Proposal (543) to South
American Classification Committee
English
names for Schiffornis (genus and
species)
We now have had a number of suggestions
from various people on the names for both the genus Schiffornis and the various species that we’ve accepted to
recognize. Now it’s time to bite the bullet and decide. So, I have tried to
pull together the various names proposed and run them up the proverbial
flagpole. I thank all who have weighed
in with suggestions on what is indeed a pretty inhospitable group (of birds,
that is) for which to find useful and distinctive names! OK, here goes …
I. On a name
for the group:
1.
Schiffornis –has the advantage of having been used (at least recently) and
being evocative (anyone knowing Neotropical birds immediately pictures an
undistinguished brown bird with a loud, whistling voice). We already have many
generic names being used as English names: Tityra,
Vireo etc. etc. Whether it’s a patronym or whether Schiff was an important
ornithologist are really irrelevant; the object of a name is to distinguish a
group.
2.
Mourner – has also been used, but is not distinctive (already in use for two
other genera of suboscines, and the voices of all Schiffornis species are arguably the least mournful of the lot.
3.
Whistling-bird (Donegan)- appropriate, but these are hardly the only birds that
whistle, in addition to which such a name simply sounds silly (at least, to my
perhaps persnickety aesthetic sense).
“Whistler” would at least sound relatively decent, but is also in use
for another group (at the family level, at least in some classifications) so is
best not considered.
My recommendation: 1, Schiffornis.
[Note from Remsen: We previously dealt with this issue
and voted to use Schiffornis over Mourner – see Proposal 194. But no harm in reconsidering this]
II. Names for
the species- here we have a rather wide range of choices for most species, so I
suggest that we weigh our first, second and third choices as 3,2 and 1 points
and at the bitter end, simply go with the name with the most points). If we wind up with a tie for first place,
have a second round with the two names with the highest scores to choose.
A.
veraepacis
1. Brown (from Ridgway 1907 and Hellmayr 1929,
and used by Nyári)- arguably the worst name, as it is not distinctive
(especially with respect to stenorhyncha,
with which it is sympatric in at least two areas and is appreciably “browner”,
hence this name could actually impede the correct identification of specimens.
2. Olive
(Stiles) – useful with respect to stenorhyncha
but, as Van notes, could cause confusion with respect to olivacea, and Thomas notes that
it isn’t really “olive” but olive-brown, and “olive-brown” sounds pretty
cumbersome to my ear.
3.
Western (Donegan) – this is perhaps the best name as it is appropriate for
South America, and Central America is in fact to the west of most of South
America.
4. Northern (Hilty) – seems best for Central
America but not for South America, in that this species’ range extends south to
Ecuador (and south of that of stenorhyncha).
My choices: Western (3 points), Olive (2, or 1 as I
don’t like either Northern or Brown and recognize the problems with Olive).
B. stenorhyncha
1.
Slender-billed (from Hellmayr 1929 and used by Nyári)- goes with the
Latin name, but neither distinctive (amazonum
has a narrower bill) nor useful in the field.
2.
Brownish (Stiles) – useful with respect to veraepacis
but not distinctive, as all Schiffornis are
“brownish”.
3. Russet-winged [was Rufous-winged] (Stiles) –
although the wings are hardly a bright rufous, they are definitely more
rufescent than the body plumage, and this is distinctive with respect to at
least amazonum, which is the form
most similar in plumage at least in Colombia, where the ranges of the two
approach most closely. (I have not seen any of the eastern races of turdina so cannot say whether this
character holds throughout its range).
4. Pale-bellied (Stiles)- in reality the gray
belly in adults is not consistently paler than that of amazonum, but it does contrast more sharply with the brown of the
breast; again, I don’t know if this holds for the eastern races of turdina.
5.
Russet (already in use in Ridgway 1907) – short and convenient; my only caveat
is that probably most people (like me) don’t know exactly what shade of brown
is “russet”.
My choices: Rufous-winged (3),
Russet (2), Pale-bellied (1).
C. olivacea
1. Olivaceous (already in use in
Hellmayr 1929) – goes with the Latin name and has been used before, but not
wholly distinctive. Matches scientific
name.
