RafaelMatias
Unknown member
![Portugal Portugal](/styles/images/flags/portugal.gif)
They abbreviated all the last names/surnames instead of the first names. :king:am I missing something? how is that citation wrong? It's pretty common to abbreviate names in references.
They abbreviated all the last names/surnames instead of the first names. :king:am I missing something? how is that citation wrong? It's pretty common to abbreviate names in references.
Uva, V., Päckert, M., Cibois, A., Fumagalli, L., Roulin, A.am I missing something? how is that citation wrong? It's pretty common to abbreviate names in references.
am I missing something? how is that citation wrong? It's pretty common to abbreviate names in references.
Sorry, not at the moment - sci-hub is giving 'article not found'. I'll check again in a couple of days (it often happens like this with newly announced papers).Might be interesting to know whether Tyto maniola occurred until the Late Quarternary (Pleistocene/Holocene border?). So if someone has access to this paper, it would be great to send me a copy.
Sorry, not at the moment - sci-hub is giving 'article not found'. I'll check again in a couple of days (it often happens like this with newly announced papers).
Not really glowing reception by the first couple of comments
Reading the comments (but not re-reading the papers), I was concerned at the generally dismissive approach to possibly quite deep genetic divergence. How to arrange the taxa is subjective (whether species, subspecies or whatever), but I'd suggest any deep genetic divergence requires explanation.Not really glowing reception by the first couple of comments
Niels
I'm not sure geographic distance per se should lead to large mtDNA divergence. Yes if there's some physical break in the population when you'll get drift and founder effects but if there's regular dispersal between populations and individuals "freely" interbreed any divergence should be shallow. You might get difference by distance effects but these would be clinal and not great "breaks" in the phylogeny. Deep divergence suggests reproductive isolation to me.I also cannot find the actual genetic differences published anywhere... the supplemental materials available online don't seem to include them?
Barn Owls are really interesting, and it wouldn't be surprising, to anyone, I don't think, to find that there truly are three species there. There very likely are three species (at least by our human definitions). But it's also fair to say that nothing presently available seems to resolve the issue adequately, even if common sense suggests it's an open-and-shut case. For instance, Colihueque 2015 (link), using mtDNA to study Barn Owl in Chile, found "intraspecific genetic divergence (mean p-distance) was 4.6 to 5.5% for the Common Barn Owl in comparison with specimens from northern Europe and Australasia." However, large mtDNA divergence is to be expected with such a great geographic distance. Large genetic distance
(particularly nuclear) between birds breeding closer together would be a much more incontrovertible argument - but I am not sure any such data has been published?
I also think the question of vocalizations in Barn Owls is interesting. Perhaps, at some point, some more clever computational analysis will uncover patterns that we do not hear - similar to UV plumage details that we do not see.
I just looked it up: on Lord Howe, "birds declined to interbreed".I believe it was the printed HBW that recounted an experiment where some Barn Owls of Australian and American origin was released on the same island location. The experiment ended with the birds dying out and there was speculation it was because the two groups did not recognize each other an belonging to same species? (disclaimer, it is a long time since I read this so I might mis-remember something).
Reading the comments (but not re-reading the papers), I was concerned at the generally dismissive approach to possibly quite deep genetic divergence. How to arrange the taxa is subjective (whether species, subspecies or whatever), but I'd suggest any deep genetic divergence requires explanation.
I also wonder about the importance of vocalisations in barn owls in particular, as I think they're more diurnal than most..?
Not really glowing reception by the first couple of comments
Niels
Yes. The question is how long will it take for someone to get around to do what they hope?Later comments seem to show members "coming around" to a split, but wanting a more complete proposal. I'm guessing that a lot of these were posted after you commented here, Neils. Toward the end:
Comments from Robbins: “”As Van suggested, will hold off for now on voting on this proposal until a new proposal is presented.”
SACC does seem decently fast compared to some committees on creating follow-up proposals. Plus there might be greater pressure to get this done if they are attempting to realign checklists, given that I think American Barn Owl is split from the old world taxa by at least IOC.Yes. The question is how long will it take for someone to get around to do what they hope?
Niels