Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
-
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.
How many bird species are there? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Peter Kovalik
- Start date
jurek
Well-known member
Total number of bird species can grow indefinitely, to the total number of subspecies and more. There is no reason why bird populations which we consider laughably similar, e.g. English and Irish House Sparrows, cannot be considered different species in 20 years time.
Therefore splitting will go indefinitely, as long as there are incentives to split, especially: gratification to scientists from making additional papers and increased conservation attention to a new species in the area.
The only way to stabilize taxonomy and nomenclature are:
- modification of science publishing that taxonomy papers are ranked by new facts, not re-interpretations focusing on making more splits, and
-that conservation attention is given to objective criteria, e.g. EDGE ranking or percentage of genetic difference, not to labels like species or subspecies.
Therefore splitting will go indefinitely, as long as there are incentives to split, especially: gratification to scientists from making additional papers and increased conservation attention to a new species in the area.
The only way to stabilize taxonomy and nomenclature are:
- modification of science publishing that taxonomy papers are ranked by new facts, not re-interpretations focusing on making more splits, and
-that conservation attention is given to objective criteria, e.g. EDGE ranking or percentage of genetic difference, not to labels like species or subspecies.
Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
The first step to stabilising taxonomy is to agree a standard approach which doesn't look likely in my lifetime.
A
jurek
Well-known member
There will be no standard as long as there is an incentive not to have a standard. There is no point pretending there is no politcal factor in bird taxonomy.
lewis20126
Well-known member
It's exactly the same as boxing - too many competing authorities, each with their own rules. No one authority is prepared to disband (other than BOURC TSC!), merge or collaborate, given the incentives to do otherwise.
cheers, alan
From the point of view of a conservation activist or a politician, it would be much easier if one standard could be set, final answers delivered and be done with it. From the twitchers, great, there would be one lasting standard to compete from.
From a scientific point of view, having a healthy (or sometimes less healthy?) discussion of what is the right approach and to find more data aimed at bolstering one's own argument is exactly the right way to go. Stopping that would be like putting a stop to finding ever faster PC processers, more powerful batteries, etc.
Niels
From a scientific point of view, having a healthy (or sometimes less healthy?) discussion of what is the right approach and to find more data aimed at bolstering one's own argument is exactly the right way to go. Stopping that would be like putting a stop to finding ever faster PC processers, more powerful batteries, etc.
Niels
michalb
Well-known member
What are the reasons for this apparent need to stabilize taxonomy? Apart from bird listers' convenience, which I hope everyone agrees is not a very important issue.
Science is virtually never a closed, finished sentence. In my opinion the essence of science is to adapt the answers, theories etc. to new discoveries (even based on data already available a long time ago, which is often the case in ornithology), not to deliver stability.
Totally agreed!
Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
I was simply addressing the OP and pointing out that without a standardised taxonomy, no answer to the question is possible
Indeed, of no importance at all. To my mind, the only really important reason for a stabilized taxonomy is political—the provision of pegs for conservationists and land managers to hang their hats on.
Last edited:
Similar threads
