Gruiformes (1 Viewer)

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

How was the genus Antigone for cranes allowed to be given in 2010 then, given it was an already existent animal genus?

Because the extinct "Antigone" has never existed, it was a misspelling of Antigona Schumacher, 1817

 

[l_raty]

How was the genus Antigone for cranes allowed to be given in 2010 then, given it was an already existent animal genus?

What already existed was Antigona Schumacher 1817 : Essai d'un nouveau système des habitations des vers testacés - Biodiversity Heritage Library

In this work, "Antigone" (left column) was a French vernacular, equivalent to the scientific name Antigona (right column). In 1847, Gray cited Antigona as "Antigone", in the synonymy of Chione Megerle 1811. Gray did not make his intent to change Antigona Schumacher 1817 into "Antigone" explicit, hence his use of "Antigone" must be treated as a mere error.

The genus Antigone was given to a crane in 1853, by HGL Reichenbach : Abt.2:Bd.1;Abt.3:Bd.4:pt.1 (1836-1847) [Text] - Die vollständigste Naturgeschichte der Vögel - Biodiversity Heritage Library

 

[mb1848]

Thank you Laurent for finding Antigone Reichenbach it was alluding me. The AOU in 2010 said: Antigone Reichenbach, 1852, Handb. Spec. Orn. p. xxiii.  Type, by original designation and tautonomy, Grus torquata Vieillot = Ardea antigone Linnaeus. Gray dated it 1853 not 1852. Catalogue of the Genera and Subgenera of Birds Contained in the British Museum . Page 113.
v.1 - Caroli Linnaei...Systema naturae per regna tria naturae - Biodiversity Heritage Library .
Part I & II - A natural history of uncommon birds - Biodiversity Heritage Library .
I think Linne called it Antigone with a capital A. Because Edwards described the bird as stately? Sorry read the Key to Scientific Names before posting. The Greek lady was turned into a stork.
The Key to Scientific Names - Birds of the World .

 

[l_raty]

Thank you Laurent for finding Antigone Reichenbach it was alluding me. The AOU in 2010 said: Antigone Reichenbach, 1852, Handb. Spec. Orn. p. xxiii.  Type, by original designation and tautonomy, Grus torquata Vieillot = Ardea antigone Linnaeus. Gray dated it 1853 not 1852. Catalogue of the Genera and Subgenera of Birds Contained in the British Museum . Page 113.
v.1 - Caroli Linnaei...Systema naturae per regna tria naturae - Biodiversity Heritage Library .
Part I & II - A natural history of uncommon birds - Biodiversity Heritage Library .

The type is Grus torquata Vieillot 1817 (a subjective synonym of Ardea antigone Linnaeus 1758) by original designation.

(The designation results from the fact that Reichenbach's systematic list was titled "Genera et species typicae" on p. II of the work. Ardea antigone Linnaeus 1758 was not cited by Reichenbach, and cannot play any role in the fixation of the type of the genus. The Code accepts four methods of fixation of a type species in the OD, which are (in order of decreasing precedence) : original designation, monotypy, absolute tautonymy and Linnaean tautonymy. Fixations simply "by tautonymy" (i.e., by a tautonymy that might not be absolute or Linnaean -- most of the "tautonymic" fixations usually accepted for Brissonian generic names, for example) do not exist under the current Code. A type fixed in the OD is always fixed through one and only one of these four methods (the one with highest precedence), thus fixations "by original designation and [whatever else]" do not exist either -- if there is an acceptable type designation in the OD, it's this that fixes the type : the fixation is then by original designation, period.)

The Vorwort of Reichenbach's work is dated "Dresden, den 1. October 1852." on p. VIII, which has led to the work being cited to 1852. But this date presumably reflects the writing of the text, and is unlikely to have ever been intended as a date of publication. The text (which was Lieferung 3 -- VIII+36+XXXI pp.) was listed among erschienene Werke in the Messkatalog of the 1853 Leipziger Ostermesse; the Messe is given by Evenhuis 2014 as having started on 17 Apr 1853 -- which (unless someone digs out earlier evidence) I would tend to accept as date of publication.
Also reviewed by Gloger in the May 1853 issue of Z. gesamm. Ornithol. ; listed as having appeared in the first half of 1853 in Bibl. Hist.-Nat. ; noticed on 9 Jul 1853 in Lit. Centralbl. Deutschland.

 

[mb1848]

I apologize to everyone as a North American alive in 2010. Grus torquata is an interesting concept. It is based on two drawings. First Ardea torquata Latham.

v.2 (1790) - Index ornithologicus, sive, Systema ornithologiae - Biodiversity Heritage Library .

v. 1, pt. 2 - Caroli a Linné ... Systema naturae per regna tria naturae - Biodiversity Heritage Library .

Supplement II to the General synopsis of birds - Biodiversity Heritage Library .

Which is based on John F. Miller 1785(?) Icones Animalium.

1 - [Icones Animalium et Plantarum] - Biodiversity Heritage Library .

1 - [Icones Animalium et Plantarum] - Biodiversity Heritage Library .

Which is not a crane.

There may be two plates of this bird (35, 36) in Cimelia Physica Miller & Shaw 1796 which I have not found.

The other drawing is Pl. 865.

t.9 - Planches enluminées d'histoire naturelle - Biodiversity Heritage Library .

La Grue a collier. Which is a crane. When was G. torquata made a synonym?

I am looking for Reichenbach’s drawings Ic. Av. t. 214, ic. 428. t. 218. ic. 1239— to see if they look like Edwards or Miller or Daubenton's Planches enluminées?

I date Miller 1785 because of a review dated February 1786. Page 81.

The Critical Review: Or, Annals of Literature .

Sherborn & Iredale 1921 ser.11:v.3=no.[9-12] (1921) [Incomplete] - Ibis - Biodiversity Heritage Library .

Jansen et al 2022.

https://www.birdforum.net/threads/l...ces-of-bird-names.322234/page-17#post-4454840

 

[l_raty]

There may be two plates of this bird (35, 36) in Cimelia Physica Miller & Shaw 1796 which I have not found.

• Shared Publication
• Shared Publication

Beware the Ardea naevia and A. torquata plates are interchanged here -- the A. torquata plate is associated to the A. naevia text, and vice versa.
The Ardea torquata plate is here indicated as "Publish'd May 16th 1782, by J. F. Miller."
(IMO, this bird is Ixobrychus exilis (Gmelin 1789), but it has been regarded as Butorides striata in the past, and was regarded as an unidentifiable Ixobrychus sp. by Walters 2009.)

I am looking for Reichenbach’s drawings Ic. Av. t. 214, ic. 428. t. 218. ic. 1239— to see if they look like Edwards or Miller or Daubenton's Planches enluminées?

• Abt.3:Bd.3 [Atlas 3] (1836) - Die vollständigste Naturgeschichte der Vögel - Biodiversity Heritage Library
• Abt.3:Bd.3 [Atlas 3] (1836) - Die vollständigste Naturgeschichte der Vögel - Biodiversity Heritage Library

Reichenbach's bird was clearly Daubenton's bird. Vieillot's description matched Daubenton's bird as well. Subsequently, Vieillot also published a plate showing this bird in La galerie des oiseaux:

• t.2=pt.3-5 (1825) - La galerie des oiseaux - Biodiversity Heritage Library
• t.2=pt.3-5 (1825) - La galerie des oiseaux - Biodiversity Heritage Library

Interestingly, in this book, the reference to Latham given by Vieillot was slightly expanded, now reading : "Ardea torquata, Lath., Index, n° 4."
Now, the species #4 in the genus Ardea in Latham's Index ornithologicus was Ardea antigone; this came with a variety "β.", which was Daubenton's Planche enluminée 865, and for which Latham cited the Buffonian name "Grue à collier", without giving it a Latin name.

From this, it can be concluded that Vieillot's "Ardea torquata, Lath." was actually a latinization, by Vieillot himself, of Buffon's "Grue à collier" as cited by Latham (and placed by him in Ardea -- Vieillot presumably viewed this name as "implied" in Latham's treatment); and that it was thus never intended as a reference to the bird that Latham actually called Ardea torquata Miller, fourteen pages farther in his book -- a bird that does not match Vieillot's description of Grus torquata at all, and to which no "n° 4" is associated whatsoever.

Pl. enl. 865 was also named Grus collaris by Boddaert 1783.

The Richmond Index cites Hartert 1921 for the synonymy with G. antigone, but the synonymization is older than this. E.g., see Brasil 1913.

 

[mb1848]

Thank you Laurent for finding everything I could not. That Vieillot never intended to refer to Miller's drawing makes sense and my high respect for him is restored. I may ask the Teyler Museum to allow their book to be put on BHL.