The African Silverbill and Indian Silverbill: from Loxia to Euodice
[Genus Euodice]
By Dirk Van den Abeele
Ornitho-Genetics VZW
De Nederlandse versie van dit artikel kan je hier lezen
The Indian Silverbill (Euodice malabarica) and the African Silverbill (Euodice cantans) are two extremely popular estrildid finches in aviculture. They are about 11 cm long, predominantly pale brown to grey in colour, and both species have a grey bill. The most striking differences between the two species are the colour of the rump and the shade of the bill. In the Indian Silverbill, the rump is white and the bill is dark grey; in the African Silverbill, the rump is black and the bill is light grey.
They are genetically very closely related. Crosses between the two species therefore produce fertile hybrids. Even so, biologically they are two distinct species.
These species have had quite a journey through biological systematics. Since the eighteenth century, scientists have placed them in different genera (taxonomic groupings). This happened because biologists once had to rely purely on external characteristics such as the bill or tail shape, which often caused confusion.
Current status
Today, both species are classified in the genus Euodice. The Indian Silverbill has only one form, whereas the African Silverbill has two subspecies.
Here is an overview:
Euodice (f.) Reichenbach 1862
- Euodice cantans (Gmelin) 1789
- Euodice cantans cantans (Gmelin) 1789
- Euodice cantans orientalis (Lorenz von Liburnau, L. & Hellmayr) 1901
- Euodice malabarica (Linnaeus) 1758
I can imagine that many enthusiasts scratch their heads when they see these classifications and do not always understand exactly what they mean. So I am happy to provide a little more information.
Let us start with Euodice (f.) Reichenbach 1862:
Euodice is the name of the genus.
The (f.) stands for femininum (feminine). It indicates the Latin grammatical gender of the genus name. The species name attached to it must therefore also have a grammatically feminine form. As a result, when taxonomists move a species to a different genus, the grammatical gender of the species epithet may also have to be changed (usually from ‘a’ to ‘us’ or vice versa). This sometimes causes quite a bit of confusion among bird fanciers.
Reichenbach 1862 refers to the naturalist Reichenbach, who officially established and described this genus in 1862.
Next we have the reference to the first taxon within this genus: Euodice cantans cantans (Gmelin) 1789. Let me break it down.
Euodice: genus name
cantans: species name
cantans: subspecies name
(Gmelin) 1789: described by Gmelin in 1789.
A number of things will probably already have caught your eye: scientific names (genus, species and subspecies) are always written in italics. Only the genus name begins with a capital letter. I know there is a myth circulating in aviculture that if a species name refers to a geographical place or a person, it should begin with a capital letter, but that is not correct.
The author’s name for this species, in this case Gmelin, is placed in parentheses; that is no coincidence. Because his name appears in parentheses, we know that he originally placed the bird in a different genus (he called it Loxia cantans at the time). Only much later was the bird moved to the present genus Euodice. If the author’s name is not in parentheses, it means that the author placed the bird directly in the currently valid genus.
Euodice cantans cantans: The fact that this taxon has a three-part name (a trinomen)—which, as you will notice, is not the case with Euodice malabarica—means that we are dealing here with subspecies. When the species name (cantans) is repeated, it means that this was the first form to be described. This is called the nominate form. Keep in mind, however, that from an evolutionary point of view this is not necessarily the ancestral form; it is simply the form that was officially described first.
The next name in the list is Euodice cantans orientalis. This is a subspecies of Euodice cantans. In other words, this form was discovered and described later. Euodice cantans therefore has two subspecies: Euodice cantans cantans and Euodice cantans orientalis. The nominate form is, after all, also regarded as a full subspecies.
Then we still have Euodice malabarica (Linnaeus) 1758. From this we can conclude that there is only one form here and no subspecies. The name consists solely of a genus name and a species name. The mention of Linnaeus 1758 means that this man described the species in 1758. The parentheses reveal that he did so under a different genus.
If a species has no subspecies, we call it a monotypic species. If a species is divided into two or more groups, we speak of subspecies and refer to it as a polytypic species.
Habitat
Although the Indian Silverbill and the African Silverbill look very similar externally, they live on two different continents. Let us set out the facts.
The Indian Silverbill (Euodice malabarica)
This bird is found across the greater Indian subcontinent and along the Arabian coast. More specifically in Bangladesh, India, Iran, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and the coastal areas in the south of the United Arab Emirates [1]. Specific field studies have been carried out on their foraging behaviour. An ecological study in West Bengal (India), for example, mapped in detail how wild Indian Silverbills, together with other munia species, use thirteen different species of wild grass both for food and for gathering nest material. The research also showed that Indian Silverbills in the wild nest in a ‘semi-communal’ way. Several females may sometimes lay eggs in the same nest, and ‘helpers’ (often young from earlier broods) are used to incubate the eggs and help raise the chicks. Not infrequently, they build their nests beneath the large platform nests of vultures. This is most likely a way to protect themselves from other predators [2], [3].
The African Silverbill (Euodice cantans)
In contrast to the Indian Silverbill, the African Silverbill is found in Africa. In fact, we can say that it occurs in an almost uninterrupted broad belt of dry savannas and semi-deserts stretching from the Atlantic Ocean in West Africa (Senegal/Gambia), across the Sahel to East Africa, and continuing via the Red Sea into the south of the Arabian Peninsula. These birds have been recorded in Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Yemen, Cameroon, Kenya, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, the Central African Republic, and South Sudan [4].
Just like the Indian Silverbill, they often use one another’s nests in the wild, share eggs, and use old weaver nests as communal sleeping places. Research shows that the body of the African Silverbill is naturally well adapted to surviving in harsh, dry environments, which may explain its frequent occurrence in these dry Sahel regions [5].
Invasive populations
Because these birds are widely kept in aviculture and adapt easily, biologists in southern Europe (France, Italy and Spain) investigated how escaped populations persist in the wild and whether they compete with native bird species such as the House Sparrow [6]. This research confirms that the Indian Silverbill has now become officially established in Italy, after the first successful breeding record was scientifically documented in the Liguria region. These are not just scattered, recently escaped cage birds, but a permanent new exotic species resulting from a natural range expansion from southern France. A stable feral population of the Indian Silverbill has in fact existed on the French Riviera since 1988, and over the years it has continued to move eastward across the Italian border. Biologists conclude that this new population must be monitored closely, because the arrival of the Indian Silverbill is changing the composition of local bird communities. Although it is a striking example of how bird populations are shifting within Europe, the long-term consequences for native Italian wildlife are still unknown at present.
Taxonomy
Today, thanks to DNA research, there is much more certainty about the taxonomic classification. But this has not always been the case. I would therefore like to take you on a journey through time to provide an overview of the taxonomic path these birds travelled before they were ultimately classified in the genus Euodice.
1758. Loxia malabaric
In 1758, Carl Linnaeus named the Indian Silverbill Loxia malabarica in volume 10 of his Systema naturae. It was a very short Latin description of the species, but it was nonetheless accepted by the taxonomic world as the official description. Linnaeus had, after all, given it both a genus name, Loxia, and a species name, malabarica. As I have mentioned several times in my other articles on taxonomy, Carl Linnaeus placed almost all birds with a strong, conical bill in the genus Loxia (the genus we now know for the crossbills). Loxia comes from the Greek loxos (crossed, slanting) [7, p. 231], and malabarica refers to Malabar, a coastal region in southwestern India [7, p. 239]. In other words: the crossbill of Malabar.
Like many other species, the Indian Silverbill was officially named in Systema Naturae. The full title of that work is Systema naturae per regna tria naturae: secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis (System of nature through the three kingdoms of nature: according to classes, orders, genera, species, with characteristics, differences, synonyms, and localities). This imposing work was published in several parts and played a major role in introducing binomial nomenclature for the scientific names of species. It is the system that we still use to this day.
