Platystira affinis Wahlberg 1855

Platystira affinis Wahlberg, 1855: 214.

VERBATIM TYPE LOCALITY: “ In Mimosis terrae Damararum. ”

CURRENT STATUS: Batis pririt affinis Wahlberg, 1855; Platysteiridae (Dickinson & Christidis 2014: 209), but see comment below.

STATUS REFERENCE: Sclater 1930: 422 (monotypic), White 1963: 27 (monotypic), Clancey et al. 1980: 227, Traylor 1986a: 382, Urban et al. 1997: 589.

TYPE MATERIAL: Wahlberg, in his description, gave data for both male and female. According to Sundevall’s acquisition catalogue, four syntypes of this species were received in Stockholm after Wahlberg’s death. Gyldenstolpe (1926: 65) referred to two “types”, so we cannot regard them as lectotype designations. The original type series consists of four syntypes: NRM 568749 [11689], an adult male collected 7 August 1854 at Swakop River; NRM 568750 [11691], an adult female collected 29 April 1854 at Walvis Bay (both of these referred to as types by Gyldenstolpe 1926: 65); NRM 90168195 [11692], a juvenile male collected 18 September 1854 at Swakop River; and NRM 90168197 [11690], an adult male collected 27 April 1854 at Walvis Bay.

VERIFIED TYPE LOCALITY: Swakop River and Walvis Bay, Namibia.

COMMENTS: Dates and places agree with journal entries. Gyldenstolpe, both in his type catalogue (1926: 65) and on labels in the NRM, consistently and erroneously spelled the species name as “ pirit ”. The nominate form, Muscicapa pririt, was described by Vieillot (1818, 21: 486) based on Levaillant (1799 –1808, 4 [1805]: 38–43, plate 161). Levaillant gave a vast distribution: “ Cette espèce est commune aux deux côtes est et ouest d’Afrique; d’un côté sur les bords de la grande rivière des Poissons et dans tout le pays des Caffres, et de l’autre, dans celui des Grands Namaquois, et notamment dans les bois de mimosas qui bordent la Grande-Rivière, de chaque côté de son cours: elle est cependant plus abondante à l’est. ” This translates to: “This species is common to both east and west coasts; on one side on the banks of the Fish River as well as in all the land of the Caffres, and on the other side, in the land of the Great Namaqua, and especially in the forests of mimosas which border the Great River (Orange or Gariep River), on each side, but it is more plentiful towards the east”. A male and a female are figured, but their origin is not given. If the figured specimens (both syntypes) are still in existence, they are likely to be stored in Paris (but they were not found in the MNHN collection by WRJD in 2004). Sundevall (1857) also points out that a large part of the information in Levaillant (1799 –1808) is not trustworthy: “ Att han gjort sig skyldig till det aldra gröfsta vetenskapliga bedrägeri är alltför uppenbart ”, translated as “the fact that he is guilty of the most severe scientific fraud is all too obvious”. The TL has been cited as Lower Orange River (Sclater 1930: 422, Traylor 1986a: 382) following Levaillant’s statement “ commune aux deux cotes [... as above]” and similar information from Vieillot (1818). Macdonald (1957: 120) suggested that it would be more correct to place the TL in theEastern Cape Province, restricted to some well-known place such as Somerset East, near the Fish River, which lies close to the route followed by Levaillant. Macdonald did not explicitly state that he restricted the type locality (and if he had done so it has no support in the Code), but nevertheless, it was accepted as a restricted TL by Clancey (1966: 513) for example. We cannot find any designation of either a lectotype or neotype, and a review of possible existing specimens of the original type series is thus required to make a designation. Until that is done, the status of the nominate species Platystira affinis is not clear.