• 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.

Western Palearctic Master list with all recorded taxa (1 Viewer)

Maffong

Well-known member
For the WP BIg Year I compiled a complete master list with all recorded bird taxa from the WP. Basis for this approach were the (outdated) AERC list, their own updates (unfortunately very few and far from complete) and the netfugl WP list.
I combined and alligned both lists (AERC common names are hidden in column E and AERC scientific names are hidden in columns G&H). If I find the time I might also add the names of other taxonomies in the future.

Families are highlighted light blue
Species are highlighted lime
Disputed subspecies, that might soon be elevated to species rank are highlighted orange
Disputed species, that might loose species rank are highlighted lime and orange

I also added the categories A (wild bird recorded after 1950), B (wild bird recorded before 1950), C (established feral population) and D (birds of doubtful origin). New taxa, that weren't in the original AERC file are marked with an asterisk.

Furthermore I added Paul Chapman's suggestions for the 'gettability' status of the birds in the WP, ranking from 1 (very easy to find) to 7 (extremely rarely observed) and 8 (extinct in WP)

Currently I'm adding my own suggestions for occurrence status, the reasoning behind each code is explained on page 2 of the sheet. I'm done with all non-passerines and will soon be done with the rest. The shown map is just a rough guideline and not always accurate.
Species where status assignment is somewhat unclear are marked with an asterisk, I'd like to hear your opinions on them (and of course if you disagree with me anywhere else).

While the english and scientific name currently shown are the ones from netfugl, the subspecies names and comments are taken from the AERC list. They are outdated in many cases and I'd like your help to correct all mistakes, that are currently still in the list.


BTW: Subspecies are normally listed from west to east (took me forever to figure it out). However in a few cases I had to break with this to highlight disputed subspecies from their parent species.

I'll try to correct the master list as soon as possible after your suggestions

Maffong
 

Attachments

  • Bird taxa of the WP.xls
    590 KB · Views: 185

Brian J Small

Well-known member
I realise now that you are following Netfugl, but here are some comments on Reed and Bush Warblers use or discard

Locustella amnicola now generally treated as Sakhalin Grasshopper Warbler - cf Locustella tree http://jboyd.net/Taxo/Locustellidae.pdf and alstrom et al

Lanceolated Warbler form in WP should be lanceolata?

Thick-billed Warbler is not really an Acrocephalus - you could find it under Iduna, Arundinax or Phragmaticola, but it does not really fit under Acrocephalus - http://jboyd.net/Taxo/acrocephalidae.pdf - best Iduna

Likewise Booted, Sykes's and the olivaceous warblers are not really Hippolais but Iduna

B
 

Brian J Small

Well-known member
Tristram's Warbler is ticehursti valid?

Sardinian Warbler - valverdei recently described subspecies - Cabot, J & Urdiales, 2005

Lesser Whitethroat is a tough one, but one quick comment - caucasica is not part of the althaea group, but within curruca; likewise jaxartica is within halimodendri - see fig 4 in Olsson et (2013) New insights into the intricate taxonomy and phylogeny of the Sylvia curruca complex

B
 

Maffong

Well-known member
I'm finally done with coding of all species. Also I've considered your corrections to the list. Here's the new one

Maffong
 

Attachments

  • Bird taxa of the WP.xls
    590 KB · Views: 96
Last edited:

DMW

Well-known member
This is a great resource - many thanks for doing this.

One small request: could we please have Siberian Tit back?! :t:
 

Nutcracker

Stop Brexit!
And also Yellow-crowned Night Heron (no hyphen, as per Black-crowned already), Rock Dove, Grey-headed Woodpecker, etc.

And as already mentioned on the other thread, European Stonechat is Saxicola rubicola (since splitting, S. torquatus is African Stonechat, not on WP list).
 

Brian J Small

Well-known member
Surprised you did not change syenitica Black Wheatear - 'Shirihai et al
2014 demonstrate that Western Sahara taxon of Black Wheatear should properly be O.l. riggenbachi , not
syenitica as previously assumed, the lone type specimen of taxon syenitica being better treated pro tem as
belonging to Mourning Wheatear, O. lugens (qv ) as a previously unrecognised black-plumaged population;
whether this is a morph or has taxonomic rank is not certain. Egypt Avib.' - OSME list

B
 

Maffong

Well-known member
Nutcracker said:
And also Yellow-crowned Night Heron (no hyphen, as per Black-crowned already), Rock Dove, Grey-headed Woodpecker, etc.

