l_raty
laurent raty
Looks perfectly OK now.
(Congrats to the authors for providing such a rapid fix.)
Last edited:
-
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.
Furnariidae (6 Viewers)
- Thread starter Peter Kovalik
- Start date
Looks perfectly OK now.
(Congrats to the authors for providing such a rapid fix.)
Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
Subspecies Updates IOC Version 13.1 (DRAFT)
[Ornithology • 2022] <i>Aphrastura subantarctica</i> • A New Bird Species <small>(Passeriformes: Furnariidae)</small> on the Southernmost Islands of the Americas
Aphrastura subantarctica Rozzi, Quilodrán, Botero-Delgadillo, Crego, Napolitano, Barroso, Torres-Mura & Vásquez, in Rozzi, Quilodrán, Bo...novataxa.blogspot.com
Add subspecies subantarctica.
Described as sp. nov.: Rozzi et al., 2022, based on genetic, morphological, and ecological divergence. Tentatively treat as a subspecies of Aphrastura spinicauda pending formal SACC evaluation.
Melanie
Well-known member
Looks perfectly OK now.
(Congrats to the authors for providing such a rapid fix.)
I hope there will be a SACC proposal soon for Aphrastura subantarctica.
Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
Proposal (964) to SACC
Treat Xiphorhynchus aequatorialis as a separate species from Spotted Woodcreeper X. erythropygius
Treat Xiphorhynchus aequatorialis as a separate species from Spotted Woodcreeper X. erythropygius
Kirk Roth
Rarely to be taken seriously
Just food for thought - last year the NACC opened up the Chihuahan Meadowlark discussion to the masses and strong opinions were everywhere. Not just on that topic, but all sorts of condescension on gull names, whimbrels, checklist alignment and so on. We are used to the armchair taxonomy here in the forum, but I think it got very loud last year over lots of venues that the NACC might be more in tune to.
I'm being totally speculative, but its possible that experience has dampened the enthusiasm for sharing.
pbjosh
missing the neotropics
Perhaps true, but it also makes it look like they're not in tune with a good chunk of the world (it gets repetitive perhaps but have to mention Gull names again here...). I still take it as a positive that they took feedback on Chihuahuan Meadowlark.
Also, taxonomic committees essentially derive their mandate from who uses their work. If eBird and IOC don't follow a taxonomic committee, it does lose relevance for a large chunk of the birding world all of a sudden. Of course the committee isn't there just to serve birders but having the committees out of step with eBird and IOC does become awkward...
Mysticete
Well-known member
My initial assumption has always been that whoever is the volunteer who normally posts these either has had to step down or been too busy. Or something is up with the website. I would like to think that is still the reason, and it doesn't reflect a change in policies.
If it is to avoid controversy, I am not sure how being less transparent is a plus. Not posting the Short-billed Gull proposal wouldn't have defused criticism, it just would have delayed it. And it's not like people complaining about things has changed...I can recall some truly scathing comments by Steve Howell in Birding regarding NACC.
Mysticete
Well-known member
I thought Chihuahuan Meadowlark was mostly pretty civilized discussion, although in that case simply because I don't think there was any real strong option if Lilian's wasn't going to be used. In fact it was amazingly democratic, letting a broader sample of folks weigh in, including people who actually have that bird on their local patch and will be using the name often.
I just don't think you can go from a relatively transparent process to a hidden one. It's one thing if you never had it (we never see the criteria Clements/Ebird has used). Especially given that if anything SACC is MORE transparent already. Having the proposals out and open allows one to see the arguments and pros and cons of any decision. For instance, I would have assumed the Franklin's Grouse split was a given, but the proposal actually did I think a good job of pointing out the lack of important data and why they would vote no. And that in turn encourages folks to perhaps actively try to collect that missing info
It also gives advance notice if lists might change, which a lot of birders find useful given that the update comes out in July.
Kirk Roth
Rarely to be taken seriously
The meadowlark discussion was civil as far as the actual process went and to the degree that we know. Any individual eBird reviewer could have posted as gently or as caustically as they please. But in addition to that, there was plenty of online commentary through social media which were much more intense and opinionated and I think I can certainly recall a good number of immature and insulting comments. I know that at least some committee members saw some of these.
I too would rather believe that the delay in posting is more due to something more mundane such as finding the volunteer time to update a website. And that may well be the case - as I said, I am being necessarily speculative. I just noticed that both the delay and the intensity of criticism (again, not only the meadowlark, but the gull name, misalignment with other world lists, strong opinions on patronym issues, gripes about past decisions, etc. etc.) are both anomalies... and sometimes multiple anomolies are not coincident. I agree that criticisms of this or any other taxonomic committee are nothing new, but I do believe we've seen an increase in the volume (in every sense of the word) of griping about the NACC (myself included). Whether or not this has anything to do with the schedule of proposal release, it can't have escaped their notice and I feel sympathy for that.
