Indeed - what is a species? To quote Darwin (who may have known a thing or
two?)
"No one definition has satisfied all naturalists; yet every naturalist knows
vaguely what he means when he speaks of a species. Generally the term
includes the unknown element of a distinct act of creation"
The Guardian reckons there are around 26 different species concepts -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/punctuated-equilibrium/2010/oct/20/3!
I guess we are trying to categorise things which may not always fit into the
neat boxes that scientists desire - indeed as evolution progresses there is
rarely a clear dividing line between the end of one species and the start of
another.
On 4 May 2011 12:27, Tim Dolby <> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> To determine taxonomical status Christidis and Bole use mainly
> morphological and molecular characters, rather than things like topography,
> food, hunting, behaviour, breeding, and vocalisations. According to the
> research carried out by C&B the Sooty and Lesser Sooty are less
> morphologically different that many birds considered the same species. In
> essence the specific status is substantiated by DNA evidence with nucleotide
> substitution in DNA-sequencing variable at subspecific level from zero to
> 1%. Greater differences suggest species status. A good example of this is
> found in Southern Boobook, with birds in Victoria being more morphologically
> divergent from birds in northern NSW than Sooty Owl are from Lesser Sooty
> Owl. In essence it depends on where you draw the line.
>
> Quite clearly subspecies complex are poorly understood and further detailed
> work is required.
>
> Personally I'd hoped that genetics would give us some clear answers when
> determining species status, however quite obviously this is not the case -
> and from reading the comments here - it is still a matter of interpretation.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tim Dolby
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: [
> on behalf of Tony Russel [
>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 12:21 PM
> To: 'Chris Sanderson'
> Cc: 'birding-aus threads';
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
>
> Hallo Chris, I'm not sure I deserved such a condemning response - I
> certainly wasn't complaining about the published taxonomy - merely that I
> choose not to go along with all of it and have in fact moved on without
> some
> of it.
>
> And yes, I do keep the Crimson Rosella Platycercus elegans separate from
> the
> subspecies nigrescens, flaveolus, subadelaidae, fleurieuensis, and
> melanoptera (on KI, and recently also on the tip of Cape Jervis where I
> have
> a property).
>
> I do choose not to adhere slavishly to what the professionals dictate .
> That's not to say they are wrong, just that I choose otherwise. I think
> it's still a free world ?
>
>
>
> Tony
>
>
>
> From: Chris Sanderson
> Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2011 11:18 AM
> To: Tony Russel
> Cc: martin cachard; ; birding-aus threads
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
>
>
>
> Do you all have Adelaide and Yellow Rosellas on your list as separate
> species too? They are pretty distinct from the Crimson Rosellas we have
> locally but are the same species taxonomically also (for now at least, I
> think there's a paper in the works on this). Personally I'll leave
> taxonomy
> to the professionals. If you have complaints, please publish a peer
> reviewed journal article to rectify the taxonomic disparity rather than
> complaining about others who have done good science. Not saying you are
> wrong about the Sooty Owl complex, but C&B is based on the best available
> science at the time of writing, if you want it overturned, fix the science,
> otherwise accept the umpire's decision and move on.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Tony Russel <>
> wrote:
>
> I keep the Sooty and the Lesser Sooty Owls as two separate species. Anyone
> who has seen them knows very well how different they are.
>
> Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> On Behalf Of martin
> cachard
> Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2011 10:10 AM
> To: ; birding-aus threads
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
>
>
>
> Hi Patrick
>
> When you come up to FNQ & hopefully observe the local Lesser Sooty Owl, you
> can't 'officially' count it as a new species tick (unless of course, you
> are yet to see a Sooty Owl further south!!).
>
> BUT, this 'lumping' by C&B 2008 is strongly disputed by many, including
> many
> of us up here more familiar with this bird in the field than some
> taxonomists.
>
> So Patrick, come up here, find & enjoy the bird, record that you've
> observed it, & in time, I'm sure that you will find that this local bird
> will be split again from the Sooty Owl & given the full species recognition
> it deserves. Some of us up here are currently working on this to be
> rectified....but there is much work still to be done on this
> one....(amongst
> some other lumps/splits of FNQ birds).
>
> As for further answers to your questions about what is tickable (or not)
> due
> to a species' status, I'm sure someone else more qualified than me can help
> to explain this to you.
>
> But for my own records list, I just make sure what birds I observe are
> recorded to sub-species level - changes in the taxonomy of our birds, &
> accordingly our official list (whatever the source of it), will continue to
> occur. For now, I keep my records as per the current C&B species list as it
> is defined in 2008 because this is the current official species list,
> like/agree with it or not. I can update my full species list as the changes
> to the official list occur since I have a record of the sub-species I have
> seen & where. I think you will find that most Aust birders do the same
> thing
> or similar.
>
> Someone else I'm certain, will add a better & more scientific explanation
> about your other questions - I, for now, just wanted to put my gripe out
> there about the poor lumping of Lesser Sooty Owl on behalf of several other
> dismayed local FNQ birders !!
>
> Obviously Patrick, as it stands now I haven't got a Lesser Sooty Owl on my
> species list - just 2 sub-species/races of Sooty Owl....
>
> Cheers
>
> Martin Cachard
> Cairns
> 0428 782 808
>
>
>
> > Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 09:11:11 +1000
> > From:
> > To:
> > Subject: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
> >
> > Hi All,
> > After reading Sean Dooley's reply to Paul, I have been trying to figure
> out
> > what happened with the Christidis and Boles list with regards to the
> Lesser
> > Sooty Owl. In the guide books they are a different size and live in
> > different parts of the country, so why is the Lesser Sooty Owl no longer
> > counted as a separate species? Does this mean that if I am lucky enough
> to
> > see the owl formally known as the Lesser Sooty Owl on the Atherton
> > Tableland that I will be seeing the Sooty Owl? Can someone please explain
> > this to me or at least if it makes no sense to others then, what is the
> > official explanation? And I have been trying to figure out the
> conspecific
> > term. C & D still have some species as separate (tickable) but as
> > conspecific. Are they saying that as with the Western Wattlebird and
> Little
> > Wattlebird that at some stage millions of years ago they were one
> species?
> > Thanks,
> > Patrick Scully
> > ===============================
> >
> > 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
> > ===============================
>
> ===============================
>
> 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
> ===============================
>
>
> ===============================
>
> 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
> ===============================
>
>
>
> ===============================
>
> 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
> ===============================
> This email, including any attachment, is intended solely for the use of the
> intended recipient. It is confidential and may contain personal information
> or be subject to legal professional privilege. If you are not the intended
> recipient any use, disclosure, reproduction or storage of it is
> unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please advise the
> sender via return email and delete it from your system immediately. Victoria
> University does not warrant that this email is free from viruses or defects
> and accepts no liability for any damage caused by such viruses or defects.
> ===============================
>
> 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
> ===============================
>
===============================
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
===============================
|
