1,721,091 research outputs found
Testudo terrestris Garsault 1764
No full textTestudo terrestris Garsault, 1764 The upper half of plate 675 in Garsault (1764) shows his Testudo terrestris or “Tortue terrestre”, which is undoubtedly a freshwater turtle, precisely a European pond turtle, currently known as Emys orbicularis (Linnaeus, 1758) (family EMYDIDAE Rafinesque, 1815). Therefore Testudo terrestris Garsault, 1764 is a junior doxisonym of Testudo orbicularis Linnaeus, 1758. Two subspecies of Emys orbicularis are presently recognized among the French continental populations: Emys orbicularis orbicularis (Linnaeus, 1758) and Emys orbicularis galloitalica Fritz, 1995, with large zones of intergradation (Rogner 2009: 44). It is probably impossible to identify at the subspecific level the turtle figured by Garsault (1764). In the northern half of France, the occurring subspecies is or was Emys orbicularis orbicularis (Linnaeus, 1758) (e.g. Rogner 2009), so we refer Testudo terrestris Garsault, 1764 to this subspecies. Testudo terrestris Garsault, 1764 is a senior hadromonym of Testudo terrestris Forskål, 1775 (author’s name often misspelt “Forsskål”, but see Dubois 2008 a). The latter nomen was “rediscovered” by Wermuth (1956), who first planned to ask the ICZN for its suppression, but a little latter (1958: 152) attributed it to a population of tortoises living in “ Südwestliches Asien (Syrien und Israel) und nordwestliches Afrika (vom nördlichen Ägypten westwärts bis Libyen) ”. In order to clarify and stabilize the nomenclatural status of this nomen, Perälä & Bour (2004) designated a neophoront for it. Although less than the other nomina for which we used the “ reversal of precedence ” Rule in this paper, the nomen Testudo terrestris Forskål, 1775 has been commonly used since Wermuth’s (1958) publication. We were able to find more than 25 publications by more than 10 different authors in the immediately preceding 50 years (see Appendix 2). Therefore, the prevailing usage must be maintained according to Art. 23.9. 1 of the Code. The nomen Testudo terrestris Garsault, 1764 is thus now an exoplonym and will not be available in the future if the need appears to recognize a taxon corresponding to this nomen, e. g. a subspecies of Emys orbicularis (Linnaeus, 1758).Published as part of Dubois, Alain & Bour, Roger, 2010, The nomenclatural status of the nomina of amphibians and reptiles created by Garsault (1764), with a parsimonious solution to an old nomenclatural problem regarding the genus Bufo (Amphibia, Anura), comments on the taxonomy of this genus, and comments on some nomina created by Laurenti (1768), pp. 1-52 in Zootaxa 2447 on page 31, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19511
Herrn von Garsault Unterricht für Liebhaber der Pferde und Reiter
No full textHERRN VON GARSAULT UNTERRICHT FÜR LIEBHABER DER PFERDE UND REITER
Herrn von Garsault Unterricht für Liebhaber der Pferde und Reiter ( - )
Binding ( - )
Title page ( - )
Verzeichniß der in gegenwärtigem Werke enthaltenen Kapitel. ( - )
Einleitung. ([1])
Das erste Kapitel. Kenntnis der Theile des Körpers eines Pferdes, und deren Fehler. (4)
Das zweyte Kapitel. Die Erkenntnis des Alters eines Pferdes. (19)
Das dritte Kapitel. Von demjenigen, was ein Liebhaber der Pferde beim Einkaufe derselben zu beobachten hat. (26)
Das vierte Kapitel. Betrügereien der Roßtäuscher, und die Mittel, sich dagegen vozusehen. (31)
Das fünfte Kapitel. Die Gewährleistung. (36)
Das sechste Kapitel. Das Maaß der Pferde. (37)
Das siebente Kapitel. Wahl der Reit-Pferde zu verschiedenem Gebrauche. (40)
Das achte Kapitel. Die Wartung und das Striegeln der Pferde, nebst den dazu gehörigen Werkzeugen und Geräthe. (43)
Das neunte Kapitel. Die Tages-Arbeit eines Pferde-Liebhabers zu Hause. (46)
Das zehnte Kapitel. Die Wartung und das Putzen der Ohren, der Mähne, des Schwanzes, und des Haars der Füße. (52)
Das eilfte Capitel. Von dem Futter und Getränke des Pferdes. (56)
Das zwölfte Capitel. Das Zeug auf ein Reitpferd. (Harnois). (61)
Das dreyzehnte Kapitel. Die Rüstung (Equipage) des Reiters. (69)
Das vierzehnte Kapitel. Allgemeine Vorschriften zur Stellung (Attitude) des Reiters, und Führung seines Pferdes. (71)
Das funfzehnte Kapitel. Die Wartung, welche ein Reiter auf Reisen seinem Pferde wiederfahren laßen muß. (77)
Das sechzehnte Kapitel. Vorsichten, welche der Reiter bei der Parforce-Jagd zu gebrauchen hat. (88)
