What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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.
Forums
Birding
Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Subspecies
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mysticete" data-source="post: 1810744" data-attributes="member: 67784"><p>The Herp community has almost completely switched over to Evolutionary Species Concept, and I think you see a similar pattern in fish workers.</p><p></p><p>BSC works so well for birds because it is so easy to test and so important to birds. Birds rely on vocal and display mate recognition systems, which are amendable to human observation. Also the majority of species are relatively easy to do field studies on in nature (at least compared to shrews and salamanders). Biological recognition might also be more important just because birds have greater (intentional or accidental) dispersal capabilities compared to most organisms.</p><p></p><p>In contrast, many species may rely on scent or similar chemical cues that might be too subtle for human detection as a speciation recognition. Similarly, allopatry, habitat selection, and even "culture" may be more important in selection than any sort of barriers to interspecies mating. There are plenty of examples of this, even within my subarea of interest (marine mammals).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mysticete, post: 1810744, member: 67784"] The Herp community has almost completely switched over to Evolutionary Species Concept, and I think you see a similar pattern in fish workers. BSC works so well for birds because it is so easy to test and so important to birds. Birds rely on vocal and display mate recognition systems, which are amendable to human observation. Also the majority of species are relatively easy to do field studies on in nature (at least compared to shrews and salamanders). Biological recognition might also be more important just because birds have greater (intentional or accidental) dispersal capabilities compared to most organisms. In contrast, many species may rely on scent or similar chemical cues that might be too subtle for human detection as a speciation recognition. Similarly, allopatry, habitat selection, and even "culture" may be more important in selection than any sort of barriers to interspecies mating. There are plenty of examples of this, even within my subarea of interest (marine mammals). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Birding
Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Subspecies
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top