l_raty
laurent raty
As well why Gerd Heinrich no co-author (but might be clear within p. 153 which I haven't seen)?
The paper is in three sections with distinct authorship, Einleintung, pp. 551-555, von E. Stresemann; Allgemeine Vorbemerkungen, pp. 155-165, von G. Heinrich; Systematischer und Biologischer Teil, pp. 166-264, von E. Stresemann und G. Heinrich.
On p. 153 (first section, by Stresemann alone), Stresemann states clearly that 7 new sspp introduced in the third section were described by him ("Aus der Ausbeute vom Mt. Victoria habe ich in den folgenden Zeilen als neu beschrieben : | Carduelis spinoides heinrichi subsp. nova | Passer rutilans lisarum subsp. nova | Psittiparus gularis rasus subsp. nova | Mixornis gularis ticehursti subsp. nova | Leioptila gracilis dorsalis subsp. nova | Iole maclellandii ventralis subsp. nova | Dryobates hyperythrus heinrichi subsp. nova.")
Stresemann's text on p. 154 also suggests strongly that he was responsible for the taxonomy ("Im Hauptteil dieser Veröfentlichung habe ich mich über taxonomische Fragen nur kurz ausgelassen"), while Heinrich provided information about the ecology and biology of the birds ("Größere Bedeutung kommt gewiß den Mitteilungen des Herrn Heinrich zur Oekologie und Biologie der Vögel zu, die von him festgestellt worden sind.").
In the third section (with dual authorship), the species accounts are typically divided into a first part in smaller types that deals with taxonomy (and includes the diagnosis for the new taxa), and a second part in larger types and in double quotes that provides information gathered in the field (where the bird was encountered, its voice, etc.). From their respective contents, the first of these two parts would appear to have been by Stresemann, the second by Heinrich. Both authors speak in the first person singular ("ich") in their respective parts.
Last edited: