-
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.
Polyborus vs. Caracara (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Melanie
- Start date
Richard Klim
-------------------------
AOU 1998. Check-list of North American Birds. 7th Edition.
http://www.aou.org/checklist/north/pdf/AOUchecklistTin-Falcon.pdf (p106)
Although White et al 1994 (HBW2) had earlier commented:
Richard
http://www.aou.org/checklist/north/pdf/AOUchecklistTin-Falcon.pdf (p106)
"Caracara Merrem 1826...
Notes.--Formerly listed as Polyborus. The type-species of Polyborus Vieillot, 1816, is not identifiable; therefore, the name Caracara must be used (Banks and Dove 1992)."
Notes.--Formerly listed as Polyborus. The type-species of Polyborus Vieillot, 1816, is not identifiable; therefore, the name Caracara must be used (Banks and Dove 1992)."
Although White et al 1994 (HBW2) had earlier commented:
"Recently, it has been shown that the time-honoured generic name Polyborus was originally applied to a form of uncertain identity. As a result, it has been proposed that Caracara should therefore substitute it as the name for this genus. However, not only has Polyborus been used almost universally for over 150 years, but it is also the basis of the subfamily name Polyborinae. In the interests of stability, one of the overriding principles in zoological nomenclature, it seems likely that Polyborus will be retained."
Richard
Last edited:
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Perhaps if the type species was at least identifiable to subfamily, the subfamily name remains valid...???
Richard
Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
Similar situation with the name of family Neosittidae while Sitella's are in genus Daphoenositta.
Melanie
Well-known member
Well, the NACC has already changed the subfamily name into Caracarinae
http://www.aou.org/checklist/north/full.php#Falconiformes
I am curious whether other check-lists will follow.
http://www.aou.org/checklist/north/full.php#Falconiformes
I am curious whether other check-lists will follow.
Richard Klim
-------------------------
I missed that.
Dickinson 2003 retained Polyborinae, but IOC, BLI and Cornell/Clements don't list subfamilies.
Interestingly, AOU-SACC includes caracaras within Falconinae (contra NACC).
Richard
Last edited:
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Maybe AOU needs a joint Pan-American systematics committee to work/agree?
on higher-level taxonomy, with NACC & SACC responsible for regional lists and species/subspecies-level taxonomy (although there is plenty of scope for conflict, even there).Richard
mb1848
Well-known member
Bonaparte used Polyborinae as a subfamily which had in it the genus(geni?) of Polyborus and Polyboroides. With Polyboroides listed first. So maybe Bonaparte's subfamily Polyborinae is named after Polboroides?
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJ...naparte&client=firefox-a#v=onepage&q=&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJ...naparte&client=firefox-a#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Melanie
Well-known member
No, Polyborinae was created by Lafresnaye in 1839 with Polyborus as type. Polyboroides was included by Bonaparte in 1850.
http://books.google.de/books?id=ttU...lesson&dq=polyborinae+lesson&client=firefox-a
http://books.google.de/books?id=ttU...lesson&dq=polyborinae+lesson&client=firefox-a
l_raty
laurent raty
Polyborus was introduced by Vieillot in 1816 (reprint from 1883 here), with a description fitting Northern Caracara, but a single included species cited as "Caracara, Buff." The latter is usually believed to refer to the bird described in Histoire Naturelle des Oiseaux, 1, p. 222, based on a description by Marcgrave.
The best other ID guess we have for this bird, AFAIK, is Circus buffoni. (See also Hellmayr & Connover 1949.)
Incidentally... That "Caracara, Buff." should refer to this particular bird is also, to some extent at least, a guess. Buffon also wrote this...
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Laurent,
If I understand correctly, the type-species from which subfamily name Polyborinae was derived was not necessarily even a caracara sp, and so the name should not be used?
Richard
If I understand correctly, the type-species from which subfamily name Polyborinae was derived was not necessarily even a caracara sp, and so the name should not be used?
Richard
l_raty
laurent raty
This is the argument.
Now... I keep running against this in publications after publications but, looking at this a bit closer: I'm actually rather perplexed by the seemingly universally accepted notion that "Caracara, Buff.", which is not an available species-group name, could be eligible to be the type species of any genus-group name. (See Art.67.2.)
(If it's not, then the entire discussion that led to the generic replacement is very seriously flawed. The name should be seen as having been established without included nominal species; the nominal species first subsequently included in it should be viewed as its originally included nominal species (67.2.2); and the type species should be selected among these. The first subsequent publication including nominal species in Polyborus would almost certainly be this.)
Last edited:
mb1848
Well-known member
Buffon did not use a latin name simply refered to it as Caracara of Marcgrave. But Marcgrave used a scientific name of Caracara brasiliensibus. So the nominal species is C. brasiliensibus Buffon (1769?) ????
http://books.google.com/books?id=GZ...A#v=onepage&q=Caracara brasiliensibus&f=false .
http://books.google.com/books?id=GZ...A#v=onepage&q=Caracara brasiliensibus&f=false .
Last edited:
l_raty
laurent raty
No, Marcgrave is pre-Linnaean (he died in 1648), thus did not use "scientific names". "CARACARA Brasiliensibus" is actually a simple statement that the bird he was describing there was called Caracara by native Brazilians.
http://gdz.sub.uni-goettingen.de/dms/load/img/?IDDOC=234575 , page "355: 211".
Note that most of his descriptions begin with "[something] Brasiliensibus"...
