Once more the generic name Passerina Vieillot

The note on the generic name of the Snow-bunting by Dr. E. Hartert in this part of our periodical gives me cause to revert to the subject of my note on the generic name Passerina Vieillot and to state here, that I stand to what I have said about the rejection of this name in Zoology (Notes Leyden Mu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Oort, E.D. van
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Published: 1910
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/record/509365
http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/document/552232
id ftnaturalis:oai:naturalis:509365
record_format openpolar
spelling ftnaturalis:oai:naturalis:509365 2023-05-15T18:20:04+02:00 Once more the generic name Passerina Vieillot Oort, E.D. van 1910 application/pdf http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/record/509365 http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/document/552232 unknown http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/record/509365 http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/document/552232 (c) Naturalis Notes from the Leyden Museum (1872-9231) vol.32 (1910) nr.2/3 p.185 Article / Letter to the editor 1910 ftnaturalis 2022-09-01T06:19:58Z The note on the generic name of the Snow-bunting by Dr. E. Hartert in this part of our periodical gives me cause to revert to the subject of my note on the generic name Passerina Vieillot and to state here, that I stand to what I have said about the rejection of this name in Zoology (Notes Leyden Mus. XXXII, n°. 1, p. 32). Dr. Hartert says, that all modern codes of nomenclature in Zoology have agreed not to consider botanical nomenclature. This may be so, but I ask here, are Zoologists and especially Ornithologists agreeing in nomenclature? The answer is in the negative. When studying papers on systematic Ornithology by different authors we learn that they agree but very little in naming the forms. Each author seems to have his own views and seems to follow different rules. There is no agreement at all, even not with authors, which follow the same code. So it will remain, I am sure, always. This is indeed a proof, that many author cannot agree with every rule of nomenclature fixed by the different committees. I do not wonder at it, as there are rules, which are not acceptable, f. i. the rule, that botanical nomenclature should not be considered in Zoology. The practice of this rule can cause confusion and therefore it is certainly better to consider botanical nomenclature in Zoology. Moreover, where is the line between Zoology and Botany? As to the type of the genus Passerina Vieillot, I differ with the view of Dr. Hartert, which is in my opinion wrong. In 1816 Vieillot created his genus Passerina, in which he included three species: “Ministre — Ortolan de riz, — de neige, Buff.” In 1822 Dr. B. Meyer united Fringilla calcarata Pallas and Embeviza nivalis L. in the genus Plectrophanes, which he had created in 1815 for the first-named species. As these two species are indeed very nearly allied and as the three species which Vieillot included in his genus Passerina are on the contrary very different forms, it is not to be denied, that the place given by Meyer to the Snow-bunting is much better and much more natural ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Snow Bunting Naturalis Digital Academic Repository (National Museum of Natural History in the Netherlands) Buff ENVELOPE(-64.567,-64.567,-64.833,-64.833)
institution Open Polar
collection Naturalis Digital Academic Repository (National Museum of Natural History in the Netherlands)
op_collection_id ftnaturalis
language unknown
description The note on the generic name of the Snow-bunting by Dr. E. Hartert in this part of our periodical gives me cause to revert to the subject of my note on the generic name Passerina Vieillot and to state here, that I stand to what I have said about the rejection of this name in Zoology (Notes Leyden Mus. XXXII, n°. 1, p. 32). Dr. Hartert says, that all modern codes of nomenclature in Zoology have agreed not to consider botanical nomenclature. This may be so, but I ask here, are Zoologists and especially Ornithologists agreeing in nomenclature? The answer is in the negative. When studying papers on systematic Ornithology by different authors we learn that they agree but very little in naming the forms. Each author seems to have his own views and seems to follow different rules. There is no agreement at all, even not with authors, which follow the same code. So it will remain, I am sure, always. This is indeed a proof, that many author cannot agree with every rule of nomenclature fixed by the different committees. I do not wonder at it, as there are rules, which are not acceptable, f. i. the rule, that botanical nomenclature should not be considered in Zoology. The practice of this rule can cause confusion and therefore it is certainly better to consider botanical nomenclature in Zoology. Moreover, where is the line between Zoology and Botany? As to the type of the genus Passerina Vieillot, I differ with the view of Dr. Hartert, which is in my opinion wrong. In 1816 Vieillot created his genus Passerina, in which he included three species: “Ministre — Ortolan de riz, — de neige, Buff.” In 1822 Dr. B. Meyer united Fringilla calcarata Pallas and Embeviza nivalis L. in the genus Plectrophanes, which he had created in 1815 for the first-named species. As these two species are indeed very nearly allied and as the three species which Vieillot included in his genus Passerina are on the contrary very different forms, it is not to be denied, that the place given by Meyer to the Snow-bunting is much better and much more natural ...
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Oort, E.D. van
spellingShingle Oort, E.D. van
Once more the generic name Passerina Vieillot
author_facet Oort, E.D. van
author_sort Oort, E.D. van
title Once more the generic name Passerina Vieillot
title_short Once more the generic name Passerina Vieillot
title_full Once more the generic name Passerina Vieillot
title_fullStr Once more the generic name Passerina Vieillot
title_full_unstemmed Once more the generic name Passerina Vieillot
title_sort once more the generic name passerina vieillot
publishDate 1910
url http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/record/509365
http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/document/552232
long_lat ENVELOPE(-64.567,-64.567,-64.833,-64.833)
geographic Buff
geographic_facet Buff
genre Snow Bunting
genre_facet Snow Bunting
op_source Notes from the Leyden Museum (1872-9231) vol.32 (1910) nr.2/3 p.185
op_relation http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/record/509365
http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/document/552232
op_rights (c) Naturalis
_version_ 1766197541275172864