Chlamydera maculata nova Mathews] [Chlamydera maculata carteri Mathews

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 : 89

[ Chlamydera maculata nova Mathews] [Chlamydera maculata carteri Mathews ]

Chlamydera maculata nova Mathews, 1920: 76 (North-west Cape, Mid-west Australia).

Chlamydera maculata carteri Mathews in Carter and Mathews, 1920: 499.

Now Chlamydera guttata carteri Mathews, 1920 .

Mathews (1920: 76) introduced C. m. nova and designated as the type a specimen collected on ‘‘ North-west Cape, Mid-west Australia’’ on 7 August 1916. AMNH 679152, female, collected at Hooroomooroo, North West Cape, by Tom Carter, bears an AMNH type label, but the date on this specimen is 6 August 1916, and it is therefore not the type even though it was collected by Carter on the same collecting trip. Hartert (1929a: 55–57) did not list a type in the Rothschild Collection for nova and no specimen was so cataloged when the Rothschild Collection came to New York.

An illustrated account of nova was published by Carter and Mathews (1920: 499) and in an initialed footnote, Mathews offered carteri as a replacement name for C. maculata nova if it and Alphachlamydera cerviniventris nova Mathews, 1915, were both included in Chlamydera . C. maculata nova and C. maculata carteri share the same type.

Frith and Frith (1997) traced the six specimens that Carter (in Carter and Mathews, 1921: 75–79) secured and found that there were two collected on 7 August, but one was marked ‘‘ nova type.’’ They designated this specimen, HLW 6591 in MV, as the lectotype of Chlamydera maculata nova (not of Chlamydera guttata carteri , although the two names automatically share the same type).

AMNH 679152 remains in the AMNH type collection because it bears a type label, but an added label explains its nontype status. Only 7 August 1916 was mentioned in the original description ; the second specimen in MV collected on that date would be the paralectotype .