sep 2010
Working in NHM collection (9)
29-09-2010 20:26
Working with types make
you sometimes think hard whether specimens need to be
considered types or not. And sometimes it is very
obvious when they are not. See the example on the
left side below, where some specimens have been made
“paratypes” for a taxon published in 1900, while the
expedition on which they where collected was held in
1905-06. You cannot deny the creativity of some
people...
Today I finished my inventory of type material. It may be that I’ll have to discount a few, but my datasheet now counts up to 627. I’m a little bit amazed myself, however, the hard work still comes. To write out the ms. will take an awful lot of time.
Today I finished my inventory of type material. It may be that I’ll have to discount a few, but my datasheet now counts up to 627. I’m a little bit amazed myself, however, the hard work still comes. To write out the ms. will take an awful lot of time.
Working in NHM collection (8)
25-09-2010 15:34
Working in historical
collections one may find traces of the malacologists
on which shoulders I may stand to augment our
knowledge. Visible (and even touchable) traces are
the handwritings on labels written by these persons.
Some are very characteristic, some are awfully
similar, or sometimes one may have a hard time to
figure out who it actually wrote.
A very characteristic handwriting is that of Louis Pfeiffer, who described many new species from the Hugh Cuming collection.
Two persons with a very similar handwriting, are Hugh Fulton and César Marie Félix Ancey. The authenticity of the handwriting of the latter was confirmed to me by Jennifer Gallichan (Cardiff museum), who has extensively published about the Ancey types.
Finally, another very characteristic one, Alcide d’Orbigny. In London I found that most of his original labels, written on very sturdy paper, had either been cut or torn into two pieces. Luckily for us, they have been preserved after all.
Just imagine what future generations will encounter when visiting museum collections. Only shells and, if they are lucky, they might dig up some databases from the digital dust and might find, if they are even more lucky, hidden under one of the menu items of the programme the name of the person who initiated the database. A very unromantic idea! I prefer the real handwritings...
A very characteristic handwriting is that of Louis Pfeiffer, who described many new species from the Hugh Cuming collection.
Two persons with a very similar handwriting, are Hugh Fulton and César Marie Félix Ancey. The authenticity of the handwriting of the latter was confirmed to me by Jennifer Gallichan (Cardiff museum), who has extensively published about the Ancey types.
Finally, another very characteristic one, Alcide d’Orbigny. In London I found that most of his original labels, written on very sturdy paper, had either been cut or torn into two pieces. Luckily for us, they have been preserved after all.
Just imagine what future generations will encounter when visiting museum collections. Only shells and, if they are lucky, they might dig up some databases from the digital dust and might find, if they are even more lucky, hidden under one of the menu items of the programme the name of the person who initiated the database. A very unromantic idea! I prefer the real handwritings...
Working in NHM collection (7)
22-09-2010 18:44
In 1837, d’Orbigny
published Pupa spixii
var.
major
and var.
minor. Both were briefly described and
figured only as a living specimen.
The quest for the type specimens has been long and so far without success. But with the material in London at hand, it is possible to solve their enigma. This is how I started the day.
With three lots from three different localities, it was easy to match them to the varieties as d’Orbigny was very explicit which variety he found where.
The upper and lower lots are var. major, the middle lot is var. minor. With the original measurements as published in the “Voyage...”, it was a matter of measuring the shells to find the one that most closely matched.
The result were two lectotypes and several paralectotypes, which are a basis for future taxonomic work, e.g. by Eugenia Salas and Gabriela Cuezzo who are currently working on this group.
The quest for the type specimens has been long and so far without success. But with the material in London at hand, it is possible to solve their enigma. This is how I started the day.
With three lots from three different localities, it was easy to match them to the varieties as d’Orbigny was very explicit which variety he found where.
The upper and lower lots are var. major, the middle lot is var. minor. With the original measurements as published in the “Voyage...”, it was a matter of measuring the shells to find the one that most closely matched.
The result were two lectotypes and several paralectotypes, which are a basis for future taxonomic work, e.g. by Eugenia Salas and Gabriela Cuezzo who are currently working on this group.
