Dear Myles
I'll put down a few thoughts that may help, although I hasten to add that I
am no expert
in this field and this is just my view of it.
Classificatory systems can be either artificial or natural. Under an
artificial system you might put
all the black birds together, all the red birds together, all those with
long beaks, etc.
That is how a phone book works with Smith next to Smittelhausen - even
though they may be quite unrelated.
Bird taxonomists work to a natural system where they try to group the most
closely related species together, first
into genera, then families and then orders. As far as possible this is
intended to reflect the evolution of the species.
Then come the process of putting these groups (usually the orders at this
stage) into a sequence for a book. The
sequence usually followed is to have the least specialised ("primitive") at
the start, ending with the most specialised.
A major problem is that the sequence in a book is linear while the actual
situation is a much more complex, branching
arrangement that can't be adequately presented in a field guide.
Adding to your/our problems is that scientists continually discover more
information which may influence what they consider
is the relationships between the groups.
So getting back to the field guides. They usually start with the ratites
(flightless) birds like the emu, ostrich, etc which are
considered closest to the ancestral condition, and end with the Order
Passeriformes - the most specialised. Within the
Passeriformes, the first families are those like the pittas and lyrebirds
which for reasons of anatomy are considered least
changed from an ancestral condition, and end with families like the finches
and crows which are most specialised.
As I mentioned above, the sequence does change, so the Galliformes
(gamebirds - fowl, quail, etc) which used to be near
the birds of prey, have been moved earlier, near the beginning, because
they are now considered less specialised.
Finally you ask why field guides don't follow a more intuitive/logical
sequence. Some have tried it - for example Lloyd Nielsen's
book on North Queensland birds does group them according to colours, and
patterns and size, etc. but I don't think that
it is wholly satisfactory. To give an example, with experience you get a
feeling for the natural affinities of a bird. Take a
bower bird for example, even when looking at a new species you realise that
its call, behaviour, shape, etc etc (jizz) all make
it a bower bird and so you would look at that section of the field
guide. With an artificial classification, bowerbirds would be
in many different parts of the guide - that may not matter until you get a
partly adult-plumaged male.
Finally I DO share your frustration in trying to find the location of some
species, especially where their position in the sequence has
recently changed. I like to be able to flip through a field guide and
rapidly get to the correct position and I am FRUSTRATED when
I have to resort to the index after minutes of unsuccessful searching.
So, like you, I would be interested if anyone has any simple way of
remembering the sequence.
Cheers
Peter
At 08:44 AM 25/03/2004 +1000, you wrote:
G'day,
Until I took up birding, I had lived a fairly "ordered" life. I could use
phone books, catalogues etc to look up people or products pretty quickly;
without having to use any index because the information was all presented
in an alphabetical order.
I recently carried out some data entry of about 1000 records of birding
information, and I very quickly realised that I lacked a fundamental skill
requirement for the job. It was absolutely nothing to do with computers I
must add. The problem was to do with placing individual records in the
birding Order and Species sequence.
I have been using Field Guides for years and years, to look up birds via
the alphabetic index at the back, but always find it frustrating if not
useless trying to look them up DIRECTLY by knowing where particular
species appear in the sequence of Orders etc.
I would be very very grateful if some kind person would put me out of my
misery by pointing me to:
- a source that explains WHY the sequence of Orders and Species is as it
is, and
- any "crib-sheet" or "mind-bender" methods used to teach and/or memorise
the sequence!
Furthermore, and without wishing to appear to be a heretic or worse, has
there been any serious attempt in the past to publish professional
ornithological information or Field Guides in a more intuitive/logical
sequence, and if so, who killed it off and why!!!!
Kind regards,
Myles
--------------------------------------------
Birding-Aus is now on the Web at
www.birding-aus.org
--------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message 'unsubscribe
birding-aus' (no quotes, no Subject line)
to
|
