8 thoughts on “Yellow-rumped Honeyguide (Indicator xanthonotus)”
I’m a birding tour guide for Sikkim. There are six locations in the Sikkim Himalayas from where the species is regularly sighted. We don’t miss their presence in any of the visits. This is an emperical and experiencial opinion and observation for me.
It is recommended to maintain the current status of “Near Threatened” till the time specific data on the numbers, population trends and/or locations is available. The species occupies a very specific ecological niche and there are definite indirect inputs on habitat degradation throughout its range in the form of organised activities like development of road infrastructure, and illegal felling & honey collection. The population trends of the Giant Honey Bees also need to be studied before arriving at a conclusion. Mere sightings of the species at most of the “likely” locations doesn’t rule out possible declining trends.
I’m a birds guide from sikkim, here in sikkim there’s a lot’s of active bee’s hive in different areas with different altitude wise & due to other birds like drongos and rock thrush i observed this Honeyguide birds became too shy!
This is a very difficult bird to estimate population size or arrive at trends as it occupies microhabitats that are usually inaccessible and everything, we know about this species is from a few limited hives close to the roads. PJ found it hard to source this information of hives away from the road networks through birdwatcher networks of Uttarakhand, Sikkim and W. Bengal. Hence, indirect evidences are very important to study this species.
Contemporary literature cites Apis dorsata as the species of Giant Honey Bees that Honeyguides frequent. However, recent study from sites where high altitude laboriosa and lowland dorsata co-occur (Kitnya et al 2022), and latest taxonomy work by Kitnya et al (Submitted to: Frontiers in Bee Science- “Taxonomic Revision and Identification Keys for the Giant Honey Bees” shows that the Himalayan giant honey bee which used to be considered as a subspecies of lowland Apis dorsata is a distinct species – Apis laboriosa. See how the distribution map of this species and altitude range closely matches that of the Yellow-rumped Honeyguide.
Anecdotal evidence of decline from elsewhere in its range (e.g. Arunachal) are hard to assess as the hives may also move to other sites when their usual preferred sites were affected by road construction or other anthropogenic activities (NK).
Currently, the western most population of Honeyguide (around the type locality of radcliffi) is indicated as possibly extinct in BLI maps. However, recent SDMs built for laboriosa predicts the occurrence of bees there (though there were no extant records of the same in that zone) See Kitnya et al 2020 and Huang et al 2022.
Interestingly, their predictions were proved correct when multiple recent records of laboriosa were recorded within the purported range of radcliffi Honeyguide; extending hope that this Honeyguide population might probably be still occurring in low numbers (Otis, G. W., Huang, M., Kitnya, N., et al. MS submitted – The distribution of Apis laboriosa revisited: range extensions and biogeographic affinities.)
The apparent gap in Himachal in both A. laboriosa and Honeyguide still holds; probably indicating the Uttarakhand population of the Honeyguides might belong to the same subspecies as the nominate Honeyguides that occur in Nepal.
Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments until 12 February 2024. We will now analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 12 February 2024, when discussions will re-open.
We thank all those who have contributed valuable information, including G. Otis for input via email regarding Apis laboriosa, all of which has been incorporated into the updated Red List assessment. Although bee colonies may be locally exploited and undergo declines (for example in Nepal), harvesting of honey is very low in in other parts of the range and much of this remains inaccessible to humans. There is clearly uncertainty surrounding Indicator xanthonotus and the population trend is maintained as unknown, however at present there is no evidence the species meets or approaches thresholds for listing as threatened under any criterion.
Based on available information therefore, our preliminary proposal for the 2024 Red List would be to adopt the proposed classifications outlined in the initial forum discussion.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 18 February 2024, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2024 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in December 2024, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments. We will analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a final decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 26 February 2024.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Yellow-rumped Honeyguide is recommended to be listed as Least Concern.
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2024.1 GTB Forum process. The final 2024 Red List categories will now be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2024, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
I’m a birding tour guide for Sikkim. There are six locations in the Sikkim Himalayas from where the species is regularly sighted. We don’t miss their presence in any of the visits. This is an emperical and experiencial opinion and observation for me.
It is recommended to maintain the current status of “Near Threatened” till the time specific data on the numbers, population trends and/or locations is available. The species occupies a very specific ecological niche and there are definite indirect inputs on habitat degradation throughout its range in the form of organised activities like development of road infrastructure, and illegal felling & honey collection. The population trends of the Giant Honey Bees also need to be studied before arriving at a conclusion. Mere sightings of the species at most of the “likely” locations doesn’t rule out possible declining trends.
I’m a birds guide from sikkim, here in sikkim there’s a lot’s of active bee’s hive in different areas with different altitude wise & due to other birds like drongos and rock thrush i observed this Honeyguide birds became too shy!
This is a very difficult bird to estimate population size or arrive at trends as it occupies microhabitats that are usually inaccessible and everything, we know about this species is from a few limited hives close to the roads. PJ found it hard to source this information of hives away from the road networks through birdwatcher networks of Uttarakhand, Sikkim and W. Bengal. Hence, indirect evidences are very important to study this species.
Contemporary literature cites Apis dorsata as the species of Giant Honey Bees that Honeyguides frequent. However, recent study from sites where high altitude laboriosa and lowland dorsata co-occur (Kitnya et al 2022), and latest taxonomy work by Kitnya et al (Submitted to: Frontiers in Bee Science- “Taxonomic Revision and Identification Keys for the Giant Honey Bees” shows that the Himalayan giant honey bee which used to be considered as a subspecies of lowland Apis dorsata is a distinct species – Apis laboriosa. See how the distribution map of this species and altitude range closely matches that of the Yellow-rumped Honeyguide.
https://zookeys.pensoft.net/article/49855/
There is some evidence from Nepal as to the decline of A. laboriosa though the study is from the 2000-2004 period. Surely, it must have had an impact on the Honeyguide population as well, at least in Nepal.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00218839.2004.11101133
Anecdotal evidence of decline from elsewhere in its range (e.g. Arunachal) are hard to assess as the hives may also move to other sites when their usual preferred sites were affected by road construction or other anthropogenic activities (NK).
Currently, the western most population of Honeyguide (around the type locality of radcliffi) is indicated as possibly extinct in BLI maps. However, recent SDMs built for laboriosa predicts the occurrence of bees there (though there were no extant records of the same in that zone) See Kitnya et al 2020 and Huang et al 2022.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989422002840
Interestingly, their predictions were proved correct when multiple recent records of laboriosa were recorded within the purported range of radcliffi Honeyguide; extending hope that this Honeyguide population might probably be still occurring in low numbers (Otis, G. W., Huang, M., Kitnya, N., et al. MS submitted – The distribution of Apis laboriosa revisited: range extensions and biogeographic affinities.)
The apparent gap in Himachal in both A. laboriosa and Honeyguide still holds; probably indicating the Uttarakhand population of the Honeyguides might belong to the same subspecies as the nominate Honeyguides that occur in Nepal.
Prepared by Nyaton Kitnya & Praveen J
Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments until 12 February 2024. We will now analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 12 February 2024, when discussions will re-open.
Preliminary proposal
We thank all those who have contributed valuable information, including G. Otis for input via email regarding Apis laboriosa, all of which has been incorporated into the updated Red List assessment. Although bee colonies may be locally exploited and undergo declines (for example in Nepal), harvesting of honey is very low in in other parts of the range and much of this remains inaccessible to humans. There is clearly uncertainty surrounding Indicator xanthonotus and the population trend is maintained as unknown, however at present there is no evidence the species meets or approaches thresholds for listing as threatened under any criterion.
Based on available information therefore, our preliminary proposal for the 2024 Red List would be to adopt the proposed classifications outlined in the initial forum discussion.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 18 February 2024, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2024 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in December 2024, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. We greatly appreciate the time and effort invested in commenting. The window for consultation is now closed and we are unable to accept any more comments. We will analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a final decision on this species’ Red List status on this page on 26 February 2024.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Yellow-rumped Honeyguide is recommended to be listed as Least Concern.
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2024.1 GTB Forum process. The final 2024 Red List categories will now be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2024, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.