Hypsibamon andicolus

Quick answer

Type series: Cabanis (1873 c: 318) based this species on an unspecified number of specimens, which included at least a male and a female. Only a male is registered in the Accession Catalogue of the ZMB, although Cabanis (1873 c: 315) wrote that specimens on which he reported are deposited in the ZMB. It is thus possible that Cabanis either returned the female or females to Taczanowski or that he never saw it, and based this information on the data received from Taczanowski. In any case, the specimen in the ZMB is a syntype of Hypsibamon andicolus Cabanis, while one or more females in the MIZ are also syntypes of this species. Taczanowski (1875: 531) mentioned that he received " plusieurs exemplaires de Maraynioc et d'Arancocha " (several specimens from Maraynioc and Arancocha [= Acancocha, Peru]) of this species. Sclater (1877: 449) obtained from Taczanowski an unsexed specimen, reportedly collected by Jelski at “ Maraynioc ” in 1873. Being of unknown sex, this specimen (which had to be collected in 1871, because Jelski did not collect at Maraynioc in 1873 – see Mlíkovský 2009 b) has no type status. Taczanowski (1889: 20) listed in the MIZ collections a male and a female as Cabanis's types of this species. There is no evidence that the MIZ male had a type status, but the female could have a type status and is thus listed below. All MIZ specimens of this species collected by Jelski were probably removed from the MIZ in 1915 and subsequently destroyed in the 1920 s (cf. Sztolcman & Domaniewski 1927: 125; see Mlíkovský 2009 b for details). Domaniewski & Sztolcman (1918: 482 – 483) already knew only Ecuadorian specimens of this species in the MIZ. Syntype: ZMB 21344 (B- 9992), 3, collected by Jelski on an unknown date [= May to September 1871] at " Maraynioc " [= Maraynioc, Peru].