• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Search results

thxpress_search_the_forum Search Opus
  1. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    Just for the sake of clarity : I assume that some might also insist that, in 2005, Melierax should have been designated as the type of Melieraxinae to make the name available, which was not done. I do not read the Code as requiring this, however. The Code (Art 16.2) merely requires that, for new...
  2. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    Blyth 1850, when he introduced 'Circaetinae' (in which he included some odd things, though), also placed the booted eagles and Buteo in the same subfamily -- which he named Aquilinae, not Buteoninae. He separated harpy and see eagles in Thrasaetinae and Haliaetinae repectively, but retained...
  3. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    Under the present Code, "Melieraxinae" (using the entire generic name as the stem) would be acceptable, and should not be changed if the name had been made available in this form after 1999. OTOH, if the name had been used previously without being made available, the author who makes it...
  4. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/20134732
  5. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    No -- not under the current Code. See my ICZN quote in post #86 above. (There was a period, in the early/mid-20th C, during which type designations were indeed deemed valid only if the genus-group name was sourced from the publication where the name was actually made available. Then I guess it...
  6. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    "Morphnus Dumont 1816" is correct. "Morphnus Cuvier 1816" or "Morphnus Cuvier in Dumont 1816" are not, because these imply that Cuvier authored the name, which is not true. I guess something like "Morphnus 'Cuvier' Dumont 1816" would be OK as well. (And one might perhaps even argue in favour of...
  7. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    No, as usual, it's the first action that counts...
  8. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    I don't know, and finding the answer to such a question would take a huge amount of time. Not many. Anyway, this is not really an issue, as there is no provision in the Code allowing individual authors to discard an otherwise valid type designation based on considerations of usage. Even if all...
  9. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    Cuvier G. "1817" (=1816). Le règne animal distribué d'après son organisation, pour servir de base à l'histoire naturelle des animaux et d'introduction à l'anatomie comparée. Tome I, contenant l'introduction, les mammifères et les oiseaux. Deterville, Paris. p. 318. The included nominal species...
  10. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    (Note - There is also an earlier wannabe designation (of the same species) in : Jardine W, Selby PJ. 1826-1835. Illustrations of ornithology. Vol. II. WH Lizard, Edinburg. text to pl. 66. This was published in July 1829 fide Zimmer 1926 (based in part on Sherborn 1894). The wording here is...
  11. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    Falco urubitinga Gmelin 1788, I'm afraid. Designation here.
  12. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    Dumont 1816 (published 12 Oct 1816, see here, thus indeed demonstrably before Cuvier "1817" = 2 Dec 1816, see here): Gregory et al : Is this defensible under the current Code ? Note ICZN 67.7 : The nominal species designated by Gray for Morphnus 'Cuvier' was unquestionably eligible to be...
  13. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    The central argument here conflicts with my reading of the Code. (1) Verheyen did not present his Harpiini as a nomen novum for Thrasaetinae Blyth 1850 at all : I see nothing that looks like "the proposal of a new replacement name (nomen novum) for an available name" in the sense of ICZN 12.2.3...
  14. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    Temminck initially published this bird on plate 85 of his Nouveau recueil de planches coloriées, calling it Falco riocourii on the wrapper of livr. 15 of this work, which appeared in Oct 1821. This wrapper is reproduced in Dickinson 2012. The decision to add texts to the Planches coloriées dates...
  15. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    There is no fully straightforward answer. Assuming there is nothing that is escaping us : Both names have been used after 1899 : the condition of 23.9.1.1 is not met, hence 23.9.1 does not protect prevailing usage against the application of 23.1, which rules that "the valid name of a taxon is...
  16. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    Kaup's work was dated to 15 Mar 1844 by Mathews without explanation (fide Zimmer in the Ayer's library catalogue). I can't confirm 15 Mar right now, but this work was noticed in Literarische Zeitung on 20 Mar 1844. Blyth's work was in the July 1844 issue of Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., and thus...
  17. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    I agree with Mark's findings. Name : Nauclerus Authority : Vigors Year : 1825 OD ref : Vigors NA. 1825. On a new genus of Falconidae. In: Sketches in ornithology; or, observations on the leading affinities of some of the more extensive groups of birds. Zool. J., 2: 385-387. Page : 386 OD link ...
  18. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    I do not read Art. 11.6.1 as having the power to make a name available if it fails to meet some other requirement of availability, not related to the validity of the name in the OD. (Even though the article may, admittedly, give that impression when read in isolation.) Art. 12 tells us that...
  19. l_raty

    Accipitridae

    I'd be cautious with this part of the tree. Nagy & Tökölyi did not give an explicit list of the sequences they used. (Unfortunately, this becomes more and more frequent: such lists, which usually appeared in the papers themselves, are now either relegated to online supplementary files [which...
Back
Top