No, the name ochruros is not invalid, but the subspecies it is referring to possibly is - it is very variable and may well originate from secondary intergradation. It is Gmelin's name from eighteenth century, so the type may well not be available. The type locality is Gilan mountains in northern Iran, close to Caspian sea - so it is from the eastern parts of the nominate ochruros distribution area.
-
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.
Redstarts (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Peter Kovalik
- Start date
Björn Bergenholtz
(former alias "Calalp")
Black Redstart Phoenicurus ochruros S.G. GMELIN 1774 (here) as "Motacilla ochruros"
Also see Mlíkovský (2011), here (p.99):
If of any help?
Björn
--
Also see Mlíkovský (2011), here (p.99):
One of the types, claimed as a "Holotype"(?) according to the Dutch Wiki (here), is allegedly specimen "94764", kept in the collection of Museum Koeing (Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig), in Bonn, Germany.
If of any help?
Björn
--
Last edited:
l_raty
laurent raty
Gmelin described "the male" and "the female", which proves there is a type series (no holotype), but gives no indication on how many birds it would be made of. (A description of "the male" or "the female" of a species doesn't need to be based on a single individual male or female. In principle, in such cases, all the individuals that the author thought of as being included in the new taxon are syntypes; any available evidence, from the OD or from elsewhere, published or unpublished, can be used to identify these individuals.)
The original plate, to complete Björn's link to the OD: [here].
I'm aware of no cases where this has been done in practice, but I don't think any nomenclatural rule would forbid using a name as valid at the species level, but deeming it unidentifiable at the subspecies level. The result would simply be a species without a nominal subspecies.
The original plate, to complete Björn's link to the OD: [here].
I'm aware of no cases where this has been done in practice, but I don't think any nomenclatural rule would forbid using a name as valid at the species level, but deeming it unidentifiable at the subspecies level. The result would simply be a species without a nominal subspecies.
Last edited:
mb1848
Well-known member
Alexander Koenig Museum
"The most precious specimens are types (holotypes, syntypes and paratypes) of more than 300 taxa. The oldest series of exhibits belongs to the collection of the "bird pastor" Christian Ludwig Brehm" I could see Brehm getting hold of Gmelin's birds.
"The most precious specimens are types (holotypes, syntypes and paratypes) of more than 300 taxa. The oldest series of exhibits belongs to the collection of the "bird pastor" Christian Ludwig Brehm" I could see Brehm getting hold of Gmelin's birds.
Last edited:
Snapdragyn
Well-known member
Does anyone have access to this?
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Je suis un mignon petit Traquet rubicole
Me 😏
Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
Martinez, N., Kirwan, G.M., and Schweizer, M. (2022) Resolving disputed subspecies distribution limits, and revealing intraspecific intergradation, in the Common Redstart Phoenicurus phoenicurus using citizen science and museum data. Journal of Ornithology. Published online 13 August 2022.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-022-02007-x
Abstract
Contact zones with hybridization are documented for several Palearctic bird taxa. However, their extent is still poorly understood in many cases, including the Common Redstart Phoenicurus phoenicurus. Nominate P. p. phoenicurus breeds across most of the species’ range, whereas P. p. samamisicus is restricted to the south-eastern part. Their precise distributions are disputed as is the existence and prevalence of hybridization between them within potential contact zones in the Balkans, Turkey and the Caucasus region. Adult males differ by the presence (samamisicus) or absence (phoenicurus) of a white wing patch; however, there is variation and white is lacking in most second-calendar-year males of both subspecies. Further, male samamisicus is thought to be darker on the mantle. We map the occurrence of pre-defined states in these two characters during the breeding season across the species’ range based upon photos in online citizen science databases, subsequently complemented by an examination of museum specimens to refute or verify the pattern inferred from photos. We demonstrate that the extent of white in the wing varies throughout the range, but nevertheless is geographically structured. Adult breeders with a large white wing patch and black mantle occurred only in Greece, southern Bulgaria, Turkey, Crimea, and the Caucasus to Iran, which should be considered the breeding range of samamisicus. Earlier reports of intermediates and/or phoenicurus breeding there perhaps reflect confusion with second-year male samamisicus. Broad areas in the Balkans and north of the Black Sea were revealed as zones of intraspecific intergradation. Employing citizen science data enabled us to acquire a much larger sample than by using museum material alone. Although photographs from citizen science databases are unlikely to ever completely replace museum specimens, our approach of combining both types of data could prove a model for similar future research.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-022-02007-x
Abstract
Contact zones with hybridization are documented for several Palearctic bird taxa. However, their extent is still poorly understood in many cases, including the Common Redstart Phoenicurus phoenicurus. Nominate P. p. phoenicurus breeds across most of the species’ range, whereas P. p. samamisicus is restricted to the south-eastern part. Their precise distributions are disputed as is the existence and prevalence of hybridization between them within potential contact zones in the Balkans, Turkey and the Caucasus region. Adult males differ by the presence (samamisicus) or absence (phoenicurus) of a white wing patch; however, there is variation and white is lacking in most second-calendar-year males of both subspecies. Further, male samamisicus is thought to be darker on the mantle. We map the occurrence of pre-defined states in these two characters during the breeding season across the species’ range based upon photos in online citizen science databases, subsequently complemented by an examination of museum specimens to refute or verify the pattern inferred from photos. We demonstrate that the extent of white in the wing varies throughout the range, but nevertheless is geographically structured. Adult breeders with a large white wing patch and black mantle occurred only in Greece, southern Bulgaria, Turkey, Crimea, and the Caucasus to Iran, which should be considered the breeding range of samamisicus. Earlier reports of intermediates and/or phoenicurus breeding there perhaps reflect confusion with second-year male samamisicus. Broad areas in the Balkans and north of the Black Sea were revealed as zones of intraspecific intergradation. Employing citizen science data enabled us to acquire a much larger sample than by using museum material alone. Although photographs from citizen science databases are unlikely to ever completely replace museum specimens, our approach of combining both types of data could prove a model for similar future research.
Brian J Small
Well-known member
An excellent and very enjoyable article.
Similar threads
