where the name really is dead wrong or misleading, the more I sit back and think about this one, the more comfortable I am in putting it in that category. In effect this is the equivalent of calling Bubo scandiaca the Sooty Owl -- it is just incorrect. There is no red on the tail, so Redstart is not appropriate. Setophaga is the American Redstart and that is appropriate, the name Redstart for Myioborus is misleading and confusing. One of the reasons we want name stability is to minimize confusion; I would argue that a grossly incorrect English name provides confusion. So, if we are in the mindset of minimizing confusion, maybe the name change in this case wins over the stability issue, it does for me.

 

Pacheco: YES. Por razões óbvias, não é confortável para mim opinar acerca da "propriedade" e conveniência dos nomes em Inglês. Logo, o meu voto aqui tem caráter meramente opinioso. Após ler o extenso arrazoado, alinho-me com a opinião do Álvaro."

 

Also notably, one voter (Robbins) preferred Whitestart but voted no, apparently out of principle (since he felt the issue had already been adjudicated) and in part because of the tone of the proposal.

 

The NACC proposal in 2016 (NACC 2016-A-02) raised these points:

 

·      “Whitestart” means “white tail” and is more appropriate than Redstart for birds with white in the tail

·      “Redstart” implies a taxonomic connection to Setophaga ruticilla (and potentially to Old World Redstarts in the genus Phoenicurus).

·      Whitestart is “accepted by multiple authorities”

 

That proposal concluded with this recommendation:

 

This change has three advantages: (1) it eliminates misleading names from North American birds, (2) it prevents widespread confusion on naming conventions, and (3) it increases knowledge of correct species taxonomy and emphasizes its importance in bird identification. If we keep the names as they are, we would thus continue to misappropriate and perpetuate the ignorance of the general public. Likewise, we already have the English name “Whitestart” for the genus Myioborus, already accepted by multiple authorities, of which the structure of the English name would be familiar, pronounceable, and far more accurate.

 

The 2016 previous NACC voters opted for Redstart 8-2, with one Yes voter stating:

 

“YES. Although I am generally for stability the English names, the use of “Redstart” for species in Myioborus by the NACC is no longer stable. Rogue field guide authors and alternative checklists have embraced the far better name “Whitestart,” such that the NACC and its adherents are nearly alone in using “Redstart.” It is time to face the inevitable and adopt the better name. Not doing so makes us look like anachronistic old cranks. Most sources not affiliated with the NACC or SACC use “Whitestart.” Google Myioborus for instance.

 

“A few of you have remarked that passing this proposal would leave the problem of “American Redstart.” I think very few ornithologists/birders have any problem with the name “American Redstart.” We are “stuck” with all sorts of new-world species sharing a the [sic] same group name as a similar species and acting but unrelated Old World species (Robin, Flycatcher, Bunting, Oriole, Warbler etc.), and those names are with us for the long haul. The red in the American Redstart is not that different in tone from the red in many Old World Redstarts. At least one Phoenicurus has no red at all. “Orangestart” would have been a better name, but there is no more problem calling Setophaga ruticilla American Redstart than there is calling Turdus migratorius American Robin.

 

“The problem is with species in Myioborus. These are not related at all to Setophaga (or Phoenicurus). Because Myioborus and Setophaga ruticilla share a common faunal region (the New World) and family, it is confusing having unrelated species sharing a distinct name like “Redstart” (unlike the more generalized names warbler, sparrow, flycatcher or bunting). The twelve or so species of Myioborus are monophyletic, share a distinct foraging behavior, and a distinct plumage character related to that foraging (white in the tail, which is used to flush (=start) insect prey. As such, the name “Whitestart” could not be more fitting, and it clears up a confusion regarding relationships. Only two of the 12 species (Painted and Slate-colored) have more than a little red. A few others have brownish red in the caps. Most species have no red at all.”

 

Historical usage of Redstart and modern phylogeny

The species in Myioborus were once placed in Setophaga, along with American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla, which created an assemblage that was presumed to have been monophyletic.

