"Sparrman's Duck" (1 Viewer)

Björn Bergenholtz

(former alias "Calalp")

• Oct 17, 2014

• #1

As far as I understand it the invalid name "Anas Sparrmanni" (sic) LATHAM 1790 (later, also by, Latham called "Sparrman's Duck") was apparently based on the equally invalid “Anas alandica” SPARRMAN 1788, shot (by a Dr. Lindroth) in the Finnish (at that time Swedish) archipelago of Åland in the Baltic Sea (thereby "alandica") … but the question is:

Isn't that (see attached Plate) simply a female specimen of (Common/Northern) Pintail Anas a. acuta LINNAEUS 1758 … !?

If so presumably a young specimen (darker bill and more contrasting head/neck-pattern). Compare with, for example; this photo or this one (even if the age of those certain Ducks isn´t mentioned).

Anyone with extensive experience of young female Pintails disagree?

PS. Link to full volume of Sparrman's Museum Carlsonianum III (here)

 

Attachments

• 
  MuseumCarlsoniaIII - A. alandica.jpg

  281.7 KB · Views: 74

l_raty

laurent raty

• Oct 17, 2014

• #2

Do you have any reason to doubt?
Anas Sparrmanni Latham, 1790: Latham cites only Sparrman's book as his source, and the diagnosis is copied from there.
Both names are in the synonymy of Anas acuta in many works, but Nilsson, 1821 may be particularly significant here: he says he examined the specimen that was used to produce the plate, and there is no doubt that it was a pintail.

 

Björn Bergenholtz

(former alias "Calalp")

• Oct 17, 2014

• #3

Not really, it was my first spontanious "Birder" reaction, and I feel pretty sure of it, at least of it being a female Pintail (age is a bit harder, especially based on that illustration) ... but since the HBW Alive Key has left the (Anas) "Sparrmanni" without any synonymity only as:

(syn. “Anas alandica” Sparrman, ...")

Click to expand...

I started to wonder why? If there might be some doubt?

In any case; thanks for the Nilsson text (even if I don´t understand it), Nilsson does confirm the same view, also in his Swedish texts. Though I haven´t seen anything regarding the age of the "alandica".

x

 

Last edited: Oct 17, 2014

l_raty

laurent raty

• Oct 17, 2014

• #4

Calalp said:

In any case; thanks for the Nilsson text (even if I don´t understand it), he does confirm the same view, also in his Swedish texts

Click to expand...

It's the note in the lower part of the page:
"OBSERV. Quin huc pertineat Anas Alandica Sparrm l. с. nullum dubium est. Exemplar enim, quod iconi ansam dedit, ipse examinavi."
(More or less: "Observation. There is no doubt that Anas Alandica Sparrm. l.c. belongs here. Indeed I examined myself the exemplar, that gave rise to the plate.")

PS - And, for a change, a Belgian reference supporting the same synonymy: Dubois, 1894.

 

Last edited: Oct 17, 2014

Björn Bergenholtz

(former alias "Calalp")

• Oct 17, 2014

• #5

You Belgians sure Rule!

 

Nutcracker

Stop Brexit!

• Oct 17, 2014

• #6

To comment on the pic - it does look very Pintail-like, except that it doesn't have much of a pin [slender pointed] tail . . . . could it be a hybrid Pintail × some other Anas?

 

Björn Bergenholtz

(former alias "Calalp")

• Oct 17, 2014

• #7

Good try!

But I choose to trust my "gut" feeling (as well as both Nilsson and Dubois) and doubt the hybrid theory; because not all female Pintails have "much of a pin". Especially not the young female (first autumn) birds.

See for example this link (... if you scroll down some nice pictures you´ll find a standing, "short-rumped" female specimen). Or this one alt. this one.

Cheers!

x

 

Last edited: Oct 17, 2014