Parrots (1 Viewer)

[l_raty]

I'm not sure that your opinion is correct. A decision made by the Commission does not require anything except, of course, that the majority of Commissioners votes for it. Opinion 2332 only rules that the family-group name Psittaculinae is conserved and the family-group name Palaeornithinae is suppressed. It does not affect the genus-group name Palaeornis.

The ruling in Opinion 2332 was :

Ruling​

(1) Under the plenary power the Commission:​

(a) has ruled that Psittacula Cuvier, 1800 is the type genus of PSITTACULINAE Vigors, 1825;​

(b) has suppressed the family-group name PALAEORNITHINAE Vigors, 1825 for the purposes of the Principle of Priority but not for those of the Principle of Homonymy.​

(2) The generic name Psittacula Cuvier, 1800 (gender: feminine) (type species Psittacus alexandri Linnaeus, 1758, by subsequent designation by Mathews (1917)), type genus of PSITTACULINAE, as ruled in (1)(a) above, is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology.​

(3) The name alexandri Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the binomen Psittacus alexandri Linnaeus, 1758, specific name of the type species of Psittacula Cuvier, 1800 is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology.​

(4) The family-group name PSITTACULINAE Vigors, 1825, type genus Psittacula Cuvier, 1800, as ruled in (1)(a) above, is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology.​

(5) The family-group name PALAEORNITHINAE Vigors, 1825, a junior objective synonym of PSITTACULINAE Vigors, 1825 by the First Reviser action of Bock (1994), is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology, as suppressed in (1)(b) above.​

As I noted above, Art. 80.7.1 states that "A work, name or nomenclatural act entered in an Official Index has the status attributed to it in the relevant ruling(s)." The above ruling placed Palaeornithinae Vigors on the Official Index, while explicitly giving it the status of junior objective synonym of Psittaculinae Vigors. Thus it now has this status per Art. 80.7.1.
Are you suggesting that we should just 'pretend' that this has no implication for Palaeornis ? (Maybe this is a way through, I don't actually know. The whole problem presumably comes from the ill-thought Art. 70.3, which was 'dropped' in the Code without taking care to the possible consequences.)

(I think that we'd all be better if this ruling -- which, essentially, 'conserved' a name that had not been used for nearly a century, by giving it the type of a name that was in universal use -- had not been produced at all, but that's another story.)

 

[Norbert R. B.]

The ruling in Opinion 2332 was :

Ruling​

(1) Under the plenary power the Commission:​

(a) has ruled that Psittacula Cuvier, 1800 is the type genus of PSITTACULINAE Vigors, 1825;​

(b) has suppressed the family-group name PALAEORNITHINAE Vigors, 1825 for the purposes of the Principle of Priority but not for those of the Principle of Homonymy.​

(2) The generic name Psittacula Cuvier, 1800 (gender: feminine) (type species Psittacus alexandri Linnaeus, 1758, by subsequent designation by Mathews (1917)), type genus of PSITTACULINAE, as ruled in (1)(a) above, is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology.​

(3) The name alexandri Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the binomen Psittacus alexandri Linnaeus, 1758, specific name of the type species of Psittacula Cuvier, 1800 is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology.​

(4) The family-group name PSITTACULINAE Vigors, 1825, type genus Psittacula Cuvier, 1800, as ruled in (1)(a) above, is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology.​

(5) The family-group name PALAEORNITHINAE Vigors, 1825, a junior objective synonym of PSITTACULINAE Vigors, 1825 by the First Reviser action of Bock (1994), is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology, as suppressed in (1)(b) above.​

As I noted above, Art. 80.7.1 states that "A work, name or nomenclatural act entered in an Official Index has the status attributed to it in the relevant ruling(s)." The above ruling placed Palaeornithinae Vigors on the Official Index, while explicitly giving it the status of junior objective synonym of Psittaculinae Vigors. Thus it now has this status per Art. 80.7.1.
Are you suggesting that we should just 'pretend' that this has no implication for Palaeornis ? (Maybe this is a way through, I don't actually know. The whole problem presumably comes from the ill-thought Art. 70.3, which was 'dropped' in the Code without taking care to the possible consequences.)

(I think that we'd all be better if this ruling -- which, essentially, 'conserved' a name that had not been used for nearly a century, by giving it the type of a name that was in universal use -- had not been produced at all, but that's another story.)

I wonder why the Commission explicitely placed Psittacula and Psittacus alexandri on the Official Lists but did not place Palaeornis on the Official Index?
Palaeornis has been used several times since as a valid name, among them by one author who brought that case before the ICZN (another of the authors was also involved in a recent revision of the Psittaciformes). Several decisions of the last two decades by the ICZN concerning ornithological nomenclature are quite unfortunate, I think, and do not strengthen trust in that institution.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Padilla-Jacobo, G.; Monterrubio-Rico, T.C.; Cano-Camacho, H.; Zavala-Páramo, M.G. Genetic Diversity of the Lilac-Crowned Parrot (Amazona finschi), a Species Endemic to Mexico. Diversity 2024, 16, 435. Genetic Diversity of the Lilac-Crowned Parrot (Amazona finschi), a Species Endemic to Mexico

Abstract
The Lilac-crowned Amazon (Amazona finschi) is an endemic parrot from western Mexico with a historical distribution in the Pacific Slope from southern Sonora and southwestern Chihuahua to Oaxaca. However, a particularly worrying decline in the extension of its distribution range has been reported in the central and southern regions. Overall, the species is listed in CITES the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, and the official Mexican standard NOM-059 as endangered. In this study, we aimed to obtain molecular information to support the planning of conservation strategies for A. finschi. For this purpose, we analyzed the genetic diversity and genealogical relationships between two groups of individuals from northern (Sinaloa) and central (Michoacan) portions of the species’ range based on mitochondrial DNA markers. In general agreement with the endangered status of the species, we found low genetic diversity values. However, at the regional level, the northern group showed high genetic diversity and the central group showed a lack of genetic diversity. Furthermore, in agreement with the proposal that A. finschi is monotypic, genealogical relationships revealed a haplotype distributed in the center and the north, although haplotypes exclusive to the north were also found. We suggest a differentiated management of northern and central populations to preserve evolutionary potential.

 

[Peter Kovalik]

Proposal (1026) to SACC

Change English group name of Amazona species from “Parrot” to “Amazon”

 

[Jeff Hopkins]

Proposal (1026) to SACC

Change English group name of Amazona species from “Parrot” to “Amazon”

I have to admit, when I saw this my knee-jerk reaction was the same as Alvaro and Dan make in the comments: too close to the pet trade nomenclature. But reading the other comments, I can understand the justification and accept it.

Judging by the voting, this one's gonna pass.

 

[raymie]

Proposal (1026) to SACC

Change English group name of Amazona species from “Parrot” to “Amazon”

This is a good change IMO. Most people who talk about these birds refer to them as "Amazons" already.

 

[Mysticete]

This is a good change IMO. Most people who talk about these birds refer to them as "Amazons" already.

now we just need them to revisit "Whitestart"...

 

[Jeff Hopkins]

now we just need them to revisit "Whitestart"...

Oh, hell no!

You might as well try to rename American Robin as "Rufous-breasted Thrush."

 

[pbjosh]

I have to admit, when I saw this my knee-jerk reaction was the same as Alvaro and Dan make in the comments: too close to the pet trade nomenclature. But reading the other comments, I can understand the justification and accept it.

Judging by the voting, this one's gonna pass.

I initially didn’t realize IOC already used Amazon for the group name either. I personally don’t think this change is a big deal, people already use both names for these birds and will continue to, this is almost more like book keeping than any profound change. And I think it has the chance to help birders learn Neotropical birds as Amazons are a really clean grouping of birds that have very similar and readily identifiable flight and (largely) similar vocalizations. As it is, it is common to call out Amazon or Amazona when first hearing or first seeing them rather than offer an instant ID.

 

[pbjosh]

now we just need them to revisit "Whitestart"...

SACC has (some time ago now) already rejected two proposals to rename the Myioborus Redstarts to Whitestarts. This would not have affected American Redstart of course but would have affected Painted Redstart which has been in Myioborus for some time now (since the 60’s or 70’s?). Some history of the names (Whitestart is a neologism dating to the early 80’s it appears) is in the first proposal if anyone is interested:

Change English names of Myioborus "Redstarts " to "Whitestarts"

And a second proposal that is less worth reading (other than perhaps the voting comments at the bottom) but that I’ll link for completeness:

Change English name of all South American Myioborus to Whitestart

I don’t know, off the top of my head, if NACC has considered the issue?

Personally I quite like the name Whitestart. I have the impression that it’s pretty widely liked from Mexico south, but not very well liked in the US or Canada…

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Proposal (1026) to SACC

Change English group name of Amazona species from “Parrot” to “Amazon”

Logical. A single name for a large, very diverse group is irrelevant

 

[THE_FERN]

Logical. A single name for a large, very diverse group is irrelevant

So why change it? (If it is irrelevant)

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

So why change it? (If it is irrelevant)

I say the opposite, that multiple names are needed for each clade within a diverse group. I give my opinion but finally it doesn't concern us French speakers 😂

 

[Peter Kovalik]

Proposal (998) to SACC

Treat Psittacara frontatus as a separate species from P. wagleri

PASSED (27 July 2024)

 

[pbjosh]

Logical. A single name for a large, very diverse group is irrelevant

I don’t agree, really. Words like Parrot, Parakeet, Warbler, Flycatcher, Sparrow are very useful even if they are broadly applied. I recall open the guide book to Panamá before my first ever trip to the neotropics and thinking “WTF is a Euphonia, this word means nothing to me” whereas I knew what general shape and size an Orange-billed Sparrow was going to be before looking at the plate.

That doesn’t mean that more refined names and subdivisions aren’t good moves in a lot of cases - I’m frequently in favor of them. But the very broadly applied names are actually very useful and more so when you step back from the insider’s view point.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

“WTF is a Euphonia, this word means nothing to me”

What name do you use instead, if there are synonyms ?

 

[pbjosh]

What name do you use instead?

I use Euphonia of course. The point is merely that the words like finch, sparrow, parrot, warbler are some of the bird names that are understood by the general public and that does have value.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

I use Euphonia of course. The point is merely that the words like finch, sparrow, parrot, warbler are some of the bird names that are understood by the general public and that does have value.

But we can use two types of nomenclature, that of the field with a generalist and simple vocabulary and that of the literature with a more precise vocabulary. Is the English language rich in terms of naturalistic lexicon? E.g. I find it hard to believe that "Warbler" is the only name that exists in the English vocabulary to designate all species that look like a warbler.

 

[pbjosh]

But we can use two types of nomenclature, that of the field with a generalist and simple vocabulary and that of the literature with a more precise vocabulary. Is the English language rich in terms of naturalistic lexicon? E.g. I find it hard to believe that "Warbler" is the only name that exists in the English vocabulary to designate all species that look like a warbler.

Warbler isn’t as widely known as Finch or Sparrow. I would guess the average native English speaker knows very broadly what a Sparrow or Finch is but might use the two terms interchangeably actually. I don’t know how many people will actually know what a Warbler is but definitely a lot fewer than Sparrow.

Off the top of my head, I don’t think there is another word that could be used interchangeably for Warbler and certainly not one that would understood out of ornithological / birder circles.

My impression is French is one of the languages in which there is the greatest level of taxonomic agreement / alignment with common names and English is one of the languages where names are very broadly applied.

 

[Mysticete]

SACC has (some time ago now) already rejected two proposals to rename the Myioborus Redstarts to Whitestarts. This would not have affected American Redstart of course but would have affected Painted Redstart which has been in Myioborus for some time now (since the 60’s or 70’s?). Some history of the names (Whitestart is a neologism dating to the early 80’s it appears) is in the first proposal if anyone is interested:

Change English names of Myioborus "Redstarts " to "Whitestarts"

And a second proposal that is less worth reading (other than perhaps the voting comments at the bottom) but that I’ll link for completeness:

Change English name of all South American Myioborus to Whitestart

I don’t know, off the top of my head, if NACC has considered the issue?

Personally I quite like the name Whitestart. I have the impression that it’s pretty widely liked from Mexico south, but not very well liked in the US or Canada…

Yeah, I am familiar with the past attempts. I just have a fondness for Whitestart over the other names, and would like to see that used more widely. IOC currently uses Whitestart, and I use that name as well in my own lifelist.