Lynx-BirdLife Taxonomic Checklist (1 Viewer)

[aegithalos]

Just got my copy of the Checklist. Regardless of not being particularly happy with the way decisions were made on splits and lumps, this book really is a class act. An absolutely joy to browse through! I'll cheerfully pay another €145 if they'll produce an ebook so I can carry it with me (and to save the crick in the neck I got from leaning over a table to read it ...).

The Tobias scores are in there, mostly (I think they have been reduced to the minimum, presumably on space grounds). Some characters are scores as 'ns[1]' (rather than a simple integer), and I can't find an explanation for that in the Checklist, or in Tobias et al. Are these characters that were evaluated, but not included in the scored total because of the cap on the number of characters that could be included in each category? I'd be grateful if anyone could confirm/deny.

Keith

 

[Melanie]

Picus vaillantii is named Levaillant's (Green) Woodpecker by BirdLife (v6.1), IOC, H&M4, eBird/Clements, Monroe & Sibley 1993, ABC, MRBC, AERC, BB, DBA, BWP, Beaman & Madge 1998, Thévenot et al 2003, Svensson et al 2009, Gorman 2014...

BirdLife (v7) and the Illustrated Checklist have instead renamed it Mahgreb [sic!] Green Woodpecker. Why......???

Someone should contact BirdLife and tell that Mahgreb is a spelling error.

 

[dnsallen]

Hodgen's Waterhen Tribonyx hodgenorum
Should this not be Hodgens' Waterhen?

 

[Melanie]

Hodgen's Waterhen Tribonyx hodgenorum
Should this not be Hodgens' Waterhen?

Seems that there is no consensus according the spelling:

We have:

A. Tennyson und P. Martinson: Extinct birds of New Zealand: Hodgens' waterhen
Trevor H. Worthy & Richard N. Holdaway: The Lost World of the Moa.: Hodgens' waterhen
Turvey: Holocene Extinctions: Hodgen's waterhen
Steadman: Extinction and Biogeography of Tropical Pacific Birds: Hodgen's moorhen
Brian James Gill, ‎Paul Martinson: New Zealand's extinct Birds: Hodgen's waterhen

Hume & Walters (2012) are very clever:
New Zealand Flightless Gallinule

I think the correct spelling should be Hodgens' waterhen as this name refer to the Hodgen brothers (who owned the Pyramid Valley swamp) and not to a single person.

 

[dnsallen]

Seems that there is no consensus according the spelling:

We have:

A. Tennyson und P. Martinson: Extinct birds of New Zealand: Hodgens' waterhen
Trevor H. Worthy & Richard N. Holdaway: The Lost World of the Moa.: Hodgens' waterhen
Turvey: Holocene Extinctions: Hodgen's waterhen
Steadman: Extinction and Biogeography of Tropical Pacific Birds: Hodgen's moorhen
Brian James Gill, ‎Paul Martinson: New Zealand's extinct Birds: Hodgen's waterhen

Hume & Walters (2012) are very clever:
New Zealand Flightless Gallinule

I think the correct spelling should be Hodgens' waterhen as this name refer to the Hodgen brothers (who owned the Pyramid Valley swamp) and not to a single person.

OK thanks. I didn't realise this error had been floating around for years.

 

[Richard Klim]

Someone should contact BirdLife and tell that Mahgreb is a spelling error.

The misspelling wasn't my main point (however embarrassing). I was more concerned with the arrogance shown by BirdLife/Lynx on some aspects of the new checklist, including the rejection of well-established common names.

The introduction to the Illustrated Checklist is an interesting essay, setting out the rationale for producing a new checklist. It notes the work of the Peters, Sibley & Monroe and Howard & Moore checklists, but rather disingenuously ignores the contributions made in recent years by the IOC and eBird/Clements checklists in providing timely open-access visibility of developments in systematics and taxonomy (during a period when the BirdLife Checklist was largely moribund in that respect). Clements doesn't even merit a mention, whilst IOC's "comprehensive and thoughtful overall review of name formation" is "respectfully acknowledged" (but essentially dismissed).

But it's undeniably a beautiful book...

 

[njlarsen]

I have so far not ordered a copy, for a number of reasons. The arrogance mentioned by Richard could be a good reason to ignore this work -- but the link to conservation through the red list maintained by Birdlife makes ignoring it difficult.

I wonder if the renaming is due to some of the same causes that in the last century made every field guide published contain new names for a number of species. (personal preference by a couple of main authors, commercial interests of the publishers, or whatever).

Niels

 

[aegithalos]

Clapper and king rails

Clapper and king rails have been split by BirdLife and the Illustrated Checklist following Maley and Brumfield (2013), exactly as Taxonomy in Flux (http://jboyd.net/Taxo/changes.html) and ABA have done. In so doing, the Illustrated Checklist notes that the split is based "largely on molecular evidence supported by morphological details ... provisionally accepted here in the light of genetic findings"

Tobias et al is not mentioned in the taxonomy notes of any of the species concerned. Is this approach being used in the same way that drunks use lamp-posts?

Keith

 

[Ian Lewis]

I have so far not ordered a copy, for a number of reasons. The arrogance mentioned by Richard could be a good reason to ignore this work -- but the link to conservation through the red list maintained by Birdlife makes ignoring it difficult.

I wonder if the renaming is due to some of the same causes that in the last century made every field guide published contain new names for a number of species. (personal preference by a couple of main authors, commercial interests of the publishers, or whatever).

