HBWAlive Key; mission accomplished or mission impossible? (2 Viewers)

The Gmelin reference to Latham does not make sense to me and refers to a heron. Edit sorry an Ibis article said v. iii p. 37.
Latham's supplement refers to this bird and the type specimen was in the Leverian Museum. Something about Dr. Fothergill. ? . Dr. John Fothergill.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/103199#page/101/mode/1up .

Maybe the sales catalogue of the Leverians museum mentions the bird? I have a thought that Turton's seven volume 1800 english translation of Gmelin may say something? Turton probably knew Latham.

Turton 1800 lists the bird and calls it shanbu with a 'b'.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/223689#page/510/mode/1up .

mb1848 said:

The Gmelin reference to Latham does not make sense to me and refers to a heron. Edit sorry an Ibis article said v. iii p. 37.

Click to expand...

I assume you ment this Ibis article https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/55640#page/48/mode/1up ?

Volume III seems indeed https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/105231#page/51/mode/1up Vol. II Part 1.

tigus as in:
• "Ixos tigus" ascribed/credited to "BONAPARTE 1850" (here), with one single reference: "Müll. Mus. Lugd. ..."

... which leads us to Musei Lugdunum (Batavorum) [= Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie (National Museum of Natural History), in Leiden/Leyden, Netherlands], which takes us onwards ... to this (far later) paper, in Notes from the Leyden Museum (from 1905–1906), which tell us that Bonaparte's "Ixus tigus" was originally described by "S. [Salomon] Müller", in 1834 (though see foot-note), as "Ixos tympanistrigus" [sic]*, in Tijdschrift voor natuurlijke geschiedenis en physiologie, No. 2 [missing in BHL, but found] here**, on p.353. All in Dutch (which leaves me out of the game).

Was it possibly Temminck who coined this name, when he labelled ("etiquetirt") the specimen itself?

However, I've got no idea on the etymology itself, but the Key's theory; " perhaps ... or deliberate a curtailment of ..." seems reasonable. To me this looks like Bonaparte's tigus simply is a short version, or similar (possibly a typo?), of tympanistrigus ... with the r (and possibly also the s?) all lost (if of striga/strigus, striated, of course) ...? At least it could be, couldn't it?

Or is the explanation possibly waiting to be found in Müller's Dutch text?

Who knows?

Björn

PS. Note that the 1905–1906 foot-note, also talks of "das wohlberechtige Genus Bonapartea (a generic name not listed in today's HBW Alive Key), which (as far as I can tell) simply seems to be a typo (alt. a later, unjustified alteration) of Büttikofer's Bonapartia, from 1896 (here). Thereby, no need (for anyone intrigued by it) to post "Bonapartea" in the thread Names lacking in the Key.

________________________________________________________________
*nec (not) "Brachypus tympanistrigus Bp.", hence, possibly simply an emendation by Bonaparte himself.
Note that this name wasn't/isn't written "tympanistrugus", as quoted in today's Key. Typo, James?
Compare with today's Spot-necked Bulbul Pycnonotus tympanistrigus (Müller, S, 1836), OD above.

**Title page does say: "1835". And without umlaut in the Surname Muller!
--

In Mullers text no reveal from an explanation.

JustinJansen said:

In Mullers text no reveal from an explanation.

Click to expand...

Wondering if he wasn't actually using 'tympanum' in the modern (anatomical) sense...?
(Cf. "aan de zijden van het achterhoofd staat eene lichtgele vlak, die tot beneden de ooren loopt, en op deze wijze de naakte deelen om de oogen, van achteren bepaalt".)

tigus

James, shouldn't the first description from 1835 be provided in the Key?

Just a thought ...

Björn
--

"Ixos tigus Mull." is a manuscript name which I am unable to find. Only Bonaparte 1850 validates the name.

Obviously, a lot of things were mixed up by Bonaparte 1850... -

* 11. Ixos tigus, Müll. Mus. Lugd. ex Sumatra. Similis praeced. viridis et subtus squamatus; sed minor, et macula auriculari flava.

