Thanks Helen you are correct,
but I did deliberately choose to say taxa, note also that I said Boobooks
plural. I should however play by the taxonomic umpires current decision and
refer to them all as a single taxon.
I hope this doesn't start a new thread.
Cheers Jeff.
From: Helen Larson
Sent: Friday, 6 May 2011 4:25 PM
To: Jeff Davies; David James; Birding-aus; martin cachard
Subject: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: what is a Rufous Boobook?
The taxonomist/editor in me cannot help but say that one species forms a
taxon, a bunch of them are taxa. But then nobody pays much attention to
grammar in emails. Though Birds Australia used taxa in the singular recently
in print; brain slightly too overloaded to remember where.
Helen
<')////==<
PS - have spent too much of the day editing manuscripts!!!
_____
From: Jeff Davies <>
To: David James <>; Birding-aus
<>; martin cachard <>
Sent: Thu, 5 May, 2011 16:57:15
Subject: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: what is a Rufous Boobook?
Thanks for that David,
Boobooks are a classic example of a taxa that should be recorded to ssp.
Martin Cachard must be reading all this, well he is now because I just
copied him in, what is the local consensus opinion of Boobooks in the Wet
Tropics Martin?.
Cheers Jeff.
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
|
