Willow Flycatcher (1 Viewer)

[Richard Klim]

Zink 2015. Genetics, morphology, and ecological niche modeling do not support the subspecies status of the endangered Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). Condor 117(1): 76–86. [abstract]

Farnsworth & Lebbin 2004 (HBW 9).

Sedgwick 2000 (BNA Online)...

E. t. extimus Phillips, 1948: Breeds in the Southwest, including s. California, Arizona, New Mexico west of the Rio Grande, sw. Utah, s. Nevada, and possibly sw. Colorado (Unitt 1987, Browning 1993). Paler on back and especially on head than either E. t. adastus or E. t. brewsteri; breast-band less distinct and paler gray than in other subspecies (Browning 1993). Northern extent of pure forms of E. t. extimus in New Mexico remains unclear, as does whether E. t. extimus occurs as far north as sw. Colorado (JAS); song forms intermediate to adastus and extimus occur in n. New Mexico and possibly in w. Colorado (Sedgwick in press).

 

[mb1848]

Wow that smack is going to hurt. There is a nice little industry surrounding that subspecies. I have not read the full paper only the abstract but I assume the ghost of Mr. Phillips might say this is zoo-politics not zoology??
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4089250?sid=21105670365333&uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256 .
https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/auk/v065n04/p0507-p0514.pdf .

 

[Kratter]

The author is one of the most staunch proponents of the Phylogenetic Species Concepts and feels that the subspecies rank does not have a place in taxonomy. He has also written very controversial papers on the ESA listed subspecies of California Gnatcatcher, with a similar conclusion that it is not valid.
Andy

 

[Nutcracker]

The author is one of the most staunch proponents of the Phylogenetic Species Concepts and feels that the subspecies rank does not have a place in taxonomy. He has also written very controversial papers on the ESA listed subspecies of California Gnatcatcher, with a similar conclusion that it is not valid.
Andy

Does he have any links with real estate development companies??

 

[Kratter]

He states in the acknowledgments that he did not receive any outside funding. First time I have seen a statement of not receiving funding in acknowledgments!
Andy

 

[Mysticete]

Well I mean what is a subspecies?

I can't access the paper at the moment, and just the abstract, but if we treat PSC species as subspecies, would this fit Remsen's requirements for a valid subspecies? It sounds like from the paper it still would be a non-diagnosable form.

I would have included the ESA line, and I would have still assumed that even if the Southwestern Willow is not a recognizable subspecies, than it would probably still be protected in some manner on a regional basis. Just like Gray wolves have protections in the lower 48, or otters in some places, etc.

I also don't think we need to entertain or suggest any sort of conspiracies regarding funding and such to explain the paper.

 

[Kratter]

Well I mean what is a subspecies?


I also don't think we need to entertain or suggest any sort of conspiracies regarding funding and such to explain the paper.

This is not pulled out of thin air. In his gnatcatcher study, Zink et al. had a conflict of interest, as his work was funded by southern California real estate developers. See:
http://www.aoucospubs.org/doi/full/10.1642/AUK-14-184.1

here is the relevant passage in McCormack and Maley:
Funding source.
Finally, data collection and analysis should be carried out either free of any financial conflict of interest or, at minimum, with such conflicts stated openly. A conflict of interest occurs in any situation in which the impartiality of a study might be undermined by a competing interest, often a funding source. The work of Zink et al. (2013) was funded by developers (Sahagun 2014), which we believe represents a conflict of interest that should have been acknowledged in their paper. The paper does not disclose that the R. Thornton thanked in the Acknowledgments for “securing funding” is a lawyer who has represented developers. Thornton is representing the National Association of Home Builders in the petition to delist the gnatcatcher. The presence of a financial conflict of interest does not necessarily invalidate a study or imply malfeasance. Yet many journals have decided that financial conflicts of interest should be stated openly because of the demonstrated effect of “sponsorship bias” (Lesser et al. 2007). The risk of sponsorship bias is even greater with negative results, which rely more heavily on the researcher's assumptions and interpretation. Especially when it comes to threatened or endangered species, explicit funding statements provide important context for researchers, the media, and the public in assessing a study's rationale, methods, and interpretation.

Andy

 

[jim davist]

flycatcher - gnatcatcher and Zink

Just read the abstract and saw the discussion re CAGN. the SD Reader has a recent article too.

considering i used to work in So Cal in land use planning, I would ask a question re gnatcatcher that may pertain to subspecies in general...

does anyone believe that crossing an arbitrary human boundary between two countries differentiates a species? so a CAGN on Otay is a distinct subspecies from a gnatcatcher in Mexico?

regardless of funding source, I would tend to agree with Zink.

which begs the question of the SWFL...having worked in applied wetland ecology in OH to start my career, I was surprised when the Carlsbad office wouldn't accept my years and hours of identifying WIFL to get a permit for SWFL. looking at Paxton's master's thesis work, which reaffirmed the listing of SWFL, there is a lack of WIFL genetic samples from east of the Rockies (3-4 total?). Paxton even acknowledges the lack of Eastern samples for differentiating an Eastern subspecies.

Science is an ever evolving discipline. One should not attack something because it challenges the status quo. perhaps verification of Zink's work on both species should be done...or we can just let the courts decide.

 

[Richard Klim]

Theimer et al 2016

Zink 2015. Genetics, morphology, and ecological niche modeling do not support the subspecies status of the endangered Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). Condor 117(1): 76–86. [abstract]

Theimer, Smith, Mahoney & Ironside 2016. Available data support protection of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher under the Endangered Species Act. Condor 118(2): 289–299. [abstract]

Perhaps AOU should re-engage with subspecific taxonomy...

 

[Bartgeier]

Zink 2016

Zink 2016. Current Topics in Avian Conservation Genetics with Special Reference to the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher. The Open Ornithology Journal 9: 60-69. [pdf]