2.
Guianan (Stiles)- accurately describes the species’ range, restricted to the
Guianan Shield where it is the only Schiffornis,
hence distinctive as well and useful in the field.
3.
Ridgway’s (Donegan) – patronym for describer.
My choices: Guianan (3), Olivaceous
(1).
D. aenea
1. Foothill (Nyári)– should be no problem, as it
appears to be the only candidate and is appropriate with respect to the
neighboring, lowland turdina. Hence, it gets my 3 points.
2.
Zimmer’s (Donegan) - patronym for describer.
E. turdina
1.
Thrush-like – as presently constituted, it is the species with the widest range
and could qualify for use; however, this name was coined when it was classified
as a manakin. While it was arguably the
most “thrush-like” among the manakins, all Schiffornis
are equally (and not very) “thrush-like”, hence this name loses most of its
practicality. Also, I agree with Van
that we should reserve this name for use when and if the whole complex is
reunited as a single species, which seems most unlikely with the evidence as it
now stands.
2.
Amazonian (Stiles?)- appropriate in that the vast majority of its range lies in the Amazon basin; however, this is
the species most likely to suffer further splitting, so it might be best to
reserve this name for the group that would include amazonum, the most widespread form, when and if the split is made. Used by Hellmayr (1929) but for amazonus only.
3. Eastern (Stiles?)– this name is appropriate
in that its range lies to the east of the other species in this complex with
the partial exception of olivacea, which
is well characterized with Guianan and should cause no confusion. Again, if turdina were to be further split, it might still be appropriate for
the non-amazonum group – but let’s
worry about this when the time comes!
4. Tetrasyllabic (Donegan)- seems appropriate if
not wholly distinctive, but sounds horrible to my persnickety ear, and
certainly would not help in the museum.
(5.) Note: although cute, I don’t think that “Schiff’s
Schiffornis” merits serious consideration – sorry, Van!
My choices: Eastern (3), Amazonian
(2), Tetrasyllabic (1).
I hope I haven’t left out any (serious) alternatives
among the welter of suggestions, and assigned “authorship” correctly!
Gary Stiles, September 2012
Note
from Remsen: Below
is the score sheet I set up to keep track of all this. This is a first try at a system like this, so
I’m sure there are unforeseen problems.
If you really do not think a name is acceptable, give it a zero. Despite Gary’s brutal dismissal of my beloved
Schiff’s Schiffornis, I have used the powerful authority of my position to
reinstate it into the candidate list. If
anyone has any “write-in” candidates, including anyone out there in the world
who is interested, let me know.
We can
insert the usual passionate and emotive comments as usual below the table.
By the
way, thanks to Gary for “volunteering” to do this. Now, his impact on Neotropical ornithology
has reached its zenith.
I |
AJ |
VR |
MR |
GS |
DS |
KZ |
SH |
MP |
TS |
SUM |
Schiffornis |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Mourner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whistling-bird |
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
II.A. veraepacis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brown |
|
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
0 |
2 |
5 |
Olive |
|
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
|
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
Western |
3 |
3 |
|
3 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
18 |
Northern |
|
1 |
3 |
|
3 |
|
|
1 |
3 |
11 |
Hesperian |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
3 |
II.B. stenorhyncha |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slender-billed |
|
0 |
3 |
|
2 |
|
1 |
0 |
|
6 |
Brownish |
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
0 |
Russet-winged |
3 |
3 |
|
3 |
1 |
|
|
0 |
1 |
11 |
Pale-bellied |
|
|
|
1 |
1 |
3 |
|
1 |
3 |
9 |
Russet |
|
2 |
|
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
0 |
2 |
8 |
Interjacene |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
3 |
II.C. olivacea |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Olivaceous |
|
3 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
9 |
Guianan |
3 |
|
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
21 |
Guyana |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
6 |
Ridgway’s |
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
4 |
II.D. aenea |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foothill |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
24 |
Bronze/Bronzy |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
4 |
Zimmer’s |
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
II.E. turdina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thrush-like |
|
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
1 |
|
1 |
Amazonian |
|
|
|
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
1 |
|
5 |
Eastern |
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|
16 |
Tetrasyllabic |
|
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
|
3 |
Brazilian |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
2.5 |
|
5.5 |
Brown-winged |
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
4 |
Four-whistle |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
Brown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
Schiff’s |
|
24 |
|
0 |
-23 |
|
|
1 |
|
1 |
Comments from Stotz:
A. veraepacis: Northern 3, Western 2, 0 for the other 2 names
I prefer
Northern to Western because this species extends far to the north of any other
species. I recognize that it also extends west of any other species, but
I think the northern extension is much clearer to most people. I give
zero to Brown and Olive because all of the birds are some version of brown,
olive-brown, brownish-olive or olive. It is hard to imagine that Brown or
Olive would help anybody to identify these birds. I am willing to
consider those names if they are a translation of the scientific name, but not
as de novo creations.
B. stenorhyncha: Slender-billed
2, Pale-bellied 1, Rufous-winged 1 others 0
No good name, it seems to me. I
go for Narrow-billed as at least being consistent with the scientific
name. I avoid Brownish and Russet because I can't see that there is any
value in using names referring to general body tone because the variation
in these taxa is just so subtle. Pale-bellied and Rufous-winged are a
little better, except that the belly is not that pale and the wings are well
short of rufous. If I have to go 3-2-1, it would be Narrow-billed 3,
Pale-bellied 2, Rufous-winged 1.
C: Guianan 3, Olivaceous 1
Not completely
dismissing Olivaceous because it goes with the scientific name, but again a
useless name in a group where arguably they are all olivaceous. Guianan
is a good distinctive name.
E. turdina: Eastern
3, Tetrasyllabic 1, Amazonian 0, Thrush-like 0, Schiff's -23.
Eastern is I think
easily the best name. Amazonian would be a poor choice given that
nominate turdina is in the Atlantic
Forest. Thrush-like would be confusing since you couldn't tell whether
you were referring to S. turdina as
one of 5 species or as including all of the other taxa.
Comments from Remsen:
“A. Concerning veraepacis, “Brown” likely derives from when thought to be a
manakin, and so this worked well compared to all other Middle
American/Trans-Andean manakins, so this is somewhat anachronistic.
C. Concerning olivacea, Olivaceous may not be diagnostic but it is accurate
(unlike Slender-billed), and I like the historical continuity, and for some,
the match with the scientific name is nice.
Don’t we have enough “Guianan Somethings” already?”
E. Concerning turdina, I doubt Tetrasyllabic stands a chance, but regardless, the
sonograms in Nyári (2007) indicate 3 syllables, not 4 – it’s just that the
terminal one is inflected – so I do not think it is an accurate name anyway.”
Comments from
Pearman:
“Just to stop that Schiffornis whistling in my
sleep, here are my preliminary votes, comments and various NEW name suggestions.
In particular I believe that more input is needed from the Guianas if anyone
can help out there.
A. veraepacis:
Northern 1, Western 2, Brown 0, Olive
0
The shades of brown and olive between the four taxa involved in this
group differ to the extent that Brown or Olive could cause serious confusion in
the name. Western is better than Northern for reasons stated by Donegan, and
that gets my 2-point vote, although I don’t think it is ideal.
B. stenorhyncha
Slender-billed 0, Pale-bellied 1, Rufous-winged 0, Brownish 0,
Russet 0.
Firstly, I have a serious problem calling it Slender-billed if it is
only to reflect an inaccurate scientific name, when some other Schiffornis taxa
have a more slender bill. Nor is this name of ANY use at all in the field,
especially since the bird has a visually humongous looking bill which is very
much deeper than Amazonian birds, hence my zero vote. The bill actually looks
outsized on the bird, so calling it Slender-billed is contradictory. According
to others, the wings are tinged rufous or russet. I have looked at photographs
and am struggling with this feature; certainly they are not rufous, but there
may be a russet tinge on specimens. I don’t think this is a good enough reason
at all for the vernacular name. Pale-bellied is not a bad name as there is a
real contrast.
C. olivacea
Guianan 0, Olivaceous 1, [NEW PROPOSED NAME- Guyana 3]
Gary stated “accurately describes the species’ range, restricted to
the Guianan Shield where it is the only Schiffornis, hence distinctive as well
and useful in the field”, but on closer inspection there is a problem with
this. It appears that olivacea is NOT
the only Schiffornis in the Guianan Shield as I understand that wallacii (of the turdina group) is the taxon that covers Surinam and French Guiana;
please correct me if I am wrong!! Accordingly, olivacea does not seemingly occur in the Guianan shield of French
Guiana and Surinam. Wallacii therefore
seemingly has a similar-sized range in the Guianan Shield as olivacea. yet none of this has been
considered or properly addressed in the proposal. I tentatively propose Guyana
Schiffornis to avoid this confusion and to reflect that olivacea occurs principally in Guyana, bearing in mind that it also
occurs in adjacent ne. Venezuela, while it is a lowland and not a tepui form.
Lastly, olivacea is yet another
olive-brown Schiffornis, so when considering that some other Schiffornis taxa
are much more olive, the appeal for the name Olivaceous shortens and only
serves to reflect the scientific name. Verification of the range of the taxa
involved is paramount before giving olivacea
an English name.
D. aenea
Foothill 0, [NEW PROPOSED NAMES- Bronze 2, and see comments]
It should be noted that elsewhere there are other Schiffornis in foothills
all over S. and C. America (in fact all of the other splits occur in foothills
somewhere), so why should we associate the word Foothill with the east slope of
the Andes in Ecuador and the east slope of the eastern Andes in (north-east?)
Peru. Moreover, if Foothill became the accepted name, we would have
Western/Northern Schiffornis in the foothills of the western slope of the
Ecuadorian Andes, but Foothill Schiffornis would chiefly occur in the eastern
“foothills” of Ecuador (where it does not occur below 900 m, which I would call
true foothills!!!), whereas in Colombia you would find Schiffornis taxa on six
different Andean foothill slopes of the three Andean ranges, but none of them
would be called Foothill Schiffornis! For me, the Foothill name concept is
redundant and is no better than calling it Forest Schiffornis, Whistling
Schiffornis or whatever. For the time being, I propose Bronze Schiffornis to
reflect the scientific name that is much better than Foothill, being more
reflective although not ideal. If need be, it could be named after the type
locality, a region, or the describer, any of which would be much better than
Foothill. I haven’t dug out those options, but would endorse any of them before
Foothill.
E. turdina
Eastern 2, Tetrasyllabic 0, Amazonian 1, Thrush-like 1, Schiff's 1,
[NEW PROPOSED NAME- Brazilian 2.5]
Eastern is marginally the best of those suggested, although it’s not
ideal at all and this name is not really saying much. Tetrasyllabic is too
cumbersome and quirky. I propose Brazilian Schiffornis because 1) it’s the only
turdina Schiffornis in Brazil, where
it is allopatric to S. virescens, 2)
it has a truly vast range in Brazil, while bearing in mind that it also gets
into seven other countries although comparatively that only represents approx.
<25-30% of the overall range. Hence I give Brazilian half a point more than
Eastern for what it’s worth, just because it tells you more about the range of
the bird. Here again, there is room for a better name, but Eastern doesn’t cut
it for me.”
Additional comments from Remsen:
“Mark’s point about wallacii brings
up a problem. The subspecies wallacii clearly falls in Nyári’s (2007)
Guianan Shield group, and as Mark noted, its range includes Amapá, French
Guiana, and Surinam. However, the type
locality is almost certainly south of the Amazon, in Pará; see Donegan et al.
(2011). Not only does this concern me
with respect to the English name but also with respect to where wallacii really belongs. i.e. in S. turdina or S. olivacea, what the N. bank populations sound like with respect
to the S. bank populations, whether wallacii
is diagnosable, and whether the N. bank populations are correctly assigned to
that taxon. The list of recordings in
Donegan et al. (2011) did not include any N. bank wallacii that I could see, but maybe I overlooked them. Nyári (2007) had a sonogram from Surinam,
thus presumably wallacii, and it
looks the same as those from Bolívar and Manaus, so by both voice and genes, N.
bank populations would seem to go with olivacea,
regardless of subspecies assignment.
“Shifting gears …. To
further add to the mayhem, I hereby introduce yet another E name choice for turdina, mainly because the existing
choices are all lousy in my opinion. To
emphasize the one clear phenotypic difference between stenorhyncha (“Rufous-winged” – yes it is a character that is
evident in the hand at least for banders) and turdina where they meet somewhere in Colombia, I’m tossing in
“Brown-winged” as a possibility.
Additional
comments from Stiles: “To add to the mayhem of Schiffornis
names, I agree with Mark R. that the wings of stenorhyncha are really duller than what most of us would call
rufous, but they definitely do contrast with the body while those of amazonum don't... so how about a
compromise: Russet-winged? Whatever the doubts regarding exactly what shade of
brown russet is, I think that most would agree that it is something brighter
than just plain brown, such that this name does imply a contrast between wings
and body, and in effect it incorporates Ridgway's name. With regard to aenea and Mark P.'s comments, the better
term would be Bronzy: I have not seen specimens of this but if it is indeed
distinguishably more bronzy than at least amazonum,
I could go with it, at least as a second choice or even in a tie with Foothill
(which to be sure is not the only Schiffornis in the foothills, but given its
restricted range, this name is still very useful in setting it apart from the
only neighboring member of the group.) As for Guyana vs. Guianan, I agree
with Van that there is sufficient doubt regarding ranges, the affinities of wallacei,
etc., that I’ll stay with Guianan, but give a second choice to Guyana.”
Comments from
Steve Hilty:
“A. veraepacis: Hesperian 2 [NEW], Western 1
(but Northern would do also, although I think the committee ought to stretch a
little for unique names, hence Hesperian.
b.
stenorhyncha: Interjacene 2[NEW], Slender-billed 1. There is
not a single name proposed (including Gray-bellied, which is not helpful and
marginally inaccurate) that is much good, and I am certainly at a loss to help.
In the absence of anything unique I would propose "Interjacene"
because this subspecies IS sandwiched "in between" forms to the east
and west. And, it gets away from the fixation on descriptive names, which
aren't helpful here. Otherwise, I'd just stick with Gary's suggestion of Slender-billed;
at least it corresponds with the scientific name.
c.
olivaceus. Guianan 3. I think Gary's suggestion of Guianan is accurate
enough and also just vague enough that it will probably work if there are
future changes. The name Guyana is inaccurate (if described range based on
Peters Checklist is correct) because it appears that more of this forms' distribution
is actually in Venezuela than in Guyana and (may need some fact-checking here),
if there is a physical barrier separating this form from wallacii to the
east it is likely to be the Essequibo River which splits Guyana down the
middle. Certainly no physical barrier exists near the political boundary
between Guyana and Suriname. Looks like wallacii and amazonus
might not be worth both being recognized anyway, and that would make Guyana
even a worse name because most of the distribution of that form would then be
in Brazil.
d.
aenea 3; others 0. Again, I think Gary's suggestion is preferable.
Maybe not perfect but descriptive names (Bronze?) for virtually any of the
numerous forms are pretty worthless. At least "Foothill" provides
some information about where this particular form resides, and that is
helpful.
e.
turdina. Brazilian 1, Eastern 1, Tetra-syllable, or Tetrasyllabic
1. I have no opinion here. Seems any of these would do. Future splitting
might render either of the first two names unsuitable. Donegan's
Tetra-whistle (or Tetra-syllable Schiffornis ought to be considered. At least
it is an attention grabber.”
Comments
from Thomas Donegan:
Below is a map that Miles McMullan has
kindly put together to clarify the distributions of the various Schiffornis
taxa, as per our paper.
Please note:
- The range of olivacea is north of the Amazon in the lower / eastern part.