Click to expand...

The diagnosis (= "like the previous one, green and scaled below; but smaller and with a yellow ear patch") is compatible with Ixos tympanistrigus as described by Müller on p. 353 of the 1835 volume of Tijdschr. nat. gesch. physiol. But this publication is not cited and the asterisk indicates a name intended to be new (this is explicitly stated in [the intoductive text] "asterisco notavi nova genera et species" -- "with an asterisk I have marked new genera and species"), so we probably have no other choice than to accept tigus as a separately introduced name. (Even though a corruption of Müller's name -- used for the same bird -- seems likely.)

12. Ixos tympanistrigus, Müll. (cristatellus, Mus. Lugd. - Pycnonotus tympanistrigus, Gr.) Tijdschr. 1835. p. 353. ex Sumatra. Rufo-fuscus; subtus albidus, pectore cinerascente, crisso flavescente; capite vix cristato: rectricibus extimis apice albis.

Click to expand...

Here, the name was not indicated as new -- it was attributed to Müller on p. 353 of the 1835 volume of Tijdschr. nat. gesch. physiol. But there is no way that the diagnosis (= "rufous-brown; whitish below, with greyish breast and yellowish crissum; with the head barely crested: with the outer tail feathers white at the tip") could be compatible with the bird actually described by Müller. (It is indeed compatible with Brachypus eutilotus Jardine & Selby 1837 [OD], as suggested by Finsch 1905 -- link in Björn's post #344 above.) I would usually regard such a name as a mere misapplication, not as a separately available name.

(But the specimens at the origin of both Brachypus tigus Bonaparte and "B. tympanistrigus Bonaparte" are treated as types in the Naturalis collection -- as if both names were available.)

chavaria (and Chavaria)

• chavaria as in "[Parra] Chavaria" LINNAEUS 1766 (OD here), with two references to "Jacquin", which leads us to the Dutch/Austrian nobleman (Freiherr) Nikolaus Joseph von Jacquin (1727–1817).

In a letter (all in Latin) from von Jacquin himself, to the great Linnaeus (now we're talking of returning to a truly Original source!), dated 2nd of January 1765, sent from "Schemnitz", [which I assume ought to be today's Banská Štiavnica, in Slovakia?], we find the following text about the bird in question, which starts (and continues, in parts) just about identical to the description in Linaeus's OD [my blue bolds]:

Avis habitat in fluviis, inundatis, et lacubus vicinis flumini Cinu 30 leucis Carthagena Indica distanti. Incolis et Hispanis vocatur Chavaria. Corpus magnitudine galli gallinacei, a terra altum sesquipede. Collum longum. Cauda brevis. Caput et rostrum conicoincurvum, sordide albescens, maxilla superiore imbricata, sunt Gallinae similia. Crura corporis respectu crassissima et fortia. Genua omnium crasissima nodosaque. Tibiae longae, eoque visae longiores, quod plumis in summa parte tantum obteguntur, flavo-rubrae, etiam crassae. Pedes tetradactyli, digitis flavo-rubris, crassis, adeo longis, ut invicem quam maxime decussent semper, dum incedunt. Forte avis non datur, qui corporis respectu tam longos habet. Corpus, cauda et alae nigricant cum nebulis griseis; minus paulo nigricat venter. Collum atrum plumis veris nullis, sed lana curta densaque obtegitur totum. Simili lana, sed nivea, gaudent inferior pars capitis sub rostro et tempora ad latitudinem circiter pollicis unius. Ad basin rostri membrana implumis utrinque rubraque ad tempora extenditur, in cujus media parte sunt oculi iride fusca. Frons et occiput plumis ornantur veris corpori concoloribus at paulo minus fuscis. Occipitis infima pars in ipso loco, ubi cessat lana colli, ornatur crista ex duodecim circiter pennis tripollicaribus nigricantibus, respectu loci, unde oriuntur, perpendicularibus, corporis autem respectu decumbentibus. Nares oblongae, apertae, ut oculi utrinque lucem per illas conspicere valeant. Rostro vel unguibus nocere nequeunt. Dedit iis natura alia arma, quae aves rapaces valdopere timent. Calcaria utrinque in alis, ipsis ad illarum articulos duos, subtus gerunt ossea, nuda, durissima, crassa, acuta, semipollicaria, interdum utrinque tria, quae non apparent, nisi quando alas, quas longissimas fortissimasque habent, extendunt. Extensis his, quantum fieri potest, hostem aggrediuntur, et ictibus fortissimis trucidant. Incessus gravis, lentus et difficilis. Volatus facilis, et sat celer. Currere omnino non possunt, nisi simul semi-volent. Sylvestres gramine vescuntur et herbis. Asssuevi illas pani aqua macerato, et Zeae seminibus tusis diuque maceratis; aliud quid assumere noluerunt. Pedes aqua lavare amant. Quando tanguntur manu, cutis, sub plumis etiam lanosa, crepat fortiter ubique. Haec lana densa levitatem conciliat corpori, ita ut perfecte natent, hoc est aquis superemineant, et pedibus digitisque longissimis, qui alias non magis quam gallinarum natatori sunt, motis tamen in aquis progrediantur. Hac longitudine quoque accidit, ut in stagnis herbosis etiam profundis incedere possint. Indi, qui gallinas, anseres similesque aves enutriunt in magno numero, quas postea in foris vendant, in toto Carthagenensi territorio unam Chavariam possidere cicuratam curant. Haec tunc semper cum reliqua gallinarum turba per viciniam pergit. Nunquam has deserit, etsi volare possit, et domum ad vesperam revertitur. Ab homine adulto tunc tangi se patitur, et nemini nocet. Contra puerulos vero se defendit saepius. Aves rapaces ferre nequit et prima illas adoritur. Cum omnis ibidem regio plena sit vulturibus illis, Gallinazo dictis, vid. litteras meas primas de avibus. Illi saepe gallinas auferunt. Has defendunt Chavariae, et simulac vulturem talem appropinquantem conspiciunt (magis enim illi vultures solent ambulare quam volare), ilico occurrunt ipsi, qui raro adventum exspectat suum. Vox clara, alta, sed ingrata. Est avis certe pulcherrima, et habitu ab omnibus a me cognitis diversissima. Collum, caput et pedes adspectu singularia sunt. Novum genus mihi postulare videtur. Tu utere hac descriptione, quam in America ad ipsam avium concinnavi Gallice, hic traducta ad usum tuum. Emi alias pro duobus aureis, alias pro quibusdam obolis, nempe ex arbitrio Indi possidentis. In itinere reduci mare paucas hebdomadas sustinuerunt, puto, longitudine pedum maris motui non resistentes, sed continuis quassatae ictibus: ab 1. Novembris enim ad 26 februarii in mari fui, hyeme et tempestatibus continuis actus. Unde perierunt in itinere omnes.

Click to expand...

Translated/explained (in short), by the ALVIN* crew, into:

A bird from Grenada, called Chavaria, is very carefully described. It is 1.5 feet tall, and it can be tamed. Jacquin had tried to take some back to Europe with him but they had died during the long voyage that lasted from November 1 to February 26.

[all from here alt. here, the physical letter itself is kept in the Linnean Society of London archive/collection]​

Click to expand...

The same letter, is also summarized in the fairly recent book Nikolaus Joseph Jacquin’s American Plants, by Santiago Mandriñán (2013), in Appendix II (Jacquin’s American animals), into the (even shorter) sentence, on p.388 (here):

On 2 January 1765, continuing his descriptions of animals, Jacquin described a large bird 1.5 feet tall from Grenada, called Chavaria, which was possible to be tamed.

Click to expand...

To me it looks like the scientific name "Chavaria" is yet another Autochthonym, based on a local name (indigenous or Spanish, probably the latter), either from Grenada, in the Caribbean (West Indies ), or (most likely) from Colombia (!) ...

If that is what Jacquin's Latin text truly says, of course?

Note that this species isn't found in/on Grenada (at least not today), as it's monotypic and endemic for NW South America (Northern Colombia and North Western Venezuela). On the other hand, if easily tame and domesticated (as well as big and nourishing), it could still have been there (or close) when von Jacquin made his Journey, to and between the Caribbean Islands, and the surrounding coast of South America (in 1755–1759). Or, maybe he heard this name, and picked it up, when he visited the shores of mainland South America?

Compare with the Type location: "lakes near Río Sinú, south of Cartagena, Colombia" (according to HBW Alive itself), which to me (not understanding Latin) seems to be in line with what's told in the very start of the OD ...

Also compare with its Spanish Vernacular/Common names (according to Avibase): "Chajá chicagüire, Chavarrí, Chicagüire, Gritón Chicagüire", and, even more local; "Spanish (Colombia): Chavarrí, Chavarria".

Maybe this "blog post" (in Spanish) adds anything, (even if he misspelled it as "Chauna chavarria", a spelling frequently used on the "net") ... !?

However; enjoy

Björn

PS. This would, most likely, also cover the (invalid) generic name Chavaria RAFINESQUE 1815 which (if so) possibly could delete the question mark ("?syn. Chauna"), in today's Key doesn't it? If we'd followed Rafinesque's suggestion/opinion today's Northern (Black-necked) Screamer Chauna chavaria, would/could have been Chavaria chavaria, wouldn't it?

____________________________________________________________________________________________
*ALVIN is a Swedish; " ... platform for the long-term preservation and accessible storage of digitied collections and digital cultural heritage materials".

Ouups!

It looks like James (in secret) have been dealing with this bird/name fairly recently ...

Contrary to what was told in the Key earlier (when I started to sketch/research my post #350):

chavaria
Etymology undiscovered; perhaps from French charivari babble of noise, cacophonous music (pace “Tupí (Brazilian) Indian name javariá for some sort of bird” (Jobling 1991)); ...

Click to expand...

It now suddenly tells us:

chavaria
Based on "Chavaria" of von Jacquin 1763 (cf. French charivari babble of noise, cacophonous music) (pace “Tupí (Brazilian) Indian name javariá for some sort of bird” (Jobling 1991)); ...

Click to expand...

Looks like James found (von) Jacquin before me! Also in an even earlier version.

Much ado about nothing.

Björn

Re sophiae (as in Leptopoecile sophiae): the Key mentions the epithet to honour Marie von Hessen-Darmstadt (Marie of Hesse and by Rhine), who became Maria Alexandrovna, wife of tsar Alexander II of Russia. Born as Maximiliane Wilhelmine Auguste Sophie Marie von Hessen und bei Rhein, but not known as Sophia, I cannot believe Severtzov would have chosen a 'middle name' as a specific epithet.

Rather, I have now found a Czech document, Jiří Hrubý. 2006. 'Moravský ornitolog Ferdinand Stolička/Moravian ornithologist Ferdinand Stoliczka.'
Sylvia 42: 130–135 (at 134), which points to Sofia being Severtzov's fiancee:

'Ruský zoolog Nikolaj A. Severcov se v roce 1864 u kyrgyzského jezera Issyk-Kul setkává s dosud neznámým ptačím druhem (i rodem). Pojmenovává jej po své snoubence Sofii: Leptopoecile sophiae.' [In 1864, Russian zoologist Nikolai A. Severtzov encountered an unknown bird species (and genus) at Kyrgyz Lake Issyk-Kul. He calls it after his fiancée Sofia: Leptopoecile sophiae.] (The translation is Google's.)

I don't know what the source is of Hrubý's information, but I find the financee more believable than the tsarina.

If so : Софья Александровна Северцова [alt. Сѣверцова; Sofya Aleksandrovna Severtsova], born Полторацкая [Poltoratskaya], 1832-1921.
[Here], she is called his wife ("Leptopoecile Sophiae, в честь своей жены Софии Александровны" -- in honour of his wife Sofya Aleksandrovna).

