International Journal of Primatology

, Volume 31, Issue 6, pp 1055–1070 | Cite as

The Rediscovery of Buffon’s Tarsier

Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

The tarsier described by Buffon and Daubenton (1765) is the source of all scientific names given to tarsiers, with the sole exception of Simia syrichta Linnaeus 1758, until the early the 19th century, and most even up to the 1820s. It is therefore extremely important to try to determine precisely what this individual might have been. We here summarize what is known of the specimen and its history, and of other specimens with which it has potentially been confused. We argue that, though there is some room for doubt, in all probability this important species still exists.

Keywords

Audebert Buffon Daubenton Desmarest Fischer Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire Paris museum Tarsier Tarsius tarsier Tarsius Tarsius spectrum Taxonomy Nomenclature History of science 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Audebert, J. B. (1797). Histoire naturelle des singes et des makis. Paris: Desray.Google Scholar
  2. Buffon, G. L. L. (1765). Histoire naturelle, Générale et Particulière, Vol 13. Paris: Imprimerie du Roi.Google Scholar
  3. Burkhardt, R. W., Jr. (2007). The leopard in the garden: life in close quarters at the Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle. Isis, 98, 675–694.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cuvier, G., & Geoffroy, E. (1795). Mémoire sur les rapports naturels du Tarsier (Didelphis macrotarsus Gm.). Magasin Encyclopédique, 1(3), 147–154.Google Scholar
  5. Desmarest, A. G. (1819). Tarsier. In Nouveau dictionnaire d'histoire naturelle, appliquée aux arts, à l' agriculture, à l'economie rurale et domestique, à la Médecine, etc. (pp. 475–477). Paris: Deterville.Google Scholar
  6. Erxleben, J. C. P. (1777). Systema regni animalis per classes, ordines, genera, species, varietates, cum synonymia et historia animalium. Classis I. Mammalia. Leipzig: Weygand.Google Scholar
  7. Fischer, G. (1804). Anatomie der maki. Frankfurt a.M: Andrea.Google Scholar
  8. Geoffroy, E. (1796). Mémoire sur les naturels des Makis Lemur, L. et description d’une espèce nouvelle de Mammifère. Magasin Encyclopédique, 2(1), 20–50.Google Scholar
  9. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, E. (1812). Suite au tableau des quadrumanes. Annales du Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 19, 156–170.Google Scholar
  10. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, I. (1851). Catalogue méthodique de la collection des mammifères, de la collection des oiseaux, et des collections annexes. Première partie—mammifères. Catalogue des primates. Paris: Gide & Baudry.Google Scholar
  11. Link, H. F. (1795). Beyträge zur naturgeschichte, Rostock & Leipzig, 1974–1801, Bd. I. Stck. 2, pp. 65–66.Google Scholar
  12. Linnaeus, C. (1758). Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis (10th ed.). Stockholm: Laurent Salvius.Google Scholar
  13. Pallas, P. S. (1778). Novae species quadrupedum e glirium ordine cum illustrationibus variis complurium ex hoc ordine animalium. Erlangen: Wolfang Walther.Google Scholar
  14. Storr, G. L. C. (1780). Prodromus methodi mammalium. Tubingen.Google Scholar
  15. Vicq-d’Azyr, F. (1792). Systême anatomique. Quadrupèdes. Encyclopédie méthodique, Vol. 2. Paris: Panckoucke.Google Scholar
  16. von Schreber, J. C. D. (1778). Die säugethiere in abbildungen nach der natur. Leipzig: T. D.Weigel.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Archaeology & AnthropologyAustralian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.Département des Mammifères et OiseauxMuséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, ParisParisFrance

Personalised recommendations