<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Welcome back Myrtle Warbler?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 22:59:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laurent</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-3604</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Laurent]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 12:05:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-3604</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[6 months later, I am just reading this post, and feel somehow confused by this discussion about the importance of hybridization for this species. Reading all this interesting stuff, I realize that the frequency and geographical range of the hybrids is an important criteria.

But what&#039;s about golden-winged and blue-winged warblers? I&#039;ve seen far more hybrids of the two than pure golden-winged warblers in my home state of Michigan. However, they are considered as distinctive species.  I realize I am very inexperienced in biology in general, but I just don&#039;t get it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>6 months later, I am just reading this post, and feel somehow confused by this discussion about the importance of hybridization for this species. Reading all this interesting stuff, I realize that the frequency and geographical range of the hybrids is an important criteria.</p>
<p>But what&#8217;s about golden-winged and blue-winged warblers? I&#8217;ve seen far more hybrids of the two than pure golden-winged warblers in my home state of Michigan. However, they are considered as distinctive species.  I realize I am very inexperienced in biology in general, but I just don&#8217;t get it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kirk</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-2657</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kirk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:06:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-2657</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jochen hit the nail on the head so I&#039;ll just second what he said. It is your list, do it how you want. Some people count birds they hear, some don&#039;t. Some people count birds they see through bird banding, some don&#039;t. If it is your list then it needs to be personally satisfying to you. I&#039;ve always had both myrtle and Audubon warblers on my life list and don&#039;t really care what the AOU has on their list. I also have both slate-colored juncos and Oregon juncos on my list. I was in a completely different part of the country and saw a very different looking bird. It doesn&#039;t really matter to me if they hybridize. I still wanted to see it and once I saw it it went on my list of birds I&#039;ve seen. The debate is very interesting on the scientific level but once it becomes political I lose interest. The AOU and IOC have their lists, I have mine.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jochen hit the nail on the head so I&#8217;ll just second what he said. It is your list, do it how you want. Some people count birds they hear, some don&#8217;t. Some people count birds they see through bird banding, some don&#8217;t. If it is your list then it needs to be personally satisfying to you. I&#8217;ve always had both myrtle and Audubon warblers on my life list and don&#8217;t really care what the AOU has on their list. I also have both slate-colored juncos and Oregon juncos on my list. I was in a completely different part of the country and saw a very different looking bird. It doesn&#8217;t really matter to me if they hybridize. I still wanted to see it and once I saw it it went on my list of birds I&#8217;ve seen. The debate is very interesting on the scientific level but once it becomes political I lose interest. The AOU and IOC have their lists, I have mine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-2489</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:08:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-2489</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Nate-  Maybe the best answer to your question is in this Condor paper from 1937: http://bit.ly/98x4mq  The author looked at 600 specimens, which seem to have been mostly collected in the winter outside the hybrid zone, and decided that 9 of them had mixed ancestry. In some of the 9 cases, this was just based on the extent of white in the tail, which I think is more variable within each species than he realized. So, 9/600 or 1.5% is probably an overestimate of hybrid frequency in the general population, even if you call anything with a trace of mixed appearance a &quot;hybrid.&quot;  To get at it another way, the hybrid zone has an area of about 200,000 km^2, and the species range is about 10,000,000 km^2. If all the birds in the hybrid zone were hybrids and population density were uniform, hybrid frequency would be 2%. I&#039;m pretty surprised how well those two estimates agree, given the problems with each.

Lots of pure Myrtles take a western migration route; I regularly saw mixed flocks of Myrtles and Audubons passing through Vancouver in March and April. For Audubons that show up in the east, I&#039;d love to know how often they&#039;re actually hybrids. On the one hand, there are orders of magnitude more Audubons than hybrids in the world, but on the other hand, migratory direction has a big genetic component so a hybrid could be  more likely to migrate eastward than a pure Audubons. Hybrids can be pretty hard to identify unless you have the bird in the hand, or unless it&#039;s a breeding-plumage male, which probably is a big part of the reason why you don&#039;t have a lot of sightings reported.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Nate-  Maybe the best answer to your question is in this Condor paper from 1937: <a href="http://bit.ly/98x4mq" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/98x4mq</a>  The author looked at 600 specimens, which seem to have been mostly collected in the winter outside the hybrid zone, and decided that 9 of them had mixed ancestry. In some of the 9 cases, this was just based on the extent of white in the tail, which I think is more variable within each species than he realized. So, 9/600 or 1.5% is probably an overestimate of hybrid frequency in the general population, even if you call anything with a trace of mixed appearance a &#8220;hybrid.&#8221;  To get at it another way, the hybrid zone has an area of about 200,000 km^2, and the species range is about 10,000,000 km^2. If all the birds in the hybrid zone were hybrids and population density were uniform, hybrid frequency would be 2%. I&#8217;m pretty surprised how well those two estimates agree, given the problems with each.</p>
<p>Lots of pure Myrtles take a western migration route; I regularly saw mixed flocks of Myrtles and Audubons passing through Vancouver in March and April. For Audubons that show up in the east, I&#8217;d love to know how often they&#8217;re actually hybrids. On the one hand, there are orders of magnitude more Audubons than hybrids in the world, but on the other hand, migratory direction has a big genetic component so a hybrid could be  more likely to migrate eastward than a pure Audubons. Hybrids can be pretty hard to identify unless you have the bird in the hand, or unless it&#8217;s a breeding-plumage male, which probably is a big part of the reason why you don&#8217;t have a lot of sightings reported.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-2483</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 03:05:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-2483</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Alan - awesome! Thanks for responding. I appreciate the info the on the levels of admixture in the hybrid zone. I can&#039;t wait to read your newer paper. Oh, and for what its worth - you guys (the Irwin lab) are awesome - I really like all of the work you&#039;ve been doing. I met Darren at the Laramie meeting and was considering his lab a good choice for grad school once upon a time.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alan &#8211; awesome! Thanks for responding. I appreciate the info the on the levels of admixture in the hybrid zone. I can&#8217;t wait to read your newer paper. Oh, and for what its worth &#8211; you guys (the Irwin lab) are awesome &#8211; I really like all of the work you&#8217;ve been doing. I met Darren at the Laramie meeting and was considering his lab a good choice for grad school once upon a time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-2481</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nate]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:43:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-2481</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Alan- Really great stuff.  Thanks for commenting!

