CommentaryMicrospiziasParabuteorev2a

LINK to draft research paper, "Commentary on the genus names Microspizias and Parabuteo"

https://sites.google.com/site/mmslouisg/commentarymicrospiziasparabuteorev2a

Commentary on the genus names Microspizias and Parabuteo. 

by Mathew Louis 

SUMMARY    The genus Microspizias was proposed for species-level taxa to rectify the matter of assignment of them as being separate from the genus Accipiter. The authors explained that only through Kaup's 1845 reference to the genus name Hieraspiza can typification of the latter be allowed, which they designated to Falco virgatus Temminck. Microspizias was proposed with an additional appendix listing the generic synonyms of Accipiter, but these included omissions. One of them, Teraspiza Kaup, has had a separate treatment in the literature from Hieraspiza. I have interpreted the nomenclatural rules to allow for an assignment of availability to Teraspiza, due to it being neither an emendation nor a permanent, incorrect subsequent spelling. Also treated is the correct attribution of dates of two important works relating to the typification of this name. However Teraspiza was proposed as an incorrect subsequent spelling of Hieraspiza, Newton (1868) was the first author to give it availability. Sharpe in Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum was published later than Ridgway in History of the Birds of North America. Wetmore’s evaluation of Ridgway allows for a more precise and earlier date of publication for said work. Ridgway's typification of Teraspiza to Falco tinus [=Falco superciliosus] has priority, and it is explained that Microspizias is a junior synonym. A difficulty relating to the genus name Parabuteo is given exposition and discussed, with an explanation as to why its priority over the genus name Erythrocnema should be retained. 

The genus name Microspizias Sangster et al. (2021) was proposed for taxa which had been previously noted to be distinct from Accipiter Brisson, 1760 (Olson 2006; Mindell et al. 2018). Recent studies on the phylogenetic relationships of these particular taxa show them to not be closely related to Accipiter (Mindell et al. 2018).

Sangster et al. designated Falco superciliosus Linnaeus, 1766 as the type of Microspizias. The new name Microspizias was created to address a nomenclatural problem relating to another name associated with these taxa, Hieraspiza Kaup, 1845. Kaup (1844), in first publishing Hieraspiza, had employed wording which did not allow for it to be a concept other than a nomen nudum With Hieraspiza again employed (Kaup 1845), the names Falco virgatus Temminck, 1822 and Falco Dussumieri Temminck, 1824 were included in it. Sangster et al. (2021) typified Hieraspiza to Falco virgatus, though earlier authors had designated this species to Kaup (1844). For all other species names associated with Hieraspiza other than the two cited above, typification is not permissible per Article 67.2 of the Code (ICZN 1999). This exclusion likewise applies to the name Falco superciliosus Linnaeus, 1766 (=Falco tinus Latham, 1790). 

In Sangster et al. there is a synonymy of Accipiter (Appendix 1). My attention was drawn to outstanding names not cited therein, including Teraspiza Kaup (1867) .

Discussion: the name Teraspiza 

There are two areas of discussion; the first is the assignment of category of the name Teraspiza. Several names are associated with Hieraspiza Kaup (1845); those originally introduced by Kaup will be addressed in chronological sequence.

•Hieraspiza Kaup, 1845. Including Falco virgatus Temminck, 1822; Falco Dussumieri Temminck, 1824.

•Hieraspizia Kaup in Jardine, 1850. Including Falco virgatus; Falco minullus Daudin, 1800; Falco tinus Latham, 1790.

•Jeraspizia Kaup, 1851. Including Falco virgatus; Falco minullus; Falco tinus.

•Teraspiza Kaup, 1867. Including Falco virgatus; Nisus [virgatus] rhodogaster Schlegel, 1862; Falco minullus; Falco tinus.

Hieraspizia can readily be construed as an incorrect subsequent spelling in Jardine's publication. The name Jeraspizia is also an incorrect subsequent spelling because its meaning is essentially unchanged. The ancient Greek ἱέρᾱξ (hierax) and σπιζιας (spizias) means “hawk,” and σπίζα (spiza) means “finch” (Woodhouse 1910).

