Add to favorites Examiner Bio

Budgerigars: defining a parakeet

 

Merriam-Webster’s dictionary simply defines parakeets as, “any of numerous usually small slender parrots with a long graduated tail."

 

The encyclopedia Britannica begins its definition the same as Merriam-Webster: “any of numerous seed-eating parrots of small size, slender build, and long, tapering tail.” But Britannica adds, “In this sense the name is given to some 115 species in 30 genera of the subfamily Psittacinae (family Psittacidae) and has influenced another parrot name, lorikeet. To indicate size only, the name is sometimes extended to little parrots with short, blunt tails, as the hanging parrots, or bat parrotlets, Loriculus species, popular cage birds in their native area, India to Malaya and the Philippines.” 

 

In both cases, parakeet refers to birds that are not necessarily parakeets. 

 

So what is a parakeet? 

 

 

 

Lories are another type of parakeet that DNA tests have verified as parakeets. These are nectar eaters. The August issue of Bird Talk has important information about raising Lories that I hope anyone interested in them will look at. I also suggest “Parrots in the Land of Oz” from PBS’ Nature Series DVDs if you want to see more about their feeding habits as they show a lot of rainbow lorikeets in the program foraging in the wild.

 

If you heard that North America has no native parrot left, then you heard wrong. From Mexico to Argentina, conures fill the tree tops—most are upper canopy rain forest parrots (macaws and Amazons tend to live lower down). South America is also home to the short tailed lineolated parakeet.  And don’t forget Quaker parakeets of Argentina who now have tiny flocks in American cities like Brooklyn and Chicago! The best reason to come to Brooklyn College in Midwood is to go parakeet watching!

 

And then there are Australia’s true parakeets like the endangered Orange-bellied parrot, blue-winged parrot, elegant parrot, scarlet-chested parrot, and turquoise parrot (genus Neophema); and the Princess parrot.

 

 

All of these are parakeets, not because of their looks, but because ornithologists have looked at the DNA relationship between all of these species and decided that they are all close enough to all be considered true parakeets.

 

The one species American culture refers to as “parakeet” is not among them. That is, the Australian budgerigar.

 

Instead, the budgerigar remains independent from the parakeets, but still, obviously, of the family Psittacidae in the scientific and veterinary world. Even if your vet may call your budgie a “parakeet” because our culture does, odds are good that your vet’s reference materials do not as standard practice. Though some sources do place the budgie in tribe platycercini (in which the broad tail parrots of genus Neophema would also belong), whether or not parakeets outside of genus Neophema belong there remains under debate, even as the existence of playcercini itself gains acceptance throughout the scientific community—including evolutionary biologists (a sample article can be found at http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/25/10/2141).  Given this confusion, conventional wisdom of “keep it simple stupid” while evolutionary biologists work to track down the budgie’s complex evolutionary path, decades after they figured out most other Australian parrots, ultimately means that the easiest way to describe a budgerigar is with the simple,  the traditional approach of Order, Family, Genus, Species to describe the budgerigar scientifically remains. That is, Psittaciformes Psittacidae Melopsittacus M.undulatus. It is not a parakeet until we can prove it is.

 

Until then, the budgerigar remains separate from the parakeet branch of parrots, just as the cockatiel was not considered a cockatoo until DNA testing showed cockatiels to be closely related to palm cockatoos. Only then were tiels permanently placed into the cockatoo branch.

 

In conclusion, budgerigars are not clearly part of the parakeet branch. At this time, there is not enough scientific evidence to place them firmly with the other parakeets. Until then, they cannot be considered parakeets.

 

Even should we wish to consider them such “parakeet” is not a species name, but a branch name. Saying “parakeet” is like saying “macaw” or “cockatoo.” It’s a very general term. What KIND of parakeet? A jenday conure? Quaker? Alexandrine? A budgie? THESE are species…parakeet is not.

 

Rather, we must begin using the species name and insist that the pet trade uses the proper species name. This author has noticed, for example, that NYC Petco stores (check Union Square in Manhattan and Sheepshead Bay Brooklyn) are especially poor at labeling which Psitticula parakeet species bird is being sold. The birds are just marked “ringneck parakeets.” As if there were only one—not 14 living species (some species are now extinct. To see the surviving species, http://home.wanadoo.nl/psittaculaworld/PsittaculaWorld.htm).  These birds range a great deal in climate, country, and climate and have great variance in needs—they are hardly the same. If you ask them about their labels, they will tell you it’s controlled by their corporate offices. The store clerks have little control over labeling of their store livestock.

 

But if we do not use the right names and do not teach others to use them, do not insist that others do, how ever will that change?

 

Having shared this all with you, budgies will be budgies henceforth and parakeet will refer to a branch of parrots, not a species.

 

And now you know, we can get medieval and talk parakeet…next time we’ll have a parrot history lesson.