SummaryThe Violet-throated Metaltail Metallura baroni is a high altitude hummingbird endemic to south-central Ecuador currently considered globally 'Endangered'. Here we present the first detailed assessment of its distribution, ecology and conservation. We first used a maximum entropy model (Maxent model) to create a predicted distribution for this species based on very limited species occurrence data. We used this model to guide field surveys for the species between April and October 2006. We found a positive relationship between model values and species presence, indicating that the model was a useful tool to predict species occurrence and guide exploration. In the sites where the metaltail was found we gathered data on its habitat requirements, food resources and behaviour. Our results indicate that Violet-throated Metaltail is restricted to the Western Cordillera of the Andes Mountains in Azuay and Cañ ar provinces of Ecuador, with an area of extent of less than 2,000 km 2 . Deep river canyons to the north and south, lack of suitable habitat, and potential interspecific competition in the east may limit the bird's distribution. The species occurred in three distinct habitats, including Polylepis woodland, the upper edge of the montane forest, and in shrubby paramo, but we found no difference in relative abundance among these habitats. The metaltail seems to tolerate moderate human intervention in its habitats as long as some native brushy cover is maintained. We found that Brachyotum sp., Berberis sp., and Barnadesia sp. were important nectar resources. The 'Endangered' status of this species is supported due to its restricted distribution in fragmented habitats which are under increasing human pressures.

Human‐induced alteration of habitat is a major threat to biodiversity worldwide, especially in areas of high biological diversity and endemism. Polylepis (Rosaceae) forest, a unique forest habitat in the high Andes of South America, presently occurs as small and isolated patches in grassland dominated landscapes. We examine how the avian community is likely influenced by patch characteristics (i.e., area, plant species composition) and connectivity in a landscape composed of patches of Polylepis forest surrounded by páramo grasslands in Cajas National Park in the Andes of southern Ecuador. We used generalized linear mixed models and an information‐theoretic approach to identify the most important variables probably influencing birds inhabiting 26 forest patches. Our results indicated that species richness was associated with area of a patch and floristic composition, particularly the presence of Gynoxys (Asteraceae). However, connectivity of patches probably influenced the abundance of forest and generalists species. Elsewhere, it has been proposed that effective management plans for birds using Polylepis should promote the conservation of mature Polylepis patches. Our results not only suggest this but also show that there are additional factors, such as the presence of Gynoxys plants, which will probably play a role in conservation of birds. More generally, these findings show that while easily measured attributes of the patch and landscape may provide some insights into what influences patch use by birds, knowledge of other factors, such as plant species composition, is essential for better understanding the distribution of birds in fragmented landscapes.

The probability of long‐term persistence of a population is strongly determined by adult survival rates, but estimates of survival are currently lacking for most species of birds in the tropical Andes, a global biodiversity hotspot. We calculated apparent survival rates of birds in the Ecuadorian tropical Andes using a moderately long‐term (11 yr) capture–recapture dataset from three habitats that varied in how much they had been modified by human activities (native forest, introduced forest, and shrubs). We fit mark–recapture models for 28 species with habitat as a covariable. For all species, recapture rates between sampling sessions were low and varied from 0.04 for Rainbow Starfrontlets (Coeligena iris) to 0.41 for Stripe‐headed Brushfinches (Arremon assimilis) when averaged across all occupied habitats. Annual survival rates varied from 0.07 for Black‐crested Warblers (Margarornis squamiger) to 0.75 for Violet‐throated Metaltails (Metallura baroni). We found no significant differences in survival rates either among habitats or species grouped by habitat specialization. Because we found similar survival rates in native forest and human‐modified habitats, our results support those of recent studies concerning the potential value of secondary habitats for the conservation of some species of birds in the tropics. However, our conclusions are tempered by the uncertainty around the estimates of survival rates. Despite the relatively long‐term nature of our study, obtaining survival estimates for bird species in this region was challenging, and either more years of study or modification of field protocols may be needed to obtain more precise survival estimates.

A major barrier to advancing ornithology is the systemic exclusion of professionals from the Global South. A recent special feature, Advances in Neotropical Ornithology, and a shortfalls analysis therein, unintentionally followed a long-standing pattern of highlighting individuals, knowledge, and views from the Global North, while largely omitting the perspectives of people based within the Neotropics. Here, we review current strengths and opportunities in the practice of Neotropical ornithology. Further, we discuss problems with assessing the state of Neotropical ornithology through a northern lens, including discovery narratives, incomplete (and biased) understanding of history and advances, and the promotion of agendas that, while currently popular in the north, may not fit the needs and realities of Neotropical research. We argue that future advances in Neotropical ornithology will critically depend on identifying and addressing the systemic barriers that hold back ornithologists who live and work in the Neotropics: unreliable and limited funding, exclusion from international research leadership, restricted dissemination of knowledge (e.g., through language hegemony and citation bias), and logistical barriers. Moving forward, we must examine and acknowledge the colonial roots of our discipline, and explicitly promote anti-colonial agendas for research, training, and conservation. We invite our colleagues within and beyond the Neotropics to join us in creating new models of governance that establish research priorities with vigorous participation of ornithologists and communities within the Neotropical region. To include a diversity of perspectives, we must systemically address discrimination and bias rooted in the socioeconomic class system, anti-Blackness, anti-Brownness, anti-Indigeneity, misogyny, homophobia, tokenism, and ableism. Instead of seeking individual excellence and rewarding top-down leadership, institutions in the North and South can promote collective leadership. In adopting these approaches, we, ornithologists, will join a community of researchers across academia building new paradigms that can reconcile our relationships and transform science. Spanish and Portuguese translations are available in the Supplementary Material.

A major barrier to advancing ornithology is the systemic exclusion of professionals from the Global South. A recent special dossier, Advances in Neotropical Ornithology, and a shortfalls analysis therein, unintentionally followed a long-standing pattern of highlighting individuals, knowledge, and views from the Global North, while largely omitting the perspectives of people based within the Neotropics. Here, we review problems with assessing the state of Neotropical ornithology through a northern lens, including discovery narratives, incomplete (and biased) understanding of history and advances, and the promotion of agendas that, while currently popular in the north, may not fit the needs and realities of Neotropical research. We argue that future advances in Neotropical ornithology will critically depend on identifying and addressing the systemic barriers that hold back ornithologists who live and work in the Neotropics: unreliable and limited funding, exclusion from international research leadership, restricted dissemination of knowledge (e.g., through language hegemony and citation bias), and logistical barriers. Moving forward, we must examine and acknowledge the colonial roots of our discipline, and explicitly promote anticolonial research, training, and conservation agendas. We invite our colleagues within and beyond the Neotropics to join us in creating a new model of governance that establishes research priorities with vigorous partici-pation of ornithologists and other stakeholders within the Neotropical region. To include a diversity of perspectives, we must systemically address discrimination and bias rooted in the socioeconomic class system, anti-Blackness, anti-Brownness, anti-Indigeneity, misogyny, homophobia, tokenism, and ableism. Instead of seeking individual excellence and rewarding top-down leadership, institutions in the North and South can promote collective leadership. Authentic collaborations should value the perspectives of those directly involved and affected by policies. In adopting these approaches, we, ornithologists, will join a community of researchers across academia building new paradigms that can reconcile our relationships and transform science.