[l_raty]

Originally Posted by Melanie

Was there ever a DNA analysis to clarify the validity of Discosura letitiae?

There are no sequences in GenBank identified as this taxon.
(It stands as a species based on mainly on Graves 1999 [here], which was based on morphology.)

[Melanie]

Biogeography and taxonomy of racket-tail hummingbirds (Aves: Trochilidae: Ocreatus): evidence for species delimitation from morphology and display behavior
KARL-L. SCHUCHMANN, ANDRÉ-A. WELLER, DIETMAR JÜRGENS

Abstract

We analyzed geographic variation, biogeography, and intrageneric relationships of racket-tail hummingbirds Ocreatus (Aves, Trochilidae). Presently, the genus is usually considered monospecific, with O. underwoodii including eight subspecies (polystictus, discifer, underwoodii, incommodus, melanantherus, peruanus, annae, addae), although up to three species have been recognized by some authors. In order to evaluate the current taxonomy we studied geographic variation in coloration, mensural characters, and behavioral data of all Ocreatus taxa. We briefly review the taxonomic history of the genus. Applying the Biological Species Concept, species delimitation was based on a qualitative-quantitative criteria analysis including an evaluation of character states. Our results indicate that the genus should be considered a superspecies with four species, the monotypic Ocreatus addae, O. annae, and O. peruanus, and the polytypic O. underwoodii (including the subspecies underwoodii, discifer, incommodus, melanantherus, polystictus). In this taxonomic treatment, O. annae becomes an endemic species to Peru and O. addae is endemic to Bolivia. We recommend additional sampling of distributional, ethological, and molecular data for an improved resolution of the evolutionary history of Ocreatus.



Keywords

Aves, Andes, biogeography, display behavior, geographic variation, Ocreatus, taxonomy, Trochilidae


http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/article/...otaxa.4200.1.3

[Peter Kovalik]

Originally Posted by Melanie

Biogeography and taxonomy of racket-tail hummingbirds (Aves: Trochilidae: Ocreatus): evidence for species delimitation from morphology and display behavior
KARL-L. SCHUCHMANN, ANDRÉ-A. WELLER, DIETMAR JÜRGENS

Abstract

We analyzed geographic variation, biogeography, and intrageneric relationships of racket-tail hummingbirds Ocreatus (Aves, Trochilidae). Presently, the genus is usually considered monospecific, with O. underwoodii including eight subspecies (polystictus, discifer, underwoodii, incommodus, melanantherus, peruanus, annae, addae), although up to three species have been recognized by some authors. In order to evaluate the current taxonomy we studied geographic variation in coloration, mensural characters, and behavioral data of all Ocreatus taxa. We briefly review the taxonomic history of the genus. Applying the Biological Species Concept, species delimitation was based on a qualitative-quantitative criteria analysis including an evaluation of character states. Our results indicate that the genus should be considered a superspecies with four species, the monotypic Ocreatus addae, O. annae, and O. peruanus, and the polytypic O. underwoodii (including the subspecies underwoodii, discifer, incommodus, melanantherus, polystictus). In this taxonomic treatment, O. annae becomes an endemic species to Peru and O. addae is endemic to Bolivia. We recommend additional sampling of distributional, ethological, and molecular data for an improved resolution of the evolutionary history of Ocreatus.



Keywords

Aves, Andes, biogeography, display behavior, geographic variation, Ocreatus, taxonomy, Trochilidae


http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/article/...otaxa.4200.1.3

IOC Updates Diary Mar 22 Accept Peruvian Racket-tail and Rufous-booted Racket-tail (incl ssp annae)

[Melanie]

A cryptic new species of hummingbird of the Campylopterus largipennis complex (Aves: Trochilidae)
LEONARDO ESTEVES LOPES, MARCELO FERREIRA DE VASCONCELOS, LUIZ PEDREIRA GONZAGA

Abstract

A new species of Campylopterus sabrewing is described from eastern Brazilian tropical dry forests occurring below 900 m asl. Its holotype (MZUSP 99024) is an adult female from Sítio Duboca (16°43’19’’S, 43°58’20’’W, elevation 840 m), municipality of Montes Claros, state of Minas Gerais. A taxonomic revision based on more than 1,000 museum specimens revealed that the new taxon, together with C. largipennis, C. diamantinensis and C. obscurus (with C. aequatorialis considered as a subjective junior synonym) should be ranked as species. We provide a key to permit easy identification of the four species. The new species is very similar to the parapatric C. diamantinensis of high altitude “campos rupestres” above 1,000 m asl, differing from it by its smaller size and longer light tail tips, as well as by sternum measurements. Given the several threats faced by the habitat to which the new species is endemic, we propose to consider it as Vulnerable under the IUCN criteria.