 

The first SACC proposal (63) summarized some of the history behind the use of “Redstart”:

 

The warblers in the genus Myioborus were known as "Redstarts" for all of their history until last decade or so. This presumably derives first from the very superficial resemblance of North American Setophaga ruticilla to the "real" Redstarts of Europe in the genus Phoenicurus, which share orange-red coloration in the rectrices and tail movements that accentuate it. Second, the Painted Redstart was given that English name when incorrectly placed in Setophaga, even though it had white where the "real" Setophaga had orange, and the species of Myioborus, by implication considered the sister genus to Setophaga by Ridgway (1902), were also called "Redstarts." Widespread M. miniatus was described in Setophaga, so it was only logical to use "Redstart" for it and relatives. Thus, Myioborus miniatus and Middle American M. torquatus have been called "Redstarts" for over a century. Coues (1872) used "Redstart" for both M. pictus and M. miniatus.

 

It was only in 1976, with the publication of the 33rd supplement to the 5th edition of the AOU Check-List (AOU 1976), that the genus Myioborus Baird, 1865 (with type species Setophaga verticalis Swainson) was resurrected, and at that time, the name “Redstart” was carried over for all included species without question. More recently, Setophaga ruticilla was found to be embedded within the large genus Dendroica, resulting in the genus Dendroica being subsumed into Setophaga. The usage of Redstart for Myioborus appears to be a legacy of when Myioborus and Setophaga ruticilla were believed to be closely related, which we now know is not the case. Modern phylogenetic information (Fig. 2) shows that the Myioborus assemblage is closer to Cardellina (e.g., Wilson’s Warbler) and Basileuterus (e.g., Golden-crowned Warbler) than to American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla.

 

 

 

Figure 2. Relationships of selected species and genera of Parulidae, showing the lack of a close relationship between Myioborus and Setophaga ruticilla (from Zhao et al. 2025).

 

When is usage prevailing?

Voters on past proposals in 2002 and 2004, considered that “Redstart” was well-entrenched for the genus. But is that still the case?

 

Googling Myioborus lands on a Wikipedia page that is entitled “Whitestarts”. The other Wikipedia pages mostly use Whitestart but do use Painted Redstart for M. pictus. eBird and Cornell Lab hits still defer to Redstart, in observance of the NACC and SACC name, but almost all other sources use Whitestart. Even a 2009 article in the Wilson Journal of Ornithology used “Whitestart” (Mumme 2009). Neither name is now clearly “prevailing”.

 

Major global checklists increasingly use Whitestart for Myioborus. Below is a summary of the use of Redstart and Whitestart across major regional or global checklists. Note that these are not entirely independent: NACC and SACC were both formerly committees of the AOU/AOS. Clements has explicitly followed NACC/SACC names, to the extent feasible, while AviList has explicitly followed IOC names.

 

·      The AOU/AOS Checklist has consistently used “Redstart” for all Myioborus from 1886 to present

·      The SACC Checklist (https://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCBaseline.htm) has consistently used “Redstart” for all Myioborus from its inception to present

·      The Clements Checklist (https://www.birds.cornell.edu/clementschecklist/introduction/updateindex/) has consistently used “Redstart” for all Myioborus from its first edition to present (although it has explicitly tried to align with English names of AOS-NACC and SACC). However, the undersigned authors of the current eBird/Clements Checklist (Clements et al. 2025) hereby recommend the use of “Whitestart” for all Myioborus.

·      The Howard & Moore Checklist (4th edition; Dickinson and Christidis 2014) uses “Whitestart” for all Myioborus, but used “Redstart” in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd editions.

·      The IOC Checklist (Gill et al. 2025) has used “Whitestart” for all Myioborus since its inception to the present day (v15.1)

·      AviList v2025 uses “Whitestart” for all Myioborus because almost all English names are aligned with IOC 15.1

·      The HBW/BirdLife International Checklist (del Hoyo and Collar 2016) uses “Whitestart” for all Myioborus but used “Redstart” through BirdLife’s version 08 (Oct 2015).

 

Despite the lack of independence between the various lists, the momentum has been towards increased usage of Whitestart for Myioborus. Both HBW/BirdLife and Howard & Moore 4th edition have changed from Redstart to Whitestart in recent decades, and the eBird/Clements team also recommends this change. NACC and SACC are the primary players that continue to advocate for Redstart for Myioborus.

 

Field guides similarly have used both names. Some authors committed to one or the other, while others expressed the alternate name in parentheses. Either way, an incomplete selection of guides shows inconsistency on the names chosen, and it is clear that both names are in use.

 

Name for Myioborus miniatus

Field Guide

comments

Slate-throated Redstart (Whitestart)

Colombia – Hilty and Brown (1986)

 

Slate-throated Whitestart

High Andes – Fjeldså and Krabbe (1990)

 

Slate-throated Redstart

Mexico – Howell and Webb (1995)

 

Slate-throated Whitestart

Ecuador – Ridgely and Greenfield (2001)

“they were formerly usually called “Redstarts”

Slate-throated Whitestart

Venezuela – Hilty (2003), 2nd ed

“called Redstarts by most previous authors”

Slate-throated Redstart

Northern South America – Restall et al. (2006)

follows SACC

Slate-throated Redstart

Peru – Schulenberg et al. (2007)

Myioborus Redstarts have prominent white outer tail rectrices (source of alternate name “Whitestarts”)

Slate-throated (Redstart or) Whitestart

Brazil - von Perlo (2009)

 

Slate-throated Redstart

Panama – Angehr and Dean (2010)

 

Slate-throated Redstart

Central America – Vallely and Dyer (2018)

follows NACC

Slate-throated Redstart

Ecuador – Freile and Restall (2018)

follows SACC

Bolivia: Slate-throated Redstart (Whitestart)

 

Bolivia – Herzog et al. (2019)

 

Brown-capped Whitestart (for M. brunniceps)

 

Argentina – Pearman and Areta (2020)

no mention of “Redstart” as alternate name

Slate-throated Whitestart (Redstart)

Costa Rica – Dyer and Howell (2023)

 

 

Note that SACC proposal 171 lists an additional 14 works that also used Whitestart, including several CD sound compilations.

 

Regardless, Redstart is certainly no longer the overwhelmingly used name for Myioborus, and it looks much more like NACC and SACC have been swimming against the tide, especially given the number of field guide authors who generally align with names endorsed by NACC and SACC, except in the case of this genus.

 

Evolving opinions

In addition to global lists and field guides, the opinions of a number of individuals have been evolving on this question. For example, MJI has long felt attached to the name Redstart for this genus, and especially for Painted Redstart (as mentioned by Zimmer and Jaramillo in their 2002 SACC votes). (However, we feel that sentimental attachment to the name of one North American species, for a mainly tropical American genus, is not the best approach in deciding on names for this 12-species genus.) But with more travel and broader experience of the genus Myioborus, the name Redstart has felt less and less appropriate to MJI for this assemblage of yellow parulids with white tail flashes, and it is apparent that many birders in Central and South America simply know these birds as Whitestarts. Whitestart now clearly feels like a better, easier handle for this genus.

 

Others have similarly changed their opinions:

 

·      Robert Ridgely recommended sticking with Redstart in Ridgely & Tudor (1989), but then used Whitestart in Birds of Ecuador (Ridgely and Greenfield 2002).

·      Steve Howell used Redstart in Birds of Mexico (Howell and Webb 1995), but Whitestart in Finding Birds in Mexico (Howell 1999) and subsequent works such as Birds of Costa Rica (Dyer and Howell 2020).

·      Tom Schulenberg voted for Redstart in two prior SACC votes, but now strongly prefers Whitestart (pers. comm. to Iliff on 2 Apr 2026).

·      Alvaro Jaramillo voted for Redstart in his initial SACC vote (2002), but for Whitestart in his second vote (2004).

·      Steve Hilty used Redstart in Birds of Colombia (1986), but Whitestart in Birds of Venezuela (2003) and Birds of Colombia (2021, though followed by Redstart in parentheses)

·      Gary Stiles (1989) used Redstart in Birds of Costa Rica, but clearly expressed preference for Whitestart in his 2002 and 2004 SACC votes.

 

The case to retain “Redstart” for Myioborus

With four previous proposals, there has been a lot of ink spent in defense of retaining “Redstart” for Myioborus, despite the acknowledgment that it is not an appropriate name and is misleading about relationships.

 

Across those three proposals, the “no” votes have consistently expressed three philosophies:

 

1.   If we tried to “fix” cases where incorrect relationships are implied, then not only would American Redstart also need to change, so too would many tanagers, warblers, flycatchers, robins, etc.

2.   Stability in English names is important and so we should not change when we can avoid it

3.   Many bird names are imperfect or even inappropriate; we should not be in the business of “common name improvement”

 

Point 1 above is not the point of this proposal. We are not recommending changing the name American Redstart or any other species. This proposal is limited to Myioborus.

 

Also, while we do believe that Whitestart is a better name for many reasons, the main reason for this proposal is in the name of consistency and long-term stability of names. The widespread adoption of Whitestart, which is so much more descriptive, has destabilized the English names for these birds. Also, modern genetic information has clarified relationships and showed clearly that a close relationship between Setophaga ruticilla and Myioborus, as believed at the time of the 5th edition of the AOU Check-List, does not exist.

 

Why change now?

As summarized above, Whitestart has been used by the IOC, AviList, HBW, BirdLife International, and multiple field guide authors (e.g., Steve Hilty, Steve Howell, Bob Ridgely, and others). Redstart has been primarily in use by NACC, SACC, and those that explicitly follow those sets of names.

 

It seems to be unanimously acknowledged that Whitestart is a better name, given that it is both a more accurate reference to the white flashes in the tail of Myioborus and a unique name that is applied to a single genus and that does not imply a non-existent close relationship with Setophaga ruticilla. The argument to retain “Redstart” for Myioborus thus rests primarily on a feeling that the name is well-established and in prevailing usage.

 

Field guides have now established a familiarity with the usage of Whitestart among birding communities in the Neotropics, where this genus predominates. Most birders and serious students of ornithology are aware that Whitestart and Redstart are interchangeable names for Myioborus. The names Whitestart and Redstart are memorable enough and similar enough that there will be little confusion if Slate-throated Redstart becomes Slate-throated Whitestart—even for those unfamiliar with this issue or the reasons for the change. And new birders who encounter Painted Whitestart in Arizona and Brown-capped Whitestart in Bolivia will have the advantage of the immediate association that the English name provides. No one will be confused about why 11 birds with yellow plumage end up with a name implying that they are red or have red tails. We are seeing a huge surge in birding interest in recent years, and recent decisions to use Mountain-gem for Lampornis, Amazon for Amazona, and Flatbill for Tolmomyias has helped bring better alignment between common names and diverse clades and better understanding to field birders that encounter them. There remain a great many English names that differ between the global checklists, many of which will not have easy resolution. However, we view this as a case where alignment can easily be achieved, and where change is not overly disruptive, toward a name that is objectively better.

 

The alternative would be for the Whitestart contingent to adopt Redstart. Past voters for NACC and SACC have acknowledged that, if this issue were to be looked at with a clean slate, the name Whitestart would be preferable for Myioborus. To ask AviList to change would require arguing that Redstart is a better name for Myioborus, because prevailing usage of that name can no longer be established. Many field guides within the range of Myioborus already use Whitestart. The name Redstart implies non-existent relationships with other genera. And no one can argue that the name Redstart is more descriptive of Myioborus species than Whitestart. Thus, it is unlikely that alignment will be achieved around Redstart.

 

To recap, we believe that this proposed change deserves fresh consideration, especially since the issue has not been reconsidered since 2016 (and SACC has not considered it since 2004), for the following main reasons:

 

1.   There are very real benefits of aligning English names across existing global lists.

2.   Applying Redstart to Myioborus implies relationships that do not exist.

3.   There is considerable benefit to aligning English names around phylogeny and scientific names.

4.   The incorrect nature of “Redstart” to refer to a genus of birds with white outertails that they flash (“start”) to hunt prey; Whitestart is correct for all members of the genus.

5.   Changing Redstart to Whitestart is unlikely to be particularly disruptive.

 

On the other hand, continuing to use the name Redstart for Myioborus would:

 

·      Miss an opportunity to align English names for all major world lists

·      Align with most regional field guide usage in the Neotropics

·      Miss an opportunity to use a distinctive name for a distinctive genus

·      Imply relationships that don’t exist between Myioborus and three other genera across two other families

·      Continue to use an inappropriate name, since these species have no red in the tails

 

On the other hand, if NACC and SACC were to adopt Whitestart, we would instantly have nearly complete global alignment around an acknowledged better name for the birds in this genus.

 

Recommendation

We recommend a YES vote to adopt Whitestart for all members of Myioborus. If accepted, this would result in these new names for the SACC (and NACC) region:

 

If adopted, the below names would change as shown:

 

Scientific Name

English Name

Revised Name

NACC

SACC

Myioborus pictus

Painted Redstart

Painted Whitestart

x

 

Myioborus miniatus

Slate-throated Redstart

Slate-throated Whitestart

x

x

Myioborus brunniceps

Brown-capped Redstart

Brown-capped Whitestart

 

x

Myioborus castaneocapilla

Tepui Redstart

Tepui Whitestart

 

x

Myioborus pariae

Paria Redstart

Paria Whitestart

 

x

Myioborus cardonai

Saffron-breasted Redstart

Saffron-breasted Whitestart

 

x

Myioborus albifacies

White-faced Redstart

White-faced Whitestart

 

x

Myioborus torquatus

Collared Redstart

Collared Whitestart

x

 

Myioborus flavivertex

Yellow-crowned Redstart

Yellow-crowned Whitestart

 

x

Myioborus ornatus

Golden-fronted Redstart

Golden-fronted Whitestart

 

x

Myioborus melanocephalus

Spectacled Redstart

Spectacled Whitestart

 

x

Myioborus albifrons

White-fronted Redstart

White-fronted Whitestart

 

x

 

 

 

Literature Cited

 

AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION (AOU). 1976. Thirty-third Supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds. The Auk 93(4): 875–879.

 

ANGEHR, G. R., AND R. DEAN. 2010. The Birds of Panama: a Field Guide. Comstock, Ithaca, NY, USA.

 

AVILIST CORE TEAM. 2025. AviList: The Global Avian Checklist, v2025. https://doi.org/10.2173/avilist.v2025

 

BANKS, R. C., C. CICERO, J. L. DUNN, A. W. KRATTER, P. C. RASMUSSEN, J. V. REMSEN, Jr., J. D. RISING, AND D. F. STOTZ. 2004. Forty-fifth supplement to the American Ornithologists’ Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk 120: 985–995.

 

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/

 

COUES, E. 1872. Key to North American Birds; Containing a Concise Account of Every Species of Living and Fossil Bird at Present Known from the Continent North of the Mexican and United States Boundary. Naturalists’ Agency, Salem, MA, USA.

 

DEL HOYO, J., AND N. J. COLLAR. 2016. HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Volume 2: Passerines. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain.

 

DYER, D., AND S. N. G. HOWELL. 2023. Birds of Costa Rica. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.

 

FJELDSÅ, J., AND N. KRABBE. 1990. Birds of the High Andes. Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

 

FREILE, J., AND R. RESTALL. 2018. Birds of Ecuador. Helm Field Guides. Helm, London, UK.

 

GILL, D., D. DONSKER, AND P. C. RASMUSSEN (Eds). 2025. IOC World Bird List (v 15.1). http://www.worldbirdnames.org/

 

HERZOG, S. K., R. S. TERRILL, A. E. JAHN, J. V. REMSEN, JR., O. MAILLARD Z., V. H. GARCIA-SOLIZ, R. MACLEOD, A. MACCORMICK, AND J. Q. VIDOZ. 2019. Birds of Bolivia. Field Guide. Asociación Armonía, Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia.

