• 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.

59th Supplement AOS checklist pdf (1 Viewer)

jmorlan

Hmmm. That's funny
Opus Editor
United States
Fifty-ninth Supplement to the American Ornithological Society's Check-list of North American Birds. Available for download here.
 
Last edited:
Newly recognized genera:

Genus PSEUDOBULWERIA Mathews
Pseudobulweria Mathews, 1936, Ibis, p. 309. Type, by original designation, Thalassidroma (Bulweria) macgillivrayi G. R. Gray.
This one is OK.
Name: Pseudobulweria
Author: Mathews
Date: 1936
OD ref: Mathews GM. 1936. A note on the black Fiji petrel. Ibis, ser. 13, 6: 309.
Page: 309
Link: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.1936.tb03375.x
OINS: Pseudobulweria macgillivrayi
Type: Thalassidroma macgillivrayi Gray 1860
Syn. of ? in use
Fixation by: original designation
Fixation ref: as OD
Page: as OD
Link: as OD
OD of type ref: Gray GR. 1859. Catalogue of the birds of the tropical islands of the Pacific Ocean, in the collection of the British Museum. British Museum, London.
Page: 56
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13969705
Notes:
Available: yes
Family: Procellariidae​
Genus PSEUDASTUR G. R. Gray
Pseudastur G. R. Gray, 1849, Genera Birds III (index): 55. Type, by original designation, Falco poecilonotus ‘‘Cuvier’’ = Falco albicollis Latham, 1790.
This one is OK. (The actual author of the type species name is Temminck.)
Name: Pseudastur
Author: Gray
Date: 1849
OD ref: Gray GR. 1844-49. The genera of birds: comprising their generic characters, a notice of the habits of each genus, and an extensive list of species referred to their several genera. Vol. III. Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans, London.
Page: index:55
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/43592060
OINS: Buteo poecilolotus
Type: Falco poecilonotus Temminck 1820
Syn. of ? Falco albicollis Latham 1790
Fixation by: original designation
Fixation ref: as OD
Page: as OD
Link: as OD
OD of type ref: Temminck CJ, Laugier de Chartrouse GMJM de. 1838. Nouveau recueil de planches coloriées d'oiseaux : pour servir de suite et de complément aux planches enluminées de Buffon. FG Levrault, Paris.
Page: pl.9 + text
link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/35245551
Notes:
Available: yes
Family: Accipitridae​
Genus DRYOBATES Boie
No details provided.
Dryobates Boie, 1826, Isis von Oken, 19, 977. Type, by monotypy, Picus pubescens Linnaeus.
(The name is used with a broad circumscription, encompassing Veniliornis and Leuconotopicus of other classifications.)
Name: Dryobates
Author: Boie
Date: 1826
OD ref: Boie F. 1826. Generalübersicht der ornithologischen Ordnungen, Familien und Gattungen. Isis (Oken), 19: 969-981.
Page: 977
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/27511180
OINS: Picus pubescens Gmelin
Type: Picus pubescens Linnaeus 1766
Syn. of ? in use
Fixation by: original monotypy
Fixation ref: as OD
Page: as OD
Link: as OD
OD of type ref: Linné C a. 1766. Systema naturae : per regna tria natura, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Editio duodecima, reformata. Tomus I. Laurentius Salvius, Stockholm.
Page: 175
link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/42946371
Notes:
Available: yes
Family: Picidae​
Genus HORORNIS Hodgson
Horornis Hodgson, 1845, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, p. 31. Types H. fortipes and H. flaviventris; restricted to H. fortipes (Seebohm, 1881, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., 5: 133).
This one is pretty much problematic. The above is widely accepted nowadays, but incorrect as Seebohm's designation was (by far) not the first one; the type is:
Horornis flaviventris Hodgson, by subsequent designation (GR Gray, 1848, Gen. Bds., p. [175]).
This is apparently a synonym of Dumeticola thoracica Blyth, now in Locustella (previously in Bradypterus).
Name: Horornis
Author: Hodgson
Date: 1845
OD ref: Hodgson BH. 1845. [On Nipalese birds.] Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 13: 22-37.
Page: 31
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/12862527
OINS: Horornis fortipes, H. flaviventris, [H.? fuligiventer, H.? fulviventris]
Type: Horornis flaviventris Hodgson 1845
Syn. of ? Dumeticola thoracica Blyth 1845
Fixation by: subsequent designation
Fixation ref: Gray GR. 1844-49. The genera of birds: comprising their generic characters, a notice of the habits of each genus, and an extensive list of species referred to their several genera. Vol. I. Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans, London.
Page: [175] (1848)
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40012281
OD of type ref: as OD
Page: as OD
link: as OD
Notes: This name is in use for a genus of Cettiidae. The PCL accepted a type “restriction” (?) to H. fortipes by: Seebohm H. 1881. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or perching birds, in the collection of the British Museum. Cichlomorphae: part II. Containing the family Turdidae (warblers and thrushes). Catalogue of the birds in the collection of the British Museum. Volume V. British Museum, London.; p.133; https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/8305045 . Published earlier in: Hodgson BH. 1844. Catalogue of Nipalese birds, collected between 1824 and 1844. Zool. Miscell. (Gray): 81-86.; p. 82 ; https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/49831444 ; nomen nudum (no description; same two species names, both nude). For ID of Horornis flaviventris Hodgson, see: Dickinson EC, Rasmussen PC, Rozendaal FG. 2000. Systematic notes on Asian birds. 1. A review of the russet bush-warbler Bradypterus seebohmi (Ogilvie-Grant, 1895). Zool. Verh. Leiden, 331: 11-64.; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254912440 .
Available: yes
Family: Locustellidae​
Genus LARVIVORA Hodgson
Larvivora Hodgson, 1837, Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal 6: 102. Type, by original designation, Motacilla cyane Pallas.
The type fixation and type species are not correct but (fortunately) this does not affect the applicability of the name.
Type, by subsequent designation (G.R. Gray, 1840, List Gen. Bds., p. 26), Larvivora cyana Hodgson = Larvivora brunnea Hodgson.
Name: Larvivora
Author: Hodgson
Date: 1837
OD ref: Hodgson BH. 1837. On three new genera or sub-genera of long-legged thrushes, with descriptions of their species. J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 6, 101-104.
Page: 102
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/37179336
OINS: Larvivora cyana, L. brunnea
Type: Larvivora cyana Hodgson 1837
Syn. of ? Larvivora brunnea Hodgson 1837
Fixation by: subsequent designation
Fixation ref: Gray GR. 1840. A list of the genera of birds, with an indication of the typical species of each genus. R and JE Taylor, London.
Page: 26
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13668920
OD of type ref: as OD
Page: as OD
link: as OD
Notes: Hodgson described as Larvivora cyana and L. brunnea the male and the female of the same species. The PCH accepted as type, “by original designation, Motacilla cyane Pallas”; not even an OINS!
Available: yes
Family: Muscicapidae​
Genus CYANECULA Brehm
Cyanecula C. L. Brehm, 1828, Isis von Oken 21:1280. Type, by monotypy, Motacilla svecica Linnaeus.
The type species is correct, the fixation is not. Brehm included five taxonomic species, three of which were denoted by nomina nuda; two remain as validly originally included nominal species (Cyanecula svecica "Brehm" (= Linnaeus 1758) and Cyanecula wolfii Brehm (which he had described in 1822). The claim of a type by monotypy is presumably rooted in early nomenclatural practice, when type species were interpreted as taxonomic (not nominal) species -- svecica and wolfii have indeed now long been regarded as denoting the same taxonomic species. They are, however, two distinct nominal species as far as nomenclature is concerned; their taxonomic synonymization is subjective, and subjective taxonomic opinion cannot play any role in the fixation of a type species; only one of them can be the type. Thus:
Type, by subsequent designation (Gray, 1840, List Gen. Bds., p. 21), Motacilla svecica Linnaeus.
