Gustaf von Carlson, and "his" Birds ... (1 Viewer)

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Re. the Identity of Gmelin's "[Loxia] Carlsoni", and Vieillot's "Coccothraustes Carlsonii" ... I fold!

On top of Laurent's excellent explanations/translations in post #14 (and #16) , ...

... also see the non-crested Bird depicted as "Loxya [sic] Carlsonii rubra Papageien Schnabel", on Plate (No.26), in Spalowsky's Erster Beytrag zur Naturgeschichte der Vögel, 1790 (here, or below, alt. in a version with less environment, here).


Certainly more similar to a Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis (even if crestless!) than any Scarlet Finch Carpodacus sipahi.

/B

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

However, I still haven't found any bird called carlsoni/carlsonii/carlsonianus that might be the reason for the Key's "?syn. Ciridops anna".

James, have you kept any notes on that one?

Or maybe I did find it!

After having dug deep in my archives, also note that the dear old (now defunct) HBW Alive Key, of 22nd of May 2016, only had one single taxon listed below:

carlsoni / carlsonii
Gustaf Carlson (fl. 1786) Swedish naturalist, collector; the “Gros-bec carlsonien” of Vieillot 1817 (?syn. Ciridops anna).

The carlsonianus Parrot was included later, compare with the same HBW Alive Key, of 27nd of March 2020:

carlsoni / carlsonianus / carlsonii
Gustaf Carlson (fl. 1786) Swedish naturalist, ... (?syn. Ciridops anna, syn. Cyanoramphus novaezelandiae).

And the Cardinal was included even later! Compare with today's Key:

carlsoni / carlsonianus / carlsonii
Johan Gustaf von Carlson (1743-1801) ... (syn. Cardinalis cardinalis, ?syn. Ciridops anna, syn. Cyanoramphus novaezelandiae).

Maybe time to delete that question/plausibility (all together) in today's Key?

To me, the addition of the Cardinal made "?syn. Ciridops anna" redundant, or superfluous.

As far as I can tell, there's only two of today's taxa that ought to cover those eponyms.

Anyone who disagree?

/B

 

[Taphrospilus]

What about Wörterbuch der Naturgeschichte, dem gegenwärtigen Stande der Botanik, Mineralogie und Zoologie angmessen:


CARDINAL CARLSONIEN. Syn. de Bouvreuil carlsouien, Pyrrhula Carlsonii. V. BOUVREUIL. https://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?pageseq=1&itemID=A743.03&viewtype=text and t.5 (1816) - Nouveau dictionnaire d'histoire naturelle - Biodiversity Heritage Library

Here Dizionario classico di storia naturale

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Sure Martin, I've seen those as well, but (to me) those are just later (French, and Italian) names for the same Carlsonii (i.e. for the same Cardinal), only placed in another Genus. Neither one connected to Ciridops anna (Dole, 1878).

In that Era (and certainly in he 1700's) the species in; Pyrrhula, Loxia and Coccothraustes (as well as Fringilla) were kept closely together, with very vague limits, with various species moved back and forth.

However, if you just wait a while I will return to the topic of an actual, true (Common/Eurasian) Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula in the Museum Carlsonianum (in another thread). I'm compiling it, at this very minute ...

Edit: Done = thread The Identity of Loxia flamengo SPARRMAN 1786 (here)

 

[JustinJansen]

The thing it is, only the Big island was explored a bit in the vicinity of Kealakekua Bay (before 1825), and not in the vicinity were Ciridops anna is known to occur. Nor is it displayed by artist on the third Cook expedition. At Vieillot's time there were (as far as I'm aware of) no specimens from Hawaii in The Paris museum, what is the main nucleus of Vieillot's descriptions. Only very few expeditions / persons collected at Hawaii before 1825.... and surely a bird as striking as Ciridops anna would be noticed!