ill

>/.

^^^.

'J-'-^

IOkI

y^^^

JWSf:

^^^.•.^?';:^N

^fN^^Hr,

■V^ .^^

r<l^:.m"¥

^f^m^Mn^

^./fkr:^

•^ :^

-.'^ /^^NX

j\. . A^:

'Mjhi^^m^^-

.1 jUt\9^1

NOVITATES ZOOLOGICAE.

H journal of ZooiOi^^^

EDITED BY

The Hon. WALTER ROTHSCHILD, Ph.D., Dr. ERNST HARTERT, and Dr. K. JORDAN.

ar

No. 1.

Pages 1— HS

Plate II.

IssDED June 17th, at the Zoological Museum, Trixg.

PRINTED BY HAZELL, WATSON & VIXEY, Ld., LO.MUON AND AYLESBURY.

1911.

Vol. XVIII.

NOYITATES ZOOLOGICAK

EDITED BY

WALTER ROTHSCHILD. ERNST HARTERT, and KARL JORDAN.

CONTENTS OF NO. I.

1. 01^ SOME NECESSARY ALTERATIONS

IN THE NOMENCLATURE OF BIRDS

2. TWO NEW AUSTRALIAN BIRDS

3. NEW SYSTO.MWAr: IN THE TRING

MUSEUM —

4. NEW AEGERJIDAK

5. ON THE BAT-FLEAS DESCRIBED BY

KOLENATI

6. KATALOO DER SIPIIONAPTEREN DES

KONIGLICHEN ZOOLOGISCHEN MUSEUMS IN BERLIN. Illustrated .

7. SOME NEW AXTHftiniDAE FROM

THE ISLAND OF ST. THOME, BAY' OF BENIN

8. NEW AyrmuniiiAK ....

9. SOME NEW GENERA AND SPECIES

OF SIPUuyAPTEEA. Illustrated

10. ON THE SKELETON OT PAIAE OCORAX

MUKIORUM (Plate II.)

11. DESCRIPTIONS OFNEW SATURNIIDAE

12. SOME NEW SRIlIXalDAE

13. TWO NEW AFRICAN BUTTERFLIES .

14. ON CARXVS HEMAI'TERCS NITZSCH

(CEXCURIDVlllA \E(H;EUI SCIIINER) AND ITS SYSTEMATIC POSITION AMUNG THE DIPTERA

15. DESCRIPTIONS OF SOME NEW

XOCTUI DA E IN THE TRING MUSEUM

Greijory M. Mathevs . 1 — 22

Greyory M. Mathews . 23

Walter Rothschild . 24—45

Waller Rothschild . 45 — 47

X. Charles Rothschild. 48—56

K. Jordan and

X. C. Rothschild . 57—89

K. ./ordan . 90—91

A'. Jordan . 92— IIG

X. Charles Rothschild . 117-122

W. p. Pycraft	. 123—128
K. Jordan		. 129—134
K. Jordan		. 135— 13()
K. Jordan		. 137—138

./. E. Collin

W. Wun'en

138— 13!>

140—148

NOVITATES ZOOLOGIGAE, Vol. XVIII., 1911.

NOVITATES ZOOLOGICAE

H Journal of Zooloo^

IN CONNECTION WITH THE TRING MUSEUM.

EDITED BY

The Hon. WALTER ROTHSCHILD, F.R.S., Ph.D., Dr. ERNST HARTERT, and Dr. K. JORDAN.

Vol. XVIIL, 1911,

(WITH TWEN'TY-SIX PLATES.)

Issued at the Zoologicai, Museum, Trino.

PRINTED RY HAZELL, WATSON & VINEY, Ld., LONDON AND AYLESBURY.

1911^12.

CONTENTS OF VOLUME XVIII. (1911).

AVES.

1. On some Necessary Alterations in the Nomenclature of Birds. Gregory

M. Mathews 1 — 22

2. Two New Australian Birds. Gregory M. Mathews 23

3. On the Skeleton of Palaeocorax morioram. (Plate II.) W. P. Pycraft 123—128

4. Preliminary De.scription» of some New Birds from Central New Guinea.

Walter Rothschild and Ernst Hartert 159 — ICO

5. On the Birds of Sermntta, one of (he South-West Islands. Ernst

Hartert 161— 1G7

6. On Henicophaps foersttri. (Plate I.) Ernst Hartert . . . .108

7. Additions to the Birds of Babber. Ernst Hartert 169

8. Additions to the Avifauna of Luang. Ernst Hartert 1^0

9. A Reference-List to the Birds of Australia. Gregory M. Mathews . 171—455

10. Ornithological Explorations in Algeria. (Plates IX.— XI., XV.— XXVI.)

Walter Rothschild and Ernst Hartert 456—550

11. Notes on the Pai-adiseidae figured on Plates VII. and VIII. Ernst

Hartert *^"^

12. Laniarius fiinebris degener suhap. uov. C. Hilgert . . • • 605 — 606

COLEOPTERA.

1. Some New AnthriUdae from the Island of St. Thome, Bay of Benin.

K. Jordan 90—91

2. New AnthriUdae. K. Jordan 92—116

3. Some Now AnthriUdae. K. Jordan 601—604

( vi ) LEPIDOPTERA.

1. New Sijntomidm in the Tring Museum. Wai.teh Rothschild

2. New Aegeriidae. Waltf.k Rothschild

3. Descriptions of New Satnrniidae. K. Jordan

4. Some New Sphingidtie. K. Jordan .....

5. Two Now African Butterflies. K. Jordan ....

6. Descriptions of some New Nocliddae in the Tring Museum. W. Warren

7. Preliminary Descriptions of some New or Littlo-known Forms of the

Genus Acram. H. Eltringham

8. New Si/ntomidae and Arctianae. Walter Rothschild .

9. On New or Little-known Delias from New Guinea. K. Jordan

10. Some New Ert/cinidae from Dutch New Guinea. K. Jordan

11. On the Geometrid Genus Eiibordeta Roths. K. Jordan

12. A New Hawk moth from Ecuador. K. Jordan

PACES

24—45

45—47

129—134

135— 13G

1,37—138 140—148

149—153 154-158 580—593 594— 59G 590-599 599— GOO

DIPTEHA.

