AASAGACITY.NET

Knowledge is Empowering

Even More Species, judged between 1998 and 2012, non-passerines.

5 points between taxa to make a different species.



Geographic separation/Chance
of cross-breeding

Physical Differences

Voice

Song/Calls

Habitat preference
Behaviour
including
migration
Known
DNA differences

Total Points
sp
or
subsp

Scoring 0-1-2-3 0-1-2-3 0-1-2-3 0-2-3-4 0-1-2-3 0-2-4-5






A SENSIBLE SPECIES DEFINITION
(Anderson 1998 and 2012)
Species are populations that are interbreeding and which are reproductively isolated from other such populations by their reproductive isolating mechanisms.
These may include -
�  geographic separation / chance of cross-breeding;
�  morphological and plumage differences;
�  voice;
�  habitat preference;
�  behavioural differences such as nest-building, social grouping or migration;
� consistent DNA differences.
Each mechanisms can be weighted according to the strength of difference from a recognised species and given a score between 0 and 5; a total of 5 would give the taxon species status.
0
 
 
 
 
 
1
 
 
 
 
 

2

 
 
  
 
3




4





5




Broad hybrid zone





e.g. Narrow and stable hybrid zone,
or good chance of interbreeding.
e.g. (1.1),(1.5),


e.g A small chance of interbreeding.
e.g.(1.3)


No chance of interbreeding.
e.g. (1.2). (1.4),
Physically little difference
e.g. (2-1).



Physically noticeably different,
e.g. (2-1), (2.2)



Physically  very different.



Physically completely different.
Not so different voice range and/or song phrases.



Noticeably different voice range and/or song phrases,
3.1,3.2,3.3,


Completely different voice range and/or song phrases.
Similar or slightly different habitat preferences.








Noticeably different habitats.







Completely different habitats.
Slightly different behaviour.






Noticeably different behaviour.





Very different behaviour.
DNA differences are barely measurable.




DNA differences are measurable.



DNA differences are larger.

DNA differences are large enough to probably have non-viable offspring.

DNA differences are so great that viable inter-breeding would be impossible.
e.g. (6.1)



A Review of Particular Species, Using the Sensible Species Concept and Evaluating the Taxon as Above, in the Systematic Order of the World List.
Comparison of a Universally Accepted Species with Other Taxon such as
a Subspecies

Geographic separation/Chance
of cross-breeding

Physical differences
Voice

Song/Calls

Habitat preference

Behaviour
differences

DNA differences

Total Points
sp
or
subsp
CHARADRIFORMES
  SUB-ORDER LARI

Chroicocephalus n. novaehollandiae Aust.
Chroicocephalus n. scopulinus New Zealand

Larus argentatus European Herring Gull
Larus sithsonianus American Herring Gull

Larus sithsonianus American Herring Gull
Larus vegae Eastern Siberian Gull

Sterna h. hirundo    Eurasian Common Tern
Sterna h. longipennis Eastern Common Tern
SUB-ORDER SCOLAPACI
Numenius p. phaeopus Whimbrel
Numenius p. hudsonicus Hudsonian Whimbrel 
SUB-ORDER CHARADRI
Haematopus ostralegus Eurasian Oystercatcher
Haematopus finschi Sth Is Oystercatcher 

Haematopus ostralegus Eurasian Oystercatcher
Haematopus longirostris Pied Oystercatcher

Haematopus longirostris Pied Oystercatcher
Haematopus finschi Sth Is Oystercatcher 

Haematopus unicolor Variable Oystercatcher
Haematopus chathamensis Chatham Oystercatcher

Himantopus h. himantopus   Black-winged Stilt
Himantopus h. leucocephalus Pied Stilt

Himantopus himantopus Black-winged Stilt
Himantopus mexicanus Black-necked Stilt

Himantopus mexicanus Black-necked Stilt
Himantopus melanurus White-backed Stilt

Himantopus h. leucocephalus Pied Stilt
Himantopus h. noaezelandiaeBlack Stilt
All pied stilts are one species, Pied Stilt.
Vanellus m. miles
Masked Lapwing
Vanellus m. novaehollandiaeMasked Lapwing
COLUMBIFORMES
Macropygia a. amboinensis Brown Pigeon
Macropygia a. phasianella Aust. Brown Pigeon

Chalcopaps i. indica
 Emerald Dove
Chalcopaps i. longirostris  Pacific Em. Dove
Aust. Rock Pigeons -
Petrophassa a. albipennis White-quilled
Petrophassa a. boothi White-quilled
Petrophassa a. rufipennis Chestnut-quilled

Ptilonopus c. cinctus  (Black)Banded Fruit Dove
Ptilonopus c. alligator Banded Fruit Dove

Ducula b. bicolor
  Pied Fruit Pigeon
Ducula b. luctuosa Silver-tipped Fruit Pigeon
Ducula b. melanura (Moluccas Fruit Pigeon)
Ducula b. spilorrhoa Torresian Fruit Pigeon
Ducula b. subflavescens Yellowish/Bismarcks
Ducula b. constans  (Kimberley Fruit Pigeon)
Test results by judging the taxon in a different order. e.g. 
 Ducula b. spilorrhoa Torresian Fruit Pigeon
Ducula b. subflavescens Yellowish Fruit Pigeon
Ducula b. bicolor  Pied Fruit Pigeon
PSITTACIFORMES
Captylorhyncus b. banksiiRed-tailed Cockatoo
Captylorhyncus b. samuelli

Cactua tenuirostris  Long-billed Corella
Cactua pastinator  Western Corella

Cactua s. sulphurea  Yellow-crested Cockatoo
Cactua s. citrinocristata Citron-crested Cockato

The Rainbow Lorikeet complex.
Trichoglossus h. haematodus (Coconut) S Molucc-N Caledoni
Trichoglossus h. moluccanus (Rainbow) Cape York - S Aust
Trichoglossus h. rubritorquis (Red-collared) Kisar-Cape York
Trichoglossus h. forsteni (Sunset) W Lesser Sundas
Trichoglossus h. weberi (Leaf) Flores
Trichoglossus h. capistratus (Marigold) E Lesser Sundas
Trichoglossus h. rosenbergii (Shawl-collared) Biak

Until the IOC published version 3.1 there have been 7 species of Trichoglossus recognised for nearly the last 20 years. IOC 3.1 has followed the proposed split of Trichoglossus haemotodus into 7 more species. Accepting these splits on the basis of differences in feather tracts (most of these subspecies interbreed) puts Australasian ornithology back 80 years and does little for the credibility of the IOC. 

