Searching for consensus in molt terminology 11 years after Howell et al.'s "first basic problem"

Abstract

Howell et al. (2003) published an innovative augmentation to terminology proposed by Humphrey and Parkes (1959) that classified bird molt on the basis of perceived evolutionary relationships. Despite apparent universal applicability, Howell et al.’s (2003) proposed terminological changes were met with criticism that cited a failure to verify the evolutionary relationships of molt and an inability to recognize homologous molts even within closely related taxa. Eleven years after Howell et al. (2003), we revisit arguments against a terminological system of molt based on evolutionary relationships, suggest an analytical framework to satisfactorily respond to critics, clarify terminology, and consider how to study molt variation within an evolutionary framework.

Citation

Wolfe, Jared D.; Johnson, Erik I.; Terrill, Ryan S. 2014. Searching for consensus in molt terminology 11 years after Howell et al.'s "first basic problem." The Auk. 131(3): 371-377.