Das siebenzehnte Kapitel. Wie man ein Pferd zum Schuß abrichte. (92)
Das achtzehente Kapitel. Die Rüstung und das Verhalten des Reiters beim Post-Reiten. (96)
Das neunzehnte Kapitel. Mittel, wilde Pferde zu bändigen. (99)
Das zwanzigste Kapitel. Wie man die Pferde zusammen koppele, um sie auf der Landstraße zu führen. (101)
Das ein und zwanzigste Kapitel. Vom Koppen der Pferde. (105)
Taf. I. ( - )
Taf. II. ( - )
Taf. III. ( - )
Taf. IV. ( - )
Taf. V. ( - )
Taf. VI. ( - )
Taf. VII. ( - )
Binding ( - )
Section ( -
Testudo marina Garsault 1764
No full textTestudo marina Garsault, 1764 Under the nomen Testudo marina or “Tortue de Mer”, the lower half of plate 675 in Garsault (1764) shows a sea turtle, identified as such by its flippers and its heart-shaped shell. Contrary to most of the drawings in Garsault (1764), this figure is not especially accurate, notably for the head and the limbs scutellation, and for the free fingers and toes. However, the first supernumerary costal on the elongated carapace allows to attribute this specimen to the “loggerhead turtle”, currently known as Caretta caretta (Linnaeus, 1758) (family CHELONIIDAE Oppel, 1811 b). This is consistent with the probable French origin of Garsault’s specimens (see above), as this species was the only shelled turtle to regularly frequent the southern (Mediterranean) French sea shore at Garsault’s time (de la Cepède 1788 a: 97–98; Bonnaterre 1789: 21) and is still the commonest species of sea turtle in the western Mediterranean (Angel 1946: 180; Scaravelli & Tripepi 2006: 400). We here consider Testudo marina Garsault, 1764 as an invalid junior doxisonym of Testudo caretta Linnaeus, 1758.Published as part of Dubois, Alain & Bour, Roger, 2010, The nomenclatural status of the nomina of amphibians and reptiles created by Garsault (1764), with a parsimonious solution to an old nomenclatural problem regarding the genus Bufo (Amphibia, Anura), comments on the taxonomy of this genus, and comments on some nomina created by Laurenti (1768), pp. 1-52 in Zootaxa 2447 on page 31, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19511
Lacertus terrestris Garsault 1764
No full textLacertus terrestris Garsault, 1764 As stated by Welter-Schultes & Klug (2009: 234), the plate 668 in Garsault, 1764 shows the Lacertus terrestris or “Lézard gris”, which is undoubtedly the species presently named Podarcis muralis (Laurenti, 1768), the “wall lizard” (see Arnold, 1973) (family LACERTIDAE Batsch, 1788). The latter specific nomen having been in wide and universal use (for a list of more than 25 recent references, see e.g. Gruschwitz & Böhme 1986: 201–208) for more two centuries and Garsault’s nomen having been ignored since its description, the prevailing usage must be maintained according to Article 23.9. 1 of the Code. The nomen Lacertus terrestris Garsault, 1764 remains however nomenclaturally available and could possibly be resurrected in the future, e.g. for a subspecies. This would require to designate a neophoront (neotype) for this nominal taxon, which should preferably have originated from the Paris region.Published as part of Dubois, Alain & Bour, Roger, 2010, The nomenclatural status of the nomina of amphibians and reptiles created by Garsault (1764), with a parsimonious solution to an old nomenclatural problem regarding the genus Bufo (Amphibia, Anura), comments on the taxonomy of this genus, and comments on some nomina created by Laurenti (1768), pp. 1-52 in Zootaxa 2447 on page 26, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19511
L'art du bourrelier et du sellier
No full textPertenece a: "Descriptions des arts et mètiers faites ou approuvées par ... l'Académie Royale des Sciences". Paris: chez Desaint & Saillant, 1761-1789 (Brunet, 10217)Fecha tomada de la antepSign.: []\p1\s, A-Z\p2\s, 2A-2O\p2\sLas h. de grab. son calc.: "Dessiné par De Garsault, gravé par N. Ransonnette
Salamandra Garsault 1764
