Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average.
Old Saturday 8th July 2017, 00:46   #176
Mike Earp
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sanderstead
Posts: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by gusasp View Post
* In Cardinalidae, Serinus and Spinus are sisters, but the smaller genus Serinus is put last, not ahead of Serinus. Shouldn't it be the other way around?
Do you mean "not ahead of Spinus" rather than "not ahead of Serinus"? On a global scale, Serinus is by far the larger genus, so I don't think the chosen sequence is wrong.
Mike Earp is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 8th July 2017, 05:48   #177
gusasp
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Earp View Post
Do you mean "not ahead of Spinus" rather than "not ahead of Serinus"? On a global scale, Serinus is by far the larger genus, so I don't think the chosen sequence is wrong.
Haha, yes, that's what I meant! No, since AOS now endorsed Crithagra, Serinus is a small one with only a handful of species, far smaller than Spinus.
gusasp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 11th July 2017, 13:55   #178
l_raty
laurent raty
 
l_raty's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 2,511
sinesciuris

Quote:
Originally Posted by l_raty View Post
"sinesciurus" corrected to the original spelling before it irreversibly enters the realms of official checklists...?
Spelling correct now.

http://americanornithologypubs.org/d...42/AUK-17-72.1
http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1642/AUK-17-72.1

Last edited by l_raty : Tuesday 11th July 2017 at 15:36.
l_raty is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 11th July 2017, 14:01   #179
LeNomenclatoriste
Taxonomy and Shiny hunting
 
LeNomenclatoriste's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: No where, my soul is lost in the churchyard
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by gusasp View Post

* In Cardinalidae, Serinus and Spinus are sisters, but the smaller genus Serinus is put last, not ahead of Serinus. Shouldn't it be the other way around?
In Cardinalidae, really ? ^^
__________________
Par respect pour les pierres
LeNomenclatoriste is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 11th July 2017, 15:04   #180
Nutcracker
Northumbrian

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 14,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeNomenclatoriste View Post
In Cardinalidae, really ? ^^
Methinks just a slip of the pen (or keyboard). Not a cardinal sin.
Nutcracker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 15th July 2017, 19:21   #181
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,395
Acanthis cabaret

Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1848 View Post
2017-C-13 adds Lesser Redpoll (Acanthis cabaret) to the NA bird list. The committee admits that "The status of this species forms part of a current AOU proposal (2017-B-7)."
IOC Updates Diary July 14

Accept proposed split of Lesser Redpoll
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 15th July 2017, 19:52   #182
andyadcock
Registered User
 
andyadcock's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Nottingham UK and St Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 7,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
IOC Updates Diary July 5

Accept split of Northern Shrike
In to what?

I hadn't realised either that Great Grey Shrike had been re-named?


A
andyadcock is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 15th July 2017, 20:59   #183
Nutcracker
Northumbrian

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 14,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyadcock View Post
In to what?

I hadn't realised either that Great Grey Shrike had been re-named?


A
Into Great Grey Shrike Lanius excubitor (Europe, western Asia) and Northern Shrike Lanius borealis (northeast Asia, North America, inc. subspp. borealis & sibiricus).

Forgot to add - GGS has always been called 'Northern Shrike' in N America, even when borealis was considered conspecific with excubitor.

Last edited by Nutcracker : Saturday 15th July 2017 at 21:02.
Nutcracker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 15th July 2017, 21:04   #184
andyadcock
Registered User
 
andyadcock's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Nottingham UK and St Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 7,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutcracker View Post

Forgot to add - GGS has always been called 'Northern Shrike' in N America, even when borealis was considered conspecific with excubitor.
That's what confused me then Nutty, thanks


A
andyadcock is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 15th July 2017, 21:43   #185
MJB
Registered User
 
MJB's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Holt
Posts: 4,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyadcock View Post
That's what confused me then Nutty, thanks
A
There are many taxa that at present continue to be listed as sspp of Southern Grey Shrike Lanius meridionalis, but the thrust of a number of papers since 2009 is that L. meridionalis will in future be confined to Iberia and southern France, the more widespread former sspp being attributed to Great Grey Shrike L. excubitor or to a common ancestor of Great Grey Shrike, Southern Grey Shrike populations being associated with a separate, earlier radiation after glaciation retreat.

