The transition now looks complete to me.HBW Alive is online again but a lot of changes (e.g. woodpeckers, parrots) have been not implemented so far.
Lynx might be delaying a full announcement until all aspects of the transition have been completed. The family accounts still seem to be the original HBW versions. Those for lumped families (eg, Meleagrididae/Tetraonidae) have simply been removed, whilst those for new families (eg, Oceanitidae) are currently just stubs. IBC also still follows the original HBW taxonomy.Perhaps Lynx has decided to adopt a low profile for now, until confident that there are no significant technical glitches.
pauper, -eris [Lewis & Short, 1879, on Perseus]HBW/BL and Peters: Nyctanassa violacea pauper
H&M4 and IOC: Nyctanassa violacea paupera
New features, 17 Sep 2014:Illustrated Checklist taxonomy
UPDATE 12 September 2014: All orders, families, species and subspecies are now displayed as on the Illustrated Checklist. New maps are visible on the latest revision, while the previous revisions of the species show the map from the HBW. Our editors are filling the sections of the splitted species as well as editing the mother species.
Ornithological News, 19 Sep 2014:New taxonomy and other changes for non-passerines
Since the publication of the first volume of the Handbook of the Birds of the World, more than 20 years ago, there have been numerous taxonomic changes and revisions.
In order to address and document these changes, the HBW team and the BirdLife International Taxonomic Group decided to pool their taxonomic expertise to prepare a carefully studied checklist. In the HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World, a modern, broad version of the Biological Species Concept (BSC) has been applied, with the aid of the scoring system to evaluate differences in morphology, vocalizations, ecology and geographical relationships published in Ibis by Tobias et al. (2010). Even though taxonomy always involves an element of subjectivity, we believe that using this system has important advantages in terms of consistency, repeatability, transparency and taxonomic stability. Click here for an outline of the Tobias criteria from the Introduction to the Checklist.
For the non-passerines, this assessment has resulted in relatively few lumps (22), but a much higher number of splits (462), compared with the taxonomy present in the HBW series, as well as changes of genera and reorganization of subspecies, helping us to better understand the relationships between the taxa. Also, the macrosystematics has been overhauled, bringing to light interesting relationships between and among families, subfamilies, tribes and genera.
All of these taxonomic changes have been applied to the non-passerines in HBW Alive. Besides the reclassification itself, subscribers will also find updates to these important elements:
- MAPS: Newly revised BirdLife International and NatureServe distribution maps for all species, with country borders included.
- ILLUSTRATIONS: New and improved figures, including those to illustrate split species and to correct detected errors from the HBW series.
- RANGES: Detailed and updated descriptions of ranges for all species and subspecies.
- TAXONOMIC NOTES: Changes and other relevant issues fully explained under Taxonomy for each species.
- REFERENCES: The over 2000 references given in the Checklist are conveniently linked in the HBW Alive texts and quickly give users detailed information about the source.
- IUCN RED LIST CATEGORIES: Current official IUCN category of each species from the 2014 BirdLife International/IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
- NAMES: Revised Latin and English species names, as well as updates in French, German and Spanish names, and in other common names in English when appropriate.
- SUBSPECIES GROUPS: Colour-coded subspecies groups marked to highlight distinct forms and their relationships.
Updated texts for non-passerines affected by new taxonomy
The HBW Alive editors are busy updating the texts for the non-passerine taxa that have changed under the new taxonomy applied to HBW Alive from the HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World.
For example, for the split species, they must review the current information and search for more details on all aspects of the natural history of both the original "mother" species and the resulting "daughter" species. They are looking at everything from habitat and food and feeding, to breeding biology and migration, to give a clear picture of each of the newly defined species and, moreover, to show both similarities and differences between the original and resulting new taxa. This obviously requires a lot of specific research, so the process is going relatively slowly, but at least 55 species have already been reviewed. The same care will be required for lumped taxa and some other species cases. For some of these affected cases, the team will also need to change the links to photos and videos formerly placed in the broader original species, or to look for new ones, but this is also progressing steadily.
The species that have so far have received this editorial treatment belong to the following 17 families:
Struthionidae (Ostriches), Rheidae (Rheas), Tinamidae (Tinamous), Apterygidae (Kiwis), Phasianidae (Pheasants, Partridges, Turkeys and Grouse), Podicipedidae (Grebes), Phoenicopteridae (Flamingos), Otididae (Bustards), Gaviidae (Loons), Spheniscidae (Penguins), Diomedeidae (Albatrosses), Procellariidae (Petrels and Shearwaters), Ciconiidae (Storks), Threskiornithidae (Ibises and Spoonbills), Pelecanidae (Pelicans), Sulidae (Gannets and Boobies) and Anhingidae (Darters).
