Calamanthus campestris wayensis Mathews, 1912

LeCroy, M., 2008, Type Specimens Of Birds In The American Museum Of Natural History. Part 7. Passeriformes: Sylviidae, Muscicapidae, Platysteiridae, Maluridae, Acanthizidae, Monarchidae, Rhipiduridae, And Petroicidae, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 313 (1), pp. 1-287 : 142

Calamanthus campestris wayensis Mathews

Calamanthus campestris wayensis Mathews, 1912a: 338 (West Australia (Lake Way)).

Now Calamanthus campestris wayensis Mathews, 1912 . See Mayr, 1986b: 428, and Schodde and Mason, 1999: 154–157.

HOLOTYPE: AMNH 587961 , adult female, collected at Lake Way , 26.50S, 120.25E ( Johnstone and Storr, 2004: 509), East Murchison, Western Australia, Australia, on 21 July 1909, by F.L. Whitlock. From the Mathews Collection (no. 2093) via the Rothschild Collection.

COMMENTS: Mathews cited his catalog number of the holotype in the original description. The specimen bears, in addition to the field label, Mathews and Rothschild type labels and a yellow ‘‘Figured’’ label, indicating that it was illustrated in Mathews (1922a: pl. 435, opp. p. 288, text p. 290), where it is confirmed as the type of wayensis.

A second specimen, AMNH 587962 (Mathews no. 4181), collected at Lake Way on 8 November 1909 by Whitlock, is a paratype. Mathews’ numbers 4178–4180 apparently also applied to Calamanthus specimens from Lake Way, collected on the same day. However, these entries have been marked out and other specimens entered opposite the same numbers! There is no way of knowing when these specimens were presumably exchanged, or even of recognizing them in other collections, as Mathews virtually never wrote his catalog number on any specimen except a type, and frequently not then. An additional specimen came to AMNH with the Rothschild Collection, collected by Whitlock (not Wilson, as written on the Rothschild label) on the same date, but labeled only ‘‘E. Murchison’’ and said to be a juvenile from spirits. There is no way of knowing if this is one of Mathews’ exchanged specimens and I do not consider it a paratype.