Jump to content
Whatbird Community

Anas carolinensis or Anas carolinensis x Anas crecca


Recommended Posts

Hello,

This is an observation of a bird outside of North America, however, I wanted to know the opinion of people who observe this species regularly, that is why I am posting it here. I have observed this bird in Spain recently and I was wondering whether you would consider it a pure Anas carolinensis or a hybrid. Anas carolinensis should not have a white scapular stripe, which this bird does not, but it does seem to have a faint rufous-buff scapular stripe. I have seen other photos of Anas carolinensis where this weak stripe appears, however, I wanted to have people comment on it, who see this bird regularly. Would you double take seeing this bird or would you just call it A. carolinensis?

Thank you very much in advance,

Jacek Szymanski

P.S. I am writing about these two species as two species rather than subspecies, based on this article:

Sangster G, Collinson JM, Helbig AJ, Knox AG, Parkin DT, Prater T (2001) The taxonomic status of Green–winged Teal Anas carolinensis. Br Birds 94:218–224

IMG_6210.JPG

IMG_6222.JPG

IMG_6289.JPG

IMG_6316.JPG

IMG_6370.JPG

IMG_6404.JPG

IMG_6423.JPG

IMG_6435.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems fine for a Green-winged, as it has the vertical bar on the upper side and seems to have a duller face pattern (I would like to see better photos of the face to be certain of that). Common Teal differs in lacking that bar but also in, generally, having a wider and whiter greater-covert bar, which is what creates the horizontal white bar on the edge of the folded wing. Both species show that, but it is just generally more obvious on Common, though, as Sibley pointed out, there is substantial variation in both species.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No evidence to suggest that this is anything other than a pure American Green-winged Teal.
 

A intergrade between Eurasian and American Green-winged Teal should show more white in the horizontal stripe and should show a reduced white vertical breast stripe. This looks like a normal American.

Also, these aren’t different species (according to current generally accepted taxonomy at least), and why are you using scientific names instead of common names?

Edited by AlexHenry
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all very much. That is what I suspected, but I wanted people who see this species more often to give their opinions. The answers are much appreciated.

When it comes to taxonomy and separation of these sub/species it depends on the country you are in. In Spain where I live, these are considered two distinct species. And I was using the scientific names just to be precise in terms of what I meant. Since in America they are still one species I didn't want any confusion. So once again thank you very much for your input.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, AlexHenry said:

why are you using scientific names instead of common names?

As someone recently pointed out, common names can vary depending on location. Different languages make it difficult to use common names, thus the need for scientific names when dealing with international ID's. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, lonestranger said:

As someone recently pointed out, common names can vary depending on location. Different languages make it difficult to use common names, thus the need for scientific names when dealing with international ID's. 

Here people use either English names or scientific names because the names in Spanish aren't standardized and therefore not clear at all. Some people, especially beginners, want to use Spanish names for obvious reasons; but for example azulejo can be either an Eastern Bluebird or a Blue-Gray Tanager, and most people call male Great-Tailed Grackles clarineros and females zanates. Some birders just translate the English names, so a White-Eared Hummingbird becomes a Colibrí Orejiblanco. But yes, scientific names are definitely more accurate, and preferred by many because they are easier to (mis)pronounce in Spanish than English names. Also professional guides, a large proportion of birders, need to know the English names to work with English-speaking tourists. 

But anyway - many of you guys use those four-letter abbreviations, which I find difficult and annoying; there certainly shouldn't be any reason not to use scientific names, and as specified by the original poster, they are more accurate in many situations.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, DLecy said:

Not to be pedantic, but since this bird was observed in Spain, doesn’t the post belong in the other thread? @Aveschapines

Since the intention is to get feedback from people that see the species frequently, and since it is not foreign to North America, I see no reason to move it.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Aveschapines said:

But anyway - many of you guys use those four-letter abbreviations, which I find difficult and annoying;

I try to use the full common English name in a thread before using the corresponding code.  I recall that's proper grammatical practice when using abbreviations.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Charlie Spencer said:

I try to use the full common English name in a thread before using the corresponding code.  I recall that's proper grammatical practice when using abbreviations.

Yes, I agree about the grammar/writing style of using the full name before the abbreviation and then just the abbreviation. And I appreciate that you do this! When you're not dealing with the same group of species the codes can be very cryptic. (And just as "jargony" as scientific names, in my opinion.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aveschapines said:

When you're not dealing with the same group of species the codes can be very cryptic. (And just as "jargony" as scientific names, in my opinion.)

We've had so many new birders coming here in the last year, and they probably aren't familiar with the codes.  Stating the bird's common name at soon as possible is just common courtesy.  Even if you know the poster is an experienced birder, stating the complete name at least once is helpful to new birders who check each thread to improve their ID skills.

Now, would someone please help me down off this soap box?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Charlie Spencer said:

Now, would someone please help me down off this soap box?

Not me; I'm right up there with you! After I posted I realized I could have been less self-centered and addressed the new birders issue too. I remember complaints ages ago about using scientific names being seen as pedantic and off-putting; but I react exactly this way to the 4-letter codes, and I agree, they are probably even more confusing than scientific names to new birders, since the scientific names are very easy to look up. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Aveschapines said:

No; re-read the original post.