(They had a son, Алексей Николаевич who became a zoologist and paleontologist, in 1866, thus "wife" seems likely to have been correct in 1873.)

https://www.geni.com/people/Sofia-Poltoratskaya/6000000029126162200
https://www.myheritage.com/names/николай_северцов
https://www.myheritage.com/search-r...siteId=293782871&indId=4506049&origin=profile


http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/Dokumenty/M.Asien/XIX/1840-1860/Severcov_2/framepred11.htm
(This is part of an introductive text, by Р. Л. Золотницкая [R. L. Zolotnitskaya], to a 1947 edition of Severtsov's Путешествия по Туркестанскому краю [Travels around the Turkestan region], originally published in 1873.)

В эту экспедицию Северцов взял с собой и молодую свою жену Софью Александровну [55], которая помогала ему в сборе ботанических и энтомологических коллекций и, будучи неплохой художницей, делала нужные зарисовки.

Click to expand...

(On this expedition, Severtsov took with him his young wife Sofya Aleksandrovna [55], who helped him in gathering botanical and entomological collections and, being a good artist, made the needfull sketches.)

55. Женился Северцов на Софье Александровне Полторацкой в том же 1865 г. Софья Александровна, по воспоминаниям, была серьёзной, очень сдержанной женщиной. Большой и верный друг Николая Алексеевича, она стойко переносила постоянные разлуки с мужем, одна вела все денежные и хозяйственные дела и воспитывала единственного сына, на которого целиком перенесла после смерти Н. А. все заботы и нежность. Туркестанская экспедиция была единственной, в которой Софья Александровна лринимала участие. Хотя с молодых лет она мечтала о путешествиях, но хозяйственные дела и подрастающий сын не позволяли ей больше участвовать в экспедициях мужа. Умерла Софья Александровна уже в глубокой старости в 1921 г. в с. Петровском на руках внука С. А. Северцова.

Click to expand...

(55. Severtsov had married Sofya Aleksandrovna Poltoratskaya in the same year 1865. Sofya Aleksandrovna, according to recollections, was a serious, very restrained woman. A great and faithful lover of Nikolai Alekseevich, she steadfastly endured constant separation from her husband, she alone conducted all monetary and household affairs and raised her single son, to whom she completely transferred all her care and tenderness after N.A.'s death. The Turkestan expedition was the only one in which Sofya Aleksandrovna took part. Although from a young age she dreamed of travelling, household affairs and a growing son did not allow her to participate more in her husband's expeditions. Sofya Aleksandrovna died when already in very old age in 1921 in the locality of Petrovsky in the arms of her grandson S. A. Severtsov.)

Re. sophiae (as in Leptopoecile sophiae)

The OD itself (allegedly all in Russian), by N. Severtzov, unseen by me. ["Izv.Imp.O.Liub.Est.Antr.Etn.1873 (1872)", which ought to be (something like): 1873. Izvestiya Imperatorskago Obshchestva Lyubitelei Estestvoznaniya Antropologii, (Antropologii i Etnografii pri Imperatorskom Moskovskom Universitete) 8 (part 2); p.66 135 Pl. 8, 9] ...

However; there's a looooooong German translation, by Fischer (of "N. Severzow") in JfO 1873 (here+, pp.321–389), continued in 1874 (on pp.403–447), as well as in 1875 (pp. 58–104 and 168–190 + an additional piece; Zusätze und Berichtigungen zur allgemeinen Uebersicht der aralo-tianschanischen Ornis. Von Dr. N. Severzow, on pp.190–200). All in German.

Without knowing German all I can tell is that; "Leptopoecile Sophiae" is first found/listed (as No. 38) on p.346, and again mentioned on pp. 373 and 386 (in 1873), but as "Leptopoecila Sophiae" on the latter page (typo?), and again on p. 80 (in the former version), as well as in table on p.172 (in 1875).

If of any help?

