Re: Sibley and Ahlquist (long)

Subject: Re: Sibley and Ahlquist (long)
From: (Simon Bennett)
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 20:58:45 +1000
I should point out that the new RAOU checklist, i.e Christidis and Boles,
does NOT follow the Sibley/Ahlquist/Monroe order in either order of families
or species within families.

C&B took a conservative approach in adopting some of the SAM work were there
is colloborating work.
Essentially C&B is a separate standard.     

It seems to be a tradition in ornithology that checklists try to reflect
relationships between families and species. I don't think ornithologists
will come at an alphebetical listing; although mammal, reptile and frog
people and botanists are more than happy with that approach.  

The problem is that avian taxonomy is a great state of flux. SAM have tried
to set a standard based on what they believe is an objective methodology. I
think it is premature. I expect things will settle down in about 50 years.
Simon Bennett
Melbourne, Australia.
PO Box 25, Lygon Street North,
Victoria 3057, Australia.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the birding-aus mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU