Proposal (964) to South American Classification Committee

 

 

Note from Remsen: This is a proposal submitted to and rejected unanimously by NACC.  Although the comments are not yet public, all voters agreed with the synopsis in the proposal, i.e. almost certainly more than one species is involved, data are insufficient for resolving the boundaries in this complex group.

 

Treat Xiphorhynchus aequatorialis as a separate species from Spotted Woodcreeper X. erythropygius

 

Description of the problem:

 

Xiphorhynchus erythropygius is an uncommon species of upper tropical and lower montane zones from central Mexico (San Luis Potosí) south through Central America and the Chocoan forests as far south as southern Ecuador (Marantz et al. 2020). Although its distribution is largely contiguous, there are multiple breaks in lowland zones. One of these is in Nicaragua and divides the species into a northern (erythropygius) group and southern (aequatorialis) group, with the species absent from most of the southern half of Nicaragua (Vallely and Dyer 2018, Marantz et al. 2020). The northern group is composed of erythropygius ("Sclater, PL", 1860) from north of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec and parvus Griscom, 1937 to the south of the isthmus. The southern group is composed of punctigula (Ridgway, 1889) from Nicaragua to central Panama, insolitus Ridgway, 1909, from central Panama to central Colombia (including the Magdalena Valley), and aequatorialis (von Berlepsch & Taczanowski, 1884) from central Colombia to southwestern Ecuador. Olive-backed Woodcreeper (Xiphorhynchus triangularis) of the Andes is part of this complex, and some authors have considered all taxa to be part of triangularis (see below). Hilty and Brown (1986) noted that triangularis is an upper elevation (above 1,500 meters) replacement of aequatorialis on the west slope of the Andes in Colombia.

 

Taxonomic history:

 

Ridgway (1911) considered erythropygius monotypic but noted that Berlepsch and Stolzmann (1896) considered erythropygius to be a subspecies of triangularis. Ridgway (1911) split punctigula (with insolitus as a subspecies) as Spotted-throated Woodhewer, with the following comment: “Somewhat like X. erythropygius, but color of pileum, back, and under parts greenish or ocherous olive instead of olive-brown, back without streaks or with very narrow ones on anterior portion only, and throat spotted rather than barred with dusky.” He gave the range of punctigula/insolitus as Nicaragua (San Rafael del Norte) to northwestern Colombia (Río Truando). Berlepsch & Taczanowski (1884) described aequatorialis as a subspecies of erythropygius, but aequatorialis was overlooked by Ridgway (1911) who considered punctigula as the name for the southern group, although aequatorialis has priority.

 

Cory and Hellmayr (1925), perhaps following Berlepsch and Stolzmann (1896), considered all taxa in the complex to be part of X. triangularis, with the following English names for the relevant taxa: Pacific Wood-Hewer for aequatorialis, Truando Wood-Hewer for insolitus (presumably based on the Río Truando in northern Colombia), Spotted-throated Wood-Hewer for punctigula, and Spotted Wood-Hewer for erythropygius. Cory and Hellmayr’s comments on the reasoning for lumping all these taxa are worth reproducing here in full, as they constitute (as far as we can tell) the most comprehensive comments on plumage variation in the complex, with taxa arranged from south-to-north:

 

Xiphorhynchus triangularis aequatorialis (Berlepsch and Taczanowski): Differs from X. t. triangularis in more brownish (less olivaceous) upper parts; plain (unspotted) crown, with only a few narrow buff streaks on forehead; the much deeper chestnut rufous of wings and tail spreading also over the lower back; much deeper buff throat, with the olive markings restricted to small, rounded apical spots; larger spots on breast and abdomen; uniform horn brown maxilla, etc.

 

Xiphorhynchus triangularis insolitus appears to have been based on intergrades between aequatorialis and punctigula. The specimen listed above, obtained by A. Schott on Lt. N. Michler's Expedition to the lower Atrato [northwestern Colombia], has the back decidedly browner than the majority in the series of the two forms, though it is very nearly matched by a female from Bulun, Prov. Esmeraldas, Ecuador, and an unsexed individual from Chiriqui [Panama]. Markings of throat and spotting on underparts are exactly as in punctigula. On the other hand, two skins from Calovevora, Veragua [Panama] hence not far from the type locality of insolitus and in the same general region I am quite unable to distinguish from Costa Rican specimens of punctigula, which, moreover, is sometimes hard to separate from aequatorialis. Individual variation in these birds is much greater than generally admitted.

 

[Regarding a specimen from San Rafael del Norte in northern Nicaragua] In the amount of spotting above, this bird is exactly intermediate between punctigula and erythropygia, but resembles the former in olivaceous coloration and restricted rufous uropygial area.

