Content deleted Content added
mNo edit summary |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) m Alter: author. Add: chapter-url, url, author-link. Removed or converted URL. Removed accessdate with no specified URL. | You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here.| Activated by User:Marianne Zimmerman |
||
Line 6:
| extinct = 1822
| status_system = IUCN3.1
| status_ref = <ref name = IUCN>{{cite journal | author =
| image = Dromaius peroni.jpg
| image_caption = 1907 illustration by [[John Gerrard Keulemans]], based on the Paris skin
Line 51:
| zbl = }}</ref> Furthermore, in 1914, L. Brasil argued the expedition did not encounter emus on King Island, because the weather had been too bad for them to leave their camp.<ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Brasil | first1 = L. | title = The Emu of King Island | doi = 10.1071/MU914088 | journal = Emu | volume = 14 | issue = 2 | pages = 88–97| year = 1914 }}</ref> The French also referred to both emus and [[cassowaries]] as "casoars" at the time, which has led to further confusion.<ref name="Mighty"/>
The French naturalist [[Louis Jean Pierre Vieillot]] coined the [[binomial nomenclature|binomial]] ''Dromaius ater'' in 1817.<ref>{{cite journal | last = Vieillot |first=L. J. P. | year = 1817 | title =''Dromaius ater''| url = | journal = Nouveau Dictionnaire d'Histoire Naturelle | volume = 11 | language = French | page = 212 }}</ref> Various collectors found [[subfossil]] emu remains on King Island during the early 20th century, the first by the Australian amateur ornithologist [[Archibald James Campbell]] in 1903, near a lagoon on the east coast.<ref name="Search">{{cite journal |last1=Hume |first1=J. |last2=Steel |first2=L. |last3=Middleton |first3=G. |last4=Medlock |first4=K. |title=In search of the dwarf emu: A palaeontological survey of King and Flinders Islands, Bass Strait, Australia |journal=Contribuciones Científicas del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales |date=2018 |volume=7 |pages=81–98 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326059421}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Campbell |first1=A. G. |title=Emu Bones on King Island |journal=Emu - Austral Ornithology |date=1903 |volume=3 |issue=2 |pages=113–114 |doi=10.1071/MU903112ah}}</ref> In 1906, the Australian ornithologist [[Walter Baldwin Spencer]] coined the name ''Dromaius minor'' based on some [[Pleistocene]] subfossil bones and eggshells found on King Island.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Spencer |first1=B. |last2=Kershaw |first2=J. A. |title=A collection of sub–fossil bird and marsupial remains from King Island, Bass Strait |journal=Memoirs of the National Museum, Melbourne |date=1910 |volume=3 |pages=5–35 |doi=10.24199/j.mmv.1910.3.01}}</ref> The Australian ornithologist [[William Vincent Legge]] also coined a name for these remains in 1906, ''Dromaius bassi'', but at a later date.<ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Legge | first1 = W. V. | title = The Emus of Tasmania and King Island | doi = 10.1071/MU906116 | journal = Emu | volume = 6 | issue = 3 | pages = 116–119 | year = 1906 | pmid = | pmc = | url = https://zenodo.org/record/1610347 }}</ref> In his 1907 book ''[[Extinct Birds (Rothschild book)|Extinct Birds]]'', the British zoologist [[Walter Rothschild]] stated that Vieillot's description actually referred to the mainland emu, and that the name ''D. ater'' was therefore invalid. Believing the skin in [[Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle]] of Paris was from Kangaroo Island, he made it the [[type specimen]] of his new species ''Dromaius peroni'', named after the French naturalist [[François Péron]], who is the main source of information about the bird in life.<ref name="Rothschild"/>
[[File:Lesueur Emu.jpg|thumb|left|[[Charles Alexandre Lesueur]]'s 1807 plate of the head, wing and feathers of a possible King Island emu]]
The Australian amateur ornithologist [[Gregory Mathews]] coined further names in the early 1910s, including a new [[genus]] name, ''Peronista'', as he believed the King and Kangaroo Island birds were generically distinct from the mainland emu.<ref name="Mathews">{{Cite book | last1 = Mathews | first1 = G. M. | last2 = Iredale | first2 = T. | year=1921 | title = A Manual of the Birds of Australia | url = https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/49436#page/33/mode/1up | volume=Vol. 1 | page = 5 | publisher=H. F. & G. Witherby | doi = 10.5962/bhl.title.14116}}</ref> Later writers claimed that the subfossil remains found on King and Kangaroo Islands were not discernibly different, and that they therefore belonged to the same [[taxon]].<ref name="Extinct Birds"/><ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Morgan | first1 = A. M. | last2 = Sutton | first2 = J. | doi = 10.1071/MU928001 | title = A critical description of some recently discovered bones of the extinct Kangaroo Island Emu (''Dromaius diemenianus'') | journal = Emu | volume = 28 | pages = 1–19 | year = 1928 | pmid = | pmc = }}</ref> In 1959, the French ornithologist [[Christian Jouanin]] proposed that none of the skins were actually from Kangaroo Island, after inspecting expedition and museum documents.<ref>{{Cite journal
Line 160:
|editor=West-Sooby, J.
|publisher= University of Adelaide Press
|chapter-url=http://www.adelaide.edu.au/press/titles/discovery/discovery-ebook.pdf
|isbn=9781922064523}}</ref> The Paris skin contains several bones, but not the pelvis, which is an indicator of sex, so the supposed female identity is unconfirmed. Péron noted that the small emus brought to France were distinct from those of the mainland, but not that they were distinct from each other, or which island each had come from, so their provenance was unknown for more than a century later.<ref name="Mighty"/>
| |||