Catalogue |
Corresponding author: Pepijn Kamminga ( pepijn.kamminga@naturalis.nl ) Academic editor: Knud Jønsson
© 2023 Steven D. van der Mije, Pepijn Kamminga, René W. R. J. Dekker.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
van der Mije SD, Kamminga P, Dekker RWRJ (2023) Type specimens of non-passerines in Naturalis Biodiversity Center (Animalia, Aves). ZooKeys 1155: 1-311. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1155.98097
|
The non-passerine type specimens in Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden are listed as an update to
Aves, birds, Leiden, non-passerines, RMNH, Schlegel, Temminck, types, ZMA
In 1997, Van den Hoek Ostende et al. published ‘Type-specimens of birds in the National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, Part 1. Non-Passerines’. Since its publication 26 years ago much has changed, both at an institutional level as well as regarding the collections. The National Museum of Natural History (NNM since 1988), the new name for the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie as it was called since 1820, was renamed Naturalis Biodiversity Center (collection acronym: RMNH) in 2011 after the merger with staff and collections of the Zoological Museum of the University of Amsterdam (ZMA) and the Herbaria and staff from the Leiden, Utrecht, and Wageningen Universities.
The merger of the bird collection of Naturalis with that of the ZMA, discussions with colleagues, publications of type catalogues in other museums such as Paris and Vienna, corrections of publication dates of historic literature and hence original descriptions and corrections, and additions found by Naturalis staff and visitors to the collection all made an update of the RMNH catalogue necessary. This work was facilitated by the rapid digitisation of (historical) books and journals (in particular BHL) which enabled quick access and easy checks of the literature. Furthermore, the merged bird collections of the RMNH and ZMA have been fully digitised, making thorough searching and comparison of specimens and their data possible.
Much has changed in this update of
What is new in this 2023 version:
Between 1833 and 1883, the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie (RMNH) bought and sold to third parties a considerable number of specimens through both Frank senior and Frank junior. Additionally, the Zoological Museum Amsterdam, whose collection is part of Naturalis since 2010, dealt with Frank sr and Frank jr.
From the labels on the specimens in the Leiden collection it is often not clear whether the object was obtained through G.A. Frank sr. or G.A. Frank jr. as only G.A. Frank is mentioned. We have not tried to sort this out any further as it would be largely impossible and beyond the scope of this catalogue.
In addition to the above, the following abbreviations have been used in the specimen information:
“Loc:” refers to place, country and, if given on the label, the date the specimen was collected;
“Leg:” refers to the field collector and, if given on the label, the date the specimen was received by the museum.
“Ex:” refers to the donator, which is not the field collector but a museum, owner of a private collection, or animal dealer and, if given on the label, the date the specimen was received by the museum.
Please note that in the past the date of collection and the date of accession on the labels and in the old catalogues have sometimes been mixed up.
Acronyms (in alphabetical order)
MLC Musée George Sand et de la Vallée Noire (Collection Baillon), La Châtre, France.
MNSL Naturkundemuseum Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
MTD Museum für Tierkunde, Dresden, Germany.
NAM Amsterdam Zoo ‘Natura Artis Magistra’, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
UZMC Universitets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark.
We wish to thank the following for discussions on a variety of taxa and topics, including literature and archives, listed in alphabetical order: Norbert Bahr, Arnoud van den Berg, Patrick Boussès, Alice Cibois, Wim Dekkers, Edward Dickinson, Robert Dowsett, Angelos Evangelidis, Clem Fisher, Christophe Gouraud, Gradimir Gradev, Hein van Grouw, Justin Jansen, Karien Lahaise, Robert Prÿs-Jones, Christiane Quaisser, Frank Rheindt, Frank Steinheimer, Jan van Tol, Pieter van Wingerden, Konstantinos Vlachopoulos, Ruud Vlek and Claire, and François Voisin.
Casuariidae
Casuarius papuanus Schlegel, 1871b: 54.
= Casuarius bennetti westermanni Sclater, 1874.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Casuarius aruensis Schlegel, 1866f: 347.
= Casuarius casuarius (Linnaeus, 1758).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Casuarius casuarius bistriatus van Oort, 1908c: 205.
= Casuarius casuarius (Linnaeus, 1758).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Van Oort described a single adult male captured on the “north coast of New Guinea, west of Humboldt Bay, very probably from Tarfia near Matterer Bay”, and sent alive to the zoological garden of Rotterdam, where it died in May 1907. According to the accession books, the skeleton of the holotype is also in the
Casuarius Kaupi Von Rosenberg, 1861: 44.
= Casuarius unappendiculatus (Blyth, 1860).
Rosenberg referred to his hunters who collected a single male on Salawati in August 1860. No specimen in the
Tinamus erythropus Von Pelzeln, 1863: 1127.
= Crypturellus erythropus erythropus (Pelzeln, 1863).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Other syntypes collected by Natterer at Barra do Rio Negro are in the
Tinamus obsoletus Temminck, 1815a: 588.
= Crypturellus obsoletus obsoletus (Temminck, 1815).
Temminck based this name on 16 specimens described and collected by d’Azara in Paraguay (1781–1801). Temminck specifically referred to two specimens in the
Tinamus strigulosus Temminck, 1815a: 594.
= Crypturellus strigulosus (Temminck, 1815).
Temminck based this name on a single specimen in his own cabinet donated by Hoffmannsegg which is no longer present in the
Tinamus tataupa tataupa Temminck, 1815a: 590.
= Crypturellus tataupa tataupa (Temminck, 1815).
Temminck based this name on the description by
Crypturus Kerberti Büttikofer, 1896a: 1.
= Crypturellus tataupa tataupa (Temminck, 1815).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
In the list of types from the
Tinamus adspersus Temminck, 1815a: 585.
= Crypturellus undulatus adspersus (Temminck, 1815).
Temminck based his description on a single specimen in the
Tinamus undulatus Temminck, 1815a: 582.
= Crypturellus undulatus undulatus (Temminck, 1815).
Temminck based this name on a description by
Tinamus vermiculatus Temminck, 1825: livr. 62, pl. 369.
= Crypturellus undulatus vermiculatus (Temminck, 1825).
Two syntypes from Brazil are presumed to be in the
Tinamus maculosus Temminck, 1815a: 557.
= Nothura maculosa maculosa (Temminck, 1815).
Temminck had seen two specimens in the
Tinamus rufescens Temminck, 1815a: 552.
= Rhynchotus rufescens rufescens (Temminck, 1815).
Temminck based his description on a single specimen in the
Tinamus nanus Temminck, 1815a: 600.
= Taoniscus nanus (Temminck, 1815).
Temminck based this name on a description by
Tinamus guttatus Von Pelzeln, 1863: 1126.
= Tinamus guttatus Pelzeln, 1863.
Syntype,
This is one of eight syntypes. Syntypes collected by Natterer are in the
Tinamus tao Temminck, 1815a: 569.
= Tinamus tao tao Temminck, 1815.
Temminck based this name on two specimens, one in a collection in Lisbon, the other in the
Talegallus pyrrhopigius Schlegel, 1879f: 159.
= Aepypodius arfakianus arfakianus (Salvadori, 1877).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
The spelling of pyrrhopigius in the title is clearly an error as later in the text it is correctly spelled pyrrhopygius.
This specimen was acquired through one of the Frank dealers. The collector must have been missionary Woelders who returned to the Netherlands in February 1879, on leave from Andai, New Guinea, bringing his collection with him (
Macrocephalon maleo Müller, S., 1846: 116.
Megacephalon maleo Gray, 1846: 849.
= Macrocephalon maleo Müller, S., 1846.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype
Sal. Müller based his name on Megachephalon maleo Temm. ms. These are also the syntypes of Megacephalon maleo Gray (1846: 849).
Forsten stayed in Celebes twice between March 1840 and April 1842.
Megapodius Bernsteinii Schlegel, 1866d: 261.
= Megapodius bernsteinii Schlegel, 1866.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
One syntype was sent to the
Megapodius sanghirensis Schlegel, 1880: 91.
= Megapodius cumingii sanghirensis Schlegel, 1880.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Megapodius Forstenii Gray, 1847: pl. CXXIV.
Megapodius Forsteni Gray, 1847: 491 (nomen nudum).
= Megapodius freycinet forsteni Gray, 1847.
Lectotype,
Gray gave no indication of the number of specimens he used for his description: he merely published a manuscript name by Temminck. Therefore, this specimen should be a syntype, but by listing it as holotype
Forsten visited Ceram [= Seram] late 1842, so either he received this specimen from another collector, or the date is an error.
The IOC spelling of forsteni (single “i”) is incorrect, based on a nomen nudum, and should follow the spelling (double “ii”) as on the plate.
Megapodius freycinet oustaleti Roselaar, 1994: 27.
= Megapodius freycinet oustaleti Roselaar, 1994.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
There is also a paratype in the
Megapodius Reinwardt Dumont, 1823: 416.
Megapodius rubripes Temminck, 1826: livr. 69, pl. 411.
= Megapodius reinwardt reinwardt Dumont, 1823.
Holotype for reinwardt, syntype for rubripes,
Holotype by monotypy for M. reinwardt Dumont, 1823 as he referred to a single individual. He erroneously indicated Amboine [= Ambon] as the type locality. The locality Lombok also seems to be erroneous, since Reinwardt never visited the island; the correct locality is most likely Buma, Sumbawa, where he stayed from 20–23 March 1821 (G.F. Mees, pers. comm.).
In his description of M. rubripes, Temminck (1826) indicated that the material was collected by Reinwardt, who collected four specimens.
Megapodius Tumulus Gould, 1842b: 20.
= Megapodius reinwardt tumulus Gould, 1842.
Paralectotype,
This specimen was acquired through Gould and possibly collected by his collector Gilbert.
The lectotype was selected by
Talegalla fuscirostris aruensis Roselaar, 1994: 15.
= Talegalla fuscirostris Salvadori, 1877.
Holotype,
Paratype,
Two paratypes are in the MTD (MTD C7298;
Talegallus jobiensis Meyer, 1874: 74.
= Talegalla jobiensis jobiensis A.B. Meyer, 1874.
Syntype,
The species was described from a series of five specimens. Only two seem to have survived: one in the MTD (MTD C3135;
Crax carunculata Temminck, 1815a: 44.
= Crax globulosa Spix, 1825.
Temminck’s description is based on a single skin in a collection in Lisbon.
Penelope parrakoua Temminck, 1815a: 85 (nomen novum).
= Ortalis motmot (Linnaeus, 1766).
Temminck introduced this name to bring order to the names for this taxon (among others Phasianus motmot Linnaeus, Phasianus parraqua Latham, Phasianus garrulus Humboldt and Phasianus guianensis Brisson). Although Temminck referred to specimens in his cabinet, there are no types involved here.
Penelope obscura “Illiger” Temminck, 1815a: 68.
= Penelope obscura obscura Temminck, 1815.
Temminck based this new species on the description by
Penelope superciliaris “Illiger” Temminck, 1815a: 72.
= Penelope superciliaris superciliaris Temminck, 1815.
Temminck based this new species on one specimen in his own cabinet and two specimens in the
Agelastes meleagrides Bonaparte, 1850d: 145.
= Agelastes meleagrides Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Perdix Sonnini Temminck, 1815a: 451.
= Colinus cristatus sonnini (Temminck, 1815).
Syntype,
Temminck based his description on specimens in his own cabinet and in the
Odontophorus cubanensis Gray, 1846: [no pagination].
= Colinus virginianus cubanensis (G.R. Gray, 1846).
Syntype,
This name is listed by G.R. Gray (1846) as a manuscript name by Gould and referring to a description of Colinus virginianus from Cuba by
Perdix borealis Temminck, 1815a: 436 (nomen novum).
= Colinus virginianus subsp.
Temminck introduced this name as a nomen novum for multiple names being in use for this taxon.
Odontophorus Columbianus Gould, 1850: [30].
= Odontophorus columbianus Gould, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the label and information written under the stand these specimens originate from Colombia, as indeed the name suggests. However, the species is restricted to Venezuela. In his description
Perdix dentata Temminck, 1815a: 419 (nomen novum).
= Odontophorus gujanensis gujanensis (Gmelin, 1789).
Temminck introduced this name as a nomen novum for Perdix guianensis [sic] Latham.
Perdix heyi Temminck, 1825: livr. 55, pl. 328 (male) and 329 (female).
= Ammoperdix heyi heyi (Temminck, 1825).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description the two syntypes, collected by Hey in the deserts of Aqaba in Jordan, were received from the
Anurophasis monorthonyx van Oort, 1910e: 212.
= Anurophasis monorthonyx van Oort, 1910.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Van Oort based his description on a single male, field number 254.
Arborophila javanica bartelsi Siebers, 1929: 149.
= Arborophila javanica javanica (Gmelin, 1789).
Holotype,
The description was based on ten specimens. The paratypes are in the
Arborophila brunneopectus lawuana Bartels, 1938: 321.
= Arborophila javanica lawuana Bartels, 1938.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Bartels (1938) based his description on a series of eight specimens. One of the paratypes is in the
Perdix Vethi Snelleman, 1887: 30, pl. III.
= Arborophila rubrirostris (Salvadori, 1879).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy:
Perdix megapodia Temminck, 1828: livr. 78, pl. 462 (male) and 463 (female).
= Arborophila torqueola torqueola (Valenciennes, 1825).
Three syntypes are in the
Argus giganteus Temminck, 1813b: 410.
= Argusianus argus argus (Linnaeus, 1766).
Temminck wrote having seen more than 30 specimens originating from Malacca in his own cabinet and several other collections. No specimens which fit as types are currently present in the
Bambusicola sonorivox Gould, 1863: 285.
= Bambusicola sonorivox Gould, 1863.
Syntype,
Syntype,
These are also the types for the genus name Bambusicola Gould, 1863.
Perdix thoracica Temminck, 1815a: 335.
= Bambusicola thoracicus (Temminck, 1815).
Perdix oculae Temminck, 1815a: 408.
= Caloperdix oculeus oculeus (Temminck, 1815).
Coturnix textilis Temminck, 1815a: 512.
= Coturnix coromandelica (Gmelin, 1789).
Syntype,
According to Temminck this taxon occurred on the Indian subcontinent. He referred specifically to specimens in his collection from Bengal to which no reference is made under the stand. We tentatively list
Coturnix vulgaris africana Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 103.
= Coturnix coturnix africana Temminck & Schlegel, 1849.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Coturnix vulgaris japonica Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 103, pl. 61.
= Coturnix japonica Temminck & Schlegel, 1849.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
In this catalogue we follow
Synoicus cervinus Gould, 1865: 195.
= Coturnix ypsilophora australis (Latham, 1802).
Possible paralectotype,
Perdix Raaltenii Müller, 1842: 158.
= Coturnix ypsilophora raaltenii (Müller, 1842).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Coturnix excalfactoria Temminck, 1815a: 516.
= Excalfactoria chinensis subsp.
Syntype,
Two specimens, also from Timor and collected by Baudin, are reported as syntypes in the
Perdix gularis Temminck, 1815a: 401.
= Francolinus gularis (Temminck, 1815).
Syntype,
Syntype,
The description is based on two specimens, one in Temminck’s cabinet and one in the
Gallus giganteus Temminck, 1813b: 84.
= Gallus gallus (Linnaeus, 1758).
Temminck claimed to describe a wild species from Sumatra and Java. He referred to a foot of this taxon in his cabinet which is, however, no longer present in the
Gallus Morio Temminck, 1813b: 253.
= Gallus gallus (Linnaeus, 1758).
Temminck claimed to be describing a wild bird from India.
Gallus bankiva Temminck, 1813b: 87.
= Gallus gallus bankiva Temminck, 1813.
Temminck based his name on the description of three specimens in the
Gallus lanatus Temminck, 1813b: 256.
= Gallus gallus domesticus (Linnaeus, 1758).
In the catalogue of his cabinet,
Gallus ecaudatus Temminck, 1813b: 267.
= Gallus lafayettii Lesson, 1831.
Syntype,
Syntype,
In the catalogue of his cabinet,
Apart from two specimens in his own collection, Temminck referred to a specimen in the collection of Raye van Breukelerwaert. This specimen was sold at the sale of this collection in 1827 (Van Cleef 1827: 49, no 885) for 4 guilders and 15 cents to the
Gallus sonneratii Temminck, 1813b: 246.
= Gallus sonneratii Temminck, 1813.
Temminck described three males and a female without mentioning where he had seen them. The
Gallus Furcatus Temminck, 1813b: 261.
= Gallus varius (Shaw, 1798).
In the catalogue of his cabinet,
Tetrao Saliceti Temminck, 1815a: 208.
= Lagopus lagopus subsp.
Possible syntype,
Two more specimens in the
Lagopus brachydactylus Gould, 1837: pl. 256 and text.
= Lagopus lagopus subsp.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Gould wrote: “M. Temminck’s specimen, which we believe to be unique”.
Perdix Lerwa Hodgson, 1833: 107.
= Lerwa lerwa (Hodgson, 1833).
Syntype,
The Hodgson collection arrived in Leiden in 1845 consisting of four crates with birds and mammals.
Lophophorus refulgens Temminck, 1813b: 355.
= Lophophorus impejanus (Latham, 1790).
Syntype,
Temminck referred to three specimens: one male in his own cabinet (now part of the
Euplocomus diardi Bonaparte, 1856b: 415.
Diardigallus prelatus Bonaparte, 1856b: 415.
= Lophura diardi (Bonaparte, 1856).
Syntype,
Syntype,
In his description Bonaparte also published the name Euplocomus diardi, a Temminck manuscript name. He intended to substitute this name with his Diardigallus prelatus.
Gallus Macartneyi Temminck, 1813b: 273.
= Lophura ignita macartneyi (Temminck, 1813).
Syntype,
The locality ‘Chine’ as written under the stand is obviously erroneous as this taxon occurs in Sumatra as was known to
Houppifer hoogerwerfi Chasen, 1939: 184.
= Lophura inornata hoogerwerfi (Chasen, 1939).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. The description was based on a single female. See also
Lophophorus cuvieri Temminck, 1820: livr. 1, pl. 1.
= Lophura leucomelanos lathami (J.E. Gray, 1829).
Holotype by monotypy. The specimen collected by Diard and Duvaucel is in the
A recommendation to the ICZN is in preparation to suppress Lophophorus cuvieri Temminck, 1820, in favour of the junior synonym Phasianus Lathami J.E. Gray, 1829 (= Lophura leucomelanos lathami (J.E. Gray, 1829), because of prevailing usage. The holotype (see livr. 1, pl. 1), which was historically considered a hybrid in the literature, is here regarded as a composite specimen as (only) the tail does not fit the (adult) Kalij Pheasant Lophura leucomelanos.
Coturnix perlata Temminck, 1815a: 470.
= Margaroperdix madagarensis (Scopoli, 1786).
Possible syntype,
Temminck based his description on a male in his own cabinet and a similar specimen in the
Pavo cristatus indicus Temminck, 1807: 145 (nomen nudum).
Pavo cristatus primus Temminck, 1813b: 26.
Pavo nigripennis Sclater, 1860a: 221.
= Pavo cristatus Linnaeus, 1758.
Syntype,
Sclater based his name on
Francolinus peli Temminck, 1854: 50.
= Peliperdix lathami lathami (Hartlaub, 1854).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Collected during Pel’s stay in Ghana between 1840 and 1855.
Phasianus Diardi Temminck, 1830: livr. 82, text to pl. 486.
= Phasianus versicolor versicolor Vieillot, 1825.
Temminck published Phasianus Diardi in his resume of P. versicolor Vieillot, 1825, based on a specimen sent by Diard to the
Polyplectron Chinquis Temminck, 1813b: 363.
= Polyplectron bicalcaratum (Linnaeus, 1758).
Temminck had seen birds in several menageries prior to the Napoleonic era. He had two males in his own cabinet and saw an immature male in the
Polyplectron chalcurum scutulatum Chasen, 1941: 17.
= Polyplectron chalcurum scutulatum Chasen, 1941.
Holotype,
Polyplectron emphanum Temminck, 1832: livr. 91, pl. 540.
= Polyplectron napoleonis Lesson, 1831.
The holotype (by monotypy) is in the
Francolinus ahantensis Temminck, 1854: 49.
= Pternistis ahantensis (Temminck, 1854).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Perdix adansonii Temminck, 1815a: 305.
= Pternistis bicalcaratus bicalcaratus (Linnaeus, 1766).
Possible syntype,
Temminck described three specimens: one in the
Perdix clamator Temminck, 1815a: 298.
= Pternistis capensis (Gmelin, 1789).
Possible syntype,
Perdix erckelii Rüppell, 1835: 12, pl. 6.
= Pternistis erckelii (Rüppell, 1835).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was designated by
Perdix rubricollis Cretzschmar, 1829: 44, pl. 30.
= Pternistis leucoscepus leucoscepus (Gray, 1867).
Possible syntype,
Possible syntype,
Perdix Longirostris Temminck, 1815a: 323.
= Rhizothera longirostris (Temminck, 1815).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck wrote having received three males and two females and that a male and female were in the collection of Raye van Breukelerwaert. No other specimens in the
Francolinus jugularis Büttikofer, 1889b: 76.
= Scleroptila gutturalis jugularis (Büttikofer, 1889).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Perdix Le Vaillantii Temminck, 1823: livr. 7–10, text to pl. 1.
Perdix vaillantii Temminck, 1829: livr. 80, pl. 477.
= Scleroptila levaillantii levaillantii (Valenciennes, 1825).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck first mentioned the name Perdix Le Vaillantii in a footnote to the text for pl. 1 (1823; see
According to the description with pl. 477 other possible syntypes are in the
Phasianus veneratus Temminck, 1830: livr. 82, pl. 485.
= Syrmaticus reevesii (Gray, 1829).
Possible syntype,
Temminck based his description on two males in his collection of which
Phasianus sœmmerringii Temminck, 1830: livr. 82, pl. 487 (male) and pl. 488 (female).
= Syrmaticus soemmerringii soemmerringii (Temminck, 1830).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck mentioned that he had received several specimens from Von Siebold. There are no mounted specimens in the
Anas (Mareca) gibberifrons Müller, 1842: 159.
= Anas gibberifrons Müller, 1842.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The year 1844 for
Anas Salvadorii Büttikofer, 1896b: 59.
= Anas platyrhynchos platyrhynchos Linnaeus, 1758.
Holotype,
Holoype by monotypy. Büttikofer described how he “found a Duck from the Island of Sumba”. Büttikofer’s description is based on a domestic duck.
Anser brachyrhynchus Baillon, 1834: 74.
= Anser brachyrhynchus Baillon, 1834.
Syntype,
The MLC houses a possible syntype (MLC.2011.0.560).
Anser cygnoides ferus Temminck & Schlegel, 1850: 140.
= Anser cygnoides (Linnaeus, 1758).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck and Schlegel (1850) wrote that they received a single specimen.
The name A. ferus was neither mentioned on pl. 81 published in 1849 (
Anser medius Temminck, 1840: 519.
= Anser erythropus (Linnaeus, 1758).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck described a single bird shot by him.
Anas scutulata Müller, 1842: 159.
= Asarcornis scutulata (Müller, 1842).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Since Müller explicitly mentioned a lake at the foot of Mt. Salak, Java as the only collecting locality of this new species, a fourth specimen from “Buitenzorg” is probably not part of the type series even though it was also collected by Müller.
Nyroca australis lebeboeri Bartels Jr & Franck, 1938: 337.
= Aythya australis (Eyton, 1838).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. The name lebeboeri is clearly a lapsus, since the species was named after A.J.M. Ledeboer.
Dendrocygna guttata “Forsten” Schlegel, 1866e: 85.
= Dendrocygna guttata Schlegel, 1866.
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
Forsten visited Celebes twice between March 1840 and April 1842.
Nettapus pulchellus Gould, 1842a: 89.
= Nettapus pulchellus Gould, 1842.
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was selected by
In the original description, Gould made no reference to specimens. However later Gould (1842c: text to pl. 4) wrote that his description was based on four specimens: two collected by Gilbert, one by Bynoe and one by an unknown collector. The two
Anas cyanoptera Hartlaub, 1855: 357.
Querquedula Hartlaubii Cassin, 1859: 175 (nomen novum).
Anas cuprea Schlegel, 1866e: 62 (nomen novum).
= Pteronetta hartlaubii (Cassin, 1859).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Hartlaub referred to a single male collected at Rio Boutry, Ghana. According to Schlegel and later labels, this specimen is a female collected at Dabocrom, Ghana.
Quercedula hartlaubii Cassin, 1859 and Anas cuprea Schlegel, 1866 were both introduced as nomen novum for Anas cyanoptera Hartlaub, 1855, which is preoccupied by Anas cyanoptera Vieillot, 1816.
Anas (Querquedula) humeralis Müller, 1842: 159.
= Spatula querquedula (Linnaeus, 1758).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Batrachostomus parvulus Bonaparte, 1850a: 57.
= Batrachostomus affinis affinis Blyth, 1847.
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
There are two species represented in the type series. The male from Borneo (
Podargus cornutus Temminck, 1822: livr. 27, pl. 157 (nomen novum).
= Batrachostomus cornutus cornutus (Temminck, 1822).
Nomen novum for Podargus Javensis Horsfield, 1822. Temminck based this name on the description by Horsfield and a single specimen from Sumatra in the
Batrachostomus javensis longicaudatus Hoogerwerf, 1962: 195.
= Batrachostomus cornutus longicaudatus Hoogerwerf, 1962.
Paratype,
The holotype is in the
Batrachostomus poliolophus “Temminck” Hartert, 1892a: 63.
= Batrachostomus poliolophus Hartert, 1892.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Hartert based his description on a single specimen in the
Podargus intermedius Hartert, 1895: x.
= Podargus ocellatus intermedius Hartert, 1895.
Paralectotype,
Hartert nominated specimens from Kiriwina as type. This excludes
Caprimulgus aegyptius Lichtenstein, 1823: 59.
Caprimulgus isabellinus Temminck, 1825: livr. 64, pl. 379 (nomen novum).
= Caprimulgus aegyptius aegyptius Lichtenstein, 1823.
Syntype,
Temminck introduced C. isabellinus as an unnecessary nomen novum for C. aegyptius Lichtenstein, 1823. He considered the reference to Egypt in the scientific name incorrect as this species also occurs outside Egypt as well as the fact that other species occur in Egypt.
The
Caprimulgus concretus Bonaparte, 1850a: 60.
= Caprimulgus concretus Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Caprimulgus smithi Bonaparte, 1850a: 59.
= Caprimulgus europaeus europaeus Linnaeus, 1758.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Caprimulgus eximius “Rüppell” Temminck, 1826: livr. 67, pl. 398.
= Caprimulgus eximius eximius Temminck, 1826.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Originally ‘Nubie’ was written under the stand, later changed into ‘Sennaar’.
Caprimulgus jotaka Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: pl. 12 and 13, p. 37.
= Caprimulgus jotaka jotaka Temminck & Schlegel, 1845.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Plates 12 and 13 appeared in 1844, the description on p. 37 one year later (
In this catalogue we follow
Caprimulgus inornatus Heuglin, 1869: 129.
= Caprimulgus inornatus Heuglin, 1869.
Syntype,
The remaining two syntypes are in the
Caprimulgus ritae
= not yet included in IOC 12.2.
Holotype,
Paratype,
According to G. Sangster (pers. comm., June 2022), this new taxon was considered to belong to Caprimulgus macrurus schlegelii A.B. Meyer, 1874. Other paratypes are in the
Caprimulgus meesi Sangster & Rozendaal, 2004: 30.
= Caprimulgus meesi Sangster & Rozendaal, 2004.
Holotype,
The paratype, an adult male collected by G. Stein at Mao Marru, Sumba, is in the
Caprimulgus nubicus Lichtenstein, 1823: 59.
= Caprimulgus nubicus nubicus Lichtenstein, 1823.
Syntype,
According to acquisition lists in the
Antrostomus dominicus Bonaparte, 1850a: 61.
= Caprimulgus pectoralis pectoralis Cuvier, 1816.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Haiti is an error since C. pectoralis only occurs in Africa. Later ‘South Africa’ was added to the label.
Caprimulgus Bartelsi Finsch, 1902: 148.
= Caprimulgus pulchellus bartelsi Finsch, 1902.
Holotype,
Caprimulgus ruficollis Temminck, 1820: 438.
= Caprimulgus ruficollis ruficollis Temminck, 1820.
Temminck based his description on two specimens in the collection of the
Caprimulgus diurnus Wied, 1821: 174.
= Chordeiles nacunda nacunda (Vieillot, 1817).
Syntype,
According to Wied he found this species between Vareda (= Inhobim) and Ressaque (= Resacca), 8 February 1817 (
Eurostopus [sic] argus Hartert, 1892b: 608.
= Eurostopodus argus Hartert, 1892.
Paralectotypes,
Hartert based his name on a nomen nudum by
Caprimulgus mystacalis Temminck, 1826: livr. 69, pl. 410.
= Eurostopodus mystacalis (Temminck, 1826).
Lectotype,
Listed as Eurostopodus albogularis albogularis (Vigors & Horsfield, 1826) in Peters (1940; Vol. IV: 190), which name was published in 1827, one year after Temminck’s publication (
Caprimulgus papuensis Schlegel, 1866f: 340.