And as already mentioned on the other thread, European Stonechat is Saxicola rubicola (since splitting, S. torquatus is African Stonechat, not on WP list).
As I stated above I used the taxonomy of netfugl and din't want to change anything to that. I might however add another column with change proposals such as those submitted by you here and maybe the people responsible for the netfugl list become aware of this thread and change things on their website, then of course I'll follow along.
Concerning subspecies and comments I don't have such reservations as I know that much of it is outdated and needs revision, so I try to change things according to your suggestions.
For Black Wheatear I hadn't understood your comment, Brian, and looked at HBW Alive, where syenitica is still the name in use and no comment is made about riggenbachi. However with your last comment I now understand better and will change it

Maffong
 

jalid

Well-known member
Is Sitta (europaea) arctica really a vagrant to WP? It is mentioned in BWP, but without references, probably a mistake.
 

Brian J Small

Well-known member
Hi Maffong (I wish I knew your real name)

It is a great effort and I do not want to come across overly pedantic. If you are happy I will continue to point a few things out...?

E.g. Nightingale - hafizi should really be golzii, which has been shown to have taxonomic precedence

B
 

Ian Lewis

aka Gryllo
Europe
The species split by IOC that are not given specific status on the list are marked in orange with the exception of Cyprus Scops Owl.

Quite a number of taxa that are given specific status by the Dutch CNSA are also not marked in orange.

But a very useful reference work.

Ian
 

Maffong

Well-known member
Hi Maffong (I wish I knew your real name)

It is a great effort and I do not want to come across overly pedantic. If you are happy I will continue to point a few things out...?

E.g. Nightingale - hafizi should really be golzii, which has been shown to have taxonomic precedence

B

Maffong is actually a real nickname that people call me, so you can just use it as my name, but if you really want to know it, my name is Mathieu

I encourage you to point out all the mistakes, no matter how small they might be. That is the purpose of this thread.

Thanks to all those who have given input so far. I encourage everybody who has knowledge and knows more about taxonomy, nomenclature or status of the western palearctic birds.

I would love to hear more opinions on asiatica Nuthatch. I don't know much about its occurrence in WP, but it jumped to my eye before. However I believed what the AERC list and BWP stated without questioning it...

Maffong
 
Last edited:

l_raty

laurent raty
I would love to hear more opinions on asiatica Nuthatch. I don't know much about its occurrence in WP, but it jumped to my eye before. However I believed what the AERC list and BWP stated without questioning it...
Sitta arctica was split in AERC TAC 2014, but not added to the WP list (Crochet & Joynt 2015) because there are no known/accepted records (even though the taxon was indeed listed in BWP, and appeared on the early taxon lists of the TAC on this base).
Sitta europaea asiatica is a breeding bird in E European Russia and a vagrant further W, but has never been seen as a potential split AFAIK.
 

Maffong

Well-known member
Sitta arctica was split in AERC TAC 2014, but not added to the WP list (Crochet & Joynt 2015) because there are no known/accepted records (even though the taxon was indeed listed in BWP, and appeared on the early taxon lists of the TAC on this base).
Sitta europaea asiatica is a breeding bird in E European Russia and a vagrant further W, but has never been seen as a potential split AFAIK.

Oops, I'm glad you understood what I meant. Then I'll erase that ssp. from the list.

Maffong
 

Nutcracker

Stop Brexit!
As I stated above I used the taxonomy of netfugl and din't want to change anything to that. I might however add another column with change proposals such as those submitted by you here and maybe the people responsible for the netfugl list become aware of this thread and change things on their website, then of course I'll follow along.
Concerning subspecies and comments I don't have such reservations as I know that much of it is outdated and needs revision, so I try to change things according to your suggestions.
For Black Wheatear I hadn't understood your comment, Brian, and looked at HBW Alive, where syenitica is still the name in use and no comment is made about riggenbachi. However with your last comment I now understand better and will change it

Maffong

Appreciate that; but the Stonechat case is just as relevant as the Black Wheatear case - to give it as Saxicola torquatus is to treat African and European Stonechats as conspecific, which their English naming shows is not their intention. It is clearly an error of accidental retention of the scientific name for the broad sense, when they should have adopted the scientific name for the narrow sense.
 

Brian J Small

Well-known member
Hi Mathieu

This may have been answered before, but could you please give me an idea of what you are using as the limits of the WP in the Middle East?

Is there a map I could look at?

Thanks

B
 

Maffong

Well-known member
I want to try and follow the netfugl definition that can be found here, I think the same boundaries are used by Club300 germany.

However as subspecies information was taken by AERC that is probably following BWP boundaries, I'm not sure where that differs from the netfugl map
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top