Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Trochilidae

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 9 votes, 5.00 average.
Old Saturday 10th March 2018, 07:50   #151
LeNomenclatoriste
Taxonomy and Shiny hunting
 
LeNomenclatoriste's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: La Rochelle (France)
Posts: 751
On the other hand, the phylogenetic position of "Amazilia" boucardi and "A" luciae remains unresolved

B. Lump Aphantochroa into Eupetomena while maintaining a monospecific Taphrospilus.
[...] We favor option B as being most concordant regarding relationships, morphology and distributions, although cirrochloris and macroura differ strongly in plumage; [...]

So, continue to recognize two monotypic genera in this case if they are so different in plumage. tssssssss

(Sorry Mr Remsen, Mr Stiles, Mr Piacentini, that's just me but I'll not follow most of your recommendation, and, fortunately it's not mandatory.)

Last edited by LeNomenclatoriste : Saturday 10th March 2018 at 08:52.
LeNomenclatoriste is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd April 2018, 13:38   #152
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
General question IOC World bird list here says Amazilia brevirostris (Lesson, R, 1829). Many other sources (Lesson, 1830). What is correct? Maybe there is a publication about dates from Lessons hummingbirds?
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd April 2018, 18:42   #153
Mike Earp
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sanderstead
Posts: 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taphrospilus View Post
General question IOC World bird list here says Amazilia brevirostris (Lesson, R, 1829). Many other sources (Lesson, 1830). What is correct? Maybe there is a publication about dates from Lessons hummingbirds?
The species is described on page xxxv of Lesson’s Histoire naturelle des oiseaux-mouches, which should have been published in 1829 since Anker 1938 (Bird Books and Bird Art: An Outline of the Literary History and Iconography of Descriptive Ornithology) says that this work “appeared in different issues and was published in 17 livraisons, the last seven of which appeared in 1830”.
Mike Earp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd April 2018, 19:15   #154
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
According Priority! The Dating of Scientific Names in Ornithology p. XXXV-Xl (Dec 1829) based on Sherborn.
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd April 2018, 19:55   #155
mb1848
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Santa Maria, California USA
Posts: 2,117
Laurent discussed this publication dating here.
https://www.birdforum.net/showthread...iseaux+mouches .
In the authors forward it mentions January 16, 1830 but I'm not sure why.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/13/mode/1up .
Of course forewards could have been published after the first few fascicles were printed?
__________________
Mark Brown, Esq.
mb1848 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd April 2018, 20:03   #156
Mike Earp
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sanderstead
Posts: 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1848 View Post
In the authors forward it mentions January 16, 1830 but I'm not sure why.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/13/mode/1up .
Isn't that the foreword to a later work (namely Histoire naturelle des colibris : suivie d'un supplément à l'Histoire naturelle des oiseaux-mouches : ouvrage orné de planches dessinées et gravées par les meilleurs artistes : et dédié A.M. le Baron Cuvier)?
Mike Earp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 3rd April 2018, 03:09   #157
mb1848
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Santa Maria, California USA
Posts: 2,117
Yes! Sorry for the mistake.
__________________
Mark Brown, Esq.
mb1848 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 3rd April 2018, 07:20   #158
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
Hmm, forgot that I already started a thread about this book. But thank's for the help.
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 24th April 2018, 09:46   #159
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Cristina González-Rubio, Francisco J. García-De León, Ricardo Rodríguez-Estrella. Phylogeography of endemic Xantus’ hummingbird (Hylocharis xantusii) show a different history of vicariance in the Baja California Peninsula. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. In Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available online 31 May 2016.

[abstract]
According

Frank Garfield Stiles III, James Vanderbeek Remsen Jr, Jimmy Adair McGuire: The generic classification of the Trochilini (Aves: Trochilidae): Reconciling taxonomy with phylogeny. In: Zootaxa. Band4353, Nr.3, 2017, S.401–424, doi:10.11646/zootaxa.4353.3.1 here

Quote:
Group B is also taxonomically polyphyletic (Fig. 1). Sister to the rest of the group (subgroup B1) are “Hylocharis” leucotis (Vieillot) and “H.” xantusii (Lawrence). However, the phylogeny (McGuire et al. 2014) separates the rest of Hylocharis Boie, 1831 including its type species sapphirina (Gmelin,1788) in group D (see below). Ridgway (1911) and Cory (1918) treated leucotis and xantusii in the genus Basilinna Boie, 1831, but Peters (1945) merged it into Hylocharis without comment. More recently, Howell & Webb (1995), Schuchmann (1999) and Hernández et al. (2014) have provided evidence that Basilinna should be restored for leucotis (Vieillot, 1818), its type species, and xantusii, which is supported by the genetic data. Here again, the character used by many authors to diagnose Hylocharis, the expanded red base of the bill in adult males, shows considerable homoplasy and is of little phylogenetic value.
Fine. But my question is about the date of publication for Hylocharis xantusii or Basilinna xantusii. I found 1860 and/or 1861. In OD we can find:

