Opening Spaces of Resistance in the Corporatized Cultural Institution: Liberate Tate and the Art Not Oil Coalition

In the current economic climate where state subsidies for the arts have been steadily eroded, there is a consensus in support of the good of corporate sponsorship for cultural institutions. This article seeks to problematize this consensus by critiquing the strategies that corporations employ in their sponsorship agreements with public cultural institutions and opening up a discussion around the ethical issues this poses for their recipients. It then examines how a coalition of subversive arts collectives, that come together under the banner ‘Art Not Oil’, have begun to successfully shatter this consensus through a sustained campaign of unauthorized live art interventions enacted inside cultural institutions. It argues that the unique strategy of resistance they employ operates at an interstitial distance to the public cultural institutions they target, from where they open up spaces of resistance ultimately capable of rewriting the cultural sectors’ corporatized value system.Key Words: Corporate sponsorship, Public cultural sector, Liberate Tate, Simon Critchley, Interstitial distanc

Deletion of a conserved Gata2 enhancer impairs haemogenic endothelium programming and adult Zebrafish haematopoiesis

Gata2 is a key transcription factor required to generate Haematopoietic Stem and Progenitor Cells (HSPCs) from haemogenic endothelium (HE); misexpression of Gata2 leads to haematopoietic disorders. Here we deleted a conserved enhancer (i4 enhancer) driving pan-endothelial expression of the zebrafish gata2a and showed that Gata2a is required for HE programming by regulating expression of runx1 and of the second Gata2 orthologue, gata2b. By 5 days, homozygous gata2aΔi4/Δi4 larvae showed normal numbers of HSPCs, a recovery mediated by Notch signalling driving gata2b and runx1 expression in HE. However, gata2aΔi4/Δi4 adults showed oedema, susceptibility to infections and marrow hypo-cellularity, consistent with bone marrow failure found in GATA2 deficiency syndromes. Thus, gata2a expression driven by the i4 enhancer is required for correct HE programming in embryos and maintenance of steady-state haematopoietic stem cell output in the adult. These enhancer mutants will be useful in exploring further the pathophysiology of GATA2-related deficiencies in vivo

Failing boys and moral panics: perspectives on the underachievement debate

The paper re-examines the underachievement debate from the perspective of the ‘discourse of derision’ that surrounds much writing in this area. It considers the contradictions and inconsistencies which underpin much of the discourse – from a reinterpretation of examination scores, to the conflation of the concepts of ‘under’ and ‘low’ achievement and finally to the lack of consensus on a means of defining and measuring the term underachievement. In doing so, this paper suggests a more innovative approach for understanding, re-evaluating and perhaps rejecting the notion of underachievement

The Australia Telescope 20 GHz Survey: The Source Catalogue

We present the full source catalogue from the Australia Telescope 20 GHz (AT20G) Survey. The AT20G is a blind radio survey carried out at 20 GHz with the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) from 2004 to 2008, and covers the whole sky south of declination 0 deg. The AT20G source catalogue presented here is an order of magnitude larger than any previous catalogue of high-frequency radio sources, and includes 5890 sources above a 20 GHz flux-density limit of 40 mJy. All AT20G sources have total intensity and polarisation measured at 20 GHz, and most sources south of declination -15 deg also have near-simultaneous flux-density measurements at 5 and 8 GHz. A total of 1559 sources were detected in polarised total intensity at one or more of the three frequencies. We detect a small but significant population of non-thermal sources that are either undetected or have only weak detections in low-frequency catalogues. We introduce the term Ultra-Inverted Spectrum (UIS) to describe these radio sources, which have a spectral index alpha(5, 20) > +0.7 and which constitute roughly 1.2 per cent of the AT20G sample. The 20 GHz flux densities measured for the strongest AT20G sources are in excellent agreement with the WMAP 5-year source catalogue of Wright et al. (2009), and we find that the WMAP source catalogue is close to complete for sources stronger than 1.5 Jy at 23 GHz.Comment: 21 pages, accepted for publication in MNRA