 

HILTY, S. L. 2003. Birds of Venezuela. Helm Field Guides. Christopher Helm, London.

 

HILTY, S. L. 2021. Birds of Colombia. Lynx and BirdLife International Field Guides. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain.

 

HILTY, S. L., AND W. L. BROWN. 1986. A Guide to the Birds of Colombia. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.

 

DICKINSON, E. C., AND L. CHRISTIDIS. 2014. The Howard and Moore Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World. 4th edition. Volume 2. Aves Press, Eastbourne, UK.

 

HOWELL, S. N. G. 1999. A Bird-Finding Guide to Mexico. Comstock, Ithaca, NY, USA.

 

HOWELL, S. N. G., AND S. WEBB. 1995. A Guide to the Birds of Mexico and Northern Central America. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

 

MOYNIHAN, M. 1979. Geographic Variation in Social Behavior and in Adaptations to Competition among Andean Birds. Nuttall Ornithological Club, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge, MA, USA.

 

MUMME, R. L. 2009. Breeding biology and nesting success of the Slate-throated Whitestart (Myioborus miniatus) in Monteverde, Costa Rica. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 122(1):29–38.

 

PEARMAN, M., AND J. I. ARETA. 2021. Birds of Argentina and the South-West Atlantic. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.

 

RESTALL, R., C. RODNER, AND M. LENTINO. 2006. Birds of Northern South America. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, USA.

 

RIDGELY, R. S., AND G. TUDOR. 1989. The Birds of South America: Volume 1: The Oscine Passerines. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX, USA.

 

RIDGELY, R., AND P. J. GREENFIELD 2001. The Birds of Ecuador. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.

 

RIDGWAY, R. 1902. The Birds of North and Middle America. Bulletin of the United States National Museum No. 50 part 2. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., USA.

 

SCHULENBERG, T. S., D. F. STOTZ, D. F. LANE, J. P. O’NEILL, AND T. A. PARKER. 2007. Birds of Peru: Revised and Updated Edition. Princeton Field Guides. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.

 

STILE, F. G. 1989. A Guide to the Birds of Costa Rica. Comstock, Ithaca, NY, USA.

 

VALLEY, A. C., AND D. DYER. 2018. Birds of Central America. Princeton Field Guides. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.

 

VON PERLO, B. 2009. A Field Guide to the Birds of Brazil. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

 

WINKLER, D. W., S. M. BILLERMAN, AND I. J. LOVETTE. 2020. New World Warblers (Parulidae), version 1.1. In Birds of the World (S. M. Billerman, B. K. Keeney, P. G. Rodewald, and T. S. Schulenberg, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.paruli1.01.1

 

ZHAO, M., J. A. OSWALD, J. M. ALLEN, H. L. OWENS, P. A. HOSNER, R. P. GURALNICK, E. L. BRAUN, AND R. T. KIMBALL. 2025. A phylogenomic tree of wood-warblers (Aves: Parulidae): Dealing with good, bad, and ugly samples. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 202: 108235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2024.108235.

 

 

Marshall J. Iliff, Pamela C. Rasmussen, and Andrew Spencer

April 2026

 

 

 

 

Vote tracking chart:

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

 

Comments from Rich Hoyer (who has Claramunt vote): “NO. Stability in scientific names is always a goal, but these must change from time to time according to rules. But stability in English names is no less important, maybe even more so, and there are no rules that require the invention of new names, unless there’s a split.

 

“It just leads to the question of what does “redstart” mean, just as we can talk about what “robin” means.

 

“We can remain all so very smart to know that “start” is an obsolete word in a foreign language that referred to the tail without creating instability. And we can know that robin was never a bird’s name to begin with, but rather a person’s name appended to the beginning of “robin rebreast, just like "jenny wren” and “tom tit." Or is someone suggesting we change the name every non-muscicapid robin in the world?”