Introduction

SEARCH: To search for a word or phrase, use Ctrl-F to create a search box.

The aim of this sixth checklist of New Zealand birds, like its predecessors, is to provide information on the nomenclature, taxonomy, classification, distribution (current, historical, and fossil) and status of the birds of the New Zealand region. As with earlier editions, it was produced by a Checklist Committee of the Ornithological Society of New Zealand Inc. (OSNZ).

The five previous checklists and the respective Checklist Committee conveners were:

• Checklist of New Zealand birds, 1953 (C.A. Fleming).
• Annotated checklist of the birds of New Zealand, 1970 (F.C. Kinsky).
• Checklist of the birds of New Zealand and the Ross Dependency, Antarctica, 1990 (E.G. Turbott).
• Checklist of the birds of New Zealand, Norfolk and Macquarie Islands, and the Ross Dependency, Antarctica, 2010 (B.J. Gill).
• Checklist of the birds of New Zealand, 2022 (C.M. Miskelly).

In 1980, a revision entitled “Amendments and Additions to the 1970 Annotated Checklist of the Birds of New Zealand” was published as a supplement to Notornis, volume 27 (F.C. Kinsky, Convener).

In preparing this revised checklist the Committee has had in mind some guiding principles agreed at the outset. One was the need for a cautious approach. We agreed that the national checklist should develop steadily on what has gone before, without adopting novel sequences or taxonomic treatments that have not been presented, discussed and adopted in other publications. Stability of nomenclature is an important consideration, and in the interests of stability the New Zealand checklist should avoid proposing radical sequences and taxonomies, only to have them reversed in a subsequent edition.

The New Zealand avifauna is part of a larger Australasian and global avifauna, and a second principle was that wherever appropriate we should be strongly guided by existing decisions in other taxonomic works. We have had the benefit of the following works published since the fifth New Zealand checklist:

• The eBird/Clements Checklist of Birds of the World, v2023 (Clements et al. 2023).
• The Handbook of the Birds of the World and BirdLife International digital checklist of the birds of the world. Version 8. (Handbook of the Birds of the World and BirdLife International 2023).
• The Check-list of North American Birds (online), (Chesser et al. 2023).
• International Ornithological Congress (IOC) World Bird Names, version 13.2 (F. Gill et al. 2023).

These works do not always agree in their sequence or taxonomic treatment, and so in attempting to follow global practice we sometimes had choice as to what seemed best for New Zealand. We have made our own decisions on taxonomy when dealing with the groups of birds endemic to New Zealand, or groups (like oceanic seabirds) where New Zealand has a large fauna.

This checklist takes account of all the records approved by the Birds New Zealand Records Appraisal Committee since the last checklist (Checklist Committee 2022) was published (Miskelly, Crossland et al. 2023). The text for the current checklist was finalised in May 2024. The Checklist Committee intends to update the Checklist biennially, with the next update due in 2026.

Contributors

OSNZ (Birds New Zealand) Council appointed C.M. Miskelly as Convener of the Checklist Committee in 2020, and ratified the continued involvement of R.L. Palma and N.J. Rawlence. Birds New Zealand council member (and now President) N.J. Forsdick, and former Checklist Committee members B.J. Gill and A.J.D. Tennyson were co-opted to the Checklist Committee in mid-2020. This team undertook the bulk of the research, preparation of new text, and editing and re-organisation of existing text presented in the 2022 revision. B.J. Gill retired from the Checklist Committee in mid-2022. Changes made to the Checklist since the 2022 (fifth edition) are summarised in Miskelly et al. (2024).

Geographical Coverage

The Checklist covers the following areas:
1. The main islands of New Zealand and the Chatham Islands / Rekohu / Wharekauri.
2. The Kermadec Islands / Rangitāhua north-east of New Zealand.
3. The subantarctic islands south of New Zealand, namely the Snares Islands / Tini Heke, the Bounty Islands / Moutere Hauriri, Antipodes Island / Moutere Mahue, Auckland Islands / Maukahuka, and Campbell Island / Motu Ihupuku.

The New Zealand Checklist no longer covers Norfolk Island, Macquarie Island, and the Ross Dependency, Antarctica (contra Checklist Committee 2010).

