• 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.

Pycnonotidae (1 Viewer)

I am not sure I follow all the arguments of this. But logically, reading the list attributed to article 58, I would as a complete nob have assumed that the omission of spelling differences between words considered Latin and Greek was an unintended omission from the list. That obviously given the rest of the post might have no bearing to whether the word was preoccupied. :eek!:

Niels
 
Pycnonotus pseudosimplex, sp. nov.

Subir B. Shakya, Haw Chuan Lim, Robert G. Moyle, Mustafa Abdul Rahman, Maklarin Lakim, Frederick H. Sheldon. A cryptic new species of bulbul from Borneo. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club, 139(1):46-55 (2019). https://doi.org/10.25226/bboc.v139i1.2019.a3

Abstract:

Cream-vented Bulbul Pycnonotus simplex of Borneo was previously considered to be polymorphic in iris colour, having either red or white (creamy-yellow) irides. Mitochondrial DNA sequence comparisons, however, indicate that white- and red-eyed Bornean individuals are not closely related to one another. Instead, white-eyed birds are sister to Ashy-fronted Bulbul P. cinereifrons of Palawan Island, in the south-west Philippines, and red-eyed birds are sister to white-eyed P. simplex of the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Consequently, we elect to treat the white-eyed Bornean population as a distinct, previously overlooked species. In respect to plumage, white- and red-eyed individuals are almost identical, varying only slightly in the amount of yellow coloration in their feathers. The two taxa are sympatric at some localities, but white-eyed individuals are rarer and more consistently associated with mature forest than red-eyed birds.

[pdf]

Pycnonotus pseudosimplex, sp. nov.
 
I just noticed that Pycnonotus erythrophthalmos is nested within this clade. I thought it was close to Ixidia squamata and cyaniventris

Suggested French name : Bulbul de Sarawak
 
Last edited:
Is there a paper stating that Bonapartia Boettikofer, 1896 is a Nomen Oblitum and Bonapartia Goode & Bean, 1896 a Nomen Protectum?
Click to expand...
Not that I am aware. But:
Eschmeyer (online Catalog of Fishes, 2003) notes of Genus Bonapartia Goode & Bean 1896, "Possibly preoccupied by Bonapartia Buettikofer, June 1896 in Aves; date of Goode & Bean being after July 20, 1896, and probably 24 August 1896. If preoccupied, should be replaced by Zaphotias Goode & Bean 1898"
 
mb1848 said:
Not that I am aware. But:
Eschmeyer (online Catalog of Fishes, 2003) notes of Genus Bonapartia Goode & Bean 1896, "Possibly preoccupied by Bonapartia Buettikofer, June 1896 in Aves; date of Goode & Bean being after July 20, 1896, and probably 24 August 1896. If preoccupied, should be replaced by Zaphotias Goode & Bean 1898"
Click to expand...

I knew this citation. However, Bernard Seret told me that this name was a Nomen Oblitum. I never knew where he obtained this information.
 
Last edited:
Fishes of the Western North Atlantic Soft-rayed Bony Fishes: Orders Isospondyli and Giganturoidei: Part 4 1964. “A re-examnation of the evidence has shown that Goode and Bean themselves acknowledged that their Bonapartia name was preoccupied by Bonapartia Buttikoffer 1896. They therefore proposed the name Zaphotias as a substitute name in the Appendix to the Fishes of the North and Middle America .”
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/32368#page/674/mode/1up .
This name was used again in 1939. But the authors in 1964 refused to use Zaphotias saying they knew it was not valid at this time but they hoped that the ICZN would agree with them.
I’m not sure if anyone made a request to the ICZN.
Bonapartia Buttikoffer was in the Index Zoologicus for 1902.
https://books.google.com/books?id=XZYdbbbTuigC&dq=Bonapartia+Aves&source=gbs_navlinks_s .
 
Last edited:
mb1848 said:
Fishes of the Western North Atlantic Soft-rayed Bony Fishes: Orders Isospondyli and Giganturoidei: Part 4 1964. “A re-examnation of the evidence has shown that Goode and Bean themselves acknowledged that their Bonapartia name was preoccupied by Bonapartia Buttikoffer 1896. They therefore proposed the name Zaphotias as a substitute name in the Appendix to the Fishes of the North and Middle America .”
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/32368#page/674/mode/1up .
This name was used again in 1939. But the authors in 1964 refused to use Zaphotias saying they knew it was not valid at this time but they hoped that the ICZN would agree with them.
I’m not sure if anyone made a request to the ICZN.
Bonapartia Buttikoffer was in the Index Zoologicus for 1902.
https://books.google.com/books?id=XZYdbbbTuigC&dq=Bonapartia+Aves&source=gbs_navlinks_s .
Click to expand...
Good & Bean's Oceanic ichthyology was published three times; two of the editions bear the date 1895, the third one 1896.
(In principle, you'd need hard evidence that the two editions where 1895 is the stated date were not published in that year; short of that (e.g., if you merely fail to find external evidence confirming the date stated in the work), the Code rules that we must accept "1895" = 31 Dec 1895. The dates of this work were discussed by Cohen 1963 (https://doi.org/10.3366/jsbnh.1963.4.3.162), but I have no access to this. (Anyone...?))

