Minor shift in Richardson eponyms (1 Viewer)

[janvanderbrugge]

Quote from HBW Alive Key:
● William Blaine (or Blaney) Richardson, Sr. (1868-1927) US collector in Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Colombia and Ecuador 1887-1927 (syn. Chlorospingus dwighti, syn. Corvus corax sinuatus, subsp. Cyphorhinus phaeocephalus, syn. Icterus graduacauda, subsp. Myiothlypis luteoviridis, syn. Saltator grandis plumbiceps, syn. Sporophila minuta parva, syn. Zenaida aurita zenaida).
● William Everett Richardson (1825-1902) US shipping manager, collector (Melanospiza).
● William Blaine Richardson, Jr. (1891-1972) US banker in Mexico, mammalogist, collector in New Guinea 1938-1939 (subsp. Zapornia tabuensis).

Skipping the Scottish Sir John Richardson, these are the eponyms for USA persons of the name Richardson. The two W.B.'s are Senior and Junior. While checking the species/subspecies I wondered about the Zenaida; according to Richmond Index Zenaida richardsoni is "named for W.B.Richardson", with comment: "Type: Colln. (now Field Mus.). W.B.Richardson." The bird was mentioned by Cory for Little Cayman Island, without specific identification, just that it seemed somewhat different from Z.spadicea and that, if different, he proposed the name Zenaida richardsoni for it.
(The Auk, IV, no.1, 1887, p.7)

For Melanospiza richardsoni the Richmond Index mentions: "Named for William Blaney Richardson (B. March, 1868). Type: Field Mus. (Cory Coll.) W.B.Richardson."
Cory in the OD of his Loxigilla richardsoni: "The bird here described was procured in Santa Lucia by Mr. W.E.Richardson (for whom I have named it)." (The Auk, III, no.3, 1886, p.382)

The last reference is as such represented in the HBW Alive Key, so here the Richmond Index was corrected, but the Zenaida is listed as one of the eight names given for W.B.Richardson, Sr.

I checked the data bank of the Field Museum; among the many specimens of Zenaida I found 4 Zenaida aurita zenaida specimens which on Little Cayman Island were collected by W.E.Richardson, nos. 754628-754631, Catalogue Nos.36957-36960. I feel convinced that the Zenaida bird in the HBW Key should be transferred and eponymically (beautiful term!) should be added to the lonely Melanospiza of W.E.Richardson.
I suppose many readers would say: well, who cares?, but that's not the right approach in this subforum nor is it shown in James' overwhelming and impressive quantity of data.
Enjoy, stay well and hold on in whatever lock that has been imposed on you.
Jan van der Brugge

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

• "Loxigilla richardsoni" CORY 1886 (here):

The bird here described was procured in Santa Lucia by Mr. W. E. Richardson (for whom I have named it), with ... Mr. Richardson claims to have seen the bird alive,...

• "Zenaida richardsoni" CORY 1887 (here, p.7, in text, bottom page), from Little Cayman (Island), West Indies, though no out-spoken dedication, later a k a "Richardson's Dove"

The same "species" in Cory's Catalogue of West Indian Birds (1892): here, resp. here. And, note the Catalogue's list of references, particularly the one on p.36 here: A list of birds collected in the island of Grand Cayman, West Indies, by W. B. Richardson, during the summer of 1886 ... (i.e. here):

DURING the past summer Mr. W. B. Richardson has been collecting specimens of natural history in the small islands known as Grand and Little Cayman, ...

Still all convinced, Jan ... ?

/B

PS. The same "W. B. Richardson" is also mentioned on pp. 52 and 74.

PPS. Field Museum specimens (of today's Zenaida aurita zenaida): here, and onwards.

Whom to trust?
--

 

[James Jobling]

Jan
I agree the evidence seems to point to W. E. Richardson, but would both Richmond and Cory have got the wrong Richardson? Key amended provisionally (while I still can; the accursed c-virus has thrown the planned transfer from Lynx to Cornell into an understandable limbo).
Stay safe.

 

[janvanderbrugge]

Thank you, James, for the adaptation in the Key reference, I think it is the safest way to present it. I suppose we will never know what the reality is in this case: it is rather curious that Cory would dedicate a new bird to a certain W.E.Richardson in 1886 and a year afterwards another bird (Zenaida) to W.B.Richardson, while precisely the Zenaida specimens are mentioned in the Field data as having been collected by W.E.Richardson. Even a check, if possible, of other birds from W.B.Richardson's collecting activities of that year, if in the Field Museum at all, would not provide full proof, would it? The information in my own files corresponds to HBW Key.
Björn, mycket tak for sharing the pages and references which surround this devilish dilemma . . . ^)
Lockdown and over. Jan van der Brugge

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

...
Björn, mycket tak for sharing the pages ...

You're welcome, Jan, "mycket tak"* yourself.

Any trace of the Type specimen/s of "Loxigilla richardsoni" CORY 1886?

Björn

__________________________
*"mycket tak" = "Much roof", in Swedish
--

 

[janvanderbrugge]

quote Calalp: Your welcome, Jan, "mycket tak" yourself.
Any trace of the Type specimen/s of "Loxigilla richardsoni" CORY 1886?
Björn
"mycket tak" = "Much roof", in Swedish


Yes, I wished you a good shelter in these days . . . (though there is no firm lockdown in Sweden like elsewhere) (;^)
My revenge: it is not my welcome, which you should give. If you want to answer to someone's thanking, you write: you're welcome (for: you are w.)
Minor correction, but still valid. OK, I am going to try and dig up Type specimen information for that "blackbird". Jan vdB

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

... I suppose we will never know what the reality is in this case: it is rather curious that Cory would dedicate a new bird to a certain W.E.Richardson in 1886 and a year afterwards another bird (Zenaida) to W.B.Richardson, while ...

Maybe it's not that "curious" at all ...?

William Blaney Richardson "Sr." (1868–1927) [his birth name seems to have been "William Blaney ...", according to here, apparently he altered his middle name into "Blaine"*], and his Son William Blaine Richardson "Jr." (1891–1972), here, versus William Everett Richardson (1825–1902), here, who seems to have been their Father resp. Grandfather!

Thereby (if true, of course ), they all, all three of them, seems to be from/in the same family. And; thus, if so, it's not so strange if they, at times, are blurred together, or got a bit mixed-up alt. confused. And (equally if so), as such, they probably, at least occasionally, collected together.

I'd follow the ODs ...

For what it's worth.

/B
____________________________________________________________________________
*When he and his wife moved to Nicaragua, he changed his middle name from "Blaney" to "Blaine", according to Wiki, here.

 

[janvanderbrugge]

No help from James Bond . . .

[actual info from HBW Alive Key:]
● William Blaine (or Blaney) Richardson, Sr. (1868-1927) US collector in Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Colombia and Ecuador 1887-1927 (syn. Chlorospingus dwighti, syn. Corvus corax sinuatus, subsp. Cyphorhinus phaeocephalus, syn. Icterus graduacauda, subsp. Myiothlypis luteoviridis, syn. Saltator grandis plumbiceps, syn. Sporophila minuta parva).
● William Everett Richardson (1825-1902) US shipping manager, collector (Melanospiza, ?syn. Zenaida aurita zenaida (Jan van der Brugge in litt.)).

Like Björn I have done some further reading, not on the Richardson family, but on the Black Finch. In Ibis, 1886, Charles Cory published an article "On a collection of Birds from several little-known Islands of the West Indies". He writes: "During the past winter (1885-6) an enterprising young collector Mr.W.B.Richardson, has been visiting the West Indies [...] new species: Loixigilla barbadensis, Thryothorus guadeloupensis, and Loxigilla richardsoni, described in 'The Auk' for July, 1886, pp.381-382. "On p.473: "From this little-known island [= Marie Galante] Mr.Richardson has forwarded sixty-seven skins of thirteen species of birds."
And p.475 for St.Lucia: "Loxigilla richardsoni. Mr.Richardson collected nothing there, but he purchased a number of skins."
If Cory writes "an enterprising young collector". this could hardly have been William Everett Richardson (born in 1825), although he had mentioned the name as such in the OD in The Auk. On the other hand, WB Sr. was only 18 years old in 1886, and Cory himself 29 . . .

A life history of this endemic St.Lucia bird was given by the well-known James Bond in The Auk, 45, No.4, 1829: "The Rediscovery of the St.Lucian Black Finch". On p.523: "Until the present year apparently only two specimens, both males, had ever been collected. The bird was described by Cory in 1886, from a specimen purchased by Mr. W.E.Richardson together with the skins of many other St.Lucian birds [...] Mr. Richardson himself claimed to have seen the Finch in life but unfortunately was unable to obtain further specimens.
The second specimen was collected together with a few other St.Lucian birds in December 1888, when the U.S. Fisheries' Steamer "Albatross" visited the island."
I don't know why Bond mentions the visit of this ship; it made me think of the term "shipping manager" linked to W.E.Richardson in HBW Alive Key; even the Albatross information seems dubious, she (ships are feminine) was near Argentine already by that time, I believe. Conclusion is that J.Bond simply copied the initials from Cory's OD.
Anyway, all Loxigilla specimens in the Field Museum data bank are mentioned with W.E.Richardson, and no W.B.Richardson there. I checked the species in Hellmayr's Catalogue of Birds of the Americas and the Adjacent Islands, where it has the name Melanospiza richardsoni already, with a nice synonym Euetheia richardsoni Richardson (Richardson in Proc.US Nat.Mus., 1890, just listed it, no comment on his namesake), and: (type in coll. of C.B.Cory, now in Field Museum). I did not find the type there, and, as i said, no W.B.
Next patient (008, after James Bond) can come in. I wonder if St.Lucia has a troublesome time now, there cannot be much tourism (good for the sea turtoises).
James, I apologize for the disturbing contributions. ^)
Cheers, stay healthy, Jan van der Brugge

 

[Taphrospilus]

So if even 007 can't help, we need Chuck Norris :egghead:.

 

[njlarsen]

Borders are closed for travel in the Caribbean generally. St. Lucia specifically have listed 15 cases, all recovered. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Niels

 

[l_raty]

The Field Museum database lists 792 specimens attributed to WE Richardson, and 676 specimens attributed to WB Richardson.
Among these, so far as I can find, all the birds collected in the winter 1885-6 on Barbados, St Vincent, Marie Galante, La Désirade, Grande Terre and St Lucia (these are the birds of the Ibis paper cited by Jan in post #8 above -- 1886, Oct issue: [here]), and all the birds collected in summer 1886 on the Cayman Islands (these are the birds of the second Auk paper, cited by Björn in post #2 above -- 1886, Oct issue: [here]) seem to be attributed in the database to WE Richardson, while they were attributed by Cory in his Oct 1886 publications to WB Richardson.

Some types with pics from the Cayman Islands:
https://collections-zoology.fieldmuseum.org/catalogue/747679
https://collections-zoology.fieldmuseum.org/catalogue/747290
https://collections-zoology.fieldmuseum.org/catalogue/745403
(Note the absence of collector labels, which doesn't help. The name of the collector is stamped in blue on the back of Cory's original labels.)

To me, it looks like Cory "changed his mind" about Richardson's middle initial -- first calling him WE Richardson on the labels he attached to specimens immediately after having received them in 1886, and in the OD of L. richardsoni in the July 1886 issue of Auk; then switching to WB Richardson in the Oct 1886 issues of Ibis and Auk, and sticking to that from that point on (1887 in Auk, 1892 in his Catalogue of West Indian Birds).

(I presume that Richmond may have reached a similar conclusion, in which case his Loxigilla richardsoni card (citing as dedicatee, not WE as in the OD, but William Blaney Richardson) could quite easily be the result of a deliberate correction rather than a mistake.)

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Melanospiza richardsoni

Neither I could find any trace of a specimen (in the Field Museum database) of the St. Lucia Black Finch Melanospiza richardsoni CORY 1886 (as "Loxigilla richardsoni") [later a k a "Richardson's Grassquit", by Ridgway, in 1901 (here), alt. "Geospiza -" or "Euetheia richardsoni"].

The only specimen that I have found mentioned (i.e. one that could, might possibly be the type?), was in Transactions of the San Diego Society of Natural History (from 1977, here), as "Melanospiza richardsoni UMMZ 136174", with the added info "(same specimen as examined by Bowman, 1961)"*, a quote that ought to lead us to the research collections of University of Michigan, Museum of Zoology (UMMZ, here), but I failed to find it there. Or could "UMMZ" possibly be an abbreviation for a completely different museum/collection?

Or maybe I simply failed to find it? I have to admit I didn't give it much time ...

Anyone luckier? Or simply smarter? Alt. with more time?

Björn

PS. Good luck finding the Type! If still needed?

________________________________________________________
*Bowman, R. I. 1961. Morphological differentiation and adaption in the Galápagos finches.
University of California publications. Zoology 58: 1-302 (unseen by me).
---

 

[janvanderbrugge]

Copied from my own files:
Zenaida richardsoni Cory, The Auk, IV, no.1, Jan., 1887, 7, in text - provisional name. (Allied to Z.spadicea.) Named for Wm.B.Richardson. Type locality: Little Cayman Id. Type: Cory Colln. (now Field Mus.) W.B.Richardson. [R.I.]
Zenaida richardsoni Cory = Zenaida aurita aurita [Cat.B.W.Ind. p.7] [C.B.Cory in Auk, Vol.4, No.1, Jan., 1887, p.7: “A few birds were also sent from Little Cayman: [...] a Zenaida. The latter appears to be somewhat different from Z.spadicea. In case future investigation should prove them to be distinct I would propose the name of Zenaida richardsoni for the Little Cayman bird.”]

