-
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.
Bean Goose group (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Daniel Philippe
- Start date
mb1848
Well-known member
"Anyone know the full page citation for Gould 1852, please? I can't find it anywhere."
Gould read a paper to the Zoological Society on March 23, 1852 but I cannot find where it was published in the Proceedings but it was reported in the Zoologist. (p. 3466)
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/123032#page/174/mode/1up . In Swinhoe 1871 he says it is a name from Gould MS.
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/28554637#page/513/mode/1up .
Gould read a paper to the Zoological Society on March 23, 1852 but I cannot find where it was published in the Proceedings but it was reported in the Zoologist. (p. 3466)
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/123032#page/174/mode/1up . In Swinhoe 1871 he says it is a name from Gould MS.
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/28554637#page/513/mode/1up .
Last edited:
Nutcracker
Stop Brexit!
Thanks! The description looks rather brief, but seems to be adequate; as Howard & Moore consider it acceptable publication, I'll not dispute their expertise.
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Anser serrirostris citation
H&M4 attributes the change of citation to...
Dickinson & Jones 2012. Some corrections to information provided in "Priority! The Dating of Scientific Names in Ornithology". Zoological Bibliography 2(2&3): 75–89.
Nutcracker
Stop Brexit!
Thanks! :t:
JustinJansen
Well-known member
Some thoughts on Bean Geese and their – in my eyes – troubled history:
- John Latham described Taiga Bean Goose Anser fabalis but lack of description (on page 297, Gen. Synopsis Birds, suppl. 1. Latham 1787) and lack of type does not justify it was the bird we call today Taiga Bean Goose as even Tundra Bean could be involved in the description. As both ‘species’ can be found in the Great Britain (as implied as type location by Latham), it is a wintering bird and could be with the knowledge now be either species as the description is not conclusive. Latham made references to Pennant 1770 and 1776, who also lacks a matching description with either one of the ‘species’.
- Secondly Gmelin 1789 named a Bean Goose segetum, again neither type nor conclusive description remains. And again a wintering bird, and both ‘species’ are still possible….
- Brehm (1822) described then a wintering bird from Gotha (Germany) as rufescens, but this bird is not present at AMNH or ZMFB. Yet again a wintering bird, while both ‘species’ could winter here.
- Brehm (1830) described platyuros from the Pommerisches Coast (Germany); again no type is present nor a conclusive description, and again a wintering bird while both ‘species’ are still possible….
- Brehm (1830) described arvenis from Germany, yet again no type, no conclusive description and a wintering bird…
- Selys Longchamps (1855) described from Belgium leukonyx and yet again - but did not a throughout research – no type, conclusive description and yet again a wintering bird.
- Strickland (1858) described a British bird and named this bird paludosus, unknown is the type for me, and if it’s description is conclusive tot exclude either ‘species”, and again it’s a wintering bird.
- Parker described in 1863 again from England palustris, can’t locate the type yet as if the description exclude the other ‘species”, and again wintering bird.
- In 1871 Swinhoe described serrirostris from Amoy, China, but I could not yet find type, nor if it’s description other bean Geese excludes.
- Sewertszow described from Turkestan (Kazakhstan) in 1873 middendorfii, type might be in Moscow, but again a wintering bird.
- Suskin (1895) described from Eastern Russian neglectus, and possibly was the first to describe a breeding bird, unknown if the type is still present and how good the description is.
- The type from mentalis from Yokohama, Japan, a wintering bird described by Oates (1899) is in NHM, Tring.
- Buturlin (1901) described a bird from Psovaia I Ruzheinaia Okhotam and named it carneirostris, this location is situated in the southern Ural (known as breeding area of fabalis).
- Rickett (1901) described from Fokien, China oatesi using a wintering bird.
- Buturlin (1901) described from Nova Zembla carneirostris (we known now as rossicus…..)?
- Alpheraky (1905) described from the Taymyr sibiricus, a breeding bird (again we know this a rossicus now….)
- Buturlin (1908) described in 1908 from Pascha Ochota the breeding anadyrensis.
- And in 1933 Buturlin described rossicus.
I did not research The Ibis 1944 (87-88), 1947 (272-275), Bannerman – the Birds of the British islands, vol. 6 (224-233). These titles could hold more information.
To clarify the problems with Bean Geese and their real Id, it would be good to select breeding birds of in-dispute origin, and therefore it would be good to select carneirostris instead of rossicus and neglectus instead of fabalis this would serve more credit for the researcher as there is a clear type 'breeding' location. Is this possible or what are the rules for this according to the ICZN?
- John Latham described Taiga Bean Goose Anser fabalis but lack of description (on page 297, Gen. Synopsis Birds, suppl. 1. Latham 1787) and lack of type does not justify it was the bird we call today Taiga Bean Goose as even Tundra Bean could be involved in the description. As both ‘species’ can be found in the Great Britain (as implied as type location by Latham), it is a wintering bird and could be with the knowledge now be either species as the description is not conclusive. Latham made references to Pennant 1770 and 1776, who also lacks a matching description with either one of the ‘species’.
- Secondly Gmelin 1789 named a Bean Goose segetum, again neither type nor conclusive description remains. And again a wintering bird, and both ‘species’ are still possible….
- Brehm (1822) described then a wintering bird from Gotha (Germany) as rufescens, but this bird is not present at AMNH or ZMFB. Yet again a wintering bird, while both ‘species’ could winter here.
- Brehm (1830) described platyuros from the Pommerisches Coast (Germany); again no type is present nor a conclusive description, and again a wintering bird while both ‘species’ are still possible….
- Brehm (1830) described arvenis from Germany, yet again no type, no conclusive description and a wintering bird…
- Selys Longchamps (1855) described from Belgium leukonyx and yet again - but did not a throughout research – no type, conclusive description and yet again a wintering bird.