Working in NHM collection (6)
21-09-2010 20:05
Alcide d’Orbigny kept
me rather busy the past days. Working
on his collection of South American Orthalicids
described in the “Voyage...” proved to be
challenging in some cases.
For instance, in the above picture, Bulimus thamnoicus is shown. However, in his text he mentions different (unnamed) varieties, which proved to be different species. In fact, as his collection is both in the London and Paris museum, I’m unable to solve the puzzle of this particular species at the moment, without the material in Paris at hand.
As a rule I selected lectotypes for all the taxa, to ensure stability of nomenclature and to enable future workers to make any synonymies if necessary. In some cases I had to reconsider a previous lectotype designation from material in Paris (Breure, 1975), as the figured specimen proved to be present in London. In my view, if the specimen that matches the original figure can be found, that has to be preferred over other material from the type series.
Although most of the nuts have been cracked, a touch one remains for tomorrow; it’s the puzzle of Pupa spixii and its varieties major and minor.
For instance, in the above picture, Bulimus thamnoicus is shown. However, in his text he mentions different (unnamed) varieties, which proved to be different species. In fact, as his collection is both in the London and Paris museum, I’m unable to solve the puzzle of this particular species at the moment, without the material in Paris at hand.
As a rule I selected lectotypes for all the taxa, to ensure stability of nomenclature and to enable future workers to make any synonymies if necessary. In some cases I had to reconsider a previous lectotype designation from material in Paris (Breure, 1975), as the figured specimen proved to be present in London. In my view, if the specimen that matches the original figure can be found, that has to be preferred over other material from the type series.
Although most of the nuts have been cracked, a touch one remains for tomorrow; it’s the puzzle of Pupa spixii and its varieties major and minor.
Working in NHM collection (5)
17-09-2010 19:43
It is thrlling to have
the opportunity to work directly with historic types.
I handled during these days many specimens that have
gone through the hands of well-known conchologists.
They left their signs through their handwriting (more
in a following post) and above all used their
creativity to give a name to a species.
The Cuming collection has inspired some well-known conchologists to work on specimens which had been collected by Hugh Cuming and his collectors. However, there is one other collection that is of special interest to Neotropical malacologists, and that is the collection of Alcide d’Orbigny. He travelled extensively through South America in the early 19th century, and most of his material is now in London. His descriptions of both the species and the localities where he found them, are detailed and accurate enough that is has been possible to pinpoint many of them (see Breure, 1973). Moreover, his collection is a good example of the important biodiversity that was still extant at that time in South America, as several species have not been recorded afterwards.
Therefore, it is very interesting to try to match the specimens in his collection with the figured specimen in his beautifully “Voyages dans l’Amérique méridionale...”. Note that in the early 19th century, shells were often pictured with the aperture at the top, contrary to what has been accustomed in later times.
Reference:
Breure, A.S.H., 1973. Index to the Neotropical land Mollusca described by Alcide d’Orbigny, with notes on the localities of the mainland species. - Basteria 37: 113-135.
The Cuming collection has inspired some well-known conchologists to work on specimens which had been collected by Hugh Cuming and his collectors. However, there is one other collection that is of special interest to Neotropical malacologists, and that is the collection of Alcide d’Orbigny. He travelled extensively through South America in the early 19th century, and most of his material is now in London. His descriptions of both the species and the localities where he found them, are detailed and accurate enough that is has been possible to pinpoint many of them (see Breure, 1973). Moreover, his collection is a good example of the important biodiversity that was still extant at that time in South America, as several species have not been recorded afterwards.
Therefore, it is very interesting to try to match the specimens in his collection with the figured specimen in his beautifully “Voyages dans l’Amérique méridionale...”. Note that in the early 19th century, shells were often pictured with the aperture at the top, contrary to what has been accustomed in later times.
Reference:
Breure, A.S.H., 1973. Index to the Neotropical land Mollusca described by Alcide d’Orbigny, with notes on the localities of the mainland species. - Basteria 37: 113-135.
Working in NHM collection (4)
14-09-2010 20:26
“In a museum nothing is
lost, only temporarily hidden”. That may be true for
a single shell, a single lot, but also for a whole
collection.
