Chestnut-breasted Malkoha (Phaenicophaeus curvirostris) is being split: list P. oeneicaudus as Near Threatened?

This is part of a consultation on the Red List implications of extensive changes to BirdLife’s taxonomy for non-passerines

Lynx Edicions and BirdLife International will soon publish the HBW-BirdLife Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World, building off the Handbook of the Birds of the World series, and BirdLife’s annually updated taxonomic checklist.

The new Checklist will be based on the application of criteria for recognising species limits described by Tobias et al. (2010). Full details of the specific scores and the basis of these for each new taxonomic revision will be provided in the Checklist.

Following publication, an open and transparent mechanism will be established to allow people to comment on the taxonomic revisions or suggest new ones, and provide new information of relevance in order to inform regular updates. We are also actively seeking input via a discussion topic here regarding some potential taxonomic revisions that currently lack sufficient information.

The new Checklist will form the taxonomic basis of BirdLife’s assessments of the status of the world’s birds for the IUCN Red List. The taxonomic changes that will appear in volume 1 of the checklist (for non-passerines) will begin to be incorporated into the 2014 Red List update, with the remainder, and those for passerines (which will appear in volume 2 of the checklist), to be incorporated into subsequent Red List updates.

Preliminary Red List assessments have been carried out for the newly split or lumped taxa. We are now requesting comments and feedback on these preliminary assessments.

Chestnut-breasted Malkoha Phaenicophaeus curvirostris is being split into P. curvirostris and P. oeneicaudus, following the application of criteria set out by Tobias et al. (2010).

Prior to this taxonomic change, P. curvirostris (BirdLife species factsheet) was listed as Least Concern on the basis that it was not thought to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under any of the IUCN criteria. This species was estimated to have a very large range, and hence did not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence [EOO] of less than 20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species did not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (at least a 30% decline over ten years or three generations). The population size has not been quantified, but it was not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (fewer than 10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be at least 10% over ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure).

P. oeneicaudus is found on the Mentawai Islands, where it probably occupies lowland primary forest, secondary forest and other modified habitats (Erritzøe et al. 2012). It is suggested that it qualifies as Near Threatened under criteria B1ab(iii,v); C2a(i), on the basis that it has a small range (with an EOO estimated at c.6,000 km2), in which the quality of habitat is in decline, although it is not severely fragmented, and the species’s population, which is thought to be small (fewer than 10,000 mature individuals, but with more than 1,000 mature individuals in the largest subpopulation), is thought to be in decline as a result.

P. curvirostris (as defined following the taxonomic change) ranges through the Thai-Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, Java, Bali, Borneo and the south-western Philippines, where it inhabits lowland primary forest, as well as secondary forest and other modified habitats (Erritzøe et al. 2012). It is suggested that it should be listed as Least Concern, on the basis that it is not thought to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under any of the IUCN criteria.

Comments are invited on these suggested categories and further information would be welcomed.

References:

Erritzøe, J., Mann, C. F., Brammer, F. P. and Fuller, R. A. (2012) Cuckoos of the World. Helm Identification Guides. London, UK: Christopher Helm.

Tobias, J. A., Seddon, N., Spottiswoode, C. N., Pilgrim, J. D., Fishpool, L. D. C. and Collar, N. J. (2010) Quantitative criteria for species delimitation. Ibis 152: 724–746.

Related posts:

  1. Cinnamon-bellied Imperial-pigeon (Ducula basilica) is being split: list D. obiensis as Near Threatened?
  2. Archived 2012-2013 topics: Red-breasted Parakeet (Psittacula alexandri): request for information
  3. Island Collared-dove (Streptopelia bitorquata) is being split: list S. dusumieri as Near Threatened?
  4. Brown Hawk-owl (Ninox scutulata) is being split: list N. randi as Near Threatened?
  5. Common Flameback (Dinopium javanense) is being split: list D. everetti as Near Threatened?
This entry was posted in Asia and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Chestnut-breasted Malkoha (Phaenicophaeus curvirostris) is being split: list P. oeneicaudus as Near Threatened?

  1. Joe Taylor says:

    Preliminary proposals

    Based on available information, our preliminary proposals for the 2014 Red List would be to treat:

    P. curvirostris as Least Concern

    P. oeneicaudus as Least Concern

    There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline of 31 March, after which recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.

    The final Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in mid-2014, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.

  2. Andy Symes says:

    Recommended categorisations to be put forward to IUCN

    Following further review, there have been no changes to our preliminary proposals for the 2014 Red List status of these species.

    The final categorisations will be published later in 2014, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by BirdLife and IUCN.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree