6 thoughts on “Araripe Manakin (Antilophia bokermanni)”
This species has been observed to decline by approximately 20% during five years of El Niño; the population was then relatively stable, but did not recover, during five years of La Niña (Weber Girão, in litt.)
There are thus concerns about the long term viability of this species, which has a restricted distribution and is affected by drought, in the light of increasingly extreme climatic impacts.
There are plans to compile and publish more information on this species in the near future.
The Brazilian assessment form for Araripe Manakin is available on the SALVE system. It indicates 515 km² of EOO for this bird. I participated in this assessment and my name appears among the authors, however, the data I presented does not match this area. I examined the government platform ARA (Cemave / ICMBio) and calculated the Minimum Convex Polygon using the geographical coordinates available there. The area found is consistent with 515 km2, but for this to be the case, an erroneous occurrence in the urban centre of the city of Juazeiro do Norte would have to be considered. The MCP with an area of 415 km2 presented in the species data sheet in this forum is not much better than the 515 km2. I redid it from the Species Range Map presented and the area I found was close to 415 km2. I used my 2003 data to make the MCP as conservative as possible, including locations where Araripe Manakin was extirpated, calculating an area of 285 km2. Since then, there has been a continued reduction in EOO, which motivated me to calculate the losses using the techniques recommended by the IUCN. The methodology recommends using alpha with a value of 2, but I was conservative in recognising up to a value of 7 (the value 4 seems to me to be the most consistent). Thus, the true EOO area is less than 100 km², which would characterise the species as CR. To see the EOO with the reductions, see the link: https://i.imgur.com/G6dqBFA.jpeg
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 Weber for their contributions and will incorporate additional information where applicable.
W. Silva has noted that the EOO presented for this species may be an overestimate, and that the EOO may be less than 100 km2. The IUCN Guidelines discourage the use of Alpha Hulls or methods other than a Minimum Convex Polygon when calculating the EOO: “for assessments of criterion B1, exclusion of areas forming discontinuities or disjunctions from estimates of EOO is strongly discouraged.” Although the Guidelines suggest that alpha hulls may be used in some circumstances for assessing reductions in the EOO, calculating the EOO for the purposes of assessing the species under Criterion B1 should use a Minimum Convex Polygon as has been done in the proposed assessment. However, we note that there is concern that the species has been extirpated from several sites. We invite W. Silva to please submit their data and map through our Red List Team inbox (redlistteam@birdlife.org). We will then reevaluate our map and can recalculate the EOO using a Minimum Convex Polygon.
Notwithstanding the above, for the species to be assessed as Critically Endangered under Criterion B1 it must also be demonstrated that it meets two of the required sub-criteria for Critically Endangered: a) severely fragmented or occurs in one Location; b) continuing declines in at least one metric; c) extreme fluctuations. As outlined in the proposed assessment, the species is not severely fragmented, and the number of Locations is 3-10; it is undergoing continuing declines in the AOO, area of habitat, and number of mature individuals; and it is not undergoing extreme fluctuations. As such, the species meets the threshold for listing as Endangered under Criterion B1ab(ii,ii,v). It does not qualify for Critically Endangered under Criterion B regardless of the EOO/AOO as it is not severely fragmented, the number of Locations is >1, and it is not subject to extreme fluctuations.
Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2026 Red List would be to list Araripe Manakin as Endangered under Criteria B1ab(ii,iii,v)+2ab(ii,iii,v); C2a(ii).
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
We thank W. Silva and B. Phalan for their contributions. We note the observation from W. Silva that the species is undergoing a continuing decline in the EOO, and the sub-criteria will be amended accordingly.
Araripe Manakin is recommended to be listed as Endangered under Criteria B1ab(i,ii,iii,v)+2ab(i,ii,iii,v); C2a(ii).
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.
This species has been observed to decline by approximately 20% during five years of El Niño; the population was then relatively stable, but did not recover, during five years of La Niña (Weber Girão, in litt.)
There are thus concerns about the long term viability of this species, which has a restricted distribution and is affected by drought, in the light of increasingly extreme climatic impacts.
There are plans to compile and publish more information on this species in the near future.
The Brazilian assessment form for Araripe Manakin is available on the SALVE system. It indicates 515 km² of EOO for this bird. I participated in this assessment and my name appears among the authors, however, the data I presented does not match this area. I examined the government platform ARA (Cemave / ICMBio) and calculated the Minimum Convex Polygon using the geographical coordinates available there. The area found is consistent with 515 km2, but for this to be the case, an erroneous occurrence in the urban centre of the city of Juazeiro do Norte would have to be considered. The MCP with an area of 415 km2 presented in the species data sheet in this forum is not much better than the 515 km2. I redid it from the Species Range Map presented and the area I found was close to 415 km2. I used my 2003 data to make the MCP as conservative as possible, including locations where Araripe Manakin was extirpated, calculating an area of 285 km2. Since then, there has been a continued reduction in EOO, which motivated me to calculate the losses using the techniques recommended by the IUCN. The methodology recommends using alpha with a value of 2, but I was conservative in recognising up to a value of 7 (the value 4 seems to me to be the most consistent). Thus, the true EOO area is less than 100 km², which would characterise the species as CR. To see the EOO with the reductions, see the link: https://i.imgur.com/G6dqBFA.jpeg
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 Weber for their contributions and will incorporate additional information where applicable.
W. Silva has noted that the EOO presented for this species may be an overestimate, and that the EOO may be less than 100 km2. The IUCN Guidelines discourage the use of Alpha Hulls or methods other than a Minimum Convex Polygon when calculating the EOO: “for assessments of criterion B1, exclusion of areas forming discontinuities or disjunctions from estimates of EOO is strongly discouraged.” Although the Guidelines suggest that alpha hulls may be used in some circumstances for assessing reductions in the EOO, calculating the EOO for the purposes of assessing the species under Criterion B1 should use a Minimum Convex Polygon as has been done in the proposed assessment. However, we note that there is concern that the species has been extirpated from several sites. We invite W. Silva to please submit their data and map through our Red List Team inbox (redlistteam@birdlife.org). We will then reevaluate our map and can recalculate the EOO using a Minimum Convex Polygon.
Notwithstanding the above, for the species to be assessed as Critically Endangered under Criterion B1 it must also be demonstrated that it meets two of the required sub-criteria for Critically Endangered: a) severely fragmented or occurs in one Location; b) continuing declines in at least one metric; c) extreme fluctuations. As outlined in the proposed assessment, the species is not severely fragmented, and the number of Locations is 3-10; it is undergoing continuing declines in the AOO, area of habitat, and number of mature individuals; and it is not undergoing extreme fluctuations. As such, the species meets the threshold for listing as Endangered under Criterion B1ab(ii,ii,v). It does not qualify for Critically Endangered under Criterion B regardless of the EOO/AOO as it is not severely fragmented, the number of Locations is >1, and it is not subject to extreme fluctuations.
Based on available information, our preliminary proposal for the 2026 Red List would be to list Araripe Manakin as Endangered under Criteria B1ab(ii,iii,v)+2ab(ii,iii,v); C2a(ii).
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
We thank W. Silva and B. Phalan for their contributions. We note the observation from W. Silva that the species is undergoing a continuing decline in the EOO, and the sub-criteria will be amended accordingly.
Araripe Manakin is recommended to be listed as Endangered under Criteria B1ab(i,ii,iii,v)+2ab(i,ii,iii,v); C2a(ii).
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.