[Richard Klim]

Lee Evans has produced an updated (Feb 2008) UK400 Club Western Palearctic list (ref. http://www.uk400clubonline.co.uk).

It includes most of the splits recently adopted by DBA/CSNA, viz:

- Pterodroma deserta Desertas Petrel (but P. feae is deleted for some reason).

- Oceanodroma jabejabe Cape Verde Storm Petrel.

- Galerida macrorhyncha Long-billed Crested Lark.

- Cyanistes hedwigii Gran Canaria Blue Tit (but, curiously, all other African & Canary Is. taxa are retained within C. teneriffae).

- Pica mauritanica Maghreb Magpie (as 'North African Blue-eared Magpie').

[But Hydrobates melitensis Mediterranean Storm Petrel has not been recognised.]

Other new splits adopted by UK400 Club are:

- Sterna acuflavida 'American Sandwich Tern'.

- Hirundo savignii 'Egyptian Nile Swallow'.

- H. erythrogaster 'North American Barn Swallow'.

- Motacilla pygmaea 'Egyptian Yellow Wagtail' (but except for feldegg, all other western Yellow Wagtail taxa, including the almost indistinguishable cinereocapilla, are retained within M. flava).

- Scotocerca saharae 'African Scrub Warbler'.

- Fringilla maderensis 'Madeiran Chaffinch' (F. africana was split earlier, but the other Macaronesian taxa & spodiogenys appear, surprisingly, to have been retained within F. coelebs).

Although some of the latter seem rather questionable, they have been included (as potential splits) in the Holarctic checklist (below).

[Birdbox]

I was n't aware that fringilla africana was split - what's the English language name? And the blue-eared Magpie is split? Just returned from Morocco where both were seen and I did n't know I'd got new ticks - finger on the pulse, that's me.

[Richard Klim]

Originally Posted by Birdbox

I wasn't aware that fringilla africana was split - what's the English language name?

UK400 Club splits F. africana as 'North African Chaffinch'.

[Farnboro John]

Originally Posted by Birdbox

I was n't aware that fringilla africana was split - what's the English language name? And the blue-eared Magpie is split? Just returned from Morocco where both were seen and I did n't know I'd got new ticks - finger on the pulse, that's me.

UK400 club is not everyone's definition of split!

John

[Richard Klim]

The UK400 Club Western Palearctic List has recently been further updated - 11 Apr 2008, ref. http://www.uk400clubonline.co.uk/Fil...l2008-XXXX.xls.

Compared to the Feb 2008 version, it has 17 extra species (although one of these is a synonym: Cuculus optatus & horsfieldi). Most of the additional splits adopted follow Dutch Birding, but the following are not generally recognised as full species elsewhere:

• Ficedula iberiae, Iberian Pied Flycatcher
• Fringilla canariensis, Canary Islands Chaffinch
• Fringilla moreletti, Azores Chaffinch

Richard

[rob stoff]

suppose Uk400 club listers who've seen a Fea's Petrel now have to take it off their list then?

Rob

[Richard Klim]

Originally Posted by rob stoff

suppose Uk400 club listers who've seen a Fea's Petrel now have to take it off their list then?

Rob

Pterodroma feae has actually been reinstated in the latest list - I guess it was removed in error from the previous (Feb) version.

Presumably UK400 Club listers are now back to recording 'Pterodroma sp.' for 'soft-plumaged petrels' seen in British Isles waters.

Richard

[rob stoff]

Originally Posted by Richard Klim

Pterodroma feae has actually been reinstated in the latest list - I guess it was removed in error from the previous (Feb) version.

Presumably UK400 Club listers are now back to recording 'Pterodroma sp.' for 'soft-plumaged petrels' seen in British Isles waters.

Richard

yes, I can't see how they could be differentiating feae from deserti, its hard enough differntiating either from Zino's!

Rob

[Steve Lister]

Will the BOU be recommending that even one of these splits are adopted?

I think not. Not for a while anyway.

Steve

[rob stoff]

Originally Posted by Steve Lister

Will the BOU be recommending that even one of these splits are adopted?

I think not. Not for a while anyway.

Steve

depends on whether the potential split A) affects the British List and B) whether the evidence for a split fulfills their published guidelines I guess:

http://www.bou.org.uk/sppguidelines.pdf

Any idea on what basis UK 400 makes its taxonomic decisons, seems a bit random to me?

Rob

[l_raty]

Originally Posted by rob stoff

yes, I can't see how they could be differentiating feae from deserti, its hard enough differntiating either from Zino's!
Rob

The only published measurements of Cape Verde feae I've seen are those given by Bretagnolle (1995 - http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.1995.tb03241.x). Would anybody know more about this taxon?

These measurements suggest:

• In overall size, feae close to deserta and both bigger than madeira (wing length - f:262, d: 264, m: 248; tarsus - f:34.7, d: 35.2, m: 32.7).
• Bill length also similar in feae and deserta and larger in both than in madeira (f:29.0, d: 28.6, m: 26.3).
• Bill depth by far biggest in deserta, lowest in madeira, and intermediate in feae (f:11.9, d: 12.9, m: 10.5).

In terms of ratios - trying to get a feeling of the structure, as absolute measurements are usually quite meaningless at sea:

• (Bill length/wing length) (f:11.1%, d: 10.8%, m: 10.6%) is rather similar in the three taxa.
• (Bill length/bill depth) (f: 2.44, d: 2.22, m: 2.53) is lowest in deserta, and highest in madeira. In feae it is intermediate, but more than twice closer to madeira than to deserta.

If these measurements are correct, it might very well be much more difficult to differentiate at sea between a Cape Verde bird and a Zino's, than between a Cape Verde bird and a Madeiran Fea's. With the weight given to relative bill depth in the assessment of Fea's Petrel records in northern Europe, a Cape Verde Fea's could well never pass the examination. (Or could even be called "probable Zino's" if Cape Verde birds are not taken into account.)

L -

[Richard Klim]

Originally Posted by rob stoff

Any idea on what basis UK 400 makes its taxonomic decisons, seems a bit random to me?

The taxonomy is certainly rather 'progressive', even compared to DB/CSNA. The following elevations to specific status are not currently recognised by any other European authority:

Anser flavirostris, Melanitta stejnegeri, Lagopus scotica, Circus hudsonius, Larus barabensis, L. atlantis, Chlidonias surinamensis, Sterna acuflavida, Dendrocopos lilfordi, Hirundo savignii, H. erythrogaster, Anthus japonicus, Motacilla pygmaea, Cercotrichas syriacus, Saxicola variegatus, Scotocerca saharae, Sylvia minula, S. albistriata, Phylloscopus tristis, Ficedula iberiae, Turdoides huttoni, Poecile hyrcanus, Remiz macronyx, Fringilla moreletti, F. maderensis, F. canariensis, F. africana, Carduelis brevirostris, C. rostrata, C. exilipes.

[Although a small number of them (Circus hudsonius, Larus barabensis, Sylvia minula, Turdoides huttoni, Poecile hyrcanus, Remiz macronyx) are recognised elsewhere, e.g. Clements 2007 or Rasmussen & Anderton 2005.]

Richard

[Richard Klim]

Originally Posted by l_raty

If these measurements are correct, it might very well be much more difficult to differentiate at sea between a Cape Verde bird and a Zino's, than between a Cape Verde bird and a Madeiran Fea's. With the weight given to relative bill depth in the assessment of Fea's Petrel records in northern Europe, a Cape Verde Fea's could well never pass the examination.

So birds identified as Fea's Petrel in NW Europe would almost certainly be P. (f.) deserta (which might be expected anyway geographically)?

Richard

[l_raty]

Originally Posted by Richard Klim

So birds identified as Fea's Petrel in NW Europe would almost certainly be P. (f.) deserta (which might be expected anyway geographically)?

Richard

Unless Bretagnolle's data are incorrect, I'd say yes, most likely.

[rob stoff]

Originally Posted by Richard Klim

So birds identified as Fea's Petrel in NW Europe would almost certainly be P. (f.) deserta (which might be expected anyway geographically)?

Richard

but has a very small population indeed!

Rob

[Daniel Philippe]

Originally Posted by Richard Klim

Lee Evans has produced an updated (Feb 2008) UK400 Club Western Palearctic list (ref. http://www.uk400clubonline.co.uk).

It includes most of the splits recently adopted by DBA/CSNA, viz:

...

- Oceanodroma jabejabe Cape Verde Storm Petrel.

...

Sorry to wake up late, but what is the rational behind the split of jabejabe from castro? Is it more consistent than split the Atlantic/Pacific populations or the cool-season population present on Vila in the Azores ?

See for instance: http://www.seaturtle.org/PDF/Monteir..._PhilTrans.pdf

Daniel

[l_raty]

Originally Posted by Daniel Philippe

Sorry to wake up late, but what is the rational behind the split of jabejabe from castro? Is it more consistent than split the Atlantic/Pacific populations or the cool-season population present on Vila in the Azores ?

See for instance: http://www.seaturtle.org/PDF/Monteir..._PhilTrans.pdf

Daniel

This:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0700446104
suggests that Cape Verde populations could well be the most distinct. (Without support, though...)

This may prove wrong, but I also suspect there is currently no available name for some of the other potential splits...

The cool-season birds of the Azores seem not genetically distinct from the other North Atlantic populations (Madeira, Salvagem, Canaries, Berlengas); the hot-season birds are those that differ. The birds from Japan also differ from the birds of the Galapagos.

L -

Edit - On re-checking the paper, it further suggests that the two seasonal populations on Cape Verde are also genetically isolated. Could be a bit more problematic, then...

[PandionMlt]

since when is the uk400 authorative in these matters?

[Farnboro John]

Originally Posted by PandionMlt

since when is the uk400 authorative in these matters?

Indeed. Identification questions over individual birds can be based on physical evidence, field observations and photographs but taxonomy must have a basis in scientific fact. Not a UK400 strong point.

John

[James Lowther]

I guess the UK400 is a club for listers and they're entitled to set their own rules. Listing is doubtless more fun the more species you have to aim at.
On the other hand no-one should consider the UK400 a serious taxonomic authority, which makes even more laughable their pompous dismissal of scottish crossbill (accepted by all major authorities, controversy notwithstanding) as a species at the same time as accepting pretty much any other flimsily supported split.

[changer400]

Originally Posted by James Lowther

I guess the UK400 is a club for listers and they're entitled to set their own rules. Listing is doubtless more fun the more species you have to aim at.
On the other hand no-one should consider the UK400 a serious taxonomic authority, which makes even more laughable their pompous dismissal of scottish crossbill (accepted by all major authorities, controversy notwithstanding) as a species at the same time as accepting pretty much any other flimsily supported split.

This is the huge misconception that exsists concerning the UK400 Club , There is absolutely no Scientific investigation that goes on , but there is a hell of a lot of Scientific Journal READING that takes place , Lee adopts Popular Spilits that are happening elsewhere in the world and publishes them (!) I assume you also read all these journals, No , thought not

Anyway Scottish Crossbill is a bit of a Joke now (!) anyway , I think the arrival of Parrot Crossbill in large numbers have clouded the flimsy evidence that exsisted to get this a seperate species in the first place ! Lump away

Si

[James Lowther]

sorry Si,
but that's not entirely true,
In many cases UK400 is just foreshadowing what will happen with the more circumspect authorities in the relatively near future, but Lee adopts plenty of "Unpopular spilits" as well

just because he reads the relevant papers doesn't mean he's qualified to make objective judgements on them, as indeed neither am I. (but then again i'm not the one publishing taxonomic recommendations).

[rob stoff]

Which scientific journals (as opposed to Birding magazines like Dutch Birding) does Mr Evans read?

Rob

[Steve Lister]

Having recently spent time discussing the BOU TSC (probably what would be called circumspect in approach) with someone who knows how they work then I can assure you that their members put a great deal of unpaid time and effort into scouring scientific, peer-reviewed journals searching for any evidence to back up possible taxonomic revisions.

And a few changes result: a lot are sadly lacking in published evidence.

Steve

[rob stoff]

Originally Posted by Steve Lister

Having recently spent time discussing the BOU TSC (probably what would be called circumspect in approach) with someone who knows how they work then I can assure you that their members put a great deal of unpaid time and effort into scouring scientific, peer-reviewed journals searching for any evidence to back up possible taxonomic revisions.

And a few changes result: a lot are sadly lacking in published evidence.

Steve

exactly, they work from actual evidence and a have a published set of guidelines by which they make their judgements. What guidelines does Mr Evans use, why does he split some things and not others when they seem to just as worthy of a split? Does he accept the concept of subspecies and if so why? Does he actually understand the complexities of genetic analysis and where does he stand on the subject of cryptic species?

Rob