• 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.

"Stenopsis Langsdorfi" and "Trogon Leverianus" are synonyms for ... ? (1 Viewer)

Björn Bergenholtz

(former alias "Calalp")
Sweden
"Stenopsis Langsdorfi" and "Trogon Leverianus" are synonyms for ... ?

James, here are two names that in today's HBW Alive Key have a question mark or "unident." regarding their synonymity:

• "Stenopsis Langsdorfi" PELZELN (in Sclater) 1867, (here) [synonym for (Caprimulgus) Eleothreptus candicans PELZELN 1867]

• "Trogon Leverianus" SHAW 1792 (here & Plate, here) [syn. Trogon s. strigilatus LINNAEUS 1766 ... ? not T. viridis LINNAEUS 1766. vide et Collar (in del Hoyo et al. 2001:112)]

Both according to: Schifter H., E. Bauernfeind & Th. Schifter. 2007. Die Typen der Vogelsammlung des Naturhistorischen Museums Wien. Teil I. Nonpasseres. - Kataloge der wissenschaftlichen Sammlungen des Naturhistorischen Museums in Wien 20, Aves, Heft 1. Naturhistorisches Museum Wien (here, p.205 and p.238)

If they are correct in those claims is far, far beyond me, I simply noted the obscurities in the Key, while dealing with the men behind those eponyms.

For what it´s worth.

Björn

PS. Nothing to add on the eponyms themselves.
--
 
Last edited:
langsdorfi, "the ill-fated Langsdorff expedition (1825-29) into the Amazon that cost the German leader Georg Heinrich von Langsdorff his sanity and the French painter Aimé-Adrien Taunay his life."
 
leverianus, must be named for Mr. Lever and his Leverian Museum.
The nomenclatural status of Trogon leverianus Shaw, 1792, and Trogon sallaei Bonaparte, 1856. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club 111: 41‐44..
 
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