Polyborus vs. Caracara (1 Viewer)

Xenospiza · Dec 15, 2009

After referring to the original text, I'd translate it as: “They are in truth two yet undescribed species of falcon stemming from Brazil, so similar in the whole structure of bill and feet to gamebirds, particularly guans, that they are hardly distinguished from them by external features. The legs are very elongated compared to other Brasilian falcons.”

It's been twenty years since I did my final Latin exam (it used to be my best subject).

Brasiliensibus is the plural ablative of brasiliensis – you'll see it in any text that deals with Brasilian things.

njlarsen · Mar 7, 2018

With thanks to Andre Moncrieff on NEOORN

PROCEEDINGS OF THE BIOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON 130:108–112. Published 13 November 2017.

On the correct application of the generic name Polyborus Vieillot, 1816 (Aves: Falconidae)

Paul Smith: [email protected]

FAUNA Paraguay, Encarnación, Dpto. Itapúa, Paraguay, Para La Tierra, Centro IDEAL, Mariscal Estigarribia 321 c/ Tte. Capurro, Pilar, Dpto. Ñeembucú, Paraguay, www.paralatierra.org

Abstract.—The generic name Polyborus has been traditionally associated with the ‘‘Crested Caracaras’’, but confusion over its correct application has led to it recent falling out of use. Polyborus is based on a description by Marcgrave accompanied by a poor illustration, but only 2 species have ever been seriously considered as the identity of this description Long-winged Harrier Circus buffoni and Southern Caracara Caracara plancus. The nomenclatural history of this name is discussed and the identity of Marcgrave’s description is elucidated as Yellow-headed Caracara Milvago chimachima. The implications for nomenclature are discussed, and it is recommended that both Polyborus and the name Falco brasiliensis (also based on the same description) be suppressed.

Niels

mb1848 · Mar 7, 2018

On the correct application of the generic name Polyborus Vieillot, 1816 (Aves: Falconidae)
"I hope Melanie's enjoying the consequences of her small enquiry...

Richard"

l_raty · Mar 8, 2018

The type fixation mechanism keeps being problematic. The very first sentence of the paper reads:

Polyborus Vieillot, 1816a (p.22) has as its type ‘‘Caracara’’ of Buffon.

The type of a genus name must be an originally included nominal species denoted by an available name.
"Caracara" of Buffon is but a French vernacular (not an available name), and cannot be the type of any genus.
If a genus was made available without any originally included nominal species (this is possible only for genera published before 1931; this is the case here), the originally included nominal species are deemed to be the nominal species cited by an available name in the first subsequent work where nominal species cited by an available name were included in the genus. The type species must be one of these. This type species does not need to be tied to the identity of any vernacular name cited in the OD.

(As a rule, every time you see a claimed type fixation that looks like

Type species: "whatever-which-is-not-an-available-species-group-name" = Aus bus Doe

...you can be sure that this type fixation does not comply to the current Code.)

Polyborus vs. Caracara (1 Viewer)

More options

Xenospiza

Distracted

njlarsen

Gallery Moderator

mb1848

Well-known member

l_raty

laurent raty

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread