6 thoughts on “Cone-billed Tanager (Conothraupis mesoleuca)”
Just to note that there are records from 15 municipalities on WikiAves https://www.wikiaves.com.br/mapaRegistros_tie-bicudo and that most of the range in this region of central Mato Grosso is poorly inventoried by birders and ornithologists. A record as far NE as União do Sul suggests the species may even be present in the Parque Indígena do Xingu which would be great news if that were the case, but at any rate the fact that it occupies riparian forests which are legally protected under Brazilian Law (The Codigo Florestal) with varying landowner compliance also bode well for its persistence.
As Alex Lees mentioned, there is some new information from WikiAves observations, which together with the article by Candia-Gallardo et al. 2010, might be used to refine the population estimate and description of geographic range. Candia-Gallardo et al. record the species in three areas, which might be considered subpopulations. To those can be added at least a further three general areas (see the WikiAves account) making six subpopulations. The species appears to be associated with flooded riparian habitats, meaning its habitat is highly restricted, but also relatively accessible by boat. Population density is low in its known range. Candia-Gallardo et al. recorded the species at only 14 of 146 playback sampling points, despite noting a strong response of individuals to playback. The number of individuals recorded in each putative subpopulation is given below:
Chapada dos Parecis/Upper Juruena River basin. 40 individuals (extensive surveys) (Candia-Gallardo et al. 2010)
Emas National Park: 6 individuals at 4 sites within the park (Marini et al. 2024)
Serra do Cachimbo (Pará): no estimate, but extent of habitat suggests a number intermediate between the above two subpopulations (Marini et al. 2024)
Itiquira/Alto Garças (Mato Grosso)/Sonora (Mato Grosso do Sul): no estimate (WikiAves)
Feliz Natal/União do Sul/Terra Nova do Norte (north of Mato Grosso): no estimate (WikiAves)
Chapada dos Guimarães (Mato Grosso): no estimate (WikiAves)
In the case of areas with no estimates, records are typically of isolated individuals or pairs. If we assume, given imperfect detectability, that the true populations have been under-estimated by 50-100% at Chapada dos Parecis and Emas, then that would indicate a population of 12-160 individuals per subpopulation, which, if the mentioned subpopulations are representative, can be used to estimate a global population of 72-960, with a central estimate of 516 individuals. That’s similar to the estimate of Marini et al. that the population does not exceed 2,500. While it is possible the species has a larger population than this, it seems a reasonable working estimate. Even if the number of subpopulations is several times that suggested here, as it could be, the total population would still fall within the criteria for listing under criterion C.
The species is currently listed as EN on the National Red List in Brazil. It would seem likely to qualify, given current information, for VU or EN under criterion C2a(i).
References
Marini, M.A.; Lima, D.M.; Carvalho, C.B.; Ubaid, F.K.; Silva, G.B.M.; Abreu, T.L.S.; Oliveira, T.D.; Alves, W.N.; Dias, F.F.; Alquezar, R.D. 2024. Conothraupis mesoleuca. Sistema de Avaliação do Risco de Extinção da Biodiversidade – SALVE – Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade – ICMBio. Disponível em: https://salve.icmbio.gov.br Digital Object Identifier (DOI): https://doi.org/10.37002/salve.ficha.11716.2 – Acesso em: 21 de jan. de 2026.
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 2 February 2026. 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 2 February 2026, when discussions will re-open.
We thank Ben and Alexander for their contributions. The original assessment proposed the species be listed as Near Threatened under Criterion B2b(ii,iii,v) because of insufficient information to determine the species’ population size and subpopulation structure for a listing under Criterion C. Although surveys have found the species to occur in low densities, scattered records indicate it may be widespread across a large area of potentially suitable habitat much of which is unsurveyed.
However, as outlined in Ben’s comment, we accept that for this species it is possible to derive a precautionary minimum population size based on available WikiAves records; these data can be used to demonstrate potentially six subpopulations with less than 250 mature individuals in each.
Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2026 Red List would be to list Cone-billed Tanager as Endangered under Criterion C2a(i). This aligns the global assessment with the current national assessment.
There is still considerable uncertainty in this assessment. Further information on the species’ dispersal capabilities, subpopulation structure, and population density, would help improve this assessment.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 8 February 2026, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2026 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites later this year, 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 a final decision on this species’ Red List category will be posted on this page on 16 February 2026.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Cone-billed Tanager is recommended to be listed as Endangered under Criterion C2a(i). The range map and associated EOO/AOO will also be updated to reflect the records/subpopulations outlined by B. Phalan.
Many thanks to everyone who contributed to the 2026.1 GTB Forum process. The final Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites later this year, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.