Name: Cyanecula
Author: Brehm
Date: 1828
OD ref: Brehm CL. 1828. Uebersicht der deutschen Vögelarten nach Brehm. Isis (Oken) 21:1268-1285.
Page: 1280
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13245366
OINS: Cyanecula suecica, [C. orientalis], C. wolfii, [C. obscura, C. leucocyana]
Type: Motacilla svecica Linnaeus 1758
Syn. of ? in use
Fixation by: subsequent designation
Fixation ref: Gray GR. 1840. A list of the genera of birds, with an indication of the typical species of each genus. R and JE Taylor, London.
Page: 21
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13668915
OD of type ref: Linnaeus C. 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Tomus I. Laurentius Salvius, Stockholm.
Page: 187
link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/727096
Notes: Attributed to Brisson. Also 1831, Handb. Nat. Vögel Deutschl., 349. Three of the cited species names are nude here and not eligible to be the type; these were described in 1831 only.
Available: yes
Family: Muscicapidae​
Genus CALLIOPE Gould
Calliope Gould, 1836, Birds Europe, pt. 2, pl. 118, text. Type, by monotypy, Calliope Lathamii Gould = Motacilla calliope Pallas.
This one is OK.
Name: Calliope
Author: Gould
Date: 1836
OD ref: Gould J. 1837. The birds of Europe. In five volumes. Vol. II. Insessores. Printed by R & JE Taylor, London.
Page: pl. cxviii + text
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/42173641
OINS: Calliope lathamii
Type: Calliope lathamii Gould 1836
Syn. of ? Motacilla calliope Pallas 1776
Fixation by: original monotypy
Fixation ref: as OD
Page: as OD
Link: as OD
OD of type ref: as OD
Page: as OD
link: as OD
Notes:
Available: yes
Family: Muscicapidae​
Genus CENTRONYX Baird
No details provided.
Centronyx Baird, 1858, Rep. Expl. Railroad Pacif. Ocean, 9, xxxviii, 340. Type, by monotypy, Emberiza bairdii Audubon.
Name: Centronyx
Author: Baird
Date: 1858
OD ref: Baird SF. 1858. Birds. Report of explorations and surveys to ascertain the most practical and economical route for a railroad from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean. Made under the direction of the Secretariat of War, in 1853-6, according to Acts of Congress of March 8, 1853, May 31, 1854, and August 5, 1854. Volume IX. Severly Tucker, Washington.
Page: xxxviii, 440
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/11689182 ; https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/11689640
OINS: Centronyx bairdii
Type: Emberiza bairdii Audubon 1844
Syn. of ? in use
Fixation by: original monotypy
Fixation ref: as OD
Page: as OD
Link: as OD
OD of type ref: Audubon JJ. 1844. The birds of America, from drawings made in the United States and their territories. Vol. VII. JB Chevalier, New York.
Page: 359
link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40419521
Notes:
Available: yes
Family: Arremonidae​
Genus AMMOSPIZA Oberholser
No details provided.
Ammospiza Oberholser, 1905, Smithson. misc. Coll., 48, no. 1574, 68. Type, by original designation, Oriolus caudacutus Gmelin.
Name: Ammospiza
Author: Oberholser
Date: 1905
OD ref: Oberholser HC. 1905. Notes on the nomenclature of certain genera of birds. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., 48: 59-68.
Page: 68
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/29986098
OINS: Ammospiza maritima (with sspp macgillvraii, peninsula, fisheri, sennetti), A. nigrescens, A. caudacuta (with sspp nelsoni, subvirgata), A. leconteii, A. henslowii (with ssp occidentalis)
Type: Oriolus caudacutus Gmelin 1788
Syn. of ? in use
Fixation by: original designation
Fixation ref: as OD
Page: as OD
Link: as OD
OD of type ref: Linnaeus C, Gmelin JF. 1788. Systema naturæ per regna tria naturæ, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species; cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Edicio decima tertia, aucta, reformata. Tomus primus, pars I. GE Beer, Leipzig.
Page: 394
link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/2896994
Notes: Neave noted this as an emendation pro Ammodramus Swainson, but this not what it is.
Available: yes
Family: Arremonidae​
 
Last edited:
Fifty-ninth Supplement to the American Ornithological Society's Check-list of North American Birds. Available for download here.

Interesting, a whole lot of the proposals came through as it seems. I wonder though about in my view two obvious ones, what's the rationale behind not splitting the barn owls and, especially, the Mexican Duck?
 
This one is pretty much problematic. The above is widely accepted nowadays, but incorrect as Seebohm's designation was (by far) not the first one; the type is:
Horornis flaviventris Hodgson, by subsequent designation (GR Gray, 1848, Gen. Bds., p. [175]).
This is apparently a synonym of Dumeticola thoracica Blyth, now in Locustella (previously in Bradypterus).

Does that mean that Horornis is not available for the ''Cettia'' diphone/canturians/fortipes clade ?

Type, by subsequent designation (Gray, 1840, List Gen. Bds., p. 21), Motacilla svecica Linnaeus.
Name: Cyanecula
Author: Brehm
Date: 1828
OD ref: Brehm CL. 1828. Uebersicht der deutschen Vögelarten nach Brehm. Isis (Oken) 21:1268-1285.
Page: 1280
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13245366
OINS: Cyanecula suecica, [C. orientalis], C. wolfii, [C. obscura, C. leucocyana]
Type: Motacilla svecica Linnaeus 1758

And Cyanosylvia ?
 
Not entirely surprising that the Mexican Duck and Barn Owl splits were not accepted, I guess, though the Mexican Duck is kind of like Yellow-rumped Warbler, you sort of wonder how much evidence will finally have to be accumulated to tip the balance.

What is more surprising to me is that the Red-eyed Vireo split, Buff-throated Foliage-Gleaner split, Cherrie's Tanager lump, and White-collared Seedeater Split were approved, but the Bean-Goose lump and Cory's & Boyd's Shearwater splits were not passed!

It's a shame that the comments and voting on the proposals are not available to the public. SACC's openness is really fantastic as there is an absolute ton to be gleaned/learned from the proposal comments.
 
2 new families: Southern Storm-Petrels and "Royal Flycatchers," including not only the Royal Flycatchers, but also the Myiobius flys, and Ruddy-tailed Fly. So. Storm-Petrels has already been recognized by IOC et al. but the latter is a surprise to me. IOC places the genera in the family Tityridae together with Tityras, Becards, Mourners, Sharpbill, et al. Wonder if it presages more new families coming out of the Tyrannidae.


Family ONYCHORHYNCHIDAE: Royal-Flycatchers
Notes.—The genera Onychorhynchus, Terenotriccus, and
Myiobius were formerly (AOU 1983, 1998) placed in the
Fluvicolinae, but genetic data (Ohlson et al. 2008, 2013;
Tello et al. 2009) indicate that they form a clade more
closely related to the Oxyruncidae [Sharpbills] than to the Tyrannidae.
Move the headings, citations, and Notes for Genus
ONYCHORHYNCHUS Fischer von Waldheim, Genus
TERENOTRICCUS Ridgway, and Genus MYIOBIUS G.
R. Gray, and their included species accounts, in this
sequence, to follow this new heading.
 
Last edited:
Not entirely surprising that the Mexican Duck and Barn Owl splits were not accepted, I guess, though the Mexican Duck is kind of like Yellow-rumped Warbler, you sort of wonder how much evidence will finally have to be accumulated to tip the balance.

What is more surprising to me is that the Red-eyed Vireo split, Buff-throated Foliage-Gleaner split, Cherrie's Tanager lump, and White-collared Seedeater Split were approved, but the Bean-Goose lump and Cory's & Boyd's Shearwater splits were not passed!

The comments on the proposals are usually made available on the NACC website, although anonymously (unlike SACC), though they are not yet in for the 2018 batch of proposals. I wonder whether this is due to voting not being final yet, perhaps the changes they incorporated into the new checklist supplement are only those that had already reached the necessary number of votes for acceptance, even if one or two members had not voted yet? I say this because I would be really surprised if the Cory's/Scopoli's split did not pass, it's such a no-brainer!
 
Does that mean that Horornis is not available for the ''Cettia'' diphone/canturians/fortipes clade ?
Keeping using it for that group requires an act by the Commission under the Plenary Power. (There is absolutely no other mechanism protecting usage in the case of a misidentified type designation in the Code.)

And Cyanosylvia ?
Cyanosylvia Brehm, 1828, Isis von Oken, 21, 920. Type, by monotypy, Motacilla svecica Linnaeus.

This was not listed by Neave, but appears to have precedence, indeed. (Published in the same volume of the same journal, but in an earlier issue (Heft VIII vs. Heft XII); issues do not seem to be dated, however, which may ultimately mean that all the names in the volume have to be dated from 31 Dec 1828; but even in this case, the first reviser would probably be Stone in April 1907, who (on the suggestion of Richmond) adopted Cyanosylvia.)
Name: Cyanosylvia
Author: Brehm
Date: 1828
OD ref: Brehm CL. 1828. Der Zug der Vögel. Isis (Oken), 21: 912-922.
Page: 920
Link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13245186
OINS: Cyano-sylvia suecica
Type: Motacilla svecica Linnaeus 1758
Syn. of ? in use
Fixation by: original monotypy
Fixation ref: as OD
Page: as OD
Link: as OD
OD of type ref: Linnaeus C. 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Tomus I. Laurentius Salvius, Stockholm.
Page: 187
link: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/727096
Notes: As “Cyano-sylvia”. Not listed by Neave. FR act versus Cyanecula Brehm 1828, p. 1280 of the same volume of the journal, if needed, would probably be: Stone W. 1907. Some changes in the current generic names of North American birds. Auk, 24: 189-199.; p. 193 ; https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/16270000 ; adopted Cyanosylvia.
Available: yes
Family: Muscicapidae​
 
Last edited:
The comments on the proposals are usually made available on the NACC website, although anonymously (unlike SACC), though they are not yet in for the 2018 batch of proposals. I wonder whether this is due to voting not being final yet, perhaps the changes they incorporated into the new checklist supplement are only those that had already reached the necessary number of votes for acceptance, even if one or two members had not voted yet?
This is the .pdf of a paper to be published in Auk, with final page numbers, etc.
In the case of the last report, a last-minute correction was allowed for the spelling of Loxia sinesciuris, after a similar .pdf had appeared at ResearchGate. But this was just a single-letter change in a name; I don't think anything more fundamental could still be changed at this stage.
Incidentally, there is a list of rejected proposals at the end of the paper. (So it looks like they were really effectively rejected.)
 
Indeed, as Laurent has already mentioned:

"Proposals considered but not accepted by the Com- mittee included merger of Taiga Bean-Goose Anser fabalis and Tundra Bean-Goose A. serrirostris, separation of Anas diazi from Mallard A. platyrhynchos, change of the English name of Rock Pigeon Columba livia back to Rock Dove, separation of Fork-tailed Swift Apus pacificus into four species, change of the English names of Common Gallinule Gallinula galeata and Common Moorhen G. chloropus, recognition of the genus Catharacta, separation of Cory’s Shearwater Calonectris diomedea into two species, separation of Puffinus boydi from Audubon’s Shearwater P. lherminieri, separation of Barn Owl Tyto alba into three species, elevation of Platyrinchinae and Rhynchocyclinae to family level, rearrangement of the linear sequence of species in the Tyrannidae, change of the treatment of Piprites by creating the new family Pipritidae, transfer of Lesser Whitethroat Sylvia curruca to Curruca, separation of
Toxostoma arenicola from LeConte’s Thrasher T. lecon- tei, separation of Melozone occipitalis from White-eared Ground-Sparrow M. leucotis, and separation of Yellow Warbler Setophaga petechia into two species."
 
