Advances in DNA extraction techniques and sequencing technologies have facilitated the use of historical museum specimens in conservation genetic studies ( Wandeler et al., 2007). The majority of errors concern taxonomic identity or collection locality, and can lead to misconceptions about a species' distribution ( Graham et al., 2004). Detection of unreliable data can often be difficult if the only information readily available are the collector's notes ( Barbanera et al., 2016), with specimen labels prone to error ( Winker, 2000). However, the reliability of this record can be compromised by inaccurate (or non-existent) data (e.g., collection locality or taxonomic status) due to poor record keeping, or deliberate falsification ( Boessenkool et al., 2009). This record can be used to inform present-day conservation management of biodiversity. Museum specimens constitute a valuable resource for conservation focused research, providing a record of past species' distributions ( Shaffer et al., 1998). This study demonstrates that ancient DNA analysis can add value to museum specimens by revealing incorrect specimen data and inform the conservation management and taxonomy of endangered species. haasti, with genetic and historical evidence suggesting that the specimens used to describe these taxa were collected from the headwaters of the Rakaia River. Additionally, we describe the type locality of both X. Our results suggest that New Zealand rock wrens have not been historically extirpated from New Zealand's North Island, and that caution must be taken when utilizing museum specimens to inform conservation management decisions. gilviventris clustered with individuals belonging to the northern New Zealand rock wren lineage. Multiple instances of inaccurate collection locality were detected, including that of the New Zealand rock wren reportedly collected from the North Island, which matches individuals from the southern South Island. We include the only specimen reportedly collected from New Zealand's North Island, outside the known range of New Zealand rock wrens, specimens collected by Henry Hamersley Travers, a collector known for poor record keeping and potentially fraudulent specimen data, and type specimens of proposed Xenicus taxa.

Here we analyze ancient DNA retrieved from New Zealand rock wren museum skins to establish the veracity of their recorded collection localities-New Zealand rock wrens exhibit strong north-south genetic structuring along the Southern Alps of New Zealand's South Island. One of these is the New Zealand rock wren ( Xenicus gilviventris), currently classified as an endangered species and experiencing ongoing population declines. New Zealand contains many endemic species that have been driven to extinction or reduced to relict distributions following the arrival of humans and mammalian predators, including the Acanthisittid wrens (of which only two of the eight described species presently persist). The scientific value of these specimens depends upon the veracity of their associated data and can be compromised by inaccurate details including taxonomic identity, collection locality, and collector. Museum specimens provide a record of past species distribution and are an increasingly important resource for conservation genetic research. 5Department of Zoology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

4Biodiversity Group, Department of Conservation, Christchurch, New Zealand.3National Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington, New Zealand.2Canterbury Museum, Christchurch, New Zealand.1Otago Palaeogenetics Laboratory, Department of Zoology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Mount and blade north and south