While I have been working for a week at my temporary work desk, I was sitting with my back to the historical collection of Alcide d’Orbigny, which contains most of the material mentioned in his ‘Voyage dans l’Amérique du Sud...’. Yesterday I (re-)discovered this collection. Luckily still in time to screen it for the types of species described by him.
The list of shells that are contained in this collection are mentioned in this publication. Which makes it very easy to access. I’m marking all available specimens in my catalogues and will look for them when I have finished with screening the Type collection for Orthalicoidea. My inventory is at 488 taxa, and still counting...
While I have been working for a week at my temporary work desk, I was sitting with my back to the historical collection of Alcide d’Orbigny, which contains most of the material mentioned in his ‘Voyage dans l’Amérique du Sud...’. Yesterday I (re-)discovered this collection. Luckily still in time to screen it for the types of species described by him.
The list of shells that are contained in this collection are mentioned in this publication. Which makes it very easy to access. I’m marking all available specimens in my catalogues and will look for them when I have finished with screening the Type collection for Orthalicoidea. My inventory is at 488 taxa, and still counting...
Working in NHM collection (3)
09-09-2010 22:15
Some museums refuse to
send their primary types via the mail. And I now know
why.
The British Museum hasn’t had this policy and I found several types that have been sent on loan to some colleagues over the past decades. Most of the times this went all right, but today I found a horrible example.
There was a label added “Returned on loan from [name] and damaged in the mail [date]”, together with a copy of the original loan form on which [name] declared to be responsible for returning the specimens carefully packaged. A matter of carefully packaging indeed...
The original lot consisted of two specimens and my first thought was to see if the paralectotype could replace the lost lectotype. Alas! It turned out to (a) a juvenile specimen, and (b) from a completely different genus (Drymaeus). Not only Reeve messed up things, but a fellow malacologist did too.
In such cases a taxonomist can only feel helpless.
The British Museum hasn’t had this policy and I found several types that have been sent on loan to some colleagues over the past decades. Most of the times this went all right, but today I found a horrible example.
There was a label added “Returned on loan from [name] and damaged in the mail [date]”, together with a copy of the original loan form on which [name] declared to be responsible for returning the specimens carefully packaged. A matter of carefully packaging indeed...
The original lot consisted of two specimens and my first thought was to see if the paralectotype could replace the lost lectotype. Alas! It turned out to (a) a juvenile specimen, and (b) from a completely different genus (Drymaeus). Not only Reeve messed up things, but a fellow malacologist did too.
In such cases a taxonomist can only feel helpless.
Working in NHM collection (2)
07-09-2010 21:01
My temporary work-desk
is in the collection room, climbing each day the
stairs to the mezzanine where the type collection is
housed.
My “lucky find” for this day was this label of Bulimus iris Pfeiffer, showing that requests for taxon names as eponyms are of all times...
However, this time Pfeiffer didn’t honour the request but made his own choice.
My “lucky find” for this day was this label of Bulimus iris Pfeiffer, showing that requests for taxon names as eponyms are of all times...
However, this time Pfeiffer didn’t honour the request but made his own choice.
Working in NHM collection
06-09-2010 09:27
Today I started in
London. The building is very much like the old
Naturalis building, although much bigger. Good Old
England, of course.
In such a large institution (over 900 people, of which more than 250 scientists), visitors has to recognizable. As I will stay for a while, I went to the Security Office to get a pass made. Just see how quickly I became Britainized...
My inventory of types tallied up to 411 before I came, but already discovered some more today. Still wondering what I need to do the coming weeks?
In such a large institution (over 900 people, of which more than 250 scientists), visitors has to recognizable. As I will stay for a while, I went to the Security Office to get a pass made. Just see how quickly I became Britainized...
My inventory of types tallied up to 411 before I came, but already discovered some more today. Still wondering what I need to do the coming weeks?
Preparing for London
03-09-2010 15:16
From next week on, I
will be for 4 weeks in London on a
Synthesys grant. This will allow me to
study the types of Orthalicoidea in the collection
of the Natural History Museum.
Hope to keep you informed while I’m there.
Hope to keep you informed while I’m there.