loi_ British Ornitliologists' Club THE NATURAL 19 MAR '^^nq PRESENTLD rr^^NQ LIBFARY Volume 129 No. 1 March 2009 MEETINGS are normally held in the Sherfield Building of Imperial College, South Kensington, London SW7. The nearest Tube station is at South Kensington; a map of the area will be sent to members, on request. (Limited car parking facilities can be reserx ed [at a special reduced charge of £5.00], on prior application to the Hon. Secretary.) The cash bar is open from 6.15 pm, and a buffet supper, of two courses followed by coffee, is ser\'ed at 7.00 pm. (A vegetarian menu can be arranged if ordered at the time of booking.) Informal talks are given on completion, commenc- ing at about 8.00 pm. Dinner charges are £22.50 per person. FORTHCOMING MEETINGS See also BOG website: http://www.boc-online.org Members (and) guests) that had planned to attend the talk scheduled for 3 February, which was cancelled because of bad weather, will note that it has been re-scheduled after the AGM meeting and dinner on Wednesday 29 April. This will replace the recent practice of short talks for this evening, which may be held at the June meeting if a speaker has not been found for that date. 29 April (Wednesday) — Douglas G. D. Russell (Curator, Bird Group, Xatural History Museum) — The Worst journexj in the World: an ornitJioIogical tale of bravery and endurance. In the depths of the Antarctic midwinter of 1911 three men embarked on one of the most difficult and dangerous ornithological expeditions ever undertaken. Braving cold and misery that is difficult to imagine, the\" trod silently in darkness around Ross Island to retrieve three of the hardest won specimens in the Natural History Museum (NHM) bird collections. The tale of the iixe weeks they spent battling against the winter weather, sheer bad luck and their own fears to bring back early embry^os of the Emperor Penguin, required to test a then-current theory in evolutionary^ biology^ was superbly told by Apsley Cherry Garrard in his narrative of Scott's last expedition. Drawing on unpublished information from the NHM archives and elsewhere, the talk will precis the stor}- itself and place it in the context of Scott's o\"erall Antarctic research and the ornithologv of the expedition as a whole. PLEASE NOTE: this meeting will be in the Rector's Residence (Imperial College) at 170 Queens Gate, London Applications to Hon. Secretary (address belo^v) by 15 April 2009 10 March — Thomas Donegan (Fundacion ProAves) — Ornithological exploration in the Colombian Andes. Thomas and colleagues have been undertaking field expeditions in Colombia's Andes for o\'er ten \-ears. These have led to the description of three new species and four subspecies, t^vo national parks and fi\-e nature reser\-es being estabhshed, and hosts of range extensions, rediscoveries and other findings. Colombia is one of the few countries in the world where ornithological exploration (as opposed to study of previously known areas) is still ongoing. The coimtry^'s long-rimning civil war makes for an interesting backgroimd to ornithological exploration, as remote regions are frequently controlled by armed non-government groups. The talk will focus on explorations of two previously imstudied and geographically isolated mountain ranges, the San Lucas and Yan'guies moimtains. There ^vill be something here for ever}-one: jov, love, tears, toil and, of course, photographs of beautiful ti'opical birds. Applications to Hon. Secretary (address below) by 24 February 2009 Overseas Members visiting Britain are especiall\ welcome at these meetings, and the Hon. Secretary ^vould be ver}' pleased to hear from anyone who can offer to talk to the Club gi^■ing as much advance notice as possible — please contact: S. A. 1 1. (Tony) Statham, Ashlyns Lodge, Chesham Road, Berkliamsted, Herts. HP4 2ST, UK. Tel. +44 (0)1442 876995 (or e-mail: boc.sec@bou.org.uk). BOG Office P.O. Box 417, Peterborough PE7 3FX, UK E-mail: boc.office@bou.org.uk. Website: www.boc-online.org Tel. & Fax: +44 (0) 1733 844 820. Club Announcements 1 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Bulletin of the BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS' CLUB Vol. 129 No. 1 Published 14 March 2009 CLUB ANNOUNCEMENTS Committee welcomes the following new members who recently joined the Club and have not been previously notified: Mr J. Azzopardi (Malta), D. Blamires (Brazil), Mr J. Flynn (UK), Mr A. Guimond (Canada), Mr I. Hinze (UK), Mr S. Hogberg (Sweden), Mr C. Maurizio (Italy), Mr F. Ruhe (The Netherlands) and Mr H. Smit (The Netherlands) It is with profound sadness that we have to report the death of Dr D. W. Snow (Member 1977-2009, Editor Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 1991-97). Members are reminded that subscriptions for 2009 were due on 1 January and are kindly asked to check that any Standing Orders are for the correct amount (£20 p. a.). Regrettably, several members are still paying incorrect subscription rates, which causes the Club unnecessary time and expense in administration duties. ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING The Annual General Meeting of the British Ornithologists' Club will be held in the Rector's Residence, Imperial College, 170 Queens Gate, London SW7 at 6.00 pm on Wednesday 29 April 2009. AGENDA I ^^^ElmURAr 1. Minutes of the 2008 Annual General Meeting (see Bull Brit. Orn. CI. 128: 73-75). | f t'STr"^-^ » s, 2. Chairman's report. 3. Trustees Annual Report and Accounts for 2008 (both to be distributed at the meping). | ^ U ^(^nn ^ 4. The Bulletin Editor's report— Mr G. M. Kirwan. I ' ' " | 5. Publications report — Revd. T.W. Gladwin, Chairman JPC. f ^^^SEMTf 'P I 6. Election of Officers. The Committee proposes that: I TP- v-'-; | ,= rn4 ~ I (i) Miss H. Baker be elected C/iflfrmflw (z;zc£' Cdr. M. B. Casement, OBE, RN) —^^^.\^^^^^^^Hy I (ii) Dr R. P. Prys-Jones be elected Vice Chairman {vice Miss H. Baker) """"^ -^J (iii) Mr S. A. H. Statham be re-elected as Hon. Secretary. (iv) Mr D. J. Montier be re-elected as Hon. Treasurer. (v) Three appointments to committee to be made {vice Dr R. P. Prys-Jones, Dr J. H. Cooper and P. J. Wilkinson) from the following nominations: S. M. S. Gregory, K. Heron Jones and C. W. R. Storey. No other changes to the committee are proposed, as all other members are eligible to serve at least one more year in office. Ex-officio members (in continuation): Revd. T. W. Gladwin {Chairman Joint Publications Committee), Prof. R. A. Cheke {Hon. Publications Officer), S. P. Dudley {Administration Manager) and G. M. Kirwan {Hon. Editor) 7. Any other business, of which advance notice has been given. The 952nd meeting of the Club was held on Tuesday 23 September 2008, in the Ante Room, Sherfield Building, Imperial College, London. Fifteen members and eight guests were present. Members attending were: Cdr. M. B. CASEMENT, RN {Chairman), Miss H. BAKER, Dr J. H. COOPER, F. M. GAUNTLETT, D. GRIFFIN, K. HERON JONES, R. H. KETTLE, R. R. LANGLEY, D. J. MONTIER, Dr R. P. PRYS-JONES, R. J. PRYTHERCH, P. J. SELLAR, S. A. H. STATHAM, M. J. WALTON and P. J. WILKINSON. Guests attending were: Mrs C. R. CASEMENT, P. CASEMENT, Mrs M. CASEMENT, Mrs M. H. GAUNTLETT, Mrs J. HERON JONES, Mrs M. MONTIER, D. SERJEANTSON and Dr S. TURVEY {Speaker). After dinner, Dr Samuel Turvey gave an account of New Zealand's moa: the biology and extinction of the world's strangest birds. New Zealand, the world's most isolated major landmass, contained a diverse endemic avifauna (c.245 species) prior to the arrival of humans c.750 years ago, which included the extraordinary large-bodied ratites known as moa. Described by Richard Owen in 1839 based on an incomplete femur. Club Announcements 2 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) subfossil remains of these giant birds proved common in Quaternary swamp sites, dunes and caves. Ten moa species in six genera and two families are recognised today, including two species of giant moa Dinornis, among the largest birds ever to have evolved. Dinornis also displayed extreme levels of female-biased size dimorphism, representing the largest sexual dimorphism of any terrestrial vertebrate. The unfossilised state of many moa remains led 19th-century researchers to speculate that moa might still survive in remote regions of New Zealand. However, the otherwise rich Maori oral tradition contains little meaningful information on moa, and archaeological evidence, radiocarbon dating and mathematical modelling suggest that moas died out within c.lOO years of Maori arrival. There is extensive evidence of moa hunting by early Maori settlers, with c. 100,000-500,000 moas in known archaeological moa-hunting sites, and evidence of preferential targeting of moa compared to other birds. Discovery of cyclical growth marks in moa long bones, a feature unknown in living birds, indicates that moa took several years even to reach adult body size, and showed a hugely exaggerated K-selected life-history strategy that evolved in the absence of mammalian predators in the pre-human New Zealand ecosystem. This would have left moa extremely vulnerable to exploitation by early settlers. The 953rd meeting of the Club was held on Tuesday 4 November 2008, in the Rector's Residence, Imperial College, 170 Queen's Gate, London. Twenty-three members and 11 guests were present. Members attending were: Cdr. M. B. CASEMENT, RN (Omirinan), Miss H. BAKER, Mrs D. M. BRADLEY, D. R. CALDER, Ms K. COOK, D. J. FISHER, J. B. FISHER, F. M. GAUNTLETT, Revd. T. W. GLADWIN, D. GRIFFIN, K. HERON JONES, R. H. KETTLE, R. R. LANGLEY, Dr C. F. MANN, D. J. MONTIER, P. J. OLIVER, R. C. PRICE (Speaker), Dr R. P. PRYS-JONES, P. J. SELLAR, S. A. H. STATHAM, C. W. R. STOREY, M. J. WALTON and P. J. WILKINSON. Guests attending were: Mrs J. CALDER, Mrs M. H. GAUNTLETT, Mrs J. M. GLADWIN, Mrs J. HERON JONES, Mrs M. MONTIER, Mrs H. PRICE, E. PRICE, R. PRICE, W. PRICE, M. STONE and D. WITHRINGTON. After dinner, Richard Price spoke on The special birds of Morocco. His many stunning photographs of the birds were set in dramatically beautiful and varied habitats, including snowy mountains, different tv pes of desert, juniper and cedar woodlands, wetlands and the coast. First up were iconic Crimson-winged Finches Rhodopechys sanguineus with (Atlas) Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris and Seebohm's Wheatear Oenanthe (oenanthe) seebohmi in the Atlas Mountains, and the elusive Levaillant's Woodpecker Picus vaillantii, and Atlas Pied Wagtail Motacilla alba subpersonata of montane rivers. Tristram's Warbler Sylvia deserticola is endemic to the Maghreb, frequenting high hillside juniper bushes. There are eight species of wheatear in Morocco. The scarcest is Mourning Wheatear Oenanthe lugens and the most beautiful Red-rumped Wheatear O. moesta. There are 14 species of lark, of which Thick-billed Lark Ramphocoris clotbey is the most extraordinary and Hoopoe Lark Alaemon alaudipes the most elegant, having a spectacular 'kamikaze' song-flight. Temminck's Lark Eremophila bilopha was illustrated performing its 'leaning' distraction display and others of note included Bar-tailed Desert Lark Ammomanes cincturus. Desert Sparrow Passer simplex is declining but still found where there are camels. Desert Warbler Sylvia nana and Scrub Warbler Scotocerca inquieta are widespread. The much-reduced numbers of birds of prev are in stark contrast to those in neighbouring Spain. Vultures are virtually extinct. Bonelli's Eagle Hieraaetus fasciatus is the most likely eagle to be seen. Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus is widespread but sparse, and all of this is probably due to poisoned carcasses put out to kill wild dogs. Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus is widely encountered in deserts. Peregrine F. peregrinus is local, as is Barbar}^ Falcon F. pelegrinoides. Blue-cheeked Bee-eater Merops persicus has just two outposts at the north-west extremitv^ of its African range. Other spectacular species are the reclusive and nomadic Houbara Bustard Chlamydotis undulata (gamekecpered by Middle-Eastern Arabs) and the smaller, pale Pharaoh (or Desert) Eagle Chvl Bubo bubo ascalaphus. I'ossible 'new' endemic species are (Atlas) Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs africana, which is boldlv marked .uui has ci v;roen mantlo (instead of a beige one), the Blue Tit Parus caeruleus ultramarinus which has a dark blue c row n (instead of powder blue), and the very dark (male) European Stonechat Saxicola torquatus. Then [hvvv IS tlu' M.iv;pic Pica pica mauritanica, which is slightly smaller than the well-kno\vn and widespread form, h.u iiii; .1 tiisliiH ti\ e post-ocul.ir patch ot turquoise skin. .Aloni; (he- southern coaxial \vmoQ is Black-crowned Bushshrike Tcliagra senegalus, which is at the northern c\u\ m| ik rani^\ anJ [he w hito-breasted Moroccan Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo maroccanus. NorHuM ii l\iUI llns t „■/(';///. ws ciciiiilii is, like birds of prey, much reduced horn its formerlv quite widespread range across \ Km o^\ o In-ing confined to just two breeding areas at the coast. This population may prove genetically clistnu I h oin that in Syria and Turkey, although all are relict populations. Breeding success, although impro\ ed, appears to be limited by restrictions on available water. It is hoped that Chris Bowden of the RSPB, who is responsible for the conser\ ation of this Moroccan population, will speak in more detail abmil this to the Club at a later date. Club Announcements 3 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Jan-Hendrik Becking 1924-2009 Born on 9 June 1924 in Blora, Java, while still in primary school Jan-Hendrik Becking began to frequent the Bogor Zoological Museum, where P. F. Franck taught him specimen preparation. By his teens he was collecting birds for the museum. Concurrently, he and his brother became friends with the Bartels brothers. Max Jr., Ernst and Hans, all eminent field ornithologists. Max Jr., 22 years his senior, became a mentor to Jan- Hendrik, making birding trips with him to remote parts of Java and permitting free access to the Bartels collection. The publication, in this issue, of his paper on fraudulent use of the Bartels egg collection, was a matter of honour to Jan-Hendrik. After the war Jan-Hendrik wanted to study zoology in Leiden, The Netherlands, but his coming from 'the colonies' proved to be an obstacle. He thus chose botany, which also led him to meet his wife and lifelong supporter, Katharina von Wallwitz. During his professional career based in Wageningen, Jan-Hendrik became an internationally recognised specialist in nitrogen fixation by free-living and symbiotic microorganisms. Four of his contributions appeared in Nature and he was awarded the Pasteur medal by the French Society for Microbiology. Indonesia, his friends there and its birds remained Jan-Hendrik's passions. In all he made 12 trips to Java. He possessed a unique combination of excellent observational, recording and analytical skills, dedication to field work (Javan Scops Owl Otus angelinae, Waterfall Swift Hydrochous gigas), a phenomenal ear (owl and cuckoo recordings, and sonograms) and painstaking laboratory skills (ultrastructure of avian egg shells). He wrote the accounts for Asian and Oceanic species in Owls: a guide to the owls of the world (Pica Press). Jan-Hendrik would have loved to exploit further all of the historical and ornithological information in his archives, but it was not to be. A biography of the Bartels family and a checklist of the birds of Java remain part-finished. Joost Brouwer REVIEW Snow, D. 2008. Birds in our lives. Ebor Press, Sessions of York, Huntington Rd, York Y031 9HS. 233 pages, numerous photographs and the author's drawings and paintings, some in colour. ISBN 978-1-85072-381-3. £12.99 + £2.50 UK p&p / £3.80 (overseas surface mail). This book is an eye-opener. Although I knew David Snow for 40 years, this book makes me realise that I had never truly known him until now. For example, I had no idea of his love of poetry and music, nor about his service in the armed forces. Far more people should write their autobiographies. It was fascinating to read about David's early life, to encounter his special sense of humour, and to learn that the great can be perfectly normal mischievous children. David Snow's navy life is fascinating, particularly to learn that a revered scientist can have led such different early life and might not have made it through. One learns the breadth of David's interests, e.g. his interest in the Roman town of Timgad in North Africa, and of cave paintings. Similarly, I had no idea of his talent for drawing and watercolour. These exhibit such charm that one wonders why he never pursued this. Is it that he never had the time to exploit all of his many talents? His statement that when he went to Trinidad in 1956, his (perceived) inability to do justice to tropical landscapes made him give up, is tragic. On the (slim) evidence of what I've seen, he was a better watercolorist than some who make their living as book illustrators. David's undergraduate expedition to Principe and Sao Tome was stimulating, particularly in view of his obvious knowledge of other groups of animals besides birds. Galapagos giant tortoises, as well Pyrenean butterflies, dragonflies and hoverflies are all covered in this book. What made him specialise? The book is packed with anecdotes of his colleagues, told with wit and charm; and providing insight into those he worked with (e.g. Reg Moreau). David's discussion of Barbara's studies on the Bearded Bellbird Procnias averano is fascinating, particularly as I have not read her original paper, and his account puts it in non-technical language. It also demonstrates that Barbara was a researcher in the classical style, who was prepared to spend years studying one quite small topic, unlike today's whizz-kids, who seem able to found Ph.D. theses on comparatively little. I think David was right to say he was fortunate to have been doing his research in the period 1948-88 when one could still produce readable papers, not loaded with statistics, as now. One could add that ornithology is fortunate that David was around then to do research in that sort of way. I, for one, regret the decline in the kind of research that David was doing all those years. Criticisms? There are some minor ones, but they in no way detract from my delight in this book, or my gratitude that it exists. For instance, on p.212, after discussing hummingbirds he mentions a large Morpho but it is quite unclear from the wording that this is a butterfly not a bird. Frequently only English vernacular names for birds are used but for other groups and plants the scientific names are usually given. But I am in full agreement with David in his retention of 'old' names for birds, such as 'Hairy Hermit', in favour of the 'more prosaic' modern names. And I am absolutely behind him on the subject of multi-authored papers. There are a few repetitions, e.g. that White Bellbird Procnias Club Announcements 4 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) albus is the only one of its genus that sounds like a bell. Much of the book reads not like a well-constructed autobiography, rather a series of 'leaves from my diary', but this is not a negative comment. One does not read a memoir to read a perfect book, but to learn something about that person. In this respect, David Snow succeeded brilliantly. The last page, quoting a previously unpublished poem by Barbara, is deeply moving. A collection of her poems should be printed, not necessarily as a 'publication', but at least as a privately printed book for family and friends. Michael Walters CORRIGENDA hi Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 128(3), the following corrections should be noted. At the foot of p. 150, caption to Fig. 5, after 'Tama population', insert the words '(36125); (vii) as previous' (only six not seven specimens were identified). On p. 156, Fig. 10(c) is mislabelled and should be 'G. n. nana' not 'G. n. occidentalis' (as stated in Appendix 1). On p. 173, Appendix 1, Other Records, the locality 'Serram'a de las Minas' is in Fiuila (not Boyaca) and 'Vereda Las Minas' is in Boyaca (not Huila). The following table was printed incorrectly in Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 128(4): 239. TABLE 2 List of Tumbesian EBA endemics and threatened species recorded at seven study sites (excluding wetlands). See Table 1 for site details: (1) Reserva hitegral Montecaimito, (2) Mompiche, (5) Finca Integral Rio Muchacho, (6) Reserva Cerro Seco, (8) Isla de La Plata, (9) Refugio de Vida Silvestre Parque Lago, (10) Cerro El Aromo. Endemism follows Stattersfield et al. (1998) and threat categor}^ follows BirdLife International (2008). Species Pale-browed Tinamou CryptureUus transfasciatus (NT) Grey-backed Hawk Leucopternis occidentalis (EN) Rufous-headed Chachalaca Ortalis erythroptera (VU) Brown Wood Rail Ar amides wolfi (VU) Ecuadorian Ground Dove Columbina buckleyi Ochre-bellied Dove Leptotila ochraceiventris (VU) Red-masked Parakeet Aratinga erythrogenys (NT) Grey-cheeked Parakeet Brotogeris pyrrhoptenis (EN) Pacific Parrotlet Forpus coelestis Anthony's Nightjar Caprimulgus anthonyi West Peruvian Screech Owl Otus {Megascops) roboratus Little Woodstar CImetocercus bombiis (VU) Orange-fronted Barbet Capita squamatus (NT) Ecuadorian Piculet Picumnus sclateri Guayaquil Woodpecker Campephilus gayaquilensis (NT) Blackish-headed Spinetail Synallaxis tithys (EN) Collared Antshrike Sakesphorus beniardi Elegant Crescentchest Mclanopareia elegans Pacific Elaenia Myiopagis subplacens Groy-b roasted Flycntchcr 1 iillnvlricnK \^ri'^cipectiis (VU) Sooty-crowned FlycciU luM- A i^lhicot.cplhiliis Haird's llwdU Ikm- Mtnoihniii^lc^ hiiiidii Tacitic Ko\ .il I l\ iMk hrr ( hiiu hoihunchus occidentalis (VU) Slaty Bocard l\k li\/niiiij'hu'^ ^jh)diiini< (EN) I'cuadoi'i.in I liriish liiiihi^ nuii iilno-^tris riiimlnnui'- 1mi krJ llii iisli I iiidii-^ rccuei I'ascialod VVivii Ciiinpyloihynchus fasciatus Grey-and-gold Warbler Basileutcnis fraseri HlarkH Mppcd Sparrow Arremon abcillci Criinson-broastod I'inch Kliodospingus cnientus White-edged Oriole Icterus graceannae 12 5 6 9 10 Paul Salaman et al. 5 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) A new subspecies of Brown-banded Antpitta Grallaria milleri from Antioquia, Colombia hy Paul Salaman, Thomas M. Donegan & Robert Pry s-] ones Received 8 October 2007; final revision received 16 January 2009 SUMMARY. — A new subspecies of Brown-banded Antpitta Grallaria milleri is described from the northern Central Andes of Colombia, based on a single specimen at The Natural History Museum, Tring, collected in 1878 at Santa Elena, dpto. Antioquia. The new subspecies is separable from G. m. milleri, which occurs 140 km further south in the Central Andes, by its considerably shorter tarsus, longer wing and longer tail. Other possible hypotheses for the type specimen's morphology, such as hybridisation or clinal variation, are not supported. Searches at the type locality and in the surrounding region (which are largely deforested at suitable elevations) have failed, suggesting that the new taxon may be either highly endangered or already extinct. Although the new antpitta appears likely to be a phylogenetic species, subspecies rank is assigned conservatively. Its taxonomic rank and status will require review should an extant population be discovered. Antpittas (Grallariidae) reach their greatest diversity at high elevations in the northern Andes. Although previously treated as part of the Thamnophilidae or Formicariidae, Grallaria is now considered part of a smaller family Grallariidae (Irestedt et al. 2002, Chesser 2004, Rice 2005a,b, Remsen et al. 2008). Grallariidae are secretive species of the understorey, have poor flight and often-small geographical ranges, factors that have contributed to the family being second only to Rhinocryptidae (tapaculos) in the number of new Andean taxa described recently (e.g. Graves 1987, Schulenberg & Williams 1992, Stiles 1992, Krabbe et al. 1999, Donegan 2008). The Central Cordillera of Colombia is the highest (average 3,000 m) and oldest of Colombia's three Andean ranges. It supports a diverse mosaic of habitats, resulting in exceptional biological diversity and intraspecific variation (Orme et al. 2005, Phillimore et al. 2007). Above 1,000 m, the cordillera supports over 30 restricted-range bird species, one of the largest global concentrations of such montane taxa (Stattersfield et al. 1998). Exceptional numbers of Grallaria species occur in Colombia's Central Andes, including various endemics to the cordillera (Krabbe & Schulenberg 2003). During the late 19th and 20th centuries, improved infrastructure encouraged bird col- lectors to explore the northern Central Cordillera, mainly around Colombia's second-largest city, Medellm, with collections by M. A. Carriker (1941-53: Graves 1987, 1997), K. von Sneidern (1938-52: Fjeldsa & Krabbe 1990), M. A. Serna (1971-91: SAO 2003) and several American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) expeditions (Chapman 1912, 1917). In the last decade, the northern Central Andes has again been a focus for ornithological research due to the activities of many individuals and groups, including the Sociedad Antioquena de Ornitologia, Medellfn's universities, and Fundacion ProAves (e.g. Salaman et al. 2002, SAO 2003), among others. Despite the region having been better studied than many other parts of the country, the Central Andes have yielded several new bird species in recent years, including two found to date only in the northernmost section, in dpto. Antioquia (Cuervo et al. 2001, Donegan 2007). Paul Salaman et al. 6 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) One of the first significant collections from the northern Central Andes was made b\- Thomas Knight Salmon, who collected 1,263 bird specimens for the British Museum, now the Natural History Museum (BMNH), in 1872-78. Details, including t\-pe specimens of 14 species, were published just after Salmon's death (Sclater & Salvin 1879). Previoush', Sclater (1877) had described Grallaria flavotincta from a single adult (BMXH 1889.9.20.622) taken by Salmon near Frontino, Antioquia, in 1876. Among the specimens in Salmon's last consign- ment, collected in September 1878, was an unidentified, plain bro^vn-plumaged Grallaria (BMNH 1889.7.10.875). Although details of it w^ere not mentioned by Sclater & Salvin (1879), they did comment on other specimens collected during the same month and referenced the holotype of G. flavotincta. The label of 1889.7.10.875 was originally annotated simply 'Grallaria', but the species name was later added [flavotincta' (i.e. Yellows-breasted Antpittaj in a different hand, almost certainly that of P. L, Sclater (handwriting compared against a signed letter). In his account of the Formicariidae for the Gatalogiie of the birds in the British Museum, Sclater (1890) referred to the specimen as a juvenile G. flavotincta, although there is no reference to its age on the labels. Norman Arlott was commissioned to illustrate various antpittas for the Handbook of the birds of the world {cf Krabbe & Schulenberg 2003) and, to this end, in 2001 he visited BMXH. His draft plate for G. flavotincta was based solely on specimen 1889.7.10.875, as the holot}'pe was stored in a separate cabinet and BMNH held no other specimens. However, XA soon discovered that his illustration did not match the species' draft text description. G. flavotinc- ta is a yellow-breasted endemic of the West Andes, whilst the BMNH skin has dull grey and brown tmderparts. NA raised the issue wdth RP-J, and on comparing the specimen with the holotype they realised it could not be of the same species. In early November 2001, PS vis- ited the collection in connection with Project BioMap's databasing of Colombian skins and, on seeing the mystery 'G. flavotincta' specimen, realised that it more closeh* recalled Brow^n- banded Antpitta G. milleri. On comparing the single G. milleri held at BMNH, a paratvpe, PS and RP-J noted that the specimen differed from G. milleri in \'arious respects. The incorrect identification of a museum specimen is not uncommon, but in this case it is rather surprising. Sclater described more Grallaria species than anyone else, in chronolog- ical order: White-bellied Antpitta G. hypoleuca and G. modesta (now^ the Tlirush-Hke Antpitta subspecies Myrmothera campanisona modesta) (Sclater 1855), Chestnut-nap ed Antpitta G. nuchalis (Sclater 1860), Grey-naped Antpitta G. griseonucha (Sclater & Salvin 1871), G. [nuchalis] ruficeps (Sclater 1874a), Red-and-white Antpitta G. enjthroleuca (Sclater 1874b), Rufous-faced Antpitta G. erythrotis (Sclater & Salvin 1876), Yellows-breasted Antpitta G. flavotincta and Plain-backed Antpitta G. haplonota (Sclater 1877), Bicoloured Antpitta G. rufocinerea (Sclater & Salvin 1879) and Ochre-striped Antpitta G. dignissima (Sclater & Salvin 1880). Particularly noteworthy is that Sclater described G. flavotincta. The collecting locality, Santa Elena, is immediately adjacent to the cit}^ of Medellin, and now on the road between the city and its airport. The region had been deforested b\- the early 1900s (Chapman 1917) and there is little native vegetation today, with pine plantations and other modified habitats predominant (Castafio & Patino 2000). Recent sur\-evs vielded only 66 bird species. The largest forest fragment covers just 136 ha and the only Grallariidae is the widespread Chestnut-crowned Antpitta G. ruficapilla (Castaiio & Patifio 2007). Manv forest-dependent species collected at the locality by Salmon, including Grallaria riifocinera and Slate-coloured Antpitta Grallaricula nana, are no longer present. Interestingly, Bicoloured Antpitta G. rufocinerea also has Santa Elena as its t\-pe localitv but was not recorded in Antioquia for 130 years until its recent rediscovery at a site 18 km south-east of Santa Elena, at San Sebastian-La Castellana, El Retiro municipality (Ramirez 2006). San Sebastian is considered the best-preserved montane forest fragment (200 ha) in Paul Salaman et al. 7 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) southern Antioquia and has been subject to much observation over the past decade. It was recently declared an Important Bird Area (Franco & Bravo 2005). G. ruficapilla, G. nuchalis and Grallariciila nana have been found there, but there are no records of G. milleri (J. D. Ramirez in lift. 2008). During 2008, Fundacion ProAves undertook eight weeks of intensive surveys for Grallaria species at seven potential sites within 80 km of Santa Elena and at similar eleva- tions, including the use of regular playback of G. milleri. These searches failed to locate G. milleri or any similar taxon. Efforts to obtain a useful mtDNA sequence from toe pad scrap- ings of the mystery BMNH (1889.7.10.875) specimen have also failed, probably because of the specimen's age (N. H. Rice in litt. 2006). Description of new subspecies We believe that the BMNH skin represents a new taxon and that further delay in alert- ing ornithologists and conservationists to its existence is not warranted. Given the lack of vocal or molecular data, we conservatively assign it subspecies (rather than species) rank and propose the following name: Grallaria milleri gilesi subsp. nov. Antioquia Brown-banded Antpitta Holotype.—See Figs. 1 and 2. Male, reg. no. BMNH 1889.7.10.875, held at the Natural History Museum, Tring, UK; collected in September 1878 by T. K. Salmon (original collec- tor's no. 41) at Santa Elena, 8 km east of Medellm, dpto. Antioquia, Colombia (06°15'N, 75°35'W). Elevation unknown, but within a 10-km radius of Santa Elena elevation does not exceed 2,750 m, with a mean of 2,550 m (http://earth.google.com). The label notes the iris as 'dark' and stomach contents included 'insects'. Diagnosis. — Referred to Grallaria Vieillot, 1816 (type: Variegated Antpitta G. varia) due to: its medium to large size; long tarsus; culmen very indistinctly (if at all) ridged and gradually but strongly curved from the base; scutellate tarsus; rictal bristles distinct but slender; and chin and upper- throat feathers with long, slender terminal setae (Lowery & O'Neill, 1969). Grallaria was treated as comprising several subgenera by Lowery & O'Neill (1969); although some of their proposed subgeneric divisions do not reflect molecular findings (Krabbe & Schulenberg 2003), they are nonetheless of use in considering the possible relations of G. m. gilesi. G. m. gilesi is apparently a fairly typical member of the plain-coloured group (proposed subgenus Oropeziis Ridgway, 1909; type species: Rufous Antpitta G. rnfiila), of which G. milleri is a member, due to: its relatively small wing (75-103 mm); fairly uniform upperparts and underparts (considered separately) without strong streaks, squamations or bars; tail more than half as long as wing (tail / wing ratio 0.54-0.60); inner edge of tarsus distinctly convolute; and presence of 12 rectrices (Lowery & O'Neill, 1969). However, G. m. gilesi falls outside of proposed tarsus / tail and tarsus / wing ratios for the subgenus. The new taxon immediately recalls G. m. milleri, which occurs 140 km further south in the Central Andes (Fig. 3). The holotype shares G. m. milleri' s uniform rufous-brown plumage, with whitish lores, throat and belly, and the structural features described for the proposed subgenus Oropezus and genus Grallaria above. Based on recorded values for G. milleri from specimens {n=10) and recent field and specimen measurements (Kattan & Beltran 1999: n=18), the G. m. gilesi holotype differs from all G. m. milleri specimens in hav- Paul Salaman et al. 8 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) TABLE 1 Comparison of morphometries of G. m. gilesi with G. m. milleri (specimens unless otherwise stated). Details of measured specimens are presented under distribution. The mean is given, followed by the standard deviation and then the range, with Kattan & Beltran (1999) data also presented for comparison. Flat wing Tail length Tarsus Maxilla Bill width Body Tail/tarsus Wing/ chord (mm) (mm) length (mm) (mm)* (gape) (mm) mass (g) ratio tarsus ratio G.m. gilesi 97.0 55.8 40.8 18.8 12.7 N/A 1.37 2.38 (holotype, male) G.m. milleri 89.1 ± 3.5 50.4 ± 1.4 44.4 ± 0.5 21.1 ± 1.4 11.3 ±0.7 N/A 1.13 ± 0.04 2.00 ± 0.10 (n=5 males) (85.0-94.5) (49.2-52.5) (44.0^5.2) (19.5-23.1) (10.3-11.8) (1.09-1.19) (1.88-2.13) G.m. milleri 88.6 ± 2.9 49.0 ± 2.9 44.5 ± 0.6 21.0 ±1.9 11.5 ± 1.0 N/A 1.10 ± 0.06 1.99 ± 0.08 (n=10) (85.0-94.5) (43.6-53.0) (43.4^5.5) (19.3-24.7) (10.3-13.0) (0.98-1.19) (1.88-2.13) G. m. milleri (Kattan & Beltran 1999) 89.6 ± 3.5 N/A 46.6 ± 2.4 17.1 ± 1.5 N/A 52 ± 3.2 N/A Based on {n=18 live individuals means: 1.92 and specimens) * Differences between Kattan & Beltran (1999) data and ours for maxilla length probably result from differences in measuring technique. ing a longer wing, longer tail and shorter tarsus (Table 1). It also appears larger bodied than G. m. milleri. Description of the holotype. — The following is based on Mimsell Color (2000) codes. Face Lores white (Gley 1, 7-8 /N) with dark brown feather tips. Ear-coverts warm cinnamon- brown (lOYR 3/6) with slightly darker feather tips outlining ear-coverts. Warm cinnamon-brown (lOYR 3/6) from ear-coverts to neck-sides and upper breast, forming a breast-band. Upperparts Entire upperparts, from the forecrown to the uppertail-coverts, uniform rufous-brown (lOYR 3/4). Tail slightly darker rufous-brown (7.5YR 2.5/3). Wings As upperparts, with uniform rufous-brown (lOYR 3/4) coverts and flight feathers with warm cinnamon-buff (lOYR 3/6) underwing-coverts. Underparts Throat white (Gley 1 8/N) with warm cinnamon-brown (lOYR 3/6) feather tips. Feather tips below culmen modified with exposed, elongated terminal setae, similar in shape (and, doubtless, function) to rictal bristles. Lower underparts to undertail-coverts pale grey (lOYR 6/1), being slightly paler whitish and creamy on central belly (lOYR 6/3). Sides of throat and malar region pale cinnamon-buff (lOYR 3/6), extending around throat to form a distinctive upper-breast- band and extending as broad streaks on mid to lower breast and over flanks. The streaking comprises broad cinnamon (lOYR 3/6) fringes to pale grey (lOYR 6/1) feathers and darkens to cinnamon-rufous (lOYR 3/4) on mid to lower flanks and thighs. Soft parts Tarsus scutellate. Irides 'dark' on collection. No bill or leg colour description, but presently faded as in C. milleri, with tarsus and culmen dark horn, tipped yellowish horn (lOYR 5/6) on both mandibles. See Figs. 1 and 2. Distribution and specimens examined. — G. ///. gilesi is known only from the type locality above the Valle de Aburra, 8 km east of Medellm, Santa Elena municipality, dpto. Antioqiiia, Colombia (06°15'N, 75°35'W; 2,750 m). The locality is 140 km north of the noi-lhcrmuosl know n hicality of its apparently closest relative, G. ///. milleri. The holotype was colkvted within the elevational range of G. ///. milleri (1,800-2,800 m), suggesting the two taxa may replace one another geographically. Paul Salaman et al. 9 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Details are presented below for known localities of G. m. milleri. Project BioMap staff and ourselves (*) checked all specimens of G. milleri in the following museums: American Museum of Natural History, New York (AMNH*), Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia (ANSP), Natural History Museum, Tring (BMNH*), Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Nacional, Bogota (ICN*^), Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, USA (CM*) and Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA (MCZ). Recordings from www.xeno-canto.org (XC) were also examined. G. m. milleri is currently confirmed to occur only in the middle section of the Central Cordillera in central Colombia, at the following localities south to north: 1. Reserva Natural de las Aves El Mirador (04°09'N, 75°44'W; 2,750 m), sound-recorded, trapped and photographed by Fundacion ProAves researchers in 2006 and others subsequently (Alonso Quevedo et al.) N. Athanas & F. Lambert: XC 10721, 16777). 2. Rio Toche watershed, municipalities of Cajamarca and Ibague, south-east flank of the Volcan Tolima-Ruiz massif, dpto. Tolima (04°26'N, 75°22'W; 1,800-2,600 m) (Lopez- Lanus et al. 2000). 3. Clarita Botero, above Ibague, dpto. Tolima (04°29'N, 75°13'W; 2,100 m) (M. Moreno- Palacios in litt. 2007). 4. Reserva Natural Ibanasca, Cafion del Rfo Conbeima, dpto. Tolima (04°35'-38'N, 75°14 '-19'W; 2,400-2,800m) (M. Moreno-Palacios & D. A. Bejarno-Bonilla in litt. 2007). 5. Laguneta (type locality), dpto. Quindfo (04°35'N, 75°30'W); specimens at AMNH (111991-94), BMNH (1921.7.3.61, formerly AMNH 111990), MCZ (81785, formerly AMNH 111995)— a small montane forest patch at 2,700-2,800 m on the west slope of the Central Cordillera (Chapman 1912). 6. Above Salento, dpto. Quindfo (04°38'N, 75°34'W; 2,745 m); male collected on 6 November 1911 (AMNH 111996) (Chapman 1917) and two males in April 1942 (ANSP 154007-08). 7. Finca San Miguel, 3 km west of Roncesvalles, dpto. Tolima (04°53'N, 75°30'W' 2,750 m) (Cadena et al. 2007). 8. Ucumari Regional Natural Park, dpto. Risaralda (04°42'N, 75°29'W; 2,200-2,600 m). Surveys in 1994-98 yielded 11 birds trapped and six collected (Universidad del Valle 6171, 6178-82: Kattan & Beltran 1997, 1999). 9. Rfo Blanco, Manizales, dpto. Caldas (05°05'N, 75°25'W; 2,500 m) (ICN 35692; Verhelst et al. 2002, Nieto & Ramirez 2006; B. Davis, D. Bradley, H. van Oosten, A. Spencer & O. Cortes: XC 13896, 17619, 18289, 20505 and 22213). 10. Sancudo {= El Zancudo), 3 km east of Manizales, dpto. Caldas (c.5°05'N, 75°30'W; 2,400 m), where a female was collected (CM 70234) in August 1918. 11. Two 'Bogota' specimens (AMNH 43555, 43559) were presumably collected in the Central Andes. The modelled distribution of G. m. milleri by J. Velasquez (in litt. 2008) using MAXENT 3.0 (Phillips et al. 2006) based on topography and climate layers available from Worldclim (Hijmans et al. 2005) predicts presence north to Antioquia (Fig. 3). Interestingly, there are no geographical barriers (e.g. significant dry valleys or high mountains) preventing contact Figure 2. The Grallmia m. v^/Vcs/ holot\ pe (left three images) and GraUnrui m. milleri paratope (right three images). © Natural History Museum, tring. Paul Salaman et al. 11 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Figure 3. Potential distribution map for G. milleri, by J. Velazquez, using MAXENT 3.0 (Phillips et al. 2006) and showing locations of records of G. milleri and the type locality of G. m. gilesi in Colombia, with potential distribution based on topography and climate layers available from Worldclim (Hijmans et al. 2005). between G. m. milleri and G. m. gilesi, but there is a region showing reduced potential suit- ability for G. milleri between the known range of G. m. milleri and the type locality of G. m. gilesi. Potentially suitable climatic variables for G. milleri are present above Santa Elena, with precipitation (1,887 mm) and temperature (max. 15.3°C) within ranges of these variables at sites where G, m. milleri has been recorded (mean rainfall = 1,769 mm; range = 1,178-2,493 mm; mean temperature = 14.0°C; range = 9.8°C-19.2°C: Hijmans et al 2005). However, G. m. milleri has been recorded to date only on the slopes of c.4,000 m or higher massifs and at lower latitudes. Despite climatic similarity, the pattern of a northern subspecies replacing one found further south in the Central Andes is not uncommon. Examples of montane understorey species showing apparently similar north-south subspecies replacements in the Central Andes include those of Yellow-breasted Brush Finch Atlapetes latinuchus elaeoprorus and A.l. caucae (Donegan & Huertas 2006) and Lacrimose Mountain Tanager Anisognathus lacrymo- Paul Salaman et al. 12 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) sus olivaceiceps and A.l palpebrosus (Zimmer 1944). The Anisognathiis taxa intergrade in dpto. Caldas, but the historical factors underlying these distributions are little studied. Taxonontic rank. — The following statistical methods were suggested by Donegan (2008) as guidelines for assessing diagnosability and rank where two allopatric populations are compared for continuous, normally distributed variables but where, for one population, there is a sample size of only one. hi the formulae below, y is the recorded value for the G. m. gilesi type specimen; and are the sample mean and sample standard deviation of G. m. milleri; and the t value uses one-sided confidence intervals at the percentage specified for the degree of freedom for G. m. milleri when considering the relevant variable. Tests are based on the highly conservative assumption that the G. m. gilesi holotype has unusual biometrics at the highest or lowest 2.5% for each variable studied (whichever is furthest from the G. m. milleri mean). Tests also assume that G. m. gilesi has sunilar sample population variance for the relevant variable to G. m. milleri and that G. m. gilesi does not represent the extreme of a cline, a hypothesis discussed further below. (A) Traditional '75% / 99%' test for subspecies (Amadon 1949, Patten & Unitt 2002): y < ^-(^9.0% + W + ^75.0%) or y > X, + {t^^^^^ + t^^^^^ + L^^J s^. (B) Isler et al.'s (1999) phylogenetic species test (97.5% / 97.5% diagnosability), adapt- ed: y < X — 3s^fg7 or y > x^ + 3s^f^^ . A Welch's f-test to compare means (Level 1 of Donegan 2008) is not assessable where only one datum is available for one population. However, var-covar principal components analysis using PAST vl.46 found the G. m. milleri specimen to fall outside the 95% elhpse for G. m. milleri, using data both from all specimens and from males alone. The G. m. gilesi holotype falls outside the range of the G. m. milleri sample in wing, tail and tarsus lengths, commissure width (males only), tail / tarsus ratio and wing / tarsus ratio. Based on data for both sexes of G. m. milleri (d.f.=9 for G. m. milleri), G. m. gilesi passed the 75% / 99% test for subspecies rank for tarsus length (missing the phylogenetic species test by only 0.2 mm or 0.16fs^). Based on data for males alone (d.f.=4 for G. m. milleri), G. m. gilesi passed the 75% / 99% test for subspecies rank for bill width at gape (missing the phy- logenetic species test by 0.1 mm or O.OSfs^) and tarsus length (missing the phylogenetic species test by 0.3 mm or 0.18fs^). G. m. gilesi would pass a test for phylogenetic species rank for tarsus length for both males and combined data were the holotype assumed to fall with- in the most unusual 5% of the hypothetical G. m. gilesi population (vs. the most imusual 2.5%, as under the present model). Thus, mensural data suggest that G. m. gilesi is at least a subspecies under the Patten & Unitt (2002) 75% / 99% concept, and is also likely a phvloge- netic species on biometrics (Cracraft 1983). Helbig et al. (2002) and Remsen (2005) suggested that, to assess taxonomic rank of allopatric populations, a comparison should be undertaken of the observed differences between (i) candidates for species rank and their possible conspecifics; and (ii) congeners known to be good species. Grallariii is hardly a model group for such comparisons given that ciinvnt species limits are poorly defined and frequently a result of historical momen- tum rather than detailed study (Krabbe & Schulenberg 2003, Remsen et al. 2008). Nonetheless, several cases of morphologically rather similar Grallaria populations consid- ered biological species (due to sympatry or vocal differences) exist, such as Scaled G. giiatoiialciisis and Moiistached Antpittas G. allefii, and G. Injpoleiica and G. flavotincta. In these species-pairs, morphological differences are subjectively rather small. In Grallaricula )iana, the only allopatric populations diagnosable by biometrics also have diagnosablv dif- ferent voices and, as here, tarsus length differed markedly between those populations (Donegan 2008). Paul Salaman et al. 13 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) We conservatively rank G. m. gilesi as a subspecies (allospecies) of G. milleri pending any vocal or molecular data becoming available. Further data might demonstrate G. m. gile- si to be worthy of species rank. Its status should also be re-evaluated as more is learned about the relationship between biometric and vocal variation in Grallaria. Possible other hypotheses. — Describing a new bird taxon based on just one specimen without vocal or molecular data might be considered controversial (e.g. Remsen et al. 2008 comments on Graves 1993). However, the other possible alternatives — an aberrant individual of G. milleri, clinal variation or a hybrid — are unsupported by the available data. Hybridisation is exceptionally rare among suboscines other than the Pipridae (e.g. Marini & Hackett 2002, McCarthy 2006), although one case has been documented in Grallaria (Cadena et al. 2007). Any hybridisation hypothesis would necessarily involve G. milleri and would therefore seem biogeographically unlikely, as there are no records of G. milleri in the northern Central Andes. Furthermore, G. m. gilesi is indistinguishable from some G. m. milleri in plumage, meaning that one possible hybrid parent would have influ- enced only the biometrics of its offspring and left no trace on its plumage. Assuming that a small population of G. m. milleri occurred at or near the type locality of Santa Elena, other possible sympatric Grallaria in the Central Andes (not all confirmed to occur in the north) are Undulated G. squamigera, Chestnut-naped G. nuchalis, Chestnut- crowned G. ruficapilla, Bicoloured G. rufocinerea, Tawny G. quitensis, Scaled G. guatemalensis, Moustached G. alleni, Rufous G. riifula, Plain-backed G. haplonota and White-bellied Antpittas G. hypoleuca. Of these, G. milleri is known to be sympatric only with G. squamigera, G. nuchalis, G. ruficapilla and G. rufocinerea (Kattan & Beltran 1997, Krabbe & Schulenberg 2003) and only G. rufocinerea, G. hypoleuca, G. nuchalis, G. alleni and G. ruficapilla are known from Antioquia (Hilty & Brown 1986, SAO 2003). Sclater's 'confusion species' G. flavotincta is replaced in the Central Andes by G. hypoleuca (Krabbe & Schulenberg 2003), so the former is not a plausible parent species. It is generally expected that hybrids would show intermediate features between their parents (Graves 1990, 1992). No examples of heterosis were noted in the only known case of hybridisation in Grallaria (Cadena et al. 2007); i.e. the only known hybrid Grallaria fell within the range of parent species in biometrics and had intermediate plumage features. Of other Grallaria occurring in the Central Andes, G. squamigera, G. guatimalensis, G. alleni, G. nuchalis, G. rufocinerea and G. ruficapilla are so different in plumage from G. m. gilesi that they can confidently be excluded as possible parents. None of the Grallaria species known to be sympatric with G. milleri bears any real resemblance to G. m. gilesi in plumage. Potential parents with nondescript plumage similar to G. milleri are G. hypoleuca, G. quitensis and G. rufula. However, none of these is known to be sympatric with G. milleri and none is known from the Santa Elena region. G. hypoleuca is a vocal species, currently known in Antioquia only from the more humid northern slope of the Central Andes at rio Force, Anori and Amalfi (Donegan & Salaman 1999), and from older specimens taken at a single locality also on the north slope (Valdivia, Antioquia: USNM 402471-472, FMNH 299492). It has not been recorded at San Sebastian (J. D. Ramirez in litt. 2008), nor is it known from his- toric material taken in the Medellm region or further south in dptos. Quindio or Caldas, despite considerable ornithological work. G. quitensis occurs only in very high-elevation paramo, as does G. rufula. None of these possible hybrid combinations explains G. m. gilesi's morphometric characters. G. hypoleuca (46-49 mm: n=5) and G. quitensis (c.50 mm; n=l: ProAves unpubl. data) have longer, not shorter, tarsi than G. milleri, whilst the Central Andes population of G. rufula is shorter tailed than G. milleri (40.0^2.2 mm; n=3: ProAves unpubl. data) and is smaller bodied (mass 40.4-42.0g; n=3: ProAves unpubl. data). The larg- Paul Salaman et al. 14 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) er body, longer tail and shorter tarsus in G. m. gilesi permit us to discount these h\ brid hypotheses. G. m. gilesi is unlikely to represent an extreme point of clinal variation within G. ni. inil- leri. Bergmann's Rule holds that populations from cooler (here, northern) regions are generally larger bodied. G. m. gilesi has a larger body and longer wing and tail than G. mil- leri, which might reflect this. Individuals measured by Kattan & Beltran (1999) in dpto. Risaralda and the ICN specimen show longer tarsi and sHghtly longer wing lengths on a\ er- age than our dpto. Quindio specimen data, in accordance with Bergmann's Rule or possiblv reflecting shrinkage in older skins. However, G. m. gilesi's considerably shorter tarsus reverses the general trend observed in G. milleri or expected under Bergmann's Rule. Although there are exceptions to Bergmann's Rule in Andean birds and the sample size is small, observed variations in tarsus length are not consistent with a hypothesis of clinal variation. G. m. gilesi is clearly not a case of an aberrant indi\'idual showing 'gigantism', given that its tarsus is shorter than that of G. m. milleri. Sclater (1890) considered the G. m. gilesi holot}pe to be possibly a juvenile. There is some variation in the intensity of rufous plumage in G. m. milleri, with AMNH 111991 and 111994 (the holotype) and the G. m. gilesi holotype being more rufous than other specimens. The more olivaceous plumage of other AMNH specimens and the BMNH specimen ^vas considered by Chapman (1912) to result from traces of juvenile plumage, a hvpothesis sup- ported by the broadly streaked crown of AMNH 111993, clearly a juvenile feature, and its more olivaceous plumage. The pattern of age-related plumage variation in G. m. milleri sug- gests that the G. m. gilesi holotype is probably adult (whilst the BMNH G. m. milleri paratApe is a juvenile) and that Sclater's (1890) note may have been no more than an attempt to explain the differences between it and G. flavotincta. Finally, Tepui Antpitta Myrmothera simplex of the Venezuelan and Guianan tepuis is almost identical in plumage to G. milleri (Lowery & O'Neill 1969), but G. m. gilesi is clearlv not a mislabelled Myrmothera given its long rictal bristles and more stronglv scutellate tarsus. The description of G. m. gilesi is given further weight bv the recent discoverv of an undescribed species of Grallaria by Fundacion ProAves researchers in the northernmost West Andes. Its closest relative appears to be G. milleri, but it differs in a nimiber of plumage and vocal characters. Notably, the undescribed species is larger bodied and longer winged than G. m. milleri (like G. m. gilesi) but does not share the short tarsus of G. m. gilesi. Biogeographic and biometric considerations suggest that the undescribed species mav be closer related to G. m. gilesi than to G. m. milleri. Ecologxj and behaviour. — Beyond its insectivorous diet, per the specimen label, no ecological information is available. Etymology. — The epithet honours O. A. Robert Giles, who has been dedicated to the conservation and study of Colombian a\ ifauna since the earlv 1990s. He has personallv supported the creation of two reserves for threatened birds in Antioquia h\ Fundacion ProAves (Arrierito Antioqueno and Loro Orejiamarillo Bird Reserves) and a further t^vo bird reser\'os elsewhere in Colombia (Reinita Cenileo and Hormiguero de Torcoroma Bird Reserves). Robert has travelled e\tensi\ ely in Colombia and aided Colombian omithologv h\ sponsoring research. Colombia's birds are safer due to his generosit\- and dedication. Paul Salaman et al. 15 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Conservation. — The Cordillera Central of Colombia has undergone massive ecological change as Colombia's prime coffee-growing region and represents one of the most human- altered landscapes in the northern Andes. The extensive deforestation of montane forests in the northern Central Andes justifies immediate conservation action for range-restricted taxa found there. Given that searches for the new taxon in remnant forests in the northern Central Andes failed, there is only a remote possibility that G. m. gilesi is not already extinct. Presently, G. milleri is considered Endangered (EN: Bla+b(iii,v), VU: C2a(i); Dl) with an estimated Extent of Occurrence of 660 km- and known from 2-5 locations (BirdLife hiternational 2008). The information presented here expands the known localities and range of G. milleri, although we believe the species remains Endangered (EN: B2b(ii,iii,v), VU: C2a(i)). G. m. gilesi (when considered separately from G. m. milleri) is best categorised as lUCN Critical under category Dl, based on a precautionary estimate of its population as <50 mature individuals, consistent with the approach to other bird species on the lUCN Red List for which no population is known, threats are intense, but hope remains for survival (S. H. M. Butchart in litt. 2007). As no population of G. m. gilesi is known, this description should not materially affect the lUCN assessment of G. milleri. Acknowledgements We thank Norman Arlott for his beautiful plate. Harry Taylor (BMNH) photographed the specimens in Fig. 2. Jorge Velazquez kindly produced Fig. 3 and discussed ecological issues. Nate Rice (ANSP) and Stephen Rogers (CM) provided photographs and data on G. milleri specimens. Paul Sweet & Peg Hart (AMNH), F. Gary Stiles (ICN) and Nate Rice (ANSP) facilitated access to collections. Funding from the Darwin Initiative (UK) and Conservation International for databasing Colombian museum specimens worldwide under Project BioMap (www.biomap.net) was vital in permitting checking for possibly overlooked Grallaria speci- mens by Juan Carlos Verhelst, Carla Isabel Bohorquez, Diana Arzuza, Andrea Morales and Nigel Cleere. We also thank Nick Athanas, Daniel Bejarno-Bonilla, Carl Downing, Miguel Moreno-Palacios, Sergio Ocampo- Tobon, Alonso Quevedo and the other sound recordists and observers mentioned in the text for providing records of G. milleri. Niels Krabbe, Thomas Schulenberg, Mary LeCroy and Guy Kirwan provided helpful comments on the manuscript. Pablo Florez led the searches for G. milleri in Antioquia, with assistance from Carlos Andres Paez, Sara Ines Lara and David Caro, and supported by Fundacion ProAves and Robert Giles. References: Amadon, D. 1949. The seventy-five per cent rule for subspecies. Condor 51: 250-258. BirdLife International. 2008. Species factsheet: Grallaria milleri. www.birdlife.org (accessed 27 November 2008). Cadena, C. D., Lopez-Lanus, B., Bates, J. M., Krabbe, N., Palacio, J. D., Rice, N. H., Stiles, F. G. & Salaman, P. 2007. A rare case of interspecific hybridization in the tracheophone suboscines: Grallaria nuchalis x G. ruficapilla in a fragmented Andean landscape. Ibis 149: 814-825. Castaho-V., G. J. & Patiho-Z., J. C. 2000. Cambios en la composicion de la avifauna en Santa Elena durante el siglo XX. Cronica Forestal y del Medio Ambiente 15: 139-162. Castaho-V., G. J. & Patiho-Z., J. C. 2007. Composicion de la comuridad de aves en bosques fragmentados en la region de Santa Elena, Andes Centrales Colombianos. Bol. Cient. Centro Museos, Miis. Hist. Nat. (Univ. Caldas) 11: 47-64. Chapman, F. M. 1912. Diagnoses of apparently new Colombian birds. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 31: 139-166. Chapman, F. M. 1917. The distribution of bird-life in Colombia. Bidl. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 36: 1-728. Chesser, R. T. 2004. Molecular systematics of New World suboscine birds. Mol. Phijl. & Evol. 32: 11-24. Cracraft, J. 1983. Species concepts and speciation analysis. Current Orn. 1: 159-187. Cuervo, A. M., Salaman, P. G. W., Donegan, T. M. & Ochoa, J. M. 2001. A new species of piha (Cotingidae: Lipaugus) from the Cordillera Central of Colombia. Ibis 143: 353-368. Donegan, T. M. 2007. A new species of brush finch (Emberizidae: Atlapetes) from the northern Central Andes of Colombia. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 127: 255-268. Donegan, T. M. 2008. Geographical variation and species limits in Slate-crowned Antpitta Grallaricula nana, with two new subspecies from Colombia and Venezuela. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 128: 150-178. Donegan, T. M. & Huertas, B. C. 2006. A new brush-finch in the Atlapetes latinuchus complex from the Yariguies Mountains and adjacent Eastern Andes of Colombia. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 126: 94-116. Donegan T. M. & Salaman P.G.W. (eds.) 1999. Rapid biodiversity assessments and conservation in northeast Antioquia and the Churumbelos highlands. Colombian EBA Project Rep. Ser. 2: www.proaves.org. Paul Salaman et al. 16 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Fjeldsa, J. & Krabbe, N. 1990. Birds of the high Andes. Zool. Mus., Univ. of Copenhagen & Apollo Books, Svendborg. Franco, A. M. & Bravo, G. 2005. Areas importantes para la conservacion de las aves en Colombia. Pp. 117-281 in Boyla, K. & Estrada, A. (eds.) Areas importantes para la conservacion de las aves en los Andes tropicales: sitios prioritarios para la conservacion de la biodiversidad. BirdLife International & Conservation International, Quito. Graves, G. R. 1987. A cryptic new species of antpitta (Formicariidae: Grallaria) from the Peruvian Andes. Wilson Bull. 99: 313-321. Graves, G. R. 1990. Systematics of the "green-throated sunangels" (Aves: Trochilidae): valid taxa or hybrids? Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 103: 6-25. Graves, G. R. 1992. Diagnosis of a hybrid antbird (Phlegopsis nigromaculata x Phlegopsis erythroptera) and the rarity of hybridization among suboscines. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 105: 834-840. Graves, G. R. 1993. Relic of a lost world: a new species of sunangel (Trochilidae: Heliangelus) from 'Bogota'. Auk 110: 1-8. Graves, G. R. 1997. Colorimetric and morphometric gradients in Colombian populations of Dusky Antbird {Cercomacra tyrannina), with a description of a new species Cercomacra parkeri. Pp. 21-36 in Remsen, J. V. (ed.) Studies in Neotropical ornithology honoring Ted Parker. Orn. Monogr. 48. Helbig A. J., Knox, A. G., Parkin, D. T., Sangster, G. & Collinson, M. 2002. Guidelines for assigning species rank. Ibis 144: 518-525. Hijmans, R. J., Cameron, S. E., Parra, J. L., Jones, P. G. & Jarvis, A. 2005. Very high resolution interpolated cli- mate surfaces for global land areas. Intern. J. Climatology 25: 1965-1978. Hilty, S. L. & Brown, W. L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia. Princeton Univ. Press. Irestedt, M., Fjeldsa, J., Johansson, U. S. & Ericson, P. G. P. 2002. Systematic relationships and biogeography of the tracheophone suboscines (Aves : Passeriformes). Mol. Phyl. & Evol. 23: 499-512. Isler, M. L., Isler, P. R. & Whitney, B. M. 1999. Species limits in antbirds. The Myrmotherula surinamensis com- plex. Wilson Bull. 116: 83-96. Kattan, G. H. & Beltran, W. 1997. Rediscovery and status of the Brown-banded Antpitta Grallaria milleri in the Central Andes of Colombia. Bird Conserv. Intern. 7: 367-371. Kattan, G. H. & Beltran, W. 1999. Altitudinal distribution, habitat use, and abundance of Grallaria antpittas in the Central Andes of Colombia. Bird Conserv. Intern. 9: 271-281. Krabbe, N. & Schulenberg, T. S. 2003. Family Formicariidae (ground antbirds). Pp. 748-787 in del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Christie D. A. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol. 8. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Krabbe, N., Agro, D. J., Rice, N. H., Jacome, M., Navarrete, L. & Sornoza M., F. 1999. A new species of antpit- ta (Formicariidae: Grallaria) from the southern Ecuadorian Andes. Auk 116: 882-890. Lopez-Lanus, B., Salaman, P. G. W., Cowley, T., Arango, S. & Renjifo, L. M. 2000. The threatened birds of the rio Toche, Cordillera Central, Colom.bia. Cotinga 14: 17-23. Lowery, G. H. & O'Neill, J. P. 1969. A new species of antpitta from Peru and a revision of the subfamily Grallariinae. Auk 86: 1-12. Marini, M. A. & Hackett. S. J. 2002. A multifaceted approach to the characterization of an intergeneric hybrid manakin (Pipridae) from Brazil. Auk 119: 1114-1120. McCarthy, E. M. 2006. Handbook of avian hybrids. Oxford Univ. Press, New York. Meyer de Schauensee, R. 1966. The birds of Colombia and adjacent areas of South and Central America. Livingston Publishing Co., Narberth, PA. Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell® soil color charts. GretagMacbeth LLC, New York. Nieto-R., M. & Ramirez, J. D. 2006. Notas sobre aves de tierras altas que siguen marchas de hormigas arrier- ras para su alimentacion, en la reserva natural Rio Blanco, Manizales, Caldas. Bol Soc. Antioqueha Orn. 16: 59-66. Orme, C. D. L., Davies, R. G., Burgess, M., Eigenbrod, F., Pickup, N., Olson, V. A., Webster, A. J., Ding, T.-S., Rasmussen, P. C, Ridgely, R. S., Stattersfield, A. J., Bennett, P. M., Blackburn, T. M., Gaston, K. J. & Owens, I. P. F. 2005. Global hotspots of species richness are not congruent with endemism or threat. Nature ^3(r. 1016-1019. Patten, M. A. & Unitt, P. 2002. Dingnosability versus mean differences of Sage Sparrows subspecies. Auk 119: 26-35. Phillimorc, A. B., Orme, C. D. L., Davies, R. G., Hadfield, J. D., Reed, W. J., Gaston, K. J., Freckleton, R. P. & Owens, 1. I'. 1'. 2007. Biogeographical basis of recent phenotypic divergence among birds: a global studv of subspi>c ii-s richness. Fvolution 61: 942-957. Phillips, S. j., AnJiM son, R. I'. Schnpire, R. E. 2006. Maximum entropv modelling of species geographic dis- tributions. /c.)/. A l(',/(7///;x 190: 231-259. Ramirez, J. D. 2006. Redoscubrimiento de Grallaria rufocincrca (Formicariidae) en el Valle de Aburra, Antiot-juia, Colombia. Bol. Soc. Antioqucna Orn. 16: 17-23. Remsen, J. V. 2005. Pattern, process, and rigor meet classification. Auk 122: 403-^H3. Paul Salaman et al. 17 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Remsen, J. V., Cadena, C. D., Jaramillo, A., Nores, M., Pacheco, J. F., Robbins, M. B., Schulenberg, T. S., Stiles F. G., Stotz, D. F. & Zimmer, K. J. 2008. A classification of the bird species of South America (version 24 March 2008). www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCBaseline.html. Rice, N. H. 2005a. Phylogenetic relationships of antpitta genera (Passeriformes: Formicariidae). Auk 122: 673-683. Rice, N. H. 2005b. Further evidence for paraphyly of the Formicariidae (Passeriformes). Condor 107: 910-915. Salaman, P. G. W., Donegan, T. M. & Cuervo, A. M. 2002. New distributional bird records from Serrani'a de San Lucas and the adjacent Central Cordillera of Colombia. Bull Brit. Orn. CI. 122: 285-304. SAO. 2003. Aves del Valle de Aburrd. Second edn. Soc. Antioquena de Orn., Medellm. Schulenberg, T. S. & Williams, M. D. 1982. A new species of antpitta (Grallaria) from northern Peru. Wilson Bull. 94:105-113. Sclater, P. L. 1855. Descriptions of some new species of ant-thrushes (Formicariinae) from Santa Fe de Bogota. Proc. Zool. Soc. Loud. 1855: 88-90. Sclater, P. L. 1860. On some new or little-known birds from the Rio Napo. Proc. Zool. Soc. Loud. 1859: 440-441. Sclater, P. L. 1874a. [Mr. Sclater exhibited and pointed out ... ] Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1873: 728-729. Sclater, P. L. 1874b. On Peruvian birds collected by Mr. Whitely. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1873: 779-784. Sclater, P. L. 1877. Description of two new antbirds of the genus Grallaria, with a list of the known species of the genus. Ibis (4)1: 437-451. Sclater, P. L. 1890. Catalogue of the birds in the British Museum, vol. 15. Trustees of the Brit. Mus., London. Sclater, P. L. & Salvin, O. 1871. On Venezuelan birds collected by Mr. A. Goering. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1870: 779-788. Sclater, P. L. & Salvin, O. 1876. On new species of Bolivian birds. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1876: 352-358. Sclater, P. L. & Salvin, O. 1879. On the birds collected by the late Mr. T. K. Salmon in the State of Antioquia, United States of Colombia. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1879: 486-550. Sclater, P. L. & Salvin, O. 1880. On new birds collected by Mr. C. Buckley in eastern Ecuador. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1880: 155-161. Stattersfield, A. J., Crosby, M. J., Long, A. J. & Wege, D. C. 1998. Endemic Bird Areas of the world: priorities for biodiversity conservation. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Stiles, F. G. 1992. A new species of antpitta (Formicariidae: Grallaria) from the eastern Andes of Colombia. Wilson Bull. 104: 389-399. Verhelst, J. C, Rodriguez, J. C, Orrego, O., Botero, J. E., Lopez, J. A., Franco, V. M. & Pfeifer, A. M. 2002 Birds of Manizales, Caldas, Colombia. Biota Colombiana 2: 265-283. Zimmer, J. T. 1944. Studies of Peruvian birds, no. XL VIII: the genera Iridosornis, Delothraupis, Anisognathus, Buthraupis, Compsocoma, Dubusia and Thraupis. Amer. Mus. Novit. 1262: 1-21. Addresses: Paul Salaman, World Land Trust-US, 2806 P Street NW, Washington DC, USA, e-mail: psalaman® worldlandtrust-us.org. Thomas M. Donegan, Fundacion ProAves, 33 Blenheim Road, Caversham, Reading RG4 7RT, UK, e-mail: tdonegan@proaves.org. Robert Prys-Jones, Bird Group, Dept. of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, Akeman Street, Tring, Herts. HP23 6AP, UK, e-mail: rpp@nhm.ac.uk © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Jan-Hendrik Becking 18 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) The Battels and other egg collections from the island of Java, Indonesia, with corrections to earlier publications of A. Hoogerwerf by Jan-Hendrik Becking^ Received 29 Januan/ 2008 Summary. — The oology of Java has been described in two longer publications bv A. Hoogerwerf (Hoogenverf 1949a, Hellebrekers & Hoogen\ erf 1967). Here I present unequivocal proof that many of the clutches mentioned in those publications, and presented by Hoogerwerf as ha\^ing been collected by himself, had been stolen b\' him from other collections, namely those of the Bartels family, of P. J. Bouma, and of my brother R. W. Becking and myself. Hoogerw^erf doubtless accessed all three collections while unofficially employed at the Bogor Zoological Museum during and immediately after the Second World War. To conceal what he had done Hoogerwerf also falsified associated collecting data. One can onh- conclude that information on the oology of Java published by A. Hoogerwerf, or included in his collection now at the RMNH in Leiden, is untrust^vorthy. Furthermore the \'alue of especially the Bartels egg collection is much greater than e^'en experts think. I do not believe that M. P. J. Hellebrekers was in anv wa\' aware of what his co-author Hoogerwerf had done. A request bv me 40 years ago to have this information published was refused by the editorial board of the journal concerned, who considered the subject too sensitive. 'Al is de leugen nog zo snel, de waarheid achterhaalt haar wel.' (Dutch proverb) [No matter how fast the lie, the truth will catch up with it.] Following the Second World War, two publications appeared by A. Hoogerw^erf about the birds of Java and their eggs. The first, Hoogerwerf (1949a), was largelv prepared ^vhile he worked at the Bogor Zoological Museum as a guest and refugee-in-hiding during the Japanese occupation of Java, and while he worked at the nearb\" Department of Forestn" as Nature Conservation Officer after the war. Almost 20 years later, back in The Netherlands, Hoogerwerf published a follow-up (Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf 1967). Therein, Hellebrekers described the Bartels egg collection, by then held in the Rijks Museum voor Natuurlijke Historic in Leiden (hereafter RMNH), whilst Hoogenverf described his o\vn egg collection, which went to RMNH shortiy after his death in Februar}- 1977. In both pub- lications Hoogerwerf stated explicitiy that all the egg material mentioned by him, if not otherwise indicated, was from his own collection, taken mainh* in West Java (Hoogenverf 1949a: 1, Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf 1967: 3). As a former co-worker of the Bartels family, I possess much material such as collecting notes and very detailed lists of the Bartels egg collection, which I studied prior to the onset of war in the Pacific in December 1941. My aim here is to show that a ven" important part of Hoogerwerf 's descriptions and colour plates of eggs were deri\-ed from the collections of others, especially the Bartels'. Moreover, Hoogenverf apparentiy remo\ ed manv eggs from the Bartels collection, especialh' those of rare species, and incorporated them into his own. He did this while the Bartels collection was at the Bogor museum during the Japanese occu- Jan-Hendrik Becking 19 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) pation. Hoogerwerf demonstrably also made unauthorised use of other egg collections present in the Bogor museum. To hide these facts Hoogerwerf gave the eggs he appropriat- ed new numbers and false dates and localities, for which he often simply inserted the place where he used to live, i.e. the lower slopes of Mt. Salak near Bogor. These incorrect dates and localities were subsequently published in Hoogerwerf (1949a) and Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967). Following publication of the latter, I wrote an article in English, similar to the present one, and submitted it to a Dutch ornithological journal. In the covering letter I suggested that Hoogerwerf be permitted to see my comments and respond publicly. The initial writ- ten reaction from the editorial board, dated 2 October 1969, assured me of publication, although the procedure would be long. It was agreed that Hoogerwerf should be asked to respond within three months, in English. However, it took him six months and he wrote it in Dutch, making it unpublishable in the journal concerned, as Hoogerwerf would have known. In addition, it was more than three times the length of my own manuscript (52 single-spaced pages). I was not allowed to see it by Hoogerwerf, but I obtained it very much later from the editors. I could only agree that it was indeed unpublishable, and not only because it was written in Dutch. The editors declined to publish my article for two main reasons. First, to publish both articles (c.70 pages) would be too expensive. Second, my article was of a very sensitive nature. Subsequently, I received a personal letter (still in my personal archive) from the main editor, stating that it had been a very difficult decision, as they did not want to appear to take sides. A request of mine to Prof. L. D. Brongersma, Director of RMNH, to appoint an impartial commission to study the disagreement between Hoogerwerf and myself, was unsuccessful. Ernst & Hans Bartels, who had read my manuscript and could confirm some of my statements, wrote to the editor of the Dutch journal concerned on 6 May 1970 (in my archive), stating that the editor could not leave this case unresolved and also asking him to appoint a commission to investigate the problem. They received no reply. As a close friend of the Bartels family and a co-worker on their collection, I feel I owe it to them to try once more to re-establish the real and enormous value of their egg collection. It is also important to show that information on the oology of Java published by Hoogerwerf, which has found its way into many important ornithological handbooks, is untrustworthy. I therefore describe here the historical context and the original collections involved. I give examples of clutches affected by Hoogerwerf's misdeeds, and discuss the implications for what is known of the oology of Java. Historical context After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the Netherlands followed the USA and declared war on Japan on 8 December 1941. All Dutch men of military age in the Dutch East Indies, trained or not, were called up to serve in the Royal Dutch East Indies Army (KNIL). The ornithologists / biologists Dr M. Bartels Jr., Dr A. C. V. van Bemmel, P. J. Bouma, A. Hoogerwerf, J. G. Kooiman, A. J. R. Lonsain, J. J. Ter Pelkwijk and G. F. H. W. Rengers Hora Siccama were among those drafted. Of these M. Bartels Jr., Bouma, Lonsain, Ter Pelkwijk and Rengers Hora Siccama did not survive the war. Until he was drafted into the army, Hoogerwerf was employed as Nature Conservation Officer in the Department of Forestry of the Netherlands East Indies. The Department of Forestry was also in Bogor, but organisationally quite separate from the Zoological Museum. Shortly after the unconditional surrender of KNIL to the Japanese army on 8 March 1942, the Japanese placed Prof. T. Nakai, a botanist and plant taxonomist, in charge Jan-Hendrik Becking 20 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) of both the Royal Bogor Botanical Gardens (Kebun Raya) and the Bogor Zoological Museum (within the gardens). Soon afterwards Hoogerwerf reappeared in Bogor in civilian clothes and offered his services to the Japanese. At Hoogerwerfs own suggestion, Nakai permitted him to work in the Bird Division of the Zoological Museum. There was a supposed vacan- cy there as its head, Dr van Bemmel, was by then a prisoner of war and had been taken to work in the coal mines in Japan. Hoogerwerf thus never held an official position at the Bogor Zoological Museum, but, like several other Europeans, worked there only on suffer- ance from its director Lieftinck and from the Japanese while they were in power. When the Dutch temporarily returned to power in Indonesia in 1947, Hoogerwerf returned to his old position as Nature Conservation Officer in the Department of Forestry. He moved betw^een Indonesia and the Netherlands until 1957, when he relocated to Dutch New Guinea and later permanently to the Netherlands (Voous 1995: 278-280). Because my father was working next door as Head of the Department of Forestry, I had been in and out of the museum since primary school. During the school holidays in 1937, when I was 13, 1 was taught to prepare bird skins under the tutelage of P. F. Franck, head taxidermist of the Bogor museum. Later, in 1940^1, I was asked by the then director (1931-56) of the museum, M. A. Lieftinck, to collect certain bird species rare or lacking in the collection, using a small rifle. When invasion by the Japanese seemed imminent in December 1941, 1 was given an unpaid position at the museum, in the hope of safeguarding me as junior civilian from possible internment by the Japanese. I was 17 at the time. This position I held until late August 1945, when I left Indonesia for the University of Leiden. Before the war, in 1937, 1 also came to know Max Bartels Jr., and was in close contact with him from 1939 until December 1941. Together we undertook many excursions to Java's montane forests, the lowland forests along the south coast of West Java (Pelabuanratu region), and the cliff islands along this coast. I had free access to his collection to measure bird skins and eggs, and to take notes. He, my brother Rudolf and I conducted a livelv, near- weekly correspondence in which we exchanged and shared bird observations and egg acquisition data. Moreover, my brother and I were frequently allowed to study the Bartels collection at his home at Ciparay. I therefore became very familiar with this collection, and measured many of its eggs during this period. The egg collections involved During the Pacific War, three private egg collections found refuge at the Bogor Zoological Museum because of war circumstances. The Bartels collection. — This was started by Max (M. E. G.) Bartels Sr., who was bom on 24 February 1871 at Bielefeld, Westphalia, Germany. In 1895, at the age of 24, he came to Java to work as a planter for the agro-industrial company Crone and started collecting already en route from Jakarta to his new post near Surabaya in East Java. The next vear, 1896, he moved to Pasir Datar near Sukabumi (West Java), where he was appointed manager of the 'Pangerango' Tea Estate, on the south-west slope of Mt. Pangrango, at c.1,000 m. He stayed there for the rest of his working life. Only after retiring in late 1928 did he mo\ e to Ciparav, on a nearby ridge, where he died on 7 April 1934. Max Bartels Sr. married Lien Maurenbrecher, originally an elementar\- school teacher, but also a gifted painter of natural subjects including birds. Thev had three sons: Max Bartels Jr. (/'. 1902), Ernst {b. 1904) and Hans {b. 1906). All three were keen naturaHsts and through many expeditions all over Java helped expand the family collections with bird observations and notes, skins, nests and eggs, and sometimes mammal skins. Max Jr. Jan-Hendrik Becking 21 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) obtained a Ph.D. in biology from the University of Bern in Switzerland, and in 1931 he returned to Java to work as an independent ornithologist and mammalogist. On his father's death in 1934 Max Jr. assumed curatorship of the family collections, which were housed at his home at Ciparay and which he and his brothers continued to expand. In December 1941 Max and Hans were drafted into KNIL and soon after the capitula- tion of the Dutch army they were sent as prisoners of war to work on the notorious Burma railway for the Japanese. Their brother Ernst was imprisoned somewhat later and taken to the Cimahi civilian concentration camp near Bandung. The Bartels collection remained at Ciparay on his explicit wish, as also explained to Lieftinck, who approached Max Jr. about this as soon as war broke out. ]n February-March 1944 the attention of the Indonesian police was drawn to zinc-clad containers, so-called 'Cambridge cans', being offered for sale on the black market at Sukabumi. Because the Bartels family had been living very close to Sukabumi for two gen- erations, their collecting activities were well known locally. It was therefore rather easy for the Sukabumi police to trace these containers to the house of Max Jr. at Ciparay, where they had been used for protecting the family's zoological collections. In both the house and the storehouses where the zoological collections were held the police noticed signs of burglary and duly informed the Bogor museum. Around the same time, in February-March 1944, there had been a military as well as a political change in Indonesia. The tide had turned against the Japanese, their army was on the defensive, even in retreat. To strengthen the army the Japanese authorities promised, and actually proclaimed, the liberation of Indonesia, if the Indonesians were willing to fight with them against the enemy. In this way they were able to recruit Indonesian soldiers and civilian workers for the army in their fight against the Allies (c/. de Jong 1985: 515, 912, 932). As part of this political shift, all governmental and administrative fimctions — thus also the management of the Bogor museum — passed into Indonesian hands. In reaction to the news from the Sukabumi police, the new museum management decided to evacuate the Bartels collection to Bogor. This was to be supervised by Abdul Samat, then in the museum's service, but previously Max Jr.'s head taxidermist (see Becking 1989: 227). The Indonesians asked Prof. Nakai for military protection to safeguard the expe- dition, because roads outside the cities were not safe at that time. The collection was transported to the museum in four trips, each accompanied by two Japanese truck drivers and an armed Japanese officer (none of them interested in zoological collections or involved in their packing). When Hoogerwerf heard about this, he offered his help to Abdul Samat. Although Samat initially accepted his help, Hoogerwerf was barred from joining the final two trips, because he was apparently more interested in the papers, manuscripts and notes of the Bartels family than in packing bird skins (A. Samat pers. comm.). Hoogerwerf indeed acknowledged in a letter to Lieftinck, dated 27 February 1954, that he had been barred from joining these two trips (copy of this letter in my possession). Therefore, Hoogerwerf 's claim that he rescued the Bartels collection, cited by Voous (1995: 204) and others, is untrue. Max Bartels Jr. died as prisoner of war of the Japanese in the 'Chung Kai' prisoner camp in Thailand on 6 October 1943. His younger brother Hans, who also worked on the Burma railway but in another camp, survived the war. Their brother Ernst also survived. In April 1946 the Bartels collection was sent by truck from the Bogor museum to Jakarta and subsequently by boat to the Netherlands, where it arrived at Leiden in September / October 1946. The Bartels collection comprised at that time 14,643 bird skins of Javan birds, more than 4,000 eggs of Javan birds, and more than 500 nests (see documents on the valua- tion of the collection in June / July 1948 by L. Coomans de Ruiter, lodged at RMNH). The entire collection was sold to RMNH for NLG 77,504 on 25 May 1954, after very protracted Jan-Hendrik Becking 22 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) (eight years!) negotiations with the remaining two Bartels brothers, primarily Ernst. The Bartels egg collection was officially incorporated into the museum on 1 July 1954, when accession cards were filled out. In 1969-70, under the curatorship of G. F. Mees, I was permitted to inspect the Bartels collection, its eggs as well as its bird skins. The Bouma collection. — Around 1937 the P. J. Bouma egg collection from Java had become de facto part of the Bartels collection. Bouma was for many years a forest manager in West Java (Sumurkondang and Cileduk) and later Central Java (Gundih or Gundik). Gundih (07°12'S, 110°53'E) was his last posting on Java, and where he undertook most of his collecting. He and Max Bartels Jr. were long-time friends who undertook many excursions together (see, e.g., Bouma 1932, 1934, Bartels 1937, Bartels & Bouma 1937). In 1937, a year before the Forestry Department transferred Bouma from Java to Samarinda in Borneo, he and Max Jr. agreed that Bouma's egg collection from Java should be incorporated into the Bartels collection. In the year before Bouma's departure and in the three years before the Pacific War start- ed, many of Bouma's eggs were gradually incorporated into the Bartels collection by Max Jr. The clutches were all from Gundih. Examples are eggs of Chestnut-breasted Malkoha Rhamphococcyx ciirvirostris, collected 18 March 1936-8 May 1936, 23 clutches totalling 44 eggs (RMNH 39004-39017, 39021-39029); Green Peafowl Pavo muticus, 31 October 1935 (RMNH 29765); Brush Cuckoo Cacomantis variolosus, 10 March 1936 (RMNH 388965); Brown Boobook Ninox scutulata, 3 May 1936 (RMNH 39070); and Richard's Pipit Anthiis novaesee- landiae, 17 May 1936 (RMNH 39473). During the operation to remove the Bartels collection to Bogor in February-March 1944, Hoogerwerf visited the Bartels' house at Ciparay under the supervision of Abdul Samat. Although Hoogerwerf thus knew of the origin of the Bouma collection, in discussing its contents (Hoogerwerf 1949a: 2, 4) he never mentioned that the collection actually came from the private house of Max Bartels Jr. at Ciparay. And, instead of negotiating with the own- ers of the Bartels collection (the surviving brothers Ernst and Hans), Hoogerw^erf only contacted P. J. Bouma's brother, J. P. Bouma, in the Netherlands, who had never been in Indonesia and was unacquainted with the actual situation there. J. P. Bouma was probably not informed by Hoogerwerf about P. J. Bouma's transferral of his egg collection to the Bartels collection before the war. At Hoogerwerf's suggestion, J. P. Bouma thus agreed to donate his brother's egg collection to the Bogor museum, where it came under Hoogerwerf's care and ultimately, in part, into his possession. Proof of P. J. Bouma's transfer of his egg collection lies in the incorporation of a consid- erable number of Bouma's eggs into the Bartels collection, species by species, well before Bouma's departure for Borneo and long before World War II (e.g. all of the clutches from Gundih cited above). Complete incorporation could not take place once the war had start- ed, because Max Jr. was by then in the army, from which both he and Bouma did not return. Moreover, Bouma had an extensive collection of over 1,000 Java bird specimens, many pre- pared by Max Jr.'s staff and originally also stored in the latter's house. This collection Bouma took with him to Borneo in 1938. That he did not also take his egg collection pro- vides further proof that it had been donated to Dr Max Bartels Jr. In February 1953 Lieftinck asked the German ornithologist J. E. Jany, then working at the Bogor museum, to provide the Bouma collection with labels and to register it on a card index. Jany found that many of Bouma's teakwood trays had empty egg boxes, and Lieftinck wrote to Hoogerwerf for an explanation. Hoogerv\^erf (then at the Forestry Jan-Hendrik Becking 23 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Department) replied by return (13 March 1953) that the Bouma collection had been like that when he saw it for the first time at Ciparay. The Becking collection. — This egg collection of Javan birds was started in 1936-37 by my older brother Rudolf W. Becking and myself. It comprised c. 1,500 clutches by the time the Japanese forces approached Java. In 1938, 1 also started a small private skin collection, which at the time of the Japanese invasion numbered c. 150-200 specimens. During the war our egg and bird skin collections were stored at the Bird Division of the Bogor museum, with Dr Lieftinck's consent. The collection was taxonomically arranged and all clutches were in separate boxes. Although, after August 1945, 1 did not return to Bogor until many years later (between 1971 and 2001 I revisited Indonesia 12 times), my brother, still in Indonesia, reclaimed the collection from the museum in April 1947 and, when he finally received it, noted that many egg boxes had been emptied. This had clearly been done selec- tively, since it was particularly the boxes with clutches of Accipitridae and Falconidae, of Pavo miiticus and of many smaller rare species that were empty. The Hoogerwerf collection. — Finally, there is Hoogerwerf's private egg collection, which he described in Hoogerwerf (1949a) and in Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967). Following Hoogerwerf's death on 5 February 1977, the collection was donated to RMNH by his widow, and was incorporated into the museum collection on 27 April 1977, when accession cards were completed. The present curator of birds at RMNH, H. van Grouw, kindly allowed me to examine the collection in 2005-07. Relevant written material Besides the egg collections, important evidence is provided by documentation of the various collections involved. In addition to Hoogerwerf's oological publications (Hoogerwerf 1949a, 1950a,b, Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf 1967), I have in my possession the following original manuscripts, or in one case (C) copies of the original writings. A. — Three handwritten lists of clutches present in the Bartels collection until 1927, written by Hans Bartels. One list is nearly complete, with only a few species lacking. (See Fig. 1, nos. 1-3, Fig. 2, nos. 4-6, Fig. 3, nos. 7-8, Fig. 4, nos. 10, 11, 13-14, Fig. 5, no. 15.) B. — Two handwritten lists of eggs collected by Hans Bartels during his 'sabbatical year', which his father gave him to observe birds and collect eggs of species not yet present in the Bartels collection (see Becking 2001), before starting planter's training in Deventer, the Netherlands. The two lists cover the periods 1 March 1927-2 September 1927 and 3 September 1927-2 March 1928. (See Fig. 3, no. 9.) C. — Letters by Hans Bartels at Sukabumi to his brother Max Jr. in Bern, Switzerland, where the latter was studying biology. These letters, dated 10 April 1927 to 2 July 1928, contain much discussion about bird observations and egg acquisitions, including new records for the Bartels collection. (Copies only; the originals are in the K. H. Voous archives in the Artis Library, Amsterdam.) (See Fig. 1, no. 3a, Fig. 2, nos. 4a, 5a, Fig. 3, no. 9a.) D. — A daily acquisition list of eggs handwritten by Max Bartels Jr., covering the period 6 September 1940-23 May 1941. (See Fig. 4, no. 12, Fig. 5, no. 16.) E. — A daily acquisition list of eggs (E,a) and notes and notebooks (E,b) handwritten by Max Bartels Jr., covering the period 1932-36. (See Fig. 2, no. 6a, Fig. 3, no. 6b.) Jan-Hendrik Becking 24 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) V X K X ^ ^ ^ ^ 65! V %t s > ^ »^ ^1 i -5 -5 I Jan-Hendrik Becking 25 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) F. — Some of the near-weekly letters by Max Bartels Jr. to my brother Rudolf and myself during 1939-41, mentioning and discussing additions to the collection. Many letters are partially missing or severely damaged by unknown events in August 1945- April 1946 at the Bogor museum. My brother Rudolf saved about ten letters in April 1947 when he retrieved our private collection from Bogor. G. — Notes and measurements of eggs in the Bartels collection made by me during my stays at Ciparay with Max Bartels Jr. (1939-41). H. — Notes concerning egg measurements, fresh weights and shell weights of eggs held in the Becking collection. Typescript with some handwriting by my brother and myself, and also by my father, who taught us to work more systematically and to list collection data for each species separately in well-organised separate files. (See Fig. 5, no. 25, Fig. 6, nos. 26-27, Fig. 7, nos. 28-30, Fig. 8, no. 31.) Examples of removed eggs and altered data Considerations of space limit me to examples for only 31 species in this paper. Many others could, however, also be cited. Of the examples, 17 concern the Bartels collection, seven the Bouma collection and seven the Becking collection. For each of species nos. 1-18 and for no. 25 I first cite the relevant information about the clutch or clutches concerned, as presented in (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a, on Hoogerwerf s own collection), (b) Hellebrekers in Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967; on the Bartels collection), and (c) Hoogerwerf in Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967; again on Hoogerwerf 's own collection). I also mention (d) the clutches of each species present in Hoogerwerf's own egg collection as it came to RMNH a few months after his death. Note that in Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967) Hoogerwerf's remarks about a particular species always directly follow those of Hellebrekers, so the relevant page is given only for Hellebrekers; note also that, for brevity, (b) and (c) are referred to in the case study headings below simply as Hellebrekers (1967) and Hoogerwerf (1967). Square brackets [ . . . ] denote translations; 2/1 means two clutches of one egg, 4/2 means four clutches of two eggs, etc.; the x symbol in Hoogerwerf's tables signifies egg- laying or breeding data not based on clutches present m the collection concerned (see Hoogerwerf 1949a: 5, footnote). Following these entries, inconsistencies between the four data sources, with other sources and occasionally with other writings of Hoogerwerf, are discussed. An alternative explanation for the origin of the clutches concerned is given and supported with references to the unpublished mss. A-H listed above. Relevant entries in these manuscripts are pre- sented in Figs. 1-8. Where scientific names have changed these are indicated. Captions to figures on opposite page Figure 1. Egg collection data m manuscripts of the Bartels family concerning (1) Javan Lapwing VnneUiis macropterus (= Xiphidiopteriis ciicuUatiis), (2) Bronze-winged Jacana Metopidius imiicus and (3 and 3a) Crested Goshawk Accipiter trivirgatus (= Astur trivirgatiis); (1-3) from ms. A, three handwritten lists of clutches present in the Bartels collection until 1927, written by Hans Bartels; (3a) from ms. C, letters by Hans Bartels at Sukabumi to his brother Max Jr. in Bern, Switzerland, dated 10 April 1927-2 July 1928. Figure 2. Egg collection data in manuscripts of the Bartels family concerning (4 and 4a) Spotted Kestrel Falco moluccensis {- Cerchneis occidentalis or F. occidentalis), (5 and 5a) Oriental Hobby F. severiis and (6 and 6a) Crested Serpent Eagle Spilornis cheela (= S. bacha); (4, 5 and 6) from ms. A, three handwritten lists of clutches present in the Bartels collection until 1927, written by Hans Bartels; (4a and 5a) from ms. C, letters by Hans Bartels at Sukabumi to his brother Max Jr. in Bern, Switzerland, dated 10 April 1927-2 July 1928; (6a) from ms. E,a, a daily acquisition list of eggs handwritten by Max Bartels Jr., covering the period 1932-36. Jan-Hendrik Becking 27 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Significance of the egg measurements Length and width measurements of the same egg may vary due to 'read-off error, indi- vidual measurement error, and operator bias. Acceptable differences in measurements for the same egg by different operators are c.1% for egg length, and 1.5-2.0% for egg width (pers. obs.). Of the 21 species mentioned here for which Hoogerwerf and Hellebrekers pro- vide sufficient egg measurements, the average spread in length, i.e. the difference between the shortest and longest egg, is 7.7% (and up to 16%). Fifteen of 21 species show a spread in length of more than 4.9%, five times the measurement error of 1%. The average spread in width is 5.1% (up to 9.0%). Fifteen of 21 species show a spread in length of 3.0% or greater. Length and width measurements published by Hoogerwerf for eggs of these 15 species are presented below. Hoogerwerf claimed that these eggs were all collected by him. However, the length mui width measurements of these more than 100 eggs of species with quite variable egg dimensions, can be matched, to within less than the measurement error of 1-2%, with the measurements of eggs missing from collections under Hoogerwerf's care. The measurements match not only egg by egg, but also clutch by clutch. The chances that Hoogerwerf collected precise duplicates for all these eggs and clutches are nil. The only log- ical conclusion is that Hoogerwerf took these eggs from the collections involved and presented them as collected by himself, which is corroborated by the presence, in Hoogerwerf's collection, of eggs from other collections that are individually identifiable because of their extreme dimensions, unusual markings, the presence of a scar, or the pres- ence on the shell of remnants of lettering from an earlier label. The B artels collection 1. JAVAN LAPWING Vanellus rnacropterus (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 58): [Examined material: three eggs, clutch size four eggs, measurements one egg: 44.30 x 32.90, breeding season May (1), June (x)]. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 34): 'Bartels: 4/1, 1/2, 1/4; May (1), June (5); Rawah Tangerang (1), Cabang Bungin (5), West Java'. Gives measurements and weights of all ten eggs. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): '1 / 2; June; Citarum estuary, near Jakarta, West Java. Measurements (2): 47.2 X 30.6, 47.8 x 31.8; weight (1) 1.709. For two previously recorded breeding dates and three earlier measured eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 58-59)'. Captions to figures on opposite page Figure 3. Egg collection data in manuscripts of the Bartels family concerning (6b) Crested Serpent Eagle Spilornis cheela (= S. bido) (see arrows), (7) Javan Owlet Glaiicidiwn castanopteriim, (8) Orange-breasted Trogon Harpactes oreskios, and (9 and 9a) White-bellied Woodpecker Dryocopiis javensis (= Thripoimx javensis); (6b) from ms. E, b, notes and notebooks handwritten by Max Bartels Jr., covering the period 1932-36; (7 and 8) from ms. A, three handwritten lists of clutches present in the Bartels collection until 1927, written by Hans Bartels; (9) from ms. B, two handwritten lists of eggs collected by Hans Bartels during his 'sabbatical year', covering the periods 1 March 1927-2 September 1927 and 3 September 1927-2 March 1928; (9a) from ms. C, letters by Hans Bartels at Sukabumi to his brother Max Jr. in Bern, Switzerland, dated 10 April 1927-2 July 1928. Figure 4. Egg collection data in manuscripts of the Bartels family concerning (10) Rufous Woodpecker Celeus brachyurus (= Micropternus brachyurus), (11) Banded Broadbill Eurylaimus javanicus, (12) Wreathed Hornbill Rhyticeros undidatus (see arrows), (13) Large Wood Shrike Tephrodomis gularis (= T. virgatus) and (14) Scaly Thrush Zoothera dauma (= Oreocichla horsfieldi); (10, 11, 13 and 14) from ms. A, three handwritten lists of clutches present in the Bartels collection until 1927, written by Hans Bartels; (12) from ms. D, a daily acquisition list of eggs handwritten by Max Bartels Jr., covering the period 6 September 1940-23 May 1941. Jan-Hendrik Becking 28 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) c CO -p 2: • «> E -t^ I. E • 0 CD a <-i » in O. I. t( 1. .'1 "A -H c i; kO O" • «! C O 1 1 ; -=.0 3 - CU 3 • •a *> u t> 1 *> m e O C -H o. c 0) S OB) c o c CO a. E- o n Ca O gM CO E ir t) © ■ fcO o ,c t it- r. E > > . i ; i « 3 ■P a D. » o tS V. « S t- o o ^ 1? it « o M o CM • 43 •-( « c O «) O O < d CJ -♦3 it i 2 •I t ■I -« ■ l^-^l— ^— ^— ^ ^ ^ ^ %v I 1, i i ^ V V ^ V C V- U," ^" 1 1 !i x< £~ 1 i 1. : 11 bC c; C c • e e t- - = o -( • • -5 ■» > e c > - -T-S E U>(- T> •E C' fa'' E — 5 C C ••CO* • o c c = oc !• i £ E 1 *< ^ 1 ci 1 - 1 ^1 1 Jan-Hendrik Becking 29 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: two clutches: 1/2 '13.06.1940, Citarum delta, W. Java' (RMNH 75549) and 1/1 'c.l940, Citarum delta, W. Java', with no further particulars (RMNH 75548). Hoogerwerf (1949a) gave little information for the three eggs in his collection. In Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967) he gave a locality for the collection of one two-egg clutch, but only a collection month, no precise date. In his own collection, at his death ten years later, there were two clutches, 1/2 and 1/1, of this endemic and then probably already extinct species, with a precise collection date for one, but only an approximate year for the other. Hoogerwerf gave no indication that these clutches were not taken by him, yet the col- lection information is very limited. All this casts doubt on the true origin of these eggs. That the V. macropteriis eggs in his collection were not collected by Hoogerwerf also seems probable from a statement by Hoogerwerf in a manuscript entitled 'Birds of Java', updated by him as late as April 1965 and given by his widow to the Zoological Museum in Amsterdam through Dr P. J. H. van Bree, then secretary of the Van Tienhoven Foundation (by which Hoogerwerf had occasionally been employed). On p. 86 Hoogerwerf wrote of V. macropterus: 'We have never observed this species in nature'. In addition Hoogerwerf (1949a) stated that the clutch size is four, but did not indicate that this knowledge came from a collection other than his own. He wrote this after having had access to the Bartels collection during the war, which collection contains the only four-egg clutch of the Javan Lapwing in the world. Furthermore, a photostat of the clutches in Hans Bartels' handwritten list of acquisi- tions up until 1927, ms. A, is presented in Fig. 1, no. 1, under the name Xiphidiopterus cucuUatus. Six clutches have been entered, 4/1 and 2/2. When this is compared with the clutches listed for the Bartels collection by Hellebrekers, 4/1 and 1/2, it is clear that one two-egg clutch of the Bartels collection was missing by 1967. The measurements I made of one of the two-egg clutches at the home of Max Bartels Jr. before World War II, labelled '13/6 1921 Batavia, Tjabang Boengin', are 47.8 x 32.0 and 47.4 x 30.8 mm (ms. G). These measurements are, within an error of 0.1-0.2 mm, identical to those for the clutch under RMNH 75549 in Hoogerwerf 's private collection: 47.8 x 31.8 and 47.2 x 30.6 mm. Given the above, one can only conclude that the missing clutch from the Bartels collec- tion and the two-egg clutch in Hoogerwerf's private collection are the same. For this clutch Hoogerwerf gave as collection date '13 June 1940', whilst for the Bartels clutch it was '13 June 1921': Hoogerwerf did not alter the day of collection, but he made a very substantial 19-year change to the year. The other V. macropterus egg in the Hoogerwerf collection (Hoogerwerf 1967, clutch 1/1), stated by Hoogerwerf to have been collected around 1940, is quite likely also original- ly from the Bartels collection. Like the four-egg clutch, this clutch was not yet included in Hans Bartels' list (ms. A) shown in Fig. 1, no. 1. Its measurements, 44.3 x 32.9 mm, coincide Captions to figures on opposite page Figure 5. Egg collection data in manuscripts of the Bartels and Becking families concerning (15) Spotted Crocias Crocias albonotatus {=Lanielhis leucogrammiciis), (16) Yellow-bellied Warbler Abroscopus superciliaris (see arrow) and (25) Green Peacock Pavo muticus; (15) from ms. A, three handwritten lists of clutches present in the Bartels collection until 1927, written by Hans Bartels; (16) from ms. D, a daily acquisition list of eggs handwritten by Max Bartels Jr., covering the period 6 September 1940-23 May 1941; (25) from ms. H, notes concerning egg measurements, fresh weights and shell weights of eggs held in the Becking collection, by my brother R. W. Becking and myself, and by our father J.-H. Becking Sr. Figure 6. Egg collection data in manuscripts of the Becking family concerning (26) Reef Egret Egretta sacra (= Demigretta sacra) and (27) Crested Goshawk Accipiter trivirgatus; both from ms. H, notes concerning egg measurements, fresh weights and shell weights of eggs held in the Becking collection, by my brother R. W. Becking and myself, and by our father J.-H. Becking Sr. Jan-Hendrik Becking 30 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Jan-Hendrik Becking 31 BuU. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) with those of a V. macropterus egg collected no later than 1925 at an untraceable locality and measured by me before the war as 44.3 x 33.0 mm (ms. G). The original Bartels collection is thus in effect the only collection to contain eggs of Javan Lapwing; eight clutches in total (5/1, 2/2, 1/4). Hoogerwerf s dates and locations for eggs of this species are false. To my knowledge the four-egg clutch collected by the Bartels family, labelled '12.05.1925, Rawah Tangerang, W. Java' {cf. also Collar et al 2000) is the last clutch of this species collected by the Bartels family. Cabang Bungin (six clutches) and Rawah Tangerang (one), just east and west of present-day Jakarta, are the only known col- lecting localities for clutches of Javan Lapwing. The eighth clutch is probably also from either of these localities. Information to the contrary, in e.g. Collar et al. (2001: 1383), based on Hoogerwerf (1949a) and Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967), is incorrect. 2. BRONZE-WINGED JACANA Metopidius indicus (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 56-57, Plate V, Fig. 43): [Examined material: seven eggs (two clutches), clutch size 3-4 eggs, no particulars on locality or collecting date, but only Central Java: April (1) and East Java: November (1)]. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 33): 'Bartels: No material available'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): '1/3; June; West Java. Measurements (3): av. 34.43 (34-34.9) x 25.3 (25.1-25.5); largest egg: 34.9 x 25.1. Weight (1/3): av. 0.729 (0.717-0.741). For two previously recorded breeding dates and seven earlier measured eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 56-57, Plate V, Fig. 43)'. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: one clutch, with the label: '1/3, Tangerang W. Java, June 1936' (RMNH 75546). Hoogerwerf (1949a) gave only very general information for the two clutches of this species, mentioning Central and East Java but no precise localities, and April and November but no precise dates, and no collectors. In 1967 he mentioned only one clutch for his own collection, this time from 'West Java'. This was probably the same clutch present in his collection when the latter was transferred to RMNH. There are marked and unexplained differences between Hoogerwerf (1949a) as opposed to the data in Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967) and Hoogerwerf's private collection. A photostat of Hans Bartels' handwritten list of acquisitions until 1927 (ms. A) is pre- sented in Fig. 1, no. 2. Bartels' notation '3,3' means a three-egg clutch (1/3) of which all three are present in the collection. This clutch was no longer present in the Bartels collection when Hellebrekers described it in 1967. My own measurements were 35.0 x 25.3, 34.6 x 25.5 and 34.1 X 25.5 mm (ms. G). This can be summarised as average 34.6 x 25.4 mm vs. Hoogerwerf's 34.4 x 25.3 mm; range in length 34.1-35.0 mm vs. Hoogerwerf's 34.0-34.9 mm; range in width 25.3-25.5 mm vs. Hoogerwerf's 25.1-25.5. mm; and in the Bartels clutch as in Hoogerwerf's, the egg with the greatest length had the narrowest width (35.0 x 25.3 mm vs. 34.9 x 25.1 mm). Given the lack of consistency in Hoogerwerf's own data, the iden- tical measurements (within measurement error), and the access that Hoogerwerf had to the Captions to figures on opposite page Figure 7. Egg collection data in manuscripts of the Becking family concerning (28) Besra Accipiter virgatus, (29) Changeable Hawk-Eagle Spizaetus cirrhatus and (30) Mangrove Whistler Pachycephala grisola (= P. cinerea); all three from ms. H, notes concerning egg measurements, fresh weights and shell weights of eggs held in the Becking collection, by my brother R. W. Becking and myself, and by our father J.-H. Becking Sr. Figure 8. Egg collection data in manuscripts of the Becking family concerning (31) Crimson Simbird Aethopyga siparaja; from ms. H, notes concerning egg measurements, fresh weights and shell weights of eggs held in the Becking collection, by my brother R. W. Becking and myself, and by our father J.-H. Becking Sr. Jan-Hendrik Becking 32 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Battels collection during 1944^5, clutch RMNH 75546 of Metopidhis indicus must be that missing from the Bartels collection, for which the data are 'Batavia near Tjabang Boengin, 20 June 1920' (Fig. 1, no. 2). 3. CRESTED GOSHAWK Accipiter trivirgatus (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 28) [Examined material: eight eggs (four clutches). Clutch size two eggs, sometimes three. Eggs average 44.91 x 35.88 mm. Breeding months: Jan. (x), Feb. (1), Mar. (1), Dec. (1)]. {b) Hellebrekers (1967: 18): 'Bartels: 3/1, 5/2; Febr. (1), Apr. (2), Oct. (1), Dec. (3); W. Java. Measurements (13): av. 45.1 (42.1-49.4) x 36.4 (35.1-38.2). Weight (13): av. 2.40 (2.20-2.80)'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): '1/2, without further particulars. Measurements (2): 44.8 x 35.44.6 X 37 [evidently a printing error]: Weight (2/2, 1/3): av. 2.460 (2.290-2.883)'. {d) Hoogerwerf private collection: two clutches (2/2). One labelled in Hoogerwerf's handwriting '2 eggs, 5 Febr. 1939, Buitenzorg (= Bogor), W. Java . leg. A. Hoogerwerf, but with this clutch there is a smaller label 'Tjiawi-Poentjak, Buitenzorg' (RMNH 75484); the other without any data (RMNH 75483). In Hans Bartels' list of eggs from 1927 (ms. A; cf. Fig. 1 no. 3, Astur trivirgatus), and in his egg measurements from 1927 (ms. C; cf. Fig. 1, no. 3a, Accipiter trivirgatus), five clutches for this species are mentioned, 1/1 and 4/2. The clutch '1/2, 20 January 1923, Tji Tamiang' is, however, missing from the Bartels collection in RMNH. The egg measurements were 45.2 X 36.7 and 44.0 x 37.1 mm. Hoogerwerf in Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967) mentioned for his private collection only one clutch '1/2, without further particulars', while in his collection as given to RMNH two clutches were present. For the clutch without particulars the measurements presented are also confused (see above). The 1/2 clutch (RMNH 75484) in Hoogerwerf's collection is not mentioned in any of his publications, although collection data are given on the label. The other clutch '1/2, without further particulars' (RMNH 75483) I measured as 45.2 x 36.7 and 44.0 x 37.1 mm, identical to the missing clutch from the Bartels collection, which I measured before the war (ms. G). Moreover, these measurements are identical to those made by Hans Bartels in 1927 in his handwriting (ms. C; cf. Fig. 1, no. 3a). This is the clutch '1/2, 20 January 1923, Tji Tamiang' in the original Bartels collection. Finally, it is remarkable that Hoogerwerf (1949a), based on his private collection, men- tioned 'clutch size 2 or 3 eggs and 8 eggs, 4 clutches' when these number three clutches and seven eggs. Later (1967) he also gave the weights of these seven eggs (2/2, 1/3): 'Weight (2/2, 1/3): av. 2.460 (2.290-2.883)', as if they were all in his collection. But, at his death, his collection only contained the 2/2 clutches. 4. SPOTTED KESTREL Faico moliiccensis (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 39, Plate 111, Fig. 25: [Examined material: five eggs (two clutches); ckitch size: four eggs. Egg measurements average 37.56 x 31.82 mm. Breeding months: W. Java, Mar. (1), E. Java Mar. (1)]. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 23): 'Bartels: 1/3, 1/4; June, October; West Java. Measurements (7): av. 38.7 (36.9-40.7) x 32.1 (31.3-33.7). Weight 1.65 (1.57-1.71)'. Jan-Hendrik Becking 33 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Figure 11 Figure 10 Figure 9. Egg shape nomenclature originated by J.-H. Becking before World War II, but used by Hoogerwerf without acknowledgement in Hoogerwerf (1949a). For more details see the main text. Figure 10. Egg of Green Peafowl Pavo muticus (RMNH 75515) originally from the Becking collection, but which arrived at RMNH via Hoogerwerf's private collection, wherein it was labelled: 'W. Java, without date'. This egg can be individually recognised by its natural scar (top) and remnants of the original lettering of the label with red ink on the shell just above the centre of the egg (bottom), and an artificial pink wash over its surface. It was actually collected in Central Java; for further details see the text. (Jan-Hendrik Becking) Figure 11. Nest of Mountain Tailorbird Orthotomus cucullatus exclusively composed of dry rattan leaves, placed in the fork of a small subcanopy tree, 1 m above ground, at Lake Situ Lembang (2,500 m), above Bandung, West Java, 21 July 1940; the nest contained two fresh eggs (H. La Bastide) Jan-Hendrik Becking 34 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) (c) Hoogerwerf (1976): 'Weight (1/4): av. 1.614 (1.551-1.675). For seven previously recorded breeding dates and five earlier measured eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 39, Plate III, Fig. 25).' (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: one clutch (1/4), labelled in his handwriting 'Surabaja, Java, 1937, leg. A. Hoogerwerf ( RMNH 75497). In Hans Bartels' handwritten list of acquisitions to 1927 (ms. A; cf. Fig. 2, no. 4), we find Falco occidentalis: [(1/4) Pangrango, dated 25 May 1921, slightly incubated.]