- Strickland (1858) described a British bird and named this bird paludosus, unknown is the type for me, and if it’s description is conclusive tot exclude either ‘species”, and again it’s a wintering bird.
- Parker described in 1863 again from England palustris, can’t locate the type yet as if the description exclude the other ‘species”, and again wintering bird.
- In 1871 Swinhoe described serrirostris from Amoy, China, but I could not yet find type, nor if it’s description other bean Geese excludes.
- Sewertszow described from Turkestan (Kazakhstan) in 1873 middendorfii, type might be in Moscow, but again a wintering bird.
- Suskin (1895) described from Eastern Russian neglectus, and possibly was the first to describe a breeding bird, unknown if the type is still present and how good the description is.
- The type from mentalis from Yokohama, Japan, a wintering bird described by Oates (1899) is in NHM, Tring.
- Buturlin (1901) described a bird from Psovaia I Ruzheinaia Okhotam and named it carneirostris, this location is situated in the southern Ural (known as breeding area of fabalis).
- Rickett (1901) described from Fokien, China oatesi using a wintering bird.
- Buturlin (1901) described from Nova Zembla carneirostris (we known now as rossicus…..)?
- Alpheraky (1905) described from the Taymyr sibiricus, a breeding bird (again we know this a rossicus now….)
- Buturlin (1908) described in 1908 from Pascha Ochota the breeding anadyrensis.
- And in 1933 Buturlin described rossicus.
I did not research The Ibis 1944 (87-88), 1947 (272-275), Bannerman – the Birds of the British islands, vol. 6 (224-233). These titles could hold more information.
To clarify the problems with Bean Geese and their real Id, it would be good to select breeding birds of in-dispute origin, and therefore it would be good to select carneirostris instead of rossicus and neglectus instead of fabalis this would serve more credit for the researcher as there is a clear type 'breeding' location. Is this possible or what are the rules for this according to the ICZN?
mb1848
Well-known member
A. Strickland's A. paludosus is described as an old male Bean Goose A. segetum from Britain by Mr. Bartlett. Strickland called it a new species. Strickland named it the Carr-lag or Long-billed Goose. Annals and magazine of Natural History V. 7 p. 419 Mr. A. D. Bartlett on Pink-footed Goose.
l_raty
laurent raty
This pretty much looks like a can of worms.
In theory, you could deem that all the older names are nomina dubia, and refuse to use them. But this would just be your personal taxonomic choice, and would not give priority to the younger names... And I think this would be quite unlikely to gain universal acceptance.
A more "classical" (and efficient?) way to go would be to neotypify the older names, assuming they indeed lack types. But in doing so, you would still have to select a type approaching as close as possible what info can be derived from the ODs, among other in terms of type locality. IOW, you would not be free to select a neotype from the breeding grounds for a name that is clearly based on a wintering bird; you would have to select a specimen from as close as possible to where the original type(s) had been obtained/described.
The name carneirostris was given by Buturlin 1901 to a black-and-pink-billed (but orange-legged) bird collected by Heuglin on Novaja Zemlia; this bird had earlier been described by Heuglin in 1872. I presume it would most likely have been a pink-billed variant of today's rossicus, but Heuglin was unsure of its identity. ("Oder sollte der beschriebene Vogel zu Anser brachyrynchus gehören?")
The name neglectus was coined by Sushkin 1895 and originally made available via a short Latin diagnosis only; the taxon was later described in details by Sushkin 1897. The type locality is Ufa, Russia, which is too far S for any breeding Bean Goose, and the types were obtained in October, during migration. They were pink-legged and black-and-pink-billed but, besides this, would seem closest to today's rossicus. I would regard these as most likely (also) variants of rossicus, not representatives of today's fabalis.
I've not seen Bannerman either.
Ibis 1944 (87-88) seems to refer to two pages in the middle of a longer paper about SE Tibet, are you sure of this reference?
Ibis 1947 (272-275) analyzes the descriptions associated to Anas fabalis Latham, and concludes that they fit Pink-footed Goose much better than any Bean G. :eek!: (There are descriptions for this name. [Actually there is always either a description, or an illustration somewhere for a name, if it is to be available.] As you noted, the name was indeed introduced on page 297, Gen. Synopsis Birds, suppl. 1., 1787. There it was made available via two references, which both describe the bird: "Synopsis VI, p. 464" = Latham 1785:464, and "Br. Zool. II, N° 267" = Pennant 1776:575. Note that Latham 1785 included a "Lev. Mus." in his Bean Goose header, which means there must also have been a specimen in the collections at the Leverianum Museum in his time; unfortunately, these collections have been dispersed, and where this specimen could be today is probably not straightforward at all to establish.)
Alphéraky 1905 is worth a look, I think.
l_raty
laurent raty
A few additional ragtag notes. Comments/suggestions certainly welcome. (But it's really, really a mess... :smoke
Based on:
- "Synopsis VI, p. 464" = Latham 1785: 464, which additionally refers to "Arct. Zool. N° 462.", errore pro N° 472. = Pennant 1785: 546;
- "Br. Zool. II, N° 267" = Pennant 1776: 575, which additionally refers to 14 different works, which I think all (!) describe the Greylag Goose (and are probably best ignored...).
Type locality: as declared, encompasses England (Lincolnshire, Yorkshire, Suffolk) in winter, Lewis (Hebrides), "northern Europe", Hudson's Bay.
Type specimen in Museum Leverianum, cited by both Latham 1785, and Pennant 1785. As I wrote above, the collections of the Museum Leverianum have been dispersed, which makes it difficult to trace the specimens. Many of Latham's types were acquired by the Natuhistorisches Museum Wien, but I cannot trace this one in Schifter et al. 2007.
Anas segetum Gmelin, 1789. [OD].
Based on:
- "Brit. Zool. 2. n. 267." = Pennant 1776: 575;
- "Arct. zool. 2. p. 546." = Pennant 1785: 546;
- "Lath. syn. III. 2. p. 464. n. 23." = Latham 1785: 464.
Type locality: as declared, encompasses Hudson's Bay, Hebrides, England in autumn.
Translation of descriptive parts of the text: "Anas grey, dirty white below, with bill compressed at the base, white tail coverts, saffron yellow legs." "2½ - 3 foot long" "Bill small, with reddish median part, and black base and tip, ferrugineous colour sprinkled on head and neck, black fringes to the flight feathers, white tail; white nails."
Gmelin's segetum entry appears to be derived entirely from the three cited references, which are precisely the same as for Latham's fabalis. It's always possible that Gmelin had seen specimens and did not make this apparent; but, in the absence of evidence that it could be the case, these two names look like objective synonyms. (Despite this, quite oddly, they have long been used, one for Taiga, the other for Tundra BG.)
Many authors have noted that interpreting the bare parts' colouration of a dead goose is typically difficult. In particular, although bright orange tends to remain orange on specimens, pink usually fades rapidly into whitish/pale yellow/brownish (eg., look at the bill colours [here]; the colour can apparently change within the first hour after death). Pennant's and Latham's descriptions indicate "saffron"-coloured legs, which might be interpreted as indicative of Bean Goose but, if based on dead birds, is actually better regarded as inconclusive. For the rest, the descriptions consistently note: a small bill, much compressed near the end, with a median part either whitish or pale red; ferruginous tones on the head and neck; very pale grey wing coverts; and grey-based flight feathers: all of these indicate Pink-footed Goose, not Bean Goose.
Faced to this "problem", Coombes 1947 suggested to regard fabalis as composite and, on this base, simply discard it; in his subsequent publications, he used arvensis for Taiga BG, retaining brachyrhynchus for Pink-footed G. However, arvensis is problematic as well (see below); the ICZN does not treat initially composite names as having to be discarded; and in practice I see no actual evidence that the name is composite (if we exclude the references to Greylag Goose descriptions in Brit. Zool.). Nothing in the descriptions applies to Bean and excludes Pink-footed.
Delacour 1951 refused to follow Coombes, and issued a quite bold statement reading: "fabalis must be used, and I formally designate the form of yellow legged Forest Bean Goose normally wintering in England, for which the name has been generally used, as representing the bird named by Latham." Subsequent western authors apparently accepted this. However, Delacour's statement is entirely void under the Code; you just cannot designate "a form" to act as typifying a name, this is perfectly invalid.
Based on a young specimen from Gotha (Germany), and an adult female specimen plus an egg, from Iceland. The description mainly covers the adult and, unsurprisingly given its provenance, fits Pink-footed Goose perfectly. The German bird differed only in thinner pale edges to the feathers and less marked ferruginous tones on the head.
Type locality: Gotha (Germany) and Iceland.
This is a senior synonym of brachyrhynchus.
"Anser platyuros Brehm, 1831" [here] is a subsequent spelling.
The OD is minimal (species said to differ from other species by having 20 tail feathers instead of 18 [hence the name]).
No type locality given; based on the 1831 work: inhabits "the high north"; in autumn and winter on the Pomeranian coast, very rarely in central Germany.
20 tail feathers not normal for any bean goose; BWP describes this only for Greylag (in which it is rare, 18 is usual). I have no clear idea what this bird was.
Only 16 tail feathers, bill largely pale.
Type locality: inhabits the high north; reaches Germany in autumn.
ALSO, from the same work:
Anser obscurus Brehm, 1831. [OD]
Smaller than previous, also 16 tail feathers, bill largely black with only a thin pale band, very dark plumage.
Based on an adult female shot near Eisenberg, and a young male from Mainz (Germany), the latter described earlier by Bruch 1821.
Anser Bruchii [OD]
Based on a bird described earlier by Bruch 1821 (see also illustration [#1]).
Initially identified by Bruch as Anser medius Temminck, but Temminck then retracted his description of this species, saying it was a young Whitefront; Brehm however remained convinced that Bruch's bird was not a Whitefront, and described it as a new species. Note that the reason why Brehm though the bird not to be a White-fronted is that he though the nail of the bill was invariably pale in Whitefront; but nail can be rather dark in young Whitefronts.
16 tail feathers is not normal for any bean goose, but perfectly normal for White-fronted. From the text coming with the last description cited above (A. Bruchii), it is obvious that Brehm would have identified any goose with a dark bill nail as a bean goose, failing to realize that this did not exclude Whitefront at all. In all probabilities, his birds with 16 tail feathers (including "arvensis") were all young White-fronted Geese.
(Here comes:
"Anser segetum var. serrirostris Swinhoe, 1871." [here] is now regarded as a subsequent usage.
By Swinhoe's, described as large with huge bill approaching that of A. grandis (Swan Goose); in comparison to a "home-shot" (=British?) bird (actual species?), paler cheek and throat, much lighter and yellowish-brown neck, narrower white edges and tips to the tail-feathers, and longer tarsi; for the rest similar.
Included in Swinhoe's new taxon were winter birds from Amoy (China), two specimens from Trans-Baikal at the British Museum and a specimen from Shanghai in Gould's collection, the latter labelled "serrirostris" by Gould. All of this, however, is irrelevant if the name is taken directly from Gould--to the exception of the information that Gould labelled a bird with the name. This bird is almost certainly either the holotype, or a syntype. (I can't say more without having seen Gould's text.)
Type locality: presumably Shanghai. In all probability not Amoy.
Characterized by white nails (hence the name) to the feet. Plumage like that of arvensis; bill colour like that of "intermedius Naum." which he said he had illustrated [here], pale parts partly pink, partly yellow; legs described as pale pink; eye-ring black.