El agroturismo: la clave para el futuro sostenible de España

This thesis explores the possibilities of agritourism in the pursuit of sustainable tourism in Spain. It criticizes the dominant model of sun-and-beach tourism and endorses agritourism as a sustainable alternative. Agritourism is a field of rural tourism that encourages tourist engagement in agricultural activities as a means of diversifying the economy and fostering cultural competency. Through an analysis of case studies of farm stays, enotourism, olive oil tourism, and cheese tourism throughout Spain, this paper examines the social and economic benefits that agritourism extends to the provider, the tourist, the host community, and the environment. It concludes by emphasizing that, in order to achieve sustainable development, people who participate in agritourism must respect the culture and nature of rural areas, as well as focus on long-term solutions

A Woman\u27s Place Is in the House, Or Is It?

Throughout United States history, men have dominated political institutions. Women have made consistent progress in political office at the state and federal levels and currently there are a record number of women serving in Congress, yet they are still underrepresented in the government. For my Seward Fellows Organizing Theme Minor in Gender and U.S. Politics, I am doing independent research on the experiences of women who have served in the House of Representatives and Senate across decades. The research project examines the influence of gender roles on a woman\u27s congressional campaign and tenure in office, in the context of evolving gender dynamics in the U.S. My research compares and contrasts the experiences of congresswomen and analyzes the ways in which gender, race, ethnicity, party affiliation, socioeconomic status and other demographic factors influence their decision to run for office and legislative priorities. The presentation will identify women\u27s motives to campaign and the challenges they encounter, as well as their legislative preferences and action while in office

Editorial

How does art, design and architecture enable empathetic and inclusive waysof living together? How do these spatial practices effect public exchange andopinion formation in urban spaces? This Special Issue of Art & the PublicSphere journal invites responses to the above questions, which frame theinterdisciplinary and cross-sectoral knowledge-transfer and research action,Spatial Practices in Art and ArChitecture for Empathetic EXchange (SPACEX)supported by a H2020 RISE grant. SPACEX looks to spatial practices as ameans of addressing these issues because of their ability to engage new publicand foster meaningful partnerships, thereby forging a culture that embracesdiversity, difference and discursive exchange within cities, towns and urbansites

Megophrys (Xenophrys) medogensis Fei, Ye and Huang 1983

Megophrys (Xenophrys) medogensis Fei, Ye and Huang, 1983 (Figure 13) Megophrys omeimontis medogensis Fei, Ye and Huang 1983:49 In: Two new subspecies of Megophrys omeimontis Liu from China (Amphibia, Pelobatidae). Acta Herpetologica Sinica, New Series, 2(2): 49–52. Holotype. Adult male (CIB 73 II0015: Figure 13), from “Motuo, Xizang, alt. 1000m ” (= Medog [or Motuo] town [~ 29°19'56"N, 95°20'27"E], Medog County, Nyingtri Prefecture, Tibet [or Xizang] Autonomous Region, China), collectors presumably Fei, Hu, Ye and Wu on 17 July 1973 (Fei et al. 1977). Paratypes [not examined]. 16 adult males, one juvenile and some tadpoles (CIB specimen numbers not provided), “collected from the same locality, alt. 850–1350m ”, collectors as above, including Huang, on 17–24 July 1973 and 21 July–5 August 1977 (Fei et al. 1977). Examined specimens. Adult male (CIB 73II 0015: images only: Figure 13), holotype. Holotype description. Refer to Fei et al. 1983 for the holotype description. For additional details of colouration and markings, see figures in Zhao et al. (2005), Fei et al. (2010, 2012) and Li et al. (2010) of specimens from the type locality. Systematic position. Refer to the Systematic position section above for M. robusta. Morphological comparison. Adult body size ranges provided for M. medogensis are from Fei et al. (2009) (adult males, N =16). Megophrys medogensis differs from M. monticola and M. zhangi by its much larger adult body size, male SVL 57.2–68.0 mm (vs. male SVL 38.2–49.5 mm, N =17; male SVL 32.5–37.2 mm, N =3, respectively); differs from M. mangshanensis by absence of white upper lip stripe (vs. present); differs from M. robusta by its smaller adult male size, SVL 57.2–68.0 mm (vs. male SVL 73.5–83.1 mm, N =6). For comparisons with additional species covered in this study, refer to relevant morphological comparison sections for those species. Etymology. The specific epithet “ medogensis ” is a toponym, derived from the type locality of Medog county. Suggested common name: Medog Horned Frog. Distribution. Megophrys medogensis is currently known with certainty from the type locality (Figure 8A) “Medog”, between 850 and 1350 m elevation (Fei et al. 1983, 2012). This species has also been reported from the southern slopes of Mt. Namjagbarwa (or Namcha Barwa) adjacent to Medog town (Zhao & Li 1987). Additional localities in Yunnan Province, China on the distribution map provided by Fei et al. (2009) are erroneous (see Remarks below). The type locality is situated near to the northern border of the Upper Siang district, Arunachal Pradesh state, Northeast India, where this species is likely to be present at similar elevation. Habitat and natural history. At the type locality, males were reported to frequent leaf litter and small streams in forests, and were heard vocalising especially on nights with clear skies (14 July–08 August). Tadpoles allocated to this species were collected from amongst rocks at the base of a waterfall of a small stream (Fei et al. 2009), but the authors did not justify how they identified the tadpoles. Remarks. In the English abstract of the original description, Fei et al. (1983) only provided a brief comparison of this species with M. omeimontis Liu, 1950 and M. jingdongensis Fei and Ye, 1983 (in Fei et al. 1983), congeners that they determined to be morphologically most similar to M. medogensis. The abstract provided the name as “ Megophrys omeimontis motuoensis ”, but elsewhere in the text the name was provided as “ Megophrys omeimontis medogensis ”, indicating that the name in the abstract was an accidental erroneous spelling (also noted by Zhao & Adler 1993). Fei et al. (1983) provided a line drawing of the profile view of the head and ventral view of the foot, but not measurements of specimens. Fei et al. (2009) provided a table of measurements for the type series, and Fei et al. (2010) provided low-resolution photos of the holotype in preservation. Zhao et al. (2005), Fei et al. (2010, 2012), and Li et al. (2010) provided images of live individuals. Fei et al. (2009) included a distribution map showing several localities in Yunnan province for Megophrys medogensis but did not provide their source (neither publications nor specimens) for these additional localities. In Fei et al. ’s (2009) book, the species Megophrys jingdongensis is accompanied by a distribution map that is identical to the one provided for M. medogensis, but without the locality “Medog” marked. Thus it is likely that the Yunnan localities for M. medogensis are the result of printing error, and should not be considered for this species’ distribution. Fei et al. (2012) provided a map for this species including only the type locality, indirectly correcting the error of Fei et al. (2009).Published as part of Mahony, Stephen, Kamei, Rachunliu G. & Teeling, Emma C., 2018, Cryptic diversity within the Megophrys major species group (Amphibia: Megophryidae) of the Asian Horned Frogs: Phylogenetic perspectives and a taxonomic revision of South Asian taxa, with descriptions of four new species, pp. 1-96 in Zootaxa 4523 (1) on pages 37-39, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4523.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/261020

Xenophrys gigas Jerdon 1870

Neotype for Xenophrys gigas Jerdon, 1870 and Megalophrys major Boulenger, 1908 (by present designation). Adult male (BMNH 1947.2.24.93 [rr. BMNH [18]72.4.17.399]: Figure 14), from Khasi Hills, Meghalaya state [previously “Darjeeling”––see Remarks section], Northeast India, collected by T.C. Jerdon, collection date ~1870. Examined specimens. Adult male (BMNH 1947.2.24.93), neotype; four adult males (BMNH 1947.2.24.94 [rr. BMNH [18]72.4.17.400]; BMNH 1947.2.24.95 [rr. BMNH [18]72.4.17.401]; BMNH 1947.2.24.96 [rr. BMNH [18]72.4.17.402]; BMNH 1947.2.24.98 [rr. BMNH [18]72.4.17.404]), two adult females (BMNH 1947.2.24.92 [rr. BMNH [18]72.4.17.398]; BMNH 1947.2.24.97 [rr. BMNH [18]72.4.17.403]), one unsexed subadult (BMNH 1947.2.24.99 [rr. BMNH [18]72.4.17.405]), and one juvenile (BMNH 1947.2.25.1 [rr. BMNH [18]72.4.17.406]), details as per the neotype; four adult males (ZSIC 9744; ZSIC 9756; BMNH 1908.4.8.4 [ex. ZSIC 9743]; BMNH 1908.4.8.5 [ex. ZSIC 9736]), one adult female (ZSIC 9746), and one unsexed juvenile (BMNH 1908.4.8.6 [ex. ZSIC 9760]) from “Cherrapunji [=Sohra]”, East Khasi Hills district, Meghalaya state, Northeast India, collected by J.H. Bourne, collection date unknown; two adult males (SDBDU 2007.229; SDBDU 2007.230), from the Terunhü River, Kenrunhü (25°55'4"N, 94°5'24"E, 510 m asl.), New Sendenyu Village, Tseminyu sub-division, Kohima district, Nagaland, Northeast India, collected by RGK on 0 3 October 2007; one adult female (CES 18901 [field number RGK 0073]: Figure 15A & B), from Raenghkucpaeng duithuak (duithuak = stream, in local Rongmei [Nruangmei] language), near St. Joseph School (24°51'40"N, 93°38'33"E, 470 m asl.), Khumhzi II village, Luangmai (Noney) district (erstwhile [before 2016] in Tamenglong district), Manipur state, Northeast India, collected by RGK on 23 May 2013; adult male (CES 18902 [field number RGK 0088]: Figure 15C & D), from Mpeih baek duithuak (24°51'0"N, 93°37'23"E, 450 m asl.), Khumhzi village, Luangmai district, Manipur state, Northeast India, collected by RGK on 26 May 2013; adult male (CES 18903 [field number RGK 0089]: Figure 15E & F), from near Khangchiuluanh (Khongjaron) Church (24°58'1"N, 93°29'53"E, 1255 m asl.), Khangchiuluanh village, Tamenglong district, Manipur state, Northeast India, collected by RGK on 27 May 2013. Neotype description (measurements in mm). Mature male (SVL 75.0) (Figure 14). Head moderately large, longer than wide (HW 29.0, HL 29.7, IFE 12.6, IBE 20.9); snout bluntly pointed in dorsal view, obtusely protruding in lateral view, without rostral appendage (Figure 14C); loreal region acute, concave; canthus rostralis angular; dorsal surface of snout very slightly concave; eye length ~2.5 times as long as maximum diameter of visible portion of tympanum, and shorter than snout length (EL 9.2, TYD 3.7, SL 10.6); eye–tympanum distance (TYE 6.3) longer than diameter of visible portion of tympanum; tympanum oval-shaped, obliquely orientated with upper ~20% concealed by supratympanic ridge (Figure 14C); pupil vertically elliptical; nostril positioned laterally, closer to eye than to snout tip (EN 4.2, NS 6.5); internarial distance greater than upper eyelid width, and equal to narrowest point between upper eyelids (IN 9.4, UEW 6.0, IUE 9.4); pineal ocellus not visible externally; vomerine ridges present, medium sized, ovoid, moderately raised, orientated acutely, positioned between to slightly posterior to choanae, slightly closer to choanae than to each other; vomerine teeth short; maxillary teeth present; tongue moderately large, with small notch posteriorly, medial lingual process absent. Forelimbs long, thin (Figure 14A & B), forearms moderately enlarged relative to upper forelimbs, and shorter than hand length (FAL 18.4, HAL 18.7); fingers long, narrow, without lateral fringes (Figure 14D), finger length formula IV–<” configuration, composed primarily of single row of closely spaced asperities; dorsal surfaces of forearms, thighs and shanks with short transverse ridges; posterior thighs with small scattered pustular tubercles, remaining dorsal surfaces of forelimbs and hindlimbs otherwise smooth; gular region, chest, abdomen and ventral surfaces of limbs smooth; pectoral glands small, raised, level with axilla on chest; femoral glands large, flat, on posterior surface of thighs, slightly closer to knee than to cloaca; distinct pair of enlarged glands present adjacent to cloaca, one on each side, that are smaller than femoral glands but larger than surrounding tubercles; small black and white dermal asperities present, forming broad dense band circummarginally on gular region, dense on upper lips, lower loreal region, and tympanic region (especially dense on tympanum), moderately dense on dorsal surface of eyelids, entire dorsal surface of head and back, increasing in density posteriorly and on dorsal ridges, absent from all remaining surfaces. Colouration: In preservative (Figure 14): Dorsal and lateral surfaces of body, and dorsal and lateral surfaces of head primarily brown; light-edged, faintly darker brown triangular marking between eyes; no X-, Y-, or V-shaped markings on dorsum; tubercles primarily white on posterior flanks only; lateral surfaces of head below supratympanic ridges and canthus rostralis dark brown with cream-white stripe on upper lip, extending from nostril to rear of jaw, bordered below by thin dark brown stripe; outer edges of eyelids dark brown; dorsal and lateral surfaces of forelimbs and hindlimbs primarily mid brown; three dark brown blotches on dorsolateral surface of forearms; dorsal surface of outer three fingers with faint brown blotches; dorsal surfaces of hindlimbs without distinct transverse crossbars; lateral surfaces of thighs and shanks with dark brown spots and blotches; throat and chest primarily plain mid brown with few cream-white spots along edge of gular region, light-edged wide dark brown stripe extending from posterior edge of mandible onto base of forearms; abdomen, ventral surfaces of forelimbs, thighs, shanks, and dorsal surfaces of tarsi and feet immaculate pale brown; some small dark brown spots and blotches laterally along lower flanks on both sides bordering lower-most tubercles; area surrounding vent and posterior surfaces of thighs primarily mid to dark brown with small cream-white tubercles; ventral surfaces of tarsi and feet pale greyish-brown; hands ventrally pale greyish-brown; pectoral and femoral glands creamish-white. In life: Not documented for neotype. Refer to Figure 15 for examples of colour in life of referred specimens. Variation. Refer to Table 1 for morphometric variation within the referred specimen series, consisting of 12 adult males, three adult females, two subadults, and a juvenile. Referred specimens generally resemble neotype for most morphological characters with the following exceptions: Webbing between digits varies slightly between individuals and sexes, i.e., webbing formula on Toe IV: males from 3.2IV3.2 to 3.6IV3.6, females 4IV 4.3; lateral fringes on toes vary from moderately weak from bases to tips on all toes, to almost completely absent on some individuals; relative finger lengths seem to vary between populations, IV<II=I<III on all “Darjeeling” specimens except a subadult (BMNH 1947.2.24.99) with IV=II=I<III, all Sohra specimens have IV=II=I<III, except a female (ZSIC 9746) with IV<II<I<III, and all aforementioned variations, with an additional IV<I<II<III for RGK 0 0 98, are observed in the Nagaland-Manipur specimens; vomerine ridges vary from sub-circular to ovoid, positioned slightly closer to choanae than to each other on many individuals; posterior edge of tongue on some specimens appears more deeply notched than others, likely due to preservation condition; dorsolateral ridges typically weak to moderately well developed, varying in length from ~60 to 90% trunk length; between ~5 and 30% of tympanum can be concealed by supratympanic ridge; dermal tubercle cover on flanks varies considerably, some with only sparse scattering of small