• 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.

AOU-NACC proposals 2014 (1 Viewer)

55th supplement

Kratter said:
With the new Auk format, deadlines were changed for submission, so our schedule was thrown of. Look for the supplement in the October issue of Auk.
Click to expand...
Chesser, Banks, Cicero, Dunn, Kratter, Lovette, Navarro-Sigüenza, Rasmussen, Remsen, Rising, Stotz & Winker 2014. Fifty-fifth supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk 131(4). [abstract] [pdf]

Michael Retter, aba blog, 30 Jul 2014: 2014 AOU Check-list Supplement is Out!

[With thanks to Michael for reporting on the North American splits thread.]
 
Last edited:
there is a comment on the ABA blog that researchers in AK also sampled DNA from probable Kamtshatka Leaf Warblers, and were able to identify some of the records this way.
 
Richard Klim said:
If the split is adopted this time, is NACC likely to also formally endorse Robert Tweit's proposed synonymisations (given that AOU doesn't currently 'do' subspecies)...?
Click to expand...

The current list on the AOU website, with 54th Supplement included, in fact DOES have subspecies in the html page coding. Their display, however, is suppressed.

If you save a copy of the page file to your computer, you can use a text editor to add a single line just above the </style> tag (inside the head):


li.subspecies { display : display !important }


Save the change and load the page in your browser.

What status these data have is for those more clued in on the AOU practices than I am to decide.

Mike
 
Subspecies

Parulini said:
The current list on the AOU website, with 54th Supplement included, in fact DOES have subspecies in the html page coding. Their display, however, is suppressed.
What status these data have is for those more clued in on the AOU practices than I am to decide.
Click to expand...
When the subspecies were first included in Dec 2012, I wondered which authority was being followed:
www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2607044&postcount=96.

Checking again, the subspecific taxonomy doesn't seem to follow AOU 1957, Peters, Clements, H&M, IOC, HBW or Zoonomen.

I guess that it was considered inappropriate for the online AOU Checklist to include subspecies never formally recognised by AOU, and so the facility was almost immediately withdrawn.

(By clicking on the species names, it's still possible to see which sspp have historically been recognised by AOU.)
 
Last edited:
AOU Checklist

Richard Klim said:
Chesser, Banks, Cicero, Dunn, Kratter, Lovette, Navarro-Sigüenza, Rasmussen, Remsen, Rising, Stotz & Winker 2014. Fifty-fifth supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk 131(4). [abstract] [pdf]
Click to expand...
Btw, the simplified online AOU Checklist seems to have been updated to incorporate changes from the 55th supplement (despite still stating only that it incorporates changes through the 54th supplement).
 
That Hooded Crane situation is going to cause a mess. This is the first time ABA has refused to accept a bird which has been validated by multiple state committees, and a LOT of birders saw this bird.
 
Mysticete said:
That Hooded Crane situation is going to cause a mess. This is the first time ABA has refused to accept a bird which has been validated by multiple state committees, and a LOT of birders saw this bird.
Click to expand...

Excellent! Grass roots revolution coming right up....

This is where we find out who is the North American equivalent of He who Must Not be Named.

John
 
Mysticete said:
That Hooded Crane situation is going to cause a mess. This is the first time ABA has refused to accept a bird which has been validated by multiple state committees, and a LOT of birders saw this bird.
Click to expand...

Could someone with access summarize the arguments used?

Niels
 
https://www2.aba.org/file/ABA-Checklist-Committee-Report.pdf

1. The escape of three captive hooded cranes in Idaho three years before the first sighting.
2. Prolonged presence of the bird in the ABA Area.
3. Eastward movement and apparent switching of allegiances from one sandhill crane population to another.
4. Analogous occurrences of crowned and sarus cranes in flocks of sandhill cranes.

I have a pdf if you want me to e-mail it you. [email protected]
 
Interesting combination of arguments...
Rick Wright said:
2. Prolonged presence of the bird in the ABA Area.
3. Eastward movement and apparent switching of allegiances from one sandhill crane population to another.
Click to expand...
In other words, it didn't move enough, but it moved too much...? Or am I misunderstanding something? ;)
 
Last edited:
I take that as "moved in the 'wrong' direction crossing from one flock to another" instead of sticking with one flock . . . but if it has in-brain migration instincts which conflict with the direction of the Sandhills it is with at the time, perhaps not surprising?
 
(2) is actually what I would expect for a wild crane in the wrong side of an ocean. (And is exactly what we have been seeing recently with the Sandhill lingering in Europe. It wouldn't have occurred to me that this might be seen as suggestive of captive origin.)

As to (3), that the bird did not stick with one flock might be an expected consequence of its (also expected) failure to find a mate in this flock. I'm not sure how we might find out which direction of movement is "right", or "wrong", for a vagrant crane. (Migration is learned in cranes, so I wouldn't expect a strong instinct conflict.) The fact that the bird moved might also suggest a predisposition for wandering in this particular individual, and a behaviour more complex than that of a simple local escape adopting the movements of the local crane flock. Is this a plus or a minus? (and why?)

Did the occurrences alluded to in (4) also involve birds that switched allegiances from one sandhill crane population to another?
 
I hope some members of the committee are reading these questions and will find a moment to answer them.
Myself, I think the committee's decision was the wrong one -- but beyond that, I think it's wrong to feel that one has to make a decision in the first place.
Best wishes,
 
Rick Wright said:
https://www2.aba.org/file/ABA-Checklist-Committee-Report.pdf

1. The escape of three captive hooded cranes in Idaho three years before the first sighting.
2. Prolonged presence of the bird in the ABA Area.
3. Eastward movement and apparent switching of allegiances from one sandhill crane population to another.
4. Analogous occurrences of crowned and sarus cranes in flocks of sandhill cranes.

I have a pdf if you want me to e-mail it you. [email protected]
Click to expand...

Regarding point 1), I thought that a) there were four escapees, b) they were all pinioned, c) three were banded, and d) they were all female, removing reproduction from the question of the sightings in question.

http://blog.aba.org/2012/01/hooded-crane-tennessee.html

Am I misunderstanding something?

Regarding point 4, I guess I'm curious the distinction between those and the analogous occurrences of Common Crane in flocks of Sandhills. There is a Common Crane currently at the Texas/New Mexico border, and a great many other records in past years. At the very least, it should be addressed that Common/Hooded/Sandhill Cranes all breed or stage in eastern Russia, while the Sarus/crowned cranes are quite different in range and migratory habits.
 
Kirk Roth said:
Regarding point 1), I thought that a) there were four escapees, b) they were all pinioned, c) three were banded, and d) they were all female, removing reproduction from the question of the sightings in question.

http://blog.aba.org/2012/01/hooded-crane-tennessee.html

Am I misunderstanding something?

Regarding point 4, I guess I'm curious the distinction between those and the analogous occurrences of Common Crane in flocks of Sandhills. There is a Common Crane currently at the Texas/New Mexico border, and a great many other records in past years. At the very least, it should be addressed that Common/Hooded/Sandhill Cranes all breed or stage in eastern Russia, while the Sarus/crowned cranes are quite different in range and migratory habits.
Click to expand...

Having read the report, it seems that most or all the points raised above were acknowledged. The report seems to me to indicate that voting members were reflecting uncertainty rather than making a case against vagrancy.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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

G
AOU-NACC Proposals 2024
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
l_raty
l_raty
Peter Kovalik
AOU-NACC Proposals 2023
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
Mysticete
Mysticete
Peter Kovalik
AOU-NACC Proposals 2022
5 6 7
Replies
130
Views
20K
Mysticete
Mysticete
Peter Kovalik
AOU-NACC Proposals 2021
6 7 8
Replies
153
Views
20K
l_raty
l_raty
Peter Kovalik
AOU-NACC Proposals 2019
10 11 12
Replies
226
Views
35K
Peter Kovalik
Peter Kovalik

Users who are viewing this thread

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