The type of subspecies wallacii seems
to have been collected South of the Amazon (as discussed in our 2011 paper) so
is presumed referable to the amazonum
sub-group of S. turdina. This
hypothesis could be tested using ancient DNA but should be the starting point
based on historical accounts of the expedition on which the type was collected
and modern recordings. There are two recordings proximate to Manaus,
Brazil, from different banks of the Amazon of olivacea (north of the Amazon) and turdina group (south of the Amazon). In the region of Para,
all recordings South of the Amazon River are of the turdina group. Further up the river, turdina occurs north of the Amazon though, ranging apparently
broadly into Colombia and Venezuela. It is not entirely clear what the
river or other boundaries are between the two taxa, based on present materials,
so some "?" are used in the map. Any comments on this are
welcome. A Rio Negro division between turdina
and olivacea seems plausible in core
Amazonia, but then turdina also
occurs broadly in the Venezuelan Amazon, so if this is a barrier in Brazil (as
seems possible), it is breached somewhere further North where the Negro gets
narrower. Similarly, to the far East, there are no recordings available
from immediately north of the Amazon opposite to the type locality of wallacii.
- Please note the sympatry /
elevational parapatry of stenorhyncha
and veraepacis in Panama: this is
shown as bi-colored on the map.
- Some committee members are voting for
S. veraepacis to be called
"Northern Schiffornis". This would be inappropriate. This
is the northernmost taxon, for sure. However, it is also the second or
third southernmost taxon out of five: note its range south to the Tumbes of
Peru. [The range of aenea is
perhaps the least known of all of these so may be extended further. It
ties currently with veraepacis in
southern-ness, but more information may push veraepacis to a more emphatic third; only turdina occurs significantly further South than the would-be
"Northern Schiffornis".] "Western Schiffornis" is far
superior if prosaic: this one occurs to the west of all other species, except
the small piece where sympatric with stenorhyncha.
- "Brazilian" for turdina seems inappropriate given that
vast tracts of the Colombian, Ecuadorian and Peruvian Amazon are included (plus
bits of Venezuela and Bolivia). Brazil is greater by area by far, as
Pearman notes, but for a wide-ranging group with very large areas in other
countries, the national label seems inappropriate. "Weid-Neuwied's"
would be more appropriate than "Schiff's" - Wied-Neuwied was
author of the species turdina, whilst
Schiff is the basis for the patronym of the genus so not linked to the name
turdina in any particular way. "Amazonian" is wrong because turdina is also in the Atlantic forest.
- "Tetrasyllabic" is clumsy
enough to be a unique, informative and memorable name of utility in the
field; the other options are really prosaic and soporific for a group in which
voice gives the best characters. As for vocal names not being any use in
the field, how about "Whip-poor-will", "Chiffchaff",
"Bellbird", "Kittiwake",
"Screamer" and "Mourner" (to name but a few
"generic" vernacular names) and for species,
"Mourning" Dove and Wheatear, "Screaming Piha", etc.?
- Retaining "Thrush-like" is
not too bad an option for turdina -
it is the name for the broader group and turdina
remains a very wide-ranging taxon, retaining over 50% of its old range by area.
- "Guyanan" (referring to the
country) seems inappropriate for olivacea,
which occurs broadly north of the Amazon in the lower segment, including a
significant range in Venezuela, Brazil, Guyana, Suriname and (presumably)
French Guyana. A broader Guianan shield reference is more appropriate,
although this is also a northern Amazonia species so that name is not
brilliant either.
- Turning to "Foothill" and
aenea, note that "Foothill Antwren" Epinecrophylla spodionota
also has a similar East slope distribution.
- I don't get a vote, but would plump
for
• veraepacis: Western 3, Brown 1
(because it is already in limited usage). Everything else 0
• stenorhyncha: Slender-billed
2. Russet, Rufous-winged, Pale-bellied 1 each. Not because
"Slender-billed" is any good, but because we used it in the McMullan
Colombia field guide based on Nyári, so it is therefore already "out
there" in three publications including a widely used field guide in the
country in which most of its distribution occurs.