1. On Camus heimijiteriis Nitzscli {Cenchridohia eijgeri Seliiner) .tikI its

Systematic Position among the Diptera. J. E. Collin . . . 138 — 139

SIPHONAPTERA.

1. On the Bat-fleas described by Kolenati. N. Charles Rothschild . 48 — 5G

2. Katalog der Siphonapteren des Koniglichen Zoologischen Museums in

Berlin. Illustriert. K. Jordan and N. C. Rothschild

57—89

3. Some New Genera and Species of Siplionaptera. Illustrated. N. Charles

Rothschild 117—122

4. List of Siplionaptera collected in Portugal. Illustrated K. Jordan

and N. C. Rothschild 551 — 554

RHYNCHOTA. 1. Contributions to our Knowledge of the Morphology and Systeniatics of

the Pohjctenidae. (Plates XII. — XIV.) K. Jordan . . . 555 — 579

GENERAL INDEX 607—626

SPECIAL INDEX TO MATHEWS' REFERENCE-LIST TO THE BIRDS

OF AUSTRALIA 627-056

LIST OF PLATES IN VOLUME XVIII.

I. Eenicophaps foersteri. By J. G. Keulemans.

II. Palaeocorax mwiorum.

III. Arctianae. By Horace Knight. TV V VI.

VII. Faloinellus astrapioides Roth.sch. By H. Giiinvold.

VIII. Astrapia rothschildi Fbrst. By H. Gibnvold.

IX. Merops persicus persiois and Merups persicus chrysocercus.

X. Galenda theklae harierti, Galerida theklae hilgerti, and Gahrida theklae deichleri.

XI. Heads of Sparrows from Algeria.

XII. — XIV. Polyctenidae. By K. Jordan.

XV.— XXVI. Algerian Views. Phot, by Walter Rothschild (XV. and XIX. from photographs by Ilyams).

.^-1 J^^

NOVITATES ZOOLOGICAE

Vol. XVIII. JUNE, 1911. No. 1.

ON SOME NECESSARY ALTERATIONS IN THE NOMENCLATURE OF BIRDS.

PART II.

Conlinued from Nov. Zool. xvii. p. 503(1910). By GREGORY M. MATHEWS.

THE succeedinj; notes refer, as iu the previous part, almost entirely to Au.straliaa birds, but tliose dealing with generic names iu some cases will appeal to students not interested iu that fauua. I wish to acknowledge the invaluable aid giveu by Mr. C. Davies Sherboru in the matter of obtaining dates ; indeed, without his assistance some of these notes would not have been written. At the end of the Australian notes I have added a few which deal entirely with extra-Australian birds, but contain points whicli seem necessary to be recorded.

Since the publication of my conclusions regarding the invalidity of the Brissonian genera 1 have received the " 0[iiiuous rendered by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature." Opinion No. 20 seems to have a direct bearing on the matter of Brisson, and the acceptance of the Summary there arrived at would necessitate the recognition of the genera proposed by Brisson. The printed Discussion, however, contains points which reijuire reconsideration.

Of Gronov's species it is written, " Essentially, Gronow's specific designations are polynominal and diagnostic," and then the conclusion reads, " It is clear that Gronow's nomenclature is binary— that is, he names two units or things, genera and spedes." I would agree with Hoyle that " Gronow has not applied the princijjles of binary nomenclature."

Article 2 states : " The scientific designation of animals is uninominal for subgenera and all higher groups, binominal for species, and trinominal for sub- species." Inasmuch as Gronov failed to comply with this article, which is certainlj' a vital principle, he did not apply the principles of binary nomenclature, and hence, according to Article 2.5, his names are invalid. That this reasoning is valid cannot be denied, as Article 2 is not split into sections but reads consecutively, and must be accepted or rejected as a whole, not partim. Otherwise it might be claimed that the Gronoviau specific names, which are by chance binominal, should receive recognition ; indeed, this principle has been carried out with regard to some, not consistently binomial, writers.

But my main, and to me unanswerable, argument against Brisson was that he was non-binomial. I interpreted the word "binary" as equivalent to "binomial," and used the latter as more familiar to my readers. According to the reading of the Commission " binary " has an altogether difi'erent meaning. I am inclined to question the correctness of the Commission's ruling iu this matter, and herewith

1

(2 )

give my reasons. From the British Association Cotle of 1842 nntil tho Ititeruatioiial Code the word " binomial " was nsed. In that Code the word " binary " was substitnted, aiijiarcntly on account of the nse of trinomials. It has been accepted as corresi>ondinfr absolutely to binomial by all the leading writers on uomenclatnro in every branch of science. As the meaning of "binary nomenclature" the standard dictionaries give "binomial nomenclature," and of "binary name," "binomial name."

That such was the intention of the compilers of the International Code is clearly shown by the wording of Article 20, which reads :

" Art. 20.— The tenth edition of Linne's Sifstema jS'afurae, 1758, is the work which inaugurated the consistent general application of the binary nomenclature in zoology. The year 1758, therefore, is accepted as the starting-point of zoological nomenclature, and of the Law of Priority."

There can be no doubt from the wording of this Article that only a substitute name for binomial was proposed. Linnd's 10th Edition of the Si/stema Naturae, 1758, (lid inaugurate consistent binomial nomenclature, but it certainly cannot be stated to have introduced consistently "binary" as understood by the Com- mission's nomenclature. That was adopted by Liiiiie in his 1st Edition, 173."), and from that date he was always " binary " until KoS, when he became " binomial " throughout in his writings.

I therefore submit that the meaning given to the word " binary "' must be governed by the context, and that in view of Article 20 it can have none other tjian t'.iat used by me, i.e. absolutely equivalent to binomial.

