Dicrurus hottentottus renschi Vaurie

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 : 57-58

Dicrurus hottentottus renschi Vaurie

Dicrurus hottentottus renschi Vaurie, 1949b: 298 (Tambora Mountain, 3000 feet, Sumbawa).

Now Dicrurus densus bimaensis Wallace, 1864 . See Rensch, 1928: 7–8; 1931: 589; Vaurie, 1962: 151; Mees, 1965: 194–195; White and Bruce, 1986: 316–317; Dickinson, 2003: 492–493; Dekker and Quaisser, 2006: 54–55; and Rocamora and Yeatman-Berthelot, 2009: 215.

HOLOTYPE: AMNH 672302 , adult male, collected on Gunung Tambora , 08.16S, 117.59E (Times Atlas), Sumbawa Island, Lesser Sunda Islands, Indonesia, in April– May 1896, by William Doherty. From the Rothschild Collection.

COMMENTS: In the original description, Vaurie gave the AMNH number of the holotype and listed one adult male and one adult female as paratypes: G. Tambora, AMNH 672301, male, AMNH 672303, female, collected in April–May 1896, collected by Doherty. He listed five additional specimens, but their separate mention ‘‘expressly excludes them from the type series’’ (ICZN, 1999: 77, Art 72.4.6).

Wallace (1864: 492) based bimaensis on a name used by Bonaparte, based in turn on a manuscript name of Temminck. These earlier usages of the name did not include a description or other indications that might make the name available under the Code (ICZN, 1999: 16, Art. 12.2). In his introductory material, Wallace (1864: 480–481) mentioned that he had no specimens from Sumbawa, but that Bonaparte had mentioned a few in the Leiden Museum. And in the description, Wallace (1864: 492) listed the range of bimaensis as ‘‘Lombock, Sumbawa (Temm.), and Flores,’’ thus making the Leiden specimens part of his type series. Mees (1965: 194–195) pointed out that other authors have regarded the Leiden specimens as types of bimaensis and that Vaurie (1949b: 297–298) incorrectly removed Sumbawa from the range of bimaensis when he named renschi. Mees (1965: 195) then named an adult male in Leiden, collected at Bima, Sumbawa, by Forsten in 1842 and labeled as the type by Finsch, as the lectotype of bimaensis , saying that this ‘‘selection of a lectotype overrules the type-locality restrictions made by Rensch and Vaurie, and fixes the type locality of Dicrourus bimaënsis as Bima, Sumbawa.’’

Rensch (1928: 7–8) separated the Lombok population as vicinus, apparently unaware of Wallace’s description. Later, he ( Rensch, 1931: 589) restricted the type locality of bimaensis to Flores and included Sumbawa in the range of vicinus. Vaurie (1949b: 297– 298) included both Lombok and Flores in the range of bimaensis , thus synonymizing vicinus with it, and named the Sumbawa population as renschi. Mees (1965: 195) concluded that as a result of his lectotypification, renschi became a synonym of bimaensis and that vicinus became the valid name for the subspecies inhabiting Lombok and Flores, if indeed the populations of these two islands are the same.

White and Bruce (1986: 317) included both vicinus and renschi as synonyms of bimaensis , which they included in the species Dicrurus densus , and most recent authors have agreed.