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.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JustinJansen" data-source="post: 3127489" data-attributes="member: 79694">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?</blockquote>

Verification