This paper is the fifth report of the Taxonomic Sub-Committee of the BOU Records Committee relating to the British List. Species-level decisions are based on criteria outlined by Helbig et al. (2002. Ibis 144: 518–525). The fourth report of the Sub-Committee was published in Ibis 149: 853–857. The Palearctic Black-throated Loon G. arctica should be treated as a separate species from the Nearctic Pacific Loon G. pacifica, on the basis of diagnostic differences in plumage (colour of the anterior femoral tract and the bases of nape feathers), sympatry in eastern Siberia and Alaska, and a number of supporting average biometric and plumage differences (Solovyev 1992. Bulleten Moskovskogo Obschestva Ispytatelei Prorody, Otdel Biologichesky 97: 18–28; Douglas & Sowl 1993. Western Birds 24: 98–100). Wink et al. (2002. Charadrius 38: 239–245) found no sequence differences between Black-throated and Pacific Loons, and low variation in general among the loons; however, Brown et al. (2008. BMC Biology 6: 6) reported (unexpectedly) that arctica and pacifica are not sister taxa, based on phylogenetic analysis of 4594 bp of mtDNA. Claims of vocal differences between the taxa are suggestive, but require corroboration. We propose to recognize: Black-throated Loon Gavia arctica (polytypic, with subspecies arctica and viridigularis) Pacific Loon G. pacifica (Lawrence) (monotypic) Black-throated Loon (ssp. arctica) is currently in Category A of the British List. Several recent records of Pacific Loon are currently under consideration. Although most of the claimed morphological differences between Common Snipe and its American counterpart Wilson's Snipe G. g. delicata show considerable overlap, there is a suite of characters that differentiate them when considered together. These include apparently diagnostic differences in the shape, width and structure of the outer tail feathers, and significant population-level differences in the depth and pattern of the sub-terminal white tips to the secondaries, and the depth of black barring on the axillaries (Bahr 1907. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 12–35; Meinertzhagen 1924. Br. Birds 17: 283–288; Reid 2008. Br. Birds 101: 189–200). The winnowing display sounds of Common and Wilson's Snipe are distinct, presumably associated with the differences in outer tail feathers, and are likely to be a significant specific signal, as in other snipe taxa: hence the morphological and vocal/acoustic evidence indicates that delicata should be treated as a separate species (e.g. Thönen 1969. Ornithol. Beob. 66: 6–13; Miller 1996. Ecology and Evolution of Acoustic Communication in Birds, Ithaca, NY; Miller 1996. Condor 98: 418–422). Zink et al. (1995. Condor 97: 639–649) found modest levels of molecular differentiation. We propose to recognise: Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago (polytypic, including subspecies gallinago and faeroeensis) Wilson's Snipe G. delicata (monotypic) Common Snipe (both sspp.) and Wilson's Snipe are currently in Category A of the British List. Several African and South American taxa have formerly been treated as conspecific with the above, but these are now generally treated as separate (e.g. del Hoyo et al. 1996. Handbook of the Birds of the World, vol. 3, Barcelona). Spelling of name should be Coccyzus erythropthalmus; use of erythrophthalmus since first BOU Checklist in 1883 constitutes an unjustified emendation (N. David pers. comm.). Dickinson (2008. Bull. Brit. Orn. Club 128: 141–142) notes that golzii Cabanis 1873 has priority over hafizi Severtsov and that the name golzii should be used for the easternmost population of the Common Nightingale. We accept this recommendation. Two subspecies of T. cyanurus are recognized. Geographically widely separate, these differ diagnostically in size, plumage and vocalizations (Martens & Eck 1995. Bonner Zool. Monogr. 38: 1–445), and ongoing research (P. Alström, L. Svensson pers. comm.) suggests these should be regarded as monotypic separate species. Red-flanked Bluetail Tarsiger cyanurus (monotypic) Himalayan Bluetail T. rufilatus (monotypic, includes ‘pallidior’) Red-flanked Bluetail is in Category A of the British List. Dusky eunomus and Naumann's thrushes naumanni differ diagnosably in plumage (Clement 1999. Limicola 13: 217–250; Clement et al. 2000. Thrushes, London) and structure (L. Svensson unpubl. data). Birds with intermediate phenotypes exist in museum collections, but are relatively infrequent (L. Svensson unpubl. data). Despite a reported overlap in the ranges of these taxa (e.g. Rogacheva 1992. The Birds of Central Siberia, Husum), the interactions between them are poorly described and apparent hybrids are much rarer than would be expected if they were merging extensively. The taxa should be treated as separate species: Dusky Thrush Turdus eunomus (monotypic) Naumann's Thrush T. naumanni (monotypic) Both taxa are in Category A of the British List. Red-throated ruficollis and Black-throated atrogularis Thrushes are diagnosably distinct in plumage (Clement 1999. Limicola 13: 217–250; Clement et al. 2000. Thrushes, London). Significant differences in their songs have been indicated (Arkhipov et al. 2003. Br. Birds 96: 79–83) although sample sizes are small. The zone of contact for these two taxa is extensive, yet