Sphenopsis frontalis (von Tschudi) Oleaginous

Halley, Matthew R., 2022, Taxonomic status of the Western Hemispingus Sphenopsis ochracea (Thraupidae) and a review of species limits in the genus Sphenopsis P. L. Sclater, 1861, Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club 142 (2), pp. 209-223 : 222

Sphenopsis frontalis (von Tschudi) Oleaginous Hemispingus

( Fig. 5 )

Hylophilus frontalis von Tschudi, 1844 .

Lectotype: MHNN 92.8817, in Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle de Neuchâtel, Switzerland (fide Hellmayr 1936: 423): eastern slope of Andes , Junín, Peru (Desfayes 1994: 90).

Sphenops [sic] ignobilis Sclater 1861: 160 (see Coues 1879: 278 for publication date). 3

Sphenopsis ignobilis P. L. Sclater, 1862a: 379 (see Duncan 1937: 72 for publication date).

Holotype: NHMUK 1885.6.12.876: ‘in Brasilia’ = Mérida, Venezuela (see Paynter & Storer 1970: 265). 4

Chlorospingus oleagineus P. L. Sclater, 1862b: 110 , Taczanowski 1884: 516.

Holotype: NHMUK 1885.6.12.877: ‘In Nov. Granada int.’ = Bogotá, Colombia (see Warren & Harrison 1971: 402).

Chlorospingus ignobilis Sclater & Salvin 1871: 784 (see Dickinson 2005 for publication date), Sclater & Salvin 1879: 504.

Chlorospingus frontalis Taczanowski 1884: 517 , von Berlepsch & Hellmayr 1905: 8.

Chlorospingus frontalis ignobilis von Berlepsch & Hellmayr 1905: 9 .

Hemispingus frontalis von Berlepsch 1912: 1094 , Isler & Isler 1987: 77, Hilty 2011: 167.

Hemispingus frontalis oleagineus von Berlepsch 1912: 1094 .

Hemispingus frontalis ignobilis von Berlepsch 1912: 1094 , Chapman 1925: 13, Hellmayr 1936: 424, Hilty 2011: 167.

Hemispingus hanieli Hellmayr & von Seilern, 1914: 87 .

Holotype: ZSM 13925, in Zoologische Staatssammlung, Munich (fide Hellmayr 1936): Galipán, Cerro del Ávila , Distrito Federal, Venezuela (see Hellmayr & von Seilern 1914: 87, Paynter & Storer 1970: 266).

Hemispingus frontalis frontalis Chapman 1921: 122 , Chapman 1925: 13, Zimmer 1947: 17, Isler & Isler 1987: 77, Hellmayr 1936: 423.

Hemispingus frontalis iteratus Chapman, 1925: 13 , Hellmayr 1936: 425, Isler & Isler 1987: 77.

Holotype: AMNH 188022, in American Museum of Natural History , New York : Carapas, Mt. Turumiquire, Sucre, Venezuela (see LeCroy 2012: 68).

Hemispingus frontalis hanieli Chapman 1925: 13 , Hellmayr 1936: 425, Isler & Isler 1987: 77, Hilty 2011: 167.

Hemisphingus [sic] frontalis flavidorsalis Phelps & Phelps, Jr., 1953: 140.

Holotype: Colección Ornitológica Phelps, Caracas (COP 55625, ‘on deposit’ at AMNH according to Phelps & Phelps 1953): Cerro Jurustaca, upper río Negro , Sierra de Perijá, Zulia, Venezuela (see Paynter & Storer 1970: 265).

Hemispingus frontalis flavidorsalis Isler & Isler 1987: 77 , Hilty 2011: 167.

SPECIMENS EXAMINED: S. f. frontalis (six males, five females, one unsexed): Colombia: Caldas: Salento (female: ANSP 154474); Cauca: El Tambo (male: ANSP 141981); San Antonio (female: ANSP 141982); Huila: La Candela (male: ANSP 155593, 155594; unsexed: 155591); La Costa (female: ANSP 141983); Tolima: Toche (female: ANSP 154472). Ecuador: Napo: Baeza (male: ANSP 83779, 83780). Peru: Junín (female: ANSP 91539). S. f. hanieli (one male): Venezuela: ‘ Galeparo, Curro del Avito’ (ANSP 67191).

COMMENTS: In addition to rectifying the identity of ZMUC 104925 (see introduction), which was a source of confusion for García-Moreno et al. (2001), my study confirms that S. f. frontalis and S. f. hanieli are divergent and diagnosable, relative to other Sphenopsis species, and from each other. The adult plumage of S. f. hanieli differs from S. f. frontalis in colour, especially on the ventral surface, and has ‘a sharply defined superciliary stripe’ as emphasised in the original description (‘Ein scharf abgesetzter Superciliarstreif’, Hellmayr & von Seilern 1914: 87). Given the surprising degree of homoplasy in plumage colour uncovered by phylogenomic analysis (Price-Waldman 2019), re-evaluating the taxonomic status of S. f. hanieli , and other S. frontalis subspecies not included in this study, should be prioritised by future researchers. Here, following tradition, I have treated S. f. hanieli as a subspecies of S. f. frontalis , although additional data may support classifying it at species rank.

Figures

Figure 5 (left). Lateral view of Oleaginous Hemispingus Sphenopsis frontalis (Chapman, 1923). From left to right, (1) ANSP 141983, adult female S. f. frontalis prepared by Kjell von Sneidern on 20 March 1939 at ‘La Costa, Huila, Colombia’. (2) ANSP 185826, adult male S. f. frontalis, prepared by Tristan J. Davis on 22 July 1992 at ‘Panguri; ca. 12 km NE San Francisco del Vergel’, Zamora Chinchipe, Ecuador. (3) ANSP 83780, adult male S. f. frontalis, collected on 15 September 1922 at ‘Baeza, Ecuador’. (4) ANSP 67191, adult male S. f.hanieli, collected on 3 March 1914 at ‘Galeparo; Curro Del Avito, Venezuela’ (Matthew R. Halley) Figure 6 (right). Lateral view of Piura Hemispingus Sphenopsis piurae (Chapman, 1923). From left to right, (1) ANSP 116357, adult female prepared by M. A. Carriker, Jr., on 21 June 1933 at ‘Palambla, D. Piura’, Peru. (2) ANSP 116352, adult male, prepared by M. A. Carriker, Jr., on 22 June 1933 at ‘Palambla, D. Piura’, Peru. (3) ANSP 116358, adult male, prepared by M. A. Carriker, Jr., on 24 August 1933 at ‘Chira, D. Cajamarca’, Peru (Matthew R. Halley)