Mistakes in Opus for a parrot (1 Viewer)

Hi, all -

Last spring, I contributed the first photo of the Red-crowned Parakeet [Cyanoramphus novaezelandiae), a rare small parrot found mostly on island reserves in New Zealand. In revisiting the bird in Opus, I find it on a page called "Red-fronted Parakeet". From my photo, you can see it has a red crown, but not a red front, although the latter poorly descriptive name has also apparently been used as well from references I find on the web.

Furthermore, an existent {stub} page for "Red-crowned Parakeet" has genus/species as Pyrrhura roseifrons. A little research shows that this is a bird with the same common name from South America (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhura_roseifrons).

We have two birds with the same common name, and one with two names. Before I try to straighten this out in Opus, I need to ask advice - I don't have the Clements checklist, so can somebody look these names up for me? I can take it from there. Last time I changed a latin species name, I was politely admonished to check with the editors first. (I'm now an editor, but only as of this morning.) Thanks!

Here's the thread that sets out our naming policy. Short version is to follow any consensus available among Clements, Gill and Wright, and Howard and Moore.

Avibase is a great help in sorting out tangles like this one, since it's a lot easier than running off to the library with a list of questions.

Now then: parakeets!

Cyanoramphus novaezelandiae is in opus as Red-fronted Parakeet because Clements, Gill and Wright, and Howard and Moore all agree on that name.

Clements uses Red-crowned Parakeet for Pyrrhura roseifrons; Gill and Wright treat it as a subspecies of Painted Parakeet P. picta.

Wait, actually this is quite a bit worse than I thought. There's a third species in this complex.

Gill and Wright and Howard and Moore use Red-crowned Parakeet for Cyanoramphus saisseti (or: saissetti), the species known in Clements (and by opus) as New Caledonian Parakeet.

So: that species is presently an exception to our policy and I would propose keeping it that way.

JT -
I'm not sure of your final conclusion - by "keeping it that way", you mean keep it as it is now? If so, I guess there would be no problem with my adding some text about the naming problem on the appropriate pages?

Thanks for the references. They will be useful. Avibase has my bird under both names. I think "Red-fronted" is a particularly poor name, but I understand the need for a policy based on authoritative works. Maybe I need to buy a copy of Clements.

nomdeploom said:

I'm not sure of your final conclusion - by "keeping it that way", you mean keep it as it is now? If so, I guess there would be no problem with my adding some text about the naming problem on the appropriate pages?

Click to expand...

Yes, keep all three of these under their present names... and please do feel free to add text. I tried to clear up some of this.

nomdeploom said:

I think "Red-fronted" is a particularly poor name, but I understand the need for a policy based on authoritative works.

Click to expand...

I think every birder has a list of desired name changes. I for one think we need something other than Red-bellied Woodpecker...