er ay
ed
re Oe tet ORO R
NT ery
Cot ent Pesta ee aE ANDI MeN eoPR, Lat
Peery re rere) eel eer a
oe er ee eer eter. yy
Pe Sh rma
Die OS eae ea
IMAL Ok Smee Ne eats Apa Tectia Tha RP Aer SAR ae EN Oe aa gel ae SAS
_ Aghoeh etm ah. hatqune TAA ARED be RY RSS CASS RCs ASR AN
N Sec Mate Ratha pian athe 8giea nts Mae OMB ANM ARAM ones 8 ate
Aaead u Casa Sonera ye Sareea tin nas DYE ee Ceo LL oak eae
eect Neth Atta Sega ene a be helen GR mma EN AOS Nee Mees Ia ON ay ame NNN Sty Metin Weoraagen aes tm
panera tehnns Mama Mem vb sAnuls Ys stutinfin sane sn ni hi
Prana
Uy ANNE RONDA Re Re te See We tethereal ee ee
tem ey® Weer evs AF NEN omen Re Ah de MONae M MEA AME RIA,
ee ee tO mre
ne ne as
ce PR me
ee eee
Bren emer ie Wer Wi
ony
Ne et ee
ee
Paw 0 OP OO © OP. OR Hen»
ee eee
Pe wee
ee ee
ete en a
QAM Healt: WME Malet yea aatly mana kasannen tien,
Sof OR geen a THEN TE Elke Ot Nr enon ea
Heads arhen Se
tet PDE OMT
ee a re
ee
en eee eee te
.
en eee eee ee ea
Aa Rent en atn rte
Re enn ele rte ace
eva e Ry Aree Reine the Bese Rel ea aS Ke
Vee tetonte te tet
. Sienecaeneertctong ae AANA AN HINg HAAS Ho tter amine Ot
oath Meher ee bet nen net ha 97.48 tae a tee dal WAIN SNE Yee te Pts Motmaernae em RS ASAE
SN CERIO tek om Rate Be Ome
Miah fe Nut Bawtig Segre beara ener ere ererer srr rire Peer Trac ko Anke MaDe Matte Cw amy as te aA TENT
ee eh ere ene Co eam ihe Mon Ne MMA ON LN Ry eT ae a NFA Ta
Peete et Prrurn rm r Un a es Po ROTOR LLnL
to MLA Rous © pa ernetieaee® Seger gnegemanynedahasnsac snes 2a
: er GL Lads a
PENN ote
Nan wane te
rey See tn ee he
pre ator
ee ee
a ad
gots
cy
*.
eee ee
et Creer: oie ark
Roe ten Na hae ete
Veh ORs
NR REM Rg MAUD ar .
ee
ee ee re
ee
ey
me BTN
en Cee ee ee ee
Aa ee
" ONE NM
Yr kaen e
WML Oh ORale ane &
ene ANNI foe ie eae
ye hee A Ne Liatyatenct
ah Peereter trot ererirn an
' ake ermal et De he DER ee te get OFA De Ame ha Mates aa NANan ofa Saleen
AE No DA atecsns attic (DRAIN: _ va aneunana na btnahenatiorite™® ining tae rarer amanem ur Rses Raine (an rasta on
. 2 ON em,
Rg OR art tgs
cre
NM Ra Nt et ae een DEN
aha NAjRATS 4A NAMA NA rin earhatag Ria a The dy, Hassan hen NALS TAS
NUN Geter gee Rite wee ee tae Ape a mata ag NY TM
Dod Ree N inate tack NUR Nae Maal nee a Oren RL
ag Worthe tat tte De Sor hs a FO abe NARS /TA TARE
serra tap hee amet ATARN.AN wits Nh xs HaThenneriaing 1A wnt bene Aaraanene”
Meriter ooh a ee Sg SAAN NAN A eee toe mee
ne ter ua tation ANIME Sat Lethe Rte NOR Ne IRS NT Sammy 9 eget Pine "ta Mowe pt a
AA Be 8a RAE AR aD Vr Vath Daly My Vv d Ra waite aw med whe AA APLO TAMA mDA LORAIN RNAS Tet hae gm
hd tat a SA RIN NS Rete NN A Gat Bike Be tata merte Nes war Doel ag REN AIAN AS MRO he iaan tev
af Tas ne pei mine niin Revi at PAIN ONS
ARPA RaW Rameng | Le WANE MC Em aa TH m
OT ee eal ae
one
Meet ket
Prete tere Ome
Pei Neath! Noon ENO
Nr ee ee
\etiet oe fess son
ee et et
Ph Uae ans NARS
Na mee
CU i ha Leo
heey
See
AND Om
ee ee ee
Ban eee tO
hte Hany
Pee hh atime ee an
a r
a
Ne MENS Malte he rk ee Nay ett
en Dae Ne Ree Prine nee na Nt
ee ae Se ate
AV ene Ae
een ern
Pen ihe tener
Sane haem Maan aNa esa
Meek phensPeherasmetetes tet tos elena Ns
a Ph i ie err
Sor pate ee eet Rate ae see’
Samy ena tee Nowa ha re tenner ®
Nene y ACen RWSL Hear na ten MAL Daten eaten beer nat
is ba
hee ee
Rete etey
Aan atte Nate Pin RP a. Peo, eemenieip iain fe
ten ote
cathe le ae Demian whe ten
A NM Reta tert Nar BEM
ee eee
Na Bea om tin Ma rane
Ree tee Nett
ern
erent ron.
thon Line ea te
ar 9m i NTN ASTI Ot Pete OM
AFR RNR Nem Ratan sna TE Im
ee kms
Pee ee Oe
Cay Seer ot ete er
CA Nar eaten a be
Me ke Me a Neda tetany
Sh ate ereay ete
Peete ee ae a
ae
aon! ve et
rae LRG RA ETL GM a9 Vee ANS
(he ee be ea et
ye apne nite
re
nee hepa witha Yat
set een tet anim
stan ae
nara rhe
ee hae wate ta tee
ney Dee
te eee
hes
=Ae gabe
pt aE tet
erence thar
wawanee
nate
ee he i
SO re i pe
ete
sete te 8
ee
> ah
ee eh i oe
=> vy
painted pee Stee s spe Or
“4 me ip ast t oar a sepaney
= R> |
SS \\; es a ee — 3
ITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILONLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31UYVYUSIT LI
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
NVYINOSHLIWS
SW
YN
\
SMITHSONIAN
.
.
LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILN
>
“fy
SJIYVYGIT_LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
ee
\S
NVINOSHLINS SA3IYVYSIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN
= uu =, wo es
— = aa) te ad
=e fed ye to
4 < ie at
= = = 3
= é = —
7) res ” m
= 7) = ”
” 7)
= =
4 “4
i pa
7) 7)
oO e)
z z2
> >
ra Z
~
SMITHSONIAN
THSONIAN _INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVHSIT
NOILNLILSNI
LIBRARIES
igo x
SNOSHLINS S3IYVUSIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION
INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI
S31YVNAII LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN
INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI
INSTITUTION
S3iuvygi
INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3Ztuyvudit_ LIBRAR
° ?
Ve lbs,
MY z :
. SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNL
CORN = W Yjiby
AM) x Up” fi 7
.
%
¢
SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLIWS
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
BOSHLINS S31YVYSIT LIBRARIES
tity
yn ae
1
1ES SMITHSONIAN
ARIES
'SON 7a
JLILSNI
TP
ry
ARIES
ILILSNI
uv
le)
m_ Pa
a
N
‘*
.
& “WN
se.
ZL.
za
THSONIA
h WY f,
%
7
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
SMI
, w” — Ww _
= z=
wW uJ Wg
a 7) YW Ww
feed Cc Me A:
m = mM. —
-_ ; 2 | cms oO
a | = oad =
IAN INSTITUTION NOILOLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uvualy
s3iuvudii
INSTITUTION
INSTITUTION
HLINS S31NVYSII SMITHSONIAN _ INSTITUTION
NVINOSHLINS SJ3IYVUdIT LIBRARIES
NVINOSHLINS S31Y¥Vudlt
no rs
N= < <
4 = >
S = :
> P = >
; me Ww) : ” a,
ONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSHLINS | S3 iyvusgII_
ie = WT 2 . ai i =
“S o ei XY -
Ty — Lr ASS tf
= < a7 ~ < =
= od a SS 0 of i
ES am
ms fea) HEL N m =
ae a = =
SHLINS SaIuvVuaIT LIBRARIES NOILNLI
y = is = wi z
i, = re) >a 2)
= on = es a
aS a a _ a a
2 a = .F E
ms a _ =
o = o 2
= w S Ww ==
a) eee | a ~S 2, “~
onl a ne | 4
LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILALIL
e ve ain’ S
ow fe sd haat
7 > Ng >
> = pan &
2 = 2 :
O z a z
INSTITUTION. NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSHLINS S3IMVYEIT_LIBRAR|
SA1UVUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION | NOILNLI
LIBRAR.
NOILNLI
INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3I Yvudil ats
= * w & w” e x = .
< = = & = YI z \
5 Ys 7 Gy 2 i Uys N
“” wm, SY - Wi vi, D 2 po! ee
<< SW: 2) ‘ Mh, a= oO Ya 7* he YQ
= » SS = % ye = z — NY
= ~S >” = > = S
ae z ov = ? NOILNL
3 i¥vud ski BRARI ES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION i
w Kae = res 5) wl Vy 2 é SON uw sai
z KAM) = KAM & Vile, = [5 vA oe |
* et 9 2 =I 5 ve
/ / OT
80°W 70°W
Fig. 2. Variation in amount of white colour on the undertail coverts of Andean Coots
(circles) and Colombian Coots (squares). Five feathers with corresponding symbols are
depicted, and geographic range of recognized taxa indicated.
21 [Bull Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(1)]
value 9.42, 3 individuals having white only distally on some inner webs.
Andean Coots usually have small white spots, but there is considerable
individual variation all the way from Narifo to the Titicaca area, while
white spots are almost absent further south. The average score for Andean
Coots was 2.33 in Narifio, 2.37 in Ecuador, 2.93 in Central Peru, 1.80 in the
Peruvian/Bolivian altiplano and 0.35 in northern Chile and Argentina. Six
birds which overlapped with the range of variation among Colombian Coots
were from Narifio (1), central Ecuador (1), central Peru (3) and Titicaca (1).
The variability may thus occur throughout the zone with polymorphic
variation in soft part colours, although the amount of white colour on the
secondaries was not associated with any particular soft part colour.
Fig. 2 shows the variation in amount of white colour on the undertail
coverts. These are completely white and form 2 broad white bands under the
tail in most coots and gallinules, including Nearctic and Colombian Coots.
This possibly primitive character is found in juvenile Andean Coots and in
adults from the southern parts of the range. However, adult Andean Coots
from coastal Peru northwards from Lima and from the paramos of Ecuador,
and especially Narifio, have black inner webs on the undertail coverts and
the outer webs more or less streaked or freckled black, in a few individuals
virtually lacking any white colour. As seen from Fig. 2, very few birds from
the highlands of central Peru and further south have dusky freckles on the
undertail coverts, and no bird even approached the condition seen in the
north of the range.
Conclusion
The variation in colours of bill and frontal shield and in wing-pattern give
no basis for taxonomic subdivision, but suggest a genetic instability through-
out much of the range of the Andean Coot. This could be a result of
hybridization of 2 main morph types of Andean Coots (previously known as
Fulica ardesiaca and F. americana peruviana), which possibly once were
allopatric (Fjeldsa 1982). Although a considerable variability is found in
the north of the range, no specimens appeared to be hybrids between any of
these and Colombian Coots, and there was no clinal change towards the
Colombian Coot. On the contrary, the northernmost Andean Coots decidedly
diverged from Colombian Coots in one character, the pattern of the undertail
coverts. As this pattern is exposed in certain displays (Fjeldsa 1983), one
could suspect that the geographic trend was due to selection against
hybridization in a period of sympatry.
Although direct evidence as to how Colombian and Andean Coots would
interact in sympatry is lacking, one can conclude that the geographic
variation gives no direct evidence of past interbreeding, but instead suggests
a possible divergence in a plumage display signal. This evidence supports the
conclusion (Fjeldsa 1982) that the Andean Coot should be maintained as a
separate species, Fusica ardesiaca.
The variation in tail-pattern was overlooked by previous students of
Andean Coots. As my data show no overlap in this character between birds
from the Andean puna zone and birds from the paramos of Narifio and
Ecuador and from coastal Peru, a recognition of subspecies appears to be
justified on the basis of this character. Since the species as such was described
first from the puna zone (Junin, 11°S, 76°W, 1843), the puna zone populations
should be ranked as nominate subspecies. As also Morrison’s (1939) name
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(1)] 22
peruviana refers to birds from Junin, a new name must be proposed for the
aberrant populations found further north:
Fulica ardesiaca atrura subsp. nov.
Diagnosis. Differs from the nominate subspecies as the undertail covert
feathers are not purely white, but have black inner webs and more or less
extensive black streaking and freckling also on the outer webs; in some
individuals, in fact, the undertail coverts are nearly completely black.
Distribution. In paramos and some lowland swamps from Narifio in southern
Colombia through Ecuador and coastal Peru south to Lima. As Andean
Coots from paramos in northern Peru were not represented in the present
data, their racial attachment remains unknown.
Type specimen. Zool.Mus.Univ.Copenhagen 37.891, Ecuador, 7 October 1909.
Material examined. 77 ad. Andean Coots, including 25 of this taxon.
Acknowledgements: My travels were supported by grants Nos. 511-8136 and 11-2250 of
the Danish Natural Science Research Council and by Queen Margrethe’s and Prince
Henrik’s Foundation, Frank M. Chapman Foundation, G.E.C. Gads Foundation and
Knud Hojgaards Foundation.
References:
Crawford, R. D. 1978. Tarsal color of American coots in relation to age. Wilson Bull. 90:
536-543.
Fjeldsa, J. 1982. Biology and systematic relations of the Andean coot “‘Fulica americana
ardesiaca”’ (Aves, Rallidae). Szeenstrupia 8: 1-21.
Fjeldsa, J. 1983. Systematic and biological notes on the Colombian Coot Fulica americana
columbiana (Aves, Rallidae). Steenstrupia, in press.
Gill, F. B. 1964. The shield colour and relationships of certain Andean Coots. Condor 66:
Hurtubia, J. 1973. Trophic diversity measurement in sympatric predatory species. Ecology
54: 885-890.
Morrison, A. 1939. A new coot from Peru. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 59: 56-57.
Ripley, S. D. 1977. Rails of the World. David R. Godine: Boston.
Address: Dr. Jon Fjeldsa, Zoologisk Museum, Universitetsparken 15, DK 2100 Kobenhayn,
Denmark.
©British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
A new species of Thicket Warbler Cich/ornis (Sylviinae)
from Bougainville Island, North Solomons Province,
Papua New Guinea
by Don Hadden
Received 13 July 1982
The little known and elusive genus of thicket-warblers, Czch/ornis, was first
described by Mayr (1933) from a specimen taken in 1926 by R. H. Beck, who
collected one bird from mountain forest (2500 ft) on Espiritu Santo in
Vanuatu. Mayr named this unique specimen C. whitney?. Another male and
3 females were also taken from Espiritu Santo between 1933 and 1935 by
A. J. Marshall and T. Harrisson (Cain & Galbraith 1955). A new subspecies,
C. w. turipavae, was also described by Cain & Galbraith in the same paper
from a single specimen taken by native hunters from Turipava (4100 ft) on
Guadalcanal. Two other. Cich/ornis specimens were collected in December
23 (Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)|
1958 at 5200 ft in the Whiteman Mountains, central New Britain by E. T.
Gilliard (1960). These proved to be of a distinct species and were named
Cichlornis grosvenori.
My discovery of the Bougainville population of Cichlornis came about
because I was trying to track down a rumour of nesting shearwaters. During
my years (1976-1980) on Bougainville I had constantly asked local villagers
if they knew the whereabouts of the nesting sites of birds that had webbed
feet and lived in holes in the ground in high mountains. Eventually, I was
informed by Tony Anung from a village behind Arawa, that he had found
the nest of a bird in a hole in a bank near the top of the Crown Prince Range.
Accordingly I arranged to spend a long weekend camping at that site to
check on this nest and to search for additional shearwater sites. After about
7 hours walking we had progressed from sea level to 5000 ft and were at the
nest site. The nest was not that of a shearwater, but obviously of a passerine
of some sort. We camped over a ridge close to the nest site and while my
guides spent the following day in the forest searching for shearwater nests,
I erected mist nets on the ridge above camp. It was in one of these nets that a
Cichlornis sp. was taken. By the time we had struck camp and returned to
Arawa the Cich/ornis had started to decompose slightly, but the skin was
saved and is now lodged in the American Museum of Natural History
(AMNB). It proved to be a new species.
Cichlornis llaneae sp. nov.
Holotype: AMNH No. 824713, sex ?, apparently adult, from Crown Prince
Range sooo ft (1550 m), central Bougainville Island, North Solomons
Province, Papua New Guinea, approximately 6°19’S, 155°30’E; collected by
Don Hadden, 17 June 1979.
Distribution: Known only from the type locality.
Description of holotype: Head, wings, back and rump sooty olive; feathers
of rump not especially elongated or fluffy. Supra-orbital line rich cinnamon-
rufous and a distinct black area before, behind and beneath the eye forming a
small mask. The lesser wing coverts black, tipped with brownish olive,
giving a scalloped appearance. Throat and upper breast cinnamon-rufous.
Lower breast and abdomen cinnamon-rufous, shading into dull brown.
Flanks and lower abdomen dull brown. The rectrices were in sheath, but
black and acuminate, not spine-tipped. The shafts were not stiffened. Legs
and bill dark.
I have much pleasure in naming this new thicket warbler for my wife
Llane Hadden.
Measurements of type: Wing 73.5 mm, tail in sheath, bill from base 21.0 mm,
tarsus 26.0 mm.
Additional remarks: Comparison of C. /aneae with types of C. grosvenori, C. w.
whitneyi and C. w. turipavae give the following distinct differences :-
Throat and upper breast of C. //aneae cinnamon-rufous, whereas the other
3 populations are tawny buff, C. w. whitneyi being the lightest of the three.
Lower breast and abdomen of C. //aneae cinnamon shading into dull brown,
whereas the other 2 species are lighter tawny buff, except that in C. grosvenori
there is a lighter central area with some feathers mottled buff and brown. The
head and back of the other 2 species are brownish olive, whereas they are
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)] 24
TABLE 1
Measurements of known specimens of Cichlornis
Bill from
Sex Wing Tail base Tarsus
C. w. whitneyi (Type) (1) 3 72.0 70.0 + 21.0 28.0
(1) 3 68.5 65.0 20.0 pay ee
(2) 2 63.0 57.0 20.0 25.5
(2) g 60.0 56.5 + 19.5 26.0
(2) 2 64.5 68.0 18.5 25.0
C. w. turipavae (Type) (2) 3 65.5 76.5 — 27.5
C. grosvenori (Type) (3) 2 72.0 59.0 20.0 31.0
(3) 3 71.0 65.0 19.5 31.0
C. Haneae (Type) ? Bits a 21.0 26.0
(1) Measurements from Mayr, 1933, p. 4
(2) Measurements from Cain & Galbraith, 1955, p. 91
(3) Measurements from Gilliard, 1960, p. 3
sooty olive in C. “aneae. The supraorbital line is rich cinnamon-rufous in
C. Haneae, but the other two species have tawny buff lines. The black mask of
C. /aneae is midway in size between the small mask of C. whitneyi and the large
mask of C. grosvenori. The lesser wing coverts on C. //aneae are markedly
scalloped, whereas there is only slight scalloping on C. w. whitneyi and none
at all on C. w. turipavae or C. grosvenori. The most striking difference is that
the rectrices of C. Maneae are not disintegrated at the tips nor the shafts
stiffened as in the other 2 species. In addition the tail of C. //aneae is black,
not brown as in the other 2 species. The fact that the tail feathers of the type
of C. /aneae are in sheath precludes further comparison, but there is no
indication that this specimen is immature. It seems more likely that the
simultaneous regrowth of the rectrices is due to the bird having suffered an
accident.
The wing of C. /aneae is much more rounded than the wings of C. whitneyi
and C. grosvenort. The outermost primary (No. 1) is not much shorter than
No. 2. Primaries 2, 3, and 4 are equal to or slightly longer than No. 5.
In C. whitneyi and C. grosvenori, primary No. 1 is much shorter than No. 2,
and No. 2 is significantly shorter than No. 3, while Nos. 3 and 4 are usually
slightly longer than No. 5. The tarsus is shorter and the legs and feet appear
weaker in C. Haneae.
In some respects the new bird is intermediate between C7ch/ornis and
Ortygocichla (including Trichocich/a). A case might be made for describing the
Bougainville form as a new genus but very little information is available on
these genera, and C. /aneae is definitely closest to C7ch/ornis. R. Orenstein
suggests (77 /itt.) that these 2 genera should be included in a larger genus,
Megalurulus, to include M. mariae of New Caledonia, Trichocichla rufa of Fiji
and Buettikoferella bivittata of Timor. However with so little information
available, it seems preferable at present not to speculate further on generic
limits. Obviously a complete revision is much needed.
Description of nest and egg: 'The passerine nest mentioned above had been
placed in a niche in a vertical wall of a creek. About 1 m downstream from
the nest the creek disappeared underground and so the nest site was
surrounded by walls on three sides. It was about 2 m above the bed of the
creek, and the width between the creek walls was 2-3 m. Very little water
was trickling down, the weather having been fairly dry the previous week.
The nest was made of dark vegetation with a lining of lighter, finer fibres
contrasting with the dark outer parts of the nest. A lip of dark vegetation
25 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)]
hung down the wall from the nest, which contained 1 egg 25 x 18 mm and
was obviously deserted. The oval egg was a light cream colour and was
entirely covered with small brown spots, more heavily at the thicker end
where they formed a brownish cap. The egg and nest are in the AMNH.
This nest and egg, found in June 1979, turned out to be those of Czch/ornis
Maneae, but this was not known until one year later when I again camped in
the area in June and an identical nest was found in the very same niche as
the one I had first seen. For further information on this nest and 2 other
specimens of C. //aneae and photographs of the type and the nest, see Hadden
(1981).
Acknowledgements: My wife Llane Hadden has spent many days alone while I have
pursued my interests in photography and ornithology. It is as a token of gratitude for her
support and interest that I have named this new species for her. I am also grateful to
Elliot Harding, Francis Munau and Tony Anung and other village men without whose
help I would not have found the thicket-warbler area. Considerable help has also been
given by Jared Diamond and R. Orenstein, and in particular I am much indebted to Mary
LeCroy and Ian Galbraith who gave invaluable assistance with comparison of specimens
from the AMNH and BMNH respectively, as well as their time and expertise, especially
that of Mary LeCroy in helping to draft this note.
References:
Mayr, E. 1933. Birds collected during the Whitney South Sea Expedition. XXII. Three
new genera from Polynesia and Melanesia. Amer. Mus. Novit. 590: 1-6.
Cain, A. J. & Galbraith, I. C. J. 1955. Five new subspecies from the mountains of
Guadalcanal (British Solomon Islands). Bu//. Brit. Orn. Cl. 75 : 90-93.
Gilliard, E. T. 1960. Results of the 1958-1959 Gilliard New Britain Expedition, 2. A new
species of thicket warbler (Aves, Cichlornis) from New Britain. Amer. Mus. Novit.
2008: 1-6.
Hadden, Don. 1981. Birds of the North Solomons. Wau Ecology Institute Handbook No. 8.
Wau, Papua New Guinea. 107 pp.
Address: Don Hadden, 288 Yaldhurst Road, Christchurch, New Zealand.
©British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
The relationship of male Lesser Honeyguides
Indicator minor with duetting barbet pairs
by Lester L. Short and Jennifer F. M. Horne
Received 28 June 1982
Our field studies of barbets (Capitonidae) in East Africa have been disrupted
regularly by honeyguides (Indicatoridae) interacting with the barbets, and
with each other. We particularly elicit approaches by honeyguides when we
use our tape-recorder to play back barbet duets, the approaches being to us
or to the barbets, which are also stimulated by our playback activities. We
reported (Short & Horne 1979) on these responses by Indicator variegatus,
I. minor and probably I. narokensis to various barbet species and to playback
of the barbets’ voices. In that report we posed several questions relating to
the honeyguide-barbet interactions. Further data now available allow us to
narrow the quest for reasons underlying these honeyguide-barbet interactions.
If we assume that, generally, the honeyguides coming to barbet vocal
activities are females seeking a nest in which to lay an egg, since honeyguides
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(F)] 26
are nest parasites especially of barbets (Friedmann 1955, 1968), the close
approach of honeyguide females to singing, duetting barbets nevertheless
would appear non-functional, the parasite being “interested” presumably in
the hosts’ nest, not in the other activities of the barbets. We suggested (1979:
17) that honeyguide females, and perhaps males, might use those activities
of barbets associated with breeding as “cues” that could trigger breeding
readiness in honeyguides and even bring together prospective honeyguide
mates. However, we remarked that such functions seemed both energetically
wasteful and disadvantageous in that they arouse the barbets and facilitate
their recognition of the honeyguides as harmful, particularly since barbet
pairs often have helpers. The non-breeding helpers presumably could gain
experience that would eventually increase the likelihood of successful
breeding if they were to learn to attack and drive honeyguides from their
vicinity.
OBSERVATIONS
In our garden outside Nairobi we can at any time of year elicit White-
headed Barbet Lybius /eucocephalus tesponses to playback of its voice, the
responses varying from chattering, aggressive overflights and close
approach to the recordist, to excited calling and “greeting ceremonies”
(see Short & Horne 1982). Between July and January we hear at intervals
ageressive trills of Lesser Honeyguides Indicator minor in the garden. At
those times, repeated playback of the barbets’ greeting ceremonies inevitably
results in the appearance and approach of a Lesser Honeyguide which, when
perceived by the barbets, is chased by one or more of them. The honeyguide
often returns, and indeed may retaliate by attacking one or another of the
barbets.
Occasionally, two Lesser Honeyguides would simultaneously approach the
playback recordist (this species is variable in plumage, but most individuals
can be identified as I. minor by size and by the presence of a distinct moustachial
stripe). In some 20 of such cases observed sporadically between 1979 and
1981, the honeyguides would attack one another, the pursuit taking
precedence over honeyguide-barbet interactions (leaving the barbets perched,
often “panting” from the exertion of chasing the speedier, more manoeuver-
able honeyguide). We assume that the Lesser Honeyguide parasitizes
L. leucocephalus, for we have reported (Short & Horne 1979) this honeyguide
entering and being evicted from a nest of /eucocephalus.
Our studies of the Black-collared Barbet Ly}ius torquatus (Short & Horne
1979, 1982) in coastal Kenya have provided over 2000 additional observations
of honeyguide-barbet interactions. (Less frequent interactions of honeyguides
with the barbets Lybius melanopterus, L. guifsobalito and L. rubrifacies recorded
in our unpublished notes are not reported here.) Lybius torquatus is a frequent
host of Indicator minor (Friedmann 1955, Ranger 1955). We have supplemented
our observations by collection of 6 Lesser Honeyguides taken (after some
minutes of observation) from beside duetting, displaying pairs of Black-
collared Barbets south of the Nature Reserve in Arabuko-Sokoke Forest
(Britton & Zimmerman 1979). Five of the 6 honeyguides collected proved
to be males, much to our surprise, and 26 seemingly separate, aggressive,
sustained honeyguide-honeyguide interactions suggest that many if not
most of these also involve males.
27 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(1)|
On the afternoon of 7 July 1979 we collected a Lesser Honeyguide that
had been following a (playback-stimulated) frequently duetting pair of
L. torquatus for some 15 minutes, moving from one duetting post to another,
perching close to the barbets, interrupting them, being chased, and then
returning to them. It was a male with enlarged (4 x 3 mm) testes. The next
day we worked with another barbet pair, and at 08:00 spied a honeyguide
following the pair, but at a greater distance than the previous day’s bird.
This individual followed the barbets on 4 consecutive flights to singing sites
(trees scattered about their territory) and watched them sing 3 duets. In most
cases we found that a honeyguide attracted to a pair of duetting barbets
approaches them closely, landing beside or even between them, thus dis-
rupting any duet attempt, though the barbets may sing an interrupted duet
or perform a greeting ceremony. In this instance, however, the honeyguide
perched 3~5 m from the barbets and did not attempt to join them or fly
directly to the sites they occupied. We collected the honeyguide from a perch
3 m from the barbets; it was a female in slight moult but with a somewhat
enlarged ovary.
In November 1981 we worked in the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest with a pair
of Black-collared Barbets that were duetting regularly and excavating a
cavity, whether for roosting or nesting is uncertain. Ato6:30 0n 19 November
we observed one of the barbet pair chasing a honeyguide through the trees.
The barbet then returned to its former perch and duetted with its mate. A
honeyguide (uncertainly the same one) again appeared, flying to the barbet
pair; all 3 flew off in a chase. We then saw what we thought was a barbet in
flight fighting with the honeyguide, but both birds proved to be honeyguides
and judged by voice were Lesser Honeyguides. They circled back and forth
in pursuit of each other, tails fanned to exhibit the tail pattern, and called
(trill calls); several times they grappled in the air, before they went off in a
long pursuit flight. We stayed with the barbet pair and at 07:00 heard a
honeyguide’s trill call to which we played back a Lesser Honeyguide call
(one recorded by C. Chappuis in Malawi), and this brought a honeyguide to
us, calling. It was chased about by one barbet as we recorded the honey-
guide’s “ta-wee-wit”’ call —- a major vocalization of I. minor, song-like, but
not the note given at a call site reported by Ranger (1955) — and its trill, and
then we collected it from beside the 2 barbets. It was a male I. minor with
testes 4 x 3 mm and 3 x 3 mm (left and right respectively). We heard 2 calls
and had one sighting of a second honeyguide about the barbets during the
next 40 minutes. Late that day we “lost” the barbet pair (they proved later
to have gone north, presumably toward a roosting hole, between 16:00 and
17:00 hours), but as we repeatedly played back their duet a Lesser Honey-
guide circled back and forth overhead, “searching” for the barbets. The
honeyguide stayed with us for 10 minutes flying about us from perch to
perch, then flew off. A short while later we played back the barbets’ duet
and had 2 honeyguides circle overhead then go off in chase.