New Zealand place names in the main text have, where possible, been updated to conform to the New Zealand Place Names Database and the New Zealand Gazetteer of Official Geographic Names. Place names in synonymies have not been updated, as these report historical records.

Format and Treatment

We have retained the same format and style as the 2022 Checklist, which in turn followed those of the 2010 Checklist. For the majority of taxa, their entries are based on the 2022 Checklist, edited to include information published since 2021, and to delete information that is out-dated. An arrowhead (➤) in the left margin is used to show full species (cf. subspecies). Extinct forms in the Recent avifauna are included in the main text, where a cross (†) marks extinct species, subspecies and their higher taxa. Similarly, introduced species in our region, and higher and lower taxa represented by introduced species, are marked by an asterisk (*). Extinct forms known only as fossils from before the Late Pleistocene are listed in Appendix 1.

Appendix 2 lists failed introductions, including species introduced in the 1800s during the acclimatisation era, and recent introductions like crimson rosella, rainbow lorikeet, and red-vented bulbul that for various reasons have not established. A full list of all taxa included in the main Checklist and Appendices 2 and 3 (including their naming authority, year of naming, English name, Māori name, order, family, species/subspecies status, New Zealand breeding status, and 2021 New Zealand conservation status) can be downloaded as Supplementary Material 1  https://www.birdsnz.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Supp-1-Checklist-2024-database.xlsx

Appendix 3 provides a comprehensive list of English, Māori, and Moriori names for New Zealand birds. A full list of the database of names underlying Appendix 3 (including page references of examples where each name and variant has been published) can be downloaded as Supplementary Material 2  https://www.birdsnz.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Supp-2-Bird-names-database-updating-2022-to-2024.xlsx

Classification

Bird classification is a fast-changing field, spurred on by advances in the use of molecular biology to help resolve taxonomic and phylogenetic problems. There have been major developments affecting the classification and taxonomy of New Zealand birds since the 2010 Checklist. The molecular biology revolution, with its ability to establish ever-finer differences, and pressure for the conservation of genetic diversity, are forcing the recognition of more and more species, often by the elevation of subspecific taxa to specific level. In general, we have tried to adopt a cautious approach, accepting higher-level relationships determined by molecular studies only when there is support from other evidence and/or several studies. Because it is a time of change and uncertainty we have explained the sequences we have adopted, and the reasons for them, by adding sections of explanatory text at various taxonomic levels.

The sequence in which orders and families are presented has been substantially changed since the 2010 Checklist, and largely follows the sequence recommended by Cracraft (2013, 2014), Dickinson & Remsen (2013), Dickinson & Christidis (2014), Clements et al. (2019), Handbook of the Birds of the World and BirdLife International (2020), Chesser et al. (2020), and F. Gill et al. (2021). Species within a genus, and subspecies of a species, are listed from north to south (according to their distribution) if there is no strong evidence for a phylogenetic sequence, with Chatham Islands and subantarctic taxa placed after South Island and Stewart Island / Rakiura taxa.

Species Concepts

How best to define species boundaries in birds is a longstanding and highly contentious issue. The debate boils down to finding the best and most practical way to impose a discontinuous classification scheme on generally uncooperative subjects, and providing a sound theoretical basis for doing so (Hull 1997). For most of the latter part of the 20th Century the dominant paradigm was Ernst Mayr’s Biological Species Concept (BSC) and his associated model of allopatric speciation (E. Mayr 1940, 1996). This concept has not stood the test of time and fails badly for birds, due to the existence of multiple allopatric populations of many taxa, and widespread interspecific and even intergeneric hybridisation (Grant & Grant 1992, 1997).

The vacuum left by the retreat of the BSC has been filled with several competing alternatives, none of which is entirely satisfactory (Mayden 1997). Among these contenders, Cracraft’s (1983) Phylogenetic Species Concept (PSC) has found increasing favour among modern biologists, because it embraces cladistic methods of classification and accommodates molecular data. However, this concept has difficult aspects too. In particular, it is recognised that in extremis each individual would become a species in its own right since each individual possesses unique genetic characters. This drawback is recognised as leading to “taxonomic inflation” (Issac et al. 2004). The Committee has followed the advice of Baum & Donoghue (1995) by recognising that several alternative versions of the PSC are available, and selecting a restricted definition popularly known as the Diagnostic Species Concept (DSC or PSC1). In this, we follow the example set by Helbig et al. (2002) for recognition of bird species in Britain and Europe. We have, however, rejected their use of the subordinate concepts “allospecies”, “semi-species” and “superspecies” for a variety of technical reasons.

Nonetheless, we have continued to recognise “subspecies”. The best definition of recognisable taxa below specific level is perhaps even more difficult for ornithologists to agree upon than the definition of species themselves. Here we have taken a conservative approach. Subspecies recognised in the 2010 Checklist have been retained unless good evidence to the contrary has been published in the intervening period. This ensures continuity of nomenclature between editions of the checklist.

All such decisions and recommendations are supported by published sources in widely available literature. We also state the nature of the new evidence (plumage characters, DNA sequences, etc.) that supports their inclusion.

Scientific Names

Original citations are given for the current names of all families, genera, species and subspecies. In the generic synonymies, synonyms are mainly limited to those genera for which the type species occurs in the New Zealand region and to those which have been published in association with New Zealand species or subspecies, regardless of the present status of the latter. In the species and subspecies synonymies, we have attempted to provide full synonymies for endemic and native taxa. However, for introduced species and subspecies, we have listed those names and combinations that have been published for the geographic coverage of this checklist. In the species and subspecies synonymies, we have attempted to include at least one example of each of the different generic combinations available in the literature, but not always the earliest one. Nomina nuda (singular: nomen nudum) are not available names in zoological nomenclature (ICZN 1999: 111) and, therefore, cannot be entered in synonymy. However, we have listed those nomina nuda that were subsequently made available by the same or other author/s when evidence from the literature showed that they were clearly intended for the same taxon.

In the generic, species and subspecies synonymies, scientific names (i.e. genus, species, subspecies, author and date) are followed by a colon (:) if the entries refer to original descriptions of taxa. In the species and subspecies synonymies, scientific names are followed by a semicolon (;) if they refer to subsequent uses of the species and subspecies names in association with other genera, or in cases of unjustified emendations. Important general references for the synonymies of New Zealand birds are the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum (Sharpe et al. 1874–98), Systema Avium Australasianarum (Mathews 1927, 1930a), Check-List of Birds of the World (Peters 1931–87), and Condon’s checklist of Australian non-passerines (Condon 1975).

Various nomenclatural issues were identified during preparation of the 2010 and 2022 Checklists that affect names and synonyms of New Zealand birds, including the following:

• The validity of the names of Brisson (1760) was restricted to those generic names that appeared in Latin on the even-numbered pages between pages 26 and 61 of the Tabula Synoptica Avium Secundum Ordines that appeared at the beginning of volume 1 (ICZN 1963).
• Over 35 scientific names of New Zealand bird species cited in R. Taylor (1870) were not included in the synonymies of the species treated in this checklist because they were either incorrectly spelt or not recognisable as belonging to any of the currently accepted taxa.
• David & Gosselin (2002a,b) advocated changing the endings of numerous bird names, including several New Zealand ones, on supposed grammatical grounds. Their approach was criticised by the Standing Committee on Ornithological Nomenclature of the 23rd International Ornithological Congress (Schodde 2006), so for the present we have not followed it, apart from for Phalaropus, Pygoscelis, Strigops, Eolophus, and Callaeas (see Dickinson & Remsen 2013, and Dickinson & Christidis 2014).
• We follow Schodde et al. (2010) in accepting 1801 as the publication date of Latham’s Supplementum Indicis Ornithologici (contra Schodde & Mason 1999, who argued for 1802).
• We have attempted to give authorship and original citations for family-group names. The main reference sources, other than the original literature, have been Ridgway (1901, 1902, 1904, 1907, 1911, 1914, 1916, 1919), Friedmann (1941, 1946, 1950), Brodkorb (1963, 1964, 1967, 1971, 1978), Bock (1994), and Olson (1995). We heeded the criticisms by Olson (1995) of certain names advanced by Bock (1994), and checked all original literature to ensure names had a valid origin in terms of ICZN (1999).
• Olson (1995) pointed out that “Some authors have accepted names based on Illiger (1811), an important and scholarly publication that Bock [1994] categorically rejects, not without some justification. On the other hand, Bock takes many family-group names as dating from the excessively recondite and eccentric work of Rafinesque (1815). There is no rational basis for accepting any of Rafinesque’s names while rejecting all of Illiger’s, however, as the nomenclatural problems attendant on both works are virtually identical.” We have concluded that in Illiger (1811) the names Psittacidae (from Illiger’s “famille Psittacini”) and Columbidae (from “famille Columbini”) are available, as the names appear to be “formed from the stem of an available generic name (… indicated either by express reference to the generic name or by inference from its stem …)” (ICZN 1999: Article 11.7.1.1). For the same reason we also concluded that in Rafinesque (1815) the following names are available: Merginae (from Rafinesque’s “sous-famille Mergidia”), Pelecanidae (from “sous-famille Pelicanea”), Rallidae (from “sous-famille Rallia”), Scolopacidae (from “famille Scolopacea”), Tringinae (from “sous-famille Tringaria”), Laridae/Larinae (from “sous-famille Laridia”), Coraciidae (from “sous-famille Coracinia”), Turdidae (from “sous-famille Turdinia”), Sturnidae (from “sous-famille Sturnidia”), Hirundinidae (from “sous-famille Hirundia”), and Passeridae (from “sous-famille Passernia”).
• We followed Bock (1994) and Olson (1995) in accepting Leach (1820) as author of many family-group names. Some have been amended, at the suggestion of Olson (1995), to allow the names to be attributed to Leach (1819). Through the help of Robert Prŷs-Jones (the Natural History Museum, Tring) we were able to confirm that it was indeed the 1819 15th edition of Leach’s “11th Room-Synopsis” that first contained latinised family names.
• We found Vigors (1825) to be the first comprehensive list in Linnaean format that was an important source of new names and also indicated authorities for previously advanced ones. By checking original references wherever possible, we found and corrected several long-standing transcription errors and incorrect citings of authorship.