The 'transfer' of the various taxa from Great Grey Shrike sensu lato to Northern Shrike may have made the formal revision of the 'meridionalis' taxa as stated above more straightforward once a better sampling distribution has been achieved. There are vast areas of large grey shrike distribution that have been poorly researched or sampled.
MJB
PS Charles Vaurie in the early 1950s had constructed two arrangements of large grey shrike taxa, but the limitations of morphology could find little to choose from. He settled on the meridionalis-based version, and I like to think that he would have been quite intrigued to find the version he rejected being supported by molecular research findings.
__________________
The fuzziness of all supposedly absolute taxonomic distinctions - Stephen Jay Gould (1977) "Ever Since Darwin: Reflections in Natural History".
Species and subspecies are but a convenient fiction - Kees van Deemter (2010), "In praise of vagueness". Biology is messy
MJB is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 07:16   #186
jmorlan
Hmm... That's funny.
 
jmorlan's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pacifica, California
Posts: 899
http://checklist.aou.org/taxa/

Full revised checklist now published. However the sequence of Agelaiinae in that checklist does not follow the approved proposal, instead retaining the old sequence.
__________________
"It turns out we're very good at not seeing things" - Jack Hitt
jmorlan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 09:15   #187
mb1848
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Santa Maria, California USA
Posts: 1,600
I just sent a proposal to Mr. Chesser at AOU:
Technical corrections to authority citation of genus Tadorna:
An earlier work of Boie Tagebuch etc. is the actual original source of the genus Tadorna instead of Isis Von Oken 1822 also Boie.
Tagebuch gehalten auf einer Reise durch Norwegen im Jahre 1817
By Friedrich Boie is dated before May 1, 1822; since F. Boie mentions his Tagebuch book in the Isis article.
https://books.google.com/books?id=Vj...adorna&f=false .
On column 560 of the Isis Von Oken Jahrgang 1822 in Boie’s article in heft five just four columns before the AOU cite is a citation to the Tagebuch book. Boie, 1822, Isis von Oken, col. 564. is in heft five which means May 1822.
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/i...e/290/mode/1up .
If you use Isis Von Oken Boie lists two species of Tadorna T. familiaris and rutila (not A. tadorna) so no tautonymy. The Norwegian book only uses T. familiaris as a species and specifically mentions it equals Anas tadorna Lin. So tautology and monotypy. “Also if you give precedence to Isis Von Oken over the Tagebuch, Tadorna familiaris Boie was a nomen nudum at the time of introduction of the genus, thus is not eligible as a type species, and Anas rutila Pallas is the type by original monotypy.” (L. Raty on Bird Forum) Pages for all this is listed as 140 and 351 because 351 is where familiaris is revealed to be A. tadorna.
In the current Auk :
Genus TADORNA Boie
Tadorna Boie, 1822, Isis von Oken, col. 564. Type, by
tautonymy, Anas tadorna Linnaeus.
This is incorrect.
History in the Check-list of North American Birds.
In the first and second AOU check-list (1886 & 1895) there is no Tadorna.
In the third check-list (1910) is Ruddy Sheldrake but in genus Casarca Bonaparte Geog. & Comp. List, 1838, 56. Type, by monotypy, Anas rutila Pallas = Anas ferruginea Pallas. In the Fourth check-list (1931) Casarca is still there for Ruddy Sheldrake but also genus Tadorna for Shel-duck Tadorna tadorna . “Tadorna Fleming Philos. Zool II 1822 260 Type by monotypy Anas tadorna Linn.” Same listing in the Fifth edition of the check-list.
In 1979 Johnsgard had it Tadorna Boie, 1822 (before May), Tagebuch Reise Norwegen, pp. 140, 351. Type, by tautonymy, Tadorna familiaris Boie = Anas tadorna Linnaeus. (Order Anseriformes: from Check-List of Birds of the World) This is correct.
Literature cited:
1. Tagebuch gehalten auf einer Reise durch Norwegen im Jahre 1817, Friedrich Boie, 1822.
2. Isis Von Oken Jahrgang 1822, erstes heft I-VI.
3. Order Anseriformes: from Check-List of Birds of the World, Johnsgard, 1979.
4. Birdforum Taxonomy and Nomenclature Forum. (www. Birdforum.net)
Mark Brown
July 17, 2017.
Eunetta next!
__________________
Mark Brown, Esq.
mb1848 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 11:56   #188
Markus Lagerqvist
Registered User
 
Markus Lagerqvist's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1848 View Post
People know it is named for a place without squirrels and that the genus of these squirrels is Sinesciurus but sinesciuris is the plural, squirrels so is correct. This is why the normals hate us.
A question regarding the English name Cassia Crossbill. The motivation says that "Cassia Crossbill more accurately describes the distribution of this species, which is endemic toCassia County, Idaho"

My question is - is it really endemic to Cassia County? The South Hills seem to be on both sides of the border of Cassia County and Twin Falls County.

