• 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.

Lynx-BirdLife Taxonomic Checklist (1 Viewer)

Richard Klim said:
Click to expand...

This split makes me a bit confused.

In Birds of the Indian Ocean Islands Sinclair & Legrand split Grande Comore gracilis as Grand Comore Cuckoo-Roller (although accidentaly naming it Anjouan Cuckoo-Roller). They retain birds from Mohéli, Anjouan and Mayotte within Madagascar Cuckoo-Roller.

Rheindt noted after visiting the Comoros in 2008 that birds belonging to the race intermedius from Mohéli and Anjouan were intermediate between gracilis from Grand Comore and discolor from Mayotte and Madagascar and speculated that there might be a clinal variation from small discolor via intermediate intermedius to larger discolor.

In the now proposed Lynx/BirdLife split gracilis is split as Grand Comore Cuckoo-Roller and intermedius as Anjouan Cuckoo-Roller, while birds from Mohéli and Mayotte are classified as the same race as on Madagascar (discolor).

Treating birds on Mohéli, Mayotte and Madagascar as race discolor is followed by most authorities (HBW, IOC, Clements).

I don't know on what basis Rheindt lumped birds from Mohéli with intermedius from Anjouan in his trip notes, but just looking at the map it would make more biogeograhical sense. It seems strange that Mohéli birds should be Madagascar Cuckoo-Rollers, while birds on Anjouan are a distinct species. A Mohéli/Anjouan taxon would make more sence, like the paradise flycatchers from Mohéli and Anjouan which were just found to be genetically very closely related.

Unfortunately we didn't see Cuckoo-Roller on Anjouan on our recent trip, but the birds on Grande Comore were admittedly more distinct from Madagascar birds than the one we saw on Mohéli and Mayotte.

Anyone here that has any thoughts on this? Especially any information or thought on Mohéli vs. Anjouan birds.
 
BirdLife splits: the story so far...

Attached is a spreadsheet listing the 2013 BirdLife splits revealed so far.

The scientific names are hyperlinked to the related Globally Threatened Bird Forum post.

In cases where I couldn't find a common name in recent literature, I've invented names just to help give context pending naming by BirdLife. (I realise that many could be improved!)
 

Attachments

  • BirdLife splits 2013-03-28.xls
    146 KB · Views: 199
Last edited:
Richard Klim said:
Attached is a spreadsheet listing the 2013 BirdLife splits revealed so far.

The scientific names are hyperlinked to the related Globally Threatened Bird Forum post.

In cases where I couldn't find a common name in recent literature, I've invented names just to help give context pending naming by BirdLife. (I realise that many could be improved!)
Click to expand...

Uff 126 species and still in progress(?) This is a huge update in comparison to the previous versions:

2005: 9906 species total
2006: 9934
2007: 9956
2008: 9990
2009: 9998
2010: 10027
2011: 10052
2012: 10064
 
Birdlife is still way behind though. There are still 90 species of non-passerines not recognized by Birdlife, but by Clements, TiF and IOC (plus another 70 IOC+TiF). Among them are a number of potentially endangered ones. So I sure hope they're not finished yet!
 
gusasp said:
Birdlife is still way behind though...
Click to expand...
But the remarkable thing is that this isn't just a belated catch-up exercise. A large number of the splits are unique to BirdLife, resulting purely from the application of the Tobias et al scoring methodology (rather than citing the conclusions of peer-reviewed studies). The title of Nigel Collar's lecture ("A species is whatever I say it is") seems particularly apt! The adoption of these new species by IUCN will of course be a fait accompli, but hopefully BirdLife will provide justification for the splits by publishing the results of the numerical scoring exercises. Perhaps this will be within the species factsheets – and maybe the artwork in the illustrated checklist could be annotated with arrows indicating the source of each morphological point scored... ;)

[Incidentally, I wonder if Lynx is commissioning new/revised artwork for the illustrated checklist for those elevated subspecies not depicted in HBW...?]

The BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group has been notably conservative and rigorous, generally requiring peer-reviewed scientific evidence before adopting taxonomic changes. But now, BirdLife is undertaking a splitting exercise on an industrial scale in an extremely compressed timescale – presumably driven by the commitment to establish a consistent and stable checklist for the Lynx-BirdLife project. And analysis of the passerines for the 2014 update (and vol 2 of the illustrated checklist) is likely to be an even larger task.

Presumably the overall systematics and sequence down to family/subfamily level will follow Jon Fjeldså's classification chapter in the imminent HBW special volume? But what about genera? As a conservation organisation with an obvious focus on species, BirdLife has understandably taken little interest in revising its classification at genus level. HBW is very mixed – the early volumes are clearly now rather dated; later volumes are a mix of conservative and quite radical treatments (according to the personal whims of individual authors). One particularly relevant example is the wholesale splitting of babbler genera by Collar & Robson (vol 12) – Nigel Collar clearly didn't persuade his BirdLife colleagues of its merits!

All in all, it'll be fascinating to see how the Lynx-BirdLife checklist shapes up – it will require the lumping of many HBW species as well as the adoption of the new BirdLife splits. It remains to be seen whether the Tobias et al-based taxonomy will in time be taken on board by other authorities and authors...
 
Last edited:
Richard Klim said:
[Incidentally, I wonder if Lynx is commissioning new/revised artwork for the illustrated checklist for those elevated subspecies not depicted in HBW...?]
Click to expand...

It will feel incomplete if they don't.

Richard Klim said:
Presumably the overall systematics and sequence down to family/subfamily level will follow Jon Fjeldså's classification chapter in the imminent HBW special volume? But what about genera? As a conservation organisation with an obvious focus on species, BirdLife has understandably taken little interest in revising its classification at genus level.
Click to expand...

They should be consulting with systematists like Jon Fjeldså regarding genera, someone who is familiar with recent research. John Boyd's site is a good place to start too. Although genus-level classification is of little importance to conservationists, this publication is first and foremost a checklist, and not a conservation piece, so it would be in their interest to have the classification as up-to-date as possible at all levels.

Richard Klim said:
It remains to be seen whether the Tobias et al-based taxonomy will in time be taken on board by other authorities and authors...
Click to expand...

They'll have to publish their analysis (and have it peer-reviewed), otherwise I can't see e.g. the SACC accepting any of these.

We should expect some of these splits to be incorrect, e.g. it's not likely that Thalurania hypochlora is a separate species from T. fannyi, given that T. fannyi was recently lumped with T. colombica! But that's ok; Tobias et al. claim their methodology gets it right 95% of the time, so we should expect about 5% of the splits to be incorrect. This would also mean that a few forms not split will also prove to be valid species based on new data.

Liam
 
Melanie said:
If they really go after Tobias they should spilt Todiramphus gambieri (in gambieri and niauensis).
Click to expand...

This seems to be somewhat of a taxonomic mess, as a comparison of Clements and Avibase for Todiramphus gambieri showed me.

Avibase:
Todiramphus [gambieri or gertrudae]
* Todiramphus gambieri
Todiramphus gambieri gambieri
Todiramphus gambieri subsp.
* Todiramphus gertrudae←
Click to expand...

Niels

Edit: cannot keep the indentations in the quote, see related taxa box in this one: http://avibase.bsc-eoc.org/species.jsp?lang=EN&avibaseid=5709225C81B483D4&sec=summary&ssver=1
 
Tuamotu Kingfisher

Melanie said:
If they really go after Tobias they should spilt Todiramphus gambieri (in gambieri and niauensis).
Click to expand...
Peters, HBW, H&M3, IOC and Clements all recognise Tuamotu Kingfisher Todiramphus (Halcyon) gambieri as a single species with subspecies gambieri† (Oustalet, 1895) of Mangareva and gertrudae Murphy, 1924 of Niau.

Peters 1945 notes that gertrudae is doubtfully distinct, whilst Woodall 2001 (HBW 6) notes that gertrudae might constitute a separate full species.

Fry, Fry & Harris 1992 (Kingfishers, Bee-eaters & Rollers) treats Mangareva Kingfisher Halcyon (tuta) gambieri† and Niau Kingfisher H gertrudae as separate species.

BirdLife describes the Niau population as 'race' niauensis of Todiramphus gambieri. Where does the name niauensis come from and why should it have priority over gertrudae?
 
Last edited:
Richard Klim said:
BirdLife describes the Niau population as 'race' niauensis of Todiramphus gambieri. Where does the name niauensis come from and why should it have priority over gertrudae?
Click to expand...

Good question. According to Murphy's scientific description (1924) gertrudae has priority and I don't know any other bird which was named gertrudae. But it is interesting that Murphy described it as full species

http://digitallibrary.amnh.org/dspa...ace/ingest/pdfSource/nov/N0149.pdf?sequence=1
 
8669 said:
I'm afraid Clements is a taxonomic mess for birds outside of the Americas.

Theo
Click to expand...

In this particular instance Clements is following the consensus Richard described, while Avibase is the more messy resource.

Niels
 
But Avibase is simply supposed to reproduce the taxonomies such as Clements, isn't it? It doesn't claim to be an independent authority.

Having said that, it's certainly possible to find errors in those reproductions. It would be very surprising if there weren't errors in such a large undertaking. However I've found that Denis LePage responds positively to e-mails pointing out errors.
 
Paul Clapham said:
Having said that, it's certainly possible to find errors in those reproductions. It would be very surprising if there weren't errors in such a large undertaking. However I've found that Denis LePage responds positively to e-mails pointing out errors.
Click to expand...

Agree. I probably should not have taken this up here, but I honestly made my first post because I got confused.

Niels
 
BirdLife splits: 4 Apr 2013

 
Last edited:
2013 update schedule

BirdLife today...
...a large number of forum topics are being posted this year to solicit comments on the status of newly defined species that are thought to qualify as Globally Threatened or Near Threatened, as well as presumed Least Concern species resulting from the same taxonomic changes...
The initial deadline for contributions is 15 July 2013, when we will assess the contributions made. We will then post up a draft list of preliminary decisions and you will have two more weeks to comment further before final decisions are posted. The new and revised species assessments and updated factsheets will be released subsequently on the BirdLife website and incorporated into the IUCN Red List.
Click to expand...
This confirms a significantly later update schedule for 2013 cf recent years, eg 2012...
  • 03 Feb 2012: BirdLife preliminary Red List 2012 decisions posted
  • 21 Feb 2012: BirdLife final Red List 2012 decisions posted
  • 07 Jun 2012: IUCN Red List 2012 updates posted
  • 03 Jul 2012: BirdLife Checklist v5 posted
 
Last edited:
Richard Klim said:
BirdLife today...

This confirms a significantly later update schedule for 2013 cf recent years, eg 2012...
  • 03 Feb 2012: BirdLife preliminary Red List 2012 decisions posted
  • 21 Feb 2012: BirdLife final Red List 2012 decisions posted
  • 07 Jun 2012: IUCN Red List 2012 updates posted
  • 03 Jul 2012: BirdLife Checklist v5 posted
Click to expand...

...two more weeks to comment further...

A bit faster than AOU, then?
MJB
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

J
Convergence of IOC, Clements and BirdLife Taxonomies?
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
awiner
awiner
J
Messy Taxonomy
Replies
15
Views
3K
James Lowther
J
J
Birding Asia Taxonomy
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
Andy Adcock
Andy Adcock
Peter Kovalik
HBW and BirdLife Taxonomic Checklist v6 (December 2021)
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
jts1882
J
Peter Kovalik
HBW and BirdLife Taxonomic Checklist v5
Replies
8
Views
2K
Nutcracker
Nutcracker

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top