Uromys banfieldi De Vis, 1907

Parnaby, Harry E., Ingleby, Sandy & Divljan, Anja, 2017, Type Specimens of Non-fossil Mammals in the Australian Museum, Sydney, Records of the Australian Museum 69 (5), pp. 277-420 : 380

Uromys banfieldi De Vis, 1907

Ann. Qld. Mus. 7: 8. (7 June 1907).

Common name. Fawn-footed Melomys .

Current name. Melomys cervinipes ( Gould, 1852) , following Jackson & Groves (2015).

? Syntype. M.3133, male, skull, study skin, Dunk Island , exchange from QM, registered in the AM in July 1922. Former QM number J1889, collector and collection date not indicated in M Register. However, the QM Register gives collector/donor as R. Hamlyn-Harris, collection date not given, registered in QM on 18 June 1914 (Heather Janetzki, QM, pers. comm. 2014) .

Condition. Cranium and dentaries complete, jugal missing from left zygomatic arch. Study skin intact except missing right ear, fur somewhat faded.

Cranial measurements (mm). M.3133: GL, 36.08; ConL, 34.52; BasL, 31.54; NasL, 11.44; NasB, 4.0; DIL, 9.93; APV, 6.23; PAL, 18.59; UMR (alv.), 6.74; ZB, 17.62; POC, 5.81; BUL, 4.93; MB, 13.21; DL (condyl.), 20.19; LMR (alv.), 6.64.

Type locality. Dunk Island, Qld, Australia.

Comments. Two female specimens from Dunk Island are mentioned in the original description, but De Vis did not indicate a holotype, cite registration numbers (they might not have been registered) or indicate the number of specimens in the type series. In correspondence from H. Longman (then Director, QM) associated with the exchange specimen M.3133 ( AM Archives AMS9 Letters Received, L.20/1922), Longman states that this specimen was “material used by De Vis”, implying that it is a type. The sex of this specimen, which was sent to the AM as a body in alcohol, is not indicated in associated documentation from the QM. It was entered in the M Register as a male by Troughton, who probably examined it as a spirit specimen. However, Troughton (1956) does not list type material for this taxon as being in the AM .

Ronald Hamlyn-Harris was Director of the QM in 1914 when the specimen was registered. De Vis had ended his association with the QM in 1912. If Hamlyn-Harris was the collector then it is unlikely to be a syntype. In May 1914 Hamlyn-Harris spent two weeks on Dunk Island with Banfield ( Quinnell, 1986: 210). Although we cannot exclude the possibility that he was the collector because we are not aware of his activities prior to 1914, it is possible that he simply registered a specimen found in the collection, and his name was inadvertently cited as collector.

An adult female in the QM ( J22169 ) is cited as a syntype of Uromys banfieldi by Mahoney & Richardson (1988). It was registered in 1972, without collector or date and does not appear to have had a prior registration number (Heather Janetzki, QM, pers. comm. 2014). Three specimens from Dunk Island registered in the AM in 1909 and 1910 as Uromys banfieldi (M.2063–64, M.2102) are presumably topotypes because they were presented to the AM by E. J. Banfield. A fourth specimen collected by Banfield (M.3110) was presented by Le Souef and registered in 1922.