. This clutch, col- lected in May, is missing from the Bartels collection as described by Hellebrekers, who lists June and October as months for the two clutches present. The measurements of this clutch taken by Hans Bartels in 1927 (ms. C)— 37.1 x 31.8, 37.9 x 32.1, 36.7 x 31.7 and 37.4 x 31.8 mm (cf. Fig. 2, no. 4a) — are identical to those of the clutch in Hoogerwerf's collection, which I measured as 37.0 x 31.7, 37.9 x 32.1, 36.9 x 31.7 and 37.5 x 31.8 mm. Once again, all evidence points to the clutch of F. moluccensis in the Hoogerwerf collec- tion belonging to the Bartels collection. It was collected not 'May, 1937 at Surabaya, Java, leg. A. Hoogerwerf, but '25 May 1921 at Mt Pangrango (Pasir Datar), leg. Bartels'. Because the clutch appears as the 'E. Java, May clutch' in Hoogerwerf's collection and publications, this not only represents a change of ownership and date but also a transfer of locality to a completely different part of Java, c.700 km away. A third clutch collected by the Bartels family is (1/4) from Tjoekoel (= Cukul), near Bandung, on 18 October 1929 (ms. E,a). It is also referred to in Max Bartels Jr.'s handwrit- ten notebook (ms. E,b; cf. Fig. 3, no. 6b, last entry). This clutch is still present in the Bartels collection (RMNH 38864) and measures 37.1 x 33.7, 37.4 x 33.7, 38.7 x 32.0 and 40.2 x 32.1 mm. A fourth clutch (1/4, slightly incubated) was collected on 10 August 1941 at Tjibatununggul, West Java, by Max Bartels Jr. (ms. D), but is now missing from the Bartels collection, its fate unknown. 5. ORIENTAL HOBBY Falco severus (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 38): [Examined material: five eggs (two clutches). Clutch size: four eggs. Egg measurements average 37.16 x 32.08 mm, length variation: 35.0-^0.0 mm, breadth variation: 30.80-33.70 mm, longest egg 40.0 x 33.70 mm, broadest egg 40.0 x 33.70 mm. Both clutches were found in June in West Java.] (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 23): 'Bartels: 4/2, 1/3; April (2), May (3); West Java. Measurements (11): av. 38.9 (37.5-40.5) x 32 (31.4-32.3). Weight (11): av. 1.66 (1.60-1.77)'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): 'Weight (1/4): av. 1.370 (1.339-1.417). For one previously recorded breeding date and five earlier measured eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949: 38-39)'. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: one four-egg clutch lacking locality and date (RMNH 75496). Again, the lack of collection information accompanying the clutch in Hoogerwerf's col- lection (1949a), and in his 1967 description of that collection, is remarkable. His collection received by RMNH did not give information on date and locality, although in his 1949a publication it is mentioned that he has two clutches both found in June in West Java. In Hans Bartels' handwritten list of acquisitions until 1927 (ms. A) six clutches of F. scvcnis are listed (cf. Fig. 2, no. 5), not just the five that were present when Hellebrekers described the collection. For four clutches Hans Bartels also took the egg measurements (ms. C), but not for the four-egg clutch collected on 5 April 1927 (if. Fig. 2, no. 5, sixth entry). The same four-egg clutch is missing from the Bartels collection at RMNH. In Hoogerwerf s collection there is a four-egg clutch (RMNH 75496) with no locality or date. I measured the Jan-Hendrik Becking 35 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) four-egg clutch in the Bartels collection as 36.3 x 32.0, 37.3 x 31.9, 34.9 x 31.8 and 36.8 x 31.0 mm (ms. G), and the clutch in the Hoogerwerf collection as 36.2 x 31.9, 37.3 x 32.0, 35.0 x 31.8 and 36.9 x 30.8. All this indicates that RMNH 75496 was taken from the Bartels collec- tion, for which the original data are '1/4, collected at Pangerango on 5.4.1927, slightly incubated'. Some manipulation of the remaining clutches has apparently also taken place. Comparison of Hans Bartels' data (Fig. 2, no. 5) with Hellebrekers in Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967) shows that the original single egg taken from a three-egg clutch on 6 June 1921 (r means rot, i.e. putrid; which nest contained also 2 downy pulli), 2/2 and 2/3 as noted by Hans Bartels, 11 eggs in total, became 4/2 and 1/3 (also 11 eggs) according to Hellebrekers. As the measurements and data for all the eggs taken by Hans Bartels are available, the five clutches can probably be restored to their original compositions and given their true collection information. 6. CRESTED SERPENT EAGLE Spilornis cheela (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 35): [Examined material; seven eggs (seven clutches). Clutch size one, sometimes two. Average measurements 62.71 x 49.77 mm (7); breeding months Central Java: Feb. (1), Apr. (1), Jun. (2), Jul. (1), Aug. (1).] Eggs are depicted in Plate II, Fig. 21 and Plate III, Fig. 22. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 21): 'Bartels: 3/1; February (2), March (1); W. Java. Measurements (3); av. 61.3 (59.6-63.1) x 49.7 (48.1-51.6). Weight (3): av. 6.30 (5.75-6.65)'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): 'Weight (3/1): av. 6.667 (6.038-7.005). For ten previously recorded breeding dates and seven earlier measured eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 35, Plate III, Figs. 21, 22)'. (This cross-reference is incorrect: it should be Plate II, Fig. 21 and Plate III, Fig. 22; see above.) (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: three clutches of 1/1, including RMNH 75492, 75493 and 75494. Two of these three eggs in Hoogerwerf's collection I recognised immediately as origi- nating from the Bartels collection. Egg RMNH 75494 is remarkable in being rather large and broad, and having characteristic bold blotches at its smaller end. This means it can easily be individually identified, as S. cheela eggs are almost always unmarked plain white. This egg is depicted by Hoogerwerf (1949a, Plate III, Fig. 22). A similar, large and rather broad, bold- ly blotched Spilornis egg, collected 17 March 1907 (ms. A; cf. Fig. 2, no. 6, first entry, Spilornis hacha), is missing from the Bartels collection in RMNH. I examined this egg before the war and my measurements of 62.1 x 49.0 mm (ms. G) are identical to those of RMNH 75494 in the Hoogerwerf collection (62.1 x 48.9 mm). In contrast to the data given by Hoogerwerf in his collection, 'February 1943, NO.222,1/1' and formerly asserted to be collected in 'Central Java' (Hoogerwerf 1949a), the real data are: 'Mt. Pangrango, W. Java, 17 March 1907, 1 egg, zw. bebr. [= hard set]' (ms. A; Fig. 2, no. 6, first entry). Egg RMNH 75492 is most remarkable, and therefore individually identifiable, by its very large size, 71.0 x 52.2 mm. It was labelled by Hoogerwerf only 'W. Java', without any date and no precise locality, although Hoogerwerf (1949a) indicated that all his seven eggs were from Central Java. This egg is also from the Bartels collection, taken according to Max Bartels Jr.'s acquisition list of 1933 on '9 Febr. 1933' at 'Tjiparay (Tjibogo), W. Java', and mentioned by him as 'groot' [=large] in the margin of his notebook page under Spilornis hido (ms. E,b; cf. Fig. 3, no. 6b, second entry). I measured it before the war as 71.0 x 52.3 mm (ms. G). Jan-Hendrik Becking 36 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Another Spilonus bido egg mentioned by Bartels in his 1933 list (ms. E,a; cf. Fig. 2, no. 6a, final entry), collected 13 February 1933 and also referred to in his notebook {cf. Fig. 3, no. 6b, fourth entry), is also plain and unmarked. It was exceptionalh" small for a Spilornis egg and hence noted by Bartels as 'klein' (= smaU) in the margin of his notebook. It measured 61.5 X 52.3 mm (ms. G) and has the original label Tjiparay (Tjibaja\vak), fW. Ja\-a), 13 Febr. 1933'. This egg is still present in the Bartels collection (RMNH 38819). 7. JAVAN OWLET Glaiicidium castanopterum (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 102): [Examined material: two eggs, (one clutch) no particulars given; breeding season: W. Java, March (1). Both examined eggs ex. coll. Bouma]. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 59): 'Bartels: 4/2; February (2), March (1), April (1); Tji Karang and Rawa Kalong (both in the Preanger district), West Java. Measurements (8): av. 33.5 (31.5-34.7) X 29.5 (28.6-30.0). Weight (8): av. 1.09 (0.90-1.22)'. (c) Hoogenverf (1967): 'Weight (1/2) 1.032, 1.051. For one previouslv recorded breeding date and the measurements of both of these eggs origmating from Gundih, near Semarang, Central Java, see Hoogenverf (1949: 102). This o^vl is ver^' rare in Java'. {d) Hoogenverf private collection: 1/2 clutch, labelled 'West Java, Xo. 229, March', ^vith no further details (mNH 75696). Hoogenverf (1949a) implied that the clutch he referred to ^vas from the Bouma collec- tion and ^vas collected in West Java. In Hellebrekers & Hoogenverf (1967), Hoogenverf explicitlv referred to the same eggs. This time he stated that the\' were from Gimdih, Central Ja\'a, but stUl implied that they were his own, as he did not mention the Bouma collection. In Hoogenverf's collection now at RMXH there is again the reference to 'W\ Java', but ^vith- out an\- further detail as to the origin of the clutch. At the same time Hellebrekers made no mention of the clutch noted by Hans Bartels as ha\-ing been collected at Mt. Masigit {cf. Fig. 3, no. 7, first entr\-). I measured that clutch before the war as 32.3 x 28.9 and 32.4 x 28.5 mm (ms. G). The clutch in the Hoogenverf col- lection at RMNH has identical measurements, 32.3 x 29.0 and 32.3 x 28.5. 1 therefore believe that RMNH 75696 is the clutch collected by H. Bartels at 'Mt. Masigit, W. Java on 4 March 1927, 2 eggs, slightlv incubated'. 8. ORANGE-BREASTED TROGON Harpactes oreskios {a) Hoogenverf (1949a: 113): [Examined material: four eggs, 2/2. Clutch size t^vo eggs, breeding months: Februarv (x), June (x), October (x)]. Eggs figured in Plate X, Fig. 114. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 66): 'Bartels 3/2; May, June, October; W. Java. Measurements (6): av. 26.7 (25.0-29.0) x 21.7 (21.4-22.3). Weight (6): av. 0.44 (0.40-0.50)'. (c) Hoogerw^erf (1967): 'Weight 2/2: a\-. 0.441 (0.405-0.485); maximal variation in the same clutch: 0.080 (0.405-0.485). For three previouslv recorded breeding dates and measurements of these four eggs originating from Moimt Pangerango and Moimt Salak, West Java, see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 113, Plate X, Fig. 114)'. {d) Hoogerwerf pri\-ate collection: 2/2: one labelled b\- Hoogerwerf 'W. Ja\-a, (Tjibodas?), June, eggmark 2' (RMNH 75710), the other 'W. Java, (Tjibodas?), October, eggmark 1' (RMNH 75711). Again, the lack of consistencv between Hoogerwerf's publications (two clutches in 1949a without a localit\-, and in 1967 'from Moimt Pangrango and Mount Salak') and his private collection (two clutches from 'Tjibodas?') is remarkable. Jan-Hendrik Becking 37 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) In Hans Bartels' handwritten list of acquisitions to 1927 (ms. A), there are four two-egg clutches (Fig. 3, no. 8) and not three as stated by Hellebrekers in 1967. 1 took measurements of all the eggs concerned before the war (ms. G), as well as of the eggs from Hoogerwerf's collection at RMNH. Those of Hoogerwerf's June clutch from 'Tjibodas?', 28.6 x 22.7 and 28.6 X 22.2 mm (RMNH 75710), agree with those of Bartels' '10 June 1923 clutch from Tjireunden', 28.6 x 22.6 and 28.5 x 22.2 (Fig. 3, no. 8, fourth entry). Those of Hoogerwerf's October clutch from 'Tjibodas?', 26.9 x 21.0 and 26.9 x 20.9 mm (RMNH 75711), agree with those (26.9 x 21.0 and 26.9 x 20.9 mm) of the clutch collected by Max Bartels Jr. in October 1934 on the lower slopes of Mt. Pangrango. This latter clutch was not in the Bartels collec- tion as described by Hellebrekers (1967), nor, having been collected in October 1934 was it registered in Hans Bartels' list (ms. A) from 1927. It is, however, clearly the true origin of RMNH 75711. 9. WHITE-BELLIED WOODPECKER Dnjocopiis javensis {a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 134): [Examined material: one egg, clutch size: Bartels: three eggs. Measurements of the above-mentioned egg: 31.80 x 24.40 mm. Breeding months: E. Java September (1); Bartels W. Java August (x)]. (h) Hellebrekers (1967: 78): 'Bartels: No material available'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): 'Weight (1/1): 0.847. For two previously recorded breeding dates and the measurements of this egg originating from the Houwing collection, see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 134)'. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: one egg, labelled '1/1, East Java, September (no year), leg. A. Hoogerwerf (RMNH 75743). In the egg box a note in Hoogerwerf's handwriting reads 'laid in captivity'. Combining the above information, the single egg of this large woodpecker, mentioned in all three Hoogerwerf publications, came from the Houwing collection and was laid in captivity. J. Houwing lived as planter on the north coast of West Java near Subang and never collected in East Java, so why did Hoogerwerf indirectly link the East Java egg (Hoogerwerf 1949a) with Houwing (Hoogerwerf 1967)? The information in Hoogerwerf (1949a) shows that Hoogerwerf must at least have seen the Bartels' original label for this species, because he mentioned a complete clutch of three eggs. Hoogerwerf again gave nei- ther precise collection date nor locality, which is remarkable for a species so rare on Java. Ernst Bartels collected a three-egg clutch on 23 September 1927, at the Kole Beres Tea Estate, Mt. Patuha, West Java. There were originally three eggs, but he dispatched them unblown by ordinary mail to his brother Hans in Pasir Datar and only one survived the transport. Hans entered the acquisition (ms. B; cf. Fig. 3, no. 9, second entry). He measured the surviving egg as '32.0 x 24.6 mm' and mentioned it under the name Thriponax on 16 October 1927 to his brother Max, nicknamed Bango (the Indonesian name for Lesser Adjutant Leptoptilos javanicus), in Bern (ms. C; cf. Fig. 3, no. 9a) with the remark 'andere eggs lapoer!' ['other eggs broken!']. Ernst Bartels described this discovery (Bartels 1931: 329). Hoogerwerf (1949a) stated the egg in his collection to be 31.80 x 24.40 mm, which is within a measurement error of 0.2 mm the same as for Ernst Bartels' egg. At the same time, Hellebrekers in 1967 stated that there was no material of this species present in the Bartels collection. Given these facts, there is, in my view, no doubt that the egg from the Hoogerwerf collection is in fact the sole surviving egg from the three-egg clutch collected by E. Bartels. Hoogerwerf's notation 'laid in captivity' is therefore untrue. The implication that this species breeds in East Java is also unsupported. The egg remains the only one of this species from Java. Jan-Hendrik Becking 38 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) 10. RUFOUS WOODPECKER Celeus brachyiirus {a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 130): [Examined material three eggs, clutch size three, average 25.67 X 20.0 mm, length variation 25.20-26.50; breadth variation 19.70-20.30; longest egg 26.50 X 19.70; broadest egg 25.30 x 20.30. Breeding months West Java: April (x) and September (1)]. Plate XI, Fig. 126. No locality or collecting date(s) given. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 75): 'Bartels collection: no material available'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): 'One egg, weight 0.310 g. For two previous recorded breeding dates and three earlier measured eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 130, Plate XI, Fig. 126); this woodpecker is rare in Java'. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: no material. Hoogerwerf (1949a) gives neither collecting date nor locality for the clutch of three eggs (1 /3) in his collection. In 1967 he implied that he possessed only one egg, but none was pres- ent when his collection was acquired by RMNH. In Hans Bartels' handwritten list of acquisitions to 1927 (ms. A), a three-egg clutch is entered under Micropternus brachyiiriis, collected on '02.09.1919, Tji-Londong, Preanger, W. Java' {cf. Fig. 4, no. 10). The eggs were '1. bebr.' [slightly incubated]), hence a 'full clutch'. The measurements I took before the war (26.5 x 19.7, 25.3 x 20.3 and 25.2 x 20.0 mm) are practically identical to those mentioned by Hoogerwerf (1949a) (ms. G), and Hellebrekers stated that the species was not represented in the Bartels collection in 1967. I have no doubt that the clutch described by Hoogerwerf (1949a) is indeed the clutch missing from the Bartels collection. The single egg weight mentioned by Hoogerwerf (1967) probably also came from this clutch. In my earlier attempts to get the present paper pub- lished I mentioned these conclusions. I suspect that in response to my earlier manuscript, which he saw, Hoogerwerf destroyed the clutch in order to remove any evidence of its origin. 11. BANDED BROADBILL Euri/Iaimus javanicus {a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 136): [To me the eggs of this species are unknown.] (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 79): 'Bartels: 1/2, 1/3; April, December; Mount Massigit and Moimt Pangerango, West Java. Measurements (5): av. 28 (27.6-29) x 21.2 (20.7-22.2). Weight (5): av. 0.300 (rather large holes) and 0.375'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): '1/2; June; Mount Salak, West Java. Measurements: 31.2 x 20.2, 31.5 x 20.1. Weight (2): 0.364, 0.391. Not previously recorded by me. For some earlier particulars derived from literature see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 136). The species is rare in Java'. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: no material present. Hoogerwerf in 1949 did not know the eggs of this species, but in 1967 he claimed to pos- sess a two-egg clutch; yet when his private collection was acquired by RMNH in 1977 no eggs were present. In Hans Bartels' handwritten list of acquisitions to 1927 (ms. A), two two-egg clutches and one three-egg clutch are entered (cf. Fig. 4, no. 11). Hellebrekers, however, mentions only single two- and three-egg clutches as present in the Bartels collection in 1967. Hoogerwerf s 1967 measurements for the two-egg clutch in his collection (see above) are exactly the same (31.2 x 20.2 and 31.5 x 20.1 mm) as mine from 1940 at the home of Max Bartels Jr. for a two-egg clutch from Mt. Masigit collected by Hans Bartels on 6 June 1922 Jan-Hendrik Becking 39 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) (ms. G). In my opinion Hoogerwerfs clutch is that taken by Bartels. Hoogerwerf may have destroyed this clutch, too, to remove evidence of its theft. 12. WREATHED HORNBILL Rhyticeros undulatus (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a): [To me the eggs of this species are unknov^n.] (b) Hellebrekers (1967): not mentioned. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): not mentioned. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: not present. In Max Bartels Jr.'s daily egg acquisition list for 1940-42 (ms. D) mention is made of three clutches: (a) '09.08.1941: 2 eggs slightly incubated, Cikuda, Cisarakan'; (b) '10.08.1941, 1 egg fresh, Citapeu, Mt. Rompang'; (c) '23.08.1941, 2 eggs hard set, Ciseureuh, Cibutun' {cf. Fig. 4, no. 12, entries 4, 6 and 12, indicated by arrows). All these clutches, from a species of which only a very few clutches were ever collected, disappeared from the Bartels collection. As with clutches of other rare species mentioned above, Hoogerwerf may have first taken these clutches for his own collection, and then destroyed them following my manuscript of 1969; see Discussion. The clutches of the commoner species collected by Max Bartels Jr. in 1940-42 are, however, all still in the Bartels collection in RMNH. 13. LARGE WOOD SHRIKE Tephrodornis gularis (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 143): [To me the eggs of this species are unknown.] (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 83): 'Bartels collection: 1/2, March, Mount Massigit, Preanger, W. Java; measurements (2): 21.6 x 15.7 and 21.9 x 16.5. Weight (2) av. 0.16'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): '1/2, March, Mount Salak (near Bogor), W. Java. Measurements: 21.4 X 15.6 and 21.7 x 16.4. For some previous published particulars see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 143). This species is not common in Java'. No weight is given. {d) Hoogerwerf private collection: no eggs of this species. It is remarkable (1) that Hoogerwerf stated in 1949 that he did not know the eggs of this species, (2) that after leaving Indonesia he claimed to possess a clutch of two in his own col- lection, without giving a collection date, and (3) that the clutch was not present when his collection was acquired by RMNH ten years later. At the same time the measurements given by Hoogerwerf for his own clutch are, within an error of 1%, identical to those given by Hellebrekers for the clutch in the Bartels collection. The entry for this species in Hans Bartels' egg list (ms. A) appears in Fig. 4, no. 13, under Tephrodornis virgatus. I described this clutch before the war, and measured the two eggs as 21.5 x 15.6 mm (0.153 g) and 21.8 x 16.5 mm (0.167 g), averaging 0.160 g (ms. G). In my opinion all three sets of measurements refer to the same clutch, collected by H. Bartels on 18 March 1923 at Mt. Masigit and even now present in the Bartels collection (RMNH 39474). Apparently Hoogerwerf (1967) faked pos- session of a clutch of T. gularis, hence its absence from the Hoogerwerf collection on arrival at RMNH in April 1977. Large Wood Shrike is rather rare on Java and its small nests are very hard to find. The Bartels clutch was unique for Java and possibly the entire Indo- Australian region, excluding India (Ali & Ripley 1971). 14. SCALY THRUSH Zoothera dauma (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 177): [Examined material: four eggs (two clutches). Clutch size: two eggs. Measurements: average 31.20 x 22.70 mm; length variation: 28.80-33.70, breadth Jan-Hendrik Becking 40 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) variation: 22.40-23.30; longest egg 33.70 x 22.50; broadest egg: 33.0 x 23.30 mm. Breeding months Jan. (1), June (1); Plate XIV, Fig. 190]. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 105): 'Bartels: 1/1, 3/2; September (3), November (1); West Java. Measurements (7): av. 34.4 (32.8-36.5) x 22.8 (22.1-23.6). Weight (7): av. 0.45 (0.39-0.51)'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): 'Weight (2/2): av. 0.433 (0.417-0.446); maximal variation in the same clutch: 0.029 (0.417-0.446). For two previously recorded breeding dates and the measurements of these four eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 177, Plate XIV, Fig. 190)'. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: '2 eggs, W. Java (no locality, no date)' (RMNH 76012), and '2 eggs, Mt. Salak, Tjiapoes, W. Java, 15 June 1940' (RMNH 76013). In Hoogerwerf (1949a) and Hoogerwerf (1967) no precise dates, only months, and no localities are given for the two clutches that Hoogerwerf implied were from his own collec- tion. When his collection came to RMNH in April 1977, a date and locality were included for one clutch (RMNH 76013), and an approximate locality and no date for the other (RMNH 76012). These represent remarkable inconsistencies in Hoogerwerf 's own accounts. In Hans Bartels' handwritten list of clutches to 1927 (ms. A), a one-egg and three two- egg clutches are entered under Oreocichla horsfieldi {cf. Fig. 4, no. 14). At least one additional two-egg clutch was added to the Bartels collection subsequently as evident from the acqui- sition lists of Max Bartels Jr. (ms. D). A clutch collected on 13 June 1918 (ms. A; Fig. 4, no. 14, first entry) was not present in the Bartels collection as described by Hellebrekers, and Hellebrekers does not mention June as a breeding month. I measured this clutch before the war as 33.8 x 22.5 and 33.1 x 23.4 mm (ms. G). These measurements are identical to ones I have recently taken of Hoogerwerf's Mt. Salak clutch (RMNH 76013). I therefore believe that RMNH 76013 was collected at Mt. Cede on 13 June 1918. The clutch mentioned in Fig. 3 (no. 6b, first entry), derived from E,b, under the name 'Oreocichla horsfieldi [= Zoothera dauma], 1/2, Mt. Gede, 13 Nov. 1932', however, is still in the Bartels collection (RMNH 40315). 15. SPOTTED CROCIAS Crocias albonotatus (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 196): under C. giittatus [Examined material: two eggs. Clutch size two eggs. Measurements of both eggs: 24.60 x 18.0 and 24.90 x 17.60 mm. Breeding months March (x), December (1), Plate XV, Fig. 214]. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 117): 'Bartels: 2/1, 3/2; April (2), May (2), June (1); W. Java. Measurements (8); av. 23.8 (22.4-25.6) x 17.7 (16.9-18.1). Weight (7): av. 0.20 (0.19-0.22)'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): '1/2; March; West Java. Measurements: 23.2 x 18.2, 23.9 x 18.1. Weight (2/2): av. 0.227 (0.210-0.242); maximal variation in the same clutch: 0.013 (0.210-0.223). For two previously recorded breeding dates and two earlier measured eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949a: 196, Plate XV, Fig. 214)'. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: 'Tjibodas, W. Java' (RMNH 76238) and 'Tjibodas, March' (RMNH 76239). Hoogerwerf (1949a) mentioned two eggs without locality, and in 1967 a two-egg clutch also collected by him, without details of locality and no exact date (only March). In his col- lection at RMNH there are two two-egg clutches, both undated but with the locality 'Tjibodas'. In Hans Bartels' handwritten list until 1927 (ms. A), a single one-egg and three two-egg clutches are entered under Lmiicllus Iciicogranuuiciis {cf. Fig. 5, no. 15). Other clutches were Jan-Hendrik Becking 41 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) subsequently added and in the Bartels collection at RMNH five clutches are mentioned (2/1, 3/2). The second clutch (1/2) in the series reported by Hans Bartels (ms. A), collected on 29 March 1921, is missing, but the others are still present. I measured the missing clutch before the war as 24.0 x 18.2 and 23.3 x 18.3 mm (ms. G), which is within 0.2 mm of the measurements of Hoogerwerf's Tjibodas, March' clutch (RMNH 76239). Hoogerwerf's clutch from Tjibodas, March' therefore does not come from the north-east side (i.e. 'Tjibodas') of Mt. Pangerango but from the south-west side (Pasir Datar), where Max Bartels Sr. lived and did most of his collecting. The data for this clutch are '29 March 1921, 2 eggs (1/2), 1. bebr. [slightly incubated]'. 16. YELLOW-BELLIED WARBLER Abroscopus superciliaris (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 210, Plate XVII, Fig. 238): under Seicerciis superciliaris vordermani [Examined: three eggs (one clutch). Clutch size: three eggs. Measurements: av. 14.40 x 11.50, length variation 14.30-14.50, breadth variation 11.40-11.50, longest egg 14.50 x 11.50, broadest egg 14.50 x 11.50. This clutch was found in W. Java in October]. {h) Hellebrekers (1967: 126): 'Bartels: no material available'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): 'Weight (1/3) av. 0.049 g (0.048-0.049 g). For one previously recorded breeding date and measurements of the three eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949: 210, Plate XVII, Fig. 238)'. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: No material present. Hoogerwerf implied in 1967 that his 1949a clutch was still present in his private collec- tion, because he measured its weights, but it had vanished by 1977. Of this clutch Hoogerwerf elsewhere (Hoogerwerf 1950a: 110-111, under Seicerciis superciliaris vorder- mani), in Dutch, mentioned that the nest was obtained above Tjiomas estate, on the lower slope of Mt. Salak, at c.800 m, i.e. near his own house. He also stated that the nest was found in a clump of bamboo, resting on a bamboo stump. Hellebrekers stated that there was no material in the Bartels collection in RMNH. However, in Max Bartels Jr.'s acquisition list (ms. D) there is an entry, 'Ahrosc. superc' col- lected '20 October 1940, 3 eggs slightly incubated' (c/. Fig. 5, no. 16, eighth entry, indicated by an arrow). At the time Max Bartels Jr. wrote to me The nest was found in a hole of an internal node of a cut-off bamboo stem in a bamboo forest at approx. 1000 m a.s.l. near Ciparay, Mt. Pangrango' (ms. F). The measurements I took for this clutch soon after were 14.5 X 11.4, 14.3 X 11.4 and 14.4 x 11.5 mm) (ms. G), almost identical to those presented by Hoogerwerf for his clutch. As I was personally involved in the discovery, there exists an extensive correspondence (ms. F) between Max Bartels Jr. and myself about this finding. The clutch represented the first nesting record for Java in c.50 years of egg collecting by the Bartels family, although the species is locally not particularly rare. In my opinion the clutch in Hoogerwerf's collection was stolen by him from the Bartels collection, and his nesting site description is incorrect. In my earlier manuscript I accused Hoogerwerf of having taken this clutch, and it seems likely that he then destroyed the eggs so that it could not be used as evidence against him. 17. CRIMSON-BREASTED FLOWERPECKER Prionochilus percussus {a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 232): under Anaimos p. percussus [To me the eggs of this species are unknown]. (h) Hellebrekers (1967: 138-139): 'Bartels: 1/1, 1/2; April; Tji Kahuripan, Preanger, West Java. Measurements (3): av. 16.4 x 11.6. Weight (3): av. 0.060'. Jan-Hendrik Becking 42 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) (c) Hoogerw^erf (1967): '1/2; April; W. Java. Measurements: 15.7 x 11.3, 15.8 x 11.3. Not previously recorded from Java; the species is perhaps fairly rare in this island'. {d) Hoogerwerf private collection: no material present. This is a rather rare and very local species. It is strange that Hoogerwerf (1949a) claimed not to know its eggs, but in 1967 had a clutch (1 / 2) collected by himself, yet that by 1977 his private collection contained no examples of this species' eggs. Moreo\'er, Hoogerwerf did not give a precise date or the locality where he obtained this clutch. Finally, although he later weighed all the eggs and clutches of his collection in the Netherlands, the weights of this clutch were not included. In my opinion Hoogerwerf s clutch never existed. He had seen the clutch in the Bartels collection, or he copied his (1967) egg description from Hellebrekers, 'bro^vnish primary points and speckles, forming an almost closed zone around the larger end'. I think that he invented the egg measurements, perhaps in order to make his collection appear more important. TIte Boiima collection 18. ASIAN PIED HORNBILL Anthracoceros albirostris {a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 122, Plate XI, Fig. 121): imder A. malabaricus convexus [Examined material: two eggs (one clutch). Clutch size two eggs. Measurements: av. 51.95 x 33.90 mm, length variation 51.80-52.10, breadth variation 33.70-34.10, longest egg 52.10 x 33.70, broadest egg 51.80 x 34.10. The above-mentioned clutch was collected in Central Java in November. The two above-mentioned examined eggs of this species are ex collection Bouma]. (b) Hellebrekers (1967: 71): 'Bartels: No material available'. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967): 'Weight (1): 2.938. For one previously recorded breeding date and two earlier measured eggs see Hoogerwerf (1949: 122, Plate XI, Fig. 121)'. (d) Hoogerwerf private collection: '2 eggs, Gundlh, Java, 11.11.1936, A. Hoogenverf (RMNH 75722). Note that in Hoogerwerf's private collection, as opposed to Hoogerwerf (1949a), there was no longer any mention of this clutch originating from the Bouma collection. This clutch, unique for Java, was collected by P. J. Bouma and later presented to Max Bartels Jr. for incor- poration into the Bartels collection (see The egg collections involved). Mv measurements of this clutch while still in the Bartels collection, 51.9 x 34.1 and 52.1 x 33.9 mm (ms. G), are almost identical to those by Hoogerwerf. He must have mo\'ed this clutch from the Bartels collection to his own whilst both the Bartels and Bouma collections were accessible to him at the Bogor museum. Some other clutches from the Bouma collection appropriated by Hoogenverf All clutches in Hoogerwerf's private collection w ith the locality Gundih, Central Java, are in fact Bouma's material. There is no evidence that Hooger^verf e\"er collected in Gundih, other than the many clutches labelled 'Gundih' in his private collection. In addition to the above-mentioned two-egg clutch of Anthracoceros albirostris the followiiig examples can be given. A large number of other clutches in Hoogerwerf's collection, taken at Gimdih in the year 1936, but with no locality recorded, clearly also derive from the Bouma collection. There were in Hoogerwerf's collection at the time of his death man\- clutches labelled 'Gundih', all of rarer species. Gundih was Bouma's principal collection locality. It is highly unlikely that Hoogerwerf collected in Gundih in e.g. March, April, May and November Jan-Hendrik Becking 43 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) 1936 (see below) while living in Bogor. Hoogerwerf must have taken the many clutches missing from the Bouma collection (see above), and incorporated them into his own with- out indicating that they had been collected by Bouma. RMNH thus registered them as having been collected by Hoogerwerf. 19. BLACK-THIGHED FALCONET Microhierax fringillaris: Gundih, Central Java, 1/4, 9 November 1936 (RMNH 75495). 20. RED-LEGGED CRAKE Rallus fasciata: Gundih, Central Java, 1/4, 1936 (RMNH 75541). 21. DRONGO CUCKOO Siirniculus lugubris: Gundih, Central Java, eggs with Horsfield's Babbler Trichastoma sepiarium, 29 November 1935 (RMNH 75680) and 20 April 1936 (RMNH 75681). 22. HOODED PITTA Pitta sordida: Gundih, Central Java, three clutches: 1/5, 20 March 1936; 1/3, 25 March 1936; 1/5, 6 April 1936 (RMNH 75744-46). 23. BLACK-HEADED BULBUL Pycnonotus atriceps: Gundih, Central Java, four clutches: 1/2, 26 March 1936; 1/2, 11 April 1936; 1/2, 21 April 1936; 1/3, 20 May 1936 (RMNH 76567-70). 24. BLACK-NAPED MONARCH Hypothymis azurea: Gundih, Central Java, two clutches: 1/2, 10 March 1936; and 1/2, 24 March 1936 (RMNH 76380-81). The above list is far from exhaustive. It concerns examples where collection details were fortunately not changed by Hoogerwerf, other than that he implied having collected the clutches himself. I do not know whether Hoogerwerf also changed the collection details of eggs in the Bouma collection, as he did with clutches from the Bartels collection, because I did not measure the eggs of the Bouma collection. The Becking collection The following data are notes, egg measurements, fresh egg and eggshell weights from the private Becking collection (ms. H). I mentioned these data in my manuscript of 1969 com- menting on Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967). All these clutches disappeared from the Becking collection while it was stored at the Bogor museum during and shortly after the Pacific War (as described in my draft publication). 25. GREEN PEAFOWL Pavo muticus (a) Hoogerwerf (1949a: 45, Plate IV, Fig. 30): [Examined material: ten eggs (three clutches and one odd egg). Clutch size: 3-4 eggs. Measurements: av. 73.39 x 54.22, length variation 69.80-79.10, breadth variation 52.60-56.40, longest egg 79.10 x 53.30, broadest egg 71.80 X 56.40 mm. Breeding months: W. Java Aug. (x), Sept. (1), Oct. (x); Central Java Oct. (1); E. Java Sept. (1)]. (h) Hellebrekers (1967: 26): 'Bartels: 1/2, October. Gundih, Djuworo, Central Java. Measurements (2): av. 68.5 x 50.0. Weight: 11.04 and 12.77. (c) Hoogerwerf (1967). '2/2; September; East and West Java. Measurements (4) av. 76.13 (74.5-79) x 53.53 (52.5-54.8. largest egg: 79 x 53; maximal variation in length in the same clutch: 2.5 (76.5-79). Weight (2/2, 1/4: av. 14.655 (13.162-15.870); maximal variation in the same clutch: 1.980 (13.508-15.488). For 18 previously recorded breeding data and 10 earlier measured eggs from Ujung Kulon nature reserve. West Java, see Hoogerwerf (1949: 45, Plate IV, Fig. 30)'. Jan-Hendrik Becking 44 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) (d) Hoogenverf's private collection contains three eggshells (1/2) of this species labelled 'W. Java, without date' (RMNH 75515); (1/4) 'Udjung Kulon, W. Java, 30.09.1942' (RMNH 75516) and (1/2) 'Merak, W. Java, 28.09.1943' (RMNH 75517). The clutch (1/2) in Hoogerwerfs collection 'W. Java, \vithout date' (RNIXH 73515) is from the Becking collection. These eggs were collected in the teak Tectona grandis forests of Central Java and were a gift from a friend (ms. H; cf. Fig. 5, no. 25). I originallv wrote on them in red ink '23 Sept. 1944, Randublatung, Central Ja\-a'. Tlie ink has been largeh" removed, leaving an artificial pink wash to the sheUs, although on close inspection some let- tering and figures are stiU faintly ^isible. Apart from this, one of the eggs has a natural scar by which I could recognise it immediately (cf. Fig. 10). Other clutches from the Becking collection appropriated by Hoogerwei-f The following clutches, mentioned in my previous attempt to bring Hoogerwerfs actions to light, disappeared from the Becking collection whilst in storage at Bogor. Thev ^vere pre- sented as part of his own collection by Hoogenverf (1949a) but ^vere no longer present when it came to RMNH after his death. In response to mx 1969 draft he probablv destroved these clutches. 26. REEF EGRET Egretta sacra Clutch: 26 July 1941, 1/4, Palabuanratu (Wijnkoopsbaai), Cikepuh, Batu Beula. Measurements: 41.0 x 32.7; 42.0 x 33.9; 44.2 x 33.8; 41.5 x 33.3 mm. (ms. H; Fig. 6, no. 26) Of the three clutches I collected on the same day and at the same localit}- (cf. Fig. 6, no. 26), this 1/4 and the 1/2 clutch disappeared from our collection ^vhile it ^vas in storage at Bogor. The 1/1 clutch, also of the same date and localit\', ^vas left imtouched. 27. CRESTED GOSHAWK Acciinfer frimrgatus Clutch: 3 March 1944, 1/2, Kp. Cibogo, Bogor. Measurements: 44.8 x 37.2, 45.0 x 35.3 mm. Shell weight 1.20 and 1.27 g; fresh weight 33.25 and 30.00 g. (ms. H; cf. Fig. 6, no. 27) 28. BESRA Accipiter virgatus Clutch: 10 April 1941, 1/2, Arcamanik, Mt. Geggerbintang, Bandung. Measurements: 36.1 x 29.7 and 35.7 x 29.3 mm. Shell weights 1.22 and 1.22 g. (ms. H; cf. Fig. 7, no. 28) Of this clutch, and the preceding one, I also have watercolours. 29. CHANGEABLE HAWK-EAGLE Spizaetus cirrhatus Two clutches: 6 June 1941, 1/1 Cibadak, Mt. Walat, dessa Ciantajan, Sukabumi, leg. M. Bartels Jr. Measurements: 67.5 x 54.3 mm, shell ^veight 6.427 g, and 16 August 1941, 1/1 Cikawung, Cireundeun, Sukabumi, leg. M. Bartels Jr. Measurements: 61.4 x 50.7 mm, shell weight 7.975 g. (ms. H; cf Fig. 7, no. 29) These two clutches were gifts of Max Bartels Jr. to our collection. Both disappeared dur- ing the war whilst in the Bogor museum. The clutch of 16 August 1941 is mentioned in Bartels' handwriting (cf. Fig. 4, no. 12, ninth entry) with the notation (Be). The puUus (\vhite phase) of Changeable Hawk-Eagle, collected on 18 August 1944 at Cidjulang, Pasir Maung (Fig. 7, no. 29, first entry), remained in our collection and is no^v in Leiden (RMXH 24192). 30. MANGROVE WHISTLER Pachycephala grisola Ckitch: 18 February 1945, 1/2, Botanical Gardens, Bogor. Measurements: 21.3 x 15.9 and 21.4 X 15.9 mm, shell weight 0.165 and 0.159 g, fresh weight 2.91 and 2.91 g. (ms. H; cf. Fig. 7, no. 30) Jan-Hendrik Becking 45 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Of the two clutches indicated in our typescript, made immediately after the discovery, that dated 18 February 1945 (fresh eggs) disappeared, while the 9 February 1945 (hard-set) clutch remained. 31. CRIMSON SUNBIRD Aethopyga siparaja Four clutches, all from Depok (07°25'S, 109°37'E), on the main road between Bogor and Jakarta, had the following data: (a) 25 June 1944, 1/2, 14.2 x 10.7 and 14.6 x 10.3 mm, hard- set, shell weight 0.032 g; (b) 25 June 1944, 1/2, 15.6 x 11.0 and 15.4 x 10.7 mm, hard-set, fresh egg weights 0.83 and 0.87 g, shell weights 0.039 and 0.038 g; (c) 17 December 1944, 1/2, 15.7 X 10.8 and 14.1 x 10.2 mm, fresh, fresh egg weights 0.81 and 0.85 g, shell weights 0.042 and 0.037 g; (d) 26 December 1944, 1/2, 13.8 x 10.9 and 14.0 x 10.8 mm, shell weights 0.042 and 0.042 g (ms. H; cf. Fig. 8, no. 31). All these eggs disappeared from their boxes, except one egg from the hard-set 1/2 clutch (b). Furthermore, a conceptual paper of mine in manuscript advocating a classification sys- tem for egg shapes into five main classes, according to a mathematical formula containing the ratio length and width of the egg, and the position of its greatest width along the long axis {cf. Fig. 9), was held for a time at the Bogor museum. The manuscript was apparently read by Hoogerwerf at Bogor and its ideas used by him without my authorisation (Hoogerwerf 1949a: 3). The manuscript was among the papers recovered from the museum by my brother in April 1947. Moreover, in Hoogerwerf 's archives donated to the Zoological Museum Amsterdam by his widow, a manuscript by the German ornithologist August Spennemann was found, along with a 64-page typescript signed by my brother Rudolf and myself concerning breed- ing months, egg acquisitions, nest descriptions, etc., of Javan birds. Both documents had gone missing from the Bogor museum during the war. The Amsterdam museum returned a copy of this manuscript to me and, some years later, also the original. Incorrect information in other publications In 1950 two papers in Dutch by Hoogerwerf (1950a,b) described the biology and nest- ing of birds in the Botanical Gardens of Cibodas on Mt. Gede and in the Botanical Gardens at Bogor. Because many eggs in Hoogerwerfs collection were not his own, he often pos- sessed few data on nesting habits and nest descriptions. The accounts in his publications are therefore often rather general, very unspecific, and sometimes plain wrong, as when he described the nest of Mountain Tailorbird Orthotomus ciiculatiis as like that of other tailor- birds: ['the nest is like that of a tailorbird (Orthotomus), but mainly composed of green moss, mixed with much seed down'] (Hoogerwerf 1950a: 111). Ln fact the nest of Mountain Tailorbird differs markedly from other tailorbirds, it being a dome-shaped structure with a side entrance exclusively composed of dry rattan or bamboo leaves, and usually placed in the fork of a small subcanopy sapling in primary forest {cf. Fig. 11). Although Hoogerwerf described and depicted the eggs of this tailorbird (1949a, Plate XVII. 17, Fig. 239), there are no eggs of this species in his collection. Moreover, Hoogerwerf ignored earlier publications by other authors when he claimed to have discovered species such as Rufous Night Heron Ni/cticorax caledonicus, Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus and Beach Stone Curlew Esaciis magnirostris breeding on Java for the first time: 'all these species were not known as breeding birds of Java at the time that the Bartels collection was obtained' (Hoogerwerf in Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf, 1967: 6). However, they had already been recorded as breeding on Java by Bartels & Stresemann (1929). Jan-Hendrik Becking 46 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Similarly, the occurrence of Nycticorax caledouiciis on Java had ah-ead\' been reported bv Schoenmakers (1933), the then director of the Zoological Gardens at Surabava (East Java). The 'rediscovery' bv Hoogenverf (1949b) of the eggs of the Javanese race of Common Coot FiiUca afra lugubris at the Bogor museum is also an overstatement, as these t^vo eggs, when I saw them in 1941^2, had been ver)- neatly labelled by P. F. Franck, former taxidermist at the musemn with: '[Mav 1937, Lake Taman Hidup (1968 m), Yang Highlands (Plateau), E. Java, leg. Mr. J. H. ten Cate, donation Mr. A. J. M. Ledeboer]' (Ledeboer being at that time owner of the Yang Highlands area). Moreo\'er Hoogenverf (1949b: 55-56) stated that he had examined onlv two eggs of the Ja^'anese race of the Common Coot, but illustrated six (Hoogenverf 1949b, Plate V, Fig. 42). Discussion and conclusions The information presented abo\'e clearl\- demonstrates that Hoogenverf impoverished other oological collections from Java to enrich his own, especiallv the Bartels collection but also the Bouma and Beckmg collections. The examples given are far from exhaustive. The missing clutches are almost all of the rarer or more difficult-to-obtain species. Thirteen species originallv represented in the Bartels egg collection were no longer in that collection at the time of its acquisition bv RMNH. These are: Bronze-winged Jacana Metopidiiis indicus. White-headed Stilt Himantopus leucocephahis, Wreathed Hornbill FJiyticeros undulatus, Asian Pied Hornbill /l/2f/z?77iocYrci5 albirostris, Rufous Woodpecker Celeus brachyurus, WTiite-bellied Woodpecker Dryocopus javensis, Stra^v-headed Bulbul Pycnonotiis zeiilaniciis, Black-headed Bulbul P. melanicterus, Cream-vented Bulbul P. simplex, Olive-winged Bulbul P. plumosiis, YeUow-bellied Warbler Abroscopiis superciliaris, Plain Flowerpecker Dicaeiim concolor and Crimson Sunbird Aethopyga siparaja. At the request of L. D. Brongersma, in 1970 I prepared a near-complete list of all clutches that had disappeared from the original Bartels collection near the end of the Pacific ^var (March 1944), after it was evacuated to the Bogor museimi. This document should still be available in RMNH. For the P. J. Bouma collection a similar list could be made. From the taxonomicaUy arranged Becking collection aU the Accipitridae and Falconidae eggs disappeared whQe the collection was in Bogor, ^vhen Hooger^verf was present in the Bird Division. A number of these raptor eggs w^ere included and tigured in Hoogenverf (1949a). Hoogenverf must have taken at least some of these eggs with him to the Netherlands, because his 1967 publication mentioned their weights, and implied that they belonged to his o^vn collection. His 1949a pubUcation did not mention any such egg ^veights. These eggs ^vere, ho^vever, missing from his collection after his death. He probably destroved them to eliminate incriminating evidence. As already briefly mentioned, I also lost a great number of mv notebooks and manu- scripts at the Bogor museum during the Japanese occupation. I was fortunate that a nimiber were kept at another location and thus survi\-ed the war. To mv great surprise, in Mav 2005, I was informed by Dr S. (Bas) van Balen that a 64-page manuscript, clearly signed b\- mv brother and myself, had been discovered among Hoogenverf's papers, as given to Dr P. J. H. van Bree of the Zoological Museum Amsterdam bv Hooger\verf's widow, shortlv after Hoogerwerf's death in 1977. It was wrapped within a manuscript of the German held ornithologist August W. Spennemann containing field obsen^ations of a nimiber of Javanese birds, including Ja\'an Lapwing VancUiis macropterus. This manuscript had been part of my papers stored at the Bogor museum during the war, from where it had gone missing. This discovery was all the more surprising as M. J. van Steenis-Krusemann, ^vidow of Prof. C. G. G. J. \'an Steenis, botanist and founder of the Flora Malesiana, who also lived Jan-Hendrik Becking 47 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) in Bogor during the war, wrote that all Hoogerwerf s papers had been burnt posthumous- ly by his widow (van Steenis-Krusemann 1988: 36). Finally, Hoogerwerf 's private egg collection has an unnatural, unbalanced species com- position. Common species are poorly represented or even absent, whereas rare species are over-represented. Eggs of such (at the time) common species as Linchi Swiftlet Collocalia linchi, Blue-eared Kingfisher Alcedo menintmg, Coppersmith Barbet Megalaima haemacephala, Brown-capped Woodpecker Dendrocopos moluccensis, White-headed Munia Lonchura maja, Java Sparrow Pada oryzivom and Asian Glossy Starling Aplonis panayensis are completely lacking. The very common sunbird Brown- throated Sunbird Anthreptes malacensis is repre- sented by only one clutch, whereas a number of clutches of the rare species (e.g. Ruby-cheeked Sunbird Anthreptes singalensis) are present. There is no clutch of the very common Brown-capped Woodpecker Dendrocopos moluccensis, but the collection does con- tain eggs of extremely rare woodpeckers such as Rufous Woodpecker Celeiis brachyiiriis and White-bellied Woodpecker Dryocopus javensis. I can only conclude that, at the time of his main oological article (Hoogerwerf 1949a), Hoogerwerf had no private egg collection worth speaking of, and he primarily assembled eggs from the three collections present in the Bogor museum while he was there: the Bartels, Bouma and Becking collections. Although Hellebrekers & Hoogerwerf (1967) purported to describe the eggs from two different collections, i.e. the Bartels collection and Hoogerwerf 's private collection, their concern for the main part is the same collection, i.e. the Bartels collection. To make this plau- sible, a large amount of information on dates and localities was falsified by Hoogerwerf. I have found no evidence that Hellebrekers knew of this, and do not believe that he did. However, it is my considered opinion that all oological and nesting information published by, or together with, or based on, Hoogerwerf, needs checking. Moreover, this means that information derived from his publications and used to indicate the ranges and breeding sea- sons of Javanese birds is unreliable. Thus, for example, certain species accounts in Collar et al. (2001), notably that on Javan Lapwing Vanellus macropterus, require reworking. In this connection it is worth referring to Mees (1986) for exposure of an early example of 'photo-shopping' (i.e. photographic manipulation) by Hoogerwerf (1965) in his attempt to find acceptance for a new subspecies of Pycnonotus plumosus, i.e. P. p. sibergi. Mees (1996), discussing the geographic variation of some birds of Java, also demonstrated that the sub- species Aegithina tiphia djungkidanensis described by Hoogerwerf (1962) is in fact identical to the Sumatran subspecies horizoptera. Many other subspecies described by Hoogerwerf should probably also be reassessed. Mees (2006: 6-7) listed eight bird species reported by Hoogerwerf (1954, 1956) from the western islands of Flores (Komodo, Padar and Rinca), which are, according to him, unknown from this region and whose records are very questionable. Finally, Hoogerwerf (1939, 1970) published photographs of a living Javan Tiger Panthera tigris taken in the Ujung Kulon nature reserve. West Java. Both Dr Max Bartels and I were intrigued by these pic- tures, as they look somewhat abnormal for a Javan Tiger, and independently came to the conclusion that the stripes on the tiger's coat in these pictures had been added using pen and ink. Acknowledgements I am greatly indebted to Dr Joost Brouwer for helping to shape this article, and to a number of biologists, amongst them Nigel Redman and Nigel Collar, who encouraged me to give this expose a second try after nearly 40 years. I thank Dr S. (Bas) van Balen for bringing to my attention the presence of several manuscripts by myself and my brother, Rudolf Willem Becking, among the papers of A. Hoogerwerf in the Zoological Museum in Amsterdam. I am very thankful as well to Dr P. Rasmussen, Dr R. Prys-Jones and an anonymous referee for their extensive comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. Many thanks also to Dr Nigel Collar and Guy Kirwan for improving the final version. Jan-Hendrik Becking 48 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) References: Ali, S. & Ripley, S.D. 1971. Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan, vol. 6. Oxford Univ. Press. Bartels, E. 1931. Vogels van Kole Beres. [Birds of Kole Beres.] Nat. Tijdschr. Ned. Indie 91: 308-348. Bartels, M. 1937. Zwei fiir Java neue Brutvogel. Orn. Mo?7atsber. 45: 16-19. Bartels, M. & Bouma, P. J. 1937. Keerkringvogels en slechtvalken aan Java's Zuidkust. [Tropicbirds and Peregrine Falcons on the south coast of Java.] Tropische Natiiur 26: 108-111. Bartels, M. Jr. & Stresemann, A. W. 1929. Systematische Ubersicht der bisher von Java nachgewiesenen Vogel. Treubia 11: 89-146. Becking, J.-H. 1989. Henry Jacob Victor Sody (1892-1959) , his life and work, a biographical and bibliographical study. E. J. Brill, Leiden. Becking, J.-H. 2001. In Memoriam. In Memory of Hans Bartels. Ardea 89: 420-425. Bouma, P. J. 1932. Broedbiologische waarnemingen bij Soemoerkondang, Cheribon, Java. [Observations on breeding biology at Soemoerkondang, Cheribon, Java.] Org. CI. Ned. Vogelk. 4: 154-157. Bouma, P. J. 1934. Broedtijden in de houtvesterij Tjiledoek, Java. [Breeding periods in the forestrv district of Tjiledoek, Java.] Ardea 25: 100-107. Collar, N. J., Scharlemann, J. P. W. & Fisher, C. T. 2000. Max E. G. Bartels and the Java:-i Lapwing Vanellus macropterus. Kiikila 11: 122-124. Collar, N. J., Andreev, A. V., Chan, S., Crosby, M. J., Subramanya, S. & Tobias J. A. (eds.) 2001. Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red Data book. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Hellebrekers, M. P. J. & Hoogervverf, A. 1967. A further contribution to our oological knowledge of the island of Java (Indonesia). Zool. Verhand. Leiden 88: 1-164. Hoogerwerf, A. 1939. Uit het leven van de gevreesden "gestreepte". [From the life of the feared "striped".] Tropische Natuiir 28: 4-13. Hoogerwerf, A. 1949a. Een bijdrage tot de oologie van het eiland Java. [A contribution to the oologv of the island of Java.] Liinosa 22: 1-277. Hoogerwerf, A. 1949b. Over van Java afkomstige eieren en balgen van de Meerkoet [Tulica atra L). [On eggs and skins of the Common Coot {Tulica atra L.) from Java.] Limosa 22: 372-375. Hoogerwerf, A. 1950a. De avifauna van Tjibodas en omgeving, inclusief het natuurmonument Tjibodas-Gn. Cede (West-Java). [The avifauna of Tjibodas and surroundings including the nature reser\^e Tjibodas- Gn. Cede (West Java).] Limosa 23: 1-158. Hoogerwerf, A. 1950b. De avifauna van de Plantentuin te Buitenzorg (Java) [The avifauna of the Botanical Gardens at Buitenzorg (=Bogor) (Java).] Limosa 23: 159-280. Hoogerwerf, A. 1954. Rapport over een naar Komodo, Padar en Rintja (Kleine Sunda Eilanden) gemaakte dienstreis van 21 Mei-6 Juli 1953. [Report on a tour of duty to Komodo, Padar and Rintja (Lesser Sunda Islands) from 21 May-6 July 1953.] Unpubl. Hoogerwerf, A. 1955. lets over de vogels van de eilanden Komodo, Padar en Rintja, het land van Varanus komodensis. [A bit about the birds of the islands of Komodo, Padar and Rintja, the land oi- Varanus kornod- ensis.] Limosa 28: 96-112. Hoogerwerf, A. 1962. On Aegithina tiphia (Linn.), the Common lora, from Udjvmg Kulon, western Java. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 82: 160-165. Hoogerwerf, A. 1965. Pycnonotus plumosus subspp. with the description of a new subspecies from Bawean Island. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 85: 47-53. Hoogerwerf, A. 1970. Ujung Kulon. The land of the last Javan Rhinoceros. E. J. Brill, Leiden, de Jong, L. 1985. Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tiveede Wereldoorlog, vol. lib, pt. n. [The Netherlands empire in the Second World War.] Rijksinstituut voor Oorlogsdocumentratie, Staatsuitgeverij, 's- Gravenhage. Mees, G. F. 1986. A list of the birds recorded from Bangka Island, Indonesia. Zool. Verh. Leiden 232: 1-176. Mees, G. F. 1996. Geographic variation hi birds of Java. Publ. Nuttall Orn. CI. 26. Nuttall Orn. CI., Cambridge, MA. Mees, G. F. 2006. The avifauna of Flores (Lesser Sunda Islands). Zool. Mededelingen Leiden 80(3): 1-261. Schoenmakers, F. F. 1933. Nycticorax calcdonicus^ Tropi^clic Natuur 22: 200. van Steenis-Kruseman, M. J. 1988. Vcrwcrkt ludisch W-rlcdcu. [My Dutch East Indian past dealt with.] Privately published, Oestgeest. Voous, K. H. 1995. /;/ de Ban van Vogels. Ornithologisch Biografisch Woordcnboek van Nederland. [Under the spell ofbird<. Ornithological biographical dictionary of the Netherlands.] Uitgev. Scheffers, Utrecht. Address: Jan-Hendrik Becking {d. 16 January 2009). Please address correspondence to Joost Brouwer, Brouwer Envir. & Agric. Consultancy, Wildekamp 32, 6721 JD Bennekom, The Netherlands, e-mail BroLnvereEAC@orange.nl © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 N. J. CoUar et al. 49 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Taxonomic status of the Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis, with notes on the voice of Gillett's Lark M. gilletti by N. ]. Collar, C. Dingle, M. N. Gabremichael & C. N. Spottiswoode Received 14 May 2008 Summary. — When first described, from two specimens taken at Bogol Manyo (='Bogol Mayo') in south-east Ethiopia in 1971, the Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis was considered a sibling species of the Horn of Africa's Gillett's Lark M. gilletti. However, subsequent field reports have failed to clarify how the two taxa can be separated. In order to evaluate the differences between Degodi Lark and Gillett's Lark we measured the two Degodi specimens (plus one we caught ourselves) and 43 Gillett's, reviewed the literature on the subject to assemble all the published diagnostic characters, and visited Bogol Manyo and adjacent areas to photograph, observe and sound-record both taxa. We find that there is no morphometric disjunction between the taxa, no evidence of vocal separation, no consistent plumage difference, and no molecular distinction. We therefore regard M. degodiensis as most probably a synonym of M. gilletti; if it is retained as a subspecies of gilletti it must be chiefly on account of its smaller mean size. The Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis was described on the basis of two specimens col- lected at Bogol Manyo (='Bogol Mayo'), eastern Ethiopia, in November 1971 (Erard 1975 [apparently only published in 1976, fide R. J. Dowsett in litt. 2008]). These specimens close- ly resembled Gillett's Lark M. gilletti but were distinguished mainly on the basis of their shorter tails, and also of distinctive combinations of certain other mensural variables; the describer was inclined to consider them as meriting only subspecific status but, on the rec- ommendation of C. Vaurie in the light of their seeming parapatric relationship to populations of Gillett's Lark, he elected to treat them as a sibling species of Gillett's (Erard 1975; C. Erard pers. comm. 2007 and in litt. 2008). Since that time the species has been found nowhere else and has therefore been listed as at risk (current lUCN status Vulnerable) owing principally to its highly restricted range (Collar & Stuart 1985, Stattersfield & Capper 2000, BirdLife International 2008); in turn, this small range has been crucial in the identifi- cation of the pastoral bushlands around Bogol Manyo as an Important Bird Area (EWNHS 1996, 2001). However, only a few observers have made their way so far east in Ethiopia to investi- gate the species, and none has sought to survey it in order to determine the true limits of its distribution and therefore its more exact conservation status. Moreover, those few that have made the journey— Ash & Gullick (1990), Webb & Smith (1996), Francis & Shirihai (1999), N. Borrow {in litt. 2007) — are by no means uniformly confident or clear over the identifica- tion of the species. Consequently the task of attempting a survey of its range and conservation status remains problematic, and the value of such work questionable. Prompted in particular by the doubts of N. Borrow {in litt. 2007 and to J. S. Ash in 2006), we assembled the sparse literature on the Degodi Lark and Gillett's Lark, listed out the charac- ters offered by various observers as certainly or possibly diagnostic of the former, and set them against our own evidence gathered during a two-night visit to Bogol Manyo (18-19 June 2007; 04°31'N, 4r32'E) and adjacent areas along the road from Filtu (05°07'N, 40°39'E) to beyond Cole (05°25'N, 41°49'E), where we sought to find, photograph and sound-record Jan-Hendrik Becking 48 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) References: Ali, S. & Ripley, S.D. 1971. Hmidbook of the birds of India mid Pakistan, vol. 6. Oxford Uniw Press. Bartels, E. 1931. Vogels van Kole Beres. [Birds ofKole Beres.] Nat. Tijdschr. Ned. Indie 91: 308-348. Bartels, M. 1937. Zwei fiir Java neue Brut\^ogel. Om. Monatsber. 45: 16-19. Bartels, M. & Bouma, P. J. 1937. Keerkringvogels en slechtv^alken aan Java's Zuidkust. [Tropicbirds and Peregrine Falcons on the south coast of Java.] Tropische Natuur 26: 108-111. Bartels, M. Jr. & Stresemann, A. W. 1929. Systematische Ubersicht der bisher von Ja\'a nachgewiesenen Vogel. Treubia 11: 89-146. Becking, J.-H. 1989. Henry Jacob Victor Sody (1892-1959), his life and zvork, a biographical and bibliographical study. E. J. Brill, Leiden. Becking, J.-H. 2001. Iii Memoriam. In Memory of Hans Bartels. Ardea 89: 420-425. Bouma, P. J. 1932. Broedbiologische waamemingen bij Soemoerkondang, Cheribon, Java. [Obser\-ations on breeding biolog}^ at Soemoerkondang, Cheribon, Java.] Org. CI. Ned. Vogelk. 4: 154-157. Bouma, P. J. 1934. Broedtijden in de hout\"esterij Tjiledoek, Java. [Breeding periods in the forestrv district of Tjiledoek, Java.] Ardea 25: 100-107. Collar, N. J., Scharlemann, J. P. W. & Fisher, C. T. 2000. Max E. G. Bartels and the Ja\-an Lapwing Vanellus macropteriis. Kukila 11: 122-124. Collar, N. J., Andreev, A. V., Chan, S., Crosby, M. J., Subramanya, S. & Tobias J. A. (eds.) 2001. Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red Data book. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Hellebrekers, M. P. J. & Hoogerwerf, A. 1967. A further contribution to our oological kno\vledge of the island of Java (Indonesia). Zool. Verhand. Leiden 88: 1-164. Hoogerwerf, A. 1939. Uit het leven van de gevreesden "gestreepte". [From the life of the feared "striped".] Tropische Natuur 28: 4-13. Hoogerwerf, A. 1949a. Een bijdrage tot de oologie van het eiland Ja\'a. [A contribution to the oologv of the island of Java.] Limosa 22: 1-277. Hoogerwerf, A. 1949b. Over van Java afkomstige eieren en balgen van de Meerkoet (Fidica atra L). [On eggs and skins of the Common Coot {Fidica atra L.) from Java.] Limosa 22: 372-375. Hoogerwerf, A. 1950a. De avifauna van Tjibodas en omgeving, inclusief het natuurmonument Tjibodas-Gn. Cede (West-Java). [The avifauna of Tjibodas and surroundings including the nature reser^^e Tjibodas- Gn. Cede (West Java).] Limosa 23: 1-158. Hoogerwerf, A. 1950b. De avifauna van de Plantentuin te Buitenzorg (Java) [The a\-ifauna of the Botanical Gardens at Buitenzorg (=Bogor) (Java).] Limosa 23: 159-280. Hoogerwerf, A. 1954. Rapport over een naar Komodo, Padar en Rintja (Kleine Sunda Eilanden) gemaakte dienstreis van 21 Mei-6 Juli 1953. [Report on a tour of dub,^ to Komodo, Padar and Rintja (Lesser Sunda Islands) from 21 May-6 July 1953.] Unpubl. Hoogerwerf, A. 1955. lets over de vogels van de eilanden Komodo, Padar en Rintja, het land van Varaniis komodensis. [A bit about the birds of the islands of Komodo, Padar and Rintja, the land oi-Varanus komod- ensis.] Limosa 28: 96-112. Hoogerwerf, A. 1962. On Aegithina tiphia (Linn.), the Common lora, from Udjimg Kulon, western Java. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 82: 160-165. Hoogerwerf, A. 1965. Pycnonotus phimosiis subspp. with the description of a new subspecies from Bawean Island. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 85: 47-53. Hoogerwerf, A. 1970. Ujung Kulon. The land of the last Javan Rhinoceros. E. J. Brill, Leiden, de Jong, L. 1985. Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog, vol. lib, pt. 11. [TJie Netherlands empire in the Second World War.] Rijksinstituut voor Oorlogsdocumentratie, Staatsuitgeverij, 's- Gravenhage. Mees, G. F. 1986. A list of the birds recorded from Bangka Island, Indonesia. Zool. Verh. Leiden 232: 1-176. Mees, G. F. 1996. Geographic variation in birds of Java. Publ. Nuttall Om. CI. 26. Nuttall Om. CL, Cambridge, MA. Mees, G. F. 2006. The avifauna of Flores (Lesser Sunda Islands). Zool. Mededelingen Leiden 80(3): 1-261. Schoenmakers, F. F. 1933. Ni/cticorax calcdoiiicus^ Tropische Natuur 22: 200. van Steenis-Kruseman, M. J. 1988. Verwcrkt Indisch Verleden. [My Dutch East Indian past dealt with.] Privately published, Oestgeest. Voous, K. H. 1995. In de Ban van Vogels. Ornithologisch Biografisch Woordenboek van Nederland. [Under the spell of birds. Ornithological biogrtiphiCiil dictionary of the Netherlands.] Uitgev. Scheffers, Utrecht. Address: Jan-Hendrik Becking {d. 16 January 2009). Please address correspondence to Joost Bromver, Brouwer Envir. & Agric. Consultancy, Wildekamp 32, 6721 JD Bennekom, The Netherlands, e-mail BrouwereEAC@orange.nl © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 N. J. CoUar et al. 49 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Taxonomic status of the Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis, with notes on the voice of Gillett's Lark M. gilletti by N. J. Collar, C. Dingle, M. N. Gabremichael & C. N. Spottiswoode Received 14 May 2008 Summary. — When first described, from two specimens taken at Bogol Manyo (='Bogol Mayo') in south-east Ethiopia in 1971, the Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis was considered a sibling species of the Horn of Africa's Gillett's Lark M. gilletti. However, subsequent field reports have failed to clarify how the two taxa can be separated. In order to evaluate the differences between Degodi Lark and Gillett's Lark we measured the two Degodi specimens (plus one we caught ourselves) and 43 Gillett's, reviewed the literature on the subject to assemble all the published diagnostic characters, and visited Bogol Manyo and adjacent areas to photograph, observe and sound-record both taxa. We find that there is no morphometric disjunction between the taxa, no evidence of vocal separation, no consistent plumage difference, and no molecular distinction. We therefore regard M. degodiensis as most probably a synonym of M. gilletti; if it is retained as a subspecies of gilletti it must be chiefly on account of its smaller mean size. The Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis was described on the basis of two specimens col- lected at Bogol Manyo (='Bogol Mayo'), eastern Ethiopia, in November 1971 (Erard 1975 [apparently only published in 1976, fide R. }. Dowsett in litt. 2008]). These specimens close- ly resembled Gillett's Lark M. gilletti but were distinguished mainly on the basis of their shorter tails, and also of distinctive combinations of certain other mensural variables; the describer was inclined to consider them as meriting only subspecific status but, on the rec- ommendation of C. Vaurie in the light of their seeming parapatric relationship to populations of Gillett's Lark, he elected to treat them as a sibling species of Gillett's (Erard 1975; C. Erard pers. comm. 2007 and in litt. 2008). Since that time the species has been found nowhere else and has therefore been listed as at risk (current lUCN status Vulnerable) owing principally to its highly restricted range (Collar & Stuart 1985, Stattersfield & Capper 2000, BirdLife International 2008); in turn, this small range has been crucial in the identifi- cation of the pastoral bushlands around Bogol Manyo as an Important Bird Area (EWNHS 1996, 2001). However, only a few observers have made their way so far east in Ethiopia to investi- gate the species, and none has sought to survey it in order to determine the true limits of its distribution and therefore its more exact conservation status. Moreover, those few that have made the journey— Ash & Gullick (1990), Webb & Smith (1996), Francis & Shirihai (1999), N. Borrow {in litt. 2007) — are by no means uniformly confident or clear over the identifica- tion of the species. Consequently the task of attempting a survey of its range and conservation status remains problematic, and the value of such work questionable. Prompted in particular by the doubts of N. Borrow (in litt. 2007 and to J. S. Ash in 2006), we assembled the sparse literature on the Degodi Lark and Gillett's Lark, listed out the charac- ters offered by various observers as certainly or possibly diagnostic of the former, and set them against our own evidence gathered during a two-night visit to Bogol Manyo (18-19 June 2007; 04°31'N, 41°32'E) and adjacent areas along the road from Filtu (05°07'N, 40°39'E) to beyond Cole (05°25'N, 41°49'E), where we sought to find, photograph and sound-record N. J. Collar et al. 50 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) a sample of birds representative both of M. degodiensis and of M. gilletti, and to capture a specimen of M. degodiensis. We also examined and measured the only material of M. degodi- ensis {n=2) and the combined series of M. gilletti (7i=43) held in the American Museum of Natural History, New York (AMNH) (16 specimens). Natural History Museum, UK (BMNH) (21), Los Angeles County Museum (LACM) (1), Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris (MNHN) (2) and National Museum of Natural History, Washington DC (USNM) (3), and we sought further information and clarification from previous observers at Bogol Manyo, namely John S. Ash, Nik Borrow and Christian Erard himself. Records, range and habitat of the Degodi Lark Records of birds judged or assumed to be Degodi Lark come from a very limited area, extending from 17 km west of Bogol Manyo (Webb & Smith 1996) to the Cole area, 25 km south-east of Bogol Manyo (C. Hillman & MNG unpubl. data), and comprise these outliers plus Bogol Manyo village itself (N. Borrow & MNG unpubl. data), the type locality 11 km east of Bogol Manyo (Erard 1975, Ash & Gullick 1990, Hornbuckle et al. 1996; pers. obs.), and points 15 km and 17 km east of Bogol Manyo (EWNHS 2001). Thus the species is known, so far as we are aware, from six localities extending over 42 km along the Filtu-Dollo road (see Fig. 1) and over an altitudinal range of c.200^00 m. z Figure 1. Map of the lower Genale region showing range of Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis (crosses represent sites from which the taxon has been reported: see text), with localities A and B where in 2007 we encountered Gillett's Larks M. gilletti. N. J. Collar et al. 51 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) We focused our own field work at the type locality to be certain that the birds we sought would unequivocally be attributable to M. degodiensis. At this site, a rectangle of 7 ha centred on c.04°32'N, 41°37'E (326 m), on 18 June 2007 we encountered three calling indi- viduals and heard several (probably at least three) more on the north side of the Bogol Manyo-Dollo road between 06.30 h and 08.30 h, over a linear distance of 520 m (individual birds being separated by 250 and 320 m). The impression from this short encounter was that the species must be common in the area. Indeed, the following morning we located two more calling birds on separate territories, within five minutes of walking south of the road, from the same starting point and in the same early morning time-frame. We made minidisc recordings (Sony MZ-RHl recorder with a Sennheiser MKE300 microphone) of calls and /or songs of five individuals, photographed three of these plus the presumed mate of one of them, and mist-netted one. Erard (1975) reported that his specimens of Degodi Lark were collected in (our transla- tion) 'a very light brush with low bushy acacias on bare soil'. At what they assumed to be the same locality Ash & Gullick (1990) found birds in 'thin low acacias 3-4 m high with scat- tered Commiphora and other bush species' but without 'any low vegetative ground cover anywhere'. Again, at what we in turn assumed to be the same locality we found habitat to consist of stunted open thorny Acacia-Commiphora scrub with scattered deciduous and ever- green trees, 3-5 m high, with open patches and clearings of low herbs, grasses and small woody shrubs, on a very stony substrate of pale red-brown soil. Quantities of livestock grazed and browsed the area, notably camels and goats. Records, range and habitat of Gillett's Lark Gillett's Lark is endemic to the Horn of Africa, ranging from eastern Ethiopia just south of the Djibouti border to the three-way intersection of the frontiers between Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia, with a small presence in north-east Kenya and a range in Somalia north of 02°N which only excludes the north-east coastal regions either side of the 'horn' itself (Erard 1975, Dean et al. 1992, Ryan 2004). More precisely, both Erard (1975) and Ash & Miskell (1998) mapped the distribution of Gillett's Lark in Somalia and showed the species as being recorded at and to the south of DoUo, around 50 km east of Bogol Manyo (04°31'N, 4r32'E in the Times comprehensive atlas of the world 1999). Moreover, Miskell & Ash (1985) indicated Gillett's Lark as being recorded in north-east Kenya from localities immediately due south of Bogol Manyo, e.g. Handotu at 03°57'N, 41°53'E and Sarigo at 03°43'N, 41°30'E, and, extrapolating from the Ethiopian evidence and habitat/ rainfall evidence, Lewis & Pomeroy (1989) suggested that the species might extend west in Kenya as far as Moyale. Whether or not this is demonstrated, it is already clear that Gillett's Lark flanks the range of Degodi Lark to the north-west, north, east, south and south-southwest. During our drive to Bogol Manyo from Filtu (17 June 2007), and on our return two days later, we stopped and searched for Gillett's Larks at regular intervals, although the time of day was never favourable and the stage in the breeding cycle appeared to be more advanced than at Bogol Manyo itself (see below), such that the species proved somewhat elusive. How^ever, we found an individual calling at 04°49'N, 41°00'E (802 m), and another only 35 km north-east of Bogol Manyo (822 m), at 04°37'24"N, 41°17'32"E. (According to N. Borrow [pers. comm. 2007], Gillett's Larks prove to be very common all along this road ear- lier in the year, during or following rain.) The habitat of Gillett's Lark has been described as 'open scrub savanna on sand and on hard stony soils, and . . . sparse thorny scrub and aloe scrub on edges of rocky outcrops, 1000-1500 m' (Dean et al. 1992) and as 'semi-arid savanna and scrub, typically on hard sub- N. J. Collar et al. 52 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) strates, often near rocky areas ... [in Somalia in areas receiving 75-450 mm annual rainfall] . . . from near sea-level to 1500 m' (Ryan 2004). Erard (1975), after outlining earlier accounts which mentioned light savanna with low thorny bushes and perhaps a preference for rich- er hill vegetation, observed birds in (our translation) 'light woody savanna with scattered large acacias dominating a discontinuous bushy stratum intersected by grassy patches on sandy soil'. Our own encounters with Gillett's Larks were in fairly dense to semi-open but heavily grazed thorn-bush (penetrable along myriad cattle-paths), with many trees at least 5 m high and bushy vegetation generally 3-4 m high, the birds themselves feeding frequent- ly in patches of short grass at the base of cover and flying up onto the outer branches of Characters judged or suspected to distinguish Degodi Lark from Gillett's Lark have been published by Erard (1975), Ash & Gullick (1990), Dean et al (1992), Francis & Shirihai (1999; also Shirihai & Francis 1999), Vivero Pol (2001), Sinclair & Ryan (2003) and Ryan (2004). These are listed and dealt with in turn below, but obvious handbook repetitions of characters are not cited. 1. Smaller (Erard 1975, Ash & Gullick 1990). It is certainly the case that the specimen material appears considerably smaller (see Fig. 12), but we cannot find evidence that proves that this is a real condition. Mensural data for Degodi Lark derive from only three specimens (type, paratype and our live specimen) and appear at the smaller end of the spectrum for Gillett's, but there is much overlap (Table 1). 2. Shorter tailed (Erard 1975). This was the single most striking feature of the type material and the one apparently most instrumental in persuading Erard to erect degodiensis as a full species ('Le caractere distinctif reside dans la remarquable brievete relative des rectrices'). However, neither Ash & Gullick (1990) nor Webb & Smith (1996) were able to gauge this feature, the former authors writing that 'the tail did not appear to be inordinately short' and the latter going so far as to 'concur with Ash and Gullick that, contrary to Erard's original description . . . , the bird appears longtailed in the field' (our italics). As a result, its 'long-tailed' appearance (Vivero Pol 2001) and 'longish tail' (Sinclair & Ryan 2003) have now, paradoxically, been incorporated into the diagnostic literature. Moreover, re-measurement of the type material (by NJC), combined with measurement of a topotypical live bird (see below), suggests that while the three tails in question are at the shorter end of the spectrum, the complete disjunction indicated in Erard (1975) is not borne out; indeed, a specimen oigilletti in AMNH (556934) proved to have a tail 1 mm shorter than the shorter of the two tails of degodiensis (Table 1). 3. Duller and more uniform (Ash & Gullick 1990). We were unable to detect any such difference, and to some extent this notion is contradicted by differences 4, 5 and 10 Measurements of M. degodiensis and M. gilletti. All measurements are in mm and expressed as means ± SE (range). They were made from museum specimens, as follows: AMNH 16, BMNH 21, LACM 1, MNHN 4 (including 2 degodiensis), USNM 3, plus a live specimen from the type locality of degodiensis. For explanation of museum acronyms, see Introduction. bushes. Morphology TABLE 1 Taxon M. degodiensis M. gilldH N 3 43 Bill 15.0 ± 1.2 (13-17) 16.9 ±0.2 (13-19) Tarsus 22.3 ± 0.3 (22-23) 22.4±0.1 (21-24) Wing 77.0 ± 1.5 (74-79) 82.3 ± 0.5 (76-91) Tail 59.0 ± 1.0 (57-60) 62.1 ± 0.4 (56-70) N. J. Collar et al. 53 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) below. Comparison of birds in all the plates reveals no evidence of greater dullness and uniformity in Degodi, and if there is variation in plumage it is probably a seasonal and /or individual rather than a taxonomic character. 4. Distinctly paler overall (Francis & Shirihai 1999). We found no clear evidence of this (see Figs. 5-12). 5. Paler and more rufous above (Erard 1975). There is a small degree of individual variation in upperpart coloration, but there is overlap with Gillett's and it is emphatically not a 100% diagnostic character. Arguably this contradicts character 3 above, and reinforces the idea that such differences may depend on wear and/ or individual variation. 6. Streaking above finer and less dense (Erard 1975), mis-repeated as 'narrower and denser' by Dean et al. (1992). This does not hold either on specimens or in photographs (see Figs. 5, 9-11). 7. Breast less heavily marked (more speckled than streaked; more finely streaked, less blotchy spotting) more camel-coloured and obsolete — by implication darker and stronger in Gillett's) (Erard 1975, Francis & Shirihai 1999). The breasts of the type material from Bogol Manyo might seem less powerfully marked, but the difference is very minor and is certainly not 100% reliable; indeed, two gilletti from one locality in northern Somalia (BMNH 1908.5.28.115-116) show a similar reduction, which may reflect local or individual variation of a trivial nature (Figs. 5-8, 10-12, 14-15). 8. Breast streaking stops at carpal level, not extending onto lower breast (Francis & Shirihai 1999). Such a subtle difference may simply be an effect of the angle at which the bird is perched, and we certainly could not confirm it in the field (Figs. 5-8, 10-12). In BMNH, however, it is apparent that breast streaking is moderately variable in both extent and strength (see, e.g.. Figs. 14-15) such that this character must be regarded as invalid. 9. Pale collar more pronounced (C. Erard in Ash & GuUick 1990). Our live specimen in the hand showed no more pallor around the hindcollar than our photographs of gilletti (Figs. 5, 9-11). 10. Scapulars black-centred and broadly fringed, forming prominent scaly pattern (brown-centred and narrower fringed in Gillett's, forming indistinct pattern) (Francis & Shirihai 1999). If anything, the photographic evidence (Figs. 5, 9-11) tends to indicate the opposite, suggesting that this character is variable within populations and/ or annual cycle. 11. Sometimes with small, ill-defined darkish breast-side patches (never in Gillett's) (Francis & Shirihai 1999). We saw no Degodi Larks that showed this feature, which is simply the running-together of a few breast streaks, except for the bird in the hand when its carpal was lifted. We saw no Gillett's which showed this character either, but there are two specimens of Gillett's in BMNH (1906.12.3.69 and 1923.8.7.2639) in which such a dark breast-side mark occurs (Fig. 13); moreover, one of the two specimens oi gilletti in Paris (MNHN 1976.561) also shows dark breast-side patches (Fig. 12). Thus this character, which in any case (not being 100% diagnostic) must be counted both unreliable and trivial, is in fact invalid. 12. Moustachial and malar stripes narrower, fainter and huffish-brown (fairly bold and blackish in Gillett's) (Francis & Shirihai 1999). This is by no means clear-cut and certainly not 100% diagnostic (Figs. 5-11, 13-15). In BMNH, specimens of arorihensis are browner and fainter than those of nominate gilletti, and despite the map in Erard (1975) it is unknown N. J. Collar et al. 54 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) ho^v close aroriJiensis approaches Bogol Manvo from the east and south. At an\- rate, the moustachial and malar markings of Degodi Lark and M. aroriJiejisis are extremeh" similar. 13. Very narroiv pre-ociilar ci/estnp\', more diffuse and poller (grey-broicn) behind eye (post-ocular) (broader and blacker along length in Gillett's) (Francis & Shirihai 1999). Photographs (Figs. 5-11) suggest that tliis is a variable condition (the Degodi in Fig. 8 seems to have at least as strong a supercilium as the Gillett's in Fig. 11), verA' difficult to gauge and improbabh' valid. Specimens are not particularh* helpful, and this feature is at best onlv a possible minor point of divergence. Description of a live individual On 19 June at around 08.00 h, at 04°31'N, 41°37'E, 318 m (and as we believe within 500 m of the site at which Erard obtained the holot}-pe), a bird ^vas captured in a mist-net by play- back of its o^vn alarm-calls \vhich, as \ve subsequentlv discovered, appeared to be given in response to the accidental threat we were perceived to present to at least one just-tledged and still completelv dependent \-oung. The captured bird had a fully ossified skull and showed no evidence of moult; it possessed a fairlv strong cloacal protuberance, suggesting it was male (as molecular analysis later proved) but an old brood-patch was possiblv pres- ent; bill from skull was 15 mm; wing 78 mm cur\^ed, 82 mm flat; tail 60 mm; tarsus 23 mm; weight 19.2 g. Plumage. — Cro^vn rufous-tinged sandv brown with faint darker bro^vn streaks and pale buffy margins, nape and hindcollar mid brown with pale buff}^ edges forming slightlv paler collar effect (only visible when head held up), mantle and back fairly dark brov\m with pale brown inner margins and buff\^ fringes, scapulars plain brown with darker bro^vn centres and buffy fringes, wing-coverts plain bro^vn ^vith buffv-whitish edges, remiges and rectri- ces brown. Supercilium broad buff; evestripe dark brown (loral line blackish bro^vn, post-ocular line brownish), ear-co\'erts rufous-tinged sand\' brown, louver lores buff, suboc- ular line buff, moustachial line thin, \-ague and blackish, submoustachial. area creamv whitish, malar line vague and bro^vnish, chin and upper throat creamy ^vhitish, breast light- ly streaked rufous-tinged sand\' brown, with \-ague darker central Knes to some streaks, darker and broader at breast-sides (but this ^vas onlv visible in the hand when the ^ving was raised), remaining underparts dirty whitish. Bare parts: irides pale bro"wn, legs pink, upper mandible blackish, lower mandible pale grey ^vith a blackish tip. The bird was sampled for blood (deposited at the Zoological Museum, Copenhagen), photographed (see Figs. 5-6), and released at the place of capture. Behaviour and voice During their February visit. Ash & Gullick (1990) took 7.5 hours of searcliing before the\- found any birds, which then proved very quiet and secretive; thev speculated that this might be a behavioural difference between Degodi and Gillett's Larks. Ho^vever, \ve sus- pect that this simply reflected season and is not a species-specific behaviour. During our June visit, we found Degodi Larks singing \-erv conspicuouslv (and on both mornings it took us onl\- a few minutes to find them), whereas b\' contrast it was then the Gillett's Larks, at higher ele\ ations farther north-west ^vhere the rain falls earlier (Februarv-April in the Filtu area, rs. start of April at Bogol Manvo: MNG pers. data), that were quiet, giving onlv calls and no songs, and wore sh\" and rclati\ el\' difficult to find. N. J. Collar et al. 55 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Accounts of the voice of Gillett's and Degodi Lark are heavily compromised by the fragmentary nature of the reports, the individual manner of both description and transcrip- tion, and the interpretation placed on them all by the observers and subsequent compilers. Literature on Gillett's Lark. — Dean et al. (1992) gave the song as a 'dsee-dsit' (reported by J. S. Ash) and as 'sisisidetio' and 'da-di-da-di-da-di-da' (reported by Erlanger). Sinclair & Ryan (2003) mentioned a 'jumbled, chirpy song similar to Foxy Lark's [Mirafra (Calendulauda) alopex] but with more "chissik" notes'. Ryan (2004), making no reference to Sinclair & Ryan, reinterpreted Dean et al.'s information so as to treat the 'dsee-dsit' more as a call, while mentioning a 'longer song in aerial display'. Literature on Degodi Lark. — Dean et al. (1992) had no information on the voice of Degodi Lark. Webb & Smith (1996) were the first to fill the void, giving its call as a 'high-pitched tsee-tsee, the first note ascending in pitch, the latter descending', and, when this call was played back to the caller, it quickly began 'calling or singing' with 'a 4-6 note high-pitched trill, twill-ill-ill-ill-it slightly reminiscent of Wood Warbler Phylloscopus sibilatrix', the whole vocalisation being lower pitched than the call and even-pitched throughout. Shirihai & Francis (1999) heard birds sing without providing a description, but they mentioned the call as a high-pitched 'tzik'. Sinclair & Ryan (2003) referred to the Degodi Lark as having a 'distinctive song', but then simply repeated the two vocalisations described by Webb & Smith (1996); their use of the word 'distinctive' is therefore misleading, since they could only have been referring to Webb & Smith's second vocalisation, which involved no comparisons with Gillett's Lark and supplied no evidence of its diagnostic value. Ryan (2004) reported Webb & Smith's two calls, but added that the species is 'also reported as uttering repeated sibilant trill . . . with occasional notes similar to those of M. gillettV; the source of this last vocalisation is not apparent from the literature cited by Ryan (2004). Most tellingly, but without any attempt at a description, Hornbuckle et al. (1996) reported three birds at the type locality 'singing identically to Gillett's (heard and taped previous and same day)', their localities for the nearest Gillett's being 7 km west and 20 km east of Filtu. Recent field evidence. — At the type locality of Degodi Lark on 18 June 2007 we heard several birds calling. This mainly consisted of two high-pitched short whistles (the same as the first two notes of the song), sii-sii, but sometimes just a single note, sii, sometimes a triplet with the emphasis on the last note, sii-sii-st, and sometimes as a more rapid double note, sisi. These all fit well with Ash's dsee-dsit (Gillett's) and Webb & Smith's seee-seee, and even Francis & Shirihai's tzik. Some birds, sitting out vigilantly as if concerned for others in the vicinity, turned this call into a longer, more rolling trill, with the same timbre and pitch, srrrrrrrii-srrrrrrrii- srrrrrrrii (but given singly, doubly, triply or in strings). We mist-netted one of these birds by playing this sound back to it, the bird instantaneously flying towards the source. We decid- ed it was in fact an alarm-call, in this case issued to just-fledged young, of which we saw one. The call is illustrated in Fig. 2 and, as can be seen, is precisely matched by Gillett's Lark. We are confident from their description that this is the same as Webb & Smith's twill-ill -ill- ill-it. We detected our first two Degodi Larks by their song, which consisted of a short, sweet, relatively quiet and simple strophe, high-pitched, lilting and slightly descending in pitch in a way reminiscent of a Willow Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus, and transcribed as: sii-sii-sii- twilly-twill-tew-tew (which clearly corresponds with Erlanger's sisisidetio, as cited in Dean et al. 1992). These songs were sound-recorded, and samples from the two individuals are N. J. Collar et al. 56 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) 15 10 5 ^ 15' N X o c CD D cr 0 M. gilleti 1 0.2 0.4 0.6 Figure 2. Sonograms of calls of Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis and Gillett's Lark M. gilletti. Recordings of M. degodiensis involve two individuals (1 and 2), both recorded 11 km east of Bogol Manyo, 19 June 2007, by CNS. The M. gilletti was recorded in Awash National Park, Ethiopia, 26 September 2006, by C. Cohen. 10 5- M. degodiensis 1 0.2 — I — 0.4 15 10 M. degodiensis 2 r r r f r ^ 0.2 0.4 reproduced in Fig. 3, where for comparison several sonograms of Gillett's Larks from various parts of , the range are presented. These ^ illustrate the strong similarity of the songs of Degodi with those of Gillett's (notably the upper sono- grams marked M. gilletti 1 and M. gilletti 2) although, as the sono- grams show, the songs of Gillett's are somewhat variable (but with a clear basic pattern). In one taped example the Gillett's song is repeat- ed several times with barely a break, rather than being a self -standing strophe, and it seems likely that more extensive sampling of birds at different times of day and year would pro- duce more evidence of variability in song pattern. Fiowever, the key point here is that the songs we recorded of Degodi Lark sit close to or within the small span of variation reflect- ed in our collected vocal material of Gillett's. Recordings were digitised at a sampling rate of 44.1 kFiz using Avisoft SASLabPro (Raimund Spect, Berlin, Germany) with a 16-bit acquisition sound card. Sonograms were created using a Fast Fourier Transformation size of 256 (Frame: 100%, Window: Hamming, Overlap: 50%), which led to a frequency resolution of 172 Hz and a temporal resolution of 2.9 msec. Time (seconds) Molecular evidence A blood sample was obtained from the specimen of Mirafra degodiensis we mist-netted (see above). The Natural History Museum (BMNH), Tring, UK, kindly provided us with four toe-pad samples of M. gilletti, including two of each of the two known subspecies of M. gilletti from geographically disjunct populations within their range (M. g. gilletti from Hawash, Ethiopia, and Hargesia, Somalia, and M. g. ahoriensis from Bera and Wajit, Somalia). Sequences of three other species in the genus Mirafi-a were obtained from GenBank and used as outgroups in phylogenetic analysis (accession numbers: M. passerina, AY165163; M. javanica, DQ008520; and M. sabota, AY165172). DNA extraction of the toe-pads was performed in a UV hood using a commercial kit (QiAmp, Qiagen). The entire foot skin sample that was provided to us was used in each extraction. Negative extraction controls, using the same instruments and reagents, were car- ried out simultaneously. DNA extraction from the blood sample was performed in a different laboratory, using a standard phenol-chloroform method (details in Dingle et al. 2006). PGR was performed on the blood sample and the museum samples separateh' to avoid contamination. First, a 674 bp section of ci/t b was amplified from the blood sample using the primers L14996 and H15646. Cycling conditions were two minutes at 94°C, 45 N. J. Collar et al. 57 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) M. degodiensis 2 M. degodiensis 1 .-w, ^^....^ ^-^^ ^^^^ M. gilletti 1 A 12 1.4 ! N X C 0 0) M. gilletti 1 22 2 4 M. gilletti 2 0.2 0.' 1..S i,a s M. gilletti 2 02 0,' M. gilletti 2 Time (seconds) Figure 3. Sonograms of songs from Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis and Gillett's Lark M. gilletti. Recordings involved two individuals of each taxon (distinguished as 1 or 2). Both songs of M. degodiensis were recorded 11 km east of Bogol Manyo, 18 June 2007 by CNS. Both songs of M. gilletti were recorded in Awash National Park, Ethiopia, 26 September 2006, by C. Cohen. cycles of 94°C for 30 seconds, 57°C for 45 seconds, and 72°C for one minute, followed by 72°C for 10 minutes. Sequencing reactions were performed using the same primers. Once sequence was obtained from the blood sample, we used the computer program Primer3 (v. 0.4.0) (Rozen & Skaletsky 2000) to design internal primers specific to the larks. These primers were cyt^F: GACGTCCAATTTGGCTGACT and cyt^7R: GTGGGGTTGTCTACC- GAAAA. A 308 bp segment of the mitochondrial cyt b region was successfully amplified from the foot skin of three of the four specimens. N. J. Collar et al. 58 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) M. sabota — M. desodiensLs 84 100 Figure 4. Phylogenetic relationships between haplotypes sampled from Gillett's Lark Mirafra gilletti and Degodi Lark M. degodiensis based on 308bp of mitochondrial cytochrome b sequence. Numbers above the branches represent Bayesian posterior probability scores. • AL silletd siUettHEtluomsi) AL s'dlem s'dletti (Somalia) AL sUletti ahoriensh (Somalia) 98 M iavanica 0.01 subsliliilirais/sili: Sequences were aligned and proofread using CodonCodeAligner (CodonCode Corporation, Dedham, MA, USA). No insertions or deletions were present, so sequence align- ments were unambiguous. Phylogenetic analyses were conducted using PAUP='4.0blO (Swofford 2002). Pairwise divergence values represent uncorrect- ed divergences. We are \f.msserina confident that the present results cannot be attributed to contamination as no posi- tive PCR results were obtained with negative extraction controls and different genotypes were obtained from dif- ferent individuals. We detected seven variable sites between the four Mirafra samples that we sequenced. At six of the variable sites, M. degodiensis shared the same allele with at least one of the M. gilletti sequences. Sequences from M. degodiensis only differed from the M. gilletti sequences by 1.2-1.3%, which was less than the level of divergence between the three M. gilletti sam- ples (2.0-2.3%); the level of sequence divergence between the different species was significantly higher, ranging from 9.5-11.7%. For the phylogenetic analysis, we included sequences from three other Mirafra species. A total of 60 nucleotide sites varied among the seven sequences, of which 31 were parsimony-informative. Phylogenetic reconstructions reveal that M. degodiensis is nested within the clade which includes all three M. gilletti individuals, indicating that the two taxa are not reciprocally monophyletic (Fig. 4). Discussion and conclusion Erard (1975) suggested that the variation in the abundance of certain species between Bogol Manyo and Filtu, and the shift between members of two species pairs somewhere between the two settlements, could be attributed to subtle differences in habitat, and this may indeed be the case. However, our own experience of Gillett's and Degodi Larks in 2007 suggested nothing by way of a real habitat shift. Both taxa were in areas of moderately dense vegetation where trees grew to 5 m or more, small thorn-bushes abounded and a fair- ly rich herb-layer, mostly consisting of grass, grew wherever the absence of cattle-tracks 59 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Figure 5. Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis, east of Bogol Manyo, June 2007 (C. N. Spottiswoode) Figure 6. Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis, east of Bogol Manyo, June 2007; same individual as in Fig. 5 (C. N. Spottiswoode) Figure 7. Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis, east of Bogol Manyo, October 2006 (N. Borrow) Figure 8. Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis, east of Bogol Manyo, June 2007 (C. N. Spottiswoode) Figure 9. Gillett's Lark Mirafra gilletti, south-east of Filtu, June 2007 (C. N. Spottiswoode) Figure 10. Gillett's Lark Mirafra gilletti, south-east of Filtu, June 2007; same individual as in Fig. 5 (C. N. Spottiswoode) Ficnirp 11 nillpH'it; T.ark Mirafra Qilletti. Awash N. J. Collar et al. 60 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) N. J. Collar et al. 61 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) permitted. Possibly our Gillett's were in taller, denser vegetation, but this is scarcely an aid to taxonomic distinction. Equally implausible from a taxonomic standpoint is the apparent shift in breeding regime between the Gillett's Larks higher up on the road to Filtu and the Degodi Larks in the relatively low-lying lands towards the Somali border, in which Degodi breeds rather later in the year (April-June, perhaps) than Gillett's (February-May, perhaps), reflecting different rainfall regimes between higher and lower ground. However true this may be, it is no good ground for taxonomic discrimination. In any case there must be some point of contact between the taxa along the rainfall gradient west of Bogol Manyo, and the acknowl- edged Gillett's to the east and south of Bogol Manyo, in Somalia and Kenya, would be on the same rainfall regime as the Degodi Lark. There seems to be no clear and consistent morphological distinction to be made between Degodi Lark and Gillett's Lark. Degodi certainly sits at the smaller end of the men- sural spectrum, with mean bill, wing and tail lengths respectively 2 mm, 5 mm and 3 mm shorter than Gillett's, but nevertheless with complete nestedness in bill and tail lengths, and the sample size is only three (Table 1). All plumage distinctions between the two appear to be based on minor individual variations or mistaken perceptions, as detailed in 'Morphology' above. A possible behavioural difference — reclusive, vs. obtrusive temperament — has been shown to be invalid. Vocal differences do not exist either: record- ings and sonograms of these songs demonstrate Degodi Lark identical to or sitting within the relatively minor variation found in Gillett's. Finally, the mtDNA data provide no basis for phylogenetic distinction of M. degodiensis from M. gilletti, although the phylogram (Fig. 4) suggests some structure within M. gilletti that would bear further study. On the basis of all this evidence we conclude that Mirafra degodiensis is conspecific with M. gilletti. This is a conclusion with which Christian Erard (pers. comm. 2007, in litt. 2008) concurs, having seen our evidence; he mentioned to us (NJC and CNS) that security issues were so serious at Bogol Manyo in 1971 that he was unable to stop over at the site and mere- ly collected there on part of one day before pressing on, thereby being deprived of acquiring enough comparative material to allow him a more informed judgement. Moreover, despite the trend towards smaller size we cannot identify a single character that dependably and consistently separates the two taxa, suggesting that M. degodiensis may in fact be a junior synonym of nominate M. gilletti. However, we suggest that, for the present and provision- ally, degodiensis is retained as a subspecies of gilletti, based on its mean smaller size. Nonetheless, all information provided in this paper on M. degodiensis, notably that on voice, therefore refers to M. gilletti. Captions to figures on opposite page Figure 12. Holotype (inner left) and paratype (outer left) of Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis next to the only two specimens of Gillett's Lark M. gilletti (outer right certainly nominate) in MNHN (N. J. Collar) Figure 13. Breast-side patches in two Gillett's Larks Mirafra gilletti (BMNH 1923.8.7.2639 and 1906.12.3.69), a character supposed never to be present in the species (see text) (N. J. Collar, © The Natural History Museum, Tring) Figure 14. Breast streaking on two specimens of Gillett's Lark Mirafra gilletti ahorihensis, showing considerable individual variation in strength and extent. Left, BMNH 98.6.13.44, male, Arabsiyo, 09°40'N, 43°46'E, November 1897; right, BMNH 1908.5.28.115, male, Eil Dab, 100 miles south-southeast of Berbera, hence roughly at Qoryale, 09°07'N, 45°57'E, December 1904. Coordinates from Ash & Miskell (1998) and Times atlas respectively (N. J. Collar, © The Natural History Museum, Tring) Figure 15. Reduced breast streaking on two specimens of Gillett's Lark Mirafra gilletti atiorihensis (BMNH 1908.5.28.115-116) from Eil Dab, 100 miles south-southeast of Berbera, hence roughly at Qoryale (09°07'N, A5°57'Efide Times atlas), December 1904. Note similarity to type material of M. degodiensis (N. J. Collar, © The Natural History Museum, Tring) N. J. Collar et al. 62 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Acknowledgements We especially thank Christian Erard for his generous consideration of our new e\-idence and for his support for our conclusion, John Ash and Nik Borrow for very helpful input into the evaluation of the taxa, Nik Borrow for photographs, Callan Cohen and Jon Hornbuckle for tape-recordings, our driver Abiy Dange for his solid support, Julian Francis for drawing our attention to Hornbuckle et al. (1996), Nick Mundy for the use of his lab for the genetic analysis, Nick Mundy and Marie Pointer for advice on conducting the genetic analysis, Paul Sweet (AMNH), Robert Prys-Jones and Mark Adams (BMNH), Kimball Garrett (LACM), Eric Pasquet (MNHN) and James Dean (USNM) for access to specimens in their care, and especially Mark Adams for supplying sample toe-pads of specimens of Gillett's Lark. Bob Dowsett and Francoise Dowsett-Lemaire were very helpful referees. Funding for our field work came from the Bromley Trust, BirdLife International, Birding Africa and Julian Francis; we thank them all. References: Ash, J. S. & Gullick, T. M. 1990. Field observations on the Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis. Bull Brit. Orn. CI. 110: 90-93. Ash, J. S. & Miskell, J. E. 1998. Birds of Somalia. Pica Press, Robertsbridge. BirdLife International. 2008. Threatened birds of the world 2008. CD-ROM. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Collar, N. J. & Stuart, S. N. 1985. Threatened birds of Africa and related islands: the ICBP/IUCX Red Data book. International Coimcil for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK. Dean, W. R. J., Fry, C. H., Keith, S. & Lack, P. C. 1992. Alaudidae, larks. Pp. 13-124 in Keith, S,, Urban, E. K. & Fry, C. H. (eds.) The birds of Africa, vol. 4. Academic Press, London. Dingle, C, Lovette, I. J., Canaday, C. & Smith, T. B. 2006. Elevational zonation and the phylogenetic relation- ships of the Henicorhina wood-wrens. Aiik 123: 119-134. Erard, C. 1975. Variation geographique de Mirafra gilletti Sharpe: description d'une espece jumelle. Oiseaii & RFO 45: 293-312. EWNHS. 1996. Important Bird Areas of Ethiopva: a first inventory. Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History- Society, Addis Ababa. EWNHS. 2001. Ethiopia. Pp. 291-336 in Fishpool, L. D. C. & Evans, M. I. (eds.) Important Bird Areas in Africa and associated islands: priority sites for conservation. Pisces Publications, Newbur\- & BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Francis, J. & Shirihai, H. 1999. Ethiopia: in search of endemic birds. Pri\'atelv published, London. Hornbuckle, J., Archer, M., Aspinall, S., Gardner, N. & Greensmith, A. 1996. Ethiopia, 24 Oct-18 Nov 1996. Unpubl. birdwatching report. Lewis, A. D. & Pomeroy, D. E. 1989. A bird atlas of Kenya. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam. Miskell, J. E. & Ash, J. S. 1985. Gillett's Lark Mirafr-a gilletti new to Kenya. Scopus 9: 53-54. Rozen, S. & Skaletsky, H. J. 2000. Primer3 on the WWV\^ for general users and for biologist programmers. Pp. 365-386 in Krawetz, S. & Misener, S. (eds.) Bioinformatics methods and protocols: methods in molecular biol- ogy. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. Ryan, P. G. 2004. Gillett's Lark Mirafra gilletti and Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis. Pp. 553-554 in del Hovo, J., Elliott, A. & Christie, D. A. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the zvorld, vol. 9. Lmix Edicions, Barcelona. Shirihai, H. & Francis, J. 1999. Endemic birds of Ethiopia. Ahda 1: 2-15. Sinclair, I. & Ryan, P. 2003. Birds of Africa south of the Sahara. Struik, Cape Towoi. Stattersfield, A. J. & Capper, D. R. 2000. Threatened birds of the world. L\tix Edicions, Barcelona & BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Swofford, D. L. 2002. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4.0bl0. Siiiauer Associates, Sunderland, MA. Vivero Pol, J. L. 2001. A guide to endemic birds of Ethiopia and Eritrea. Shama Books, Addis Ababa. Webb, R. & Smith, S. 1996. Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis, one of Africa's most poorlv-known species. Bidl. Afr. Bird CI. 3: 85-86. Addresses: N. J. Collar, BirdLife International, Wellbrook Court, Girton Road, Cambridge CB3 ONA, UK, & Bird Group, Natural History Museum, Akeman Street, Tring, Herts. HP23 6AP, UK. C. Dingle, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK. M. N. Gabremichael, c/o Atsede W Mariam, P.O. Box 1169, UNICEF Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. C. N. Spottiswoode, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Do^\Tling Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Ragnar Kinzelbach et al. 63 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) A substitute name for Serinus estherae orientalis Chasen by Ragnar Kinzelbach, Edward C. Dickinson & Soekarja Somadikarta Received 22 September 2008 The Mountain Serin Serinus estherae occurs as a series of widely disjunct high-altitude isolates from the Greater Sundas to Sulawesi and the Philippines. Chasen (1940) gave the name Serinus estherae orientalis to the east Javan form, type locality Goenoeng Ajekajek, Tengger Mountains (08°02'S, 112°55'E), of a montane serin first discovered in western Java, which species had then very recently been discovered in northern Sumatra (Chasen 1939, Meyer de Schauensee 1939). Mees (1996) confirmed the distinctiveness of the east Javan bird from that in west Java. The relationship of Philippine Serinus estherae mindanensis Ripley & Rabor, 1961, to the east Javan form now merits reinvestigation. Unfortunately, Chasen's name is a primary homonym, being preoccupied by Serinus orientalis Brehm, 1831, from Austria, a point overlooked for 68 years. Although Brehm's name is currently treated as a synonym of European Serin Serinus serinus (after Hartert 1903: 83), it is still an available name and invalidates Chasen's name under Arts. 52.2 and 57.2 of the International code of zoological nomenclature (ICZN 1999), as modified by Art. 23.9. We have examined Art. 23.9, which, according to Art. 57.2.1, may be used to validate in-use jun- ior homonyms over disused senior homonyms, and have concluded that the conditions set by Art. 23.9.1.2 ('reversal of precedence') cannot be met, there being too few usages of S. e. orientalis Chasen in the period 1958-2007. Thus, we propose to replace it by: Serinus estherae chaseni, nom. nov. The new name honours Frederick Nutter Chasen (1897-1942), Director of the Raffles Museum, Singapore, from 1932 until his death, and proposer of the name we replace. The name we propose is the masculine genitive form of his name (ICZN 1999, Art. 3.1.1.2). Because S. e. chaseni Kinzelbach, Dickinson & Somadikarta is a replacement name for S. e. orientalis Chasen, its type material is the same as that for S. e. orientalis Chasen. Acknowledgements We are grateful to Mathew Louis for drawing this instance of homonymy to our attention, and to Mary LeCroy for responding to our queries about the existence of type material for Brehm's name, for kindly checking his original description and for locating at least one syntype in the American Museum of Natural History (New York). Richard Schodde kindly advised us on the need to provide a new name, despite the fact that Brehm's name has not been used as valid since perhaps before 1899, and he and David Wells provided helpful comments on our original submission. References: Chasen, F. N. 1939. Preliminary diagnoses of new birds from North Sumatra. I. Treubia 17: 137-138. Chasen, F. N. 1940. Notes on some Javan birds. Treubia 17: 263-266. Hartert, E. 1903. Die Vdgel der palaarktischen Fauna, Bd. 1(1). R. Friedlander & Sohn, Berlin. International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). 1999. International code of zoological nomencla- ture. Fourth edn. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, c/o The Natural History Museum, London. Mees, G. F. 1996. Geographical variation in birds of Java. Publ. Nuttall Orn. CI. 26. Nuttall Orn. CL, Cambridge, MA. Meyer de Schauensee, R. 1939. Preliminary report on the birds of the George Vanderbilt Sumatran Expedition 1939. Notulae Naturae 18: 1-2. Ragnar Kinzelbach et al. 64 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(1) Addresses: Dr Ragnar Kinzelbach, Allgemeine & Spezielle Zoologie, Zoologische Sammlung Rostock, Universitatsplatz 2, 18055 Rostock, Germany, e-mail: ragnar.kLnzelbach@biologie.uni-rostock.de. Edward C. Dickinson, Flat 3, Bolsover Court, 19 Bolsover Road, Eastbourne BN20 7JG, UK. Dr S. Somadikarta, Dept. of Biology, Faculty of Science & Mathematics, University of Indonesia, Depok Campus, Depok 16424, Indonesia. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS Authors are invited to submit papers on topics relating to the broad themes of taxonomy and distribution of birds. Descriptions of new species of birds are especially welcome and will be given priority to ensure rapid publication, and may be accompanied by colour photographs or paintings. Submission may be made electronically (preferred) to the Editor (GMKirwan@aol.com): if large (>lmb) files are involved, e.g. to include illustrations, please contact the Editor first. Submission may also be made by post (to Guy Kirwan, 74 Waddington Street, Norwich NR2 4JS, UK); in this case send three hard copies and also a copy on a 3.5" disk, as MS Word or Rich Text files for PC. Wliere possible, reviews, and returns of papers and reviewers' comments to authors will be undertaken electronically. Where appropriate half-tone photographs may be included and, where essential to illustrate important points, the Editor will consider the inclusion of colour illustrations (if possible, authors should obtain funding to support this inclusion of such colour plates). Papers should follow the general style: Title — lower case, centred, bold by Aiithor(s) — lower case, centred, italics ' Introductory section without a heading Primary headings — lower case, centred, bold Secondary headings — left justified, lower case, italics, hold English names of animals should begin with capitals; give English name at first mention of every species. Numerals — thousands separated by commas, e.g. 1,000, 12,000 Units of measurement, SI. Space between values and unit, e.g. 12.1 g Statistical tests in the form: {r^^ = 3.12, P < 0.01). (x^^ = 7.31, n.s.) Citations to references in text: Author (Date); Author & Author (Date); if three or more authors — Author et al. (Date); or (Author(s) Date) etc. References: Author, A. (or Author, A. & Author, B.) Date. Title of paper. Title of journal in italics. Volume: pages. Author, A. Date. Title of hook in italics. Publisher, place of publication. Author, A. Date. Title of paper/chapter. Pages in Editor, A. & Editor, B. (eds.) Title of hook/proceedings in italics. Pages. Publisher, place of publication. Mdressies): addresses of authors, including e-mails if desired. Format for tables (to be typed on separate sheets at end of paper): TABLE n Description of table contents, including any abbreviations Column A Column B Row 1 Data Data Row 2 Data Data Legends for figures to be typed on one sheet at end of paper, in the form: Figure n. Text of legend, including key to symbols etc. Authors should provide an abstract of no more then 150 words. Correspondence confirming acceptance of papers will be accompanied by a form on which authors must assign copyright of their paper to the British Ornithologists' Club. Authors may be charged for any corrections that they request after their papers have been sent to the typesetter. After publication, authors will be sent, free of charge, a PDF file of their paper. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club ISSN 0007-1595 Edited by Guy M. Kirwan Volume 129, Number 1, pages 1-64 CONTENTS Club Announcements 1 SALAMAN, P., DONEGAN, T. & PRYS-JONES, R. A new subspecies of Brown-banded Antpitta Grallaria milleri from Antioquia, Colombia 5 BECKING, J.-H. The Bartels and other egg collections from the island of Java, Indonesia, with corrections to earlier publications of A. Hoogerwerf 18 COLLAR, N. J., DINGLE, C, GABREMICHAEL, M. N. & SPOTTISWOODE, C. N. Taxonomic status of the Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis, with notes on the voice of Gillett's Lark M. gilletti 49 KINZELBACH, R., DICKINSON, E. C. & SOMADIKARTA, S. A substitute name for Serinus estherae orientalis Chasen , 63 COMMITTEE Cdr. M. B. Casement OBE RN {Chairman 2005) Miss H. Baker {Vice-Chairman) (2005) S. A. H. Statham {Hon. Secretary) (2004) D. J. Montier {Hon. Treasurer) (1997) Dr J. H. Cooper (2005) P. J. Wilkinson (2005) D. J. Fisher {Hon. Website Manager) (2007) Dr R. P. Prys-Jones (2007) M. J. Walton (2008) Ex- officio members Hon. Editor. G. M. Kirwan (1 January 2004) Chairman ofBOU/BOC Joint Publications Committee (JPC): Revd. T. W. Gladwin Administration Manager: S. P. Dudley (2005) BOC Publications Officer: Prof. R. A. Cheke (2001) EDITORIAL BOARD Murray Bruce, R. T. Chesser, Edward C. Dickinson, Francoise Dowsett-Lemaire, Steven M. S. Gregor}-, Jose Fernando Pacheco, Robert B. Payne, Pamela C. Rasmussen, Gees Roselaar, Thomas S. Schulenberg, Lars Svensson Registered Charity No. 279583 © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 www.boc-online.org Printed on acid-free paper. Published by the British Ornithologists' Club Typeset by Alcedo Publishing of Arizona, USA, and printed bN- Latimer Trend, UK )S lOZ British Ornitliologists' Club \ \ m 2009 ) I PRESENftiD THING UBRAW Volume 129 No. 2 June 2009 MEETINGS are normally held in the Sheffield Building of Imperial College, South Kensington, London SW7. The nearest Tube station is at South Kensington; a map of the area \vill be sent to members, on request. (Limited car parking facilities can be reserved [at a special reduced charge of £5.00], on prior application to the Hon. Secretary.) The cash bar is open from 6.15 pm, and a buffet supper, of two courses follo\ved by coffee, is serv ed at 7.00 pm. (A vegetarian menu can be arranged if ordered at the time of booking.) Informal talks are given on completion, commenc- ing at about 8.00 pm. Dinner charges are £22.50 per person. FORTHCOMING MEETINGS See also BOC website: http:/A\"v\"w.boc-online.org 24 November — ^Jeffrey Boswall — Answering the calls of nature: an ornithological frolic with serious scientific and cultural undertones. Jeffrey Boswall claims to be a serious amateur ornithologist but was a professional wildlife broadcasting producer for the BBC. He says this is the "climax of his world tour, positively his farewell appearance". Applications to Hon. Secretary (address belo^v) bv 10 November 2009 6 October — Prof. David Goode — Habitat change and its impact on species including avifauna. Applications to Hon. Secretary (address below) by 22 September 2009 23 June — Social evening and a series of mini-talks. Topics will include antpittas and the Araripe Manakin Antilophia bokermanni. Additional details will be posted on the Club's \vebsite. Applications to Hon. Secretar}' (address belo^v) by 9 June 2009 Overseas Members visiting Britain are especially welcome at these meetings, and the Hon. Secretar\- ^vould be ver\- pleased to hear from anyone who can offer to talk to the Club giving as much advance notice as possible — please contact: S. A. H. (Tony) Statham, Ashlyns Lodge, Chesham Road, Berkhamsted, Herts. HP4 2ST, LTC. Tel. -44 (0)1442 876995 (or e-mail: boc.sec@bou.org.uk). Contributors See the March issue of each volume for guidelines or the BOC website Bulletin pages, at ^o\"w.boc- online.org/bulletin.htm BOC Office P.O. Box 417, Peterborough PE7 3FX, UK E-mail: boc.office@bou.org.uk. "Website: ^v'w^\^boc-online.org Tel. & Fax: +44 (0) 1733 844 820. Club Announcements 65 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Bulletin of the BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS' CLUB Vol. 129 No. 2 Published 13 June 2009 CLUB ANNOUNCEMENTS It is with great sadness that we report the deaths of Mr Ian Hinze, Mr Bob Scott and Mr Steven Piper. Members are reminded that subscriptions for 2009 were due on 1 January and are kindly asked to check that any standing orders with their banks are for the correct amount (£20 p. a.). Regrettably, several members are still paying incorrect subscription rates, causing the Club unnecessary time and expense in administration duties. The 954th meeting of the Club was held on Tuesday 10 March 2009, in the Ante Room, Sherfield Building, Imperial College, London. Eighteen members and ten guests were present. Members attending were: Cdr. M. B. CASEMENT, RN {Chairman), Miss H. BAKER, S. E. CHAPMAN, Dr N. J. COLLAR, T. M. DONEGAN {Speaker), F. M. GAUNTLETT, D. GRIFFIN, R. H. KETTLE, R. R. LANGLEY, Dr C. F. MANN, D. J. MONTIER, Dr J. S. PRINGLE, Dr R. P. PRYS-JONES, P. J. SELLAR, S. A. H. STATHAM, C. W. R. STOREY, M. J. WALTON and P. J. WILKINSON. Guests attending were: Mrs C. R. CASEMENT, E. DONEGAN, Mrs K. DONEGAN, Mrs M. H. GAUNTLETT, R. GILES, Mrs M. MONTIER, J. PEARCE, Mrs C. PEARCE, Dr P. PRINGLE and J. C. VERHELST. After dinner, Thomas Donegan gave a well-illustrated talk on Ornithological exploration in the Colombian Andes, which focused on the Serrania de los Yariguies, in the East Andes. From 2003-06, he and others studied birds and other taxonomic groups of this previously unstudied and largely pristine mountain range. Photographs of many of the 546 species recorded in the mountains were shown, along with some sound- recordings. As detailed in recent papers in the Bulletin and elsewhere, studies in Yariguies have produced several >100 significant distributional records. In addition, various taxa new to science, such as the brush finch Atlapetes latinuchus yariguierum, the antpitta Grallariciila nana hallsi and the tapaculo Scytalopus griseicollis gilesi were discovered. Photographs of undescribed bird taxa in the genera Anisognathus, Schizoeaca and Scytalopus were also shown. Thirteen threatened birds were found in Yariguies and the surrounding foothills and lowlands, including, at the time, one of the world's largest concentrations of Critically Endangered terrestrial bird species. Several of these have been downgraded in threat category following the discovery of healthy populations in Yariguies. Importantly, the region was declared a national park and two nature reserves have been established by ProAves in the region, which gives great hope for conservation. The Yariguies Mountains represent a previously unknown centre of avian endemism. In several high- elevation groups studied a three-way split of subspecifically or specifically distinct populations is revealed in the East Andes of Colombia: (i) main / southern East Andes; (ii) northern East Andes (Tama); and (iii) Yariguies. These centres are isolated by depressions within the East Andes and drier valleys. As a general rule, Yariguies populations are darker than others, which may be linked to higher levels of precipitation. Taxonomic limits were discussed in the context of the various descriptions of new bird taxa from Yariguies. Thomas noted that several new 'subspecies' described from the region would be regarded as species using liberal concepts such as those employed by the BOU. However, sympatric species in relevant genera show greater inter-specific differences than Yariguies taxa do from geographically proximate populations. As a result, subspecies treatment seems more appropriate. Prior to the talk, Robert Giles was presented by Thomas Donegan and Robert Prys-Jones with the plate of Antioquia Brown-banded Antpitta Grallaria milleri gilesi. This new taxon from Colombia was described in the March 2009 issue of Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. by Donegan, Prys-Jones and Paul Salaman. The epithet honours Robert Giles in recognition of his conservation work in Colombia. thenatural" 11JUN^n03 RRESENTtD Club Announcements 66 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING The Annual General Meeting of the British Ornithologists' Club was held in the Rector's Residence, 170 Queens Gate, Imperial College, London, SW7 on Wednesday 29 April 2009 at 6 pm with Cdr. M. B. Casement OBE, RN, in the Chair. Fifteen members were present (including eight from the committee and one ex- officio). Apologies were received from: D. R. Calder, S. P. Dudley G. M. Kirwan, Mrs M. N. Muller, C. W. R. Storey and P. J. Wilkinson. 1. Minutes of previous meeting. The Minutes of the 2008 AGM held on 29 April 2008, which had been published {Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 128: 73-75), were approved and signed by the Chairman. 2. Chairman's report. The Chairman delivered his review, which can be read at the start of the Trustees' Annual Report on pp. 66-67. 3. Trustees Annual Report. The Chairman advised the meeting that the Trustees' Annual Report and Annual Accounts were again combined in the handout available at the meeting, and confirmed that these would be published in the June issue of the Bulletin. The Hon. Secretary referred members to those sections of the report covering Management, Membership and Activities, and read these aloud. The Hon. Treasurer drew attention to the income and expenditure details (shown on pp. 71-72) of the accounts and summarised the balance sheet (shown on p. 71). He drew attention to the fall in value of investments in line with world financial markets, but was pleased to report an increase in income. The Chairman thanked the Hon. Treasurer for his support and seconded his proposal that the accounts be formally accepted; all those present agreed. 4. The Bulletin. In the absence of the Hon. Editor, the Chairman referred to his report published in the Trustees' Annual Report, which can be found on p. 69 of this issue. 5. Publications report. The Chairman of the BOU-BOC Joint Publications Committee referred to his report published in the Trustees' Annual Report, which can be found on p. 69 of this issue. 6. Election of Officers and Committee. The Chairman said that the election of Officers was as proposed in the agenda as published in Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 129: 1: (i) Miss H. Baker be elected Chairman {vice Cdr. M. B. Casement, OBE, RN) (ii) Dr. R. P. Prys-Jones be elected Vice-Chairman {vice Miss H. Baker) (iii) Mr S. A. H. Statham be re-elected as Hon. Secretary (iv) Mr D. J. Montier be re-elected as Hon. Treasurer (v) Three appointments to committee to be made {vice Dr. R. P. Prys-Jones, Dr J. H. Cooper and Mr P. J. Wilkinson) from the following nominations: Mr S. M. S. Gregory, Mr K. Heron Jones and Mr C. W. R. Storey No other changes to the committee are proposed, as all other members are eligible to serve at least one more year in office. Ex-ojficio members (in continuation): Revd. T. W. Gladwin {Chairman Joint Publications Committee) Prof. R. A. Cheke {Hon. Publications Officer) Mr S. P. Dudley {Administration Manager) Mr G. M. Kirwan (Ho/7. Editor) All changes were proposed by Dr C. F. Mann, seconded by Revd. T. W. Gladwin and unanimously agreed by those present. 7. Any Other Business. There was no other business and the meeting closed at 6.30 pm. BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS' CLUB Founded 5 October 1892 Registered Charity No. 279583 Chairman's review This is my fourth and, in naval jargon, my 'haul-down' report, as vouv Chairman. My heartfelt thanks are due, once again, to the many key members of Committee who have given me loyal support throughout another exceptionally busy year. You will read a summary of their activities in the appropriate sections of the Trustees' Report, and most will present their reports in person. Chief amongst these must be David Montier {Hon. Treasurer) who has once again produceti a masterfully clear set of accounts and successfully managed our resources, despite a severe decline in the value of the Herbert Ste\'ens Fund in\ estments in the current financially difficult year. My special thanks also go to Tony Statham {Hojl SccrctiTru) tor his patience and support, for the administration of our meetings and speakers for dinners, and his excellent handling of Club Announcements 67 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) administrative arrangements with Imperial College. Having held this post myself (1996-2004), I know he has not found it easy living in my shadow. Unfortunately, Guy Kirwan (Hon. Editor) cannot be with us today, but I wish to record our thanks to him for continuing to produce a high-quality Bulletin despite very difficult conditions, often from the depths of South America. I can apologise, on his behalf, for errors in the production of a recent issue, but steps have been taken recently to strengthen the Bulletin Subcommittee (BSC) to provide the additional support he needs. I am grateful to Nigel Collar for his advice and support as Chairman of the BSC, and to Steven Gregory who has now agreed to take on this challenging task, in addition to completing his invaluable work with the scanning project for all Bulletin back-numbers. I thank Steve Dudley, once again, for his advice and support for the administration of our membership and subscriptions, and handling of sales of publications. The steady and continuing small decline in membership remains a matter of concern, but is similar to other comparable societies. I thank Tom Gladwin for continuing to chair the BOC-BOU Joint Publications Committee (JPC) and Bob Cheke for his contribution as Commissioning Editor of the Checklist series; also David Fisher and Eng-Li Green who continue to modernise the BOC website. My thanks are due to each of them for their key roles in managing our affairs. Sadly, your Committee says goodbye to Jo Cooper and Peter Wilkinson on completion of their four-year terms of office. Our thanks are due to Imperial College for their excellent administrative support and for continuing to allow us very favourable rates, and especially for permitting us the excellent facilities of the Rector's Residence, at no extra charge, when our normal room in the Sherfield Building has not been available because of redecoration. The Club's projector has been put to good use throughout the year, and we are grateful to Pat Sellar and Ron Kettle for their technical skills with the sound equipment. Two major projects continued to feature prominently in your Committee's discussions. We have agreed to maintain our grant towards the completion of the international Taxonomic Reference project (REFTAX). We have also agreed to finance, for a trial period of two years, the continuation of the publication of Systematic notes on Asian birds (SNAB), as an item in the Occasional Publications series, under the management of the JPC. The first issue is due to be published later this year. Three years ago, we set ourselves a vision for the future, and a special meeting was held at Tring, in February 2007, to review and reform the activities and publications to further the stated charitable aims of this Club in this age of rapidly changing technologies. I hope all will agree that considerable progress has been achieved, but the task is not yet complete, and two targets remain, namely to find successors for our two chief Officers — David Montier and Tony Statham. Both have served with commendable dedication and loyalty, and have indicated a desire to retire. I thank them both for their continuing loyalty and support. And finally, my thanks go to Helen Baker who, as my Vice-Chairman, has quietly and conscientiously supported me throughout my term and, in handing over to her as my successor, I urge you all to give her your encouragement and support. I wish her every success. Cdr. Michael Casement, 0B£, RN 29 April 2009 TRUSTEES' ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2008 List of Trustees — Committee Cdr. M. B. CASEMENT, OBE, RN Chairman (2005) Miss H. BAKER Vice-Chairman (2005) S. A. H. STATHAM Hon. Secretary (2004) D. J. MONTIER Hon. Treasurer (1997) Dr J. H. COOPER (2005) D. J. FISHER (2007) Dr R. P. PRYS-JONES (2007) M. J. WALTON (2008) P. J. WILKINSON (2005) Dr J. P. HUME also served as a Trustee for part of the year covered by this annual report and accounts Correspondence and enquiries to the Hon. Secretary, Ashlyns Lodge, Chesham Road, Berkhamsted, Herts. HP4 2ST Hon. Editor G.M. Kirwan Independent Examiners Porritt Rainey, 9 Pembroke Road, Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 IXR Bankers Barclays Bank pic. Dale House, Wavertree Boulevard, Liverpool L7 9PQ Trustees of the Herbert Stevens Trust Fund The following served as Trustees of the Fund during the year covered by this annual report and accounts: Mr N. J. Crocker, Mr P. J. Oliver, Mr R. C. Price and Mr S. J. R. Rumsey Club Announcements 68 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Objects of the Charity The promotion of scientific discussion between Members of the British Ornithologists' Union (BOU) and others interested in ornithology, and to facilitate the dissemination of scientific information concerned with ornithology, with a particular emphasis on avian systematics, taxonomy and distribution. These objects are pursued through the Club's publications, especially the Bulletin published four times a year, and a regular programme of meetings. Constitution and Committee The British Ornithologists' Club was founded in October 1892. It currently operates under Rules revised in 2000 and approved at a Special General Meeting on 31 October of that year. Members of the Committee, who are also the trustees of the Club, are listed above with the dates of their appointment. The Committee is responsible for the general control and management of the Club and consists of four Officers, namely a Chairman and a Vice-Chairman, each elected for a term of four years, an Hon. Secretary and an Hon. Treasurer, each elected for a term of one year and five other members, each of whom shall be elected for a term of four years. Elections to the Committee from amongst the Club's membership are by a simple majority of those Members of the Club present and voting at an ACM or a Special General Meeting. A Member may be co-opted by the Committee to fill a temporary vacancy until the following AGM. Management The Committee met six times during the year. Mr S. A. H. Statham was re-elected as Hon. Secretary and Mr D. J. Montier was re-elected Hon. Treasurer at the AGM on 29 April. Mr M. J. Walton was elected in succession to Dr J. P. Hume; no other changes to the Committee were proposed or made, as all other members were eligible to serve at least one more year in office. Under the terms of an agreement between the Club and the BOU entered into in 2004, certain administrative matters are undertaken on behalf of the Club by the BOU Administrative Office under the management of Mr S. P. Dudley, the BOU Senior Administrator. Under this arrangement, Mr Dudley continued his ex-officio roles as Membership Secretary and advisor on publication matters, including management of BOC publications (publishing, sales and warehousing), subscription management of BOC Institutional Subscribers to the Bulletin and other Bulletin-related matters. Membership As at 31 December 2008, there were 420 paid-up members (447 in 2007)— 217 from the UK and 203 overseas (45 countries). Overseas members comprise Europe (87), North America (49), Australasia (24), Africa (19), Asia (15) and South America (9). The Club welcomed 12 new members, but mourned the death of two, G. A. Hall (1978) and T. R. Smeeton (2002). Six resignations were received, and 31 were removed under Rule 24. Institutions The Bulletin was distributed to 104 institutes during 2008 (107 in 2007), with 25 in the UK and 79 overseas (24 different countries). Of the latter, 37 were in North America, 28 in Europe (including Russia), seven in Australasia, four in Africa, two in Asia and one in South America. BOC-BOU Joint Publications Committee Revd. T. W. Gladwin remained Chairman of the Joint BOC-BOU Publications Committee and Prof. R. A. Cheke remained Hon. Publications Officer. Herbert Stevens Trust Fund There was a change of Trustee for the Herbert Stevens Trust Fund on 29 January 2008 w^hen Mr S. J. R. Rumsey was appointed in place of Mr P. J. Oliver who had given notice of his wish to resign. The Committee wishes to record its thanks to Mr Oliver for his services as Trustee since his appointment in 1985 and is very grateful for his valuable contribution to the management of the fund over such a long period. The Committee also thanks the continuing Trustees, Mr N. J. Crocker and Mr R. C. Price, together with Mr Rumsey, for their time and expertise advising on the performance of the fund. Meetings The number of evening meetings held at Imperial College, London, was maintained at six in 2008, with a total of 174 attendees, representing a mean attendance of 29. The programme of speakers during the year covered a variety of topics. The opening meeting in January gave members the benefit of Dr Nigel Collar outlining his recent work on Birds and people. In March, Dr Lars Svensson provided a detailed taxonomic analysis of four species of warblers found in the Caucasus and our AGM in April once again featured a series of short talks from members. These included a summary of the activities of Kalman Kittenberger, a collector of African birds, a discussion on White Wagtails MoiaciUa a. alba wintering in Britain, reports of trips to Mozambique and Antarctica, and a question of why 'experts' caiinot agree on an international name for Club Announcements 69 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) certain species and, in particular, confusion over the names of Anthus pipits. A special meeting was held on Saturday 21 June at the Natural History Museum, Tring, to mark two 150th anniversaries — viz. the reading of the first papers on natural selection by Alfred Russel Wallace and Charles Darwin at the Linnean Society and the founding of the BOU; Revd. Tom Gladwin marked the occasion with a talk on the former topic but acknowledged the special relationship between the Club and its 'parent', the BOU. The summer meeting in July complemented the anniversary theme with Dr Jo Cooper focusing on the life and works of Charles Darwin. In September, Dr Sam Turvey gave the Club a fascinating insight into the world of the Moa and Richard Price concluded the Club's programme with a well-illustrated talk on the birds of Morocco. Summaries of all these talks are to be found in the Club News section of the Bulletin. The Committee was pleased to advise members that the cost of Club dinners was being maintained at £22.50 per head. The Bulletin Vol. 128 comprised 288 pages and 43 papers of broad geographical scope, albeit with the Neotropics again particularly well represented. Taxonomy and nomenclature remain Bulletin mainstays, and three new subspecies were described, all from South America, one a new Arremonops (Emberizidae) sparrow and the other two both Grallaricida (Grallariidae) antpittas. Other highlights included papers reporting the rediscoveries of two long-lost birds, Beck's Petrel Pseudobuhveria becki and White-tailed Tityra Tityra leucura. For papers published in 2008, the interval between receipt and publication was 2-16 months, with a mean of C.12 months. The Bulletin received a total of 34 new manuscripts in 2008. Of these, five were rejected and the rest have been accepted or are still being refereed for potential publication. Grateful thanks are due, as ever, to referees who have given freely of their time and expertise; members of the Standing Committee on Ornithological Nomenclature (SCON), especially Edward Dickinson and Richard Schodde; to Eng-Li Green, of Alcedo Publishing, for her constant dedication to Bulletin duties, including production of the index; and Latimer Trend (printers) for their efficiency. Tony Statham prepared the cover information and Club Announcements, whilst staff at The Natural History Museum, Tring, continue to offer much-needed assistance in all manner of small but useful ways. BOC-BOU Joint Publications Committee Members. Revd. T. W. Gladwin {Chairman), Prof. R. A. Cheke {Commissioning and Checklist Series Editor), S. P. Dudley {Publications Manager), Prof. C. M. Perrins, D. J. Montier, N. J. Redman, S. A. H. Statham and Dr J. H. Cooper. This joint committee (JPC), which is responsible for the BOU's and BOC's non-journal publications, met twice in 2008; much of its business being conducted by e-mail. The Chairman is alternately appointed by the BOC and the BOU. Nominated in 2007 by the BOU, Tom Gladwin continues to chair the committee until April 2009. Dr J. H. Cooper kindly accepted an invitation to be co-opted onto the committee. Publications. For various good reasons all publications in hand experienced further delays. The checklist of the birds of Borneo was published at the year-end, and The checklist of the birds of Barbados is now expected to be published in early summer 2009. The committee was pleased to receive the main part of the manuscript of The checklist of the birds of the British Isles and, subject to contract, publication is planned for 2009. The Asian bird records of Richard Meinertzhagen by Pamela Rasmussen and Robert Prys-Jones, now expected in 2009, will form the next in the BOC's Occasional Publication Series. The manuscript for the sixth volume in the series of Systematic notes on Asian birds, being the first of two issues to be financed by the BOC, is also expected in 2009. The committee continues to seek to maintain contact with authors of other potential titles and evaluate new proposals. Acknowledgements. The committee is grateful to all who have contributed to its work, especially to Bob Cheke and Steve Dudley for progressing and managing the titles in its charge, and Angela Langford for kindly attending and preparing the minutes of its meetings. Financial review A surplus of £5,949 on the ordinary activities of the Club for 2008 is almost exactly £2,000 higher than in 2007, with much of that improvement resulting from a reduction in expenditure. In total, the incoming resources showed little change, though there are variations under the individual headings. A drop of £900 in membership subscriptions was partly offset by the catch-up in the recovery of income tax on Gift Aid and deeds of covenant, but the downward trend is a worry. Interest rates remained fairly high for much of 2008 resulting in an increase of £800 in interest received on the Club's cash deposits, whilst distributions from the Herbert Stevens Trust Fund investments improved by over £900. Expenditure for the year was down by approximately £1,300 compared with 2007. Bulletin costs totalled £12,566 and are expected to rise further in 2009, taking them above the level of the current subscription income. A small sum spent during the year on the Bulletin scanning project has been charged against the Clancey Fund, which is specifically for additional expenditure related to the Bulletin. Further expenditure was incurred on the joint checklist series with the BOU, covering both The birds of Borneo, published at the end of the year, and The birds of Barbados, due to appear in 2009. Club Announcements 70 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) The major impact on the Club's finances, however, came from the serious collapse in share prices as stock markets suffered from the banking crisis. The value of the Herbert Stevens Fund fell by £82,930 (30%) over the year, giving a market value at 31 December of £190,836 against £273,766 the year before. As a result, the Club's total funds at the end of 2008 stood at £364,059, a net decrease of just short of £77,000. Investments There were no changes in the composition of the Herbert Stevens Fund during the year and it remains in\"esteci in three charity imit trusts. As mentioned abo\'e, the income improved, despite the falling market \ alues, but in the current economic climate, it is likely that distributions in 2009 will be lower as companies reduce their di\ddends. Interest rates have also fallen sharply over the last few months and that, too, is expected to ha\"e a marked impact on the amount earned on cash deposit accoimts. Reserves Fortimatelv, the Club has a reasonable level of liquidity at present and it is intended that expenditure, particularlv on The birds of Barbados and The checklist of the birds of the British Isles, will continue as planned. In addition to the £20,000 Unrestricted Designated Fund for future publications, the two restricted funds, the Clancev bequest and the Publications Fund totalled £66,605 at the year-end and are held as backing for new developments for the Bulletin or additions to other Club publications respectively. Risks The Committee has reviewed the major risks to which the Club is exposed, particularly with regard to managmg the Club's cash resources during a period when interest rates and unit trust distributions are expected to be strained. Expenditure on the Bulletin is a major item and has a regular production schedule, but timing of other publications, particularly the joint Checklists, produced in conjunction with the BOU, are less predictable as they rely on dedicated work by authors working on an entirely voluntary basis and with other commitments of their own. The production timetable is regularly reviewed to ensure that sufficient resources are available w^hen required. The Herbert Stevens Fund is managed by three Trustees, who report regularly to the Committee. Trustees' Responsibilities Under the Charities Act 1993, the Trustees are required to prepare a statement of accounts for each financial vear that gives a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the charity at the end of the financial year and of the incoming resources and application of resources in the year. In preparing the statement the trustees are required to: • Select suitable accounting policies and then apply them consistently; • Make judgements and estimates that are reasonable and prudent; • State whether applicable accounting standards and statements of recommended practice have been followed, subject to any material departures disclosed and explained in the statement of accounts; • Prepare the financial accounts on the going concern basis imless it is inappropriate to presume that the charity will continue its operations. The Trustees are responsible for keeping proper accounting records which disclose with reasonable accuracy at any time the financial position of the charity and to enable them to ensure that any statement of account prepared bv them complies with the regulations imder section 41(1) of the Charities Act 1993. They are also responsible for safeguarding the assets of the trust and hence for taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities. Appro\'ed and signed on behalf of the Trustees M, B. Casement Cdr. M. B. Casement, OBE RN, Chairman Date: 29 April 2009 Club Announcements 71 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS' CLUB Registered charity No. 279583 BALANCE SHEET— 31 December 2008 Notes 2008 2007 FIXED ASSETS Projection Equipment INVESTMENTS At market value CURRENT ASSETS Stock of publications Cash at bank and in hand Cash on deposit Prepayments Other debtors CURRENT LIABILITIES Subscriptions in advance Creditors falling due within one year 100 7,674 126,568 510 1,084 135,936 (3,764) (7,949) 239,836 100 4,688 122,024 1,171 127,983 (4,146) (5,563) 322,766 124,223 118,274 TOTAL ASSETS 364,059 441,040 FUNDS Unrestricted Designated 4 Other 5 Restricted 6 20,000 277,454 297,454 66,605 364,059 20,000 357,918 377,918 63,122 441,040 Approved and Signed on behalf of the Trustees M. B. Casement Cdr. M. B. Casement, OBE, RN, Chairman Date: 29 April 2009 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES— 31 December 2008 2008 2007 Unrestricted Restricted Total Total £ £ £ £ INCOMING RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS AND DONATIONS Members 8,408 - 8,408 9,042 histitutional subscribers 3,408 - 3,408 3,676 Donations 72 - 72 383 Income Tax recoverable under Gift Aid & Deeds of Covenant 651 85 736 230 12,539 85 12,624 13,231 INVESTMENT INCOME Herbert Stevens Trust Fund 12,370 - 12,370 11,405 Interest received 6,202 3,745 9,947 9,113 18,572 3,745 22,317 20,518 Club Announcements 72 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) SALES OF PUBLICATIONS Bulletin 200 - 200 495 Other BOC publications 316 - 316 484 Joint BOU/BOC publications 1,544 - 1,544 1,621 2,060 - 2,060 2,600 OTHER INCOMING RESOURCES MEETINGS 3,892 - 3,892 3,958 OTHER INCOME 269 - 269 151 TOTAL INCOMING RESOURCES 37,332 3,830 41,162 40,458 RESOURCES EXPENDED CHARITABLE EXPENDITURE BOC BULLETIN Production, printing and distribution 12,566 - 12,566 11,884 Bulletin scanning project - 347 347 OTHER PUBLICATIONS Production costs 5,565 - 5,565 2,046 Publicity, postage and packing 499 - 499 613 GRANTS 325 - 325 5,000 MEETINGS Room and equipment hire, speakers' expenses, etc. 1,423 - 1,423 1,337 Restaurant 3,853 - 3,853 3,934 ADMINISTRATION 7 10,635 - 10,635 11,713 TOTAL EXPENDITURE 34,866 347 35,213 36,527 EXCESS OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE 2,466 3,483 5,949 3,931 (Decrease) / Increase in value of investments 5 (82,930) - (82,930) (14,283) (80,464) 3,483 (76,981) (10,352) TOTAL FUNDS brought forward at 1 January 2008 377,918 63,122 441,040 451,392 TOTAL FUNDS at 31 December 2008 297,454 66,605 364,059 441,040 NOTES TO THE ACCOUNTS— 31 December 2008 1. ACCOUNTING POLICIES a) Basis of Accounts. The financial statements are prepared under the historical cost convention as modified by the inclusion of investments in the Herbert Stevens Trust Fund at market values. They are also pre- pared in accordance with the Financial Reporting Standards for Smaller Entities and follow the recommendations in Accounting and Reporting by Charities: Statement of Recommended Practice (revised 2005). b) Investments and Cash Deposits. The Herbert Stevens Trust Fund is invested in quoted charity unit trusts and included as investments in the Balance Sheet at year-end market values. Income from this fund and from cash deposits shown in the Balance Sheet under Current Assets is included in Incoming Resources in the Statement of Financial Activities on a receipts basis. The Clancey bequest is held in a fixed-term deposit account which forms part of the total of investments in the Balance Sheet. Interest on this deposit account is brought into the Statement of Financial Activities on an accruals basis. c) Subscriptions. Subscriptions for the current year and any arrears are included in Incoming Resources in the Statement of Financial Activities. Subscriptions received in advance are carried forward in the Balance Sheet as Current Liabilities. d) Expenditure is accounted for on an accruals basis. e) Depreciation. Depreciation of fixed assets is calculated to write off their value o\'er their expected useful lives at an annual rate of 25"/o on cost. Club Announcements 73 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) f) Publications. The cost of publications is written off in the Statement of Financial Activities as incurred except for a nominal stock value of £100 carried in the Balance Sheet. 2. FIXED ASSETS Projection Equipment Cost at 1 January and 31 December 2008 Accumulated depreciation at 1 January 2008 Charge for the year At 31 December 2008 Net Book Value: At 31 December 2008 At 31 December 2007 3. INVESTMENTS— at market value UNRESTRICTED FUNDS Herbert Stevens Trust Fund RESTRICTED FUNDS Clancey bequest AU investments are held in the UK. 4. UNRESTRICTED DESIGNATED FUND for future publications Balance at 1 January 2008 Designated during the year Balance at 31 December 2008 2008 £ 648 648 648 2008 £ 190,836 49,000 239,836 2008 £ 20,000 20,000 2007 £ 273,766 49,000 322J66 5. OTHER UNRESTRICTED FUNDS Balances at 1 January 2008 Decrease in value of investments during year Excess of income over expenditure Balances at 31 December 2008 GENERAL FUND £ 84,152 2,466 HERBERT STEVENS TRUST FUND £ 273,766 (82,930) 86,618 190,836 TOTAL £ 357,918 (82,930) 2,466 277,454 6. RESTRICTED FUNDS CLANCEY PUBLICATIONS BEQUEST FUND TOTAL £ £ £ Balances at 1 January 2008 58,353 4,769 63,122 Gift Aid recovered 85 85 Expenditure on Bulletin scanning project (347) - (347) Interest received 3,484 261 3,745 Balances at 31 December 2008 61,575 5,030 66,605 a. The Clancey bequest was donated by the late Dr P. A. Clancey with the request that it should be used to support and enhance the Club's Bulletin. b. The Publications Fund is available to finance Club publications other than regular issues of the Bulletin. Club Announcements 74 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) 7. ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES 2008 2007 £ f Club's share of rental of storage unit 1,839 2,311 Audit and Independent Examination fees 600 600 Depreciation 162 BOU administration services 6,685 6,367 Other administration expenses 1,511 2,273 10,635 11,713 8. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES Trustees do not receive any remuneration and have not been reimbursed for an}' costs the}- may incur in attending regular Trustee meetings. They are reimbursed for any other expenses incurred on behalf of the Club. The total amount reimbursed during the year was £613 (2007 £753). INDEPENDENT EXAMINER'S REPORT TO THE TRUSTEES OF THE BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS' CLUB I report on the accounts of the Club for the vear ended 31 December 2008, which are set out on pages 71 to 74. Respective responsibilities of Trustees and Examiner The charity's Trustees are responsible for the preparation of the accounts. The charitv^'s Trustees consider that an audit is not required for this year (under section 43(2) of the Charities Act 1993 (the 1993 Act)) and that an independent examination is needed. It is my responsibilit}' to: • Examine the accounts (under section 43(3)(a) of the 1993 Act); • To follow the procedures laid down in the General Directions given by the Charit}- Commissioners (under section 43(7)(b) of the 1993 Act); and • To state whether particular matters have come to my attention. Basis of Independent Examiner's report My examination was carried out in accordance with the General Directions gi\'en by the Charity Commissioners. An examination includes a review of the accounting records kept by the charitv^ and a comparison of the accounts presented with those records. It also includes consideration of any unusual items or disclosures in the accounts, and the seeking of explanations from you as Trustees concerning any such matters. The procedures undertaken do not provide all the evidence that would be required in an audit and, consequently, I do not express an audit opinion on the view given by the accoimts. Independent Examiner's statement In connection with my examination, no matter has come to my attention: (1) which gives me reasonable cause to believe that, in any material respect, the requirements: • to keep accounting records in accordance with s41 of the 1993 Act; and • to prepare accounts which accord with the accounting records and to comph- with the accoimting requirements of the 1993 Act have not been met; or (2) to which, in my opinion, attention should be drawn in order to enable a proper imderstanding of the accounts to be reached. A/a« Peal Alan Peal ACA— Principal Porritt Rainey Chartered Accountants 29 April 2009 David Snow 1924-2009 There can be few who were not shocked and saddened to hear of the death of David Snow, on 4 Februar}-, and many BOC members were at his funeral, at Wingra\-e on 19 Februarv. All who ha\^e had the good fortune to know him would endorse the words in The Times obituarv of 28 February: 'David Snow was one of the most important ornithologists to emerge during the great development of the subject as a productive branch of biology after the Second World War. Throughout his remarkable career, he never lost his enduring love of birds, and always evinced the delight he took in obser\ ing them.' Club Announcements 75 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) With similar glowing tributes also published in the Daily Telegraph and Guardian, and others due in Ibis and British Birds, there is little more to be said about how he came to achieve such international academic distinction. But, luckily for all obituary writers, this is chronicled in his delightful autobiography Birds in our life, originally written as a record for his family and published privately last summer. The book was reviewed in Bidl. Brit. Orn. CI. 129: 3-4 by his close friend and colleague at Tring, Michael Walters. Together with Barbara, his wife, herself an equally distinguished field worker, David carried out meticulous research over four decades. Barbara sadly died when the book was in its final stages of preparation, and so it became a tribute to their partnership of nearly 50 years. If you have not already obtained a copy, I do commend all readers to do so, without delay; it is a real joy, and is available direct from the publishers, Sessions of York (www.sessionsofyork.co.uk). Chief among David's achievements were his pioneering studies, jointly with Barbara, in Trinidad (1956-61), of two Neotropical bird families, cotingas (Cotingidae) and manakins (Pipridae). Another major contribution to ornithological science was his appointment in the Galapagos Islands (1961-62), where he established, and supervised the construction of, the Charles Darwin Research Station, becoming its first director. Back in the UK, he became involved in setting up the Common Bird Census and other population studies with the British Trust for Ornithology (1964-68), thence to the British Museum (Natural History), in South Kensington. With Derek Goodwin, he supervised the transfer of the bird collection to its present home at Tring (1968-72). Further expeditions with Barbara followed: to Costa Rica (1974), Ecuador and Venezuela (1976), and Colombia (1978). David's researches culminated in his monograph The cotingas (published in 1982). His contributions to our knowledge of this group were honoured by Rick Prum's (2001) naming the genus Snoivornis for two species of Andean green pihas. David also described a new cotinga himself, from south-east Brazil in 1980, and the rare north-east Brazilian endemic Alagoas Antwren Myrmotherula snoivi is also named for him. In a small way, David's early years are the converse of my own; from early childhood we both had an enduring interest in birds. A scholar at Eton College, David won a further scholarship to Oxford, to read classics, and seemed groomed for an academic career. But when called up for war service, he escaped the threat of a back-seat job ashore, and joined the Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve (1943-46), where he saw many successful actions against U-boats in the Battle of the Atlantic. But throughout this time at sea, he never lost his abiding passion for the accurate recording and identification of birds. On demobilisation, in 1946, he changed from classics to read zoology at Oxford, which set him on course for a prodigious career in ornithology. In my own case, I was a science student at Winchester College, and was groomed by my biology tutor to head for King's College, Cambridge, to read medicine but, just before taking the entrance exams, I changed to follow my family tradition for a career in the Royal Navy. There I developed a life-long interest studying birds that landed aboard ships at sea. And that is how I first came into contact with David, when his name came to my notice through his sightings of species recorded in the western Atlantic. We exchanged occasional correspondence, over several years, when I became Chairman of the Royal Naval Birdwatching Society (RNBWS), and editor of Sea Swallow, and I sought his advice about identifications of landbirds recorded on ships in the western Atlantic and the Caribbean. But it was not until 1991 that we first met, as fellow members of the BOC Committee. I was a humble 'paper shuffler' and Club servant, whilst he was editor of the Bulletin (1991-97), with an illustrious international career in ornithology, as a former President of the British Ornithologists' Union (1983-87), and editor of Ihis (1968-73). Thus it was that David, knowing of my naval past, invited me to review for RNBWS his autobiography, which I gladly did [cf. Sea Swallow 57: 75). David's spell as editor of Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. was marked by two special publications, both listed on the Club's publications web page: Avian taxonomy from Linnaeus to DNA (1977), edited jointly with Bob Cheke, and his edited Birds, discovery and conservation, 100 years of the British Ornithologists' Club (1992). He came regularly to BOC dinner meetings, usually with Barbara, until age made travel to London difficult. As anyone who worked closely with David will confirm, he was essentially a very shy and modest man, with a huge intellect, a phenomenal memory, and a passion for meticulous accuracy in all that he wrote. He was old-fashioned in his methods, and communicated in hard copy, often in his own clearly legible but tiny handwriting; he was also an accomplished artist. He shunned the instant communication of e-mail, and so was spared the many frustrations of temperamental computers. Retirement meant nothing to David, and he continued his studies of the ever-changing populations of Song Thrushes Turdiis philomelos and other garden birds in his local village. And he remained a frequent visitor to Tring, where friends remember talking birds with him, within a few days of his death. He will be sadly missed, but his legacy of scholarly books and papers are his permanent memorial on both sides of the Atlantic, and on library bookshelves worldwide. Michael Casement Corrigendum 76 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) CORRIGENDUM The figure below was inadvertently subject to a last-minute error in the production process of Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 129(1). Members can download a correct PDF of the entire paper at the following URL: http://boc- online.org/bulletins/bulletinl29-correction.htm. We apologise to the authors, Paul Salaman, Thomas Donegan and Robert Prys-Jones, for this unfortunate error. Figure 2. The GraUaria m. gilesi holotype (left three images) and Grallaria m. milleri paratype (right three images). © Natural History Museum, Tring. Addendum to: Becking, J.-H. 2009. The Bartels and other egg collections from the island of Java, Indonesia, with corrections to earlier publications by A. Hoogerwerf. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 129: 18-48. Joost Brouwer has pointed out that the paper's Acknowledgements make no mention of the cooperation the author received from RMNH in Leiden, especially by Hein van Grouw. Dr Becking frequently remarked how grateful he was for Mr van Grouw's assistance. Bryan Sage 77 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Global warming and the breeding birds of the Arctic by Bryan Sage Received 3 April 2008 Summary. — The purpose of this paper is to outline some of the effects of global warming on Arctic habitats, to summarise some of the definitions of the Arctic that have been used in the past, to propose a tight definition of the area that would facilitate monitoring, and to provide a list of the breeding species of the area so defined. It is not intended to discuss the effects of global warming on individual species or populations, or to attempt to summarise the huge volume of ongoing research on climate change. It is recognised that any definition of the Arctic is open to criticism, but general agreement is a prerequisite for effective monitoring of the changes caused by global warming. There are now very few scientists involved in climate change research who do not agree that marked global warming is occurring and is a serious issue, although opinions differ on the precise extent to which sea levels will rise and global temperatures increase. This is because different computer models give different results, and predictions are constantly changing as more data become available. The publication of ACIA (2004) presented the results of an assessment made by nearly 300 scientists, based not on worst-case scenarios but on observed changes by 2004, combined with projected temperature increases below the ^ mid-range of those anticipated by increasingly accurate global climate models. These pre- dictions have serious ecological implications. The Arctic is experiencing some of the most rapid and severe climate changes on the planet, and these are projected to increase substan- tially in the future. It is clear that many bird species currently breeding at northern latitudes will be affected by predicted changes, and it is essential that the situation be closely moni- tored. Publications that have been referred to include Zockler & Lysenko (2000), which was one of the first to closely examine the impact of climate change on Arctic breeding water- birds, and ACIA (2004), which looks in detail at the impacts of global warming on the Arctic. The effects of global warming The ACIA report suggests that at least 50% of summer sea-ice in the Arctic will melt by 2099, along with a significant portion of the Greenland ice sheet, as the region is projected to warm by 4-7°C (other models predict 5-8°C) by the year 2100. Greenland could produce sufficient meltwater to eventually raise sea levels by c.7 m. Over the past 30 years the mean extent of sea-ice has decreased by c.8% and late summer ice coverage by 15-20%. In September 2002 the smallest extent of Arctic sea-ice cover on record was noted. More recently IPCC (2007) showed that in 2007 even less ice was recorded. This report states that satellite data since 1978 reveal that annual mean Arctic sea-ice extent has shrunk by 2.7% (2.1-3.3%) per decade, with larger decreases in summer of 7.4% (5.0-9.8%) per decade. In December 2006, the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research in the USA predict- ed that if greenhouse gases continue to build up in the atmosphere at the current rate, then by 2040 only a small amount of perennial sea-ice will remain along the north coasts of Greenland and Canada, and most of the Arctic basin will be ice-free in September. In 2008 the extent of the sea-ice was the lowest recorded since records began. Mean Arctic temper- Bryan Sage 78 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) atures have increased at almost twice the global rate in the last 100 years. Should the Arctic Ocean become completely ice-free in summer, which some models predict, then the ecolog- ical consequences could be devastating. It was shown by ACIA (2004) that snow cover over Arctic land areas has declined by c.10% over the last 30 years or so, and it has been project- ed that it will decrease by an additional 10-20% by 2100. Recent decades have also seen widespread glacier melt, rising permafrost temperatures and increased coastal erosion. Reductions in sea-ice will drastically reduce the marine habitat for Polar Bears Ursus mar- itimus, ice-inhabiting seals and some seabirds. In a region as large and diverse as the Arctic, the effects of global warming will not be uniform, because there are significant subregional variations in climate and recent warming has been more dramatic in some areas than in others. Generally, the treeline will move northwards and to higher elevations, with forest and shrubland replacing a significant pro- portion of the existing tundra habitats as the permafrost thaws, and tundra vegetation will shift north into polar desert habitat, which may be considerably reduced in extent or even eliminated. Existing forest-tundra habitats (in Canada and Russia) are Hkely to become more forested and thus less suitable for some species. These changes will result in north- ward shifts in the ranges of plant and animal species, and some might well become extinct. One region where biological diversity will be most at risk is Chukotka, northern Alaska and the western Canadian Arctic, which currently holds the largest number of threatened plant and animal species of any other arctic subregion, including >70% of rare Arctic plant species (ACIA 2004). As a result of these changes, Arctic biomes will be among the most severelv affected by a warming climate, and will be among the first to show direct impacts. According to previous records in the Quaternary, large forest shifts of up to 2,000 km have been recorded. Deglaciation caused an average migration (even of long-lived trees) of 200-500 m/p.a. in response to rapid environmental changes, and such rates were sustained for several millennia (Huntley 1996). It was suggested by Maddox (1996) that one region, extending from the north-east Canadian archipelago and west Greenland to Iceland, would experience lower tempera- tures at all seasons, a phenomenon caused by the strengthening of the Icelandic low to the south-east, resulting in increased north to north-westerly flow over this area. Howe\'er, the IPCC (2007) report predicted a negative mass balance for the Greenland ice sheet, which is not consistent with a lower temperature. Should severe cooling occur it would ad\"erselv impact the breeding population of Greenland White-fronted Geese Anser albifrons flavirostris. Species ranges are projected to shift north on both land and at sea, therebv bringing 'new' species into the Arctic whilst severely limiting the available suitable habitat to other species that are currently present. Some seabirds such as Ivory Gull Pagopliila ehurnea and Little Auk Alle alle are highly likely to be negativelv affected bv the decline in the extent of sea-ice and subsequent changes to the communities in which they live. P. ehurnea is inti- mately associated with sea-ice during most of its life cycle. There is a complex interaction of factors that complicates predictions of the impacts of climate change on Arctic ^vaterbirds. Species will not react statically to climate change and will certainly respond to changing habitats. Many will be able to extend their range with the northward shift of their preferred habitat. Clearly there are limits and in particular those species breeding on the edge of their range in high- Arctic habitats will encounter increasingh* less suitable conditions as the cli- mate warms. Most Calidris shorebirds will be imable to adapt to shrubby or tree-like habitats and cannot expand into other habitats, except perhaps for a few areas gained bv retreating glaciers. Useful recent studies of the effects of climate change on Arctic birds include those by Boyd & Diamond (1994), Boyd & Madsen (1997) and Bauer et al. (2008). Bryan Sage 79 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC 1998) predicted a major change in Arctic vegetation types, including a decrease of 40-57% of the area currently covered by tundra vegetation. Tundra is the most relevant biome for Arctic waterbirds, hence there are major implications for their populations. A possible scenario of changes to tundra habitat as predicted due to CO doubling during the period 2070-99 indicates the possible extent of habitat loss for a range of species. The tundra-breeding Bean Geese Anser fabalis rossicus / A.f. serrirostris could lose 76% of their present tundra habitat. Comparable figures for other species include Red-breasted Goose Branta ruficollis 67%, Ross's Gull Rhodostethia rosea 54% and Red-necked Stint Calidris ruficollis 48%. Other tundra-nesting taxa will also be affected. However, there are extensive unvegetated areas in the Arctic at high elevations that may become suitable habitat for tundra-nesting species as the climate warms. Some tundra- nesting waders such as Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris, Baird's Sandpiper C. bairdii and Purple Sandpiper C. maritima are relatively scarce and nest at low densities. These may be able to withstand a substantial reduction in breeding habitat because that habitat is unsat- urated at present. Defining the Arctic Global warming will bring changes to habitats and to bird populations currently breed- ing in the biome, and if these are to be accurately monitored then agreement regarding the boundary of the Arctic is essential. Whilst there has never been universal agreement on this point, the vast majority of ecologists and geographers have adopted the 10°C July isotherm as the southern boundary, as proposed by Koppen (1900), because this is closely correlated with the northern edge of the treeline (the northern limit of arborescent growth) or the northern limit of the boreal forest. However, the two lines do diverge, in places by up to C.160 km. Another important point relevant to this definition is that all of the areas includ- ed therein are underlain by continuous permafrost (see Fig. 5.2 in Sage 1986). Areas of continuous permafrost do, of course, occur south of the boundary proposed here. The main disagreements revolve around whether or not Fennoscandia, Iceland, and sometimes the west coast of Alaska and the Aleutians should be included within the Arctic. Various authors have included all or some of these areas in their definition of the Arctic. For example, Stonehouse (1971) employed a wide definition that included most of Iceland, western Alaska south of Cape Prince of Wales, and various Bering Sea islands. A much tighter definition was adopted by Sage (1986) who excluded Iceland, Fennoscandia and, in Alaska, took the Continental Divide of the Brooks Range from Cape Lisburne east to the Canadian border as the southern limit. More recently Sale (2006), using a 'pragmatic approach', included Iceland but not Fennoscandia. In Canada he included the southern end of Hudson Bay, northern Quebec and Labrador. In Alaska he included the west coast (but little of the hinterland), the Pribilofs and Aleutians and, remarkably. Mount Denali (McKinley) National Park in the Alaska Range nearly 400 km south of the Arctic Circle. In Russia the Commander Islands, the Kamchatka Peninsula, and the north-east coast of the Sea of Okhotsk were all included. The most extensive and confusing definition to be suggested to date is that of the CAFF (2001) report prepared for the Arctic Council. The CAFF boundary includes Iceland, much of mainland Scandinavia, and much of the hinterland of Russia, where it extends south of the July isotherm well into the boreal forest biome, but excludes Kamchatka and the Commander Islands. In Canada also it extends well below the July isotherm and into the boreal forest. In Alaska the boundary includes much of the south-west including the Bryan Sage 80 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) — CAFF Boundary Arctic Circle (Latitude: 66° 33'Northi " " +10°C -Juiy isotherm ~~" Treeline r ; Continuous permafrost ; Discontinuous permofrost Bi Alpine permafrost i \ Maximum sea ice extent (February) LZJ Minimum sec ice extent (August) Figure 1. The limits of the Arctic according to various definitions (from CAFF 2001). Aleutian chain. In ecological terms the CAFF boundary is completely illogical. The position of the CAFF boundary, the 10°C July isotherm, and the treeline are all shown in Fig. 1. In defining the Arctic the July isotherm cannot be followed in its entirety because, in Alaska, it turns south to touch the Aleutians, goes on through the Bering Sea to pass across Kamchatka, and in Canada loops down to the southern end of Hudson Bay and proceeds east to include part of the forest- tundra habitat of Labrador. A modification of the 10°C July isotherm was suggested by Nordenskjold & Mecking (1928) to take account of the fact that the coldest point in the Northern Fiemisphere lies in the Siberian boreal forest south of the isotherm. This modification has largely been ignored, except by Sale (2006). There is strong rationale for not including certain areas within the true Arctic because most of them belong in the subarctic. In the case of Fennoscandia, because of the influence of the North Atlantic Drift, its climate, fauna and flora are all closer to those of the temper- ate zone, and what little permafrost is present is discontinuous. Iceland was excluded by Nordenskjold & Mecking (1928) on the basis of their research into its climate and flora. The Aleutians have no permafrost and are barely touched by the July isotherm. The Kamchatka Peninsula lies in the boreal forest zone and is underlain only by discontinuous permafrost. In a quite recent paper on floristic divisions in the Arctic, Yurtsev (1994) quite specifically excluded the Aleutians, Commanders and Pribilofs, Iceland and northernmost Scandinavia because of the boreal-oceanic aspect to their floras, which is expressed bv a high proportion of boreal, particularly boreal-oceanic, species and other oceanic hypo-arctic and low-arctic taxa alien to circumpolar areas. Finally, mention must be made of the forest-tundra habitat, which is quite extensive iii Canada, but in Russia is restricted to a relatively narrow belt up to 300 km wide (see Figs. 1.2 and 1.4 in Sage 1986). This habitat basically represents a zone of intergradation between the boreal forest and true tundra, and was assigned to the subarctic by Love (1970). Bryan Sage 81 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) However, it was suggested by Rosseau (1952) that the forest- tundra is not a transitional habitat, but comprises purely arctic patches imprisoned within a network of subarctic for- est strips. Insofar as birds are concerned, assigning the forest-tundra zone to the subarctic makes very little difference as it only excludes basically forest species that penetrate the forest- tundra, but do not usually reach the true tundra. The variety of definitions mentioned above, no two of which are identical, illustrate the difficulty of monitoring changes in breeding bird populations. What is required for this pur- pose is a tight definition of the true Arctic, as opposed to the subarctic. It is suggested that the most practical definition of the true Arctic could be a modification of that used by Sage (1986), where the southern boundary in Alaska ran westwards from the Canadian border along the Continental Divide of the Brooks Range to Cape Lisburne (see Fig. 1.3 in Sage 1986). It is proposed that this boundary be amended to include the coastal highlands of rolling topography and gentle slopes, tundras, and plains and lowlands south from Cape Lisburne as far as and including the Seward Peninsula. The taiga habitat extends on to the south-eastern quarter of the peninsula, but this is excluded. The whole of this additional area is underlain by continuous permafrost (see Fig. 5.2 in Sage 1986). The forest-tundra zone in Canada is regarded as subarctic, leaving the extreme north of the Ungava Peninsula in the true Arctic. All of Greenland, along with Svalbard, is included. In Russia, as in Canada, the forest-tundra belt is considered as subarctic, whilst the polar desert and tundra biomes comprise the true Arctic. Also included therein are the tundra areas of the Chukotka Peninsula. Breeding species of the true Arctic A few workers have produced lists of Arctic breeding birds, e.g., Salomonsen (1972) who listed 141 species as breeding regularly in the region. In Sage (1986) 183 species were recognised including several of marginal occurrence. The differing totals are mainly due to slightly varying views regarding boundaries, and the availability of new information. A much higher total of 280 species was given in CAFF (2001). However, nowhere in this pub- lication is a full list given, the appendix listing only those mentioned in the text. Furthermore, Surfbird Aphriza virgata is shown as breeding entirely in the Arctic, yet its breeding range includes the Alaska Range and south to the Chugach Mountains, both out- side even CAFF's wide definition of the Arctic. Earlier, Scott (1998) stated that of the 449 species of birds that breed or have bred (listed in Appendix 1) in the Arctic region, 279 breed in significant numbers within the Arctic, but nowhere is it explained what the difference is between 'the Arctic region' and 'the Arctic'. The list in Scott's Appendix 1 includes many species which have never previously been suggested as having any connection with the polar region, for example Eurasian Capercaillie Tetrao nrogallus, Corncrake Crex crex, Black Woodpecker Dryocopus martins and Palm Warbler Dendroica palmarum. It also lists Water Rail Rallus aquaticus and Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago as having bred occasionally in Greenland. However, D. Boertmann (1994 and in litt. 2008) states that neither of these latter two species has ever bred there. Within the true Arctic as defined above, 203 species are considered to have bred (Appendix 1). Order, taxonomy and names follow Gill & Wright (2006). In Collinson et al. (2008) American Herring Gull Lams smithsonianus is recognised as a species distinct from Herring Gull L. argentatus, but this split is not adopted here as it has not been accepted by the American Ornithologists' Union at the time of writing. Some species listed are of mar- ginal occurrence in the Arctic or have very limited distributions, and these are identified in Appendix 1. Also shown are the number of breeding species in Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Bryan Sage 82 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Svalbard and Russia. Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis, which formerly bred in northern Canada, has been omitted as it is probably extinct. Also omitted are Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos and Brambling Fringilla montifringilla, which bred on the Yamal Peninsula, Russia, in 1950 during a period of climatic amelioration, but have not done so since (P. Tomkovich in litt. 1985). Whooper Swan Cygnus cygnus formerly bred in Greenland but no longer does so (Boertmann 1994), and Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica has bred once (possibly twice) on the Arctic Slope of Alaska (Pitelka 1974). Finally, Baikal Teal Anas formosa, which formerly bred on the northern Russian tundra and, in the early 20th century, as far north as Bolshoy Lyakhovsky Island, in the New Siberian Archipelago, is now a rare species and few breeding records are available, so it is excluded from the list (P. Tomkovich in litt. 2008). Acknowledgements I am indebted to Stephen Brown (Manumit Centre for Conservation Studies, MA, USA^I and Brad Andrews (US Fish & Wildlife Service, CO) for sending me reprints of relevant papers. Richard Lanctot (USFWS, Anchorage, Alaska) kindly provided information on the status of Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes in north- ern Alaska, and Vicky Johnston (Canada) sent data on this and other species in northern Canada. For a copy of the checklist of the birds of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, and other information I must thank Steve Kendall (USFWS, Fairbanks, Alaska). Assistance with references was kindly provided by Ian Dawson (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Sandy) and Shirley Sawtell (Scott Polar Research Institute, Cambridge, UK). In compiling the list of the breeding birds of Greenland I received much help from David Boertmann (The Commission for Scientific Research in Greenland). I am particularly grateful to Dr Pavel Tomkovich (Zoological Museum, Moscow State University) for significant information concerning the breed- ing birds of the Russian Arctic. References: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA). 2004. Impacts of a warming Arctic: Arctic climate impact assessment. Cambridge Univ. Press. Bauer, S., Van Dinther, M., Hogda, K.-A., Klaassen, M. & Madsen, J. 2008. The consequences of climate- driven stop-over site changes on migration schedules and fitness of Arctic geese. /. Anim. Ecol. 77: 654-660. Boertmann, D. 1994. A annotated checklist to the birds of Greenland. Medd. Gronland, Bioscience 38: 1-63. Boyd, H. & Diamond, A. W. 1994. Influence of climate on Arctic migratory birds. Pp. 67-75 in Riewe, R. & Oakes, J. (eds.) Biological implications of global change: northern perspectives. Canadian Circumpolar Institute, Jasper, Alberta. Boyd, H. & Madsen, J. 1997. Impacts of global change on Arctic-breeding bird populations and migration. Pp. 201-217 in Oechel, W. C, Callaghan, T., Gilmanov, T., Holten, J. I., Maxwell, B., Molau, U. & Sveinbjornsson (eds.) Global change and Arctic terrestrial ecosystems. Springer Verlag, New York. Collinson, J. M., Parkin, D. T., Knox, A. G., Sangster, G. & Svensson, L. 2008. Species boundaries in the Herring and Lesser Black-backed Gull complex. Brit. Birds 101: 340-363. Conservation of Arctic Fauna and Flora (CAFF). 2001. Arctic fauna and flora: status and conservation. Edita, Helsinki. Gill, F. & Wright, M. 2006. Birds of the zuorld: recommended English names. Christopher Helm, London. Huntley, B. 1996. The responses of vegetation to past and future climate changes. Pp. 290-311 in Oechel, W. C, Callaghan, T., Gilmanov, T., Holten, J. I., Maxwell, B., Molau, U. & Sveinbjornsson, B. (eds.) Global change and Arctic terrestrial ecosystems. Springer Verlag, New York. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 1998. The regional impacts of climate change: an assessment of vulnerability. Spec. Rep. 11. IPPC, Cambridge, UK. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate change 2007: fourth assessment report. IPPC, Cambridge, UK. Koppen, W. 1900. Versuch einer Klassifikation de Klimate, vorzugsweise nach ihren Beziehung zur Pflanzenwelt. Geogr. Zeitschr. 1900: 593-611. Love, D. 1970. Subarctic and subalpine: where and what? Arct. Alp. Res. 2: 63-73. Maxwell, B. 1996. Recent climate patterns in the Arctic. Pp. 21-46 /// Oechel, W. C, Callaghan, T., Gilmanov, T., Holten, J. I., Maxwell, B., Molau, U. & Sveinbjornsson, B. (eds.) Global change and arctic terrestrial ecosystems. Springer Verlag, New York. Nordenskjold, O. & Mecking, L. 1928. The geography of the polar regions. Amer. Geogr. Soc, New York. Pitelka, F. 1974. An avifaunal review for the Barrow region and North Slope of Arctic Alaska. Arct. Alp. Res. 6: 161-184. Rousseau, J. 1952. Les zones biologiques de la peninsule Quebec-Labrador et I'hemi-arctique. Can. ]. Bot. 30: 436-474. Bryan Sage 83 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Sage, B. 1986. The Arctic and its wildlife. Croom Helm, London. Sale, R. 2006. A complete guide to Arctic wildlife. Christopher Helm, London. Salomonsen, F. 1972. Zoogeographical and ecological problems in Arctic birds. Pp. 25-77 in Proc. XV Intern. Orn. Congr., Den Haag, the Netherlands, 1970. Scott, D. A. 1998. Global overview of the conservation of migratory Arctic breeding birds outside the Arctic. Wetlands International Publ. No. 45 / CAFF Tech. Rep. No. 4. Wetlands International / Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, Reykjavik. Stonehouse, B. 1971. Animals of the Arctic: the ecology of the far north. Ward Lock, London. Yurtsev, B. A. 1994. Floristic division of the Arctic. /. Veg. Sci. 5:765-776. Zockler, C. & Lysenko, I. 2000. Water birds on the edge: first circumpolar assessment of climate change impact on Arctic breeding water birds. WCMC Biodiversity Series No. 11. World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, UK. Address: Waveney House, Waveney Close, Wells-next-the-Sea, Norfolk NR23 IHU, UK, e-mail: bryan.sage@btopenworld.com © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Appendix. Breeding birds of the Arctic Willow Ptarmigan Lagopus lagopus Rock Ptarmigan Lagopus mutus Bean Goose Anserfabalis Pink-footed Goose Anser brachyrrhynchiis Greater White-fronted Goose Anser albifrons Lesser White-fronted Goose Anser erythropus Emperor Goose Anser canagicus Snow Goose Chen caerulescens Ross's Goose Chen rossii Canada Goose Branta canadensis Cackling Goose Branta hutchinsn Brant Goose Branta bernicla Barnacle Goose Branta leucopsis Red-breasted Goose Branta ruficollis Trumpeter Swan Cygnus buccinator Tundra Swan Cygnus columbianus Whooper Swan Cygnus cygnus Eurasian Wigeon Anas penelope American Wigeon Anas americana Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata Northern Pintail Anas acuta Eurasian Teal Anas crecca Redhead Aythya americana Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula Greater Scaup Aythya marila Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis Steller's Eider Polysticta stelleri Spectacled Eider Somateria fischeri King Eider Somateria spectabilis Common Eider Somateria mollissima Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus Surf Scoter Melanitta perspicillata Velvet Scoter Melanitta fusca White-winged Scoter Melanitta deglandi Black Scoter Melanitta nigra American Scoter Melanitta americana Long-tailed Duck Clangula hyemalis Barrow's Goldeneye Bucephala islandica Alaska X X X X X X X X(d) X X X X X X X X Canada Greenland X X X Svalbard X X X X X X X X X Russia X X X X x*(a) X* X X X X X X* x^a) X X X*© X X X X X X Bryan Sage 84 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Red-breasted Merganser Mei-giis senator x x x Red-throated Loon Gavin stellata x x x x x Black-throated Loon Gavia arctica x Fadhc Loon Gaviapacifica x x x Great Northern Loon Gavia iminer ? x x YeUo-w-billed Loon Gavia adamsii x x x Northern Fuknar Fulmarus glacialis x x x x x Red-necked Grebe Podiceps grisegena x x x x Homed Grebe Podiceps auritus x x Great Cormorant Plialacorax carho x Pelagic Cormorant Phalacrocorax pelagica x x Merlin Falco cohimbariiis x x x G}Tfalcon Falco nisticohis x x x x Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrimis x x x x WTiite-tailed Eagle Haliaeetus albicilla x x*(a) Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus x Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus x x x*(a) Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus x*(a) Roughleg Buteo lagopus x x x Golden Eagle Acjuila chn/saetus x x x*(a) Siberian Crane Grus leucogeramis x Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis x x x European Golden Plover Pluvialis apricaria x x American Golden Plover Pluvialis dominica x x x Pacific Golden Plover P/nrw/zs /i//rfl x x x Grey Plover Pluvialis squatarola x x x x Common Ringed Plover Charadrnis hiaticula x x x x Semipalmated Plover Cliaradrius semipalmatus x x x Lesser Sand Plover Cliaradrius mongohis x* Eiirasian Dotterel Cliaradrius morinellus x x Jack Snipe Lymnocryptes minimus x Pin-tailed Snipe Gallinago steniira x Great Snipe Gallinago media x* Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago x Wilson's Snipe Gallinago delicata x x Long-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus scolopaceus x x x Hudsonian Godwit Limosa haemastica x Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica x x Whimbrel Numeniiis phaeopiis x x x x Bristle-thighed Curlew Numenius tahitieiisis x(d) Spotted Redshank Tringa erytliropus x Lesser \qL1o\\-\q^s Fringa flavipes x x Sohtar}^ Sandpiper Fringa solitaria x ? Wood Sandpiper Fringa glareola x Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinerea x© Spotted Sandpiper Actitis maculariiis x x Upland Sandpiper Bartramia longicauda x Grey-tailed Tattler Heteroscehis brevipes x* W cindering T attler Heteroscelus incaniis x x x* Ruddy Turnstone Areuaria intei-pres x x x x x Black Turnstone Areuaria melanocephala x Surfbird Aphriza virgata x Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris x Red Knot Calidris canutus x x x x x Sanderling Calidris alba x x x x Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla x x x Western Sandpiper Calidris mauri x x x Red-necked Stint Calidris ruficoUis x x Little Stint Calidris minuta x Bryan Sage 85 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Temminck's Stint Calidris temminckii x Least Sandpiper Calidris minutilla x x VVhite-rumped Sandpiper Cfl/ztins/i/S(:zco///s x x Baird's Sandpiper Calidris bairdii x x x x Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos x x x x Sharp-tailed Sandpiper Calidris acuminata x Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea x x Purple Sandpiper Calidris maritima x x x x Rock Sandpiper Calidris ptilocnemis x(d) x Dunlin Calidris alpina x x x x x Stilt Sandpiper Calidris himantopus x x Spoon-billed Sandpiper Eurynorhynclms pxjgmeus x Broad-billed Sandpiper Limicola falcinelliis x Buff-breasted Sandpiper Tryngites subruficollis x x x Ruff Philomachus pugnax x Red-necked Phalarope Phalaropiis lobatus x x x Red Fhalarope Phalaropus fulicarius x x x x x Mew Gull Larus canus x x x* Great Black-backed Gull Larus marinus x x x x Glaucous Gull Larus hyperboreus x x x x x Iceland Gull Larus glaucoides x x x Thayer's Gull Larus thayeri _ x x Herring Gull Larus argentatus x x x Lesser Black-backed Gull Larus /uscz/s x x Common Black-headed Gull Larus ridibundus - x Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea x x x x Ross's Gull Rhodostethia rosea x x x x Sabine's Gull Xema sabini x x x x x Black-legged Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla x x x x x Arctic Tern Sterna paradisaea x x x x x Aleutian Tern Sterna aleutica x(d) Great Skua Stercorarius skua x Pomarine Skua Stercorarius pomarinus x x x Parasitic Jaeger Stercorarius parasiticus x x x x x Long-tailed Jaeger Stercorarius longicaudus x x x x x Little Auk Alle alle x x x x Thick-billed Murre Uria lomvia x x x x x Common Murre Uria aalge x x x x Razorbill Alca torda x x x Black Guillemot Cepphus grylle x x x x x Pigeon Guillemot Cepphus columba x Kittlitz's Murrelet Brachyramphus brevirostris x(d) x(b) Parakeet Auklet Aethia psittacula x(b) Least Auklet Aethia pusilla x(d) x(b) Crested Auklet Aethia cristatella x(b) Atlantic Puffin Fratercula arctica x x x Homed Fuifin Fratercula corniculata x x Tufted Puffin Fratercula cirrhata , x x Snowy Owl Nyctea scandiaca x x x x x Short-eared Owl Asioflammeus x x x Northern Flicker Colaptes aurata x Say's Phoebe Sayornis saya x x Alder Flycatcher Empidonax alnorum x(d) Great Grey Shrike Lanius excubitor x x x© Eurasian Magpie Pica pica x Carrion Crow Corvus corone x(b) Northern Raven Corvus corax x x x x Sand Martin Riparia riparia x(d) x American Cliff Swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonota x Bryan Sage 86 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Homed Lark Eromophila aJpestris Sedge Warbler Acrocephahis schoenobaemis Arctic Warbler Phylloscopus borealis Willow Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus Common Chiffchaff Phylloscopus collybita Grey-cheeked Thrush Caiharus minimus Naumann's Thrush Turdus naumanni Fieldfare Turdus pilaris Redwing Turdus iliacus American Robin Turdus migratorius Bluethroat Luscinia svecica Eurasian Stone Chat Saxicola torquntus Northern Wheatear Oenanthe oemnthe American Dipper Cinclus mexicanus Eurasian Tree Sparrow Passer montanus House Sparrow Passer domesticus Siberian Accentor Prunella montanella Western Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava Citrine Wagtail Motacilla citreola White Wagtail Motacilla alba Meadow Pipit Anthus pratensis Pechora Pipit Anthus gustavi Red-throated Pipit Anthus cervinus Buff-bellied Pipit Anthus rubescens Common Redpoll Carduelis flammeus Arctic Redpoll Carduelis hornemanni Asian Rosy Finch Leucosticte arctoa Grey-crowned Rosy Finch Leucosticte tephrocotis Orange-crowned Warbler Vermivora celata BlackpoU Warbler Dendroica striata Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia Northern Waterthrush Seiurus noveboracensis Wilson's Warbler Wilsonia pusilla Rust}^ Blackbird Euphagus carolinus Little Bunting Emberiza pusilla Pallas's Reed Bunting Emberiza pallasi Common Reed Bunting Emberiza schoeniculus Lapland Longspur Calcarius lapponicus Smith's Longspur Calcarius pictus Snow Bunting Plectrophenax nivalis Fox Sparrow Passerella iliaca Lincoln's Sparrow Melospiza lincolni Harris's Sparrow Zonotrichia querula White-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia leucophnjs Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandivichensis American Tree Sparrow Spizella arborea 203 species (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) x(d) X X X X x(d) X x(d) x(d) X X(d) X x(d) X X X X x(d) X X X 129 X X X X x(a) X X X 112 X x*(a) X X x*(a) X X x*(a) x(a) x x*(a) X x*(e) x(e) x*(a) X X X X X X X X X X 72 33 Of marginal occurrence in the Arctic Breeds in the extreme south of the timdra zone Breeds on the Chukotski Peninsula Extends into the timdra zone only along \vooded \ alle)"s, particularh" ri\"er \ alle)"S Breeds on the Seward Peninsula Associated with human settlements 147 (22 species) (13 species (4 species) (3 species) (17 spedes) (2 secies) H. Douglas Pratt et al. 87 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) An Abbott's Booby Papasula abbotti on Rota, Mariana Islands: first historical record for the Pacific Ocean by H. Douglas Pratt, Michael L. P. Retter, Douglas Chapman, W. Michael Ord & Paul Pisano Received 21 May 2008 SUMMARY. — We describe the first documented record of Abbott's Booby Papasula abbotti in the North Pacific, a female observed and photographed at Rota, the southernmost island in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (USA), in northern Micronesia, on 17 April 2007. Furthermore, on the same island, we also observed and photographed a subadult Red-footed Booby Sida sula with a black-tipped pink bill very similar to that of Abbott's. The available evidence suggests that pink is a normal but poorly documented bill colour variation for some older immature Red-footed Boobies and not a diagnostic feature of Abbott's or an indication of hybridisation between the two species. Abbott's Booby Papasula abbotti is a rare and endangered member of the Sulidae with a relict distribution (BirdLife International 2000, Commonwealth of Australia 2001). Originally placed in the genus Sula, it is quite distinct from the more typical boobies (Olson & Warheit 1988). The species is currently known to nest only on the Australian territory of Christmas Island in the Indian Ocean (Yorkston & Green 1997; Fig. la), and is observed Figure 1. a) Map of the Indo-Pacific showing important localities mentioned in the text; b) The Mariana Islands, North Pacific Ocean; c) Island of Rota, showing sighting location of Abbott's Booby, geographic features mentioned in the text, main towns, and highest elevation. H. Douglas Pratt et al. 88 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) infrequently at sea in the nearby ocean north to Java (Becking 1976, Dunlop et al. 2001). However, the type specimen was collected 6,300 km west of Christmas on Assumption Island, in the Aldabra Group north of Madagascar (Ridgway 1893, Skerrett et al. 2001), where the species is apparently extirpated (Nelson 1974, Prys-Jones et al. 1981). A few sight- ings from the Chagos Archipelago, between Assumption and Christmas islands (Bourne 1971, Hirons et al. 1976; Fig. la), including a 1996 observation of an immature visiting a large mixed-species seabird roost with Red-footed Boobies Siila siila (Symens 1999), suggest the possibility of a small remnant or incipient colony. Pre-cultural remains in the Mascarenes (Nelson 1974, Bourne 1976), as well as 6,000 km to the east on Tikopia (Steadman et al. 1990) and Efate (Steadman 2006) in eastern Melanesia, indicate that P. abbotti formerly had a much wider distribution, extending into the western South Pacific. A different subspecies (or species) P. a. costelloi is known from bones found in the Marquesas in eastern Polynesia (Steadman et al. 1988, Steadman 2006). Today, Abbott's Booby is almost never seen far from Christmas Island, although the 1990s Chagos sightings may have involved birds from there, and individuals disappear from the colony for long periods supposedly on distant foraging journeys (Commonwealth of Australia 2001). Balen (1996) summarised recent sightings in the Banda Sea in eastern Indonesia, and there are three recent 'continental' Australia records (Hassel & Boyle 1999, Palliser 2005, 2007). We report here the observation of a sin- gle female Abbott's Booby at Rota, the southernmost island in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (USA), in northern Micronesia (Fig. lb). It is the first historical record from the Pacific, and the first ever for the North Pacific. On 17 April 2007, as participants in a research expedition under the auspices of the North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, we were observing birds from the clifftop platform above the seabird colony in Chenchon Bird Sanctuary on the south-east coast of Rota (Fig. Ic), encompassing Puntan Saguagahga (= Funiya Point). It is the only large seabird nesting colony in the main inhabited islands of the commonwealth, and the sanctuary provides both legal and physical (low-canopy trees between sheer cliffs and the sea) protection. Weather was characteristically hot with a clear blue sky as hundreds of Red- footed Boobies S. siila circled overhead or perched in their nest trees. Also present were lesser numbers of Brown Booby S. leucogaster, Brown Noddy Anous stolidus, White-tailed Phaethon lepturns and Red-tailed Tropicbirds P. rubricauda, Great Frigatebird Fregata minor and Common Fairy (White) Tern Gi/gis alba. At c. 14.30 hrs, from the north-eastern visible terminus of the cliff, an unusual-looking booby flew toward us. It had a large head and nar- row wings compared to the other boobies present, and was 'ungainly and prehistoric-looking' (MLPR field notes). It had a black tail and a black facial marking around the eye at the base of the upper mandible, which contrasted with the white head, neck and underparts. Based on the black tail and partial mask, some of us initially suspect- Captions to figures on opposite page (a colour PDF can be downloaded at w\\ ^v.boc-online.org/bulletin- downloads.htm) . Figure 2 (top left). Abbott's Booby Pnpasula abbotti, Rota, Northern Mariana Islands, 17 April 2007 (M. L. P. Retter) Figure 3 (top right). Field sketch by P. Pisano drawn shortly after sighting of Abbott's Boobv Papmsida abbotti on Rota, Northern Mariana Islands, 17 April 2007. Notes read as follows: A) bird from above; B) pinkish bill with black tip; C) mostly white body possibly with darker feathers interspersed; D) white head with thimier neck; E) solid, satin black upper surface of the wings — no white feathering and no clear difference between coverts and remiges; F) white rump? G) black tail. Figure 4 (bottom), (a-c) Three views of probably the same subadult Red-footed Boob\- Siila siila showing black-tipped pink bill similar to that of Abbott's Boob\- Papasiila abbotti, Rota, Northern Mariana Islands, 17 April 2007. (d) Subadult Red-footed Booby showing Abbott's-Uke black-tipped pink bill, Ulupau Head, Oahu, Hawaii, August 1974. (Photograph a by D. Gemmill, photographs b-d by H. D. Pratt.) H. Douglas Pratt et al. 89 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) H. Douglas Pratt et al. 90 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) ed the bird might be a juvenile Masked Booby S. dactylatra, a rare bird at this locality (Reichel 1991). As the bird circled and flew past us again, lower and c. 60-100 m away, it afforded a good view of both wing surfaces. MLPR took a single photograph (Fig. 2) before the bird disappeared. We identified it as an adult female Abbott's Booby based on the following: the bill was rose-pink with a dark tip (juveniles and adult males have a black-tipped grey bill; Pizzey & Knight 1997); the black marking on the face was confined to the lores at the base of the upper mandible and did not extend below the gape; the head, neck, nape and most of the underparts and underwings were white, the outermost primaries having black tips; the upperwings were black or very dark brown, with sharp, clean margins where they met the white central back; the rump was white with black mottling near the tail; and the posterior flanks just behind the wings exhibited an odd-shaped black patch, just visible in Fig. 2. We did not note feet and leg colours. PP made a field sketch with notes of the dorsal surface (Fig. 3). These include nearly all of the field marks given by Pizzey & Knight (1997). We returned to the colony next day in the late afternoon, and PP spotted what he thought might be the same bird, circling at great distance with large numbers of Red- footed Boobies offshore, apparently preparing to return to the colony to roost. The bird never came sufficiently close for a positive identification. We subsequently learned that the colony extends quite far to the east, with only about one-third visible from the lookout. Perhaps the Abbott's Booby was roosting in the inaccessible portion. Abbott's is the only booby other than Red-footed (Schreiber et al. 1996) that nests and roosts in trees (Nelson & Powell 1986, Yorkston & Green 1997), which may explain why the bird was attracted to this site. Interestingly, another seabird endemic to Christmas Island, the golden subspecies of White-tailed Tropicbird P. I. fiilva, is also a rare visitor to the Marianas, with records for Saipan (Pratt & Bruner 1981), Guam (Pratt et al. in prep.) and perhaps Rota (Pratt et al. 1987; based on hearsay, with source lost, HDP). Another intriguing observation on the second day was of a subadult Red-footed Booby with a black- tipped pink bill very similar to that of Abbott's (Fig. 4a-c). We were unaware that some Red-footed can have this bill colour, and have found no description or illustra- tion of it in any field guide. Schreiber et al. (1996) stated that the dark bill of the juvenile becomes pale grey with a black tip in immatures, before reaching the pink-based blue bill of adults. At no stage during such a transition would one expect the bill to be largely pink. We considered the possibility that the pink-billed bird might be a Red-footed x Abbott's hybrid, but later, among old photographs, found an example of a similar pink-billed bird from Hawaii (Fig. 4d), indicating that pink is a normal, albeit atypical and poorly docu- mented, bill colour variation for some older immature Red-footed Boobies and not a diagnostic feature of Abbott's or an indication of hybridisation. Recently, observers at the Great Barrier Reef misidentified a pink-billed Red-footed as an Abbott's (D. J. James /'// litt. 2008). We offer our photographs to bolster the literature on maturational stages of Red- footed Booby and to help future observers avoid such errors. We encourage future visitors to Rota to look for this Abbott's Booby to determine whether it was simply a long-distance vagrant or is a solitary resident. If the latter, the bird might indicate a (re)colonisation attempt or even a relict colony. Acknowledgements Colleagues present in addition to the authors were Romney Bathurst, William Mueller and Daphi^e Gemmill. We thank the last-named for the use of her photographs. Our expedition was funded by contributions from the participants to the Friends of the North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, which institution also supported HDP's research, and provided computers and software used in preparation of the manuscript H. Douglas Pratt et al. 91 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) and figures. Referees R. Pitman and D. J. James offered suggestions and additional information that both shortened and strengthened this report. References: van Balen, S. 1996. Note on observations of Abbott's Booby in the Banda Sea. Kukila 8: 145. Becking, J.-H. 1976. Feeding range of Abbott's Booby Sula abbotti at the coast of Java. Ibis 118: 589-590. BirdLife International. 2000. Threatened birds of the world. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona & BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Bourne, W. R. P. 1971. The birds of the Chagos Group, Indian Ocean. Atoll Res. Bull. 149: 175-207. Bourne, W. R. P. 1976. On subfossil bones of Abbott's Booby Sula abbotti from the Mascarene Islands, with a note on the proportions and distribution of the Sulidae. Ibis 118: 119-123. Commonwealth of Australia. 2001. Background information for the Abbott's Booby, Papasula abbotti recov- ery plan. Dept. of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra. Dunlop, J. N., Surman, C. A. & Wooller, R. D. 2001. The marine distribution of seabirds from Christmas Island, Indian Ocean. Emu 101: 19-24. Hassel, C. J. & Boyle, A. N. 2000. Abbott's Booby: first record for mainland Australia. Australian Bird Watcher 18: 255-258. Hirons, M. J., Bellamy, D. J. & Sheppard, C. 1976. Birds on the Chagos Bank. Nature 260: 387. Nelson, J. B. 1974. The distribution of Abbott's Booby Sula abbotti. Ibis 116: 368-369. Nelson, J. B. 1978. The Sulidae. Oxford Univ. Press. Nelson, J. B. & Powell, D. 1986. The breeding ecology of Abbott's Booby Sula abbotti. Emu 86: 33-46. Olson, S. L. & Warheit, K. I. 1988. A new genus for Sula abbotti. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 108: 9-12. Palliser, T. 2005. Submission No. 432: Abbott's booby Papasula abbotti. Birds Australia Records Committee (BARC). http://users.bigpond.net.au/palliser/barc/SUMM432.htm (accessed 27 April 2008). Palliser, T. 2007. Submission No. 541: Abbott's booby Papasula abbotti. Birds Australia Records Committee (BARC). http:/ /users.bigpond.net.au/palliser/barc/summ541.htm (accessed 17 September 2008). Pizzey, G. & Knight, F. 1997. Field guide to the birds of Australia. Angus & Robertson, Sydney. Pratt, H. D. & Bruner, P. L. 1981. Noteworthy records of nonbreeding birds in Micronesia. Micronesica 17: 195-198. Pratt, H. D., Bruner, P. L. & Berrett, D. G. 1987. A field guide to the birds of Hawaii and the tropical Pacific. Princeton Univ. Press. Pratt, H. D., Etpison, M. T., Falanruw, M., Klauber, D., Buden, D. W., Clement, P., Gupta, A., Herter, D. R., Ketebengang, H., Olsen, A., Pisano, P. & Yalap, Y. P. In prep. Noteworthy bird observations in Micronesia, with indications of trends among seasonal visitors. Prys-Jones, R. P., Prys-Jones, M. S. & Lawley, J. C. 1981. The birds of Assumption Island, Indian Ocean: past and future. Atoll Res. Bull. 248. Reichel, J. D. 1991. Status and conservation of seabirds in the Mariana Islands. Pp. 248-262 in Croxall, J. P. (ed.) Seabird status and conservation: a supplement. International Council for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK. Ridgway, R. 1893. Descriptions of some new birds collected on the islands of Aldabra and Assumption, northwest of Madagascar, by Dr. W. L. Abbott. Proc. US Natl. Mus. 16: 597-600. Schreiber, E. A., Schreiber, R. W. & Schenk, G. A. 1996. Red-footed Booby {Sida sula). In Poole, A. & Gill, F. (eds.) The birds of North America, 241. Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia, PA & American Ornithologists' Union, Washington DC. Skerrett, A., Bullock, I. & Disley, T. 2001. Birds of the Seychelles. Princeton Univ. Press. Steadman, D. W. 2006. Extinction and biogeography of tropical Pacific birds. Univ. of Chicago Press. Steadman, D. W., Schubel, S. E. & Pahlavan, D. 1988. A new subspecies and new records of Papasula abbotti (Aves: Sulidae) from archaeological sites in the tropical Pacific. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 101: 487-495. Symens, P. 1999. Breeding seabirds of the Chagos Archipelago. Pp. 257-272 in Sheppard, C. R. C. & Seaward, M. R. D. (eds.) Ecology of the Chagos Archipelago. Linnean Soc. Occas. Publ. 2. Westbury Publishing, Otley. Yorkston, H. D. & Green, P. T. 1997. The breeding distribution and status of Abbott's Booby (Sulidae: Papasula abbotti) on Christmas Island, Indian Ocean. Biol. Conserv. 79: 293-301. Addresses: H. Douglas Pratt, North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, 11 West Jones Street, Raleigh, NC 27601, USA, e-mail: doug.pratt@ncmail.net. Michael L. P. Retter, 3346 Peppermill Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47906, USA. Douglas Chapman, 3108 S Holly Avenue, Sioux Falls, SD 57105, USA. W. Michael Ord, 1178 Hunakai Street, Honolulu, HI 96816, USA. Paul Pisano, 626 18th Street South, Arlington, VA 22202, USA. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Eninia Bennett et al. 92 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Temporal segregation of breeding by storm petrels Oceanodroma castro (sensti lato) on St Helena, South Atlantic Emma Bennett, Mark Bolton & Geoff Hilton Received 11 ] line 2008 Summary. — The storm petrel Oceanodroma castro {sensii lato) complex shows considerable variation in the seasonal pattern of breeding throughout its extensive range in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. At several locations two seasonally separate, sympatric, populations exist, warranting recognition as separate species in at least one case. Here we report a hitherto unsuspected seasonal segregation of breeding among storm petrels on tW'O small islets off St Helena in the South Atlantic. Egg laying occurs in two discrete periods, late March-early July ('cool season') and late September-late December ('hot season'). Most birds breed during the 'cool' season and their breeding success is substantially higher than that of those nesting in the 'hot' season. These results parallel the findings from similar studies of sympatric seasonal populations in both the Azores and Galapagos. Sympatric breeding of temporally segregated populations of storm petrels of the Oceanodroma castro {sensii lato) complex has been well established at several locations for some years (e.g. Galapagos: Harris 1962; Azores: Monteiro & Furness 1998). Recent molec- ular, morphological and behavioural studies have greatlv clarified taxonomic relationships amongst those populations in the Pacific and North Atlantic (Bolton 2007, Friesen et al. 2007, Smith et al. 2007), leading to the proposal to treat one such population specifically (Azores hot season: Bolton et al. 2008); further taxonomic revisions are anticipated. In contrast, pop- ulations in the South Atlantic have been less well studied (though see Allan 1962 for a detailed account from Ascension Island). Benson (1950) reported information obtained from local fisherman and a policeman during his visit to St Helena in January 1949, that egg lav- ing occurred in October and November. Haydock (1954) found nests with eggs on George, Egg and Shore islands on 25 November 1952, and Stonehouse (1960) reported nests with fresh eggs on Egg Island on 14 November 1958. From a visit to Egg Island on 26 April 1959, Stonehouse (1960) reported just a single storm petrel without egg or chick, though with a freshly developed brood patch. More recent authors (e.g. Rowlands et al. 1998, Ashmole & Ashmole 2000, McCulloch 2004) all state that breeding occurs annually bet^veen October and December. Here we provide the first detailed information on breeding phenology of storm petrels nesting on two offshore islets of St Helena, South Atlantic, and examine breed- ing performance across six breeding cycles. Methods Study sites St Helena (15"58'S, 05"43'W) lies 1,913 km from the west coast of Africa and c.800 km east of the mid-Atlantic ridge, having drifted some 150 km north-east from the hotspot on the African Plate where it was formed by volcanic activity about 14 MYA (Ro^vlands et al. 1998). The main island is surrounded by 24 satellite islets and stacks, most within 100 m of the coast and of very limited area, the largest being c.4 ha. Several species of predator Emma Bennett et al. 93 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) (domestic cat Felis cattus, Black Rat Rattus rattiis, Brown Rat R. norvegicus and Common Myna Acridotheres tristis) have been introduced to St Helena since the island's discovery in 1502. Seabirds vulnerable to predators are consequently restricted to these very small off- shore islets and now occupy a very small proportion of their former potential range. The present study was undertaken on two neighbouring islets. Egg Island (c.4 ha) and Peaked Island (c.0.5 ha), which lie c.350 m apart and less than 100 m off the north-west coast. On these islets, storm petrels nest under lava screes and in the remains of walls associated with former fortifications. Nests are often very close to the surface, the incubating bird being clearly visible. The islets also support large numbers of breeding Brown Anoiis stolidus and Black Noddies A. minutus. Whilst no avian or mammalian predators are resident on these two islets. Common Mynas visit from the main island and have been observed taking or scavenging seabird eggs and chicks (EB pers. obs.). Although St Helena lies well north of the Tropic of Capricorn, the climate is subtropical, with temperatures ameliorated by the south-east trade winds. The warmest month, March, is at the end of the austral summer (mean air temperatures at Jamestown, on the coast, range from 24.5-29.2°C) and the coolest month is September (19.6-23.8°C). Sea surface temperatures similarly peak in March (24.5-25.0°C) and are coolest at the end of the austral winter in September-October (19.5-21. 5°C: Rowlands et al 1998). Monitoring protocols Egg Island and Peaked Island were visited approximately monthly from November 2004 to June 2007. Nests of storm petrels were located by visual searches of suitable habitat over all parts of each islet that are safely accessible. Nests were marked with uniquely num- bered tags to enable the breeding history at individual nests to be followed over the course of the three-year study period. The contents of each nest were recorded on each visit accord- ing to the following categories: adult incubating (egg present), downy chick (0-28 days), downy/ feathered chick (29-49 days), nearly fledged chick (50-70 days). The approximate ages of each growth stage were assumed following Allan (1962). The approximate timing of laying, hatching and fledging was determined from the presence of incubating adults and back-calculation of laying dates from the ages of chicks assuming a 42-day incubation peri- od from laying to hatching and a 70-day chick development period (Allan 1962, Harris 1969). Data analysis Daily egg and chick survival rates were calculated following Mayfield (1975) and their standard errors following Johnson (1979). The timing of egg and chick outcomes (i.e. hatch /fledge /fail) was assumed to have occurred halfway between visits (Mayfield 1975), unless the stage of development of the chick indicated otherwise. Hatching success (the per- centage of eggs hatching) was calculated assuming a 42-day incubation period from laying to hatching and fledging success (the percentage of hatched chicks surviving to fledging) was calculated assuming a 70-day chick development period (Allan 1962, Harris 1969). Breeding success (the percentage of eggs laid that result in a fledged chick) was calculated as the product of hatching success and fledging success. Egg and chick survival rates were examined in relation to breeding season using a General Linear Model implemented in SAS V 9.1. Daily survival rates of eggs and chicks were modelled as a binomial response variable with the number of days exposure as a binomial denominator (see Aebischer 1999). Emma Bennett et al. 94 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Results Timing of breeding The occurrence of incubating storm petrels on each islet showed two distinct seasonal peaks, with an absence of incubation at other times of year (Fig. 1). The estimated egg- laying periods, from timing of incubation and back-calculation for nests containing chicks, are from late March to early July ('cool' season) and late September to late December ('hot' season). The chick-rearing periods lasted from mid May to late October in the 'cool' season and from early November to late April in the 'hot' season. There was a single instance of a downy chick present in a newly discovered nest on 28 March 2006, which probably related to a late 'hot'-season breeding attempt (egg laid in January). The same nest was occupied by an incubating 'cool'-season adult when it was next checked on 25 April. The number of nests monitored from the egg stage during each season ('hot' and 'cool') is given in Table 1. Whilst these data do not represent a systematic assessment of absolute population size, they do strongly suggest that larger numbers of birds breed during the 'cool' season (late March-late October), given the similar level of search effort in each season. 50 40 30 20 10 Egg Island A ~D 6iO- O A o 2004 o 2005 A 2006 □ 2007 nA10 years) (pers. obs.). Few data are available on the sequences of plumage development in the capuchinos, however delayed plumage maturation, although occasionally noted in S. ruficollis, is appar- ently not common in the group. The S. ruficollis and S. palustris reported herein behaved territorially, vocalised like adult-plumaged males and careful observation failed to detect any sign of incipient maturity in their plumages. This suggests not only protracted reten- tion of the immature plumage, but also raises the possibility that it is retained throughout the life of the birds concerned, as in the two confirmed cases reported here for S. ruficollis. The individual ontogenetic potential of creating, in the long term, paedomorphic pop- ulations is present in the capuchinos, at least in S. ruficollis and apparently also in S. palustris. Indeed a whole taxon of the clade, the subspecies crypta of Capped Seedeater S. boiwreuil, restricted to Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, can be considered paedomorphic: males never acquire a plumage obviously different from females and only show a few intermingled black crown-feathers and pale chestnut body-feathers. These few feathers suggest the deri- vation of crypta, by retention of immature plumage, from the black-crowned and chestnut-bodied S. b. bouvreuil (Sick 1967, 1968, 1997). Thus, the intra-populational phenom- enon of immature plumage retention in S. ruficollis and apparently in S. palustris provides a mechanistic explanation for the evolutionary origin of paedomorphosis in S. b. crypta. The highly variably plumaged Temminck's Seedeater S. falcirostris exhibits a very protracted period of plumage maturation, and some captive individuals were reported never to reach a plumage different from that of immatures (Sick 1997), suggesting that protracted plumage maturation can lead to paedomorphosis within a species (but see Bjorklund 1991). Another case in which paedomorphosis might be partially invoked as a generative explanation is in the slightly dimorphic Drab Seedeater S. siwpilex,, where some males show traces of a blackish-patterned throat and greyish back recalling those found in the Parrot-billed Seedeater S. peruviana. In another Neotropical seed-eating genus, both sexes of Dull-coloured Grassquit Tiaris obscurus look like typical immatures / females of the genus Tiaris, unlike congenerics in which males are usually either mostly black or possess yellow and olive plumages (Sick 1967, Restall et al. 2006). The deep phylogenetic position of T. obscurus within Tiaris (Lijtmaer et al. 2004) suggests that this species' male plumage might have originated Juan Ignacio Areta 101 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) through the evolutionary retention of immature plumage from a male ancestor of a sexual- ly dichromatic species. These apparently independently evolved instances of paedomorphosis in Neotropical seedeaters demand further investigation, and provide a suite of cases to elucidate the evo- lutionary significance, developmental pathways, ecological factors and other conditions that lead to the appearance and maintenance of paedomorphosis in birds. Regardless of the mechanism behind their origin, the cases reported here represent the loss of obvious colour dimorphism in males of usually dichromatic taxa (c/. Price 2008 and references therein). The protracted plumage changes of Sporophila seedeaters through life indicates that colour intensity and plumage patterns can be considered true signals of age, with less colourful males usually being younger birds with less breeding experience. Although no male Sporophila seedeaters are known to incubate, many males share some nest duties and fledg- ling care with their females, and in some species males even mate-feed and brood nestlings (Facchinetti et al. 2008 and references therein). Whilst cryptic male coloration might enhance breeding success (e.g., improved brood care through reduced predation risk or fewer dis- putes with other males), it could also diminish male reproductive performance (e.g., if females and males are using colour to evaluate male aptitude and for species recognition). Among other possible causes (Badyaev & Hill 2003), these natural history and other fea- tures, together with detailed phylogenetic studies, might be important to explain the loss of obvious sexual dichromatism in Sporophila. On purely ontogenetic grounds, the cause of such a loss of pigmentation should be sought in the genetic control of pigment deposition in feather follicles (e.g. Mayr 1931), and their study should prove enlightening to establish plumage homologies. The theoretical framework and vocabulary developed for the under- standing of plumage maturation (e.g., Humphrey & Parkes 1959, 1963, Rohwer et al. 1980, Foster 1987, Thompson & Leu 1994, 1995, Howell et al. 2003) provide several lines of thought that could be fruitfully applied to the problem of paedomorphosis. Although Sick (1967) frequently referred to S. b. crypta as a 'hen-feathered race' of feminised plumage, this assertion suggests that he might have concurred with my view that it could have evolved through the simple retention of juvenile / immature characters along pre-existing develop- mental pathways. Additionally, retention of winter plumage could be responsible for the observed female-like breeding males. Since females, immature and winter-plumaged males are extremely similar in Sporophila, all these explanations require thorough testing. Further clarification of the details of plumage ontogeny, homology and evolution in Sporophila depends upon carefully designed and repeated observation of plumage development in the same individuals over long periods. Such observations are needed to firmly establish the homology of retained paedomorphic plumages to those of earlier ontogenetic stages pro- posed in this study. In sum, all of the cases discussed here suggest that paedomorphosis could be an impor- tant factor in the evolution of Sporophila. However, given our scant knowledge of the phylogeny and moults in Sporophila and the vexing similarity of different plumages at dif- ferent ages and seasons within a species (and even between different species), plumage homologies cannot be firmly established. Paedomorphosis must remain a plausible, but to date not satisfactorily tested, explanation for some of the plumage diversity of Sporophila seedeaters. Acknowledgements I thank Jorge Noriega, Hernan Povedano, Luis Pagano, Leticia Haudemand, Violeta Gomez Serrano, Guadalupe Garriz, Joaquin Areta, Diego Isaldo, Enrique Camba, Bernabe Lopez-Lanus, Chendo Fraga and Ingrid Holzmann for sharing my field work; and Robin Restall and Jack C. Eitniear for their thoughts and knowledge of juvenile, immature and female plumages in Sporophila. Bernabe Lopez-Lanus, Miguel Angel Juan Ignacio Areta 102 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Roda and Pocho Ferro contributed to the initial data that contributed to this work. Erika Machado, Vftor Piacentini, Luis Fabio Sih'eira and Marcelo Pena Padua assisted and joined my field work in Brazil. Kristof Zvskowski provided references and Storrs Olson helpful advice on the manuscript. I thank the Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas (COMCET) for a Ph.D. scholarship, the American Museim:! of Natural Histor}' (New York) for a Collection Study Grant and Birder's Exchange for equipment. A mi Chinita, y como siempre, a mis abuelos, mis viejos, mis hermanos, y mis amigos que son el mejor apoyo y compama para Uevar a cabo esta vida; ellos saben quienes son y lo infinito que les debo, y sus nombres estan grabados en mis actos mas alia del papel. Gracias che, gracias por todo. References: Areta, J. I. 2008. The Entre Rios Seedeater {Sporophila zelichi): a species that never was. /. Field Orn. 79: 352-363. Badyaev, A. V. & Hill, G. E. 2003. Avian sexual dichromatism in relation to phvlogenv and ecologv. Ann. Rev. EcoI.Evol. Syst. 34: 27-^9. Bjorklund, M. 1991. Coming of age in fringillid birds: heterochronv in the ontogenv of secondary' sexual char- acters. /. Evol. Biol 4: 83-92. Carroll, R. L. 1998. Patterns and processes of vertebrate evolution. Cambridge Univ. Press. Facchinetti, C, Di Giacomo, A. G. & Reboreda, J. C. 2008. Parental care in Tawny-bellied {Sporophila hypoxan- tha) and Rust}--collared (S. collaris) Seedeaters. V^ilson J. Om. 120: 879-883.' Foster, M. S. 1987. Delayed maturation, neoteny, and social system differences in two manakins of the genus Chiroxiphia. Evolution 41: 547-558. Eitniear, J. C. 1997. White-coUared Seedeater {Sporophila torqueola). In Poole, A. (ed.) The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Om., Ithaca, NY (http://bna.birds.comell.edu/bna/species/278). Gould, S. J. 1977. Ontogeny and phylogeny. Har\' ard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA. How^eU, S. N. G., Corben, C, Pyle, P. & Rogers, D. 1. 2003. The first basic problem: a revie^v of molt and plumage homologies. Condor 105: 635-653. Ho^vell, S. N. G., Corben, C, Pvle, P. & Rogers, D. 1. 2004. The first basic problem revisited: replv to commen- taries on Howell et al. (2003). Condor 106: 206-210. Humphrev, P. S. & Parkes, K. C. 1959. An approach to the study of molts and plumages. Auk 76: 1-31. Himiphrey, P. S. & Parkes, K. C. 1963. Comments on the study of plumage succession. Auk 80: 496-503. Kinvan, G. M. 2007. Rust}'-coUared Seedeater Sporophila collaris in Bahia, Brazil, with some comments on morphological variation in the species. Cotinga 28: 67-70. Lijtmaer, D., Sharpe, N. M. M., Tubaro, P. L. & Lougheed, S. C. 2004. Molecular phvlogenetics and diversifi- cation of the genus Sporophila (Aves: Passeriformes). Mol. Phyl. & Evol. 33: 562-579. Mayr, E. 1931. Birds collected during the Whitney South Sea Expedition. 13. A systematic list of the birds of Rennell Island ^vith descriptions of new species and subspecies. Amer. Miis. Novit. 486: 1-29. McNamara, K. J. 1995. Evolutionary change and heterochrony. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Narosky, S. 1977. Una nueva especie del genero Sporophila. Hornero 11: 345-348. Olson, S. L. 1966. A partly chestnut specimen of Variable Seedeater. Wilson Bull. 78: 127. Olson, S. L. 1968. Possible breeding of some seedeaters in subadult pkmiage. Florida Natural. 41: 20. Olson, S. L. 1981a. Interaction bet\veen the two subspecies groups of the seed-finch Sporophila angolensis in the Magdalena Valley, Colombia. Auk 98: 379-381. Olson, S. L. 1981b. The nature of the variability in the Variable Seedeater in Panama {Sporophila americana: Emberizinae). Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 94: 380-390. Ouellet, H. 1992. Speciation, zoogeographv and taxonomic problems in the Neotropical genus Sporophila (Aves: Emberizinae). Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. Suppl. 112A: 225-235. Price, T. 2008. Speciation in birds. Roberts & Co., Colorado Springs. Remsen, J. V., Cadena, C. D., Jaramillo, A., Nores, M., Pacheco, J. F., Robbins, M. B., Schulenberg, T. S., Stiles, F. G., Stotz, D. F. & Zimmer, K. J. 2007. A classification of the bird species of South America (version 23 October 2007). w^ vw.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCBaseline.html. Restall, R. 2006. Identifying Sporophila grey seedeaters in Venezuela. Neotrop. Birding 1: 48-51. Restall, R., Rodner, C. & Lentino, M. 2006. Birds of northern South America. Christopher Helm, London. Rohwer, S., Fretwell, S. D. & Niles, M. D. 1980. Delayed maturation in passerine plumages and deceptive acquisition of resources. Amer. Natural. 115: 400-437. Sabel, K. 1990. Pfdffchen Finkenammern Mittel-und Siidamerikas. Eugen Ulmer, Hohenheim. Sick, H. 1963. Hybridization in certain Brazilian Fringillidae {SporopJiila and Ori/zoborus). Proc. XIII Intern. Orn. Congr.: 161-170. Sick, H. 1967. "Bico de Ferro" — Ox erlooked seedeater from Rio de Janeiro {Sporopliila, Fringillidae, Aves). An. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 39: 307-314. Sick, H. 1968. Hennenfederige Rasse eines Pfaffchens aus Brasilien: SporopiJiila bouvreuil cn/pta subsp. nov. Beitr. Neotrop. Fauna 5: 153-159. Sick, H. 1997. Ornilologia brasileira. Ed. No\"a Fronteira, Rio de Janeiro. Skutch, A. F. 1954. Life histories of Central American birds. Pacific Coast Avifaima 31. Cooper Om. Soc, Berkeley, CA. Juan Ignacio Areta 103 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Stiles, F. G. 1996. When black plus white equals gray: the nature of variation in the Variable Seedeater com- plex (Emberizinae: Sporophila). Orn. Neotrop. 7: 75-107. Stiles, F. G. 2004. The Tumaco Seedeater {Sporophila insulata: Emberizidae): a species that never was? Orn. Neotrop. 15: 17-30. Thompson, C. W. & Leu, M. 1994. Determining homologies of molt and plumages to address evolutionary questions: a rejoinder regarding Emberizid finches. Condor 96: 769-782. Thompson, C. W. & Leu, M. 1995. Molts and plumages of Orange-breasted Buntings (Passerina leclancherii): implications for theories of delayed plumage maturation. Auk 112: 1-19. Address: CICyTTP-CONICET, Materi & Espana, Diamante (3105), Entre Rios, Argentina, and Grupo FALCO, Calle 117 N° 1567 e/ 67 y 68, La Plata (1900), Buenos Aires, Argentina, e-mail: esporofila@yahoq.com.ar © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Anthony Cheke 104 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Was Mascarene Grey White-eye Zosterops borbonicus introduced to Madagascar? by Anthony Cheke Received 25 July 2008 SUMMARY. — A previously ignored or misinterpreted report from the 1830s of Mascarene Grey White-eye Zosterops borbonicus being introduced from Reunion to lie Sainte-Marie off north-east Madagascar is shown to be valid, based on the evidence of the original paper (Sganzin 1840) and the discovery of a specimen from Madagascar collected by Sganzin in 1831. There is evidence that the species was also introduced to Nosy Be (off north-west Madagascar) in the mid- 19th century; it no longer survives at either locality. Mascarene Grey White-eye Zosterops borbonicus is endemic to Reunion and Mauritius in the Indian Ocean, each island having a form generally considered a subspecies (Gill 1973, Warren et al. 2006), but sometimes treated as sibling species (e.g. Sinclair & Langrand 1998). Mauritian Z. (^7.) mauritianus is grey above with a white belly, whereas nominate Z. {b.) bor- bonicus on Reunion possesses a range of plumage variation separable into four colour morphs (Gill 1973), grey or brown above, and generally grey (pale to dark) below. All forms have a conspicuous white rump. The species is common on both islands, and, unlike most native forest passerines, readily occupies anthropogenic habitats (Cheke 1987, Barre et al, 1996). It is well known to most inhabitants, and indeed was often eaten in the 19th and early 20th centuries (Schlegel & Pollen 1868, Lantz 1887, Milon 1951). Here I argue that birds from the French colony of Reunion were introduced to French-controlled islands off Madagascar in the 19th century. Where scientific names are cited from 19th-century usage, they are given in single quotes. Sganzin's observations In 1831 Victor Sganzin (1840) travelled from France via Reunion to become military governor of lie Sainte-Marie (=Nosy Boraha), off north-east Madagascar, which had been a French outpost since 1818 (Pitcher & Wright 2004). He remained there until 1832 (Rand 1936), observing and collecting mammals and birds in addition to conducting his official duties, reporting these in the first formal scientific paper published by a European visitor to have collected Malagasy wildlife in the field (Sganzin 1840). Amongst birds, he reported having collected on Sainte-Marie the 'petit simon de Buffon', i.e., if he identified it correct- ly, the Reunion race borbonicus of the white-eye (Cheke 1983). Furthermore, he believed, following Buffon (1770-83), that the species was not native to Reunion but had been intro- duced from Madagascar. He gave the bird's local name as 'thzeiri', and considered it quite rare on Sainte-Marie, unlike his 'cheric' (taken from Buffon 1770-83) or 'ramanzeri', i.e. the Madagascar White-eye Z. maderaspatanus, which he described as common. Richardson (1885, 'ramanjereky') and Langrand (1990, 'ramanjereka') confirm usage of similar names for the native white-eye, though Pollen reported 'souy' (Schlegel & Pollen 1868). Subsequent workers appear to have ignored this record or considered Sganzin mistak- en. The local name 'thzeiri' appears to be a variant of Brisson's (1760) 'tcheric' for Z. maderaspatana (the source of Buffon's 'cheric'), and even more closely resembles the name 'tsere' reported by Cowan (1881) and Richardson (1885) as in use by the Betsimisaraka tribe Anthony Cheke 105 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) for Common Jery 'Eroessa' {=Neomixis) tenella, a bird undescribed in Sganzin's day. ']ery' is the current transliteration, used for all three modern segregates of N. tenella (e.g. Langrand 1990, Morris & Hawkins 1998). Indeed, apparently based on his use of 'thzeiri', but without explanation, Sharpe (1883) and Milne-Edwards & Grandidier (1885) assumed that Sganzin's 'petit simon' was Neomixis tenella, although Hartlaub (1866) mentioned neither Sganzin nor the local name in formally describing the genus and species from specimens collected by Edward Newton. Grandidier, collecting with Lantz (see below) in 1865-67, likewise made no mention of Sganzin in connection with 'Eroessa teywlla' (Grandidier 1867-68). Schlegel & Pollen (1868) and Hartlaub (1877) included Sganzin in their bibliographies, but not in dis- cussing 'Eroessa tenella' or 'Zosterops horbonica'^. The assumption that Sganzin was referring to Neomixis appears to have effectively buried the record and prevented its re-appraisal. But did Sganzin misidentify the bird? Whilst no other bird in Sganzin's paper can be identified as a jery, Neomixis do not resem- ble Z. borbonicus in anything but size, and lack the conspicuous white rump. Another candidate, also without a white rump, might be a Nezvtonia, but Sganzin's 'souis gris' may represent this species-group, though the eye colour he cited is wrong. A grey Newtonia on lie Sainte-Marie can only be Common Newtonia N. bninneicauda (Goodman 1993). As Schlegel & Pollen (1868) noted, 'souy' is a generic Malagasy term for sunbirds, white-eyes and similar species. It is probable that the names 'thzeiri' / 'tsere' / 'tcheric' were (are?) also applied fairly indiscriminately to all small warbler-like passerines and cannot be considered species-specific; indeed, Richardson (1885) listed numerous synonyms for jerys, white-eyes and 'warblers'. Given the non-specificity of local names, and that Buffon's description to which Sganzin referred his specimen (see appendix) does not match any jery, there is no reason to uphold Sharpe's and Milne-Edwards & Grandidier's view, generally accepted since by default, that the bird was Neomixis tenella. As Sganzin had visited Reunion, where Z. borbonicus is common, he should have been familiar with it before he reached Saint-Marie. Mentioning 'Bourbon' (^Reunion) as well as Madagascar in connection with the 'petit simon' suggests that he had probably also seen it there: for other species he only mentioned Reunion or Mauritius if he had noted them there, as well as on Madagascar. As he denied having seen on Madagascar Buffon's 'figuier bleu' (in part Z. (b.) mauritianus (Cheke 1983) but alleged by Buffon to be from Madagascar), his bird presumably did not resemble the white-bellied Mauritian form^. Regrettably he did not describe his 'petit simon' specimen (see appendix), referring instead to Buffon's (1770-83) description, which despite being otherwise accurate did not mention the white rump, though it is clearly evident in Martinet's plate (Planches Enluminees 705: 2) which is referred to in the description. In general Sganzin's paper was strongly influenced by having read Buffon after returning to France, to the extent of emulating his style and very inconsistent 1 Zosterops was, until 1974, considered feminine, hence 19th-century authors always cited its specific names in feminine form. 2 Any inference from the 'figuier bleu' is possibly compromised, in that Buffon, Sganzin s only acknowledged source apart from his own observations, thought that the birds illustrated in plates 705: 1 and 705: 3 repre- sented female and male of the same species. While 705: 1 is indisputably a Z. (b.) mauritianus and is indeed its lectotype (Cheke 1983), 705: 3, labelled 'figuier de Madagascar' in the Planches, is a grey bird with a white- edged, rather long tail (unlike the white-eyes), lacking a white rump, and resembles no known Malagasy species. In fact it is the lectotype of 'Motacilla livida' ]. F. Gmelin, Tropical Gnatcatcher from Middle and South America (now Polioptila plumbea; see Penard 1923), although the plate appears to my eye to resemble more closely Blue-grey Gnatcatcher P. caerulea. Nonetheless, since plate 705: 1 is a grey white-eye from Mauritius, and Sganzin denied having seen it, it is likely he recognised the bird he collected as the Reunion form (illus- trated on the same Planche as 705: 2). Anthony Cheke 106 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) usage of Linnaean binomials; however, at the time, Buffon's encyclopaedias were the only ready source on Malagasy fauna. Malagasy specimens in Paris The internal evidence in the paper, w^hilst strongly indicative, does not prove that Sganzin collected Z. borbonicus on lie Sainte-Marie. There the matter might have rested, but for the fact that Sganzin's specimen of Z. (b.) borbonicus survives in the Museum Nationale d'Histoire Naturelle (MNHN), Paris, labelled 'pouillot gris — Madagascar', and dated 1831. There is no collector's name on the label, but the monogram 'VS' (i.e. Victor Sganzin) appears twice (J.-F. Voisin m litt. 2008), and there is also a number (236) on the reverse (pers. obs.), presumably referring to a specimen list. No such list survives (A. Previato per J.-F. Voisin), but Sganzin (1840) stated that he had donated his most important Malagasy speci- mens to the Paris museum (c/. Valenciennes 1832), though he also gave 17 bird skins (not listed) to the natural history society in Mauritius on his return journey (Desjardins 1832). There is a further Malagasy specimen of Z. (b.) borbonicus in MNHN, from a collection by Auguste Lantz received in 1868, and labelled 'Nossi Be' (=Nosy Be, off north-\vest Madagascar), another island where the French long had a presence (from 1841: Pitcher & Wright 2004). Lantz was curator of the natural history museum m Reunion, which island served as the French base for colonial adventures in Madagascar, where Lantz frequenth' collected (Andriamialisoa & Langrand 2003). He was an exemplary collector and extreme- ly unlikely to have made a locality error with a species so familiar from Reunion. Curiously, in their history of zoological exploration in Madagascar, Andriamialisoa & Langrand (2003) made no mention of Sganzin. There appears to be no trace of these putative introductions in the subsequent literature (pers. obs.; R. Safford pers. cormn.), and Pollen (Schlegel & Pollen 1868: 76) conunented that he had never seen Grey White-eyes m Madagascar; he collected in 1864-66 mainly on Nosy Be (where he clearly did not find the species) and in north-west Madagascar, but apparent- ly spent little or no time on lie Sainte-Marie. Mascarene Grey White-eye is certainly absent from Sainte-Marie today, as are Neomixis species, though Newtonia brunneicauda is stiU pres- ent (Goodman 1993). However, the island has been heavily deforested since Sganzin's day (Goodman 1993). Equally, there are no subsequent reports from Nosy Be (R. Safford pers. comm.). Surprisingly, only eight bird species are recognised as having been successfully introduced to Madagascar and its islands (Hawkins & Goodman 2003), in contrast to the numerous introductions on the region's oceanic islands (Skerrett et al. 2001, Hawkins & Goodman 2003, Cheke & Hume 2008). Acknowledgements Roger Safford 's helpful comments and suggestions are much appreciated, as are those of David Wells and the editor. Jean-Fran(;ois Voisin kindly re-examined the Sganzin specimen for me, and Anne Pre\ iato searched hard, albeit fruitlessly, for documentation of Sganzin's collections. Christian Jouanin facilitated my visit to the MNHN in 1976; I have only recently rediscovered my contemporarv" draft on ^vhich this note is based. References: Andriamialisoa, F. & Langrand, O. 2003. The historv of zoological exploration in Madagascar. Pp. 1-1 5 in Goodman, S. M. & Benstead, J. P. (eds.) The natural history of Madagascar. Univ. of Chicago Press. Barre, N., Barau, A. & Jouanin, C. 1996. Oiscaux i1c la Reunion. Second (revised) edn. Editions du Pacifique, Paris. Brisson, M. J. 1760. Ornithologic. J.-B. Bauche, Paris. Buffon, G. L. L de. 1770-83. Histoirc naturelle des oiseaii.x. L'Imprimerie Rovale, Paris. [Includes the Planches Enluminees by Martinet.] Anthony Cheke 107 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Cheke, A. S. 1983. The identity of Buffon's Grand Traquet and other nomenclatural problems in eighteenth century descriptions of endemic Mascarene birds. Bull Brit. Orn. CI. 103: 95-100. Cheke, A. S. 1987. The ecology of the smaller land-birds of Mauritius. Pp. 151-207 in Diamond, A. W. (ed.) Studies of Mascarene Island birds. Cambridge Univ. Press. Cheke, A. & Hume J. 2008. Lost land of the Dodo: an ecological history of Mauritius, Reunion and Rodrigues. T. & A. D. Poyser, London. Cowan, W. D. 1881. List of Madagascar birds, together with the native names among a few of the different tribes. Friends' Foreign Mission Association, Antananarivo. Desjardins, J. 1832. Troisieme Rapp. Ann. Trav. Soc. Hist. Nat. He Maurice. [Pp. 53-112 in Ly-Tio-Fane, M. (ed.) 1972. Societe d'Histoire Naturelle de Vile Maurice. Rapports annuels I-IV, 1830-1834. Roy. Soc. Arts & Sci. Mauritius, Port Louis.] Gill, F. B. 1973. Intra-island variation in the Mascarene White-eye Zosterops borbonica. Orn. Mongr. 12: 1-66. Goodman, S. M. 1993. A reconnaissance of He Sainte Marie, Madagascar: the status of the forest, avifauna, lemurs and fruit bats. Biol. Conserv. 65: 205-212. Grandidier, A. 1867-8. Notes sur les mammiferes et les oiseaux observes a Madagascar de 1865 a 1867. Rev. Mag. Zool. (2)19: 313-321; 20: 3-7. Hartlaub, G. 1866. On a new genus and species of birds from Madagascar. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1866: 219. Hawkins, A. F. A. & Goodman, S. M. 2003. Introduction to the birds. Pp. 1019-1044 in Goodman, S. M. & Benstead, J. P. (eds.) The natural history of Madagascar. Univ. of Chicago Press. Langrand, O. 1990. Guide to the birds of Madagascar. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, CT. Lantz, A. 1887. Sur les mammiferes et les oiseaux de I'ile de la Reunion. Bidl. Soc. Natl. Acclim. Paris (4)4: 657-659. Milne-Edwards, A. & Grandidier, A. 1885. Histoire naturelles des oiseaux, vol. 12, of Grandidier, A. (ed.) Histoire physique, naturelle et politique de Madagascar. Comite de Madagascar, Paris. Milon, P. 1951. Notes sur I'avifaune actuelle de I'ile de la Reimion. Terre et Vie 98: 129-178. Morris, P. & Hawkins, F. 1998. Birds of Madagascar: a photographic guide. Robertsbridge, Pica Press. Penard, T. E. 1923. The identity of Gmelin's Todus plumbeus. Auk 50: 334-335. Pitcher, G. & Wright, P. C. 2004. Madagascar & Comoros. Lonely Planet, Victoria. Rand, A. L. 1936. The distribution and habitats of Madagascar birds. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 72: 142-499. Richardson, J. 1885. A new Malagasy-English dictionary. London Missionary Soc, Antananarivo. Schlegel, H. & Pollen, F. P. L. 1868. Recherches sur lafaune de Madagascar et de ses dependances, d'apres les decou- vertes de Frangois P. L. Pollen et D. C. van Dam, vol. 2. J. K. Steenhoff, Leiden. Sharpe, R. B. 1883. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or perching birds, in the collection of the British Museum — Cichlomorphae: Part IV, containing the concluding portion of the family Timaliidae (babbling thrushes), vol. 7. Trustees of the Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), London. Sinclair, I. & Langrand, O. 1998. Birds of the Indian Ocean Islands. Struik, Cape Town. Skerrett, A., Bullock, I. & Disley, T. 2001. Birds of Seychelles. Christopher Helm, London. Sganzin, V. 1840. Notes sur les mammiferes et sur I'ornithologie de I'lle de Madagascar (1831 et 1832). Mem. Soc. Mus. Hist. Nat. Strasbourg 3(1): l-i9. Valenciennes, A. 1832. Rapport sur les collections de M. Sganzin. Nouv. Ann. Mus. Hist. Nat., Paris 1: 469^72. Warren, B. H., Bermingham, E., Prys-Jones, R. P. & Thebaud, C. 2006. Immigration, species radiation and extinction in a highly diverse songbird lineage: white-eyes on Indian Ocean islands. Mol. Ecol. 15: 3769-3786. Address: 139 Hurst Street, Oxford OX4 IHE, UK, e-mail: anthony.cheke@innerbookshop.com © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Appendix. Sganzin's text (1840) on the 'petit simon', 'cheric' and 'soui gris', and Buffon's description of the 'petit simon' (translated by ASC) p. 27. Le Cheric, Buffon {Ramanzeri a Sainte-Marie) See Buffon for the description of this species. These birds fly in groups and eat insects. They pair up in the mating season, but otherwise live solitarily. They are tame and allow close approach. They are found in the forests and are common at Sainte-Marie, where they are known by the name of ramanzeri. p. 28. Le Petit Simon de Bourbon, Buffon (Thzeiri, madag.); le Figtiier de Madagascar This bird is called petit simon on Bourbon Island [=Reunion], but is not native. It is naturalised there after having been brought from Madagascar. 1 obtained one at Sainte-Marie, where is it rather rare and known by the name of thzeiri. I have nothing to add to the description given by Buffon. Anthony Cheke 108 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) p. 30. Le Souis Gris This bird, a little larger than the next one^ has ash-grey plumage, the tail tending to dark rust\' colour. The beak is black, prominent and slightly down-curved. The feet are black; the eye is brown^. I was able to obtain this bird only once on Sainte-Marie. Buffon (1770-83, original edition, vol. 5, pp. 280-81: Le Petit Simon% third species [of 'figuier'] *See the Planches Enluminees 705, fig. 2, under the label 'figuier of Madagascar'. This bird is called 'petit simon' on the isle of Bourbon, but is not native to that island, and it must have been carried there from elsewhere, as we are informed by the reports of very reliable persons, and particularh' those of M[onsieur] Commerson, that there were no quadrupeds or birds on the isles of Bourbon and of France [=Mauritius] when discovered by the Portuguese^ . . . This bird is precisely the same size as the previous one [the 'cheric']; its upperparts are a clear slate colour, the underparts whitish grey, the throat white, the tail feathers dark brown narrowly edged with slaty, the beak brown, pointed and tapering, the feet grey and the eyes black^, females, and even the young, have more or less the same plumage as males. It is found evervwhere in large numbers on the Isle of Bourbon . . . 3 The subsequent bird on Sganzin's list, his 'soui a collier bleu', is, from the adequate description, Souimanga Sunbird Nectarinia souimanga. •* All Newtonia species have white or pale yellow irises (Sinclair & Langrand 1998). ^ This is nonsense, see e.g. Cheke & Hume (2008). ^ The irides are deep chestnut. Anthony Crease 109 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) First breeding data for Roraiman Nightjar Caprimulgus whitelyi, from south-east Venezuela hy Anthony Crease Received 12 August 2008 Summary. — Observations were made at a nest of the poorly known Roraiman Nightjar Caprimulgus whitelyi, in bushy savanna at 885 m elevation, near El Pauji in the southern Gran Sabana, Venezuela, from 14 days prior to hatching on 16 March 2008, until the fledgling and adults vacated the site. I present the first description of the nest, single white egg, chick and fledgling, as well as notes concerning the identification and behaviour of the adults and juvenile. Both adults incubated and tended the young. The fledgling became active and relocated from a nearby day roost to the nest just before the first of several feeding visits by the adults after dark, greeting their arrival with begging 'warbles'. Otherwise, the birds hardly vocalised at all during the entire period. Roraiman Nightjar Caprimulgus whitelyi is a rare, local and poorly known species (e.g. Cleere 1998, 1999, Hilty 2003, Restall et al. 2006). No information on its behaviour is avail- able. A recent molecular study (Han 2006) suggested that C. whitelyi is not closely related to any other Caprimulgus. Endemic to the Pantepui with records from forested slopes and upper levels of the southern tepuis of Venezuela (Hilty 2003), including Cerro Urutani on the frontier with Brazil (Dickerman & Phelps 1982, Naka et al. 2006), at 1,280-1,800 m, it has more recently been found in bushy savanna near forest, at c.850 m, in Las Agallas in the southern Gran Sabana of Venezuela (D. Ascanio in litt. 2008) and near Kopinang in central- west Guyana (O'Shea et al. 2007). For seven weeks in March / April 2008, I made daily observations of C. whitelyi breeding at a site <1 km south of El Pauji (04°28'N, 61°35'W) in the southern Gran Sabana. Most of my observations were made in daylight. Initial discovery The presence of Roraiman Nightjars was drawn to my attention by A. Ronnevik, the owner of a nearby house, who first saw them in March 2007. Due to travel commitments, I was only able to make brief observations of an adult male (Fig. 1) and just-fledged juvenile. On my return in early May, they were no longer present, but on 2 March 2008, a pair was back in exactly the same place and was found to be incubating an egg. Breeding site and habitat El Paujf village lies within an irregular strip of savanna, 3-6 km wide by c.60 km long, with a maximum elevation of 1,050 m, surrounded by forest. The breeding site lies between gallery forest and the village airstrip, c.250 m further south, at 885 m. Shallow sandy soil of variable depth covers sandstone rock and supports a mosaic of grass, in stiff clumps, and bushes up to 3 m tall, mostly Bonnetia sessilis (Bonnetiaceae), which is common in the area to 2,200 m (P. Perret in litt. 2008). The airstrip and the dirt road from the village to the strip protect the breeding site from occasional savanna fires. The egg was laid c.40 cm to the east of the base of a relatively old Bonnetia sessilis comprising c.lOO thin stems emerging from a wide base. The root mass is raised above puddles that form during heavy rain, whilst the bush and its broad base afford shade from midday to sunset, and protection against intru- Anthonv Crease 110 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) sion from the west. The single egg was placed immediately adjacent to a c.30 cm patch of white quartzite stones, perhaps for camouflage. Dead Bonnetia leaves and twigs were scat- tered throughout, sometimes forming small banks. No nest was constructed, not e\^en bv removing larger debris from the area where the egg was laid, and the egg was in fact moved aroimd within a radius of 10+ cm. To the east was a c.lO-m clear area with a low bush on its far side with protruding dead branches used by the nightjars when approaching the site. A surprising feature is the site's proximity to two houses, one at c.80 m and the other c.200 m distant, with attendant noise and domestic animals. Identification notes The continuous presence of the adults during seven weeks permitted ample opportu- nity to study and photograph both them and the juvenile, at rest and in daylight. Although good descriptions are available (Cleere 1999, Hilty 2003, RestaU et al. 2006), I offer a few additional characteristics based on my observations. Although the base colour of C.whitelyi is considered near black based on museum specimens, even darker than C. nigrescens (N. Cleere in litt. 2008), in the field the apparent colour varies from near black to brown, depending on the lighting and as shown by comparison of Figs. 2 and 3. When the adults are alert, the head is lifted and the neck feathers are raised revealing the collar, which is more prominent (Figs. 1-2) than described in the literature. The large pale tips to the male's wing-coverts appear to be arrayed in four 'curved' lines, suggesting a fourth set of coverts (Fig. 2). No other dark nightjar in range has uniform buff undertail-coverts. This feature, which is present in both sexes and even in fledglings (Fig. 1), is therefore diagnostic. On the ground, the buff sides to the undertail-coverts can be seen when the bird perches (Fig. 2). The white spots on the inner webs of the second and third rectrices are noticeable on perched birds from below (Fig. 1), and occasionally from above when the rectrices are fanned (Fig. 4) or displaced. The single all-white egg measured 27.5 mm x 21.0 mm and was onlv slighth' bkmter at one end (Fig. 3). Some indistinct, small, pale brown spots of somewhat variable size, sparse- ly scattered over most of the surface, proved to be marks from ground contact (being removable by washing) rather than pigmentation. Incubation rhythms Both adults incubated the egg. Despite carefully searching for the second adult near the nest, I never saw one; it presumably spends the day roosting some distance a^vav. The nest was visited several times on some days and the same bird was ahvavs present during dav- light on any given day. In fact, daytime incubation shifts were three or more da\ s long, as follows: male: 3; female: 5; male: 3; female: 3+ (hatchii^g occurred on the third dav and the female tended the chick for some davs more). The 'on-dutv' adult appears to take up posi- tion shortly before dawn. Once, at 05.20 h, before there was enough light to see, flight noise was heard from the vicinity. On another day, the egg was found unattended at 05.31 h, but the male arrived and commenced incubation within <2 minutes. This ^vas the onh" time m 20 visits that the egg was found uncovered. Response to disturbance The incubating adult appears, in general, to remain completeh" immobile throughout the day, with eyes closed. The only response to quiet approach ^vas to progressively open Anthony Crease 111 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) the eyes wider, from a slit when the observer was 10 m away, to almost round at 1 m. No type of threat behaviour was adopted, except by the female, which raised its wings and revealed the huge pink gape when I collected the eggshell halves soon after hatching. If flushed, the adult usually flew c.8 m, to an area north-east of the nest, near a line of bushes. On alighting, it would tilt forward and extend the wings briefly, apparently feigning injury, and occasionally emit a low, soft warble, the throat visibly vibrating as it did so. On my withdrawing a few metres, the bird would soon walk laboriously back to the egg (Fig. 2), with occasional rests. Once an adult made a short flight when returning, but landed c.l m away and made the final approach on foot (Fig. 3). Hatchling Hatching occurred on 16 March 2008, probably around 10.30 h, on a dry morning. The semi-altricial hatchling was found, with the female (Fig. 4) close by, at 11.20 h, covered in white down, still damp with amniotic fluid (Fig. 5). The eyes were not seen to open during this first visit. On day 4 (after hatching), the hatchling had its eyes open after I flushed the female, which had been brooding it during preceding visits in the intervening period. Chick growth The female was found brooding the chick on all visits subsequent to the first, until day 6. On day 7, ten minutes after a rain shower, the female was found c.30 cm from the chick. The female continued in daytime attendance until day 8, the male on days 9-14, sometimes brooding, sometimes not (Fig. 6). On day 14 the chick had moved c.l m from the nest. On day 15, the chick was found with the female c.5 m west of the bush, in an area of younger, thinner Bonnetia sessilis bushes, which the chick continued to frequent on most subsequent days. On day 16, the male was back in attendance and remained so until day 29. On days 18-19, the by now quite large chick was found under the male's wing, facing rearwards. Day 19 was the last on which I observed the male brooding the chick. Thereafter, the birds were found separated by just a few cm or up to 5 m, at the base of the original bush or under the thinner bushes to the north-west. It is noteworthy that the shared attention to the egg and chick by both adults differs from the behaviour of some other Neotropical nightjars, e.g., Pauraque Nyctidromus albicollis, Blackish Nightjar Caprimidgus nigrescens (J. Ingels in litt. 2008) and Lyre-tailed Nightjar Uropsalis lyra (Greeney & Wetherwax 2005). From day 30, the chick spent the day alone on the ground, mostly among the thinner bushes, with no sign of the adults. On days 32-35, 1 made observations of the fledgling and adults immediately after nightfall as follows. Day 32. — On approaching the site at 17.12 h, I inadvertently flushed the fledgling, which made a short (c.7 m) flight to the nest. As the flight was controlled and direct, it is probable that the adults left the young alone during the day only after it could fly. This would place fledging prior to day 30 and perhaps well before as, for example, fledging at day 14 is reported for Caprimulgus nigrescens (Cleere 1998). On landing the young resumed its usual, immobile, daytime position. At c.l 7.35 h, just before sunset, but with less light than normal due to heavy cloud cover, the young suddenly became much more active, moving the eyes and eyelids, producing a 'nibbling' action of the bill, rapidly twisting the entire head (apparently tracking flying insects), head-bobbing, 'yawning', sideways rocking and wing-stretching. Once it shuffled to a bank of dead leaves, recently wetted by rain, and spent several minutes taking them deeply into its gape, then 'spitting' them out, presum- ably to obtain water. When inclining forward to select leaves, I noticed that the undertail-coverts were already buff like the adults. Anthony Crease 112 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Anthony Crease 113 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) At c.18.00 h, the male, identified by the relatively long tail spots, fluttered c.3 m above the fledgling and uttered two short bouts of 3-4, rather chicken-like, whistled cheeps, the first vocalisations I had heard from the birds. The fledgling responded with soft warbles, initially inaudible and only evidenced by the vibrating throat, but becoming clearly audible when an adult approached closely. As direct torchlight appeared to cause the fledgling to revert to its inactive daytime mode, I shifted the beam slightly away from the bird, where- upon it became very active, stretching the wings and, during a low pass by an adult, taking laboriously off almost vertically upwards, moth-like, with the wings held high and beating rapidly, to c.2.5 m, before descending to a rather 'uncontrolled' landing on a grass tuft. While airborne, the adult circled buoyantly around it, apparently providing encourage- ment. The adult was evidently keen to deliver food, but was unwilling to do so because of the light and my presence. The young then made another take-off in my direction but the adult appeared and seemed to 'steer' it to a landing c.lO m away, behind a bush. Here the adult landed beside it and commenced feeding. My observations then ceased for the night. Day 33. — I approached the site 17 minutes before sunset and again flushed the fledg- ling before seeing it. This time the young flew c.25 m and, after I flushed it again, flew back to c.lO m north-west of the nest. At 21 minutes after sunset, but with considerably more light than on day 32, the fledgling became more active, behaving similarly to the day before. Four minutes later, it stood up, defecated, wing-stretched and head-bobbed, and then flew to the nest. At 37 minutes after sunset, an adult, probably the female as no obvious white was detected, flew over. The young responded with soft warbles. A few minutes later, it made a short hop onto a small rock, an adult flew over and the young followed it into the air and away through the tops of the nearest bushes and out of sight (in moth-like, hover- ing flight). On days 32-33, my presence clearly altered the usual pattern of feeding, which would presumably be for the adult to feed the young at the nest. Day 34. — This night I hung my recorder from the bush above the nest before sunset and switched it on. Visibility was unusually good due to the absence of cloud and a near-full moon, and I could remain further away, c.lO m from the nest, and still observe some detail without torchlight. The young was alone at the same location as on day 33. Thirteen min- utes after sunset, the young became active, stood, defecated, started walking toward the nest and then flew the rest of the way. It made a short visit to the leaf pile and, c.l5 minutes later, made three buoyant flights over a circular route, which brought it back to the nest. At 36 minutes after sunset, I detected an adult overhead and the young warbled. The adult landed and I identified it as the female using the torch, causing the bird to flush to a dry branch near the top of the favoured bush c.lO m east of the nest and closer to me, without Captions to figures on opposite page: Figure. 1. Male Roraiman Nightjar Caprimulgus whitelyi, showing buff undertail-coverts and long white spots on inner webs of middle rectrices. El Pauji, Bolivar, Venezuela, 2008 (Anthony Crease) Figure 2. Male Roraiman Nightjar Caprimidgus whitelyi returning to egg after being flushed. El Paujf, Bolivar, Venezuela, 2008 (Anthony Crease) Figure 3. Male Roraiman Nightjar Caprimidgus whitelyi with egg. El Pauji, Bolivar, Venezuela, 2008 (Anthony Crease) Figure 4. Female Roraiman Nightjar Caprimidgus whitelyi (soon after hatching of chick); note small spot in fanned tail. El Paujf, Bolivar, Venezuela, 2008 (Mathias Gonzales) Figure 5. Hatchling Roraiman Nightjar Caprimidgus whitelyi, when one-hour-old. El Paujf, Bolivar, Venezuela, 2008 (Mathias Gonzales) Figure 6. Male Roraiman Nightjar Caprimidgus whitelyi with 11-day-old chick. El Paujf, Bolivar, Venezuela, 2008 (Anthony Crease) Figure 7. Fledgling Roraiman Nightjar Caprimidgus whitelyi at 36 days old. El Paujf, Bolfvar, Venezuela, 2008 (Anthony Crease) Anthony Crease 114 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) : .7. Figure 8. Sonogram depicting begging 'warbles' of fledgling Roraiman Nightjar Caprimidgus whitelyi, recorded at El Pauji, Bolivar, Venezuela, 19 April 2008. Recorded by Anthony Crease using Olympus Digital Voice Recorder WS-331M with built-in microphone (sample rate 44,100 Hz, frequency range 50 to 13,000 Hz). Recording converted from .wma format to .wav format (sample size: 16 bit, bit rate: 352 kbps, sample rate: 22050 Hz) using iTunes software. Sonograms created using Wavesurfer software. providing food. Five further visits by the adult occurred within the next ten minutes, mostly flights between the low bush and the nest and back, as if the bush was being used as a staging and surveillance post, which facilitat- ed reaching the chick via the intervening clear area most expeditiously. Once I saw the adult in hovering flight for c.5 seconds, prior to alighting on the dry branch, with the wings held high and beating quickly. I presume that food was provided during each of the five visits, but I could not observe any details and was loath to use my torch. The number of feeds in the first feeding session of the night is similar to the 4-5 reported for Lyre-tailed Nightjar (Greeney & Wetherwax 2005). Six more or less long bouts of warbling were recorded on analysing my recording subsequently, corresponding to the initial and five successful feed- ing visits. It seems that the young begs by warbling each time it detects an adult nearby. The first bout of warbling lasted 36 seconds and included 16 warbles (Fig. 8). The longest and strongest warble was 0.55 seconds long and comprised 17 notes, reaching peak volume in the second half. The last bout (before I retired at 19.02 h) included only a single warble, pre- sumably reflecting reduced hunger. This night, the young remained at the nest throughout, even when I retrieved my recorder from 80 cm above its head. Day 35. — I left my recorder hanging over the nest at 17.30 h, withdrew and retrieved it at 19.20 h. On my first visit I spotted the fledgling, which did not flush, c.8 m north of the nest. At 19.20 h it was directly below my recorder; neither adult was seen. Strong warbling was recorded at 18.26 h (44 minutes after sunset), presumably when an adult first arrived. Twelve warbles were given in the space of 32 seconds, and 2.5 minutes later a single war- ble was uttered, probably signalling the second arrival of an adult with food. Surprisingly, no more warbling was recorded. Next day, 22 April 2008 (day 36), I took the last photo- graphs of the fledgling, at 14.15 h (Fig. 7). On 23 April, the birds had abandoned the site and were not seen subsequently. The pattern that emerges is that the parents fed the fledgling (and presumably the chick also) when it is dark, not in the crepuscular period, i.e. from 20 minutes after sunset on a dark, cloudy night to 45 minutes after sunset, and that the fledgling becomes active c.20 minutes before the commencement of feeding and moves some distance (up to 10 m), from the day roost to the hatching site, before a parent arrives with food. Vocalisations Apart from the begging warbles of the young, a few similar warbles or churrs were given by the adults on flushing and a few cliccps by the male on arriving to feed the fledg- Anthony Crease 115 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) ling and finding me present, but no other vocalisations were heard during the entire seven weeks. In particular, during my dawn visits, I heard nothing similar to the dawn vocalisa- tion recorded in Guyana for C. whitelyi (O'Shea et al. 2007). It is probably that the birds are quiet when breeding, presumably to avoid drawing attention to their presence. Plumage of fledgling At 36 days old the fledgling's wings still extended just beyond the tip of the tail, com- pared to the adult in which the tail extends 0.5-1.0 cm beyond the wingtips. Fledgling plumage is highly cryptic with no visible white (Fig. 7). Base colour of all feathers is dark brown, darkest on the mantle, tipped, scaled and barred pale grey, buff and rufous. The breast and belly are covered by a dense 'apron' of dark-brown feathers with greyish- and buffy-white tips, producing a barred effect, and overlapping the leading edge of the closed wing. The undertail-coverts are buff. Discussion My observations confirm that the lower altitudinal limit of Roraiman Nightjar is lower (to below 900 m) than previously stated in the literature. Similarly, its habitat is confirmed to include savannas near forest, with grass and bushes. My observations have all been in areas of Bonnetia sessilis. It is probable that further details of the species' breeding could be established by a more intrusive approach to observation. However, for this first study, I was careful to minimise disturbance to obtain the general pattern of behaviour during an unin- terrupted breeding cycle, and to avoid discouraging reuse of the site. Acknowledgements My thanks to Robin Restall and Johan Iiigels who assisted with obtaining references. Ingels, and Nigel Cleere, provided invaluable reviews of the paper. I thank all of the generous people on the NEOORN list server who sent me references. Mathias Gonzales kindly permitted me to use two of his photographs. Above all, I thank my wife for her support during my dedication to the nightjars. References: Cleere, N. 1998. Nightjars: a guide to the nightjars and related nightbirds. Pica Press, Robertsbridge. Cleere, N. 1999. Family Caprimulgidae (nightjars). Pp. 302-386 in del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol. 5. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Dickerman, R. W. & Phelps, W. H. 1982. An annotated list of the birds of Cerro Urutani on the border of Estado Bolivar, Venezuela and Territorio Roraima, Brazil. Amer. Miis. Novit. 2732: 1-20. Greeney, H. F. & Wetherwax, P. B. 2005. Brooding behaviour and nestling growth of the Lyre-tailed Nightjar Uropsalis lyra. Cotinga 23: 44-47. Han, K. L. 2006. Molecular systematics of nightjars and nighthawks (Caprimulgidae). Ph.D. thesis. Univ. of Maryland, College Park. Hilty, S. L. 2003. Birds of Venezuela. Princeton Univ. Press. Holyoak, D. T. & Woodcock, M. 2001. The nightjars and their allies: the Caprimulgiformes. Oxford Univ. Press. Naka, L. N., Cohn-Haft, M., Mallet-Rodrigues, P., Santos, M. P. D. & Torres, M. F. 2006. The avifauna of the Brazilian state of Roraima: bird distribution and biogeography in the Rio Branco basin. Rev. Bras. Orn. 14: 197-238. O'Shea, B. J., Milensky, C. M., Claramunt, S., Schmidt, B. K., Gebhard, C. A., Schmitt, C. G. & Erskine, K. T. 2007. New records for Guyana, with description of the voice of Roraiman Nightjar, Caprimulgiis white- lyi. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 127: 118-128. Restall, R., Rodner C. & Lentino, M. 2006. The birds of northern South America. Christopher Fielm, London. Address: El Pauji, Santa Elena de Uairen, La Gran Sabana, Estado Bolivar, Venezuela, e-mail: trcrease@gmail.com © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Rafael Matias 116 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Removal of Black Crake Amauromis flavirostris from the Western Palearctic list, and the first record of Lesser Moorhen Gallinula angulata for Madeira by Rafael Matias Received 24 May 2008 SUMMARY. — Here I describe the rediscovery of a forgotten specimen originally identified as a Black Crake Amauromis flavirostris, collected on Madeira in January 1895, the sole record of this species for the Western Palearctic. However, the specimen was reidentified as a Lesser Moorhen Gallinula angulata, the first record for Macaronesia, and the fourth for the Western Palearctic. Black Crake Amauromis flavirostris occurs throughout sub-Saharan Africa, where it gen- erally is a common resident, which undertakes only local movements (Urban et al. 1986). The northernmost limit of its range is south-west Mauritania (Borrow & Demey 2001). There is a single record for the Western Palearctic, a male collected on Madeira (at Santo Amaro, near Funchal), on 29 January 1895 (Cramp 1980). The specimen was prepared by Padre Ernesto Joao Schmitz and originally formed part of the ornithological collection of Funchal seminary (Museu do Seminario do Funchal, MADS). Translated from the German (Schmitz 1896), its discovery was described thus: '26 January 1895: today I received a bird recalling a Moorhen but much smaller; can it be a Spotted Crake [Porzana porzana]?' Three years later, Schmitz (1899) included Limnocorax niger (Amauromis flavirostris) on his list of the birds of Madeira, writing: 'The first and only time this bird was collected was on the 26.1.1895. It was a male and was caught in S. Amaro'. Both accounts refer to the same individual, as no other birds were caught on that date according to Schmitz's writings. Seventy years later, Bannerman & Bannerman (1965) wrote: 'This record is very unexpected, but in view of the data published by Padre Schmitz [ . . . ] we must undoubtedly accept it as a genuine vagrant from the west coast of Africa [ . . . ] If it was preserved at one time in the Seminario Museum, the skin has been lost.' Schmitz (1845-1922) was a prominent naturalist of the time. Of German birth, he first came to Funchal, Madeira, as a chaplain in 1874, became established in 1878 and took Portuguese citizenship thereafter. He left Madeira in late 1908, never to return, going to Jerusalem and then Haifa, where he died (Silva & Menezes 1940). Especially between 1882 (when he founded the Museu do Seminario do Funchal) and 1908, he gathered much impor- tant information on the birds of the archipelago, building up a collection of htrndreds of specimens. This included the first proof of breeding for Zino's Petrel Pterodroma madeira (although not recognised as such at the time: Zino & Zino 1986) and records of many new taxa for Madeira (e.g. Schmitz 1899, 1903; see also Zino et al. 1995). The collection was originally housed at the Museu do Seminario do Funchal, but after Schmitz left Madeira the entire collection (and museum) was moved several times (until 1982), and for a period its whereabouts appear to have been imcertain, but probably in warehouses belonging to the church (Silva & Menezes 1940; R. Jardim in litt.). This may explain why D. A. Bannerman never got to see Schmitz's specimens as, in his work on the birds of Madeira, he states that 'they had been allowed to fall into decay. The majority indeed seems to have perished. [ . . . ] Its loss is a sore blow' (Bannerman & Bannerman 1965). Rafael Matias 117 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Figure 1. Comparison of the Lesser Moorhen Gallinula angulata specimen from Madeira, with a Common Moorhen G. chloropus from the same collection (MADS-a262) (Rafael Matias) Figure 2. Detail of the head of the Lesser Moorhen Gallinula angulata specimen, showing the distinctly wedge- shaped frontal shield and the bill's colour (Rafael Matias) By the early 1980s, although a large part of the collection still existed, it was poorly con- served. Because of this, the remainder was sent to the Museu do Jardim Botanico do Funchal, in 1982, where it remains. The collection is still the property of the Diocese of Funchal. The bird specimens presently held in the Museu do Jardim Botanico have been inexplicably neglected by researchers, but a catalogue of the collection is currently being prepared by the author. On a visit to the Museu do Jardim Botanico do Funchal, on 1 June 2007, a few mount- ed specimens immediately caught my eye. One was a small rallid, recalling a tiny Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus, but clearly an adult Lesser Moorhen G. angulata (Figs. 1-2). The specimen could be seen only through the cabinet window and it was not possible to see the original tag, only a more recent red plastic label attached to the wooden base that stated 'Corvo do charco, 29-01-1895'. On a second visit, on 10 September 2007, 1 was able to exam- ine the original tag, from the seminary collection, which states 'Limnocorax niger (Gm.) male, S. Amaro 26.1.95'. It is therefore straightforward to conclude that the specimen is the same referred to as the first and only Black Crake for the Western Palearctic, and thought to be lost' (Bannerman & Bannerman 1965, Cramp 1980). A full description and series of photo- graphs were taken. Although much smaller, the bird's general shape recalls that of a Common Moorhen, but with a proportionately larger head and shorter legs (Fig. 1). Bill yellow with a reddish culmen from the frontal shield to the bill tip, and proportionately shorter and more robust than G. chloropus. The frontal shield is distinctly wedge-shaped and not rounded as in Common Moorhen (Fig. 2). Overall coloration sooty-grey, darker on the lores, at the bill base and throat (Fig. 2); the wings and scapulars had an olive-brown cast, and upper-flank feathers white on the outer fringes, producing a white line on the flanks; undertail-co verts also white (Fig. 1). Legs yellow (present colour) with no reddish on the tibia. The bare parts of the specimens in this collection do not seem to have ever been painted, as was often com- mon practice. All these characteristics are typical of Lesser Moorhen, and exclude both Black Crake and Common Moorhen (with both of which the author has ample experience). The following measurements (all within published values for the species) were taken with callipers (to 0.1 mm): bill length (upper tip of frontal shield to bill tip) 29.4 mm; head and Rafael Matias 118 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) bill 46.4 mm; wing 132 mm; primary projection 19.2 rmn; middle toe (to tip of claw) 52.6 mm; middle toe (to base of claw) 44.1 mm; tarsus: 38.5 mm. Several plumage traits, and tarsus length, suggest that the bird is a male. According to Urban et al. (1986) mean tarsus length of males is 36.6 mm (range 35-39, n=9) and that of females is 36.7 mm (range 36-37, /7=3). This confirms the original sex determination, presum- ably made via gonad analysis. After a full renumbering of the seminary collection at the Museu do Jardim Botanico, the specimen is now accessioned under the number MADS-all4. Black Crake should therefore be removed from the list of birds recorded in the Western Palearctic. Rather, the specimen represents the first Lesser Moorhen for the same region. This species has a similar range to that of Black Crake, occurring throughout most of sub- Saharan Africa (although it is somewhat uncommon and local) as far as northern Senegal (Urban et al 1986). There are three other published records of Lesser Moorhen for the Western Palearctic, but only one of them is widely accepted as valid (in Egypt, at Lake Nasser in May 1997; Haavisto & Strand 2000). The other two concern singles in southern Spain (origin unknown: Algeciras, Cadiz, 10 March 2003; de Juana et al. 2005), and on the Canary Islands (never sub- mitted to a rarities committee: immature. Las Palmas, Gran Canaria, 19 Januar}^ 1997; Clarke 2006). The date of the Madeira record accords well with the pattern obser\^ed for other African vagrants to Europe (Hudson 1974, Alstrom et al. 1991). A juvenile female was recorded off Brazil, on St. Peter and St. Paul Rocks, on 10 January 2005 (Bencke et al. 2005), demonstrating that G. angulata is even capable of transatlantic vagrancv. This species' movements are apparently triggered mainly by rainfall patterns and water levels at ^\ et- lands (Urban et al 1986, Dodman & Diagana 2006). Acknowledgements The director of the Museu do Jardim Botanico do Funchal, Roberto Jardim, kindh* permitted examination of the bird collection, and Lms Camara offered logistical help at the museum. Francisco Femandes drew my attention to this neglected collection and Paulo Catry lent me many of Schmitz's papers. I also thank the ref- erees, Frank Zino and Pierre- Andre Crochet, and the editor, Guy Kirwan, for their important comments. I dedicate this note to Ernesto Schmitz for his efforts to increase our knowledge of the avifauna of Madeira. References: Alstrom, P., Colston, P. & Lewington, I. 1991. A field guide to the rare birds ofBritniu and Europe. HarperCollins, London. Bannerman, D. A. & Bannerman, W. M. 1965. Birds of the Atlantic Islands. A histonj of the birds of Madeira, the Desertas and Porto Santo Islands. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh & London. Bencke, G. A., Ott, P., Moreno, I., Tavares, M. & Caon, G. 2005. Old World birds new to the Brazilian territo- ry recorded in the archipelago of Sao Pedro and Sao Paulo, equatorial Atlantic Ocean. Ararajuba 13: 126-129. Borrow, N. & Demey, R. 2001. A guide to the birds of VJestern Africa. Princeton Uni\-. Press. Clarke, T. 2006. Birds of the Atlantic Islands. Christopher Helm, London. Cramp, S. & Simmons, K. E. L. (eds.) 1980. The birds of the Western Palearctic, vol. 2. Oxford Univ. Press. Dodman, T. & Diagana, C. H. 2006. Conservation dilemmas for intra-African migrator}^ waterbirds. Pp. 218-223 in Boere, G. C, Galbraith, C. A. & Stroud, D. A. (eds.) Waterbirds around the world. The Stationery- Office, Edinburgh. Haavisto, S. & Strand, A. 2000. The first Lesser Moorhen Gall inula angulata in Eg\pt and the "Western Palearctic. Srtnc/^^roHst' 22: 137-139. Hudson, R. 1974. Allen's Gallinule in Britain and the Palearctic. Brit. Birds 67: 403-113. de Juana, E. & Comite de Rarezas de la Sociedad Espahola de Ornitologia. 2003. Report on rare birds in Spain in 2003. Ardeola 52: 185-206. Schmitz, E. 1896. Tagebuch-Notizen aus Madeira. Orn. lahrb. 7: 197-201. Schmitz, E. 1899. Die Vogel Madeira's. Orn. Jahrb. 10: 41-66. Schmitz, E. 1903. Tagebuch-Notizen aus Madeira. Orn. liJirb. 14: 206-211. Silva, F. A. & Menezes, C. A. (eds.) 1940. Eluciddrio Madcirciisc. Second edn. Centro de Estudos de Historia do Atlantico, Funchal. Urban, E. K., Fry, C. H. & Keith, S. (eds.) 1986. The birds of Africa, vol. 2. Academic Press, London. Rafael Matias 119 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Zino, P. A. & Zino, F. 1986. Contribution to the study of the petrels of the genus Pterodroma in the archipela- go of Madeira. Bol. Miis. Municipal Fiinchal 38: 141-165. Zino, F., Biscoito, M. J. & Zino, P. A. 1995. Birds of the archipelago of Madeira and the Selvagens: new records and checkUst. Bol Mus. Municipal Funchal 47: 63-100. Address: Av. D. Nuno Alvares Pereira 24, 3Dto., 2700-256 Amadora, Portugal, e-mail: rfsmatias@gmail.com © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 First record of Todd's Nightjar Caprimulgus heterurus in Guyana by Christopher M. Milensky, Fiona A. Wilkinson & Ashley P. Holland Received 22 September 2008 Todd's Nightjar Caprimulgus heterurus has recently been reinstated as a full species by the AOU's South American Checklist Committee (Remsen et al. 2008). The species was orig- inally described by Todd (1915), but later grouped with its sister taxon. Little Nightjar Caprimulgus parvulus, without justification by Peters (1940) and since then its status has been debated (Davis 1978, Hardy 1983, Cleere 1998, Hilty 2003). Vocalisations of the two species distinctly differ (Fig. 1). In addition, C. heterurus breeds in the grassland / forest edge across northern Colombia and north-central Venezuela, whilst C. parvulus is unknown north of the Amazon River. Nightjars are easier to locate when they vocalise frequently, primarily in the breeding season, but nesting information and status at other times of year in general is lacking. Here we present a new country record of C. heterurus from Guyana on 1 September 2006. This record is significant because it is the first for the expansive Gran Sabana / Roraima-Rupununi savanna region of northern South America. At 20.35 h at the village of Yupukari in the northern Rupununi savanna (03°39'36"N, 59°20'52"W), a single nightjar was seen and sound-recorded by APH using a Sony MZ-NF810 Minidisc and Sennheiser ME66 microphone. The recording is archived at the Macaulay Library of Natural Sounds, Cornell, Ithaca, NY (MLNS 138135). The bird was perched on a bush in savanna bordering dense gallery forest along the Rupununi River. What was presumably the same bird was heard singing at the same location on 2 and 4 September. Each time it sang intermittently for c.l hour. This range extension demonstrates the need for further research, not only for this species but also for nightjars in general. More data will be necessary to determine if C. heterurus breeds in this savanna region of the Guianas or is merely an irregular visitor. Acknowledgements We would like to recognise Cindy Lawrence for initially hearing the bird and bringing it to our attention. Mark Robbins encouraged publication and offered suggestions on the manuscript. Assistance in archiving the recording at the Macaulay Library was provided by Jesse Barry and Greg Budney. Miguel Lentino, Steve Hilty and Brian O'Shea provided useful information while researching this record. This is number 142 in the Smithsonian's Biological Diversity of the Guiana Shield Program publication series. References: Cleere, N. 1998. Nightjars: a guide to the nightjars, nighthawks, and their relatives. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, CT. Davis, L. L 1978. Acoustic evidence of relationship in Caprimulginae, Pan-Amer. Stud. 1: 22-57. Hardy, J. W. 1983. Review update. Wilson Bull. 95: 503. Hilty, S. L. 2003. Bzrrfs o/Wnezwdfl. Princeton Univ. Press. Christopher M. Milensky et al. 120 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(2) Time (sec) Figure 1. (A) Todd's Nightjar Caprimiilgus heterums, village of Yupukari, Rupununi savanna, Guyana, 1 September 2006 (MLNS 138135). (B) C. heterums, near Petare, Venezuela, April 1961 (recorded by P. Schwartz, and published by Ranft & Cleere 1998). (C) Little Nightjar C. parvidus, Arcoverde, Pemambuco, Brazil, December 1973 (recorded by C. Chappuis, and published by Ranft & Cleere 1998). Sonograms created using Raven 1.2 (Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Bioacoustics Research Program). Peters, J. L. 1940. Check-list of birds of the world, vol. 4. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA. Ranft, R. & Cleere, N. 1998. A sound guide to the nightjars and related nightbirds. CDs. Pica Press, Robertsbridge & The British Library National Sound Archive, London. Remsen, J. V., Jaramillo, A., Nores, M., Pacheco, J. F., Robbins, M. B., Schulenberg, T. S., Stiles, F. G., Silva, J. M. C, Stotz, D. F. & Zimmer, K. J. 2008. A classification of the bird species of South America. www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCBaseline.html (accessed 8 September 2008) Schwartz, P. 1968. Notes on two Neotropical nightjars, Caprimulgus anthonyi and C. parvuhis. Condor 70: 223-227. Addresses: Christopher M. Milensky, Division of Birds, Smithsonian Institution, P.O. Box 37012, WasMngton DC 20013-7012, USA, e-mail: milenskyc@si.edu. Fiona A. Wilkinson, USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, National Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 37012, Washington DC 20013-7012, USA. Ashley P. Holland, Karanambu Ranch, North Rupununi, Region 9, Guyana. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 BOC Office P.O. Box 417, Peterborough PE7 3FX, UK E-mail: boc.office@bou.org.uk. Website: www.boc-online.org Tel. & Fax: +44 (0) 1 733 844 820. MEMBERSHIP jubscriptions for 2009 were due for renewal from 1 January 2009. ;*lease note that a single subscription rate of £20 applies regardless of whether the subscriber is a member of the BOU Sr not. The US$ alternative is no longer available. \11 paid-up members receive (postage free) four issues of the Bulletin (including index). viembership correspondence and applications for membership, changes of address and all other membership related tems should be addressed to the BOC Office (above). No registered items should be sent to the P.O. Box. Contact BOC Dffice for direct mail of such items. For general Club correspondence see below. INSTITUTIONAL SUBSCRIBERS & APPLICATIONS FOR BACK NUMBERS OR OTHER CLUB PUBLICATIONS The Bulletin, together with annual index, may be purchased (postage free) by Institutional Subscribers, on payment ol m annual subscription of £40 to the BOC Office (above) or via the BOC website (www.boc-online.org). Please note that he US$ option is no longer available. Back issues of the Bulletin are available from the BOC Office (above). BOC Occasional Publications and other BOC publications are available from the BOC Office or online from the BOC website www .boc-online. org) . deas for future publications and policy should be referred direct to the BOC: Prof. R. A. Cheke, Hon. Publications )fficer BOC, Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich at Medway, Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, I!hatham, Kent ME4 4TB (e-mail: r.a.cheke@greenwich.ac.uk). I PAYMENTS \11 amounts quoted are net, should be paid in £ Sterling and sent to the BOC Office (above). Other currencies are nol ccepted. Other currency users can pay by credit card from which the Sterling amount will be deducted and the amount n your local currency will be indicated on your card statement. All cheques or drafts should be made payable to British )rnithologists' Club. Direct bank transfers can be made to Barclays Bank, Wavertree Boulevard, Liverpool L7 9PQ. Sori :ode: 20-00-87. Account no: 10211540, with confirmation to the BOC Office (above). CLUB CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence on all general Club matters should be addressed to: The Hon. Secretary, S.A.H. (Tony) Statham, ^shlyns Lodge, Chesham Road, Berkhamsted, Herts. HP4 2ST, UK. E-mail: boc.sec@bou.org.uk. See inside front covei Dr details of Club meetings. COMMITTEE 4iss H. Baker {Chairman 2009) D. J. Fisher {Hon. Website Manager) (2007) )r R. P. Prys-Jones {V ice-Chairman 2009) S. M. S. Gregory (2009) . A. H. Statham {Hon. Secretary) (2004) K. Heron Jones (2009) ). J. Montier {Hon. Treasurer) (1997) C. W. R. Storey (2009) M. J. Walton (2008 x-officio members ion. Editor. G. M. Kirwan (1 January 2004) Chairman of BOU/BOC Joint Publications Committee (JPC): Revd. T. W. Gladwin administration Manager: S. P. Dudley (2005) 'OC Publications Officer. Prof. R. A. Cheke (2001) Registered Charity No. 279583 Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club ISSN 0007-1595 Edited by Guy M. Kirwan Volume 129, Number 2, pages 65-120 CONTENTS Club Announcements 65 SAGE, B. Global warming and the breeding birds of the Arctic 77 PRATT, H. D., RETTER, M. L. P., CHAPMAN, D., ORD, W. M. & PISANO, P. An Abbott's Booby Papasula abbotti on Rota, Mariana Islands: first historical record for the Pacific Ocean 87 BENNETT, E., BOLTON, M. & HILTON, G. Temporal segregation of breeding by storm petrels Oceanodroma castro {sensu lato) on St Helena, South Atlantic 92 ARETA, J. I. Paedomorphosis in Sporophila seedeaters 98 CHEKE, A. Was Mascarene Grey White-eye Zosterops borbonicus introduced to Madagascar? 104 CREASE, A. First breeding data for Roraiman Nightjar Caprimulgus ivhitelyi, from south-east Venezuela 109 MATIAS, R. Removal of Black Crake Amaurornis flavirostris from the Western Palearctic list, and the first record of Lesser Moorhen Gallinula angulata for Madeira 116 MILENSKY, C N., WILKINSON, F. A. & HOLLAND, A. P. First record of Todd's Nightjar Caprimulgus heterurus in Guyana 119 EDITORIAL BOARD Murray Bruce, R. T. Chesser, Edward C. Dickinson, Frangoise Dowsett-Lemaire, Steven M. S. Gregors^, Jose Fernando Pacheco, Robert B. Payne, Pamela C. Rasmussen, Cees Roselaar, Thomas S. Schulenberg, Lars Svensson Authors are invited to submit papers on topics relating to the broad themes of taxonomy and distribution of birds. Descriptions of new species of birds are especially welcome and will be given priority to ensure rapid publication, subject to successful passage through the normal peer review procedure, and wherever possible should be accompanied by colour photographs or paintings. On submission, manuscripts, double-spaced and with wide margins, should be sent to the Editor, Guy Kirwan, preferably by e-mail, to GMKirv\^an@aol.com. Alternatively, two copies of manuscripts, typed on one side of the paper, may be submitted to the Editor, 74 Waddington Street, Norwich NR2 4JS, UK. Where appropriate half-tone photographs may be included and, where essential to illustrate important points, the Editor will consider the inclusion of colour figures (if possible, authors should obtain funding to support the inclusion of such colour illustrations). As far as possible, review, return of manuscripts for revision and subsequent stages of the publication process will be undertaken electronically. For instructions on style, see the inside rear cover of Bulletin 125 (1) or the BOC website Registered Charity No. 279583 © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 www.boc-online.org Printed on acid-free paper. Published by the British Ornithologists' Club Typeset by Alcedo Publishing of Arizona, USA, and printed by Latimer Trend, UK ulletin of th British Ornithologists' Club 14 SEP i PRESENT Volume 129 No.3 September 2009 MEETINGS are normally held in the Sheffield Building of Imperial College, South Kensington, London SW7. The nearest Tube station is at South Kensington; a map of the area will be sent to members, on request. (Limited car parking facilities can be reserved [at a special reduced charge of £5.00], on prior application to the Hon. Secretary.) The cash bar is open from 6.15 pm, and a buffet supper, of two courses followed by coffee, is served at 7.00 pm. (A vegetarian menu can be arranged if ordered at the time of booking.) Informal talks are given on completion, commenc- ing at about 8.00 pm. DiiTner charges are £22.50 per person. FORTHCOMING MEETINGS See also BOG website: http://www.boc-online.org 24 November — ^Jeffrey Boswall — Answering the calls of nature: an ornithological frolic with serious scientific and cultural undertones. Jeffrey Boswall claims to be a serious amateur ornithologist but was a professional wildlife broadcasting producer for the BBC. He says this is the "climax of his world tour, positively his farew^ell appearance". Applications to Hon. Secretary (address below) by 10 November 2009 6 October — Prof. David Goode — London's natural history in 50 years time. Prof. David Goode was Director of the London Ecology Unit and later Head of Environment at the Greater London Authority. His talk will review the current position regarding nature conservation in London and will go on to make predictions for the next 50 years, concentrating particularly on the effects of climate change on birds. Applications to Hon. Secretary (address below) by 22 September 2009 Provisional dates for Tuesday evening meetings in 2010 have been selected as follows: 26 January, 9 March, 27 April (incl. AGM), 22 June, 21 September and 2 November Overseas Members visiting Britain are especially welcome at these meetings, and the Hon. Secretary- would be ver\ pleased to hear from anyone who can offer to talk to the Club giving as much advance notice as possible — please contact: S. A. H. (Tony) Statham, Ashlyns Lodge, Chesham Road, Berkhamsted, Herts. HP4 2ST, UK. Tel. +44 (0)1442 876995 (or e-mail: boc.sec@bou.org.uk). Contributors See the March issue of each volume for guidelines or the BOC website Bulletin pages, at \\^\^v.boc- online.org/bulletin.htm BOC Office P.O. Box 417, Peterborough PE7 3FX, UK E-mail: boc.office@bou.org.uk. Website: www.boc-online.org Tel. & Fax: +44 (0) 1733 844 820. Club Announcements 121 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Bulletin of the BRITISH ORNITHOLOGIST^' O^g^ THE HAT ORAL Vol. 129 No. 3 Published ^3Si LD IHG LIBR ARY CLUB ANNOUNCEMENTS Members are reminded that subscriptions for 2009 were due on 1 January and are kindly asked to check that any standing orders with their banks are recorded at the correct amovmt (£20 p. a.). Regrettably several members are still paying incorrect subscription rates, which cause the Club unnecessary time and expense in administration duties. The 955th meeting of the Club was held after the AGM dinner on Wednesday 29 April 2009, in the Rector's Residence at 170 Queens Gate, Imperial College, London. Twenty-one members and 24 guests were present. Members attending were: Cdr. M. B. CASEMENT, RN {Chairman), Miss H. BAKER, Ms K. COOK, Dr J. H. COOPER, D. J. FISHER, F. M. GAUNTLETT, Revd. T. W. GLADWIN, S. M. S. GREGORY, K. HERON JONES, G. P. JACKSON, M. C. JENNINGS, R. R. LANGLEY, Dr C. F. MANN, D. J. MONTIER, R. C. PRICE, Dr J. S. PRINGLE, Dr R. P. PRYS-JONES, R. J. PRYTHERCH, P. J. SELLAR, S. A. H. STATHAM, and M. J. WALTON Guests attending were: W. ACKWORTH, Mrs S. ACKWORTH, Miss T. CARD, Dr P. CASSEY, Mrs C. R. CASEMENT, W. R. J. CASEMENT, Mrs R. CASEMENT, Sir CLIVE ELLIOTT, Mrs M.H. GAUNTLETT, Mrs J. GLADWIN, Mrs A. C. HARDING, Mrs J. HERON JONES, The Viscount HOOD, The Viscountess HOOD, A. J. HOWARD, Mrs E. HOWARD, G. MAURER, C. J. MIDDLETON, Mrs R. MIDDLETON, Mrs M. MONTIER, B. O'BRIEN, D. G. D. RUSSELL (Speaker), Miss J. M. STATHAM and Ms S. WHEELER. After dinner, Douglas Russell, a curator in the Bird Group (The Natural History Museum, Tring) gave a talk entitled The Worst Journey in the World: an ornithological tale of bravery and endurance. He prefaced his talk with the following quotation from Robert Falcon Scott's diary, at Cape Evans, 1911: — 'To me, and to every one who has remained here the result of this effort is the appeal it makes to our imagination, as one of the most gallant stories in Polar History. That men should wander forth in the depth of a Polar night to face the most dismal cold and the fiercest gales in darkness is something new; that they should have persisted in this effort in spite of every adversity for five full weeks is heroic. It makes a tale for our generation which I hope may not be lost in the telling.' As an allegory of suffering, the infamous 'Winter Journey' undertaken on the British Antarctic ('Terra Nova') Expedition of 1910 is a poignant reminder of the hardships endured by some to study ornithology. During the expedition, observations on birds were made by several members, but principally by the respected Chief of the Scientific Staff, Dr Edward A. Wilson. Over 100 ornithological specimens were taken during the expedition, including collections made in transit in the Southern Ocean. The most famous of all these specimens are undoubtedly the three Emperor Penguin Aptenodytes forsteri eggs collected in the depths of the Antarctic midwinter of 1911; a legendary journey when three men embarked on one of the most difficult and dangerous ornithological expeditions ever undertaken. Braving cold and misery that is difficult to imagine, they trod silently in darkness around Ross Island to retrieve three of the hardest won specimens in the Natural History Museum (NHM) bird collections. The story of the five weeks they spent battling against the winter weather, sheer bad luck and their own fears to bring back early embryos of the Emperor Penguin, required to test a then current theory in evolutionary biology, was superbly told by Apsley Cherry Garrard in his narrative of Scott's Last Expedition. Drawing on unpublished information from the archives of the NHM and elsewhere, the talk examined the motivations for the journey, its aftermath and the untold 20-year story of the research into the eggs by Dr Richard Assheton (1863-1915), Prof. James Cossar Ewart (1851-1933) and Dr Charles Wynford Parsons (1901-50). Owls of the world A. & C. Black Publishers regret that the recently deceased Jan-Hendrik Becking was omitted as co-author of the second edition of this work, published in November 2008. The authors of the revised edition are Claus Konig, Friedhelm Weick and Jan-Hendrik Becking. Mark T. Lee et al. 122 Bull. B.O.C. 20Uy 129(3) A photographic record of Silvery Pigeon Coliimba argentina from the Mentawai Islands, Indonesia, with notes on identification, distribution and conservation hy Mark T. Lee, Yong Ding Li & Ong Tun Pin Received 12 May 2009 Summary. — The Critically Endangered Silvery Pigeon Cohimha argentina, an insular pigeon of small islands off Sumatra and Borneo, has not been definitely recorded for over 70 years. We report here a photographic record of an individual observ^ed near Masokut Island, off Siberut in the Mentawai archipelago, Sumatra, which documents the species' continued existence in the wild. We also present an overview of this pigeon's historical status in the region and a review of its key identification features. More research is needed to locate populations before any conserv^ation measures can be designed. Silvery Pigeon Cohimba argentina Bonaparte, 1855, is an enigmatic taxon of small islands and adjacent coastal forests in the Sunda Region with no recent confirmed records. It is one of the least-known birds in South-East Asia (Butchart et al. 2005, Yong 2009) with the only recent records being unconfirmed reports, on the Talang-Talang Islands and Banggi Island, two of Borneo's satellites (Rahman & Abdullah 2002, Wilson 2004), and from coastal and riverine forest on Sumatra (Nash & Nash 1985, van Marie & Voous 1988, Verheugt et al. 1993, Iqbal 2005). The last definite record involved a specimen taken in 1931 on Gurimgan Besar Island, in the Karimata Islands, off south-west Borneo (Collar et al. 2001). The specimen record suggests that Silvery Pigeon is (or was) a wide-ranging species, occurring on many small islands, with single mainland records on Sumatra and Kalimantan (Borneo). Its historical range included Simeulue Island, the Mentawai and Banvak islands off western Sumatra, the Riau-Lingga Islands off east Sumatra, the Natima and Anambas islands, Burong Island off Sarawak and the Karimata Islands off south-west Kalimantan (Oberholser 1919, Chasen 1931, Robinson & Chasen 1936, Gibson-Hill 1952, van Marie & Voous 1988, Collar et al. 2001). Unconfirmed historical sightings are from Jarak Island in the Strait of Malacca (Robinson & Chasen 1936). A record from Sepilok (Sabah) on mainland Borneo is also considered unreliable (Sheldon et al. 2001). Since the last confirmed record in 1931, there have been reports at three resen^es on the south-east coast of Sumatra (Padang Sugihan, Sembilang and Way Kambas), Banggi Island off northernmost Borneo and most recently, the Talang-Talang Islands off Sarawak (e.g. Nash & Nash 1985, Rahman & Abdullah 2002, Wilson 2004). None were confirmed due to potential confusion with the similar-looking Pied Imperial Pigeon Duciila bicolor, which is svmpatric ^vith Silverv Pigeon on small wooded islands, in coastal forests and mangroves (Collar et al. 2001). Listed as Critically Endangered (BirdLife International 2004), Butchart et al. (2006) cited habitat loss and long absence of confirmed records as evidence for possible extinc- tion. However a fairly recent, but undated photograph of two Silvery Pigeons of unknown origin held in a private collection, apparenth" in Hong Kong, provides e\'idence that the species is surely still extant. Here, we document a bird off Masokut Island, in the Mentawai Islands, which provides even more concrete e\ idence that the species survives in the wild. Mark T. Lee et al. 123 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Field observations On 13 October 2008, at 16.49 h, MTL was on a boat between Masokut Island and Simaimu Island (at c.01°50'55.11"S, 99°18'08.45"E), two small islets off the southern tip of Siberut, in the Mentawai Islands, Indonesia. Masokut (1,400 ha) and Simaimu (120 ha) are within 10 km of Siberut and are separated by a 2.2 km-wide channel (Fig. 1). Both islands have substantial forest cover with fruiting trees noted at the time of the visit. MTL pho- tographed a pigeon flying from Masokut towards Simaimu, in the opposite direction to that of small groups of pigeons, subsequently identified from photographs as Green Imperial Pigeon Diiciila aenea and Pied Imperial Pigeon. The lone pigeon appeared superficially similar to Pied Imperial Pigeon, which is com- mon at the locality, and was thus initially dismissed as the latter. Subsequently, however, we noticed several features that differed considerably from Pied Imperial Pigeon. YDL com- pared the photographs with eight specimens of Silvery Pigeon, all collected pre-1950, and 20 specimens of D. h. bicolor from diverse localities, held at the Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, National University of Singapore (Yong 2009). We also traced two undated photographs of a captive pair of Silvery Pigeons of unknown provenance on an avicultural website (www.internationaldovesociety.com/SeedSpecies/ SilveryWoodPigeon.htm), purportedly held in a private collection in Hong Kong. Based on our comparisons with specimens, the photographs of the captive birds and illustrations of C. argentina and Pied Imperial Pigeon in the literature (Smythies 1981, MacKinnon & Phillipps 1993, Baptista et al 1997), it is clear that MTL's images are the first of Silvery Pigeon in the wild. Whilst there were no past records from Siberut and her satel- lites, it is unsurprising that Silvery Pigeon should occur there given that it is apparently a highly nomadic, dispersive species. Indeed, Ripley (1944) predicted that Silvery Pigeon could occur on any of the West Sumatran islands. Figure 1. Location of Masokut and Simaimu in relation to Siberut (left), and the location of Siberut in the Mentawai Islands in relation to Sumatra (right) Mark T. Lee et al. 124 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Figures 2-3. Silvery Pigeon Cohimba argeutina in flight showing upper- and underwing patterns, Masokut Island, Mentawai Islands, Indonesia, 13 October 2008 (Mark T. Lee) Figure 4. Pied Imperial Pigeon Ducula b. bicolor in flight showing undenving pattern, Similan Islands, Thailand, 11 March 2007 (Carl-Johan Svensson) Figure 5. Two specimens of Pied Imperial Pigeon Ducula b. bicolor (top) compared ^vith a Silvern- Pigeon Cohimba argentina (bottom) (Yong Ding Li) Figure 6. Under\ving pattern of Pied Imperial Pigeon Ducula b. bicolor (top) and Silver^" Pigeon Cohimba argeutina (Yong Ding Li) Figure 7. Specimen of Silverv Pigeon Cohimba argeutina showing close-up of facial features, including the t^vo-toned hooked bill and reddish orbital skin around the eve (Yong Ding Li) Mark T. Lee et al. 125 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Identification Silvery Pigeon is easily confused with the very similar Pied Imperial Pigeon, with which it is sympatric (Gibbs et al. 2001, Butchart et al 2005). Both are small-island special- ists and historical observations from Burong Island, off Sarawak, and Bungaran Island in the Natima Islands demonstrated that they nest and forage in close proximity (Robinson & Chasen 1936, Smythies 1981). However, based on the specimens mentioned above, we iden- tified several consistent, diagnosable differences in plumage and bare-parts coloration. We concluded that despite the similarities highlighted in the literature, the two species are dis- tinguishable using a few key features (Yong 2009). Bare parts. — All specimens of Silvery Pigeon exhibited a distinct orbital skin that ranged from dark reddish to purplish brown, which is never shown by Pied Imperial Pigeon. Furthermore, this feature is consistent in the two captive birds. In flight at a dis- tance, it is difficult to distinguish the eye within the darkish orbital skin, affording Silvery Pigeon the appearance of having an unusually 'large eye' (Fig. 2). In Silvery Pigeon the feathers of the forehead and lores extend over a large part of the maxilla, unlike Pied Imperial Pigeon. Silvery Pigeon has a two-toned maxilla with a deep purplish-red base (almost black in specimens) and an orange-yellow tip covering c.50% of the maxilla. The mandible is also two-toned and hooked, although the yellowish tip occupies <25% of its length; in contrast the bill of Pied Imperial Pigeon is uniformly blue-grey. These features, however, will be difficult to observe in the field, unless the bird is seen very close (c/. Gibbs et al. 2001). Plumage. — Overall, Silvery Pigeon is pale silvery blue-grey compared to the creamy white to white of Pied Imperial Pigeon. Perched Pied Imperial Pigeons should show black on the wings extending to the 'shoulder'. Seen from above, the primaries, primary-coverts and outer secondaries are black, whilst Silvery Pigeon has all-black primaries and second- aries (Baptista et al. 1997), so that when perched. Silvery Pigeon should show more black on its wings because the folded secondaries are wholly black, whereas only the outer second- aries are black in D. bicolor. Furthermore, the tail of Silvery Pigeon has a broad black terminal half, clearly lacking the extensive white in the outer tail of Pied Imperial Pigeon, which shows as a wedge-shaped apical tail-band (Fig. 4) (Gibbs et al. 2001). Seen in flight. Silvery Pigeon should show a considerably narrower band of 'black' cov- ering less than half the wing area (Fig. 3) as compared to Pied Imperial Pigeon, which shows extensive black covering more than half the wing area. Seen at close range, the underwing pattern of Pied Imperial Pigeon differs significantly from Silvery Pigeon, in which only the outermost primaries are all black. The remaining primaries and secondaries are only par- tially black, with the black covering about one-third of the lower vane. The amoimt of black on the feather also decreases away from the outer primaries, unlike Pied Imperial Pigeon in which the primaries and secondaries are all black. This pattern explains the narrower band of black on Silvery Pigeon's underwing when seen in flight (Yong 2009). As shown in Figs. 4 and 6, Pied Imperial Pigeon has considerably more black on the underwing. Discussion Columha argentina is probably the most enigmatic pigeon in the Sunda Region. Due to its superficial similarity to Pied Imperial Pigeon, confusion between them is highly possible and the species has quite probably been overlooked during biological surveys, given the lack of good illustrations in field guides, especially of birds in flight. The only such works to illustrate Silvery Pigeon are MacKinnon & Phillipps (1993) and Smythies (1981), neither of which depicts the species in flight. Other illustrations, mostly showing perched birds, are Mark T. Lee et al. 126 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) in Gibbs et al. (2001), Wells (1999) and Baptista et al. (1997; also reproduced in Collar et al. 2001). The underwing pattern of Silvery Pigeon is frequently assumed to resemble that of Pied Imperial Pigeon (c/. Gibbs et al. 2001), although as demonstrated here this feature is actually one of the most useful to separate the two species. Our images represent the first wild photographs of Silvery Pigeon, and provide confir- mation that the species persists. The identification was based on four key features. (1) Whilst it might initially appear an artefact of blurring in the photograph (Fig. 2), the unusually Targe eye', in fact is due to the dark orbital skin, and as we have shown, occurs in both sexes. (2) The extent of black on the tail is well defined and occupies only the termi- nal half on the pigeon photographed, which is consistent with specimens and illustrations (e.g. Baptista et al. 1997, Wells 1999, Gibbs et al. 2001), whereas in flight D. bicolor exhibits more considerable white on the undertail. (3) The underwing pattern is perhaps the most conclusive feature in the identification. It has generally been assumed that Silvery Pigeon has an underwing pattern more or less similar to Pied Imperial Pigeon, and certainly the difference has never been highlighted in the literature (e.g. Smythies 1981, MacKinnon & Phillipps 1993, Baptista et al. 1997, Wells 1999, Gibbs et al. 2001). The Silvery Pigeon pho- tographed had a narrow band of black on its secondaries and primaries, covering the entire feather only over the outermost 2-3 primaries. In specimens, we found that most of the inner primaries and secondaries are not completely black, unlike Pied Imperial Pigeon, with most of these feathers being black over only 30-50% of their length. (4) In our comparison of Silvery Pigeon and Pied Imperial Pigeon specimens, plumage colour differences should appear striking when birds are seen close, even in poor light. Silvery Pigeon has a largely blue-greyish appearance with a slight green iridescence on the nape (not visible at a dis- tance) unlike the very pale cream- white plumage of Pied Imperial Pigeon (Fig. 5). Our record of Silvery Pigeon is unsurprising given that the species has been recorded historically on other islands in the Mentawai group and is speculated to disperse widely in search of food (Collar et al. 2001). Silvery Pigeon is considered Critically Endangered (BirdLife International 2004) and ecological data are limited, making field surveys an urgent priority as a prelude to conser- vation measures. Currently, priority should be afforded to follow-up surveys of Siberut and her satellites (especially Masokut) to locate remnant populations. This could be comple- mented by baseline surveys of fruiting tree phenology to better understand food availability and feeding ecology of pigeons on small islands. Such work is also especially needed in the Banyuasin Peninsula of south-east Sumatra, where there have been unconfirmed modem records of large numbers of this pigeon (Nash & Nash 1985). Furthermore, increased field work on small forested islands in the region, especially those where the species has not been previously recorded but that still possess suitable habitat (e.g. Nias, Singkep, Tioman) might detect new populations. One major threat faced by Silvery Pigeon is habitat loss, with extensive clear-cutting for agriculture and logging occurring throughout the species' range. Batam Island, where Silvery Pigeon formerly occurred, is now largely deforested with very little remaining for- est habitat (Sodhi et al. submitted). Neighbouring Bintan is comparatively less developed, but is now only 16% forested (Sodhi et al. submitted). Recent surveys have failed to detect the species on both islands (Rajathurai 1996). Likewise, Pagai Selatan, another island from which the species is known, is also now heavily deforested (Collar et al. 2001). Llunting probably also takes a toll, as with many pigeons in Asia, Australia and Oceania (Walker 2007). Whilst no direct evidence exists to indicate that Silvery Pigeon is hunted for food, large-bodied pigeons, especially many similar-sized Ducula, often provide subsistence meat (Sankaran 1998, Walker 2007). Further losses might occur through poaching to supply the Mark T. Lee et al. 127 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) pet trade, as exemplified by the two captive birds in Hong Kong. However, the true impact of hunting on wild populations remains unknown. Acknowledgements We thank Kelvin Lim from the Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, National University of Singapore, for granting access to specimens, as well as Albert Low, Alfred Chia, Christian Artuso, David Bakewell, Frank Lambert, Krys Kazmierczak, Lim Kim Chuah, Lim Kim Seng and Nick Brickie for their suggestions and various inputs during the preparation of this paper. Carl-Johan Svensson permitted use of his excellent photograph. Clive Mann, Colin Trainor, David Wells and Stuart Butchart provided many helpful comments on the submitted draft. References: Baptista, L. F., Trail, P. W. & HorbHt, H. M. 1997. Family Columbidae (pigeons and doves). Pp. 60-243 in del Fioyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol. 4. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. BirdLife International. 2004. Threatened birds of the world 2004. CD-ROM. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Butchart, S. H. M., Collar, N. J., Crosby, M. J. & Tobias, J. A. 2005. Lost and poorly known birds: targets for birders in Asia. BirdingASIA 3: 41-49. Butchart, S. H. M., Stattersfield, A. J. & Brooks, T. M. 2006. Going or gone: defining 'Possibly Extinct' species to give a truer picture of recent extinctions. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 126A: 7-24. Chasen, F. N. 1931. Birds from Bintang Island in the Rhio Archipelago. Bidl. Raffles. Mus. 5: 114-120. Collar, N. J., Andreev, A. V., Chan, S., Crosby, M. J., Subramanya, S. & Tobias, J. A. (eds.) 2001. Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red Data book. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Gibson-Hill, C. A. 1952. A revised list of the birds known from the Rhio-Lingga Archipelago. Bidl. Raffles Mus. 24: 344-380. Gibbs, D., Barnes, E. & Cox, J. 2001. Pigeons & doves: a guide to the pigeons and doves of the world. Christopher Helm, London. Gray, G. R. 1856. List of the specimens of birds in the collection of the British Museum. Part IV. Columbidae. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), London. van den Hoek Ostende, L. W., Dekker, R. W. R. J. & Keijl, G. 0. 1997. Type-specimens of birds in the National Museum of Natural History, Leiden. Part 1. Non-Passerines. Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Mus. Tech. Bull. 1: 1-248. Iqbal, M. 2005. New and noteworthy bird records from Sumatra, Indonesia. Forktail 21: 167-169. MacKinnon, J. & Phillipps, K. 1993. A field guide to the birds of Borneo, Sumatra, Java and Bali. Oxford Univ. Press. van Marie, J. G. & Voous, K. H. 1988. The birds of Sumatra: an annotated checklist. BOU Check-list No. 10. British Ornithologist's Union, London. Nash, S. V. & Nash, A. D. 1985. A checklist of the forest and forest edge birds of the Padang-Sugihan Wildlife Reserve, south Sumatra. Kukila 2: 51-59. Oberholser, H. C. 1919. Notes on bird collected by Dr. W. L. Abbott, on Pulo Taya, Berhala Straits, southeast- ern Sumatra. Proc. U.S. Natl. Mus. 55: 267-274. Rahman, M. A. & Abdullah, M. T. 2002. Notes on birds and mammals in a limestone forest of Banggi Island, Sabah, Malaysia. Malay. Nat. J. 56: 145-152. Rajathurai, S. 1996. The birds of Batam and Bintan islands, Riau archipelago. Kukila 8: 86-113. Richmond, C. W. 1903. Birds collected by Dr W. L. Abbott on the coasts and islands of northwest Sumatra. Proc. US Natl. Mus. 26: 448-524. Ripley, S. D. 1944. The bird fauna of the West Sumatra Islands. Bidl. Mus. Comp. ZooL, Harvard Univ. 44: 307-430. Robinson, H. C. & Chasen, F. N. 1936. The birds of the Malay Peninsula, vol. 3. H. F. & G. Witherby, London. Sankaran, R. 1998. An annotated list of the endemic avifauna of the Nicobar islands. Forktad 13: 17-22. Sheldon, F. H., Moyle, R. G. & Kennard, J. 2001. Ornithology of Sabah: history, gazetteer, annotated checklist and bibliography. Orn. Monogr. 52. American Ornithologist's Union, Washington DC. Sodhi, N. S., Wilcove, D. S., Lee, T. M., Sekergioglu, C. H., Subaraj, R., Bernard, H., Yong, D. L., Lim, S. L. H., Prawiradilaga, D. M. & Brook, B. W. submitted. Deforestation and avian extinction on tropical land- bridge islands. Conserv. Biol. Smythies, B. E. 1981. The birds of Borneo. Third edn. Sabah Society & Malayan Nature Society, Kuala Lumpur. Verheugt, W. J. M., Skov, H. & Danielsen, F. 1993. Notes on the birds of the tidal lowlands and floodplains of South Sumatra province, Indonesia. Kukila 6: 53-58. Wells, D. R. 1999. The birds of the Thai-Malay peninsula, vol. 1. Academic Press, London. Walker, J. S. 2007. Geographical patterns of threat amongst pigeons and doves (Columbidae). Oryx 41: 289-299. Mark T. Lee et al. 128 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Wilson, K.-J. 2004. A pro\'isional sighting of the Sih er\- Pigeon on the Talang Talang Islands, Sarawak, Malaysia. BirdingASIA 1: 53-57. Yong, D. L. 2009. Notes on the status and identification of the Sih erv Pigeon Cohimba argentirm. BirdirigASlA 11: 53-58. Addresses: Mark T. Lee, 351, 5th Avenue, Chula \"ista, CaHfomia 91910, USA, e-mail: marktleeSjuno.com. Yong Ding Li, Bukit Batok Street 21, Block 209, =*03-lS8, Singapore 650209, e-mail: zootl"iera@A'aJ-ioo.com. Ong Tun Pin, 212/ 48 Atchison Street, St. Leonards 2065, Ne-\v South Wales, Australia, e-mail: cops\'chusS'vahoo.com British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Hadoram Shirihai et al. 129 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) First observations of Fiji Petrel Pseudobulweria macgillivrayi at sea: off Gau Island, Fiji, in May 2009 hy Hadoram Shirihai, Tony Pym, Jorg Kretzschmar, Kolinio Moce, Amania Taukei & Dick Watling Received 29 June 2009 Summary. — The first unambiguous observations of Fiji Petrel Psendobiihveria macgillivrayi at sea are documented with photographs. The species' behaviour, jizz and flight are described, presented together with comments on confusion species, especially Bulwer's Bulweria hiilwerii and Jouanin's Petrels B.fallax, and Christmas (Kiritimati) Shearwater Puffinus nativitatis. Preparations for the expedition, why a given sea area was chosen, the 'recipe' and use of 'chum' as an attractant, and the methods used for counting petrels are explained. The four specimens of Fiji Petrel were studied in detail and records of grounded birds, from the only known location, Gau Island, Fiji, were reviewed and their ageing re-considered. These data permit us to speculate on this petrel's breeding season, which is highly relevant to the future conservation of this Critically Endangered species. We report the results of pelagic work off Gau Island in May 2009, during which our prime objective was to observe Fiji Petrel Pseudohulweria macgillivrayi in its marine environ- ment. Until now the species has been identified only on Gau itself, where the type specimen was collected in 1855 (Gray 1859). Thereafter the species went unrecorded for nearly 130 years until one was caught in 1984 (Watling & Lewanavanua 1985). Considerable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to search for nesting sites on Gau, but several ground- ed birds have confirmed its continued presence (Priddel et al. 2008). Because Fiji Petrel is exceptionally rare and extremely poorly known (Bourne 1965, Imber 1986, Bretagnolle et al. 1998, Brooke 2004), being listed as Critically Endangered (lUCN 2009), any new data con- cerning range and abundance are vital to its conservation. The Fiji Islands are in western Polynesia, c.2,000 km north of New Zealand and east of Australia. Volcanic Gau (18°01'S, 179°17'E; 136 km^) is 57 km east of the main island of Viti Levu and is Fiji's fifth-largest island. Rugged and mountainous, Gau rises to 715 m, has c.50% forest cover, and supports a human population of 3,000 (Watling 1985, Priddel et al. 2008). The people of Fiji, especially Gau, are proud of their petrel, known locally as Kacau ni Gau; it featured on the former Fijian $50 banknote, and is the logo of Air Fiji. Because John MacGillivray was not involved with the holotype's collection (Watling & Lewanavanua 1985, Bourne 2007) we endorse Fiji Petrel as the species' English name. Several organisations over the years have supported the National Trust of Fiji's efforts to conserve the species, which have chiefly involved awareness raising and training people to give 'first aid and release' to any grounded birds attracted to village lights (c/. Priddel et al. 2008). There has also been an emphasis on gaining data from dead and / or grounded birds to assess the timing of breeding (Priddel et al. 2003). The idea to search deep oceanic waters was originally proposed and instigated by HS, in 2005, with a second expedition by HS, TP, JK and DW in 2008 (Appendix 3). Our objectives were to gather data on identifica- tion and behaviour of this virtually unknown Pseudohulweria. The May 2009 expedition was one of several field surveys within a new conservation project planned by NatureFiji- MareqetiViti (NFMV 2009a) in partnership with the National Trust of Fiji. The main Hadoram Shirihai et al. 130 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) objective is to learn more about Fiji Petrel, and to find and protect its nests from the threat posed by rats, feral cats and an expanding population of feral pigs. Methodology Finding Fiji Petrel at sea was no accident; the sea area surveyed and the methods used were planned following surveys in 2005 and 2008. We used a method of attracting petrels close to the boat that HS and TP had developed and used successfully elsewhere in the world. Timing. — The expedition dates were 13-22 May 2009. Prior to this, we examined the four specimens of Fiji Petrel collected on Gau (Appendix 1), reviewed the work of Priddel et al (2008) and chose the period at sea based on two grounded birds. In early May 2005 two crashed onto village roofs, one of which was caught, and in April 2007 an adult female was caught. We concur with Bourne (1981) and Priddel et al. (2008) that the breeding season is likely to be sometime from April, and that in May breeders might be supplemented by the presence of non-breeders. May was chosen as the month when most birds might be encoun- tered at sea, close to the island. May marks the transition between the cyclone season and the onset of the south-east trade winds, so major storms would be unlikely. We also took into account the lunar cycle, knowing that we would commence the work when the moon was near full, at which time fewer birds were likely to be in the vicinity. However, over ten days at sea we should learn if there were changes to numbers (and species) relating to the lunar cycle. Many petrels, being nocturnal at their colonies, tend to return in darkness to avoid predators, but local conditions, like cloud cover and stage of breeding, also determine arrival. The rather full moon at the outset might show that petrels use the period of dark- ness before the moon rises to reach nearby waters earlier in the day. 'Chumming'. — The objectives were to determine the following. (1) Whether Fiji Petrels can be observed at sea and to provide information on their identification and behaviour. (2) If photography can enable adults and juveniles to be distinguished, thereby contributing to an assessment of the timing of breeding. (3) Whether Fiji Petrels can be attracted, in suf- ficient numbers, close to a small boat to enable capture for transmitter attachment. We plan three trips before the technique is reviewed. Frozen 10-kg blocks of 'chum' were used. Each block comprised 60% fish offal (6 kg), cut into small pieces and mixed with 10% very dense fish oil (one litre) to which 30% water (three litres) was added. In addition, we used large- fish livers cut and mixed with fish oil and popcorn. In total, we transported 1,000 kg of 'chum' and 100 kg of the liver mix to the island in freezers. The 'chum' was prepared a few weeks ahead by volunteers from NatureFiji-MareqetiViti. The 'chum recipe', quantity need- ed and its use was piloted off Gau in 2008, based on previous work (Shirihai 2008a) where it was found that dissolving frozen blocks act as the principal attractant, whilst the liver pieces, which float naturally, are added, as required, to maintain the petrels' interest. Frozen 'chum' blocks persist for up to 1.5 hours creating a pungent and constant oil slick, with the aroma and visible slick being pushed downwind, attracting petrels from some miles away. One or two blocks, plus a small amount of liver, were dropped overboard at intervals of 1.0-1.5 / hour. We 'chummed' for c.50 hours during the ten days with daily sessions last- ing a mean of five hours. Studxj area. — Given the location of Gau in relation to neighbouring islands, its bathy- metric setting based on ocean charts, and the prevailing winds, we concentrated effort in the ocean due south of the island. We surveyed an area, c.25 nautical miles (mn) from Gau, mainly at 18°27.293'S, 179°10.775'E (see also Results). This area was selected based on suc- cessful pelagic work with Zino's Petrel Ptcrodroma madeira off Madeira, Atlantic Ocean Hadoram Shirihai et al. 131 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) (Shirihai 2008b, 2009), given similarities between the islands' topography, the approach of birds using the dominant winds, and the location of records of grounded birds in relation to the breeding sites. With Kadavu to the south-west, Viti Levu to the west, an arc of islands — Ovalau, Batiki, Wakaya to the north and Moala and Matuku to the east — a direct passage from the open ocean converged on Gau. In 2005 and 2008 we found an afternoon / evening passage of petrels arriving from the south-west, bypassing Gau to the south, which we hoped to attract to the 'chum' as 'trigger species', so that any feeding frenzy might attract Fiji Petrels. May marks the beginning of the south-east trade winds, which would aid petrels returning to the island from the south and south-west, whilst most records of grounded Fiji Petrels are from the south-west of the island. The study area chosen is shown in Fig. 1. Vessel. — We were based at Nukuloa village on Gau and travelled daily to the survey area in an open, sports-fishing speedboat, the privately chartered HiFlyer (12 m, two 225-hp outboard engines). Averaging 22 knots, we covered over 550 nm during the ten days, returning to Gau prior to dark to safely enter the narrow Nagali passage. Camera equipment and GPS. — We used the most advanced camera equipment current- ly available, including Canon Mark3 D and DS, and 300-mm / F2.8 and 500-mm / F4 lenses. Figure. 1. Map showing Gau and locations of Fiji Petrels Pseudobulweria macgillivrayi. Position 1 (c.25 nm off Gau), Fiji Petrels 2, 3 and 6 recorded. Position 2 (c.15.0-17.5 nm off Gau), Fiji Petrels 1 and 5 recorded. Position 3 (c.4-10 nm off Gau), Fiji Petrels 4, 7 and 8 recorded. 4. Arrows show the direction of afternoon passage of Tahiti P. rostrata and Collared Petrels Pterodroma brevipes though this varied with wind, weather and cloud cover. See text for rationale for choosing the survey area. Hadoram Shirihai et al. 132 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) as well as Nikon D 700, 300 mm / F4.0 and 1.7 converter. We used a mobile GPS, Garmin Colorado 300 with a marine chart programme, to waymark positions, travel between loca- tions, and log sightings. Data collection. — Usually the boat drifted just off the 'chum slick', permitting birds to move freely along the 'slick' and to feed undisturbed, as well as affording us the best angle for observing birds already attracted and those incoming. We counted birds and their activ- ity during sessions of 30-60 minutes each. For each species we recorded the estimated number of birds during the session and the maximum number seen at one time. For consis- tency the same observer made virtually all counts. These counts are relevant to the commoner species, especially Tahiti Petrel Pseudobidweria rostrata and Collared Petrel Pterodroma brevipes, and, most importantly, can be directly compared to the numbers of Fiji Petrel in any period. Also, ten birds with distinct plumage due to moult and / or missing remiges were selected, and their visits to, and duration at, the 'chum' noted, which proved useful to determine overall numbers. At the end of each day we agreed on conservative totals. This method is the same as that recently used in Cape Verde and Madeira, where counts during 'chumming' were suggested as a tool to monitor the Pterodroma feae complex (Bretagnolle et al. in prep. a). Here, only our basic data are presented (Appendix 3, Table 2); additional data will be used in further research, currently being planned, and a future pub- lication on the region's petrels. Each Fiji Petrel seen was afforded a number with individual description, behavioural notes and photographs used in the analyses below. Prior to the work, we agreed the man- ner for accepting any sightings of the species; given various levels of relevant field skills, only when four of us (HS, TP, JK, DW) had observed a bird sufficiently for all key features to be detected, and were unanimously agreed, was an identification considered certain. We photographed four of the eight Fiji Petrels we saw. All other petrels seen during the expe- dition, and in 2005 and 2008, are recorded in Appendix 3; for those observed in 2009 see Table 2. Also we studied plumages of the polymorphic Collared Petrel (Watling 1986a), par- ticularly variation within darker morphs (>200 birds were photographed). Results Fiji Petrel sightings. — This section records sightings of Fiji Petrels and other tubenoses (see Appendix 3 and Table 2 for all species and estimated numbers). 13 May — Fiji Petrel 1 seen at 10.50 h, at 18°18.722'S, 179°13.515'E (c.l5 nm off Gau), flying in quite high arcs west; Fiji Petrels 2-3 visiting 'chum' at 18°27.293'S, 179°10.775'E (c.25 nm south of Gau), for tim- ings see below, both photographed; during each appearance, per session, there were also C.20 (max. 11 at once) Tahiti Petrels, c.20 (13) Collared Petrels, two Gould's Petrels Pterodroma leucoptera, one Mottled Petrel P. inexpectata and a Wedge-tailed Shearwater Puffinus pacificus. 14 May— ¥i]i Petrel 4 at 17.29 h, at 18°12.020'S, 179°13.552'E (c.lO nm off Gau), appeared to be heading towards Gau. 16 May — Fiji Petrel 5 at 12.15-12.25 h, visiting 'chum' at 18°21.968'S, 179°14.855'E (c.17.5 nm south of Gau), photographed; also observed were c.5 (max. 3) Tahiti Petrels and a Collared Petrel. 17 May — Fiji Petrel 6, at 11.25-11.35 h, visiting 'chum' at 18°27.293'S, 179°10.775'E (c.25 nm south of Gau), photographed, and its behaviour described below; also observed were c'.20 (max. 8) Tahiti and c.20 (5) Collared Petrels, and single Sooty Puffinus griseus and Wedge-tailed Shearwaters. En route to Gau, at 17.45 h, Fiji Petrel 7, at 18°06.900'S, 179°15.424'E (c.2 nm outside the reef and c.4 nm from Gau), clearly seemed to be on approach, flying north to north-west, and perhaps adopting a 'holding' position, awaiting darkness before flying to the island. We spent time inside Gau lagoon, off the village of Nawaikama, facing a valley and the island's highest peak, to check Hadoram Shirihai et al. 133 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) if this or any other bird arrived at dusk, but none was seen. 18 May — Fiji Petrel 8, at 17.30 h, at 18°09.523'S, 179°13.909'E (just 3.6 nm from the reef and c.5 nm from Gau), was flying north-east, and again appeared to be adopting a 'holding' position, waiting for darkness. It is premature to conclude much from these observations, but we noted two main activities. (1) Towards dusk, post-17.30 h, Fiji Petrels 4, 7 and 8 were closer to land, off the south-west of the island, presumably before flying in under complete darkness. All four birds photographed were adult-like (see Ageing and moult), i.e. presumably breeders. (2) During the day, some (Fiji Petrels 2, 5 and 6) were south off the island (mostly c.20 nm and more), and were attracted to the 'chum'. There is a possible correlation between the number of Fiji Petrels and numbers of commoner petrels visiting the 'chum'. Behaviour at sea and response to the boat. — Fiji Petrel is rare and our encounters too few to permit a detailed description of its behaviour at sea. However, we can state that the species appears to ignore boats: of the eight sightings, four were en route to, or in the vicin- ity of, Gau and these birds showed no interest in the boat, as sometimes happened with Tahiti Petrels. At the 'chum', where the other four individuals were seen, Fiji Petrel seemed to tolerate our small boat, with bird 2 approaching food on the surface just a few metres away several times and once flying over the bow. The duration of uninterrupted visits by the four birds attracted to the 'chum' was 2-10 minutes (mean c.7.3 minutes of six visits). Bird 2 revisited twice, as verified by photographs: the first visit at 14.21-14.28 h (c.8 min- utes) was followed by a gap of seven minutes, reappearing at 14.35-14.40 h (c.6 minutes), before another gap of c.l3 minutes then returning at 14.53-15.01 h (c.8 minutes). It was in the vicinity for c.44 minutes. The two other Fiji Petrels visited the 'chum' once only. Bird 3 was seen for two minutes, arriving at 17.24 h as dusk approached and we were preparing to depart; it might have stayed after our departure. Our impression was that this bird's rather brief, hesitant approach was determined by the larger Tahiti Petrels, who could be aggressive at the 'chum', calling loudly when squabbling. Fiji Petrel may be subordinate in such a melee. Bird 6 was observed to take some offal, only to then be chased by a Tahiti Petrel and, after landing again, drop the food and depart. The foraging technique of Fiji Petrels at 'chum' is similar to Pseudobiihveria rostrata and P. becki that HS and TP have observed in the Pacific. Fiji Petrels usually approached from downwind and slowly zig- zagged over the 'slick', suddenly changing direction to drop onto a small floating morsel (14 such approaches were observed by four birds). Also, bird 6 landed briefly on the water with wings held upwards and partially opened, in a manner used by P. rostrata and P. becki. Fiji Petrel, like gadfly petrels, appeared to be attracted to the 'chum' using both smell and sight. The bird that stayed on the 'chum' longest (bird 2) was observed on the day that we recorded the largest numbers of other petrels. Ecology and conservation When does Fiji Petrel breed? The protection of this Critically Endangered species is the main objective of all our activities. To enable this, an understanding of the breeding cycle is essential in order that resources can be targeted to the period when active nests are most likely to be found and protected. Any data on moult and / or age of photographed birds can contribute to this (see Ageing and moult; Appendix 1). Priddel et al. (2003, 2008) relied primarily on the presumed age of the holotype as the key to the breeding period, however, we can no longer be sure of this bird's age and have therefore excluded it from our calculations. Fig. 2 shows records of grounded petrels that Priddel et al. (2008) considered confirmed, with the addition of the 2009 bird. It shows also the six we examined (as specimens or in Hadoram Shirihai et al. 134 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) T I [ Unknown age (not examined) j^/^ Juvenile (recently fledged) Moulting, possibly 1 year old (young Immature) * lllll Adult or immature (2nd year or older); grounded bird Adult or immature (2nd year or older); at sea G not examined, but confirmed record grounded, exammed as specimen / photo m nnb 1 11 n 1 IIXI niffl Jan Feb Mar Apr | May Jun 1 Jul 1 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec cool season & trade winds humid 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr | May Jun 1 Jul 1 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec G*6 g's G1 : : 4e G2 *i * • G3 May 09 8 birds at sea Holotype possible breeding season suspected |breedlng activity suspected •breeding activity Figure. 