Swedish bird names - extinct species (1 Viewer)

[Markus Lagerqvist]

Hi,

As a last stage in BirdLife Sweden's project of putting Swedish names on all the birds of the world a list of extinct species not inlucded i the IOC list, that have gone extinct during the Holocene Era, have now been published at:

http://www.sofnet.org/sveriges-orni...s-faglar-ver-4/namnlistan-del-3-utdoda-arter/

 

[Fred Ruhe]

Hi Markus,

An interesting list, but it would be more interesting if you add the names of the describers and a reference list where the description can be found.

You give English names, but most describers did not suggest an English name for their new species, so you might indicate that you have made them up so we know where it comes from.

I have not checked whether the list is complete, that will cost me to much time, perhaps I will do so in the future. What I did find on first look is the Arredondo described 4 species of Ornimegalonyx (1 in 1958, 3 in 1982). Formely the were never placed into synonymy, so 3 are missing.

All the best,

Fred

 

[Markus Lagerqvist]

Hi Markus,

What I did find on first look is the Arredondo described 4 species of Ornimegalonyx (1 in 1958, 3 in 1982). Formely the were never placed into synonymy, so 3 are missing.

All the best,

Fred

Hi,

Thanks, any comments are appreciated, escpecially since the list will be included in a forthcoming printed version of the Swedish name list. I'll forward the question about the Ornimegalonyx to Tommy Tyrberg who is our expert on extinct birds.

Cheers!
Markus

 

[Fred Ruhe]

Yes!

Tommy is a great expert on Pleistocene and Holocene birds of the Palearctic (see his 1998 book on Pleistocene Birds of the Palearctic: A Catalogue; Publications of the Nuttall Ornithological Club 27. 720 pp., 3 tables, 59 figs. and his on-line updates that unfortunately stopped in 2006 with the promise that there will be a new book!), but Cuba is not in the Palearctic.

Cheers,

Fred

 

[jurek]

My hint: make name which can be told 10 times in a row without the (native language) speaker coughing. And for bird which is not likely to be talked about very often, make a name which is either exact lift from English, or immediately obvious. Many invented bird names in Polish fail this test.

 

[Richard Klim]

My hint: make name which can be told 10 times in a row without the (native language) speaker coughing... Many invented bird names in Polish fail this test.

Reminds me of my (Polish) dad trying to teach me "Nie pieprz Pietrze wieprza pieprzem, bo przepieprzysz wieprza pieprzem".

 

[Peter Kovalik]

Reminds me of my (Polish) dad trying to teach me "Nie pieprz Pietrze wieprza pieprzem, bo przepieprzysz wieprza pieprzem".

:t: B

 

[Peter Kovalik]

Hi,

As a last stage in BirdLife Sweden's project of putting Swedish names on all the birds of the world a list of extinct species not inlucded i the IOC list, that have gone extinct during the Holocene Era, have now been published at:

http://www.sofnet.org/sveriges-orni...s-faglar-ver-4/namnlistan-del-3-utdoda-arter/

Hi Markus,

thanks for posting. Some notes on this list:
Mergus millineri should be M. milleneri
Gallicolumba 'norfolciensis' should be Alopecoenas norfolkensis Forshaw, 2015
(see Melanie's post here)

These species are not mentioned:
Pterodroma imberi Tennyson, Cooper & Shepherd 2015
(see Richard's post here)
Aegolius gradyi Olson, 2012
(see Richard's post here)
Pipilo naufragus Olson & Wingate 2012
(see Richard's post here)

 

[Fred Ruhe]

Markus wrote:

As a last stage in BirdLife Sweden's project of putting Swedish names on all the birds of the world a list of extinct species not inlucded i the IOC list, that have gone extinct during the Holocene Era, have now been published at:

http://www.sofnet.org/sveriges-ornit...-utdoda-arter/

This list (if complete, see comments by Peter) would make a nice addition to the IOC list and maybe some other additions like Hypsipetes cowlesi Hume, 2015 (Hume, Julian P. (2015). "A new subfossil bulbul (Aves: Passerines: Pycnonotidae) from Rodrigues Island, Mascarenes, south-western Indian Ocean". Ostrich: Journal of African Ornithology 86 (3): 247–260. doi:10.2989/00306525.2015.1067651).

As you notice already, this does not work. What is needed is a list that covers the complete Holocene extinctions, so you don't have to wonder will it be on the "swesish" list or on the IOC list. Why the IOC uses the year 1500 to stop their list is beyond me, Birds nor the Holocene work with ÿears".

If I was a member of the committee presenting a list, I would recommend a complete list for Holocene extinct birds and mark those already mentioned by the IOC list. I would recommend to give them their propper scientific name (so include the author(s) and the year of description and gave the article in the refs. That would make a list very usefull! Even if I don't like english or dutch or swedish names!

These are my two cents on this subject.

All the best,

Fred Ruhe

 

[Richard Klim]

Why the IOC uses the year 1500 to stop their list is beyond me, ...

H&M, HBW/BirdLife and eBird/Clements all do the same.

 

[Fred Ruhe]

H&M, HBW/BirdLife and eBird/Clements all do the same.

Do they give a reason for it?

Fred

 

[Richard Klim]

Do they give a reason for it?

I assume that their intention is simply to provide a classification for all avian taxa that have existed in the modern era (ie c1500+), which of course can be close to 'complete'.

 

[Markus Lagerqvist]

Markus wrote:

I would recommend to give them their propper scientific name (so include the author(s) and the year of description and gave the article in the refs. That would make a list very usefull! Even if I don't like english or dutch or swedish names!

In the next version we will include author(s) and year of description.
We will continoulsy update this list online.

 

[Markus Lagerqvist]

If I was a member of the committee presenting a list, I would recommend a complete list for Holocene extinct birds and mark those already mentioned by the IOC list. I would recommend to give them their propper scientific name (so include the author(s) and the year of description and gave the article in the refs. That would make a list very usefull!

Fred Ruhe

Good idea, will suggest this to the other committee members!

 

[Fred Ruhe]

I assume that their intention is simply to provide a classification for all avian taxa that have existed in the modern era (ie c1500+), which of course can be close to 'complete'.

Who decided that the modern era started on 1500? The completeness of that list you can see with the list of Markus with the additions mentioned before. The modern era is called the Holocene, it started at the end of the last ice-age and is around 10,000 years old and covers an important era of human influence on the earth (an important reason for the extinction of many taxa). The year 1500 AD is just arbitrary.

Richard wrote: "H&M, HBW/BirdLife and eBird/Clements all do the same."

Well, I think they are wrong, it makes their information incomplete and unreliable. Nobody can prove at this moment that birds that are thought to become extinct early in the Holocene, did not survive until after 1500, only their remains have not (yet) been found or described.

Fred

 

[Nutcracker]

1500 is a conveniently rounded date shortly before the date at which there are the first museum specimens and written scientific descriptions of species that were still alive when reported, but are not now. Birds that became extinct earlier are only known from either subfossil remains, or if written about, are at best very vague myths (e.g. Roc, possibly = Aepyornis maximus).

 

[Fred Ruhe]

1500 is a conveniently rounded date shortly before the date at which there are the first museum specimens and written scientific descriptions of species that were still alive when reported, but are not now. Birds that became extinct earlier are only known from either subfossil remains, or if written about, are at best very vague myths (e.g. Roc, possibly = Aepyornis maximus).

So we can only list birds that were known to people since 1500 onwards, that are known from more than subfossil material. What a bad luck for Pterodroma rupinarum Olson, 1975, extict since probably 1502, but only known from bones or Anas chathamica (Oliver, 1955), extinct since the 16th century, but also only known from bones. Well, I am pretty sure they are on the IOC list (although I did not see that list)

Your way of thinking only creates problems that can be avoided by not taking an arbitrary starting year, 1500, what a nonsence!

I am very glad Markus agrees with my view on this and will discuss it with his committee, and that he will report the results on this forum!

Fred

 

[Fred Ruhe]

Another suggestion to Markus is mention in which countries the birds were found, it would make the list even more interesting!

Fred Ruhe

 

[Richard Klim]

Fred, you seem to be very agitated by this, using strong terms like 'wrong', and 'nonsense!'.

The fact is, like it or not, that the four popular world checklists summarise the classification, distribution and common names of birds known in recent/modern times. I'm sure that the vast majority of users prefer it that way, and wouldn't want the lists to be cluttered by large numbers of long-extinct taxa (which could anyway only provide a very incomplete picture, riddled with question marks), and with range statements complicated by the inclusion of much earlier historical distributions.

I doubt that any of the teams concerned have the expertise or interest to provide the specialised list that you want (eg, being variously focused on conservation, bird records, vernacular names), and yet you evidently consider that it's nevertheless their job to do so!

 

[Fred Ruhe]

Dear Richard,

First of all, I am not agitated, I am perhaps a bit fanatic. Keep in mind, we are on the bird paleontology subforum, here we discuss fossil birds, recently extinct but also extinct longer ago. We also discuss lists of fossil birds, as you have noticed. All I have done is give Markus some suggestions for his list. He seems to like them. Some people, like you and Nutcracker have arguments why they want to draw a line at a certain year. All I try to do is try to show that these arguments are weak and unnecessary and make the resulting list very incomplete and not very helpfull to amateur and proffesional ornithologists. And for Tommy Tyrberg, a member of Markus´ committee, he knows far more about fossil birds than I do and is well able to make such a list.`

You wrote: “The fact is, like it or not, that the four popular world checklists summarise the classification, distribution and common names of birds known in recent/modern times. I'm sure that the vast majority of users prefer it that way, and wouldn't want the lists to be cluttered by large numbers of long-extinct taxa (which could anyway only provide a very incomplete picture, riddled with question marks), and with range statements complicated by the inclusion of much earlier historical distributions”.

Markus is trying to make a list of extinct birds not included in the IOC list, that means Holocene birds extinct birds before 1500.
I’ve tried to show that you end up with two lists, not knowing which species is on which list, not a very senseble thing to do.

While he’s busy I gave him some suggestions how to make the list even more interesting, what is wrong with that?

But as always, if somebody is thinking aloud, other people try to shut him up.

So stop trying to think of reasons why this list should not be made, but of reasons and ways how to realize such a list! Birds unfortunately did not start in 1500 and did not go extinct before 1500! and people have the right to be informed as completely as possible.

It is about scientific correctness and people should care about that.

And before you say it, I am not angry, 'wrong', and 'nonsense!' are not strong terms, they are as far as I know normal English wiords, it is not my intend to hurt anybody with my words, but I have to give my (in my opinion strong) arguments to support my view.

All the best,

Fred Ruhe