|1||Sequences - Author's notes|
|2||Notes on "Sibleyan Theory"|
|3||Negative search - Uncertain positioning|
|4||Specific species' names ("desinenze")|
|5||"Neornithes: nomina avium": purpose|
|7||Symbols and "Legenda"|
|-||Biological concept of Species|
|-||Philogenetic concept of Specie|
|-||How a Subspecies develops itself|
|9||Origin of the Species|
|10||How it is written|
|11||How a classification is instituted|
|*||The Neornithes consults|
1. SEQUENCES - Author's notes
Classifications are always object of "arguments".
There is a strong controversy about the attribution to certain groups, and about the interrelations between sequences and orders or families included in the Passeriformes' Order.
However, the greatest part of the groups of dealt Families is adopted by everybody, and maintains its identity even if the acquaintance on the mutual relations between several species of birds becomes deeper with much promising searches.
In the last years the attention of the ornithologists has addressed on the Dna-dna HYBRIDIZATION (not the same as desossiribonucleici acids) by Sibley C.G. & Ahlquist J.E. (Phylogeny and classification of Birds - To study in Molecular Evolution), based on chemical-physical parameters of behavior in solution of the DNA.One way that would have to concur to draw information of philogenetic type from the genetic material is that the tree of the life has been reconstructed with the ramification outline.
Some authors have (arbitrarily) modified the name of various Kinds.
Not being to us the approval but to the I.C.Z.N. I have left unchanged the existing terminology.
have replaced MEGALURUS,
MEGALURUS,TRICHOCICHLA which have replaced ORTYGOCICHLA
LICHENOSTOMUS which has been partially replaced by Kind MELIPHAGA, and others.For Kinds CYANOLOXIA, CYANOCOMPSA, GUIRACA and PORPHYROSPIZA, Peters' is PASSERINA
2. NOTES On The "Sibleyan Theory"
Sibley & Monroe, jr (Distribution and Taxonomy of Birds of the world) have in many ancient cases restored "taxa" (vs. other classificationary sequences used in the ornithologists' world) reviewing the original Kind assigned from the discoverer of the species or the Kind proposed from another student or upgraded a Subgenus to a Kind.Example:
PSAROCOLIS in OCYALUS (ancient CASSICUS)
Restoring ancient "taxon" and the Kinds in
the aforesaid way, the ordering of the sort, in the comparisons of the
conventional sequence, assumes an "innovative aspect".
With the "proposal" new sequence, derived from the Dna-dna HYBRIDIZATION, has been brought marginal modifications and substantial to what the International Code of Zoologic Nomenclature states.
Reviewed by Alberto Masi.
In my opinions, I share in part the marginal
modifications, convinced that whichever modification must (before being
put into effect) be subordinate to the approval of the I.C.Z.N. -.
These modifications (with the new sequence, too), having not found some any positive reply, are not put into the taxonomic state.
Only the time (and other, deeper searches) will tell us if the theory adopted from the Sibley & Ahlquist could be thought a "new" point of departure in order to pursue the acquaintance.
Personally I praise Professor Sibley and others
for having brought again to attention the drowsy classificationary interest
(because in the ornithological world there are groups favorable to the
which begin to delineate themselves with the adoption of the "new classification")
and for having rendered various slight knowledge of the Taxonomy to the
capacity of all in a simple and concise way.
The witnesses recall the most recent tassonomic observations (considering the date of press) beyond personal judgments of eminent scientists.
3. NEGATIVE SEARCH - Uncertain positioning
If searching a Subspecie must be had the surprise to find the nominative case not correctly found out, is advised to try again from the "SEARCH: Species "(or vice-versa).
It's not to exclude that some authors consider some Subspecies as Species: it depends on the criterion and the adopted sequence.Example:Muscicapa williamsoni ( BirdsofSouth-East Asia pag.380) for author ( King & Dickinson) is species.
In the NEORNITHES subspecies is just
one, dauurica Muscicapa williamsoni (12#:Peters, Xi-319) .The
authors make their point in banning the species which use the Latin binomial...
the trinomial are used formally, to demonstrate that in their country species
It is unavoidable and under a sure aspect the writing shape ( ) is from considering "lawful illicit" an "allowed shape".Just to give an example, in Italy the Merlon (that is not an endemic specie) would have been named "Turdus merula merula" (and for precision, with the added one of Linnaeus, 1758).