Just to note that there are records from 15 municipalities on WikiAves https://www.wikiaves.com.br/mapaRegistros_tie-bicudo and that most of the range in this region of central Mato Grosso is poorly inventoried by birders and ornithologists. A record as far NE as União do Sul suggests the species may even be present in the Parque Indígena do Xingu which would be great news if that were the case, but at any rate the fact that it occupies riparian forests which are legally protected under Brazilian Law (The Codigo Florestal) with varying landowner compliance also bode well for its persistence.
As Alex Lees mentioned, there is some new information from WikiAves observations, which together with the article by Candia-Gallardo et al. 2010, might be used to refine the population estimate and description of geographic range. Candia-Gallardo et al. record the species in three areas, which might be considered subpopulations. To those can be added at least a further three general areas (see the WikiAves account) making six subpopulations. The species appears to be associated with flooded riparian habitats, meaning its habitat is highly restricted, but also relatively accessible by boat. Population density is low in its known range. Candia-Gallardo et al. recorded the species at only 14 of 146 playback sampling points, despite noting a strong response of individuals to playback. The number of individuals recorded in each putative subpopulation is given below:
Chapada dos Parecis/Upper Juruena River basin. 40 individuals (extensive surveys) (Candia-Gallardo et al. 2010)
Emas National Park: 6 individuals at 4 sites within the park (Marini et al. 2024)
Serra do Cachimbo (Pará): no estimate, but extent of habitat suggests a number intermediate between the above two subpopulations (Marini et al. 2024)
Itiquira/Alto Garças (Mato Grosso)/Sonora (Mato Grosso do Sul): no estimate (WikiAves)
Feliz Natal/União do Sul/Terra Nova do Norte (north of Mato Grosso): no estimate (WikiAves)
Chapada dos Guimarães (Mato Grosso): no estimate (WikiAves)
In the case of areas with no estimates, records are typically of isolated individuals or pairs. If we assume, given imperfect detectability, that the true populations have been under-estimated by 50-100% at Chapada dos Parecis and Emas, then that would indicate a population of 12-160 individuals per subpopulation, which, if the mentioned subpopulations are representative, can be used to estimate a global population of 72-960, with a central estimate of 516 individuals. That’s similar to the estimate of Marini et al. that the population does not exceed 2,500. While it is possible the species has a larger population than this, it seems a reasonable working estimate. Even if the number of subpopulations is several times that suggested here, as it could be, the total population would still fall within the criteria for listing under criterion C.
The species is currently listed as EN on the National Red List in Brazil. It would seem likely to qualify, given current information, for VU or EN under criterion C2a(i).
References
Marini, M.A.; Lima, D.M.; Carvalho, C.B.; Ubaid, F.K.; Silva, G.B.M.; Abreu, T.L.S.; Oliveira, T.D.; Alves, W.N.; Dias, F.F.; Alquezar, R.D. 2024. Conothraupis mesoleuca. Sistema de Avaliação do Risco de Extinção da Biodiversidade – SALVE – Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade – ICMBio. Disponível em: https://salve.icmbio.gov.br Digital Object Identifier (DOI): https://doi.org/10.37002/salve.ficha.11716.2 – Acesso em: 21 de jan. de 2026.
WikiAves (2026). Tiê-bicudo Conothraupis mesoleuca. https://www.wikiaves.com.br/wiki/tie-bicudo
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 2 February 2026. 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 2 February 2026, when discussions will re-open.
Preliminary proposal
We thank Ben and Alexander for their contributions. The original assessment proposed the species be listed as Near Threatened under Criterion B2b(ii,iii,v) because of insufficient information to determine the species’ population size and subpopulation structure for a listing under Criterion C. Although surveys have found the species to occur in low densities, scattered records indicate it may be widespread across a large area of potentially suitable habitat much of which is unsurveyed.
However, as outlined in Ben’s comment, we accept that for this species it is possible to derive a precautionary minimum population size based on available WikiAves records; these data can be used to demonstrate potentially six subpopulations with less than 250 mature individuals in each.
Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2026 Red List would be to list Cone-billed Tanager as Endangered under Criterion C2a(i). This aligns the global assessment with the current national assessment.
There is still considerable uncertainty in this assessment. Further information on the species’ dispersal capabilities, subpopulation structure, and population density, would help improve this assessment.
There is now a period for further comments until the final deadline on 8 February 2026, after which the recommended categorisations will be put forward to IUCN.
The final 2026 Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites later this year, 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 a final decision on this species’ Red List category will be posted on this page on 16 February 2026.
Recommended categorisation to be put forward to IUCN
The final categorisation for this species has not changed. Cone-billed Tanager is recommended to be listed as Endangered under Criterion C2a(i). The range map and associated EOO/AOO will also be updated to reflect the records/subpopulations outlined by B. Phalan.
Many thanks to everyone who contributed to the 2026.1 GTB Forum process. The final Red List categories will be published on the BirdLife and IUCN websites later this year, following further checking of information relevant to the assessments by both BirdLife and IUCN.