Red-capped Coua Coua ruficeps


Taxonomic note

Coua ruficeps and C. olivaceiceps (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) were previously lumped as C. ruficeps following Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993).

Taxonomic source(s)
del Hoyo, J., Collar, N.J., Christie, D.A., Elliott, A. and Fishpool, L.D.C. 2014. HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Volume 1: Non-passerines. Lynx Edicions BirdLife International, Barcelona, Spain and Cambridge, UK.

IUCN Red list criteria met and history
Red List criteria met
Critically Endangered Endangered Vulnerable
- - -

Red List history
Year Category Criteria
2022 Least Concern
2016 Least Concern
2014 Least Concern
Species attributes

Migratory status not a migrant Forest dependency medium
Land mass type Average mass 180 g

Estimate Data quality
Extent of Occurrence breeding/resident (km2) 154,000
Number of locations -
Severely Fragmented -
Population and trend
Value Data quality Derivation Year of estimate
No. of mature individuals unknown not applicable not applicable 0
Population trend stable suspected -
Decline (3 years/1 generation past) - - -
Decline (5 years/1 generation past) - - -
Decline (10 years/1 generation past) - - -
Decline (10 years/3 generation future) - - -
Decline (10 years/3 generation past and future) - - -
Number of subpopulations - - -
Percentage in largest subpopulation - - -
Generation length (yrs) 5 - - -

Population justification: The global population size has not been quantified, but the species is reported to be common throughout its range (del Hoyo et al. 1997, Erritzøe et al. 2011), including within Ankarafantisika National Park and other protected areas (Kirwan et al. 2020). Around Ampijoroa it is commoner in disturbed forest, with densities of up to 25.7 individuals/km2 in burned forest compared to 16.7 individuals/km2 in intact forest (Chouteau et al. 2004).

Trend justification: Although tree cover loss within the range is currently estimated at around 25% across three generations (15 years; Global Forest Watch 2021, using Hansen et al. [2013] data and methods disclosed therein), the species persists in degraded habitats and may even benefit from burning (Chouteau et al. 2004, Erritzøe et al. 2011). The population is therefore suspected to be stable in the absence of evidence for any declines or substantial threats. However, repeated monitoring over a longer timeframe is required to determine any lasting population impacts.

Country/territory distribution
Country/Territory Presence Origin Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage
Madagascar extant native yes

Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBA)
Country/Territory IBA Name

Habitats & altitude
Habitat (level 1) Habitat (level 2) Importance Occurrence
Artificial/Terrestrial Subtropical/Tropical Heavily Degraded Former Forest suitable resident
Forest Subtropical/Tropical Dry suitable resident
Forest Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland suitable resident
Shrubland Subtropical/Tropical Dry suitable resident
Altitude 0 - 850 m Occasional altitudinal limits  

Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2023) Species factsheet: Coua ruficeps. Downloaded from on 06/06/2023. Recommended citation for factsheets for more than one species: BirdLife International (2023) IUCN Red List for birds. Downloaded from on 06/06/2023.