Page 8 : Genus XII. I'filojuis is preoccupied by ScliOnherr, his p. 1 140 (1823). ,, 12 : „ XXX. RalliiM must be reinstated.

In the last number of the Soc. Zool. p. 403 I projiosed the rejection of RnUina (anct.), not Heichenbach, and the substitution oi Eari/zona Bonaparte.

While the matter was in the press I came across a note by Witmcr Stone (I'roc. Acad. Xaf. Sci. Philad. p. 141, 1804) which, although Stone had arrived at the same conclusion as myself, provided data which led me to reconsider the question.

It appears that Stejneger {I'roc. V. S. Sat. Mas. x. p. 305, 1887) over twenty years ago had antieijiated me in advising the misuse (apparent) oi' H'iIUiki, and tlie necessity of using Kanizona. His arguments led to a diflerent source of liullina, and consequent invalidity of the conclusions of Stejneger, Witraer Stone, and myself.

Stejneger (p. 300) wrote : —

1846. Corethriira Gray, Gen. /!. iii p. 595 (type R. cei/lonicus Gm.) nee Reichb. 1855. Rallinn Gray, Cat. den. j). 120 (type R. fascintus Kaffl.) nee Keichb. Unfortunately he did not say what he considered Corethrura Ueichb. or Rallina Reichb. to refer to. Witmer Stone, probably basing his researches ujion this groundwork, gave more detail, thus : — On p. 132— 1848. Rullina Reich. Si/n. Ae. vol. iii. Rasores — tyi)e R. maximus Vieill. ; and on p. 141 —

1840. Rallina Gray, Gen. Birds iii. p. 505— 1\ pe R. zeylanictts Gm. (ncc Rallina Reichb.).

(3)

Throngb an apparent oversiglit he then rejected Gray's name, though obviously it had priority.

Moreover, on p. 134 he had stated that Reichenbach first proposed the name Rnllina in his Si/nopsis Avium vol. iii. Hasores, fam. llalliiKie, which agrees with his quotation on p. 132.

Reference to Gray's Genera Birds iii. settled the matter, for on p. 595 Gray introduced " Corethrura Reich.," naming thirty-one species but designating no type. A footnote reads: "Established by M. Reichenbach in 184 ? liallina of the same author is synonymous."

The second species, however, is thus treated : —

"2. C.fasciuta (Raffl.), Linn. Trans, xiii. p. 328; Gallinula euryzona Temni., PI. col. 417; Rallus nificeps Cav. — type oi Rallina Reich. 1845."

This was dated November 1846. Hence we have de6nitely : —

Rallina (Reich.) Gray 1^46 — type It. fasciata Raffl., as R. ruficeps Cuv. = R. fasciata Rafti.

All quotations as to Rallina and its type are somewhat after this style {^Cat. Birds xxiii. p. 74) : —

Rallina Relchenl). Handh. Falicar. p. xxi. (1846).

This reference is apparently incorrect as to the date, but I cannot get to the truth regarding Reichenbach's works. According to Meyer in his Index zu L. Reichenbach'' s Ornith. Werken, published in 1879, the date of the publication of the family Rallinae was December 30, 1840, and of the synopsis Natatores, etc. 1848. If these be accurate then Rallina must be quoted as of Gray's introduction. Even if Rallina was published prior to Gray's use, no type was designated anterior to Gray's selection.

The type selections, both for Corethrura and Rallina, given by Stejneger and Witmer Stone, are inaccurate, the type of Corethrura Reichenbach having been fixed by Reichenbach himself in the Nat. S>/st. Vuyel p. xxiii. Is52 as jardinii A. Smith, which is one of the species originally included by Gray.

Page 14 : Species 68. Aptenodytes patagonica Miller, Var. Sub). Nat. Hist. pt. iv. pi. 23 (1778) replaces A.forsteri Gray.

The latter species has not yet been recorded from Australia, whereas the former has recently been noted from Tasmania.

When I reviewed the nomenclature of the Penguins {Xoc. Zool. vol. xvii. p. 495, 1910) I indicated the existence of the Millerian plates but questioned their publication. While the paper was in the j)ress I noted their quotation by Boddaert, and since then I have seen that Richmond has dated the entrance oi Aptenodytes from Miller 1778 {Proc. U. S. Xat. Mus. vol. xxxv. p. 590, 1908), and that Riley {Auh, p. 269, 1908) has given details of these Millerian plates. Their recognition will give stability to the genus Aptenodytes as generally accepted. Therefore Ajitenndyles will date from Miller (1778), and the type (by monotyiiy) Aptenodytes patayonica Miller.*

* It is worthy of remark that tliese plates of Tenguins (fur others were issued later) seem to be the ones fi-ora which the iUuslnitions were made that appear in Forster's paper. The original drawings of Geo. Forster in the Dritish Museum show that they were the source of both J. It. Forster's and Miller's plates. They have, in Geo. Forster's handwriting, " I'ublished by J. F. Miller," and also reference to J, R. Forster's paper in L'ljmment. Gotting.

(4)

Page 16 : Species 84. Pujfinus irecicaitdus Gould replnces /'. tt'nuii-os(ris Temrainck. „ 21 : Species 120. Sterna striata Gmelin, S//s(. Sat. XIIIlL EJ. p. 6U9 (1789) replaces Sterna frontalis Graj'.

This is a change that should have been made long .ago, and I now find that Sharpe {Hist. Coll. B. M. vol. ii. p. ~'U4, I'JUG), from a stuily of Ellis's drawings, has already pointed out its necessity.

Page 21 : Genns LXXII. Me<jaloj>l,'ruti Boio, l.-<is p. 1)60 (182G) replaces Micranoiis Saunders.

In the his p. 980 (1826) Bois introduced his new gvuus thus : —

Mt-galojjterus tenutrosfris Tern. col. 202, u.s.w.