• olivacea: Guianan 2,
Olivaceous 1, Ridgway's 1
• aenea: Foothill 2, Bronze
1
• turdina: Tetrasyllabic 3, Eastern 1,
Brown-winged 1, Thrush-like 1
Comments
from Zimmer:
“This
really is a horrible group to have to choose English names for! Let me start by reiterating my preference for
“Schiffornis” over “Mourner” or “Whistler” or “Whistling-Bird” as a group
name. As for the various species, here
goes:
“A) veraepacis: Western (3 points). I think Western is the most geographically
descriptive name.
“B) stenorhyncha: Pale-bellied (3 points), Russet (2
points). Note: I do not like “Russet-winged” for this
species, mainly because S. virescens
of the Atlantic Forest has much more distinctly russet wings that contrast
sharply with the greenish body. If any
Schiffornis is named “Russet-winged” or “Rufous-winged” it should be virescens. Actually, I would prefer “Gray-bellied” over
“Pale-bellied”, because the belly is contrastingly gray (compared to the
chest), but is not particularly pale.
Introducing “Gray-bellied” would cause me to give it 3 points, and only
2 points to “Pale-bellied”, with “Russet” getting 1 point.
“C) olivacea: Guianan (3 points), Ridgway’s (2 points),
Olivaceous (1 point). I like “Guianan”
as the most informative name, with “Ridgway’s” as the more memorable and
distinct. I don’t like Olivaceous,
because there are too many populations in this group that are essentially some
shade of olive or brown.
“D) aenea:
Foothill (3 points), Zimmer’s (2 points). “Foothill” is probably the most descriptive
name. Again, I don’t have an aversion to
patronyms – at least they are usually distinct and memorable.
“E) turdina:
Eastern (3), Amazonian (2). Doug
is correct in pointing out that nominate turdina
is in the Atlantic Forest. However, I
would note that it occurs in the northern portion of the Atlantic Forest (Rio
de Janeiro northward through Espirito Santo, Bahia, etc.), which has a definite
Amazonian link (with taxa like Attila
spadiceus, Thamnomanes caesius,
Campylorhynchus turdinus, Turdus fumigatus, etc.). When I think of Atlantic Forest Schiffornis,
my mind turns to virescens before turdinus. But, with more splitting likely, I think it
is best to reserve the modifier “Amazonian” for some future split with an
exclusively Amazonian distribution.
Given that, I think that “Eastern” would be the best choice for this
group at the moment.
Comments from Schulenberg: “This entire
situation is a mess. We've known for a long time that there was geographic
variation in voice in Thrush-like Schiffornis, and suspected that Thrush-like
represented more than one species. So on the face of it, Nyari's paper
represented a big step forward. Yet his sampling was coarse - hard to ignore
the paper completely, but it's also hard to work with the results. What we are
left with is a suite of clades identified genetically, loosely tied to vocal
types, all of which is, in some cases, even more loosely tied to described
taxa. This just cries out for follow-up work to fill in the gaps in our
knowledge, but to date that follow-up work has not appeared (or even been
initiated?). I'm not sure how much confidence we can have, however, that the
ranges of the taxa found east of the Andes as described in, say, Peters
checklist will conform in the end to the lineages identified by Nyári.
Collectively we have a lot of work to do, in the field and in the lab.
As for English names, we have to be careful not to make a bad
situation worse. The situation is bad to begin with because all of these taxa
are nondescript and look more or less alike, and because there is little in the
way of available names to fall back on (Hellmayr names never really having had
any traction, and being terrible anyway). But to top it all off, some of the
comments in this discussion tend towards ruling out this name or that name
because it isn't perfect - a unique descriptor of the taxon in question. I'm
not convinced that that should be our benchmark. A lot of well-accepted names
aren't uniquely descriptive - Little Tinamou is not the only little tinamou or even
the littlest, Fork-tailed Woodnymph is not the only woodnymph with a fork in
the tail, Barred Antshrike is not the only antshrike that is barred, et many
cetera - but they are descriptive and there's nothing wrong with them. Learn to
accept a name that is descriptive, and worry less about whether a given name is
uniquely descriptive under every scenario under the sun.
