Ian and tweeters,

Interesting re Juncos, but also puzzling.

I am surprised that Rising thinks the AOU Committee might respond to a
"proposal" that he and Barrowclough suggest to them. It has been AOU policy
since the Dark Ages that only "published" material be considered by the AOU
Committee. They ignore theses and other "unpublished" information. But AOU
Committee membership does change over time, so maybe the policy can change
too. Only two members of the Committee at the time of the last AOU
Check-list (1998) are still on the Committee, and there are 6 new members,
including RISING!

But if they allow unpublished info to be considered, they will probably be
faced with similar unpublished info on other species groups, and who knows
where that may lead.

Regarding, Barrowclough saying Miller (1941) was basically right, I suspect
that is a bit of an overstatement. Miller concluded there were 7 species in
the then defined AOU area (North American north of Mexico, plus Baja Calif,
Bermuda, and Greenland), plus three more species south of that in Mexico
and Central America. The 1957 edition of the AOU Check-list followed
Miller's lead. But that was surely too many species. Some of his species
seemed to freely interbreed. Since that time opinion shifted, under the
influence of Ernst Mayr of Harvard, to treating Juncos as 3 semispecies
(i.e., 3 forms that barely reach the species level of differentiation and
reproductive isolation). But that may be too few. Mayr was an archetypical
lumper; he never saw a lump he didn't like, to borrow and butcher a phrase.


Anyway, I suspect what Barrowclough meant was that "several" [but not all]
of Miller's species that Mayr rejected are really good species. Rising
suggests separation of White-winged, Gray-headed, Oregon, and Pink-sided
forms as separate species. Preliminarily, I might agree with the first
three, but even Miller did not think the Pink-sided form (mearnsi) was a
distinct species, so it's difficult to see why it should be. [Even Mayr
felt Miller knew more about Juncos than than anyone ever had or probably
ever would.] Rising cites no evidence on that point (that the Pink-sided
is specifically distinct), but perhaps he knows of some.

I would guess that 5 (to 7) species are possible for North and Central
America (Miller had 10, Mayr 3). Anyway, it will be interesting to see how
things develop.


Dick

Dr.Richard E. Johnson
Conner Museum &
School of Biological Sciences
Washington State University
Pullman, WA 99164-4236
johnsonre at wsu.edu




>HI ALL:
> Food for thought!
>
>Ian "Birdbooker" Paulsen
>Bainbridge Is., WA, USA
>ipaulsen at linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us
>"Rallidae all the way"
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 21:57:49 -0500
>From: James D. Rising <rising at ZOO.UTORONTO.CA>
>To: BIRDCHAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>Subject: [BIRDCHAT] Juncos
>
>George Barrowclough of the Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. has been working on
>juncos for years and knows them far better than anyone else.
>Unfortunately, he has published little of this, and we've sort have been
>waiting for him. I regularly see George at meetings and talk about
>juncos and ask him to publish, or at least to make specific
>recommendations that the AOU can study. He hasn't done this yet, and
>last summer told me that basically Miller (1941) "had it right." I plan
>this summer to dig out Miller and study it, put together a proposal, and
>pass it by George, then submit it to the committee. DOn't have any idea
>about how that would be received. Some comments (totally off the top of
>my head)
>
>Dark-eyed and Yellow-eyed are very different--should not be lumped under
>any circumstances. Differences in behavior and song in addition to other
>things.
>
>Within Dark-eyed:
>
>1) One or 2 old records of hybridization between Gray-headed x
>White-winged. The habitat where the hybrids were collected has been
>destroyed and the ranges no longer overlap (i.e. they are allopatric now,
>and probably always essentially were). Split White-wing.
>
>2) Few hybrids of Pink-sided and Gray-headed, on one hand, and between
>Gray-headed and Oregon on the other hand. Limited areas. Probably split
>them all.
>
>3) Oregon and Slate-colored--apparently there is a massive hybrid swarm
>in northern British Columbia ("cismontanus"). Probably recognize them as
>2 subspecies of the same thing, with cismontanus as a broad zone of
>intergradation. Lump all of those subspecies of Oregon (I'm ignoring
>Mexico, but the one from the Cape region of Baja is very distinct,
>etc.).
>
>Again, this is unanalyzed and unstudied--and perhaps nothing is going to
>be done.
>
>Also waiting for some more data on the Red Crossbills to be published.
>
>
>
>Name: Jim Rising
>Mail: Dept. Zoology, Univ. Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 3G5
> rising at zoo.utoronto.ca or rising at zoo.toronto.edu
> Phone (416) 978-3482 FAX (416) 978-8532
>
>For BirdChat guidelines, go to
>http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
>For BirdChat archives or to change your subscription options, go to
>http://listserv.arizona.edu/lsv/www/birdchat.html
>To contact a listowner, send a message to
>mailto:birdchat-request at listserv.arizona.edu