' ' * , - fii ■ . . THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA BY GREGORY M, MATHEWS F.R.S.E. MEMBER OF THE AUSTRALIAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION AND THE BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS' UNION CORRESPONDING FELLOW OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION WITH HAND-COLOURED PLATES \\ VOLUME VI. WITHERBY & CO. 326 HIGH HOLBORN LONDON 1916—1917 £ a? l 643 M42. I / ( CONTENTS AND LIST OF PLATES. PAGE Order PSITTACIFORMES 1 Genus TRICHOGLOSSUS 9 No. 324. Blue-bellied Lorikeet, Trichoglossus moluccanus . 14 Plate 275 lettered Trichoglossus novce-hollandice, to face . 14 No. 325. Red-collared Lorikeet, Trichoglossus rubritorquis . 27 Plate 276 lettered Trichoglossus rubritorquis, to face . . 27 Genus EUTELIPSITTA 31 No. 326. Scaly-breasted Lorikeet, Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota . 33 Plate 277 lettered Eutelipsittu chlorolepidota, to face . . 33 Genus PSITTEUTELES 37 No. 327. Varied Lorikeet, Psitteuteles versicolor . . . 38 Plate 278 lettered Psitteuteles versicolor, to face ... 38 Genus GLOSSOPSITTA 43 No. 328. Musk Lorikeet, Glossopitta concinna ... 46 Plate 279 lettered Glossopsitta porphryocephala, Glossopsitta pusilla, Glossopsitta concinna, to face ... . 46 No. 329. Purple-crowned Lorikeet, Glossopsitta porphyrocephala 53 No. 330. Little Lorikeet, Glossopsitta pusilla ... 58 v. THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Genus OPOPSITTA ......... No. 331. Red-faced Lorilet, Opopsitta coxeni Plate 280 lettered Opopsitta leadbeateri and Opopsitta coxeni, to face .......... No. 332. Blue-faced Lorilet, Opopsitta leadbeateri Genus PROBOSCIGER .... ..... No. 333. Cape York Palm Cockatoo, Probosciger aterrimus . Plate 281 lettered Solenoglossus macgillivrayi, to face . Genus CALYPTORHYNCHUS No. 334. Banksian Cockatoo, Calyptorhynchus banlcsii Plate 282 lettered Calyptorhynchus macrorhynchus, to face . Genus HARRISORNIS No. 335. Glossy Cockatoo, Harrisornis lathami Plate 283 lettered Calyptorhynchus viridis, to face Genus ZANDA .......... No. 336. White-tailed Black Cockatoo, Zanda baudinii Plate 284 lettered Zanda baudinii , to face No. 337. Black Cockatoo, Zanda funerea .... Plate 285 lettered Calyptorhynchus funereus , to face . Genus CALLOCORYDON No. 338. Gang-gang Cockatoo, Callocorydon fimbriatus . Plate 286 lettered Callocephalon galeatum, to face Genus KAKA.TOE ......... No. 339. White Cockatoo, Kakatoe galerita. .... Plate 287 lettered Cacatoes galerita, to face Genus LOPHOCHROA ......... No. 340. Pink Cockatoo, Lophochroa leadbeateri Plate 288 lettered Lophochroa leadbeateri, to face Genus DUCORPSIUS No. 341. Bloodstained Cockatoo, Ducorpsius sanguineus Plate 289 lettered Ducorpsius sanguineus and Ducorpsius gymnopis, to face ........ PAGE 61 67 67 69 73 77 77 95 100 100 124 125 125 133 134 134 138 138 150 153 153 160 170 170 189 190 190 197 198 198 Yl. CONTENTS. PAGE Genus LICMETIS ........ No. 342. Longbilled Cockatoo, Licmetis tenuirostris Plate 290 lettered Licmetis tenuirostris, to face . 213 214 214 , Genus EOLOPHUS 223 No. 343. Posebreasted Cockatoo (Galah), Eolophus roseicapillus 225 Plate 291 lettered Eolophus roseicapillus, to face . . 225 ' Genus LEPTOLOPHUS 235 No. 344. Cockatoo-Parrot, Leptolophus hollandicus . . 239 Plate 292 lettered Leptolophus auricomis, to face . , . 239 Genus LORIUS .......... 246 No. 345. Red-sided Parrot, Lorius pectoralis .... 248 Plate 293 lettered Eclectus macgillivrayi , to face . . . 248 Genus GEOFFROYUS No. 346. Red-cheeked Parrot, Geoffroyus geoffroyi Plate 294 lettered Geoffroyus maclennani, to face . 251 253 253 Genus POLYTELIS No. 347. Greek Leek, Polytelis sivainsonii Plate 295 lettered Polytelis swainsonii, to face . No. 348. Black-tailed Parrot, or Rock Pebbler, Polytelis anthopeplus ....... Plate 296 lettered Polytelis anthopeplus, to face . Genus NORTHIPSITTA No. 349. Alexandra Parrot, Northipsitta alexandrce Plate 297 lettered Northipsitta alexandrce, to face . 258 261 261 • 266 266 270 271 271 Genus APROSMICTUS 277 No. 350. Red-winged Parrot, Aprosmictus erythropterus . 279 Plate 298 lettered Aprosmictus parry ensis, to face . . 279 Genus ALISTERUS 287 No. 351. King-Parrot, Alisterus scapularis .... 291 Plate 299 lettered Alisterus cyanopygius, to face . . 291 * vn. THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. PAGE Genus PLATYCERCUS 298 No. 352. Crimson Parrot, Platycercus elegans . . . 304 Plate 300 lettered Platycercus nigrescens , to face . . 304 • No. 353. Yellow Parrot, Platycercus ftaveolus . . . 317 Plate 301 lettered Platycercus innominatus , to face . . 317 ' No. 354. Green Parrot, Platycercus caledonicus . . . 322 Plate 302 lettered Platycercus caledonicus, to face . . 322 No. 355. Yellow-cheeked Parrot, Platycercus icterotis . . 329 Plate 303 lettered Platycercus icterotis and Platycercus salvadori , to face ........ 329 • No. 356. Blue-cheeked Parrot, Platycercus adscitus . . 338 Plate 304 lettered Platycercus amathusice and Platycercus palliceps , to face ........ 338 * No. 357. Smutty Parrot, Platycercus venustus . . . 345 Plate 305 lettered Platycercus hilli and Platycercus venustus, to face .......... 345 ' No. 358. Rosella, Platycercus eximius ..... 352 Plate 306 lettered Platycercus splendidus, to face . . 352 Genus BARNARDIUS No. 359. Mallee Parrot, Barnardius barnardi Plate 307 lettered Barnardius macgillivrayi and Barnardius whitei, to face ........ No. 360. Yellow-banded Parrot, Barnardius zonarius . Plate 308 lettered Barnardius occidentalis and Barnardius dundasi, to face ........ 363 365 365 * 373 373 . Genus PURPUREICEPHALUS No. 361. Red-capped Parrot, Purpureicephalus spurius . Plate 309 lettered Purpureicephalus spurius, to face 384 386 386 , Genus PSEPHOTUS No. 362. Red-backed Parrot, Psephotus hcematonotus Plate 310 lettered Psephotus hcematonotus, to face No. 363. Many-Coloured Parrot, Psephotus varius Plate 311 lettered Psephotus varius, to face 391 395 395 401 401 . vm. CONTENTS. PAGE Genus NORTHIELLA No. 364. Crimson-bellied Parrot, Northiella hcematogaster Plate 312 lettered Northiella zanda and Northiella hcematog aster, to face 409 410 410 Genus PSEPHOTELLUS ...... No. 365. Beautieitl Parrot, Psephotellus puleherrimus Plate 313 lettered Psephotellus puleherrimus , to face No. 366. Golden-shouldered Parrot, Psephotellus pterygius ........ Plate 314 lettered Psephotellus dissimilis, to face Genus NEOPSEPHOTUS ...... No. 367. Blue-vented Parrot, Neopsephotus hour Mi Plate 315 lettered Neopsephotus bourMi, to face . chryso 419 421 421 425 425 431 432 432 Genus NEONANODES 436 No. 368. Orange-bellied Parrot, Neonanodes chrysogaster . 438 Plate 316 lettered Neonanodes chrysogaster and Neonanodes chrysostomus , to face ....... 438 No. 369. Blue-winged Parrot, Neonanodes chrysostomus . 442 No. 370. Grass-Parrot, Neonanodes elegans .... 447 Plate 317 lettered Neonanodes elegans and Neonanodes carteri, to face .......... 447 No. 371. Rock Parrot, Neonanodes petrophilus . . . 451 Plate 318 lettered Neonanodes petrophilus , to face . . 451 Genus NEOPHEMA . . . . . . . . d No. 372. Red-shouldered Grass Parrot, Neophema pulchella Plate 319 lettered Neophema pulchella, to face . No. 373. Scarlet-chested Grass Parrot, Neophema splendida Plate 320 lettered Neophema splendida, to face . 456 458 458 462 462 Genus LATHAMUS No. 374. Swiet-Parrot, Lathamus discolor Plate 321 lettered Lathamus discolor, to face 465 468 468 Genus MELOPSXTTACXJS No. 375. Betcherkygah, Melopsittacus undulatus . Plate 322 lettered Melopsittacus undulatus, to face 474 475 475 IX. THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. PAGE Genus PEZOPORUS No. 376. Ground Parrot, Pezoporus wallicus Plate 323 lettered Pezoporus terrestris, to face Genus GEOPSITTACUS No. 377. Spinifex Parrot, or Night Parrot, Geopsittacus occidentalis ......... Plate 324, lettered Geopsittacus occidentalis, to face 484 486 486 494 495 495 APPENDIX .......... xv. CORRECTION .......... xix. INDEX 499 D x. PREFACE. THE completion of the present volume sees the abnormal conditions still existent, so that little progress in our science can be reported. Nevertheless, some work is still being carried on and one notable event has to be chronicled. The re-discovery, by Mr. Tom Carter, of the two birds named Malurus textilis and Malurus leucopteru-s by Dumont, almost one hundred years ago, must rank as one of the most gratifying occurrences of recent years. These species had not been secured since their discovery, and as the type or types were lost in shipwreck no specimens existed in any collection. Moreover, as the names had been grossly misused, it was important that they should either be re-collected or their extinction proved. Mr. Tom Carter has succeeded in his search for these missing birds, and has thereby earned the thanks of ornithologists, not only Australian, but of all countries. Full details of his search will appear elsewhere, but I may note one other interesting item Mr. Carter records. On September 10th, 1916, he found nestlings of Leptolophus hollandicus, and these were covered with yellow down similar to that of the domestic duckling. Another expedition of importance was that undertaken by Mr. W. R. McLennan, on account of Mr. H. L. White, when that energetic field worker ranged over the Northern Territory, collecting at much the same locality as Gilbert and thus procuring almost absolute topotypes of many of the “ species ” described by Gould. He is to be congratulated upon his safe return from what appears to have been anything but an easy trip. Dr. W. Macgillivray and Mr. W. R. McLennan have recently called on me, and from them I learned that the latter had collected on the Watson River, North Queensland, a specimen of the true P. chrysopterygius Gould, a most important item, as I had suggested it was extinct. Nomenclature now has but very little concern, as, since Australian ornithologists have generally accepted the usage of trinomials and base their conclusions upon absolute priority, there is no matter of dispute between any class. As a further prophetic item I will suggest that the next edition of the ‘6 List of British Birds ” sanctioned by the British Ornithologists’ Union will also adhere to the principles of absolute priority as well as trinomialism as utilised in the same way as in my “ List of the Birds of Australia.” This is xi. THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. the only List showing the nomenclature of Australian Birds in this scientific manner, and as I have corrected it in every possible way as I have monographed the groups, I propose at the end of the next volume, which will complete the non-Passerine birds, to give a List of the species with names and data as corrected up to that point. Since the preceding was written, a peculiar confusion has arisen which I here discuss, so that my readers can get the position truly without recourse to newspapers. My “ erstwhile friend,” Mr. Archibald J. Campbell of Melbourne, the famous author of Nests and Eggs of Australian Birds , has written to the weekly press of Australia, viz. The Australasian of April 28th, 1917, a letter in which he has made statements which are contrary to the facts, and which disclose ignorance on his side of the subject he deals with. I had intended to ignore this absurd letter, but my Australian distributors have written to my publishers asking for a refutation, as this foolish letter has caused other subscribers to consider the matter without recourse to the facts. Mr. Campbell has written : “We were promised that the work was to be completed in eight volumes at a prospective cost of £70.” This is untrue , and if Mr. Campbell did not know it to be so, then he is a very careless man. If he will look, and read, my prospectus again (if he ever read it in the first instance) he should write a public apology to The Australasian simply as an act of justice. The succeeding sentences in Mr. Campbell’s letter are as inaccurate as this one. Mr. Campbell continues by complaining that too much of the letterpress has been technical (even speculative at times), and concludes : “ Why have subscribers to pay for page upon page of extraneous matter concerning nomenclature ? ” I would point out that my subscribers do not pay for this extraneous matter. I do all that. Each page of “ extraneous matter ” is given to my subscribers. Mr. Campbell suggests that he would be content with four pages, whereas I gave him eighteen for the same money. It is difficult to suit all people, as when the parts were small, owing to our ignorance of the birds treated, complaints were made ; now when they are of larger size, still complaints are made. All my subscribers must have observed that, whatever I have done, I have stuck to my very bad bargain as regards myself to my subscribers in the matter of price, instead of the opposite. When I entered into my contract no world conflict was ever anticipated, and the present conditions are such that my outlay in the publication of my work has very considerably increased, and I have not complained. Had I cut down my work to the barest limits I venture to suggest some would have complained still more. However, I have dealt with this item in this place so that my subscribers may gauge for themselves, by facing the facts, who deserves the blame in this matter. xu. PREFACE. Mr. Campbell concluded : “ However, Australians have an authoritative, workable, and consistent 4 check-list ’ of the birds of the Commonwealth.” The only one in existence, as noted above, was my own 44 List of the Birds of Australia,” published in 1913, but I don’t think this was the one Mr. Campbell intended. It is a pleasing coincidence to receive, by the same mail that my attention was drawn to the preceding, a letter from one of my critical friends and a friendly critic, the item 44 Received with many thanks the Birds of Australia, Volume VI., Part II. Most interested both in matter and plates.” I attach as an Appendix some interesting notes on the Platycercine forms, sent me by Mr. Edwin Ashby. Such investigations as these are very valuable and, to quote my friend’s words used in connection with another matter, 4 4 facilitate the gaining of knowledge, in a sense to make the pathway of future students more easy than it was before we did work therein.” As usual, I have to tender thanks for kindly co-operation : Notes and specimens to Captain S. A. White, Tom Carter, Edwin Ashby, T. P. Austin, etc., whose names regularly appear as helpers, and without help my work could not be as complete as it is. I might just remark that the technical matter is the most important to Australians, as it can only be prepared at this side, where complete collections of specimens and libraries are available. Parochial views are not accepted by Australian ornithologists as far as I am aware from my correspondence and perusal of the Emu, South Australian Ornithologist , etc. GREGORY M. MATHEWS. Fottlis Court, Fair Oak, Hants. 23 rd November , 1917. r Xlll. APPENDIX. Mr. Edwin Ashby has sent me the following notes in connection with a new form of Platycercus he has described. They have since appeared in the Emu. At the present time I can make no comment, as I have given my views in the text, and with the birds I have here I must still maintain flaveolus as a distinct species. There is, however, no reason why the matter should not be followed up and Mr. Edwin Ashby’s suggestions confirmed or otherwise. DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SUBSPECIES OF PLATYCERCUS ELEGANS GMELIN. By Edwin Ashby, M.B.O.U., R.A.O.U., “ Wittttnga,” Blackwood, S.A. Colour. — As compared with P. elegans, the adult birds of the form under review are scarlet rather than crimson. Head, nape, rump and lower back bright scarlet. Hind neck, mantle, scapulars and most of the greater wing-coverts black edged with bright orange-red. Shoulder : patch on shoulder black. Median and lesser wing-coverts light blue. Outer-webs of primaries, secondaries and some of the wing-coverts basal part of exposed portions of outer-web dark blue. Tail : central tail- feathers, dull green on the inner- web ; other portions of tail-feathers blue, the outer four feathers broadly tipped with pale blue. Chin or lower cheek blue. Under-side, including under tail-coverts, uniformly bright scarlet. Under-side of tail-feathers, with the exception of the broadly tipped portions of the four outer feathers, deep black. Under-side of wing black with the exception of the large shoulder patch, which is blue. Comments.— hi less developed specimens in the mantles and scapulars the edgings show more or less green, also some of the feathers on the nape and rump have pale edges. This race is distinguished from all other forms of P. elegans, with the exception of P. adelaidce, by the scarlet colour replacing the crimson. And from the latter in the generally more brilliant scarlet plumage and in the case of old specimens the green feathers on rump and back are entirely replaced by scarlet. xv. / THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Habitat . — The Fleurieu Peninsula, S.A., the extremity of which is familiar under the name of Cape Jervis. The peninsula was thus named at the time of Flinders’ and Baudin’s exploration of St. Vincent’s Gulf, but later the name was dropped until in 1911, at the request of Count Fleurieu, the grandson of the famous French Minister, the name was replaced on the South Australian maps. While we have recognised for a long time that a highly coloured strain of the Adelaide Rosella was frequently seen in the neighbourhood of Myponga and even extending as far as the Meadows along the same range, it has fallen to the lot of Mr. Frank E. Parsons, R.A.O.U., and myself, to locate the true home of these highly coloured birds on the occasion of a rather hurried motor-trip to Cape Jervis last Easter. I am indebted to Mr. Parsons both for specimens and help in attempting to elucidate the problem of this highly coloured form. We consider that their headquarters are between Normanville and Cape Jervis. Between Normanville and Second Valley every flock had its quota of highly coloured birds; they were met with in numbers in the Gums along the water-courses. If it be decided to distinguish these geographical races by trinomial designations, I suggest the name of Platycercus elecjans fleurieuensis or the Fleurieu Peninsula Rosella for this form. On the other hand, should it be decided to make P. adelaidce a dominant species, then this form under review and P. flaveolus would be subspecies of Adelaidce. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ON THE FLEURIEU PENINSULAR ROSELLA AND COMMENTS ON THE AFFINITIES OF PLATYCERCUS ADELAIDE GOULD AND FLAVEOLUS GOULD. I have collected specimens of Platycercus elegans from the Western portion of Kangaroo Island and the Mt. Gambier district of South Australia, Victoria, N.S.W., and Southern Queensland, and have specimens from Cape York, Northern Queensland. In Mr. Mathews’ 1915 “ List ” the western form is called melanopterus North and Northern nigrescens Ramsay, both subspecies of the intermediate or dominant form elegans . A comparison of these skins shows that the rich crimson coloration, subject to some divergence of shade, is persistent throughout the whole series. Now the Fleurieu bird, in the case of the adult specimen described, at first glance appears to have closer affinities with P. elegans than with P. adelaidce, in that the whole of the green coloration is replaced with red, but on closer study it is evident that the character of the red links it up with xvi. APPENDIX. P. adelaidce and suggests the possibility that adelaidce is more nearly related to flaveolus than to elegans , of which it is made a subspecies in Mr. Mathews 1913 “ List.” On comparing the Fleurieu skins with those in Capt. White s, the S.A. Museum, and Mr. Parsons’ collections, I find that while no skins of adelaidce show nearly as much red as the highly coloured skin described, several skins exhibit nearly as much as the less brightly coloured skins from Second Valley, two of these highly coloured skins in Capt. White s collection came from Mt. Compass, a place distinctly within the range assigned to the new bird. The examination of a large number of skins establishes the fact that exceptionally bright P. adelaidce , although rarely, do occur throughout the Adelaide Hills, that could not be specifically separated from the second- class skins of the Fleurieu birds, but in the best the latter stands out as very distinct in the brilliancy and extent of the scarlet coloration. We therefore establish the fact that skins exist that, when carefully selected and placed together, will show a gradual transition from the brilliantly scarlet bird of Second Valley to the more sombre green-backed and more or less green-rumped form so common in the Adelaide Hills. But on carrying this investigation further I find that intermediate forms between P. adelaidce and P. flaveolus are not only not rare but there is every reason to believe that the substitution of pale yellowish-green on the back and almost yellow on the under-side, as occurs in typical P. flaveolus , for the scarlet and more sombre green of P. adelaidce, largely corresponds with the decreasing rainfall. My investigations lead me to the conclusion that fleurieuensis , adelaidce and flaveolus are all one species. The types of each race are certainly widely different, but undoubtedly intermediates exist, making one doubt the advisability of referring to any of them as other than varieties \of the one dominant form. The following notes on some of the skins examined should be of interest : — Platycercus flaveolus Gould. Of two adult birds shot out of the same flock at Wirrabara, September, 1916 — (1) Shows red above beak, slight red wash over crown, upper-side pale yellowish-green and a considerable amount of red distributed over the general yellowish ground colour of the under-side. (2) Also red fore-head, but the reddish-orange extends over the crown. Upper tail-coverts, outer ones broadly fringed with red and some of the scapulars showing red. Under-side, breast and tail-coverts bright red with some yellow distributed throughout. Both were adult males. xvii. THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. (3) Skin from Melrose, also in the Flinders Range, shows still more red both in upper tail-coverts and scapulars. (4) Skin obtained at Watervale, April, 1914, by Mr. Parsons, has on the under-side the general yellowish ground colour of flaveolus, but the fore-head and crown are bright red. The upper tail-coverts have a considerable number of red feathers distributed throughout, and the general tone of the upper-side is deeper than is usual in this species, some of the scapulars are brightly tipped with red and the secondaries red fringed. The breast and under tail-coverts bright red and yellow. Bright red distributed throughout the under-side. (5) Skin shot by myself on River Murray, twelve miles above Mannum, is fully as red as any of the preceding, but has the mantle and shoulders almost black. Platycercus adelaiclce Gould. (6) Shot by myself at Kangarilla in the Adelaide Hills on 10th November, 1914, is almost identical with the foregoing, except the pale yellowish-green fringe to the feathers of the mantle and scapulars is more marked. EDWIN ASHBY. 1 6th June, 1917. A recent still more critical review tends to confirm some of Mr. Ashby’s views with a very peculiar complex present. Thus, while adelaidce is very similar to elegans and Ashby’s new form is still closer, it may be proved later that these are truly allies of flaveolus, which would be the species name. That flaveolus is a very distinct species from elegans is proven by the fact that both live together in the Murrumbidgee District, where flaveolus is typical and a much smaller bird than elegans. Consequently the complication is in the above-named two forms, which apparent^ are derivatives of elegans , instead of which it is suggested they are forms of flaveolus . It is hoped that field observation will be undertaken, as I cannot decide with the specimens here, and it would be unwise to make any more alterations without better knowledge. Nevertheless, I conclude that Ashby is on the right track and that his jleurieuensis should go with adelaidce, subadelaidce, flaveolus and innominatus as distinct from elegans. xviii. CORRECTION. In this volume, Part I., p. 65, published November, 1916, I introduced the new generic name Nannopsittacus for Cyclopsitta suavissima Sclater. I find that Itidgway, in the Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, Vol. 25, p. 100, May 4, 1912, had proposed Nannopsittaca for a different group, thus preoccupying my name. I therefore remedy this item by the new name Suavipsitta , with the same species as type. \\ xix. Order— PSITTACIFORMES. The birds of this Order are well known from their universal acceptance as pets, with the faculty of uttering sounds resembling the human art of speech. Scientifically, the members are well differentiated by the combination of cere-bearing short-hooked falconine-like bill with zygodactyle feet, i.e., the four toes are paired, two in front and two behind. The birds vary in size from large birds, comparatively speaking, for perching birds, to very small ones, and are generally brightly coloured, even too much so, but no especial colour-schemes are apparent, green being perhaps the most prevalent colour. They are restricted mainly to the southern parts of both new and old worlds, and particularly to South America and Australia. The latter country is especially favoured in forms, and Campbell has recorded that on the earliest Dutch charts it was designated as the “ Land of Parrots.” Yet it is certain that comparatively few species were seen by these early investigators, so that we must conclude that it received this name from the extraordinary numbers observed. Dampier also makes note of White Cockatoos as being abundant on the West Coast. Captain Cook makes few notes, as they seem to have been too common to excite that great sailor, but the “ scientific gentlemen ” did not fail to collect these new and wondrous birds, and many species were soon described from their collections, one of the most famous being called after Sir Joseph Banks, one of the “ scientific gentlemen.” Shaw described some in the Museum Leverianum and others in the Naturalists’ Miscellany, while\\ Latham introduced some half-dozen in the General Synopsis of Birds. At the settling of New South Wales other forms were recognised, and these were described in Phillip’s “ Voyage ” and White’s “ Journal.” The writers were perplexed as to the plumage changes and the confusion has not yet all been dissipated. Watling made coloured drawings of many of the species, and from these paintings Latham added other new forms. Robert Brown accompanied Flinders on his voyage, and though primarily a botanist, made a nice collection of birds, some of which were presented to the Linnean Society and others to the British Museum. These were neglected, though Brown drew up descriptions in manuscript of the new forms. When Temminck and Kuhl visited England they took advantage of these birds and named these species. A VOL. VI. 1 THE BIRDS OE AUSTRALIA. few years later, Vigors and Horsfield systematically accounted for the Linnean Society’s collection, and becoming interested, Vigors later named some new species. Lear monographed the Parrots, and this almost completed the Australian Parrot fauna. Gould, however, covering new ground, was enabled to recog- nise some new things, mostly small, but one or two striking forms were included. Nothing further was anticipated, though hoped for, but an extra- ordinary surprise was sprung upon Australian ornithologists by the enterprise of Dr. Macgillivray in 1913. McLennan, collecting for Macgillivray, suggested the investigation of a point some miles south of Cape York, and this request being acceded to, McLennan at once furnished two large new additions to the Australian List, which will inspire hope for the future. The details of the above items will be given in connection with the species concerned. The systematics of this Group have never been simple, owing to the generalisation of the structure, and this remark is applicable to internal as well as external features. It seems unnecessary to go into ancient history, yet I might remark that though Linne classed the few species known to him in the one genus Psittacus, this disposal was soon attacked. Cuvier seems to have been the earliest subdivider, as in 1798 he indicated four subdivisions, Les Kakatoes, Perroquets, Aras and Perruches. In 1799 Lacepede proposed two only, Am and Psittacus, but in 1800 Cuvier gave names to his own four divisions, KaJcatoe, Psittacus, Am and Psittacula. Previously, without giving any systematic account, Boddaert had proposed Lorius. Illiger in 1811 added Pezoporus for an Australian form. The first systematic monograph was by Kuhl in 1820, and this fine foundation deserves all praise. Although the species were all retained in Psittacus, Kuhl skilfully divided this into six sections, viz., Am, Conurus, Psittacula, Psittacus, Kakadoe and Probosciger. These sections were subdivided into colour-sections and geographical groups, but only one other name was proposed, Sagittifer, although Lori was indirectly used. Kuhl’s specific treat- ment was good and accurate, and although only a young man, he had visited various museums, including the British, in quest of material for his work. As one consequence Australian ornithology is indebted to him for the description of several species. Vigors shortly afterwards attacked bird-classification generally, and Parrots especially, and with Horsfield undertook the determination of the Australian collection in the possession of the Linnean Society. He proposed many new genera and some were for Australian groups. Unfortunately he 2 PSTTTACIFORMES. published these names without definition in the first instance, and these became common property and were utilised by Desmarest, who mono- graphed the Parrots in the Diet. Sci. Nat. (Levrault) and by Stephens, who was just completing the Ornithological portion of Shaw’s General Zoology. The generic names Vigors invented for Australian Parrots were Tricho- glossus, Calyptorhynchus, Nanodes and Platycercus. These were elaborated in a paper in the Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV. Desmarest’s monograph above noted almost entirely dealt with species, the higher groupings being untouched and Vigors’s divisions derided. In 1832 Wagler published a serious systematic monograph dealing very completely with the subject. It was certain that more genera would be necessary and these Wagler introduced. Previously, however, the brilliant Lesson had systematically dealt with the Parrots in his Manuel d'Ornith. and his Traite, as well as in the Illustr. Zool. It is necessary to note this, as one of Lesson’s names anticipates a Waglerian one, viz., Euphema Wagler gives place to Lathamus Lesson, both proposed for Nanodes Vigors preoccupied. Wagler’s essay was remarkable for its extent, and its accuracy is unquestionable. No fewer than thirty genera were found necessary for the species known to Wagler, and he is the authority for the Australian genera Licmetis and Polytelis. Still, no higher than family rank had been accorded the group and no divisions had been advocated. A step forward was taken by Gray in 1840, who proposed five subfamilies, Pezoporinse, Arinse, Lorinse, Psittacinse and Cacatuinse. In 1850 Bonaparte advanced them to the rank of an Order, moreover giving them pride of place at the head of the bird-world in the Conspectus Generum Avium. ' He recognised two families, Psittacidse and Strigopidse. The former was divided into seven subfamilies, Maerocercinse, Pezoporinse, Platycercinse, Trichoglossinse, Loriinse, Psittacinse and Plyctolophinse : the latter into two, Nestorinse and Strigopinse. In 1855 Gray accepted this last subfamily, thereby making six sub- families. In 1867 Finsch began an erudite monograph in great detail, but as regards systematics he accepted one family with five subfamilies, Stringopinse, Plictolophinse, Sittacinse, Psittacinse and Trichoglossinse. Gray, our most pro- gressive ornithologist, never content, never showing any “ finality,” but always improving his own good work, in 1870 recognised three families: Psittacidse, 3 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Cacatuidse and Strigopidse. The former he divided into six subfamilies : Pezoporinse, Arainse, Lorinse, Trichoglossinse, Nestorinae and Psittacinse ; the second into three subfamilies : Cacatuinse, Calyptorhynchinae and Micro- glossinse, the last-named family containing only a single species. Herein is seen the essence of progress — lack of finality — always attempting and endeavouring to improve upon what has been done. Sundevall, a couple of years later, called the group a cohort, and recognised six families : Camptolophini, Androglossini, Conurini, Platycercini, Stringo- pini and Trichoglossini, the first five forming the Psittaci proprii, and the last Psittaci orthognathi. Reichenow in 1881 provided a Conspectus, in which he admitted nine families: Stringopidse, Plissolophidse, Platycercidse, Micropsittacidae, Tricho- glossidae, Palseornithidse, Psittacidae, Conuridse and Pionidse. It will be noted that this was quite a novel rearrangement Garrod had previously furnished the results of an investigation into particular points of the anatomy of Parrots and provided a scheme, which was obviously incompetent, to express the facts. The most careless student would protest against the association of some of the groups, brought together through the consideration of a single feature. Salvadori wrote the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., which dealt with this Group. It was published in 1891, twenty -five years ago. The accuracy and painstaking care manifested by Salvadori in all his works is seen here, and in the Preface he apologised as follows : “It is well known to Ornithologists that the Classification of Parrots has been a very difficult problem, and I am sorry to say that I cannot offer results that will settle the question. Those at which Mr. Garrod arrived are far from being satisfactory. “ The classification I have followed in this volume agrees to a certain extent with that of Sundevall, who divided the Parrots into Psittaci proprii and Psittaci orthognathi. As to the families, I have found that those admitted by Dr. Reichenow in his excellent ‘ Conspectus Psittacorum ’ are the most natural and can be defined without much difficulty. In a few points I had to differ from him. I have withdrawn the genus Nestor from the Cacatuidce, and made it the type of a distinct family, as has already been proposed by others ; from the Cacatuidce I have separated also the genus Dasyptilus and united it with the Psittacince (restricted), although I am not quite sure about this being the right place. Moreover, the genera Polytelis, Ptistes, Apros- mictus and Pyrrhulopsis, having a well-formed furcula, have been separated by me from the Platycercince and arranged with the Palceornithince, and the genera Pezoporus and Geopsittacus have been again united with the Platycercini , 4 PSITTACIFORMES. leaving the genus Stringops alone in the Stringopidce. A peculiar feature in my classification is the establishment of the family Cyclopsittacidse, which is not equivalent with Dr. Reichenow’s Micropsittacinse. The under-surface of the hook of the bill, without file-like sculpture in the species of the genera Neopsittacus and Cyclopsittacus, separates them from all the other Psittaci proprii and approaches them to the Psittaci orthognathi ; when the structure of their tongue is known, we shall be able to understand better their true affinities. “ Although I think that the families and subfamilies admitted by me are fairly definable, I must confess that my arrangement does not bring us nearer to an understanding of the mutual or phylogenetic relations of the different families. A complete study of the internal structure of the Parrots will, perhaps, throw the requisite light on the subject.” As Salvadori’s arrangement has been generally accepted by systematic workers for the last twenty-five years, I here reproduce his scheme, naming the Australian genera adopted by him. Order Psittaci. Family Nestoridse. Family Loriidse Family Cyclopsittacidse Family Cacatuidse. Subfamily Cacatuinse Subfamily Calopsittacinse . . Family Psittacidse. Subfamily Nasiterninse. Conurinse. Pioninse. Psittacinse. Palseornithinse . . Subfamily Platycercinse Family Stringopidse. Trichogbssus, Psitteuteles, Ptilosclera , Glossopsittacus. Cyclopsittacus. Microgbssus, Calyptorhynckus, CaUo- cephalon , Cacatua, Licmetis. Calopsittacus. Eclectus , Geoffroyus, Polytelis , Ptistes, Aprosmictus. Pbtycercus, Porphyrocephalus , Barnardius, Psephotus, Neophema, N anodes, Melop- sittacus, Pezoporus, Geopsittacus. 5 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. I do not propose to criticise this classification as regards extra- Australian groups, but had intended to suggest some emendations in connection with Australian Parrots. After sketching out my own groupings, I referred to a paper entitled, “ On Characteristic Points in the Cranial Osteology of the Parrots,” by D’Arcy Thompson ( Proc . Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1899, pp. 9-46). That investigator wrote : “To discover anatomical characters such as might yield or help to yield a natural classification of the Parrots has been the desire of many ornithologists, but the search has availed little. Garrod’s abundant work has told us many facts in regard to the presence or absence of an ambiens, of an oilgland, of one carotid or two, and other varying characters in a multitude of species ; but when we come to put these data together the result is unsatisfactory, and one is left with the impression that the several series of facts are incoordinate and cannot be linked together in a single system. When we find, for instance, that the collation of these facts places in a single group Ara, Psittacus, Poeocephalus , and Nestor, and in another Stringops, Melopsittacus, and Agapornis, one is tempted to think that the only thing proved is that the data are invalid or antagonistic — in other words, that the several structures had really followed diverse or parallel or convergent lines of modification and evolution. While such internal structures seem to me to lead to confusion by indiscriminate variability, the characters of the skeleton are generally deemed too monotonously alike to present features of significance. Even in Stringops, the osteological peculiarites of which are greater than those of any other form (except perhaps Nestor), they are yet not conspicuous enough to have prevented certain recent writers from remarking that the divergence of Stringops from the other Parrots is not so great as it had been supposed to be.” Thompson then gave the results of the critical examination of skulls, and the paper appears to furnish a concrete example of the value of specialisation. The close study given to these skulls has shown features overlooked by casual osteological examination, and by means of such characters Thompson has indicated errors in the grouping proposed by Salvadori. Thompson wrote : “ The Cockatoos possess certain cranial characters in common and their skulls are easily to be recognised, but there are many variations within the family and even within the restricted genus Cacatua. . . . It is clear that the skull of Calopsittacus, though at first sight very similar to, is different in several respects from, the true Cacatuine. It is possible that these differences involve resemblances to the Plutycercini, and this question will be further discussed below.” I had previously dissociated the species classed by Salvadori in Cacatua 6 PSITTACIFORMES. into several genera, and had recently determined to separate Leptolopus (= Calopsittacus ) from the Cockatoos and place it near the Platycercine species. Further, Thompson has shown: “The Australian genera Pohytelis , Aprosmictus, and Pyrrhulopsis (and I expect Ptistes also) agree so perfectly in cranial characters with the Platycercince, that I do not doubt for a moment the necessity of removing them from the Palceornithince and uniting them with the other Australian genera.” The character for their divorce by Salvadori was the presence of a well-developed furcula. Dealing with Calopsittacus again, Thompson concluded : “On the whole I should say that, so far as cranial osteology goes, the position of Calopsittacus is an open question, and that it is by no means impossible that it may really deserve to be grouped somewhere near Nymphicus and Melopsittacus. While the facts suggest at least the possibility of a closer affinity than that usually recognised between the two Australian groups of Cacatuince and Platycercince, this larger question must also remain for the meantime in uncertainty.” The examination of the Australian Parrots alone, from an osteological view-point, would seem to be worthy of consideration, especially in view of such forms as Calopsittacus and Melopsittacus, while Pezoporus and Geo - psittacus were not available to Thompson, and the last named may never be now. However, judging from the superficial features and also accepting the anatomical facts known, I am separating Leptolophus, and as it is so peculiar I am giving it family rank. Also, as Probosciger (— Microglossus ) proves to be as distinct internally as it is externally, I promote it to family rank. The Black Cockatoos must be separated from the White Cockatoos, at least, as a subfamily, though it is suggested that family rank will later be granted them. To emphasize the development of the furcula in Pohytelis, qtc., these species are grouped together as a family, distinct from the Platy cere idee, though it is obvious they are very closely related. Unhesitatingly I separate Pezoporus and Geopsittacus from the Platycercidae and I associate with them Melopsittacus. It is interesting to observe that the cranial features of the last-named genus are very peculiar, as externally it differs considerably from the other small Australian species. I suggest that Pezoporus and Geopsittacus, as has been often advocated, are close relations of Strigops, and that Melopsittacus is a recent evolution product. That is, I believe Pezoporus and Geopsittacus to be remnants of a very ancient fauna, and that Melopsittacus has survived and, adapting itself to new environmental stresses, has become a strong living independent form, whereas the unadaptable Pezoporus and Geopsittacus have become nearly extinct phases. 7 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. The nomination and order here adopted will read : Order Psittaciformes. Family TrichoglossidsB Family Opopsittidae . . Family Proboscigeridse Kakatoeidae Subfamily Calyptorhynchinse Kakatoeinae Family Leptolophidae * Loriidae Polytelitidae . . Platycercidae . . Trichoglossus, Eutelipsitta , Psitteuteles, Glossopsitta. Opopsitta. Probosciger. Calyptorhynchus, Harrisornis, Zanda , (Callocorydon). Kakatoe, Lophochroa, Ducorpsius, Eolophus, Licmetis. Leptolophus. Lorius, Geoff royus. Polytelis, Northipsitta, Aprosmictus , Alisterus. Platycercus, Barnardius, Purpurei- cephctlus, Psephotus, Northiella, Psephotellus, Neopsephotus, Neon- anodes, Neophema, Lathamus. Melopsittacus, Pezoporus, Geopsittacus. It will be obvious that the order here given should be reversed to show the evolution of the forms, as it is accepted at the present time that Tricho- glossus is the highest form and Pezoporus the lowest as regards Australia. I agree with Salvadori and do not pretend to understand the inter- relationships and phylogeny of these groups. To indicate the difficulty, I might cite the case of Licmetis, one of the white Cockatoos. On account of the apparent superficial feature, the elongate bill, the genus was named by Wagler as long ago as 1832. Good anatomical distinctions are seen, yet it seems an obvious recent offshoot of Ducorpsius, and that the differences have been comparatively recently achieved. Pezoporidse 8 Genus— TR I CHOGLOSSUS. Trichoglossus Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. I., p. 129, 1826 Type T. moluccanus. Australasia Lesson, Traite d’Ornith., p. 209, 1830 . . Type T. moluccanus. Also spelt — Australia Bonaparte, Consp. Gen. Av., Vol. I., p. 3, 1850; Medium-sized Trichoglossine birds, with short bills, long wings, long tail and small legs and feet. The chief character of the Trichoglossine Parrots is the brush tongue, and of the genus Trichoglossus the peculiar coloration. The bill is long with the cere small, just covering the nostrils, which are placed near together high up ; the upper mandible is rapidly curving, with the hook long and sharp, the under edges sinuate but without a distinct notch succeeding the tip, the inside of which is not cross-lined : the under mandible is very short and deep, as deep as long, with the tip truncate and much over- hung by the upper mandible. The wings are long with the first primary longest, the rest regularly decreasing : the primaries narrow and pointed, the secondaries short. The tail is long and wedge-shaped, about five-sixths the length of the wing ; it is broadly wedged, the outer feathers very short, the middle ones long and all the feathers broad. The feet are small, zygodactyle, the tarsus very short and thick, covered with reticulate scales ; the toes are long, exceeding the length of the tarsus, with long claws. \ The introduction of the genus name Trichoglossus was attended with confusion. At the time it was proposed no strict rules were in force, but it should be noted that the author (Vigors) was one of the first to demand that rules should be made and attended to. As far as I can trace its history, the name was invented in connection with the study of the Linnean Society’s Collection of Australian Birds by Vigors and Horsfield. In the Zool. Journ., Vol. II., Apl. 1825, p. 37, et seq., Vigors, continuing his “ Sketches in Ornithology,” wrote an essay “ On a Group of Psittacidse known to the Ancients.” Therein he discussed the classification and diagnosed a number of groups without, however, giving names to them. In the VOL. VI. 9 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA, present connection he recorded the suction tongue, but referred for details and nomination to his forthcoming account with Horsfield of Australian Birds. In the same Journal for July, p. 280, a report of the Description of Australian Birds read at the Linnean Society’s meeting was included, noting that certain Australian parrots had tongues formed for suction, but no name was given. On the next page, reporting the succeeding meeting of May 10th, we read : “ Mr. Vigors read a continuation of the ‘ Catalogue of the New Holland Birds in the Collection of the Linnean Society,’ by Dr. Horsfield and himself. In this portion of the Catalogue, the Psittacidce of New Holland were described, and the characters given of the new generic groups N anodes, Platycercus, Palceornis, Trichoglossus and Calyptorhynchus. The characters of these groups were explained by a reference to the birds themselves in the Society’s Collection, which were exhibited to the meeting.” In the next number (October) Vigors published a New Arrangement of Birds, but only gave generic names, including Caly'ptorhynchus, Nanodes, and Trichoglossus, with a footnote (p. 400) : “ The genera . . . are among the New Holland groups lately described by Dr. Horsfield and myself.” The names thus published became common property, and consequently we find in the Diet. Sci. Nat. (Levr.), Vol. XXXIX., published on April 29, 1826, Desmarest, when he monographed the Parrots, commenting on this classification in some detail. With regard to the present genus he wrote : “ Le genre Trichoglossus Horsfield comprend toutes les especes dont la langue est terminee par un pinceau de filamens cartilagineaux.” Desmarest rejected this, so did not further note it, and consequently it still remained exactly indeterminable. Later in the same year, in the Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., Stephens made use of the above names, citing in connection with them certain species and giving short diagnoses, observing on p. 109 under the name Calyptorhynchus : “ The generic character not having been published, I have merely given the above concise definition, and must refer my readers to the fifteenth volume of the Linnean Transactions, now in the press, in which they will find them accurately laid down by Mr. Vigors : the same remark may also apply to the genera Nanodes and Trichoglossus of the same author.” When Vol. XV. of the Linnean Transactions appeared in 1827, the genus Trichoglossus was fully characterised by Vigors and Horsfield and species described, but no type was named. It has been commonly accepted as of that introduction, but Stephens’ use of it in a valid manner has undoubted priority, and it must therefore be cited as of the latter author. Gould, in his Introd. Birds Austr., 8vo. Ed., p. 76, 1848, wrote: “The arboreal group of Trichoglossi or honey-eating Parrakeets, if not so numerous in species as the grass-feeding Parrakeets, whose habits lead them to frequent 10 TRICHOGLOSSUS. the ground, are individually much more abundant and are more universally dispersed, being found in every part of the country yet visited, but from circumstances not easily to be accounted for, not more than one species is found in Western Australia. Other members of the genus are found in New Guinea and the Moluccas, but Australia is the great nursery for the birds of this form. “ Jn their structure, habits and mode of nidification, and in their economy, no two groups of the same family can be more widely different than the Trichoglossi and the Platycerci , the pencilled tongue, diminutive stomach, thick skin, tough flesh, and foetid odour of the former presenting a decided contrast to the simple tongue, capacious crop and stomach, thin skin, delicate flesh and freedom from odour of the latter : besides which the Trichoglossi possess a strong os furcatorium, which organ is wanting in the Platycerci ; hence while the Trichoglossi are powerful, swift and arrowlike in their flight, the Platycerci are feeble, pass through the air in a succession of undulations near the ground, and never fly to any great distance. The mode in which the two groups approach and alight upon and quit the trees is also remarkably different : the Trichoglossi dashing among and alighting upon the branches simultaneously, and with the utmost rapidity, and quitting them in like manner, leaving the deafening sound of their thousand voices echoing through the woods; while the Platycerci rise to the branch after their undulating flight and leave them again in the like quiet manner, no sound being heard but their inward piping note. The eggs of the Trichoglossi are from two to four in number.” As confirmatory, I quote the remarks of another very famous worker in field zoology as worthy of note. A. R. Wallace ( Proc . Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1864, p. 274) wrote : “ Undoubtedly the most highly organised form of Parrot is the Tridioglossine or Brush-tongue family, in which the whole structure is modified to enable these birds to derive a considerable portion of their subsistence from the nectar of flowers. The bill is unusually small, elongated and compressed, so that it may readily enter the corolla ; the tongue is large, long, and very extensible, and can be thrust down to the very bottom of the nectary ; and the papillae of the terminal portion of the upper surface are developed into erectile fibres, forming a double brush, which rapidly gathers up all the honeyed secretion of the blossom. In correlation with this structure, the species are mostly of small size, of graceful forms, and have powerfully grasping feet — qualities that enable them to climb actively among the twigs and branches, and to cling in any position to the waving sprays of blossom. They have also elongated wings and a powerful flight, which give them the 11 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. means to traverse the whole area of their range, and discover at the right moment the flowering trees which are so attractive to them, the period of blossoming in tropical regions being very limited for each species.” The exact name of the type of Trichoglossus is not easily defined. In the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., p. 49, 1891, Salvadori, referring Trichoglossus to Vigors and Horsfield, cited T. hcematodes as type. Stephens, however, of Trichoglossus , as now restricted, only included two as follows (the other five species being referable to other genera) : “ Tr. hcematopus. Psittacus hcematopus Gmel., Syst. Nat., I., p. 357, Psittacus cyanogaster Shaw, v. viii., p. 413. Molucca Islands. “ Tr. capistratus. Psittacus capistratus Beckst. Psittacus hcematodes. Shaw, v. viii., p. 415. Amboy na ? ” Vigors and Horsfield did not name any type, but Lesson {Manuel d'Orn., p. 147, 1828) wrote : “ Le type de ce genre est le psittacus hcematodus des Moluques, espece tres voisine du P. ornatus du Port Jackson et qui ne different l’une de l’autre que par des teintes diversement placees.” Since this was written Opinion No. 67 of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature has been received. By this Opinion one hundred and two bird names are placed in the Official List of Generic Names. There citations of introduction and type are given and in the present case we read. “ Trichoglossus (Vigors MS.) Stephens, General Zool. 14. i. 1826. 129 Tsd., Swainson 1832, swainsoni Jar dine and Selby, 1831 = hcematopus Stephens (nec hcematodus Linn.) = Psittacus novcehollandice Gmelin.” This is a delightful instance of the inadvisability of preparing Official Lists with our present imperfect knowledge. I checked the above and at the time it appeared correct. My more complete investigation of the facts for the purpose of this work shows that it is not faultless. I have just noted that Lesson in 1828 named Psittacus hcematodus as type and that designation has as much right as Swainson’ s. Further Linne did not write hcematodus but hcematodes. Again hcematopus is a different name and if it can be determined as equivalent to hcematodes we have a good precedent for rectifications as will be hereafter noted. Still again I show moluccanus Gmelin to have precedence over novcehollandice (written by Gmelin novcehollandia ) and by the Opinions already rendered moluccanus must be preserved. 12 Key to the Species. A. Nuchal collar green . . .. .. .. •• T. moluccanus, p. 14 B. Nuchal collar scarlet T. rubritorquis, p. 27 \\ 13 Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 324. Family TRICHOGLOSSIDJE. TRICHOGLOSSUS MOLUCCANUS. BLUE-BELLIED LORIKEET. (Plate 275).* Psittacus moluccanus Gmelin, Syst. Nat., p. 316, 1788 ; “ Amboina ” errore=New South Wales. I select as locality Botany Bay. Blue-bellied Parrot, Brown, New Blustr. Zool., pi. vii., p. 14, 1776 ; Latham, Gen. Synops. Birds, Vol. I., p. 213, 1781 ; id., Suppl. Gen. Synops. Birds, Yol. I., p. 59, 1787 (var. C.) ; Phillip, Voy. Botany Bay, pi. opp. p. 152, 1789 ; White, Journ. Voy. N.S.W., pi. opp. p. 140, 1790. Perruche des Moluques Daubenton, Plan. Enlum., 743 Vol. VII., p. 114 (? post 1776). White-collared Parrot, Pennant, Genera Birds, 2nd ed., 4to, p. 59, pi. 2, 1781 ; Latham, Gen. Synops Birds, Vol. I., p. 251, 1781. Orange-breasted Parrot, Latham, Gen. Synops. Birds, Vol. I., p. 212, 1781. Psittacus moluccanus Gmelin, Syst. Nat., p. 316, 1788 (based on Perruche des Moluques, PI. Enl. 743, as above). Psittacus novcehollandia, Gmelin, ib. (based on Brown, New Illustr., pi. vii.) : New South Wales. Psittacus multicolor, Gmelin, ib. p. 328 (based on White-collared Parrot of Pennant “ East Indies ” ?=New South Wales). Psittacus hcematodus, vars. /3 & y, Latham, Index Ornith. , Vol. I., p. 87, 1790 — moluccanus and novcehollandia Gin.). Psittacus semicollaris Latham, Index Ornith., Vol. I., p. 103, 1790 {—multicolor Gm.) ; Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XXV., p. 343, 1818 ; Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol., Vol. X., p. 48, 1820. Psittacus cyanogaster Shaw, Gen. Zool., Vol. VIII., pt. n., p. 413, 1811 : New South Wales. Psittacus hcematopus Bechstein, Kurze Uebers Vogel, p. 67, 1811 (partim) ; Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol., Vol. X., p. 34, 1820 (partim). Trichoglossus hcematodus Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 289, 1827 (specimens). Trichoglossus hcematopus Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 129, 1826 (part). * The Plate is lettered Trichoglossus novcehollandice. 14 A. 4 TRICHOGLOSSUS NOVyEHOLLANDI^E . ( BL UE - BELLIED L OLUKEET ) . BLUE-BELLIED LORIKEET. P(sittacus) ornatus Lesson, Manuel d’Orn., Vol. ii., p. 147, 1828 (Port Jackson). Not of Linne. Australasia novcehollandice Lesson, Traite d’Om., p. 209, 1830 (N.S.W.). Trichoglossus swainsonii Jardine and Selby, Illus. Omith., Vol. III., pi. cxii., 1831 : New South Wales ; Swainson, Zool. Illus., 2nd Series, Vol. III., pi. 92, 1832-3 ; Selby, Nat. Libr. Orn., Vol. VI., p. 153, pi. 20, 1836 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. ix. (Vol. V., pi. 48), 1842 ; Bamsay, Ibis 1865, p. 305 ; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt, xvn., pi. 85, 1868 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 138, 1915 (Viet.). Trichoglossus multicolor Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen Munch., Vol. I., p. 553, 709, 1832 Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 93, 1865 ; Ramsay, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1875, p. 602 (Q.). Trichoglossus novcehollandice Blyth, Cat. Birds Mus. As. Soc. Beng., p. 11, 1852 ; Finsch, Die Papag., Vol. II., p. 820, 1868 ; G. R. Gray, Handl. Gen. Sp. Birds, pt. n., p. 155, 1870 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Sharpe, Rep. Zool. Coll. Alert Birds, p. 25, 1884 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., no. 12, p. 266, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 94, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 57, 1891 ; Hartert, Nov. Zool., Vol. VI., p. 428, 1899 (N.Q.) ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 60, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 592, 1901 ; H. E. Hill, Emu, Vol. II., p. 165, 1903 (Viet.) ; J. A. Hill, ib., Vol. III., p. 115, 1903 (Viet.) ; A. G. Campbell, ib., Vol. V., p. 144, 1906 (Kangaroo Isl.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 45, 1908 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 162, 1909 (S.A.) ; Hall, ib., Vol. IX., p. 130, 1910 (S.A.) ; Littler, Handb. Birds Tas., p. 88, 1910 (Tas.) ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. X., p. 215, 1910 (Q.) ; Macgillivray, ib., p. 221 (Q.) ; Broadbent, ib., p. 241 (N.Q.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec., Cat., no. 1, Vol. III., p. 40, 1911 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XII., p. 5, 1912 (S.A.) ; Mivart, Monogr. Lories, pi. xxxv., p. 109. Trichoglossus novcehollandice, subsp. septentrionalis Robinson Bull, Liverp. Mus., Vol. II., p. 115, 1900 : Cooktown, North Queensland. Trichoglossus novcehollandice septentrionalis Robinson and Laverock, Ibis 1900, p. 642 (N.Q.) ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., 2nd ed., p. 114, 1906 ; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 259, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 119, 1913 ; id., South Austr. Omith\, Vol. ii., p. 30, 1915 (N.Q.). Trichoglossus septentrionalis Salvadori, Ibis 1905, p. 418 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 45, 1908 ; Jackson, Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 255, 1909 (N.Q.) ; Hall, Emu, Vol. IX., p. 83, 1909 (Q.) ; Campbell, ib., Vol. X., p. 340, 1911 (N.Q.) ; Barnard, ib., Vol. XI., p. 22, 1911 (N.Q.) ; Macgillivray, ib., Vol. XIII., p. 155, 1914 (N.Q.). Trichoglossus colesi Le Souef, Emu, Vol. X., p. 204, 1910 : Gladstone, Q. Trichoglossus novcehollandice novcehollandice Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 258, 1912 : id.. List Birds Austr., p. 118, 1913. Trichoglossus novcehollandice eyrei Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 258, 1912 : Eyre’s Peninsula, S.A. Trichoglossus novcehollandice colesi, Mathews, ib. (Mid. Q.). Distribution. Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia. 15 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Adult male. General colour of the upper-surface including the back, wings and tail, green the feathers on the lower hind-neck and mantle bright scarlet on the subapical portion : primary- and secondary-quills green on the outer webs and dark brown or blackish on the inner webs, with a large ovate yellow spot on the middle portion of the feathers ; outer web of first primary blackish like the inner web ; scapulars green with some of the small feathers almost entirely red ; middle tail-feathers bluish-green, the outer feathers green broadly margined with yellow on the inner webs, occupying the whole of the inner web at the base ; a nuchal collar of apple-green ; head, sides of face and throat dusky-brown with glossy blue shaft streaks to the feathers ; breast, under wing-coverts, axillaries and sides of the body bright red, the feathers on the sides of the breast edged with yellow at the tips, those on the sides of the body margined with green at the tips ; outer margin of wing below more or less green ; lower flanks and outer portion of thighs green, the inner portion of the latter red like the base of the under tail-coverts, the sub-basal portion of the latter yellowish with green tips ; abdomen purplish-brown tinged with blue ; greater series of under wing-coverts and quills below pale brown with a broad band of yellow across the latter ; lower aspect of tail pale brown with a green tinge, the outer feathers yellow on the basal portion. Bill coral red ; eyes scarlet ; feet ashy -grey. Total length 315 mm.; culmen 18, wing 155, tail 154, tarsus 16. Figured. Collected on Kangaroo Island, South Australia, on the 5th of December, 1911. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Nest. A hollow in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, two ; white. 28-30mm. by 22-24. Breeding-season. October to January, but varies in different parts. This was the first Parrot definitely described from Australia as it appears in the New Illustr. Zool. by Peter Brown 1776. A good figure is given on Plate VII., which is inscribed “ Published . . . Nov. 3rd, 1774 ” : a good description follows with the locality “ New South Wales, in New Holland ; very numerous in Botany Bay. This bird was first brought over by Joseph Banks, Esq.” In the Gen. Synops. Birds, Vol. I., 1781 (Preface dated Jan. 1), Latham included on p. 212 the Red-breasted Parrot, adding as “ Var. A — Orange- breasted Parrot— Perruche des Moluques, Buff. ois. VI., p. 150. PI. enl. 743,” and on p. 213, “ Var. B. Blue Bellied Parrot ” (of Brown cited above). Gmelin, in his Systema Natural, latinised Latham’s work and his Latin names become authoritative. In this case he named the var. A, Psittacus moluccanus and the var. B, Psittacus novcehollandia. In the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., p. 57, 1891, Salvadori gave as his first quotation : “ White-collared Parrot, Penn. Gen. of B., p. 59, pi. 2 (1773).” In 1773 an octavo edition of the Genera of Birds by Pennant was printed at Edinburgh, but that contained no plates, and the White-collared Parrot is not mentioned therein. In 1781 a quarto edition was issued in London with a large number of plates added and explanations given. Therein does appear on PI. II., opposite 16 BLUE-BELLIED LORIKEET. p. 6, “ The White-collared Parrot,” and on p. 59, Explanation of the Plates, it is described thus : 44 P. with a red bill ; blue head, cheeks, and chin ; green neck, back, and wings. Neck half surrounded with a white collar, passing over the upper part towards the throat. Upper part of the breast of a fine red; the lower yellow; belly blue; thighs, yellow and blue; tail, cuneated ; yellow beneath. Inhabits the isles of the East Indies ? ” In the Gen. Synops. Suppl. I., p. 59, 1787, Latham added a var. C: “ This variety differs merely in having five or six spots of red tipped with yellow on the scapulars and inner bend of the wing, and the blue bounded with reddish at the nape. I observed it among the drawings of Colonel Davies .” This was placed by Salvadori as a questionable reference to the next species, but that bird has not a 44 blue belly,” so I place it here with doubt, as this is the only blue-bellied Trichoglossus. The next reference is by Phillip, who gave a plate and reprinted Latham’s account, taken from Brown, with this note: “ To this account little need be added, except that in our present specimens the parts there said to be blue are rather a bright lilac ; the bill is a deep orange, and there are red spots on the back between the wings, and a few near the vent feathers.” White simply gave a plate without comment. After Gmelin had dealt with the species as above noted, Kerr in his “Animal Kingdom,” published in 1792, named the varieties trinomially, and therefore on p. 564 wrote: 44 Ps. heematotus moluccanus and Ps. hcematotus novcehollandice ,” and added Ps. hcematotus daviesianus for Latham’s var. C above described. Notwithstanding the above, another name had been introduced by Gmelin for Pennant’s White-collared Parrot, viz., P. multicolor , for which Latham preferred his own name P. semicollaris. In 1827 Vigors and Horsfield published their “Description of the Australian Birds in the Collection of the Linnean Society,” and used the name Trichoglossus hcematodus , writing : “ Mr. Caley informs us that 4 this bird is called Wafrin by the natives, and by the settlers Blue Mountain Parrot. The young birds of this species are taken by the natives, who sell them to the settlers inhabiting the banks of the Hawkesbury and the neighbourhood of Richmond Hill, which latter settlement, being situated at the foot of the mountains, the above name has been given to the bird. The name, however, is misapplied, for this species does not frequent the mountains ; at least, I have never met with it there during the various times and the different seasons that I visited those parts. It is a bird remarkable for its docility and attachment to some people, although a perfect scold to others who may have teased or offended it. VOL. VL 17 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Flocks of these birds may be seen in the Eucalypti trees, when in flower, in different parts of the country, but in the greatest number near their breeding- places. It does not eat any kind of grain, even when in a domesticated state. It is much subject to fits, which generally prove fatal, and it is rare to find an individual kept alive above a couple of years. One that I kept, on being shown a figure of a coloured plant, used to put its tongue to the flowers, as if with the intent of sucking them ; and I have seen it make the same attempt with a piece of cotton furniture. The flesh of this bird is very good eating.’” They also included Trichoglossus capistratus as of Bechstein, but the bird they must have handled would probably belong to this species and not to Bechstein’ s. Gould’s notes are also worthy of transcription : “ The flowers of the various species of Eucalypti furnish this bird with an abundant supply of food, and so exclusively is it confined to the forests composed of those trees, that I do not recollect to have met with it in any other. However graphically it might be described, I scarcely believe it possible to convey an idea of the appearance of a forest of flowering gums tenanted by Trichoglossi, three or four species being frequently seen on the same tree, and often simultaneously attacking the pendant blossoms of the same branch. The incessant din produced by their thousand voices, and the screaming notes they emit when a flock of either species simultaneously leave the trees for some other part of the forest, is not easily described, and must be seen and heard to be fully comprehended. So intent are they for some time after sunrise upon extracting their honeyfood, that they are not easily alarmed or made to quit the trees upon which they are feeding. The report of a gun discharged immediately beneath them has no other effect than to elicit an extra scream, or cause them to move to a neighbouring branch, where they again recommence feeding with avidity, creeping among the leaves and clinging beneath the branches in every variety of position. During one of my morning rambles in the brushes of the Hunter, I came suddenly upon an immense Eucalyptus, which was at least two hundred feet high. The blossoms of this noble tree had attracted hundreds of birds, both Parrots and Honey-suckers ; and from a single branch I killed the four species of the former inhabiting the district, viz., Trichoglossus multicolor and T. chlorolepidotus , Glossopsitta australis and G. pusilla. I mention this fact in proof of the perfect harmony existing between these species while feeding ; a night’s rest, however, and the taming effect of hunger doubtless contributed much to this harmonious feeling, as I observed that at other periods of the day they were not so friendly.” 18 BLUE-BELLIED LORIKETT. Mr. J. W. Mellor’s notes read : “ When shot, the honey will run out of the bird’s mouth in a regular stream : they generally go about in flocks and make a loud screeching noise when flying swiftly along ; they also make a most deafening row when clambering about a large eucalypt which is in full blossom, chattering and screeching as if each one was trying to drown the voice of the other, and in this way one’s attention is soon attracted to their presence. They will also eat a certain amount of soft fruit, such as pears and apples that are sweet and ripe, and for this they are often shot, but it seems a shame to kill them on account of their most resplendent plumage, which is so varied as to contain fairly all the colours of the rainbow, and for this reason it has been suggested that ‘Rainbow Parrot’ would be a good name, but of course this would not take on well, now that they are so well known as the Blue Mountain Parrot. I have seen these parrots in flocks in Queensland, getting the honey from the bright orange flowers of the Moreton Bay chestnut trees ( Castanospermum australis), the bright orange of the flowers and the multitudinous colours of the parrot making a gay scene, and all the while the din of the birds being deafening. At the Reedbeds, South Australia, they come during the summer time to suck the honey from the gums, and along the Mount Lofty Range they are also plentiful at this time of the year. On Eyre’s Peninsula I have found them breeding in the hollow spouts of the gnarled sugar gums. I have also seen them breeding in the Flinders Ranges, below Port Augusta, where the timber is large along the stony creeks and watercourses. They have been trained to eat seed, and have lived in captivity on this diet for some time, but all eventually die of fits. The breeding months are August, September and October.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has also written me as follows : “ These birds are always to be found in the neighbourhood of the Meadows, South Australia. I have never seen them in great numbers here. During the last six years (1913) I have only seen a pair in the neighbourhood of Blackwood, but this year has been a remarkable exception with the Loriidae. On the 10th May, 1908, flocks of a hundred or two were continually visiting the blue gums (E. leucoxylon) in my garden. At an earlier date than this they were visiting the gardens on the plains and eating pears. The brilliant plumage of these birds formed a fine spectacle. On 28/8/08 the birds had almost disappeared from our neighbourhood. I have been in South Australia over twenty years and have never seen this species in such numbers before. I have also collected this species on the Blackall range, seventy miles north of Brisbane, Queensland.” Mr. A. Campbell also added: “ T. novcehollandice, in; company with G. concinnus, invaded the orchards of Pomonal, Victoria, in countless numbers 19 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. in January, 1908, before the native eucalypt trees, which had been retarded by a heat wave, came into full flower.” Mr. J. A. Hill, writing from Kewell, via Murtoa, Victoria, in the Emu, Vol. III., p. 115, 1903, on the question, “ Do birds find food by instinct or sight ? ” records : “A flock (about 20) of Blue-bellied Lorikeets ( Trichoglossus novcehollandice) came to a clump of sugar gums (eucalypts) I have planted for shelter last December, and stayed while the blossoms lasted. I have not seen these birds about this district for over twenty years, not even flying overhead.” As confirmation may be cited Capt. S. A. White in the Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 162, 1909 : Cl Last season, Lorikeets ( Trichoglossus novcehollandice) visited the Adelaide plains in unusual numbers, perhaps due to the big bush-fires in the ranges, and most likely these beautiful birds have been in the habit for ages of visiting these plains for food when their supply in the hills gave out ; but now, poor things ! they find man has completely destroyed their forest feeding grounds, and, not satisfied with this destruction, he shoots the birds on sight. Large numbers of these birds visited my garden and showed a great liking for pears, and on several mornings just as the sun rose and shed its bright rays on the pear-trees, literally covered in these gorgeous birds, screaming and chattering as they made their morning meal, they presented a sight that I will not easily forget. But what was my sorrow a few days later to find my friends had visited a neighbour’s garden and soon a gun was brought to bear on them, and they paid with their lives ; and so it goes on. Man takes up a piece of country in the centre of a virgin forest, clears it, and plants an orchard. When the trees begin to bear, of course they are an attraction or bait for miles around to the unsuspecting birds, and they are destroyed one after another till the country far and near is drained of our native birds, and soon they will be exterminated.” Dr. W. Macgilhvray thus describes the northern form’s habits in the Emu, Vol. X., p. 221, 1910 : “ There is, however, a distraction to the monotony of the Pigeon’s note, and this consists in the continued screechings of thousands of Blue Mountain Lorikeets ( Trichoglossus novcehollandice), which are also arriving from the mainland in vast flocks to rest in this same belt of mangrove. This large stream of screeching and cooing creatures continues to pour into the mangrove patch until it can hold no more, and the noise is almost deafening. The overflow occupies the trees on the side of the island, until, not every tree, but every limb, has its quota of either Pigeons or Lorikeets, the Pigeons making the dark mass of the mangroves to appear as if covered with great white blossoms. The Lorikeets take longer to settle, rising again and again in vast flocks, whirling and screeching over the trees ; but when they are all settled, their voices are the first to 20 BLUE-BELLIED DORIKKET. quieten, the cooing of the Pigeons lasting about an hour longer. Then, with darkness, all is quiet till the moon rises, when a few Pigeons can be heard until dawn. The night is calm, with light fleecy clouds crossing the face of the moon ; great shadowy bird-like forms flit by, and one crossing the moon reveals the form of a flying fox. At earliest dawn, when the mangrove belt is still a dark mass, the Lorikeets bestir themselves and begin their screeching again. With a very little more light they are all astir and, rising in a dense wheeling, whirling and screaming host, soon head off to the mainland. As the last Lorikeets are leaving, the advance guard of the Pigeons begins to move off in small flocks.” On the Eyre Peninsula, South Australia, Capt. S. A. White has recorded {Emu, Vol. XII., p. 5, 1912) : “ Were nesting in great numbers ... in the hollow gums. Seen in all stages, from young with grey down to fully fledged birds ready to leave the nest ; also fresh eggs.” This is the south-western limit of the range of the bird. In Vol. XIV., p. 138, the same worker also noted large flocks passing over at Mallacoota, Victoria. Under the name Trichoglossus septentrionalis Macgillivray wrote {Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 155, 1914) : “ The only pair of ‘ Blue Mountains ’ noted in the Gulf flew past the Brook Hotel, twenty miles from Burketown. At Cape York they were very numerous in all the open pockets, feeding on the blossoming eucalypts and other trees and nesting freely in the spring in the hollows of tea tree, Moreton Bay ash, or bloodwood, usually at a height of about 50 feet. Nesting operations commenced in August and continued until January. A single nest was, however, found in April. The invariable clutch was two. Thirty nests were examined by Mr. M’Lennan containing either young in all stages or eggs.” Barnard had previously recorded {Emu, Vol. XI., p. 22, 1911) from Cape York : “ Great numbers seen. Several birds, out of numbers shot, were in very poor plumage, while others were breeding. Found several nests, * each containing two young birds, and one with clutch of two eggs, on 22nd October, 1910. Measurements: {a) 1.0x0.84, ( b ) 0.96x0.84. This species breeds in holes in Eucalyptus and Melaleuca trees, in forest country. Nests placed from 1 foot to 18 inches down in a horizontal limb. Habits similar to that of Trichoglossus novcehollandice (of which it is the Northern repre- sentative) ; feed on the blossom trees.” From the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., pt. i., 1911, I extract the following notes. Mr. Grant has observed: “While collecting on behalf of the Trustees of the Australian Museum, in 1888-9, in the Cairns and Herb er ton Districts, North-eastern Queensland, Trichoglossus novcehollandice 21 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. was everywhere found to be very numerous. In the main street of Cairns there used to be a large Fig-tree, and these birds could be seen coming and going all day long, and their incessant chattering and screeching used to be almost deafening at times. At Boar Pocket, in the month of September, numbers could be seen clinging to the trunks of trees we used to call c weeping pines,’ which had drooping branches like a willow. These birds were apparently feeding upon a resinous exudation, which seemed to affect them, giving them a dazed and stupid look. I have very often seen them lose hold of the trunks of those trees, fall to the ground, roll over, then get on then.’ legs and give their wings a flap or two, and remain there ten or fifteen minutes before they could recover and fly off to some other trees. Birds we caught, while thus affected, or shot, were useless as specimens, as their plumage was more or less covered with this sticky juice or resinous exudation.” H. G. Barnard’s note reads : “ Breeds from June to December and lays two eggs for a sitting, the site selected being a hollow spout in any species of Eucalyptus, dead or alive, the eggs being placed from one to two feet from the entrance. When the female is sitting, the male bird collects honey from the flowering trees, returning to the nest shortly before sundown, enters the hollow, where he remains for a short time while presumably feeding the female. Both birds then leave the hole, returning just after sundown, when they re-enter and remain for the night. At one time these birds bred freely in this district (Duaringa, Queensland), but I have not seen a nest since the big drought of 1902.” Dr. Macgillivray’s notes follow : “ Is numerous throughout the district (Hamilton, Victoria) and destroys a great quantity of fruit annually, and is not at all particular as to the kind of fruit, seeming able to assimilate the hardest Pear as easily as the softest Plum. This is not to be wondered at when one finds that this bird, which in a state of nature lives on nothing but the honey of the Eucalyptus, can so adapt itself to altered conditions of life as to live on grain in captivity. 4 I have a record of one which lived in a small aviary for seventeen years, never getting any other food than wheat and canary seed. The Blue Gums in the streets of Coleraine bloomed continuously from May until November one year, and provided during the whole of this period a continued feast for immense numbers of these birds, as well as other honey eaters. Adult birds captured by being trapped or stunned, live well in captivity, and soon become reconciled to their lot.” The subspecific forms of this species are certainly two, but probably more may later be defined. It was not until 1900 that Robinson named specimens from Cooktown, North Queensland, subsp. septentrionalis, on account of their smaller size 22 BLUE-BELLIED LORIKEET. and brighter head coloration. He added : “ It seems curious that the marked difference in size between northern and southern specimens of T. novae, - hollandice should have been (as far as I am aware) overlooked. Since these notes were in type, Mr. Hartert has observed in his article ‘On the Birds of Cape York ’ {Novit. Zool., VI., p. 428, 1899) that specimens before him from that locality are smaller and brighter coloured.” As measurements he gave: wing 140-144 mm., tail 113-123 mm., as against typical birds, wing 153-163, tail 140-163 mm. In the Ibis , 1900, p. 642, Robinson and Laverock added : “ The northern representative of this common Australian Lory can readily be distinguished sub specifically by its smaller size and by the brighter and purer blue of the head and abdominal patch. Some of the numerous specimens received from Mount Sapphire and Bellenden Ker agree very fairly with the original specimens from Cooktown, while others approach the typical form more nearly as far as coloration is concerned, but all are distinctly smaller in dimensions. One specimen from Cooktown is remarkable for having the tail composed of fourteen feathers, and not the normal number of twelve. Iris red ; feet black ; bill red (Olive).” In the Emu, Vol. IX., p. 83, 1909, Hall recorded “ Variation in Trichoglossus Vig. and Hors.” as follows : “ Some time ago I purchased in one parcel 60 skins of what appeared to be T. septentrionalis subsp. Robinson. They were labelled ‘ Southern Queens- land.’ . . . Salvadori, writing of the species, says : ‘ Breast yellow, more or less stained with red along the middle, sometimes almost entirely red except on the sides.’ My skins show : “ (a) The young (six specimens) exhibit a nearly uniform yellow breast, with a small proportion of red upon the central area. “ ( b ) Certain of the fully adult specimens show the sides to be red also ; a vestige of yellow upon one. “ (c) Ten specimens show uniform red breasts, with a very small proportion of yellow upon the sides of the neck. “ ( d ) As the bird matures, the breast red becomes separated from the abdominal blue by a clearly defined horizontal line. Only 7 per cent, of the specimens show this stage of development. “ (e) The depth of colour on the occiput varies considerably between a light violet or violet brown to a deep violet and blue. This appears as much in the adult as in the young birds. “ (/) The abdominal blue in 20 skins is dull, mostly lustreless. In 20 others it is full of lustre. No dates are upon the skins to indicate 23 / THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. the time of year in relation to moult or nesting. In many more the transitional phases are showing. “ (g) Wing measurements in adults show 6.2 to 6.8 inches, mostly 6.5. “ I think, with Mr. Robinson, that there is a subspecies, and that it is confined to the extreme north of Queensland. About the Richmond River we get the species. I think the subspecies is nomadic in Northern Queensland, while the species is migratory between Southern Queensland and Tasmania.” In the Emu , Vol. X., p. 204, 1910, Le Souef described as a new species Trichoglossus colesi , from one specimen shot by Mr. Clifford Coles at Gladstone, noting : “ This bird probably ranges over the greater portion of Eastern Queensland, and its nearest ally is T. novcehollandice .” As a matter of fact, the description pointed to the unicum being only an aberration of the common T. novcehollandice , and in this conclusion Capt. S. A. White unhesitatingly agrees and writes me that the normal birds are common in that district. In the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., pt. i., published on 7th March, 1911, North gave the distribution (p. 41) “ as far north as Cairns in Queensland. Specimens from the latter locality are slightly smaller and have the feathers of the head of a brighter blue than examples obtained near Sydney.” It will be noted that he has overlooked Hartert’s record from Cape York, and Robinson and Laverock’s from Cooktown, both Journals easy of access, while even in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., which he quotes , are specimens listed from Cape York. In the Nov. Zool. , Vol. XVTIL, p. 258, 1912, I recognised four sub- species thus: T. n. novcehollandice .. . . New South Wales, Victoria. T. n. eyrei . . . . . . . . South Australia. T. n. colesi . . . . . . Mid-Queensland. T. n. septentrionalis . . . . North Queensland. In my “ List of the Birds of Australia ” of 1913 I conservatively reduced the subspecies to two, thus : T. n. novcehollandice . . . . South Queensland, Victoria, New South Wales, Tasmania and South Australia. T. n. septentrionalis . . . . North Queensland. The criticism of ample material now admits of the following conclusions. When a large number of skins are laid out they are separable by colour into two lots, one with a brighter head, more blue coloration, the other with a duller head, more lilac coloured. All the brighter ones are from Queensland, 24 BLUE-BELLIED LORIKEET. ranging from Brisbane to Cape York ; and the lighter ones from the South of Brisbane to Eyre’s Peninsula, South Australia. Two subspecies are therefore absolutely admissible upon colour alone, and these I recognise as given in my 1913 List. If, however, splitting such as is in vogue in connection with Palsearctic or North American birds be demanded, the four forms accepted in 1912 by me would be preferable. Measurements taken show that from Cairns to Cape York the birds are much smaller than typical New South Wales birds ; specimens from Cairns southward to Brisbane, however, are somewhat larger and almost equivalent to New South Wales ones, but on a series they notably differ in coloration, agreeing much more closely with the more northern form. These intermediate birds can bear the name colesi, though this was based on an aberration, or they would carry the complex formula : T. m. moluccanus — septentrionalis. When South Australian specimens are re-examined, the series agrees in coloration fairly well with typical birds and only differ slightly in size. As, however, each bird is consistently small, this would constitute a recognisable subspecies were these birds of Palaearctic origin. Upon averaging the figures, as is done by American ornithologists, they are distinctly smaller, but this method I do not emphasize. It may be noted that New South Wales birds are largest and that they regularly decrease in size northward to Cape York. This appears to confirm Hall’s suggestion that they are only nomadic in North Queensland, and not migratory. In Victoria they appear to be the same as New South Wales, so that Hall’s remarks as to their being migratory in this portion of their range would appear valid. In the east of South Australia they also appear more or less migratory, and these would be in agreement with New South Wales specimens. From Eyre’s Peninsula the breeding birds appear smaller, and this may be the beginning of a fixed colony, which may have given up their migratory habits, as flying north they would only get into the desert. It is unfortunate that the species name must be changed from novce- hollandice to moluccanus , but the latter has undoubtedly place priority, and the figure upon which it is based is a very good one. The subspecies and nomination of the species will then be as follows. Dominant subspecies, or better still, primary subspecies, number two as follows : Trichoglossus moluccanus moluccanus (Gmelin). New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania (migrant only) and South Australia. VOL. VI. 25 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Trichoglossus moluccanus septentrionalis (Robinson). Queensland. Secondary subspecies, also two in number : Trichoglossus moluccanus colesi (Le Souef). South Queensland. Trichoglossus moluccanus cyrei (Mathews). Eyre’s Peninsula, South Australia. TRICHOGLOSSUS VERREAUXIUS. It should be recorded in this place that certain specimens have received names, but later investigation has shown such to be abnormalities. The names, if altogether neglected, might cause inconvenience to the future student, so I give here notes of such. In the present case I extract the matter from the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., p. 59, footnote, 1891 : “ Trichoglossus verreauxius. “ Trichoglossus verreauxius Bp., Rev. et Mag. de Zool., 1854, p. 157, n. 352 (Australasia) : G. R. Gr., List Psitt. Brit. Mus., p. 61, 1859 ; id., Handlist , II., p. 156, n. 8221 (1870). “ Trichoglossus verreauxi Bp., Naumannia 1856, Consp. Psitt., n. 315 ; Finsch. Papag., II., p. 846 (1868) ; Gieb. Thes. Orn., III., p. 660 (1877) ; Rchnw., Journ. f. Orn., 1881, p. 155 (Consp. Psitt., p. 91) ; id., Vogelbild. Nachtr. 33. “ Bright green ; cheeks and throat bluish ; breast, abdomen and sides with irregular yellow and orange cross-bands ; forehead and eyebrows red ; middle of the back with yellow spots ( Bonaparte ). “ Hob. Unknown.” “This bird, which according to Bonaparte is a large and true Tricho- glossus, was only known from Bonaparte’s original and incomplete description : the type specimen is in the Museum of Paris ; but there is a second specimen in the British Museum which has been labelled by Dr. Finsch as T. verreauxius ; it agrees pretty well with Bonaparte’s description : it is not symmetrical, and after some consideration I have arrived at the conclusion that most likely it is a hybrid between T. novcehollandice and Glossopsittacus concinnus. At the present time it is impossible to re-examine the original specimen, so that I am content to leave this matter as decided by Salvadori. The specimen in the British Museum, which I have examined, has no bearing upon the disposition of the species name. Mivart, in his Monograph, pi. xxxvi., has figured both the Paris and British Museum types. - - ■ ■ ■ . _3_ *r TRICHOGLOSSaS RUBRITORQUIS. ( REE - COLLARED LORIKEET) . Order PSITTACIFORMES Family TRICHOGLOSSIDM. No. 325. TRICHOGLOSSUS RUBRITORQUIS. RED-COLLARED LORIKEET. (Plate 276.) Tbiohoglosstjs rubritorquis Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 291, 1827 : No locality given. = North-west Australia, selected by me in 1912, now restricted to Derby. Trichoglossus rubritorquis* Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 291, 1827 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen Munch., Vol. I., pp. 552, 709, 1832 ; Lear, Illustr. Psittacidae, pt. vm., 1831 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. ix. (Vol. V., pi. 49), 1842 ; Elsey, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1857, p. 27 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 95, 1865 ; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt. xvn., pi. 85, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. Vol. II., p. 195, 1878 ; Masters, ib., p. 274, 1878 (N.T.) ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; Salvadori, Gat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 60, 1891 ; North, Viet. Naturalist, Vol. XVI., p. 12, 1899 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 60, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 593, 1901 ; Hall, Emu, Vol. II., p. 62, 1902 (N.W.A.) ; Le Souef, ib. p. 93 (N.T.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral. , p. 45, 1908 ; id., Emu, Vol. IX. pp. 5, 57, 1909 (N.-W.A.) ; Crossman, ib., p. 149, 1910 (N.-W.A.) ; Mathews, ib. , Vol. X. , p. 108, 1910 (N.-W.A.) ; Hill, Emu, Vol. X., p. 268, 1911 (N.-W.A.) ; North, Aust. Mus. Spec. Cat., no. 1, Vol. III., p. 43, 1911 ; Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 119, 1913 ; Barnard, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 46, 1914 (N.T.) ; Mivart, Monogr., Lories, pi. xxxvii., p. 115. Trichoglossus rubritorquatus Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. H., p. 824, 1868 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psitt., p. 97, 1891. Trichoglossus hcematodus rubritorquis Hartert, Nov. Zool., Vol. XH., p. 211, 1905 (N.T. and N.-W.A.). Trichoglossus rubritorquis rubritorquis Mathews, Nov. Zool. Vol. XVIII., p. 259, 1912. Trichoglossus rubritorquis melvillensis Mathews, Austral Av. Rec., Vol. I., p. 35, 1912 : Melville Island ; Zietz, South Austr. Ornith., Vol. I., p. 13, 1914 (M.I.). Distribution. North-west Australia ; Northern Territory (as far east as McArthur River) ; Melville Island. Adult male. Back, wings, scapulars and tail green ; primary- and secondary- quills brown on the inner webs and on the tips of the former, the outer feather brown also on the outer web, the edge of which is yellow on the middle portion, the middle and basal portion of the inner webs bright yellow ; tail green with a bluish tinge on the * Commonly written rubritorquea. 27 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. middle feathers towards the tips, the outer feathers yellow on the inner webs ; lower hind-neck and upper mantle scarlet, the feathers of the former broadly tipped with dark and those of the latter with green ; entire head and sides of face to the sides of the throat dusky brown at the base, with bright blue shaft-lines to the feathers ; throat and middle of abdomen blackish tinged with glossy green ; breast and a collar on the hind-neck orange-red ; under wing-coverts, axillaries, and sides of the body bright red, some of the feathers on the latter tipped with very dark green ; lower flanks, thighs and Tinder tail-coverts green with yellowish bases to the feathers ; outer greater under wlng-coverts and tips of primary- and secondary- quills below brown, the remainder of the quill-lining yellow ; lower aspect of tail for the most part yellow, rather darker on the central feathers. Bill orange yellow ; eyes red ; feet slate-grey. Total length 295 mm. ; culmen 20, wing 146, tail 137, tarsus 17. Figured. Collected at Palmerston, Northern Territory, on the 8th of May, 1886. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Nest. A hollow in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, two; white, about the same size as the preceding speoies. Breeding-season. May to December. When Vigors and Horsfield described this bird they wrote : “ This species approaches very nearly to the two preceding, but it may at once be distinguished from them by the colour of the nuchal collar, which is scarlet, with the feathers margined by deep blue. The colour of the head is of a paler azure, and that of the breast and inner wing-coverts is more of an orange and less of a scarlet than in Trich . hcematodus ( =moluccanus ).” They gave no locality, nor did they give any collector’s name. Con- sequently in 1912 I designated as the type-locality North-west Australia. Salvadori placed in the synonymy with doubt the Var. C. of Latham’s Blue-bellied Parrot. I have transferred this to the preceding species, as it seems to have been based upon an aberrant specimen or bad painting and I do not think specimens of the present species, owing to its restricted range, had at that time been procured. Campbell and North include in its range North Queensland, and Banfield, in his “Dunk Island Birds,” includes the name. I further observe that Gould, in his “Introduction to the Birds of Australia,” 8vo ed., 1848, p. 77, has written : “ Procured at Port Molle on the north-east coast, previously only found at Port Essington. — J. McGillivray.” I have never seen a Queensland specimen, nor have I heard of the whereabouts of such a bird, so consequently disallow this locality until authenticated. Owing to its northern habitat, little has been recorded of the habits of this bird. Gould gives Gilbert’s notes as follows : “ This species is abundant in all parts of the Cobourg Peninsula and the adjacent islands, and is an especial 28 BED-COLLARED LORIKEET. favourite with the natives, who carefully preserve the heads of all they kill for the purpose of ornamenting their persons by slinging them to the arm a little above the elbow. It is generally seen in large flocks, feeding on the summits of the loftiest trees. Its flight is rapid in the extreme. Like the other Trichoglossi, its food consists of honey and the buds of flowers.” From this note Gould concluded : “ This lovely Trichoglossus inhabits the northern coasts of Australia, and is as beautiful a representative of its near ally, the T. multicolor of the south coast, as can well be imagined. In their habits and economy also the two birds so closely approximate that a description of one will serve for both.” This may be quite true, but I have seen no further note of its habits since the time of Gilbert. Masters also noted it was very common at Port Darwin, and recently Barnard in the Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 46, 1914, has written of it in the Northern Territory as “Very common all along the M’ Arthur, where they bred freely, from May to December, in the hollow spouts of the swamp gums. Two eggs form a clutch.” Mr. J. P. Rogers has written me : “ At Marngle Creek a few pairs were seen : none were seen at Mungi. Mr. Logue, owner of Knowla Downs Station, who knows this bird well, tells me it is very rare on his station, but in seasons when flowers are numerous it becomes very common. The first seen on my return trip to Derby were about 10 miles south of Fitzroy River.” From Melville Island he wrote: “Nov. 6, 1911. This species is numerous when the trees are in bloom. Dec. 7, 1911. Very numerous in the flowering gums three miles north of Cooper’s Camp. Jan. 13, 1912. Ten miles S.E. of Snake Bay. Many gums are now in bloom and this species is very numerous.” Very few notes are on record, as far as I have been able to trace?, and its life history is practically unknown. Crossman {Emu, IX., p. 149, 1910) records from Broome, North-west Australia, that the Red-collared Lorikeet ( Trichoglossus rubritorques ) is ‘‘ Plentiful at times. Four which I saw in a cage had the breast more orange than red, as mentioned in Hall’s ‘ Key ’ (1st edition).” G. F. Hill {Emu, X., p. 268, 1911) added: “Arrived at Napier Broome Bay on 28/11/09, and were seen in small flocks until 2/3/10. Their food, during these months, consisted of honey from Orevillea and cajaput flowers and fruit juice of a certain tree.” As might be anticipated, the scientific history of the bird is also scanty. Hartert regarded it at one time as a subspecies of T. hcematodes Linne, chiefly on account of the generic coloration, but that is not a good conclusion. 29 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. I separated the Melville Island birds, but upon criticising a good series I find that though the head appears generally brighter and the belly darker, the differences are not marked enough for recognition in this place, accepting a conservative standard of subspecific values. Of course, if it were a Palsearctic form, the Melville Island would unhesitatingly be recognised, but at the present time I consider the Palsearctic standard too fine for general work among Australian birds. 30 Genus— E UTELIPSITTA. Eutelipsitta Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 10, 1911 Type E. chlorolepidota. Smaller Trichoglossine birds, with structural characters typical, but of different coloration. The bill is similar to that of the preceding genus, but the under-edge of the upper mandible is not so sinuate. The wing has the first primary longest and the tail is wedge-shaped ; the wedge is less pronounced and the feathers are more pointed ; the feet are slightly smaller. It is difficult to define any differences save coloration and slightly smaller size, yet this genus has been accepted since Salvadori adopted it in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. Salvadori was openly an exponent of colour-genera, and his diagnosis of the present genus reads: “ Like Trichoglossus, only differing in colour ; no blue shaft-streaks on the fore-head, and no red colour on the breast; head yellowish or bluish- green ; bill orange red.” Nevertheless, this is probably a natural genus, and I would cite Pycraft in this connection. In a letter addressed to the Editors of the Emu , and published in Vol. XV., April 1916, pp. 265-266, he accuses me of misrepresenting his views. I would apologise and lay the blame to his own peculiar expressions, as he concludes : “ Had I had an opportunity of carefully choosing my words, I should not have described coloration as 4 an extremely important ’ factor in classification. I should have said, ‘ a very useful aid to the grouping of species.’ ” I am quite content to accept the carefully chosen words, as that is my only use for coloration, viz., “ the grouping of species ” ; whether the groups be called genera, subgenera or sections does not particularly concern me. With regard to the genus name, I quote from the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 10, June 1911, the data provided when I proposed the name: “ Page 45 : Genus CLXXVTII. Eutelipsitta nom. nov. replaces Psitteuteles nec Bonaparte. „ Genus CLXXIX. Psitteuteles Bonaparte replaces Ptilosclera (Bp.) Gould. “In the jfiev. Mag. Zool., Vol. VI., p. 157, 1854, Bonaparte introduced Psitteuteles with four species — versicolor Vig., iris Temm., euteles Temm., 31 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. and platens Temm. No type was indicated, and therefore the following year Gray (Cat. Gen. Subgen. Birds, p. 88) selected the first-named as type. In the Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 98, 1865, Gould used Ptilosclera as of Bonaparte for versicolor alone. He referred to Ptilosclera versicolor, Comptes Rendus 1857, but gave no pagination. In the Cat. Birds B.M., Vol. NX., p. 66, Ptilosclera is accepted for the species versicolor. Its entiy is given as that of Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus, Vol. XLIV., p. 597, 1857, but at that place only the nude name occurs, no indication being given as of its extent. The earliest systematic use of the name I have traced is that of Gould, as above. In the Cat. Birds, Vol. XX., p. 63, Psitteuteles is also retained, the type being selected as P. euteles Temminck. But Gray’s designation invalidated all later type differentiations, and consequently Ptilosclera must be replaced by Psitteuteles, and a new name is necessary for the group erroneously known by the latter name. I therefore propose Eutelipsitta, and designate as type Psittacus chlorolepidotus Kuhl.” Since then Richmond has recorded that Ptilosclera was proposed by Bonaparte, with versicolor alone as type, in one of his pamphlets, as given in my synonymy. S'" 32 H Goodchild. del vVitherby &. C° EUTELIP5ITTA CHLOROLEPIDOTA . ( SCALY - BREASTED LORIKEET ). Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 326. Family TRIOHOGLOSSIDM EUTELIPSITTA CHLOROLEPIDOTA. SCALY-BREASTED LORIKEET. (Plate 277.) Psittacus chlorolepidotus Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X.,p. 48, 1820: “ Nova Hollandia.” I selected New South Wales in 1912. Psittacus chlorolepidotus Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 48, 1820 ; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 291, note, 1827. Spotted Parrot, Latham, Gen. Hist. Birds, Vol. H., p. 197, 1822. Trichoglossus matoni Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 291, 1827 (given to same specimen as Kuhl described) ; Griffith and Pidgeon, Animal Kingdom (Cuvier) Birds, Vol. H., pi., p. 580, 1829 (lettered P. matoni ) ; Lear, Illus. Psittacidae, pt. x., 1831-2. Trichoglossus chlorolepidotus Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pi. 2, p. 130, 1826 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen Munch., Vol. I.,pp. 550, 708, 1832; Jardine and Selby, Illus. Ornith., Vol. IH., pi. cx. 1831 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. x. (Vol. V., pi. 50), 1843 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 96, 1865 ; Ramsay, Ibis, 1865, p. 305 ; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt. xii., pi. 86, 1867 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 847, 1868; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 195, 1878 ; Sharpe, Rep. Zool. Coll. Alert Birds, p. 25, 1884 (Q.) ; Broadbent, Proc. Roy Soc. Queensl., Ser. 2, Vol. II., p. 124, 1885 (Q ); Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., no. 12, p. 267, 1890; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psitt., p. l00, 1891; Broadbent, Emu, Vol. Y., p. 241 (N.Q.). Australasia viridis Lesson, Traite d’Ornith, p. 210, Juli, 1830 ; “ Timor” errore=New South Wales ; Pucheran, Rev. et Mag. de Zool. 1853, p. 159. Psitteuteles chlorolepidotus Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX... p. 65, 1891 ; Mivart, Monogr., Lories, pi. xliii., p. 131, 1898; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 60, 1899; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 594, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 45, 1908; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. X., p. 215, 1910 (Q.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., no. 1, Vol. III., p. 45, 1911. Psitteuteles neglectus Reichenow, Ornith. Monatsb. Jahrb, Vol. VI., p. 4, 1898; Cairns, North Queensland ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., 2nd ed., p. 114, 1906 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral. , p. 45 1 908. Psitteutes chlorolepidotus neglectus Robinson and Laverock, Ibis 1900, p. 642 (N.Q.). VOL. VI. 33 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Trichoglossus chlorolepidotus chlorolepidotus Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII.. p. 259, 1912. Trichoglossus chlorolepidotus neglectus Mathews, ib. Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota chlorolepidota Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 119 1913. Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota neglecta Mathews, South Austr. Ornith., Vol. II., p. 30, 1915 N. Q. Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota minor Mathews, Austral Av. Rec., Vol. III., p. 57, 1916, North Queensland. Distribution. New South Wales and Queensland as far north as Cooktown. Adult male. General colour of the upper- and under-surface green, the feathers on the manFe, hind-neck, sides of neck, throat, breast and s'des of the body broadly banded with yellow ; bastard-wing and primary-coverts black a’ong the sha ts and on the inner webs ; primary- and secondary- quills have black shafts dark brown on the inner webs which extends to the outer web on the outermost primary ; an orange spot on the inner webs, which commences on the first primary as a narrow edging, increases in size towards the inner secondaries where it covers almost the whole of the inner web and is deeper in colour, the inner webs of the primaries show a tendency to yellow edging towards the tips ; outer tail-feathers more or less yellow on the inner webs ; crown of head and entire sides of the face emerald-green ; axillaries, under wing-coverts, and a patch across the lining of the quills red. rather paler on the last, the remainder of the quill-lining and the outer greater coverts below dark brown ; the lower flanks, thighs, and under tail- coverts green, with yellowish at the base of the feathers ; lower aspect of tail dull yellow with orange on the inner edges of some of the feathers. Bill orange, fading to yellow at the tip and edges ; eyes pale pink ; feet yellowish-brown. Total length, 235 mm. ; culmen 16, wing 124, tail 91, tarsus 14. Figured. Collected at Kuranda, near Cairns, North Queensland, on the 7th of February, 1913. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Nest. A hollow in a tree. Eggs. Two, white ; 24-27 mm. by 19-21. Breeding-season. May or June to January. Kuhl described this species in 1820 from a specimen in the Collection of the Linnean Society of London, and in 1827 Vigors and Horsfield renamed it Trichoglossus matoni, observing : “ There is a species described by M. Kuhl in his Monograph on this family ( Psitt . chlorolepidotus , p. 48, No. 75), which he refers to as being in the Linnean Society’s Collection, and which bears some resemblance in characters to the present species. The description, however, is not sufficiently accordant with our bird to lead us at once to conclude that it is intended for it. The species described above is extremely common, and in every extensive collection.” It was at once accepted, however, that the two names referred to the same bird, and Kuhl’s name having priority was given preference. Practically nothing has been written of its habits. Mr. Mellor has written me: “I have seen these birds in the Blackall Ranges, Queensland, in November 1910, and also near Brisbane about the same time. They live on the honey from the various euealypts and other flowering forest and scrub 34 SCALY-BREASTED LORIKEET. trees : they make a loud screeching noise while feeding in a well-flowered tree, as a great many of them congregate together and feed in a flock.” Gould simply stated : “ To give any detailed account of its habits and mode of life would be merely repeating what I have said respecting the Trichoglossus multicolor , with which it frequently associates and even feeds on the same branch; it is, however, not so numerous as that species, nor so generally distributed over the face of the country. The brushes near the coast, studded here and there with enormous gums, towering high above every other tree by which they are surrounded, are the localities especially resorted to by it. Its principal food is honey, gathered from the cups of the newly expanded blossoms of the Eucalypti, upon which it feeds to such an excess, that on suspending a fresh-shot specimen by the toes, a large tea- spoonful of liquid honey will flow from the mouth.” The following notes are taken from the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Yol. III., and will show how little is known of the economy of this species. Mr. H. G. Barnard’s notes from Duaringa, Queensland, read : “ Trichoglossus chlorolepidotus almost invariably breeds when the Swamp Gums {Eucalyptus) are in flower. In 1907 they bred plentifully: the following are the dates of three sets taken in that year — 27th July, 3rd and 6th August. In 1908, owing to the great amount of rain in March, the Gums flowered earlier than usual, and on my return from a trip to Brisbane, I examined several nests in the early part of August, but found only young birds. The weather had then set in dry, and breeding stopped. In a good season I have taken fresh eggs up till the end of November. These birds breed in the holes in the limbs of Gum trees, generally selecting a place from which a thin dead branch has fallen, and chip away the decayed wood till they reach the hollow in the centre of the limb ; the eggs, two in number, are placed on the soft decayed wood at the bottom of the hole, which is usually about a foot from the entrance. A pair which I had under observation close to the house were six weeks eating their way into a limb, until the eggs, two in number, were deposited. The nesting-places are generally very high, the heights of the three nests taken being 69, 72 and 77 feet.” Mr. Geo. Savidge’s observations follow : “ The Scaly -breasted Lorikeet is plentifully dispersed all through the Clarence River District, and it prefers the cultivated fields and open flat country. The nesting-season usually commences the first week in June, and continues till the end of February, the earliest set taken by me was on the 23rd May. By the third week in June all have eggs or young birds ; the nest is placed in a hole or the bole of a tree, sometimes as far as six feet from the entrance, and the height from the ground varies from nine to sixty feet. Two eggs are always laid 35 THE BIRDS OE AUSTRALIA. for a sitting : upon one occasion only did we find three ; several broods are reared each season. In suitable places it is still numerous, but their numbers in this locality are decreasing. In the autumn it may be seen feeding on the nectar of the various Eucalyptus in company with the Blue-bellied Lorikeet. It is a good talker, but is a quarrelsome bird when nesting. I have on many occasions seen several locked together fighting until they gradually reached the ground. I remember upon two occasions my son running up and placing his hat over them before they could release their grip of one another.” Its systematic history is almost as brief, as, owing to its restricted range, little variation can be anticipated. In 1898 Reichenow described a new species under the name Psitteutes neglectus from Cairns, North Queensland. The chief specific character was its smaller size. Robinson and Laverock in 1900 rightly considered this as a subspecies only. North in 1911 wrote: “Regarding Psitteuteles neglectus only as a smaller northern race, and not specifically distinct from the present species. . . . There is a variation in the wing measurement of specimens obtained in the coastal districts of North-eastern and South-eastern Queensland, and, as frequently occurs in other species, the further north the specimens are procured so are they smaller.” The difference is so slight, that in my “List of the Birds of Australia,” published in 1913, I conservatively rejected the subspecific distinction of the northern birds. I have reconsidered the specimens and find that my largest Cairns specimen measures 128 mm. in the wing, while my smallest New South Wales bird reaches 130 mm., the averages of course showing greater differences. To the extreme splitter there is here good sub specific distinction, but even such a worker must deny specific value to such a close form. Consequently, two subspecies may be recognised by careful workers, E. c. chlorolejpidota (Kuhl) from New South Wales and South Queensland and E. c. neglecta (Reichenow) from North Queensland. 30 Genus — P SITTEUTEL E S . Psitteuteles Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. de Zool., Vol. VI., p. 157, 1854 Type P. versicolor . Also spelt — Psittenteles Giebel, Thes. Omith., Vol. II., p. 347, 1877. Ptilosclera Bonaparte, Rem. Char. Ost., Psittacides, p. 7, March 1857 Type P. versicolor. Smaller Trichoglossine birds, with small bills, etc., very similar structurally to the preceding but of different coloration. The bill has a distinct notch after the tip, and the edge of the mandibles is thence straight : the cere is more prominent, with the circular nostrils exposed. The tail is comparatively shorter, about three-fifths the length of the wing, all the feathers attenuate and pointed. This genus, mainly based on colour, is more definable than the last- mentioned, the shorter tail and attenuate feathers at once attracting attention. The history of the genus-name has been given in connection with the preceding genus. 37 i Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 327. Family TRICHOGLOSSIDjE. PSITTEUTELES VERSICOLOR. VARIED LORIKEET. (Plate 278). Trichoglossus versicolor Lear, Illustr. Psittacidse, pt. vn., 1831 : No locality. I selected in 1912 Cape York, Queensland. Trichoglossus versicolor Lear, Illustr. Psittacidse, pt. vn. 1831 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. ix. (Vol. V., pi. 51). 1842; Jacquinotand Pucheran, Voy. Pole Sud. Zool., Vol. III., p. 102, 1853 (N.T.) ; Elsey, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1857, p. 27 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 853, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 195, 1878 ; id., Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittac., p. 98, 1891 ; Hartert, Nov. Zool., Vol. XII., p. 211, 1905 (N.T.). Psitteuteles versicolor Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. de Zool. 1854, p. 157 ; Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 120, 1913. Ptilosclera versicolor Bonaparte, Rem. Char. Ost., Psittacides, p. 7, 1857 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 98, 1865 ; Masters, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 274, 1878 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 66, 1891 : Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 60, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 595, 1901 ; id., Emu, Vol. II., p. 36, 1902 ; Hall, ib., p. 62, 1902 (N.-W.A.) ; Berney, ib., p. 218, 1903 (N.Q.) ; Le Souef, ib., Vol. III., p. 55, 1903 (N.T.) ; Berney, ib., p. 188, 1904 (N.Q.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 45, 1908 ; id., Emu, Vol. IX., p. 5, 1909 (N.-W.A.); G. F. Hill, ib., Vol. X., p. 268, 1911 (N.-W.A.); North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., no. 1, Vol. III., p. 47, 1911 ; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 155, 1914 (N.Q.) ; Barnard, ib., Vol. XIV., p. 46, 1914 (N.T.) ; Mivart, Monogr., Lories, pi. xliv., p. 135. Goriphilus versicolor Gray, List Spec. Birds Brit. Mus., pt. m., Psitt., p. 59, 1859. Nanodes versicolor Schlegel, Mus. de Pays-Bas, Vol. III., Psittaci, p. 115, 1864. Neopsittacus versicolor Salvadori, Orn. Pap. e Moll., Vol. III., p. 519, 1882. Trichoglossus versicolor versicolor Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 259, 1912. Trichoglossus versicolor mellori Mathews, ib., South Alligator River, Northern Territory. Zietz, South Austr. Ornith., Vol. I., p. 13, 1914 : Melville Island. Trichoglossus versicolor whitei Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 260. 1912 : Derby North-west Australia. Psitteuteles versicolor versicolor Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 120, 1913. Psitteutdes versicolor mellori Mathews, ib. Distribution. North Queensland, Northern Territory, North-western Australia. 38 ■ ; - ?•£ /: l:.-V -*i ; liiffiii ilSl i 11 jM >fs I -Wi MtiMk MR ~ ' '.■- ‘\'~.y ■ •.K'TVWV*'*, »: " ■ ..:- ,v'l ‘ ,;>;: , ;5< .-■■■,■:■ ■■ £k -> ' ' 1 1 1 g ' r 11 ■ ':V T' gt. H . Goodchild. del Wither by & _3 PSITTEUTELES VERSICOLOR. (VARIED I ORIKEETJ. VARIED LORIKEET. Adult male. General colour of the back, wings, tail, lower breast, abdomen, axillaries and under wing-coverts yellowish-green with paler edges and paler shaft-lines to the feathers ; the primary-quills darker green, the shafts black, the inner portion of the inner webs of both primary- and secondary- quills blackish ; inner webs of tail-feathers yellow ; lores and crown of head cardinal red ; ear-coverts greenish- yellow ; sides of throat, sides of face, and occiput bluish-green with minute yellow shaft-streaks, becoming darker and more blue on the hind-neck and sides of the neck where the shaft-streaks are almost obsolete ; middle of throat and breast dull red with yellow shaft-lines and green tips to the feathers ; the bases of some of the feathers on the sides of the abdomen show a tendency to orange ; the major series of under wing-coverts and quill-lining blackish ; under-surface of tail, which is almost entirely obscured by the under tail-coverts, golden yellow. Bill red, with the tip, tomium and the base of the upper mandible streaked with brown ; eyes light brown ; cere and orbits creamy-white ; feet and tarsus leaden grey. Total length 202 mm. ; culmen 14, wing 119, tail 66, tarsus 14. Figured. Collected at Derby, North-west Australia, on the 26th of November, 1910. Adult female. Similar, but not so pronounced in coloration. Immature male. Differs from the adult male in being darker green above where the shaft- streaks are more contrasting, the crown of the head incompletely covered with cardinal red, and the red on the breast much less pronounced. Male, juvenile. Almost entirely green above and below, darker and inclining to emerald- green on the upper wing-coverts, rump, and upper tail-coverts ; the crown of the head with the base of the fore-head and lores only dull red ; throat and breast slightly washed with red, becoming somewhat brighter and more pronounced on the sides of the breast. Nest. A hollow in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, two ; white. 23-24 mm. by 19-20. Breeding-season. May to January. This beautiful little Parrot seems to have been unknown until figured by Lear in 1831. Shortly after Gilbert commonly met with it, and Gould’s notes from that source read : “ The northern coast is the only part of the country in which it has as yet been discovered ; it is particularly abundant at Port Essington, where its suctorial mode of feeding leads it, like the other members of the genus, to frequent the flowery Eucalypti. Gilbert informed me that it congregates in immense numbers, and when a flock is on the wing their movements are so regular and simultaneous it might easily be mistaken for a cloud passing rapidly along, were it not for the utterance of the usual piercing scream, which is frequently so loud as to be almost deafening. They feed on the topmost branches of the Eucalypti and Melaleucce . I observed them to be extremely abundant during the month of August on all the small islands in Van Diemen’s Gulf. The stomach is membranous and extremely diminutive in size. The food consists of honey and minute portions of the blossoms of their favourite trees.” 39 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. From North-west Australia, Mr. J. P. Rogers wrote me : “ Usually many are found on the Fitzroy, but none were seen this trip as few trees were then flowering. Sometimes this bird visits West Kimberley in thousands and then wholly disappears : it almost wholly depends on flowers and honey for food.” From Melville Island he recorded : “ Cooper’s Camp. Nov. 6, 1911. These birds are very numerous and have been ever since I came here. Nov. 20, 1911. This species is not so numerous: the trees they were feeding in have now finished blossoming. Dec. 7, 1911. Only a few are now to be seen and those only in the flowering gums three miles north of here. None were seen at the north side of the island. Feb. 3, 1912. Several flocks have been seen : they are feeding in the paperbark trees which are now in bloom, but they are not so numerous as early in November 1911.” Mr. Fred L. Berney, in the Emu, Vol. II., p. 218, 1903, has the following item from Richmond, North Queensland : “ I am forwarding the skin of a Lorikeet (female) ( Ptilosclera versicolor ) obtained on the river here, where during the past month it has been numerous, feeding on the honey of the bauhinia blossoms and the river gums. Never saw it on the ground except when down at water. It apparently lives almost entirely on honey. One we caught, and which has taken very kindly to captivity, is reported never to eat seed, but to subsist on sugar and water, with perhaps now and again a small portion of bread soaked in sugar and water. I examined three specimens recently that suicided in a well. They were all females, and, like the one I skinned, contained in their ovaries only very minute eggs. The bird sent fell into the sheep water-trough. I rescued it (only to make a specimen), when it squealed so vigorously that in an instant I was standing in a cloud of the Parrots, which settled on my arms, hands, shoulders and hat until they weighed down the broad felt brim of the latter almost to shut out my sight. They must have been two or three dozen on me. It was a wonderfully pretty sight, and I should much have liked to have caught the picture with a camera.” In the next volume, p. 188, Berney added : “ As very little appears to be known concerning the nidification of this pretty little Lorikeet, it may interest ornithologists to hear that I saw two broods, three and four respectively, that were taken from their nests — hollow spouts in trees, I understand — about the 15th September ; they had been in hand a week when I saw them, and the oldest lot would, I should think, just be able to fly a short distance had they had their liberty. They appeared to differ but little in their plumage from adult birds, excepting that the red crown was entirely wanting ; three individuals, though, showed the first indications of it by 40 VARIED LORIKEET. a narrow band of red across the fore-head. They were thriving on a mixture of oatmeal and honey.” G. F. Hill, in his “ Field Notes from Kimberley, North-west Australia ” {Emu, Vol. X., p. 268, 1911) has the following item : “ Large flocks of these pretty Lorikeets ( Ptilosclera versicolor) arrived at Napier Broome Bay on and after 20/12/09, and some few remained until July. Several pairs were seen preparing nesting places (28/4/10) but none of them was used. While watching a pair of Crimson Finches (Neochmia 'phaeton ) building their nest in a small hollow — a very unusual position for these birds — I saw a pair of Lorikeets drive them away and immediately set to work to remove the nest, which they did in an incredibly short space of time. After working inside the hollow for a few minutes, both flew away, leaving the Finches to collect the remains of their nest, which they rebuilt in the top of a pandanus palm close by.” Macgillivray in the Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 155, 1914, observed : “ Noted at Sedan, in flocks, feeding on the flowering box, in February 1910, and later in the flowering teatree along the river at Byromine. Later again in March, April, May and June, they were noted through to the Leichhardt, where they were very numerous on the river flats, which are covered with bloodwood, wattles similar to the Victoria black wattle, silver box, and bauhinia. They are probably spring breeders, as no nests were found in these months.” Barnard {Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 46, 1914) writes : “ Only a few were seen about Borroloola, but they were very plentiful further west (in the Northern Territory), where they were busy feeding on the flowers of the bloodwood eucalypt. A nest examined in July 1913 contained three young birds.” In the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., there is the following note from Mr. G. A. Keartland: “In December 1896, immense flocks of Ptilosclera versicolor visited several box-trees which were in blossom in the vicinity of our camp, near the junction of the Fitzroy and Margaret Rivers, North- western Australia. As they moved rapidly amongst the foliage, their scarlet crowns were very conspicuous, suggesting the idea that the trees were adorned with brilliant scarlet flowers. A number afterwards bred in the hollow branches of trees growing along the Margaret River. In habits, mode of flight and notes, they bear a close resemblance to Glossopsittacus concinnusP The range of the species is Northern Australia, and as the type locality of the original bird was quite unknown when I prepared my “ Reference List,” published in the Novit. Zool., Vol. XVIII., 1912, I designated Cape York and then separated out the Northern Territory and North-western Australian birds as subspecies with the names T. v. mellori and T. v. whitei respectively. VOL. VI. 41 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. In the South Austr. Ornithologist, Vol. I., 1914, p. 13, Zietz recorded from Melville Island : “ Trichoglossus versicolor mellori (no Northern Territory specimens for comparison). Much darker green throughout the whole of the plumage, the red of the crown of the head is not so vivid, and also a smaller bird in comparison to specimens from the Fitzroy River, N.W. Australia. Wing 114; N.W.A. specimens av. 125.” Though this conclusion agreed to a certain extent with my differential characters, I am now compelled to discard all subspecies for more material. The increase since I proposed my forms has tended to show that the characters utilised are more or less individual, and I have not yet fixed on stable separative characters. I find North has written : “ This species appears to be subject to much variation in colour. The finest pair of skins in the Australian Museum Collection was obtained by Mr. E. J. Cairn, near Derby, North-western Australia.” 42 Genus— G L 0 S S 0 P S I TT A. Glossopsitta Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. de Zool., Vol. VI., p. 157, 1854 Type G. concinna. Also spelt — Glossopsittactis Sundevall, Meth. Nat. Av. Disp. Tent., p. 71, 1872. Glossoptilus (errore) Rothschild and Hartert, Nov. Zool., Vol. III., p. 532, 1896. Centrourus Gray, List Genera Birds, 1840, p. 51 . . . . Type G. concinna. (Not of Swainson 1837.) Smallest Triehoglossine birds with small bills, long wings, medium tails, and small legs and feet. The bill is small, somewhat projecting, rather narrow, the tip followed by a notch, which, however, is not so marked as in the preceding genera : the cere is small and naked, the feathers approaching a little between the nostrils, which are circular holes. The wing is long with the first primary slightly the longest, but the first three are almost sub equal. The tail is wedge-shaped, more than half the length of the wing : the central feathers pointed, but not attenuate, the laterals rounded. The legs and feet are small and normal. Three species are included in this genus, the type being larger than the other two. For the last two I propose the new subgeneric name Parvipsitta, naming Psittacus pusillus White as type. They differ in their smaller size, their smaller and narrower bill more projecting, with longer tip and ^obsolete notch after tip, their proportionately shorter tail and smaller legs and feet. It is possible that internal differences may be observed, as in the case of Lathamus to be hereafter noticed. As a small item I have noticed that the typical species is recorded as laying two eggs only, while the smaller species fay four or five eggs. In the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. NX., Salvadori introduced a genus Hypocharmosyna with the diagnosis : “ Tail feathers green, with the tips yellow or red.” The small species I have above indicated approach this genus in the formation of the bill, and some of its members agree closely in coloration. The tail in Hypocharmosyna is a little longer, but otherwise there seems 43 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. to be very little distinction between the genera. I would conclude that G. pusilla was closer to Hypocharmosyna than to Glossopsitta typical. Another species classed in Glossopsitta is the Trichoglossus goldiei of Sharpe. In coloration it differs appreciably and it varies slightly in structural features. Rothschild and Hartert have admitted that it looks so peculiar that some one might generically separate it, an admission that is very sug- gestive. However, in the Nov. Zool., Vol. III., p. 532, 1892, Rothschild and Hartert recorded it as Glossoptilus goldiei, and if Opopsitta be considered a valid name, I conclude that Glossoptilus must be so adjudged. I have conferred with Dr. Hartert upon this matter and he agrees that the two cases seem to be absolutely parallel, and at the present time he would use Opopsitta and would suggest the usage of Glossoptilus , if a name were considered necessary, though denying that conclusion, and also regretting the erroneous introduc- tion of the name Glossoptilus. 44 Key to the Species. A .Larger; wing over 115 mm.: crown bluish, fore- head red B . Smaller ; wing under 115 mm. (a) Crown purplish (b) Crown green : face all round red G. concinna, p. 46. G. porphyrocephala, p. 53. G. pusilla, p. 58. 45 Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 328. Family TRI CH OGLOSSIDA2. GLOSSOPSITTA CONCINNA. MUSK LORIKEET. (Plate 279, lower figure.) Psittacus concinnus Shaw and Nodder, Naturalists5 Miscellany, Vol. III., pi. 87, Dec. 1, 1791 ; New Holland =New South Wales selected by me, 1912. Pacific Parroquet (a new variety) Phillips, “Voyage Botany Bay,55 pi. opp. p. 155 (June 17), 1789. Psittacus australis Latham (not of Gmelin 1788), Index. Ornith., Vol. I., p. 104, 1790 : Botany Bay, New South Wales (based on Phillips’ account). Psittacus concinnus Shaw and Nodder, Nat. Miscell., Vol. HI., pi. 87, 1791 ; Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol., Vol. X., p. 46, 1820. Psittacus p aci ficus Shaw (not of Gmelin 1788), Gen. Zool., Vol. VIII., pt. n., p. 419, 1811. Psittacus rubrifrons Bechstein, Kurze Uebers Vogel, p. 84, pi. 11, 1811 ; New South Wales (based on Levaillant’s pi. 48). Psittacus velatus Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XXV., p. 373 (Dec. 26), 1818: New South Wales (also based on Levaillant’s pi. 48). Triclioglossus concinnus Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 130, 1826; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 292, 1827 ; Jardine and Selby, Ulus. Ornith., Vol. I., pi. 34, 1829 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xni. (Vol. V., pi. 52), 1843; Ramsay, Ibis 1865, p. 305; Diggles, Orn. Austr., pt. xn., 1867 ; Finsch, Die Papag., Vol. II., p. 857, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 195, 1878;. Forbes, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1879, p. 170, figs. 5 and 6; Legge, Papers and Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasm. 1886, p. 238, 1887 (Tas.) ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds; p. 17, 1888 ; Cox and Hamilton, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., 2nd Ser., Vol. IV., p. 418, 1889 (N.S.W.) ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr., Psittaci, p. 103, 1891. Lathamus concinnus Lesson, Traite d’Ornith., p. 206, 1830. Trichoglossus australis Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen Munch., Vol. I., p. 549, 1832. Centrourus australis G. R. Gray, List Genera Birds, p. 51, 1840. Olossopsitta australis Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. de Zool. 1854, p. 157 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. H., p. 100, 1865 ; Ramsay, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1875, p. 602 (Q.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., no. 12, p. 268, 1890. Coriphilus australis Schlegel, De Dierent, p. 77, 1864. N anodes australis Schlegel, Mus. de Pays-Bas, Vol. III., Psittaci, p. 114, 1864. 46 GLO S SOP SI TTA PORPHRYO CEPHALA . (PURPLE - CROWNED LORIKEET). GLOSSOPSITTA PIJSILLA. ( LITTLE LORIKEET). GLOSSOPSITTA CONCINNA. ( MUSK LORIKEET). Wither hy & C° H Goodchild del ■ ^ MUSK LORIKEET. Glossopsittacus concinnus Sundevall, Meth. Nat. Av. Disp. Tent., p. 71, 1872 ; Salvador!, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 69, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 60, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 595, 1901 ; A. G. Campbell, Emu, Vol. II., p. 17, 1902 (Viet.); Hill, ib., p. 166, 1903 (Viet.); Littler, ib., p. 170, 1903 (Tas.) ; Godfrey, ib., Vol. IV., p. 171, 1905 (Viet.) ; Batey, ib., Vol. VII., p. 12, 1907 (Viet.) ; Hill, Emu, Vol. VII., p. 21, 1907 (Viet.) ; Austin, ib., p. 75, 1907 (N.S.W.) ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral., p. 45, 1908 ; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasm., p. 88, 1910; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., no. 1, Vol. III., p. 49, 1911 ; Mivart, Monogr., Lories, pi. xlv., fig. 2, p. 141. Glossopsitta concinna North, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. , Ser. n., Vol. III., p. 1778, 1889; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 260, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 120, 1913 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 138, 1915 (Viet.). Glossopsitta concinna didim us Mathews, Austral Av. Bee., Vol. H., p. 127, Jan. 28, 1915: Tasmania. Distribution. South Queensland; New South Wales ; Victoria; Tasmania; South Australia. Adult female. General colour both above and below, including the back, wings and tail on the upper-surface and the throat, breast, abdomen, under tail-coverts and under wing-coverts on the lower parts green ; inner webs of the bastard- wing, primary- coverts, primary- and secondary-quills, blackish -brown, the outer primary uniform blackish with a very narrow pale edging on the outer web ; middle tail-feathers green, the outer feathers red at the base and yellow at the tips on the inner webs ; mantle brownish-yellow ; hinder crown and nape bluish-green ; fore part of head, lores, and an elongated patch behind the eye, reaching to the sides of the neck, bright red ; cheeks and throat inclining to emerald green ; a patch of yellow on each side of the lower breast ; abdomen and under tail-coverts somewhat paler green than the back; outer edge of wing yellowish-white ; greater under w ng- coverts and quill-lining dark brown ; lower aspect of tail red on the basal portion and yellowish towards the tips ; bill fiery orange and black ; eyes with outer ring fiery red, middle grey-black, inner pale yellow ; feet pale green. Total length 245 mm. ; culmen 13, wing 130, tail 92, tarsus 12. Figured. Collected at Narrawa, New South Wales, on the 3rd of June, 1909. Adult male. Similar to the adult female. Nest. A hollow in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, two ; white. 23 to 25 mm. by 19 to 22. Breeding- season. August to December. The first description and figure of this bird appears to have been given by Phillips in his \ oyage to Botany Bay ” 1789, when he gave a plate (dated June 17) opposite page 155, where he wrote : “ Pacific Parroquet. A new variety. The variety here represented has a brown bill, tinged with red at the end, and a cap of azure blue at the back of the head, interspersed with a few small feathers of a yellowish green ; the top of the wings is of a yellow hue, and there are no blue feathers in the wings.” In the Index Ornith Vol. I,, p. 104, 1790, Latham proposed Psittacus australis for the bird described and figured above, but Gmelin had used that 47 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. name two years previously. The next year Shaw and Nodder in the Naturalists’ Miscellany figured and described the species with the name Psittacus concinnus. A few years later Le Vaillant figured it, under a vernacular name only, in his Monograph on the Parrots, and to this figure two later names were given, viz., Psittacus rubrifrons by Bechstein in 1811 and Psittacus velatus by Vieillot in 1817. Since that time no synonyms have been added. Mr. T. P. Austin has forwarded me the following note : “ The usual food of this species appears to he the nectar of the flowering Eucalypts ; when these trees are in flower these birds arrive in thousands, and are to be seen hanging on to the extreme ends of the branches, mostly with their heads pointing to the ground and their tails straight upwards. Some seasons great numbers of them breed here in any suitable hollow they can find, but they seem to prefer a living red gum tree growing on the bank of a river, but if such a situation is not available they will nest in any suitable hollow they can find, but not as a rule far away from water. Why this should be I have never been able to discover, as I have never seen them drinking, and doubt very much if they ever do so. They usually commence nesting early in August, and although I have examined a great number of their nests, I have never found more than two eggs or young in a clutch. Considering the vast numbers of them that arrive here in suitable seasons, usually about March, it is a very small percentage of them that remain here to breed. Some seasons very few, if any, come at all ; last year I noticed only a few pairs and this year (1915) so far I have not seen a single bird. In some districts I believe they are very destructive on fruit, but here (Cobbora, New South Wales) I have never seen a single bird in my orchard, and yet just over the fence I have seen them in the Eucalypt trees in hundreds, and plenty of fruit in my orchard at the time.” Mr. A. G. Campbell wrote me : “ An exceptionally dry spring, when food became scarce, drove myriads of this species and G. porphyrocephalus to the vicinity of Melbourne in January 1896. Much damage was done to orchard fruits, and the blossoms of Eucalypts, like Blue gums and sugar gums, planted in the gardens were eagerly sought.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has written me : “ Flocks of these birds visited Black- wood, South Australia, in the autumn of 1908, and did a great deal of damage in the orchard, especially to the pears, which seem their favourite fruit ; they then disappeared for a fortnight or more, no doubt following the ripening of the fruit in the higher ranges, but by 10th May they had returned in large flocks and were in the blue gums collecting honey from the flowers, the same as the other three species of Lorikeets.” 