2urn:lsid:arphahub.com:pub:45048D35-BB1D-5CE8-9668-537E44BD4C7Eurn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:91BD42D4-90F1-4B45-9350-EEF175B1727AZooKeysZK1313-29891313-2970Pensoft Publishers10.3897/zookeys.420.70503907Data paperCracidMex1: a comprehensive database of global occurrences of cracids (Aves, Galliformes) with distribution in MexicoPinilla-BuitragoGonzalo17Martínez-MoralesMiguel Angel1mmartinez@ecosur.mxGonzález-GarcíaFernando2EnríquezPaula L.3Rangel-SalazarJosé Luis3RomeroCarlos Alberto Guichard4Navarro-SigüenzaAdolfo G.5Monterrubio-RicoTiberio César6Escalona-SeguraGriselda1El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, unidad Campeche. Avenida Rancho Polígono 2-A, Ciudad Industrial, Lerma, Campeche, Campeche, 24500, MexicoEl Colegio de la Frontera SurCampeche, CampecheMexicoRed de Biología y Conservación de Vertebrados, Instituto de Ecología, AC. Carretera antigua a Coatepec No. 351, El Haya, Xalapa, Veracruz, 91070, MexicoRed de Biología y Conservación de Vertebrados, Instituto de Ecología, AC. Carretera antigua a Coatepec No. 351, El Haya, Xalapa, Veracruz, 91070, MexiXalapa, VeracruzMexicoEl Colegio de la Frontera Sur, unidad San Cristóbal. Carretera Panamericana y Periférico Sur s/n, Barrio María Auxiliadora, San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas, 29290, MexicoEl Colegio de la Frontera Sur, unidad San Cristóbal. Carretera Panamericana y Periférico Sur s/n, Barrio María Auxiliadora, San Cristóbal de Las CasasSan Cristóbal de Las Casas, ChiapasMexicoZoológico Miguel Álvarez del Toro. Calzada Cerro Hueco s/n, Colonia Zapotal, Apartado Postal 6, Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas, 29094, MexicoZoológico Miguel Álvarez del Toro. Calzada Cerro Hueco s/n, Colonia Zapotal, Apartado Postal 6, Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas, 29094, Mexico.Tuxtla Gutiérrez, ChiapasMexicoMuseo de Zoología, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Apartado Postal 70-399, México DF, 04510, MexicoUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoMexico DFMexicoFacultad de Biología, Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolas de Hidalgo. Edificio R, Ciudad Universitaria, Morelia, Michoacán, 58000, MexicoFacultad de Biología, Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolas de Hidalgo. Edificio R, Ciudad Universitaria, Morelia, Michoacán, 58000, Mexico.Morelia, MichoacánMexicoPresent address: Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Ciudad Universitaria, Av. Carrera 30 No. 45, Bogotá DC, 111321, Colombia
Corresponding author: Miguel Angel Martínez-Morales (mmartinez@ecosur.mx)
Academic editor: V. Chavan
2014256201442087115FFF1FFAF-2E08-670F-0561-FFE6FFEAFF94578370092C5CF7-F8C7-498D-98FC-6187093C4D4422120142942014Gonzalo Pinilla-Buitrago, Miguel Angel Martínez-Morales, Fernando González-García, Paula L. Enríquez, José Luis Rangel-Salazar, Carlos Alberto Guichard Romero, Adolfo G. Navarro-Sigüenza, Tiberio César Monterrubio-Rico, Griselda Escalona-SeguraThis is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Cracids are among the most vulnerable groups of Neotropical birds. Almost half of the species of this family are included in a conservation risk category. Twelve taxa occur in Mexico, six of which are considered at risk at national level and two are globally endangered. Therefore, it is imperative that high quality, comprehensive, and high-resolution spatial data on the occurrence of these taxa are made available as a valuable tool in the process of defining appropriate management strategies for conservation at a local and global level. We constructed the CracidMex1 database by collating global records of all cracid taxa that occur in Mexico from available electronic databases, museum specimens, publications, “grey literature”, and unpublished records. We generated a database with 23,896 clean, validated, and standardized geographic records. Database quality control was an iterative process that commenced with the consolidation and elimination of duplicate records, followed by the geo-referencing of records when necessary, and their taxonomic and geographic validation using GIS tools and expert knowledge. We followed the geo-referencing protocol proposed by the Mexican National Commission for the Use and Conservation of Biodiversity. We could not estimate the geographic coordinates of 981 records due to inconsistencies or lack of sufficient information in the description of the locality.
Given that current records for most of the taxa have some degree of distributional bias, with redundancies at different spatial scales, the CracidMex1 database has allowed us to detect areas where more sampling effort is required to have a better representation of the global spatial occurrence of these cracids. We also found that particular attention needs to be given to taxa identification in those areas where congeners or conspecifics co-occur in order to avoid taxonomic uncertainty. The construction of the CracidMex1 database represents the first comprehensive research effort to compile current, available global geographic records for a group of cracids. The database can now be improved by continuous revision and addition of new records. The CracidMex1 database will provide high quality input data that could be used to generate species distribution models, to assess temporal changes in species distributions, to identify priority areas for research and conservation, and in the definition of management strategies for this bird group. This compilation exercise could be replicated for other cracid groups or regions to attain a better knowledge of the global occurrences of the species in this vulnerable bird family.
Pinilla-Buitrago G, Martínez-Morales MA, González-García F, Enríquez PL, Rangel-Salazar JL, Guichard Romero CA, Navarro-Sigüenza AG, Monterrubio-Rico TC, Escalona-Segura G (2014) CracidMex1: a comprehensive database of global occurrences of cracids (Aves, Galliformes) with distribution in Mexico. ZooKeys 420: 87–115. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.420.7050 GBIF key: http://www.gbif.org/dataset/d912f677-e998-4beb-a61f-b68406c2b66b
Resource citation
El Colegio de la Frontera Sur (2014 -). CracidMex1: a comprehensive database of global occurrences of cracids (Aves, Galliformes) with distribution in Mexico. 23896 records. Contributed by Pinilla-Buitrago G, Martínez-Morales MA, González-García F, Enríquez PL, Rangel-Salazar JL, Guichard Romero CA, Navarro-Sigüenza AG, Monterrubio-Rico TC, Escalona-Segura G. Online at http://ipt.pensoft.net/ipt/resource.do?r=cracidmex1, released on 10-03-2014, version 7 (last updated on 19-04-2014). GBIF key: http://www.gbif.org/dataset/d912f677-e998-4beb-a61f-b68406c2b66b. Data Paper ID: doi: 10.3897/zookeys.420.7050
Introduction
Cracids are a primitive family of Neotropical Galliformes. They are mainly frugivorous birds that inhabit primary forests, and may play an important role in regenerating and structuring forests through the dispersion and predation of seeds (Peres and Roosmalen 1996; Sedaghatkish 1996; Muñoz and Kattan 2007). Based on this and on their sensitivity to disturbance, the presence of viable populations of cracids in an area is considered indicative of forest quality.
Cracids are one of the most vulnerable groups of Neotropical birds because almost half of the 54 recognized species (AOU 2014) are at risk, and some of them are almost extinct (Brooks and Strahl 2000). This vulnerability is a consequence of their strong dependence on primary forests, and their susceptibility to habitat destruction and degradation, in addition to the intensity of hunting faced by cracids (Silva and Strahl 1991, 1997; Brooks and Strahl 2000; del Hoyo and Motis 2004). These factors together with life history traits of delayed age of first reproduction, low chick survival, and low reproduction rates, act in synergy to exacerbate the vulnerability of cracids to human pressures. In Mexico there are 12 cracid taxa of which six are included in the national list of threatened species (SEMARNAT 2010) and two (Oreophasis derbianus and Crax rubra griscomi) are globally endangered (Brooks and Strahl 2000; Martínez-Morales et al. 2009; IUCN 2013).
The lack of up to date, high quality data on the presence and abundance of cracids in many regions of their distribution prevents the definition and implementation of appropriate management strategies for their conservation (Brooks and Strahl 2000; González-García et al. 2001). Although their distribution has already been depicted in maps (Delacour and Amadon 2004; Ridgley et al. 2012), and even analysed in the context of global climate change (Peterson et al. 2001), we still do not know the present species distribution with a high level of certainty as a result of continual changes in forest cover. Not to mention that for several species or regions there are still significant gaps in knowledge of species distribution. In this regard, the former Cracid Specialist Group recommended an urgent revision of cracid distribution (Brooks and Strahl 2000; Brooks 2006).
To tackle this imperative need for information, we constructed the CracidMex1 database that embodies an exhaustive, high quality, and updated compilation of the global geographic records of the eight cracid species with distribution in Mexico. The collation of records from numerous sources required a thorough process of quality control in terms of consolidation and elimination of record redundancies, completion of missing data, verification of record localities and their spatial precision, and validation of taxa identity. This involved an iterative process of automatized tasks and the use of expert knowledge in terms of species and regions.
The CracidMex1 database will provide high quality, input data that could be used to identify areas where more research is needed, generate species distribution models, assess temporal changes in species distribution, identify priority areas for cracid conservation, and even in the definition of management strategies for this avian group. This compilation exercise could be replicated for other groups of cracids or regions to achieve a more complete knowledge of the global occurrences of the species of this vulnerable bird family.
This open access database will be continuously reviewed and supplemented with additional records, and all contributions to the database are very welcome.
The CracidMex1 database comprises 23,896 global records of 12 taxa of cracid species and subspecies with distribution in Mexico. This includes eight cracid species distributed in Mexico, out of the 54 recognized species in the Neotropical region (AOU 2014). The database also includes records of Ortalis vetula deschauenseei from the Utila Island, Honduras, and of two other subspecies of Penelope purpurascens (aequatorialis and brunnescens) which are not distributed in Mexico (Table 2). The genus Ortalis accounted for most of the records, followed by Penelope, Crax, Penelopina, and Oreophasis. This bias in records at a genus level is also mirrored at species level (Figure 1). However, at subspecies level this bias is not evident because only 19.9% of the records assignable to subspecies level are given to this taxonomic level (4.6% in Ortalis vetula, 43.5% in Penelope purpurascens, and 100% in Crax rubra).
Distribution of the 23,896 records by species in the CracidMex1 database.
https://binary.pensoft.net/fig/30148
Number of records in the CracidMex1 database by genus, species, and subspecies.
Genus/Species/Subspecies
Records
Proportion (%)
Ortalis
17,663
73.9
Ortalis vetula
14,366
60.1
Ortalis vetula vetula
193
0.8
Ortalis vetula mccalli
291
1.2
Ortalis vetula pallidiventris
119
0.5
Ortalis vetula deschauenseei
4
0.0
Ortalis vetula intermedia
58
0.2
Ortalis wagleri
1,151
4.8
Ortalis poliocephala
1,754
7.3
Ortalis leucogastra
392
1.6
Penelope
3,100
13.0
Penelope purpurascens
3,100
13.0
Penelope purpurascens purpurascens
1,152
4.8
Penelope purpurascens aequatorialis
164
0.7
Penelope purpurascens brunnescens
29
0.1
Penelopina nigra
907
3.8
Oreophasis derbianus
401
1.7
Crax
1,825
7.6
Crax rubra
1,825
7.6
Crax rubra rubra
1,797
7.5
Crax rubra griscomi
28
0.1
Spatial coverage
General spatial coverage
Valid distributional records (22,731), based on the native distribution of taxa, cover distributions from southern Texas, USA, in the north, to Loja, Ecuador, in the south, including Mexico, Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, and Peru (Table 3, Figures 2 and 3). These records are labelled as presente (present) in the “occurrenceStatus” field of the database. Other records corresponded to zoo specimens (49), records with spatial inconsistencies or ambiguities (143), and records for which coordinates could not be calculated due to insufficient information in the description of the locality (981). These records are labelled as ausente (absent) or dudoso (doubtful) in the “occurrenceStatus” field. In this case a label of “absent” (186 records) means that the record is out of the distributional range of the species (e.g., zoo records), and “doubtful” (979) means that the species could be present in the area, but the ambiguity in the description of the locality prevents an unequivocal assertion of the spatial validity of the record (e.g., Locality: Mexico).
Geographic distribution of the 22,731 valid distributional records of cracids in the CracidMex1 database. Grey shadeing represents the area where the species occurrence is expected based on Ridgley et al. (2012).
https://binary.pensoft.net/fig/30149
Distribution of cracid genera by country for the 22,731 valid distributional records in the CracidMex1 database.
https://binary.pensoft.net/fig/30150
Number of valid distributional records of cracid species by country in the CracidMex1 database.
Country
Ortalis vetula
Ortalis wagleri
Ortalis poliocephala
Ortalis leucogastra
Penelope purpurascens
Penelopina nigra
Oreophasis derbianus
Crax rubra
Total
USA
9,904
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9,904
Mexico
2,938
1,113
1,675
124
642
533
145
430
7,600
Belize
533
0
0
0
175
0
0
112
820
Guatemala
408
0
0
87
176
145
210
115
1,141
Honduras
134
0
0
0
33
42
0
16
225
El Salvador
1
0
0
78
10
29
0
10
128
Nicaragua
17
0
0
33
21
73
0
17
161
Costa Rica
57
0
0
0
1,410
0
0
769
2,236
Panama
0
0
0
0
141
0
0
59
200
Colombia
0
0
0
0
128
0
0
43
171
Venezuela
0
0
0
0
41
0
0
0
41
Ecuador
0
0
0
0
90
0
0
13
103
Peru
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
Total
13,992
1,113
1,675
322
2,868
822
355
1,584
22,731
Coordinates
-4.3327 to 31.1707 Latitude; -109.4433 to -61.1382 Longitude. This range includes the location of only the 22,731 valid distributional records (Figure 2).
Temporal coverage
The date of occurrence records (year-month-day) encompasses from 1700-01-01 to 2013-10-25. However, of the 22,731 valid distributional records, 854 lack information on recording date. Although temporal coverage spans more than 300 years, most of the records were generated in the last decades (Figure 4). A boom in reporting or generating species records started at the end of the last century, most probably due to the emergence of the Internet and technological advancement in field survey equipment. Additionally, this observed pattern might be due to an increased interest in studying this bird group. Information gathered through years of research and observation of the species’ natural history led to the publication in 1973 of the first edition of the inspiring book “Curassows and related birds” by Delacour and Amadon. Added to which the First International Symposium on the Family Cracidae was organized in 1981, which may also have triggered an exponential increase in the interest for studying this avian group, and thus, an increase in reporting species occurrences.
Number of cracid records gathered per year (red line) and the cumulative number of cracid records gathered from 1700 to 2013 (blue line).
Title: Present and future distribution models of cracids occurring in Mexico.
Personnel: Miguel Angel Martínez-Morales (Project Coordinator, Resource Contact, Resource Creator), Gonzalo Enrique Pinilla-Buitrago (Database Manager, Metadata Provider), Fernando González-García, Paula L. Enríquez, José Luis Rangel-Salazar, Carlos Alberto Guichard Romero, Adolfo G. Navarro-Sigüenza, Tiberio César Monterrubio-Rico, Griselda Escalona-Segura (Data Contributors).
Funding: National Commission for Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO), Mexico, under the agreement FB1585/JM024/12.
Study area descriptions/descriptor: Valid distribution records are located in the northern portion of the Neotropical region, including the transitional zone with the Nearctic region (Figure 5). Native vegetation in this area ranges from tropical dry to humid forests, and from lowlands to montane forests. However, a large proportion of the native vegetation has been converted to pasture and agricultural areas. The expansion of human settlements, infrastructure, and mining have also contributed to forest degradation and deforestation in the region. Tropical forests have the largest net loss of forested area compared to other forest types in the world (FAO and JRC 2012), and the Neotropical region is not the exception. The study area includes the Mesoamerica biodiversity hotspot, the Chocó/Darién/Western Ecuador hotspot, and marginally the Tropical Andes hotspot (Myers et al. 2000), but these hotspots harbour only 20 to 25% of the original extent of primary vegetation.
