||Megapodius geelvinkianus Meyer, 1874
||Jones, D.N., Dekker, R.W.RJ. and Roselaar, C.S. 1995. The Megapodes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.
||36 cm. Medium-sized, all-brown megapode. Plumage largely dark grey with slight crest. Reddish or bluish face. Red or dark grey legs. Similar spp. No other gamebirds occur on these islands. Differs from rails such as Rufous-tailed Bush-hen Amaurornis moluccanus by crest, short bill and leg colour. Voice Various crowing and clucking calls. Hints Commonly heard and seen in Biak Utara Reserve.
|Red List Category & Criteria:
||Butchart, S. & Symes, A.
||Beehler, B., Bishop, K.D., Dekker, R., Holmes, D., van Balen, S. & Dutson, G.
||Benstead, P., Bird, J., Davidson, P., Keane, A., Taylor, J., Khwaja, N.
This little-known megapode is classified as Vulnerable because of its small population which continues to decline owing to a variety of possible threats.
|Previously published Red List assessments:|
- 2012 – Vulnerable (VU)
- 2008 – Vulnerable (VU)
- 2007 – Vulnerable (VU)
- 2004 – Vulnerable (VU)
- 2000 – Vulnerable (VU)
- 1994 – Not Recognized (NR)
- 1988 – Not Recognized (NR)
|Range Description:||Megapodius geelvinkianus is endemic to Biak-Supiori in Papua (formerly Irian Jaya), Indonesia, and its satellite islands, Mios Korwar, Numfor, Manim and Mios Num. It is not clear whether one specimen, apparently from Manokwari on mainland Papua, represents a straggler from a nearby island or a mislabelled specimen (Jones et al. 1995). Its population size is unknown, but is believed to be small and declining. It was formerly common on Biak (Mayr and Meyer de Schauensee 1939) and it was heard regularly during the course of field visits to Biak between 1983 and 1997 (K. D. Bishop in litt. 2007), but only "small numbers" were seen during the 1990s on Owi (a satellite of Biak) and Supiori (Jones et al. 1995). It was recorded daily in and around Biak-Utara Reserve in 1997 (S. van Balen and B. M. Beehler in litt. 2000), and is still seen regularly by visitors (S. van Balen in litt. 2012). Overall, the population is thought to be in decline owing to a number of pressures on habitat within its range. |
|♦ Continuing decline in area of occupancy (AOO):||Yes|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO):||No||♦ Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO) - km2:||10800|
|♦ Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO):||No||♦ Extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence (EOO):||No|
|♦ Number of Locations:||11-100||♦ Continuing decline in number of locations:||Unknown|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations in the number of locations:||No|
|♦ Upper elevation limit (metres):||450|
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
|Population:||The population is estimated to number 2,500-9,999 mature individuals based on an assessment of known records, descriptions of abundance and range size. This is consistent with recorded population density estimates for congeners or close relatives with a similar body size, and the fact that only a proportion of the estimated Extent of Occurrence is likely to be occupied. This estimate is equivalent to 3,750-14,999 individuals, rounded here to 3,500-15,000 individuals.|
Trend Justification: The species is suspected to be declining at a moderate rate, owing to on-going habitat loss and degradation, and hunting pressure.
|Current Population Trend:||Decreasing|
|♦ Number of mature individuals:||2500-9999||♦ Continuing decline of mature individuals:||Yes|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations:||No||♦ Population severely fragmented:||No|
|♦ No. of subpopulations:||1||♦ Continuing decline in subpopulations:||Unknown|
|♦ Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations:||No||♦ All individuals in one subpopulation:||Yes|
|♦ No. of individuals in largest subpopulation:||100|