The ABA says: "We begin with a bit of linguistic housekeeping. As it turns out, the species epiphet wilsonia is the wrong gender for the genus Charadrius, an oversight that has gone without rectification for 143 years since the species was formally described. This proposal would, at long last, rectify it."
Quotes are from the wilsonis/wilsonius proposal.
“The Fifth Edition of the AOU Check-List (AOU 1957) restored Wilson’s Plover to the genus Charadrius. That edition and those subsequent (AOU 1983, AOU 1998, AOU 2014), however, retained the species epithet wilsonia, apparently considering that name a noun in apposition (see ICZN 31.2.1) rather than an adjective requiring gender agreement (see ICZN 31.2) with the masculine genus name Charadrius.”
Ord named the bird in the genus Charadrius. AEgialitis wilsonia first edition 1886 and 2nd edition 1895 AOU check-list. Ochthodromus wilsonius 1910 3rd edition AOU check-list , Pagolla wilsonia 4th ed. AOU check-list.
Fourth Edition of the Howard and Moore Complete Checklist (Dickinson and Remsen 2013), where the epithet wilsonia is indicated to be “invariable.”.
Wilsonia is mentioned in David & Gosselin 2013. Variable species-group names and their gender endings. Appendix 4 in H&M4.
http://www.birdforum.net/archive/index.php?t-265206.html .
“There is no documented suggestion anywhere that George Ord considered wilsonia a noun when he described and named the species in 1814. There is, however, unequivocal evidence that he considered it an adjective, as did his contemporaries and as did ornithological taxonomists for the next 143 years.”
There were no regles/rules for naming birds in 1814-1818.
But, Linnaeus’s (1751) aphorisms from the Philosophia botanica served as the basis for nomenclatural practices up to the 1840s in zoology, when the Strickland Code was devised (Strickland 1843), and up to the 1860s in botany, when de Candolle Jr. (1867) published the first botanical rules (Nicolson 1991).
In Aphorism #257 of the Philosophia Botanica, Linnaeus (1751) clearly defines a trivial name as a single word (vocabulo uno). However, more importantly, he also indicates that trivial names do not follow any laws and can be selected freely (vocabulo libere undequaque defunto). This largely explains why Linnaeus changed some specific (trivial) names between the 10th and the 12th edition of the Systema Naturae… (Celebrating 250 Dynamic Years of Nomenclatural Debates Dayrat 2010)
Augustin-Pyramus de Candolle is a central author in nomenclatural history because he provided one of the first definitions of the principle of “priority” in his Théorie élémentaire de la botanique (1813), a cornerstone in the history of systematics (it also is in this book that de Candolle coined and defined “taxonomie,” as the théorie des classifications, i.e., classification theory). De Candolle (1813:227–228) mentioned three primary principles: (1) names must be in Latin; (2) names must follow basic grammar (e.g., names mixing Greek and Latin roots can be replaced); (3) the first name given to a species must remain unchanged, unless it is already in use for another species or contradicts some essential rules of nomenclature. De Candolle (1813:228–241) Ord in Philadelphia in 1814 had not read this and so was following Linne. But Vieillot in France in 1818 most probably had read de Candolle. Thus he felt the need to fix Char. Wilsonia.(?) The fact that he did does not make it correct today following the 1999 ICZN rules.
Ord in 1814 capitalized Wilsonia. Linnaeus capitalized most of the species group names that he used as nouns, but not all. In the works of Linnaeus (and authors who followed him like Ord) capitalization of a specie name may have relevance in indicating a noun when they can be regarded as either a noun or adjective. (Art. 31.2.2) Normand & Gosselin 2000) Ord in 1825 supplement 2nd edition simply followed the respected Vieillot. Philadelphia of 1825 was pro-republicanism and pro-French.
“ It is the lack of grammatical agreement between the masculine genus name and Ord’s species epithet that has apparently misled more recent authorities to construe wilsonia as a noun in apposition. There is, however, no indication anywhere that Ord meant to create a new noun, or what such a noun, feminine or neuter plural in form, might be intended to mean.”
Capitalization of Wilsonia is an indication by Ord.
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/46337984#page/57/mode/1up .
“Lapsus.”
See my first post. Wilsonia is a latinization, I think?? Bad latinizations are misspellings the 1999 code does not let you fix.
32.5.1. If there is in the original publication itself, without recourse to any external source of information, clear evidence of an inadvertent error, such as a lapsus calami or a copyist's or printer's error, it must be corrected. Incorrect transliteration or latinization, or use of an inappropriate connecting vowel, are not to be considered inadvertent errors.
“In an ironic echo of Ord’s own error, the AOU’s first edition had named the bird Aegialitis wilsonius (1886), notwithstanding Coues’s (1882) admonition that the genus when spelled thus was feminine; the error was corrected in the abridged reprint of that edition (AOU 1889)”
I have looked at four copies of the 1886 first edition of the check-list and all have AE. wilsonia. Perhaps they all were revised editions(?) but it is not apparent anywhere. All were google books from different libraries.