Thank you, Laurent, for all this checking labour. This Loxigilla/Melanospiza information, together with what can be found about Cory's Zenaida specimen, could lead us to the conclusion that W.E.Richardson was not honoured at all by Cory, so that his (W.E.R.'s) name could of should disappear from the HBW Key stage. There would not even be room for a question mark there. Well, I'm not the one to decide. Anyway, such investigation "keeps one from the street", as the Dutch saying goes (the saying is much older than the actual lockdown . . .)
Stay well, I am gonna look for another eponym to tackle or analyse.
Jan van der Brugge

 

[Mike Earp]

The only specimen that I have found mentioned (i.e. one that could, might possibly be the type?), was in Transactions of the San Diego Society of Natural History (from 1977, here), as "Melanospiza richardsoni UMMZ 136174", with the added info "(same specimen as examined by Bowman, 1961)"*, a quote that ought to lead us to the research collections of University of Michigan, Museum of Zoology (UMMZ, here), but I failed to find it there. Or could "UMMZ" possibly be an abbreviation for a completely different museum/collection?

________________________________________________________
*Bowman, R. I. 1961. Morphological differentiation and adaption in the Galápagos finches.
University of California publications. Zoology 58: 1-302 (unseen by me).
---

A scanned copy of Morphological differentiation and adaptation in the Galápagos finches is available here with the specimen in question referred to here.

 

[l_raty]

A scanned copy of Morphological differentiation and adaptation in the Galápagos finches is available here with the specimen in question referred to here.

I was about to post the same link, but you were faster.
Anyway, Bowman wrote:

Nonetheless, it must be agreed that the palatal configuration of Geospiza fortis is almost identical with that of one species of emberizine finch examined, namely, Melanospiza richardsoni (Univ. Mich. Mus. Zool. no. 136174), from the British West Indies. In this one skeletal specimen the horny palate is of no higher relief than in G. fortis.

Thus, yes, UMMZ is University of Michigan, Museum of Zoology; but no, it is certainly not the type -- it's a skeleton, while the type should be a skin.

As noted by Jan above, the type was in the Field Museum collection in 1938 according to Hellmayr [here]. But I don't find it in the current database either.

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Thanks Mike and Laurent!

Even if the type of the St. Lucia Black Finch Melanospiza richardsoni (or "Richardson's Grassquit") remain to be found ... note that all (676) specimens (in the Field Museum) allegedly collected by "W. B. Richardson" seems to have been collected in/on Mainland Central/Latin/South/North America [i.e. Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Surinam, Guatemala, and New Mexico (USA)], but none (or close to none) are from any of the Islands in the Caribbean/West Indies (except from two Jamaican specimens of Quiscalus niger crassirostris), contrary to their (792) specimens collected by "W. E. Richardson", that offers various localities/Islands in the Caribbean/West Indies ... ?!?

Is it just us (simply messing things up), or is the Field Museum Staff in Michigan that has to check their records?

/B
--

 

[l_raty]

Is it just us (simply messing things up), or is the Field Museum Staff in Michigan that has to check their records?

Their records presumably reflect what Cory wrote on his labels (as is the case for the three type specimens from the Caymans I linked in post #11 above), and Cory obviously messed things up somewhere, because what he wrote on his labels conflicts directly with what he published.

E.g., Quiscalus caymanensis:
- Type specimen labels: https://fm-digital-assets.fieldmuseum.org/672/877/30023-004.JPG, "Gd. Cayman I., W.I., collected by W. E. Richardson", "17 Aug 1886".
- OD: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/15933388, in a paper describing 13 new species from Grand Cayman, which is immediately followed by the list of a collection of birds, "very rich in novelties, containing no less than thirteen species which [Cory] believe[d] to be new" -- which are obviously the 13 spp he just described, including Quiscalus caymanensis -- "collected in the island of Grand Cayman, West Indies, by W. B. Richardson in the summer of 1886."

The label says W. E., the publication says W. B. (This cannot be "just us".)

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

True, not "just us", Cory as well ... but messy it is.

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Jan, Laurent, just to get it right (simply to make sure that I've understood the twists and turns of this thread correctly) ...

Do you mean that William Everett Richardson (1825–1902) wasn't commemorated in any bird name? None, zip, zero ... ?

Björn

PS. Note that the Melanospiza bird was attributed/listed below/for/to "William B. Richardson (fl.1917)" in the Dictionary of Scientific Bird Names (Jobling, 2010)

 

[James Jobling]

I am now convinced that W. E. Richardson is not commemorated either in Melanospiza or Zenaida, and have amended the Key accordingly.