Frank,
 There seems to be a fair bit of confusion with the scientific name for  
Little Kingfisher. Not only do C&B use pusilla on p69 and pusillus on  
p169, but they use both pusillus and pusilla on p169. If you google C.  
pusillus and C. pusilla, you come up with references to it being  
Little Kingfisher. It would appear that a typo has occurred somewhere  
along the line and it has lead to this confusion.
 The Index of Organism Names    http://www.organismnames.com/  uses C.  
pusillus and the ION is generally regarded as the the authoritative  
source for scientific names. The only problem with that is that  
Temmink, when he described the species in 1836, called it Ceyx pusilla  
So, there you go. Call it whatever you like, because whichever name  
you use, someone will say you are wrong.
Cheers,
Carl Clifford
On 31/10/2008, at 1:12 PM, Frank O'Connor wrote:
 I have just read the review by Stephen Debus of C&B2008 in the latest  
Australian Field Ornithology.
 He points out that on page 29, Little Kingfisher has the scientific  
name Ceyx pusilla, where on page 169 both that and Ceyx pusillus are  
used.  Which is correct?  He states that C. pusillus is correct.
 But there are several other species with pusilla as their specific  
name.  Namely Baillon's Crake, Little Lorikeet and Brown Thornbill.   
So I would assume that pusilla is correct for Little Kingfisher?
 The IOU list and Clements have Alcedo pusilla.  The different genus  
might make a difference.
_________________________________________________________________
Frank O'Connor           Birding WA http://birdingwa.iinet.net.au
Phone : (08) 9386 5694              Email : 
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message:
unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 
===============================
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
 To unsubscribe from this mailing list, 
send the message:
unsubscribe 
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 
===============================
 
 |