What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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.
Forums
Birding
Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Bird Name Etymology
"diagnosis not seen" for genus names in the Key A through S
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="l_raty" data-source="post: 3672948" data-attributes="member: 24811"><p>• Genus <em>Caudolanius</em> Bianchi 1907</p><p></p><p>Біанки ВЛ. (Bianchi VL.) 1907. Матеріалы для авифауны Монголіи и восточнаго Тибета. (Aves expeditionis PK Kozlowi per Mongoliam et Tibetam orientalem 1899-1901.) In: Козлов ПК. Монголія и Камъ. Изд. Имп. Русск. Геогр. Общ., 5. Imperial Academy of Sciences, St-Petersburg. p. 60. [<a href="https://legendtour.ru/rus/mongolia/text/kozlov_mongolia_i_kam_t_5.djvu" target="_blank">djvu</a>]</p><p></p><p>In a somewhat modernized spelling:</p><p></p><p></p><p>= "The group of shrikes, which includes <em>L. erythronotus</em> Vig., <em>L. tephronotus</em> Vig., <em>L. bentet</em> Horsf., <em>L. schach</em> Linn., <em>L. nigriceps</em> Frankl., <em>L. cephalomelus</em> Bonap. and <em>L. fuscatus</em> Less., I distinguish in a special genus, <em>Caudolanius</em>, characterized by a not dramatically colourful, dark brown or black tail, which is at least 8 mm., usually much longer than the wing, and by a sharp color contrast between the upper coverts of the tail and the middle 'rudders' [= quills?]. As type of this genus I choose <em>L. erythronotus</em> Vig."</p><p></p><p>The derivation is presumably correct, the type might possibly be better cited as "<em>L. schach erythronotus</em>"...? (I'm not sure what the policy is in this type of cases; in [<a href="https://www.hbw.com/species/long-tailed-shrike-lanius-schach" target="_blank">HBW Online</a>], <em>erythronotus</em> forms (with <em>caniceps</em>) a distinctive sspp group with English name "Indian Long-tailed Shrike".)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Is there a way to find out which diagnoses have not been seen/verified, other than by searching the <strong>Key</strong> for every name?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="l_raty, post: 3672948, member: 24811"] • Genus [I]Caudolanius[/I] Bianchi 1907 Біанки ВЛ. (Bianchi VL.) 1907. Матеріалы для авифауны Монголіи и восточнаго Тибета. (Aves expeditionis PK Kozlowi per Mongoliam et Tibetam orientalem 1899-1901.) In: Козлов ПК. Монголія и Камъ. Изд. Имп. Русск. Геогр. Общ., 5. Imperial Academy of Sciences, St-Petersburg. p. 60. [[URL="https://legendtour.ru/rus/mongolia/text/kozlov_mongolia_i_kam_t_5.djvu"]djvu[/URL]] In a somewhat modernized spelling: = "The group of shrikes, which includes [I]L. erythronotus[/I] Vig., [I]L. tephronotus[/I] Vig., [I]L. bentet[/I] Horsf., [I]L. schach[/I] Linn., [I]L. nigriceps[/I] Frankl., [I]L. cephalomelus[/I] Bonap. and [I]L. fuscatus[/I] Less., I distinguish in a special genus, [I]Caudolanius[/I], characterized by a not dramatically colourful, dark brown or black tail, which is at least 8 mm., usually much longer than the wing, and by a sharp color contrast between the upper coverts of the tail and the middle 'rudders' [= quills?]. As type of this genus I choose [I]L. erythronotus[/I] Vig." The derivation is presumably correct, the type might possibly be better cited as "[I]L. schach erythronotus[/I]"...? (I'm not sure what the policy is in this type of cases; in [[URL="https://www.hbw.com/species/long-tailed-shrike-lanius-schach"]HBW Online[/URL]], [I]erythronotus[/I] forms (with [I]caniceps[/I]) a distinctive sspp group with English name "Indian Long-tailed Shrike".) Is there a way to find out which diagnoses have not been seen/verified, other than by searching the [B]Key[/B] for every name? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Birding
Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Bird Name Etymology
"diagnosis not seen" for genus names in the Key A through S
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top
