Symplectes tephronotus Reichenow, 1892 Journ.f.Orn. 40 no.198 p.184
Turdus tricolor Vieillot, 1818, Nouv. Dict. Hist. Nat., nouv. éd.,30, p. 291which on casual inspection apparentlymust be a typographic for20 rather than30 (which was published in 1819).
Aegithina viridissima thapsina Oberholser, 1917 Smiths.Misc.Coll.60, (7) p.40which makes no sense, volume 60 was published in 1912, not 1917. The only things correctabout this citation are the year and the page number.
Ara tricolor Bechsteinand therefore does not list the authority in parentheses. This is followed by the6th and 7th AOU CL's (p.273; p.237).
"A" [=Psittacus] tricolor "Vaillant" J.M. Bechstein, 1811and Richmond says it is based on
"L' Ara tricolor, Vaillant. Hist Nat. des Peroquets ..."
Psittacus tricolor(but probably should haveP[sittacus] tricolor).
Sittasomus griseicapillus transitivus Pinto and Camargo, Papéis Avulsosdo Depto. Zool. Scr. da Agricultura, São Paulo,1, no. 26, 1948,p. 317
*14. ASTURtrinotatusnotAccipiter trinotatus
Falco tanypterus Schlegel, 1843, Abh.Gebiete Zool. Vergleich. Anat. Heft 3, p.8 pls.12-13.
Schlegel(1843) Abh.Gebiete Zool. Vergleich Anat.3: 3, 8.[APP: remarkably, this citation is given for bothfeldeggii andtanypterus; clearly an error on thepart of HBW.]
tanypterus Falco, H. Schlegel, Abh. Gebiete Zool. I (3) 1841, 8.
F. tanypterusLicht. Abhand. --Bonap.Rev. Zool.1850, p.485.
Falco tanypterus,Schl. Abhandl. Geb. Zool. &c. p.8, Taf. 12,13(1841,ex Licht. Mus.Berol.);Bp. Consp. i p.25 (1850)
18.Falco tanypterus,Licht. -Schlegel, Abhand.tab. 12et 13.In summary, at this point it appeared that the Schlegel Abhand. citation was the most frequently cited. Petersholds this to be 1843, though with no supporting data. 1841 seemed "a good guess" to me forFalco biarmicufeldeggii, and Hartert's note for that taxon suggests (but does not prove) that thosefeldeggii platesfollowed at least plates 9 and 10. Therefure 1841 may be a reasonable guess for this taxon.
"Heft III:(2), 8, pl.12 (ad.) & pl.13 (fem. juv.)they donot appear to discuss the interpretation by Browning & Monroe.
Pyrrhula telasco Lesson, 1828, Voy. Coquille, Zool.,1, livr. 8, pl.15, fig.3;idem., op. cit., 1830, livr.15, p.663
Pyrrhula telascoLess. Voy. Coquille i p.663, pl.15 fig.3 (1826)
5. The last species, finally,Col. torringtoni, Layard, is properlysaid, only a race ofPal. elphinstoni, particular to Ceylon ...Bonaparte's Comptes Rendu Description
31.1.2. A species-group name, if a noun in the genitive case (see Article11.9.1.3) formed directly from a modern personal name, is to be formed by addingto the stem of that name -i if the personal name is that of a man, -orum if ofmen or of man (men) and woman (women) together, -ae if of a woman, and -arum ifof women; the stem of such a name is determined by the action of the originalauthor when forming the genitive.I agree with the interpretation that the name must be renderedtorringtoniae.
The acceptance of 1853, rather than 1854 relies on the minutes of acommittee meeting held on 21 December 1853 (Lamprey, 1855), which record that 'Aletter from Dr. Kelaart was read and laid on the table, stating that he had beenat great expense in publishing, and requesting that the Society would acceptcopies of his work in lieu of subscriptions due. It was then moved and agreedto, that two copies of his publication be recieved, in lieu of all past arrearsof subscriptions due by him to the Society, and that a recommendation be made bythe Committee at teh next General Meeting, that he be made a Correspondingmember of the Society.'It must be noted:
"Remarks -- This beautiful pigeon we have named after Lady Torrington..."Pittie and Dickinson state in their footnote (#6, p.198)
"There seems to be no reason to suggest that the 'we' was a 'Royal plural.'"Theygive no support for this assertion, and tell us nothing of the patterns of use of"I" or "we" in the rest of the work; patterns of use which might make one position or the otherclear.