 

Xiphorhynchus triangularis punctigula. Birds from Veragua (Calovevora) and Chiriqui [Panama] are identical with those from Costa Rica. X. t. punctigula is exceedingly close to X. t. aequatorialis, but generally distinguishable by brighter olivaceous under parts with smaller buff spots, more heavily spotted throat, somewhat lighter rufous rump and wings, etc. Single specimens are, however, not always separable. Through individual variation, it also intergrades with X. t. erythropygius, of Guatemala. There is notably a specimen from Chiriqui (at Tring), which combines the greenish olive coloration of punctigula with the heavy spotting, both above and below, of erythropygia. Similar examples are no doubt responsible for Panama records of the last named race.”

 

In a departure from his typical pattern of lumping taxa without comment, Peters (1951) split the Choco/Middle American taxa from X. triangularis (although again without comment), a treatment maintained by Eisenmann (1955), Wetmore (1972), AOU (1983), and most current authors.

 

Multiple authors (e.g., Eisenmann 1955, AOU 1983) noted that the aequatorialis group is sometimes recognized as a separate species from erythropygius, a treatment formalized by HBW-BirdLife: "[aequatorialis] Hitherto considered conspecific with X. erythropygius, but differs in its much less obvious, less teardrop-shaped (and often minimal) pale streaking on mantle and back (2); darker chestnut tail (1); slightly less dense pale spotting on underparts (1); higher maximum frequency of whistles in song after first whistle (2), and overslurred vs downslurred whistles in song after first whistle (2) (Boesman 2016)."

 

AOU (1983) account: populations from eastern Nicaragua southward, occurring commonly in lowland habitats, are sometimes recognized as a species, X. aequatorialis (Berlepsch and Taczanowski, 1884) [SPOT-THROATED WOODCREEPER], distinct from X. erythropygius. The widespread South American species, X. triangularis (Lafresnaye, 1842), and X. erythropygius are regarded as conspecific by some authors; they constitute a superspecies.

 

New information:

 

Although many studies have sampled Xiphorhynchus erythropygius for phylogenetic work, most included only a single sample, so are not of use here. The sole study we have been able to find that included multiple taxa is Weir (2009), who sampled three individuals and sequenced the mitochondrial locus cytochrome-b. Samples from El Copé, Panama, and Darién, Panama (both insolitus under current taxonomy), were sisters, whereas one from the western slope of the Andes (=aequatorialis) was sister to those two. However, no genetic distances were reported, and the northern erythropygius group was not sampled. Two samples in Harvey et al. (2020) were both of erythropygius (sensu stricto), whereas two samples in Aleixo (2002) were both of aequatorialis. Multiple studies found erythropygius/aequatorialis as sister to X. triangularis.

 

Below are photos of most taxa in the group, from the collections at the Louisiana State University Museum of Natural Science (LSUMNS). The two samples of insolitus are from Darién, Panama, so east of the canal zone.

 

The specimens at LSUMNS show a confusing patchwork of plumage variation that do not readily align with current species limits. The one taxon in the complex not represented in the LSUMNS collections is the Venezuelan X. t. hylodromus (see photo in Macaulay Library: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/205397931).

 

The plumage character that most readily distinguishes X. triangularis from X. erythropygius (as currently defined) is the scalloped vs spotted throat. However, nominate triangularis (with hylodromus based on the Macaulay photo above) shares the extensive and broad streaking on the belly shown by all taxa in X. erythropygius, and is quite distinct in this regard from the two southern taxa in X. triangularis (intermedius and bangsi), which show sparse streaks on the belly. Within X. erythropygius, the two northern taxa (Spotted group) show extensive dorsal streaking not shown by other taxa, whereas the three southern taxa (Berlepsch’s group) show less crown spotting than either the Spotted group or X. triangularis, although one specimen of aequatorialis seems to show some crown spotting (Figure 1, right hand specimen).

 

Vocal variation

 

To our knowledge the only quantitative analysis of vocal variation within the X. erythropygius / X. triangularis complex comes from Boesman (2016), who described vocal variation within X. erythropygius. There is considerable variation among recognized subspecies across the two currently recognized species. We are not aware of any rigorous playback studies on this group.

 

Between the currently recognized subspecies within X. erythropygius, there are some slight differences across the putative split in question, but they are overall quite similar. Both groups

 

 

Figure 1: Dorsal view of LSUMNS specimens of X. erythropygius and X. triangularis.

 

 

 

Figure 2: Ventral view of LSUMNS specimens of X. erythropygius and X. triangularis.

 

 

Figure 3: Lateral view of LSUMNS specimens of X. erythropygius and X. triangularis.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

emit a similar series of 2-4 whistles each of approximately 0.5–1.0 s in length. However, the erythropygius / parvus group has little to no frequency modulation in these whistles and is slightly lower in pitch, starting at ~2.5 kHz and descending to ~1.5 kHz. Among the Berlepsch’s group of punctigula / insolitus / aequatorialis, the nearest neighbor X. e. punctigula in Costa Rica has a similar structure in the series of whistles to the erythropygius / parvus group, but the first punctigula note has considerably more frequency modulation and higher pitch overall, starting at ~3.5 kHz and descending to ~2.5 kHz. The songs of X. e. aequatorialis are the most distinct among these in having much more frequency modulation in each of the notes, giving them much more of a ‘quavering’ tone compared to the pure ‘whistled’ tone of those in Costa Rica or north of Nicaragua. The quavering tone seems to extend to the west of the Canal Zone in Panama, but then becomes decidedly more clear east of the Canal Zone. The type locality of insolitus is in Coclé, Panama, so insolitus would be of the northern vocal type. Please note that these observations are qualitative and may not stand up to a more rigorous quantitative analysis of larger sample sizes for vocal variation within the group.

 

Boesman (2016) divided X. erythropygius into two vocal groups, a northern one (comprised of erythropygius and parvus) and a southern one (comprised of punctigula, insolitus, and aequatorialis), and his results largely agree with what we describe above. Additionally, he described the erythropygius group as having downslurred notes, whereas the aequatorialis group has overslurred notes. This difference is quite subtle to our ears, and the strong frequency modulation of aequatorialis (not present in punctigula and insolitus) and lower pitch of the erythropygius group seem like more distinct characters. Boesman (2016) stated that the quavering songs change gradually from north to south, but it seems to us that there may be a clear break between pure-toned and quavering songs near the canal zone of Panama. However, some examples even from the northern group seem to have a quavering tone to some songs.

 

Macaulay Library holdings for erythropygius / parvus songs from N of Nicaragua:

https://search.macaulaylibrary.org/catalog?taxonCode=spowoo2&mediaType=audio&view=list

https://search.macaulaylibrary.org/catalog?taxonCode=spowoo1&mediaType=audio&regionCode=MX

 

Macaulay Library holdings for punctigula / insolitus / aequatorialis song from S of Nicaragua:

https://search.macaulaylibrary.org/catalog?taxonCode=spowoo3&mediaType=audio&tag=song&view=list

 

An example of the quavering song immediately east of the canal zone in Panama: https://xeno-canto.org/253672

 

But songs of birds immediately west of the canal zone in Panama are whistled like those from Costa Rica:

https://xeno-canto.org/127316

https://xeno-canto.org/128320

 

However, some recordings of parvus are somewhat quavering, but otherwise match typical parvus songs in pattern and lower pitch:

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/527388

 

Because X. triangularis has been considered part of the same species, we have here provided some recordings from the nearest populations in Colombia. However, there are not many recordings of the song of this species, and recordings from farther south in the Andes sound quite different from those in the north. The short descending whinny of these northern birds is quite different from the songs of any of the taxa currently considered part of X. erythropygius.

https://xeno-canto.org/320708

https://xeno-canto.org/148021

https://xeno-canto.org/251788

 

Schulenberg et al. (2007) described the song of the northern Peruvian populations of X. triangularis as a “mellow, decelerating, descending series of musical whistled notes: “whi’we-we-we-we we we wur”, which agrees with the recordings linked to above, but they noted that the southern Peruvian (Pasco south) X. t. bangsi has an additional song, a wiry insistent rising-falling series of nasal whines: “WHEEEW who-WHI-WHI-whi-whi-whi” suggesting some vocal variation within X. triangularis. An example of that latter song is here: https://xeno-canto.org/746087 All song recordings available online from south of the Marañón Valley seem to match this latter nasal song type.

 

Very few examples of hylodromus are available online, all in Macaulay, and it is not clear if these refer to natural songs:

https://media.ebird.org/catalog?taxonCode=olbwoo1&mediaType=audio&regionCode=VE

 

Effect on AOS-CLC area:

 

Splitting X. aequatorialis from X. erythropygius would result in one additional species for the AOS area. Splitting X. aequatorialis and X. punctigula from X. erythropygius would result in two additional species for the AOS area.

 

Recommendation:

 

We recommend a NO on any splits in this group at this time.

 

Although we suspect that multiple species may be involved within what is currently treated as X. erythropygius, it is not clear where best to split taxa as the different data types are not concordant in their clustering. Vocal data suggest three song groups within X. erythropygius, a low-pitched group with clear whistles (erythropygius / parvus), a higher-pitched group with clear whistles (punctigula / insolitus west of the canal zone) and a quavering song group (aequatorialis east of the canal zone). The vocal aspect of the BirdLife split is based on song pitch and downslurred vs overslurred notes but minimized the diagnosability of the distinctive quavering songs of aequatorialis. However, quantitative analyses are likely necessary to ascertain whether there is a gradual change in clear-noted to quavering songs as suggested by Boesman (2016). The differences between the songs of these groups do not seem as drastic as the differences between X. erythropygius and X. triangularis, and the songs of the southern X. triangularis (bangsi) seem more distinct than do the three groups within X. erythropygius.

 

Plumage data support the distinctiveness of the erythropygius / parvus group based on their extensive mantle and crown streaking. However, the two southern groups (punctigula and aequatorialis) show ventral streaking similar to the northern taxa in X. triangularis, although they differ from X. triangularis in throat pattern. We are unable to find consistent plumage differences between punctigula/insolitus and aequatorialis (which agrees with comments by Cory and Hellmayr 1925, see above) despite apparent differences in song.

 

This complex is an excellent candidate for future work. Quantitative analysis of song, plumage, and genetic variation (the latter of which is lacking) would go a long way towards resolving species limits in the group.

 

If any of these splits gain traction, an English name proposal should be drafted to address the new names. Cory and Hellmayr (1925) provided some options to work with, which adapted for modern conventions would be:

 

• Spot-throated Woodcreeper for punctigula (which would include insolitus).

• Spotted Woodcreeper for erythropygius (although this has now been used for X. erythropygius s.l., so a new name may be necessary)

• Pacific Woodcreeper for aequatorialis s.s.

 

AOU (1983, 1998) used Spot-throated Woodcreeper for the aequatorialis group (when separated from X. erythropygius, although we note that both groups have spotted throats). Clements/eBird gives Berlepsch’s Woodcreeper as the English name for this group.

 

Please vote on the following:

 

1)            Elevate aequatorialis (with punctigula and insolitus) to species rank (BirdLife treatment)

2)            Elevate both punctigula (with insolitus) and aequatorialis to species rank

 

Literature Cited:

 

Aleixo, A. 2002. Molecular systematics and the role of the “várzea”–“terra-firme” ecotone in the diversification of Xiphorhynchus woodcreepers (Aves: Dendrocolaptidae). The Auk 119(3): 621-640. https://doi.org/10.1093/auk/119.3.621

AOU. 1983. Check-list of North American Birds. The species of birds of North America from the Arctic through Panama, including the West Indies and Hawaiian islands. 6th edition. American Ornithologists’ Union.

AOU. 1998. Check-list of North American Birds. The species of birds of North America from the Arctic through Panama, including the West Indies and Hawaiian islands. 7th edition. American Ornithologists’ Union.

Berlepsch, G. H. von, and L. Taczanowski. 1884. Liste des Oiseaux recueillis par MM. Stolzmann et Siemiradski dans l’Ecuadeur occidental. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 536-577.

Berlepsch, G. H. von, and J. Stolzmann. 1896. On the ornithological researches of M. Jean Kalinowski in central Peru. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 322-388.

Boesman, P. 2016. Notes on the vocalizations of Spotted Woodcreeper (Xiphorhynchus erythropygius). HBW Alive Ornithological Note 82. In: Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. (retrieved from http://www.hbw.com/node/931976).

Cory, C. B. and Hellmayr, C. E. 1925. Catalogue of birds of the Americas, part IV. Field Museum of Natural History Zoological Series Vol. XIII. Chicago, USA.

Eisenmann, E. 1955. The species of Middle American birds. Transactions of the Linnaean Society of New York. Vol. VII.

Harvey, M.G., A. Aleixo, C.C. Ribas, and R.T. Brumfield. 2017. Habitat association predicts genetic diversity and population divergence in Amazonian birds. American Naturalist 190: 631-648.

Hilty, S. L., and W. L. Brown. 1986. A Guide to the Birds of Colombia. Princeton University Press.

Marantz, C. A., J. del Hoyo, N. Collar, A. Aleixo, L. R. Bevier, G. M. Kirwan, and M. A. Patten. 2020. Spotted Woodcreeper (Xiphorhynchus erythropygius), version 1.0. 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.spowoo1.01

Peters, J. L. 1951. Check-list of birds of the world. Vol. VII. Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College.

Ridgway, R. 1911. The birds of North and Middle America. Part V. Bulletin of the United States National Museum. No. 50.

Schulenberg, T. S., D. F. Stotz, D. F. Lane, J. P. O’Neill, and T. A. Parker III. 2007. Birds of Peru, revised and updated edition. Princeton University Press.

Vallely, A. C. and D. Dyer. 2018. Birds of Central America. Princeton University Press.

Weir, J. 2009. Implications of genetic differentiation in Neotropical montane forest birds. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 96(3): 410-433. https://doi.org/10.3417/2008011

Wetmore, A. 1972. The Birds of the Republic of Panamá. Part 3.-Passeriformes: Dendrocolaptidae (Woodcreepers) to Oxyruncidae (Sharpbills). Smithsonian miscellaneous collections, v. 150.

 

 

Oscar Johnson and Nicholas A. Mason, February 2023

 

 

Note from Remsen on voting: Although I didn’t put this in the proposal title, note that there are two parts, which require separate votes:

 

964.1. Elevate aequatorialis (with punctigula and insolitus) to species rank (BLI treatment)

964.2. Elevate both punctigula (with insolitus) and aequatorialis to species rank

 

 

Note from Remsen on English names: if this passes, a separate proposal would be needed; see discussion of possibilities above.

 

 

 

Comments from Remsen: “I’m not voting on this one – I have asked Jorge to take my slot.  What I said on the NACC version was ‘No for all the reasons given in the proposal (which is outstanding).  As noted in the proposal, this is a complex situation that requires a rigorous, formal, published study to change species limits, and it seems clear that changes are needed, even from the largely anecdotal information presented so far.’

 

Comments from Areta: “NO, following the rationale in the excellent proposal. After hearing to several vocalizations, I could not find any clearly diagnostic feature of each taxon. There seems to be a lot of geographic variation, and some vocalizations sound quite intermediate. Until someone performs a more rigorous vocal study, I prefer to keep these as one species. Xiphorhynchus triangularis is also in need of a taxonomic review, of course.”

 

Comments solicited from Curtis Marantz (voting for Pacheco): “NO. I am in agreement with the recommendation to recognize no splits at this time.  I should begin by noting that this is a mostly highland complex for which I have very little field experience, and as such, I am not in as good a position as I am with the lowland taxa to comment on the variation that I see or hear in the photos and recordings, or in past treatments of the group. It has also been a very long time now since I last looked at any of this, because even though they have contacted me regarding some of the HBW accounts, this was not one of them, so I have had no input whatsoever on anything in the newer HBW account beyond what I wrote back in 2001, and to be honest, I cannot even recall now if I wrote the taxonomic section for this entry (though I think I did write this one).

 

“This said, the plumage variation is rather complex and confusing.  Moreover, I am not sure how important things like the extent of spotting or the tone of olive or brown in the plumage is for species-level differences.  These seem more like subspecies-level differences to me.  I feel better about discrete differences, such as those shown between the Central American and Amazonian populations of the Barred Woodcreepers, and especially so when they correspond to very striking vocal differences.  I suppose the first thing one would want is a detailed analysis based on many specimens of each taxon to see how consistent these plumage differences really are.

 

“With regard to the vocal differences, my recommendation would be that a much larger sample is required, not only to examine individual and regional variation in the song of the species, but also to examine the repertoire more carefully to ensure that you are not comparing songs with calls. Even within the sets of recordings from smaller areas, I am hearing sufficient variation to conclude that both songs and calls are included in these samples, but I do not know these birds sufficiently well to determine which sounds are homologous. In the Xiphorhynchus guttatus complex, which I know best, there are several different calls and extensive variation in the songs, some if it motivational and not regional. From listening to the various recordings linked, it becomes immediately apparent that the recordings from the Macaulay Library show a break between the clear and quavering songs to be well south of where the species-groups are divided, with recordings from Costa Rica and those from Ecuador having rather different songs despite both being treated under the category Spotted Woodcreeper (Berlepsch's).  I also found some recordings in which the initial element was quavered but the others were clear, which may suggest to me that there is a motivational aspect to the quavered elements.

 

“So, in the end, I do agree that there are interesting patterns evident, and possibly even more than one species involved, but as with many such cases in woodcreepers, I feel that it is premature, given the information available, to make any taxonomic decisions. Then again, I am also one who tends to be of the opinion that taxonomy should remain as stable as possible unless there is a really compelling reason to make a change. If not, the result is that others will conclude that the bodies making these decisions do not really have a solid grasp on what they are doing and are just trying to jump on the newest suggestions based on incomplete data.”

 

Comments from Robbins: “I vote NO for elevating any of the taxa currently in Xiphorhynchus erythropygius to species level for the reasons that Oscar and Nick have detailed in their thorough proposal. It appears that there is considerable variability in all character states mentioned and genetic data are lacking across the entire complex. Yes, likely more than one species involved in the complex, but clarifying what taxonomic changes need to be made will require much more data.”

 

Comments from Lane: “NO. As a believer in the concept of subspecies, I see the variation demonstrated within X. erythropygius here as in line with my expectations of furnariid subspecific variation.

As an aside, I would point out that the proposal made the comment that within X. triangularis "All song recordings available online from south of the Marañón Valley seem to match this latter nasal song type." This is not true, as illustrated by https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/531434and https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/534618. The wiry song described in Schulenberg et al. seems to be genuinely limited to more southerly Peruvian and Bolivian populations; central Peru seems poorly sampled for voice of this species. Nevertheless, the well-sampled San Martín area population lacks this wiry song, seeming more aligned with the north of the Marañon voice type. This taxonomic issue is best saved for some future proposal, however.”

 

Comments from Stiles: “NO, on current evidence in which genetics, plumages and perhaps vocalizations appear not to concur.”

 

Comments from Jorge Pérez-Emán (voting for Remsen): “This proposal aims to treat the subspecies Xiphorhynchus erythropygius aequatorialis as a separate species (aequatorialis) from X. erythropygius. It also elaborates on the potential for an additional species (punctigula), the relationship of these taxa with X. triangularis, and the geographical differentiation of triangularis (just briefly). The evidence put into the proposal is thorough and provide a good picture of geographical variation both in plumage patterns and vocalizations. Based on such information, it is clear we don´t have enough data to understand species limits in this complex, so my short answer will be NO and NO to both parts of the proposal (two or three species, when considering punctigula also as a different species). I elaborate a bit more below, and provide additional complementary information on molecular data, thanks to Brant Faircloth who extracted mitochondrial sequences from UCEs data from the suboscines project (from Harvey et al. 2020) to provide molecular data of the northern erythropygius group.

 

“1. Differences in plumage coloration and size are minor among recognized subspecies. However, on top of that and as clearly indicated in the proposal, the large amount of individual variation shown by X. erythropygius specimens compromise any pattern of geographical variation previously used to define taxon limits. Such awareness for individual variation is not new and was emphasized by previous researchers (Cory and Hellmayr 1925, Griscom 1937), some even indicating the potential effects of foxing in museum specimens and age in such variation (Wetmore 1972, Griscom 1937). Even with a short series, pictures of LSUMNS specimens taken by Oscar and Nick reveal plumage differences between two specimens of aequatorialis (differences that suggest even potential diagnostic patterns are variable). Additionally, Cory and Hellmayr (1925, and also Griscom 1937) highlighted different aspects of this variation suggesting the presence of intermediates between punctigula and parvus (specimens from San Rafael del Norte, Nicaragua, and Chiriqui, Panama). In fact, I am not quite sure when the San Rafael del Norte specimen was transferred to punctigula, but Griscom (1937) already included there. The same pattern was highlighted by these authors (as noticed in the proposal) for aequatorialis and insolitus in Colombia, where limits of distribution are unclear and some localities were considered as dubious (about what taxon was present) by M. de Schauensee (1950, lower Cauca Valley, La Frijolera).

 

“2. Variation in vocalizations seems to better differentiate some groups but is not clear cut. Analyses from Boesman (2016) and this proposal found a major break between the northern and southern group (erythropygius/parvus vs. punctigula/insolitus/aequatorialis, respectively), though diagnostic vocal characters differed between both analyses. However, the most different vocalization corresponded to aequatorialis compared to other taxa and there is individual variation that makes difficult to understand differences between punctigula and insolitus or even between these taxa and the northern group taxa (as highlighted in this proposal). A pattern of variation worth mentioning is the suggested break of vocalization similarities at the Canal zone, with birds east of it similar to aequatorialis and birds west of it more similar to punctigula and the northern group. This pattern suggests insolitus vocalizations group with different taxa depending on location relative to the Canal zone. With much variation and no certainty about the cause of these differences (as pointed out by Curtis), deciding how to group these taxa is difficult. The proposal also makes clear that patterns presented are qualitative and require formal analysis with larger data. Unfortunately, Boesman (2016) does not indicate sample size for his analysis, making difficult to evaluate how consistent are the reported differences.

 

“3. I gathered all available molecular information (both from GenBank and Brant Faircloth) to complement this proposal with some hints on genetic variation, doing a quick phylogenetic analysis and some molecular pairwise comparisons. Previous phylogenetic information showed triangularis to be the sister taxon of erythropygius (Derryberry et al. 2011; Harvey et al. 2020), a relationship that holds here with increasing taxon representation for each species (Figure 1).

 

 

Figure 1. Maximum Likelihood hypothesis of phylogenetic relationships of Xiphorhynchus erythropygius species complex. In the left figure is the hypothesis based on both ND2 and cytochrome b genes, while the right figure shows only the relationships within X. erythropygius based on just cytochrome b gene. Color boxes highlight relationships within (and between) both X. erythropygius and X. triangularis. Sequences obtained either from GenBank (identified by their code starting with AY, GU or FJ) or from the UCEs data of the suboscine phylogeny (Harvey et al. 2020, mitochondrial genes courtesy of Brant Faircloth). Numbers at nodes represent bootstrap data obtained from 1000 pseudoreplicates of the fast algorithm of RAxML. Localities: HI_MX = Hidalgo, Mexico; LI_CR = Limón, Costa Rica; CH_PA = Chiriquí, Panama; BT_PA = Bocas del Toro, Panama; CO_PA = Coclé, Panama; PA_PA = Panama, Panama; DA_PA = Darién, Panama; SPt_TT = Saint Patrick, Trinidad and Tobago; ES_EC = Esmeraldas, Ecuador; PI_EC = Pichincha, Ecuador; EO_EC = El Oro, Ecuador; CA_PE = Cajamarca, Perú; LO_PE = Loreto, Perú; PA_PE = Pasco, Perú; LP_BO = La Paz, Bolivia; SC_BO = Santa Cruz, Bolivia.

