Heads up: Some or all of the identifications affected by this split may have been replaced with identifications of Ceyx. This happens when we can't automatically assign an identification to one of the output taxa. Review identifications of Ceyx erithaca 2623

Taxonomic Split 45743 (Guardado el 17/01/2020)

This is a retroactive split - Ceyx rufidorsa was added when it should have been split off from Ceyx erithaca. We are now splitting Ceyx erithaca after the fact to sort out existing identifications of Ceyx erithaca that now apply to Ceyx rufidorsa

The eBird/Clements checklist of birds... (Referencia)
Añadido por maxkirsch el 11 de enero de 2019 | Comprometido por loarie el 17 de enero de 2020
dividido en


@rjq and @maxkirsch - can you advise here. Is a retroactive split necessary here? I see that the range of Ceyx erithaca 2623 is wrong. But we can update the range (e.g. with the one on Ceyx erithaca 850880)

but a retroactive split would only be necessary to deal with obs ID'd as Ceyx erithaca 2623 what should have been split off as Ceyx rufidorsa 72646

Clements says Ceyx erithaca is "partially migratory, wintering to the southern Thai-Malay Peninsula and Sumatra" - so are those obs from there obs that should be split off as Ceyx rufidorsa, or are they just migratory Ceyx erithaca?

I guess I'm asking whether we need to split here or whether we can just let IDers sort out confusion between sympatric Ceyx erithaca and Ceyx rufidorsa south of the Isthmus of Kra?

Publicado por loarie hace más de 1 año (Marca)

Still necessary, for similar reasons to the vireo. Please note that range for 850880 is wrong as excludes wintering range, but atlas is correct (erithaca also reaches Borneo, not stated in Clements). Have added an atlas for rufidorsa.

Publicado por rjq hace más de 1 año (Marca)

ok committed

Publicado por loarie hace más de 1 año (Marca)

Agregar un comentario

Acceder o Crear una cuenta para agregar comentarios.