Hi All,
Recently I wrote a note questioning Australian Bird Nomenclature &
Classification and received this reply from Jeff Price in the USA, which
he asked to be posted on the list.
Tom Tarrant
Tom' question raises a whole host of issues that span from taxonomy into
listing. It's of interest to me because I had some of the same discussions
with some noted Australian birders when I was there last year.
There are two key parts to Tom's question -
1) What is a species and who decides
2) What can I count on my list
As for the first part - there is no single International body on taxonomy
(nomenclature, yes, but that is not the same). A quick look in the birdchat
archives should turn up a bunch of opinions as to what a species is. You
can search the literature and find different authors with quite different
opinions as to what is a species/subspecies. Do you use genetics?
morphology? behavior? conservation? Do species that hybridize constitute
one species or two?
For example, Clement's (Checklist of the Birds of the World) currently
considers all of the species Tom listed as actually being at least two
species. I don't have the recent Howard and Moore to know what they do. So,
these authors consider the birds in question to be distinct (based on their
own reading of the literature). The problem is, who is correct? There is
NO correct answer. Correctness depends on the definition of species used.
That brings us to the second part. In North America, the American
Ornithologists' Union acts as the "final" word on taxonomy and they publish
their decisions in books with updates every two years. These decisions are
made by a committee consisting of taxonomists and other experts. There have
certainly been taxonomists who disagree with some of the AOU's
classification as to what defines a species (e.g., Alan Phillips 'The Known
Birds of North America'). Nevertheless, the AOU committee makes the
decisions that sets taxonomy in North America. As the composition of the
committee changes, sometimes the decisions change as well (birders call this
the lumpers versus the splitters). So, the question is - does Australia
have an equivalent committee within the RAOU?
Now, as to what can count on your list. Some would say it is your list and
you can count what you want. Others like to have some det of guidelines
that can follow - the countable list being set by the listing body you
subscribe to. So, in North America that likely means American Birding
Association (ABA) rules. The ABA currently follows AOU for North America
and then Clements for the rest of the world. Thus, my Australian list
currently has the Australian version of most of the birds that Tom lists
(e.g. Australian Koel) subject to Clement's changing his taxonomic basis.
I don't know what the current state of listing/taxonomy is in Australia.
However, as former taxonomist and a current avian biogeographist (and
lister) my personal opinion/suggestion would be -
1) There should be a standardized committee (perhaps Australasian based as
the AOU covers more than just the US and Canada) making these decisions
and/or
2) In the absence of 1, whatever the dominant Australian birding group is
should consider developing their own guidelines.
I think the gap/difference of opinion is just going to get wider as you
continue to have
'classical taxonomists (e.g., biological species concept)' arguing with
those who blend classical taxonomy with genetic and other methods. As there
is no correct answer there needs to be a method of arriving at a concensus.
Be it within a scientific body or a group of birders.
Just my 2 cents worth,
Jeff Price
Boulder, CO
--
********************************************************
Tom & Marie Tarrant
Samsonvale, Queensland 4520
Australia
Email:
URL: http://www.aviceda.org/
http://www.hotkey.net.au/~aviceda
*********************************************************
Birding-Aus is on the Web at
www.shc.melb.catholic.edu.au/home/birding/index.html
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message
"unsubscribe birding-aus" (no quotes, no Subject line)
to
|
