|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Dec 14, 2009 13:46:58 GMT
Hello experts everybody! Anybody care to explain to newbies like me the following terms and concepts?  The more I read about birds, the more I am confused! So here: - What is a subspecies? When do you consider one a subspecies? - what is a race? How can you identify it without a guide like the KG? - I have read that sometimes the birds names differ across authors and references, why is that? - Bird calls in written format, how do you play it in your head? (e.g. Scale Feathered Malkoha's explosive quizzzzzzzzz-kid or whizzzzzzz-kid) I am hoping this thread enlightens the newbies as they go through either lack of information or information overload. At times, I just dont know how to assess how useful information are when it comes to birds! |
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Sarenas on Dec 14, 2009 14:51:19 GMT
I'll take a non-expert crack at this: The term subspecies and race are used interchangeably. There is a nominate race which is usually the bird that is first described/discovered and has usually just two latin names (e.g. Aethopyga flagrans for the Flaming Sunbird), when another similar bird, in another area is found that exhibits a notable difference in morphology, call, etc. it is then classified as a subspecies (e.g. Flaming Sunbird of Negros - Aethopyga flagrans daphoenonota). There are also cases where a subspecies is eventually determined to merit full species status and hence usually loses the middle latin name (e.g. the Philippine Serpent-Eagle; from Spilornis cheela holospilus to Spilornis holospilus) One can discern which race one has seen by the location (mostly), unless the bird has an endemic or resident race, and then a migrant race occurs there at certain times. In those cases, one's skills in bird observation/photography will later show you which bird it is. caveat: this is my amateur take on this and could be wrong on some points  |
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Dec 14, 2009 23:02:52 GMT
I'll take a non-expert crack at this: The term subspecies and race are used interchangeably. There is a nominate race which is usually the bird that is first described/discovered and has usually just two latin names (e.g. Aethopyga flagrans for the Flaming Sunbird), when another similar bird, in another area is found that exhibits a notable difference in morphology, call, etc. it is then classified as a subspecies (e.g. Flaming Sunbird of Negros - Aethopyga flagrans daphoenonota). There are also cases where a subspecies is eventually determined to merit full species status and hence usually loses the middle latin name (e.g. the Philippine Serpent-Eagle; from Spilornis cheela holospilus to Spilornis holospilus) One can discern which race one has seen by the location (mostly), unless the bird has an endemic or resident race, and then a migrant race occurs there at certain times. In those cases, one's skills in bird observation/photography will later show you which bird it is. caveat: this is my amateur take on this and could be wrong on some points Now that to me is so clear and so sharp and full of details! Well explained. No nose bleeding here! Thanks Ivan. |
|
|
|
Post by Edu Lorenzo Jr on Dec 14, 2009 23:14:38 GMT
same here.. can I add one thing that is also getting me confused? I will place here how I understand these terms and please put correction/s or add the correct meaning. If I am in the Philippines, what makes a bird a... migrant - a bird that does not nest here, just comes here for the winter endemic - a bird that can only be found in the Phil. (here I am confused when a sub specie of a bird is Endemic to Luzon) almost/near endemic - almost as confusing as the endemic? vagrant - does not belong where the bird was seen/spotted (but aren't migrants like these?) Or does this refer to habitat? introduced - brought to the Phil with human intervention and the intent to breed them here. Is there an "accidentally introduced" variety or are those the vagrants? resident - pays rent?  are these, those birds who actually "live" in a small area? If so, then any bird can be a resident of anywhere yes? Or does it have to show that it nests and breeds there to be a resident?  |
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Sarenas on Dec 15, 2009 5:11:18 GMT
I missed Toto's other queries, so here:
There are no rules almost when it comes to common names and bird experts will adopt or create names that they see fit and it will be up to history to choose, by usage, which expert to follow. There is now a trend to replace common names bearing a discoverer/patron/expedition leader's name. (e.g. Steere's Pitta to Azure-breasted Pitta). This is being pushed by taxonomists because in some places, like China, all the common names of their endemics are named after white people which obviously carry colonial undertones.
I share your frustation in the use of phonetics in Kennedy and hardly learn them. But, later in the field, once you hear the bird and sort of remember its call, the phonetics are quite a helpful memory aid.
For Edu:
Even in the singular, the word used is subspecies. When said to be endemic to Luzon, it means that it can only be found in Luzon.
A near-endemic is one that has a limited breeding population just outside of Philippine territory (e.g. Blue-naped Parrot which occurs in some islands of Indonesia). I prefer the term Essentially Endemic.
A vagrant is an accidental record of a bird that is not supposed to regularly occur in that area.
Introduced birds can be accidental or intentional, but they are not vagrants.
A resident breeds here, but that the species also occurs outside the Philippines.
caveat still holds ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Edu Lorenzo Jr on Dec 15, 2009 7:54:11 GMT
hi Ivan,
thanks for the primary responses. So an endemic on one part of the country, if also found in other parts, is endemic only to that part? Like the YVBs in Luzon, they are endemic to Luzon and are considered as a subspecies? Correct?
In the naming part, this is really new region to me. Sometimes I invent names also when, in the absence of internet and photo-sharing, I send out SMS to those I know with descriptions that I think describes the bird like "Scaly breasted Shrike" when I first saw a female Brown Shrike with the pre-winter plumage or a "yellow-vented warbler" to describe a lemon-throated warbler.
So, in a nutshell (please also correct this notion of mine) the name of the bird does not necessarily have to be descriptive of the bird's habits or physical properties. I mean, a flycatcher does not necessarily mean its diet is strictly flies and same goes with flowerpeckers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Sarenas on Dec 15, 2009 13:50:08 GMT
The YVB is not considered an endemic since it occurs throughout SE Asia but, yes according to KG we do have several endemic subspecies of this bird which means that they are different from those in, say, Thailand. But not until taxonomists propose and the scientific community agrees by consensus, shall it become a Philippine endemic. Endemic subspecies naturally do just stay within their respective ranges. For the Luzon YVB, it is also the subsp. for a lot of the Visayas. This is all in KG, btw. You can invent names but maybe that will just confuse you more. Photos or notes are better when encountering an unknown bird, then try to check KG, our online guide, Oriental Bird Images for comparison. If you're still stumped, ask the experts. Yup, common names do not fully describe what a bird is about. There are some forest kingfishers that do not even know about fish |
|
The more I read about birds, the more I am confused!
are these, those birds who actually "live" in a small area? If so, then any bird can be a resident of anywhere yes? Or does it have to show that it nests and breeds there to be a resident?