tubercles (e.g., Figure 15A), others with moderately dense cover of heterogeneous sized (large to small) tubercles (e.g., Figure 15C & E); dorsal markings vary from faint to distinct complete X-shaped, Yshaped, hourglass-shaped marking, or just a V-shaped marking on parietoscapular region, not visible on some older specimens presumably due to fading; some specimens have faint spotting and blotching on chest and abdomen (e.g., Figure 15F); density and surface coverage of dermal asperities varies extensively among male specimens, if present on females, asperities sparse on mid-dorsum increasing in density posteriorly to above cloaca, but absent from other surfaces, asperities typically absent on juvenile and subadult specimens examined; white upper lip stripe not present on metamorphs and juveniles (with SVL <50 mm), instead lateral surfaces of head plain dark brown. Secondary sexual characters. Males: nuptial pads present, weakly raised, covered with brown/black microasperities on freshly collected specimens (appear as microgranules on old specimens), primarily covering dorsal surface of base of Finger I, narrowing distally, extending to mid-proximal phalange on inner dorsal side; nuptial pad on Finger II small, oval, positioned on base of digit on inner dorsal side (extending to mid-proximal phalange on some individuals); external vocal sac indistinct; internal vocal slit present on floor of mouth near rear of mandible, one on each side; forearms enlarged relative to upper forelimbs. Females: mature ova without pigment; nuptial pads, vocal sac, vocal slits, and enlarged forearms, all absent. Morphological comparison. Megophrys major s.s. (adult males, N =12, adult females, N =3) differs from M. monticola and M. zhangi by its larger adult body size, male SVL 71.6–87.5 mm, female SVL 85.6–98.2 mm (vs. male SVL 38.2–49.5 mm, N =17, female SVL 40.5–56.1 mm, N =6; male SVL 32.5–37.2 mm, N =3, respectively); differs from M. robusta and M. medogensis by presence of distinct continuous whitish-cream upper lip stripe (vs. absent), by basal webbing present (vs. absent); differs from M. mangshanensis by basal webbing between toes present (vs. absent), lateral fringes on toes occasionally present (vs. absent), larger adult body size, male SVL 71.6–87.4 mm, female SVL 85.6–98.2 mm (vs. male SVL 62.5 mm, N=1, female SVL 73 mm, N=1). For comparisons with subsequent species covered in this study, refer to relevant morphological comparison sections for those species. Systematic position. OTU 5 (“ M. cf. major 3”) in the molecular analyses of this study and Mahony et al. (2017) represents Megophrys major s.s. The systematic position of M. major s.s. within the MMC clade is not fully resolved (Figures 2–5; Appendix I, Table 3; Appendix II, Figures 1, 2 & 5: as M. cf. major 3/OTU 5). It was consistently found to be the sister taxon to a new species (OTU 7/“ M. cf. major 1”) described below, but it is not yet clear which species these sister taxa are most closely related to within the MMC. Uncorrected p -distance for the 16S rRNA gene between these sister taxa was 6.4–6.5% (Appendix I, Table 6). Etymology. The original species epithet “ gigas ” is derived from the Greek word meaning “giant”, later replaced with “ major ”, Latin for “large”. Suggested common name: Jerdon’s White-lipped Horned Frog. Distribution. This species was considered widespread from Northeast India to southeastern Vietnam but M. major sensu lato (s.l.) is now known to represent a species complex (Chen et al. 2017; Mahony et al. 2017; this study). Only the following localities (between 450 and 1255 m asl.) represent the verified distribution of M. major s.s. (Figure 8A): Sohra [=Cherrapunji], in the East Khasi Hills district, Meghalaya state; Khumhzi, in Luangmai district and Khangchiuluanh, in Tamenglong district, Manipur state; and Tseminyu, in Kohima district, Nagaland. The locality “Darjeeling” associated with Jerdon’s BMNH series of specimens is considered erroneous (see Remarks for details). The eastern distribution