Based on a non-fresh specimen seen by the author in the possession of H. Roberti in Sint-Truiden (Belgium). Where the bird itself had been obtained is not said.
Foot nails are not usually white in any bean goose as far as I know; white in White-fronted and in Greylag. I'm unclear what this bird was; I'm not fully certain that we can exclude some kind of semi-domestic Greylag.
Based in part on the illustrations of:
- Yarrell 1851;
- Gould 1837.
Strickland thought that "the true segetum or Bean Goose", the one which comes in large numbers in Britain, had a short bill (and that the Pink-footed Goose was "the young of" this species). He further thought that a long- and weak-billed goose, which he imagined more associated to water, also existed, and had formerly bred in Britain, but did not anymore. This (half-hypothetical, as I read it) goose, he named Anas paludosus.
Hypothetically inhabited Britain in the past; no actual type locality given.
I'd tend to treat this as doubtfully available. (Based upon a hypothetical concept.)
Anyway, Sherborn does lists (but it is omitted by Richmond, no idea why):
Anser palustris Fleming, 1828. [OD]
...which is undoubtedly a Greylag. This would preoccupy the 1828 name, which could therefore never become valid.
An English translation was published by Dresser 1876. (However, despite my desperately poor Russian, the apparent translation of "туркестанскихъ" in the 3rd §, into "from the Amoor", calls for cautiousness... If anybody who really reads this language would be so kind as to check the two versions and see if they differ in other respects, I'd be more than interested.)
The taxon was discovered by Middendorff, who described it in 1853, misidentifying it as "Anser grandis Gmelin" (which actually applies to Swan Goose) [description, illustration]. It was then treated under this name by several subsequent authors, including Schrenck 1860.
Severtsov, while studying geese from Turkestan, found them identical to Middendorff's bird, but noted that Anser grandis Gmelin did not apply to them, and therefore "renamed" the taxon (which, actually, was unnamed).
Included under the new name were Middendorff's bird, Severtsov's own Turkestan bird, and specimens described by Schrenck.
Type locality: Middendorff wrote about his bird that it does not reach the Taimyr, but has been caught on the Boganida; then he went on saying that it was killed on 25 April on the Polovinnaya, not far from Uds'kój Os'tróg (Удской острог, the jail of Udskoye, Khabarovsk Krai) (I'd be tempted to interpret the first location as possibly second-hand info, the second as the the locality of origin of his specimen); Schrenk's birds were from the Amur region; for his own birds, Severtsov cites the Aris (now Arys), Keless (now Keles), and Chirchick (now Chirchiq) rivers, Turkestan; nowadays, the former two are in Kazakhstan, the last one in Uzbekistan.
Later described in more detail by Sushkin 1897.
Similar to "Anser segetum" but orange in the bill and feet replaced with pink; darker head and neck. Upperwing lacking the blue grey present in Pink-footed Goose.
Based on 8 birds collected on autumn passage on the lake Thoungak, government of Ufa, where such birds said to be common at this time. Breeding grounds unknown.
One of the syntypes used to be at the British Museum (Reg. no. 1897.6.19.1).
Five birds labelled "neglectus", but none of the types, were sequenced by Ruokonnen & Aarvak 2011; their position in the tree varied widely, indicating that birds that received such labels are not interrelated--this being consistent with them not being a distinct taxon. Only an analysis of one of the types could yield actual information about what the names applies to. This name is available, has precedence over, ia., rossicus, and is not a nomen oblitum.
Like the "Common Bean-goose" but bigger.
The holotype is a bird from the Seebohm collection, at the British Museum (Reg. no. 1894.8.12.11).
Type locality Yokohama.
Ruokonnen & Aarvak 2011 sequenced the holotype, and found it to have a tundra bean goose haplotype. In their morphological analysis, this bird appeared atypical, albeit closest to middendorffii.
Anser carneirostris Buturlin, 1901. (OD in "Дикие гуси Российской империи", "Wild geese of the Russian Empire", published in Псовая и ружейная охота ["Psovaya i ruzheinaya okhota"], "Hounds and hunting rifles"--this is not a location in the Urals, but a magazine; not seen by me.)
See, eg., Alpheraky 1905, Buturlin 1934.
Based on an orange-legged, but pink-&-black-billed bird described earlier (but not named) by Heuglin 1872. (As well as, according to Buturlin 1934, unpublished handwritten notes by two other authors.)
Type locality Novaya Zemlya.
Bird said by Buturlin 1934 to be identical to rossicus, except for the bill band colour. This name clearly is available, has precedence over rossicus, apparently applies to the same taxon, and is not a nomen oblitum.
Described as having the size of Pink-footed, but a much bigger bill and a white chin.
Based on a single shot specimen; only the head/neck, one wing, and one leg said to have been preserved. Wing 16.4, tarsus 2.9.
Type locality Fohkien (Fujian, China).
The lower limits for serrirostris in Alpheraky 1905 were: wing 16.7, tarsus 2.78. I'm unconvinced that this bird is really outside the normal variation.
Ruokonnen & Aarvak 2011 sequenced a bird (BMNH 1902.8.5.365), labelled oatesi by Rickett and collected from the same locality, and found it had a Tundra Bean Goose haplotype. They also tried sequencing the type (which is therefore certainly still extant), but without success.
Alpheraky checked Severtsov's specimens from Turkestan, and concluded that these did not represent the same taxon as Middendorff's Goose. He judged that the name middendorffii had to remain with these Turkestan specimens, and placed the name in the synonymy of his Melanonyx arvensis.
