Flag for Taxon: Adelaide Rosella (Subspecies Platycercus elegans adelaidae)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| rfoster | maxkirsch | Adelaide Rosella (Subspecies Platycercus elegans adelaidae) |
Not a valid subspecies name. Cannot be neatly swapped with another subspecies as the 'Adelaide Rosella' pop is a hybrid swarm. Ideally the name should be deleted but a swap with Platycercus elegans (without subspecies epithet) the most pragmatic solution |
Jan. 9, 2018 02:17:30 +0000 | rjq |
Comments
Thanks for the response. It's a can of worms this one. I've been doing some checking - I assumed the Australian Faunal Directory followed the IOC list but, unlike the IOC, it considers filewoodi to be a synonym of ssp elegans. As part of what is essentially a ring species, the subspecific name for the 'Adelaide Rosella' is particularly vexed. It strikes me the whole species should be renamed the 'Variable Rosella' doing away with names for the regional variants (Crimson, Yellow and Adelaide Rosella) and with the artifice of pinning subspecies names on them (but I know that would go down like a lead balloon with the ornithology community, let alone the general public who are so familiar with them...).
The following paper (which I don't have access to) apparently (per the IOC subspecies updates) argues that adelaidae should be recognized after all -
Black A, G Johnston, D Donato, G Dare & B Blaylock. 2022. Plumage diversity in the Adelaide Rosella: a case for taxonomic revision. South Australian Ornithologist 47 (1): 1-21.
The subspecies is still recognized by Clements, which iNat follows (but Clements is the only major taxonomic authority that still recognizes adelaidae [and doesn't recognize fleurieuensis or filewoodi] - presumably those revisions have just been overlooked; I'll contact those in charge of Clements to make sure adelaidae is considered for deletion in this year's update)