Geographic distribution of the 22,731 valid distributional records of cracids in the CracidMex1 database. Present pattern of forest cover is depicted in green shading. Forest cover was obtained from INEGI (2012) for Mexico, the World Bank and CCAD (2000) for Central America, and the European Commission Joint Research Centre (http://www-gem.jrc.it/glc2000) for South America.
https://binary.pensoft.net/fig/30152
Given the current pattern of forest cover in the region, and the temporal coverage of records in the CracidMex1 database, many records, particularly older records, are now located outside of currently forested areas (Figure 5). This suggests a substantial reduction in the distribution of cracid species, particularly for those species restricted to primary forests (Penelope purpurascens, Penelopina nigra, Oreophasis derbianus, and Crax rubra). Habitat loss and hunting pressure are the main drivers of cracid population declines and distribution contractions, the synergy of which has caused the endangerment of these species (Silva and Strahl 1991, 1997; Brooks and Strahl 2000; del Hoyo and Motis 2004).
Design description: The construction of the CracidMex1 database aimed to gather most of the globally available records of cracids which are distributed in Mexico, in order to generate global species distribution models. We initiated the construction of the database by collating records from six electronic databases available through the Internet: GBIF <http://data.gbif.org>, ORNIS <http://www.ornisnet.org>, REMIB <http://www.conabio.gob.mx/remib/doctos/remib_esp.html>, UNIBIO <http://unibio.unam.mx>, SpeciesLink <http://splink.cria.org.br>, and IBC <http://ibc.lynxeds.com>. Additionally, we obtained records from the National System of Information on Biodiversity (SNIB) database at CONABIO and from museum specimen records contained in the Bird Atlas of Mexico database at the Facultad de Ciencias of the National Autonomous University of Mexico. We also obtained records from published papers through searches in BioOne <http://www.bioone.org>, EBSCO <http://search.ebscohost.com>, JSTOR <http://www.jstor.org>, ScienceDirect <http://www.sciencedirect.com>, Springer Link <http://www.springerlink.com>, Web of Science <http://apps.webofknowledge.com>, Wiley Online Library <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com>, Zoological Record <http://thomsonreuters.com/zoological-record/>, Redalyc <http://www.redalyc.org>, SciELO <http://www.scielo.org>, and Google Scholar <scholar.google.com>. We also reviewed the bulletins of the Cracid Group of the Galliformes Specialists Group <http://www.cracids.org>. Added to which, we gathered records from “grey literature” through searches in technical reports and theses. These searches included the electronic portal of CONABIO and the repositories OpenDOAR <http://opendoar.org> and the Registry of Open Access Repositories <http://roar.eprints.org>. Finally, we gathered records from our own and unpublished databases of colleagues through personal contacts. After the GBIF, these personal unpublished databases were the second most important source of records, followed by records gathered from the SNIB and published papers (Table 4).
Relative contribution of records of cracid species by the different sources used in the construction of the CracidMex1 database. Numbers represent non-duplicate records. GBIF was the main source of records, but its relative contribution is magnified in this table because in the consolidation process we considered this source as the reference database.
Source
Ortalis vetula
Ortalis wagleri
Ortalis poliocephala
Ortalis leucogastra
Penelope purpurascens
Penelopina nigra
Oreophasis derbianus
Crax rubra
Total
GBIF
13,479
982
896
279
2,751
734
233
1,524
20,878
ORNIS
180
19
11
64
2
1
0
2
279
REMIB
86
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
98
UNIBIO
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SpeciesLink
1
0
0
0
5
0
0
1
7
IBC
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
2
SNIB
209
1
435
8
17
26
9
12
717
Bird Atlas Mex
120
95
31
1
57
34
2
51
391
Published papers
235
47
77
37
131
56
40
90
713
“Grey literature”
37
3
6
3
20
4
2
16
91
Unpublished DB
19
4
298
0
116
52
115
116
720
Total
14,366
1,151
1,754
392
3,100
907
401
1,825
23,896
Database quality control, based on the standards described in CONABIO (2012), was an iterative process that commenced with the detection, consolidation and elimination of duplicate records (the same record reported in more than one source). For detection of duplicate records within and among sources we first gave priority to the fields “institutionCode”, “catalogNumber”, “country”, “state”, “locality”, “decimalLatitude”, and “decimalLongitude”. The consolidation process consisted of the creation of a single record with more complete data from duplicate records. In the case of inconsistencies in duplicate records, we referred to the original source of the record. We avoided and corrected errors (omission, typographic, contextual, redundancy, convention, and congruence) through automatized tasks and case by case revision of the database. We then calculated geographic coordinates and their uncertainties for those records lacking these data, based on the standards described in CONABIO (2008). All coordinates refer to the datum WGS84. We used a variety of resources for geo-referencing, namely Google Earth 7 <http://www.google.com/earth/index.html>, Google Maps and the tools of Map Labs <http://maps.google.com>, glosk <http://www.glosk.com/>, CONABIO <http://www.conabio.gob.mx/informacion/metadata/gis/loc2000gw.xml?_httpcache=yes&_xsl=/db/metadata/xsl/fgdc_html.xsl&_indent=no>, GEOSiB <http://www.humboldt.org.co/geoinformacion/geosib>, and Georeferencing Calculator <http://manisnet.org/gci2.html>. We also consulted regional experts for advice during the geo-referencing process. Once we were sufficiently certain of the correct location of the record, we checked that each location was consistent with taxa identification by displaying the records in a GIS. This taxonomic and geographic validation through the use of GIS tools and expert knowledge allowed us to detect inconsistencies. Where possible, we corrected inconsistencies through an iterative process, otherwise we labelled the record as “doubtful” (979 records) or “absent” (186) in the “occurrenceStatus” field as described above (Figure 6).
Flowchart depicting the iterative process for the construction of the CracidMex1 database up to publication.
https://binary.pensoft.net/fig/30153
The CracidMex1 database has 41 fields based on the standard Darwin Core version 1.4 (Table 5).
Definition of fields included in the CracidMex1 database based on the standard Darwin Core version 1.4.
Field
Definition
institutionCode
The name (or acronym) in use by the institution having custody of the object(s) or information referred to in the record. In the case of personal records, we used the value “NA” No aplica (Not applicable).
collectionCode
The name, acronym, code, or initials identifying the collection or data set from which the record was derived. If the record was not held in a collection, we used the value “NA” No aplica (Not applicable). If the collection name was not known, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
datasetName
The name identifying the data set from which the record was derived. If the data set name was not known, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
basisOfRecord
The specific nature of the data record. • Ejemplar preservado (Preserved specimen). Denoting a preserved specimen in a collection. • Observación (Human observation). Denoting an observation made by one or more people. • Observación con aparato (Machine observation). Denoting an observation made by a machine. • Ocurrencia (Occurrence). Denoting a case where no information is available on how the record was obtained.
occurrenceID
A uniform resource name as a unique identifier for the record. In the absence of a persistent global unique identifier, this was constructed in the form: “[institutionCode]: [collectionCode]: [catalogNumber]”. If the record lacked a value in one of these fields (NA or ND) a sequential number was assigned at the end.
catalogNumber
An identifier for the record within the data set or collection. If the record did not have a catalogue number, we used the value “NA” No aplica (Not applicable). If we did not know the catalogue number, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
recordNumber
An identifier given to the occurrence at the time it was recorded. This often serves as a link between field notes and an occurrence record, such as a specimen collector’s number. If the record did not have a record number, we used the value “NA” No aplica (Not applicable). If we did not know the record number, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
recordedBy
A list (concatenated and separated) of names of people, groups, or organizations responsible for recording the original occurrence. The primary collector or observer, especially one who applies a personal identifier (recordNumber), is listed first. If we did not know the name of the collector, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
individualCount
The number of individuals recorded at the time of the occurrence. We left the value empty if individualCount was unknown.