No type designated; type series complex, as many references included in the taxon, and all the birds described in these are in theory syntypes. Range described as "East Siberia, from the Taimyr peninsula eastwards to Kamchatka, Chukchiland, and the Komandor Islands”. 13 specimens listed explicitly in a table on p.107, from a wide variety of locations within this whole range. Among these, however, the two that are marked "Taimyr", both have a question mark next to their stated geographical origin. I would regard the inclusion of Taimyr in the original type locality as uncertain; I see no reason to regard this as a synonym of rossicus, and this is certainly not what the name was intended to be.
Subsequent authors have varied in their reading, some following Alpheraky (eg., Buturlin & Dement'ev 1935), others regarding Severtsov's name as attached to Middendorff's bird, rather than to Severtsov's Turkestan birds, in which case middendorffii is valid. In particular, Delacour 1951 commented: "According to Dementiev (Alauda 1936, pp. 181-189), Severtzov has expressly indicated that middendorffi is a new name for A. grandis Middendorf, antedated by Anser grandis Gmelin, which applies to the domestic breed of A. cygnoides", and he concluded that the name therefore had to apply to Middendorff's bird. I have not seen Dementiev 1936, but the above reading is unlikely to be tenable, because Middendorff did not actually propose any new name. He merely, explicitly, (mis)applied Gmelin's name, which is therefore the only available name that could have been replaced. And if middendorffii replaced Gmelin's name, what it applies to is the Swan Goose, and it cannot be used for any bean goose... I think it makes more sense to regard it as applying to a new taxon, which therefore has a composite type series, the two sets of birds (Middendorff's and Severtsov's) being syntypes: what we would need here is a lectotypification. (Alpheraky did not do this, as far as I can see; neither did Delacour.)
(What seems clear, in any event, is that you can not use middendorffii as the valid name of eastern Taiga Bean Goose, and claim its type locality is Turkestan.)
Based on a male shot on 11 July 1902, in coll. Menzbir.
Type locality given by Buturlin & Dement'ev 1935 as "Post Novo-Mariniskiy"; in Anadyr, but I'm not clear where exactly.
This is, again, a pink-and-black-billed bird (see Buturlin 1934).
Introduced upon the realization that the name then used for the western Tundra Bean Goose (segetum) was actually a synonym of the name then used for the western Taiga Bean Goose (fabalis).
The type is an adult male, collected 2 June 1908, deposited in Zool. Mus. Univ. Moscow, according to both Buturlin 1934 and Delacour 1951. (Albeit, surprisingly, this name is called a nomen emendatum in Buturlin & Dement'ev 1935...?)
Type locality reported inconsistently (ia, "restricted by Dementiev, Alauda, 1936, p. 190 to Beluchia Guba, Jamal, Taymyr" according to Delacour 1951, but Belushya Guba is on the W coast of Novaya Zemlya, and Yamal and Taimyr are two distinct peninsulas...). If there is a single type specimen, where this type was obtained is the actual type locality ("restrictions", etc., are irrelevant).
Anas fabalis Latham, 1787. [OD].
Based on:
- "Synopsis VI, p. 464" = Latham 1785: 464, which additionally refers to "Arct. Zool. N° 462.", errore pro N° 472. = Pennant 1785: 546;
- "Br. Zool. II, N° 267" = Pennant 1776: 575, which additionally refers to 14 different works, which I think all (!) describe the Greylag Goose (and are probably best ignored...).
Type locality: as declared, encompasses England (Lincolnshire, Yorkshire, Suffolk) in winter, Lewis (Hebrides), "northern Europe", Hudson's Bay.
Type specimen in Museum Leverianum, cited by both Latham 1785, and Pennant 1785. As I wrote above, the collections of the Museum Leverianum have been dispersed, which makes it difficult to trace the specimens. Many of Latham's types were acquired by the Natuhistorisches Museum Wien, but I cannot trace this one in Schifter et al. 2007.
Anas segetum Gmelin, 1789. [OD].
Based on:
- "Brit. Zool. 2. n. 267." = Pennant 1776: 575;
- "Arct. zool. 2. p. 546." = Pennant 1785: 546;
- "Lath. syn. III. 2. p. 464. n. 23." = Latham 1785: 464.
Type locality: as declared, encompasses Hudson's Bay, Hebrides, England in autumn.
Translation of descriptive parts of the text: "Anas grey, dirty white below, with bill compressed at the base, white tail coverts, saffron yellow legs." "2½ - 3 foot long" "Bill small, with reddish median part, and black base and tip, ferrugineous colour sprinkled on head and neck, black fringes to the flight feathers, white tail; white nails."
Gmelin's segetum entry appears to be derived entirely from the three cited references, which are precisely the same as for Latham's fabalis. It's always possible that Gmelin had seen specimens and did not make this apparent; but, in the absence of evidence that it could be the case, these two names look like objective synonyms. (Despite this, quite oddly, they have long been used, one for Taiga, the other for Tundra BG.)
Many authors have noted that interpreting the bare parts' colouration of a dead goose is typically difficult. In particular, although bright orange tends to remain orange on specimens, pink usually fades rapidly into whitish/pale yellow/brownish (eg., look at the bill colours [here]; the colour can apparently change within the first hour after death). Pennant's and Latham's descriptions indicate "saffron"-coloured legs, which might be interpreted as indicative of Bean Goose but, if based on dead birds, is actually better regarded as inconclusive. For the rest, the descriptions consistently note: a small bill, much compressed near the end, with a median part either whitish or pale red; ferruginous tones on the head and neck; very pale grey wing coverts; and grey-based flight feathers: all of these indicate Pink-footed Goose, not Bean Goose.
Faced to this "problem", Coombes 1947 suggested to regard fabalis as composite and, on this base, simply discard it; in his subsequent publications, he used arvensis for Taiga BG, retaining brachyrhynchus for Pink-footed G. However, arvensis is problematic as well (see below); the ICZN does not treat initially composite names as having to be discarded; and in practice I see no actual evidence that the name is composite (if we exclude the references to Greylag Goose descriptions in Brit. Zool.). Nothing in the descriptions applies to Bean and excludes Pink-footed.