How often are these intermediate birds reported outside the contact zone?  I assume they get swamped by the far greater numbers of typical Audubon&#039;s and Myrtles in their wintering range, but I rarely hear about these birds showing up among the general population of YRWAs in places where they winter.  Do they associate with the subspecies they are most similar too?  Or do intermediate birds tend to segregate themselves into their own groups?  Are reports of Myrtle Warblers in the west or Audubon&#039;s in the east more or less likely to be intermediates than pure subspecies?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Alan- Really great stuff.  Thanks for commenting!</p>
<p>How often are these intermediate birds reported outside the contact zone?  I assume they get swamped by the far greater numbers of typical Audubon&#8217;s and Myrtles in their wintering range, but I rarely hear about these birds showing up among the general population of YRWAs in places where they winter.  Do they associate with the subspecies they are most similar too?  Or do intermediate birds tend to segregate themselves into their own groups?  Are reports of Myrtle Warblers in the west or Audubon&#8217;s in the east more or less likely to be intermediates than pure subspecies?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-2479</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:01:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-2479</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A couple of comments to add to this, as an author of the most recent article... 
 
&quot; &#039; and genetic similarities are due to incomplete lineage sorting rather than to gene flow.&#039;
I’m not convinced of that, as disentangling gene flow from lineage sorting is almost impossible and most of the time authors just make an inference about it being one or the other.&quot;

You&#039;re right, and I think the IOC misinterpreted what we wrote on that subject in the paper. We didn&#039;t present any evidence to distinguish between those two options for the genetic loci that weren&#039;t strongly differentiated, and raised incomplete lineage sorting only as a possible alternative to ongoing gene flow as an explanation of genetic similarity at most markers. 

&quot;I can&#039;t find any data right now on the actual frequency of hybrids versus &quot;pure&quot; across the transect (except the reference to one of the earliest papers on the zone which found nearly all individuals at the center have some hybrid phenotype).&quot;

191 out of 200 birds sampled near the hybrid zone centre had some evidence of admixture, which is in line with what Hubbard found 40 years earlier. Many of those 191 &quot;hybrids&quot; were very close in appearance to one or the other species,  (e.g. a Myrtle appearance but with a trace of yellow in the throat), but intermediates far outnumbered pure Myrtles or Audubon&#039;s in that local area.

&quot;Finally, if you are impatient with the AOU’s seemingly snail pace at taxonomic changes, you can always write the proposal to split these species.&quot;