It all began in 1735, when Carl Linnaeus published a slim, modest booklet of barely twelve pages under the title Systema Naturae. Linnaeus wanted to bring order to the complete chaos of nature by giving every plant, mineral, and animal a fixed double Latin name. His system caught on in the scientific world, and his Systema Naturae soon became the guide for every naturalist. Whenever new species were discovered anywhere in the world, Linnaeus adjusted his text and issued a larger, revised edition. By the time he sent his legendary tenth edition to the press in 1758, the thin pamphlet had grown into an impressive work in two thick volumes. Linnaeus continued working until his own final twelfth edition in 1766.
1789. Loxia cantans
Eleven years after the death of Carl Linnaeus, Gmelin published the thirteenth and final edition of his Systema naturae. When Linnaeus died in 1778, his system was in danger of collapsing under an enormous flood of newly discovered exotic species from voyages of exploration. To save his life’s work, the thirteenth edition became not an ordinary reprint but a gigantic modernization. The German professor Johann Friedrich Gmelin (1748–1804) took on this formidable task. He began this titanic undertaking by studying piles of travel accounts, dried plants, and stuffed birds for years, and then assigning them a place within the legacy of his Swedish predecessor. In doing so, he officially put many newly discovered tropical birds on the map for the first time—including the African Silverbill. Gmelin named the bird Loxia cantans. The species name, cantans, means singing or songful. In other words: ‘the singing crossbill’.
Once again, the description remained limited to only a few lines. Understandably so, because Gmelin had not been on a voyage of discovery himself and had to rely on the works of other experts—in this case A General Synopsis of Birds by the Briton John Latham (1740–1837). At the bottom of the description there is therefore also a reference to an illustration and a text about the African Silverbill in Latham’s 1782 book. Latham wrote his Synopsis in English and did not yet give the birds Latin names. He called them “Malabar Finch.” Taxonomically, such an English designation is not valid as a scientific species name, even if it is older than the name that Gmelin later introduced. Gmelin adopted Latham’s description and converted it into the valid scientific name: Loxia cantans.
1842. Amadina cantans
In Isis von Oken, a German scientific and cultural journal founded in 1816 by the biologist Lorenz Oken, an index of the species known at the time was published. In this index he placed the African Silverbill under the list Amadina. In 1842 he listed it as Loxia cantans, with a question mark after Loxia. By doing so, he clearly indicated that he had doubts about assigning these birds to the genus Loxia and preferred to place them in the genus Amadina. That genus had been introduced in 1827 by the Briton William Swainson (1789–1855) for small finch species in The Zoological Journal.
There is not always a need for an extensive description in order to move bird species to another genus. Every collection or museum regularly published books containing an overview of their collection. Only the new species they themselves had just discovered were described in them; existing species were usually only listed. If a species was then placed by them in a new genus, they would mention the names under which that species was also known. It was then up to other taxonomists to accept this and possibly adopt it. A number of them indeed followed this reasoning and placed the birds in the genus Amadina in their articles or books. I found references to Amadina cantans in lists and catalogues by, among others, the German researcher Jean Louis Cabanis (1816–1906). Even in the prestigious Journal für Ornithologie of 1851 these names could be read [8], [9].
1854. Munia malabarica & Munia cantans
It was soon discovered that neither the African Silverbill nor the Indian Silverbill had anything to do with European crossbills. A number of authors thought that both species fitted better in the genus Munia. That genus was established in 1836 by the British naturalist Brian Houghton Hodgson (1800–1894) for Asian and African seed-eating finches. From then on, some taxonomists used Munia malabarica and Munia cantans. The earliest references I have been able to trace come from A catalogue of the birds in the Museum of the Honorable East India Company by the American Thomas Horsfield (1773–1859) and the British researcher Frederic Moore (1830–1907). This is an ornithological reference work that appeared between 1854 and 1858. It is a detailed inventory of the enormous bird collection of the British East India Company. It includes, among other things, a systematic list of more than 1,000 bird species with their scientific names, synonyms, and geographical distribution. The birds described come mainly from the Indian subcontinent, Southeast Asia, and parts of China. Both authors were clearly of the opinion that the Indian Silverbill and the African Silverbill should be classified in the genus Munia.