"But we regret exceedingly that since we left Newera Ellia, we have not been able to gain furtherinformation on the subject. It is to be hoped that some Zoologist will soon visit that interestinglocality and complete the work which we have only begun."
"Our own labours would, like those of too many collectors, have been a chaotic mess, but for theassistance of the cabinet investigations of such eminent men as the Grays and Blyths. Would that we hadmore opportunities of consulting their works and extending under such auspices, our researches in thenatural history of our native land."
"There seems to be no reason to suggest that the 'we' was a 'Royal plural.'"The use of "we" neither demonstrates nor excludes the possibility of Blyth's inclusion in theauthority, and should, it seems to me, be ignored.
50.1.1. However, if it is clear from the contents that some person other than an author ofthe work is alone responsible both for the name or act and for satisfying the criteria of availabilityother than actual publication, then that other person is the author of the name or act. If the identityof that other person is not explicit in the work itself, then the author is deemed to be the person whopublishes the work.So is there any indication from the contents of the work that speaks to the responsibility for thenomenclatural act?As noted by Wijesinghe the title of Appendix C is as follows:
Appendix C. Notes and Descriptions of some new or little known species of Ceylon birds: by Ed.Blyth, Esq. Curator of the Bengal Asiatic Society's Museum. From the Journals of the AsiaticSociety.[The footnote to this title says:'The "remarks" are mine.-E. F. K.'].and we have:
"Remarks -- This beautiful pigeon we have named after Lady Torrington..."and this act of naming thus appears to be attributable to "E. F. K." = Kelaart, based on thecontents of the work.
Regarding the year of publication of Kelaart's Prodromus (including the Appendix pages 1-50), Ithink we can fix it at 1853, since Pethiyagoda & Manamendra-Arachchi (1998) refer to a "flyer" issued byKelaart in 1853 advertising his book as "just published in one Vol. 8vo cloth; price 10s. 6d."
In Écho du monde savant 2, 2nd divis., no. 24, Sci. Nat.et Géogr., p.107 (1836),Lafresnaye wrote (thank you Jean-François for the transcription):"...je me crois en droit, non pas de donner un quatrième nomnouveau au Roitelet omnicolor (Dieu me garde de cette manie si fataleà la Science !), mais de lui rendre le nom génériquede Tachuris que d'Azzara lui avait imposé, il y a plus detrente-cinq ans dans son excellente description, etde lui laisser le nom d'espèce d'omnicolor de Vieillot, et souslequel il est connu si généralement. Dès lors, leTachuris omnicolor devient le type d'un genre dans le groupe asseznombreux des Fluvicolinae de Swainson, ouGobe-mouches riverains, et suivra immédiatement les Gobe-mouchespetit coq et Guira yetata..."Here, Lafresnaye established genusTachuris, withRegulusomnicolor Vieillot, 1823 (notMuscicapa regia Lafresnaye ...)as type species.All this because I wanted to know the grammatical gender ofTachuris. It is masculine, and the names now combined with it(libertatis, alticola, loaensis, rubrigastra) do not change.
Tachuris Lafresnaye, 1836, Écho du Monde Savant,3, 2nddivis., no.24, Sci. Nat. et Géogr., p. 107
L Écho du Monde Savant,3e année,{138,no.{24June 12, 1836. p.107 (in text).With an additonal handwritten note saying:First publ. in Mem. Soc. Acad. de Falaise, at least so Lafr. says in the present paper!.June 12, 1836 would be a Sunday, which fits the indicated schedule of publicationfor this serial.
STRIX TURCOMANA,MIHI. St. aurita, albido-ferruginea, fusco varia, caudaelongata, fasciis quinque fusco variis. Unum tantum hujus strigis exemplar inter mare Ca-spium et lacum Aralansem in littore alto saxoso, apud in-colasTschink dicto, inveni hieme; cum autem a ceteriscongeneribus valde differt, sub proprio nomine describam.Descriptio. Non multo brevior Bubone, sed multo gra- cilior et colore laetior. Caput auritum supra ferru- gineum fusco maculatum, auribus magnis ferrugineis, apice nigris; rostro nigro. Collum et pectus fer- ruginea, lituris longitudinalibus fuscis; abdomen et crissum pallidora, vel ferruginoso-albida, lituris longtiudinalibus taeniolisque transversalibus fuscis varia. Supra avis pallide ferruginea et albo macu- lata, ubique fusco fasciatum variegata et irrorata. Remiges ferruginei fusco fasciati, apice obscuriores: primus totus, secundus dimidio, tertius apice serra- tus. Cauda valde elongata, (in pelle sicco 6½ polli cibus alis longio), pallide ferruginea, taeniolis nu- merosis fasciisque quinque distinctioribus latis fus- cis varia. Pedes cum digitis hirsuti, ferruginei, concolores; ungues magni nigri. — Longitudo pel- lis sicci duo pedes a capite ad caudae apicem. —
Tilmatura is also Aufzählung d. Colibris (1854), on p.6 Reichenbach introduces it as a replacement name forTryphaena Gould,preoccupied in Entomology. Peters' footnote (1945: 133) is incorrect,Tilmatura cannot beconsidered anomen nudum on p.8, if clearly anomen novum on p.6.
TROCHILUS TYRIANTHINUS. Troch. capite suprà dorsoque aureo- viridibus; gulá splendenti saturatè viridi; alis brunneo fuscis; caudâ subrotundatâ, latissimâ, aureo-purpureâ: rostro gracili, brevissimo, recto.Long.corporis 4 unc.;rostri 4 lin. This bird differs from all the known species by its small bill, whichis much shorter than the head; and by the rich golden-purple tailcomposed of very broad feathers.
After placing this species inTockus in Birds of Africa, the hornbill specialist Kemp went back to the monotypic genusTropicranus in HBW [6:496]. The latter is surely the best treatment for this very distinctive bird, as remarked by:Borrow N. & Demey R. 2001. "Birds of Western Africa". London: Helm.Note that Kemp similarly went back on his earlier decision to put allBycanistes hornbills inCeratogymna, another about-turn that is surely correct.
HYLACTESTARNII.Hyl. saturatè fusco brunneus ; fronte, dorso,abdomineque rufus, hoc fusco fasciato.Habitat in insulâ Chiloe et Portu Otway Sinu Peñas.
VI. Ord. Palmipeden4 Fam. LamellirosternMergusAnas; Querquedula;Anas, Tadorna, SouchetMarila. Eider, Clangula,Macreuse, Bernicla, An-ser, Cygnus
It is difficult to see a valid genus description in the abovetext. I cannot see the "type by tautonymy Anas tadorna Linnaeus"listed in the above text (as given by AOU 1957: p. 70).
The correct citation for Tadorna is either:
Tadorna Boie 1822 Tagebuch Reise Norwegen pp. 140, 351 (as inHBW1: 591)
or
Tadorna Fleming 1822 Philosophy of Zoology 2: 260 (as in PetersI, first Edition, and AOU 1931)
whichever has priority.
--------------------------------------------------
Espinosa de los Monteros A. Phylogenetic relationshipsamong the Trogons. 1998. Auk 115(4):937-954.
