What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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.
Forums
Birding
Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Winter Wren potential split
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="l_raty" data-source="post: 3141160" data-attributes="member: 24811"><p><em>Cygnus</em> Bechstein, 1803 [<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/127844#page/446/mode/1up" target="_blank">OD</a>].</p><p>Originally included species:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><em>Anas Olor</em> Gmelin [<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/83107#page/7/mode/1up" target="_blank">OD</a>]</li> </ul><p><em>Anas cygnus</em> Linnaeus is <em>not</em> cited, thus it can definitely <em>not</em> be the type by tautonymy. <em>Anas Olor</em> Gmelin is the type species by original monotypy.</p><p>(Note that there are also suggestions that <em>Cygnus</em> might be regarded as available from Garsault 1764 ["<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/104875#page/101/mode/1up" target="_blank">OD</a>"]. This would not change anything regarding the type species, though.)</p><p></p><p></p><p><em>Olor</em> Wagler, 1832 [<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/85170#page/663/mode/1up" target="_blank">OD</a>].</p><p>Originally included species:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><em>Olor musicus</em> (<em>Cygnus musicus</em> Bechstein)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><em>Olor Bewickii</em> (<em>Cygnus bewickii</em> Yarrell)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><em>Olor Buccinator</em> (<em>Cygnus Buccinator</em> Richardson)</li> </ul><p><em>Anas olor</em> Gmelin is <em>not</em> cited, thus it can definitely <em>not</em> be the type by tautonymy. (And the descriptive text [<em>die Stirn ohne höcker</em>: the forehead without a bump] actually excludes it.) No type species fixed in the OD. Type species deemed (eg., <a href="http://zoonomen.net/cit/RI/Genera/O/o00133a.jpg" target="_blank">Richmond</a>, <a href="http://www.aou.org/checklist/north/pdf/AOUchecklistTin-Falcon.pdf" target="_blank">AOU 1998</a>) to have been fixed by subsequent designation by <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/48588#page/87/mode/1up" target="_blank">Gray 1840</a> as <em>Cygnus musicus</em> Bechstein [<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/95666#page/306/mode/1up" target="_blank">OD</a>], which is a junior synonym of <em>Anas cygnus</em> Linnaeus. Gray did not do this, though: he designated "<em>Cygnus mansuetus</em>" (L.) Wagler", adding a reference to a plate showing a Mute Swan (<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/109417#page/33/mode/1up" target="_blank">Planche enluminée 913</a>). "<em>Cygnus mansuetus</em>" is a prelinnean name, used by Willughby and Ray for the Mute Swan, and cited by Linnaeus 1758 under the <em>varietas β</em> of his <em>Anas cygnus</em> [<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/10277#page/140/mode/1up" target="_blank">here</a>]. This designation is invalid (what Gray designated was not an originally included species); I'm unsure who actually designated a type validly.</p><p></p><p></p><p><em>Troglodytes</em> Vieillot, 1809 [<a href="http://www.e-rara.ch/nev_r/content/pageview/1894111" target="_blank">OD</a>].</p><p>Originally included species:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><em>Troglodytes aedon</em> Vieillot</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><em>Troglodytes arundinaceus</em> Vieillot</li> </ul><p>This case is less straightforward than the previous two, because <em>Motacilla troglodytes</em> Linnaeus/Gmelin <em>is</em> cited in the synonymy of <em>Troglodytes arundinaceus</em> Vieillot [<a href="http://www.e-rara.ch/nev_r/content/pageview/1882594" target="_blank">here</a>], and this might be interpreted as satisfying Art.68.4: "If a valid species-group name, or its cited synonym, originally included [Art. 67.2] in a nominal genus-group taxon is identical with the name of that taxon, the nominal species denoted by that specific name (if available) is the type species (type species by absolute tautonymy)", effectively making <em>Motacilla troglodytes</em> Linnaeus the type species by absolute tautonymy. What <em>Troglodytes arundinaceus</em> is deemed a synonym of, however, is the "Var. Y" (actually the <em>varietas γ</em>) of <em>M. troglogytes</em>, described but not named by Gmelin 1789 [<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/83107#page/500/mode/1up" target="_blank">here</a>]; <em>Motacilla troglodytes</em> itself is not presented as "a cited synonym" of "a valid species-group name" originally included in the genus, and therefore does <em>not</em> qualify as the type species.</p><p>No type species fixed in the OD. Type species fixed as <em>Troglodytes aedon</em> Vieillot by subsequent designation by <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/33120#page/431/mode/1up" target="_blank">Baird 1858</a>.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="l_raty, post: 3141160, member: 24811"] [I]Cygnus[/I] Bechstein, 1803 [[URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/127844#page/446/mode/1up"]OD[/URL]]. Originally included species: [LIST] [*][I]Anas Olor[/I] Gmelin [[URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/83107#page/7/mode/1up"]OD[/URL]] [/LIST] [I]Anas cygnus[/I] Linnaeus is [I]not[/I] cited, thus it can definitely [I]not[/I] be the type by tautonymy. [I]Anas Olor[/I] Gmelin is the type species by original monotypy. (Note that there are also suggestions that [I]Cygnus[/I] might be regarded as available from Garsault 1764 ["[URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/104875#page/101/mode/1up"]OD[/URL]"]. This would not change anything regarding the type species, though.) [I]Olor[/I] Wagler, 1832 [[URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/85170#page/663/mode/1up"]OD[/URL]]. Originally included species: [LIST] [*][I]Olor musicus[/I] ([I]Cygnus musicus[/I] Bechstein) [*][I]Olor Bewickii[/I] ([I]Cygnus bewickii[/I] Yarrell) [*][I]Olor Buccinator[/I] ([I]Cygnus Buccinator[/I] Richardson) [/LIST] [I]Anas olor[/I] Gmelin is [I]not[/I] cited, thus it can definitely [I]not[/I] be the type by tautonymy. (And the descriptive text [[I]die Stirn ohne höcker[/I]: the forehead without a bump] actually excludes it.) No type species fixed in the OD. Type species deemed (eg., [URL="http://zoonomen.net/cit/RI/Genera/O/o00133a.jpg"]Richmond[/URL], [URL="http://www.aou.org/checklist/north/pdf/AOUchecklistTin-Falcon.pdf"]AOU 1998[/URL]) to have been fixed by subsequent designation by [URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/48588#page/87/mode/1up"]Gray 1840[/URL] as [I]Cygnus musicus[/I] Bechstein [[URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/95666#page/306/mode/1up"]OD[/URL]], which is a junior synonym of [I]Anas cygnus[/I] Linnaeus. Gray did not do this, though: he designated "[I]Cygnus mansuetus[/I]" (L.) Wagler", adding a reference to a plate showing a Mute Swan ([URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/109417#page/33/mode/1up"]Planche enluminée 913[/URL]). "[I]Cygnus mansuetus[/I]" is a prelinnean name, used by Willughby and Ray for the Mute Swan, and cited by Linnaeus 1758 under the [I]varietas β[/I] of his [I]Anas cygnus[/I] [[URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/10277#page/140/mode/1up"]here[/URL]]. This designation is invalid (what Gray designated was not an originally included species); I'm unsure who actually designated a type validly. [I]Troglodytes[/I] Vieillot, 1809 [[URL="http://www.e-rara.ch/nev_r/content/pageview/1894111"]OD[/URL]]. Originally included species: [LIST] [*][I]Troglodytes aedon[/I] Vieillot [*][I]Troglodytes arundinaceus[/I] Vieillot [/LIST] This case is less straightforward than the previous two, because [I]Motacilla troglodytes[/I] Linnaeus/Gmelin [I]is[/I] cited in the synonymy of [I]Troglodytes arundinaceus[/I] Vieillot [[URL="http://www.e-rara.ch/nev_r/content/pageview/1882594"]here[/URL]], and this might be interpreted as satisfying Art.68.4: "If a valid species-group name, or its cited synonym, originally included [Art. 67.2] in a nominal genus-group taxon is identical with the name of that taxon, the nominal species denoted by that specific name (if available) is the type species (type species by absolute tautonymy)", effectively making [I]Motacilla troglodytes[/I] Linnaeus the type species by absolute tautonymy. What [I]Troglodytes arundinaceus[/I] is deemed a synonym of, however, is the "Var. Y" (actually the [I]varietas γ[/I]) of [I]M. troglogytes[/I], described but not named by Gmelin 1789 [[URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/83107#page/500/mode/1up"]here[/URL]]; [I]Motacilla troglodytes[/I] itself is not presented as "a cited synonym" of "a valid species-group name" originally included in the genus, and therefore does [I]not[/I] qualify as the type species. No type species fixed in the OD. Type species fixed as [I]Troglodytes aedon[/I] Vieillot by subsequent designation by [URL="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/33120#page/431/mode/1up"]Baird 1858[/URL]. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Birding
Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Winter Wren potential split
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top
