This ability to match and align taxa also highlights another revolutionary process that BOW has been able to use. Further, with the use of the group label, users can still track their observations and media using eBird, and search observations down the group level so no data will be lost in the alignment process. Information in species accounts is still displayed for both taxonomic units under the group concept. This alignment with our group concept ensures that no information on any of these differently recognized species is lost. When there was disagreement in the two lists, we were able to directly match a BirdLife/HBW Checklist species with its Clements group counterpart. In order to fully align the BirdLife/HBW taxonomy with that of Clements, then, we utilized the group concept. The group is not a formal taxonomic unit, but often represents a potential future split of a subspecies, or group of subspecies, that already have been split by other authorities. A “group” is a distinctive (field identifiable) collection of subspecies (a polytypic group), or, in some cases, a single subspecies (in other words, a monotypic group – which we recognize is an oxymoron, but please bear with us). One approach adopted early on by eBird was to recognize a special category, the eBird subspecies group. Consequently, Clements has been grappling for years with the challenge of reconciling taxonomic disagreements. The Clements Checklist was developed to support eBird, the world’s largest biodiversity-related citizen-science project, which compiles bird observations and associated rich media from around the world. Fortunately, we had some preparation for this challenge.
#Handbook of the birds of the world alive how to#
When we first began working on BOW, one of our first tasks was to figure out how to align the BirdLife/HBW taxonomy with the Clements taxonomy. Due to some of those difficulties of using the BSC, HBW Alive, for example, relied on a taxonomy developed by BirdLife International and The Handbook of Birds of the World. The BSC usually works well, which is one reason why it is so widely accepted, but the application of the BSC to certain situations, such as populations that are allopatric (i.e., not in geographic contact), or to populations that hybridize when in contact, leaves more room for interpretation this is where one sees the greatest differences between Clements and other taxonomies. As is true of most other major global avian checklists, Clements follows the Biological Species Concept (BSC). BOW uses a single taxonomy, the eBird/Clements Checklist (Clements), across all of its content. Each of these founding projects differed, to a greater or a lesser degree, in taxonomy. BOW had its origins in three separate projects: The Handbook of the Birds of World Alive (HBW Alive), Birds of North America (BNA), and Neotropical Birds (NB). Birds of the World (BOW) is a powerful resource for understanding the diversity of avian life.
0 kommentar(er)
