Chlamydera maculata subsp. subguttata Mathews
| Main Author: | Lecroy, Mary |
|---|---|
| Format: | info publication-taxonomictreatment Journal |
| Terbitan: |
, 2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: |
https://zenodo.org/record/4630270 |
Daftar Isi:
- Chlamydera maculata subguttata Mathews Chlamydera maculata subguttata Mathews, 1912a: 440 (West Australia (East Murchison)). Now Chlamydera guttata guttata Gould, 1862. See Mathews, 1926: 322–333; Hartert, 1929a: 57; Mayr and Jennings, 1952: 8–10; Mayr, 1962c: 180; Gilliard, 1969: 361–363; Schodde and Mason, 1999: 632–633; Johnstone and Storr, 2004: 291–293; Frith and Frith, 2004: 416–418; Christidis and Boles, 2008: 179–180; and Frith and Frith, 2009a: 403. HOLOTYPE: AMNH 679150, adult male, collected in the East Murchison, on 1 November 1909, by F.B. Lawson Whitlock. From the Mathews Collection (no. 3887) via the Rothschild Collection. COMMENTS: Mathews cited his catalog number of the holotype in the original description and gave the range of subguttata as ‘‘Mid Westralia.’’ The holotype bears, in addition to Whitlock’s original label and Mathews and Rothschild type labels, a ‘‘Figured’’ label, indicating that the specimen served as the model for Mathews (1926: pl. 585, lower fig., opp. p. 324; text pp. 323–324) where it is confirmed as the type of subguttata. Hartert suffered a slip of the pen when he wrote on Mathews’ ‘‘Figured’’ label that it was the lower figure on ‘‘pl. 485.’’ It seems that Mathews had only one paratype: East Murchison, AMNH 679151 (Mathews no. 3888), female, 18 September 1909, by Whitlock. Whitlock’s label bears the following note: ‘‘Probably a ♀ less than 1 yr old,’’ which Mathews (1926: 324) quoted when he described (but did not figure) this specimen as a third female, one lacking a crest. Additional information on the type locality can be found in Whitlock (1910: 186–187). In this article he noted that he spent the period from late September to 6 November 1909 at Milly Pool, approximately 20 miles northwest of Wiluna, 26.36S, 120.13E (USBGN, 1957) and ‘‘on the stock route from Peak Hill and the Gascoyne and Ashburton Rivers.’’ Hartert (1929a: 57) wrote: ‘‘Described as being paler than guttata, which I cannot see, and the head is not ‘grey,’ though it appeared to be so when covered with plaster of Paris.’’ There remains a slight residue of a white substance on the head and around the base of the bill of this type. Chlamydera guttata was long considered a subspecies of C. maculata, and there has been much discussion in the literature whether one or two species are involved; see discussion in Schodde and Mason (1999: 633–635). Most subsequent authors have treated C. maculata and C. guttata as separate species, the two forming a superspecies. Johnstone and Storr (2004: 291, 293) have included them in a single species in the genus Ptilonorhynchus, while noting that they are sometimes considered separate species.
- Published as part of Lecroy, Mary, 2014, Type Specimens Of Birds In The American Museum Of Natural History Part 12. Passeriformes: Ploceidae, Sturnidae, Buphagidae, Oriolidae, Dicruridae, Callaeidae, Grallinidae, Corcoracidae, Artamidae, Cracticidae, Ptilonorhynchidae, Cnemophilidae, Paradisaeidae, And Corvidae, pp. 1-165 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2014 (393) on page 88, DOI: 10.1206/885.1, http://zenodo.org/record/4629954