Buffon is not pre-Linnaean, but he did not use binominal nomenclature, hence his names are not available.
"Caracara, Buff.", as such, in addition to being an unavailable name, is also in my opinion an unidentifiable concept, because Buffon used this name for two completely different birds in his writings. One was indeed Marcgrave's bird, that is now deemed unidentifiable. The other (see last link in my previous post) was a bird described by Reverend Father Jean-Baptiste du Tertre--a capon-sized bird observed in the French Antilles, called "faisan" ("pheasant") by local French people, longer-legged and longer-necked than a fowl, with a blue neck and breast, a grey back, and short black wings and tail. Buffon named this bird based on its call, described by du Tertre as "caracara-caracara". Du Tertre also made clear that this bird used to be domesticated and, when so, behaved very dominantly, and that its flesh was tasty. This bird has been thought to be a trumpeter by several subsequent authors (including Buffon himself, at a later stage), but there are no trumpeters in the Antilles. Based on the description, I actually think feral guineafowls would be a much better guess (these were introduced in the Antilles back in the 17th C).
Anyway, my concern in the present case is due to:
All of these discussions become irrelevant if Buffon's Caracara cannot be the type of Polyborus.
http://gdz.sub.uni-goettingen.de/dms/load/img/?IDDOC=234575 , page "355: 211".
Note that most of his descriptions begin with "[something] Brasiliensibus"...
Buffon is not pre-Linnaean, but he did not use binominal nomenclature, hence his names are not available.
"Caracara, Buff.", as such, in addition to being an unavailable name, is also in my opinion an unidentifiable concept, because Buffon used this name for two completely different birds in his writings. One was indeed Marcgrave's bird, that is now deemed unidentifiable. The other (see last link in my previous post) was a bird described by Reverend Father Jean-Baptiste du Tertre--a capon-sized bird observed in the French Antilles, called "faisan" ("pheasant") by local French people, longer-legged and longer-necked than a fowl, with a blue neck and breast, a grey back, and short black wings and tail. Buffon named this bird based on its call, described by du Tertre as "caracara-caracara". Du Tertre also made clear that this bird used to be domesticated and, when so, behaved very dominantly, and that its flesh was tasty. This bird has been thought to be a trumpeter by several subsequent authors (including Buffon himself, at a later stage), but there are no trumpeters in the Antilles. Based on the description, I actually think feral guineafowls would be a much better guess (these were introduced in the Antilles back in the 17th C).
Anyway, my concern in the present case is due to:
67.2. Species eligible for type fixation (originally included nominal species). A nominal species is only eligible to be fixed as the type species of a nominal genus or subgenus if it is an originally included nominal species.
67.2.1. In the meaning of the Code the "originally included nominal species" comprise only those included in the newly established nominal genus or subgenus, having been cited in the original publication by an available name (including citation by an incorrect spelling [Art. 67.6]) of a species or subspecies (see Articles 45.6 and 68.2), or having been cited there as the deliberate application of a previous misidentification (see Articles 11.10, 67.13 and 69.2.4).
From this it seems to follow that "Caracara, Buff.", the only species cited by Vieillot when he introduced Polyborus in his Analyse d'une Nouvelle Ornithologie élémentaire, is not eligible to be the type species of the genus. The genus probably fulfills:67.2.1. In the meaning of the Code the "originally included nominal species" comprise only those included in the newly established nominal genus or subgenus, having been cited in the original publication by an available name (including citation by an incorrect spelling [Art. 67.6]) of a species or subspecies (see Articles 45.6 and 68.2), or having been cited there as the deliberate application of a previous misidentification (see Articles 11.10, 67.13 and 69.2.4).
67.2.2. If a nominal genus or subgenus was established before 1931 (in the case of an ichnotaxon, before 2000 [Art. 66.1]) without included nominal species [Art. 12], the nominal species that were first subsequently and expressly included in it are deemed to be the only originally included nominal species.
All of the discussions I have read about this case have focused on the (un)identifiability of Marcgrave's bird, that forms the base of (one of) Buffon's Caracara(s), itself assumed to be the type species of Polyborus by monotypy.All of these discussions become irrelevant if Buffon's Caracara cannot be the type of Polyborus.
Last edited:
mb1848
Well-known member
I think that Merrem's C. plancus is Cathartes plancus not Caracara plancus, anyway.
http://books.google.com/books?id=p6...C0zP_mdE5YJA&lr=#v=onepage&q=Caracara&f=false .
Page 159 & 160.
http://books.google.com/books?id=p6...C0zP_mdE5YJA&lr=#v=onepage&q=Caracara&f=false .
Page 159 & 160.
l_raty
laurent raty
:eek!: Gothic is not what I read most easily, and my German is a bit too poor to guess when I can't read a word... But that a genus name Caracara is proposed there seems at least unclear to me, indeed.
Any genuine German speaker who could translate this text?
(As far as I understand, he first states that to him (Mir scheinen sie [...]) Caracaras seem to form a separate genus, with several characteristics (welche sich durch [...] auszeichnen.), but then he adds other characteristics (Sie leben in den [...]), and says that in all of these (In allen diesen Eigenschaften [...]), they are close to Cathartes vultures and can be united with them in a single genus.
Then he goes on placing the species in a genus starting with a C., and using Caracara in full only in his vernacular names (Klagender Caracara for C. plancus)...
What does the C. stand for?)
Last edited:
Similar threads
