Table Of Contentc2
/TtS i - ulletin of the
JL
&-
Britis
Ornithologists'
THENATURAL
HISTORYMUSEUM
- APR 2003
1
PRESENTED
TRINGLIBRARY
Volume 123A - Supplement. 2003
Why Museums
Matter:
Avian Archives in an Age ofExtinction
Edited by Nigel Collar, Clem Fisher & Chris Feare
3rd European Symposium ofBird Curators
Following the firsttwoEuropeanconferencesonbird collections, in Tringin 1999 and
in Bonn in 2001, the 3rd Conference will be held in the National Museum ofNatural
History in Leiden, the Netherlands, from Friday 10 - Sunday 12 October2003.
The scientific programme will be organised by the Bird Department of the National
Museum ofNatural History, starting early 2003. Ideas and suggestions for the scien-
tific programme are welcome: please forward these to Dr. Rene W.R.J. Dekker at
[email protected]
The logistics oftheconference will be organisedby theLeids Congres Bureau (LCB).
The LCB will be responsible for conference registration, hotel reservations, mailings,
etc., and will contact you by email early 2003.The conference will take place in the
Auditorium ofthe National Museum ofNatural History in Leiden, which is only a 5
minutes walk from the Leiden central railway station. Your accommodation may be
able to be arranged within walking distance. Leiden can be reached by train from
Schiphol airport in only 15 minutes.
The conference fee, which includes registration, documentation, lunch (2), tea and
coffee (but not dinner and hotel reservations), will be approximately 175-200 Euro.
Programme: Friday 10 October2003 - afternoon: arrival andregistration; Saturday 11
and Sunday 12 October 2003 - lectures and panel discussions.
The NEWbirdcollection is openforstudyduring the week, butNOTon Saturday and
Sunday during the conference.
If you would like to receive future mailings about the 3rd European Conference on
Bird Collections in October 2003 in Leiden, please send an email to
[email protected]
Bulletin ofthe British Ornithologists' Club 2003
Apartfrom singlecopies made forthepurposeofrcscarehorprivate study,orcriticismorreview,as
permitted underUK law, nopartofthis publication may be reproduced, storedortransmitted in any
formorbyanymeans,exceptwithpriorpermissionofthepublishers.Enquiriesconcerningreproduction
outside theseterms should be senttothe Editor(address insiderearcover).
TheBulletinisdespatchedfromtheprinteronpublicationandissentbySurfaceServerPostalServices
toall European destinations outside the UKand byAirSaverPostal Services todestinationsoutside
Europe.Thosewhosesubscriptionshavenotbeenreceivedbythebeginningofamonthofpublication
will havetheircopiesdespatchedby surfacemail, aftertheircurrentsubscriptionhasbeenpaid.
A
Bull B.O.C. 2003 123
Bulletin of the
BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS' CLUB
Vol. 123A Published 15 March 2003
Why Museums
Matter:
Avian Archives an
in
Age
of Extinction
Papers from a conference of this title
held at Green Park, Aston Clinton, and
workshops at the Natural History Museum,
Tring, 12-15 November 1999
Edited by
Nigel J Collar, ClemencyT Fisher
and Chris J Feare
A
2 Bull. B.O.C. 2003 123
Phillip Alexander Clancey
The publication ofthese conference proceedings as a supplement to the Bulletin of
theBritish Ornithologists' Clubhasbeen madepossibleby agenerous legacytothe
Club by the late Dr Phillip Clancey. DrClancey contributed specimens to and used
museums extensively during his studies on the taxonomy ofAfrican birds (see his
Obituary - Bull. B.O.C. 121:217-218 (2001)) and wished his legacy to be used to
support the Bulletin, in which he published many ofhis findings.
It seems fitting that DrClancey's legacy should be used to highlightthe continuing
importance of museums as archives for historic and current collections of
ornithological material and we are pleased to dedicate this volume to his memory.
Recommendedcitation:
Collar, N.J., Fisher, C.T. &Feare, C.J. (eds.) 2003. Whymuseumsmatter: avianarchivesinanageof
extinction. Bull. Brit. Orn. CI. Supplement, 123A: 1-360.
