Data Zone
Justification of Red List category
This species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence <20,000 km² or Area of Occupancy < 2,000 km² combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size has not been quantified, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern.
Population justification
The global population size has not been quantified, but this species is described as 'uncommon' (Stotz et al. 1996). It appears to be more common in undisturbed and unhunted areas (Thiollay 1989, 1992, 2005, G. Leite in litt. 2020, R. H. Cecile in litt. 2021). In Suriname, it is common in primary forest, probably much rarer or absent in logged forests, and rare elsewhere (O. Ottema in litt. 2020).
Estimated population densities include 14.2 and 15 individuals per km2 in lowland rainforest in southern French Guiana (Thiollay 1986); 13.87 (+/- 5.28) individuals per km2 at sites without hunting and 0.64 (+/- 0.60) individuals per km2 at regularly hunted sites in primary forest in French Guiana (Thiollay 1989); 17.08 (90% C. I. 6.88–37.58) individuals per km2 at undisturbed sites in French Guiana (Denis et al. 2018); c.2 individuals per km2 at hunted sites in French Guiana (Vaessen et al. in prep. 2021); 15.3 (7.9–30.1) individuals per km2 in unlogged forest and 24.4 (14.5–40.1) individuals per km2 in forest subject to reduced-impact logging in central Guyana (Bicknell and Peres 2010); and 2.2 (0.6–8.1) individuals per km2 in undisturbed primary forest, 1.8 (0.4–9.2) individuals per km2 near an oil extraction road, and 5 (1.7–15.3) individuals per km2 near an oil extraction road with controlled access in Ecuador (Suárez et al. 2013).
The subpopulation struture is not known. There are two subspecies, indicating at least two subpopulations.
Trend justification
Remote sensing data on tree cover loss within the species's range indicates that approximately 2.5% of tree cover with at least 50% canopy cover was lost over 2001-2020 (Global Forest Watch 2021). Extrapolating over the period 1997-2020, it is estimated that approximately 3% of tree cover was lost from the species's range over the past three generations. Extrapolating forwards, it is estimated that approximately 3-6% of tree cover may be lost from the species's range over the next three generations.
The species appears to prefer mature primary forest (Parry et al. 2007). Surveys in Guyana found higher densities in forest subject to reduced-impact logging than in unlogged forest (Bicknell and Peres 2010), whilst other survey have found that the species is sensitive to logging and associated forest degradation (Thiollay 1992, Laufer et al. 2015). The species may therefore experience faster population declines than may be suggested by the rate of tree cover loss.
The species is also known to be susceptible to hunting, and population densities have been found to be severely depleted in heavily hunted areas (Thiollay 1989, 1992, 2005, G. Leite in litt. 2020, R. H. Cecile in litt. 2021; Vaessen et al. in prep. 2021). Therefore, it is likely that hunting is causing population declines in at least some parts of its range. In French Guiana, surveys have recorded mean population densities of 3.87 (+/- 5.28) individuals per km2 and 17.08 (90% C. I. 6.88–37.58) individuals per km2 at sites without hunting (Thiollay 1989, Denis et al. 2018), and 0.64 (+/- 0.60) individuals per km2 and c.2 individuals per km2 at hunted sites (Thiollay 1989, Vaessen et al. in prep. 2021), representing >80% reductions in abundance in hunted sites.
Assuming that hunting may double the rate of decline, and that disturbance may contribute an additional decline at around half of the rate of deforestation (Barlow et al. 2016), the population size is suspected to have undergone a reduction of 3-8% over the past three generations, and to undergo a reduction of 3-14% over the next three generations.
The nominate occurs from extreme SE Colombia east through southern and eastern Venezuela, south into Brazil east of the Rio Negro, and east into Guyana, French Guiana and Suriname. P. c. napensis occurs from southeastern Colombia, south through eastern Ecuador and northeastern Peru, north of the Río Marañón and Amazon, and east into northwestern Brazil, north of the Río Solimões. It is typically found well away from human settlement.
Found in dense, lowland, moist forest away from human settlement. It appears to prefer mature primary forest (Parry et al. 2007) with a closed canopy (Michalski et al. 2015). Surveys in Guyana found higher densities in forest subject to reduced-impact logging than in unlogged forest (Bicknell and Peres 2010), whilst other survey have found that the species is sensitive to logging and associated forest degradation (Thiollay 1992, Laufer et al. 2015). Occurs in polyandrous groups that feed predominantly on ripe fruit on the forest floor, but will also take arthropods and small vertebrates such as snakes. Breeds during December-June in the Guianas, presumed to breed during the wet season throughout range. Nest is placed at height in an elevated unroofed cavity.
The species is a popular hunting target in populated areas across much of its range. Five villages in northern Brazil took 162 birds in a year, making it one of the most frequently hunted bird species (De Souza-Mazurek et al. 2000). Surveys in primary forest in French Guiana found severely depleted population densities in regularly hunted areas, with very low densities remaining (Thiollay 1989, 2005, Denis et al. 2018, Vaessen et al., in prep. 2021). Hunting in the Jari region was found to be unsustainable, although no significant effect on the species's population density was detected (Parry et al. 2009). The species is also captured to be kept as a pet, or to guard flocks of poultry.
Accelerating deforestation is also a threat, as land is cleared for mainly for wood extraction, cattle ranching and small-scale agriculture (P. Boesman in litt. 2020). Escaped agricultural fires and gold mining are also increasingly leading to forest loss and degradation (O. Ottema in litt. 2020, P. Boesman in litt. 2020, G. Leite in litt. 2020). Approximately 20-30% of inland forest in Suriname is designated as gold mining concessions (O. Ottema in litt. 2020, GONINI 2020). Gold mining also exacerbates the threat of hunting, as miners often hunt whilst camping at gold mines (P. Boesman in litt. 2020). The species is likely to be sensitive to forest degradation caused by selective logging (Thiollay 1992, Laufer et al. 2015). Approximately 10-20% of the inland forest in Suriname is designated as timber concessions, and logging in the country is increasing rapidly (O. Ottema in litt. 2020, GONINI 2020).
Conservation and research actions underway
Individuals are held in captivity. The species is listed as nationally Near Threatened in Ecuador (Freile et al. 2018). It occurs in protected areas throughout its range.
Conservation and research actions proposed
Research the species's population size and trends. Monitor trends in hunting of the species. Monitor habitat loss and degradation across the range.
Expand the protected area network. Effectively resource and manage existing and new protected areas to prevent logging and hunting. Conservation on private lands, through expanding market pressures for sound land management and preventing forest clearance on lands unsuitable for agriculture, is also essential (Soares-Filho et al. 2006). Ensure that hunting does not exceed sustainable levels.
45–52 cm. Sturdy, upright, ovoid, noisy, largely terrestrial birds of northwest and north Amazonian and Guianan shield forests. Predominantly black with green iridescence on the neck, pale grey secondaries and ochre across the lower mantle creating a large pale area on the hindquarters. P. c. napensis differs only in having largely purple iridescence on the neck. The bill and legs are dark. Similar species. Ochre-winged Trumpeter P. ochroptera has ochre secondaries, White-winged Trumpeter P. leucoptera has pure white secondaries and a pale yellow bill.
Text account compilers
Wheatley, H.
Contributors
Butchart, S., Symes, A., Ekstrom, J., Taylor, J., Claessens, O., Pelletier, V., Ottema, O., Boesman, P., Leite, G., Richard-Hansen, C. & Brooks, D.
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Species factsheet: Grey-winged Trumpeter Psophia crepitans. Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/grey-winged-trumpeter-psophia-crepitans on 20/12/2024.
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 20/12/2024.