A New Species of Sunangel (Trochilidae: Heliangelus)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Auk A QuarterlyJournal of Ornithology Vol. 110 No. 1 January 1993 The Auk 110:1-8 + frontispiece, 1993 RELIC OF A LOST WORLD: A NEW SPECIES OF SUNANGEL(TROCHILIDAE: HELIANGELUS) FROM "BOGOTA" GARY R. GRAVES Departmentof VertebrateZoology, National Museum of NaturalHistory, SmithsonianInstitution, Washington, D.C. 20560, USA AI•STRACT.--Anew speciesof hummingbird, the BogotJSunangel (Heliangeluszusii), is describedfrom a unique specimenpurchased in 1909 in BogotJ,Colombia. Hellangeluszusii is intermediate in plumage between ungorgetedH. regalisand the typical gorgeted species in the genus. Now possiblyextinct becauseof habitat destruction,H. zusiimay have inhabited cloud forest and forest edge in the Eastern Cordillera of the Colombian Andes. Received10 April 1992, accepted6 July 1992. FUELED BY the demands of a fashion-conscious specimenslabeled "Bogota,"Colombia, some of public, millions of hummingbirds destined for which were actually taken elsewhere.Many of the millinery trade in Europe and the United thesehave now been determined to be hybrids, Stateswere exported from South America be- genetic plumage variants, artifacts, or subspe- fore bird protection laws were passed in the ciesof previously describedspecies (e.g. Taylor early 20th century. The staggeringsize of these 1909, Simon 1921, Berlioz and Jouanin 1944, shipmentscan hardly be overemphasized.One Greenway 1978, Graves 1990).A tantalizing few London auction house alone sold 152,000 hum- (e.g. Isaacson'sPuffieg, Eriocnemisisaacsonii [Par- mingbirds between 1904 and 1911 (Doughty zudaki] 1845) may representvalid species,pos- 1975), a figure that undoubtedly exceedsthe sibly surviving in someornithologically unex- number of hummingbird specimens now plored locality or perhaps extinct. housed in the world's museums. In 1947, BrotherNic•foro Maria sent a spec- As expected,commerce in avian plumagehad tacular fork-tailed hummingbird purchasedin a profound effecton science.The golden age of Bogotain 1909to RudolpheMeyer de Schauen- hummingbird taxonomy and systematicswas seeat the Academy of Natural Sciencesof Phil- attained much earlier than in other Neotropical adelphia (ANSP) for identification. After re- bird families (Gould 1861). More than a quarter ceiving the specimen, Meyer de Schauensee of all hummingbird specieswere describeddur- asked several of his colleaguesto examine the ing the 1840sand, by 1890, more than 91% had specimen (literature among the archives of been discovered(Table 1). By comparison,only ANSP). Although there was little agreement 73% of all antbird specieswere described by among the correspondents,their ideas consti- 1890. As the rate of discoverydeclined (1860- tute someimportant hypothesesconcerning the 1895), systematicsscoured imports for rarities identity and origin of the specimen. and described dozens of new trochilid taxa from JamesL. Peters (in litt., 10 April 1947) wrote, Frontispiece. Aerial pursuitof male BogotaSunangels (Heliangelus zusii sp. nov.) aboveflowering Brachyo- turnm•crodon, a common melastome in the EasternCordillera of the ColombianAndes. Painting by JonFjelds/i. 2 GARYR. GRAVES [Auk,Vol. 110 TABLE1. Number of hummingbird and antbird Finally, Alexander Wetmore (in litt., 5 May (Thamnophilidae and Formicariidae) speciesde- 1947) wrote, "I have never seen a bird like it .... scribed as new to scienceby decade(taxonomy of I am inclined to doubt any hybrid origin for Sibley and Monroe 1990). this bird, on the contraryI would supposethat Species it is a specimen of an unknown species.... If I were planning a description of this specimen I Decade Hummingbirds Antbirds would compareit closelywith Agelaiocercus[sic] 1750 13 0 to determine whether it should be placed in 1760 5 3 1770 0 1 that genusor named as a distinct genus." 1780 15 13 Meyer de Schauensee(1947:113) concluded, 1790 1 0 "Were it not for the fact that I have examined 1800 3 1 Metallura purpureicaudaand Zodaliathaumasta and 1810 15 9 1820 26 24 found them to be virtually identical in color- 1830 47 14 ation and pattern, but differing in the shape of 1840 87 15 the bill, I would not hesitate to describe Brother 1850 33 44 Nicfiforo's bird as a new speciesand perhaps 1860 21 33 1870 14 11 even a new genus.However, there are so many 1880 11 10 points of similarity between our specimen and 1890 9 8 Neolesbiathat without seeingthe type it seems 1900 3 19 the wisest course to identify it as a third ex- 1910 4 7 ample of Neolesbia.It should be noted that both 1920 2 12 1930 1 5 the type and the American Museum specimen 1940 2 2 have longer bills (19.25, 17 mm) than ours 1950 2 3 (15.5)." 