I haven't read the comments
(Why I do hope there's never a single world list, and why I'm so against anything which forces you to use only one view.)
Probably people should only get exercised if a decision has practical implications---for conservation etc. Having variant taxonomies in science is actually valuable as it allows you to test how strong any relationship is in the face of phylogenetic uncertainty.
The "appropriate name" thing is a different argument. My only view is for stability. Common names don't have to reflect phylogeny: stability should reign here. I very much wish you Americans (in the proper sense) would just leave them alone.
(I feel neutral about political correctness: a name which commemorates a dodgy character can serve as celebration of that person or a reminder of their misdeeds. Probably it's better for a society not to flaunt these names, but it mustn't forget what they did.)
I haven't read the comments you mention, or followed the various proposals. It almost sounds as if people don't understand taxonomy is a subjective exercise !
(Why I do hope there's never a single world list, and why I'm so against anything which forces you to use only one view.)
Probably people should only get exercised if a decision has practical implications---for conservation etc. Having variant taxonomies in science is actually valuable as it allows you to test how strong any relationship is in the face of phylogenetic uncertainty.
The "appropriate name" thing is a different argument. My only view is for stability. Common names don't have to reflect phylogeny: stability should reign here. I very much wish you Americans (in the proper sense) would just leave them alone.
(I feel neutral about political correctness: a name which commemorates a dodgy character can serve as celebration of that person or a reminder of their misdeeds. Probably it's better for a society not to flaunt these names, but it mustn't forget what they did.)
Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
DID NOT PASS
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Je suis un mignon petit Traquet rubicole
GEORGE SANGSTER, MICHAEL G. HARVEY, JIMMY GAUDIN, SANTIAGO CLARAMUNT (2023). A new genus for Philydor erythrocercum and P. fuscipenne (Aves: Furnariidae). Zootaxa 5361(2): 297-300.
No abstract
Neophilydor new genus
No abstract
Neophilydor new genus
l_raty
laurent raty
GEORGE SANGSTER, MICHAEL G. HARVEY, JIMMY GAUDIN, SANTIAGO CLARAMUNT (2023). A new genus for Philydor erythrocercum and P. fuscipenne (Aves: Furnariidae). Zootaxa 5361(2): 297-300.
Just one detail, if I may :
- Phylidor was authored by Spix in 1824, hence there is obviously no way that Wied-Neuwied proposed a species in this genus, as the above seems to imply, in 1821. The species described by Wied-Neuwied was Anabates atricapillus Wied-Neuwied 1821.
- The nominal species originally included in Philydor by Spix were Philydor superciliaris, P. albigularis, and P. ruficollis. Spix did not cite Anabates atricapillus Wied-Neuwied 1821 : this nominal species is in no event eligible to be the type of the genus.
- The idea that atricapillus Wied-Neuwied 1821 should be the type stems from the acceptation of a type designation by Gray, in 1855, who designated this nominal species without citing any synonym. As this designation did not involve anything that would have been eligible to be the type of the genus, there is no way that it could have any standing.
- Gray's 1855 designation was not the first one, anyway : a designation of Philydor superciliaris appeared in a work by Reichenbach in 1853. ("SPIX hat zwar seine Gattung Philydor weder richtig charakterisirt, noch klar gedacht, indem er heterogene Formen vermischt hat, aber seine erste Art — unsre 484. — mag die typische bleiben. [...] 484. Ph. superciliaris SPIX 73. t. LXXIII.")
This name is also (fortunately) a subjective synonym of Anabates atricapillus Wied-Neuwied 1821, so that the taxonomic interpretation of Philydor is not threatened.
--------------------------
Peters' check-list (VII: 128) :
H&M 4 :
The current Key :
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Je suis un mignon petit Traquet rubicole
Can we say that this is just an inaccuracy?
Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
GEORGE SANGSTER, MICHAEL G. HARVEY, JIMMY GAUDIN, SANTIAGO CLARAMUNT (2023). A new genus for Philydor erythrocercum and P. fuscipenne (Aves: Furnariidae). Zootaxa 5361(2): 297-300.
No abstract
Neophilydor new genus
Proposal (991) to SACC
Recognize the new genus Neophilydor for Philydor erythrocercum and P. fuscipenne (Furnariidae)
Mysticete
Well-known member
