Latest IOC Diary Updates (11 Viewers)

[DDonsker]

In IOC red 15.1, a few normally used initials are missing:

I think 'Silva' in Cerqueira, Gonçalves, Quaresma, Silva, Pichorim & Aleixo, 2024
should be 'Silva, M'
(Authority of Sakesphoroides cristatus niedeguidonae)

and 'Gray' in 'Gray, 1869'
should be 'Gray, GR, 1869'
(Authority of Phoenicopterus ruber glyphorhynchus)

Yes, missing initials added. Thanks.

 

[DDonsker]

Another small error I noticed the other day:

The main distribution of Otus lempiji still includes Thailand and Malaya. These populations were returned to O. lettia in the last update.

I don't believe so. Here is how the range is represented in IOC 15.1:

OR : Greater Sundas, Con Son I. (Vietnam), Bangka and Belitung (e of s Sumatra), n Natuna Is. (nw of Borneo), Kangean Is. (n of Bali)

Are you looking at the IOC 15.1 red spreadsheet?

Please clarify. Thanks.

 

[DDonsker]

This row has 'ssp' in column 'Rank'. Surely that should be either 'Species', or the 'Scientific Name' column should be R. s. citreolaemus ? (probably the latter, if I understand the 'Comment' correctly)

ssp​

Citron-throated Toucan​

Ramphastidae​

Ramphastos citreolaemus​

Gould, 1844​

Oops. Thanks. Fixed.

 

[Jacana]

I don't believe so. Here is how the range is represented in IOC 15.1:

OR : Greater Sundas, Con Son I. (Vietnam), Bangka and Belitung (e of s Sumatra), n Natuna Is. (nw of Borneo), Kangean Is. (n of Bali)

Are you looking at the IOC 15.1 red spreadsheet?

Please clarify. Thanks.

Sorry David, I realised I was looking at V.14.2

Apologies!

 

[Swindon Addick]

As for the rest. The "strange" hyphens are correctly placed in these several compound surnames (as the authors themselves represent them).

I think what's being reported is that they aren't hyphens, they're another character which looks very similar, possibly copied from an online reference to the publication. If I copy the hyphen from Garcia-Porta in cell I6703 and the one in Higashi-jima in cell J6706, put them into the same font and the same point size, they are slightly different lengths which means they aren't the same ISO character.

 

[kweetal]

As for the rest. The "strange" hyphens are correctly placed in these several compound surnames (as the authors themselves represent them).

Thanks.

I think you misunderstand. The display of these compound names is fine. It is not about the display, it's about the storage (i.e., the spreadsheet). For data like this it makes sense to use the keypad-minus for hyphen and not some much less often used unicode character. The current hyphen replaced by hyphen-minus (the keypad minus) will look exactly the same. The authors won't complain.

 

[Tor Olsen]

Really minor detail, but Authority for Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator (row 576) is given in grey font (as for subspecies), not black font (as for species).

 

[DDonsker]

I think you misunderstand. The display of these compound names is fine. It is not about the display, it's about the storage (i.e., the spreadsheet). For data like this it makes sense to use the keypad-minus for hyphen and not some much less often used unicode character. The current hyphen replaced by hyphen-minus (the keypad minus) will look exactly the same. The authors won't complain.

I did misunderstand. Thanks. Will correct these.

 

[DDonsker]

Really minor detail, but Authority for Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator (row 576) is given in grey font (as for subspecies), not black font (as for species).

Fixed. Thank you.

 

[Markus Lagerqvist]

The use of "and allies" in family names is a bit inconsistent in the new familes:

"and allies"

Royal Flycatchers and allies

"& allies"

Tityras, Becards & allies

"& Allies"

Pheasants & Allies

Vangas & Allies

Woodswallows, Butcherbirds & Allies

Whistlers & Allies

Cettia Bush Warblers & Allies

Reed Warblers & Allies

Grassbirds & Allies

Tetrakas & Allies

Cisticolas & Allies

Parrotbills & Allies

Laughingthrushes & Allies

Dapple-throat & Allies

 

[DDonsker]

The use of "and allies" in family names is a bit inconsistent in the new familes:

"and allies"

Royal Flycatchers and allies

"& allies"

Tityras, Becards & allies

"& Allies"

Pheasants & Allies

Vangas & Allies

Woodswallows, Butcherbirds & Allies

Whistlers & Allies

Cettia Bush Warblers & Allies

Reed Warblers & Allies

Grassbirds & Allies

Tetrakas & Allies

Cisticolas & Allies

Parrotbills & Allies

Laughingthrushes & Allies

Dapple-throat & Allies

Thanks. First two modified to conform with the others.

 

[Jim Mountjoy]

Just using the 'countif' function in Excel, the new total seems to be 11,244 species. If that is correct, then it is a drop of 32 since 14.2.

 

[kweetal]

I arrive at these numbers

                     Subspecies   Species    Genera   Families  Orders
           IOC v15.1      19779     11249      2396        256      44
           IOC v14.2      19756     11276      2392        254      44
           IOC v14.1      19802     11194      2381        253      44
      Clements v2024      20289     11145      2374        254      46
   HBW/Birdlife v9.1      20020     11195      2397        247      36
 Howard & Moore v4.1      21025     10175      2348        236

(edit: added ssp)

 

[Jim Mountjoy]

I arrive at these numbers

                       Species    Genera   Families  Orders
           IOC v15.1     11249      2396        256      44
           IOC v14.2     11276      2392        254      44
           IOC v14.1     11194      2381        253      44
      Clements v2024     11145      2374        254      46
   HBW/Birdlife v9.1     11195      2397        247      36
 Howard & Moore v4.1     10175      2348        236

That seems better - I actually got 11,249 species as well, by simply doing a sort on the Rank column and counting the rows of species. I don't know why Excel's 'countif' misses stuff, but I have seen it happen before.

 

[jts1882]

You can just do a search for "species" on column D to get the 11,249.

And "ssp" gives 19,779.

P.S. I also got the 11,249 with =COUNTIF(D3:D34000,"species")

 

[baldviking]

You can just do a search for "species" on column D to get the 11,249.

And "ssp" gives 19,779.

P.S. I also got the 11,249 with =COUNTIF(D3:D34000,"species")

While the 15.1 red spreadsheet includes 11,249 species, there should be an additional species for a total of 11,250 in the final 15.1 listing. See kweetal's post #3,638 regarding the Citron-throated Toucan showing "ssp" instead of "species" in the Rank column. Per David Donsker this will be adjusted in the final listing.

11,250 species is also the number arrived at by adding and subtracting all splits and lumps announced in the "Diary".

 

[kweetal]

Or possibly that record is indeed a 'ssp' where the 'Scientific Name' should be:
R. v. citreolaemus
(not R. s. citreolaemus as I erroneously suggested upthread)

Because the 'Comment' is:
"Citron-throated Toucan Ramphastos citreolaemus is split from largely allopatric Channel-billed Toucan R. vitellinus (e.g. Hilty 2003). But the two taxa reportedly hybridize in w Venezuela in the Maracaibo basin (Haffer 1974) and conspecific treatment is suggested by limited phylogenetic analyses (Patané et al. 2009; Ostrow et al. 2023),"

We'll see...

 

[Larry Sweetland]

Does anyone have a number yet for the number of extant species in 15.1?

 

[Swindon Addick]

Does anyone have a number yet for the number of extant species in 15.1?

I make it 164 entries in the spreadsheet with species rank and a † or †† symbol in the extinction column. †Amaui being the only new species among those. That would make 11,085 extant.

 

[Maffong]

FYI, unfortunately, the species considered in IOC are not entirely the same as those considered extinct by BirdLife (ans thus IUCN). A handful of birds are treated differently, as informagion about their current status is currently so thin, that they are very likely but not definitely extinct.