|
Book Review The Birds of Africa. Volume 6 from ABC Bulletin 8.2 September 2001 pages 142 - 143. Six down, one to go! It is now 18 years since the first volume of this work appeared but only three since volume 5, a consequence, we are told, of the publishers 'having put their foot down Volume 6 treats 19 families, from the Picathartidae to the Buphagidae, and in so doing covers, among others, the babblers, shrikes, sunbirds and
starlings, 324 species in all. At 724 pages it is the largest volume yet, being some 50 pages longer than the previous one, which was the largest then produced. The greater size is not immediately apparent, however, because one of a number of innovations in this volume is a change in paper to a thinner, higher quality, gloss art paper that is a pleasure to handle. Different printers have been used, too, for both text and plates, resulting in a marked improvement, particularly in the quality of the plates, which are crisp and, I suspect, faithful to Martin Woodcock's original artwork. There have been changes, too, in the plate legends. The latest design, the third to be used, has the full page facing the plate now reproducing the plate itself, faintly and in black and white, across which pale pink overlays All these improvements presumably ensue from the aforementioned increased downward pressure from the publisher's corporate foot, which has also resulted in changes in the editorial Martin Woodcock probably had to buy a entire new range of colours for his palette in order to illustrate this volume. At the very least it must have come as a welcome change, after the browns and greys of the previous volume (Cisticola, Bradypterus, Acrocephalus, Muscicapa etc.) to turn It is also a treat to be shown such confusing genera as Illadopsis, Speirops and Dryoscopus all on one plate for the first time, rather than to have to juggle two or more different books or, worse, to have to try to deduce the appearance of a bird from a series of statements which start with the words 'differs from the previous species in...', especially when the same formula of words also appears under the previous species! From earlier volumes of Birds of Africa one has come to expect one or two taxonomic innovations in treatment of taxa and this one doesn't disappoint. The most obvious here is, I suppose, the (tentative) transfer of the Ethiopian Bush-Crow Zavattariornis stresemanni from the crows to the More extensive changes have, following work by Michael Irwin, been adopted in sunbird taxonomy. Recent 'conventional' treatment has been to ascribe all African sunbirds either to Anthreptes or, the majority, to Nectarinia. Irwin has, on the basis of detailed studies of biological and morphological characters, including those of bill structure, proposed that African taxa hitherto placed in Anthreptes be divided among three genera and those formerly in Nectarinia seven. To illustrate the changes with Anthreptes, removed from it to the genus Hedydipna are collaris (Collared), platura (Pygmy), metallica (Nile Valley) and pallidigastra (Amani), while Fraser's or Grey-headed Sunbird becomes Deleornis fraseri. The placement of fraseri within a monotypic genus does
not seem at all unreasonable, as it does not behave like any other sunbird I know. As the anonymous author (Deleornis having apparently been omitted from the list of authorship At the species level, there are -
thankfully - relatively fewer changes. However, the Olive Sunbird in West African forests that I have hitherto known as Nectarinia olivacea, here becomes Cyanomitra obscura because, in addition to being moved to this restored genus, it has been separated from the nominate form of eastern and southern Africa. Lastly, the Purple-banded One further split to mention is the separation of the Velvet-mantled Drongo Dicrurus modestus (together with coracinus and atactus) of the Guineo-Congolian forests from the Common Drongo D. adsimilis of the surrounding savannas and beyond. In areas where two or three species are Another error is in the account of Monteiro's Bush-Shrike Malaconotus monteiri. Here, Eddie Williams' recent suggestion' that M. monteiri and M. gladiator may be conspecific isn't really given a fair shake, I feel, probably in part because he has been misquoted. The species account states This error was noted partially because Williams' purported observation of M. monteiri in Bakossi in the 'Range and Status' section is referenced. Which raises the question, why are some such localities here so referenced and others not? Another question, what determines the sequence However much the editors have striven to avoid omissions and inaccuracies (another example of the latter is the eye colour of the gonoleks which, in Laniarius mufumbiri and L. erythrogaster at least, is shown in the plate as being too yellow; it should be white or nearly so), these are inevitable in a work of this scale and one which covers what remains, for the most part, a very imperfectly known avifauna. Consider, after all, how many iterations it has taken guide books of L. D. C. Fishpool References 1. Irwin, M.P.S, 1993. What sunbirds belong to the genus Anthreptes? Honeyguide 39: 211-215. Last page update 14th September 2011 |
|||||||||||||||||||||