Current view: Data table and detailed info
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.
IUCN Red List criteria met and history
Red List criteria met
Red List history
| Migratory status |
not a migrant |
Forest dependency |
medium |
| Land-mass type |
shelf island
|
Average mass |
6 g |
Population justification: Described as fairly common (Allen 2020). Dutson et al. (1992) considered it a 'common component of mixed-species flocks' and 'one of the commonest species in closed forest' during fieldwork in 1991, but were sceptical of the species' tolerance for highly degraded landscapes, unlike Allen (2020) who note the species as occurring in 'second growth...open country, coconut groves and cultivation'. Citizen science data (eBird 2024) suggest that the species is tolerant of at least moderate degradation, with numerous records from second growth and highly degraded forests; most records, however, originate from closed-canopy forest, although this in part may reflect search effort.
Based on 584 point counts, Lee and Marsden (2008) calculated an average density of 300 birds/km2 (SE ± 50.6) in lowland forest, and satellite imagery suggests a total of c.1,400 km2 of suitable habitat remains (data from Jung et al. [2020], analysed using sRedList [2023]), although some of this is degraded and at elevations marginal for this species (but it bears mention that more than 400 km2 appears optimal or nearly so). Moreover, not all birds counted are likely to have been mature individuals, especially given Lee and Marsden (2008) targeted their surveys to the breeding season. The global population size is therefore placed in a broad band of 40,000-160,000 mature individuals, with the minimum assuming only optimal habitat is occupied at a reduced density of 100 mature individuals/km2, and the upper bound set at a figure arbitrarily four times this, but with reasonable certainty that the species' true abundance probably lies somewhere between the two.
Trend justification: The only threat to this species is habitat loss and degradation, although of the latter it is at least somewhat tolerant (Dutson et al. 1992, Allen 2020, eBird 2024). While historically rates of lowland forest cover loss were very high, recent rates have been much slower, and over the past 10 years (2013-2023) forest cover in this species' range has been reduced by 3-4% (Global Forest Watch 2024, based on data from Hansen et al. [2013] and methods therein). Notwithstanding this species' tolerance of modified habitats, degradation may be having additive impacts, noting the observation by Dutson et al. (1992) that the species is likely commoner in unmodified forests. Over the past 10 years therefore, this species is suspected to have declined by 1-9%. Much remaining suitable habitat is poorly protected, and so similar declines are suspected over the next 10 years.
Country/territory distribution
Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBA)
Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Species factsheet: Scarlet-collared Flowerpecker Dicaeum retrocinctum. Downloaded from
https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/scarlet-collared-flowerpecker-dicaeum-retrocinctum on 22/11/2024.
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 22/11/2024.
