Phalangista rufescens Krefft, 1872h

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 : 404

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.3853/j.2201-4349.69.2017.1653

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:68F315FF-3FEB-410E-96EC-5F494510F440

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7555802

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DD87C8-FFC6-734A-18E0-FF7CFEBC93B8

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

Phalangista rufescens Krefft, 1872h
status

 

Phalangista rufescens Krefft, 1872h nomen dubium

The Sydney Mail and New South Wales Advertiser (new series) vol. XIII, nu. 626, p. 821, col. 1. (29 June 1872)

Common name. The “Rufous Phalanger ” of Krefft.

Current name. Trichosurus ? vulpecula ( Kerr, 1792) .

Syntypes (2). Two specimens were registered as “ Phalangista rufescens ”, c. 1878 but neither specimen has been located, nor mentioned in inventories of the past few decades. The original entries by Palmer, are: PA.510, Port Denison [= Bowen, Qld], “type mounted”; PA.511, Port Denison, mounted, to which a “Gallery” stamp imprint has been added. No details were given of collector, donor or accompanying documentation. Both entries were amended to “ T. vulpecula ”, in different handwriting, but when or by whom is not known.

Type locality. Port Denison [= Bowen], north Qld, Australia.

Comments. This taxon appears to have been overlooked, or ignored, and we have not found any mention of it in the taxonomic literature. We report the likely identity of Krefft’s original material for the first time. Krefft, who called this taxon the “Rufous Phalanger ”, cited external and cranial criteria to distinguish it from the three other species of Phalangista that he recognized: “ vulpina ” (= T. vulpecula ), “ canina ” (= T. caninus (W. Ogilby, 1836)) and “ fuliginosus ” (= T. vulpecula ). Krefft’s description of cranial criteria demonstrates that he had examined a cleaned skull of his proposed new species. If both of Krefft’s original specimens were used for public display, the original tags could have been removed at any time prior to the second half of the 1980s. Alternatively, it is possible that they were exchanged with other institutions.

GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF