Names lacking in the Key (1 Viewer)

[l_raty]

Hortensis Balatski 1999

The Key has Communis Balatski 1999, but appears to lack the similar Hortensis Balatski 1999 from the same paper.

Hortensis Balatski 1999
Балацкий НН. [Balatski NN.] Настоящие славки Sylviidae авифауны России. [Typical warblers Sylviidae of the avifauna of Russia.] Русск. Орнитол. Журн. [Russ. Ornithol. J.] 8 (59): 13-19.
p. 17
https://cloud.mail.ru/public/160de6a6e3ad/Русский орнитологический журнал/1999 Том 8/
OINS: Hortensis hortensis, H. melanocephala
Type: Motacilla hortensis Gmelin 1788 (in use) by original designation
Linnaeus C, Gmelin JF. 1789. Systema naturæ per regna tria naturæ, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species; cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Edicio decima tertia, aucta, reformata. Tomus primus, pars II. GE Beer, Leipzig.
p. 955
https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/2656450


(As an aside, in the "Communis" account "Tipovoy vit" should be "Tipovoy vid", and "c. 287" in the quoted type species ref would more logically stand as "s. 287" -- it's a Cyrillic с in the original (for страница = page), not the Latin letter c.)

 

[mb1848]

Balatski 1999 created a new Family name: Agrobatidae.
http://www.balatsky.ru/Publications/76.pdf .
I did not find it in the Key.

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Agrobatidae (ex Agrobates Swainson, 1837)

Mark, but you will find Agrobates: "(syn. Cercotrichas Ϯ Rufous-tailed Scrub Robin C. galactotes)" ... the latter today placed in Muscicapidae.

Neither would you find Muscicapidae in the Key, simply as Family names isn't included in it ... nor will you find Turdidae, Sturnidae, Mimidae, and so on ...

 

[mb1848]

Thanks Björn. I see now that the HBW approved family group names are available on the “left” side of the computer screen but you cannot search the Key for family group names. Edward C. Dickinson stated in 2016 that the ornithological community needs a comprehensive set of all validly published avian scientific names complete with their authors, dates and citations. This dataset should consist of original combinations with original spellings, right or wrong. By mentioning a validly published avian scientific name I am not vouching that it is the right name to use with our current understanding of bird taxonomy. But some day in the future science may need Agrobatidae. Dickinson in the same publication mentioned a List of Available Names for avian family-group names. Perhaps I’ll create a thread for creating such a thing starting with Agrobatidae.

 

[l_raty]

But some day in the future science may need Agrobatidae.

The most restricted synonym that is in use is:

Copsychinae Sundevall 1872
Original rank: family
Sundevall CJ. 1872. Methodi naturalis avium disponendarum tentamen. Försök till Fogelklassens naturenliga uppställning. Samson & Wallin, Stockholm.
p. 8
https://books.google.com/books?id=8AsAAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA8
Type Copsychus Wagler 1827 (in use).
Available.​

(This is used as tribe Copsychini; Cercotrichas / Tychaedon; Copsychus / Saxicoloides / Trichixos / Kittacincla; possibly Alethe; Namibornis has also been included but belongs in Muscicapini.)


Names based on generic names currently placed in synonymy with Agrobates:

Aedoneae Bonaparte 1854
Original rank: group
Bonaparte CL. 1854. Notes sur les collections rapportées, en 1853, par M. A. Delattre, de son voyage en Californie et dans le Nicaragua. Quatrième communication: chanteurs subulirostres. C.-R. Hebd. Séan. Acad. Sci. Paris, 38:1-11.
p. 11
http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/1215416
Type Aedon Boie 1826 (syn. Cercotrichas Boie 1831) http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/27511177
Available but permanently invalid (based on a junior homonym). Junior homonym of Aedonidae Hogg 1845 (type Aedon Forster 1817). Omitted entirely by Bock 1994 (who may have failed to recognise it as distinct from Hogg's homonymous name).

"Erythropygiidae" Rheinwald 1968
Original rank: family
Rheinwald G. 1968. Die Mallophagengattung Ricinus De Geer 1778. Revision der ausseramerikanischen Arten. Mitt. Hamburg. Zool. Mus. Inst., 65: 181-326.
pp. 315, 320
http://www.phthiraptera.info/conten...-1778-revision-der-ausseramerikanischen-arten
Type Erythropygia Smith 1836 (syn. Cercotrichas Boie 1831) https://books.google.com/books?id=lcMNAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA46
Unavailable (no description after 1960, proposed conditionally after 1960). (The name is in double quotes on Abb. 36 [p. 315]; in the text, the sentence that introduces it [p.320] is clearly conditional: “Wenn unsere Annahme richtig ist, dass R. maculatus ein primärer Parasit bei Erythropygia ist, dann müssten wir folgern, dass diese bisher allgemein zu den Turdidae gerechneten Vögel modifizierte Lerchen mit drosselartigem Habitus sind. Wir hätten dann eine neue Familie, die Erythropygiidae, zu errichten.”). This name also appeared (attributed to Rheinwald 1968) in: Złotorzycka J. 1972. Problemy współzalezności ewolucji Arthropoda i ich zywicieli. Wiadomości Parazytologiczne 18:397-414.; http://darwin.biology.utah.edu/PubsHTML/LicePubPages/LicePDF's/1972/Zlotorzycka1972problemy.pdf ; p.409; conditional nature of the proposal not apparent here, but it is unclear at best that the author really endorsed the name, and still no description.