Common Names (English, Māori, and Moriori)

A primary role of the four previous editions of the Checklist of the Birds of New Zealand has been to provide guidance on the names to use for New Zealand birds. This has included English and Māori bird names, as well as scientific names. Māori and Moriori bird names have become increasingly widely used by the general public and the scientific community in recent years (Wehi et al. 2019), and this is reflected in this revision of the Checklist.

Māori or Moriori bird names are presented alongside English bird names, on either side of a vertical bar. The two names presented (English, and Māori or Moriori) are considered equivalent; authors and editors of Birds New Zealand publications can use either name without explanation or justification.

The name presented to the left of the bar is the name that has been used most often in the journal Notornis over the previous decade (or decades, for species that are referred to infrequently). For a few species (e.g. rowi Apteryx rowi, kererū Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae, hihi Notiomystis cincta, and mohua Mohoua ochrocephala), the Māori name has been more widely used within recent scientific literature than the equivalent English name that was used in the 2010 Checklist (Okarito brown kiwi, New Zealand pigeon, stitchbird, and yellowhead, respectively), and so the Māori name is presented first. It is anticipated that further English, Māori, and Moriori names will switch positions (either side of the vertical bar) with subsequent revisions of the Checklist, based on the increasing usage of Māori and Moriori bird names.

We have chosen to place several other widely used Māori bird names to the right of the vertical bar if they are used for more than one species (e.g. kuaka for Pelecanoides urinatrix and Limosa lapponica, and tieke for Philesturnus rufusater and P. carunculatus). Māori bird names that apply to two or more species are followed with an asterisk (*), with a footnote immediately below the species or subspecies account listing or summarising other taxa to which the same name also applies.

For species where Māori and English names are identical apart from the use of macrons, the Māori name is presented first, to encourage correct pronunciation (e.g. kākāpō | kakapo Strigops habroptilus, kākā | kaka Nestor meridionalis, and tūī | tui Prosthemadera novaeseelandiae). Names that combine Māori and English are treated as if they are English names, without macrons (e.g. North Island kaka N. m. septentrionalis, and Chatham Island tui P. n. chathamensis).

