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
Uropsalis
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="thomasdonegan" data-source="post: 2425030" data-attributes="member: 5190"><p><strong>Plan D done</strong></p><p></p><p>All these proposals so far have (in my view) failed to strike an appropriate middle ground between what is often the molecular biologist's preference of delimiting genera where they see a node with very strong bootstrap support versus the "field biologist who is used to current treatments" approach, which may involve uber-splitting of genera. I think in birds we tend to over-split many genera in a way that entomologists, palaentologists and others finds perplexing. The proposed middle ground, as adopted in the 2011 Spanish language version of the recent Colombia field guide was as follows:</p><p></p><p>REF: Donegan, TM, Salaman P, Quevedo A & McMullan M. 2011. Revision of the status of bird species occurring or reported in Colombia 2011. Conservacion Colombiana 15: 4-21. <a href="http://www.proaves.org/IMG/pdf/CC15/Conservacion_Colombiana_15_4-21.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.proaves.org/IMG/pdf/CC15/Conservacion_Colombiana_15_4-21.pdf</a></p><p></p><p>"AOU–SACC Proposal 465 was to transfer Uropsalis,</p><p>Eleothreptus, Nyctidromus, Macropsalis, Nyctiprogne,</p><p>Lurocalis, and certain Caprimulgus spp. (cayennensis,</p><p>maculicaudus, longirostris, whitelyi, parvulus, anthonyi and</p><p>nigrescens) to the genus Hydropsalis ... It did not</p><p>pass but most committee members were in favour of some</p><p>changes. We adopt a middle–ground route of provisionally</p><p>placing members of the following genera occurring in</p><p>Colombia into Hydropsalis: Uropsalis, Nyctidromus and</p><p>most Caprimulgus. We retain the other genera occurring in</p><p>Colombia (Lurocalis and Nyctiprogne) as they were resolved</p><p>as monophyletic. We retain carolinensis in Caprimulgus for</p><p>the time being, pending action by the AOU’s North</p><p>American committee."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="thomasdonegan, post: 2425030, member: 5190"] [b]Plan D done[/b] All these proposals so far have (in my view) failed to strike an appropriate middle ground between what is often the molecular biologist's preference of delimiting genera where they see a node with very strong bootstrap support versus the "field biologist who is used to current treatments" approach, which may involve uber-splitting of genera. I think in birds we tend to over-split many genera in a way that entomologists, palaentologists and others finds perplexing. The proposed middle ground, as adopted in the 2011 Spanish language version of the recent Colombia field guide was as follows: REF: Donegan, TM, Salaman P, Quevedo A & McMullan M. 2011. Revision of the status of bird species occurring or reported in Colombia 2011. Conservacion Colombiana 15: 4-21. [url]http://www.proaves.org/IMG/pdf/CC15/Conservacion_Colombiana_15_4-21.pdf[/url] "AOU–SACC Proposal 465 was to transfer Uropsalis, Eleothreptus, Nyctidromus, Macropsalis, Nyctiprogne, Lurocalis, and certain Caprimulgus spp. (cayennensis, maculicaudus, longirostris, whitelyi, parvulus, anthonyi and nigrescens) to the genus Hydropsalis ... It did not pass but most committee members were in favour of some changes. We adopt a middle–ground route of provisionally placing members of the following genera occurring in Colombia into Hydropsalis: Uropsalis, Nyctidromus and most Caprimulgus. We retain the other genera occurring in Colombia (Lurocalis and Nyctiprogne) as they were resolved as monophyletic. We retain carolinensis in Caprimulgus for the time being, pending action by the AOU’s North American committee." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Birding
Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Uropsalis
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
