• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Estrildidae (1 Viewer)

In my own notes, I have Fringilla nisoria Temminck 1830 as type by subsequent designation of Wiegmann in 1835 here :
(RB Sharpe was not even born yet.)
 
Last edited:
Questions

1. Why does H&M4 give the authority for Fringilla nisoria as Sykes 1832 rather than Temminck 1830? Is this an error?

No idea -- looks more like an error to me.
The Peters' check-list (which is the source of most tupe-genus statements in H&M4) has a similar statement, with Temminck as the author :
The name of the ssp is attributed to Temminck 1830 in H&M4.

2. Is the type equivalent to the subspecies Lonchura punctulata nisoria or to the nominate Lonchura punctulata punctulat?.

Only the nominal species cited in the OD by an available name and positively included in the genus-group taxon are eligible to become the type. Sykes did not cite punctulata in the OD of Lonchura, hence punctulata cannot be the type, and Sharpe's designation could in any case not be accepted prima facie.

If Sharpe designated punctulata and, at the same time, placed Fringilla nisoria Temminck (and no other eligible nominal species) in synonymy with punctulata, this action (had it not been preceded by Wiegmann's) could have fixed Fringilla nisoria Temminck as the type, as per Art. 69.2.2 of the ICZN.

Fringilla nisoria Temminck 1830 remains the type, irrespective of the taxonomic status it is given (taxonomic species or subspecies, valid name of a taxon or not). Thus, if the type material of Fringilla nisoria Temminck was to be reinterpreted, this might potentially affect how the genus name is to be applied. A reinterpretation of the type material of punctulata could not have any such effect.
 
Last edited:
Laurent - thanks for your detailed reply. I'm not surprised that Wiegmann's article passed under the radar, he usually published on reptiles rather than birds.
 
Smith, P. (2023)
The overlooked nomenclatural history of the Fernando Po Mannikin Spermestes bicolor poensis (Fraser, 1843) (Estrildidae)
Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club 143: 283–288
doi: 10.25226/bboc.v143i3.2023.a3

Fernando Po Mannikin Spermestes bicolor poensis (Fraser, 1843) has had a relatively stable nomenclatural history since its formal scientific description. However, references in previous publications that have long been overlooked also clearly refer to this taxon. The Radiated Grosbeak of Latham (1783) on which the scientific name Loxia lineata J. F. Gmelin, 1789, is based, and the Pico grueso blanco y negro of Azara (1802), also refer to this taxon. Loxia lineata is a senior subjective synonym of Amadina poensis Fraser, 1843, but is a nomen oblitum. Thus, prevailing usage of the current name should be maintained.
 
I find it hard to believe that Paludipasser locustella is close to Ortygospiza given the plumage. Based on the plumage of the juvenile, female and male, which group would we place this species in?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top