Buller's Albatros (1 Viewer)

[Daniel Philippe]

I haven't seen this one ... yet:

Schweizer M., Frahnert S., Shepherd L.D., Miskelly C.M., Tennyson A.J.D., Bretagnolle V., Shirihai H. & Kirwan G., 2024. Genetic data confirm that Diomedea platei Reichenow, 1898, is the correct name for the population of Buller’s albatross Thalassarche bulleri breeding at the Chatham Islands, New Zealand. Notornis 71: 165-175.

https://www.cebc.cnrs.fr/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/SM-2024-1.pdf

 

[Paul Clapham]

I didn't read that article, but it must be contra Australian Faunal Directory which says the name is unavailable.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

I didn't read that article, but it must be contra Australian Faunal Directory which says the name is unavailable.

Why unavailable ? Are there things contrary to ICZN ?

 

[Dave Boyle]

I haven't read it either but my understanding is platei was the original name for Northern Buller's, then people realised the type specimen was an immature & couldn't be identified so it went to an undescribed subspecies but now they've tested the type specimen & its is a Northern Bullers so platei was correct all along. And if you even need a reason to not allow scientists to come up with new common names this has to be one of the best examples - Pacific Albatross

 

[pbjosh]

I haven't read it either but my understanding is platei was the original name for Northern Buller's, then people realised the type specimen was an immature & couldn't be identified so it went to an undescribed subspecies but now they've tested the type specimen & its is a Northern Bullers so platei was correct all along. And if you even need a reason to not allow scientists to come up with new common names this has to be one of the best examples - Pacific Albatross

Shame to use a name like that when both Thick-billed Albatross and Short-billed Albatross are available

 

[l_raty]

Why unavailable ? Are there things contrary to ICZN ?

Presumably they meant it is "not available for" that particular population -- i.e., that it cannot be used as its valid name. Unfortunately, this word is rather frequently used in this sense, even by taxonomists.

6, 1898 - Ornithologische Monatsberichte - Biodiversity Heritage Library

The Biodiversity Heritage Library works collaboratively to make biodiversity literature openly available to the world as part of a global biodiversity community.

biodiversitylibrary.org

The name was published in a work applying binominal nomenclature, where it was unambiguously combined with a generic name and used as part of the valid name of a species; it is a word of more than one letter, spelled with the Latin alphabet; and it was accompanied by a statement of characters purported to differentiate the taxon. This makes it unquestionably an "available name" in the sense of the ICZN.

 

[Xenospiza]

I haven't read it either but my understanding is platei was the original name for Northern Buller's, then people realised the type specimen was an immature & couldn't be identified so it went to an undescribed subspecies but now they've tested the type specimen & its is a Northern Bullers so platei was correct all along. And if you even need a reason to not allow scientists to come up with new common names this has to be one of the best examples - Pacific Albatross

It is a dismal name, but "Pacific Albatross" has been around for years for Buller's Albatross (and I had it in my database as used for platei).

"The Pacific Albatross is a small, rather lightly built albatross, with a wingspan of 205–213 cm (Marchant & Higgins 1990)"
From: Thalassarche bulleri platei — Northern Buller's Albatross, Pacific Albatross

 

[Dave Boyle]

It is a dismal name, but "Pacific Albatross" has been around for years for Buller's Albatross (and I had it in my database as used for platei).

"The Pacific Albatross is a small, rather lightly built albatross, with a wingspan of 205–213 cm (Marchant & Higgins 1990)"
From: Thalassarche bulleri platei — Northern Buller's Albatross, Pacific Albatross

I thought it had come from Chris Robertson's towards a new taxonomy for albatrosses paper but yep, that pre-dates that - everybody just calls them Northern & Southern Buller's.

 

[Dave Boyle]

Presumably they meant it is "not available for" that particular population -- i.e., that it cannot be used as its valid name. Unfortunately, this word is rather frequently used in this sense, even by taxonomists.

6, 1898 - Ornithologische Monatsberichte - Biodiversity Heritage Library

The Biodiversity Heritage Library works collaboratively to make biodiversity literature openly available to the world as part of a global biodiversity community.

biodiversitylibrary.org

The name was published in a work applying binominal nomenclature, where it was unambiguously combined with a generic name and used as part of the valid name of a species; it is a word of more than one letter, spelled with the Latin alphabet; and it was accompanied by a statement of characters purported to differentiate the taxon. This makes it unquestionably an "available name" in the sense of the ICZN.

Would the name have become unavailable when it was thought the type specimen for Northern Bullers wasn't actually a Northern Buller's, so Northern Buller's needed a new name & couldn't have a name that had been used in error in the past, but now it turns out the name was correct all along so its ok?

 

[l_raty]

Would the name have become unavailable when it was thought the type specimen for Northern Bullers wasn't actually a Northern Buller's, so Northern Buller's needed a new name & couldn't have a name that had been used in error in the past, but now it turns out the name was correct all along so its ok?

What you describe has nothing to do with the availability of the name.
If the name was thought to apply to something else, to which an older name already applied, this would make it a junior synonym of this older name and, as such, invalid.
But it would remain available.