Sensu latu vs sensu strictu vs sensu amplificato (1 Viewer)

[Zosterornis latistriatus]

Hi everyone! I encountered these words from one of my microbiology references (see title). As an aspiring ornithologist, I was curious if these taxonomic terms were also used in ornithology.

I checked the 'A Dictionary of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics' by Lincoln et al. (1998)- see image attached, and did not get the answer I needed. Is there anyone here kind enough to explain the detailed definitions, use, and examples of these terms? Thank you for the help.

 

[njlarsen]

The opus dictionary only have two of these:

Dictionary P-S - BirdForum Opus

www.birdforum.net

Text included there:

Sensu: Latin; 'in the sense of'. Usually used in two terms, sensu stricto ('in the strict sense' - splitting close relatives separately), and sensu lato ('in the broad sense' - lumping close relatives together), for defining the taxonomic treatment of a bird. Also sometimes as "sensu Bloggs et al., 2016", to describe the treatment adopted by a particular paper by the named author(s).

Niels

 

[James Jobling]

In the Cornell BOW Key to Scientific Names (freely available online) I give an expansive list of standard abbreviations and symbols in ornithology, including sens. lat. and sens. str. As examples, the genus Erithacus sens. str. includes just the single species Erithacus rubecula (the modern treatment); the genus Erithacus sens. lat. includes the genera Erithacus, Luscinia, Calliope, Larvivora, Tarsiger, Stiphrornis, and Sheppardia (per Peters, 1964, Check-list, X, pp. 32-49). Sensu amplo is another term for sensu lato.

 

[Zosterornis latistriatus]

In the Cornell BOW Key to Scientific Names (freely available online) I give an expansive list of standard abbreviations and symbols in ornithology, including sens. lat. and sens. str. As examples, the genus Erithacus sens. str. includes just the single species Erithacus rubecula (the modern treatment); the genus Erithacus sens. lat. includes the genera Erithacus, Luscinia, Calliope, Larvivora, Tarsiger, Stiphrornis, and Sheppardia (per Peters, 1964, Check-list, X, pp. 32-49).

I did not know that. Thank you so much! Big help.

 

[Zosterornis latistriatus]

In the Cornell BOW Key to Scientific Names (freely available online) I give an expansive list of standard abbreviations and symbols in ornithology, including sens. lat. and sens. str. As examples, the genus Erithacus sens. str. includes just the single species Erithacus rubecula (the modern treatment); the genus Erithacus sens. lat. includes the genera Erithacus, Luscinia, Calliope, Larvivora, Tarsiger, Stiphrornis, and Sheppardia (per Peters, 1964, Check-list, X, pp. 32-49). Sensu amplo is another term for sensu lato.

@James Jobling pardon me for my layman mind, but do you know how did the genus Erithacus includes the other genera you mentioned (i.e., Erithacus, Luscinia, Calliope and etc.)? How does that work in taxonomy?

 

[James Jobling]

The differences between Erithacus sens. str. and Erithacus sens. lat. merely reflect the different interpretations of the available evidence by authors as to the position and validity of the various genera. The authors in Peters X, based on morphology and physiology, considered the genera Luscinia, Calliope, etc., insufficiently distinct from Erithacus to warrant generic separation. Modern authors rely more upon mtDNA and other sophisticated methods of distinction, although much must be down to personal opinion. Yesterday’s synonym suddenly finds itself upgraded to full recognition, and vice versa.

 

[Tiraya]

Never heard of "sensu amplificato", but other two are common in taxonomy. To give a very simple definition, sensu stricto is "in the specific sense" and sensu lato is "in the vague sense". My understanding of their use is as follows, and yes they are more common outside of birds in my experience.

Effectively these terms are used in taxonomy when species become cryptic. For instance, if Eurasian tree sparrow (Passer montanus) was actually a complex of cryptic species, there are now two potential meanings to the binomial "Passer montanus". If writing a publication about taxonomy, when you say this name you could either mean Passer montanus (as the "original" species), or you could mean Passer montanus (as in the Passer montanus complex). As you can see, it's not clear without additional clarification which of these two versions you are saying.

This is what sensu lato and stricto solve. It's clarification. Passer montanus s.s. (stricto) explicitly means you are talking about the original species, without its cryptic buddies included in the label. Passer montanus s. l. (lato) would mean you are including all the species in that complex, the original and its cryptic friends, all under one overall label.

For instance, an author may say something like the following: "While analyzing older specimens labelled as Passer montanus, it was clear that most examples from Europe represented Passer montanus s.s. Some specimens were too damaged to identify but clearly at least Passer montanus s.l." or "We were able to identify specimens of this new invasive species as Passer montanus s.l., but were unable to proceed further with identification at this time." Very on the nose examples, but you get the picture.

To clarify, it's not just a general "this species is similar to other species" situation, typically these refer to isolated groups of species that have very close relationships, perhaps only distinguishable by DNA at times.

 

[jts1882]

I think the use is much more common for higher taxa than at specific level. So you can have Caprimulgiformes sensu lato (=Strisores) instead of a Caprimulgimorphae containing Caprimulgiformes sensu stricto or Struthioniformes sensu lato (=Paleognathae) instead of Struthionimorphae containing Struthioniformes sensu stricto.

P.S, You occasionally see sensu strictissimo ("in the strictest sense") as a more narrow circumscription than sensu stricto.

 

[Tiraya]

In non-ornithology, particularly entomology, I see it used most often for species referral, but indeed it could be used for any taxonomic level.

"strictissimo" seems reasonably unnecessary, considering stricto is already meant to be a narrow sense. What would that even be used for? The nominate subspecies?

 

[l_raty]

"strictissimo" seems reasonably unnecessary, considering stricto is already meant to be a narrow sense. What would that even be used for? The nominate subspecies?

You can have more than two levels of broadness / narrowness...

Motacilla flava sensu largo = M. flava in the sense that was traditionally accepted before the split of M. tschutschensis.
Motacilla flava sensu stricto = M. flava in the sense of the current world checklists, with M. tschutschensis excluded from it.
Motacilla flava sensu strictissimo = M. flava in the sense accepted on the Dutch list (deemed monotypic, but encompassing traditional flava and beema).

 

[Tiraya]

I see, I suppose I've never encountered that situation before. Perhaps that's because the subjects I am familiar in refer to taxonomic situations of relatively narrow focus, or only being treated by one author. In those cases there is an absence of several conflicting taxonomic treatments.