Pyrrhula cineracea

Quick answer

Type series: Cabanis (1872 b: 316) described this species at the 45 th Monthly Meeting of the German Ornithological Society held on 3 June 1872 on the basis of a male, stating that he had already presented this specimen at the 35 th monthly meeting of the same Society held on 5 June 1871 (Cabanis 1871 c: 318). At the latter meeting, however, both a male and female Siberian bullfinch were mentioned, and both could thus belong to the type series of P. cineracea (see ICZN 1999, Art. 72.4.1). Nonetheless, Cabanis (1872 b) described only the male, while the female (B 7850, ZMB 20348; not found in 2008) was catalogued by him in the ZMB as Pyrrhula Cassini. Hence, the male is to be considered a holotype of the nominal species, while the female has no type status. Taczanowski (1889: 32) listed three males in the MIZ as types of P. cineracea (see also Mlíkovský 2007 a: 69), but it follows from the present results that Cabanis did not have them at his disposal when he described the species. They thus have no type status. Holotype: ZMB 20347, ♂, collected by an unknown person [= W. Godlewski] on 27 October 1869 [= 8 November 1869] at “ Lac Baical, pars meridionalis ” (field label). Dybowski was on the expedition to easternmost Asia in November 1869 (NS), but his fellow exile and coworker W. Godlewski continued to work at Kultuk during this time (see Mlíkovský 2007 a: 35 – 36). The specimen thus must have been collected by Godlewski. Type locality: The holotype was collected at “ Lac Baical, pars meridionalis ” (Cabanis 1871 c, and label; see also Hartert 1903: 96; Dement’ev 1954: 347; Vaurie 1959: 663). Considering its date of collection, and the known itinerary of B. Dybowski and his fellows (see Mlíkovský 2007 a: 35 – 36), we here restrict the type locality of P. cineracea to Kultuk, Irkutskaâ Province, Russia [51.72 ˚ N, 103.68 ˚ E].