limit for M. major s.s. is currently unclear, but it might be expected to extend into adjacent areas of western Myanmar. A report of this species from Tura Peak, West Garo Hills district in Meghalaya state was provided by Sangma and Saikia (2015). The authors provided no diagnostic characters for their specimens so the taxonomic identity of animals from this locality warrants careful investigation considering our study identifies the presence of three MMC species in Meghalaya state. Habitat and natural history. There have been many observations and notes published regarding M. major s.l., primarily from Southeast Asian countries (e.g., Bain & Nguyen 2004; Ohler et al. 2000; Stuart 1999, 2005), which are likely to represent different species. Some old reports of M. major tadpoles (e.g., Annandale 1912) from Northeast India are not considered reliable, since most tadpoles were identified by association of adult frogs present in the collection stream, not accounting for the fact that in our experience most streams in Northeast India are inhabited by two or more Megophrys species. Based on our observations of recently collected specimens, a female (CES 18901) collected towards the end of May contained mature ova, and males were found calling during May (CES 18902, CES 18903) and October (SDBDU 2007.229, SDBDU 2007.230), indicating that the breeding season for this species probably extends from the pre-monsoon (May) until post monsoon (October). SDBDU 2007.229 and SDBDU 2007.230 were found calling amongst fallen and dead reeds on the banks of the Terunhü River in Nagaland at around 18:30 h (just after dusk). The Terunhü River at the collection locality is a moderately fast flowing stream passing through a disturbed secondary forest patch. CES 18902 was found calling during the daytime perched ~ 2.3 m above ground level on a leaf of a wild cardamom on the bank of the Mpeih bak duithuak (stream). CES 18903 was found calling from a hole in the retaining wall where a clear water stream exits an underground diversion. The gravid female (CES 18901) was collected nearby an unnamed stream. No further individuals could be located along that stream during the subsequent two nights of searching, indicating that breeding activity had not yet reached a peak (or was experiencing a lull). Remarks. On Xenophrys gigas Jerdon, 1870: The original type series of Xenophrys gigas consisted of five syntype specimens in Jerdon’s personal collection collected from “ Sikim [sic] and the Khasi Hills” (Jerdon 1870). Soon after the description of Jerdon’s X. gigas, Anderson (1871b) stated “I have a specimen of Dr. Jerdon’s X. gigas beside me [in the Indian Museum (now ZSIC)], but I find that in no way differs from the Darjeeling large specimens, which are the adults of this species [Xenophrys monticola Günther, 1864]”. With that statement, X. gigas was regarded to represent a junior synonym of X. monticola for the subsequent four decades. Sclater (1892b:33) listed all Indian Museum amphibian specimens by numbers, localities and collectors, which included seven specimens of “ X. monticola ” sensu Anderson (1871b) deposited by Jerdon, six from “Darjeeling” (ZSIC 9673–9677, ZSIC 9721) and one from “Khasia Hills” (ZSIC 9679). We know now (discussed below) that the large species from Darjeeling that Anderson (1871b) was referring Jerdon’s X. gigas specimen to is M. robusta. However, it is not clear whether that particular specimen was one of Jerdon’s five syntype specimens of X. gigas. Deuti et al. (2017) referred five of the aforementioned “Darjeeling” specimens (ZSIC 9673–9677), and three others not mentioned by Sclater (1892b; ZSIC 9722–9724) to Megophrys sanu comb. nov. (as juveniles). The taxonomic identities of ZSIC 9721 and ZSIC 9679 require clarification. The whereabouts of the original type series of Xenophrys gigas, and which specimens actually belong to the original type series of this species, is an imbroglio. Chanda et al. (2000) referred four specimens (ZSIC 9670, ZSIC 9681, ZSIC 