Keywords

cryptic biodiversity, Neotropical, Trochilidae, tropical dry forests, Aves

http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/article/...otaxa.4268.1.1


Campylopterus calcirupicola sp. nov

[LeNomenclatoriste]

Originally Posted by Melanie

Campylopterus calcirupicola sp. nov

danke Melanie

[Melanie]

I am very curious on the SACC proposal. The authors state that it is very similar to C. diamantinensis. So it might be just a new subspecies?

[LeNomenclatoriste]

They did not provide a phylogenetic analysis?

[Melanie]

Originally Posted by LeNomenclatoriste

They did not provide a phylogenetic analysis?

The article is free available:

https://www.biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/arti...4268.1.1/27441

[LeNomenclatoriste]

A brief history of the generic classification of the Trochilini (Aves: Trochilidae): the chaos of the past and problems to be resolved


F. GARY STILES, VITOR DE Q. PIACENTINI, J. V. REMSEN, JR.

Abstract

The generic classification of the Trochilidae is unusually complicated because early authors, faced with a deluge of specimens with little or no data, often based species and genus names on superficial plumage characters derived from figured plates of varying artistic quality and reproduction. Working independently and with little knowledge of species distributions and with the fixation of type species for genera inconsistent or ignored, these authors produced a bewildering array of generic synonyms. The generic nomenclature of the largest and most recently derived clade of hummingbirds, the tribe Trochilini or “emeralds”, presents an unusually tangled web. Here we review the history of hummingbird generic nomenclature from Linnaeus to the present, giving detailed attention to two generic names that epitomize this confusion: Amazilia (the variety of spellings, supposed type species and circumscriptions makes for an especially complicated tangle) and Leucippus (for which nearly every successive author has advocated a different circumscription). Through application of the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature, this review lays the foundation for a revision of the generic nomenclature of the emeralds to bring it into conformity with recent genetic studies elucidating the phylogeny of this clade.


http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/article/...otaxa.4269.3.4

[Daniel Philippe]

Araújo-Silva L.E., Miranda L.S., Carneiro L. & Aleixo A., in review. Phylogeography and diversification of an Amazonian understory hummingbird: paraphyly and evidence for widespread cryptic speciation in the Plio-Pleistocene.

Abstract Straight-billed Hermit Phaethornis bourcieri inhabits the understory of upland terra-firme forest throughout most of the Amazon basin. Currently, two allopatric taxa regarded as subspecies are recognised: P. b. bourcieri and P. b. major. However, the validity, inter-specific limits, and evolutionary history of these taxa are not yet fully elucidated. We use molecular characters to propose a phylogenetic hypothesis for populations and taxa grouped under Phaethornis bourcieri. Our results showed that P. bourcieri is part of the 'Ametrornis' clade, along with P. philippii and P. koepckeae, and that the subspecies major is more closely related to the latter two species than to populations grouped under nominate bourcieri. Our phylogenetic hypotheses recovered three main reciprocally monophyletic clades under nominate bourcieri separated by the lower Negro River and the Branco River or the Branco-Negro interfluve (clades B and C) and the upper Amazon (Solimões) or lower Marañon / Ucayali rivers (clades C and D). Based on multi-locus phylogeographic and population genetics approaches, we show that P. b. major is best treated as a separate species, and that P. b. bourcieri probably includes more than one evolutionary species, whose limits remain uncertain. The diversification of the 'Ametrornis' clade (P. bourcieri, P. philippii, and P. koepckeae) is centered in the Amazon and appears to be closely linked to the formation of the modern Amazon drainage during the Plio-Pleistocene.

[l_raty]

Licona-Vera, Ornelas. 2017. The conquering of North America: dated phylogenetic and biogeographic inference of migratory behavior in bee hummingbirds. BMC Evol. Biol. 17:126.
[whole paper] [suppl.data(Dryad)]

[Peter Kovalik]

Quintero & Perktaş. Phylogeny and biogeography of a subclade of mangoes (Aves, Trochilidae). Journal of Ornithology, First Online: 31 August 2017.

Abstract:

In this study we explore the phylogenetic relationships within the hummingbird genera Doryfera, Schistes and Colibri (Family Trochilidae), distributed in the Andes, the Pantepui, the southern Brazilian uplands and the lowlands of South America including the Chocó, the Amazon Basin, the Chaco, the Cerrado, and the southeastern Brazilian coast, as well as Central and Mesoamerica. To do this, we included a comprehensive sampling of the 16 traditionally recognized subspecies within this group. We found that Doryfera, Schistes and Colibri form a well-supported monophyletic group, and that most of the traditionally recognized subspecies are indeed evolutionary lineages. As there is a high likelihood that the ancestors of this clade of hummingbirds were distributed in the lowlands, we ask: what events might account for the diversification of this subclade of mangoes into the Andes with a later potential dispersal episode from the Andes to the lowlands? We found that several phenomena such as the uplift of the Andes, the marine transgressions of the Plio–Pleistocene, the final closure of the Isthmus of Panama and the climatic oscillations of the Pleistocene might be at least, in part, responsible for the diversification of this group in both the lowlands and the highlands of this region of South America.

[Peter Kovalik]

Originally Posted by Melanie

A cryptic new species of hummingbird of the Campylopterus largipennis complex (Aves: Trochilidae)
LEONARDO ESTEVES LOPES, MARCELO FERREIRA DE VASCONCELOS, LUIZ PEDREIRA GONZAGA

Campylopterus calcirupicola sp. nov

Proposal (755) to SACC

Split Campylopterus largipennis into four species

Proposal (756) to SACC

Recognize Campylopterus calcirupicola as a valid species

[Peter Kovalik]

Originally Posted by Melanie

A cryptic new species of hummingbird of the Campylopterus largipennis complex (Aves: Trochilidae)
LEONARDO ESTEVES LOPES, MARCELO FERREIRA DE VASCONCELOS, LUIZ PEDREIRA GONZAGA

Campylopterus calcirupicola sp. nov

IOC Subspecies Update:

Proposed as a distinct species [Campylopterus calcirupicola]. Tentatively treat as a subspecies of C. largipennis for now. Lopes et al. 2017.

[LeNomenclatoriste]

Once again a taxonomic question :
Why Cephallepis Loddiges 1830 (synonym of Stephanoxis) is not accepted?

[James Jobling]

This is the synonymy of STEPHANOXIS Simon, given in Peters' (1945) Check-list, V, p. 30;

Cephallepis Loddiges, Proc. Comm. Zool. Soc. London, pt. 1, 1830-31 (1831), p. 12. Type, by subsequent designation, Trochilus lalandi Vieillot. Not Cephalepis Rafinesque, 1810. (G. R. Gray, Cat. Gen. Subgen. Bds., 1855, p. 23.)

Cephalolepis Cabanis and Heine, Mus. Hein., Th. 3, 1860, p. 61. Emendation of Cephallepis Loddiges, not Cephalolepis Dumeril and Bibron 1844, nor of Agassiz, 1846.

Stephanoxis Simon, Cat. Trochil., 1897, p. 40. New name for Cephallepis Loddiges and Cephalolepis Cabanis and Heine, both preoccupied.

Cephaloepis M. and W. Bertoni, An. Sci. Paraguayos (1), no. 1, 1901, p. 55. Emendation.

[LeNomenclatoriste]

Okay, thanks. Cephallepis and Cephalepis have, almost, the same spelling and I wonder if this little difference of spelling was a valid reason to consider Cephallepis preoccupied by Cephalepis.

[mb1848]

"I wonder if this little difference of spelling was a valid reason to consider Cephallepis preoccupied by Cephalepis"
I do not think now but it is one letter difference and so was considered preoccupied in 1897??
Here is Simon 1897:
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/43/mode/1up .
Here is Rafinesque:
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/64/mode/1up .
Gray 1855 https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/35/mode/1up .
If this is Loddiges 1831:
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/26/mode/1up .
Cephallepis is not really published.

[l_raty]

Originally Posted by mb1848

"I wonder if this little difference of spelling was a valid reason to consider Cephallepis preoccupied by Cephalepis"
I do not think now but it is one letter difference and so was considered preoccupied in 1897??

One-letter difference rule = [Art. 56.2] of current ICZN. The rule was introduced at the Copenhagen Congress of Zoology of 1953 (decision, published 1957: [here]).
In 1945, the rules that were used were those that were introduced in Opinion 147 (1943) [here]: assuming the same origin and meaning, names differing only in the use of a single vs. double consonnant were to be regarded homonyms; thus the nomenclature in the Peters' Check-list was still 'right'. But it's not any more; in principle, Cephallepis should have been reinstated after Copenhagen. (Which it was not, obviously.)

Originally Posted by mb1848

If this is Loddiges 1831:
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/26/mode/1up .
Cephallepis is not really published.

This is it. And it's enough to make Cephallepis available. The name appears in a publication, and it has two available specific names unambiguously placed under it (T. lalandei (= lalandi) Vieillot and T. loddigesii Gould), which qualifies as an indication under [Art. 12.2.5]. The originally included nominal species are the nominal species denoted by these two names; the type is the first one, T. lalandi Vieillot, by subsequent designation of Gray 1855 (who spelled it delalandii). The author of the name is Loddiges under [Art. 50.2].
The name has been used as valid during the 20th C, albeit very rarely (example from 1902: [here]), thus it cannot be dealt with by a reversal of precedence under [Art. 23.9]. It must either be reinstated, or be submitted for suppression to the Commission.

[LeNomenclatoriste]

Originally Posted by l_raty

The name has been used as valid during the 20th C, albeit very rarely (example from 1902: [here]), thus it cannot be protected by a reversal of precedence under [Art. 23.9]. It must either be reinstated, or be submitted for suppression to the Commission.

It means that the art. 23.9 could be applied ?

There is a similar case with Cyphos Spix, 1824 (= replaced , I think, by Argicus Cabanis and Heine, 1863) and Cyphus Schönherr in Germar, 1824, both published in the same year.

[l_raty]

Originally Posted by LeNomenclatoriste

It means that the art. 23.9 could be applied ?

Not 23.9.1; only 23.9.3. (And the end result would depend on the Commission's decision, of course.)

[LeNomenclatoriste]

And, also, if They examine this case :/

[mb1848]

There is a similar case with Cyphos Spix, 1824 (= replaced , I think, by Argicus Cabanis and Heine, 1863) and Cyphus Schönherr in Germar, 1824, both published in the same year.

Cyphus Germar 1824:
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...e/461/mode/1up .
Cyphos Spix 1824:
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/71/mode/1up .
Argicus Cabana 1863
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...e/154/mode/1up .
The SACC says: Bucco macrodactylus was formerly (e.g., Ridgway 1914, Cory 1919, Pinto 1937) placed in the monotypic genus Argicus, but this was merged into Bucco by Peters (1948); this has been followed by most subsequent classifications, except for Rasmussen & Collar (2002), who resurrected Argicus. Penhallurick (2008) noted that Cyphos has priority over Argicus, and del Hoyo & Collar (2014) used Cyphos.

[LeNomenclatoriste]

month of publication please?

[l_raty]

Germar's work was commented in the 5th Heft (out of 12: May?) of the 1824 Jahrgang of Isis (Oken) [here], in a way that suggests publication had already occurred. Note that Cabanis actually dated Cyphus as of 1823, when introducing Argicus.

The date of publication of Spix's work, on the other hand, doesn't seem to be clear even down to the year: Richmond (e.g. [here]) actually suggested it was later than 1824. For nomenclatural purposes, you'd need actual evidence to depart from what the book claims, however (i.e., unambiguously "MDCCCXXIV" [here] -- beware that the first volume of the original edition doesn't seem to be in BHL; Mark's link above is to an 1838 re-edition), and I see no suggestion that such evidence exists. Unless there is additional info, the date should presumably be assumed to be 31 Dec 1824.

But, anyway, under the present rules, these two names do not compete, as they are not homonyms.