6 thoughts on “Minas Gerais Tyrannulet (Phylloscartes roquettei)”
This Brazilian endemic species is listed as EN on the national red list assessment, so a careful comparison of the SALVE and SIS would be important before making a change that would take these lists out of sync. The text from SALVE reads:
“Phylloscartes roquettei é endêmico do Brasil, ocorrendo nas matas secas de Minas Gerais, Bahia, Goiás e Distrito Federal. Aparenta ser altamente sensível à degradação ambiental em razão de sua grande especificidade de habitat. A área de ocupação (AOO) foi calculada em 496 km². A população é severamente fragmentada e os indivíduos não se deslocam por longas distâncias fora do seu habitat. Há declínio continuado da população devido à perda e fragmentação de habitat por expansão da atividade agropecuária e mineração de calcário. Dessa forma, P. roquettei foi categorizada como Em Perigo (EN) pelo critério B2ab(ii,iii).”
While this species has certainly been under-recorded in the past and some degree of downlisting may be warranted, note that its habitat may be more threatened than general assessments of deforestation within its range might suggest, as it is specifically associated with riparian forest and larger trees, which may be disproportionately removed or degraded. From Birds of the World: “Much of the species’ range is in mesophytic, semi-deciduous dry forest and gallery forest, probably the most threatened habitat in central and eastern Brazil owing to its valuable aroeira (Astronium urundeuva) timber and relatively fertile soils.”
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 25 April 2025. We will now analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List category on this page on 25 April 2025, when discussions will re-open.
We thank B. Phalan for their helpful comment above. All relevant information will be incorporated into the updated Red List assessment for this species. Based on this, the lower bound of the suspected rate of decline has been increased to 5% over ten years, while the upper bound remains at 19%. There is currently no evidence that the species is declining at a rate that meets or approaches threatened thresholds under Criterion A however.
The species’ AOO is difficult to estimate and is here considered unknown due to the lack of presence/absence data from across its range. While calculating AOO solely based on a grid over validated georeferenced records may yield a value that falls below threatened thresholds, this does not account for the potential occupancy of remaining apparently suitable habitat and is thus likely to result in a significant underestimate.
Even if the species’ AOO did fall below the threshold for Vulnerable (2,000 km2), it would still need to meet two of the additional subcriteria to qualify as Vulnerable. Specifically, in addition to the ongoing decline in habitat area/extent/quality, it must either be severely fragmented (>50% of individuals or the total AOO in habitat patches that are both isolated and too small to support viable populations) or be restricted to ten or fewer locations (the term ‘location’ defining a geographically or ecologically distinct area in which a single threatening event can rapidly affect all individuals of the taxon present). There is currently no evidence that the majority of individuals are in subpopulations that would be considered unviable. The spatial footprint of each individual threat event likely to affect the species is small, such that the number of locations would be many. Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2025 Red List would be to adopt the proposed classification outlined in the initial forum discussion.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 4 May 2025, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2025 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2025, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
I understand that if there is no estimate of the number of mature individuals, but only suspected or inferred, criterion C cannot be used, not even to classify as NT. If there is no estimate of population size, criterion C does not apply, the species would be DD by this criterion.
The evaluators in Brazil do not calculate the AOO based solely on validated georeferenced records, they also consider the potential habitat and inferred records. They also considered the population to be severely fragmented, and the individuals do not move long distances outside their habitat. This is another case in which the data, arguments, and interpretations should be discussed directly between the BirdLife and ICMBio teams.
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 a final decision on this species’ Red List category will be posted on this page on 12 May 2025.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
We thank all contributors for their comments.
To be listed as threatened under Criterion C it is true that the population size must be estimated – it cannot be inferred or suspected (see IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee 2024). A listing as Near Threatened only requires a species to approach threatened thresholds however. Although not estimated, the population size threshold can be considered to be nearly met when the population size is suspected/inferred to be <10,000 mature individuals. The suspected population size in this instance is thus enough to qualify the species as Near Threatened under Criterion C, given there is also a suspected decline and likely less than 1,000 mature individuals in the largest subpopulation.
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Minas Gerais Tyrannulet is recommended to be listed as Near Threatened, approaching thresholds under Criterion C2a(i).
