birding-aus
<<<<
The taxonomy of Sibley & Monroe is rife with unjustified and subjective
decisions. Many people consider Sibley and Monroe to be convenient, but I
consider it to be substandard. It is an example of fashionable rather than
of scientific taxonomy (at the species level).
>>>>
In defence of S and M (the people that is), I understand that they don't
claim to have worked at the species level. Their DNA work was primarily
concerned with interrelationships between higher-level taxa. It could be
claimed that their approach to this is much more scientific that
traditional approaches, so I think you are being a little harsh in
dismissing them as "fashionable".
<<<<
A. melanogaster and A. (m.) novaehollandiae both exist as separate taxa.
what's the difference between subspecies and species anyway? and who cares,
apart from taxonomists and twitchers?
>>>>
Elegantly expressed. The difference I suppose is time which is also a
continuum.
I use Sibley and Monroe in my database because I like their
reclassification of families etc and because their "complete" list was the
first one I found on the internet. I wanted something which would help me
resolve issues like is the "Brown Duck" I saw in Ecuador the same taxon as
the "Brown Duck" in Botswana? I hasten to add that I am not a taxonomist
and just needed an "authority" to help me impose some order on my birding
records.
My tuppence worth. Best wishes, Ian
****************************************
Dr Ian Montgomery, Marine Ecology, A11, University of Sydney, NSW 2006.
Ph: (+61-2) 9351 4786; Fax: 9351 6713; Home ph: 9818 4838.
Visit us at: http://www.bio.usyd.edu.au:80/SOBS/SRC_EICC/QTUF/qtuf.html
Some of my bird photos are at: http://home.vicnet.net.au/~osch/hintsfor.htm
****************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, please send a message to
Include "unsubscribe birding-aus" in the message body (without the quotes)
|
