Content uploaded by Flavia A. Montaño-Centellas
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Flavia A. Montaño-Centellas on Feb 08, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Orlando Acevedo-Charry
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Orlando Acevedo-Charry on Feb 07, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Carine Emer
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Carine Emer on Feb 07, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Roberto Carlos Almazán-Núñez
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Roberto Carlos Almazán-Núñez on Feb 07, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Ornithological Applications, 2023, 125, 1–31
https://doi.org/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046
Advance access publication 7 February 2023
Review
Neotropical ornithology: Reckoning with historical
assumptions, removing systemic barriers, and reimagining
the future
LetíciaSoares,1,† Kristina L.Cockle,2,†,*, ErnestoRuelas Inzunza,3,†,*, José TomásIbarra,4,†
Carolina IsabelMiño,2,† SantiagoZuluaga,5,† ElisaBonaccorso,6,†, Juan CamiloRíos-Orjuela,7,†
Flavia A.Montaño-Centellas,8,†, Juan F.Freile,9 María A.Echeverry-Galvis,10,
Eugenia BiancaBonaparte,2, Luisa MariaDiele-Viegas,11, KarinaSpeziale,12
Sergio A.Cabrera-Cruz,13, OrlandoAcevedo-Charry,14, EnriquetaVelarde,15,
CeciliaCuatianquiz Lima,16, Valeria S.Ojeda,12, Carla S.Fontana,17, AlejandraEcheverri,18
Sergio A.Lambertucci,12, Regina H.Macedo,19, AlbertoEsquivel,20
Steven C.Latta,21, IreneRuvalcaba-Ortega,22, Maria Alice S.Alves,23
DiegoSantiago-Alarcon,24, AlejandroBodrati,25, FernandoGonzález-García,13, NestorFariña,26
Juan EstebanMartínez-Gómez,13 RubénOrtega-Álvarez,27,
María Gabriela Núñez Montellano,28 Camila C.Ribas,29 CarlosBosque,30,
Adrián S.Di Giacomo,31 Juan I.Areta,32, CarineEmer,33 LourdesMugica Valdés,34,
ClementinaGonzález,35, María EmiliaRebollo,36, GiselleMangini,28,
CarlosLara,37 José CristóbalPizarro,38, Victor R.Cueto,39 Pablo Rafael Bolaños-Sittler,40,
Juan FranciscoOrnelas,13, MartínAcosta,34, MarcosCenizo,41 Miguel ÂngeloMarini,19
Leopoldo D.Vázquez-Reyes,42 José AntonioGonzález-Oreja,43 LeandroBugoni,44, MartinQuiroga,45
ValentinaFerretti,46 Lilian T.Manica,47 Juan M.Grande,36 FlorRodríguez-Gómez,48 SoledadDiaz,49
NicoleBüttner,50 LuciaMentesana,51 MarconiCampos-Cerqueira,52 Fernando GabrielLópez,36,53
André C.Guaraldo,47 IanMacGregor-Fors,54, Francisca HelenaAguiar-Silva,29 Cristina Y.Miyaki,55
SilvinaIppi,12 EmilseMérida,56 CeciliaKopuchian,31 CintiaCornelius,57 Paula L.Enríquez,58
NataliaOcampo-Peñuela,91 KatherineRenton,60 Jhan C.Salazar,61 LuisSandoval,62
JorgeCorrea Sandoval,58 Pedro X.Astudillo,63 Ancilleno O.Davis,64 NicolásCantero,59 DavidOcampo,65
Oscar Humberto,Marin Gomez42 Sérgio HenriqueBorges,57 SergioCordoba-Cordoba,66
Alejandro G.Pietrek,32 Carlos B.de Araújo,2 GuillermoFernández,67 Horaciode la Cueva,68
João Marcos,Guimarães Capurucho69 Nicole A.Gutiérrez-Ramos,70 ArianeFerreira,17 Lílian MarianaCosta,71
CeciliaSoldatini,68 Hannah M.Madden,72 Miguel AngelSantillán,73 GustavoJiménez-Uzcátegui,74
Emilio A.Jordan,75 Guilherme Henrique SilvaFreitas,76 Paulo C.Pulgarin-R,77
Roberto CarlosAlmazán-Núñez,78 TomásAltamirano,79 Milka R.Gomez,25 Myriam C.Velazquez,80
RebecaIrala,59 Facundo A.Gandoy,28 Andrea C.Trigueros,81 Carlos A.Ferreyra,82
Yuri VladimirAlbores-Barajas,83 MarkusTellkamp,84 Carine DantasOliveira,57 AndreaWeiler,85
Ma. del CoroArizmendi,42 Adrianne G.Tossas,86 RebeccaZarza,59 GabrielSerra,87
RafaelVillegas-Patraca,13 Facundo GabrielDi Sallo,2, CleitonValentim,29
Jorge IgnacioNoriega,75 GiraldoAlayon García,88 Martín R.de la Peña,89 Rosendo M.Fraga,56 and
Pedro Vitor RibeiroMartins90
Copyright © American Ornithological Society 2023. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Submission Date: April 14, 2022. Editorial Acceptance Date: November 18, 2022
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
2L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
1Western University, Department of Biology and Advanced Facility for Avian Research, Canada
2CONICET-Universidad Nacional de Misiones, IBS, Argentina
3Universidad Veracruzana, Instituto de Biotecnología y Ecología Aplicada, Mexico
4Ponticia Universidad Católica de Chile, Chile
5Fundación Proyecto Águila Crestada Colombia (PAC-Colombia), Colombia
6Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Instituto Biosfera, Ecuador
7Universidad de los Andes, Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas, Colombia
8Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, Instituto de Ecología, Bolivia
9Red Aves Ecuador, Comité Ecuatoriano de Registros Ornitológicos, Ecuador
10Ponticia Universidad Javeriana, Colombia
11Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Brazil
12CONICET-Universidad Nacional del Comahue, INIBIOMA, Argentina
13Instituto de Ecología, A.C., Mexico
14University of Florida, School of Natural Resources and Environment, Department ofWildlife Ecology and Conservation and Florida Museum
of Natural History, USA
15Universidad Veracruzana, Instituto de Ciencias Marinas y Pesquerías, Mexico
16Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala, Centro Tlaxcala de Biología de la Conducta, Mexico
17Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
18Stanford University, Department of Biology, USA
19Universidade de Brasília, Brazil
20WWF Paraguay, Paraguay
21National Aviary, USA
22Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Mexico
23Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
24University of South Florida, USA
25Proyecto Selva de Pino Paraná, Argentina
26Reserva Natural Provincial Rincón de Santa María, Argentina
27Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad, Mexico
28UNT-CONICET, Instituto de Ecología Regional, Argentina
29Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, Brazil
30Universidad Simón Bolívar, Venezuela
31CONICET, CECOAL, Argentina
32CONICET, IBIGEO, Argentina
33Instituto de Pesquisa do Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
34Universidad de La Habana, Facultad de Biología, Cuba
35Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo, Instituto de Investigaciones sobre los Recursos Naturales, Mexico
36Colaboratorio de Biodiversidad, Ecología y Conservación (ColBEC), Argentina
37UAT, Centro de Investigación en Ciencias Biológicas, Mexico
38Universidad de Concepción, Facultad de Ciencias Forestales, Chile
39CONICET-Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia “San Juan Bosco”, CIEMEP, Argentina
40Sorbonne Université, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, France
41Fundación de Historia Natural Félix de Azara-Universidad Maimónides, Argentina
42Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Estudios Superiores Iztacala, Mexico
43Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Mexico
44Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Brazil
45UNL-CONICET, ICiVetLitoral, Argentina
46CONICET, IEGEBA, Argentina
47Universidade Federal do Paraná, Brazil
48Universidad de Guadalajara, Departamento de Bioingeniería Traslacional, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Exactas e Ingenierías, Mexico
49Institute for Applied Ecology, USA
50Un Poco del Chocó Reserve and Biological Station, Ecuador
51Max Planck Institute for Ornithology, Germany
52Rainforest Connection, Puerto Rico
53CONICET-Universidad Nacional de La Pampa, INCITAP, Argentina
54University of Helsinki, Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Ecosystems and Environment Research Programme, Finland
55Universidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Biociências, Departamento de Genética e Biologia Evolutiva, Brazil
56Buenos Aires, Argentina
57Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Brazil
58El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, Mexico
59Wildlife Paraguay, Paraguay
60Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Biología, Estación de Biología Chamela, Mexico
61Washington University in St. Louis, United States of America
62Universidad de Costa Rica, Escuela de Biología, Costa Rica
63Universidad del Azuay, Escuela de Biología, Ecuador
64Science and Perspective, Bahamas
65Princeton University, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, USA
66Universidad de Ciencias Aplicadas y Ambientales, Colombia
67Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnología, Unidad Académica Mazatlán, Mexico
68Centro de Investigación Cientíca y de Educación Superior de Ensenada, Mexico
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.3
69Field Museum of Natural History, Negaunee Integrative Research Center, USA
70University of Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico
71Espinhacensis Pesquisas Ambientais, Brazil
72Caribbean Netherlands Science Institute, St. Eustatius, Caribbean Netherlands
73Gobierno de La Pampa, Museo Provincial de Historia Natural, Argentina
74Charles Darwin Foundation, Charles Darwin Research Station, Ecuador
75CONICET, CICYTTP, Argentina
76Universidade Federal de Goiás, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Departamento de Ecologia, Brazil
77Partnerships for Forests, Colombia
78Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero, Facultad de Ciencias Químico Biológicas, Mexico
79Universidad de Magallanes, Chile
80Fundación Moisés Bertoni, Paraguay
81University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA
82Ministerio de Ecología y RNR de la Provincia de Misiones, Argentina
83Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur, Mexico
84Universidad Yachay Tech, Ecuador
85Universidad Nacional de Asunción, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Departamento de Biologia, Paraguay
86Universidad de Puerto Rico, Aguadilla, Puerto Rico
87Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, Brazil
88Fundación Ariguanabo, Cuba
89Santa Fe, Argentina
90Observatório de Aves da Mantiqueira, Brazil
91University of California, Santa Cruz, USA
*Corresponding authors: Kristina L. Cockle, kristinacockle@gmail.com; Ernesto Ruelas Inzunza, ruelas.uv@gmail.com
†These authors contributed equally.
ABSTRACT
A major barrier to advancing ornithology is the systemic exclusion of professionals from the Global South. A recent special feature, Advances
in Neotropical Ornithology, and a shortfalls analysis therein, unintentionally followed a long-standing pattern of highlighting individuals, know-
ledge, and views from the Global North, while largely omitting the perspectives of people based within the Neotropics. Here, we review current
strengths and opportunities in the practice of Neotropical ornithology. Further, we discuss problems with assessing the state of Neotropical
ornithology through a northern lens, including discovery narratives, incomplete (and biased) understanding of history and advances, and the pro-
motion of agendas that, while currently popular in the north, may not fit the needs and realities of Neotropical research. We argue that future ad-
vances in Neotropical ornithology will critically depend on identifying and addressing the systemic barriers that hold back ornithologists who live
and work in the Neotropics: unreliable and limited funding, exclusion from international research leadership, restricted dissemination of know-
ledge (e.g., through language hegemony and citation bias), and logistical barriers. Moving forward, we must examine and acknowledge the colo-
nial roots of our discipline, and explicitly promote anti-colonial agendas for research, training, and conservation. We invite our colleagues within
and beyond the Neotropics to join us in creating new models of governance that establish research priorities with vigorous participation of orni-
thologists and communities within the Neotropical region. To include a diversity of perspectives, we must systemically address discrimination
and bias rooted in the socioeconomic class system, anti-Blackness, anti-Brownness, anti-Indigeneity, misogyny, homophobia, tokenism, and
ableism. Instead of seeking individual excellence and rewarding top-down leadership, institutions in the North and South can promote collective
leadership. In adopting these approaches, we, ornithologists, will join a community of researchers across academia building new paradigms
that can reconcile our relationships and transform science. Spanish and Portuguese translations are available in the Supplementary Material.
Keywords: discovery narrative, discrimination, knowledge construction, north–south relations, parachute science, regional priorities, research agenda
How to Cite
Soares, L., K. L. Cockle, E. Ruelas Inzunza, J. T. Ibarra, C. I. Miño, S. Zuluaga, E. Bonaccorso, J. C. Ríos-Orjuela, F. A. Montaño-Centellas, J. F. Freile, et al. (2023).
Neotropical ornithology: Reckoning with historical assumptions, removing systemic barriers, and reimagining the future. Ornithological Applications 125:duac046.
LAY SUMMARY
• Research conducted by ornithologists living and working in Latin America and the Caribbean has been historically and systemically excluded
from global scientific paradigms, ultimately holding back ornithology as a discipline.
• To avoid replicating systems of exclusion in ornithology, authors, editors, reviewers, journals, scientific societies, and research institutions
need to interrupt long-held assumptions, improve research practices, and change policies around funding and publication.
• To advance Neotropical ornithology and conserve birds across the Americas, institutions should invest directly in basic field biology research,
reward collective leadership, and strengthen funding and professional development opportunities for people affected by current research
policies.
Ornitología Neotropical: Reconsiderando supuestos históricos, eliminando barreras sistémicas y
reimaginando el futuro
Resumen
Una barrera importante para el avance de la ornitología es la exclusión sistémica de los profesionales del Sur Global. Una colección especial
de artículos publicada recientemente, Advances in Neotropical Ornithology, incluye un análisis de deficiencias que involuntariamente sigue
un largo patrón de destacar a las personas, el conocimiento y las opiniones de los EEUU y Europa (Norte Global) mientras que omite en
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
4L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
gran medida las perspectivas de personas basadas en el Neotrópico. Aquí revisamos las fortalezas y oportunidades actuales en la práctica
de la ornitología neotropical. Además, discutimos el problema de evaluar el estado de la ornitología neotropical a través de una visión del
norte, incluida la propagación de narrativas de descubrimiento, una imagen incompleta (y sesgada) de su historia y avances, y la promoción
de preguntas, herramientas y enfoques que, si bien son populares actualmente en el norte, no necesariamente encajan en la agenda y
realidades de la investigación neotropical. Argumentamos que los avances futuros en la ornitología neotropical dependerán críticamente de
identificar y abordar las deficiencias sistémicas que frenan a los ornitólogos que viven y trabajan en el Neotrópico: financiamiento limitado
y poco confiable, exclusión del liderazgo de la investigación internacional, difusión restringida del conocimiento (por ejemplo, a través de
la hegemonía del idioma y el sesgo de citación) y barreras logísticas. En el futuro, debemos examinar y reconocer las raíces coloniales de
nuestra disciplina y promover agendas de investigación, capacitación y conservación que sean explícitamente anticoloniales. Invitamos a
nuestros colegas dentro y fuera del Neotrópico a unirnos en la creación de nuevos modelos de gobernanza que establezcan prioridades de
investigación con una participación vigorosa de ornitólogos y otras partes interesadas de la región neotropical. Para incluir una diversidad de
perspectivas, debemos abordar sistémicamente la discriminación y el sesgo arraigados en el sistema de clases socioeconómicas, el racismo
anti-negro, anti-mestizo y anti-indígena, la misoginia, la homofobia, la inclusión simbólica y el capacitismo. En lugar de buscar la excelencia
individual y recompensar el liderazgo de arriba hacia abajo, las instituciones del norte y del sur pueden promover el liderazgo colectivo.
Al adoptar estos enfoques, los ornitólogos nos uniremos a una comunidad de investigadores de toda la academia en la construcción de
nuevos paradigmas que reconcilien nuestras relaciones y transformen la ciencia. Hay traducciones al español y al portugués en el material
suplementario.
Palabras clave: agenda de investigación, ciencia neocolonial, ciencia paracaídas, construcción del conocimiento, discriminación, narrativa de
descubrimiento, prioridades regionales, relaciones norte-sur
INTRODUCTION
Roughly a third of all bird species occur in the Neotropics
(Mexico, Central and South America, and the Caribbean;
Newton 2003), yet these birds are under-represented by
an order of magnitude in scientic studies (Ducatez and
Lefebvre 2014), leading many to call for increased research in
Neotropical ornithology (Ramos 1988, Naranjo et al. 1992,
Estades 2002, Freile et al. 2006, 2014, Alves et al. 2008, Freile
and Córdoba 2008, Latta 2012). These calls were recently re-
iterated in a Special Feature entitled Advances in Neotropical
Ornithology, published in The Auk: Ornithological Advances
and The Condor: Ornithological Applications (Lindell and
Huyvaert 2020), which included a roadmap for identifying
and lling shortfalls in Neotropical ornithology (Lees et al.
2020). The framework for this roadmap was the idea that
biological knowledge shortfalls, grouped in seven domains
(systematics, biogeography, population biology, evolution,
functional ecology, abiotic tolerance, and biotic interactions)
limit large-scale comprehension of biodiversity (Hortal et al.
2015). However, knowledge—and knowledge gaps—look
different depending on where we are standing, our lived ex-
periences, our assumptions, and what we perceive to be our
objectives (Naranjo et al. 1992). In this paper, we use “Global
North” to indicate wealthier, geopolitically dominant regions
(i.e. Canada, USA, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and
Japan), and “Global South” for the rest of the world (Africa,
Latin America and the Caribbean, most of Asia). Of course,
the world is much more nuanced than this binary, but we
chose “Global North” and “Global South” for simplicity of
communication, and to avoid the negative implications of al-
ternate terms (Khan et al. 2022).
The roadmap by Lees et al. (2020) aimed to “take stock
of the last 25 years of Neotropical ornithological work since
the untimely death of Ted Parker” (Lees et al. 2020,1). It was
initially invited as the rst chapter of a (second) special vol-
ume honoring Theodore A. Parker III, which, like the special
volume of Ornithological Monographs edited by Remsen
(1997), would pay homage to Parker’s legacy (A. C. Lees in
litt. 2020). Parker was a eld ornithologist from the USA, who
specialized in the Neotropics and died tragically in a plane
crash while conducting eldwork in 1993 (Remsen 1997).
His contributions, and those of his colleagues, sparked im-
portant lines of research in the Neotropics, and some of our
own work builds on their publications (e.g., González-García
1994, 1995, Bonaccorso 2009, Mata et al. 2009, Areta and
Cockle 2012, Ruelas Inzunza et al. 2012, Borges et al. 2019,
Martínez-Medina et al. 2021).
While admiring Parker’s work and understanding the con-
text of the invited contribution by Lees et al. (2020), we
think it is problematic to build a roadmap for Neotropical
ornithology based primarily on a foreign perspective. The
review by Lees et al. (2020) cites literature from only three
of the many ornithological journals based in the Neotropics
(Table 1). It focuses quite extensively on contributions of
foreign scientists (including quotes and photos), which cre-
ates the unfortunate impression that Neotropical ornithol-
ogy advances primarily in response to a northern research
agenda, led by short-term visitors who conduct eldwork
in the region, but produce, analyze, and disseminate know-
ledge elsewhere (e.g., see Monge-Nájera 2002, Adame 2021,
Haelewaters et al. 2021, Asase et al. 2022). Our critique is
not aimed at the authors of the Lees et al. (2020) roadmap,
their collaborations, or their research programs. Nor do we
aim to provide an alternative roadmap. Before we can de-
ne where we each want to be in terms of knowledge about
birds, and build roadmaps to get there, we need policy and
cultural changes that interrupt the status quo of research
agendas for the Neotropics, decided by researchers in the
USA and Europe. The Lees et al. (2020) paper ignited our
critique, but all of our authors and readers have likely con-
tributed, inadvertently, to perpetuating systems of exclusion
through our research practices.
The Neotropical region stretches from central Mexico to
the southern tip of South America (Sclater 1858, Newton
2003). Although frequently imagined, from outside, as a rather
homogenous monolith (Strahl 1992), the Neotropical region
is a complex mosaic, culturally, linguistically, socially, racially,
and economically. It encompasses biomes from tropical to
sub-polar, with more than 40 countries and political units,
and a human population comparable to that of Europe with
twice its area. Yet, of the 10 papers published in the Special
Feature Advances in Neotropical Ornithology, only three in-
cluded authors afliated with a Neotropical institution, and
only one of them was listed as rst author. In fact, 77% of the
contributors to the special feature, and all six contributors to
the Lees et al. (2020) roadmap, were primarily afliated with
institutions in the USA, Europe, or Canada; Supplementary
Material Table S1). Foreign-based scientists unquestionably
contribute to the development of Neotropical ornithology,
but exclusion of the Latin American and Caribbean scientic
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.5
TABLE 1. Peer-reviewed ornithological journals focusing on the Neotropics (in chronological order by date of creation). *Journals cited by Lees et al. (2020). In addition to these journals, dozens of other
regional zoology, ecology, biodiversity, veterinary, paleontology, ethnobiology, and natural history journals regularly publish papers in ornithology. Access: Open Access = all articles freely available to readers,
Paywalled = access restricted (e.g., to members, libraries, paying customers), Hybrid indicates a mix of Open Access and Paywalled articles. Cost to authors indicates whether authors must pay article
processing charges (APC) or page charges to publish. 1Formerly, Boletín Chileno de Ornitología. 2Discontinued in 2020. 3Formerly, El Pitirre. 4Formerly, Revista Brasileira de Ornitologia and Ararajuba. This
table does not include non peer-reviewed journals that are specialized in birds, such as Achará: Revista de Estudio y Observación de Aves (published by Aves Uruguay), Boletim da Sociedade Brasileira de
Ornitologia (Sociedade Brasileira de Ornitologia), El Bien-te-veo (Sociedad Ornitológica Puertorriqueña), or Spizaetus Boletín (Red de Rapaces Neotropicales).
Journal Published by
Year 1st
issue Languages Access
Cost to authors
(USD) Website
El Hornero Aves Argentinas/ Asociación Ornitológica
del Plata
1917 Spanish, English Open Access Free https://www.avesargentinas.org.ar/ciencia/
el-hornero
Nuestras Aves Aves Argentinas/ Asociación Ornitológica
del Plata
1962 Spanish, Portuguese Open Access Free https://www.avesargentinas.org.ar/ciencia/
nuestras-aves
Revista Chilena de
Ornitología1
Unión de Ornitólogos de Chile (UNORCH) 1969 Spanish, English Open Access Free https://aveschile.cl/revista-rco/
Atualidades Ornitológicas2Pedro Salviano Filho (deceased) 1984 Portuguese, Spanish,
English, French,
Italian
Hybrid Free N/A
Journal of Caribbean Orni-
thology3
BirdsCaribbean 1988 English, Spanish, French Open Access Free https://jco.birdscaribbean.org/index.php/jco
Boletín de la Sociedad
Antioqueña de Ornitología
Sociedad Antioqueña de Ornitología 1990 Spanish, English Open Access Free https://sao.org.co/boletinsao.html
Ornitología Neotropical* Neotropical Ornithological Society 1990 English, Spanish,
French, and Portu-
guese
Open Access Beyond 10 pages,
$50 per page
https://journals.sfu.ca/ornneo/index.php/
ornneo
Ornithology Research4* Sociedade Brasileira de Ornitologia 1990 English (Portuguese and
Spanish until 2016)
Hybrid Free ($2780 for
open access)
http://revbrasilornitol.com.br/BJO
https://www.springer.com/journal/43388/
Cotinga Neotropical Bird Club (NBC) 1994 English, Spanish, Por-
tuguese
Hybrid Free https://www.neotropicalbirdclub.org/nbc-
publications/cotinga/
Zeledonia Asociación Ornitológica de Costa Rica
(AOCR)
1997 Spanish, English Members only Free https://www.zeledonia.com/
Huitzil, Revista Mexicana de
Ornitología
Sociedad para el Estudio y Conservación de
las Aves en México A.C. (CIPAMEX)
2001 Spanish, English Open Access Free http://www.mexorn.org/index.php/huitzil
Ornitología Colombiana Asociación Colombiana de Ornitología 2003 Spanish, English Open Access ~$2.00 per page https://asociacioncolombianadeornitologia.
org/revista-ornitologia-colombiana/
Ornithologia2*Centro Nacional de Pesquisas e Conservação
de Aves Silvestres (CEMAVE), Brazil
2005 Portuguese, Spanish,
English
Open Access Free http://ornithologia.cemave.gov.br/index.
php/ornithologia/about/index
La Chiricoca Red de Observadores de Aves y Vida
Silvestre de Chile (ROC)
2006 Spanish Open Access Free http://www.lachiricoca.cl/la-revista/
Boletín de la Unión de
Ornitólogos del Perú
Unión de Ornitólogos del Perú 2006 Spanish, English Open Access Free https://sites.google.com/site/boletinunop/
Revista Venezolana de
Ornitología
Unión Venezolana de Ornitólogos 2011 Spanish, English Open Access Free http://uvo.ciens.ucv.ve/?page_id=2342
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
6L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
community is a long-standing pattern with deep roots in the
scientic colonialism of the 19th and 20th centuries (Raby
2017a, Mohammed et al. 2022). Today, it is still common for
high-impact reviews, proposals, and research articles focused
on the Neotropics to neglect contributions, perspectives,
and goals from within the region, often overlooking import-
ant developments and key barriers to advancing knowledge.
