Proposal
(326) to South American
Classification Committee
Elevate the
subspecies pulsatrix of the Spectacled Owl (Pulsatrix perspicillata) to
species
Effect on South American CL: This proposal would
elevate a taxon to species rank that we currently treat as a subspecies.
König et al. (1999) treated the subspecies pulsatrix of
the Spectacled Owl (Pulsatrix perspicillata), which is restricted to
southeastern Brazil and probably extreme northeastern Argentina, as a species
based on its "different vocalisations and very different plumage
patterns". They acknowledged that this form was very poorly known,
including the vocalizations. In fact, the only stated vocal difference
between pulsatrix and perspicillata is that
the former's primary vocalization does not accelerate. No quantification (i.e.,
sample sizes, spectrographs, localities) is provided for documenting that
statement. With regard to plumage differences it is clear that P. s.
pulsatrix differs from the distributionally closer P. p.
perspicillata in being more chocolate brown dorsally, having a greater
extent of chest band, and in having buffy (instead of white) and less extensive
"spectacles". However, it could be argued that the plumage
differences between perspicillata and the Central American (Mexico
to Pacific slope of western Panama) saturata are as great as they are
between perspicillata and pulsatrix. Thus, based solely on
plumage, one might argue that there are three species of Spectacled Owl or one
species that has discrete differences in morphology.
Although König et al. (1999) may well prove correct in elevating
the southeastern Brazilian pulsatrix to species level, I believe it
would be premature to do this without a more thorough vocal analysis, and as
König et al. stated, genetic data are needed to confirm their hypothesis.
Recommendation: Based on the available data, I recommend that
we continue to treat perspicillata as a subspecies. Therefore, I vote
"no" for the elevation of pulsatrix to species.
References:
König, C., F. Weick, and J-H. Becking. 1999. Owls. A guide to the
owls of the world. Pica Press, Sussex, England.
Mark
Robbins, January 2008
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Comments from Remsen: "NO. As Mark outlined, data
are insufficient for making any formal taxonomic change on this one. Hopefully,
assertions about two populations having "different" vocalizations
will never be taken as sufficient evidence for any change without presentation
of actual data."
Comments from Stiles: "NO. I agree with Mark that
current evidence for making this change is insufficient."
Comments from Zimmer: "NO for reasons stated by
Mark. There needs to be more evidence submitted than what is there to justify a
change."
Comments from Nores: "NO, pienso que las razones dadas por Robbins son suficientes
como para considerar el cambio prematuro. Con ese criterio, habría que pasar
una buena parte o la mayor parte de las subespecies a especies. En estos casos,
hay que esperar indudablemente los análisis moleculares."