Saunders iu the Cat. i>/;-rfsxsv.p. 130, iJS'JO, placed this genus in the synonymy of Ano'is, stating Megulopterus Boie, Ms p. 980, 1826, cf. id. op. cit. 1844, jip. lST-8 — type -I. stoliihis ; and in the synonymy of A. stolidns (p. 137) gave Megalopterus temtirostris Boie, I sis p. 980, ls20 (nee Temm., cf. Boie, Isis pp. 187-8, 1844).

But in the his (1844), at the quotation made, Boie only referred his Megalo- pterus to the synonymy of Anoiis (Leach) Steph. (1825), on the score of priority, usinsr both genera with their wide signiticaliuus. Boie also identified teitnirostris Tern., PI. col. 202, with St. senex Leach. That action had no elfect either upon the generic status of Megalopterus nor the specific of teiiuirostris Tem., PI. col. 202. If Temminck's species were valid, and if ever generically separable, no oilier lonrso Avas open save the adoption of Boie's name. This was made absolute by Gray, who, in his List Genera Birds p. 79, 1840, included Megalopterus Boie (type) M. tenuirostris Temminck, PI. col. 202. Yet in the Bull. B. 0. C. No. x.^iii. p. six, 1895, Saunders proposed a new genus Micranous for Sterna tenuirostris Temminck. In the Cat. Birds Saunders retained his own genus, dealing with Megalopterus Boie as stated above, and as the introduction of tenuirostris gave PI. col. 202.

Page 23 : Genus LXXXI. I.ohihjx Heine, Xomeiicl. Mus. Bei/i. p. 334, 1890 replaces Lobicanellus ncc Strickland.

Strickland, in Froc. Zool. Soc. Lond. p. 32, 1841, proposed Sarciop/iorus for three birds, the first- named being pileutus Gmelin. On p. 33 he introduced Lobicanellus, to which he referred nine species, the first of which was yoensis (Jmelin. The same year Gray in his 2nd Edition of his List Genera Birds included these two genera Q). 64), and designated as tyjies the first-named species in each case.

In his Sat. Sgst. Viigel p. xviii, I6.j2, Rcichenbach made a new disposition thus :^

Lobicanellus. Tyi)e /.. lobatus Latham.

Sarciop/iorus. „ S. pectoralis; and jiroposed

Sarcogrammus. „ 'S'. goensis Gmelin.

Of course these designations are invalid owing to the piior action of Gray, but in the ( 'at. Birds xxiv. Heichenbach has been I'ollowed with regard to Lobicanellus and Sarcogrammus, though the error was noted when dealing with Sarciop/iorus. (Jonseijuently Lobibgx of Heine must be used for Lobivanellus of the Cat. Birds, and Lobicanellus will be the name of the genus there called Sarcogrammus.

( 5)

Page 23 : Species 147. Lobibi/x novaehollandiae Stephens, in Shaw's Gen. Zool. vol. xi. \)t. ii. p. 510 (1819) replaces L. lobatus " Latham " Vieill.

Latham proposed the name Triiiga lohata in the Stippl. Index Ornitli. p. Ixv, 1801, for this bird, bnt tliat combination liad been ntilised by Linne in the Si/st. Nat. Xth Ed. p. 148 (175.S) for another sj)ecies. Vieillot's Vanelhis lobatus {Nouc. Diet, et Hist. Nat. vol. xxxv. p. 209, 1819) is simply a new generic location for Latham's species, so that we have to fall back upon Stephens's name as above.

Page 24: Genus LXXXIV. P^i^na^is Schaeffer, Mas. Ornith. p. 48 (1789)— type P. axrea — C/iaradrus piuvialis Linne replaces Ckaradrius nee Linni'. „ ,, Genus LXXXV^. Eupoda Brandt, in TchihatchefF's Voi/. Sci. Altai Oriental p. 444 (1845) — type (by monotypy) E. caspia Pallas replaces Ochthodromus Reichb. 1852. „ „ Genus LXXXVI. Chamdrius Linn(5, Syst. Nat. Xth Ed. p. 150 (1758)— type C. hiatii'ida replaces Aegialitis Boie, 1822. „ 26: Genus XCV. Tringa Linn6, Syst. Nat. Xth Ed. p. 148 (1758)— type T. ocrophm replaces Ilelodromas Kanp (1829). „ „ Genus XCVI. Ileteroscelus Baird, Rep. Expl. Sin-f. Railr. Pac. Ocean vol. ix. p. 734 (1858) replaces Heteractitis Stejneger, 1884.

Refer to note under Genus CXLVIII, Oxyum (p. 9).

Page 27 : Genus XOVIII. Xeniis Kaup, Skizz. Entwick. Gesch. Nat. Syst. p. 115 (1829) replaces Tere/na Bonaparte, 1838.

The same remark applies as to the preceding.

Page 28 : Genus CVI. Canutus Brehm, Vdgel Dcutschl. p. 653 (1831)— type C. canutus L. replaces Tringa nee LinnS.

In Nov. Zool. vol. xvii. p. 502, 1910, I pointed out tliat under existing laws Curvirostra Scopoli should replace Loxia as currently accepted. In a footnote Dr. Hartert drew my attention to the fact that by the exercise of tautonymy Loxia could be preserved. Privately he referred me to the published Opiuiiiiis iif tlie International ('ommission on Nomenclature, where Opinion No. 10 dealt with tautonymy as applicable to the Linnean genera. That Opinion, while ruling that it was a most desirable proceeding to have the type of the Linnean genera fixed by this method wlien available, carefully decided to say nothing with regard to the only debatable cases, and wrote : " If any author attempts to construe the cases (viz. Tringa, Ckaradrius) under the present ruling, the burden of proof to show that he is justified in the procedure rests upon him." I consider this a most unscientific proceeding, and feel that if the Linnean genera can lawfully have types fixed by this method (viz. tautonymy), all that will admit of such type fixation must be so treated, Cousecjuently I accept as type of

( « )

Chamchius Linnt'', Xtli Ed. ji. l.">0, 1T58, Charadriiis hintictda Liiiiir, ami, as type of Tringa Lioue, Xtli Ed. p. 148, 1758, Tringa ocrojtlius Linne.