Glaucidium tucumanumSystematics
86. Motacilla tractrac, the African Whinchat. Thisspecies inhabits the Auteniquis country, perching onbushes. It is about the size of the European whinchat,but extremely wild and shy, rarely approaching the hauntsof men; sometimes it may be seen in the cattle-inclo-sures; but, if a man approach, flies off directly; then youmay discover that the rump is white, as are also the fourlateral tail-feathers, which it spreads much as it flies. Itis calledtrac-trac becuase it seems to express that syllablerepeatedly in its cry. In flapping its wing, and shakingits tail, it resembles the rest of the species. There isnothing striking in the plumage. It is cinereous grey onthe head and mantle, lighter on the lower part of theback, and entirely white on the tail-coverts; the frontof the neck and breast are lightsh grey; the rest of theunder part white. The twelve tail-feathers are blacktipped with white, and of equal length; the first oneach side are edged outwardly with white, the fourth andthird have it only toward the origin; the third, how-ever, rather more than the fourth; the two last, i.e. theoutermost of all, are white all along. The wing-feathersare brwon, edged, the first of them with light brown, thelast with white. The bill, legs and feet, are black; theeye, which is very large, nut-brown; a row of white fea-thers encircles the eyelids. The bird digs a hole for itsnest at the foot of a dwarf-tree or bush; the eggs are fourin number, greyish, with an infinite number of browndots. Though this species be very difficult of approach,M. Vaillant succeded in killing eight males and five fe-males. The latter were rather smaller, and the white over the vent not so extensive. In the young bird the featuresof the mantle are bordered with rufous.Vol. XVI No.1095
Spizella taverniSpecies or subspecies?
The debate here is sharply drawn, and strongly presented on bothsides.
The debate and its implications are fascinating. Theenthusiastic pursuit of the "species concept" is not over, despitenumerous announcements of its resolution. My own personal view isunimportant. I think the "phylogenetic species concept" has moreappearance of utility and testability than the "biological speciesconcept" but I think it suffers from a difficulty that will be notless problematic than that bedeviling the biological speciesconcept. Collection of enough data to resolve the full extent ofvariability of the population in question will be oftenimpracticle.
The idea of a species as a "narrative predictor" (which Ibelieve is due to Robert O'Hara) is a good one to keep in mind.Both BSC and PSC discussions ofS. taverni seem to me toinclude consideration of whatwill happen to the isolatedallopatric population. While I tend to generally favor theBiological Species Concept, I think the attempt to acheive"taxonomic balance" is impossible on practical grounds. I alsothink that definition of population limits and what degrees andcharacter of differences are sufficient to constitute a specieswill be a challenge for the Phylogenetic Species Concept. Some ofthe early characterizations of the Phylogenetic Species Conceptseemed to me poorly thought out, and the defense predominantly byad hominem attacks made it seem more religous thanscientific.
I leaveSpizella taverni in at full species rank whichwould appear to suggest I more swayed by the PSC than the BSCposition here. If this continues I am confidant it will be hard tokeep up with the number (doubling at least) of species that willsoon constitute the AVES.
The PSC approach does seem more appropriate and tractable foraddressing phylogeographic issues.
Most classical Latin nouns that end in the substantival suffix-cola [dweller] are masculine, but a few are feminine aswell as masculine [e.g.monticola,limicola (Glare1982)]. Thus, generic names that end in-cola and thathappen to be classical Latin words of common or variable gender, orhappen to be newly derived words, are not all mandatorily masculinecontrary to what Clancey (1992: 221), Dowsett & Dowsett-Lemaire(1993: 359), and Sibley & Monroe (1990: 592) have concluded;they are feminine if originally established in combination with afeminine adjectival name (Godfrey 1965: Auk 82: 273). For example,Arundinicola d'Orbigny, 1840, originally established incombination with the latinized adjectiveleucocephala, isfeminine and currently treated as such. Therefore:
Bambusicola Gould, 1863, was first established incombination with the noun phrasesonorivox, and is thusmasculine. [The name sonorivox, although ending in a feminine noun,is not an adjective; it is an invariable noun phrase likeruficauda]. And the correct combination isBambusicolathoracicus.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Todiramphus divinus Lesson 1827.Mem.Soc. d'hist.Nat. Paris, III, 1827, 422 {read Aug. 21Named from its: "joue un grand role dans l'ancienne theogonie deshabitans des archipels de la Societe. C'etait un des oiseauxfavoris du dieuOro."Type locality: BoraBora Id. Society Group. 2 Spns.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~