In 1898, Jordan & Evermann published Zaphotias as a replacement name: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/7516861
The name was attributed to Goode & Bean, but nothing there was clearly or explicitly provided by them (and George Brown Goode had in fact been dead for a couple of years), so that the authors of this name are obviously, IMHO, Jordan & Evermann. (The attribution presumably just reflected the authorship of the original name -- i.e., G&B were those who described the taxonomic group. This also means that there was no real acknowledgement by "Goode and Bean themselves" that the fish name was preoccupied.)

(As an aside, there is also a potential issue with the authorship of Bonapartia itself. Jordan & Evermann 1896 used this name in the first part of their work (https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/7536170), declared to have been published 3 Oct 1896 in its second part (https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/7530684), and where they extensively used as a source "advance proof-sheets of the "Oceanic Ichthyology" of Goode & Bean" (see https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/7535536). If Goode & Bean's work was not published in 1895, they authored Bonapartia only if this work can be demonstrated to have existed as a published work on a day earlier than 3 Oct 1896. Otherwise, Jordan & Evermann would be the authors here as well. Perhaps there is a straightforward answer to this -- that might depend on what "after July 20, 1896, and probably 24 August 1896" means precisely, which I don't know.)

There is no Bonapartia on the Official List, thus the ICZN presumably never issued anything about these names. (I'd also expect Bill Eschmeyer to have known it, should it have been the case.)

Bonapartia Büttikofer is indeed cited by Waterhouse 1902 (for non-US readers: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/24682589), but this does not count as usage in the sense of ICZN 29.3 (see ICZN 29.3.6), and would not prevent a reversal of precedence. The name was also cited as a synonym of Pycnonotus in the Peters' check-list in 1960 (https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/14480900), and was listed in the index to this check-list in 1987 (https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/14476848); this does not count either.

Does the fish name qualify as a nomen protectum ? I assume it probably does, but this must be demonstrated if the bird name is to be made a nomen oblitum relative to it. (This would require 25 published works, by at least 10 authors, where Bonapartia Goode & Bean was used as valid after 1969; I don't find them in BHL, in any case.)
 
Last edited:
IOC Updates Diary May 9

Split Grey-cheeked Bulbul (Alophoixus tephrogenys, including gutteralis) from Brown-cheeked Bulbul (Alophoixus bres) with revision of Pycnonotidae. Note English name assigments with the split.

Split Penan Bulbul (Alophoixus ruficrissus, including fowleri and meratusensis ssp. nov.) from Ochraceous Bulbul with revision of Pycnonotidae.

Revise sequence and genera of Pycnonotidae based primarily on Shakya & Sheldon (2017).
 
Peter Kovalik said:
IOC Updates Diary May 9


Revise sequence and genera of Pycnonotidae based primarily on Shakya & Sheldon (2017).
Click to expand...


The “Golden Bulbuls” were formerly assigned to Thapsinillas, but that genus is embedded in Hypsipetes (Shakya & Sheldon 2017); move all three species to Hypsipetes.
Click to expand...

For my part, I moved some Hypsipetes in an enlarged genus Thapsinillas with sixteen species, limiting Hypsipetes to amaurotis, borbonicus, crassirostris, ganeesa, leucocephalus, madagascariensis, moheliensis, olivaceus, parvirostris and thompsoni.


Move Pycnonotus leucogrammicus to Hemixos [...]Sister to other members of Hemixos. Move to that genus from Pycnonotus (Shakya & Sheldon 2017).
Click to expand...

For me, tympanistrigus and leucogrammicus are closely related, so the name Bostrycholophus could be applied for them.
 
Last edited:
LeNomenclatoriste said:
For me, tympanistrigus and leucogrammicus are closely related, so the name Bostrycholophus could be applied for them.
Click to expand...
You mean leucogenys ? (This, and not leucogrammicus, is the type of Bostrycholophus.)

I must say I'm not exactly comfortable either with moving tympanistrigus into a genus it was hitherto not thought to be part of, based exclusively on a node in a super-tree (built from a data set which was far from being gap-less), with a Bayesian posterior probability of 0.6 (I'd generally not trust anything below 0.95) and a ML bootstrap support of 42 (I'd prefer > 80)...
 
l_raty said:
You mean leucogenys ? (This, and not leucogrammicus, is the type of Bostrycholophus.)
Click to expand...

No, leucogrammicus. Since Brachypus tigus (
= tympanistrigus) seem to be the type species of Bostrycholophus, I put them 2gether in this genus. I'm based on morphology only, both are very similar.

Is there a problem somewhere?
 
Last edited:
Bostrycholophus Büttikofer, 1896, is a replacement name for Centrolophus Büttikofer, 1896 (not Centrolophus de Lacépède, 1802), the type of which, by original designation, is Centrolophus leucogenys (Gray & Hardw.).
 
