Larus novaehollandiae gunni

To: "Birding Aus" <>
Subject: Larus novaehollandiae gunni
From: "John Penhallurick" <>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:38:29 +1100
Sorry to bother you all again, but I have just noticed something.
Mathews,1927,Systema Avium Australasianarum,1,p.147 list the form in Tasmania as
Bruchigavia novaehollandiae jamesonii
based on
Larus jamesonii Wilson,1829,Wilson,James,1831,Illustrations of Zoology, being representations of new, rare, or remarkable subjects of the animal kingdom : with ... descriptive details,pt.6,pl.xxiii."Shores of New Holland" = Tasmania.
Mathews list his own gunni (Larus novaehollandiae gunni Mathews,1912,Novitates Zoologicae,18,p.212.(Tasmania). ) in the synonymy.
So if the Tasmanian form is recognised as a good subspecies, should it be called jamesonii?
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Larus novaehollandiae gunni, John Penhallurick <=

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the birding-aus mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU