• 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.

Links to digitized versions of original sources of bird names (1 Viewer)

:oops: ... ok, so your question was simply posted in the wrong thread.

Thus, queries on Werner is better kept in your own thread here. ;)

Either way, I haven't seen a digitized copy of (this particular) Les oiseaux et les fleurs ... anywhere.

Looks like a very Rare Children's book.
Last edited:
Thamnophilus nigrocinereus kulczynskii (Domaniewski & & Stolzmann) 1922
Original description newly available online at Biodiversity Heritage Library.
Nouvelles formes d'oiseaux de la famille Formicariidae - Biodiversity Heritage Library .
The Key: The Key to Scientific Names - Birds of the World .
No OD link on Zoonomen.
World Birds Taxonomic List: Genera and species with citations. .
Mlíkovský 2009 says "Myrmelastes kulczyńskii [sic] Domaniewski & Sztolcman, 1922: 2. Myrmelastes kulczynskii Domaniewski & Sztolcman: Cory & Hellmayr 1924: 79. [Spelling emended.]"
There are new subspecies named in the article and I am not sure if they are valid or being used?
Last edited:
I am wondering what the publication Mus. Lugd. from Temminck may. Mentioned e.g. t.1 (1850) - Conspectus generum avium - Biodiversity Heritage Library or http://www.zoonomen.net/cit/RI/SP/Dace/dace00045a.jpg . Was that really published? Is Dacelo vaillanti considered as a synonym?

"Mus. Lugd." ("Museum Lugduni", AKA "Museum Lugduni Batavorum") is the Leiden Museum, not a publication.
Names cited this way are manuscript names, which the person presented as their author associated to a specimen in the collection of the Museum.
"Is Dacelo vaillanti considered as a synonym?"
Richmond says "not used here; cited in syn of Halcyon fuscicapilla (LaFres.) "
http://www.zoonomen.net/cit/RI/SP/Dace/dace00045a.jpg .
v.3 (1833) [Incomplete] - [Mollusques] - Biodiversity Heritage Library .
That skin vaillanti does not seem to still be at Leiden.
Type specimens of non-passerines in Naturalis Biodiversity Center (Animalia, Aves) .

It's not used as a valid name, but under the current rules, it could nevertheless be available under Art. 11.6.1, if it had been adopted as the valid name of a taxon or treated as a senior homonym before 1961.

The bird illustrated in Mag. Zool. is the type of Lafresnaye's Dacelo fuscicapilla (OD : v.3 (1833) [Incomplete] - [Mollusques] - Biodiversity Heritage Library ). I would expect this bird to be #1838 (the adult type) in Catalogue des oiseaux de la collection de feu M. le bon. de Lafresnaye de Falaise - Biodiversity Heritage Library , and thus to have been, originally at least, in Lafresnaye's personal collection. I wouldn't be too sure that the fact that Dacelo vaillanti is not cited by van der Mije et al 2023 necessarily means that the skin that used to bear this name in Leiden is gone -- if the name was generally not regarded as available, this specimen might simply never have been treated as a type.
For the Philosophical Magazine and Annals of Philosophy report, there is evidence that it existed as a published work on 6 Feb 1830; plus, arguably, a stated date of 1 Feb 1830.
For the Edinburgh Journal of Natural and Geographical Science note, so far, we only have a stated date "February", which for nomenclature purposes, should mean 28 Feb 1830, and a statement that implies that part of the text was written before 4 Feb, but does not establish unambiguously when it was published.

If things remain as they are, the Philosophical Magazine and Annals of Philosophy should be given precedence.

(If precedence can really not be decided (i.e., two works are published on the same day, or on an undetermined day of two periods ending on the same day), you need a published first reviser act.)
I see that the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (still) cites the OD as Edinb. J. Nat. Geogr. Sci. 1 no. 6 p. 477 (see here) rather than page 146 of the February 1830 issue of The Philosophical Magazine and Annals of Philosophy (New Series volume 7 number 38):
11.4. Consistent application of binominal nomenclature

The author must have consistently applied the Principle of Binominal Nomenclature [Art. 5.1] in the work in which the name or nomenclatural act was published;

Garsault, 1764 used a few binomial names.​

v.5 - Les figures des plantes et animaux d'usage en medecine - Biodiversity Heritage Library .
But not for all birds and not for Cygnus in particular.
v.5 - Les figures des plantes et animaux d'usage en medecine - Biodiversity Heritage Library .
v.6 - Les figures des plantes et animaux d'usage en medecine - Biodiversity Heritage Library .
Last edited:
Garsault used uninominal names (which have been interpreted as generic names) to denote entities that he must obviously have regarded as species, rather than as supraspecific groups.

In the case of Cygnus, he was explicit in his text that "Cygnus" / "Cygne" was possibly better named "Cygne privé" because "another species" existed (which implies that he understood "Cygnus" / "Cygne", in the first pace, as applying to the species he was writing about, not to a higher-ranked group that would also have included that "other species").
On his plate 692, he had a species (the House Sparrow) called "Passer" and another one (the Wren) called "Passer troglodytes"; everything (be it on the plate itself or in the text describing this plate) suggests that he saw these two names as denoting two distinct entities of identical rank (i.e., two species); nothing suggests that he understood the first name as generic, and therefore as encompassing the taxon denoted by the second name.
On his mammal plates, in a number of case, he even used uninominal (i.e., "generic") names to denote things that he could not conceivably have regarded as anything but the male and female of a single species -- "Bos" / "Vacca", "Hircus" / "Capra", "Cervus" / "Cerva" (but then "Cervus rangifer", with a modifier, was another species), "Aries" / "Ovis", "Homo" / "Mulier".

He also used many obviously polynominal names for plants -- things like "Helleborus niger flore roseo", "Serpentaria virginiana nigra", etc. --, although, admittedly, not for animals.
Last edited:
Hello all,
I am looking for the source of Turdus plumbeus rubripes
Which according to Bond is "Turdus rubripes, Temminck Nouv Rec. Pl Col. 2, 69 livr, 1826, pl 409"

I tried searching through this thread and did not find it. If it is mentioned, my apologies.
I am looking for the source of Turdus plumbeus rubripes
Which according to Bond is "Turdus rubripes, Temminck Nouv Rec. Pl Col. 2, 69 livr, 1826, pl 409"

Here it is :
Cheers, L -
One more perhaps: how about Turdus ardosiaceus Vieillot, Tabl. Enc. Meth. Orn. 2, livr. 91, 1823, p 646. (currently a subspecies of Turdus plumbeus).
Zoonomen does not have a link to H. tethys Bp. OD . It took me a while but here is the OD:

Tageblatt der ... Versammlung deutscher Naturforscher und Ärzte .

1852 Tageb.Deutsch.Naturf.AertzeWiesbaden Beilage 7 p.89.

The type was collected by Neboux during 1839 in the Galapagos.

https://sciencepress.mnhn.fr/sites/default/files/articles/pdf/z1997n4a12.pdf . Page 10of 12.

In 2014 on Bird Forum Richard Klim mentioned a list of possible splits from Howell, Lewington & Russell 2014. Rare Birds of North America. One was split of Hydrobates kelsalli from H. tethys. Peruvian Wedge-rumped Storm Perel. I was wondering if in nine years anyone has seen any paper or DNA supporting this?

August 19 2023 there were 15 accepted records of Wedged-rumped Storm Petrel in California. By now that has been quadrupled. Hurricane Hilary brought up many birds frigatebird, Cook’s Petrel etc but mostly many storm petrels. Birders noticed two kinds of the Wedged-rumped storm petrels. One bunch much smaller that being H. kelsalli. Many California birders would like to get two new ticks.

Zoonomen has no link to the original description of
Hydrobates pelagicus melitensis .

Catalogo ornitologico del gruppo di Malta . Page 118. Not on BHL.

Users who are viewing this thread