From Wikispecies
Latest comment: 2 years ago by DCDuring in topic Dispute
Jump to navigation Jump to search


  • For now, the subfamily classification adopted herein is that of Livezey (1986), except that Merginae and Oxyurinae are treated as subfamiliae, rather than as tribes of Anatinae
  • Livezey is well out of date, with multiple paraphyletic taxa - I'd recommend removing all infrafamilial classification above the rank of genus, until the phylogeny is more completely analysed - MPF (talk) 22:52, 17 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Livezey (1997)'s revised classification might be better, but in the absence of a new classification reflecting molecular data your suggestion might be best. The alternative is the classification in H&M4 (2013), which makes some changes to reflect molecular results.
This classification has been bugging me for a while (I should have read the talk page sooner). The page was created in 2004 with the nine subfamily classification and no source. Anseranatinae was add in 2006 and removed in 2008, neither with a source. A source was first added in 2009, when Stho002 added the Livezey (1986) reference and the unsigned comment above. Looking at the contents of the subfamilies at that time, I agree that Livezey (1986) was the most likely source, with the strange elevation of two tribes, but leaving Aythyini genera in Anatinae. It would be interesting to know the source for this, but I can't find this arrangement anywhere. Jts1882 (talk) 12:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Jts1882: - only just seen your note now (please add a ping|MPF for further contributions!). More info is available, but it is spread between multiple primary research papers, so I'd still favour not having any formal infrafamilial classification above the rank of genus. Most important is to get the genus and species taxonomy updated to IOC 11.2 (particularly Mareca, Sibirionetta and any other recent genus splits that still need creating) - IOC don't list any infrafamilial names, but their list order does follow current evidence of relationships in the family. Most of the important references (Gonzalez et al. 2009, Ottenburghs et al. 2016, etc.) are cited there. - MPF (talk) 23:48, 22 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
A useful resource for avian taxonomy, though not an authoritative source, is Avian Taxonomy in Flux. It IS difficult to follow the twists and turns of taxonomic reassignments. Most definitive sources don't spend a lot of time on sub- and super- ranks, tribes, subgenera, and sections. DCDuring (talk) 18:27, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • Livezey, B.C. 1986. A phylogenetic analysis of recent anseriform genera using morphological characters. Auk 103: 737-754. PDF

Hello fellow editors,

I have just modified 1 external links on Anatidae. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:19, 18 August 2019 (UTC)Reply