Sixty-second Supplement to the American Ornithological Society’s Check-list of North American Birds (1 Viewer)

[Kratter]

The rejection of the McKay Bunting lump continues to make AOS's standards on what is or isn't a species laughable

McKay’s Bunting had continued to be phenotypically distinct despite being surrounded by its abundant highly migratory sister species through near parapatry for likely centuries. If there was no reproductive isolation, MCBU would have been. genetically swarmed out of existence in an instant.

 

[Mysticete]

McKay’s Bunting had continued to be phenotypically distinct despite being surrounded by its abundant highly migratory sister species through near parapatry for likely centuries. If there was no reproductive isolation, MCBU would have been. genetically swarmed out of existence in an instant.

Audubon's and Myrtle Warblers continue to maintain separate evolutionary trajectories despite the presence of a hybrid zone.

 

[Mysticete]

And for an opposite example, see Golden-winged and Blue-winged Warbler, which are ranked as species despite hybridization at the expense of Golden-winged

 

[jurek]

I think one needs to make a birdwatchers checklist of North American birds, and purposefully include some birds which are definitely not species (e.g. Nelson's Gull or Glaucous x Herring Gull).

This will help science by removing the effect of 'push' of birdwatchers to split visually different but genetically almost identical birds, or decide things which are unknowable, e.g. whether an introduced species is sustainable or will die out in future.

 

[Xenospiza]

And for an opposite example, see Golden-winged and Blue-winged Warbler, which are ranked as species despite hybridization at the expense of Golden-winged

There are just six genes which are responsible for the differences between the two, all their other DNA is the same.
This shows that a mathematical approach just does not work.

 

[Kirk Roth]

ahh...I think you are referring to the ABA blog post. That was written by someone not on the AOS taxonomy committee. I think this is the author's addition just to poke the bear a bit.

They did actually split off the Cape Verde (I think?) Storm Petrel, but it's extralimital and doesn't otherwise effect the checklist. Would have been nice to see the Pacific population split off, which seemed a reasonable option and what I sort of expected would happen.

Yes, I was referring to the ABA blog in Post #10 - I hadn't seen the other post in time.

I know the author and his impish sense of humor, so perhaps you're right about the Ocotero. But that will do nothing to alleviate confusion on the matter. Among other decisions it provides for a good illustration of the difference between stasis and stability, and the apparently common mistake in "western" checklists committees of confusing the two.

Your storm petrel explanation makes sense for why it would not be included in the main blog. However, the Pacific population is still missing from the tiny blurb at the bottom that lists the rejected splits. If the Galapagos Frigatebird shows up there, so too should the storm petrel.

 

[Kirk Roth]

McKay’s Bunting had continued to be phenotypically distinct despite being surrounded by its abundant highly migratory sister species through near parapatry for likely centuries. If there was no reproductive isolation, MCBU would have been. genetically swarmed out of existence in an instant.

The Haida Gwai Owl had continued to be phenotypically distinct despite being surrounded by its abundant highly migratory sister species through near parapatry for likely centuries. If there were no reproductive isolation, Haida Gwai Owls would have been genetically swarmed out of existence in an instant.

Andy, I'm teasing of course, but I'm trying to bring up the issue of consistency in the committee decisions. The McKay's and/or the owl decisions may well be as "correct" as any other taxonomic decision... but it is fairly difficult for common observers such as myself to resolve how both of these decisions can be true using the same philosophy.

 

[Paul Clapham]

The Haida Gwai Owl had continued to be phenotypically distinct despite being surrounded by its abundant highly migratory sister species through near parapatry for likely centuries. If there were no reproductive isolation, Haida Gwai Owls would have been genetically swarmed out of existence in an instant.

Andy, I'm teasing of course, but I'm trying to bring up the issue of consistency in the committee decisions. The McKay's and/or the owl decisions may well be as "correct" as any other taxonomic decision... but it is fairly difficult for common observers such as myself to resolve how both of these decisions can be true using the same philosophy.

I'm just another common observer, with no knowledge of the real issues, but it does have a slight smell of status quo bias to me.

 

[Snapdragyn]

I'm just another common observer, with no knowledge of the real issues, but it does have a slight smell of status quo bias to me.

And I would say potentially the same for the refusal to split Myrtle & Audubon's Warblers while maintaining Blue-winged & Golden-winged Warblers.

 

[cajanuma]

I'm just another common observer, with no knowledge of the real issues, but it does have a slight smell of status quo bias to me.

The status quo bias is built into the voting system since a proposal requires a 2/3 majority to pass. The comments on the 2021 proposals have not been published yet, but the proposal to lump McKay's Bunting would have failed even with a 7-4 vote in favor; conversly, the proposal to split the Haida Gwai Owl would have needed 8 favorable votes to pass (as it were, it only got one, although quite a few of the 'no' votes seemed very much on the fence: Comments 2020-B - American Ornithological Society)

 

[jts1882]

I'd expect each voter to apply a status quo bias. They may be convinced that the change should or should not be made or they may take an on the fence position where a change is probably needed, but needs more evidence to be sure. You don't want to have to reverse decisions when more complete evidence becomes available.

 

[Mysticete]

Plus you have committee members who have there own idea of what the biological species concepts is, and so enforce interpretations that are unnecessarily strict. The Yellow-rumped Warbler split has abundant evidence for it, but the key holdouts on the vote only consider whether two forms recognize each other for mating purposes, disregarding post-zygotic barriers that seem to be maintaining those birds as separate species. If they followed that interpretation for all birds, we would have one mallard type duck, amongst other examples.

 

[Paul Clapham]

R Terry Chesser, Shawn M Billerman, Kevin J Burns, Carla Cicero, Jon L Dunn, Blanca E Hernández-Baños, Andrew W Kratter, Irby J Lovette, Nicholas A Mason, Pamela C Rasmussen, J V Remsen, Jr., Douglas F Stotz, Kevin Winker, Sixty-second Supplement to the American Ornithological Society’s Check-list of North American Birds, Ornithology, 2021;, ukab037, Sixty-second Supplement to the American Ornithological Society’s Check-list of North American Birds

Updated version is now online: Sixty-second Supplement to the American Ornithological Society’s Check-list of North American Birds (So far I don't know what the update consists of.)

 

[l_raty]

(So far I don't know what the update consists of.)

Looks perfectly identical to the file attached to #13 above.