I do not feel it necessary, the sentence of Commission Opinion No. Ki above qnoted notwitlistauding, to give proof of the urgency of the alterations, bnt nevertheless will place on record a few of the vicissitudes of Trlnya.

When Bechstein (Orn/t/i. TaM-lienb. I)eutch.i\. p. ~'S2, 1803) introduced Tottnitis he included in it species of Liinosa, and in Tringa, p. 302, he included both ocroj/hus and eanutux. In Vanellus, p. 312, he included randltis and sijuatarola.

Illiger in the Prodromus, p. 202, 1811, proposed Aetitis for a mixture of Limosa, Totantts, etc., and used Tringa, p. 203, for (anellus and squutarolu. In the Abhamll. K. P. Wissen., 1812-13, p. 230, 1810, he accepted Tringa for what he had called Actitis, and referred his prior acceptation of Tringa to Charadrius.

Temrainck (}rnniiel d'Ornith. p. xxxi, 181:')) preserved Tringa for the "Tringoid"' species and Totanns for ^^ ochropus," etc., using Vanellus for squatarola and vanellus.

Koch (Si/st. baier. Zool. p. xli, 181()) accepted the same disposition of the species as Temminck.

Vieillot {Analyse nouv. Ornith. p. 50, 1816) indicated as members of Tringa — • Maubeche-Alouette de Mer-Paon de Mer Bitff.

Caviar {JRegne Animal i. p. 407, 1817) restricted Tringa to squatarola and vanellus, designating the latter as Tringa s. str. ; then joined the remaining members of Linnd's Tringa and Scopolax, and subdivided them into varions sections. For canutus he provided Calidris.

Forster (5y«. Cat. Brit. Birds p. 24, 1817) included earnitus in Tringa, but put ocropus into Totanus.

Stephens, in Shaw's Gen. Zool. vol. xii. pt. i. p. 89, 1824, u.^ed Cnlidris for canutus, not designating anything as typical of Tringa, p. 115, but using it as a name for the residuum after allotting the species he was familiar with to various genera.

Boie (/;</« p. .500, 1822) followed Temminck, whilst Brehm {Vogel Dcutschl. p. 053, 1831) proposed Canutus for canutus, and Tringa, p. 050, he restricted to maritima, a Gmelin-Linnean species.

Fleming (Pkil. Zool. ii. pp. 255-0, 1822) followed fhivier, as did Lesson {Manuel Ornith. 1828) and Kanp {Shizz. Entic. (iesch. Nat. Sgst. 1829).

It would seem that it is quite a questionable matter as to the correct type of Tringa, and Gray's designation of 1840 {List Gen. Birds p. 09) is just as unsatisfactory. So that, accurately speaking, the acceptance of tautonyray to fix the type will settle a matter which cannot otherwise be considered as scientifically decided.

The case of Cliaradrius is not quite the same, as the members of the genus are very closely allied, and not much genus-splitting could be done. Tlic intro- duction of Pluvialis by Schaeffer has however been consistently neglected. Its type by tautonymy is P. aurea = Cliaradrius phivialis Linno. This has been commonly accepted as the type of Charadrius Linne, but some other sjiecies must be selected. The wisest course in this dilemma is the adoption of tautonymy and the fixation of the type of Linne's Charadrius as hiaticula.

The division Orhthodromus must bear the prior name F.upoda of Brandt. Some authorities may wish to ignore this name on account of a prior Kupodes, bnt to such I would point out that Ochthodromus on the same grounds would

( 7 )

appear ineligible, as Ochthedromns was used previous])' [b}- Le T'onte, Ann. Lye. Xut. Hist. Sew York p. 453 (1848)] to Reichenbacli's Ochthod romus.

Page 25 : Genns LXXXVIII. Hypsibateg Nitzsch. m Erscb. u. Gniber's Ewyd. vol. xvi. p. 150 (1827) replaces Himantopus Bonnaterre fpreoccupied).

lu the last nnraber of Nov. Zool. p. 499 I allowed the use of Himantopus Bonnaterre. I unfortunately overlooked the fact that this name was preoccupied by Miillor, Anim. InJ'us. p. 248 (1780), so that we have to fall back upon Ifi/psihates, which was provided on account of the invalidity of Himantopus.

Macrotarsus was introduced by Lacepede (Tabl. Ois. p. 18, 1799) for this genus, but it is unavailable from the fact that earlier in the Tabl. Mamm. p. 5, 1799, he had proposed the same name.

Page 28 : Species 181. For this species acuminata Horsfield must be resumed.

Examination of the Watling drawing upon which the species aurita was founded, and which Sharpe (///.?/. Coll. B.M. ii. p. 147) recognised as pertaining to the species commonly known as acuminata Horsfield proves it to be a good figure of Linne's hi/polencos.

8harpe's determination seems to be purely a lapsus, as no reason for such identification appears in the figure.

Page 28 : Species 184. Canutus magnus Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. Land. p. 39 (1848) replaces C. crassirostris Temminck and Schlegel, Fauna Japonica, p. 107 (1849).

No proof of prior publication of C. crassirostris can be obtained.

Page 29 : Genus CIX. Irediparra nom. nov.

replaces Hi/dralector auct. uec Wagler. In the Isis p. 279, 1832, Wagler introduced a new genus Metopidius for "Latham's Parra a/ricana und Cnvier's Parra aenea." On the next page ho proposed Hi/dralector for " Vieillot's Parra cristata, Nouv. Diet. 16, p. 450, und Temmiuck's Parra (tallinacea PI. Col." In the List Genera Birds 1840 Gray typified these genera thus :

Page 70 : Hijdralector Wagl. //. cristatus (Vieill.) Wagl. „ 71 : Metopidius Wagl. M. aeneus (Cnv.) Wagl.

