• Summary
• Text account
• Data table and detailed info
• Distribution map
• Reference and further resources

Taxonomic source(s)
del Hoyo, J., Collar, N.J., Christie, D.A., Elliott, A., Fishpool, L.D.C., Boesman, P. and Kirwan, G.M. 2016. HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Volume 2: Passerines. Lynx Edicions and BirdLife International, Barcelona, Spain and Cambridge, UK.
SACC. 2005 and updates. A classification of the bird species of South America. Available at: https://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCBaseline.htm.

Red List criteria met

Critically Endangered	Endangered	Vulnerable
-	-	C2a(i)

Red List history

Year	Category	Criteria
2020	Near Threatened	B2ab(i,ii,iii,iv,v); C2a(i)
2016	Near Threatened	B1ab(iii)
2012	Near Threatened	B1ab(iii)
2011	Near Threatened	B1a+b(iii)
2008	Vulnerable	B1a+b(iii)
2004	Vulnerable
2000	Endangered
1996	Endangered
1994	Endangered
1988	Lower Risk/Least Concern

Migratory status	not a migrant	Forest dependency	does not normally occur in forest
Land-mass type	continent	Average mass	-

	Estimate	Data quality
Extent of Occurrence (breeding/resident)	32,000 km2	medium
Area of Occupancy (breeding/resident)	200 km2
Number of locations	11-30	-
Severely fragmented?	no	-

	Estimate	Data quality	Derivation	Year of estimate
Population size	3000-48000, 10600 mature individuals	medium	estimated	2020
Population trend	decreasing	poor	inferred	2000-2011
Generation length	2.89 years	-	-	-
Number of subpopulations	3-9	-	-	-
Percentage of mature individuals in largest subpopulation	1-89%	-	-	-

Population justification: When discovered, the species was described as 'not uncommon in a small area at Serra do Cipo, Minas Gerais' (Pearman 1990). The species seems to be more abundant in the northern part of its range, especially in the Diamantina plateau and central Espinhaço in central-northern Minas Gerais state (M. F. de Vasconcelos in litt. 2009).

The species has a strongly male-biased sex ratio (Freitas 2011, Costa 2015), with an adult population composed of c.70% males (Costa 2015, Freitas et al.2019). As a result, a low proportion of the adult population (47%) are in breeding pairs (Costa 2015).

Surveys in 2009-2010 in Serra do Cipó found a mean population density of 29 individuals per km² in campo rupestre habitat, and 13 individuals, and five breeding pairs, per km² across the study area (Freitas 2011). Another analysis of surveys at Serra do Cipó provided mean population densities of 35.2 adult individuals per km² in campo rupestre habitat, and 13.6 adults per km² across the study area (Freitas et al. 2019a). Considering paired individuals only, this study found an average of 22.9 per km² in campo rupestre habitat, and 8.7 per km² across the study area (Freitas et al. 2019a). Surveys from 2009-2015 in Serra do Cipó found an average density of 17 adult individuals per km² of rocky outcrops, and 8 adults per km² of study area, with a lower density of paired individuals (7 and 3 respectively) due to the sex ratio bias (Costa 2015). Based on the area of habitat within the species's range, the species' global population size was projected to be around 21,800 (7,400 - 47,600) paired individuals (Costa 2015).

Updated estimates of the area of suitable habitat were derived from a species distribution model by Freitas et al. (2019b). By multiplying average numbers of paired individuals found by Costa (2015) by the new estimated area of habitat, the population size was estimated at 12,792 (3,655-29,238; L. M. Costa and G. H. S. Freitas in litt. 2020). By removing some area of the modelled range polygons without nearby records, a more conservative version of the modelled range was produced, which represented 83% of the original area. Multiplying the above population estimated by 83% produced a more conservative population estimate of 10,617 (3,034-24,268).

Based on the estimates described, the population size is here placed in the band 3,000 - 48,000 mature individuals, with a best estimate of 10,600.

The species's range is divided into three areas separated by some distance and there are at least three subpopulations. L. M. Costa (2015) estimated 700 mature individuals in the northern part of the range, 1,900 in the central part and 19,800 in the southern part. However, it is likely that there are further subpopulation divisions within these blocks, particularly the southern block, due to narrower gaps of around 10 km between areas of suitable elevation. The species is thought to have a low dispersal distance (Costa 2015). A study of the species's habitat and elevational range identified nine 'sky islands' within the species's range, which may represent separate subpopulations (Freitas et al. 2019b). By multiplying the area of each ‘sky island’ by the proportion of each sky island that falls within the species distribution model (from Table 1 in Freitas et al. 2019b) to find the area of the distribution model in each, then dividing the population estimate between the sky islands according to their relative area of species distribution model, the largest sky island (Cipó North) is estimated to hold 974-15,287 mature individuals (here rounded to 900-16,000), with a best estimate of 3,404 (here rounded to 3,000).

Trend justification: Studies of ringed individuals and territories in Serra do Cipó over six years by L. M. Costa (2015) indicated a declining population trend from 2009 to 2015. Therefore, there is an inferred continuing decline in the number of mature individuals. There is no quantified estimate of the rate of reduction.

Country/Territory	Presence	Origin	Resident	Breeding visitor	Non-breeding visitor	Passage migrant
Brazil	extant	native	yes

Country/Territory	IBA Name

Habitat (level 1)	Habitat (level 2)	Importance	Occurrence
Grassland	Subtropical/Tropical High Altitude	suitable	resident
Rocky areas (eg. inland cliffs, mountain peaks)		major	resident
Shrubland	Subtropical/Tropical High Altitude	major	resident
Altitude	1100 - 2000 m	Occasional altitudinal limits

Threat (level 1)	Threat (level 2)	Impact and Stresses
Agriculture & aquaculture	Livestock farming & ranching - Small-holder grazing, ranching or farming	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Ongoing		Minority (<50%)		No decline		Low Impact: 4
		Stresses Ecosystem degradation, Ecosystem conversion
Climate change & severe weather	Habitat shifting & alteration	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Ongoing		Whole (>90%)		Slow, Significant Declines		Medium Impact: 7
		Stresses Ecosystem degradation, Ecosystem conversion
Energy production & mining	Mining & quarrying	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Ongoing		Minority (<50%)		Negligible declines		Low Impact: 4
		Stresses Ecosystem degradation, Ecosystem conversion
Invasive and other problematic species, genes & diseases	Invasive non-native/alien species/diseases - Molothrus bonariensis	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Ongoing		Majority (50-90%)		Slow, Significant Declines		Medium Impact: 6
		Stresses Reduced reproductive success
Invasive and other problematic species, genes & diseases	Invasive non-native/alien species/diseases - Unspecified species	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Ongoing		Minority (<50%)		Negligible declines		Low Impact: 4
		Stresses Ecosystem degradation, Ecosystem conversion
Natural system modifications	Fire & fire suppression - Increase in fire frequency/intensity	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Future		Minority (<50%)		Rapid Declines		Low Impact: 4
		Stresses Ecosystem degradation, Species mortality
Residential & commercial development	Tourism & recreation areas	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Ongoing		Majority (50-90%)		Negligible declines		Low Impact: 5
		Stresses Species disturbance, Ecosystem degradation, Ecosystem conversion
Transportation & service corridors	Roads & railroads	Timing		Scope		Severity		Impact
		Past, Likely to Return		Minority (<50%)		Slow, Significant Declines		Past Impact
		Stresses Ecosystem degradation, Ecosystem conversion

---

Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Species factsheet: Cipo Canastero Asthenes luizae. Downloaded from https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/cipo-canastero-asthenes-luizae on 22/12/2024.
Recommended citation for factsheets for more than one species: BirdLife International (2024) IUCN Red List for birds. Downloaded from https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/search on 22/12/2024.