Amblyornis flavifrons Rothschild, 1895

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 : 84

Amblyornis flavifrons Rothschild

Amblyornis flavifrons Rothschild, 1895a: 480 (Dutch New Guinea).

Now Amblyornis flavifrons Rothschild, 1895 . See Hartert, 1919: 127; Gilliard, 1969: 316–318; Diamond, 1982, 1985; Frith and Frith, 2004: 297–298; Beehler, 2006; Beehler and Prawiradilaga, 2010; and Frith and Frith, 2009a: 396.

HOLOTYPE: AMNH 679120 , adult male, collected at an unknown locality in what was then Dutch New Guinea, purchased from van Renesse van Duivenbode. From the Rothschild Collection.

COMMENTS: When the original description was written, Rothschild had a single specimen. (The head was illustrated in color in Rothschild and Hartert [(1896, 3: pl. 1, figs. 3 and 4)]. This specimen on which the description was based is the holotype. There was, however, an added footnote to the original description explaining that after the description went to press, Rothschild had received a second specimen. This specimen would be a paratype of A. flavifrons . Hartert (1919: 127) noted that by 1919 the Rothschild Collection had three male specimens. The third specimen has no type standing.The holotype and paratype, AMNH 679121 , are in AMNH; the third is in BMNH as part of the Rothschild Bequest, no. 1939.12.9.13.

On AMNH 679121, someone whose handwriting I don’t recognize has written in red ink: ‘‘Typical’’ and ‘‘Co-Type’’ and it was cataloged as a cotype when it came to AMNH. Someone else has also noted on the label ‘‘not cotype,’’ and this is correct if the term cotype is being used in the sense of a ‘‘ syntype,’’ but cotype also has been used at times in the sense of ‘‘paratype’’ in modern terminology. This confusion of usage is why the ICZN (1999: 80 (Recommendation 73E), 119) does not recognize the term cotype.

A note on the label of AMNH 679121 reads: ‘‘This specimen is figured in Sharpe’s Monograph of the Paradiseidae’’ dated ‘‘25/ 6.97.’’ This refers to Sharpe (1898, part 8, plate unnumbered, text page unnumbered). Sharpe, in his monograph, said: ‘‘The lower figure represents the typical example of A. flavifrons of the natural size.’’ This statement, and ‘‘Typical’’ and ‘‘Co-type’’ on the label leads me to believe that the plate is of Rothschild’s second specimen and the paratype of the name. The third specimen, in BMNH, bears no annotation (R. Prŷs-Jones, personal commun.).

The rediscovery of this species in the Foja Mountains, Papua Province, Indonesia, is one of the most exciting ornithological events of recent years. For information concerning its rediscovery, see Diamond (1982, 1985), Beehler (2006), and Beehler and Prawiradilaga (2010).