A
3 Bull. B.O.C. 2003 123
Editors' commentary and acknowledgements
Ifpublication ofany set of symposium papers is delayed, it becomes increasingly
problematic to follow through the standard editing process of refereeing and
negotiation with authors overthe final version oftheircontributions. The difficulty
largely derives from the fact that material leftunpublished too long begins to date,
anditbecomes uncertain whetheritisbettertoleavethecontributions as they were
atthetimetheyweremade,ortoupdatetheminthelightofmorerecentpublications.
Decisions eitherway can create a sense ofloss ofauthenticity. Some authors in the
presentproceedingsdeclinedtoincludenewmaterialrelevanttotheirsubject;others
chose to include some, opportunistically; still others provided a comprehensively
up-to-date version oftheirpapers. However, the discrepancies are not striking, and
we strongly commend these proceedings as a relevant, comprehensive and topical
collective review of the values of museums in ornithology. We also note that,
meanwhile, other assertions ofthe value ofmuseum collections ofbirds have been
&
no less insistent (e.g. Griffiths Bates 2002, Oniki 2002).
Theseproceedingsarethefirstofwhatwenowexpecttobeaseriesdocumenting
meetingsofbirdcuratorsheldinEuropetodiscussandpromotecooperationbetween
museums. The meeting at the Natural History Museum's Bird Department atTring
in Hertfordshire in November 1999 engendered a second conference in Bonn in
November2001 TheBonnproceedingsareduetoappearapproximatelyatthesame
.
time as those fromTring, in early 2003 (Rheinwald in press). Athird conference is
scheduled to be held in Leiden in October2003, and doubtless its proceedings will
appearin due course.
Profoundapologiesmustbeextendedtotheauthorsforthedelayineditingtheir
contributions,butwemustalsothankthemallwarmlyfortheirverypositiveresponse
to our requests for their rapid cooperation. We also thank those who in mid-year
2002mostgenerouslyundertooktorefereethepapers, atvery shortnotice andwith
very short turn-around times: P.Andrew, T. M. Brooks, L. Christidis, J. H. Cooper,
E. C. Dickinson, J. Fjeldsa, R. E. Green, H. Jakober, I. Newton, R. B. Payne, R. P.
Prys-Jones, C. S. Roselaar, D.W. Snow,W. Stauber,F. D. SteinheimerandR.Yosef.
We also thank the British Ornithologists' Union and British Ornithologists' Club,
particularly S. P. Dudley, C. J. Feare and T. W. Gladwin, for their strong
encouragement and support in bringing the editing of these proceedings to a
conclusion.
Griffiths, C. S. & Bates, J. M. 2002. Morphology, genetics and the value ofvoucher specimens: an
examplewithCathartesvultures.J. RaptorRes. 36: 183-187.
Oniki,Y. 2002.Anothervalueofspecimensinmuseumcollections. OrnitologiaNeotropical 13: 323-
324.
Rheinwald, G, (ed.) In press. Conference Proceedings of the Second European Symposium 'Bird
CollectionsinEurope:TheChallengesofMutualCooperation'.Bonn. zool. Beitr. 51(3-4).
Editor'scommentaryandacknowledgements 4 Bull. B.O.C. 2003 123A
Addresses: N. J. Collar. Conservation Biology Group, Department of Zoology, Downing Street,
CambridgeCB2 3EJ, U.K.:and BirdLife International,WellbrookCourt,GirtonRoad,Cambridge
CB4ONA, U.K. C. T. Fisher. DepartmentofZoology, Liverpool Museum,William Brown Street,
Liverpool L3 8EN, U.K.
