What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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.
Forums
Birding
Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature
AOU-NACC Proposals 2009
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="njlarsen" data-source="post: 1559311" data-attributes="member: 7427"><p>One thing that these proposals (specifically the Trogon splits) bring to the forefront is the lack of logic in the geographical limits between NACC and SACC areas. My guess is that the least overlap in number of species would have been if the limit was set at the Mexican Isthmus of Tehuantepec instead of at the Panama-Colombia border (am I correct in thinking the latter is the current limit? </p><p></p><p>I would not be surpriced if Mysticete is correct in the guesses of which splits to accept. Reading the account yesterday, I would have felt that the arguments for Woodhouse's would be good enough, but of course, I don't have a vote <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p></p><p>If Woodhouse's is split but Sumichrast is not, which entety will the latter actually belong to? I have never seen this one, but brighter blue with hooked bill sounded more like <em>californica</em>?</p><p></p><p>Niels</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="njlarsen, post: 1559311, member: 7427"] One thing that these proposals (specifically the Trogon splits) bring to the forefront is the lack of logic in the geographical limits between NACC and SACC areas. My guess is that the least overlap in number of species would have been if the limit was set at the Mexican Isthmus of Tehuantepec instead of at the Panama-Colombia border (am I correct in thinking the latter is the current limit? I would not be surpriced if Mysticete is correct in the guesses of which splits to accept. Reading the account yesterday, I would have felt that the arguments for Woodhouse's would be good enough, but of course, I don't have a vote ;) If Woodhouse's is split but Sumichrast is not, which entety will the latter actually belong to? I have never seen this one, but brighter blue with hooked bill sounded more like [I]californica[/I]? Niels [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Birding
Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature
AOU-NACC Proposals 2009
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top