• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Accipitridae (1 Viewer)

Nutcracker

Stop Brexit!
Now that Astur (Astur) atricapillus has been raised to species rank, how are the subspecies distributed between A. gentilis and A. atricapillus ?

Astur?? Still Accipiter here, the genus may be in need of splitting, but it hasn't been split yet ;)

From IOC:
Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis (Linnaeus, 1758) NA, MA, EU : widespread

Palaearctic:
A. g. buteoides (Menzbier, 1882) n Eurasia
A. g. albidus (Menzbier, 1882) ne Siberia
A. g. schvedowi (Menzbier, 1882) ne Asia to c China
A. g. fujiyamae (Swann & Hartert, 1923) Japan
A. g. gentilis (Linnaeus, 1758) c and n Europe
A. g. marginatus (Piller & Mitterpacher, 1783) Italy and the Balkans to Caucasus and n Iran
A. g. arrigonii (Kleinschmidt, O, 1903) Corsica, Sardinia

Nearctic:
A. g. atricapillus (Wilson, A, 1812) North America (except sw Canada, sw USA and nw Mexico)
A. g. laingi (Taverner, 1940) islands of British Columbia (sw Canada)
A. g. apache van Rossem, 1938 sw USA, nw Mexico
 
Last edited:

Jim LeNomenclatoriste

Taxonomy and zoological nomenclature
France
Astur?? Still Accipiter here, the genus may be in need of splitting, but it hasn't been split yet ;)


From IOC:

Northern GoshawkAccipiter gentilis(Linnaeus, 1758)NA, MA, EU : widespread

Palaearctic:
A. g. buteoides(Menzbier, 1882)n Eurasia
A. g. albidus(Menzbier, 1882)ne Siberia
A. g. schvedowi(Menzbier, 1882)ne Asia to c China
A. g. fujiyamae(Swann & Hartert, 1923)Japan
A. g. gentilis(Linnaeus, 1758)c and n Europe
A. g. marginatus(Piller & Mitterpacher, 1783)Italy and the Balkans to Caucasus and n Iran
A. g. arrigonii(Kleinschmidt, O, 1903)Corsica, Sardinia

Nearctic:
A. g. atricapillus(Wilson, A, 1812)North America (except sw Canada, sw USA and nw Mexico)
A. g. laingi(Taverner, 1940)islands of British Columbia (sw Canada)
A. g. apachevan Rossem, 1938sw USA, nw Mexico

I follow my forward-thinking taxonomy, which is regularly modified and updated. I have already split Accipiter in several genera following Boyd and some phylogenetic studies . I don't care about current taxo, honestly


Thanks
 
Last edited:

Mysticete

Well-known member
United States
I follow my forward-thinking taxonomy, which is regularly modified and updated. I have already split Accipiter in several genera following Boyd and some phylogenetic studies . I don't care about current taxo, honestly


Thanks

Do realize however that when you are communicating on a public forum, you are likely to confuse people when you make comments about Astur being split without any reference that this is a personal opinion...
 

Jim LeNomenclatoriste

Taxonomy and zoological nomenclature
France
Do realize however that when you are communicating on a public forum, you are likely to confuse people when you make comments about Astur being split without any reference that this is a personal opinion...

True. I should always point out that this is a personal opinion. Let's say that, like Boyd, I propose and anticipate even it's not yet current.
 

Jim LeNomenclatoriste

Taxonomy and zoological nomenclature
France
Mine is not public unfortunately, I would like...
I can send it to anyone but it will maybe not be enough |:||
 
Last edited:

Acrocephalus

Well-known member
History of Buteo eximius

A detailed query about 'Buteo eximius' was posted in this blog-post. My answer is just below his comment. Anyone wants to have a look at it?

He asks if this species is the same as the North African Buzzard (i.e. the name suggested for cirtensis in that blog-post). As far as I know eximius was synonymized with rufinus rather than with cirtensis. I am right?. The question mentions also ‘Buteo rufinus leucurus’, but I don’t think if leucurus is still used nowadays.

Thanks!
 

Melanie

Well-known member
Nisaetus cirrhatus complex (Accipitriformes: Accipitridae) in India
J. O. GJERSHAUG, O. H. DISERUD, O. KLEVEN, P. C. RASMUSSEN, Y. ESPMARK

Abstract

The Changeable Hawk-Eagle Nisaetus cirrhatus complex is represented by two taxa in mainland India: N. c. cirrhatus in the northern plains and peninsula and N. c. limnaeetus in the Himalayan foothills. Traditionally these taxa have been regarded as subspecies of one species, but recently they have been proposed to be different species. Here, we use an integrative taxonomic approach based on considerations of plumage, biometrics, genetics and vocalizations. Several plumage characters are significantly different between the two taxa, but crest length was the only one of 56 characters that was diagnostically different, with no overlap. About 30% of the birds had intermediate crest lengths, suggesting that they are hybrids or backcrosses, as also supported by the microsatellite results. PCAs of adult plumage show many intermediate individuals, irrespective of whether these birds were collected near a putative contact zone. There is restricted gene flow between the two taxa, presumably as a result of their largely allopatric distributions. On current knowledge, reproductive isolation appears to be weak at best, and we therefore recommend continuing to regard limnaeetus and cirrhatus as conspecific.

https://mapress.com/j/zt/article/view/zootaxa.4789.2.10
 

Nutcracker

Stop Brexit!
Falco vulpinus

The cited protologue for Falco vulpinus (now Buteo buteo vulpinus) Das Abändern der Vögel durch Einfluss des Klima's: 141 is skimpy to say the least, and accompanied by a '?'. Is this really valid publication under ICZN rules?

It also attributes the name to 'Licht.' (presumably Anton August Heinrich Lichtenstein), but IOC etc. give the author as Gloger, the author of the book as a whole.

What gives, please?
 

albertonykus

Well-known member
Starikov, I.J. and M. Wink (2020)
Old and cosmopolite: molecular phylogeny of tropical–subtropical kites (Aves: Elaninae) with taxonomic implications
Diversity 12: 327
doi: 10.3390/d12090327
https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/12/9/327

Kites of the Elaninae group are small and medium-sized, mostly tropical raptors traditionally considered as an early diverged subfamily of the Accipitridae. We used nucleotide sequences of three genetic markers (mitochondrial Cyt b and COI, nuclear RAG-1) to reconstruct the phylogenetic relationships of the Elaninae, other kites, and representatives of different families of diurnal raptors. Our results confirm the basal position of Elaninae, separated the latest in Early Miocene, including Chelictinia riocourii, which was not sequenced before and belongs to this group. Not only DNA data but also cytological, morphological, and ecological data show the singularity of Elaninae. We suggest elevating this group to family level as Elanidae within the order Accipitriformes. It includes Gampsonyx swainsonii as a monotypic subfamily because of distinctive traits and DNA sequence data. Taxonomic implications for other macrogroups of Accipitriformes are discussed.
 

mb1848

Well-known member
It also attributes the name to 'Licht.' (presumably Anton August Heinrich Lichtenstein), but IOC etc. give the author as Gloger, the author of the book as a whole.

What gives, please?
Der Name Falco vulpinus Gloger ist ein Lichtensteinscher. Manuskriptname; es war n i c h t ungenau, als ich ,,ex Lichtenstein. M. S." schrieb. 2. Gloger bezog

Gloger (ex Lichtenstein M. S.) angewendet und längere Erörterungen daran geknüpft. ... sondern den Namen Falco vulpinus Lcht. nur als ein Synonym.
https://www.zobodat.at/pdf/Journal-fuer-Ornithologie_69_1921_0038-0040.pdf .
https://reader.digitale-sammlungen.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb10307317_00177.html .
 
Last edited:

Paul Clapham

Well-known member
I ran the relevant parts of your links through Google Translate with pretty bad results. Having the verbs that far away from their subjects seems to have confused it too much. However I took the output and reshuffled it, resulting in these fragments:

In his treatise on the avifauna of the western Pripjet Marsh, Journ. f. Orn. 1920 p. 355, Count Zedlitz, following an unsubstantiated process of Dr. Stresemann, applied the name vulpinus Gloger (ex Lichtenstein M. S.) to the North Russian steppe buzzard and linked lengthy discussions to it.

From this it follows quite clearly that Gloger did not want to introduce the species name vulpinus for the one he described, the African modification of the common buzzard, but the name Falco vulpinus Lcht. was cited only as a synonym for F. tachardus Daud., moreover as a questionable one.

Now, don't take that to be a competent translation. It would be better if somebody with a practical knowledge of German reviewed it and fixed up the bits which I made a mess of.
 

Norbert R.

Active member
According to Art. 11.6.1 of the Code (ICZN 1999), if a name published as a younger synonym has been used before 1961, either accepted as an available name for a taxon or treated as an older synonym, it is thereby made available. As Stresemann and von Zedlitz used Gloger's synonym vulpinus for the Eastern European Common Buzzard, which is wintering in southern Africa, they made that name available. The name is now widely accepted, and there seems to be no reason to abandon it.
 

l_raty

laurent raty
According to Art. 11.6.1 of the Code (ICZN 1999), if a name published as a younger synonym has been used before 1961, either accepted as an available name for a taxon or treated as an older synonym, it is thereby made available. As Stresemann and von Zedlitz used Gloger's synonym vulpinus for the Eastern European Common Buzzard, which is wintering in southern Africa, they made that name available.
I do not read Art. 11.6.1 as having the power to make a name available if it fails to meet some other requirement of availability, not related to the validity of the name in the OD. (Even though the article may, admittedly, give that impression when read in isolation.) Art. 12 tells us that "every new name" published before 1931 must, in addition to satisfying the provisions of Art. 11, be accompanied by a description or indication; short of this, the name is a nomen nudum. "Every new name" is "every new name": this also includes names that fall under Art. 11.6.1. Being merely cited as an invalid junior synonym does not qualify as an indication under Art. 12.2. (A name first used in synonymy is not automatically made an objective synonym of the name then used as its valid synonym.) As a consequence, I don't believe that we can dismiss the content of an OD on the simple account that "a name published as a younger synonym has been used before 1961".

I have always had a hard time with question marks in nomenclaturally significant statements, and this one makes no exception... Here, Gloger gives us a single-sentence descriptive statement associated to Falco buteo L. from 'the South' (incl., but not clearly limited to, African birds); but his association of the name 'vulpinus' to this descriptive statement (which is what makes the name available) is queried, hence comes through as not positively affirmed -- "Falco vulpinus Licht. is perhaps the bird described above -- albeit, in truth, I'm not really sure of it". Can something like this really make a name available ?
 

Jim LeNomenclatoriste

Taxonomy and zoological nomenclature
France
I do not read Art. 11.6.1 as having the power to make a name available if it fails to meet some other requirement of availability, not related to the validity of the name in the OD. (Even though the article may, admittedly, give that impression when read in isolation.) Art. 12 tells us that "every new name" published before 1931 must, in addition to satisfying the provisions of Art. 11, be accompanied by a description or indication; short of this, the name is a nomen nudum. "Every new name" is "every new name": this also includes names that fall under Art. 11.6.1. Being merely cited as an invalid junior synonym does not qualify as an indication under Art. 12.2. (A name first used in synonymy is not automatically made an objective synonym of the name then used as its valid synonym.) As a consequence, I don't believe that we can dismiss the content of an OD on the simple account that "a name published as a younger synonym has been used before 1961".

I have always had a hard time with question marks in nomenclaturally significant statements, and this one makes no exception... Here, Gloger gives us a single-sentence descriptive statement associated to Falco buteo L. from 'the South' (incl., but not clearly limited to, African birds); but his association of the name 'vulpinus' to this descriptive statement (which is what makes the name available) is queried, hence comes through as not positively affirmed -- "Falco vulpinus Licht. is perhaps the bird described above -- albeit, in truth, I'm not really sure of it". Can something like this really make a name available ?


And....do you have any information to add concerning Nauclerus ?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top