. Some of the splits has been expected like the Hudsonian Whimbrel. I wonder what the world shorebird list will finally be. It is quite crucial for me as we are in the middle of making the colour plates for the a new shorebird handbook (see sample plate.).
Yes, my comment 'not recognised' was inappropriate. I've changed it to 'not included'.
Also true. Although I highlighted low-level details of the classification, clearly the primary goal was to refine interrelationships, rather than to embark on a splitting and lumping exercise per se. And most/all of the 'lumps' indeed simply reflect that the lumped forms were not specifically considered in the analysis - I've changed these to state 'included within' rather than 'lumped with' to indicate that they don't necessarily represent explicit proposals.
Interesting. This from Dickinson 2003 Corrigenda 3R:
Private message. Click on Peter Kovalik's name, and then choose 'Send a private message...' etc.
Yes, I was rather surprised by the various revised common names. Although I can see some justification for the suggestion of names for newly described (or newly split) species in scientific papers, I'm not convinced that it's an appropriate place to propose widespread changes to existing well-established common names. The author is clearly a firm advocate of the adoption of revised common names mapping more closely onto the underlying taxonomic groupings.