Votes:
I. On a name for the group: Schiffornis (3), Mourner (2),
Whistle-bird (0).
II A. veraepacis
Northern (3), Brown (2), Western (1), Olive (1).
To me "Northern" is obviously a better (more descriptive
or evocative) name than "Western" (and in no way
"inappropriate"). Apparently others have different ideas, but the
fact that the distribution of this species reaches the most northerly latitudes
("almost reaches Canada") is a lot more important biologically and is
more interesting than whether or not the * entire * distribution is more
northerly than that of some other taxon in this group. (See remarks above about
Little Tinamou, etc.)
Of course, if anyone really were worried about all this, then - in
the spirit of "Tetrasyllabic" (or "Pacific-slope") -
the appropriate name would be "Trans-Andean" (which I see that Doug
has invoked, independently, in a different proposal). Tetrasyllabic and
Trans-Andean are seriously pedantic names, which might appeal to academic
eggheads (most of whom rely on scientific names anyway), but I don't see either
Tetrasyllabic or Trans-Andean winning much favor among the birding community,
who are the ones who will need this name more than we do.
"Hesperian" is an interesting suggestion. I like the
"thinking outside the box" approach. At the same time, how many
people would know what it means? In this case, I'm not sure I do! Does it mean
"western" or is it referring to "evening", as in a species
that sings crepuscularly? If the latter, then why not "Evening" or
"Twilight"? If "Hesperian" is just a fancy way of saying
"Western", however, then better to stick with "Western".
II B. stenorhyncha
Pale-bellied (3), Russet (2), Rufous-winged (1)
I prefer "Russet" over "Rufous-winged" mostly
because it is shorter and snappier. (I take "russet" to be a dark
reddish brown, similar to chestnut, so in that sense getting at the
"Rufous-winged" aspect anyway.)
"Narrow-billed" doesn't do anything for me.
II C. olivacea
Guianan (3), Olivaceous (2), Ridgway's (1)
II D. aenea
Foothill (3). The fact that other taxa occur somewhere else in some
other foothills doesn't bother me (see Little Tinamou, Fork-tailed Woodnymph, Barred
Antshrike, etc.). In addition to the example of the antwren (Epinecrophylla),
there also is a tyrannid with the name "Foothill" (Myiopagis
olallai). These are the only species (globally) with "Foothill" in
the name, so "Foothill" as a modifier is well on its way to
signifying the foothills of the eastern Andes. This name is entirely
appropriate for the species. Furthermore, as in the examples of the antwren and
elaenia, the name "Foothill" emphasizes a key biological difference
between a pair of related and closely similar species, one of which occurs in
Amazonia and the other of which occurs "up there" in the foothills.
This is a taxon, by the way, that I suspect has a much broader
distribution than currently is recognized. I assume that birds in the foothills
of southern Peru (with a shorter song, lacking the inflected terminal note of turdina) are aenea - one of the many incompletely resolved pieces of this puzzle
yet to be investigated.
II E. turdina
Brown (which I don't think was an option here). Why not? This is a
brown taxon, and sets up a contrast with the parapatric and (marginally!) more
olivaceous S. olivacea. Furthermore, it is the "rump" Thrush-like
Schiffornis, the largest piece left after other taxa have been carved out, and
its brownness was one of the features rendering it "thrush-like" - so
in that sense the name is appropriate. Retaining "Thrush-like" could
lead to confusion; it's usually a good idea to retire the sensu lato English
name when there is a split. Amazonian and Eastern would do, but neither seems
very good to me either. Brown-winged would be my second choice. Enthusiasm for
other names given as options would be in negative territory.
Comments from Jaramillo: “
“1 – Use
Schiffornis
“A –
Western; B – Russet-winged; C – Guianan;
D – Foothill; E – I like the idea of
tetrasyllabic, but this is an English name, not a Scientific name. So why not
call it Four-whistle Schiffornis. Four whistle will be very useful in the
field, and is easily understood and memorable. So I am voting for tetrasyllabic
in a way, but want to change it to make it more palatable.”