Read April 9, 1860 but the Volume is from 1862. I assume read is not equal to published. Nevertheless is 1861 correct or 1860 as publishing date?
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 24th April 2018, 10:47   #160
l_raty
laurent raty
 
l_raty's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 3,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taphrospilus View Post
Read April 9, 1860 but the Volume is from 1862. I assume read is not equal to published. Nevertheless is 1861 correct or 1860 as publishing date?
The signature is dated April 1860 (at the foot of [p.103]). That should in principle indicate the time of printing.
(Printed is still not equal to published, though; publication requires the distribution of the printed item.)
l_raty is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 29th April 2018, 17:35   #161
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by l_raty View Post
The signature is dated April 1860 (at the foot of [p.103]). That should in principle indicate the time of printing.
(Printed is still not equal to published, though; publication requires the distribution of the printed item.)
According Priority!:

Quote:
SI copy include p. 103 in a second state

sig 19 pp. 279-286; CRW* reported that pp. 103-286 made up issues 4/9 [and so p. 103 must have occured in two states] and that theres pages bear the date 'June 1861'!

*CWR Charles W. Richmond (unpublished cards)
But a next question. Berlepsch wrote here about Uranomitra quadricolor (Vieill.)

Quote:
...same as the bird which we used to call U. cyanocephala. in his description of Trochilus quadricolor....
Which would fit to William Jardine here or the plate here.

So Vieillot may have described Trochilus quadricolor in 1822. Lessons description seems from 1830 here.

So why no priority to Vieillot?
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 16th May 2018, 14:55   #162
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taphrospilus View Post
So why no priority to Vieillot?
Thank to Laurent I got the explanation. The answer is that Vieillot already used the same name in 1817 here. In this case a synonym for Anthracothorax nigricollis. Therefore the name is preoccupied.

Last edited by Taphrospilus : Wednesday 16th May 2018 at 15:28.
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 8th June 2018, 09:14   #163
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
I am a little bit confused about the status of Amazilia viridifrons rowleyi in OD is written:

Quote:
Appears intermediate between A. v. viridifrons and A. (v?) wagneri but closer to the former from which it differs in more extensively vinaceous-cinnamon flanks and axillars....
So is it a synonym, a valid subspecies of either Amazilia viridifrons or Amazilia wagneri, a separate species or a hybrid?

Was this issue ever properly analysed?
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 8th June 2018, 16:18   #164
mb1848
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Santa Maria, California USA
Posts: 2,117
In a 2015 paper the tree shows rowleyi in clade 2 at least not sure what that means.
I have not read this:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...1111/jav.01536 . It might address rowleyi?
__________________
Mark Brown, Esq.
mb1848 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 8th June 2018, 16:39   #165
Calalp
Björn Bergenholtz
 
Calalp's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taphrospilus View Post
I am a little bit confused about the status of Amazilia viridifrons rowleyi ...

So is it a synonym, a valid subspecies of either Amazilia viridifrons or Amazilia wagneri, a separate species or a hybrid?

Was this issue ever properly analysed?
HBW Alive (here) says:
Quote:
... Birds from C Oaxaca have been awarded race rowleyi, but probably represent intergradation with wagneri in zone of supposed secondary contact. Two subspecies recognized.
...
If of any help?
Calalp is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 8th June 2018, 16:57   #166
Mike Earp
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sanderstead
Posts: 245
The Neotropical Birds entry for Green-fronted Hummingbird Amazilia viridifrons says that rowleyi "was considered to be indistinguishable from wagneri by Weller (1999) and Peterson and Navarro-Sigüenza (2000)".
Mike Earp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 10th June 2018, 10:33   #167
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1848 View Post
I have not read this:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...1111/jav.01536 . It might address rowleyi?
No. It is only about the relationship/gene flow Amazilia viridifrons, Amazilia villadai and Amazilia violiceps and the question it to spilt Amazilia villadai as a seperate species or lump Amazilia violiceps including A. villadai into Amazilia viridifrons.

But if we read here Amazilia viridifrons rowleyi is equal to Amazilia wagneri.

Last edited by Taphrospilus : Sunday 10th June 2018 at 10:37.
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 21st June 2018, 08:37   #168
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 3,024
Colibri cyanotus

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melanie View Post
Zootaxa 3957 (1): 143–150 (13 May 2015)
Classification of the Polytminae (Aves: Trochilidae)
J. V. REMSEN JR., F. GARY STILES & JIMMY A. MCGUIRE

Abstract
Proposal (796) to SACC

Recognize Colibri cyanotus as a separate species from C. thalassinus
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 12th July 2018, 10:48   #169
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 3,024
Calothorax

Yuyini Licona-Vera, Juan Francisco Ornelas, Susan Wethington, Kelly B Bryan; Pleistocene range expansions promote divergence with gene flow between migratory and sedentary populations of Calothorax hummingbirds, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, , bly084, https://doi.org/10.1093/biolinnean/bly084

Abstract:

We investigated the influence of postglacial population expansion on the genetic structure of reproductively isolated populations that come into secondary contact and produce hybrid zones. We tested migratory behaviour to explain geographical patterns of genetic diversity and phylogeographical structure in migratory and sedentary populations of hummingbirds in the Chihuahuan Desert. We assessed genetic structure, demographic expansion and introgression in Calothorax hummingbirds using mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and nuclear microsatellites and used ecological niche modelling to predict where migratory and sedentary populations resided during Pleistocene climate events. Bayesian analysis yielded three clusters. However, only two clusters matched mtDNA haplogroups, one parental in the south (C. pulcher) and a cluster with two admixed taxa (sedentary and migratory C. lucifer) that cannot be attributed to any pure parental population. Demographic expansion, gene flow and admixture in the C. lucifer range, postglacial northern expansion predicted by ecological niche modelling, and approximate Bayesian computation strongly supported a scenario of divergence with gene flow: a Pleistocene basal split separating C. pulcher; and the other two clades are derived from a second split (migratory and sedentary C. lucifer). Population genetic admixture was higher in localities with lower inferred stability of habitat suitability. The genetic differentiation of Calothorax may be explained by the combined effects of the following factors: (1) gene flow and recent postglacial northern expansion from southern sedentary populations; (2) increased genetic admixture with lower stability of habitat suitability; and (3) the evolution of long-distance seasonal migration during glacial–interglacial cycles, suggesting a role for diversification through the divergence of migratory subpopulations that become sedentary.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th August 2018, 08:33   #170
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
If HBW key is correct than Trochilus Adolphei Lesson, 1843 OD here is a synonym to Phaethornis ruber nigricinctus Lawrence, 1858 OD here. I am wondering why Lessons name has no priority?

Phaethornis adolphi Gould, 1857 OD here can't be the reason as the plate an text are part of delivery 14 from Gould from the year 1857 or here as Pygmornis Adolphi. Therfore Lesson would have priority. What do I miss?


I think I found the answer myselfe ashere is written:

Quote:
Lesson's entire diagnosis is very brief, being quite at variance with the detailed descriptions he customarily provided. No mention is made, for instance, of the facial pattern or of the rufous uropygial patch, both of which are conspicuous features of these birds. The paper in which the account appears is, in fact, a mere
summary of the species which the author planned for a supplementary fourth volume of his "Histoire naturelle" of the hummingbirds-a volume that was never published although 100 plates were said to have been prepared for it. "Trochilus Adolphei" was to be figured on plate 24. If this "manuscript" plate is still in existence, it might be possible to determine precisely to which form the name properly applies. There is enough uncertainty at present to make me unwilling to supplant the name nigricinctus, whose application is unquestionable, by adolphei, which is still in doubt.
Would be interesting if this plates and/or the specimen still exist.

Last edited by Taphrospilus : Monday 6th August 2018 at 09:03.
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th August 2018, 21:56   #171
mb1848
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Santa Maria, California USA
Posts: 2,117
Here is Lesson's description.
http://www.zoonomen.net/cit/RI/SP/Todu/todu00825a.jpg .
And here is L'Echo du munde savant. Which looks like a list of names.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...e/264/mode/1up .
Somewhere in the back of my head is a thought that Prince Weid bought these plates of Rene Lesson to New Harmony but they ended up being given to Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences by William MacLure. ????
__________________
Mark Brown, Esq.

Last edited by mb1848 : Wednesday 8th August 2018 at 00:54.
mb1848 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th August 2018, 08:15   #172
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1848 View Post
Somewhere in the back of my head is a thought that Prince Weid bought these plates of Rene Lesson to New Harmony but they ended up being given to Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences by William MacLure. ????
Could be as here is written:

Quote:
While in Europe he purchased the copper-plate illustrations of some important works both to Science and Art, with the intention of having them republished at home in a cheaper form, in order to render them accessible to all classes of learners.
But does not clearly telling me that this are unpublished plates.

Last edited by Taphrospilus : Wednesday 8th August 2018 at 17:40.
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th August 2018, 17:25   #173
mb1848
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Santa Maria, California USA
Posts: 2,117
I think it was Vieillot's plates I was thinking of.
http://www.ansp.org/research/library...099/vieillot69 .
__________________
Mark Brown, Esq.
mb1848 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 9th August 2018, 19:54   #174
mb1848
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Santa Maria, California USA
Posts: 2,117
In 1840 Parzduki mentions a part 4 of Lesson's hummingbirds.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/81/mode/1up .
__________________
Mark Brown, Esq.
mb1848 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 10th August 2018, 12:17   #175
Taphrospilus
Registered User
 
Taphrospilus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1848 View Post
In 1840 Parzduki mentions a part 4 of Lesson's hummingbirds.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/...ge/81/mode/1up .
Or here is written:

Quote:
M. Lesson possède de nombreux manuscrits écrits dans la silence, une histoire des Méduses avec plus de 200 figures coloriées, un tome 4e d'Oiseaux mouches et un volume d'illustration avec devélins de M. Prêtre. Il s'est livré à une sérieuse de monumens de la Saintone, une des provinces les plus riches, les moins connues de la France; il se priver des choses les plus nécessaire pour se former une bibliotèque qui est fort riche en livres d'ornithologie, et pour solder ses secrétaires et ses peintres.
Taphrospilus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.31933689 seconds with 36 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:59.