Abstract
The scientific names and taxonomy adopted by the Check-List of Japanese Birds 7th edition published in 2012 was reviewed for 154 taxa belonging to15 families in the order Passeriformes, focusing on discrepancies from the 6th edition and the IOC World Bird List, mainly in light of the latest molecular phylogeny. Fifty taxa differed from the 6th edition and twenty-five taxa differed from the IOC list. Whereas the majority of the taxa in the 7th edition reflected the latest molecular phylogeny, some taxa in the Fringillidae and Corvidae did not. In the Fringillidae, Carduelis spinus should be moved to the genus Spinus, and C. flammea and C. hornemanni should be moved to the genus Acanthis. The range of Corvus corone is questionable, and the taxonomy of Pica pica and related taxa should be reconsidered. Molecular phylogenetic studies, published since the 7th edition, have advocated different names for Paridae and Fringillidae than those adopted by the 7th edition. It is advocated that Poecile varius should be moved to the genus Sittiparus and that two subspecies are elevated to full species. Both Uragus sibiricus and Chaunoproctus ferreorostris are to be moved to the genus Carpodacus. Passer rutilans should be renamed Passer cinnamomeus based on the Principle of Priority, although that is not a taxonomic subject. We were unable to give the correct spelling for Artamus leucorynchus because of a loophole in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. In past editions of the check list of Japanese birds, many taxa have been considered to be junior synonyms and removed from the list, without sufficient scientific evidence. Therefore, the check list of Japanese birds may be revised on a large scale in the future.