1860. Uroloncha cantans
In Museum Heineanum: Verzeichniss der ornithologischen Sammlung des Oberamtmann … from 1860, Jean Cabanis mentioned Uroloncha cantans as the scientific name for the African Silverbill. Jean Louis Cabanis wanted to separate species with a stepped, sharply tapering (pointed) tail from species with a rounder tail. In doing so, he moved away from his earlier idea that the African Silverbill belonged in the genus Amadina. Well into the early twentieth century, Uroloncha was a very common name in the scientific literature for both the Indian Silverbill and the African Silverbill [10], [11], [12].
Anyone who thought this classification was final at that point would be mistaken. The search for the correct genus for these birds was far from over: the more experts became involved, the more opinions arose. And so the revisions continued to follow one another.
1870. Spermestes cantans
The name Spermestes cantans for the African Silverbill appears mainly in ornithological literature from the 1870s and 1880s. The German Otto Finsch (1839–1917) and Gustav Hartlaub (1814–1900) used this name in their standard work Die Vögel Ost-Afrikas [13]. And eight years later, in 1878, the Swiss researcher Gustav Fischer (1848–1886) and his German colleague Anton Reichenow (1847–1941) also adopted the name in their scientific reports on the fauna of East Africa [14].
The genus Spermestes was introduced in 1837 by the English naturalist William Swainson (1789–1855). When the bird genus Spermestes was established, only one specific bird species was initially classified in it, namely Spermestes cucullata (the Bronze Mannikin). A bird that lives chiefly in a large part of southern Africa. The fact that the Bronze Mannikin is also predominantly brown, has a dark grey bill, and occurs in Africa was probably the reason why these authors believed it should be placed in the same genus as the African Silverbill.
1890. Aidemosyne malabarica en Aidemosyne cantans
In 1890, volume 13 of the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum was published. In fact, it is the “Wikipedia of the nineteenth-century bird world.” The entire project is a gigantic series of 27 volumes, published between 1874 and 1898. The aim of the British Museum was not only to describe its bird collection, but to map all bird species known on Earth at that time in a systematic way.
In that thirteenth volume, Richard Bowdler Sharpe (1847–1909) described the African Silverbill and the Indian Silverbill as species within the genus Aidemosyne. This genus was officially introduced in 1862 by the German ornithologist Heinrich Gottlieb Ludwig Reichenbach [15].
During this period, people were probably looking for an evolutionary link between African waxbills (such as the mannikins / Spermestes) and Australian/Asian species (such as the Plum-headed Finch / Aidemosyne). Because of their intermediate characteristics, the Indian Silverbill and African Silverbill briefly swung between these groups. It was an understandable line of reasoning.
Later we see that around the turn of the century, various European ornithologists used this genus to describe both the African Silverbill (Aidemosyne cantans) and the Indian Silverbill (Aidemosyne malabarica).
1901. Euodice cantans orientalis
In 1901, the subspecies Euodice cantans orientalis was described scientifically for the first time by the Austrian zoologists Ludwig Lorenz von Liburnau and Carl Eduard Hellmayr. They called it Aedemosyne orientalis.
Here is a translation of part of the original German text:
…..Aedemosyne orientalis n. sp. (abbreviation for ‘nova species’: new species)
When comparing the Arabian birds with specimens from the Nile, from Senegal and from Abyssinia (Ethiopia), it became apparent that the East African and Arabian birds differ essentially from the western A. cantans (Gm.). Whereas in the latter the cheeks, sides of the neck, throat and flanks are always more or less rusty-coloured, these parts in the eastern specimens appear pure white. Professor Reichenow was kind enough to examine the rich material in the Berlin Museum with this in mind and confirmed our view that two clearly distinguishable species are involved here. We therefore wish to set the eastern form as A. orientalis opposite the western species….
What stands out is that at the time they introduced the bird as Aedemosyne orientalis (a variant of the name Aidemosyne we discussed earlier). They also regarded the bird as a separate species, not yet as a subspecies of the African Silverbill (Euodice cantans), as would later prove to be the case.
Lonchura malabarica & Lonchura cantans
The exact first publication in which the combination Lonchura malabarica explicitly appeared probably surfaced somewhere in the waxbill literature at the end of the nineteenth century or the beginning of the twentieth century. During this period a major “clean-up” took place in taxonomy. Many small genera (such as Munia and Uroloncha) were merged by various taxonomists under the oldest valid name: Lonchura. During this time, the Indian Silverbill and the African Silverbill were even regarded by many authors as one and the same species (Lonchura malabarica), with the African Silverbill being considered merely the African subspecies (Lonchura malabarica cantans).
Although the genus Lonchura had already been established in 1832 by the English naturalist and military officer William Henry Sykes (1790–1872), it took almost a century before taxonomists began assigning various finch species to it. The name of the genus refers to the tail shape: Lonchura is a combination of the Ancient Greek words lonkh? (spearpoint/lance) and oura (tail) [16]. These names effectively remained in use until the 2000s.
2007. Euodice malabarica & Euodice cantans
The first publication that, as far as I have been able to trace, placed both the African Silverbill and the Indian Silverbill in the genus Euodice was undoubtedly the Clements Checklist 2007 [17]. A few years later, the IOC World Bird List followed suit.
Naturally, all of these changes were accompanied by considerable discussion. Did the species belong in Lonchura or in Munia? For a long time, opinions were divided. Later, molecular DNA research demonstrated that the African Silverbill and the Indian Silverbill stand clearly apart from the true Lonchura munias.
The shift to the genus Euodice is based on advanced molecular phylogenetic research. An important study appeared in 2020: A comprehensive phylogeny and taxonomic evaluation of the waxbills by Olsson & Alström. This DNA-based research mapped the family tree of the waxbills (Estrildidae) with exceptional clarity. It showed clearly that the Indian Silverbill and the African Silverbill together form a separate evolutionary branch. That branch split off before the rest of the Lonchura group developed further. Genetically, both species therefore stand at the base of that group.
The genetic material also confirms that Euodice cantans and Euodice malabarica are true sister species. The genetic distance between them indicates that they diverged from one another about one million years ago. This probably happened when their common ancestor, under the influence of geographical and climatic changes, became spread across Africa and the Indian subcontinent.
The conclusion is therefore fairly straightforward: to keep the systematics biologically correct and consistent, both species must be placed in their own genus, Euodice. All leading international taxonomic authorities—such as the IOC World Bird List, Clements, and BirdLife International/HBW—have now fully accepted this classification.
It therefore seems that these birds have finally found their definitive place. Yet in taxonomy the question always remains: how definitive is definitive?
Dirk
References
[1] B. I. (BirdLife International), “IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Euodice malabarica,” IUCN Red List Threat. Species, Aug. 2018, Accessed: May 21, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.iucnredlist.org/en
[2] L. Chatterjee, T. Samanta, N. Chaudhuri, S. Besra, and A. B. Roy, “Diversity and Seasonal activities of Munias with preferent wild grasses in Rajarhat marshy grassland, West Bengal, India,” World News Nat. Sci., vol. 50, pp. 60–72, 2023.
[3] S. Kumar and O. P. Bairwa, “Grass species utilization by Munia birds (Estrildidae) at Abhera Biological Park, Kota, Rajasthan, India,” J. Adv. Future Res., vol. 3, no. 12, pp. 788–791, 2025.
[4] B. I. (BirdLife International), “IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Euodice cantans,” IUCN Red List Threat. Species, Aug. 2018, Accessed: May 21, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.iucnredlist.org/en
[5] S. J. Enam, “Comparative hematology of apparently healthy free-living wild birds from the orders Apodiformes and Passeriformes in Zaria Kaduna State, Nigeria,” Jul. 2018, doi: 10.4172/2161-0681-C2-049.
[6] E. Carta, E. F. Zucchetti, R. Valfiorito, and N. Alberti, “The Indian Silverbill Euodice malabarica: a new exotic breeding species for the Italian avifauna?,” Riv. Ital. Ornitol., vol. 95, no. 1, 2025, Accessed: May 21, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://sisn.pagepress.org/rio/article/download/853/789/8109
[7] J. A. Joblin, Helm Dictionary of Scientific Bird Names. London: Christopher Helm, 2010.
[8] Deutsche Ornithologen-Gesellschaft, D. Ornithologen-Gesellschaft, D. O. Gesellschaft, and A. D. O. Gesellschaft, Journal für Ornithologie, vol. Jahrg.7-8=no.37-48 (1859-1860). Berlin: Friedländer, 1859, pp. 1–976. [Online]. Available: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/50195
[9] J. L. Cabanis, J. L. Cabanis, and F. Heine, Museum Heineanum?: Verzeichniss der ornithologischen Sammlung des Oberamtmann Ferdinand Heine, auf Gut St. Burchard vor Halberstadt, vol. T.1 (1850-1851). Halbertstadt: In Commission bei R. Frantz, 1850, pp. 1–256. doi: 10.5962/bhl.title.112135.
[10] M. A. Dr. S.T. SATYAMURTI, BIRDS EGGS AND NESTS IN THE COLLECTION OF THE MADRAS GOVERNMENT MUSEUM. The Commissioner Of Museums,Government Museum, Chennai., 1979. Accessed: May 22, 2026. [Online]. Available: http://archive.org/details/dli.chennai.26
[11] D. K. Chatterjee and H. N. Ray, “Some observations on the morphology and developmental stages of Trypanosoma avium bakeri ssp.nov. from the red-whiskered bulbul (Otocompsa jocosa Linn.),” Parasitology, vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 331–338, Apr. 1971, doi: 10.1017/S0031182000071560.
[12] B. M. D. Gupta and L. B. Siddons, “On a Trypanosome of the White-Throated Munia—Uroloncha Malabarica (Linn.),” Indian Med. Gaz., vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 151–152, Mar. 1941.
[13] O. Finsch, O. Finsch, and G. Hartlaub, Die Vogel Ost-Afrikas. Baron Carl Claus von Deer Decken’s Reisen in Ost-Africa. Bd. 4. Leipzig: C.F. Winter’sche Verlagshandlung, 1870, pp. 1–948. doi: 10.5962/bhl.title.14155.
[14] Deutsche Ornithologen-Gesellschaft, D. Ornithologen-Gesellschaft, D. O. Gesellschaft, and A. D. O. Gesellschaft, Journal für Ornithologie, vol. ser.4:Jahrg.26=no.141-144 (1878). Berlin: Friedländer, 1878, pp. 1–486. [Online]. Available: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/102855
[15] H. G. L. Reichenbach and H. G. L. Reichenbach, Die vollständigste Naturgeschichte der Vögel, vol. [Abt.4]:Bd.4 (1862) [Text]. Dresden: Expedition der Vollständigsten Naturgeschichte, 1862, pp. 1–136. doi: 10.5962/bhl.title.102901.
[16] Zoological Society of London., Z. S. of London, and Z. S. of London, Proceedings of the Committee of Science and Correspondence of the Zoological Society of London, vol. pt.1-2 (1830-1832). [London]: Printed for the Society by Richard Taylor, 1830, pp. 1–426. [Online]. Available: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/46215
[17] J. F. Clements, The Clements checklist of birds of the world. Ithaca?: Comstock Pub. Associates/Cornell University Press, 2007. Accessed: May 22, 2026. [Online]. Available: http://archive.org/details/clementschecklis0000clem_t1e2