Nearby, at 17:20 hours on the same day our barbet playback brought to
us a single Lybius torquatus and 2 honeyguides, apparently Indicator minor. The
honeyguides seemed to try to approach the barbet, but the barbet attacked
one honeyguide as the other honeyguide also attacked it, and all 3 birds
circled in a furious “dogfight”. We were unsuccessful in attracting a second
barbet, but the one barbet was engaged with the 2 honeyguides, and they
[ Bu//. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(1)| 28
with each other, for 50 minutes. The barbet chasing one honeyguide seemed
to trigger an attack by the second honeyguide on the first, and this appeared
to “confuse” the barbet, which shifted its attack to the other honeyguide.
The barbet tired more readily and when it perched, the 2 honeyguides flew
about in sweeping circles or directly off in a line, then back, still in pursuit of
each other, to the barbet.
We continued working with several barbets, seeing honeyguides daily as
they came to our playback of the barbets or to the calling of the barbets
themselves. Not only the barbet duets but even greeting ceremonies and the
sounds accompanying their courtship feeding attracted honeyguides,
causing them to approach. At 08:05 on 21 November 1981, we watched 2
honeyguides attracted by the playback of a Lybius torquatus greeting ceremony
as they engaged in a chase near the excavating pair of barbets. The 2 honey-
guides perched in a tree north of the excavation, gave low grating calls with
tails fanned, bowing to each other and raising and lowering the (spread) tail.
One of the honeyguides was notably smaller than the other and held its bill
open, but gave the same displays, its call being a buzzy trill. The 2 flew in
pursuit of each other, circled and came together grappling, floating downward
toward the ground clutching each other, with tails spread, then breaking
apart. The larger bird flew away, and the other followed. At 08:18 we played
a duet of L. sorquatus, instantly bringing a moustached I. minor to us, then a
second honeyguide; they attacked one another, then engaged in a fast chase,
bursting through undergrowth and canopy, with tails spread, pecking and
hitting each other in flight. They disappeared in a chase to the southwest.
Again we brought the same 2 honeyguides back, this time with playback of
the barbets’ greeting ceremony, and the honeyguides fought and chased
round and round until, at 08:25, a barbet joined the fray, attacking one
honeyguide; but before the chase had gone 20 m the same honeyguide was
chasing the barbet, being much faster in flight. After a while they perched
side by side, the barbet “‘panting’’, and then gave chase again. The second
honeyguide, apparently watching, overflew and disappeared as the barbet
and first honeyguide chased to and fro.
At 07:43 on 22 November 1981 we employed honeyguide calls to bring
the barbet pair to their excavation. After the barbets duetted near the
excavation a honeyguide joined them. The barbets called and flew at the
honeyguide, which zoomed upward in the air (the barbets dropped back
down to a tree) and then without calling and with tail spread widely in a
somewhat stilted flight, flew twice in a circle about zoo m in diameter
centred over the area of the barbets’ excavation. A honeyguide was near this
pair until o9:00 on that day, although we were unsuccessful in attracting
honeyguides to this same pair of barbets later in the morning. In fact our
rate of success in drawing honeyguides to barbet playback was greatest
before 10:00 and after 16:00; the barbets responded at any time, but their
response was more sustained, with more frequent duets and less rapid
habituation, to playback early and late in the day. Next day (23 November)
we worked close to the excavating pair of birbets. Two honeyguide trills
were heard between 07:00 and 07:26, but we did not playback, preferring to
watch the behaviour of the barbets. At 08:10 the barbet pair flew to a tall
dead tree and duetted, a honeyguide instantly appearing and getting between
the duetters. The “lead” barbet, namely the one which initiated movement
29 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(1)]
to duetting sites and was presumably the male, viciously attacked the
honeyguide. The barbet pair then flew and the honeyguide joined them and
followed the lead barbet to another tree, where the 2 barbets performed their
greeting ceremony. Again accompanied by the honeyguide, the barbets then
returned to the dead tree and attempted a duet. At this point we fired at and
missed the honeyguide; but one playback of the barbets’ duet instantly
brought the honeyguide, trilling, and then the barbet pair, back to the dead
tree. We collected the honeyguide from within 1 m of this barbet pair at
08:30. It proved to bea male I. minor with testes 3 x 3 mm.
At 08:37, at the same site we played back the L. torquatus duet, and were
rewarded by approach first to us, then to the excavating barbets, of another
honeyguide. This honeyguide was chased by one barbet, but evaded it and
flew back to the tree bearing the incompleted excavation. It landed near the
excavation, then flew up to a perch and trilled. The barbets first gave chase,
then the honeyguide chased one barbet off to the northwest. After a few
minutes we played back a barbet duet and a barbet and honeyguide appeared
together in a chase (apparently of the honeyguide by the barbet) before
perching in the same dead tree from which we had just taken the male
honeyguide as described above. A second barbet joined the first barbet and
honeyguide and the 2 barbets attempted to duet, the honeyguide being
perched only 1 m away when we collected the latter (at 08:57). This bird too
was a male (testes 3.5 x 3.5 mmand 3 x 1.5 mm, left and right respectively).
Just after 09:10, having glimpsed yet another honeyguide nearby, we
played the barbets’ duet at a point between the tree bearing the excavation
and the dead tree referred to above. The pair of barbets appeared im-
mediately, with a honeyguide close behind them. A chase occurred, the lead
barbet chasing the honeyguide, the latter reversing the pursuit, and over and
over again. Another playback brought back the lead barbet, followed by the
honeyguide, and then the second barbet; they all perched just west of the
excavation site. L.L.S. went to the dead tree from which the 2 previous
honeyguides had been collected, and played back the barbets’ duet, bringing
in all 3 birds. The barbets managed to duet as the honeyguide flitted about
them in a tight circle; but, when the duet ceased the honeyguide moved
away from the barbets and was collected (at 09:25). This honeyguide, taken
from the same tree as the previous 2, and from beside the same pair of
barbets as the previous 2, as well as the male of 19 November, also was a
male, with testes 3 x 2 mm and 4 x 3 mm (left and right respectively, a
reversal from the usual left testis being longer). Thus, within one hour, 3
different male Lesser Honeyguides were collected as they interacted strongly
with the same pair of barbets in the same tree.
This barbet pair continued that morning to react, by duetting, to playback
of their duet. One other dark-coloured honeyguide, of uncertain species,
was seen to the west of this pair before we left the site and the area later that
morning.
The testes of the Lesser Honeyguides that we collected seem sufficiently
enlarged to consider the birds as in breeding or pre-breeding condition
(also fide R. Payne). However, we saw no copulations of honeyguides, nor
did the Lesser Honeyguide males employ singing or sites from which to
call (Ranger 1955) in order to attract females. The vocalizations of the
honeyguides during their interactions with each other and with the barbets
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cil.1983 103;(2)] 30
were usually trilling calls and squeak calls, which are those associated with
aggression (Short & Horne 1979). It may be that the behaviour of the
Kenyan honeyguides differs from that in more seasonally oriented popu-
lations in southern Africa (note, for example, the large testes of both July
and November Lesser Honeyguides). We ourselves have noted that gonads
are somewhat enlarged in most barbets and honeyguides that we have
collected (even in subadults of such barbets as Trachyphonus darnaudii) in
Kenya, suggesting that irregularity of the rains or other perhaps associated
factors demand a state of readiness to breed (or to defend resources necessary
for breeding) all the year round.
The above observations are summarized from our field and tape-recorded
notes. We have noted many other honeyguide responses to calls and duets
of various barbets (including, e.g. I. minor responses to L. melanopterus and
L. guifsobalito), and also frequent honeyguide—interactions. The latter include
some interspecific interactions (e.g. of I. minor to I. narokensis, of I. indicator to
I. variegatus, of I. variegatus to I. narokensis, and of I. indicator to I. minor) as
well as over a hundred instances of apparent I. minor intraspecific chases in
the vicinity of barbet pairs. The behaviour of I. indicator (which is common
in the areas worked) in regard to the barbets and our playback differed
markedly from that of I. minor. Only rarely did a Greater Honeyguide appear
when we played barbet duets, and it would either leave after a look at us,
chase a Lesser Honeyguide if one was present, or (twice) commence guiding
calls directed at us. Unfortunately not all of the honeyguides that we studied
could be observed closely; some I. minor have very weak malar stripes that
are not readily apparent (e.g. there is only a trace of the malar stripes in one
of the 4 males just described, and the malar area varies in colour considerably
in the other 3 birds) and small sized I. minor can be mistaken for I. narokensis
or vice versa. Hence, identification of a honeyguide species (let alone deter-
mination of its sex) in the field was not always possible. Nonetheless, it is
apparent that many, if not most (possibly nearly all) the honeyguide—
honeyguide and honeyguide—barbet interactions involved male honeyguides.
DIscUssION
We have established that Lesser Honeyguides of both sexes, including
many males, are attracted to singing (duetting) pairs of certain barbets.
There is ample evidence that 2 or perhaps more honeyguides are attracted
simultaneously to duetting barbets (or to playback of their duets), and that
when this occurs they engage in fights associated with the presence and
location of the barbets or of the latters’ excavations. The collecting of 4 male
Lesser Honeyguides, 3 within one hour in intimate association with the same
duetting barbet pair clearly suggests that there is benefit to the males in such
association, and the fighting we have described suggests that the honeyguides
are exhibiting themselves with, and defending “ownership” of, particular
barbet pairs against one another.
The possibility also exists (Short & Horne 1979) that the honeyguides
could utilize the duetting barbets as “cues” triggering or enhancing repro-
ductive development in the honeyguides (of both sexes), helping to bring
them reproductively into synchrony with their hosts. This could be
accomplished by the honeyguides observing the barbets without actually
approaching them and interfering with their displays. On the other hand,
the interactions of the honeyguides with barbets may create a disturbance
31 [ Bull_Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 10x{1)]
bse draws the attention of male and female honeyguides to the presence of
territorial male. A female Lesser Honeyguide, by following a
ladies pair, but not so closely as would a male, perhaps places herself in a
favourable position from which to attract (through the barbets’ activities) the
attention of a possible mate.
We have no data on take-over of barbet holes by honeyguides. It is not
even known where honeyguides roost, nor whether or not they require a
cavity. They do not seem to usurp roosting holes from the barbets, for we
have frequently watched barbets go to roost and in all cases in which honey-
ides had been accompanying a barbet pair, the honeyguides disappeared
well before the barbets roosted.
We do not know the number of Lesser Honeyguides that may both
approach a duetting pair of barbets already “claimed” by another honeyguide
and then depart without attracting our attention. We have heard calls of
honeyguides at a distance when observing one honeyguide following a
barbet pair; but whenever 2 honeyguides were present with a pair of barbets
there have been pursuits and apparent or actual conflicts (some conceivably
male-female courtship chases), resulting in only one honeyguide being left
with the barbets. There also have been 7 instances of a small honeyguide,
ly I. narokensis (see Short & Horne 1979), present with a barbet pair
and later replaced by a larger, moustached I. minor. Naturally, in some
Lesser Honeyguide—barbet pursuits passing out of our view, the returning
honeyguide may not have been the same individual. (We have circumstantial
indications of this possibility from lengthy pursuits out of our sight
accompanied by trilling bursts as if from 2 honeyguides.)
Further corroboration of these results is desirable, including their extension
to other species of Indicator. The employment of barbet pairs in territorial
proclamation, or as an essential element, of a honeyguide territory is
intriguing and unique in birds. Indeed, territoriality itself and the pair bond
in honeyguides require investigation, especially in view of the lek-like
mating of I. minor described by Ranger (1955) in southern Africa, and
the fact that such behaviour contrasts strongly with that of host—parasite
relations of the parasitic cuckoos (Cweu/us spp.) and cowbirds (e.g. Mal/othrus
ater), which we have personally observed, and indigobirds (Payne 1973).
Each female Lesser Honeyguide requires several host nests. Possibly a
male, defending a territory containing several pairs of barbets, would thus
try to ensure that only one egg (fertilised of course by the territorial male) is
laid per host nest. (Note that young honeyguides kill other young in a nest,
hence 2 honeyguide eggs in a mest would mean the death of one of the
cone honeyguides.) Since honeyguides have hosts other than barbets
and woodpeckers, one wonders if these other hosts’ nests are used to “dump”
eggs when preferred hosts are unavailable. In any event, further data are
needed to treat these possibilities.
Acknowledgements: We are grateful to A. and P. Donnelly for assistance, to G. R.
wan Someren for suggestions and help, and to the authorities of the Kenyan
of Tourism and Wildlife for permission to obtain specimens. D. Amadon and
R. B. Payne kindly read and commented constructively on the manuscript. The field studies
Were supported by the L. C. Sanford Fund and the Ritter-Eisenmann Fund of The
ets Micrium of Natural History.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(1)] 32
References:
Britton, P. L. & Zimmerman, D. A. 1979. The avifauna of Sokoke Forest, Kenya. Jour,
East Afr. Nat. Hist. Soc. & Nat. Mus. No. 169.
Friedmann, H. 1955. The honey-guides. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 208.
— 1968. Additional data on brood parasites in the honey-guides. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus.
124: 1-8.
Payne, R. B. 1973. Behavior, mimetic song and song dialects and relationships of the
parasitic indigobirds (Vidua) of Africa. Orn. Mon. No. 11.
Ranger, G. A. 1955. On three species of honey-guide; the Greater (Indicator indicator), the
Lesser (/ndicator minor) and the Scaly-throated (Indicator variegatus). Ostrich 26: 70-87.
Short, L. L. & Horne, J. F. M. 1979. Vocal display and some interactions of Kenyan honey-
guides (Indicatoridae) with barbets (Capitonidae). Amer. Mus. Novit. No. 2684.
— 1982. Vocal and other behaviour of Kenyan Black-throated Barbets Lybius torquatus.
[bis 124: 27-43.
Addresses: L. L. Short, American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York
10024, U.S.A.
J. F. M. Horne, P.O. Box 24622, Karen, Nairobi, Kenya.
©British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
Books Received
Plint, P. R. & Stewart, P. F. 1983. The Birds of Cyprus. Pp. 182. Maps, appendices. British
Ornithologists’ Union, c/o The Zoological Society, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY.
£12(£10 to members if ordered before end May ’83).
This check-list, the sixth in the series of annotated avifaunal lists being published by the
BOU, comprehensively covers an island of major importance to Palaearctic/African
migrants crossing the eastern Mediterranean, but where even today several million birds
are killed annually, mainly illegally. Besides the systematic list covering some 330 species
and usefully providing a yardstick for estimating future population changes, there is
discussion of past and present Cyprus ornithology, geography, geology, climate, vegetation,
migration, breeding and conservation. The appendices include details of ringing recoveries,
biometric data and sites of ornithological interest.
Dunning, J. S. 1982. South American Land Birds. A photographic aid to identification. Pp. 364.
Over 1000 coloured photographs. End paper maps. Harrowood Books, Newton Square,
Pennsylvania, USA. $37.50 or$27.50 in paperback.
The author, with the expert collaboration of R. S. Ridgely, has produced a book
identifying over 2500 South American birds, 1112 of them in clear cut colour portrait
photographs, 8-12 to a page, with useful brief notes and tiny distribution maps. It is a
remarkable achievement. The technique, developed over 15 years, of trapping birds and
then photographing them, when they have regained a relaxed posture, in what amounts to
a mini portable studio in the field, has never been exploited on such a scale or so success-
fully. The colours in some plates may appear slightly distorted, probably due to techniques
and colour reproduction, but they are remarkably few and the resulting portrait gallery is as
yet unique.
The author’s main concern, in his capacity as a Director of the World Wildlife Fund, is
to alert more people to the dangers menacing South American birds and he is generously
donating all royalties to the WWF for purchase and protection of their threatened habitats.
NOTICE TO CONTRIBUTORS
Papers, whether by Club Members or by non-members, should be sent to the
Editor, Dr. J. F. Monk, The Glebe Cottage, Goring, Reading RG8 9AP, and
ate accepted on the understanding that they are offered solely for publication
in the Bulletin. 'They should be typed on one side of the paper, with double-
spacing and a wide margin, and submitted with @ duplicate copy on airmail
aper.
3 A cientific nomenclature and the style and lay-out of papers and of Refer-
ences should conform with usage in this or recent issues of the Ba//etin, unless
a departure is explained and justified; but informants of unpublished
observations (usually given as 7 Uitt. or pers. comm.) should be cited by
initials and name only, e.g. “‘. . . catches wasps (B. Eater)”’, but “B.B.C. Gull
informs me that .. .”. Photographic illustrations, although welcome, can
only be accepted if the contributor is willing to pay for their reproduction.
An author wishing to introduce a new name or describe a new form should
append om., gen., sp. or subsp. nov., as appropriate, and set out the supporting
evidence under the headings “Description”, “Distribution”, ‘“Type’’,
“Measurements of Type” and “Material examined”, plus any others needed.
A contributor is entitled to 10 free reprints of the pages of the Bu//etin in which his con-
tribution, if one page or more in length, appears. Additional reprints or reprints of contri-
butions of less than one page may be ordered when the manuscript is submitted and will be
charged for. Authors may be charged for proof corrections for which they are responsible.
BACK NUMBERS OF THE BULLETIN
Available on application to Dr D. W. Snow, British Museum (Natural
History), Tring, Herts HP23 6AP as follows: 1981-2(Vols. 101 & 102) £3 each
issue, 1980 (Vol. 100) No. 1 £4, No. 2, 3 & 4 £2 each, 1973-9 (Vols. 93-99)
£2 each issue (4 issues per year for Vol. 93 and after), 1969-72 (Vols. 89-92)
£1.50 each issue (6 per year), 1929-68 (Vols. 50-88) £1 each issue (generally
9 per year), earlier than Vol. 50 £2 each issue (generally 9 per year); Indices
Vol. 7o and after {1 each, Vols. 50-69 £2 each, Vol. 49 and before £4 each.
Long runs (at least 10 years) for Vol. 50 and after are available at reduced
rates on enquiry. Orders over £50 post free.
MEMBERSHIP
Only Members of the British Ornithologists’ Union are eligible to join the
Club: applications should be sent to the Hon. Treasurer, Mrs. D. Bradley,
53 Osterley Road, Isleworth, Middlesex, together with the current year’s
subscription. The remittance and all other payments to the Club should
always be in ster/ing unless an addition of {1.00 is made to cover bank
charges for exchange, etc. Payment of subscription entitles a Member to
receive all Bulletins for the year. Changes of address and revised bankers’
orders or covenants (and any other correspondence concerning Membership)
should be sent to the Hon. ‘Treasurer as promptly as possible.
SUBSCRIPTION TO BULLETIN
The Bulletin may be purchased by non-members on payment of an annual
subscription of £15.00 (postage and index free). Send all orders and remit-
tances in sterling, unless an addition of £1.00 is made to cover bank charges, to
the Assistant Hon. Treasurer, Mr. S. A. H. Statham, 87 Gladstone Road,
Watford, Hertfordshire WD1 2RA. Single issues may be obtained as back
numbers (see above).
CORRESPONDENCE
Correspondence about Club meetings and other matters not mentioned
above should go to the Hon. Secretary, R. E. F. Peal, 2 Chestnut Lane,
Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 3AR.
CONTENTS
Page
Crus Notes ss Si ie is en vee aa I
S. N. Stuart. A Pyrenestes from northwestern Tanzania ... ay 3
S. L. Hirty & W. L. Brown. Range extensions of Colombian birds
as indicated by the M. A. Carriker Jr. collection at the
National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution 5
J. Fyetpsa. Geographic variation in the Andean Coot Fulica ardesiaca 18
Don Happen. A new species of Thicket Warbler C7ch/ornis (Sylviinae)
from Bougainville Island, North Solomons Province, Papua
New Guinea... $e a0 Jee as ae a 22
L. L. Shorr & J. F. M. Horne. The relationship of male Lesser
Honeyguides Indicator minor with duetting barber pairs... 25
Booxs RECEIVED cs oa ae a a che ve ' 32
It is hoped to send the Bulletin by Bulk Air Mail to all European destinations outside the
British Isles and by Accelerated Surface Post to almost every destination outside Europe
commencing with Vol. 103 No. 1. This will only apply to copies despatched from the
printers on publication. Those whose subscriptions have not been received by the beginning
of a month of publication will have their copies despatched by surface mail, after their
current subscription has been paid.
Published by the BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS’ CLUB and printed by
The Caxton and Holmesdale Press, 104 London Road Sevenoaks Kent.
QL
ISSN 0007 - 1595
Bulletin of the
British Ornithologists’ Club
Edited by
Dr. J. F. MONK
Volume 103 No. 2 June 1983
FORTHCOMING MEETINGS
Tuesday, 5 July 1983, in the Senior Common Room, SHERFIELD
BUILDING, Imperial College, S.W.7 at 6.30 p.m. for 7 p.m., Mr Paul
Goriup will speak on Bustards. He will be speaking on bustards generally
and, more particularly, on species that he has studied in the field, which
include the Great Bustard Otis tarda and the Houbara Bustard Chlamydotis
undulata. Those wishing to attend should send their acceptance with a
cheque for £6.40 a person to reach the Hon. Secretary at 2 Chestnut Lane,
Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 3AR (telephone Sevenoaks [0732] 450313) not later
than first post on Thursday, 30 June.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS 1S NOT OUR USUAL VENUES Tae
SHERFIELD BUILDING IS ON THE WEST SIDE OF EXHIBITION
ROAD IN THE MAIN BLOCK OF IMPERIAL COLLEGE AND LIES
A SHORT DISTANCE NW OF THE CARILLON TOWER.
Tuesday, 20 September 1983, at Imperial College in the Senior Common
Room, SOUTH SIDE, PRINCE’S GARDENS, S.W.7. at 6.30 p.m. for 7 p.m.,
Mr George A. Smith, Jr., widely known for his work on parrots, will speak
on Convergence and Radiation in Parrots. Those wishing to attend should send
their acceptance with a cheque for £6.40 a person to reach the Hon. Secre-
tary (address above) not later than first post on Thursday, 15 September.
THIS IS OUR USUAL VENUE AND IS ON THE EAST SIDE OF
EXHIBITION ROAD.
Tuesday, 29 November 1983 — 750th MEETING OF THE CLUB.
At the same time and place as the previous Meeting, the Survival Anglia
film “‘Almost a Dodo” on the Shoebill will be shown.
Tuesday, 10 January 1984. Mr M. K. Swales will speak on The Denstone
College Expedition to Inaccessible Island (South Atlantic), with an intro-
duction by Sir Hugh Elliott.
Many copies of the Sw//e/zn must get thrown away annually by
Members, copies which the Club would welcome. Please
send all unwanted copies, and ask your Executors to do the
same, to the Hon. Treasurer at 53 Osterley Road, Isleworth,
Middlesex TW7 4PW at any time. Postage will be refunded
if requested.
COMMITTEE
B. Gray (Chairman) Revd. G. K. McCulloch, O.B.E. (Vice-Chairman)
R. E. F, Peal (Hon. Secretary) Mrs. D. M. Bradley (Hon. Treasurer)
Dr. J. F. Monk (Editor) R. A. N. Croucher
P, J. Conder, O.B.E. D. Griffin
S. A. H. Statham
©British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
33 [Bull Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)]
Bulletin of the
BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS’ CLUB
Vol. 103 No. 2 Published: 20 June 1983
ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING
The Annual General Meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club was held at
Imperial College, London, $.W.7 on Tuesday, 17 May 1983 at 6 p.m. with
Mr D. R. Calder in the Chair. Thirteen Members were present.
The Minutes of the Annual General Meeting held on 18 May 1982 (Bull.
Brit. Orn. Cl. 102:43 & xxiv) were approved and signed by the Chairman.
The Report of the Committee for 1982 was presented; on the proposal of
Mr P. J. Conder, seconded by the Revd. G. K. McCulloch it was approved
unanimously that the Report be received and adopted. The Accounts for
1982 were presented by the Hon. Treasurer, who explained the salient points,
including the increased excess of income over expenditure. She mentioned
that the Investment Reserve of £20 in the previous year’s figures had become
unnecessary upon the redemption at par in 1982 of the holding in 84%
Treasury Loan 1980/82 and had been credited to Investment Income
(General Fund) during 1982. In reply to an enquiry, it was explained that
there was no entry in the Balance Sheet for the property “Clovelly” at
Tring, as the Club was currently a tenant at a nominal rent but subject to the
fulfilment of conditions prescribed in the Will of the late Herbert Stevens.
On the proposal of Dr D. W. Snow, seconded by Captain Sir Thomas
Barlow, the Accounts for 1982 were unanimously approved.
The Editor reported that papers for the Bw//etin were mostly published
within six to nine months of acceptance but that he hoped to reduce the
waiting time by publication of larger issues as appropriate. There were fewer
papers on Africa but more on the Far East and South America.
There being no nominations additional to those of the Committee, the
following were declared duly elected:
Chairman: Mr B. Gray (vice Mr D. R. Calder, who retired on com-
pletion of his term of office and was ineligible for
re-election).
Vice-Chairman: ‘The Revd. G. K. McCulloch, O.B.E. (vice Mr B. Gray, on
his election as Chairman).
Hon. Treasurer: | Mrs D. M. Bradley (re-elected).
Hon. Secretary: Mr R. E. F. Peal (re-elected).
Committee: Mr D. Griffin, M.A., and Mr S. A. H. Statham (vice The
Revd. G. K. McCulloch on his election as Vice-
Chairman and Mr J. G. Parker, who retired by rotation
and was ineligible for re-election).
The Editor proposed a vote of thanks to the retiring Chairman for all the
work he had done for the Club, especially on legal matters concerning
“Clovelly”; this was seconded by the Hon. Secretary and carried unan-
imously.
The Meeting closed at 6.20 p.m.
£361 doy galt
AddnsPIu4AT KATAVUA VNVIG
uoMdtog) FAATVO “AX GIAVG
*popzode3 useq DARY qnI) ou OF
Sur wor sUOTIOUSULI} [Te FdP2[A\0U INO JO 3s9q 943 03 vy} WAYUOD puL aI”p IY} UO popud Ivak 943 IF
JUNODY any pusdxy pur swosuy pur z7g61 soquiszaq] ISIE ye sv JOdYg doUL[Yg poyorae oy DAoTdde 94K
sjuvIUNO IY poroyey
ANVdWO7) GNV aTUVaS
£961 dy yi y($ Sy xoso[ppryy ‘souUTg
‘suoprvy pIOJoIOPY “OsnoyZy pIojorsyzy
*YAAoI04} DDU"pIOdI¥ UT or” AOY} IVY) AjIQIDD puL
Sn 0} pawuasazd uOILWIOJU! puUe sIOYONOA ‘syOod ay} WOIZ dep IY UO popud 3A dy} JO} JUNODDV
ainypusdxy pur aWOduy pue 7g61 soquiadeq ISI ye sv D9Yg adUL]eg PoyorIe oY3 posedosd savy aM
ALVOMILYAD SLNVLNNODDY
L6S*S¥ ozL‘olFf
zLo‘s gSz‘g ———__"" su es 3 “* SLASSY LNYWUND LAN
zS$g‘z bEz‘s
1gz‘1 Lzo%z : aS 4 ge ake ** sroupory Arpuns
6bz1 6£6 : sroqiosqng—
zzE 89z oye ** siaqlusj\J—9oUvApE UT paAroooz suondyzosqns
SHILITIGVIT LNANAND 3 SsaT
bz65L o6P'11
L99‘$ 9gl‘L a srs yurg sduravg jeuoneny—
be1‘z g09‘z vis Oy crn yunossy swsodoq—
LL 989 ts ** juNOdDY OID DO IsOg—
Sr 60+ ae J Oe yuNO.V JWorIND—syurg yw Ysvy
I I og ‘i ** an[eA [eUIWION]—urjo][Ng JO 49035
SLASSY LNTWUND
Shh S44 Py ** 4809 qv Z1/gooz yD0Ig Asnsvary, %$S ogg F
INIWLSAANT GNA,J Lsnwy,
0g ——— 610'z
oz —_ sas x sie PIEMIOF IYSnNoIQ oAIosoOy ¢ s5aT
ool — nas ** 4809 qe zg/0g61 uvo7y Arnsvory, %$g oo1F
— 61057 os 4s09 ye $661 y903g sonboyoxy %%o1 101‘z'F
INIWLSTANT GNM, TVYANAS
—: kq pojuosorday
L655 ¥ ozL‘ory
ool —_——._ 9S zz —
Ool g$1°z a0 Bis Iwok Surlrnp sopes wo sposd.0rg * ppp
— ool Te OC oo 1g61 Jaquiadeq ASE ye ooULTLg
GNN,j Lsandag SNTAALS
Str Shy oe is 20 1g61 Joquis.0q IsI£ We doUL[LG
AOVOUT NOLONINUVG “yf “J—ANNY 1sawy,
z$o8S ——— 610‘g aa
Ivh‘z L96‘z pi ** ganjipusdxy J9AO dUIODUT JO ssooxXg ‘ppE
119‘ z$o%S ons * ie 1g61 Joquiadoq 3s1é ye DoUr[Eg
GN, TWUAINaS
aif Jk th ‘i
1g61 Zg61
ZQG6I ‘J9quUIDDNqj ISIE 3 Sv JODYS DOULT Eg
oov
G1¢
z61'F
1£g°¢
zes
fob
19z
zo1sy
Lor‘1
90z
1g61
$60‘1
Lo6‘zF
£9S$‘S
o£ S*g
(96)
17g
Z1ze
ogz*I
1Sz‘1
.
SUNLIGNAdX FY AWAAO AWNOON] AO SsAOxe]
** ganjipusdxg snoourl[aost py
om x “+ sodivyD yurg
sadivyD Aduejuno.2y pur pny
oe "* BuNI9,T JO sootONY
20 os er oourInsuy
suoydsjay,
AQUOTIeIG pur o8vIsog “BuNUIIgG
a ** ginyipusdxg Ajorqng
syoquinu yoeq uNey[ng Surjursd-sy
** NILATING dO saNssy LNAWAND
HU SLSOT) NOILNGIULSIG GNV NOILVOIIAN
UNIN[NG Jo WdvisOg
$}sOD sIOYyINY /SsaT
ee oe we
soqeredog
UNe[Ng Jo voHEoyTqng 29 Sunutsg
aun LIGNad Xa
ae ** oInjyIpuodxg
“ a QWIOIUJ—SONI LAA
SUMAWAN] HOVG—NILATINg AO sHIVS
“M19
JUBUSAO’) JO sp29q
GaaTAOOAY XVI, SNOONT
** 9o.uvinsuy pur suedoy :ssaT
es Surry, Ayjaaoy>D Ayzodorg
GHTAIZOAY LNAY
pun,y isn,
ai ve ‘+ pun, [eIouey
AWOONT LNXALSHANT
GAAIFOAY SNOILVNOG
s i 3 sroqizosqns
as suorjdryosqng sroquiayy
CQHAIROAY SNOLLAWMOsSANS
AWOONI
TQ6I JOquIDDNq ISIE popud JeaA 9Y} JOJJUNOSDSY sINjIpusdxy_ pure swosuy
35 [Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)]
The seven hundred and forty-fifth Meeting of the Club was held in the Senior Common
Room, South Side, Imperial College, London, S.W.7 on Tuesday, 18 January 1983 at
7 p.m. The attendance was 20 Members and 8 guests.
Members ptesent were: B. GRAY (Chairman). Captain Sir THOMAS BARLOW, R.N.,
P. J. BELMAN, K. F. BETTON, Dr G. BEVEN, Mrs DIANA BRADLEY, P. J.
CONDER, R. A. N. CROUCHER, J. H. ELGOOD, D. J. FISHER, A. GIBBS, R. H.
KETTLE, J. KING, Dr A. G. KNOX, Revd. G. K. MCCULLOCH, D. G. MEDWAY,
Dr J. F. MONK, R. E. F. PEAL, P. S. REDMAN and S. A. H. STATHAM.
Guests present were: Mrs B. M. GIBBS, P. J. HAYMAN, Miss PATRICIA C. MED-
WAY, Dr AMICIA MELLAND, Mrs DIANA C. MONK, Mtr and Mrs G. H. SEARLE
and ROBIN W. WOODS.
Mr Robin W. Woods gave a much appreciated address on “Some Birds of the Falkland
Islands’’, metioning a number of species with which he had been particularly familiar and
especially his ringing studies of Dolphin Gulls Leacophaeus scoresbit.
The seven hundred and forty-sixth Meeting of the Club was held in the Senior Common
Room, South Side, Imperial College, London, $.W.7 on Tuesday 8 March 1983 at 7 p.m.
The attendance was 19 Members and 3 guests.
Members present were: D. R. CALDER (Chairman), Major N. A. G. H. BEAL, P. J.
BELMAN, K. F. BETTON, Mrs DIANA BRADLEY, P. J. CONDER, R. A. N.
CROUCHER, J. H. ELGOOD, D. J. FISHER, B. GRAY, D. GRIFFIN, P. HOGG,
Deter NOx, Revd. G. K. McCULLOCH, Dr J. F. MONK, R. E. F. PEAL, P. S.
REDMAN, C. E. WHEELER and Lieut.-Col. T. C. WHITE.
Guests present were: Dr C. J. CADBURY, Mrs I. MCCULLOCH and N. PICOZZI.
Dr C. J. Cadbury gave a stimulating address on “The Restoration of Habitats for Birds”
He dealt especially on the need to make the best use possible on land that is available and on
what can be achieved in this respect.
Bullfinches Pyrrhala pyrrbula and fruit crops
The following is a resumé of the talk given to the Club by T. J. Seller on 22 June 1982:
Bullfinches Pyrrhula pyrrhula are notorious pests of a wide range of fruit and soft fruit
crops grown commercially, as well as of ornamental shrubs and fruit bushes in domestic
gardens. They attack fruit buds between late November and April, and can decimate or
destroy the potential crop. The timing and extent of damage varies markedly between
yeats and some varieties of fruit seem to be more susceptible than others. Pear and apple
trees have some degree of tolerance, but plum, gooseberry, black and redcurrant bushes
have little and the effects of the damage accumulate. The cost of Bullfinch damage is
difficult to estimate, but countrywide it could be in excess of a million pounds.
We have been studying a 2 hectare pear orchard in Kent over a number of years, to
analyse the course and extent of Bullfinch damage. During the winter of 1978, Bullfinches
began taking pear buds in late December and the damage increased rapidly until by April
no tree had escaped. Many of the trees had few, if any buds left and the crop picked the
following autumn was small. Estimates indicated that in excess of 860,000 buds had been
eaten, representing some 92% of those on the trees in mid-December. The financial loss
was large, problably well over £2500. Succeeding years showed less dramatic losses of
buds and these were not necessarily associated with a loss in the value of the crop picked.
Detailed studies of the effects of Bullfinch damage showed it did not always reduce the
crop; in some instances there was no effect and it could even be associated with a slight
increase. Partly this was because a small proportion of the attacked buds produced some
flowers; on heavily damaged trees these formed 60% of flower trusses. More important
was that flowers (and buds) surviving on heavily damaged trees set more fruitlets than
those on undamaged trees. Following flowering, usually in June when fruitlets were still
small, there was typically a large natural drop of excess fruitlets. This was less in years
when the number of buds, and consequently the number of fruitlets, was depleted. Thus
on undamaged trees, many buds did not produce pears and Bullfinch damage increased the
fruit-bearing potential of buds that escaped attack. Another factor was that heavily damaged
trees produced larger pears, so a greater percentage of their fruit was of marketable size.
Finally, the pear trees studied compensated for the loss of buds in one year by producing
more the following year. As a result, their tolerance to attack was greatest in the third year,
when a loss of 90% of the buds did not reduce their crop.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)] 36
The activities of Bullfinches are not the only reason for crop reduction. The fruit is
attacked later in the growing season by other birds such as tits, thrushes, Blackbirds and
Starlings. Also, pears are made unfit for marketing by the activities of wasps and other
insects, and by bad weather during the growing season; autumnal gales especially can
cause significant losses. These factors result in an immediate and irretrievable loss of crop,
in direct contrast to Bullfinch damage that may have little or no effect, even at high levels.
Bullfinches ate a serious problem to tree and bush fruit growers. However, our work
indicated that they may not have the exclusively bad influence that is often suggested.
They ate active in orchards at a time when they are easily seen and blamed for crop losses,
because there are no leaves on the trees. On the other hand, the damage they cause is only
one of a number of factors that reduce the final harvest.
Department of Pure and Applied Biology, T. J. Seller and
Imperial College, London SW7 2BB. N. J. Matthews.
First record of the Sooty Shearwater Puffinus griseus
for Arabia
by P. R. Colston and M. D. Gallagher
Received 7 September 1982
The mostly intact skeletal remains of a medium sized Pufinus shearwater
were discovered amongst debris on a tideline of a shelving beach near
Azaiba, Batinah, Sultanate of Oman, on the Gulf of Oman, at 23°36’N,
58°20’E, on 23 June 1982 by Wg. Cdr. D. Foster. The specimen was passed
to MDG who realised that it was unusual and took it to the British Museum
(Natural History) (BMNH) where it is now lodged as a skeleton (BM
S/1982-115-1) and where we identified it as a Sooty Shearwater Pufinus
griseus. Although one wing was missing and the head detached, the rest of
the corpse was apparently complete, still retaining the feathers of the tail and
parts of the body. The dark blackish-brown wing showed the silvery-white
under-wing pattern characteristic of griseus, and the long slender black bill
matched other specimens in the BM. Measurements were: wing 298 mm;
tail, strongly rounded with 12 tail feathers, 90 mm; bill (from skull) 52 mm;
tarsus 55 mm; length of middle toe 62 mm. The primaries were abraded and
the rest of the plumage also showed some degree of wear, so it was therefore
probably a full grown adult.
This migratory, cold-water species breeds in the sub-antartic around
South America, New Zealand and Tasmania, departing between mid-March
and May, mostly migrating rapidly northward across the equatorial Pacific
and Atlantic Oceans to winter in the northern temperate zones — Bourne
(1956) Sea Swallow 9:23-25; Phillips (1963) Ibis 105: 340-353; Cramp &
Simmons (1977) Bzrds of the Western Palearctic 1:143-5. Sooty Shearwaters
occur at sea south of Kerguelen I. in the southern Indian Ocean (Bourne
1956) and though there had been no records from further north, Bourne
pointed out that there had been 2 records of the Short-tailed Shearwater
P. tenuirostris accidentally migrating north in the “wrong” (Indian) ocean
and that the Sooty Shearwater seemed equally likely to do the same thing
(Bourne (1960) Sea Swallow 13:20; (1967) Ibis 109:152). A sighting of a total
of 15 Sooty Shearwaters was subsequently reported from the east coast of
Sti Lanka in November 1974 “when the size, colour, mode of flight and
silvery wing linings allowed positive identification” (Sinclair 1977) /.
Bomhay Nat. Hist. Soc. 74: 354). However it is surprising that Sinclair does
37 [ Bull, Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)]
not appear to have identified the Wedge-tailed and Flesh-Footed Shearwaters
Puffinus pacificus and P. carneipes which normally pass through Sri Lanka
waters at that season, and it may be wondered whether there was some
mistake.
The present record appears to be the first from Arabia. The specimen’s
condition and its position on the beach indicates arrival after the winter
storms, in spring, at which time the strong, contrary, northeast monsoon
winds of winter would have begun to decline, and when other species which
breed in the southern hemisphere, such as Pale-footed Shearwater Puffinus
carneipes and Wilson’s Storm Petrel Oceanites oceanicus, begin to move north-
wards towards the cool waters of the upwelling off the Kuria Muria islands
of Oman.
Adresses: P. R. Colston, British Museum (Natural History), Tring, Herts. HP23 6AP.
M. D. Gallagher, Oman Natural History Museum, P.O. Box 668, Muscat, Sultanate
of Oman.
©British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
Notes on the birds of southwestern Banks Island,
Northwest Territories, Canada
by D. T. Holyoak
Received 30 September 1982
The southwestern area of Banks Island, (c. 72°N, 125°W) arctic Canada, was
visited from 30 June to 9 August 1981 with an expedition carrying out
geological research. There were frequent opportunities to make ornitho-
logical observations. Two of the bird species seen have not previously been
recorded from Banks Island, 2 others are little known there and one had not
previously been found nesting. This note records these, along with a list of
the breeding birds found in the region around Sachs Harbour.
PINTAIL Anas acuta
On 1 July a female was flushed from a nest containing 5 eggs, on a tundra
slope above a small marsh witha pool, c. 2 kmeast of Sachs Harbour. The only
other record of Pintail was of 2 males and 5 females seen together near the
Kellett River on 3 July.
Although there are other summer observations of Pintail on Banks Island
this is the first record of breeding; the only other breeding records from the
Canadian Arctic Archipelago are from southern Victoria Island (A.O.U.
1957, Godfrey 1966).
WHIMBREL Numenius phaeopus
On 27 July one was seen flying east along the shore west of Sachs Harbour.
There are a few other breeding season records from Banks Island but no
proof of breeding (Manning ef a/. 1956, Godfrey 1966).
BLACK-LEGGED KITTIWAKE Réssa tridactyla
On 28 July a flock of about 65 (with c. 40 adults and c. 25 first-year birds)
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)| 38
was seen on Cape Kellett. On 3 August a flock of c. 60 (mostly adults) was
seen resting on a sand bar in the estuary of the Sachs River at Sachs Harbour.
The species has not previously been recorded from Banks Island (the breed-
ing record given in A.O.U. 1957 is apparently erroneous). However, there
are breeding colonies in northern Alaska and numerous sightings from the
southwestern part of the Beaufort Sea (Gabrielson & Lincoln 1959, Frame
1973, Watson & Divoky 1974, Johnson ef a/. 1975) as well as sightings
within 150 miles of the North Pole (Godfrey 1966).
SABINE’S GULL Larus sabini
Several sightings of single birds and groups of up to 6 were made around
Sachs Harbour, Cape Kellett and Fish Lake. On 3 July a nest with 3 eggs
was found in a shallow pool with emergent grasses and sedges c. 12 miles
inland on a low terrace south of the Kellett River; 3 adult birds were present
and 2 of them mobbed vigorously when we visited the nest. There are few
other breeding records of this species from western Banks Island (Manning
et al. 1956, Godfrey 1966).
BARN SWALLOW Hirundo rustica
One seen about Sachs Harbour repeatedly on 1 July; one seen along shore
c. 4 miles west of Sachs Harbour on 9 July. These are the first records from
Banks Island. The northern edge of the breeding range is well south of the
arctic islands, but there are other records of stragglers from Cambridge Bay,
Victoria Island (Godfrey 1966) and one of attempting to breed in northern
Alaska (Childs & Maher 1960).
OTHER SPECIES
Other species recorded within 20 miles of Sachs Harbour (from the Kellett
River south to Cape Currie) have all been reported before as breeding on
Banks Island (Manning ef a/. 1956, Godfrey 1966). The full list excluding
species noted above is as follows (names follow Voous 1973, 1977; breeding
was confirmed for species marked*) :—
*Yellow-billed Loon Gavia adamsii, *Arctic Loon G. arctica, *Red-throated Loon G.
stellata, *Whistling Swan Cygnus columbianus, *Brent Goose Branta bernicla, *Snow Goose
Anser caerulescens, Long-tailed Duck Clangula hyemalis, *Eider Somateria mollissima, King
Eider S. spectabilis, *Rough-legged Buzzard Buteo lagopus, Gyrfalcon Falco rusticolus, Pere-
gtine F. peregrinus, *Willow Grouse Lagopus lagopus, Rock Ptarmigan L. mutus, *Sandhill
Crane Grus canadensis, *Semipalmated Plover Charadrius semipalmatus, *Lesser Golden
Plover Pluvialis dominica, *Black-bellied Plover P. squatarola, Ruddy Tutnstone Arenaria
interpres, *Pectoral Sandpiper Ca/lidris melanotos, *White-rumped Sandpiper C. fuscicollis,
*Baird’s Sandpiper C. bairdii, Sanderling C. alba, Grey Phalarope Phalaropus fulicarius,
*Pomarine Jaeger Stercorarius pomarinus, Parasitic Jaeger S. parasiticus, Long-tailed Jaeger
S. longicaudus, *Glaucous Gull Larus hyperboreus, Thayet’s Gull L. thayeri, *Arctic Tern
Sterna paradisaea, *Snowy Owl Nyctea scandiaca, *Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris, *Water
Pipit Anthus spinoletta, Snow Bunting Plectrophenax nivalis, *Lapland Longspur Ca/carius
lapponicus.
Acknowledgements: My visit to Banks Island with an Expedition from the University of
Reading was funded by N.E.R.C. and the Royal Society of London; the Polar Continental
Shelf Project gave logistic support. Thanks are due to Dr. Peter Worsley for making many
of the arrangements for this Expedition and for tolerating much extracurricular ornithology
while we were there.
References :
A.O.U. 1957. Check-list of North American Birds. 5th ed. Baltimore, Maryland: A.O.U.
Childs, H. E. Jr. & Maher, W. J. 1960. Nesting attempt by a pair of Barn Swallows in
north Alaska. Condor 62: 141-142.
39 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)]
Frame, G. W. 1973. Occurrence of birds in the Beaufort Sea, summer 1969. Auk go:
552-563.
Gabrielson, I. N. & Lincoln, F. C. 1959. The Birds of Alaska. The Stackpole Co. & Wildlife
Management Institute.
Godfrey, W. E. 1966. The Birds of Canada. Ottawa: National Museum of Canada Bull. 203.
Johnson, S. R., Adams, W. J. & Morrell, M. R. 1975. The birds of the Beaufort Sea. Part
II. Observations of 1975 spring migration. Unpublished Rept. prepared under con-
tract to the Canadian Wildlife Service, for the Beaufort Sea Project.
Manning, T. H., Hohn, E. O. & Macpherson, A. H. 1956. The birds of Banks Island.
Nain. Mus. Canada Bull, 143: 1-144.
Voous, K. H. 1973, 1977. List of Recent Holarctic bird species. Non-Passerines. [bis 115:
612-638. Passerines. [bis 119: 223-250, 376-406.
Watson, G. E. & Divoky, G. J. 1974. Pelagic bird and mammal observations in the
western Beaufort Sea, late summer 1971 and 1972. U.S. Coast Guard Oceanogr. Rept.
CG-373.
Address: Dr. D. T. Holyoak, Department of Geography, University of Reading, 2 Earley
Gate, Whiteknights Road, Reading RG6 2AU, England.
©British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
Mass spring migration of European Rollers Coracias
garrulus in eastern Tanzania
by C.. J. Peare
Received 8 September 1982
It is well-known that vast numbers of European Rollers Coracias garrulus
winter in the savannah regions of East Africa south of the Sahara (Moreau
1972). Ash & Miskell (1980) recorded a mass migration of this species in
southern Somalia in spring 1979, and the obervations reported here indicate
that, as expected, such migration is not an isolated event. During a visit to
coastal Tanzania in spring 1982 I was able to record the period over which
this mass migration—the evacuation of East Africa by Palaearctic migrants—
occurred.
On 22 March, large numbers of rollers were seen during a drive from Arusha
to Muheza; and large numbers were present, especially in Sisal Agave stsalana
plantations, on the following 4 days (23-26 March) in the general area
between Muheza and Dar-es-Salaam. Sample counts indicated that the
migrants outnumbered the indigenous Lilac-breasted Roller C. caudata by
overt 50:1, as recorded by Moreau (1972). There was no evidence of mass
migration on those days.
At about 07.00 on 28 March, large numbers of European Rollers were flying
northeast over Muheza. They flew high, at over 300 m, until about 10.00
when heavy rain brought them down to less than 100 m. The northeastward
movement was then seen to include European Swallows Hirundo rustica,
Striped Swallows H. abyssinica, a few Mosque Swallows H. senegalensis, White-
rumped Swifts Apus caffer and a Peregrine Falco peregrinus. The species com-
posing this migration were therefore similar to those described by Ash &
Miskell (1980).
Heavy rain showers continued up to 30 March and the movement of
European Rollers continued uninterruptedly on 29 and 30 March; but at
Tanga, on the coast, the direction of the movement was more northerly. On
a journey from Muheza to Maramba on 31 March the number of European
Rollers seen in Sisal plantations was much smaller than had been seen earlier
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)] 40
and the northeastward movement continued throughout the day.
On 1 and 2 April my observations were on the coast, mainly around
Pangani, south of Tanga. The rain had stopped and these days were pre-
dominantly sunny with light southeast winds. A continuous stream of
European Rollers migrated up the coast on both days, accompanied by
European Swallows and small parties of unidentified falcons. Although the
northeastward movement of rollers was seen inland, there was obviously
a concentration of birds migrating up the coast. I did not attempt to estimate
numbers, but on 1 and 2 April certainly tens of thousands coasted past and
the numbers may have reached 6 figures.
On 3 April European Rollers were comparatively scarce on the journey
from Pangani to Korogwe with C. garrulus and C. caudata in about equal
numbers. In the Korogwe area, about 100 km inland, migration of European
Rollers was still observed on 3 and 4 April, but their numbers and concen-
tration were much lower than on the coast. Furthermore, the direction of
migration at Korogwe was east of northeastward, suggesting that the birds
were heading for the coast, possibly to avoid flying over the Usambara
mountains. On subsequent journeys in the Arusha, Dodoma and Manyoni
areas very few European Rollers were seen.
These observations suggest that the mass-migration reported by Ash &
Miskell (1980) may be regular. In addition, it appears that the evacuation of
the wintering area by European Rollers occurs over a relatively short period,
possibly a fortnight or less.
Acknowledgements: These observations were made during a visit to Tanzania financed by the
Tropical Pesticide Research Institute, Arusha, the British Council, Overseas Development
Administration and the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
References:
Ash, J. S. & Miskell, J. E. 1980. A mass-migration of Rollers Coracias garrulus in Somalia.
Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 100: 216-218.
Moreau, R. E. 1972. The Palaearctic- African Bird Migration Systems. London: Academic
Press.
Address: Dr. C. J. Featre, MAFF Worplesdon Laboratory, Tangley Place, Worplesdon,
Guildford, Surrey GU3 3LQ, UK.
Crown © reserved.
Description of the downy young of Lichtenstein’s
Sandgrouse Péerocles lichtensteini and the significance of
“unpatterned” downy young in the Pteroclididae
by David H. Thomas and A. Paul Robin
Received 8 September 1982
There does not appear to be any published description of the downy young
of Lichtenstein’s Sandgrouse Pverocles lichtensteini (Harrison 1975), although
it is hard to believe that such young have not been seen before by ornitho-
logists. The following description is offered despite being based on a single
individual and because the downy young’s appearance in this and some other
sandgrouse species is unusual in the Pteroclididae. The possible significance
of this will be discussed.
Observations were made in the Moroccan Sahara (where Lichtenstein’s
4I [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 10 3(2)]
Sandgrouse is at the northwestern limit of its range) during the course of
a study of the sandgrouse there (for a full description of the location and
general ecological conditions there see Thomas & Robin 1977). At 08.20
on 28 May 1974, a pair of Lichtenstein’s Sandgrouse with a single downy
chick were found among boulders in stoney ground on the lower slopes of
Jebel Bani (c. 30°N, 6°W), in the region of Foum Zguid. They were observed
at 5-10 m range from a Landrover for about an hour, during which time the
female and chick sheltered in the shade of a rock, while the male stood
nearby, gular fluttering, in weak sunshine (air temperature 38°C and relative
humidity 18°94 1 m above the ground in the shade of the Landrover at
08.55). When later all 3 birds moved off unhurriedly, the chick walked
almost under the female or very close to her shaded side, hiding immediately
in the shadow of a rock when we followed. The chick was photographed at
close range, the following description being made from 2 diapositives
(projected) and also from notes made at the time. Colour codes are in Munsell
notation (Munsell Color 1975), determined by comparison with the pro-
jected diapositive images, which may, of course, have shown some distortion
from the true colour of the chick itself. Unfortunately no measurements
were made, since we did not appreciate at the time that this plumage was
undescribed.
DESCRIPTION OF THE DOWNY YOUNG
Age. Unknown, but the plumage was entirely downy and showed no out-
ward sign of any later feather development. Since it had already left the nest
site, the chick was presumably at least one day old, and may have been 2-3
days old. Sandgrouse normally have clutches of 2-3 eggs, which may hatch
at one day intervals, and chicks do not normally leave the nest until the last
chick is hatched and dried (Maclean 1976).
Colouration. Crown and nape, throat, body, wings, thighs and the feathered
anterior aspect of the tarsus all of a markedly uniform warm donkey brown,
only slightly paler ventrally (7.5 YR 6/4) than dorsally (7.5YR 5/4). Lores,
supercilium, ear coverts and below the eye a somewhat darker brown (light
chocolate: 7.5YR 3.5/4), demarcated below by a short pale moustachial-
stripe and above by a long pale lateral-crown stripe running from the bill to
the back of the head, the pale stripes irregular in width and alignment. A
pale spot just below and behind the eye was the same creamy buff (7.5 YR 8/4)
as the other 2 pale strips (see Fig. 1). The texture of the down appeared very
uniform, tather like dense velvet. The bare parts (bill, a narrow eye ring,
toes and the posterior aspect of the tarsus) were light grey (5 YR 6/1).
DISCUSSION
The unusual feature of this downy plumage in comparison with that of
many other sandgrouse species is the uniform colouration. Typically, downy
young of sandgrouse are marked disruptively with mottled browns, buffs,
black and white, more or less organised into symmetrically placed darker
panels outlined and separated by paler lines, particularly on the head and
_ dorsal aspect of the body. Specifically, this generalised description can be
applied to the following species:
Syrrhaptes paradoxus, S. tibetanus (Fjeldsaa 1976, 1977); Pterocles namaqua,
P. alchata, P. quadricinctus (Fjeldsaa 1976); P. orientalis (Fjeldsaa 1977); P.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)] 42
Figure 1. View of the downy young of Lichtenstein’s Sandgrouse Prerocles lichtensteini,
showing the pattern of pale lateral-crown and moustachial stripes, the position of the pale
spot below and behind the eye, the posterior margin of the darker facial colouring (dotted
line between the pale stripes) and the otherwise unpatterned plumage. (Traced from a
photograph; the bird was straddling a pebble, which obscured some plumage details.)
exustus (Aldrich 1943, Harrison 1975); P. burchelli (DHT’s unpublished
photographs of a chick collected by Mr. J. E. W. Dixon, Department of
Zoology, University of Capetown, Rondebosch, S. Africa); P. decoratus,
P. gutturalis, P. bicinctus (Mackworth-Praed & Grant 1952).
This list includes all members of the family (see Hiie & Etchécopar 1957)
except the Madagascar Sandgrouse P. personatus (for whose downy young
no description was found), Lichtenstein’s Sandgrouse (in which the absence
of patterning on the body has been noted already), and P. coronatus, P. sene-
gallus and P. indicus, of which 3 species Fjeldsaa (1976: 213) comments that
the downy young are “faintly marked . . . but the course of the light lines is
nearly the same in all’. Of these last 3 species, P. indicus is probably closely
related to P. /ichtensteini (and is possibly conspecific—Meinertzhagen 1954),
and at least one description of the downy young of P. indicus (as “uniform
earthy brown’”—Ali & Ripley 1969:93) seems to conform to the present
one of P. “Uichtensteint. Colour photographs of P. coronatus downy young
(George 1978: plate 32) shows them to be not unlike P. Achtensteini chicks in
the comparative uniformity of general colouration and with a darker facial
patch, while P. senegallus is slightly more patterned than coronatus or Lichten-
steini (George 1978: plates 29-31, Mackworth-Praed & Grant 1952).
The slight or absent patterning in downy young of Péerocles indicus, lichten-
steini, coronatus and senegallus may represent convergent adaptations to extreme
desert conditions rather than any phyletically close relationship. There has
not been a recent evaluation of relationships within the sandgrouse family,
but Bowen (1927) showed the existence of 2 distinct species groups in
Pierocles (based on plumage characteristics and drinking behaviour): on these
criteria, /ichtensteini seems close to indicus, bicinctus and quadricinctus, yet the
latter 2 species have strongly patterned downy young. Similarly, coronatus and
senegallus also seem otherwise phyletically close to species with more or less
strongly patterned young (P. alchata, orientalis, namaqua, exustus, gutturalis
and burchellii). Elsewhere we have shown that P. “ichtensteini, coronatus and
senegallus show matked adaptations for extreme desert conditions (Thomas
43 (Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)]
& Robin 1977), and zudicus also is found in arid areas (Ali & Ripley 1969).
Thus, it seems that the loss of the “‘typical’’ family patterning of downy
young and adoption of more uniform colouration has evolved at least twice
in sandgrouse, in association with existence in extreme deserts: once in the
P. lichtensteinilindicus species group and again in the P. coronatus|senegallus
group. Interestingly, P. namaqua, bicinctus and burchellii have “typically”
patterned downy young, yet survive well in the Namib and/or Kalahari
deserts (Maclean 1968, Thomas & Maclean 1981). However, these 3 southern
African species experience less extreme climatic conditions, and live to a
greater extent in savanna (as well as desert) compared to the 4 Saharan/
Arabian/Indian species, coronatus, senegallus, lichtensteini and indicus (Thomas
& Maclean 1981, Thomas ef a/. 1981), and so selection for “unpatterned”’
downy young may not have been so strong in the southern African species.
Acknowledgements. Research was done with the permission of the Moroccan Government
and with the help of the Moroccan Minister for Waters and Forests and of the Governor
of the Region of Ouarzazate. DHT received grants from the Royal Society of London,
the Science Research Council (B/RG/22939) and University College, Cardiff.
References:
Aldrich, H. C. 1943. Some notes on the Common Sandgrouse (Prerocles exustus Temminck)
in Kaira District. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 44: 123-125.
Ali, S. & Ripley, S. D. 1969. Handbook of the Birds of India and Pakistan. Vol. 3. Oxford
University Press: Bombay.
Bowen, W. W. 1927. Remarks on the classification of the Pteroclididae. Am. Mus. Novit.
2732112.
Fjeldsaa, J. 1976. The systematic affinities of sandgrouse, Pteroclididae. Widensk. Meddelr
Dansk Naturhist. Foren. 139: 179-243.
Fjeldsaa, J. 1977. Guide to the Young of European Precocial Birds. Skarv Nature Publications:
Tisvildeleje, Denmark.
George, U. 1978. In the Deserts of this Earth. Hamilton: London.
Harrison, C. J. O. 1975. A Field Guide to the Nests, Eggs, and Nestlings of British and European
Birds. Collins: London.
Hie, F. & Etchécopar, R. D. 1957. Les Ptéroclididés. L’Oiseau et R.F.O. 27: 35-58.
Mackworth-Praed, C. W. & Grant, C. H. B. 1952. Birds of Eastern and North Eastern Africa.
Vol. 1. Longman: London.
Maclean, G. L. 1968. Field studies on the sandgrouse of the Kalahari Desert. Living Bird.
7: 209-235.
Maclean, G. L. 1976. Adaptations of sandgrouse for life in arid lands. Proc. Int. Orn. Congr.
16: 502-5 16.
Meinertzhagen, R. 1954. Birds of Arabia, Oliver & Boyd: Edinburgh.
Munsell Color. 1975. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Munsell Color: Baltimore.
Thomas, D. H. & Maclean, G. L. 1981. Comparison of physiological and behavioural
thermoregulation and osmoregulation in two sympatric sandgrouse species (Aves:
Pteroclididae). J. Arid Environments 4: 335-358.
Thomas, D. H., Maclean, G. L. & Clinning, C. F. 1981. Daily patterns of behaviour com-
pared between two sandgrouse species (Aves: Pteroclididae) in captivity. Madoqua 12:
187-198.
Thomas, D. H. & Robin, A. P. 1977. Comparative studies of thermoregulatory and osmo-
regulatory behaviour and physiology of five species of sandgrouse (Aves: Ptero-
clididae) in Morocco. J. Zool. Lond. 183: 229-249.
Address: Dr. D. H. Thomas, Department of Zoology, University College (University of
Wales), Cardiff CF1 1XL, U.K.
Dr. A. P. Robin, Centre Hospitalier, Morlaix-Cedex, 29205 France.
[Bull Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2) | 44
Birds in the Brak and Sabha regions of central
Libya, 1981-82
by P. J. Cowan
Received 6 September 1982
In his check-list The Birds of Libya, Bundy (1976) collated separately records
of birds seen in the Fezzan region of Libya (south of 30°N, west of 19°E) on
the basis of the few published papers. I reported bird records for the Brak
and Sabha regions (27°N, 14°E) of the Fezzan for September 1980 to June
1981 (Cowan 1982). The present paper reports my continued observations
in the Brak and Sabha regions, from 28 August 1981 to 24 June 1982.
Acquisition of a car considerably improved my exploration of the area and,
for example, allowed discovery of a further pool at Ashkidah which pro-
vided the Ashkidah breeding records in this paper. I had first visited the lake
at Sabha in late March 1981. Subsequently I was able to visit the lake during
autumn and winter also.
Sites mentioned are shown on the map in Cowan (1982) though I have
changed the spelling of Maharouga to Al Mahruqah (National Atlas 1978).
Al Mahrugah, Agar, Brak and Ashkidah are settlements in the Wadi ash
Shati. South of the Shati, across an arm of the Awbari Sandsea, is the town
of Sabha. West of Sabha, in the Awbari Sandsea, is Gabroan village. Wetland
areas are present in the vicinity of these settlements and include pools or
small lakes. In the following list the sequence of species and checklist number
of Bundy (1976) are used.
3. Podiceps nigricollis Black-necked Grebe. Noted at Sabha on 2 dates in
Sep, one in Oct, one in Nov, 2 in Jan, one in Feb and one in Mar, 2-5 birds,
but 10 in Feb. Also at Sabha, 6 grebes, presumably this species, once in Dec.
First records of any grebe in the Fezzan.
11. Phalacrocorax carbo Cormorant. One at Brak, 19 Oct. First Fezzan
record.
12. Ardea cinerea Grey Heron. Maximum seen c. 75 at Sabha on 1 Oct, but
otherwise, and apparently in past (Bundy 1976), only seen in small numbers.
15. Botaurus stellaris Bittern. One Sabha 24 June. Previously recorded Apr
and Oct (Bundy 1976).
18. Egretta garzetta Little Egret. Maximum seen, 28 at Sabha on 22 Sep.
In autumn, only singles mentioned by Bundy (1976) although a similar
maximum was recorded in autumn by Cowan (1982).
20. Nycticorax nycticorax Night Heron. Maximum, c. 25 at Sabha on 1 Oct.
Apparently previously recorded only in small numbers in autumn.
23. Platalea leucorodia Spoonbill. Singles at Sabha, 21 and 22 Sep, 1 Oct,
8 Nov and 19 Apr and at Ashkidah 17, 23 and 27 Apr. Two previous Fezzan
records.
24. Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis. Records include 21 at Sabha on 21 Sep.
Previously apparently only singles in autumn.
26. Anas acuta Pintail. Seen on 28 dates Sep-June, maximum c. 50 at
Sabha, 23 Oct and at Ashkidah, 30 Oct. Maximum for the 5 dates Dec—Jan,
c. 20 at Brak, 28 Jan. Bundy (1976) mentioned small numbers Oct—Nov,
Feb—Apr.
29. Anas clypeata Shoveler. Recorded Sep—Dec on 6 dates, maximum 10
45 Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)]
at Ashkidah on 16 Nov and Mar-Apr on 7 dates, maximum c. 15 at Ashkidah
5 Apr. Also one at Sabha, 24 June. Only one previous Fezzan record.
30. Anas crecca Teal. Recorded on 5 dates, Dec-Mar. Maximum, c. 25 at
Sabha, 21 Jan. Previously recorded Sep-Nov only, apparently singles
(Bundy 1976).
33. Anas querquedula Garganey. Recorded Sep—Nov on 4 dates and Feb-
June on 14 dates. Maximum, 20 at Brak, 19 Sep. Bundy (1976) mentions
records on 2 autumn dates, Cowan (1982) on 2 spring dates, involving small
numbers.
37. Aythya ferina Pochard. One at Sabha, 23 Oct. First Fezzan record.
38. Aythya fuligula Tufted Duck. One at Sabha, 8 Nov. First Fezzan record.
39. Aythya nyroca Ferruginous Duck. Recorded Sep—June on 22 dates,
maximum c. 100 at Sabha, 23 Oct. Jan maximum, 24 at Sabha, 6 Jan. June
maximum, 28 (excluding downy young) at Ashkidah, 13 June. Previously
only recorded Oct-Nov (Bundy 1976). Breeding records (at Ashkidah):
several sightings in June of 2 females each rearing a single brood. When last
seen brood size down to 8 and 5 downy young respectively. First Fezzan
breeding records.
58. Circus aeruginosus Marsh Harrier. Recorded Sep—June on 31 dates,
maximum 4 at Sabha, 8 Mar. Includes 2 dates in Dec, 3 in Jan and 2 in Feb.
First January records for the Fezzan.
64. Hieraetus pennatus Booted Eagle. One Gabroan, 21 May. 3rd Fezzan
record.
74. Falco concolor Sooty Falcon. One Sabha, 24 June. 4th Fezzan record.
81. Falco vespertinus Red-footed Falcon. One Sabha, 10 May. First Fezzan
record.
85. Grus grus Crane. One at Ashkidah, 5 Dec. First Fezzan record.
87. Fulica atra Coot. Recorded Sep—June on 31 dates, maximum c. 140 at
Sabha on 18 Feb. Autumn maximum, 72 at Sabha, 8 Nov. Includes 5 dates
Dec—Jan, maximum 45 at Sabha, 6 Jan. Apr—June maximum excluding downy
young juveniles, c. 60 at Ashkidah 17 Apr, 29 May and 7 June. Bundy (1976)
mentioned only singles Oct-Nov, while Cowan (1982) had 2 spring dates
involving only a few birds. Breeding records: a small number of broods
reared at Ashkidah and apparently also at Sabha. Sightings of broods of
downy young at Ashkidah late May to 19 June, maximum c. 4 broods on
29 May. Juveniles present Ashkidah in June, maximum of 6 seen on 7 June. 7
juveniles seen at Sabha 24 June. First Fezzan breeding records.
88. Gallinula chloropus Moorhen. Recorded Sep—June. Maximum adults
seen 22, Ashkidah 19 June. Breeding records: at Ashkidah, one brood of
downy young 29 May and one, apparently a different brood, 5 June. Juveniles
at Ashkidah, Brak, Al Mahruqah and Sabha in June, maximum 7 Ashkidah
19 June. Breeding colony previously reported from Sabha (Bundy 1976).
Probably a resident breeder at all suitable localities in west central Libya.
96. Charadrius alexandrinus Kentish Plover. At Sabha, singles on 15 Dec
and 6 Jan. At Ashkidah seen Apr—June on 13 dates, maximum 4 (excluding
downy young). Previously, singles on 5 dates in autumn (Bundy 1976).
Breeding records (at Ashkidah): sightings involving at least 3 different
broods. Observations of downy young Apr and June, including 2 broods
of 2 downy young each on 19 June; one juvenile 2 May; nest with 3 eggs
5 June. First breeding records for the Fezzan.
[ Ball. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)] 46
97. Charadrius dubius Little Ringed Plover. One on 22 Sep, 2 on 1 Oct and
2 on 21 Jan at Sabha. Also recorded Mar—Apr. First autumn and winter
records for the Fezzan. One unseparated dubius|hiaticula at Sabha, 6 Jan.
98. Charadrius hiaticula Ringed Plover. 3 at Brak on 11 Sep, 3 at Sabha on
1 Oct and one at Ashkidah on 5 Nov and 14 May. First Fezzan records.
102. Pluvialis squatarola Grey Plover. One at Ashkidah, 23 Apr. First
Fezzan record.
103. Vanellus vanellus Lapwing. One at Ashkidah, 5 Dec. Previously
recorded by Cowan (1982) only.
105. Calidris alba Sanderling. At Ashkidah, one on 2 May and 2 on 24
May. Previously recorded on only 2 dates (Bundy 1976).
106. Calidris alpina Dunlin. 2 at Ashkidah, 5 Nov and one at Sabha, 8 Nov.
First Fezzan records.
108. Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper. At Ashkidah, 3 on 27 Apr, one
on 14 May and 2 on 24 May. 6 at Sabha 10 May and one at Gabroan 21 May.
Only one previous Fezzan record.
110. Calidris minuta Little Stint. Recorded Sep—June including, at Sabha,
c. 15 on 15 Dec, 7 on 6 Jan, c. 20 on 21 Jan and c. 15 on 18 Feb, the first
winter records for the Fezzan.
111. Calidris temminckii Temminck’s Stint. One at Sabha, 22 Sep. First
autumn record.
112. Gallinago gallinago Snipe. 2 on 22 Sep and one on 1 Oct at Sabha. Also
recorded in Mar. An unseparated snipe sp. at Brak, 8 Dec. One previous
autumn record.
116. Limosa limosa Black-tailed Godwit. Singles at Sabha on 21, 22 Sep
and 1 Oct and at Ashkidah on 23, 27 Apr and 5 June. Two previous Fezzan
records (Bundy 1976, Cowan 1982).
121. Philomachus pugnax Ruff. Recorded Sep-Oct and Mar—June. Also, one
at Sabha on 15 Dec, the first Fezzan winter record.
123. Lringa erythropus Spotted Redshank. Recorded on 7 dates Sep—Nov,
maximum 4 at Sabha on 1 Oct. Previously, records of 5 birds (Bundy 1976).
124. Tringa glareola Wood Sandpiper. One at Brak, 27 Sep. The second
autumn record for Fezzan. Also recorded Apr and May.
126. Tringa nebularia Greenshank. One at Ashkidah on 30 Oct. Also
recorded Apr, May. In autumn, previously, singles on one date only, at
Sabha (Bundy 1976).
127. Iringa ochropus Green Sandpiper. Recorded Aug—Apr including, at
Brak, singles on 8, 21, 24 Dec, 4, 14, 19 Jan and, at Sabha, singles on 15 Dec,
21 Jan. Winter records were first reported by Cowan (1982).
128. Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper. One at Brak, 27 Sep. Also recorded
Apr, May. Only one previous autumn record.
129. Tringa totanus Redshank. One at Sabha 22 Sep, one at Brak 27 Sep,
9 Oct. Also Mar, May. First autumn records for Fezzan.
130. Himantopus himantopus Black-winged Stilt. One at Sabha, 1 Oct.
Recorded on 13 dates Mar—June, maximum 14 at Ashkidah 2 May. No
previous autumn records. Previous maxima, 2 (Bundy 1976), 17 (Cowan
1982).
“ 34. Cursorius cursor Cream-coloured Courser. One at Agar 22 Feb and 4 at
Sabha 8 Mar. Bundy (1976) mentioned the uncertain Fezzan status of this
species, previous records having been Oct-Nov and Feb—May.
47 [ Bull, Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)|
136. Glareola pratincola Collared Pratincole. 3 at Ashkidah, 24 May. In
same flock were a further 3 pratincoles whose underwing colour was not de-
termined. First Fezzan records of pratincoles.
143. Larus fuscus Lesser Black-backed Gull. One (L. f. fuscus) at Ashkidah
on 24 and 29 May. No previous Fezzan records.
147. Larus ridibundus Black-headed Gull. At Sabha: one on 1, 23 Oct, 8
Nov; c. 50 on 15 Dec; 40, 6 Jan; c. 30, 21 Jan; c. 20, 18 Feb; 6, 8 Mar; one,
19 Apr. At Ashkidah, one on 28 Jan and 5 Apr. One at Brak, 19 Mar. 3 gulls,
presumably this species, Ashkidah, 17 Apr. First recorded Cowan (1982),
maximum 16.
148. Chlidonias hybrida Whiskered Tern. At Sabha, one on 1 Oct, 4 on 10
May. At Ashkidah, one on 24 May, 2 on 29 May. First Fezzan records.
149. Chlidonias leucopterus White-winged Black Tern. One at Sabha, 1 Oct.
Second autumn record for the Fezzan. Also, at Ashkidah, 5 on 23 Apr, 3 on
27 Apr, 2 on 24 May and one on 13 June. 7 at Sabha, 10 May.
150. Chlidonias niger Black Tern. 4 at Ashkidah, 23 Apr. Previously, 5
birds recorded (Bundy 1976).
151. Gelochelidon nilotica Gull-billed Tern. One at Sabha, 1 Oct. Second
Fezzan record.
164. Streptopelia senegalensis Palm Dove. Recorded Oct—June on 19 dates.
Seen at Ashkidah, Brak, Sabha and Al Mahruqah. Probably a resident
breeder. First recorded by Cowan (1982).
207. Riparia riparia Sand Martin. Recorded Sep—Oct on 8 dates. Also seen
Mar—June. First recorded in autumn by Cowan (1982).
215. Motacilla cinerea Gtey Waytail. At Brak, one on 8 Dec and 27 Feb.
Previously, singles on 4 dates (Bundy 1976, Cowan 1982).
251. Syia cantillans Subalpine Warbler. At Brak, one on 29 Aug, 23 Nov
and 4 Jan. One at Al Mahruqah 29 Mar. Bundy (1976) gave one and Cowan
(1982) 3 winter dates.
282. Saxicola rubetra Whinchat. Though recorded Apr—May as expected
(Bundy 1976), no autumn records (cf. Cowan 1982).
283. Saxicola torquata Stonechat. One at Brak, 29 Nov. 3rd Fezzan
record.
307. Passer hispaniolensis Spanish Sparrow. At Brak, 28 Oct-23 Mar with
a maximum of c. 1000 on 31 Oct. Cowan (1982) recorded it early Nov to Mar
though previously not recorded in Fezzan before Jan (Bundy 1976).
I can add the following species to the list in Cowan (1982) of species seen
by myself of which the Fezzan status is reasonably certain (Bundy 1976):—
21. Ciconia ciconia; 61. Circus pygargus; 79. Falco subbuteo; 161. Pterocles sene-
gallus; 177/179. Apus apus|pallidus (anseparated); 192. Calendrella cinerea;
203. Hirundo daurica; 225. Ficedula albicollis (not semitorquata); 226. Ficedula
hypoleuca; 252. Sylvia communis; 281. Phoenicurus phoenicurus.
References:
Bundy, G. 1976. The Birds of Libya. British Ornithologists’ Union: London.
Cowan, P. J. 1982. Birds in west central Libya, 1980-81. Bu//. Brit. Orn. Cl. 102: 32-35.
National Atlas of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. 1978. Surveying Department,
Secretariat of Planning, Tripoli. Arabic/English edition.
Address: Dt. P. J. Cowan, Higher Institute of Technology, P.O. Box 68, Brak, Socialist
People’s Libyan Atab Jamahiriya.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)] 48
On the nominate race of Césticola fulvicapilla
(Vieillot), 1817
by P. A. Clancey
Received 25 August 1982
Sylia fulvicapilla Vieillot, 1817, is based on the La Fauvette Rousse téte of
Levaillant (1802), who encountered the species in the Cape to the south of
the Orange R. and specifically near Old Camdeboo, close to the present
town of Graaff-Reinet in the east of the Province at 32° 12’S, 24° 32’E, which
is the accepted type-locality of the nominate race. In his major review of the
genus Cisticola, Lynes (1930) gave the range of C. f. fulvicapilla as the Cape
(except for ecologically unsuitable karoo country and the southwest) and
Natal. Interestingly enough, Graaff-Reinet lies in the east of the Karoo and
is well outside the currently established range of the species in the eastern
Cape, the valley of the Great Fish R. being the western distributional limit
in this sector.
In my revision of C. fulvicapilla (Clancey 1971), I refined the range of the
nominate race to read “‘southern and eastern Cape, east from about George,
Lesotho, Natal and Zululand, and, probably, western Swaziland’—this
being adopted in the recent S.A.O.S. Checklist (Clancey 1980). In this
revision it was pointed out that the population occurring on the periphery
of the massif of Lesotho differs from the norm of nominate fu/vicapilla in its
greater size. Quickelberge (1972), in his report on 2 ornithological expedi-
tions to the highlands of Lesotho, comments on the same 4 adult males from
Moletsane (a remote outpost in northern Lesotho on the Maluti escarpment
between Mamathes and Mapoteng at 6200 ft) which were commented on by
Clancey in 1971, as demonstrating a redder, less brownish, pileum and
lighter mantle when compared with the bulk of referred populations of
nominate fulvicapilla. Two adult males taken in early August 1982 near the
village of Rhodes (30° 48’S, 27° 28’E), and now in the Durban Museum,
show similar characters to those established for Lesotho birds by Quickel-
berge.
While no specimens from anywhere near the type-locality of C. f. fulvicapilla
exist in museum collections, material is available from the karoid country
to the east of the mid- and upper valley of the Great Fish R., northeast to the
versant of the seaward facing escarpment of the Drakensberg Range and
Lesotho.
This karoid element of the present nominate race of C. fu/vicapilla is clearly
different from the populations of the southern and eastern Cape to Natal
and western Zululand currently associated with them. No name in synonymy
is available for such populations. Hartlaub’s Camaroptera natalensis of 1863
(proposed in Gurney, Ibis 1863: 323, pl. viii, Fig. 1), described on an Ayres
skin from Pinetown, Natal, is pre-occupied in the genus Czsticola by Drymoica
natalensis A. Smith, 1843: Durban, Natal. No name being available, the
innominate populations may be known as
Cisticola fulvicapilla dumicola subsp. nov.
Type: 3, adult, Inanda, north of Durban, Natal, South Africa. Collected
8 May 1955 by Durban Museum personnel. In the collection of the Durban
Museum, D. M. Reg. No. 2677.
49 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2))
Description: Differs from C. f. fulvicapilla of the karoid regions of the
interior of the eastern Cape to the east of the mid- and upper valley of the
Great Fish R., northeast to the Drakensberg escarpment and the Maluti of
Lesotho, in having the vertex in moderately worn non-breeding dress
(August) Argus Brown (Ridgway 1912) versus Dresden Brown, and with the
dorsum deep Saccardo’s Umber, the red-brown of the head-top diffused as
a wash over the mantle and scapulars, and the tail rather redder; in worn
breeding dress (from November) with the vertex darker, more chestnut and
less ochraceous, and with the back rather blacker. The ventral surface in
both plumages is about the same. The size ranges smaller than nominate
fulicapilla: wings in $3 48.5-51.5 (in nominate fu/vicapilla to 54) mm.
Material examined: 50 specimens.
Range: Moist coastal regions of the southern and southeastern Cape from
the George/Knysna region to coastal Transkei, Griqualand East, Natal
(except Drakensberg escarpment country of extreme west), and western
Zululand.
Measurements of the Type: Wing (flattened) 49.5, culmen from base 13, tail
40 mm.
Remarks: The name chosen is from the Latin dumico/a: inhabiting thickets
or coppices.
With the description of C. f. dumicola, the range of nominate C. fulvicapilla
will stand as outlined in the above “Description’’.
References:
Clancey, P. A. 1971. Miscellaneous taxonomic notes on African birds XXXII. Durban
Mus. Novit. ix (5): 51-57
Clancey, P. A. (Ed.). 1980. 5.A.O.S. Checklist of Southern African Birds. p. 218. Southern
African Ornithological Society: Johannesburg.
Levaillant, F. 1802. Histoire Naturelle des Oiseaux d’ Afrique. Vol. iii: 98, plate 124. Paris.
Lynes, H. 1930. Review of the genus Cisticola. Ibis Suppl. Ser 12 (6): 503-517.
Quickelberge, C. D. 1972. Results of two ornithological expeditions to Lesotho. Durban
Mus. Novit. 1x (17): 268.
Ridgway, R. 1912. Color Standards and Color Nomenclature. The author: Washington, D.C.
Address: Dt. P. A. Clancey, Durban Museum, P.O. Box 4085, Durban 4000, South Africa.
©British Ornithologists’ Club 1983
A new subspecies of the Usambara Weaver
Ploceus nicolli
by N.—E. Franzmann
Received 14 August 1982
The affinity of the 2 East African weavers Ploceus olivaceiceps and P. nicolli has
been disputed for some time. Both forms were originally described as
separate species and were also treated as such by Mackworth-Praed & Grant
(1960). It was apparently Moreau (1960: 465) who first suggested that
olivaceiceps and nicolli were conspecific, repeating this in Peters’ (1962: 56),
but later (1966: 88) changing his mind. Hall & Moreau (1970: 292) con-
sidered nicol/i “at least an incipient species”. Britton (1980: 212) also treats
nicolli as a colour form of o/waceiceps.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)] 50
While working on a large collection of skins collected in Tanzania by
Thorkild Andersen between 1947 and 1965, a specimen clearly belonging
to this weaver complex, but different from the forms hitherto described,
was discovered. For the reasons given below, this finding leads me to believe
that P. o/ivaceiceps and P. nicolli are best treated as separate species. I propose
the new form be considered a subspecies of P. nicolli, as follows:
Ploceus nicolli anderseni subsp. nov.
Type. Adult 3 collected 23 May 1952 by Thorkild Andersen in the Uluguru
Mts., Tanzania, elevation 1500-1800 m. Collector’s No. 144. Type at the
Zoological Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark. No. 10.5. 1982: 1.
Description. The male differs from nominate xico//i in having forehead,
crown and nape black with a sepia brown cast. There is no trace of yellow,
not even on the forehead. The throat is very dark, almost black, as opposed
to dark brown. This dark area is also more extensive in anderseni than in the
nominate form, while the chestnut chest-band is narrower in anderseni. The
feet are light brown, the bill black and the iris brown.
The female anderseni differs from nominate females in having the throat
darker brown. The crown of the female anderseni is very dark brown, almost
black, whereas the crown colour of nominate females varies from dusky
brown to very dark brown.
Measurements of type (mm). Wing (chord) 88, tail 48, tarsus 23.3 and culmen
from base 17.3.
Range. The Uluguru Mountains (7° 10'S, 37° 40’E), Morogoro District,
Morogoro Region, Tanzania above 1400 m. Sight records from the Mwani-
hana Forest (7° 45'S, 36° 50’E), Uzungwa Mountains, Kilombero District,
Morogoro Region can also be assigned to this subspecies.
Specimens examined. Ploceus olivaceiceps (13). Mzimba, Malawi 1 g, 1 2 British
Museum (Natural History) (BMNH); Kapiriuta, Malawi 1 9 (BMNH);
Michiru Hill, Malawi 1 9 (BMNH); Unangu, Mozambique 1 ¢ (BMNH);
Furancungo, Mozambique 3 gd, 3 929 (BMNH); Songea, Tanzania 1 g, 1 9
(Zoological Museum, Copenhagen) (ZMC).
P. 2. nicolli (13). Amani, Tanzania 2 gg, 1 92 including type (BMNH);
Lushoto, Tanzania 1 9? (BMNH); Shume, Manolo & Lushoto, West Usam-
bara, Tanzania 3 $d, 2 99, 1 dimm, 3 99 imm (Peabody Museum of Natural
History) (PMNH).
P. n. anderseni. (2) Uluguru Mts, Tanzania 1 ¢ type (ZMC), 1 9 (PMNH).
Remarks. The only 2 specimen of anderseni was collected in the Uluguru
Mountains by G. H. Heinrich at 1600 m. on 10 December 1961 (Ripley &
Heinrich 1966). I consider P. nicolli and P. olivaceiceps to be separate species
for the following 2 reasons: first, although anderseni is much closer to
olivaceiceps geogtaphically, it is even less similar to it than is nominate wicoli1.
In the male o/ivaceiceps there is a distinct yellow forehead. To a varying degree
this is also seen in nominate zico//i, but there is no trace of this character in
anderseni. P. n. anderseni is generally darker around the head and throat than
nominate nico/li, whereas olivaceiceps is much paler; secondly both nominate
nicolli and anderseni ate inhabitants of the canopy of high mountain rain
forest, whilst o/vaceiceps is a denizen of Brachystegia woodland (Stuart & van
der Willigen 1978). I do not doubt the common ancestry of the 2 species,
51 (Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)]
but both have clearly diverged very considerably, both in plumage charac-
teristics and habitat requirements. They are best regarded as forming a
superspecies in the sense of Hall & Moreau (1970).
Ploceus nicolli is a rather variable species. In the nominate subspecies, the
forehead of the male is always dull yellow, but this may sometimes extend
over the crown and nape. This was noted by Ripley & Heinrich (1966), who
also pointed out the variability in the female head colour from dusky brown
to black. With only 2 specimens of anderseni it is not possible to comment
on such variability except to note that both Uluguru specimens have plumage
characteristics well outside the limits of variation shown by nominate nicol/.
Ploceus nicolli has recently been seen in the Mwanihana Forest, on the
eastern scarp of the Uzungwa Mountains in eastern Tanzania. This is a new
locality for the species. Very good field observations were obtained by S. N.
Stuart and Miss T. A. van der Willigen at 1150-1200 m, both of whom noted
the very dark heads and absence of yellow forehead. I therefore ascribe these
birds provisionally to anderseni. In addition to the 2 specimens of anderseni
collected in the Ulugurus, a field observation of one individual was recently
made in Kinole Forest (6° 53’S, 37° 44’E) at 1350 m (Stuart & Jensen 1981)
on the eastern side of the mountains.
This subspecies is named after the collector, the late Thorkild Andersen,
whose collection of birds from Tanzania is one of the most extensive ever
made.
Acknowledgements. 1 wish to thank the curators of the British Museum (Natural History),
the Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale, and the Zoological Museum, Copenhagen,
Mr. I. C. J. Galbraith, Prof. C. G. Sibley and Dr. J. Fjeldsa respectively for their co-opera-
tion. F. P. Jensen and S. N. Stuart gave valuable assistance and comments in the prepara-
tion of this paper. S. N. Stuart also improved the English. I thank them all for their help.
References:
Britton, P. L. (ed.) 1980. Birds of East Africa. Nairobi: EANHS.
Hail, B. P. & Moreau, R. E. 1970. An Aftlas of Speciation in African Passerine Birds. British
Museum (Nat. Hist.): London.
Mackworth-Praed, C. W. & Grant, C. H. B. 1960. African Handbook of Birds. Series 1, Vol.
2. Birds of Eastern and North Eastern Africa. 2nd Edition. London: Longmans, Green
& Co.
Moreau, R. E. 1960. oe and classification of the Ploceine weaver-birds. Part 2.
Ibis 102: 443-47
— 1966. The Bird ees of Africa and its Islands. Academic Press: London.
Peters, J. L. 1962. (Mayr & Greenway, Eds.) Check-list of Birds of the World. Vol. XV. Mus.
Comp. Zool: Cambridge, Mass.
Ripley, S. D. & Heinrich, G. H. 1966. Comments on the avifauna of Tanzania. Postilla 96:
I-45.
Sclater, W. L. 1931. Ploceus nicolli, sp. nov. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 52: 26-27.
Stuart, S. N. & van der Willigen, T. A. 1978. Report of the Cambridge Ecological Expedition
to Tanzania. Cambridge.
Stuart, S. N. & Jensen, F. P. 1981. Further range extensions and other notable records of
forest birds from Tanzania. Scopus 5: 106-115.
Address: N.-E. Franzmann, Game Biology Station, Kalo, DK- 8410 Ronde, Denmark.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)] 52
The Soft-plumaged Petrel, the Gon-gon and the Freira,
Prerodroma mollis, P. feae and P. madeira
by W. R. P. Bourne
Received 21 July 1982
The soft-plumaged petrels allied to Pzerodroma mollis are a complex group of
seabirds of wide distribution but uncertain affinities whose classification has
caused repeated difficulty to systematists (Murphy & Mowbray 1951, Bourne
1957, 1966). In the past I have urged a cautious approach pending the
acquisition of more information, a course adopted by Jouanin & Mougin
(1979); but since the only important recent information indicates that a
number of colonies may have been lost and the remainder include some of
the rarest seabird populations in the North Atlantic (Bourne 1965, 1972,
Bannerman 1965, 1968, Cramp & Simmons 1977), it seems time to reconsider
their importance before we lose these as well. They are currently both the
subject of debatable propositions about the difference between dark and
light individuals of the same species (Clancey e¢ a/. 1981) and of intrinsic
interest in their own right.
DISCOVERY AND DESCRIPTION
The first soft-plumaged petrel appears to have been collected at 6° 50’ N,
23° 46’ W off west Africa in October 1768 during Cook’s first voyage. It was
named Procellaria crepidata by D. C. Solander in his notes and this was the
name used in some accounts of the voyage, though unfortunately no descrip-
tion was published at the time. An excellent drawing by Sydney Parkinson
has since been reproduced by Lysaght (1959), from which it is recognisable
as the form breeding locally in the Cape Verde Islands, where it is known
as the Gon-gon, which was eventually named Oestre/ata feae by Salvadori
(1899). This still appears to be the only record of the collection of an example
of the North Atlantic populations at sea, and confirms that this form has a
primarily tropical qietneenoe
A number of specimens, including an almost uniformly dark grey bird,
were next collected in the Southern Ocean by Gould (1860) on the way to
Australia in 1838, and subsequently he obtained others from sailors. Gould
(1844) published the first description of the main southern population under
the name Procellaria mollis. He deduced that while the adults have white
breasts, the young are grey (as in gulls), repeating this in his influential books
on the birds of Australia. When it was eventually realised that while few
petrels show much variation in appearance with age, many are polymorphic,
P. mollis was therefore assumed to be one of them.
Soon afterwards, in 1853, Frere obtained 2 more birds in Madeira (now at
Cambridge—Benson in press). He presumably exhibited them as a new dis-
covery, since shortly afterwards William Yarrell misidentified a stray speci-
men, without data, of the rather similar nominate race of Fairy Prion
Pachyptila turtur as a new species from Madeira for Gould (1855) to describe
and name Procellaria brevirostris. Fortunately this name had already been
applied to the Kerguelen Petrel by Lesson (Bourne & Elliott 1965), so that
while this mistake has caused a good deal of speculation, it has had no
permanent nomenclatural consequences.
53 (Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)]
The situation was eventually investigated thoroughly by Mathews (1924,
1932, 1934 4). First he appropriately named another stray specimen of doubt-
ful origin, now in the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) as
Pterodroma dubius, and what appears to be Gould’s original grey “‘immature”’
in the British Museum (Natural History) (BMNH) as P. deceptornis. He
followed this by describing a small population nesting in the mountains of
Madeira, where they are known as the Freira, and large birds nesting on the
offshore islands, as 2 new races, P.m. madeira and P.m. deserta. Finally in his
definitive check-list (1934b) he synonymised all the southern birds under
nominate P. mo//is but continued to accept 3 races from the North Atlantic,
including large P.m. feae from the Cape Verde Islands, P. m. deserta and P. m.
madeira. Most subsequent authors have considered P. m. deserta inseparable
from P. m. feae (Bourne 1957, Jouanin ef a/. 1969, Cramp & Simmons 1977).
Up to this time, apparently, it was assumed that the Soft-plumaged Petrels
were most closely related to the larger members of the genus Pzerodroma in
the Southern Ocean. Then Murphy & Mowbray (1951) reported the redis-
covery of the long-lost Bermuda Petrel P. cahow which proved to be inter-
mediate in size and appearance between P. mo//is and a group of large warm-
water species including the Capped Petrel P. hasitata of the West Indies and
the Dark-rumped and White-necked Petrels P. phaeopygia and P. externa of
the Pacific (Bourne 7 Palmer 1962). I have already suggested that the full
elucidation of the situation must depend on further investigation in the field,
notably at another possible intermediate station, namely the Azores (Bourne
1966).
: OBSERVATIONS IN THE FIELD
The appearance and behaviour of live Soft-plumaged Petrels has been
examined critically by Elliott (1954, 1957) in the Tristan/Gough group. He
found that while most had white breasts, one distinct group nesting high on
the main island were darker with more markings below, though otherwise
quite similar, and concluded therefore that they were only a variety. Simul-
taneously Rand (1954) reported what he took to be a uniformly dark form
of P. mollis breeding commonly on Marion Island; so that the 2 authors,
prior to publication, were consequently unable to to compare their observa-
tions. This was unfortunate, since the specimens that Rand sent to the
BMNH are in fact young Kerguelen Petrels (Bourne 1957).