I did read the original post. I'm aware of exactly what the poster was stating. I guess I always assumed it was where the poster was observing the birds, but in re-reading the forum statement, it says "This Forum is just for North American birds," which is somewhat ambiguous to me. For example, many warblers and shorebirds that people on this thread would readily identify as a "North American bird" actually spend less than half of their lives in N.A., where they may have a short breeding season before migrating back to Central and S.A. Maybe I'm thinking too hard about it and if the intention is to get feedback on any bird that spends time in N.A. (like the O.P. here) then cool, I understand now.

 

43 minutes ago, Charlie Spencer said:

I try to use the full common English name in a thread before using the corresponding code.  I recall that's proper grammatical practice when using abbreviations.

Agreed. This is the unwritten rule for our local listservs as well. The four letter banding codes are appropriate AFTER the full common name has been used.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DLecy said:

I did read the original post. I'm aware of exactly what the poster was stating. I guess I always assumed it was where the poster was observing the birds, but in re-reading the forum statement, it says "This Forum is just for North American birds," which is somewhat ambiguous to me. For example, many warblers and shorebirds that people on this thread would readily identify as a "North American bird" actually spend less than half of their lives in N.A., where they may have a short breeding season before migrating back to Central and S.A. Maybe I'm thinking too hard about it and if the intention is to get feedback on any bird that spends time in N.A. (like the O.P. here) then cool, I understand now.

Maybe my comments here will be helpful to you, but no need to continue to debate this here.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DLecy said:

Agreed. This is the unwritten rule for our local listservs as well. The four letter banding codes are appropriate AFTER the full common name has been used.

That's good to know, and, I think, very helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if I sparked this debate with my original comment. I did not intend to be hostile or unwelcoming to the original poster.

I did not know that those two taxa were considered different species in other countries. (Although I knew they had been considered different species historically, and may potentially be considered different species again at some point in the future (at least in North America)).

Regarding the use of scientific names, I recognize that scientific names are more universal, world-wide, than common names.

However, at least in the US and Canada (which is where most, though not all, members who use the North American subforum are from), English common names are the primary, easily understandable way to refer to bird species. Outside of academia, almost no one uses scientific names (except to make Anas and Turdus jokes). Banding codes are actually used a LOT more in the birding community than scientific names, and both are equally easy to look up, but ideally, nobody should have to go look stuff up, posts should just be written in such a way as to be understandable.

Also, banding codes are a short-form, an abbreviation meant to save time and make typing the bird’s name faster and easier. Scientific names are, in many cases, longer than common names.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, DLecy said:

The four letter banding codes are appropriate AFTER the full common name has been used.

I think this is something that should be emphasized throughout the website, maybe even pinned somewhere. *hint hint @Aveschapines, @Charlie Spencer...tries not to be obvious...fails*  While codes are helpful to those that know them, and know all the exceptions associated with them, codes are totally useless and often confusing if you don't know EVERYTHING there is to know about them. Strictly speaking for myself of course. 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Charlie Spencer said:

Now, would someone please help me down off this soap box?

 

1 hour ago, Aveschapines said:

Not me; I'm right up there with you!

*builds a soapbox big enough to pin things from* 😁

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, lonestranger said:

While codes are helpful to those that know them, and know all the exceptions associated with them, codes are totally useless and often confusing if you don't know EVERYTHING there is to know about them. Strictly speaking for myself of course. 😉

I am definitely a proponent of using common names first, but if you ever encounter a situation where someone has used a banding code without the common name the Sibley app is very helpful. If only the banding code is given, you can search by that. Conversely, if you know the species name and want to find the banding code, you can find it in the text of the species account. I have attached screenshots of both examples.

As for knowing everything there is to know about banding codes, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that. For the non-bird bander, banding alpha codes are simply a shorthand way to refer to a bird species. For example, if I am writing a post about American Three-toed Woodpeckers, it is often easier to write ATTW than it is to write out the full common name multiple times over the course of a post. Of course, it should be common practice (and courtesy) to at least use the full species name in the title of the post before using the alpha codes.

IMG_8387.jpg

IMG_8388.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, AlexHenry said:

both are equally easy to look up,

I beg to differ. I googled EABL and got hits for breweries and sports teams. I googled sialia sialis and got Eastern Bluebirds. Perhaps if you know where to look up the 4-letter codes they're easy to look up, but if so you probably know what the codes mean.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DLecy said:

As for knowing everything there is to know about banding codes, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that.

I was referring to exceptions such as Canada Goose and Cackling Goose that don't fit the normal shorthand you're referring to, an exception beginners might not know about when CAGO is used. I have picked up a lot from reading the forums but many new members may find the jargon confusing, I know I did and sometimes still do.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realize there was any consensus about using banding codes and common names. I'm happy to pin or highlight a suggestion to use common names with banding codes; any suggestions as to where and how I might post it? I thought the popularity of banding codes was just an annoyance I had to live with, but the situation for new birders does concern me. 

I do understand that using scientific names is not popular for US birders and can be seen as pretentious; but that is not true everywhere, and this site is used by people around the world, as you know. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...