occurrenceStatus
A statement about the presence or absence of a taxon at a location. • Presente (Present). There is at least one well documented record of the taxon’s presence in the area. • Ausente (Absent). There is evidence to document the absence of a taxon in the area. • Dudoso (Doubtful). The taxon is presumed present in the area, but there is doubt over the evidence, including taxonomic or geographic imprecision in the records.
associatedReferences
A list (concatenated and separated) of identifiers (publication, bibliographic reference, global unique identifier) of literature associated with the occurrence. If no reference was associated, we used the value “NA” No aplica (Not applicable).
year
The four-digit year in which the event occurred, according to the Common Era Calendar. If we did not know the year, we used “9999”.
month
The ordinal month in which the event occurred. If we did not know the month, we used “99”.
day
The integer day of the month on which the event occurred. If we did not know the day, we used “99”.
country
The name of the country or major administrative unit in which the location occurs. If we did not know the name, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
stateProvince
The name of the next smaller administrative region below country (state, province, canton, department, region, etc.) in which the location occurs. If we did not know the name, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
county
The full, unabbreviated name of the next smaller administrative region below stateProvince (county, shire, department, municipality) in which the location occurs. If this administrative region does not apply, we used the value “NA” No aplica (Not applicable). If we did not know the name, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
locality
The specific description of the place. This term may contain information modified from the original to correct perceived errors or standardize the description. If we did not know the description, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
decimalLatitude
The geographic latitude (in decimal degrees, using the spatial reference system given in geodeticDatum) of the geographic centre of a location. Positive values are north and negative values are south of the Equator. We left the value empty if decimalLatitude was unknown.
decimalLongitude
The geographic longitude (in decimal degrees, using the spatial reference system given in geodeticDatum) of the geographic centre of a location. Positive values are east and negative values are west of the Greenwich Meridian. We left the value empty if decimalLongitud was unknown.
geodeticDatum
The ellipsoid, geodetic datum, or spatial reference system upon which the geographic coordinates given in decimalLatitude and decimalLongitude are based. We used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined) when no data was available in decimalLatitude and decimalLongitude.
coordinateUncertaintyInMeters
The horizontal distance (in meters) from the given decimalLatitude and decimalLongitude describing the smallest circle containing the entire location. We left the value empty if the uncertainty was unknown, could not be estimated, or was not applicable (because there are no coordinates).
georeferencedBy
A list (concatenated and separated) of names of people, groups, or organizations who determined the geo-reference for the location.
georeferenceProtocol
A description or reference for the methods used to determine the spatial footprint, coordinates, and uncertainties.
georeferenceSources
A list (concatenated and separated) of maps, gazetteers, or other resources used to geo-reference the location.
identifiedBy
A list (concatenated and separated) of names of people, groups, or organizations who assigned the taxon to the subject. If we did not know the name, we used the value “ND” No determinado (Not determined).
dateIdentified
The date on which the subject was identified as representing the taxon. Format yyyy-mm-dd. If we did not know the date, we used “9999”.
typeStatus
A list (concatenated and separated) of nomenclatural types applied to the subject. If the nomenclatural type did not apply, we used the value “NA” No aplica (Not applicable).
scientificName
The full scientific name of the lowest taxonomic rank determined.
originalNameUsage
The taxon name, as it originally appeared when first determined.
kingdom
The full scientific name of the kingdom in which the taxon is classified.
phylum
The full scientific name of the phylum in which the taxon is classified.
class
The full scientific name of the class in which the taxon is classified.
order
The full scientific name of the order in which the taxon is classified.
family
The full scientific name of the family in which the taxon is classified.
genus
The full scientific name of the genus in which the taxon is classified.
specificEpithet
The name of the species epithet of the scientificName.
infraspecificEpithet
The name of the lowest or terminal infraspecific epithet of the scientificName. If the infraspecific epithet did not apply, we used the value “NA” No aplica (Not applicable).
taxonRank
The taxonomic rank of the most specific name in the scientificName.
scientificNameAuthorship
The authorship information for the scientificName formatted according to the conventions.
taxonomicStatus
The status of the use of the scientificName as a label for a taxon.
Dataset description
Object name: Darwin Core Archive CracidMex1: a comprehensive database of global occurrences of cracids (Aves, Galliformes) with distribution in Mexico
Character encoding: UTF-8
Format and storage mode: xlsx; ASCII csv, tab-delimited; decimal separator: ‘.’
We are thankful to the many colleges that contribute with records at specific localities, particularly Adrián Maldonado, Alan Monroy Ojeda, Alejandro Salinas Melgoza, Alma Patricia Degante González, Barbara MacKinnon de Montes, David Molina Tovar, Epifanio Blancas Calvas, Erik González, Fernando Ayerbe Quiñones, Gonzalo Merediz Alonso, Gustavo A. Bravo, Hernaldo Padilla, James Rodríguez, Javier Rivas, José Raúl Vázquez Pérez, Juan Freile Ortiz, Juan Quiñones, Karla Patricia Parra Noguez, Mario C. Lavariega, Paola Nicté Cotí Lux, Robert Ridgely, Román Díaz Valenzuela, and Santiago Guallar. Alejandro Gordillo (MZFC) coordinated the geolocation of specimen data for the Atlas of the Birds of Mexico. The manuscript was improved thanks to the appropriate comments of Katherine Renton and two anonymous reviewers. CONABIO provided financial support (project JM024).
