birding-aus

World Checklists

To: "Sue & Phil Gregory" <>
Subject: World Checklists
From: "Dave Torr" <>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 12:35:09 +1000
I agree that Clements updates used to be good. Unfortunately as far as
I can tell there is no document that defines the changes made between
edition 5 (plus the web updates) and edition 6. I use Clements for my
world list and Christides & Boles for my Aussie list - which
unfortunately means that my Aussie list differs according to which one
I choose.

Anyone interested in comparing lists could look at Avibase
(http://www.bsc-eoc.org/avibase/avibase.jsp?pg=home&lang=EN) which has
checklists for all countries using 6 different taxonomies (although
not all lists are complete and there are inevitable a few errrors).
For Australia it shows 868 species using Sibley and Munroe, 864 using
Howard and Moore, 860 using Clements 5th, 865 using Clements 6th and
886 using CINFO (A French naming system).

On 06/09/07, Sue & Phil Gregory <> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>   The world listers are mostly Americans and they use Clements as the
> default. The new edition is disappointing as they have missed so much
> recent work and seem to have largely halted in 2002, and the names
> are a nightmare as the Americans have renamed loads of Australasian
> and African birds so they are different to the standard regional
> field guides- cultural imperialism lives! Still, updates are promised
> every 6 months or so, and the first one is going to be huge if they
> stick to it.
> it's also worth looking at Howard and Moore, which was the original
> checklist that had all the subspecies, though the 2003 edition opts
> to be conservative with the taxonomy and there have been no updates
> since.
> Nothing is perfect, and the default is sorry to say Clements, though
> he does have a lot of the new Oz splits this time round, (as does H &
> M where Dick Schodde did this region).  You can use either to record
> your sightings.  Essentially you then have to update each as and
> when, but the on-line updates promised for Clements used to work well
> in the past. Clements gives you 203 families in the new edition (204
> in the 5th), H& M give 194, and this is significant for world listers
> and collectors of families.
> ]Hope this helps.
> Cheers
> Phil
> On 06/09/2007, at 10:32 AM, Gregory Little wrote:
>
> > Phil
> >
> > You mention the world classification/taxonomy texts by "Clements" and
> > "Howard and Moore" plus "Schodde and Mason" for Australia. I am
> > looking
> > at getting one of the world classification texts ie the recently
> > published Clements. As far as I know there are three or four that are
> > commonly used. It appears that you have these or have access to and
> > know
> > something of them. Could you please advice which would be the best to
> > get and why. I suppose different people have their favourites.
> >
> > Greg Little
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: 
> >  On Behalf Of Sue & Phil
> > Gregory
> > Sent: Thursday, 6 September 2007 9:23 AM
> > To: Dave Sargeant
> > Cc: Birding Aus
> > Subject: [Birding-Aus] Grey Whistlers
> >
> > hi Dave,
> > Just came in the tail end of this- essentially Clements new edition
> > is in error (again!), he has a peninsulae taxon listed under both
> > this and Grey-headed Whistler, in the 5th edition simplex was
> > monotypic and called Gray Whistler ( 'cos it's brown with no grey in
> > the plumage of course!). Howard and Moore combine them all.
> >   The birds in PNG and New Guinea are often called Grey-headed
> > Whistler if split, and the Directory of Australian Birds has a good
> > discussion on the merits of splitting the group- unfortunately they
> > put them all in simplex, which is where the 6th Clements P. simplex
> > peninsulae derives from.
> > Only two forms are non-flavenoid, simplex in the NT and dubia in East
> > New Guinea, separated by flavenoid forms (put in Grey-headed Whistler
> > if split). Birds on the Kai Is (rufipennis) seem somewhat
> > intermediate and Schodde and Mason lump them all.
> > This may be premature and the vocal data ought to be investigated, it
> > seems to me that the NT birds sound quite different, and DNA stuff
> > would also help I'm sure.
> >
> > Regards
> > Phil Gregory
> > ===============================
> > www.birding-aus.org
> > birding-aus.blogspot.com
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> > send the message:
> > unsubscribe
> > (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> > to: 
> > ===============================
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.6/991 - Release Date:
> > 5/09/2007 2:55 PM
> >
> >
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.6/991 - Release Date:
> > 5/09/2007 2:55 PM
> >
> >
>
> ===============================
> www.birding-aus.org
> birding-aus.blogspot.com
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to: 
> ===============================
>
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, 
send the message:
unsubscribe 
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 
===============================

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

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