/B

PS. Ouups! While I was typing away Laurent posted his exhaustive and thorough post #353, which make my fumbling attempt somewhat obsolete and superfluous! I was just about to delete it, but I will keep it here (simply as German is somewhat more understandable than Russian, for most/some BirdForum readers). If of absolutely no use ... just ignore it!
--

That's brilliant, thanks Laurent.

Björn, Severtzov's work, which describes a few new species is:

N.A. Severtzov. 1873. 'Вертикальное и горизонтальное распределение Туркестанских животных' [Vertical and horizontal distribution of Turkestan fauna], Известия Императорском общества любителей естествознания, антропологии и этнографии [News of the Imperial Society of Devotees of Natural History, Anthropology and Ethnography]. 8(2).

It has been translated into German in two different series of articles. The first part as:

N. Severzow. 1875. ' Allgemeine Uebersicht der aralo-tianschalischen Ornis, in ihrer horizontalen und verticalen Verbreitung.' Journal für Ornithologie (trans. J. von Fischer). 23(129): 58–104, 23(130): 168–200.

The second part as:

H.E. Dresser. 1875–1876. 'Notes on Severtzoff's "Fauna of Turkestan" (Turkestan jevotnie).' Ibis (trans. H.E. Dresser), 3rd ser., 5(17): 96–112, 5(18): 236–250, 5(19): 332–342, 6(21): 77–94, 6(22): 171–191, 6(23): 319–330, 24: 410–422.

Sorry, of the first part I forgot about the 1873 & 1874 articles, which you, Björn, already mentioned.

The Dresser translation is the one of the species accounts.

The plates remain in the orginal.

Fair enough (got it!): OD, here, on p.135 (alt. "137 из 179", in the viewer) + Plate (at the end of the same volume; in the "ОБЪЯСНЕНИЕ ТАБЛИЦ" part), No. VIII fig 8, 9. Or see attached jpg.

The text by "Severzoff" is a bit more easy to read: in The Ibis (1876), translated by H. E. Dresser (and Carl Craemers): "Leptopœcile sophiæ", here ... (even if no Sophia/Sofya was mentioned there, not even if we backtrack it all the way to the very start of it, here).

However; well done guys! :t:

/B

--

An anecdote regarding this species:

In the period between Severtzov's Russian publication and Dresser's translation in the Ibis, Allan Hume published a description of the same species in 'Novelties?', Stray Feathers, 2/6 (1874), 513–516, as Stoliczkana Stoliczkæ, for Ferdinand Stoliczka (whether he collected Hume's specimen is not clear, but they were in close contact at least, nor is it clear who collected the type specimen). In the document, Hume already mentions Severtzov's document, but only the first part in the Journal für Ornithologie, where Leptopoecile sophiae is still a nomen nudum.

After Hume has received a copy of the Russian work, he publishes the name change, with a rather petulant addition:


(From A. Hume. 1875. 'Stoliczkana Stoliczkæ, Hume, is Leptopœcile sophiæ, Severtsov'. Stray Feathers. 3(4): 329.)

To be complete, a French translation was also published a few years later: https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/41096567
(Both depart from the original in that they are limited to the ornithological aspects of Severtsov's work; while, in the original, birds and mammals are discussed in parallel. If I remember correctly, Dresser recast the structure of the work more in depth than Olphe-Galliard, whose version was closer to a real (albeit partial) translation.)

A quick summary, and conclusion, of this Joek's (very successful!) sidetrack ... (to the two sophia/e birds/names that this thread truly was looking for; "Psaltria sophia" DAVID 1874 and "Sturnus sophiae" BIANCHI 1896 – both solved along the way!)

Regarding the recent sophiae bird ... today's updated HBW Alive Key now tell us:

sophia / sophiae
[...]
● Sofya Aleksandrovna Severtsova née Poltoratskaya (1832-1921) wife of Russian zoologist and explorer Prof. Nicolai Severtsov (Joek Roex and Laurent Raty in litt.) (Leptopoecile).
[...]

Click to expand...

Once again; well done guys!

/B