PIE *kwokt

this root is supposed to be the one for actually English word "wihtel",
German " wachtel", ahd "wahtala", friz. "kwakkel".
Since the PIE root is just *kwokt- which should be the accepted suffixes
here?
The Germanic languages show an "al/el" the frizon one too "el".
In Latin it was "coturnix, coturnicis".
The Romanian word is "potârniche" which confirm once again that the
language where from this word derives is one which made from an PIEe *kW
an "p", but it is very close to Latin form as construction
coturni+x = potârni+che
The Romanian linguists tried to explain the Rom. word trough an Latin
*quoturnicula, with a syncopated form *quoturnicla for explaining the
"che" in Romanian . The Latin word itself remains with an uncertain
etymology.
It seems this try (*qoturnicla= potârniche) was rejected since Walde
shows the discussion for this word and means there is no *quoturnicla
for the rom. "potârniche", nor in vulgar latin, nor in oscan neither in
umbrian.
The PIE form in the zero grade matches perfectly the rom. root, but the
suffix is very strange until now.
How is the Latin form to analyse? Cot+urnix. Is this "urnix, urnicis" to
find in other words or is there an Greek cognate or what about? I know
just about the greek-dorian "urnix/utniz" as beeing something like Latin
"urnix". Any ideea?
Alex