In the Cat. Birds xxiv. p. 73, 189(3, these two species are synonymised with Parra indica Latham, which is considered the type of Metopidius. As a con- sequence Hijdralector became an absolute synonym of Metopidius. But on p. 79 Hi/dralector is used, the type being given as //. gallinacens Temm.

However, that action cannot be admitted, and as no other name is available I propose the above, with /. (/allin'(ceus = I'arra gallinacea Temm. as type.

Page 29 : Species 189. Trachelia maldimrum Latham & Davies, Faunula Indica p. 11 (1795) replaces T. orientalis Leach (1820).

In the Faunula Indica p. 11, 1795, Latham & Davies proposed three names, G. maldivarum, G. coromanda, and G. madraspatana, for the three varieties described by Latham in the Gen. S>/n. Birds vol. v. p. 224. These have ail

(8 )

been referred to tlie synonymy of the species npon whicli Leach bestowed the name of orientalis tweuty-five years later.

Page 29: Species 190. Burliiniis magnirostris Latham, Siipj'l. IihIpt Dm, p. Ixvi. (1801) replaces li. graUarius Latham.

The name maqnimiitns was given on the same page as (/rallariKs, bnt ajipeared first. It has been neglected owing to slight inaccnracies in the diagnosis. Both names, as well as a third, were given to birds represented by drawings. I have examined the drawings known as the Watling drawings, now in the British Mnsenm, and find tliat the one npon which magnirostrix was founded is by far the best representation of the liird. I therefore have no liesitatiou in adopting this name in preference to the two later ones, grultarius andj'i-ae/ia/tt.i.

Page 30: Genns CXIY. Choriotis (Bp.) Gray, Cut. Gen. Stibgen. Birds j). In'j (185.-.) replaces Eupo(loti.<i anct. nee Lesson.

Eapodotis was introduced by Lesson in the Jietue Xool. ii. p. 47, 1839, for a nnmber of species, Otis rhaad, arabs, and others. The following year Gray typified {List Genera Birds p. 04, 1840) Eitpodotis by rliaad Gm. as of Lesson, XIus. Senckenb. ii. pi. 15.

In the Ann. Sci. Sat. Ser. iv. vol. i. Zool. p. 148, 1854, Bonaparte included Choriotis, a nude name. In the Cat. Gen. Subgen. Birds, p. Iii9, 1855, Gray noted :

Choriotis Pr. B. 1854. Type Otis arabs Linn.

The succeeding year Bonaparte used Choriotis (Comptes Itendiis xliii. ji. 410, 1850), attaching thereto arabs, cristata, edwardsi, and australis.

In the Nut. Sgst. Vogel p. xxx, 1852, Reichenbach had typified Kupodotis Gray by 0. arabs, and proposed Tracheitis with cacrnle.'icens as type.

In the Cat. Birds xxiii. 1894 is given :

Page 308 : Trachelotis Heichb. Type T. caerulescens.

„ 322 : Eupodotis Lesson. „ E. arabs.

As congeneric with cacruleseens Vieill. is included senegalensis Vieill., as a synonym of which is accej.ted rhaad (Mus. Senchenb. ii. p. 230, taf. 15, 1837), and rhaad Gm. is dismissed as indeterminable. But Uiippell's fixation of rhaad would seem to decide its identity, and hence Ei/podotis must be resumed for tlie species included in the Cat. Birds under Trachelotis, which becomes synonymous, and for the species typified by arabs, Choriotis must again, as formerly, be recognised.

Page 30 : Genus CXV. Mathewsia Iredale, Bull. B. n. C. vol. xxvii. j.. 47 (101 1; replaces Antigone Reichb. (preoccupied). „ 33: Genus CXXXL Ardeirallu Bonaparte, Consp. Ac. ii. p. 131 (I8o0) replaces Dupetor Heine.

Dupetor was proposed (yomencl. Ma.s. Ilein. Orn. p. 308) as a substitute for Ardeirallu, the latter name not meeting with approval on account of its unclassical formation. I cannot generically separate the Australian bird from the type of Ardeirallu, but to those more skilled the generic name Xanthocnus Sharpe

(9)

{BuU. B. 0. C. iii. p. sxxvii, lSfl4) iutrodnced for the Anstral-Malayan species will be available.

Page 35 : Species 222. D. youldi Gonld, Handh. Birds Aiistr. ii. p. 374 (LSG.")) replaces D. arcuata Horsfield.

In the Cat. Birds, vol. xxvii. p. 153 Ralvadori preferred P. nrewita Horsfield, Zool. Ttes. in Java, pi. 6.5, 1824, for the Austro-Malayan species dift'erentiated from D.javanica of the same anther previously proposed in the Trans. Linn. Son. Land. vol. xiii. p. 199, 1822.

Salvador! accepted arcuata on the plate given, hnt the letterpress covered javanica. The fiicts are : Horsfield proposed jacaniea and noted varieties, one of which agrees with the bird in question now considered specifically separable. In his second paper he used arcuata for the same group on account of its prior introduction by Cuvier in BIS. only, and saidv javanica as a synonym of the later arcuata. Of course, in reality arcuata is a pure synonym of jaranica, the latter having priority. Count Salvador!, however, recognising that the figure given really belonged to one of the varieties, used arcuata as based on that figure, though the text proved the contrary. This course is not permissible. As a substitute I have fallen back upon ijouldi, which Gonld accepted for the Australian bird as of Bonaparte. Bonaparte's introduction {Comptes Rendus, vol. xliii. p. 649, 185G) was of a nude name only, so that the above quotation is the first description.

Two other prior names have been used for this bird, but each I consider inapplicable. Miiller's Anas badia {Verh. Nat. Gesch. Land en Yolkenk., p. 159, 1842) is another nude name, whilst Eraser's .4. vagans was described from the Pliilippines {Zool. Tijpica, p. 68, 1849), and I am not inclined to accept it for the Australian form.

