Hyphantica cardinalis Hartlaub, 1880

Lecroy, Mary, 2014, Type Specimens Of Birds In The American Museum Of Natural History Part 12. Passeriformes: Ploceidae, Sturnidae, Buphagidae, Oriolidae, Dicruridae, Callaeidae, Grallinidae, Corcoracidae, Artamidae, Cracticidae, Ptilonorhynchidae, Cnemophilidae, Paradisaeidae, And Corvidae, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2014 (393), pp. 1-165 : 26-27

Hyphantica cardinalis Hartlaub

Hyphantica cardinalis Hartlaub, 1880: 325 (Ladó) . Now Quelea cardinalis ( Hartlaub, 1880) . See Hartlaub, 1881; Moreau and Greenway, 1962:

61; Dickinson, 2003: 724; Fry and Keith, 2004: 204–205; and Craig, 2010: 140.

SYNTYPE: AMNH 725957, adult male, collected at Lado, 05.10N, 31.32E (Times Atlas), Sudan, on 7 August 1879, by Emin Pasha (no. 412). From the Rothschild Collection.

COMMENTS: The above specimen is the only Lado specimen that came to AMNH with the Rothschild Collection; it had not previously been recognized as a type. Hartlaub did not designate a type in the original description, saying only that Emin had collected numerous specimens of both sexes at Lado. The type series of Hyphantica cardinalis would include those Emin specimens collected at Lado in 1879. His specimens were widely dispersed and now are found in many collections. Schubotz (1921: 164–165) provided information from Emin’s ‘‘Daybook’’ on this species and listed there eight specimens of cardinalis collected at Lado in 1879. A male specimen collected on 7 August 1879 with a wing measurement of 61 mm is listed by Schubotz (1921: 165). I measure the wing of AMNH 725957 as 60.5 mm and consider it a syntype of cardinalis . It retains its original Emin label.

Sánchez-Osés (2010: 66) noted that there had been nine specimens at UMB, with only three there now, the other six having been destroyed by insects. Only two of these syntypes are dated 1879, with no information as to date of collection included for the destroyed specimens. He now thinks that all specimens collected by Emin in July and August 1879 should be considered syntypes, and to his knowledge no lectotype has been designated (Sánchez-Osés, in litt., 11 May 1013). I am very grateful to him for his help in unraveling some of the problems associat- ed with this name.

For BMNH, Sharpe (1890: 257) listed one specimen collected at Lado on 17 July 1879 and five others from Lado without date. The 17 July 1879 specimen is listed by Schubotz (1921: 165) and should be considered a syntype, although it is not so listed by Warren and Harrison (1971). Pelzeln (1881: 141, 156) mentioned Hartlaub’s description, but apparently did not receive additional specimens in Vienna.

This new species was illustrated in Journal für Ornithologie (1881: 29, pl. 1), without further comment.