Subject: (outdated過期)香港鳥類名錄 List of HK Birds - 2012-07-03 [Print This Page] Author: HKBWS Bonnie Time: 3/07/2012 14:13 Subject: (outdated過期)香港鳥類名錄 List of HK Birds - 2012-07-03
香港鳥類名錄已更新:
The next update List of HK Birds is available at:
Category I: species that have been recorded in an apparently wild state in HK.
Category IIA: southeast China breeding species, the currently established HK breeding population of which is considered to derive from captive stock, but which probably occurred in HK prior to habitat changes.
Category IIB: extralimital species that, although originally introduced to HK by man, maintain a regular feral breeding stock without necessary recourse to further introduction.
Category IIC: previously established feral species.
Category III: species for which all published HK records are considered likely to relate to birds that have escaped or have been released from captivity.
*Category III species do not form part of the official HK List which is only Category I and II species and currently stands at 513.
We (HFCheung and I) believe that erythroryncha is a typo error in the IOC list and that Urocissa erythrorhyncha is actually correct.
But if any scientific name experts disagree, we would be pleased to hear. Author: lpaul Time: 8/08/2012 10:16
It appears that erythroryncha is the correct spelling, although it is frequently spelt erythrorhyncha.
HBW states as such, but without explanation:
Taxonomy: Corvus erythrorynchus Boddaert, 1783, Canton (Guangzhou) south China.
Genus has sometimes been subsumed in Cissa, but three members of latter seem to form a distinctive group. Present species forms a superspecies with U. caerulea and U. flavirostris. Race alticola initially described under name "caerulea", but this name is invalid, as preoccupied. Species name often misspelt "erythrorhyncha". Five subspecies recognized.
A more helpful discussion can be found at: http://www.birdforum.net/showthr ... light=erythroryncha
This states that Boddaert when describing the species used erythrorynchus (which for grammatical reasons became erythroryncha when the species was later transferred to Urocissa) and provides a link to a reprint of this reference.
Hope this helps. Author: wgeoff Time: 8/08/2012 17:59
Yes, Paul and Samuel are correct .
IOC changed the name from "Urocissa erythrorhyncha" to "Urocissa erythroryncha" in their Version 2.7 of 29 December 2010 under the following reference
"Urocissa erythroryncha Nomenclature
•Often spelled "erythrorhyncha".
•The original is spelled "erythrorynchus"
•Normand David writes (in litt. 2010.01.19) "NOTE: under 32.5.1, the original erythrorynchus (= erythroryncha) cannot be corrected, since " incorrect transliteration or latinization .. are not to be considered inadvertent errors, and thus are not to be corrected".
2010.01.19; 2010.01.24"
So, although erythrorhyncha is actually the correct spelling from a Latin viewpoint and the spelling rhyncha appears many times in the IOC List for other species, the original name given by Boddaert was erythroryncha and it therefore stands.
We will change it in the next published HK List
[ Last edited by wgeoff at 8/08/2012 18:27 ] Author: HKBWS Bonnie Time: 27/09/2012 16:13
香港鳥類名錄已更新:
The next update List of HK Birds is available at: