BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="l_raty" data-source="post: 3513552" data-attributes="member: 24811">Lack of monophyly at the species level may not be a problem if there is 'something' at play that unifies 'the species' as a whole -- e.g., actual gene flow between parts that look like they are non-sister; uniformity within 'the species' in some aspect that is central to reproductive isolation between one of its parts and its sister group; etc. If this is not the case, then it's somewhat problematic.In the present case, you would need some (preferably good) reason to split South Hills Crossbill rather than splitting 'Loxia minor' from L. curvirostra. If the only information you have is that these two are reproductively isolated from one another, how do you choose?*****PS -- I know the proposal was written by the author of the name, but the South Hills Crossbill was really described as Loxia sinesciuris, not 'L. sinesciurus'.(Benkman et al 2009 [<a href="http://repository.uwyo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=zoology_facpub" target="_blank">pdf</a>]:<a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3Dsine" target="_blank">sine</a>: without, preposition requiring ablative; <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3Dsciurus" target="_blank">sciurus</a><a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3Dsciurus" target="_blank">, -i</a> (from Gr. σκίουρος): squirrel; albative plural: sciuris.)</blockquote>

Verification