This pattern is visible not just in Neotropical ornithology
but across academic disciplines and across the Global South
(Cusicanqui 2012, McKechnie and Amar 2018, Adame 2021,
de Gracia 2021, Trisos et al. 2021, Asase et al. 2022).
People in the Neotropics share a responsibility for how orni-
thology is conceived and practiced, and we posit that effective
strategies to further develop Neotropical ornithology require a
critical review of research practices and perspectives that have
long been taken for granted. Here, we explore current strengths
and challenges of Neotropical ornithology in a global context,
contrast our assessment with prevailing views expressed or im-
plied in the roadmap by Lees et al. (2020), explore some of the
consequences for ornithology, and propose systemic changes to
reduce inequities and advance Neotropical ornithology. We do
not represent all Neotropical ornithologists, and we recognize
that our authorship remains biased (e.g., 58% cis men, 39%
white or ethnically European, 96% able-bodied, 64% based
in Argentina, Mexico, or Brazil). However, we made inten-
tional efforts and took extra time to ensure that we included
and highlighted voices from a breadth of regions, races, eth-
nicities, gender identities, disciplines, career paths, and stages
(Supplementary Material Table S2). In our citations, we priori-
tized literature by Neotropical-based authors, where appropri-
ate. We recognize that some of the terms that are commonly
used in the literature on colonialism in science will be uncom-
fortable to some readers. However, we believe this discomfort
is a necessary stage in confronting the history of our discip-
line (and our own participation in that history), so that we can
grow and change as researchers and institutions. Some excel-
lent examples of scientists confronting difcult histories can be
found in the recent special feature on Nature, Data, and Power,
at American Naturalist (Kamath 2022).
NEOTROPICAL ORNITHOLOGY TODAY
Strengths
Ornithology in Latin America and the Caribbean is underpinned
by regional institutions, conservation programs, and a rapidly
growing cadre of students, professionals, and non-academics
based in this region, who creatively propel the discipline des-
pite numerous challenges. Today, ornithological research in the
Neotropics is made possible by a combination of locally driven
and government-funded research, scientic societies, univer-
sities, scientic collections, non-governmental organizations,
citizen-science (=community science) projects, international
collaborations, and highly signicant contributions from inde-
pendent naturalists, birding clubs, tour guides, environmental
licensing studies, Indigenous communities, and park rangers.
Ornithological societies within and beyond the Neotropics
provide funding to attend professional meetings. Beyond the
USA-backed programs and research stations most visible to
researchers in the Global North, many well-established Latin
American and Caribbean groups are powerhouses of research
focused on Neotropical birds, with long-term programs in
the Caribbean, Mesoamerica, the Andes, the sub-Antarctic
Journal Published by
Year 1st
issue Languages Access
Cost to authors
(USD) Website
Revista Ecuatoriana de
Ornitología
Red Aves Ecuador 2017 Spanish, English Open Access Free https://revistas.usfq.edu.ec/index.php/reo
Boletín de la Asociación
Boliviana de Ornitología
Asociación Boliviana de Ornitología 2021 Spanish, English Open Access Free https://www.facebook.
com/Bolet%C3%ADn-
ASBOR-255987806272275/?_rdr
Table 1. Continued.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.7
TABLE 2. A few examples of ongoing, Neotropical-based, long-term (20+ years) ornithology research programs (ordered by starting year), and the biological shortfalls they address. Domains follow Lees et
al. (2020): Systematics, Biogeography, Population Biology, Evolution, Functional Ecology, Abiotic Tolerance, Biotic Interactions, Natural History; we add Human-wildlife Interactions as a ninth domain of critical
importance to ornithology. We chose to highlight studies initiated or currently led by in-country researchers that may be less visible to researchers outside of the Neotropics.
Year started
Country or
region Biome/site Focus Domain Example citation
1960s Ecuador Galapagos Marine birds, endemics Natural History, Population Biology, Human-
wildlife Interactions, Abiotic Tolerance,
Biotic Interactions
Jiménez-Uzcátegui et al. (2011, 2019) and Dvorak et al.
(2017)
1970 Argentina Espinal Nests Natural History de la Peña (2005, 2019)
1970 Argentina Marine Marine birds Population Biology, Abiotic Tolerance, Bioge-
ography, Human-wildlife Interactions
Yorio et al. (2005) and Copello and Quintana (2009)
1970 Mexico Sea of Cortez Seabirds Population Biology Anderson et al. (2017)
1980 Brazil Amazon Taxonomy, evolution Systematics Buainain et al. (2021), Ritter et al. (2021) and Stopiglia
et al. (2022)
1980 Mexico Marine Blue-footed Boobies Evolution Drummond et al. (1986), Pérez-Staples and Drummond
(2005) and Ancona et al. (2011, 2018)
1980 Mexico Islands of the Sea of
Cortez
Seabirds, Heermann’s
Gulls
Population Biology, Biogeography, Functional
Ecology, Biotic Interactions
Velarde (1992), Velarde et al. (2015, 2019), Ruiz et al.
(2017) and Veit et al. (2021)
1984 Argentina Monte desert Ecology Population Biology, Functional Ecology, Biotic
Interactions, Natural History
Marone (1992), Lopez de Casenave (2001), Cueto et al.
(2008) and Sagario et al. (2020)
1980s Cuba La Habana Urban birds Population Biology García-Lau et al. (2018)
1989 Colombia Bogotá Monitoring Abiotic Tolerance Stiles et al. (2017, 2021)
1990 Venezuela Cordillera de la Costa
Montane forest
Migrant and resident
birds
Population Biology, Natural History Lentino et al. (2003), Lentino (2016) and Malpica-
Piñeros et al. (2020)
1990 Venezuela Caribbean Parrot conservation Population Biology, Human-wildlife
Interactions
Sanz and Rodríguez-Ferraro (2006) and Sánchez-
Mercado et al. (2022)
1990 Brazil Marine Marine bird conservation Human-wildlife Interactions Vaske Júnior (1991) and Nascimento et al. (2022)
1991 Mexico Gulf of Mexico Coastal
Plain
Raptor monitoring and
conservation
Population Biology Ruelas Inzunza et al. (2000, 2009, 2010)
1991 Brazil Atlantic Forest Parrot conservation Population Biology Martinez and Prestes (2008, 2021)
1992 Brazil Atlantic Forest Fragmentation Biogeography Aleixo and Vielliard (1995), dos Anjos (1998), Uezu et al.
(2005), Hasui et al. (2018), dos Anjos et al. (2019),
Rodrigues et al. (2019) and Pizo and Tonetti (2020)
1993–1994 Mexico Pacic Islands Socorro Dove, Socorro
Mockingbird
Population Biology Martínez-Gómez and Curry (1996) and Martínez-Gómez
et al. (2010)
1994 Paraguay Atlantic Forest Ethno-ornithology Natural History, Human-wildlife Interactions Chachugi (2013) and Madroño (2016)
1994 Ecuador Tropical Andes Species-habitat
associations
Population Biology, Biotic Interactions Latta et al. (2011), Astudillo et al. (2020)
1995 Mexico Tropical Dry Forest Parrot conservation Population Biology, Natural History, Biotic
Interactions
Renton (2001), Renton and Salinas Melgoza (2004) and
Renton et al. (2018)
1995 Argentina Chaco Nests, behavior Natural History Di Giacomo (2005)
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
8L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
region, the Amazon basin, and the Atlantic Forest, to name a few (Table
2). Regional strengths extend to the elds of avian paleontology, ethno-
ornithology, and behavior, mostly overlooked by Lees et al. (2020), but
crucial for lling gaps in knowledge about the systematics, evolution, bio-
geography, mutualistic interactions, abiotic tolerance, and natural history
of Neotropical birds (e.g., Cohn-Haft et al. 1997, Ornelas et al. 2013,
Tambussi and Degrange 2013, Navarro-Sigüenza et al. 2014, Vizentin-
Bugoni et al. 2014, Ibarra and Pizarro 2016, Reboreda et al. 2019).
Across Latin America and the Caribbean, hundreds of graduate
programs offer master’s and doctoral degrees with theses in ornithol-
ogy (Paynter 1991, Alves et al. 2008, Freile et al. 2014). In some coun-
tries, notably Argentina, Mexico, and Brazil, public universities offer free
undergraduate or graduate training. Many undergraduate programs re-
quire theses, which can result in publications in regional or global-scope
journals. In several countries, ornithological research is government-
funded, with agencies providing salaries, fellowships, and grants for re-
search and graduate studies (e.g., CONICET in Argentina, CONACYT
in Mexico, ANID in Chile, MINCIENCIAS in Colombia, CNPq and
CAPES in Brazil). In many cases, free and paid training opportunities in
Latin America are extended to foreigners, such that a Colombian student
can receive 5 years of full-time salary from CONICET to obtain a PhD
in Argentina, or a Brazilian student can attend a free week-long statis-
tics course in Uruguay. Organizations within and beyond the Neotropics
have provided specialized training courses in ornithology, for example in
banding, study design, and advanced data analysis.
The wealth of regionally produced knowledge in Neotropical or-
nithology has been increasingly accessible, largely resulting from the
growth of our professional societies since the 1980s (e.g., Neotropical
Ornithological Society, the Brazilian Society of Ornithology, Asociación
Colombiana de Ornitología, Society of Avian Paleontology and Evolution,
and Sociedad para el Estudio y Conservación de las Aves de México A.C.
[CIPAMEX]). Many of these societies regularly organize professional
meetings (e.g., Congreso de Ornitología Neotropical, Congreso para el
Estudio y Conservación de las Aves en México, Congreso Colombiano
de Ornitología, BirdsCaribbean meetings) and publish peer-reviewed
scientic journals in Spanish, Portuguese, and English. Regional jour-
nals (Table 1) are the main outlets for publications on natural history
and bird distributions in the Neotropics and have contributed greatly to
advancing knowledge of avian ecology (Vuilleumier 2003, Levy 2008,
Freile et al. 2014, Devenish-Nelson et al. 2017, Bugoni 2020). At least
21 regional journals focus on Neotropical ornithology; most of them are
Diamond Open Access (free to readers and free to authors; Table 1). The
oldest, El Hornero, dates to 1917 (Lopez de Casenave 2017).
Challenges: Systems of Exclusion
Despite the many strengths mentioned above, one of the most perva-
sive shortfalls in Neotropical ornithology is the systemic exclusion of
Neotropical ornithologists, and their research, from the global scientic
context (Duffy 1988, Strahl 1992, Valenzuela-Toro and Viglino 2021,
Khelifa and Mahdjoub 2022, Table 3). Within and beyond the Neotropics,
the current academic system rewards fast-paced science that reinforces
existing inequalities and racial disparities, disfavoring under-represented
groups (Leite and Diele-Viegas 2021). For a variety of reasons we discuss
below, Neotropical researchers often ask different kinds of questions; use
different study designs, sampling protocols, and tools; and disseminate
our research at a different pace and in different outlets than colleagues
who work at institutions in the Global North. For example, in the face
of chronic and severe funding scarcity, we may prioritize our insufcient
funds for training students and involving local communities (vs. purchasing
imported technology). Current systems in academia (within and beyond
the Neotropics) allow and even encourage ornithologists to overlook re-
search contributions of colleagues based in the Neotropics (Table 3), and
these systems of exclusion extend well beyond ornithology (Gibbs 1995,
Year started
Country or
region Biome/site Focus Domain Example citation
1997 Chile Mediterranean forest Conservation biology Natural History, Population Biology Estades and Temple (1999) and Santander et al. (2021)
1998 Argentina Austral Temperate
Forests
Magellanic Woodpecker Population Biology Ojeda (2004) and Chazarreta et al. (2012)
1999 Argentina Patagonian Monte Burrowing Parrot Population Biology Masello and Quillfeldt (2012)
2000 Chile Sub-Antarctic forest Interdisciplinary ecology Population Biology, Biotic Interactions,
Human-wildlife Interactions
Rozzi and Jiménez (2014)
2002 Chile South-Temperate Rain
Forest
Reproduction Natural History Moreno et al. (2007), Ippi et al. (2017) and Botero-
Delgadillo et al. (2020)
Table 2. Continued.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.9
Campos-Arceiz et al. 2018, Minasny et al. 2020, Nuñez et al.
2021).
Dominance of the northern lens.
Reviewers and editors rarely ask scholars from Europe,
Canada, or the USA to translate, learn, or cite theory and
case studies from Latin America or Africa, but they routinely
expect scholars from the Global South to frame their work
in the context of citations, theory, and case studies from the
Global North (Cusicanqui 2012, Monjeau et al. 2013, Rau
et al. 2017, Pérez and Radi 2019). Whereas studies from
Europe or North America are interpreted as being globally
representative (de Gracia 2021), similar studies from the
Neotropics are often rejected as “too locally focused”. In
Canada or the USA, students studying Nearctic bird species
stand on the shoulders of decades of research into their study
systems, summarized, for example, in Pyle’s (2008) guide to
molt, extensive and well-researched species accounts in Birds
of North America (https://birdsoftheworld.org/bow/home),
and annual data from the Breeding Bird Survey (https://www.
pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/). They can, and usually must, focus their
research questions to ensure that their thesis represents an ad-
vance in knowledge, often with several other labs working on
the same species and similar questions, concurrently. In con-
trast, students in the Neotropics are often the rst to publish
on the basic biology of their study system or species, which
can include globally threatened and undescribed or newly de-
scribed species (e.g., Sanabria Mejía 2010, Repenning 2012).
These students must learn all about their system from their
own eld observations (e.g., molt patterns, distribution, diet,
phenology, reproductive behavior, vocalizations, and subspe-
cies identication) as a rst step in their research. In such a
context, descriptive studies (as opposed to hypothesis test-
ing) can be the most appropriate way to move knowledge
forward and address regional priorities for bird conservation.
Nevertheless, the contributions of these students to ornithol-
ogy are overwhelmingly assessed using whatever standards
and values are current in the Global North. They must pub-
lish (in foreign journals, in English, using foreign theoretical
frameworks and case studies from the Global North) “or
perish”. In this way, the northern lens is a self-perpetuating
system that excludes certain types of research and researchers.
Parachute science.
When researchers (including students) from the Global North
conduct short-term projects in countries of the Global South,
they may hope for meaningful long-term collaborations, but
institutional policies and academic culture can be a major dis-
incentive to investing the necessary time and energy, and can
steer them away from the research questions most important
for advancing science and conservation locally. Parachute sci-
ence occurs when foreigners (usually from a wealthier region)
lead projects without including local researchers in author-
ship, planning, and decision-making roles (de Vos 2022). It has
resulted in many papers in high-impact journals, by authors
from the Global North, but it can slow or obstruct the growth
of research capacity in the Global South (Asase et al. 2022).
Parachute science leaves researchers based in Latin America
and the Caribbean under-represented in research networks,
publications, professional societies, editorial boards, priority-
setting groups of funders, taxonomic authorities, awards, and
citations (Espin et al. 2017, Dada et al. 2022). This exclusion
is especially acute for those Neotropical researchers who are
historically, systemically, and persistently excluded from sci-
ence because of marginalized identities (e.g., Black, Brown,
and Indigenous women). Beyond its serious ethical implica-
tions, the self-perpetuating system of parachute science is a
barrier to achieving conservation goals. For the many species
of long-distance migratory birds in steep decline (Rosenberg
et al. 2019), analysis of citizen-science and tracking data
[solutions recommended by Lees et al. (2020)] by northern
researchers will be insufcient to understand and reverse
stressors on the non-breeding grounds (Faaborg et al. 2010,
Buxton et al. 2021). Conservation efforts for migratory birds
in the Americas can only succeed if a diversity of people based
in the Neotropics are involved in leadership, planning, and
implementation.
Language hegemony.
Modern science is, in the words of Gordin (2015:2), “the most
resolutely monoglot international community”. Few people
in Latin America and the Caribbean are native speakers of
English, and in most countries only a privileged minority can
afford to learn English as a second language (e.g., about 5%
of the population of Bolivia, Brazil, or Ecuador, vs. 38% of
the European Union; European Commission 2006, British
Council 2015, Sevy-Biloon et al. 2020). Many journals
(including Ornithology and Ornithological Applications) ex-
plicitly ask authors whose primary language is not English
to have their work edited by an English-speaking colleague
or professional editing service (Instructions for Authors:
Ornithology and Ornithological Applications, 21 December
2021). However, English-speaking colleagues are rarely avail-
able for free editing of manuscripts, and professional editing
services cost ~US$600 for a 6,000-word manuscript—more
than a month’s salary for many scientists in Latin America
and the Caribbean. Disseminating and integrating the know-
ledge generated by non-English speakers is a justice issue
critical to both the inclusiveness and the quality of science
(Ramírez-Castañeda 2020, Amano et al. 2021). Non-English
journals are critical to disseminating ornithological research
by, and to, groups under-represented in science. However, glo-
bal reviews frequently overlook research that is not in English,
which lowers impact factors and pushes Latin American stu-
dents and researchers to publish in English when possible
(Di Bitetti and Ferreras 2017, Konno et al. 2020). Even re-
searchers based in the Neotropics may often prioritize citing
work in English, led by scientists from wealthier regions, in
an attempt to increase the chances their manuscripts will be
accepted in global-scope journals (Meneghini et al. 2008,
MacGregor-Fors et al. 2020). In many cases these citations
are imposed by reviewers and editors during the review pro-
cess.
Language hegemony also extends to bird names. Journals
and international meetings often require the use of English
common names, rather than the scientic (Latin) names that
are supposed to be a global standard and are used by orni-
thologists throughout the Neotropics. To communicate their
research, Neotropical researchers and students must re-learn
avian taxonomy. Similarly, birdwatchers, birding guides,
eBirders, and guidebooks in Latin America and the Caribbean
routinely use English birdwatching terms and English
common names for birds. This habit helps when guiding
English-speaking groups, but it is also a powerful sign of cul-
tural assimilation (Rozzi 2013, Cantú et al. 2020). Whereas
English names were often generated in museums and refer to
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
10 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
TABLE 3. Major barriers that hold back the development of Neotropical ornithology.
Barrier Examples
Funding Field work. Scarce and unpredictable funding from governments (including currency devaluation) favors applied science and limits technology, geographic location,
sample size, replication, and length of studies and monitoring programs. Researchers must adapt their projects to available calls for funding and long delays in
reimbursement, develop many projects funded by several small grants, and spend out-of-pocket to sustain data collection. Many grants have unnecessary budget
restrictions (e.g., no salaries for assistants) or requirements (e.g., must include bird banding or uploading eld data to online repositories) that condition the re-
search or conservation program and who can participate. Trade embargos by nations of the Global North prevent organizations from funding research in some
countries, such as Cuba and Haiti. Often, Neotropical ornithologists do not pursue their main interests, but adapt the resources they have to do what they can,
making it difcult to maintain sampling protocols across time and space.
Lack of institutional overhead. Institutions in the Neotropics do not cover many research costs that ornithologists from the Global North take for granted.
Ornithologists in the Neotropics frequently pay out-of-pocket for bird bands, page charges, conference fees, travel, printing, eld equipment, camping equipment,
station fees, permits, research vehicles, food and accommodation for volunteers, ofce furniture, ofce cleaning supplies, vehicle repairs, and shipping of samples
to colleagues (including shipping to colleagues in the Global North). The frequent need to self-nance (on a minimal salary) severely limits the scope, timing, and
sample size of projects, as well as reinforcing socioeconomic inequalities among researchers within Neotropical countries (e.g., researchers who can afford a per-
sonal vehicle will have a larger sample size and more balanced study design). Even some of our regional journals are self-nanced, which leaves them in a precar-
ious situation; Atualidades Ornitológicas was funded by the editor, Pedro Salviano Filho, and was discontinued when he passed away in 2020. Regional journals
supported by ornithological societies depend on free software and the unpaid labor of volunteers, which can sometimes slow or complicate the review process.
Salaries and scholarships. Small and unpredictable salaries of researchers and students limit the spending of personal funds on travel, conferences, courses, society
memberships, and computer hardware and software. Although some countries offer scholarships for graduate students and post-docs (e.g., Brazil, Chile, Argen-
tina, Mexico), these stipends are insufcient to allow any savings. Supervisors rarely have funding to pay short-term stipends, such that students from working-
class backgrounds may face poverty the month their fellowship ends. In practice, many ornithologists can only access a paid teaching position at a university
after years of unpaid work as a teaching assistant or junior lecturer.
Publication charges. Grant funding to Neotropical ornithologists is generally insufcient to pay for Open Access publications in major journals, which typically
costs $1,000–3,000 USD (~1 to 4 months salary for a research scientist in Argentina). The Gold Open Access model, promoted by many governments and
institutions as a best practice for sharing scientic knowledge, increases the impact of scientists from European and North American institutions (who can afford
to pay), while effectively excluding knowledge produced by scientists in the Neotropics (who cannot). Valuable research remains as gray literature and unpub-
lished theses.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.11
Barrier Examples
Representation of
Neotropical
ornithologists
and
institutions in
research lead-
ership
International priorities and decisions. Ornithologists from the Global South are often perceived as a legion of “xers” and eld workers, who solve logistical
problems and collect data, but are not needed in setting the research agenda or interpreting results (Asase et al. 2022). Even northern researchers who rmly be-
lieve in their intent to respectfully collaborate with scientists from the Global South may act in opposite ways, for example by excluding southern partners from
publications (Dahdouh-Guebas et al. 2003). Neotropical ornithologists are under-represented among the leadership of international ornithological societies,
taxonomic authority bodies, editorial boards, scientic committees for conferences, and reviewers of global-scope journals, and are generally excluded from
important policy decisions around research (e.g., data-sharing, open access; Serwadda et al. 2018). Many researchers from the Global North begin working on
Neotropical birds with very little understanding of the social, political, cultural, and ecological contexts of these birds. However, because of the tendency for
top-down agendas from the group with the funding, these researchers can control North-South “partnerships” in a semi-colonial fashion (Rodríguez et al. 2007,
Boshoff 2009). International research proposals involving Neotropical birds, especially long-distance migrants to North America, frequently ignore or minimize
critical Neotropical perspectives. The culture and values of academia push researchers (from North and South) to prioritize publishing as many papers as pos-
sible in high-impact journals (in English), rather than taking the time to include policy makers and other people local to the study area in the design and impact
of the research.
Evaluation of research contributions. Academic evaluation of Neotropical researchers relies heavily on metrics set by northern-based publishing companies, which
has led to the prioritization of international agendas over regional needs (Monjeau et al. 2013) and often discounts Natural History research as “descriptive”
(Beehler 2010, Ríos-Saldaña et al. 2018). The continuous disincentive to Natural History research produces a vicious cycle that undermines the international im-
pact of regional journals (Monjeau et al. 2013, Devenish-Nelson et al. 2017, Rau et al. 2017) and the training and retention of professional eld ornithologists in
the Neotropics.
