• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Owls (1 Viewer)

That would make Eurasian Scops Owl unidentifiable in the field, except calling males.

Anybody knows what sample size was in these call and single nucleotide differences, which were basis of the assertion that Eurasian Scops doesn't invade Cyprus? N > 1?

I honestly think that many (most?) Scops Owls would be unidentifiable if they didn't call or if you didn't know which Island in Asia you were on?


Andy
 
morphology sample sizes

A note about sample sizes: in the paper, we presented comparative biometrics for 51 cyprius (of which 26 were live birds) and 24 scops s. l., as noted above (see Table 7, p. 310). Nevertheless, if you read the Methods (p. 303), you will see that I collected biometric data (and obviously examined morphology simultaneously) for a total of 28 and 25 specimens, respectively. The discrepancy in totals (2 and 1, respectively) is due to the fact that, following standard practice, data from specimens from which it was impossible to take one or more of the different biometrics were discarded from formal analyses. On p. 303, you will see that I also examined an additional 10 and 12 specimens of cyprius and scops s. l. at two German museums, in these cases for plumage alone. (In fact, it is actually true that I looked at many more scops [but not cyprius] than these numbers reflect, but the totals pertain to those subject to “detailed” examination.)

Speaking purely personally, I’d say there are questions to answer still about which taxon in this complex inhabits some of the Greek islands, e.g. Crete. And, while the suggestion that voice is a sufficient isolating mechanism looks pretty good on the face of it, for me cyprius is a taxon en route to becoming a species, but whether it’s there yet, well you pays your money and takes your choice—evolution is a continuum, more rarely an endpoint (until, of course, Man’s havoc-wreaking behaviour really kicks in). Peter Flint, as lead author, is confident though and, in any case, journals don’t like to publish papers that don’t provide reasonably definitive points of view! Birdwatchers should certainly pay more attention to cyprius than they have been doing … that much is true.

The paper is here: https://www.researchgate.net/public...Otus_scops_cyprius_a_neglected_island_endemic
 
Ninox strenua

Subir Sarker, Shubhagata Das, Jade Forwood, Karla Helbig & Shane R. Raidal (2016) The complete mitochondrial genome sequence of an Endangered powerful owl (Ninox strenua), Mitochondrial DNA Part B, 1:1, 722-723, DOI: 10.1080/23802359.2016.1229588

[pdf]
 
Ninox

Yin Gwee, C., Christidis, L., Eaton, J.A., Norman, J.A., Trainor, C.R., Verbelen, P., Rheindt, F.E., Bioacoustic and multi-locus DNA data of Ninox owls support high incidence of extinction and recolonisation on small, low-lying islands across Wallacea, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution (2016), doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2016.12.024
 
Last edited:
Referring back to March 2016 and post # 19:
"The name has also been used for Megascops albogularis alone (implying this is the type) by several workers, the first one possibly Wolters in Vogelarten der Erde, but I'm unclear on which base." Wolters in Die Vogelgarten der Erde has, Subgenus Tacitathena Kelso & Kelso 1937. Strix hylophila Temm. 1825. Genus Macabra Bonap. 1854. Subgenus Macabra Bonap. 1854, syn Psuedociccaba Kelso 1932. Macabra albogularis Cassin 1850.
 
Tif Update March 10, 2017

Screech-Owls: I've split some of the Screech-Owls based on the genetic data in Dantas et al. (2016) and discussion of vocalizations in König and Weick (2008). The Vermiculated Screech-Owl, Megascops guatemalae has been split into

Middle American Screech-Owl, Megascops guatemalae,
Choco Screech-Owl, Megascops vermiculatus,
Napo Screech-Owl, Megascops napensis, and
Roraiman Screech-Owl, Megascops roraimae.
Note that I include centralis in M. vermiculatus.

The Tawny-bellied Screech-Owl, Megascops watsonii has been split into

Northern Tawny-bellied Screech-Owl, Megascops watsonii, and
Southern Tawny-bellied Screech-Owl, Megascops usta.
Finally, the undescribed Santa Marta Screech-Owl, Megascops sp. has also been added to the list. All these changes have led to some rearrangment of the Screech-Owls.
[Strigidae, Afroaves II, 3.07]

Santa Marta Screech-Owl, Megascops ''santamartae'' ?
 
Last edited:
LeNomenclatoriste;3536296 Santa Marta Screech-Owl said:
Megascops ''santamartae''[/I] ?

This is the one widely referred to already as Megascops gilesi nom. nud. (a name with 1,120 hits on google but no formal description as yet).
 
This is the one widely referred to already as Megascops gilesi nom. nud. (a name with 1,120 hits on google but no formal description as yet).

Is this the most observed species in the world which remains un-described? I would have thought 100s of birders have now seen it. It seems quite likely to me, although some very cryptic species (Gran Canaria Robin?!) may perhaps have perhaps been seen by more.

cheers, alan
 
Is this the most observed species in the world which remains un-described? I would have thought 100s of birders have now seen it. It seems quite likely to me, although some very cryptic species (Gran Canaria Robin?!) may perhaps have perhaps been seen by more. cheers, alan

The Alto Pisones Tapaculo was (until recently) and various Peruvian birds are in a similar situation, but the main difference is doubtless widespread usage of a name that looks like an available scientific name but (as far as I am aware still) is not (yet). The name was first used in an ABC publication, discussed in a separate BF discussion on this one a couple of years ago and seems to have caught on somewhat.
 
Strix

Girini, J. M., Palacio, F. X. and Zelaya, P. V. (2017), Predictive modeling for allopatric Strix (Strigiformes: Strigidae) owls in South America: determinants of their distributions and ecological niche-based processes. J. Field Ornithol., 88: 1–15. doi:10.1111/jofo.12188

[abstract]
 
A Review of the Systematics of Neotropical Owls (Strigiformes) by P. Enriquez et al.

In Neotropical Owls Diversity and Conservation http://www.springer.com/gb/book/9783319571072

I searched for the chapter and clicked on a link and the attached file appeared on my computer! I assume it's therefore OK to share it as anyone could do the same. It's a really badly written/edited summary of current knowledge.
 

Attachments

  • 9783319571072-c1.pdf
    417.7 KB · Views: 213
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top