2. Records of Fiji Petrels Psendobuhveria macgillivrayi from Gau Island, Fiji, and nearby seas 1855-2009. For details of grounded birds see Appendix 1 (G = grounded Fiji Petrels 1-6). The eight birds seen at sea in May 2009 are also shown. Centre, the winter cool season with trade winds, and the hot and humid cyclone season are illustrated. Below, months when breeding activity is suspected based on ages of grounded birds (see legend) and our observation of birds close to shore. photographs), and for which ages can be ascertained using moult. Of ten Fiji Petrels (six grounded 1984-2009 and four photographed at sea) nine were adults or immatures (second- year or older) and only one a juvenile (January 2009). Grounded records are mostly in April-July, with fewer in October-January, and none in August-September or February-March. With so few records, it is premature to conclude that the breeding sea- son of Fiji Petrel falls during a given climatic cycle (Fig. 2), although the majority "of records are from the cool season during the trade winds. Priddel et al. (2008), following Bourne (1981) and Imber (1986), assumed Fiji Petrel to be essentially an austral winter breeder and, with the holotype collected in early October believed to be a recently fledged juvenile, eggs would be laid sometime in June (based on 118 days estimated from laying of the egg to fledging for similar-sized petrels). Our data, however, tend to suggest a protracted breeding season, perhaps lasting most of the year. The records are not spread evenly through the year but dates, moult and behaviour suggest two periods of apparent breeding activity. April-July: three of the six documented ground- ed birds, adults (or non-breeding immatures), were from this period, including that on 4 May, which was the only bird in active moult showing, apparently, juvenile-retained remiges, suggesting a moulting youngster. Since non-breeding immatures may arrive at the island a few weeks after breeding adults, we speculate that adults might arrive during April, with breeding probably commencing in May (or even mid April) including a pre- laying exodus. The breeding season of petrels of this size may extend c.5 months (with pre- and post-breeding activities) yet to date there are no confirmed records for August. Octobcr-Janiuny: the discovery of a very fresh, recently fledged juvenile on 19 January 2009 suggests that breeding also commences from October (or even September). Flowever, there are too few records to conclude that the breeding season is continuous, or contains two peaks, or even to identify when the bulk of breeders probably come ashore. For now, we Hadoram Shirihai et al. 135 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) suggest searching for nests from late April and May and that these months might be more profitable for spotlighting, capturing birds for telemetry, and for the proposed use of trained dogs for locating breeding sites (Priddel et al. 2008). How rare is the Fiji Petrel? We observed only a few Fiji Petrels. This was despite choos- ing what we considered to be the optimum month, and a period when the moon went from almost full to almost new. We worked a corridor, from positions far offshore to close inshore, from where petrels approached Gau. We used large amounts of 'chum', targeting all petrels, and we believe few birds in the vicinity would not have been attracted at some time. The present evidence is that few Fiji Petrels survive, that immediate efforts to find the nest sites are needed, and prompt, effective protection is urgently required before it is too late. Recent work with Pterodroma madeira off Madeira (Shirihai 2009) recorded 13 birds at sea in eight days, where a comparatively well-known population is estimated at c.80 pairs (Zino et al. 2008). Contrast this with our figures for Fiji Petrel and the population might therefore be <50 pairs. We endorse Brooke (2004) who wrote 'The species' population is unknown; it may be only a few tens of individuals'. Two new threats to the species' survival are manifest. The first is the reports from islanders of a burgeoning population of feral pigs that are now ranging into summit forests — in the 1980s there were no feral pigs on Gau (Watling 1986b). Secondly, we observed several Tahiti Petrels, and a Kermadec Petrel Pterodroma neglecta, with damaged wings (partially broken and twisted inner primaries) suggesting that these birds had become entangled with long-lines when scavenging at fishing vessels. As Fiji Petrels are attracted to 'chum', they might well be exposed to the dangers of long-lining. Description Until now, the plumage of Fiji Petrel had been described only from specimens, and its characteristics and behaviour only assumed. Here we provide a full description of Fiji Petrel based on the eight birds we saw, which observations confirm that structurally and behav- iourally it is a typical Pseudobulweria, and given good or prolonged views should be readily identifiable at sea. Size and proportions. — A typical Pseudobulweria with large bill, proportionately long wings, and elongated rear body and tail. Total length c.29 cm and wingspan 73 cm (based on the recently grounded bird, January 2009). Full measurements are given in Table 1; see also Figs. 3-8. We observed Fiji Petrels directly alongside P. rostrata, the sole Pseudobulweria known to overlap in range, and our impression was that macgillivrayi is structurally a minia- ture version of rostrata. This is confirmed by actual measurements of body length, wingspan, wing and tail, which compared to data from rostrata (Villard et al. 2006) reveal Fiji Petrel to be c.17% smaller but with body mass 50% that of rostrata, adding to the field impression of a smaller delicate bird. It has several features that differ structurally though; the rear body, beyond the trailing edge of the wing, is very elongated, slim and tapers to the pointed tail, the tip of which is blunt and rounded (Figs. 3-5). The wings appear proportion- ately narrower and more pointed than Tahiti with the 'hand' (primaries) tapering markedly and sometimes appearing disproportionately longer than the 'arm' (secondaries) by c.35% (Figs. 3-6, 8). The bill is typical of the genus, being noticeably smaller than that of Tahiti (c.25% shorter), but appears more compressed forward of the nostrils at the culmen and the maxillary nail more bulbous (Figs. 3, 5-7). In profile the head looks rather square, with a 70°-slope to the forehead and flatfish crown (Figs. 6-7). Its long narrow neck (e.g. Figs. 6-8) further enhances the slim, elongated impression of Fiji Petrel. Overall it never has the heavy-bodied appearance of Tahiti Petrel. On several occasions the feet of Fiji Petrel were Hadoram Shirihai et al. 136 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) TABLE 1 Biometrics of the four specimens of Fiji Petrel Pseudobuhucrin macgiUivrai/i. All measurements by HS. Body mass data taken from the capture protocol. For wing formula see below. Wing Tail Tail graduated Tarsus Bill to feathers Bill depth at feathers Bill rlpn1"li 11 I CI L top of hook Bill hook base Total length V V Clcll 1 1 (g) Right Left Bird 1 o" 205.5 83.7 23.9 36.0 25.8 12.0 8.5 8.5 280.0 Bird 2 ? 216.0 218.0 91.0 24.0 36.0 27.4 12.6 10.2 10.2 285.0 120 Bird 3 215.0 25.0 9.5 Bird 4 225.0 225.5 90.0 29.0 37.8 27.4 12.2 10.3 10.3 288.0 145 Range 205.5-225.5 83.7- 91.0 23.9- 29.0 36.0- 37.8 25.0- 27.4 12.0- 12.6 8.5- 12.3 8.5- 10.3 280.0- 288.0 120- 145 Mean 217.5 88.2 25.6 36.6 26.4 12.3 9.6 9.6 284.3 132.5 Bird 1 Holotype, Natural History Museum (Tring), October 1855; examined June 2008. Wing formula: plO (outer) 3.1 mm < tip (=p9 longest) [plO = p8/9, closer to p8] Bird 2 In possession of DW, collected 12 April 2007; examined July 2008. Wing formula: primary tips heavily worn due to captivity and difficult to measure: plO (outer) longest by 1.0mm>p9 [or = p9] Bird 3 Suva Museum (F605), collected 3 July 1985; examined July 2008 (wet specimen and difficult to obtain precise measurements). Wing formula: plO (outer) longest by 2.0 mm > p9 Bird 4 Li possession of DW, collected January 2009; examined May 2009. Wing formula: plO (outer) longest by 3.5 mm > p9 seen. They do not project past the tail, ending far from the tip, and appear heavy and pow- erful (Fig. 3). The long tapering undertail-coverts reach the tail tip. In Fiji's seas, the species with the closest total length and wingspan to Fiji Petrel is Black Noddy Anous niinutus (total length C.34 cm, wingspan c.76 cm), which is very frequently seen. No other petrels are directly comparable in size to Fiji Petrel, with perhaps only Collared (very frequent) and Black-winged Petrels Pterodroma nigripennis (rare) having a similar total length (c.29 cm), but their wingspans, at max. c.70 cm, are much shorter. These Pterodroma also possess a rel- atively shorter rear body and tail, and thus different overall shape. Amongst familiar tubenoses of the Pacific, Fluttering Shearwater Puffinus gavia has the nearest total wingspan (76 cm). Fiji Petrel, to some degree, is closer in size and structure to Beck's Petrel Pseudohulweria becki (HS and TP pers. obs. in Bismarck archipelago, Papua New Guinea) due to the relatively smaller size, more delicate structure, longer neck and narrower wings of becki in relation to rostrata. It too shares the squarer head and bulbous compressed bill, but becki lacks the distinctive tapering rear of Fiji Petrel. Jizz and flight. — Fiji Petrel has several flight modes like those of rostrata and behaves similarly. However, being noticeably smaller and slimmer it is visibly more elegant. It flies effortlessly on characteristically long, narrow, pointed wings. When gliding (Figs. 3-5) into the wind, the wings are held rather stiffly and seemingly straight. Seen head-on, or from the rear, they are held slightly below body level, which forms a shallow arc in shape. The wing- beats are very relaxed and supple, appearing sometimes loose and languici. Even in ten-knot winds there were only a few shallow flaps. To our eyes, Fiji Petrel is not a particu- larly fast or energetic flyer. Only when the species was 'excited', near 'chum', was there clearly a more rapid pace with shorter wingbeats, swooping glides and more erratic changes of direction. Nevertheless, like gadfly petrels, arcing and banking (Fig. 3) can be Hadoram Shirihai et al. 137 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) impressive. We never observed any in really strong winds or rough seas, but one bird per- formed rather high arcing (up to c.l5 m above the surface), like a Pterodroma, in direct flight (bird 1). In comparison, the larger and heavier Tahiti Petrel's flight involves much longer and higher glides and arcs. We never observed Fiji Petrel in calm conditions. With its slim dark body and long wings outstretched, a Fiji Petrel at distance shows a unique silhouette (Figs. 3 and 8), yet when investigating the 'chum' the long neck and rear body were more obvious (Figs. 5 and 7), illustrating the variation in posture. The spread wings in lateral pro- file can appear rounder, but this is due to foreshortening. Plumage. — Fiji Petrel is uniformly dark brown (Figs. 3-4, 6 and 8). However, in certain lights and at various angles, some subtle shades and coloration patterns were perceptible. We also noted some slight variation between individuals. The head and body appear black- ish brown in overcast conditions or when distant, but medium to richer and brighter brown in sunlight and close views (Fig. 7). The head and breast usually appear a shade darker than the rest of the body, but this is not always visible, and does not create any contrast. A small ill-defined dark loral mark is usually apparent (Fig. 7). The underparts, below the breast, often possess a very slight rusty hue, whilst some of the paler feather bases can be exposed, forming diffuse and asymmetric barring (Figs. 5 and 7). Both the degree of rusty shades and barring can be subtle and vary individually. The vent to undertail-coverts often appears slightly darker than the belly. The upperparts and upperwing lack any distinct pattern and are generally concolorous (Figs. 4 and 6). In certain lights the back and scapulars, and espe- cially the lesser coverts, secondaries and five outermost primaries, are darker brown, with the bulk of the remaining coverts a slightly paler and richer brown. There is no pale carpal bar, or dark 'M' across the open wings, which several dark gadfly petrels possess. The underwing is somewhat plain brown, mirroring to a degree the upperwing with slightly darker / blacker lesser coverts, axillaries, secondaries and five outermost primaries (Figs. 3 and 5). The concealed bases and part of the webs of the greater coverts and the two largest rows of median coverts are diffusely greyer. When the wing is fully stretched or the coverts disturbed, for example by the wind, the bases are more visible and in some lights can show as pale areas, even as a ragged mid- wing band (Figs. 5 and 7). This effect, of a pale under- wing panel, is illusory but can be brighter (and more apparent) when there is strong light reflection off the water or in captured birds, when the underwing-coverts are disturbed and camera flash heightens the falsity. Adults may show this pale band more extensively, though this might be due to individual variation and the number of feather bases and webs visible at the time. Contra Onley & Scofield (2007) we have not seen any birds in the field, or hand, showing a 'silvery sheen to flight feathers and outer wing-coverts' nor any 'pale lustre to the underwing' though this 'silvering' appearance can be common on many gad- fly petrels, especially those in fresh plumage seen in bright light. The tail is concolorous with the uppertail-coverts and rump, or perhaps subtly darker, and shows no pattern. Bare parts. — Based on our observations and photographs both at sea and in the hand, the bill and irides are blackish and the tarsi mostly pinkish flesh with a variable pale bluish tinge (= bluish-pink). Dor sally, the feet are mostly dark brownish black, from the outer side of the tarsus near the foot and over the whole outer toe. On the middle toe, the black col- oration covers c.50% but on the inner toe just the tip. The base of the webs is pink, and the colour of the inner toe and basal half of the middle toe a purer blue, which coloration is clearly visible in images of birds with the folded feet exposed (Fig. 3). Ageing and moult. — Examination of the moult of six grounded Fiji Petrels (1984-2009: see Appendix 1), and the four birds photographed at sea suggest the following, juvenile — Of the ten birds, only 'grounded bird 6' can be certainly aged as a recently fledged juvenile. Like other petrels, at this stage the plumage is fresh and evenly feathered with no signs of Hadoram Sliirihai et al. 138 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Figure 3. Fiji Petrel Pseiidobiilwcria nhics^illivim/i, off Gau, Fiji, 13 May 2009. Bird 2 showing ventral side while arcing. Note typical Pscudobukvcria structure; relatively large bill, proportionately long wings and slim elongated rear end. In natural light the entire underparts, fore and inner underwing-coverts and axillaries are dark brown whilst the remiges are fractionally paler / greyer, with no apparent pattern below (Hadoram Shirihai) Hadoram Shirihai et al. 139 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Figure 4. Fiji Petrel Pseiidobuhveria macgillivrayi, off Gau, Fiji, 13 May 2009. Another photograph of bird 2 while gliding, showing dorsal coloration to be generally concolorous and lacking any pattern (Hadoram Shirihai) Figure 5. Fiji Petrel Pseiidobuhveria macgillivrayi, off Gau, Fiji, 13 May 2009. Another photograph of bird 2 during its slow flight investigating the 'chum slick'. The slim elongated body with tapering rear end, and particularly long slim wings, are evident. The underwing is virtually uniform, lacking any distinct pale elements, and the underparts show a very slight rusty hue with some paler feathering giving a subtle effect of diffuse barring (Hadoram Shirihai) Figure 6. Fiji Petrel Pseudobuliveria macgillivrayi, off Gau, Fiji, 13 May 2009. Bird 2 in profile; gentle wing flapping during a shallow glide. Note the sharp forehead, relatively large bulbous bill, and slim, very pointed rear body and tail. The outermost two secondaries are new, appearing darker, suggesting it is at least second- year or older, and possibly adult (Hadoram Shirihai) Figure 7. Fiji Petrel Pseudobuliveria macgillivrayi, off Gau, Fiji, 17 May 2009. Bird 6 flying low over the water, showing how in sunny conditions the plumage appears richer brown. The wing-coverts can appear misleadingly pale, even creating an underwing panel, which is an illusory effect due to light reflecting off the water surface (see text). Further images of the same bird show it lacking the pale panel effect (Hadoram Shirihai) Figure 8. Tahiti Petrel Pseudobuliveria rostrata (front) with Fiji Petrel P. macgillivrayi, off Gau, Fiji, 13 May 2009. Bird 2 in the background, behind the much larger and heavier Tahiti Petrel. Despite being much smaller, note Fiji Petrel's distinctive silhouette with slim body, elongated thinly pointed rear section, and very long narrow wings Qorg Kretzschmar) Hadoram Shirihai et al. 140 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) wear, abrasion or earlier generation feathers. Immature and adult — The other nine (five grounded and four at sea) belong to these age classes. All show, to varying degrees, mixed- generation feathers, although in most many of the remiges and rectrices are of the same generation. Four birds ('grounded birds' 1 and 5, and birds 1 and 6) have 2-3 newer (fresh- er / darker) outer secondaries, and one has a single fresher inner primary. If no moult occurs in the first year (like most petrels) we can affirm that most of these birds are second- year or older. We suspect that adults will undertake a complete post-breeding moult with limited or no feather retention. However, because we know virtually nothing about the biol- ogy of Fiji Petrel, to confirm moult sequence and changes in moult pattern through age, two options exist. Either these are non-breeding immatures (second-year or older) or breeding adults that appear to have completely moulted during the post-breeding (or a non- breeding) season, with recent additional or delayed and restricted partial (suspended?) moult just prior to the next breeding season. The only bird in active moult of the remiges is 'grounded bird' 4, which had some unmoulted flight-feathers and coverts of weaker and softer texture (probably juvenile-retained); it was probably undertaking its first complete moult. Without handling the bird (and further knowledge of the species' moult and ageing) its age is best considered uncertain. Field identification This depends on an ability to critically judge true size, colour and structure, whilst tak- ing into account the effects of light and other conditions, and the observers' experience with other species. Fiji waters attract an assortment of dark species of petrels and shearwaters (see Appendix 3). Those that could be confused with Fiji Petrel, even by the most experi- enced observer, are discussed below. Suspected Fiji Petrels away from Fiji waters will be difficult to prove unless well photographed and their size evaluated through direct compar- ison with nearby petrels. Potential confusion with seahirds common in Fiji waters. — Several locally breeding seabirds are dark or chiefly dark. Tahiti Petrel — Given reasonable views is unmistakable, and its much larger size and white belly easily identify the species from Fiji Petrel. However, Tahiti shares several structural and flight characteristics with Fiji Petrel, and when size and colour are difficult to judge, this species should be considered. At first glance, a Tahiti sometimes looks small and darker overall and the white belly can be invis- ible, due to the combination of bright sunlight and distant views. Collared Petrel (dark morph) — Again, unlikely to be confused with Fiji Petrel, unless seen briefly or distantly. The white forehead and throat, and mostly white underwing with narrow dark diagonal bar, eliminate Fiji Petrel. Frequently, we had extremely dark examples of Collared approach the boat in low flight and side view, thereby revealing neither the underwing nor the rounder, shorter wings, and appearing initially like an all-dark small petrel. Brown Noddy Anous stolidus and Black Noddy — Despite being terns, these mostly brown to dull black seabirds are also slim and long- winged. Often they perform short, petrel-like, glides, but their typical shape and almost constant flapping flight should be swiftly apparent. At clos- er ranges, the thin tern-like bill and whitish cap are evident. Bulwer's and Jotianin's Petrels. — Any claim of Fiji Petrel needs to be critically separat- ed from the two Bulweria petrels, Bulweria bidwerii and B. fallax. Both these graceful flyers have long slim wings and distinctly elongated rear bodies, as well as all-dark plumage. Bulwer's is widespread in tropical oceans, but seems rare off Fiji and in nearby waters, whilst Jouanin's occurs mostly in the western Indian Ocean, though vagrants have been reported off Western Australia three times (www.users.bigpond.net.au/palliser/ Hadoram Shirihai et al. 141 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) bare/ case349.html; www.users.bigpond.net.au/ palliser/barc/ case363.html; www.users.bigpond.net.au/palliser/barc/SUMM458.html) and twice in Hawaii (Seto et al. 1996). These Bulweria often possess a diagnostic pale panel on the greater upperwing- coverts, but this is highly variable and can alter with angle and light, as well as feather wear. Our observations (HS and TP) show that many Bulweria can possess a reduced pale panel, indeed so reduced on some to appear lacking! Identification must rely on correct evaluation of size and shape: compared to Fiji, Bulwer's is smaller with shorter wings (total length c.27 cm, wingspan c.70.5 cm) but the larger Jouanin's is closer in size to Fiji (total length c.31 cm, wingspan c.79 cm). Experienced observers should differentiate Fiji Petrel and the two Bulweria by their characteristic flights. Fiji Petrel, a Pseudobulweria with proportionately longer wings held stiffly, has a less erratic flight, whereas Bulweria fly low to the water, zigzag, change height and alter direction rapidly with short glides and arcs. In close views, Bulweria have rather smaller, squarer shaped, storm petrel-like heads, with a high forehead and a bill clearly narrower than in Fiji Petrel. We should emphasise that correct evaluation of bill structure at sea requires prolonged and close observation, but can be assessed up to 100 m away, even further in especially favourable conditions. Also, when Bulweria are seen in profile, with the tail fully folded, the projection of the rear body and the tail, beyond the wings' trailing edge, is almost (up to) double that of the fore body to the bill tip, forward of the leading edge (in photographs, 50-90% longer). In Fiji Petrel the rear section is only c.30% longer. However, these proportions should be used cautiously: for example, the tail of Bulweria can appear misleadingly shorter due to wear, and the profile of a flying bird may alter with its flight mode. Furthermore, in Bulweria the rear body and tail taper less abrupt- ly than in Fiji, and the bodies of both, especially Jouanin's, appear slimmer and flatter bellied, resulting in a straighter profile. Christmas (Kiritimati) Shearwater. — Tropical Pacific Puffinus nativitatis is probably rare in Fijian waters (see Appendix 3), but as likely to be encountered as Fiji Petrel. During extensive observations, HS found that this species is the most likely to be confused with Fiji Petrel. It is almost uniform dark brown, with a similarly indistinct colour and pattern, e.g. a slight rusty tinge to the body that Fiji Petrel also possesses. It has a similar wingspan (c.75 cm) and, despite being short-tailed, also has a tapering rear body, with the folded tail nar- rowing to a point, which profile resembles Fiji Petrel. Contra most literature, this shearwater sometimes flies languidly with slow and easy flaps, and shallow glides, on slim and supple wings. It is essential to check bill structure and confirm if this is thin and typical of a shear- water, or thick, bulbous and petrel-like, although this might not always be easy. Christmas Shearwater has an angular head profile, like many Puffinus, and tends to show pale upperwing-covert fringes, as well as having feet that project slightly beyond the tail. When this shearwater is seen well, Fiji Petrel is easily dismissed. Mascarene Petrel. — All-dark Pseudobulweria aterrima may be the closest relative of Fiji Petrel and is the second-largest Pseudobulweria (total length c.36 cm, wingspan c.88 cm). It is known only from Reunion in the western Indian Ocean and, because it is very rare, the pos- sibility of it reaching Fiji waters is unlikely. However, the possibility of vagrancy of Fiji and Mascarene Petrels to the south-west Pacific and south-east Indian Oceans (e.g. off southern or south-east Australia) cannot be excluded. Only one of us (HS) has seen Mascarene, both as specimens and at sea, though all of us have examined photographs of grounded birds from Reunion. On present, admittedly very limited, experience, we believe that they are vir- tually identical in structure and plumage, but they differ markedly in size. Claimed records of either species away from their breeding islands must pass a very stringent size evaluation. Hadoram Shirihai et al. 142 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Taxonomy The genus Pseudobulweria was initially erected for Fiji Petrel by Mathews (1936). The species' genetic relationships are currently unknown, although macgillivrayi is currently being sequenced together with aterrima, rostrata and becki (Bretagnolle et al. in prep, b), which will classify for the first time all four Pseudobulweria. Bretagnolle et al. (1998) con- firmed the validity of Pseudobidweria, showing it to be sister to Puffimis and Calonectris, which genera in turn are most closely related to Buliueria and Procellaria. Our observations confirm that structurally and behaviourally Fiji Petrel is correctly placed in Pseudobulweria, and that it shares many features with the much larger rostrata. Measurements of the four Fiji Petrel specimens appear in Table 1. To compare these with other taxa in Pseudobulweria refer to Villard et al. (2006) for rostrata, Attie et al. (1997) for aterrima, and Shirihai (2008a) for becki. Acknowledgements We thank the Takalai Gau (Paramount Chief of Gau) Ratu Marika Lewanavanua for his ongoing support and encouragement of the project. Our hosts at Nukuloa village welcomed us warmly; we are grateful to Nukuloa District School Committee, the school manager Metuisela Raitaukala, and headmaster Sosiceni Cavumaivalu for their assistance and hospitality. The staff of NatureFiji-MareqetiViti was responsible for the considerable organisation that enabled the expedition to proceed. Gratitude is due to Kelera Macedru, Amanda Rogers and Lice Tiqe, who arranged our logistics on Gau, and to Reena Fiu, Nunia Thomas and Lai Waqanisau for their administration from Suva. Preparation of the 'chum' was a major undertaking. Fiji Fish Ltd supplied the selected bycatch and generously provided freezer facilities, but the least-appealing work was performed by staff and volunteers of NatureFiji-MareqetiViti; Kelera Macedru, Lai Waqanisau, Alisi Moce, Lice Tiqe, Elia Mataitoga and Inoke Waqanivere. Doug Cammick and Paula Tikoisuva, the skipper and mate of HiFlyer, were an integral part of our team and demonstrated much enthusiasm for our mission. The skipper and crew of the Turagalevu, our supply ship, transferred all the equipment and supplies to Nukuloa in first-class condition. Neville Koop (www.nadraki.com) furnished the weather forecasts. David Priddel and Nicholas Carlile, Dept. of Environment & Climate Change (NSW), commented on a draft of this paper and their prior assistance is largely responsible for the retrieval of the 2009 specimen and data from grounded birds. HS is indebted to Bill Bourne and Mike Imber for earlier discussions on the rarest petrels, and Vincent Bretagnolle for his moral support and interesting ideas. All three commented on the poorly known moult and ageing of petrels, in particular Pseudobulweria. Mark Adams and Katrina Cook of The Natural History Museum (Tring, UK) assisted HS during his work with the holotype, and staff at the Fiji Museum (Suva) provided access to the 1985 specimen. Edward Soldaat answered our questions concerning petrel osteology. The expedition was partially financed by a grant from the BirdLife Internatiofial Preventing Extinctions Programme and its official sponsor the British Birdwatching Fair, with additional funding from HS, TP, JK, DW and Maria San Roman. Maria, who as part of the at-sea team undertook petrel coimts and produced the daily log, perhaps influenced our good fortune, as she also participated in the rediscover}* of Beck's Petrel in 2003! Additional team members in 2008 were Geoff Jones, Dick Newell and Patric Blomquist. The expedition formed part of NatureFiji's wider Fiji Petrel Project sponsored bv the Disnev Conser^^ation Trust Fund, the BirdLife International Community Conservation Fund (managed by the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand), and the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. Finally, HS and TP dedicate this work to Robert Cushman Murphy, who inspired in us a passion to search for this rarest of petrels. References: Attie, C, Stahl, J.-C. & Bretagnolle, V. 1997. New data on the endangered Mascarene Petrel Pseudobulweria aterrima: a third twentieth century specimen and distribution. Colonial Waterbirds 20: 406-412. Bourne, W. R. P. 1965. The missing petrels. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 85: 97-105. Bourne, W. R. P. 1967. Observations of seabirds and review of literature. Sea Swallow 19: 51-76. Bourne, W. R. P. 1981. Notes on some museum specimens of petrels from Fiji. Sea Swallow 30: 37-38. Bourne, W. R. P. 2007. The visit by John MacGillivray to the Kermadec Islands in 1854 and the discover)- and description of the Kermadec Petrel Pterodroma neglecta. Notoniis 54: 229-230. Bourne, W. R. P. & Dixon, T. J. 1971. Observations of sea birds 1967-1969. Sea Swallow 22: 29-60. Bretagnolle, V., Attie, C. & Pasquet, E. 1998. Cytochrome-/^ evidence for validit\' and ph\ logenetic relation- ships of Pseudobulweria and Bulweria (Procellariidae). Auk 115: 188-195. Bretagnolle, V., Zino, F., Gangloff, B., Gonzalez-Solfs, J. & Shirihai, H. In prep. a. Taxonomy, variation and conservation of the complex of gadfly petrels (Pterodroma feae, madeira, deserta) from the north-east Atlantic. Hadoram Shirihai et al. 143 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Bretagnolle, V., Gangloff, B. & Shirihai, H. In prep. b. A new study of evolution and systematics of the genus Pseudobidzueria. Bretagnolle, V., Gangloff, B. & Shirihai, H. In prep. c. Evolution, taxonomy and identification of the various populations of the P. brevipes-leucoptera complex. Brooke, M. 2004. Albatrosses and petrels across the world. Oxford Univ. Press. Finsch, O. 1877. On a new species of petrel from the Feejee Islands. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1877: 722. Gray, G. R. 1860. Catalogue of the birds of the tropical islands of the Pacific Ocean, in the collection of the British Museum. Taylor & Francis, London Howell, S. N. G. 2007. Western Pacific Odyssey 2007 cruise narrative. \\^\-iv.wingsbirds.com/ tours /narrative/ 170. Imber, M. J. 1985. Origins, phylogeny and taxonomy of the gadfly petrels Pterodroma spp. Ibis 111: 197-229. Imber, M. 1986. The plight of the Fiji Petrel Pseudobidzueria macgillivrayi: a report of a visit to Gau Island in 1985. Australasian Seabird Nezvsletter 24: 8-12. lUCN. 2009. lUCN Red List of threatened species, version 2009.1. www.iucnredlist.org. Marchant, S. & Higgins, P. J. (eds.) 1990. Handbook of Australian, Nezv Zealand and Antarctic birds, vol. 1. Oxford Univ. Press. Mathews, G. M. 1936. A note on the Black Fiji Petrel. Ibis 6: 309. Murphy, R. C. 1930. Birds collected during the Whitney South Sea Expedition. Ajner. Mus. Novit. 419. Murphy, R. C. & Mowbray, L. S. 1951. New light on the Cahow, Pterodroma cahozv. Auk 68: 266-280. Murphy, R. C. & Pennoyer, J. M. 1952. Larger petrels of the genus Pterodroma. Whitney South Sea Expedition of the American Museum of Natural History (1920-1941). Amer. Mus. Novit. 1580. NFMV. 2009a. NatureFiji-MareqetiViti. Current projects, wwn-v.naturefiji.org/cprojects.php. NFMV. 2009b. NatureFiji-MareqetiViti. Current projects. www.naturefiji.org/newsstory.php?id=49. Onley, D. & Scofield, P. 2007. Field guide to the albatrosses, petrels and shearzvaters of the zvorld. Christopher Helm, London. Plant, A. R., Moce, K., Vererusa, K. & Watling, D. 1989. A Tahiti Petrel Pseudobulzveria rostrata from Gau Island, Fiji. Notornis 36: 149-150. Priddel, D., Carlile, N. & Watling, D. 2003. Recovery plan for the Critically Endangered Fiji Petrel Pseudobulzveria macgillivrayi. Hurstvalle: NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service. Priddel, D., Carlile, N., Moce, K. & Watling, D. 2008. A review of records and recovery actions for the Critically Endangered Fiji Petrel Pseudobulzveria macgillivrayi. Bird Conserv. Intern. 18: 381-393. Seto, N. W. H., Warham, J., Lisowski, N. L. & Tanino, L. 1996. Jouanin's Petrel Bidiveria fallax obserA^ed on Sand Island, Midway Atoll Colonial Waterbirds 19: 132-134. Shirihai, H. 2008a. Rediscovery of Beck's Petrel Pseudobidzueria becki, and other obser\'ations of tubenoses from the Bismarck archipelago, Papua New Guinea. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 128: 3-16. Shirihai, H. 2008b. An April expedition to Madeira and the challenge of Zino's Petrel at sea. Birding World 21: 282-288. Shirihai, H. 2009. The Zino's Petrel at sea expedition II — and the best pelagic birding in the Western Palearctic. Birding World 22: 204-218. Shirihai, H. & BretagnoUe, V. In prep. Albatrosses, petrels and shearzvaters of the zuorld: a handbook to their taxon- omy, identification, ecology and conservation. Christopher Helm, London. Watling, D. 1985. Notes on the birds of Gau Island, Fiji. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 105: 96-102. Watling, D. 1986a. Notes on the Collared Petrel Pterodroma (leucoptera) brevipes. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 106: 63-70. Watling, D. 1986b. Rediscovery of a petrel and new fauna records on Gau Island. Oryx 20: 31-34. Watling, D. 1986c. Ratu Filipe and MacGillivray's Petrel. Jounmj 8(4): 74-83. Watling, D. & Lewanavanua, R. F. 1985. A note to record the continuing sur\'ival of the Fiji (MacGillivrav's) Petrel Pseudobulzveria macgillivrayi. Ibis 127: 230-233. Villard, P., Dano, S. & BretagnoUe, V. 2006. First data on the breeding biology of the Tahiti Petrel Pseudobulzveria rostrata. Ibis 148: 285-291. Zino, F., Brown, R. & Biscoito, M. 2008. The separation of Pterodroma madeira (Zino's Petrel) from Pterodroma feae (Fea's Petrel). Ibis 150: 326-333. Addresses: Hadoram Shirihai, c/o AusserdorfstraCe 6, 8052 Zurich, Switzerland, e-mail: albatross_shirihai@hotmail.com. Tony Pym, Southcott, Pewsey, Wiltshire SN9 5JF, UK, e-mail: tony_pym@hotmail.com. Jorg Kretzschmar, Heinrich-Konig Strafie 25, D-44797 Bochum, Germany, e- mail: info@oiko-m.net. Kolinio Moce, Amania Taukei & Dick Watling, NatureFiji-MareqetiViti, Box 2041 Government Buildings, Suva, Fiji, e-mail: watling@naturefiji.org APPENDIX 1: Previous records of grounded Fiji Petrels Priddel et al. (2008) detailed past records of Fiji Petrel. We add new information from recent examination of all museum specimens and photographs of collected or grounded birds. New data, especially concerning Hadoram Shirihai et al. 144 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) moult and ageing, add to deliberations on the breeding season. Previous records of grounded birds were important in planning our work (see Methodology). Holotype. — The medical doctor aboard HMS Herald, Dr F. M. Rayner, obtained the holotype, which is held in The Natural History Museum (Tring), during a visit to Gau in October 1855. Bourne (1965, 1981) and Imber (1985) reported that it was a recently fledged juvenile, with flight-feathers not fully developed and non-fused pre-frontal skull morphology, which interpretation was accepted by Priddel et al. (2003, 2008). M. J. Imber {in litt. 2009) also referred to his notes, wherein he had recorded that the specimen had some down feathers, but these now seem to be lacking (perhaps lost during subsequent handling). However, recent examination by HS revealed that the bird appears to lack fresh plumage, with very worn and bleached greater upperwing- coverts. Lack of any moult contrast (i.e. different feather generations) often does indicate a juvenile petrel, and both W. R. P. Bourne {in litt. 2009) and M. J. Imber {in litt. 2009) thought that wear on the coverts could be explained by nesting burrow abrasion and / or poor handling. However, unlike the strong wear of this particular specimen, the most recently grounded fledgling (January 2009) has typically very fresh plumage, including all wing-coverts. The extent of wear in the type is similar to another HS examined, an adult (or at least second-year) from April 2007 (see below). These uncertainties and current lack of knowledge of moult and ageing of the species, and Pseudobidzoeria as a whole, hinder the theory that the holotype is vmquestionably a fledgling. If it is a juvenile, then the relatively small size could be explained by it being a male. Conversely, if it is not a juvenile, questions arise as to why an adult male is the smallest of the four available specimens. We are unsure if the fact that p9>pl0 in the holotype can be attributed to the flight- feathers being not yet fully developed, as the fledgling (2009) had plO longest like the adult / immature (2007). Interestingly, the four birds photographed at sea had wing formulae like the type (p9>pl0). The simplest explanation to the above discrepancies is that the specimen is a fledgling, as both Bourne and Imber concluded, but with exceptionally abraded coverts. We recommend that the type specimen be checked again and be compared genetically with recent specimens, to remove lingering doubts. See Table 1. Grounded birds on Gaii. — 1965: A Fiji Petrel landed in Nukuloa village, and was examined by KM and B. Palmer, the head of the Fiji Museum at the time, but unfortunately no specific date is known, and no photographs or measurements were taken. Priddel et al. (2008) regarded this record as acceptable. 1984: DW had the extraordinary experience of a bird crash-landing into him while spotlighting on 30 April (Watling & Lewanavanua 1985). In our view this record ('grounded bird' 1) marks the rediscovery, after c.130 years, as it was confirmed with photographs and measurements. To the islanders of Gau Fiji Petrel was never a 'lost bird' and Ratu Filipe Lewanavanua, paramount chief of Gau, had much influence, including spiritual, in the belief that the petrel awaited rediscovery (Watling 1986c). Photographs reveal it was probably an adult (or immature, second-year or older): the left wing has two newer and distinctly darker outer secondaries and there appears to be mixed feather generations in the upperwing-coverts and upperparts. The plumage is moderately worn on the greater coverts and primary tips and, if a breeding adult, suggests the bird was caught early in the breeding season. 1985: In April or May, a Fiji Petrel was reported in Nukuloa village but there are no further details. A second bird ('grounded bird' 2) flew into lights at Nukuloa on 3 July 1985 and died a week later. It was deposited in the Fiji Museum by DW, and preserved in formalin. In July 2008, this specimen was re-examined by HS but it was difficult to inspect moult and to age the bird, though overall the plumage, including the primaries, appeared rather fresh with no apparent moult limits or gaps in wing or tail. According to Priddel et al. (2008), W. Boles, Curator of the Ornithology Section at the Australian Museum, aged it as young adult female that had not bred yet (the oviduct was thin and straight, and the ovary, 5x3 mm, smooth). Thus, it could have been a non-breeding adult or immature, perhaps making an early exploration of the island. 1987-2001: Priddel et al. (2008) listed six petrels crash-landing onto roofs in Nukuloa and Nawaikama villages, but none is documented photographically and no measurements were taken. These include four that Priddel et al. (2008) regarded as confirmed (examined by KM): two in 1987 (30 Julv and 11 October); one in 1989 (18 December); and one in 1990 (no date). Two later ones, considered doubtful, involved singles in 1990 (no date) and December 2000. Only three, those in 1987 and 1989, were released safely back to the wild. 2002: On 29 December, a Fiji Petrel landed on a roof at Nukuloa village. It was photographed ('grounded bird' 3), unfortunately died and was not retained. Image quality is too poor to permit moult assessment and ageing, but HS considers it to be possibly an adult (or an immature, at least second-year), based on contrasting feathers in the wing and bodv, suggesting different generations, apparently noticeably worn greater wing-coverts, and what appears to be highly bleached outer primary tips. Also in December a bird was reported to have landed at Lamiti, the only record from eastern Gau. It apparently died and was not retained. Priddel et al. (2008) reviewed this incident with scepticism. Hadoram Shirihai et al. 145 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) 2003: There are unconfirmed reports that possible Fiji Petrels grounded in June, one in Lovu and the other at Nacavanadi. Neither village has had grounded birds in the past, or since, and details are lacking. Priddel et al. (2008) were sceptical of both records. 2005: On 4 May two were seen in Sawaieke village. One flew off the same evening and the other, captured by local children and of which several photographs exist, was released next day ('grounded bird' 4). It is the only record of two together. Examination by HS of the photographs show that the bird was in progressive moult, missing three inner primaries on both wings and had a growing primary visible on the right wing. Separate feather generations were noted on the body, upperwing-coverts and tail. The older unmoulted feathers appear weak, and of softer texture, and could be juvenile-retained. The bird may have been adult (Priddel et al. 2008), but it is unlikely that it was a breeder given moult stage. It may have been a non-breeding immature whose moult would be earlier than breeders. Conceivably, both birds were inexperienced, returning perhaps for the first time, and having limited familiarity of the island were more likely to become disoriented by village lights. 2007: On 12 April, a bird landed in Levuka village. This individual was kept in captivity but died on 19 April ('grounded bird' 5). In August 2007, while processing the specimen, W. Boles (in Priddel et al. 2008) concluded it was an adult female that had not yet bred. Examination by HS revealed the following: all remiges appear to be single generation and are slightly to moderately worn, but the longest primary tips are very worn (probably due to poor handling). Greater secondary-coverts and some tertials are considerably worn. Among the tertials and scapulars there are single new feathers and on the left wing one secondary is new; these are much blacker and clearly distinct from older feathers. The greater secondary-coverts are heavily worn and bleached, and conceal the fresh greater primary-coverts. Thus again, it was possibly a non- breeding adult or immature (second year or older) that had moulted completely with recent additional, delayed and restricted partial (suspended?) moult, just prior to the next breeding season. 2009: One in Levuka village on 19 January 2009 died shortly afterwards ('grounded bird' 6) and was transferred to DW in Suva. Partially frozen, it was examined by HS. The examination revealed all remiges and rectrices to be very fresh and of the same generation, but with very minor wear, and the greater-coverts had a paler brownish tinge, perhaps due to some wear as a nestling. It had a few downy feathers on the crown and neck-sides, so clearly was a recently fledged juvenile. APPENDIX 2: Past records and efforts to see Fiji Petrel at sea Past claims at sea. — Priddel et al. (2008) re-examined claimed records (all post-1960) and concluded that none is substantiated. These included four observations of small dark petrels that could have been Fiji Petrels (8 November, 31 December 1964, and 1 January, 23 May 1965; summarised in Bourne 1965), but might have been Bulwer's Petrel. Also included was an unconfirmed record, from 12 June 1986, by DW of a bird near the reef off north-west Gau. Onley & Scofield (2007) noted Fiji Petrel 'at sea near Gau and from 200 km north of Gau but believed to disperse to pelagic waters far from the island'. We cannot confirm or deny this statement and we are uncertain if the same source made the comment 'pale lustre to the underwing' in their description (see Plumage). We agree with Priddel et al. (2008) that there were no genuine records of Fiji Petrel at sea, prior to ours in May 2009. Recent records of Fiji-like Petrels elsewhere. — Shirihai (2008a) described three dark petrels observed in the Bismarck archipelago, Papua New Guinea, which were noted as 'Fiji-like Petrels'; one in August 2003, one in July 2007 and another in August 2007. All three had a Pseudobuhveria-like structure, resembling Beck's Petrel in shape, but two seemed slightly smaller overall, despite appearing more robust, larger headed and particularly heavier billed. Plumage was predominantly dark brown, slightly darker on the head / face, and they had fractionally paler fringes to the upperwing-coverts, though these did not create a carpal bar. Underwing was almost uniformly dark, perhaps with a paler / greyer tone, though this was partially attributed to the effect of strong sunlight. Until now, there were no photographs or even a basic description of Fiji Petrel's appearance and behaviour at sea for comparison. Shirihai (2008a) cautiously regarded these sightings as uncertain; they could even represent an undescribed Psendolmhveria. Following the 2009 expedition HS can confirm that on shape and flight behaviour, especially jizz, the Bismarck birds were not the same, and prefers to retain them as 'unidentified dark Pseudobulweria petrels'. Howell (2007) saw an unidentified dark petrel, suspected by him to be Fiji Petrel, in the same general area in April 2007. On the Western Pacific Odyssey cruise, April 2008, another all-dark petrel was logged, but we cannot validate either sighting without further details from Howell and the other observers aboard. Hadoram SMriliai et al. 14b Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Prcviotts attempts to find Fiji Petrel at sea. — Aside from the efforts to locate Fiji Petrels ashore on Gau l^Watlmg iSc Le^\•anavanua 1985, Priddel et al. 2008), three earlier attempts targeted Fiji Petrel at sea. DW chartered a vdcht and searched Gau waters imsuccessfully for a week in 1986. HS arrived in Fiji on 17 July 2003 for three \s'eeks, to search the archipelago, especially aroimd Gau. The Tiiragalevii was chartered and the 'chimi' loaded, but the ^\•eather was unusually rough, with frequent rain and storms, and the expedition could onlv operate on a fe^v days. In July 2008, HS, TP, JK and DW (with others from the UK, Australia and S^veden) made a third attempt to locate Fiji Petrel at sea, this time using the Summer Spirit with two tonnes of 'chmn' aboard. This joumev was aborted after just three days due to mechanical problems with the boat. T'wo 'clumiming' sessions did produce six Kermadec Petrels and two PohTiesian Storm Petrels Nesofregetta tuligiuosa. Twice, some of the team saw a 'Cookilaria-sized' dark petrel. The first 'chumming', south-west of Gau, recorded a steady stream of petrels, mostly Tahiti and Collared Petrels, moving in the direction of breeding islands further north in the archipelago (Fig. 1). Following the boat's technical problems, the team tle\\' to Ta\"euni to tr\' for seabirds there and, whilst aboard the HiFh/er, recorded White-bellied Storm Petrel Fregetta grallaria and at dusk a gatheriag of Tahiti Petrels in the Somosomo Strait, waiting to return to their burro\\'S ashore. APPENDIX 3: Other tubenoses recorded in July 2008 and May 2009 A passage of petrels ^vas noted, apparently from feeding grounds south of Fiji (Fig. 1). The vast majority were Tahiti and Collared Petrels but other less common species were involved. Since this passage occurs mostly after 14.00 h, during late afternoon and e\-ening especially, Ave assimie it in\-oh-es mostly birds breeding on nearby islands: on Gau (Collared Petrels) and islands further north (Tahiti and Collared Petrels). In the context of finding Fiji Petrels at sea, we sa^v great ad\'antage in that this 'rush hour' occurred near Gau (see Methodology^). We collected data on the timing and nimiber of these birds, as well as weather patterns, for a future publication whereiLi we Avill discuss the relationship of Aveather to these movements. For now, we note that this passage is changeable and can drift further east of Gau. Highest nimibers of individuals and diversity of species occiur in south-east winds and extensi\'e cloud co\'er, but in simnv conditions and winds from the north or w^est we foimd the sea lacking in tiibenoses. This area might pro\'e to be a 'hotspot' for seabirds, and further work should increase our knoAvTedge of some of these species. Table 2 provides daily (conser\'ative) estimates for each species and maximimi coimts in 2009, mostly during 'chLmnming' (see Methods), with notes on each species included below; current status in Fijian waters comes from the records of DW. Murphy's Petrel Pterodroma ultima One photographed on 16 May 2009. There are no knowm records from Fiji and the literature (e.g. Murphy 1930, Murphy & IvIoAvbray 1951, Murphy & Pennoyer 1952, Bourne 1965, Bourne & DLxon 1971, Marchant & Higgins 1990) suggests this record is also the first for the Western Pacific. This is an extraordinary record of vagrancy bv a species that breeds no closer than the western Tuamotu archipelago (HS pers. obs.), 2,000 km east of Fiji, and usually migrates north and east of the breeding islands. The typical under\ving pattern, duskier hood, scaly upperparts with bluish-grey tinge, and Avell-developed dark upperwing 'M', make this record undeniable. The photograph was compared with HS's photo collection of ultima (>300 birds) from Henderson and Oeno islands. Kermadec Petrel P. iieglccta Birds varied from very pale to all dark. It breeds as close as the islands of Kermadec, Lord Howe and Tonga, but is a \'agrant to mainland New Zealand and eastern Australia. We obsen-ed it in 2005, 2008 and 2009 and believe it to be regular iti Fiji waters, and that it may breed. Characteristic feeding behaviour, chasing other petrels in the manner of skuas, was obser\'ed. The dark morph is easily separated from Fiji Petrel bv its distinctly larger size, broacier \\'ing and shorter and roimder tail. E\'en the darkest examples show white primary bases (lacking in Fiji Petrel). Phoenix Petrel P. alba One on 21 May 2009 apparenth" is the tirst contirmed record for Fiji Avaters. Obser\-ers ma\- be confused with respect to wiriation Avithin the Herald Petrel P. heraldica complex, and the species seems alwa\ s to be compared directh" with Tahiti Petrel. This is misleading, though frequently repeated even in recent literature, e.g. Onle\- & Scotield (2007). A full re\-ieAv of the identification and variation of the iicglccta-Jicraldica-alba complex will be given in Shlrihai & Bretagnolle (in prep.). Mottled Petrel P. uhwycctata This long-distance migrant moves from breeding grounds in NeAV Zealand to the North Pacitic, but has seldom been recorded in Fiji waters. It Avas seen (and photographed) almost daily in 2009. White-necked Petrel P. ccrricali^ One briefh inspected the chum' on IS July 2008. The bird might have been a X'anuatu Petrel P. occulta, although it \vas seen alongside several other species and appeared too large. Hadoram Shirihai et al. 147 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) TABLE 2 Daily counts of Procellariidae in 2009. Numbers in parenthesis refer to maximum numbers of birds seen together, at 'chum'. Details of individual count sessions with species / numbers are available from the authors. Note: 12 May data refer to observations en route between Suva, Viti Levu, to Gau Island. Murphy's Petrel Pterodroma ultima 12 May 13 May 14 May 15 May 16 May 17 May 18 May 19 May 20 May 21 May 22 May 1 Kermadec Petrel P. negleda Phoenix Petrel P. alba Mottled Petrel P. inexpedata Black-winged Petrel P. nigripennis Gould's Petrel P. kucoptera CoUared Petrel P. brevipes Tahiti Petrel Pseiidobulweria rostrata Fiji Petrel P. macgillivrayi Parkinson's (Black) Petrel Procellaria parkinsoni Christmas Shearwater Pujfinus nativitatis 1 Wedge-tailed Shearwater P. padficus BuUer's Shearwater P. bidleri Sooty Shearwater P. griseus Flesh-footed Shearwater P. carneipes Wilson's Storm Petrel Oceanites oceanicus White-faced Storm Petrel Pelagodroma marina Black-beUied Storm Petrel Fregetta tropica Polynesian Storm Petrel Nesofregetta fuliginosa Matsudaira's Storm Petrel Oceanodroma matsudairae 14 1 2 2 1 >2 1 3 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 6 >5 6 1 3 12 2 >80(13) >40(12) >40(5) >60(12) >80(8) >40(6) >5 >10(3) >15(4) >100(13) 1 >100(11) >50(8) >70(12) >100(14)>70(14) >50(12) >10 >15(4) >35(4) >100(17) 15+/- 1 1 2+/- 3(2) Vanuatu Petrel has been identified once at sea only, between New Caledonia and Vanuatu, in January 2006 (HS). Both species can be expected in Fiji waters. Black-winged Petrel P. nigripennis Two; one in fresh plumage, the other in heavy moult. The species' status is uncertain in Fiji waters, where it is little known, despite breeding as close as New Caledonia, Tonga and the Kermadec Islands. Gould's Petrel P. kucoptera A few seen, almost daily, amongst the many P. brevipes, with which it was considered conspecific in the past. All were P. I. caledonica. The paucity of records in Fiji waters may be attributable to a lack of knowledge in separating it from pale-phase P. brevipes. The possibility that P. Hadoram Shirihai et al. 148 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) leiicoptera also breeds in Fiji cannot be excluded as, apart from New Caledonia, Cabbage Tree Island (off New South Wales, Australia), and possibly Vanuatu, the species has now been found breeding far to the east, in south-east (French) Polynesia (Bretagnolle et al. in prep. c). Collared Petrel P. brevipes Numbers increased during the late afternoon, suggesting most were breeders from Gau. Notes on plumage variation will be published in Bretagnolle et al. (in prep, c) and Shirihai & Bretagnolle (in prep.); 10% were dark-bellied birds (17% noted by Watling 1986a). Tahiti Petrel Pseudobiiliveria rostrata The most frequent petrel. Most are believed to breed in northern Fiji, e.g. on Taveuni. In the area surveyed this large petrel was the most dominant and aggressive at 'chum'. Although recorded ashore on Gau (Plant et al. 1989), breeding has not been recorded and we did not see Tahiti Petrels massing off Gau in the evenings, in either year. If it does breed it could be a potential competitor with Fiji Petrel for burrows. Parkinson's (Black) Petrel Procellaria pmrkinsoni Our observation (Table 2) of this New Zealand endemic breeder is the first for Fiji waters. Christmas (Kiritimati) Shearwater Piiffinus nativitatis A bird seen en route to Gau (12 May 2009) is the second for Fiji waters. Wedge-tailed Shearwater P. pacificus Breeds on many islands in Fiji, including Gau, but relatively few seen (Table 2), all of the dark morph, and we are unaware of pale forms in the region. The inexperienced observer could confuse dark pacificus with Fiji Petrel, but it is a typical shearwater with a long slim bill, and is distinctly larger. Distantly, or at first glance. Wedge-tailed can show a petrel-like silhouette but we never found size problematic to judge. Buller's Shearwater P. buUeri Observed on two days in 2009. Only three previous records in Fiji waters. Sooty Shearwater P. griseus Few seen on most days. Some showed quite dark underwings, had apparently short bills, and their feet projected beyond the tail in flight. We mistook some as Short-tailed Shearwaters P. tenuirostris and these odd birds require future attention. Both shearwaters are regular in Fiji waters. Sooty Shearwater is also readily distinguished from Fiji Petrel by its much larger size, typical shearwater shape and flight, long thin bill and shorter tail. Most show pale panels on the underwings, unlike Fiji Petrel, but confusingly some are virtually all dark. Perhaps, in brief and distant views, or for inexperienced obser\^ers, these could be confused, albeit briefly. Flesh-footed Shearwater P. carneipes Surprisingly, our 21 May 2009 sighting is only the second in Fiji waters; the first was a bird captured off Gau, in February 2009 (NFMV 2009b). Despite its almost uniform body and underwing, the species should be easy to separate by its large size, proportions, and long thin bill with pinkish base. Wilson's Storm Petrel Oceanites oceanicus Observed on four days, always at the 'chum'. White-faced Storm Petrel Pelagodroma marina A single at the 'chum' on 16 May 2009 had the pale, virtually whitish-grey, rump apparently associated with P. (m.) albiclunis, which breeds on the Kermadec Islands, New Zealand and possibly Norfolk Island, Australia. There are two previous records of this species from Fiji waters. White-bellied Storm Petrel Fregetta grallaria We photographed the first for Fiji waters, in July 2008, off Taveuni Island. Black-bellied Storm Petrel F. tropica One at the 'chum' on 16 May 2009, the second confirmed record in Fiji waters. Polynesian Storm Petrel Nesofregetta fuliginosa This attractive storm petrel was first recorded in Fiji from a bird taken on the nest in September 1876 on Kadavu Island (Finsch 1877). There were no further confirmed records until 19 July 2008, when we photographed a bird at the 'chum', with anotlier on 14 Mav 2009. Matsudaira's Storm Petrel Oceanodronia niatsiidairac The first record for Fiji waters of this Japanese breeder (and Indo-Pacific migrant) was on 13 May 2009. The closest region where the species is regular is the Bismarck archipelago, Papua New Guinea. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 J. Cabot & T. de Vries 149 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) A new subspecies of Gurney's Hawk Buteo poecilochrous by J. Cabot & T. de Vries Received 28 July 2008; final revision accepted 27 June 2009 Summary. — A new subspecies of Gurney's Hawk Buteo poecilochrous is recognised for populations of the species from northern Peru and western Bolivia to north- west Argentina and northern Chile. Specimen analysis reveals that they differ in size and plumage from northernmost populations, in south Colombia to south Ecuador. The new subspecies is slightly smaller in body measurements and in definitive plumage has the grey-feathered areas darker and more slate-coloured than the nominate subspecies. Furthermore, pale- and dark-morph females possess a more extensive dorsal patch; the pale morph has white central underparts and finely barred or vermiculated sides, whilst in juveniles, in general, these areas are warm brown with rusty or cinnamon markings. In the nominate form, by contrast, the underparts are usually darker brown with creamy or whitish markings. Buteo poecilochrous is a high- Andean hawk found from southern Colombia to northern Argentina and Chile (Fjeldsa & Krabbe 1990). Gurney (1879) mentioned Yauayacu, in Ecuador, as the type locality. This name cannot be located on any map, but Cabot & de Vries (2005) considered it to be a transcription error of the Quecha name 'Yanayacu', which is a village in Ecuador (01°25'S, 78°39 W). Further evidence to support this proposition can be found in Sclater & Salvin (1880), wherein it is stated that Clarence Buckley, who collected the type specimen, took the greater part of his 10,000 Ecuadorian specimens along 'the upper branches of the Rio Pastaza, and on the spurs lying between this stream and its affluent the Bobonaza, Mr Buckley's headquarters having been during the greater part of the time the village Sarayacu on the latter stream, which must be carefully distinguished from the place of the same name on the Ucayali.' Here, we firstly justify the recognition of B. poecilochrous as a species separate from Variable Hawk B. polyosoma, and then proceed to describe a new subspecies of Gurney's Hawk from the puna and high Andes above 3,000 m, from northern Peru (Marafion Valley and the PorcuUa pass) south to north-west Argentina and northern Chile. The nominate subspecies is restricted to the paramos of southern Colombia to southern Ecuador. The recognition of the new subspecies is based on Mayr (1963) who defined a subspecies as 'an aggregate of local populations of a species inhabiting a geographic subdivision of the range of the species, and differing taxonomically from other populations of the species'. The ver- nacular name Gurney's Hawk Buteo poecilochrous is employed in this paper following Jimenez & Jaksic (1990) and Jaksic et al. (1991), as well as our own proposal (Cabot & de Vries in press). Taxonomic status of B. poecilochrous We take this opportunity to reiterate that B. poecilochrous and B. polyosoma are distinct species in accordance with the Biological Species Concept, as proposed by Cabot & de Vries (2003) but contrary to Farquhar (1998). Furthermore, we clarify the following points. The two species are of different size with different biometrics. There is evident sexual dimor- phism but the wing lengths of the two species do not overlap in either sex, although that of some female B. polyosoma may overlap those of male B. poecilochrous (Cabot & de Vries 2003; J. Cabot & T. de Vries 150 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Fig. 4). The clinal gradient in body size related to altitude proposed by Farquhar (1998) does not exist. Each taxon is morphologically different (Cabot 1991, Cabot & de Vries 2003). No intermediates have been detected. Farquhar (1998) observed that geographical size differ- ences vary from one species to the other. In B. poecilochroiis the northern form is larger than the southern taxon, contrary to Bergmann's Rule (this study), whereas in B. polyosoma the largest forms occur in southern South America and on islands such as the Juan Fernandez (de Vries 1973, Jimenez 1995, Cabot & de Vries 2003). Some individuals of B. polyosoma in the lowlands of south-west Ecuador and extreme north-west Peru {'peruviensis') are small- er than the intermediate Andean form found at the same latitude but which is apparenth' separated by altitude with no known overlap (Buitron-Jurado et al. in press). The two species are separable by plumage characters. There are t^vo colour morphs in B. polyosoma, and age-related changes in plumage occur in both B. polyosoma amd B. poe- cilochroiis (Cabot & de Vries 2004, 2005). In B. poecilochroiis, adult females, immatures and some males of both colour morphs possess heavy dark barring on the tertials, secondaries and all wing-coverts, not unlike those in Black-chested Buzzard-Eagle Geranoaetus melanoleucus. In B. polyosoma obvious and extensive barring on the upperparts is usuall\' absent (Fig. 1), being faint, pale and more restricted to the secondaries. In both species, age- and sex-related plumage types resemble one another more in pale morphs (Fig. 2) than in dark morphs (Fig. 3), although diagnostic differences are still evident (Cabot & de \"ries 2004). The two species occupy different habitats where the\' occur in svmpatr\-. B. poe- cilochroiis occurs in grassy paramos, puna steppe and on montane ridges, usuallv >3,000 m, whereas B. polyosoma inhabits more xeric, scrubby and forested habitats, usuallv between sea level and 3,000 m, although it is occasionallv found above 4,000 m (Cabot 1991). Recently, in the Atacama Desert of Chile, a population of B. poecilochroiis wds discovered in the river gorges that dissect the pre-Cordilleran plains, in ^vhich region B. polyosoma occurs in more brushy areas with scattered trees or open forests, as well as in neighbouring desert scrub beyond fluvial environments (Cabot et al submitted). Lerner et al. (2008) treated B. polyosoma and B. poecilochroiis as species derived independ- ently from White-tailed Hawk B. albicaiidatiis. The lack of genetic divergence bet^veen the two species does not automatically indicate conspecificit^^ as has been clearh- sho^vn for Galapagos B. galapagoensis and Swainson's Hawks B. swainsoni (Hull et al. 2008). Finally, we emphasise that the dark morph of B. polyosoma has marked sexual dimor- phism: females are all grey or blackish grey with a broad uniform reddish breast-band, whereas males have uniform grey underparts (Fig. 1) (Cabot & de Vries 2003, 2004). In B. poecilochroiis the underparts of both sexes are similar in both morphs: in the pale miorph, both sexes are white below (Figs. 6-7), whereas in the dark morph the^' are gre\' and ^vhite (Figs. 4-5). In the latter morph the sexes often show the same patterns of marks and bars. Methods We examined 73 specimens of B. poecilochroiis held at the follo\ving institutions: Museo de la Universidad del Cauca (Popayan); Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Uni\"ersidad Nacional de Colombia (Bogota; ICN); Museo Ecuatoriano de Ciencias Naturales (Quito); Museo de Ciencias Naturales del Instituto 'Mejfa' (Quito); Museo de la Escuela Politecnica Nacional (Quito; MCNQ); Museo Nacional de Ciencias del Instituto Tecnico Superior 'Bolivar' (Ambato); Universidad Nacional (Quito); The Natural Histor}' Museum (Tring; BMNH); Ins ti tut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique (Brussels; IRSNB); Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle (Paris; MNHN); Estacion Biologica de Donana (Seville; EBD); J. Cabot & T. de Vries 151 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Figure 1. Upper images adult male (BMNH) and female (NHRM) Variable Hawks Biitco pohjosoma in dark- morph plumage, ventral and dorsal views; below, adult and female pale-morph B. pohjosoma held at ZMA and NHRM, respectively (J. Cabot) J. Cabot & T. de Vries 152 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Figure 2. Upper images, pale-morph female Gurney's Hawks Biitco pocciloclirous in, left to right, their first-, second- and third-calendar years (specimens held at ZMB, NHRM and MCNQ respectively); below, one first- calendar year male (BMNH) and two, second- (BMNH) and third-calendar year (MHNG), pale-morph female Variable Hawks B. poli/osoiiui. All specimens of both species are from the Ecuadorian Andes, except one from the Colombian Andes (J. Cabot) J. Cabot & T. de Vries 153 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Figure 3. Upper images, dark-morph first-year Gurney's Hawks B. poecilochroiis, all from Ecuador (from left to right held at ZMUC, NHRM and ZMB); below, dark-morph first-year Variable Hawks B. polyosoma, from several countries; the left-hand specimen held at IRSNB, the others at NHRM (J. Cabot) J. Cabot & T. de Vries 154 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) A B C D Figure 4. Dark-morph adult male Gurne\-'s Hawks Bittco poccilocliroii>: (a) nominate subspecies from Ecuador (NHRM); (b-d) subspecies (/WJ.w?/ from i3oli\ ia (EBD), holotvpe and two paratvpes, respectively (J. Cabot) J. Cabot & T. de Vries 155 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Figure 5. Dark-morph adult female Gurney's Hawks Buteo poecilochrous: (a) nominate subspecies from Ecuador (ZMB); (b and c) subspecies //e/rfsa/ from Bolivia (EBD) and Chile (BMNH), respectively. Specimen (c) has a reddish tinge to the central underparts that is typical of pre-definitive plumage (J. Cabot / (c) © The Natural History Museum, Tring) Figvire 6. Pale-morph adult male Gumev s Ha%\-ks Buteo poecilochrous: (a and b) nominate subspecies from Ecuador (Museo de Ciencias Xaturales del Instituto 'Mejia', Quito); (c and d) subspecies fjehisai from BoK\ia lEBD) and southern Peru (NMNH) Q. Cabot) Figure 7. Pale-morph adult female Gurney's Hawks Buteo poecilochroiis: (a and b) nominate subspecies from Ecuador; (c and d) subspecies fjeldsai from Bolivia and Chile (BMNH) (J. Cabot / (c and d) © The Natural History Museum, Tring) J. Cabot & T. de Vries 158 Bull, B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Miiseo Nacional de Ciencias Natiirales (Madrid); Natiirhistoriska Riksmuseet (Stockliolm; NHRM); Zoological Museum (Copenhagen; ZMUC); and Naturalis (Leiden; RMNH). To complement this, ^ve also examined photographs of specimens from the Museo Xacional de Historia Natural (La Paz), the National Museum of Natural Histor\' (Washington DC; NMNH) and ^hiseum fur Naturkunde (Berlin; ZMB). During 1996-2002, we monitored annual plumage changes of five Peru\'ian B. pcccilocJiroiis that had been held in pri\'ate zoos and hawking centres since thev were jm'eniles. Field data ^vere collected on an irregular basis in Peru and Bolivia bet^veen 1981 and 2004 and in Ecuador from 1986 to 2008. Unsexed specimens were sexed bv measurement (Cabot & de \'ries 2003) and molecular tecliniques (Ellegren 1996). Photographs of B. p7ohfosoma were also taken of specimens housed at the Zoological Museum, Universitv of Amsterdam (Z^LA.), Museum d'Histoire Naturelle Ville de Geneve (Geneva; MHNG) and at se\'eral of the museums mentioned abo\'e. Because the species possesses t^vo colour morphs and dela\'ed plumage maturation, specimens in definitive plumage ^vere selected as the holot\'pe and parat\ pes for the ne^v subspecies. Plumage patterns v^^rv with age and sex for up to six \"ears before definiti\'e plumage is attained (Cabot & de Vries 2008), as is also true of \^ariable Hawk B. polyosoma (Pavez 1998, Cabot & de Vries 2004). The holotvpe of the new subspecies, a dark-phase male, coincides in sex and morph with the holotvpe of the nominate subspecies (Gurnev 1879), whilst the paratvpes comprise pale-morph and dark-morph birds of both sexes. For the morphometric analvsis, bodv measurements ^vere taken from 36 females (two from Colombia, 12 from Ecuador, seven from Peru, 12 from Boli\"ia, one from Argentina and two from Chile) and 37 males (19 from Ecuador, five from Peru, 11 from Boli\Ta and two from Chile). The following measurements ^vere taken: culmen from tip to skull; cranial width (post-orbital border); length of the cubito-radius; tarsus; middle and hind toes; outer and hind claws (using callipers, to the nearest 0.01 mm); ^vidth of the second (p9) and third (p8) outermost primaries at the base of the notch; ^ving, alula and tail lengths; the outermost primary (plO) and the outermost secondar\- were measured at their maximum length from the tip to the skin insertion (flattened against a ruler, to the nearest 0.5 mm). An analysis of variance ^vas used to evaluate the significance of anv differences in the morphometric variables. Btiteo poecilochrous fjeldsai subsp. nov. Holotype. — Adult male, EBD 7274A, collected 8 Jime 1984 bv J. Cabot at Pehas, prov. Los Andes, dpto. La Paz, Bolivia (16°14'S, 68°30'W; 3,850 m). Habitat: piiuj with grass tussocks and Lq:)idopJn/Uii}u scrub. Weight 810 g; total length 540 mm; culmen 34 mm: tarsus 89.3 mm; wing 434 mm; tail 221 mm; testes: left 12 x 6 mm, right 10x6 mm. Paratypes. — Durk-uiorph uuilc^: EBD 4866A, arro\'o Canuma, pro\". Bautista Saavedra, dpto. La Paz, Bolivia, 19 Julv 1982; high-Andean puna, west of the east Andean cordillera, 4,600 m. EBD 6917A, 30 km' south of La Paz city, prov. Murillo, dpto. La Paz, BoHvia (16^^46'S, 68°10'W), 7 January 1984; puihi with rolling plains of sparse tussock grass, 3,800 m. EBD 7476A, Sopocachi, prov. Pacajes, dpto. La Paz, Bolivia (15'^^05'S, 69^^06'^^, 10 November 1984; semi-arid piiiui with rolling plains and hills of LcpidopJii/Uuiu scrub, and rockv areas with cliffs and small stands of Pohjlepis, 3,700 m (all collected b\- ]. Cabot). ^E\'HN 3024, Checayani, 37 km north of Lake Titicaca, dpto. Puno, Peru ( 14^^48 S, 70^^01 'W), collected 10 December 1960 b\ j. Dorst. BMNH 1899.10.3.3, Peru, c .4,900-5,500 m, collected by G. P. Ashmore. BMNH 1902.3.13.1601, Choquecamate, dpto. Cochabamba, Bolivia (16^50'S, 65"70'W: gi\-en b\- collector), collected 29 Julv 1901 b\- P. O. Simons; 4,000 m. J. Cabot & T. de Vries 159 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Dark-morph females: EBD 6925, 40 km north-east of La Paz, near turn-off to Pucarani, prov. Murillo, dpto. La Paz, Bolivia (16°22'S, 68°30'W), collected 14 January 1984 by J. Cabot; puna with rolling plains of sparse tussock grass, 3,800 m; ovaries 21 x 12 mm; weight 1.2 kg; stomach contents a bird {Turdus chiguanco?) and beetles. MNHNP 3025, Azangaro, dpto. Puno, Peru (18°47'S, 68°15'W), collected 10 December 1960 by J. Dorst. BMNH 1892.2.10.438, Lalcalhuay, prov. Tarapaca, Chile, collected 27 January 1886 by C. Rahmer (c/. Paynter 1988). BMNH 1904.7.9.3, either Rinconada, near Laguna de Pozuelos, or elsewhere in the dpto. of Rinconada, prov. Jujuy, Argentina (22°26'S, 66°09'W), collected 4 June 1897 by G. F. Gerling; pmia, 3,870 m. Pale-morph males: EBD 5700A, 10 km north of Sevaruyo, prov. Avaroa, dpto. Oruro, Bolivia (19°16'S, 66°50'W), 6 November 1982; arid pima with thola scrub, 3,700 m. EBD 6917A, Huachacalla, prov. Litoral, dpto. Oruro, Bolivia (18°47'S, 68°15'W), 12 August 1984; puna desert with sparse grass tussocks and thola scrub, 3,700 m (both collected by J. Cabot). BMNH 1902.3.13.1598, Choquecamate dpto. Cochabamba, Bolivia (16°50'S, 65°70'W: given by collector), collected 30 July 1901 by P. O. Simons; 4,000 m (wrongly sexed as female). Pale-morph females: BMNH 1873.7.4.5, Ccachupata (= Cachupata: Stephens & Traylor 1983), dpto. Cuzco, Peru (13°39'W, 7r52'W), collected 14 November 1871 by H. Whitely. BMNH 1899.10.3.2, Alto Peru {= Bolivia), collected by C. P. Ashmore; 3,000-5,400 m. BMNH 1887.5.1.333, Macaya, Iquique, Chile (20°07'S, 69nrS), collected by H. Rowland (cf Paynter 1988). Diagnosis. — Buteo poecilochrous fjeldsai differs from nominate B. poecilochrous as follows. (1) Darker overall, from steel grey to slate-grey, unlike nominate, whose plumage varies from pale grey to mid grey. (2) Upperparts more uniform and blackish barring less obvious. Barring covers basal half of primaries, secondaries and, sometimes, median and greater wing-coverts, whereas in B. p. poecilochrous the barring covers only the lesser and median wing-coverts. (3) Inner secondaries and primaries have grey borders to their tips, whereas in B. p. poecilochrous the secondaries are broadly fringed white and the inner primaries have white tips. The white fringes are especially wide on the northernmost bird we examined (Tuquerres, Colombia: ICN 8724). (4) Barring on uppertail- and undertail-coverts fainter and finer than in B. p. poecilochrous, as are the transverse tail bars above the black subterminal band. Females of the new subspecies possess a larger dorsal patch, extending from the mantle to the middle scapulars, with some red on the lower scapulars, whereas in B. p. poecilochrous it is restricted to the mantle and upper scapulars (Figs. 1-3); individual variation does exist, however. Plumage changes with age, and females in their third to fifth calendar-years may be very reddish, with an extensive dorsal patch, and reddish feathers elsewhere (rump, back, wing-coverts, flanks, and middle and lower underparts in dark morphs) that they will lose by their sixth year (Cabot & de Vries 2008). Dark morphs of both subspecies have barred underparts with similar patterns. B. p. fjeldsai has a white throat with blackish streaks, foreneck and breast steel grey to slate-grey, the feathers broadly white-edged and intermixed with pure white feathers. The rest of the underparts are strongly barred steel grey to slate-grey and white, except the undertail- coverts, which are white with slight dark vermiculations. B. p. poecilochrous has mid grey and whitish-grey bars, the pale throat patch is smaller and it has fewer pale marks in the bib. Some B. p. poecilochrous have a uniform grey throat to chest, which is rare in B. p. fjeld- sai, especially in its southernmost range. Males with apparently uniform plumage and little barring on the thighs and rear underparts are lead grey to steel grey, whereas mB. p. poe- cilochrous they are paler ash-coloured. Pale birds have obvious dark transverse lines on the white chest, belly and thighs; pale B. p. poecilochrous has fewer marking on the underparts. J. Cabot & T. de Vries 160 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) cind some are pure white below. First- and second-years have brown upperparts with gin- ger-red or rusty-red markings, whereas yoimger B. p. poecilochrous are darker brown with creamy or ochre markings. Description of the holotype. — Narrow line on forehead and pre-ocular region white with black filiform feathers; upperparts including head- and neck-sides slate-grey with black striations on feather shafts, and vague ash-coloured fringes. Nape feathers white basally, with small black spots at tips contrasting visibly; mantle uniform, with some feathers slightly tinged at bases with reddish; scapulars slate-grey with paler centres and darker edges, some finely edged brown-ochre; lower scapulars slate-grey with wavy blackish barring and brown fringes, some faintly tinged reddish. Lesser wing-coverts uniform and blacker; median and greater coverts paler with brown sheen and dark barring; primaries and secondaries slate-grey with brown tinge, dark barring and paler tips; inner primaries and secondaries edged white at tips. Back dark slate-grey with lead grey markings; upper rump grey with white-edged feathers, lower rump with wide-spaced, fine grey barring; uppertail-coverts white with sparse, wavy black-brown lines; tail white with eight irregular wavy black transverse bars, broad subterminal black band (c.20 mm) with proximal narrow pale grey band and, distally, white edging. Chin and throat white, with black filiform feathers on former and striations on latter comprising dark shafts and narrow black markings on sides that become larger and denser on upper neck; obvious blackish slate- grey chest-band, darker than back, with some feathers variably fringed or tipped white-grey mixed with some white feathers; mid and lower underparts, flanks, belly and thighs white, with well-spaced black barring becoming finer and browner rearw^ards; white undertail-co verts. Underwing-coverts and axillaries white with black barring, hmer margin of primaries dirty white at base, with barring and brown-grev markings becoming black- brown towards tip; some have white tips, whilst others may lose these through abrasion. Soft parts: brown irides; bluish-grey bill with blackish tip; yellow cere; yellow legs with black claws. Description of the paratypes. — Dark-morph males have two different definitive plumages. The first is dark grey to slate-grey with white throat and dark barring; underparts white with dark barring, as holotype. Examples include EBD 7476A, which is darker than holotype, without white on forehead, generally less white on underparts, and bolder barring. Throat more heavily streaked; foreneck and neck-sides to lower breast dark slate- grey, some feathers on lower chest have whitish edges; rest of plumage as holotvpe, but has bolder markings and coarser dark barring; tail has ten, bolder transverse bars and broader subterminal black band (43 mm). EBD 4866A: like previous birds, but dark plumage black- brown rather than dark slate-grey, with narrower tail-band (35 mm). BMNH 1899.10.3.3 and MNHN 3024 have same pattern, with paler dark parts (dull steel grey, not blackish or brownish slate-grey). Birds of the second type appear uniform lead gre\', paler than those described above, with thin, sparse barring restricted essentiallv to the sides and rear underparts. Examples include BMNH 1902.3.13.1601 and EBD 6917A, which are imiform grey, with few white marks limited to fine white barring on lower chest, thighs and belly; lesser and median underwing-co\'erts uniform gre\' or with slight ^vhite barring, unlike greater coverts, which are densely barred white and grey; upperside (wing and tail) like holotype. Dark-morph females are similar to holotype, but ha\-e brick-red dorsal patch and are somewhat more boldly barred than males. Examples include EBD 6923, ^vith cheeks and ear-coverts finely streaked grev and white; brick-red mantle with dark streaks on shafts; J. Cabot & T. de Vries 161 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) some partially grey feathers on sides of mantle and lower dorsal patch. Upper and middle scapulars partially reddish; lesser coverts with whitish edges; median and greater wing- coverts, secondaries and inner primaries grey, whilst outer primaries have bluish-silvery bases, all with contrasting black barring; tail dirty white, outer feathers with greyish mar- gins at tips, and 11 irregular blackish bars. White throat heavily streaked black; grey chest-band with broad whitish-edged feathers; rest of underparts more boldly barred, espe- cially flanks. BMNH 1892.2.10.438 is more white below; chin dark-streaked and central chest grey with white feathers; belly has white and grey barring, with some retained red- dish-brown feathers on rear underparts and wing-coverts from previous plumages; extensive reddish dorsal patch on mantle and scapulars. BMNH 1904.7.9.3 has more exten- sive dorsal patch, from hindneck to scapulars; underparts with more grey and less white; throat with more dark streaking, bib more uniform grey with white-edged feathers and a few white feathers at sides; rest of underparts, flanks and thighs more boldly barred black than previous bird. MNHN 3025 has recently acquired definitive plumage similar to previ- ous birds, but much more reddish with extensive dorsal patch reaching tertials; reddish feathers in wing-coverts and on central underparts retained from previous plumage. Pale-morph males have steel grey back with pale ash-coloured sheen; underparts (including cheeks) pure white or with fine variable barring over chest, flanks, thighs and under wing-coverts; tail has irregular transverse bars above tail-band that are finer than in previous plumages. BMNH 1902.3.13.1598 has fine dark barring on chest, flanks and thighs. EBD 5700 similar but has vague wavy transverse bars over chest, belly and thighs. EBD 6917 has white middle chest, belly, flanks, uppertail-coverts and median and lesser underwing- coverts, all with fine dark barring. Pale-morph females have upperparts similar to dark-morph females, whilst the under- parts recall those of pale-morph males, with a few partly red feathers in the rump (BMNH 1873.7.4.5) or median and lesser wing-coverts (BMNH 1887.5.1.333), or in both (BMNH 1899.10.3.2). Geographical variation. — Birds from Peru are paler and more steel grey, whereas those from Bolivia, Argentina and Chile are darker and more slate-grey. Dark specimens from the south are white below, with streaking on the throat, a broad chest-band and blackish-barred rear underparts, which overall afford a very contrasting pattern. Age variation. — Old birds in definitive plumage have purer grey and black tones, with lesser wing-coverts white-edged and with white scaling on the wing edge (pers. obs. in captive birds). In contrast, birds in recently acquired definitive plumage have a brownish cast to the grey parts. In both morphs larger areas of purer white appear with age and there is a gradual loss of darker areas of plumage. In the oldest dark-morph birds, the white throat and the underparts barring restrict the dark chest-band, in which the number of white feathers increases. The underparts of old females possess the same pattern as in males of the same morph, whilst the reddish dorsal patch contracts and is limited to the mantle. In addition, both the reddish tones on the underparts (only in the dark morph) and the reddish feathers in the upperwing-coverts and rump (both morphs), which are typical of females in pre-definitive or recently acquired definitive plumage, disappear. Morph variation. — Dark-morph males have darker upperparts than pale morphs. Nevertheless, females of both morphs possess similar dorsal coloration. Dark-morph males possess two definitive body patterns: a) dark (slate-grey or blackish), with a white throat, dark grey chest and white underparts with black barring, which may vary individually in J. Cabot & T. de Vries 162 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) extent and intensity (Fig. 4); b) uniform steel or lead-grey, less black with smaller areas of white plumage; they lack contrast on the throat and have faint white barring only on the belly and thighs. Dark females have the underparts as the holotype (Fig. 5). No females with uniform grey underparts (as in dark males) have been observed. Pale-morph individuals (both sexes) show little variation in the intensity and depth of the wavy barring on the underparts and underwing-coverts (Figs. 6-7). Measurements. — B. p.fjeldsai is slightly smaller than B. p. poecilochroiis (Table 1), except that the alula and outermost primary are longer, and the primary tips narrower. TABLE 1 Mean and typical deviations of body measurements (in mm) for B. p. poecilochroiis and B. p. fjeldsai {* = p< 0.001, ANOVA). B. p. poecilochroiis cf B. p. fjeldsai cf B. p. poecilochroiis ? B. p. fjeldsai ? n X s.d. n X s.d. n X s.d. n X s.d. Weight (g) 0 8 840 76.7 1 1,300 0 13 1,170 69.5 Culmen* 13 36.8 1.1 15 34.6 1.6 15 40.1 1.2 14 38.4 1.3 Cranial width 7 49.8 2.3 8 48.3 1.3 6 50.7 2.1 10 49.7 1.4 Tarsus* 12 96.1 3.7 17 91.8 3.5 14 100.1 5.1 19 96.0 4.4 Toe 2* 12 35.1 2.4 13 33.1 1.4 11 38.8 2.8 13 36.1 1.3 Toe 4* 11 24.9 1.5 13 23.4 1.4 11 27.4 2.8 14 25.2 1.3 Outer claw* 11 24.9 1.1 13 24.6 1.3 12 27.9 1.4 13 27.7 1.2 Inner claw* 11 26.0 1.1 12 24.5 1.3 12 29.2 1.2 14 28.0 1.5 Cubito-radius 16 146.7 4.9 13 135.0 3.6 6 151.4 2.5 16 146.7 5.0 Wing* 20 434.3 10.2 17 423.7 10.1 15 469.1 10.3 19 464.3 8.6 Alula* 12 116.7 6.9 12 118.4 5.6 13 124.0 7.9 17 126.3 5.1 PIO length* 11 198.9 11.1 13 208.0 11.5 13 215.5 7 16 220.4 6.4 Tail* 12 220.9 19.3 14 216.6 13.6 15 241.4 18 17 233.8 14.3 Outer secondary* 18 236.1 22.0 13 234.4 11.0 14 256.3 14.6 18 253.0 12.4 PIO width* 11 23.1 0.8 11 21.3 1.4 12 25.3 1.4 14 23.5 1.34 P9 width* 12 25.1 1.1 10 24.1 0.6 12 27.7 1.2 14 26.0 1.57 P8 width* 11 27.1 1.8 10 25.7 1.3 11 30.2 1.1 13 28.7 1.7 Distribution. — Northern Peru to north-west Argentina and Chile, where apparentlv sedentary (Cabot 1988, 1991). Habitat. — High ridges and puna in the Andes, at 3,000-5,000 m to the snowline (Fjeldsa 1987, Cabot 1988, 1991). At the southern limit of its range in Calama (Antofagasta), in the Atacama of northern Chile, B. poecilochroiis has been reported at c.2,000 m, an unusually low altitude (Cabot et at. submitted), where it hunts over the green belts and cultivation bordering the rio Loa. Breeding. — On escarpments and cliffs, although a pair in dpto. Puno, Peru, bred on a Puya raimondii tree, initiating the clutch in April-May (Macedo 1964). In Calama, Chile, tliree pairs (L. Demetrio pers. comm.) started breeding in September, in the early spring (Demetrio & Torres-Mura 1991). In the same area, Cabot et al. (submitted) obsen^ed a fledged juvenile as well as recently occupied nests on cliffs beside the rfo Loa in November. As in B. p. poecilochroiis (Solfs & Black 1985, Coello 1997), the newly described subspecies breeds in solitary pairs (Macedo 1964), but sometimes with more than one male in a given territory (Cabot et al. submitted). J. Cabot & T. de Vries 163 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Etymology. — The subspecific epithet honours Jon Fjeldsa, for his contribution to the conservation of Andean ecosystems and his many contributions to ornithology, and is formulated as a noun in the genitive case, following the relevant Articles of the Code (ICZN 1999; Arts. 32.5.2.1 and Art. 31.1.2). Acknowledgements We are very grateful to David A. Christie who revised the text and provided many important suggestions that substantially improved the manuscript. The help of Dr Robert Prys-Jones (The Natural History Museum, Tring) was essential. We also thank the staff of the following museums for access to specimens: Museo de la Universidad del Cauca, Popayan; Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota; Museo Ecuatoriano de Ciencias Naturales, Quito; Museo de Ciencias Naturales del Instituto 'Mejia', Quito; Museo de la Escuela Politecnica Nacional, Quito; Museo Nacional de Ciencias del Instituto Tecnico Superior 'Bolivar', Ambato; Universidad Nacional, Quito; The Natural History Museum, Tring; Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Brussels; Zoological Museum, University of Amsterdam; Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris; Museum d'Histoire Naturelle Ville de Geneve, Geneva; Estacion Biologica de Dofiana, Seville; Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid; Naturhistoriska Riksmuseet, Stockholm; Zoological Museum, Copenhagen; and Naturalis, Leiden. We also thank Dr Lilian Vilallalba at the Museo de Historia Natural de La Paz, Dr Sylke Frahnert of the Museum fiir Naturkunde, Berlin, and Dr Terry Chesser at the US National Museum of Natural History, Washington DC, for providing photographs of specimens. L. & M. Newman of Berkhamstead provided hospitality during JC's visit to England, and Antonio Jimenez Lara also proffered photographs. Lorenzo Demetrio Jara also provided use- ful information and specimen photos. Two MAE grants partly covered the costs of JC. References: Buitron-Jurado, G., Cabot, J. & de Vries, T. in press. Patron de distribucion preliminar del Busardo dorsirrojo {Buteo poh/osoma) en Ecuador. Act. I Congr. Intern. Aves Rapaces y Conserv., Quito 1-5 de abril 2008. SIMBIOE-PUCE. Cabot, J. 1988. Dinamica anual de la avifauna en cinco habitats del Altiplano norte de Bolivia. Ph.D. thesis. Univ. Cordoba, Spain. Cabot, J. 1991. Distribution and habitat selection of Buteo poh/osoma and B. poecilochrous in Bolivia and neigh- bouring countries. Bull Brit. Orn. CI. 114: 199-209. Cabot, J. & de Vries, T. 2003. Buteo polyosoma and B. poecilochrous are two distinct species. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 123: 190-207. Cabot, J. & de Vries, T. 2004. Age- and sex-differentiated plumages in the two morphs of the Variable Buzzard Buteo polyosoma: a case of delayed maturation with subadult males disguised in definitive adult female plumage. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 124: 272-285. Cabot, J. & de Vries, T. 2005. On the type locaHty of the Cordilleran Buzzard Buteo poecilochrous. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 125: 147-148. Cabot, J. & de Vries, T. 2008. Relaciones taxonomicas y plumajes de los busardos dorsirrojos Buteo polyosoma y B. poecilochrous. Act. Mem. I Reunion Orn. Quito, Ecuador. 2-7. Univ. San Francisco de Quito, 3-5 de marzo 2005. Cabot, J. & de Vries, T. in press. On the common name of Buteo poecilochrous as used in ornithological litera- ture. Act. I Congr. Intern. Aves Rapaces y Conserv., Quito 1-5 de abril 2008. SIMBIOE-PUCE. Cabot, J., Alvarado, S. & de Vries, T. submitted. First breeding record and new data on distribution and alti- tude for Gurney's Buzzard Buteo poecilochrous in Chile Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. Coello, M. 1997. Biologia reproductiva y habitos alimenticios de Buteo poecilochrous en el paramo de la Reserva Ecologica Antisana, Ecuador. Thesis. Pontificia Univ. Catolica del Ecuador, Quito. Demetrio, L. & Torres-Mura, J. C. 1991. La dieta de aguiluchos {Buteo polyosoma y Buteo sp.) en un ambiente de desierto. Resum. I Congr. Chil. Orn., Ill Encuentro Nac. Orn. Valdivia. Ellegren, H. 1996. First gene on the avian W chromosome (CHD) provides a tag for universal sexing of non- ratite birds. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 263: 1635-1641. Farquhar, C. C. 1998. Buteo polyosoma and B. poecilochrous, the "Red-backed Buzzards" of South America are conspecific. Condor 100: 27-43. Fjeldsa, J. 1987. Birds of relict forests in the high Andes of Peril and Bolivia. Tech. rep. Zool. Mus., Univ. of Copenhagen. Fjeldsa, J. & Krabbe, N. 1990. The birds of the high Andes. Zool. Mus., Univ. of Copenhagen & Apollo Books, Svendborg. Gurney, J. H. 1879. Note upon three American raptorial birds apparently new to science. Ibis (4)3: 171-178. Hull, J. M., Wesley, S. K., Bollmer, J. L., Kimball, R. T., Parker, P. G., Whiteman, N. K. & Holly, B. E. 2008. On the origin of the Galapagos hawk: an examination of phenotypic differentiation and mitochondrial paraphyly. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 95: 779-789. J. Cabot & T. de Vries 164 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) International Commission for Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). 1999. International code of zoological nomenclature. Fourth edn. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, c/o The Natural History Museum, London. Jaksic, F. M., Silva S., Marquez, P. & Contreras, L. C. 1991. Food habits of Gurney's Buzzard in pre- Andean ranges and the high Andean plateau of northernmost Chile. /. Raptor Res. 25: 116-119. Jimenez, J. E. 1995. Historia natural del Aguilucho Buteo polyosoma: una revision. Hornero 14: 1-9. Jimenez, J. E. & Jaksic, F. M. 1990. Diet of Gurney's Buzzard in the puna of northernmost Chile. Wilson Bull. 102: 344-346. Lerner, H. R. L., Klaver, M. C. & Mindell, D. P. 2008. Molecular phvlogenetics of the Buteonine birds of prev (Accipitridae). Auk 125: 304-315. Macedo, H. 1964. Curieux cas de nidification du Buteo poecilochrous Gurnev sur Puya raimondii. Oiseau & R.F.O. 34: 200-203. Mayr, E. 1963. Animal species and evolution. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA. Pavez, E. F. 1998. Observaciones sobre el patron de coloracion en machos y hembras de Aguilucho {Buteo polyosoma, Quoy y Gaimard, 1924). Bol. Chil. Orn. 5: 21-23. Paynter, R. A. 1988. Ornithological gazetteer of Chile. Mus. Comp. Zool., Har\ ard Uniw, Cambridge, MA. Sclater, P. L. & Salvin, O. 1880. On new birds collected by Mr. C. Bucklev in eastern Ecuador. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1880: 155-161. Solfs, C. & Black, J. 1985. Anidacion de Buteo poecilochrous en Antisana. Rev. Geogr., Quito 21: 132-142. Stephens, L. & Traylor, M. A. 1983 Ornithological gazetteer of Peru. Mus. Comp. Zool., Har\-ard Univ., Cambridge, MA. de Vries, T. 1973. The Galapagos Hawk. An eco-geographical study ^vith specific reference to its svstematic position. Ph.D. thesis. Free Univ. of Amsterdam. Addresses: J. Cabot, Estacion Biologica de Dofiana (CSIC), Av. Maria Luisa s/n. 41013, Seville, Spain, e-mail: cabot@ebd.csic.es. T. de Vries, Dpto. Biologfa, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Ecuador, Apartado 17-01-2184, Quito, Ecuador, e-mail: tdevries@puce.edu. ec © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Jared Diamond et al. 165 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) The avifauna of Kofiau Island, Indonesia by Jared Diamond, Iwein Maiiro, K. David Bishop & Like Wijaya Received 24 December 2008 Summary. — Kofiau is an island of 144 km^ lying among the Western Papuan Islands 30 km west of the New Guinea continental shelf. Although it supports two endemic allospecies and three subspecies of birds discovered during brief earlier surveys, it has remained ornithologically the most under-surveyed significant island of the Papuan Region. In three visits we increased Kofiau's known avifauna from 29 to 78 species. Its avifaunal species composition is typical of the Papuan Region's oceanic islands, in lacking bird species that do not fly across water and hence are confined to New Guinea and the larger continental islands of the New Guinea shelf. The avifauna is convergently similar to that of Bismarck islands east of New Guinea, similarly founded by over-water colonisation. The Western Papuan Islands support ten species of avian supertramps, i.e. species characteristic of species-poor small and / or remote islands. More colonists reached Kofiau from New Guinea than from Wallacea. We discuss the relationship of Kofiau to Lydekker's Line, the eastern equivalent of the much more famous Wallace's Line that forms the western boundary of Wallacea. We report the first field observations of Kofiau's five endemics, and of three Kofiau populations constituting first or second records for the Papuan Region. The year 2009 is being marked by many celebrations to recognise the 150th anniversary of publication of Darwin's On the origin of species in 1859. As the first detailed exposition of evolution and natural selection, Darwin's book founded the science of evolutionary biolo- gy and is widely considered the greatest single advance in the history of biology. Few celebrations recognise Alfred Russel Wallace, who in the previous year had independently conceived and published simultaneously with Darwin a brief account of evolution and nat- ural selection (Wallace 1858). Wallace's two books The geographic distribution of animals (1876) and Island life (1880) founded the science of biogeography. Our paper contributes to honouring Wallace through an account of the birds of Kofiau Island, lying in what Wallace termed the Malay Archipelago (the island zone between the South-East Asian mainland and New Guinea). The eight years that Wallace spent collecting in the archipelago played a far larger role in forming his ideas than did Darwin's brief visit to the Galapagos archipelago in shaping Darwin's. Wallace termed his years in the Malay Archipelago the 'central and controlling incident' of his life. Wallace's name is associated with the two most striking biogeographic features of the archipelago, termed Wallace's Line and Wallacea; the former is the most famous single feature of world biogeography. Wallace attempted to land on Kofiau from a sailing canoe on 21 June 1860, but unfavourable winds drove him past the island (Wallace 1869: 519, where he refers to Kofiau by the name of Poppa). Hence it was reserved for another collector seven years later to bring ornithological fame to Kofiau by discovering there a beautiful endemic species of paradise kingfisher. Subsequent collectors on Kofiau also obtained an endemic species of monarch flycatcher and three endemic bird subspecies. However, those previous ornithological visi- tors only collected specimens and reported no field observations. As a result, Kofiau has been ornithologically the most under-surveyed significant island of the Papuan Region. Our paper is based on three visits to Kofiau, in 1986, 2002 and 2007. We increased the number of Jared Diamond et al. 166 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) bird species known for Kofiau from 29 to 78 species, and we provide the first field informa- tion on Kofiau's five avian endemics and other birds. As background, it is useful to remind ourselves of the differences between three biogeo- graphic lines: Wallace's Line, Lydekker's Line and Weber's Line (see Fig. 1). Wallace's Line was named for Wallace by T. H. Fiuxley in 1868. To Wallace, it signified both a biogeograph- ic and a geological divide. Fie noted that it is of biogeographic importance, because the line marks the eastern limit of the rich tropical continental Asian fauna. But Wallace recognised that the line is also geological: it marks the eastern limit of the shallow Asian continental shelf (termed the Sunda Shelf), such that islands west of the line, of which the largest are Bali, Java, Borneo and Sumatra, were (as we now know) part of the Asian mainland during Pleistocene times of low sea level. That second (geological) significance of Wallace's Line explains its first (biogeographic) significance: Asian animals that have difficulty crossing salt water (such as most non-volant mammals except rodents, almost all strictly freshwater fish, and many birds) were able to spread east during the Pleistocene to Bali and Borneo because those islands were then part of the Asian mainland, but could not cross beyond the Asian shelf limit across the permanent deep saltwater gap between Bali and Lombok. Asia / n Philippines / ^ Borneo ^/ Tv^-x^^w^,^ WALLACEA V ( Lon(bok ^ ' /-^V>^er's Li100 m from the coast. El = primary forest, F2 = secondary forest, old gardens and sago swamp, M = mangrove, T = non-forest habitats with trees (gardens, coconut plantations, forest edge), O = open habitats and villages, A = aerial. 'Ab.' (abundance): 4 = Kofiau's nine most abundant species, 3 = common, 2 = in low numbers but encountered repeatedly, 1 = just one or a few records. 'Col./Obs.': Be = Beccari, Bn = Bernstein, Br = Bruijn, D = Diamond & Bishop, H = Hokum, K = Khakiaj, M = Mauro & Wijaya. 'Distr.' (distribution): species present in the Moluccas = M, Kofiau = K, Western Papuan Islands = W (excluding the few species confined there to Kofiau, Gebe and /or Gag), and New Guinea = N. Underlinings denote shared subspecific affinities, as follows. Monotypic species receive no underlining (e.g., species 2, 13 ... : MKWN, MKW, MK). Species known to be represented by the same subspecies where present in all of our letter-designated regions receive a continuous underlining (e.g., species 1, 3, 15 ... : MKN, MKWN , MK, KWN, KW, KN). Species of which the Kofiau population is known to belong to the Moluccan subspecies, which is distinct from the Western Papuan Island / New Guinea subspecies, are designated MKWN or MK N (species 28, 58, 77). Conversely, species of which the Kofiau population is known to belong to the Western Papuan Island subspecies or to the subspecies shared by the Western Papuan Islands and New Guinea, distinct from the Moluccan population, are designated M KWN, M KW (species 19, 27, 31 . . . ). Finally, species for which the subspecific affinity of the Kofiau population is unknown have no underlining beneath the letter K, and either a single line beneath the letters M, W and N if those populations belong to the same subspecies (e.g., species 16, 36, 40, 45: MKN, K WN, MKW, MK WN ), or single and double underlirdngs to distinguish different subspecies for the populations M, W and N (e.g., species 8, 34, 62: MK^N/ MK^) For the three endemic subspecies of Kofiau (species 61, 63, 70), the letter K is not underlined, and different subspecific affinities of the other populations are indicated by single and double underlinings (e.g., KW^, MK^^). # English name Scientific name Status Habitat Ab. Col./Obs. Distri. 1 Little Grebe Tachybaptus riificoUis tricolor res L 2 D,M MKN 2 Lesser Frigatebird Fregata ariel res S 2 D,M MKWN 3 Little Pied Cormorant Phalacrocorax melanoleucos melanoleucos res? c 1 M MKWN 4 Great-billed Heron Ardea sumatrana sumatrana res? CM 1 D,M MKWN 5 Yellow-billed Egret Egretta intermedia intermedia res? LC 1 M MKWN 6 Little Egret Egretta garzetta nigripes res? C 1 M MKWN 7 Pacific Reef Heron Egretta sacra sacra res CM 2 D,M MK\\N 8 Striated Heron Ardeola striata subsp. res M n D, K, M MKWN 9 Rufous Night Heron Nycticorax caledoniciis lulU res? F2 1 M MKAVN 10 Osprey Pandion haliaetiis melvillensis res C 2 D, K, M MK\W 11 Pacific Baza Aviceda subcristata subsp. res T 1 D MK\VN 12 Brahminy Kite Haliastur indus girrenera? res T 2 D, M MK\'\N 13 White-bellied Sea Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster res CS 1 D,M MK\W 14 Grey Goshawk Accipiter novaehollandiae subsp. res T -) D, M MKWN 15 Spotted Kestrel FaIco moluccensis moluccensis res T 1 M MK 16 Peregrine Falcon Falco peregriniis subsp. W\'p? ? 1 M MJQ^ 17 Spotted Whistling Duck Dendrocygna guttata res C 1 M MKWN 18 Raja Shelduck Tadorna radjali res LC 1 D,M MKWN 19 Dusky Megapode Megapodiiis frcyciih't freycinet res F1,F2 3 Be, D, K, M MKW 20 Red-necked Crake Rallina tricolor tricolor res F2 M KWN 21 Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis fulva ^\'^'p C 1 K MKWN 22 Whimbrel Numeniiis phacopus varicgatus \vvp CM 1 D MKWN 23 Grey-tailed Tattler Tri)iga brcvipcs vv\-p C 1 M MKWN Jared Diamond et al. 171 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) 24 Common Sandpiper Tringa hypoleucos wvp C 1 D, M MKWN 25 Red-necked Phalarope Phalaropus lobatus wvp s 2 D MKWN 26 Swift Tern Sterna bergii cr is tat a res s 1 D MKWN 27 Brown Cuckoo-Dove Macropygia amboiner^sis doreya res Fl, F2 3 Be, D, K, M MKWN 28 Common Emerald Dove Chalcophaps indica indica res F2 2 Be, D, M MKN 29 Nicobar Pigeon Caloenas nicobarica nicobarica res Fl, F2 ? 1 D, H MKWN 30 Wnite-bibbed Fruit Dove Ptilinopus rivoli prasinorrhous res Fl, F2, M 3 Be, D, M MKWN 31 Claret-breasted Fruit Dove Ptilinopus viridis pectoralis res Fl, F2, M 3 Be, D, M MKWN 32 Spice Imperial Pigeon Diicula myristicivora myristicivora res Fl, F2, M 1 D, M KW 33 Spectacled Imperial Pigeon Ducula perspicillata subsp. res Fl, F2, M 4 D, M MK 34 Violet-necked Lory Eos squamata subsp. res F2, T 4 D, M MKW 35 Red-flanked Lorikeet Charmosyna placentis subsp. res F2 1 D, M A /TTy^TA / A T MKWN 36 Yellow-crested Cockatoo Cacatua galerita subsp. res Fl, F2 3 D, M KWN 37 Yellow-capped Pygmy Parrot Micropsitta keiensis chloroxantha res Fl, F2 4 Be, D, M MKWN 38 Double-eyed Fig Parrot Cyclopsitta diophthalma diophthalma res Fl, F2, M 1 D, H KWN 39 Red-cheeked Parrot Geojfroyus geoffroyi pucherani res F2, T 2 D, H, K, M MKWN 40 Great-billed Parrot Tanygnathus megalorynchos subsp. res F2 2 D, M MKW 41 Eclectus Parrot Eclectus roratus subsp. res Fl, F2, T 3 D, M MKWN 42 Brush Cuckoo Lacomantis variolosus infaustus res F2 3 Bn, D, K, M MKWN 43 Little Bronze Cuckoo Chrysococcyx minutillus subsp. res F2 3 D, M MKWN A A 1 1 "11 J 1 44 Channel-billed Cuckoo Scythrops novaehoUandiae wva? F2 2 D, M MKWN 45 Large-tailed Nightjar Caprimidgus macrurus subsp. res T 3 M MKWN 46 Uniform Swiftlet CoUocalia vanikorensis subsp. res A 4 D,M MKWN 47 Glossy Swiftlet Collocalia esculenta subsp. res A 3 D,M MKWN 48 Kofiau Paradise Kingfisher Tanysiptera ellioti** res F1,F2 4 Be, Br, D, K H, K, M 49 Sacred Kingfisher Halcyon sancta sancta wva T 3 Be, K, M A yfTXT A 7A. T MKWN 50 Little Kingfisher Alcedo pusilla pusilla res L 1 Be, D MKWN 51 Rainbow Bee-eater Merops ornatus wva T 3 K, M MKWN 52 Oriental Dollarbird Eurystomus orientalis subsp. wva? T 3 M MKWN no T T J J T>* 53 Hooded Pitta Pitta sordida novaeguineae res Fl, F2 3 Be, D, K, M KWN 54 Barn Swallow Hinindo rustica gutturalis wvp A 3 D, M MKWN 55 Pacific Swallow Hirundo tahitica subsp. res A 2 M A J{1/"\ A 7 A T MKWN 56 Red-rumped Swallow Hinindo daurica subsp. wvp A 2 M KN 57 Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava simillima wvp 0 1 D, M A J"TXT A 7X T MKWN 58 White-beliied Cuckooshrike Coracina papuensis melanolora res T, M 2 Be, D, K, M MKWN 59 Common Cicadabird Coracina tenuirostris muellerii wva? T 1 Be, M MKWN 60 Black-browed Triller Lalage atrovirens subsp. res F2,T 3 D,M KWN 61 Large-billed Gerygone Gerygone magnirostris occasa* res Fl, F2, M 4 D, K,M KWN 62 Rufous Fantail Rhipidura rufifrons subsp. res F2 1 D MKWN 63 Northern Fantail Rhipidura rufiventris vidua* res Fl, F2 4 Be, Br, D, MKWN H, K, M 64 Willie Wagtail Rhipidura leucophrys melaleuca res i, M 2 U, M MKWlNl 65 island Monarch Monarcha cinerascens subsp. res? T 1 M A yfTXTATM MKWJNi 66 Kotiau Monarch Monarcha jidianae** res Fl, F2 4 Be, D, K, M K 67 Shining Flycatcher Myiagra alecto chalybeocephalus res F2, M, T 3 Be, D, K, M A ,f T/^T A 7A T MKWN 68 Island Whistler Pachycephala phaionota res ? 1 K A /fT/'T A 7 MKW 69 Olive-crowned Flowerpecker Dicaeum pectorale subsp. res Fl, F2, M 3 U, M JyVViN 70 Black Sunbird Nectar inia aspasia mariae* res F2 4 Be, D, K, M A yfT^T A 7 A T MKWN 71 Olive-backed Sunbird Nectar inia jugularis frenata res F2, T, M 3 D, K, M A jrjy"\ A 7A T MKWN 72 Papuan rriarbird Philemon novaeguineae novaeguineae res F2, T, M 2 Be, D, M KWINI 73 Black-faced Munia Lonchura Molucca res 0 1 M MK 74 Eurasian Tree Sparrow Passer montanus malaccensis res 0 2 M MKWN 75 Moluccan Starling Aplonis mysolensis subsp. res T 1 D MKW 76 Metallic Starling Aplonis metallica metallica res Fl, F2, T 3 D,M MKWN 77 Hair-crested Drongo Dicrurus hottentottus atrocaeruleus res Fl, F2 2 Be, D, K, M MKWN 78 Torresian Crow Corvus orru orru res T,M 2 D,M MKWN Jared Diamond et al. 172 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) common, vocal and conspicuous where present that our failure to observe them on Kofiau probably means that they really are absent; and others (e.g., Buhulcus ibis and Hemiprocne mystacea) may just have been vagrants on Gag or Gebe and could equally well turn up on Kofiau. Notable and probably real on all three islands is the absence or paucity of hon- eyeaters, usually common elsewhere in the Papuan region: on Kofiau we, Khakiaj, and Beccari found only Papuan Friarbird Philemon novaeguineae; Johnstone, we, Wallace, and Bernstein found no honeyeater on Gag; and the sole honeyeater known from Gebe is the small-island specialist Lichmera argentauris, collected there only by Bernstein, possibly as a vagrant. Continental and oceanic island species on Kofiau In passing from Java and Bali across Wallace's Line to Lombok, one leaves behind flightless mammals unable to fly, swim or raft across broad water gaps — such as rhinocer- oses, tigers, leopards and gibbons. More surprisingly, because most birds can fly, Wallace was struck by the fact that Wallace's Line also serves as a barrier for many families and gen- era of birds, including pheasants, barbels, trogons, broadbills, leafbirds, and most genera of woodpeckers and babblers. These and many other tropical birds, whilst physically capable of flying across water, are behaviourally very reluctant to do so (Diamond 1981). Hence their insular distributions are restricted to continental islands that had Pleistocene connec- tions to the Asian mainland, and that are sufficiently large to support sizeable populations able to persist in isolation since the end of the Pleistocene. Corresponding to Wallace's observation that Wallace's Line at the edge of the Sunda Shelf marks the distributional limit for Oriental bird species unwilling or unable to fly across water, Lydekker's Line at the edge of the Sahul shelf marks the distributional limit for New Guinea species similarly unwilling or unable to cross water. Previous studies had identified 134 species of New Guinea lowland birds known from New Guinea's six large continental islands (Aru, Batanta, Misool, Salawati, Waigeo and Yapen) on the Sahul Shelf and connected to New Guinea during the Pleistocene^ whilst absent from all oceanic islands near New Guinea but beyond the shelf and lacking Pleistocene connections to New Guinea (e.g., Biak, Gebe, Gag, Karkar, Kei, Manam, Misima, New Britain, Numfor and Woodlark) (Diamond 1972a). Those species include all bowerbirds, all New Guinea birds of paradise except Manucodia and Paradisaea, many genera with three or more New Guinea lowland species (e.g., Talegalla, Chalcopsitta, Psittacidirostris, Dacelo, Sericomis, Pitohiii and Pycnopygius), plus some of the commonest species of New Guinea lowland forest (e.g.. Beautiful Fruit Dove Ptilinopus pulchellus, Blue Jewel-babbler Eupetes caerulescens, Rusty Mouse Warbler Crateroscelis murina, Yellow-bellied Gerygone Gerygone chrysogaster, Frilled Monarch Arses telescopthalmus, Brown Oriole Oriolus szalayi, Green-crowned Longbill Toxorhamphus novaeguineae and Long-billed Honeyeater Melilestes megarhynchus). 