SACC Proposal- English names
for Schiffornis species
Given that we have
accepted the proposal (505) by Donegan to split Schiffornis turdina into five species (at least for now) and that
the question of English names is still undecided (and messy), I will present
the alternatives proposed in the course of the discussions, as alternatives.
Given that none of these names has much of a track record, I think that we
should try to clear up any ambiguity now. So here goes, starting from the
north:
A. Schiffornis veraepacis:
1. Brown Schiffornis (Nyári): I regard
this as singularly inappropriate as this species is greenish-olive, especially
when compared with stenorhyncha, with
which it is sympatric in at least two areas. For this reason, I would prefer names that help to
distinguish these two, as there are many specimens in collections that would
now require identification to species (and having done so, might also disclose
further areas of sympatry).
2. Olive Schiffornis
(Stiles): This name, in combination with that proposed below for stenorhyncha, would resolve the
confusion between these two.
3. Northern Schiffornis,
Middle American Schiffornis (Hilty): Neither is appropriate at present, as veraepacis, as presently constituted,
extends south to Ecuador. However, should this species eventually be split,
either would be appropriate for the northern (Middle American) species, Pacific
Schiffornis for the southern one.
B. Schiffornis stenorhyncha:
1. Narrow-billed Schiffornis (Nyári): this
name goes with the Latin name, but that’s all it has going for it; it is
neither appropriate (amazonum has a
“narrower” bill) nor distinctive – it certainly would not help anyone in
the field!
2. Brownish Schiffornis (Stiles): this is
the “brownest” Schiffornis, at least of the ones for which specimens are
available to me; this name would help to dispel the confusion with veraepacis. Although “Brown Schiffornis” would also be appropriate, I
avoid this as Nyári used it for veraepacis.
3. Rufous-winged Schiffornis (Stiles): I proposed
this as an alternative, albeit without overwhelming enthusiasm, as its wings
are more rufescent than the rest of the plumage (but hardly conspicuously
rufous), unlike the other subspecies I have seen.
C. Schiffornis olivaceus:
1. Olivaceous Schiffornis (Remsen): Goes
with the Latin name and presumably descriptive, had been used by Ridgway and
Hellmayr – but has lain fallow for the better part of a century, and
could cause confusion with Olive Schiffornis for veraepacis should that one be accepted.
2. Guianan Schiffornis: This describes
accurately the distribution of this species and would presumably be more
helpful in the field, as Hilty suggests, and avoids confusion with Olive for veraepacis.
D. Schiffornis aenea:
1. Foothill Schiffornis: again, this name
describes the distribution accurately with respect to the following species,
which is a lowland bird.
2. No
other alternatives seem to have been proposed for this one (and I don’t think
we need any! I include a “2” here in case anyone objects strenuously, and comes
up with a brilliant new idea).
E. Schiffornis turdina:
1. Thrush-like Schiffornis: as currently
constituted, this species includes the most extensive range of any considered
here and includes the nominate race, so it is the most appropriate according to
current SACC practice. However, it
is also the species most likely to suffer further splitting. Because there is some ambiguity as to
how the various subspecies would fall in such a split, my personal feeling is
that we don’t really need to deal with this right now. Possible suggestions for future use in
the event of a split would be “Amazonian Schiffornis” for the group including amazonum, and “Atlantic Schiffornis” for
that including turdina, assuming that
this is how the chips would fall – but let’s cross this bridge when we
come to it!
2. Eastern Schiffornis: I suggest this as
an alternative, in case anyone objects to the use of “Thrush-like”: although it
does not exclude olivaceus, aside
from this form which is localized in the Guiana Shield region, it is the most
extensively “eastern” of the species considered here.
Hence, to summarize my choices, for
what they’re worth: A2, B2, C2,D1,E1.
OK lads, have at it!
Gary Stiles. 30 Apr. 2012
Comments from Remsen:
1. I hope we can do better than
Northern and Southern.
2. I really dislike Thrush-like
because (a) when so many taxa encompassing so much of the former range are
split out, I think the parent name should be abandoned to prevent confusion
from this point on as to what Thrush-like refers to. (b) I never liked the name to begin with, regardless of
reference to species epithet. Its
origin, from the perspective of an early taxonomist largely unfamiliar with New
World birds and looking for a familiar Old World taxon as a reference point, is
understandable, particularly in reference to its former membership in
Pipridae. What would a
non-thrush-like Schiffornis be like?
3. Gary, what happened to your
“Brown-winged Schiffornis” suggestion?
I liked this in reference to its sister species stenorhyncha, if we go with Rufous-winged for that one.
Comments from Thomas Donegan:
A few comments from the author of the proposal and
paper that leads to us considering these issues:
A. I don't really like any of these names.
The species overlaps in its northern-ness with virtually all of the other taxa,
given that it extends south to western Ecuador. "Western" would
be more appropriate as it is the westernmost taxon. I would like to propose
"Western Schiffornis" as option A4. Gary has argued against
Brown. I think that Olive is a bad name also: these birds are an olive
shade of brown, but they are neither green nor back (the colours of olives I
have eaten).
B. Option 1 should be what Nyári proposed
("Slender-billed" not "Narrow-billed") which links to
the Latin name and older usages by Hellmayr. I like
"Rufous-winged" as the best name. Gary also proposed
"Pale-bellied" which is not a bad name and should probably be made
available as option B4. The
options in this proposal also omit Ridgway's name of "Russet" (which
should be made available as option B5).
On the basis that we should go with decent existing names rather than
new ones where available, I would go with "Russet". Rufous-winged would be my second
choice.
.
C. Guianan is best. My same olive gripe as
above applies; and this is endemic to the Guianan shield.
D. Foothill.
E. Apathetic here. If you want another
better option, then the committee should consider that these birds are all
linked and distinguished from other taxa by their songs having four (not two or
three) whistled notes. An original name would be "Tetrasyllabic
Schiffornis" - a bit of a mouthful perhaps, but I would like to make this
available as option E3. I cannot think of anything else that would be
appropriate without getting into patronyms. Patronyms should be avoided
here because Schiffornis is itself a patronym and such an approach would
produce a unique double-patronym name.
In summary, I would plump for:
Western (veraepacis)
Russet (stenorhyncha)
Guianan (olivacea)
Foothill
(aenea)
Tetrasyllabic
(turdina)
General: I have previously raised a proposal on the
generic English name for this group, which failed.
"Schiffornis" is probably the worst on the SACC list aesthetically
and has little to no significance or memorability. Dr. Schiff was a friend of
the describer of the genus who made no material contribution to ornithology,
yet has of the best-memorialised patronyms of all present bird names.
"Mourner" is inappropriate due to the whistling calls of the group,
as is Manakin. I would like the committee to discuss whether these birds
ought to have some other generic English name. They are united by their
whistles: no other Neotropical bird I have come across - except possibly Lipaugus unirufa - gives songs which are
so easily imitated by whistling. "Whistler" is already
"preoccupied" by some Australian birds, but the SACC should consider
using some variation on this theme: "Whistle-bird" would be available
but there may be better options out there and this topic should also be
discussed. We now know the relationships of this group and lots of their
English names are changing following this re-arrangement, so now is the right
time to consider this broader issue also.
Comment from Remsen:
Double patronyms: Thomas, Thomas, …
but “Schiff’s Schiffornis” could be one of the all-time great bird names!
Schiffornis: indeed a lousy name, but I worry that
it is already too widespread to be superseded by novel concoctions. I’m willing to entertain one, however,
although “Whistle-bird” is D.O.A. in my opinion.
I’m thinking that “Tetrasyllabic
Whistle-bird” might not have wide popular appeal and lacks the caché of
Schiff’s Schiffornis.
On a more serious note, I would
lobby vigorously, vehemently, and maybe even violently against “Olive” or
“Olivaceous” is the name of any other taxon except S. olivaceus (Option A2 in Gary’s list) because of the perpetual
confusion that would cause.
Comments from Paul Smith:
I don’t see any reason to change the name Schiffornis.
It is fine and the fact that Dr Schiff didn’t make a material contribution to
ornithology, and it doesn’t really sound very nice don’t seem like good
reasons to change the names of this group yet again. The generic name is Schiffornis and so Dr Schiff is already
guaranteed his (or her) immortalisation for taxonomic eternity whether we
change the common name or not and whether he (or she) deserves it or not.
Whistlebird sounds a little childish to me (along the
lines of some Australian bird names) and rebirthing the name Mourner isn’t
a good idea either as it is used already for Rhytipterna and Laniocera
in recent literature. Inventing yet another name so soon after the adoption of
Schiffornis would seem to be unnecessary for an issue of no taxonomic
importance. I actually think Schiffornis is memorable partly because it is not
aesthetic. There is no rule that says names have to be nice.
As a point apart, Greenish Schiffornis has a
tetrasyllabic call, so whilst it may set turdina apart from this group it
isn’t unique in the genus.
Comments from T.
Donegan:
In response to the comments above on the suitability
of "Tetrasyllabic": Greenish Schiffornis' song is more variable than
that of what is now the turdina group. The most common song
of S. virescens involves three notes, although various variants exist of
songs made up of between 2 and 6 notes. A handful of the songs on
xeno-canto have four notes, but these are in a minority. As a result, the
name "Tetrasyllabic" for turdina should not overly confuse.
See the following link and click on "sonograms" for graphical details
of virescens songs:
More generally, my personal impression is that the process
- not only or necessarily at this committee but more generally - for
establishing some recent vernacular names has involved unnecessary fussiness
about the uniqueness of geographical or morphological names. In my
view, it is better to have a name which refers to a geographical region that
constitutes most of the range of a species - even if it is not an endemic to
that region - or a morphological or vocal feature that a species has - even
if not unique - than to have a patronym. "Tetrasyllabic" is
accurate even within the genus in describing the principal song of turdina,
even if virescens sometimes gives songs with four notes.
"Eastern" also works for turdina as currently constituted,
even if both olivacea and stenorhyncha overlap in part in their
respective eastern-ness.