= Eurostopodus papuensis (Schlegel, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Hydropsalis trifurcatus Von Tschudi, 1846: 129.
= Hydropsalis climacocerca climacocerca (Tschudi, 1844).
Syntype,
Caprimulgus psalurus Temminck, 1822: livr. 27, pl. 157 and 158.
= Hydropsalis torquata torquata (Gmelin, 1789).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Although not mentioned in
According to Natterer’s handwritten register cards in the
Caprimulgus Nattererii Temminck, 1822: livr. 18, pl. 107.
= Lurocalis semitorquatus nattererii (Temminck, 1822).
Holotype,
Following
Lyncornis macrotis jacobsoni Junge, 1936: 39.
= Lyncornis macrotis jacobsoni Junge, 1936.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Lyncornis macropterus “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 62.
= Lyncornis macrotis macropterus Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited the Tondano area between 15 April 1840 and 19 June 1841.
Lyncornis Temminckii Gould, 1838b: pl. XVI and text.
Lyncornis imberbis “Temminck” Gould, 1838b: pl. XVI and text.
= Lyncornis temminckii Gould, 1838.
Syntype,
Gould based his description on several specimens in his own collection and on a bird sent by Temminck under the manuscript name L. imberbis. A name Gould published in synonymy of L. temminckii. Müller visited Borneo between 28 July and 17 December 1836.
Hydropsalis creagra Bonaparte, 1850a: 58.
= Macropsalis forcipata (Nitsch, 1840).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Nyctidromus grallarius “Wied” Bonaparte, 1850a: 62.
= Nyctidromus albicollis albicollis (Gmelin, 1789).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Caprimulgus minutus “Natterer” Bonaparte, 1850a: 63.
= Nyctiprogne leucopyga (Spix, 1825).
Possible holotype,
Bonaparte based his description on a manuscript name by Natterer and a specimen in the
Originally this specimen was sexed as female, later changed into male on the label.
Caprimulgus binotatus “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 60.
= Veles binotatus (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Bonaparte erroneously gave “Borneo” as collecting locality and gave no indication of the number of specimens available to him. The listing in
Batrachostomus crinifrons “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 57.
= Aegotheles crinifrons (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Bonaparte gave no indication of the number of specimens available to him. The listing in
During a forced stay due to illness on Ternate from 19 June 1841 until mid- September 1841, Forsten sent his hunters to Halmahera to collect skins.
Caprimulgus brachyurus Von Rosenberg, 1866: 143.
= Aegotheles wallacii G.R. Gray, 1859.
Holotype,
Cypselus comatus Temminck, 1824: livr. 45, pl. 268.
= Hemiprocne comata comata (Temminck, 1824).
Dendrochelidon schisticolor Bonaparte, 1850a: 66.
= Hemiprocne coronata (Tickell, 1833).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Cypselus longipennis Temminck, 1821: livr. 14, pl. 83.
= Hemiprocne longipennis longipennis (Rafinesque, 1802).
Temminck’s name is considered here to be a younger homonym of longipennis Rafinesque as Temminck made no reference to Rafinesque.
Following
Collocalia ceramensis van Oort, 1911c: 64.
= Aerodramus ceramensis (van Oort, 1911).
Holotype,
Collocalia francica bartelsi Stresemann, 1927: 46.
= Aerodramus fuciphagus fuciphagus (Thunberg, 1812).
Holotype,
The data listed above have been taken from
Collocalia francica sororum Stresemann, 1931: 12.
= Aerodramus sororum (Stresemann, 1931).
Paratypes,
The holotype is in the
Collocalia brevirostris vulcanorum Stresemann, 1926: 352.
= Aerodramus vulcanorum (Stresemann, 1926).
Holotype,
The data listed above have been taken from
Cypselus barbatus Sclater, 1866: 599.
= Apus barbatus barbatus (Sclater, 1866).
Syntype,
Sclater based this name on two specimens labelled “Cypselus barbatus” in the
Cypselus pygargus Temminck, 1828: livr. 77, pl. 460, fig. 1.
= Apus caffer (Lichtenstein, 1823).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Although not mentioned in the original description,
Apus affinis furcatus Brooke, 1971: 101.
= Apus nipalensis furcatus Brooke, 1971.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
There are also four paratypes in the
Cypselus leucorrhous “Müller” Sclater, 1866: 603.
= Apus nipalensis furcatus Brooke, 1971.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Sclater published this manuscript name by Müller in the synonymy of Cypselus subfurcatus Blyth, 1849. We have found no subsequent use to validate this name which therefore does not seem to be available.
Cypselus nipalensis Hodgson, 1837a: 780.
= Apus nipalensis nipalensis Hodgson, 1837.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Cypselus poliourus Temminck, 1839: 78.
= Chaetura brachyura brachyura (Jardine, 1846).
Lectotype,
Temminck based his description on pl. 726, fig. 2 in Daubenton and gave no indication of the number of specimens available to him. The listing in
Cypselus senex Temminck, 1826: livr. 67, pl. 397.
= Cypseloides senex (Temminck, 1826).
Syntype,
The data listed here come from a relatively new label. The old label, which is still attached to the specimen, gives no sex. According to this old label the specimen originates from the collection of Auguste de Saint Hilaire.
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Cypsiurus batasiensis [sic] bartelsorum Brooke, 1972: 221.
= Cypsiurus balasiensis bartelsorum Brooke, 1972.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
There are also four paratypes in the
Tachornis parvus brachypterus Reichenow, 1903: 386.
= Cypsiurus parvus brachypterus (Reichenow, 1903).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Cypselus ambrosiacus Temminck, 1828: livr. 77, pl. 460, fig. 2.
= Cypsiurus parvus parvus (Lichtenstein, 1823).
Lectotype,
Temminck based his description on Seba and Brisson and gave no indication of the number of specimens available to him. The listing in
The origin of Cap de Bonne-Esperance as given by Temminck and on the label is considered to be erroneous as C. parvus does not occur in that part of South Africa. On the backside of the label it was later changed into “Nubia” as is also indicated by
Cypselus (Chætura) Nudipes Hodgson, 1837a: 779.
= Hirundapus caudacutus nudipes (Hodgson, 1837).
Syntype,
Hodgson did not give much or any information on the specimen labels such as collecting date. Hence it is in most cases uncertain whether specimens collected and described by him are indeed types. This is also the type species for Hirundapus Hodgson, 1837.
Chaetura gigantea var. celebensis Sclater, 1866: 608.
= Hirundapus celebensis (Sclater, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited the Tondano area between 15 April 1840 and 19 June 1841.
Hirundinapus Klaesii Büttikofer, 1887: 40.
= Hirundapus cochinchinensis (Oustalet, 1878).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Chaetura ernsti M. Bartels jr, 1931: 54.
= Hirundapus cochinchinensis (Oustalet, 1878).
Holotype,
Cypselus giganteus “van Hasselt” Temminck, 1825: livr. 61, pl. 364.
= Hirundapus giganteus giganteus (Temminck, 1825).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Van Hasselt visited Java between 1820 and 1823.
Acanthylis coracina “Müller” Boie, 1844: 167.
= Rhaphidura leucopygialis (Blyth, 1849).
Syntype,
Usually referred to as A. coracinus Bonaparte, 1850. However, the first valid description was given in a letter of Müller, which was published by
Müller visited West Sumatra from June 1833 until late 1835.
Cypselus collaris Temminck, 1823: livr. 33, pl. 195.
= Streptoprocne zonaris zonaris (Shaw, 1796).
Cypselus alpinus africanus Temminck, 1815b: 270.
= Tachymarptis melba africanus (Temminck, 1815).
Syntype,
Cypselus alpinus Temminck, 1815b: 270.
= Tachymarptis melba melba (Linnaeus, 1758).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Collocalia Coquerelii Schlegel & Pollen, 1868: 65.
= Zoonavena grandidieri grandidieri (Verreaux, 1867).
Lectotype,
Schlegel and Pollen gave no indication of the number of specimens available to them. The listing in
Aglæactis aliciæ Salvin, 1896: 24.
= Aglaeactis aliciae Salvin, 1896.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Other syntypes are in the
Uranomitra whitelyi Boucard, 1893: 8.
= Amazilia brevirostris brevirostris (Lesson, 1829).
Syntype,
Other syntypes are in the
Uranomitra Derneddei Simon, 1911: 129.
= Amazilia violiceps violiceps (Gould, 1859).
Possible paralectotype,
Since the date of collecting is missing there is no unequivocal evidence that
Amazilia cupreicauda Salvin & Godman, 1884: 452.
= Amazilia viridigaster cupreicauda Salvin & Godman, 1884.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Trochilus scutatus “Natterer” Temminck, 1824: livr. 50, pl. 299, fig. 3.
= Augastes scutatus scutatus (Temminck, 1824).
According to the original description, syntypes are in the
Trochilus Langsdorffi Temminck, 1821: livr. 11, pl. 66.
= Discosura langsdorffi langsdorffi (Temminck, 1821).
According to the original description the depicted specimen was in the collection of Langsdorff and another in the collection of Leadbeater.
Eriocnemis catharina Salvin, 1897: xxx.
= Eriocnemis luciani catharina Salvin, 1897.
Syntype,
According to
Trochilus bilophus Temminck, 1820: livr. 3, pl. 18, fig. 3.
Trochilus cornutus Zu Wied-Neuwied, 1821: 190.
= Heliactin bilophus (Temminck, 1820).
Holotype for bilophus, syntype for cornutus,
Temminck’s plate of October 1820 has priority over Wied’s (Zu Wied-Neu
-*which name was commonly used in the 20th century based on
Following
Trochilus squamosus Temminck, 1823: livr. 34, pl. 203, fig. 1.
= Heliomaster squamosus (Temminck, 1823).
Syntype,
Trochilus mesoleucus Temminck, 1824: livr. 53, pl. 317, fig. 1–3.
= Heliomaster squamosus (Temminck, 1823).
According to Temminck three syntypes are in the
Leucippus Baeri Simon, 1901: 202.
= Leucippus baeri Simon, 1901.
Syntype,
This is one of two syntypes. The whereabouts of the other type are unknown.
Trochilus chalybeus Temminck, 1821: livr. 11, pl. 66, fig. 2.
= Lophornis chalybeus (Temminck, 1821).
Following
Trochilus squalidus Temminck, 1822: livr. 20, pl. 120, fig. 1.
= Phaethornis squalidus (Temminck, 1822).
Possible holotype,
Following
Chizärhis leucogaster Rüppell, 1842: 127.
= Corythaixoides leucogaster (Rüppell, 1842).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was selected by
Chizaerhis zonurus Rüppell, 1835: 9, pl. 4.
= Crinifer zonurus (Rüppell, 1835).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was designated by
Musophaga paulina Temminck, 1820: livr. 4, pl. 23.
= Tauraco erythrolophus (Vieillot, 1819).
The holotype (by monotypy) is in the
Corythaix leucotis Rüppell, 1835: 8, pl. 3.
= Tauraco leucotis leucotis (Rüppell, 1835).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was selected by
Musophaga Verreauxii Schlegel, 1854a: 462.
= Tauraco macrorhynchus verreauxii (Schlegel, 1854).
Syntype,
Corythaix schalowi Reichenow, 1891: 148.
Turacus schalowi var. marungensis Reichenow, 1902: 52.
= Tauraco schalowi (Reichenow, 1891).
Syntype,
Turacus emini Reichenow, 1893: 30.
= Tauraco schuettii emini Reichenow, 1893.
Syntype,
Turacus finschi Reichenow, 1899: 190.
= Tauraco schuettii emini Reichenow, 1893.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Otis cærulescens Vieillot, 1821: 334.
= Eupodotis caerulescens (Vieillot, 1821).
Holotype,
Vieillot based his name on the description in Levaillant’s Voyage (1790: 226). Levaillant wrote that his dogs caught a bustard, later listed by
Otis scolopacea Temminck, 1836: livr. 97, pl. 576.
= Eupodotis vigorsii vigorsii (Smith, 1831).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The year of publication of livraison 97, usually given as 1835 following
Otis melanogaster Rüppell, 1835: 16, pl. 7.
= Lissotis melanogaster melanogaster (Rüppell, 1835).
According to the correspondence in the
Otis Ludwigii
= Neotis ludwigii (Rüppell 1837).
In his description of Otis scolopacea, Temminck (1836) referred to a specimen collected by Ecklon which he identified as O. Denhamii (Pl. Col. 97).
Cacomantis aeruginosus Salvadori, 1878b: 456.
= Cacomantis aeruginosus aeruginosus Salvadori, 1878.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The remaining syntypes are in the
Cacomantis arfakianus Salvadori, 1889: 177.
= Cacomantis castaneiventris (Gould, 1867).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Cuculus leucolophus Müller, 1840: 22.
= Cacomantis leucolophus (Müller, 1840).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Cuculus lanceolatus Müller, 1843: 178.
= Cacomantis merulinus lanceolatus (Müller, 1843).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Cuculus poliogaster Müller, 1845: 236.
= Cacomantis pallidus (Latham, 1801).
Lectotype,
Müller gave no indication of the number of specimens.
Forsten was forced to stay on Ternate due to illness between 19 June 1841 and mid-September 1841.
Cuculus sepulcralis Müller, 1843: 177.
= Cacomantis sepulcralis sepulcralis (Müller, 1843).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Müller described this species as originating from Java and Sumatra, and
Cuculus fasciolatus Müller, 1843: 177.
Penthoceryx sonneratii schlegeli Junge, 1948: 322.
= Cacomantis sonneratii fasciolatus (Müller, 1843).
Syntype for fasciolatus, holotype for schlegeli,
Syntype for fasciolatus,
Syntype for fasciolatus,
The type series also includes specimens from Java, which are Cacomantis sonneratii musicus (Ljungh, 1804).
Müller visited Sumatra between 1833 and 1835.
Cuculus tymbonomus Müller, 1843: 177.
= Cacomantis variolosus tymbonomus (Müller, 1843).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy: Müller collected a single male.
Cuculus dumetorum Gould, 1845b: text to pl. 87.
= Cacomantis variolosus variolosus (Vigors & Horsfield, 1827).
Possible paralectotype,
Calobates radiceus Temminck, 1832: livr. 91, pl. 538.
= Carpococcyx radiceus (Temminck, 1832).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck wrote that this species is known from a single female.
The name C. radiceus is considered a lapsus for radiatus (
Centropus medius “Müller” Bonaparte, 1850a: 108.
= Centropus bengalensis medius Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to Bonaparte this species originated from Ambon and Java, a fact overlooked by
Kuhl and Van Hasselt visited Java between December 1820 and September 1821. Blume stayed in Java from 1818 until 1826.
Centropus bengalensis philippinensis Mees, 1971a: 190.
= Centropus bengalensis philippinensis Mees, 1971.
Holotype,
Paratype,
There are also eight paratypes in the UZMC.
The year of collecting given on the original labels is 1887, but should be 1888 (G.F. Mees, in litt.).
Centropus Bernsteini Schlegel, 1866c: 251.
= Centropus bernsteini Schlegel, 1866.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Schlegel wrote he had only seen a female. Salawati is probably incorrect (
Centropus celebensis Quoy & Gaimard, 1832: 230.
= Centropus celebensis celebensis Quoy & Gaimard, 1832.
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was selected by
Centropus goliath Bonaparte, 1850a: 108.
= Centropus goliath Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
During a forced stay on Ternate from 19 June 1841 until mid-September 1841 due to illness, Forsten sent his hunters to Halmahera to collect skins.
Centropus francisci Bonaparte, 1850a: 107.
= Centropus leucogaster leucogaster (Leach, 1814).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Centropus monachus Rüppell, 1837a: 57, pl. 21, fig. 2.
= Centropus monachus monachus Rüppell, 1837.
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was designated by
Polophilus Gigas Stephens, 1815: 45.
Corydonix giganteus Vieillot, 1819c: 295.
= Centropus phasianinus phasianinus (Latham, 1801).
Holotype,
Both Stephens and Vieillot based their description on a plate by Levaillant.
Centropus epomidis Bonaparte, 1850a: 107.
= Centropus senegalensis senegalensis (Linnaeus, 1766).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Centropus kangeangensis Vorderman, 1893: 190.
= Centropus sinensis kangeangensis Vorderman, 1893.
Syntype,
Vorderman mentioned that he collected two specimens of this taxon together with three specimens of C. sinensis sinensis Stephens, 1815. The
Centropus madagascariensis Schlegel, 1864b: 65.
= Centropus toulou toulou (P.L.S. Müller, 1776).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Schlegel listed only
Centropus molkenboeri Bonaparte, 1850a: 108.
= Centropus viridis viridis (Scopoli, 1786).
Lectotype,
Bonaparte gave no indication of the number of specimens available to him.
Cuculus Klaas Stephens, 1815: 128.
Cuculus klaasii Vieillot, 1817b: 230.
= Chrysococcyx klaas (Stephens, 1815).
Lectotype,
Both Stephens and Vieillot based their description on Levaillant’s ‘Le Coucou de Klaas’ (1806–1807: 53, pl. 212). Levaillant based his description on a specimen in his own collection and a specimen in the
Cuculus chalcites “Illiger” Temminck, 1821: livr. 17, pl. 102, fig. 2.
= Chrysococcyx lucidus plagosus (Latham, 1801).
Following
Cuculus neglectus Schlegel, 1864b: 35.
= Chrysococcyx minutillus aheneus (Junge, 1938).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Müller visited Borneo between 28 July 1836 and 17 December 1836.
Chalcites malayanus aheneus Junge, 1938: 238.
= Chrysococcyx minutillus aheneus (Junge, 1938).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Chalcites malayanus albifrons Junge, 1938: 237.
= Chrysococcyx minutillus albifrons (Junge, 1938).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Lamprococcyx crassirostris Salvadori, 1878b: 456.
= Chrysococcyx minutillus crassirostris (Salvadori, 1878).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Müller visited Ambon between 29 March and 20 April 1828.
Chalcites malayanus jungei Stresemann, 1938: 148.
= Chrysococcyx minutillus jungei (Stresemann, 1938).
Paratype,
The holotype is in the
Chalcococcyx innominatus Finsch, 1900: 94.
= Chrysococcyx minutillus rufomerus Hartert, 1900.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Finsch described C. innominatus based on a single male.
Cuculus edolio Temminck, 1807: 60.
= Clamator jacobinus subsp.
Possible syntype,
Temminck based his description on a male and female in his own collection.
Temminck referred to
Van Horstok is not mentioned under the stand in Temminck’s handwriting but was added later to the label and should be considered an error as he was not in South Africa as early as 1807.
Coccyzus lansbergi Bonaparte, 1850a: 112.
= Coccyzus lansbergi Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Coccycus Delalandei Temminck, 1827: livr. 74, pl. 440.
= Coua delalandei (Temminck, 1827).
The holotype is in the
Cuculus lepidus Müller, 1845: 236.
= Cuculus lepidus Müller, 1845.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Müller collected a single specimen during his stay in the area of Lelogama from 7 to 9 October 1829 (
Cuculus tenuirostris Müller, 1845: 235.
= Cuculus lepidus Müller, 1845.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Birds arrived in the
Cuculus canoroïdes Müller, 1845: 235.
= Cuculus lepidus Müller, 1845.
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
= Mt.] Doesoen, Poeloe Maja” as collecting locality. This specimen was collected, however, on the Dusun [= Barito] River (
Cuculus concretus Müller, 1845: 236.
= Cuculus micropterus concretus Müller, 1845.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Eudynamis melanorhynchus Müller, 1843: 176.
= Eudynamys melanorhynchus Müller, 1843.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten stayed in the Tondano area between 22 March 1840 and 19 June 1841.
Eudynamis ransomi Bonaparte, 1850a: 101.
Cuculus punctatus var. ceramensis “Forsten” Bonaparte, 1850a: 101.
= Eudynamys orientalis orientalis (Linnaeus, 1766).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Bonaparte published Forsten’s manuscript name C. p. ceramensis in the synonymy of E. ransomi.
Forsten visited Seram late 1842.
Eudynamis picatus Müller, 1843: 176.
= Eudynamys orientalis picatus Müller, 1843.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Müller based his description on a single male in moult.
Eudynamis minima van Oort, 1911b: 54.
= Eudynamys orientalis rufiventer (Lesson, 1830).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Eudynamis scolopacea simalurensis Junge, 1936: 43.
= Eudynamys scolopaceus malayanus Cabanis & Heine, 1863.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Cuculus vagans Müller, 1845: 233.
= Hierococcyx vagans (Müller, 1845).
Holotype,
Müller described this specimen as an adult male.
Kuhl and Van Hasselt visited Java between December 1820 and September 1821.
Coccyzus Geoffroyi Temminck, 1820: livr. 2, pl. 7.
= Neomorphus geoffroyi geoffroyi (Temminck, 1820).
Following
Cuculus Audeberti Schlegel, 1879b: 99.
= Pachycoccyx audeberti audeberti (Schlegel, 1879).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Schlegel referred to
Cuculus curvirostris Shaw, 1810: text to pl. 905.
Phænicophæus tricolor Stephens, 1815: 61, pl. 14.
Phænicophaus [sic] viridis Vieillot, 1817d: 462.
= Phaenicophaeus curvirostris curvirostris (Shaw, 1810).
The above names are based on “Le malkoha rouverdin” by
Phœnicophaeus viridirufus “Levaillant” Müller, 1845: 234.
Phaenicophaeus erythrognathus Bonaparte, 1850a: 98.
= Phaenicophaeus curvirostris subsp.
Syntype (viridirufus and erythrognathus),
Syntype (viridirufus and erythrognathus),
Syntype (viridirufus and erythrognathus),
Syntype (viridirufus and erythrognathus),
Syntype (viridirufus),
Syntype (viridirufus),
Possible syntype (viridirufus),
Possible syntype (viridirufus),
Possible syntype (viridirufus),
Müller applied the name P. viridirufus to birds from Java, Sumatra, and Borneo. Hence three subspecies of Phaenicophaeus curvirostris (Shaw, 1810) are involved: nominate P. c. curvirostris Shaw, 1810, from Java, P. c. singularis Parrot, 1907, from Sumatra and P. c. microrhinus von Berlepsch, 1895, from Borneo. Bonaparte applied the name P. erythrognathus to birds from Sumatra only.
Phoenicophaus elongatus Müller, 1836: 342, pl. IV, fig. 5.
= Phaenicophaeus tristis tristis (Lesson, 1830).
Syntype,
Syntype,
The 1835 volume of the Tijdschrift voor Natuurlijke Geschiedenis en Physiologie 2: 315–355 was published in 1836 (
Müller, who visited West Sumatra from June 1833 until late 1835, described how he collected an adult and a juvenile male.
Piaya circe Bonaparte, 1850a: 110.
= Piaya cayana circe Bonaparte, 1850.
Lectotype,
Piaya mehleri Bonaparte, 1850a: 110.
= Piaya cayana mehleri Bonaparte, 1850.
Lectotype,
Cuculus melanogaster Vieillot, 1817b: 236.
= Piaya melanogaster (Vieillot, 1817).
Lectotype,
The locality “Java” is erroneous.
Phænicophæus calyorhynchus Temminck, 1825: livr. 59, pl. 349.
= Rhamphococcyx calyorhynchus calyorhynchus (Temminck, 1825).
Syntype,
Syntype,
A third syntype is in the
Reinwardt visited North Sulawesi between September and December 1820.
Scythrops novaehollandiae fordi Mason & Forrester, 1996: 225.
= Scythrops novaehollandiae fordi Mason & Forrester, 1996.
Paratype,
The holotype is in the
Scythrops novaehollandiae schoddei Mason & Forrester, 1996: 226.
= Scythrops novaehollandiae schoddei Mason & Forrester, 1996.
Paratype,
The holotype is in the
Pseudornis Dicruroïdes Hodgson, 1839: 136.
= Surniculus dicruroides dicruroides (Hodgson, 1839).
Possible paralectotype,
Pterocles setarius Temminck, 1815a: 256.
= Pterocles alchata alchata (Linnaeus, 1766).
Pterocles bicinctus Temminck, 1815a: 247.
= Pterocles bicinctus bicinctus Temminck, 1815.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Pterocles coronatus Lichtenstein, 1823: 65.
= Pterocles coronatus coronatus Lichtenstein, 1823.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Three syntypes collected by Hemprich and Ehrenberg in Nubie are in the
Pterocles exustus Temminck, 1825: livr. 60, pl. 354 (male) and livr. 61, pl. 360 (female).
= Pterocles exustus exustus Temminck, 1825.
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
During the preparation of this catalogue the authors were in doubt about the type status of the above listed specimens based on the possibility that Temminck’s exustus could be interpreted as a nomen novum for senegalensis Lichtenstein, 1823, which is preoccupied by Tetrao senegalensis Shaw, 1810, a junior synonym of Tetrao senegallus Linnaeus, 1771. After discussions with C. Gouraud and consultation of, among others, F. Rheindt, F. Steinheimer, and J. van Tol, it was concluded that this was not a clear case of a new name and ICZN art.72.7 does not apply. Hence, we follow
Pterocles lichtensteinii Temminck, 1825: livr. 60, pl. 355 (male, not pl. 335 as mentioned in the text).
= Pterocles lichtensteinii lichtensteinii Temminck, 1825.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Pterocles tachypetes Temminck, 1815a: 274.
= Pterocles namaqua (Gmelin, 1789).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype, RNMH.AVES.90762, adult male, mounted skin. Loc.: “Cap”, [South Africa]. Leg.: -.
Syntype,
Pterocles quadricinctus Temminck, 1815a: 252.
= Pterocles quadricinctus Temminck, 1815.
Temminck based his description on a male and female in the collection of Raye van Breukelerwaert. Although some of this collection was bought for the
Pterocles guttatus Lichtenstein, 1823: 64.
= Pterocles senegallus (Linnaeus, 1771).
Syntype,
Four syntypes collected by Hemprich and Ehrenberg in Nubie are in the
Syrrhaptes Pallasii Temminck, 1815a: 282.
= Syrrhaptes paradoxus (Pallas, 1773).
Temminck based his name on a drawing and description by prof. Fischer (Moscow) and reports of specimens collected by Pallas and Ireskin. Types are presumed to be in the
Chalcophaps timorensis Bonaparte, 1856d: 948.
Chalcophaps javanicoides “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1856d: 948.
= Chalcophaps indica indica (Linnaeus, 1758).
Lectotype for timorensis, syntype for javanicoides,
According to
Peristera bornensis “Müller” Bonaparte, 1857: 91.
= Chalcophaps indica indica (Linnaeus, 1758).
Lectotype,
Müller visited Borneo from 28 July 1836 to 17 December 1836.
Peristera albifrons Bonaparte, 1857: 92.
= Chalcophaps stephani wallacei Brüggemann, 1877.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited the area near Gorontalo from September 1841 until April 1842.
Columba Godefrida Temminck, 1811: livr. 14/15, p. 125, pl. 57.
= Claravis geoffroyi (Temminck, 1811).
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Peristera lansbergii Schlegel, 1873b: 139.
= Claravis mondetoura (Bonaparte, 1856).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Collected between 1842 and 1855 when van Lansberge was governor in Caracas.
Columba cinerea Temminck, 1811: 126, pl. 58 (nec Scopoli, 1786).
Peristera pretiosa Ferrari-Perez, 1886: 175 (nomen novum).
= Claravis pretiosa (Ferrari-Perez, 1886).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Columba albitorques Rüppell, 1837: 63, pl. 22, fig. 1.
= Columba albitorques Rüppell, 1837.
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was designated by
Myristicivora grisea “Gray” Bonaparte, 1854b: 1078.
[Myristicivora] argentea “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1854b: 1078
Columba argentina “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1857: 36.
= Columba argentina Bonaparte, 1855 [error for 1857].
Lectotype for argentina, syntype for grisea and argentea,
Gray (1844: 5) published Columba grisea as a nomen nudum. Bonaparte formerly described Myristicivora grisea in 1854 with [Myristicivora] argentea, a manuscript name by Temminck, in synonymy. In 1857, Bonaparte published the name Columba argentina? “Temm.” in synonymy of Myristicivora grisea. However, Myristicivora grisea Bonaparte, 1854, is preoccupied by Columba grisea Bonnaterre, 1790, making argentea Bonaparte, 1854, the first available name, not argentina Bonaparte, 1857.
By erroneously listing
Colomba Arquatrix Temminck, 1808: livr. 3, p. 11, pl. 5.
= Columba arquatrix Temminck, 1808.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Stictoenas arquatricula Bonaparte, 1854c: 1105.
= Columba arquatrix Temminck, 1808.
Possible syntype,
According to the original label this specimen was collected in South Africa (“Cap”), while
Columba janthina Temminck, 1830: livr. 86 [85], pl. 503.
= Columba janthina janthina Temminck, 1830.
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
No livraison number is given under the text. According to
The word “Usinato” written under the stand of
Columba Larvata Temminck, 1809: livr. 7, p. 71, pl. 31.
= Columba larvata Temminck, 1809.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck wrote that Levaillant donated him a male of this species.
Columba Erythrotorax Temminck, 1809: livr. 7, p. 15, pl. 7.
= Columba larvata Temminck, 1809.
Temminck (1809) referred to two specimens in the
Junior synonym of Columba Larvata Temminck, 1809 which was published in the same work, though slightly later. For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Columba leucomela Temminck, 1821: 126.
= Columba leucomela Temminck, 1821.
Holotype by monotypy. Collected by Westall in “New Holland” [= Australia]. Formerly in the collection of the Linnean Society, now in the
Palumbus casiotis Bonaparte, 1854c: 1103.
Columba palumbus himalayana Schlegel, 1873b: 66.
= Columba palumbus casiotis (Bonaparte, 1854).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba pollenii Schlegel, 1865c: 87.
= Columba pollenii Schlegel, 1865.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Schlegel wrote that Pollen and Van Dam collected a single specimen.
Pages 1–180 of Vol. 3, ‘Nederlandsch Tijdschrift voor de Dierkunde’ were published in 1865 (
Columba kitlitzii Temminck, 1836: livr. 98, no plate.
= Columba versicolor Kittlitz, 1832.
Extinct. According to the original description, syntypes from Bonin and Japan are in St. Petersburg and in the
Janthoenas luzoniensis Schlegel, 1873b: 75.
= Columba vitiensis griseogularis (Walden & Layard, 1872).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Schlegel listed only a single specimen.
Janthœnas albigularis “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1854: 1105.
Janthaenas halmaheira Bonaparte, 1857: 44.
= Columba vitiensis halmaheira (Bonaparte, 1857).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Janthoenas albigularis Bonaparte, 1854 is a nomen nudum and replaced by halmaheira Bonaparte, 1857 (not 1855 as in IOC 11.1).
During a forced stay due to illness on Ternate from 19 June 1841 until mid September 1841, Forsten sent his hunters to Halmahera to collect skins. Forsten visited Seram late 1842.
Columba metallica Temminck, 1835: livr. 95, pl. 562.
= Columba vitiensis metallica Temminck, 1835.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Columba Cruziana Prevost, 1842: 89, pl. 48.
= Columbina cruziana (Prevost, 1842).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to
Columba Picui Temminck, 1813a: 435.
= Columbina picui picui (Temminck, 1813).
In Temminck (1810: 29) the vernacular name used by
Columba squammata Lesson, 1831: 474.
Columba Squamosa Temminck, 1811: 127, pl. 59 (nec Bonnaterre, 1790).
= Columbina squammata squammata (Lesson, 1831).
Lectotype,
Columba Squamosa is also the type of the genus name Scardafella Bonaparte, 1855.
Columba Talpacoti Temminck, 1810: livr. 12/13, p. 22, pl. 12.
= Columbina talpacoti talpacoti (Temminck, 1810).
Temminck (1810) based his description on a specimen in his own cabinet and in several other collections, including the
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Columba Holosericea Temminck, 1809: livr. 8, p. 73, pl. 32.
= Drepanoptila holosericea (Temminck, 1809).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck (1809) wrote that he only knew the specimen which was used as a model here.
Temminck described the species as originating from the Sandwich Islands [= Hawaii] which is clearly erroneous, since it does not occur there. According to
Carpophaga Vandepolli Büttikofer, 1896c: 190.
= Ducula aenea consobrina (Salvadori, 1887).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Carpophaga nuchalis Cabanis, 1882: 126.
= Ducula aenea nuchalis (Cabanis, 1882).
Syntype,
The other syntype is in the
Ducula paulina Bonaparte, 1854b: 1076.
= Ducula aenea paulina Bonaparte, 1854.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited the Tondano area from 22 March 1840 to 19 June 1841.
Ducula aenea sulana Siebers, 1929: 152.
= Ducula aenea paulina Bonaparte, 1854.
Holotype,
There are seven paratypes in the
Columba muscadivora “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 32.
= Ducula aenea polia (Oberholser, 1917).
Possible syntype,
Ducula problematica Rensch, 1931: 372.
= Ducula aenea polia (Oberholser, 1917).
Holotype,
Columba capistrata Temminck: 1822: livr. 28, pl. 165.
= Ducula badia badia (Raffles, 1822).
Ducula basilica Bonaparte, 1854b: 1076.
= Ducula basilica basilica Bonaparte, 1854.
Syntype,
Syntype,
During a forced stay due to illness on Ternate from 19 June 1841 until mid-September 1841, Forsten sent his hunters to Halmahera to collect skins.
Columba Littoralis Temminck, 1808: 15, pl.7.
= Ducula bicolor (Scopoli, 1786).
Temminck based his description primarily on reports by Leschenault. Specimens in the
Ducula melanura siebersi van Bemmel, 1940: 335.
= Ducula bicolor (Scopoli, 1786).
Holotype,
There are three paratypes in the
Columba cineracea Temminck, 1835: livr. 95, pl. 563.
= Ducula cineracea (Temminck, 1835).
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
Müller visited Timor from October 1828 until December 1829, the area of Mount Miomaffo between 7 and 30 September 1829.
Carpophaga concinna Wallace, 1865: 383.
= Ducula concinna (Wallace, 1865).
Syntype,
According to Peters (1937: 45) the type locality Matabello is based on an error and should be Watubela (Moluccas).
Columba Forsterii “Temminck” Prévost, 1843: 87, pl. 47.
Hemiphaga forsteni Bonaparte, 1854b (nomen novum).
= Ducula forsteni (Bonaparte, 1854).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Prévost (1842) dedicated this species to Forster, clearly a lapsus for E.A. Forsten. This was corrected by Bonaparte, who introduced Hemiphaga forsteni as a nomen novum.
According to field notes and collection lists by Forsten in the Naturalis archives, he collected eight specimens on 16 May 1840 near and between Tondano and Tomohon (P. van Wingerden, June 2022, pers. comm.). Three listed here as syntype are still in Leiden, the whereabouts of the remaining five specimens is not known to us. None are in the
Columba lacernulata Temminck, 1822: livr. 28, pl. 164.
= Ducula lacernulata lacernulata (Temminck, 1822).
Lectotype,
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822.
Columba luctuosa Temminck, 1824: livr. 42, pl. 247.
= Ducula luctuosa (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description other type specimens are in the
Reinwardt visited North Sulawesi between September and December 1821.
Columba mullerii Temminck, 1835: livr. 96, pl. 566.
= Ducula mullerii (Temminck, 1835).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
The label indicates that the skin was collected in May 1829. This must be an error as Müller visited the Dourga River between 21 and 27 May 1828.
Carpophaga geelvinkiana Schlegel, 1873b: 86.
= Ducula myristicivora geelvinkiana (Schlegel, 1873).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Carpophaga roseinucha Schlegel, 1866b: 197.
= Ducula myristicivora myristicivora (Scopoli, 1786) but see below.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Although
Taxonomy: In the second edition of his catalogue,
Ducula myristicivora occurs on the West Papuan Islands (nominate race: Batanta, Gebe, Gag, Gam, Misool, Salawati, Schildpad, Sinapang, Waigeo, and Widis) and the islands in the Geelvink Bay (race geelvinkiana). It has also been recorded as a vagrant from New Guinea. Ducula concinna is resident on countless small islands of the Sanghir and Talaud group, the Central and South Moluccan Islands and the islands south of Sulawesi. Birds from the Aru, Kei and Talaud Islands are sometimes treated as separate taxa: D. c. aru Salomonsen, 1934, D. c. separata (Hartert, 1896), and D. c. intermedia (Meyer & Wiglesworth, 1894), respectively.
Consequently, the type series is composed of two taxa, Ducula myristicivora myristicivora (Scopoli, 1786) and Ducula concinna (Wallace, 1865).
Nomenclature: To exclude specimens which do not belong to the same taxon from being name-bearing types, it is necessary to designate a lectotype. Taking Schlegel’s description into account, the name has to be applied to birds known as myristicivora. However, since the type specimens identified as myristicivora originate from different West Papuan islands and Schlegel did not prefer one of them, the fixation of the name roseinucha to a single specimen and thus to one of these islands would be an arbitrary selection. In order to keep the name applicable to different islands and because roseinucha as a younger synonym does not (yet) affect current taxonomy, we do not propose or select a lectotype here.
Carpophaga neglecta Schlegel, 1866b: 194.
= Ducula neglecta (Schlegel, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The sex of
Columba oceanica “Lesson and Garnot” Desmarest, 1826: 316.
= Ducula oceanica oceanica (Desmarest, 1826).
Syntype,
The publication of the name Columba oceanica by Desmarest in June 1826 predated the publication in
According to
According to
Columba perspicillata Temminck, 1824: livr. 42, pl. 246.
= Ducula perspicillata (Temminck, 1824).
Lectotype,
The label mentions Forsten as the collector. This must be erroneous since Forsten arrived in Indonesia after the name was published in 1824. The specimen was probably collected by Reinwardt who visited Halmahera briefly in 1821. A similar mix-up is found in the type specimens of Columba hyogastra Temminck, 1824, which were presumably collected by Reinwardt and are also labelled ‘Forsten’.
According to the original description paratypes are in the
Carpophaga pinon jobiensis Schlegel, 1871a: 26.
Carpophaga Westermanii “von Rosenberg” Schlegel, 1871a: 27.
= Ducula pinon jobiensis (Schlegel, 1871).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba rosacea Temminck, 1836: livr. 98, pl. 578.
= Ducula rosacea (Temminck, 1836).
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
The year of publication of livraison 97, usually given as 1835 following
Globicera rubricera Bonaparte, 1854b: 1073.
= Ducula rubricera rubricera (Bonaparte, 1854).
Syntype,
Ducula rufigaster pallida Junge, 1952: 248.
= Ducula rufigaster rufigaster (Quoy & Gaimard, 1832).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Ptilopus helviventris Von Rosenberg, 1866: 144.
= Gallicolumba rufigula helviventris (von Rosenberg, 1866).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy,
Columba tristigmata Bonaparte, 1855a: 207.
= Gallicolumba tristigmata tristigmata (Bonaparte, 1855).
Lectotype,
Columba humeralis Temminck, 1821: 128.
= Geopelia humeralis humeralis (Temminck, 1821).
Columba Maugeus Temminck, 1809: livr. 10/11, p. 11, pl. 52.
= Geopelia maugeus (Temminck, 1809).
Temminck (1809) referred to two specimens in the
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Geopelia placida Gould, 1844: 55.
= Geopelia placida placida Gould, 1844.
Possible paralectotype,
Columba scripta Temminck, 1821: 127.
= Geophaps scripta scripta (Temminck, 1821).
Lectotype,
It is clear that
Columba Mystacea Temminck, 1811: livr. 14/15, p. 124, pl. 56.
= Geotrygon mystacea (Temminck, 1811).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy, as
Columba cristata Temminck, 1809: 20, pl. 9 (nec Gmelin, 1788).
= Geotrygon versicolor (Lafresnaye, 1846).
Syntype,
According to the original description, another syntype was in London (collection not mentioned) and a third in the collection of Raye van Breukelerwaert.
Columba Violacea Temminck, 1809: livr. 7, p. 67, pl. 29.
= Geotrygon violacea violacea (Temminck, 1809).
Temminck (1809) based his description on a single specimen in the
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Goura coronata minor Schlegel, 1864a: 208.
= Goura cristata (Pallas, 1764).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
A syntype was sent in exchange to the
Goura cristata pygmaea Mees, 1965: 160.
= Goura cristata (Pallas, 1764).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Goura Steursii “Temminck” Gray, G.R., 1845: pl. CXX, p. 479.
= Goura victoria victoria (Fraser, 1844).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to
The plate in Gray (1845) was drawn after a living bird in the aviary of the Earl of Derby, so if preserved, this specimen is also part of the type series.
Columba mada Hartert, 1899: 33.
= Gymnophaps mada (Hartert, 1899).
Paralectotype,
Hartert gave no indication of the specimens available to him. Later
Columba gigas Ranzani, 1821: 223 (nomen novum).
= Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae spadicea (Latham, 1801).
Van den Hoek Ostende et al. (1979) erroneously listed
Rynchaenas Schlegeli Von Rosenberg, 1866: 143.
= Henicophaps albifrons schlegeli (von Rosenberg, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Although given as 1867 in
Columba Armillaris Temminck, 1808: 13, pl. 6.
= Leucosarcia melanoleuca (Latham, 1801).
Syntype,
The depicted specimen is from Temminck’s Cabinet, who also referred to two specimens in London.
Columba dilopha Temminck, 1821: 124.
= Lopholaimus antarcticus (Shaw, 1793).
Paralectotype,
Macropygia griseinucha Salvadori, 1876: 204.
Macropygia maforensis Salvadori, 1878a: 429.
= Macropygia amboinensis griseinucha Salvadori, 1876 and Macropygia amboinensis maforensis Salvadori, 1878.
Syntype for griseinucha only,
Syntype for griseinucha only,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Two or three taxa are involved: Macropygia amboinensis maforensis Salvadori, 1878 from Numfor and Macropygia amboinensis griseinucha Salvadori, 1876 from Mios Num. IOC 11.1 is not clear about the subspecific status on Biak.
Macropygia keyensis Salvadori, 1876: 204.
= Macropygia amboinensis keyensis Salvadori, 1876.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Macropygia albicapilla Bonaparte, 1854c: 1111.
= Macropygia doreya albicapilla Bonaparte, 1854.
Lectotype,
Forsten stayed in Celebes twice between March 1840 and April 1842.
Macropygia albiceps “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1854c: 1111.
= Macropygia doreya albiceps Bonaparte, 1856.
Syntype,
Although
Forsten visited Ternate from 19 June 1841 until mid-September 1841.
Macropygia phasianella barussa Siebers, 1929: 152.
= Macropygia emiliana emiliana Bonaparte, 1854.
Holotype,
Macropygia phasianella megala Siebers, 1929: 151.
= Macropygia emiliana megala Siebers, 1929.
Holotype,
Macropygia nigrirostris major van Oort, 1908a: 174.
= Macropygia nigrirostris Salvadori, 1876.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Macropygia phasianella Temminck, 1821: 129.
= Macropygia phasianella phasianella (Temminck, 1821).
Columba ruficeps Temminck, 1835: livr. 95, pl. 561.
= Macropygia ruficeps ruficeps (Temminck, 1835).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to
Although not mentioned in the original description,
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822. Müller visited West Sumatra from July 1833 until late1835.
Columba Unchall Wagler, 1827: no. 38.
Columba leptogrammica Temminck, 1835: livr. 95, pl. 560.
= Macropygia unchall unchall (Wagler, 1827).
Syntype,
Syntype only for leptogrammica,
According to
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822. Boie visited Java between June 1826 and September 1827.
Columba Picturata Temminck, 1813: page 315.
= Nesoenas picturatus picturatus (Temminck, 1813).
Syntype,
Dowsett (pers. comm.) assumed that Réunion is the type locality instead of Mauritius, where the species had been introduced prior to 1813 when the specimen was described. The native distribution of Nesoenas picturatus is on islands in the Indian Ocean (Seychelles, Amirantes, Aldabra, Glorieuse, and Comoro islands) with the nominate picturatus Temminck on Madagascar.
Columba lophotes Temminck, 1822: livr. 24, pl. 142.
= Ocyphaps lophotes lophotes (Temminck, 1822).
Lectotype,
The original description gives no indication about the number of type specimens. However, since Temminck (1822) described a single “male” there was probably only one specimen available at that time. As
This specimen must have been received in the
Columba erythroptera Gmelin, 1789: 254.
Columba leucophrys Wagler, 1829: 743.
= Pampusana erythroptera erythroptera (Gmelin, 1789).
Possible syntype,
The origin, collector, and history and therefore the true identity of this specimen was and is still open to much debate. Up to now it is assumed to be the only surviving specimen out of at least four collected on Tahiti and Moorea between 17 August and 1 September 1773 and between 22 April and 14 May 1774 during Captain James Cook’s second voyage. It is and long has been considered one of the syntypes. However, only if it is one of the specimens collected during Capt. Cook’s second voyage, is it one of the syntypes.
Another possibility currently examined by J. Jansen and J. Hume is that, because of a lack of evidence due to the absence of original labels as well as morphological differences with true P. erythroptera,
Leptoptila Hoedtii Schlegel, 1871a: 30.
= Pampusana hoedtii (Schlegel, 1871).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Phlegoenas vitiensis Finsch, 1872: 50.
= Pampusana stairi (Gray, 1856).
Syntype,
Columba xanthonura Temminck, 1823: pl. 190.
= Pampusana xanthonura (Temminck, 1823).
Temminck (1823) based this name on two specimens in the
Columba denisea Temminck, 1830: livr. 86 [= 85], pl. 502.
= Patagioenas araucana (Lesson & Garnot, 1827).
Holotype,
Contrary to
According to
Columba Rufina Temminck, 1809: livr. 6, p. 59, pl. 24.
= Patagioenas cayennensis cayennensis Bonnaterre, 1792.
Temminck (1809) based his description on a specimen in the
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Columba Gymnophtalmos Temminck, 1809: livr. 5, p. 48, pl. 18.
= Patagioenas corensis (Jacquin, 1784).
Temminck (1809) based his description on a male in the
Columba fasciata vioscae Brewster, 1888: 86.
= Patagioenas fasciata vioscae (Brewster, 1888).
Syntype,
Columba leucocapilla Temminck, 1807: 142, no. 777.
= Patagioenas leucocephala (Linnaeus, 1758).
Syntype,
Columba Maculosa Temminck, 1813a: 113.
= Patagioenas maculosa maculosa (Temminck, 1813).
Chloroenas fallax Schlegel, 1873b: 80.
= Patagioenas maculosa maculosa (Temminck, 1813).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba Picazuro Temminck, 1813a: 111.
= Patagioenas picazuro picazuro (Temminck, 1813).
Columba Portoricensis Temminck, 1809: 41, pl. 15.
= Patagioenas squamosa (Bonnaterre, 1792).
Lectotype,
See
Columba Vinacea Temminck, 1809: livr. 9, p. 87, pl. 41 (nec Gmelin, 1789).
= Patagioenas subvinacea purpureotincta (Ridgway, 1888).
Temminck (1809) reused a specific epithet for this new species already occupied by Columba vinacea Gmelin, 1789 (= Streptopelia vinacea). Temminck based his description on a single specimen in
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Columba leucotis Temminck, 1823: livr. 32, pl. 189.
= Phapitreron leucotis leucotis (Temminck, 1823).
The holotype is in the
Columba Elegans Temminck, 1809: livr. 6, p. 56, pl. 22.
= Phaps elegans elegans (Temminck, 1809).
Temminck (1809) based his description on two specimens in the
Peristera histrionica Gould, 1841b: pl. 66.
= Phaps histrionica (Gould, 1841).
Syntype,
Syntype,
These are two of the 12 specimens Gould collected on the Namori Plains in December 1839.
Ptilopus bernsteinii Schlegel, 1863c: 59.
= Ptilinopus bernsteinii bernsteinii Schlegel, 1863.
Holotype for bernsteinii, syntype for ochrogaster,
Ptilopus ochrogaster Bernstein, 1864: 86.
= Ptilinopus bernsteinii bernsteinii Schlegel, 1863.
Syntype for ochrogaster, holotype for bernsteinii,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Ptilopus cinctus Florensis Schlegel, 1871a: 20 (nomen novum).
= Ptilinopus cinctus albocinctus Wallace, 1864.
Columba Cincta Temminck, 1809: livr. 6, p. 58, pl. 23.
= Ptilinopus cinctus cinctus (Temminck, 1809).
Temminck (1809) based his description on a single specimen in his own cabinet, which could not be found in the
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Ptilopus cinctus Lettiensis Schlegel, 1871a: 20.
= Ptilinopus cinctus lettiensis Schlegel, 1871.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba hyogastra “Reinwardt” Temminck, 1824: livr. 43, pl. 252.
= Ptilinopus hyogastrus (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
Syntype,
The stand gives Forsten as collector in Temminck’s handwriting, which must be erroneous since Forsten arrived in Indonesia after the species was published. The specimens were probably collected by Reinwardt who visited Halmahera briefly in 1821. A similar mix-up is found in a type specimen of Columba perspicillata Temminck, 1824, which was presumably collected by Reinwardt and is also labelled ‘Forsten’. In addition to this Temminck wrote on the stand of
Ptilopus insolitus Schlegel, 1863c: 61, pl. Vogels 3, fig. 3.
= Ptilinopus insolitus insolitus Schlegel, 1863.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. The bird was acquired in 1862, the collector is not known. The tail and primaries are lacking. This was already mentioned by Schlegel in the description and most probably the reason why the bird in the plate is partly hidden behind a plant. The type locality was given as New Ireland by
Ptilopus humeralis iobiensis Schlegel, 1873b: 16.
= Ptilinopus iozonus iobiensis Schlegel, 1873.
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
In his description
Ptilopus Hugoniana Schlegel, 1863c: 60, pl. 3 fig. 2.
= Ptilinopus leclancheri leclancheri (Bonaparte, 1855).
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
Columba luteovirens Hombron & Jacquinot, 1841: 315.
= Ptilinopus luteovirens (Hombron & Jacquinot, 1841).
Syntype,
According to
Columba magnifica Temminck, 1821: 125.
= Ptilinopus magnificus magnificus (Temminck, 1821).
Holotype,
Jotreron chrysorrhoa Salvadori, 1875a: 671.
Ptilinopus sulaënsis Brüggemann, 1876: 81.
= Ptilinopus melanospilus chrysorrhous (Salvadori, 1875).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The collecting date of
Wallace visited Ceram [= Seram] twice between October 1859 and June 1860 (
Jotreron melanauchen Salvadori, 1875a: 671.
= Ptilinopus melanospilus melanauchen (Salvadori, 1875).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. The description by
Jotreron melanospila Salvadori, 1875a: 670.
= Ptilinopus melanospilus melanospilus (Salvadori, 1875).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Jotreron xanthorrhoa Salvadori, 1875a: 671.
= Ptilinopus melanospilus xanthorrhous (Salvadori, 1875).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
On the stand of
Columba monacha Temminck, 1824: livr. 43, pl. 253.
= Ptilinopus monacha (Temminck, 1824).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. According to Temminck (1824) this species is from Celebes. This is an error since P. monacha is restricted to Halmahera and surrounding islands.
Reinwardt visited Ternate (and very briefly Halmahera) twice between 15 August 1821 and 4 September 1821.
Columba naina Temminck, 1835: livr. 95, pl. 565.
= Ptilinopus nainus (Temminck, 1835).
Lectotype,
See
Ptilopus ornatus Schlegel, 1871b: 52.
= Ptilinopus ornatus ornatus Schlegel, 1871.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba perlata Temminck, 1835: livr. 94, pl. 559.
= Ptilinopus perlatus perlatus (Temminck, 1835).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. See
Ptilopus zonurus Salvadori, 1876: 197.
= Ptilinopus perlatus zonurus Salvadori, 1876.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba porphyracea Temminck, 1821: 130.
Columba Forsteri Desmarest, 1826: 340.
Columba viridissima Temminck, 1835: text for pl. 254 (2nd ed. livr. 95).
= Ptilinopus porphyraceus porphyraceus (Temminck, 1821).
Syntype for porphyracea and Forsteri, lectotype for viridissima,
According to
Columba porphyrea “Reinwardt” Temminck, 1822: livr. 18, pl. 106.
Columba roseicollis Wagler, 1827: no. 27 (nomen novum).
= Ptilinopus porphyreus (Temminck, 1822).
Holotype,
Following
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822.
Columba pulchella Temminck, 1835: livr. 95, pl. 564.
= Ptilinopus pulchellus (Temminck, 1835).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Ptilopus neglectus Schlegel, 1873b: 7.
= Ptilinopus rarotongensis rarotongensis Hartlaub & Finsch, 1871.
Holotype,
Columba Xanthogaster Wagler, 1827: no. 29 [237].
= Ptilinopus regina xanthogaster (Wagler, 1827).
Syntype,
Temminck described this specimen as a female collected by Reinwardt in Celebes, which was later corrected to a male from Banda by
Reinwardt visited the Banda Archipelago from 18 May to 25 June 1821.
Columba diademata Temminck, 1835: text for 254 (2nd ed. livr. 95).
= Ptilinopus regina xanthogaster (Wagler, 1827).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Müller stayed on Banda-Neira from 25 to 29 April 1828. In the report of his visit, he mentioned collecting this new species (
Ptilopus aurantiventris Von Rosenberg, 1866: 144.
= Ptilinopus regina xanthogaster (Wagler, 1827).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Although given as 1867 in
Ptilopus Miquelii Schlegel, 1871a: 22.
= Ptilinopus rivoli miquelii Schlegel, 1871.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba roseicapilla Lesson, 1831: 472.
= Ptilinopus roseicapilla (Lesson, 1831).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Two other syntypes are in the
The original data was lost when these specimens were removed from their stands. The more recent labels give “Guam, “Lesson” Schleg.” and additionally “Mus. Paris” for
Ptilopus speciosus “von Rosenberg” Schlegel, 1871a: 22.
= Ptilinopus solomonensis speciosus Schlegel, 1871.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba Superba Temminck, 1809: livr. 8, p. 75, pl. 33.
= Ptilinopus superbus superbus (Temminck, 1809).
Temminck (1809) based his description on a single specimen in his cabinet (
Ptilopus viridis Geelvinkiana Schlegel, 1871a: 23.
Carpophaga Musschenbroekii “von Rosenberg” Schlegel, 1871a: 23.
= Ptilinopus viridis geelvinkianus Schlegel, 1871.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Ptilinopus viridis pseudogeelvinkianus Junge, 1952: 247.
= Ptilinopus viridis geelvinkianus Schlegel, 1871.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Macropygia reinwardtii minor Schlegel, 1873b: 106.
Reinwardtoena reinwardtsi brevis Peters, 1937: xiii (nomen novum).
= Reinwardtoena reinwardti brevis Peters, 1937.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Peters (1937) introduced brevis as a nomen novum for Macropygia reinwardtii minor Schlegel, 1873 because the latter was preoccupied by Macropygia unchall minor Swinhoe, 1870.
Columba reinwardtsi Temminck, 1824: livr. 42, pl. 248.
Reinwardtoena typica Bonaparte, 1857: 59.
= Reinwardtoena reinwardti reinwardti (Temminck, 1824).
Holotype,
The spelling of the specific name reinwardtsi is a lapsus (
Temminck (1824) gave Celebes as the origin of the specimen which is obviously an error as the species does not occur there. Reinwardt visited Ambon twice between 26 June 1821 and 12 August 1821.
Columba miniata Temminck, 1813: 460.
= ?Spilopelia chinensis chinensis (Scopoli, 1786).
Columba Tigrina Temminck, 1809: livr. 9, p. 94, pl. 43.
= Spilopelia chinensis tigrina (Temminck, 1809).
Temminck’s description (1809) is based on a specimen in his own collection and two in the
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Columba Bitorquata Temminck, 1809: livr. 9, p. 86, pl. 40.
= Streptopelia bitorquata bitorquata (Temminck, 1809).
Temminck (1809) based his description on a single specimen in the
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Columba dusumieri Temminck, 1823: livr. 32, pl. 188.
= Streptopelia bitorquata dusumieri (Temminck, 1823).
Syntype,
The spelling of the specific name dusumieri is clearly a lapsus. Temminck (1823) named this species in honour of Dusumier, a miss-spelling for Jean-Jacques Dussumier.
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Turtur neglectus Schlegel, 1873b: 122.
= Streptopelia decipiens decipiens (Hartlaub & Finsch, 1870).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
As the exact type locality is unknown other than “NE Africa”, the name Turtur neglectus Schlegel, 1873, is linked to either Streptopelia decipiens decipiens (Hartlaub & Finsch, 1870) or Streptopelia decipiens elegans (Zedlitz, 1913). Further study is needed into the subspecific characters of the holotype and/or the travel reports of Clot to determine where the doves have been collected. See also Turtur fallax Schlegel, 1873, collected during the same expedition.
Columba lugens Rüppell, 1837: 64, pl. 22, fig. 2.
= Streptopelia lugens (Rüppell, 1837).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was designated by
Columba gelastis Temminck, 1835: livr. 93, pl. 550.
= Streptopelia orientalis orientalis (Latham, 1790).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba Alba Temminck, 1809: livr. 9: 102, pl. 46.
= Streptopelia roseogrisea (Sundevall, 1857).
Temminck (1809) does not refer to specimens of this white form of a Streptopelia roseogrisea (see
Turtur fallax Schlegel, 1873b: 124.
= Streptopelia roseogrisea roseogrisea (Sundevall, 1857).
Holotype,
As the exact type locality is unknown other than “NE Africa”, the name Turtur fallax Schlegel, 1873 is linked to either Streptopelia roseogrisea roseogrisea (Sundevall, 1857) or Streptopelia roseogrisea arabica (Neumann, 1904). Further study is needed into the subspecific characters of the holotype and/or the travel reports of Clot to determine where the doves have been collected. See also Turtur neglectus Schlegel, 1873.
Columba humilis Temminck, 1824: livr. 44, pls 258 and 259.
= Streptopelia tranquebarica humilis (Temminck, 1824).
Temminck (1824) referred to specimens from Manilla, Luzon, and “Bengale” in the
Columba Calva Temminck, 1811: livr. 14/15, p. 35, pl. 7.
= Treron calvus calvus (Temminck, 1811).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy, as
Phalacrotreron delalandii Bonaparte, 1854d: 873.
= Treron calvus delalandii (Bonaparte, 1854).
Possible syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Columba capellei Temminck, 1822: livr. 24, pl. 143.
= Treron capellei capellei (Temminck, 1822).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description another syntype (a male) is in the
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822.
Treron nasica Schlegel, 1863d: 67.
= Treron curvirostra nasica Schlegel, 1863.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to
Müller visited Borneo from 28 July 1836 to 17 December 1836, Schwaner from 1843 to 1848, and Crookewit from 1851 to 1858.
Columba cinnamomea Temminck, 1835: livr. 93.
= Treron fulvicollis fulvicollis (Wagler, 1827).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Columba cinnamomea is not illustrated in the ‘Planches Coloriées’.
Müller, whose name occurs on the labels but not on the stand, cannot be the collector, since he did not visit Borneo until 1836. These specimens are presumed to have been collected by either Diard or Henrici (G.F. Mees, in litt.).
Columba fulvicollis Wagler, 1827: [229].
Columba Aromatica Temminck, 1813a: 53.
= Treron fulvicollis fulvicollis (Wagler, 1827).
Three specimens were sent to Leuven in 1822 and 1829 and a skeleton was sent to the
Columba aromatica Temminck is preoccupied by Columba aromatica Gmelin, 1789 (= Treron aromaticus (Gmelin, 1789).
Treron sangirensis Brüggemann, 1876: 79.
= Treron griseicauda sangirensis Brüggemann, 1876.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Treron Vordermani Finsch, 1901: 162.
= Treron griseicauda vordermani Finsch, 1901.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Treron pompadori dehaani
Voous, 1951: 97. In:
= Treron griseicauda wallacei (Salvadori, 1893).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Voous (in
Columba olax Temminck, 1823: livr. 41, pl. 241.
= Treron olax (Temminck, 1823).
According to the original description, syntypes are in the
Columba oxyura “Reinwardt” Temminck, 1823: livr. 41, pl. 240.
= Treron oxyurus (Temminck, 1823).
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
According to the original description the types, collected by Reinwardt and Diard, are in the
According to a note attached to
Van Raalten stayed in Java from 1820 until 1827.
Columba Militaris Temminck, 1809: 23, pl.1.
= Treron phoenicopterus phoenicopterus (Latham, 1790).
Temminck (1809) referred to a male in the museum Raye de Breukelerwaert and a female in the
Columba Psittacea Temminck, 1808: livr. 1, p. 28, pl. 4.
= Treron psittaceus (Temminck, 1808).
Temminck (1808) based his description on more than 30 specimens from Indonesia. The depicted specimen was from his own cabinet, but is no longer present in the
Columba sieboldii Temminck, 1835: livr. 93, pl. 549.
= Treron sieboldii sieboldii (Temminck, 1835).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
One specimen was sent to the
Sphenocercus korthalsi Bonaparte, 1857: 9.
= Treron sphenurus korthalsi (Bonaparte, 1855) [error for 1857].
Syntype,
Syntype,
Treron Teysmannii Schlegel, 1879d: 103.
= Treron teysmannii Schlegel, 1879.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Treron chlorops Salvadori, 1874: 288.
= Treron vernans (Linnaeus, 1771).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Treron vernans griseicapilla Schlegel, 1863d: 71.
= Treron vernans (Linnaeus, 1771).
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
According to Peters (1937),
Ten years after his description,
Van den Bossche visited Bangka from May 1859 until July 1861.
Treron vernans karimuniensis Hoogerwerf, 1962: 196.
= Treron vernans (Linnaeus, 1771).
Hoogerwerf based his description on a series of 14 specimens, two of which he nominated as “types” (
Treron vernans parva Kloss, 1931: 308.
= Treron vernans (Linnaeus, 1771).
Holotype,
For recognition of subspecies, see under Treron chlorops Salvadori, 1874.
Columba modesta Temminck, 1835: livr. 93, pl. 552.
= Turacoena modesta (Temminck, 1835).
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
Columba (Peristera) puella Schlegel, 1848: 17 (nec Lesson, 1827).
Turtur brehmeri infelix Peters, 1937: xiii, 113 (nomen novum).
= Turtur brehmeri infelix Peters, 1937.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Possible syntype,
Peters (1937: 113) introduced Turtur brehmeri infelix as a nomen novum for Columba (Peristera) puella Schlegel, 1848.
Columba Tympanistria Temminck, 1809: livr. 8, p. 80, pl. 36.
= Turtur tympanistria (Temminck, 1809).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck (1809) wrote having received a single specimen from Levaillant.
Columba venusta Temminck, 1825: livr. 57, pl. 341, fig. 1.
= Uropelia campestris (Spix, 1825).
Temminck (1825) gave no indication about the number of type specimens or their whereabouts. Two syntypes from the province of Goyas, Brazil, are in the
Columba Aurita Temminck, 1809: livr. 7, p. 60, pl. 25.
= Zenaida aurita aurita (Temminck, 1809).
Temminck (1809) based his description on several specimens. The one illustrated on pl. 25 is from the collection of Raye van Breukelerwaert. Its whereabouts are unknown.
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Columba Carunculata Temminck, 1809: 19, pl. 11 is not applicable, artefact.
The name was based on an artefact. Temminck (1809) referred to a single specimen in the collection of Levaillant.
Columba Caerulea Temminck, 1809: livr. 8, p. 82, pl. 37 is not applicable, artefact.
Temminck (1809) based his description on a single specimen in the collection of Holthuizen, which was an artefact.
For dating of this name and those of other pigeons and doves by Temminck in the years 1808–1811, see
Columba Hottentotta Temminck, 1809: 26, pl. 15 is not applicable, artefact.
Temminck (1809) based the name on a fictional description by Levaillant, therefore this name is excluded as a scientific name.
Columba Auricularis Temminck, 1809: livr. 6, p. 54, pl. 21.
C[olumba] Temminckii Wagler, 1827: 241 (is not applicable, artefact).
Syntype,
Syntype,
The description is based on artefacts. According to
Rallicula rubra Schlegel, 1871b: 55.
= Rallicula rubra rubra Schlegel, 1871.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Rallus rufus Vieillot, 1819e: 564.
Rallus dimidiatus Lesson, 1831: 537.
= Sarothrura rufa rufa (Vieillot, 1819).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Rallina isabellina Schlegel, 1865b: 16.
= Amaurornis isabellina (Schlegel, 1865).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten stayed in Celebes twice between March 1840 and April 1842.
Gallinula Frankii Schlegel, 1879g: 163.
= Amaurornis moluccana moluccana (Wallace, 1865).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Gallinula leucomelana Müller, 1842: 158.
= Amaurornis phoenicurus leucomelana (Müller, 1842).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Didus Brouckei Schlegel, 1854b: 345.
= Aphanapteryx bonasia (Sélys-Longchamps, 1848).
Extinct Red Rail from Mauritius. Based on a plate by Van den Broucke. Spelt Broeckei in
Gallinula oculea Hartlaub, 1855: 357.
= Canirallus oculeus (Hartlaub, 1855).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Didus Herbertii Schlegel, 1854b: 346.
= Erythromachus leguati (Milne-Edwards, 1874).
Extinct Leguat’s Rail from Rodrigues Island. Based on a plate by Herbert. Schlegel’s name from 1854 should have priority over Milne-Edwards’ name leguati that was published 20 years later.
Fulica atra japonica Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 120, pl. 77.
= Fulica atra atra Linnaeus, 1758.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Page 120 as well as pl. 77 of the ‘Fauna Japonica’ appeared in 1849 (
According to
Fulica lugubris Müller, 1847b: 454.
= Fulica atra lugubris Müller, 1847.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Müller’s work was published in parts, with pp 281–472 published in 1847.
Gallinula haematopus Schlegel, 1865b: 44.
= Gallinula tenebrosa frontata Wallace, 1863.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
There is also a paratype in the
Reinwardt visited North Celebes from September 1821 until November 1821.
Rallus etorques “Temminck” Schlegel, 1865: 23.
= Gallirallus philippensis philippensis (Linnaeus, 1766).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited the Tondano area from 22 March 1840 to 19 June 1841.
Hypotaenidia philippensis xerophila van Bemmel & Hoogerwerf, 1940: 470.
= Gallirallus philippensis xerophilus (van Bemmel & Hoogerwerf, 1940).
Holotype,
There are two paratypes in the
Stictolimnas Sharpei Büttikofer, 1893: 274.
= Gallirallus philippensis subsp.
Holotype,
This species is only known from the holotype.
It is now considered a melanistic colour morph of the Buff-banded Rail Gallirallus philippensis after genetic studies revealed that it is “genetically indistinguishable” from G. philippensis (den Tex and Dekker; Sharpe’s Rail’s Riddle, unpubl.). See
Hypotaenidia Jentinki Sharpe, 1893: 268.
= Gallirallus torquatus sulcirostris (Wallace, 1863).
Holotype,
Rallus Hoeveni Von Rosenberg, 1866: 144.
= Gymnocrex plumbeiventris plumbeiventris (Gray, 1862).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Although given as 1867 by
In the same year, hoeveni was described again by
Rallina rosenbergii Schlegel, 1866b: 212.
= Gymnocrex rosenbergii (Schlegel, 1866).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Schlegel wrote having received “un individu”.
Himantornis haematopus Hartlaub, 1855: 357.
= Himantornis haematopus Hartlaub, 1855.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Rallus exilis Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, pl. 523.
= Laterallus exilis (Temminck, 1831).
The holotype (by monotypy) is in the
Corethrura rubra Sclater & Salvin, 1860: 300.
= Laterallus ruber (Sclater & Salvin, 1860).
Paralectotype,
Rallus pectoralis connectens Junge, 1952: 247.
= Lewinia pectoralis mayri (Hartert, 1930).
Holotype,
Rallus pectoralis Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, text to pl. 523.
= Lewinia pectoralis pectoralis (Temminck, 1831).
The type specimen from Australia, collected by Lesueur in 1801, is in the
Gallinula angulata Sundevall, 1850: 454.
= Paragallinula angulata (Sundevall, 1850).
Paralectotypes,
Rallus Ricordi Schlegel, 1865b: 8.
Rallus Ricordi Bonaparte, 1856b: 598.
= Pardirallus sanguinolentus subsp.
Holotype,
Gallinula porphyrio Hartlaub, 1855: 357.
= Porphyrio alleni Thompson, 1842.
Syntype,
Porphyrio minutus von Heuglin, 1863a: 169.
= Porphyrio alleni Thomson, 1842.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Porphyrio bemmeleni Büttikofer, 1889c: 192.
= Porphyrio indicus Horsfield, 1821.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Porphyrio smaragdinus Temminck, 1827: livr. 71, pl. 421 (nomen novum).
= Porphyrio indicus Horsfield, 1821.
Temminck (1827) published smaragdinus as an unnecessary nomen novum for Porphyrio indicus Horsfield, 1821.
Porphyrio smaragnotus Temminck, 1820: 700.
= Porphyrio madagascariensis (Latham, 1801).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Porphyrio chloronotus Brehm, 1855: 293.
= Porphyrio madagascariensis (Latham, 1801).
Syntype,
According to
Porphyrio bellus Gould, 1841a: 176.
= Porphyrio melanotus bellus Gould, 1841.
Paralectotypes,
Porphyrio melanopterus Bonaparte, 1856b: 599.
= Porphyrio melanotus melanopterus Bonaparte, 1856.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited Seram late 1842.
Porphyrio porphyrio plessenorum Neumann, 1941: 109.
= Porphyrio melanotus melanopterus Bonaparte, 1856.
Holotype,
There are three paratypes in the MTD (MTD C44724, C45528, C45529;
Porphyrio melanotus Temminck, 1820: 701.
= Porphyrio melanotus melanotus Temminck, 1820.
Temminck gave no reference to the specimens he described.
Porphyrio neglectus Schlegel, 1865b: 53.
= Porphyrio poliocephalus poliocephalus (Latham, 1801).
Syntype,
Syntype,
In the original description,
Porphyrio hyacinthinus Temminck, 1820: 698.
= Porphyrio porphyrio (Linnaeus, 1758).
Porphyrio caesius Schlegel, 1865b: 52.
= Porphyrio porphyrio (Linnaeus, 1758).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Cantraine visited Sicily in 1833.
Porphyrio pulverulentus Temminck, 1826: livr. 68, pl. 405.
= Porphyrio pulverulentus Temminck, 1826.
Syntype,
Temminck (1826) described this species as occurring from Senegal to South Africa, which is erroneous as this species is from the Philippines. According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Rallus olivaceus Vieillot, 1819e: 561.
= Porzana albicollis typhoeca Peters, 1932.
According to
Erythra cinerea media Schlegel, 1865b: 33.
= Porzana cinerea (Vieillot, 1819).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Erythra cinerea minima Schlegel, 1865b: 34.
= Porzana cinerea (Vieillot, 1819).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Gallinula erythrothorax Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 121, pl. 78.
= Porzana fusca erythrothorax (Temminck & Schlegel, 1849).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
In this catalogue we follow
Gallinula rubiginosa Temminck, 1825: livr. 60, pl. 357.
= Porzana fusca fusca (Linnaeus, 1766).
Syntype,
Porzana pusilla mayri Junge, 1952: 247.
= Porzana pusilla mayri Junge, 1952.
Holotype,
Rallus Sandwichensis Gmelin, 1789: 717.
Rallus obscurus Gmelin, 1789: 718.
Pennula Wilsoni Finsch, 1898: 77.
= Porzana sandwichensis (Gmelin, 1789).
Lectotype for sandwichensis, syntype for obscurus and Wilsoni,
Rallina minahasa Wallace, 1863a: 346.
= Rallina eurizonoides minahasa Wallace, 1863.
Syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Gallinula eurizona Temminck, 1826: livr. 70, pl. 417.
= Rallina fasciata (Raffles, 1822).
Syntype,
Syntype,
In the index of the ‘Planches Coloriées’ Temminck refers to this bird as Gallinula euryzonia.
Rallus abyssinicus Rüppell, 1845: 127, pl. 46.
= Rougetius rougetii (Guérin-Méneville, 1843).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was designated by
Grus cinerea longirostris Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 117.
Grus Schlegelii Blyth, 1873: 419.
= Antigone canadensis canadensis (Linnaeus, 1758).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck and Schlegel (1849: 118) received a single specimen from Japan. Plate 72 illustrating the holotype was published after the text (
Grus leucauchen Temminck, 1828: livr. 76, pl. 449.
= Antigone vipio (Pallas, 1811).
Syntype,
Grus monacha Temminck, 1835: livr. 94, pl. 555.
= Grus monacha Temminck, 1835.
Syntype,
Podiceps rubricollis major Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 122, pl. 78B.
= Podiceps grisegena holbollii Reinhardt, 1853.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Phoenicopterus antiquorum Temminck, 1820: Man. d’Orn. 2: 587.
= Phoenicopterus roseus Pallas, 1811.
Nomen nudum (
Turnix hottentottus Temminck, 1815a: 636.
= Turnix hottentottus Temminck, 1815.
Possible syntype,
Possible syntype,
Possible syntype,
Hemipodius maculosus Temminck, 1815a: 631.
Turnix Maculatus Vieillot, 1823: 330.
= Turnix maculosus maculosus (Temminck, 1815).
Syntype,
According to the label this specimen is a male from ‘Oceania’. However, in his description
Hemipodius nanus Sundevall, 1850: 110.
= Turnix nanus (Sundevall, 1850).
Syntype,
Hemipodius thoracicus Temminck, 1815a: 622.
= Turnix ocellatus subsp.
As two subspecies occur on Luzon, T. o. ocellatus (Scopoli, 1786) and T. o. benguetensis Parkes, 1968, it is unclear to which of these two thoracicus referred.
Hemipodius fasciatus Temminck, 1815a: 634.
= Turnix suscitator fasciatus (Temminck, 1815).
According to
Hemipodius pugnax Temminck, 1815a: 612.
= Turnix suscitator suscitator (Gmelin, 1789).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Turnix suscitator baweanus Hoogerwerf, 1962: 199.
= Turnix suscitator suscitator (Gmelin, 1789).
Turnix suscitator kuiperi Chasen, 1937: 208.
= Turnix suscitator suscitator (Gmelin, 1789).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Fourteen specimens were examined by
Hemipodius dussumier Temminck, 1828: livr. 76, pl. 454, fig. 2.
= Turnix sylvaticus dussumier (Temminck, 1828).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Hemipodius tachydromus Temminck, 1815a: 626.
= Turnix sylvaticus sylvaticus (Temminck, 1815).
Hemipodius lunatus Temminck, 1815a: 629.
= Turnix sylvaticus sylvaticus (Temminck, 1815).
Turnix joudera Gray, 1846: 129.
= Turnix tanki tanki Blyth, 1843.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Gray (1846) published this name based on a description and plate by
Hemipodius nigrifrons Temminck, 1815a: 610.
= Turnix cf. tanki Blyth, 1843.
According to
Its identification is a mystery. According to Temminck’s description it originated from India.
Oedicnemus maculosus Temminck, 1824: livr. 49, pl. 292.
= Burhinus capensis maculosus (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Oedicnemus affinis Rüppell, 1837b: 210.
= Burhinus capensis maculosus (Temminck, 1824).
According to the correspondence in the
Œdicnemus crepitans Temminck, 1815b: 322.
= Burhinus oedicnemus oedicnemus (Linnaeus, 1758).
Possible syntype,
Although any information about the origin or location of the specimen is lacking, we list it here as a possible syntype because of Temminck’s handwriting and Schlegels’ confirmation to Oedicnemus crepitans on the stand and in
Oedicnemus büttikoferi Reichenow, 1898: 182.
= Burhinus vermiculatus buettikoferi (Reichenow, 1898).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Although Sala is also mentioned on the label of
Chionis minor Hartlaub, 1841: 5.
= Chionis minor minor Hartlaub, 1841.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Hæmatopus niger “Cuvier” Temminck, 1820: 131 (nec Pallas).
Haematopus moquini Bonaparte, 1856a: 1020 (nomen novum).
= Haematopus moquini Bonaparte, 1856.
Haematopus moquini Bonaparte is a nomen novum for Haematopus niger Temminck. Both names are based on “black oystercatchers” referred to by Cuvier without specifically referring to specimens. Hence Temminck’s and Bonaparte’s names do not have types.
Haematopus palliatus Temminck, 1820: 532.
= Haematopus palliatus palliatus Temminck, 1820.
Syntype,
Syntype,
The type locality was restricted to Rio de Janeiro by
Recurvirostra rubricollis Temminck, 1820: 592 (nomen novum).
= Recurvirostra novaehollandiae Vieillot, 1816.
Nomen novum for “R. americana”. According to Voisin & Voisin (2012: 49)
Charadrius azarai Temminck, 1823: livr. 31, pl. 184.
= Charadrius collaris Vieillot, 1818.
We have no indication of the whereabouts of the type(s) of Charadrius azarai Temminck, 1823.
Charadrius pyrrhothorax Gould, 1837: pl. 299.
= Charadrius mongolus subsp.
Syntype,
It is not clear which subspecies of C. mongolus is involved here.
Charadrius pecuarius Temminck, 1823: livr. 31, pl. 183.
= Charadrius pecuarius Temminck, 1823.
Temminck (1823) referred to Levaillant’s travels in South Africa. We have no indication of the whereabouts of the type specimens.
Charadrius peronii Schlegel, 1865a: 33.
= Charadrius peronii Schlegel, 1865.
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
The specimens from Samau were designated lectotype and allotype by
Charadrius peronii chaseni Junge, 1939: 120.
= Charadrius peronii Schlegel, 1865.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Charadrius ruficapillus Temminck, 1821: livr. 8, pl. 47, fig. 2.
= Charadrius ruficapillus Temminck, 1821.
Following
Charadrius nigrifrons “Cuvier” Temminck, 1821: livr. 8, pl. 47, fig. 1.
= Elseyornis melanops (Vieillot, 1818).
Following
Charadrius pluvialis orientalis Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 104, pl. 62.
Charadrius auratus longipes Schlegel, 1858: 411.
= Pluvialis fulva (Gmelin, 1789).
Lectotype for orientalis, syntype for longipes,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Syntype for longipes, paralectotype for orientalis,
Temminck and Schlegel (1849) mentioned having received specimens from South Africa, Java, Timor, Borneo, Celebes, and Japan.
The so-called ‘Dernière Expedition’ (see lectotype) refers to a shipment which arrived in Leiden on 31 August 1829 and contained Von Siebold’s main collection: 827 specimens of 188 species (
Kuhl and Van Hasselt collected together on Java from December 1820 until September 1821. Forsten stayed in the Pagouat area between September and November 1841 and in the area around Gorontalo from September 1841 until April 1842. Müller visited Borneo from 28 July 1836 to 17 December 1836.
In this catalogue we follow
Charadrius albiceps Temminck, 1832: livr. 89, pl. 526.
= Vanellus armatus (Burchell, 1822).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Lobi-vanellus inornatus Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 106, pl. 63.
= Vanellus cinereus (Blyth, 1842).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. The description on page 106 appeared in 1849, the publication date of pl. 63 is unknown (
In this catalogue we follow
Charadrius melanopteroides “Temminck” Schlegel, 1865a: 63.
= Vanellus lugubris (Lesson, 1826).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Vanellus cucullatus Temminck, 1830: livr. 85, pl. 505.
= Vanellus macropterus (Wagler, 1827).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Kuhl and Van Hasselt collected on Java from December 1820 until September 1821. Müller visited Timor from 14 October 1828 until late 1829.
Parra gallinacea Temminck, 1828: livr. 78, pl. 464.
= Irediparra gallinacea (Temminck, 1828).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Reinwardt visited the Menado area between 11 October and 11 November 1821.
Tringa platyrhincha Temminck, 1815b: 616.
= Calidris falcinellus (Pontoppidan, 1763).
Tringa Bonapartei Schlegel, 1844: 89.
= Calidris fuscicollis (Vieillot, 1819).
Holotype,
Tringa albescens Temminck, 1821: livr. 7, pl. 41, fig. 2.
= Calidris ruficollis (Pallas, 1776).
Following
Tringa crassirostris Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 107, pl. 64.
= Calidris tenuirostris (Horsfield, 1821).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to
In this catalogue we follow
Scolopax Wilsonii Temminck, 1826: livr. 68, text to pl. 403.
= Gallinago delicata (Ord, 1825).
Temminck (1826) published this name in a footnote to the text with pl. 403. His description was based on the description of the “Snipe” by
Scolopax gallinagoides Schlegel, 1864d: 6.
= Gallinago delicata (Ord, 1825).
Holotype,
Scolopax Lamotti Baillon, 1834: 71.
= Gallinago gallinago gallinago (Linnaeus, 1758).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Scolopax Pygmaea Baillon, 1834: 71.
= Gallinago gallinago gallinago (Linnaeus, 1758).
Syntype,
According to
Gallinago megala Swinhoe, 1861: 343.
= Gallinago megala Swinhoe, 1861.
Paralectotype,
Gallinago nemoricola Hodgson, 1836a: 8.
= Gallinago nemoricola Hodgson, 1836.
Syntype,
Gallinago nobilis P.L. Sclater, 1856b: 31.
= Gallinago nobilis P.L. Sclater, 1856.
Possible syntype,
According to
Spilura solitaria japonica Bonaparte, 1856b: 579, 1024.
= Gallinago solitaria japonica (Bonaparte, 1856).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Gallinago solitaria Hodgson, 1831: 238.
= Gallinago solitaria solitaria Hodgson, 1831.
Possible syntype,
Scolopax stenura Bonaparte, 1831: 335.
= Gallinago stenura (Bonaparte, 1831).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Gallinago Biclavus Hodgson, 1837b: 490.
Gallinago heterura Hodgson, 1836a: 8.
= Gallinago stenura (Bonaparte, 1831).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Hodgson did not give much or any information on the specimen labels such as collecting date. Hence it is in most cases uncertain whether specimens collected and described by him are indeed types. The
Scolopax gigantea Temminck, 1826: livr. 68, pl. 403.
= Gallinago undulata gigantea (Temminck, 1826).
Syntype,
Syntype,
See
According to
Numenius nasicus Temminck, 1840: 393.
Numenius major Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 110.
= Numenius arquata orientalis Brehm, 1831.
Syntype for nasicus and major,
Syntype for nasicus,
There are also several specimens in the
Numenius brevirostris
Numenius hemirhynchus “Temminck” Schlegel, 1864b: 101.
= Numenius borealis (Forster, 1772).
Syntype,
This specimen was erroneously listed under “Numenius hemirhynchus
It was
Numenius minor Müller, 1841: 110.
= Numenius minutus Gould, 1841.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Phalaropus fimbriatus Temminck, 1825 livr. 62, pl. 370.
= Phalaropus tricolor (Vieillot, 1819).
According to Temminck (1825), two syntypes are in the
Tringa leucoptera Gmelin, 1789: 678.
Tringa pyrrhetraea Forster & Lichtenstein, 1844: 174.
= Prosobonia leucoptera (Gmelin, 1789).
Syntype,
Extinct. The origin of the only known specimen of this species in the
Scolopax Rochussenii Schlegel, 1866c: 254.
= Scolopax rochussenii Schlegel, 1866.
Holotype,
Scolopax Rosenbergii Schlegel, 1871b: 54.
= Scolopax rosenbergii Schlegel, 1871.
Holotype,
Totanus pulverulentus Müller, 1842: 153.
= Tringa brevipes (Vieillot, 1816).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falcinellus cursorius Temminck, 1830: livr. 86, pl. 510.
= not applicable, artefact.
Lectotype,
This name is based on an artefact which is a modified Calidris ferruginea (Pontoppidan, 1763) (
Temminck (1830) based his description on two specimens,
Glareola lactea Temminck, 1820: 503.
= Glareola lactea Temminck, 1820.
Possible syntype,
Possible syntype,
Glareola nuchalis liberiae Schlegel, 1881: 58.
Glareola megapoda Büttikofer, 1885: 233.
= Glareola nuchalis liberiae Schlegel, 1881.
Lectotype for liberiae, syntype for megapoda,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype for megapoda, paralectotype for liberiae,
Syntype only for megapoda,
The name Glareola megapoda was first introduced by G.R. Gray (1844: 62) as a nomen nudum, used subsequently as Glareola megapodia by
Cursorius Africanus Temminck, 1807: 175, description: 263.
= Rhinoptilus africanus africanus (Temminck, 1807).
Holotype,
In his description,
Cursorius bicinctus Temminck, 1820: 515.
= Rhinoptilus africanus africanus (Temminck, 1807).
Possible holotype,
Cursorius chalcopterus Temminck, 1824: livr. 50, pl. 298.
= Rhinoptilus chalcopterus (Temminck, 1824).
According to Temminck (1824) the holotype (by monotypy) is in the
Glareola isabella Vieillot, 1816a: 69.
Glareola grallaria Temminck, 1820: 503.
= Stiltia isabella (Vieillot, 1816).
Syntype,
Sterna tenuirostris Temminck, 1823: livr. 34, pl. 202.
= Anous tenuirostris tenuirostris (Temminck, 1823).
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Sterna leucopareia Temminck, 1820: 746.
= Chlidonias hybrida hybrida (Pallas, 1811).
Syntype,
Hydrochelidon fluviatilis Gould, 1843: 140.
= Chlidonias hybrida javanicus (Horsfield, 1821).
Paralectotypes,
Sterna leucoptera Temminck, 1815b: 483.
= Chlidonias leucopterus (Temminck, 1815).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Larus poliocephalus Temminck, 1820: 780.
= Chroicocephalus cirrocephalus cirrocephalus (Vieillot, 1818).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Larus tenuirostris Temminck, 1840: 478.
= Chroicocephalus genei (Breme, 1839).
Lectotype,
Larus melanorhinchus Temminck, 1830: livr. 85, pl. 504.
= Chroicocephalus philadelphia (Ord, 1815).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Larus capistratus Temminck, 1820: 785.
= Chroicocephalus ridibundus (Linnaeus, 1766).
Lectotype,
Both Orkney and Shetland are mentioned on the labels. As Temminck gave Orkney as provenance for his specimen, we follow this.
Larus Kittlitzii Schlegel, 1863i: 40.
= Chroicocephalus ridibundus (Linnaeus, 1766).
Holotype,
Sylochelidon strenuus Gould, 1846: 21.
= Hydroprogne caspia (Pallas, 1770).
Paralectotype,
According to
Larus Audouinii Payraudeau, 1826: 462.
= Ichthyaetus audouinii (Payraudeau, 1826).
Lectotype,
The lectotype was selected by
Larus ichthyaëtus minor Schlegel, 1863i: 34.
= Ichthyaetus ichthyaetus (Pallas, 1773).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Larus leucophthalmus Temminck, 1825: livr. 62, pl. 366.
= Ichthyaetus leucophthalmus (Temminck, 1825).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Larus melanocephalus Temminck, 1820: Man. D’Orn., ed. 2, II: 777.
= Ichthyaetus melanocephalus (Temminck, 1820).
The original description was based on specimens in the
Larus melanurus Temminck, 1828: livr. 77, pl. 459.
= Larus crassirostris Vieillot, 1818.
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
Sterna fuligula
Lichtenstein (in
= Onychoprion anaethetus antarcticus (Lesson, R, 1831).
Syntype,
Lichtenstein (in
Sterna melanogaster Temminck, 1827: livr. 73, pl. 434.
= Sterna acuticauda Gray, 1831.
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
The name Sterna melanogaster Temminck, 1827, is preoccupied by its prior use as Sterna melanogaster “T[emminck]” Horsfield, 1824, as a substitute name for Sterna Javanica Horsfield, 1821 (
Sterna arctica Temminck, 1820: 742.
= Sterna paradisaea Pontoppidan, 1763.
Syntype,
Sterna melanauchen Temminck, 1827: livr. 72, pl. 427.
= Sterna sumatrana sumatrana Raffles, 1822.
Lectotype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Reinwardt visited Sulawesi from September until December 1821.
Sterna natalensis “Verreaux” Schlegel, 1863j: 22.
= Sternula albifrons albifrons (Pallas, 1764).
Sterna Pusilla Temminck, 1840: 465.
= Sternula albifrons sinensis (Gmelin, 1789).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Müller visited Borneo between 28 July 1836 and 17 December 1836.
Sterna affinis Cretzschmar, 1827: 23, pl. 14.
= Thalasseus bengalensis bengalensis (Lesson, 1831).
Possible paralectotypes,
Sterna Bergii Lichtenstein, 1823: 80.
= Thalasseus bergii bergii (Lichtenstein, 1823).
Syntype,
Sterna ressa “Müller” Schlegel, 1863j: 9.
= Thalasseus bergii cristatus (Stephens, 1826).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Sterna Velox Cretzschmar, 1827: 21.
= Thalasseus bergii velox (Cretzschmar, 1827).
Possible syntype,
Syntype,
Although listed as a syntype by
As Cretzschmar (1827: 22) also referred to South African specimens in the
Sterna bernsteini Schlegel, 1863j: 9.
= Thalasseus bernsteini (Schlegel, 1863).
Holotype,
Sterna galericulata Lichtenstein, 1823: 81.
= Thalasseus maximus (Boddaert, 1783).
Syntype,
Lestris spinicauda Hardy, 1854: 657.
= Stercorarius longicaudus longicaudus Vieillot, 1819.
Syntype,
Lestris pomarinus Temminck, 1815b: 514.
= Stercorarius pomarinus (Temminck, 1815).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Uriae Mandtii Lichtenstein in Mandt, 1822: 30.
= Cepphus grylle mandtii (Lichtenstein, 1822).
Syntype,
According to J. Mlíkovský (in litt., 21 February 2008),
One year after the name was mentioned for the first time in Mandt’s dissertation, Lichtenstein gave another description of mandtii with reference to Mandt in his “Doublettenverzeichnis” (
Uria wumizusume Temminck, 1836: livr. 98, pl. 579.
Synthliboramphus Temminckii Brandt, 1837: 347.
= Synthliboramphus wumizusume (Temminck, 1836).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The year of publication of livraison 97, usually given as 1835 following
Brandt’s name was published without description but with reference to “Temm. Planch. Col. tab. 579”. The same specimens are therefore types of both names.
Eudyptes schlegeli Finsch, 1876: 204.
= Eudyptes schlegeli Finsch, 1876.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Finsch’s description (1876) is based on a single specimen (“indiv. No. 3, Schleg. in Mus. P.B.”).
Diomedea brachiura Temminck, 1828: livr. 75.
= Phoebastria albatrus (Pallas, 1769).
This name was first published by
For the date of publication of livraison 75, see
Diomedea cauta Gould, 1841a: 177.
= Thalassarche cauta cauta (Gould, 1841).
Paralectotype,
According to an acquisition list in the
Diomedea melanophris Temminck, 1828: livr. 77, pl. 456.
= Thalassarche melanophris (Temminck, 1828).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The subsequent spelling melanophrys is an “unjustified emendation” (Art. 33.2.3.,
According to Temminck there should also be specimens from the Cape and Australia in the
Procellaria leachii Temminck, 1820: 812.
= Oceanodroma leucorhoa leucorhoa (Vieillot, 1818).
Nectris chilensis Bonaparte, 1857: 202.
= Ardenna grisea (Gmelin, 1789).
Syntype,
Procellaria tenuirostris Temminck, 1836: livr. 99.
= Ardenna tenuirostris (Temminck, 1836).
Syntype,
Syntype,
There is no plate related to the description nor is the livraison mentioned underneath the text, which is generally considered to be livraison 99, following the description and illustration of Procellaria leucomelas Temminck, 1836: livr. 99, pl. 587.
The year of publication of livraison 98 and 99 was corrected to 1836 by
Procellaria leucomelas Temminck, 1836: livr. 99, pl. 587.
= Calonectris leucomelas (Temminck, 1836).
Paralectotypes,
The year of publication of livraison 98 and 99 was corrected to 1836 by
Two crania (
Procellaria nivea major Schlegel, 1863h: 15.
= Pagodroma nivea major (Schlegel, 1863).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Procellaria nivea minor Schlegel, 1863h: 16.
= Pagodroma nivea nivea (Forster, 1777).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Procellaria aterrima Bonaparte, 1857: 191.
= Pseudobulweria aterrima (Bonaparte, 1857).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was designated by
Bonaparte based his description on specimens in the
According to
Procellaria hasitata Kuhl, 1820a: 142.
Procellaria leucocephalae Kuhl, 1820a: 142.
= Pterodroma hasitata (Kuhl, 1820).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
See also
Procellaria incerta Schlegel, 1863h: 9.
= Pterodroma incerta (Schlegel, 1863).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
All specimens
Some doubt remains about the taxonomic identity of the downy chick (G.O. Keijl, pers. comm., 31 October 2007).
Procellaria neglecta Schlegel, 1863h: 10.
= Pterodroma neglecta neglecta (Schlegel, 1863).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
All specimens listed by
Procellaria anglorum Temminck, 1820: 806.
= Puffinus puffinus (Brünnich, 1764).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Anastomus lamelligerus Temminck, 1823: livr. 40, pl. 236.
= Anastomus lamelligerus lamelligerus Temminck, 1823.
Syntype,
According to the original description the second syntype, reported by Delalande from South Africa, is in the
Ciconia Abdimii Lichtenstein, 1823: 76.
= Ciconia abdimii Lichtenstein, 1823.
Syntype,
The specimen was received in exchange with the
Dissoura neglecta Finsch, 1904: 94.
= Ciconia episcopus neglecta (Finsch, 1904).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The species was first published in a determination key. Later,
Teijsmann’s specimen was most likely collected during the Celebes expedition of 1877, during which he stayed in the Makassar area in June, July, October, and December.
Two skeletons (
Ciconia argala Temminck, 1824: livr. 51, pl. 301, nec Latham, 1790.
= Leptoptilos crumenifer (Lesson, 1831).
Possible syntype,
Temminck (1824) caused confusion by naming this taxon from Africa argala and the one from Asia (see next entry) marabou which are both local names. However, Temminck mixed them up as he should have given argala to the Asian taxon and marabou to the African. See e.g.,
The name argala Temminck, 1824 (Africa) is preoccupied by argala Latham, 1790 (Africa and Asia), the latter being misapplied; crumenifer Lesson, 1831 is the next available name for the taxon from Africa.
Temminck referred to specimens from various parts of Africa in the collections of the
Ciconia marabou Temminck, 1824: livr. 51, pl. 300.
= Leptoptilos dubius (Gmelin, 1789).
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Ciconia capillata Temminck, 1824: livr. 53, pl. 312.
= Leptoptilos javanicus (Horsfield, 1821).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description two syntypes (immature birds) are in the
Tantalus lacteus Temminck, 1825: livr. 59, pl. 352.
= Mycteria cinerea (Raffles, 1822).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Kuhl and Van Hasselt collected on Java from December 1820 until September 1821. Two skeletons also collected by Kuhl and Van Hasselt are not included in the type series, since Temminck (1825) made no reference to skeletal material. One was sent to the
Plotus Levaillantii Temminck, 1807: 196.
= Anhinga rufa rufa (Daudin, 1802).
Syntype,
Syntype,
One specimen was sent to the
Phalacrocoracidae
Carbo Desmarestii Payraudeau, 1826: 464.
= Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii (Payraudeau, 1826).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was selected by
Carbo capillatus Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: pl. 83.
Carbo filamentosus Temminck & Schlegel, 1850: 129.
= Phalacrocorax capillatus (Temminck & Schlegel, 1849).
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
This taxon was erroneously given two different names: on pls 83 and 83B it was referred to as Carbo capillatus, but in the text on p. 129 as C. filamentosus. According to
In this catalogue we follow
Phalacrocorax lugubris Rüppell, 1845: 134.
= Phalacrocorax lucidus (Lichtenstein, 1823).
Paralectotype,
Phalacrocorax mentalis Bonaparte, 1857: 175.
= Phalacrocorax magellanicus (Gmelin, 1789).
Holotype,
The locality under the stand is given as Ile Magdalena, with Malowines (= Falklands) added to it. However, Ile Magdalena is located in the Strait of Magellan, not in the Falklands (R. Woods, pers. comm., 26 February 2004).
Carbo graculus Temminck, 1820: 897.
= not applicable, see below.
Considering this, it was obviously not Temminck’s intention to describe a new species. He applied the name graculus to the wrong specimens and listed the birds known as P. aristotelis under the name Carbo cristatus. According to the Code (
Ibis carunculata Rüppell, 1837: 49, pl. 19.
= Bostrychia carunculata (Rüppell, 1837).
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was designated by
Lampribis splendida Salvadori, 1903: 185.
= Bostrychia olivacea olivacea (Du Bus de Gisignies, 1838).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Ibis nippon Temminck, 1835: livr. 93, pl. 551.
Nipponia Temminckii Reichenbach, 1850: xiv.
= Nipponia nippon (Temminck, 1835).
Holotype for nippon, syntype for Temminckii,
Holotype by monotypy, as
Platalea major Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 119, pl. 75.
Platalea japonica Reichenow, 1877: 159 (nomen novum, in part).
= Platalea leucorodia leucorodia Linnaeus, 1758.
Holotype for major, syntype for japonica,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck and Schlegel (1849: 119) state that they received only one specimen of the two new Japanese species of Platalea.
The description on page 119 as well as the plate appeared in 1849 (
Platalea minor Temminck & Schlegel, 1849: 120, pl. 76
Platalea japonica Reichenow, 1877: 159 (nomen novum, in part).
= Platalea minor Temminck & Schlegel, 1849.
Holotype for minor, syntype for japonica,
Holotype by monotypy, see also Platalea major. The description on page 120 as well as the plate appeared in 1849 (
Reichenow proposed the name japonica as a nomen novum for P. major Temminck & Schlegel, 1849 and P. minor Temminck & Schlegel, 1849, which he considered as a single species. Previously japonica was listed in synonymy of minor (e.g.,
Tantalus chalcopterus Temminck, 1830: livr. 86, pl. 511.
= Plegadis chihi (Vieillot, 1817).
Lectotype,
According to the original description paralectotypes from Chile are in the
This species is depicted on pl. 511, not 515 as erroneously given in
Ibis peregrina Bonaparte, 1857: 159.
= Plegadis falcinellus (Linnaeus, 1766).
Syntype,
There are also specimens collected by Kuhl and Van Hasselt from Java which must have been present at the time of Bonaparte’s visit. Two early specimens from Java have no collector indicated on the label and two specimens collected by Forsten are labelled ‘Celebes’. These have not been listed here, since they do not fit the provenance or collector indicated by Bonaparte, but all these specimens could be part of the type series.
Ibis papillosa Temminck, 1824: livr. 51, pl. 304.
= Pseudibis papillosa (Temminck, 1824).
Paralectotypes,
According to
Ibis plumbeus Temminck, 1823: livr. 40, pl. 235.
= Theristicus caerulescens (Vieillot, 1817).
Paralectotypes,
According to the original description other type specimens are in the
Theristicus columbianus Finsch, 1899b: 23.
= Theristicus caudatus caudatus (Boddaert, 1783).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Ibis leucon Temminck, 1829: livr. 81, pl. 481.
= Threskiornis melanocephalus (Latham, 1790).
Paralectotypes,
According to
Temminck (1829) mentioned a series of specimens in the
Ardea flavirostris “Temminck” Wagler, 1827: spec. 9, [p. 177].
= Ardea alba subsp.
A specimen from Java in the
Ardea cinerea altirostris Mees, 1971b: 225.
= Ardea cinerea jouyi Clark, 1907.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Ardea goliat Temminck, 1829: livr. 80, pl. 474.
= Ardea goliath Cretzschmar, 1829.
Paralectotype,
According to
Temminck referred to a specimen depicted by Rüppell in his ‘Atlas zu der Reise im nördlichen Afrika’ (between immature and adult) and to an adult in the
Ardea purpurea madagascariensis van Oort, 1910c: 83.
= Ardea purpurea madagascariensis van Oort, 1910.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Ardea typhon Temminck, 1829: livr. 80, pl. 475.
Ardea Temminckii Reichenbach, 1852: XVI (nomen novum) (see t. 159, ic. 466).
Ardea robusta Bonaparte,1855: 110 (ex MS Muller) (nomen novum).
= Ardea sumatrana Raffles, 1822.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck (1829) referred to a single object from Africa (Gambia, Galam) in the
Ardea semirufa Schlegel, 1863g: 35.
= Ardeola rufiventris (Sundevall, 1850).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the labels these specimens were received in 1862.
Ardea stellaris capensis Schlegel, 1863g: 48.
= Botaurus stellaris capensis (Schlegel, 1863).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Ardea nigripes Temminck, 1840: 376.
= Egretta garzetta nigripes (Temminck, 1840).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Ardea Lansbergei Schlegel, 1879e: 113.
= Egretta picata (Gould, 1845).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The specimens are most likely collected during the Celebes expedition of 1877, during which Teijsmann stayed in the Makassar area in June, July, October, and December. The year 1878 on the label is probably the year they arrived in Leiden.
Ardea (Herodias) picata Gould, 1845a: 62.
= Egretta picata (Gould, 1845).
Possible paralectotype,
Nycticorax goisagi Temminck, 1836: livr. 98, pl. 582.
= Gorsachius goisagi (Temminck, 1836).
Paralectotypes,
By mistake,
The year of publication of livraison 97, usually given as 1835 following
According to
A skull (
Nycticorax limnophilax Temminck, 1836: livr. 98, pl. 581.
= Gorsachius melanolophus (Raffles, 1822).
Syntype,
Syntype,
The year of publication of livraison 97, usually given as 1835 following
Temminck (1836) gave no indication how many specimens he had and where he had seen them, but he mentioned that both sexes were alike, so he had more than one specimen.
Kuhl and Van Hasselt collected on Java from December 1820 until September 1821.
Ardea sibilatrix Temminck, 1824: livr. 46, pl. 271.
= Syrigma sibilatrix sibilatrix (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Pelecanus conspicillatus Temminck, 1824: livr. 47, pl. 276.
= Pelecanus conspicillatus Temminck, 1824.
According to
Pelecanus crispus Bruch, 1832: 1109.
= Pelecanus crispus Bruch, 1832.
Syntype,
Pelecanus minor Rüppell, 1837a: 186.
= Pelecanus onocrotalus Linnaeus, 1758.
Syntype,
Cathartes urubutinga Von Pelzeln, 1861: 7.
= Cathartes burrovianus urubutinga Pelzeln, 1861.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Both the collecting locality and collecting date of
Cathartes vulturinus Temminck, 1821: livr. 6, pl. 31.
= Gymnogyps californianus (Shaw, 1797).
According to
Pandion haliaëtus orientalis Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 13.
= Pandion haliaetus haliaetus (Linnaeus, 1758).
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was designated by
Falco dussumieri Temminck, 1824: livr. 52, pl. 308.
= Accipiter badius dussumieri (Temminck, 1824).
According to the original description, the type specimens are in the
Falco pileatus Temminck, 1823: livr. 35, pl. 205.
= Accipiter bicolor pileatus (Temminck, 1823).
Paralectotypes,
Temminck (1823) based his description on specimens in the
Accipiter chilensis Philippi & Landbeck, 1864: 43.
= Accipiter chilensis Philippi & Landbeck, 1864.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Nisus cirrhocephalus ceramensis Schlegel, 1862c: 39.
= Accipiter erythrauchen ceramensis (Schlegel, 1862).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Schlegel stated that Forsten only collected a single female. Forsten visited Seram late 1842.
Nisus erythropus Hartlaub, 1855: 354.
= Accipiter erythropus erythropus (Hartlaub, 1855).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Hartlaub did not mention the number of specimens he had seen, but only described a male and gave a single set of measurements.
Accipiter büttikoferi Sharpe, 1888: 200.
= Accipiter erythropus erythropus (Hartlaub, 1855).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Erroneously identified as Accipiter minullus (Daudin, 1800) by
Nisus brutus Schlegel, 1865c: 80.
= Accipiter francesiae brutus (Schlegel, 1865).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Pages 1–180 of vol. 3 of the ‘Nederlandsch Tijdschrift voor de Dierkunde’ were published in 1865 (
In his description Schlegel mentioned two males and three females. One female could not be located.
Nisuoïdes Morelii Pollen, 1866: 62.
= Accipiter francesiae francesiae Smith, 1834.
Syntype,
This specimen is one of a series of eight syntypes. The others are in the natural history museum of St. Denis (Réunion).
Falco regalis Temminck, 1830: livr. 84, pl. 495.
= Accipiter gentilis atricapillus (Wilson, 1812).
Astur griseiceps Kaup, 1848: 774.
= Accipiter griseiceps (Kaup, 1848).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
This name is usually, but incorrectly, attributed to
Astur (Nisus) gularis Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 5, pl. 2.
= Accipiter gularis gularis (Temminck & Schlegel, 1844).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Astur henstii Schlegel, 1873a: 62.
= Accipiter henstii (Schlegel, 1873).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falco hiogaster Müller, 1841: 110.
= Accipiter hiogaster hiogaster (Müller, 1841).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Müller collected on Ambon in April 1828.
Astur novaehollandiae leucosomus Sharpe, 1874: 94.
= Accipiter hiogaster leucosomus (Sharpe, 1874).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Urospizias pallidiceps Salvadori, 1879: 474.
= Accipiter hiogaster pallidiceps (Salvadori, 1879).
Syntype,
Astur hypoxanthus Schlegel, 1862c: 16.
= Accipiter melanoleucus melanoleucus Smith, 1830.
Syntype,
In discussing Astur melanoleucus Smith, 1830,
Astur Temminckii “Pel” Hartlaub, 1855: 353.
= Accipiter melanoleucus temminckii (Hartlaub, 1855).
Syntype,
Nisus verreauxii Schlegel, 1862c: 37.
= Accipiter melanoleucus subsp.
Syntype,
Syntype,
The two syntypes of Nisus verreauxii belong to different subspecies of Accipiter melanoleucus.
Based on the different coloration of morphs, adults, and immature birds,
Since Schlegel’s description includes both taxa, the name verreauxii cannot unambiguously be applied to one of them. A fixation of verreauxii either to temminckii or melanoleucus by lectotypification would be an arbitrary selection. Furthermore, there is no taxonomic purpose of a lectotype selection since none of the current names is antedated by Schlegel’s verreauxii. Therefore no lectotype needs to be designated here.
Falco poliogaster Temminck, 1824: livr. 45, pl. 264.
= Accipiter poliogaster (Temminck, 1824).
Lectotype,
According to
According to
Accipiter rhodogaster butonensis
Voous, 1951: 82 (in
= Accipiter rhodogaster rhodogaster (Schlegel, 1862).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
According to
Nisus virgatus rhodogaster Schlegel, 1862c: 32.
= Accipiter rhodogaster rhodogaster (Schlegel, 1862).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited the area near Gorontalo from September 1841 until April 1842.
Nisus sulaënsis Schlegel, 1866a: 26.
= Accipiter rhodogaster sulaensis (Schlegel, 1866).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy, as
Falco exilis Temminck, 1830: livr. 84, pl. 496.
= Accipiter rufiventris rufiventris Smith, 1830.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to
In reaction to
Falco cuculoides Temminck, 1822: livr. 19, pl. 110.
= Accipiter soloensis (Horsfield, 1821).
According to
Reinwardt collected in Indonesia from April 1816 until June 1822. Temminck mentioned several specimens of all plumages in the
Astur macrocelides Hartlaub, 1855: 354.
= Accipiter toussenelii macroscelides (Hartlaub, 1855).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Accipiter trinotatus Bonaparte, 1850a: 33.
= Accipiter trinotatus Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten stayed in Celebes twice between March 1840 and April 1842 and in the area near Gorontalo between September 1841 and April 1842.
Falco trivirgatus Temminck, 1824: livr. 51, pl. 303.
= Accipiter trivirgatus trivirgatus (Temminck, 1824).
According to the original description, the type specimens are in the
Accipiter virgatus fuscipectus Mees, 1970: 286.
= Accipiter virgatus fuscipectus Mees, 1970.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Two paratypes are in the
Accipiter virgatus quinquefasciatus Mees, 1984: 314.
= Accipiter virgatus quinquefasciatus Mees, 1984.
Holotype,
A paratype is in the
Accipiter virgatus vanbemmeli Voous, 1950: 99.
= Accipiter virgatus vanbemmeli Voous, 1950.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Falco virgatus Temminck, 1822: livr. 19, pl. 109.
= Accipiter virgatus virgatus (Temminck, 1822).
Holotype,
Livraison 19 was published in February 1822, the text to the plate appeared on 26 June 1824.
Holotype by monotypy. Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822.
Falco fucosa ‘Cuvier’ Temminck, 1821: livr. 6, pl. 32.
= Aquila audax audax (Latham, 1801).
Following
Falco (Aquila) albicans Rüppell, 1835: 34.
= Aquila rapax belisarius (Levaillant, 1850).
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was designated by
According to correspondence in the
Rüppell’s name is preoccupied (and not a nomen oblitum as stated by
Falco rapax Temminck, 1828: livr. 76 (error for livr. 77), pl. 455.
= Aquila rapax rapax (Temminck, 1828).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
For correction to livraison 77, see
Falco obsoletus Gloger, 1833: 141.
= Aquila rapax rapax (Temminck, 1828).
Syntype,
Four syntypes are in the
Spizaetus spilogaster Bonaparte, 1850c: 487.
= Aquila spilogaster (Bonaparte, 1850).
Syntype,
According to
Baza borneensis Brüggemann, 1876: 47.
= Aviceda jerdoni borneensis (Brüggemann, 1876).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Baza celebensis Schlegel, 1873a: 135.
= Aviceda jerdoni celebensis (Schlegel, 1873).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Aviceda subcristata obscura Junge, 1956a: 231.
= Aviceda subcristata obscura Junge, 1956.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Falco (Lophotes) Reinwardtii Schlegel & Müller, 1841: 37, pl. 5, figs 1 and 2.
= Aviceda subcristata reinwardtii (Schlegel & Müller, 1841).
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
Different taxa are represented in the type series.
Baza rufa Schlegel, 1866a: 40, 41, pl. 27, fig. 4; pl. 28, figs 1–3.
= Aviceda subcristata rufa (Schlegel, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the labels
Baza stresemanni Siebers, 1930: 243.
= Aviceda subcristata stresemanni (Siebers, 1930).
Holotype,
Siebers referred to 15 specimens collected by Toxopeus (Buru Expedition, 11 specimens) and Denin (local collector, 4 specimens). He referred to
Falco poliogenys Temminck, 1825: livr. 55, pl. 325.
= Butastur indicus (Gmelin, 1788).
Syntype,
The syntype which is illustrated on pl. 325 is in the
Falco liventer Temminck, 1827: livr. 74, pl. 438.
= Butastur liventer (Temminck, 1827).
Syntype,
Temminck (1827) illustrated a male and mentioned other specimens of both sexes from Celebes [= Sulawesi], Sumatra, Java, and the Malayan Peninsula. According to the original description, other syntype(s) are in the
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822.
Falco (Buteo) Augur Rüppell, 1836: 38, pl. 16.
= Buteo augur (Rüppell, 1836).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was designated by
Falco (Buteo) hydrophilus Rüppell, 1836: 39, pl. 17.
= Buteo augur (Rüppell, 1836).
Syntype,
Besides the
Faclo [sic] buteo capensis Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 16.
= Buteo buteo vulpinus (Gloger, 1833).
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
Buteo hemilasius Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 18.
= Buteo hemilasius Temminck & Schlegel, 1844.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck and
Faclo [sic] buteo japonicus Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 16, pls 6 and 6B.
= Buteo japonicus japonicus Temminck & Schlegel, 1844.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falco striolatus Temminck, 1821: livr. 15, pl. 87.
= Buteo nitidus (Latham, 1790).
Following
Falco cirtensis Levaillant, 1850: pl. 3.
= Buteo rufinus cirtensis (Levaillant, 1850).
Paralectotype,
According to
Falco lacernulatus Temminck, 1827: livr. 74, pl. 437.
= Buteogallus lacernulatus (Temminck, 1827).
According to
Falco rutilans Temminck, 1820: livr. 5, pl. 25.
= Buteogallus meridionalis (Latham, 1790).
Following
Falco riocourii Temminck, 1821: livr. 15, pl. 85.
= Chelictinia riocourii (Temminck, 1821).
Following
Falco uncinatus “Illiger” Temminck, 1822: livr. 18, pls 103 (male), 104 (female).
= Chondrohierax uncinatus uncinatus (Temminck, 1822).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Following
This name is thought not to have been published by Illiger (
Falco vitticaudus Zu Wied-Neuwied, 1830: 178.
= Chondrohierax uncinatus uncinatus (Temminck, 1822).
Paralectotype,
Circus gouldi Bonaparte, 1850a: 34.
= Circus approximans Peale, 1849.
Syntype,
Syntype,
The two types of Circus gouldi are labelled and listed in
Falco gularis Temminck, 1820: livr. 4, pl. 22.
= Circus buffoni (Gmelin, 1788).
Following
Falco torquatus “Cuvier” Temminck, 1821: livr. 8, pl. 43.
= Accipiter cirrocephalus (Vieillot, 1817).
Following
Falco histrionicus Quoy & Gaimard, 1824: 93, pl. 15 and 16.
= Circus cinereus Vieillot, 1816.
Possible syntype,
According to
After having been shipwrecked in East Falkland, the crew of the L’Uranie remained in the area around Berkeley Sound between 15 February and 27 April 1820.
Falco maurus Temminck, 1828: livr. 78, pl. 461.
= Circus maurus (Temminck, 1828).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Van Horstok arrived 30 March 1826 in Cape Town, South Africa.
Astur spectabilis Schlegel, 1863e: 131, pl. 6.
= Circaetus spectabilis spectabilis (Schlegel, 1863).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Elanus intermedius Schlegel, 1862f: 7.
= Elanus caeruleus hypoleucus Gould, 1859.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten stayed in Celebes twice between March 1840 and April 1842.
Elanus minor Bonaparte, 1850a: 22.
= Elanus caeruleus vociferus (Latham, 1790).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falco dispar Temminck, 1825: livr. 54, pl. 319.
= Elanus leucurus leucurus (Vieillot, 1818).
According to Temminck (1825), the type specimens are in the
Falco pterocles Temminck, 1821: livr. 10, pl. 56.
= Geranoaetus albicaudatus albicaudatus (Vieillot, 1816).
Following
Falco aguia Temminck, 1824: livr. 51, pl. 302.
= Geranoaetus melanoleucus melanoleucus (Vieillot, 1819).
Syntype,
Temminck (1824) refers in the original description to specimens from Brazil in the collections in the
Incorrectly referred to as aguja in Peters’ Checklist vol. I, second edition (1979: 359).
Falco hemidactylus Temminck, 1820: livr. 1, pl. 3.
= Geranospiza caerulescens caerulescens (Vieillot, 1817).
Following
Falco gracilis Temminck, 1821: livr. 16, pl. 91.
= Geranospiza caerulescens gracilis (Temminck, 1821).
Holotype,
Following
Freyreis worked near Colonia (Bahia, Brazil). Hellmayer and Conover (1949: 231) restricted the type locality to that area.
Vultur indus Forster, 1798: 40.
Vultur chaugoun Daudin, 1800: 14.
Vultur indou Rüppell, 1830: 382–383.
= Gyps bengalensis (Gmelin, 1788).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Both authors based their name on Levaillant’s description of “Le Chaugoun” (1799: 50) in which Levaillant wrote about this specimen in singular “d’ou je l’ai reçu”. On the label is added: ‘ind. fig. par Le Vaill. Ois. Afr. Pl. 11’.
Vultur Coprotheres Forster, 1798: 35.
Vultur Kolbii Daudin, 1800: 15.
Vultur vulgaris Vieillot, 1819b: 262.
Vultur chassefiente Ruppel [sic], 1830: 382.
= Gyps coprotheres (Forster, 1798).
Syntype,
According to
Vultur fulvus occidentalis Schlegel, 1844: 12.
= Gyps fulvus fulvus (Hablizl, 1783).
Syntype,
Syntype,
In ‘Die Europäischen Tag-Raubvögel’
Cantraine collected in Sardinia between 29 October 1829 and 5 June 1830 (
Vultur fulvus orientalis Schlegel, 1862i: 6.
= Gyps fulvus fulvus (Hablizl, 1783).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
See Vultur fulvus occidentalis Schlegel, 1844. Cantraine collected in Dalmatia between 1831 and 1833.
Falco humilis Müller & Schlegel, 1841: 44.
= Haliaeetus humilis (Müller & Schlegel, 1841).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falco macei Temminck, 1820 (ex Cuvier MS): livr. 2, pl. 8 (ad.).
= Haliaeetus leucoryphus (Pallas, 1771).
Following
Falco leucopterus Temminck, 1830: livr. 83, pl. 489.
= Haliaeetus pelagicus (Pallas, 1811).
There is no specimen in the
Falco diodon Temminck, 1823: livr. 34, pl. 198.
= Harpagus diodon (Temminck, 1823).
Lectotype,
The type locality was restricted to Ipanema, São Paolo, Brazil by
Falco hamatus Temminck, 1821: livr. 11, pl. 61.
= Helicolestes hamatus (Temminck, 1821).
Holotype,
Following
Henicopernis longicauda minima Junge, 1937a: 150.
= Henicopernis longicauda (Lesson & Garnot, 1828).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Aquila morphnoïdes Gould 1841: 161.
= Hieraaetus morphnoides (Gould, 1841).
Paralectotype,
Falco bonelli Temminck, 1824: livr. 49, pl. 288.
= Hieraaetus pennatus (Gmelin, 1788).
Temminck (1824) did not specify where he had seen the four type specimens. One is in the
Falco malaiensis Temminck, 1822: livr. 20, pl. 117.
= Ictinaetus malaiensis (Temminck, 1822).
Following
The spelling of the specific epithet on the wrapper of the plate is malaiensis, in the text malayensis. The latter spelling has long been followed by different authors. However, the spelling with the plate has priority and should be used.
Falco monogrammicus Temminck, 1824: livr. 53, pl. 314.
= Kaupifalco monogrammicus monogrammicus (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Falco palliatus “Wied” Temminck, 1822: livr. 35, pl. 204.
Cymindes buteonidis Lesson, 1830 (nomen novum).
= Leptodon cayanensis monachus (Vieillot, 1817).
Syntype,
Syntype,
There is much confusion regarding the specimens Temminck (1822) used in his description. He described a female but figured a male.
In the
Lesson introduced Cymindis buteonidis as a nomen novum for Falco palliatus Temminck, 1822.
Leucopternis superciliaris Von Pelzeln, 1861: 10.
= Leucopternis kuhli Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
According to
Macheiramphus alcinus Bonaparte, 1850c: 482.
Machaerhamphus alcinus Westerman, 1851: 29.
= Macheiramphus alcinus alcinus Bonaparte, 1850.
Holotype,
The spelling of the genus name and authorship has long been debated.
Falco (Nisus) polyzonus Rüppell, 1836: 36, pl. 15.
= Melierax metabates metabates Heuglin, 1861.
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was designated by
Milvus melanoti s Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 14, pl. 5, pl. 5B.
= Milvus migrans lineatus (Gray, 1831).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to
Cathartes monachus Temminck, 1823: livr. 38, pl. 222.
= Necrosyrtes monachus (Temminck, 1823).
Although the
Spizaëtus nipalensis bartelsi Stresemann, 1924: 431.
= Nisaetus bartelsi (Stresemann, 1924).
Holotype,
Falco cristatellus Temminck, 1824: livr. 48, pl. 282.
= Nisaetus cirrhatus cirrhatus (Gmelin, 1788).
According to the original description, the type specimens collected by Leschenault in “l’Inde et à Ceylan” are in the
Falco niveus Temminck, 1822: livr. 22, pl. 127.
= Nisaetus cirrhatus limnaeetus (Horsfield, 1821).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck (1822) mentioned several specimens from Java sent to him by Reinwardt. Two specimens in the collection, an adult female, and an immature, both listed here, are labelled “Reinwardt. Java”. The adult specimen
Spizaëtus cirrhatus vanheurni Junge, 1936: 24.
= Nisaetus cirrhatus vanheurni (Junge, 1936).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Spizaëtos lanceolatus Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 7.
= Nisaetus lanceolatus (Temminck & Schlegel, 1844).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten stayed in Celebes twice between March 1840 and April 1842.
Nisactus [sic] Nipalensis Hodgson, 1836b: 229, pl. 7.
= Nisaetus nipalensis nipalensis Hodgson, 1836.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Spizaëtos orientalis Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 7, pl. 3.
= Nisaetus nipalensis orientalis (Temminck & Schlegel, 1844).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck and
Falco unicinctus Temminck, 1824: livr. 53, pl. 313.
= Parabuteo unicinctus unicinctus (Temminck, 1824).
According to
Pernis cristatus var. celebensis Wallace, 1868: 17.
= Pernis celebensis Wallace, 1868.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
The date of collection given by
Falco ptilorhynchus Temminck, 1821: livr. 8, pl. 44.
= Pernis ptilorhynchus ptilorhynchus (Temminck, 1821).
Following
Falco gymnogenys Temminck, 1824: livr. 52, pl. 307.
= Polyboroides radiatus (Scopoli, 1786).
Syntype,
According to
Falco poecilonotus Temminck, 1820 (ex Cuvier MS): livr. 1, pl. 9.
= Pseudastur albicollis albicollis (Latham, 1790).
Following
Cymindis leucopygus Spix, 1824: 7, pl. II.
= Rostrhamus sociabilis sociabilis (Vieillot, 1817).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Asturina gularis Schlegel, 1862d: 4.
= Rupornis magnirostris pucherani (Verreaux & Verreaux, 1855).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Circaëtus bacha celebensis Schlegel, 1862e: 27.
= Spilornis rufipectus rufipectus Gould, 1858.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten stayed in Celebes twice between March 1840 and April 1842.
Circaëtus sulaënsis Schlegel, 1866a: 38, pl. 23 figs 4, 5, 6.
= Spilornis rufipectus sulaensis (Schlegel, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falco tyrannus Wied, 1820: 357.
= Spizaetus tyrannus tyrannus (Wied, 1820).
Falco albescens Daudin, 1800: 45.
Falco longicaudus Wilkes, 1810: 180.
= Stephanoaetus coronatus (Linnaeus, 1766).
Syntype,
According to the label this is the ”ind. tué et figu. par Le Vaill. Ois. d’Afr. 1 pl. 3”. Levaillant named this bird “Le Blanchard” and described how he, after three weeks of observing the behaviour of a pair, was able to collect both. His description formed the basis for both Falco albescens Daudin, 1800, and Falco longicaudus Wilkes, 1810. Both authors translated the description of Levaillant.
Vultur imperialis Temminck, 1827: livr. 72, pl. 426.
= Torgos tracheliotus (Forster, 1791).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck (1827) wrote: “the subject of our illustration…”. He also referred to Levaillant’s “Le Chincou” (1796: pl. 12) but claimed that the depicted bird in Levaillant was from a specimen in captivity, which was not preserved. According to Temminck the specimen in the
Vultur ægypius Rüppell, 1830: 377 (not Temminck, 1826: livr. 69, pl. 407).
= Torgos tracheliotus (Forster, 1791).
Syntype,
Astur macrourus Hartlaub, 1855: 353.
Accipiter (Urotriorchis) amadoni Wolters, 1979: 440 (nomen novum).
= Urotriorchis macrourus (Hartlaub, 1855).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Phodilus badius parvus Chasen, 1937: 216.
= Phodilus badius parvus Chasen, 1937.
Holotype,
Paratype,
Strix furcata Temminck, 1827: livr. 73, pl. 432.
= Tyto furcata furcata (Temminck, 1827).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Pöppig visited Cuba between 1822 and 1824 (
Strix inexspectata Schlegel, 1879a: 50.
= Tyto inexspectata (Schlegel, 1879).
Lectotype,
Tyto novaehollandiae calabyi Mason, 1983: 126.
= Tyto novaehollandiae calabyi Mason, 1983.
Holotype,
Paratype,
Strix Rosenbergii Schlegel, 1866b: 181.
= Tyto rosenbergii rosenbergii (Schlegel, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Possible syntype,
Forsten stayed in Celebes twice between March 1840 and April 1842.
Strix tenebricosa Arfaki Schlegel, 1879c: 101.
= Tyto tenebricosa arfaki (Schlegel, 1879).
Holotype,
The collector most likely was missionary Woelders, who returned to the Netherlands in February 1879, on leave from Andai, New Guinea, bringing his collection with him (
Ciccaba gisella Bonaparte, 1850a: 44.
= Aegolius harrisii harrisii (Cassin, 1849).
Lectotype,
Otus capensis major Schlegel, 1873a: 3.
Asio helvola hova Stresemann, 1922: 64 (nomen novum).
= Asio capensis hova Stresemann, 1922.
Holotype,
Strix brama Temminck, 1821: livr. 12, pl. 68.
= Athene brama brama (Temminck, 1821).
Following
Noctua Tarayensis Hodgson, 1836c: 175.
= Athene brama indica (Franklin, 1831).
Syntype,
Possible syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Strix grallaria Temminck, 1822: livr. 25, pl. 146.
= Athene cunicularia grallaria (Temminck, 1822).
Syntype,
Temminck (1822) described only the male of this species and depicted
Strix sonnerati Temminck, 1820: livr. 4, pl. 21.
= Athene superciliaris (Vieillot, 1817).
Following
Noctua pollenii Schlegel, 1865c: 81.
= Athene superciliaris (Vieillot, 1817).
Holotype,
Pages 1 to 180 of Vol. 3, ‘Nederlandsch Tijdschrift voor de Dierkunde’ were published in 1865 (
Strix africana Temminck, 1821: livr. 9, pl. 50.
= Bubo africanus africanus (Temminck, 1821).
Following
Strix lactea Temminck, 1820: livr. 1, pl. 4.
= Bubo lacteus (Temminck, 1820).
Livraison 1 was published in August 1820, the text appeared on 25 December 1824. The holotype (by monotypy) is in the
Bubo verreauxi Bonaparte, 1850a: 49.
= Bubo lacteus (Temminck, 1820).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Bubo leucostictus Hartlaub, 1855: 354.
= Bubo leucostictus Hartlaub, 1855.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Bubo fasciolatus Hartlaub, 1855: 354.
= Bubo poensis Fraser, 1854.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Strix strepitans Temminck, 1823: livr. 30, pl. 174.
= Bubo sumatranus strepitans (Temminck, 1823).
Lectotype,
Bubo orientalis minor Schlegel, 1862g: 13.
= Bubo sumatranus sumatranus (Raffles, 1822).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Bubo sumatranus tenuifasciatus Mees, 1964a: 116.
= Bubo sumatranus tenuifasciatus Mees, 1964.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Strix macrorhyncha Temminck, 1821: livr. 11, pl. 62.
= Bubo virginianus subsp.
Following
Strix ferruginea Wied, 1820: 104.
= Glaucidium brasilianum brasilianum (Gmelin, 1788).
Syntype,
Other syntypes are in the
Strix infuscata Temminck, 1820: 97.
Strix passerinoides Temminck, 1825: livr. 58, pl. 344.
= Glaucidium brasilianum brasilianum (Gmelin, 1788).
Possible holotype for infuscata, syntype for passerinoides,
According to the original description other syntypes of passerinoides Temminck are in the
Peters’ name for passerinoides Temminck was erroneously given as G. b. phaloenoides (Daudin, 1800) by
Strix spadicea Temminck, 1821: livr. 17, pl. 98.
= Glaucidium castanopterum (Horsfield, 1821).
Holotype,
Following
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822.
Strix pumila “Illiger” Temminck, 1821: livr. 7, pl. 39.
Strix minutissima Wied, 1830: 242.
= Glaucidium minutissimum (Wied, 1830).
Holotype for pumila, syntype for minutissima,
A recommendation to the ICZN is in preparation to suppress Strix pumila Temminck, 1821, in favour Strix minutissima Wied, 1830 (= Glaucidium minutissimum (Wied, 1830) because of prevailing usage unless the available evidence changes and shows that the name pumila has been used as valid since 1899.
Strix licua Lichtenstein, 1842: 12.
Noctua perlata capensis Schlegel, 1862h: 37.
= Glaucidium perlatum licua (Lichtenstein, 1842).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Strix perlata Vieillot, 1818d: 26.
= Glaucidium perlatum perlatum (Vieillot, 1818).
Lectotype,
Strix occipitalis Temminck, 1821: livr. 6, pl. 34.
= Glaucidium perlatum perlatum (Vieillot, 1818).
Holotype,
Following
Strix sylvatica “Müller” Bonaparte, 1850a: 40.
Glaucidium brodiei peritum Peters, 1940: 133 (nomen novum).
= Taenioptynx sylvaticus sylvaticus (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Peters (1940) introduced peritum as an unnecessary nomen novum for Strix sylvatica Bonaparte, 1850.
Bubo lettii Büttikofer, 1889a: 34.
= Jubula lettii (Büttikofer, 1889).
Lectotype,
Cultrunguis Flavipes Hodgson, 1836d: 364 pl. 26.
= Ketupa flavipes (Hodgson, 1836).
Syntype,
Ketupa minor Büttikofer, 1896c: 165.
Bubo ketupu büttikoferi Chasen, 1935: 84 (nomen novum).
= Ketupa ketupu minor Büttikofer, 1896.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Strix Leschenaulti Temminck, 1820: livr. 4, pl. 20.
= Ketupa zeylonensis leschenaulti (Temminck, 1820).
Following
Syrnium macabrum Bonaparte, 1850a: 53.
= Megascops albogularis macabrus (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Strix atricapilla “Natterer” Temminck, 1822: livr. 25, pl. 145.
= Megascops atricapilla (Temminck, 1822).
Otus choliba caucae Hekstra, 1982: 60.
= Megascops choliba cruciger (von Spix, 1824).
Holotype,
Ephialtes argentina “Lichtenstein” Schlegel, 1862g: 21.
= Megascops sanctacatarinae (Salvin, 1897).
In a footnote to his entry of Scops brasiliensis,
The taxonomic status of this taxon is currently under review (Dickinson, pers. comm., 2022) and is listed here, following IOC 11.2, tentatively as Megascops sanctacatarinae (Salvin, 1897), a name published 35 years after argentina Schlegel.
The two syntypes of Ephialtes argentina Schlegel are in the
Scops novae-zelandiae Bonaparte, 1850a: 47.
= Megascops watsonii watsonii (Cassin, 1849).
Lectotype,
The locality of New Zealand is an error. Megascops watsonii is a South American species.
Strix (Athene) guteruhi Müller, 1845: 279.
= Ninox fusca (Vieillot, 1817).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Strix maugei Temminck, 1821: livr. 8, pl. 46.
= Ninox fusca (Vieillot, 1817).
The holotype (by monotypy) is in the
Ninox ios Rasmussen, 1999: 458.
= Ninox ios Rasmussen, 1999.
Holotype,
Strix hirsuta japonica Temminck & Schlegel, 1845: 28, pl. 9B.
= Ninox japonica japonica (Temminck & Schlegel, 1844) (error for 1845).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the data under the stand
In this catalogue we follow
Noctua ochracea Schlegel, 1866b: 183.
Ninox perversa Stresemann, 1938: 149 (nomen novum).
= Ninox ochracea (Schlegel, 1866).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Noctua hirsuta philippensis Schlegel, 1862h: 26.
= Ninox philippensis philippensis Bonaparte, 1855.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Noctua aruensis Schlegel, 1866f: 329.
= Ninox rufa humeralis (Bonaparte, 1850).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Noctua fransenii Schlegel, 1866c: 256.
= Ninox rufa humeralis (Bonaparte, 1850).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Strix hirsuta minor Schlegel, 1873a: 24.
= Ninox scutulata (Raffles, 1822).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Strix hirsuta borneensis Bonaparte, 1850a: 41.
= Ninox scutulata borneensis (Bonaparte, 1850).
Syntype,
Strix hirsuta Temminck, 1824: livr. 49, pl. 289.
= Ninox scutulata hirsuta (Temminck, 1824).
Temminck (1824) reported syntypes in the
Ninox nipalensis
= Ninox scutulata lugubris (Tickell, 1833).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Other syntypes are in the
Athene squamipila Bonaparte, 1850a: 41.
= Ninox squamipila (Bonaparte, 1850).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Noctua Hoedtii Schlegel, 1871a: 3.
= Ninox theomacha theomacha (Bonaparte, 1855).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Pisorhina angelinae Finsch, 1912: 156.
= Otus angelinae (Finsch, 1912).
Holotype,
Otus collari Lambert & Rasmussen, 1998: 207.
= Otus collari Lambert & Rasmussen, 1998.
Paratypes,
The holotype is in the SNMB, Braunschweig (
Strix noctula “Reinwardt” Temminck, 1821: livr. 17, pl. 99.
= Otus lempiji lempiji (Horsfield, 1821).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Following
Scops Lettia Hodgson, 1836c: 176.
= Otus lettia lettia (Hodgson, 1836).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Strix magica Müller, 1841: 110.
= Otus magicus magicus (Müller, 1841).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Otus mantis Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 25.
= Otus rufescens rufescens (Horsfield, 1821).
Lectotype,
Scops longipennis “Lichtenstein” Kaup, 1853: 110.
= Otus scops cycladum (Tschusi, 1904).
Syntype,
According to
Apparently, Kaup’s name was never used as a valid name as it was questionable which subspecies the birds from this region belonged to.
Otus s. cycladum is in prevailing usage, but to be qualified by the term nomen protectum the conditions of “the Code” (
Otus semitorques Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 24, pl. 8.
= Otus semitorques semitorques Temminck & Schlegel, 1844.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck and
Otus scops africana Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 27.
= Otus senegalensis senegalensis (Swainson, 1837).
Syntype,
Scops siaoënsis Schlegel, 1873a: 13.
= Otus siaoensis (Schlegel, 1873).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Otus scops japonicus Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 27, pl. 9.
= Otus sunia japonicus Temminck & Schlegel, 1844.
Syntype,
Syntype,
This name was published in 1844 (or 1845 according to
Scops zorca asiaticus Schlegel, 1862g: 20.
= Otus sunia (Hodgson, 1836).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Strix leucotis Temminck, 1820: livr. 3, pl. 16.
= Ptilopsis leucotis (Temminck, 1820).
Following
Strix peli “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 44.
= Scotopelia peli (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Syrnium fulvescens Sclater & Salvin, 1868: 58.
= Strix fulvescens (Sclater and Salvin,1868).
Syntype,
Strix huhula Daudin, 1800: 190.
= Strix huhula huhula Daudin, 1800.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Strix hylophila Temminck, 1825: livr. 63, pl. 373.
= Strix hylophila Temminck, 1825.
Lectotype,
Syrnium bartelsi Finsch, 1906: 63.
= Strix leptogrammica bartelsi (Finsch, 1906).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Strix leptogrammica chaseni Hoogerwerf & de Boer, 1947: 140.
= Strix leptogrammica chaseni Hoogerwerf & de Boer, 1947.
Holotype,
Possible paratype,
Strix leptogrammica Temminck, 1832: livr. 89, pl. 525.
= Strix leptogrammica leptogrammica Temminck, 1832.
Holotype,
Although the text to the plate suggests that this plate was published in livr. 88, it was actually part of livr. 89 (see
Ciccaba myrtha Bonaparte, 1850a: 44.
= Strix leptogrammica myrtha (Bonaparte, 1850).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the data under the stand
Strix pagodarum Temminck, 1823: livr. 39, pl. 230.
= Strix seloputo seloputo Horsfield, 1821.
Syntype,
Other syntypes are in the
Kuhl and van Hasselt collected together on Java from December 1820 until September 1821.
Strix fuscescens Temminck & Schlegel, 1850: pl. 10.
Strix rufescens Temminck & Schlegel, 1845: 30.
= Strix uralensis fuscescens Temminck & Schlegel, 1850 (not 1845).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
This taxon was named in two different ways by Temminck and Schlegel. In the text of the Fauna Japonica (1845; 30) it was described as Strix rufescens, but on pl. 10 as S. fuscescens. The exact publication date of pl. 10 is unknown (
Syrnium squamulatum “Lichtenstein” Bonaparte, 1850a: 53.
= Strix virgata squamulata (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Colius nigricollis Vieillot, 1817a: 378.
= Colius striatus nigricollis Vieillot, 1817.
Holotype,
Colius erythromelon Vieillot, 1817a: 378.
Colius guiriva Hartlaub, 1849: 3.
= Urocolius indicus indicus (Latham, 1790).
Lectotype,
According to
Neither Levaillant nor Vieillot mentioned the number of specimens available to them. The listing in
Trogon Mackloti Müller, 1836: 336, pl. IV, fig. 1.
= Apalharpactes mackloti (Müller, 1836).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Not 1835 as in Peters’ Checklist. The 1835 volume was published in 1836 (see
Müller visited West Sumatra from June 1833 until late 1835 and stayed in the area around Mt. Singgalang between May and November 1834.
Trogon reinwardtii Temminck, 1822: livr. 21, pl. 124.
= Apalharpactes reinwardtii (Temminck, 1822).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Trogon Narina Stephens, 1815: 14.
= Apaloderma narina narina (Stephens, 1815).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Trogon ardens Temminck, 1826: livr. 68, pl. 404.
= Harpactes ardens ardens (Temminck, 1826).
The holotype (by monotypy) was in the collection of Laugier, now in
Trogon diardii Temminck, 1832: livr. 91, pl. 541.
= Harpactes diardii diardii (Temminck, 1832).
Syntype,
There is confusion about the type specimens for this name.
Trogon duvaucelii Temminck, 1824: livr. 49, pl. 291.
= Harpactes duvaucelii (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
Müller is given as the collector. This must be an error, since he left the Netherlands for Indonesia on 21 December 1825. Temminck (1824) mentioned that he had only received male specimens.
Trogon flagrans Müller, 1836: 338, pl. 4, fig. 2.
= Harpactes erythrocephalus flagrans (Müller, 1836).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the data on the stand,
Not 1835 as in Peters’ Checklist. The 1835 volume was published in 1836 (see
Trogon Temminckii Gould, 1835: 29.
= Harpactes kasumba kasumba (Raffles, 1822) (if from Sumatra; see below).
Holotype,
Since it was assumed that the birds came from Diard from Borneo, they were identified as Harpactes kasumba impavidus (Chasen & Kloss, 1931), an identification which seemed to be corroborated by their somewhat smaller size. However, if these birds were indeed collected by Van den Berg on Sumatra, as is most likely, they belong to the nominate race.
Trogon oreskios Temminck, 1823: livr, 31, pl. 181.
= Harpactes oreskios oreskios (Temminck, 1823).
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Trogon temnurus Temminck, 1825: livr. 55, pl. 326.
= Priotelus temnurus temnurus (Temminck, 1825).
Syntype,
Temminck also referred to type material in the
Trogon massena Gould, 1838a: III, pl. 16d.
= Trogon massena massena Gould, 1838.
Syntype,
According to
Falcinellus cyanomelas Vieillot, 1819a: 165.
= Rhinopomastus cyanomelas cyanomelas (Vieillot, 1819).
Syntype,
According to the description,
Buceros carunculatus guineensis Schlegel, 1862a: 20.
= Bucorvus abyssinicus (Boddaert, 1783).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Buceros carunculatus cafer Schlegel, 1862a: 20.
Bucorvus schlegeli Roberts, 1926: 219 (nomen novum).
= Bucorvus leadbeateri (Vigors, 1825).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Roberts introduced schlegeli as an unnecessary nomen novum for Buceros carunculatus cafer Schlegel, 1862.
Buceros galeritus Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, pl. 520.
= Anorrhinus galeritus (Temminck, 1831).
Syntype,
Possible syntype,
Possible syntype,
Possible syntype,
According to
Buceros convexus Temminck, 1832: livr. 89, pl. 530.
= Anthracoceros albirostris convexus (Temminck, 1832).
Lectotype,
As Müller did not arrive in Sumatra before June 1833 and Temminck published this name in 1832, there is doubt about the correctness of Müller as collector.
See
Buceros violaceus Wilkes, 1808: 479.
= Anthracoceros coronatus (Boddaert, 1783).
Buceros antracicus Temminck, 1832: livr. 89, pl. 529.
= Anthracoceros malayanus (Raffles, 1822).
Syntype,
Temminck (1832) referred to specimens from Sumatra and Borneo but failed to indicate in which collections the type specimens were kept.
Anthracoceros Marchei Oustalet, 1885: 108.
= Anthracoceros marchei Oustalet, 1885.
Syntype,
Buceros rhinoceros var. Borneoensis Schlegel & Müller, 1845: 22.
Buceros rhinoceroides “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 89 (nomen novum).
= Buceros rhinoceros borneoensis Schlegel & Müller, 1845.
Syntype,
Syntype,
The type locality was restricted to the “Doeson or Barito River” by
Bonaparte introduced rhinoceroides as an unnecessary nomen novum for Buceros rhinoceros var. Borneoensis Schlegel & Müller, 1845.
Buceros rhinoceros var. Sumatrana Schlegel & Müller, 1845: 22.
= Buceros rhinoceros rhinoceros Linnaeus, 1758.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Page 22 of the bird section of the ‘Verhandelingen’ was published in livraison 11 on 26 June 1845 (
Müller visited the area of Batang Singgalan between May and August 1834.
Buceros cristatus Vieillot, 1816c: 591.
= Buceros rhinoceros silvestris Vieillot, 1816.
Buceros silvestris Vieillot, 1816c: 592.
= Buceros rhinoceros silvestris Vieillot, 1816.
Buceros rhinoceros var. Indica Schlegel & Müller, 1845: 22.
Buceros sublunatus “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 90 (nomen novum).
= Buceros rhinoceros silvestris Vieillot, 1816.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Schlegel and
Bonaparte introduced sublunatus as an unnecessary nomen novum for Buceros rhinoceros var. Indica Schlegel & Müller, 1840.
Buceros lunatus Temminck, 1834: livr. 92, pl. 546.
Buceros rhinoceros var. Javanica Schlegel & Müller, 1845: 22.
= Buceros rhinoceros silvestris Vieillot, 1816.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck (1834) mentioned that at the time of the publication of his introduction to the genus Buceros (Temminck, 1823: livr. 36) this species was only known from a mutilated specimen and a living bird, both in his possession. These specimens are no longer in the
Boie visited Java between June 1826 and September 1827.
Buceros bucinator Temminck, 1824: livr. 48, pl. 284.
= Bycanistes bucinator (Temminck, 1824).
Temminck (1824) based his description on a skull in his possession (no longer in the
Buceros cylindricus Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, pl. 521, fig. 2.
= Bycanistes cylindricus (Temminck, 1831).
Lectotype,
Temminck (1831) based his description on two skulls bought at the auction of the Brooke’s collection in 1828 (
Buceros atratus Temminck, 1835: livr. 94, pl. 558.
= Ceratogymna atrata (Temminck, 1835).
Holotype by monotypy. Formerly in the collection of Meiffren-Laugier de Chartrouse, now probably in the
Buceros elatus Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, pl. 521, fig. 1.
= Ceratogymna elata (Temminck, 1831).
Lectotype,
Erroneously given as
Temminck (1831) described this species based on two skulls, one in the
Ortholophus Cassini Finsch, 1903b: 196.
= Horizocerus albocristatus cassini (Finsch, 1903).
Syntype,
Berenicornis (Buceros) macrourus Bonaparte, 1850a: 91.
= Horizocerus albocristatus macrourus (Bonaparte, 1850).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Buceros Nagtglasii Schlegel, 1862a: 16.
= Horizocerus hartlaubi hartlaubi (Gould, 1861).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy as
Lophoceros alboterminatus Büttikofer, 1889b: 67.
= Lophoceros alboterminatus Büttikofer, 1889.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Buceros pulchrirostris Schlegel, 1862a: 15.
= Lophoceros camurus (Cassin, 1857).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Buceros fasciatus Shaw, 1812: 34.
= Lophoceros fasciatus fasciatus (Shaw, 1812).
Lectotype,
Shaw (1812) based his name on Levaillant’s description of the “Calao Longibandes” (1806–1807: pl. 233) which Levaillant based on three specimens of which one was send to Temminck (Temminck, 1807: 38, cat. no. 778). By listing one of these syntypes as holotype,
Buceros semifasciatus “Temminck” Hartlaub, 1855: 356.
= Lophoceros fasciatus semifasciatus (Hartlaub, 1855).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Although the article by
Buceros limbatus Rüppell, 1835: 5, pl. 2 fig. 1.
= Lophoceros hemprichii (Ehrenberg, 1833).
Paralectotype,
According to
Buceros epirhinus Sundevall, 1850: 108.
Buceros nasutus var. caffer Sundevall, 1850: 108.
= Lophoceros nasutus epirhinus (Sundevall, 1850).
Syntype,
Buceros cineraceus Temminck, 1832: livr. 89, no plate.
= Ocyceros griseus (Latham, 1790).
Temminck (1832) did not give an indication where he had seen the specimen(s) on which he based his description.
Penelopides talisi Finsch, 1903a: 190.
= Penelopides manillae manillae (Boddaert, 1783).
Syntype,
Buceros corrugatus Temminck, 1832: livr. 90, pl. 531.
= Rhabdotorrhinus corrugatus corrugatus (Temminck, 1832).
Syntype,
Temminck (1832) wrote having received three specimens: an adult male and an immature from Borneo collected by Diard and a male from the Indian continent. The latter is either a different species or the locality is erroneous.
Buceros gracilis Temminck, 1832: livr. 90, pl. 535.
= Rhabdotorrhinus corrugatus corrugatus (Temminck, 1832).
Holotype by monotypy. According to Temminck (1832) he received a single specimen from Borneo.
Buceros exarhatus “Reinwardt” Temminck, 1823: livr. 36, pl. 211.
= Rhabdotorhinus exarhatus exarhatus (Temminck, 1823).
Possible holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck (1823) based his description on a single specimen collected by Reinwardt. Judging from Temminck’s illustration this bird was a female. There is no longer a mounted skin collected by Reinwardt in the
Reinwardt visited North Sulawesi between September and December 1821.
Buceros leucocephalus Vieillot, 1816c: 592.
Buceros sulcatus Temminck, 1821: livr. 12, pl. 69.
= Rhabdotorrhinus leucocephalus (Vieillot, 1816).
Holotype for leucocephalus,
Following
Buceros cassidix Temminck, 1823: livr. 36, pl. 210.
= Rhyticeros cassidix (Temminck, 1823).
Syntype,
According to the description the
Reinwardt visited the Tondano area between 20 and 24 September 1821.
Aceros cassidix brevirostris
Van Bemmel, 1951: 56, in:
= Rhyticeros cassidix (Temminck, 1823).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
There might be other paratypes in the
Buceros crispatus Wilkes, 1808: 479.
Buceros undulatus Shaw, 1812: 26.
= Rhyticeros undulatus (Shaw, 1812).
Buceros Erythrorhynchus “Brisson” Kuhl, 1820: 522 (not Temminck, 1823. livr. 36, sp. 19 (text).
= Tockus erythrorhynchus (Temminck, 1823).
Kuhl (1820, Buffoni et Daubentoni: 5, 22) published Buceros Erythrorhynchus as a scientific name for “Le Calao a bec rouge de Sénégal’’ described and depicted in Brisson (1760:, t. 4: 575, pl. 46, fig. 2) and depicted on pl. 260 in Daubenton (Planches enluminées). Although Kuhl did not give a proper description (his work was intended to be an index to the plates by Buffon and Daubenton), by referring to the plate this is an available name. Therefore, Tockus erythrorhynchus should be attributed to Kuhl, 1820 and not to Temminck, 1823.
The specimen Brisson had seen was in the collection of R.-A. de Reaumur and was collected by M. Adanson in Senegal.
Buceros rufirostris Sundevall, 1850: 108.
Buceros erythrorhynchos var. caffer Sundevall, 1850: 108.
= Tockus rufirostris (Sundevall, 1850).
Paralectotype,
Coracias cyanogaster Cuvier, 1816: 401.
= Coracias cyanogaster Cuvier, 1816.
Possible holotype,
Garrulus Temminckii Vieillot, 1819d: 435.
= Coracias temminckii (Vieillot, 1819).
Holotype,
According to
Coracias Violacea Temminck, 1807: 45.
= Eurystomus glaucurus afer (Latham, 1790).
Syntype,
Eurystomus orientalis oberholseri Junge, 1936: 30.
= Eurystomus orientalis oberholseri Junge, 1936.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Dacelo concreta Temminck, 1825: livr. 58, pl. 346.
= Actenoides concretus concretus (Temminck, 1825).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck’s description (1825) was based on the only specimen known. According to
Dacelo monachus Bonaparte, 1850a: 154.
Dacelo cyanocephala “Forsten” Bonaparte, 1850a: 154.
= Actenoides monachus monachus (Bonaparte, 1850).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited North Sulawesi from 22 March to 19 June 1841.
Dacelo princeps “Forsten” Bonaparte, 1850a: 154.
Monachalcyon princeps Reichenbach, 1851: iv, 38.
= Actenoides princeps princeps (Reichenbach, 1851).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited North Sulawesi from 22 March to 19 June 1841.
Alcedo japonica Bonaparte, 1854a: 320.
= Alcedo atthis bengalensis Gmelin, 1788.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Alcedo beryllina Vieillot, 1818a: 414.
= Alcedo coerulescens Vieillot, 1818.
Possible syntype,
According to
Alcedo cryzona [sic] Temminck, 1830: livr. 86, text with pl. 508.
= Alcedo euryzona euryzona Temminck, 1830.
Lectotype,
Not illustrated; the description was published in the text of A. lazuli Temminck (1830) who gave no indication of the number of specimens, so the listing by
Alcedo quadribrachys “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 158.
= Alcedo quadribrachys quadribrachys Bonaparte, 1850.
Lectotype,
Halcyon fulgidus Gould, 1857: 65.
= Caridonax fulgidus (Gould, 1857).
Paralectotype,
Wallace stayed in Lombok from 17 June to 30 August 1856 and his sales catalogue listed Halcyon fulgidus, collected at Ampanam and Gunong Sari (
Ceryle rudis syriaca Roselaar, 1995: 22.
= Ceryle rudis syriacus Roselaar, 1995.
Holotype,
Paratype,
Other paratypes are in the
Alcyone diemenensis Gould, 1846: 19.
= Ceyx azureus diemenensis (Gould, 1846).
Possible paralectotype,
Gould travelled through Australia between September 1838 and May 1840, visiting Tasmania several times.
Alcyone pulchra Gould, 1846: 19.
= Ceyx azureus ruficollaris (Bankier, 1841).
Possible paralectotype,
Ceyx innominata Salvadori, 1869: 446.
= Ceyx erithaca (Linnaeus, 1758).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Kuhl and van Hasselt collected together on Java between December 1820 and September 1821. Müller visited West Sumatra from July 1833 until late 1835.
Dacelo fallax Schlegel, 1866b: 187.
= Ceyx fallax fallax (Schlegel, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
In some cases, the date of collection on the stand differs from that on the label. According to the data on the stands, and according to
Rosenberg stayed in the area of Tulabolo between 14 April and 21 May 1864 (see
Ceyx lepida Temminck, 1836: livr. 100, pl. 595, fig. 1.
= Ceyx lepidus lepidus Temminck, 1836.
Syntype,
Müller visited Ambon between 29 March and 20 April 1828.
Ceyx pusilla Temminck, 1836: livr. 100, pl. 595, fig. 3.
= Ceyx pusillus pusillus Temminck, 1836.
Lectotype,
Temminck (1836) gave no indication of the number of specimens available to him.
According to Temminck this specimen was collected “dans les mêmes localités que la précédente” i.e., Ceyx solitaria.
Ceyx solitaria Temminck, 1836: livr. 100, pl. 595, fig. 2.
= Ceyx solitarius Temminck, 1836.
Lectotype,
Temminck (1836) gave no indication of the number of specimens available to him.
Dacelo cyanotis Temminck, 1824: livr. 44, pl. 262.
= Cittura cyanotis cyanotis (Temminck, 1824).
Lectotype,
Temminck (1824) gave no indication of the number of specimens available to him.
The type locality in the original description is erroneously given as Sumatra, as this species is endemic to Sulawesi.
Clytoceyx rex imperator van Oort, 1909a: 79.
= Clytoceyx rex Sharpe, 1880.
Lectotype,
The listing as holotype by
Dacelo Gaudichaud Gaimard, 1823: 52.
= Dacelo gaudichaud Gaimard, 1823.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Original description was by
The ‘Uranie’ visited Waigeo between 16 December 1818 and 5 January 1819.
Dacelo pygmaeus Cretzschmar, 1829: 42, pl. 28 b.
= Halcyon chelicuti chelicuti (Stanley, 1814).
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was designated by
Halcyon rufigularis Sharpe, 1892: 215.
= Halcyon cinnamomina subsp.
Alcedo (Halcyon) coromanda major Temminck & Schlegel, 1848: 75, pl. 39.
Halcyon schlegeli Bonaparte, 1850a: 156.
= Halcyon coromanda major (Temminck & Schlegel, 1848).
Syntype,
Syntype,
The word “Janasemi” under the stand of both specimens does not refer to a locality (as presumed in the first edition of this catalogue) but to the Japanese name for the species “Yamasemi”.
Alcedo (Halcyon) coromanda minor Temminck & Schlegel, 1848: 76.
Halcyon lilacina Bonaparte, 1850a: 156 (nomen novum).
= Halcyon coromanda minor (Temminck & Schlegel, 1848).
Lectotype for minor, syntype for lilacina,
Paralectotype for minor, syntype for lilacina,
The lectotype for minor was selected by
Müller visited West Sumatra from June 1833 until late1835.
Halcyon coromanda sulana Mees, 1970: 299.
= Halcyon coromanda sulana Mees, 1970.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
According to the label,
Alcedo omnicolor Temminck, 1822: livr. 23, pl. 135.
= Halcyon cyanoventris (Vieillot, 1818).
Syntype,
According to
Alcedo cyanoleuca Vieillot, 1818a: 401.
= Halcyon senegalensis cyanoleuca (Vieillot, 1818).
Lectotype,
Alcedo picturata Schlegel, 1863f: 16.
= Ispidina picta natalensis (Smith, 1832).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Dacelo melanops “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 154.
= Lacedo pulchella melanops (Bonaparte, 1850).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Dacelo buccoides Temminck, 1836: livr. 99, pl. 586.
= Lacedo pulchella pulchella (Horsfield, 1821).
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
Kuhl and Van Hasselt collected on Java from December 1820 until September 1821. Müller visited the Indrapoera area (west Sumatra) in July 1835.
For dating of Temminck’s livraison 99, pl. 586, see
Alcedo lugubris Temminck, 1834: livr. 92, pl. 548.
= Megaceryle lugubris lugubris (Temminck, 1834).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. Temminck (1834) based his description on a unique sample and described and illustrated a specimen with a “belt” formed by black and red spots. Since only males have red (rusty) spots, Temminck must have based his description on a male, although he did not give the sex of the specimen and was probably unaware of the difference.
For more information on dating and Siebold’s collection see
Ramphalcyon capensis innominata van Oort, 1910d: 126.
= Pelargopsis capensis innominata (van Oort, 1910).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Alcedo melanorhyncha Temminck, 1826: livr. 66, pl. 391.
= Pelargopsis melanorhyncha melanorhyncha (Temminck, 1826).
Lectotype,
Reinwardt visited north Sulawesi between September and December 1821.
Tanysiptera Carolinae “von Rosenberg” Schlegel, 1871a: 13.
= Tanysiptera carolinae Schlegel, 1871.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype, Cat no 11, adult female, mounted skin. Loc.: Mefor [= Numfor], [Papua], [Indonesia], 23.i.1869. Leg.: C.B.H. von Rosenberg.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype, Cat no 6, adult male, mounted skin. Loc.: Mefor [= Numfor], [Papua], [Indonesia], 11.ii.1869. Leg.: C.B.H. von Rosenberg.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Cat. No. 6 and cat. No. 11 (Rosenberg no. 119) are registered to be in the
Tanysiptera galatea boanensis Mees, 1964b: 125.
= Tanysiptera galatea boanensis Mees, 1964.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Tanysiptera obiensis Salvadori, 1877b: 302.
= Tanysiptera galatea obiensis Salvadori, 1877.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Tanysiptera Schlegelii “von Rosenberg” Schlegel, 1871a: 12.
= Tanysiptera riedelii Verreaux, 1866.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype, Cat. no 5, adult male, mounted skin. Loc.: Soek [= Biak], [Indonesia], 18.iii.1869. Leg.: C.B.H. von Rosenberg.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Cat. no. 5 could not be located.
Halcyon coronatus Müller, 1843: 175.
= Todiramphus australasia australasia (Vieillot, 1818).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Müller visited Timor between October 1828 and December 1829.
Todiramphus forsteni “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 157.
= Todiramphus chloris chloris (Boddaert, 1783).
Lectotype,
Forsten visited the area near Gorontalo between September 1841 and April 1842.
Alcedo diops Temminck, 1824: livr. 46, pl. 272.
= Todiramphus diops (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
Although Temminck (1824) did not refer to Ternate as type locality,
Todiramphus funebris “Forsten” Bonaparte, 1850a: 157.
= Todiramphus funebris Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
During a forced stay due to illness on Ternate from 19 June 1841 to mid September 1841, Forsten sent his hunters to Halmahera to collect skins.
Alcedo lazuli Temminck, 1830: livr. 86, pl. 508.
= Todiramphus lazuli (Temminck, 1830).
Syntype,
Temminck (1830) referred to two specimens from Sumatra in the
Dacelo grayi Schlegel, 1863f: 37.
= Todiramphus sacer erromangae (Mayr, 1938).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Both specimens from Aneiteum (= Anatom Island) refer to H. s. erromangae (Mayr, 1938).
Alcedo albicilla Lesson & Garnot, 1826a: 338 (nec Dumont, 1823).
= Todiramphus saurophagus saurophagus (Gould, 1843).
Lectotype,
Alcedo tuta Gmelin, 1788: 453.
= Todiramphus tutus tutus (Gmelin, 1788).
Possible lectotype,
Possible paralectotype,
Meropogon forsteni “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 164.
= Meropogon forsteni Bonaparte, 1850.
Lectotype,
Forsten visited the Tondano area between 15 April 1840 and 19 June 1841.
Merops hirundinaceus Vieillot, 1817c: 21.
Merops tavva “Levaillant” Boie, 1828: 316.
Merops taiva Cuvier, 1829: 271.
= Merops hirundineus hirundineus A.A.H. Lichtenstein, 1793.
Syntype,
All three authors based their name on the description of “Le Guépier à queue fourchue” by
Merops variegatus Vieillot, 1817c: 25.
Merops Sonninii “Levaillant” Boie, 1828: 316.
= Merops variegatus variegatus Vieillot, 1817.
Lectotype of variegatus, syntype of Sonninii,
Merops amictus Temminck, 1824: livr. 52, pl. 310.
= Nyctyornis amictus (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
Temminck (1824) wrote having received two specimens from Van den Berg, of which only one could be found in the
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Bucco pulmentum Sclater, 1856a: 194.
= Bucco tamatia pulmentum Sclater, PL, 1856.
Paralectotypes,
Monasa tenebrio Temminck, 1825: livr. 54, pl. 323, fig. 1.
= Chelidoptera tenebrosa tenebrosa (Pallas, 1782).
Syntype,
Temminck (1825) gave no indication of specimens or their whereabouts.
Monaca [sic] phaioleucos Temminck, 1825: pl. 323, fig. 2.
= Nonnula rubecula rubecula (Spix, 1824).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
No livraison is mentioned, but according to
According to
Nonnula rubecula tapanahoniensis Mees, 1968: 102.
= Nonnula rubecula tapanahoniensis Mees, 1968.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Capito melanotis Temminck, 1821: livr. 16, pl. 94.
= Nystalus chacuru chacuru (Vieillot, 1816).
Possible holotype,
Following
According to
Bucco striolatus Von Pelzeln, 1856: 500.
= Nystalus striolatus striolatus (Pelzeln, 1856).
Syntype,
This is one out of eight syntypes.
Mycropogon fuliginosus Temminck, 1830: livr. 83.
= Caloramphus fuliginosus fuliginosus (Temminck, 1830).
Syntype,
Temminck (1830) described male(s) and female(s) but only
Bucco armillaris Temminck, 1821: livr. 15, pl. 89, fig. 1.
= Psilopogon armillaris armillaris (Temminck, 1821).
Holotype,
Following
The type locality was restricted to the Province of Batam, West Java (
Bucco gularis “Reinwardt” Temminck, 1821: livr. 15, pl. 89, fig. 2.
Bucco cyanocephalus Reinwardt, 1820: Bataviasche Courant, febr. 1820 (not seen).
= Psilopogon australis (Horsfield, 1821).
Holotype,
Following
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822.
Bucco chrysopogon Temminck, 1824: livr. 48, pl. 285.
= Psilopogon chrysopogon chrysopogon (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
Temminck (1824) listed three specimens:
Megalaima chrysopsis Goffin, 1863: 15.
= Psilopogon chrysopogon chrysopsis (Goffin, 1863).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Schwaner visited Borneo between 1843 and 1848.
Bucco corvinus Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, pl. 522.
= Psilopogon corvinus (Temminck, 1831).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Boie visited Java between June 1826 and September 1827.
Bucco frontalis Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, text “Genre Barbu”.
= Psilopogon duvaucelii duvaucelii (Lesson, 1830).
According to the original description, type specimens are in the
Bucco faiostriatus Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, text “Genre Barbu”.
Bucco faiostrictus Temminck, 1832: livr. 89, pl. 527.
= Psilopogon faiostrictus faiostrictus (Temminck, 1832).
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
No livraison number is given underneath the text. According to
Bucco aurifrons Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, text “Genre Barbu”.
= Psilopogon flavifrons (Cuvier, 1816).
Syntype,
Temminck (1831) first published this name in the introduction to the genus Bucco as species no. 12. He referred to Levaillant’s “Le Barbu à Front d’Or” (1806: II, pl. 55), which Temminck, in the text to Bucco armillaris (Temminck, 1821), considered to be an immature specimen of this latter species. In livraison 88, Temminck described it as a separate species.
According to the original description other syntypes were present in the
Bucco roseus Dumont, 1805: 52.
= Psilopogon haemacephalus roseus (Dumont, 1805).
Holotype,
Dumont’s name is frequently referred to as published in 1816, but Vol. IV and V and a few copies of VI were published in 1805 and 1806, after which publication was suspended until 1816 when volumes were brought up to date by Supplements (www.zoonomen.net).
Bucco henricii Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, pl. 524.
= Psilopogon henricii henricii (Temminck, 1831).
Syntype,
One was sent to the
Bucco Kotoreas “Temminck” Horsfield, 1824: general catalogue (no pagination) (nomen novum).
= Psilopogon javensis (Horsfield, 1821).
Megalaimus hodgsoni Bonaparte, 1850a: 144.
= Psilopogon lineatus hodgsoni (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
Bucco mystacophanos Temminck, 1824: livr. 53, pl. 315.
= Psilopogon mystacophanos mystacophanos (Temminck, 1824).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes collected by Diard and Duvaucel are in the
Megalæma nuchalis Gould, 1863: 283.
Megalaima calauchenia Goffin, 1863: 94.
= Psilopogon nuchalis (Gould, 1863).
Paralectotype for nuchalis, holotype for calauchenia,
Paralectotypes for nuchalis,
Holotype by monotypy for calauchenia as
Shelley (
Bucco Oorti Müller, 1836: 341, pl. IV, fig. 4.
= Psilopogon oorti (Müller, 1836).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Not 1835 as in Peters’ Checklist. The 1835 volume was published in 1836 (
Psilopogon pyrolophus Müller, 1836: 339, pl. IV, fig. 3.
= Psilopogon pyrolophus Müller, 1836.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Not dated 1835 as in Peters’ Checklist. The 1835 volume was published in 1836 (
Müller visited west Sumatra from June 1833 until late 1835.
Gymnobucco Peli Hartlaub, 1857: 175.
= Gymnobucco peli Hartlaub, 1857.
Lectotype,
The lectotype was selected by
Pogonias Brucii Rüppell, 1837: 50, pl. 20, fig. 1.
= Lybius guifsobalito Hermann, 1783.
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was designated by
According to the correspondence in the
Pogonias personatus Temminck, 1823: livr. 34, pl. 201.
= Lybius torquatus torquatus (Dumont, 1805).
Syntype,
Temminck reported syntypes in the
Pogonias undatus Rüppell, 1837: 52, pl. 20.
= Lybius undatus undatus (Rüppell, 1837).
Paralectotype,
The lectotype was designated by
According to the correspondence in the
Pogonias rubescens Temminck, 1823: livr. 34, text “Genre Pogonias”.
P[ogonias] Rubicon Cuvier, 1829: 457.
= Lybius vieilloti rubescens (Temminck, 1823).
Syntype,
Temminck (1823, in the introduction to the genus) and
Megalæma bilineata Sundevall, 1850: 109.
= Pogoniulus bilineatus bilineatus (Sundevall, 1850).
Paralectotype,
Bucco chrysoconus Temminck, 1832: pl. 536, fig. 2.
= Pogoniulus chrysoconus chrysoconus (Temminck, 1832).
Syntype,
No livraison is mentioned in the text. According to
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Barbatula uropygialis Heuglin, 1862: 37.
= Pogoniulus chrysoconus chrysoconus (Temminck, 1832).
Syntype,
Bucco pusillus Dumont, 1805: 50.
Bucco Rubrifrons Vieillot, 1816b: 497.
Bucco Parvus Cuvier, 1817: 428.
Bucco barbatula Temminck, 1831: livr. 88, text to “Genre Barbu”.
= Pogoniulus pusillus pusillus (Dumont, 1805).
Syntype,
All authors based their description on Levaillant’s “Barbion” (1806: 73, pl. 32). Levaillant brought 14 specimens to Europe, one of which he gave to Temminck (
Dumont’s name is frequently referred to as published in 1816, but Vols IV and V and a few copies of Vol. VI were published in 1805 and 1806 after which publication was suspended until 1816 when volumes were brought up to date by Supplements (www.zoonomen.net).
Bucco minutus Bonaparte, 1850a: 144.
= Pogoniulus pusillus pusillus (Dumont, 1805).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The locality Senegal for
Xylobucco scolopaceus “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 141.
= Pogoniulus scolopaceus scolopaceus (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
Megalæma leucotis Sundevall, 1850: 109.
= Stactolaema leucotis leucotis (Sundevall, 1850).
Paralectotype,
Bucco margaritatus Cretzschmar, 1828: 30, pl. 20.
Micropogon margaritaceus Temminck, 1838: tabl. meth. 55.
= Trachyphonus margaritatus margaritatus (Cretzschmar, 1828).
Paralectotype for margaritatus, syntype for margaritaceus,
Possible paralectotype for margaritatus, syntype for margaritaceus,
Possible paralectotype for margaritatus, syntype for margaritaceus,
The lectotype was designated by
Besides
Capito Goffinii “Schlegel” Goffin, 1863: 72.
= Trachyphonus purpuratus goffinii (Goffin, 1863).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Peters (1948) mentioned Schlegel as the author. However, the catalogue of the Buccones in the
Trachyphonus lurpuratus [sic] Verreaux & Verreaux, 1851a: 260.
= Trachyphonus purpuratus purpuratus Verreaux & Verreaux, 1851.
Syntype,
Polysticte Quopopa Smith, 1836: 54.
= Trachyphonus vaillantii vaillantii (Ranzani, 1821).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Pogonias melanocephala Cretzschmar, 1829: 41, pl. 28a.
= Tricholaema melanocephala melanocephala (Cretzschmar, 1829).
Paralectotypes,
The lectotype was designated by
Indicator archipelagicus Temminck, 1832: livr. 91, pl. 542, fig. 1.
= Indicator archipelagicus Temminck, 1832.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy. The original name was erroneously given as archipelagus in
Indicator major Stephens, 1815: 139.
= Indicator indicator (Sparrman, 1777).
Syntype,
Indicator albirostris Temminck, 1825: livr. 62, pl. 367.
= Indicator indicator (Sparrman, 1777).
Syntype,
Indicator minimus “Vieillot” Temminck, 1832: livr. 91, pl. 542, fig. 1.
= Indicator minor minor Stephens, 1815.
Possible lectotype,
Temminck (1832) based this name on the description by
Melignothes pachyrhynchus Heuglin, 1864: 266.
= Indicator minor diadematus Rüppell, 1837.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Indicator Levaillantii Temminck, 1825: livr. 62, text to “Genre Indicateur”.
= Indicator variegatus Lesson, 1830.
Temminck (1825) based this name on the description by
Prodotiscus regulus Sundevall, 1850: 109.
= Prodotiscus regulus regulus Sundevall, 1850.
Paralectotype,
Dryocopus percoccineus Bonaparte, 1850b: 134.
= Campephilus robustus (Lichtenstein, 1819).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Picus balius Heuglin, 1871: 810.
= Campethera punctuligera balia (Heuglin, 1871).
Picus galeatus Temminck, 1822 (ex Natterer MS): livr. 29, pl. 171.
= Celeus galeatus (Temminck, 1822).
The holotype (by monotypy), a single male collected by Natterer in Ipanema, Brazil, is in the
Picus Sultaneus Hodgson, 1837d: 105.
= Chrysocolaptes guttacristatus sultaneus (Hodgson, 1837).
Syntype,
Dryotomus Flavigula Hodgson, 1837d: 106.
= Chrysophlegma flavinucha flavinucha (Gould, 1834).
Syntype,
Picus mentalis Temminck, 1826: livr. 65, pl. 384.
Picus gularis Wagler, 1827: no 89.
= Chrysophlegma mentale mentale (Temminck, 1826).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Picus gularis Wagler, 1827 is based on the same series as Picus mentalis Temminck, 1826 as is a female specimen in the
Chrysophlegma niasense Büttikofer, 1896c: 169.
= Chrysophlegma miniaceum niasense Büttikofer, 1896.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Piculus rubiginosus fortirostris Mees, 1974: 57.
= Colaptes rubiginosus nigriceps (Blake, 1941).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Piculus rubiginosus poliocephalus Mees, 1974: 56.
= Colaptes rubiginosus nigriceps (Blake, 1941).
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Picus analis “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 137.
= Dendrocopos analis analis (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Picus analis was first published by
Kuhl and van Hasselt collected on Java from December 1820 until September 1821.
Picus insularis Gould, 1863: 283.
= Dendrocopos leucotos insularis (Gould, 1863).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Of the six specimens in the
Picus Westermani Blyth, 1870: 163.
= Dendrocopos macei westermani (Blyth, 1870).
Holotype,
Picus melanauchen Heuglin, 1871: 808.
= Dendropicos abyssinicus (Stanley, 1814).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Picus minutus Temminck, 1823: livr. 33, pl. 197, fig. 2.
Dendropicos elachus Oberholser, 1919: 8 (nomen novum).
= Dendropicos elachus Oberholser, 1919.
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Picus fulviscapus “Illiger” Lichtenstein, 1823: 11.
= Dendropicos fuscescens fuscescens (Vieillot, 1818).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Picus fuscescens Vieillot, 1818c: 86.
= Dendropicos fuscescens fuscescens (Vieillot, 1818).
Dendrobates Gabonensis Verreaux & Verreaux, 1851b: 513.
= Dendropicos gabonensis gabonensis (Verreaux & Verreaux, 1851).
Possible holotype,
Picus erithronothos Vieillot, 1818c: 73.
Picus neglectus Wagler, 1827: no. 29.
= Dinopium psarodes (Lichtenstein, 1793).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Picus leucogaster Temminck, 1830: livr. 85, pl. 501.
= Dryocopus javensis javensis (Horsfield, 1821).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck (1830) did not give an indication in which collection(s) the specimens, both male and female from Java, were kept. All specimens above refer to the original description in Temminck’s handwriting. Two arrived in the
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822. Kuhl and van Hasselt collected together on Java from December 1820 until September 1821.
Picus concretus Temminck, 1821: livr. 15, pl. 90, fig. 1 and 2.
= Hemicircus concretus concretus (Temminck, 1821).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Following
Yunx japonica Bonaparte, 1850a: 112.
= Jynx torquilla chinensis Hesse, 1911.
Lectotype,
Picus poicilophos Temminck, 1823: livr. 33, pl. 197, fig. 1.
= Meiglyptes tristis tristis (Horsfield, 1821).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description, other syntypes are located in the
Picus melanopogon “Lichtenstein” Temminck, 1828: livr. 76, pl. 451.
= Melanerpes formicivorus formicivorus (Swainson, 1827).
Syntype,
Syntype,
The original description is based on “a” male from Mexico received from Lichtenstein (
Picus larvatus Temminck, 1827: livr. 73, text to pl. 433.
= Melanerpes radiolatus (Wagler, 1827).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Centurus canescens Salvin, 1889: 370.
= Melanerpes santacruzi canescens (Salvin, 1889).
Syntype,
Picus superciliaris Temminck, 1827: livr. 73, pl. 433.
= Melanerpes superciliaris superciliaris (Temminck, 1827).
Lectotype,
The description gives no indication about the number of specimens. By listing it as holotype,
Meiglyptes badiosus “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 113.
= Micropternus brachyurus badiosus (Bonaparte, 1850).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Picus pulverulentus Temminck, 1826: livr. 66, pl. 389.
= Mulleripicus pulverulentus pulverulentus (Temminck, 1826).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Hemilophus mülleri Bonaparte, 1850b: 131.
= Mulleripicus pulverulentus pulverulentus (Temminck, 1826).
Lectotype,
The description gives no indication about the number of specimens. By listing it as holotype,
Picus aurulentus “Illiger” Temminck, 1821: livr. 10, pl. 59, fig. 1.
= Piculus aurulentus (Temminck, 1821).
Holotype,
Following
Picumnus asterias Sundevall, 1866: 97.
= Picumnus albosquamatus guttifer Sundevall, 1866.
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to Peters (1948: 96), who listed P. asterias Sundevall, 1866 as a distinct species, it was only known from the “unique type”. However,
Picumnus cirratus Temminck, 1825: livr. 62, pl. 371, fig. 1.
= Picumnus cirratus cirratus Temminck, 1825.
Syntype,
Picumnus Temminckii De Lafresnaye, 1845: 6.
= Picumnus temminckii Lafresnaye, 1845.
Picus awokera Temminck, 1836: livr. 99, pl. 585.
= Picus awokera awokera Temminck, 1836.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck (1836) described male(s) and female(s) and illustrated a male. The plate was erroneously labelled “kizuki” instead of “awokera”.
Three races are recognized by IOC 11.1, but variation might “reflect a cline of decreasing size and increasing plumage darkness from N to S and a division of geographical races seems unjustified”, subsequently treated as monotypic (
Gecinus dedemi van Oort, 1911c: 59.
= Picus canus dedemi (van Oort, 1911).
Holotype,
Gecinus tancolo Gould, 1863: 283.
= Picus canus tancolo (Gould, 1863).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Warren (1866: 291) listed two syntypes in the
Gecinus Weberi A. Müller, 1882: 421.
= Picus viridanus Blyth, 1843.
Syntype,
Syntype,
These are two of a series of 20 syntypes.
Picus dimidiatus Temminck, 1830: livr. 85, text to pl. 501.
= Picus vittatus Vieillot, 1818.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck (1830) referred to Java, Sumatra, and the “Indian Continent” as collecting areas but gave no indication in which collection(s) he had seen the specimens.
Kuhl and van Hasselt collected together on Java from December 1820 until September 1821.
Gecinus xanthopygius “Hodgson” Bonaparte, 1850a: 127.
= Picus xanthopygaeus (Gray & Gray, 1847).
Lectotype,
The locality Java is obviously in error, as the species does not occur there.
Bonaparte gave no indication of the number of specimens available to him.
Picus validus Temminck, 1825: livr. 64, pl. 378 (male), pl. 402 (female).
= Reinwardtipicus validus validus (Temminck, 1825).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description other syntypes are in the
Reinwardt visited Java several times between April 1816 and March 1822. Kuhl and van Hasselt collected together on Java from December 1820 until September 1821.
Chrysocolaptes xanthopygius Finsch, 1905: 34.
= Reinwardtipicus validus xanthopygius (Finsch, 1905).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The description was based on five specimens, three males and two females. One female specimen is no longer in the
Skeletons
Picumnus abnormis Temminck, 1825: livr. 62, pl. 371, fig. 3.
= Sasia abnormis abnormis (Temminck, 1825).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Venilia albertuli Bonaparte, 1850a: 129.
= Veniliornis sanguineus (Lichtenstein, 1793).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Picus percussus Temminck, 1826: livr. 66, pl. 390.
= Xiphidiopicus percussus percussus (Temminck, 1826).
Syntype,
Syntype,
The female was later depicted on pl. 424 (livr. 71, 1827). Both sexes are described in the text.
Picus kaleënsis Swinhoe, 1863: 390.
= Yungipicus canicapillus kaleensis (Swinhoe, 1863).
Syntype,
Of the nine specimens in the
Picus kizuki Temminck, 1836: livr. 99, text to pl. 585.
= Yungipicus kizuki kizuki (Temminck, 1836).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
No plate is mentioned in the original description, although the name is erroneously added under the illustration of Picus awokera (pl. 585). The year of publication of livraisons 98 and 99 was corrected to 1836 by
Picus Temminckii Malherbe, 1849: 529.
= Yungipicus temminckii (Malherbe, 1849).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Forsten visited the area around Gorontalo between September 1841 and April 1842.
Picus boie Temminck, 1829: livr. 80, pl. 473.
= not applicable.
Holotype,
Picus boie is based on an artefact; a specimen composed of parts of various species.
Falco aterrimus Temminck, 1821: livr. 7, pl. 37.
= Daptrius ater Vieillot, 1816.
Following
Daptrius niger “Vieillot” Temminck, 1821: livr. 7, pl. 37.
= Daptrius ater Vieillot, 1816.
Following
In the text to pl. 37, Temminck (1823) referred to a name supposedly given by Vieillot, Daptrius niger. Vieillot’s use of “niger” is, however, part of the description of the plumage of the bird, not the introduction of a new name. The use as name by Temminck constitutes a valid publication of this name.
Falco biarmicus Temminck, 1825: livr. 55, pl. 324.
= Falco biarmicus biarmicus Temminck, 1825.
Syntype,
According to the original description, other syntypes are present in the
Falco lanarius capensis Schlegel, 1862b: 16.
= Falco biarmicus biarmicus Temminck, 1825.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falco Feldeggii Schlegel, 1843: 2, pl. 10 (ad. male) and 11 (imm. male).
= Falco biarmicus feldeggii Schlegel, 1843.
Syntype,
Falco lanarius graecus Schlegel, 1862b: 6, 15.
= Falco biarmicus subsp.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
As
We identified
Falco tanypterus Schlegel, 1843: 2, pl. 12 and 13.
Falco lanarius nubicus Schlegel, 1862b: 15.
= Falco biarmicus tanypterus Schlegel, 1843.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falco tanypterus was described by Schlegel in 1843, not 1862 as mentioned in
According to
In his description of Falco lanarius nubicus Schlegel listed three specimens in the
Falco concolor Temminck, 1825: livr. 56, pl. 330.
= Falco concolor Temminck, 1825.
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description, other syntypes are present in the
Falco Bosschii Schlegel, 1863m: 123, pl. 5.
= Falco cuvierii Smith, 1830.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Falco deiroleucus Temminck, 1825: livr. 59, pl. 348.
= Falco deiroleucus Temminck, 1825.
According to the original description, the holotype is in the
Falco femoralis Temminck, 1822: livr. 21, pl. 121.
= Falco femoralis femoralis Temminck, 1822.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck published the description of Falco femoralis twice: in livr. 21, pl. 121, in 1822 and in livr. 58, pl. 343, in 1825 (
According to the original description, other type specimens are in the
Falco religiosus Bonaparte, 1850: 25.
= Falco longipennis longipennis Swainson, 1837.
Lectotype,
Tinnunculus moluccensis orientalis Meyer & Wiglesworth, 1898: 79 (nec Brehm, 1851).
Falco moluccensis bernsteini Stresemann, 1919: 8 (nomen novum).
= Falco moluccensis moluccensis (Bonaparte, 1850).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
In their description,
Wallace visited Halmahera for the first time in February 1858 and made several subsequent visits. Forsten visited Ternate from 19 June 1841 until mid September 1841.
Falco peregrinus harterti Buturlin, 1907: 99.
= Falco peregrinus japonensis Gmelin, 1788.
Syntype,
Syntype,
The name was based on a series of skins.
Falco minor Bonaparte, 1850a: 23.
= Falco peregrinus minor Bonaparte, 1850.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falco pelegrinoides Temminck, 1829: livr. 81, pl. 479.
= Falco peregrinus pelegrinoides Temminck, 1829.
Syntype,
In the original description, Temminck (1829) referred to specimens reported by Rüppell from Nubia and in the
Falco punctatus “Cuvier” Temminck, 1821: livr. 8, pl. 45.
= Falco punctatus Temminck, 1821.
Possible holotype,
Following
Falco smithii Schlegel, 1873a: 43 (nomen novum).
= Falco rupicoloides rupicoloides A. Smith, 1829.
Falco gyrfalco groenlandicus Schlegel, 1862b: 13.
Falco holbœlli Sharpe, 1873: 415.
= Falco rusticolus Linnaeus, 1758.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The labels of the specimens received from Conradsen give 1859 as date while on the stand 1860 is given. Probably all these Conradsen specimens were collected in the winter of 1859–1860. Only in the case of
Falco gyrfalco norwegicus Schlegel, 1862b: 12.
= Falco rusticolus Linnaeus, 1758.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Falco aldrovandii Temminck, 1822: livr. 22, pl. 128.
= Falco severus Horsfield, 1821.
Syntype,
Temminck (1822) mentioned having two specimens: only
Falco tinnunculus japonicus Temminck & Schlegel, 1844: 2, pl. 1.
Cerchneis tinnunculus manchuricus Stuart Baker, 1930: vol. 7 (2nd ed.): 403 (nomen novum).
= Falco tinnunculus interstinctus McClelland, 1840.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Temminck and
Cerchneis tinnunculus manchuricus Stuart Baker, 1930, is a nomen novum for Falco tinnunculus japonicus Temminck & Schlegel, 1844, and thus relates to the same type specimens.
See also
Falco neglectus Schlegel, 1873a: 43.
= Falco tinnunculus neglectus Schlegel, 1873.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Astur mirandollei Schlegel, 1862c: 27.
= Micrastur mirandollei (Schlegel, 1862).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Micrastur macrorhynchus Von Pelzeln, 1865: 11.
= Micrastur mirandollei (Schlegel, 1862).
Syntype,
According to
Falco xanthothorax Temminck, 1821: livr. 16, pl. 92.
= Micrastur gilvicollis (Vieillot, 1817).
Holotype,
Following
The identification of
Falco leucauchen Temminck, 1824: livr. 52, pl. 306.
= Micrastur ruficollis ruficollis (Vieillot, 1817).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the original description, other syntypes collected by Natterer are in the museums in the
Falco brachypterus Temminck, 1822: livr. 20, pl. 116.
= Micrastur semitorquatus semitorquatus (Vieillot, 1817).
Holotype,
Following
An adult male which is depicted on pl. 141 in livraison 24 is in the
Lophochroa Leari Finsch, 1863: xxiii.
= Cacatua ducorpsii Pucheran, 1853.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Lophochroa Goffini Finsch, 1863: xxiii.
Cacatua tanimberensis Roselaar & Prins, 2000: 104.
= Cacatua ducorpsii Pucheran, 1853.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Junior synonym of Cacatua ducorpsii Pucheran, 1853.
Cacatua eleonora Finsch, 1863: xxi.
= Cacatua galerita eleonora Finsch, 1863.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Kakatoë galerita aruensis Mathews, 1917: 187.
= Cacatua galerita eleonora Finsch, 1863.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Cacatua triton Temminck, 1849: 405.
= Cacatua galerita triton Temminck, 1849.
Lectotype,
The stand of
Cacatua goffiniana Roselaar & Michels, 2004: 186.
= Cacatua goffiniana Roselaar & Michels, 2004.
Holotype,
Paratype,
Until the publication by
Cacatua pastinator transfreta Mees, 1982: 79.
= Cacatua sanguinea transfreta Mees, 1982.
Holotype,
Paratypes,
Plyctolophus parvulus Bonaparte, 1850b: 139.
= Cacatua sulphurea parvula (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Müller visited Timor from October 1828 until December 1829 during his expedition with the corvette ‘Triton’.
Cacatua aequatorialis Temminck, 1849: 405.
= Cacatua sulphurea sulphurea (Gmelin, 1788).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Van den Hoek Ostende (1997: 118) gave Tomoni [sic] as collecting locality, which is an error for Tomini (
Psittacus nasicus Temminck, 1821: 115.
= Cacatua tenuirostris (Kuhl, 1820).
This species was described based on a single specimen collected by Brown in Port Philippe, south coast New Holland (
See
Psittacus Lathami Temminck, 1807: 21.
Psittacus Temminckii Kuhl, 1820b: 89.
Psittacus Solandri Temminck, 1821: 113.
= Calyptorhynchus lathami lathami (Temminck, 1807).
Holotype for Lathami, lectotype for Solandri, syntype for Temminckii,
See
Cacatua intermedia Schlegel, 1861: 186.
= Probosciger aterrimus aterrimus (Gmelin, 1788).
Psittacus Goliath Kuhl, 1820b: 92.
= Probosciger aterrimus goliath (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
Psittacus alcato Temminck, 1828: 74.
Ara alecto Temminck, 1835: 17 (amended).
= Probosciger aterrimus goliath (Kuhl, 1820).
Holotype,
Usually
Probosciger aterrimus oorti Mathews, 1916: 94.
= Probosciger aterrimus goliath (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Microglossus aterrimus stenolophus van Oort, 1911a: 240.
= Probosciger aterrimus stenolophus (van Oort, 1911).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittacus roseicollis Vieillot, 1818b: 377.
= Agapornis roseicollis roseicollis (Vieillot, 1818).
Lectotype,
Psittacus pretrei Temminck, 1830: livr. 83, pl. 492.
= Amazona pretrei (Temminck, 1830).
Lectotype,
Temminck (1830) doubted “Mexico” as the provenance of this specimen. This species originates from southern Brazil. The description gives no indication about the number of specimens nor the whereabouts.
Chrysotis rhodocorytha Salvadori, 1890: 369.
= Amazona rhodocorytha (Salvadori, 1890).
Syntype,
Psittacus auricapillus Kuhl, 1820b: 20.
= Aratinga auricapillus auricapillus (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittaculus chrysosema “Natterer” Schlegel, 1864c: 28.
= Brotogeris chrysoptera chrysosema (Sclater, 1864).
Holotype,
According to Von Pelzeln (1871: 261), Natterer collected ten specimens on the Rio Madeira, Cachoeira das Pederneiras, in October 1829.
Sittace cyanoptera “Natterer” Von Pelzeln, 1870: 260.
= Brotogeris cyanoptera cyanoptera (Pelzeln, 1870).
Syntype,
Syntype,
The type series comprises all specimens available to Von Pelzeln at that time. Although not mentioned in
The name cyanoptera has long been credited to
Psittacus viridissimus Kuhl, 1820b: 25.
= Brotogeris tirica (Gmelin, 1788).
Lectotype,
Conurus ocularis Sclater & Salvin, 1865: 367.
= Eupsittula pertinax ocularis (Sclater & Salvin, 1865).
Conurus xanthogenius Bonaparte, 1850b: 132.
= Eupsittula pertinax xanthogenia (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Although
According to
Psittacula cyanochlora “Natterer” Schlegel, 1864c: 31.
= Forpus passerinus cyanochlorus (Schlegel, 1864).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittacus brachyurus “Temminck” Kuhl, 1820b: 72.
= Graydidascalus brachyurus (Temminck & Kuhl, 1820).
Lectotype,
This publication was authored by
According to Kuhl this species occurred in Cayenne.
Brotogerys panychlorus Salvin & Godman, 1883: 211.
= Nannopsittaca panychlora (Salvin & Godman, 1883).
Possible syntype,
Possible syntype,
Other syntypes are in the
Psittacus leucogaster “Illiger” Kuhl, 1820b: 70.
= Pionites leucogaster leucogaster (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
One syntype was sent to the
Psittacus mitratus Wied, 1820: 260.
= Pionopsitta pileata (Scopoli, 1769).
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to
Psittacus Maximiliani Kuhl, 1820b: 72.
= Pionus maximiliani maximiliani (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
According to
Psittacus flavirostris Spix, 1824: 42, pl. 31, fig. 2.
= Pionus maximiliani maximiliani (Kuhl, 1820).
Possible syntype,
This could also be a syntype of Psittacus maximiliani Kuhl, 1820 (see entry above) if already in Temminck’s cabinet prior to 1820. Because of a lack of information, we do not list this specimen as such.
Pionus flavifrons Rüppell, 1842: 126.
= Poicephalus flavifrons (Rüppell, 1842).
Possible syntype,
Pionias citrinocapillus Finsch, 1868: 484.
= Poicephalus flavifrons (Rüppell, 1842).
Syntype,
Psittacus Meyeri Cretzschmar, 1827: 18, pl. 11.
= Poicephalus meyeri meyeri (Cretzschmar, 1827).
Possible syntype,
Possible syntype,
Poiocephalus Versteri “Goffin” Finsch, 1863: xvi.
= Poicephalus senegalus versteri Finsch, 1863.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Sittace primoli Bonaparte, 1853: 807.
= Primolius auricollis (Cassin, 1853).
Lectotype,
Psittacus Illigeri “Temminck” Kuhl, 1820: 19.
= Primolius maracana (Vieillot, 1816).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Arara aymara d’Orbigny, 1841: 376.
Psittacus murinoides “Temminck” Schlegel, 1864c: 16.
Psittacus aguava Schlegel, 1864a: 81.
= Psilopsiagon aymara (d’Orbigny, 1839) (error for 1841).
Syntype for aymara and aguava, holotype for murinoides,
Two other syntypes collected by d’Orbigny in Bolivia are in the
Conurus holochlorus Sclater, 1859: 224.
= Psittacara holochlorus (Sclater, 1859).
Syntype,
This is one of four syntypes;
Psittacus vulturinus “Illiger” Kuhl, 1820b: 62.
= Pyrilia vulturina (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
A specimen was sent by Temminck to the
Psittacus cruentatus Wied, 1820: 70.
= Pyrrhura cruentata (Wied, 1820).
Lectotype,
Conurus hoffmanni Cabanis, 1861: 6.
= Pyrrhura hoffmanni hoffmanni (Cabanis, 1861).
Syntype,
Psittacus leucotis “Lichtenstein” Kuhl, 1820b: 21.
Psittacus lepidus “Illiger” Kuhl, 1820b: 21.
= Pyrrhura leucotis (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
Conurus phoenicuru s “Natterer” Schlegel, 1864c: 26.
= Pyrrhura molinae phoenicura (Schlegel, 1864).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Conurus rhodogaster “Natterer” Schlegel, 1864: 27.
= Pyrrhura perlata (Spix, 1824).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Psittacus micropterus Kuhl, 1820b: 67.
= Touit batavicus (Boddaert, 1783).
According to
Psittacus huetii Temminck, 1830: livr. 83, pl. 491.
= Touit huetii (Temminck, 1830).
Lectotype,
Psittacus surdus Kuhl, 1820b: 59.
Psittacus ochrurus “Prins Maximil.” [= Wied] Kuhl, 1820b: 59.
= Touit surdus (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittacus (Platycercus) hypophonius Müller, 1843: 181.
= Alisterus amboinensis hypophonius (Müller, 1843).
Syntype,
Syntype,
During a forced stay due to illness on Ternate from 19 June 1841 until mid September 1841, Forsten sent his hunters to Halmahera to collect skins.
Chalcopsitta spectabilis van Oort, 1908b: 127.
= Chalcopsitta atra insignis Oustalet, 1878.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Psittacus sintillatus Temminck, 1835: livr. 96, pl. 569.
= Chalcopsitta scintillata scintillata (Temminck, 1835).
Lectotype,
Charmosyna Stellae A.B. Meyer in: Finsch & Meyer, 1886: 1, pl. 2.
= Charmosyna papou stellae A.B. Meyer, 1886.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Psittacus placentis Temminck, 1835: livr. 93, pl. 553.
= Charmosyna placentis placentis (Temminck, 1835).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
See
Coracopsis barklyi Newton, 1867: 346.
= Coracopsis barklyi Newton, 1867.
Possible syntype,
See
Coracopsis melanorhyncha Finsch, 1863: xx [20].
= Coracopsis cf vasa vasa (Shaw, 1812).
Psittacula diophthalma aruensis Schlegel, 1874a: 33.
= Cyclopsitta diophthalma aruensis (Schlegel,1874).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittacula gulielmi III Schlegel, 1866c: 252.
= Cyclopsitta gulielmitertii gulielmitertii (Schlegel, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittacula melanogenia Von Rosenberg, 1866: 142.
= Cyclopsitta gulielmitertii melanogenia (von Rosenberg, 1866).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Eclectus Cornelia Bonaparte, 1850b: 135.
= Eclectus roratus cornelia Bonaparte, 1850.
Possible holotype,
The description was based on a single bird living in the zoological garden of NAM. However, the type status is uncertain since the original information is lost (see
Larius roratus biaki Hartert, 1932: 448.
= Eclectus roratus polychloros (Scopoli, 1786).
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Psittacodis intermedius Bonaparte, 1850a: 4.
= Eclectus roratus roratus (P.L.S. Müller, 1776).
Lectotype,
Psittacodis westermani Bonaparte, 1850a: 4.
= Eclectus roratus westermani (Bonaparte, 1850).
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
According to Peters (1937: 231) this taxon might represent an arrested plumage development of Lorius roratus riedeli (A.B. Meyer, 1882).
Psittacus (Eos) Bernsteini Von Rosenberg, 1863: 145.
Domicella Schlegeli Finsch, 1868: 792 (nomen novum).
= Eos bornea bornea (Linnaeus, 1758).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Rosenberg was based in Ambon at the time of writing, together with Hoedt. He did not refer to any specimens, neither in collections nor from his own observations, so must have seen the specimens collected by Hoedt.
Eos cyanogenia Bonaparte, 1850b: 135.
= Eos cyanogenia Bonaparte, 1850.
Lectotype,
This specimen, which died in captivity in the zoological garden of NAM, originated from the Moluccas according to
Psittacus reticulatus Müller, 1841: 107.
= Eos reticulata (Müller, 1841).
Lectotype,
Eos reticulata is confined to Tanimbar. Ambon probably refers to the locality where Müller, who never visited Tanimbar, obtained this specimen and where he stayed from 29 March to 20 April 1828. The locality Timorlaout (= Tanimbar) could have been added to the label later.
Eos semilarvata Bonaparte, 1850b: 135.
= Eos semilarvata Bonaparte, 1850.
Lectotype,
In his original description,
Lorius (Eos) Wallacei Finsch, 1864: 411.
= Eos squamata squamata (Boddaert, 1783).
Syntype,
Wallace visited Waigeo from July until September 1860 (
Psittacus cyanicollis Müller, 1841: 108.
= Geoffroyus geoffroyi cyanicollis Müller, 1841.
In his description
Geoffroyus Lansbergei Finsch, 1899a: 225.
= Geoffroyus geoffroyi floresianus Salvadori, 1891.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Pionias obiensis Finsch, 1868: 389.
= Geoffroyus geoffroyi obiensis (Finsch, 1868).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Eclectus rhodops Schlegel, 1864c: 43.
Geoffroyus schlegelii Salvadori, 1877a: 29 (nomen novum).
= Geoffroyus geoffroyi rhodops (Schlegel, 1864).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Müller visited Ambon from 29 March to 20 April 1828. Forsten visited Ambon in 1842.
Loriculus aurantiifrons Schlegel, 1871a: 9.
= Loriculus aurantiifrons aurantiifrons Schlegel, 1871.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Loriculus catamene Schlegel, 1871a: 7.
= Loriculus catamene Schlegel, 1871.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Loriculus exilis Schlegel, 1866b: 185.
= Loriculus exilis Schlegel, 1866.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the label,
Loriculus sclateri ruber Meyer & Wiglesworth, 1896: 2.
= Loriculus sclateri ruber Meyer & Wiglesworth, 1896.
Syntype,
Syntype,
The entire type series was originally held by the MTD (
Loriculus sclateri Wallace, 1863a: 336.
= Loriculus sclateri sclateri Wallace, 1863.
Syntype,
Another syntype is in the
Psittacus (Psittacula) stigmatus Müller, 1843: 182.
= Loriculus stigmatus stigmatus (Müller, 1843).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Forsten visited the Tondano area from 22 March to 19 June 1841 and the area near Gorontalo between September 1841 and April 1842.
Domicella garrula morotaiana van Bemmel, 1940: 333.
= Lorius garrulus morotaianus (van Bemmel, 1940).
Holotype,
Psittacus cyanauchen Müller, 1841: 107.
= Lorius lory cyanauchen (Müller, 1841).
Lectotype,
The label does not indicate the locality. The species was described by Müller as originating from the Moluccas. In fact, L. l. cyanauchen is restricted to Biak Island, Indonesia.
Lorius cyanauchen viridicrissalis de Beaufort, 1909: 393.
= Lorius lory viridicrissalis de Beaufort, 1909.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Although
Nasiterna pygmaea Geelvinkiana Schlegel, 1871a: 7.
Nasiterna maforensis Salvadori, 1875c: 908.
Nasiterna misoriensis Salvadori, 1875c: 909.
= Micropsitta geelvinkiana geelvinkiana (Schlegel, 1871).
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and maforensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and misoriensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and misoriensis,
Syntype geelvinkiana and misoriensis,
Nasiterna aruensis Salvadori, 1875b: 985.
= Micropsitta keiensis keiensis (Salvadori, 1876).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Publication date incorrectly given as 1876 by the IOC.
Psittacus venustus Temminck, 1821: 121 (nec Kuhl).
= Neophema chrysostoma (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
Nanodes Musschenbroekii “von Rosenberg” Schlegel, 1871b: 34.
= Neopsittacus musschenbroekii (Schlegel, 1871).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittacus vaillanti Shaw, 1810: 909
Psittacus phigy Bechstein, 1811: 81.
Psittacus coccineus Shaw, 1812: 472.
= Phigys solitarius (Suckow, 1800).
Syntype,
All authors based their name on Levaillant’s “La Perruche Phigy” (1801b: 125, pl. 64), who based his description on specimens in the
The locality “New Caledonia” is obviously in error, as this parrot is only found in Fiji.
Psittacus Brownii Kuhl, 1820b: 56.
= Platycercus caledonicus brownii (Kuhl, 1820).
Syntype,
According to
Psittacus flavigaster Temminck, 1821: 116.
Psittacus flaviventris Temminck, 1821: 117.
= Platycercus caledonicus subsp.
Psittacus icterotis “Temminck” Kuhl, 1820b: 54.
= Platycercus icterotis Kuhl, 1820.
Psittacus Brownii Temminck, 1821: 119 (nec Kuhl).
= Platycercus venustus venustus (Kuhl, 1820).
Prioniturus mada Hartert, 1900: 230.
= Prioniturus mada Hartert, 1900.
Paralectotype,
A specimen originally in the
Prioniturus platenae Blasius, 1888: 335.
= Prioniturus platenae Blasius, 1888.
Syntype,
Psittacus platurus “Temminck” Vieillot, 1818b: 314.
= Prioniturus platurus platurus (Vieillot, 1818).
Psittacus setarius Temminck, 1820: livr. 3, pl. 15.
= Prioniturus platurus platurus (Vieillot, 1818).
Following
According to
The specimen illustrated on pl. 15 does, however, compares best with P. p. platurus from Sulawesi.
Prioniturus Wallacei Schlegel, 1864a: 70.
= Prioniturus platurus platurus (Vieillot, 1818).
Syntype,
Syntype,
First published as a nomen nudum by
Müller visited Buton between 22 and 25 March 1828.
Psephotus chrysopterygius blaauwi van Oort, 1910a: 71.
= Psephotellus dissimilis (Collett, 1898).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittacella Brehmii Schlegel, 1871b: 35.
= Psittacella brehmii brehmii Schlegel, 1871.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Psitacella [sic] modesta Schlegel, 1871b: 36.
= Psittacella modesta modesta Schlegel, 1871.
Holotype,
Holotype by monotypy.
Psittacella lorentzi van Oort, 1910e: 212.
= Psittacella picta lorentzi van Oort, 1910.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittacula alexandri dammermani Chasen & Kloss, 1932: 8.
= Psittacula alexandri dammermani Chasen & Kloss, 1932.
Holotype,
Psittacula alexandri kangeanensis Hoogerwerf, 1962: 202.
= Psittacula alexandri kangeanensis Hoogerwerf, 1962.
Cyclopsitta blythii Wallace, 1864: 284.
= Psittaculirostris desmarestii blythii (Wallace, 1864).
Possible syntype,
The
According to
Wallace never visited Misool, where Allen collected for him between February and September 1860 (
Cyclopsitta desmarestii intermedia van Oort, 1909b: 229.
= Psittaculirostris desmarestii desmarestii (Desmarest, 1826).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Psittacus iris Temminck, 1835: livr. 96, pl. 567.
= Psitteuteles iris iris (Temminck, 1835).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Tanygnathus affinis Wallace, 1863b: 20.
Tanygnathus intermedius Schlegel, 1864a: 70.
= Tanygnathus megalorynchos affinis Wallace, 1863.
Paralectotype for affinis, syntype for intermedius,
Syntype for intermedius,
Syntype for intermedius,
Syntype for intermedius,
Syntype for intermedius,
There appears to have been a mix-up of the labels and stands.
Tanygnathus Morotensis Schlegel, 1864a: 70.
= Tanygnathus megalorynchos megalorynchos (Boddaert, 1783).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
According to the label
Psittacus Mulleri Müller, 1841: 108.
= Tanygnathus sumatranus sumatranus (Raffles, 1822).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The locality “Boeton” was written on the stand of
Müller visited Buton between 22 and 25 March 1828.
Psittacus euteles Temminck, 1835: livr. 96, pl.568.
= Trichoglossus euteles (Temminck, 1835).
Lectotype,
Paralectotypes,
Trichoglossus alorensis Finsch, 1899a: 226.
= Trichoglossus euteles (Temminck, 1835).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Trichoglossus Forsteni “Temminck” Bonaparte, 1850a: 3.
= Trichoglossus forsteni forsteni Bonaparte, 1850.
Lectotype,
Paralectotype,
Trichoglossus Rosenbergii Schlegel, 1871a: 9.
= Trichoglossus rosenbergii Schlegel, 1871.
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Chalcopsitta rubiginosa Bonaparte, 1850b: 134.
= Trichoglossus rubiginosus (Bonaparte, 1850).
Psitteuteles weberi Büttikofer, 1894: 290, taf. XVII, fig. 1.
= Trichoglossus weberi (Büttikofer, 1894).
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
Syntype,
The syntype from the former