Cacicus uropygialis pacificus Chapman, 1915
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1206/832.1 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4627302 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/2B4687A0-9E29-FFE1-FF15-7649FCB412F6 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Cacicus uropygialis pacificus Chapman |
status |
|
Cacicus uropygialis pacificus Chapman View in CoL
Cacicus uropygialis pacificus Chapman, 1915: 657 View in CoL (Alto Bonito, R. Sucio, Chocó, Colombia).
Now Cacicus uropygialis pacificus Chapman, 1915 View in CoL . See Hellmayr, 1937: 33–34; Blake, 1968: 145– 146; Dickinson, 2003: 769; and Fraga, 2011: 748–749.
HOLOTYPE: AMNH 134533 About AMNH , adult male, collected at Alto Bonito , 1500 ft, ca. 07.05N, 76.30W ( Paynter, 1997), Antioquia, Colombia, on 17 February 1915, by Leo Miller (no. 11227) and Howarth Boyle. GoogleMaps
COMMENTS: Chapman gave the AMNH number of the holotype in the original description and gave measurements for 13 males (including the type) and seven females from Colombia and Ecuador. The following specimens are considered paratypes of pacificus: Colombia, Rio Salaqui, AMNH 113363 About AMNH , male, 23 February 1912, by Kerr ; Alto Bonito , AMNH 134534 About AMNH , male [female], 18 February, AMNH 134535 About AMNH , 134537 About AMNH , males, 23 February, AMNH 134538 About AMNH , sex?, 17 February, AMNH 134539 About AMNH , female, 23 February, all collected in 1915 by Miller and Boyle View Materials ; Baudo, AMNH 123504 About AMNH , male, 29 June, AMNH 123505 About AMNH , male, 17 June, both collected in 1912 by Kerr, the latter specimen exchanged to O. Bangs in 1918, now in MCZ ; Barbacoas , AMNH 118349 About AMNH , male, 3 September, AMNH 118350 About AMNH , female?, 1 September (measurments on label), AMNH 118353 About AMNH , female, 5 August (no measurementson label), all collected in 1912 by W.B. Richardson ; Puerto Valdivia, AMNH 134531 About AMNH , 134532 About AMNH , males, 14 December 1914, by Miller and Boyle, the latter specimen exchanged with Bangs in September 1918 and now in MCZ ; La Vieja, AMNH 123506 About AMNH , female, 2 October 1912, by Kerr. Ecuador, Esmeraldas, AMNH 119038 About AMNH , male, 27 October, AMNH 119039 About AMNH , female, 24 October (exchanged to ANSP in 1928), AMNH 119040 About AMNH , female, 25 October (exchanged to MCZ in 1928), AMNH 119041 About AMNH , male, 24 October, AMNH 119042 About AMNH , male, 20 November , AMNH 119043 About AMNH , male, 27 November, all collected by Richardson in 1912 .
I was not able to verify that the following specimens should be considered paratypes: AMNH 134536, male, Alto Bonito, 19 February 1915 was exchanged with USNM, no date, and was perhaps not available to Chapman. AMNH 118351, female, Barbacoas, 22 August 1912, was exchanged to USNM, no date, and I did not find AMNH 118352, male, Barbacoas, 18 August 1912 in the collection. AMNH 155193, although collected by Richardson on 24 August 1912 at Barbacoas, was not cataloged until 1920, and then only to genus. It is not a paratype.
Chapman (1917: 58–68, 640) gave more information on the Miller and Boyle expedition and the locality Alto Bonito.
The subspecies pacificus is usually considered a subspecies of C. uropygialis , but Fraga (2011: 749) has separated the subspecies pacificus and microrhynchus as the separate species C. microrhynchus based on vocal differences. He also suggested that pacificus may merit treatment as a full species based on vocal differences, but that more research is required.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Cacicus uropygialis pacificus Chapman
LeCroy, Mary 2013 |
Cacicus uropygialis pacificus
Fraga, R. M. 2011: 748 |
Dickinson, E. C. 2003: 769 |
Hellmayr, C. E. 1937: 33 |
Cacicus uropygialis pacificus
Chapman, F. M. 1915: 657 |