Name : Centrolophus
Authority : Büttikofer
Year : 1896
OD ref : Büttikofer J. 1896. On the genus Pycnonotus and some allied genera. Notes Leyden Mus., 17: 225-252.
Page : 230
OD link : https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9640419
Included nominal species : Centrolophus leucogenys
Type species : Brachypus leucogenys Gray 1835
Type species valid syn. : in use
Fixation by : original designation
Fixation ref : as OD
Page : as OD
Fixation link : as OD
Type OD ref : Gray JE. 1833-34. Illustrations of Indian zoology; chiefly selected from the collection of Major-General Hardwicke, F.R.S., [etc.] Vol. II. Adolphus Richter and Co, London.
Page : pl.35
Type OD link : https://archive.org/stream/IllustrationsOfIndianZoology2/Hardwicke2#page/n78/mode/1up
Notes : Junior homonym of Centrolophus Lacépède 1802 (Pisces).
Available : yes
Family : Pycnonotidae

Name : Bostrycholophus
Authority : Büttikofer
Year : 1896
OD ref : Büttikofer J. 1896. Rectification of two generic names. Notes Leyden Mus., 18: 58.
Page : 58
OD link : https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9632213
Included nominal species : none
Type species : Brachypus leucogenys Gray 1835
Type species valid syn. : in use
Fixation by : replacement name
Fixation ref : see original name
Page : see original name
Fixation link : see original name
Type OD ref : Gray JE. 1833-34. Illustrations of Indian zoology; chiefly selected from the collection of Major-General Hardwicke, F.R.S., [etc.] Vol. II. Adolphus Richter and Co, London.
Page : pl.35
Type OD link : https://archive.org/stream/IllustrationsOfIndianZoology2/Hardwicke2#page/n78/mode/1up
Notes : New name for Centrolophus Büttikofer 1896, preoccupied by Centrolophus Lacépède 1802 (Pisces). ““[…] Centrolophus and Gymnocrotaphus are already preoccupied among the Fishes, the first being used by Lacépède, the second by Günther. I propose, therefore, to substitute the name Centrolophus (pp. 226 and 230) by Bostrycholophus (curl-crest) on account of the upward-bent longer crest-feathers.”
Available : yes
Family : Pycnonotidae

Name : Gymnocrotaphus
Authority : Büttikofer
Year : 1896
OD ref : Büttikofer J. 1896. On the genus Pycnonotus and some allied genera. Notes Leyden Mus., 17: 225-252.
Page : 245
OD link : https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9640434
Included nominal species : Gymnocrotaphus tygus
Type species : Brachypus tigus Bonaparte 1850
Type species valid syn. : Ixos tympanistrigus Müller 1835
Fixation by : original designation
Fixation ref : as OD
Page : as OD
Fixation link : as OD
Type OD ref : Bonaparte CL. 1850. Conspectus generum avium. EJ Brill, Leiden.
Page : 264
Type OD link : https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/43560401
Notes : Junior homonym of Gymnocrotaphus Günther 1859 (Pisces). Type species name misspelled 'tygus'' by Büttiköffer.
Available : yes
Family : Pycnonotidae

Name : Bonapartia
Authority : Büttikofer
Year : 1896
OD ref : Büttikofer J. 1896. Rectification of two generic names. Notes Leyden Mus., 18: 58.
Page : 58
OD link : https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9632213
Included nominal species : none
Type species : Brachypus tigus Bonaparte 1850
Type species valid syn. : Ixos tympanistrigus Müller 1835
Fixation by : replacement name
Fixation ref : see original name
Page : see original name
Fixation link : see original name
Type OD ref : Bonaparte CL. 1850. Conspectus generum avium. EJ Brill, Leiden.
Page : 264
Type OD link : https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/43560401
Notes : Dated 15 Jul 1896 in the Richmond Index. New name for Gymnocrotaphus Büttikofer 1896, preoccupied by Gymnocrotaphus Günther 1859 (Pisces). Homonym of Bonapartia Goode & Bean 1896 (1895 ?) (Pisces) (https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/2105603 , stated date 1895; https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9048621 , stated date 1895; https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/7536170, stated date 1896). “[…] Centrolophus and Gymnocrotaphus are already preoccupied among the Fishes, the first being used by Lacépède, the second by Günther. I propose, therefore, to substitute the name […] Gymnocrotaphus (pp. 227 and 245) by Bonapartia, Bonaparte being the author of the single species of this peculiar genus.”
Available : yes
Family : Pycnonotidae
 

Similar threads

Fred Ruhe
Restricted lineage diversification and endemism among corvoid birds
Replies
0
Views
621
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe
Acanthis
Passeriformes
9 10 11
Replies
206
Views
29K
mb1848
mb1848
Fred Ruhe
Pantropical distribution: Coraciiformes
Replies
1
Views
652
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe
Earth history and the passerine superradiation
Replies
0
Views
1K
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe
Peter Kovalik
The Evolution Conference 2016
Replies
12
Views
3K
cwbirder
C

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top