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2025.2 GTB Forum process. The final Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2025, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
This Brazilian endemic species is listed as EN on the national red list assessment, so a careful comparison of the SALVE and SIS would be important before making a change that would take these lists out of sync. The text from SALVE reads:
“Phylloscartes roquettei é endêmico do Brasil, ocorrendo nas matas secas de Minas Gerais, Bahia, Goiás e Distrito Federal. Aparenta ser altamente sensível à degradação ambiental em razão de sua grande especificidade de habitat. A área de ocupação (AOO) foi calculada em 496 km². A população é severamente fragmentada e os indivíduos não se deslocam por longas distâncias fora do seu habitat. Há declínio continuado da população devido à perda e fragmentação de habitat por expansão da atividade agropecuária e mineração de calcário. Dessa forma, P. roquettei foi categorizada como Em Perigo (EN) pelo critério B2ab(ii,iii).”
While this species has certainly been under-recorded in the past and some degree of downlisting may be warranted, note that its habitat may be more threatened than general assessments of deforestation within its range might suggest, as it is specifically associated with riparian forest and larger trees, which may be disproportionately removed or degraded. From Birds of the World: “Much of the species’ range is in mesophytic, semi-deciduous dry forest and gallery forest, probably the most threatened habitat in central and eastern Brazil owing to its valuable aroeira (Astronium urundeuva) timber and relatively fertile soils.”
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 25 April 2025. We will now analyse and interpret the information, and we will post a preliminary decision on this species’ Red List category on this page on 25 April 2025, when discussions will re-open.
Preliminary proposal
We thank B. Phalan for their helpful comment above. All relevant information will be incorporated into the updated Red List assessment for this species. Based on this, the lower bound of the suspected rate of decline has been increased to 5% over ten years, while the upper bound remains at 19%. There is currently no evidence that the species is declining at a rate that meets or approaches threatened thresholds under Criterion A however.
The species’ AOO is difficult to estimate and is here considered unknown due to the lack of presence/absence data from across its range. While calculating AOO solely based on a grid over validated georeferenced records may yield a value that falls below threatened thresholds, this does not account for the potential occupancy of remaining apparently suitable habitat and is thus likely to result in a significant underestimate.
Even if the species’ AOO did fall below the threshold for Vulnerable (2,000 km2), it would still need to meet two of the additional subcriteria to qualify as Vulnerable. Specifically, in addition to the ongoing decline in habitat area/extent/quality, it must either be severely fragmented (>50% of individuals or the total AOO in habitat patches that are both isolated and too small to support viable populations) or be restricted to ten or fewer locations (the term ‘location’ defining a geographically or ecologically distinct area in which a single threatening event can rapidly affect all individuals of the taxon present). There is currently no evidence that the majority of individuals are in subpopulations that would be considered unviable. The spatial footprint of each individual threat event likely to affect the species is small, such that the number of locations would be many. Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2025 Red List would be to adopt the proposed classification outlined in the initial forum discussion.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 4 May 2025, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2025 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2025, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
I understand that if there is no estimate of the number of mature individuals, but only suspected or inferred, criterion C cannot be used, not even to classify as NT. If there is no estimate of population size, criterion C does not apply, the species would be DD by this criterion.
The evaluators in Brazil do not calculate the AOO based solely on validated georeferenced records, they also consider the potential habitat and inferred records. They also considered the population to be severely fragmented, and the individuals do not move long distances outside their habitat. This is another case in which the data, arguments, and interpretations should be discussed directly between the BirdLife and ICMBio teams.
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 a final decision on this species’ Red List category will be posted on this page on 12 May 2025.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
We thank all contributors for their comments.
To be listed as threatened under Criterion C it is true that the population size must be estimated – it cannot be inferred or suspected (see IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee 2024). A listing as Near Threatened only requires a species to approach threatened thresholds however. Although not estimated, the population size threshold can be considered to be nearly met when the population size is suspected/inferred to be <10,000 mature individuals. The suspected population size in this instance is thus enough to qualify the species as Near Threatened under Criterion C, given there is also a suspected decline and likely less than 1,000 mature individuals in the largest subpopulation.
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Minas Gerais Tyrannulet is recommended to be listed as Near Threatened, approaching thresholds under Criterion C2a(i).
Many thanks for everyone who contributed to the 2025.2 GTB Forum process. The final Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites in October 2025, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.