Blake.
Try to keep your tone within the bounds of General Questions. You have a hard time doing this.
Not a warning, just something you need to work on.
samclem Moderator
Blake.
Try to keep your tone within the bounds of General Questions. You have a hard time doing this.
Not a warning, just something you need to work on.
samclem Moderator
No, this is completely and utterly incorrect. But I assume this was a slip of the keyboard.
The genus Falco is, unsurprisingly, in the family Falconidae (falcons and caracaras), not the Accipitridae (hawks, eagles, old world vultures, kites, etc.). The largest genus in the Accipitridae is Accipiter (goshawks, sparrowhawks, etc.), with around fifty species, followed by Buteo. The genus Falco is the largest genus in the family Falconidae.
Both families have been traditionally grouped in the order Falconiformes due to their close morphological similarity. However, in a major surprise, a recent genetic study apparently shows that falcons are more closely related to parrots and perching birds than they are to the Accipitridae.
On the broader issue, it is correct that there is no taxonomic basis for a division between hawks and eagles. For example, in this studywe see that “eagles” are scattered among several subfamilies.
As has been said, in popular parlance “eagles” tend to be larger and more heavily built than hawks (and the largest ones, such as the Harpy and Steller’s Sea Eagles, are called eagles), but there is a substantial overlap in size and no clear dividing line.
Wow…utility really does determine morphology, doesn’t it? I feel the same way I did when I learned that New World vultures are more closely related to storks than raptors.
I remember being taught in elementary school that there was a distinction between two types of birds of prey that used common general names, and that the difference had to do with wing/feather configuration–if memory serves, “falcons” had tapering wings and short flight feathers, and “eagles/hawks” had relatively broad wings and long, splayed flight feathers.
Does this have any actual relation to any real concepts in raptor biology? Could this kind of half-remembered factoid be the cause for questions like this?
Genetic studies have been back and forth on that one too, with some more recent studies contending the New World Vultures are in fact more closely related to other raptors.
To a degree this is correct, especially for species in the US. Falco falcons have long tapering pointed wings, and the wings of most hawks/eagles are broader. However, some members of the Falconidae, including the forest-falcons and Laughing Falcon, have broad wings; and some members of the Accipitridae such as many kites have pointed wings.
sigh
Genetic studies keep taking away my bar trivia stumpers…
Nice set-up
Heh! Actually, I appreciate the education. I sometimes have to fake sports knowledge and the more team names and such I know, the better off I am. As long as I don’t have to actually watch any.
The resident native Chinese (Mandarin) speaker has gone to bed, but in Japanese, 鷹 taka means hawk and 鷲 washi means eagle. Looking up on an online Chinese dictionary, one does give it “eagle/falcon/hawk” as the English for 鷹 and “vulture” for 鷲, but another has “black eagle; condor; cruel” for 鷲 while also giving the three same English word for 鷹.
Wait, isn’t Steller’s Sea Eagle pretty closely related to the Bald Eagle? If Steller’s Sea Eagle isn’t an Eagle, then the Bald Eagle isn’t an Eagle either. And I don’t want to live in that world.
Wow, I didn’t know this. So the eagle/hawk thing is pretty much like the whale/dolphin thing.
Doesn’t matter because an owl can kick both of their asses
ORLY?
I got news for you: it ain’t bald either.
Yes, the sea-eaglesor fishing-eagles are not particularly close to the Aquila eagles like the Golden Eagle, probably being closer to the kites.