The name Teraspiza is remarkable becauase it invokes a distinct meaning (τέρᾰς (teras, “portentous marvel”) and σπίζα (spiza, “finch”) as a nominal concept separate from Hieraspiza (Woodhouse 1910).

It is not an emendation because there is no evidence of "intentional change in the original spelling" (ICZN 1999; Art. 33.2). Further, the Code (Art. 67.8) requires expression, that an author must make it clear that a term is being emended from a previous name. This was not evident in Kaup (Kaup 1850; 1851; 1867); there are no explicit references in the later works to the earlier. In his writings, Kaup was ambiguous in this respect and did not characterize his names in such a manner. Kaup (1850) employed “Hiëraspiza Kp.” as a subgenus of Accipiter. Kaup (1851) used “Jeraspizia, Kaup” as a subgenus of Nisus Lacépède, 1799. These designations were presented as his way of superseding his own treatments of the names in question, without recourse to him addressing the respective spellings of those earlier names. The Code also requires (Art. 32.2, 32.5) "clear evidence of an inadvertent error" and that "incorrect transliteration or latinization, or use of an inappropriate connecting vowel, are not to be considered inadvertent errors.” If Kaup had intended Teraspiza to be “Jeraspiza,” then the error in usage or transcription allowed for incorrect latinization, one which begot a separate nominal concept.

This discussion also draws attention to some unusual points. Some of Kaup's publications in English (Kaup 1849; 1850) refer to the author as "T. T. Kaup," a lapse on the transcription of his initials. All of these errors or lapses are derived from a single source, Jardine's Contributions to Ornithology, which Kaup had translated himself. Kaup (1867) was translated by James Murie, Prosector to the Society. Due to an interpretation of handwritten, German Fraktur script by either Jardine or later by Murie, there is plausibility to assume (in the absence of an actual, extant manuscript), that, in each of those cases, the "J" was exchanged for "T."

With the publication of Teraspiza, Kaup made reference to “Nisus (Teraspiza) virgatus, Kp. Falc. p. 172,” which is unusual as it suggests that the name Teraspiza had a prior history in the literature. It does not (Kaup 1847); it had been placed with Nisus (Hieraspiza). This does not mean that an error was perpetuated, but, rather, that he may have been retroactively substituting Hieraspiza with Teraspiza. This and the previous point both give credence that Teraspiza, as it was introduced, was presented as an incorrect subsequent spelling. This conforms to the Code's definition of the term in Article 33.3.

Designating a permanent disposition of Teraspiza as an incorrect subsequent spelling, per the rules of the Code, fails to draw attention to the fact that it has a subsequent history of being treated separately as an available name. This is not to misconstrue a correlation to the various references of Teraspiza where it has been given as a valid name. (Hieraspizia Kaup (1850) and Jeraspizia Kaup (1851) do not, to my knowledge, have a history of such treatment).

Newton (1868) recognized that "Teraspiza and Erythrospiza (nec Erythrospiza Bp. 1830!) appear to be new." Newton wrote: "The former is made to contain Falco virgatus, Reinw. [sic], Nisus rhodogaster, Schl., F. minullus, Daud., and F. tinus, Lath.;.." Various authors gave Teraspiza separate treatment or disposition from Hieraspiza (Sharpe 1874; Ramsay 1876; Reichenow 1901; Waterhouse & Sharp 1902; Dubois 1904; Scott & Sharpe 1912; Neave 1939; Neave 1940). In these instances it was not designated as being either an incorrect subsequent spelling nor an emendation; it appeared separately from Hieraspiza and also as a synonym of genus group names such as Accipiter. As an example, Neave (1939; 1940), employed "pro" to designate references of one entry as being correlative to that of a separate entry. Teraspiza, in said work, is not assigned such a designation to Hieraspiza. However, the name Teraspizias Blyth, 1875, the next entry therein, is assigned to the former name.

In being comprehensive, references to Teraspiza as being either an emendation (Friedmann 1950) or a subsequent spelling (Mathews 1915; Schulze et al. 1938) of Hieraspiza have been presented.

