List of Cathartiformes by population was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 26 March 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into New World vulture. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
New World vulture was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 4, 2013). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Washington University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Fall term. Further details are available on the course page.
Above message substituted from {{WAP assignment}}
on 14:57, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
I believe that first picture is a California Condor because of the white underwings and lack of the Andean Condor's head and neck ornamentation. I'm absolutely convinced it's not a Turkey Vulture, a bird I'm very familiar with. — JerryFriedman 19:18, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
My reading shows that these birds are not closely related to storks but they are more closely related than to Old World vultures or other diurnal raptors. -- Droll 21:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
This issue deserves more thorough discussion, including references. Old World vultures seem to have certain DNA rearrangements that are unique to thats group (Cytogenetics and Cell Genetics April 2006 paper IIRC, but whether anything can be drawn from that I don't know (the other accipitrids have not been checked on that marker it seems). Altogether, molecular evidence for the Cathartidae relationships seems equivocal (and possibly suffering from the errors of early application of molecular taxonomy; I don't have any recent studies on the topic) while, morphological evidence is largely in favor of a relationship with Ciconiiformes (in general - not storks in particular!). Behavior, on the other hand, very strongly supports a ciconiiform relationship. Feeding habits are prone to fast change (in fact, they are possibly one of the driving factors of speciation, we're gonna hear more on this in 2 years or so when the research currently underway gets published), while characters like urinating on the legs are rather conservative. The evolutionary history of all taxa in question is farly well known, but the points of divergence are still a mystery or unresolvable (due to many early Neornithes presenting a mix of characters of many orders). Dysmorodrepanis 21:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
OK, the paper I mentioned is: Cytogenetics and Genome Research '112: 286-295. It does not mention whether this has actually been analyzed in NWVs, but it points out that Falconiformes have the most strongly rearranged genomes of all birds analyzed to date (which is to say, in all likelihood all birds since chromosomal studies are fairly bread n butter work and has been done for a long time). For some reason, in Falconiformes there exists a bias for chromosomes to aggregate until a certain size has been reached, and then to rearrange. Most birds have a medium number of large chromosomes and a large number of small chromosomes. Falconiforms have a large number of lerge and medium-sized chromosomes and very few (a handful or so) small chromosomes. So whether NWVs are falconiform could possibly be determined using nothing more serious than a good quality light microscope... Dysmorodrepanis 00:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
It would assist verification if page numbers were included in the notes. Snowman ( talk) 10:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
This page makes the distinction between the two condor species, and the five vulture species. However, no distinction between the two is given. This is especially confusing, as the five vulture New World vulture species are different than the Old World vulture species. ( Vulture points back to this page for clarification on the New World species.) So ... what's the difference between a condor and a (new world) vulture? Is it purely linguistic? Why make the distinction between New World vultures and condors - it seems that it would be clearer to call the old world vultures in general "vultures", and new world vultures in general "condors", so why isn't it done? -- 20:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
"Condor" is used for members of the genera Vultur and Gymnogyps (the Andean and California condors, respectively, the latter being included in Vultur by some ornithologists). The rest of them are called vultures, and "New World vulture" may be used as a collective term for all members of the family Cathartidae, whether they are called "condor" or "vulture" in English. According to Online Dictionary, "vulture" comes from the Latin and entered written English in the 14th century, and "condor" derives from a Native American word and began to be used around 1600. 153.2.247.30 ( talk) 04:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
OK then, what does this need....cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 07:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Support:
Comments:
The references are the usual untemplated ratbag of DIY formats, I've tried to tidy, but needs another check
:Is there a better way to do the checklist ref?
Jimfbleak -
talk to me? 08:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Calling these birds "New World Vultures" is thinking in three dimensional terms - perhaps the fourth should be taken into consideration. As the article mentions that this clade is known from Old World fossils and it is implied that they evolved there, the name of the article should probably be "Cathartidae" (see below). A member of the "Old World" vulture lineages was also found in the New World (Neophrontops spp.) until quite recently, further necessitating a name change.
It also deserves mention that Cathartidae is a junior synonym for Vulturidae - see here - thus it is unusual that the former name is still being commonly used. It appears that palaeontologists prefer using "Vulturidae" - see here - and ornithologists prefer "Cathartidae"; since "Cathartidae" is more widely used/known, it is still the best candidate for the title of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.161.233.82 ( talk) 16:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
This identical sentence, "They were widespread in both the Old World and North America, during the Neogene," appears in both this article and the Old World vulture article. To what group, New, Old or all vultures of whatever clade does "they" in this statement refer? μηδείς ( talk) 17:51, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
I nominate this article for Good Article status based upon the following criteria:
WhitleyTucker ( talk) 10:34, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Danger ( talk · contribs) 14:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
More later. Danger High voltage! 14:42, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
The lead claims "Many now consider them to be in their own order Cathartiformes, closely related to, but distinct from, Old World vultures". Later in the article, there is a contradictory statement "Although New World vultures have many resemblances to Old World vultures they are not very closely related." How can it be said that New World vultures "are closely related to, but distinct from Old World vultures" but also that "they are not very closely related"? I am not an expert on this topic, but it definitely seems that either the lead is wrong or the article is wrong. Since there is a citation in the article text, would there be any objection in me changing the lead to be consistent with the article text? AuburnMagnolia ( talk) 01:04, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on New World vulture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:57, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Cathartidae Lafresnaye 1839 is listed as the formal name, with Vulturidae Illiger 1811 as a synonym. How is that possible? Shouldn't the oldest name be preferred, per ICZN rules? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.249.176.102 ( talk) 17:26, 20 February 2022 (UTC)