Niels

Like Richard, I deplore the replacement of long established English names, regret the loss of long established species like Barbary Falcon, but I love the fact that for the first time for nearly half the world's species, an illustration, a range map and taxonomic notes can be seen on one double page spread.

I don't have a photographic memory and seeing nearly half the world's birds displayed like this makes maintaining and remembering my world life list so much easier (even if there are a number of anomalies compared to my IOC based list).

Ian

 

[MJB]

OK thanks. I didn't realise this error had been floating around for years.

That's what happens when the grammar police are downsized!:t:
MJB

 

[SzimiStyle]

Nez Zealand Dotterel

The split is perhaps partially justified by this paper?

Please help me understand this paper as I'm not a taxonomic expert. The paper says "Over all investigated DNA markers, genetic variation was very low between the two C. obscurus subspecies, which might be due to recent divergence or interbreeding between the two subspecies.".

Doesn't that mean that there is not enough evidence to split the two subspecies?

Thanks, Szimi

 

[Richard Klim]

Greater White-fronted Goose

The subspecific taxonomy in the Illustrated Checklist is curious, recognising both sponsa Banks, 2011 and frontalis (which Banks synonymised with gambelli, assigning the entire Eurasian breeding population to nominate albifrons).

[H&M4 and IOC follow Banks 2011.]

 

[Mysticete]

They seem to give precedence to morphology/vocalizations over genetic and life history data. Which is kind of the opposite of what every other checklist does

 

[Richard Klim]

New Zealand Dotterel

• Charadrius (obscurus) aquilonius – Northern Red-breasted Plover (New Zealand Dotterel)

The split is perhaps partially justified in the Illustrated Checklist by this paper?

The split of C aquilonius is actually justified in the Illustrated Checklist by application of the Tobias criteria (score 7), but with the qualification that "Treatment here as a species tentative and provisional, acknowledging possibility that strong clinal shift has been lost with loss of South I populations, although evidence for this may not now be recoverable".

 

[MJB]

They seem to give precedence to morphology/vocalizations over genetic and life history data. Which is kind of the opposite of what every other checklist does

The way the Tobias criteria have been applied, without presenting the mechanics of each decision up-front (or better still, in advance), has the appearance of the 'one true religion' approach, which I'm sure was not the intent.

What it has done is that it has created lack of confidence in the various judgements/assessments because a number seem to be 'left-field', but can't be queried or challenged because of lack of explanation, whereas the majority (to be charitable for the sake of argument) probably are uncontentious. However, the general lack of information is likely, in my estimation to make even the 'uncontentious' assessments suspect in the view of many, and that circumstance was completely avoidable.
MJB

 

[SzimiStyle]

The way the Tobias criteria have been applied, without presenting the mechanics of each decision up-front (or better still, in advance), has the appearance of the 'one true religion' approach, which I'm sure was not the intent.

Ig Tobias criteria is used then more shorebird species will be split in the future e.g. Dunlins or Masked Lapwing. Not sure about its future.

 

[Richard Klim]

Tobias scores

The way the Tobias criteria have been applied, without presenting the mechanics of each decision up-front...

Mike, I hope that I haven't inadvertantly given the impression that the Illustrated Checklist just gives the Tobias criteria total scores as justification for new splits. Staying with Charadrius (obscurus) aquilonius as an example, the Illustrated Checklist states...

Only recently recognized taxonomically, on basis of differences in morphometrics, plumage, ecology and behaviour[Dowding (1994)], but evidence suggests that the differences are at specific level, with aquilonius smaller in size, notably in length of mid-toe and claw (from published data, effect size –2.93, score 2), yet tail marginally longer (effect size 0.42, score 1); notably paler above and below in breeding birds (2), and with greater amounts of white on face, chin and flanks (1); and nesting in coastal environments close to sea, with no nest-lining vs inland and mainly upland nesting (riverbeds, mountain tops, grassy plains) with nest lined (1).

It's a pity that the justification isn't included in the BirdLife Species factsheet (which instead just cites the [very expensive] Illustrated Checklist), but perhaps the justifications will be included in the open-access taxonomy sections of the HBW Alive (and IBC?) species accounts when HBW Alive automatically transitions to the new HBW/BirdLife taxonomy...?

 

[MJB]

Mike, I hope that I haven't inadvertantly given the impression that the Illustrated Checklist just gives the Tobias criteria total scores as justification for new splits. Staying with Charadrius (obscurus) aquilonius as an example, the Illustrated Checklist states...

It's a pity that the justification isn't included in the BirdLife Species factsheet (which instead just cites the Illustrated Checklist), but perhaps the justifications will be included in the open-access taxonomy sections of the HBW Alive (and IBC?) species accounts when HBW Alive automatically transitions to the new HBW/BirdLife taxonomy...?

No, Richard, you didn't give that impression at all. I'm just puzzled about this whole approach of making taxonomic changes first and promising justification later. To me, conclusions are justified by the testable argument presented, tested as required, then accepted, and not the other way round - the latter guarantees an absence of clarity.
MJB

 

[James Eaton]

No, Richard, you didn't give that impression at all. I'm just puzzled about this whole approach of making taxonomic changes first and promising justification later. To me, conclusions are justified by the testable argument presented, tested as required, then accepted, and not the other way round - the latter guarantees an absence of clarity.
MJB

I couldn't agree more!

James

 

[Mysticete]

Ig Tobias criteria is used then more shorebird species will be split in the future e.g. Dunlins or Masked Lapwing. Not sure about its future.

I assume those taxa were assessed using the Tobias scoring system. Masked Plover was split, but Dunlin wasn't.