Is the crossbill not present on the Twin Falls side of South Hills?
__________________
Latest bird lifer: Shining Honeycreeper (#5,244)
Latest bird family: Hypocolius (#215)
Latest mammal lifer: Risso's Dolphin (#315)
Web page: pbase.com/lagerqvist
Markus Lagerqvist is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 14:59   #189
jurek
Registered User
 
jurek's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Switzerland/Poland
Posts: 3,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Lagerqvist View Post
My question is - is it really endemic to Cassia County? The South Hills seem to be on both sides of the border of Cassia County and Twin Falls County.

Is the crossbill not present on the Twin Falls side of South Hills?
Would it be possible to identify Cassia Crossbill with reasonable certainty as a vagrant elsewhere at all?

In Europe, crossbills matching 'Scottish Crossbill' 'Loxia scotica' are repeatedly trapped and recorded outside Scottish Highlands, but no authority ever dared to assign them to this form. Not so good species.
jurek is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 17:15   #190
fugl
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 13,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by jurek View Post
Would it be possible to identify Cassia Crossbill with reasonable certainty as a vagrant elsewhere at all?

In Europe, crossbills matching 'Scottish Crossbill' 'Loxia scotica' are repeatedly trapped and recorded outside Scottish Highlands, but no authority ever dared to assign them to this form. Not so good species.
Distinguishable by DNA and call analysis presumably. Just because Cassias are unidentifiable by the usual morphological criteria doesn't in itself make them a "bad" species,
__________________
Bird photos (Flickr): http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugl/
". . .Let them be left, O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."

--Gerard Manley Hopkins

Last edited by fugl : Monday 17th July 2017 at 17:20.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 17th July 2017, 18:28   #191
Nutcracker
Northumbrian

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 14,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by jurek View Post
Would it be possible to identify Cassia Crossbill with reasonable certainty as a vagrant elsewhere at all?

In Europe, crossbills matching 'Scottish Crossbill' 'Loxia scotica' are repeatedly trapped and recorded outside Scottish Highlands, but no authority ever dared to assign them to this form. Not so good species.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugl View Post
Distinguishable by DNA and call analysis presumably. Just because Cassias are unidentifiable by the usual morphological criteria doesn't in itself make them a "bad" species,
What worries me more: does acceptance of Loxia sinesciuris as a species, leave Loxia curvirostra paraphyletic? Are Loxia curvirostra in other parts of Idaho more closely related to Loxia curvirostra 12,000 km away in the Himalaya, than they are to Loxia sinesciuris a few kilometres away?
Nutcracker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 18:47   #192
Kirk Roth
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutcracker View Post
What worries me more: does acceptance of Loxia sinesciuris as a species, leave Loxia curvirostra paraphyletic? Are Loxia curvirostra in other parts of Idaho more closely related to Loxia curvirostra 12,000 km away in the Himalaya, than they are to Loxia sinesciuris a few kilometres away?
The short answer is "no."

See Figure 1 in the crossbill proposal: http://checklist.aou.org/assets/prop...PDF/2017-A.pdf for a good illustration. If the Mexican Crossbill ever gets split, there may be questions of polyphyly for those who are concerned.
Kirk Roth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 19:02   #193
Nutcracker
Northumbrian

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 14,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk Roth View Post
The short answer is "no."

See Figure 1 in the crossbill proposal: http://checklist.aou.org/assets/prop...PDF/2017-A.pdf for a good illustration. If the Mexican Crossbill ever gets split, there may be questions of polyphyly for those who are concerned.
Thanks! Shame there's no info on where the samples in that figure are from.
Nutcracker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 20:35   #194
l_raty
laurent raty
 
l_raty's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 2,511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk Roth View Post
The short answer is "no."

See Figure 1 in the crossbill proposal: http://checklist.aou.org/assets/prop...PDF/2017-A.pdf for a good illustration.
If you accept what this figure shows, the answer is 'yes', actually.
The basalmost L. curvirostra (incl. type 9 = sinesciuris) are those that are at the end opposite to the type 9 cluster. A single type two is sister to everything else; then you have a cluster made of tree type 2 and one type 5, which is sister to sinesciuris + the rest.
No support is given for the two critical nodes, though; and the branch lengths in the basalmost clusters become progressively a bit shorter than the rest (which proves nothing, but is often the case when a tree is misrooted).
l_raty is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 20:40   #195
Nutcracker
Northumbrian

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 14,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutcracker View Post
What worries me more: does acceptance of Loxia sinesciuris as a species, leave Loxia curvirostra paraphyletic? Are Loxia curvirostra in other parts of Idaho more closely related to Loxia curvirostra 12,000 km away in the Himalaya, than they are to Loxia sinesciuris a few kilometres away?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk Roth View Post
The short answer is "no."
Quote:
Originally Posted by l_raty View Post
If you accept what this figure shows, the answer is 'yes', actually.
The basalmost L. curvirostra (incl. type 9 = sinesciuris) are those that are at the end opposite to the type 9 cluster. A single type two is sister to everything else; then you have a cluster made of tree type 2 and one type 5, which is sister to sinesciuris + the rest.
No support is given for the two critical nodes, though; and the branch lengths in the basalmost clusters become progressively a bit shorter than the rest (which proves nothing, but is often the case when a tree is misrooted).
Depends on which of my two original questions you are answering!! I'm assuming Kirk was replying to my second part "Are Loxia curvirostra in other parts of Idaho more closely related to Loxia curvirostra 12,000 km away in the Himalaya, than they are to Loxia sinesciuris a few kilometres away?"

And again - unfortunate that the paper does not say where the samples are from. I fear there are no Old World samples, which makes the tree even less well rooted. As a basic essential, there really must be a sample from around the type locality (presumably Sweden), to ensure the name-bearing type is included.

In my extensive arboricultural experience, badly rooted trees fall over very easily.

Last edited by Nutcracker : Monday 17th July 2017 at 20:43.
Nutcracker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 21:12   #196
l_raty
laurent raty
 
l_raty's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 2,511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutcracker View Post
Depends on which of my two original questions you are answering!! I'm assuming Kirk was replying to my second part "Are Loxia curvirostra in other parts of Idaho more closely related to Loxia curvirostra 12,000 km away in the Himalaya, than they are to Loxia sinesciuris a few kilometres away?"
True, and now that you ask, I'm not sure any more which part Kirk was answering either... :(
Anyway, what I meant is that, if you accept Fig. 1 in the proposal, some (most) non-sinesciuris crossbills seem closer to sinesciuris than to some other non-sinesciuris crossbills.

Quote:
And again - unfortunate that the paper does not say where the samples are from. I fear there are no Old World samples, which makes the tree even less well rooted. As a basic essential, there really must be a sample from around the type locality (presumably Sweden), to ensure the name-bearing type is included.
Types 1 to 10 are strictly American and not known in Eurasia. The original data are described in:
Parchman, Buerkle, Soria-Carrasco, Benkman. 2016. Genome divergence and diversification within a geographic mosaic of coevolution. Mol. Ecol. 25:5705–5718.
[abstract & supp.info.] [pdf here]
For sample sources, check the supporting info file, Table S1 (p.7) and Fig. S1 (p.10). There were clearly no OW samples. (Thus if you accept Fig. 1, sinesciuris is embedded within American Red Xbills.)

Last edited by l_raty : Monday 17th July 2017 at 22:26.
l_raty is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 17th July 2017, 23:29   #197
Nutcracker
Northumbrian

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 14,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by l_raty View Post
True, and now that you ask, I'm not sure any more which part Kirk was answering either... :(
Anyway, what I meant is that, if you accept Fig. 1 in the proposal, some (most) non-sinesciuris crossbills seem closer to sinesciuris than to some other non-sinesciuris crossbills.