48 MUSK LORIKEET. Mr. Christian has also forwarded me a note : “ These birds may be found in any flowering gum-tree, but they only come to us here (in Victoria) for the summer-blossoming gums and not when other gums are in blossom at other times of the year. Chattering and noisily a whole flock will take possession of the trees, as they generally go about in large flocks. When shot they will sometimes cling to the bough, and are extremely hard to get down, hanging head downwards with the nectar running out of their mouths. They some- times gorge themselves with pears, so that, either intoxicated or helpless through greed, they may be caught by hand.” In the Emu, Vol. II., p. 17, 1903, A. G. Campbell recorded Glossopsittacus concinnus as a visitor to North Eastern Victoria, while in the same volume H. E. Hill observed, regarding the Geelong and Otway districts : “ Plentiful enough at times in all parts, especially in the fruit season, but never in such numbers as in the north of the colony.” In Vol. IV., Fred. P. Godfrey wrote : “ On 9th October, 1904, in the Bacchus Marsh district, I chopped out a nest of the Musk Lorikeet ( Glossop - sittacus concinnus) which, much to my disappointment, contained a young bird. Having enlarged the nesting-hole to such an extent with a tomahawk, I decided to take the bird, which had only a few feathers. For the first few days after being brought to Melbourne it was fed on honey diluted in water, injected down its throat with a small glass syringe. The little thing soon learnt to feed itself from a small saucer, and was no trouble to rear. Nothing delights it more than to be handled and played with ; its antics on the swing are most amusing. It is now in full plumage, the rusty marking just appear- ing on the nape and back. Occasionally it says a few words, learnt from a Rosella Parrakeet whose cage hangs near. The breeding-season in Victoria appears to be far advanced in October, as two or three nests found by our party on the same occasion contained fairly well-grown young, always two in number. These birds were very numerous in the district, and were in company with G. pusillus. Lately they are very numerous round Melbourne, having been seen in the parks, gardens, etc., feeding from the flowering gums. The favourite nest-site seems to be about 18 inches from the opening down the main trunk of a green tree in open forest. The birds quickly betray their nest by harsh screeching, and only have to be watched for a few minutes in order to detect the nest.” Littler noted in Emu, Vol. II., p. 170, 1903 : “ Large flocks are in the habit of visiting the district (Launceston, Tasmania).” Isaac Batey (Emu, VII., p. 12, 1907) of the Drouin District, Victoria, noted : “ Musky Lorikeet (Glossopsittacus concinnus). Always on the scene VOL. VL 49 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. when eucalypts are in flower. Comes to the place yet to devour fruit. Seems to know when it is fit.” G. F. Hill confirmed this of the Ararat District (ibid., p. 21) : “ A common bird, especially when the eucalypts are in blossom. The hollows selected for nesting are usually inaccessible, and for this reason the eggs are not often taken.” From Cobbora, New South Wales, the same account is given by Thos. P. Austin (ibid., p. 75), joining with the above the Little Lorikeet, writing: “ I think it best to mention these two together, because they always arrive here about the same time, and may be found feeding together. They arrive here after the nesting season in tremendous flocks, and their screeching notes are not altogether pleasant music as they fly from the tree-tops in thousands.” Writing about the birds of Mallacoota, Victoria, in the Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 138, 1915, Capt. S. A. White observes : “ Numbers of these birds were found feeding on the young shoots and buds of the Angophora trees. Many of the specimens handled had a deep, bright blue frontal band ; no doubt this is due to age.” Gould’s observations may be repeated : “ It is a noisy species, and with its screeching note keeps up a perpetual din around the trees in which it is located. During its search for honey it creeps among the leaves and smaller branches in the most extraordinary manner, hanging and clinging about them in every possible variety of position. It is so excessively tame that it is very difficult to drive it from the trees, or even from any particular branch. Although usually associated in flocks, it appears to be mated in pairs, which at all times keep together during flight, and settle side by side when the heat of the sun prompts them to shelter themselves under the shade of the more redundantly leaved branches.” In the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., there are many notes about this species, and I here incorporate such as deal more particularly with habits, as otherwise not a lot has been recorded about these. North’s own notes are really valuable : “Its appearance (near Sydney) is greatly governed by the food supply, and in some seasons it is far more abundant than others, and it is more common in the western suburbs of Sydney than it is close to the coast. When living at Dobroyde, Ashfield, in 1889, large flocks used to fly over from February to the middle of April, fairly high in the air, resembling in form a wave or the spray left on a long beach by a receding wave. These flocks were about three hundred yards in width, and three or four birds deep, and were travelling from the south-west to the north-east, and were probably a quarter of a mile apart. They could be seen at almost any time of the day, from early morning until nearly sunset. Numbers of these birds were allured 50 MUSK LORIKEET. and caught by means of a captive call bird in a cage and a snare pole. The trap consists of a long pole about twenty feet long, which is placed in a socket, and has at the top one or two thin forked limbs, which fairly bristled with horse-hair nooses. A pulley is usually attached, so that the cage containing the call or decoy bird can be lowered as required. Three seasons in particular, during my residence in Ashfield and Canterbury, the Musk Lorikeets were unusually numerous, from the end of January to the middle of April, 1889, 1893 and 1896. From my notebook I make the following extract of one season : ‘18th March, 1893. For the past five weeks large flocks of Gbssop - sittacus concinnus have been passing over Ashfield and all the western suburbs, thousands of which have been caught by means of snare poles. It seems strange that these birds, when once they alight on one of these poles, repeatedly come back until they are eventually entangled in one of the many horse-hair nooses with which the forked extremity of the snare pole is covered. These poles may be seen as one passes through Parramatta to Petersham, even from the window of a railway carriage, and are usually erected in yards or gardens, and attended to by schoolchildren or the average boy. The number caught in a day varies ; I met one boy who informed me that he had caught one hundred and twenty, but even in a good season the average all through would be about ten a day. In M. Octave Le Bon’s bird shop I heard many inquiries if he wanted to purchase “ keets ” from men, women and boys, but he was not disposed to, even at one shilling and sixpence per dozen. The mortality amongst these birds must be very great, as one seldom sees them in captivity in winter or spring.’ ” Mr. G. A. Keartland’s notes follow : “ During the summer and autumn months Ghssopsittacus concinnus is to be found in large flocks wherever the Eucalypts are in blossom, but in the latter part of spring they are generally seen in pairs. Sometimes several pairs breed in the same tree. Of late they have taken a fancy to fruit, and become a serious pest to orchardists, who often resort to poison to get rid of them, as shooting fails to scare them away. I have seen as many as fifty-six shot off one large tree, without the rest of the flock taking alarm. One fruit grower at Wandin, Victoria, who laid poisoned grain, gathered two wheel-barrowsful of them from under his fruit trees two weeks in succession without any apparent diminution in their numbers. Nestlings thrive well on a mixed diet of bread and sugar and canary seed, and when six months old will repeat several short sentences. They are the best talkers amongst our small Psittaci, but seldom live long in confinement.” Dr. W. A. Angove, from Tea Tree Gully, South Australia, confirmed the above thus : “ Gbssopsittacus concinnus is most abundant, at times the whole district being alive with them. They follow the flowering of the Gums, 51 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. and are most destructive to fruit, especially apples. A fruit grower at Houghton killed a large number in 1908 by poisoning the fruit with strychnine; he gathered over one thousand, which shows how numerous they are at times. Although consistently hunted for, I know of one nest only having been found ; this was at Mount Pleasant in 1907.” Mr. Frank Howe’s notes read : “ At Bacchus Marsh (Viet.) during October 1904, Mr. F. P. Godfrey, C. F. Belcher and myself found this honey-sucking Lorikeet breeding in the tall green box and white gums. The nesting-site in each case was in a green spout containing two young, and one young and one addled egg respectively. I consider this bird to be fastest on the wing of all Victorian birds, and when they are flying in flocks (rarely above the height of the timber) you can hear the whirr of their wings long before they reach you, and as they flash by they are indeed hard to see, so swift is the pace. As they ‘ pitch ’ in the trees they invariably alight on a perpendicular bough, then fly on to a horizontal limb and walk out to the blossoms. The call note is a single note in the crescendo and fairly high pitched, and when feeding they utter a much lower and more tremulous note. One may always tell when they are about to leave a tree, as they utter the last call a few times quickly and it seems to have a higher intonation, then c whirr-r-r-r ’ away goes the flock. This is characteristic of the genus.” Though I recently indicated a sub specific form of this species, I do not here recognise it, as owing to the migratory habits of the species the differences cannot be determined exactly. Thus, the Tasmanian form may be correctly limited when only breeding birds are examined, but present collections contain visitors and thus are comparatively valueless. Gould concluded: “ It is stationary in New South Wales, but I am not certain that it is so in the more southern country of Tasmania.” 52 Order PS ITT A Cl FORME 8 No. 329. Family TRICHOGLOSS1DM. GLOSSOPSITTA PORPHYROCEPHALA. PURPLE-CROWNED LORIKEET. (Plate 279, top figure.) Trichoglossus porphyrocephalus Dietrichsen, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XVII., pt. iv., p. 553, 1837 : No locality ; I here designate South Australia (New South Wales was an error). Psittacus purpurea (not of Muller 1776) Dietrichsen, Philos. Mag. (new series), Vol. XI., p. 387, 1832 (May) : No locality ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen, Munch., Vol. I., p. 747, 1832 (after Dec. ?). Trichoglossus porphyrocephalus Dietrichsen, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XVII., pt. iv., p. 553, 1837 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. i. (Vol. V., pi. 53), 1840 ; Sturt, Narr. Exp. Centr. Austr., Vol. II., App., p. 41, 1843 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 862, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 195, 1878 ; id., Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888; id., Cat. Austr. Psitt., p. 101, 1891. Trichoglossus purpureus Fraser, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1839, p. 113. Olossopsitta porphyrocephala Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. Zool. 1854, p. 157 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 102, 1865 ; Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 120, 1913 ; Chandler, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 36, 1913 (Viet.) ; Orton and Sandland, ib., p. 77, 1913 (W.A.) ; S. A. White, ib., Vol. XIV., p. 138, 1915 (Viet.). Coriphilus porphyrocephalus Schlegel, De Dierent., p. 78, 1864. Nanodes porphyreocephalus Schlegel, Mus. de Pays-Bas, Vol. III., Psittaci, p. 115, 1864. Glossopsittacus porphyrocephalus Salvadori, Cat. Birds. Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 70, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 61, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 596, 1901 ; Belcher, Emu, Vol. I., p. 124, 1901 (Viet.) ; Milligan, ib., Vol. II., p. 74, 1902 (W.A.) ; id., ib., Vol. III., p. 19, 1903 (W.A.) ; Nicholls, ib., Vol. V., p. 79, 1905 (W.A.) ; Batey, ib., Vol. VII., p. 13, 1907 (Viet.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 45, 1908 ; Hall, Emu, Vol. IX., p. 130, 1910 (S.A.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 55, 1911 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIL, p. 5, 1912 (S.A.) ; Wilson, ib., p. 31, 1912 (Viet.); Mivart, Monogr. Lories, p. 143, pi. xlvi. (top fig.) Glossopsitta porphyrocephala porphyrocephala Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVTIL, p. 260, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 120, 1913. Glossopsitta porphyrocephala whitlocki Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 260, 1912 : Wilson’s Inlet, South-west Australia ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 120, 1913. 53 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Distribution. Victoria ; South Australia ; South-west Australia. Adult wale. General colour of the upper-surface green ; occiput, hind-neck and sides of neck yellowish-green, mantle dull yellowish-green ; upper wing-coverts somewhat darke than the back, those around the bend of the wing, both above and below, blue ; inner webs of the bastard wing, primary-coverts, primary- and secondary- quills dark brown, the last two very narrowly edged with yellow on both webs ; rump and upper tail coverts emerald-green ; outer tail-feathers orange at the base and yellow at the tips on the inner webs ; crown of head purplish blue ; fore-head orange , becoming red on the lores and above and in front of the eye ; above and below the eye pale green ; ear-coverts pale orange ; throat, breast, and abdomen pale cob alt -blue ; sides of the body and under tail-coverts yellowish- green with a patch of orange on the former ; axillaries and inner under wing-coverts red, the median series of the latter inclining to cobalt-blue, and the greater series pale brown like the quill-lining ; under -surface of tail orange at the base and yellow at the tip ; bill black ; eyes hazel-brown ; feet iron-grey. Total length 185 mm. ; culmen 12, wing 110, tail 65, tarsus 12. Figured. Collected at Wilson’s Inlet, South-west Australia, on the 8th of April, 1910. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Nest. A hollow in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, four; white. 20-22 mm. by 17-18. Breeding-season. September to November ; but varies in different parts. There is no ancient history to this species, as it was only named by Dietrichsen in 1832, but the name chosen by him on that occasion ( Psittacus purpurea) being invalid, it was altered at once to the name it bears at present ; it should be noted that though remedied “at once,” the new name was not published until five years after. About the latter date another name was given in the continuation of Le Vaillant’s Perroquets, but the author was not a systematic binomialist. Gould’s notes were made soon afterwards and constitute the first con- tribution to its life history as follows : “ This handsome little bird is abundant in South Australia, is equally numerous at Swan River, and in all probability is dispersed over the whole of the intermediate country. It is the only true honey-feeding Lorikeet I have seen from Western Australia — a circumstance which cannot be accounted for, since the face of the country is covered with trees of a character so conducive to the well-being of the other members of the group. Most of the specimens I collected were shot during the months of June and July in the neighbourhood of Adelaide, and some of them in the town itself. It appears to arrive in this district at the flowering season of the Eucalypti , in company with Trichoglossus multicolor, Glossopsitta australis and G. pusilla , all of which may frequently be seen on the same tree at one time. As this tribe of birds depends solely for its subsistence upon the flowers of the gum trees, their presence in any locality would be vainly sought for at any season when those trees are not in blossom.” 54 PURPLE-CROWNED LORIKEET. In South Australia it is still numerous, as Mr. Sandland in 1909 wrote me: “Very common at Balah. Took nine nests last season (1908), every one containing three eggs, except one which had four.” Mr. Edwin Ashby at the same time wrote: “These birds are here (Blackwood, South Australia) in great numbers this year, but they visit the neighbourhood every year when the gums or Peppermint gums flower.” Mr. J. W. Mellor has given me the following observations : “ This is a common Lorikeet about Adelaide all the year round, where it is known as the Blue-crowned Lorikeet, although I have not seen it breed in the Adelaide Plains, but it breeds in the Flinders Range in the North. They fly in small flocks about the gum trees, uttering a sharp, short little screech as they wheel about on the wing, the flock being worked so systematically by the leader that in an instant the whole flock will turn or swoop up or down, as if all con- nected by string and forming one piece of material. They will settle in a flowering gum, chattering all the while as they cling in the slender twigs and branches and suck out the sweet nectar from the flowers ; they are extremely animated, being sometimes on their feet, and the next moment upside down with their heads hanging beneath some honey-laden flower, extracting the sweet fluid with great rapidity, and while doing this they are extremely interesting to watch. It is only in the breeding-season that they are in pairs, going into small flocks as soon as the young come out of the nests.” Mr. Tom Carter’s notes on the Western form read : “ This species was never observed by me in Mid-west Australia, but occurs commonly at Keller- berin, about one hundred miles inland, and a little north of Perth, and from there southwards to the Southern Ocean through all the timbered districts. The chief food is honey, obtained from the blossoms of the various Eucalyptus trees. When these blossoms are numerous in the summer months, the upper parts of the gum trees simply swarm with these birds, busily feeding in every attitude, and keeping up a constant chattering noise. In seasons when 'the blossoms are scarce, very few of the birds are seen. They fly in flocks at a great speed, making a loud whizzing noise when passing overhead. Many birds are killed by flying against wire and netting fences, and it was quite a common occurrence on my Broome Hill Station to find several dead in the course of a morning’s ride along some of my fences, or around the sides of the netted fowl run. Many birds also become intoxicated by the honey, and are found in a helpless condition on the ground. The breeding-season seems to be mostly in September and October. Many young birds were observed in November.” Mr. A. W. Milligan in the Emu , Vol. II., p. 74, 1902, recorded : “ I observed several of these birds on my first visit at Cowaramup Brook (West 55 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Australia). Evidently the locality has been a favourite nesting-place for these lorikeets, as the word ‘ Cowaramup ’ signifies, in the language of the south west aborigines, ‘ the resort of the Cowara,’ c Cowara ’ meaning the 4 Purple-crowned Lorikeet.’ ” ML E. B. Nicholls, writing about “A Trip to the West” in the Emu, Vol. V., p. 79, 1905, noted : Later on, in the month of May, when a fine clump of transplanted Tasmanian blue gums burst into early blossom, a flock of the Purple-crowned Lorikeets ( Glossopsittacus porphyrocephalus), with that unerring instinct which we cannot explain, found them out the following day, and continued their visits every morning for some weeks. These Lorikeets, rather scarce in Victoria, fly in flocks of twenty or so, though sometimes they collect in hundreds. I often met with them whilst walking through the bush, and noticed a peculiarity. If you fire a gun or shout out loudly the whole flock dart towards the ground like a flash, and fly with amazing speed only a few feet above the grass. The aborigines, taking advantage of that peculiarity, used to build a sort of brush fence, whitewashing it with the pipeclay mixture they used in their corroborees. When the birds passed overhead, the blacks raised a great clamour, and the panic-stricken Parrots, dropping to earth, flew into the brush and were caught in hundreds. Round about Albany the boys often frighten them into wire-netting in the same way.” Shortridge’s note [Ibis 1910, p. 165) reads : “ The Purple-crowned Lorikeet is gregarious and was very plentiful throughout the central and south-western divisions (W.A.). It was generally seen feeding among the flowers of the Eucalyptus trees, and its flight is very swift.” Capt. S. A. White, in the Emu , Vol. XII., p. 5, 1912, states that on Eyre Peninsula “ Glossopsittacus porphyriocephalus were found nesting in great numbers. Voung, covered more or less in grey down, observed. Eggs, varied from two to four ; placed on the bare wood.” Mr. F. E. Wilson in the same volume, p. 31, added, regarding the Mallee of North-west Victoria : “ Wherever there was a patch of big mallee euca- lyptus, there these birds were nesting in flocks, every available hole being utilized as a nesting-site. Nests containing every stage from the first egg to the chick ready to leave the hollow were found. The nestlings when newly hatched are covered with a whitish down, and the nesting hollow containing them on being opened smells very strongly of honey. Sometimes the egg cavity would be close to the entrance, while at other times it would be at the bottom of the tree, 15 or 20 feet below. Around these nesting areas was a scene of constant activity, the parent birds continually setting out for and returning from the feeding grounds.” 56 PURPLE -CROWNED LORIKEET. Chandler, in the next volume, p. 36, 1913, confirmed this note adding : “ It was noticed that from nearly every nest which contained eggs, if the tree were tapped in the late morning or early afternoon, two birds were flushed.” In 1912 I selected New South Wales as the type locality of this species, a locality where it does not occur. As a matter of fact, the species seems to be extending its range into eastern Victoria and may even occur in south- west New South Wales, but it is a South and West Australian bird, strictly limited to the south. Whether it originated in West Australia and travelled eastwards, an unlikely proposition, or travelled from the east to the west is not easy of decision. At the present time it is equally common in South and West Australia, and is certainly travelling eastward from the former into Victoria. The eastern and western forms are easily separable by the obviously paler coloration of the latter, and two subspecies must be recognised. Glossopsitta porphyrocephala porphyrocephala (Dietrichsen), South Australia ; Victoria. Glossopsitta porphyrocephala whitlocki Mathews, South-west Australia. The last named seem to be slightly smaller, with shorter tails and shorter tarsus and toes. This suggests nothing. I make this remark, as I have just seen two papers dealing with geographical distribution ; one writer argues that the centre of distribution of a species is where it is strongest, while the other maintains that the original habitat of a species would show its weakest form. Neither is generally right, as the environmental factors work in different ways in each case, and what might be true in one case would be wrong in another. I will deal later with some aspects in this connection. VOL. VI 57 Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 330. Family TRICE OGLOSSIDAE. GLOSSOPSITTA PUSILLA. LITTLE LORIKEET. (Plate 279, middle figure.) Psittacus pusillus White, Joum. Voy. New South Wales, p. 262, pi. (48), 1790 ; New South Wales (near Sydney). Psittacus pusillus White, Joum. Voy. New South Wales, p. 262, pi. (48), 1790. Psittacus pusillus Latham, Index Omith., Vol. I., p. 106, 1790 : New South Wales. Psittacus nuclialis (not Shaw & Nodder 1810) Bechstein, Kurze Uebers Vogel, p. 81, 1811 ; New South Wales (based on Levaillant, pi. 63). Trichoglossus pusillus Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 130, 1826 ; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 293, 1827 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., p. 548, 1832 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xm. (Vol. V., pi. 54), 1843; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 195, 1878; Legge, Papers Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasm. 1886, p. 238, 1887 (Tas.) ; id., ib., 1887, p. 86, 1888 (Tas.) ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 105, 1891 ; Broadbent, Emu, Vol. X., p. 241, 1910 (N.Q.). Lathamus pusillus Lesson, Traite d’Omith., p. 206, 1830. Coriphilus pusillus Schlegel., De Dierent., p. 78, 1864. N anodes pusillus Schlegel, Mus. de Pays-Bas, Vol. III., Psittaci, p. 115, 1864. Glossopsittacus pusillus Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 71, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 61, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 597, 1901 ; A. G. Campbell, Emu, Vol. V., p. 145, 1906 (Kangaroo I.) ; Morgan, ib., p. 224 (reK’goo I. record) ; Batey, Emu, Vol. VII., p. 12, 1907 (Viet.) ; Austin, ib., p. 75 (N.S.W.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 45, 1908; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasm., p. 90, 1910 (Tas.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., no. 1, Vol. III., p. 52, 1911 ; Mivart, Monogr. Lories, p. 145, pi. xlvi. (lower fig.). Glossopsitta pusilla Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. de Zool. 1854, p. 157 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 103, 1865 ; Ramsay, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond. ) 1875, p. 602 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., no. 12, p. 268, 1890 ; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 260 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 121, 1913 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 138, 1915 (Viet.) Glossopsitta pusilla ashbyi Mathews, Austral Av. Record, Vol. II., p. 127, Jan. 28, 1915 : Cairns, North Queensland. 58 r LITTLE LORIKEET. Distribution. Queensland ; New South Wales ; Victoria ; Tasmania ; South Australia. Adult male. General colour above and below green ; mantle and a collar onthe hind -neck and sides of neck dusky, tinged with green ; inner webs of bastard -wing, primary - coverts, blackish-brown ; middle tail-feathers green, the outer ones red at the base and yellow on the apical portion ; crown of head and occiput bluish-green becoming emerald -green on the hinder face ; fore -head, forepart of face and sides of throat brick-red ; abdomen and inner under wing-coverts yellowish -green, the outer series of the latter darker ; thighs and under tail-coverts emerald -green ; greater series of the under wing-coverts and quill-lining dark brown ; lower aspect of tail red at the base and yellowish on the apical portion ; bill black, lower mandible browner ; eyes with pale yellow ring round the pupil, with a wider one of bright yellow ; feet dirty brown. Total length 167 mm. ; culmen 11, wing 102, tail 61, tarsus 9. Figured. Collected on the Barron River, North Queensland, on the 11th of January, 1913. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Nest. A hollow in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, three or four ; white. 19-21 mm. by 16-17. Breeding-season. August to December. In the “Journal of a Voyage to New South Wales,” published in 1790, White gave figures and descriptions of new or rare birds and to these attached Latin names. Thus a plate is given, opposite p. 262, of the Small Paroquet, and the description reads : “ Small Paroquet, Psittacus pusillus. Psittacus sub- macrourus viridus, capistro rectricumque, basi rubris. Cauda suhtus flavescens, basi rubra. Remiges latere interiore fuscse. Magnitudo Psittaci Porphy- rionis. Rostrum subflavescens, sew fusco-flavescens. Pedes subfusci. “ Green Paroquet, with somewhat lengthened tail ; the feathers round the beak and the base of the tail-feathers red. About the size of the violet- coloured Otaheite Paroquet. The beak is yellowish, or brownish-yellow. The feet dusky. The tail-feathers yellowish beneath, and red at the base. The wing feathers dusky on the interior margin.” Simultaneously Latham independently selected the same name fqr this bird. Mr. T. P. Austin’s notes read : “ The habits of this species are somewhat similar to G. concinnus, and they very often appear to arrive and feed together ; they are by nature an exceptionally tame bird and show very little fear of man ; when feeding they will allow people to walk within a few feet of them, and apparently take no notice. I have shot bird after bird in a fruit tree before any would attempt to fly, then suddenly the whole flock would fly practically instantaneously, and all of them uttering their screeching note, which is usually only continued until they are well on the wing in a compact flock. When nesting they are equally tame, in fact in some cases more so ; by throwing sticks into the nesting tree, a sitting bird will sometimes come to the 59 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. entrance of the hollow, and just sufficiently pop its head up to look about; in that position it will often remain for a few seconds, then suddenly turn round and go back into the hollow, and there will often remain until the nesting hollow has been chopped out, and the bird has to be pulled off the eggs. It is very seldom they will fly away from their nests simply from the sound of danger, and even if they do, will most probably return again within a few minutes, and go straight into the nesting hollow and then nothing will induce her to leave the hollow. They usually lay four eggs, occasionally five. They generally breed in August; in fact, out of the thirteen nests I have examined containing eggs, eleven were in August, the other two during October. Owing to the birds being such close sitters, their nests are very difficult to find.” Very little is on record concerning this bird’s habits, as they seem to differ but little from those of the preceding with which it associates. I here re- produce Caley’s notes given by Vigors and Horsfield about ninety years ago: “ The native name of this bird Jerryang. This, like Coolich , is seen in very large flocks in the Eucalypt trees when in blossom. The natives now and then bring in the young ones, but they seldom live long. I had three young ones for some time, which used to huddle together and give out a very pleasing note. They all died strongly convulsed, and nearly at the same time ; the limbs were as stiff, the moment life was extinct, as if the body had become cold. The natives tell me it builds on the hollow limbs of trees, making no other nest than of the decayed wood. It has four young ones. The eggs are white and without spots.” No subspecies are at present recognisable, though with longer series the northern bird, which I recently separated, may be determined. The migratory habits of the southern forms make it difficult to limit subspecies without long series accurately collected together with field notes. Genus— 0 POPSITTA. Opopsitta Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1860, p. 227 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Type 0. diophthalma. Cyclopsitta Auctorum. Not Reichenbach, Syst. Av., tab. lxxxii., 1850. Also spelt — Cyclop8ittacus Sundevall, Meth. nat. Av. Disp. Tent., p. 69, 1872. Manopsitta Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. II., p. 62, 1913 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Type 0 . coxeni. Medium Opopsittine birds, with short bills, long wings, short tails and small legs and feet. The chief character of the Opopsittine birds seems to be the small size and bill characters. The bill is broad and deep ; the upper-mandible has the cere exposed, the nostrils circular, placed comparatively rather wide apart, the culmen being broadly ridged, not keeled ; the projecting tip is succeeded by an incised notch, followed by almost straight lateral edges ; the lower mandible is very short and broad, deeper than wide, the frontal view showing from none to five ridges, the tip squarely truncate. The wings are long with the first primary longest, the second, third and fourth slowly but regularly decreasing. The tail is short, slightly exceeding half the length of the wing ; the feathers are pointed, the tail wedge-shaped, the two middle feathers longest, and while the upper tail-coverts reach only about half the length of the tail, the under tail-coverts are just exceeded. The legs and feet are of the usual style and are small, but comparatively large when all the species of the family are examined. Salvadori, in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., separated the Family Cyclopsittacidse with the following diagnosis : “Bill deeper than long, much swollen on the sides ; under-mandible with the gonys strongly curved and abruptly ascending towards the tip ; tongue unrecorded.” As his definition of the genus Cydopsittacus he gave : “ Bill black or dark horn-colour, much swollen on the sides ; gonys broadly flattened in front, and with several distinct ridges and grooves ; nostrils exposed, or hidden when the cere is feathered.” 61 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. In the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., Jan., 1912, in my ‘‘Reference List” to the Birds of Australia, I used (p. 261) Family Opopsittidse, Genus Opopsitta Sclater, to replace Cyclopsitta, explaining : “ Note. — Cyclopsitta was introduced by Reichenbach, Syst. Av., tab. Ixxxii., 1850, where figures of a head, tail, wing and claw are given. It seems to be a composite effort, as the head most resembles that of Trichoglossus versicolor Lear, the tail is unlike that of G. diophthalma Jacquinot and Pucheran, while the wing does not seem like that of any of these little parrots. It can certainly not be used for this genus, and I have rejected it as indeterminable.” In spite of this clear statement of facts, Ogilvie-Grant continued the misusage of Cyclopsittacus in the Ibis Jubilee Supplement, No. 2, December, 1915. In the April Ibis, I pointed out how misleading such action was in the following language (p. 300) : “ Cyclopsittacus. “ It seems strange that in this case Ogilvie-Grant has disagreed with Rothschild and Hartert, as in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XX., 1913, p. 485, they correctly used Opopsitta. This was due to my initiative, as I examined the basis of Cyclopsitta Reichenbach and recorded the result in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., 1912, p. 261. The writers quoted examined my data and found them to be correct. It may be objected that I write strongly, but this is necessary in view of the very important position held by Mr. Ogilvie- Grant; his actions, right or wrong, are liable to prejudice workers unable to consider technical matters for themselves, and, consequently, he should be specially careful.” Mr. Ogilvie-Grant’ s idea of special carefulness is shown by his reply (p. 311) : “ I have carefully considered Reichenbach’s plate Ixxxii., Syst. Av. (1850), and disagree with Mr. Mathews’s conclusions. The drawings are, perhaps, not very good, but sufficiently so, and have been accepted by Count Salvadori. Opopsitta Sclater, P.Z.S. 1860, p. 227, was introduced without description, and was most likely a printer’s error, overlooked by the author, as, on p. 224, he uses the name Cyclopsitta in referring to the Philippine species Psittacus lunulatus Scop. The Philippine species were afterwards placed in a separate genus, Bolbopsittacus, by Count Salvadori.” In order that the matter may be examined by unprejudiced workers, I reproduce exactly the figures given by Reichenbach under the name Cyclopsitta. The items to be considered are four in number. (I.) No species of the group we are now considering has a dark cap as shown in the figure. (II.) No species has the wing formula as depicted. (III.) No species has the tail of the shape figured. (IV.) No species has the feet as large as com- paratively shown. To emphasize the item “ The drawings are, perhaps. 62 OPOPSITTA. not very good, but sufficiently so,” I might explain that the majority of Reichenbach’s figures are excellent and recognisable at sight. Again, it is conjectured that Reichenbach took up the name Cyclopsitta from Hombron and Jacquinot’s plate of their Cyclopsitte double ceil which appeared in 1846. The plate does not show the details given by Reichenbach, which must therefore have been drawn from a specimen. The species named by Hombron and Jacquinot is the one from which I have written up my generic characters, and it differs in every essential, so that Ogilvie-Grant’s careful consideration is valueless, as the accompanying figures taken from that bird will prove. REICHENBACH’S DRAWING. DRAWN FROM 0. DIOPHTHALMA. The history of the name Opopsitta will now be given. In an article in the Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1860, p. 223 et seq ., Sclater, writing on the genus Prioniturus, listed the Parrots of the Eastern Archipelago. On p. 227 he included Opopsitta diophthabna and Opopsitta desmaresti. "Whatever his intention was cannot now be known, and fifty years after he wrote me that it was a slip for Cydopsitta. That may have been, but in 1862 Rosenberg accepted the genus name Opopsitta , and again in 1873 Sclater himself made use of it. From the published account the name appears valid, as Opo- does not seem to be a printer’s error for Gy do-, as Ogilvie-Grant 63 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. suggests. It may have been a mental aberration, and for this idea we have the parallel case of Glossoptilus goldiei Rothschild and Hartert. In the latter case, Hartert wrote the genus-name as given instead of Glossopsittacus or Glossopsitta. It was later written that probably some worker would generieally separate goldiei, so that a name is already provided should that course be adopted and should Opopsitta be accepted. I have considered the latter case from all points of view, and at one time, accepting Ogilvie-Grant’s standpoint, proposed as a substitute Manopsitta. Again reviewing the matter I continue the usage of Opopsitta, but give the following notes on the species. I criticised the birds and made my notes as hereafter given, and afterwards found that Salvadori had practically made the same disposition but did not provide names. This seems very strange, as otherwise Salvadori separated pure colour-genera, and moreover, such as might easily have been overlooked by the most extreme splitter. In the present instance I find four distinct groups easily recognisable. Opopsitta I have already described in detail, and to this group belongs the Australian leadbeateri, which at one time, following Hartert, I only sub- specifically separated, but now regard it as quite of specific value. Manopsitta, which at present includes coxeni alone, may be considered as a subgenus, but probably later it will be given generic rank. The species is larger than typical Opopsitta, with comparatively shorter wings, and the second primary longest, the first being equal to the third ; the tail is comparatively longer, both the under and upper tail-coverts being also longer, the former about equal to the tail ; the feet are comparatively smaller, being about the same size as those of the typical species. The bill is heavier, with the face of the under-mandible three-ridged. A series of birds classed in Cyclopsittacus have the cere feathered : in addition they are larger birds with projecting bills of narrower contour, the under-mandible with the face multi-ridged. The wing is long with the wing-formula of Manopsitta, but the tail is longer, more wedge-shaped, the feathers pointed and the two middle tail-feathers much more elongate ; the feet are comparatively large. As a secondary adjunct, in some cases they have developed a facial ornament of long feathers on the cheeks and ear- coverts. This group is as well marked as any genus of Parrots, and I consider it of much better value than, say, Eutelipsitta or Charmosynopsis. I therefore provide for it the new genus-name Cbuopsitta, and name Cyclopsittacus edwardsii Oustalet as type. The forms blythi, occidentalis and desmaresti, as determined in the British Museum Collection, belong here, all agreeing in the general characters given above. In the 64 OPOPSITTA. Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., pp. 88-89, Salvadori grouped together with the definition “ Feathers of the cheeks and ear-coverts very long and narrow ” salvadorii and edwardsi , and in another group, “ Feathers . . . not very long and narrow,” named desmaresti, occidentals, blythi and cervicalis. These two sections constitute my genus, and I note Ogilvie-Grant’s figure of his Cyclopsittacus godmani shows strongly developed facial ornamentation, yet Rothschild and Hartert ranked it as a subspecies only of blythi, which Salvadori regarded as an unadorned species. Consequently there does not seem any appreciable difference between the two sections. There is another group of very small birds with square tails which, however, must be regarded as a very distinct genus. In this group the cere is naked, the bill projecting, the face of the lower mandible three-ridged. The wing has the first three primaries practically equal, with the fourth very little less ; a wing-formula unlike either of the preceding. The tail is very short, almost hidden by the upper and under tail-coverts, the former slightly shorter, the latter equal ; it has the feathers broad, not pointed, and the tail is square, not wedge-shaped, and much less than half the length of the wing. I name as type Cyclopsitta suavissima Sclater, introducing for it the generic name Nannopsittacus. This includes the species gugliebni III., melanogenys and nigrifrons of the British Museum Catalogue. % VOL, VI. 65 Key to the Species. A. Larger ; wing over 95 mm., lores red . . . . . . 0. coxeni, p. 67. B . Smaller ; wing under 95 mm., lores blue . . . . 0. leadbeateri, p. 69. 66 ' C r . . , ■ - >■ > - . . , 8 OPOPSITTA LEADBEATERI. f BL UE - FACED L ONI LET) . OPOPSITTA COXENI. (NED - FA CEB L OR/LET) . Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 331. Family OPOPS1TTIDAS. OPOPSITTA COXENI. RED-FACED LORILET. (Plate 280, lower figures.) Cyclopsitta coxeni Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1867, p. 182 ; thirty miles inland from Brisbane, Queensland. Cyclopsitta coxeni Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1867, p. 182 ; id., Birds Austr. Suppl., pt. rv. (pi. 65), 1867; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 195, 1878; id., Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; id.. Cat. Austr., Psittaci, p. 32, 1891 ; Witmer Stone, Austral Av. Rec., Vol. I., p. 147, 1913. Psittacula coxeni Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 957, 1868. Cyclopsittacus coxeni Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 139 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 94, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 61, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 598, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 46, 1908. Opopsitta coxeni Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 261, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 121, 1913. Manopsitta coxeni Mathews, Austral Av. Rec., Vol. II., p. 62, 1913. Distribution. South Queensland, Northern New South Wales. Adult male. General colour above and below green ; head, back, wings and tail dark green ; fore part of face, ear-coverts, and inner webs, and innermost secondary- quills red ; a tinge of dark blue on the lower cheeks ; bastard-wing, primary -coverts, primary- and secondary-quills dark blue on the outer webs and blackish, with a yellowish white spot on the inner ones ; tail dark green like the back ; throat and entire under-surface yellowish-green, with a patch of yellow on the sicj^s of the body ; under wing-coverts bluish-green ; the greater series and quill-lining glossy-brown with a pale yellow band across the latter ; lower aspect of tail, which is hidden by the under tail-coverts, pale brown ; bill bluish horn ; eyes brown; feet ashy brown. Total length 165 mm.; culmen 15, wing 98, tail 49, tarsus 11. Figured. Collected on the Tweed River, Northern New South Wales in June, 1892. Adult female. Similar to the adult male (?) Nest and Eggs. Undescribed (?) In the Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1867, p. 182, Gould wrote about a new Parrakeet from Australia, thus : “ Mr. Coxen of Brisbane, in Queensland, having forwarded to me a correct drawing of a small species of Parrakeet new to the Australian 67 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Avifauna, I hasten to bring it under the notice of the Zoological Society, and to name the bird Cyclopsitta coxeni , in honour of the gentleman who has been the first to make us aware of the existence of the species.” Then followed a description, succeeded by the “ Ee?narJcs. — In the note accompanying the drawing, Mr. Coxen states that two examples of this bird were procured by Mr. Waller from a sawyer, who found them in a scrub on the east coast, where he was at work, and where he observed the species moving about in small flocks of from fifteen to twenty in number, and by no means shy.” The fuller history does not add much to our knowledge. Thus Mr. Waller wrote : “ The history of the bird, so far as I can learn, is, that during the month of June, 1866, it was shot by a sawyer near a mountain scrub, about thirty miles from Brisbane. The man states that he had seen a flock in the neighbourhood for some weeks, and had shot several for a pudding ; being somewhat interested in ornithology, and observing a difference between them and the ordinary Green Parrakeet, he skinned three or four, two of which he brought me ; the others were, unfortunately, destroyed.” Apparently nothing whatever is known of the life-history of this bird. In the Austral Avian Record , Vol. I., p. 147-8, 1913, is recorded : “ Description based on a painting sent by Mr. Coxen, of Brisbane, and now in the possession of G. M. Mathews, of birds killed on the east coast. There are two specimens received from Gould in the British Museum.” The first part of this statement is not correct; the painting I have is of 0. leadbeateri. 68 Order PS1TTACIF0RMES No. 332. Family OPOPSITTIDJE. OPOPSITTA LEADBEATERI. BLUE-FACED LORILET. (Plate 280, upper figures.) Cyclopsitta leadbeateri McCoy, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. iv., Yol. XVI., p. 54, July 1, 1875 : Rockingham Bay, North Queensland. Cyclopsitta leadbeateri McCoy, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. iv., Vol. XVI., p. 54, July 1, 1875. Cyclopsitta maccoyi Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1875, p. 314 (Aug. 1, 1875) : Rockingham Bay, North Queensland ; id., Birds New Guinea, pt. i., pi. 10, Vol. V., pi. 7, 1875 ; Sassi, Journ. fur Orn. 1909, p. 382 (N.Q.) ; Witmer Stone, Austral Av. Rec., Vol. I., p. 148, 1913 ; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 155, 1914 (N.Q.). Cyclopsitta macleayana Ramsay, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1875, p. 602 : Cardwell, North Queensland ; id., Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 195, 1878 ; id., Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr., Psittaci, p. 33, 1891. Cyclopsittacus maccoyi Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 139 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 95, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 61, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 599, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 46, 1908 ; Broadbent, Emu, Vol. X., p. 241, 1910 (N.Q.). Opopsitta diophthalma leadbeateri Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 261, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 121, 1913 ; id. South Austr. Ornith., Vol. II., p. 30, 1915. Opopsitta diophthalma boweri Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. II., p. 127, Jan. 28, 1915 : Barron River, North Queensland. Distribution. North Queensland (Cardwell district). Adult male. General colour above and below green, darker on the back, wings and tail, brighter on the head, hind-neck, sides of neck and breast, paler and more ^ello wish- green on the lower breast, abdomen, thighs, under tail-coverts and under wing-] coverts, the outer margin of the last more or less blue ; bastard- wing, primary- coverts, and outer aspect of the primary- and secondary-quills dark blue, with the inner webs dark brown, a whitish spot on those of the quills which commence on the third or fourth primary-quill, some of the outer webs of the secondary- quills green ; base of forehead red, as is also a large patch on the sides of the face, as well as the inner webs of the innermost secondaries ; lores and a line below the eye turquoise-blue ; chin and lower cheeks tinged with purplish-blue ; a large patch of yellow on the sides of the body ; greater series of under wing-coverts and quill-lining pale brown, the margins of the former and a band across the latter lemon-yellow ; lower aspect of tail, which is obscured by the under tail-coverts, greyish-brown ; bill light blue-grey ; eyes dusky, feet light grey. Total length 130 mm. ; culmen 14, wing 92, tail 49, tarsus 10. Figured. Collected at Tolga, North Queensland, in August, 1911. 69 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Adult female. Differs in the absence of the red on the side of the face, this part being bluish-green. Wing 84. Figured. Collected at Rockingham Bay, Queensland. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch three to four, white at first, but becoming discoloured by the wood dust in the nest (Campbell). Breeding -season. “ September to November ” (Campbell). In the Proceedings of the Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1875, p. 602, Ramsay, writing on the Birds of Queensland, included : “ Cydopsilta madeayana Ramsay, ‘Sydney Morning Herald5 Newspaper, Nov. 15, 1874. “ This interesting and prettily-marked species was discovered first by Mr. K. Broadbent near Cardwell, and found feeding on the native figs with which the scrubs abound. The specimens in the Dobroyde Collection are the only fully adult specimens obtained. I believe I forwarded to the Society a full description of the adults, male and female, and the young, several months ago. In case I should not have done so, I enclose a slip from the ‘ Sydney Morning Herald,’ in which a portion of my notes appeared about the same time. [Ed. note. — This description was never received. The species appears to be the same as C. maccoyi Gould, P.Z.S. 1875, p. 314, and Birds of New Guinea , pt. i., pi. 10.]” Then followed a detailed description and the following “ Remarks. — This very prettily-marked species is the second of the genus Cydopsilta now known to inhabit Australia ; it is closely allied, though quite distinct from C. coxeni Gould, being much smaller and more beautifully and distinctly marked about the face and head. The specimens now gracing the collection of William Macleay, Esq., M.L.A., of Elizabeth Bay, Sydney, those in the Australian Museum and in the Dobroyde Museum collection, from which the above descriptions have been jointly taken, were procured by Mr. K. Broadbent, taxidermist, during a collecting tour in the neighbourhood of Cardwell. They were found feeding on the fruit of the native fig-trees, which abound in the dense scrubs and brushes clothing the margins of creeks and rivers at the foot of the coast range. It is doubtless the northern representative of Cyclopsitta coxeni , which, I believe, has not been met with north of the Brisbane district.” The editorial reference to Gould’s description was correct, the same species, from the same lot, having been sent to him by Mr. Waller, while even previously it had been described by McCoy, again from the same collector’s material. It would appear that Broadbent got quite a number and sold them to everyone, and the beauty of the small Parrot attracted three recipients so 70 BLUE-FACED LORILET. much that they named the species. Quaintly Gould, at Waller’s request, named the species maccoyi after Professor Maccoy, while the latter, ignorant of this proposal, independently named it leadbeateri, and this last name is the oldest. Ramsay claimed to have described it in a newspaper, but I have been unable to trace his description. Apart from the confusion in connection with the triple nomination of the bird, little has been written concerning the species. Thus Campbell writes : “ In February, 1894, Mr. W. B. Barnard, after a northern tour, forwarded me some interesting field notes, including one referring to this Lorilet, with a skin for identification. Two nests were found in small holes in trees, at a height of about forty feet from the ground ; the eggs were deposited about a foot downward from the entrance. The birds were discovered breeding in the scrub and forest country alike, from September to November. During my own Cardwell camp-out (1885) we procured skins of the Blue-faced Lorilet.” In the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., dealing with the “ Nests and Eggs of Birds found breeding in Australia and Tasmania,” no mention is made of either of these Lorilets, the author, North, absolutely ignoring their occurrence in the country. Such action makes caustic criticism necessary, and H. J. White has already commented upon the manner in which his Title had been neglected by the author. In the South Austr. Ornith., Vol. II., 1915, I have given a note written by Bowyer-Bower at Barron River, Queensland : “ Appears plentiful, but is often overlooked, as it makes no noise when feeding, and creeps about like a mouse. The only indication of its presence is the quantity of seeds that keep dropping all the time it is feeding, but even under the very tree it is in one can see and hear nothing of it, except by carefully watching. It only makes a noise as it leaves or arrives at a tree.” A Nothing further is recorded of this bird. Although I differentiated the Barron River form, I here suppress it until more material becomes available, though I would observe that the sub specific values in this genus as recognised in New Guinea forms are very slight. A new subspecies or even species is indicated by the following item. Macgillivray , under the name Cyclopsitta 7naccoyi, wrote {Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 155, 1914) : “ When camped a few miles from the Jardine River, on the Cape York Peninsula, a pair of small Lorikeets was noted feeding high up in a flowering bloodwood near the camp. One was shot, but fell into some tea- tree brush and could not be found. Mr. M’Lennan is sure that they were of this species.” 71 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Until this Cape York form is recovered, I am considering the Queensland bird as a distinct species from the New Guinea diophthahna, as it appreciably differs, and with which I previously sub specifically associated it. If the Cape York bird proved intermediate, the latter association would be renewed, but should it turn out otherwise the present rank would stand. The painting in my possession, as mentioned under the former species, was purchased (together with others sent by E. Waller of new species of birds) from John Gould. The painting of this Parrot is life size, and both male and female are included. Pasted on to the painting is a letter from Kendall Broadbent as follows : — Edward Street, To J. Gould, Esq. Brisbane. July 11$, /74. Dear Sir, The new parrot Cyclopsitta which yon will receive the drawing of, you will see by the notes accompanying it that it was collected by me at Rockingham Bay, and should it prove to be new, I wish it to be called after my friend Mr. Waller of Brisbane, as a mark of my esteem for his kindness to me, and who has worked hard for many years collecting the ornithology of Australia. I remain, Dear Sir, Yours respectfully, Kendall Broadbent. Also in Waller’s handwriting is : “This parrot was collected by Mr. Broadbent in the scrubs of Rockingham Bay ; both in the lower and mountain scrubs it feeds on the native figs and other fruits indigenous to the scrubs of the north coast. “They are difficult,” says Mr. Broadbent, “to obtain, and their presence is only to be found by the falling of the refuse of the fruit they are feeding on. They utter a weak screech when they enter and also when they leave, but make no noise while feeding.” 72 Genus— PR OBOSCIGER. Probosciger Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 12, 1820 Type P. aterrimus. Solenoglossus Ranzani, Elem. di Zool., Vol. III., pt. il, p. 18, 1821 Type P. aterrimus. Microglossus Vieillot, Galerie des Ois., Vol. I., pt. n., p. 47, pi. 50, 1822 Type P. aterrimus. Also spelt — Microglossum Vigors, Zool. Joum., Vol. II., p. 63, 1825. Microglossa Voigt, Cuvier’s Thierreich, Vol. I., p. 47, 1831. Macroglossum Temminck, Coup, d’oeil Inde. Archip., Vol. III., p. 405, 1849. Eurhynchus “ Berthold, Ed. Latreille Fauna Thierreich 1827,” fide C. A . Rich- mond in litt. Lesson, Traite d’Ornith, p. 183, 1830. Largest Proboscigerine birds, with huge massive bills, long crest, naked cheeks, long wings, long rounded tail, short legs and feet. Superficially recognisable by the above combination of features. The upper-mandible is much compressed, long, apparently solid, and much hooked, the tip very long, acute and pointed ; the inside of tip cross-lined. The tip is succeeded by a huge solid perpendicular triangular tooth, the edge afterwards concave. The cere is feathered, the nostrils appearing as small circular holes at one-third the depth from the culmen ridge. The under-mandible massive, broader at the base than the upper-, and almost twice as deep as broad, somewhat triangular, front convex and broad, sides straight, almost parallel, but increasing towards the base. The bill is much deeper than long, and the tongue is short and cylindrical. 1 The lores , cheeks and chin are naked, and the top of the head is adorned with a very long crest of narrow feathers. The wing is very rounded with the fourth primary longest, the third about equal to the fifth, the second slightly longer than the sixth, with the first shorter than the seventh. The tail is very long and rounded, the feathers, twelve in number, broad, the length about two-thirds that of the wing. The feet are short, the tarsus stout, covered with small reticulate scales : the middle toe is proportionately long, the fourth very short. Superficially these birds recall Maccaws, and many years ago Kuhl wrote : “ Species intermedia inter Aras et Kakadoes.” VOL. VI. 73 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. The skeletal characters seem to confirm this suggestion. In D’Arcy Thompson’s essay on the “Cranial Osteology of the Parrots” ( Proc . Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1899, pp. 9-46), the figure given of the cranium of M. aterrimus at once suggests that of the Maccaws, and is very different from those of the other Cockatoos with which it is placed, the point of resemblance being the complete orbital ring. Differences are cited in the text. When the Maccaws are treated of, peculiarly enough — though Anadorhynchus has an incomplete orbital ring — comparisons are continually made with Microglossus. The osteology differs so much from that of the other Cockatoos, that I have separated the present species as of family rank, and it is possible that a complete re-examination would cause it to be placed nearer the Maccaws than the Cockatoos. It is obviously a very isolated form, however it be viewed, and it is worthy of an extended investigation. Before it is too late, a delightful essay might be prepared by one of the younger Australian ornithologists on the comparative osteology of, say, Probosciger, Calyptorhynchus , Zanda, Kakatoe , Licmetis and Eolophus, from nestling to adult. In the Nov . Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 11, June 1911, correcting the nomen- clature of my “ Handlist Birds Australia,” I wrote : “ Page 46 : Genus CLXXXII., Solenoglossus Ranzani, Elem. di Zool., iii., pt. ii., p. 18, pi. v., figs. 2, 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), used Microglosswn Geoffr., 1809 ; probably following Gray, Agassiz, in the Nomen. Zool. Aves, p. 47, 1846, gave Microglossum Geoff., Ann. Mus., XIII. (1809). But search through the Annales Mus. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XIII. (1809) does not reveal Microglossum, though in that volume Geoffroy Saint Hilaire introduced a new genus Microdactylus. 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, Galerie cFOiseaux I., p„ 47, pi. 50. In the same place, Count Salvadori pointed out that Probosciger Kuhl ( Consp . Psitt., p. 12, 1820) was not proposed generic- ally, but only the name given to a section, and therefore did not recognise it as applicable from that introduction. With this statement I quite agree, and refuse to accept names simply proposed sectionally as of their sectional date.” 74 PROBOSCIGER. Two criticisms of this conclusion have appeared. In the Ibis Jubilee Suppl., No. 2, December 1915, Ogilvie-Grant, using Solenoglossus , wrote: “ Count Salvadori in a footnote (Cat. XX., p. 102) states that Solenoglossus Ranzani, Elem. di Zool. III., pt. 2, p. 18 (1821) has priority over Microglossus Vieill., Gal. des Ois. I., pt. 2, p. 47, pi. 50 (1821-23). He does not, however, use the former name, as ‘ it conveys quite a false idea of the structure of the tongue.’ Page 47 appeared in Livr. 10 and 11, published on 2nd Feb., 1822 {fide C. D. Sherborn).” I would not have taken any notice of this item had there not been necessity to remark upon his other words in connection with the species. In the Ibis , April, 1916, p. 300, I therefore observed : “ Though Ogilvie- Grant has used this name ( Solenoglossus ) to replace Microglossus Auct., as determined by myself some years ago {Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., 1911, p. II), a reconsideration is necessary, and I will fully discuss the matter in my ‘ Birds of Australia,’ the part dealing with these birds being now in preparation. Again, though the date of publication of Vieillot’s Microglossus is given ‘ {fide C. D. Sherborn),’ this had been published by me in the ‘ Austral Avian Record,’ Vol. II., 1915, pp. 153-158.” Ogilvie-Grant rejoined (p. 311) : “ That this name {Solenoglossus) has priority over Microglossus was pointed out by Count Salvadori, Cat. Birds B. M. XX., p. 102 (1891), but, for the reason there stated, he did not make use of it. Mr. Mathews’s notes on the matter appeared in 1911 ! ” That is hardly fair criticism, as the absolute priority of the name Soleno- glossus was not made certain until I published the dates of Vieillot’s Galerie d’Oiseaux in 1915, when I explained the reason. I may here state that by so doing I saved Mr. Ogilvie-Grant from making a serious blunder, as he had wrongly concluded that Microglossus had priority, notwithstanding his present championship of Count Salvadori’s twenty odd year-old statement. As the matter now stands, no further reference is needful, on account of the second criticism. Thus, W. de W. Miller, writing on “ Notes on Ptilosis, with special reference to the Feathering of the Wing,” in the Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. XXXIV., March 19, 1915, observed (p. 134, footnote 1) : “As stated by Mathews {Novitates Zoologicce, Vol. XVIII., pp. 11-13, 1911), Cacatua Vieillot and Galopsitta Lesson must be replaced respectively by Cacatoes Dumeril and Leptolophus Swainson on the grounds of priority. I cannot agree, however, with the contention that Probosciger Kuhl and Gonurus Kuhl should be superseded by Solenoglossus Ranzani and Aratinga Spix. Though the older names were merely given as ‘ sections,’ these are equivalent to subgenera, and there seems to be no reason why they should not be accepted as such.” 75 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. This note determined the reconsideration of the status of the name Probosciger, the rejection of which name having long been unsatisfactory in my mind. I had been dubious about my decision, as I found that in most other branches of science sectional names were, and had been for many years, treated as on the same level as subgeneric names. Even in Ornithology, racial and sectional names had otherwise been recognised, so that I could see no reason for the present exception. I therefore now make use of Kuhl’s name and give particulars of its introduction. In his Conspectus Psittacorum Kuhl only recognised one genus Psittacus , but this he divided into six sections ; as no subgenera are noted, it must be accepted that these sections are absolutely the equivalent of our subgenera. If the constituents of the sections be examined, we must recognise the advance upon any previous division of Parrots, as apparently working upon Le Vaillant’s work on this group Kuhl certainly made improvements. His sections were named Ara, Conurus, Psittacula, Psittacus, Kakadoe and Probosciger. Only two species were included in the last named, aierrimus Gm. L. and goliath nov. These are now recognised as onfy sub specifically distinct, so that the section was monotypic. 76 3 SOLENOGLOSSUS MACGILLIVRAYI. (CAPE YORK PALM -COCKATOO ). Order PSITTAOIFORMES No. 333. Family PROBOSCIGERIDM. PROBOSCIGER ATERRIMUS. CAPE YORK PALM COCKATOO. (Plate 281.)* Psittactts aterrimus Gmelin, Syst. Nat., p. 330, 1788 ; “ Nova Hollandia ” errore, based on Edwards’ Gleanings, t. 316, of a painting of a bird made at Ceylon : type locality designated by me in 1911, Salwatty. Solenoglossus aterrimus macgillivrayi Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 261, Jan. 1912 : Cape York, North Queensland. Microglossus f aterrimus Gould, Birds Austr. Suppl., pi. 61, 1851 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 27, 1865 ; Masters, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. I., p. 58, 1876 ; Ramsay, ib., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878 ; Forbes, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1878, p. 125 ; Ramsay, Tab. List. Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., no. 12, p. 254, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr., Psittaci, p. 29, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 61, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 600, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 46, 1908 ; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. X., p. 231, 1910 ; Barnard, ib., Vol. XI., p. 22, 1910 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., no. 1, Vol. III., p. 56, 1911 ; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 155, 1914. Solenoglossus aterrimus macgillivrayi Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 261, 1912 : Cape York ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 122, 1913. Distribution. Cape York District, Australia. Extra-limital. Adult female. General colour above and below black, with a hoary grey tinge which is more strongly pronounced on the crest feathers which are much elongated, narrow, and lanceolate in form ; hinder cheeks black ; base of fore-head and lores deep black, the feathers short, close set, and velvet-like in texture ; the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh primary-quills incised on the outer webs, the inner webs show scarcely any signs of incision. Iris brown ; cheeks red ; feet, tarsi and lower tibia black ; bill black, lower mandible slaty-black. Total length 635 mm. ; culmen 71, wing 349, tail 250, tarsus 30. Figured. Collected at Cape York, North Queensland, on 1st September, 1911. Adult male. Similar to the adult female, but slightly larger. Immature have the feathers on the under-surface and mider- wings, with three or four yellow bars towards the tips. * The Plate is lettered Solenoglossus macgillivrayi, f Also spelt Microglossum and Microglossa. 77 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Nest. “ A hole in a tree, about 18 to 24 inches down, and lined with sticks ” (Barnard). Eggs. Clutch one, white : according to North sometimes pitted and with limy excrescences. 51-55 mm. by 38-41. Breeding-season. August to January. The technical history of the species will follow hereafter, but the notes here given constitute its economic history in Australia. It was discovered in 1847 that the species inhabited Cape York, when Macgillivray, on H.M.S. “ Rattlesnake,” visited there. His notes were published by Gould as follows : “ This very fine bird, which is not uncommon in the vicinity of Cape York, was usually found in the densest scrub among the tops of the tallest trees, but was occasionally seen in the open forest land perched on the largest of the Eucalypti , apparently resting on its passage from one belt of trees or patch of scrub to another ; like the Calyptorhynchi, it flies slowly, and usually but a short distance. In November 1849, the period of our last visit to Cape York, it was always found in pairs, very shy, and difficult of approach. Its cry is merely a low short whistle of a single note, which may be represented by the letters ‘ Hweet — JiweeV The stomach of the first one killed contained a few small pieces of quartz and triturated fragments of palm cabbage, with which the crop of another specimen was completely filled ; and the idea immediately suggests itself, that the powerful bill of this bird is a most fitting instrument for stripping off the leaves near the summits of the Seaforthia elegans and other palms to enable it to arrive at the central tender shoot.” In the Emu , Vol. XI., p. 22, 1911, Barnard continued the histoiy : “ These birds were nowhere plentiful. They breed in the forest country, and appear to feed in the scrub, on the kernels of large fruits and grubs chopped out of rotten wood. When not breeding they are generally seen in flocks of from 3 to 7. The first nest was found on 27th September, 1910, and contained a young bird about 10 days old. From the same hole I later on took two clutches, one egg each — the first on December 18th, 1910, and the other on 15th January, 1911. Two other sets were taken — one on 29th September, 1910, and the other on 19th December, 1910. These Cockatoos select upright, large, hollow spouts, the eggs being placed at depths varying from 2 to 8 feet from entrance of hole, and from 10 to 50 feet from the ground. Owing to the nests being placed in the upright hollows, they are exposed to the heavy rains, and to obviate risk of drowning to the young birds, the parents cut green sticks about 1 inch in diameter and from 12 to 18 inches in length, which are carried from the scrub to the nesting-hole, down which they are dropped. The birds then climb down the hollows, and chop the sticks up into small 78 CAPE YORK PALM COCKATOO, splinters, until the bottom of the hole is covered to a depth of about 4 inches. On top of this platform the egg is laid. On one occasion I saw a Palm Cockatoo carrying a stick, but though I followed the direction of its flight for fully a mile, I could not discover the nesting-tree. During my former visit, in 1896, I found the birds far more numerous than on this occasion. Mr. F. L. Jardine informed me that he had noticed the same fact, and attributed it to the frequent visits of sportsmen (?) from Thursday Island, who shoot everything that comes in their way. The note of this Cockatoo is a loud whistling, and much more harmonious than the call of the other Black Cockatoos. Four clutches measure as follows : (a) 1.84 x 1.37, (6) 1.75 x 1.37, (c) 1.84 x 1.35, {d) 1.80 x 1.38.” Macgillivray, a relation of the discoverer of this Cockatoo, over sixty years after the first named, added quite a lot in the Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 155, 1914: “ This fine Cockatoo is a common object in the scrubs and open pockets on the upper end of the Cape York Peninsula. In the 1911 season Mr. M‘Lennan inspected numerous nesting-hollows, seventeen of which contained either the single egg laid by the Cockatoo or a young bird. A large hollow is required by the bird, consequently a big tree or dead stump is usually chosen to nest in. The hollows were at an average height of 35 feet from the ground, and were of an average depth of 4 feet, with an internal diameter at the nest and at the mouth of the hollow of from 10 inches to 2 feet. Usually, however, the entrance is smaller than the bottom of the hollow. The egg is always placed on a bed of splintered twigs ; these are carried to the nest in long pieces, and there splintered by the bird. This bedding may be several feet in thickness in some hollows, and only a few inches in others. It serves to keep the nest clean, the excreta, which is very oily, and the scaling of the feathers filtering through. The eggs vary a good deal in size and shape, the largest specimen measuring 2^ inches x 1T% inches, an average of ten being lg inches x 1^ inches. A rounded specimen measured If inches X 1J inches ; this was also the smallest. Nests were found containing eggs and young birds as early as the 6th and 8th of August respectively, and the last on the 22nd of January — August, September, October and November being the principal nesting months, so that most of the young are reared before the commencement of the wet season. One nest visited on the 8th August, 1911, contained a newly-hatched young bird. This was again inspected on the 1st September, when it was found to be about half-grown, with all its feathers encased in sheaths, from 1 to 2 inches in length, giving it the appearance of a porcupine. This young bird was taken from the nest on the 18th September, 1911. The feathers were then just 79 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. breaking out of their sheaths, half of them being clear ; cheeks white with a faint yellowish tint. On the 1st October the feathers were almost free of sheathing, of a beautiful glossy black, breast and abdomen barred, and cheeks beginning to assume a pinkish tinge. Another young bird was first found in its hollow on the 13th August, 1911 ; it was then about 10 days old. On the 2nd September it was a little larger than the other bird when inspected on the 1st, and the feathers were a little longer, but still encased in sheaths. This bird was taken from the nest on the 1st October, when it was nearly fully fledged, and in Mr. M‘Lennan’s opinion would have left the nest in about another 10 or 12 days. The feathers were black, without gloss ; lower breast barred with yellowish ; abdomen and a few feathers under the wing barred with narrow bars of sulphur-yellow, two or three bars to each feather ; cheeks pinkish-red ; upper mandible, basal half blackisli-brown, terminal half whitish ; lower mandible whitish, with brown streaks at the base ; legs and feet greyish-black. Both birds did well on crushed boiled maize. These two birds were reared until May on crushed corn and wheat, when they took it whole ; they were very fond of pea-nuts. They were sent away to Sydney in perfect health, and arrived safely, but one sickened and died not long after its arrival ; the other is still alive and well in the possession of Dr. D’Ombrain, who has made many interesting notes on the manners of his pet. On several occasions parties of from five to seven of these birds were noted at play in a big tea or other tree in an open pocket, going through a whole series of evolutions and antics. Sometimes a pair would take up a position on a spout, and the others would all try to displace them by flying at them from all sides, and this would often be kept up for more than half an hour. In the open forest these birds were found to feed principally upon the very hard nut or stone of the nonda plum or weeba-tree, and in the scrub on another very hard nut which had no local name.” The preceding notes constitute practically the whole of the life-history of this magnificent Parrot, and I would emphasize the need for investigation at once before the birds become more scarce, as is suggested by Barnard’s second note. At the present time, on account of their large size, they are conspicuous and easily observed, as it will be noted that every collector since Macgillivray has either observed or recorded the species. In addition to the above-named, North has cited Alex. Morton, while I can add J. P. Rogers and Robin Kemp ; and D’ Albertis, the famous Italian explorer of New Guinea, met with it at Cape York, and even the naturalists of the Challenger, who paid very little attention to birds, mentioned it. So much confusion has surrounded the present species, both as to the generic and specific names and forms, that a review of the literature once more 80 i CAPE TOWN PALM COCKATOO. becomes necessary. I have given the facts in connection with the generic name and here detail the facts relative to the species names and forms. Edwards, in his “ Gleanings of Natural History,” Vol. VII., gave a plate 316. On the plate was a figure of the present species with an outline sketch of the bill “ Bigness of Life.” The plate is inscribed “ The Great Black Cockatoo from the East Indies. After an Original Drawing. George Edwards, Sculp., October 15, A.D. 1761.” A good description is given on p. 229 and the details added : “ This figure was taken from a drawing done from the life, of its natural size, by the order of John Gideon Loton, Esq., late Governor in the Island of Ceylon and other Dutch settlements in the East Indies. ... I think this bird is figured by Petro Schenk, by the name of Corvus Indicus, in a small book of prints of birds, drawn from life, published at Amsterdam a.d. 1707 by S. Vanden Meulen.” Under the title “Le Kakatoes noir,” Buffon simply transcribed Edwards’ account, and a couple of years later Latham, in his Gen, Synops. Birds, included the Black Cockatoo (p. 260) based upon “ Le Kakatoes noir Buf. ois. VI., p. 97, and Great Black Cockatoo, Edw. glean., pi. 316,” writing : “ If we may judge by the size of the head which accompanies the drawing of this bird in Edwards, it must at least be of the size of the red and blue Maccaw, if not bigger. The general colour is black, with a large crest on the head, of a colour somewhat more pale than the rest of the plumage ; the bill is dusky brown ; the eye dark ; side of the head, from the eyes to the under- mandible, bare of feathers, wrinkled, and of a red colour ; the legs brown- black. This was taken from a drawing done by order of Governor Loten at Ceylon. In Parkinson’s voyage are mentioned black Cockatoos of a large size, having white sjDots between the beak and ear, as well as on each wing, and scarlet and orange-coloured feathers on their tails. These were met with on the coast of New Holland, in the South Seas. Gmelin, in his Sy sterna Natures, p. 330, 1788, latinised this : “ Psittacus aterrimus. Ps. niger, crista magna dilutiore, genio rubris nudis. Kakatoes noir. Buff. hist. nat. des oif. 6, p. 97. Great Black Cockatoo, Edw. glean., t. 316. Black Cockatoo. Lath. syn. 1.1., p. 260, n. 66. Habitat in Nova Hollandia, magnitudine Macao. Bostrum obscure fuscum ; pedes ex fusco nigriN It is obvious that the superficial Gmelin here added the locality “ Nova Hollandia ” from the Lathamian note ex Parkinson. Before, however, Gmelin’ s account was published, Latham had corrected his error, for in the First Supplement to the General Synopsis of Birds, published in 1787, he had VOL. VL 81 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. described the Bankian Cockatoo and given a figure on pi. cix., writing : “ It most certainly differs from the Ceylonese Black Cockatoo, but is probably the same with that mentioned by Mr. Parkinson in his voyage.” When he compiled his Index Ornithologicus, published in 1790, Latham discarded Gmelin’s name aterrimus for his own gigas, but an earlier name which does not appear to have been noted had been given to the Edwardsian Plate 316. Thus, to the Indische Zoologie, by Forster, of Pennant’s work, is added a Specimen Faunulae Indicae by Thomas Pennant, published in 1781. In this specimen appears a binomial list of birds, generally with a reference, thereby validating the name ; I say binomial, but there are a few trinomials and the consideration of these provide a very puzzling problem. The binomials have already been quoted in literature but not as regards Parrot names. In the present case “ Psittacus niger crist. (Edw.) 316 ” is the wording, and we are relieved by the knowledge that there is both a prior Psittacus niger and a prior Psittacus cristatus, and I think this can be justly ignored. So far only the Edwardsian account seems to have been known to ornithologists, but Levaillant in his Hist. Nat. Perroq., published in 1801, introduced a new complication. He gave three beautiful plates, the first of a grey bird, the second of a black bird and the third of the head of the black bird. He wrote : “ J’ai eu le plaisir de voir deux de ces oiseaux au Cap de Bonne- Esperance, ou ils furent apportes vivans par un conseiller de Batavia. L’un etoit gris, et F autre noir.” The grey bird was fully described, and regarding the bill measurements he stated : “ Le mandible superieure a pres de cinq pouces de long, en suivant sa courbure, et quatre, en prenant le coude de son arc.” He added, that Temminck also possessed a grey bird, but he was not con- vinced that there were two species, but rather that the grey bird was the female and the black bird the male. The huge head figured by Levaillant for his black bird agrees with the measurements given for the grey one, and these measurements exceed very much the figure given by Edwards for his Great Black Cockatoo. The exact locality of the latter was not known, and now we do not know the exact locality for Levaillant’s birds. This is important, as in 1811 Bechstein, in his Kurze Uebers Vogel, proposed Psittacus griseus for the grey bird, re- taining aterrimus for the black one. We now know the grey bird could not have been a different species, but the name griseus has to be accounted for. It appears applicable to the bird with the largest bill if there be variation in that respect, and we shall see that that item has been the main consideration in defining subspecies, by the earlier workers called more often species. 82 CAPE TOWN PALM COCKATOO. Kuhl, in the Conspectus Psittacorum, pp. 91—2, recognised two distinct species, differentiating them in this manner : “ PsiTTACUS aterrimus Gm. L. In India orientali. Psittacus Gigas Lath. Edw. 316, fig. optima. Colores proportionesque Psittaci Goliath, sed corpore dimidio minori, rostro 2-J-2£ poll, longo, dente magis emarginato — Crista longissima partesque omnes avem adultam indicant. Observ. Avis musei Parisiensis aliquanto major est ea, quae in museo Temminkiano asservatur. In Museo Temminkiano , Parisiensi. Psittacus Goliath mihi. In India orientali. 11. Vaill. UAras gris a trompe. Psitt griseus Bechstein. 12. Vaill. UAras noir a trompe. Nec tamen Psitt. aterrimus Gm. L. uti communis opinio fert. Corpore crasso, colore griseo, post avis mortem nigro ; plumis longissimis, angustis ; facie nuda ; rostro nigro, maximo ; lingua structura linguae chamaeleontis ; crista elongata ; cauda quadrata. — Longitudo rostri 4J poll. Observ. Species intermedia inter Aras et Kakadoes. In Museo Temminkiano , BullokianoP It will be observed that here two species are separated on account ot size, the bill especially being mentioned and that the smaller one was con- sidered the true aterrimus of Gmelin. This was correct, judging from the figure of the bill given by Edwards. Kulil also noted that a specimen in the Paris Museum was larger than one in Temminck’s collection. It may be as well to note here that the latter was labelled alecto by Temminck, but the name was not published by him as far as is at present known. To the larger species Kuhl gave the name goliath, but cited as a synonym Psitt. griseus Bechstein, as well as both of Levaillant’s figures. Ranzani, when he introduced his genus Solenoglossus, gave a new specific name zeylanicus, but his account is absolutely that of Gmelin, so that this name is an absolute synonym of aterrimus, whatever that may be. Lesson is next responsible for two mis-spellings and a new name : thus in the Traite d’Ornith., p. 184, 1830, he wrote Microglossum ater, and then in the Compl. de Bufjfon, Vol. IX., 1837, he gave a plate 27 lettered Micro* glossum nigerrimum, and of this species he wrote : “ Qui se rencontre communement dans les forets de la Nouvelle Guinee et de l’ile de Waigiou,” and on p. 200 added : “ Une espece reellement nouvelle est V alecto, qui se trouve a Waigiou, a Banda, a Ceram. II est plus petit d’un tiers que le precedent, et le nu des joies a moins d’etendue. Sa queue est legerement 83 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. etagee, mais son plumage est completement noir.” He gave the following reference for alecto : “ Ara alecto Temminck, Disc. Faun. Japon, p. xvii.” I have been no more successful than previous workers in tracing this reference. The “ Disc ” does not appear in the Fauna Japonica, nor can I find it in any Journal, though the page xvii. looks probable. The bird was apparently labelled and is still preserved, but Temminck himself claims publication in the Coup d' ceil general Possess Neerland UInde Archip., Vol. III., p. 405, note, 1849, as he ob served : “ Macroglossum alecto. Cette espece a deja ete indiquee par nous. Elle est d’un tiers moindre dans toutes ses dimensions que P. gigas des catalogues methodiques.” In the Consp. Gen. Av ., Vol. I., 1850, p. 7, Bonaparte included Micro- glossus aterrimus and added as a new species : “ M. alecto, Temm. Mus. Lugduno-Batav. Multo minor : gense minus denudatse.” Again, for this species no locality is given, and it appears that there never was any for Temminck’s species, which was based on a cage bird. Schlegel, in the Journ. fur Orn., 1861, p. 377 et seq., contributed “ Einige Worte fiber die Schwarz-Kakatu’s ...” and there proposed C(acatua) intermedia for the Aru Island bird, giving comparative measurements. C. aterrimus. C. intermedia. C . alecto Temm. Ganze Lange 22" 19" 17" Fliigel 15" 12" 11" Schwanz 11" 8i-H" 7J" Lange der Haube 7-11" 5-0" 5" Oberkiefer (grosseste Hohe) . . 21"' 17-19"' isr Unterkiefer (grosseste Breite) . . 18-19"' 15-10"' 12"' Mittelzehe 20"' 17-18"' 15"' In the Mus. de Pays-Bas , Vol. III., Psittaci, Aug. 1864, pp. 146-152, Schlegel fully discussed these birds, admitting two species, thus: p. 147, Microglossum aterrimum. Individuals from New Guinea are the goliath of Kuhl, while those of Waigiou he attached to aterrimus Kuhl, remarking upon the large size of the Doreh birds and recording in connection with No. 10 from Waigiou : “ Male a bee petit, semblable a celui de la figure d’Edwards.” On p. 151 he recognised M. alecto as a distinct species, remarking : “ Individu d’origine incertaine, apporte vivant en Europe, type du Psittacus aterrimus (specimen minus) de Kuhl et de X Ara alecto de Temminck.” However, in the Revue Mag., 1874, p. 67, he lumped in M. alecto , apparently concluding it was a captive hungered freak. It must be remembered that he was dealing with the actual type of “ alecto Temminck,” which, however, is only a museum name, and realty does not concern us. 84 CAPE TOWN PALM COCKATOO. Tlie above is noteworthy in that the small Arn Island race is definitely named, and that Schlegel also recognised that Kuhl was right in naming the bigger bird goliath and that the smaller, Waigiou, bird was typical aterrimus agreeing with Edwards’ figure. Ramsay, in the Proc. Linn . Soc., N.S.W., Vol. I., p. 394, 1877, recorded birds from Port Moresby, New Guinea, under the name Microglossum aterrimum, observing : “ Some specimens agreeing with those from Cape York have the crest feathers much more narrow ; others again, having the bill larger and the culmen wider, have the plumes of the crest broader. The young have the feathers of the abdomen narrowly margined with yellow, in some forming a band across the body.” Salvadori, in the Orn. Papua, e Moll., Vol. I., 1880, discussed the species Microglossus aterrimus and indicated its division into three varieties, which he named (p. 107) var. major, var. intermedia and (p. 108) var. minor. To the first he allotted as synonyms the “ Ara gris a Trompe Le Vaill. and the Ara noir of the same author. Upon the former was founded Psittacus griseus Bechstein, and as subordinate he cited Psittacus goliath Kuhl. To the second he added the quotations of Edwards, Montbeillard, aterrimus Gmelin, gigas Latham, zeylanicus Ranzani and intermedia Schlegel. The third was exactly equivalent to alecto. In the text he gave measurements of Sorong birds as follows : — dd Wing 390-385 mm. Culmen 132 mm. $$ „ 380-373 mm. ,, 108-98 mm. He recorded that Salvatti, Waigiou, etc., birds were less, one specimen from the last-named locality measuring: wing 325 mm, ; culmen ? 71 mm. He further noted that Aru Island specimens were of notably smaller dimensions, measuring: » »» S 46 32 6 51 34 N. Australia .. a 55 37 $ 55 35 $ 56 36 “ As regards the present specimen of G. stellatus, the difference in the size of the body between it and the larger species is striking. On the other hand, the difference in the size of the bill is comparatively less when compared with the specimens from Queensland. On account of insufficient materials, it is impossible to determine whether the unspotted body in the present female is an invariable and specific characteristic by which this species can be separated from the larger species (in which the females are known to be always spotted). “ Hab. Dr. Dahl did not meet with C. stellatus in separate flocks, but only in the company of the larger species. The preserved specimen was shot amongst C . ?nacrorhynchus , which appears everywhere throughout Arnhem Land, where it was, as a rule, seen in flocks of about six individuals. Likewise in the neighbourhood of Roebuck Bay (further to the southward) these large black Cockatoos were numerous, and assembled in great flocks, especially during the dry season, at those spots where water was to be found. Many were shot as food for the expedition. Amongst these flocks of C. macrorhynchus there were occasionally seen individuals which appeared to be smaller than the others, and which might be assumed to have been C. stellatus .” In the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., Jan., 1912, was published my “Reference List ” to the Birds of Australia. In that List I endeavoured to indicate the multitudinous sub-specific forms of birds that could be discriminated were series available. With all its faults it marked an advance, as thereby was placed on record all the names and forms at that time recognisable and the now universal trinomials introduced on a large scale into Australian ornithology for the first time. My treatment of this species reads : “ Calyptorhynchus banksii banksii (Latham). New South Wales. “ Calyptorhynchus banksii northi nov. “ Differs from C. b. banksii in its smaller size : wing 400 mm. North Queensland. 118 BANKSIAN COCKATOO. “ Calyptorhynchus banksii macrorhynchus Gould. Northern Territory, North-west Australia. “ Caly'ptorhynchus banksii stellatus Wagler. West Australia.” In this outline it will be noticed that no birds are quoted from Central Australia, for instance. This was purposely done, as I only recorded the localities from whence I had examined specimens, and it was probable that birds from other localities might be referable to new subspecies. In the Austral Avian Record , Vol. I., p. 35, Apl., 1912, I separated “ Calyptorhynchus banksii fitzroyi. Differs from C. b. 'macrorhynchus in its much less massive bill. Type, Fitzroy River, North-west Australia.” This separation was due to the accession of specimens from Melville Island, which were utilised as typical macrorhynchus , in view of the fact that none were available from Port Essington, the exact type-locality. In my “ List of the Birds of Australia,” 1913, pp. 122-123, I suppressed this last subspecies, continuing the four subspecies recognised in the “ Reference List.” Zietz, however, in the South Austr. Ornithologist , Vol. I., p. 14, 1914, dealing with Melville Island birds, wrote : “ Calyptorhynchus banksii macrorhynchus ? These birds have a much stronger bill than speci- mens from North-west Australia, and may prove to be identical with the above. (No Northern Territory specimens for comparison).” This would seem to confirm the separation of fitzroyi. For the purpose of this revision I have carefully gone over all the material available, which is now fairly extensive, running into three figures, but still not sufficient to settle all the queries incited. That there is only one species involved is certain, but I agree with North that the subspecies are not well characterised, and, quaintly enough, probably the best is a new one, the Central Australian form. The huge bill is a feature of the Northern birds but many specimens are met without this character. It is certainly not diagnostic. The tail coloration, as well as that of the female, may prove valuable when longer series can be obtained, as it certainly is in some forms. At the present time I admit five subspecies and find that I am in agreement with North, though he only named three subspecies. Calyptorhynchus banksii banksii (Latham). Type-locality Sydney, New South Wales. Range. South Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia. This, the first named form, is undoubtedly the largest. 119 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Ca lyptorhynchus banksii naso Gould. South-west Australia. Type-locality, Swan River. Even as North concluded, I have been unable to appreciate any differences in the bill when comparisons are made with series of examples. There is, however, a good deal in size, the Western bird being much smaller, the adult birds before me varying in the wing from 377 to 389 mm., no difference in size being remarked between male and female. The average of typical birds is much larger, specimens varying from 434 to 451 mm. in the wing. Immature females appear to be much more barred underneath, and the yellow of the tail usually washed with red, instead of pure yellow as in the typical form. Calyptorhynchus banksii samueli subsp. nov. Central Australia. Type in my collection from Hugh River, Central Australia, collected by Capt. Samuel A. White, September 2nd, 1913. A series of specimens were at once remarked upon by the consistent small size of the bill, and they varied from 387-402 in the wing, being thus slightly larger than West Australian birds, though still small. I also noted that the bands on the under-surface of the females were duller in coloration than in the case of the Western bird. Since this conclusion was drawn, I have observed that North, in the Report of the Horn Scientific Expedition to Central Australia, recorded five specimens with full measurements and remarked : “ The males are similar in size and plumage to examples obtained at King George’s Sound ; in one specimen, the crimson band across the median portion of the tail- feathers extends in a narrow line along the shaft of the outer web of the outermost feather on either side. The cross-bars on the under-surface and under tail-coverts of the females are less numerous and much duller in colour than in specimens procured in West Australia.” North used for this form the specific name stellatus then in use for the West Australian bird, and recently Capt. S. A. White also used the same name for the Central form. I consider the Central form a well-marked subspecies, and have therefore provided the above name for it, named in honour of my great friend Samuel Albert White of Wetunga, Fulham, South Australia. Until North charac- terised it, no scientist had examined specimens, though Sturt recorded Calyptorhynchus funereus ? — a species not met with by recent Central Australian explorers. The status of the name stellatus I herewith discuss. Calyptorhynchus stellatus as of Wagler has been used in place of C. naso Gould, but I conclude without valid reason. I have noted that monographers 120 BANKSIAN COCKATOO. have questioned its usage, but somehow it has gained favour, as Ramsay in Australia and Salvadori in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , in 1891, both made use of it. Wagler gave a long description of his new form, which I need not insert here, but I give his conclusions : “ Species haec differt a simillimo Calyptorhyncho Temminckii tectricibus superioribus minoribus alarum et plumis capitis flavo-punctatis nec non rectricum limbo interno flavo, a Calyptorhyncho Cookii et C. hanksii statura multo minore, rostri forma, caet.” I here add the measurements as far as Wagler gives them : C. stellatus. C. hanksii. Longitudo V 6" 26-27" „ caudse . . 