http://djringer.com/birding/2007/07/27/taxonomic-and-nomenclatural-changes-in-aou-48th-supplement/ Fri, 25 Jul 2008 08:02:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 http://djringer.com/birding/2007/07/27/taxonomic-and-nomenclatural-changes-in-aou-48th-supplement/#comment-2385 Jochen Wed, 01 Aug 2007 10:34:25 +0000 http://djringer.com/birding/?p=285#comment-2385 I am surprised about the decision to split the Bean Goose. Even though many aspects point towards this split, it is still hotly debated in Europe and as far as I know, it has not been split there yet with the evidence deemed not sufficient - yet. We get both forms (although other subspecies within the Taiga/Tundra-complex) on the Baltic Sea Coast of Germany in good numbers and strangely, it seems there's the distinct Tundra, the very distinct Taiga but also a form that clearly belongs to Taiga but is less different from Tundra. Could this point to a clinal change? We don't know! But most birders in Germany now differentiate between both forms, and that's a good thing in general, independently of taxonomic status. I am surprised about the decision to split the Bean Goose. Even though many aspects point towards this split, it is still hotly debated in Europe and as far as I know, it has not been split there yet with the evidence deemed not sufficient - yet. We get both forms (although other subspecies within the Taiga/Tundra-complex) on the Baltic Sea Coast of Germany in good numbers and strangely, it seems there’s the distinct Tundra, the very distinct Taiga but also a form that clearly belongs to Taiga but is less different from Tundra. Could this point to a clinal change?
We don’t know!
But most birders in Germany now differentiate between both forms, and that’s a good thing in general, independently of taxonomic status.

]]> http://djringer.com/birding/2007/07/27/taxonomic-and-nomenclatural-changes-in-aou-48th-supplement/#comment-2384 djringer Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:16:10 +0000 http://djringer.com/birding/?p=285#comment-2384 John, the supplement indicates that the placement within Falconiformes is not at all certain. It seems that no one has really figured out where the New World vultures belong. Some authors place them in their own order, as they do not seem closely related to any other group. See, for example, this <a href="http://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCprop241.html" rel="nofollow">proposal to the <abbr title="South American Classification Committee">SACC</abbr></a>. John, the supplement indicates that the placement within Falconiformes is not at all certain. It seems that no one has really figured out where the New World vultures belong. Some authors place them in their own order, as they do not seem closely related to any other group. See, for example, this proposal to the SACC.

]]> http://djringer.com/birding/2007/07/27/taxonomic-and-nomenclatural-changes-in-aou-48th-supplement/#comment-2383 John Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:31:01 +0000 http://djringer.com/birding/?p=285#comment-2383 I find it interesting that the AOU decided to move New World Vultures back into Falconiformes. The relationship to storks always seemed somewhat counterintuitive to me. I wonder where the vultures will finally end up. I find it interesting that the AOU decided to move New World Vultures back into Falconiformes. The relationship to storks always seemed somewhat counterintuitive to me. I wonder where the vultures will finally end up.

]]> http://djringer.com/birding/2007/07/27/taxonomic-and-nomenclatural-changes-in-aou-48th-supplement/#comment-2382 The 48th Supplement to the AOU’s Checklist Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:33:40 +0000 http://djringer.com/birding/?p=285#comment-2382 [...] has been published.  Search and Serendipity has the less-than-earthshaking details. [...] [...] has been published.  Search and Serendipity has the less-than-earthshaking details. [...]

]]>