• 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.

Bean Goose group (1 Viewer)

Daniel Philippe

Well-known member
With A Difference …

Ruokonen, M., Litvin, K., Aarvak, T., 2008
Taxonomy of the bean goose – pink-footed goose,
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2008.04.038

found 3 species using mtDNA:

Anser brachyrhynchus, monotypic

Anser middendorffii, monotypic

Anser fabalis, polytypic (fabalis, serrirostris & rossicus)
 

Richard Klim

-------------------------
Brown 2010

Brown 2010. Identification and taxonomy of bean geese. Birding World 23(3): 110-121.

Essentially follows Dutch Birding:

  • A fabalis - Taiga Bean Goose (monotypic)
  • A middendorffii - Middendorff's Bean Goose (monotypic)
  • A serrirostris - Tundra Bean Goose:
    A s rossicus - (Western) Tundra Bean Goose
    A s serrirostris - Eastern Tundra Bean Goose
Includes 19 colour photographs, plus distribution map.

Richard
 
Last edited:

Richard Klim

-------------------------
So which one tastes better: the Tundra Bean or the Taiga Bean ? |8||
Surprisingly BWP doesn't mention flavour, but Taiga is typically 20% heavier than Tundra. So for a hungry Frenchman, I would recommend Taiga, served with apple sauce, and potatoes crisp-roasted in the goose fat, with perhaps a fine Bourgogne Pinot noir...

Richard :eat:
 

Daniel Philippe

Well-known member
So for a hungry Frenchman, I would recommend Taiga, served with apple sauce, and potatoes crisp-roasted in the goose fat, with perhaps a fine Bourgogne Pinot noir...

Sorry Richard, I am not that hungry and simply wonder about the taste of the beans (back to the problem of hyphens: Tundra-Bean Goose or Tundra Bean-Goose ...). ;)

However we did have a famous hungry Frenchman: Victor Hugo who said that the goose was the most stupid animal: "Too much for one, but not enough for two" (he was probably referring to the Tundra Goose then). :eat:
 
Last edited:

chris butterworth

aka The Person Named Above
Surprisingly BWP doesn't mention flavour, but Taiga is typically 20% heavier than Tundra. So for a hungry Frenchman, I would recommend Taiga, served with apple sauce, and potatoes crisp-roasted in the goose fat, with perhaps a fine Bourgogne Pinot noir...

Richard :eat:

Uncalled for Richard. I'm stuck at work with a couple of cheess sandwiches :-C :-C
Chris
 

Microtus

Maryland USA (he/him)
Supporter
United States
Surprisingly BWP doesn't mention flavour, but Taiga is typically 20% heavier than Tundra. So for a hungry Frenchman, I would recommend Taiga, served with apple sauce, and potatoes crisp-roasted in the goose fat, with perhaps a fine Bourgogne Pinot noir...

Richard :eat:

I only have 3.5 hours until lunch...
|=)|
 

Richard Klim

-------------------------
Hyphens

...back to the problem of hyphens: Tundra-Bean Goose or Tundra Bean-Goose...
Yes, I guessed that's what you meant. ;)

But in the absence of hyphens, adjectives (and modifying nouns) are usually interpreted as applying from the noun outwards: roasted (Eastern (Tundra (Bean (Goose)))).

Incidentally, last year's WJO paper by Frank Gill & Co provides a compelling (to me, anyaway) case against AOU's policy on hyphenation:
http://www.worldbirdnames.org/On hyphens and phylogeny WJO 2009.pdf

SACC proposals #401/402 provide a convenient reminder of how convoluted it's become:
http://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCprop401.html
http://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCprop402.html
[So ordinary birders unaware of the underlying relationships must learn on a case-by-case basis when a hyphen should be used.]

Richard

PS. Sorry, SACC links seem to have a problem today.
PPS. OK now.
 
Last edited:

Richard Klim

-------------------------
Hyphens

Just reflecting on the simple example of Bean Goose...

AOU's hyphenation policy divides Anserinae into three species groups (listed separately, and distantly, in any conventional alphabetical index):

  • 'Bean-Goose': Anser (2 spp)
  • 'Goose': Anser (4 spp), Chen, Branta (OK, I realise the abbreviated 'Brant' bucks the system)
  • 'Swan': Cygnus
Bean Goose would have happily remained a member of 'Goose' until two very closely related forms were (perhaps controversially) split. For AOU, this automatically removed them to a new highest-level named species group: 'Bean-Goose'. Unfortunately this suggests that the other four Anser species are more closely related to Chen/Branta than to bean geese.

Does this make any sense? To me, it's entirely contrary to any desire to use hyphenation to reflect underlying relationships.

Richard
 
Last edited:

Farnboro John

Well-known member
I have been unaware of the latest American offences against the English language until now but am quite certain that their approach to hyphenation deserves no less than all-out war.

There is no grammatical need for a hyphen anywhere in Tundra Bean Goose and where there is no need there should be no hyphen.

John
 

chris butterworth

aka The Person Named Above
I have to agree with John, excessive - and in my view, plain wrong- use of hyphens is becoming far to common. Regarding "Bean Geese", they are geese, not something that may resemble a goose, as the hyphenation suggests. I seem to recall that Reed-Warbler, Leaf-Warbler and even Reed-Bunting have all put in an appearence on t'other side of the pond ( Leaf-Warbler has even been / is being used over here - probably instigated by addicts of the "Golden Arches")
Yours, in sweetness and light, :t:
Chris
 

Kirk Roth

Well-known member
I have been unaware of the latest American offences against the English language until now but am quite certain that their approach to hyphenation deserves no less than all-out war.

Having been born and raised under the "hyphen system," it bothers me a bit less than, well, everyone else who speaks the English language.

That said, I feel that hyphens are just part of a larger problem - that of trying to force English common names to make taxonomic sense. That would be a noble goal if we weren't attempting to cover over several hundred years of language and if the scientific naming system weren't so well-performing to make the aforementioned efforts superfluous.

Personally, I like when a common name describes morphology and the scientific name describes phylogeny. If the common name happens to shed a little light on evolutionary relations, then that's a nice bonus... but there's no reason to shove.

As has been alluded to here, "group names" in geese are not going to make sense unless there is a total overhaul of ALL goose names, if not all bird names. The task is too bulky and monumental. Frankly, I don't believe that a "war" against hyphens is necessary, as it seems to be falling under its own weight as more and more modifications and fuss occurs over it!
 

Shi Jin

Well-known member
Thanks for the advert Richard

With regard to spellings and things, The BBBC has never regarded English and American as the same language, so the arguments about divers and loons and "bean-geese" and "bean geese" are entirely academic as far as it is concerned.

Just to clarify though, The BBBC uses English, as opposed to American names and spellings.

It's also a big fan of the principle that shorter is better (assuming that brevity doesn't confuse).

So with regard to the proposed splitting of bean geese... The BBBC, this evening, added Middendorff's Goose to its English-language China list.

Here's a picture of one ... flying with a Tundra Goose (ssp serrirostris)

Big-bill-or-what-?
 

Attachments

  • Middendorff's Goose and Tundra Goose (ssp serrirostris).jpg
    Middendorff's Goose and Tundra Goose (ssp serrirostris).jpg
    52.2 KB · Views: 262
Last edited:

Richard Klim

-------------------------
So with regard to the proposed splitting of bean geese... The BBBC, this evening, added Middendorff's Goose to its English-language China list.
I suspect that official acceptance by the BBBC required the ceremonial quaffing of suitable quantities of a well-known Irish beverage...

Richard B :)
 
Last edited:

lewis20126

Well-known member
Bean Goose would have happily remained a member of 'Goose' until two very closely related forms were (perhaps controversially) split. For AOU, this automatically removed them to a new highest-level named species group: 'Bean-Goose'. Unfortunately this suggests that the other four Anser species are more closely related to Chen/Branta than to bean geese.

Does this make any sense? To me, it's entirely contrary to any desire to use hyphenation to reflect underlying relationships.

Richard

Agree entirely. Bean-Goose is a nonsense and remains that irrespective of your continent.

a
 

Shi Jin

Well-known member
Hi Richard

Yes indeed!

The Liffey was flowing freely...

So freely in fact that I took the unusual step of publishing what was, I think, a unanimous decision before I went to bed (it's 1.20 am here now)... ;-)
 

njlarsen

Gallery Moderator
Opus Editor
Supporter
Barbados
A couple of questions:
the subspecies johanseni which is mentioned in Clements seems to have been subsumed into one of the other forms, but which? (fabilis or middendorfii)?

What are some field marks for the Middledorf's goose? The large bill has been mentioned, but how else does it differ?

Shi Jin, nice picture, it deserves being in the gallery where more people would see it!

Niels
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top