The Code provides for the preservation of names once made available, irrespective of how they were introduced and if there were ever deemed unavailable. Art. 10.6 stipulates that a name "once available remains so irrespective of its invalidity as a junior synonym, a junior homonym, an unjustified emendation, an unnecessary substitute name [emphasis mine], or a suppressed name,..." The availability of Teraspiza was conferred to it shortly after its original publication, in Newton (1868), who by describing it as '"new"' in the Record of Zoological Literature, as noted above, allowed for a separate and unique designation, apart from any previous names (i.e., Hieraspiza). This availability of Teraspiza shows that it conforms to Articles 11--20 of the Code. In 1868 The Record of Zoological Literature was in its formative period and did not explicitly disclaim the scientific names employed therein (Art. 8.2). Teraspiza Newton, 1868 was proposed as valid (Art. 11.5).

From the above discussion, Teraspiza is treated here as an available genus group name. I base this argument on the Code’s definition of “emendation” being inapplicable to it and also to the defintion of “incorrect subsequent spelling” being inapplicable to it as it has a history of availability, despite the evident fact that it was first published as an incorrect subsequent spelling.

Discussion: The assignment of dates to the works of Ridgway and Sharpe

The genus name Teraspiza does not have the same typification as does Hieraspiza. The second part of the discussion is the assignment of date and the question of type species designation of Teraspiza. Sharpe (1874) designated the type of Teraspiza as Falco virgatus. The Preface of Sharpe's work, the first volume of the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, has a publication date of 1 June 1874, and Sherborn (1934) gives 27 June 1874 as the date of publication of the whole volume. There is no further information as to the possibility of Sharpe appearing before said date, though Ridgway (1876) gives July.

Sharpe may be inferred as being the first to typify Teraspiza. A separate publication which appeared in the same year challenges this, though the date of publication assigned to this work has been confused. Ridgway in Baird et al. (1874), in the third volume of History of North American Birds, was believed to have been published as late as 1875 on account of the title page in some printings showing said date (Colby and Williams 1926). Most authors credit Ridgway (1874) as being published in the earlier year, though some (Coues 1878; Zimmer 1926) claim that it was published “about December.”

Old information has been resuscitated to claim with confidence that Ridgway (1874) was in publication prior to Sharpe. Ridgway (1876) later asserts that certain names (i.e., Parabuteo Ridgway) were also introduced or published in this work in January 1874, and other sources (AOU 1886; 1895; Bendire 1892, Hellmayr and Conover 1949; Friedmann 1950) also include references to the earlier month. Ridgway’s is the first reference to a more specific month and date of publication, two years before Coues (1878). Thus, the example of the genus name Parabuteo underscores the assertion that Ridgway appeared before Sharpe because, in the latter work, a separate genus name had been introduced for the same species concept of which this example is given; that name is Erythrocnema Sharpe, a junior synonym (Sharpe 1874: 84).

The Code (ICZN 1999; Art. 21.3) stipulates that the date of publication is the date in which it is demonstrated to be in existence. In the case of Ridgway that would be no later than 31 March 1874. Spencer Fullerton Baird (Baird et al. 1874) wrote in his Preface to the first volume, dated 8 January 1874, that the section on Raptores had already been completed by Ridgway; therein is also a direct reference to the Glossary on page 535 of the third volume. Baird also refers to the Explanation of Terms on page 526 of the same. These points suggest that the entire work had been in print at once. Banks and Browning (1979: 196) had made an effort to examine certain documents from the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, relating to the publication of the first two volumes, the date of which they fix to 14 February 1874. There is no more precise information from them for the last volume, and Dickinson et al. (2011: 72) did not remedy this. However, the information is not actually wanting because Wetmore (1931: 70) had given March, 1874 as its month of publication, derived from Ridgway's collections and materials as they were known at the time. I will fix the date of publication of Ridgway (1874) as the last day of that particular month as that is required by the provision of the Code, Art. 21.3.1. This is the date that it was obtainable (Art. 8.1.2).

The importance of Ridgway (1874) antedating Sharpe is necessary because Ridgway assigned the type species of Teraspiza to Falco tinus (=Falco superciliosus). (Ridgway also assigned said species to Hieraspiza Kaup, 1844 and to Jeraspiza [sic] Kaup, 1851.) Given also that Teraspiza is here treated as an available name and a separate genus, Ridgway's treatment also has priority over Microspizias (Sangster et al. 2021).

The synonymy of Ridgway (1874: 220), the text of which is presented here, might suggest that he intended for typification of Falco tinus to apply only to Hieraspiza Kaup (1844). The availability of Teraspiza per the rules of the Code allows for recognition of it as a separate genus group concept (see above). Thus, Ridgway, being the first to do so, typified Teraspiza, and he typified it to Falco tinus. The Code is without a provision which would prohibit typification to a name that is presented this way. Though the Code does not permit type designation to be made in a manner that is “ambiguous or conditional” (Art. 67.5.3), Ridgway’s use of “Type, Falco tinus, Latham” in making such a designation was explicit due to his use of the parentheses around the type designation and reference to Latham.

Art. 67.7 permits Ridgway to use "Kaup, 1867" instead of "Newton, 1868." This article states: "If, in fixing the type species for a nominal genus or subgenus, an author wrongly attributes the name of the type species, or of the genus or subgenus, to an author or date other than that denoting its first establishment [emphasis mine], or cites wrongly the first express inclusion of nominal species in that genus or subgenus, he or she is nevertheless to be considered, if the nominal species was otherwise eligible, to have validly fixed the type species."

Conclusion

Microspizias Sangster et al., 2021 should be treated as a junior generic synonym of Teraspiza Newton, 1868 because they both have the same type species; Teraspiza is a feminine name. (Kaup (1867) treated the senior synonym as a name that can now be deemed unavailable.) A reversal of precedence would not now be allowed under the rules of Art. 23.9 of the Code because the junior synonym is a name which has only been in the published literature less than three years and has been insufficiently used as a valid name (Art. 23.9.1.2). Of equal importance, reversal of precedence would need to consider the possibility of a valid reference to the senior synonym that was published after 1899. Hartlaub (1899) is the most recent reference which I have been able to trace. Any possible effort by the ICZN to suppress the name Teraspiza, either as it was given in Kaup (1867) or in Newton (1868), would actually reinforce its availability, and a recourse to such a measure is not encouraged.

Priority of the genus name Parabuteo

To infer that Sharpe (1874) does have priority over Ridgway (1874), as is suggested by authors such as Coues (1878) and Zimmer (1926), presents a conundrum. It would mean that Erythrocnema Sharpe has priority as a senior synonym of Parabuteo Ridgway, however the latter has been in long standing. There has not been any measure taken by the ICZN to conserve or suppress either names. To invoke the Code (ICZN, 1999), Art. 23.9, on the reversal of precedence presents a problem because that article requires that both of its given conditions be met (Art. 23.9.1), that the senior synonym or homonym has not been used as a valid name after 1899 (Art. 23.9.1.1) and that, secondly, the junior name must have been published within certain chronological parameters in a minimum number of publications, etc. The second provision has been met, with Parabuteo being frequently cited. However, there is at least one reference, which was published 19 February 1900 (Salvadori and Festa 1900), which validly employs Erythrocnema unicincta (Temminck, 1824) as entry 497 in a list of birds collected in Ecuador under the direction of Enrico Festa. Thus, this first condition has not been met; Erythrocnema is not a nomen oblitum, nor is Parabuteo a nomen protectum. However, since I stress the priority of Parabuteo, I do not propose recourse to Art. 23.9.3, as this would become a special case and one which would require a ruling by the ICZN.

Acknowledgements

I wish to acknowledge the following persons:

Francisco Welter-Schultes, ICZN and the Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, for answering queries and providing helpful feedback.

References:

AOU [American Ornithologists' Union] 1886. The Code of Nomenclature and Check-List of North American Birds: Adopted by the American Ornithologists' Union. Being the Report of the Committee of the Union on Classification and Nomenclature. American Ornithologists' Union, New York. 

AOU [American Ornithologists' Union] 1895. Check-List of North American Birds: Prepared by a Committee of the American Ornithologists' Union. Second and Revised Edition. American Ornithologists' Union, New York.