Page 36 : Genus CXLVIII. Oxyura Bonaparte, Ann. Lye. Kat. flist. Xew York, ii. p. 390, 1828 replaces Erisrnatura Bonaparte, 1831.

I am unable to find that Oxyura is preoccupied. I have noticed several prior usages of Oxyurus, but none of Oxyura. Under the existing nomenclatorial laws the latter must be used. I may state that I have carefully considered this matter, as the American Ornithological Union have sanctioned the rejection of some names ending in -ics on account of prior similar names ending in -a and rice versa, but in other cases acccj)t(.'d some differing only in the same way, and conclude that confusion would ensue should the American Ornithological Union's views be adopted. Many changes would be necessary in the nomenclature of Australian birds by following the American Ornithological Union Code. To those who would wish to retain lirismatura I would point out that it would occni)y an unstable position. As far as I can trace, though that generic name, Giorn. Arcud. Iii. p. 208, is usually quoted as 1831, it was not published until well on in the year 1832, whereas Cerconectes Wagler, Isis, 1832, p. 282, appeared early in that year and appears to have priority.

Page 38 : Species 244. Sula dactylatra Lesson, Traitc d. Ornith. p. OiJl (1831) replaces S. cyanops Snndevall, 1837.

In the Cat. Birds, vol. xxvi. p. 430 Ogilvie-Grant accepted cyanops of H\nidcva!l {I'hysioyr. Sails/,: Tidsk. (Lund.) i. p. 218, 1837) in preference to

( 10 )

Lesson's ihtctylatra, which first upiieareil in the Vo>/. CoqniUe i. p. 404, noting, "The description of S. dachjlatra given by Lesson is nnrecognisable." This remark may be applicable to the note given in the Voij. CoquiUe, bat certainly not to the account in the Traitl; which fixes the sjiecies as the bird called cyanops by Sundevall six years later. It appears probable that tlie Australian bird will bear the name given to it by Gould, viz. persoiwta, but I have not yet sufficient material to decide.

Page 39 : Species 254. Circus approximam Peale, United States Expl. Erped. p. 04 (1848) replaces Circus gouleh Bonaparte, 1S50. ., 40 : Genus CLXL IlieraaHus Kaup, Classif. Sdmj. </• 17«/. p. V2n (1844)

replaces Eutolmaetxs Bl_\th, 1845. „ 41 : Species 206. Ilaliastur leucostermis Gould, Synops. Birds Aitstr. pt. iii. April 1838 replaces H. girrencra Vieillot.

Vieillot {Galerie d''Ois. i. pi. x. I82ii) j)roposed Ilaliaotus girrenera simply as a new name for the bird described as Falco pondecerianus Gmelin. He wrote : " On le tronve anssi, selon Latham, :i la Nonvelle Hollande, oil il porte le nom qne nous Ini avons conserve." Of course this cannot be construed as separating the Australian from the Indian bird, especially when the context is read. (Con- sequently we must revert to Gould's name founded on the Australian species.

Page 44 : Species 293. Sinox queenslandica Mathews, Bull. B. 0. C. xxvii. p. 02 (1911) replaces yinox liwneralis, Bonaparte.

The later bird is confined to New Guinea, and is represented in Queensland l)y a distinct form, as above.

Page 45 : Genns ('LXXVIII. Entelipsitta nom. nov. replaces Psitteuti-les nee Bonaiiarte. „ „ Genus CLXXIX. Psittextelrs Bonaparte replaces Ptilosdera (Bp.) Gonld.

In the Rev. Mag. Zool. vol. vi. p. 157, 1854, Bonaparte introdnced Psitfetifeles with four species — versicolor Vig., iris Temm., cuteles Temm., and placens Temm. No type was indicated, and therefore the following year Gray {Cat. Gen. Suhgen. Birds, p. 88) selected the first named as type.

In the Uandlj. Birds Austr. ii. p. 98, 1805, Gould used Ptilosdera as of Bonaparte for versicolor alone. He referred to Ptilosdera versicolor, Comptes liendus, 1857, but gave no pagination. In the Cat. Birds B. M. vol. xx. p. 06 Ptilosdera is accepted for the species versicolor.

Its entry is given as that of Bonajiarte, Comptis I'l'udiis, vol. xliv. p. 597, 1857, but at that place only the nude name occurs, no indication being given as to its extent. The earliest systematic use of the name I have traced is that of Gonld, as above.

In the Cat. Birds xx. p. 63 Psitteuteles is also retained, the type being selected as P. euteles Temminck. But Gray's designation invalidated all later type difterentiations, and couseqnently Ptilosdera must be replaced by P.titteiiteles, and a new name is necessary for the group erroneously known by the latter name.

( 11 )

I therefore propose Eutelipsifta, and designate as type Psittacus chlorolepidotus Kuhl.

Page 40: Species 311. Ci/r-lopsitta h'lilhmti'ri McCoy, Annals Mag. j^at. Ilisf. Ser. iv. vol. xvi. p. .54, Jnly 1, 1875 replaces C. mnccoyi Gonld, Froi\ Zool. Soc. Loml. p. 314, Ang. 1, 1875. „ „ Genus CLXXXII. 5o;«no^Zos«i<.s Ranzani, Efewi. ^/< ^rto/. iii. pt. ii. p. 18, Jh qI. pi. V. figs. 3, 3, 1821 replaces Microglossus Vieillot. ,

Salvadori's reason for rejecting Solenoglossus, as given in the Cat. Birds xx. p. 102 footnote, reads:

" Solenoglossus Ranz. has certainly the priority over Microglossus Geoffr., but it conveys quite a false idea of the structure of the tongue."

Then follows a history of the name Microglossus.

It is interesting to note that Gray, in the List Genera Birds, p. 69 (1841), nsed Microglossum Geoffr., 1 809 ; probably following Gray, Agassiz, in the Nomen. Zool. Aves, p. 47, 1846, gave Microglossum Geoff., Ann. Mus. xiii. (1809).

But search through the Aimales Mus. d'llisf. Nat. Paris, vol. xiii. (1809) does Dot reveal Microglossum, though in that volume Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire introduced a new genus Microductylus. I surmise that the similarity of names, through inadvertence, caused the reference of Microglossum to this place. I have looked through all Saint-Hilaire's papers without result, and when he later discussed Microglossus Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire did not claim to have previously proposed the name, and accepted it as of Vieillot, Galcrie d'Oiseaux i. p. 47, pi. 50.

In the same place Count Salvadori pointed out that Probosciger Knhl {Consp. Psitt. p. 12, 1820) was not proposed generically, but only the name given to a section, and therefore did not recognise it as applicable from that introdnction. AVith this statement I ijuite agree, and refuse to accept names simply proposed sectionally as of their sectional date.

Bnt I noted that on p. 170 Count Salvadori has allowed the use of Conurus, which was proposed at the same time and in the same manner as Prohosciger, and moreover dates it from the Consp. Psitt. of Kuhl. I consider it invalid as of that place, and before it was taken up generically Aratinga would appear to have been proposed by Spix {Av. Bras. i. p. 29, 1824). Further, the earliest use of Coriurus 1 can trace is that of Lesson, who, in the Manuel d'Orn. ii. p. 148, 1828, used it subgeuerically and cited as type Psittacus rujirostris L. enl. 550. This is one of Kuhl's original species, and therefore should Co'nurus be recognised as of Kuhl, it follows that its type would of necessity be that species. In the Cat. Birds xx. p. 443, the species, enl. 5.50, is called Palaeorids torquata Boddaert, the name given to that figure alone. It would thus follow that Conunis Lesson, 1828, should be quoted in the synonymy of Palaeornis. To refer it incorrectly to Knhl, 1820, would mean the displacement of Palaeornis by Conurus. Consistently Comirus must be displaced by Aratinga.

Further, Count Salvadori {Cat. Birds xx. p. 138) rejected Micropsitta Lesson, Traitc d'Orn. Tp. 646. 1831, in favour of N'asiterna Wagler, 3{on. Psitt. p. 498. 1832. No reason is given, but in the Ibis, 1906, p. 326, Count Salvadori has cxi)lained, " The latter name (Micropsitta) was proposed as a subgenus of Psittacus, and not as a real genus." Here Count Salvadori is clearly at fault, as for nomen-

( in

clatorial purposes names proposed generically luul subgenerically are of eiiiuil value; therefore Nasiterna mnst be replaced by Micropsitta. Page 47 : Genus C'LXXXV. Cacatois Domeril, Zool. Anah/tique p. 50 (1800) replaces Cucatua Vicillot. Genus ( 'LXXXVII. Lqitulophm Swainson, Xool. IlbiMr. Ilud Ser, i)l. 112 (18:i2-3) rei)lace8 Calopsitta Lesson, Illustr. Zool. pi. xlix. 1835. In the Cat. Birds xx. p. 135, Calopsitta is jjreferred as of date May 183'» ; the month of Swainson's genus not being given.

A casual examination of Lesson's work showed that Mai 1832 was only the date of the text to i)ls. xlix. and 1., and had nothing to do with publication. The text to pis. xlv. and xlvi. is dated Juillet ls33.

Upon reference to the Bibliotheque Frauraise I obtained the following dates. The prospectus, noticed February 4, 1832, gave the information that the volume would consist of 20 livrs., eacli livraison to contain 3 pis. with text, not paged, and the first No. to be issued March 1, and thence monthly. The dates show that this was not carried out :

ilates. In 8" de % sheet. Julv 14, 1832. „ i „ Sept. 1,1832. „ I „ Oct. 13, 1832. „ J „ Nov. 3,1832. „ I „ Dec.1,1832. „ f „ Feb. 23, 1833. „ . i „ April 13, 1833. „ i „ Aug. 10, 1833. „ f „ Aug. 24, 1833. „ J „ Oct. 19, 1833. „ i „ Dec. 21, 1833. „ 5 „ March 22, 1834. „ i „ May IT, 1834. „ f „ Aug. 2, 1834. „ 3 „ .Jan. 17, 1835.

No further notices appear in this journal, but in the Comptes Rendiis, December 1835, p. 517, livr. 18 and 20 are noticed.

As corroboratory evidence it may be noted that the text to pi. Ix. contains a reference to Journal cle I'lnstitut, No. 72, 27 Septembre, 1834.

These dates, therefore, place J;he publication of Calopsitta in 1835.

The 1st Series of Swainson's Zool. //to^r. were published monthly, and tlie 2nd Series was commenced on the same plan. They were announced on February 29, 1829, to appear monthly. In the Mag. Nat. Hist. vol. iv. p. 272, June 1831, Swaiuson himself wrote, "In each regular number (12 out of 13) there are five plates,"' and in the same volume, p. 555, wrote in a letter dated September 1831, " The 17th and istli came out bnt a month ago." He there threatened to publish only two more parts. Apparently this was done, and constitutes the first two volumes. Then under pressure a third volume was undertaken some time later, and it was completed early in 1833, the preface being dated March 4, 1833. I have been so far unable to fix tlie absolute date of the parts comprising this last volume, but there can be no doubt that the date given on the title-page, 1832-3, is correct.

pro	livr.	3]
2'	»	3
3°	)J	3
4.	»J	3
5*	»	3
fi»	))	3
I	)»	3
8"	?)	3
9«	JJ	3
lo-	T)	3
ll"	)»	3
12*	>l	3
13=	»	3
14"	JJ	3
1.5"	1»	3

( 13)

Consequeutly the date for Lcptolophus Swaiuson, at the latest, is 1833, and it has thus clear priority over Calopsitla.

It may be as well to note that Wagler, in the Abhandl. Ak Wi&semch. Miliicfien, i. p. 400, proposed Xj/mpliicm, and