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="Kirk Roth" data-source="post: 1934530" data-attributes="member: 85015">It certainly is the case!!  I believe you are thinking of plant varieties, which do not (necessarily) have a geographic component.To illustrate with a popular example, Cannabis sativa has several subspecies, depending on the authority.  C. s. sativa is the northern subspecies is the northern form, preferred for hemp rope, while C. s. indica is the southern subspecies... cherished for other purposes.C. s. sativa can be further subdivided into two varieties: C. s. sativa var. sativa may grow tall and has relatively low resin levels.  C. s. sativa var. spontanea is shorter and bushier.   I'll not get into all the varieties of indica!  But these varieties, while having a strong genetic component, are not necessarily geographically divergent, although each may fare better in specific microhabitats.  But the point is that the botanical community has, for over a century, had a system for genetic but nongeographical variation - perhaps ornithologists should become more comfortable with this as well.I feel that there is a good case for some biological species within the Red Crossbill complex, but at our current level of understanding and for those "taxa" that may not yet have achieved species definition, I feel that we are dealing with different "varieties" of crossbills, not subspecies.</blockquote>