Comments 2022-D

• 2022-D-1: Establish an English name for Sturnella lilianae 
• 2022-D-2: Establish English names for Anthracothorax aurulentus and A. dominicus s. s.

2022-D-1: Establish an English name for Sturnella lilianae

Note on the votes and comments for Proposal 2022-D-1:

The proposal to split Sturnella lilianae from S. magna (2022-C-2) included a section on English names, in which the following names were proposed: Chihuahuan, High Desert, Pallid, and White-tailed.  Pallid was the recommended name. The NACC was unable to reach a consensus on the English name based on votes on this proposal (no name received more than 3 votes), so a separate English name proposal (2022-D-1) was submitted to the committee. This proposal provided options for 12 English names, including historical names as well as new names based on plumage or geography. This second proposal generated much discussion but also produced no consensus, in large part because all names were perceived to have serious drawbacks, making this a choice among many poor alternatives.

Marshall Iliff suggested that in this particular case, a difficult decision in which no name was clearly superior to others, the eBird reviewer community might offer additional perspective. Consequently, the committee prepared a poll to solicit votes and written comments from eBird reviewers. The options in the poll consisted of 12 English names, 10 of the names from 2022-D-1 (the historical names Jalisco and Arizona were deleted) and two additional names: Madrean (a name suggested by a botanist) and Desert Grassland. Pros and cons were listed for each name, and voters were asked to select their top three choices and to provide additional comments if they wished to. Votes were received from 125 reviewers and comments from 60 of these. The names with the most votes were Chihuahuan (64) votes, Madrean (52), and Pallid (49), but Madrean received the most first-place votes (26). Lilian’s received the fourth-most votes (42) and the second-most first-place votes (23), but also received a disproportionate number of extremely negative comments. Mexican, a name inadvertently omitted in the initial distribution of the poll but added later, received 17 first-place votes but undoubtedly would have received many more had it been included from the start. One other name not included in the poll at all, Southwestern, also received support in the comments.

Due to the large number of choices and the resulting lack of consensus from the first poll, the committee prepared a second poll of eBird reviewers, this one limited to the name that received the highest number of votes in the previous poll (Chihuahuan), the name that received the highest number of first-place votes (Madrean), the name that received large numbers of votes but which had not been included on all ballots (Mexican), and the new name suggested in comments on the first poll (Southwestern), and asked voters to rank all the names. Pros and cons for each name were again provided:

Chihuahuan Meadowlark: PRO: The distribution of the northern subspecies lilianae overlaps broadly with the Chihuahuan Desert and the Chihuahuan Desert Bird Conservation Region. The Clements list currently refers to the group of subspecies that includes auropectoralis+lilianae as Eastern Meadowlark (Chihuahuan), although this group also includes subspecies saundersi, which is not part of the newly split Sturnella lilianae. CON:  Subspecies auropectoralis is not known to occur in the Chihuahuan Desert, instead occupying the southern Mexican Plateau and coastal West Mexico (almost as large a range as lilianae). The range of subspecies lilianae extends north of the Chihuahuan Desert to central-northern Arizona and New Mexico and to extreme SE Colorado (where rare).

Madrean Meadowlark: PRO: The Madrean floristic region https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madrean_Region encompasses all of the range of S. l. lilianae and much of the range of S. l. auropectoralis. CON: The Madrean floristic region extends to the Great Basin and California Desert and is not well-known even among naturalists (e.g., no clear map of the Madrean Region is revealed by Google searches). “Madrean” is more often used in reference to the Madrean Pine-Oak Woodlands, a habitat quite different to that of the meadowlark. Much of the distribution of Western Meadowlark is also encompassed by the Madrean Region.  “The word “madrean” has vulgar connotations in Spanish, especially in Mexico.

Mexican Meadowlark: PRO: Much of the distribution of this species is in Mexico, unlike Eastern and Western Meadowlark. CON: Both Eastern and Western Meadowlark also occur widely in Mexico, especially in winter. Subspecies mexicana of Eastern Meadowlark is widespread in eastern Mexico, occurring throughout the Caribbean lowlands, and is nearly endemic to Mexico. It has been known by the English name Mexican Meadowlark., and thus Google Scholar searches on “Mexican Meadowlark” produce references to this subspecies.

