Rea (ptica) – razlika između verzija

The two recognized extant species and eight subspecies are:<ref name="Clements, James">{{Cite book|last1=Clements |first1=James |title=The Clements Checklist of the Birds of the World |edition=6 |year=2007 |publisher= Cornell University Press|location=Ithaca, NY |isbn=9780801445019}}</ref>▼

*Greater rhea ''Rhea americana''▼

**''R. a. americana'', found in the [[cerrado]]s (bushlands) and [[caatinga]] of central and eastern [[Brazil]].▼

**''R. a. intermedia'', southeastern [[Brazil]] in [[Rio Grande do Sul]] and [[Uruguay]].▼

**''R. a. araneipes'', chaco of Paraguay to [[Bolivia]] and [[Mato Grosso]] in Brazil.▼

**''R. a. albescens'', plains of [[Argentina]] south of [[Rio Negro Province|Rio Negro]].▼

*Darwin's rhea or lesser rhea ''Rhea pennata''▼

**''R. p. garleppi'', [[Puna grassland|puna]] of southeastern [[Peru]], southwestern Bolivia, and northwestern Argentina.▼

**''R. p. tarapacensis'', northern [[Chile]] from [[Atacama]] to [[Tarapacá Region|Tarapacá]].▼

''Rhea pennata'' was not always in the ''Rhea'' genus. In 2008, the [[American Ornithologists' Union|SACC]], the last holdout, approved the merging of the genera, ''Rhea'' and ''Pterocnemia'' on August 7, 2008. This merging of genera leaves only the ''Rhea'' genus.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCProproster.html | title=Classification of birds of South America Part 01: | accessdate=4 February 2009 | last=Remsen Jr. | first=J. V. |author2=et al. |date = 7 August 2008 |page= Proposal#348| work=South American Classification Committee | publisher=American Ornithologists' Union }}</ref> A third species of rhea, ''Rhea nana'', was described by [[Richard Lydekker|Lydekker]] in 1894 based on a single [[egg (biology)|egg]] found in [[Patagonia]],<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Knox |first1=A. |last2=Walters |first2=M. |title=Extinct and Endangered Birds in the Collections of the Natural History Museum |series= British Ornithologists' Club Occasional Publications |volume=1 |year=1994 |publisher= British Ornithologists' Club }}</ref> but today no major authorities consider it valid.▼