Inequalities among individuals. Legacies of internal colonialism (i.e. colonialism within our own countries; Casanova 1965) continue to restrict access to scientic
training primarily to racially and economically privileged classes (Torres and Schugurensky 2002). Pigmentocracy, political instability, and economic uncertainty
select the groups that have access to higher education and nancial resources, resulting in signicant regional and racial bias to who produces scientic knowl-
edge and who continues to be sidelined, namely Black, Brown, and Indigenous Peoples (McCowan 2007). In many countries (e.g., Bolivia) a career in science is
likely to result in a marginal, unstable income, and is therefore not a viable option for most people. Throughout the Neotropics, ornithology is dominated by
heterosexual cis men. Women and members of the LGBTQIA+ community, especially trans people, have been vastly excluded because of misogyny and homo-
phobia, which are pervasive in the region (Salerno et al. 2019).
Inequalities among regions. In some countries (e.g., Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico), academic centers, scientists, and projects are concentrated in major
cities, biasing knowledge toward regions where natural habitats have been drastically transformed. In others (e.g., Ecuador), research is concentrated in specic
geographic locations of interest to foreign scientists (Galapagos Islands, Amazonia), while the rest of the country remains generally neglected.
Inequalities among countries. Whereas some countries have strong institutional research capacity (e.g., Mexico, Brazil, Argentina), others suffer from a lack of
ornithologists at universities, graduate programs that can host ornithological research, and employment opportunities for ornithologists across institutions and
agencies (e.g., Dominican Republic). Institutional research capacity is cyclically under threat because of political shifts.
Table 3. Continued.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
12 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
Barrier Examples
Restricted dis-
semination
of knowledge
produced
in the Neo-
tropics
Enforced language hegemony. The increased time, costs, and challenges of publishing in English slow the advancement of knowledge and exclude many students
from making impactful contributions to science (Hanauer and Englander 2011, Ramírez-Castañeda 2020). Studies written in languages other than English
are much less likely to be cited (Di Bitetti and Ferreras 2017), creating unrealistic standards of English prociency that are enforced within our own coun-
tries (Monge-Nájera 2002), biasing the construction of knowledge (Konno et al. 2020, Angulo et al. 2021) and excluding students from career-determining
opportunities of scientic training and networking based on a skill strongly correlated with inherited socioeconomic status.
Citation bias towards the Global North. Citations and global reviews consistently overlook and under-represent knowledge produced by minoritized groups
(Hofstra et al. 2020), including ornithologists in the Neotropics (Areta and Juhant 2019, MacGregor-Fors et al. 2020). This trend is especially clear in the case
of articles published in local or regional journals (often in Spanish or Portuguese; Di Bitetti and Ferreras 2017). Even authors from the Neotropics exhibit this
citation bias, perhaps driven to select the most prominent references from Europe and North America, to frame their work in a context familiar to and respected
by reviewers (Meneghini et al. 2008). Search engines like Google Scholar reinforce these biases by ranking articles by citation count, thereby burying less-cited
papers that may be just as relevant (Matthew Effect, Beel and Gipp 2009). The names of authors from the Neotropics are often improperly or incompletely
cited. The centuries-old tradition of using both parents’ last names, widespread in Latin American and the Caribbean, has not been assimilated by most journals,
resulting in a lower number of citations for authors with two last (family) names (Ruelas Inzunza 2009).
Implicit bias. Authors with Neotropical afliations face implicit bias during the submission process at high-impact journals (Meneghini et al. 2008).
Logistical limita-
tions
Lack of government and institutional support. Although birds feature prominently in Neotropical cultures (Ibarra et al. 2013), ornithology is not a priority for most
governments, even in countries with many ornithologists (e.g., Argentina and Brazil). Many initiatives (including conferences, journals, monitoring programs,
and records committees) lack institutional support, depending on the commitment of individuals, so that they are difcult to sustain in the long-term. Many
countries in the Neotropics are currently in the hands of political leaders who defund academic institutions (Torres and Schugurensky 2002), dismantle environ-
mental policies (Siqueira-Gay et al. 2020, Barbosa et al. 2021), and even persecute local scientists. In several countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, in-
sufcient support during the COVID-19 pandemic has had drastic negative effects on the training of the next generation of ornithologists, and many early career
professionals are leaving the eld due to economic uncertainty and lack of job security (Bottan et al. 2020, Dávalos et al. 2020, Pérez Ortega and Wessel 2020).
Equipment and supplies. Many of the supplies and basic equipment taken for granted by northern researchers are unavailable in Neotropical countries and require
complicated and expensive logistics to import legally, or time to make from scratch. For example, banders working in the Neotropics face a constant challenge
in acquiring the numbered aluminum bands that are fundamental to any study capturing birds, and monitoring programs can be paused for years because bands
are unavailable.
Permits. Permitting varies widely by country and jurisdiction, with some eld research (e.g., in parts of Brazil) requiring permits from up to ve organizations, each
with its own requirements (e.g., an employee of the organization must accompany the researcher in the eld, complicating the schedule). In some countries (e.g.,
Venezuela), obtaining permits has become virtually impossible for many projects. Permits are also required to import equipment, funds, and supplies to many
areas or to move samples for analysis and can represent an insurmountable bureaucratic barrier.
Specimens. A large part of the Neotropical bird collection is held in museums in the Global North; visiting these collections requires funding and visas that are inac-
cessible to many researchers from the Neotropics.
Field access and safety. In the second half of the 20th century, ornithologists and other scientists in many Neotropical countries suffered direct persecution (torture,
imprisonment, exile) and massive interruptions to research programs during periods of socioeconomic and political turmoil, including USA-supported decades-
long dictatorships (e.g., Bekerman 2009, Rapoport 2015, Fraga 2019). For many of us (ornithologists of the 21st century), this context framed our childhoods
and/or early careers. Across many parts of the Neotropics, local ornithologists and allies are still attacked, kidnapped, and even murdered during eldwork and
bird conservation activities (Malakoff 2004, Mifsut and Barrero 2012, Méndez 2021, Palomino 2021).
Table 3. Continued.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.13
the bird’s appearance, indicate a geographic location, or honor
a notable person, local names more often recognize birds by
their vocalizations, behavior, cultural signicance, the time of
year they are present, or their habitat (Ibarra et al. 2020b). In
La Araucanía Region of Chile, for example, Mapuzugun bird
names include the onomatopoeic fío-fío (Elaenia albiceps),
chuncho (Glaucidium nana), and pitío (Colaptes pitius), and
the behaviorally derived küchag (which leaves waste after
eating; Phrygilus patagonicus), which carry important local
information about how the birds are experienced (Ibarra et
al. 2020b). For comparison, their English names are White-
crested Elaenia, Austral Pygmy-Owl, Chilean Flicker, and
Patagonian Sierra Finch, which focus on the type of informa-
tion that interests foreign ornithologists. The dominance of
English terms can erroneously signal that the enjoyment and
knowledge of birds is for the English-speaking (i.e. educated
or wealthy) classes, and that bird identication occurs pri-
marily through appearance (which requires purchase of bin-
oculars) rather than vocalizations or other cues. The spread of
nomenclatural standardization from English to Spanish (e.g.,
Bernis et al. 1994 and subsequent) has resulted in the use of
standardized names in citizen-science and eld guide projects
that further erase the rich cultural legacy and understanding
of bird behavior reected in local names (e.g., Navarro 2015).
CONTRASTING PERSPECTIVES ON
NEOTROPICAL ORNITHOLOGY
The Problem of Discovery Narratives
Short-term expeditionists from Europe and the USA contrib-
uted to the development of ornithology in the Neotropics,
particularly in taxonomy and systematics (e.g., Alexander
Wetmore, Frank Chapman, and Storrs Olson; Freile and
Córdoba 2008, Levy 2008, Hume 2021). However, to
access research sites, expeditionists frequently aligned
themselves with imperial or commercial interests (such as
territorial acquisition and resource extraction; Naranjo
2008, Raby 2017a). Their research practices generally fol-
lowed the same unequal exchange model as the economy:
foreign companies exported raw materials northward, to
be returned to Latin America as nished products; foreign
researchers exported bird specimens northward, where
they served to formulate theories that were sent back to
Latin America for “consumption” (Quintero 2011). The
more signicant, long-term contributions to Neotropical
ornithology came from people (whether local- or foreign-
born) who lived in the Neotropics and invested in local
capacity, often by founding schools, ornithological collec-
tions, or long-term research programs (e.g., among those
now deceased, Juan Gundlach in Cuba; James W. Wiley
in Cuba, Puerto Rico, and elsewhere in the Caribbean;
Gustavo Kattan in Colombia; William H. Phelps, William
H. Phelps Jr., and Adolfo Pons in Venezuela; Helmut Sick,
Emilie Snethlage, William Belton, and Fernando Novaes
in Brazil; Miguel Lillo, Roberto Dabbene, Claes Christian
Olrog, and Eduardo Tonni in Argentina; Maria Koepcke in
Peru; Allan R. Phillips, Miguel Álvarez del Toro, and Mario
A. Ramos in Mexico; and Daniel González Acuña in Chile,
to name just a few; Vuilleumier 1995,Cuarón 1997, Silva
et al. 2005, Di Giacomo and Di Giacomo 2008, Levy 2008,
Junghans 2009, Voss 2009, López Ordóñez et al. 2014,
Snyder et al. 2019, Pizarro et al. 2020, Gomez et al. 2022).
Discovery narratives centered on foreign researchers are
common across scientic disciplines, and they perpetuate
the colonialist discourse that phenomena and species re-
main “unknown” until they are “discovered” or named (by
the right person). For example, Ted Parker is remembered
for his “singular skills of observation” (Lees et al. 2020:10)
leading to the description of 10 taxa, and his popularization
of vocalizations as a critical tool for surveying birds in trop-
ical forests, at a time (the 1970s) when “the voices of most
Neotropical birds were unknown” (Remsen and Schulenberg
1997:10). However, it is critical to recognize that long be-
fore Europeans colonized the Americas, Indigenous Peoples
had already identied, named, and catalogued, through oral
tradition, thousands of bird vocalizations, often experien-
cing and identifying birds more by ear than visually (Berlin
1981, Cebolla Badie 2000, 2013, Ibarra and Pizarro 2016,
Madroño 2016, Ibarra et al. 2020b). For example, Chachugi
(2013) explains how the Aché Indigenous language (in the
region currently known as Paraguay) includes specic words
that represent types of bird sounds associated with specic
contexts (e.g., lek, alarm, mixed-species ock) and environ-
mental conditions (e.g., open understory at display arenas).
Chachugi and other Aché adults recall how, in their childhood,
they were instructed by their grandparents to imitate the vo-
calizations of a wide diversity of bird species, from the tiny
kwi’i (Olivaceous Woodcreeper, Sittasomus griseicapillus) to
the djaku (Black-fronted Piping-Guan, Pipile jacutinga). The
Aché people exhibit an extraordinary ability (by the stand-
ards of western scientists) to remember and reproduce these
sounds, using them as “playback” to attract and hunt adult
birds, and to nd nests. Parker played an important role in
popularizing the use of bird vocalizations among ornitholo-
gists, but for the Aché and many other Indigenous Peoples
of the Americas, the use of bird vocalizations was already an
integral part of their daily lives.
Among western scientists, too, knowledge of bird vocaliza-
tions in the Neotropics was and is constructed collectively,
and the story is much more complex and interesting than a
simple discovery narrative would have us believe. The use of
bioacoustics to identify Neotropical birds dates at least to
1831 in Brazil (Toledo and Araujo 2017). Johan Dalgas Frisch
released his rst record (Cantos das Aves do Brasil) simultan-
eously in Rio, New York, and London in 1962 (Gorgulho et
al. 2005), and Jacques Vielliard recorded and described birds
by sound as early as 1974 (e.g., Vielliard 1983). In Venezuela,
Paul A. Schwartz recorded around 800 species by the 1970s,
nearly 1/4 of all South American birds (Gorton 2010). In
Argentina, Roberto Straneck began recording birds in 1964,
contributed to the archive of natural audio recordings of
the Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales and, in 1990,
published popular guides to bird sounds of Argentina that
were critical to expanding knowledge of bird distributions
and abundance in the Southern Cone (e.g., Straneck 1990,
Fernández Balboa 2016). Schwartz, Straneck, and Vielliard
pioneered the use of bioacoustics as a taxonomic tool
(Schwartz 1968, 1972, Straneck 1987, 1993, 2007, Vielliard
1990, Straneck and Vidoz 1995).
Although discovery narratives are part of the colonialist
scientic legacy we have inherited, we must conceptualize an
ornithological future without them. It is worthwhile to ques-
tion our own roles as authors in perpetuating the idea that
phenomena remain “unknown” until they are popularized in
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
14 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
North America and Europe (see Bauer et al. 2018). Breaking
our reliance on discovery narratives also means acknowledg-
ing the role of colonialism in the ongoing suppression of ances-
tral knowledge (Barreau et al. 2016). For those of us working
in the Neotropics, it means justifying our research in ways
that acknowledge the work already done in the region, rather
than citing studies from the Global North and then stating
that “little is known” about our topic in the Neotropics. We
can all highlight the collective process of building knowledge,
taking into account not only research that is of interest to the
scientic community of Europe and the USA, but also, critic-
ally, contributions that advance local and regional agendas.
The Natural History Gap
Building on the framework of seven biological shortfalls laid
out by Hortal et al. (2015), Lees et al. (2020) proposed an
eighth “Parkerian Shortfall,” a gap in knowledge of natural
history. They justied this proposal on the basis of missing
information about foraging behavior, diet, nesting, and vocal-
izations, primarily in English-language resources, especially
the Birds of the World platform (https://birdsoftheworld.org).
Birds of the World is a highly used and cited online resource
maintained by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology and a result of
the fusion of the Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive
(del Hoyo 2015), Birds of North America (https://birdsna.
org/, a domain redirecting users to Birds of the World),
Neotropical Birds Online (http://neotropical.birds.cornell.
edu/ formerly freely accessible resource now redirecting users
to Birds of the World), and other resources. As an example
of the natural history gap, Lees et al. (2020) stated that even
basic nest descriptions are not listed for 328 of a sample of
1,018 Neotropical species across nine families in Birds of the
World. However, Birds of the World (and other such compil-
ations) are not reliable yardsticks by which to assess recent
advances in Neotropical ornithology. In November 2021,
we conducted a cursory review of Neotropical species whose
nests were described up to 2017, and we found that Birds of
the World continued to list 59 of these species without nesting
information, despite the published descriptions (Table 4). The
primary publications arose in online searches and were freely
available to download (unlike the species accounts in Birds of
the World, which are behind a paywall). According to Fierro-
Calderón et al. (2021), in the past 20 years, research teams in
Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Ecuador, Colombia,
and Peru have presented the rst descriptions of the nests of
over 100 species. We infer that Birds of the World may, at pre-
sent, omit about half of the Neotropical literature presenting
new nest descriptions in the last two decades.
Beyond the species with completely missing nest descrip-
tions, many Neotropical species continue to be listed in Birds
of the World with a rudimentary nest description and a state-
ment of “no further information”, when in fact journal art-
icles and graduate theses (indexed in Google Scholar and
freely available online) have addressed other aspects of their
reproductive biology, sometimes extensively and with import-
ant implications for ecology and evolution (Table 4). Because
Birds of the World omits much of the primary literature pro-
duced in the Neotropics over the last two decades, it does not
accurately reect advances in our natural history knowledge
since the death of Ted Parker in 1993. Researchers should not
use it to assess advances in knowledge of Neotropical birds,
just as they would not use it to assess advances in knowledge
of Nearctic birds over the same time period. Over-reliance on
Birds of the World, rather than primary literature, broadens
the natural history gap in the Neotropics by undermining the
value of research in this eld.
Although we critique the methods used by Lees et al. (2020),
we nonetheless agree that there is a real natural history gap in
Neotropical ornithology. This gap is maintained by a chronic
sidelining of natural history and other eld research by aca-
demic institutions and editorial policies. Lees et al. (2020:11)
urge readers to “encourage, support, and value both basic sci-
ence and natural history descriptions of Neotropical birds”.
As people who already encourage, support, and value natural
history, we are caught in a dilemma. For many of us, natural
history is a passion, as well as a critical foundation for our
ecological or phylogenetic studies and conservation baselines.
However, too often, our results are excluded from publica-
tion in global-scope journals (the ones highly valued by our
employers), which has a negative impact on our chances of
obtaining funding, with the consequent damaging cascade
effect on our research and training capacity. When our re-
sults are published (Table 4), they are under-cited. Yet we are
asked, by the very institutions that ignore our natural his-
tory studies, to generate more natural history data, not for
publication in major journals, but for online databases, such
as eBird (http://ebird.org, Cornell Lab of Ornithology) or in
“regional” journals regarded as second-tier outlets for our
research. To stop perpetuating the natural history gap, our
colleagues who wish to encourage natural history research
should start valuing it in the currencies of academia: funding,
high-impact journals, and citations.
Tools and Approaches for Neotropical Ornithology
When considering tools and remedial approaches to ll
“gaps” in Neotropical ornithology, it is important to take
into account the limitations imposed by global inequities in
access to funding and equipment, and the social implications
of technology. For example, in avian parasitology, microscopy
is a relatively cheap and data-rich method to identify species,
suitable for most regional labs. However, many reviewers
do not recommend accepting manuscripts based solely on
microscopy. Instead, they urge Neotropical researchers to
use more expensive techniques (such as Polymerase Chain
Reaction amplication of molecular markers), which are
often unnecessary to support the results already obtained and
create nancial and logistical complications. DNA barcoding
and Next Generation Sequencing offer powerful tools for
understanding our birds; however, because they are not avail-
able in many countries of Latin America and the Caribbean,
Neotropical researchers can often only access these tools by
relying on foreign collaborators, frequently in a context of
unequal power dynamics.
Even relatively simple methods can get complicated in the
Neotropics. Mexico, for example, lacks a centralized band-
ing system and the infrastructure and operations teams to
support it. Instead, it relies on partial participation in the
USA system, under conditions that are often unfavorable for
Mexican banders. Banders in Mexico can use self-made bands
or foreign-purchased bands, but the only way to participate in
a centralized banding system is to use ofcial U.S. Geological
Survey’s Bird Band Laboratory (BBL) bands, which require
BBL permits. For legal reasons, master banding permits are
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
15 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
TABLE 4. Examples of information about the reproductive biology of some Neotropical birds, published by 2017, which remained excluded from Birds of the World as of November 2021. The order of taxa
follows Remsen et al. (2021).
Taxonomy Published breeding information Source
A. Example species without nest descriptions in Birds of the World
Band-tailed Nightjar (Systellura longirostris) Nest, eggs, nestlings Balderrama et al. (2008)
Rothschild’s Swift (Cypseloides rothschildi) Nest, eggs Dabbene (1918) and Smyth (1928)
Slaty Gnateater (Conopophaga ardesiaca) Nest, eggs Sánchez and Aponte (2006)
Green Thorntail (Discosura conversii) Nest architecture, egg Sánchez et al. (2016)
Bearded Mountaineer (Oreonympha nobilis) Nest, eggs Córdoba-Córdoba et al. (2012)
Garden Emerald (Chlorostilbon assimilis) Nest architecture, parental care Sandoval and Escalante (2010)
Chestnut-headed Crake (Anurolimnas castaneiceps) Nest, eggs Buitrón Jurado et al. (2011)
Andean Motmot (Momotus aequatorialis) Nest, eggs Greeney et al. (2006)
Mottled Piculet (Picumnus nebulosus) Nest, clutch, incubation and nestling periods, pa-
rental care, nestling growth
Pichorim (2006)
Grayish Piculet (Picumnus granadensis) Nest, clutch, nest attentiveness, incubation bouts, nestlings Sedano et al. (2008)
Versicolored Barbet (Eubucco versicolor) Nest, parental care Avalos and Saavedra (2016)
Rusty-faced Parrot (Hapalopsittaca amazonina) Courtship, nest placement, laying, incubation and
nestling periods, parental care, edging
Sanabria Mejía (2010)
Brown-breasted Parakeet (Pyrrhura calliptera) Nest, laying, nestling growth Arenas-Mosquera (2011)
Caatinga Antwren (Radinopsyche sellowi) Nest construction, clutch, parental care da Silva et al. (2008)
Band-tailed Antshrike (Thamnophilus melanothorax) Nest Zyskowski et al. (2008)
Spot-backed Antwren (Herpsilochmus dorsimaculatus) Nest, edgling Melo and Xavier (2017)
Pectoral Antwren (Herpsilochmus pectoralis) Nest, clutch da Silva et al. (2008)
Leaden Antwren (Myrmotherula assimilis) Nest, clutch Leite et al. (2016)
White-lined Antbird (Myrmoborus lophotes) Nest, clutch, parental care Lebbin et al. (2007)
Stripe-headed Antpitta (Grallaria andicolus) Nest architecture, placement, eggs, nestlings Greeney (2012)
Speckle-breasted Antpitta (Cryptopezus nattereri) Nest, clutch, parental care Chachugi (2013) and Bodrati and Di Sallo (2016)
White-browed Antpitta (Hylopezus ochroleucus) Nest, nestlings, distraction display Greeney et al. (2016)
Thicket Antpitta (Myrmothera dives) Nest, nestlings, nestling diet Greeney and Vargas-Jiménez (2017)
Trilling Tapaculo (Scytalopus parvirostris) Nest, clutch, nestling growth rate, nest attentiveness Smith and Londoño (2014)
Long-tailed Tapaculo (Scytalopus micropterus) Nest, nestlings, nestling diet Greeney and Gelis (2005)
Nariño Tapaculo (Scytalopus vicinior) Nest, clutch, nestling Arcos-Torres and Solano-Ugalde (2007)
Sharp-billed Treehunter (Heliobletus contaminatus) Nest, clutch, nestlings, parental care Cockle and Bodrati (2017)
Black-capped Foliage-gleaner (Philydor atricapillus) Nest Tanaka et al. (2016)
Ochre-breasted Foliage-gleaner (Anabacerthia lichtensteini) Nest, nestlings, parental care Saibene (1995) and Cockle and Bodrati (2017)
White-browed Spinetail (Hellmayrea gularis) Nest Greeney and Zyskowski (2008)
Maquis Canastero (Asthenes heterura) Nest, nest-site Martínez et al. (2011)
Serra do Mar Tyrant-Manakin (Neopelma chrysolophum) Nest Kirwan (2016)
Yungas Manakin (Chiroxiphia boliviana) Nest, eggs, nestling growth, parental care Hazlehurst and Londoño (2012)
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.16
Taxonomy Published breeding information Source
Round-tailed Manakin (Ceratopipra chloromeros) Nest, construction Doucet and Mennill (2005)
Hooded Berryeater (Carpornis cucullata) Nest architecture and placement (variation) Maurício (2013)
Fiery-throated Fruiteater (Pipreola chlorolepidota) Nest construction, clutch, nestlings, nestling period Gelis et al. (2006)
Black-capped Piprites (Piprites pileata) Nest Cockle et al. (2008)
Bronze-olive Pygmy-Tyrant (Pseudotriccus pelzelni) Nest, clutch, nestlings, parental care Greeney et al. (2005)
Rufous-headed Pygmy-Tyrant (Pseudotriccus ruceps) Laying, clutch, incubation period, nestlings Greeney (2006)
Plain Tyrannulet (Inezia inornata) Nest, eggs Di Giacomo (2005)
Ash-breasted Tit-Tyrant (Anairetes alpinus) Nest, eggs, nestlings, parental care Barnes (2009) and Greeney (2013)
Juan Fernandez Tit-Tyrant (Anairetes fernandezianus) Nest, clutch, parental care Hahn (2006)
Agile Tit-Tyrant (Uromyias agilis) Nest, nestlings, adult behavior, ectoparasites Bonier et al. (2008)
Rufous Mourner (Rhytipterna holerythra) Nest construction, eggs Snow et al. (2017)
Pale-edged Flycatcher (Myiarchus cephalotes) Nest construction, clutch, incubation period, nest-
ling period, nest attentiveness, nestling diet,
edgling period
Greeney and Dyrcz (2011)
White-rumped Monjita (Xolmis velatus) Nest, eggs Lombardi et al. (2010)
Salinas Monjita (Neoxolmis salinarum) Nest, eggs, nestlings Cobos and Miatello (2001)
Rufous-bellied Bush-Tyrant (Myiotheretes fuscorufus) Nest, eggs, nestling growth, parental care Kingwell and Londoño (2015)
Black-billed Peppershrike (Cyclarhis nigrirostris) Nest architecture, eggs Strewe (2001) and David (2011)
Gray-mantled Wren (Odontorchilus branickii) Nest placement, nest building Johnson (2017)
Niceforo’s Wren (Thryophilus nicefori) Nest Valderrama et al. (2007)
White-eared Solitaire (Entomodestes leucotis) Nest Rheindt and Quispe Vela (2008)
Hellmayr’s Pipit (Anthus hellmayri) Nest, eggs Belton (1985), Güller et al. (2004), de la Peña (2005) and
Lombardi et al. (2010)
Carmiol’s Tanager (Chlorothraupis carmioli) Nest, eggs, parental care Martínez and Rechberger (2011)
Cinnamon-tailed Sparrow (Peucaea sumichrasti) Nest, egg McAndrews et al. (2008)
Plain-colored Seedeater (Catamenia inornata) Nest, eggs Peraza (2011)
Paramo Seedeater (Catamenia homochroa) Nest, eggs Chaparro-Herrera et al. (2015)
Masked Saltator (Saltator cinctus) Nest, eggs, incubation period, nestling growth, nest
attentiveness
Ortiz Mendoza (2013)
Multicolored Tanager (Chlorochrysa nitidissima) Nest, clutch, nestling growth, parental care Loaiza-Muñoz et al. (2017)
B. Example species with only a photo or very limited nest description in Birds of the World
Small-billed Tinamou (Crypturellus parvirostris) Nesting period, nest, eggs, clutch size, incubation
period, nest defense
Marini et al. (2012)
Picazuro Pigeon (Patagioenas picazuro) Nesting period, nest, eggs, incubation period, nest-
ling period
Marini et al. (2010)
Scissor-tailed Nightjar (Hydropsalis torquata) Nestlings, parental care, apparent lack of territori-
ality, nesting ecology, nest defense
Pautasso and Cazenave (2002) and Marini et al. (2012)
Pavonine Quetzal (Pharomachrus pavoninus) Clutch, incubation, provisioning, nestling period,
nestling diet, edging
Lebbin (2007)
Buff-bellied Puffbird (Notharchus swainsoni) Clutch, nestling period, parental care Matthews and Smith (2017)
Table 4. Continued.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.17
Taxonomy Published breeding information Source
Ochre-collared Piculet (Picumnus temminckii) Nest, clutch, incubation and nestling periods,
nestlings, nest attentiveness, nestling diet, social
roosting, parental care, evolution
Bodrati et al. (2015)
Chestnut-capped Foliage-gleaner (Clibanornis rectirostris) Eggs, nestlings, pair delity, territoriality, parental
care, nest success, edgling movements
Faria et al. (2008)
Swallow-tailed Manakin (Chiroxiphia caudata) Mating and social systems, incubation and nestling
periods, daily nest survival, attentiveness during
incubation and nestling periods, comparative
life history
Brodt et al. (2014), Bobato (2016) and Zima et al. (2017)
Three-wattled Bellbird (Procnias tricarunculatus) Nest construction, courtship, copulation Sánchez et al. (2013)
Suiriri Flycatcher (Suiriri suiriri) Nesting ecology, nest survival, nestling devel-
opment, Philornis parasitism, parental care,
renesting
Lopes and Marini (2005a, 2005b, 2006) and Marini et al.
(2012)
Chapada Flycatcher (Guyramemua afne) Nesting ecology, nest survival, nestling devel-
opment, Philornis parasitism, parental care,
renesting
Lopes and Marini (2005a, 2005b, 2006), França and
Marini (2009, 2010)
Sulphur-rumped Flycatcher (Myiobius barbatus) Nest, clutch, parental care Greeney and Gelis (2007)
Gray-backed Tachuri (Polystictus superciliaris) Clutch, incubation and nestling periods, nestling
parasitism, parental care, daily nest survival,
breeding synchrony, renesting
Hoffman and Rodrigues (2011)
Hudson’s Black-Tyrant (Knipolegus hudsoni) Nest materials, eggs Lucero (2014)
Cipo Canastero (Asthenes luizae) Nest characteristics, nesting behavior and ecology,
brood parasitism, comparative life history/phy-
logeny
Costa (2011, 2015)
Red-billed Pied Tanager (Lamprospiza melanoleuca) Nest, clutch, parental behavior Melo and Xavier (2017)
Carmiol’s Tanager (Chlorothraupis carmioli) Clutch, nest attentiveness, incubation and nestling
periods, incubation behavior, nestling growth,
comparative life history/phylogeny
Valdez-Juarez and Londoño (2016)
Scrub Tanager (Stilpnia vitriolina) Nest architecture, placement, clutch, eggs,
nestlings, brooding behavior
Freile (2015)
Pale-throated Pampa-Finch (Embernagra longicauda) Nest architecture, nest materials, nest-site, clutch,
eggs, nestlings
Freitas et al. (2009) and Rodrigues et al. (2009)
Table 4. Continued.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
18 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
only available to USA and Canadian nationals (following a
1923 treaty between these two countries), and, in practice, to
foreign nationals who are residents of these two countries (A.
Celis-Murillo, BBL Chief, pers. com.). Mexican banders based
in Mexico, regardless of their experience, fall outside the legal
jurisdiction of USA or Canadian law. Therefore, to partici-
pate in this centralized banding system, they need to take a
paid NABC (North American Banding Council) certication
course, and (in the best-case scenario) band birds using BBL
bands as subpermitees of a North American permit holder.
These requirements impose both a nancial cost and a loss
of regional autonomy over the data (however, the NABC and
the Association of Field Ornithologists offer partial nancial
support for groups or individuals pursuing these certica-
tions, https://nabanding.net/grants/). Moreover, BBL bands
are restricted to species found in the USA, which excludes
many tropical, non-migratory species in Mexico. The creation
of banding systems is a pending assignment for Neotropical
countries: the USA model of a government-administered
banding system has been proposed to many Latin American
and Caribbean governments for decades with little progress.
Alternative models exist, such as the ca. 30 independent bird
ringing national/regional centers in Europe, many of them run
by non-prots (e.g., British Trust for Ornithology) that con-
tribute their records to the unied Euring Data Bank in the
Netherlands (https://euring.org/).
Online data platforms, such as eBird (Cornell Laboratory
of Ornithology) and the Global Biodiversity Information
Facility (GBIF) can help advance knowledge of macroecology,
distributions, relative abundance, and migration, but can also
unintentionally reinforce the status quo of colonizer–colon-
ized relationships. eBird was initially developed to harness
the data produced by “everyday birders”, tapping into the
“healthy competition” of “the birding community”: people
driven “to the far ends of the earth” by “the desire to nd and
identify birds, as well as the accolades that occur as a result
of their discoveries” (Sullivan et al. 2009:2285). In the USA,
where eBird originated, 95% of eBirders are white (Rutter
et al. 2021). They remain “highly specialized recreationists”
motivated by competition and achievement (Rosenblatt et al.
2022). In Africa and the Caribbean, where white people are a
minority in the population, they nevertheless represent most
of the top eBird contributors (Scott 2021). For the GBIF, data
coverage is strongly and positively related to GDP per capita,
with 79% of data coming from just ten countries, and very
little coverage of tropical countries despite much higher spe-
cies richness (Hughes et al. 2021). We stress that the rst step
in reducing racial and geographical biases in representation in
such systems is not encouraging more people from minoritized
groups to upload data to the platform, but reecting carefully
on how the platform’s origin, objectives, culture, and design
might be excluding or exploiting these populations.
In the Neotropics, some researchers benet from eBird
(mainly those who work with big data) while others (e.g., nat-
uralists working with their own data) lose protagonism, for
example, when eBird records are cited instead of published
papers. Because eBird requires a single, centralized list of bird
common names for each country and language, it can, unin-
tentionally, contribute to the erasure of cultural diversity (and
knowledge about bird behavior and vocalizations) associ-
ated with the diversity of local names. Importantly, while the
competitive model of birding has some tradition with highly
specialized white recreationists in the USA, its popularization
across the Neotropics supplants local traditions of cost-free
enjoyment and knowledge of birds (without binoculars or
specialized equipment). eBird and other “community science”
projects often imply the ow of data from local communities
to academic researchers in major centers, including many in
the Global North. Rather than further expanding the eBird
platform to incorporate natural history observations (as re-
commended by Lees et al. 2020), we suggest investing in a
thorough examination of the unintended social costs of the
current system.
The growing movement toward open data and author-paid
open access publication models will increase power imbal-
ances if we do not directly address inequalities inherent in
these systems (Fontúrbel and Vizentin-Bugoni 2021, Smith et
al. 2021). While free access to publications is laudable, most
Neotropical researchers cannot afford to pay for open ac-
cess, which casts authors in the role of clients, rather than
creators of knowledge. Likewise, we need to consider how
open data policies might be giving researchers at powerful
institutions access to data from Indigenous land and the
Global South, without involving or consulting the relevant
communities (Serwadda et al. 2018, Liboiron 2021). In con-
trast, open software such as R (R Core Team 2021) and QGIS
(www.qgis.org), online data-sharing platforms such as xeno-
canto (www.xeno-canto.org) and WikiAves (www.wikiaves.
com.br), searchable databases such as VertNet (vertnet.org),
and online platforms that allow free sharing and access to
scientic literature, have revolutionized and democratized
our ability to study Neotropical birds. When deciding how
to produce and share ornithological knowledge (e.g., mov-
ing journals to Open Access), we urge colleagues to choose
options that reduce, rather than exacerbate, historical in-
equalities (e.g., the Diamond Open Access model widely used
in Latin America; Alperin 2022, Cabrera and Saraiva 2022,
Ross-Hellauer 2022, Ruelas Inzunza et al. 2023).
WHY SCIENCE NEEDS VIEWS FROM THE
NEOTROPICS: FOUR EXAMPLES
In his classic work, “The Structure of Scientic Revolutions”,
Kuhn (1962) proposed that to move beyond static “normal
science” we need paradigm shifts, which are frequently gen-
erated by outsiders to a eld. Not all researchers believe that
there can or should be a universal roadmap for Neotropical
ornithology, and creating one was not an aim of this paper.
Instead, for the interest of readers, we offer a few examples of
how the northern lens (regardless of researcher location) has
affected the pace, direction, and conclusions of bird research
and conservation efforts, and how perspectives from the
south can shift our understanding and direction. We stress,
however, that exclusion from science is an ethical issue, and
needs to be addressed regardless of how it affects the devel-
opment of a eld.
Woodpeckers as Ecosystem Engineers
Across North America, woodpeckers produce nearly all of the
cavities used by non-excavators (birds that rely on existing
tree cavities for nesting). Because nest sites can limit popula-
tion size and distribution of non-excavators, woodpeckers are
often considered to be keystone taxa or ecosystem engineers
that facilitate the presence and abundance of other species
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.19
(e.g., Daily et al. 1993). Based on this North temperate frame-
work—and noting that in temperate-zone forests up to half of
the species comprising bird communities may depend on cav-
ities in dead trees for nesting—Gibbs et al. (1993) examined
the availability of dead trees (assumed important for wood-
peckers to excavate) and the ratio of non-excavator species
to excavator species along a latitudinal gradient from central
Venezuela to northeastern USA. On nding few standing dead
trees and a high ratio of non-excavators to excavators at more
tropical latitudes, they proposed that limitations on nest-site
availability could be more severe in lower than higher latitude
forests and recommended that tropical forest managers fol-
low their north temperate counterparts in developing forestry
practices to maintain dead trees for birds.
The framework of woodpeckers as key facilitators of
non-excavators was later used to examine relationships be-
tween the richness and abundance of woodpeckers and
non-excavators. While correlations in richness can be found
at global scales and continue to be interpreted within the
framework of cavity facilitation (e.g., van der Hoek et al.
2020), these correlations are rarely detected at local scales
within the Neotropics (e.g., Sandoval and Barrantes 2009,
Siqueira Pereira et al. 2009). Indeed, we now know that in
the Neotropics (and much of the world outside of North
America), woodpeckers do not provide most of the cavities
used by non-excavators (Cornelius et al. 2008, Cockle et al.
2011, Ruggera et al. 2016, Altamirano et al. 2017), a pattern
that was likely evident to Indigenous Peoples and local natur-
alists in the Neotropics, whose knowledge was not included
in the imported framework. Correlations between wood-
pecker and non-excavator richness in the Neotropics (and
likely in many parts of the world) are more likely related to
shared habitat associations and macro-ecological gradients in
species richness (e.g., related to climate) than to facilitation.
Although exceptions exist, the framework of woodpeckers
as ecosystem engineers is generally inappropriate for most
Neotropical forests.
Replication of Latitudinal Gradients
In the book “Behavioral Ecology of Tropical Birds”,
Stutchbury and Morton (2001) recognized that temperate-
zone birds have received most scientic attention but may in
fact be atypical. As an example, they described much lower
rates of extra-pair fertilization (EPF; resulting from copula-
tions outside the pair bond) in socially monogamous birds
in tropical vs. temperate regions. They suggested that EPF is
probably unusual in socially monogamous tropical species
because tropical birds have small testes (i.e. less potential for
sperm competition) and have extended breeding seasons, and
they hypothesized breeding synchrony to be a main driver
of EPF. Although based on only seven species from the trop-
ics (three in Panama and one each in Hawaii, Galapagos,
Venezuela, and northeastern Australia), and lacking data on
south-temperate species, the purported latitudinal pattern
and hypothesis regarding breeding synchrony remained for
years (Stutchbury and Morton 2008). Macedo et al. (2008)
pointed out numerous shortcomings to these ideas, including
limited knowledge of the latitudinal trends in testes size, and
the high diversity of tropical habitat types and climatic condi-
tions that could inuence breeding synchrony. In a recent re-
view that included studies of 33 socially monogamous species
from central Mexico (19°N) to Tierra del Fuego, Argentina
(54°S), Ferretti (2019) showed rates of EPF that ranged from
0 to 78% of broods, but were associated with neither latitude
nor breeding synchrony.
Along similar lines, Landler et al. (2014) studied “global”
trends in woodpecker cavity entrance orientation and con-
cluded that woodpeckers are more likely to orient their cav-
ities toward the equator with increasing latitude, likely driven
by climatic factors (incident solar radiation). Unfortunately,
their study did not include any data from the southern hemi-
sphere. When Ojeda et al. (2021) examined cavity entrance
orientation of woodpeckers in the Neotropics, they found no
such trend. While we do not fault Landler et al. (2014) for
excluding data from the Neotropics (these were not published
at the time), we do suggest that perspectives from the south
enrich our understanding of patterns in nature, and journals
need to stop implying that northern patterns are universal
(Castro Torres and Alburez-Gutierrez 2022).
“Outside the Journal Scope”
In 1969, while exiled in Venezuela, the Argentinian ecologist
Eduardo H. Rapoport was working on a paper proposing
that gradients in species richness reect gradients in the size
of species’ latitudinal ranges, whereby range size increases
with latitude (Rapoport 2015). On a visit to New York,
he shared his ideas and data with the USA-based ecologist
Robert MacArthur. Rapoport planned to submit his work
to a Venezuelan journal, but MacArthur suggested, instead,
American Naturalist, “to reach a wider public”. Rapoport re-
turned to Venezuela but found soldiers and tanks blocking
access to his university. The military dictatorship in Argentina
still prevented him from working at a university, but he took
a position at Fundación Bariloche in the south of Argentina,
shipping his data and notes. When the papers did not arrive,
he traveled 1,600 km to obtain a truck to bring them home,
to nish writing his article.
Around 1971, Rapoport submitted the manuscript to
American Naturalist, but it was rejected as “outside the jour-
nal scope”. He decided to expand the manuscript into a book,
which was rst published in Mexico in Spanish (Rapoport
1975), then translated to English 7 years later (Rapoport
1982). Almost 20 years after Rapoport’s paper was rejected
as “outside the scope” of American Naturalist, the USA-based
ecologist George C. Stevens published a paper in American
Naturalist (Stevens 1989) proposing that latitudinal ranges
of species are generally smaller at lower latitudes than at
higher latitudes, naming this correlate “Rapoport’s Rule.”
According to Google Scholar, by July 2022 the original ver-
sion of Rapoport’s book in Spanish had been cited 222 times,
the English version 796 times, and Stevens’ paper 1981 times.
Conservation in the “American Tropics”
Throughout the 20th century, USA-based biologists posi-
tioned themselves as experts on the Neotropics, often using
their country’s geopolitical interests (e.g., Panama Canal,
Puerto Rico, “American Tropics”) to promote their research
and conservation agendas (Raby 2017a, 2017b, Mohammed
et al. 2022). Writing for The Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics, Janzen (1986:306) famously proposed that “if
biologists want a tropics in which to biologize, they are going
to have to buy it with care, energy, effort, strategy, tactics,
time, and cash. And I cannot overemphasize the urgency
as well as the responsability”. Although well-meaning, this
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
20 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
vision reected and espoused a northern conservation agenda
that uplifted the role of foreign biologists over that of conser-
vation movements from within the Neotropics.
Similarly, writing in Science, Mares (1986:738), another
USA-based scientist, described the Neotropics as a “bio-
spheric resource” for “innumerable food and drug resources”
and “genetic structure[s]” of “enormous value to future gen-
erations”. He argued that “by any standard, the Neotropical
biota belongs not only to those countries within whose bor-
ders it lies, but to the people of the biosphere whose existence
depends upon continued efcient operation of its various eco-
systems”. Mares (1986) evaluated the state of conservation in
South America through (mostly unfavorable) comparison to
the USA and proposed seven “root factors” holding back con-
servation in South America: lack of data, lack of money, lack
of trained people, lack of a long-term plan, weak economies,
short-term strategies, and an air of panic. He proposed a con-
servation strategy modeled on the Marshall Plan (a program
led by USA Secretary of State, General George C. Marshall,
providing $13 billion in aid money and technical assistance
from the USA to European governments, to rebuild war-torn
regions, remove trade barriers, modernize industry, and pre-
vent the spread of communism after World War II).
Mares worked in South America for several years and col-
laborated with South American scientists, but he did not in-
dicate whether these colleagues inuenced his thinking on the
root factors inuencing conservation, or his proposed solu-
tion (namely, a large inux of funding and training from the
USA). For context, in the 1970s and 1980s, the USA trained,
facilitated, and funded fascist military regimes across much
of South America, ostensibly to prevent the spread of com-
munism but focused especially on the suppression of social
movements that questioned the deeply stratied class system
of Latin America, thus protecting US interests in the region
(McSherry 2002). These dictatorships imposed neoliberal
economic policies, assassinated dissident faculty and stu-
dents (among many others), and rendered eld work in many
areas extremely dangerous. A more nuanced and inclusive
approach to exploring the conservation situation might have
revealed very different root factors holding back conserva-
tion, including USA intervention in South American democ-
racies, neoliberalism, extractivism, corruption, suppression of
peaceful movements for social change, or forced displacement
and genocide of Indigenous Peoples. A wider variety of per-
spectives, from the South, might have highlighted the need to
support existing conservation efforts within South America
at the time (e.g., movements to defend the Amazon led by
Chico Mendes and COICA [Coordinator of the Indigenous
Organizations of the Amazon Basin]), and might have sug-
gested more equitable, locally rooted, and democratic solu-
tions for conservation moving forward.
A NEW VISION FOR NEOTROPICAL
ORNITHOLOGY
We envision a future ornithology in which new models of sci-
ence governance allow local ornithologists and communities
to establish research priorities for the Neotropical region, re-
spectful of regional and local worldviews and realities (e.g., as
proposed by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform
on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; Díaz et al. 2019). In
this vision, ornithological societies and institutions publicly
acknowledge the cultural importance of birds to Indigenous
Peoples and other communities across the Neotropics, as
well as the harm perpetuated by colonialism in our discip-
line. These organizations recognize that they are not race- and
class-neutral, that access to higher education and publishing is
not equitable, and that goals for diversity will not be achieved
unless we remove systemic barriers to funding, publishing,
and collaboration (Ahern-Dodson et al. 2020, Haines et al.
2020, Urbina-Blanco et al. 2020, Trisos et al. 2021, Cisneros
et al. 2022, Kraus et al. 2022). We envision programs and
policies that sustain long-term community-based research
and conservation agendas (Rodríguez et al. 2007), prioritize
creativity, innovation, and collective leadership (Asai 2020,
Care et al. 2021), and explicitly engage in science as a know-
ledge dialogue (a multiparty interchange or discussion that
acknowledges and integrates participants’ local and regional
needs and outcomes; Anderson et al. 2015).
In our vision, ornithologists (including those of us born
in the Neotropics) reect on our positionality (our eco-
nomic and social advantages and disadvantages) and ac-
knowledge that all research is shaped by philosophical
foundations and assumptions. We work to understand
the language and the socioeconomic and political histor-
ies of the places where we will be studying birds, and we
ensure deep and meaningful local collaborations that in-
clude capacity-building in both directions (Table 5). We
learn from Indigenous and other non-western approaches,
not only with respect to birds but also with respect to
leadership, cooperation, kinship, reciprocity, knowledge
coexistence, and reconciliation (Levidow 1988, Ibarra et
al. 2020a, Spiller et al. 2020, Reid et al. 2021, Singeo and
Ferguson 2022, Yua et al. 2022).
HOW DO WE GET THERE?
Institutions
Reward collaboration.
Currently, our institutions may say that they value collabor-
ations, but in practice they maintain many policies and met-
rics that prevent and discourage researchers from meaningful
collaborations outside of a very narrowly dened academic
model. These systems push researchers to prioritize their
own ideas and the topics “important” in the Global North
(e.g., by only rewarding rst and last-author publications in
high-impact journals), while barely considering broader im-
pacts (Davies et al. 2021). Moving forward, institutions within
and beyond the Neotropics should implement policies and as-
sessment criteria that encourage researchers to step back from
top–down leadership positions and instead support collective
leadership that includes people outside academia. Building
equitable and respectful collaborations across cultures takes
time, effort, and skills in facilitation and consensus-building
that often need to be acquired. Institutions can favor such
collaborations by reducing their emphasis on rst- or last-
authorship, allowing non-academics to be co-leaders on
grants, and rewarding efforts toward co-production of know-
ledge with Indigenous and other local communities, among
other initiatives (Davies et al. 2021, Singeo and Ferguson
2022, Yua et al. 2022). We are not asking researchers from
the Global North for handouts of “capacity-building” and
expertise; we are asking institutions within and beyond the
Neotropics to make policy changes to promote respectful
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.21
collaborations among colleagues, acknowledging and chal-
lenging the context of inequality in which we all live and con-
duct our research.
Shift lenses and assumptions.
Editors, reviewers, and funding boards should stop judging
work from the Neotropics through a northern lens, remove -
nancial and language barriers, and revert the prevailing belief
that the role of scholars from the Global South is to produce
data or case studies for theorists in the North (Eichhorn et al.
2020). Journals should update their visions around novelty
and impact to remind editors and reviewers of their biases,
to prevent articles from being rejected just because a reviewer
thinks they are of “regional interest” or “limited scope”.
Journals can reduce inequities in access to publishing and cit-
ation by offering waivers for authors based in the Neotropics
to publish open access and allowing authors to submit their
manuscripts in the main languages of the Neotropics, with
English translation on acceptance.
Encourage transparency.
Journals can discourage parachute science and improve cit-
ation ethics through their guidelines to authors, in which they
could state the expectation that manuscripts on the Global
South include authors afliated within the region, regard-
less of the data source, and that these authors participated
actively in the design and interpretation of the research,
not simply acquisition of permits and collection of samples
(Minasny et al. 2020, see Conservation Letters Guidelines
for Authorship: https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/hub/
journal/1755263x/homepage/forauthors.html). Many studies
that use online data sources are large-scale analyses that aim
to identify priority areas for conservation and make recom-
mendations for conservation policy, that clearly have broader
impacts. They should include regional input. Journals should
also state the expectation that authors have reviewed, and
cited when appropriate, literature published in regional jour-
nals. To evaluate equity on a case-by-case basis and promote
integrity in authorship decisions and citation practices, jour-
nals can require structured reexivity statements that describe
the ways in which equity was promoted through collabor-
ation and citation practices (Morton et al. 2022). Similar to
animal ethics and data-sharing statements, reexivity state-
ments on equity are structured through a series of questions
during the manuscript submission process. For example,
journals could ask researchers to state whether researchers or
community members local to the study area or country were
involved in the study design. Reexivity statements intend to
promote more ethical and equitable partnerships and better
citation practices over the long-term, by inviting researchers
to examine their own actions and roles in the research pro-
cess, with the same rigor they apply to scrutinizing their data
(Mason 1996, Guillemin and Gillam 2004, Morton et al.