After the delays to which Nigel Collar and Clem Fisher have referred above, the
decision to publish these proceedings as a supplement to the Bulletin ofthe British
Ornithologists' Clubwas made only in late 2002. By thetimethetextsbegantofall
onto mydeskin December2002,thebulkoftheeditinghadbeencompletedandwe
set the somewhat daunting target ofpublishing the supplement in March 2003. My
task was largely to convert the style to Bulletin format and to send the texts to the
authors forfinal approval, duringwhichIdid seekclarifications andrevisions. Iam
grateful toNigel andClemforthehugeeditorialjobthattheyhadalreadydone, and
to the authors for responding so rapidly to my appeals for urgent attention to the
finaldetails.Thisrapidpublicationalsoinvolvedspeedyprocessingbyourtypesetter,
Alcedo Publishing, and our printer, Crowes ofNorwich, and I am grateful to them
for making it possible.
Chris Feare
Hon. Editor, Bulletin ofthe British Ornithologists'Club
A
5 Bull. B.O.C. 2003 123
Introduction
by Robert Prys-Jones
My desire to plan the conference 'WhyMuseumsMatter:AvianArchives in anAge
ofExtinction anditsassociatedworkshop 'IncreasedCo-operationbetweenMuseum
BirdCollections, especiallyinEurope'aroseoutoftwointerrelatedfactswhichhad
becomeapparenttomeinmyroleascollectionmanagerofoneoftheworld'slargest
bird collections. First, in an era of ever-rising threats to ever more bird species
worldwide,itwasincreasinglyimportanttoimprovecooperationbetweenmuseums
in collating and making available information about the bird specimen resources
they look after. Second, such cooperation would most easily arise out ofpersonal
contact, but at the time no forum existed, at least within Europe, to facilitate the
meeting and exchange ofviews among bird collection management staff.
The aim was therefore to organise a conference containing a suite of papers
focusingcomprehensivelyonthecontentandvalueofbirdcollectionsandonresearch
arising directly out ofthem, but avoiding undue overlap with previously published
reviews (e.g. Miller 1985). Although open to all interested parties, the core target
audience would comprise representatives with hands-on collection management
responsibilities from as many European museums containing significant bird
collectionsaspossible,butleavenedwithacross-sectionofspeakersfrommuseums
elsewhere, and indeed from other relevant backgrounds, to provide wider
perspectives.Thiswouldbefollowedbyaworkshop,openonlytomuseumpersonnel,
aimed at facilitating a structured general discussion of issues ofcommon concern
and priorities for future cooperative action. The focus on European museum staff
seemed desirable both because the continent is a coherent entity which contains
numerous important bird collections, hitherto lacking any interaction of the type
achievedbytheirU.S. equivalents at, forexample,AmericanOrnithologists'Union
meetingsandthroughtheelectronicdiscussionforumAVECOL,andbecausefunding
and logistical constraints precluded any comprehensive worldwide approach.
Given that the whole enterprise was undertaken on a shoestring budget, the
responseandoutcomeweregratifying.Approximately 130peoplefrom25 countries
attended, including representatives from the great majority of larger, and some
smaller, European bird collections. The conference speakers, almost all of whom
attendedattheirownexpense, mustbecongratulatedforstickingtotheirbriefs and
producing contributions ofahigh standard, as is fullyevidentfromthesepublished
proceedings (for reviews of the event, see Brooke 2000 and Cooper 2000). The
workshop discussions, summarisedherein (see underCooper& Steinheimer), were
lively andconstructive, andhave led directly to anumberofinitiatives, such as the
setting up ofeBEAC (the electronic Bulletin for EuropeanAvian Curators), and a
strong stimulus towards the goal of a world avian type specimen list. Perhaps the
best indication that a real need was being addressed came through the general
agreementthatthemeeting shouldbecomethefirstofabiennial series, with staffof
A
Introduction 6 Bull. B.O.C. 2003 123
theAlexander Koenig Research Institute and Museum ofZoology, Bonn, Germany,
hosting a second European Bird Curators' symposium in 2001, and with plans well
advanced now for a third in the National Museum ofNatural History, Leiden, The
Netherlands in 2003.
