• 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.

Handbook of Western Palearctic birds (1 Viewer)

Interesting that the previous reference work Birds of the Western Palearctic by Stanley Cramp has not been mentioned in the reviews so far. Personally I think that Shirihai/Svensson have published a very good follow-up work in particular due to the fact that the original BWP is out of print.
 
I would not mind DIY taxonomy in such books if the basic sequence remained the same. ;) :eat:
At the very least, these attempts show that things can as well be viewed differently and that there is no absolute way to tell which sequence is the correct one. A major argument to untie FG-sequences from systematics as a science.
 
Last edited:
I would not mind DIY taxonomy in such books if the basic sequence remained the same. ;) :eat:
At the very least, these attempts show that things can as well be viewed differently and that there is no absolute way to tell which sequence is the correct one. A major argument to untie FG-sequences from systematics as a science.

The problem Robert that is that every author these days, seems think it neccessary to produce a new order or nomenclature and impose their own splits.


A
 
Which is so far out of date that it hides rather then reveals the truth

Niels

But for FGs and similar-use sources it really would not matter. The "truth" one wants in such sources is info on identification and possibly "life history".
 
But for FGs and similar-use sources it really would not matter. The "truth" one wants in such sources is info on identification and possibly "life history".

I am guessing, but I believe there has been something like 20 percent more species added since that list. That was my message, more so than looking at the order. I did not see the prior message as limiting the usage to order. Maybe that was wrong relative to the intent of the person writing that post. if so, sorry.

Niels
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top