Sylvia caerulescens

Quick answer

COMMENTS: In the original description, Wied (on p. 714) thought his new species was similar to ‘‘ Azara’s bec-en-poinçon bleu et blanc (vol. III, pag. 257) oder Vieillot’s Sylvia bicolor, doch bin ich von der Identität beider nicht vollkommen überzeugt. ’’ He described the adult male fully and indicated that he had a female: ‘‘ Nicht bedeutend verschieden, die Obertheile fallen weniger in’s Blaue. ’’ Allen (1889: 218) listed this specimen as a male and as a type of Sylvia caerulescens. He considered it a synonym of Dacnis plumbea (5 Conirostrum bicolor bicolor). The original Maximilian label is glued onto the reverse of the AMNH label and the specimen is there unsexed, although it is labeled ‘‘ ♀ ’’ on the front of the AMNH label; it is considered an adult male by Allen and the AMNH type label is so marked. It matches specimens of either sex in the AMNH collection and is the only specimen of this form that came to AMNH with the Wied collection. The locality on the label is ‘‘ Brasilia, ’’ but in the original description, Wied noted that he had obtained it on the Mucuri. The number ‘‘ 139, ’’ written in pencil on the original label, is of unknown significance. Allen did not find it listed in Wied’s catalog.