2021-A-3: Split Mew Gull Larus canus brachyrhynchus and rename as Short-billed Gull
* Very long overdue! Don't see any need to change the name to 'Short-billed Gull'; Common Gull for canus as it's always been except in the minds of US imperialists, and Mew Gull for brachyrhynchus.
No.However, because camtschatchensis Bruch, 1855, is the first available name, Bruch is the author, but the incorrect subsequent spelling kamtschatschensis is in prevailing usage and thus protected by ICZN Article 33.3.1. Thus, on Schodde’s advice the name should be Larus canus kamtschatschensis (Bruch, 1855).
[...]
c. Change the authorship of the east Siberian form to kamtschatschensis (Bruch, 1855).
33.3.1. when an incorrect subsequent spelling is in prevailing usage and is attributed to the publication of the original spelling, the subsequent spelling and attribution are to be preserved and the spelling is deemed to be a correct original spelling.
Historically, Mew Gull was an American name for Larus canus (sensu stricto), actually. E.g.: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/16807071However, historically the AOU had Larus brachyrhynchus in their 1st edition under the name "Short-billed Gull" and it remained thus until the 3rd edition, which was published in 1910. They lumped it with canus in the 4th edition, which I believe was published in 1931. So they have precedent for that name.
There may be precedent - but it's 110 years old. I doubt there's many folk still around who remember using it then? 😂However, historically the AOU had Larus brachyrhynchus in their 1st edition under the name "Short-billed Gull" and it remained thus until the 3rd edition, which was published in 1910. They lumped it with canus in the 4th edition, which I believe was published in 1931. So they have precedent for that name.
Hence my remark in post #3 (why did they feel the need to treat Europeans as getting the name of a European bird wrong? What does it say about their respect for European birders' right to name their own birds?)Historically, Mew Gull was an American name for Larus canus (sensu stricto), actually. E.g.: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/16807071
(If I remember correctly, the author of the name refused to call the bird "common", because it was a vagrant.)
The proposal describes recent usageThere may be precedent - but it's 110 years old. I doubt there's many folk still around who remember using it then? 😂
Even if you forget about very recent trends, "Short-billed Gull" persisted until much more recently than this.There may be precedent - but it's 110 years old. I doubt there's many folk still around who remember using it then? 😂
Is it visionary to hope, as well, for the time when the Short-billed Gull of the Pacific coast of America and the Common Gull of Europe, both Larus canus, become the circumpolar Mew Gull? It would save awkwardness if those of us who write about birds for publication in England and America alike, addressing readers who are not necessarily professional specialists, could dispense with the need for translation that such differences impose.
To be fair, they did clarify the (originally unclear, indeed) sampling subsequently: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2009.10.032 (access should be free, I think).The stonechat split remains premature because the Zink article is not a very strong basis, with its odd outliers and unclear sampling.
Perhaps worth reminding here that Nannopterum, being a latinized Greek word with its ending changed to -um, is (as per Art. 30.1.3) neuter ?2021-A-4: Revise generic limits in the Phalacrocoracidae (cormorants)
No, go on, when then?Can you guess the year of this quote ?
1930........?Even if you forget about very recent trends, "Short-billed Gull" persisted until much more recently than this.
To start with, when the AOU lumped in 1931, they did not change the name of the bird, continuing Short-billed Gull: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/5824001. I cannot trace a formal change in any of the Supplements, hence "Mew Gull", as a name officially applied to a taxon including brachyrhynchus, may date from the 5th ed of the Check-list in 1957: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/34733065. But even after that, "Short-billed Gull" (or, occasionally, "Short-billed Mew Gull") continued to be used with some regularity, particularly when referring to the American race only.
Can you guess the year of this quote ?
Technically there kind of is: I noticed the name Japanese Stonechat proposed, versus the more typical Stejneger's Stonechat. On the other hand, they suggest Darwin's Storm-petrel so it might be down to the preference of the proposal writer.Good to see no common name proposals.
I am pretty sure that is what you see, common name proposals are those of the proposal writer.Technically there kind of is: I noticed the name Japanese Stonechat proposed, versus the more typical Stejneger's Stonechat. On the other hand, they suggest Darwin's Storm-petrel so it might be down to the preference of the proposal writer.