ReferencesReferences cited within metadataAOU (American Ornithologists’ Union) (2014) . http://checklist.aou.orgBrooksD M (Ed) (2006) , number 6. Houston, Texas.BrooksDMStrahlS D (comp) (2000) Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK, 182 pp.CONABIO (2008) . Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Mexico, 177 pp.CONABIO (2012) . Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Mexico, 59 pp.del HoyoJMotisA (2004) Update chapter. In: DelacourJAmadonD. . Lynx Editions and The National Museum of Natural History. Barcelona and New York, 322–476.DelacourJAmadonD (2004) . Second edition. Lynx Edicions and The National Museum of Natural History, Barcelona and New York, 319 pp.FAO, JRC (2012) Global forest land-use change 1990–2005, by Lindquist EJ, D’Annunzio R, Gerrand A, MacDicken K, Achard F, Beuchle R, Brink A, Eva HD, Mayaux P, San-Miguel-Ayanz J, Stibig H-J.No. 169. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and European Commission Joint Research Centre, Rome, 40 pp.González-GarcíaFBrooksDMStrahlS D (2001) Historia natural y estado de conservación de los crácidos en México y Centroamerica. In: BrooksDMGonzález-GarcíaF (Eds) , , number 2. Houston, Texas, 1–50.INEGI (2012) . Serie IV. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía, Mexico.IUCN (2013) . http://www.iucnredlist.orgMartínez-MoralesMACaballero-CruzPCuarónA D (2009) Predicted population trends for Cozumel Curassows (Crax rubra griscomi): empirical evidence and predictive models in the face of climate change.80: 317–327. doi: 10.1111/j.1557-9263.2009.00237.xMuñozMCKattanG H (2007) Diets of cracids: How much do we know?18: 21–36.MyersNMittermeierRAMittermeierCGda FonsecaG ABKentJ (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities.403: 853–858. doi: 10.1038/35002501PeresCAvan RoosmalenM GM M (1996) Avian dispersal of “mimetic seeds” of Ormosia lignivalvis by terrestrial granivores: deception of mutualism?75: 249–258. doi: 10.2307/3546248PetersonATSánchez-CorderoVSoberónJBartleyJBuddemeierRWNavarro-SingüenzaAG (2001) Effects of global climate change on geographic distributions of Mexican Cracidae.144: 21–30. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3800(01)00345-3RidgleyRSAllnuttTFBrooksTMcNicolDKMehlmanDWYoungBEBirdLife International (2012) Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 5.0. In: . http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/info/spcdownloadSedaghatkishG (1996) Thesis, College Park, University of Maryland. Maryland, 122 pp.SEMARNAT (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales) (2010) Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2010, Protección Ambiental – Especies nativas de México de flora y fauna silvestres – Categorías de riesgo y especificaciones para su inclusión, exclusión o cambio – lista de especies en riesgo.. 30 December 2010, Second Section. Mexico City.SilvaJLStrahlS D (1991) Human impact on populations of chachalacas, guans, and curassows (Galliformes: Cracidae) in Venezuela. In: RobinsonJGRedfordK H (Eds) . University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 37–52.SilvaJLStrahlS D (1997) Presión de caza sobre poblaciones de crácidos en los parques nacionales al norte de Venezuela. In: StrahlSDBeaujonSBrooksDMBegazoAJSedaghatkishGOlmosF (Eds) . Hancock House Publishers Ltd., Surrey, BC and Blaine, WA, 437–438.World Bank, CCAD (2000) . World Bank, Comisión Centroamerica de Ambiente y Desarrollo, World Institute for Conservation and Environment, and the Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza, Washington, DC. http://www.worldbank.org/ca-envReferences used to develop the databaseAICAhttp://www.conabio.gob.mx/otros/nabci/doctos/pdf/lista-spmar.pdfAlmazán-NúñezR (2009) Información adicional sobre la avifauna de la Sierra Norte de Guerrero, México. Acta Zoológica Mexicana (n.s.25(3): 537–550.Almazán-NúñezRNavarroSA (2006) Avifauna de la subcuenca del río San Juan, Guerrero, México.77: 103–114.Almazán-NúnezRNova-MuñozOAlmazán-JuarézA (2007) Avifauna de Petatlán en la Sierra Madre del Sur, Guerrero, México.23(2): 141–149.Altamirano González OrtegaMA (2004) Obtención de la riqueza de aves y selección de especies susceptibles de monitoreo en la zona noroeste en el estado de Chiapas.Instituto de Historia Natural del Estado de Chiapas, . Mexicohttp://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/InfY018.pdfAltamirano González OrtegaMAGuzmán HernándezJMartín GómezMF (2004) Obtención de la riqueza de aves y selección de especies susceptibles de monitoreo en la zona noroeste en el estado de Chiapas.Instituto de Historia del Estado de Chiapas, Dirección de Investigación. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_Y018.zipArévaloJENewhardK (2011) Traffic noise affects forest bird species in a protected tropical forest.59(2): 969–980.ArizmendiMCEspinosa de los MonterosA (1996) Avifauna de los bosques de cactáceas columnares del Valle de Tehuacán, Puebla. (n.s.) 67: 25–46.Arriaga WeissSL (2000) Composición y estructura de la ornitofauna de la Reserva de la Biosfera Pantanos de Centla. Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_L121.zipArriaga-WeissSLCalméSKampichlerC (2007) Bird communities in rainforest fragments: guild responses to habitat variables in Tabasco, Mexico.17(1): 173–190. doi: 10.1007/s10531-007-9238-7Ayerbe-QuiñonesFLópez-OrdóñezJPGonzález-RojasMFEstelaFARamírez-BurbanoMBSandoval-SierraJVGómez-BernalLG (2008) Aves del departamento del Cauca-Colombia.9(1): 77–132.BakerRHFlemingRL (1962) Birds near La Pesca, Tamaulipas, Mexico.7(3): 253–261. doi: 10.2307/3668847BanksR (1990) Taxonomic status of the Rufous-bellied Chachalaca (Ortalis wagleri).92(3): 749–753. doi: 10.2307/1368694Becerra CabañasLE (2009) . BSc thesis, Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa, Mexico. http://cdigital.uv.mx/bitstream/123456789/29297/1/BecerraCabanas.pdfBeckerCDAgredaA (2005) Bird community differences in mature and second growth garúa forest in Machalilla National Park, Ecuador.16: 297–319.BlakeJGLoiselleBA (2000) Diversity of birds along an elevational gradient in the Cordillera Central, Costa Rica.117(3): 663–686. doi: 10.1642/0004-8038(2000)117[0663:DOBAAE]2.0.CO;2Bojorges-BañosJC (2011) Riqueza de especies de aves de la microcuenca del Río Cacaluta, Oaxaca, México.27(1): 87–95.Bojorges-BañosJCLópez-MataL (2006) Asociación de la riqueza y diversidad de especies de aves y estructura de la vegetación en una selva mediana subperennifolia en el centro de Veracruz, México.77: 235–249.Bolaños MartínezRSánchez-CorderoVGurrola HidalgoMAIglesias HernándezJAMagaña-CotaGEBotello LópezFJ (2010) Primer registro de la cojolita (Penelope purpurascens) en el estado de Guanajuato, México. (n.s.) 26(1): 237–241.BoucardA (1883) On a collection of birds from Yucatan.1883: 434–462.Brito AguilarR (2000) Avifauna de la Reserva de la Biosfera El Cielo, Tamaulipas, México. Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas.. Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_L022.zipBrodkorbP (1943) Birds from the Gulf lowlands of southern Mexico.55: 1–98.BrooksDMBegazoAJOlmosF (Eds) (1997) 5: 1–19.BrooksDMBegazoAJOlmosF (Eds) (1999) 8: 1–29.BrooksDMBegazoAJSilveiraLF (Eds) (2000) 11: 1–26.BrooksDMGonzález-GarcíaFPereiraSL (Eds) (2003) 16: 1–71.BrooksDMGonzález-GarcíaFPereiraSL (Eds) (2004) 18: 1–51.BrooksDMGonzález-GarcíaFSilveiraLF (Eds) (2001) 12: 1–22.BrooksDMGonzález-GarcíaFPereiraSLSilveiraLF (Eds) (2002) 14: 1–31.CalméSGuerraM (2005) Subproyecto Cacería. In: Pozo de la TijeraMCCalméS (Eds) . El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, Unidad Chetumal. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/InfBJ002_caceria.pdfCamacho MoralesM (2001) Monitoreo de las aves silvestres en zona prioritaria de Zapotitlán-Salinas, Puebla.Unión de capturadores, transportistas y vendedores de aves canoras y de ornamento del estado de Puebla AC. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/R121_Hoja%20de%20calculo.xlsxCancinoLBrooksDM (2006) Conservando crácidos: la familia de aves más amenazada de las américas.6: 1–178.CancinoLPereiraSLBrooksDM (Eds) (2007) 23: 1–33.CancinoLPereiraSLBrooksDM (Eds) (2009) 28: 1–52.CerezoARobbinsCSDowellB (2009) Uso de hábitats modificados por aves dependientes de bosque tropical en la región caribeña de Guatemala.57(1–2): 401–419.ChristensenZDPenceDB (1977) Helminths of the Plain Chachalaca, Ortalis vetula maccalli, from the South Rio Grande Valley.63(5): 830. doi: 10.2307/3279886Cóbar CarranzaAJ (2006) . BSc Thesis, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, Guatemala, Guatemala.Comisión Nacional de Área Naturales Protegidas: http://www.biodiversidad.gob.mx/corredor/cbmm/DOC/41_326.pdfComisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (2011) . Comisión Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas y Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, México, DF. http://www.biodiversidad.gob.mx/especies/especies_priori/fichas/pdf/pavon.pdfComisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (2011) Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Mexico, 440 pp. http://www.biodiversidad.gob.mx/region/EEB/pdf/BiodiversidadenPuebla.pdfContreras-BalderasAGonzález-RojasJGarcía-SalasJRuvalcaba-OrtegaI (2008) Nuevo León. In: Ortiz-PulidoRNavarro-SigüenzaAGGómez de SilvaHRojas-SotoORPeterson AT (Eds) . CIPAMEX, Pachuca, Mexico, 165–198.Córdova-AvalosAAlcántara-CarbajalJLGuzmán-PlazolaRMendoza-MartínezGDGonzález-RomeroV (2009) Desarrollo de un índice de integridad biológica avifaunístico para dos asociaciones vegetales de la reserva de la biosfera pantanos de Centla, Tabasco.25(1): 1–22.CornejoJSecairaE (Eds) (2007) . Comité Internacional para la Conservación de Oreophasis derbianus y su Hábitat. Veracruz, Mexico, 72 pp.CornejoJPereiraSLBrooksDM (Eds) (2011) 31: 1–29.CossíoA (2007) . MSc thesis, Instituto de Ecología, AC, Xalapa, Mexico.Cotera CorreaM (2007) Aves del Parque Nacional Cumbres de Monterrey, Nuevo León, México. Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León. Facultad de Ciencias Forestales. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_BK061.zipCotíP (2010) FUNDAECO-FCA, Guatemala, 84 pp.DaughertyH (1973) The Montecristo Cloud-Forest of El Salvador - a change for protection.5(1): 227–230. doi: 10.1016/0006-3207(73)90025-6Díaz GutiérrezKEOrellana RodríguezCM (2011) . BSc Thesis, Universidad de El Salvador, San Salvador, El Salvador. http://ri.ues.edu.sv/497/1/10136857.pdfDirección de Áreas Naturales y Vida Silvestre, Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Vivienda, Gobierno del Estado de Chiapas (2004) . http://www.biodiversidad.gob.mx/corredor/cbmm/DOC/41_307.pdfDredge DavisDMGómez GarcíaO (1997) Diseño, planeación y manejo sustentable de ecoturismo.Instituto de Ecología, AC. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/InfC024%20primera%20parte.pdfEdwardsEPLeaRB (1955) Birds of the Monserrate area, Chiapas, Mexico.57(1): 31–54. doi: 10.2307/1364696EdwardsEPTashianRE (1959) Avifauna of the Catemaco basin of southern Veracruz, Mexico.61(5): 325–337. doi: 10.2307/1365125EisermannKSchulzU (2005) Birds of a high-altitude cloud forest in Alta Verapaz, Guatemala.53(3–4): 577–594.Escalante PliegoP (1997) Avifauna de la Isla de Cozumel, Quintana Roo.Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_B010.zipEscamillaASanvicenteMSosaMGalindo-LealC (2000) Habitat mosaic, wildlife availability, and hunting in the tropical forest of Calakmul, Mexico.14(6): 1592–1601. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99069.xEscobar OcampoMCMorales PérezJEHernández GarcíaEGuzmán HernándezJRiechers PérezAEspinoza MedinillaEE (2006) Sistematización de las colecciones científicas del Instituto de Historia Natural y Ecología, (IHNE) Chiapas.Instituto de Historia Natural y Ecología. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_V050.zipEstradaACammaranoPCoates-EstradaR (2000) Bird species richness in vegetation fences and in strips of residual rain forest vegetation at Los Tuxtlas, Mexico.9: 1399–1416. doi: 10.1023/A:1008935016046EstradaACoates-EstradaR (1997) Anthropogenic landscape changes and avian diversity at Los Tuxtlas, Mexico.6: 19–43. doi: 10.1023/A:1018328930981FeltenHSteinbacherJ (1955) Contribuciones al conocimiento de la avifauna de El Salvador.36(1): 1–42.Flores VillelaOGerezP (1994) , 2nd ed. Facultad de Ciencias, UAM, Mexico, 463 pp.ForceyJM (2002) Notes on the birds of central Oaxaca, Part I: Podicipedidae to Laridae.3(1): 1–10.Fournier ZepedaRJanikD (2005) Fundación Restauración de la Naturaleza - Zoo Ave, La Garita, Alajuela, Costa Rica, 27 pp.FUNDAECO (2009) . FUNDAECO, Guatemala.García RamírezAA (1982) . BSc Thesis, Universidad Veracruzana, Veracruz, Mexico. http://cdigital.uv.mx/bitstream/123456789/29210/1/Garcia%20Ramirez%20p1d2.pdfGarza TorresHA (2002) Avifauna de la Laguna Madre de Tamaulipas.Instituto de Ecología Aplicada, Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_S085.zipGehlbachFDillonDHarrellH (1976) Avifauna of the Rio Corona, Tamaulipas, Mexico: northeastern limit of the tropics.93(1): 53–65.Gómez-PompaADirzoR (1995) Reservas de la biosfera y otras áreas naturales protegidas de México.Instituto Nacional de Ecología, SEMARNAP y Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Mexico. http://www.biodiversidad.gob.mx/publicaciones/librosDig/pdf/reservasBiosfera3.pdfGonzález-GarcíaF (1993) Avifauna de la Reserva de la Biosfera “Montes Azules”, Selva Lacandona, Chiapas, Mexico. (n.s.) 55: 1–86.González-GarcíaF (1995) Reproductive biology and vocalisations of the Horned Guan Oreophasis derbianus in Mexico.97: 415–426. doi: 10.2307/1369027González MadridA (2011) Actualizando la distribución del pavo de cacho en la región noroeste de Guatemala: el caso de Uspantán, El Quiché.Asociación CON-CIENCIA, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Consejo Nacional de Áreas Protegidas, Embajadores de las Nubes. Guatemala, Guatemala.González MarínRM (2006) MSc Thesis, Instituto de Ecología, AC, Xalapa, Mexico.González-ValdiviaNOchoa-GaonaSPozoCGordon FergusonBRangel-RuizLJArriaga-WeissSLPonce-MendozaAKampichlerC (2011) Indicadores ecológicos de hábitat y biodiversidad en un paisaje neotropical: perspectiva multitaxonómica.59(3): 1433–1451.GötzCM (2008) Coastal and inland patterns of faunal exploitation in the prehispanic northern Maya lowlands.191(1): 154–169. doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2008.02.003GrahamCMartínez-LeyvaJECruz-ParedesLRemnantsFTuxtlasL (2002) Use of fruiting trees by birds in continuous forest and riparian forest remnants in Los Tuxtlas, Veracruz, Mexico.34(4): 589–597. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2002.tb00578.xGrosseletMBurcsuT (2005) Notas sobre las aves de Capulalpan de Méndez, Sierra Juárez, Oaxaca, México.6(2): 18–24.HafferJ (1967) Some allopatric species pairs of birds in north-western Colombia.84(3): 343–365. doi: 10.2307/4083085HampeAGarcía-CastañoJLSchuppEWJordanoP (2008) Spatio-temporal dynamics and local hotspots of initial recruitment in vertebrate-dispersed trees.96(4): 668–678. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2008.01364.xHernández MoralesT (2009) . BSc Thesis, Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa, Mexico. http://cdigital.uv.mx/bitstream/123456789/29344/1/HernandezMorales.pdfHoffmeisterD (1951) A western record of the Quetzal, Pharomachrus mocinno mocinno, and Chachalaca, Penelopina nigra, in Mexico.68(4): 507–508. doi: 10.2307/4080849IbáñezRConditRAngehrGAguilarSGarcíaTMartínezRSanjurAStallardRWrightSJRandASHeckadonS (2002) An ecosystem report on the Panama Canal: monitoring the status of the forest communities and the watershed.80: 65–95. doi: 10.1023/A:1020378926399IbarraACArriagaSEstradaA (2001) Avifauna asociada a dos cacaotales tradicionales en la región de la Chontalpa, Tabasco, México.17(34): 101–112.Irby DavisL (1965) Acoustic evidence of relationship in Ortalis (Cracidae).10(4): 288–301. doi: 10.2307/3669305KantakG (1979) Observations on some fruit-eating birds in Mexico.96(1): 183–186.KomarO (2002) Priority conservation areas for birds in El Salvador.5(3): 173–183. doi: 10.1017/S1367943002002238KosterJMHodgenJJVenegasMDCopelandTJ (2010) Is meat flavor a factor in hunters’ prey choice decisions?21(3): 219–242. doi: 10.1007/s12110-010-9093-1LaBastilleA (1973) Establishment of a Quetzal cloud-forest reserve in Guatemala.5(1): 60–62. doi: 10.1016/0006-3207(73)90066-9LandH (1962) A collection of birds from the Sierra de las Minas, Guatemala.74(3): 267–283.León PaniaguaLRojas SotoOROrtizD (2001) Distribución geográfica de las aves y los mamíferos de las zonas montanas de los estados de San Luis Potosí e Hidalgo circundantes de la Sierra Gorda.Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_L176.zipLópez-PortilloJLara-DomínguezALÁvila-ÁngelesAVázquez-LuleAD (2009) Caracterización del sitio de manglar La Mancha. In: . CONABIO, Mexico.MacGregor-ForsISchondubeJE (2011) Use of tropical dry forests and agricultural areas by Neotropical bird communities.43(3): 365–370. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2010.00709.xMacGregor-ForsIVázquezLVega-RiveraJHSchondubeJE (2009) Non-exotic invasion of Great-tailed Grackles Quiscalus mexicanus in a tropical dry forest reserve.97(3): 367–369. doi: 10.5253/078.097.0312Madrigal-GuridiXVázquez-LuleAD (2009) Caracterización del sitio de manglar Laguna El Caimán. In: . CONABIO, Mexico.Maldonado-GascaA (2007) Nuevo Vallarta, Mexico, 70 pp.MandujanoSMartínez-RomeroLE (1997) Fruit fall caused by chachalacas (Ortalis poliocephala) on red mombin trees (Spondias purpurea): impact on terrestrial fruit consumers, especially the white-tailed deer.32(1): 1–3. doi: 10.1076/snfe.32.1.1.13466MarionWRThorntonJE (1974) Ectoparasites of the plain chachalaca, Ortalis vetula mccalli, from south Texas.60(3): 498. doi: 10.2307/3278370Martínez-MoralesMA (1999) Conservation status and habitat preferences of the Cozumel Curassow.101(1): 14–20. doi: 10.2307/1370441Martínez-MoralesMA (1999) Efectos de la fragmentación del bosque mesófilo de montaña en el este de México.Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/R137_Hoja%20de%20calculo.xlsxMartínez-MoralesMA (2007) Avifauna del bosque mesófilo de montaña del noreste de Hidalgo, México.78: 149–162.Martínez-MoralesMACruzPCCuarónAD (2009) Predicted population trends for Cozumel Curassows (Crax rubra griscomi): empirical evidence and predictive models in the face of climate change.80(4): 317–327. doi: 10.1111/j.1557-9263.2009.00237.xMartínez-MoralesMAOrtiz-PulidoRde la BarredaBZuriaILBravo-CadenaJValencia-HerverthJ (2007) Hidalgo. In: Ortiz-PulidoRNavarro-SigüenzaAGómez de SilvaHRojas-SotoOPetersonTA (Eds) . CIPAMEX, Pachuca, Mexico, 49–95.Martínez-SánchezJ (2007) . Fundación Cocibolca. Managua, Nicaragua. http://www.bio-nica.info/biblioteca/ListaPatronAvesNicaragua2007.pdfMartínez-SánchezJC (1987) Deforestación y conservación de cracidos en Nicaragua: un informe preliminar. II Simposio Internacional sobre la Familia Cracidae. Caracas, Venezuela.Martínez SánchezJL (2004) Fragmentación y remoción de semillas en el piso de la selva húmeda tropical: el caso de la reserva natural de Los Tuxtlas, sureste de México.20: 7–14.MazzottiFFlingHMeredizG (2005) Conceptual ecological model of the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve, Quintana Roo, Mexico.25(4): 980–997. doi: 10.1672/0277-5212(2005)025[0980:CEMOTS]2.0.CO;2Medina-MacíasMGonzález-BernalMNavarro-SigüenzaAG (2010) Distribución altitudinal de las aves en una zona prioritaria en Sinaloa y Durango, México.81(2): 487–503.MolinaD (2008) . BSc Thesis, Instituto Tecnológico de Bahía de Banderas, La Cruz de Huanacaxtle, Mexico.Molina-GarcíaAMaldonado HernándezCROliveras de ItaARojas-SotoO (2008) Primer reporte de nidos depredados por la chachalaca vetula (Ortalis vetula).9(2): 32–34.MonroeBL, Jr (1968) The American Ornithologists’ Union, Anchorage, USA, 458 pp.MooreRTMedinaDR (1957) The status of the chachalacas of western Mexico.59(4): 230–234. doi: 10.2307/1364653Morales PérezJE (2005) Vertebrados terrestres del Corredor Biológico Sierra Madre del Sur, Chiapas, México.Instituto de Historia Natural y Ecología. Dirección de Investigación Miguel Álvarez del Toro. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_Y021.zipMuñoz AlonsoLAMarch MifsutIJ (2003) Actualización y enriquecimiento de las bases de datos del proyecto de evaluación y análisis geográfico de la diversidad faunística de Chiapas.El Colegio de la Frontera Sur. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_U014.zipNavarroAGHernándezBEBenítezH (1993) . Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico. http://www.ibiologia.unam.mx/BIBLIO68/fulltext/lf4.htmlNavarro SigüenzaAG (2002) Atlas de las Aves de México: Fase II.Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Facultad de Ciencias. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/cgi-bin/datos.cgi?Letras=E&Numero=18Navarro SigüenzaAGMeave de CastilloJA (1998) Inventario de la biodiversidad de vertebrados terrestres de los Chimalapas, Oaxaca. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Facultad de Ciencias. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_B002.zipNavarro-SigüenzaAGPetersonATPuig-SamperMAZamudioG (2007) The ornithology of the Real Expedición Botánica a Nueva España (1787–1803): an analysis of the manuscripts of José Mariano Mociño.109(4): 808–823. doi: 10.1650/0010-5422(2007)109[808:TOOTRE]2.0.CO;2Ornelas RodríguezJF (1999) Vocalizaciones de aves mexicanas en análisis biogeográficos y reconstrucción filogenética.Instituto de Ecología, AC. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/H028_CARATULA%20BASE%20DE%20DATOS.pdfOrtiz-PulidoRGómez de SilvaHGonzálezFÁlvarezA (1995) Avifauna del Centro de Investigaciones Costeras La Mancha. (n.s.) 66: 87–118.Ortiz-PulidoRLabordeJGuevaraS (2000) Frugivoría por aves en un paisaje fragmentado: consecuencias en la dispersión de semillas.32(3): 473–488.PattenMAGómez de SilvaHIbarraACSmith-PattenBD (2011) An annotated list of the avifauna of Palenque, Chiapas.82: 515–537.PearsonDLAndersonCDMitchellBRRosenbergMSNavarreteRCoopmansP (2009) Testing hypotheses of bird extinctions at Rio Palenque, Ecuador, with informal species lists.24: 500–510. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01383.xPetersonATEscalonaGZyskowskiKKluzaDHernándezB (2003) Avifaunas of two dry forest sites in northern Oaxaca, Mexico.4(1): 3–9.PetersonATNavarroSigüenzaAGHernándezBañosBEEscalonaSeguraGRebónGallardoFRodríguezAyalaEFigueroaEsquivelEMCabreraGarcíaL (2003) The Chimalapas region, Oaxaca, Mexico: a highpriority region for bird conservation in Mesoamerica.13: 227–253. doi: 10.1017/S0959270903003186PhillipsARRookW (1965) A new race of the Spotted Nightingale-Thrush from Oaxaca, Mexico.67(1): 3–5. doi: 10.2307/1365376PinedaLAguirreC (2013) Primer registro de la chachalaca común (Ortalis vetula pallidiventris) en El Salvador. In: CornejoJBerstchCSilveiraLFEitniearJC (Eds) 35: 9–12.PinedaLHerreraNIbarraR (2008) Contribuciones a la biología de la pava negra (Penelopina nigra) en El Salvador.12(1): 20–24.Pozo de la TijeraMC (1997) Formación de las colecciones de referencia de aves y mamíferos de la Reserva de la Biosfera de Sian Ka’an, Quintana Roo, México.El Colegio de la Frontera Sur. Unidad Chetumal. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BD_B114.zipQuiñónez GuzmánJM (2011) . MSc Thesis, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, Guatemala.Ramírez-AlboresJE (2006) Variación en la composición de comunidades de aves en la Reserva de la Biosfera Montes Azules y áreas adyacentes, Chiapas, México.6(2): 1–19. doi: 10.1590/S1676-06032006000200019Ramírez-AlboresJE (2007) Avifauna de cuatro comunidades del oeste de Jalisco, México.78(2): 439–457.Ramírez-AlboresJE (2007) Bird diversity and conservation of Alto Balsas (southwestern Puebla), Mexico.55: 287–299.Ramírez-AlboresJE (2010) Avifauna de sitios asociados a la selva tropical en la Depresión Central de Chiapas, México. (n.s.) 26(3): 539–562.Ramírez-AlboresJERamírez CedilloMG (2002) Avifauna de la región oriente de la Sierra de Huautla, Morelos, México.73(1): 91–111.Ramírez-AlboresJEMartínezFVásquezJC (2007) Listado avifaunístico de un matorral espinoso tamaulipeco del noreste de México.8(1): 1–10.Ramírez-BarajasPJIslebeGACalmeS (2012) Impact of hurricane Dean (2007) on game species of the Selva Maya, Mexico.44(3): 402–411. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2011.00819.xRamírez BarajasPJTorrescano-ValleNChan-RivasC (2006) Diagnóstico del aprovechamiento de flora y fauna por los mayas del ejido Petcacab y evaluación de la cacería y pesca, Felipe Carrillo Puerto, Quintana Roo.Sociedad de Productores Forestales Ejidales de Quintana Roo S.C.. Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/InfBJ008.pdfRangel-SalazarJLEnríquezPLSántiz LópezEC (2009) Variación de la diversidad de aves de sotobosque en el Parque Nacional Lagos de Montebello, Chiapas, México. (n.s.) 25(3): 479–495.RennerSC (2005) The Mountain Guan (Penelopina nigra) in the Sierra Yalijux, Guatemala.16: 419–426.RidgelyRSAllnuttTFBrooksTMcNicolDKMehlmanDWYoungBEZookJR (2003) NatureServe, Arlington, USA, 6 pp.RivasJSecairaECornejoJ (Eds) (2005) Reserva Los Tarrales, Patulul, Suchitepéquez, Guatemala, 77 pp.Rivas-RomeroJCóbar-CarranzaA (2008) Estudio preliminar sobre la distribución del pavo de cacho (Oreophasis derbianus) en la Reserva de Biosfera Sierra de las Minas, Guatemala.1(2): 12–26.RobinsCRHeedWB (1951) Bird notes from la Joya de Salas, Tamaulipas.63(4): 263–270.Rodríguez GarzaJA (1998) Mirmecofauna de la Reserva Ecológica de San Felipe Bacalar.Universidad de Quintana Roo. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/InfG032.pdfRojas-SotoOOliverasAAlmazán-NúñezRNavarro-SigüenzaAGSánchez-GonzálezLA (2009) Avifauna de Campo Morado, Guerrero, México.80(3): 741–749.RotenbergJA (2007) Ecological role of a tree (Gmelina arborea) plantation in Guatemala: an assessment of an alternative land use for tropical avian conservation.124(1): 316–331. doi: 10.1642/0004-8038(2007)124[316:EROATG]2.0.CO;2Salgado OrtizJ (1999) Avifauna terrestre del estado de Campeche: riqueza, abundancia y distribución de especies en los principales biomas del estado.Universidad Autónoma de Campeche. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/H324_Caratula_Base%20de%20datos.pdfSanchéz-GonzálezLGarcía-TrejoE (2010) San Luis Potosí. In: Ortiz-PulidoRNavarro-SigüenzaAGómez de SilvaHRojas-SotoORPetersonAT (Eds) . CIPAMEX, Pachuca, México, 198–242.SclaterPLSalvinO (1870) Synopsis of the Cracidae.1870: 504–544.StreweR (2000) Birds and conservation value of Reserva Natural El Pangan, Nariño, south-west Colombia.11(20): 56–73.SuttonGMBurleighTD (1940) Birds of Tamazunchale, San Luis Potosi.52(4): 221–233.The Internet IBC Bird Collection: (Penelope purpurascens) http://ibc.lynxEdscom/photo/crested-guan-penelope-purpurascens/picture-taken-cano-guacajara-400-meters-away-abujene-lodgeThe Internet IBC Bird Collection: http://ibc.lynxEdscom/species/great-curassow-crax-rubra/mapUrquiza-HaasTPeresCADolmanPM (2011) Large vertebrate responses to forest cover and hunting pressure in communal landholdings and protected areas of the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico.14(3): 271–282. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1795.2010.00426.xValencia-HerverthJValencia-HerverthRMendoza-QuijanoF (2008) Registros adicionales de Aves para Hidalgo, México. (n.s.) 24(2): 115–123.Vargas SorianoJSalgado OrtizJ (2005) Inventario avifaunístico de las áreas focales Zoh-Laguna y La Montaña en el corredor biológico mesoaméricano Sian Ka’an - Calakmul, México.Universidad Autónoma de Campeche. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/Y042_H324_Caratula_Base%20de%20datos.pdfVaurieC (1965) Systematic notes on the bird family Cracidae. No. 2. Relationships and geographical variation of Ortalis vetula, Ortalis poliocephala, and Ortalis leucogastra.2222: 1–36.VaurieC (1966) Systematic notes on the bird family Cracidae. No. 5. Penelope purpurascens, Penelope jacquaçu, and Penelope obscura.2250: 1–23.VaurieC (1967) Systematic notes on the bird family Cracidae. No. 9. The genus Crax.2305: 1–20.VázquezLMoyaHArizmendiMC (2009) Avifauna de la selva baja caducifolia en la cañada del río Sabino, Oaxaca, México.80(2): 535–549.Vázquez-TorresSMCarvajal-HernándezCIAquino-ZapataAM (2010) Áreas naturales protegidas. In: Benítez BadilloGWelsh RodríguezC (Eds) . Comisión del Estado de Veracruz para la Conmemoración de la Independencia Nacional y de la Revolución Mexicana, Gobierno del Estado de Veracruz, Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa, Mexico, 249–274.Villafañe TrujilloAJ (2009) BSc Thesis, Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa, Mexico.Villaseñor GómezLEVillaseñorJF (2005) Actualización de la base de datos aves del estado de Michoacán.Facultad de Biología, Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/Inf%20AA016.pdfVillaseñor GómezLEVillaseñorJF (2008) Avifauna de la Reserva de la Mariposa Monarca.Facultad de Biología, Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/BK073_AA016_%20L245_%20P025_%20R215_Caratula_Base%20de%20datos.pdfVillaseñor GómezLEVillaseñor GómezJF (2004) Avifauna de la costa y vertiente de la Sierra de Coalcomán en el estado de Michoacán, México.Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo. Facultad de Biología. . Mexico. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/institucion/proyectos/resultados/InfL245.pdfVillordo GalvánJA (2009) . MSc Thesis, Colegio de Postgraduados, Texcoco, Mexico. http://www.carnivoreconservation.org/files/thesis/villordo_2009_msc.pdfWarnerDWMengelRM (1951) Notes on birds of the Veracruz coastal plain.63(4): 288–295.WeteringsMJAWeterings-SchonckSMVesterHFMCalméS (2008) Senescence of Manilkara zapota trees and implications for large frugivorous birds in the southern Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico.256(9): 1604–1611. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.07.007Wolf RoqueK (2009) . BSc Thesis, Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa, Mexico.Yalbac Ranch and Cattle Corporation Limited (2012) Yalbac Ranch and Cattle Corporation, Belize, 7 pp. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/125029212/Yalbac-PublicSummaryZimmermanDAHarryGB (1951) Summer birds of Autlan, Jalisco.63(4): 302–314.Publications based on this databaseHernández-PérezEMartínez-MoralesMATobón-SampedroAPinilla-BuitragoGSanvicente LópezMCastillo VelaGReyna-HurtadoR (Submitted) Registros notables que amplían la distribución conocida de dos especies de crácidos (Aves: Galliformes) en la Península de Yucatán, Mexico..Martínez-MoralesMAGonzález GarcíaFEnríquez RochaPRangel SalazarJLNavarrete GutiérrezDAGuichard RomeroCATobón SampedroAPinilla BuitragoGE (2013) . El Colegio de la Frontera Sur. Unidad Campeche. . Mexico City.