Talk:Accipitridae

Birds Start‑class Mid‑importance

Accipitridae is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not substitute this template. Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Birds To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Endemic birds of Papua New Guinea (more) Cleanup : Bullfinch • Vesper sparrow • Bird flight • Bird bath (more) Copyedit : Plushcap • Magpie duck • Saker falcon (more) Expand : Phalarope • Nidicolous • Gouldian finch • Cathartes • Cnemophilidae • Avian malaria (more) NPOV : Debeaking • Driven grouse shooting • Abu Dhabi Falcon Hospital (more) Stubs : Cathartiformes • Semiplumbeous hawk • Rainbow-bearded Thornbill • Sunda scops owl (more) Update : Coal tit • Scottish crossbill • New Caledonian lorikeet • Operation Migration (more) Verify : Argus (bird) • Blyth's frogmouth • Nik Borrow • Pytilia • Fregata • Chestnut-headed tesia • Darter • Pallid scops owl • Starling (more) Wikify : Ninox boobook ocellata • The Institute for Bird Populations (more) Other : Add photos to bird articles needing photos (search Flickr for free images). Add taxonomic authorities to genus articles. More outstanding tasks at the project's cleanup listing, Category:Birds articles needing attention, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Todo.

Tannin, please revert if you're not happy with this jimfbleak

This family is listed both under the "falconiformes" order and the "accipitriformes" order. What's up with this? --Mithcoriel 14:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Added Merge request. Accipitriformes is redundant with Falconiformes and Accipitridae. Dysmorodrepanis 17:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I agree that Accipitriformes is not covering anything that is not included in either Falconiformes or Ciconiiformes, but the positions of the some families, e.g. the New World vultures, is unclear. Accipitriformes appears to still be in use and it would seem odd to me for an encyclopedia not to have an article covering the subject. JohnCastle 13:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Also, I don't know that the enlarged Ciconiiformes, inc birds of prey, is widely accepted by national ornithological societies outside NAm jimfbleak 15:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

They were/are accepted by the AOU but IIRC nobody else. At any rate, they're paraphyletic. I have gotten ahold of some more recent nuc/mtDNA paper that suggests Falconidae - Accipiteridae - Sagittariidae - Pandionidae in Falconiformes, but outgroup choice should be carefully studied.

In any case, "Accipitriformes" would be treated in the systematics section of Accipitridae - compare the discussion of alternative taxonomic models in Anatidae. Accipitriformes and Accipitridae are nearly 100% about the same subject. Dysmorodrepanis 01:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I think the point is this: S/A's DNA-DNA hybridization suggested a distance between falcons and accipitrids that is an artefact due to most accipitrids having a rearranged genome. DNA-DNA hybridization is essentially worthless here.

What can be said is that falcons are probably not significantly more distinct from hawks than the osprey is from either, and actually closer than secretarybirds. Pending the ultimate resolution of the issue, it seems a Falconiformes that includes all of 'em is the most prodent way to go. It almost certainly would need to be split due to being deeply divergent, but it is quite possibly a clade.