A Revision of Species Limits in Neotropical Pipits Anthus Based on Multilocus Genetic and Vocal Data Van Els, Paul; Norambuena, Heraldo V
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Point Reyes National Seashore Bird List
Birds of Point Reyes National Seashore Gaviidae (Loons) Alcedinidae (Kingfishers) Podicipedidae (Grebes) Picidae (Woodpeckers) Diomedeidae (Albatrosses) Tyrannidae (Tyrant Flycatcher) Procellariidae (Shearwaters, Petrels) Alaudidae (Larks) Hydrobatidae (Storm Petrels) Hirundinidae (Swallows) Sulidae (Boobies, Gannets) Laniidae (Shrikes) Pelecanidae (Pelicans) Vireonidae (Vireos) Phalacrocoracidae (Cormorants) Corvidae (Crows, Jays) Fregatidae (Frigate Birds) Paridae (Chickadees, Titmice) Ardeidae (Herons, Bitterns, & Egrets) Aegithalidae (Bushtits) Threskiornithidae (Ibises, Spoonbills) Sittidae (Nuthatches) Ciconiidae (Storks) Certhiidae (Creepers) Anatidae (Ducks, Geese, Swans) Troglodytidae (Wrens) Cathartidae (New World Vultures) Cinclidae (Dippers) Accipitridae (Hawks, Kites, Eagles) & Regulidae (Kinglets) Falconidae (Caracaras, Falcons) Sylviidae (Old World Warblers, Gnatcatchers) Odontophoridae (New World Quail) Turdidae (Thrushes) Rallidae (Rails, Gallinules, Coots) Timaliidae (Babblers) Gruidae (Cranes) Mimidae (Mockingbirds, Thrashers) Charadriidae (Lapwings, Plovers) Motacillidae (Wagtails, Pipits) Haematopodidae (Oystercatcher) Bombycillidae (Waxwings) Recurvirostridae (Stilts, Avocets) Ptilogonatidae (Silky-flycatcher) Scolopacidae (Sandpipers, Phalaropes) Parulidae (Wood Warblers) Laridae (Skuas, Gulls, Terns, Skimmers) Cardinalidae (Cardinals) Alcidae (Auks, Murres, Puffins) Emberizidae (Emberizids) Columbidae (Pigeons, Doves) Fringillidae (Finches) Cuculidae (Cuckoos, Road Runners, Anis) NON-NATIVES Tytonidae (Barn Owls) -
Lista Roja De Las Aves Del Uruguay 1
Lista Roja de las Aves del Uruguay 1 Lista Roja de las Aves del Uruguay Una evaluación del estado de conservación de la avifauna nacional con base en los criterios de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza. Adrián B. Azpiroz, Laboratorio de Genética de la Conservación, Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas Clemente Estable, Av. Italia 3318 (CP 11600), Montevideo ([email protected]). Matilde Alfaro, Asociación Averaves & Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de la República, Iguá 4225 (CP 11400), Montevideo ([email protected]). Sebastián Jiménez, Proyecto Albatros y Petreles-Uruguay, Centro de Investigación y Conservación Marina (CICMAR), Avenida Giannattasio Km 30.5. (CP 15008) Canelones, Uruguay; Laboratorio de Recursos Pelágicos, Dirección Nacional de Recursos Acuáticos, Constituyente 1497 (CP 11200), Montevideo ([email protected]). Cita sugerida: Azpiroz, A.B., M. Alfaro y S. Jiménez. 2012. Lista Roja de las Aves del Uruguay. Una evaluación del estado de conservación de la avifauna nacional con base en los criterios de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza. Dirección Nacional de Medio Ambiente, Montevideo. Descargo de responsabilidad El contenido de esta publicación es responsabilidad de los autores y no refleja necesariamente las opiniones o políticas de la DINAMA ni de las organizaciones auspiciantes y no comprometen a estas instituciones. Las denominaciones empleadas y la forma en que aparecen los datos no implica de parte de DINAMA, ni de las organizaciones auspiciantes o de los autores, juicio alguno sobre la condición jurídica de países, territorios, ciudades, personas, organizaciones, zonas o de sus autoridades, ni sobre la delimitación de sus fronteras o límites. -
Freshwater Fishes
WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE state oF BIODIVERSITY 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction 2 Chapter 2 Methods 17 Chapter 3 Freshwater fishes 18 Chapter 4 Amphibians 36 Chapter 5 Reptiles 55 Chapter 6 Mammals 75 Chapter 7 Avifauna 89 Chapter 8 Flora & Vegetation 112 Chapter 9 Land and Protected Areas 139 Chapter 10 Status of River Health 159 Cover page photographs by Andrew Turner (CapeNature), Roger Bills (SAIAB) & Wicus Leeuwner. ISBN 978-0-620-39289-1 SCIENTIFIC SERVICES 2 Western Cape Province State of Biodiversity 2007 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Andrew Turner [email protected] 1 “We live at a historic moment, a time in which the world’s biological diversity is being rapidly destroyed. The present geological period has more species than any other, yet the current rate of extinction of species is greater now than at any time in the past. Ecosystems and communities are being degraded and destroyed, and species are being driven to extinction. The species that persist are losing genetic variation as the number of individuals in populations shrinks, unique populations and subspecies are destroyed, and remaining populations become increasingly isolated from one another. The cause of this loss of biological diversity at all levels is the range of human activity that alters and destroys natural habitats to suit human needs.” (Primack, 2002). CapeNature launched its State of Biodiversity Programme (SoBP) to assess and monitor the state of biodiversity in the Western Cape in 1999. This programme delivered its first report in 2002 and these reports are updated every five years. The current report (2007) reports on the changes to the state of vertebrate biodiversity and land under conservation usage. -
Beidaihe^ China: East Asian Hotspot Paul I
Beidaihe^ China: East Asian hotspot Paul I. Holt, Graham P. Catley and David Tipling China has come a long way since 1958 when 'Sparrows [probably meaning any passerine], rats, bugs and flies' were proscribed as pests and a war declared on them. The extermination of a reputed 800,000 birds over three days in Beijing alone was apparently then followed by a plague of insects (Boswall 1986). After years of isolation and intellectual stagnation during the Cultural Revolution, China opened its doors to organised foreign tour groups in the late 1970s and to individual travellers from 1979 onwards. Whilst these initial 'pion eering' travellers included only a handful of birdwatchers, news of the country's ornithological riches soon spread and others were quick to follow. With a national avifauna in excess of 1,200 species, the People's Republic offers vast scope for study. Many of the species are endemic or nearly so, a majority are poorly known and a few possess an almost mythical draw for European birders. Sadly, all too many of the endemic forms are either rare or endangered. Initially, most of the recent visits by birders were via Hong Kong, and concentrated on China's mountainous southern and western regions. Inevitably, however, attention has shifted towards the coastal migration sites. Migration at one such, Beidaihe in Hebei Province, in Northeast China, had been studied and documented by a Danish scientist during the Second World War (Hemmingsen 1951; Hemmingsen & Guildal 1968). It became the focus of renewed interest after a 1985 Cambridge University expedition (Williams et al. -
The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion
The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion Strategic Framework for Conservation 2005 – 2025 Strategic Framework for Conservation (2005–2025) The Eastern Afrca Coastal Forests Ecoregon Strategc Framework for Conservaton 2005–2025 The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion Publshed August 2006 Editor: Kimunya Mugo Design and layout: Anthony Mwangi Cover design: Kimunya Mugo Front cover main photo: WWF-EARPO / John SALEHE Front cover other photos: WWF-UK / Brent STIRTON / Getty Images Back cover photo: WWF-EARPO / John SALEHE Photos: John Salehe, David Maingi and Neil Burgess or as credited. © Graphics (2006) WWF-EARPO. All rights reserved. The material and geographic designations in this report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WWF concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers and boundaries. WWF Eastern Africa Regional Programme Office ACS Plaza, Lenana Road P.O. Box 62440-00200 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 3877355, 3872630/1 Fax: +254 20 3877389 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.panda.org/earpo Strategic Framework for Conservation (2005–2025) Contents Acknowledgements......................................................................................................... iv Foreword........................................................................................................................... v Lst of abbrevatons and acronyms.............................................................................. v A new approach to -
Pechora Pipitanthus Gustavi in Australia
59 AUSTRALIAN FIELD ORNITHOLOGY 2003, 20, 59-65 Pechora PipitAnthus gustavi in Australia MIKE CARTER 30 Canadian Bay Road, Mount Eliza, Victoria 3930 (Email: [email protected]) Summary A Pechora Pipit Anthus gustavi was present on West Island, Ashmore Reef, off the northern coast of Western Australia on 4 and 5 November 2001. This paper documents the occurrence, the first record for Australia. lntrQduction During the morning of 4 November 2001, twelve observers (Allan Benson, Rob Benson, Peter Crabtree, Penny Drake-Brockman, Phil Joy, Chris Lester, Jann Mullholland, Ross Mullholland, Stuart Pell, Fred Smith, George Swann and the author) carried out a census of the birds of West Island, Ashmore Reef (12°14'S, 122°58'E). This is about 600 km north of Broome in Western Australia. Apart from the resident Buff-banded Rails Gallirallus philippensis, the only land birds discovered were passage migrants: 4 Oriental Cuckoos Cuculus saturatus, 1 Little Bronze-Cuckoo Chrysococcyx minutillus, 4 Sacred Kingfishers Todiramphus sanctus, 3 Rainbow Bee-eaters Merops omatus, 3 Magpie-larks Grallina cyanoleuca, 4 Yellow Wagtails Motacilla flava and 2 Barn Swallows Hirundo rustica. In the late morning a small, short-tailed passerine was flushed but not identified. In the afternoon, a small ground-bird was seen walking into a clump ofArgusia argentia. This large sprawling shrub growing to about 5 m tall, with a dome-like canopy embraced by creeping vines, is confined almost completely to the fringes of the island where it is the dominant vegetation. In spite of a prolonged attempt, we were unable to identify the bird before nightfall, but the views obtained were sufficient to suggest that our quarry was a pipit Anthus sp. -
Report on Biodiversity and Tropical Forests in Indonesia
Report on Biodiversity and Tropical Forests in Indonesia Submitted in accordance with Foreign Assistance Act Sections 118/119 February 20, 2004 Prepared for USAID/Indonesia Jl. Medan Merdeka Selatan No. 3-5 Jakarta 10110 Indonesia Prepared by Steve Rhee, M.E.Sc. Darrell Kitchener, Ph.D. Tim Brown, Ph.D. Reed Merrill, M.Sc. Russ Dilts, Ph.D. Stacey Tighe, Ph.D. Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................. i List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. v List of Figures............................................................................................................................... vii Acronyms....................................................................................................................................... ix Executive Summary.................................................................................................................... xvii 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................1- 1 2. Legislative and Institutional Structure Affecting Biological Resources...............................2 - 1 2.1 Government of Indonesia................................................................................................2 - 2 2.1.1 Legislative Basis for Protection and Management of Biodiversity and -
Taxonomy of the Mirafra Assamica Complex
FORKTAIL 13 (1998): 97-107 Taxonomy of the Mirafra assamica complex PER ALSTROM Four taxa are recognised in the Mirafra assamicacomplex: assamica Horsfield, affinis Blyth, microptera Hume, and marionae Baker; subsessorDeignan is considered to be a junior synonym of marionae. These four taxa differ in morphology and especially in vocalizations. Both assamicaand microptera have diagnostic song-flights, while affinis and marionae have similar song-flights. There are also differences in other behavioural aspects and habitat between assamicaand the others. On account of this, it is suggested that Mirafra assamicasensu lato be split into four species:M assamica,M affinis,M micropteraand M marionae.English names proposed are: Bengal Bushlark, ] erdon' s Bushlark, Burmese Bushlark and Indochinese Bushlark, respectively. The Rufous-winged Bushlark Mirafra assamica Horsfield (including the holotype) on my behalf in the Smithsonian is usually divided into five subspecies: assamica Horsfield Institution, Washington, D.C., USA. I have examined c. (1840), affinis Blyth (1845), microptera Hume (1873), 20 specimens of ceylonensis, though I have not compared it subsessor Deignan (1941), and marionae Baker (1915) in detail with affinis, and I have only measured four (Peters 1960, Howard and Moore 1991). One further specimens (of which two were unsexed). For all taxa, taxon, ceylonensis Whistler (1936), is sometimes recognized, measurements of wing length (with the wing flattened and but following Ripley (1946) and Vaurie (1951) most recent stretched; method 3, Svensson 1992), tail length, bill length authors treat it as a junior synonym of affinis. The name (to skull), bill depth (at distal end of nostrils), tarsus length marionae is actually predated by erythrocephala Salvadori and hind-claw length were taken of specimens whose labels and Giglioli (1885), but this does not appear to have been indicated their sex. -
TNP SOK 2011 Internet
GARDEN ROUTE NATIONAL PARK : THE TSITSIKAMMA SANP ARKS SECTION STATE OF KNOWLEDGE Contributors: N. Hanekom 1, R.M. Randall 1, D. Bower, A. Riley 2 and N. Kruger 1 1 SANParks Scientific Services, Garden Route (Rondevlei Office), PO Box 176, Sedgefield, 6573 2 Knysna National Lakes Area, P.O. Box 314, Knysna, 6570 Most recent update: 10 May 2012 Disclaimer This report has been produced by SANParks to summarise information available on a specific conservation area. Production of the report, in either hard copy or electronic format, does not signify that: the referenced information necessarily reflect the views and policies of SANParks; the referenced information is either correct or accurate; SANParks retains copies of the referenced documents; SANParks will provide second parties with copies of the referenced documents. This standpoint has the premise that (i) reproduction of copywrited material is illegal, (ii) copying of unpublished reports and data produced by an external scientist without the author’s permission is unethical, and (iii) dissemination of unreviewed data or draft documentation is potentially misleading and hence illogical. This report should be cited as: Hanekom N., Randall R.M., Bower, D., Riley, A. & Kruger, N. 2012. Garden Route National Park: The Tsitsikamma Section – State of Knowledge. South African National Parks. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................2 2. ACCOUNT OF AREA........................................................................................................2 -
South Puget Sound Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila Alpestris Strigata) Genetic Rescue Study Report for Year 2
South Puget Sound Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) Genetic Rescue Study Report for Year 2 Spring/Summer 2012 Photo credit: Rod Gilbert South Puget Sound Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) Genetic Rescue Study Draft Report for Year 2 September 2012 Prepared by Adrian Wolf THE CENTER FOR NATURAL LANDS MANAGEMENT The Center for Natural Lands Management 120 East Union Avenue, suite 215 Olympia, WA 98501 Tel. 360-742-8212 Email: [email protected] Abstract Hatchability of Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) eggs in the Puget Lowlands of Washington State is extremely low relative to other grassland nesting birds at the same site and generally. Because genetic factors (inbreeding depression) appear to be a likely explanation, an effort to increase genetic diversity was initiated in 2011. 2012 was the second year of the genetic rescue effort initiated at the 13th Division Prairie on Joint Base Lewis-McChord. A total of eight breeding lark pairs and one unpaired male were detected within the study area. Nest building was first detected on 25 April; the first eggs were observed on 16 May; the first nestlings hatched on or around 27 May, the first fledgling was observed on 20 June. Twenty nests were located, which produced a total of 49 eggs (2.9 eggs/nest ± 0.9 SD). Mean number of eggs per completed clutch (n = 15) was 3.1 ± 0.6 (SD), an increase from 2.3 in 2011. A total of 14 local nestlings were color-banded, and at least four of the fourteen were observed foraging independently. Hatchability of the Puget Sound nests increased to 84% in 2012, from 61% in 2011. -
Small Grants for Building Research Capacity Among Tanzanian and Kenyan Students
CEPF FINAL PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT I. BASIC DATA Organization Legal Name: BirdLife International Project Title (as stated in the grant agreement): Small Grants for Building Research Capacity among Tanzanian and Kenyan Students Implementation Partners for this Project: BirdLife International – African Partnership Secretariat, Nature Kenya, Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania Project Dates (as stated in the grant agreement): September 1, 2006 - June 30, 2009 Date of Report (month/year): 31 July 2009 II. OPENING REMARKS Provide any opening remarks that may assist in the review of this report. Acceleration in environmental and habitat degradation, habitat and biodiversity loss, over-exploitation of resources and loss of species are some of the threats facing biodiversity conservation. Concerted efforts are being put in place to overcome these threats through: site protection, site management, invasive species control, species recovery, captive breeding, reintroduction, national legislation, habitat restoration, habitat protection and awareness-raising and communication. However, lack of sufficient biological knowledge, shortfalls in funding, and lack of sufficient capacity still pose a major challenge. This project was developed to fill gaps in biological knowledge while at the same time developing the capacity of a cadre of research scientists. When the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) launched its 5-year conservation programme in the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Kenya and Tanzania (EACF), the focus was to address most of these thematic areas. These included improving biological knowledge in the hotspot through research, monitoring, education and awareness raising, integrating and engaging local populations into biodiversity conservation and livelihood initiatives and building the capacity through small scale efforts to increase biological knowledge of the sites and efforts to conserve Critically Endangered Species in the hotspot and connectivity of biologically important patches. -
21 Sep 2018 Lists of Victims and Hosts of the Parasitic
version: 21 Sep 2018 Lists of victims and hosts of the parasitic cowbirds (Molothrus). Peter E. Lowther, Field Museum Brood parasitism is an awkward term to describe an interaction between two species in which, as in predator-prey relationships, one species gains at the expense of the other. Brood parasites "prey" upon parental care. Victimized species usually have reduced breeding success, partly because of the additional cost of caring for alien eggs and young, and partly because of the behavior of brood parasites (both adults and young) which may directly and adversely affect the survival of the victim's own eggs or young. About 1% of all bird species, among 7 families, are brood parasites. The 5 species of brood parasitic “cowbirds” are currently all treated as members of the genus Molothrus. Host selection is an active process. Not all species co-occurring with brood parasites are equally likely to be selected nor are they of equal quality as hosts. Rather, to varying degrees, brood parasites are specialized for certain categories of hosts. Brood parasites may rely on a single host species to rear their young or may distribute their eggs among many species, seemingly without regard to any characteristics of potential hosts. Lists of species are not the best means to describe interactions between a brood parasitic species and its hosts. Such lists do not necessarily reflect the taxonomy used by the brood parasites themselves nor do they accurately reflect the complex interactions within bird communities (see Ortega 1998: 183-184). Host lists do, however, offer some insight into the process of host selection and do emphasize the wide variety of features than can impact on host selection.