successful hybridization or mixed pairing has not been confirmed. Occasional individuals with hybrid appearance occur in the zone of contact (summarized by Clement et al. 2000), but it has not been shown that these are true hybrids. That strong diagnosability is maintained in spite of syntopic breeding and clear opportunity for gene flow suggests that effective reproductive isolation exists between these taxa, and supports them being treated as independent evolutionary lineages. We propose to recognize them as separate species: Black-throated Thrush Turdus atrogularis (monotypic) Red-throated Thrush T. ruficollis (monotypic) Both taxa are in Category A of the British List. The allopatric Green Warbler P. t. nitidus and Greenish Warbler trochiloides were treated as a separate species by Voous (1977. List of Recent Holarctic Bird Species, London), although more recently were considered to be conspecific (Sangster et al. 2002. Ibis 144: 707–710). There are differences in mtDNA between nitidus and P. t. viridanus, although rather few individuals have been analysed (Helbig et al. 1995. J. Avian Biol. 26: 139–153; Irwin et al. 2001. Nature 409: 333–337). Plumage characters have now been confirmed as diagnostic in that supercilium, face, throat and upper breast are more vividly yellow than in any Greenish Warbler. Songs also generally distinct (Albrecht 1984. Sandgrouse 6: 69–75; L. Svensson unpubl. data), that of Green having a dry trilling element in nearly all phrases, not heard from viridanus. Apart from differences in mtDNA sequences, morphology and vocalization there are a number of supporting average biometric and plumage differences that confirm the overall level of difference between nitidus and other Greenish Warblers is similar to or greater than that between other closely related Phylloscopus species. We recommend that nitidus be treated as a monotypic species: Green Warbler Phylloscopus nitidus (monotypic) Greenish Warbler P. trochiloides (polytypic, with subspecies trochiloides, ludlowi, obscuratus, plumbeitarsus and viridanus) Green Warbler and Greenish Warblers of sspp. viridanus and plumbeitarsus are in Category A of the British List. Phylogenetic analyses of mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences (Lovette & Rubenstein 2007. Mol. Phylogen. Evol. 44: 1031–1056; Lovette et al. 2008. Mol. Phylogen. Evol. 47: 251–260; Zuccon et al. 2008. Zool. Scr. 37: in press) have clarified the evolutionary relationships among the starlings. These studies indicate that Rosy Starling and Daurian Starling are more closely related to the mynas than to Common Sturnus vulgaris and Spotless Starlings S. unicolor. We adopt the generic revision proposed by Lovette et al. (2008) and Zuccon et al. (2008). Rosy Starling (currently Sturnus roseus) becomes Pastor roseus, and Daurian Starling (currently Sturnus sturninus) becomes Agropsar sturninus. The European species of starlings should be listed in the following sequence: Spotless Starling Sturnus unicolor Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris Rosy Starling Pastor roseus Daurian Starling Agropsar sturninus Common and Rosy Starling are in Category A and Daurian Starling is in Category D of the British List. Treat as polytypic. Enzyme data (Johnson et al. 1988. Condor 90: 428–445) indicate North American olivaceus to be conspecific with South American chivi taxa, and these are currently treated as two subspecies groups (Cimprich et al. 2000. Birds of North America, No. 527). One North American subspecies (olivaceus) and up to nine South American subspecies are currently recognized (Dickinson 2003. The Howard and Moore complete checklist of the birds of the world, London). Records of birds in Britain have not been assigned to any subspecies but most likely refer to olivaceus. Male plumages of Citril Finch and Corsican Finch differ in the colour and pattern of the upperparts (Cramp & Perrins 1994. Birds of the Western Palearctic vol. 8, Oxford; Förschler & Siebenrock 2007. Bonn. Zool. Beitr. 55: 159–162). Citril and Corsican Finches also differ in contact calls and perch song, whereas geographical variation in Citril Finch calls is clinal (Chappuis 1976. Alauda 44: 475–495; Cramp & Perrins 1994; Förschler & Kalko 2007. J. Biogeogr. 34: 1591–1600). Mitochondrial DNA sequences of Citril Finch differ from those of Corsican Finches by 2.7–2.8% (Pasquet & Thibault 1997. Ibis 139: 679–684; Zamora et al. 2006. Ardeola 53: 1–17). Differences in morphology, vocalizations and mitochondrial DNA sequences are concordant and indicate that Citril Finch and Corsican Finch are best treated as separate species (Sangster 2000. Ibis 142: 487–490). Phylogenetic study of molecular sequence data supports inclusion of Citril Finch in the genus Carduelis as the sister taxon of Carduelis carduelis (Zamora et al. 2006; Arnaiz-Villena et al. 2007. Acta Zool. Sin. 53: 826–834; Arnaiz-Villena et al. 2008. The Open Ornithology Journal 1: 1–7). We propose to treat the species as follows: Citril Finch Carduelis citrinella (monotypic) Corsican Finch Carduelis corsicana (monotypic) A recent record of Citril Finch is currently under consideration for admission to the British List. We thank Per Alström, Vladimir Arkhipov, Dick Banks, Normand David, Mikhail Soloviev and Keith Vinicombe for their help.