2022). Ruelas Inzunza et al. (2023) recommend 14 actions
that global-scope ornithological journals can undertake, to
address systemic barriers and increase inclusion and recog-
nition of researchers from Latin America and the Caribbean.
Revise research agendas.
Large ornithological societies (such as the American
Ornithological Society) should revise their research agen-
das, with input from people across the Global South
(Table 5). They should acknowledge that both hypothesis-
driven research and basic biology research are critical in the
Neotropics, and direct some funding and publication op-
portunities toward natural history. Ornithological societies
publishing major bird journals can maintain or add sections
or special issues dedicated to natural history, to increase the
visibility of important eld observations and the students, re-
searchers, and editors who dedicate time to natural history
studies (Ríos-Saldaña et al. 2018, Moore et al. 2020, Powers
et al. 2021). We need many more grants along the lines of the
Skutch and Bergstrom Awards from the Association of Field
Ornithologists, which provide critical funding for basic biol-
ogy research by Neotropical ornithologists; the Vuilleumier
Fund from the Neotropical Ornithological Society, which
supports thesis research by students at universities in the
Neotropics; the Neotropical Bird Club Conservation Awards;
and the newly established Beingolea Raptor Research Grant
for Latin American and/or Caribbean nationals or residents
with limited access to other funding.
Revise grant guidelines.
Organizations should scrutinize and update their grant
guidelines to remove all unnecessary requirements. Funding
should be available to those who cannot afford membership.
Organizations should reconsider requirements to implement
specic tools or approaches (such as marking individuals, hy-
pothesis testing, uploading observations to specic websites)
that may promote the organization’s interests but can under-
mine local leadership of research and conservation agendas.
Budget restrictions should be relaxed so that applicants are
free to identify the items they need. Organizations within
and beyond the Neotropics should ensure that the selection
process of funding, awards, and training opportunities pri-
oritizes locally designed projects led by people systemically
marginalized or excluded from academic circles (because of
race, gender, sexuality, economic limitations, politics, and/or
disability; Table 5).
Invest in local initiatives.
Neotropical governments need to maintain and develop re-
search programs, develop performance metrics for our own
scientic challenges, and support large-scale and long-term
ornithology initiatives based on locally dened research and
monitoring objectives. Intentional efforts should be made to
support local sound collections and museums with specimens
and all their extensions, essential for systematic and taxo-
nomic studies (Franke 2007, Ortega and Hernández 2009,
Fontana et al. 2017). Collective efforts are needed to ensure
long-term funding of bird observatories, at least 6 of which
have been established in Brazil since 2014 (Figueira 2021).
Bird observatories contribute to knowledge of habitat rela-
tionships and population trends, train students and wildlife
professionals, and help grow local conservation organiza-
tions (Latta et al. 2005, Latta and Faaborg 2008). Urgently,
Neotropical institutions must develop their own criteria for
evaluating research contributions and reduce their reliance on
journal impact factors (and similar metrics), which increas-
ingly reect foreign priorities and markets.
Research Groups
Whether we are located in the Global South or North, indi-
viduals and research groups can adopt explicitly anti-colonial,
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
22 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
collaborative, and inclusive approaches to ornithology, as a
matter of honor and research ethics. The idea of individual
excellence, competition for power, and top-down leadership
by a single charismatic leader (usually white, cisgender male)
is deeply ingrained in our western value system (Davis 2016)
and is a pervasive expression of coloniality in academia (Pérez
2022); we can question and reject this paradigm (Davies
et al. 2021). We can encourage, instead, a culture of consen-
sus, democracy, and power-sharing in our labs and projects.
Researchers from the Global North can get to know the work
of ornithologists in the Neotropics, value their knowledge,
and visit their museums and other collections (e.g., Areta and
Juhant 2019). We can engender authentic collaborations by
applying our curiosity to understand everyone’s perspective
TABLE 5. Recommended actions to support the advancement of Neotropical ornithology, based on consensus among our 124 authors
Goal Proposed change
Promote mean-
ingful
collaborations
through new
models of
governance
1. Institutions explicitly acknowledge the colonial legacy of ornithology in the Neotropics, including the historical exclu-
sivity of eld stations and expeditions embedded in systems of hierarchy and segregation (Raby 2017a, 2017b).
2. Journals and funding agencies add requirements for researchers to reect on how they promoted/will promote
equity and inclusion of local ornithologists in research leadership (e.g., through structured reexivity statements;
Morton et al. 2022). Funding agencies and institutions incentivize collective/shared leadership of research
programs as a core principle of academic recognition (Eichhorn et al. 2020).
3. Neotropical institutions develop local evaluation methods (for scholarships, graduate programs, promotion,
awards) that better reect regional needs, reduce the use of academic metrics (e.g., journal impact factors), and
include local impact evaluation (Rau et al. 2018, CLACSO 2020).
4. Governments and institutions promote, sustain, and support ornithological societies in Neotropical countries in which
there are none yet. Consortia of ornithological societies in the Neotropics can foster regional collaboration, deliberate
research and publication priorities (e.g., priority-setting sessions of BirdsCaribbean), and promote shared visions and
assumptions to effectively communicate regional bird research ideas to non-Neotropical institutions.
5. Organizations fund and researchers develop systems for career-long, multi-dimensional mentorship networks
(Davies et al. 2021), virtual meetings, and guest visits among labs in different countries. South-South links are an
important priority, to learn from and inuence ideas across the Neotropics, Africa, and Asia (Cusicanqui 2012).
Promote diver-
sity through
justice, equity,
and inclusion
6. Organizations eliminate all forms of racism in ornithology (see Schell et al. 2020, Ali et al. 2021, and Gosztyla et
al. 2021, for actionable plans) and develop strategies to promote the careers of Neotropical ornithologists across
the spectrum of gender identities (Tulloch 2020).
7. Organizations address implicit bias and access considerations across all aspects of ornithology, including lead-
ership of professional societies, editorial invitations, plenary and keynote speakers, and awards. Organizations
rewrite awards criteria to include Neotropical researchers, eliminate exclusionary requirements (such as paid so-
ciety membership), and prioritize research on little-known study systems or regions.
8. Organizations reduce nancial and language barriers to Latin American and Caribbean researchers (e.g., elimi-
nate article processing fees, hold bilingual meetings, promote multilingual publication through machine transla-
tion; Steigerwald et al. 2022).
9. Journals add steps in the submission and review process to remind authors to cite work in languages other than
English, and remind reviewers that frameworks and examples from the Global North are not always appropriate
or needed for studies from the Global South.
Strengthen
funding and
professional
development
10. Organizations increase professional-track programs for ornithologists in training in the Neotropics, and provide
funding and opportunities to maintain these ornithologists working in the eld after completion of graduate
studies.
11. Institutions specically channel funding to marginalized groups. For example, the Graduate Course in Ecology
at University of São Paulo (USP, Brazil) opened a special call for students from social and ethnic groups that
are disproportionately excluded. Funding agencies should also redirect funding toward the topics of interest to
marginalized groups (e.g., Hoppe et al. 2019).
12. Organizations support visits of ornithologists from the Neotropics to museum collections in the Neotropics and
in the Global North. A good example is the Frank M. Chapman Memorial Fund from the American Museum of
Natural History: https://www.amnh.org/research/vertebrate-zoology/ornithology/grants
13. Donors directly support small, independent organizations based in the Neotropics.
14. Ornithologists in the Neotropics provide professional and research mentorship to undergraduate and grad-
uate students in the North, and vice-versa (McGill et al. 2021). Some examples are the “women and non-binary
people of color in Ecology, Evolutionary Biology, and allied elds” https://wocineeb.wordpress.com/woc-in-
eeb-networking, the EEB Mentor Match https://eebmentormatch.com, and Cientíco Latino https://www.
cienticolatino.com
15. Researchers coordinate efforts to increase funding to locally-led projects. For example, we can better coordi-
nate research efforts on long-distance migratory birds, such as aerial insectivores, to leverage local research on
residents and austral migrants that are currently understudied (Faaborg et al. 2010, Jahn et al. 2020).
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.23
on a topic, rather than jumping to preconceived ideas about
objectives.
We do not aim for all research projects to be fully local, nor
do we argue that foreign researchers stop proposing any of their
own ideas; we simply suggest a better balance. To achieve this
balance, collaborations can follow the excellent guidelines and
examples of de Vos (2022), Ramírez-Castañeda et al. (2022),
Singeo and Ferguson (2022) and Yua et al. (2022). Researchers
can seek to join and build equitable networks for cooperation
across the Americas and insist that hemispheric conservation
efforts include the many declining species that spend their en-
tire life cycle within the Neotropics. Promising examples of
research networks include the Western Hemisphere Shorebird
Reserve Network (http://whsrn.org), Censo Internacional de
Aves Acuáticas (Wetlands International), Colombia Resurvey
Project (Gomez et al. 2022), Aves Internacionales Network pro-
ject (Cueto et al. 2015, https://avesinternacionales.wordpress.
com), and joint meetings, such as the Ornithological Congress
of the Americas.
A STARTING PLACE
We began writing this article to channel a collective sense
of exasperation with review papers that ignored the know-
ledge and work of ornithologists based in the Neotropics.
Regardless of our origins, most of the authors were trained
in a positivist epistemology, immersed in a colonial culture
that assumes the North leads and the South follows (Monge-
Nájera 2002). However, in the words of Simón Rodríguez
(1769–1854):
La América no debe imitar servilmente, sino ser original.
La sabiduría de la Europa y la prosperidad de los Estados
Unidos son, en América, dos enemigos de la libertad de
pensar [The Americas must not slavishly imitate, but be
original. The wisdom of Europe and the prosperity of the
United States are, in the Americas, two enemies of freedom
of thought].
In questioning perspectives of Neotropical ornithology, we
had to step outside of our research about birds and turn the
lens on our own colonial histories and life experience as orni-
thologists [as modeled 30 years ago by Naranjo et al. (1992),
in a symposium on migratory birds].
We present ideas from a few of the people studying birds
in the Neotropics, but there is no easy recipe by which orni-
thologists can eliminate all of the injustices that arise from
centuries of colonialism and ongoing coloniality in science.
Our role as ornithologists is not to solve every problem raised
in this paper, but to learn to recognize coloniality in orni-
thology, and to humbly apply our skills and resources in the
service of collective processes of decolonization (Pérez 2022).
We urge editors and authors to ensure that future reviews
of Neotropical ornithology include perspectives from more
people living and working in the Neotropics (Armenteras
2021), and thorough and comprehensive reviews of regional
literature. Many of us have beneted and continue to bene-
t from graduate training, positions, and collaborations
housed at northern institutions; we have beloved friends and
respected colleagues and mentors among researchers in the
Global North, including the authors of Lees et al. (2020). We
invite these friends and colleagues to join us on the path de-
scribed so beautifully by Pérez and Radi (2019:982):
...look... past well-known sources, learn... about alien con-
texts, share... the burden of translation that scholars from
the South have carried on their shoulders for centuries,
and develop... ethical frameworks for non-exploitative re-
lationships with peers from marginalized contexts...
In making these efforts, we ornithologists will join a commu-
nity of researchers, across academia, working to build new
paradigms of knowledge construction that can transform our
understanding of the world.
Supplementary material
Supplementary material is available at Ornithological
Applications online. Supplements also include versions of this
manuscript translated into Spanish and Portuguese.
Acknowledgments
We dedicate this article to those who came before us and gave
us their shoulders to stand on, to the friends and colleagues
no longer with us, and to the future generations who will
continue the work when we are gone. For discussions or com-
ments on earlier drafts of the manuscript, we are grateful to
Ana González-Prieto, Eduardo E. Iñigo-Elías, Luiza Figueira,
Pedro Blendinger, Joseph Wunderle, Diego Méndez, Harold
Greeney, Miguel Lentino, Paolo Piedrahita, Jaime Chaves,
David Riaño, Adrián Azpiroz, Kaspar Delhey, María Soledad
Liébana, José Luis Alcántara Carbajal, and Steve Beissinger.
We thank peer reviewers and the journal’s Editor-in-Chief,
Catherine Lindell, for input.
Funding statement
We did not receive specic funding for this project, but we
thank many funding sources for supporting our work over
the years.
Author contributions
All authors conceived, discussed, and contributed to the con-
tent of the paper (lived experiences, ideas, literature, and
edits). KLC, ERI, LS, CIM, JTI, SZ, EB, JCR-O, and FM-C
organized the contributions, wrote, and substantially edited
the drafts. The Spanish and Portuguese translations were con-
ducted using DeepL Translator (www.deepl.com/translator)
and were proofread and edited by EB, JTI, CCR, FHA-S and
KLC.
LITERATURE CITED
Adame, F. (2021). Meaningful collaborations can end “helicopter re-
search”. Nature. (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-
01795-1)
Ahern-Dodson, J., C. R. Clark, T. Mourad, and J. A. Reynolds (2020).
Beyond the numbers: Understanding how a diversity mentoring
program welcomes students into a scientic community. Ecosphere
11:e03025.
Aleixo, A., and J. M. E. Vielliard (1995). Composição e dinâmica da
avifauna da Mata de Santa Ginebra, Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil.
Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 12:493–511.
Ali, H., S. L. Shefeld, J. E. Bauer, R. P. Caballero-Gill, N. M. Gasparini,
J. Libarkin, K. K. Gonzales, J. Willenbring, E. Amir-Lin, J. Cisneros,
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
24 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
et al. (2021). An actionable anti-racism plan for geoscience organ-
izations. Nature Communications 12:3794.
Alperin, J. P. (2022). Article-processing charges weaken open access.
Nature 610:233.
Altamirano, T. A., J. T. Ibarra, K. Martin, and C. Bonacic (2017).
The conservation value of tree decay processes as a key driver
structuring tree cavity nest webs in South American temperate rain-
forests. Biodiversity and Conservation 26:2453–2472.
Altamirano Gómez Ortega, M. A., and J. Guzmán Hernández (2009).
La Colección Zoológica Regional (Aves) del Instituto de Historia
Natural de Chiapas, México. Huitzil 1:7–14.
Alves, M. A. S., J. M. C. da Silva, and E. S. Costa (2008). Brazilian
ornithology: History and current trends. Ornitología Neotropical
19:S391–S399.
Amano, T., V. Berdejo-Espinola, A. P. Christie, K. Willott, M. Akasaka,
A. Báldi, M. Chen, C. -Y. Choi, M. B. D. Karrhat, L. G. de Oliveira,
et al. (2021). Tapping into non-English-language science for the
conservation of global biodiversity. PLoS Biology 19:e3001296.
Ancona, S., S. Sánchez-Colón, M. C. Rodríguez, and H. Drummond
(2011). El Niño in the Warm Tropics: Local sea temperature pre-
dicts breeding parameters and growth of Blue-footed Boobies.
Journal of Animal Ecology 80:799–808.
Ancona, S., H. Drummond, C. Rodríguez, and J. J. Zúñiga-Vega (2018).
Experiencing El Niño conditions during early life reduces recruit-
ing probabilities but not adult survival. Royal Society Open Science
5:170076.
Anderson, C. B., A. Monjeau, and J. R. Rau (2015). Knowledge dia-
logue to attain global scientic excellence and broader social rele-
vance. BioScience 65:709–717.
Anderson, D. W., C. R. Godínez-Reyes, E. Velarde, R. Avalos-
Tellez, D. Ramírez-Delgado, H. Moreno-Prado, T. Bowen,
F. Gress, J. Ventura-Trejo, L. Adrean, et al. (2017). Pelícano
Pardo, Pelecanus occidentalis californicus (Aves: Pelecanidae):
Cinco décadas con ENOS, anidación dinámica y estatus
contemporáneo de reproducción en el Golfo de California.
Ciencias Marinas 43:1–34.
Angulo, E., C. Diagne, L. Ballesteros-Mejia, T. Adamjy, D. A. Ahmed, E.
Akulov, A. K. Banerjee, C. Capinha, C. A. K. M. Dia, G. Dobigny,
etal. (2021). Non-English languages enrich scientic knowledge:
The example of economic costs of biological invasions. Science of
the Total Environment 775:144441.
Arcos-Torres, A., and A. Solano-Ugalde (2007). First description of the
nest, nest site, eggs and nestlings of Nariño Tapaculo (Scytalopus
vicinior). Ornitología Neotropical 18:445–448.
Arenas-Mosquera, D. (2011). Aspectos de la biología reproductiva del
Periquito Aliamarillo (Pyrrhura calliptera) en los bosques altoandinos
de La Calera, Colombia. Conservación Colombiana 14:58–70.
Areta, J. I., and K. L. Cockle (2012). A theoretical framework for
understanding the ecology and conservation of bamboo-specialist
birds. Journal of Ornithology 153:163–170.
Areta, J. I., and M. A. Juhant (2019). The Rufous-thighed Kite Harpagus
diodon is not an endemic breeder of the Atlantic Forest: Lessons to
assess Wallacean shortfalls. Ibis 161:337–345.
Armenteras, D. (2021). Guidelines for healthy global scientic collabor-
ations. Nature Ecology & Evolution 5:1193–1194.
Asai, D. J. (2020). Race matters. Cell 181:754–757.
Asase, A., T. I. Mzumara-Gawa, J. O. Owino, A. T. Peterson, and E.
Saupe (2022). Replacing “parachute science” with “global science”
in ecology and conservation biology. Conservation Science and
Practice 4:e517.
Astudillo, P. X., I. Grass, D. C. Siddons, D. G. Schabo, and N. Farwig
(2020). Centrality in species-habitat networks reveals the import-
ance of habitat quality for high-Andean birds in Polylepis wood-
lands. Ardeola 67:307–324.
Avalos, V. R., and F. Saavedra (2016). Parental behaviour in Versi-
coloured Barbet Eubucco versicolor in Bolivia. Cotinga 38:101–
103.
Balderrama, J. A., M. Crespo S, R. Vargas-Rodriguez, and L. F. Aguirre
(2008). Descripción del nido, huevos y polluelos de Caprimulgus
longirostris atripunctatus en el Parque Nacional Tunari, Cocha-
bamba, Bolivia. Kempfana 4:3–7.
Barbosa, L. G., M. A. S. Alves, and C. E. V. Grelle (2021). Actions
against sustainability: Dismantling of the environmental policies in
Brazil. Land Use Policy 104:105384.
Barnes, E. (2009). The nest and eggs of Ash-breasted Tit-Tyrant
Anairetes alpinus in southern Peru. Cotinga 31:138–139.
Barreau, A., J. T. Ibarra, F. S. Wyndham, A. Rojas, and R. A. Kozak
(2016). How can we teach our children if we cannot access the
forest? Generational change in Mapuche knowledge of wild ed-
ible plants in Andean temperate ecosystems of Chile. Journal of
Ethnobiology 36:412–432.
Bauer, R. (2018). The crucible of the tropics: Alexander von
Humboldt’s hermeneutics of discovery. The Eighteenth Century
59:237–255.
Beehler, B. M. (2010). The forgotten science: A role for natural history
in the twenty-rst century? Journal of Field Ornithology 81:1–4.
Beel, J., and B. Gipp (2009). Google Scholar’s ranking algorithm: an
introductory overview. Proceedings of the 12th International Con-
ference on Scientometrics (ISSI’09), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Bekerman, F. (2009). El campo cientíco argentino en los años de plomo:
desplazamientos y reorientación de los recursos. Sociohistórica/
Cuadernos del CISH 26:151–176.
Belton, W. (1985). Birds of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Part 2.
Formicariidae through Corvidae. Bulletin of the American Museum
of Natural History 180:1–242.
Berlin, B. (1981). The pervasiveness of onomatopoeia in Aguaruna and
Huambisa bird names. Journal of Ethnobiology 2:238–261.
Bernis, F., E. de Juana, J. del Hoyo, X. Ferrer, M. Fernández Cruz, R.
Sáez-Royuela, and J. Sargatal (1994). Nombres en castellano de
las aves del mundo recomendados por la Sociedad Española de
Ornitología. Ardeola 41:79–89.
Bobato, R. (2016). Biologia reprodutiva e comparativa de Chiroxiphia
caudata na Floresta Atlântica Subtropical. Master’s thesis,
Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil.
Bodrati, A., and F. G. Di Sallo (2016). Primera descripción del
nido, huevos, y comportamiento de incubación del Chululú
Chico (Hylopezus nattereri) en la selva Atlántica de Argentina.
Ornitología Neotropical 27:197–201.
Bodrati, A., K. L. Cockle, F. G. Di Sallo, C. Ferreyra, S. A. Salvador, and M.
Lammertink (2015). Nesting and social roosting of the Ochre-collared
Piculet (Picumnus temminckii) and White-barred Piculet (Picumnus
cirratus), and implications for the evolution of woodpecker (Picidae)
breeding biology. Ornitología Neotropical 26:223–244.
Bonaccorso, E. (2009). Historical biogeography and speciation in the
Neotropical highlands: molecular phylogenetics of the jay genus
Cyanolyca. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50:618–632.
Bonier, F., P. R. Martin, and I. T. Moore (2008). First description of
the nest and young of the Agile Tit-Tyrant (Uromyias agilis).
Ornitología Neotropical 19:117–122.
Borges, S. H., F. Baccaro, M. Moreira, and L. E. Choueri (2019). Bird
assemblages on Amazonian river islands: Patterns of species diver-
sity and composition. Biotropica 51:1–10.
Boshoff, N. (2009). Neo-colonialism and research collaboration in
Central Africa. Scientometrics 81:413–434.
Botero-Delgadillo, E., V. Quirici, Y. Poblete, S. Ippi, B. Kempenaers, and R.
A. Vásquez (2020). Extrapair paternity in two populations of the so-
cially monogamous Thorn-tailed Rayadito Aphrastura spinicauda
(Passeriformes: Furnariidae). Ecology and Evolution 10:11861–11868.
Bottan, N., B. Hoffmann, and D. Vera-Cossio (2020). The unequal
impact of the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from seventeen
developing countries. PLoS One 15:e0239797.
British Council. (2015). O ensino de inglês na educação pública
brasileira. British Council Brasil, São Paulo, Brazil.
Brodt, M. S. C., F. Della-Flora, and N. Cáceres (2014). Non-linear ascen-
sion in a reproductive hierarchy of the Blue Manakin (Chiroxiphia
caudata). Acta Ethologica 17:181–185.
Buainain, N., M. F. A. Maximiano, M. Ferreira, A. Aleixo, B. C.
Faircloth, R. T. Brumeld, J. Cracraft, and C. C. Ribas (2021).
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.25
Multiple species and deep genomic divergences despite little
phenotypic differentiation in an ancient Neotropical songbird,
Tunchiornis ochraceiceps (Sclater, 1860) (Aves: Vireonidae). Mo-
lecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 162:107206.
Bugoni, L. (2020). From Ararajuba to Ornithology Research: an histor-
ical overview of bird journals published by the Brazilian Ornitho-
logical Society. Ornithology Research 28:1–3.
Buitrón-Jurado, G., J. M. Galarza, and D. Guarderas (2011). First de-
scription of nests and eggs of Chestnut-headed Crake (Anurolimnas
castaneiceps) from Ecuador. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology
123:142–145.
Buxton, R. T., E. A. Nyboer, K. E. Pigeon, G. D. Raby, T. Rytwinski, A.
J. Gallagher, R. Schuster, H. -Y. Lin, L. Fahrig, J. R. Bennett, et al.
(2021). Avoiding wasted research resources in conservation science.
Conservation Science and Practice 3:e329.
