The problem with taxonomically unrelated birds with the same name is the
consequence of "non-birders" colonizing other continents (America, Australia)
from Europe and naming birds after superficially similar birds at home.
All sparrows in the Americas (except for the introduced House and Tree
Sparrows) are actually emberizids (aka buntings in the old world). On the other
side the American buntings (except for Snow and Lark Buntings which are true
buntings) are actually cardinalids. American orioles are icterids and so on.
Similar here: Australian Magpies are artamids and not corvids, and there are
many more examples.
Nikolas
----------------
Nikolas Haass
Sydney, NSW
----- Original Message ----
From: Philip Veerman <>
To: Bill Jolly <>; ; birding-aus
<>
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 9:51:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Sparrows
Very good answer from Bill. I would add that there are of course many species
of the genus Passer (which are the sparrows, the nominate genus of the order,
from which the word passerine is derived) and only two of those were introduced
to Australia. America also has another different family of birds, many or maybe
all of which are called sparrows but these are not the same genus.
The differences between the House Sparrow & Tree Sparrows are far greater than
just "physical differences between them mostly about the head". They are very
different in the extent of sexual dimorphism and as a corollary or consequence
in their social behaviour. (This was the subject of a thesis I did a long time
ago.) The Tree Sparrows being very unusual among a group in which most species
are sexual dimorphic, in that the female plumage is like the typical for the
males of the genus.
I would also add that the native finch the Diamond Firetail is also unhelpfully
called Diamond Sparrow sometimes.
Philip
|