In planningandcarryingthroughthisenterprise, I wasfortunate inthevarietyof
assistancethatbecameavailablefrombothindividualsandorganisations.TheBritish
Ornithologists' Union accepted the conference as one ofits regular series, making
freely available its administrative and publicity machinery and the able organising
skillsofits staff, Steve Dudley andGwenBonham.TheBritishOrnithologists'Club
providedfundingtosupportattendanceoftheconferenceandworkshopbymuseum
personnel who would otherwise have been precluded from coming, as well as
supporting the publication of these proceedings. The Natural History Museum
allowed its Bird Group staffto take time to plan and organise the conference and
workshop, and permitted use ofthe Walter Rothschild Zoological Museum for the
conference reception. BirdLife International also lent its support to the enterprise,
signalling clearly its recognition of natural history museums as key players in
conservation science.
Scientific organisationoftheentire eventwas sharedbetween Drs Nigel Collar,
ClemFisher, KeesRoselaarandmyself.Aswellashisroleinrunningtheworkshop,
Kees Roselaar has made a particularly noteworthy contribution in compiling the
Europeanbirdcollectionsdirectorythatispublishedintheseproceedingsandwhich
will hopefully soon be available on-line. Professor Sir Robert May, then U.K.
GovernmentChiefScientificAdvisor,graciouslyagreedtogivetheopeningaddress.
Mark Adams, Joanne Cooper, Steven Parry, Jorn Scharlemann, Don Smith, Frank
NHM
Steinheimer and Michael Walters of the Bird Group played indispensable
roles in assisting with all the logistical requirements necessary to ensure the
programmeransmoothly. DrAndrewRichford(AcademicPress)kindlyunderwrote
the cost ofrefreshments forthe conference reception.
The production of these proceedings has been delayed for reasons which fall
verylargelyatmydoorandforwhichIapologisetoallcontributors.Theirappearance
now is due almostentirely to the efforts ofNigel Collar, whohas played very much
the leading role in collating and editing the contents of this volume. The whole
enterprise has been a satisfying one tobe associated with and hopefully will have a
legacy oflasting value.
References:
Brooke, M.de L. 2000.Whymuseumsmatter. TrendsEcol. Evol. 15: 136-137.
Cooper,J. 2000. Reporton "Why museumsmatter".Ibis 142: 347-348.
Miller. E. H. (ed.) 1985. Museumcollections: theirrolesandfutureinbiologicalresearch. Occasional
Papers oftheBritish ColumbiaProvincialMuseum25.
Address:RobertPrys-Jones,BirdGroup,DepartmentofZoology,TheNaturalHistoryMuseum,Akeman
Street,Tring, Herts HP236AP, UK.
A
JurgenHaffer 7 Bull. B.O.C. 2003 123
Avian zoogeography, speciation
and the museum tradition
byJurgen Haffer
SUMMARY
Zoogeographical studies involvingtheidentificationofspeciationpatterns inbirdshave
beengreatlyfacilitatedbythepreparationofdistributionmapsusingpublishedlocalities
andunpublishedmuseumspecimenrecords.ZoogeographicalpatternsinAmazonianbirds
include sixconspicuous areasofendemismandnumerous sharplydefinedcontactzones
between closelyrelatedgeographically representativebirds. Manycontactzones cluster
alongtheAmazonandthelowerportionsofitstributaries,butotherscrossrivercourses
atrightangles.Parapatriccontactzonesgeneratemanyimportantriddlesovertheprocesses
wherebyspeciesremainintact(dothezonesremainstationaryorfluctuate,howisparapatry
maintained,whyandwhendiditoriginate?etc.);parapatricpatternsinNewGuinealowland
birds offer further opportunities to solve such questions. Studies based on museum
collectionscontinuetocontributevaluabledataonthecharactergeographyofparticular
speciesgroups(inthecaseofmigrantArcticwadersbasedonextensivequantificationof
subtle character differences between populations), on geographical variation of sexual
dimorphism, andgeographically variablepolymorphism.