Cabrera, M., and I. Saraiva (2022). Principales problemáticas de las
publicaciones cientícas: un análisis en perspectiva latinoamericana.
e-Ciencias de la Información 12:1–20.
Campos-Arceiz, A., R. B. Primack, A. J. Miller-Rushing, and M. Maron
(2018). Striking underrepresentation of biodiversity-rich regions
among editors of conservation journals. Biological Conservation
220:330–333.
Cantú, J. C., E. García de la Puente, G. M. González, and M. E. Sánchez
(2020) Riqueza Alada: El Crecimiento del Aviturismo en México.
Defenders of Wildlife, UABCS, ENESUM, Teyeliz, A.C.
Care, O., M. J. Bernstein, M. Chapman, I. Diaz Reviriego, G. Dressler,
M. R. Felipe-Lucia, C. Friis, S. Graham, H. Hänke, L. J. Haider,
et al. (2021). Creating leadership collectives for sustainability
transformations. Sustainability Science 16:703–708.
Casanova, P. G. (1965). Internal colonialism and national development.
Studies in Comparative International Development 1:27–37.
Castro Torres, A. F., and D. Alburez-Gutierrez (2022). North and South:
naming practices and the hidden dimension of global disparities in
knowledge production. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences USA 119:e2119373119.
Cebolla Badie, M. (2000). El conocimiento Mbya-Guaraní de las aves:
nomenclatura y clasicación. Novedades de Antropología 36:9–188.
Cebolla Badie, M. (2013). Cosmología y naturaleza Mbya-Guaraní.
Ph.D. thesis, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Chachugi, R. (2013). Las aves y el conocimiento tradicional Aché. Ache
kwatygi kwyra wywy–djiwã. Fundación Moisés Bertoni, Fundación
Global Nature y Comunidad Aché de Arroyo Bandera, Asunción,
Paraguay.
Chaparro-Herrera, S., P. Montoya, and O. Barreto Borges (2015).
Primera descripción del nido y huevos del Semillero Paramuno
(Catamenia homochroa). Ornitología Neotropical 26:295–298.
Chazarreta, L., V. Ojeda, and M. Lammertink (2012). Morphological
and foraging behavioral differences between sexes of the Magel-
lanic Woodpecker (Campephilus magellanicus). Ornitología Neo-
tropical 23:529–544.
Cisneros, J. C., N. B. Raja, A. M. Ghilardi, E. M. Dunne, F. L. Pinheiro,
O. R. Regalado Fernández, M. A. F. Sales, R. A. Rodríguez-de la
Rosa, A. Y. Miranda-Martínez, S. González-Mora, et al. (2022).
Digging deeper into colonial palaeontological practices in modern
day Mexico and Brazil. Royal Society Open Science 9:210898.
CLACSO - Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales. (2020).
Evaluando la evaluación de la producción cientíca. Serie: Para una
transformación de la evaluación de la ciencia en América Latina y
el Caribe del Foro Latinoamericano sobre Evaluación Cientíca
(FOLEC). 2da. Edición. CLACSO, Buenos Aires, Argentina. www.
clacso.org/folec/clacso-ante-la-evaluacion
Cobos, V., and R. Miatello (2001). Descripción del nido, huevo y pichón
de la Monjita Salinera (Neoxolmis salinarum). El Hornero 16:47–48.
Cockle, K. L., and A. Bodrati (2017). Divergence in nest placement
and parental care of Neotropical foliage-gleaners and treehunters
(Furnariidae: Philydorini). Journal of Field Ornithology 88:336–348.
Cockle, K., C. Maders, G. Di Santo, and A. Bodrati (2008). The Black-
capped Piprites Piprites pileata builds a spherical moss nest. Co-
tinga 29:166–168.
Cockle, K. L., K. Martin, and T. Wesołowski (2011). Woodpeckers,
decay, and the future of cavity-nesting vertebrate communities
worldwide. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 9:377–382.
Cohn-Haft, M., A. Whittaker, and P. C. Stouffer (1997). A new look
at the “species-poor” Central Amazon: The avifauna north of Ma-
naus, Brazil. Ornithological Monographs 48:205–235.
Copello, S., and F. Quintana (2009). Spatio-temporal overlap between
the at-sea distribution of Southern Giant Petrels and sheries at the
Patagonian Shelf. Polar Biology 32:1211–1220.
Córdoba-Córdoba, S., M. Echeverry-Galvis, S. Chaparro-Herrera,
and N. Morales-G (2012). Description of the nest and eggs of the
Bearded Mountaineer Hummingbird (Oroenympha nobilis) from
Peru. Ornitología Neotropical 23:299–302.
Cornelius, C., K. Cockle, N. Politi, I. Berkunsky, L. Sandoval, V. Ojeda,
L. Rivera, M. Hunter Jr., and K. Martin (2008). Cavity-nesting
birds in Neotropical forests: cavities as a potentially limiting re-
source. Ornitología Neotropical 19:S253–S268.
Costa, L. M. (2011). História de vida de Asthenes luizae: biologia
reprodutiva, sucesso reprodutivo e o impacto de Molothrus
bonariensis em uma ave ameaçada e endêmica dos campos
rupestres da Cadeia do Espinhaço. Master’s thesis, Universidade
Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Costa, L. M. (2015). História natural, demograa, viabilidade
populacional e conservação de Asthenes luizae (Furnariidae), ave
endêmica dos campos rupestres da Cadeia do Espinhaço, Minas
Gerais. Ph.D. thesis, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo
Horizonte, Brazil.
Cuarón, A. D. (1997). Miguel Alvarez del Toro: First and last of a kind.
Conservation Biology 11:566–568.
Cueto, V. R., J. Lopez de Casenave, and L. Marone (2008). Neotropical
austral migrant land birds: population trends and habitat use in the
central Monte Desert, Argentina. Condor 110:70–79.
Cueto, V., A. E. Jahn, D. T. Tuero, A. C. Guaraldo, J. H. Sarasola, S. P. Bravo,
V. Gómez, J. I. Giraldo, D. Masson, M. MacPherson, et al. (2015).
Las aves migratorias de América del Sur. Nuevas técnicas revelan
información sobre su comportamiento. Ciencia Hoy 142:19–25.
Cusicanqui, S. R. (2012). Ch’ixinakax utxiwa: A reection on the prac-
tices and discourses of decolonization. South Atlantic Quarterly
1:95–109.
Dabbene, R. (1918). Nidos y huevos de vencejos de Argentina. El Hor-
nero 1:193.
Dada, S., K. R. van Daalen, A. Barrios-Ruiz, K. -T. Wu, A. Desjardins,
M. Bryce-Alberti, A. Castro-Varela, P. Khorsand, A. Santamarta
Zamorano, L. Jung, et al. (2022). Challenging the “old boys club”
in academia: Gender and geographic representation in editorial
boards of journals publishing in environmental sciences and public
health. PLoS Global Public Health 2:e0000541.
Dahdouh-Guebas, F., J. Ahimbisibwe, R. V. Moll, and N. Koedam
(2003). Neo-colonial science by the most industrialised upon
the least developed countries in peer-reviewed publishing.
Scientometrics 56:329–343.
Daily, G. C., P. R. Ehrlich, and N. M. Haddad (1993). Double keystone
bird in a keystone species complex. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences USA 90:592–594.
da Silva, M., M. Pichorim, and M. Z. Cardoso (2008). Nest and egg
description of threatened Herpsilochmus spp. from coastal forest
habitats in Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil (Aves: Thamnophilidae).
Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 25:570–572.
Dávalos, L. M., R. M. Austin, M. A. Balisi, R. L. Begay, C. A. Hofman,
M. E. Kemp, J. R. Lund, C. Monroe, A. M. Mychajliw, E. A. Nel-
son, et al. (2020). Pandemics’ historical role in creating inequality.
Science 368:1322–1323.
David, S. (2011). El nido y los huevos del Verderón Piquinegro
(Cyclarhis nigrirostris). Ornitología Colombiana 11:87–90.
Davies, S. W., H. M. Putnam, T. Ainsworth, J. K. Baum, C. B. Bove, S.
C. Crosby, I. M. Côté, A. Duplouy, R. W. Fulweiler, A. J. Grifn,
et al. (2021). Promoting inclusive metrics of success and impact to
dismantle a discriminatory reward system in science. PLoS Biology
19:e3001282.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
26 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
Davis, A. Y. (2016). Freedom is a Constant Struggle: Ferguson, Pales-
tine, and the Foundations of a Movement. Haymarket Books, Chi-
cago, IL, USA.
De Gracia, N. (2021). Decolonizing conservation science: Response to
Jucker et al. 2018. Conservation Biology 35:1321–1323.
Devenish-Nelson, E. S., D. E. Weidemann, J. M. Townsend, and H. P.
Nelson (2017). The role of a regional journal as a depository for
valuable ornithological data as demonstrated by Caribbean forest
endemic birds. Journal of Caribbean Ornithology 30:75–87.
Díaz, S., J. Settele, E. Brondízio, H. T. Ngo, M. Guèze, J. Agard, A.
Arneth, P. Balvanera, K. Brauman, S. Butchart, K. Chan, et al.
(2019). Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report
on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services -
Advance unedited version - 6 May 2019. IPBES.
Di Bitetti, M. S., and J. A. Ferreras (2017). Publish (in English) or per-
ish: The effect on citation rate of using languages other than Eng-
lish in scientic publications. Ambio 46:121–127.
Di Giacomo, A. G. (2005). Aves de la Reserva El Bagual. In Historia
natural y paisaje de la Reserva El Bagual, Provincia de Formosa,
Argentina. Inventario de la fauna de vertebrados y de la ora vascu-
lar de un área protegida del Chaco Húmedo (A. G. Di Giacomo and
S. F. Krapovickas, Editors). Temas de Naturaleza y Conservación 4.
Aves Argentinas/ Asociación Ornitológica del Plata, Buenos Aires,
Argentina.
Di Giacomo, A. S., and A. G. Di Giacomo (2008). Una breve historia de
la ornitología en la Argentina. Ornitología Neotropical 19:S401–
S414.
dos Anjos, L. (1998). Conseqüências biológicas da fragmentação no
norte do Paraná. Série Técnica IPEF 12:87–94.
dos Anjos, L., G. Menezes Bochio, H. R. Medeiros, B. de Arruda
Almeida, B. R. Arakaki Lindsey, L. C. Calsavara, M. C. Ribeiro,
and J. M. Domingues Torezan (2019). Insights on the functional
composition of specialist and generalist birds throughout continu-
ous and fragmented forests. Ecology and Evolution 9:6318–6328.
Doucet, S. M., and D. J. Mennill (2005). First description of the nest of
the Round-tailed Manakin (Pipra chloromeros). Ornitología Neo-
tropical 16:433–434.
Drummond, H., E. González, and J. L. Osorno (1986). Parent-offspring
cooperation in the Blue-footed Booby (Sula nebouxii). Behavioral
Ecology and Sociobiology 19:365–372.
Ducatez, S., and L. Lefebvre (2014). Patterns of research effort in birds.
PLoS One 9:e89955.
Duffy, D. C. (1988). Ornithology in Central and South America: Cause
for optimism? The Auk 105:395–396.
Dvorak, M., E. Nemeth, B. Wendelin, P. Herrera, D. Mosquera, D.
Anchundia, C. Sevilla, S. Tebbich, and F. Fessl (2017). Conservation
status of landbirds on Floreana: the smallest inhabitat Galapagos
island. Journal of Field Ornithology 88:132–145.
Eichhorn, M. P., K. Baker, and M. Grifths (2020). Steps to-
wards decolonising biogeography. Frontiers of Biogeography
12:e44795.
Espin, J., S. Palmas, F. Carrasco-Rueda, K. Riemer, P. E. Allen, N. Berkebile,
K. A. Hecht, K. Kastner-Wilcox, M. N. Núñez-Regueiro, C. Prince,
etal. (2017). A persistent lack of international representation on edi-
torial boards in environmental biology. PLoS Biology 15:e2002760.
Estades, C. F. (2002). El sesgo geográco en la teoría ornitológica y la
necesidad de desarrollar la ornitología en Chile. Boletín Chileno de
Ornitología 9:1.
Estades, C. F., and S. A. Temple (1999). Temperate-forest bird commu-
nities in a fragmented landscape dominated by exotic pine plant-
ations. Ecological Applications 9:573–585.
European Commission. (2006). Europeans and their languages. Special
Eurobarometer 243/ Wave 64.3 - TNS Opinion & Social.
Faaborg, J., R. T. Holmes, A. D. Anders, K. L. Bildstein, K. M.
Dugger, S. A. Gauthreaux, P. Heglund, K. A. Hobson, A. E. Jahn,
D. H. Johnson, et al. (2010). Conserving migratory land birds in
the New World: Do we know enough? Ecological Applications
20:398–418.
Faria, L. C. P., L. A. Carrara, and M. Rodrigues (2008). Biologia
reprodutiva do Fura-barreira Hylocryptus rectirostris (Aves:
Furnariidae). Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 25:172–181.
Fernández Balboa, C. (2016). Roberto Straneck, el hombre de los
sonidos. In Aves Argentinas: 100 Años (Aves Argentinas, Editor).
Aves Argentinas/AOP, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Ferretti, V. (2019). Understanding variation in extra-pair paternity in
birds: A focus on Neotropical birds. In Behavioral Ecology of Neo-
tropical Birds (J. C. Reboreda, V. D. Fiorini, and D. T. Tuero, Edi-
tors). Springer, Cham, Switzerland.
Fierro-Calderón, K., M. Loaiza-Muñoz, M. A. Sánchez-Martínez, D.
Ocampo, S. David, H. F. Greeney, and G. A. Londoño (2021).
Methods for collecting data about the breeding biology of Neo-
tropical birds. Journal of Field Ornithology 93:315–341.
Figueira, L. (2021). O que são observatórios de aves? Livro de
Resumos, XXVII Congresso Brasileiro de Ornitologia, online, 1–5
August 2021.
Fontana, C. S., T. W. da Silva, and J. P. de Souza (2017). Brazilian
bird collections: A decade after Aleixo & Straube (2007). Revista
Brasileira de Ornitologia 25:254–268.
Fontúrbel, F. E. and J. Vizentin-Bugoni (2021). A paywall coming
down, another being erected: Open Access Article Processing
Charges (APC) may prevent some researchers from publishing in
leading journals. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America
102:e01791.
Fraga, R. M. (2019). A la memoria de Sergio Salvador (16-12-1955/
2-9-2018). El Hornero 1:38.
França, L. F., and M. Â. Marini (2009). Low and variable reproduct-
ive success of a Neotropical ycatcher (Suiriri islerorum). Emu
109:265–269.
França, L. F., and M. Â. Marini (2010). Negative trend in population
size in a Neotropical Flycatcher (Suiriri islerorum) despite high ap-
parent annual survival. Journal of Field Ornithology 81:227–236.
Franke, I. (2007). Historia de la ornitología peruana e importancia
de las colecciones cientícas de aves. Revista Peruana de Biología
1:159–164.
Freile, J. F. (2015). Nesting of the Scrub Tanager (Tangara vitriolina) in
Andean Ecuador. Ornitología Neotropical 26:51–58.
Freile, J. F., and S. Córdoba (2008). Historia de la ornitología en la
región Andina: el ejemplo de Colombia y Ecuador. Ornitología
Neotropical 19:S381–S389.
Freile, J. F., J. M. Carrión, F. Prieto-Albuja, L. Suárez, and F. Ortiz-
Crespo (2006). La ornitología en Ecuador: un análisis del estado
actual del conocimiento y sugerencias para prioridades de
investigación. Ornitología Neotropical 17:183–202.
Freile, J. F., H. F. Greeney, and E. Bonaccorso (2014). Current Neo-
tropical ornithology: Research progress 1996–2011. The Condor
116:84–96.
Freitas, G. H. S., M. F. Vasconcelos, and M. Rodrigues (2009). Aspectos
reprodutivos e comentários adicionais sobre o jovem do Rabo-
mole-da-serra (Embernagra longicauda) na Serra do Cipó, Minas
Gerais. Atualidades Ornitológicas 147:8–9.
García-Lau, I., M. Acosta, L. Mugica, A. Rodríguez-Ochoa, and
A. González (2018). Revisión de los estudios cientícos sobre
ornitología urbana de La Habana, Cuba. El Hornero 33:29–44.
Gelis, R. A., H. F. Greeney, M. Cooper, and C. Dingle (2006). The nest,
eggs, nestlings and edglings of Fiery-throated Fruiteater Pipreola
chlorolepidota in north-east Ecuador. Cotinga 26:10–12.
Gibbs, W. W. (1995). Lost science in the Third World. Scientic Ameri-
can 2:92–99.
Gibbs, J. P., M. L. Hunter Jr., and S. M. Melvin (1993). Snag availability
and communities of cavity nesting birds in tropical versus temper-
ate forests. Biotropica 25:236–241.
Gomez, C., C. D. Cadena, A. M. Cuervo, J. Díaz-Cárdenas, F. García-
Cardona, N. Niño-Rodríguez, N. Ocampo-Peñuela, D. Ocampo, G.
Seeholzer, A. Sierra-Ricaurte, et al. (2022). Reexpedición Colom-
bia: Entender el pasado para empoderar acciones que fortalezcan
el conocimiento y conservación de las aves. Biota Colombiana
23:e984.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.27
González-García, F. (1994). Behavior of Horned Guan in Chiapas,
Mexico. The Wilson Bulletin 106:357–365.
González-García, F. (1995). Reproductive biology and vocalizations of
the Horned Guan Oreophasis derbianus in Mexico. The Condor
97:415–426.
Gordin, M. D. (2015). Scientists’ Babel: How Science Was Done Before
and After Global English. University of Chicago Press, Chicago,
Illinois, USA.
Gorgulho, S., S. S. Jardim, and M. B. Mesquita (2005). A vida e a obra
de Johan Dalgas Frisch. Dalgas Ecoltec, São Paulo, Brazil.
Gorton, G. (2010). Remembering Paul A. Schwartz (1917–1979) pion-
eer Neotropical bird recordist and taxonomist. Birding, September
2010:40–50.
Gosztyla, M. L., L. Kwong, N. A. Murray, C. E. Williams, N.
Behnke, P. Curry, K. D. Corbett, K. N. DSouza, J. Gala de
Pablo, J. Gicobi, et al. (2021). Responses to 10 common criti-
cisms of anti-racism action in STEMM. PLoS Computational
Biology 17:e1009141.
Greeney, H. F. (2006). The nest, eggs, and nestlings of the Rufous-
headed Pygmy-Tyrant (Pseudotriccus ruceps) in southeastern
Ecuador. Ornitología Neotropical 17:589–592.
Greeney, H. F. (2012). The nest, egg, and nestling of the Stripe-headed
Antpitta (Grallaria andicolus) in southern Peru. Ornitología Neo-
tropical 23:367–374.
Greeney, H. F. (2013). The nest of the Ash-breasted Tit-Tyrant (Anairetes
alpinus). Ornitología Colombiana 13:74–78.
Greeney, H. F., and A. Dyrcz (2011). Breeding biology of Pale-edged
Flycatcher (Myiarchus cephalotes) in northeastern Ecuador.
Ornitología Colombiana 11:49–57.
Greeney, H. F., and R. A. Gelis (2005). The nest and nestlings of
the Long-tailed Tapaculo (Scytalopus micropterus) in Ecuador.
Ornitología Colombiana 3:88–91.
Greeney, H. F., and R. A. Gelis (2007). Further breeding records from
the Ecuadorian Amazonian lowlands. Cotinga 29:62–68.
Greeney, H. F., and J. D. Vargas-Jiménez (2017). First description of
the nest and nestlings of the Thicket Antpitta (Hylopezus dives).
Ornitología Neotropical 28:181–185.
Greeney, H. F., and K. Zyskowski (2008). A novel nest architecture
within the Furnariidae: First nests of the White-browed Spinetail.
The Condor 110:584–588.
Greeney, H. F., R. C. Dobbs, and R. A. Gelis (2005). The nest, eggs,
nestlings, and parental care of the Bronze-olive Pygmy-Tyrant
(Pseudotriccus pelzelni). Ornitología Neotropical 16:511–518.
Greeney, H. F., L. H. Jamieson, R. C. Dobbs, P. R. Martin, and R. A.
Gelis (2006). Observations on the nest, eggs, and natural history of
the Highland Motmot (Momotus aequatorialis) in eastern Ecuador.
Ornitología Neotropical 17:151–154.
Greeney, H. F., J. L. Gonçalves de Lima, T. Tolêdo, and T. T. Silva (2016).
First description of the nest of White-browed Antpitta Hylopezus
ochroleucus. Revista Brasileira de Ornitologia 24:213–216.
Guillemin, M., and L. Gillam (2004). Ethics, reexivity, and “ethically
important moments” in research. Qualitative Inquiry 10:261–280.
Güller, R., H. Di Santo, and R. Lejarraga (2004). Nido de Cachirla
Pálida (Anthus hellmayri) en la Reserva Natural Otamendi,
Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Nuestras Aves 48:12.
Haelewaters, D., T. A. Hofmann, and A. L. Romero-Olivares (2021).
Ten simple rules for Global North researchers to stop perpetuating
helicopter research in the Global South. PLoS Computational Biol-
ogy 17:e1009277.
Hahn, I. (2006). First reproductive records and nest sites of the endemic
Juan Fernández Tit-Tyrant Anairetes fernandezianus (Philippi,
1857) (Aves: Passeriformes: Tyrannidae) from Robinson Crusoe
Island, Chile. Zoologische Abhandlungen (Dresden) 55:177–190.
Haines, C. D., E. M. Rose, K. J. Odom, and K. E. Omland (2020). The
role of diversity in science: A case study of women advancing fe-
male birdsong research. Animal Behaviour 168:19–24.
Hanauer, D. I., and K. Englander (2011). Quantifying the burden of
writing research articles in a second language. Written Communi-
cation 28:403–416.
Hasui, E., J. P. Metzger, R. G. Pimentel, L. F. Silveira, A. A. A. Bovo, A.
C. Martensen, A. Uezu, A. L. Regolin, A. Bispo de Oliveira, C. A. F.
R. Gatto, et al. (2018). ATLANTIC BIRDS: A data set of bird spe-
cies from the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Ecology 99:497.
Hazlehurst, J., and G. Londoño (2012). Reproductive biology of the
Yungas Manakin (Chiroxiphia boliviana) in Manu National Park,
Peru. Ornitología Neotropical 23:597–601.
van der Hoek, Y., G. V. Gaona, M. Coach, and K. Martin (2020). Glo-
bal relationships between tree-cavity excavators and forest bird
richness. Royal Society Open Science 7:192177.
Hoffman, D., and M. Rodrigues (2011). Breeding biology and repro-
ductive success of Polystictus superciliaris (Aves: Tyrannidae), an
uncommon tyrant-ycatcher endemic to the highlands of eastern
Brazil. Zoologia 28:305–311.
Hofstra, B., V. V. Kulkarni, S. M. Galvez, B. He, D. Jurafsky, and D. A.
McFarland (2020). The diversity–innovation paradox in science.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 117:9284–
9291.
Hoppe, T. A., A. Litovitz, K. A. Willis, R. A. Meseroll, M. J. Perkins,
B. I. Hutchins, A. F. Davis, M. S. Lauer, H. A. Valantine, J. M. An-
derson, et al. (2019). Topic choice contributes to the lower rate
of NIH awards to African-American/black scientists. Science Ad-
vances 5:eaaw7238.
Hortal, J., F. de Bello, J. A. F. Diniz-Filho, T. M. Lewinsohn, J. M. Lobo,
and R. J. Ladle (2015). Seven shortfalls that beset large-scale know-
ledge of biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and
Systematics 46:523–549.
Hughes, A. C., M. C. Orr, K. Ma, M. J. Costello, J. Waller, P. Provoost,
Q. Yang, C. Zhu, and H. Qiao (2021). Sampling biases shape our
view of the natural world. Ecography 44:1259–1269.
Hume, J. (2021). Storrs Lovejoy Olson (3 April 1944–20 January
2021). Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club 141:117–119.
