HBW and BirdLife Taxonomic Checklist v6 (December 2021) (1 Viewer)

[AlexJB497]

Not sure what has happened with that pdf(!) -- will fix it on Monday.

 

[l_raty]

Ptiliogonatidae to Ptiliogonidae [?]

Ptiliogonys is formed from πτιλον, ptilon, feather (with an unexplained added i after the l) + γόνυ, gonu / gony, knee + an added -s.

In principle, the modified ending precludes using the stem of the original final element of the type-genus name, which is how "Ptiliogonatidae" was formed (the genitive of γόνυ is γόνατος, gonatos, and the stem is gonat-); the stem should be formed assuming a latinization with a change of ending, and be "that appropriate to the latinized form" (ICZN 29.3.2).
Latin words in -ys (quite unsurprisingly, these are all of Greek origin) have genitive in -yos/-yis or (less frequently, feminine words only) -ydis, hence Ptiliogonyidae or Ptiliogonydidae would probably be more correct than any of the two forms that are in use.

On the other hand, any of the two forms that are in use would be protected by ICZN 29.5 if it was "in prevailing usage".

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Ptiliogonys is formed from πτιλον, ptilon, feather (with an unexplained added i after the l) + γόνυ, gonu / gony, knee + an added -s.

In principle, the modified ending precludes using the stem of the original final element of the type-genus name, which is how "Ptiliogonatidae" was formed (the genitive of γόνυ is γόνατος, gonatos, and the stem is gonat-); the stem should be formed assuming a latinization with a change of ending, and be "that appropriate to the latinized form" (ICZN 29.3.2).
Latin words in -ys (quite unsurprisingly, these are all of Greek origin) have genitive in -yos/-yis or (less frequently, feminine words only) -ydis, hence Ptiliogonyidae or Ptiliogonydidae would probably be more correct than any of the two forms that are in use.

On the other hand, any of the two forms that are in use would be protected by ICZN 29.5 if it was "in prevailing usage".

In an almost similar case, why Chloropseidae and not Chloropsidae?

 

[l_raty]

In an almost similar case, why Chloropseidae and not Chloropsidae?

Chloropsis is χλωρός, chloros, green + ὄψις, opsis, appearance, the most usual (*) genitive of which is ὄψεως , opseos, making the stem ospe-.
(*) = Ancient Greek occurred in several variants or dialects. In Ionic Greek, the genitive was ὄψιος, opsios.

(The spelling used in the work Bock 1994 claimed as having established the name (Wetmore 1960) was "Chloropseidae". The first actual use of the name was by Henninger in 1914, who wrote it "Chloropsidae".)

 

[Mike Earp]

The taxonomic notes say:

• Calendulauda africanoides / alopex -

• Mirafra somalica / ashi -

"In the same article in which he described ashi as a full species, Colston also described Mirafra somalica rochei ... Thus it appears that ashi is a southern subspecies of somalica and that rochei is nothing more than a rufous colour morph of ashi (which has nomenclatural priority)."

What gives ashi priority over rochei if they were described in the same paper?

 

[l_raty]

What gives ashi priority over rochei if they were described in the same paper?

Its higher original rank (ICZN 24.1).

 

[Mike Earp]

Its higher original rank (ICZN 24.1).

Thanks for the helpful explanation Laurent.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

HBW and BirdLife International (2021) Handbook of the Birds of the World and BirdLife International digital checklist of the birds of the world. Version 6. Available there

Are older versions still available?

 

[Mike Earp]

Are older versions still available?

Seems so if you scroll down the page linked to

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Seems so if you scroll down the page linked to

As Teal'c says : indeed 🙄

 

[jts1882]

Are older versions still available?

You can use the Avibase comparison page.

Avibase - The World Bird Database

avibase.bsc-eoc.org