The white-cheeked Rosella group -
Platycerus adscitus  (Latham 1790) Pale-headed Rosella
Platycerus eximius (Shaw 1792) Eastern Rosella
Platycerus venustus (Kuhl 1820)Northern Rosella
And changing the judging order to test the results -
Platycerus eximiusEastern Rosella
Platycerus adscitus Pale-headed Rosella
Platycerus venustus Northern Rosella
And again -
Platycerus venustus Northern Rosella
Platycerus eximiusEastern Rosella
Platycerus adscitus Pale-headed Rosella
In pairs -
Platycerus adscitus Pale-headed Rosella
Platycerus eximiusEastern Rosella
again -
Platycerus adscitus  Pale-headed Rosella
Platycerus venustus Northern Rosella
and reversed -
Platycerus venustus Northern Rosella
Platycerus adscitus Pale-headed Rosella
The species uncertainty portrayed here reflects the real situation. There have long been questions over whether Eastern and Pale-headed Rosellas are really separate species owing the the fact that they have a broad hybrid zone where the one colour morph has dominant genes so all young fledge the same as ?Eastern.
Also, the differences between Pale-headed and Northern are barely enough to declare them separate species. But clearly, Eastern Rosella could be a different species to Northern Rosella. And although it seems prudent to recognise three different species in the meantime, further research may indicate a cline is evident with Pale-headed being an intermediary subspecies.
Cyanopica c. cooki Iberian Magpie
1.
Cyanopica cyanus Azure-winged Magpie


0
2


0
2
 
0

1

0

1
 
0
1

0

3

0

2

0

2

0

2

0

1

0

2-3

0

1

0

0
  
0
1

0
1-2

0 
1

0
1
2

0 
2

0 
1
1
2
2
2

0 

0-1
1-2

0

1

0

3

0

2

 

0
1
1
1
1
1
1











0

0
2

0

0
3

0

3
2

0

0

0

2

0

2













0
3
 


0
0

0
0

0

0-1

0

1

0
0-1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

0

1

0

0-1

0

1

0

1
1

0

1

0
1
1
1
1
1

0
0
1

0
1

0
2

0
1



0
1
1
1
3
1-2
1











0

3
2

0

3
3

0

3
2

0

3

0

2

0

2













0

0-1


0
0

0
0

0
1

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0-1

0
0

0
0-1

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0
0

0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0



0
0
0
0
0
0
0











0
0-1
0-1

0
0-1
0-1

0
0-1
0-1

0
0-1

0
0-1

0
0-1













0
0


0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
1

0
1

0
2

0
0-1

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0
 
0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0
0

0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0



0
0
0
0
0
0
0











0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0













0
0


0

0

0
0

0

0

0

0
 
0
1

0

2

0

2

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0
0

0

0

0

0
0

0

0

0

0
0
0-1
0
0

0
0
0-1

0

0

0

0

0

0



0
0
0
0
0
0
0











0

0
0

0

0
0

0

0
0

0

0

0

0

0

0













0

0


0

0

0
5

0

0-1

0

0

0
0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0-1

0

0

0
0

0

0

0

0
0

0

0

0

0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0

0

0

0

0

0

0



0
0
0
0
0
0
0











0

1
0

0

1
0

0

0
0

0

1

0

0

0

0













0

2


0
2

0
7

0
2-4

0
2

0
2-3

0
6

0
5

0
6

0
3-4

0
1

0
2-4

0
1

0
2-4

0
2

0
1-3

0
2

0
2
3

0
3

0
2
2
3-4
3
3

0
0-1
2-4

0
2

0
5

0
3



0
2
2
2
4
2-3
2











0
4-5
4-5

0
4-5
5-6

0
6-7
4-5

0
4-5

0
4-5

0
4-5













0
5-6


sp
subsp

sp
sp

sp
subsp


sp
subsp


sp
subsp


sp

sp

sp
sp

sp
sp

sp
subsp


sp
subsp

sp
subsp


sp
subsp

sp
subsp


sp
subsp

sp
subsp


sp
subsp


sp
subsp

subsp

sp
subsp

sp
subsp

subsp
subsp
subsp
subsp

subsp
subsp

sp

sp
subsp


sp
sp

sp
subsp




sp

subsp
subsp
subsp
subsp
subsp
subsp











sp

sp?
sp?

sp
sp?
sp

sp
sp
sp?

sp
sp?

sp
sp?

sp
sp?














sp
sp
 
1. BLI: Cyanopica cyana (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) was split into C. cyana and C. cooki by Fok et al. (2002) on the basis of minor (subspecific-type) morphological differences and a 6.06% difference in mtDNA, but this treatment has not been adopted by the BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group. This is because although this level of genetic differentiation is indeed high, the BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group does not consider it in itself sufficient grounds for assuming a species-level distinction.  WL thinks that with the high mtDNA difference plus the vast distance between the taxa, the combined differences are more than adequate to declare separate species.