Ibarra, J. T., and J. C. Pizarro (2016). Hacia una etno-ornitología
interdisciplinaria, intercultural e intergeneracional para la
conservación biocultural. Revista Chilena de Ornitología 22:1–6.
Ibarra, J. T., A. Barreau, and T. A. Altamirano (2013). Sobre plumas
y folclore: presencia de las aves en refranes populares de Chile.
Boletín Chileno de Ornitología 19:12–22.
Ibarra, J. T., A. Barreau, J. Caviedes, N. Pessa, J. Valenzuela, S. Navarro-
Manquilef, C. Monterrubio-Solís, A. Ried, and J. C. Pizarro
(2020a). Listening to elders: birds and forests as intergenerational
links for nurturing biocultural memory in the southern Andes. In
Transnational Children and Youth: Experiences of Nature and
Place, Culture and Care across the Americas (V. Derr, and Y. Cor-
ona, Editors). Routledge, Abingdon, UK.
Ibarra, J. T., J. Caviedes, and P. Benavides (2020b). Winged voices: Ma-
puche ornithology from South American temperate forests. Journal
of Ethnobiology 40:89–100.
Ippi, S., W. F. D. van Dongen, I. Lazzoni, C. I. Venegas, and R. A. Vásquez
(2017). Shared territorial defence in the suboscine Aphrastura
spinicauda. Emu-Austral Ornithology 117:97–102.
Jahn, A. E., V. R. Cueto, C. S. Fontana, A. C. Guaraldo, D. J. Levey, P. P.
Marra, and T. Ryder (2020). Bird migration within the Neotropics.
The Auk: Ornithological Advances 137:ukaa033.
Janzen, D. H. (1986). The future of tropical ecology. Annual Review of
Ecology and Systematics 17:305–324.
Jiménez-Uzcátegui, G., W. Llerena, W. B. Milstead, E. E. Lomas, and D.
A. Wiedenfeld (2011). Is the population of Floreana Mockingbird
Mimus trifasciatus declining? Cotinga 33:34–40.
Jiménez-Uzcátegui, G., D. Wiedenfeld, C. A. Valle, F. H. Vargas, P.
Piedrahita, L. J. Muñoz, and J. J. Álava (2019). Threats and vision
for the conservation of Galápagos birds. The Open Ornithology
Journal 12:1–15.
Johnson, O. (2017). Notes on the nesting behavior of the Gray-mantled
Wren (Odontorchilus branickii). Ornitología Neotropical 28:175–179.
Junghans, M. E. (2009). Avis rara: A trajetória cientíca da naturalista
alemã Emília Snethlage (1868–1929) no Brasil. Master’s Disserta-
tion (History of Science and Health), Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio
de Janeiro, Brazil.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
28 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
Kamath, A., B. Velocci, A. Wesner, N. Chen, V. Formica, B. Subramaniam,
and M. Rebolleda-Gómez (2022). Nature, data, and power: How
hegemonies shaped this special section. The American Naturalist
200:81–88.
Khan, T., S. Abimbola, C. Kyobutungi, and M. Pai (2022). How we
classify countries and people — and why it matters. BMJ Global
Health 7:e009704.
Khelifa, R., and H. Mahdjoub (2022). Integrate geographic scales in
equity, diversity and inclusion. Nature Ecology & Evolution 6:4–5.
Kingwell, C. J., and G. A. Londoño (2015). Description of the nest,
eggs, and nestling of Rufous-bellied Bush-Tyrants (Myiotheretes
fuscorufus). The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 127:92–97.
Kirwan, G. M. (2016). The nest of Serra do Mar Tyrant-Manakin
Neopelma chrysolophum with a brief review of nest architecture
in the genera Neopelma and Tyranneutes. Bulletin of the British
Ornithologists’ Club 136:293–295.
Konno, K., M. Akasaka, N. Osada, and R. Spake (2020). Ignoring non-
English-language studies may bias ecological meta-analyses. Ecol-
ogy and Evolution 10:6373–6384.
Kraus, M. W., B. Torrez, and H. LaStarr (2022). How narratives of
racial progress create barriers to diversity, equity, and inclusion in
organizations. Current Opinion in Psychology 43:108–113.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientic Revolutions. University
of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA.
Landler, L., M. A. Jusino, J. Skelton, and J. R. Walters (2014). Glo-
bal trends in woodpecker cavity entrance orientation: Latitudinal
and continental effects suggest regional climate inuence. Acta
Ornithologica 49:257–266.
de la Peña, M. R. (2005). Reproducción de las aves argentinas (con
descripción de pichones). Literature of Latin America, Buenos
Aires, Argentina.
de la Peña, M. R. (2019). Nidos, huevos, pichones y reproducción de aves
argentinas. Comunicaciones del Museo Provincial de Ciencias Naturales
“Florentino Ameghino” (Nueva Serie) Vol. 2., Santa Fe, Argentina.
Latta, S. C. (2012). Avian research in the Caribbean: past contri-
butions and current priorities. Journal of Field Ornithology
83:107–121.
Latta, S. C., and J. Faaborg (2008). Migratory birds in the Caribbean:
Benets of studies of over-wintering birds for understanding resi-
dent bird ecology and promoting critical development of conserva-
tion capacity. Conservation Biology 23:286–293.
Latta, S. C., C. J. Ralph, and G. Geupel (2005). Strategies for the con-
servation monitoring of permanent resident landbirds and winter-
ing Neotropical migrants in the Americas. Ornitología Neotropical
16:163–174.
Latta, S. C., B. A. Tinoco, P. A. Webster, and C. H. Graham (2011). Pat-
terns and magnitude of temporal change in avian communities in
the Ecuadorian Andes. The Condor 113:24–40.
Lebbin, D. J. (2007). Nesting behavior and nestling care of the Pavonine
Quetzal (Pharomachrus pavoninus). The Wilson Journal of Orni-
thology 119:458–463.
Lebbin, D. J., P. A. Hosner, M. J. Andersen, U. Valdez, and W. P. Tori
(2007). First description of nest and eggs of the White-lined Ant-
bird (Percnostola lophotes), and breeding observations of poorly
known birds inhabiting Guadua bamboo in southeastern Peru.
Boletín SAO 17:119–132.
Lees, A. C., K. V. Rosenberg, V. Ruiz-Gutierrez, S. Marsden, T. S.
Schulenberg, and A. D. Rodewald (2020). A roadmap to identifying
and lling shortfalls in Neotropical ornithology. The Auk: Orni-
thological Advances 137:ukaa048.
Leite, L., and L. M. Diele-Viegas (2021). Juggling slow and fast science.
Nature Human Behaviour 5:409.
Leite, G. A., M. M. Barreiros, I. P. Farias, and C. A. Peres (2016). De-
scription of the nest of two Thamnophilidae species in the Brazilian
Amazon. Revista Brasileira de Ornitologia 24:83–85.
Lentino, M. (2016). Migración de las aves en Rancho Grande:
Resultados del programa de monitoreo de la migración de aves
en el Parque Nacional Henri Pittier, 2015. Revista Venezolana de
Ornitología 6:37–49.
Lentino, M., E. Bonaccorso, M. A. García, E. A. Fernández, R. Rivero, and
C. Portas (2003). Longevity records of wild birds in the Henri Pittier
National Park, Venezuela. Ornitología Neotropical 14:545–548.
Levidow, L. (1988). Non-western science, past and present. Science as
Culture 1:101–117.
Levy, C. (2008). History of ornithology in the Caribbean. Ornitología
Neotropical 19:S415–S426.
del Hoyo, J., ed. (2015). Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive.
Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain.
Liboiron, M. (2021). Decolonizing geoscience requires more than
equity and inclusion. Nature Geoscience 14:876–877.
Lindell, C. A., and K. P. Huyvaert (2020). Advances in Neotropical or-
nithology: A special feature. The Condor: Ornithological Applica-
tions 122:duaa049.
Loaiza-Muñoz, M. A., D. M. Mosquera-Muñoz, J. C. Bermudez-Vera,
and G. A. Londoño (2017). First description of the nest, egg, and
nestling of Multicolored Tanager (Chlorochrysa nitidissima). The
Wilson Journal of Ornithology 129:207–212.
Lombardi, V. T., R. Gonçalves Faetti, S. D’Angelo Neto, M. F. de Vasconcelos,
and C. O. Araujo Gussoni (2010). Notas sobre a nidicação de aves
brasileiras raras e/ou pouco conhecidas. Cotinga 32:131–136.
Lopes, L. E., and M. Marini (2005a). Biologia reprodutiva de Suiriri
afnis e S. islerorum (Aves: Tyrannidae) no Cerrado do Brasil cen-
tral. Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia 45:127–141.
Lopes, L. E., and M. Marini (2005b). Low reproductive success
of Campo Suiriri (Suiriri afnis) and Chapada Flycatcher (S.
islerorum) in the central Brazilian Cerrado. Bird Conservation
International 15:337–346.
Lopes, L. E., and M. Â. Marini (2006). Home range and habitat use by
Suiriri afnis and S. islerorum in central Brazilian Cerrado. Studies
on Neotropical Fauna and Environment 41:87–92.
Lopez de Casenave, J. (2001). Estructura gremial y organización de un
ensamble de aves del desierto del Monte. Ph.D. thesis, Universidad
de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Lopez de Casenave, J. (2017). Un Hornero de cien años. El Hornero
2:193–196.
López Ordóñez, J., J. Avendaño, N. Gutierrez-Pinto, and A. Cuervo
(2014). The birds of the Serranía de Perijá: The northernmost avi-
fauna of the Andes. Ornitología Colombiana 14:62–93.
Lucero, F. (2014). Descripción del nido y posturas de la Viudita Chica
(Knipolegus hudsoni) en la provincia de San Juan, Argentina.
Nótulas Faunísticas (segunda serie) 160:1–5.
Macedo, R. H., J. Karubian, and M. S. Webster (2008). Extrapair pater-
nity and sexual selection in socially monogamous birds: Are trop-
ical birds different? The Auk 125:769–777.
MacGregor-Fors, I., C. C. Rega-Brodsky, M. García-Arroyo, M. A.
Gómez-Martínez, and L. -B. Vázquez (2020). Urban bird ecologists
cite more publications from the Global North; why? Journal of
Urban Ecology 6:1–4.
Madroño, A. (2016). Bird vocalizations as a tool to document Ache In-
digenous traditional knowledge in the Atlantic Forest of Paraguay.
Revista Chilena de Ornitología 22:89–106.
Malakoff, D. (2004). Rebels seize research team in Colombia. Science
304:1223.
Malpica-Piñeros, C., C. Sainz-Borgo, M. Ayala, and M. Lentino (2020).
Ciclos anuales de colibríes (Aves: Trochilidae) en un bosque
nublado, Parque Nacional Henri Pittier, Venezuela. Revista de
Biología Tropical 68:260–275.
March Mifsut, I. J. M., and M. A. Lazcano Barrero (2012). Relatos de
fogata: Anécdotas y experiencias de biólogos y conservacionistas
en el campo. Comisión Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas,
Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo, Mexico.
Mares, M. A. (1986). Conservation in South America: problems, conse-
quences, and solutions. Science 233:734–739.
Marini, M. Â, F. J. Borges, L. E. Lopes, L. França, C. Duca, L. V. Paiva, L. T.
Manica, D. T. Gressler, and N. M. Heming (2010). Breeding biology of
Columbidae in central Brazil. Ornitología Neotropical 21:581–590.
Marini, M. Â, F. J. A. Borges, L. E. Lopes, N. O. M. Sousa, D. T. Gressler,
L. R. Santos, L. V. Paiva, C. Duca, L. T. Manica, S. S. Rodrigues,
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.29
etal. (2012). Breeding biology of birds in the Cerrado of central
Brazil. Ornitología Neotropical 23:385–405.
Marone, L. (1992). Seasonal and year-to-year uctuations of bird
populations and guilds in the Monte Desert, Argentina. Journal of
Field Ornithology 63:294–308.
Martinez, J., and N. P. Prestes (2008). Biologia da conservação: estudo
de caso com o Papagaio-charão e outros papagaios brasileiros.
Editora UPF, Passo Fundo, Brazil.
Martinez, J., and N. P. Prestes (2021). Biologia da conservação: Programa
nacional para a conservação do Papagaio-de-peito-roxo e outras
iniciativas. Livraria e Editora Werlang LTDA, Passo Fundo, Brazil.
Martínez, O., and J. Rechberger (2011). El nido, huevos y pollos del
Guayabero Aceituna (Chlorothraupis carmioli, Aves, Thraupidae)
en el oeste de Bolivia. Ornitología Neotropical 22:155–158.
Martínez, O., I. Gómez, and K. Naoki (2011). Nuevos reportes de aves
amenazadas y poco conocidas en la Cuenca de Bermejo (Tarija),
al sur de Bolivia. Revista Boliviana de Ecología y Conservación
Ambiental 29:41–51.
Martínez-Gómez, J. E., and R. L. Curry (1996). The conservation status
of the Socorro Mockingbird Mimodes graysoni in 1993–1994. Bird
Conservation International 6:271–283.
Martínez-Gómez, J. E., H. M. Horblit, S. G. Stadler, and P. W. Shannon
(2010). Re-Introduction of the Socorro Dove, Socorro Island,
Revillagigedo Archipelago, Mexico. In Global Re-introduction
Perspectives (P. S. Soorae, Editor). The IUCN/SSC Re-introduction
Specialist Group (RSG).
Martínez-Medina, D., O. Acevedo-Charry, S. Medellín-Becerra, J.
Rodríguez-Fuentes, S. López-Casas, S. Muñoz-Duque, and M.
E. Rodríguez-Posada (2021). Status, development and trends of
studies in fauna acoustics in Colombia. Biota Colombiana 22:7–25.
Masello, J. F., and P. Quillfeldt (2012). ¿Cómo reproducirse
exitosamente en un ambiente cambiante? Biología reproductiva del
Loro Barranquero (Cyanoliseus patagonus) en el noreste de la Pata-
gonia. El Hornero 27:73–88.
Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative Researching. Sage, London, UK.
Mata, H., C. S. Fontana, G. N. Maurício, M. R. Bornschein, M. F.
Vasconcelos, and S. L. Bonatto (2009). Molecular phylogeny and
biogeography of the eastern tapaculos (Aves: Rhinocryptidae:
Scytalopus, Eleoscytalopus): Cryptic diversication in Brazilian At-
lantic Forest. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 53:450–462.
Matthews, A., and P. Smith (2017). Breeding observations on Buff-
bellied Puffbird Notharchus swainsoni (Piciformes: Bucconidae) at
Rancho Laguna Blanca, San Pedro Department, Paraguay. Revista
Brasileira de Ornitologia 25:20–23.
Maurício, G. N. (2013). First description of the nest of the Hooded
Berryeater, Carpornis cucullata. The Wilson Journal of Ornithol-
ogy 125:669–673.
McAndrews, A. E., J. E. Montejo-Díaz, and G. D. Alducin-Chávez
(2008). First description of the egg and notes on the nest of the
Cinnamon-tailed Sparrow (Aimophila sumichrasti). Ornitología
Neotropical 19:123–127.
McCowan, T. (2007). Expansion without equity: An analysis of current
policy on access to higher education in Brazil. Higher Education
53:579–598.
McGill, B. M., M. J. Foster, A. N. Pruitt, S. G. Thomas, E. R. Arsenault,
J. Hanschu, K. Wahwahsuck, E. Cortez, K. Zarek, T. D. Loecke,
et al. (2021). You are welcome here: A practical guide to diver-
sity, equity, and inclusion for undergraduates embarking on an eco-
logical research experience. Ecology and Evolution 11:3636–3645.
McKechnie, A. E., and A. Amar (2018). Missing the bigger picture: a
response to Beale (2018). Ostrich 89:151–152.
McSherry, J. P. (2002). Tracking the origins of a state terror network:
Operation Condor. Latin American Perspectives 29:38–60.
Melo, T. N., and R. S. Xavier (2017). First nest description for Spot-
backed Antwren Herpsilochmus dorsimaculatus. Bulletin of the
British Ornithologists’ Club 137:152–155.
Méndez, G. E. (2021). MP realiza allanamientos por asesinato de
Pedro Viteri. Soy 502. https://www.soy502.com/articulo/realizan-
allanamientos-asesinato-pedro-viteri-escuintla-32419
Meneghini, R., A. L. Packer, and L. Nassi-Calò (2008). Articles by Latin
American authors in prestigious journals have fewer citations.
PLoS One 3:e3804.
Minasny, B., D. Fiantis, B. Mulyanto, Y. Sulaeman, and W. Widyatmanti
(2020). Global soil science research collaboration in the 21st cen-
tury: Time to end helicopter research. Geoderma 373:114299.
Mohammed, R. S., G. Turner, K. Fowler, M. Pateman, M. A. Nieves-
Colón, L. Fanovich, S. B. Cooke, L. M. Dávalos, S. M. Fitzpatrick,
C. M. Giovas, et al. (2022). Colonial legacies inuence biodiversity
lessons: How past trade routes and power dynamics shape present-
day scientic research and professional opportunities for Carib-
bean scientists. The American Naturalist 200:140–155.
Monge-Nájera, J. (2002). How to be a tropical scientist. Science seen
from childhood: The white man scientist stereotype. Revista de
Biología Tropical 50:XIX–XXVIII.
Monjeau, A., J. R. Rau, and C. B. Anderson (2013). Latin America
should ditch impact factors. Nature 499:29.
Moore, A. J., A. P. Beckerman, J. L. Firn, C. G. Foote, and G. B. Jenkins
(2020). Nature Notes: A new category for natural history studies.
Ecology and Evolution 10:7952.
Moreno, J., S. Merino, E. Lobato, M. A. Rodrígues-Gironés, and R.
A. Vásquez (2007). Sexual dimorphism and parental roles in the
Thorn-tailed Rayadito (Furnariidae). The Condor 109:312–320.
Morton, B., A. Vercueil, R. Masekela, E. Heinz, L. Reimer, S. Saleh, C.
Kalinga, M. Seekles, B. Biccard, J. Chakaya, et al. (2022). Consen-
sus statement on measures to promote equitable authorship in the
publication of research from international partnerships. Anaesthe-
sia 77:264–276.
Naranjo, L. G. (2008). El arcano de la ornitología colombiana.
Ornitología Colombiana 7:5–16.
Naranjo, L., J. Correa, J. García, H. González, D. Hernández, B. Ji-
ménez, J. Morales, A.G. Navarro, R. Vidal, L. Villaseñor, F.
Villaseñor, and J. Colón (1992). Some suggestions for future co-
operative work in Latin America: an outline. In Ecology and Con-
servation of Neotropical Migrant Landbirds (J. M. Hagan III and
D. W. Johnston, Editors). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washing-
ton, DC, USA.
Nascimento, G. D., A. Pereira, G. R. R. Brito, C. K. M. Kolesnikovas, and
P. P. Serani (2022). Prevalência e tipos de plásticos em albatrozes e
petréis (Aves: Procellariiformes): Recorte espacial da costa Sudeste e
Sul do Brasil, de 2015 a 2019. Biodiversidade Brasileira 12:15–24.
Navarro, N. (2015). Aves endémicas de Cuba. Guía de campo.
Ediciones Nuevos Mundos. La Habana, Cuba.
Navarro-Sigüenza, A. G., M. Rebón-Gallardo, A. Gordillo-Martínez,
A. T. Peterson, H. Berlanga-García, and L. A. Sánchez-González
(2014). Biodiversidad de aves en México. Revista Mexicana de
Biodiversidad 85:S476–S495.
Newton, I. (2003). Speciation and Biogeography of Birds. Academic
Press, London, UK.
Nuñez, M., M. C. Chiuffo, A. Pauchard, and R. D. Zenni (2021). Making
ecology really global. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 36:766–769.
Ojeda, V. (2004). Breeding biology and social behaviour of Magellanic
Woodpeckers (Campephilus magellanicus) in Argentine Patagonia.
European Journal of Wildlife Research 50:18–24.
Ojeda, V., A. Schaaf, T. A. Altamirano, E. B. Bonaparte, L. Bragagnolo,
L. Chazarreta, K. Cockle, R. Dias, F. Di Sallo, J. T. Ibarra, et al.
(2021). Latitude does not inuence cavity entrance orientation of
South American avian excavators. The Auk: Ornithological Ad-
vances 138:ukaa064.
Ornelas, J. F., V. Sosa, D. E. Soltis, J. M. Daza, C. González, P. S. Soltis,
C. Gutiérrez-Rodríguez, A. Espinosa de los Monteros, T. A. Castoe,
C. Bell, et al. (2013). Comparative phylogeographic analyses illus-
trate the complex evolutionary history of threatened cloud forests
of Northern Mesoamerica. PLoS One 8:e56283.
Ortiz Mendoza, C. A. (2013). Primera descripción del nido de Saltátor
Collarejo (Saltator cinctus) y notas sobre su comportamiento
reproductivo. Ornitología Neotropical 24:413–420.
Palomino, S. (2021). El guardián de loros asesinado a tiros en Colom-
bia. El País, 14 January 2021.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
30 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
Pautasso, A. A., and J. Cazenave (2002). Observaciones sobre la
nidicación del Atajacaminos Tijera Hydropsalis torquata en el
este de la provincia de Santa Fe, Argentina. El Hornero 17:99–104.
Paynter, R. A. (1991). The maturation of Brazilian ornithology.
Ararajuba 2:105–106.
Peraza, C. A. (2011). Aves, Bosque Oriental de Bogotá Protective Forest
Reserve, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia. Check List 7:57–63.
Pérez, M. (2022). Can academia be decolonized beyond the metaphor?
Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies 20:21–40.
Pérez, M., and B. Radi (2019). Current challenges of North/South re-
lations in gay-lesbian and queer studies. Journal of Homosexuality
67:965–989.
Pérez Ortega, R., and L. Wessel (2020). “We’re losing an entire gener-
ation of scientists.” COVID-19’s economic toll hits Latin America
hard. Science.
Pérez-Staples, D., and H. Drummond (2005). Tactics, effectiveness
and avoidance of mate guarding in the Blue-footed Booby (Sula
nebouxii). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 59:115–123.
Pichorim, M. (2006). Reproduction of the Mottled Piculet in southern
Brazil. Journal of Field Ornithology 77:244–249.
Pizarro, J. C., L. Moreno Salas, M. Martínez Jamett, T. A. Altamirano,
J. Cabello Cabalín, C. A. Moraga, J. A. Vianna, J. T. Ibarra, I.
Fernández Latapiat, C. Tala González, et al. (2020). Daniel
González Acuña: Ornitólogo desde siempre y por siempre. Revista
Chilena de Ornitología 26:114–116.
Pizo, M. A., and V. R. Tonetti (2020). Living in a fragmented world:
Birds in the Atlantic Forest. The Condor: Ornithological Applica-
tions 122:duaa023.
Powers, J. S., T. A. Carlo, E. M. Slade, and F. Slik (2021). Biotropica
announces a new paper category: Natural History Field Notes.
Biotropica 53:352–353.
Pyle, P. (2008). Identication Guide to North American Birds, Part II.
Slate Creek Press. Point Reyes Station, USA.
Quintero, C. (2011). Trading in birds: imperial power, national pride,
and the place of nature in U.S.-Colombia relations. ISIS 102:421–
445.
R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical
computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Aus-
tria. http://www.R-project.org/
Raby, M. (2017a). American Tropics: The Caribbean Roots of Biodiversity
Science. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Raby, M. (2017b). The colonial origins of tropical eld stations. Ameri-
can Scientist 105:216–223.
Ramírez-Castañeda, V. (2020). Disadvantages in preparing and
publishing scientic papers caused by the dominance of the Eng-
lish language in science: The case of Colombian researchers in bio-
logical sciences. PLoS One 15:e0238372.
Ramírez-Castañeda, V., E. P. Westeen, J. Frederick, S. Amini, D. R. Wait,
A. S. Achmadi, N. Andayani, E. Arida, U. Arin, M. A. Bernal, et al.
(2022). A set of principles and practical suggestions for equitable
eldwork in biology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci-
ences USA 119:e2122667119.
Ramos, M. A. (1988). The conservation of biodiversity in Latin Amer-
ica: A perspective. In Biodiversity (E. O. Wilson and F. M. Peter,
Editors). National Academies of Science and Smithsonian Institu-
tion. Washington, DC, USA.
Rapoport, E. H. (1975). Aerografía: Estrategias Geográcas de las
Especies. Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City, Mexico.
Rapoport, E. H. (1982). Areography: Geographical Strategies of Spe-
cies. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.
Rapoport, E. H. (2015). Aventuras y desventuras de un biólogo
latinoamericano. Fundación de Historia Natural Félix de Azara,
Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Rau, J. R., A. Monjeau, J. C. Pizarro, and C. B. Anderson (2017). Cuanto
más publicamos menos nos citan. Ecología Austral 27:385–391.
Rau, H., G. Goggins, and F. Fahy (2018). From invisibility to impact:
Recognising the scientic and societal relevance of interdisciplinary
sustainability research. Research Policy 47:266–276.
Reboreda, J. C., V. D. Fiorini, and D. T. Tuero (2019). Behavioral Ecol-
ogy of Neotropical Birds. Springer, Cham, Switzerland.
Reid, A. J., L. E. Eckert, J. Lane, N. Young, S. G. Hinch, C. T. Darimont,
S. J. Cooke, N. C. Ban, and A. Marshall (2021). “Two-Eyed Seeing”:
An Indigenous framework to transform sheries research and man-
agement. Fish and Fisheries 22:243–261.
Remsen, J. V. (1997). Studies in Neotropical Ornithology honoring Ted
Parker. Ornithological Monographs, no. 48. American Ornitholo-
gists’ Union. Washington, DC, USA.
Remsen, J. V., and T. S. Schulenberg (1997). The pervasive inuence of
Ted Parker on Neotropical Field Ornithology. In Studies in Neo-
tropical Ornithology honoring Ted Parker. Ornithological Mono-
graphs (J. V. Remsen, Editor). Ornithological Monographs 48:7–19.
Remsen, J. V., Jr., J. I. Areta, E. Bonaccorso, S. Claramunt, A. Jaramillo,
D. F. Lane, J. F. Pacheco, M. B. Robbins, F. G. Stiles, and K. J. Zim-
mer (2021). A classication of the bird species of South Amer-
ica. American Ornithological Society. http://www.museum.lsu.
edu/~Remsen/SACCBaseline.htm
Renton, K. (2001). Lilac-crowned Parrot diet and food resource avail-
ability: resource tracking by a parrot seed predator. The Condor
103:62–69.
Renton, K., and A. Salinas-Melgoza (2004). Climatic variability, nest
predation, and reproductive output of Lilac-crowned Parrots
(Amazona nschi) in tropical dry forest of western Mexico. The
Auk 121:1214–1225.
Renton, K., A. Salinas-Melgoza, R. Rueda-Hernández, and L. D.
Vázquez Reyes (2018). Differential resilience to extreme climate
events of tree phenology and cavity resources in tropical dry forest:
cascading effects on a threatened species. Forest Ecology and Man-
agement 426:164–175.
Repenning, M. (2012). História natural, com ênfase na biologia
reprodutiva, de uma população migratoria de Sporophila aff. plumbea
(Aves, Emberizidae) do sul do Brasil. Master’s dissertation, Ponticia
Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul. Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Rheindt, F. E., and H. Quispe Vela (2008). Descripción del nido y de los
polluelos del Solitario Orejiblanco Entomodestes leucotis. Cotinga
30:70–71.
Ríos-Saldaña, C. A., M. Delibes-Mateos, and C. C. Ferreira (2018). Are
eldwork studies being relegated to second place in conservation
science? Global Ecology and Conservation 14:e00389.
Ritter, C. D., L. A. Coelho, J. M. Capurucho, S. H. Borges, C. Cornelius,
and C. C. Ribas (2021). Sister species, different histories: comparative
phylogeography of two bird species associated with Amazonian open
vegetation. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 132:161–173.
Rodrigues, M., L. M. Costa, G. H. S. Freitas, M. Cavalcanti, and D. F. Dias
(2009). Ninhos e ovos de Emberizoides herbicola, Emberizoides
ypiranganus e Embernagra longicauda (Passeriformes: Emberizidae)
no Parque Nacional da Serra do Cipó, Minas Gerais, Brasil. Revista
Brasileira de Ornitologia 17:155–160.
Rodrigues, R. C., E. Hasui, J. C. Assis, J. C. C. Pena, R. L. Muylaert, V.
Rodrigues Tonetti, F. Martello, A. L. Regolin, T. V. V. da Costa, M.
Pichorim, E. Carrano, et al. (2019). ATLANTIC BIRD TRAITS: a
data set of bird morphological traits from the Atlantic forests of
South America. Ecology 100:e02647.
Rodríguez, J. P., A. B. Taber, P. Daszak, R. Sukumar, C. Valladares-
Padua, S. Padua, L. F. Aguirre, R. A. Medellín, M. Acosta, A. A.
Aguirre, et al. (2007). Globalization of conservation: A view from
the South. Science 317:755–756.
Rosenberg, K. V., A. M. Dokter, P. J. Blancher, J. R. Sauer, A. C. Smith, P.
A. Smith, J. C. Stanton, A. Panjabi, L. Helft, M. Parr, et al. (2019).
Decline of the North American avifauna. Science 366:120–124.
Rosenblatt, C. J., A. A. Dayer, J. N. Duberstein, T. B. Phillips, H. W.
Harshaw, D. C. Fulton, N. W. Cole, A. H. Raedeke, J. D. Rutter, and
C. L. Wood (2022). Highly specialized recreationists contribute the
most to the citizen science project eBird. Ornithological Applica-
tions 124:duac008.
Ross-Hellauer, T. (2022). Open science, done wrong, will compound
inequities. Nature 603:363.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
Reimagining Neotropical ornithology L. Soares et al.31
Rozzi, R. (2013). Biocultural ethics: From biocultural homogenization
toward biocultural conservation. In Linking Ecology and Ethics
for a Changing World. Values, Philosophy, and Action (R. Rozzi, S.
T. A. Pickett, C. Palmer, J. J. Armesto, and J. B. Callicott, Editors).
Springer, New York, NY, USA.
Rozzi, R., and J. E. Jiménez (2014). Magellanic Sub-Antarctic Orni-
thology: First Decade of Long-term Studies at the Omora Ethno-
botanical Park, Cape Horn Biosphere Reserve, Chile. Ediciones de
la Universidad de Magallanes, Chile, and University of North Texas
Press, Santiago, Chile.
Ruelas Inzunza, E. (2009). Writing and citing “international” names.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7:351–352.
Ruelas Inzunza, E., L. J. Goodrich, S. W. Hoffman, and R. Tingay
(2000). Conservation strategies for the world’s largest raptor mi-
gration yway: Veracruz, The River of Raptors. In Raptors at Risk
(R. D. Chancellor and B.-U. Meyburg, Editors). Hancock House
Publishers, Surrey, BC, Canada. pp. 591–596.
Ruelas Inzunza, E., L. J. Goodrich, S. W. Hoffman, E. Martínez
Leyva, J. P. Smith, E. Peresbarbosa Rojas, R. Rodríguez Mesa,
K. L. Scheuermann, S. L. Mesa Ortiz, Y. Cabrera Carrasco, N.
Ferriz, R. Straub, M. M. Peñaloza, and J. G. Barrios. (2009).
Long-term conservation of migratory birds in México: The
Veracruz River of Raptors Project. In Tundra to Tropics: Con-
necting Birds, Habitats and People (T. D. Rich, C. Arizmendi, D.
Demarest, and C. Thompson, Editors). Proceedings of the 4th
International Partners in Flight Conference. Partners in Flight,
Washington, DC, USA.
Ruelas Inzunza, E., L. J. Goodrich, and S. W. Hoffman (2010). North
American population estimates of waterbirds, vultures, and hawks
from migration counts in Veracruz, Mexico. Bird Conservation
International 20:124–133.
Ruelas Inzunza, E., R. T. Zepilli, and D. F. Stotz (2012). Birds. In Perú: Cerros
de Kampankis. Rapid Biological and Social Inventories No. 24 (N. Pit-
man, Editor). The Field Museum, Chicago, Illinois, USA. pp. 273–282.
Ruelas Inzunza, E., K. L. Cockle, M. G. Núñez Montellano, C. S. Fontana,
C. Cuatianquiz Lima, M. A. Echeverry-Galvis, R. A. Fernández-
Gómez, F. A. Montaño-Centellas, E. Bonaccorso, S. A. Lambertucci,
C. Cornelius, et al. (2023). How to include and recognize the work
of ornithologists based in the Neotropics: Fourteen actions for Or-
nithological Applications, Ornithology, and other global-scope orni-
thological journals. Ornithological Applications 125:duac047.
Ruggera, R. A., A. A. Schaaf, C. G. Vivanco, N. Politi, and L. O. Rivera
(2016). Exploring nest webs in more detail to improve forest man-
agement. Forest Ecology and Management 372:93–100.
Ruiz, E. A., E. Velarde, and A. Aguilar (2017). Demographic history of
the Heermann’s Gull (Larus heermanni) from late Quaternary to
present: Effects of past climate change in the Gulf of California.
The Auk: Ornithological Advances 134:308–316.
Rutter, J. D., A. A. Dayer, H. W. Harshaw, N. W. Cole, J. N. Duberstein,
D. C. Fulton, A. H. Raedeke, and R. M. Schuster (2021). Racial,
ethnic, and social patterns in the recreation specialization of bird-
watchers: an analysis of United States eBird registrants. Journal of
Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 35:100400.
Sagario, M. C., V. R. Cueto, A. Zarco, R. Pol, and L. Marone (2020).
Predicting how seed-eating passerines respond to cattle grazing in
a semiarid grassland using seed preferences and diet. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment 289:106736.
Saibene, C. A. (1995). Nidicación de aves en Misiones II. Nuestras
Aves 31:20.
Salerno, P. E., M. Páez-Vacas, J. M. Guayasamin, and J. L. Stynoski
(2019). Male principal investigators (almost) don’t publish with
women in ecology and zoology. PLoS One 14:e0218598.
Sanabria Mejía, J. S. (2010). Aproximación a la biología reproductiva
del Loro Multicolor Hapalopsittaca amazonina velezi en una
localidad de la Cordillera Central, Tolima. Undergraduate Thesis,
Universidad del Tolima, Ibagué, Tolima, Colombia.
Sánchez, G., and M. A. Aponte (2006). Primera descripción del nido y
huevos de Conopophaga ardesiaca. Kempfana 2:102–105.
Sánchez, J. E., C. Porras, and L. Sandoval (2013). Descripción del
nido y la cópula del Pájaro Campana Tricarunculado (Procnias
tricarunculatus). Ornitología Neotropical 24:235–240.
Sánchez, J. E., K. Conejo-Barboza, C. Sánchez, D. Calderón-Franco, and
L. Sandoval (2016). Description of the nest and eggs of the Green
Thorntail (Discosura conversii). Ornitología Neotropical 27:73–76.
Sánchez-Mercado, A., O. Blanco, B. Sucre, J. M. Briceño-Linares, C.
Peláez, and J. P. Rodríguez (2022). When good attitudes are not
enough: Understanding intentions to keep Yellow-shouldered Ama-
zons as pets on Margarita Island, Venezuela. Oryx 56:209–217.
Sandoval, L., and G. Barrantes (2009). Relationship between species
richness of excavator birds and cavity-adopters in seven tropical
forests in Costa Rica. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 121:75–
81.
Sandoval, L., and I. Escalante (2010). Nest description of the Garden
Emerald (Chlorostilbon assimilis) from Costa Rica. The Wilson
Journal of Ornithology 122:597–599.
Santander, F., S. Alvarado, and C. F. Estades (2021). Effect of forest
cover on raptor abundance in exotic forest plantations in Chile.
Ardeola 68:391–408.
Sanz, V., and A. Rodríguez-Ferraro (2006). Reproductive parameters
and productivity of the Yellow-shouldered Parrot on Margarita
Island, Venezuela: A long-term study. The Condor 108:178–192.
Schell, C. J., C. Guy, D. S. Shelton, S. C. Campbell-Staton, B. A. Sealey,
D. N. Lee, and N. C. Harris (2020). Recreating Wakanda by pro-
moting Black excellence in ecology and evolution. Nature Ecology
& Evolution 4:1285–1287.
Schwartz, P. (1968). Notes on two Neotropical nightjars, Caprimulgus
anthonyi and C. parvulus. The Condor 70:223–227.
Schwartz, P. (1972). Micrastur gilvicollis, a valid species sympatric with
M. rucollis in Amazonia. The Condor 74:399–415.
Sclater, P. L. (1858). On the general geographical distribution of the
members of the Class Aves. Journal of the Proceedings of the Lin-
nean Society of London 2:130–145.
Scott, J. (2021). When eBird meets Black birders. Network in Canadian
History and Environment. https://niche-canada.org/2021/03/17/
when-ebird-meets-black-birders/
Sedano, R., M. Reyes-Gutiérrez, and D. Fajardo (2008). Descripción de
la anidación, el comportamiento de forrajeo y las vocalizaciones
del Carpinterito Gris (Picumnus granadensis). Ornitología
Colombiana 6:5–14.
Serwadda, D., P. Ndebele, M. K. Grabowski, F. Bajunirwe, and R. K.
Wanyenze (2018). Open data sharing and the Global South—Who
benets? Science 359:642–643.
Sevy-Biloon, J., U. Recino, and C. Munoz (2020). Factors affecting English
language teaching in public schools in Ecuador. International Journal
of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research 19:276–294.
Silva, J. M. C., D. C. Oren, and M. de F. C. Lima (2005). Fernando
Novaes: O fundador da moderna ornitologia brasileira. Boletim
do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Série Ciências Naturais 1:249–
254.
Singeo, A., and C. E. Ferguson (2022). Lessons from Palau to end para-
chute science in international conservation research. Conservation
Biology 2022:e13971.
Siqueira-Gay, J., B. Soares-Filho, L. E. Sanchez, A. Oviedo, and L. J.
Sonter (2020). Proposed legislation to mine Brazil’s Indigenous
lands will threaten Amazon forests and their valuable ecosystem
services. One Earth 3:356–362.
Siqueira-Pereira, H., E. Hasui, G. dos Reis Menezes, and E. Batista
Ferreira (2009). Efeitos diretos e indiretos da fragmentação sobre
as redes de nidicação. Ornitología Neotropical 20:431–444.
Smith, C., and G. Londoño (2014). First description of the nest, eggs,
incubation behavior, and nestlings of Trilling Tapaculo (Scytalopus
parvirostris). The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 126:81–85.
Smith, A. C., L. Merz, J. B. Borden, C. K. Gulick, A. R. Kschirsagar, and E.
M. Bruna (2021). Assessing the effect of article processing charges on
the geographic diversity of authors using Elsevier’s “Mirror Journal”
system. Quantitative Science Studies 2:1123–1143.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
32 L. Soares et al. Reimagining Neotropical ornithology
Smyth, C. H. (1928). Descripción de una colección de huevos de aves
argentinas. El Hornero 4:125–152.
Snow, S. S., L. Sandoval, and H. F. Greeney (2017). The nest and eggs
of the Rufous Mourner (Rhytipterna h. holerythra). The Wilson
Journal of Ornithology 129:626–630.
Snyder, N. F., H. Raffaelle, A. Kirkconnell, and J. Wunderle (2019).
James W. Wiley, 1943–2018. The Auk 136:ukz037.
Spiller, C., R. M. Wolfgramm, E. Henry, and R. Pouwhare (2020). Para-
digm warriors: Advancing a radical ecosystem view of collective
leadership from an Indigenous Māori perspective. Human Rela-
tions 73:516–543.
Steigerwald, E., V. Ramírez-Castañeda, D. Y. C. Brandt, A. Báldi, J. T.
Shapiro, L. Bowker, and R. D. Tarvin. (2022). Overcoming lan-
guage barriers in academia: Machine translation tools and a vision
for a multilingual future. Bioscience 72:988–998.
Stevens, G. C. (1989). Latitudinal gradient in geographical range: how so
many species coexist in the tropics. American Naturalist 133:240–256.
Stiles, F. G., L. Roselli, and S. de la Zerda (2017). Changes over 26 years
in the avifauna of the Bogotá region, Colombia: Has climate change
become important? Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 5:58.
Stiles, F. G., L. Roselli, and S. de la Zerda (2021). Una avifauna en
cambio: 26 años de conteos navideños en la Sabana de Bogotá, Co-
lombia. Ornitología Colombiana 19:1–65.
Stopiglia, R., W. Barbosa, M. Ferreira, M. A. Raposo, A. Dubois, M.
G. Harvey, G. M. Kirwan, G. Forcato, F. A. Bockmann, and C. C.
Ribas (2022). Taxonomic challenges posed by discordant evolu-
tionary scenarios supported by molecular and morphological data
in the Amazonian Synallaxis rutilans group (Aves: Furnariidae).
Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 195:65–87.
Strahl, S. D. (1992). Furthering avian conservation in Latin America.
The Auk 109:680–682.
Straneck, R. J. (1987). Aportes sobre el comportamiento y distribución
de la Cachirla Armillenta, Anthus lutescens Pucheran y la Cachirla
Chaqueña, Anthus chacoensis Zimmer. Revista del Museo Argentino
de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”, Zoología 14:95–102.
Straneck, R. J. (1990). Canto de las aves de los esteros y palmares.
LOLA, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Straneck, R. J. (1993). Aportes para la unicación de Serpophaga
subcristata y Serpophaga munda, y la revalidación de Serpophaga
griseiceps (Aves: Tyrannidae). Revista del Museo Argentino de
Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”, Zoología 16:51–63.
Straneck, R. (2007). Una nueva especie de Serpophaga (Aves:
Tyrannidae). Revista FAVE - Ciencias Veterinarias 6:32–37.
Straneck, R., and F. Vidoz (1995). Sobre el estado taxonómico de Strix
rupes (King) y de Strix chacoensis (Cherrie and Reichenberger).
Nótulas Faunísticas 74:1–5.
Strewe, R. (2001). Notes on nests and breeding activity of fourteen
bird species from southwestern Colombia. Ornitología Neotrop-
ical 12:265–269.
Stutchbury, B. J. M., and E. S. Morton (2001). Behavioral Ecology of
Tropical Birds. Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA.
Stutchbury, B. J. M., and E. Morton (2008). Recent advances in the
behavioral ecology of tropical birds. The Wilson Journal of Orni-
thology 120:26–37.
Sullivan, B. L., C. L. Wood, M. J. Iliff, R. E. Bonney, D. Fink, and S.
Kelling (2009). eBird: A citizen-based bird observation network in
the biological sciences. Biological Conservation 142:2282–2292.
Tambussi, C. P., and F. Degrange (2013). South American and Antarc-
tic Continental Cenozoic Birds: Paleobiogeographic Afnities and
Disparities. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Tanaka, R. M., E. Muscat, and E. Laura (2016). First record of Philydor
atricapillus nesting in bamboo (Guadoa [sic] tagoara). Atualidades
Ornitológicas 194:26.
Toledo, L. F., and C. B. Araújo (2017). Zoophonie: les origines de la
bioacoustique. In Hercule Florence: Le Nouveau Robinson (L. F.
Nagler and C. Raimondi, Editors). Humboldt Books, Milan, Italy.
Torres, C. A., and D. Schugurensky (2002). The political economy of
higher education in the era of neoliberal globalization: Latin Amer-
ica in comparative perspective. Higher Education 43:429–455.
Trisos, C. H., J. Auerbach, and M. Katti (2021). Decoloniality and anti-
oppressive practices for a more ethical ecology. Nature Ecology &
Evolution 5:1205–1212.
Tulloch, A. I. T. (2020). Improving sex and gender identity equity and
inclusion at conservation and ecology conferences. Nature Ecology
& Evolution 4:1311–1320.
Uezu, A., J. P. Metzger, and J. M. E. Vielliard (2005). Effects of struc-
tural and functional connectivity and patch size on the abundance
of seven Atlantic Forest bird species. Biological Conservation
123:507–519.
Urbina-Blanco, C. A., S. Z. Jilani, I. R. Speight, M. J. Bojdys, T.
Friščić, J. F. Stoddart, T. L. Nelson, J. Mack, R. A. S. Robinson,
E. A. Waddell, et al. (2020). A diverse view of science to catalyse
change. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 59:18306–
18310.
Valderrama, S. V., J. E. Parra, and N. Dávila (2007). First nest description
for Niceforo’s Wren (Thryothorus nicefori): A critically endangered
Colombian endemic songbird. Ornitología Neotropical 18:313–318.
Valdez-Juarez, S. O., and G. A. Londoño (2016). Nesting biology of
Carmiol’s Tanager (Chlorothraupis carmioli frenata) in southeastern
Peru. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 128:794–803.
Valenzuela-Toro, A. M., and M. Viglino (2021). How Latin American
researchers suffer in science. Nature 598:374–375.
Vaske Júnior, T. (1991). Seabirds mortality on longline shing for tuna
in southern Brazil. Ciência e Cultura 43:388–390.
Veit, R. R., E. Velarde, M. H. Horn, and L. L. Manne (2021). Popula-
tion growth and long-distance vagrancy leads to colonization of
Europe by Elegant Terns Thalasseus elegans. Frontiers in Ecology
and Evolution 9:725614.
Velarde, E. (1992). Predation of Heermann’s Gull (Larus heermanni)
chicks by Yellow-footed Gulls (Larus livens) in dense and scattered
nesting sites. Colonial Waterbirds 15:8–13.
Velarde, E., E. Ezcurra, and D. W. Anderson (2015). Seabird diet pre-
dicts following-season commercial catch of Gulf of California
Pacic sardine and northern anchovy. Journal of Marine Systems
146:82–88.
Velarde, E., D. W. Anderson, and E. Ezcurra (2019). Seabird clues to
ecosystem health. Science 365:116–117.
Vielliard, J. M. E. (1983). Catálogo sonográco dos cantos e piados
dos beija-ores do Brasil, 1. Boletim do Museu de Biologia Mello
Leitão, Série Biologia 58:1–20.
Vielliard, J. (1990). Estudo bioacústico das aves do Brasil: o gênero
Scytalopus. Ararajuba 1:5–18.
Vizentin-Bugoni, J., P. K. Maruyama, and M. Sazima (2014). Processes
entangling interactions in communities: forbidden links are more
important than abundance in a hummingbird–plant network. Pro-
ceedings of the Royal Society B 281:20132397.
de Vos, A. (2022). Stowing parachutes, strengthening science. Conser-
vation Science and Practice 4:e12709.
Voss, W. A. (2009). William “Bill” Belton and ornithology in Rio
Grande do Sul. Revista Brasileira de Ornitologia 17:161–162.
Vuilleumier, F. (1995). Five great Neotropical ornithologists: an appreci-
ation of Eugene Eisenmann, Maria Koepcke, Claës Olrog, Rodulfo
Phllippi, and Helmut Sick. Ornitología Neotropical 6:97–111.
Vuilleumier, F. (2003). Neotropical ornithology: Then and now. The
Auk 120:577–590.
Yorio, P., F. Quintana, and J. Lopez de Casenave (2005). Ecología y
conservación de las aves marinas del litoral marítimo argentino. El
Hornero 20:1–3.
Yua, E., J. Raymond-Yakoubian, R. Aluaq Daniel, and C. Behe (2022).
A framework for co-production of knowledge in the context of
Arctic research. Ecology and Society 27:34.
Zima, P. V. Q., D. F. Perrella, C. H. Biagolini-Jr, L. Ribeiro-Silva, and
M. R. Francisco (2017). Breeding behavior of the Atlantic Forest
endemic Blue Manakin (Chiroxiphia caudata). The Wilson Journal
of Ornithology 129:53–61.
Zyskowski, K., J. C. Mittermeier, and E. S. Stowe (2008). First de-
scription of the nest of the Band-tailed Antshrike Thamnophilus
melanothorax. Revista Brasileira de Ornitologia 16:246–249.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/condor/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ornithapp/duac046/7026133 by guest on 07 February 2023