No full textSalamandra Garsault, 1764 The plate 673 of Garsault (1764) shows a common salamander of Europe (family SALAMANDRIDAE Goldfuss, 1820), under the nomen Salamandra or “Salamandre”. No specific nomen is associated to this generic nomen. The nomen Salamandra, borrowed from the Latin, was in common use in pre-Linnaean times to designate all urodelans or just the terrestrial species of this group. Its first use after 1758 was by Gronovius (1763: 12), but his “ Salamandra ” is an anoplonym, having been published in a work which is not binominal for species (Dubois & Raffaëlli 2009: 64). The generic nomen in current use is Salamandra Laurenti, 1768, the nucleospecies of which, by subsequent designation of Fitzinger (1843: 33) is Salamandra maculosa Laurenti, 1768, a doxisonym of Lacerta salamandra Linnnaeus, 1758 (see Dubois & Raffaëlli 2009: 64). As remarked by Welter-Schultes & Klug (2009: 238), replacement of Salamandra Laurenti, 1768 by Salamandra Garsault, 1764 does not raise any nomenclatural problem and should not be avoided or opposed. Three taxa of the genus Salamandra occur in France (Raffaëlli 2007), all being members of the subgenus Salamandra (see Dubois & Raffaëlli 2009) and subspecies of Salamandra salamandra (Linnaeus, 1758): Salamandra salamandra terrestris (Bonnaterre, 1789), in most of the country, Salamandra salamandra fastuosa (Schreiber, 1912) in the western Pyrenees, and Salamandra salamandra salamandra (Linnaeus, 1758) in the southern Alps. In the Paris region, only the former of these three subspecies occurs, and the pattern of coloration shown in plate 673 of Garsault (1764), with long clear spots on both sides on the back, tending to the formation of two longitudinal bands, is a common one in this subspecies (Thorn & Raffaëlli 2001: 179; Raffaëlli 2007: 154). Therefore, we hereby designate the nominal species Salamandra terrestris Bonnaterre, 1789 (onymotope: Saint-Geniez-d’Olt, Aveyron, France), as nucleospecies (type-species) of Salamandra Garsault, 1764, the now valid nomen of this genus (for a clarification of the nomenclatural status of this nominal species, see Dubois & Raffaëlli 2009: 27). This change in authorship and date of this generic nomen has no other nomenclatural consequence, and all the taxa included in this genus (Dubois & Raffaëlli 2009: 68–69) keep their nomina unchanged, but the nominal-complexes of most of them must change as the author’s name and date must now be placed between parentheses.Published as part of Dubois, Alain & Bour, Roger, 2010, The nomenclatural status of the nomina of amphibians and reptiles created by Garsault (1764), with a parsimonious solution to an old nomenclatural problem regarding the genus Bufo (Amphibia, Anura), comments on the taxonomy of this genus, and comments on some nomina created by Laurenti (1768), pp. 1-52 in Zootaxa 2447 on page 29, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19511
Lacertus viridis Garsault 1764
No full textLacertus viridis Garsault, 1764 The plate 669 in Garsault (1764) shows his Lacertus viridis or “Lézard verd”, which is undoubtedly a species of the group of Lacerta viridis (Laurenti, 1768) (family LACERTIDAE Batsch, 1788). However, if we suppose that the specimens drawn by Garsault were from the Paris region or at least from France (see above), the specimen of plate 669 could not be a Lacerta viridis, but must have belonged in the species now named Lacerta bilineata Daudin, 1802, a nomen formerly considered a synonym of Lacerta viridis (Laurenti, 1768) (e.g. Mertens & Wermuth 1960: 151) but now considered to apply to a distinct species, the “western green lizard” (see Amann et al. 1997). The nomen Lacertus viridis Garsault, 1764 is a senior asthenomonym (secondary homonym) of Lacerta 2. For the valid author and date of this family nomen, see Dubois (2004 a). viridis (Laurenti, 1768), originally described as a member of the genus Seps Laurenti, 1768. Its allocation to the species now known as Lacerta bilineata would require that another nomen be given to the species currently known as Lacerta viridis. According to Mertens & Wermuth (1960: 151), the first three available junior doxisonyms of the latter are three nomina created by Laurenti (1768: 61–62) for species that he referred to his genus Seps, now an invalid junior doxisonym of Lacerta Linnaeus, 1758 (Stejneger 1936: 138). Acting as First-Revisers, we hereby choose the following order of priority among these three nomina: Seps varius Laurenti, 1768, then Seps sericeus Laurenti, 1768, then Seps terrestris Laurenti, 1768. Consequently, the species long known as Lacerta viridis should now be known as Lacerta varia, and the nomen Lacerta viridis should now apply to the species currently known as Lacerta bilineata. We think this change would have a disruptive effect on communication among zoologists, as the nomen Lacerta varia has never been used as valid, and as, since its creation and for about 250 years, the nomen Lacerta viridis has been associated with the common green lizard present in most of Europe (for a list of more than 25 recent references, see e.g. Nettmann & Rykena 1984: 173–180). We therefore use Article 23.9. 1 of the Code to reject the nomen Lacertus viridis Garsault, 1764 in favour of its junior asthenomonym Lacerta viridis (Laurenti, 1768). Being rejected under this Article, Lacertus viridis Garsault, 1764 becomes an exoplonym and it does not threaten its junior doxisonym Lacerta bilineata Daudin, 1802.Published as part of Dubois, Alain & Bour, Roger, 2010, The nomenclatural status of the nomina of amphibians and reptiles created by Garsault (1764), with a parsimonious solution to an old nomenclatural problem regarding the genus Bufo (Amphibia, Anura), comments on the taxonomy of this genus, and comments on some nomina created by Laurenti (1768), pp. 1-52 in Zootaxa 2447 on pages 26-27, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19511
Lacertus aquatilis Garsault 1764
No full textLacertus aquatilis Garsault, 1764 The plate 674 of Garsault (1764) shows his species Lacertus aquatilis or “Salamandre d’eau”. The plate provides a good drawing of a breeding male of the newt species currently known (e.g., Raffaëlli 2007, Dubois & Raffaëlli 2009) as Triturus cristatus (Laurenti, 1768) (family SALAMANDRIDAE Goldfuss, 1820). Given the quality of the drawing, showing the dorsal fins on the body and tail, it was most likely drawn from a living specimen, probably from the Paris region, where this subspecies was then common, although nowadays it is rarer there (Dubois & Ohler 1988). Simply following priority, the species currently known as Triturus cristatus should now be known as Triturus aquatilis, a nomen that has never been used since 1764. This change would no doubt be disturbing for communication among zoologists, as since its creation and for almost 200 years, the nomen Triturus cristatus has been associated with the crested newt of western Europe (for a list of more than 25 recent references, see e.g. Arntzen 2003: 482–514). We therefore use Article 23.9. 1 of the Code to reject the nomen Lacertus aquatilis Garsault, 1764 in favour of its junior doxisonym Triton cristatus Laurenti, 1768.Published as part of Dubois, Alain & Bour, Roger, 2010, The nomenclatural status of the nomina of amphibians and reptiles created by Garsault (1764), with a parsimonious solution to an old nomenclatural problem regarding the genus Bufo (Amphibia, Anura), comments on the taxonomy of this genus, and comments on some nomina created by Laurenti (1768), pp. 1-52 in Zootaxa 2447 on page 26, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19511
Serpens Garsault 1764
No full textSerpens Garsault, 1764 The figure of the plate 667 shows a snake named Serpens or “Serpent à collier”, which is beyond any doubt a specimen of the species currently known as Natrix natrix (Linnaeus, 1758), the “grass snake” (family COLUBRIDAE Oppel, 1811 a). The genus Natrix was established by Laurenti (1768: 73) with 22 prenucleospecies. Stejneger (1936: 139) stated that the nominal species Coluber natrix Linnaeus, 1758 was the “type-species” of Natrix Laurenti, 1768, “both” by absolute tautonymy, because Natrix vulgaris Laurenti, 1768 was its synonym, and by subsequent designation of Fleming (1822). Just like for the genus Bufo discussed above, this statement is incorrect, as Coluber natrix was not a prenucleospecies of this nominal genus. As for the subsequent designation by Fleming (1822: 29 [sic]) evoked by Stejneger (1936: 139), it is also wrong. Actually Fleming (1822: 291) mentioned only one species, Coluber torquatus, in the genus Natrix Laurenti, 1768, but did not designate it as “ type ” as he did for some other genera, and at any rate this nominal species was not eligible for nucleospecies designation, not being one of the prenucleospecies of Natrix Laurenti, 1768. The nomen Coluber torquatus was first established by de la Cepède (1789: 100) in a work invalidated by the ICZN (Anonymous 1987), so that authorship of this nomen was then shifted to Bonnaterre (1790: 53). However, the species described by the latter author is different from that described by de la Cepède (1789: 100), a “detail” which has escaped the attention of the ICZN and of other recent authors, but this point needs not be discussed further here. Fitzinger (1843: 27) designated Tropidonotus quincunciatus Schlegel, 1837 as nucleospecies of Natrix, but this designation is also invalid as this species was not among the prenucleospecies. The valid designation of a nucleospecies for Natrix Laurenti, 1768 was made by Mertens & Müller (1928: 49), who chose Natrix vulgaris Laurenti, 1768. The generic nomen Serpens Garsault, 1764 is therefore a senior doxisonym of Natrix Laurenti, 1768. Serpens having been ignored since its description, and Natrix having been in general use (for a list of more than 25 recent references, see e.g. Kabisch 1999: 564–580), the prevailing usage must be maintained according to Art. 23.9. 