One of the challenges with presenting Māori bird names is that some species have different names applied to different life stages, or by different iwi (H.W. Williams 1917; Wehi et al. 2019). The names presented in the main text of this revision are predominantly those that were in Appendix 3 of the 2010 Checklist. These were largely based on the compendiums prepared by the Anglican bishop Herbert Williams (1860–1937) in various editions of his A dictionary of the Maori language (see H.W. Williams 1906, 1917, 1957, 1971). Alternative Māori, Moriori, and English names for New Zealand birds are presented in Appendix 3, with superscripts denoting where the name is sourced from (and see Supplementary Materials 2 (https://www.birdsnz.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/supp-2-bird-names-database.xlsx)). If any of these names become the most widely-used name or variant over time, they will be moved into the main Checklist during subsequent revisions.

We give only one English common name in the species and subspecies headings, and only one Maori or Moriori name (if relevant), so as to provide single, preferred names for taxa in each language. This should help people making lists of bird records, and is one of the major uses of an “official” checklist.”

Number of Species

The present checklist enumerates 432 living or recently extinct species (Table 1), compared with 427 species in the 2022 Checklist. The increase is due to the addition of three vagrant species (black tern Chlidonias niger, black-naped tern Sterna sumatrana, and Matsudaira’s storm petrel Hydrobates matsudairae), and splitting of two species pairs (Siberian sand plover Anarhynchus mongolus and Tibetan sand plover A. atrifrons; and fulmar prion Pachyptila crassirostris and Pyramid prion P. pyramidalis).

Table 1. Number of taxa represented in the main list (excluding any appendices) of this, and previous, New Zealand checklists.

CHECKLIST	SPECIES	SPECIES OR SUBSPECIES	SCOPE
1953	254	333	NZ and Macquarie Island; birds extant in historical times
1970	282	363	As for 1953 plus Ross Dependency
1990	379	448	As for 1970 plus all extinct species, including fossil species
2010	435	491	As for 1970 plus Norfolk Island and post-Pleistocene extinct species
2022	427	484	NZ only, including post-Pleistocene extinct species
2024	432	490	NZ only, including post-Pleistocene extinct species

Fossil Distributions

The fossil record of birds in New Zealand can conveniently be considered in two sections. The majority of fossils or remains of extinct birds (and nearly half of the species) are from during the Late Pleistocene epoch (0.05–0.01 Ma) and Holocene epoch (0.01–0 Ma). No avian taxa are known to have become extinct in the Late Pleistocene, therefore the Recent fauna comprises species known only from Holocene remains plus historically known species. The Holocene extinctions were all human-induced (Tennyson & Martinson 2007). Knowledge of the Pleistocene (>0.05 Ma) fauna is limited (Worthy et al. 1991; Worthy 1997a; B. Gill et al. 2005; Tennyson & Tomotani 2021a). Fossils older than the Late Pleistocene (Appendix 1) are listed with their age. These species (e.g. various penguins, Miocene birds of the St Bathans assemblage) should be excluded from analyses of the Recent fauna.

In the species texts, statements on Late Pleistocene and Holocene remains are based mainly on the data presented in the faunal reviews of Millener (1990, 1991) and Holdaway et al. (2001), and compilations by area as follows:

• North Island – Yaldwyn (1956), Millener (1981a), Horn (1983), Worthy (2000, 2004), Worthy & Holdaway (2000), Worthy, Holdaway et al. (2002), Worthy & Swabey (2002).
• South Island, north-west Nelson – Worthy & Mildenhall (1989), Worthy (1993a, 1997b, 2001), Worthy & Holdaway (1994), Worthy & Roscoe (2003).
• South Island, West Coast – Worthy & Holdaway (1993), Worthy, Miskelly et al. (2002), Worthy & Zhao (2010).
• South Island, Canterbury and Marlborough – Worthy (1993b, 1997d, 1998d), Worthy & Holdaway (1995, 1996), Holdaway & Worthy (1997).
• South Island, Otago and Southland – Worthy (1998a,b), Worthy & Grant-Mackie (2003).
• Stewart Island / Rakiura – Worthy (1998c,e).
• Chatham Islands / Rekohu / Wharekauri – Tennyson & Millener (1994), Millener (1999).
• Auckland Islands / Maukahuka – Tennyson (2020a).

Distributions in archaeological sites are mainly based on data in Worthy (1998c,d, 1999b) and Worthy & Holdaway (2002) and references therein.