"Cercotrichidae" Kumerloeve 1974
Original rank: family
Kumerloeve H. 1974. Über die Balgsammlung Ludwig Graf von Huyns und weiteres äthiopisches Vogelmaterial im Zoologischen Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig. Bonn. Zool. Beitr., 25: 56-75.
p. 67
http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/44717511
Type Cercotrichas Boie 1831 (in use) https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/27512958
Unavailable (no description after 1960). Cited by Bock 1994 from the later work: Wolters HE. 1983. Die Vögel Europas im System der Vögel: eine Übersicht. Biotropic Verlag, Baden-Baden. I don't know (but would be interested to know) the spelling / rank / page. Presumably no description there either, as Wolters did not usually describe his family-group taxa.​

Another synonym:

Thamnobiae Sharpe 1883
Original rank: group
Sharpe RB. 1883. Catalogue of the Passeriformes or perching birds in the British Museum. Cichlomorphae: part IV. Containing the concluding portion of the family Timeliidae (babbling thrushes). Catalogue of the birds in the British Museum. Volume VII. British Museum, London.
p. 2
http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/8300727
Type Thamnobia Swainson 1832 (syn. Saxicoloides Lesson 1832 / Copsychus Wagler 1827) https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/41549934
Available.
​

Any other ?

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Thamnobia Swainson, 1831 (after July) according to Richmond Index

 

[l_raty]

Thamnobia Swainson, 1831 (after July) according to Richmond Index

4 Feb 1832 according to Browing & Monroe 1991 (which is: [this]).

See also: http://www.zoonomen.net/cit/jourf.html#FaunaBor.-Am.[Swainson&Richardson].
The names from this volume are nowadays universally dated 1832; e.g. Chaetops, which appeared 3 pages ahead of Thamnobia: [OD], see [dating on Zoonomen].

(OTOH, it's unclear to me why Saxicoloides would be senior to Thamnobia. https://books.google.com/books?id=EQM1AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA270 -- date stated on the work's title page "1834"; this was once dated "1831" (which I presume is why the name displaced Thamnobia; e.g. Baker 1930 [here]), but now 1832 is normally accepted; Saxicoloides was in livraison 4 according to Richmond, the publication of which was announced on 4 Aug 1832 in Bibliographie de la France: https://books.google.com/books?id=QbEisyJoLvgC&pg=PA438&dq="indes+orientales". August is later than February. EDIT -- But see https://books.google.be/books?id=qeBNzxVnEV8C&pg=PA291, signature dated (foot of p. 289) Sep 1831.)

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Moreover, Thamnobia (Feb 1832), Saxicoloides (Aug 1832)

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Isn't this, those latest posts, more of a topic for the Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature forum?

Not much in terms of Etymology ...

Björn

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Isn't this, those latest posts, more of a topic for the Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature forum?

Not much in terms of Etymology ...

Björn

Ouch! my bad

 

[mb1848]

Just to answer Laurent's question. Wolters lists Cercotrichas Boie 1831 as a genus and subgenus but no higher. The species name is podobe Muller 1776. He has Agrobates as a subgenus of Cercotrichas with species galactotes, paena, and puts coryphaeus in an unnamed subgenus. Page 427 in the 6th Lieferung

 

[l_raty]

Just to answer Laurent's question. Wolters lists Cercotrichas Boie 1831 as a genus and subgenus but no higher. The species name is podobe Muller 1776. He has Agrobates as a subgenus of Cercotrichas with species galactotes, paena, and puts coryphaeus in an unnamed subgenus. Page 427 in the 6th Lieferung

Is this not in Die Vogelarten der Erde, though...?
(Die Vögel Europas im System der Vögel is a later work. Bock claimed 37 family-group names in Vogelarten and 11 in Vögel Europas; I'm not aware that a single one was since confirmed to be available from any of these two works.)

 

[mb1848]

Die Vogelarten der Erde yes my mistake.
https://watermark.silverchair.com/z...B66OvwwaHRhPdyktQZzte4F65R5bQic3ZyqqQi56kBNXs .
In a review of Europas it says:W o l t e r s ’ großes Werk über die Vogelarten der Erde (Parey, Hamburg) legt erstmals für alle Vogelarten einen deutschen Namen fest. Doch wer glaubt, die einzelnen Arten oder Gruppen nach der bekannten, gängigen Systematik ausfindig m achen zu können, wird rasch bemerken müssen, daß das WoLTERS’sche System erheblich anders aufgebaut ist (der umfassende Index hilft da gut weiter!). Mit diesem
kleinen Band versucht der Autor nun, die europäischen Vogelarten in sein umfassendes System einzuordnen; eine willkommene Verbesserung, die auch seinem großen Werk zugute kommen wird. Die Randzeichnungen erleichtern das Verständnis,
weil sie jeweils typische Vertreter der einzelnen Ordnungen (nach Wolters ) vorstellen. I wonder if the drawings defeat the label of nomen nudum?

 

[James Jobling]

Laurent, thank you for the correction (your post #141) to Communis Balatzki, 1999, and for the overlooked Hortensis Balatzki, 1999, which has now been added to the Key. However, I have kept ВИД as VIT, because in my (old) Russian/English transliteration crib Д is represented by T at the end of a word.

 

[Paul Clapham]

However, I have kept ВИД as VIT, because in my (old) Russian/English transliteration crib Д is represented by T at the end of a word.

Russian speakers use what's called "terminal devoicing", which affects consonants at the end of spoken words. So untrained Russian speakers say "bick" for the English word "big" and "hat" for the English word "had". (They can of course learn to pronounce words properly in English, but that reflects how they pronounce Russian words.)

I wouldn't have thought that transliteration would reflect pronunciation features like that, but perhaps it might. For example the name of a certain leader of the USSR is uniformly transliterated "Gorbachev" even though his name is pronounced "Gorbacheff". And you'll find both "Ustinov" and "Ustinoff" as transliterations (for different people).

I didn't see what "ВИД" was supposed to be but if it's an acronym and not a word then surely "VID" would be the correct transliteration.

 

[l_raty]

I didn't see what "ВИД" was supposed to be but if it's an acronym and not a word then surely "VID" would be the correct transliteration.

It's in: типовой вид = type species. (Not an acronym, thus.)

Many different transliteration systems do exist, but I can't remember having seen a t being used for a final д before now, which makes me doubt that this is widespread practice. (In any case, I can't find any suggestion to use anything but d for д in any of the 13 different systems described in the [Romanization of Russian article of Wikipedia]. Incidentally, I'm not fully sure that a transcription system taking the context-dependent pronunciation of the letters into account would still qualify as "transliteration" in the strict sense of the word.)

I'm used to see -ff endings mainly in association to old/oldish French sources (incl. old French-language Russian literature), following transcription rules like [these ones] (which I think are almost completely disused nowadays). You'll find papers by "Démentieff" (Дементьев) in early issues of Alauda (e.g., the second note in [this issue]). But I doubt anyone would still spell his name that way nowadays -- except of course in direct reference to one of these early articles.

 

[mb1848]

I wonder if the drawings defeat the label of nomen nudum?

Here is an example of the drawings in the book.
https://www.zvab.com/servlet/BookDe...20&cm_sp=snippet-_-srp1-_-title8#&gid=1&pid=1 .
To answer my own question. No. Since Wolters 1983 was published after 1930 an indication to a drawing is not enough. ICZN 13 To be available, every new name published after 1930 be accompanied by a description or definition that states in words characters...etc.

 

[Paul Clapham]

For example the name of a certain leader of the USSR is uniformly transliterated "Gorbachev" even though his name is pronounced "Gorbacheff".

Actually, "Горбачёв" is pronounced "Gorbachoff" in Russian but transliterated as "Gorbachev". So the character "ё", which is pronounced as "yo" in Russian, is still transliterated as "e" (or "ye") in English these days. Another case where pronunciation is disregarded.

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Monsieur Mauduyt's (Hawk) Eagle

One more for the Key!

• "Falco mauduyti" DAUDIN 1800 (here):

Grand Autour de Cayenne, MAUDUYT,
Encyc. méth.
[...]
CARACT. HAB. Mauduyt a reçu de Cayenne ...

Who Monsieur Mauduyt was? Well, I´d never heard of this bird, nor guy, before yesterday.

But I would bet on: Pierre Jean Claude Mauduyt de la Varenne (1732–1792), French Naturalist, medical doctor, electrotherapist, etc., etc., ... (as of French Wiki here), Collaborateur de l'Encyclopédie méthodique (as of ditto, here). I haven't checked him further than this.

Regarding if valid, invalid, and its surmised synonym, ... I haven´t got a clue!

As a minor help, on its identity; this bird/name (at least, I assume it's the same, surely it must be?) has also been listed as "Sp. [Spizaëtos] Mauduyti, Daud.", here, [that´s where I spotted it, and got curious], but also as "Spizaëtos manduyti [sic] Daudin", here [the latter clearly a typo].

Tricky time in those days, for the the guys in the Print shop, keeping track of all those small moveable types, and putting those tiny n:s and u:s the proper way (and not, as in the latter case, upside-down).

However; enjoy!

Björn

 

[James Jobling]

Björn, thanks for Falco mauduyti Daudin, 1801. I am slowly working my way through Cat. Bds. Americas, and would have got to his name eventually!
According to Hellmayr & Conover 1949, Cat. Bds. Americas, I (4), p. 211, footnote, Daudin's bird is unidentifiable. Sharpe 1874, Cat. Bds. B. M., I, p. 262, linked the name with Spizaetus ornatus. Your identification of Mauduyt de la Varenne is correct, and I will insert his name in the Key.