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: 3951305" data-attributes="member: 24811">Sylvia is no problem -- the species designated by Selby was not one of the species included by Scopoli (Sylvia luscinia, S. curruca, S. atricapilla, S. oenanthe, S. rubecula, S. phoenicurus, S. tithys, S. zya, S. muscipeta, S. rubetra, S. trochilus, S. troglodytes, S. regulus), hence his designation cannot stand. The type was fixed by Bonaparte in 1828.The type of Alcedo is A. ispida. (By designation in: Swainson W. 1820-21. Zoological illustrations, or, original figures and descriptions of new, rare, or interesting animals, selected chiefly from the classes of ornithology, entomology, and conchology, and arranged on the principles of Cuvier and other modern zoologists. Vol. I. Printed by R. and A. Taylor for Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy; and W. Wood, Strand, London.; text to pl.26; <a href="https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/29156534" target="_blank">https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/29156534</a> -- still earlier than Selby 1825. Gracula atthis [as the name implies] was not included in Alcedo by Linnaeus, and is in no way eligible to be the type of the genus.)The type designated by Selby for Otis is a bit more problematic, though.Note that the only way to discard an overlooked type designation allowed by the Code is to submit a case to the Commission.</blockquote>