Feather Lice: a Note by R.L. Palma

Bird lice, also called feather lice (Insecta: Phthiraptera), are wingless, flat-bodied insects that are permanently parasitic on warm-blooded vertebrates. Most species of birds have lice in their plumage, where they shelter, feed, reproduce, and die. The geographical distribution of lice is, with some exceptions, that of their hosts. Bird lice have developed morphological, behavioural, and physiological adaptations to survive on their hosts. Similarly, because lice are detrimental to host health and fitness, hosts have developed adaptations to control their lice populations. This reciprocal natural selection pressure has led to the co-evolution of hosts and lice (Johnson & Clayton 2003). Thus, the phylogenetic relations of lice often parallel those of their hosts and may help both to elucidate the relationships of the latter and to distinguish closely related host taxa, which are otherwise poorly defined.

A total of 375 identified species and subspecies of feather lice – belonging to 84 genera and subgenera in four families – have been recorded from birds in the New Zealand region. Pilgrim & Palma (1982) published the first checklist of lice known from New Zealand birds, which was updated by Palma (1999). Palma (2017) published a comprehensive account of all the species of feather lice recorded in New Zealand. That total number of species represents about 8% of all the species known from birds in the world (Price et al. 2003: 3).

Levels of endemism are generally low compared with other insect groups in New Zealand: only 29 louse species (9.5%) are endemic to the region, while at higher taxonomic levels the degree of endemism is even lower, with one endemic genus and two endemic subgenera representing 4% of the total, and none at the family level. As many as 58 species and subspecies (15%) of feather lice were introduced into the region together with their hosts by human agency.

The total New Zealand bird louse fauna is much greater than the figures given above. A large number of species are expected to be recorded from a considerable number of breeding and vagrant birds (mainly among the Charadriiformes and Passeriformes), which have not yet been sufficiently searched for lice in the New Zealand region. For breeding species without louse records in the region see Palma (2017: 272).

Lice are a useful tool to aid the identification of seabirds that are found dead on New Zealand beaches every year, especially in the case of immature specimens (Melville 1985) or when the bird remains are in such poor condition that they lack diagnostic features to allow proper identification. Kiwi lice are also an extremely reliable tool to identify their hosts – not only the species but also their geographical provenance (Palma 1991; Palma & Price 2004). Suggestions for collecting bird lice are given in Pilgrim & Palma (1982: 32).

General References

The previous New Zealand checklists (see second paragraph of this Introduction) are cited in the main text as Checklist Committee (1953, 1970, 1990, 2010, 2022). Two important general works underpinning entries in the present checklist are the OSNZ’s atlases of bird distribution (Bull et al. 1985; C. Robertson et al. 2007).

The species texts have drawn on the following reviews on the birds of certain island groups:

• Kermadec Islands / Rangitāhua – Veitch et al. (2004).
• Chatham Islands / Rēkohu / Wharekauri – Holdaway (1994b), Aikman & Miskelly (2004), Miskelly et al. (2006).
• Snares Islands / Tini Heke – Miskelly et al. (2001a).
• Bounty Islands / Moutere Hauriri – C. Robertson & van Tests (1982).
• Antipodes Islands / Moutere Mahue – Warham & Bell (1979), Tennyson et al. (2002).
• Auckland Islands / Maukahuka – Miskelly, Elliott et al. (2020).
• Campbell Island / Motu Ihupuku – Westerskov (1960), Bailey & Sorensen (1962), Kinsky (1969).

This checklist deals primarily with classification, nomenclature, and status. For information on the biology and life history of New Zealand birds and associated literature, readers should consult the multi-volume series Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds (1990–2006). General biology references to New Zealand species are given in the 1990 Checklist, and also in Heather & Robertson (1996).

Symbols and Abbreviations

➤ Indicates a species (cf. subspecies)
* Indicates a species (or other taxon) introduced to the New Zealand region
† Indicates an extinct taxon
a.s.l., above sea level
AIM, Auckland War Memorial Museum
BMNH, Natural History Museum (bird section), Tring, United Kingdom
CM, Canterbury Museum, Christchurch
NMNZ, Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington

Recommended Citations

Colin M. Miskelly
Convener, OSNZ Checklist Committee
Wellington, September 2024

On behalf of the Checklist Committee (Natalie J. Forsdick, Ricardo L. Palma, Nicolas J. Rawlence & Alan J. D. Tennyson).