1 It is uncertain whether Batanta and Waigeo actually lie on the Sahul Shelf, or on a separate plate that has remained separated from the shelf by up to a few kilometers. The sea between Batanta and Waigeo is so shal- low that those islands were undoubtedly connected to each other during the Pleistocene, and similarly Misool and Salawati were undoubtedly connected to each other and to New Guiiiea. Batanta is todav sepa- rated from Salawati by the narrow Sagewin Strait, whose deepest portion is slightly more than 200 m deep. If that were also true throughout the Pleistocene, Batanta / Waigeo would have been separate then from Salawati / Misool / New Guinea, because Pleistocene drops in sea level were by slightly less than 200 m. However, in this tectonically active region one cannot be certain that the depth of Sagewin Strait has remained constant. In their proportions of non-water-crossing bird species, tlie avifaunas of Batanta and Waigeo are similar to those of Misool and Salawati, suggesting tliat a Pleistocene water gap at the Sagewin Strait, if it persisted at all, was extremely narrow. J a red Diamond et al. 173 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) This list of 134 lowland species present on one or more of New Guinea's continental islands but absent from all of its oceanic islands was drawn up 37 years ago, at a time when the avifauna of Kofiau was very incompletely known. Now that Kofiau's avifauna is better known, we re-examined it from this perspective. It turns out that all of Kofiau's species are ones already identified as water-crossers because of their presence on other oceanic islands of the New Guinea region. That is, the avifaunas of New Guinea's oceanic islands, including Kofiau, are all drawn from a subset of the New Guinea avifauna characterised by ability and willingness to colonise across water. That accounts at least in part for the above-mentioned similarities between the avifaunas of Kofiau, Gag and Gebe: that Kofiau's 62 resident land and fresh- water species include 85% of Gag's resident species and 77% of Gebe's resident species. One could object that these three islands are within 108 km of each other, and that their avifau- nal similarities may thus be partly due to colonisation between these three. Hence a stronger test is provided by comparing Kofiau's avifauna with that of the Bismarck Archipelago (Mayr & Diamond 2001) east of New Guinea, c.2,000 km east of Kofiau, and separated from Kofiau by the entire length of New Guinea. There can hardly have been direct colonisations between the Bismarcks and Kofiau. Because the Bismarck Archipelago includes many islands much larger than Kofiau, the Bismarck resident land and freshwater avifauna (151 species) is richer than Kofiau's (62 species), though much poorer than New Guinea's (432 species). (In these calculations we do not separately count different allospecies of the same superspecies: see Mayr & Diamond 2001.) Of Kofiau's 62 species, eight have no access to the Bismarcks because they are confined to western New Guinea and / or Wallacea and absent from the eastern part of New Guinea facing the Bismarcks (species nos. 15, 33, 34, 40, 68 and 73-75 of Table 1). That leaves 54 Kofiau species with access to the Bismarcks, of which 45 (i.e., 85%) actually occur in the Bismarcks, and only nine are absent (species nos. 4, 18, 28, 38, 39, 43, 48, 61 and 66 of Table 1). This similarity between the Kofiau and Bismarck avifaunas, despite their independent origins, mostly from New Guinea, arose convergently because both avifaunas were founded via over-water colonisation by a vagile subset of New Guinea's rich avifauna. Supertramps In the Papuan Region and other tropical regions with many islands, some bird and bat species termed supertramps are confined to species-poor, small and / or remote islands and are absent from species-rich, large and / or central islands except as vagrants (Diamond 1972b). These species have especially high over-water colonisation rates, enabling them to maintain populations (through frequent recolonisations) on islets too small to support self- sustaining populations in isolation, and also enabling them to be among the first species to colonise islands defaunated by volcanic eruptions. Supertramp vagrants reach large species-rich islands but are competitively excluded by established species, except as occa- sional individuals along the coast. Which species can be considered supertramps in the Western Papuan Islands? Ornithological visits to five isolated islets of <6 km^ in that region have been reported: Ayu north-east of Waigeo, visited by Khakiaj on 1 September 1955 (Ripley 1959); Gam north of Misool, visited by JD & KDB on 5 February 1986; Kommerrust north of Kofiau, visited by JD & KDB on 8 February 1986; Little Boo west of Kofiau, visited by IM & LW on 23 April 2007; and Schildpad north-east of Misool, visited by Ripley and other members of the Denison-Crockett Expedition on 19-23 October 1937 (Mayr & Meyer de Schauensee 1939) (see Fig. 2). Collectively, these islets support nine species that approximate to the above def- jaivd nianiond el al. 174 Hull. li.O.C. 2009 129(3) inition of supertramps (numbers in parentheses indicate on how many of the five islets each species has been recorded): White-bibbed Fruit Dove Ptilinopiis rivoli prasinorrhous (3), Spice Imperial Pigeon Diiciila myristicivora (2), Violet-necked Lory Eos sqiiamata (5), Rufous Fantail Rhipidura rufifrons (2), Pachycephala phaionota (3), Lemon-bellied White-eye Zosterops chloris (1), Lichmera argentauris (3), Varied Honeyeater Lichenostomus versicolor (1) and Moluccan Starling Aplonis mysolensis (3). (We add the subspecies name to P. rivoli, to emphasise that this species includes a race P. r. bell us occupying the New Guinea mainland, as well as the supertramp race P. r. prasinorrhous). To this list of nine supertramps may be added a tenth. Island Monarch Monarcha cinerascens, not recorded on these five islets but apparently col- lected on islets off north-west Misool by Hoedt, and widespread on islets elsewhere in Wallacea, the Papuan Region and Northern Melanesia. Of these five small isolated islets surveyed in the Western Papuan Islands, four were visited briefly, for a day or an hour. The only one surveyed more completely is Schildpad, on which Ripley and his team spent five days collecting. Schildpad yielded eight of the ten supertramps (all but Monarcha cinerascens and Zosterops chloris), and seven of the eight (all except Eos squamata) were noted by Ripley as common there or were collected by him as multiple specimens. As for the occurrence of the supertramps on larger islands, the literature contains records of nine of these ten species (all except Zosterops chloris) by 19th-century collectors for all four of the large continental Western Papuan Islands (Batanta, Misool, Salawati and Waigeo, with areas of 453-3,155 km^). However, in our own surveys of these four islands our only encounters with these putative supertramps other than Ducula myristicivora were two records of Lichenostomus versicolor and one of Aplonis mysolensis from coastal villages of Misool and Waigeo. We suspect that the 19th-century records were mainly based on speci- mens similarly collected in coastal villages or on offshore islets, where 19th-century collectors made their bases and which they did not distinguish from the four larger islands themselves. A marginal case for inclusion as a supertramp is Ducula myristicivora, which we observed only on the coasts of Batanta and Waigeo where its congeners Pinon Imperial Pigeon D. pinon and Purple-tailed Imperial Pigeon D. rufigaster are abundant inland. What about supertramp occurrences on Kofiau, Gebe, and Gag, which are intermediate in area (57-144 km-) between the small islets (<6 km-) with many supertramps and the large islands (453-3,155 km-) with few supertramps? The best surveyed of these three intermediate-sized islands is Kofiau, on which seven of the ten supertramps (all except Lichmera argentauris, Lichenostomus versicolor and Zosterops chloris) have been recorded. Of those seven, we found two common (Ptilinopus rivoli prasinorrhous and Eos squamata), one scarce (Ducula myristicivora), and four represented by only one or two specimens, or observed by just one of the seven ornithological visitors to Kofiau. The scantier information for Gebe and Gag yields a similar conclusion, with one interesting difference. On Gebe (to judge from specimens: Mees 1972) and Gag (Johnstone's and our observations), Ptilinopus rivoli prasinorrhous and Eos squamata are common, as on Kofiau. Lichmera argentauris and Aplonis mysolensis are known on Gebe only from one and two specimens respectively taken by a single collector. The interesting exception is that Ducula myristicivora is common on Gebe and Gag, but scarce on Kofiau. We attribute this difference to the fact that Ducula myristicivora faces competition from its abundant and similar-sized congener Spectacled Imperial Pigeon D. perspicillata on Kofiau, but from no congener or indeed any other large pigeon on Gebe and Gag. Jared Diamond et al. 175 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Biogeographic affinities of the Kofiau avifauna Of Kofiau's 62 resident land and freshwater bird species, 35 yield no information about biogeographic affinities, because they are widespread in Wallacea (or at least in the Moluccas) as well as on New Guinea, and are either monotypic (four species: nos. 13, 17, 18, 68), or they occur as the same subspecies throughout the Moluccas and western New Guinea or the larger Western Papuan Islands (20 species: nos. 1, 3-7, 9, 10, 12, 29, 30, 40, 42, 45, 50, 64, 71, 74, 76, 78), or else occur in those two areas as different subspecies but the sub- specific identity of the Kofiau population is unknown (11 species: nos. 8, 11, 14, 35, 41, 43, 46, 47, 55, 62, 65). Among the remaining 27 species that do permit conclusions, their directions of coloni- sation are suggested by several different lines of evidence. Five are Kofiau's endemic species and subspecies, of which two (species nos. 48 and 63) are most similar to their Moluccan relatives, and three (nos. 61, 66, and 70) are most similar to their Papuan relatives. Among ten species widespread in both the Papuan Region and in Wallacea or the Moluccas, occurring as different subspecies in those two regions, and with the Kofiau population sub- specifically identified, the Kofiau population belongs to the Papuan race in seven (nos. 19, 27, 31, 37, 39, 53, 67) and to the Wallacean race in three (nos. 28, 58, 77). Seven species (nos. 20, 32, 36, 38, 60, 69, 72) distributed over all or most of New Guinea extend west only to the Western Papuan Islands (including Kofiau), do not reach the Moluccas, hence can only have reached Kofiau from the direction of New Guinea. Conversely, five Wallacean or Moluccan species extend east only to Kofiau (no. 33), Kofiau and Gag (nos. 15, 73) or very sparingly to other Western Papuan Islands (nos. 34 and 75), hence surely or probably reached Kofiau from the direction of the Moluccas. Thus, among those 27 informative species, 3 + 7 + 7 = 17 probably reached Kofiau from New Guinea, whilst 2 + 3 + 5 = 10 probably arrived from the Moluccas. Our conclusion of a Papuan predominance in the Kofiau avifauna confirms Mayr's (1941) and Ripley's (1959) conclusions deduced at a time when knowledge of Kofiau's avifauna was much less com- plete. This Papuan predominance is to be expected because New Guinea is much larger and much more species-rich, and slightly closer to Kofiau than are the Moluccas, and because the large Western Papuan island of Misool supporting a large fraction of the New Guinea mainland avifauna is even closer to Kofiau. The Papuan and Moluccan colonists of Kofiau also differ in their spread beyond Kofiau. One- third (six of 17) of the Papuan colonists have spread further west to colonise species-rich habitats of large Moluccan islands, whilst none of the Moluccan colonists spread east to New Guinea or even to the larger Western Papuan Islands. Wallacea's eastern boundary Recent biogeographic discussions of the Malay Archipelago are in agreement that Wallacea is basically the archipelago of oceanic islands lying between the continental islands of the Sunda Shelf to west, and the continental islands of the Sahul Shelf to the east (e.g., Mayr 1976: 637-639, Darlington 1976: 462-472, White & Bruce 1986: 10, Coates & Bishop 1997: 9). Almost no ambiguities arise in defining the western boundary of Wallacea, because the sea gap separating the easternmost large continental islands of the Sunda Shelf (Borneo and Bali) from the westernmost large oceanic islands of Wallacea (Sulawesi and Lombok) con- tains only a few, tiny, ornithologically insignificant islets. Hence one can straightforwardly take Wallacea's western boundary as the Sunda Shelf's edge (aUas Wallace's Line); the geo- logical and biogeographic lines are essentially the same. However, the situation is more jared Diamond ot a I 176 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) complex at Wallacea's eastern boundary, because the sea gap separating the westernmost large Papuan islands of the Sahul Shelf (Misool, Salawati and possibly Batanta and Waigeo) from the easternmost large oceanic islands of Wallacea (Halmahera and Seram) contains three intermediate-sized islands of ornithological significance (Kofiau, Gebe and Gag), all of which support endemic birds, including the two endemic allospecies of Kofiau. Should Wallacea's eastern boundary be drawn east or west of those three islands, so as to place them in Wallacea or in the Papuan Region respectively? A simple solution consistent with the definition of Wallacea's western boundary would be to take its eastern boundary as the Sahul Shelf's edge (Lydekker's Line), thereby assign- ing Kofiau, Gebe and Gag to Wallacea. However, that geological definition does violence to biogeographic criteria, because the avifaunas of Kofiau, Gebe and Gag are predominantly Papuan rather than Wallacean. Hence all recent ornithological treatments (Mayr 1941, 1954, White & Bruce 1986, Coates & Bishop 1997) include Kofiau, Gebe and Gag within the Papuan Region and thus take Wallacea's eastern boundary to lie slightly west of the Sahul Shelf's edge. As Mayr (1976: 636) expressed it, ' . . . these islands are so purely Papuan [now known to be an exaggeration] that it seems justified to be slightly inconsistent.' We agree. Conservation status Kofiau's five endemics — its two endemic allospecies of kingfisher and monarch, and its three endemic subspecies of warbler, fantail and sunbird — are presently among Kofiau's most abundant species. All five are widespread in primary and secondary forests, except that the sunbird is only in secondary forests. The three endemic subspecies are not in imme- diate danger. However, there are reasons to be concerned about the long-term survival of the two endemic allospecies, which we shall explain according to the threat categories and criteria used by lUCN (2001). These two allospecies are currently classified as Data Deficient (BirdLife International 2007). We propose that both be treated as Endangered based on lUCN criteria EN Bl+2ab(iii) (lUCN 2001). Both species, on present knowledge, are con- fined to the island of Kofiau proper, an area of 144 km^. Even if they occurred on some satellites in the group, their Extent of Occurrence delineated by the minimum convex poly- gon spanning the entire group could never exceed 5,000 km- (lUCN criterion Bl), and their Area of Occupancy at full saturation of the entire group at the lUCN 4 km^ grid cell refer- ence scale could never exceed 500 km- (criterion B2). The entire island of Kofiau can only be regarded as a single location with regard to applying lUCN qualifier a (<5 locations; quali- fier a). Our observations show that, whilst both species persist in shaded, traditional subsistence gardens, they are commonest in closed-canopy secondary and primary forest. We also found circumstantial evidence that immatures of the kingfisher may depend entire- ly on tall closed-canopy forest during their early life stages (see below). Kofiau has been extensively selectively logged since the 1970s, and the infertile limestone substrates delay forest regeneration. Establishment of new subsistence gardens and cash-crop coconut groves by slash-and-burn methods, as well as small-scale timber extraction in the remain- ing patches of primary forest such as on Mata Hill, were all evident during our visits. We conservatively estimate that agricultural clearings increased by 30% along our trans-island transect during the five-year period spanning our 2002 and 2007 visits. The 4 km- lUCN ref- erence scale is too coarse to trigger complete local extirpation and a reduction in Area of Occupancy (lUCN qualifier b(ii)) because some individuals are still likely to persist within the non-forest matrix at this scale. However, the general picture emerging is that of contin- uous internal degradation of remaining primary forest, conversion of secondary forest to Jared Diamond et al. 177 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) cash-crop coconut groves, and scaling-up of traditional subsistence gardens, and we believe that lUCN qualifier b(iii) is met. The future of Kofiau's endemic birds will require efforts to protect remaining tracts of primary forest in a consensus conservation area through partic- ipatory mapping with local communities and landowners. Annotated list of selected species We comment here on Kofiau's five endemics, and on three Kofiau populations consti- I tuting first or second records for the Papuan Region. SPOTTED KESTREL Falco m. moluccensis The only other Papuan record of this widespread Wallacean non-forest species is from Gag, where JD & KDB observed at least three pairs in 1986 and Johnstone (2006) found individ- l uals and pairs uncommonly in 1997. On Kofiau, in 2002 we (IM and LW) observed daily an adult pair with two volant but incessantly begging juveniles near a tall forest-edge tree with a cavity at 20 m pointed out to us as the nest hole. In 2007 we observed two individuals at separate locations 2.5 km from the 2002 nest site. In their heavily blackish-spotted underwing-coverts, and the adults' lack of pale greyish cheeks, the Kofiau birds resembled the Moluccan race f . m. moluccensis (as Johnstone also concluded for Gag birds) rather than f . m. microhalius of other Wallacean islands. SPECTACLED IMPERIAL PIGEON Duciila perspicillata ssp. ' This is the first record of this widespread Moluccan species for the Papuan Region. We found it abundant in the canopy of primary and secondary forests, and remnant trees in gardens, singly or in groups of up to 30, far outnumbering its congener D. myristicivora. Plumage seemed closer to that of D. p. neglecta of Seram than to D. p. perspicillata of the Northern Moluccas and Buru, but we noted the leg coloration as pale greyish, rather than purple (Salvadori 1880-82) or pinkish (Coates & Bishop 1997). We recorded three vocalisa- tions: a far-carrying, descending series of c.7 hoarse notes, the first at a lower pitch than the second, similar to the call of Floury Imperial Pigeon D. pistrinaria of the Papuan Region and Northern Melanesia; a soft, short, ascending br-r-r; and a low-pitched slow note that rises and then falls in pitch. KOFIAU PARADISE KINGFISHER Tanysiptera ellioti This beautiful endemic allospecies is abundant, tame and solitary in tall shaded primary and secondary forests, and (adults but not immatures) also in shaded gardens, perching at 1-12 m but not venturing higher into the canopy. It holds perches for as long as several min- utes. In July 2002 we recorded immatures only from tall closed-canopy forests, with home ranges centred on then-dry forest pools or small streams, suggesting narrower ecological requirements in immatures than adults. Soft-part colours of adults: bill blood red, iris very dark, legs dull olive; of immatures: bill blood red, often with darker cutting edges and dark brownish markings along culmen, usually on the centre; iris very dark brown or greyish black, legs pale yellowish green, claws posteriorly dark horn or blackish and anteriorly yel- lowish beige. Name, in the Raja Ampat dialect of the Biak language spoken on Kofiau: Mampitasoi ('Mam' means 'bird'). We heard four vocalisations. The primary song is a soft, musical, ascending, accelerat- ing, rapidly trilled series of notes lasting 1.5-2.0 seconds, similar to the song of Galatea Paradise Kingfisher T. galatea but more plaintive and shorter. Agitated individuals repeat- edly gave a shortened version of the song. The call, given by individuals seen near the lared Diamond et al. 178 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) ground, is a series of three identical soft, mournful, high-pitched, slow downslurs; in some cases each note is slightly upslurred at the end. Finally, on a few occasions we heard three loud unmusical downslurs with the quality of an adolescent boy whose voice is breaking. LARGE-BILLED GERYGONE Gerygone magnirostris occasa Common in all wooded habitats from primary forest to mangrove, sago swamps and gar- dens with trees, at any height from the understorey to the canopy, and foraging alone by gleaning. That broad habitat range on Kofiau contrasts with the New Guinea mainland and with all four continental Western Papuan Islands (Batanta, Misool, Salawati and Waigeo), where several forest-dwelling congeners (Green-backed Gerygone G. chloronota, Yellow- bellied Gerygone G. chrysogaster and Fairy Gerygone G. palfebrosa) occur, and where we found G. magnirostris mainly restricted to mangrove and to riverine vegetation. Amongst New Guinea gerygones, this is the sole species to disperse across water to oceanic islands of the Papuan Region, including Biak, Karkar, Manam, Misima, Rossel and Tagula. We often heard the song, which is a light, fast, tinkling, repeated phrase similar in quality to the song of G. chloronota. Ripley (1957) described this endemic subspecies from a single specimen on the strength of its 'being much more richly yellow on the abdomen, vent and undertail coverts' and exhibiting 'darker, or brownish olive upperparts' than geographically proximate forms. We did not detect those features of Kofiau birds compared to birds that we saw in the previous and following weeks on Batanta, Misool, Salawati and Waigeo. At the time of Ripley's description, the most recent specimens available for comparison from those islands were considerably older and possibly had undergone post-mortem colour changes through fox- ing. Hence the validity of this subspecies demands confirmation. We noted Kofiau birds in life as having a distinct white eye-ring, rufous face- and neck-sides, buffy flanks, and white throat and central belly. NORTHERN FANTAIL Rhipidura rufiventris vidua Common and widespread in forest and wooded habitats, including second growth and coconut groves with scrub, from 1-25 m, foraging by long swoops and sallies and returning to the original perch. Seen alone or with Kofiau Monarch Monarcha julianae; aggressive towards Yellow-capped Pygmy Parrot Micropsitta keiensis, Shining Flycatcher Myiagra alec- to and Black Sunbird Nectarinia aspasia. This dark, cleanly patterned endemic subspecies is closest to R. r. obiensis of Obi. The song is a descending weak series of 3-5 whistled notes, occasionally preceded and / or followed by several other notes of similar quality. KOFIAU MONARCH Monarcha julianae Abundant in primary and secondary forest, at heights of 1-30 m. Often in pairs of two iden- tical birds, occasionally followed by a Northern Fantail Rhipidura rufiventris sallying presumably for insects disturbed into flight by the M. julianae, which rarely sallies. Active and tame, often flicking its wings and tail. It forages within a tree rather than at the tips of branches, by hover-gleaning, quick short hops of 0.3-1.0 m along a branch, and working vertically up a tree or vine. Its three types of vocalisations are similar to those of many other monarchs, and are especially similar to those of Spot-winged Monarch M. guttulus and Hooded Monarch M. manadensis: a weak, tremulous, high-pitched note repeated three times at inter^^als of two seconds; a short, dry, buzzy rasp or squawk; and a rapid series of squawks. In life, presumed adults have the upperparts, wings, face and throat black, the posteri- or margin of the black throat rounded; white underparts, extending anteriorly onto the Jared Diamond et al. 179 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) sides of the throat to behind the eye; top of the head pearly grey; tail ventrally black at the base, tip and medially, with broad white outer margins; bill bluish, legs dull blue-grey, eye black. All adults observed closely in 2002 had tiny white elongated spots along the shafts of the outer greater wing-coverts, but no adults seen in 2007, and only one in 1986, had such spots. With one exception, presumed non-adults had the crown, mantle and rumip dull grey, wings and tail brown, belly white, breast orange, a dark ear patch and area around the eye, a pale spot in front of the eye, and tail margins of reduced extent and off-white. The sole exception was an individual, accompanied by an adult, which had the entire upperparts (including the crown) and wings brown, the tail's underside paler brown without any visi- ble white, the underparts dirty white extending to behind the eye as in the adult, and a dark but not black face patch. M. julianae is very similar to M. guttulus in plumage, size, vocalisations and behaviour. The main distinctions of adult M. julianae from M. guttulus are that its back and wings are black not grey, white spots on the upper wing-coverts are tiny or absent, and the black throat extends less far posteriorly onto the breast. On Kofiau we observed no M. guttulus; all adult pied monarchs observed were similar except for the above-mentioned occasional presence of tiny white spots on the upper wing-coverts. II In describing M. julianae as a new species, Ripley (1959) stated that it occurs sympatri- cally on Kofiau with M. guttulus on the basis of a monarch specimen collected there by Beccari in 1875 and held in the Museo Civico di Storia Naturale, Genoa. Salvadori (1880-82, vol. 2: 23) had identified the specimen as a M. guttulus not quite adult, and differing from other M. guttulus specimens in lacking white spots on the upper wing-coverts and with the black of the throat less extensive posteriorly. That description suggested M. julianae. Hence JD wrote Dr Carlo Violani (University of Pavia), who with great kindness described in detail, measured, photographed and compared with M. guttulus Beccari's single Kofiau Figure 3. Adult Kofiau Monarch Monarcha julianae (Iwein Mauro); this monarch flycatcher is endemic to Kofiau. Jared Diamond et al. ISO Bull. B.O.C. 21HW specimen, anei then sent Beccari's specimen to the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), New York, where JD compared Beccari's specimen with Khakiaj's unique type specimen (aciult) of M. julianae borrowed from Yale's Peabody Museum of Natural History, plus the extensive series of adult and young M. guttiilus at AMNH. These comparisons confirmed, in the adult M. julianae type, the distinctions of M. julianae from M. gitttuhis that we observed in the field. The only other apparent distinction worth mentioning is that the black bib of the M. julianae type is narrower and more diamond-shaped (as noted by Ripley 1959) than in life; that appears to be an artefact of the t3^e's preparation. The Beccari specimen agrees with the M. julianae type and with our field observations in (compared to M. giittulus) the absence of white spots on the upper wing- coverts, reduced posterior extent of the black throat, closer approach of white on the throat-sides to the eye, and perhaps more extensive white distally on the undertail. Beccari's specimen differs from adult M. julianae mainly in that the primaries are grey-brown not black, the back is slate blue-grey not black, and the superciliary is mottled grev and black rather than clean black, which features led Salvadori to identify it as a subadult M. gutfuhis, and not to recognise it as an endemic taxon in 1875. The dorsal blue-grey and ventral white of Beccari's specimen suggest that it represents a more advanced plumage than the brown- backed orange-breasted non-adults that we observed. Evidently, Beccari's specimen is a not fully adult M. julianae, and there is thus no evidence for sympatry of M. guttulus and M. julianae. In short, we conclude that M. julianae is an endemic allospecies occurring on Kofiau in allopatry, and belonging to the same superspecies as either M. guttulus or (as suggested bv Ripley) M. manadensis. Filardi & Smith's (2005) molecular evidence suggests that the latter superspecies is polyphyletic. Considerations in favour of the relationship with M. guttulus rather than with M. manadensis are the white spots on the wing-coverts of many adults of M. julianae (similar to but smaller than the spots of M. guttulus); and the fact that M. guttulus is a successful island colonist present on 15 islands of the Papuan Region besides Ne^v Guinea itself (including four of the Western Papuan Islands), but that M. manadensis occurs on no island except New Guinea. These relationships warrant further study. BLACK SUNBIRD Nectarinia aspasia mariae Common in secondary forest, gardens and coconut groves, often feeding at coconut flow- ers, but absent from primary forest. Described by Ripley (1959), and accepted by Mees (1965), as an endemic subspecies closest to the nominate New Guinea race but differing somewhat in coloration. BLACK-FACED MUNIA Lonchura mohicca Encountered only on our 2002 visit, when on several occasions we observed a group of two adults and five immatures in an old overgrown coastal garden with alternating grassland and low scrub, on the Kofiau mainland opposite Deer Island. Second record for the Papuan Region, where it was previously recorded by Joliiistone (2006) from Gag. Acknowledgements Collection and library research by IM at the American Khiseum of Natural History (AMNH), Ne^v York, and at the Yale Peabody Museum (YPM), New Haven was funded through a small grant of tlie Van Tienl-io\"en Foundation for hiternational Nature Protection (VTS). Collection research by IM at Naturalis (RMNH), Leiden was funded through grant NL-TAF-388 of the S}Tithesys program of the European Commmiity. JD and KDB's field studies were funded by World Wildlife Fund. We are most grateful to A. Ambrau-Dimara for expertly guiding us around his land on Kofiau; to Dr Carlo Violani for studying and arranging tlie loan of Beccari's M. julianae specimen; and to members of the AMNH, YPM and RMNH for access to their collections. Jared Diamond et al. 181 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) References: Beccari, O. 1875. Lettera Ornitologica di O. Beccari intorno agli uccelli osservati durante un suo recente viag- gio alia Nuova Guinea. Ann. Mus. Civ. Stor. Nnt. Genova 7: 704-720. Beehler, B., Pratt, T. K. & Zimmerman, D. A. 1986. Birds of New Guinea. Princeton Univ. Press. BirdLife International. 2007. Species factsheet: Tam/siptera ellioti. www.birdlife.org (accessed on 15 March 2008). Coates, B. J. & Bishop, K. D. 1997. A guide to the birds of Wallacea. Dove Publications, Alderley. Darlington, P. J. 1957. Zoogeography: the geographical distribution of animals. Wiley, New York. Diamond, J. 1972a. Biogeographic kinetics: estimation of relaxation times for avifaunas of Southwest Pacific islands. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 69: 3199-3203. Diamond, J. 1972b. Colonization of exploded volcanic islands by birds: the supertramp strategy. Science 183: 803-806. Diamond, J. 1981. Flightlessness and fear of flying in island species. Nature 293: 507-508. Filardi, C. E. «& Smith, C. E. 2005. Molecular phylogenetics of monarch flycatchers (genus Monarcha) with emphasis on Solomon Island endemics. Mol. Phyl. & Evol. 37: 776-788. Gill, F. & Wright, M. 2006. Birds of the world: recommended English names. Christopher Helm, London. lUCN. 2001. lUCN Red List categories and criteria: version 3.1. lUCN Species Survival Commission, Gland, Switzerland & Cambridge, UK. Johnstone, R. E. 2006. The birds of Gag Island, Western Papuan Islands, Indonesia. Rec. West. Austral. Mus. 23: 115-132. Mayr, E. 1941. List of New Guinea birds. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York. Mayr, E. 1976. Wallace's Line in the light of recent zoogeographic studies. Pp. 626-645 in Mayr, E. Evolution and the diversity of life. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA. Mayr, E. & Diamond, J. 2001. The birds of Northern Melanesia: speciation, ecology, and biogeography . Oxford Univ. Press. Mayr, E. & Meyer de Schauensee, R. 1939. Zoological results of the Denison-Crockett South Pacific Expedition for the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 1937-1938. Part V. — Birds from the Western Papuan Islands. Froc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 91: 145-163. Mees, G. F. 1965. Revision of Nectarinia sericea (Lesson). Ardea 53: 29-56. Mees, G. F. 1972. Die Vogel der Insel Gebe. Zool. Meded. 46: 69-89. Ripley, S. D. 1957. New birds from the Western Papuan Islands. Postilla 31: 1-4. Ripley, S. D. 1959. Comments on birds from the Western Papuan Islands. Postilla 38: 1-17. Salvadori, T. 1880-82. Ornitologia della Papuasia e delle Molucche, 3 vols. Paravia, Turin. Wallace, A. R. 1858. On the tendency of varieties to depart indefinitely from the original type. Proc. Linn. Soc. Zool. 3: 53-62. Wallace, A. R. 1869. The Malay Archipelago. Harper, New York. Wallace, A. R. 1876. The geographical distribution of animals; with a study of the relations of living and extinct fau- nas as elucidating the past changes of the Earth's surface. Macmillan, London. Wallace, A. R. 1880. Island Life: or, the phenomena and causes of insular faunas and floras, including a revision and attempted solution of the problem of geological climates. Macmillan, London. White, C. M. N. & Bruce, M. D. 1986. The birds of Wallacea (Sulawesi, the Moluccas and Lesser Sunda Islands, Indonesia). BOU Check-list No. 7. British Ornithologists' Union, London. Addresses: Jared Diamond, Department of Geography, UCLA, 1255 Bunche Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1524, USA, e-mail: jdiamond@geog.ucla.edu. Iwein Mauro, P.O. Box 289, Sorong 98401, Indonesia, e-mail: iweinmauro@gmail.com. K. David Bishop, P.O. Box 1234, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia, e-mail: kdbishop@ozemail.com.au. Like Wijaya, cv. Ekonexion, Jl. Bukit Baru, Klademak I, RT 02 RW 1, Klaligi Quarter, Sorong 98401, Indonesia, e-mail: admin@ekonexion.com © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Marco Antonio Rego et al. 182 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) First records of Fine-barred Piculet Picumnus suhtilis from Acre, western Amazonia, Brazil hy Marco Antonio Rego, Sidnei Dantas, Edson Giiilherme & Paido Martuscelli Received 11 June 2008 Summary. — Fine-barred Piculet Picl^mnu5 suhtilis is a poorly known south-east Peruvian endemic. Here we present the first records for Brazil, from Acre state: a specimen collected on the rio Macaua, in March 1998, and a sight record from the rio Purus, in August 2007. The new records extend the species' range more than 400 km to the east. Tlie genus Picumnus is restricted to the Neotropics, except the Speckled Piculet P. innominatus of India and south-east Asia (Winkler & Christie 2002). This unusual distribu- tion represents one of the most intriguing problems in avian phylogeny and biogeography. Nevertheless, the genus forms a well-defined monophyletic group (Goodge 1972, Winkler & Christie 2002, Benz et al. 2006). Fine-barred Piculet Picumnus suhtilis is considered endemic to south-east Peru, at the base of Andes and in the Ucayali and Madre de Dios drainages (Short 1982, Schifter 2000, Winkler & Christie 2002, Lane et al 2004, Walker et al. 2006; Fig. 1). It was described as recently as 1968 (Stager 1968), from Hacienda Villacarmen (12°51'S, 71°15'W), dpto. Cuzco, and is sympatric in south-east Peru with Gold-fronted Piculet P. aurifrons and in central east Peru with Plain-breasted Piculet P. castelnaii (Stager 1968). It superficially resembles the lat- ter species, but is distinguished by the spotted crown marked with orange, rather than red, in males, and barred chest (Stager 1968, Schifter 2000). It is locally common but geographi- cally range-restricted, occurring in humid tropical forests at 200-1,100 m, and its natural history is poorly known (Winkler & Christie 2002, Schulenberg et al. 2007). Although for- merly considered Near Threatened, the species is not currently assigned any degree of threat (lUCN 2007). Here we present the first two records of P. suhtilis for Brazil. In March 1998, PM visited the rio Macaua (09°52'S, 69°23'W), a tributary^ of the laco, which in turn flows into the Purus, in south-west Brazilian Amazonia, where he collected an adult male P. suhtilis, held in the Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de Sao Paulo (MZUSP), Brazil. The specimen (MZUSP 76408) presents all of the diagnostic features of P. suhtilis including the dorsal and ventral barring, white-spotted crown and more orange-red nape and forecrown. It was moulting primaries nine and ten, and measured: w^ing 49.6 mm; tail 31.8 mm; exposed culmen 11.7 mm; tarsus 9.2 mm. P. suhtilis was also recorded by EG and SD on 17-31 August 2007 on the upper Purus, at a locality known as 'Santa Cruz Velha', on the right bank of the river (09°00'S, 69°32'W). At dawn on 30 August 2007, SD heard a Picumnus vocalisation similar to Golden-spangled Piculet P. exilis. The bird was located foraging high in a terra firme forest edge dominated by the bamboo Guadua zueherhaueri. Shortly afterwards two piculets were seen c.8 m above ground, but were quickly lost to view. Subsequentlv, one bird flew do\vn to c.1.5 m above ground, making it easv to distinguish from Rufous-breasted Piculet P. rufiventris, "^vhich is fairly common in such habitat in Acre (one specimen was collected at the same locality and deposited in the Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi, Belem, collection [MPEG 63298]). Marco Antonio Rego et al. 183 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) 73 70 Figure 1. Updated distribution of Fine-barred Piculet Picumniis subtilis. The dotted circle represents the MZUSP specimen and filled triangle the sight record made by EG and SD. Circles represent specimen localities (the type locality is denoted by the filled circle). Unfilled squares represent sight records from Peru. Several other bamboo specialists were noted in the same habitat as P. subtilis: Flammulated Pygmy Tyrant Hemitriccus flammiilatus , Long-crested Pygmy Tyrant Lophotriccus eidophotes, Manu Antbird Cercomacra manu and Goeldi's Antbird Myrmeciza goeldi, but the piculet did not appear to form mixed flocks with these species. EG and SD tape-recorded the piculets' vocalisations (comprising five notes with even-spaced intervals: si, si, si, si, si), and endeavoured to attract them using playback, but they were not respon- sive. The following day, SD observed the species again and was able to make better recordings and take photographs. The recordings (available at www.xeno-canto.org) were compared with the voices of other piculets that occur in the area based on Erize et al. (2006), including P. subtilis and P. castelnau, enabling SD and EG to be confident of their identification. These records from Acre represent not only the first Brazilian records but also a range extension of c.400 km north-east, and both are from the lowlands. Previously considered endemic to Peru (Erize et al. 2006, Schulenberg et al. 2007), the species' presence in Brazil might suggest that its range is more closely associated to the distribution of bamboo vege- tation than to the Andes foothills (D. F. Lane pers. comm.). Fiowever, P. subtilis was not recorded along the upper rio Jurua, Acre, in bamboo, despite fairly intensive field work that yielded several new species for Brazil, among them three bamboo specialists (Whittaker & Oren 1999, Whittaker et al. 2002). This suggests that, in Brazil, the species may be restricted to the Purus drainage, and will not be found along other rivers with extensive bamboo in Acre and neighbouring south-west Amazonas (A. Whittaker pers. comm.). Nevertheless, Marco A\ntonio Rego et al. 184 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) studies of other suitable areas in Acre are needed to more reliably determine the distribu- tion and population of this poorly known piculet, along with other species such as the recently described Rufous Twistwing Cnipodcctcs siipcrnifus (Lane ct al. 2007, Tobias ct al. 2008). " Acknowledgements MAR thanks Dr Luis Fabio Sih-eira, A. Whittaker, J. F. Pacheco and M. Vasconcelos for re^■ie^ving the text, Tom Schulenberg for important distributional data, Vitor Q. Piacentini for important ad\-ice and help with the map, and Daniel F. Lane, who offered much assistance and confirmed the identification of the MZUSP specimen. EG and SD thank Dr Alexandre Aleixo for logistical support of their research along the upper Purus, and EG thanks Conser\^ation International /Belem for part-fundii^g the project 'Avifauna do Estado do Acre: Composi^ao, Distribuicao Geografica e Conservacao'. References: Benz, B. W., Robbins, M. B. & Peterson, A. T. 2006. Evolutionary history of woodpeckers and allies {Aves: Picidae): placing key taxa on the phylogenetic tree. Mol. Phyl. & Evol. 40: 389-399. Erize, F., Mata, J. R. R. & Rumboll, M. 2006. Birds of South America — non-passerines. Princeton Univ. Press. lUCN. 2007. lUCN Red List of threatened species, www.iucnredlist.org (accessed 14 December 2007). Goodge, W. R. 1972. Anatomical evidence for phylogenetic relationships among ^voodpeckers. Auk 89: 65-85. Lane, D. F. & Pequeho T. 2004. Aves / Birds. Pp. 204-214 in Vriesendorp, C., Rivera Chavez, L., Moskovits D. & Shopland, J. (eds.) Peru: Adegantoni. Rapid Biological Inventories Rep. 15. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago. Lane, D. F., Servat, G. P., Valqui, T. H. & Lambert, F. R. 2007. A distinctive new species of t\Tant flvcatcher (Passeriformes: Tyraimidae: Cnipodectes) from southeastern Peru. Auk 124: 762-772. Schulenberg, T. S., Stotz, D. F., Lane, D. F., O'Neill, J. P. & Parker, T. A. 2007. Birds of Peru. Princeton Umv. Press. Short, L. L. 1982. Woodpeckers of the world. Monogr. Ser. 4. Delaware Mus. Nat. Hist., Greenville. Schifter, H. 2000. A further specimen of the Fine-barred Piculet {Picumnus suhtilis) in the Museum of Natural History, Vienna, Austria. Orn. Neotrop. 11: 247-248. Stager, K. E. 1968. A new piculet from southeastern Peru. Los Angeles Co. Mus. Contrib. Sci. 153. Tobias, J. A., Lebbin, D. J., Aleixo, A., Andersen, M. J., Guilherme, E., Hosner, P. A. & Seddon, N. 2008. Distribution, behavior, and conser\^ation status of the Rufous T^vistwing {Cnipodectes superrufus). Wilson J. Orn. 120: 38-49. Walker, B., Stotz, D. F., Pequeho, T. & Fitzpatrick, J. W. 2006. Birds of the Manu Biosphere Reser^-e, Peru. Fieldiana, Zool. 110. Whittaker, A. & Oren, D. C. 1999. Important ornithological records from the Rio Jiirua, western Amazonia, including twelve additions to the Brazilian avifaima. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 119: 235-259. Wliittaker, A., Oren, D. C, Pacheco, J. F., Parrini, R. & Minns, J. C. 2002. Aves registradas na reserva extra- tivista do Alto Jurua. Pp. 81-99 in Enciclopedia da floresta, o alto Jurud. Ed. Sch^varcz, Sao Paulo. Winkler, H. & Cliristie, D. A. 2002. Family Picidae (woodpeckers). Pp. 296-555 in del Hovo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol. 7. L}tix Edicions, Barcelona. Addresses: Marco Antonio Rego, Dpto. Zoologia, Universidade de Sao Paulo, CP 11461, 05422-970, and Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de Sao Paulo, CP 42494, 04218-970, Sao Paulo, Brazil, e-mail: pyroderus@yahoo.com.br. Edson Guill^erme, Pos-graduagao em Zoologia, Universidade Federal do Para / Museu Paraense Emflio Goeldi, Av. Perimetral 1901, 66077-530, Belem, Para, Brazil, and Universidade Federal do Acre, Departamento de Ciencias da Natureza, Laboratorio de Paleontologia, BR-364, km 4, Campus, 69915-900, Rio Branco, Acre, Brazil, e-mail: guillierme@ufac.br. Sidnei de Melo Dantas, Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi, Av. Perimetral 1901, 66077-530, Belem, Para, Brazil, e-mail: smdantas@yahoo.com. Paulo Martuscelli, Rua Gravata 387, Quinta da Boa Msta, 07600-000 Mairipora, Sao Paulo, Brazil. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 APPENDIX 1 Sources used to prepare the distribution map: AMNH = American Museum of Natural Histor\- (Ne^v \ ork); FMNH = Field Museum of Natural Histor\- (Chicago); NMW = Naturhistorisches Museum Wien (\'iem-ia); PM = Peabod\- Museum of Natural Histor\-, Yale Universitv (NeAV Haven); MNHN = Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle (Paris); MZPW = Museum and Institute of Zoologv, Polish Academv of Sciences (Warsaw); MZUSP = Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de Sao Paulo (Sao Paulo). Marco Antonio Rego et al. 185 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Locality Reference / observer Specimen / sight record Santa Rosa, upper no Ucayali, dpto. Ucayali, Peru Stager (1968) AMNH Timpia, dpto. Cuzco, Peru N. Gerhart (unpubl.) sight KapiromasH dpto. Cuzco, Peru Lane & Pequefio (2004) sight Quebrada Aguas Calientes, 2.75 km east of Shintuya, upper no Madre de Dios, dpto. Madre de Dios, Peru Walker et al. (2006) sight Moskitania, 13.4 km north-west of Atalaya, upper no Madre de Dios, dpto. Madre de Dios, Peru FMNH specimen database FMNH Hacienda Villacarmen, dpto. Cuzco, Peru Stager (1968) FMNH Hacienda Amazonia, dpto. Madre de Dios, Peru FMNH specimen database FMNH Consuelo, 15.9 km south-west of Pilcopata, dpto. Cuzco, Peru Walker et al. (2006) sight Sangaban, dpto. Puno, Peru Schifter (2000) NMW Cadena, dpto. Cuzco, Peru T. Schulenberg (pers. comm.) MNHN Cadena, dpto. Cuzco, Peru Stager (1968) YPM Hacienda Cadena, dpto. Cuzco, Peru Stager (1968) FMNH Huaynapata, dpto. Cuzco, Peru T. Schulenberg (pers. comm.) MNHN Marcapata, dpto. Cuzco, Peru T. Schulenberg (pers. comm.) MZPW Candamo, dpto. Puno, Peru Stager (1968) AMNH Rio Macaua, Acre, Brazil present work MZUSP Santa Cruz Velha, right bank of rio Purus, Acre, Brazil present work sight Kinglet Calyptura Calyptura cristata (Vieillot, 1818): documented record for the state of Sao Paulo and taxonomic status of the name Pipra tyrannulus Wagler, 1830 by Renata Stopiglia, Lorian C. Straker & Marcos A. Raposo Received 29 July 2008 A specimen (ZMB 2306) of Kinglet Calyptura Calyptura cristata (Vieillot, 1818) collected in the state of Sao Paulo by Friedrich Sellow (1789-1831) and Ignaz Franz J. M. von Olfers (1793-1872) was rediscovered in the ornithological collection of the Museum fiir Naturkunde (ZMB) in Berlin in 2007. The finding has important consequences for the nomenclature of this taxon as well as for knowledge of its distribution. Concerning its nomenclature, the species Calyptura cristata was originally described by Vieillot (1818: 528) as Pardalotus cristatus based on a specimen collected by Pierre Antoine Delalande in Rio de Janeiro. The type specimen is held at the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris (General Catalogue 2004-300). Nowadays, the genus Pardalotus Vieillot, 1816, is applied to a small family of oscines (Pardalotidae) confined to Australia. Swainson (1832) therefore introduced the genus name Calyptura to separate the Brazilian species from the Australian, thereby establishing a new combination for the epithet cristatus. Specimen ZMB 2306 has two significant labels: a type label in red inscribed 'Pipra tyrannu- lus Wagler (ex Licht. M.S.)', probably added by Jean Cabanis, curator at ZMB in 1850-92; and Renata Stopiglia et al. 186 Bull. B.O.C. 21)09 129(3) Figure 1. Female Kinglet Cal\^tura Cah/ptum cristata specimen (ZMB 2306) collected by Sellow and Olfers in the state of Sao Paulo, Brazil, and held at the Museum fiir Naturkunde, Berlin: a) dorsal view; b) lateral vie^v (Marcos A. Raposo) a green label from the original mount that identifies the specimen as Pipra (R.) tyrannu- his and describes it as a female collected in Sao Paulo by Sellow and Olfers (Figs. 1-2). In reference to the type of Pipra tyrammhis Wagler, 1830, it seems Wagler (1830) ^vorked on a revision of the genus Pipra and pro- posed, amongst others, a new combination for 'Regiilus tyranmiliis Lichtenstein' (cited without dates or references). Furthermore, history has treated the name h/ranuulus in two distinct ways. Sclater (1888: 394) treated Pipra tyranmihis Wagler, 1830, as a s}Tionvm of Calyptura cristata (Vieillot, 1818), whereas Hellmayr (1929: 127) stated Pipmi tyranmihis Wagler, 1830, to be a new name for Pardalotiis cristatus Vieillot, 1818. Analysing the specimen and literature, it is clear to us that Wagler (1830) ^vas first to publish the name tyrannulus, which he considered to be Lichtenstein's. Although Johann Georg Wagler (1800-32) never claimed to be the author of the specific name, under the terms of the Code (ICZN 1999) he is, nevertheless, its author; his reference to a MS name of Lichtenstein has no standing under the Code. This "M.S." probablv referred to the label data attached to the specimen or, implausibly, to an impublished catalogue bv Lichtenstein Figure 2. Close-up of the labels attached to specimen ZMB 2306 of Kinglet Calyptura Calyptura cristata held at the Museum fiir Naturkunde, Berlin (Pascal Eckhoff) Renata Stopiglia et al. 187 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) (D. M. Teixeira pers. comm.)- Wagler himself never mentioned tyrannulus as being a new name for cristatiis. Rather, he considered Pardalotiis cristatus a synonym of Pipra tyrannulus in his list. It is worth mentioning that Lichtenstein (1823) did not mention the taxon. In light of the above, Hellmayr (1929) was incorrect to consider tyrannulus a nomen novum, whilst Sclater's (1888) treatment of Pipra tyrannulus Wagler, 1830, as a junior syn- onym of Calyptura cristata (Vieillot, 1818) is the correct one. This is strongly reinforced by Lichtenstein (1854: 16), who referred to Calyptura cristata as the name of this taxon in his Nomenclator Avium Musei Zoologici Berolinensis. Under the Code (Art. 72.7), the name-bearing types of taxa stated to be new names are the original types, 'both the nominal taxa they denote have the same name-bearing type despite any simultaneous restriction or application of the new replacement name (nomen novum) to particular specimens or any contrary designation of type, or any different taxo- nomic usage of the new replacement name.' So, if Hellmayr (1929) was correct about the nomen novum condition of P. tyrannulus, ZMB 2306 would lack type material status. In fact, this specimen is more properly considered as one of the syntypes given that at least one other specimen (ZMB 2305, also labelled Regulus tyrannulus, from 'Brasilien' and also collected by Sellow and Olfers), was analysed at that time by Wagler. Most subsequent authors, including Snow (1979), do not mention the name Pipra tyrannulus. Regarding the record for the state of Sao Paulo, specimen ZMB 2306 was collected by Sellow and Olfers sometime between May 1819 and April 1820 (Berlin museum catalogue data), during their visit to Brazil. According to Urban (1893, 1906) and Hoehne et al. (1941), Sellow and Olfers, after eight months collecting in Minas Gerais, initiated their work in the state of Sao Paulo in May 1819. They worked together until mid July of that year, when Olfers returned to Rio de Janeiro (Urban 1906). During this period in Sao Paulo, they visit- ed several localities, including Jundiai, Itu and Ipanema, where they spent most time. Sellow left Ipanema in January 1820, collecting in the surroundings of Santos, including the Serra de Cubatao and Rio das Pedras, until mid- April 1820, when he commenced his jour- ney to Rio de Janeiro (Urban 1893, 1906, Hoehne et al. 1941). The range of Calyptura cristata has long been considered to comprise just a few locali- ties in Rio de Janeiro, despite that D. F. Stotz (in Ridgely & Tudor 1994: 737) hypothesised that the species might be found in north-east Sao Paulo, at Ubatuba. Indeed, Sigrist (2006) recently reported a possible sight record from Sao Paulo. Now, based on label, catalogue and historical data, the Berlin specimen of C. cristata (ZMB 2306) confirms that this enigmat- ic species does (or did) occur in Sao Paulo. Acknowledgements We are immensely grateful to the curator of the bird collection at the Museum fiir Naturkunde, Sylke Frahnert, and her assistant, Pascal Eckhoff, for many kindnesses and discussing the type status of specimens ZMB 2305 and ZMB 2306. We acknowledge our colleagues Jorge Nacuiovic and Dr Dante Teixeira, who shared important data with us. We are also indebted to Dr Eduardo L. R. de Moraes, for fruitful discussions concerning the history surrounding this specimen, and to our referees Frank Steinheimer and Steven Gregory for their valuable comments and corrections. The CNPq, National Research and Development Council, are thanked for providing financial support to the project 'Catalogo de tipos de especies de aves brasileiras' (Edital Uruversal 01/2006, Processo n° 479049/2006-8). References: Hellmayr, C. E. 1929. Catalogue of birds of the Americas, pt. 6. Field Mus. Nat. Hist. Puhl, Zool. Ser. 13(6): 1-258. Hoehne, F. C, Kuhlmann, M. & Handro, O. 1941. O Jardim Botdnico de Sao Paulo. Secretaria da Agricultura, Industria e Comercio, Sao Paulo. Renata Stopiglia et al. 188 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). 1999. lutcnnifioiitil code ofzoolo^iciil uouwucU]- tiirc. Fourth edn. The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, c/o The Natural History Museum, London. Lichtenstein, M. H. C. 1823. Vcrzcicliniss dcr Doublctten dcs zoologischcii Museums dcr Kdnigl. Universitat zu Berlin nebst Beschreibung vieler bisher unbekaiinter Arten von Saugethieren, Vogeln, Amphibien und Fischen, Berlin. Lichtenstein, M. H. C. 1854. Nomcndator Avium Musci Zoologici Bcroliucnsis. Buchdruckerei der Koniglichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin. Ridgely, R. S. & Tudor, G. 1994. The birds of South America, vol. 2. Univ. of Texas Press, Austin. Sclater, P. L. 1888. Catalogue of the Passer if ormes, or perching birds, in the collection of the British Museum, vol. 14. Trustees of the Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), London. Sigrist, T. 2006. Aves do Brasil. Uma visao arti'stica. Fosfertil, Sao Paulo. Snow, D. W. 1979. Family Cotingidae. Pp. 281-308 in Traylor, M. A. (ed.) Check-list of birds of the world, vol. 8. Mus. Comp. ZooL, Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA. Urban, I. 1893. Biographische Skizzen. 1. Friedrich Sellow (1789-1831). Bot. fahrb. Sijst. 17: 177-198. Urban, I. 1906. Vitae itineraque collectorum botanicorum, Notae collaboratorum biographicae. Flora Brasiliensis ratio edenti chronologica, Systema, Index Familiarum. Pp. 1-268 in Martins, C. F. P., Eichler, A. G. & Urban, I. (eds.) Flora Brasiliensis. Enumeratio plantarum in Brasilia, hactenus detectarum qiias suis aliorumque botanicorum studiis descriptas et methodo naturali digestas partim icone ilhistratas. R. Oldenbourg, Munich & Liepzig. Vieillot, L. P. 1818. Nouveau dictionnaire d'histoire naturelle appliquee aux arts, a V agriculture , a V economic rurale et domestique, a la medicine, vol. 24: 528-529. Deterville, Paris. Wagler, J. 1830. Revisio generis Pipra. Isis von Oken 35(9): 928-943. Address: Museu Nacional, Departamento de Vertebrados, Setor de Ornitologia, Quinta da Boa Vista, s/n, 20940-040, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. E-mail: stopiglia@mn.ufrj.br © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 The identity of the type species of the cuckoo-dove genus Macropygia Swainson, 1837 (Columbidae) by Richard Schodde Received 7 September 2008 Summary. — Evidence is presented that the taxonomic identity of the type species of the cuckoo-dove genus Macropygia Swainson — Cohimba phasianella Temminck — is of the east Australian form of Macropygia amboinensis (Linnaeus), known today as Macropygia amboinensis phasianella (Temminck). When Swainson (1837) described the cuckoo-dove genus Macropiygia, he cited the species designated subsequently as its type as 'M. phasianella', with the unelaborated refer- ence Tl. Col. 100/ That reference was to pi. 100 in the Nouveau Recueil de Planches coloriees d'Oiseaux of Temminck & Tangier (1820-39), hereafter the Planches coloriees. The entry for pi. 100 in that work is titled 'Colombe phasianelle. Columba phasianella. Temm.', based by refer- ence on a cuckoo-dove that Temminck had described from east Australia (Temminck 1821a). Gregory et al. (2007) interpreted Swainson's reference to pi. 100 strictly, building a case that the bird figured was instead Philippine Macropygia tenuirostris Bonaparte, 1854, which had first been designated as the taxonomic species involved by Mathews (1920: 9). Thereby they rejected Schodde's (1997: 23) argument that Columba phasianella Temminck, 1821, of east Australia was the type species, designated by Selby (1840). Bonaparte (1854) had already concluded that the specimen figured in the Planches coloriees was of his new species from the Philippines, a point not in dispute here. Richard Schodde 189 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Gregory et al. (2007) contended that valid type species designation of Macropygia 'must be conditioned by the qualifying 'PL Col. 100' imposed by Swainson with the meaning that he indicated the bird depicted and not the later text to that plate'. In this case. Arts. 69.2.4 and 11.10 of the International code of zoological nomenclature (ICZN 1999), hereafter the Code, should apply. These articles validate nominal type species that are applied deliberately to taxa different from those originally bearing their name, i.e. are misapplied or 'misidenti- fied' by intention. If Swainson (1837) had nominated Columba phasianella on pi. 100 on the explicit grounds that it was not Temminck's (1821a) original Columba phasianella, then Gregory et al.'s (2007) recognition of Macropygia tenuirostris Bonaparte as the taxonomic species involved is correct. Gregory et al (2007) nevertheless did not address this circum- stance; nor did they, or Mathews (1920: 9) before them, provide evidence that Swainson had 'expressly stated' that he was consciously referring to a Philippine and not an east Australian cuckoo-dove, as required by Art. 69.2.4. In fact, Swainson's (1837) bald reference to 'PL Col. 100' does not consciously refer to a Philippine cuckoo-dove. Nor does it necessarily refer to the figure alone, divorced from Temminck's text. At least three reasons exist for this. First, the Planches coloriees is unpagi- nated: the only way that Swainson could refer to entries in it, whether figure or text or both, was by quoting the plate number. As text is not expressly excluded from figure in his refer- ence to 'PL Col. 100', objective interpretation of that reference should treat both. Secondly, although the plate was issued in December 1821 ahead of its text in August 1822 (Stresemann 1922, Dickinson 2001), both had long been available together before Swainson saw them for his description of Macropygia in 1837. Significantly, the binomen 'Columba phasianella' was used only in the title of Temminck's text, not on the earlier figure nor its wrapper (Gregory et al. 2007, from Froriep 1822). Thus, in Swainson's full reference — 'M. phasianella PL Col. 100' — plate and text are tied together through the name; and so the text to pi. 100 cannot be excluded from the identification of the type species. Thirdly, major illus- trated works were Swainson's (1837) unexplained choice for referencing species characteristic of genera in the encyclopaedia where Macropygia was described. Common sense says that he cited figures of species there merely as exemplars of the genera he was describing, and not for intrinsic specific identity. Had he specified Temminck's figure alone because it was a species different from that described in Temminck's text, he would have said so according to the views expressed in his introductory paragraph 220 on p. 201 (Swainson 1837). Instead, he kept Temminck's species name, thereby implicitly accepting phasianella in Temminck's taxonomic sense. Here is the crux of the argument. Type species carry the names of genera, and to func- tion as such they must be taxonomically circumscribed (cf. Art. 11. 10). For Swainson and Macropygia, the type species is Columba phasianella Temminck according to Temminck's cir- cumscription of the species phasianella in the Planches coloriees. In that work, Temminck's taxonomic understanding of phasianella is made clear in the text and figure for pi. 100 com- bined, not by the figure alone. What is that understanding? Temminck (1821a) first described Columba phasianella from a presumed immature (female) from near Port Jackson (Sydney) in eastern Australia, in May 1821, after examining the specimen in the collection of the Lirmean Society on a visit to London in 1819. By the time he began preparing its entry for the Planches coloriees about a year later, he had seen adult and male material from else- where in the Indo-Australasian archipelago. It led him to broaden his perception of phasianella to include similar-looking cuckoo-doves from the Sundas, Moluccas and Philippines, as explained in the following paragraph. Gregory et al. (2007) contended instead that Temminck had circumscribed phasianella differently in the Planches coloriees by including Indo-Philippine populations and excluding Australian (and Moluccan) members. Kk'haid Schoddo 190 Hull, n.o.c. 2t)(w \2'){r->) Thus thev treated Coliiiuhn pluisiiiihilii Temminck in the Plnnchcs coloriccs as a junior homo- n\'m of Cohiuilm pluisiiiiwllii Temminck, May 1821. This, nevertheless, is an error because, in the account in the Plniiclics coloriccs, Temminck (1821b, 1822) expUcitly inchided the figureti anci ciescribed adult male from the Philippines and his 'immature' from Port Jackson within the one species by express mention of botli age forms. The heading and initial sentences of his text state: 'Colombe phasianelle. / Cohiuiba phasinucUa. Temm. / L'Adulte - Planche 100. / Nous figurons cet oiseau sous le plumage de I'etat parfait. Une courte notice, prise sur un jeune individu tue a la Nouvelle-Hollande, a ete donne dans le vol. 13 des Transactions Linneemies, pag. 129, sous les nom indiques ci- dessus'. Confirming the connection is the ensuing account of distribution: 'La Colombe phasianelle parait repandue dans le plus grand nombre des iles qui forment les archipels de la Sonde, des Moluques, des Philippines, ct jiisqii' ii In NoiivelJc-HolInnde' (italics mine). In pi. 100 of the Planches coloriccs, the basic reference for type species identity for Macropygia, Temminck thus treated Australian, Moluccan and Sunda-Philippine populations as a single species, and employed for them Coluiuba phasiancUa under which he had first described the Australian form. The type species of Macropygia Swainson is thus Coluiuba phasiancUa Temminck, May 1821 = Macropi/\^ia aiuboiucusis phasiancUa (Temminck, May 1821), designated by Selby (1840). Contra Gregory ct al. (2007), this does not 'disrupt stabihty' because Coluiuba phasiancUa Temminck in the taxonomic sense of Macropi/gia {auiboincnsis) pJiasianclla (Temminck) has been used as the type species of Macropi/gia by more authors (Sah^aciori 1882, 1893, Wardlaw Ramsay 1890," Mathews 1910-11, Condon 1975, Schodde 1997) and over a longer period than in the sense ot Macropygia tenuirostris Bonaparte (RAOU Checklist Committee 1926, Mathews 1927, 1946, Peters 1937). Acknowledgements 1 am grateful to the six members of the Standing Committee on Ornithological Nomenclature of the International Ornithological Committee who read and responded so helpfiilh- and in such detail to the argu- ments presented in this paper. Those arguments do not necessarily retlect the \'ie\vs of respondents. References: Bonaparte, C. L. 1854. Coup d'oeil sur les pigeons (troisieme partie). Coniptcs Rcudiis J' Acad. Sci. (Paris) 39(24): 1102-1112. Condon, H. T. 1975. CliCiklisf of the birds of Aiistmlin, pt. 1. Roval Australasian Ornithologists' Union, Melbourne. Dickinson, E. C. 2001. Systematic notes on Asian birds. 9. The "Nou\ eau receuil de planches coloriees " of Temminck & Tangier (1820-1839). ZooL Vcrhaud. 335: 7-54. Froriep, L. F. 1822. Notizen aus dem Gebiete der Natur- und heilkunde. cols. 130-132. Gregory, S. M. S., Dickinson, E. C. & Voisin, C. 2007. The genus Macvopxigia Swainson, 1837, and its t\'pe ' species. Bull. Brit. Oni. CI. 127: 321-326. hiternational Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). 1999. Intcruatioiuil code of zoological uouioicln- fiirc. Fourth edn. The International Trust tor Zoological Nomenclatin-e, c o The Natural History Museum, London. Mathews, G. M. 1910-11. The hird> of Austral la. \ ol. 1. H. F. & G. Witherbv & Co., London. Mathews, G. M. 1920. The birds of Australia. Supplement 1. H. F. & G. Witherbv & Co., London. Mathews, G. M. 1927. S\/steiua Avniiu .Australasiaiiaruui, pt. 1. British Ornithologists' Union, London. Mathews, G. M. 1946. .4 uvrkni^^.: list of Australian birds. Privately published, Sydney. Peters, J. L. 1937. CJieek-list of birds of the world, vol. 3. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA. Royal Australasian Ornithologists' L'nion (RAOU) Checklist Committee. 1926. Official checklist of the birds of Australia. Second edn. RAOL, Melbourne. Salvadori, T. 1882. Ornitolo^iia delta Papuasia e delle Molucche, vol. 3. Paravia & Co., Torino. SaK adori, T. 18'-)3. Catiilo^ue of the Coluiubae. or pigeons, in the collection of the British Museum. Catalogue of the birds in the Ihilisli Museum, vol. 21. Trustees of the Brit. Mus., London. Schoddo. R. hH)7. Columbidae. Pp. 9-63 Houston, W. W. K. & Wells, A. (eds.) Zoological catalogue of .■\uslralia ,"^7.2 . Uvn {Columbidae to Coraciidae). CSIRO, Melbourne. Selby, P. j. 1840. .1 eatalo<:ue of the \:euerie and sub-generic types of the class Aves. T. & J. Hodgson, Ne\\-castle. Richard Schodde 191 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(3) Stresemann, E. 1922. Erscheinungsdaten von Temminck und Laugiers "Planches Coloriees". Anz. Oru. Gcs. Bay em 1(7): 54-55. Swainson, W. 1837. O;; tlic natural history and classification of birds, vol. 2. Longmans, Brown, Green & Longmans, London. Temminck, C. J. 1821a. Account of some new species of birds of the genera Psittacus and Coluuiba, in the museum of the Linnean Society. Trans. Linn. Sac. Lond. 13: 107-130. Temminck, C. J. 1821b. PI. 100 and wrapper for Livr. 17 in Temminck, C. J. & Laugier, M. 1820-39. Nonvcau Receuil de Planches coloriees d'Oiseaiix, pour servir de suite et de complement aux planches erduminees de Buffon. Dufour & d'Ocagne / G. Levrault, Paris. Temminck, C. J. 1822. Text for pi. 100 of Livr. 17 //; Temminck, C. J. & Laugier, M. 1820-39. Nouveau Receud de Planches coloriees d'Oiseaux, pour servir de suite et de complement aux planches eiduminees de Buffon. Dufour & d'Ocagne / G. Levrault, Paris. Temminck, C. J. & Laugier, M. 1820-39. Nouveau Receuil de Planches coloriees d'Oiseaux, pour servir de suite et de complement aux planches enluminees de Buffon, 5 vols. Dufour & d'Ocagne / G. Levrault, Paris. Wardlaw Ramsay, R. G. 1890. On the Columbinae genus Macropygia and its allies. Ibis (6)2: 214-247. Address: 6/14 Hartigan Street, Garran, ACT 2605, Australia. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 A substitute name for Dryobates minor heinrichi von Jordans hy Edward C. Dickinson, Sylke Frahnert & Cees S. Roselaar Received 5 March 2009 The name heinrichi was applied as new to two different species of woodpecker in the genus Dryobates in 1940. The collector in both instances was Gerd Heinrich. One of the two, Dryobates hyperythnis lieinricJii Stresemann, 1940, a race of Rufous- bellied Woodpecker that was described from Mt. Victoria in western Burma, did not appear in Peters (1948), perhaps because it was not listed in the Zoological Record before then. Indeed World War II might have led to the name being completely ignored had not Smythies (1953) listed it, and he seemed to accept the name as valid. However, a rapid re- evaluation suggests that these specimens fall within the range of colour variation exhibited by nominotypical hypierythrus. Stresemann suggested that Mt. Victoria birds are shorter winged, but the number of available specimens is small and we prefer to treat this name as a synonym of nominate hyperythrus. The holotype and four paratypes are in the Museum fiir Naturkunde, Leibniz-Institut fur Evolutions-und Biodiversitatsforschung an der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin. In the same year, a Bulgarian population of Lesser Spotted Woodpecker was named Dryobates minor heinrichi by von Jordans (1940: 131). This name did appear in Peters (1948: 196), as a synonym of Dendrocopos minor serbicus Buturlin. The discovery of homonymy in the same year led us to explore the dates of publication in more detail to determine priority. The paper on the birds of Mt. Victoria in the 1939 vol- ume of the Mitteilungen der Zoologische Museum Berlin by Stresemann & Heinrich is the first paper in part 2 of that volume, and the first page of that paper, and of the part, is dated 1939. However, the title page is dated 1940 and states 'Ausgegeben am 18 Januar 1940'. The description of the Bulgarian woodpecker is in a volume dated 1940 and at the end of the article in which it is described are the words, on p. 152, Im Druck erschienen am 1. II. 1940'. It is thus clear that Stresemann's Burmese bird was the first named. Edward C. Oickinsoii ot al. U)2 Hull. B.e).C. 2(HW 129(3) In place of Dn/obntcs minor hciurichi von Jordans, 1940, we now propose the following name, which continues to honour the collector as von Jordans wished. Dendrocopos minor gerdi nom. nov. The holotype, collected on 6 June 1935 was originally given no. 38875 in the Alexander Koenig collection, but in the Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig it is now catalogued as ZFMK 38.614 (cf. van den Elzen & Rheinwald 1984: 99). Although this taxon is described in a paper reporting on an expedition of Adolf von Jordans, Wolf, Breining and Pateff in 1937, its holotype was collected in south-east Bulgaria on an earlier trip by Heinrich. Of the 13 paratypes, one is also in Bom^, 11 are in Warsaw (Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences) and one has not been traced. Primary homonymy requires that the new name be used for the Bulgarian population when the latter is recogi^ised taxonomically. This is the case whether one follows Dickinson (2003), where the genus Hypopiciis was used for Rufous-bellied Woodpecker, or Winkler & Christie (2002), where Dendrocopos was used for both species. Acknowledgements The discovery of this homonymy arose during work on the Howard & Moore complete cliecklist of the birds of the ivorhi (Dickinson 2003). We thank Zlatozar Boev for a copy of the original description of the Bulgariaii taxon and for supplying evidence that confirmed the date, and Renate van den Elzen for confirming that the cata- logue number iii Bomi is correct ai"id that the number given in the original paper is unexplained. Comments from a reviewer (Richard Schodde) much improved the clarity of this note. References: Dickinson, E. C. (ed.) 2003. The Howard & Moore complete checklist of the birds of the worhi. Third edn. Christopher Helm, London, van den Elzen, R. & Rlieinwald, G. 1984. Die Wirbeltiersammlungen des Museums Alexander Koenig. Bonn. ZooJ. Monogr. 19: 49-150. V011 Jordans, A. 1940. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Vogelwelt Bulgariens. Mitt. K. Naturwiss. Instit. Sofia 13: 49-152. Smythies, B. E. 1953. Tlie birds of Burma. Second edn. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh. Stresemami, E. & Heinrich, G. 1940 [1939]. Die Vogel des Mount Victoria. Mitt. Zoo/. Mus. Berlin 24: 151-264. Winkler, H. & Christie, D. A. 2002. Family Picidae (woodpeckers). Pp. 296-555 in del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol. 7. L)aix Eciicions, Barcelona. Addresses: Edward C. Dickinson, Flat 3, Bolsover Court, 19 Bolsover Road, Eastbourne BN20 7JG, UK. Sylke Frahnert, Museum fur Naturkunde, Leibniz-histitut fiir Evolutions-und Biodi\'ersitatsforschung an der Humboklt-Universitat zu Berlin, hivalidenstr. 43, D-10115 Berlin, Germanv. Cees S. Roselaar, Zoological Museum, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 94766, 1090 GT Amsterdam, Netherlands. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 BOC Office P.O. Box 417, Peterborough PE7 3FX, UK E-mail: boc.office@bou.org.uk. Website: www.boc-online.org Tel. & Fax: +44 (0) 1 733 844 820. MEMBERSHIP S bscriptions for 2009 were due for renewal from 1 January 2009. P ase note that a single subscription rate of £20 applies regardless of whether the subscriber is a member of the BOU onot. The US$ alternative is no longer available. / paid-up members receive (postage free) four issues of the Bulletin (including index). ]>?mbership correspondence and applications for membership, changes of address and all other membership related ilns should be addressed to the BOC Office (above). No registered items should be sent to the P.O. Box. Contact BOC C 'ice for direct mail of such items. For general Club correspondence see below. INSTITUTIONAL SUBSCRIBERS & APPLICATIONS FOR BACK NUMBERS OR OTHER CLUB PUBLICATIONS 8 Bulletin, together with annual index, may be purchased (postage free) by Institutional Subscribers, on payment of , annual subscription of £40 to the BOC Office (above) or via the BOC website (www.boc-online.org). Please note that ; US$ option is no longer available. Back issues of the Bulletin are available from the BOC Office (above). BOC I casional Publications and other BOC publications are available from the BOC Office or online from the BOC website ww.boc-online.org). ! ?as for future publications and policy should be referred direct to the BOC: BOC/BOU JPC Publications Manager, I) Box 417, Peterborough PE7 3FX, UK. Email jpc@bou.org.uk. PAYMENTS [ amounts quoted are net, should be paid in £ Sterling and sent to the BOC Office (above). Other currencies are not :epted. Other currency users can pay by credit card from which the Sterling amount will be deducted and the amount your local currency will be indicated on your card statement. All cheques or drafts should be made payable to British nithologists' Club. Direct bank transfers can be made to Barclays Bank, Wavertree Boulevard, Liverpool L7 9PQ. Sort de: 20-00-87. Account no: 10211540, with confirmation to the BOC Office (above). CLUB CORRESPONDENCE rrespondence on all general Club matters should be addressed to: The Hon. Secretary, S.A.H. (Tony) Statham, hlyns Lodge, Chesham Road, Berkhamsted, Herts. HP4 2ST, UK. E-mail: boc.sec@bou.org.uk. See inside front cover details of Club meetings. COMMITTEE liss H. Baker {Chairman) (2009) 1 R. P. Prys-Jones {V ice-Chairman) (2009) ^ A. H. Statham {Hon. Secretary) (2004) 1 J. Montier {Hon. Treasurer) (1997) D. J. Fisher {Hon. Website Manager) (2007) S. M. S. Gregory (2009) K. Heron Jones (2009) C. W. R. Storey (2009) M. J. Walton (2008) I -officio members hn. Editor: G. M. Kirwan (1 January 2004) (•airman ofBOU/BOC Joint Publications Committee (JPC): Revd. T. W. Gladwin Aministration Manager. S. P. Dudley (2005) DU/BOC Commissioning Editor. Dr D. R. Wells (2009) Registered Charity No. 279583 Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club ISSN 0007-1595 Edited by Guy M. Kirwan Volume 129, Number 3, pages 121-192 CONTENTS Club Announcements 121 LEE, M. T., DONG, D. L. & ONG, T. P. A photographic record of Silvery Pigeon Columba argentina from the Mentawai Islands, Indonesia, with notes on identification, distribution and conservation 122 SHIRIHAI, H., PYM, T., KRETZSCHMAR, J., MOCE, K., TAUKEI, A. & WAILING, D. First observations of Fiji Petrel Pseudobulweria macgillivrayi at sea: off Gau Island, Fiji, in May 2009 . . . 129 CABOT> J. & DE VRIES, T. A new subspecies of Gurney's Hawk Buteo poecilochrous 149 DIAMOND, J., MAURO, I., BISHOP, K. D. & WIJAYA, L. The avifauna of Kofiau Island, Indonesia 165 REGO, M. R., DANTAS, S., GUILHERME, E. & MARTUSCELLI, P. First records of Fine-barred Piculet Piciimnus subtilis from Acre, western Amazonia, Brazil 182 STOt'IGLIA, R., STRAKER, L. C. & RAPOSO, M. A. Kinglet Calyptura Calyptura cristata (Vieillot, 1818): documented record for the state of Sao Paulo and taxonomic status of the name Pipra ^ tyrannulusW cig\er,lS30 185 SCHODDE, R. The identity of the type species of the cuckoo-dove genus Macropygia Swainson, 1837 (Columbidae) 188 DICKINSON, E. C, FRAHNERT, S. & ROSELAAR, C. S. A substitute name for Dryobates minor heinrichi von Jordans 191 EDITORIAL BOARD Murray Bruce, R. T. Chesser, Edward C. Dickinson, Frangoise Dowsett-Lemaire, Steven M. S. Gregor}^, Jose Fernando Pacheco, Robert B. Payne, Pamela C. Rasmussen, Cees Roselaar, Thomas S. Schulenberg, Lars Svensson Authors are invited to submit papers on topics relating to the broad themes of taxonomy and distribution of birds. Descriptions of new species of birds are especially welcome and will be given priority to ensure rapid publication, subject to successful passage through the normal peer review procedure, and wherev'er possible should be accompanied by colour photographs or paintings. On submission, manuscripts, double-spaced and with wide margins, should be sent to the Editor, Guy Kirwan, preferably by e-mail, to GMKirwan@aol.com. Alternatively, two copies of manuscripts, typed on one side of the paper, may be submitted to the Editor, 74 Waddington Street, Norwich NR2 4JS, UK. Where appropriate half-tone photographs may be included and, where essential to illustrate important points, the Editor will consider the inclusion of colour figures (it possible, authors should obtain funding to support the inclusion of such colour illustrations). As far as possible, review, return of manuscripts for revision and subsequent stages of the publication process will be undertaken electronically. For instructions on style, see the inside rear cover of Bulletin 129 (1) or the BOC website Registered Charity No. 279583 © British Ornithologists' Ckib 2009 www.boc-online.org Printed on acid-free paper. Published by the British Ornithologists' Club T) pesot by Alcedt) Publishing ot Arizona, USA, and printed by Latimer Trend, UK British Ornithologists' Club THE NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM 1 0 DEC 2009 PRESENTED TRING LIBRARY Volume 129 No. 4 December 2009 MEETINGS are normalh- held on the ground floor of the Shertield Building ot Imperial College, South Kensington, London S\\ ~. This suite is now called the Tower Rooms and meetings will take place in Section C with the entrance opposite the Queen s Tower in the main quadrangle . The nearest Tube station is at South Kensington; a map of the area will be sent to members, on request. (Limiteci car parking facilities can be reserved [at a special reduced charge of £5,00], on prior application to the Hon. Secretary.) The cash bar is open from 6.15 pm, and a buffet supper, of two courses followed by coffee, is served at 7.00 pm. (A \'egetarian menu can be arranged if ordered at the time of booking.) Informal talks are given on completion, commenc- ing at about 8.00 pm. Dimmer charges are £22.50 per person. FORTHCOMING MEETINGS See also BOG website: http://www.boc-online.org PLEASE NOTE THE MINOR CHANGE TO OUR REGULAR VENUE (see above). Section C of the renamed TOWER ROOMS is to the east of the previous venue of the Ante-room which no longer exists; this is nearer to the main entrance off Exhibition Road but still part of the Sherfield Building. 26 January — Chris Bowden — Conserving the Nortliern Bald Ibis: wlmt's being done to halt centuries of decline in Morocco, Syria, Turkey and elsewhere? Chris Bowden is the international species recovery officer for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (BirdLife in the UK), especially for Gyps vultures in Asia and the Northern Bald Ibis Geronticus eremita in Morocco, Syria and Turkey. Applications to Hon. Secretary (address below) by 12 January 2010 16 March — Dr Julian Hume — Birds of the Comoros Islands Dr Hume is a research associate of the Natural History Museum and is currently working on fossil birds of the south- west Indian Ocean. Applications to Hon. Secretary (address below) by 2 March 2010 Dates for Tuesday evening meetings in the remainder of 2010 have been selected as follows: 27 April (incl. AGM); 22 June; 21 September — speakers to be announced. 2 November — Michael Jennings — Bird distribution in Arabia Overseas Members visiting Britain are especially welcome at these meetings, and the Hon. Secretar}' \vould be very pleased to hear from anyone who can offer to talk to the Club giving as much advance notice as possible — please contact: S. A. H. (Tony) Statham, Ashlyns Lodge, Chesham Road, Berkhamsted, Herts. HP4 2ST, UK. Tel. +44 (0)1442 876995 (or e-mail: boc.sec@bou.org.uk). Contributors See the March issue of each volume for guidelines or the BOC website Bulletin pages, at w\\ ^v.boc- online.org/bulletin.htm BOC Office P.O. Box 417, Peterborough PE7 3FX, UK E-mail: boc.office@bou.org.uk. Website: www.boc-online.org Tel. & Fax: +44 (0) 1733 844 820. Club Announcements 193 Bulletin of the BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS' CLUB Vol. 129 No. 4 Published 15 December 2009 CLUB ANNOUNCEMENTS Honorary Secretary and Meetings Organiser Members will note the extra insert advertising the post of Honorary Secretary and Meetings Organiser. After five years in this role, Tony Statham plans to stand down as Secretary in April 2010. We are therefore now looking for someone with energy and ideas to work with the Chairman and Committee in the management of the Club, as Secretary and overall organiser of the dinner meetings and lectures. The main responsibilities are to: • organise and attend Club meetings, liaising with Imperial College re dates, accommodation and menus, and with speakers; • organise and attend all Committee meetings, producing papers in consultation with the Chairman and taking the minutes; • update and consult Committee members on matters which arise between meetings; • prepare the first draft of the Annual Report, produce the Club Announcements for the Bulletin and contributions for the website; and • represent BOC at Joint Publications Committee and BOU Meetings Committee when required. The Club currently holds six meetings a year, usually in London. Committee meetings are held immediately before Club meetings but we are aiming to conduct more of our business by e-mail and reduce the number of formal Committee meetings to a maximum of four per annum. A full job description for the post is available. Members are reminded that subscriptions are due for renewal on 1 January 2010 and are again respectfully requested to check that any standing orders are correctly lodged with their banks. Subscriptions are £20 per annum irrespective of whether the subscriber is a member of the BOU or not. REVIEWS Mann, C. 2009. The birds of Borneo: an annotated checklist. BOU Checklist No. 23. British Ornithologists' Union & British Ornithologists' Club, Tring. 440 pages, several maps and 68 colour plates. UK£50.00. The world's third largest island, Borneo has long been recognised for its rich and diverse avifauna comprising 630 species and many endemics, these latter numbering 41-47 species (depending on species limits, specimen provenance and possible hybridism), five endemic genera and one endemic family. This latest publication in the BOU Checklist series provides an up-to-date summary of the avifauna of this fascinating region. The introduction covers a brief history of Borneo, geography, geology, topography and climate, vegetation, other fauna, a history of ornithology in Borneo, a brief general overview of the avifauna, and bird conservation. The author has sensibly adopted an approach to taxonomy close to that espoused by the BOURC. Thus the parapatric Garnet Pitta Pitta granatina and Black-headed Pitta P. ussheri are split and some isolated populations are considered sufficiently different to be treated as full species (e.g. Long-billed Partridge Rhizothera longirostris and DuHt Partridge R. dulitensis). The main body of the work is the systematic list, which follows a similar format to previous publications in the series. Each species account includes sections on distribution, habitat and, where appropriate, breeding and taxonomic notes. There is a great deal of information buried within these, but I found the way in which they are presented does not make the data particularly accessible. Frequently the accounts seem to consist of lists of locations and altitudes punctuated by reference to source works. Occasionally, I found it difficult to interpret the information presented. Whilst one can dip in this book to answer a particular question about Borneo's birds, it is not a publication with which to sit down and enjoy a good read! A section of photographs, scattered over 28 pages, includes 42 plates of Bornean landscapes and a further 26 of birds. The reproduction is excellent and there are some wonderful images, with those of Blue-headed Pitta Pitta baudii, and Rhinoceros Buceros rhinoceros and Helmeted Hornbills Rhinopilax vigil being particularly pleasing. Other images are less successful and one would think that better photographs of Bornean Whistler NATURAL "«TORY MUSEUM 1 0 DEC 2009 PRiSENTED ^ TRING LIBRARY Bull. B O.C. 2009 129(4) Club Announcements 194 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Pachycephnln hypoxantha should be available, and a quick search of the Oriental Bird Club's image database quickly proves they are. A gazetteer and list of references conclude the book. This publication provides an important summary of the current knowledge of the distribution of Borneo's birds. However, the price of £50 is not cheap and will inevitably reduce the market for this publication significantly. Whilst libraries and academic institutions will doubtless take it, I very much doubt that it will be a high-priority purchase for travelling birders, many of whom are capable of plugging the still significant gaps in our knowledge of Borneo's birds. Without this publication, he or she might be oblivious of the discoveries they could make, which would certainly be a shame. Chris Bradshaw Tennyson, A. & Martinson, P. 2007. Extinct birds of New Zealand. Te Papa Press, Wellington. 180 pages, maps, diagrams and numerous colour plates. NZ$64.99 (c.UK£25). Although at first glance this book looks like an update of Gill & Martinson's similarly titled work from 1991, it is in a different class. Immediately noticeable is how much Martinson's artwork has improved, but the coffee-table format belies the enormous amount of information that Tennyson has condensed into the species descriptions, which unlike in the earlier work are very fully referenced. Each species is accompanied by a full-page colour painting, many of course speculative in colour, but based on the known osteolog}^ and set in typical habitat. The book's coverage includes the far-flung Kermadec and Chatham islands, and the subantarctic islands (Campbell etc.), with the Australian-owned islands (Norfolk, Macquarie) included on biogeographical grounds. An appendix lists known skins (not subfossils) of extinct New Zealand birds and where they are held. There is much ongoing archaeology and palaeontology in New Zealand, reflected in the increasingly detailed dating of extinctions and descriptions of new species that feature here, though of course nothing is static, and Trevor Worthy has just described a 'new' Miocene pigeon. However the book's emphasis is on Holocene avifauna, and its disappearance in two distinct waves — Polynesians (Maori) brought Pacific Rats Rattus exulans from the late 13th century, and Europeans a suite of exotic predators from the late 1700s. The 'contribution' of each predator to extinctions is tabulated, the worst offender (after humans) being Pacific Rat, but perhaps only because it arrived before Eurasian rats, cats and mustelids. Feral pigs only 'possibly' played a role in bird extinctions — the score is different for reptiles. An unexpected extinction was Norfolk Island Triller Lalage leucopygia, exterminated in the 1970s by Ship Rats R. rattus which exploded after the local cats had been knocked out by distemper — a classic example of 'mesopredator release'. That so much of New Zealand's fauna survives is partly due to the large number of offshore islands that escaped invasion by some or all exotic predators — but as in Madagascar, another large fragment of Gondwana where humans arrived remarkably late, the big 'stuff went first — e.g. the moas hunted to extinction, depriving giant eagles of their prey. But so many species, especially on the outer islands, were flightless or nearly so, with the result that whatever their size they fell victim to rats and cats — Stephen's Island Wren Traversia lyalli being only the most famous example. Published by New Zealand's national museum, the book is excellent value. I hope they will soon produce a counterpart for the other vertebrates that have suffered equally. Anthony Cheke REFEREES I am grateful to the following, who have reviewed manuscripts submitted to the Bulletin during the last vear (those who refereed more than one manuscript are denoted by an asterisk in parentheses): David Anderson, Phil Atkinson, Bas van Balen, Richard Banks {*), Bruce Beehler, Robert Bleiweiss, Jeremy Bird, Nik Borrow, Bill Bourne, Vincent Bretagnolle, Michael Brooke, Murray Bruce (*), Stuart Butchart, Terr}^ Chesser, David Christie, Nigel Cleere, Nigel Collar, Charles T. Collins, Jared Diamond (*), Edward C. Dickinson (*), Paul Donald, Guy Dutson, Juan Freile, Steven Gregory, Kees Hazevoet, Steve Hilty, Mike Imber, Morton Isler, H. Lee Jones, Oliver Komar, Niels Krabbe C"), Mary LeCroy {*), Clive Mann, Martim Melo, David Medway, Storrs Olson, David Parkin, Fernando Pacheco, H. Douglas Pratt, Thane Pratt, Robert Prys-Jones, Pamela C. Rasmussen, Van Remsen, Richard Schodde (*), Raul Sedano, Thomas S. Schulenberg, Frank Steinheimer, Lars Svensson, Colin Trainor, David Wells, Kevin J. Zimmer and Francis Zino. — The Editor Lara D. Shepherd et al. 195 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Selection of a neotype for Apteryx mantelli Bartlett, 1852, with the support of genetic data by Lara D. Shepherd, Joanne Cooper, James Haile, Paul Scofield, Alan J. D. Tennyson & Trevor H. Worthy Received 30 September 2008 Summary. — Genetic studies in kiwis (Apteryx spp.) have led to a number of recent taxonomic changes, including the recognition of three species of brown kiwi. For one of these species. North Island Brown Kiwi Apteryx mantelli Bartlett, 1852, no holotype was originally nominated and the type series has remained unidentified. We searched for potential syntypes but were unsuccessful. Therefore, we designate a neotype that preserves the current usage of A. mantelli for extant North Island brown kiwi. Studies of genetic variation in modern and ancient populations of New Zealand's Brown Kiwi Apteryx aiistralis (Baker et al. 1995, Burbidge et al. 2003, Shepherd & Lambert 2008) have revealed distinct genetic groupings that are not completely congruent with tra- ditional taxonomic schemes (e.g. Turbott 1990). These studies have led to a number of taxonomic changes, including the description of a new kiwi species, Apteryx rowi Tennyson et al., 2003, from the west coast of New Zealand's South Island. Furthermore, it is now wide- ly accepted that North Island Brown Kiwi A. mantelli Bartlett, 1852, is specifically distinct from South Island Brown Kiwi A. australis Shaw, 1813, and they are now usually listed as species as they were originally described (e.g., Holdaway et al. 2001, Tennyson et al. 2003, Robertson 2003). Abraham Dee Bartlett (1812-97), a British taxidermist and natural history dealer who published papers on avian taxonomy, behavioural and avicultural matters (Anon. 1897) first recognised the distinctiveness of the brown kiwi from the North Island. When Bartlett described Apteryx mantelli at a meeting of the Zoological Society of London on 10 December 1850, he gave the imprecise locality of 'North Island' and, as was then common practice, did not nominate a holotype (Bartlett 1852). Bartlett specified his use of kiwi specimens from the collections of the British Museum, the Zoological Society and the Royal College of Surgeons, but gave no indication of the numbers of individuals involved, nor their specific identifica- tions. None of these syntypes has since been located. In the course of studies of genetic diversity in brown kiwis, complex phylogeographi- cal patterns have been revealed (Baker et al. 1995, Burbidge et al. 2003, Shepherd & Lambert 2008) that make it necessary to clarify the biological entity to which the name Apteryx man- telli Bartlett, 1852, applies. Modern and ancient samples of brown kiwis from the North Island separate into several distinct genetic clades, including one now believed to be only extant in the South Island (Shepherd & Lambert 2008). It is not known to which of these the name A. mantelli Bartlett, 1852, should be associated, thus precluding any further taxonom- ic distinctions. We set out to locate specimens in Bartlett's syntype series, and nominate a lectotype if appropriate. Measurements from two potential syntypes were compared with Bartlett's description but since none was a close match, a neotype is nominated that preserves the cur- rent usage of Apteryx mantelli for extant North Island Brown Kiwi. Lara D. Shepherd et al. 196 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Methods Identification o f potential syntypes Using Bartlett's description, the collections in the Royal College of Surgeons and Natural History Museum in Tring, where the avian collections of the former British Museum and Zoological Society's museum are now housed, were searched for potential s\T:it}^es of Apteryx mantelli Bartlett, 1852, during 2005/06. Results and designation of a neotype No reliably traceable pre-1850 specimens of Apteryx mantelli appear to have sur\dved in the collections of the Royal College of Surgeons, which no^v include only a small number of fluid-preser^^ed, partial anatomical preparations (SurgiCat 2006), most of which are not identified beyond genus. Whilst further investigation may reveal some of this material to potentially hold syntype status for A. mantelli, given that they cannot be adequately com- pared to the description, it would be inappropriate to use any of them as a potential lectotvpe. In his catalogue of birds in the British Museum, Gray (1844) listed onh' three specimens of Apteryx australis, two of which were subsequently re-identified as A. mantelli: BMNH 1838.5.12.102, presented by the Earl of Derby and BMNH 1842.5.17.2, presented by Miss Rebecca Stone. These two specimens are the only extant examples of A. mantelli in the NHM collections that pre-date Bartlett's 1850 research. No specimens of A. australis or A. mantelli were found amongst the collections recei\^ed by the British Museum at the dispersal of the Zoological Society's museum in 1855. DNA analysis of sequences obtained from the two BMNH specimens grouped them with previously published North Island Brown Kiwi DNA sequences (J. Haile and L. Shepherd unpubl.; GenBank accession nos. DG295829 and DQ295830). However, compari- son of Bartlett's plate XXXI, depicting the right foot in mirror image (as is usual in lithography), with those of both specimens has re\'ealed that neither is an exact match for the plate. Both are scutellated significantlv further up the tarsus than is shown on the plate. Although BMNH 1838.5.12.102 matches Bartlett's origmal description in its dark plumage coloration, neither specimen is a close match to Bartlett's morphological measurements (Table 1). We therefore consider that both BMNH 1838.5.12.102 and BMNH 1842.5.17.2 are not sufficiently similar to Bartlett's description of A. mantelli to be considered s\Tit\^es. Owing to the poor preser\^ation of the BMNH specimens we ha\ e decided not to nominate either of these specimens as the neot)pe and instead select the best-preser\-ed specimen of this taxon for which DNA sequence data is a\^ailable. TABLE 1. Comparison of measurements from Bartlett (1852) and Aptcn/x mantelli study skins. Bartlett's original measurements were given in inches; the millimetre equi\ alent is provided in brackets. Measurement methods follow Tennyson et al. (2003). - = data not available. Bartlett (1852) BMNH BMNH OR.9375 1838.5.12.102 1842.5.17.2 (neot\p>e) Bill from forehead 6 in. (101.6) 109.0 119.3 127.2' Tarsus 2 V2 in. (69.8) 67.6 70.2 C.76 Middle toe and claw 3 5/8 in. (63.5) 61.8 62.5 C.80 Bristle length 68.2 Bristle % 53.6 Scute count (right leg) 7 Lara D. Shepherd et al. 197 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Apteryx mantelli Bartlett, 1852 Neotype. — Female skin, no. OR. 9375 of the collection of the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington, New Zealand. Collected at Ohakune, North Island, New Zealand by L. Rowles on 17 August 1960 and presented to the museum by M. P. Scott. DNA sequences from this specimen strongly supported its placement within a clade comprising North Island Brown Kiwi (Haplotype 29 in Fig. 1 from Shepherd & Lambert 2008; GenBank accession nos. AY713368 and AY713335). Furthermore, the morphology of this specimen represents typical A. mantelli and has most of the characters originally described by Bartlett (1852) to distinguish his species from A. australis, apart from his scute count, which appears erroneous (see Tennyson et al. 2003). Distinguishing characters for all brown kiwis were presented in Tennyson et al. (2003). Description of neotype. — Adult female of weight 51b 15 oz (2,690 g). Dried colours are as follows. Feathers: streaked brown and black lengthwise, with a rufous hue on the bird's back and flanks. Outer wing feathers: unbarred. Bill: horn. Legs and claws: dark brown. Plumage 'harsh' when stroked backwards. Elongate barbless regions at the wing feather bases. Measurements are given in Table 1. Acknowledgements We thank the Natural History Museum (Tring) for permission to sample the kiwi skins and Simon Chaplin for searching the collections of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Robert Prys-Jones, Brian Gill and Leon Perrie provided helpful comments on the manuscript. References: Anon. 1897. Obituary of A. D. Bartlett. Ibis 3: 479. Baker, A. J., Daugherty, C. H., Colbourne, R. & McLennan, J. L. 1995. Flightless brown kiwi of New Zealand possess extremely subdivided population structure and cryptic species like small mammals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 92: 8254-8258. Bartlett, A. D. 1852. On the genus Apteryx. Proc. Zool. Soc. London for 1850 (18): 274-276, pi. 30. figs 3-4; pi. 31, fig. 2— North Island. Burbidge, M. L., Colbourne, R. M., Robertson, H. A. & Baker, A. ]. 2003. Molecular and other biological evi- dence supports the recognition of at least three species of brown kiwi. Conserv. Genetics 4: 167-177. Gray, J. E. 1844. List of the specimens of birds in the collections of the British Museum, part 3. Trustees of the Brit. Mus., London. Holdaway, R. N., Worthy, T. H. & Tennyson, A. J. D. 2001. A working list of breeding bird species of the New Zealand region at first human contact. Nezv Zealand J. Zool. 28: 119-187. Robertson, H. A. 2003. Kiwi (Apteryx spp.) recovery plan 1996-2006. Dept. of Conservation, Wellington. Shepherd, L. D. & Lambert, D. M. 2008. Ancient DNA and conservation: lessons from the endangered kiwi of New Zealand. Mol. Ecol. 17: 2174-2184. SurgiCat 2006. The on-line catalogue of the museum and archive collections at the Royal College of Surgeons of England, http:/ /surgicat.rcseng.ac.uk/. Tennyson, A. J. D., Palma, R. L., Robertson, H. A., Worthy, T. H. & Gill, B. 2003 A new species of kiwi (Aves, Apterygiformes) from Okarito, New Zealand. Rec. Auckland Mus. 40: 55-64. Turbott, E. G. 1990. Checklist of the birds of New Zealand and the Ross Dependency, Antarctica. Orn. Soc. New Zealand & Random Century, Auckland. Addresses: L. D. Shepherd, Allan Wilson Centre for Molecular Ecology and Evolution, Institute of Molecular Biosciences, Massey University, Private Bag 11 222, Palmerston North, New Zealand. A. ]. D. Tennyson, Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, P.O. Box 467, Wellington, New Zealand. P. Scofield, Canterbury Museum, Rolleston Avenue, Christchurch, New Zealand. T. H. Worthy, School of Earth & Environmental Science, Darling Building DP 418, University of Adelaide, North Terrace, Australia. J. Cooper, Bird Group, Dept. of Zoology, Natural History Museum, Tring, Herts. HP23 6AP, UK. ]. Haile, Henry Wellcome Ancient Biomolecules Centre, Dept. of Zoology, Oxford University, South Parks Road, Oxford OXl 3PS, UK. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Thomas M. Donegan et al. 198 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Overlooked first record of Leach's Storm Petrel Oceanodroma leiicorhoa for Colombia Thomas M. Donegan, Paul Salaman & James Dean Received 23 October 2008 SUMMARY. — We report the first record of Leach's Storm Petrel Oceanodroma leucorhoa for Colombia. The bird is a specimen, held in the Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC, collected 160 miles from the country's west coast in either late April or early May 1941. Analysis of the specimen suggests that it can be assigned to O. /. chaipmani. Leach's Storm Petrel Oceanodroma leucorhoa is a widespread and relatively well-known pelagic species, found in the Pacific Ocean with breeding populations on islands west of Mexico and Baja California. In the Pacific region, its taxonomy, whilst controversial, has been subject to considerable study (Ainley 1980, 1983, Bourne & Jehl 1982, Power & Ainley 1986, Penhallurick & Wink 2004). Leach's Storm Petrel disperses south to equatorial regions after breeding and at this time individuals often undergo moult (Crossin 1974, Spear & Ainley 2007). There are a handful of records of O. leucorhoa from Costa Rica (Slud 1979) and the Galapagos (Harris 1973). Harrison (1983) stated that the limits of southwards dispersal [are] not kno^vn but probably S to Peru' but did not show the species occurring in South American waters in his distribution map. Pitman (1986) and Prize et al/s (2006) distribution maps show the species to occur broadly across Colombian Pacific waters. Spear & Ainley (2007) list the distribution of dark-rumped O. leucorhoa as far south as 10°S and Hilty & Brown (1986) considered that it 'should be found' in the Colombian Pacific. However, there are no previous published Colombian records (Salaman et al. 2008). The larger Markham's Storm Petrel- O. markhami and Black Storm Petrel O. melania have similar plumage to the dark-rumped races of O. leii- O. leucorhoa USNM 346545 O. markhami USNM 554848 Figure 1. Skeletons of Colombian Leach's Storm Petrel Occauodwfiui Icucorlioa cluipiiuini (USNM 346545, left) and larger Markham's Storm Petrel O. markhami (USNM 554848, right) (James Dean) Thomas M. Donegan et al. 199 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) corhoa, posing a field identification challenge and meaning that O. leiicorhoa may have been overlooked in the Colombian Pacific. Project BioMap (http://www.biomap.net) compiled and verified 230,000 records of Colombian bird specimens from 87 collections across the world. Details of a trunk skeleton and study skin prepared from the same specimen labelled Swinhoe's Storm Petrel O. monorhis socorroensis and housed at the Smithsonian Institution (USNM 368053 study skin / 346545 partial skeleton) were copied into the BioMap database from the USNM database, but logged onto the database as O. leiicorhoa socorroensis. Subsequent examination of the study skin and consultation with S. N. G. Howell lead us to consider the specimen to be of O.l. chapmani and not socorroensis as originally labelled. The specimen is a male, collected '160 miles off the west coast of Colombia' (04°40'N, 80°08'W) by Carl Ecklund (field no. 85). The USNM catalogue shows the specimen to have been collected late April or early May 1941. The words 'U.S. Antarctic Service' appear on the label. No further details are available and no field notes were deposited at USNM. Friedman (1945) published details of birds recorded during this expedition including spec- imens collected by Ecklund but did not mention the Colombian Oceanodroma. Ecklund published several leading papers on the ecology of southern seabirds (e.g. Ecklund & Charlton 1959, Ecklund 1961) giving us no reason to doubt that the record is genuine. The USNM Oceanodroma skin is somewhat bedraggled and the tail is in heavy moult. Measurements are as follows: wing chord: 150 mm, tail length (to tip of longest feather): 76 mm; tarsus length: 22.9 mm; culmen: 15.8 mm; bill depth at base 5.2 mm; bill depth at gonys 4.5 mm. These measurements all fall within the range for 0. I. chapmani (Ainley 1980). The culmen length is larger than that known for any 0. /. socorroensis (Ainley 1980) and other measurements are close to the maximum recorded for that subspecies, strongly suggesting that 0. 1, chapmani is the subspecies involved. The Colombian specimen can be separated from the possible confusion species O. monorhis by the absence of pale markings on the primary shafts and due to the latter's deep- er and shorter bill (bill depth at base 6.5-7.0 mm, depth at gonys 5 mm for O. monorhis measured at USNM: see Fig. 2). Compared to the other possible confusion species, O. markhami and O. melania, the Colombian specimen is smaller, has a less deeply forked tail (although tail moult in the Colombian specimen means this is not definitive) and differs in the shade of grey in its plumage (Fig. 3). Compared to O. melania, the Colombian specimen also has a shorter tarsus. The USNM specimen represents the only record of which we are aware of Leach's Storm Petrel for Colombia. It is surprising that the specimen has previously been over- looked (or no attention has been drawn to it) in the considerable literature relating to the species. The collection locality, 160 miles west of Colombia, falls within the 200 nautical miles standard limit set by checklist authorities dealing with the region (Remsen et al. 2009) meaning that the species can be added to the Colombian list. Acknowledgements We thank aU Project BioMap staff and museum curators, particularly Juan Carlos Verhelst, Diana Arzuza, Andrea Morales, Clara 1. Bohorquez, Nigel Cleere, Sussy de la Zerda, Loreta Rosselli, David Caro and Robert Prys-Jones. Project BioMap was funded by the Darwin Initiative UK-DEFRA, Conservation International, The Natural History Museum (UK), American Museum of Natural History, Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia and other institutions. We also thank Steve N. G. Howell for his very helpful review comments, particularly on subspecies identification. References: Ainley, D. G. 1980. Geographic variation in Leach's Storm-Petrel. Auk 97: 837-853. Ainley, D. G. 1983. Further notes on geographic variation in Leach's Storm-Petrel. Auk 100: 230-233. 200 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) 4 Figure 2. Leach's Storm Petrel Oceanodroma leiicorhoa chapmani (USNM 368053; top) with two Swinhoe's Storm Petrels O. mouorhis (USNM 552200; middle, and USNM 552201; bottom), both from ex-USSR localities in the western Pacific, showing differences in bill depth and length (James Dean) Figure 3. Two Black Storm Petrels Oceanodroma melania from Isla San Benito, Baja CaHfomia, Mexico (top: USNM 153958 and USNM 543591); with Colombian Leach's Storm Petrel O. leiicorhoa chapmani specimen (centre: USNM 368053); and two Markham's Storm Petrels O. markhami (bottom: USNM 364914 from Pern, 200 miles west of Callao; USNM 277919 Peru, at sea off Lagarto Head) (James Dean) Figure 4. Two Leach's Storm Petrels Oceanodroma leiicorhoa chapmani (top: USNM543524 and USNM 543522; both Isla San Benito, Baja California); the Colombian O. /. chapmani specimen (centre: USNM 368053); and the paler-bellied O. /. socorrocnsis (bottom: USNM 543675 and USNM 543644; both Isla Guadelupe, Baja California, Mexico) (James Dean) Figure 5. Dorsal view of Colombian Oceanodroma leiicorhoa chapmani specimen (USNM 368053) (James Dean) Thomas M. Donegan et al. 201 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Bourne, W. R. P. & Jehl, J. R. 1982. Variation and nomenclature of Leach's Storm-Petrels. Auk 99: 793-797. Crossin, R. S. 1974. The storm petrels (Hydrobatidae). In King, W. B. (ed.) Pelagic studies of seabirds in the central and eastern Pacific Ocean. Smithsonian Contrib. Zool. 158: 154-203. Ecklund C. R. 1961. Distribution and life history studies of the South Polar Skua. Bird Banding 32: 187-223. Ecklund, C. R. & Charlton, F. M. 1959. Measuring the temperature of incubating penguin eggs. Amer. Sci. 42: 80-86. Erize, F., Rodriguez-Mata, J. R. & Rumboll, M. 2006. Birds of South America: non-passerines. Princeton Univ. Press. Friedmann, H. 1945. Birds of the United States Antarctic Service Expedition 1939-1941. Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc. 89(1): 305-313. Harris, M. P. 1973. The Galapagos avifauna. Condor 75: 265-278. Hilty, S. L. & Brown, W. L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia. Princeton Univ. Press. Penhallurick, J. M & Wink, M. 2004. Analysis of the taxonomy and nomenclature of the Procellariiformes based on complete nucleotide sequences of the mitochondrial cytochrome-l? gene. Emu 104: 125-47. Pitman, R. L. 1986. Atlas of seabird distribution and relative abundance in the eastern tropical Pacific. Southwest Fisheries Center, La Jolla, CA. Power, D. M. & Ainley, D. G. 1986. Seabird geographic variation: similarity among populations of Leach's Storm-Petrels. Auk 103: 575-585. Remsen, J. V., Cadena, C. D., Jaramillo, A., Nores, M., Pacheco, J. F., Robbins, M. B., Schulenberg, T. S., Stiles, F. G., Stotz, D. F. & Zimmer, K. J. 2009. A classification of the bird species of South America (version 13 January 2009). www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCBaseline.html. Salaman, P., Donegan, T. & Caro, D. 2008. Listado de avifauna Colombiana 2008. Conserv. Colombiana 5: 3-79. Slud, P. 1979. First record of Leach's Petrel in Costa Rica: a correction. Condor 81: 102-103. Spear, L. B. & Ainley, D. G. 2007. Storm-petrels of the eastern Pacific Ocean: species assembly and diversity along marine habitat gradients. Orn. Monogr. 62. Addresses: Thomas M. Donegan, Fundacion ProAves, 33 Blenheim Road, Caversham, Reading RG4 7RT, UK, e-mail: tdonegan@proaves.org / thomasdonegan@yahoo.co.uk. Paul Salaman, World Land Trust, 2806 P Street NW, Washington DC 20007, USA, & Project Biomap & Scientific Associate, Natural History Museum, Akeman Street, Tring, Herts. HP23 6AP, UK, e-mail psalaman@worldlandtrust-us.org. James Dean, Collection Manager, Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, MRC-116, P.O. Box 37012, Washington DC 20013-7012, USA, e-mail DEANJ@si.edu © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Robert Prys-Jones et al. 202 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) A second specimen of Sabine's Gull Xema sabini from Texas, with a review of Meinertzhagen-generated confusion surrounding the first hy Robert Prys-Jones, Daniel M. Brooks & Keith A. Arnold Received 23 December 2008 Summary. — We document the first voucher specimen of Sabine's Gull Xema sabini from the upper Texas coast of the Gulf of Mexico, salvaged on 25 August 2007 from Surfside Beach, Brazoria County. We also present evidence pointing to a case of fraud by Richard Meinertzhagen concerning the first Texas specimen of Sabine's Gull, taken on 4 October 1889 at Corpus Christi, Nueces County. Herein we document the first voucher specimen of Sabine's Gull Xejna sabini from the upper Texas coast of the Gulf of Mexico. The female specimen (HMNS.VO 2055) from Surfside Beach (Brazoria County) is housed at the Houston Museum of Natural Science (HMNS), Vertebrate Ornithology (VO) division. It was salvaged by D. Simon on 25 August 2007, having apparently died of an undiagnosed illness, and was prepared as a study skin by T. McSweeny in July 2008 (Fig. 1). The non-breeding plumaged specimen weighed 203 g, had no trace of fat, an ovary 10 mm in diameter containing individual ovules 2.5 mm in diameter, and a wholly ossified skull. Sabine's Gull was removed from the Texas review list at the Texas Bird Records Committee (TBRC) annual meeting in November 1999. Prior to that time there was only a single known specimen from the state (from Nueces County, lower Texas coast), along with 31 records documented with photographic evidence; however, none of these was from the upper Texas coast. Two records submitted to the TBRC but not accepted were from Galveston (1988) and Chambers (Peterson 1967) Counties. This second Sabine's Gull speci- men therefore provides an important addition to our knowledge of the species' status in Texas. Moreover, this is the fourth species of pelagic bird to be documented as the first voucher specimen from the upper Texas coast from the HMNS VO collections; the first three were Parasitic Jaeger Stercorarius parasiticus, Band-rumped Storm Petrel Oceanodroma castro and Leach's Storm Petrel O. leucorhoa (Brooks & Arnold 2003). The first Texas specimen of Sabine's Gull was an adult male taken on 4 October 1889 at Corpus Christi, Nueces County, by F. B. Armstrong, working on behalf of the English ornithologists F. D. Godman and O. Salvin. Godman and Salvin donated their enormous bird collection to the British Museum (Natural History, BMNH), and in 1891 their Texan Sabine's Gull was registered into the BMNH as specimen 1891.10.30.53 (as noted, with asso- ciated specimen data, contemporaneously in BMNH register AV42, p. 165) and its collection details subsequently published in Saunders (1896). However, no proper write-up of Armstrong's substantial southern Texas collection appeared (Griscom & Crosby 1925-26), and American ornithologists remained largely unaware of the existence of a Sabine's Gull specimen from the state; indeed, the first published American reference ma}^ not have been until Ridgway (1919: 664) noted a specimen from the 'coast of Texas (Corpus Christi, Oct.)'