 

“Molecular data allow for a complementary view of geographical variation from a different character set. An important add-on to previous analyses is the availability of one sample of erythropygius from Hidalgo, Mexico (erythropygius). Haplotypes from this specimen are sister to the rest of haplotypes (punctigula, insolitus, aequatorialis; parvus not included) with large genetic divergence between them (around 5% in ND2, and 4% in Cytb). Such genetic divergence and sister relationship is in agreement with suggestions that this taxon is a candidate for a separate species (or aequatorialis, including the southern group, being a separate species). Variation within the aequatorialis group is somehow complex. The most complete available molecular data is for the cytochrome b gene, and it shows a non-monophyletic aequatorialis with high support and some structure suggesting western Panama and Costa Rican taxa conforming a group that separates from another one that includes both east and west Canal zone populations (Darien and Coclé, Figure 1). Whether the Coclé specimen is insolitus is unclear as it comes from the Pacific slope of Coclé (El Copé National Park), perhaps less than 30km to one of the closest localities associated to punctigula (Chitra, Panama; Wetmore 1972). These sequences are very similar (about 0.3% divergent) and differed a bit when compared to western Panama/Costa Rica sequences (about 0.6%), but still very similar. Sequences from aequatorialis diverge in average 1.4% from these punctigula/insolitus but are more similar to the Darien one (1.2%) than the ones from the west Canal zone (1.6%; including the Coclé sequence). However, these are very similar numbers which might not mean much based on the small sample size.

 

“4. Even when we could be tempted to make some conclusions from the plumage, vocalizations and molecular patterns at hand, geographical differentiation and species/taxon limits are difficult to understand as geographical sampling is far from being representative and different characters vary differently with geography as pointed in the proposal. There are unclear geographical breaks based on plumage variation (with some intermediates found throughout Central America and northern Colombia, based on the literature) and vocal data suggest a complex differentiation in Panama (breaking potential insolitus in two potential groups, west and east of the Canal zone) with the largest variation associated to aequatorialis. Molecular data show a large differentiation of erythropygius compared to the southern group, which does not differentiate much genetically. However, data from specimens collected west and east of the Canal zone (Darien and Coclé) group together, contrasting with vocalization data. It is worth to highlight the fact that the area from Colón to Veraguas (east and west Canal zone) have been identified as a potential suture zone in which morphology and molecular data are not congruent between each other (McLaughlin et al. 2020 Cotinga 42:77-81; McLaughlin et al. 2023, bioRxiv). This could explain the lack of correlation among all sets of characters in this area and make it hard to understand, with current data, the relationships between punctigula, insolitus and even aequatorialis. If we add the lack of data for the region of potential contact between insolitus and aequatorialis or punctigula and parvus (and between the northern group subspecies), we realize we are far from reaching a conclusion regarding species/taxon limits in this complex.

 

“5. To expand on the discussion of X. triangularis, plumage variation seems to be larger between triangularis (and hylodromus) and intermedius/bangsi. In the proposal, Oscar and Nick did not have access to skins of hylodromus. I am including two pictures (taken by Miguel Lentino from Colección Ornitológica Phelps) in which you can see the large similarity between both taxa. Wetmore (1939, Smith. Misc. Coll. 98) described hylodromus as “brighter olive brown above; expose surfaces of secondaries darker, less reddish brown; under surface lighter, more greenish olive, more abundantly spotted, the spot lighter colored; throat decidedly lighter, with the dark marginal lines on the feathers reduced in width (underlining mine).” Many of these differences are really tenuous and with a series such as the one in the picture (Figure 2), showing large individual variation throughout the distribution of the species in Venezuela, a reevaluation of geographical differentiation is needed to recognize (or not) the presence of two subspecies. The major difference is on the throat, lighter in hylodromus, part of the effect given by the reduction of dark marginal lines on the feathers (Figure 2, right picture). Regarding distribution of these taxa in Venezuela, and perhaps a consequence of the tenuous differences between them, Hilty (2003) indicated hylodromus has a distribution along the northern Cordillera of Venezuela extending to the northeastern Andean Cordillera (Lara and Trujillo). However, these specimens were suggested to be either intermediate in plumage coloration between both taxa (Phelps and Phelps, ms.) or should be better placed in triangularis (M. Lentino, pers. comm.). Unfortunately, Hilty (2003) did not provide any criteria to understand how he assigned localities to these taxa.

 

Figure 2. Pictures of Xiphorhynchus triangularis triangularis and X. t. hylodromus from Venezuela (pictures taken by Miguel Lentino from Colección Ornitológica Phelps). On the left, ventral view of a short series of specimens showing the large similarity between these taxa. The major difference between them is the lighter throat in hylodromus shown in the right picture.

 

 

“Molecular data and phylogenetic analyses (Figure 1) also suggest a major break potentially associated to the Huancabamba Dry Valley or Marañon river. Sequences were available from Cajamarca, Peru and Zamora-Chinchipe, Ecuador (not shown in the figure), north of Marañon river (both triangularis, diverging by just 0.2%), and, south of the Marañon, from Pasco, Peru (intermedius) and La Paz, Bolivia (bangsi), also very similar genetically (0.3-0.4%). These data show that there might be a large break between triangularis and both intermedius/bangsi but the geographical range of triangularis is largely unsampled. On the other hand, sequences of intermedius and bangsi are very similar (suggesting either current gene flow or recent divergence) compared to vocalizations that appear to be largely different (based on southern records (potentially bangsi) of Tom Schulenberg. However, the geographical distribution of these vocal differences and the real nature of it (i.e., larger vocal diversity, frequency of each vocalization in the repertoire) is unclear as Dan Lane recordings from San Martin, Peru, suggest a similar vocalization of this population (intermedius) to triangularis and we don´t know where, if any, is the break between these type of vocalizations.

 

“In summary, the proposal clearly indicates that even when phenotypic differentiation of X. erythropygius suggest more than one species within this group, the complexities of this variation, the lack of correlation among characters, and the lack of formal analyses, sample sizes and geographical representation, do not allow to make any definitive conclusions at this point. The same goes for X. triangularis, included in the proposal as historically considered to form a species or species complex with X. erythropygius.”

 

Comments from Zimmer: “NO. As laid out nicely in this proposal, we simply don’t have enough information in my opinion to make sense out of the observed variation.  Sample sizes and geographic breadth of genetic data seems insufficient to do much with, and plumage variation, while notable at the extremes, seems to not be concordant with currently recognized taxa, and intra-taxon variation looks, in some cases, to exceed or equal between-taxon variation.  Vocal distinctions are much more impressive to me, as I would expect to be the case with tree-hugging, forest-interior inhabiting, suboscines of a group in which plumage seems to be evolutionarily conservative, and in which minor distinctions are unlikely to be used by the birds themselves for sorting one another out.  As Curtis pointed out in his comments, it is especially important that any quantitative vocal analysis compares homologous vocalizations from one taxon to the next, and in the linked audio recordings, I’m seeing some instances where the vocalizations being compared are not clearly homologs.  This was particularly the case with the referenced recordings of X. triangularis hylodromus from Venezuela, all of which I would label as calls and not songs.  It has been some years since my last field exposure to members of the erythropygius-triangularis complex, but my recollection is that the two currently recognized species (Spotted and Olive-backed) always struck me as vocally distinct (at least in their songs), and that vocal differences from one place to another in Spotted Woodcreepers were a matter of degree, not of kind.  I also remember individual Spotted Woodcreepers giving altered songs in response to playback, and those alterations involved differences in number of notes, pace, and degree of frequency modulation, the latter altering the quality of the vocal elements – something I’m certain would have been visible in spectrograms.  It is my experience that woodcreepers, in general, tend to give all kinds of twisted, qualitatively different vocalizations in response to playback (as is also the case with the various Sclerurus species of Leaftossers), and therefore, any attempts at quantitative vocal analyses need to be of spontaneously vocalizing birds and homologous vocalizations.  All of that being said, I will say that my personal experience with Spotted Woodcreepers is mostly from Mexico to c Panama (west of the Canal Zone), and it is those birds whose voices I would describe as differing in only subtle ways from one another.  I was struck by how consistently different all of the songs of aequatorialis that I listened to from the sound archives (mostly from Ecuador) sounded from the relatively pure, unmodulated whistles of birds from w Panama, Costa Rica, and points north and west from there.  Nothing from those northern populations sound anything, to my ears, like the tremulous, quavering songs of aequatorialis, nor do the tracings from the spectrograms look anything alike.  So, I think there’s definitely some significant vocal differences between songs of triangularis versus the erythropygius group and the aequatorialis group, and between the erythropygius group and the aequatorialis group.  But, at this point, that’s a qualitative judgement on my part, and one that still hasn’t been rigorously quantified with geographically broad samples of homologous, spontaneously given vocalizations across the various taxa.  Until we have that, I would favor sticking with the status quo.  Also, although I clearly think it is premature at this point to be talking about English names for any splits, I do want to point out that the suggested (in the Proposal) English name of “Spot-throated Woodcreeper” for X. punctigula/insolitus is already taken by Certhiasomus stictolaemus!”

 

Comments from Jaramillo: “NO. This is a highly complex situation that requires much more rigorous data to sort it out. Looking at that line up of specimens is eye-opening … that is a good amount of variation morphologically there. That alone makes me think something more than one species is present, but which ones, why, based on what data independent of morphology? I don't think we are close on this one yet to understanding what is going on.

 

Comments from Claramunt: “NO. First I have to disagree with previous comments: plumage variation is suggestive of species-level differences, in my opinion. At least the LSU series shows three clearly diagnostic groups, easily distinguishable, that would match the proposed three-species classification. Those differences are not minor in the context of Xiphorhynchus woodcreepers that tend to be very conservative in plumage patterns. But of course, the situation may be more complex and a detailed study of geographic variation (including also songs and DNA) is clearly necessary here before making decisions about species limits.”