Parrots (8 Viewers)

[Peter Kovalik]

Do you happen to know what is "Chaves et al. (2013)" ?

Daniel, I think Van has accidentally inherited that text from Proposal #593.

:t: Daniel, Richard good catch. Fixed now.

 

[Daniel Philippe]

:t: Daniel, Richard good catch. Fixed now.

Hmm ! this part is still there Peter :

... and barring additional tweaks, removes previous misconceptions on relationships in the genus

 

[Richard Klim]

Hmm ! this part is still there Peter :

The result of adopting a generic approach to proposal writing?

 

[Daniel Philippe]

The result of adopting a generic approach to proposal writing?

Yep ! Van calls this the perils of "copy-paste"

 

[Peter Kovalik]

Proposal (599) to SACC:
Revise classification of the Psittaciformes

 

[viator]

IOC diary

Nov 1 Post proposed splits of Black-fronted Fig Parrot and Dusky-cheeked Fig Parrot from Orange-breasted Fig Parrot

 

[Richard Klim]

Orange-breasted Fig Parrot

IOC diary

Nov 1 Post proposed splits of Black-fronted Fig Parrot and Dusky-cheeked Fig Parrot from Orange-breasted Fig Parrot

IOC World Bird List: Nov 3 Decline Fig Parrot splits: await full study.
www.worldbirdnames.org/updates/update-diary/
www.worldbirdnames.org/updates/proposed-splits/

PS. Next version will evidently be v4.

 

[viator]

IOC World Bird ListS. Next version will evidently be v4.

Strangely the the PS page says 4.0 but the other update pages say draft 4.1. Don't see the point myself in changing from 3 to 4 unless something really major is going to happen (e.g. radical format change in the lists) otherwise stick with 3.x until a good reason

 

[Richard Klim]

IOC World Bird List

Don't see the point myself in changing from 3 to 4 unless something really major is going to happen (e.g. radical format change in the lists) otherwise stick with 3.x until a good reason

www.worldbirdnames.org/updates/update-diary/

Nov 4: Future updates will be aligned to calendar year, e.g. v4.1 – 4.4 (2014)

 

[viator]

Nov 4: Future updates will be aligned to calendar year, e.g. v4.1 – 4.4 (2014)

So zero value whatsoever

 

[Richard Klim]

So zero value whatsoever

It's outstanding value – it's free!

 

[Frank Gill]

The proposed alignment of version number to calendar year has value for bibliographic purposes and especially doi registration, I am told. To your point, our thought also is to schedule major annual revisions - of higher classification, for example - for the Jan update. Comments most welcome.

Thanks also for spotting the consistency problem of 4.0 vs 4.1. V4.0 will be reserved for the "database" element of the doi registration. v4.1-4.5 will refer to "data sets" of that database. I'm on a steep tech learning curve here, so expect this all to evolve in the months ahead.

 

[MJB]

The proposed alignment of version number to calendar year has value for bibliographic purposes and especially doi registration, I am told. To your point, our thought also is to schedule major annual revisions - of higher classification, for example - for the Jan update. Comments most welcome.

Thanks also for spotting the consistency problem of 4.0 vs 4.1. V4.0 will be reserved for the "database" element of the doi registration. v4.1-4.5 will refer to "data sets" of that database. I'm on a steep tech learning curve here, so expect this all to evolve in the months ahead.

Thanks, Frank!:t:
MJB

 

[viator]

The proposed alignment of version number to calendar year has value for bibliographic purposes and especially doi registration, I am told. To your point, our thought also is to schedule major annual revisions - of higher classification, for example - for the Jan update. Comments most welcome.

Thanks also for spotting the consistency problem of 4.0 vs 4.1. V4.0 will be reserved for the "database" element of the doi registration. v4.1-4.5 will refer to "data sets" of that database. I'm on a steep tech learning curve here, so expect this all to evolve in the months ahead.

Thanks for the explanation!

 

[viator]

The proposed alignment of version number to calendar year has value for bibliographic purposes and especially doi registration, I am told. To your point, our thought also is to schedule major annual revisions - of higher classification, for example - for the Jan update. Comments most welcome.

Thanks also for spotting the consistency problem of 4.0 vs 4.1. V4.0 will be reserved for the "database" element of the doi registration. v4.1-4.5 will refer to "data sets" of that database. I'm on a steep tech learning curve here, so expect this all to evolve in the months ahead.

Thanks for the explanation!

 

[Peter Kovalik]

Strigopidae

Rheindt, F. E., Christidis, L., Kuhn, S., de Kloet, S., Norman, J. A. and Fidler, A. (2013), The timing of diversification within the most divergent parrot clade. Journal of Avian Biology. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-048X.2013.00200.x

Abstract

 

[Richard Klim]

Touit parrotlets

Schodde, Bock, Watling & Pacheco 2013. Case 3640 Touit G.R. Gray, 1855 and Prosopeia Bonaparte, 1854 (Aves, PSITTACIDAE): proposed conservation of usage. BZN 70(4): 245–248. [abstract]

 

[Peter Kovalik]

Proposal (595) to SACC: Revise sequence of genera in the New World parrots

October 2013

PASSED (29 Dec 2013)

 

[Richard Klim]

Agapornis lovebirds

Manegold & Podsiadlowski (in press). On the systematic position of the Black-collared Lovebird Agapornis swindernianus (Agapornithinae, Psittaciformes). J Ornithol. [abstract]

 

[Richard Klim]

Arinae

Schweizer, Hertwig & Seehausen (in press). Diversity versus disparity and the role of ecological opportunity in a continental bird radiation. J Biogeogr. [abstract] [supp info]

[supp info includes phylogeny]