Proposal
(568) to South American
Classification Committee
Change
English names of Immaculate Antbirds
With the passing of Proposal 541, the names "Western
Immaculate-Antbird" and "Andean Immaculate-Antbird" were adopted
for Myrmeciza zeledoni and M. immaculata respectively. Vernacular names were discussed in Donegan
(2012) as follows:
"Although
some commentators prefer new names for components of split species (e.g.,
Remsen et al. 2012), the name ‘Immaculate Antbird’ remains appropriate even for
a split M. immaculata, being a direct translation of the species’
scientific name. Cory & Hellmayr (1924) used two uninspiring patronyms for
the other group: Zeledon’s Ant-catcher for M.
i. zeledoni and Berlepsch’s Ant-catcher for M. i. berlepschi.
No other vernacular names appear ever to have been used. ‘Berlepsch’s Antbird’
would confuse with Stub-tailed Antbird M. berlepschi and the name berlepschi is
currently replaced by macrorhyncha. However, Zeledon’s Antbird
would be available.
“Because patronyms convey
little information about birds to their main users— birdwatchers—possible
alternative names for M. zeledoni require consideration. These antbirds
do not lend themselves to plumage-based names due to their strong sexual
dichromatism. No obvious plumage patterns unite both sexes and the various
populations of the new species. Males are uniform black, and females uniform
brown, but Uniform Antshrike (Thamnophilus unicolor) could confuse and
‘White-shouldered Antbird’ is already used for M. melanoceps. A good morphological-based
name for zeledoni is therefore elusive. Similarly, there is no
geographic name available to describe the region from western Ecuador to Costa
Rica. Arguably the best approach is to use Western Immaculate Antbird (zeledoni)
and Andean Immaculate Antbird (immaculata). They are clearly related and
both have been known as Immaculate Antbirds for a long time."
In response to some calls for
"Zeledon's Antbird", it was further noted as follows in Proposal 541:
"… the preference
for "Western Immaculate Antbird" (zeledoni) and "Andean
Immaculate Antbird" (immaculata) is for two reasons. First, there
are probably issues with restricting "Immaculate" to a species whose
range does not coincide with the region where probably most birders have seen
these (western Ecuador and Costa Rica, where zeledoni in the
species sense occurs). The zeledoni group occurs to the west of immaculata.
Whilst zeledoni does itself also occur in the western cordillera and
slope of the Andes and achieves similar elevations to immaculata, a
split immaculata is restricted to Andean slopes mostly at 800-2000
m, which is an unusual distribution for a thamnophilid antbird. (In Colombia,
Parker's Antbird, Rufous-[rumped] Antwren, various Dysithamnus and
[Uniform] Antshrike are others that spring to mind as truly Andean in
distribution; this compares to many tens of lowland antbirds.) Secondly, this
suggestion is based on a personal bias against using patronyms generally where
possible."
A map showing the two species'
distributions in Colombia is set out below, copied from Donegan (2012). M. zeledoni extends further south
in Ecuador to around the Chocó / Tumbes interface (subspecies macrorhyncha/berlepschi)
and also north into highlands of Costa Rica (subspecies zeledoni).
<<insert graphic>>
An opportunity is now presented to
adopt different names, which some committee members indicated they would
prefer. Some committee members also
expressed a preference for re-naming immaculata as something else
if zeledoni becomes Zeledon's. This
proposal is split into various parts as follows:
A: Change
name of M. zeledoni from "Western Immaculate-Antbird" to
"Zeledon's Antbird".
B: Change
name of "Andean Immaculate-Antbird" to something else. Options would include simple "Immaculate
Antbird" or "Lafresnaye's Antbird". If there is any swell of
support for these or another name or better idea, then this can be dealt with
in a follow-up proposal or sub-proposal.
Thomas
Donegan, November 2012
___________________________________________________________________
Comments from Remsen: “A.
YES. B. YES. Anything to get
rid of these awkward compound names is good, in my opinion. Although patronyms
are not popular with some people, I like them when they highlight the history
of ornithology, and certainly when descriptive names are of minimal or no use.”
Comments from Robbins: “Given
that there are no obvious good choices, I’ll support both A & B of Donegan’s
proposal.”
Comments from Stiles: “YES to A
and B. As I mentioned earlier, I like
“Zeledon’s” for zeledoni since José Cástulo Zeledón was an important
pioneer of Costa Rican ornithology (unlike the hapless Schiff), and I prefer
“Immaculate” for immaculatus as being shorter than “Central Andean”
and agreeing with the Latin name (as does zeledoni).”
Comments from Zimmer: “YES. I like the use of compound group names for
larger groups that are clearly monophyletic, but for just two constituent
species, they do come off as awkward. I also think that we cannot
retain “Immaculate Antbird” for one of the daughter species, especially since,
as noted by Anonymous, that the taxon most familiar to birders and
ornithologists (and by logical extension, the one most associated with the
English name “Immaculate Antbird”) is actually zeledoni. So, for Part A, I would vote YES to change to
“Zeledon’s Antbird”. Unlike some others
on the committee, I do not have an aversion to patronyms -- no one ever said a
name had to be descriptive, but it should be unique. It may not communicate much information about
the bird, but a patronym does communicate information about the history of
ornithology, and can be indirectly informative regarding distribution in as
much as certain ornithologists are strongly associated with certain regions
(say “Skutch” and you think Costa Rica; say “Sick” and you think
Brazil). In the absence of obvious plumage-based descriptive names
or geographic modifiers in this specific case, we could do much worse than to
amplify the recognition of Zeledon’s work in the region by changing the English
name to conform to the Latin name. For Part B, I feel strongly that
we need to change the name, but the choice of a new name is less
obvious. As much as I hate to see it go, “Immaculate Antbird” should
be out for reasons already stated. For
lack of a better name, and because it would provide some nice symmetry with
“Zeledon’s”, I would support the suggestion of “Lafresnaye’s Antbird” for immaculatus.
“
Comments from Schulenberg: “Compound
group names are detestable (and SACC really needs to be broken of the habit of
adopting such names), so changes from "xxx Immaculate-Antbird" are *
highly * desirable. "Zeledon's" and "Lafresnaye's" work for
me.”
Additional comments from Stiles: “I could
live with "Lafresnaye's Antbird" for M. immaculata if
"Immaculate" be excluded (although I suspect that English-language
birders are perforce getting used to so many name changes that leaving this
species as "Immaculate" would not cause too much confusion ...
however, if it helps to reach a quorum, "Lafresnaye's" would be OK by
me).”