BOW Key (4 Viewers)

[antonysh]

This is a typo candidate in The Key, no? (A classic.)

Ophtalmomegas -> Ophthalmomegas

Indeed, it's very likely

 

[l_raty]

This is a typo candidate in The Key, no? (A classic.)

Ophtalmomegas -> Ophthalmomegas

OD here. (Originally described as a primate. Quite a lot of subsequent authors spelled it Ophtalmomegas.)

 

[kweetal]

I see in Peters' Check-list

OD here. (Originally described as a primate. Quite a lot of subsequent authors spelled it Ophtalmomegas.)

Thanks. In Peters' check-list I find /nine/ epitheta with one of the h's dropped (opthalm or ophtalm). And three in current names (IOC, H&M, etc) against 13 correct spellings.

 

[kweetal]

The Key has (under 'manacus'):
Dutch manneken pretty little thing
That seems wrong to me, a Dutch native speaker. In Dutch manneken (also: mannetje) just means: 'little man'. Other meanings include 'male animal', but nothing like 'pretty little thing'.

 

[kweetal]

I have extracted genera names from a (manually improved) digital Peters' Check-list (thanks to BHL).

Below are the genera names that the Key gives an empty response for. They are mainly from volume 1 (edition 2).
Threskornis - v1.ed2:262 - Threskornis G. R. Gray, 1842, List Gen. Birds, ed. 2, App.,
Phaëthon - v1.ed2:155 - Phaëthon Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat., ed. 10, p. 134. Type,
Phaëton - v1.ed2:155 - Phaëton Linnaeus, 1766, Syst. Nat., ed. 12, 1, p. 219
Haliëtor - v1.ed2:164 - Haliëtor Heine, 1860, Journ. Ornith., 8, p. 202. Type, by
Polioaëtus - v1.ed2:302 - Polioaëtus Kaup, 1850, Monogr. Falconidae, p. 72, in Jardine,
Circaëtus - v1.ed2:309 - Circaëtus Vieillot, 1816, Analyse, p. 23. Type, by monotypy,
Spizaëtus - v1.ed2:383 - Spizaëtus Vieillot, 1816, Analyse, p. 24. Type, by subsequent
Uroaëtus - v1.ed2:378 - Uroaëtus Kaup, 1844, Class. Saugethiere Vogel, p. 121. Type,
Hieraaëtus - v1.ed2:383 - Hieraaëtus Kaup, 1844, Class. Säugethiere Vögel, p. 120.
Lophaëtus - v1.ed2:385 - Kaup, 1847, Isis von Oken, col. 165. Type, by
Polemaëtus - v1.ed2:390 - Polemaëtus Heine, 1890, in Heine and Reichenow, Nomencl.
Polihiërax - v1.ed2:398 - Polihiërax Kaup, 1847, Isis von Oken, col. 47. Type, by
Chloëphaga - v1.ed2:447 - Chloëphaga Eyton, 1838, Monogr. Anatidae, p. 13. Type,
Galli-rallus - v2:177 - Galli-rallus Lafresnaye, Rev. Zool., 1841, p. 234. Type, by monotypy,
Pseudo-chelidon - v9:81 - Pseudo-chelidon Hartlaub, 1861, Journ. f. Orn., 9, p. 11. Type,

Most are in fact in the KEY entry text (as Var.) but are not indexed (and therefore unfindable); others are typoed by the Peters' editor, like Threskornis, a popular typo to this day, dixit google.

No doubt more names will follow as text parsing improves.

-kweetal

 

[James Jobling]

Thanks for Threskornis.
The use of diacritic marks, apostrophes, ligatures and hyphens in zoological nomenclature is forbidden by the ICZN Code (Art. 27, Art. 32.5); such marks are to be corrected (the German umlaut is to be replaced by e inserted after the vowel, e.g. ü becomes ue) or deleted. Hence, names containing original aë and so on are not given in The Key.

 

[kweetal]

Thanks for Threskornis.
The use of diacritic marks, apostrophes, ligatures and hyphens in zoological nomenclature is forbidden by the ICZN Code (Art. 27, Art. 32.5); such marks are to be corrected (the German umlaut is to be replaced by e inserted after the vowel, e.g. ü becomes ue) or deleted. Hence, names containing original aë and so on are not given in The Key.

I know these have been 'forbidden' for a long time, but if the values are in the Key text of the entry they might as well be searchable, no? (after all, plenty books from the 70's, 80s still have Circaëtus, etc.)

 

[Mike Earp]

Thanks for Threskornis.
The use of diacritic marks, apostrophes, ligatures and hyphens in zoological nomenclature is forbidden by the ICZN Code (Art. 27, Art. 32.5); such marks are to be corrected (the German umlaut is to be replaced by e inserted after the vowel, e.g. ü becomes ue) or deleted. Hence, names containing original aë and so on are not given in The Key.

Hyphens aren't allowed, v-nigrum apart.

Is the Key's reference to G. Gray 1856 correct? Murray Bruce and Normand David (Spelling, authorship, and date of the name of the Pacific Eider (Somateria mollissima v-nigrum), The Auk, Volume 124, Issue 2, 1 April 2007, Pages 709–712) suggest a different OD.

 

[l_raty]

"Threskornis G. R. Gray, 1842, List Gen. Birds, ed. 2, App., p. 13." is a mere typo in the synonymy of the PCL : v.1:ed.2 (1979) - Check-list of birds of the world - Biodiversity Heritage Library
Google Books finds this spelling in less than 20 works, so I wouldn't say it is really 'popular'.
The correct spelling (which is also the name that is used as valid in the PCL) is of course Threskiornis : Appendix to A list of the genera of birds - Biodiversity Heritage Library

 

[James Jobling]

Some of the original accented headers from my MS and the HBW Key were brought across (although I cannot find an example at present!), but I cannot insert new ones.
Nevertheless, I believe the duplication of Phaethon, Circaetus, Chloephaga, Polihierax and their kin with their accented counterparts would simply expand The Key to no purpose.

 

[kweetal]

Fair enough.

What do you think about 'perflava' and 'tephrus', which I shook out of IOC 14.1 data ?

Hypocnemis flavescens perflava
Basileuterus lachrymosus tephrus

These two are the only missing word forms from 14.1
(they are obviously derivations: 'perflavus' exists, as does 'tephra' )

 

[kweetal]

I found these (sub)genus names that are in Peters but not in the Key:

Alcedinoides - v5:170 - Alcedinoides Laubmann (subgenus), Arch. f. Naturg., 89, Abth. A,
Pseudoxenops - v7:129 - Pseudoxenops Pinto, Rev. Mus. Paulista, 17, 1932, pt. 2, p. 759 (p. 71
Macronous - v10:318 - Macronous Jardine and Selby, 1835, Illustr. Orn., text to

-kweetal

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

I found these (sub)genus names that are in Peters but not in the Key:

Alcedinoides - v5:170 - Alcedinoides Laubmann (subgenus), Arch. f. Naturg., 89, Abth. A,
Pseudoxenops - v7:129 - Pseudoxenops Pinto, Rev. Mus. Paulista, 17, 1932, pt. 2, p. 759 (p. 71
Macronous - v10:318 - Macronous Jardine and Selby, 1835, Illustr. Orn., text to

-kweetal

Kweetal, re. the former, and the latter, see the Key's entry/entries for:

Alcedoides
(Alcedinidae; syn. Alcedo † Blue-eared Kingfisher A. meninting) Genus Alcedo Linnaeus, 1758, kingfisher; Gr. -οιδης -oidēs resembling; "Subgenus: Alcedoides nov. subgen. Typus: Alcedo meninting meninting Horsf." (Laubmann 1924); "Alcedinoides [sic] Laubmann (subgenus), Arch. f. Naturg., 89, Abth. A, 1923 (1924), Heft 12., p. 195. Type, by original designation, Alcedo meninting Horsfield." (Peters, 1945, V, p. 170).
Var. Alcedinoides.

[here]
​

"Arch. f. Naturg., 89, Abth. A, 1923 (1924), Heft 12., p. 195" = here

MACRONUS
(Timaliidae; Ϯ Fluffy-backed Tit-babbler M. ptilosus) Gr. μακρος makros long; ονυξ onux, ονυχος onukhos finger-nail (alluding to the broad white plumes); "[Plate 150] Macronus ptilosus. [Text] MACRONOUS, PTILOSUS, NOBIS LONG FEATHERED MACRONOUS. WHEN we first saw this bird we were inclined to consider it as a species of Timalia, having the peculiar form of the plumage developed to an extraordinary extent. The form of the bill, however, and of the rictus, is entirely different, and points out a fissirostral type. ... the most marked character, which we have endeavoured to express in the generic or sub-generic title we have provisionally applied, is in a series of plumes which spring from the centre of the back, and from the sides of the breast; these have the quill broad, and flat at the base, (and of a clear white colour,) where it is furnished with soft and downy webs, but which as they advance upon the shafts, become like fine and delicate hairy filaments, which hang over the rest of the plumage: all the other feathering of the bird is remarkably loose and unconnected, but without any rigidity."(Jardine & Selby 1835); "Macronous1 Jardine and Selby, 1835, Illustr. Orn., text to pl. 150. Type, by monotypy, Macronous ptilosus Jardine and Selby. ... 1 Spelling used by first revisor (Blyth, 1842, Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 11, p. 795). However, the plate is lettered Macronus and the editors would prefer to maintain this more frequently used spelling.—Eds." (Deignan and Mayr & Paynter in Peters, 1964, X, p. 318).
Var. Macronous.
Synon. Minodoria.

[here]​

"Jardine and Selby, 1835, Illustr. Orn., text to pl. 150" = here (i.e. scroll to the next species; and the Plate/s of "Macronus ptilosus", versus the attached text about: "MACRONOUS, PTILOSUS, Nobis". Also note the English name "LONG FEATHERED MACRONOUS")

However, I have no idea regarding Pinto's alleged "Pseudoxenops" (... and I haven't been able to find a digitized copy of Revista do Museu Paulista 17, 1932)*.

Good luck finding it!

Björn

---

*Pinto, O. M. O. 1932. Resultados ornitológicos de uma excursão pelo oeste de São Paulo e sul de Mato Grosso. Revista do Museu Paulista 17 (2): pp.689–826

 

[kweetal]

Thanks!
Sorry, I did not express myself correctly; instead of 'are not in the Key' I should have said be 'are not in the index of the Key'. I asked Mr Jobling about these often aberrant names, and he likes to be informed about them (so as to add them to the index / make them searchable, I suppose).
-kweetal

 

[James Jobling]

Carry on the excellent work, Erikjan.
Alcedinoides and Macronous are varieties (in the broadest sense of The Key) of Alcedoides and Macronus, but Pseudoxenops Pinto, 1932, is completely new (i.e. I missed it!!). All now inserted in The Key.
Readers may wish to learn that when The Key entries were originally brought across from Lynx Edicions and set up by the IT boffins at Cornell, they gave me an extra editorial box where such misspellings, etc, should be entered and thus appear in the appropriate alphabetic order. Sometimes I forgot to fill in that box, so that the misspelling appeared under Var. in the generic heading but not alphabetically in the main list.

 

[l_raty]

Pseudoxenops - v7:129 - Pseudoxenops Pinto, Rev. Mus. Paulista, 17, 1932, pt. 2, p. 759 (p. 71

The ref is :

Pinto OMO. 1932. Resultados ornithologicos de uma excursão pelo oeste de São Paulo e sul de Matto-Grosso. Rev. Mus. Paulista, 17 (2) : 689-826.​

I have attached pp. 759-760. (I found a separate version of the paper in this. Only the first part of volume 17 of Rev. Mus. Paulista is in BHL. Google Books also appear to have a copy of vol. 17 that includes the second part, but this one is completely hidden -- they don't even let us see snippets.)
A lot of nomenclators appear to have missed that name.

 

[James Jobling]

I always like to include extracts from the OD, but, for some strange reason, I cannot access any of the attachments that Laurent has provided; can anyone help or provide a verbatim account?

 

[l_raty]

I always like to include extracts from the OD, but, for some strange reason, I cannot access any of the attachments that Laurent has provided; can anyone help or provide a verbatim account?

You cannot access the pdf file that I attached to my post ?
(The full text in the link I provided in the post itself can in principle only be accessed from the US, so it's not unexpected that you have problems with it.)

 

[l_raty]

Anyway, what it says is :

102. Pseudoxenops dimidiatus (Pelzeln).
♂? Sant'Anna do Paranahyba (22 — VII), Lima coll.
Tanto quanto me permittem julgar as descripções, outro não é este passaro senão o descoberto por Natterer nos sertões de Matto-Grosso (Rio Sangrador, Rio Manso, entre Goyaz e Cuyabá) e descripto por Pelzeln (1) sob o nome de Anabates dimidiatus. O perfil fortemente convexo e ascendente do gonys parece justificar a separação d'esta especie do genero Phylidor, cuja especie mais approximada, sob este ponto de vista — Ph. lichtensteini — diverge accentuadamente, n'outros caracteres chromaticos. Pelo colorido ruivo-canellino das partes inferiores, assemelha-se a Ph. pyrrhodes Cab., como observa Hellmayr, (2) porém d'elle radicalmente differe pela còr das azas, pardo-rufescentes, ao em vez de preto-pardacentas, e da cauda, castanho-ferruginea carregada, em vez de ruivo canellina clara. O dorso é além d'isso pardo-canellino, em logar de pardo-olivaceo, e os lados da cabeça, região superciliar inclusa, comquanto se approximem dos de Phylidor pyrrhodes, são de um ruivo mais intenso. As coberturas superiores e inferiores da cauda copiam o colorido das rectrizes. Dimensões : aza 83 mm., cauda 74 mm., culmen 17 mm. A redescoberta d'este interessante passaro, após mais de um seculo do seu descobrimento, é um dos resultados mais importantes da presente exploração.
(1) Pelzeln, 1859, Sitz. Ber. Akad. Wissens. Wien, XXXIV, p. 107; Idem, 1867, Zur. Orn. Bras. p. 40.
(2) Cf. Berlepsch & Hellmayr, 1905, Journ. f. Orn., LIII, p. 29; Hellmayr, 1925, Field. Mus. Publ. Zool. ser., XIII, parte 3, pag. 202.

(There is no statement of characters associated to the new genus per se, but the part I highlighted in blue is a statement of the characters justifying separating the single included species generically which IMO fulfills the same function -- so I would treat the name as available.)

(The "(1)" and "(2)" in the main text are in superscript in the original version; I don't know how to make superscripts here.)

This name was used again by Pinto in 1938 : 22, 1938 - Revista do Museu Paulista - Biodiversity Heritage Library

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

I always like to include extracts from the OD, but, for some strange reason, I cannot access any of the attachments that Laurent has provided; can anyone help or provide a verbatim account?

James, even if now somewhat superfluous (after Laurent's recent post, #159), the full entry looks like below:





Enjoy!

/B