Proposal (402) to South American Classification Committee
Remove hyphens from
certain English names that do not represent monophyletic groups
As part of the
ongoing debate generated by Gill & Wright (2006) on when to use hyphens in
bird names, I asked Frank Gill to comb the SACC list for hyphenated group-names
that included species for which there is no evidence of relationship.
Frank’s search
yielded the following names on the SACC list with hyphens implying group
relationship when none (presumably) exists:
(1) Ochthornis littoralis Drab
Water-Tyrant and the Fluvicola Water-Tyrants
(3 species)
(2) Urothraupis
stolzmanni Black-backed Bush-Tanager; Cnemoscopus
rubrirostris Gray-hooded Bush-Tanager; and the 7 species of Chlorospingus bush-tanagers.
Parkes’ (1978) the rationale for use of hyphens fits for Fluvicola and Chlorospingus, the hyphen here uniting presumed monophyletic
groups. For example, Great Blue Heron
and Little Blue Heron are not hyphenated because there is no proposed group
relationship between them.
To remedy this grave problem, I propose removing the hyphens in the
English names in Ochthornis littoralis, Urothraupis stolzmanni, and Cnemoscopus rubrirostris (and retaining them
in Fluvicola and Chlorospingus).
Literature Cited
GILL, F. B., AND M. WRIGHT.
2006. Birds of the World.
Recommended English names. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton.
PARKES, K. C. 1978. Guide to forming and capitalizing compound names of
birds in English names. Auk 95: 324-326.
Van (Hyphens
Are My Life) Remsen, July 2009
Comments
from Zimmer:
“YES for removing the hyphens in the English names in Ochthornis littoralis, Urothraupis stolzmanni, and Cnemoscopus rubrirostris (and retaining
them in Fluvicola and Chlorospingus, where they do unite
members of a monophyletic group).”
Comments from
Stotz: “YES. Huge conceptual breakthrough for Neotropical
ornithology.”
Comments from Stiles:
“YES. Here, I agree with Kevin – Bush-Tanager
is fine for Chlorospingus and
Water-Tyrant for Fluvicola, both of
which represent monophyletic groups so far as I am aware; remove the hyphens
for the others, which are “one-offs” in genera
(often monotypic) unrelated to these.”
Comments from Jaramillo:
“YES. Argument
makes sense. Does this mean that going forward hyphenated English names will be
automatically de-hyphenated if data arrives which confirms lack of monophyly of
the hyphenated group name?”