If therefore he was the reader, he would immediately think to a Subspecies, while the actual bird wants
itself to be indicated on the territory (that is, it's a subspecie. Species whose "corologic category" corresponds to its Paleartic-Oriental distribution)
|This indicates how much the taxonomic examination
(or the search of the same one from a database) can
become complex when it's done incorrectly and without a minimum of acquaintance of the systematic status.
You should remember that the SPECIES assumes the name just in function of the "taxon" of its belongings.
Ficedula albicollis semitorquata (Peters, Xi-338) subspecies, which is present also in the NEORNITHES, is brought back to Species by the Sibley (semitorquata Ficedula) as an interpretation of Voous's suggestion (1977: Distribution and Taxonomy of Birds of the World, page 527).
Always as an example, to page 343 of the Peters,
vol.XI, the famous one at the bottom of the page evidences as ssp.
the Ficedula solitaris submonilinger. This from various authors it is considered
ssp. ascribed to other Species (it is read 'monileger').
According to the famous one in Sibley, page 527 (12#:top), "submonilinger" being Species to himself could be considered.
Arsesinsularis (Meyer, 1874) is brought back from the Sibley, page 495 (top) as a "Species" favouring the personal comment of R.Schodde. In the Peters, Xi-514 (and in the NEORNITHES: nomina avium) it is an "ascribed subspecies" to the species Arsestelescophalmus (Garnot, 1827).
Rhipiduraorissae (Ripley, 1955) was considered
as a "Species".
Since 1964, you see famous Peters, Xii-533 subspecies: Rhipidura albicollis orissae - Ripley, 1955. In the NEORNITHES: nomina avium, it is Ssp.
Sittanagaensis - Godwin-Austin, 1874 is in
the Neornithes (: Peters, Xii-131) that in the Sibley (page 555) it
Other authors consider it as a Ssp of europaea Sitta - Linnaeus, 1758.
Chlorospingusta carcunae - Griscom, 1924 brought
back like Sp from the Sibley and the Neornithes:
nomina avium, following the Wetmore.
The same one is considered [flavigularis] ssp. from Hellmayr (12#:1936) and [ophthalmicus] ssp. from the Zimmer (12#:1947).
The same one is worth for some Kinds, like
as an example arcaei BUTHRAUPIS, "melanochalmys", "rothschildi", "edwardsi"
and "aureocincta" tha some authors assign to kind BANGSIA. In the same
way, kind HALCYON (monachus) brought back in part like ACTENOIDES (monachus)
while in the NEORNITHES: nomina avium figures as Halcyon monacha (see 3,2
- grammatical Kind).
| The classification for excellence does
not exist so far.
Classifications match their authors' point of view.
|It shouldn't be considered as an error but just as the response of the NEORNITHES: nomina avium to the dispositions dictated from the ICZN.|
Some authors, in order to give an example, bring back in the writing the species "erythropleura" (Zosterops) using the female one.
The indication corresponds to "erythropleurus" name to the male one. In fact, I.C.Z.N [ 1985: 549, art. 30(a)(ii)] has deliberated that all the final names in -ops; must be conjugated to the male one.
Other examples, "hypoxanthus" (Neodrepanis) at the male one is wrong.
The correct term is "hypoxantha" at the feminine
one. Or "scutatus" (Synallaxis) male, wrong and "scutata" to the feminine
Pluvialis obscurus and not "obscura". Fulicaria Phalaropus and not "fulicarius".
The search becomes emblematic when some authors
"use" a not conventional Kind.
For this reason it's advisable to use the "option kind" in the Search options.
|In this option also the wrong "and" not conventional "Kinds" are brought back.|
LICHENOSTOMUS flavus (Gould, 1843) used from the Sibley [pag.431] in place of "corrected" MELIPHAGA flava (Gould, 1843) of the Peters, 12#:XII pag.373.
Like already recommended from the Tawny Lanza (12#:1982 Dictionary of the Animal Reign), I turn I invite it automatically not to conclude to find in front of a mistake in presence of allies by marriage mismatchings between the kind of a name and that one of one its species in how much the specific name always does not correspond to an adjective (in the which case prevails that its kind - in literal sense - it comes of the sort come to an agreement with that one - in systematic sense to which it refers), but also to one affixing.
not always the specific denomination "brevicauda" has been applied which nominative feminine singular of the adjective "brevicaudus", - to, - um, instead of the used corrected one "brevicaudatus" but like affixing (= with the short tail) and therefore undeclinable.
It's to remember also that the kind of a scientific generic name doesn't always match that of the correspondent Italian name: e.g. "Ibis", scientific kind, is female; the correspondent "Ibi" (or "Ibis") in Italian, is male.
The 'wrong' name can (in the limits of the possible wrong names) be used as a search key in order to retrieve the correct one.
5. "NEORNITHES: nomina avium ": PURPOSE
It is an instrument of search of our "computer science" age: a database with a simple, built-in specific program that allows to explore a huge archive of data about the birds, with multiple search keys.
This archive has been built from famous lists like "the Peters", which can be considered "the list of the lists" for its great, universal, recognized and acquired merit. That is the more used list in the world, and a reference for every indexing or sequence of that recorded data.
Even if it's considered the more reliable list,
the real last one will maybe never exist.
|The NEORNITHES wants to be a support for people who don't have the possibility to consult a huge, specialized library, because it offers fast and exhaustive searches of the basic data of the formal taxonomic hierarchy.|
Because it also contemplates a wide range of
hard to find information "immense little easy-to-find news range",
where it is necessary, one advises to the completion of the data through
the specific Field Guides or of the witnesses cited in bibliography.
|For this reason, the NEORNITHES allows the user to add new data 'ex-novo' and to modify the already existing.|
In order to achieve that aim, we recommend the maximum attention in order not to delete the already stored data.
"Author" is the term used to indicate the author of a scientific name, that is the person who first published the description of one species.
The LATIN NAME is constructed following the international rules for the zoologic nomenclature (*) and follows the one suggested by James Lee Peters (and followers) in Check-list of Birds of the World, 1931 - 1962.
(*) Art. 11, International Tails of Zoological Nomenclatures: "the scientific name of animals must be expressed in Latin or must be Latinized, or must be constructed so as you think it deals to you as Latin words."
When an erroneous written form has been found, it has in some cases been corrected following the I.C.Z.N. directives; this last one has been left in the database, you can find it in the Notes field.
The "frequently used erroneous written form" approached by the traditional school, has been treated by Neornithes as "famous of dismissal" respect to the right term.
The discussed written form and the proposed
one are reported just as "acquaintance" because they're lacking in scientific
worth. The given English terminology is the one which has been adopted
from the Committee of the International Ornithological Congress of
|The ITALIAN NOMENCLATURE, beyond to the names of the already existing birds and consolidated to you, pertaining to the ornithological lexical of common use, reruns "ex novo" to the terminology taken from the translation of the Latin name with the comparison and the free translation from the English names.|
For the ENDEMIC SPECIES it would have been opportune to use the local name. This, but some cases (e.g. the Drepanididi of the Archipelago of the Hawaii isles that unusually have maintained to the given name they originally given by the NATO) has become not feasible for the objective impossibility of application to the Italian language beyond that for the difficulty in it pronounces and in the writing.
They are resorted to the transliteration of the name of the Family and of the sort meaning "to of the sort frame" with the transliteration of the name of the Family the species and with the transliteration of the name, " the peculiarity" of the bird.
I have used also terms deriving from the Aristhothelic Classicism which became necessary for the determination of particular groups of tropical birds, however it indicates to you in the ornithological lexical of our Country.
e.g. "Parula-direction", which stands for BASILEUTERUS
Approximately the terms (improper) used from people fond of ornithology, they have been considers only the assimilable names you that for tradition make part integrating of the popular ornithological nomenclature and therefore to the "names alternated to you".
The NAMES REPLACED from the "Hand-list of the generate species of birds" of Sharpe R.B. (voll. I-V et Index, 1899-1909) and Omonym Names or Synonyms (NOMEN OBLITUM, NOMEN NUDUM) and the INVALIDATED NAMES and SUPPRESSED from I.C.Z.N. names, and some names recalled from the "official literature" as pertaining to HYBRIDS) find reply in the NOTES field.
In some cases I have thought right to conserve without "alteration" the scientific name, the endemic name (*), those "endiadi" and of onomathopeic origin.
