D'oh
On 4 May 2011 18:50, David James <> wrote:
> John,
>
> I don't think the IOC have split the rainforest subspecies of boobook.
> Confusingly, the IOC list calls Rufous Owl Ninox rufa "Rufous Boobook".
>
> Incidently, I think there are two rainforest forms of Southern Boobook in
> the rainforests of NQ. N. b. lurida is the widely known dark form in the
> upland rainforests of the wet tropics. There is a paler rufous barred form
> like a mini Rufous Owl in the lowland rainforests and forest edges that I
> saw between Cardwell and Innisfail on a few occassions between 10 and 15
> years ago. It doesn't seem to have a name, it is very different from either
> lurida (very dark with a spotted breast) or the dry vegetation form in NQ,
> ocellata (very brown with a streaked breast). I don't know of any
> reference to it in the literature, and perhaps there are no specimens.
> From: John Leonard <>
> To: Birding-aus <>
> Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2011 6:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
>
> I note that the recent IOC version 2.8 list splits the rufous form of
> the Boobook found in north Qld from the non-rainforest form.
>
> :-)
>
> John Leonard
>
> On 4 May 2011 13:00, Dave Torr <> wrote:
>> 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
>> ===============================
>>
>
>
>
> --
> John Leonard
> Canberra
> Australia
> www.jleonard.net
>
> I want to be with the 99,999 other things.
> ===============================
>
> 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
> ===============================
>
>
>
--
John Leonard
Canberra
Australia
www.jleonard.net
I want to be with the 99,999 other things.
===============================
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
===============================
|