In the course of an investigation of the birds of the North Atlantic islands
I examined nearly all soft-plumaged petrel specimens in northern museums
(Bourne 1957, 1966). They showed little consistent geographical variation
except that while North Atlantic birds are usually pale and white below, the
southern ones are darker with a breast-band. The birds from the North
Atlantic are also divisible into 2 groups of different sizes with different
breeding-seasons. Thus the small, form madeira lacks much mottling and
appears to breed in the early summer in the mountains of that island; and the
large form feae, which tends to be streaked on the flanks, breeds in the
autumn on the offshore islands of Madeira and in winter in the mountains
of the Cape Verde Islands. About one in ten of all large series were darker
and more heavily marked below and one in many hundreds of the southern
population were dark all over.
Further summer-breeding populations of P. mo//is which appear indistin-
guishable from the nominate form have also been found in the Southern
(Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)] 54
Ocean at the Crozets by Despin e¢ a/. (1972) and on Antipodes Island, south
of New Zealand, by Warham & Bell (1979). There is also a specimen of
P. mollis in the BMNH collected in the 1840s by Ross’ Antarctic Expedition
and 2 others in the Melbourne Museum collected in February 1952 at Port
Jeanne d’Arc from Kerguelen, from where Derenne ef a/. (1974) give other
records. Individuals have also recently been reported from Macquarie and
Chatham Islands (Jones 1980, Crockett 1981), where it now seems likely that
bones formerly attributed on grounds of probability to the osteologically
similar Mottled Petrel Pterodroma inexpectata, together with other bones
from Amsterdam Island (Jouanin & Paulian 1960), really belong to further
southern populations of P. mollis. While some of these populations may have
been exterminated by introduced predators, it might still be worth searching
for survivors (Bourne 1965, 1967, 1972, 1981).
Further observations have now confirmed that while heavily-marked
individuals can normally be found in variable proportions in most or all
populations of Soft-plumaged Petrel, and may apparently predominate in
the Prince Edward Islands (Clancey e¢ a/. 1981), uniformly dark individuals
are rare. In addition to the bird obtained in the last century by Gould (1844,
see Mathews 1932), about 12 have now been reported at sea (Sinclair 1978)
and on Gough Island (Swales 1965) in the Southern Ocean, while on Marion
Island one was found consorting in a hole with a white-breasted individual
(Schramm 1982). At sea the paler birds showed contrasting darker markings
of the type usual in Soft-plumaged Petrels, while the darker birds were
darker than Kerguelen Petrels, with which they might have been confused,
and which appear silvery at sea. Sinclair (1978) reports also that P. mollis can
be separated by its characteristic shape and behaviour and the darker leading
edge of the underwing.
DISCUSSION
Any attempt to classify the Soft-plumaged Petrels and their allies en-
counters difficulties resulting from either gaps or overlaps in their distribu-
tion, suggesting that either the missing populations are likely to have been
lost or overlooked, as in the subantarctic islands of New Zealand or the
Azores; or that the overlapping populations must either interbreed or repre-
sent separate species (Mayr e¢ a/. 1953: 121). It may be useful to consider the
problem under 3 headings.
The medium-sized gadfly (or Soft-plumaged) petrels of the Southern Ocean
Owing to the fact that the most important early authority, Gould (1844,
1860), apparently collected only one medium-sized grey gadfly petrel in the
Southern Ocean, which by chance proved to be the rare dark form of P.
mollis, there appears to have been persistent confusion over the relationship
of this species to the more southerly grey Kerguelen Petrel P. brevirostris
(Falla 1937, Rand 1954). Until I saw them together I also assumed that they
must be closely related and might hybridise (Bourne 1966). In fact they
appear to be rather distinct with numerous isolating mechanisms.
Thus, in the first place, while the Soft-plumaged and Kerguelen petrels
are rather similar in size and sometimes in appearance, they differ consider-
ably in their structure and behaviour, the Kerguelen Petrel having a much
larger eye, presumably an adaption for nocturnal vision in particular (Harper
1973). Secondly, they also have rather distinct annual cycles, the Kerguelen
Petrel laying about 2 months earlier in the spring and completing its breeding
55 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)]
cycle rapidly during the summer (Mougin 1969); the Soft-plumaged Petrel
in contrast continues to feed its chick into the winter. Thirdly, I found that
on Gough Island the 2 species use rather different nest-sites, the subtropical
Soft-plumaged Petrels breeding in dry, sheltered burrows in the steep sides
of the island, while the subantarctic Kerguelen Petrels preferred waterlogged
holes in the bleak upland heaths.
Similarly, while 1 formerly supposed that both species were originally
replaced by the rather similar Mottled Petrel P. inexpectata in the New
Zealand area until the sites were devastated by introduced predators (Bourne
1957), the presence of P. inexpectata on the outlying islands has never been
proved, while P. wo//zs has in fact been found there instead. It consequently
seems more likely that P. znexpectata was a specialised form which developed
on and around the main islands of New Zealand, dispersing south in the
summer and migrating into the northern hemisphere in the winter, whereas
the sedentary P. wo//is continued to occupy the same niche on the outlying
islands that it does in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. (Incidentally I have
seen P. mollis commonly at sea much further east in the Great Australian
Bight than shown on the distribution map in Harper (1973). )
The medium-sized gadfly petrels of the North Atlantic
While the Soft-plumaged Petrels of the Southern Ocean may vary in their
appearance, they are all rather similar in their size and habits, nesting on the
middle slopes of oceanic islands in the local summer. The situation is rather
different in the North Atlantic, where, as already mentioned, in addition to
a population of small-sized birds nesting in the summer on the cool, moist,
heavily-vegetated upper slopes of Madeira, other groups of larger-sized birds
breed in the autumn on its bare, arid outlying islands, and in the winter on
the mountains of the Cape Verde Islands to the south and islets around
Bermuda to the west.
This situation is susceptible to 2 alternative explanations. All the birds
may possibly be derived (together with P. cahow of Bermuda) from the large,
winter-nesting Capped Petrel P. hasttata of the West Indies. This could have
given rise when the climate deteriorated during the Pleistocene to a summer-
nesting population on the mountains of Madeira, which subsequently
colonised the Southern Ocean, where it is now replacing P. znexpectata in the
New Zealand area following reduction of the latter by introduced predators.
Alternatively the eastern North Atlantic populations may be derived from
summer-nesting birds of the Southern Ocean, which colonised the North
Atlantic during the Pleistocene, and since the climate became warmer have
given rise to a winter-nesting population in the Cape Verde Islands, and have
now colonised the lower levels of the Madeira group as well.
The relationship between birds of different colours
On the basis of a personal examination of specimens in northern collec-
tions, including all the types, it is clear (see above) that while northern
populations of the Soft-plumaged Petrels are normally pale with white
breasts, and the southern ones darker with a band across the breast, occasional
individuals in all populations are darker with more marking below, or even
dark all over in the southern populations. The examination of many more
specimens including recent series from the Antipodes and Crozet islands
confirms this.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)] 56
Figure 1. Breeding distribution of Soft-plumaged and Capped Petrels.
M-— Soft-plumaged Petrel Prterodroma mollis. - Petrel Mottled Petrel P. inexpectata.
F— Gon-gon P. feae. X— Freira P. madeira. C- Bermuda Petrel P. cahow. H- Capped
Petrel P. hasitata. D- Jamaica Petrel P.h. caribbaea. P- Dark-rumped Petrel P. phae-
opygia. S— Hawaiian Petrel P.p. sandwichensis, E— Juan Fernandez Petrel P. externa.
Y-— White-necked Petrel P. e. cervicalis. B— Barau’s Petrel P. barani. Populations circled
are already known to be severely reduced in numbers, and those with small letters
are only known from stray specimens and bones; the Jamaica Petrel (D) may be
extinct.
Clancey e¢ a/. (1981) have recently deduced instead, from South African
specimens from a more limited series of sites, that the darker birds belong
to a distinct race, P. w. dubia Mathews (1924), breeding in the southern Indian
Ocean and expected to occur on Antipodes Island in the South Pacific.
Regrettably, in fact, the type of P. m. dubia is so worn that it is difficult to be
sure of its original appearance in the absence of information about its origin.
Clancey e¢ a/. also report the occurrence of two small, pale petrel corpses
resembling the North Atlantic race P. m~. madeira on South African beaches.
In addition to the dark birds collected on Tristan by Elliott (1954), the
BMNH also contains 2 small, pale birds, possibly immatures, which Elliott
collected on nearby Inaccessible Island in May 1952. There is also a third, in
spirit, collected on Marion Island in March 1961. Thus the full range of
variation in the southern populations has now been collected in both the
Tristan/Gough and Prince Edward groups and, as reported by Warham &
Bell (1979), the Antipodes birds show a similar variation in appearance.
It appears that while the soft-plumaged petrels allied to P. wo/lis become
darker and more heavily marked from north to south, there is a wide range
of variation and overlap in their appearance, so that plumage is not a very
satisfactory basis for their classification. The populations in the Southern
Ocean, which all appear to nest in the summer, are otherwise rather uniform
in such characters as size and behaviour, and seem rather distinct from other
southern petrels except possibly P. inexpectata, which differs in its voice
(Warham 1979) and migratory habits; thus there seems little case for recog-
nising racial variation there. The North Atlantic populations are more
57 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2) |
variable in size and annual cycle, intergrading through madeira, feae and
cahow with the large, winter-nesting Capped Petrel P. hasitata of the West
Indies (Fig. 1).
While there is at present an important gap in the North Atlantic range of
the group in the inadequately-explored Azores, where the birds may either
have been overlooked or exterminated by introduced predators, Madeira
appears to have been colonised twice. Presumably it was first occupied by
the small, summer-nesting Freira madeira when it was cooler and wetter
during the Pleistocene; but adeira has now become restricted to the upper
slopes and the low ground has been colonised by the larger, winter-nesting
Gon-gon feae, derived from the same stock but under the more arid condi-
tions of the Cape Verde Islands since the climate became warmer in recent
times. In consequence the Madeira area, which appears to have the best
conditions for subtropical petrels in the North Atlantic, is now exploited
by birds of a wider range of sizes breeding during much of the year.
The most important conclusion arising from recent observations, for
which I am indebted to C. Jouanin, R. de Naurois, G. Le Grand and D.
Wingate, is that all the North Atlantic Pterodroma petrels are now rare and
threatened, with cahow and madeira in particular already reduced to a few
dozen birds. In this situation there has been a strange contrast between the
assistance given to the Cahow, which has been regarded as a species and
has received world-wide attention and special assistance (so that it is now
recovering), and the Freira, which has been well-nigh ignored as a dubious
race. The Gon-gon and the Freira are in fact sympatric forms of great
interest which are both in grave danger on Madeira. Because it is difficult to
say which of the two is closer to the Soft-plumaged Petrel, showing as the
latter does an overlap in its variation in colour, it seems time to abandon
taxonomic caution and I advocate treating all 3 binomially as distinct species,
Pterodroma mollis, Pterodroma feae and Pterodroma madeira.
References:
Bannerman, D. A. 1965, 1968. Birds of the Atlantic Islands. Vols. 2 and 4. Oliver and Boyd:
Edinburgh.
Benson, C. V. in press. ype Species of Birds (skins) in the University Museum of Zoology, Cam-
bridge, United Kingdom. Cambridge.
Bourne, W. R. P. 1955. The birds of the Cape Verde Islands. [bis 97: 508-556.
— 1957. Additional notes on the birds of the Cape Verde Islands. /bis 99: 182-190.
— 1965. The missing petrels. Bu//. Brit. Orn. Cl. 85: 97-105.
— 1966. Further notes on the birds of the Cape Verde Islands. /bis 108: 425-429.
— 1967. Subfossil petrel bones from the Chatham Islands. /bis 109: 1-7.
— 1972. General threats to seabirds. [CBP Bull. 11: 200-218.
— 1981. The gadfly petrel skull and diving petrels from Macquarie Island. Nosornis
28: 142-143.
Bourne, W. R. P. & Elliott, H. F. I. 1965. The correct scientific name for the Kerguelen
Petrel. [bis 107: 548-550.
Clancey, P. A., Brooke, R. K. & Sinclair, J. C. 1981. Variation in the current nominate
subspecies of Pterodroma mollis (Gould) (Aves: Procellariidae). Durban Mus. Novit.
12: 203-213. .
Cramp, S. & Simmons, K. E. L. 1977. The Birds of the Western Palearctic. Vol. 1. Oxford
University Press.
Crockett, D. 1981. 1980-81 Chatham Island Taiko Expedition. OSNZ News 18: 1.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)] 58
Derenne, P., Lufbery, J. X. & Tollu, B. 1974. L’avifaune de l’archipel Kerguelen. CVFRA
33: 58-87.
Despin, B., Mougin, J. L. & Segonzac, M. 1972. Oiseaux et mammiféres de I’Ile de l’Est,
archipel Crozet (46° 25’S, 52° 12’E). CNFRA 1: 1-106.
Elliott, H. F. I. 1954. On two new races and an undescribed variety from the Tristan da
Cunha group. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 74: 21-24.
— 1957. A contribution to the ornithology of the Tristan da Cunha group. Jbis 99:
545-586.
Falla, R. A. 1937. Birds. BANZ Antarctic Research Expedition 1929-1931. Reports (B) 11:
1-304.
Gould, J. 1844. On the family Procellariidae with descriptions of ten new species. Amn.
Mag. Nat. Hist. 13: 360-368.
— 1855. Ona new species of the genus Prion. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1855: 87-88.
— 1860. The Birds of Australia. London.
Harper, P. C. 1973. The field identification and supplementary notes on the Soft-plumaged
Petrel (Pterodroma mollis Gould 1844). Notornis 20: 193-201.
Jones, E. 1980. A survey of burrow-nesting petrels at Macquarie Island based on remains
left by predators. Notornis 27: 11-20.
Jouanin, C. & Mougin, J.-L. 1979. Procellariiformes in Peters, J. L., Check-list of Birds of
the World, Vol. 1, 2nd. ed.: 48-121.
Jouanin, C. & Paulian, P. 1960. Recherches sur des ossements d’ oiseaux prevenant de
Vile Nouvelle Amsterdam (Océan Indien). Proc. XII Int. Orn. Congr. 368-372.
Jouanin, C., Roux, F. & Zino, A. 1969. Visites aux lieux de nidification de Pterodroma
mollis **deserta’. Oiseau 39: 161-175.
Lysaght, A. M. 1959. Some eighteenth century bird paintings in the library of Sir Joseph
Banks. Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.) Hist. Ser. 1: 253-371.
Mathews, G. M. 1924. (Description of Pterodroma dubius). Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 44: To.
— 1932. The birds of Tristan da Cunha. Novit. Zool. 38: 13-48.
— 1934a. (Remarks on the races of Prerodroma mollis). Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 54: 161,
178-179.
— 1934b. A check-list of the order Procellariiformes. Novit. Zool. 39: 151-206.
Mayr, E., Linsley, E. G. & Usinger, R. L. 1953. Methods and Principles of Systematic Zoology.
McGraw-Hill: New York.
Mougin, J.-L. 1969. Notes écologique sur la Petrel de Kerguelen Prerodroma brevirostris
de I’Ile de la Possession. Ozseau 69 Spec. No. 58-81.
Murphy, R. C. & Mowbray, L. S. 1951. New light on the Cahow. Pterodroma cahow. Auk
68: 266-280.
Palmer, R. C., 1962. Handbook of North American Birds. Vol. 1. New Haven.
Rand, R. W. 1954. Notes on the birds of Marion Island. [bis 96: 173-206.
Salvadori, T. 1899. Collezioni ornitologische fatte nelle isole del Capo Verde de Leonardo
Fea. Ann. Mus. Civ. Genova (2)20: 3-32.
Schramm, M. 1982. Recent records of the dark form of the Soft-plumaged Ho Ptero-
droma mollis from the subantarctic, Cormorant 10.
Sinclair, J. C. 1978. The Kerguelen Petrel in South Africa and its comparison eth Soft-
plumaged Petrel. Bokmakierie 30: 99-101.
Swales, M. K. 1965. The sea-birds of Gough Island. /bis 107: 17-42, 215-229.
Warham, J. 1979. The voice of the Soft-plumaged Petrel (Pterodroma mollis). Notornis 26:
357-360.
Warham, J. & Bell, B. D. 1979. The birds of Antipodes Island, New Zealand. NNofornis
26: 121-169.
Address. Dr. W. R. P. Bourne, Department of Zoology, Aberdeen University, Tillydrone
Avenue, Aberdeen ABg 2TN, UK.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
59 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(2)|
Sexual size dimorphism in some montane forest
passerines from south-central Africa
by R. J. Dowsett
Received 9 August 1982
The number of bird species in montane forests in Africa is notably less than
that in lowland forest (Moreau 1966), and it has been suggested that montane
species occupy broader niches. One way in which this might be accomplished
is for there to be a significant difference in body size between the sexes of a
species, enabling the species to exploit a greater range of food items. This
paper examines mensural data from some African montane forest birds with
this problem in mind.
Forty-three bird species breed regularly in the evergreen forests of the
southwestern Nyika Plateau in northern Malawi and adjacent Zambia
(Dowsett-Lemaire in press), 24 of them comprising the understorey avifauna
of my main study area on the Nyika. All 24 species were caught in mist nets
and ringed during population studies, particularly between 1979 and 1982,
mostly at an altitude of 2100-2200 m.
Birds were weighed on each capture, and the wing-length of each indivi-
dual measured at least once each year. Weights were taken to 0.1 g in the
passerines considered in this paper, using Pesola balances whose accuracy
was checked at intervals. Wing measurements (to 0.5 mm) were taken by the
maximum chord method (Svensson 1975). Each bird was examined for
moult, and those found to be moulting the longest primary feathers are
excluded from the wing-length measurements analysed here.
DETERMINATION OF SEX
Sexual dimorphism in plumage exists in 11 of the 43 species in the Nyika
forests, but only 4 of these are passerines resident in the understorey and
thus able to be caught in any numbers: Cape Batis Batis capensis, Green-
headed Sunbird Nectarinia verticalis, Eastern Double-collared Sunbird N.
mediocris and Red-faced Crimson-wing Cryptospiza reichenovii (nomenclature
follows Benson e¢ a/. (1971), amended by Dowsett & Dowsett-Lemaire
(1980) ). Of these 4 dichromatic species, the Cape Batis has a yearling plum-
age which for both sexes closely resembles the adult female dress. The
remaining 20 species of the understorey are for all practical purposes mono-
chromatic, although in the Starred Robin Pogonocichla stellata breeding males
- can be separated from females by the blue-grey of their heads being slightly
lossed. —
7 Because of these morphological similarities, therefore, I initially sexed
birds of each species only by examination of the cloacal area of sexually active
individuals (see Dowsett-Lemaire & Collette 1980). By this method, females
could be recognized for at least one month during the breeding season and
males for at least 3 months—in the Starred Robin, for example, males had
greatly enlarged penile protuberances between mid-September and early
January. All these species are strictly seasonal breeders on the Nyika
(Dowsett & Dowsett-Lemaire in prep.), and as they were most easily mist-
netted at that time, the great majority of individuals could be sexed with
[ Ball. Brit.Orn.Cl_1g43 raz 2z)| 6a
certainty. Other characters (e.g. song, presence of a brood patch, etc.) were
not used, as they need not be the prerogative of one sex alone.
Wing-lengths of the large number of birds sexed by cloacal examination
were then analysed to see if there was a relationship between sex and wing-
length. Thirteen species were sexed im numbers large enough for Student’s
t-test to be used (those species im Table 1 with 2 sample of at least 10 of each
sex). Eleven of these showed highly significant differences (Parx
9 z 76.93 3 75.94 ditto.
Ig r 7G.32 z 76.50 ditto
t. Number of individuals for which measurements are available im each of 2 years> year E
(1979-40), 2 (1990-81), 3 (199 2—#z).
z. Student’s t-test; ms. = not significant.
Because of the confusing yearling plumage im the Cape Batis, only females
sexed by cloacal examination are included im Table 1. This is the case
with the White-chested Alethe Alethe fuellebarni, in which yearlings resemble
adults but retain the shorter remiges of the juvenile, so that the wing-lengths
of some first-year males are likely to fall within the ramge of adult females.
In the Starred Robin, wing-lengths increase by 3-4 mm or 4-5% on moult
61 [ Bull Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2))
into adult dress (n= 26), but in that species yearlings have a distinctive
plumage quite unlike that of the monochromatic adults.
Even when adult, a bird’s wing-length may vary from one annual moult
to the next, but usually only to a small extent in passerines, and not suffi-
ciently to influence any overall sexual differences. Table 2 shows that there
were no significant changes in the mean wing-length of samples of individual
Starred Robins measured at intervals of one and of 2 years. However,
Thorne (1975) did show that in large samples of European Reed Warblers
Arocephalus scirpacens there were small but significant increases in wing-
length with age (of about 0.5; mm or 0.8% p.a.). Most other studies have
shown no apparent increase with age (Flegg & Cox 1977, Stewart 1963).
Wear through abrasion during the year also has only a small effect: the
wing-lengths of 3 adult male Starred Robins were reduced by o.5—1.0 mm
(0.6—1.2%) between the end of moult and the start of breeding, i.e. over a
iod of about 6 months. Most birds in the present study were measured
uring the breeding season, and so most data are strictly comparable as far
as the degree of wear is concerned.
SEXUAL DIMORPHISM IN WING-LENGTH
In the present analyses, I include only a mean measurement for each
individual which has been measured more than once, in order to avoid any
bias from the frequent recapture of certain long-lived, highly territorial
individuals. However, in determining overall ranges, I have taken all
recorded measurements into account.
For only 4 of the 17 species in Table 1 does there seem to be a complete
dimorphism in size between the sexes. The samples for both Fiilleborn’s
Black Boubou Laniaris sagan and the Green-headed Sunbird are too
small for this to be confirmed. Although there is no overlap in measure-
ments of known male and female Olive-breasted Mountain Bulbuls Axdro-
padus tepbrolaemus, a large number of unsexed birds have wing-lengths of
95-97 mm, and so there probably is an overlap in fact. The sexual dimor-
phism in sie dni in the Yellow-streaked Bulbul Phy/l/astrephus flavo-
striatus is eled by differences in weights reported from several popula-
tions—a feature of most species in this genus (Britton 1972).
In those 13 species with some overlap in the ranges of wing-lengths for
the sexes, the amount of overlap varies considerably. Two extremes are
illustrated in Fig. 1: in the Yellow White-eye Zosterops senegalensis there is a
very broad overlap, and some 92%, of all birds measured had wing-lengths
of 57.5—62 mm inclusive. On the other hand, only 4% of all Starred Robins
had wings of 80-80.; mm. Proportions overlapping in other species ranged
from 6% to 96% (Table 1). It is of interest that 2 of the species that are
strongly dimorphic in plumage (Cape Batis and Red-faced Crimson-wing)
have an overlap in wing-length of 90% or more.
No other measurement seems to be as suitable as wing-length for distin-
guishing the sexes. Although tail-lengths of Starred Robin adults are also
significantly longer in males, there is a greater degree of overlap between
the sexes. This is also true of wing- and tail-lengths combined, which I have
analysed, following the suggestion by Oatley (1982) that there was no over-
lap between the sexes in this measurement in Natal, Dealing only with
individual Starred Robins sexed by cloaca, tails overlapped between 61 and
[ Bull. Brit.Ora.Cl.1983 103(2)] 62
Lassies YY ; n=96
N SOOO
: srererers ;
orererereretete®
10- LASSE
. 6.6.06 OOOO
><) stetetete LSS Ses A
RN oO
O : © 0:0 0000666606 6666600060 0 of,
55 60 HTH
20 \owN
“T 07 oee
80 85 mm
Histograms showing sexual dimorphism in wing-lengths of 2 montane forest passerines
on the Nyika Plateau: (a) Yellow White-eye Zosterops senegalensis; (b) Starred Robin Pogo-
necichla stellata. The % is shown of each sample falling within each 1 mm of wing-length.
63.5 mm (comprising 16% of the population), and wings-+tails between
141 and 144.5 mm (9%).
SEXUAL DIMORPHISM IN WEIGHTS
The significant differences in wing-length between the sexes in several
species are doubtless a reflection of differences in body size. However, it is
difficult to establish a direct relationship between an individual bird’s wing-
length and weight. In part this is because weight varies seasonally much more
than does wing-length, but even when comparable data are available, there
may still be no apparent relationship (Clark 1979, Snow & Snow 1963).
A sample of 78 adult male Starred Robins measured in October and
63 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(2)]
November (lacking any apparent furcular fat deposit), when tested statis-
tically gave a low value for the correlation of wing-length with weight
(r=0.28). Similarly, there was no significant correlation between these
parameters in 39 fat-free adult male Eastern Double-collared Sunbirds,
measured when not moulting or breeding (r=o.38). Analyses could not be
undertaken for other species of which large samples were measured because
of the seasonal presence of visible fat deposits (Dowsett & Dowsett-Lemaire
in prep.).
TABLE 3
Sexual differences in weight (g) in some Malawi forest passerines
Adult male Adult female
n Range Mean n Range Mean
Alcippe abyssinica 4 1833-2183 20.0 4 18,5—-21.0 19.4
Andropadus tephrolaemus 40 32.2-42.0 38.4 90 30.0—41.0 36.8
Phyllastrephus flavostriatus 11 28.1-35.8 31.8 14 22.0-32.4 252
Alethe fuelleborni 17 41.6-56.5 49.0 fe) 44.0-58.0 49.7
Cossypha anomala 28 22.6-27.4 25.0 39 20.6-27.4 24.1
C. caffra 35 26.2-34.0 28.9 23 25.4-32.0 28.0
Pogonocichla stellata 114 16.1-21.5 18.5 93 15.5—26.3 18.7
Turdus olivaceus bi 66.0-77.0 70.8 13 64.5-78.0 70.6
Chloropeta similis 8 10.9-12.7 11.8 5 II.I-14.0 12.6
Abpalis thoracica 20 10.9—13.3 T2.1 54 10.2—16.0 12.1
Batis capensis 36 LY.4—13.6 12.6 34 T1.3-15.6 13.3
Elminia albonotata 23 8.4-10.9 9.5 21 7.9-11.6 8.9
Laniarius fuelleborni 6 46.0-53.0 48. 4 43.0—-47.0 45.2
Nectarinia verticalis 5 12.9-15.5 14.2 4 11.8—14.8 13.5
NN. mediocris 48 7.2-10.7 8.8 44 6.3- 9.9 7.8
Zosterops senegalensis 96 9.3-12.3 10.7 97 8.9-14.1 Tie
Cryptospiza reichenovii 23 I1.5—14.8 13.0 22 I1.9—-15.6 13.4
Not surprisingly, overall weights (Table 3) of the 17 species in Table 1
show very much more variation and much more overlap between the sexes
than do wing-lengths. Even in species showing no overlap in wing-length,
such as the Yellow-streaked Bulbul, there may be a large overlap in weights,
the heaviest individuals usually being females containing eggs. Although
such individuals can be recognised in the hand with experience, those with
ovaries at an earlier stage of development usually cannot. Consequently, any
analysis of geographical or sexual variation in weights would be biased if
samples cannot be strictly comparable, e.g. sexed accurately, not breeding,
fat-free and not moulting.
Individual weights of adult forest birds on the Nyika are generally lowest
when young are still dependent and also during the cold months (at least in
insectivores), and highest just before breeding and afterwards, even during
moult (Dowsett & Dowsett-Lemaire in prep.). Seasonal variation may be
considerable: for example, female Starred Robins increase weight before
saying to some 144% of their minimum weights, and even in males the
maxima may often exceed 120% of minimum weights. Diurnal variation in
this and species of similar size on the Nyika is in the region of 6.5% of body
weight (Dowsett in press).
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103{2)] 64
Discussion
The significant differences in wing-length between the sexes of many of
the montane forest birds studied on the Nyika suggest there may be signifi-
cant differences in body size, despite the difficulty of demonstrating differ-
ences in body mass. There may consequently be differences in the size of food
eaten, but it is difficult to take this any further. Differences in wing-length
may be paralleled by differences in bill-length: for example, bill-lengths of
adult male Starred Robins are significantly greater than those of adult
females (Student’s t-test, P
$i31si OML®
aiMila,
eo@
VAIHSUVNVL @ e
tas 1anin @
dNOUud
7a Spe
NIMVAS
ee
Ch \ Nvans
po LuOd
OC
we
o
“SI vuVvi —
BILAAVW —ef} 100
YM yvINW ~~ Pd. HOW
ost
oO
=.
Mary P. Wilson
Received 15 February 1983
Brown eé¢ a/. (1982: 453) state that the breeding habits of the Grey Kestrel
F. ardosiaceus are “very well known” but that details of chick development
ate not described nor the fledging period known. The following details were
obtained from a brood in a Hamerkop’s Scopus umbretta nest at Niono,
Mali (14°15’N, 05°55’W). All recent records of Grey Kestrel breeding are
from Hamerkop nests and Brown ef a/. maintain that the Kestrel is depen-
dent on the latter species.
Two kestrel eggs were found in a typical Hamerkop nest on 13 April 1981
and 2 more were present on 19 April. Four is the usual clutch size. Colour and
shape were in agreement with published records but one of the first 2 eggs
was only slightly blotched at the broader end. The eggs measured (mm):
42.1 X 32.8, 44.1 X 32.0, 41.9 X 33.0 and 42.1 x 32.8 (av. 42.5 x 32.6) and
weighed (g) 25.6, 25.1, 24.6 and 24.7 respectively, in all cases probably after
2 or 3 days of incubation. Breeding in April would be expected—Brown
et al. give April for Nigeria, Sudan and Uganda.
119 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103( 4)]
The first egg hatched on 13 May, followed by the others on 15, 16 and
17 May and incubation probably therefore started with the first egg. Brown
et al. state that incubation “does not begin with the first egg” (p. 454) but
later say that hatching “occurs over several days in some cases, which
suggests incubation may begin before clutch complete”. The maximum
incubation period for the 3rd and 4th eggs would be 32 and the minimum
29 days (‘‘at least 26, less than 31, days (A. Root in press)” in Brown ef a/.).
TABLE 1
Weights (g) and measurements (mm) of the culmen (Cn) and tarsus (T's) of four nestling
Falco ardosiaceus in Mali
Chicks
I 2 3 4
Day Riese Cp * T's We Cay Ts We »- Ca “Es We're Gat tis
Beth. 36.3 -7.1 11.8 EOS». ufc?) EAA TOA FA. 12:0 17.2
I 18.9 20.8
2 24.8 25.2 24a") T= Fae
oe 33-6 S21 58.0 52S ALS 24 E535
4 44.8 ZOLA Gost ESO
5 34.4
fe cod = 8.6 22.7 42.5
7 53-2
8 yep ETD ele
go 76.4 90.8 11.8 18.2
10 S725 52.2. 133.2
II 124.5
ua £29.96 “120 136.2 145.0
13 157-8
Fou L7¥.2
Table 1 gives mensural data of the developing chicks. Visits were made to
the nest on 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 22, 25 and 28 May. Primary quills appeared on
day 9, by which time the irises were brown and the legs turning yellow.
Rectrices appeared on day 12, when the bill had assumed a slaty colour. The
egg-notch disappeared at about day 12.
All the young birds were found dead, in good condition, in the nest on
31 May 1981, possibly from heat stroke. Assuming death occurred at the
mid-point between this and the previous visit, ages at death would be 16,
14, 13 and 12 days for the individual chicks.
References:
Brown, L. H., Urban, E. K. & Newman, K. 1982. The Birds of Africa. Vol. I, Academic
Press: London.
Address: R. T. and M. P. Wilson, 21 Westfield Grove, Wakefield WF1 3RS, U.K.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983
Food of the Black-headed Bee-eater Merops breweri
by C. HL. Fry and D. J. Gilbert
Received 21 February 1983
New information on breeding of the little-known African forest bee-eater
Merops (Bombylonax) breweri demonstrates that its nesting habits are very like
those of its congeners (Dyer, Fry & Hendrick 1982, Maes & Louette 1983).
[ Ball. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)] 120
Dyer e¢ a/. reported briefly also on its diet; here we supplement their informa-
tion with an analysis of 600 ml of nest litter and show that the diet. also is
like those of other bee-eaters (Fry 1983).
Nest litter was collected by J. A. Hendrick soon after the young had
fledged from 2 nests a few metres apart at Elubi (07°35’N, 07°26’), Nigeria,
in 1982. It consisted of mixed soil and insect sclerites, the latter from crushed
pellets regurgitated by nestlings, though doubtless some pellets would have
been from brooding adults. A few insect heads which appeared undigested
may have been from decomposed insects discarded entire (which are prey
but not, strictly, food). Identifiable sclerites, mainly head capsules, jaws and
wings, were isolated by hand sorting and microscopic inspection of litter.
Litter from the 2 nests was sorted separately, but the 2 were very similar and
the results have been combined.
Of 561 prey items, the percentages (by numbers, not weight) contributed
by 6 insect Orders are given in Table 1. Hymenoptera comprise half of the
food. Besides honeybees Apis mellifera there ate about 40 species, including :—
bees, probably Xy/ocopa, Megachile and Sphecodes; wasps (Vespidae, Sphecidae),
Chlorion maxillosum, Ropalidia, Eumenes, Belanogaster, Synagris and Philanthus;
ants (Formicidae), Paltothyreus tarsatus 9, Ocecophylla and Odontomachus; and
chrysidids, scolioids and ichneumons. Beetles (Coleoptera) of 9 families
comprise 42% of the diet (also numerically). Scarabaeidae greatly pre-
dominate, with the chafer Plaesiorrhina recurva forming 15% of the entire
insect sample, chafers of over 20 other species (some possibly of Poecilophora
and Porphyronota) forming 20%, and the dung-beetle Onthophagus tridens 4%.
TABLE 1
Proportions of insects in diet of Merops breweri
Laer n a
ODONATA § I HYMENOPTERA
Apis mellifera. 42 7
ORTHOPTERA 18 3 other bees 107 19
| | Vespidae | 49 9
LEPIDOPTERA TIO], OC Sphecidae ' $2 4
: Formicidae 34 6
HEMIPTERA 20 4 others . 29 5
COLEOPTERA 234 42 io! . 283 cf 50
- The Hemiptera include several cicadas, and cicadas featured importantly
among insects which C.H.F. observed adult bee-eaters carrying into the
same 2 nest burrows in 1981. In that year numerous hawk-moths (Sphingidae)
were also fed to nestlings, including Cephanodes hylas and Nephele comma
(Plate 1). The absence of hawk-moths, and dearth of Lepidoptera in general,
in the 1982 nest litter is not easy to explain. tects
A single adult M/. breweri netted at Elubi on 26 March 1981 weighed 54 g,
and on the same date 3 nestlings estimated to be 10-15 days old weighed
34-43 g. The species is evidently about the same weight as the Carmine Bee-
eater M. nubicus, but M. breweri may take even larger prey than does M.
nubicus (Fry in press). From photographs in 1981 and 1982, we estimate that
hawk-moths carried into nest holes by adults were 32-40 mm long; cicadas,
dragonflies, wasps, probable carpenter-bees Xy/ocopa and some other insects
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)) 121
Plate 1. Adult Merops breweri at nest entrance with hawk-moths Cephanodes hylas (above)
and Nephele comma (below) (Nigeria 1981). [See Fry & Gilbert].
Plate 2 Dorsal, ventral and side views of Tyto novachollandiae to highlight the differences
in racial characters of plumage and body proportions. From left to right:
T.n. novaehollandiae; T.n. kimberli; T.n. calabyi. [See Mason]
123 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4))
in the nest litter were very large, and one of the Chlorion maxillosum head
capsules is larger than all but one in the collection of some 500 specimens in
the British Museum (Natural History).
Acknowledgements. We ate grateful to Mr. J. A. Hendrick for obtaining the nest litter, to
Messrs. M. E. Bacchus, B. Bolton, G. R. Else and C. R. Vardy of the British Museum
(Natural History) for determinations of some insects, and to Dr. L. A. Mound and Mr. A.
Lucas for other assistance.
References:
Dyer, M., Fry, C. H. & Hendrick, J. A. 1982. Breeding of Black-headed Bee-eaters in
Nigeria. Malimbus 4: 43-45.
Fry, C. H. 1983. Honeybee predation by bee-eaters, with economic considerations. Bee
World 64: 65-78.
Fry, C. H. (in press). The Bee-eaters. Evolutionary Biolog y of the Meropidae. T. & A. D. Poyser,
alton.
Maes, V. & Louette, M. 1983. Breeding of Black-headed Bee-eater in Zaire. Malimbus 5: 55.
Address. Dt. C. H. Fry and D. J. Gilbert, Zoology Department, Aberdeen University,
Aberdeen ABg 2TN, Scotland.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983
A new subspecies of Masked Owl Tvto novachollandiae
(Stephens) from southern New Guinea
by I. J. Mason
Received 10 March 1983
While analyzing subspecific variation in TZyto novaehollandiae (Stephens)
(Schodde & Mason 1980), it appeared to me that specimens from southern
New Guinea (Merauke-Fly River District) were of an undescribed form.
Previous authors (Rand 1942, Mayr 1941, Mees 1964, 1982, Rand & Gilliard
1967) seem to have had mixed feelings about the subspecific status of this
population, not surprisingly, as the intensity of tones and patterns of plumage
in this species varies geographically, in keeping with the different climatic
regimes that these owls inhabit (see Schodde & Mason 1980: 70-77). Conse-
quently, plumage characters alone may be somewhat misleading in assess-
ments of the subspecific limits and possible relationships of Tyto novae-
hollandiae.
The scattered northern island populations—TJ\n. melvillensis Mathews
(Melville and Bathurst Islands), No. 5 in Fig. 1, 7.2. sorocula (P. L. Slater)
(Tanimbar) ,No. 7, 7.2. caye/ii (Hartert) (Buru), No. 6, 7\”. manusi Rothschild &
Hartert (Manus) ), No. 9 and those from southern New Guinea (8)—have the
same dark dorsal plumage as each other. Likewise, the general plumage tones
and patterns of nominate novaehollandiae (2) from eastern and southern
Australia ate comparable with those birds from southern New Guinea.
Interposed between the southern New Guinea and eastern Australia popula-
tions, however, is an out-of-sequence light (white) to medium phase form,
T.n. kimberli (Mathews) (4) from northern Australia, whose characteristics
may have been acquired in adaptation to the drier tropical woodlands it
inhabits today (Schodde & Mason 1980, Mees 1982).
Other characters, therefore, needed to be evaluated in conjunction with
plumage to determine the status of these forms. It was observed that speci-
mens from southern New Guinea exhibited a mixture of pale and dark
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4)] 124
1 Tyto novaehollandiae % =
castanops
Manus Is
(Admiralty Islands)
ae Oo
oF
NY)
als (ag 9
novaehollandiae 6? —
3 T. n. galei oe
: ; Tanimbar Is ¢ ed A
4 T. n. kimberli 7 9
0
5 T. n. melvillensis
6 T. n. cayelii Melville Is
7 T. n. sorocula Bathurst Is
8 T. n. calabyi
9 T. n. manusi
sesectetens
RESIS
Figure 1 Distribution of the races of Tyo novaehollandiae.
plumage traits and variable measurements, characters that may have been
derived either directly from both southern and northern forms nearby, or
independently by convergence (see diagnosis of new subspecies). As it is,
one might have expected Masked Owls from southern New Guinea (8) to
have characters in common with those of Cape York Peninsula (3) due to
their comparable tropical habitat and close proximity, as well as to the past
geographical connections between the vertebrate faunas of these 2 land
masses (see Schodde & Calaby 1972, Kikkawa ef a/. 1981). It was also to be
expected that plumage characters, in the past, might have masked these
relationships.
125 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4)]
From the current revision it also became apparent that the only similarity
between Cape York Peninsula (3) and northwestern Australian populations
(4) is in their pale plumage and the reduced feathering on the lower tarsus.
The Cape York population is in fact consistently smaller in wing and tail,
and proportionally larger in culmen and tarsus (Table 1), so that when its
geographical location and similarity to neighbouring (north and west)
populations are taken into account these Cape York birds appear to hold
Table 1. Body measurements (mm) of Tyto novaebollandiae. Measurements in brackets ate means; 3(—2), for example,
signifies that there are 3 wing measurements and 2 birds with an incomplete set of body measurements.
Localities Sample Wing Tail Culmen Tarsus
No. (from cere)
99
Melville/Bathurst Is. 3(—2) 295—308(301.3) 130 24 64
Northern Australia 7 313—332(320.7) 133-144(136.8) 24—26.3(24.9) 67-73.3(70.9)
Cape York Peninsula 2 299-—306(302 §) 126—135(130.5) 23.2—24.4(23.8) 71.5-76(73.8)
Southern New Guinea 2 317—328(322.5) 127—137(132) 25.5—27.9(26.7) 71-5-74(72.5)
Southern Queensland 12(—2) 317—339(323.0) 130—145(138.0) 24.0—25.8(24.6) 63.7—69.7(66.4)
New South Wales bite) 328—344(334.1) 138—150(143.4) 24.4—26.1(25.4) 62.4—75.5(68.3)
Victoria 4(-2) 333-35 2(342.3) 142-152(145.7) 23.3-25(24.1)
ae 7 5 347-368(359.2) 150—172(163.8) 24.8—27.3(25.9) 66-80(76.4)
Melville/Bathurst Is. I 280 120 21.3 60
Northern Australia 4 293—305(299.3) 123—132(128.8) 21.0—24.0(22.7)
Cape York Peninsula 3(—2) 280—283(281.3) 119 22.5 68.5
Southern New Guinea 3(—2) 305—308(306.0) 126-127(126.5) 24.0—25.4(24.7) 66—68.5(67.3)
Southern Queensland 6(—2) 295—308(300.6) 122—128(125.8) 22.7—23.0(22.8) 60.2-62.4(61.2)
New South Wales 9 285—318(302.6) 12I—143(130.4) 21.4—23.8(22.5) 59.9-67(63.7)
Victoria 1(—1) 308
Tasmania be) 310—338(328.5) 140—163(148.4) 21.9—24.5(23.2) 64—72(66.4)
Localities Tail/ Tarsus/ Tarsus/ Culmen] Culmen/ Culmen/
Wing Tail Wing Tarsus Wing Tail
ge
Melville/Bathurst Is 44 49 22 38 .08 .18
Northern Australia -42—.45(.43) -49—.5 3(.51) -21—.23(.22) -34—.38(.35) .08 .18—.19(.18)
Cape York Peninsula -42-.44(.43) -56-.§7(.57) .24—.25(.25) -31—.34( 33) 08 -17—.19(.18)
Southern New Guinea -40—.42(.41) -54—.56(.55) .22—.23(.23) 36— 38(.37) .08—.09(.09) .20
Southern Queensland .40—.45(.43) -45—.5 2(.48) .20—.21(.21) -35—-40(.37) .07—.08(.08) -17-.19(.18)
New South Wales -42—.45(.43) -44—.54(.48) -19—.23(.21) -33—.40(.38) .07—.08(.08) -17-.19(.18)
Victoria -43 .07 -15—.18(.17)
Gorm -43—.48(.46) .44—.49(.47) -19—.22(.21) -33—.38(.34) .07—.08(.07) -15—.17(.16)
Melville/Bathurst Is. -43 50 22 -36 .08 18
Northern Australia -41—.45(.43) .07—.08(.08) -16-.18(.17)
Cape York Peninsula 42 58 24 36 .08 19
Southern New Guinea 41 -52-.5.4(.53) -21—.22(.22) -35—-38(.37) .08 -19-.20(.20)
Southern Queensland .41—.43(.42) -48—.50(.49) -I9—.21( 20) -36—.38(.37) -07—.08(.08) -18—.19(.18)
New South Wales .40-.45(.43) 46—.52(.49) .20-.23(.21) -33—-36(.35) .07—.08(.07) -16—.18(.17)
Victoria
Tasmania -43--48(.45) — .43--48(.45) —«19-.22(.20) 3 3-.37(.36) 07 -15—.17(.16)
clues to past links between the populations of Masked Owls within these
regions. Because of the above differences the trinomial 7’n. gale¢ should be
reinstated for those populations inhabiting Cape York Peninsula (pace
Schodde & Mason 1980: 77).
The origin of the disjunct and isolated island populations of Zyto novae-
hollandiae (sorocula, cayelii and manusi (Fig. 1—7, 6, 9) is still open to speculation
(Schodde & Mason 1980). Clues to a possible evolutionary pathway of these
forms may lie in the degree of similarity to melvillensis (5) and evidence of
avifaunal links between the islands which they inhabit, keeping in mind that
morphological similarities between these forms may be nothing more than
convergence.
It seems reasonable to speculate that sorocu/a may have evolved in isolation
from melvillensis-like stock, and in turn cayelii and manusi from sorocula,
(Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4)) 126
possibly during the latter half of the Pleistocene, when land masses extended
far beyond their present boundaries (Hope & Hope 1976: 30, Kikkawa ef a/.
1981: 1698). The possibility of such a chance transoceanic crossing by Tyto
novaehollandiae from northern Australia to colonize islands in the Banda Sea
by way of the Tanimbar Islands could be considered unrealistic were it not
for additional evidence, that other avian species have in the past (e.g. Cacatua
pastinator goffini, Geopelia maugeus) and at the present day do still follow this
route (Hartert 1901, Schodde & Mathews 1977), and, accordingly, that
considerable avifaunal interchange has taken place in the past between the
southern Moluccas (Buru) and the Tanimbar Islands (see Hartert (1901) for
similarities between a number of species and subspecies from these islands).
However, J.. caye/ii of Buru does show some similarity to 7. zmexpectata of
Sulawesi in having the white dorsal spots replaced by brownish ones.
Geographical position (see Audley-Charles (1981) for discussion on past land
connections between Celebes and Australo-Papua) and morphological
similarity of 7. inexpectata to T.n. cayelii suggests that imexpectata may have
budded off much earlier and speciated from the 7. novaehollandiae line.
The origin of manusi is more difficult to explain but it may have followed
a northeasterly route from Buru around northern New Guinea via the
Moluccas, to the Admiralty Islands (see Salomonsen (1976: 595-6) for a
possible route). Rothschild & Hartert (1914) also suggest that manusi is
nearest to cayelii. T.n. manusi, in my opinion, on the other hand, exhibits little
or no morphological similarity to 7. aurantia, from New Britain, although
T. aurantia presumably originated and diverged from Masked Owl stock
(Schodde & Mason 1981: 77).
If 7. novaehollandiae did follow this suggested evolutionary route, it is
possible that there are undiscovered populations on some of the islands
around the Moluccas and the Vogelkop. There are a number of publications
discussing collections from intervening locations throughout this region
without reference to 7. novaehollandiae, while few specimens of the races dis-
cussed above exist in collections. Kiln, for example (Hartert 1901), whilst
collecting on Timorlaut (Tanimbar Islands), did not procure any specimens
of sorocula, and the paucity of specimens from islands north of Australia may
suggest a number of possibilities, e.g. a lack of systematic collecting of night
birds, the inaccessibility of likely locations, that populations of these sub-
species may be low in number or that they have a very patchy distribution —
or a combination of all these factors.
Tyto novaehollandiae calabyi subsp. nov.
FHolotype. (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden) Reg. No. 42474,
Field No. 305, adult 3, Merauke (southern New Guinea—see Fig. 1), 22 April
1960, coll. A. Hoogerwerf. Measurements (mm) wing 305, tail 130, culmen
(from cere) 24.3, tarsus 70.
Paratypes. (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden) Reg. No. 42475,
?; (American Museum of Natural History) Reg. Nos. 425939, 425940—d
and © respectively.
Series studied. 2 8 3, 2 2 2; 3, 2 immatures.
Range. Tn. calabyi inhabits southern New Guinea, in the eucalypt savannahs
between Merauke and the Fly River Delta (Fig. 1).
Diagnosis. T.n. calabyi differs from tropical island populations (me/illensis,
127 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4)]
cayelii, sorocula and manus) in its large size and its coarser spotting and speck-
ling of the dorsal surface. It is distinguished from ga/ei by its darker dusky
and tawny, and less coarsely mottled, dorsal plumage (Plate 2), and larger
size (Table 1).
Although calabyi of southern New Guinea is said not to differ from
novaehollandiae (Mees 1964, 1982), calabyi can be distinguished by its consist-
ently darker dorsal plumage (4 adults, 2 immatures) when compared with 7
medium and 4 dark phase birds from the northern limits of novaehollandiae’s
range. To date there are no dark phase birds with an extensive russet wash
to the dorsal surface recorded from southern New Guinea. Moreover, in
differing from sovaehollandiae, calabyi exhibits a number of characters similar
to galei: pale feather pattern to the lesser wing coverts, secondary and
primary flight feathers (contrasting with the rest of the dark dorsal plumage),
lack of feathering and hair to the lower portion of the tarsus and toes, and
proportionally larger tarsi and smaller tails (Table 1). Although New
Guinean birds are as large as nominate sovachollandiae, they differ in their
larger culmen and tarsus and their appendage ratios (Table 1).
Etymology. This subspecies is named after Dr. John H. Calaby in acknow-
ledgment of his support and encouragement to my work over the years and
because of his deep past interest in this species.
Acknowledgments. 1 would like to thank the curators of the Australian museums and the
American Museum of Natural History for placing their collections of this species at my
disposal, to express my gratitude to Dr. G. F. Mees (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie,
Leiden) for comments and material loaned, to Dr. R. Schodde for comments on the manu-
sctipt and atranging loans, to F. H. J. Crome for comments on the manuscript, and to
Messts. F. D. Knight for drawing the figure and J. Wombey who photographed the
specimens.
References:
Audley-Charles, M. G. 1981. 4. Geological History of the Region of Wallace’s Line. In
Wallace’s Line and Plate Tectonics (T. C. Whitmore, Ed.): 24-35. Clarendon Press:
Oxford.
Hartert, E. 1901. On a collection of birds from the Timorlaut Islands. Novit. Zool. 8:
163-176.
Hope, J. H. & Hope, G. S. 1976. Palaeoenvironments for man in New Guinea. In The
Origin of the Australians (R. L. Kirk & A. G. Thorne, Eds.): 29-54. Australian Institute
of Aboriginal Studies: Canberra.
Kikkawa, J., Monteith, G. B. & Ingram, G. 1981. Cape York Peninsula: a major region
of faunal interchange. In Ecological Biogeography of Australia (A. Keast, Ed.). Mono.
Biol. 41: 1697-1742. The Hague: Dr. W. Junk.
Mayr, E. 1941. List of New Guinea Birds. New Yotk: Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist.
Mees, G. F. 1964. A tevision of the Australian Owls (Strigidae and Tytonidae). Zoo/.
Verhandl. 65: 1-62.
— 1982. Birds from the lowlands of southern New Guinea (Merauke and Koembe).
Zool, Verhandl. 191: 1-188.
Rand, A. L. 1942. Results of the Archbold Expeditions. Birds of the 1936-37 New Guinea
Expedition. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 79: 289-366.
Rand, A. L. & Gilliard, E. T. 1967. Handbook of New Guinea Birds. London: Weidenfeld
and Nicolson.
Rothschild, W. & Hartert, E. 1914. The birds of the Admiralty Islands, north of German
New Guinea. Novit. Zool. 21: 282-292.
Salomonsen, F. 1976. The main problems concerning avian evolution on islands. In Proc.
XVI Int. Orn. Congr: 585-602. Australian Academy of Science: Canberra.
Schodde, R. & Calaby, J. H. 1972. The biogeography of the Australo-Papuan bird and
mammal faunas in relation to Torres Strait. In Bridge and Barier: the natural and cultural
history of Torres Strait (D. Walker, Ed.): 257-300. Publ. BG/3. Dept. of Biogeogr.
and Geomorphol.: Aust. Nat. Univ.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)] 128
Schodde, R. & Mathews, S. J. 1977. Contributions to Papuasian ornithology, V. Survey of
the Birds of Taam Island, Kai Group. CSIRO Division of Wildlife Research Tech. Paper
No. 33: I-29.
Schodde, R. & Mason, I. J. 1980. Nocturnal Birds of Australia, Melbourne: Lansdowne
Editions.
Address. Tan J. Mason, CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Rangelands Research, P.O. Box
780, Atherton, Queensland 4883, Australia.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983
The nomenclature of Buteo oreophilus
by A. H. James and J. Wattel
Received 3 March 1983
In 1914, Hartert & Neumann described a species of buzzard from Koritscha,
Ethiopia, under the name Buteo oreophilus, giving as the range of this species
the mountain areas of central, northeast, and east Africa. Sclater (1919) was
the first to suggest that the resident buzzards of southern Africa might also
belong to the same species (see also Roberts 1940, Courtenay-Latimer 1941).
It was not until 1957 that Rudebeck formally described and named the
South African segment of this resident buzzard as Buteo buteo trizonatus, type
locality Knysna, Cape Province. Hesitantly, he followed Meinertzhagen
(1951) in considering both oreophilus and trizonatus as conspecific with the
Eurasian Buteo buteo. Since then the taxonomic affinity of these forms has
been examined by many authors, resulting in widely varying conclusions.
A. H. J. intends to discuss the taxonomy of the group (James in prep.), but
before doing so there is a need to clear up the nomenclatural confusion that
has arisen recently from Brooke’s (1974) conclusion that in his opinion
Rudebeck (1957) was not the first author to describe the South African form
of Buteo. .
In 1830, Andrew Smith started publication of a series of papers in the
South African Quarterly Journal, which he apparently intended should form
a kind of catalogue of South African birds. In trying to identify these birds
he referred to Levaillant’s Histoire Naturelle des Oiseaux d’ Afrique (1799-
1808) and to Daudin’s Traité élémentaire et complet d’ ornithologie (1800). The
latter work gave binominal scientific names. After citing these, Smith gave
cateful descriptions of the material he had at hand. At the time these were
not meant to constitute descriptions of new species (Mees 1967, Clancey
et al. 1971), but they were later considered as such by him and also by other
authots. .
Among the species of Buteo found in South Africa, Smith (1830) listed
Buteo tachardus (Falco tachardus Daudin, 1800) and Buteo desertorum (Falco
desertorum Daudin, 1800). Falco tachardus Daudin is based upon-Le Tachard
as depicted on Plate 19 in Levaillant (published in 1799), and Faso desertorum
Daudin on Le Rougti (Plate 17 in Levaillant 1799). Both names, and par-
ticularly F. desertorum have later been applied to Buteo buteo vulpinus Gloger,
1833, a migrant to South Africa. However, Hartert (1914:1125) was of the
opinion that Le Rougri is unidentifiable [. . . Figment of fantasy! ‘The fox-red
upperparts, the description of the underparts, the beautiful yellow bill,
especially mentioned in the description, void the use of the name desertorum.
On top of all this, the miraculous animal should be resident in South Africa
and breed there]; and that Le Tachard refers to Pernis apivorus (Linnaeus,
129 (Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4))
1758). Brooke (1974), however, was of the opinion that Hartert’s conclusions
were irrelevant and that Smith clearly described a recognizable species under
a new name, using Bufeo as the generic name instead of Fa/co. Brooke stated:
““Buteo tachardus Smith, 1830 is an unequivocal description of what Rudebeck
(1957, 1958) clarified under the name Buteo buteo trizonatus”. Brooke’s con-
clusion is primarily based on Smith’s description of a small raptor with a
clear white upper abdomen between the brown streaked and blotched breast
and lower abdomen, which is similar to the ventral tri-zoned pattern in
trizonatus. Also 2 of Smith’s surviving specimens in the British Museum
(Natural History) (BMNH) were identified by Rudebeck (1958) as belonging
to B. b. trizonatus. The consequence of Brooke’s view is that the long-
established name B. oreophilus of East Africa becomes a subspecies of Buteo
tachardus Smith, 1830, since the latter is the older name to apply to the
species. In addition Brooke stated that Smith did not work outside Cape
Province and that Knysna can be regarded as the restricted type locality. He
suggested that one of the surviving specimens collected by Smith should be
chosen as a lectotype if one was required.
After carefully reviewing Smith’s description we concede it may, at least
in part, be a description fitting ¢rizonatus, but we cannot agree that it is an
unequivocal description. Brooke quotes as significant Smith’s description of
the underparts; but this can apply to ¢rizonatus only if we understand Smith’s
“posterior part of the belly” to be an area of the belly nearer the vent, thus
construing that the “anterior” belly is unmarked. Smith, however, also
mentions that in some specimens the breast and belly are almost divested of
spots, while in others the whole underparts are densely covered with streaks
or roundish blotches. These patterns can also characterize B. b. vulpinus,
especially immatures, where the underparts may vary from being completely
unmarked except for thin streaks to being completely marked with streaks
or oblong blotches. The colour of the legs and toes are greenish yellow
according to Smith but pale yellow to wax yellow or brownish (Rudebeck
1957) in ¢rizonatus. Smith described the young bird as “below brownish red,
with shafts of the feathers black”. This certainly does not fit the description
of an immature ¢rizonatus. Smith stated further: “In most instances the tail is
grayish brown, banded with blackish brown, yet in not a few is it deep
chesnut (sc) or bright rufous, and distinctly banded transversely by numer-
ous black lines”. This unequivocally describes a vu/pinus tail.
Furthermore, Smith remarks that tachardus “inhabits the whole of South
Africa”’. This fits excellently the distribution of vx#/pinus, but hardly applies to
trizonatus. With reference to B. desertorum, Smith said that he had never met
with this species. This would be surprising if Smith had meant to describe
Buteo buteo vulpinus under the name desertorum as Brooke (1974) will have it,
since vulpinus greatly out-numbers ¢rizonatus. During several seasons in
South Africa, Rudebeck (1963) observed only 5 individuals of trizonatus
compared to about 400 va/pinus. According to Roberts (1936), Smith spent
at least 3 years in the Cape Province prior to 1830. It seems unbelievable that
he never met with vz/pinus during that time, but quite natural that he did not
obsetve any bird answering the description of Falco desertorum Daudin, 1800,
since such a species does not exist (Hartert 1914). It becomes clear that both
trizonatus and vulpinys specimens were included in the series Smith identified
as B. tachardus.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)) 130
During a visit to the BMNH at Tring in 1982, A. H. J. was only able to
locate 5 out of 8 of Smith’s Buteo specimens registered there. According to
the museum’s register 5 Buteo specimens were received directly from Smith.
These were listed as: 1845.7.6.54 Buteo /agopus (Natal); 55 Buteo communis
(Natal); 57 Buteo tachardus; 60 Buteo (tachardus); 112 Buteo mentalis. Of these
only numbers 54 and 60 were located after a thorough search through
specimens of other genera and through all Buteo specimens. The names in the
register ate presumably from Smith’s own labels. All 3 specimens registered
in the Norwich Castle Collection (1955.6.N.2175,2176,2177), now in-
corporated in the BMNH, were found. Smith’s original specimen labels were
not available on any except for specimen number 60. There may be more
specimens in other collections.
Specimen number 54, registered as B. /agopus, was identified by Rudebeck
(1958) as B. b. trizonatus. Specimen number 60 was registered only as Buteo,
but on Smith’s original label tachardus was written in pencil on the front
side, crossed out, but again written on the back. The rest of the label was
written in black ink. This specimen is without doubt a melanistic B. D.
vulpinus. ‘The 3 specimens from the Norwich Castle Collection are all regis-
tered as B. desertorum. One, (No. 2175), was identified by Rudebeck (1958) as
a d immature B. b. trizonatus, as given on the specimen label; but in the
register it was recorded as a 2 immature. The wing length would seem to
indicate a 9. A. H. J. identified specimen 2176 as frizonatus and specimen
number 2177 as clearly being a vu/pinus. All measurements are shown in
Table 1.
TABLE 1
Measurements of Buseo specimens collected by Sir Andrew Smith in South Africa, from the
British Museum (Natural History). ("worn plumage)
Register Number Coll. cul- _ tar- bare
and a. No. wing tail men sus tarsus sex age identification
1845.7.6.5 — 329 163 — 67 — -— ad. B.o. trizonatus
pee ihe (Natal)
1845.7.6.60 46 388 205 — 75 40 — ad. B.b.vulpinus
Buteo (tachardus)
1955.6.N.2175 9° 0353 182 23.0 69 37 imm. B. o. trizonatus
B. desertorum 2 im.
1955.6.N.2176 IO 359 184: ..28.0)...70 32 9 ad. B.o. trizonatus
B. desertorum 9
1955.6.N.2177 IT. 340"" 164 20-5 JO 42 & imm.B. bd. vulpinus
B. desertorum Qim.
Despite the fact that Brooke (1974), presumably acting as first reviser,
clearly did not examine Smith’s original material, he stated that Smith’s
name must be used. However, we are of the opinion that it should not.
Most importantly, Smith’s name Buteo tachardus is preoccupied. Vieillot
(1823:1224) described a species of buzzard under the heading La Buse
Tacharde. 21. B.(uteo) Tachardus, referring to Plate 19 in Levaillant (1799)
and to Falco tachardus as published by Latham (1809), and he listed it under
the buzzards with scantily feathered lores (p. 1217, “lorums un peu velus’’).