(*) like for some Kinds "formicarie" and others
The words in the written form are brought back in correct way and not modified (e.g.: forehead white woman and "frontebianca") not preferring the literal construction of the name with adapted phonetic and the conservation of the scientific sense (*)
Where it has been possible I have avoided to cite the name of the bird with the name of the author or of the person to which the species came dedicated, giving to priority to the morphologic character or the specific name (example: Urosticte benjamini (Bourcier, 1851) = Colibri from the tip white woman and Benjamin's Colibri [Leadbeater is not read ]. Contrary case: Phylloscopus subviridis (Brooks, 1872).
(*) For some names I have preferred to write the term separatedfrom an hyphen to evidence qualifying of the bird.
(alimentary style of life, habits), e.g.:"spider-eaters" ("Mangiaragni") or "Flowerpecker" ("Beccafiori") or "Cincia-averla" and Cincia, not the awful "Cinciaverla".
(* *) Beccogrosso is the term (written for entire) used for some species ascribed to the kind PHEUCTICUS = Cardinale-beccogrosso.
In order to adapt the Italian nomenclature
to that of the European Countries, where it is possible, we have just a
little used a recently introduced term, EURASIAN, even if it's unusual
for the Italian ornithology.
|The adaptation of the literally translate
English terms, must be considered EXTENSION to the future similarity of
the nomenclature hoping that the adoption of just obly one Check-List
for the Countries interested from the Western Paleartic, conforming the
That although is from holding in consideration that the identification of some groups with the English name badly is suited to the Italian nomenclature; therefore one will be noticed in some cases substantial difference.
The GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION takes advantage of one acronym put in front to the relative detailed list. Such acronym, brought back in the Biogeographical Regions for the examination, wants to make to visualize with immediacy the distribution * of the taken NOMINAL SPECIES in examination.
Moreover, the main interested Countries are transcribed for extend, distances to you from hyphens one or two, with the meant one "from... to", for the comprehensible use of less space.
The distribution area of the indicated SUBSPECIES
is also under the above described criterion.
|The eventual visualized asterisk to flank of a Country (like as an example: Paraguay * or n.Peru *) wants to indicate one VARYING or mentioned in scientific banns but not taken LOCAL Ssp in consideration in the actions of the I.C.Z.N.|
The NEORNITHES, just as information, fills for extended all data recalled to you in the NOTES field with the locale terminology * varying? (also: *varying?)
We can say without fear to exaggerate that not there is on the earth some Region, for how much small, than is not inhabited or at least flown over periodically from the birds, with the only exception of the inner part of the Arctic Continent.
The adopted SEQUENCE is that classic (classification is of "the formal" type), called from the students "Basel Sequence" (* * )
(*). It traces the sequence of the Families of Ernst Mayr, modern father of the systematic one, after that one proposed from Alexander Wetmore (and followers)to the job of the Peters.
(* *) from the name of the city of Basel where in the 1954 the XI International Ornithological Congress has been carried out. Also known as "Traditional Sequence".
On the whole i have taken advantage of Successory Check-lists of "BIRDS OF THE WORLD" by James Lee Peters (1931-1962).
For a general control of the species, of the text of Edward S. Gruson (assisted from Richard A. Forster). To CHECKLIST OF THE BIRDS OF THE WORLD, 1976, Collins Sons & Co., Ltd - London and to WORLD CHECKLIST OF BIRDS by Burt L.Monroe Jr & Charles Gald Sibley, 1993, Yale University Press, New Haven & London.
For checking the names alternated to those
in the English Language, of the text by Walter Lodge: Birds Alternative
Names - To World Checklist, 1991, Blandford, London and of the text by
Graham Pizzey; to Field Guides to Birds of Australia, 1985, Collins, Sidney.
|The NOTES are relative to the given Kind
in the taxonomy in biochemistry sequence derived from the
technique of molecular hybridization Dna-dna by C.G.Sibley and J.E.Ahlquist (1988, 1990).
E.g.: * CYORNIS *.
Like all the authors who deal with Classification,
the Sibley also re-proposes things already contemplated by Peters (e.g.
GUADALCANARIA and other Kinds).
The asterisk (*) at the beginning of the NOTES field evidences that for the examined species (and for the subspecies, therefore) there is a "famous one" indicated. This is always found in the schedule, at the beginning of that specie (as "former name" or "replaced name").