Introduction
Bird collections in natural history museums document the occurrence ofcommon,
rare, threatenedandextinct species obtainedin accessible and inaccessible areas of
the world. Collections form the basis ofsystematic and zoogeographic studies, for
researchongeographicvariation, studyofplumagecolourpatterns,ecomorphology,
biodiversityandmanyothertopics.Earlyprivateandpubliccollectionswerealready
important during the period when ornithology originated as a separate branch of
zoologyduringthefirsthalfofthenineteenthcentury.Later,scientistsandcommercial
collectorstravelledwidelyoverseascontributingtotherapidgrowthoftheregional
knowledgeoftheavifaunas oftheworld, andleadingtoaconspicuousboominbird
collections during the second half the nineteenth century and into the twentieth
century (Stresemann 1975, Barrow 1998, Mearns & Mearns 1998, Haffer 2001,
Glaubrecht 2002).
Below I demonstrate the constant and non-substitutable relevance ofmuseum
collectionstothetopicofavianzoogeography,inparticularthemappingofbreeding
and wintering ranges of birds, the study of individual and geographic variation,
theanalysisofcontactzonesbetween subspecies andspecies as well as ofareas of
endemism. I show that bird collections stored in museums are essential tools for
such research. Conceptual contributions of systematists to biological science
through specimen-based research include the theory of geographical speciation,
the principle ofpopulation thinking, and the interpretation ofthe gradualness of
evolution.
A
Jihrgen Haffer 8 Bull. B.O.C. 2003 123
Mapping ofbreeding and wintering ranges
Preciselocalitydataandthedatesofcollectingarethebasicinformationonspecimen
labels needed for taxonomic and zoogeographic work. Such notes are often
supplementedby dataon thecolourofbill, feet, iris andskinaroundtheeye, aswell
as by information on moult and stomach contents. The field notebooks of the
collectorsfrequentlyprovideinformationontheecologyandcallsofparticularbirds.
Obviously, the correct labelling ofmuseum specimens, astowhere andwhen abird
was taken, is of crucial importance, including information on the altitude of the
collecting locality, especially in mountains, and its position with respect to the left
or right bank of a broad river. Occasional misidentifications of birds can only be
clarified through reference to preserved specimens.
Locality data are utilised in taxonomic and faunistic publications as well as in
regionalatlasprojectslikethosewhichhavebeenpublishedforPalearcticandAfrican
birds. In the Palearctic atlas (Stresemann, Portenko etal. 1960-2000) the limits of
the breeding ranges ofselected species are mapped and the localities used to trace
these range limits are documented in the accompanying text of each map, which
also includes discussions ofthe ecology and taxonomy ofthese birds. The detailed
documentation ofall localities as totheirliterature sourcepermits theirverification
in case oflaterneed. So far 19 instalments ofthis atlas treat 210 species ofbirds in
62 genera which have been studied cooperatively by 16 scientists, mainly at the
Berlin and St. Petersburg Zoological Museums.
The atlases ofAfrican passerine (Hall & Moreau 1970) and non-passerinebirds
(Snow 1978) map the distributions of more or less related and geographically
representative species onto a background vegetation map ofAfrica. Each locality
whereaspecieshasbeencollectedismarkedwithaparticularsymbol(solidoropen
circle, triangle, square, etc.). Such presentation permits at-a-glance appreciation of
the ecological occurrence ofa species, its relative abundance (few ormany locality
records) and the location of contact zones, i.e. areas of geographic replacement,
betweenrelatedrepresentatives(withorwithouthybridisation).Theseaspectswould
notbe soobvious ifthedistributionofeachmemberspeciesofsuch superspeciesor
species groups had been illustrated on a separate map. Numerous opportunities for
field studies become apparent simply by studying theseAfrican maps.
Although theuse ofpoint-locality mapping intheseAfrican atlases is extremely
valuable as a means ofestablishing baseline distributions, there are two drawbacks
(N. J. Collar pers. comm.): (1) the mapped locality records are not tagged with a
source, so that in cases ofdoubt they cannot be scrutinised; and (2) not all sources
havebeen usedandcertain informationismissing. Inalessdetailedmanner,Moreau
(1972) mapped and discussed the summerand winterdistributions ofall Palearctic
migratory birds.
South America has immense potential for mapping species distributions thanks
to the extraordinary programme ofgazetteer production for every South American
country by R. A. Paynter (Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts) and