In view of the fact that Levaillant’s Tachard is now generally accepted as
Pernis apivorus, it is remarkable that Vieillot described B.(uteo) Apiworus under
number 22 in the next section of his genus Buteo, which covers species with
lores covered in small scale-like feathers (p. 1224, “lorums couverts de
131 (Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)]
petites plumes trés serrées, et en forme d’écailles”). We suggest that Vieillot’s
name must be considered as indeterminable but that whatever he may have
had in mind in naming Buteo tachardus, the name was validly published 7 years
before Smith applied it to a mixed series of Buteo oreophilus trizonatus and
B. buteo vulpinus. Buteo tachardus Vieillot, 1823 was known in the 19th century
and cited by Giebel (1872:516, in the synonymy of Buteo vulgaris=Buteo
buteo), and by Sharpe (1874:345, in the synonymy of Pernis apivorus). The
citation in Sharpe is confused by a printing error in the page number, which
is given as 224. Moreover, the authors of the name are given as Bonnaterre
et Vieillot. J. P. Bonnaterre died in 1804 and Vieillot alone was responsible
for part 3 of the Tableau Encyclopédique et Méthodique des Trois Régnes de la
Nature— Ornithologie, which appeared in 1823 (Sherborn & Woodward 1906).
If one is to accept Brooke’s view, many problems are encountered. In
picking a lectotype, all Smith’s Buteo specimens must be considered and not
just the 2 reported in Rudebeck (1958), as suggested by Brooke (1974).
Since Smith’s surviving series contains both vx/pinus and trizonatus, either
form could be chosen as a lectotype. However, we prefer to consider Smith’s
description of Buteo tachardus not only as not having had the intention of
describing a new species, but also as one describing an unidentifiable taxon.
Smith’s series contains at least 2 separate taxa, and it even seems that those
specimens now identified as f¢rizonatus were identified by Smith under an
atray of names, and those under ¢achardus were in fact a misidentification of
Falco tachardus Daudin. Therefore, strictly speaking B. tachardus Smith has
no nomenclatural status (G. F. Mees zn “itt.). Consequently no choice of a
lectotype is necessary.
We want to point out that Brooke’s suggestion of restricting the type
locality to Knysna in the southern Cape Province is stretching the evidence.
According to Roberts (1936), Smith collected only in the western and
northern Cape before 1830.
Stresemann & Amadon (1979) did not recognize B. tachardus, but listed it
questioningly under B. oreophilus, although it could as well have been under
B. buteo vulpinus (D. Amadon in litt.). We, similarly, conclude that Rudebeck
(1957) validly described a new taxon, hitherto confused with Buteo buteo
vulpinus and Buteo oreophilus, and that his name Buteo trizonatus must be used
for the resident Mountain Buzzard of Southern Africa. Most will call it a
race of oreophilus considering B. buteo specifically distinct.
We want to mention here another possible problem regarding the nomen-
clature of Buteo oreophilus. Temminck & Schlegel (1844:16) renamed the
common buzzard of the Cape (“la buse commune du Cap”) Buteo capensis,
now generally accepted as a synonym for B. b. vulpinus. They referred to both
le Tachard and le Rougri of Levaillant, which they considered to be the
juvenile and adult of B. capensis. They also referred to Falco tachardus as
published by Shaw (1826) and gave a short description of it, presumably
based on 3 specimens at Leiden in the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie
(RMNH). While examining this series of syntypes, A. H. J. noticed that in
fact one showed the typical three-zoned pattern of B. oreophilus trizonatus.
The measurements confirmed the identification (Table 2). As the other 2
specimens are clearly vu/pinus, we select one of the 2 v#/pinus specimens as the
lectotype: RMNH catalogue number 1. Thus the result is the retention of
Buteo capensis as janior synonym of Buteo b. vulpinus.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)] 132
On account of the consideration given above and in the interest of
stability of nomenclature, an urgency apparently overlooked or neglected by
Brooke, we conclude that the names Buteo oreophilus Hartert & Neumann
1914 for the African Mountain Buzzard and Buteo oreophilus trizonatus
Rudebeck 1957 as its South African subspecies should firmly stand.
TABLE 2
Syntypes of Buteo capensis Temminck & Schlegel, 1844 at the Rijksmuseum van
Natuurlylee Historie at Leiden
bare
Museum Number Locality age wing tail culm. tarsus tarsus
RMNHL 2 Cape (Prov.); ad. 343 168 * Jie 69 32
*“Kneisna’’
RMNHL I Afrique, aust. ad. 348 169 21.0 71 —
RMNHL 3 Wolga, Russie ad. 375 190 )=— 21.8 72 a=
Acknowledgements. We thank I. C. J. Galbraith, D. Reed (BMNH) and Dr. G. F. Mees
(RMNBH) for allowing A. H. J. to study specimens under their care. We ate grateful to
Dr. D. Amadon (American Museum of Natural History), P. A. Clancey (Durban Museum),
Dr. G. F. Mees, Dr. J. F. Monk, Dr. C. A. W. Jeekel (Zool. Museum, Amsterdam),
R. Sluijs (ZMA), and Prof. K. H. Voous for constructive comments on earlier drafts of
this paper. Their help aided greatly the quality of our conclusions.
References:
Brooke, R. K. 1974. Buteo tachardus Andrew Smith 1830. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 94: 59-62.
Clancey, P. A., Brooke, R. K., Liversidge, R., Maclean, G., Smithers, R. H. N. & Winter-
bottom, J. M. 1971. Falco exilis Temminck 1830; proposed invalidation under the
plenary powers in ordet to conserve Accipiter rufiventris Smith, 1830 (Aves) Z. N. (S)
1956. Bull. Zool. Nom. 28: 114-116.
Courtenay-Latimer, M. 1941. Breeding of the Mountain Buzzard (Buteo oreophilus Hartert &
Neuman) (sic). Ostrich 12: 20-23.
Daudin, F. M. 1800. Traité élémentaire et complet d’ornithologie, ou Histoire Naturelle des
Oiseaux. Paris.
Giebel, C. G. 1872. Thesaurus Ornithologiae. Leipzig: Brockhaus.
Hartert, E. 1914. Die Végel der Paldarktischen Fauna. Vol. 2, pt. 3; Berlin: R. Friedlander
und Sohn.
Hartert, E. & Neumann, O. 1914. Ein bisher verkannter Bussatd Buteo oreophilus sp. nov.
Orn. Mber. 22: 31-33.
Latham, J. 1809. Systema Ornithologiae, sive Index Ornithologicus. Patis: Johanneau.
Levaillant, F. 1799. Histoire Naturelle des Oiseaux d’ Afrique. 1. Patis: H. J. Jansen et Co,
Mees, G. F. 1967. Zur Nomenklatur einiger Raubvégel und Eulen. Zool. Meded. Leiden
42: 143-146.
Meinertzhapen, R. 1951. Some relations between African, Oriental, and Palaearctic genera
and species, with a review of the genus Monticola. Ibis 93: 443-459.
Roberts, A. 1936. Some unpublished field notes made by Dr. (Sir) Andrew Smith. Aun.
Transv. Mus. 18: 271-323.
— 1940. The Birds of § auth Africa. London and Johannesburg: H. F. & G. Witherby.
Rudebeck, G. 1957. Buteo buteo trizonatus a new Buzzard from the Union of South Africa.
In: S. Afr. Animal Life 4: 415-437; Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell.
— 1958. er additional notes on the Buzzard Buteo buteo trizonatus. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl.
78: 54-5
— 1963. Studies on some Palaearctic and Arctic birds in their winter quarters in South
Africa. In: S. Afr. Animal Life 10: 418-516; Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell.
Sclater, W. L. 1919. On the buzzards of the Ethiopian Region. Ibis 1919: 251-256.
Shatpe, R. B. 1874. Catalogue of the Accipitres or diurnal Birds of Prey in the Collection of the
British Museum. London: Taylor & Francis.
Shaw, G. 1826. General Zoology or systematic natural history with plates from the first
authorities and most select specimens engraved principally by Heath. Aves. London.
Sherborn, C. D. & Woodward, B. B. 1906. On the dates of publication of the Natural
History portions of the Paryelopbaie Méthodique’. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. Set. 7.
Vol. 17: 577-582.
133 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103( 4)
Smith, A. 1830. A description of the birds inhabiting the south of Africa. S. Afr. Quart. J.
4: 380-391.
Stresemann, E. & Amadon, D. 1979. Falconiformes. In: Mayr, E. & Cottrell, G. W. (Eds.).
Check-list of Birds of the World. Vol. 1; Cambridge, Mass.: Mus. Comp. Zool.
Temminck, C. J. & Schlegel, H. 1844. In: Siebold, F. Fauna Japonica, Aves. Leiden.
Vieillot, L. P. 1823. Ornithologie. Encycl. Méth. 3: 1224.
Address. A. H. James & Dr. J. Wattel, Instituut voor Taxonomische Zodlogie, Zodlogisch
Museum, Postbus 20125, tooo HC Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983
A new antwren from northeastern Brazil
by D. M. Teixeira and L. P. Gonzaga
Received 23 March 1983
In the early months of 1979, the Ornithological Section of the Museu
Nacional began field work in the residual Atlantic Forests of northeastern
Brazil. Our main goal was to locate and study the nominate form of the
Razor-billed Curassow Mita mitu, the most endangered Brazilian member of
the Cracidae. Some areas of Alagoas were visited, including the “‘Serra
Branca”, county of Murici (c. 9° 15’S. 35° 50’W), a forest located on the
lower slopes of the coastal “Chapada da Borborema” at 550m.
It was quite a surprise that our researches at ‘“‘Serra Branca’”’ led to the
discovery of birds never reported north of the Sao Francisco river and, above
all, to undescribed species. In another paper (Teixeira & Gonzaga, in press),
we describe a new Philydor (Furnariidae) and now we describe a new
Formicariid of the genus Terenura, naming it in honour of Dr. Helmut Sick,
who introduced us to ornithology. For all references on colours we used
Villalobos & Villalobos (1947), with citation of the respective code.
Orange-bellied Antwren Terenura sicki sp. nov.
Holotype. Museu Nacional-UFRJ No. 32048. Inactive 9, from “Serra
Branca”, Murici, Alagoas, northeastern Brazil (c. 9° 15’S, 35° 50’W),
collected 7 February 1979.
Distribution. Known only from the type locality. The first Terenura from
northeastern Brazil.
Description of Holotype. Crown with black and pale yellowish buff (OOY-
16-6°) bordered feathers, with a streaked aspect. The superciliaries, face and
auriculars also pale yellowish buff, the last 2 lightly dotted with black. Sides
of neck olive grey (OOY-12-3°). Mantle, rump and upper tail coverts
chestnut (0-9-8°); tail olivaceous grey (o-8-1°). Lesser and median upper
wing coverts black with light apical grey (0-13-1°) spots; greater wing
coverts plumbeous (0-7-0) bordered with buff (0-16-5°). Primaries and
secondaries ashy-black (0-6-1°) with grey borders and with a whitish basal
stripe on the inner web. Tertiaries also ashy-black, but bordered with chest-
nut; scapulars as the mantle. Wing lining and under wing coverts whitish.
Throat whitish orange (OOY-16-9°) slightly dotted with black. Breast the
same, but almost plain and shaded towards orange (OOY-16-9°), underparts
plain orange (O-16-11°). Iris brown, mandible brown, maxilla plumbeous,
tomia pearl grey, tarsus plumbeous.
Measurements of Folotype. Exposed culmen 11 mm; wing (flat) 43 mm; tail
40 mm; tarsus 15 mm; total length 110 mm. Weight 6.5 ¢. Wing formula as
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)| 134
in Terenura maculata (ptimaties numbered from inner to outer): p7, p6 and
ps are the longest primaries and are about the same size; p8 is slightly
shorter than p7 and about the same size as p4; pg is 3 mm shorter than p8
and pio is almost 9 mm shorter than p9. Compared with the series of T.
maculata studied (‘Table 1), the measurements of 7. sicki show no significant
difference.
TABLE 1
Measurements (mm) of Terenura sicki sp.nov. and Terenura maculata 22 compated
Terenura maculata 39 Terenura sicki
(a— 11) (holotype)
X SD
Wing (flat) 39.546 42.9 2.35 43
Tail 41-49 44.2 2.350 40
Tarsus 14-18 15.8 3.00 15
Exposed culmen II-13 11.9 0.7 II
Diagnosis. Differs from all other Terenura in its conspicuous orange under-
parts. The general pattern of its plumage resembles 7. maculata, which can
be distinguished from T. sicki by the pale yellow (Y-19-6°) underparts, its
light olive (YYO-9-7°) rump contrasting with the back, and by the white
lesser upper wing coverts. Additionally, the immature of T. waculata is easily
distinguishable from the adult 7. sicki by its strong olivaceous tinge, the
slightly streaked pileum and breast, and by the underparts being pale
yellowish suffused with olive.
The other 4 species of the genus Terenura are Amazonian in range and are
quite distinct in pattern from 7. sicki and T. maculata. All of them show a
plain pileum and in some the mantle and underparts are completely diverse
in colour (see Meyer de Schauensee 1970).
Additional remarks. T. sicki seems to be an endemic of the middle-altitude
forests of northeastern Brazil. This probably-could explain its late discovery
since only the coastal lowlands have as yet been well explored. Like T-
maculata, T. sicki being arboreal and inhabiting the upper strata, it is difficult
to locate. We saw it only 4 times. With its small size, it is able to move
through the dense foliage looking for food amongst the leaves and between
the debris fixed to the branches. Its diet includes small insects (Coleoptera,
Blattaria), as the stomach contents of the holotype confirm. As true of many
other Formicariidae, 7. sicki often joins mixed flocks. Its vocalization seemed
to us to be very similar to that of T. maculata, a quick sequence of notes
“‘thiu, ti-ti thiu, ti-ti thiu,...”’.
The avifauna of the forests of northeastern Brazil is very complex. There
is well marked sympatty of meridional and Amazonian species as well as a
core of endemic birds, the latter being more closely related to either Amazon-
ian ot to Atlantic Forest taxa. T. sicki is an example of the latter case, being
apparently closely related to T. maculata from eastern Brazil (Espirito Santo
and eastern Minas Gerais to Santa Catarina) to Paraguay and northeastern
Argentina in Misiones (fide Pinto 1978). The 2 are allopatric in range, replac-
ing each other at the Sado Francisco River, and compose a superspecies. The
same is true of many other birds from Alagoas (Teixeira & Gonzaga in
press; Pinto 1954).
The restricted known range of T. sicki raises doubts about its survival, as
the State of Alagoas has had its original 35% of forested area reduced to 10%
EE
135 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4)]
since 1938 (Sick & Teixeira 1979). In any case, the establishment of the first
protected areas for the northeastern Atlantic Forests is an urgent need.
Acknowledgments. We would like to thank Dr. E. O. Willis, A. Rosemberger and Ms. A.
Muskin for the revision of our original manuscript, and Dr. M. Monné for the identification
of the stomach contents of the holotype. We also thank WWF, ICBP and the Brazilian
CNPq, which partially supported our researches.
References:
Meyer de Schauensee, R. 1970. A Guide to the Birds of South America. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.
USA.
Pinto, O. M. O. 1954. Resultados ornitol6gicos de duas viagens cientificas ao Estado de
Alagoas. Pap. Avuls. Dep. Zool. Sao Paulo, 12(1): 1-98.
Pinto, O. M. O. 1978. Novo Catalogo das Aves do Brasil. Vol. 1. Conselho Nacional de
Désenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnolégico (CNPq): Sao Paulo.
Sick, H. & Teixeira, D. M. 1979. Notas sobre aves brasileiras raras ou ameacadas de
extingao. Publ. Avuls. Mus. Nac. (Rio de Janeiro) 62: 1-39.
Teixeira, D. M. & Gonzaga, L. P. In press. Um novo Furnariidae para o nordeste do
Brasil: Philydor novaesi sp.nov. Bol. Mus. Nac.
Villalobos, C. D. & Villalobos, J. 1947. Alas de Jos Colores. Ateneo Buenos Aires.
Address. Professor Dante Martins Teixeira and Luiz Pedreira Gonzaga, Secio de Ornito-
logia, Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
© British Ornithologist’s Club 1983.
African Reed Warblers in northern Nigeria;
morphometrics and the taxonomic debate
by R. Wilkinson and D. J. Aidley
Received 23 March 1983
African Reed Warblers Acrocephalus baeticatus are widely distributed over
much of southern and east-central Africa, but are apparently more local in
the northern tropics (Hall & Moreau 1970). The discovery on the shores of
Lake Chad of a population of A. baeticatus (formerly believed to be A.
dumetorum—Ash et al. 1967) and the suggestion that A. baeticatus be con-
sidered conspecific with A. dumetorum (Fry et al. 1974), together with Clan-
cey’s (1975) reclassification of A. baeticatus as 2 parapatric species (A.
baeticatus and A. cinnamomeus) has resulted in renewed debate with regard to
the taxonomy of this difficult group (Dowsett & Lemaire 1976, Fry &
Ferguson-Lees 1977, Devillers & Dowsett-Lemaire 1978).
Until recently African Reed Warblers were known from only 3 localities in
Nigeria; at Malamfatori (Lake Chad), at Serti in southeast Nigeria and at
Ibadan in the southwest (Elgood 1982). The newly discovered population
at Jekara, some 30 km ENE of Kano, Nigeria (Wilkinson & Aidley 1982) is
of interest in that it lies between the Lake Chad population, previously
described as A. baeticatus hopsoni and thought to represent a unique gene
pool (Fry e¢ a/. 1974), and the more southerly Nigerian populations, pre-
sumably A. ¢. cinnamomeus (see Clancey 1975, and maps in Fry et a/. 1974, and
Fry & Ferguson-Lees 1977).
As part of a larger study of the avifauna of Jekara Dam (12°40’N, 8°10’B),
mist netting was undertaken, normally twice monthly, from October 1981
to October 1982, in paths cut in the 7ypha-dominated waterside vegetation.
African Reed Warblers were caught in every month from October 1981 until
June 1982, and again in October 1982. These were distinguished from the
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103( 4) 136
overwintering Palaearctic Reed Warblers A. scirpaceus by wing formula,
A. baeticatus having Pz shorter than P6 rather than longer as in A. scirpaceus
(Bannerman 1953). Numbering the primaries ascendantly from the outer-
most P1 inwards to Pro is followed in recording wing formulae. The shorter
wing length of A. baeticatus also normally distinguished it from A. scirpaceus,
but some overlap did occur and differences in wing formulae proved more
reliable. A total of 37 individuals (excluding retraps) was handled and wing
lengths (maximum-chord) were recorded for all of these; additionally
morphometric data, including weight, tail-, tarsus- bill-lengths and wing
formula were obtained for most of them. Description of colour in the field
was considered to be unreliable and was not attempted for the Jekara birds.
TABLE 1
Measurements of African Reed Warblers Acrocephalus baeticatus from Artigui (Niger),
Malamfatori (Lake Chad), Jekara (N. Nigeria) and Darfur (Sudan). Means are given with
range in parenthesis; all linear measurements are mm.
— Weight (g) Wing Tail Tarsus Bill
Arrigui 54-7(53-57)
19°06’N, 12°55’E N=11
Malamfatori 8.4(6.3-9.3) §8.0(§6.5-59) 50.7(5§0-52) 20.7(20.5-23) (16-16.5)
13°37 N,, 13: 230k N=8 N=5 N=5 N=5 N=5
Jekara 8.9(7-8-12.5) §6.7(54-62) 47.5(44-55) 22.3(21-24) — 15.6(14-17)
12040 N. Gado Ey | IN 36 INES) N= 23 N= 26 N= 23
Darfur
Zalingei:
12°51'N, 23°29'E 53-8(50.5-55.5) 46.9(43-52) 20.4(18.5-22)
Kulme: N=8 N=8 N=8
12°35 N23. 47 Ly
Morphometric data.
Table 1 presents the data for the Jekara birds together with the published
data of Fry e¢ a/. (1974) and Devillers & Dowsett-Lemaire (1981) for birds
from neighbouring populations. In average wing-length and tail-length the
Jekara birds are intermediate between the Lake Chad population of hopsoni
and cinnamomeus from the Sudan. The mean tarsus measurements are larger
for the Jekara birds than for any other series, but we cannot be sure whether
these differences are real or reflect differences in the method of taking this
measurement. Although mean values for tail and wing-lengths at Malamfatori
are slightly larger than for the Jekara birds, all Lake Chad specimens fall
within the range of measurements of Jekara birds with respect to tail-, wing-
and bill-length, but many more birds have been measured at Jekara than
elsewhere. It is possible that with bigger samples from Chad and Darfur the
difference would not be significant. The range of weights suggests that the
Jekara birds are somewhat heavier than their neighbours at Lake Chad.
However, weights for 33 out of 35 Jekara birds fell within the range 7.8 —
9.8 g (mean=8.8), the 2 exceptions beitig one bird of 11.4 g on 3 May, and
another weighing 12.5 g on 6 April. These 2 exceptions may have been
females about to lay. Fry et a/. (1974) suggest that African Reed Warblers a
Lake Chad were ready to breed from April onwards. .
137 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)]
TABLE 2
Wing formulae of African Reed Warblers Acrocephalus baeticatus from Arrigui (Niger),
Malamfatori (Lake Chad), Jekara (N. Nigeria) and Darfur (Sudan)
2nd primary falls roth pry. shortfall Wing point
Mean range
Arrigui between 7th & 8th 9.5(8-11)
19°06’N, 12°55’E N=11I N=11
Malamfatori equals 6th-7th (9-11) P3
13°37'N, 13°23’E N=5 N=5 N=1
ekara between 6th & toth 8.4(6-10) P3-4/5
12°40’N, 08°10’E (mean 8, median 8) N= 24 N=29
—29
Darfur between 6th & 8th (5-8) 4°*
Zalingei: 12°51’N, 23°29’E
Kulme: 12°35’N, 23°37’E
No#e. *From Fig. 2 in Fry ef a/. (1974).
Of 29 Jekara birds examined for wing formula (Table 2), the second
primary fell between the 6th and 7th or equalled the 7th in 9 birds, between
the 7th and 8th or equalled the 8th in 15 birds, and exceeded the 8th in 5
birds. In the 5 specimens from Lake Chad examined by Fry ef a/. (1974), the
second primary equalled the 6th — 7th. Thus in this respect the Jekara birds
more closely approach those from Arrigui and Darfur than those from
Lake Chad. A further difference in wing formulae between the Lake Chad
skins and the Jekara birds is suggested by the type specimen of A. b. hopsoni,
which has the wing point at the 3rd primary (Fry e¢ a/. 1974), rather than, as
normally in the Jekara birds, at the 4th primary (22 of 29 birds examined),
and only once at the 3rd primary. In the latter case the bird was also aberrant
for some reason in having P4 shorter than both P3 and Ps, perhaps indicating
a failure of this feather to grow normally. With regard to the roth primary
shortfall (sensu Fry e¢ al. 1974), the range for the Jekara birds bridges that
between the Arrigui and Lake Chad specimens and those from Darfur.
Discussion
We have no skins of the Jekara birds, but in defining the Lake Chad
population as Acrocephalus baeticatus hopsoni, Fry et al. (1974) state that the
race is less rusty and lacks the rufous wash of cinnamomeus. In contrast,
Devillers & Dowsett-Lemaire (1978) failed to find any difference in colour-
ation between skins from Lake Chad, Arrigui (Niger) and cinnamomeus from
Darfur (Sudan). A. b. hopsoni was secondly differentiated by Fry e¢ a/. (1974)
in having a longer wing and a greater roth primary shortfall than cinna-
momeus. However, since the Lake Chad specimens fall within the range
established for Jekara birds with respect to tail-, wing- and bill-lengths it
could be argued that the Jekara population is hopsonz. On the other hand, the
average wing- and tail-lengths of the Jekara birds were intermediate between
those of hopsoni and cinnamomeus. Fry & Ferguson-Lees (1977) comment on a
cline in wing-length in cinnamomeus, with the more northerly populations
approaching /opsoni in this respect. We suggest that hopsoni continues this
cline and question the ecological isolation of this race. In agreement with
this suggestion we note that in the measurements of the toth primary
shortfall, the range in the Jekara birds bridges those of the Chad and Arrigui
series and the cinnamomeus specimens from Darfur. Although we remain
cautious of the above comparisons of wing formulae (these may differ
| Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4)| 138
between live birds and museum specimens—Mead 1977), when considered
together with the other data we must concur with Devillers & Dowsett-
Lemaire (1978) in questioning the validity of hopsoni.
The Jekara population, although some 550 km from Malamfatori, Lake
Chad, must cast doubt on the ecological isolation of the Lake Chad popula-
tion. Jekara dam is a man-made, construction, which was completed in
October 1976. The presumably recent invasion of this habitat attests to the
mobility of these small warblers, a view supported by their apparent seasonal
occurrence at Lake Chad (Fry e¢ a/. 1974). Similar waterside habitats that may
hold A. baeticatus occur in other areas of Northern Nigeria between Kano
and Lake Chad but to our knowledge none has been systematically worked.
Finally we suggest that the apparent similarity between the most northerly
populations in the northern tropics and those from southern Africa may
represent convergent evolution of these populations. Contrary to Fry &
Ferguson-Lees (1977), we consider this the most probable of the 4 explan-
ations they offer for this similarity. If Clancey’s (1975) reclassification of
Al. baeticatus as 2 species is adopted, we would place “hopsoni’ and similar
populations with the northerly A. cinnamomeus and not, as previously
suggested by Fry & Ferguson-Lees (1977), with the southerly A. baeticatus.
However, in the absence of more certain data we concur with the latter
authors that ali African Reed Warblers may presently be best represented as a
single polytypic species.
Acknowledgements. Roger Wilkinson is grateful to Bayero University, Kano, for study
leave during which this paper was prepared. We thank Ali Garko Mohammed, Roger
Beercoft, Jessica Aidley, Lynn Wilkinson and Victor Obadele for assistance in various,
ways, and Dr. C. H. Fry and the editor for helpful comments on this manuscript.
References:
Ash, J. S., Ferguson-Lees, I. J. & Fry, C. H. 1967. B.O.U. expedition to Lake Chad,
Northern Nigeria, March — April 1967: a preliminary report. /bis 109: 478-486.
Bannerman, D. A. 1953. The Birds of West and Equatorial Africa. Vol. 2. Oliver & Boyd:
Edinburgh.
Clancey, P. A. 1975. On the species limits of Acrocephalus baeticatus (Vieillot) (Aves: Sylvi-
idae) of Ethiopian Africa. Arnoldia 7: 1-14.
Devillers, P. & Dowsett-Lemaire, F. 1978. African Reed Warblers (Acrocephalus baeticatus)
in Kaouar (Niger). Le Gerjaut 68: 211-213.
Dowsett, R. J. & Lemaire, F. 1976. The problem of the African Reed Warbler (Acroce-
phalus baeticatus) in Zambia. Bull. Zamb. Orn. Soc. 8: 62-63.
Elgood, J. H. 1982. The Birds of Nigeria. British Ornithologists’ Union: c/o Zoological
Society, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY.
Fry, C. H. & Ferguson-Lees, I. J. 1977. Taxonomy of the Acrocephalus baeticatus complex
of African marsh warblers. Nigerian Field 42: 134-137.
Fry, C. H., Williamson, K. & Ferguson-Lees, I. J. 1974. A new subspecies of Acrocephalus
baeticatus from Lake Chad and a taxonomic reappraisal of Acrocephalus dumetorum. Ibis
116: 340-346. ei
Hall, B. P. & Moreau, R. E. 1970. An Aflas of Speciation in African Passerine Birds. British
Museum (Nat. Hist.): London.
Mead, C. J. 1977. The wing formulae of some live warblers from Portugal. Ringing and
Migration 1: 178-183.
Wilkinson, R. & Aidley, D. J. 1982. Additions to local avifaunas: Kano State. Malimbus
A kOT.
Addresses. Dt. R. Wilkinson, Department of Biological Sciences, Bayero University,
P.M.B. 3011, Kano, Nigeria. (Present address—North of England Zoological Society,
Zoological Gardens, Upton-by-Chester, Cheshire, U.K.)
Dr. D. J. Aidley, School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich
NR4 7 tJ, Ua
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983
139 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103( 4) |
First record of Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris
in Oman, Eastern Arabia
by Ben F. King and Michael D. Gallagher
Received 6 April 1983
At 0730 on 23 September 1982, at West Khawr (an estuary), Salalah, in
Dhofar, the southern province of the Sultanate of Oman, we identified a
Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris, a species not previously acceptably identified
in Oman. The bird was near other waders but very shy, and as we approached
it flew to the sandy shore of the Arabian Sea and joined several Bar-tailed
Godwits Limosa lapponica. When flushed from there it flew strongly up the
coast. It was about the size and coloration of a nearby Grey Plover Plwialis
squatarola, but had a longer and strongly tapered bill, noticeably broad at the
base, narrow and very slightly decurved at the tip, and had a thinner neck
and smaller head. The axillaries were white. It fed with the body held
horizontally while deliberately probing with the bill. When near a Common
Redshank 77inga totanus, the Knot’s body appeared larger and its legs shorter.
It was much larger and heavier than a nearby Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria
inter pres, and than several Curlew Sandpipers Calidris ferruginea. Its call was a
low hard chuck, repeated rapidly when taking wing and less rapidly when
standing. Its greyish upper parts, as early as this date in autumn, would
indicate that the bird was an adult in basic plumage (Dement’ev e# a/. 1951,
and Humphrey & Parkes 1959).
Later on the same day, at 1645, we found 2 Great Knots at another
estuary, Khawr Rayzut, c. 10 km west of West Khawr. We observed them
for about 1 hour at 100 m with a 25x telescope. One was in the same plumage
as the Great Knot seen that morning, but appeared to have more distinct
grey spots on the upper breast, which suggested that it was not the morning’s
bird. The other bird had generally much darker upper parts than its compan-
ion, and had a heavy “necklace” of blackish spots across its upper breast,
indicating it was an adult in partial alternate plumage. Detailed descriptions
of all 3 birds are available in the Ornithology Dept. of the American Museum
of Natural History in New York.
B.F.K. has had considerable experience with this species in Korea,
Thailand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. As far as we know, this is the first certain
record of the Great Knot for the entire Arabian Peninsula. There are,
however, 2 earlier Oman possible sight records from Masirah Island. T. D.
Rogers made one sighting on 30 Nov 1974 (Griffiths & Rogers 1976) and
T. D. Rogers and C. A. Pomeroy another on 6 Dec 1975 (Rogers in Uitt.).
While the descriptions of these sightings are suggestive of Great Knot, the
birds were not positively identified at the time and they are not confirmable.