Delacour 1951 refused to follow Coombes, and issued a quite bold statement reading: "fabalis must be used, and I formally designate the form of yellow legged Forest Bean Goose normally wintering in England, for which the name has been generally used, as representing the bird named by Latham." Subsequent western authors apparently accepted this. However, Delacour's statement is entirely void under the Code; you just cannot designate "a form" to act as typifying a name, this is perfectly invalid.
Anser rufescens Brehm in Brehm & Schilling, 1822. [OD]
Based on a young specimen from Gotha (Germany), and an adult female specimen plus an egg, from Iceland. The description mainly covers the adult and, unsurprisingly given its provenance, fits Pink-footed Goose perfectly. The German bird differed only in thinner pale edges to the feathers and less marked ferruginous tones on the head.
Type locality: Gotha (Germany) and Iceland.
This is a senior synonym of brachyrhynchus.
Anser playurus Brehm, 1928. [OD]
"Anser platyuros Brehm, 1831" [here] is a subsequent spelling.
The OD is minimal (species said to differ from other species by having 20 tail feathers instead of 18 [hence the name]).
No type locality given; based on the 1831 work: inhabits "the high north"; in autumn and winter on the Pomeranian coast, very rarely in central Germany.
20 tail feathers not normal for any bean goose; BWP describes this only for Greylag (in which it is rare, 18 is usual). I have no clear idea what this bird was.
Anser arvensis Brehm, 1831. [OD]
Only 16 tail feathers, bill largely pale.
Type locality: inhabits the high north; reaches Germany in autumn.
ALSO, from the same work:
Anser obscurus Brehm, 1831. [OD]
Smaller than previous, also 16 tail feathers, bill largely black with only a thin pale band, very dark plumage.
Based on an adult female shot near Eisenberg, and a young male from Mainz (Germany), the latter described earlier by Bruch 1821.
Anser Bruchii [OD]
Based on a bird described earlier by Bruch 1821 (see also illustration [#1]).
Initially identified by Bruch as Anser medius Temminck, but Temminck then retracted his description of this species, saying it was a young Whitefront; Brehm however remained convinced that Bruch's bird was not a Whitefront, and described it as a new species. Note that the reason why Brehm though the bird not to be a White-fronted is that he though the nail of the bill was invariably pale in Whitefront; but nail can be rather dark in young Whitefronts.
16 tail feathers is not normal for any bean goose, but perfectly normal for White-fronted. From the text coming with the last description cited above (A. Bruchii), it is obvious that Brehm would have identified any goose with a dark bill nail as a bean goose, failing to realize that this did not exclude Whitefront at all. In all probabilities, his birds with 16 tail feathers (including "arvensis") were all young White-fronted Geese.
(Here comes:
Anser brachyrhynchus Baillon, 1834. [OD, see also Yarrell 1839].
Based on birds from the Département de la Somme. Specimens (types?) were sent by Baillon to the museums of Paris, Turin, Mayence, Leyden.
Type locality vicinity of Abbeville, Somme, France.)
Based on birds from the Département de la Somme. Specimens (types?) were sent by Baillon to the museums of Paris, Turin, Mayence, Leyden.
Type locality vicinity of Abbeville, Somme, France.)
Anser serrirostris Gould, 1852. (OD in The Literary Gazette, 1836: 306; not seen by me.)
"Anser segetum var. serrirostris Swinhoe, 1871." [here] is now regarded as a subsequent usage.
By Swinhoe's, described as large with huge bill approaching that of A. grandis (Swan Goose); in comparison to a "home-shot" (=British?) bird (actual species?), paler cheek and throat, much lighter and yellowish-brown neck, narrower white edges and tips to the tail-feathers, and longer tarsi; for the rest similar.
Included in Swinhoe's new taxon were winter birds from Amoy (China), two specimens from Trans-Baikal at the British Museum and a specimen from Shanghai in Gould's collection, the latter labelled "serrirostris" by Gould. All of this, however, is irrelevant if the name is taken directly from Gould--to the exception of the information that Gould labelled a bird with the name. This bird is almost certainly either the holotype, or a syntype. (I can't say more without having seen Gould's text.)
Type locality: presumably Shanghai. In all probability not Amoy.
Anser leukonyx Selys Longchamps, 1855. [OD]
Characterized by white nails (hence the name) to the feet. Plumage like that of arvensis; bill colour like that of "intermedius Naum." which he said he had illustrated [here], pale parts partly pink, partly yellow; legs described as pale pink; eye-ring black.
Based on a non-fresh specimen seen by the author in the possession of H. Roberti in Sint-Truiden (Belgium). Where the bird itself had been obtained is not said.
Foot nails are not usually white in any bean goose as far as I know; white in White-fronted and in Greylag. I'm unclear what this bird was; I'm not fully certain that we can exclude some kind of semi-domestic Greylag.
Anas paludosus Strickland, 1858. [OD, with Illustration (#1)]
Based in part on the illustrations of:
- Yarrell 1851;
- Gould 1837.
Strickland thought that "the true segetum or Bean Goose", the one which comes in large numbers in Britain, had a short bill (and that the Pink-footed Goose was "the young of" this species). He further thought that a long- and weak-billed goose, which he imagined more associated to water, also existed, and had formerly bred in Britain, but did not anymore. This (half-hypothetical, as I read it) goose, he named Anas paludosus.
Hypothetically inhabited Britain in the past; no actual type locality given.
I'd tend to treat this as doubtfully available. (Based upon a hypothetical concept.)
I don't find any trace of this one.
Anyway, Sherborn does lists (but it is omitted by Richmond, no idea why):
Anser palustris Fleming, 1828. [OD]
...which is undoubtedly a Greylag. This would preoccupy the 1828 name, which could therefore never become valid.
Anser middendorffii Severtsov, 1873. [OD: distribution in Turkestan p.70; description p.149]
An English translation was published by Dresser 1876. (However, despite my desperately poor Russian, the apparent translation of "туркестанскихъ" in the 3rd §, into "from the Amoor", calls for cautiousness... If anybody who really reads this language would be so kind as to check the two versions and see if they differ in other respects, I'd be more than interested.)
The taxon was discovered by Middendorff, who described it in 1853, misidentifying it as "Anser grandis Gmelin" (which actually applies to Swan Goose) [description, illustration]. It was then treated under this name by several subsequent authors, including Schrenck 1860.
Severtsov, while studying geese from Turkestan, found them identical to Middendorff's bird, but noted that Anser grandis Gmelin did not apply to them, and therefore "renamed" the taxon (which, actually, was unnamed).
Included under the new name were Middendorff's bird, Severtsov's own Turkestan bird, and specimens described by Schrenck.
Type locality: Middendorff wrote about his bird that it does not reach the Taimyr, but has been caught on the Boganida; then he went on saying that it was killed on 25 April on the Polovinnaya, not far from Uds'kój Os'tróg (Удской острог, the jail of Udskoye, Khabarovsk Krai) (I'd be tempted to interpret the first location as possibly second-hand info, the second as the the locality of origin of his specimen); Schrenk's birds were from the Amur region; for his own birds, Severtsov cites the Aris (now Arys), Keless (now Keles), and Chirchick (now Chirchiq) rivers, Turkestan; nowadays, the former two are in Kazakhstan, the last one in Uzbekistan.
Anser neglectus Sushkin, 1895. [OD]
Later described in more detail by Sushkin 1897.
Similar to "Anser segetum" but orange in the bill and feet replaced with pink; darker head and neck. Upperwing lacking the blue grey present in Pink-footed Goose.
Based on 8 birds collected on autumn passage on the lake Thoungak, government of Ufa, where such birds said to be common at this time. Breeding grounds unknown.
One of the syntypes used to be at the British Museum (Reg. no. 1897.6.19.1).
Five birds labelled "neglectus", but none of the types, were sequenced by Ruokonnen & Aarvak 2011; their position in the tree varied widely, indicating that birds that received such labels are not interrelated--this being consistent with them not being a distinct taxon. Only an analysis of one of the types could yield actual information about what the names applies to. This name is available, has precedence over, ia., rossicus, and is not a nomen oblitum.
Anser mentalis Oates, 1899. [OD]
Like the "Common Bean-goose" but bigger.
The holotype is a bird from the Seebohm collection, at the British Museum (Reg. no. 1894.8.12.11).
Type locality Yokohama.
Ruokonnen & Aarvak 2011 sequenced the holotype, and found it to have a tundra bean goose haplotype. In their morphological analysis, this bird appeared atypical, albeit closest to middendorffii.
(Twice the same thing, ie.
Anser carneirostris Buturlin, 1901. (OD in "Дикие гуси Российской империи", "Wild geese of the Russian Empire", published in Псовая и ружейная охота ["Psovaya i ruzheinaya okhota"], "Hounds and hunting rifles"--this is not a location in the Urals, but a magazine; not seen by me.)
See, eg., Alpheraky 1905, Buturlin 1934.
Based on an orange-legged, but pink-&-black-billed bird described earlier (but not named) by Heuglin 1872. (As well as, according to Buturlin 1934, unpublished handwritten notes by two other authors.)
Type locality Novaya Zemlya.
Bird said by Buturlin 1934 to be identical to rossicus, except for the bill band colour. This name clearly is available, has precedence over rossicus, apparently applies to the same taxon, and is not a nomen oblitum.
Anser oatesi Rickett, 1901. [OD]
Described as having the size of Pink-footed, but a much bigger bill and a white chin.
Based on a single shot specimen; only the head/neck, one wing, and one leg said to have been preserved. Wing 16.4, tarsus 2.9.
Type locality Fohkien (Fujian, China).
The lower limits for serrirostris in Alpheraky 1905 were: wing 16.7, tarsus 2.78. I'm unconvinced that this bird is really outside the normal variation.
Ruokonnen & Aarvak 2011 sequenced a bird (BMNH 1902.8.5.365), labelled oatesi by Rickett and collected from the same locality, and found it had a Tundra Bean Goose haplotype. They also tried sequencing the type (which is therefore certainly still extant), but without success.
Melanonyx arvensis sibiricus Alpheraky, 1904. (OD in "Гуси России", "Geese of Russia", 1904; not seen by me; translated into English as The Geese of Europe & Asia 1905.) [translation of OD; illustration; bill]
Alpheraky checked Severtsov's specimens from Turkestan, and concluded that these did not represent the same taxon as Middendorff's Goose. He judged that the name middendorffii had to remain with these Turkestan specimens, and placed the name in the synonymy of his Melanonyx arvensis.
No type designated; type series complex, as many references included in the taxon, and all the birds described in these are in theory syntypes. Range described as "East Siberia, from the Taimyr peninsula eastwards to Kamchatka, Chukchiland, and the Komandor Islands”. 13 specimens listed explicitly in a table on p.107, from a wide variety of locations within this whole range. Among these, however, the two that are marked "Taimyr", both have a question mark next to their stated geographical origin. I would regard the inclusion of Taimyr in the original type locality as uncertain; I see no reason to regard this as a synonym of rossicus, and this is certainly not what the name was intended to be.
