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="Scott_sg" data-source="post: 1657564" data-attributes="member: 81463">Just throwing in my 2c for my first real post.Isn't this really more of an issue about people rather than the birds etc as such? What I am getting at is that species as a term is really a human creation, and subspecies is probably closer to the truth.There is also a temporal aspect in that taxonomy is essentially a current "snapshot", based on what we know at this moment. No account is made for the future, and if it was it would be pure speculation.In fields such as ornithology and mammology etc it is often hard to see the need for subspecies, often the complaints are based on increased complexity. Again this is a human issue though, I doubt anyone would seriously argue that there are different populations of species of birds. Dialects are now well known, and there are often very real morphological differences among populations.Although I have not seen it mentioned, an interesting - hypothetical question would be - how ethical would it be to start mixing populations of birds? For example the Superb Fairy-wren, Malurus cyaneus, of southeastern Australia. There are distinct populations on the mainland, then populations on Tasmania and then the Bass Strait Islands.So while we might argue that subspecies are a hassle, I am sure there would be an outcry if I proposed to start mixing the island "subspecies". Since intuitively we recognise that there - may be - important implications in that idea. Afterall we may be watching speciation in progress.In reality though ornithology is not as complex as other fields, botany and ichthyology and entomology come to mind. Not only is the diversity much much greater but often the reproductive cycles are much shorter.For example in Killifish, the actual puddle specimens come from is important. In botany the whole concept of species sometimes seems pointless with numerous variations just in one locality.So at least to me, subspecies is important in that it probably reflects a closer truth about the natural world, even though it is not ideal. In the end though taxonomically we are trying to fit everything into neat little boxes, when the real world just isnt like that.</blockquote>

Verification