The Great Knot breeds in NE Siberia and winters from southern Asia to
Australia (Dement’ev e¢ a/. 1951, Ali & Ripley 1980, Condon 1975). It is
nowhere common in winter and its main wintering grounds are unknown,
the westernmost records being from the Makran and Sind coasts of Pakistan
(Ali & Ripley 1980), where they are uncommon. Although Vaurie (1965)
states that the Great Knot has occurred in the Persian Gulf, Scott (1975)
lists no records for Iran, and Bundy & Warr (1980) list no records for the
southern shores of the Gulf. The proximity of the Oman coast to the
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)] 140
Pakistan coast, and the fact that the Great Knot must fly in a southwesterly
direction to reach Pakistan from its breeding grounds, would lead one to
expect that it might well reach the Arabian Peninsula at least occasionally.
A tecent sight record as far west as Morocco on 27 Aug 1980 (Lister 1981)
lends support to this expectation. Further, a flock of 70 Great Knots that
B.F.K. observed neat Karachi on 11 Mar 1981 had not been observed there
previously that winter, suggesting that they had wintered farther south. The
fact that the Great Knot has occurred as far south as southern Australia and
Tasmania (Condon 1975), also suggests the possibility of its occurrence in
winter to the south of Oman, on the east African coast. On migration and in
winter, B.F.K. has usually found it on coastal mud-flats and sand-flats,
including tidal creeks.
Acknowledgements. We wish to thank His Highness Sayyid Faisal bin Ali Al-Said, Minister
for National Heritage and Culture, Sultanate of Oman, for his assistance with our field
studies.
References:
Ali, S. & Ripley, S. D. 1980. Handbook of the Birds of India and Pakistan. 2nd ed. Vol. 2:
297-8. Oxford Univ. Press, Delhi.
Bundy, G. & Warr, F. E. 1980. A Check-list of the birds of the Arabian Gulf States.
Sandgrouse 1: 4-49.
Condon, H. T. 1975. Checklist of the Birds of Australia. 1. Non-passetines. p. 134. Royal
Australasian Orn. Union, Melbourne.
Dement’ev, G. P., Gladkov, N. A. & Spangenberg, E. P. 1951. Birds of the Soviet Union.
hems, in 1969 from Russian to English by Israel Program for Scientific Translation.)
Vol. 3: 181-184.
Griffiths, W. & Rogers, T. D. 1976. An Interim List of the Birds of Masirah Island. Oman.
Coes Typescript copy in the British Museum (Natural History), Tring,
England.).
Humphrey, P. S. & Parkes, K. C. 1959. An approach to the study of molts and plumages.
Auk 76: 1-31.
Lister, S. M. 1981. Le Grand Maubéche Ca/idris tenuirostris nouveau pour l’ouest du
Paléarctique. Alauda 49: 227-228.
Scott, D. A. 1975. Check List of the Birds of Iran. MTT Technical Leaflet No. 12, Dept. of
the Environment, Tehran.
Vaurie, C. 1965. The Birds of the Palearctic Fauna. Non-passeriformes. p. 403. Witherby,
London,
Addresses. B. F. King, c/o Ornithology Dept., American Museum of Natural History
Central Park West at 79th St., New York, N.Y. 10024, USA.
M. D. Gallagher, Oman Natural History Museum, Ministry of National Heritage and
Culture, P.O. Box 668, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983
Reappraisal of variation in the nightjar
Caprimulgus natalensis Smith
by R. M. Harwin
Received 23 April 1983
Huxley (1964) listed the Caprimulgiformes as an order in which poly-
morphism was absent, evidently overlooking its occurrence in Caprimulgus
donaldsoni, which had already been documented by Mackworth-Praed &
Grant (1952). More recently, Benson & Colebrook-Robjent (1977) have
shown that it occurs in Caprimulgus pectoralis, and in the course of preparing
the section on the Caprimulgidae for Volume 3 of The Birds of Africa (Urban
141 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4)]
et al. in press), I came to the conclusion that the grey forms of C. natalensis
are better considered as colour-morphs rather than as distinct subspecies. Of
these forms, White (1965) remarked “‘Geographical variation is not fully
understood, very similar reddish populations having a wide, broken range,
with greyer populations intervening”.
C. natalensis is a small, distinctively marked, short-tailed nightjar with
robust legs and feet, inhabiting short, moist grasslands from Liberia to
Kenya and thence south to Natal. The colour-pattern consists of large black
or brown spots on a rufous-buff or greyish ground. It is variously known as
the White-tailed or Natal Nightjar, neither name being particularly appro-
priate. White in the tail is limited to the 2 outer pairs of rectrices and the
undertail coverts, while the Natal population is an isolated one, whose
habitat has, in any case, been very largely destroyed by sugar cane culture.
Cyrus & Robson’s recent “‘Bird Atlas of Natal” (1980) shows it surviving
only in Zululand and the extreme south of Natal; however, it almost certainly
extends to southern Mozambique—probably even further up the Mozam-
bique coast. I suggest a more appropriate name is “Swamp Nightjar’,
referring to its chosen habitat.
20°W 10°W 0° 10°E 20°E 30°E 40°F 50°E
10°N
(2 Se ee ee none Pe, “aes ASS eS SOE 0°
10°s 10°S
20°S
30°S
20°W 10°W o° 10°E 20°E 30°E 40°E S0°E
Fig. 1. Sketch map showing distribution of Caprimulgus natalensis and the areas inhabited
by populations A to N (see text and Table 1). Circles represent isolated localities. Blacked
in citcles indicate the type-localities of 7 described subspecies, question marks possible but
unproved occurrence. Adapted with permission from The Birds of Africa. Vol. 3 (Urban
et al. in press).
The range of the species as a whole is much broken up, and it is perhaps
not surprising that 7 subspecies should have been described. A study of the
distribution map in Snow (1978) shows that there could be as many as 14
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103(4)] 142
discrete populations (5; known from a single locality and 7 having received
subspecific names) as follows (Fig. 1) :—
A. Liberia.
B. Southeast Ghana, coastal Togo and Benin, southern Nigeria and
West Cameroon (“C. #. accrae Shelley’’).
C. Gabon (“C. 2. gabonensis Alexander’’).
D. Savannas along lower reaches of the Congo River (“C. 2. fulvwentris
Hartlaub’’).
KE. Bahr-el-Ghazal, Sudan; separated from F by the Sudd.
F. Region around Lake Victoria and upper Nile (Uganda, Rwanda and
adjacent parts of Sudan, Zaire, Kenya, Tanzania and Burundi).
G. Southern Zaire and northern Zambia (“C. ”. mpasa Smithers’’).
H. Caprivi Strip, northern Botswana and extreme southwestern Zambia
(“C. 2. carpi Smithers’).
I. Coastal Natal and southern Mozambique (“C. 2. natalensis Smith’).
J. Lake Chad (“C. x. chadensis Alexandet’’).
K. Upper Niger, Mali.
L. Southwestern Ethiopia.
M. Bend of the River Oubangi, northern Zaire.
N. Southwestern Tanzania.
Populations J to N represent single localities.
I have examined 80 specimens of natalensis (35 33, 44 99 and 1 unsexed) in
the collections of the British Museum (Natural History) and the National
Museum of Zimbabwe, and this paper attempts an explanation of the treat-
ment adopted in The Birds of Africa. It will be appreciated, of course, that
80 specimens is by no means a large sample, particularly considering the
number of populations involved. Nevertheless, I believe that only 2 sub-
species are recognisable, and the grey populations are nothing but localised
colour-morphs.
VARIATION IN GROUND COLOUR
I agree with White (1965), who, in uniting C. 2. chadensis and C. n. gabonensis
with nominate C. x. natalensis, stated “I doubt whether the included popula-
tions can be separated on colour”. White might well have gone further and
also included fuliventris, of which he commented “doubtfully distinct’,
mpasa and carpi. When describing the latter 2 taxa, Smithers (1954a and
1954b) compared them with nominate natalensis, but not with the popula-
tions of Zaire and Uganda. I have only examined 2 specimens of carpi, which
are, as Smithers claimed, of the very grey form. M. P. Stuart Irwin, however,
informs me that some yeats ago he examined 3 males collected on behalf of
the Smithsonian Institution at Xugana in Botswana, about 250 km SW of the
type locality of carpi, and observed that all were sandy coloured. Both the
carpi which I examined were also males, while 13 out of 17 mpasa were
females. One cannot, therefore, discount the possibility of sexual differences
in these variable populations. Until a fuller examination of all populations
from the Upper Nile to Ngamiland is undertaken, only one trinomial should
be applied. All are probably best included with nominate satalensis. If
distinct from the Natal population, the earliest name is C. p. fubiventris
Hartlaub.
C. 2. accrae of coastal West Africa is darker and duller and is the only
subspecies clearly separable from nominate C. 2. natalensis on colout.
143 [Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103( 4))
VARIATION IN SIZE
Sex difference
Published figures (Chapin 1939, Mackworth-Praed & Grant 1952, 1962,
1970, White 1965) do not differentiate between the sizes of males and females,
implying that there is no significant difference. My own measurements
showed that the wing-lengths of 35 males varied between 148 and 162 mm
(mean 156.2), and of 44 females between 145 and 167 mm (mean 153.8). In
Table 1 therefore, I have likewise not distinguished between the wing-
lengths of the two sexes.
TABLE 1
Wing measurements of populations A to J of Caprimulgus natalensis (see text)
Pop- Wing-lengths as given by
ula- Putative No. Range Mean Chapin M.-P. &G. White
tion subspecies (1939) (1952,°62,’70) (1965)
A/B accrae 7 148-155 150.7 146-154 146-150 146-154
Cc gabonensis I 149 149 138-147 137-144 138-152
D fulviventris = — — — 154 154 —
E chadensis 15 146-162 154.9 147-159* 146—166* 147—-163*
F chadensis 22 146-161 153.0 147-159* 146-166* 147-163*
G mpasa 17 148-167 159.4 — 156-167 156-167
H carpi 2 149-164 156.5 — 155-166 —
I natalensis 10 145-162 155.3 149-163 150-167 147-163*
J chadensis 5 145-159 151.4 147-159* 146-166* 147-163*
*Chapin, Mackworth-Praed & Grant included populations E, F and J under the name
chadensis. White included them under natalensis.
Geographical difference
Table 1 shows the range of my measurements, compared with those given
by Chapin, Mackworth-Praed & Grant, and White (some of which may
have been repeated from an earlier author). It will be seen that there is
general agreement, apart from Population C, of which I examined only one
specimen. It is possible that the latter population, “C. 2. gabonensis”, may be
separable on account of smaller size, as is the Gabon population of C. fossii,
but on the basis of one specimen which appears to be at the upper limit of
the species range, I cannot express an opinion.
CONCLUSION
In the present state of knowledge, it is advisable to admit only the 2
subspecies of Caprimulgus natalensis, accrae of coastal West Africa, with
nominate “atalensis occupying the remainder of the range of the species. The
Gabon population may represent a small subspecies, but other subspecies
named heretofore are based on colour-morphs.
Acknowledgements. I should like first to express a debt of gratitude to the late Con Benson,
who guided my nightjar studies, but died before the preparation of this paper. I thank
Mr. I. C. J. Galbraith and Mr. Fo Jackson for permission to examine the collections of
the British Museum (Natural History) and National Museum of Zimbabwe respectively.
Dr. C. H. Fry and Mr. M. P. Stuart Irwin read and commented on a preliminary draft of
this paper. I also acknowledge the permission to use the accompanying map from Messrs
Academic Press Ltd.
References:
Benson, C. W. & Colebrook-Robjent, J. F. R. 1977. Eorpersns in the Fiery-necked Nightjar
Caprimulgus pectoralis. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 9 -39.
Chapin, J. P. 1939. The Birds of the Belgian Chie Part II]. American Museum of Natural
History: New York.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103(4)] 144
Cyrus, D. & Robson, N. 1980. Bird Avlas of Natal. University of Natal Press: Pietermaritz-
burg.
Huxley, J. S. 1964. ““Polymorphism’ im Thomson, A. L. (ed.): New Dictionary of Birds.
Nelson: London and New York.
Mackworth-Praed, C. W. & Grant, C. H. B. 1952, 1962, 1970. African Handbook of Birds.
Series 1-3. Longmans, Green and Co: London.
Sclater, W. L. 1924. Systema Avium Aethiopicarum. Vol. 1. British Ornithologists’ Union:
London.
Smithers, R. H. N. 1954a. A new trace of nightjar from the Caprivi Strip, South-West
Africa. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 74: 83.
— 1954b. A new race of nightjar from Northern Rhodesia. Bu//. Brit. Orn. Cl. 74: 84.
Snow, D. W. (ed.). 1978. An Aftlas of Speciation in African Non-Passerine Birds. Trustees of
the British Museum (Natural History): London.
Urban, E., Fry, C. H. & Keith, S. (Eds.). In press. The Birds of Africa. Vol. 3.
White, C. M. N. 1965. A Revised Check-List of African Non-Passerine Birds. Government
Printer: Lusaka.
Address. Dt. R. M. Harwin, 2 Norman Close, P.O. Chisipite, Harare, Zimbabwe.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983.
The spelling of Semioptera wallacii (Paradisaeidae)
by Mary LeCroy
Received 29 April 1983
I believe that some comment on McAlpine’s (1979) article on the spelling of
several names in the family Paradisaeidae is in order. He proposes to use the
spelling Semeioptera wallacei; this spelling was used in the Literary Gazette
report concerning the meeting of the Zoological Society of London at which
Gray proposed both the name Semzoptera as the subgeneric name and wallacii
as the specific name of Wallace’s Standard-wing Bird of Paradise. This
Literary Gazette was published (March 1859) before the Proceedings of the
meeting in question (June 1859) and contained a description of the bird. To
further complicate matters a report on the meeting also appeared in [bes
(April 1859: 210) before the Proceedings were published but in which the
Literary Gazette article was quoted.
I have not seen the original Literary Gazette article, but McAlpine says
that the spelling there was Semezoptera for the subgenus (later elevated to
generic rank) and Wa//acei for the species. In the Jbis article, within the
quotation from the Literary Gazette, the name is spelled Semioptera for the
subgenus and wallacii for the species, as it is in the rest of the Jbis article
itself. In the Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, published in June
1859, Gray spelled the name as Semioptera for the subgenus and wal/aciz for
the species. Gray obviously intended the spelling to be Semioptera wallaciz,
and I consider the spelling in the Literary Gazette a misspelling. Nevertheless,
as McAlpine says, there was included a recognizable description of the bird.
However, as far as I have been able to determine, the spelling Semezoptera
has never been used in the literature in over 120 years and, as Wa/l/acei is only
a variant spelling of Wallace’s name, I am petitioning the International
Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to suppress the names Semeioptera
and Wallacei in reference to Wallace’s Standard-wing Bird of Paradise and to
conserve, in the interest of nomenclatural stability, the spelling Semzoptera
wallacit, which I believe was Gray’s intended spelling.
I would also like to point out that while the citation for the description of
145 [ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.1983 103( 4)]
Semioptera wallacii in Gilliard (1969: 126) is not correct, as Gould did not
describe the bird, the plate of Wallace’s Standard-wing Bird of Paradise in
Gould’s (1859) Birds of Australia Supplement was the second one (Roman
numeral II, not Arabic ii) in Part 3 of the Supplement and is so listed on the
cover of the third part, which is bound into the American Museum copy.
“Part 3”’ was omitted from the reference in Gilliard. Plate 57 is the number
of the plate in the recommended final binding sequence, as stated by Mc-
Alpine, and no reference should be made to parts if that number is used.
According to the cover of Part 3, it was issued on 1 September 1859. This
postdates all of the publications relevant to Gray’s description cited above.
In my opinion the spelling Paradisaea is correct. In Linnaeus (1758: 83)
the spelling Paradisea is a nomen nudum as no description is included, and it is
not part of the Index. In the same work (p. 110) where the description occurs,
the spelling is Paradisaea. Furthermore, the spelling is unchanged in the roth
revised edition of 1760. Linnaeus, in his subsequent 12th (1766) edition cannot
be construed as the first reviser (see Article 24 a1 of the lnternational Code of
Zoological Nomenclature). When later authors have used the spelling Paradisea
they have quoted the original description as Linnaeus, 1766. As the bird
was obviously described in Linnaeus, 1758, p. 110 and spelled Paradisaea,
this is the spelling which should be used.
Acknowledgements. The late Eugene Eisenmann was a source of encouragement and much
assistance in the preparation of the first draft of this manuscript. I would like to thank
Bruce Beehler and Dr. Lester L. Short for their comments.
References:
Gilliard, E. T. 1969. Birds of Paradise and Bower Birds. Weidenfeld and Nicholson: London.
Gould, J. 1859. The Birds of Australia. Supplement, Pt. 3. London.
Gray, G. R. 1859a. Zoological Society (report of meeting). Literary Gazette (New Series)
39: 406 (26 March). [Not seen]
— 1859b. Letters, extracts ... etc. Jbis Ser. 1(1): 210 (April).
— 1859c. [Report of meeting on 22 March 1859]. Proc. Zool. Soc. London. Pt. 27: 128-130
(June).
ce %. 1758. Systema Naturae (10th Edition), vol. 1. L. Salvii: Holmiae.
— 1760. Systema Naturae (10th Edition, revised), vol. 1. I.I.Curt: Halae Magdeburgicae.
— 1766. Systema Naturae (12th Edition), vol. 1. L. Salvii: Holmiae.
McAlpine, D. K. 1979. The correct name and authorship for Wallace’s Standard Wing
(Passeriformes, Paradiseidae). Bu//. Brit. Orn. C7. 99: 108-110.
Address. Maty LeCroy, Dept. of Ornithology, American Museum of Natural History, New
York, New York 10024, U.S.A.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983
The subspecific name of the Common Paradise
Kingfisher Tanysiptera galatea from Halmahera Island,
North Moluccas (Maluku Utara), Indonesia
by S. Dillon Bipley
Received 10 May 1983
In reporting on a collection of birds made by my wife and myself on Hal-
mahera Island (Ripley 1959), I discussed the Paradise (Racquet-tailed)
Kingfishers Tanysiptera galatea of the Northern Moluccas with special
reference to new material we had collected on Halmahera and Batjan islands.
[ Bull. Brit.Orn.Cl.19 83 103( 4) | 146
Birds of this region had been described originally as Tanysiptera margarethae
(Heine 1859), the type locality subsequently identified as Batjan by Hartert
(1903). Subsequent to Heine’s paper G. R. Gray (1860) erected the name
Tanysiptera isis, based on material collected by A. R. Wallace from “‘Batchian”
(=Batjan) and “Gilolo” (—Halmahera).
In 1959 I separated the Batjan and Halmahera populations taxonomically.
Restricting the type locality of is7s Gray to Halmahera, I applied the name
T. g. isis to the subspecifically distinct population on that island. However,
close examination of the description of Gray (1860), describing Wallace’s
collecting stations, shows that the material on which zsvs was based originated
in fact from Batjan, not Halmahera. This is reaffirmed by Warren (1966). As
a result, zis becomes a junior objective synonym of margarethae and is not
available. This leaves the Halmahera population without a name or type
Specimen.
I therefore propose that the Halmahera population be named:
Tanysiptera galatea browningi subsp. nov.
Holotype. U.S.N.M. No. 571751, male, skull ossified, collected 18 May
1981 by Paul M. Taylor at Kampung Pasir Putih, Jailolo District, Halmahera
Island (near sea level).
Distribution. Halmahera Island.
Diagnosis. Comparing a series of birds collected on Halmahera with
material from Batjan, I have noted that the birds from Halmahera have an
ultramarine crown only very narrowly bordered on the sides with cobalt
which forms a supra-ocular stripe. In contrast, birds from Batjan have a
cobalt stripe which is much more pronounced, being broad, extending onto
the crown and making a noticeable nuchal ring (cf. Ripley 1959). Addition-
ally, the Batjan birds show more purple on the crown. These population
differences were checked against material that I collected in 1954 as well as
new material collected by Paul M. Taylor, and deposited at the U.S. National
Museum, and the comparisons reaffirm the validity of these inter-island
differences (contra Mees 1964).
Measurements of the type. Wing 97.5 mm (chord), tail 170 mm, bill from base
38 mm, tarsus 16 mm.
Acknowledgements. 1 am pleased to name this new subspecies in honour of
M. Ralph Browning, of the National Bird Laboratories, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, who very kindly brought this taxonomic problem to my
attention. Thanks are also due to C. G. Sibley, for loan of material in his
care at the Yale Peabody Museum, New Haven, USA.
References:
Gray, G. R. 1860. List of birds collected by Mr. Wallace from the Molucca elcid with
descriptions of new species, etc. Proc. Zool, Soc. London: 341-366.
Hartert, E. 1903. The birds of Batjan. Novit. Zool. 10: 43-64.
Heine, F. 1859. Ueber einige neue oder weniger bekannte V6gel des “Museum Heineanum’’.
7 Orn. 42: 401-407.
Mees, G. 1964. Four new subspecies of birds from the Moluccas and New Guinea. Zoo/.
Meded. 40: 125-130.
Ripley, S. D. 1959. Birds from Djailolo, Halmahera. Posti//a 41: 1-8.
Warren, R. L. 1966. Type specimens of birds in the British Museum (Natural History).
Vol. 1. Non-passerines. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.) Publ. No. 651: 1-320.
Address. Dt. S. Dillon Ripley, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560.
© British Ornithologists’ Club 1983
NOTICE TO CONTRIBUTORS
Papers, whether by Club Members or by non-members, should be sent to the
Editor, Dr. J. F. Monk, The Glebe Cottage, Goring, Reading RG8 9AP, and
ate accepted on the understanding that they are offered solely for publication
in the Bulletin. They should be typed on one side of the paper, with double-
spacing and a wide margin, and submitted with a duplicate copy on airmail
aper.
: Scientific nomenclature and the style and lay-out of papers and of Refer-
ences should conform with usage in this or recent issues of the Bu//etin, unless
a departure is explained and justified; but informants of unpublished
observations (usually given as i /tt. or pers. comm.) should be cited by
initials and name only, e.g. “. . . catches wasps (B. Eater)”, but “B.B.C. Gull
informs me that .. .”. Photographic illustrations, although welcome, can
only be accepted if the contributor is willing to pay for their reproduction.
An author wishing to introduce a new name or describe a new form should
append nom., gen., sp. or subsp. nov., as appropriate, and set out the supporting
evidence under the headings “Description”, “Distribution”, ‘“Type’’,
“Measurements of Type” and “Material examined”, plus any others needed.
A contributor is entitled to 10 free reprints of the pages of the Bulletin in which his con-
tribution, if one page or more in length, appears. Additional reprints or reprints of contri-
butions of less than one page may be ordered when the manuscript is submitted and will be
charged for. Authors may be charged for proof corrections for which they are responsible.
BACK NUMBERS OF THE BULLETIN
Available on application to Dr D. W. Snow, British Museum (Natural
History), Tring, Herts HP23 GAP as follows: 1981=2(Vols. 101 & 102) £3 each
issue, 1980 (Vol. 100) No. 1 £4, No. 2, 3 & 4 £2 each, 1973-9 (Vols. 93-99)
£2 each issue (4 issues per year for Vol. 93 and after), 1969-72 (Vols. 89-92)
£1.50 each issue (6 per year), 1929-68 (Vols. 50-88) {1 each issue (generally
9 per year), earlier than Vol. 50 £2 each issue (generally 9 per year); Indices
Vol. 70 and after £1 each, Vols. 50-69 £2 each, Vol. 49 and before £4 each.
Long runs (at least 10 years) for Vol. 50 and after are available at reduced
rates on enquiry. Orders over £50 post free.
MEMBERSHIP
Only Members of the British Ornithologists’ Union are eligible to join the
Club: applications should be sent to the Hon. Treasurer, Mrs. D. Bradley,
53 Osterley Road, Isleworth, Middlesex, together with the current year’s
subscription. The remittance and all other payments to the Club should
always be in ster/ing unless an addition of £1.00 is made to cover bank
charges for exchange, etc. Payment of subscription entitles a Member to
receive all Bu//etins for the year. Changes of address and revised bankers’
orders or covenants (and any other correspondence concerning Membership)
should be sent to the Hon. Treasurer as promptly as possible.
SUBSCRIPTION TO BULLETIN
The Bulletin may be purchased by non-members on payment of an annual
subscription of {15.00 (postage and index free). Send all orders and remit-
tances in sterling, unless an addition of {1.00 is made to cover bank charges, to
the Assistant Hon. Treasurer, Mr. S. A. H. Statham, 87 Gladstone Road,
Watford, Hertfordshire WD1 2RA. Single issues may be obtained as back
numbers.
CORRESPONDENCE
Correspondence about Club meetings and other matters not mentioned
above should go to the Hon. Secretary, R. E. F. Peal, 2 Chestnut Lane,
Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 3AR.
CONTENTS
Page
Crus NortEs oe = Ook a a oye des 2 ee
D. R. Wetts. Brown-breasted Flycatcher Muscicapa mutiui in
Thailand mee am ome si ee ae a :..
Autan G. Knox. Handedness in crossbills Loxia and the Akepa
Loxops coccinea 114
R. T. Witson & Mary P. “WILson. Notes on a Grey Kestrel Falco
ardosiaceus brood in central Mali... 118
C. H. Fry & D. J. Grtpertr. Food of the Black- headed Bee- eater
Merops breweri (Plate 1)... 119
I. J. Mason. A new subspecies of Masked Owl Tyto novaehollandiae
(Stephens) from southern New Guinea (Plate 2) : i Ta
A. H. James & J. Warrex. The nomenclature of Buteo oreophilus .. 128
D. M. Terxerra & L. P. Gonzaca. A new antwren from north-
eastern Brazil ant oe ee he a aa
R. WILKINSON & D. J. Arey. African Reed Warblers in northern
Nigeria; morphometrics and the taxonomic debate & 135
Ben F. Kinc & M. D. GALLAGHER. First record of Great Knot
Cahdris tenmrostris in Oman, eastern Arabia ts 139
R. M. Harwin. Reappraisal of variation in the nightjar Caprinalgs
natalensis Smith 140
Mary LeCroy. The spelling of 5 emioptera wallacii (Paradisaeidae) .. 144
S. Ditton Riptey. The subspecific name of the Common Paradise
Kingfisher Tanysiptera galatea from Halmahera Island, North
Moluccas (Maluku Utara), Indonesia ae . : 145
The Bulletin is now being sent by Bulk Air Mail to all European destinations outside the
British Isles and by Accelerated Surface Post to almost every destination outside Europe.
This will only apply to copies despatched from the printers on publication. Those whose
subscriptions have not been received by the beginning of a month of publication will have
their copies despatched by surface mail, after their current subscription has been paid.
Many copies of the 4u//etin must get thrown away annually
by members, or their relatives, which the Club would
welcome. Please send ALL unwanted copies, and ask your
Executors to do the same, to the Hon. Treasurer at 53
Osterley Road, Isleworth, Middlesex TW7 4PW at any time.
Postage will be refunded if requested.
Published by the BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS’ CLUB and printed by
The Caxton and Holmesdale Press, 104 London Road, Sevenoaks, Kent.
th _———,
= we = ae. t w = a
Wagiq_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI
- = ¥ = = + w ; =
- < = =< = ee
z a = = =.
O < Oo x ,
= We - g E
i, a = > =
NOILALILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS LIBRARIES §
“” = ” S an
7 4 = ® =
ac rar a = a
< = Wee pe ~e
= =a ps 4 x
ar 4 . aS =z er Us |
vudii LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVI
3 os S = 5 =
2 5 th fe = bs
= -¢ilg = = >
= - BYy ce rm =
o ce = ‘YU en.
TUTION |, NOILNLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS S31NVuaI7 LIBRARIES. SMITHSO
Ne
RNS
* s
MQ
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLIW
SMITHSONIAN
*
LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI
NVINOSHLIWS
& Se eee ss G
fe ie Mes. a
aa =. Pip = fe =
= fad “ts y < faa "Se
= by , pe =
o a S) = rt
= «ail = 4 = ei
UTION NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSHLINS S3!iyuvugty LIBRARIES SMITHSC
z oe = - : =
? = a
E = = o reel
Aa > — a ee
= = > -
EK = E = =
ee A cle Z 4
Maiq =! BRARI ES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION | NOLLALILSNI_ NVINC SHI
: Ses = < = : < om
z ~ = .
5 = S = 2 &
s as) 2 @ oD |
= = = Zs =
= > = a6
a 2 a 2 a :
JTION NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSHLINS” S31NVY G17 LIBRARIES SMITHSC
= . oy )
Mt rr WW = a
a ar \ oO —_ a
co = WNO's = 2
= oS. es 3S a .
Udit LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHL)
7 — ; ‘e) Ace ) © Kap 2 » . «3 ar 2 gam 5 |
gin “LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOS
= |S o ae ” z
im | = < = by b"
= 4 = ee 4 YY, 2
rE “My.
2 SA 6 2 Ay @ WI 2
Ee: NS = - AS 2, 7 fe *
Y NOILALILSNINVINOSHLINS S3IuVvUugII LIBRARIES SMITHS
n Be cs ” 3 7)
WW Tr) whe ow uJ
a = a a
fe + ce = ow
r z 5 Fs ET
LIBRARIES _ SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOS!
w — ‘Oo om o ¥
> = > - >
- =a = - 2
a ere - o
NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYEIT LIBRARIES SMITHSt
no. z on = bins 7)
= ax = ys NS =
= ra = Zz \\ YS FF
ae ve) = ie D9 Qe KR =
: 2 g 2M 3B
S = r= = Xs 2
a a 2 a We
UVUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOS|
= Ww — w ome
: =. yl jp? : ZN
=. < 5; a < = | SN
= a: - a a VN
5 = Y? S) _ S)
z —J a unl z
TITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLIWS _ S3 iyVvuyg Mh LIBRARI ES_ SMITHS!
= aay” Hi y
EID, 2 2 2 w = WZ,
5 A \\ = A = be
a > We = > E UG
i = W's ss ne
Z noe D =
LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHI
= ” ee ee wn =
< = oh = Vie <
= = Z \. = Yi ye =
8 x S WS = fide 9
= 2) am EX WS oO Vy TZ, A i
‘= z Ei Nae Sr A B
= > = WN 7 =
an < 7) tok = 7)
_NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYHYSIT LIBRARIES SMITHS
ahs “ S w
{ w aw uw ui
« -, — + —
co — r ~ Gf
- rs) = ) om,
a5 = ~! z ae
yVud Js LIBRARI ES. SMITHSONIAN _ INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSH
= Oo KASON, re) ‘ = a)
> © Bap 2 >», «0 Kamp 2 Ge =«s &<
wee
we
“ ore ar aps
, noe
vs hate
. ¢ gfwictine
one .
‘ ’
a ‘
reser
“var
Veen
as
einai eure =e
selene wee
aa pra ee®
ey
Pee ead
mee
er ae ee ree
reer