Christmas Bells

Christmas Bells
Christmas Bells - Blandfordia nobilis
Showing posts with label Taxonomy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Taxonomy. Show all posts

Thursday, November 22, 2012

A Sparrow fell, today, in Robertson

"Two sparrows are sold for a penny, aren't they? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground without your Father's permission. International Standard Version (©2008) 
(DJW Note: the last word "permission" is variously omitted, or substituted with other more clumsy phrases). But the biblical reference still stands as worthy of quoting.
Matthew Ch 10, V 29.

My point is simple: I found a freshly killed Sparrow in the middle of the Illawarra Highway, in Robertson, today. It cried out to be examined and photographed, for several reasons.


Firstly, Sparrows are a subject of reference in the Bible, and in later literature:
"Jesus's use of "sparrows" as an example of divine providence in the Gospel of Matthew also inspired later references, such as that in Shakespeare's Hamlet and the Gospel hymn His Eye Is on the Sparrow."

So, the figure of God the Father (or the "Creator") ought be pleased that at least this little Sparrow's life has not been shed completely in vain. I can at least use it for education purposes.



Secondly, under the Linnaean "binomial" system of taxonomic classification, the humble Sparrow (Passer domesticus) became, because of its familiarity to European scientists of the day, the "benchmark" for small perching birds (or "songbirds") - known today as Passerines (literally Sparrow-like birds). 


The Sparrow was one of the first birds to be named by Linnaeus, in 1758, and almost certainly, one of the first to have its name changed by virtue of a taxonomic revision (something familiar to Australian Orchid enthusiasts).
  • "The House Sparrow was among the first animals to be given a scientific name in the modern system of biological classification, since it was described by Carl Linnaeus, in the 1758 10th edition of Systema Naturae. It was described from a type specimen collected in Sweden, with the name Fringilla domestica. Later the genus name Fringilla came to be used only for the Chaffinch and its relatives, and the House Sparrow has usually been placed in the genus Passer created by French zoologist Mathurin Jacques Brisson in 1760."
In my opinion, the Sparrow would never have assumed the position it has in taxonomy, if the taxonomists had been starting with Australian birds, which are primarily nectar-eaters or insectivorous. We have many "finches" in Australia, but they are not in any sense, "typical" of other birds (in Australia). But I guess that just proves my point about "taxonomists" - that their vision is limited by what they grew up studying, and their knowledge base has expanded from that base (or not). Linnaeus was  a creature of his time, and so is the Passer domesticus, and hence, the huge class of birds known as passerines.

Head of House Sparrow
massive wedge-shaped beak shows it is a seed eater.
Compare beak shape with the insectivorous Rufous Songlark below.

Feet structure of Sparrow.
three toes forward, and one large toe facing to the rear.
This structure if described as "Anisodactyly"

Plain patterns on wing of the female Sparrow
A successful camouflage colouring,.

Small "Brood patch" on this female Sparrow
Its presence indicates she has had a brood of chicks this year.
However, the fact that the brood patch is so small,
indicates she is not still sitting on eggs of young chicks.

Hopefully her young are able to survive with help of the father.

Head of Rufous Songlark -
clearly an insectivorous species.
Note the sharp pointed beak,
Suitable for probing for insects.
It is not a seed-cracking beak.
(ignore the shadow, if you can)



Monday, July 14, 2008

Soft-bodied Creatures

This is something of a follow-up to a posting "Red" by Junior Lepid over at "Lepidoptera Diary"

Soft-bodied creatures, with an excess of legs have been puzzling me for some time. I do not even know how to begin to classify this tiny creature. The term "insects" does not fit, for a mere 6 legs would appear to be boring, to these little guys. On my counting, this creature has 10 pairs of legs, plus two large "palps" (or similar feeding devices) on its front end. This is the best I can do with this image, before pixellation causes distortion. (Click to enlarge to maximum size.) The little creature was quite active, as you can see from how it changed angles, over a few seconds.

I went to the Australian Faunal Directory, and looked for creatures with 20 legs, but was no closer to an answer after hours of scouring through Webpages. Part of my problem is I do not know if this creature is a "larval stage" of something else which might be more familiar if I saw it in its adult stage. I am thinking here of how Ladybird (beetles) look nothing like their larval stages, or indeed caterpillars and moths.

Here is the creature in situ, on the bark of a "Scribbly Gum", to give a sense of scale, to any Aussie Nature lovers. It is about real size on my screen, when not 'blown up" to higher resolution.
I added the title "Larva" for want of any better name.
I am not even sure if this creature meets the definition of an "arthropod" for it ought have a "hard exoskeleton (doubtful), a body divided into segments (yes) and jointed legs (doubtful - certainly flexible, but "jointed" - not sure.)"

Now that I have been linking up with other Nature Bloggers in Australia, I am hoping for some words of wisdom from more experienced naturalists or even some taxonomists. Perhaps Christopher Taylor might be able to help, or Mosura, who seems to know his way around a microscope, or Junior Lepid, or any of my other new-found friends and colleagues. I would be happy to get to within a "Class" or "Order" - but this Berkeley University website on the Tree of Life tells me that even in that aspiration I am trying to apply out-of-date science.

Help!
Original text
Rate this translation
Your feedback will be used to help improve Google Translate