Types 1 to 10 are strictly American and not known in Eurasia. The original data are described in:
Parchman, Buerkle, Soria-Carrasco, Benkman. 2016. Genome divergence and diversification within a geographic mosaic of coevolution. Mol. Ecol. 25:57055718.
[abstract & supp.info.] [pdf here]
For sample sources, check the supporting info file, Table S1 (p.7) and Fig. S1 (p.10). There were clearly no OW samples. (Thus if you accept Fig. 1, sinesciuris is embedded within American Red Xbills.)
Thanks! So another dodgy crossbill species . . .
Nutcracker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 18th July 2017, 00:30   #198
Mysticete
Registered User
 
Mysticete's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 3,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutcracker View Post
Thanks! So another dodgy crossbill species . . .
Not really...remember monophyly is not a requirement for a biological species. A good biological species can be embedded within a clade comprising another species in a phylogenetic tree, and may be more closely related to some populations than others. After all, selection is likely to be strongest on peripheral populations, and there are many cases where the founders of a given species are more closely related to a specific nearby population than more distant populations.
__________________
World: 1193, ABA: 626
Last Lifer: Louisiana Waterthrush
Last ABA:Louisiana Waterthrush
Mammal: 228 Herp: 174
Mysticete is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 18th July 2017, 06:37   #199
Markus Lagerqvist
Registered User
 
Markus Lagerqvist's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 178
Maybe a small detail, but I'm still curious to the statement that it's endemic to Cassia County, Idaho. Is there anyone familier with the South Hills range (I'm not) that can bring clarity to this? Is the forest vegetation different on the Cassia County side of the range compared to the Twin Falls County side of the range? Or is it actually endemic to Cassia AND Twin Falls counties?
__________________
Latest bird lifer: Shining Honeycreeper (#5,244)
Latest bird family: Hypocolius (#215)
Latest mammal lifer: Risso's Dolphin (#315)
Web page: pbase.com/lagerqvist
Markus Lagerqvist is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 19th July 2017, 10:50   #200
l_raty
laurent raty
 
l_raty's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 2,511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutcracker View Post
What worries me more: does acceptance of Loxia sinesciuris as a species, leave Loxia curvirostra paraphyletic? Are Loxia curvirostra in other parts of Idaho more closely related to Loxia curvirostra 12,000 km away in the Himalaya, than they are to Loxia sinesciuris a few kilometres away?
Some mtDNA-based stuff attached.

The sequences marked "Groth" in the tree are from GenBank, where they were deposited by Jeff Groth in 1999 with references to a work "in press" that never materialized. References to these data have been published in the literature (see e.g. Parchman et al. 2006 [pdf]), but no actual analyses, I think. These are long sequences (~4250bp long, encompassing cyt-b, nd6, the entire control region, 12s rRNA, and five intervening/flanking tRNAs), but there are few of them (13 Loxia sp., 10 of which belonged to the plain-winged complex).
The single Michigan sequence marked "Lerner" is from an entire mt genome that was produced to act as one of the outgroups in Lerner et al. 2011 [pdf] [supp.info], a study that addressed Drepanidini. I cropped this sequence to use only the part homologous to Groth's sequences.
The sequences marked "Piertney" are from Scotland and from Piertney et al. 2001 [pdf here]; I reconstructed them using the single sequence deposited in GenBank and Table 2 of the paper. These are ~1140bp long (thus quite shorter than Groth's), covering most of the control region.
The sequences marked "Questiau" were published by Questiau et al. 1999 [pdf here]. These are still a bit shorter, ~715bp long, also of the control region, and overlapped almost entirely by the fragment sequenced by Piertney et al. 2001. The two terminals I have labelled Loxia sinesciuris were of course not presented as such in 1999; they were published as "Endemic race? South Hills, Idaho".
To these I have added a handfull of cardueline mt genomes as outgroups, also cropped to match the fragment sequenced by Groth.

Green is Old World, ochre is New World.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Loxia-Groth-Piertney-Questiau.pdf (7.0 KB, 87 views)

Last edited by l_raty : Wednesday 19th July 2017 at 11:06.
l_raty is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Corbett etc. Feb.2017 / Sikkim April 2017 transform777 India 0 Monday 31st October 2016 14:17
SACC Proposals Peter Kovalik Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature 16 Wednesday 25th January 2012 19:35
SACC Proposals 496-500 Peter Kovalik Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature 0 Wednesday 21st September 2011 19:12
AOU 2010 Proposals B Mysticete Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature 17 Wednesday 25th May 2011 06:12
First of the AOU pending proposals up Mysticete Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature 25 Saturday 28th February 2009 18:26

{googleads}
£100 Cashback on Opticron DBA VHD Binoculars. Click to find out more.

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.33200312 seconds with 38 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:56.