tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5460788270738656369.post5235375348380315274..comments2023-12-24T07:02:43.274+08:00Comments on Catalogue of Organisms: CoscorobaChristopher Taylorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11075565866351612441noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5460788270738656369.post-55769930177269621332011-06-02T02:43:00.419+08:002011-06-02T02:43:00.419+08:00Yes, according to Sick it does breed in southern B...Yes, according to Sick it does breed in southern Brazil. Here's a picture of a couple with chicks in Brazil: http://www.wikiaves.com.br/228899&t=s&s=10031. And here's a picture of a bird in the nest, also in Brazil: http://www.wikiaves.com.br/197906&t=s&s=10031rafael marcondeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17977820582079641506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5460788270738656369.post-43382608730190299482011-06-01T12:26:14.949+08:002011-06-01T12:26:14.949+08:00Thanks for the correction, Rafael. Do you know if ...Thanks for the correction, Rafael. Do you know if it breeds in Brazil?Christopher Taylorhttp://coo.fieldofscience.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5460788270738656369.post-82196738205715561972011-06-01T08:23:25.377+08:002011-06-01T08:23:25.377+08:00Nice post!
I should add that the Uruguay is not th...Nice post!<br />I should add that the Uruguay is not the northern limit of its distribution, as it also occurs in southern Brazil. You can see a map with some Brazilian records here: http://www.wikiaves.com.br/capororoca There are also some pictures and sound recordings. It really sounds like 'cos-coroba!'<br />Notice in the map that there is also one record in the Pantanal, and more records in that region are mentioned in Helmut Sick's "Ornitologia Brasileira" ("Birds in Brazil", in the english edition)rafael marcondeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17977820582079641506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5460788270738656369.post-69395602165229966742011-05-27T15:20:49.918+08:002011-05-27T15:20:49.918+08:00Of course, being a vernacular name, you are perfec...Of course, being a vernacular name, you are perfectly entitled to call it whatever you wish ;-) . Personally, I simply prefer 'coscoroba' on its own because I think it sounds nicer and simpler than 'coscoroba swan'. It's like 'civet cat': it's not that it's wrong (vernacular pretty much by definition can't be wrong), it's just that the second part is unnecessary.Christopher Taylorhttp://coo.fieldofscience.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5460788270738656369.post-44688787299534347862011-05-27T14:25:28.082+08:002011-05-27T14:25:28.082+08:00Regarding vernacular names; ideally, I (like many ...Regarding vernacular names; ideally, I (like many if not most other biologists) would prefer them to correspond as closely as possible with phylogeny. In this particular case, however, I have no real problem with keeping on calling the coscoroba a 'swan', even if it turns out not to be the sister taxon of <i>Cygnus</i>. Waterfowl referred to as 'geese' and 'ducks', respectively, are non-monophyletic assemblages to a far greater extent. (For example, neither the 'geese' <i>Anseranas</i>, <i>Branta</i> and <i>Plectropterus</i> on one hand, nor the 'ducks' <i>Dendrocygna</i>, <i>Stictonetta</i> and <i>Anas</i> on the other hand, are closely related to each other.) If I can live with that, I can live with 'coscoroba swan' too.Dartiannoreply@blogger.com