Specimens examined are designated as to collection in which catalogued
by the following abbreviations: USNM, the United States National Museum;
AMNH, the American Museum of Natural History; MCZ, the Museum of
Comparative Zoölogy; and KMNH, the University of Kansas Museum of
Natural History. Average and extreme measurements of specimens are
usually listed in tables; unless otherwise indicated, measurements are
in millimeters, and are of adult specimens. The wings have been measured
by flattening them on a ruler. Weights are in grams. Unless otherwise
indicated, descriptions of the birds have been written by the author.
Descriptions of shore birds are not given; for these the reader may
refer to Mayr (1945a:28-47) where characters useful for identification
of the birds in the field also are given. The writer is especially
indebted to Dr. Ernst Mayr for making available the descriptions of
Micronesian birds made by Miss Cardine Bogert, especially those dealing
with color of the irides, feet, and bill. Color terms in quotation marks
refer to those in Ridgway (1912).
In dealing with insular forms the criterion of intergradation as
indicative of subspecies cannot be applied as it can in kinds of birds
on the mainland which have geographically continuous distributions.
Instead, degree of difference in combination with geographic position
plus other factors such as degree of variation in the geographic races
of the same species or a related species on continental areas are used
in deciding whether two closely related kinds are subspecies or full
species. Many kinds of birds in the islands are modified but little from
island to island (examples, _Rhipidura rufifrons_, _Aplonis opacus_,
_Ducula oceanica_, and _Myzomela cardinalis_), and can be treated as
subspecies. Others show much variability from island to island and it is
uncertain whether they should be treated as subspecies or as separate
species (examples, _Myiagra oceanica_, _Zosterops cinerea_, _Rukia_, and
possibly _Acrocephalus luscinia_). Decisions on generic status are
equally difficult to make. In many cases the experience and judgment of
the taxonomist may be the only criteria by which he can decide whether a
bird is different enough to be considered as a distinct genus. This
"human element" has caused some disagreement. Knowing whether the bird
is to be considered as a distinct genus or instead merely as a species
may not be as important as knowing its correct phylogenetic
relationship. The circumstance that variation in these insular birds is
in general less predictable than in mainland birds adds, I think, to the
pleasure inherent in the classification of the variations.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account