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="aegithalos" data-source="post: 3054430" data-attributes="member: 49599">This will surely come in the near future, possibly when the journal-formatted version is posted.I see their proposals as a logical extension of the way molecular results have come (mostly) to dominate discussion of species-level taxonomy. Holt & Jønsson push this up to genus, family and order. I would be astonished if exactly what they are proposing actually happened, but I suspect there will be a drift towards it over the coming decade or two. Does it really make sense that the most recent common ancestor of some sister genera is further back than for some entire orders? If thinking is morphology-dominated, and the genera look alike (i.e. there has been considerable genetic change but it has not translated into much morphological change), then it is OK. If thinking is molecular-dominated, then it is not OK. This is a discussion/argument that is going to run.Keith</blockquote>