CD *Y
Et

mt
a in cig Pig 5 ni

C34

YON

Bi

wy,

RDA

) i r f
bd LODO SiO

(OV GV.

7

  
  

‘PPENDIX.

XXXVI £
]. CHLAMYDODERA CERVINIVENTRIS.

AGIGl ==
Chlamydodera cerviniventris,
Parad. part viii. (1898).
2, Parad. p. 9 (1898).

Rothschild, Thierveich, Lief. 2,
Abhandl. k. zool. Mus. Dresden, vii. no. 2, p. 55.—Sharpe, Monogr. Parad.

Meyer, Abhandl. k. zool. Mus. Dresden, vil. no. 2, p. 55 (1898).—Sharpe, Monogr,

Chlamydera cerviniventris,
Chlamydodera recondita, Meyer,

part viii. (1898).
Dr. Meyer now believes that the egg on which he founded his C. recondita, though somewhat
° . oo. . ‘ Spi e Ya F . :
aberrant in colour, is really that of C. cervinwentris, and so the identity of C. recondita and C. lauterbachi is
no longer in question.
Add 2. CHLAMYDODERA MACULATA.
dd :—
Chlamydodera maculata, Meyer, Abhandl. k. zool.
Parad. part viii. (1898).
Chlamydera maculata, Rothschild, Thierreich, Lief. 2

Mus. Dresden, vii. no. 2, p. 54 (1898).—Sharpe, Monogr.
5
, Parad. p. 9 (1898).

eqs 3. CHLAMYDODERA OCCIPITALIS.

Chlamydodera oceipitalis, Sharpe, Bull. |
Meyer, Abhandl. k. zool. Mus. Dresden, vii. no. 2, p. 54 (1898).

h, Lief. 2, Parad. p. 9 (1898).

3rit. Orn. Club, iv. p. xiv (1894).—Id. Monogr. Parad. part ui. (1894).—

Chlamydera maculata, pt., Rothschild, Thierreic
The Hon. Walter Rothschild has united this species to C. maculata, as 1 did myself in the ‘ Catalogue of
. T 7 S i ; 1 z
Birds’ Now that the range of €. maculata is known to extend to Cape York, there is nothing wonderful in
the occurrence of the species at Port Albany, and I am quite prepared to accept the identity of C. occipitalis
y i 1 ; |
and C. maculata. Gould was always very emphatic as to my having made a mistake in uniting the two
. . . e = a s : : =
species, and as_ his judgment on the questions of Australian birds was always worthy of consideration
5 . oEne . . . e : * ‘
I preferred to consider C. occintalis distinct, influenced also perhaps, as Mr. Rothschild suggests, by a
. . e oe : :
desire to ‘ bring in ’s very beauti OTN, ate.” , iev ee .
: g in Gould’s very beautiful original plate.” I now believe that C. occipetahs is nothing
ea ‘ Ee alee ON ola fay ‘2
more than a finely plumaged male of C. maculata, as Dr. Ramsay long ago suggested.
ee 4, CHLAMYDODERA GUTTATA.
Chlamydodera qutte yer [
cl guttata, Meyer, Abhandl. k. zool. Mus ‘esden, Vil ‘ 5 398 S
ee, é x is. Dresden, vii. no. 2, p. 54 (1898).—Sharpe, Monogr. Parad.
part vill. (1898).
Y nae é Z : : 11° : un
Chlamydera guttata, Rothschild, Thierreich, Lief. 2, Parad. p. 10 (1898)

aq 5). CHLAMYDODERA NUCHALIS.
Chlamydodera nuchalis, Meyer
uchahs, Meyer, Abhandl. k. zool. Mus. Dresden, vii. no. §
part viii. (1898). y s. Dresden, vii. no. 2, p. 54 (1898).—Sharpe, Monogr. Parad.
Chlamydera nuchalis, Rothschild, Novit. Zool. vy. p. 86 (1898).—Id. Thierreich, Lief. 2, Parad. p. 10 (1898)

aes 6. CHLAMYDODERA ORIENTALIS.
Chlamydodera orientalis, St .
ydoe mals, Sharpe, Monogr. Parad. part i. (18%
Mever : gr. Parad. pi 1.(1891).—Id. Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, iv. p. xi =
ley oh Abhandl. k. zool. Mus. Dresden, vii. no. 2, p. 54 (1898 | a
lamydera orientalis, Rothschild, Novit. Zool. v p. 86 Gass 5
Chlamydera nuchalis, Rothschild, Thierreich, Lief 2 Parad | ier (1898)
: » Lief. 2, Parad. p. 1898).
The Hon. Walter Rothschild does not recognize
“in the British Mus ae
british Museum there are exam
from one and the same locality.”

ee, this species as distinct from C. nuchalis, as he says that
es of both forms eine ; : /
| th forms, together with a specimen almost intermediate, all

Although there is
Rn ee A D5 re iS an approac y . seas . ‘
the two forms can be fairly well divided an approach to C. nuchalis in some specimens, J think