Sphecotheres stalkeri Ingram

Sphecotheres stalkeri Ingram

Sphecotheres stalkeri Ingram, 1908a: 100 (Mount Elliot, N. Queensland).

Now from a zone of intergradation between S. v. vieilloti and S. v. flaviventris. See Mathews, 1930: 861–862; Greenway, 1962: 136; Ford, 1975; 1982; 1987; Schodde and Mason, 1999: 595–597; Walther and Jones, 2008: 715–716.

SYNTYPES: AMNH 671356, AMNH 671357, adult males, collected on Mount Elliot, 19.30S, 147.00E (Times Atlas), Queensland, Australia, in December 1907, by Wilfred Stalker (no. 390 for both). From the Mathews Collection via the Rothschild Collection.

COMMENTS: In the original description, Ingram did not designate a type or list his specimens. Subsequently, Ingram (1908b: 458– 481) noted that Stalker had collected on Mount Elliot and that he had two male specimens that shared the Stalker number ‘‘390.’’ Mathews purchased this collection.

Mathews then entered into a series of discussions concerning S. stalkeri. Having apparently not read Ingram’s (1908a) original article on Stalker’s collection, where Ingram stated that Stalker collected on Mount Elliot, Mathews (1917b: 141) proposed that stalkeri was perhaps collected by Stalker earlier, in New Guinea, and became accidentally mixed in with his Queensland collection. In the same paper, Mathews (1917b: 140) also said that he had put Sphecotheres into its own family nearest the ‘‘Campophagidae.’’

Mathews (1921: 163), in writing about S. vieilloti boweri (see below), said: ‘‘it is now doubtful whether the much debated Sphecotheres stalkeri Ingram, as noted hereafter, is anything more than a peculiar state of plumage of the northern form of this species,’’ and on page 164 admitted that boweri might have to bear the name stalkeri (i.e., the older name). The ‘‘debate’’ was apparently between Mathews and himself.

Mathews (1921: 170) discussed but did not illustrate the two specimens collected by Stalker, describing in detail how they differed from both vieilloti and flaviventris without recognizing the possibility of intergradation. He still considered them to have come from New Guinea and refused ‘‘the so-called S. stalkeri a place on the Australian List until re-confirmed by a reliable collector’’!

Mathews (1928: 38, pl. 69 opp. p. 38) described and figured a male of stalkeri, but did not say whether it was of either syntype. AMNH 671356 is the syntype bearing Mathews and Rothschild type labels; the original Stalker label is marked ‘‘ Sphecotheres stalkeri TYPE’’ in a hand that is not Mathews’ and may have been marked by Ingram. Mathews’ catalog number ‘‘3612’’has been added to the Rothschild type label and it is marked ‘‘type’’ opposite that number in Mathews’ catalog. AMNH 671357, the other syntype with Mathews’ number 3613, has the Mathews label marked ‘‘ Fig. G.M.M. ’’ by Mathews but neither specimen bears a Mathews ‘‘ Figured’ ’ label. The catalog and label marked ‘‘type’’ does not convey type status, and I have not found any designation of a lectotype; therefore, the two specimens remain syntypes, as they were originally described.

Mathews (1930: 861) still recognized Sphecotheridae as a family, but placed it between orioles and drongos. He recognized both boweri and stalkeri, bestowing on the latter the English name of ‘‘Doubtful Fig-Bird.’’