Baird S.F., Brewer, T.M. & Ridgway, R. 1874. A History of North American Birds. Land Birds. Little, Brown and Company, Boston. 1: 1-596. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.12713

Banks, R.C. & Browning, M.R. 1979. Correct Citations for some North American Bird Taxa. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 92: 195-203. https://dn790003.ca.archive.org/0/items/biostor-81270/biostor-81270.pdf  Accessed 13 December 2023.

Bendire, C. 1892. Life Histories of North American Birds, with Special Reference to their Breeding Habits and Eggs, with Twelve Lithographic Plates. United States National Museum; Smithsonian Institution, Washington. (Special Bulletin No. 1).

Colby, F.M. & Williams, T. 1926. The New International Encyclopaedia. Second Edition. Dodd, Mead, & Co., New York.

Coues, E. 1878. Birds of the Colorado Valley. A Repository of Scientific and Popular Information concerning North American Ornithology. Bibliographical Appendix. Department of the Interior. United States Geological Survey of the Territories 1: 566-807.

Dickinson, E.C., Overstreet, L.K., Dowsett, R.J. & Bruce, M.D. 2011. Priority! The Dating of Scientific Names in Ornithology: a Directory to the literature and its reviewers. Aves Press, Northampton, U.K.

Dubois, A. 1904. Synopsis Avium. Nouveau Manual d'Ornithologie. H. Lamertin, Brussels. 2:731-1339. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.13384

Friedmann, H. 1950. The Birds of North and Middle America. Bulletin of the United States National Museum. 50(11): 1–793.

Gray, G.R. 1855. Catalogue of the Genera and Subgenera of Birds contained in the British Museum. Trustees of the British Museum, London.  https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.17986

Gray, G.R. 1869. Hand-list of Genera and Species of Birds, Distinguishing those Contained in the British Museum. Trustees of the British Museum, London. 1: 1-404.  https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.54948

Hartlaub, G. 1899. Zwei Beiträge zur Ornithologie Asiens. Ein Beitrag zur Avifauna der Insel Mindoro. Abhandlungen herausgegeben vom Naturwissenschaftlichen Verein zu Bremen; 16: 245-273.

Hellmayr C.E. & Conover, B. 1949. Catalogue of birds of the Americas and the adjacent islands in the Field Museum of Natural History including all species and subspecies known to occur in North America, Mexico, Central America, South America, the West Indies, and islands of the Caribbean Sea, the Galapagos Archipelago, and other islands which may be included on account of their faunal affinities. No. 4. Cathartidae, Accipitridae, Pandionidae, Falconidae. Publications of the Field Museum of Natural History (Zoology Series). 13: 1–358.

ICZN [International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature]. 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Fourth edition. The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London.

Kaup, J.J. 1844. Classification der Säugethiere und Vögel. C. W. Leske, Darmstadt.  https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.51492

Kaup, J.J. 1845. Ueber Falken, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der in Museum der Senckenbergischen naturforschenden Gesellschaft aufgestellten Arten. Museum Senckenbergianum 3: 229–262.

Kaup, J.J. 1847. Monographien der Genera der Falconidae. Dritte Monographie. Isis von Oken, 1847: 161–212. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/260091#page/54/mode/2up 

Kaup, J.J. 1849. Monograph of the Falconidae, systematically arranged by Dr. T. T. Kaup [sic]. In: Jardine, W., Contributions to Ornithology for 1849.

Kaup, J.J. 1850. Monograph of the Falconidae, systematically arranged by Dr. T. T. Kaup [sic]. In: Jardine, W., Contributions to Ornithology for 1850: 51-72.

Kaup, J.J. 1851. Corrigirte uebersicht der Falconidae. Archiv für Naturgeschichte, 1850: 29-41. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/6958135 

Kaup, J.J. 1867. On the Nisi and Astures of the Indian Archipelago and of New Holland. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1867: 168-179.

Mathews, G.M. 1915. The Birds of Australia. Volume 5. Witherby & Company, London.

Mindell, D.P., Fuchs, J. & Johnson, J.A. 2018. Phylogeny, taxonomy, and geographic diversity of diurnal raptors: Falconiformes, Accipitriformes, and Cathartiformes. In: Sarasola, J.H., Grande, J., & Negro, J. (Eds.); Birds of Prey. Springer, Cham, 3–32.

Neave, S. A. (ed.). 1939. Nomenclator Zoologicus. A list of the names of genera and subgenera in zoology from the tenth edition of Linnaeus 1758 to the end of 1935. Volume 2. London: The Zoological Society of London.

Neave, S. A. (ed.). 1940. Nomenclator Zoologicus. A list of the names of genera and subgenera in zoology from the tenth edition of Linnaeus 1758 to the end of 1935. Volume 4. London: The Zoological Society of London.

Newton, A. 1868. Aves. In: Gunther, A. (Ed.), The Record of Zoological Literature; 1867. John Van Voorst, London. 4: 43-125.

Olson, S.L. 2006. Reflections on the systematics of Accipiter and the genus for Falco superciliosus Linnaeus. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. 126: 69–70.

Ramsay, E.P. 1876. Catalogue of the Australian Birds in the Australian Museum, at Sydney, N.S.W. Part I: Accipitres. Order of the Minister of Justice and Public Instruction, Sydney.

Reichenow, A. 1901. Die Vögel Afrikas. Erster band. J. Neumann, Neudamm.

Ridgway, R. 1874. Raptores. In: Baird, S.F., Brewer, T.M., & Ridgway, R.; A History of North American Birds. Land Birds. Little, Brown and Company, Boston. 3: 1-560.  https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.7493 

Ridgway, R. 1876. Studies of the American Falconidae. Bulletin of the United States Geological and Geographical Survey of the Territories. 2: 91--182.

Salvadori, T. & Festa, E. 1900. Viaggio del Dr. Enrico Festa nell'Ecuador. Bollettino dei musei di zoologia ed anatomia comparata della R. Università di Torino. Volume 15. 368:30.  https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/43398#page/42/mode/1up Accessed 11 December 2023.

Sangster, G., Kirwan, G.M., Fuchs, J., Dickinson, E.C., Elliott, A. & Gregory, S.M. 2021. A new genus for the tiny hawk Accipiter superciliosus and semicollared hawk A. collaris (Aves: Accipitridae), with comments on the generic name for the crested goshawk A. trivirgatus and Sulawesi goshawk A. griseiceps. Vertebrate Zoology 71: 419-424.  https://doi.org/10.3897/vz.71.e67501

Schulze, F.E., Kükenthal, W. & Heider, K. 1938. Nomenclatur Animalium, Generum et Subgenerum. Prussian Academy of Sciences, Berlin. 5: 3413.

Scott, W.E.B. & Sharpe, R.B. 1912. Reports of the Princeton University Expeditions to Patagonia. Volume II. Ornithology Part IV. Anatidae--Tytonidae. 505--718. Princeton University, New Jersey 

Sharpe, R.B. 1874. Catalogue of the Accipitres or Birds of Prey in the Collection of the British Museum. Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. Trustees of the British Museum, London. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.8233

Sherborn, C.D. 1934. Dates of Publication of Catalogues of Natural History. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 10: 308-312.

Waterhouse, C. O. & Sharp, D. 1902. Index Zoologicus. An alphabetical list of names of genera and subgenera proposed for use in zoology as recorded in the "Zoological Record" 1880--1900 together with other names not included in the "Nomenclator Zoologicus" of S. H. Scudder. London: Zoological Society of London.

Wetmore, A. 1931. Biographical Memoir of Robert Ridgway 1850—1929. National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Biographical Memoirs. 15: 57--101.  https://www.nasonline.org/publications/biographical-memoirs/memoir-pdfs/ridgway-robert.pdf Accessed 13 December 2023.

Woodhouse, S.C. 1910. English-Greek Dictionary: A Vocabulary of the Attic Language. George Routledge & Sons, London.

Zimmer, J.T. 1926. Catalogue of the Edward E. Ayer Ornithological Library. Field Museum of Natural History Publication 239. 16: 35.

Link--Nota bene