. Cottam ct al. (1975: 135) later gave fuller data, correctly recording 'one adult male collected 4 October 1889 by F. B. Armstrong at Corpus Christi (Nueces County)', but knowledge of its whereabouts was clearly not widespread gi\ en that the second edition of the Texas checklist (TOS 1984) could onlv list it as 'specimen not located (shown in Oberholser 1974)'. Robert Prys-Jones et al. 203 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Subsequently, however, Rappole & Blacklock (1985) published the registration number 1965.M.4079 for the specimen, based on information provided by the BMNH. The breeding plumage specimen 1965.M.4079 is indeed now the only Texan Sabine's Gull in the BMNH collection and has been since at least before the mid 1970s (see below). It was acquired by the BMNH in the 1950s with the huge Meinertzhagen collection and bears three labels: one, clearly the collector's label though lacking the name of the person involved, states in pencil on one side only 'C Christi, Texas, Oct 4-89, ?'; the second is the Meinertzhagen label with similar data, but with '(J. Dwight)' recorded on its reverse; the third is the BMNH label (Fig. 2). A bracketed name on the reverse of a label is the standard way Meinertzhagen indicated the institution or individual involved when he acquired a specimen by gift or exchange and, again typically, Dwight's name is also noted against the appropriate specimen entry in Meinertzhagen's own register (now also held by the BMNH). 'J. Dwight' refers to the well-known American ornithologist and gull expert Jonathan Dwight, who died in 1929 and whose large collection is now in the American Museum of Natural History, New York (Lanyon 1995). There is thus a seeming paradox, with two BMNH specimens of Sabine's Gull, 1891.10.30.53 and 1965.M.4079, having the same date and Texas locality data but different collector and collection origins, and with seemingly only the latter now extant. The possi- bilit}-^ of two separate Sabine's Gulls being collected on the same day, 4 October 1889, in Corpus Christi, but only one ever having been publicised, strains credulity. Moreover, the collector's label on the Meinertzhagen specimen is totally characteristic, in both style and handwriting, of those used by Armstrong on other specimens he obtained for Salvin and Godman, as was first noted over 30 years ago. On 21 July 1976, John Rappole wrote to the BMNH asking for information on an enclosed list of South Texan bird specimens, including Sabine's Gull, 'reputedly collected by Armstrong' for Salvin and Godman. In reply on 19 August 1976, the former curator, Derek Read, confirmed the presence only of the Meinertzhagen Sabine's Gull specimen 1965.M.4079, but noted 'However, a small label has the locality and date, without collector, written in pencil, and agrees in every way with the labels I have found on the other Armstrong specimens. I have assumed, therefore, that this is also one of his specimens.' (BMNH Library Archives, Tring) Independently of this, when re-curating the BMNH gull collection another former curator, Michael Walters, recorded that 'I am suspicious of this skin, Meinertzhagen seems to be only authority that Dwight was actually the collector' (notes dated 14 February 1986). The style of preparation of 1965.M.4079 is characteristic of Armstrong, who produced beautiful, de-fatted skins, with the body cavity generously stuffed and carefully closed, wings and legs precisely aligned (latter crossed), and the beak normally pointing straight back so that the skull rests on the surface when the bird is laid on its back (six BMNH Armstrong skins of Laughing Gull Lams atricilla, Ring-billed Gull L. delawarensis and Bonaparte's Gull L. Philadelphia examined). Even by Armstrong's high standards, however, and in comparison to all other BMNH X. sahini, the specimen's plumage is quite exception- ally clean (Fig. 3). Since the first published accusation by Clancey (1984), it has become increasingly clear that Richard Meinertzhagen stole and relabelled numerous birds in his collection, with many being taken from the BMNH (e.g. Knox 1993, Rasmussen & Prys-Jones 2003). He prid- ed himself on the high quality of his specimens and is known to have cleaned and or remade other important specimens he stole (e.g. see Rasmussen & Collar 1999, Kennerley & Prys-Jones 2006). It therefore seems almost certain that specimen 1965.M.4079 is in fact the missing 1891.10.30.53, but with the Salvin and Godman label replaced by a Meinertzhagen one that implies the latter obtained it from Dwight who, interestingly, did have a large col- Robert Prys-Jones et al. 204 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Figure 1 (above). First voucher specimen I (HMNS.VO 2055) of a Sabine's Gull Xemn sabini from the upper Texas coast of the Gulf of Mexico, USA (Beth Copeland) Figure 2 (left). Current labels of Sabine's Gull ^/ Xemn sabini specimen BMNH 1965.M.4079 (actually BMNH 1891.10.30.53— see text) (© Natural History Museum) Figure 3 (below). First voucher specimen (BMNH 1891.10.30.53) of a Sabine's Gull Xema sabini from the state of Texas, USA (© Natural History Museum) Robert Prys-Jones et al. 205 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) lection of skins from southern Texas collected for him by A. P. Smith, but not until between 1908 and 1912 (Griscom & Crosby 1925-26). Despite the lack of a collector's name, it is nev- ertheless puzzling why Meinertzhagen retained the original collector's label and collection details in this instance although, as with some other important specimens he stole, e.g. the Forest Owlet Athene bleivitti (Rasmussen & Collar 1999), Meinertzhagen appears never to have publicised that his collection contained this rarity. Acknowledgements We thank Dana Simon for salvaging the HMNS specimen and Tim McSweeny for preparing it, as well as Pamela Rasmussen for her most helpful comments on this manuscript. References: American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1895. Check-list of North American birds. Second edn. AOU, New York. Brooks, D. M. & Arnold, K. A. 2003. First specimens of three seabirds from the upper Texas coast. Bull. Texas Orn. Soc. 36: 5-6. Clancey, P. A. 1984. Tring as an ornithological centre. Bokmakierie 36: 32-35. Cottam, C, Bolen, E. G. & Zink, R. 1975. Sabine's Gull on south Texas coast. Soiithzvest. Natural. 20: 134-135. Griscom, L. & Crosby, M. S. 1925-26. Birds of the Brownsville region, southern Texas. Auk 42: 432-440, 519-537; 43: 18-36. Kennerley, P. R. & Prys-Jones, R. P. 2006. Occurrences of Gray's Grasshopper Warbler in Europe, including a further case of Meinertzhagen fraud. Brit. Birds 99: 506-516. Knox, A. G. 1993. Richard Meinertzhagen — a case of fraud examined. Ibis 135: 320-325. Lanyon, W. E. 1995. Ornithology at the American Museum of Natural History. Mem. Nuttall Orn. CI. 12: 113-144. Oberholser, H. C. 1974. The bird life of Texas. Univ. of Texas Press, Austin. Peterson, R. T. 1967. A field guide to the birds of Texas and adjacent states. Third edn. Houghton Mifflin, Boston. Rappole, J. H. & Blacklock, G. W. 1985. Birds of the Texas coastal bend: abundance and distribution. Texas A. & M. Univ. Press, College Station. Rasmussen, P. C. & Collar, N. J. 1999. Major specimen fraud in the Forest Owlet Heteroglaux {Athene auct.) blewitti. Ibis 141: 11-21. Rasmussen, P. C. & Prys-Jones, R. P. 2003. History vs mystery: the reliability of museum specimen data. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 123A: 66-94. Ridgway, R. 1919. The birds of North and Middle America. Bull. US Natl. Mus. 50(8). Saunders, H. 1896. Gaviae (terns, gulls, and skuas). Pp. 1-339 in Sharpe, R. B. (ed.) Catalogue of the birds in the British Museum, vol. 25. Trustees of the Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), London. Texas Ornithological Society (TOS). 1984. Checklist of the birds of Texas. Second edn. TOS, Houston. Addresses: Robert Prys-Jones, Bird Group, Department of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, Akeman Street, Tring, Herts. HP23 6AP, UK, e-mail: r.prys-jones@nhm.ac.uk. Daniel M. Brooks, Houston Museum of Natural Science, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, One Hermann Circle Drive, Houston, TX 77030-1799, USA, e-mail: dbrooks@hmns.org. Keith A. Arnold, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A. & M. University, TAMU 2258, College Station, TX 77843-2258, USA, e-mail: kaarnold@tamu.edu © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Storrs L. Olson & Julian P. Hume 206 BuU. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Notes on early illustrations and the juvenile plumage of the extinct Hawaii Mamo Drepanis pacific a (Drepanidini) by Storrs L. Olson & Julian P. Hume Received 1 9 February 2009 Summary. — The earliest published illustrations of the extinct Ha^vaii Mamo Drqpams pjdficu are probabh" all based on one or two adult specimens originating during Cook's third \'Ovage and tiie \'ariation bet^veen them does not reflect \'ariation m plumage. T^vo unremarked specimens of Ha^vaii Mamo in the Paris Museum are in a transitional plumage sho^ving that this species had a previouslv miknowm iu\-enile phmiage in ^s'liich the black feathers of the adult ".\'ere dark brown. This fact has further implications for the plumage sequence of other species of the black-and-red clade of Drepanidini. Tlie brilliant black-and-\'ello^v Ha^vaii Mamo Drqpams paciiica ^vas of cultural sigrifi- cance to nati\"e Hawaiians for making their feather artefacts (Brigham 1899), but the species is now extinct and is among the r?jest of Hawaiian birds in museimi collections. Onlv 11 specimens sur\'i\'e (Banko 1979), from four ki^own sources: Cook's third vova.^e in 1779 (Medwav 1981, Olson 1989), the private collector James Mills of Hilo who tlourished in the 1860s CNIaiming 1978), Tlieodore Bailleu about 1S76 (see belo^vi and Herj^' Palmer for whom the last specimen ^vas obtained in 1S92 i Rothschild 1893-1900 1. Until now, onlv adult specimens were thought to exist and no sex or age differences ^\'ere kno^\~n (Pratt 2002, 2005). Here ^ve supph" o\'erlooked e\'idence for a distinct bro^sm juvenile plumage of the Ha^xaii Mamo. The earliest specimens and their illustrations Our disco\'er\" of the ]'u\'enile plumage of Drqyanis pacific.i led us to examine the earli- est published illustrations of the species because we ^xere a^xare that one of the two mdividuals illustrated bv Reichenbach (1553: pi. DLXL figs. 3828-3829) ^xas sho^sm ^Ni.th a distinctly browmish throat and belh', and a line of bro^xnish along the dorsum (Tig. IC), as opposed to the oflier specmien m w hich the dark parts of the plumage were entireh* black. The Ha^vaii Mamo ^vas first obtained on Cook's third vovage in 1779 (Med^xay 1981). Cook \-o} age artists U'ilUam EUis and Jolin Webber each depicted the species and their paintu^gs stiU sund^-e at Tlie Natural History- Museum, London (Lvsaght 1959). \\Tiether these were made from li\"e birds or extant specimens is unknowm. The species ^xas first described (but not illustrated, contra Jackson 1998) bv Latham (1782) ^vho called it the 'Great Hook-billed Creeper' and attributed it to the Triendlv Islands' (Tonga). Latham's descrip- tion was the basis for Gmelin s (1788) binomial Certhia pacfica, ^vhich eventually became the t}rpe species of Temminck's (1820) generic name Drepanis. Latham (1787) later corrected the localit\ to 0^vh\ hee' (Ha\xaii) and stated that its local name was 'hoohoo'. The specimens that Latham sa^^• were then iri the collection of Sir Ashton Le\-er and ^vhile still in his pos- session one of them ^vas illustrated b\- Sarah Stone (\Valters 2004). That painttag, no^x also in The Natural History Museum, was reproduced in Jackson (1998). Citing both Latham and GmeHn, abbre\ iatLng the name to 'Hoho' and giving the local- ity as 'Owhihee', Audebert & Meillot (1802: 124, pi. 63) published the first illustration of the species (Fig. lA) from an 'indi\ idu nous a ete communique par 'SI. Parkinson' that formed Storrs L. Olson & Julian P. Hume 207 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) part of Parkinson's collection and that had been drawn by 'Syd.[enham] Edwards/ Their description could have been taken from Latham and from Edward's drawing, although it is possible that Vieillot once had the actual specimen in hand. Edwards was a well-known draughtsman of natural history, particularly botany (DNB 1921-22, vol. 6). James Parkinson was a museum proprietor who won the collection of Sir Ashton Lever in a lottery in 1784. Parkinson's collection was then auctioned in 1806 (DNB 1921-22, vol. 15, King 1996). The museum in Vienna bought two specimens of Drepanis pacifica at that time (Medway 1981), one of which (MCZ 236875), lacking the upper half of the bill, was later exchanged with the American Museum of Natural History and thence went to the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University (Bangs 1930, Olson 1989). The intact specimen remaining in Vienna (NMW 50735) had probably served as model for Audebert & Vieillot's plate. They described the underparts as being blackish brown ('brun noiratre'). We examined the spec- imen and found it to be an adult with typically blackish underparts, perhaps slightly brownish but definitely not brown such as in the juvenile plumage we describe here. The species was next illustrated (Fig. IB) five years later by Levaillant (1807: 45, pi. 19) under the name 'Merops jaunoir', of which he said: T have seen only a single individual of this species, which is part of my collection. Viellot [sic] has described one, of which he received a sketch from London, under the name of Haho [sic], which we can retain as it like- ly has some connection with its cry or singing. This bird lives in New Holland [= Australia]' (our translation). A label annotation (probably from the early 19th century) on the Vienna specimen of Drepanis pacifica states that the only other specimen of the species was in the Leiden museum, possibly received from Levaillant. Levaillant was closely associated with C. J. Temminck of the Leiden museum. (Stresemann 1975) and Temminck's father was already exchanging material with Levaillant prior to 1820. Those specimens became part of the son's private collection, which was subsequently donated to Leiden (Hoek Ostende et al. 1997). Regardless, the Leiden specimen of Drepanis (RMNH 110.030) was not acquired until 1819 at the sale of William Bullock's museum (Medway 1981), long after Levaillant's publication. Although Medway (1979: 126) originally believed that specimen to have come from Cook's third voyage, he later stated that there was no evidence to support his earlier proposition given that Bullock's specimens 'could have been obtained on any one of the voyages (at least of English ships) which visited the Hawaiian Islands after Cook but before Bullock's sale in 1819.' Whereas that statement might be true for the Hawaiian Islands as a group, most vessels called only at Honolulu on Oahu and very few troubled to preserve specimens of birds. No records exist of anyone who returned with specimens of birds from the island of Hawaii between Cook's voyage and 1825 (Olson & James 1994). Thus Cook's voyage is as yet the only known source for any specimen of Hawaii Island endemic such as Drepanis pacifica, the Hawaii 'O'o Moho nobilis or the Akialoa Hemignathus obscurus (s.s.) that were documented as being in collections prior to 1819 or even somewhat later. The Leiden Drepanis is mummified, as are the two specimens known to be from Cook's voyage, and as were many, but apparently not all. Cook voyage specimens (Rothschild 1893-1900, Steinheimer 2006). Levaillant's mention of Vieillot is clearly a reference to Audebert & Vieillot (1802), as the latter continued the work after Audebert's death in 1800. Levaillant must have known, therefore, that his 'Merops jaunoir' did not come from Australia. No existing specimen of Drepanis pacifica can be identified as ever having been in the possession of Levaillant or labelled as being from Australia (most of Levaillant's collections went to Leiden and Paris). We strongly suspect that he based his illustration on Audebert & Vieillot (1802) and made up his own name and origin for the species. Levaillant was a 'fanatical defender' (Stresemann 1975: 94) of Buffonian procedure in eschewing the Linnean binomials that Storrs L. Olson & Julian P. Hume 209 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) were Vieillot's stock and trade. Copying the Drepanis and giving it his own name and his- tory would have enhanced his reputation for depicting 'colorful and bizarre birds from all over the world, not merely from Africa' that sold the books from which he made his living (Stresemann 1975: 90). The overall impression of Levaillant's plate (Fig. IB) is that the dark parts of the plumage are black and only by very close inspection (Fig. ID) can one detect a brownish tinge along the line of the underparts and dorsum. We believe the brown edge is an artefact either of the colourist's technique or of the pigment and may have been an attempt to pro- vide highlights. It might also have been an attempt to recreate the 'brun noiratre' underparts described by Audebert & Vieillot (1802). The small figures in Reichenbach (Fig. IC) were copied from Levaillant (foreground) and Audebert & Vieillot (background) and in the former the brown areas, as well as the shading in the black areas, have been greatly exaggerated. If we assume that Levaillant's figure is a copy, then it is possible that all of these figures were based on the single speci- men now in Vienna, which is an adult without any of the truly brown juvenile plumage we now describe. The juvenile plumage Remains of what we interpret to be the juvenile plumage are preserved in two speci- mens of Drepanis pacifica in the Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, that apparently were never examined or described by anyone who has written about the species. They were collected by Theodore Ballieu (not Bailleu as often misspelled — see Mearns & Mearns 1992) in the vicinity of 'Dr. Trousseau's mountain-cottage in the district of Kona on Hawaii' (Wilson & Evans 1890-99: 89, footnote). Banko (1981: 167) believed they were col- lected C.1876 at Pulehua (sic = Pu'ulehua) Ranch, a well-known collecting locality on the leeward slopes of Mauna Loa (cf. Olson 1999). The specimens are unstuffed skins and are mangled and twisted so that colour distribution is difficult to determine. Here we provide descriptions of the plumage of both specimens (Fig. 2). Drepanis pacifica MNHN V399 unsexed, lacking the anterior half of the mandible. Forehead to top of crown black, grading into brown on nape; brownish black on upper back grading to black on lower back. Yellow feathers of lower back pale lemon-yellow inter- spersed with black feathers, central and lower regions deep yellow. Upper surface of tail dark brownish black. Sides of head brown, superciliary blackish brown, cheeks brown, darker at top; throat black, sides of neck blackish brown, breast hazel-brown, sides of body blackish brown/black. Belly hazel-brown, edged laterally with black. Undertail-coverts deep yellow, undertail greyish brown. Surface of upper wing blackish brown, secondaries brown, primaries blackish grey-brown. Primary-coverts dark, one off-white; shoulder deep Legend to figures on facing page Figure 1 (top). The three earliest depictions of the Hawaii Mamo Drepanis pacifica: (A) Audebert & Vieillot (1802); (B) Levaillant (1807), possibly copied from A; (C) Reichenbach (1853), which was taken from A (in back) and B (foreground) — the figure is reversed here to facilitate comparison and in the original was much smaller than A or B; (D) detail of B showing brownish pigment along edge of breast and dorsum that was greatly exaggerated in C. It is possible that all of these figures may ultimately have been based on the adult specimen in Vienna (NMW 50735). Figure 2 (bottom). Acrylic paintings of the two specimens of Hawaii Mamo Drepanis pacifica in the Paris museum that retain brown feathers from the juvenile plumage: (left and second from right) MNHN V399 unsexed, lacking the anterior half of mandible (the right leg was not figured to show more of the undertail- coverts, but is present in the specimen); (right and second from left) MNHN V398, unsexed, lacking right leg and tail (Julian P. Hume). Storrs L. Olson & Julian P. Hume 210 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) yellow, interspersed with black; imderwing off-white, pale yellow on edge; primaries and secondaries greyish brown. Thighs off-white at base grading to deep yellow. Bill paler at base. Drepanis pacifica MNHN V398, unsexed, lacking right leg and tail. Forehead and nape to back black, with a hint of blackish brown on sides. Yellow feathers of lower back almost uniform deep yellow, with lemon-yellow feathers on sides. Cheeks brown, blackish brown at top, throat black grading to blackish hazel-brown on belly, darker on sides. Upper wings blackish brown, secondaries brown with pale brown edges, primaries dark brown with pale greyish-brown edges, particularly at the tips. Primary-coverts off-white, with pale yellow centres at base; shoulder deep yellow, interspersed with black feathers; underwing off- white with deep yellow edges. Under surface of primaries and secondaries greyish brown. Thighs off-white, becoming deep yellow distally, interspersed at base with brown feathers. Bill paler at base. Unfortunately, these specimens lack dates of collection, which would have provided some clue as to the species' breeding season. The differences between them suggest that V398 is more mature than V399. Brown feathers are much more extensive in V398, particu- larly on the head, neck and underparts. In both, the development of adult black feathers appears first on the back, forehead, throat and sides of body, and where black feathers appear through the brown, they are black only at the tips, and brown at the base. The yel- low feathers of the lower back are almost uniform deep yellow in V398, more lemon-yellow and interspersed with dark feathers in V399. There is greater colour development on the primary-coverts in V398, and the coverts along the outer edge of the 'wrist' have deep yel- low, rather than pale yellow edges. The primaries in V398 have pale greyish-brovm edges, and the secondaries light brown edges, whereas in V399 they are almost uniformly black- ish brown. The legs are larger in V399 and the bill and wings longer in total length, but the thighs are more extensively deep yellow in V398. A distinct juvenile plumage was probably characteristic of all species of the black-and- red clade of Drepanidini, as recognised by Perkins (1903) and all recent • phytogenies (reviewed by Pratt 2005). The juvenile plumage of 'Apapane Himatione sanguinea is largely brownish, and the body feathers in the first prebasic moult go directly to the red adult plumage (Fancy et al. 1993, Fancy & Ralph 1997). In the Tiwi Vestiaria coccinea, the juvenile body feathers are greenish, fading to yellow, with black tips, but likewise change to the adult scarlet colour in the first prebasic moult (Fancy et al. 1993, Fancy & Ralph 1998). Both species retain the juvenile primaries and most or all of the secondaries after the first preba- sic moult. Such appears to have been the case in Drepanis pacifica as well, as the decidedly brown secondaries in the specimens described above appear to be juvenile. We interpret the brown contour feathers in those specimens also to be remnants of juvenile plumage. The specimens are too advanced in their state of moult to know how to interpret the appearance TABLE 1 Measurements of the two specimens of Hawaii Mamo Drepanis pacifica with partial ju\'enile plumage. Measurement (mm) MNHNV398 MNHNV399 Total length 140 140 Anterior edge of nostril to tip 36.6 38.6 Exposed culmen 41 43.4 Wing-length (chord) 96 97.4 Tail-length - 53.4 Tarsus 29 33.4 i Storrs L. Olson & Julian P. Hume 211 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) of the fresh juvenile plumage, but it possibly was entirely cryptic and may have lacked the yellow rump and undertail feathers so as not to signal adult social status. The discovery of a brown juvenile plumage in Drepanis pacifica provides insight into the confusing plumages of an even less well known Hawaiian honeycreeper, the extinct Ula-'ai- hawane Ciridops anna. Three plumages are evident in the five existing unsexed specimens (one of which is not usable for colour comparisons — Olson 1992: 445): a scarlet, black and grey plumage, presumably adult (two specimens); a mostly green, grey and brown speci- men in fresh, unworn, hard plumage with no sign of juvenile fluffiness or pointed rectrices; and a mostly red-and-black specimen with much brown intermingled (Pratt 2002, 2005). We believe this 'transitional' specimen shows the remnants of a brown juvenile male plumage. Thus the single green-plumaged specimen is probably the adult female and not the imma- ture as believed by Pratt (2005). If so, the 'Ula-'ai-hawane would be unique amongst the red-and-black clade in being highly sexually dichromatic. Acknowledgements We are extremely grateful to Mai Qaraman, American Museum of Natural History, New York, for providing images of the plates and text from Audebert & Vieillot and Levaillant, and to Erin Clements Rushing and Daria Wingreen-Mason, Smithsonian Institution Libraries, for the image from Reichenbach. Leslie Overstreet, Frank Steinheimer and Paul Sweet also assisted the bibliographical effort. For access to collec- tions we thank Jean Dorst and Jean-Fran(;ois Voisin, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris (MNHN); Herbert Schifter, Naturhistorisches Museum Wien (NMW); and Gerlof Mees and Rene Dekker, Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum, Leiden (RMNH). Richard L. Zusi kindly supplied photographs of specimens. Fig. 1 was composed by Brian Schmidt (Smithsonian Institution). For careful reading and a great many helpful comments on the manuscript we are obliged to David Medway, H. Douglas Pratt, Thane Pratt, and Robert Prys-Jones. References: Audebert, J. B. & Vieillot, L. P. 1802. Oiseaux dores ou a reflets metalliques, vol. 2. Desray, Paris. Bangs, O. 1930. Types of birds now in the Museum of Comparative Zoology. Bull Mus. Comp. Zo'ol. 70: 149-426. Banko, W. E. 1979. History of endemic Hawaiian birds [sic] specimens in museum collections. Coop. Natl. Park Resources Study Unit, Univ. of Hawaii, Avian Hist. Rep. 2: 1-80. Banko, W. E. 1981. History of endemic Hawaiian birds. Part I. Population histories — species accounts. Forest birds: Vestiaria coccinea, Drepanis funerea, Drepanis pacifica. Coop. Natl. Park Resources Study Unit, Univ. of Hawaii, Avian Hist. Rep. 11: 1-180. Brigham, W. T. 1899. Hawaiian feather work. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Dictionary of National Biography (DNB). 1921-22. Dictionary of national biography. Oxford Univ. Press. [Sydenham Edwards, vol. 6: 544; James Parkinson, vol. 15: 314-315.] Fancy, S. C, Pratt, T. K., Lindsey, G. D., Harada, C. K., Parent, A. H. & Jacobi, J. D. 1993. Identifying sex and age of Apapane and liwi on Hawaii. /. Field Orn. 64: 262-269. Fancy, S. G. & Ralph, C. J. 1997. 'Apapane Himatione sanguinea. In Poole, A. & Gill, F. (eds.) The birds of North America, 296. The Birds of North America, Philadelphia. Fancy, S. G. & Ralph, C. J. 1998. Tiwi Vestiaria coccinea. In Poole, A. & Gill, F. (eds.) The birds of North America, 317. The Birds of North America, Philadelphia. Gmelin, J. F. 1788. Systema naturae, vol. 1(1). Georg Emmanuel Beer, Leipzig. Hoek Ostende, L. W. van den, Dekker, R. W. R. J. & Keijl, G. 0. 1997. Type-specimens of birds in the National Museum of Natural History, Leiden. Part 1. Non-Passerines. Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Mus. Tech. Bull. 1: 1-248. King, J. C. H. 1996. New evidence for the contents of the Leverian Museum. /. Hist. Coll. 8: 167-186. Jackson, C. 1998. Sarah Stone natural curiosities from the New Worlds. Merrell Holberson, London. Latham, J. 1782. A general synopsis of birds, vol. 1(2). Benjamin White, London. Latham, J. 1787. Supplement to the general synopsis of birds. Leigh & Sotheby, London. Levaillant, F. 1807. Histoire naturelle des promerops, et des guepiers; faisant suite a celle des oiseaux de paradis. Chez Dennei le jeune, Paris. Lysaght, A. 1959. Some eighteenth century bird paintings in the library of Sir Joseph Banks. Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.). Historical Ser. 1: 251-271. Manning, A. 1978. James D. Mills: Hilo bird collector. Hawaiian }. Hist. 12: 84-98. Mearns, B. & Mearns, R. 1992. Audubon to Xantus. The lives of those commemorated in North American bird names. Academic Press, London. Storrs L. Olson & Julian P. Hume 212 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Medway, D. G. 1979. Some ornithological results of Cook's third voyage. /. Soc. Bibliog. Nat. Hist. 9: 315-351. Medway, D. G. 1981. The contribution of Cook's Third Voyage to the ornithology of the Hawaiian Islands. Pacific Sci. 35: 105-175. Olson, S. L. 1989. Notes on some Hawaiian birds from Cook's third voyage. Bull Brit. Orn. CI. 109: 201-205. Olson, S. L. 1992. William T. Brigham's Hawaiian birds and a possible historical record of Ciridops anna (Aves: Drepanidini) from Molokai. Pacific Sci. 46: 495-500. Olson, S. L. 1999. Kona Finch (Chloridops kona), Greater Koa-Finch {Rhodacanthis palmeri), Lesser Koa-Finch {Rhodacajithis flaviceps). In Poole, A. & Gill, F. (eds.) The birds of North America, 424. The Birds of North America, Philadelphia. Olson, S. L. & James, H. F. 1994. A chronology of ornithological exploration in the Hawaiian Islands, from Cook to Perkins. Pp. 91-102 in Jehl, J. R. & Johnson, N. K. (eds.) A century of avifaunal change in west- ern North America. Stud. Avian Biol. 15. Perkins, R. L. 1903. Vertebrata. Pp. 365-466 in Sharp, D. (ed.) Fauna Hawaiiensis or the Zoology of the Sandwich (Hawaiian) Islands, vol. 1(4). Cambridge Univ. Press. Pratt, H. D. 2002. Hawai'i Mamo Drepanis pacifica; Black Mamo Drepanis funerea; 'Ula-'ai-hawane Ciridops anna. In Poole, A. & Gill, F. (eds.) The birds of North America, 640. The Birds of North America, Philadelphia. Pratt, H. D. 2005. The Hawaiian honeycreepers Drepanidinae. Oxford Univ. Press. Reichenbach, H. G. L. 1853. Handbuch der speciellen Ornithologie. Scansoriae. Tenuirostres. Icones ad Synopsin Avium, no. 11. L. Reichenbach, Dresden & Leipzig. [The plates were also published as part of Die voll- stiindigste Naturgeschichte, issued in parts under various titles, to which the above reference was intended as a partial text. See Zimmer (1926) for bibliographic details concerning this extremely confus- ing series of publications.] Rothschild, W. 1893-1900. The avifauna of Laysan and the neighbouring islands: with a complete history to date of the birds of the Hawaiian possessions, 3 parts. R. H. Porter, London. Steinheimer, F. D. 2006. Sammlungsgeschichte und Praparationsstil von fiinf Exemplaren der Kleidervogelart Ou Psittirostra psittacea (Gmelin, 1789) der dritten Weltumsegelung von James Cook. Sitzungsberichte der Gesellschaft Naturforschender Treunde zu Berlin (Neue Folge) 44: 119-131. Stresemann, E. 1975. Ornithology from Aristotle to the present. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA. Temminck, C. J. 1820. Manuel d' ornithologie , vol. 1. Second edn. H. Cousin, Paris. Walters, M. 2004. Birds depicted in a folio of eighteenth century watercolours by Sarah Stone. Arch. Nat. Hist. 31: 123-149. Wilson, S. B. & Evans, A. H. 1890-99. Aves Hawaiienses: the birds of the Sandwich Islands. R. H. Porter, London. Zimmer, J. T. 1926. Catalogue of the Edward E. Ayer ornithological library, 2 vols. Field Mus. Nat. Hist. Zool. Ser. 16. Addresses: Storrs L. Olson, Division of Birds, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC 20560, USA. Julian P. Hume, Bird Group, The Department of Zoology, Natural History Museum, Akeman Street, Tring, Herts. HP23 6AP, UK. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Hugulay A. Maia & Antonio C. Alberto 213 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) The occurrence of Sao Tome Short-tail Amaurocichla bocagii and Newton's Fiscal Lanius newtoni in the montane forests of Sao Tome by Hugulay Albuquerque Maia & Antonio Camuenha Alberto Received 10 March 2009 Summary. — The globally threatened Sao Tome Short-tail Amaurocichla bocagii and Newton's Fiscal Lanius newtoni, both of which are endemic to Sao Tome in the Gulf of Guinea, have been considered to be mostly confined to low-elevation forests. A playback survey in the island's central massif found three (possibly four) family groups of short-tail and a single fiscal along a 4-km trail above 1,300 m. At least the short-tail appears able to use, and breed in, montane forests, extending the possible Area of Occupation of this Vulnerable species. The island of Sao Tome in the Gulf of Guinea holds at least 17 species of single-island endemic birds, plus two shared with the nearby island of Principe and another shared with Principe and Annobon (Melo 2007, Melo & Jones in press). Several of the Sao Tome endemics are of conservation concern, making the island one of the most important Endemic Bird Areas in tropical Africa (Stattersfield et al. 1998). Most threatened endemics, including the globally Vulnerable Sao Tome Short-tail Amaurocichla bocagii and the Critically Endangered Newton's Fiscal Lanius newtoni, are still poorly known, and systematic data on their habitat use and altitudinal range are still lack- ing. Jones & Tye (2006) set an altitudinal limit for A. bocagii at 500 m, despite that Dallimer et al. (2003) recorded one bird at 1,100 m, near Estagao Souza, in the island's central mon- tane massif. Newton's Fiscal Lanius newtoni has been collected at up to 1,060 m (Jones & Tye 2006), although most recent records come from lower areas (Schollaert & Willem 2001). Both species were also found in higher parts of the central massif by Olmos & Turshak (2007) and Rocha (2008), but without further details. Following sightings of both species at Estagao Souza by one of us (ACA), we decided to assess if short-tails and fiscals are regularly found in the montane forests of the Pico Sao Tome or if previous records referred to transient individuals. Methods We undertook a playback survey on 16-17 August 2008 along the trail to Pico de Sao Tome, in the central mountains of Sao Tome. This trail runs along the north-facing slope of a steep forested valley with a stream at its bottom, and traverses the small plateau at Estagao Souza, where both species had been recorded previously. Although the trail intersects some drainage lines, most of the heavy rainfall is quickly absorbed by the volcanic soil. The area is cloaked by montane forest, commonly wrapped in mist, growing on steep ground, except for small occasional plateaux. The closed canopy reaches over 25 m and branches and trunks are densely covered in epiphytic lichens, mosses, ferns and orchids. The under storey is in places dense, with tree ferns such as the endemic Cyathea welwitschii, giant gingers Renealmia grandiflora and Costus giganteus, and the giant begonias Begonia bac- cata and B. crateris, amongst others. Hugulay A. Maia & Antonio C. Alberto 214 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Typical trees include Trichilia grandifolia, Pauridiantha insidaris, Pavetta monticola, large figs such as Ficus chlamydocarpa and f . kameninensis, Croton steUidifenis, En/trococca moUeri, Homaliiim henriquensii and the white-flowered Tahernaemontana stenosiphon. The South American tree Cinchona quina has invaded many areas. These forests were largely spared large-scale disturbance by man because of the rugged topography and wet climate Qones & Tye 2006, Vaz & Oliveira 2007). A 4 km-stretch of trail, including Estagao Souza, was flagged at roughly 200-m inter- vals. At each point we played the songs of the short-tail and fiscal (from Chappuis 2001) using a MPS player equipped with a small amplifier during the morning and afternoon of 16-17 August. At each point we recorded the number of individuals of the survey species responding vocally or seen, as well as simple habitat descriptors: altitude (m), litter cover (%), canopy cover (%), terrain (slope, plateau and ridge) and distance to water (m). Canopy and litter cover were estimated using sighting tubes with crosshairs and quadrats (Elzinga et al. 2001). Results and Discussion Short- tails were detected at ten of the 18 survey points, being readily attracted and responding to playback. At five of these points, birds were detected only in the morning, three only during the afternoon and two in both periods. Totals of 29 short-tails and one fis- cal were registered along the 4-km stretch surveyed using playback (Table 1). A single fiscal was heard at Point 14, whilst up to seven and nine individual short-tails were detected around a single playback point (Table 1). These latter probably refer to points at the edge of territories between two or more family groups, as some of the birds seen were clearly juve- nile, having shorter bills and a yellowish gape. At least one of these young was observ-ed foraging for itself, suggesting that nesting had occurred during the previous two months during the long dry season (Jones & Tye 2006). Dallimer et al. (2009) did not detect these species during a recent systematic bird sur- vey, which included the area of this study, using distance sampling and point counts. Although their study was undertaken at a different season (December-January), when birds may have been less conspicuous, playback proved an effective method of detecting short-tails and (to a lesser extent) fiscals, although the first-named species had probablv largely finished breeding and, in principle, was less responsive. All survey points were at altitudes >1,300 m. The fiscal was found at 1,395 m and short- tails up to 1,540 m, setting new altitudinal limits for both species (Dallimer et al. 2003, Jones & Tye 2006). Our short-tail records suggest that at least three and probably four familv groups were present along the surveyed trail, or roughly one per 1 km of vallev. We found no significant relationship between the number of short-tails recorded and the type of terrain, sites with canopy cover greater or smaller than 80% or litter cover greater or smaller than 70% (x^ tests, all P>0.05). All points, except one, were >100 m from perma- nent water, precluding a more detailed analysis about the suggested relationship between short-tails and streams (Jones & Tye 2006). These results should be viewed with caution because of the small sample size and limited period of the study. Our survey confirmed that short-tails do occur in the montane forests of the central Sao Tome massif at altitudes above those recorded in the literature, and suggest fiscals do like- wise. The number of short-tail records, territorial behaviour and the presence of family groups strongly suggest the species is resident rather than transient at these elevations. That both fiscals and short-tails can occur in montane forests was to be expected, given that both survived the loss of most low-elevation forests to shade cacao and coffee plantations in the Hugulay A. Maia & Antonio C. Alberto 215 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) w m w w W w W W p-1 w w w l-Ll w w l>; CO LO ON CO LO in a< CO i>: LO o ON o6 o6 CN CO o ^ o o CO p 3^ T 1 p CO CO CO CO CO ^ CO ^ CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 0 CO CO CO CO CO o CO o CO o CO o p CO CO CO CO ?o ?D 5o 5d \D \D \D \o ^ o o VO O o o o o o O O O o O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O o o o o o o o o o o o CO o CNJ CN CO ON p CO o T 1 o LO o LO o LO o LO o LO CO LO o p o LO p ON p ON LO o LO 0 LO 0 LO o LO LO 0 LO o LO o LO 0 LO 0 LO LO ^ LO LO LO LO LO o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B o o On OO CO CO LO LO LO LO Oh S 2 > \D ^ CN OO B B S S B B B s o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o A A A A A A A A A B B B B B B iope lope iope ope Ope ope ope CO CO en CD CO CO ^ ^ ^ ^ ?r ^ S S S r^j (N 0 Hiigiilay A. Maia & Antonio C. Alberto 216 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) 18-19th centuries (Seibert 2002, Jones & Tye 2006). On the other hand, the specific habitat characters that determine the presence of both species demand proper assessment, as the\' remain unrecorded from apparently suitable sites that are well co\'ered hv ornithologists and birdwatchers, such as Lagoa Amelia (Christy & Clarke 1998). Acknowledgements This field work ^vas conducted during the First Ornitholog}' and Bird Conser\-ation Training Course, pro- moted by the A. P. Leventis Foimdation and BirdLife International, with support from the Associacao de Biologos Sao-tomenses (ABS), Instituto Superior Politecnico (ISP) and Associacao Monte Pico. Fabio OLmos and Christine Steiner ^vere our tiitors during the field work and we are grateful for their help in preparing an early draft of this manuscript. Martim Melo, Phil Atkinson and Nik Borrow helped to improve the first draft of the manuscript. References: Chappuis, C. 2001. African bird sounds: West and Central Africa. CDs. Societe d'Etudes Ornithologiques de France, Paris & British Librar}^ National Sound Archive, London. Christ}', P. & Clarke, W. P. 1998. Guide des oiseaux de Sao Tome e Principe. ECOFAC, Sao Tome. Dallimer, M., King, T. & Atkinson, R. 2003. A high altitude sighting of the Sao Tome Short-tail Amaurocichla bocagei [sic]. Malimbus 25: 101-103. Dallimer, M., King T. & Atkinson R. J. 2009. Pervasive threats within a protected area: consen."ing the endem- ic birds of Sao Tome, West Africa. Anim. Conserv. 12: 209-219. Elzinga, C. L., Salzer, D. W. & Willoughby, J. W. 1998. Measuring and monitoring plant populations. Bureau of Land Management, Denver. Jones, P. J. & Tye, A. 2006. The birds of Sao Tome and Principe irith Annobon: islands of the Gulf of Guinea. BOU Checklist Series No. 22. British Ornithologists' Union, Oxford & British Ornithologists' Club, Tring. Melo, M. 2007. Bird speciation in the Gulf of Guinea. Ph.D. thesis. Institute of Evolutionar\- Biolog^-, Univ. of Edinburgh. Melo, M. & Jones, P. J. in press. Bird speciation in the Gulf of Guinea island svstem. In Harebottle, D. M., Craig, A. J. F. K., Anderson, M. D., Rakotomanana, H. & Muchai, M. (eds.) Proc. 12th Pan-African Orn. Congr., 2008. Animal Demograph}- Unit, Cape To^^vn. Oknos, F. & Turshak, L. G. 2007. Final report of the fact-finding tiip to Angola and Sao Tome and Principe, July-August 2007. Unpubl. report to A. P. Leventis Ornithological Research Institiite & BirdLife International. Rocha, J. R. T. 2008. Birds in humanized landscapes: Sao Tome endemic birds' response to agricultiiral inten- sitication. M.Sc. thesis. Imperial College, London. Schollaert, V. & Willem, G. 2001. A new site for Newton's Fiscal Lanius neictom. Bull. Afr. Bird CI. 8: 21-22. Seibert, G. 2002. Camaradas, clientes e compadres: colonialismo, socialismo e democratizacao em Sao Tome e Principe. Veja Editora, Lisbon. Stattersfield, A. J., Crosby, M. J., Long, A. J. & Wege, D. C. 1998. Endemic Bird Areas of the world: priorities for biodiversity conservation. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Vaz, W. & Oliveira, F. 2007. Relatorio nacional do estado geral da biodiversidade de Sao Tome. Ministerio dos Recursos Naturals e Meio Ambiente / Direccao Geral do Ambiente, Sao Tome. Address: Hugulay Albuquerque Maia, Associacao dos Biologos Sao-tomenses, CP. 781, Sao Tome e Principe, e-mail: hugulaymaia25@hotmail.com. Antonio Camuenha Alberto, Associacao Monte Pico, \Tla de Monte Cafe, Sao Tome e Principe, e-mail: montepico(sH-ahoo. com.br © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Sabine M. Hille & Nigel J. Collar 217 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) The taxonomic and conservation status of Milvus kites in the Cape Verde archipelago: further (and final?) reflections hy Sabine M. Hille & Nigel J. Collar Received 1 May 2009 Summary. — Records of Red Kite Mihnis {?nilvus) fasciicaiida and Black Kite M. migrans on the Cape Verdes have been clouded by the difficulty of telling them apart (some earlier visitors not realising both species occurred). This convergence of identities may in part be due to hybridisation, although the two taxa appear to have been segregated to some extent by geography (fasciicaiida on islands in the north-west and south-west, migrans on islands in the east). Recently, the form fasciicaiida, regarded by some as a species, was judged not even to exist as a valid taxon; however, this conclusion was based in part on genetic analysis of birds attributable to M. migrans. Unfortunately, Red Kites have now almost or actually died out on the Cape Verdes, and Black Kites, showing somewhat different morphometries from mainland birds and of intrinsic interest, are down to critically low numbers but still merit study. The Cape Verde archipelago is the westernmost point in the global ranges of both the Red Kite Milvus milvus and Black Kite M. migrans (Hille & Thiollay 2000). Red Kite is known there by an endemic form, M. milvus fasciicaiida, whereas the Black Kite of the islands is con- sidered part of nominate M. migrans migrans. However, fasciicaiida is morphologically less distinctive than nominate milvus, so that it is not so readily separated in the field from migrans (Hazevoet 1995, Hille & Thiollay 2000). Indeed, Bourne (1955) bluntly wrote of the Cape Verde Red Kite that it Tooks like the Black Kite', unaware of the latter's presence in the archipelago, so that some of his records of the former quite possibly referred to the lat- ter. This problem of confused identities afflicts statements in the literature back to at least the 1860s and, despite the clarifications of Hazevoet (1995), still confounds our understand- ing of the former status and distribution of the two taxa in the archipelago. Moreover, the Abbe de Naurois (1984 and pers. comm.) plausibly suggested that hybridisation between Red and Black Kites had been occurring for some time, causing the former's decline towards extinction, and further exacerbating the problem of identification. A specimen from the southern island of Santiago has been considered a hybrid fasciicaiida x migrans, and certain unattributable individuals observed on Santiago and Santo Antao in 1986-93 were also presumed to be hybrids (Hazevoet 1995), although actual proof by observation or molecular analysis is lacking (Hille & Thiollay 2000). An alternative explanation for the intermediacy oi fasciicaiida, favoured by Hazevoet (1995), is that it is or was a relic of the ancestor of Red and Black Kite before it divided into these two species (de Naurois 1987). Conservation interest m. fasciicaiida was first promoted by Hazevoet (1995), who elevat- ed it to species level under a phylogenetic species concept. Sangster (2000) then used the case o{ fasciicaiida to develop Hazevoet's (1996) argument that the reliance of conservation- ists on the Biological Species Concept was resulting in the unopposed and indeed unrecognised extinction of taxa relegated to the status of subspecies. Independently, how- ever, work by SMH on the kites of the Cape Verdes began in 1996 as an extension of her European Milvus studies (e.g. Hille 1995), and this led to further publicity for the plight of both taxa, whatever their taxonomic status (Hille & Thiollay 2000). This, in turn, generated Sabine M. Hille & Nigel J. Collar 218 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) a Peregrine Fund (PF) project, implemented by SMH in October 2000-June 2002, to survey the entire archipelago ior fasciicauda (which at the time PF, following Hazevoet 1995, con- sidered a species), with a view to taking any individuals found into captivity for breeding (Watson 2001, 2002). The very brief accounts of this research in Watson (2001) and Anon. (2002) were, however, crucially mistaken in indicating that the six birds recorded in May-August 2001 on the eastern islands of Boavista (four) and Maio (two) belonged tofasci- icauda, rather than just being six Milviis whose specific identity was uncertain (resembling Palearctic and African migrans, but with a somewhat different jizz: SMH & S. Thomsett pers. obs.). Five birds were eventually captured in June 2002, all on Maio — not on Maio and Boavista as stated in Johnson et al. (2005), which is presumably the source of the statement in Clarke (2006) that fasciicauda was 'also recorded recently on Boavista and Maio'. They were transferred to a breeding facility in the UK where they 'were found to share character- istics of both Red Kites and Black Kites with substantial variation between individuals', such that 'molecular genetics will be needed to determine if and how these birds may be paired to breed and preserve the genes of Cape Verde Red Kites' (Anon. 2001). In fact, this genetic analysis (Johnson et al. 2005) demonstrated that the five captive birds were all Black Kites. Prior to (and ignorant of plans to conduct) this genetic work, a parallel analysis of the same blood samples was undertaken in Germany involving not only mitochondrial cytochrome b but also nuclear DNA using Simple-Sequence Repeat profiles, and with this greater body of evidence it was also found that birds from Maio grouped together with Black Kites (SMH & M. Wink unpubl.). As a result, further plans by PF to conserve the kites of the Cape Verdes, including the breeding of the five captive individuals, were dropped (Johnson et al. 2005). But were the birds captured on Maio in any way representative of the Cape Verde Red Kite, as Johnson et al. (2005) assumed? All the evidence, circumstantial and direct, points against this. The (orm fasciicauda was never known from Boavista or Maio: Hazevoet (1995) marshalled all the records, ancient and modern, and listed the taxon only for Santo Antao, Sao Vicente, Sao Nicolau, Santiago and Brava (with its satellite Rombo), adding that its gen- eral (though not absolute) preference for montane areas, as against the use of coastal and low-lying areas by migrans, suggests that in historical times it may never have occurred on the relatively flat Sal, Boavista and Maio. Moreover, six months' research across the archi- pelago in 1996-97 produced sightings of fasciicauda on Santo Antao only and of migrans on Boavista only (Hille 1998, Hille & Thiollay 2000); and photographs taken in 2001 of birds on Boavista and in 2002 of captured birds on Maio confirm that, as judged at the time (see above), the birds were phenotypically akin to migrans. Although DNA evidence from fasciicauda museum specimens suggests that this form sits polyphyletically within the Red Kite clade (Jolmson et al. 2005), the bootstrap \'alues involved were generally all low and it may be that, with more iterations and use of a sec- ond marker, fasciicauda would group monophyletically. This would have the likeh^ effects of (a) reinstating the form as a valid taxon, and therefore (b) reopening debate about its spe- cific or subspecific status and about the conservation of e\^olutionarv significant units (ESUs), defined by a combination of reproductive and historical isolation (Moritz 1994) and adaptive distinctiveness (Lande & Shannon 1996, Lynch et al. 1999). The same considerations apply to the seemingly undifferentiated Black Kites of the eastern islands. That these birds, according to Johnson et al. (2005), cluster with Palearctic Black Kites and not with the geographically far closer (Yellow-billed) Black Kites Milims migrans parnsitus (sometimes treated as a separate species; present in adjacent West Africa) suggests that they, like fasciicauda, possess intrinsic interest and value. Despite the absence Sabine M. Hille & Nigel J. Collar 219 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) of genetic differentiation, the five birds from Maio provide at least a hint of evidence of adaptation to local insular conditions. SMH measured ten ecologically relevant variables — wing length, length of each toe (i.e. four values), tarso-metatarsal length, inter-tarsal joint width, Kipp's distance (wingtip to tip of secondary 1), bill length and body mass (see Leisler & Winkler 1985, 1991) — among 40 individual kites, namely ten Milvus migrans migrans, three M. migrans parasitus, 22 M. milvus milvus and the five birds from Maio, all living at the Wildtier- und Artenschutzstation, Sachsenhagen, Germany, and the National Birds of Prey Centre, Newent, UK. All birds measured were adult and the sexes were distributed evenly within groups except that the five birds from Maio consisted of four females and one male. Data were adjusted by dividing all characters by the cube root of the body mass, trans- formed to natural logarithms and analysed with canonical variates analysis (CVA: ter Braak 1995). The results (Fig. 1) reveal that, despite their genetic make-up, morphometrically Maio kites are more different from Black Kite than they are from Red, perhaps as an adaptation to their aerial snatching of large orthopterans from trees in the Cape Verdes (SMH pers. obs.). Clearly, however, neither kite in the archipelago represents a powerful case for conser- vation attention from major broad-remit international bodies. Hazevoet's (1995) morphological diagnosis of fasciicauda, by which he elevated it to species level, involves a fairly tenuous set of characters that not only may be shown, to some degree, by certain indi- viduals within nominate milvus (barred tails can, for example, be found relatively easily when examining images of continental Red Kites on the internet), but also may quite possi- -1S -10 -S 0 5 1U 15 longer tarscN-metirtarsus snd outer toe > Figure 1. Plot of the scores resulting of a canonical variate analysis (CVA) with respect to (1) Milvus migrans migrans, (2) M. migrans parasitus, (3) M. milvus milvus and (4) Maio birds. Unit of scale is the standard deviation of the scores relative to the mean. We grouped individuals according to taxonomic origin. With CVA we obtained one highly significant factor (chi-square = 192.63, F.G. = 18, p<0.00l). It correlates mainly with five variables. Variables on the x-axis describe 70% and on the y-axis 28% of the variation. Sabine M. Hille & Nigel J. Collar 220 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) bly have derived from a degree of introgression with migrans. Likewise, it is arguable that the variation in the Maio birds derives from a small degree of introgression, by recent ances- tors moving between islands, with M. milviis fasciicaiida (and thus these birds mav possess genes from an otherwise probably extinct form) and / or a small degree of local adaptation to a prey-poor environment. Even so, both taxa could still be considered strong regional or specialist priorities as nationally threatened species, ESUs and / or targets of groups interested in the conser\-a- tion of raptor populations (things that BirdLife International, despite its cardinal focus on full species, has always readily promoted: see, e.g.. Collar 1996). Unfortunatelv, however, the latest evidence from the Cape Verdes suggests that it is now too late, as birds answer- ing the description of fasciicaiida on the north-western and south-western islands can no longer be found. With the Black Kite population also dwindling — a roosting tlock of 22 found on Maio on 18 July 2002 probably represented the great majoritv of birds remaining there and on adjacent Boavista (SMH pers. obs.) — we now face the loss of t^vo enigmatic and interesting populations, and their associated functions and \'alues, from the Cape Verde fauna. Of the five Maio birds captured in 2002, onlv two (a potential pair) remain aHve, now at the Zoological Societv of London (and still the property' of the Cape \^erde government); it is a matter of current discussion ^vhether they should be encouraged to breed or returned to and freed on their island of origin (J. A. Ellis in lift. 2009). Certainlv the Black Kites of the archipelago, though few in number, still offer important research oppor- tunities (e.g. foraging adaptations and phvsiological and reproductive responses in a w^indswept food-poor environment), and academic engagement ^vith their pHght might vet help determine and promote appropriate remedial actions. Acknowledgements We thank Roy Dennis for fruitful discussions, Anita Gamauf and Stuart Marsden for comments on the man- uscript, and John A. EUis for recent information concerning the captive Maio Black Kites. References: Anon. 2001. Cape Verde Kites. Peregrine Fund 2001 Newsletter. 32. Anon. 2002. Pan- Africa Raptor Conserv ation Program: results — Cape Verde Kite Project. Peregrine Fund 2002 Ann. Rep.: 20. Bourne, W. R. P. 1955. The birds of the Cape Verde Islands. Ibis 97: 508-556. ter Braak, C. J. F. 1995. Ordination. Pp. 91-173 in Jongman, R. H. C, ter Braak, C. J. F. & van Tongeren. O. F. R. (eds.) Dntn analysis in community and landscape ecologxj. Cambridge University' Press, Cambridge & Xe\v York. Clarke, T. 2006. Field guide to the birds of the Atlantic islands. Christopher Helm, London. Collar, N. J. 1996. Species concepts and conservation: a response to Hazevoet. Bird Conserv. Intern. 6: 197-200. Hazevoet C. J. 1995. The birds of the Cape Verde Islands: an annotated check-list. BOU Check-list 13. British Ornithologists' Union, Tring. Hazevoet C. J. 1996. Conservation and species lists: taxonomic neglect promotes the extinction of endemic birds, as exemplified bv taxa from eastern Atlantic islands. Bird Conserv. Intern. 6: 181-196. Hille, S. 1995. Nahrungsvvahl und Jagdstrategien des Rotmilans (Milvus milvus) im Biospharenreservat Rhon / Hessen. Vogel u. Umzvelt, Sonderheft: 99-126. Hille, S. 1998. Zur Situation der Milane Milvus milvus fasciicauda (Hartert 1914) und Milvus m. migrans (Boddaert 1783) auf den Kap\ erdischen Inseln. /. Orn. 139: 73-75. Hille, S. & Thiollay, J. M. 2000. Tlie imminent extinction of the kites Milvus milvus fasciicauda and Mil'vus m. migrans on the Cape Verde Islands. Bird Conserv. Inter)!. 10: 361-369. Johnson, J. A., Watson, R. T. & Mindell, D. P. 2005. Prioritizing species conservation: does the Cape \'erde kite exist? Pwc. Rou. Soc. Lond. B 272: 1365-1371. Lande, R. & Shannon ^. 1996. The role of genetic \ ariation in adaptation and population persistence in a changing en\ u\)mncnt. EvoliitioJi ^(V 434-437. Leisler, B.'& Winkler, H. 1985. l .onnM pholo-N . Current Orn. 2: 155-186. Leisler, B. & Winkler, H. 1991. Ergobnl^sc und Konzepte okomorphologischer Untersuchungen an \'ogeLri. [. Orn. 132: 373-425. Sabine M. Hille & Nigel J. Collar 221 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Lynch, M & Ritland, K. 1999. Estimation of pairwise relatedness with molecular markers. Genetics 152: 1753-1766. Moritz, C. 1994. Defining 'evolutionary significant units' for conservation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 373-375. de Naurois, R. 1984. Contribution a Tornithologie de I'archipel du Cap Vert : reproducteurs menaces d'ex- tinction, nicheurs occasionnels, oiseaux mentionnes par erreur. Bol. Mus. Mun. Fiindml 36: 38-50. de Naurois, R. 1987. Les oiseaux de I'archipel du Cap Vert, peuplements, adaptations, endemisme. Bull. Soc. Zool. France 112: 307-326. Sangster, G. 2000. Taxonomic stability and avian extinctions. Conserv. Biol. 14: 579-581. Watson, R. 2001. Cape Verde Kites found. Peregrine Fund Newsletter 32: 10-11. Watson, R. 2002. Update: Cape Verde Red Kite. Peregrine Fund Newsletter 33: 11. Addresses: Sabine M. Hille, Institut fiir Wildbiologie und Jagdwirtschaft, Universitat fur Bodenkultur Wien, Gregor-Mendel-Strafie 33, A-1180 Wien, Austria. Nigel J. Collar, BirdLife International, Wellbrook Court, Girton Road, Cambridge CB3 ONA, UK. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Ignacio Roesler et al. 222 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) First sight records of White-cliested Swift Cypseloides lemosi in Bolivia, with documented records of C. lemosi and White-chinned Swift C. cryptus in Peru by Ignacio Roesler, Guy M. Kinoan, M. Gabriela Agostini, David Beadle, Hadoram Shirihai & Laurence C. Binford^ Received 2 May 2009 Summary. — We present new records of the little-known White-chested Swift Cypseloides lemosi from northern Peru and north-west Bolivia; photographic documentation is available for one of the Peruvian records, whilst the sight-only Bolivian records represent the species' first mention for the country. We also present a photographically documented record of the almost equally poorly known White-chinned Swift C. cryptus from north Peru, along with two previously unpublished specimen records from the same country, and discuss some aspects of the identification of both these swifts. The poorly known White-chested Swift Cypseloides lemosi, Eisenmann & Lehmann, 1962, was described from south-west Colombia, in which country there have now been records in dptos. Valle, Cauca and Amazonas, with an overall altitudinal range of 350-2,000 m (Chantler & Driessens 2000, Downing & Hickman 2002). It was subsequently discovered in north-eastern Ecuador, in prov. Napo, where the species was first noted as recently as March 1990 (Ridgely & Greenfield 2001, Howell 2002). Records in this country are from the east-slope subtropics, foothills and lowlands of Amazonia, with those in the latter region being mainly in July-August, as well as a single claim from coastal west Ecuador (Lopez- Lanus 2001). In August 1994, C. lemosi was observed for the first time in northern Peru, during a multidisciplinary survey of the Cordillera del Condor, with tape-recorded docu- mentation (Schulenberg & Awbrey 1997). There have been several subsequent sight records in Peru, as far south as dpto. Cusco, in Manu Biosphere Reserve (Walker et al 2006), and well into western Amazonia at the rio Yavari (Lane et al. 2003, Schulenberg et al. 2007), mak- ing it almost unsurprising that there should have been a claim from adjacent Brazil, at Palmari Lodge, on the east bank of the Yavari (Javari), in Amazonas state, on 10 September 2004 (S. Hansson in Cotinga 26: 92). Lane et al. (2003) witnessed an apparently large number of C. lemosi, consorting with other swifts, on migration over the Yavarf from Brazil into Peru on 28 March 2003. However, there have been no published specimen / photographic records away from Colombia. Here we report the first observation of White-chested Swift in Bolivia, marking a new southernmost limit for C. lemosi, along with photographic records of this species and White-chinned Swift C. cryptus in Peru, as well as two pre\ioush' unpub- lished specimen records of the latter from Peru. White-chested Swift Bolivian observations. — Between 27 and 29 December 2005, IR and MGA were conduct- ing ornithological field work on the east slope of the Andes between Caranavi (15^50'S, 67^'33'W), in dpto. La Paz, and Rurrenabaque (14^^26'S, 67''31'W), in dpto. Beni (Fig. 1). Via Ruta Nacional 3 and 8, they traversed an elevational gradient commencing at just over 600 m down to 250 m. On 28 December they observed a group of ten Wliite-chested Swifts in Ignacio Roesler et al. 223 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) -66' ■86' -64' ■14" -16' ■16' PERJI^V .i A^ 'J / t f' » } A ' La Paz /Beni X / / 7V ' •J / r --y [ BOL IVIA r ( A -12" ■14' -16" •IS" -70" ■66" ■66" ■64' Figure 1 . Map showing the region of Bolivia in which IR and MG A observed White-chested Swift Cypseloides lemosi. Localities are denoted as follows: 1 = Caranavi, dpto. La Paz; 2 = Rurrenabaque, dpto. Beni. flight over an extensive area of secondary woodland in the montane zone north-east of Caranavi, on the outskirts of the village of Carrasco. The next day, at 07.30 h, IR observed another group of C. lemosi, this time numbering 30 individuals, together w^ith a group of other swifts comprising White-collared Swift Streptoprome zonaris and Short-tailed Swift Chaetura brachyura in the environs of Rurrenabaque. An hour later, at 08.30 h, 2 km away, IR observed again what he considered to be the same group of birds. Around Rurrenabaque natural habitats have been extensively modified by man's activities, and the best-preserved fragments were atop low hills. Identification of the swifts concerned as belonging to the genus Cypseloides was made on the basis of their flight silhouette, which was similar to that of congeners with which IR and MGA are familiar. IR, especially, was cognisant of the dif- ficulties of specifically identifying Cypseloides spp., including their separation from members of other genera of Apodidae, but the white chest patch (lacking in congenerics that might be expected in this area, namely Rothschild's Swift C. rothschildi and C. crypt us) was clearly noticed. In fact, in this case, greater care was needed to distinguish the C. lemosi from S. zonaris, as was noted by Hilty & Brown (1986), but fortunately during the observa- tions on 29 December the two species could be compared directly, when the larger overall size, the longer and proportionately slimmer wings, and complete white collar of the White- collared Swifts could be fully appreciated. Ours are the first sightings of White-chested Swift in Bolivia (Hennessey et al. 2003, Herzog & Maillard 2008) and represent a range extension of c.600 km from the previous southernmost known site. Ignacio Roesler et al. 224 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Figure 2. The environs of Carana\ i, dpto. La Paz, Boli\ ia, o\ er \vhich area a group of White-chested S^vift Ci/pseloiLies Icmosi was observed on 28 December 2005 (Ignacio Roesler) Figure 3. AAHiite-chested Swift Ci/pseloides lemosi, presumed female, Abra Patricia, San Martin, Peru, 25 October 2008 (Hadoram Shirihai / Photographic hnndbook of birds of the zvorJd, by Jomvall & Shirihai, A. & C. Black, London); note the slight tail-fork, striking contrast between the paler flight-feathers and darker underwing-coverts, the pale breast-band, which obviously does not extend onto the neck (although it is narrower than the heart-shaped patch shown b}" many individuals, and appears to be slightly higher on the breast than usual), and the rather longer wings than in Chestnut-collared Swift Streptoprocne rutila. Figure 4. Juvenile White-chinned Swift Cypseloides cryptus, Abra Patricia, San Martin, Peru, 25 October 2008 (Hadoram Shirihai / Photographic hnndbook of birds of the world, by Jomvall & Shirihai, A. & C. Black, London); note the obvious white tips to the underparts, from the mid breast down, which become much more marked, forming a blotchy effect, over the crissum. Peruvian observations . — During a photographic trip to the north of the country, in mid-September-mid-November 2008, White-chested Swifts were observed twice. On 30 September, DB and GMK watched a flock of C.20 C. lemosi flying south in a single group over the rio Yanayacu, close to Muyima Lodge, 140 km south of Iquitos, m dpto. Loreto. They were identified based on their general structure, which permitted their assignment to Cypseloides, and the diffuse and irregular white breast patch visible on several individuals in the flock confirmed the species identification. Between us, we have extensive experience of almost all potential confusion species recorded in South America. Subsequently, on 25 October, DB, GIMK and HS \vere obser\'ing large numbers of White-collared Swifts Streptoprocne zonaris and Chestnut-collared S^vifts S. rutila departing their montane roost sites, east of the pass at Abra Patricia, dpto. San Martin, at c. 1,900 m (c.05''40'S, 77^46' W). Some were passiiig <50 m from us, but others were up to 250 m distant. HS was photographing the swifts, ^vhilst DB and GMK scanned the t"lock ^vith binoculars. GMK eventualh" drew the others' attention to two birds, ^vhich he identified as C. lemosi, based on their overall size (fractionally larger and longer-'winged than S. rutila), only very slightly forked tails (compared to S. zonaris, whereas most S. rutila appeared to have square-ended tails), blunter and shorter ^vings than S. zonaris, and the \vhite patch confined to the breast, rather than extending as a complete collar. Unfortunately, it \vas not possible to distinguish any \^ocalisations definiteh' emittmg from the two birds ^ve ^vere watching. We concur with Howell (2002) that in shape and structure, e.g. wing length etc., C. lemosi seems closest to American Black S^vift Cypseloides niger. Ignacio Roesler et al. 225 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) HS photographed one individual at a distance of 200-300 m (Fig. 3), apparently a female, based on the rather smaller white breast patch. The underwing pattern is typical of the genus in the notably pale flight feathers contrasting very well with the much darker underwing-co verts. Both Streptoprocne and Chaetiira also show broadly similar patterns, but the level of contrast is often much less striking in even light conditions in the former genus (see photographs of S. zonaris and Biscutate Swift S. bisciitata in Kirwan 2007) and in Chaetiira the pale area is also less strikingly contrasting in most lights whilst the coverts (i.e. the dark area) occupy a perceivably more restricted part of the wings. To our knowledge, this constitutes the second documented record of C. lemosi for Peru, and an in-country alti- tudinal range extension of c.300 m (Schulenberg et al. 2007). White-chinned Swift Peruvian field records. — Remarkably, when we subsequently studied all of the photo- graphs of swifts taken by HS at Abra Patricia, we found that he had also photographed, at equally long range, a juvenile of the almost equally poorly known Cypseloides cryptus (Fig. 4), thereby underlining the possibilities and opportunities presented by digital SLR high- speed photography. The white-tipped feathers of the underparts, which become broader and more obvious over the vent, are obvious in the photograph, making the identification reasonably straightforward, as juvenile S. rutila does not display such a pattern (Chantler & Driessens 2000, Schulenberg et al. 2007). Presumed juveniles of S. nitila photographed on the same day at this site show some pale tips to the larger wing-coverts but none on the under- parts. C. Jiiger, which has never been recorded in Peru (Schulenberg et al. 2007), or Ecuador (Ridgely & Greenfield 2001), can show variable white tips to the feathers of the rear under- parts (Zimmer 1945), but the bird photographed by HS lacks the strong contrast between the darker underparts and paler head to upper breast typical of C. niger borealis (the only race definitely known to occur in South America), and has an obviously square-ended tail, whereas C. iiiger usually shows a more or less obvious tail-fork in males, often reduced to a notch in females (Stiles & Negret 1994). Juvenile C. lemosi is reportedly much like the female of that species, i.e. in showing a much-reduced but evident white breast patch (Chantler & Driessens 2000), and would presumably also possess that species' Targer swift' proportions. Specimen records from Peru. — Other than the type specimen, from the 'Inca Mine' on the rio Tavara (Zimmer 1945), there has been no previously published documentation for C. cryptus in Peru. However, Zimmer (1945, 1953) already drew attention to two problematic specimens of Cypseloides swifts held in what is now The Natural History Museum, in Tring, UK (BMNH). Both specimens, one, a male, from Cosnipata, western Peru (close to the type locality of cryptus) collected by H. Whitely in (November?: label partially illegible) 1868 (BMNH 90.2.18.58), and the other labelled as being from 'Ecuador' from the Gould collec- tion (BMNH 88.7.30.66), were originally identified as Sooty Swift C. fiimigatus, a species now considered to be confined to south-east South America (Chantler 1999). The two were re-identified as C. cryptus as long ago as 1966, by C. T. Collins, and have been catalogued by the museum as that species ever since. Despite this, P. Chantler, who worked in the same collection in preparing the text of Chantler & Driessens (2000) considered there to be 'only [one] certain specimen from that coimtry [Peru]', and apparently continued to treat the Whitely specimen as pertaining to C. (fumigatus) rothschildi. Collins (1968) published on the identity of the Ecuadorian specimen, which remains the only documentation of the species for that country (Ridgely & Greenfield 2001). Both specimens were re-examined by P. C. Rasmussen and D. Davison in 2001, and by GMK in 2009. Zimmer (1945, 1953) did not examine either bird, but published measurements of the Peruvian specimen (Taczanowski Ignacio Roesler et al. 226 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) TABLE 1 Mensural data for two specimens of White-chinned Swift Ci/pseloides cryptus from Ecuador and Peru, held at The Natural History Museum, Tring, UK (BMNH), compared with published data for the same species and published and unpublished measurements for Sooty Swift C. fumigatiis and Rothschild's Swift C. rothschildi (Zimmer 1945, Eisenmann & Lehmann 1962, Belton 1984, Marm & Stiles 1992, Chantler & Driessens 2000). All data are from specimens, except those published by Marm & Stiles (1992), which are from live birds. Our data = specimens measured by GMK at BMNH using a metal wing-rule and digital callipers, and following standard parameters. All measurements in mm. Source Zimmer Eisenmann Belton Marm & Stiles Chantler & Own data Taxon (1945) & Lehmami (1984) (1992) Driessens (from BMNH i (1962) (2000) specimens) C. cnjptns Wing 136.5 (;/=l) 136-143 (n=4) 136.44 ± 1.71 (;/=14) 142 (n=2) Tail 43 (/z=l) 40^9 (n=4) 44.02 ± 1.40 (n=10) 46-47 (n=2) Tarsus 16 (n=l) iJ-iO \H-4j ij.D7 ± V.jZ. [U-lj) iD.j4-i/.j [U-lj C. fiimigahis Wing 153 (n=l) 135-147 (n=4) 142.5-146.5 (n=4) 142-145 (H=4) Tail 49 (;;=1) 49-55 (n=4) Tarsus 12 (n=l) 13.2-14.61 (n=4) C. rothschildi Wing 147-157 (n=7) Tail 47-56 (n=7) Tarsus 12 (;/=!) 1884: 232) suggested to him that the identification as fumigatus should stand. The Ecuadorian specimen (wing-chord 142 mm, tail 46 mm, tarsus 16.34 mm: GMK pers. obs.) is a classic example of cryptus, having the chin and throat notably pale, whilst the Whitely bird from Peru only has a very restricted pale area on the chin, which would be almost cer- tainly invisible in the field (as is often the case with this species: Chantler & Driessens 2000). Nonetheless, it can still be confidently identified as cryptus, based on the general plumage coloration, and the shape and size of the nostrils, which differ from C. niger (Chantler & Driessens 2000: 110; GMK pers. obs.) and C. fumigatus (GMK pers. obs.). Its measurements (wing-chord 142 mm, tail 47 mm, tarsus 17.3 mm: GMK pers. obs.) are, contra Zimmer (1945, 1953), far more concordant with cryptus than fumigatus (see Table 1), especially in the short- er tail and longer tarsi, and given that the classic Ecuadorian specimen of cryptus also has a long wing-chord (like two Colombian male specimens: Eisenmami & Lehmami 1962). Given this, we can confidently state that there is no record of Rothschild's S\vift C. rotliscJiildi (a species formerly considered conspecific with C. fumigatus) for Peru, contra Chantler & Driessens' (2000) repetition of Zimmer (1945), either as a winter visitor (Short 1975) or vagrant. Finally, there is another unpublished specimen from Peru, held at the Louisiana State University Museum of Zoology, in Baton Rouge (LSUMZ 98105) of a C. cryptus from Abra de Maruncunca, 10 km south-west of San Jose del Oro, dpto. Puno (2,000 m), \vhich was collected by LCB (collector's number 1527), on 12 November 1980, being caught by hand (!) fluttering against the wall of a well-lit tent at 22.45 h. It was a female, with o\"ary 7 X 4 mm, largest ova 1 mm and 0.5 mm. The skull was 50% ossified (indicating immaturity); no moult; total length 125 mm; very fat; weight 31.3 g; insect parts in stomach. Ignacio Roesler et al. 227 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Discussion Neither C. lemosi nor C. cri/ptiis was mentioned for the Abra Patricia region by Hornbuckle (1999), but T. S. Schulenberg {in litt. 2009) informs us that the late P. Coopmans {in litt. to Schulenberg, November 2003) observed several C. lemosi in the area on 18 October 2003, and T. S. Schulenberg {in litt. 2009) & F. P. Angulo observed a small flock at the same place as we made our observations in late September 2007. Stiles & Negret (1994) already noted that C. cri/ptus can join mixed flocks with S. zonaris, C. lemosi and S. rutila, based on observations in southern Colombia, and C. cryptiis and S. rutila have also been observed together in Costa Rica (Marin & Stiles 1992). The presence of a fresh juvenile could suggest that the species breeds somewhere in the environs of Abra Patricia (M. Marm in litt. 2009). The altitude of our second Bolivian observation, 250 m, is the lowest specifically men- tioned in the literature to date, although given the Amazonian observations reported above and in other literature C. lemosi can clearly be expected to occur down to sea level. Observations from throughout the range of White-chested Swift, from montane regions to the lowlands of Amazonia indicate that the species is a habitat generalist and that it is not restricted to inter- Andean valleys, as was formerly thought to be the case (Hilty & Brown 1986, Chantler 1999), or at least not year-round. More observations are needed to determine whether C. lemosi performs regular intra-tropical migrations. The forests surrounding Rurrenabaque, in those areas visited by IR and MGA, are extremely threatened, principal- ly due to expanding agricultural concerns, especially large farms. BirdLife International (2008) currently treats C. lemosi as Low Risk, given that advancing deforestation in many parts of the species' known range probably favours it. Future workers should seek to iden- tify the species' breeding areas in both Bolivia and Peru, and identify any threats to such places. There are numerous waterfalls in the environs of Caranavi, which might serve as breeding sites for C. lemosi (IR & MGA pers. obs.), and given this and the time of year (December) in which our observations were made it seems quite probable that the species breeds in Bolivia (as well as in Peru). It seems certain to be the case that the overall status and distribution of C. lemosi (and C. cryptus) have been under-estimated due to the difficulties in identifying the species, as evidenced in part by the recent discovery of C. cryptus in northern Brazil (Whittaker & Araujo Whittaker 2008; GMK pers. obs.). There have been observations of suspected C. cryp- tus at Palmari Lodge on the east bank of the Yavari, and Lane et al. (2003) suspected that some of this species were also involved in the large swift migration they witnessed on the Peruvian side in late March 2003 (see above). Whilst the white chest offers a 'sure-fire' means of separating C. lemosi from other swifts, lighting conditions under which the extent of this can be accurately determined need to be exceptionally favourable, and the distance of observation is often a telling factor preventing certain identifications. Acknowledgements We thank Manuel Marm for confirming the identification of the White-chim^ed Swift, whilst we are grateful to Charles T. Collins and Tom Schulenberg for providing fine reviews of the manuscript, which immeasur- ably improved its final content. Dan Davison and Pam Rasmussen examined and photographed the 'mystery' Cypseloides specimens in Tring on behalf of Schulenberg. Van Remsen facilitated contact between GMK and LCB. Mark Adams permitted access to specimens at The Natural History Museum, Tring. References: Belton, W. 1984. Birds of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil part 1. Rheidae through Furnariidae. Bull. Amer. Mits. Nnt. Hist. 178. BirdLife International. 2008. Species factsheet: Cypseloides lemosi. www.birdlife.org (accessed 21 April 2009). Chantler, P. 1999. Family Apodidae (swifts). Pp. 388-457 in del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol. 5. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Ignacio Roesler et al. 228 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Chantler, P. & Driessens, G. 2000. Swifts. A guide to the swifts ami treeswifts of the worhi. Second edn. Pica Press, Robertsbridge. Collins, C. T. 1968. Distributional notes on some Neotropical swifts. Bull. Brit. Oni. CI. 88: 133-134. Downing, C. & Hickman, J. 2002. The first White-chested Swift Cypseloides leiuosi in Amazonian Colombia. Cotingn 18: 102-103. Eisenmann, E. & Lehmann V., F. 1962. A new species of swift of the genus Cypseloides from Colombia. Amer. Mus. Novit. 2117. Hennessey, A. B., Herzog, S. K. & Sagot, F. 2003. Listn nnotada de Ins aves de Bolivia. Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Asociacion Armom'a. Herzog, S. & Maillard, O. 2008. Species lists of birds for South American countries and territories: Bolivia. www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCCountryLists.html (accessed 8 April 2009). Hornbuckle, J. 1999. The birds of Abra Patricia and the upper rio Mayo, San Martin, north Peru. Cotinga 12: 11-28. Howell, S. N. G. 2002. Additional information on the birds of Ecuador. Cotinga 18: 62-65. Kirwan, G. M. 2007. Separation of Streptoprocne swifts in the Atlantic Forest region. Neotrop. Birding 2: 24-26. Lane, D. F., Pequeno, T. & Villar, J. F. 2003. Birds. Pp. 150-156 in Pitman, N., Vriesendorp, C. & Moskovits, D. (eds.) Peru: Yavari. Rapid Biological Inventories Rep. 11. The Field Museum, Chicago. Lopez-Lanus, B. 2001. White-chested Swift Cypseloides lemosi in west Ecuador? Cotinga 15: 63. Marrn A., M. & Stiles, F. G. 1992. On the biology of five species of swifts (Apodidae: Cypseloidinae) in Costa Rica. Proc. ]Nest. Found. Vert. Zool. 4: 287-351. Ridgely, R. S. & Greenfield, P. J. 2001. The birds of Ecuador. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, NY. Schulenberg, T. S. & Awbrey, K. (eds.) 1997. The Cordillera del Condor region of Ecuador and Peru: a biological assessment. RAP Working Papers 7. Conservation International, Washington DC. Schulenberg, T. S., Stotz, D. F., Lane, D. F., O'Neill, J. P. & Parker, T. A. 2007. Bu-ds of Peru. Princeton Univ. Press. Short, L. L. 1975. A zoogeographic analysis of the South American Chaco avifauna. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 154. Stiles, F. G. & Negret, A. J. 1994. The nonbreeding distribution of the Black Swift: a clue from Colombia and unsolved problems. Condor 96: 1091-1094. Taczanowski, L. 1884. Ornithologie du Perou, vol. 1. Oberthur, Paris. Walker, B., Stotz, D. F., Pequeno, T. & Fitzpatrick, J. W. 2006. Birds of the Manu Biosphere Reserve. Pp. 23^9 in Patterson, B. D., Stotz, D. F. & Solari, S. (eds.) Mammals and birds of the Manu Biosphere Reserve, Peru. Fieldiana, Zool. n. ser. 110. Whittaker, A. & Araujo Whittaker, S. 2008. The White-chinned Swift Cypseloides cryptus (Apodiformes: Apodidae) breeding near Presidente Figueiredo, Amazonas: the first documented record for Brazil. Rev. Bras. Orn. 16: 398-401. Zimmer, J. T. 1945. A new swift from Central and South America. Auk 62: 586-592. Zimmer, J. T. 1953. Studies of Peruvian birds. No. 64 the swifts: family Apodidae. Amer. Mus. Novit. 1609. Addresses: Ignacio Roesler, Grupo FALCO, Calle 2, no. 1187, La Plata (1900), Buenos Aires, Argentiiia, e-mail: kiniroesler@gmail.com. Guy M. Kirwan, 74 Waddington Street, Norwich NR2 4JS, UK, e-mail: GMKirwan@aol.com. M. Gabriela Agostini, CIMA and CONICET, Facultad de Cs. Exactas, Calle 47 y 115, La Plata (1900), Buenos Aires, Argentina, e-mail: gagostini@quimica.unlp.edu.ar. David Beadle, 4 Yarmouth Gardens, Toronto, Ontario M6G 1W4, Canada. Hadoram Shirihai, c/o Ausserdorfstrafie 6, 8052 Zurich, Switzerland. Laurence C. Binford^, Museum of Natural Science, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70805, USA. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Edson Guilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 229 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Birds associated with bamboo forests in eastern Acre, Brazil by Edson Guilherme & Marcos Persio Dantas Santos Received 7 May 2009 Summary. — Rainforest habitats dominated by arborescent bamboo of the genus Guadiia are common in south-west Amazonia. We gathered data on the avifauna associated with this type of forest in south-west Brazil, in eastern Acre, during November 2006. Birds were surveyed using mist-netting, observations and recordings of vocalisations, and a total of 266 bird species was recorded, 20 (7.5%) of which are considered to be strictly associated with bamboo forest. Our survey also extended the known ranges of several bamboo forest specialist species in south-west Amazonia, and confirmed the importance of this habitat type for regional biodiversity. Open forests dominated by arborescent bamboo of the genus Guadiia cover some 180,000 km^ of the south-west Amazon basin, including south-east Peru, northern Bolivia and western Brazil (Nelson et al. 1997, Silveira 2005). In the Brazilian state of Acre, these bamboo forests are known as tabocais, and form a mosaic of habitats together with Ombrophyllous open forest with palms, open floodplain rainforest and dense rainforest (Acre 2000). Amazonian bamboo forests are unique ecosystems with a rich fauna of verte- brates (Conover 1994, Servat 1996, Kratter 1997, 1998, Lebbin et al. 2007) and invertebrates (Conover 1994, Louton et al. 1996). Some bird and mammal species are considered to be bamboo forest specialists, and are only found in areas where this type of forest is present (Kratter 1997, Haemig 2006a,b). Stotz et al. (1996) identified 29 bird species in the southern Amazon basin that are closely associ- ated with these tabocais, although this number may be an under-estimate, which hypothesis is supported by the recent discovery of a new bird species, Rufous Twistwing Cnipodectes superriifus, which is restricted to bamboo forests (Lane et al. 2007, Tobias et al. 2008). This dis- covery further emphasises the need for more detailed studies of the unique, but poorly known fauna of these bamboo forests. With the aim of providing more reliable information on the bird fauna of this type of habitat, we conducted an ornithological expedition to the eastern portion of the Brazilian state of Acre. In addition to a general overview of the study area and the data collected, we present an annotated list of the records of the species most relevant to understanding the ecological characteristics of this unique forest type. Methods Study area. — The area surveyed is located at km 11 of the Jarinal road, an offshoot of the Transacreana highway, in the east of the Brazilian state of Acre (09°54'16.5"S, 68°28'26.6"W; Fig. 1). Ornithological surveys were conducted on 11-23 November 2006, at the start of the rainy season, in an area of open terra firme forest dominated by bamboos associated with palms. The area surrounding the forest is mainly cattle pasture, with scattered plots of sub- sistence agriculture. The forest has been subject to selective logging of hardwood trees by local residents in recent years, for both subsistence and commercial purposes. Edson Guilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 230 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) 74'0'0"W 72"0'0"W 70 0'0"W 68 0'0"W 66 0'0"W 74"0'0"W 72°0'0"W 70'0'0"W 68=G'0"W 66^0'0"W Figure 1. Location of the study site. Surveys. — The inventory used two complementary approaches. Quantitative sampling was conducted using ten 36 mm-mesh mist-nets, 2 m high by 12 m long, whilst qualitative records were made using binoculars, and recordings of vocalisations were made using a Sony TCM 5000 tape-recorder. Recordings will be deposited at the Museu Paraense Emflio Goeldi (MPEG) in Belem, Para. Mist-nets were set along transects within the forest, remain- ing at each location for three days. The nets were opened at dawn (05.30 h) and were generally kept open until 15.00 h, to maximise the number of captures. In some cases, voucher specimens were collected in order to confirm the presence of the species in the study area. These specimens were prepared using standard taxidermy techniques. Collection of specimens was authorised by the Brazilian Federal Environment Institute (IB AM A) through licence number 044/2006-COFAN. All specimens are deposited at the MPEG. Nomenclature follows that of the Brazilian Ornithological Records Committee (CBRO 2008). Results A total of 266 bird species (Table 1) was recorded during the 12 days of sampling, which encompassed 916 net-hours of mist-netting and eight hours of recording. Twenty of the species are associated with or restricted to lowland bamboo forests in south-west Amazonia, i.e. 7.5% of the total, and almost 70% of the species recognised by Stotz ct al. (1996) as being predominantly associated with bamboo forests of the southern Amazon basin. An annotated list of species most relevant to understanding the ecological character- istics of this unique forest system is presented below. Edson Guilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 231 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) TABLE 1 List of families and species of birds recorded on the Jarinal road, eastern Acre, Brazil. Habitat codes: BE = open bamboo forest; R = reservoir; OA = open area; OP = open area with cattle pasture; EE = forest edge. Records: S = specimen deposited at the MPEG, Belem; O = sight record; V = vocalisation sound-recorded. Asterisks denote species considered to be closely associated with bamboo forest in south-west Amazonia as defined by Stotz et nl. (1996), Kratter (1997) and our observations. Family Species English Habitat Record (number of species) name Tinamidae (6) Tinamus tno Grey Tinamou or V Tinatnus giittcitus White-throated Tinamou RC or V Crypturellus cuiereiis Cinereous Tinamou or D, V CTyptiiTclhis soui Little Tinamou Dr V K^rUylUlcllLlb UllUULlllUb Undulated Tmamou Dr V Cvi/ptuvcUus ntrocnpillus Black-capped Tinamou or V v^raciQae yi) OTtalis giittcitn Speckled Chachalaca RF Dr \Jf V Pcuclopc jnccjiincii Spix's Guan RF Dr \J, V Ociontopnoriuae (1) OdontopJioTus gujcmcftsis iviarDieQ vvooq ^^uau RP Dr V Tnrlmhnr)i-ii White-necked Puftbird BF V Bucco iiincrodi!clylu< Chestnut-capped Puttbird BF 0 Edson Guilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 233 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Ramphastidae (5) Picidae (9) Thamnophilidae (33) Grallariidae (1) Bucco tamatia Spotted Puffbird BF 0 Bucco capensis Collared Puffbird BF 0 Malacoptila semicincta Semicollared Puffbird BF S Nonnula ruficapilla* Rufous-capped Nunlet BF S Monasa nigrifrons Black-fronted Nunbird BF, FE 0, V Monasa morphoeus White-fronted Nunbird BF S, 0, V Monasa flavirostris* Yellow-billed Nunbird BF, FE S, 0 Chelidoptera tenebrosa Swallow-wing BF, FE 0 Ramphastos tucanus Red-billed Toucan BF, FE S, 0, V Ramphastos viteUinus Channel-billed Toucan BF, FE 0, V Pteroglossiis inscriptus Lettered Aracari BF S, 0 Pteroglossus mariae Brown-mandibled Aracari BF 0 Pteroglossiis castanotis Chestnut-eared Aracari BF, FE 0 Melanerpes cruentatiis \/ n (("ilTA7 1 1 Yellow-tufted Woodpecker OP; FE 0, V Veniliornis passer inus Little Woodpecker BF s Colaptes punctigiila Spot-breasted Woodpecker BF s Celeiis elegans /^l I 1 TAT 1 1 Chestnut Woodpecker BF s Celeus spedabilis* T>r 1 11TA7 1 1 Rufous-headed Woodpecker BF S, V, 0 Celeus torquatus Ringed Woodpecker BF 0 Dryocopus lineatus Lineated Woodpecker OP; FE 0, V Campephilus rubricoUis Red-necked Woodpecker OP; FE 0 Campephilus melanoleucos Crimson-crested Woodpecker OP; FE 0, V Cymbilaimus lineatus Fasciated Antshrike BF V Cymbilaimus sanctaemariae* Bamboo Antshrike BF S, V, 0 Taraba major Great Antshrike BF S, V, 0 Thamnophilus doliatiis Barred Antshrike BF S, V, 0 Thamnophiliis schistaceus Plain-winged Antshrike BF s Thamnophilus murinus Mouse-coloured Antshrike BF V Thamnophilus aethiops White-shouldered Antshrike BF S, V, 0 Thamnomanes schistogyniis TDl • 1 1 1. A J. 1 M Bluish-slate Antshrike BF S, V 7""' 1111 1 1 1 1 tpinecrophylla leucopnthalma White-eyed Antwren BF V Epinecrophylla haematonota Stipple-throated Antwren BF V Epinecrophylla ornata* Ornate Antwren BF s Myrmotherula iheringi Ihering's Antwren BF s Myrmotherula hauxwelli Plain-throated Antwren BF V Myrmotherula axillaris White-flanked Antwren BF S, V Myrmotherula longipennis Long-winged Antwren BF V Myrmotherula menetriesii Grey Antwren BF V, 0 Drymophila devillei* Striated Antbird BF S, 0 Cercomacra cinerascens Grey Antbird BF s Cercomacra manu* Manu Antbird BF s Myrmoboriis leucophrys White-browed Antbird BF S, 0, V Myrmoborus myotherinus Black-faced Antbird BF S, 0, V Hypocnemis peruviana Peruvian Warbling Antbird BF 0, V Hypocnemis subflava* Yellow-breasted Warbling Antbird BF s Percnostola lophotes* White-lined Antbird BF s Myrmeciza hemimelaena Southern Chestnut-tailed Antbird BF S, 0, V Myrmeciza atrothorax nl 111 1 lA il'J Black-throated Antbird BF 0, V Myrmeciza goeldii* Goeldi's Antbird BF S, V, 0 Myrmeciza hyperythra Plumbeous Antbird BF S, V Gymnopithys salvini TA71*( i1 lJA l1*J White-throated Antbird BF S, V Rhegmatorhina melanosticta Hairy-crested Antbird or U, V Hylophylax naevius Spot-backed Antbird BF s,v Willisornis poecilinotus Scale-backed Antbird BF o,v Phlegopsis nigromaciilata Black-spotted Bare-eye BF s, o,v Myrmothera campanisona Thrush-like Antpitta BF V Edson Giiilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 234 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Formicariidae (2) Sclemridae (2) Dendrocolaptidae (11) Furnariidae (10) Tyrannidae (30) Fornucnriiis colnm Rufous-capped Antthrush BF o,v Formiuiriiis ivmlis Black-faced Antthrush BF s, 0,V Scleriinis ciiudacittiis Black-tailed Leaftosser BF S Sclcninis albigulmis Grey-throated Leaftosser BF s Deudrocincla fuliginosa Plain-brown Woodcreeper BF s,v Dendrocincla merula White-chinned Woodcreeper BF o,v Deconi/chiira longicauda Long-tailed Woodcreeper BF o,v Sittasomus griseicapiUiis Olivaceous Woodcreeper BF s Glyphorynchus spirurus Wedge-billed Woodcreeper BF 0 Dendrocolaptes picumniis Black-banded Woodcreeper BF s Dendroplex piciis Straight-billed Woodcreeper OP; FE o,v Xiphorhynchus chiinchotambo Tschudi's Woodcreeper BF s Xiphorhynchiis guttatus Buff-throated Woodcreeper BF s, o,v Lepidocolaptes alboUneatus Lineated Woodcreeper BF V CampylorJmmphus trochilirostris* Red-billed Scythebill BF s Funmriiis leiicopiis Pale-legged Hornero BF S, 0, V Synallaxis rut Hans Ruddy Spinetail BF 0 Synallaxis cherriei* Cheshiut-throated Spinetail BF s Simoxenops ucayalae* Peruvian Recurvebill BF s, o,v Automohis ochrolaemus Buff-throated Foliage-gleaner BF s, v,o Aiitomoliis infuscatus Olive-backed Foliage-gleaner BF 0 Automohis melanopezus* Brown-rumped Foliage-gleaner BF s Automohis nibiginosus Ruddy Foliage-gleaner BF s Automohis nifipileatus Chestnut-crowned Foliage-gleaner BF s Xenops minutus Plain Xenops BF S,0 Mionedes oleagineiis Ochre-bellied Flycatcher BF 0 Leptopogon amaurocephahis Sepia-capped Flycatcher BF s Corythopis torquntus Ringed Antpipit BF s Lophotriccus eulophotes* Long-crested Pygmy Tyrant BF s Hemitricciis flammulatus* Flammulated Bamboo Tyrant BF o,v Hemitriccus minimus Zimmer's Tody-Tyrant BF s Myiopagis gaimardii Forest Elaenia FE . o,v Omithion inerme White-lored Tyrannulet BF o,v Camptostoma obsoletum Southern Beardless Tyrannulet FE 0 Siiblegatus modestus Southern Scrub Flycatcher FE 0 Cnipodedes supernifus* Rufous Twistwing BF s, o,v Rhyndtocydus oUvaceus Olivaceous Flatbill BF o,v Tolmomyias assimihs Yellow-margined Flycatcher FE s Lathrotriccus euleri Euler's Flycatcher BF s Onychorhynchiis coronatiis Royal Flycatcher BF s Myiobius barbatus Whiskered Flycatcher BF s Terenotriccus ery thrums Ruddy-tailed Flycatcher BF 0 Legatus leucophaius Piratic Flycatcher FE 0, V Myiozetdes cayanensis Rusty-margined Flycatcher FE S, 0, V Myiozddcs simihs Social Flycatcher FE s, o,v Pitangus sulphuratus Great Kiskadee FE o,v Myiodynastes maculatus Streaked Flycatcher FE 0 Megarhyndms pitangua Boat-billed Flycatcher FE o,v Empidouomus vnriiis Variegated Flycatcher BF 0 Tyniiiiiiis iiiclnihlioliLiis Tropical Kingbird FE 0,V Myiarduis sivaiusoni Swainson's Flycatcher FE 0 Myinrdnis ferox Short-crested Flycatcher FE S, 0, V Rnnipliolrigoii inc^^ticcphnhiiu* Large-headed Flatbill BF S, V Riiniphotngon fusciciuidif Duskv-tailed Flatbill BF s Attihi spndiccus Bright-rumped Attila BF s Edson Guilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 235 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Cotingidae (2) Lipniigus vociferans Screaming Piha BF o,v Qiienila purpurata Purple-throated Fruitcrow BF o,v Pipridae (5) Neopelma sulphureiventer* Sulphur-bellied Tyrant-Manakin BF s Piprites chloris Wing-barred Piprites BF s Pipra fasciicaiida Band-tailed Manakin BF S, 0, V Pipra rubrocapilla Red-headed Manakin BF 0 Schiffornis major Varzea Schiffornis BF 0 Tityridae (4) Laniocera hypopi/rrJw Cinereous Mourner BF V Tityra cayana Black-tailed Tityra BF 0 Tityra semifasciata Masked Tityra BF 0 PachyrampJms polychopterus White-winged Becard BF; FE s Vireonidae (2) Cydarhis gujanensis Rufous-browed Peppershrike BF; FE V Vireo olivaceiis Red-eyed Vireo BF; FE 0 Himndinidae (2) Tachycineta albiventer White-winged Swallow R 0 Stelgidopteryx ruficollis Southern Rough-winged Swallow R 0 Troglodytidae (5) Microcer cuius marginatiis Scaly-breasted Wren BF 0 Troglodytes musculus Southern House Wren OP; FE o,v Campylorhynchus turdinus Thrush-like Wren BF S, 0, V Plieugopedius genibarbis Moustached Wren BF; FE o,v Cyphorhimis arada Musician Wren BF V Polioptilidade (1) Ramphocaenus melanurus Long-billed Gnatwren BF s Turdidae (2) Turdus ignobilis Black-billed Thrush OP; FE s, o,v Tiirdus hauxwelli Hauxwell's Thrush BF s, o,v Coerebidae (1) Coereba flaveola Bananaquit FE 0 Thraupidae (14) Lnmprospiza melnnoleucn Red-billed Pied Tanager BF; BF 0 Halm rubica Red-crowned Ant Tanager BF V Tachyphomis liictiiosus White-shouldered Tanager BF S,0 Ramphocelus carbo Silver-beaked Tanager FE s, o,v Thraupis episcopus Blue-grey Tanager OP; FE s, o,v Thraupis palmarum Palm Tanager OP; FE a o,v Tangara mexicana Turquoise Tanager BF s, o,v Tangara chilensis Paradise Tanager BF s, o,v Tangara schrankii Green-and-gold Tanager BF o,v Tangara nigrocinda Masked Tanager BF o,v Tangara velia Opal-rumped Tanager BF o,v Dacnis cayana Blue Dacnis BF o,v Cyanerpes cyaneus Red-legged Honeycreeper BF o,v Hemithraupis giiira Guira Tanager BF o,v Emberizidae (4) Ammodramus aiirifrons Yellow-browed Sparrow OP S, 0, V - Volatinia jacarina Blue-black Grassquit OP o,v Sporophila castandventris Chestnut-bellied Seedeater OP S,0 Sporophila angolensis Chestnut-bellied Seed Finch OP s, o,v Cardinalidae (4) Saltator grossus Slate-coloured Grosbeak BF 0 Saltator maximus ■ . Buff-throated Saltator OP; FE o,v Saltator coerulescens Greyish Saltator OP; FE s, o,v Cyanoloxia cyanoides Blue-black Grosbeak BF s Parulidae (1) Phaeotlilypis fulvicauda Buff-rumped Warbler BF 0 Icteridae (5) Psarocoliits deciimanus Crested Oropendola BF o,v Psarocolius bifasciatiis Olive Oropendola Dr Cacicus cela Yellow-rumped Cacique OP; BF 0, V Molothrus oryzivora Giant Cowbird OP; BF 0 Sturndla militaris Red-breasted Blackbird OP s, o,v Fringillidae (1) Eiiphonia chrysopasta White-lored Euphonia BF s Edson Guilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 236 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Species accounts BLUE-HEADED MACAW Primoiiiis couloni Restricted to part of the Inambari centre of endemism (Haffer 1978, Cracraft 1985). Tobias & Brightsmith (2007) recently reviewed all records from south-west Amazonia, finding that, in Brazil, almost all records are from Acre. During the present study, MPDS observed at least six flying over pastures or perched on palm trees at the edge of the forest. The species' vocalisations were recorded twice. P. couloni is probably relatively common in eastern Acre. PAVONINE CUCKOO Dromococcyx pavoniniis Known in Acre from the upper rio Jurua (Whittaker et al. 2002) and the Rio Acre Ecological Station in the east of the state. D. pavoniniis was heard in forest almost daily, and was rela- tively common in the middle strata. On 13 November 2006, one was collected in the undergrowth of bamboo forest after responding to playback. This specimen (MPEG 61235) is the first from Acre. RUFOUS-CAPPED NUNLET Nonnula ruficapilla Recorded previously in Acre solely from the upper rio Jurua (Whittaker et al. 2002) and on the upper rio Acre in the east of the state. Our record at Jarinal is the fourth for the state of Acre, and a specimen (MPEG 61249), collected in the undergrowth of the bamboo forest, is only the second from the state. YELLOW-BILLED NUNBIRD Monasa flavirostris Records from Acre come from the rio Jurua in the west (Whittaker et al. 2002) and the Purus basin in the east (Rasmussen et al. 2005, Aleixo & Guilherme 2008). We observed the species at the edge of bamboo forest and in the canopy. It appeared to be segregated ecologically from other Monasa, at least partially, through its preference for the canopy rather than the understorey. A specimen (MPEG 61244) was collected on 12 November 2006, and is the first from Acre, and only the third example of this species in the Goeldi Museum collection. RUFOUS-HEADED WOODPECKER Celeus spectabilis First reported from Acre by Whittaker & Oren (1999) based on observations in tabocais along the upper rio Jurua. At our study site, several were observed foraging among bamboo stems. We collected three birds responding to playback on 12 November 2006. On 15 November, a fourth specimen was mist-netted. These four, two females (MPEG 61254-55) and two males MPEG 61256-57), increases the number of specimens of this taxon in the Goeldi Museum collection to seven, all from Acre. Kratter (1997) considered the species a 'near-obligate' inhabitant of lowland bamboo forest in south-west Amazonia. BAMBOO ANTSHRIKE Ci/mbilaimus sanctacmariac First recorded in Acre by Pierpont & Fitzpatrick (1983), based on one collected by J. Hidasi, in 1968, in the vicinity of the city of Rio Branco (Seringal Nova Empresa). The species was subsequently recorded on the upper rio Jurua (Whittaker & Oren 1999, Wl^ittaker et al. 2002). It has an easily recognised song and is very common in forest undergrowth. C. sanc- tacmariac was frequently observed following mixed-species flocks of insecti\ ores in the understorey. Three were collected, a female (MPEG 61295) and two males (MPEG 61293-94). This is another 'near-obligate' inhabitant of south-west Amazonian bamboo forests (Kratter 1997). Edson Guilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 237 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) ORNATE ANTWREN EpinecropJnjUa ornata Recorded throughout most of Acre (Whittaker et al. 2002, Guilherme 2007). Several were observed foraging in mixed-species flocks in the undergrowth of the tabocal at the study site. We collected four specimens, three males (MPEG 61346-48) and a female (MPEG 61345). According to Kratter (1997), the species is a 'facultative' resident of bamboo forest in south- west Amazonia. STRIATED ANTBIRD Dnjmophila devillei Whittaker & Oren (1999) presented the first records from Acre, from the upper rio Jurua, in a riparian (vdrzea) forest with bamboo. It was subsequently recorded at Catuaba Experimental Ranch in the east of the state (Rasmussen et al. 2005). We collected two birds (MPEG 61349-50) that responded to playback. According to Kratter (1997) and Parker et al. (1997), Striated Antbird is an 'obligate' resident of bamboo forest. In the study area, the species used the upper stratum of the tabocal, and was observed within mixed-species flocks of understorey insectivores. MANU ANTBIRD Cercomacra manu Known from Acre on the basis of a specimen collected on the upper rio Jurua (Whittaker & Oren 1999), Manu Antbird was recently recorded at the Rio Acre Ecological Station (A. Aleixo in litt. 2009). Our two specimens from Jarinal (MPEG 61336-37) are the first from the east of the state. The species is another 'obligate' resident of bamboo forest (Kratter 1997, Parker et al 1997). YELLOW-BREASTED WARBLING ANTBIRD Hi/pocnemis siibflava The first confirmed record in Acre was by B. M. Whitney in 1997 at Catuaba Experimental Ranch {cf. Isler et al. 2007) based on visual observations and voucher sound-recordings. It was also recorded in 2001 by EG in the Zoobotanical Park of the Federal University of Acre (UFAC). However, the first Brazilian specimens of this taxon were collected as recently as August 2005 and February 2006, at Rio Acre Ecological Station (Aleixo & Guilherme 2008). On 16 November 2006, we collected a male (MPEG 61308) in the understorey of bamboo for- est. The species is common in eastern Acre, and appears to replace Yellow-browed Antbird H. hypoxantha geographically, with the latter species apparently restricted to the west of the state, i.e. the Jurua basin (EG pers. obs.). WHITE-LINED ANTBIRD Percnostola lophotes The first records for Acre involved specimens taken on the upper rio Jurua (Whittaker & Oren 1999) and subsequently at Rio Acre Ecological Station (Aleixo & Guilherme 2008). Our specimen, MPEG 61317, collected in tabocal at Jarinal is the first for eastern Acre. It is a 'near- obligate' resident of bamboo forest in south-west Amazonia (Kratter 1997). GOELDFS ANTBIRD Myrmeciza goeldii Occurs throughout Acre (Whittaker & Oren 1999, Guilherme 2001, Whittaker et al. 2002, Aleixo & Guilherme 2008). This species has an easily recognised song, and it was sound- recorded daily during our survey. Four specimens, two females (MPEG 61311-12) and two males (MPEG 61314-15), were mist-netted in the understorey of tabocal. Goeldi's Antbird is a 'near-obligate' resident of bamboo forests in south-west Amazonia (Kratter 1997). Edson Guilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 238 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) RED-BILLED SCYTHEBILL Canipi/lorhamplnis twchiliwstris Occurs throughout Acre (Whittaker et al. 2002, Guilherme 2007). We mist-netted four spec- imens, all males (MPEG 61273-76), in the understorey of tabocal. According to Kratter (1997), the species is a 'facultative' resident of bamboo forest in south-west Amazonia. CHESTNUT-THROATED SPINETAIL Synallaxis cherriei The only two prior records from Acre were visual and vocal (Whittaker et al. 2002, Aleixo & Guilherme 2008). On 23 November 2006, we mist-netted a male (MPEG 61278) in the mid- storey of bamboo forest. This is the first specimen from Acre. PERUVIAN RECURVEBILL Simoxenops ucayalae The first specimens from Acre were collected on the upper rio Jurua (Whittaker & Oren 1999). Subsequently, a specimen was taken at Rio Acre Ecological Station bv Aleixo & Guilherme (2008). A female (MPEG 61287), collected during the present study in dense tabo- cal near the Jarinal road, is the second specimen from eastern Acre, and one of onlv six specimens from localities across the state. At Jarinal, the species w^as obser\ ed t^vice in asso- ciation with a mixed-species flock of understorey insectivores, and responded to pla\'back. This is a 'near-obligate' resident of bamboo forest in south-west Amazonia (Kratter (1997). BROWN-RUMPED FOLIAGE-GLEANER >lz/fa/no///s melauopeziis Recorded at both the western (Whittaker et al. 2002) and eastern (Aleixo & Guilherme 2008) extremes of the state of Acre, but only two specimens are available, making the female (MPEG 61280) mist-netted at Jarinal on 22 November 2006 only the third from Acre. Another 'near-obligate' resident of bamboo forest in south-west Amazonia (Kratter 1997). RUFOUS TWISTWING Cnipodectes siipernifus This recently described species (Lane et al. 2007) was collected at the UFAC Zoobotanical Park by EG in 1998, but was misidentified as Brownish Twistwing C. siib- brunneus (Tobias et al. 2008). We collected one in the undergrowth of terra firme bamboo forest at Jarinal on 20 November 2006, when it responded to playback. The male specimen (MPEG 61351; Fig. 2) is only the third for Brazil, and the first away from UFAC (Tobias et al. 2008). LONG-CRESTED PYGMY TYRANT Lophotriccus eulophotes Occurs throughout the state of Acre (Whittaker et al. 2002, Rasmussen et al. 2005, Guilherme & Dantas 2008). A male (MPEG 61327) was collected in tabocal on 19 November 2006, after responding to pla\"back. FLAMMULATED BAMBOO TYRANT Hemitriccus flammulatus Occurs throughout the state of Acre (Whittaker ct al. 2002, Guilherme 2001, 2007, Aleixo & Guilherme 2008). It was the onh' bamboo forest species of which no specimens were collect- Figure 2. Rufous TAvistw ing Cnipodectes supernifus, a recently described species associated ^vith baniboo forest in south-^\•est Amazonia; this is the first image of a li\-e C. supcrnifus from Brazil (Edson Guillierme) Edson Guilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 239 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) ed during the present study. However, we found it common at Jarinal, and documented its presence with sound-recordings. LARGE-HEADED FLATBILL Ramphotrigon megacephalwn Occurs throughout Acre (Whittaker et al. 2002; EG pers. obs.). Two males (MPEG 61328-29) were collected, on 13 and 20 November 2006, in the understorey of terra firme bamboo for- est. According to Kratter (1997), the species is a 'near-obligate' resident of lowland bamboo forest in south-west Amazonia. DUSKY-TAILED FLATBILL Ramphotrigon fuscicauda Occurs throughout Acre (Whittaker et al. 2002, Guilherme et al. 2003, Guilherme 2007). Two specimens, a male (MPEG 61330) and an unsexed individual (MPEG 61331) were collected in bamboo forest at Jarinal. This species is a 'near-obligate' resident of lowland bamboo for- est in south-west Amazonia. SULPHUR-BELLIED TYRANT-MANAKIN Neopelma siilplnirewenter Occurs throughout Acre (Whittaker & Oren 1999; EG pers. obs.). We collected a male (MPEG 61358) mist-netted in bamboo forest. Final considerations During the expedition reported here, we recorded and collected almost all of the south- west Amazonian bird species considered to be bamboo forest specialists. We believe that our data will contribute not only to a better understanding of these species' geographic ranges, but also to the importance of the region's bamboo forests for conserving the local avifauna in this unique region of outstanding biological richness. Acknowledgements We are gratefiil to Conservation international (CI-Belem) for financial support of this expedition as part of the project 'Avifauna do Estado do Acre: Composicao, Distribuicao Geografica e Conservacao'. We also thank Dr Alexandre Aleixo, curator of the ornithological laboratory of the Goeldi Museum, for providing essential technical assistance, to the biologist Liondon Jhonson, for assisting the field work, and the techni- cian Jose Nilton Santa Brigida, for preparing specimens in the field. We thank Kevin Zimmer and Fernando Pacheco for refereeing the manuscript. References: Governo do Estado do Acre (Acre). 2000. Programa Estadual de Zoneamento Ecologico-Economico do Estado do Acre — ZEE. Documento final, vol. 3. SECTMA, Rio Branco. Aleixo, A. & Guilherme, E. 2008. Avifauna da Estacao Ecologica do Rio Acre, fronteira Brasil / Peru. P. 305 in Congr. Bras. Orn. XVI, Palmas, Reswnos. Comite Brasileiro de Registros Ornitologicos (CBRO). 2008. Lista das aves do Brasil. www.cbro.org.br (accessed 20 March 2009). Conover, A. 1994. A new world comes to life, discovered in a stalk of bamboo. Smithsonian 25: 121-131. Cracraft, J. 1985. Historical biogeography and patterns of differentiation within the South American avifau- na: areas of endemism. Pp. 49-84 in Buckley, P. A., Foster, M. S., Morton, E. S., Ridgely, R. S. & Buckley, F. G. (eds.) Neotropical ornithology. Orn. Monogr. 36: American Ornithologists' Union, Washington DC. Guilherme, E. 2001. Comunidade de aves do Campus e Parque Zoobotanico da Universidade Federal do Acre, Brasil. Tangara 1(2): 57-73. Guilherme, E. 2007. Levantamento preliminar da avifauna do complexo de florestas piiblicas estaduais do Mogno e dos rios Liberdade e Gregorio, mimicfpio de Tarauaca, Estado do Acre, como subsidio para elaboracao de sens pianos de manejo. Atualidades Orn. 136: 1-8. Guilherme, E. & Dantas, S. M. 2008. Resultados ornitologicos de uma pesquisa no alto rio Purus, Estado do Acre, Brasil. P. 401 in Congr. Bras. Orn. XVI, Palmas, Resiimos. Guilherme, E., Nobre, H. R. & Gonzaga, E. P. 2003. The first record of the avian near-obligate bamboo spe- cialist Dusky-tailed Flatbill {Ramphotrigon fuscicauda) in the eastern Acre state, Brazil. Liindiana 4: 157-159. Edson Giiilherme & Marcos P. D. Santos 240 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Haeniig, P. D. 2005a. Birds and mammals associated with bamboo m the Atlantic Forest. Ecol. Info 5: \\-Av^v.ecologv.info (accessed 6 May 2009). Haemig, P. D. 20(35b. Amazonian birds associated with bamboo. Ecol. Info 7: ^\•A\-^v.ecolog^^info (accessed 6 May 2009). Haffer, J. 1978. Distribution of An^azon forest birds. Bonn. Zool. Beitr. 1-3: 38-78. Kratter, A. \V. 1997. Bamboo specialization bv Amazonian birds. Biotropica 29: 100-110. Kratter, A. \\\ 1998. The nests of two bamboo specialists: Celeu? spectabilis and Cercomacra mami. J. Field. Om. 69: 37-t4. Isler, M. L., Isler, P. R. & "Whitney, B. M. 2007. Species limits in antbirds (Thamnophilidae): the IVarbling Antbird {Hyyocnemis cantntor) complex. Auk 124: 11-28. Lane, D. F., Serv at, G. P., \"alqui H., T. & Lambert, F. 2007. A distinctive new species of tvrant tlvcatcher (Passeriformes: Tvrannidae: Cnipodectes) from south-^vestem Peru. Auk 124: 702-772. Louton, J., Gelhaus, J. & Bouchard, R. 1996. The aquatic macrofaima of "^vater-filled bamboo (Poaceae: Bamusoideae: Guadua) intemodes in a Peruvian lo^ viand tropical forest. Biotropica 2: 228-242. Nelson, B. W., Kalliola, R. & Shepard, G. 1997. Tabocais de Guadua spp. no sudeste amc^onico: extensao geografica, mortahdade sincronizada e relacao com incendio tlorestais. P. 163 in Congr. Xac. Botanica XL\TII, Crato, Resumos. Parker, T. A., Stotz, D. F. & Fitzpatrick, J. U". 1997. Xotes on a\-ian bamboo specialists in south^vestem Amazonian Brazil. Pp. 543-547 in Remsen, J. \7 (ed. ) Studi^5 u: Neotropical ornithologi/ honoring Ted Parker. Oru. Monogr. 48. American Ornithologists' Union, Wasliington DC. Pierpont, N. & Fitzpatrick, J. \\'. 1983. Specific status and behaviour of Gymbilaimus sanctaemariae , the Bamboo Antshrike, from south"^vestem Amazonia. Auk 100: 645-652. Rasmussen, D. T., Rehg, J. & Giulherme, E. 2005. A\-ifaima da Fazenda Experimental Catuaba: uma pequena resen^a florestal no leste do Estado do Acre, Brasil. Pp. 173-19S /-i Dnmiond, P. M. (ed. i Fauna do Acre. Ed. UFAC, Rio Branco. Serwit, G. P. 1996. An annotated list of birds of the Biolat Biological Station at Paldtza, Peru. Pp. 555-575 in Wilson, D. E. & SandoA'al, A. (eds.) Mami: la biodiversidade del sureste del Peru. Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC. Sih'eira, M. 2005. .4 ^loresta aberta com bambu no sudoesfe da Amazonia: padroes e processos em miiltiplas escalas. Ed. UFAC, Rio Branco. Stotz, D. F., Fitzpatrick, J. W., Parker, T. A. &: Mo5ko\ its, D, K. 1996. Neotropical birds: ecologxj and conservation. Um\'. of Chicago Press. Tobias, J. A. & Brightsmith, D. J. 2007. Distribution, ecologv and consen^ation status of the Blue-headed Macsiw Primolius couloni. Biol. Gonserr. 139: 126-13S. Tobias, J. A., Lebbin, D. J., Aleixo, A., Andersen, M. ]., Guilherme, E., Hosner, P. A. & Seddon, X. 2008. Distribution, behavior, and consen"ation status of the Rufous Twistwing [Gnipodectes superrufus). Wilson J. Orn. 120: 38-49. Wliittaker, A. & Oren, D. C. 1999. Important ornithological records from the rio Jurua, ^vestem Amazonia, including tw eh e additions to the Brazilian avifaima. Bull. Brit. Orn. Gl. 119: 235-260. Whittaker, A., Oren, D. C, Pacheco, J. F., Parrini, R. & Minns, J. 2002. Aves registradas na Reser\-a Extrativista do Alto Juruci. Pp. 81-99 in Cunha, M. C. & Almeida, M. B. (eds.) Enciclopedia dafloresta: o altojurud: prdti- cas e con}jecin:L populacoes. Companhia das Letras, Sao Paulo. Addresses: Edson Guilherme, Universidade Federal do Acre, Centro de Ciencias Biologicas e da Xatureza, Laboratorio de Paleontologia, BR-364, Km 04, Campus, CEP 69915-900, Rio Branco, AC, Brazil; and Pos- graduacao em Zoologia, Uni\'ersidade Federal do Para / Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi. Marcos Persio Dantas Santos, Laboratorio de Ecologia e Zoologia de Vertebrados — Omitologia, Instituto de Ciencias Biologicas, Uni\-ersidade Federal do Para, Rua Augusto Correa, 01 Guama, CEP 66075-110, Belem, PA, Brazil. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 W. John Tennent 241 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) A cat among the pigeons! Known specimens and supposed distribution of the extinct Solomons Crested Pigeon Microgoura meeki Rothschild, 1904 by W. John Tennent Received 23 May 2009 Summary. — Based on unpublished letters written by A. S. Meek to the staff of Rothschild's Museum at Tring, the collection of the only known specimens of the Solomons (or Choiseul) Crested Pigeon Microgoura meeki Rothschild, 1904, on the island of Choiseul is discussed. The question of whether six or seven adults were collected by Meek is resolved, and notes are provided on the habitat and supposed distribution of the bird, which is now considered extinct. Details are given of subsequent searches for M. meeki, in particular by the Whitney South Sea Expedition, in the form of extracts from unpublished journals held in the Department of Ornithology archives at the American Museum of Natural History, New York. The unique egg, a skin of M. meeki, sections from Meek's letters, and a Whitney map showing the areas of Choiseul that were searched, are illustrated for the first time. Pigeons (Columbidae) have not been the most fortunate of birds in their contacts with people, indeed the association has often been catastrophic. The most famous example of extinction (the Dodo Raphus cucuUatus from Mauritius in the late 17th century) and the mas- sacre of billions of Passenger Pigeons Ectopistes migratorius in the continental USA less than 100 years ago are widely known. A lesser known pigeon whose fate may also be laid — albeit indirectly — at the door of Homo sapiens is the Solomons (or Choiseul) Crowned Pigeon Microgoura meeki Rothschild, 1904, which Mayr & Diamond (2001: 37) regarded as 'the most spectacular endemic bird of Northern Melanesia'. In transcribing letters written by Albert Stewart Meek (1871-1943) between 1894 and 1931 to the staff of Walter, Lord Rothschild's Museum at Tring in Hertfordshire, references were noted regarding his collection of M. meeki. The correspondence consists of c.500 hand- written letters, a high proportion of which were written by Meek in the field. In addition to providing an insight into Meek's mindset, and the very real hardships associated with 19th and early 20th century collecting in some of the most remote places on the globe, they con- tain a wealth of field data relating to a variety of natural history material. The correspondence is rather frustrating, primarily because it is so one-sided. It comprises let- ters written by Meek to Rothschild and his curators, Ernst Hartert in the case of birds and Karl Jordan on the subject of insects, but copies of replies to Meek were not retained at Tring (the earliest copy of an outgoing letter to Meek is dated January 1911). This paper deals with some confusion in the literature regarding how many specimens of M. meeki were sent to Tring by Meek, subsequent searches for it, and the supposed distribution of this distinctive bird, considered by most ornithologists — almost certainly correctly — to be extinct. The discovery of Microgoura meeki Like its collector Albert Stewart Meek, most often referred to simply as 'A. S. Meek', but cited for example as 'Alfred Stanley Meek' by Parsons (1998) throughout his book, the W. JoItti Tennent pigeon has been pro\dded with different names in the literature. The most frequently used common names are Solomons Crested Pigeon, Solomon Islands Crested Pigeon or Choiseul Crested Pigeon, but it has also been referred to as Choiseul Pigeon (e.g. Stattersfield & Capper 2000), Crested Choiseul Pigeon (Mayr 1945), the 'Crested Pigeon of the Solomons' (Greenway 1967) and Dwarf Goura (Tyler 1979). Ferguson-Lees & Faull (1992) declared it was 'better known as Meek's Pigeon', although I have not noted this name used elsewhere — other than informally in the Whitney South Sea Expedition journals (see below). A. S. Meek was one of the most pro- ductive of Rothschild's professional natural history collec- tors and he is well known to entomologists for the enormous number of new insects he discov- ered, including the largest butterfly in the world: Ornithoptern alexandrae Rothschild, 1907 (Ackery 1997, Tennent in press). Ornithologists remember him for his prolific collections of birds, which included Microgoiira meeki. Meek's first mention of what was soon to be described as M. meeki appears in a letter to Ernst Hartert dated 18 January 1904 (Meek 1904a; Figs. 1-2): ' . . . there's a big ground pigeon, if it's new will be a jolly good one. It is like a Goura but only the size of a bantam. It has peculiar head, nos- tril well out to end of beak, and above that is flat space inch long Figures 1-2. Meek's letter ing the first details of what was [o be described b\- Rothschild as Micro;^oiini iiiccki (Meek, 1904a: 3-4) (© The Natural History Museum, London). W. John Tennent 243 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) and half inch wide, of slatey milky colour then about ears is sparsely feathered with chin dark red similar to turkey and on head is crest similar to common [original emphasis] Goura but smaller in proportion to size of bird. It has black velvety face changed abruptly to grey, chestnut red belly, metallic blue black tail, wings I think are olive brown. This bird makes no nest but lays on the ground, one egg of dark creamy white and small in propor- tion to size of bird.' Very shortly thereafter, this highly distinctive pigeon was described by Rothschild (1904) as a new species in a monotypic genus Microgoiira and, so far as is known, the bird has never been seen since, at least by ornithologists. Not unusually for the time, the num- ber of specimens available to Rothschild is not mentioned in the type description, other than to say that both sexes were present, together with an egg (Rothschild 1904). The birds' habi- tat was given as 'Choiseul Island, Solomon Islands', and the holotype was said to have been collected by Meek on 7 January 1904 (according to the accompanying data label, the Tring paratype cT [Fig. 4] was taken two days earlier). Considering the specimens were taken in January, some distance from the capital of the Solomon Islands (at that time on Tulagi Island, part of the Florida group), they reached England quite quickly, and Meek said in a letter less than six months later (Meek 1904b): 'Your [letter] of tenth May duly to hand . . . you do not mention getting egg (cream colour) of the crested pigeon . . . '. Since then, there have been at least four concerted efforts to rediscover M. nieeki — ^by members of the Whitney South Sea Expedition in 1927 and 1929 (especially the latter), and more recently by Jared Diamond (Diamond 1987) and the late Shane Parker, an Australian ornithologist with a particular interest in the pigeon (Parker 1967a,b, 1972). Historical and modern literature raise questions as to how many specimens of M. meeki were collected by Meek in 1904, and on the distribution of the pigeon. How many specimens of Microgoura meeki were collected? Despite an unequivocal statement by Rothschild & Hartert (1905: 247) that ' ... Mr Meek sent seven specimens, of which six are in the Tring Museum . . . 3cf cf, 3? Choiseul, January 1904 ... an egg was taken on January 10th', doubt has been expressed as to whether there were seven specimens or only six. Parker (1967a) said: ' . . . still only known from seven skins (five in the American Museum of Natural History, one in the British Museum [Natural History], one untraced) and an egg (in the B.M. [N.H.]) . . . ' and added (Parker 1967b: 129): 'Many specimens not retained by Rothschild were passed on to such dealers as Gerrard and Janson; this may have been the fate of the missing seventh specimen of the Solomons Crowned Pigeon . . . whereas the majority of Meek's bird skins passed with the Rothschild collection to the American Museum of Natural History, New York, in 1932, a few came via Gerrard to the British Museum (Natural History), London . . . '. However, five years later Parker (1972: 25) mentioned that 'Meek, in a letter to Hartert from Gizo dated 18 January 1904, wrote that he had collected six specimens . . . '. This was repeated by Fuller (2000: 185-186) who stated ' ... in a covering letter dated 18 January, Meek wrote . . . that six specimens had been sent. Interestingly, Rothschild and Hartert recorded that seven were actually received; the seventh specimen is probably a cream-coloured egg that still exists at the museum . . . five of the skins were eventually sold ... to The American Museum of Natural History, New York . . . and the sixth passed into the collection of The Natural History Museum, London'. The question of what Meek himself said is easily resolved. His letter dated 18 January 1904 (Meek 1904a) is one of his longer missives, comprising six pages and written in at least two sections ten days apart (the last section is dated 28 January). Meek was in expansive W. John Tennent 244 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Figures 3-4. Male paratype of Solomons Crested Pigeon Microgoura meeki, held at The Natural History Museum, Tring (© The Natural History Museum, Tring). Figure 5. The unique egg of Solomons Crested Pigeon Microgoura meeki, held at The Natural History' Museum, Tring (© The Natural History Museum, Tring) Figure 6. Map of Choiscul Island, slnow collecting localities of the VVhitnev South Sea Expedition (Hamlin 1930) and the suhsec]uent search b\ Shane Parker (courtesy of the Department of Ornithology, American Museum of Natural History, New York) W. John Tennent 245 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) mood, and discussed his health, money, equipment, future expedition plans, and collection of birds and insects from Choiseul and elsewhere. Many of Meek's letters have words or sections annotated or underlined by the staff at Tring, often in coloured crayon, and the sec- tion in this letter noting the 'new pigeon' is underlined in red (Fig. 1). There is also a note in red ink on the first page of the letter 'Please return soon for answer'. On the top of the fourth page (Fig. 2), next to the final part of the entry, is written 'six of these'. This is clear- ly in Meek's handwriting, and although it is next to Meek's description of the egg, and does not actually state 'I collected six specimens' in so many words {cf. Parker 1972), it can only refer to the number of birds sent. Subsequent authors have varied in their statements: some mentioning six specimens, others seven, and others six or seven. Miriam Rothschild (1983: 158) noted that Walter agreed to pay Meek for 'six specimens of every species [of bird] at [six shillings and six pence = 37.5 pence in modern currency] each, with a bonus of £4 for every new species', and this is confirmed in Meek's correspon- dence, although there is evidence there that additional birds were sometimes accepted on the basis that Rothschild could and would use unwanted material for exchange. Meek had a well-established agreement with Rothschild and his curators that insects surplus to requirements would be released to Oliver Janson for sale, and the same arrangement exist- ed with natural history dealer Edward Gerrard in respect of bird skins. In the case of Microgoiira meeki, Rothschild retained all of the skins Meek sent him but later sold the bulk of his bird skins — some 280,000 specimens — to the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), New York, retaining 4,000 skins that he wished to bequeath in due course to what is now The Natural History Museum (BMNH) (Robert Prys-Jones pers. comm.). The male M. meeki (Fig. 3) now in the BMNH (Tring) is the sixth of Rothschild's specimens. The unique egg (Fig. 5) is rather dark in colour (creamy) compared to the eggs of associated taxa, and is also in the BMNH at Tring. The AMNH (internet site accessed March 2009) Hsts five specimens (AMNH 616456-460), the last associated with a skeleton. In March 2009 AMNH Microgoiira holdings were very kindly examined by Mary LeCroy, who confirmed the presence of five skins and a partial skeleton, removed from the skin more recently, associated with AMNH 616460. Beyond the statement by Rothschild and Hartert, there is no evidence that there were ever more than six skins extant, nor any indication that more than five specimens were offered to, or received by, the AMNH. Meek's comment in the margin of his letter can be taken as definitive. Unusual though it may be — for Rothschild was renowned for attention to detail and for his prodigious memory — it seems that he, and Hartert, made a mistake. The Whitney South Sea Expedition search Unpublished Whitney South Sea Expedition journals held in the Department of Ornithology archives at the AMNH provide a fascinating insight into the search for M. meeki some 25 years following its discovery and raise reasonable doubt as to reliability of locally obtained data concerning the bird. The journal sections seen are typed, and include a map prepared by Hannibal Hamlin (Hamlin [1930]) entitled ' . . . The Quest for Microgoura meeki . . . ', reproduced here (Fig. 6) with annotations made by Mary LeCroy to show where the late Shane Parker subsequently investigated offshore islands close to the southern coast of Choiseul in the 1960s. Hamlin's map appears to be based on one drawn by Coultas (1929-30: unnumbered page between 225 and 226). Several members of the expe- dition referred to the pigeon, including Rollo Howard Beck who, as leader of the expedition in 1927, noted in an entry dated 22 November 1927 (Beck 1923-28: 280) 'went up into a wild forest to look for ground pigeons, but found none' and on 29 November (Beck 1923-28: 281) 'The last four days we have been at Choiseul Bay but found no Microgoura . . . '. Guy W. Jolin Tennent 246 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Richards, another member of the expedition's 1927 visit to Choiseul, added (Richards 1927-28: 124) Tlie search for the gromid pigeon tliat Meeks [sic] reported came to no result . . . the dove famih' ^vere hard to locate, and it ^vas on onlv one da\" that am- of us ever heard them call' and later (Richards 1927-28: 129-130) 'Our stop in Choiseul Bav ^vas presumabh' for another trv at Meek's crested pigeon. After going up both ri\-ers, one or more of us sev- eral times, we all had the same stor}- to report, no birds . . . our stav in Choiseul Bav from the collecting standpoiiit was a rank faikire . . . the quest for the crested pigeon proved as fruitless here as it had at Moli'. Tlie most detailed Wliitiiev account ^vas provided bv Hannibal Hamlin. Regarding the visit to Choiseul Bay on 22 November 1927, he noted (Hamlin 1927-28: [90]) 'The crested ground pigeon (Microgura [sic] meeki) remains a m\'ster\- bird'. In 1929, Hamlin, having replaced Beck as expedition leader, made a concerted effort to rediscover Microgoura; in a journal entry for 15 September 1929, he ^vrote (Hamlin 1928-30: [99]-[100]): ' . . . [we dropped] anchor in the northern corner of Choiseul Ba\- . . . [we] spent from November 25-28, 1927 m this anchorage . . . after six da^-s at Moli Is., about 15 miles do^vn the coast . . . we failed to find Emv trace of the Jshcrogoura meeki Rothsch. ... it is mv idea that Meek spent his time somewhere around the southern extremit\- of Choiseul; and it is there that we shall ha^^e to go in order to get the bird . . . mv intention ^vas to go to Bambata ^vhere ^ve can get aU the information needed, and proceed do'^vn the southern coast as ^ve foimd anchorages and, if we did not get the bird, to continue right aroimd the island and up the northern coast . . . Choiseul Bav is kno^vn as a safe anchorage and from here we can reach almost anv part of Choiseul bv launch. The difficult\" will be to learn ^vhether the pigeon has a localized habitat or distribution, whether or not Meek collected it at the southern end, etc. The natives I have questioned about the ^vlicrogoura, all from the \-icinitv of Choiseul Bay, have given doubtful e\-idence. One or t^vo seem to know the bird and are positiv e of its presence. All reports, ho^vever, are vague and are given in a favorable manner more to please the inquisitor than anvthing else.' Two days later, on the morning of 17 September, aboard a Chinese trading vessel en route for Senga on the north-^vest coast, he \vrote (Hamlin 1928-30: [101], [103]): ' . . . upon short notice I had little opportimitv to formulate anv accurate plans or prognostications. AVe hope to find new terrain that harbors our pigeon, at least \ve will acquire some definite information. The rest of the staff must make the best of the countr\- aroimd Choiseul Bav . . . ', and a few days later, ... the Microgoura is probablv a forest bird . . . numerous nut- harvesters questioned about the bird; all proved mdefinite but cited a crested pigeon as 'kukuwonzo'. It answers to the characteristics of the Microgoura as given bv me, the natives say 'Yes' to everything. But I suspect it is the long-tailed crested arboreal pigeon because the call which thev imitate is the same . . . the teacher brought some bo\-s alons; and we had more talk about birds. Again, they do not seem to know the Microgoura. It is best that we hunt around here for a few days more, and if we do not fuid it make a camp inland. I am informed that there are still some bush ^-illages; perhaps the citizens of these can impart something conclusive or useful . . . '. Hamlin's suspicion that reports of M. meeki probably referred not to that species but to the Crested Cuckoo-Do\'e Reinwnrdtoenn crassirostris Gould, 1856, ^vas confirmed to his sat- isfaction on 25 September 1929 (Hamlin 1928-30: [105]): 'I crossed several deep ravines and unexpectedly came upon a nutting camp of true bush people from Saralata, one of the few sur\ i\ing bush villages. Onlv one man could speak pidgin and he could gi\ e me no infor- mation of the Microgoura, which I certainh- expected, either through lack of imderstanding or ignorance. As it happened, luckily, a crested pigeon started calling close at hand while we were talking. We prompth" stalked the unmistakable call and I shot it. He brought it to W. John Tennent 247 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) me, naming it 'kukuwonzo', which proves mv suspicion correctly that the Senga natives have taken my description of the ground bird to be that of this crested tree pigeon (Turcaena crassirostris, old nom.), or 'kea' pigeon. Further inquirv with evidence in hand evinced no additional information'. Jared Diamond had a similar experience when he visited Sasamunga in 1974 to search for Microgoura. He was told of a crested pigeon that ^vas rarelv encountered, referred to by a guide as 'kuwanjo'. A solitary pigeon heard and then seen h\ Diamond and his guide was R. crassirostris, which the guide proclaimed to be 'kuwanjo' (J. Diamond in Utt. 2009). As Gibbs et al. (2001: 418) recentlv pointed out, R. crassirostris is generallv grev with a long crest, and this has probablv perpetuated confusion in local folklore regarding the supposed continued existence of M. meeki. Hamlin's enquiries continued. Writing at Sasamunga on 7 October 1929 he said (Hamlin 1928-30: [109], [110]): 'Enquiried [sic] about the Microgoura resulted in some new information: the bird they know here from my description is called 'kukuru-ni-loua' (lit. pigeon-belong-ground), and is recalled onlv bv the older men, who say that cats, introduced since the advent of the Mission, have destroved so manv that they carmot remember when one was last seen in the bush . . . the big river basin we traversed yesterday is said to have been a good place for them. The birds were easily caught by the boys in their hands after the\' had found a low-branched tree in which the pigeons roosted in twos and threes and fours by noting the manure on the ground underneath; they would simply wait their opportimity and seize them while sleeping. No one could recall Meek or where he worked on Choiseul'. Some further light is thrown on the name 'kukuru-ni-loua' by Jared Diamond who, on his visit to Sasamunga, was told of another large pigeon called 'kurulilua'. An elderlv Sasamunga inhabitant informed Diamond that the Whitnev Expedition had collected a specimen of 'kurulilua', and since the expedition diaries confirm collecting their only spec- imen of the large ground-dwelling Yellow-legged Pigeon Columha pallidiceps at Sasamunga, it is quite possible that the local name 'kukuru-ni-loua' or 'kurulilua' refers to C. palUdiceps, not M. meeki (J. Diamond in Utt. 2009). On 11 October (Hamlin 1928-30: [112]) continued: 'Left the ship ... en route we cabled [sic: called] at several villages where I made enquiries about Meek's bird. Only one seemed to know it — ToiToi. Thev confirmed what I had been told at Sasamunga — that thev had not seen the bird of late and that cats gone wild had been known to make prey of it ... '. Almost a week later, still with no sign of Microgoura meeki, and with expedition time rimning out (Hamlin 1928-30: [114]-[115]): 'October 16. With seven carriers and ourselves loaded we climbed the range just behind the coast and dropped into the extensive flats flanking the Kolumbanara [= Kolombangara] river . . . according to the older men the}^ used to catch the Microgouras in this localitv . . . October 17. Nine of us out in various directions. Those without guns will search for roosting places. Rain fell continuously after 10 o'clock and all returned to camp by 5 with no report of success . . . October 18. All out with similar intent . . . the natives are discouraged about the Microgoura; no sign of its presence has been found. Many are in the bush looking for it since I posted a re"^vard of five poimds for a live one. This extravagance is safe; the species is probably extinct. Only the rarest kind of luck could bring one into the collection . . . '. The promise of such largesse failed to provide any reliable evidence of M. meeki' s con- tinued existence (Hamlin 1928-30: [118]-[122]): 'October 24. . . . we have about given up the Microgoura, although some local boys are still said to be in the bush hoping to find one in order to be able to claim the five pound boimtv ... I learn that the citizens of Tauro village recall that Meek worked in that vicinitv. Three of the older men vouched that they had seen the Microgoura this vear, one man in June, and two others just a few months ago while nut- W. Jolm Tennent 248 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) ting. Can I believe them? . . . October 26. Called at Sambi village and anchored at Rorivai (Roramboko) for the night . . . propaganda about Meek's pigeon was spread at both these places. Again, the older inhabitants recognized the description of the bird and remarked on its beauty; but one has not been seen or heard lately. They imitate the call by a low trilling sound . . . October 28. . . . at Tauro village which is situated on a bluff fifty feet high on the very point of the mainland of Choiseul, a deep water passage dividing it from Rob Roy L, just across the bay . . . the few people in the village can impart no information about the Microgoura; they speak no pidgin and we shall have to hunt for ourselves until the men who told us they had seen it this year return from Sasamunga . . . November 2 . . . the teacher . . . took us by canoe to a big inland river flat where he says the Microgoura was observed this year. Four hunters walked about until dark and saw nothing. Either these gentlemen are awful liars, which I suspect is the case, or the M. meeki Rothsch. is nomadic because of the pussy cats gone wild. Arriving back at the village . . . we found the whale boat of the France waiting for us; the ship anchored about two miles up the coast this after- noon. So we embarked, giving up the search for the phantom ground pigeon . . . '. Mention here of the name 'pussy cat' rather than plain 'cat' is not as strange as it might now seem: many Solomon Islanders still refer to the animal as 'pusscat', presumably as a result of having been given this name for an animal they had no experience of prior to the arrival of missionaries. Even as the expedition prepared to leave Choiseul, local hunters continued — probably erroneously in the opinion of Hamlin — to report the presence of the bird. On 3 November further reports were received (Hamlin 1928-30: [122]-[123]). 'November 3 ... a canoe came alongside in the late afternoon with boys returning to Kumburu village which is on the other end of the trans-Choiseul passage from Tauro. They say they have seen the Microgoura this year and are positive one only has to go to their place to get it. The older ones know of Meek and can point out his camp in the bush . . . November 4. I decided last night to leave David here on Choiseul to have a final stab for this rumor of the Kumburu boys. He will be able to put in three weeks before the steamer takes him from Gizo to Tulagi ... if these natives are not liars, which they are, he might crown our discouraging search with eleventh-hour success . . . '. Much of Hamlin's account appears in lesser detail in journals compiled by other expe- dition members, and the lack of success of this final search for M. meeki was recorded by Walter Eyerdam (Eyerdam 1929-30: 7-8): 'At Bambatani we continued our hunting and had a lot of hunters out but no sign of a Microgoura pigeon. Some of the older natives know the bird and one of the newcomers to the big religious meeting that was in progress, declared that he had caught two of them about a year before near Tahro on Rob Roy Island, adjacent to the south end of Choiseul island. This locality was very near to the spot where Meek and Eichhorn had secured their specimens, so we still laid out hopes of bagging one or two in that place. We were informed by the natives that the bird had been practically exterminat- ed by pussy cats gone wild that the Mission had first brought to Choiseul Island, a fe^v years before. This is quite likely the case and we are quite convinced that there are no more Microgoura pigeons left. They can fly but little, have permanent roosts at night, are easily found and especially the young would be very easy prey for cats, dogs and pigs . . . Mr. Hamlin and David and I went ... to Tahro where we hunted over a week. This was Meek's old hunting locality and remains of his camp could still be seen in the bush at one place . . . Mr. Hamlin had not yet abandoneci hope ... so he left David, our best hunter and bird skin- ner, to work further inland and to hunt on the mainlanci of Choiseul. About three weeks later, David joined us in Tulagi, with a good few birds but no Microgoura. 0\'er three months had been spent on Choiseul at an expense of about 60 dollars per day. The primary object [in visiting Choiseul] was to get Microgoura . . . '. W. John Tennent 249 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Supposed distribution of Microgoura meeki Many years later — after the 1927 Whitney Choiseul visit, but before that in 1929 — Meek stated in a letter to Rothschild (Meek 1929): 1 met a man in Sydney a few months ago who said he was collecting for a M"^ Whitney (I think he said), and wanted to know the exact spot where Yd taken the ground pigeon (Microgoura meeki). He'd already been thereabouts a long while. When I told him he was surprised to find he had anchored there and collected for some weeks without dropping across it.' The man in question was almost certainly Rollo Beck, who had looked for M. meeki in the Choiseul Bay area in 1927, and there is little doubt that the type locality of the bird was in that general area, on the north-west coast of the island, although Meek did also collect in other localities. According to his book (1913: 134) Meek regarded his collection of the Solomons Crested Pigeon as highly noteworthy: ' ... at Choiseul I discovered a very won- derful bird, which the Hon. Walter Rothschild names after me Microgoura meeki. It is a kind of crested ground-pigeon and was my best discovery so far in Natural History.' It is interesting that Meek made no such claim in any of his letters, and that although the statement may be true — he may have made such a comment verbally to the staff at Tring on one of his visits — there is persuasive evidence (research in progress) that the bulk of his book was written by the editor, Frank Fox, from Meek's correspondence, with little or no contemporary input from Meek. However, he made several remarks on the distribution of M. meeki. In 1908 (Meek 1908, repeated almost verbatim in his book [Meek 1913: 187]), he said: ' . . . The Microgoura I'm satisfied does not occur [on Bougainville], though I'm told by boys that it's on both Ysabel [Santa Isabel] and Malaita . . . '. And a year later (Meek 1909) he added: ' . . . After doing this trip I should like to revisit the Solomons and collect on Malaita. I know the Microgoura pigeon occurs there, from the natives . . . '. The alleged occurrence of M. meeki on Ramos, a small island some 40 km off the south- east coast of Santa Isabel between that island and Malaita (and far from Choiseul), not mentioned by Meek, was noted recently. Most authors (including those of the current lUCN Red List) agree that M. meeki was endemic to Choiseul, and mention of Ramos is thought to stem from Doughty et al. (1999). The first author is unable to recall the source for including the island of Ramos (Christine Doughty in litt. 2009). Checklists of the birds of Choiseul and Ramos on Mike Tarburton's website in March 2009 listed the 'Choiseul Pigeon Microgoura m. meeki' as 'end[emic]' to 'Chois[eul] and Ramos' — the clear implication being that a meeki population (on Ramos) was subspecifically distinct from that on Choiseul. Elsewhere on the same website, the bird's range was stated as 'Mak + Ramos'; 'Mak' usually refers to Makira (=San Cristobal). The author of the website agrees that references to San Cristobal and a phenotypically distinct population away from Choiseul were mistakes (M. Tarburton in litt. 2009) and the website is to be amended. J. Diamond {in litt. 2009) suggests the possibility of confusion with another now-extinct ground pigeon, Gallicolumba salamonis, which did occur on both Ramos and San Cristobal. Although he planned to do so. Meek never visited Malaita, so how seriously should Meek's correspondence be taken as evidence of the occurrence of M. meeki on any of the Solomons other than Choiseul? If the bird is extinct, which it almost certainly is (see Diamond 1987), it is impossible now to know the extent of its previous distribution, and Meek was not averse to pressing a case to the staff at Tring in order to support future travel plans. I possess detailed entomological field experience on many of the Solomons, including all those (with the exception of Ramos) where M. meeki has either been looked for or has been claimed to occur (Choiseul, Santa Isabel, Malaita), and in many localities the knowledge local people have regarding their fauna is rather patchy. Local knowledge of actual or potential W. John Tennent 250 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) food items is understandably more detailed than knowledge of insects, which are rarely regarded as food. However, I stayed several times in a village on San Cristobal where pigeon was on the menu, and where all pigeon species seemed to be collectively referred to as 'kuru kuru', a common name for pigeons throughout the Solomons in reference to the call. Whilst Microgoura meeki might be a highly distinctive pigeon to ornithologists, 'confirmation' of its presence elsewhere by local people may not necessarily relate to this species. Visiting Malaita is difficult, even now. I visited the island several times when research- ing butterflies in the Solomons (Tennent 2002), but even in the mid 1990s and early 21st century, failed to venture far inland due to the reluctance or refusal of local guides to do so. Parker (1972: 25) stayed two weeks on western Malaita (probably the Auki region) in 1968, enquiring into the presence or previous existence of M. meeki on the island, but found no confirmation that it ever existed there. That said, a proposed occurrence along the northern Solomons chain, from Bougainville to Malaita, is not far fetched. Within the Solomons archipelago (Bougainville belongs politically to Papua New Guinea), there are distinct areas of endemism (Tennent 2002), notably the New Georgia group and San Cristobal and its satellites, and to a lesser extent Malaita. Numerous insects and terrestrial animals share a distribution of Bougainville, Choiseul, and Santa Isabel, and more than a century ago Rothschild & Hartert (1905: 243) noted that 'the ornis of the islands of the northern chain — i.e. the three islands of Bougainville, Choiseul and [Santa] Isabel — is generally alike . . . '. Mayr & Diamond (2001: 40) suggested a former presence of M. meeki on Bougainville or Santa Isabel and pointed out that almost all bird species occurring on Choiseul also occur on other islands of what Diamond (1983) postulated from hydrographic depth-contours were previously one long island, referred to as 'Greater Bukida' — Bougainville, the Shortlands, Choiseul, Santa Isabel and the Florida group (possibly also Guadalcanal). Early 20th century (and subsequent) accounts from local people confirming previous or recent occurrence of M. meeki on islands other than Choiseul can only have been based on a verbal description or pictures of skins, and there is no supporting evidence that such accounts were accurate. Despite comprehensive searching by experienced ornithologists on Choiseul and elsewhere, no specimen has been collected since Meek's original short series. Since there are no further specimens of M. meeki in existence, and no evidence for its appear- ance on any other island, claims for its occurrence outside Choiseul can be no more than anecdotal. The only confirmed distribution of Microgoura meeki is the island of Choiseul. Discussion Despite a relatively recent claim (Day 1981: 38) that 'Modern ornithologists surmise that this pigeon inhabited remote cloud forests in the island's interior . . . ', M. meeki seems to have been a coastal forest bird. A high-elevation habitat seems unlikely, if only because it would have been virtually impossible for Meek to venture far inland on Choiseul at the time of his visit in 1904. The source of a further assertion (Day 1981: 38) that 'it seems Meek acquired the birds in trade from a village and consequently did not know exactly what locality they came from . . . ' is also unknown, nor is that of the account by Flamiery & Schouten (2001: 108) that 'Meek . . . emerged from the bush unscathed, and ^vith six mag- nificent chicken-sized pigeons in hand, along with a single egg . . . '. It is most likeh' — and seems generally accepted — that M. meeki was an inhabitant of lowland forests and / or swamps. Parker (1972: 25) received reports of its occurrence 'usually from areas along the sheltered southern coast' and was told by old hunters with memories of the bird that 'it lived in lowland, often swampy, forest, but not in mangroves', contrary to at least one pre- vious report of its occurrence in mangrove. He looked for it on several low-lying swampy W. John Tennent 251 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) uninhabited islands off the southern Choiseul coast without success, and the most recent (but unsupported) report he received in 1968 was of a small roost seen in the early 1940s on the Kolombangara River, south-west Choiseul, an area extensively searched by the Whitney South Sea Expedition some 40 years earlier. As natives reported to Hamlin, M. meeki was a terrestrial pigeon that was said to roost in small groups on low branches, and presence of a roost was conspicuous due to accumu- lated droppings on the ground below. It reportedly nested on the ground, although this information originated from Meek (1904a: see introduction), and it might be considered opti- mistic to extrapolate the species' nesting habits from the discovery of a solitary egg. Gibbs et al. (2001: 418) were given information to suggest that a terrestrial pigeon (assumed to be Microgoiira) habitually roosted in pairs in shrubs just a few feet above the ground and that they could easily be located and picked off a branch by hand when they 'sang' in the evening. Since the only available specimens are those Meek sent to Rothschild, there is no way of knowing the appearance of this remarkable pigeon in life (see comments by Parker 1967a, regarding the crest). Rothschild & Hartert (1905) provided what was in effect an artist's impres- sion of the bird — a hand-coloured lithograph by J. G. Keulemans — which has been reproduced elsewhere (e.g. Fuller 2000), whilst others (Doughty et al. 1999, Flannery & Schouten 2001, Day 1981) have prepared their own impressions; the last depicts a rather different bird to the oth- ers, most of which conform more or less to the original plate, in that it has a rather pale breast. Fuller (2000: 185-186) stated: ' . . . Parker (1967) pointed out that the position of the crest shown in a plate . . . may be misleading and perhaps results from a misinterpretation of Meek's muse- um skins . . . Meek, to the contrary, remarked on how similar the crest of his new species was to the crests on the more familiar Goiira pigeons'. A picture of the bird in flight with crest slight- ly raised (Gibbs et al. 2001) provided a further artist's impression. If M. meeki did (or indeed, does) occur on any of the other islands in the Solomons, it is remarkable that it was not discovered prior to Meek's Choiseul visit, and that it has not been seen since. At the time of Meek's visit, the inhabitants of Choiseul were, like those of New Georgia and elsewhere — particularly Malaita — extremely warlike, and a European ventur- ing ashore, or at least any distance inland, most certainly took their life in their own hands. But other travellers visited Choiseul Bay prior to Meek, from French navigator Louis- Antoine de Bougainville in 1768, through Henry Brougham Guppy (who had a keen interest in natural history and made various observations on pigeons: Guppy 1887) and the first resident commissioner of the Solomons, Charles Morris Woodford (Tennent 1999) in the late 19th century. Woodford travelled widely in the Solomons, and would surely have seen or heard of such a distinctive ground pigeon, especially one so easy to approach, in his travels on Choiseul or Santa Isabel. Island faunas have historically been under significant threat, largely because of limited habitat and the highly specialised nature of island species having evolved in the absence of predators. The non-natural introduction by early Western sailors and travellers of exotic species either accidentally (rats escaping from ships) or deliberately (cats, dogs etc.) have most certainly had a significant (usually catastrophic) effect on endemic island faunas, either directly (cats to control rats) or indirectly (competition to other herbivores from goats released to provide food for passing ships). Johnson & Stattersfield (1990) reviewed the fate of island endemic birds, and noted three extinct and several other endangered Pacific pigeons, including M. meeki — other pigeons known only from the fossil record include a new genus and species of pigeon from as far east as remote Henderson Island (Worthy & Wragg 2008). It seems probable that M. meeki only ever occurred on Choiseul and that mis- sionaries' cats contributed significantly to the bird's demise — it must surely have been close to extinction when Meek collected it in 1904. W. John Tennent 252 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Sadly, cats, now established as feral on many of the larger islands in the region (Flannery 1995) probably sealed the fate of many ground-nesting birds — the infamous case of the Stephen Island Wren Xenicus [=Traversia] lyalli Rothschild, 1894, and the lighthouse keeper's cat is well known. Greenway (1958, 1967) believed Microgoura was 'most probably extinct'. Although Goodwin (1967) offered no opinion on this matter, he later (Goodwin 1983) remarked that he was 'reliably' informed that M. meeki was extant possibly as late as the 1980s. This seems rather unlikely. Knox & Walters (1994) noted that the species 'may have survived as late as 1965', and Parker (1972) said 'Although one cannot say even now that Microgoura meeki is extinct, the likelihood of its survival is small'. It is almost certainly the case that science would be unaware of the existence of M. meeki had it not been for Meek's fortuitous collection in 1904 of the only specimens now known. One wonders how many other animals were lost from the region before their presence could be registered. Acknowledgements I am grateful to several ornithologists for allowing, with such good grace, meddling by an entomologist well outside his comfort zone. Robert Prys-Jones, Mark Adams and Douglas Russell (The Natural History Museum, Tring) were helpful in discussing material of M. meeki and permitting specimens to be pho- tographed. Alison Harding was also very helpful during the author's visit to Tring. Mary LeCroy, AMNH, New York, has been helpful over several years in discussing A. S. Meek, most recently in examining AMNH material of M. meeki, and very kindly supplied copies of the relevant sections of the Whitney journals and the map (Fig. 6), as well as commenting on an early draft of this ms. Mike Tarburton discussed the content of his website and John Chainey commented on an early draft. Sue Kendall has been extremely helpful in transcrib- ing substantial sections of the Meek correspondence, without which this and associated research would have proved more difficult and certainly more lengthy. Jared Diamond refereed the manuscript and added some valuable notes from his own research on Choiseul. References: Ackery, P. R. 1997. The Natural History Museum collection of Ornithoptera (birdwing) butterflies (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Biol. Curator 8: l\-V7. Beck, R. H. 1923-28. Letters and journal of the Whitney South Sea Expedition, vol. D. Unpubl. journal held at American Museum of Natural History, New York. Coultas, W. F. 1929-30. Letters and journal of the Whitney South Sea Expedition, vol. V. Unpubl. journal held at American Museum of Natural History, New York. Day, D. 1981. The Doomsday Book of animals. A unique natural history of three hundred vanished species. Ebury Press, London. Diamond, J. M. 1983. Survival of bird populations stranded on land-bridge islands. Natl. Geogr. Soc. Res. Rep. 15: 127-141. Diamond, J. M. 1987. Extant unless proven extinct? Or, extinct unless proven extant? Conserv. Biol. 1: 77-79. Doughty, C, Day, N. & Plant, A. 1999. Birds of the Solomons, Vanuatu & New Caledonia. Christopher Hebn, London. Eyerdam, W. J. 1929-30. Journal and notes. Whitney South Sea Expedition, vol. U. Unpubl. journal held at American Museum of Natural History, New York. Ferguson-Lees, J. & Faull, E. 1992. Endangered birds. George Philip, London. Flannery, T. 1995. Mammals of the south-west Pacific and Moluccan Islands. Reed Books, Australia. Flannery, T. & Schouten, P. 2001. A gap in nature. Discovering the world's extinct animals. William Heinemami, London. Fuller, E. 2000. Extinct birds. Oxford Univ. Press. Gibbs, D., Barnes, E. & Cox, J. 2001. Pigeons and doves: a guide to the pigeons and doves of the world. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, CT. Goodwin, D. 1967. Pigeons and doves of the world. Brit. Mus (Nat. Hist.), London. Goodwin, D. 1983. Pigeons and doves of the world. Third edn. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), London. Greenway, J. C. 1958. Extinct and vanishing birds of the world. Spec. Publ. 13. American Committee for International Wildlife Protection, New York. Greenway, J. C. 1967. Extinct and vanishing birds of the world. Second revised edn. Dover Publications, New York. Guppy, H. B. 1887. The Solomon Islands and their uiUlvrs. Swan Sonnenschein, Lowry & Co., London. Hamlin, H. 1927-28. Journal and notes. Whitnox South Sea Expedition, vol. S. Unpubl. journal held at American Museum of Natural History, New York. W. John Tennent 253 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Hamlin, H. 1928-30. Journal and notes. Whitney South Sea Expedition, vol. T (Hamlin's journal vol. 2). Unpubl. journal held at American Museum of Natural History, New York. Hamlin, H. [1930]. Hand-drawn map titled 'Choiseul Is., Solomons. The quest for Microgoura meeki Rothsch.'. Whitney South Sea Expedition journal and notes. Unpubl. journal held at American Museum of Natural History, New York. lUCN. 2009. lUCN Red List of threatened species: Microgoura meeki. www.iucn.org (accessed 15 March 2009). Johnson, T. H. & Stattersfield, A. J. 1990. A global review of island endemic birds. Ibis 132: 167-180. Knox, A. G. & Walters, M. P. 1994. Extinct and endangered birds in the collections of the Natural History Museum. Brit. Orn. CI. Occ. Publ. 1: 1-292. Mayr, E. 1945. Birds of the southwest Pacific. Macmillan, New York. Mayr, E. & Diamond, J. 2001. The birds of Northern Melanesia. Speciation, ecologij, & biogeography. Oxford Univ. Press. Meek, A. S. 1904a. Letter to Karl Jordan dated 18 January 1904 from Gizo Island, Solomon Islands. Unpubl. Meek letter 124b-c, BMNH archives, Tring. Meek, A. S. 1904b. Letter to Karl Jordan dated 4 July 1904 from Cooktown, Queensland, Australia. Unpubl. Meek letter 129, BMNH archives, Tring. Meek, A. S. 1908. Letter to Walter Rothscliild dated 7 February 1908 from Gizo Island, Solomon Islands. Unpubl. Meek letter 205, BMNH archives, Tring. Meek, A. S. 1909. Letter to Walter Rothschild dated 13 February 1909 from Atherton, Queensland, Australia. Unpubl. Meek letter 218, BMNH archives, Tring. Meek, A. S. 1913. A naturalist in cannibal land. T. Fisher Unwin, London. Meek, A. S. 1929. Letter to Walter Rothschild dated 29 January 1929 from Yatte Yatah, New South Wales, Australia. Unpubl. Meek letter 378a, BMNH archives, Tring. Parker, S. A. 1967a. New information on the Solomon Islands Crowned Pigeon, Microgoura meeki Rothschild. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 87: 86-89. Parker, S. 1967b. A. S. Meek's three expeditions to the Solomon Islands. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 87: 129-135. Parker, S. 1972. An unsuccessful search for the Solomon Islands Crowned Pigeon. Emu 72: 24-25. Parsons, M. J. 1998. The butterflies of Papua New Guinea: their systematics and biology. Academic Press, London. Richards, G. 1927-28. Journal and notes. Whitney South Sea Expedition, vol. R. Unpubl. journal held at American Museum of Natural History, New York. Rothschild, M. 1983. Dear Lord Rothschild. Birds, butterflies & history. Hutchinson & Co., London. Rothschild, W. 1904. [A new pigeon from the Solomon Islands]. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 14: 77-78. Rothschild, W. & Hartert, E. 1905. Further contributions to our knowledge of the ornis of the Solomon Islands. Novit. Zool. 12: 243-268. Stattersfield, A. J. & Capper, D. R. (eds.) 2000. Threatened birds of the world. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona & BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. Tarburton, M. K. Choiseul Island systematic bird checklist, Solomon Islands. http://birdsofmelanesia/ solomons8.htm (accessed 15 March 2009). Tarburton, M. K. Ramos Island systematic bird checklist, Solomon Islands. http://birdsofmelanesia/ solomons8.htm (accessed 15 March 2009). Tennent, W. J. 1999. Charles Morris Woodford C. M. G. (1852-1927): Pacific adventurer and forgotten Solomon Islands naturalist. Archiv. Nat. Hist. 26: 419-432. Tennent, W. J. 2002. Butterflies of the Solomon Islands: systematics and biogeography. Storm Entomological Publications, England. Tennent, W. J. In press. The "long-winged Troides": discovery of the largest butterfly in the world, in Papua New Guinea, by Albert Stewart Meek (1871-1943). The Linnean. Tyler, M. J. (ed.) 1979. The status of endangered Australian wildlife. Royal Zoological Society of South Australia, Adelaide. Worthy, T. H. & Wragg, G. M. 2008. A new genus and species of pigeon (Aves: Columbidae) from Henderson Island, Pitcairn group. Pp. 499-510 in Clark, G., Leach, F. & O'Connor, S. (eds.) Islands of inquiry: coloni- sation, seafaring and the archaeology of maritime landscapes. Terra Australis 29. Australian National University Press, Canberra. Address: Department of Entomology, The Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, UK, e-mail: jtstorment@googlemail.com / joht@nhm.ac.uk © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 William S. Clark et al. 254 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 J 29(4) Dark Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus from California is melanistic by William S. Clark, Michael A. Patten & John C. Wilson Received 7 February 2009 Patten & Wilson (1996) reported a dark Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus that was represented as a colour morph previ- ously unknown for this species (Bildstein & Meyer 2000). The claim was based on two photographs of a perched juvenile female, one included as their Fig. 1, taken in 1994 by JCW in southern California. Clark & Wheeler (1997) disagreed that this hawk was a dark morph and opined that it was a dark individual of the dark Pacific Northwest subspecies A. s. perobscurus. That possibility was denied by Dickerman (2004), who, after examin- Figure 1. Melanistic Sharp- ing the original slides, could not determine 'if it is a morph, a shinned Hawk Accipiter -, Ti 1 . 1 . 11 ii.il/--i sfnah/s, southern California, phase, or, more likely, simply stained, but the bird definitely can- ^994 (John C Wilson) not be identified as perobscurus.' MAP and WSC met recently and studied the original photographs, as Clark & Wheeler (1997) had only seen the published photo. We now agree that the hawk was not A. s. perob- scurus, nor was it a 'dark morph', a term we feel applies best to a plumage persistent in a population rather than just aberrancy. We instead feel that the bird best fits the description 'melanistic'. Similar aberrant plumages have been described as melanistic for many bird species, for example: Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus (Short 1965), Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor (Campbell & Siddle 2006), Blackcap Sylvia atricapilla (Berthold et al. 1996), and Cory's Shearwater Calonectris diomedea (Bried et al. 2005). It has also been used to describe aberrant plumages in raptors, for example: Northern Harrier Circus hudsonius (Howell et al. 1992, Olson & Osborn 2000), Osprey Pandion haliaetus (Clark 1998) and Black- breasted Buzzard (Eagle) Geranoaetus melanoleucus (Clark & Schmitt 2006). There remains confusion about use of terms. For example, in his authoritative book on the subject, Majerus (1998) defined melanism 'to mean simply: the occurrence in a species of dark or black forms', and Butcher & Rohwer (1989) noted of color dimorphism or poly- morphism that 'Many of these involve melanism'. By contrast, Thomsett (2007) asserted that 'The terms melanistic and dark morph should not be interchangeable if the aetiology of these conditions is not clear'. We contend that most scientific literature, bird guides, and handbooks use the term 'dark morph' for regularly occurring dark plumages of birds, a con- dition unknown in the A. s. velox subspecies of Sharp-shinned Hawk, although South American taxa in the Sharp-shinned Hawk species complex (e.g. A. [s.] ventralis) do possess a true dark morph. With the terminology clarified, we therefore conclude that this Sharp- shinned Hawk was a melanistic individual, the first to be recorded in North America. References: Berthold, P., Mohr, G. & Querner, U. 1996. The legendary "Veiled Blackcap" (Aves): a melanistic mutant ^vith single-locus autosomal recessive in heritance. Natunvisscuschaftcu 83: 568-570. Bildstein, K. L. & Meyer, K. 2000. Sharp-shinned Hawk {Accipiter 'striatus). In Poole, A. & Gill, F. (eds.) The birds of North America, no. 482. The Birds of North America, Inc. Philadelphia, PA. Bried, J., Fraga, H., Calabuig-Miranda, P. & Neves, V. C. 2005. First two cases of melanism in Cory's Shearwater Calonectris diomedea. Marine Orn. 33: 19-22. Butcher, G. S. & Rohwer, S. 1989. The evolution of conspicuous and distinctix e coloration for communication in birds. Current Orn. 6: 51-108. William S. Clark et al. 255 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Campbell, R. W. & Siddle, C. 2006. Melanistic Tree Swallow in British Columbia. Wildlife Afield 3: 138-139. Clark, W. S. 1998. First North American record of a melanistic Osprey. Wilson Bull. 110: 289-290. Clark, W. S. & Schmitt, N. J. 2006. Melanistic specimen of Black-breasted Buzzard-Eagle, with comments on the species' taxonomic position. /. Raptor Res. 40: 86-88. Clark, W. S. & Wheeler, B. K. 1998. 'Dark-morph' Sharp-shinned Hawk reported from California is normal juvenile female of race perobscurus. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 118: 191-193. Dickerman, R. W. 2004. A review of the literature of Accipiter striatus perobscurus, with a report of specimens from California, Colorado, and New Mexico. Western Birds 35: 108-113. Howell, S. N. G., Webb, S., Sibley, D. A. & Prairie, L. J. 1992. First record of a melanistic Northern Harrier in North America. Western Birds 23: 79-80. Majerus, M. E. N. 1998. Melanism: evolution in action. Princeton Univ. Press. Olson, C. V. & Osborn, S. A. H. 2000. First North American record of a melanistic female Northern Harrier. /. Raptor Res. 34: 58-59. Patten, M. A. & Wilson, J. C. 1996. A dark-morph Sharp-shinned Hawk in California, with comments on dichromatism in raptors. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. 116: 266-270. Short, L. L. 1965. A melanistic Pileated Woodpecker specimen from Georgia. Wilson Bull. 77: 404-405. Thomsett, S. 2007. A record of a first year dark plumage Augur Buzzard moulting into normal plumage. Gabar 18: 25-30. Addresses: William S. Clark, P.O. Box 531467, Harlingen, Texas 78550, USA. Michael A. Patten, Oklahoma Biological Survey and Dept. of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019, USA. John C. Wilson, 1425 Alta Vista Drive, Bakersfield, California 93305, USA. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Harold F. Greeney et al. 256 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) First nest description of the Yellow-breasted Antpitta Grallaria flavotincta in north-west Ecuador by Harold F. Greeney, Mery E. Juina Segundo M. hnba Lliquin & Jane A. Lyons Received 17 March 2009 Grallaria antpittas are poorly known members of the Grallariidae, distributed through- out the Andes and comprise 31 species. Despite many recent contributions to our understanding of their breeding biology (e.g., Freile & Renjifo 2003, Greeney & Martin 2005, Martin & Greeney 2006, Solano-Ugalde et al. in press), the breeding biology of most species is poorly documented (Greeney et al. 2008). Yellow-breasted Antpitta G. flavotincta inhabits humid montane forests (1,300-2,350 m) from north-west Colombia to north-west Ecuador (Hilty & Brown 1986, Ridgely & Greenfield 2001). While it is a range-restricted species. Yellow-breasted Antpitta is not considered globally threatened (BirdLife International 2009), but some authors consider the species to warrant Near Threatened status (Krabbe & Schulenberg 2003, Freile et al. in press). Other than specimens collected in breeding condi- tion in June in Colombia (Krabbe & Schulenberg 2003), nothing has been published on its breeding biology. Here we describe a nest of Yellow-breasted Antpitta from north-west Ecuador. Methods and Results On 20 January 2009, SMIL found a nest of Yellow-breasted Antpitta at Reserva Las Gralarias (00°00'06"S, 78°43'09"W), at an elevation of 2,050 m, near Mindo, prov. Pichincha. At the time of discovery, the nest contained two turquoise eggs. He did not examine them closely, but they appeared lightly spotted. It is unclear, however, to what extent staining from the nest or eclosion fluids may have contributed to these markings. We took measure- ments and photographed the nest on 14 February, when it contained two nestlings that we estimated to be c.8 days old based on our experience with other Grallaria. The nestlings (Fig. 1) were pale-skinned with patches of black down on the dorsum. Their primary feathers had not yet broken their sheaths, but would probably have done so within the next 24 hours. Their mouth linings and gape were bright crimson-orange, contrasting starkly with the dark interior of the nest. They weighed 29.8 and 32.7 g. On the morning of 17 February the nest still contained two nestlings, but six days later the nest had partially fallen from its position and several feathers were found on the rim. While it is possible that the nestlings had fledged by this time, we feel it is likely that a predator destroyed the nest. The bulky, open-cup nest was composed mostly of green moss and fern leaves inter- mixed with a few sticks, leaf rachises and vines. It was lined with dark rootlets and a few bare fern rachises. The nest was 1.5 m above ground and constructed against the side of a 9 m-tall living tree trunk that was 13 cm in diameter at breast height. The substrate, howe\^- er, was made substantially larger by copious epiphytes and vines clinging to the trunk at the height of the nest. These created a platform of vegetation that provided a solid support for the nest. It appeared that the nest had been built into a natural depression atop the solid tangle. Externally, the cup measured 21 cm wide by 19 cm front to back, and 15 cm tall. The neatly formed cup measured 13 cm wide by 12 cm front to back, and 7.5 cm deep. The for- est surrounding the nest was mature second growth, with an open canopy ^.20 m in height. The understorey was relatively dense, with many tangles and fallen trees. A few epiphytic Harold F. Greeney et al. 257 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Figure 1. Nest with two young Yellow-breasted Antpittas Grallaria flavotincta, Reserva Las Gralarias, north- west Ecuador, 14 February 2009 (Harold F. Greeney) ferns directly above the nest provided roughly 25% cover, but the nest was otherwise rela- tively visible from most directions. Discussion Unsurprisingly, the nest of Yellow-breasted Antpitta is a deep, bulky cup similar in form to those nests of other Grallaria that have been described (Greeney et al. 2008). In that it was well supported, the nest is most similar to species such as Rufous Antpitta G. riifida (Greeney & Gelis 2005), White-bellied Antpitta G. hypoleiica (Price 2003), Variegated Antpitta G. varia (Protomastro 2000), Pale-billed Antpitta G. carrikeri (Wiedenfeld 1982) and Great Antpitta G. excelsa (Koefed & Auer 2004). The nest's composition, predominantly of moss and humid materials, most recalls nests of Rufous Antpitta (Whitney 1992, Greeney & Gelis 2005), Great Antpitta (Koefed & Auer 2004), Tawny Antpitta G. quitensis (Greeney & Martin 2005) and Stripe-headed Antpitta G. andicolns (J. Fjeldsa in Greeney et al. 2008), as well as some nests of Moustached Antpitta G. alleni (Freile & Renjifo 2003, Londono et al 2004, Greeney & GeHs 2006) and Scaled Antpitta G. guatimalensis (Miller 1963, Rowley 1966, Dobbs et al. 2001, 2003). Unfortunately, for most species, so few nests are described that the phylogenetic importance of composition and placement suggested by Greeney et al. (2008) remains unclear. Acknowledgements Matt Kaplan and John V. Moore generously support the studies of HFG through donations to the Population Biology Foundation. This study was funded by National Geographic Grant no. W38-08. The PBNHS contin- ues to aid and inspire all of our natural history work. HFG was further supported during the preparation of this manuscript by NSF grant no. DEB0346729. Mort Isler provided valuable comments on earlier versions of this manuscript. This is publication no. 195 of the Yanayacu Natural History Research Group. Harold F. Greeney et al. 258 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) References: BirdLife International. 2009. Species factsheet: Yellow-breasted Antpitta Grallana flavotiucta. \\rww.birdlife.org/datazone/species/index.htinl (accessed 29 April 2009). Dobbs, R. C, Martin, P. R. & Kuehn, M. J. 2001. On the nest, eggs, nestlings, and parental care of the Scaled Antpitta (Grallavia guatimalensis). Orn. Neotrop. 12: 225-233. Dobbs, R. C, Martin, P. R., Batista, C, Montag, H. & Greeney, H. F. 2003. Notes on egg laying, incubahon and nestling care in Scaled Antpitta Grallaria guatimalensis. Cotinga 19: 65-70. Freile, J. F. & Renjifo, L. M. 2003. First nesting records of the endangered Moustached Antpitta, Grallaria alleni. Wilson Bull. 115: 11-15. Freile, J. F., Parra, J. L. & Graham, C. H. in press. Distribution and conservation of Grallaria and Grallaricula antpittas (Grallariidae) in Ecuador. Bird Conserv. Intern. 19. Greeney, H. F. & GeHs, R. A. 2005. A nest of the Rufous Antpitta Grallaria rufula depredated by a Turquoise Jay Cyanolyca turcosa. Cotinga 24: 110-111. Greeney, H. F. & Gelis, R. A. 2006. Observations on parental care of the Moustached Antpitta {Grallaria alleni) in northwestern Ecuador. Orn. Neotrop. 17: 313-316. Greeney, H. F. & Martin, P. R. 2005. High in the Ecuadorian Andes: the nest and eggs or the Tawny Antpitta {Grallaria quitensis). Orn. Neotrop. 16: 567-571. Greeney, H. F., Dobbs, R. C., Martin, P. R. & Gelis, R. A. 2008. The breeding biology of Grallaria and Grallaricula antpittas. /. Field Orn. 79: 113-129. Hilty, S. L. & Brown, W. L. 1986. A guide to the birds of Colombia. Princeton Univ. Press. Kofoed, E. M. & Auer, S. K. 2004. First description of the nest, eggs, young, and breeding behavior of the Great Antpitta {Grallaria excelsa). Wilson Bull. 116: 105-108. Krabbe, N. & Schulenberg, T. S. 2003. Family Formicariidae (ground-antbirds). Pp. 682-731 in del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Christie, D. A. (eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol. 8. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. Londono, G. A., Saavedra R., C. A., Osorio, D. & Martinez, J. 2004. Notas sobre la anidacion del Tororoi Bigotudo {Grallaria alleni) en la Cordillera Central de Colombia. Orn. Colombiana 2: 19-24. Martin, P. R. & Greeney, H. F. 2006. Description of the nest, eggs, and nestling period of the Chestnut- crowned Antpitta Grallaria ruficapilla from the eastern Ecuadorian Andes. Cotinga 25: 47-49. Miller, A. H. 1963. Seasonal activity and ecology of the avifauna of an American equatorial cloud forest. Univ. Calif Publ. Zool. 66: 1-78. Price, E. R. 2003. First description of the nest, eggs, hatchlings, and incubation behavior of the White-bellied Antpitta {Grallaria hypoleuca). Orn. Neotrop. 14: 535-539. Protomastro, J. J. 2000. Notes on nesting of Variegated Antpitta Grallaria varia. Cotinga 14: 39-41. Ridgely, R. S. & Greenfield, P. J. 2001. The birds of Ecuador. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, NY. Rowley, J. S. 1966. Breeding records of birds of the Sierra Madre del Sur, Oaxaca, Mexico. Proc. West. Found. Vert. Zool. 1: 107-204. Solano-Ugalde, A., Paz, A. & Paz, W. in press. First description of the nest, nest site, eggs, and yoimg of the Giant Antpitta {Grallaria gigantea). Orn. Neotrop. 20. Whitney, B. M. 1992. A nest and egg of the Rufous Antpitta in Ecuador. Wilson Bull. 104: 759-760. Wiedenfeld, D. A. 1982. A nest of the Pale-billed Antpitta {Grallaria carrikeri) with comparative remarks on antpitta nests. Wilson Bull. 94: 580-582. Addresses: Harold F. Greeney & Mery E. Juiha J., Yanayacu Biological Station & Center for Creative Studies, c/o Foch 721 y Amazonas, Quito, Ecuador, e-mail: revmmoss@yahoo.com. Segundo M. Imba Lliquin & Jane A. Lyons, Reserva Las Gralarias, c/o Av. Brasil N45-283 y Zamora, Quito, Ecuador. © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club Edited by Guy M. Kirwan Index for Volume 129 (2009) AutJior mid CoiJtc}its Index 260 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) LIST OF AUTHORS AND CONTENTS AGOSTINI, M. G. see ROESLER, I. ALBERTO, A. C. see MAIA, H. A. ARETA, J. I. Paedomorphosis in SporophUa seedeaters 98 ARNOLD, K. A. see PRYS-JONES, R. P BEADLE, D. see ROESLER, I. BECKING, J.-H. The Bartels and other egg collections from the island of Java, Indonesia, with corrections to earlier publications of A. Hoogerwerf 18 BENNETT, E., BOLTON, M. & HILTON, G. Temporal segregation of breeding by storm petrels Oceanodroma castro {sensii lata) on St Helena, South Atlantic 92 BINFORD, L. C. see ROESLER, I. BISHOP, K. D. see DIAMOND, J. BOLTON, M. see BENNETT, E. BROOKS, D. M. see PRYS-JONES, R. P. CABOT, J. & DE VRIES, T. A new subspecies of Gurney's Hawk Buteo poecilochroiis 149 CHAPMAN, D. see PRATT, H. D. CHEKE, A. Was Mascarene Grey White-eye Zosterops borbonicus introduced to Madagascar? 104 CLARK, W. S., PATTEN, M. A. & WILSON, J. C. Dark Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatiis from California is melanistic 254 CLUB ANNOUNCEMENTS Notice and Agenda for the AGM on 29 April 2009 1 Report of the AGM held on 29 April 2009 66 Trustees' Annual Report for 2008 & Financial Statement 67 Meeting Reports 1, 65, 121, 193 COLLAR, N. J. see HILLE, S. M. COLLAR, N. J., DINGLE, C, GABREMICHAEL, M. N. & SPOTTISWOODE, C. N. Taxonomic status of the Degodi Lark Mirafra degodiensis, with notes on the voice of Gillett's Lark M. gilletti 49 COOPER, J. see SHEPHERD, L. D. CREASE, A. First breeding data for Roraiman Nightjar Caprimidgus whitelyi, from south-east Venezuela 109 DANTAS, S. see REGO, M. R. DEAN, J. see DONEGAN, T. M. DE VRIES, T. see CABOT, J. DIAMOND, J., MAURO, I., BISHOP, K. D. & WIJAYA, L. The avifauna of Kofiau Island, Indonesia ... 165 DICKINSON, E. C. see KINZELBACH, R. DICKINSON, E. C, FRAHNERT, S. & ROSELAAR, C. S. A substitute name for Dnjobates minor heinrichi von Jordans 191 DINGLE, C. see COLLAR, N. J. DONEGAN, T. see SALAMAN, P. DONEGAN, T. M., SALAMAN, P. & DEAN, J. Overlooked first record of Leach's Storm Petrel Oceanodroma leucorhoa for Colombia 198 FRAHNERT, S. see DICKINSON, E. C. GABREMICHAEL, M. N. see COLLAR, N. J. GREENEY, H. F., JUINA J., M E., LLIQUIN, S. M. I. & LYONS, J. A. First nest description of the Yellow-breasted Antpitta Grallaria flavotincta in north-west Ecuador 255 GUILHERME, E. see REGO, M. R. GUILHERME, E. & SANTOS, M. P. D. Birds associated with bamboo forests in eastern Acre, Brazil 229 HAILE, J. see SHEPHERD, L. D. Author and Contents Index 261 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 12(4) HILLE, S. M. & COLLAR, N. J. The taxonomic and conservation status of Milvus kites in the Cape Verde archipelago: further (and final?) reflections 217 HILTON, G. see BENNETT, E. HOLLAND, A. P. see MILENSKY, C. N. HUME, J. P. see OLSON, S. L. JUINA J., M E. see GREENEY, H. F. KIRWAN, G. M. see ROESLER, I. KRETZSCHMAR, J. see SHIRIHAI, H. LEE, M. T., YONG, D. L. & ONG, T. P. A photographic record of Silvery Pigeon Columba argentina from the Mentawai Islands, Indonesia, with notes on identification, distribution and conservation 122 LLIQUIN, S. M. I. see GREENEY, H. F. LYONS, J. A. see GREENEY, H. F. MAIA, H. A. & ALBERTO, A. C. The occurrence of Sao Tome Short-tail Amaurocichla bocagii and Newton's Fiscal Lanius newtoni in the montane forests of Sao Tome 213 MARTUSCELLI, P. see REGO, M. R. MATIAS, R. Removal of Black Crake Amaiirornis flavirostris from the Western Palearctic list, and the first record of Lesser Moorhen Gallinula angulnta for Madeira 116 MAURO, I. see DIAMOND, J. MILENSKY, C. N., WILKINSON, F. A. & HOLLAND, A. P. First record of Todd's Nightjar Caprimulgus heterurus in Guyana 119 MOCE, K. see SHIRIHAI, H. KINZELBACH, R., DICKINSON, E. C. & SOMADIKARTA, S. A substitute name for Serimis estherae orientalis Chasen 63 OLSON, S. L. & HUME, J. P. Notes on early illustrations and the juvenile plumage of the extinct Hawaii Mamo Drepanis pacifica (Drepanidini) 206 ONG, T. P. see LEE, M. T. ORD, W. M. see PRATT, H. D. PATTEN, M. A. see CLARK, W. S. PISANO, P. see PRATT, H. D. PRATT, H. D., RETTER, M. L. P., CHAPMAN, D., ORD, W. M. & PISANO, P. An Abbott's Booby Papasula abbotti on Rota, Mariana Islands: first historical record for the Pacific Ocean 87 PRYS-JONES, R. see SALAMAN, P. PRYS-JONES, R. P., BROOKS, D. M. & ARNOLD, K. A. A second specimen of Sabine's Gull Xema sabini from Texas, with a review of Meinertzhagen-generated confusion surrounding the first 202 PYM, T. see SHIRIHAI, H. RAPOSO, M. A. see STOPIGLIA, R. REGO, M. R., DANTAS, S., GUILHERME, E. & MARTUSCELLI, P. First records of Fine-barred Piculet Picumnus siibtilis from Acre, western Amazonia, Brazil 182 RETTER, M. L. P. see PRATT, H. D. ROSELAAR, C. S. see DICKINSON, E. C. ROESLER, I., KIRWAN, G. M., AGOSTINI, M. G., BEADLE, D., SHIRIHAI, H. & BINFORD, L. C. First sight records of White-chested Swift Cypseloides lemosi in Bolivia, with documented records of C. lemosi and White- chinned Swift C. cryptus in Peru 222 SAGE, B. Global warming and the breeding birds of the Arctic 77 SALAMAN, P. see DONEGAN, T. M. SALAMAN, P., DONEGAN, T. & PRYS-JONES, R. A new subspecies of Brown-banded Antpitta Grallaria milleri from Antioquia, Colombia 5 SANTOS, M. P. D. see GUILHERME, E. SCHODDE, R. The identity of the type species of the cuckoo-dove genus Macropygia Swainson, 1837 Author ami Contents Iihle.x 262 Bull, B.C. C. 2009 12^n4) (Columbidae) 188 SCOFIELD, P. see SHEPHERD. L. D. SHEPHERD, L. D., COOPER, J., HAILE, J., SCOFIELD, P., TEXXYSOX, A. J. D. & WORTHY, T. H. Selection of a neoh-pe for Apteri/x manteUi Bartlett, 1832, with the support of genetic data 195 SHIRTHAI, H. see ROESLER, I. SHIRIHAI, H., PYM, T., KRETZSCHMAR, J., MOCE, K., TAUKEI, A. & WATLIXG, D. First obsen"ations of Fiji Petrel Pseiidobuhceria macgillivvayi at sea: off Gau Island, Fiji, in Mav 2009 129 SONIADIKARTA, S. see KINZELBACH, R. SPOTTISWOODE, C. N. see COLLAR, N. J. STOPIGLIA, R., SIRAKER, L. C. & R-\POSO, M. A. Kinglet Calvptura Cah/ptura cristata (Vieillot, 1818): documented record for the state of Sao Paulo and taxonomic status of the name Pipra hjranmiJus Wagler, 1830 185 STRAKER, L. C. see STOPIGLIA, R. TAUKEI, A. see SHIRIHAI, H. TENNEXT, W . J. A cat among the pigeonsi Known specimens and supposed distribution of the extinct Solomons Crested Pigeon Microgoura meeki Rothschild, 1904 241 TEXTNYSON, A. J. D. see SHEPHERD, L. D. WATLIXG, D. see SHIRIHAI, H. WIJAYA, L. see DIAMOX^D, J. ^\^LKIXSOX, F. a. see MILEXSKY, C. N. UTLSOX, J. C. see CLARK, W. S. WORTm-, T. H. see SHEPHERD, L. D. YOXG, D. L. see LEE, M. T. Scientific Names Index 263 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 12(4) INDEX TO SCIENTIFIC NAMES All generic and specific names (of birds only) are indexed. New specific and subspecific names are indexed in bold print under generic, specific and subspecific names. Illustrations are numbered in italics. aalge, Uria 85 abbotti, Papasula 87-91, 88 Abroscopus superciliaris 29, 41, 46 Accipiter novaehollandiae 170 Accipiter soloensis 169 Accipiter striatus 254, 254 Accipiter trivirgatus 25, 29, 32, 44 Accipiter virgatus 32, 44 Acridotheres tristis 93 Acrocephalus schoenobaenus 86 Actitis hypoleucos 82 Actitis macularius 84 acuminata, Calidris 85 acuta. Anas 83 adamsii, Gavia 84 Aegithina tiphia 47 aethereus, Phaethon 96 Aethia cristatella 85 Aethia psittacula 85 Aethia pusilla 85 Aethopyga siparaja 32, 45, 46 affinis, Aythya 83 alba, Calidris 84 alba, Egretta 169 alba, Gygis 88, 96 alba, Motacilla 86 alba, Pterodroma 146, 147 albicaudatus, Buteo 150 albicilla, Haliaeetus 84 albicollis, Nyctidromus 111 albifrons, Anser 78, 83 albirostris, Anthracoceros 42, 46 albonotatus, Crocias 29, 40 Alca torda 85 Alcedo meninting 47 Alcedo pusilla 171 alecto, Myiagra 171, 178 aleutica. Sterna 85 Alle alle 78, 85 alle, Alle 78, 85 alleni, Grallaria 12, 13, 257 alnorum, Empidonax 85 alopex, Mirafra 55 alpestris, Eremophila 86 alpina, Calidris 85 Amaurocichla bocagii 213, 215 Amaurornis flavirostris 116 amboinensis, Macropygia 171, 188, 190 americana. Anas 83 americana, Aythya 83 americana, Melanitta 83 Anaimos percussus 41 Anas acuta 83 Anas americana 83 Anas clypeata 83 Anas crecca 83 Anas formosa 82 Anas penelope 83 Anas platyrhynchos 83 andicolus, Grallaria 257 angulata, Gallinula 116, 117, 227, 118 Anisognathus lacrymosus 11, 12 Anous minutus 93 Anous stolidus 88, 93 Anser albifrons 78, 83 Anser brachyrrhynchus 83 Anser canagicus 83 Anser erythropus 83 Anser fabalis 79, 83 Anthracoceros albirostris 42, 46 Anthracoceros malabaricus 42 Anthreptes malacensis 47 Anthreptes singalensis 47 Anthus cervinus 86 Anthus gustavi 86 Anthus novaeseelandiae 22 Anthus pratensis 86 Anthus rubescens 86 Aphriza virgata 81, 84 Aplonis metallica 171 Aplonis mysolensis 171, 174 Aplonis panayensis 47 apricaria, Pluvialis 84 Apteryx australis 195, 196-197 Apteryx mantelli 195-197 aquaticus, Rallus 81 Aquila chrysaetus 84 Aquila gurneyi 169 arborea, Spizella 86 arctica, Fratercula 85 arctica, Gavia 84 arctoa, Leucosticte 86 Ardea sumatrana 170 Ardeola striata 170 Arenaria interpres 84, 169 Arenaria melanocephala 84 argentatus, Larus 81, 85 argentauris, Lichmera 169, 172, 174 argentina, Columba 122-128, 224 ariel, Fregata 170 Arses telescopthalmus 172 Artamus leucorhynchus 169 Asio flammeus 85 aspasia, Nectarinia 171, 178, 180 ater, Manucodia 169 aterrima, Pseudobulweria 141, 142 Athene blewitti 205 Atlapetes latinuchus 11 atra, Fulica 46 atricapilla, Sylvia 254 atriceps, Pycnonotus 43 atricilla, Larus 203 atrovirens, Lalage 171 aurata, Colaptes 85 aurifrons, Picumnus 182 auritus, Podiceps 84 austraUs, Apteryx 195, 196-197 Automolus melanopezus 238 Aviceda subcristata 170 Aythya affinis 83 Scictinfic Index 264 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) A\iliya americana 83 A\'thya fuligula S3 Avth\-a marila 83 azurea, H)-poth\nii5 43 bacha, Spilomis 25 bairdii, Calidris 79, 83 Bartramia longicauda 84 becki, Pseudobiil^veria 133, 136, 142 bergii, Sterna 171 bemicla, Branta 83 bicolor, Ducula 122-128, 124 bicolor, Tachvdneta 234 bido, Spilomis 27, 36 biscutata, Streptoprocne 223 ble^Nitti, Athene 203 borbonica, Zosterops 103 borealis, Nimienius 82 borealis, Phvlloscopiis 86 bomTeuil, Sporopliila 98, 101 Brach^Tanlphus b^e^"irost^is 83 brach\Th^Tichus, .Anser S3 b^ach^-LlnlS, Celei.is 27, 38, 46, 47 brach\Tini5. Microptemus 27, 38 Branta bemicla 83 Branta canadensis S3 Branta hutchinsii S3 Branta leucopsis 83 Branta nificollis 83 bre^ipes, Heteroscelus S4 bre^-ipes, Pterodroma 151, 132, 147, 148 breAipes, Tringa 170 bre^irostris, Brach^Tamphus 83 bninneicauda, Ne^vtonia 103, 106 Bubulcus ibis 169, 172 buccinator, Cvgnus 83 Bucephala islandica 83 bulleri, Puffiiius 14". 148 Biil\veria 141, 142 Bul-\veria bIl]^ve^ii 129, 140 Bul^veria fallax 129, 140 bul\verii, Bul^\-eria 129, 140 Buteo albicaudatus 130 Buteo galapagoensis 130 Buteo lagopus 84 Buteo poecilochrous 149-164, 152-157 Buteo poecilochrous fjeldsai subsp. nov. 15S Buteo polyosoma 149, 130, 151-153_, 13S Buteo s^vainsoni 130 Cacatua galerita 171 Cacomantis variolosus 22, 168, 171 caerulescens, Chen 83 caerulescens, Eupetes 172 caemlescens, Sporophila 100 Calcarius lapponicus 86 Calcariu< pictus 86 caledonicus, N\xticora\ 43, 46, 170 Cahdris 78 CaHdris acuminata 83 Cahdris alba 84 Cahdris alprna 83 Cahdris bairdu 79, 83 Cahdris canutus 84 Cahdris fermginea S3 Calidris fuscicollis S? Calidns himantopus S3 V - niaritima 79, S3 L.a.iarL- mauri 84 Cahdris melanotos 83 Cahdris minuta 84 Cahdris niinutiUa 83 Cahdris ptilocneniis 83 Cahdris pusiUa 84 Cahdris ruficohis 79, 84 Cahdris tenimincku 83 Cahdris tenuirostris 79, 84 Caloenas nicobarica 171 Cfilonectris 142 Calonectris diomedea 234 Cal)-ptura cristata 183, 186, 187 campanisona, ^vhTmothera 6 Campylorhamphus trochihrostris 238 canadensis, Branta 83 canadensis, Grus 84 canagicus, Anser 83 canus. Lams S3 canutus, Cahdris 84 Caprimulgus heteninis 119, 120 Caprimulgus macnu-us 171 Caprimulgus nigrescens 110, 111 Caprimulgus pan-ulus 119, 120 Caprimulgus ^vhiteM 109-113, 113, 114 carbo, Phalacrocorax 84 Carduehs tlammeus 86 Carduehs homemanni 86 cameipes, Puffinus 147, 148 carohnus, Euphagus 86 carrikeri, Grallaria 237 cassicus, Cracticus 169 castanopterum, Glauddium 27, 36 castelnau, Picmnnus 182. 183 castro. Oceanodrom? ^2 ~- ^5,96.202 Catharus minimus celata, \>rmivora Sc Celeus brach^-Lunis I " " ^ 47 Celeus spectabhis 23c Cepphus coliunba 83 Cepphus gr\'Ue 83 Cerchneis ocddentalis 25 Cercomacra manu 183, 237 Certhia pacfica 206 cenicahs, Pterodroma 146 cer\-inu5, Anthus 86 Chaetura 223 Chalcophaps indica 171 Chalcophaps stephani 169 Chalcopsitta 172 Charadrius hiaticula 84 Charadrius mongolus 84 Charadrius morineUus 84 Charadrius semipahnatus S4 CharmosNTia placentis l~l chaseni nom. nov., Serinus estherae 63 cheela, Spilomis 25. 2~. 33 Chen caemlescens S3 Chen rossii S3 cherriei. SxTiaUaxis 238 chiguanco, Turdus 139 chlori- H?.k-vonl69 chlo- - - - ops 174 chlo:\ . .: ^ ervgone 178 Scientific Names Index 265 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 12(4) chloropus, Gallinula 117, 117 chrysaetus, Aquila 84 Chrysococcyx minutillus 171 chrysogaster, Gerygone 172, 178 Cinclus mexicanus 86 cinerascens, Monarcha 171, 174 cinerea, Pachycephala 31 cinereus, Xenus 84 Circus cyaneus 84 Circus hudsonius 254 Circus macrourus 84 cirrhata, Fratercula 85 cirrhatus, Spizaetus 32, 44 citreola, Motacilla 86 Clangula hyemalis 83 clypeata. Anas 83 Cnipodectes subbrunneus 238 Cnipodectes superrufus 184, 229, 238, 238 coccinea, Vestiaria 210 Colaptes aurata 85 Collocalia esculenta 171 Collocalia linchi 47 Collocalia vanikorensis 171 collybita, Phylloscopus 86 Columba argentina 122-128, 124 Columba pallidiceps 247 Columba phasianella 188-190 columba, Cepphus 85 columbarius, Falco 84 columbianus, Cygnus 83 concolor, Dicaeum 46 Coracina papuensis 171 Coracina tenuirostris 171 corax, Corvus 85 corniculata, Fratercula 85 corone, Corvus 85 Corvus corax 85 Corvus corone 85 Corvus orru 171 couloni, Primolius 236, 239 Cracticus cassicus 169 crassirostris, Reinwardtoena 246, 247 Crateroscelis murina 172 crecca. Anas 83 cristata, Calyptura 185, 186, 187 cristatella, Aethia 85 cristatus, Pardalotus 185-187 Crocias albonotatus 29, 40 Crocias guttatus 40 cryptus, Cypseloides 222, 224, 225-227 cuculatus, Orthotomus 33, 45 cucullatus, Raphus 241 cucullatus, Xiphidiopterus 25, 29 Cuculus saturatus 169 curvirostris, Rhamphococcyx 22 cyaneus. Circus 84 Cyclopsitta diophthalma 171 Cygnus buccinator 83 Cygnus columbianus 83 Cygnus cygnus 82, 83 cygnus, Cygnus 82, 83 Cymbilaimus sanctaemariae 236 Cypseloides cryptus 222, 224, 225-227 Cypseloides fumigatus 225, 226 Cypseloides lemosi 222, 223, 224, 225, 227 Cypseloides niger 224-226 Cypseloides rothschildi 226 Dacelo 172 dauma, Zoothera 27, 39, 40 daurica, Hirundo 171 deglandi, Melanitta 83 degodiensis, Mirafra 50, 56-59, 61 delawarensis, Larus 203 delicata, Gallinago 84 Demigretta sacra 29 Dendrocopos minor gerdi nom. nov. 192 Dendrocopos moluccensis 47 Dendrocygna guttata 170 v Dendroica palmarum 81 . Dendroica petechia 86 Dendroica striata 86 devillei, Drymophila 237 Dicaeum concolor 46 Dicaeum pectorale 171 Dicrurus hottentottus 171 dignissima, Grallaria 6 diomedea, Calonectris 254 diophthalma, Cyclopsitta 171 domesticus. Passer 86 dominica, Pluvialis 84 Drepanis 206, 207, 209 Drepanis pacifica 206-212, 209 Dromococcyx pavoninus 236 Drymophila devillei 237 Dryobates minor 191 Dryocopus javensis 27, 37, 46, 47 Dryocopus martius 81 Dryocopus pileatus 254 Ducula bicolor 122-128, 224 Ducula myristicivora 171, 174 Ducula perspicillata 171, 174, 177 Ducula pinon 174 Ducula pistrinaria 177 Ducula rufigaster 174 eburnea, Pagophila 78, 85 Eclectus roratus 171 Ectopistes migratorius 241 Egretta alba 169 Egretta garzetta 170 Egretta intermedia 170 Egretta sacra 29, 44, 170 ellioti, Tanysiptera 168, 171, 177 Emberiza pallasi 86 Emberiza pusilla 86 Emberiza schoeniculus 86 Empidonax alnorum 85 Eos squamata 171, 174 Epinecrophylla ornata 237 Eroessa tenella 105 Eremophila alpestris 86 erythrogaster. Pitta 169 erythroleuca, Grallaria 6 erythropus, Anser 83 erythropus, Tringa 84 erythrotis, Grallaria 6 Esacus magnirostris 45, 169 esculenta, Collocalia 171 estherae, Serinus 63 eulophotes, Lophotriccus 183, 238 Eupetes caerulescens 172 Scientific Names Index 266 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Euphagus caroliniis 86 Eurylaimiis javaiiicus 27, 38 Eur}Tiorhynchus pygmeus 85 Eurystomus orientalis 171 excubitor, Lanius 85 exilis, Picumnus 182 fabalis, Anser 79, 83 falcinellus, Limicola 85 falcinellus, Plegadis 45 falcirostris, Sporophila 98, 100 Falco columbarius 84 Falco moluccensis 25, 32, 34, 170, 177 Falco occidentalis 25 Falco peregrinus 84, 170 Falco rusticolus 84 Falco severus 25, 34 fallax, Bulweria 129, 140 fasciata, Rallus 43 fasciolata, Locustella 169 feae, Pterodroma 132 ferruginea, Calidris 85 fischeri, Somateria 83 fjeldsai subsp. nov., Buteo poecilochrous 158 flammeus, Asio 85 flammeus, Carduelis 86 flammulatus, Hemitriccus 183, 238 flava, Motacilla 86, 171 flavicollis, Ixobrychus 169 flavipes, Tringa 84 flavirostris, Amaurornis 116 flavirostris, Monasa 236 flavotincta, Grallaria 6, 12, 13, 256, 257 formosa. Anas 82 Fratercula arctica 85 Fratercula cirrhata 85 Fratercula corniculata 85 Fregata ariel 170 Fregata minor 88, 169 Fregetta grallaria 148 Fregetta tropica 147, 148 freycinet, Megapodius 170 Fringilla montifringilla 82 fringillaris, Microhierax 43 Fulica atra 46 fulicarius, Phalaropus 85 fuliginosa, Nesofregetta 146, 147, 148 fuligula, Aythya 83 Fulmarus glacialis 84 fulva, Pluvialis 84, 169, 170 fumigatus, Cypseloides 225, 226 funerea, Sporophila 98 funereus, Oryzoborus 98 fusca, Melanitta 83 fuscata. Sterna 96 fuscicauda, Ramphotrigon 239 fuscicollis, Calidris 85 fuscus, Larus 85 galapagoensis, Buteo 150 galatea, Tanysiptera 177 galerita, Cacatua 171 Gallicolumba salamonis 249 Gallinago delicata 84 Gallinago gallinago 81, 84 Gallinago media 84 Gallinago stenura 84 gallinago, Gallinago 81, 84 Gallinula angulata 116, 117, 117, 118 Gallinula chloropus 117, 227 garzetta, Egretta 170 Gavia adamsii 84 Gavia arctica 84 Gavia immer 84 Gavia pacifica 84 Gavia stellata 84 gavia, Puffinus 136 geoffroyi 171 Geoff royus geoffroyi 171 gerdi nom. nov., Dendrocopos minor 192 Gerygone chloronota 178 Gerygone chrysogaster 172, 178 Gerygone magnirostris 171, 178 Gerygone palpebrosa 178 gilesi subsp. nov., Grallaria milleri 7-15 gilletti, Mirafra 49, 50, 52, 54, 55, 56-59, 61 glacialis, Fulmarus 84 glareola, Tringa 84 Glaucidium castanopterum 27, 36 glaucoides, Larus 85 goeldii, Myrmeciza 183, 237 Goura 251 Grallaria 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 256 Grallaria alleni 12, 13, 257 Grallaria andicolus 257 Grallaria carrikeri 257 Grallaria dignissima 6 Grallaria erythroleuca 6 Grallaria erythrotis 6 Grallaria flavotincta 6, 12, 13, 256, 257 Grallaria griseonucha 6 Grallaria guatimalensis 13, 257 Grallaria haplonota 6 Grallaria hypoleuca 6, 12, 13, 257 Grallaria milleri 5-17, 10, 11, 76 Grallaria milleri gilesi subsp. nov. 7-15 Grallaria modesta 6 Grallaria nuchalis 6, 7, 13 Grallaria quitensis 13, 257 Grallaria ruficapilla 6, 7, 13 Grallaria rufocinerea 6, 13 Grallaria rufula 7, 13 Grallaria squamigera 13 Grallaria varia 257 grallaria, Fregetta 148 Grallaricula nana 6, 7, 12 grisegena, Podiceps 84 griseiceps, Pachycephala 169 griseisticta, Muscicapa 169 griseonucha, Grallaria 6 griseus, Puffinus 132, 147, 148 grisola, Pachycephala 32, 44 Grus canadensis 84 Grus leucogeranus 84 grylle, Cepphus 85 guatimalensis, Grallaria 13, 257 gularis, Tephrodornis 27, 39 gurneyi, Aquila 169 gustavi, Anthus 86 guttata, Dendrocygna 170 guttatus, Crocias 40 guttulus, Monarcha 169, 178-180 Scientific Names Index 267 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 12(4) Gygis alba 88, 96 haemacephala, Megalaima 47 haemastica, Limosa 84 Halcyon chloris 169 Halcyon sancta 171 Halcyon saurophaga 169 Haliaeetus albicilla 84 Haliaeetus leucocephalus 84 Haliaeetus leucogaster 170 haliaetus, Pandion 170, 254 Haliastur indus 170 haplonota, Grallaria 6, 13 Harpactes oreskios 27, 36 Hemignathus obscurus 207 Hemiprocne mystacea 169, 172 Hemitriccus flanimulatus 183, 238 heraldica, Pterodroma 146 Heteroscelus brevipes 84 Heteroscelus incanus 84 hetemrus, Caprimulgus 119, 120 hiaticula, Charadrius 84 Himantopus leucocephalus 46 himantopus, Calidris 85 Himatione sanguinea 210 Hirundo daurica 171 , Hirundo nigricans 169 1 Hirundo rustica 82, 171 Hirundo tahitica 171 Histrionicus histrionicus 83 histrionicus, Histrionicus 83 hornemanni, Carduelis 86 horsfieldi, Oreocichla 27, 40 hottentottus, Dicrurus 171 hudsonius. Circus 254 hutchinsii, Branta 83 hyemalis, Clangula 83 hyperboreus, Larus 85 Hypocnemis hypoxantha 237 Hypocnemis subflava 237 hypoleuca, Grallaria 6, 12, 13 hypoleucos, Actitis 82 hypoleucos, Tringa 171 Hypothymis azurea 43 hypoxantha, Hypocnemis 237 ibis, Bubulcus 169, 172 iliaca, Passerella 86 iliacus, Turdus 86 immer, Gavia 84 incanus, Heteroscelus 84 indica, Chalcophaps 171 indicus, Metopidius 25, 31, 32, 46 indus, Haliastur 170 inexpectata, Pterodroma 132, 146, 147 innominatus, Picumnus 182 intermedia, Egretta 170 interpres, Arenaria 84, 169 islandica, Bucephala 83 Ixobrychus flavicollis 169 javanica, Mirafra 58 javanicus, Eurylaimus 27, 38 javanicus, Leptoptilos 37 javensis, Dryocopus 27, 37, 46, 47 javensis, Thriponax 27 jugularis, Nectarinia 171 julianae, Monarcha 171, 178, 279, 180 keiensis, Micropsitta 171, 178 lacrymosus, Anisognathus 11, 12 Lagopus lagopus 83 Lagopus mutus 83 lagopus, Buteo 84 lagopus, Lagopus 83 Lalage atrovirens 171 Laniellus leucogrammicus 29, 40 Lanius excubitor 85 Lanius newtoni 213 lapponica, Limosa 84 lapponicus, Calcarius 86 Larus argentatus 81, 85 Larus atricilla 203 Larus canus 85 Larus delawarensis 203 Larus fuscus 85 Larus glaucoides 85 Larus hyperboreus 85 Larus marinus 85 Larus Philadelphia 203 Larus ridibundus 85 Larus smithsonianus 81 Larus thayeri 85 latinuchus, Atlapetes 11 lemosi, Cypseloides 222, 223, 224, 225, 227 Leptoptilos javanicus 37 lepturus, Phaethon 88, 90 leucocephalus, Haliaeetus 84 leucocephalus, Himantopus 46 leucogaster, Haliaeetus 170 leucogaster, Sula 88 leucogeranus, Grus 84 leucogrammicus, Laniellus 29, 40 leucophrys, Rhipidura 171 leucophrys, Zonotrichia 86 leucopsis, Branta 83 leucoptera, Pterodroma 132, 147, 148 leucorhoa, Oceanodroma 198, 198-201, 200, 202 leucorhynchus, Artamus 169 Leucosticte arctoa 86 - . . Leucosticte tephrocotis 86 Lichenostomus versicolor 174 Lichmera argentauris 169, 172, 174 Limicola falcinellus 85 Limnocorax niger 116, 117 Limnodromus scolopaceus 84 ; , Limosa haemastica 84 Limosa lapponica 84 linchi, Collocalia 47 lincolni, Melospiza 86 livida, Motacilla 105 lobatus, Phalaropus 85, 171 Locustella fasciolata 169 lomvia, Uria 85 Lonchura maja 47 Lonchura molucca 171, 180 longicauda, Bartramia 84 longicaudus, Stercorarius 85 lophotes, Percnostola 237 Lophotriccus eulophotes 183, 238 luctuosa, Sporophila 100 lugubris, Sumiculus 43 Luscinia svecica 86 lyalli, Xenicus [=Traversia] 252 Scientific Niimcs Index 268 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Lymnocr)^tes minimus 84 lyxa, Uropsalis 111 macgillivrayi, Pseudobulweria 129-148, 131, 134, 138, 139 macropterus, Vanellus 25, 27, 46, 47 Macropygia 188 Macropygia amboinensis 171, 188, 190 Macropygia phasianella 188 Macropygia tenuirostris 188, 189, 190 macrourus. Circus 84 macrurus, Caprimulgus 171 macularius, Actitis 84 madeira, Pterodroma 130, 135 maderaspatanus, Zosterops 104 magnirostris, Esacus 45, 169 magnirostris, Gerygone 171, 178 maja, Lonchura 47 malabaricus, Anthracoceros 42 malacensis, Anthreptes 47 manadensis, Monarcha 180 mantelli, Apteryx 195-197 manu, Cercomacra 183, 237 Manucodia 172 Manucodia ater 169 marila, Aythya 83 marina, Pelagodroma 147, 148 marinus, Larus 85 maritima, Calidris 79, 85 markhami, Oceanodroma 198, 200 martius, Dryocopus 81 matsudairae, Oceanodroma 147, 148 mauri, Calidris 84 media, Gallinago 84 meeki, Microgoura 242, 244, 241-253 Megalaima haemacephala 47 megalorynchos, Tanygnathus 171 Megapodius freycinet 170 megarhynchus, Melilestes 172 melania, Oceanodroma 198, 200 melanicterus, Pycnonotus 46 Melanitta americana 83 Melanitta deglandi 83 Melanitta fusca 83 Melanitta nigra 83 Melanitta perspicillata 83 melanocephala, Arenaria 84 melanogaster, Sporophila 98 melanoleucos, Phalacrocorax 170 melanopezus, Automolus 238 melanotos, Calidris 85 Melilestes megarhynchus 172 Melospiza lincolni 86 meninting, Alcedo 47 Mergus serrator 84 Merops ornatus 171 metallica, Aplonis 171 Metopidius indicus 25, 31, 32, 46 mexicanus, Cinclus 86 Microgoura meeki 242, 244, 241-253 Microhierax fringillaris 43 Micropsitta keiensis 171, 178 Micropternus brachyurus 27, 38 migrans, Milvus 217, 229 migratorius, Ectopistes 241 migratorius, Turdus 86 milleri, Grallaria 10,11, 5-17, 76 Milvus 217-221 Milvus migrans 217, 229 Milvus milvus 217, 219, 220 milvus, Milvus 217, 219, 220 minimus, Catharus 86 minimus, Lymnocryptes 84 minor, Dryobates 191 minor, Fregata 88, 169 minuta, Calidris 84 minuta, Sporophila 98 minutilla, Calidris 85 minutillus, Chrysococcyx 171 minutus, Anous 93 Mirafra alopex 55 Mirafra degodiensis 50, 56-59, 61 Mirafra gilletti 50, 56-59, 61 Mirafra javanica 56 Mirafra passerina 56 Mirafra sabota 56 modesta, Grallaria 6 Moho nobilis 207 mollissima, Somateria 83 molucca, Lonchura 171, 180 moluccensis, Dendrocopos 47 moluccensis, Falco 25, 32, 34, 170, 177 Monarcha cinerascens 171, 174 Monarcha guthilus 169, 178-180 Monarcha julianae 171, 178, 279, 180 Monarcha manadensis 180 Monasa flavirostris 236 mongolus, Charadrius 84 monorhis, Oceanodroma 200 montanella. Prunella 86 montanus. Passer 86, 171 montifringilla, Fringilla 82 morinellus, Charadrius 84 Motacilla alba 86 Motacilla citreola 86 Motacilla flava 86, 171 Motacilla livida 105 murina, Crateroscelis 172 Muscicapa griseisticta 169 muticus, Pavo 22, 29, 31, 43 mutus, Lagopus 83 Myiagra alecto 171, 178 myristicivora, Ducula 171, 174 Myrmeciza goeldii 183, 237 Myrmothera 14 Myrmothera campanisona 6 Myrmothera simplex 14 mysolensis, Aplonis 171, 174 mystacea, Hemiprocne 169, 172 nana, Grallaricula 6, 7, 12 nativitatis, Puffinus 129, 141, 147, 148 naumanni, Turdus 86 Nectarinia aspasia 171, 178, 180 Nectarinia jugularis 171 neglecta, Pterodroma 135, 146, 147 Neomixis 106 Neomixis tenella 105 Neopelma sulphurei\'enter 239 Nesofregetta fuliginosa 146, 147, 148 newtoni, Lanius 213 Nevvtonia 105 Scientific Names Index 269 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 12(4) Newtonia brunneicauda 105, 106 nicobarica, Caloenas 171 niger, Cypseloides 224-226 niger, Limnocorax 116, 117 nigra, Melanitta 83 nigrescens, Caprimulgus 111 nigricans, Hirundo 169 nigripennis, Pterodroma 136, 147 Ninox scutulata 22 nivalis, Plectrophenax 86 nobilis, Moho 207 Nonnula ruficapilla 236 novaeguineae, Philemon 171, 172 novaeguineae, Toxorhamphus 172 novaehollandiae, Accipiter 170 f novaehollandiae, Scythrops 169, 171 novaeseelandiae, Anthus 22 noveboracensis, Seiurus 86 nuchalis, Grallaria 6, 7, 13 Numenius borealis 82 Numenius phaeopus 84, 170 Numenius tahitiensis 84 Nyctea scandiaca 85 Nycticorax caledonicus 45, 46, 170 Nyctidromus albicollis 111 obscurus, Hemignathus 207 obscurus, Tiaris 98, 100 occidentalis, Cerchneis 25 occidentalis, Falco 25 occulta, Pterodroma 146 oceanicus, Oceanites 147, 148 Oceanites oceanicus 147, 148 Oceanodroma castro 92, 94, 95, 96, 202 Oceanodroma leucorhoa 198, 198-201, 200, 202 Oceanodroma markhami 198, 200 Oceanodroma matsudairae 147, 148 Oceanodroma melania 198, 200 Oceanodroma monorhis 200 Oenanthe oenanthe 86 oenanthe, Oenanthe 86 Oreocichla horsfieldi 27, 40 oreskios, Harpactes 27, 36 orientalis, Eurystomus 171 orientalis, Sertnus 63 Oriolus szalayi 172 ornata, Epinecrophylla 237 ornatus, Merops 171 orru, Corvus 171 Orthotomus 45 Orthotomus cuculatus 33, 45 oryzivora, Pada 47 Oryzoborus funereus 98 pacfica, Certhia 206 Pachycephala cinerea 31 Pachycephala griseiceps 169 Pachycephala grisola 31, 4A Pachycephala phaionota 169, 171, 174 pacifica, Drepanis 206-212, 209 pacifica, Gavia 84 pacificus, Puffinus 132, 147, 148 Pada oryzivora 47 Pagophila eburnea 78, 85 pallidiceps, Columba 247 palmarum, Dendroica 81 palpebrosa, Gerygone 178 palustris, Sporophila 98, 99, 100 panayensis, Aplonis 47 Pandion haliaetus 170, 254 Papasula abbotti 87-91, 88 papuensis, CoracLna 171 Paradisaea 172 paradisaea. Sterna 85 parasiticus, Stercorarius 85, 202 Pardalotus cristatus 185-187 parkinsoni, Procellaria 147, 148 parvulus, Caprimulgus 119, 220 Passer domesticus 86 Passer montanus 86, 171 Passerculus sandwichensis 86 Passerella iliaca 86 passerina, Mirafra 56 Pavo muticus 22, 29, 33, 43 pavoninus, Dromococcyx 236 pectorale, Dicaeum 171 pelagica, Phalacrocorax 84 Pelagodroma marina 147, 148 penelope. Anas 83 Percnostola lophotes 237 percussus, Anaimos 41 percussus, Prionochilus 41 peregrinus, Falco 84, 170 perspicillata, Ducula 171, 174, 177 perspicillata, Melanitta 83 peruviana, Sporophila 100 petechia, Dendroica 86 Petrochelidon pyrrhonota 85 phaeopus, Numenius 84, 170 Phaethon aethereus 96 Phaethon lepturus 88, 90 Phaethon rubricauda 88 phaionota, Pachycephala 169, 171, 174 Phalacrocorax carbo 84 Phalacrocorax melanoleucos 170 Phalacrocorax pelagica 84 Phalaropus fulicarius 85 Phalaropus lobatus 85, 171 phasianella, Columba 188-190 phasianella, Macropygia 188 Philadelphia, Larus 203 Philemon novaeguineae 171, 172 Philomachus pugnax 85 Phylloscopus borealis 86 Phylloscopus collybita 86 Phylloscopus sibilatrix 55 Phylloscopus trochilus 55, 86 Pica pica 85 pica. Pica 85 pictus, Calcarius 86 Picumnus aurifrons 182 Picumnus castelnau 182, 183 Picumnus exilis 182 Picumnus innominatus 182 Picumnus rufiventris 182 Picunmus subtilis 182, 183 pilaris, Turdus 86 pileatus, Dryocopus 254 pinon, Ducula 174 Pipra tyrannulus 185-187 Pitohui 172 Pitta erythrogaster 169 Scientific Names Index 270 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Pitta sordida 43, 171 placentis, Charmosyna 171 platyrhynchos, Anas 83 Plectrophenax nivalis 86 Plegadis falcinellus 45 plumbea, Polioptila 105 plumosus, Pycnonotus 46, 47 Pluvialis apricaria 84 Pluvialis dominica 84 Pluvialis fulva 84, 169, 170 Pluvialis squatarola 84 Podiceps auritus 84 Podiceps grisegena 84 poecilochrous, Buteo 149-164, 152-157 Polioptila plumbea 105 polyosoma, Buteo 149, 150, 151-153, 158 Polysticta stelleri 83 pomarinus, Stercorarius 85 Porzana porzana 116 porzana, Porzana 116 pratensis, Anthus 86 Primolius couloni 236 Prionochilus percussus 41 Procellaria 142 Procellaria parkinsoni 147, 148 Prunella montanella 86 Pseudobulweria 141, 142, 144, 145 Pseudobulweria aterrima 141, 142 Pseudobulweria becki 133, 136, 142 Pseudobulweria macgillivrayi 129-148, 131, 134, 138, 139 Pseudobulweria rostrata 131, 132, 133, 135, 136, 142, 147, 148 psittacula, Aethia 85 Psittaculirostris 172 Pterodroma 137 Pterodroma alba 146, 147 Pterodroma brevipes 131, 132, 147, 148 Pterodroma cervicalis 146 Pterodroma feae 132 Pterodroma heraldica 146 Pterodroma inexpectata 132, 146, 147 Pterodroma leucoptera 132, 147, 148 Pterodroma madeira 130, 135 Pterodroma neglecta 135, 146, 147 Pterodroma nigripennis 136, 147 Pterodroma occulta 146 Pterodroma ultima 146, 147 Ptilinopus pulchellus 172 Ptilinopus rivoli 171, 174 Ptilinopus viridis 171 ptilocnemis, Calidris 85 Puffinus 142 Puffinus bulled 147, 148 Puffinus carneipes 147, 148 Puffinus gavia 136 Puffinus griseus 132, 147, 148 Puffinus nativitatis 129, 141, 147, 148 Puffinus pacificus 132, 147, 148 Puffinus tenuirostris 148 pugnax, Philomachus 85 pulchellus, Ptilinopus 172 pusilla, Aethia 85 pusilla, Alcedo 171 pusilla, Calidris 84 pusilla, Emberiza 86 pusilla, Wilsonia 86 Pycnonotus atriceps 43 Pycnonotus melanicterus 46 Pycnonotus plumosus 46, 47 Pycnonotus simplex 46 Pycnonotus zeylanicus 46 Pycnopygius 172 pygmeus, Eurynorhynchus 85 pyrrhonota, Petrochelidon 85 querula, Zonotrichia 104-108 quitensis, Grallaria 13, 257 radjah, Tadoma 170 Rallina tricolor 170 Rallus aquaticus 81 Rallus fasciata 43 Ramphotrigon fuscicauda 239 Ramphotrigon megacephalum 239 Raphus cucullatus 241 Regulus tyrannulus 186, 187 Reinwardtoena crassirostris 246, 247 Rhamphococcyx cur\drostris 22 Rhipidura leucophrys 171 Rhipidura rufifrons 171, 174 Rhipidura rufiventris 168, 171, 178 Rhodostethia rosea 79, 85 Rhyticeros undulatus 27, 39, 46 ridibundus, Larus 85 Riparia riparia 85 riparia, Riparia 85 Rissa tridactyla 85 rivoli, Ptilinopus 171, 174 roratus, Eclectus 171 rosea, Rhodostethia 79, 85 rossii, Chen 83 rostrata, Pseudobulweria 131, 132, 133, 135, 136, 142, 147, 148 rothschildi, Cypseloides 226 rubescens, Anthus 86 rubricauda, Phaethon 88 ruficapilla, Grallaria 6, 7, 13 ruficapilla, Nonnula 236 ruficollis, Branta 83 ruficollis, Calidris 79, 84 ruficollis, Sporophila 98, 99, 100 ruficollis, Tachybaptus 170 rufifrons, Rhipidura 171, 174 rufigaster, Ducula 174 rufiventris, Picumnus 182 rufiventris, Rhipidura 168, 171, 178 rufocinerea, Grallaria 6, 13 rufula, Grallaria 7, 13 rustica, Hirimdo 82, 171 rusticolus, Falco 84 rutila, Streptoprocne 224, 225, 227 sabini, Xema 85, 202-205, 204 sabota, Mirafra 56 sacra, Egretta 29, 44, 170 sacra, Demigretta 29 salamonis, Gallicolumba 249 sancta, Halcvon 171 sanctaemariae, Cymbilainius 236 sandwichensis, Passerculus 86 sanguinea, Himatione 210 saturatus, Cuculus 169 Scientific Names Index 271 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 12(4) saurophaga. Halcyon 169 Saxicola torquatus 86 saya, Sayornis 85 Sayornis saya 85 scandiaca, Nyctea 85 schoeniculus, Emberiza 86 schoenobaenus, Acrocephalus 86 scolopaceus, Limnodromus 84 scutulata, Ninox 22 Scythrops novaehollandiae 169, 171 Seicercus superciliaris 41 Seiurus noveboracensis 86 semipalmatus, Charadrius 84 Sericornis 172 Serinus estherae 63 Serinus estherae chaseni, nom. nov. 63 Serinus orientalis 63 Serinus serinus 63 serinus, Serinus 63 serrator, Mergus 84 severus, Falco 25, 34 sibilatrix, Phylloscopus 55 Simoxenops ucayalae 238 simplex, Myrmothera 14 simplex, Pycnonotus 46 simplex, Sporophila 98, 100 singalensis, Anthreptes 47 siparaja, Aethopyga 31, 45, 46 skua, Stercorarius 85 smithsonianus, Larus 81 solitaria, Tringa 84 soloensis, Accipiter 169 Somateria fischeri 83 Somateria mollissima 83 Somateria spectabilis 83 sordida. Pitta 43, 171 spectabilis, Celeus 236 spectabilis, Somateria 83 Spilornis 36 Spilornis bacha 25 Spilornis bido 27, 36 Spilornis cheela 25, 27, 35 Spizaetus cirrhatus 32, 44 Spizella arborea 86 Sporophila 98, 99 Sporophila bouvreuil 98, 101 Sporophila caerulescens 100 Sporophila falcirostris 98, 100 Sporophila funerea 98 Sporophila luctuosa 100 Sporophila melanogaster 98 ~ Sporophila minuta 98 Sporophila palustris 98, 99, 100 Sporophila peruviana 100 Sporophila ruficollis 98, 99, 100 Sporophila simplex 98, 100 Sporophila torqueola 98, 100 squamata, Eos 171, 174 squamigera, Grallaria 13 squatarola, Pluvialis 84 stellata, Gavia 84 stelleri, Polysticta 83 stenura, Gallinago 84 stephani, Chalcophaps 169 Stercorarius longicaudus 85 Stercorarius parasiticus 85, 202 Stercorarius pomarinus 85 Stercorarius skua 85 Sterna aleutica 85 Sterna bergii 171 Sterna fuscata 96 Sterna paradisaea 85 stolidus, Anous 88, 93 Streptoprocne 225 Streptoprocne biscutata 225 Streptoprocne rutila 224, 225, 227 Streptoprocne zonaris 224, 225, 227 striata, Ardeola 170 striata, Dendroica 86 striatals, Accipiter 254, 254 subbrunneus, Cnipodectes 238 subcristata, Aviceda 170 subflava, Hypocnemis 237 subruficollis, Tryngites 85 subtilis, Picumnus 182, 183 Sula leucogaster 88 Sula sula 87, 88, 88, 169 sula, Sula 87, 88, 88, 169 sulphureiventer, Neopelma 239 sumatrana, Ardea 170 superciliaris, Abroscopus 29, 41, 46 superciliaris, Seicercus 41 superrufus, Cnipodectes 184, 229, 238, 238 Surniculus lugubris 43 svecica, Luscinia 86 swainsoni, Buteo 150 Sylvia atricapilla 254 Synallaxis cherriei 238 szalayi, Oriolus 172 Tachybaptus ruficollis 170 Tachycineta bicolor 254 Tadorna radjah 170 tahitica 171 tahitiensis, Numenius 84 Talegalla 172 Tanygnathus megalorynchos 171 Tanysiptera elHoti 168, 171, 177 Tanysiptera gala tea 177 telescopthalmus. Arses 172 temminckii, Calidris 85 tenella, Eroessa 105 tenella, Neomixis 105 tenuirostris, Calidris 79, 84 tenuirostris, Coracina 171 tenuirostris, Macropygia 188, 189, 190 tenuirostris, Puffinus 148 tephrocotis, Leucosticte 86 Tephrodornis gularis 27, 39 Tephrodornis virgatus 27, 39 Tetrao urogallus 81 thayeri, Larus 85 Thriponax 37 Thriponax javensis 27 Tiaris 99 Tiaris obscurus 98, 100 tiphia, Aegithina 47 torda, Alca 85 torquatus, Saxicola 86 torqueola, Sporophila 98, 100 Toxorhamphus novaeguineae 172 Scientific Names Index 272 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) tricolor, Rallina 170 tridactyla, Rissa 85 Tringa brevipes 170 Tringa erythropus 84 Tringa flavipes 84 Tringa glareola 84 Tringa hypoleucos 171 Tringa solitaria 84 tristis, Acridotheres 93 trivirgatus, Accipiter 25, 29, 32, 44 trivirgatus, Astur 25 trochilirostris, Campylorhamphus 238 trochilus, Phylloscopus 55, 86 tropica, Fregetta 147, 148 Tryngites subruficollis 85 Turdus chiguanco 159 Turdus iliacus 86 Turdus migratorius 86 Turdus naumanni 86 Turdus pilaris 86 tyrannulus, Pipra 185-187 tyrannulus, Regulus 186, 187 ucayalae, Simoxenops 238 ultima, Pterodroma 146, 147 undulatus, Rhyticeros 27, 39, 46 Uria aalge 85 Uria lomvia 85 urogallus, Tetrao 81 Uropsalis lyra 111 Vanellus macropterus 25, 27, 46, 47 vanikorensis, Collocalia 171 varia, Grallaria 257 variolosus, Cacomantis 22, 168, 171 Vermivora celata 86 versicolor, Lichenostomus 174 Vestiaria coccinea 210 virgata, Aphriza 81, 84 virgatus, Accipiter 31, 44 virgatus, Tephrodornis 27, 39 viridis, Ptilinopus 171 whitelyi, Caprimulgus 109-115, 113, 114 Wilsonia pusilla 86 Xema sabini 85, 202-205, 204 Xenicus [^Traversia] lyalli 252 Xenus cinereus 84 Xiphidiopterus cucuUatus 25, 29 zeylanicus, Pycnonotus 46 zonaris, Streptoprocne 224, 225, 227 Zonotrichia leucophrys 86 Zonotrichia querula 86 Zoothera dauma 27, 39, 40 Zosterops borbonica 105 Zosterops borbonicus 104-108 Zosterops chloris 174 Zosterops maderaspatanus 104 BOC Office P.O. Box 417, Peterborough PE7 3FX, UK E-mail: boc.office@bou.org.uk. Website: www.boc-online.org : Tel. & Fax: +44 (0)1733 844 820. MEMBERSHIP Subscriptions for 2010 will be due for renewal from 1 January 2010. iEASE NOTE THAT A SINGLE SUBSCRIPTION RATE OF £20 APPLIES REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE UBSCRIBER IS A MEMBER OF THE BOU OR NOT. THE US$ ALTERNATIVE IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE. ill paid-up members receive (postage free) four issues of the Bulletin (including index). aembership correspondence and applications for membership, changes of address and all other membership related ems should be addressed to the BOC Office (above). No registered items should be sent to the PO Box. Contact BOC tffice for direct mail of such items. For general Club correspondence see below. INSTITUTIONAL SUBSCRIBERS & APPLICATIONS FOR BACK NUMBERS OR OTHER CLUB PUBLICATIONS he Bulletin, together with annual index, may be purchased (postage free) by Institutional Subscribers, on payment of I annual subscription of £40 to the BOC Office (above) or via the BOC website (www.boc-online.org). Please note that 18 US$ option is no longer available. Back issues of the Bulletin are available from the BOC Office (above). BOC occasional Publications and other BOC publications are available from the BOC Office or online from the BOC website vww.boc-online.org). leas for future publications and policy should be referred direct to the BOC: Dr D. R. Wells, BOU/BOC ommissioning Editor, c/o BOC Office, P.O. Box 417, Peterborough, PE7 3FX, UK. PAYMENTS II amounts quoted are net, should be paid in £ Sterling and sent to the BOC Office (above). Other currencies are not xepted. Other currency users can pay by credit card from which the Sterling amount will be deducted and the amount I your local currency will be indicated on your card statement. All cheques or drafts should be made payable to British ornithologists' Club. Direct bank transfers can be made to Barclays Bank, Wavertree Boulevard, Liverpool L7 9PQ. Sort *ode: 20-00-87. Account no: 10211540, with confirmation to the BOC Office (above). CLUB CORRESPONDENCE orrespondence on all general Club matters should be addressed to: The Hon. Secretary, S.A.H. (Tony) Statham, shlyns Lodge, Chesham Road, Berkhamsted, Herts. HP4 2ST, UK. E-mail: boc.sec@bou.org.uk. See inside front cover )r details of Club meetings. COMMITTEE liss H. Baker (Chairman) (2009) D. J. Fisher (Hon. Website Manager) (2007) ' 'r R. P. Prys-Jones {Vice-Chairman) (2009) S. M. S. Gregory (2009) A. H. Statham (Hon. Secretary) (2004) K. Heron Jones (2009) J. Montier (Hon. Treasurer) (1997) C. W. R. Storey (2009) M. J. Walton (2008) Ix-officio members 'on. Editor: G. M. Kirwan (1 January 2004) hairman of BOU/BOC Joint Publications Committee (JPC): Revd. T. W. Gladwin dministration Manager: S. P. Dudley (2005) OU/BOC Commissioning Editor: Dr D. R. Wells (2009) Registered Charity No. 279583 i Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club ISSN 0007-1595 Edited by Guy M. Kirwan Volume 129, Number 4, pages 193-272 CONTENTS Club Announcements 193 SHEPHERD, L. D., COOPER, J., HAILE, J., SCOFIELD, P., TENNYSON, A. J. D. & WORTHY, T. H. Selection of a neotype for Apteryx mantelli Bartlett, 1852, with the support of genetic data 195 DONEGAN, T. M., SALAMAN, P. & DEAN, J. Overlooked first record of Leach's Storm Petrel Oceanodroma leucorhoa for Colombia 198 PRYS-JONES, R. P., BROOKS, D. M. & ARNOLD, K. A. A second specimen of Sabine's Gull Xema sabini from Texas, with a review of Meinertzhagen-generated confusion surrounding the first . . . 202 OLSON, S. L. & HUME, J. P. Notes on early illustrations and the juvenile plumage of the extinct Hawaii Mamo Drepanis pacifica (Drepanidini) 206 MAIA, H. A. & ALBERTO, A. C. The occurrence of Sao Tome Short-tail Amaurocichla bocagii and Newton's Fiscal Laniiis newtoni in the montane forests of Sao Tome 213 HILLE, S. M. & COLLAR, N. J. The taxonomic and conservation status of Milviis kites in the Cape Verde archipelago: further (and final?) reflections 217 ROESLER, I., KIRWAN, G. M., AGOSTINl, M. G., BEADLE, D., SHIRIHAI, H. & BINFORD, L. C. First sight records of White-chested Swift Cypseloides lemosi in Bolivia, with documented records of C. lemosi and White-chinned Swift C. cryptus in Peru 222 GUILHERME, E. & SANTOS, M. P. D. Birds associated with bamboo forests in eastern Acre, Brazil . 229 TENNENT, W. J. A cat among the pigeons! Known specimens and supposed distribution of the extinct Solomons Crested Pigeon Microgoura meeki Rothschild, 1904 241 CLARK, W. S., PATTEN, M. A. & WILSON, J. C. Dark Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus from California is melanistic 254 GREENLY, H. F., JUINA J., M E., LLIQUIN, S. M. I. & LYONS, J. A. First nest description of the Yellow-breasted Antpitta Gra//nrzfl//ai'of/ncto in north-west Ecuador 256 Index for Volume 129 (2009) 259 EDITORIAL BOARD Murray Bruce, R. T. Chesser, Edward C. Dickinson, Francoise Dowsett-Lemaire, Steven M. S. Gregors^ Jose Fernando Pacheco, Robert B. Payne, Pamela C. Rasmussen, Cees Roselaar, Thomas S. Schulenberg, Lars Svensson Authors are invited to submit papers on topics relating to the broad themes of taxonomy and distribution of birds. Descriptions of new species of birds are especially welcome and will be gi^•en priority to ensure rapid publication, subject to successful passage through the normal peer review procedure, and ^vhere^■er possible should be accompanied by colour photographs or paintings. On submission, manuscripts, double-spaced and with wide margins, should be sent to the Editor, Guy Kirwan, preferably bv e-mail, to GMKirAvan@aol.com. Alternatively, two copies of manuscripts, tvped on one side of the paper, mav be submitted to the Editor, 74 Waddington Street, Norwich NR2 4JS, UK. Where appropriate half-tone photographs may be included and, where essential to illustrate important points, the Editor will consider the inclusion of colour figures (if possible, authors should obtain funding to support the inclusion of such colour illustrations). As far as possible, review, return of manuscripts for re\ ision and subsequent stages of the publication process will be undertaken electronicalh . For instructions on style, see the inside rear cover of Bulletin 129 (1) or the BOC website Registered Charit)- No. 279583 © British Ornithologists' Club 2009 www.boc-online.org Printed on acid-free paper. Published bv the British Ornithologists' Club Typeset by Alcedo Publishing of Arizona, USA, and printed bv Latimer Trend, UK