10777, ZSIC 10779) as types of X. gigas Jerdon, from “Darjeeling”, West Bengal, India. ZSIC also have an additional two specimens from Darjeeling that they regard to be the types of X. gigas (ZSIC 9650 and ZSIC 9668) (SM per. obs. during a visit to the ZSIC in 2010). Several problems exist with the recognition of these six ZSIC specimens as the types for this species: 1) all of these specimens were collected by J. Gammie (Sclater 1892b:33 [as Leptobrachium monticola]); Jerdon (1870) clearly stated that he “obtained” the type specimens from the type localities—Jerdon acknowledged throughout this paper when specimens were sent to him by other collectors, so it may be interpreted that he (or his party) were the collectors of the specimens; 2) ZSIC 9650 (SVL 51.1 mm) is a gravid adult female M. monticola (SM per. obs.). ZSIC 9668 was not examined in detail but is either an adult M. monticola or a juvenile M. robusta ––both specimens do not fit Jerdon’s original description by being “large”, presumably relative to the considerably smaller Xenophrys monticola, the only other Xenophrys species known at that time; 3) ZSIC 10777 and ZSIC 9681 are M. robusta (SM per. obs.); 4) Sclater (1892a, 1892b) provided a list of types in the Indian Museum that included only one megophryid, Scutiger (as Cophophryne) sikkimensis (Blyth, 1855), and Sclater (1892a) explicitly stated that the collections then contained the types of only one of Jerdon’s species, Hyla annectans (Jerdon, 1870). Before leaving India, Jerdon visited and collected specimens in and around Darjeeling–Sikkim and the Khasi Hills, but he notoriously did not maintain notes on his collections, relying largely on memory for details of localities (Günther 1875). Upon his return to England, Jerdon assisted Günther with the accessioning of his collection into the BMNH– –“The work of systematically arranging and naming this collection was carried on jointly by him [Jerdon] and myself, and proceeded as far as the genus Tropidonotus, when it was interrupted by an illness from which he never recovered….and I am therefore ignorant of the habitat [collection localities] of a part of the specimens which were still unexamined at the time of his death” (Günther 1875). Jerdon’s original “ X. gigas ” collection consisted of a series of presumably 17 specimens (BMNH [18]72.4.17.398–414), and was one of the last taxa from his collection to be accessioned (BMNH Accession Register). The BMNH Accession Register gives the locality “Darjeeling (& Khasia)”, but the locality appeared in subsequent literature as Darjeeling only (e.g., Boulenger 1882 [“h”]). Doubts regarding whether some of Jerdon’s other herpetological specimens were from the Khasi Hills or from Darjeeling have been noted elsewhere (e.g., the type locality of Ixalus jerdoni Günther, 1876 [= Frankixalus jerdoni] from “Darjeeling” was subsequently found to be widespread in the Khasi Hills [Biju et al. 2016] but not reported from Darjeeling or surrounding regions since its original description). Jerdon deposited most (if not all) of his type specimens in the British Museum and Indian Museum, but since the Indian Museum did not (according to Sclater [1891a, 1891b]) contain Jerdon’s megophryid type specimens, the BMNH specimen series may have contained some, or all, of the five original specimens based on which Jerdon (1870) coined the name. Remarks on Megophrys major Boulenger, 1908: Xenophrys gigas was subsequently transferred to the genus Megalophrys by Boulenger (1908) rendering Megalophrys gigas (Jerdon, 1870) a junior homonym of Megalophrys gigas Blyth, 1855 [now Nanorana liebigii (Günther, 1860)]. To correct this, Boulenger (1908) coined the replacement name Megalophrys major, and provided a morphological description of the species with a note that Jerdon (1870) named X. gigas based on specimens from Darjeeling and the Khasi Hills “now preserved in the British Museum [now NHMUK] and Indian Museum [now ZSIC]”. Considering Sclater (1892a, 1892b) did not recognise types for this