Southwestern Meadowlark: PRO: This geographical name contrasts fairly well with Eastern and Western meadowlark: the range of S. lilianae is south of the bulk of the range of Western Meadowlark and west of the US and Mexican range of Eastern Meadowlark. CON: The name can be interpreted to refer to the southwestern USA, which excludes much of the range of the new species. The name is similar to that of Western Meadowlark and could be confused with it. The name Southwestern is somewhat misleading, because the range of Eastern Meadowlark extends much further south than does that of S. lilianae (into South America), and that of Western Meadowlark extends much further west than S. lilianae and south, like S. lilianae, to the southern Mexican Plateau.

We received 283 responses to the second poll, a sizable increase from the first poll. Chihuahuan was the top choice, receiving 124 first-place votes and only 25 last-place votes, and Mexican was a rather distant second:

Following these polls, the committee was asked to vote and comment again based on all the available information and discussion. These votes and comments are recorded below.

Votes and comments on Proposal 2022-D-1:

CHIHUAHUAN MEADOWLARK. After extensive discussion, and after soliciting feedback from many outside sources, my top choice is Chihuahuan Meadowlark. After Chihuahuan, my second choice is Mexican Meadowlark, even though both Eastern and Western meadowlarks occur in Mexico, and a subspecies of Eastern Meadowlark (mexicana) has been referred to as “Mexican Meadowlark” in the past; I think given that a significant portion of its range is in Mexico, more so than either of the other species, and its very similar range to Mexican Duck (Anas diazi), this could be a good option, though I do recognize the confusion that could come from Sturnella magna mexicana. I do not think Lilian’s is an appropriate name for the species, for the reasons stated in the proposal. By applying a new name to the combined species of lilianae and auropectoralis, it avoids confusion about the past use of Lilian’s to describe the subspecies lilianae exclusively. Use of Lilian’s also goes back on our recent actions to not use eponymous names for newly split taxa, as we did for West Mexican Euphonia (Euphonia godmani), Turquoise-crowned Hummingbird (Cynanthus doubledayi), Yellow-throated Nightingale-Thrush (Catharus dryas), and Speckled Nightingale-Thrush (Catharus maculatus).

CHIHUAHUAN MEADOWLARK. Initially I felt that Lilian’s was the best choice, given the long history of its use for lilianae (apart from auropectoralis though).  As an eponym, it is more inclusive given that it is named after a woman who generously provided the funds and collection for the description of the taxon. However, given the current review of eponyms by another AOS committee, it would be better to choose a different name even though each of the other names has problems.  None of the plumage oriented names seems to exclusively describe a distinct auropectoralis + lilianae. The same goes for the geographic names.  Chihuahuan Raven has a distribution similar to that of lilianae, and Chihuahuan is okay (but not great) both as a type of desert and a large Mexican state that encompasses some of the range.  It is a familiar term to most, as it is used for Chihuahuan Raven, which shares a distribution similar to lilianae but not auropectoralis.  Madrean is potentially a good name, but is largely unknown, seems not to have a generally agreed upon definition or geographic demarcation, and many birders usually think of it as more montane for species like Imperial Woodpecker or Eared Trogon. There is some problem with its use as a vulgarity in some parts of Mexico, but this use is not known to most Spanish speakers in our area. Although Desert Grassland Meadowlark seems not to have any history, it is rather descriptive of the habitat and may be one of the better names for merged lilianae with auropectoralis.   My choices: 1 – Chihuahuan Meadowlark. 2 –Madrean Meadowlark. 3 – Desert Grassland Meadowlark.

CHIHUAHUAN MEADOWLARK. I initially preferred the plumage-based English names rather than the geographic options. To me, the pale sides and cheeks do help distinguish lilianae from magna and neglecta although there is certainly quite a bit of phenotypic variation in both characters, so I initially preferred Pale-sided and Pale-cheeked Meadowlark. We then conducted multiple surveys to solicit input from the broader ornithological community. I reviewed both the quantitative rankings as well as the individual comments that survey responders provided. Combined with my personal preferences, I feel that Chihuahuan Meadowlark is my preferred English name, based on the approximate distribution of lilianae and the Chihuahuan Desert and parallel use of a geographic name with Eastern / Western Meadowlark. As others have noted, there are populations of lilianae in southwestern Mexico that occur outside of the Chihuahuan Desert, but that same issue of geographic cohesion is much, much more pronounced for what remains of the Eastern Meadlowlark (neglecta) after this split is resolved. While not perfect, Chihuahuan or Mexican are the best options in my opinion. I don’t find Desert Grassland as clunky as others. After more reflection, White-tailed seems the best phenotypic option as it is the most commonly used field mark in my discussions with other birders. My final rankings are: 1) Chihuahuan, 2) Mexican, 3) Desert Grassland, 4) White-tailed, 5) Madrean.