Subsequent authors have varied in their reading, some following Alpheraky (eg., Buturlin & Dement'ev 1935), others regarding Severtsov's name as attached to Middendorff's bird, rather than to Severtsov's Turkestan birds, in which case middendorffii is valid. In particular, Delacour 1951 commented: "According to Dementiev (Alauda 1936, pp. 181-189), Severtzov has expressly indicated that middendorffi is a new name for A. grandis Middendorf, antedated by Anser grandis Gmelin, which applies to the domestic breed of A. cygnoides", and he concluded that the name therefore had to apply to Middendorff's bird. I have not seen Dementiev 1936, but the above reading is unlikely to be tenable, because Middendorff did not actually propose any new name. He merely, explicitly, (mis)applied Gmelin's name, which is therefore the only available name that could have been replaced. And if middendorffii replaced Gmelin's name, what it applies to is the Swan Goose, and it cannot be used for any bean goose... I think it makes more sense to regard it as applying to a new taxon, which therefore has a composite type series, the two sets of birds (Middendorff's and Severtsov's) being syntypes: what we would need here is a lectotypification. (Alpheraky did not do this, as far as I can see; neither did Delacour.)
(What seems clear, in any event, is that you can not use middendorffii as the valid name of eastern Taiga Bean Goose, and claim its type locality is Turkestan.)
Melanonyx segetum anadyrensis Buturlin, 1908. (OD in Наша охота ["Nascha Okhota"], "Our hunting", again a hunting magazine; not seen by me.)
Based on a male shot on 11 July 1902, in coll. Menzbir.
Type locality given by Buturlin & Dement'ev 1935 as "Post Novo-Mariniskiy"; in Anadyr, but I'm not clear where exactly.
This is, again, a pink-and-black-billed bird (see Buturlin 1934).
Anser serrirostris rossicus Buturlin, 1933. (OD in "Определитель промысловых птиц", "Identification of game birds"; not seen by me.)
Introduced upon the realization that the name then used for the western Tundra Bean Goose (segetum) was actually a synonym of the name then used for the western Taiga Bean Goose (fabalis).
The type is an adult male, collected 2 June 1908, deposited in Zool. Mus. Univ. Moscow, according to both Buturlin 1934 and Delacour 1951. (Albeit, surprisingly, this name is called a nomen emendatum in Buturlin & Dement'ev 1935...?)
Type locality reported inconsistently (ia, "restricted by Dementiev, Alauda, 1936, p. 190 to Beluchia Guba, Jamal, Taymyr" according to Delacour 1951, but Belushya Guba is on the W coast of Novaya Zemlya, and Yamal and Taimyr are two distinct peninsulas...). If there is a single type specimen, where this type was obtained is the actual type locality ("restrictions", etc., are irrelevant).
Last edited:
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Laurent, your "ragtag notes" are consistently more perceptive than most formally-published / peer-reviewed papers on taxonomy and nomenclature. :t:
mb1848
Well-known member
The Literary Gazette: 1836 .
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015033904890;view=1up;seq=5 .
I could not find any Gould on Geese.
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015033904890;view=1up;seq=5 .
I could not find any Gould on Geese.
l_raty
laurent raty
Thanks Mark. But, unfortunately, this is The Literary Gazette for the year 1836, issues 989-1041; the name is supposed to be published in year 1852, issue 1836.
I have searched there, in Google, and at archive.org, I didn't find this issue.
Last edited:
mb1848
Well-known member
Sorry my mistake! Possibly Anser serrirostris Gould 1852 The Literary Gazette is suppressed and A. serrirostris Swinhoe is listed as the official species name by the ICZN this is from BZN 54(3) 1994 Case 3044.
http://biostor.org/reference/2989.text .??
Wrong again, in Opinion 2026 (2003) Bock & Schodde's proposal was denied.
http://biostor.org/reference/2989.text .??
Wrong again, in Opinion 2026 (2003) Bock & Schodde's proposal was denied.
Last edited:
MJB
Well-known member
Seconded! I've taken them, if Laurent is happy with that, as a PDF for reference!
MJb
JustinJansen
Well-known member
Thanks for digging so deep Laurent! One addition it's von Schrenck ;-)
mb1848
Well-known member
The Royal Navy Commander Ince who procured the Bean Goose for Gould, in Shanghai was J.E. Gray's nephew. Gould named a Paradise Flycatcher after him that supposedly had the original description was to be in the PZS for 1852 like this goose but was never published in the PZS. Flycatcher was published only in Gould's Birds of Asia.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bibliodyssey/14115616304 .
Ince was on the Fly with MacGilivray and got Gould his first specimen of Nectarinia australis.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bibliodyssey/14115616304 .
Ince was on the Fly with MacGilivray and got Gould his first specimen of Nectarinia australis.
l_raty
laurent raty
But then shouldn't it also be "von Middendorff"?
I've never actually been certain of the rules dealing with nobiliary particles in German. (And from what I remember of discussions on the ICZN mailing list, even German native speakers were not sure, and there were suggestions that usage had not been constant in time.) The rules in French for this type of thing are rather complex, have exceptions, and are indeed nowadays forgotten by many native speakers (particularly in places like Belgium, where things are still more complicated due to names including a French nobilary "de", which in many situations should be omitted, being mixed with names including the Dutch article "De", which should always be cited).
Severtsov certainly called him "Г Шренк", "Mr Schrenk", not "Г фон Шренк".
Richard Klim
-------------------------
There seem to be differing opinions on usage, eg, Ixobrychus eurhythmus...
- Schrenck's Bittern: H&M4, BirdLife/HBW, eBird/Clements
- Von Schrenck's Bittern: IOC
Farnboro John
Well-known member
Is that the same Ince who is jointly mentioned with Wince in the naming of the spider found in the spout?
John
Richard Klim
-------------------------
According to some authorities, that Ince (adjective 'Incy') is just a synonym of Its (adjective 'Itsy').