Other bird families soon to be covered include:
Megapodiidae (Megapodes), Cracidae (Guans, Chachalacas and Curasows), Numididae (Guineafowl), Odontophoridae (New World Quails), Oceanitidae (Southern Storm-petrels) and Hydrobatidae (Northern Storm-petrels).
BirdLife, 16 May 2014: Additional changes to species listed as Extinct: six [edited from five] Extinct species are being re-categorised as Not Recognised and 12 taxa [edited from 11] are being newly recognised as Extinct species.
- Gallicolumba norfolciensis – Norfolk Island Ground-dove – Not Recognised
Gallicolumba sp.: Until recently the ground-dove species reported from Norfolk I was associated with the name Columba norfolciensis Latham, 1801; however, there is no type specimen for this name, and original description appears to be composite, perhaps referring to both Columba leucomela (infrequent vagrant to Norfolk I) and Chalcophaps longirostris (present on Norfolk I, possibly introduced), due to incertain identity, combined with confused usage spanning three rather different genera, this name has now been formally suppressed. Indeed, a fourth genus might now been applied, as with recent split of genus Gallicolumba (which see), present species, if valid, would most likely belong in Alopecoenas.
I assume those taxa were assessed using the Tobias scoring system. Masked Plover was split, but Dunlin wasn't.
Tobias et al 2010.Sorry to be late to the party here, but can you point me to the Tobias scoring system and how it was applied to the Masked Plover (Lapwing)?
The Tobias criteria really isn't a BSC approach. Hybrid zones (at least in the strict sense) are not a factor in splitting/lumping species.
HBW said:...zone of intergradation would add a score (1 or 2 depending on width).
HBW said:The fact that hybridization is treated in these criteria as a positive rather than a negative characteristic in determining species rank must appear counterintuitive to many people who, perhaps for many decades, have assumed that almost any serious degree of hybridization between two taxa is evidence of their reproductive compatibility and hence of their conspecificity. The fact that at least 9% of all bird species have interbred in the wild (Grant & Grant 1992) tends, however, to suggest that hybridization is on the one hand a widespread and common phenomenon and on the other very rarely capable of producing significant changes in parent taxa (mostly on oceanic islands and only as a result of anthropogenic interference).....
Is there anything really new there, though...? Eg., in 2002, Helbig et al wrote:Actually they are. They ADD to the score.
To "be termed semi-species" = to be split.Otherwise diagnosable taxa will be termed semi-species if:
3.2 a stable, distinct hybrid zone joins them. We regard a hybrid zone as distinct if historically it has changed little in breadth (although it may have moved in position) and if local populations contain one or both pure phenotypes (phenotypically indistinguishable from birds in the respective allopatric areas) plus first-generation and back-cross hybrids. Such cases always indicate a substantial restriction of gene flow, e.g. Carrion Crow Corvus corone and Hooded Crow C. cornix (reviewed by Parkin et al. in prep.).
Overall, the BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group criteria (Tobias et al 2010) appear to be more conservative than the BOURC Taxonomic Subcommittee guidelines (Helbig et al 2002).Is there anything really new there, though...? Eg., in 2002, Helbig et al wrote...
Is there anything really new there, though...? Eg., in 2002, Helbig et al wrote:
To "be termed semi-species" = to be split.
Note that, here, diagnosability + a "distinct hybrid zone" = case closed. The hybrid zone doesn't just add to a divergence score; it dispenses you entirely from taking the degree of divergence into account.
Words are certainly playing a significant role, here, as indeed Short 1969 wrote:Short (Auk: 86:90, 1969) defined semispecies as species which form a zone of overlap and hybridization (or potentially capable of so doing)..." Subspecies "hybridize in a hybrid zone."
...while Helbig et al 2002 explicitly restricted the term to its other possible meaning:The term "hybrid zone" has been loosely used to designate any area of secondary contact in which hybrids occur. I restrict a "hybrid zone" (see below) to include an area of hybridization where only hybrids occur, as distinguished from a "zone of overlap and hybridization. I prefer to include both of these categories within the category of secondary intergradation, thus retaining the latter general term for all situations involving hybridization and backcrossing between allopatric forms in a secondary contact.
Thus indeed Helbig et al's "hybrid zones" could be seen as Short's "zones of overlap and hybridization", while Short's "hybrid zones" would probably be a special case of what Helbig et al call "transition zones". What are Tobias et al's "hybrid zones"...?Populations in a hybrid zone contain one or both pure phenotypes of the hybridizing taxa plus first-generation and backcross hybrids; an example is the zone of contact between crows Corvus cornix and C. corone in Northern Italy (Rolando 1993). This distinguishes it from a clinal transition zone, in which local populations are intermediate between populations on either side of the zone, but are phenotypically uniform [...]