2008
DOI: 10.1007/s10336-008-0298-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Willughby’s angel: the pintailed sandgrouse (Pterocles alchata)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 6 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1 Presumably to enhance these descriptions, both the Latin (1676) and English (1678) editions were illustrated by an identical set of 78 plates at the end of the book; black and white engravings derived from a variety of published sources (e.g. Gessner 1555; Belon 1555; Aldrovandi 1599-1603; Olina 1622; Jonston 1650), paintings, information from various explorers, and the observations that Willughby and Ray themselves made on their travels around Europe, both in nature and in private collections (Raven 1950; see also Charmantier and Birkhead 2008). Some of the representations of birds on these engravings are both aesthetically pleasing and scientifically accurate, such as those derived from Olina (1622), while others, like some of those copied from Marcgrave (1648), tend to be rather poor, especially as some of these are fanciful 'species'.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 Presumably to enhance these descriptions, both the Latin (1676) and English (1678) editions were illustrated by an identical set of 78 plates at the end of the book; black and white engravings derived from a variety of published sources (e.g. Gessner 1555; Belon 1555; Aldrovandi 1599-1603; Olina 1622; Jonston 1650), paintings, information from various explorers, and the observations that Willughby and Ray themselves made on their travels around Europe, both in nature and in private collections (Raven 1950; see also Charmantier and Birkhead 2008). Some of the representations of birds on these engravings are both aesthetically pleasing and scientifically accurate, such as those derived from Olina (1622), while others, like some of those copied from Marcgrave (1648), tend to be rather poor, especially as some of these are fanciful 'species'.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%