Indeed, as Laurent has already mentioned:

"Proposals considered but not accepted by the Com- mittee included merger of Taiga Bean-Goose Anser fabalis and Tundra Bean-Goose A. serrirostris, separation of Anas diazi from Mallard A. platyrhynchos, change of the English name of Rock Pigeon Columba livia back to Rock Dove, separation of Fork-tailed Swift Apus pacificus into four species, change of the English names of Common Gallinule Gallinula galeata and Common Moorhen G. chloropus, recognition of the genus Catharacta, separation of Cory’s Shearwater Calonectris diomedea into two species, separation of Puffinus boydi from Audubon’s Shearwater P. lherminieri, separation of Barn Owl Tyto alba into three species, elevation of Platyrinchinae and Rhynchocyclinae to family level, rearrangement of the linear sequence of species in the Tyrannidae, change of the treatment of Piprites by creating the new family Pipritidae, transfer of Lesser Whitethroat Sylvia curruca to Curruca, separation of
Toxostoma arenicola from LeConte’s Thrasher T. lecon- tei, separation of Melozone occipitalis from White-eared Ground-Sparrow M. leucotis, and separation of Yellow Warbler Setophaga petechia into two species."

OK, thanks, I missed that. I am really curious to see the rationale behind rejecting the Cory's/Scopoli's split as the evidence for their reproductive isolation seems very strong, including their maintaining genetic and phenotypic differences on islands where both taxa breed. I can't imagine what else they would need, unless they found the Zidat et al paper cited in the proposal less than convincing?
 
The comments on the proposals are usually made available on the NACC website, although anonymously (unlike SACC), though they are not yet in for the 2018 batch of proposals. I wonder whether this is due to voting not being final yet, perhaps the changes they incorporated into the new checklist supplement are only those that had already reached the necessary number of votes for acceptance, even if one or two members had not voted yet? I say this because I would be really surprised if the Cory's/Scopoli's split did not pass, it's such a no-brainer!

I guess I should have stated that differently - "It's a shame the whole process isn't open to the public." But c'est la vie. We'll see what the comments are in time.

In looking at this further, it's still very surprising that the Foliage-Gleaner and Cherrie's Tanager proposals passed on only playback data, but the LeConte's Thrasher and Cory's were rejected with much more and seemingly stronger evidence presented. But then again we still have two Redpolls, and we still have Goldman's Warbler and Sumichrast's Scrub-Jay ignored :)
 
Laurent said:...appears to have precedence, indeed. (Published in the same volume of the same journal, but in an earlier issue (Heft VIII vs. Heft XII); issues do not seem to be dated, however, which may ultimately mean that all the names in the volume have to be dated from 31 Dec 1828. Each Isis has 12 hefts and each heft in the literature are dated to its month. Although there are late hefts. Wrappers would be nice . One writer said: "1839 (2): 126—137. [not before Mar 1839 (submission dates of ads in Heft 2" Awesome work Laurent and LeNomenclatoriste on Cyanosylvia.
 
Pseudobulweria .
THALASSIDROMA (BULWERIA) MACGILLIVRAYI Gray (Cat. Birds Tropic Islands Pacific Ocean, p. 56, 1859, published 14 January, 1860 : Ngau, Fiji Islands). This unique skin has been figured in Godman’s â Monograph of the Petrels, pl. 75, and described on p. 260, part iv. April 1909, and in the â Catalogue of Birds,â vol. xxv. p. 421, 1896 (pref. 16 December, 1895). It is perhaps unfortunate that this bird was placed in the genus Bulweria, as its significance has thereby been lost. I can see no resemblance except in colour (and that not exact) to Bulwerâs Soft-nosed Petrel. The bill is certainly more like that of Pterodromine Petrels than the bill of Cooki- laria, much less to that of Bulweria. In life Bulweria has the openings of the nostrils soft, and in the dried skin the openings point upwards in a receding nasal orifice. This is a most marked characteristic in Bulweria. A glance at the plate will show more clearly how the bills of the two mentioned species differ. The tail of mncgilliwruyi is shorter than the tail of Bulweria, although the bird is larger. In the former the first primary is shorter than the second, while in Bulweria the f i s t primary is the longest. The difference can be considered of generic importance, so I introduce PSEUDOBULWERIA, gen. nov. ; type, T. MACGILLIVRAYI Gray. In Bulweria the wing measurement is less than twice the tail measurement ; in Pseudobulweria the wing measurement is more than twice that of the tail. Mathews Ibis 1936.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/123024#page/185/mode/1up .
 
I wondered why Cyanecula instead of Cyanosylvia, after all. Same author, same publication and same year
The AOU 2018 A-9 proposal cites del Hoyo and Collar (2016) HBW passerine volume. Saying that this publication
restricted Luscinia to L. megarhynchos and L. luscinia, left H. phaenicuroides in Hodgsonius, and transferred L. svecica to Cyanecula Brehm, 1828, based on “unique morphological characters”. We don’t know whether this refers to something other than plumage, but
the plumages of the species of Luscinia (the nightingales) under this generic scheme are extremely similar and very different from those of C. svecica (Bluethroat) and H. phaenicuroides (White-bellied Redstart), which differ considerably from each other.
So blame del Hoyo 2016 for not citing the name with priority.
In 1915 the BOU bird list of Britain said
The generic name Cyanosylvia was given to the Red-spotted Blue-throat by C. L. Brehm
Isis, 1828, p. 920). It therefore antedates Cyanecula, which was created by the same author on p. 1280 of the same volume of the ' Isis ' for the same bird. The first name must therefore be used. The type is C. suecica Linn., by monotypy.
.
I want to explain QUOTE]submission dates of ads in Heft 2[/QUOTE]
Here are the ads part and some publications mention Marz.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/47584#page/499/mode/1up .
 
Last edited:
"Genus HORORNIS Hodgson
Horornis Hodgson, 1845, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, p. 31. Types H. fortipes and H. flaviventris; restricted to H. fortipes (Seebohm, 1881, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., 5: 133).
In THE FAUNA OF BRITISH INDIA, INCLUDING CEYLON AND BURMA by E.O. Stuart Baker in the CORRIGENDA AND ADDENDA says Homochlamys Salvadori, Atti It. Accad. Torino, vol. v, p. 510, 1870.
Type by mon., H. luscinia Salv.=A. canturians Svvinhoe.

The type of Horornis is unfortunately given by Hodgson as
Horornis flaviventris (Gray, Cat. Gen. & Subgen. Birds, 1855,
p. 35), which makes the name a synonym of Tribura.

The generic name Horornis , Nos. 908 to 916, should therefore
be altered to Homochlamys , and the former name altered wherever
used on pp. 504 to 512.
 
But is Horornis flaviventris Hodgson, 1845, identifiable? It seems to be a small example of Horornis fortipes Hodgson, 1845.

Which has priority, Horornis flaviventris Hodgson, 1845 or Horornis fortipes Hodgson, 1845? And why is flaviventris (Salvadori, 1879) in use as a subspecific name by HBW and Avibase?

The type of Horornis is unfortunately given by Hodgson as Horornis flaviventris (Gray, Cat. Gen. & Subgen. Birds, 1855,
p. 35), which makes the name a synonym of Tribura.

I think you mean that Gray (1855) selected flaviventris as the type species before Seebohm (1881) selected fortipes.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top