1 of the Code. Therefore, Natrix Laurenti, 1768 remains the valid generic nomen for Coluber natrix Linnaeus, 1758 and its allies, i.e., three species only nowadays (see Rossman & Eberle 1977): Natrix maura (Linnaeus, 1758), Natrix natrix (Linnaeus, 1758) and Natrix tessellata Laurenti, 1768, and their subspecies. We follow Jandzík (2005), Kasparek (2005) and Venchi & Sindaco (2006), who recommended not to recognize Natrix megalocephala Orlov & Tuniyev, 1987 as a valid species. According to its probable origin (France), the snake depicted by Garsault (1764) belongs in the subspecies currently known as Natrix natrix helvetica (Bonnaterre, 1790), actually also first named by de la Cepède (1789: 100) in one of his publications suppressed by the ICZN (Anonymous 1987). This subspecies was based on the specimens from “Jorat” 4 described by Razoumowsky (1789: 121) under the nomen Coluber vulgaris Linnaeus, 1758. For this reason, we hereby designate the nominal species Coluber helveticus Bonnaterre, 1790 (onymotope: “ parmi les buissons & dans les bois du Jorat ”) as nucleospecies of the genus Serpens Garsault, 1764, invalid senior doxisonym of Natrix Laurenti, 1768. 4. Wooded upland in the county of Vaud, north of Lausanne (Switzerland).Published as part of Dubois, Alain & Bour, Roger, 2010, The nomenclatural status of the nomina of amphibians and reptiles created by Garsault (1764), with a parsimonious solution to an old nomenclatural problem regarding the genus Bufo (Amphibia, Anura), comments on the taxonomy of this genus, and comments on some nomina created by Laurenti (1768), pp. 1-52 in Zootaxa 2447 on page 30, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19511
Bufo Garsault 1764
No full textBufo Bufo Garsault, 1764, was established for a group of species containing Rana bufo Linnaeus, 1758 or one of its synonyms. First species added by Laurenti 1768 (use of the name was in accordance with Garsault's use of the name, it contained Bufo vulgaris Laurenti, 1768, a junior subjective synonym of Rana bufo Linnaeus, 1758), type species Bufo viridis Laurenti, 1768 fixed by Fitzinger 1843. The fact that Garsault 1764 had used the name for a French animal, while Laurenti 1768 had used the synonymous name for presumably Austrian (his own material) and German animals (Rösel's material), has no influence because in these times the French populations were not classified as a different taxon, there is no expressed evidence to support the assumption that Laurenti 1768 would have used the name Bufo in a much different sense than Garsault 1764 had done it. We agree that Tschudi 1828 was not an unambiguous type designation (Art. 67.5). The fact that Bufo vulgaris and Bufo viridis have recently been classified in different genera or subgenera, has no influence on the nomenclatural act of type fixation. The present-day taxonomy has no influence on the nomenclature. We reject the names used in the subgeneric classification proposed by Dubois & Bour (2010), because their use was based on incorrect nomenclatural assumptions, following which Fitzinger's 1843 type designation was ignored for the present-day classification. The names used in that classification at subgeneric level should be revised and brought in line with the ICZN Code. In our interpretation Rana bufo will not be classified in the (sub)genus Bufo. If researchers think that it would be more convenient to have Rana bufo as the type for Bufo, and Fitzinger's type fixation should be set aside, this needs to be addressed to the Commission.Published as part of Welter-Schultes, F. W. & Klug, R., 2011, Comments on new names and nomenclatural acts of amphibians and non-avian sauropsids established by Garsault 1764 and Laurenti 1768 (response to Dubois & Bour 2010), pp. 50-58 in Zootaxa 2814 on page 5
- …