CHIHUAHUAN MEADOWLARK. None of the names are perfect, but I vote for Chihuahuan of the proposed geographical names. I do like Lilian’s because of the history, although I understand the reasons for not going with that name. I don’t like the habitat or plumage-based names.

CHIHUAHUAN MEADOWLARK. I initially preferred plumage-based names, and as most individuals are distinctly pale-sided (including on the cheeks). I marginally preferred Pale-sided but would be fine with White-cheeked or Pale-cheeked. Desert or Desert Grassland would be OK too but the others occur in some types of desert and Desert Grassland is a bit long and clunky, and again not even exclusive to lilianae. I’m less enamored of Pallid and don’t think it fits the bird overall. Again, White-tailed Meadowlark, another plumage-based name which highlights the most distinctive feature, is flawed as it is just more extensively white in this species vs. the others. No name is perfect, though, as some magna have white cheeks and some (fresh) lilianae are not that pale-sided. I don’t think we should use Lilian’s for reasons mentioned by others. Once it became clear there were no good plumage- or habitat-based names for this cryptic species, that leaves geographic names. I’ve come around to considering that Chihuahuan is best because the region is accurate for a sizable portion of the species’ range, it is already familiar as the long-standing name for a raven, and it has considerable traction, having recently been used by eBird. I think that Madrean is unacceptable due primarily to its inconsistent usage that sometimes refers to a much larger area but seems most often applied to southwestern US and central Mexican montane pine-oak habitat. So my final rankings are: 1. Chihuahuan, 2. Desert, 3. White-tailed, 4. Mexican, 5. Pale-sided.

CHIHUAHUAN MEADOWLARK. My priority: 1. Chihuahuan. 2 – Pallid Meadowlark. 3 – Pale-cheeked Meadowlark. 4 – White-cheeked Meadowlark. 5 – Golden-breasted Meadowlark.

CHIHUAHUAN MEADOWLARK. Chihuahan is the best choice, given all the pros and cons. Southwestern is ok. I still like Desert, High Desert, or Desert Grassland as a way of distinguishing this species from the other meadowlarks. My other choices in order are: White-tailed or Pallid. I’m strongly opposed to Lilian’s. 

CHIHUAHUAN MEADOWLARK. After multiple reviews mentioned above, my top five preferences are: 1 – Chihuahuan Meadowlark. 2 – Mexican Meadowlark. 3 – Desert Grassland Meadowlark. 4 – Pallid Meadowlark. 5 – Golden-breasted Meadowlark. I fully support women in science and agree that the work of women ornithologists should be recognized. However, I disagree with the normalized practices in which men are recognized by naming species with their surnames, while women are recognized by naming species with their first names. Therefore, I am opposed to the name Lilian’s Meadowlark.

CHIHUAHUAN MEADOWLARK. All English names being considered for this newly recognized species, including the names based on plumage, habitat, distribution, and a person’s name, have serious drawbacks that to me outweigh their positive aspects. The task, then, is to choose the least bad name from a candidate pool of poor names. Under these circumstances, the information obtained from polling eBird reviewers has been invaluable, and the results of the poll are the main reason for my opting for Chihuahuan Meadowlark over other, equally flawed names.

The fact that Chihuahuan Meadowlark is a less than ideal name has been noted in many other comments, one going so far as to include a map showing the lack of concordance in many areas of the range of this species with the Chihuahuan Desert or the range of Chihuahuan Raven. Two points should be made about this. First, similar maps could be produced showing the inappropriateness of other geographical names such as Mexican Meadowlark and Southwestern Meadowlark, as well as similar arguments showing the drawbacks of the non-geographical names. For example, a map targeting Mexican Meadowlark would show that both Eastern and Western meadowlarks also occur extensively in Mexico, and a map targeting Southwestern Meadowlark would show that it is neither the southernmost (Eastern Meadowlark occurs south to South America) nor the westernmost (Western Meadowlark occurs further west in Mexico and further west – and southwest – in the US) species of yellow meadowlark. Second, the range of Sturnella lilianae on the map showing comparisons with the Chihuahuan Desert and Chihuahuan Raven is at odds with its range on the specimen-based map in Lanyon’s 1962 paper on meadowlarks of the desert grassland (Auk 79: 183-207), in which the distribution of subspecies auropectoralis, in addition to lilianae, shows overlap with the distribution of Chihuahuan Raven. The map of Lanyon, whose studies of these birds are landmark publications, is presumably more accurate than the admittedly crude map included in the comment.

Lanyon’s study of desert grassland meadowlarks is also instructive regarding the habitat preferences of subspecies lilianae and auropectoralis. Whereas in the US and northern Mexico subspecies lilianae is found in desert grassland and Western Meadowlark in more mesic habitats in areas of sympatry, this situation is reversed further south in Mexico, where subspecies auropectoralis occurs in more mesic habitats, whereas Western Meadowlark occupies desert grassland. Thus, Desert Grassland Meadowlark, although highly appropriate for one subspecies of S. lilianae, does not apply to subspecies auropectoralis and is in fact misleading regarding its habitat relations with Western Meadowlark.

Comments regarding stability of English names disregard the point that this is a substantially different taxon than the one traditionally referred to by the name Lilian’s Meadowlark, which consisted solely of subspecies lilianae. Prior to the molecular studies, auropectoralis was not considered to be closely related to lilianae, and inclusion of auropectoralis in the new species not only doubles the number of subspecies but also increases the range size over lilianae alone by some 50%, perhaps more. The arguments in favor of using Lilian’s Meadowlark for the new species seem to be much the same as those offered for retaining Mew Gull: it’s a name in common usage and it should be retained despite the fact that the species in question is now a substantially different taxon than that referred to by the old name (Lilian’s Meadowlark or Mew Gull). This argument was soundly rejected by the committee in the case of Mew Gull and in my view should also be rejected in this case.

LILIAN’S MEADOWLARK. Thanks to the authors for a thorough proposal on this. I don’t care what we call this species. But I have some observations. Notice that some of our discussion has focused on the rather narrow issue that “Lilian’s Meadowlark” has never included the subspecies auropectoralis. Flip that 180 degrees and recognize that at the same time Eastern Meadowlark has never included the particular subspecific constellation now excluding lilianae+auropectoralis. Yet we’ve spent no time questioning the applicability of that English name for the remaining configuration of that species (thanks to committee members for pointing out to me that this is resolved by the range size criterion). This illustrates what we might call the principle of flexible inclusion for English bird names (I just made that up, but I think it has some merit.) We’re used to a label’s specific content varying in some detail yet still being that labeled thing. We might observe on Eastern Meadowlark, “Stability, precedence!” Yes. But the same applies to “Lilian’s Meadowlark,” and under this same principle of flexible inclusion. It offers really the only credible avenue to stability and precedence (e.g., AOU 1998:643), with other potential names on the table mostly being entirely de novo, made up, with zero hits on Google (even the existing “Jalisco Meadowlark,” if we consider flexible inclusion, has zero hits; Lilian’s in contrast has its own Wikipedia page). With a stated goal for promoting stability and without a formally adopted guideline to avoid eponymous names, I think we should use Lilian’s (she also made a legitimate contribution to our discipline and was a good person; see notes below). If there was a really compelling, glaringly obvious descriptive name, I could see setting aside our stability goal for something new that really fits the bird. But the discussions thus far, which have been helpful for me, suggest that in the absence of a compelling feature of the bird or its habitat it seems to be coming down to personal preference. Because I have none, I’ll vote for the closest thing to stability on the ballot. I have no other preferences and am happy with whatever the majority chooses. Coming back to this later, after two external polls, my second choice is “Chihuahuan Meadowlark.” This seems the least bad of a series of poor names for this bird.

Some brief biographical notes on Lilian Hanna Baldwin that I looked up before the full English name proposal was developed: W. W. Brown collected the type, and Lilian Hanna Baldwin purchased the collection and donated it to the Cleveland Museum of Natural History. This collection formed the basis of Oberholser’s 1930 publication. That’s about a ~40 pp. publication, and the frontispiece is Sturnella neglecta lilianae, the first depiction of the taxon. So she directly contributed to the discovery of the bird by Oberholser, which is why he bestowed her name on it. Moreover, this was not Lilian’s only contribution to support birds and conservation: https://case.edu/ech/articles/b/baldwin-bird-research-laboratory .

Lilian was the sister of a senator (from Kendeigh’s 1940 In Memoriam for her husband S. Prentiss Baldwin in The Auk ). Baldwin was an impressive ornithologist (and a Fellow of the AOU) and an impressive scientist. But Lilian was an admirable person: https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/LKYX-BP4/lillian-converse-hanna-1852-1948. It would take a bit more digging, but it looks like at least some consider her to have been important in Red Hills (Georgia-Florida) wildlife management and conservation: http://blogs.tallahassee.com/community/2015/06/08/s-prentiss-baldwin-pivotal-man-in-red-hills-conservation/, though perhaps by accident of marriage and networking (the land donation for bird conservation in Ohio seems solid; see below).

There is also a permanent Lilian Hanna Baldwin Fund at the Cleveland Foundation. It would take some more digging to see what its funding objectives are. The bird sanctuary land donation in Ohio is the only quick bird-related conservation philanthropy I find: https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/930

Bird Sanctuary Sign: All welcome signs marking the corporate limits of the Village of Gates Mills denote the village as a bird sanctuary. While that did not become a village-wide designation until 1966, it certainly owes some credit to Lilian Hanna Baldwin’s decision to will her Gate Mills property as a bird sanctuary upon her death in 1948 as a tribute to her husband’s lifelong passion. Source: Cleveland.com Date: 2019 (unclear whose Hanna property they occupied in Thomasville, GA).

LILIAN’S MEADOWLARK. This is the “field name” for lilianae that has been in use for at least 5 decades among those interested in species limits in North American birds. It also provides an opportunity to honor the woman who is strongly associated with this species (see others’ comments).  In an era when opportunities for women in ornithology were very limited, she made a substantial contribution. To do otherwise, in my opinion, would be disrespectful. Even the paper on which our split is anchored, published in the AOS journal Ornithology in 2021, uses “Lilian’s” in the title of the paper!  Any change from this violates our guidelines on name stability, and I predict that many birders will just continue to use “Lilian’s” in the field out of habit.

2. Southwestern Meadowlark.  This one came from the eBird reviewer poll on the English name, and I think it’s fine.  It describes the general geographical position of this species with respect to the other two meadowlarks.  It works for the position of lilianae in the USA + Canada and it also works for auropectoralis from the purely Mexican perspective.  Some think “Southwestern” sounds too USA-centric, but I don’t get that; perhaps if the name were “Southwest” Meadowlark, I could understand that interpretation, but Southwestern is a relative term, just like Western and Eastern.

3. Desert Grassland Meadowlark: Yes, it’s clunky, but it’s the best way to describe the species’ habitat.  It also highlights a fundamental difference between lilianae and the species under which it was formerly treated, magna, which is nearly always restricted to mesic grasslands,  It also takes care of the minor problem that Lilian’s has referred to lilianae sensu stricto, i.e. not the Mexican subspecies auropectoralis.

As for the other choices, I can’t rank them because I find them unacceptable.  The valiant attempts to find a plumage-based name are misleading in that they also apply to Western Meadowlark just as well — they will only cause confusion.  

As for Chihuahuan, that name might be acceptable for just lilianae (analogous to Chihuahuan Raven), but it is unacceptable for a species for which most of its distribution is NOT the Chihuahuan Desert.  Very misleading and very USA-centric.  Chihuahuan Raven is a pretty good name given how hard it is to come up with accurate toponyms.  “Chihuahuan” Meadowlark is not.  I predict that many birders will use it facetiously with a wink and air quotes.  Here are some crude range maps to illustrate my point — I like to think that if this were shown to the eBird reviewers polled, it would have changed many votes:

As for Mexican Meadowlark, this name was already used for the subspecies S. magna mexicanus, not only in foundational literature such as Ridgway and Hellmayr but also many papers and books of the era.  Although no longer in direct use, it will be “used” in Google Scholar searches forever.  Also, Eastern Meadowlark occupies a larger range within Mexico than does Lilian’s (including auropectoralis), and most of that is occupied by S. m. mexicanus.  Sure, ornithology as a discipline would survive calling S. lilianae “Mexican Meadowlark” (and it is certainly more appropriate than is Chihuahuan), but I think we can do better.

DESERT GRASSLAND MEADOWLARK. First choice, Desert Grassland Meadowlark, 2nd choice White-tailed Meadowlark. Without the political baggage, sometimes addressed, sometimes not, even within NACC, my desire would be Lilian’s Meadowlark as that is what the birding community has always called it. It is an eponym, but one that Oberholser established to honor Lilian Baldwin who generously donated her late husband’s collection. In some ways we are dishonoring her memory by moving away from this widely used English name, and we do this because of the political climate we find ourselves in, this for what I believe is a minority of the birding community. We shall see. I realize that Lilian’s overlooks the allopatric (to lilianae) auropectoralis. Further studies should help clarify the relationships of those two taxa. But, given the sharp divisions of opinion, even within this Committee, I would rather not have a confrontation at this point. I appreciate being brought up to speed about Western Meadowlarks breeding in the desert grassland of north central Mexico, south of lilianae, but desert grassland does describe the breeding habitat of lilianae and auropectoralis, and as Van notes, not the remaining populations of S. magna. I would add that the dismissal of Desert Grassland because two species of meadowlarks breed in desert grasslands was not a factor when it came to the mangos where two species breed in Puerto Rico. My second choice, and one with little support, is White-tailed Meadowlark as it describes the best field mark for the species, the one that folks that know the taxon rely on along with the head pattern to identify them in the field. I believe we could overcome the confusion by explaining that it is the taxon of meadowlark with the most white in the tail. I’m not sure how much white auropectoralis has in the tail. Most other English names including Pallid, Pale-sided, Madrean, and Mexican, are all inappropriate for reasons articulated earlier. Chihuahuan is misleading as it doesn’t even incorporate the full range of lilianae, let alone auropectoralis. But it does cover much of the range of lilianae and is demonstrably better than the list given of unacceptable names. The one thing that the Committee does agree on is that no new English name is a particularly good one. 

2022-D-2: Establish English names for Anthracothorax aurulentus and A. dominicus s. s.

PUERTO RICAN MANGO & HISPANIOLAN MANGO. I prefer names based on geography as my first choice: b. Puerto Rican Mango and Hispaniolan Mango. However, to avoid confusion since another species of the same genus lives in Puerto Rico, my second option is: e. Black-breasted Mango and Hispaniolan Mango.

PUERTO RICAN MANGO & HISPANIOLAN MANGO. I think that although the geographic names appear somewhat inappropriate (if we over-analyze), they still convey the most information. I have no problem with aurulentus occurring on Vieques and Culebra (both politically Puerto Rican, and both less than 10 miles off of Puerto Rico).   Puerto Rican Mango simply delineates that it occurs on Puerto Rican; it does not necessarily mean that there aren’t other mangos there.  Black-breasted and Black-bellied are good diagnostic names but too similar (especially when Black-throated is added in the same genus).   

PUERTO RICAN MANGO & HISPANIOLAN MANGO. I prefer the geographic names which are so much more informative than the potential plumage-based names. Never mind that there is another mango endemic to Puerto Rico; I’m sure that can be said for plenty of island endemics worldwide (e.g. Jamaican and Blue Mountain vireos; however, I could not find other examples from the Caribbean at least). And the fact that aurulentus has occurred (and still does on some islands; see eBird) on a few of the Virgin Islands is not a problem in my view, since clearly Puerto Rico is its main range. That said, I also think that Black-breasted Mango (which contrasts nicely with Green Mango) paired with Hispaniolan would be fine, and I don’t think Jamaican Mango is necessarily implicated as being closely related other than being a congener. I don’t prefer Black-bellied because the whole underparts of dominicus are black and black-bellied can be taken as only referring to a small part of the underparts. Also, several mangos are black-breasted or black-bellied, whereas the geonyms are much more specific. I spent considerable time looking at photos on eBird and the sides of aurulentus are often green but also often gray, and even dominicus can have a bit of these colors on the sides; plus there are many immature males with even more green or gray below, so Black-sided for dominicus or Green/Gray-sided for aurulentus didn’t make the cut, and nothing else suggested itself.

PUERTO RICAN MANGO & HISPANIOLAN MANGO. In this case I prefer the geographical names Hisplanolian Mango and Puerto Rican Mango. Hispaniolan Mango is certainly appropriate for dominicus, and as noted by others, I don’t think it’s an issue that 1) aurulentus occurs on islands outside of Puerto Rico (they are still politically associated with Puerto Rico), or 2) that there is another species of mango also on Puerto Rico. I also don’t think that having ‘Jamaican Mango’ necessarily implies a close relationship.

PUERTO RICAN MANGO & HISPANIOLAN MANGO. In this case I prefer the geographical names, and my suggestions are 1) Puerto Rican Mango and Hispaniolan Mango and 2) Black-breasted Mango and Hispaniolan Mango.

PUERTO RICAN MANGO & HISPANIOLAN MANGO. I prefer the geographic names. Puerto Rican Mango is already being used and other species called “Puerto Rican” have similar distributions. I’m not concerned about confusion with Green Mango and it does have a more restricted distribution. I see no reason to change Hispaniolan Mango. 

PUERTO RICAN MANGO & HISPANIOLAN MANGO. Unlike 2022-D-1, this split did not have an English major subspecific group name in AOU (1998). Not caring what we call these, I tried to gauge usage. Google searches are a very mixed bag of information and not literature, but they can give a rough idea of broader use. In this taxon, “mango” goofs up these searches (somewhat alleviated by adding “bird” after a name in quotes), but top hits are illustrative. “Haitian Mango” gives zero hits, but “Hispaniolan Mango” gives 556. “Black-bellied Mango” gives just three. Based on disparate usage and solid “bird” hits for it, I will go with Hispaniolan for dominicus. Searching on “”Puerto Rican Mango” bird” yields 428 hits; “East Antillian Mango” yields zero, and “Black-breasted Mango” is especially popular, being commonly incorrectly used for the Black-throated Mango, A. nigricollis (e.g., google ““Black-breasted Mango” bird Panama”). I think it would be good to avoid adding to such confusion and use Puerto Rican Mango. So I prefer option B, but am happy with whatever the majority chooses.

BLACK-BREASTED MANGO & HISPANIOLAN MANGO. A tough decision, but I think as the proposal points out, the presence of another endemic Anthracothorax on Puerto Rico, plus the fact that aurulentus occurs (currently and historically) outside of Puerto Rico, suggests that the name Puerto Rican Mango may not be appropriate. I favor the name Black-breasted Mango for aurulentus, but using Hispaniolan Mango for dominicus sensu stricto. That being said, however, I would be okay with Puerto Rican Mango, but agree with the proposal that it would be strange and confusing to have two endemic (or near endemic) mangos to the island, with only one getting the name Puerto Rican Mango.

BLACK-BREASTED MANGO & HISPANIOLAN MANGO. Preference: option E so Hispaniolan Mango for A. dominicus and Black-breasted Mango for A. aurulentus. Hispaniolan Mango is perhaps the best name for the taxon, the only Anthracothorax on Hispaniola and fits well with Jamaican Mango. I do think that Black-bellied Mango counters well with Black-breasted Mango, so I also think that is a good English name. The fact that there are two Anthrocorax on Puerto Rico, and calling one of them Puerto Rican Mango does trouble me, especially when the one totally confined to the island (A. viridis, Green Mango) isn’t the one called Puerto Rican Mango. And, A. aurulentus was formerly widespread in the Virgin Islands. This is not Puerto Rico. And, where it is still present (Virgin Gorda, Anegada and Beef Island), these are the British Virgin Islands, not the islands near Puerto Rico (Raffaele 1989). These islands where the species is still present are over 150 km away from the closest point on the island of Puerto Rico. The depletion from most of the Virgin Islands and for that matter from the east coast of Puerto Rico is apparently due to the presence and range expansion of the Green-throated Carib Eulampis holosericeus (Raffaele 1989). Raffaele et al. (2020) says that aurulentus on Puerto Rico is common on the southern coast and northern haystack hills, but is now nearly absent from the east coast and is increasingly rare in the Virgin Islands. Today, I’m not even sure it can be said it is the most widespread mango in Puerto Rico. As for coloration, yes, in certain lights, etc, the black breast band and the contrast with the rest of the dull underparts isn’t apparent, but that’s true for all hummingbirds named for their colors.