Hypotaenidia, REICHENBACH, 1853

HYPOTAENIDIA REICHENBACH, 1853 View in CoL

HYPOTAENIDIA PHILIPPENSIS ( LINNAEUS, 1766) View in CoL , BUFF-BANDED RAIL

Material: Nukuleka: NISP = 1, MNI = 1. Falevai: NISP = 1, MNI = 1. Ofu: NISP = 4, MNI = 1. Otea: NISP = 3, MNI = 1. Vuna: NISP = 1, MNI = 1.

Measurements (in millimetres): Ka2.05.XX.00FE0b, dL fem, SW = 3.8, DW = 8.9; Of1.05.03.07, dR tib, DW = 5.9; Of1.05.08.06, sR hum, SW = 3.0; Of1.05.08.09a, pR tib, PW articular surface = 7.7; Ka1.05.10.14, dL fem, DW = 7.5; Ka1.05.10.15, dR hum, DW = 6.2; Ka1.05.12.15, dR tib, DW = 6.2; Pa1.04.19.08, dR tib, DW = 6.4.

Remarks: These specimens are indistinguishable from Hypotaenidia philippensis (= Gallirallus philippensis, sensu Kirchman, 2012 ), which includes 22 subspecies ( Dickinson & Remsen, 2013). In describing the prehistoric fossil bones of Gallirallus from Tonga, Kirchman & Steadman (2005) attributed most from Ha'apai and Tongatapu to Gallirallus philippensis . However, from ' Eua, they noted that all remains that post-dated human arrival were from Gallirallus philippensis , but that in older layers, a now extinct species ( Gallirallus vekamatolu ) was the sole one present. Material of Hypotaenidia philippensis ecaudata (J. F. Miller, 1783) , the subspecies in the Tongan region, was not available to us, but the Tongan bones were qualitatively similar to and about the same size as SAM B.36299, an example of the Australian form Hypotaenidia philippensis mellori ( Mathews, 1912) , with which they were compared. All bones fell within the size range of those given for Samoa, Tonga and Vanuatu for this sexually size-dimorphic species ( Kirchman & Steadman, 2005) and were much smaller than for those of the following species.

HYPOTAENIDIA VAVAUENSIS WORTHY & BURLEY SP.