Talk:Viti Levu Giant Pigeon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Reconstruction
What is so wrong about the reconstruction? After all, didn't they say the pigeon was closely related to the Gouras, and that all known relatives of goura pigeons had elaborate crests, right?--Mr Fink 14:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Color pattern is conjectural. It is not known whether this bird had a crest; probably it didn't. It is not believed to be closely related to Goura. The wings were quite small. The bill was wide for a pigeon, and extremely high. And so on, and so on. Little is known about how this bird looked, but it was in all probability halfway between a Ducula pigeon and a dodo. All the more unfortunate since the original description, which contains images of the actual specimens and some speculation on how the bird lifed, what it ate and by what it was eaten, is linked in the article, because the technical quality is really good :( This reconstruction of the entirely unrelated Sylviornis probably comes closer in overall shape (save for the crest and the missing tail) to what the giant pigeon looked like... (that is not to say it should be used as a model). Dysmorodrepanis 00:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Then why was Sylviornis a megapode?
- Wrong question. Correct question would be for example: "Then why doesn't Sylviornis look like a megapode?"
- Two answers,
- a) Because it is no megapode but a sylvornithid.
- b) Because of parallel evolution. See also Foster's rule and what might tentatively be called "Olson's Rule" - patterns of flightlessness in bird orders such as rails vs megapodes. Pigeons are intermediate between these two in acquiring flightlessness, but the present bird was closer to megapodes (i.e. gigantism by massive size increase, not by reduction of already-waek flying apparatus. Its wings were proportionally small, but not vestigial as in some Gallicolumba). As regards color, the giant pigeon was certainly not straw-brown, but it's a reasonable guess for Sylviornis (because that was not a pigeon). Color, however, is only plumage-deep.
- To rephrase the question: "Then how can we tell that Sylviornis was a megapode relative?"
- Because its skeleton (the part that's not simply weird) is galliform. Dysmorodrepanis 00:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Then why was Sylviornis a megapode?
[edit] Merge?
Set up merge request. Reason: monotypic genus should have one page for genus and species under the most "popular" title rather than 2 half-redundant stubs as per bird pages SOP. Dysmorodrepanis 00:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)