At the request of somebody on the AOU checklist committee, I wrote a proposal for a split, which I&#039;m told is under consideration right now. My personal opinion is that there&#039;s pretty good evidence now for 3 species (Myrtle, Audubon&#039;s, and Goldman&#039;s), but that splitting Audubon&#039;s from Black-fronted would be premature. Yes, Mila et al. 2007 found big differences between those two in mtDNA, but we have some new information (still working on the publication) showing that the nuclear markers put Audubon&#039;s closer to Black-fronted than to Myrtle (as you&#039;d guess from their apperances), and don&#039;t rule out a lot of ongoing gene flow between them. There may very well be 4 species in the complex, but I think more evidence is needed for one of the splits. Another student in the Irwin lab is just starting work on the Audubon&#039;s/Black-fronted contact zone, so there&#039;s a lot left to find out about these birds, and we&#039;ll have a more complete story in the next few years.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A couple of comments to add to this, as an author of the most recent article&#8230; </p>
<p>&#8221; &#8216; and genetic similarities are due to incomplete lineage sorting rather than to gene flow.&#8217;<br />
I’m not convinced of that, as disentangling gene flow from lineage sorting is almost impossible and most of the time authors just make an inference about it being one or the other.&#8221;</p>
<p>You&#8217;re right, and I think the IOC misinterpreted what we wrote on that subject in the paper. We didn&#8217;t present any evidence to distinguish between those two options for the genetic loci that weren&#8217;t strongly differentiated, and raised incomplete lineage sorting only as a possible alternative to ongoing gene flow as an explanation of genetic similarity at most markers. </p>
<p>&#8220;I can&#8217;t find any data right now on the actual frequency of hybrids versus &#8220;pure&#8221; across the transect (except the reference to one of the earliest papers on the zone which found nearly all individuals at the center have some hybrid phenotype).&#8221;</p>
<p>191 out of 200 birds sampled near the hybrid zone centre had some evidence of admixture, which is in line with what Hubbard found 40 years earlier. Many of those 191 &#8220;hybrids&#8221; were very close in appearance to one or the other species,  (e.g. a Myrtle appearance but with a trace of yellow in the throat), but intermediates far outnumbered pure Myrtles or Audubon&#8217;s in that local area.</p>
<p>&#8220;Finally, if you are impatient with the AOU’s seemingly snail pace at taxonomic changes, you can always write the proposal to split these species.&#8221;</p>
<p>At the request of somebody on the AOU checklist committee, I wrote a proposal for a split, which I&#8217;m told is under consideration right now. My personal opinion is that there&#8217;s pretty good evidence now for 3 species (Myrtle, Audubon&#8217;s, and Goldman&#8217;s), but that splitting Audubon&#8217;s from Black-fronted would be premature. Yes, Mila et al. 2007 found big differences between those two in mtDNA, but we have some new information (still working on the publication) showing that the nuclear markers put Audubon&#8217;s closer to Black-fronted than to Myrtle (as you&#8217;d guess from their apperances), and don&#8217;t rule out a lot of ongoing gene flow between them. There may very well be 4 species in the complex, but I think more evidence is needed for one of the splits. Another student in the Irwin lab is just starting work on the Audubon&#8217;s/Black-fronted contact zone, so there&#8217;s a lot left to find out about these birds, and we&#8217;ll have a more complete story in the next few years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jochen</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-2473</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jochen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:45:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-2473</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Patrick: ah, you see, Germans will not willingly apply the term &quot;beer&quot; to anything that comes out of the UK. I mean, they do some good stuff with hops, malt and barley, but it&#039;s not what we&#039;d call beer. Franziskaner is a Wheat Beer, and I am more of a Pilsen type... So you see, Germans are very picky about beer.

@Corey: yeah, I guess after my google earth attack, I owe you some.

@Carrie; no gods, no masters. It&#039;s your list, and if you don&#039;t like the AOU&#039;s decisions, well heck: count the Euro Gull! Science is on your side anyway, and what more can one ask for?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Patrick: ah, you see, Germans will not willingly apply the term &#8220;beer&#8221; to anything that comes out of the UK. I mean, they do some good stuff with hops, malt and barley, but it&#8217;s not what we&#8217;d call beer. Franziskaner is a Wheat Beer, and I am more of a Pilsen type&#8230; So you see, Germans are very picky about beer.</p>
<p>@Corey: yeah, I guess after my google earth attack, I owe you some.</p>
<p>@Carrie; no gods, no masters. It&#8217;s your list, and if you don&#8217;t like the AOU&#8217;s decisions, well heck: count the Euro Gull! Science is on your side anyway, and what more can one ask for?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carrie</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-2464</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Carrie]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:52:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-2464</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When I was growing up, there were certain lumps that my mother always complained about, because they &quot;got rid of&quot; birds she was fond of from her own youth.

I&#039;m hopeful that she&#039;ll be able to live out her golden years with Baltimore Orioles, Myrtle Warblers, and Yellow-shafted Flickers all back in their proper places. I don&#039;t think she actually gives a particular damn about American Herring Gulls though. (I do, though, since that&#039;s the only mentioned split that would give me a new lifer.)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I was growing up, there were certain lumps that my mother always complained about, because they &#8220;got rid of&#8221; birds she was fond of from her own youth.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m hopeful that she&#8217;ll be able to live out her golden years with Baltimore Orioles, Myrtle Warblers, and Yellow-shafted Flickers all back in their proper places. I don&#8217;t think she actually gives a particular damn about American Herring Gulls though. (I do, though, since that&#8217;s the only mentioned split that would give me a new lifer.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-2459</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nate]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:26:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-2459</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@John- I&#039;ve seen Audubon&#039;s once, in spring in south Texas, so I&#039;ve got fingers crossed on this one.  And I much prefer Myrtle Warbler to the alternative.

@Gunnar- No doubt.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@John- I&#8217;ve seen Audubon&#8217;s once, in spring in south Texas, so I&#8217;ve got fingers crossed on this one.  And I much prefer Myrtle Warbler to the alternative.</p>
<p>@Gunnar- No doubt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gunnar Engblom</title>
		<link>http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/2010/03/12/welcome-back-myrtle-warbler/#comment-2458</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gunnar Engblom]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:42:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedrinkingbirdblog.com/?p=2815#comment-2458</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Taxonomy is slower than Evolution!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Taxonomy is slower than Evolution!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