1960 2 1 Recently,Hinkelmann et al. (199!) reaffirmed 1970 2 1 the identification of the ANSP specimen as an 1980 1 7 example of the problematic Nehrkorn's Sylph (Neolesbianehrkorni), which they judged to be a hybrid between the Long-tailed Sylph (Aglaio- "Assumingyour bird to be a hybrid, one of the cercuskingi) and the Fork-tailed Woodnymph parents is probably one of the Colombian pur- (Thaluraniafurcata).Here I presentevidence that ple-tailed forms of Aglaiocercus;the shapeof the the hybrid origin of Brother Nic•foro's speci- bill, color and general shape of the tail and men can be rejected and that it does indeed luminous plaqueson forehead and throat could represent an undescribed species. quite conceivably result from a union between Aglaiocercusand some form of Heliangelus,but MATERIALS AND METHODS in sucha caseI should expectthe body plumage of the product to be green.... Now what • I compared the specimen (ANSP 159261) directly with all hummingbird taxain the ANSP and National crossedwith a C of predominately green col- Museum of Natural History, SmithsonianInstitution. oration (or vice versa) would produce a steel- Detailed notes and color transparenciesof the spec- blue offspring?Damned if I know. If Helianthea imen (Fig. 1) were comparedwith the trochilid col- [Coeligena]prunellei is involved I should expect lections of the Museum of Natural Sciences, Louisiana a longer billed result at least; Eriocnemisnigri- State University and the American Museum of Nat- vestiscan be dismissedas a geographic impos- ural History (AMNH), including a specimen with a sibility. SupposeNeolesbia to be distinct, should molting tail, provisionallyidentified asNeolesbia nehr- not the resultantproduct have at leasta slightly korni(AMNH 484177), the type of which cannot now decurved bill?... It's all very puzzling and I be found (Hinklemann et al. 1991). The specimenwas am afraid I haven't been any help." comparedwith the descriptionand colorplate of Neo- lesbianehrkorni (Berlepsch 1887), and color transpar- Meyer de Schauensee(in litt., 19 May 1947 enciesof a specimenin the Museum Heineanum Hal- to Alexander Wetmore) reported the observa- berstadt, Germany (courtesyof B. Nicolai), that was tions of John T. Zimmer of the American Mu- recently identified as N. nehrkorni(Hinkelmann et al. seum of Natural History, "Zimmer saw it and 1991). All color comparisonswere made under Ex- thought it could possiblybe a hybrid between amolites (Macbeth Corporation). Descriptions of Aglaiocercuskingi and Heliangelussquamigularis." structural colors are unusually subjective and actual •anuary 1993] New Speciesof Sunangel Fig. 1. Dorsal.ventral. and lateral view of holotype of Heliangeluszusii. 4 GARYR. GRAVES [Auk, Vol. 110 color varies with angle of inspection. For this reason a white spot are found posterior to the eyes. I use general color descriptionsthroughout. The hindneck, back, and wing coverts are deep Measurementsof wing chord, bill length from an- bluish-black, slightly iridescent, turning deep terior edge of nostril, and rectrix length from point greenish-blueon the lower back and rump and of insertion of centralrectrices to the tip of the longest returning to bluish-black on the upper tail co- rectrix of each pair (from innermost to outermost), verts. Primaries and secondaries are dark brown were made with digital calipersto the nearest0.1 mm. with a purplish tint. Secondarieshave acumi- Measurementsof the Heineanum Halberstadt speci- men of Neolesbianehrkorni were provided by B. Ni- nate rather than broadly rounded tips. The colai. Diagnosticassumptions and methodsof hybrid deeply forked tail (fork 54% of length) is glit- diagnosis based on plumage characters and mor- tering dark purple above, duller and less iri- phology follow Graves(1990). descent on the lower surface. Basal portions of the rectrices, obscured in the folded tail, are the Heliangelus zusii sp. nov. same color as the exposed distal tips (unlike Bogot• Sunangel speciesof Aglaiocercusand Lesbia).Shafts of rec- trices are dark brown distally, fading to light Holotype.--Academy of Natural Sciences of brown basally.Rectrices are flat in crosssection. Philadelphia, No. 159261;adult (• ?);purchased The ventral plumage is duller than the dorsum. in Bogota,Colombia in 1909 by Brother Nic•- The chin is dull bluish-black, bordered poste- foro Maria. riorly by a brilliant golden-green gorget (same Diagnosis.--Heliangeluszusii is a dark bluish- color as frontlet). Gorget feathers have golden- black hummingbird with a deeply forked, dark green tips separated from the gray base by a purple tail, brilliant green frontlet and gorget, narrow violet band. Gorget and frontlet feath- and straight bill (seefrontispiece). It differs from ers are broadly rounded rather than narrow or H. regalisin having a frontlet and gorget, a pur- pointed. The gorget is bordered below and on plish rather bluish-black tail, and pale rather the sidesby lustrousbluish-black.