Upcher's Warbler (1 Viewer)

[Norbert R. B.]

Upcher's Warbler Hippolais languida is sometimes considered polytypic with an eastern subspecies H. l. magnirostris Severtsov, 1873 recognized by Watson 1986 (Peters Check-list).
Watson (1986) gives the protonym as Sylvia magnirostris whereas Stepanyan (2003), who treated H. languida as monotypic, listed Salicaria magnirostris as the protonym. As I am unable to find the OD of the taxon magnirostris in BHL or other reference pages (Zoonomen, AnimalBase) can someone help with the correct original name of this now mostly synonymized form? The OD is given as Izvest. Imp. Obshchestva Liubitel. Estest. Antrop. Etnogr. Moscow 8, pt. 2, (1872) p. 123 and note by Watson (1986). Any hint on how to access the OD is welcome. Many thanks in advance.

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Severtsov's "Sylvia magnirostris" nob. [nobis/new], of 1873 = here (on page 123, in text, right column, all in Russian) ...

... though also consider (the Swedish): "Sylvia magnirostris" LILJEBORG 1850 (here + Plate here), which, at least as far as I can tell, seems (very) close to Eversmann's "Sylvia scita", of 1842/3 (i.e. today's Booted Warbler Sylvia/Hippolais/Iduna caligata Lichtenstein, 1823), the latter one fairly close to Upcher's Warbler.

If relevant?

/B

 

[James Jobling]

Some years ago I needed to consult Izvestiya Imperatorskogo Obshchestva Lyubitelei Estestvoznaniya, Antropologii i Etnografii pri Imperatorskom Moskovskom Universitete, but after much searching could only find it in the Library of the Natural History Museum, London. I assume you have already contacted some of your larger natural history museums, like Zoologisches Institut und Zoologisches Museum, Universität Hamburg; Staatliches Naturhistorisches Museum, Braunschweig; Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin; or Niedersächsisches Landesmuseum, Hannover, to see if they have a holding?

 

[Norbert R. B.]

Severtsov's "Sylvia magnirostris" nob. [nobis/new], of 1873 = here (on page 123, in text, right column, all in Russian) ...

... though also consider (the Swedish): "Sylvia magnirostris" LILJEBORG 1850 (here + Plate here), which, at least as far as I can tell, seems (very) close to Eversmann's "Sylvia scita", of 1842/3 (i.e. today's Booted Warbler Sylvia/Hippolais/Iduna caligata Lichtenstein, 1823), the latter one fairly close to Upcher's Warbler.

If relevant?

/B

Thank you, Björn & James.
Apparently, Severtsov described a new species Sylvia magnirostris on p. 123, and although I don't speak Russian, it seems that he is considering whether it is a species of Sylvia or belongs to Salicaria. In the note on the same page he is mentioning

 

[Norbert R. B.]

Oops, something went wrong with my mail, so I repeat it here ...

Thank you, Björn & James.
Apparently, Severtsov described a new species Sylvia magnirostris on p. 123, and although I don't speak Russian, it seems that he is considering whether it is a species of Sylvia or belongs to Salicaria. In the note on the same page he is mentioning

other species of Hypolais = Hippolais.
On p. 129, Severtsov mentiones Salicaria magnirostris Liljeb. (thus, not a new species!). I wonder whether Stepanyan (2003) mixed up both names in his "Conspectus"; unfortunately, he gives no page numbers or sources for the synonyms listed in his book. In any case, Liljeborg's name Sylvia (Salicaria) magnirostris has priority over Severtsov's Sylvia magnirostris and the latter should not have been used by Watson for a subspecies of Upcher's Warbler, as it is preoccupied. Should an eastern subspecies be recognized, one of the names Hypolais upcheri Tristram, 1864 or Acrocephalus sogdianensis Dresser, 1874 could be available for them, but I have to look for the type localities of these proposed taxa.
Norbert

 

[James Jobling]

The following synonymy of Hippolais languida, with type localities, is from Hartert, 1910, Die Vögel der paläarktischen Fauna, I, p. 573:
“Curruca languida Hemprich & Ehrenberg, Symb. Phys. fol. cc (1833— Syrien).
Hippolais upcheri Tristram, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1864, p. 438 (“Slopes of Libanon and Hermon”).
Sylvia magnirostris Sewertzoff, Turk. Jevotn. (in Izv. Obshch. Moskov. VIII, 2), p. 123 (1873— Karatau und westliche Vorberge des Tian-Schan): Übers. in Madarász, Zeitschr. ges. Orn. IV, p. 65.
Acrocephalus sogdianensis Dresser, Ibis 1874, p. 420 (Kokand).”

Vaurie, 1959, The Birds of the Palearctic Fauna. Passeriformes, p. 249, gives no synonymy or subspecies.

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

For what it's worth, the Type location for Liljeborg's (1850): "S. [Sylvia] (Salicaria) magnirostris ...[*]) n. sp. Tab. XIX" (on p.274, here) ought to be somewhere; "Mellan Kargopol och Cholmogory; ...." ("Between Kargopol and Cholmogory; ..."). The added "sällsynt" is just its status (i.e. Rare).

Thereby, somewhere in Arkhangelsk Oblast, Russia, between here and here.

Hopefully of some help/use?

Björn

---

*The Footnote (5) only says: "Det som hos den synes vara mest utmärkande, är dess stora näbb; hvaraf jag derföre fått anledning till dess benämning.", which in English (and in short, less chiselled) means something like: "Its most characteristic [feature] is its large beak/bill, hence its name." [magnirostris, Latin: magnus great, + -rostris -billed]

/B

 

[l_raty]

Apparently, Severtsov described a new species Sylvia magnirostris on p. 123, and although I don't speak Russian, [...]

A French translation of this text (by Léon Olphe-Galliard) was published in J. Ornithol., which may be helpful :

Jahrg.4 (1887-1888) - Zeitschrift für die gesammte Ornithologie - Biodiversity Heritage Library

The Biodiversity Heritage Library works collaboratively to make biodiversity literature openly available to the world as part of a global biodiversity community.

www.biodiversitylibrary.org

In any case, Liljeborg's name Sylvia (Salicaria) magnirostris has priority over Severtsov's Sylvia magnirostris and the latter should not have been used by Watson for a subspecies of Upcher's Warbler, as it is preoccupied.

Indeed -- it's a junior primary homonym, hence in principle permanently invalid.

 

[Norbert R. B.]

For what it's worth, the Type location for Liljeborg's (1850): "S. [Sylvia] (Salicaria) magnirostris ...[*]) n. sp. Tab. XIX" (on p.274, here) ought to be somewhere; "Mellan Kargopol och Cholmogory; ...." ("Between Kargopol and Cholmogory; ..."). The added "sällsynt" is just its status (i.e. Rare).

Thereby, somewhere in Arkhangelsk Oblast, Russia, between here and here.

Hopefully of some help/use?

Björn

---

*The Footnote (5) only says: "Det som hos den synes vara mest utmärkande, är dess stora näbb; hvaraf jag derföre fått anledning till dess benämning.", which in English (and in short, less chiselled) means something like: "Its most characteristic [feature] is its large beak/bill, hence its name." [magnirostris, Latin: magnus great, + -rostris -billed]

/B

It is likely that Liljeborg's species concerns Iduna caligata, as the type locality is in the breeding range of that species. Hippolais upcheri could belong to the western population of H. languida or it could be a bird on migration to the East African winter quarter, depending on the date the type(s) was/were collected. Acrocephalus sogdaniensis from Kokand (Uzbekistan) would probably the correct name for the eastern population, if it is considered a valid taxon. But there seems to be consensus that H. languida is best treated as monotypic.
Once again it became clear that the information in Peters Check-list is not trustworthy in many cases. It is important to go back to the ODs of taxa for taxonomic/nomenclatural studies.

Many thanks for the very helpful contributions to all who answered on my question.

 

[l_raty]

It is likely that Liljeborg's species concerns Iduna caligata, as the type locality is in the breeding range of that species.

Stepanyan 1990 treated Liljeborg's Sylvia (Salicaria) magnirostris as a synonym of Acrocephalus dumetorum -- an identification that seems to date back to Dresser 1874, and that I find accepted in several other places too.
Liljeborg's description indicates quite clearly that his bird had long undertail coverts (extending farther than half of the tail length), which conflicts with it being an Iduna.
(Note that Severtsov himself placed Liljeborg's species in Salicaria, which he used for what we now call Acrocephalus. This is undoubtedly the reason why he did not see a conflict between Liljeborg's name and his own Sylvia magnirostris.)

(This is why it is critical that the two names are primary homonyms, as I pointed out in post #8. A junior primary homonym is invalid even if it is not regarded as congeneric with its senior homonym.)