lined with grass stems or similar vegetable matter. The clutch is believed to be two eggs, which are white with purple and violet blotches, similar to a smaller version of the upland sandpiper's eggs. One two-egg clutch is in the American Museum of Natural History collection (specimen AMNH 5299). Status The Tuamotu sandpiper is threatened by introduced rats and habitat destruction caused by the spreading cultivation of coconuts, and is listed as endangered. Although it had a much wider range historically (see also below), it now survives on a small number of rat-free islands, namely Anuanuraro, Tenararo, Morane and one other atoll. Birds will occur as non-breeding visitors on other islands nearby, particularly in the Acteon group. Its IUCN Red List status of "Endangered B1a+b (ii, iii, iv, v); Vulnerable C2a(i), D1" means that estimates indicate between 250 and 1000 mature birds occurring in less than six locations, with a declining trend. There are no conservation measures in place, although proposals are being suggested to protect the species. These include granting full protection to the remaining atolls where it breeds and preventing the further spread of rats. Systematics Historically, the species occurred also on Kiritimati (Christmas) Island in Kiribati (the type locality) and possibly others. John Latham figured the bird as the "Barred Phalarope" in his General Synopsis of Birds, based on a Kiritimati specimen collected on Captain Cook's last voyage, probably on January 1 or 2, 1778. This was in the collection of Joseph Banks at Latham's time, but later became lost. During Cook's visit, the bird was observed by William Anderson and painted by William Ellis. Latham's description was the basis for Gmelin's, which was valid according to zoological nomenclature. The Tuamotu birds only came to the attention of science during the US Exploring Expedition, which collected five specimens in late August, 1839. These were described by Titian Peale as species parvirostris based on perceived differences to Latham's description. The validity of this form is in doubt; some considered it distinct, whereas in recent times the evidence is generally found too scant to consider both forms good species. However, it is entirely likely that (given the non-migrant nature of the species) the populations, some 2,000 miles separated from each other, would constitute separate subspecies. In this case, the Tuamotu subspecies would be called Prosobonia cancellata parvirostris, while the Kiribati population would be the nominate subspecies, P. c. cancellata