BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="l_raty" data-source="post: 3092883" data-attributes="member: 24811">Mmh. Looking at this a bit closer, the above seems in fact incorrect.TiF and H&M4 actually take Zapornia from <a href="http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/46105#page/44/mode/1up" target="_blank">Leach, 1816</a>, not from Stephens, 1824.As it stands, this may be somewhat problematic, though. The only included species there is cited as Zapornia minuta. This species is neither described nor illustrated, and no other indication is given, thus (1) the species group name is certainly not made available there, and (2) the only way that the genus-group name can be deemed to have been made available, is through its use in combination with an available specific name (under Article 12.2.5). In other words, "Zapornia minuta" must be a recombination of a species name that was made available somewhere else--or there is no "Zapornia Leach". Is there any other plausible candidate than <a href="http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/83107#page/225/mode/1up" target="_blank">Rallus minutus Gmelin, 1789</a>, based on <a href="http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/109420#page/101/mode/1up" target="_blank">"Le Petit Râle de Cayenne" of Buffon</a> = Rallus flaviventer Boddaert, 1783...?EDIT - No, OK, I get it: <a href="http://books.google.be/books?id=OgkAAAAAQAAJ&pg=PT132#v=onepage&q&f=false" target="_blank">Gallinula minuta Montagu, 1813</a> is the type species (same specimen as listed by Leach, shot in 1809 by W. Tucker, Esq., at Ashburton, Devon--here described and named as a new species).</blockquote>

Verification