9J" 13" 2'" ,, alse . . . . . . 12" 16f" „ maxillae ad frontem . . 2" 2"' 2" Ejusdem altitudo prope basin . . 1" 1"' 1" 2 Latitudo ad basin culminis 2'" 4'" „ ante apicem . . i'" — „ lateris anterioris mandibulae 10'" 6'" Ambitus rostri ad basin 5" 5" 4"' From these measurements it will be seen that Wagler’ s name has no claim for usage for the Western form of hanksii. The shortage in the wing is so much as to suggest that the bird was in full moult or else the wing had been clipped. It does not agree with the wing measurements of the Western form in any way. Further, the tail is also extraordinarily short, which would confirm the suggestion of moult. In this case the name carries no meaning as regards geographical races of a species, as the only habitat given is Nova Hollandia. The existence of the type is in doubt, as Wagler wrote : “ Specimen descriptum Londini mecum communicavit dom Ryals.” To defi- nitely determine the rejection of Wagler’s name, I cite the bill measurements. These show the bill in stellatus to be larger, whereas, if anything, the bill of the Western bird is slightly smaller. However, stellatus has the lower mandible much broaaer than hanksii , and this is the chief character of macrorhynchus, but not of the Western form known under the former name. Therefore, stellatus might have been a specimen of macrorhynchus in full moult. Under such circumstances I absolutely reject stellatus in connection with the Western bird, and cite it as a doubtful synonym of the typical subspecies. Finsch appears to have been the one to fix the name stellatus on to naso , noting of the figure: “ fig. sat. accur. av. jun.,” but under the name he VOL. VI. 121 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. included specimens commonly considered macrorhynchus, and macrorhynchus Gould he doubtfully ranked as a synonym of banksi typical. Ramsay, in 1888, recorded stellatus as a synonym of macrorhynchus , but as above noted, in 1891 used stellatus for naso, as did Salvadori, but I conclude without good reason. I also note that Ramsay, in 1878 and 1888, actually used stellatus in place of macrorhynchus, as different from naso, but in 1891 he used stellatus = macrorhynchus ? + naso. It may be here interposed that when Wagler proposed his C. stellatus he cited as a synonym : “ Banksian Cockatoo Lath. Synops. Suppl. 2. Fishly var., p. 92.” Latham’s “ fifthly,” as I have already noted, appears to have been founded upon the Watling Drawing No. 55, which is now missing, but which answers to a female or immature of the species. Salvadori quoted Latham’s “ fifthly ” as a doubtful synonym for stellatus, which he was using for the form from South-west Australia. All Watling’s drawings were made about Sydney, New South Wales, so that Latham’s “ fifthly ” could not refer to the West Australian form, but must be cited in connection with the typical ba?iksii from New South Wales. Calyptorhynchus banksii macrorhynchus Gould. Type-locality, Port Essington, Northern Territory. Range. North-west Australia and Northern Territory. I am still unable to differentiate satisfactorily the birds from North-west Australia from those of Northern Territory and Melville Island, though the bills of the former may be less massive. The bill formation I have found to be, comparatively-speaking, valueless, and cannot be used as a differential feature, save in conjunction with other characters. I have criticised and measured a series from North-west Australia, Northern Territory and Melville Island, without finding anything stable, save size. I have not been able to fix the coloration of the female as of any constancy, as some writers have averred. My measurements read : North-west Australia, $$, wing 420- 437 mm., $$ 409-433 mm. ; Northern Territorj^, wing 420-445 mm., 2 397 + mm. ; Melville Island, $$, wing 415-447 mm., $ 437 mm. The average measurements of all these, either taken separately or collectively, runs out about 430 mm., and, taken as a whole, the bill is larger than typical birds. It is possible that longer and better series may determine the presence of more subspecific forms in the range above given, but I have been 122 BANKSIAN COCKATOO. unable to discriminate such, and, taken as a whole, this seems an ill-defined subspecies. Calyptorhynchus banksii northi Mathews. Type-locality, Dawson Eiver, Queensland. Range. North Queensland. This form is smaller than the typical one, specimens varying in the wing measurement from 390-425 mm. and averaging about 415 mm. As far as has been observed, it never develops the large bill associated with the preceding. \\ 123 Genus— H ARRISORNIS. Harrisornts Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. II., p. 110, 1914 .. .. . . .. .. . . Type H. lathami. feMAEL Kakatoeine birds of dark coloration, swollen keeled bill, long wings, long tail, and small legs and feet. The crest is less developed than in the preceding genus, while the bill is more swollen and keeled ; the cere is feathered. The tip of the upper-mandible is very short, the edges simply sinuate, no pronounced toothing being apparent. The under-mandible is much more swollen, with the outer face very broad, not much exceeded by length of side, a broad deep sinus apparent. The figures given will complement this description. The lores are naked and the space round the eye bare. The wing has the fourth primary longest, the third longer than the fifth, which is about equal to the second, while the first is longer than the sixth though shorter by far than the fifth : all these primaries are scalloped. The tail is proportionately like that of the preceding genus. The feet are very small : the tarsus is covered with minute reticulate scales, as are the toes, save the first joint, which shows regular scales, though tending to break up into reticulations. When I introduced the genus-name Harrisornis, I wrote : “ Differs from Calyptorhynchus in having a distinct sharp keel to the culmen : and although the smallest of the black cockatoos has the widest bill, the lower mandible being particularly noticeable, being bigger than that of C. inacrorhynchus 124 CALYPT ORHYN CHU S VIRID I S . (GLOSSY COCKATOOJ. Order PSITTaCI FORMES No. 335. Family KAKATOE1DM. HARRISORNIS LATHAMI. GLOSSY COCKATOO. (Plate 283.)* Psittaous lathami Temminck, Cat. Syst. Cab. d’Omith., p. 21, 1807 ; Botany Bay, New South Wales. Bankian Cockatoo, Phillips’s “ Voy. Botany Bay,” pi., p. 267, 1789 ; White, Joum. Voy. New South Wales, pi., p. 139, 1790 ; Latham, Suppl. II., Gen. Synops. Birds, p. 91, 1801 vars. Psittacus banksii, var. y, Latham, Index Omith., p. 107, 1790. Ps(ittacus) banksii fuscus (not Muller 1776) Kerr, Anim. Kingd., p 586, 1792; based on Phillips’s plate. Psittacus lathami Temminck, Cat. Syst. Cab. d’Omith., p. 21, 1807. Cacatua viridis Yieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XVII., p. 13, 1817, “ Nouvelle Hollande ” : I selected in 1912 New South Wales ; Pucheran, Rev. Mag. de Zool., 1852, p. 563. Psittacus temminkii Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 89, 1820 : New South Wales. Psittacus cookii Temminck, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XIII., p. Ill, 1821, $>. Psittacus solandri ? Temminck, ibid, p. 113 : New South Wales. Calyptorhynchus ? temminckii Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., p. 109, 1826 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., p. 684, 1832. Calyptorhynchus cookii (part) Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 272, 1827. Calyptorhynchus solandri ? Vigors and Horsfield, ibid., p. 274, 1827 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878 ; Broadbent, Proc. Roy. Soc. Queensland, Vol. II., p. 124, 1885 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 22, 1891. Calyptorhynchus stellatus (not of Wagler) Selby, Naturalists’ Library, Vol. VI., Parrots, p. 134, pi. 15, 1836. Plyctolophus banksii Swainson, Classif. Birds, Voh II., p. 302, 1837. Plyctolophus solandri, id., ib. Banksianus " temminckii ” Lesson, Compl. de Buff, Vol. IX., Ois., p. 194, 1837. * The plate is lettered Oalyptorhynchus viridis 125 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Calyptor hynchus leachii (not of Kuhl) Gould, Birds Austr., Vol. V., pi. 10, 1842 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 18, 1865 ; Ramsay, Proo. Zool. Soo. (Lond.) 1875, p. 601 (Q.)„ Cacatua leachii Schlegel, Joum. fur Orn., 1861, p. 379. Calyptorhynchus viridis Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 112, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 62, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 609, 1901 ; Asbby, Emu, Vol. V., p. 27, 1905 (Kangaroo Island) ; A. G. Campbell, ib., p. 145, 1906 (Kangaroo Island) ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral., p. 46, 1908. Calyptorhynchus viridis viridis Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 263, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 123, 1913. Calyptorhynchus viridis halmaturinus Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 263, 1912 : Kangaroo Island ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 123, 1913 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XII., p. 269, 1913, Kangaroo Island. Harrisornis viridis Mathews, Austr. Av. Rec., Vol. II., p. 110, 1915. Harrisornis viridis viridis Mathews, ib. Harrisornis viridis halmaturinus Mathews, ib. Distribution. South Queensland ; New South Wales ; Victoria ; South Australia. Adult male. General colour of the upper-parts, including the back, wings, and middle tail- feathers black, glossed with bottle-green, the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth primary-quills incised on the outer webs and the first to the fourth on the inner ones ; the outer tail-feathers black, with a large patch of sealing-wax red occupying both webs except on the outer pair where it is confined to the inner webs, the shafts of each remaining black ; entire head, including the crest, sides of face, and throat smoky-brown, the middle of the feathers somewhat darker ; under-surface, including the under wing-coverts and under tail-coverts, black with a smoky shade. Iris brown ; feet and tarsi mealy black ; bill horn colour. Total length 540 mm. ; culmen 48, wing 356, tail 230, tarsus 14. Figured. Collected at Picton, New South Wales, in May, 1899, Adult female. Differs from the adult male in having the red of the tail-feathers crossed by about five black bars. The red has more yellow in it than in the tail of the male. In some specimens there are many yellow feathers on the throat, sides of the neck and head. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch one ; sometimes two. White, 44-46 mm. by 29-32. Breeding-season. May and June. This bird was not differentiated accurately by the earliest workers from the Banksian Cockatoo, on account of the variation in plumage of the former and also in size from immature to adult. The female of the Banksian species seems to have been regarded as distinct from the male, and then the immature was noticeably less. Consequently the present species appears to have been considered as probably an immature variation, and to have been classed in some cases with the fully adult male of the Banksian as a smaller phase. The occurrence of the Funereal Cockatoo seems to have confirmed the suggestion of variation, and when the differences were accurately fixed. 126 GLOSSY COCKATOO. the references of the earlier writers to the species were not clearly understood. I have given an idea of the perplexity of the case under the preceding species and will here consider most of the references particularly applicable. When Latham named Psittacus banlcsii he gave a var. /3, which I consider the immature of banlcsii , but which may not be. Later, Latham recognised as referable to his var. p the account given by White, which to me does not agree, and which is certainly the present species. He also added as a var. y the bird figured and described by Phillips in his “ Voyage Botany Bay.” This also is the present species. When Shaw proposed his Psittacus maqnificus he considered all the forms as one species, and I conclude that in the days of settle- ment at Port Jackson this species was the commonest bird, but being smaller in size, the rarer and larger bird was more sought after and written about. It has recently been known under the name Calyptorhynchus viridis as of Vieillot, whose specimen was probably brought back from Australia by Peron & Lesueur, but there is an earlier name, about which there is no doubt, as follows : In the Gat. Syst. Cab. d’Orn., p. 21, 1807, Temminck introduced : “ Psittacus lathami (Mas.) Mihi — Psittacus banksii varietas y — le cacatoe latham, ou cacatoe noir a queue cramoisi (Male) de la Baije Botanique — Bankian Cockatoo. Phyll. Bot. Bay, T. p. 166 — Lath. var. /3.” Previous to this, however, Kerr had named Phillips’s plate trinomially as shown in my synonymy, but selected a pre-occupied name. Phillips’ description reads : “ Bankian Cockatoo. This is about the size of the great white cockatoo ; the length twenty-two inches. The bill is exceedingly short, and of a pale lead-colour. The head feathers are pretty long, so as to enable the bird to erect them into a crest at will. The colour of the head, neck and under-parts of the body are dusky brown, inclining to olive, darkest on the belly ; the feathers of the top of the head and back part of the neck are edged with olive ; the rest of the plumage on the upper part of the body, the wings, and tail, are of a glossy black : the last is pretty long and a little rounded at the end ; the two middle feathers are wholly black ; the others of a fine vermilion in the middle for about one-third, otherwise black ; the outer edge of the exterior feather black the whole length. Legs black. “ This bird was met with in New South Wales, and is supposed to be a variety, if not a different sex, from the Bankian Cockatoo described in the General Synopsis of Birds Supplement, p. 63, pi. 109. It varies, however, in not having the feathers of the head or those of the wing-coverts marked with buff-coloured spots ; nor is the red part of the tail crossed with black bars, as in that bird.” 127 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. With this description may be contrasted that given by Vieillot of his Le Kakatoes vert, Cacatua viridis Vieill. est de la taille du kakatoes banksien , et porte un plumage vert, a reflets, avec du brun jaunatre sur le cou ; du jaune sur la tete, au bas les joues et au menton ; la queue est etagee et en partie rouge ; le bee couleur de corne et le tarse gris. On le trouve a la Nouvelle Hollande. Est-ce une espece distincte ? ” This seems indeterminable without criticism of type. White, in the Journ. Voyage New South Wales , 1790, gave a plate (dated Dec. 29, 1789) opposite p. 139, where he wrote: “April 15, 1788. We this day discovered the Banksian Cockatoo. This species was first described by Mr. Latham , in his seventh volume or supplement to the General Synopsis of Birds, and the one in the plate annexed differs from that in some few particulars. ... In our specimen, the general colour of the bird is olive or rusty black, the head feathers pretty long, and about the sides of the head and top of it is a mixture of fine yellow ; but none of the feathers are marked with buff at the tips, nor is the under-part of the body crossed with buff-colour. In the tail it differs scarcely at all from Mr. Latham’s figure.” This description applies to the present species, but most authors have separated the references to White and Phillips or else misapplied both. Thus Latham separated them, as did Wagler. When Kuhl prepared his Monograph, he described Psittacus temminlcii from Mus. Bullock, Temminck, Paris and Laugier. As he mentions separately a specimen in the Mus. Bullock, I would select as type the specimen in the Mus. Temminck, which would also be the type of Temminck’s P. lathami, while the specimen in the Paris Museum would be the C. viridis of Vieillot. He then recognised P. banksii , to which he attached as synonym “ Phyll. 166 fig.”, which is wrong. Another new species was named as P. leacliii and a beautiful figure given, which is the preceding species. I mention this as the species was described from the Mus. Soc. Linn. Lond. Published a little later was an account by Temminck. This worker undoubtedly agreed with Kuhl, but erred in his nomination, apparently through a confusion of notes. Thus he proposed P. cookii for the specimens named leachii by Kuhl, and these are still preserved in the British Museum. As recorded by Salvadori in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., the male, Kuhl’s figured specimen (?), is the foregoing bird, but the female is the one I am now dealing with. There was another specimen in the Linnean Society’s collection which Temminck named P. solandri ? He was doubtful of its specific validity and gave a good account. This was certainly Kuhl’s C. temminkii . 128 GLOSSY COCKATOO. Vigors and Horsfield noted that the Linnean Society’s specimens were not collected by Caley, but under the name cookii gave a note, already reproduced, which may refer to our bird. Under the name C. solandri ? they write : “ In describing and giving a name to this bird, M. Temminck expresses his doubts as to its being a distinct species, or the young of the preceding G. cookii ; and he clearly states the arguments on both sides the question. As far as we can judge, it seems probable that the birds will prove distinct. But this is a mere matter of fact, which we hope will be ascertained shortly ; and as such we leave it to time, without indulging in conjecture.” Wagler, in his Monograph, ranged the Banksian Cockatoo of Phillips as the immature of G. leachii, but recognised the Banksian Cockatoo of White as P. temminkii Kuhl, and thereunder placed Vieillot’s C. viridis : this is the first time this name had been allocated. Gould wrongly determined this species as C. leachii Kuhl, and many writers accepted this name, while the majority of those who did not, continued to use Vigors and Horsfield’s wrong acceptance of C. solandri. This continued until the publication of the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., 1891, when Salvadori used C alyptorhynchus viridis as of Vieillot. As above noted, the description was incomplete, but Pucheran, as long ago as 1852, had shown fcom examination of the type that Wagler was correct in referring it to this species. His work was, however, ignored for forty years. Through the confusion no life-history was known until Gould’s time, so I reproduce his account under the name of G alyptorhynchus leachii : “ Is the least species of the genus yet discovered, and, independently of its smaller size, it may be distinguished from its congeners by the more swollen and gibbous form of its bill. Its native habitat is Xew South IVales, Victoria, and South Australia. ... So invariably did I find it among the Gasuarince , that those trees appear to be as essential to its existence as the Banksice are to that of some species of Honey-eater ; the crops of those I killed were mvariably filled with the seeds of the trees in question. Its disposition is less shy and distrusting than those of the Calyptorhynchi banksii and funereus, but little stratagem being required to get within gunshot; when one is killed or wounded, the rest of the flock either fly around or perch on the neighbouring trees, and every one may be procured. It has the feeble, whining cafi of the other members of the genus. Its flight is laboured and heavy ; but when it is necessary for it to pass to a distant part of the country, it mounts high in the air and sustains a flight of many miles. It is not unusual to find individuals of this species with yellow feathers on the cheeks and other parts of the head : this variation I am unable to VOL. VI. 129 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. account for ; it is evidently subject to no law, as it frequently happens that six or eight may be seen together without one of them exhibiting this mark, while on the contrary a like number may be encountered with two or three of them thus distinguished. To this circumstance, and to the variation in the colouring of the tail-feathers of the two sexes, may be attributed the voluminous list of synonyms pertaining to this species. There is no doubt that Mr. Caley was right in the opinion expressed in his notes that this is the Carat of the natives.” I have given Caley’s notes under the preceding species. Mr. Thos. P. Austin has written me : “A few small flocks of this species remain in the Iron-bark scrubs near here (Cobbora, New South Wales) through the year : their food appears to consist mostly of various kinds of oak seeds, but they are very partial to those of the needlewood bushes, and it appears that they not only eat the seed of this bush but also part of the wood ; although this bush is only sparingly dispersed through the scrubs near here, I have noticed that nearly every bush of this species is bitten to pieces : what food they get from this bush I have not been able to discover. In hot weather I notice they come out of the dry scrubs to the river to drink just about sunset. Their call note is a most mournful cry, which they seldom utter except when flying.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has given me the following account of the Kangaroo Island form : “ In March, 1905, I spent one day and night at Western River, Kangaroo Island, the object of my visit being to obtain a specimen of a red- tailed black Cockatoo that settlers in the Eastern part of the island told me was to be found in the Western end. I heard from some lads that there was a pair nesting and I suggested that they should come with me to prevent my shooting the birds that they were watching, as they wished to get the young one alive when old enough. They did not trouble to come, so I went up the gully and found one of these birds in some lofty Sugar Gums. On shooting the bird, it gave out a hoarse cry which brought another to the same clump of trees, uttering the same sort of plaintive cry that is made by C. funereus, but if memory serves me right a rather weaker note. I shot the second bird, which turned out to be the female, thus securing a pair in splendid plumage. I found out later that I had shot the pair that were nesting, and that were being watched by the lads, so I persuaded the boys to go up the tree and they secured the egg for me. The egg was a single one and the lads told me that they never lay more than one egg, which is almost spherical, and of course pure white. At the tune of my obtaining these specimens, no collector had ever obtained the Kangaroo Island bird : in fact, no collection in South Australia had South Australian specimens of C. viridis, 130 GLOSSY COCKATOO. and certainly there was no record of the egg being previously found in this state. This being the first record for the state, it is of interest to know where the skins are. The male is in the Adelaide Museum, the female now in the collection of Gregory M. Mathews, at Fair Oak, Hampshire, and the egg on loan from myself in the Adelaide Museum. “ A few years a pair probably of this species nested at Naracoort in the south-east : my friends who tried to rear the young were unsuccessful. Mrs. Coleman tells me that about seventy years ago, when she was a girl, that cockatoos with red tail-feathers used to come to Echunga in the Adelaide Hills to eat Wattle seed ( Acacia pycnantha). They have not been heard of in that locality for a great many years.” Captain S. A. White has written me : “ This bird was quite numerous in the seventies of the last century in the southern portion of the Mt. Lofty Ranges, for my father, the late Samuel White, had many skins in his collection taken in the Mt. Lofty Ranges. I saw it myself at the Black Swamps in 1885. Many of the old settlers have told me that the Red- tailed Black Cockatoos were very plentiful in the Ranges south of Adelaide in the early days of the Colony. I feel sure there are none left to-day. There are very few on Kangaroo Island and those that are left are right up at the Western End.” North, in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., gives some interesting notes about the nidification of the species, but I do not see any- thing concerning the general habits that need be here reproduced. Dr. Macgillivray, of Broken Hill, says this bird is found about Casterton and Balmoral in the Victorian border, near South Australia. The restricted range does not admit of subspecific differentiation, owing to the movements of the birds. I did separate the Kangaroo Island form, but I find that the characters relied upon were individual. With my present material I am compelled to reject all idea of subspecies, and I here quote North’s remarks on the subject : “ Leach’s Black Cockatoo is remarkable for individual variation in plumage, and, from the material now before me, especially in the females. Some adult females are sparingly dotted and spotted with yellow on the sides of the head and upper and under wing-coverts : the feathers of the abdomen have narrow, and the under tail-coverts broad, yellow cross-bars. Others have the feathers on the throat yellow, margined with orange : in some, this yellow colouring extends to portions of the head and hind-neck, and in one abnormally plumaged specimen has one of the quills entirely yellow and washed with orange on the central portion of the outer web, the others being parti-coloured yellow and black, while the apical portion of the outer web of one of the inner secondaries has a long wedge- 131 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. shaped golden yellow marking, narrowly edged at the tip with orange red. In the males, the vermilion band on the middle of all but the central pair of tail-feathers crosses both webs, but more often it is narrowly edged with black on both webs : sometimes the outer web of the external feather on either side is entirely black.” Erratum . — In the head-lines, pages 81 to 93, for Cape Town read Cape York. Genus — Z ANDA. Zanda Mathews, Austral Avian Kecord, Vol. I., p. 196, 1913. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . Type baudinii. This genus agrees in general with Calyptorhynchus, with the following important differences : the bill is very narrow with a long tip ; the cere is half feathered ; though there is a bare eye space, the lores are feathered ; the first and second joints of the toes are rather regularly scaled. Figures of the bill given will show how unlike the bill is to that of Calyptorhynchus , the very narrow long tip of the upper-mandible, with minute sinus of the tip of the lower-mandible. I have given some notes under Calyptorhynchus, but here add some suggestions. Under the present genus two species are recognised, one eastern and one western. Calyptorhynchus is obviously only subspecifically separable in the east and west, though it ranges over the whole continent but does not enter Tasmania. The present genus is the only black Cockatoo repre- sented in Tasmania. The tail-coloration of this species somewhat recalls that of the immature and female of Calyptorhynchus. It is here suggested that this is the oldest phase of the Calyptorhynchine group, and that the more recently evolved Calyptorhynchus ( sensu stricto) has, by means of its more virile stock, extended its range through the continent perhaps at the expense in some places of the present genus. Key to the Species. Ear patch and bar on tail white . . . . Z. baudinii , p. 134. Ear patch and bar on tail yellow . . . . . . Z. funerea, p. 138. 133 Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 336 Family KAKATOEIDAE . ZANDA BAUDINII. WHITE-TAILED BLACK COCKATOO. (Plate 284.) Calyptorhynchus BAUDwn Lear, Ulustr. Psittacidse (pi. 6), pt. xn.f 1832, Hab. (?) : I selected in 1913 Albany, West Australia. Calyptorhynchus baudinii * Lear, Ulustr. Psittac., pt. xn., 1832 ; Gould, Birds Austr., Vol. V., pi. 13, 1846; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 25, 1865; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. I., p. 363, 1867 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878 ; id., Tab. List Birds Austr., p. 16, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., no. 12, p. 253, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittacidse, p. 27, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 106, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 61, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 601, 1901 ; Le Souef, Emu, Vol. II., p. 28, 1902 (W.A.) ; Milligan, ib., p. 75, 1902 (W.A.) ; id., Vol. III.,pp. 12, 19, pi. II., 1903 (W.A.) ; Lawson, ib., Vol. IV., p. 136, 1905 (W.A.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 46, 1908 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., no. 1, Vol. III., p. 73, 1911 ; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 262, 1912 ; Orton & Sandland, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 77, 1913 (W.A.). Plyctolophus ? bandinii Swainson, Classif. Birds, Vol. H., p. 302, 1837. Banksianus “ baudinii ” Lesson, Compl. de Buff., Vol. IX., Ois., p. 194, 1837. Cacatua baudinii Schlegel, Journ. fur Om. 1861, p. 380. Calyptorhynchus baudinii baudinii Mathews, Austral Av. Record, Vol. I., p. 190, 1913. Calyptorhynchus baudinii tenuirostris Mathews, ib : Wandering, West Australia. Zanda baudinii Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 124, 1913. Zanda baudinii baudinii Mathews, ib. Zanda baudinii tenuirostris Mathews, ib. Distribution. South-west Australia. Admit female. General colour of the upper-surface blackish-brown, including the head, hind- neck, back, wings, and middle tail-feathers, with pale edges to the feathers on the hind-neck, sides of the neck, back, upper wing-coverts, and the tips of the primary- and secondary-quills ; the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth primary-quills inci ed on the outer webs and the first on the inner one ; the middle portion of * Also often spelt baudini. 134 "Ww': . H.Goodchild, del Wither by & C° ~s ZANDA BAUDINII. (WHITE -TAILED BLACK COCKATOO ). WHITE-TAILED BLACK COCKATOO. the outer tail-feathers dull white except the outer edges and shafts, which are blackish ; crown of head and nuchal crest uniform blackish like the ; ides of the face and throat ; ear-coverts pale straw-yellow ; breast, abdomen, sides of the body, under tail-coverts, axillaries, and under wing-coverts dark brown with pale edgings to the tips of the feathers. Iris hazel, orbits yellowish-white ; feet yellowish horn : bill pearly-white, with the tips of mandibles dark horn. Total length 666 mm. ; culmen 56, wing 367, tail 270, tarsus 27. Figured. Collected at Wandering, South-west Australia. Adult male. Similar to the adult female, but slightly larger. Immature appear to take on the adult plumage from the nest. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, two ; white. 48 by 35 mm. Breeding-season. August to October. Until Lear in 1832 figured this beautiful bird, it does not seem to have been noted by any writer or collector. Gould’s notes made soon afterward are here quoted : “ This species, which is a native of Western Australia, is distinguished from all the other known members of the group by its smaller size and by the white markings of its tail-feathers. It belongs to that section of the Black Cockatoos in which a similarity of marking characterizes both sexes, such as Calyptorhyndius funereus and xanthonotus. Like the other members of the genus, it frequents the large forests of Eucalypti and the belts of Banksice, upon the seeds of which it mainly subsists ; occasionally it seeks its food on the ground, when insects, fallen seeds, &c., are equally partaken of ; the larvae of moths and other insects are also extracted by it from the trunks and limbs of such trees as are infested by them. Its flight is heavy and apparently laboured ; when on the wing it frequently utters a note very similar to its aboriginal name (Oo-laak) : at other times, when perched on the trees, it emits a harsh croaking sound, which is kept up all the time the bird is feeding.” Mr. Tom Carter has contributed the following observations: yThis is the common Cockatoo of south-west Australia, and is found as far north as the Murchison Liver. They associate in flocks when the breeding-season is over, flying rather slowly with a flapping flight, and constantly uttering their rather mournful piping note, which resembles the word Oo-lack, which is the aboriginal name for them in the extreme south-west and about Broome Hill. They feed largely on the seeds of the Red Gum trees, to obtain which they bite and tear open with their powerful beaks the very hard nuts that contain them. At times a flock will settle in an orchard, and do great damage in a very short time to the buds and young shoots of the trees. In the winter months they fly about in flocks in a very restless manner, before a spell of wild and wet weather. 135 THE BIRDS OE AUSTRALIA. “ The breeding-season about Broome Hill seemed to commence in August and continue until November. Two eggs appear to be the full clutch, and very frequently one egg is not hatched. A neighbour of mine, who found several nests, told me that the second egg is laid about a fortnight after the first, and is not sat upon after the first chick is hatched. The nesting cavity is usually a considerable height from the ground, but I saw one not more than twelve feet from the ground that contained eggs. Although the birds are usually shy in their habits, I have seen two nesting-sites in trees alongside high roads where there was considerable traffic. At Broome Hill the following notes were made. August 7th, 1908. A nest containing eggs. Sept. 22nd, 1908. Young birds were heard in above nest. . Oct. 19th, 1908. Fledged young bird seen. Sept. 1st, 1910. Nest containing two eggs. Sept. 19th, 1910. Noted a flock of fifteen birds. Why not nesting ? Oct. 8th, 1910. Two birds noted moulting. Oct. 3rd, 1910. While travelling with the mail coach on the main high road running east from Broome Hill, the mailman pointed out to me a nesting cavity in a large Morrell tree, about 25 feet from the ground, on the edge of the road. He told me that a pair of these Cockatoos bred there for several consecutive years in October or November, and that as he passed with his mail coach, the sitting bird used to emerge from the nest and perch in the tree until the coach had passed. “ The fledged young birds are fed by the parents for many weeks after leaving the nest : thus on February 10th, 1914, I noted young birds being fed by adults in the stunted Jarrah timber close to Albany in West Australia. Flocks of these Cockatoos often flew over this town, which is of considerable size. North, in the Austr. Mus . Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 73, 1911, has but few notes on this species. I quote one by Mr. G. A. Keartland : “ Although Calyptorhynchus baudinii is generally confined to South-western Australia, I saw several pairs near Mullawa, about sixty miles from Geraldton. They were generally out of range, but I managed to shoot one, which proved to be a female. Near Quindalup they are fairly common, and breed in the neighbourhood. Their habits are similar to those of Calyptorhynchus funereus. Their eggs are usually smooth and the shell fine in texture.” The very restricted range of this species is conducive to no subspecific forms. I separated an inland form, as the specimens had very strikingly narrow bills, but I have since received coastal birds showing nearly the same bill formation. In consonance with the conservative policy I have adopted in this work, I am not admitting the inland form as a distinct subspecies. It must be emphasized, however, that this non-recognition does not dismiss the idea of an inland subspecies altogether, but only for the time being, with 136 WHITE-TAILED BLACK COCKATOO. the material available. Further collections may prove the existence of the narrow-billed inland form, and that my coastal specimens are simply erratic occurrences due to the movements of the species. This has continually been proved in connection with Palsearctic birds, and when we have studied Australian birds better we may clear up some of these points. With regard to the species, North wrote : “It has no ally.” It is, however, simply a bird like funereus, with the pale yellow of the ear-coverts and tail changed to white. In many similar cases only subspecific value has been allotted such a distinction, and it may be that such will later be only given here. In the meanwhile, the fact that no intermediates whatever are known allows of full specific value being accepted, but it is very possible that such may hereafter be recognised. vol. vi. 137 lit xlil" iVi'VMi T * EB| B 1 I I '* * ' * Order PSITTACIFOEMES Family KAKATOEIDAE. No. 337. ZANDA FUNEREA. BLACK COCKATOO. (Plate 285.)* Psittacus funereus Shaw and Nodder, Naturalists’ Miscellany, Yol. VI., pi. 186, Sept. 1, 1794 : New Holland =New South Wales. Psittacus funereus Shaw and Nodder, Naturalists’ Miscellany, Vol. VI., pi. 186, Sept. 1, 1794 ; Latham, Index Omith, Suppl. II., p. xxn., 1801 ; Kuhl, Nova Acta Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 89, 1820. Banksian Cockatoo var. C. and first and fourth vars. Latham, Gen. Synops. Birds, Suppl. II., pp. 91-2, 1801. Psittacus magnificus Shaw, Leverian Museum (part), pt. vi., pi. 16, 1796. Psittacus banksii (part) Shaw, Gen. Zool., Vol. VIII., pt. 2, p. 476, 1811. Cacatua banksii Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XVII., p. 9, 1817 (part). Calyptorhynchus funereus Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 109, 1826 ; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 271, 1827 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., p. 688, 1832 ; Gould, Birds Austr., Vol. V., pi. 11, 1846; id., Handb. Birds Austr. Vol. II., p. 20, 1865; Finsch Die Papageien, Vol. I., p. 357, 1867 ; Ramsay, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1875, p. 601 (Q.) ; id., Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878 ; Broadbent, Proc. Roy. Soc. Queensland, Vol. II., p. 124, 1885 (Q.) ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat. No. 12, p. 253, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci., p. 24, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 107, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 61, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 602, 1901 ; Hill, Emu, Vol. II., p. 165, 1903 (Viet.); Littler, id., p. 170 (Tas.) ; Fletcher, id., Vol. III., p. 109, 1903 (Tas.) ; Clark, id., Vol. V., p. 27, 1905 (Kangaroo Island) ; Batey, id., Vol. VII., p. 11, 1907 (Vic.) ; Hill, id., p. 21 (Viet.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austr., p. 46, 1908 ; Fletcher, Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 79, 1908 (Tas.) ; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasm., p. 90, 1910 ; Hall, Emu, Vol. IX., p. 130, 1910 (S.A.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat. No. 1, Vol. III., p. 58, 1911 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 138, 1915 (Viet.). Banksianus australis (pars) Lesson, Traite d’Omith, p. 180, 1830. * The plate is lettered Calyptorhynchus funereus. 138 CALYPTORHYNCHUS FUNEREUS. (BLACK COCKATOO) . ■ BLACK COCKATOO. BanJcsianus funereus Lesson, Compl. de Buff, Vol. IX., Ois., p. 194, 1837. Plyctolophus funeralis Swainson, Classif. Birds, Vol. II., p. 302, 1837. Calyptorhynchus xanthanotus Gould, Synops. Birds Austr., App. p. 5, 1838 : Van Diemen’s Land ; id., Birds Austr., Vol. V., pi. 12, 1847 ; Krefft, Ibis, 1863, p. 177 (N.S.W.) ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 22, 1865 (Tas. and S.A.) ; Legge, Papers and Proc. Boy. Soc. Tasm., 1886, p. 237, 1888 (Tas.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat. No. 12, p. 253, 1890 ; Bamsay, Cat. Austr. Psitt., p. 26, 1891 (as var.) ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds, Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 108, 1891 ; A. G. Campbell, Emu, Vol. V., p. 145, 1906 (Kangaroo Island) ; Mellor and White, id., Vol. XII., p. 161, 1913, Flinders Island. Gacatua funerea Schlegel, Journ. fur Orn. 1861, p. 379. Cacatua xanthonotus Schlegel, id., p. 380. Calyptorhynchus funereus var. xanthonotus A. G. Campbell, Emu, Vol. II., p. 208, 1903 : Kangaroo Island. Calyptorhynchus funereus funereus Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 262, 1912 ; ih.. List Birds Austr., p. 123, 1913. Calyptorhynchus funereus xanthanotus Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 262, 1912 ; ib., List Birds Austr., p. 123, 1913. Calyptorhynchus funereus whitece Mathews, Austral Av. Bee., Vol. I., p. 35, 1912, Kangaroo Island ; ib., List Birds Austr., p. 123, 1913. Calyptorhynchus whitece S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XII., pp. 263-5, 1913 : Kangaroo Island. Distribution. South Queensland ; New South Wales ; Victoria ; Tasmania ; South Australia. Adult female. General colour above blackish-brown, including the head, sides of face, back, wings, and tail, with smoke-brown edges to the feathers on the hind-neck, sides of neck, back, and upper wing-coverts ; primary-coverts and primary-quilla margined wi h whitish at the tips, as a e al o the tail-feathers ; the second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth primary-quill incised on the outer webs and the first to the fourth on the inner ones ; the lateral tail-feathers mottled with sulphur-yellow on t he middle portion ; ear-coverts lemon-yellow ; under-surface dark brown including the fore-neck, breast, abdomen, under tail-coverts and under wing-coverts, with pale yellowish margins to ihe feathers ; the axillaries somewhat paler than the rest of the under-surface. Iris brown, orbits black ; feet ashy grey ; bill whitish with black tips. Total length 630 mm. ; culmen 50, wing 383, tail 270, tarsus 29. Figured. Collected on Kangaroo Island on 6th December, 1911. Adult male. Differs in having the yellow edges to the feathers only faintly noticeable ; and in being larger. Immature. Besemble the female in having the yellow edges to the feathers very pronounced. Nest. A hole in a tree, placed very high up. Eggs. Clutch two. White. 46 to 50 mm. by 32-34. Breeding-season. May, June (Dawson Biver, Queensland), December and January in the South, but the time varies. The striking difference in the formation of the bill between this species and C. banksii seems to have escaped the notice of the vigilant Latham, but Shaw 139 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. and Nodder boldly claimed it to be a very distinct species. Almost at once the former repented his boldness, as in the Museum Leverianum he depreciated the species and refers to it as a variation of magni ficus, his name for banksii. In 1801, Latham ranked the Funereal Cockatoo of Shaw and Nodder as var. C., only of his own Banksian Cockatoo, and examination of the Watling drawings made him rank figures of funereus as varieties also. Thus as related under the heading of C. banksii the first and the fourthly of the Second Suppl., p. 92, are based on drawings of this species. Moreover, these two drawings are rather obviously made from the same specimen by two different painters. The first is signed Thos. Watling, the other unsigned. The notes on the drawings read : No. 52 (the first), “ From the tip of the beak to the tip of the tail 2 feet 8 inches. Native name Karratt. All the varieties of the Black Cockatoos are so called ; this is the most uncommon bird.” No. 56 (the fourthly), “ Native name Karrott. A rare genus. Half the size nature.” By a peculiar oversight when Sharpe published his account of the Watling drawings he referred all the drawings to C. banksii. Never- theless, from the descriptions alone Ramsay and Salvadori had correctly referred these varieties to the present species. A similar oversight was perpetrated by myself when I retained this species in Calyptorhynchus in my “List of the Birds of Australia,” though separating baudinii under the genus Zanda. This species is absolutely congeneric with baudinii and is therefore referable to Zanda, and moreover I suggest that they may later be considered as only sub specifically distinct. Captain J. A. White’s notes read : “ G. f. funereus. We saw numbers of these birds at Mallacoota Inlet, Victoria, near the borders of New South Wales. They were feeding upon the seed of the sword bush, this plant always growing on the sand dunes near the coast. C. /. whitece v as once a very common bird all along the South Australian coast line ; it is still to be met with in small parties amidst the heavily- timbered parts of the Mt. Lofty Ranges, but not nearly in such numbers as in days gone by. They still move about amongst the ranges according to food supply. After a bush fire has swept over a piece of country, and should there be Hakea or Banksia growing upon it, these black Cockatoos will congregate in numbers to feed upon the roasted seeds of these plants, and which crack open after the fire passes over. They breed in the big gums in some secluded spot, and lay their round white eggs upon the bare wood in the hollow. One often comes upon the Acacia and Hakea boughs bitten through, and bark pulled off, when these birds have been searching for the larvae of boring beetles. From observation I have found that these birds breed in late October or November and that both parent birds feed the young. 140 BLACK. COCKATOO. “ C. f. xanihonotus. This seems to he a fairly common bird in Tasmania, for small parties are scattered all through the heavily-timbered country ; they seem to have the same habits, flight and call as the mainland bird. The only thing is they seem to be more diligent in stripping the bark off the large forest trees in search of grubs, some of the giants of the forest presenting quite a tattered appearance after several of the birds had searched from top to bottom, the bark hanging down for yards all round.” Mr Edwin Ashby’s notes continue : “ This bird is not at all uncommon throughout the more wild portions of the Adelaide Hills, as a rule only four or five in a flock, but on a few occasions I have seen as many as twenty-five in a ‘ mob.’ A few years ago large numbers were feeding on Honeysuckle (Banksia marginata) seeds right in the township of Normanville, S.A. I have also seen large numbers in the Cape Otway Ranges in Victoria. On killing one of a pair the mate stays about for a long time uttering the most heart- rending, wailing cries. In 1885 this bird was nesting, within eleven miles of the city of Adelaide, near Government House, Marble Hill. In March, 1905, this species was numerous at Western River, Kangaroo Island. In Tasmania I have often seen the bark of lofty Stringybark trees (Eucalyptus obliqua) stripped into shreds from top to bottom by these birds, in search of grubs, but I have never noticed them do the same in this colony. Mr. A. G. Campbell states : “ C. funereus nests in the most inaccessible parts of the Grampians, Victoria, arriving in October from the more open country to the north-west, and leaving again about March.” Mr. Frank S. Smith adds: “Very plentiful in the heavily-timbered country in the south-east of South Australia, and across the border into Victoria. Also in Victoria valley, north of Dunkeld, and the mallee north of Stawell. In these districts it feeds on the seeds of the honeysuckle trees and seeds from the flowers of the previous year, to which it is very partial. Three of my correspondents note this latter fact ; in view of the general statement that its chief food is grubs torn from the bark and rotten wood of trees, this is perhaps worth noting. I do not know the scientific name of the honeysuckle, but it is a dwarf tree, rarely more than 15 or 20 feet high, with a honey-yielding bottlebrush flower ” (? Banksia marginata). Mr. E. E. Howe has also written : “ At Pine Plains (Vic.) on the 19th September, 1907, in company with Messrs. J. A. Ross, A. Mattingley and C. McLennan, I saw a flock of upwards of 200 birds. It is said by some authorities that this bird does not feed on the ground, but here they were, the whole flock feeding on the Plain. I have also seen them feeding in the scrubs round Stawell. The call note is a very harsh and grating one, and sounds like “ Kee-ow ” when said in the throat. At Gembrook, Victoria, 141 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. last August, we saw them in the hazel gullies, and they are very expert in being able to locate the grubs that infest this timber, as they get to them at once, and the great holes made by their very powerful bills are at heights varying from one to fifteen feet high in the hazel. The flight is slow and laboured, as if they flew with difficulty, and as they alight on a bough the crest is erected and stands thus for quite a minute, then gently subsides. In August, 1907, we saw an old pair and with them one that appeared to be their offspring of the previous season. They flock in the winter and early spring.” Mr. E. J. Christian and Mr. J. W. Mellor have also sent notes which cover exactly the same ground as the preceding, so that the life-history of the bird, as far as my notes go, is contained in the preceding. Mr. Christian, however, notes that it “ does good work, but it damages and kills trees in its hunting for food. It clears many trees of the larvae of destructive beetles, and will do the orchardist more good than harm.” Mr. Mellor observes: “ For this useful work the black Cockatoos are now totally protected in South Australia. The bird is very wary as a rule, and will sail off at the slightest noise ; but at times, when no shooting is done on the place, they become tame. The breeding months are generally in the spring, but in the back country, where drought is often felt, they wait until the rain comes before they start to lay and breed.” Miss J. A. Fletcher notes {Emu, Vol, III., p. 109, 1903) : “ At frequent times throughout the year the Black Cockatoos ( Galyptorhynckus funereus) are about in flocks of from eight to twenty. They do not appear to nest in this more open locality (Wilmot, Tas.), but evidently in the ranges to the south and west of us. They are noisy birds, and work most vigorously at the stringy bark trees after the white grubs of which they are so fond. The birds tear the bark down and leave it hanging in strips, and the trees present a most curious appearance. What powerful beaks these birds have ! The grinding noise they make can be heard for a considerable distance.” A. G. Campbell, dealing with Kangaroo Island avian forms, wrote {Emu, Vol. V., p. 145, 1906) : “ Calyptorhynchus xanthonotus were in flocks of 20 to 50 some distance back from the coast, feeding upon the black- winged seeds of Bahexi bushes, the strong pods of which they have no difficulty in cracking. This species in life is very handsome. There is a delicate pink- coloured naked membrane encircling the eyelids which greatly enhances its appearance. Salvadori in “ Genera Avium,” gives 13 to 14 inches as typical wing measurements of this species, and 15 to 16 in. for C. funereus. Two specimens from Kangaroo Island measure 15 in. and 15*5 in.” Here is a matter of comparison of measurements made by different workers, to which I shall refer later in the present article. 142 BLACK COCKATOO. Batey’s (Emu, Vol. VII., p. 11, 1907) recollections read: “From 1846 to, say, 1850, a constant visitor on Jackson’s Creek (Victoria), which it followed down in quest of wattle grubs. Last seen on Emu Bottom, some three or four miles up stream. Of recent years saw one near Gisborne, and lately heard it is found in the forest country between Bullengarook West and Mt. Macedon. Old teamsters stated it was a precursor of bad weather.” In the same volume, p. 21 concerning the Ararat District, Victoria, G. F. Hill remarked: “Usually found in the mountains, but during the summer may be seen in any part of the district in search of the larvae of certain beetles which bore into the branches of the Casuarina trees. A cluster of Pinus insignis trees growing close to a house was visited periodically by a flock of these Cockatoos, and the cones torn open to extract the seed which they contained.” Capt. S. A. White, recording the Birds of Mallacoota, Victoria (Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 138, 1915), suggested these were large birds by the use of the name “(7. funereus funereus” and wrote: “A good many of these birds were met with near the sand-dunes along the coast. Three specimens came under the notice of the writer — an adult female and two immature males. They seem to agree with the Queensland and New South Wales birds both in size and coloration. The immature males, which would be between one and two years old, resemble the female in coloration. The yellow of the tail of the older bird of the two is speckled over with dark specks ; the other is heavily blotched. Their bills, like that of the female, are nearly white. The stomachs contained banksia, casuarina, and grass seeds, the latter principally the seeds of a flat-leaved plant growing on the sand-dunes.” North, in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Gat. No. 1, Vol. III., p. 58, et seq., 1911, has a number of notes mainly relating to the nidification of the species, but I quote the following of more general interest : “ It is the only species (of Black Cockatoos) inhabiting the neighbourhood of Sydney, and it may be found all the year about the upper parts of Middle Harbour. . . . Usually they are seen in pairs or small flocks of four or five individuals, but on the 28th August, 1900, I counted twenty as they flew over my house at Roseville, the largest number I have ever seen in this locality. On the 15th February, 1909, a flock of eight also flew over. They have a slow, laboured flight, and when on the wing is the time they usually utter their somewhat weak but harsh and discordant cries, which may, nevertheless, be heard a long distance away. Their notes, when once heard, are not easily mistaken for any other species. These birds breed about Middle Harbour, for in August, 1908, I saw a pair attending to the wants of a young one. Usually they are shy and wary and difficult of approach, but occasionally I have, without any 143 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. difficulty, walked beneath the tree on which they were perched. This species I found more common on the Hawkesbury River, and higher parts of the Blue Mountains. . . . The food of this species consists principally of seeds of the Banksia, Casuarina, and Hakea, and large white wood horny grubs found in living Eucalypts, which it strips and cuts away with its powerful bill, and more often when the grub has eaten its way into a sapling. Probably by tapping, the bird detects the distance down the limb the grub has bored, for it is generally about eight inches below the hole where it has entered the branch that the bird commences to tear away the bark and bite away the wood in its search for the grub, and it may be another foot before it finally obtains it.” Mr. A. E. Holden’s notes are of interest : “ For as long as I can remember a flock of Black Cockatoos ( Calyptorhynchus funereus) have lived in the remoter gullies at the back of Middle Harbour. At one time they numbered sixteen or seventeen, now their numbers are reduced to four or five. A few years ago we built a camping house of galvanized iron in French’s Forest, at the extreme head of Bantry Bay north-eastern arm, and painted the roof red with oxide paint. At this time the flock was roosting in a gully below the house, and their habit was to move out at the grey dawn and wait for the sun amongst the trees in the hill on which our camp was built. They must have become familiarised with the hut, for very soon they began to disturb our slumbers by flitting on to the ridge capping. The noise they made increased, and was not explainable until one morning, on stealing outside silently, I caught them picking at the red oxide, and apparently devouring small flakes as they bit it off with their powerful beaks. Bush fires cleared out their coverts eventually, and they moved to more secure fastnesses. On another occasion I was Gill-bird shooting in some Red Honeysuckle Scrub with a friend, when a pair of these birds moved suddenly out of a bush. An involuntary “ double ” brought them down. On picking them up quantities of nectar poured out of their throats, precisely as happens with any honey-eating bird, and as the nectar was of the Banksia flower they would seem to be most ingenuous feeders, as their huge mouths do not seem at all suitable for the operation of honey extraction. In the Southern Alps these birds are said to be harbingers of blizzards and storms when seen in any sheltered gully in the day-time, and many a miner has ‘ broken camp ’ at the sight of them, especially in the months of March or April. On the 1st August, 1907, three sat in a low bush (whilst a gale and rain was at its height), just off the French’s Forest Road, and made most dismal cries. They would not move at my approach, and not until I had almost put my hand on them did they flit heavily a few yards away.” 144 BLACK COCKATOO. Mr. H. L. White’s notes read : “ Calyptorhynchus funereus is often seen in the high country, and it is a recognised sign of rain when they fly about in the open lower forest. Their well-known habit of stripping the bark from newly ring-barked trees, has been frequently observed here. One nest has only been noted (Scone, New South Wales). It was in an inaccessible position in a tall dead Stringybark tree ; the young left the nest early in January, previous to which they had been fed by the parent birds apparently late in the afternoon only.” Mr. James D. Cox wrote from the Blue Mountains, December 26th, 1895 : “An unknown incident happened, as far as my knowledge goes, in early spring this year. Flocks of hundreds, or perhaps thousands, of the Yellow- tailed Black Cockatoo ( Calyptorhynchus funereus) flew low down over the mountains, heading north. Occasionally, some of the flocks would alight for rest, and blacken the trees with their vast numbers, and their united cries made a deafening noise. Previously I had never seen more than about fifty or sixty in one flock. As you know, it has been a remarkably dry season.” Dr. Macgillivray reported : “ Calyptorhynchus funereus is found all over the Hamilton district ; a favourite food seems to be the green She oak cones, which are cut into bits by this bird for the seeds contained in them ; they also feed on the larvae of some insect found under the bark and in the soft decayed wood of dead wattle trees. They nest late in the year, usually about the last week in December, or early in January, and choose a hollow in a tall Red Gum for the purpose, and are often noticed frequenting the tree, and going in and out of the hollow, for a month before laying, the same place being often resorted to year after year if unmolested. Two eggs are usually laid and sometimes three, but rarely more than one young one reared. The young when hatched are covered with yellow down, and take a long time to become sufficiently feathered to leave the nest. The birds are in the habit of chipping off the bark round the mouth of the nesting hollow, which renders it rather conspicuous. When drinking they usually alight a yard or two from the water, and walk down to it, one being always left on guard.” Dr. Angove, writing from Tea Tree Gully, South Australia, states : “ Calyptorhynchus funereus visits us in most years, but in decreasing numbers. The birds come to the Honeysuckle when in pairs or in small flocks of three or four. This species nested yearly in Forest Range, at Fox’s Creek, very high in the largest of the Stringybark, but has not done so of late years to my knowledge.” Tasmanian notes are separately ranged as here given : “ From Penguin, Tasmania, Mr. R. N. Atkinson wrote : “ Calyptorhynchus xanthonotus occurs throughout Tasmania and some of the larger islands of Bass Strait. I have VOL. VI. 145 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. often seen flocks tearing off pieces of wood, chiefly from Sassafras trees, containing the larvse of Coleoptera, their principal food. When travelling long distances they usually fly at a great height from the ground.” Mr. Malcolm Harrison, of Glenorchy, added : “ CalyptorJiynchus xanthonotus is much more generally distributed throughout Tasmania than the White Cockatoo. Parties of from three or four to seven or eight are more commonly seen, and their advent to the lower country is generally in advance of rough weather. They still frequent the country around Mount Wellington, as in Gould’s time, and on the 1st January, 1909, I watched for some time a small flock busy on the Banksia cones in the neighbourhood of Glenorchy.” In the Records of the Australian Museum, Vol. V., 1904, pp. 265-268, North gave a note entitled : “ On Heterochrosis in Australian Psittaci.” This will he also quoted later, but he wrote : “ Instances of xanthocliroism, partial in most, total in some, are many in the specimens of Australian Psittaci in the Australian Museum. Among them may be mentioned a remarkably fine Black Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus funereus) presented by Mr. G. M. Pitt, and obtained by him at Wiseman’s Ferry, on the Hawkesbury River, New South Wales. This specimen differs from the typical form in having the upper and under surface, upper and under wing- coverts, scapulars, innermost secondaries and under tail-coverts yellow, with which are intermingled a number of the usual brownish-black feathers, giving it a distinctly mottled appearance. . . . When these birds were alive, their abnormal plumage rendered them conspicuous objects in the bush. Consequently they were much sought after, the Black Cockatoo being followed at various times for three months before he shot it.” Almost the same queries have been raised as to the relationships of funereus and xanihanotus with the same solution as in the case of C. banksii and macrorhynchus. In 1837 Gould described a very large number of subspecific forms as species, and be it well observed he was sure of their status, but subspecies at that time had no distinct standing. With regard to C. xanihanotus from Van Diemen’s Land he gave a description and then only remarked : “ This species is nearly allied to Cal. Baudinii and Cal. funereus, but is quite distinct from both ” without indicating the differences. In the Introduction to the “Birds of Australia,” 8vo. Ed., p. 72, 1848, he observed, “The true habitat of this species is Van Diemen’s Land, but I have lately received a specimen from Port Lincoln, which proves that its range extends to South Australia. It is distinguished from C. funereus by its much smaller size, and by the uniformity of the yellow colouring of the tail.” Ramsay reduced it to varietal rank, writing : “ This is an insular form of C. funereus, but has 146 BLACK COCKATOO. also been obtained on the mainland. It is the same in plumage, but has the yellow ear-coverts of a darker tint, and is also slightly smaller in size. Habitat : Tasmania, South Australia.” In the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., as Salvadori did not admit subspecies, he included with specific rank C. xanthonotus, recording : “ Exactly like C. funereus in colouring, but smaller in all the dimensions. Habitat. : Tasmania and South Australia. Although I have kept this species separate from the preceding one, I am not at all sure that I am justified in so doing, as there is the most perfect gradation between the two forms.” This is a most peculiar decision in view of the measurements he gave : funereus : wing 18, tail 14, bill 2.1, tarsus 1.1 inch ; xanthonotus : wing 15-14, tail 11-10. North, in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 63, 1911, concluded : “ There are only three Tasmanian skins in the Australian Museum Collection, two of which were obtained by Mr. George Masters at the Ouse River in March, 1867, and another at Lachlan Vale, during the same month. Whether Calyptorhynchus xanthonotus Gould is a distinct species from the continental form, C. funereus, I am unable to tell from the small number of Tasmanian examples. In addition to the slightly smaller size of the latter, they may be distinguished by the broader dull yellow margins to the feathers of the under-parts, and to the under wing-coverts and tips of the under tail-coverts. The yellow band on the tail-feather is also comparatively narrower than in Australian specimens.” Under C. funereus he gives as range : “ Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Kangaroo Island.” It may be noted that Capt. White stated the Mallacoota (Victoria) birds were the same size as the New South Wales specimens. My own series show two distinct subspecies to be separable thus : — Zanda funerea funerea (Shaw and Nodder). ^ Type locality, Port Jackson, N.S.W. Range : ? Queensland, New South Wales, ? North Victoria. Zanda funerea xanthanota Gould. Type locality : Tasmania. Syn. Zanda funerea whiteae (Mathews). Range : South Victoria, King Island, Bass Straits, Tasmania, ? South Australia, ? Kangaroo Island. I separated birds from the latter locality in the Austral Avian Record , Vol. I., p. 35, April 2, 1912, as Calyptorhynchus funereus whitece , noting : Differs from C. f. funereus in its smaller size : wing 281 (typical wing 314 mm.).” The figures should have read 381 and 414 mm. 147 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Subspecies are of little value when a large continental area is discussed, and I have constantly treated subspecies as deserving of little consideration. In the determination of migratory birds in the Palsearctic area the different subspecies are more valuable, but still they have been much overvalued by Northern workers. The British subspecies, as instance, are in many cases so slightly differentiated that many British ornithologists deny them recognition, while others would utilise such ill-defined forms to dogmatize on migrants. In such a vast extent of country as Australia, where varying conditions are continually met with, very many subspecies are well marked, while others certainly as valid are ill-marked and need careful consideration. The present species furnishes a beautiful illustration in many ways. Gould, recognising that Tasmania was a distinct entity from the mainland of Australia, determined the majority of Tasmanian birds as distinct species, though recognising they were mostly geographical variations only, such as now termed subspecies. In this case he named the Tasmanian funereus bird, xanthanotus and always wrote of it as a species. He later noted that South Australian birds agreed with Tasmanian ones. Recent writers have restricted the Tasmanian form to Tasmania, concluding that South Australian birds were typical. The most distinctive feature of the Tasmanian bird is its smaller size, Gould also cited colour variation and North has also mentioned this item. With my series I do not see any variation in colour that can be regarded as a constant factor, hence I conclude size is the only decisive feature. It is impossible to compare measurements made by different workers, as no two workers follow the same methods and get the same figures. I have been severely criticised by the reviewer in the Auk for my folly in not giving measurements. I would acknowledge that if I gave pages of measurements, as is the custom of my American friends, it would not prejudice any worker in favour of my subspecific forms, and I would rather that these forms were confirmed or rejected absolutely without prejudice. This method of giving pages of measurements and then averaging the results does not validate the subspecies, and is comparatively useless and a waste of paper. The work must be done, but the results only are necessary, not the methods whereby the results were achieved. In this species I find I get the following results (the males and females are equivalent in size). Tasmanian birds : Wing 350, 380, 390, 390, 360, 360, 365, 393 mm. Victorian birds : Wing 388, 365, 393, 428, 372, 390, 380 mm. Kangaroo Island bird : Wing 382 mm. New South Wales birds : Wing 425, 415 mm. King Island birds : Wing 392, 392, 370, 372, 372 mm. 148 BLACK COCKATOO. If these figures be averaged we would get Tasmanian average 371 mm., Victorian average 389 mm., Kangaroo Island 382 mm.. New South Wales average 420 mm., and King Island average 379 mm. It should be noted that one Victorian bird measures 428 mm. in the wing, and belongs to the New South Wales form. Unfortunately this particular specimen has no definite locality, but it almost certainly came from North Victoria. It will be at once seen that the averages do not agree with the facts as represented by the figures, yet this method of working was carried out in connection with Moluccan birds by Stresemann, and it is very easy to see the fallacy of it. Many American workers have also utilised this erroneous method, and having employed much paper and written detailed descriptions of the birds their fallacious conclusions have been ranked as valid until an independent worker checked them with other material. Genus — C ALLOCORYDON. Callocorydon, noy. Callocephalon Lesson, Journ. aut Globe “ Thetis,” Type G . fimbriatus . Vol. II., p. 311, 1837 Type 0. fimbriatus. Also spelt — Catticephalus Agassiz, Nomencl. Zool. Ind, Univ., p, 168, 1848, Collocephalon Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus Sci. (Paris), Vol. XXX., p. 138, 1850, Callocephalus Gerbe, Diet. Univ. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. IX., p. 641, 1861. CaUocephala Reichenow, Journ. fi r Orn., 1881, p. 31. Callocephalum, Mathews Handl. Birds Austral., p. 47, 1908. Not Calocephalus F. Cuvier, Diet. Sci. Nat. (Levrault), Vol. XXXIX., p. 544, 1826. Corydon (not Lesson, 1828), Wagler Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., p. 504, 1832 . . Type C . fimbriatus. Medium Kakatoeine birds with peculiar crest, short heavy bill, long wings, long tail and small legs and feet, and peculiar coloration. The distinctive characters of the genus are the crest formation and colour. The crest is composed of feathers which rapidly become recurved and erect and are more or less disintegrated in texture, differing altogether from the crests of all the other Cockatoos. The bill is short, stout and heavy, sharply hooked with the under edge of the upper mandible sinuate ; the culmen narrowly rounded ; the under mandible is massive with a broad rounded face and the sides nearly straight. The height of the bill is about twice its breadth. The under-mandible has the edges nearly straight, but a sinuation precedes the tip at each side while there is a deep sinus between the tips, leaving these as angular tooth-like projections. The cere is feathered, the nostrils hidden, while the lores are only sparsely feathered. The wing is long with the first primary shorter than the fifth, the third being longest, the second and fourth a little shorter and subequal ; the first four primaries are scalloped on their inner webs for half their length. 150 CALLOCORYDON. The tail is long, more than half the length of the wing, the feathers very broad. The feet are as usual in the family, the tarsus very short, thick and coarsely reticulate with small scales ; toes longer than the tarsus and claws of medium length. The coloration separates the genus, which is monotypic, from the White Cockatoos, and it has generally been associated with the dark species, but it appears to differ almost as much from those. The skeletal characters show certain differences in the skull and it may be that further osteological examination will show it to be less nearly related to the dark Cockatoos than is usually accepted. In the meanwhile it may be classed in the sub- family Calyptorhynchince, my reason being that the coloration somewhat recalls that of Zanda funerea in the immature state, and its range suggests that it is an ancient form and may be derived from the same stock as Zanda. I have altered the genus name Callocephalon on account of the prior C otocephalus. As there is apparently a distinction between these names, sufficient to allow both to stand, I give the following explanation. The International Commission have decided upon the item, “ errors of trans- literation ” in the recognition of their amendment. Consequently the above two names are identical when such errors have been corrected. I pointed out that it seemed a grave mistake to me that such a ruling should have been given as it was difficult to find students who agreed upon the amendment. The present case was not at that time before me, but it proves to be a most striking example. It seems agreed with the whole of the amenders that the double l should be preserved in Call, but while Lesson wrote Callo — and this was generally accepted — Agassiz, the purist, proposed Calli. It was undoubted that Lesson’s cephalon* referred to head, so Agassiz changed it right out to cephalus , the common transliteration. Salvin, among others, accepted this alteration but retained Lesson’s reading of Callo. Reichenow, in his effort at correcting the error of transliteration, preferred the feminine ending and therefore wrote cephala. In any case it has been ruled that the transliteration of Greek words ending in on should be in Latin w, so that we arrive at Callocephalum as I wrote in 1908. Whichever of these be correct, it must be conceded that Cuvier’s rendering of Calocephalus previously introduced must be brought into line, so that we have here a pure homonym. With regard to the alteration of Calo to Callo , we have in the present order the case of Calopsitta , also of Lesson, which has also been amended to Callipsittacus by the accurate Agassiz. * Lesson’s Vernacular lor his genus was “ calloc6phale.” 151 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. The species name is in like case. Latham called the parrot Psittacus galeatus but in the Indische Zoologie by Forster, published in 1781, twenty years previously, on p. 40, Psittacus galeatus crist. was proposed for Edwards’ pi. 317, which is recognised by Salvadori in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., p. 121, 1891, as Psittacus sulphureus Gmelin, 1788. Forster’s name has priority, so that it would appear that Kakatoe galeata would supersede Cacatua sulphur ea (Gmelin) of the Cat. Birds. This is a matter that should engage the attention of specialists in the Molucca Avifauna, but in the meanwhile I prefer the name of fimhriatus Grant for the present species. Note. — It will be observed that in the species on the opposite page, as in many others, the name used in the text differs entirely from the one given on the plate. Lord Rothschild has again drawn attention to this “ confusion ” as if it were an undesirable item. I have explained that the plates are prepared often two years in advance of their issue, and the name engraved on them is the name then in current use. The text is corrected and revised right up to the date of issue of the work, and it would be ridiculous to persist in the use of an incorrect name simply because it had been engraved on a plate. I think all scientific workers will agree with me that my method of working is correct, and as I correlate the plate with the text there is no need for confusion save to a superficial observer. This note is written on the 18th January, 1917. Lord Rothschild’s note {Bull. Brit. Orn. Club , Vol. XXXVII., Jan. 2, 1917, p. 17) on my treatment of Megastrix will, as he suggests, be decided, by others. I would note, however, that he quotes Salvador i’s large measurement of the wing without recording that Salvadori measured over the wing, not as we do now. Further he guesses that the small measurements are due to the Arfak birds being males. I do not indulge in vain conjectures as to sex to agree with my conclusion, nor do I suggest that facts which disagree are due to variation, when there is little variation save that due to locality and plumage change which can be gauged. 152 Roland Green . del . Wither by &. C° CALLOCEPHALON GALEATUM f GANG -GANG COCKATOO ) \ v \ Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 338. Family KAKATOEIDM , CALLOCORYDON FIMBRIATUS. GANG-GANG COCKATOO. (Plate 286.)* Psittaous eimbriatus Grant, Narr. Voy. Discov., pi. p. 135, 1803; Bass’s River, Victoria. Red-crowned P(arrot) Latham, Suppl. Gen. Synops. Birds, pt. n., pi. 140, p. 369, 1801 ; New South Wales. Ps{ittacus) galeatus (Not P. galeatus Forster 1781.) Latham, Suppl. Index Omith. II., p. xxiii, 1801 ; “ Nova Hollandia ” == New South Wales. Kuhl Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 88, 1820. Cacatua galeata Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XVII., p. 12, 1817 ; Schlegel, Joum. fur Orn., 1861, p. 379 ; id., De Dierent., p. 82, fig. p. 83, 1864. Psittacus phoenicocephalus Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 88, 1820 ; in synonymy, nom. nud. King Island (New South Wales is an error). Calyptorhynchus galeatus Stephens, Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., p. 110, 1826 ; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), 1827, Vol. XV., p. 274; Finsch, Die Papag., Vol. I., p. 337, 1867 ; Reichenow Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 31. Banksianus galeatus Lesson, Traits d’Ornith., p. 181, 1830. Corydon galeatus Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissensch. Munch., Vol. I., pp. 504, 689, 736, 1832 ; G. R. Gray, List Gen. Birds, p. 53, 1840. Plyctolophus galeatus Swainson, Classif. Birds, Vol. II., p. 302, 1837. Callocephalon australe Lesson, Journ. aut Globe Thetis, Vol. II., p. 311, 1837 ; King Inland (New South Wales is an error). Callocephalon galeatum G. R. Gray, List Birds Austr., 2nd ed., p. 68, 1841 ; Gould, Birds Austr., Vol. V., pi. 14, 1847 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 29, 1865; Ramsay Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878; Legge, Papers and Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasm., 1886, p. 237, 1887 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 14, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 113, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 62, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 610, 1901 ; Hill, Emu, Vol. II., p. 165, 1903 (Viet.) ; A. G. Campbell, id., p. 208 (King I.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 47, 1908; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasm., p. 92, 1910; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 74, 1911 ; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., * The Plate is lettered Callocephalon galeatum. VOL. VI. 153 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. p. 263, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 124, 1913 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 138, 1915 (Viet.) ; Purnell, id., Vol. XV., p. 40, 1915 (Viet.). Callocephalon galeatum tasmanicum Mathews, Austral. Ay. Rec., Vol. II., p. 127, Jan. 28, 1915 ; Tasmania. Distribution. New South Wales ; Victoria ; King Island ; Tasmania (occasional) ; South Australia (formerly). Adult male. General colour above and below dusky slate-colour, with pale edgings to the feathers, which are more strongly pronounced on the hind-neck, sides of the neck, entire back, and upper tail-coverts ; bastard-wing and primary coverts dark slate-colour ; primary and secondary quills hoary grey, the second, third, fourth, and fifth primaries incised on the outer webs, the secondaries barred with white on the inner webs and more or less marked with whitish on the outer ones ; tail- feathers slate-grey, darker towards the tips and indistinctly barred with whitish which is more pronounced on the inner webs ; sides of face, forehead, crown, and hind-neck bright red with a nuchal crest of disintegrated feathers, a small slaty-black patch on the sides of the hinder crown and a few feathers of the same colour in front of the eye ; lower cheeks, sides of the throat, breast, abdomen, sides of the body, under tail-coverts, and under wing-coverts slaty-brown with pale edges to the feathers, but the general aspect is duller than the upper surface and the pale margins not so pronounced, some of the feathers on the sides of the lower abdomen barred with white and tipped with reddish-orange ; quill lining and lower aspect of tail-feathers dark slate-colour. Iris hazel ; feet grey ; bill horn-grey. Total length 360 mm. ; culmen 31, wing 241, tail 125, tarsus 18. Figured. Collected at Dura, Victoria, on the 24th March, 1913. Adult female. General colour above slaty-black, with paler slate-colour margins to the feathers on the hind-neck, sides of neck, and mantle, and mottled bars of the same colour on the feathers of the back, scapulars, bastard-wings, primary and secondary quills and tail-feathers ; upper wing-coverts, scapulars, feathers of the back, upper tail-coverts, and innermost secondaries narrowly barred with white ; crown of head and nuchal crest almost uniform slaty black, the pale edges to the feathers scarcely discernible ; sides of the face and throat slate-grey, becoming darker grey on the breast, abdomen and flanks, where the feathers are narrowly barred with white and more broadly with orange-red ; under tail-coverts and under wing-coverts slate-grey barred with white the bars being increased in width on the latter and mottled on the under surface of the quills. Iris hazel ; feet grey ; bill horn-grey ; culmen 30 mm. ; wing 241. Figured. This is the mate of the male described. They were shot together. Immature. Resemble the females. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, four ; white, without gloss, 32-33 mm. by 25-27. Breeding-season. October to December or January. Just as Latham was finishing his Second Supplement to his General Synopsis of Birds he met with this strange and beautiful Parrot and added a full description in his Addenda. He stated they came from New South Wales, but otherwise gave no clue to the source of his information, adding that he “ saw another at Mr. Thompson’s.” In the Index Ornith. Suppl., II., he gave this the Latin name of Psittacus galeatus, but this name had been used by Forster, as noted already. 154 GANG-GANG COCKATOO. Almost at the same time the bird, was noticed by Grant in Victoria and he proposed for it the name Psittacus fimbriatus, which I now use. The type was shot on the 31st March, 1801, on Bass’s River in Victoria by Mr. Barreillier. Grant says the plate was reproduced from “ a design from the elegant pencil of Major-General Davies of the Royal Artillery, to whom Governor King presented the preserved specimen.” When Kuhl monographed the Parrots he cited as a synonym Psittacus phoenicocephalus, a label name in the Paris Museum. As a known habitat of the species he had quoted above “ Insula King — autore Peron.” When Bourjot St. Hilaire completed Levaillant’s Monograph of the Parrots the specimens from King Island, collected by Peron, were figured. It is, therefore, certain that the name Psittacus phoenicocephalus was given to the King Island birds, probably by Peron himself. It is necessary to comment here upon the Latin names used by Bourjot St. Hilaire for the Parrots, and I quote my explanation given as Appendix to my List of the Birds of Australia , p. 330, 1913. “ In 1837-38 Bourjot St. Hilaire prepared the continuation of Les Perroquets, commenced by Le Vaillant. Some of the Latin names used by this writer have been recorded in synonymy as if they had been properly- introduced scientific names. As I read them they are simply Latin equivalents of the French vernacular names of the Parrots, and should have no scientific value.” In order to have an independent opinion I referred to Mr. C. Davies Sherborn, who, I was pleased to find, had already considered this work in his task of enrolling names for the second part of the Index Animalium, and had recorded upon his slip that the Latin names were simply the equivalents of the French vernaculars, and were rejected by him on that account. As the book is a rare and valuable one, I here give an example of the nomenclature used : Cohors C. Subcohors C. Le Cacatoes rose. Le Cacatoes a casque rouge “ Section IV. Kakadoe. Kakadoe. Psitt. kakatoe rosea Vieill. Psitt. kakat. rubro galeata (adult). femelle adulte. femelle jeune. Le grand Cacatoes a huppe galeatus Lath, feemina adulta. feemina junior. Psitt. kakat. sulfureus major, Austr. j jaune d’ Austr. galeritus Lath. 155 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Le petit Cacatoes a huppe jaune Buff (des Moluques). Psitt. kakat. sulfureus minor. Sulf. Gm. Le petit Cac. des Philippines (male ou fern.) Psitt. kakat. minor Philippinarum (mas vel foem.).” It is obvious that such names cannot be utilised in a binomial or trinomial nomenclature ; while the names given above appear in the systematic scheme the text to the plates is differently lettered ; thus in the present case Kahadoe rubrogaleatus appears, and in the third instance above we read Kalcadoe sulfureus major vel australensis. Mr. J. W. Mellor has written me : “ The Gang-Gang Cockatoo I have seen on the River Buchan, Gippsland, Victoria, where, on the 11th December, 1908, I secured several pairs for my collection. The birds were very intent in feeding on the green seeds of a species of wattle (acacia), which had long, narrow, pendant pods, about three inches in length ; the birds settled on the large eucalyptus trees and then came down to the smaller acacias underneath ; they were quite tame, and intent upon getting their food, so that I could pick and choose my birds, so as to get pairs, as the cock bird can be easily distinguished from the female on account of his bright red topknot, the hen having a dullish grey colour here and less bright colour on other parts of the body. They breed in the Gippsland district in the large tree country, but select high and inaccessible trees, using hollows, and making their nest of the rotten wood. The Gang-Gang Cockatoo was once to be seen in South Australia, as Mr. William White, a brother of the late Mr. Samuel White, the well-known naturalist, tells me that he has seen it in the south-east of this State in the ’fifties, when he was interested in a cattle station there, but it was not common and he did not know of it nesting there.” Captain S. A. White confirms the above note, stating : “ This bird was also found in the southern part of the Mt. Lofty Ranges, and was collected there by my father in the early days. The specimens procured in Victoria seem to have lived almost entirely upon acacia seeds at certain times of the year, and their stomachs are so distended with green seeds the smell of the seeds penetrates the whole of their body. When feeding in the large acacia trees during the day a party of these birds keep up a growling sound all the time.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has communicated to me : “ In May, 1892, at Lorn, in the Cape Otway Ranges, Victoria, these birds were very numerous, feeding in the tops of the forest trees, probably on the gum seeds. Their movements were easily followed by the continuous sound of their peculiar wheezy notes (with upward inflection). On both occasions that I have visited Mt. Dandenong, in Victoria, I have met with this bird, and in June last year 156 GANG-GANG COCKATOO. (1915) I saw them in the Blue Mountains, New South Wales, but I have never seen them in this State.” Gould wrote as follows : “ The only information I can give respecting this fine species is that it is a native of the forests bordering the south coast of Australia, some of the larger islands in Bass’s Straits, and the northern parts of Tasmania.” Mr. Littler wrote me some years ago that his correspondents denied its existence in Tasmania, and concluded that its inclusion among Tasmanian birds was due to the fact that it was found on King Island. One correspondent, however, recollected seeing some strange birds which he afterwards determined as Gang-Gangs, but these were obviously stragglers. However, I have a specimen procured in Tasmania but it may also have been a straggler from King Island. Campbell’s range reads : “ through eastern forests, but not in great numbers, from South Queensland to Tasmania. . . . Probably the bird is nowhere more frequently met with than in the Snowy River district and other places in Gippsland. Its most westerly range is the Grampians.” In the South Australian Ornithologist, Vol. I., pt. iii. , p. 17, 1914, is a note, unsigned, reading : “The Gang-Gang Cockatoo ( Callocephalon galeatum), now found in Victoria, in the early days extended its habitation to South Australia, and Mr. William White, of the Reedbeds, has a specimen that he shot in the ranges at Mosquito Plains, near Kalangadoo, in the south-east of South Australia in 1858. Mr. White states that he occasionally saw these birds in the district while he was on the Tatiara Station, but they were at no time plentiful, and never stayed to nest.” From the Australian Museum Special Catalogue No. 1, Vol. III., 1 give the following notes : Mr. Robert Grant wrote : “ I have shot Gang-Gangs ail over the ranges around Lithgow on the Blue Mountains, New South Wales, but particularly at Marrangaroo, Badger Brush, and Sodwalls. In the spring the adults are usually met with in pairs, and in summer are more ofteh seen accompanied by their young. In the autumn and winter months they congregate in flocks from ten to twenty or thirty in number. On one occasion my brother and I shot eighteen from one tree, which were attracted by the cries of two of their wounded mates lying on the ground. These birds can inflict a nasty bite. A wounded female I attempted to pick up fastened on to my right thumb, the top of which it nearly bit through.” Mr. G. A. Heartland noted : “ Whilst most species of Cockatoos feed principally on grain or leguminous seeds, Callocephalon galeatum lives almost exclusively on the seed of the Eucalypt. I recently skinned a pair of Gang- Gang Cockatoos from Croydon, and from the crop of each bird took an egg- 157 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. cupful of Eucalyptus seed ; in fact, when killed, their flesh smells strongly of this food. They are usually seen in pairs, but during the winter months they congregate in flocks. On two occasions I have seen them on the bush tracks in the Dandenong Ranges, picking over the droppings from the carters’ horses. Some of the male birds acquire the scarlet on their heads at a very early age. One that I kept for some time was scarlet on the head before it could feed itself.” When Gould wrote be commented : “ The paucity of information here given will, I trust, be a sufficient hint to those who may be favourably situated for observing the habits of this species. ...” Some fifty years afterward, when Campbell drew up his “ Nests and Eggs,” he reproduced the above, as so little had been done in the meanwhile. I cannot see that since the date of Campbell’s book much has been added, so here emphasize the plaint of Gould and beg that some observations be taken by field students before it is too late. Captain S. A. White, writing on the birds of Mallacoota, Viet., in the Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 138, 1915, observed: “Quite a number of these little Cockatoos ( C . galeatum) were met with amongst the heavily-timbered country ; most were immature birds in their first year’s plumage. They visited the deep, damp gullies where the acacias grew ; the seeds of these trees seem to be the principal food of the Gang-Gang at this time of the year. When passing through the timber country late in the afternoon, the low, growling notes of these birds when feeding were often heard. The immature males in the first year’s plumage have but a short crest, much mottled with grey ; wings, breast, and abdomen are barred and mottled with fight yellow ; many of the feathers of the abdomen are barred with pink. When dissected the stomachs were found to be packed with the green acacia seeds, and the birds smelt very strongly of this plant.” The systematic history of this species is short. Owing to its restricted range no subspecies were named until I designated the Tasmanian bird. The reconsideration of the species forces the conclusion that the Victorian, King Island and Tasmanian birds must be lumped for the present time with the few specimens that are available. These are readily separated from the New South Wales birds by the deeper coloration of the head and crest and generally darker coloration. The subspecies will be : — Callocorydon fimbriatus fimbriatus (Grant). Victoria ; King Island ; Tasmania. As synonyms I note Psittacus phcenicocephalus (Kuhl) and Callocorydon fimbriatus tasmanicum (Mathews). Callocorydon fimbriatus superior subsp. nov., New South Wales. 158 GANG-GANG COCKATOO. Distinguished from C. /. fimbriatus (Grant) by its paler coloration ; particularly the head and crest. Type from the Blue Mountains, New South Wales. A male in my collection. When Lesson proposed his Callocephalon australe he included in it all birds previously referred to P. galeatus and distinctly mentioned first Peron’s specimen from King Island and then a -female from New South Wales. I have selected King Island as the type locality in order to relieve the absurd situation of applying australe to the northern bird. 159 Genus— K AKATOE. Kakatoe Cuvier, Legons Comp. Anat., Vol. I., Tabl. II. after p. 496, 1800 Also spelt — Kakadoe Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 11, 1820. Kakadoea Desmarest, Diet. Sci. Nat. (Levrault), Vol. XXXIX., p. 19, 1826. Cacatoes Dumeril, Zool. Analyt., p. 50, 1806 .. Also spelt — Kacatoes Gerbe, Diet. Univ. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. IX., p. 641, 1861. Catacus Rafinesque, Analyse de la Nature, 1815, p. 64 (cf. Auk. Vol. XXVI., p. 42.) Plyctolophus Vieillot, Analyse nouv Ornith., p. 26 (Apl.) 1 1 • . .. .. .. .. .. Also spelt — Plyctiloplius Lesson, Joum. Aut. Globe Thetis, p. 312, 1837. Plvctobphus Nitzsch, Pterylogr., p. 146, 1840. Plictolophus Le Maout, Hist. Nat. Ois., p. 106, 1853. Phycloptolophua Gerbe, Diet. Univ. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. IX., p. 650, 1861. Pleetolophus Sundevall, Meth. Nat. Av. Disp. Tent., p. 68, 1872. Cacatua Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XVII., p. 6, 1817 . . . . Also spelt — Catacua Dumont, Diet. Sci. Nat. (Levr.), Vol. XXIV., p. 317, 1822. Cacatus Voigt, in Cuvier’s Thier-reich, Vol. I., p. 737 •• » • •• •• •• • • Plissolophus Gloger, Hand. u. Hilfsb., p. xxxv, 1842 . . Camptolophus Sundevall, Meth. Nat. Av. Disp. Tent., p. 69, 1872 Type K. galerita. Type K. galerita. Type K. galerita. Type K. rosacea. Type K. rosacea. Type K. rosacea. Type K. rosacea. Type K. rosacea. Medium-sized Kakatoeine birds of white coloration, with medium bills, long wings, long tail and small legs and feet. The distinctive features of the genus are the long recurved crest, white coloration and naked cere. The bill is comparatively narrow with a projecting long tip, succeeded by a notch and then straight edge ; the cere is small but naked, the nostrils placed high up on sides of bill in the cere. The under mandible is deep and narrow, the sides straight, the tips with sinus between, but the tips do not project like teeth. The lores are feathered but there is a small bare space round the eye. 160 KAKATOE. The head bears a crest of long narrow recurved feathers. The wing is long, the feathers broad, the first five primaries scalloped on their inner webs ; the first primary is long but is exceeded by the next five, the sitxh primary being longer than the first but shorter than the intermediate four which are about the same length. The tail is even, composed of very broad feathers and more than half the length of the wing. The tarsus is very short and thick but the toes are much longer and the feet are comparatively large. This genus agrees in coloration with the genera Licmetis and Ducorpsius, but differs absolutely in the crest formation and also in the wing formula. In both the secondaries are very long, but in the latter the naked eye space is larger and more noticeable. It appears that we here have two or more groups with the same coloration retained. Of course, some workers may not wish to recognise that more than one group is here represented, yet they have consistently recognised Licmetis on account of the longer bill. I shall show this latter item to be certainly of much less value than the crest formation. Salvadori, in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., 1891, utilised Cacatua as of Vieillot for the whole of the White Cockatoos, save two which were placed in Licmetis. In Cacatua he also included the well-known “ Galah ” which is not a “ White ” Cockatoo. He gave no generic definitions, strictly speaking, but included a Key to Genera, and therein wrote : “ General colour white or rosy white, except in Cacatua roseicapilla (the Galah), which is grey above, rose-colour on the head and below. Bill with the hook of the upper mandible of the ordinary size and nearly perpendicular. . . . Cacatua .” I will hereafter discuss the association of species, but first deal with the genus name. Although Salvadori used Cacatua as of Vieillot, 1817, he noted that there was an earlier name Plyctolophus , also of Vieillot, 1816, writing : “ The generic name, Plyctolophus , which, according to Sundevall, is not Greek, was abandoned by Vieillot himself,” and then further added : “ Cuvier ( Tableau Elem. Hist. Nat. An., p. 236, 1798 ; Regn. An. L, p. 433, 1817) did not use either KaJcadoe or Cacatoes as a Latin generic term, but only as a French name for a section of the genus PsittacusN As the abrogation of a name, even by its author, is inadmissible under the International Code, it was necessary to investigate the matter. In the Nov. Zool, Vol. XVIII., June 1911, p. 12, I recorded the alterations necessary in my “ Handlist of the Birds of Australasia,” and wrote : “ Page 47 ; Genus CLXXXV. Cacatoes Bumeril, Zool. Analytique , p. 50 (1806) replaces Cacatua Vieillot.” VOL. VI. 161 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. This name had not previously been noted. I herewith give the matter in connection with it. On p. 51 a table is given by Dumeril, where the generic forms are diagnosed in French and vernacular names cited, the vernacular in this case being “ Cacatoes.” On p. 50 appear “ Notes sur le No. 32,” No. 32 being the aforesaid table. Therein Latin names are provided for the vernaculars and in the present case is written : “ Les per roquets ( psittacus ) et. les deux genres suivans, qui ont conserve le meme nom d’ara et de cacatoes e n latin. . . .” Such a definite statement fixes the name of the genus as Cacatoes without any doubt. However, in the Preface, p. xxii, Dumeril explained his work, acknowledging it was based on certain authorities, and therein stated : “La classe des oiseaux ofi're a-peu-pres les memes divisions que celles qui ont ete etablies par M. Cuvier, dans son ouvrage intitule: Tableau elementairc de V Histoire naturelle des Animaux . Si nous avons fait quelques changemens dans la disposition des genres, c’etoit seulement pour en faire ressortir davantage les caracteres.” In my “ List of the Birds of Australia,” 1913, I used Cacatoes and as no type had been noted in connection with it I designated Latham’s Psittacus galeritus as type. However, a German translation of Dumeril’s work had been made bv Froriep and published also in 1806. In this translation Froriep, noting the lack of examples in connection with the generic names in the original work, provided such. In this translation, of course, the table is in German and the vernacular names are Geripan also, the present reading “ Kakatu.” The table “ No. XXXII.” appears on p. 50, followed by “ Bemerkungen zur XXXII. Tabelle,” and on p. 51 we get “ Die Papageys (psittacus) psitt. erytkacus und die Aras (ara) psittac. macao L. so wie die Kakatus (cacatoes) psittac. cristatus L. haben einen in Form ...” American ornithologists in similar cases have cited Froriep’ s examples as type-designations, and in the present case it may be accepted. It will be noted that reference is made both by Salvadori and Dumeril to Cuvier’s Tableau elemen taire de V Histoire naturelle des Animaux , so that it was necessary to examine this work. A new classification was therein proposed, but Cuvier was careless of providing Latin names. He was a sincere zoologist and a great systematist, but he concerned himself with teaching others and continually neglected the introduction of Latin equivalents to his French vernaculars. In the present instance he split up the Parrots into four sections as follows : “ p. 236, (a) Les Kakatoes : (b) Les Perroquets, p. 237, (c) Les Aras and (d) Les Perruches.” None of these names come into systematic work, but in 1800 Cuvier published another work entitled, Lemons KAKATOE. cT Anatomie co?nparee, and at the end of the first volume inserted tables giving diagnostic characters down to genera and also naming sections. In these tables to each vernacular was allotted a Latin equivalent and the vernaculars generally agreed with the ones given in the earlier Tableau elementaire. The sectional Latin names were apparently nomina nuda as they were based simply on a vernacular name. On the face of this conclusion I rejected the names proposed in the Lemons, as this ruling had been quite generally accepted in connection with these names. Comparatively recently the matter was submitted to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature for an opinion as to the recognition of these names. The Opinion No. 39 was given in their favour, reading : “ The Latin names in the systematic tables given in Cuvier 1800 (Legons d’ Anatomie comparee) are available in so far as they are identifiable through the bibliographic references given on page XIX. of the introduction.” This at once necessitated the reconsideration of the nomination of these birds, as in the Lemons on Table II. we get the following series : — Kakatoe . — Les Katakoes (sic) Psittacus I Psittacus = Les Perroquets. Ara = Les Aras. Psittacula — Les Perruches. Consequent!} the Latin name Kakatoe is available as it is the equivalent of Les Kakatoes of the Tableau elementaire. Since my note on Cacatoes was published, one or two workers, e.g., De Witt Miller, have accepted that name, but in the Jubilee Supplement, No. 2, of the Ibis , published in December, 1915, Ogilvie-Grant continued the usage of Cacatua, which was obviously wrong. In the Ibis , April, 1916, p. 301, I commented upon this action in the following words : — “ Cacatua. Ogilvie- Grant has continued the usage of this name for the genus I call Cacatoes. I here give the synonymy of the generic names, which shows what a poor claim Ogilvie-Grant’ s selection has. I will fully discuss the matter in my ‘ Birds of Australia,’ as the matter is very complex and cannot be stated shortly here. ? Kakadoe Cuvier, 1798-1800. Cacatoes Dumeril, 1806. Catacus Rafinesque, 1815. Plyctolo'phus Vieillot, 1816. Cacatua Vieillot, 1817. It is certain that whatever the ultimate designation of this man}/ -named genus may be, it will not be the last-named. At present, and probably correctly, I use Cacatoes.” 163 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Ogilvie-Grant replied, p. 311 : “ The reasons for using the name Cacatua are explained by Count Salvadori, Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , XX., p. 115 (footnote).” This rejoinder was perfectly criticised by the reviewer in the Auk : “ In reply to this criticism, Mr. Ogilvie-Grant admits some of the errors, and in most of the others takes refuge behind such time-honoured arguments as ‘ current usage,’ 4 obvious mistake ’ and others not recognised by the International Code of Nomenclature.” It might be noted that in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , XX., p. 115, Salvadori does not record Cacatoes Dumeril, nor even Catacus Rafinesque, while he misspells Cuvier’s name even as Kuhl and I (in error) did, and does not refer to the tables in the Lemons. Such omissions should have shown Ogilvie-Grant that a later view than that taken by Salvadori was urgent, but that side of the matter seems to have been overlooked. I remarked, in my note, that, probably correctly, I used Cacatoes. I now revert to Cuvier’s name Kakatoe on account of the Opinion No. 39. The reading in the Tableau elementaire is as follows: “ Les Kakatoes, dont la tete est ornee d’une huppe mobile. Ce sont les plus grands et les plus beaux. Leur plumage est le plus souvent blanc ; la huppe varie en couleur selon les especes. II y en a une a plumage tout noir. Tous les kakatoes sont des Indes orientales.” No species are, however, given as examples, but the definition is quite diagnostic and there seems no clear argument against it. There has, however, been much controversy about the recognition of names given in such manner, and many good workers have argued for the entire rejection of names unaccompanied by species. If these became law then Cacatoes Froriep would be the name of the genus, as Froriep definitely gave an example in connection with the genus name. Catacus Rafinesque was a name proposed because the introducer would not accept Cacatoes as a good name. Even if all the above came under review as liable to rejection Plyctolophus would still antedate Cacatua , and the reason given by Salvadori for its rejection is unacceptable, as Ogilvie-Grant commonly accepts names in similar cases. The genus as accepted by Salvadori cannot be absolutely utilised as it was certainly not homogeneous. He classed most of the White Cockatoos, together with one coloured species, in one genus, and separated two White Cockatoos as a distinct genus. The reason for distinguishing the last two was the elongation of the upper mandible. Otherwise the species were quite typical White Cockatoos. The value of such a single feature is quite problematical, as it appears to have been induced through a change in the habits of the species and really to be the character of the least phylogenetic 164 KAKATOE. value. Nevertheless, the genus has been commonly accepted ever since its introduction by Wagler in 1832. However, leaving out the coloured species, which is quite obviously not congeneric, there appears to be two kinds of crest formation among the White Cockatoos. The evolution of an ornament of this kind, which is quite independent of food-habits, would appear to have more phylogenetic value and has been so considered by some systematic workers. We would thus arrive at four groups in one step instead of only two used by Salvador!. With this conclusion in view the birds were examined in order to group them for my “ List of the Birds of Australia.” The result was as follows : Cacatoes Lophochroa Ducorpsius Eolophus Licmetis Cacatoes galerita. Lophochroa leadbeateri. Ducorpsius sanguineus and gymnopis . Eolophus roseicapillus. Licmetis tenuirostris. It has been suggested that such mono ty pic genera are not desirable, but how else these birds can be accurately arranged is a matter not easily decided. As already stated, if colour only were used, all the white ones would go together and the coloured one separated. I had selected as type of Cacatoes the species galerita , and this species has the bill of the nature of the species commonly accepted as generically distinct under the name Licmetis . It varies as a subspecific character, so that a form sixty years ago was dis- tinguished under the name licmetorhyncha. The species varies somewhat in size, but is the largest of the White Cockatoos, and has a long erectile crest of narrow feathers. I have already detailed the generic characters, so here note the differences other species show. An absolutely similarly coloured series of birds are of smaller size, a somewhat similarly foimed bill, a notable bare eye space, though lores ^re feathered and the cere is also covered by feathers, the nostrils quite hiddten. A peculiar crest has been, however, developed by these birds, short, rounded, broad feathers, somewhat resembling the crest of the Umbrella bird. If Licmetis be recognised, this group certainly must be, and hence I used the name provided by Bonaparte, Ducorpsius. Another species has a pink flush through its plumage, thus separating it rather widely from the previous three groups, Cacatoes , Licmetis , and Ducorpsius. It possesses a crest recalling very closely that of the first- named, but the feathers are broader. It might have been classed with that, the difference in coloration being ignored, were it not for the fact that it had evolved a distinct wing formula. As the wing formula of the above three 165 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. distinct groups has remained constant, though the bills and crests have become widely differentiated, and no alteration whatever in coloration has taken place, the peculiar coloration and different wing formula demand generic recognition. We thus arrive at four generic groups in the White Cockatoos, and I see no course open save their recognition or the lumping of the whole under one genus name. The latter course would not be a scientific procedure as the skulls of Cacatoes and Licmetis appear to differ. The skull of Lophochroa (the pink-flushed species) would show just as great distinction, as superficially the bill differs more from that of Cacatoes than does that of Licmetis. It again becomes a matter of colour and it is quite impossible in these forms to admit colour only as of generic value. It is quite unreasonable to accept a structural^) difference in one case as of generic value and reject it in another. Again, as noted above, the structure of the bill differs in the pink-flushed species as compared with the white species. A further complication is the nature of the crests. Are these of less value than a mere elongation of the bill ? It is suggested that the osteology of the species will show characters just as strongly marked as the ones I superficially record. In which case there will be no hesitation in accepting the groups here utilised as genera, and to use them as such appears to be the only logical conclusion. A splendid instance of the newer and more exact methods of Ornithology is seen in a paper entitled “ Notes on Ptilosis, with special reference to the feathering of the Wing, by W. De. Witt. Miller,” in the Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. XXXIV., pp. 129-140, 1915. Dealing with first primary covert, he has written : “ The condition of this covert in the Psittaci is of particular interest, as I believe it will prove of some assistance in the difficult problem of classification in tins group. In the Cockatoos ( Cacatoes , Eolophus, Licmetis and Leptolophus) and in Stringops the first covert is normal in size, form, and texture. In all other Parrots examined it is decidedly less than three-fourths the length of the second, often less than one-half, and is sometimes reduced to a mere tuft of down, not one-third the second covert in length. Tins last stage is reached in Charmosyna , Ara , Conurus and Conuropsis , and the feather is nearly or quite as vestigial in Trichoglossus, Vini , Anodorhynchus , Brotogeris, Pionus, Pionites, Porcephalus , Psittacula and Myiopsitta. In Amazona, Rhynchopsitta, Psittacus , Palceornis, Agapornis, Aprosmictus ( Ptistes auct.), Alisterus ( Aprosmictus auct.), Tanygnathus and Melopsittacus the reduction is carried not quite so far, and in none of them is the covert completely downjx It is least reduced in Coracopsis, Pezoporus , Platycercus, Psephotus, Eos , Lorius and Nestor, being considerably more than half as long as the second, less vestigial in 166 KAKATOE. structure, and firm, not downy, terminally. Between these several groups of species there is, however, complete intergradation in the size and form of this covert. “It is obvious that the Cockatoos and the Owl Parrot branched off from the early Psittacine stem before the reduction in the first primary covert began, and it is unlikely that this reduction took place independently in two or more groups. On this view the Cacatuidce and Stringopidce form a group, or two groups, equal in value to all the other Parrots combined. * This is contrary to Gadow’s scheme in which the suborder is divided into Tricho- glossidce with Nestorince, Loriince, and Cyclopsittacince, and Psittacidoe with Stringopince , Cacatuince and Psittacince . The Cockatoos are a strongly marked group. The entire absence of green or blue in any species is very striking, and among other characters are the presence of a crest, and, in the skull, a peculiar orbital ring. The arrangement suggested does not appear to be contradicted by any other character, and though it is here impracticable fco pursue the subject further, it is evident that the first primary covert should be considered in any future attempts to elucidate the classification of the Parrots.” Further on, in an extract I. quote in connection with Eolophus, Miller recognises that genus as very distinct from Cacatoes, but concludes : “ Mathews recognizes five segregates of the old genus Cacatoes, a degree of subdivision that to many will seem quite unnecessary.” It will be noted that Miller does not give it. as his personal opinion that the five segregates are unnecessary, and I am quite certain, from his very careful work? that when he does criticise my subdivisions (four, not five) he will find good reasons for the retention of some, if not all, of these segregates. In any case I do not think that Cacatoes , Lophochroa and Ducorpsius can be lumped while Licmetis is recognised, as suggested in the second sentence of the quotation given. While agreeing with Miller that every item should be considered in the classifi- cation of birds, I cannot see any close relationship between the Owl Parrot and the Cockatoos, as I have already stated. A few notes on the distribution of the Cockatoos may prove interesting, and I shall here use the restricted genus names adv ocated. As regards extra limit al range KaJcatoe and Ducorpsius only occur, the other three genera having no representatives. A feature in connection with colour at once engages attention, as these are the pure white species with sulphur colouring on crest, under wings and under tail. In some extra limital species, however, orange- red has displaced the sulphur. KaJcatoe and Ducorpisus agree in coloration but differ widely in the crest formation ; the former extends into Tasmania 167 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. but does not occur in the south-west of Australia nor in the interior, the same species also ranging through New Guinea. The range of Ducorpsius is similar but more restricted, as it does not extend into Tasmania and rather belongs to the interior of Australia, and neither reaches South-west Australia nor Victoria and the south of South Australia, while different species occur in the islands to the north of Australia. Eolophus , which has really no place with the White Cockatoos, also extends over Australia and Tasmania, although more common as a central bird. Lophochroa is differentiated by colour and wing-formation, and has a peculiar distribution, probably also due to a central origin, as it is more common in the interior, and rarely occurs in South-west Australia, more common in North-west Australia but otherwise has no northern habitat, being missing from the Northern Territory and North Queensland, and it does not occur in Tasmania. Licmetis , the genus commonly recognised as distinct, has the coloration and crest of Ducorpsius and only differs in its longer bill. It is confined to the South of Australia, occurring in New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and West Australia, but again does not live in Tasmania. It may be noted that it represents Ducorpsius where that genus is missing, though probably the two forms may now be met with together. Nevertheless it appears a recent evolutionary form and seems of less age than Lophochroa , and more closely allied to Ducorpsius than Lophochroa is to Kakatoe. I have noted some more complications in connection with the genus name, and here make explanation as I now view the matter. Cuvier’s Kakatoe was introduced with no species named, so I here designate Psittacus galeritus Latham as type. I have not on record any prior designation. The Opinions indicate that the tj^pe must be selected from the species first added to the genus name. Again I have no names. It may be argued that Dumeril’s Cacatoes is absolutely equivalent and the type of that would be automatically the type of Cuvier’s genus. I also named P. galeritus Latham as type of Dumeril’s genus, ignorant of Froriep’s action. Froriep’s selection was P. cristatus Linne, but I find that Salvadori has rejected that species on account of the description being indefinite. The point then arises, what is the status of Cacatoes ? Also, will Kakatoe suffer ? Accepting Froriep’s selection, all the names cited, Kakatoe, Cacatoes , Plyctolophus, Cacatua, Plissolophus and Camptolophus are based on a group separable from the Australian galerita, and which would be nameless were Lophochroa (proposed for leadheateri) rejected, 168 KAKATOE. I have given the preceding long account as it seems necessary to have the facts on record, and I now introduce Eucacatua with Psittacus galeritus Latham as type, so that definite results may be soon achieved. My name will become a synonym if my conclusions be accepted, but will come into use if they are rejected. The type of Plyctolophus I have given as K. rosacea ; I select this name for the bird Salvadori called Cacatna moluccensis , based on Psittacus moluccensis Gmelin, 1788, which is antedated by Psittacus moluccensis Forster, 1781. As an item of importance to extra-limital workers, I might notice that Opinion No. 39 legitimatises Cuvier’s Psittacula, and this is quite different to the genus now so called and is antecedent to Palceornis. Thus Psittacula Cuvier was provided for Les Perruches, and as examples in the Lemons are cited P. alexandri and P. rufirostris. These, as understood by Cuvier, were congeneric and are typical Palceornis of Vigors. I have already indicated that Conurus Kulil was typified by Lesson by Palceornis and should displace it. At the present time Psittacula Cuvier will replace Conurus , while Palceornis must altogether disappear. Apparently for the South American Parrots now termed Psittacula , Boie’s genus name Forpus will come into use. In the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., p. 240, 1891, Salvadori wrote : “ Forpus Boie, 1858 {fide G. R. Gr. Handlist, II., p. 166, 1870) ” but there was little difficulty in tracing Boie’s name as it appeared in the Journ. fur Ornith. p. 363 for the year quoted. If the facts are displayed they will be more easily understood thus : Psittacula Cuvier, Lemons d’Anat. Comp., table at end of Vol. I., 1800. Type Psittacus alexandri Linn, will displace Conurus Ivuhl, 1820, which equals Palceornis Vigors, Zool. Journ., Vol. II., p. 46, 1825, and of Salvadori, Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., p. 433, 1891. Forpus Boie, Journ. fur Orn., 1858, p. 363 will replace Psittacula as used by Salvadori, Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., p. 240, 1891. VOL. VL 169 Order PS1TTAC1F0RMES Family KA KA TOFIDM. No. 339. KAKATOE GALERITA. WHITE COCKATOO. (Plate 287.)* PsiTTACtJS galeritus Latham, Index Omith., Yol. I., p. 109, 1790 ; New South Wales. Psittacus cristatus (not Linne), White, Joum. Voy. New South Wales, pi. opp. p. 237, 1790. Psittacus galeritus Latham, Index Ornith., Vol. I., p. 109, 1790 ; Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 87, 1820. Cacatua galerita Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XVII., p. 11, 1S17 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., p. 694, 1832 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. x. (Vol. V., pi 1), 1843 ; Sturt, Narr. Exped. Cent. Aust., Vol. II., App. p. 35, 1849 (Centr.) ; Elsey, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1857, p. 26 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II.. p. 2, 1865 ; Ramsay, Ibis, 1866, p. 332 ; id., Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1875, p. 601 (Q.) ; Masters, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol. I., p. 57, 1876 (Q.) ; Vol. II., p. 274, 1878 (N.T.) ; Broadbent, Proc. Roy. Soc. Q’ld., II., p. 124, 1885 (Q.) ; id., ib.. III., p. 30, 1886 (Q.) ; id., ib., V., p. 26, 1887 (Q.) ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 15, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 250, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 1, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 116, 1891 ; North, Trans. Roy. Soc. S.A., Vol. XXII., p. 129, 1898, N.W.A. Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 62, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 611, 1901 ; Le Souef, Emu, Vol. II., p. 93, 1902 (N.T.) ; Hill, ib., p. 165, 1902 (Viet.) ; A. G. Campbell, ib., p. 208, 1902 (King I.) ; Fletcher, ib., III., p. 109, 1902 (Tas.) ; Hartert, Nov. Zool, Vol. XII., p. 211, 1905 (N.T., N.W.A.) ; A. G. Campbell, Emu, Vol. V., p. 145, 1906 (K’goo Is.) ; Batey, ib., VII., p. 11, 1907 (Viet.) ; Hill, ib., p. 21 (Viet.) ; Hah, ib., p. 25 (N.W.A.) ; Austin, ib., p. 75 (N.S.W.) ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral., p. 47, 1908 ; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasrn., p. 93, 1910 (Tas.) ; Broadbent, Emu, Vol. X., p. 240, 1910 (N.Q.); Hill, ib., p. 269 (N.W.A.) ; Barnard, ib., XI., p. 23, 1911 (N.Q.) ; North Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 77, 1911 ; H. L. White, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 101, 1913 (N.S.W.) ; Chisholm, ib., p. 120, pi. 16, 1914 (Viet.) ; S. A. White, ib., p. 125, fig. in text ; Barnard, ib., XIV., p. 46, 1914 (N.T.). Plyctolophus galeritus Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 268, 1827 ; Lear, Ulus. Psitt., pt. ix. (1831?) ; Gould, Synops. Birds Austr., pi. 64, 1837. * The Plate is lettered Cacaio'es galerita. 170 CACATOES GALERITA. (WHITE COCKATOO). Witherby & C° Roland Green. del. WHITE COCKATOO. Cacatua chrysolophus Lesson, Traite d’Ornith., p. 182, 1830 : New name for P. galeritus Latham. Plyctolophus licmetorhynchus Bonaparte Comptes Rendus Acad. Sci. (Paris), Yol. XXX., p. 139, 1850 ; Tasmania. Plictolophus galeritus Finsch Die Papag., Yol. I., p. 286, 1867 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 192, 1878 ; Legge, Papers and Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasm., 1886, p. 237, 1887 (Tas.). Plissolopkus galeritus Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 30. Cacatoes galeriia galerita Mathews, Nov. Zool., Yol. XVIII., p. 264, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 125, 1913. Cacatoes galerita licmetorhyncha Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 264, 1912 ; id.. List Birds Austr., p. 125, 1913. Cacatoes galerita fitzroyi Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 264, 1912 ; Fitzroy River, North-West Austr. ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 125, 1913. n Cacatoes galerita queenslandica Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 264, 1912 ; Cook- town, North Queensland ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 15, 1913. Cacatoes galerita rosince Mathews, Austral Av. Record, Vol. I., p. 36, Apl., 1912 ; Kangaroo I., South Austr. ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 125, 1913. Cacatoes galerita melvillensis Mathews, Austral. Av. Record, Vol. I., p. 36, 1912 ; Melville Island ; id., List Birds Austral., p. 125, 1913 ; Zietz, South Austr. Ornith., Vol. I., p. 14, 1914, Melville Island. Cacatoes rosince S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XII., p. 264, 1913 (Kangaroo Island). Cacatua queenslandica Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 156, 1914 (N.Q.). Distribution. Australia (except the Central and South-west) ; Tasmania ; extra limital. Adult male. General colour above and below white ; inner webs of the primary and secondary quills and tail-feathers sulphur-yellow, as are also the elongated feathers of the nuchal crest ; lower aspect of the tail and quill lining also sulphur yellow. Iris brown ; feet and tarsus mealy -black ; bill black. Total length, 510 mm. ; culmen 39, wing 345, tail 195, tarsus 27. Figured. Collected on Melville Island on the 22nd June, 1912. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Culmen 37 mm., wing 337. Melville Island, 24th May, 1912. Immature. Take on the adult plumage from the nest. Nest. A hole in a tree, often very high up. Eggs. Clutch, two ; white. 47-52 mm. by 30-35 (Dawson River). Breeding-season. August to November. When this bird was first seen in Australia, it was regarded as identical with the White Cockatoo of the Moluccas, which was already known in Europe. Thus in White’s Journal Voy. New South Wales, published in 1790, a plate of the Crested Cockatoo, dated December 29th, 1789, is given, while in the text, p. 237, the Latin equivalent Psittacus cristatus Lin. is added with the note : “I cannot regard this bird in any other view than as a variety of 171 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA the Psittacus cristatus of Linnaeus, or large white Cockatoo, which has been described by almost all ornithologists, and figured in several works of Natural History.” Simultaneously, however, Latham, in the Index Ornithologicus, named it Psittacus galeritus , observing “ Vix ejusdem varietas ? ” With regard to the other White Cockatoos, Mr. Caley’s observations, recorded by Vigors and Horsfield, read : “ This bird is called by the natives Car' away, and also Cur'riang. I have met with it in large flocks at the conflux of the Goose and the Hawkesbury rivers, below Mulgo’ez on the former river, and in the long meadow near the Nepean river. They are shy and not easily approached. The flesh of the young ones is accounted good eating. I have heard from the natives that it makes its nest in the rotten limbs of trees, of nothing more than the vegetable mould formed by the decayed parts of the bough ; that it has no more than two young ones at a time ; and that its eggs are white without spots. The natives first find where the nests are by the bird making Co' torn in an adjoining tree, which lies in conspicuous heaps on the ground. Co' tor a is the bark stripped off the smaller branches, and cut into small pieces. When the young ones are nearly fledged the old birds cut a quantity of small branches from the adjoining trees, but never from that in which the nest is situated. They are sometimes found to enter the hollow limb as far as two yards. The nests are generally formed in a Black-butted gum- tree ; and also in Coroy'bo , Cajim'bora and Yarrowar'ry trees (species of Eucalyptus). Their breeding-places appear to be local.” Gould’s notes read : “ The late Mr. Elsey furnished me with the following note : ‘ The Cacatua galerita of the Victoria (Northern Territory) has many points of difference from that of the eastern coast, especially in the upper mandible. I find that the mandibles of the Cockatoos differ in a striking manner according to the season and the kind of food upon which they subsist. When feeding on the seeds of the Eucalypti the brittle outer layers disappear, and the tip becomes hard and sharp, while when feeding on roots grubbed from soft ground, the outer layers are not worn and the end is square and spadelike. Leichardt mentions that the Cockatoos shot round the gulf had a pink colouring on the breast, and asks whether they were to be considered as a variety. We noticed this fact also ; and the first bird I saw was so well coloured on the breast, and the dye so uniform, that it deceived me ; but I soon found others in which not only the breast, but the wings, tail and face were dyed of a pale rose-colour ; spots of the same hue also occurred on their bodies. The cause is this — all the large sandy river-beds contain a large quantity of iron, and the pools formed in them are usually covered with a thin film of oxide of iron, which is transferred to the bird when drinking. The crops and stomachs of those killed in Tasmania were very muscular, and 172 WHITE COCKATOO. contained seeds, grain, native bread (a species of fungus), small tuberous and bulbous roots, and in most instances large stones. As may be readily imagined, this bird is not regarded with favour by the agriculturist, upon whose fields of newly sown grain and ripening maize it commits the greatest devastation ; it is consequently hunted and shot down wherever it is found, a circumstance which tends much to lessen its numbers. It evinces a decided preference for the open plains and cleared lands, rather than for the dense brushes near the coast ; and, except when feeding or reposing on the trees after a repast, the presence of a flock, which sometimes amounts to thousands, is certain to be indicated by their screaming notes, the discordance of which may be easily conceived by those who have heard the peculiarly loud, piercing, grating scream of the bird in captivity, always remembering the immense increase of the din occasioned by the large number of birds emitting their harsh notes at the same moment ; still, I considered this annoyance amply compensated by their sprightly actions and the life their snowy forms imparted to the dense and never-varying green of the Australian forest — a feeling participated in by Sir Thomas Mitchell who says, “ Amidst the umbrageous foliage, forming dense masses of shade, the White Cockatoos sported like spirits of light.” The situations chosen for the purpose of nidification vary with the nature of the locality the bird inhabits ; the eggs are usually deposited in the holes of trees, but they are also placed in fissures in the rocks wherever they may present a convenient site ; the crevices of the white cliffs bordering the Murray, in South Australia, are annually resorted to for this purpose by thousands of this bird, and are said to be completely honey- combed by them.’ ” Campbell, in his Nests and Eggs , reported that he could get no confirmation of this Murray river habitat, but Chisholm in the Emu , Vol. XIII., 1914, gave a plate XVI. of the “ Cockatoo Cliffs on the River Murray ” and wrote : “ The cliff -building Cockatoos were there in hundreds, and made a striking picture as they dashed wildly out of hollows 150 feet above the water and rent the air with a continual harsh ‘ Kar-r-r.’ ” Captain S. A. White, a few pages on, gave a picture of a Young White Cockatoo at entrance of nesting burrow, from a photo taken by A. H. E. Mattingley, writing : “ Numbers of these fine birds were nesting in the high cliffs rising from the river.” Mr. Thos. P. Austin has written me from Cobb ora. New South Wales : ‘ Although never very plentiful in this district, there are always a few breed about twenty miles down the Talbragar River, where they mostly choose the largest red gum trees which have a suitable hollow. On this estate they are very seldom seen, probably not more than once in every two years, but. 173 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. strange to say, if I have a crop of maize just getting ripe, these Cockatoos are sure to find it out, and ‘will do great damage in a single day. They are awfully difficult to get near enough to shoot, as they seem to always have a sentinel perched on top of a dead tree or some other convenient place for an outlook, and at the least sign of danger it will give the feeding birds a warning, then they are off at once. The young are very slow growers, they take months to become fully fledged. With proper treatment they become splendid pets, also good talkers, but seldom have such human voices as many others of this tribe. In captivity they are very subject to the feather disease ; this I am sure is not altogether caused by the food given to them, because I once had a pair from the same nest, of which, at four years old the male was a perfect specimen, while the female was absolutely naked ; there was not what could be called a feather on any part but a few diseased stumps here and there, and yet these two birds were always fed together, and had exactly the same treatment.” Mr. J. W. Mellor’s notes read : “ This is one of the commonest of our Cockatoos ; it is found all over Australia, and nowiiere more plentiful than in South Australia. I have seen them in large flocks, and where the farmers stack their wheat in the open along the river banks, they will soon find it out, and rip open the bags, let the golden grain run out, and then eat it at their leisure. I noted them very plentiful along the Murray, while on a trip up to Renmark in the steamer “ Maggie ” at Easter (March), 1910, and the birds were then helping themselves to the grain in the bags in the usual manner ; they will also attack the wheat crops “while growing by rooting up the freshly planted grain, and also by nipping off the young shoots as they come above the ground ; they will also attack the wheat and other grain crops when in ear and ripening. They therefore have the hand of the farmer against them ; this is a pity as they are such beautiful birds. I have seen them also in Victoria, New South Wales, Tasmania and Queensland. In the latter place I saw large numbers at Coorong in the Blackall Ranges in November 1910, where they congregated in large flocks at night, to roost in the thick tropical scrubs around, and the harsh screeching noise was deafening, as they called to each other and settled down for the night ; they are fairly tame birds in this wild state. They nest in hollow trees, and sometimes in hollows in the rocks along the cliffs of the river banks like the Murray, laying two eggs to the clutch, rather elongated, and of a white colour. I have seen them nesting also in Kangaroo Island, the months being September, October and November.” Captain S. A. White observes : “ I take it that the New South Wales and Victorian bird would be the one found upon the river Murray in South 174 WHITE COCKATOO. Australia. They are found all the year along the river and a great distance back ; they congregate in great numbers at nesting time and take possession of the holes worn by the weather into the high cliffs rising several hundreds of feet out of the water ; here they lay their eggs upon the bare sand and hatch out their young. It is a very interesting sight to see many hundreds i of these birds half out of their nesting holes or sitting upon the ledges of rock near their nests ; depressing and raising their beautiful yellow crests. They are very noisy birds and keep up a continual screeching call. They nest in November and December. The bird found upon Kangaroo Island is rare, and all the time we were there we did not see more than half a dozen birds ; they were met with in the open country near the coast hunting for seeds upon the ground ; they appeared a much smaller bird. Birds found on the West Coast of South Australia build in the hollows of large gums.” Mr. Edwin Ashby states : “ These birds still nest in the more wild parts of the Adelaide Hills. Last month (May 1916), I saw a flock of about fifty in the large Red Gums ( E . rostrata ) at Buckland Park about 20 miles north of Adelaide ; the residents informed me that they had been there for some years, being attracted by the seeds of the tall Milk thistle ( Silybum marianum Gaertn.) which grows there in great quantities, many up to 8 ft. in height. I have also seen it nesting in the north-west of Kangaroo Island.” Mr. Christian, from Victoria, noted : “As a rule more destructive than G. funereus. It seems to prefer the more lightly timbered places of the plains to the heavily timbered ranges. As this is a large wheat-growing district (as well as grazing) these birds are shot down, as they do a lot of damage in the wheat field. Their screechings may be heard in almost any timber bordering a wheat field.” Mr. J. P. Rogers recorded at Melville Island : “ Cooper’s Camp, 1 Nov. 11. These birds are sparingly distributed in the vicinity of my camp. Ten miles south-east of Snake Bay. Numerically about the same as at Cooper’s Camp.” From the Austr. Mus. Special Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., I quote Mr. Geo. Savidge’s notes : “ Cacatua galerita was at one time very numerous in this district, but the havoc it played on the ripening maize fields and upon newly planted grounds caused it to be persecuted, poisoned and shot to such an extent that amongst the more settled parts it is indeed a rare bird. I have seen the ground white with them pulling up the maize as it showed above ground, and soon destroying a whole field of it. In the early days poisoning was chiefly resorted to, maize being soaked in strychnine diluted in water, and scattered about. Upon one occasion I saw the poor creatures laying dead in large numbers in the bush. These birds are wary and difficult to approach and seem to know a gun ; it is seldom one can give them a surprise, although 175 THE BIRDS OE AUSTRALIA. the tall maize gives one good cover to do so ; several of their mates always mount guard on the loftiest trees to give the alarm. The nesting-places I have found contained two eggs in each, and they were generally in the tall Eucalyptus in quiet remote places.” Mr. H. L. White added : “ Cacatua galerita is extremely plentiful and very mischievous, causing considerable damage to the maize crops. When pressed for food in the winter months they attack pumpkins and pie melons, into which they tear large holes and devour the seeds. I have noted hundreds of pie melons along the river banks with the seeds scooped right out by the Cockatoos. These birds apparently occupy the same roosting quarters for a great length of time. I have known a flock of several hundreds, during the past thirty-five years, to roost in the same clump of timber every night. Very old residents state that the site referred to has been used by the birds ever since the district was settled. The noise made when going to roost is very remarkable and not easily forgotten. During these years of observation many of the roosting trees have died, killed evidentty by the birds nipping the small twigs off. When a tree dies it is abandoned for a living one in close proximity. In my younger days I frequently raided the roosts on moonlight nights and shot dozens of the birds, but the site was never entirely deserted. Nests are common, and invariably in holes in the highest trees growing near rivers or creeks.” The two preceding notes refer to New South Wales localities. Dr. W. Macgillivray, writing from Hamilton, Victoria, observed : “ Cacatua galerita and Licmetis nasica are numerically very strong, large flocks of either species being no uncommon sight, especially on the newly sown crops in late autumn. A family of bird-catchers in Hamilton sent over three hundred young birds of these two species away to market in 1899 and have been doing so for the last fifteen years without appreciably diminishing their numbers.” From Tasmania Mr. E. D. Atkinson reported : “I have never known Cacatua galerita anywhere more abundant than in the open country on the west coast of Tasmania, where I have seen flocks of hundreds busily engaged feeding amongst the seaweed on the beaches. Also, I have met with it in large numbers in the thickly wooded ranges near Rockingham Bay, Queensland.” From Glenorchy, Tasmania, Mr. Malcolm Harrison wrote : “ Some years ago Cacatua galerita was plentiful, comparatively speaking, in those parts of Tasmania with which I was best acquainted, viz., the midland portions. I can remember it appearing in considerable flocks around the grain fields ready to take toll as soon as opportunity offered. War was declared against them, and many a weary tramp have I had in a vain effort to get at them with a gun. The wary sentinels, however, perched on the topmost branches of the highest neighbouring trees, rarely failed to 176 WHITE COCKATOO. prevent an approach within gunshot, and one had to be contented to scare the birds away without injuring them. My opportunities of observation are now certainly limited, but from what I can see and learn they are not now to be found in anything like their former numbers. I have not myself observed them south of the Derwent River, but a few seasons ago found a pair nesting at Glenora, near that river.” H. E. Hill in the Emu, Vol. II., p. 165, 1903, giving notes from Geelong and Otway Districts, Victoria, observed : “ Cacatua galerita penetrates two or three miles into the forest from the north, but in other parts I have only seen a single bird — at the Phantom Falls. Occurs abundantly on the plains, especially at Dean’s Marsh, where it is in very large numbers. Have only seen it near the town in the two following instances : — 7/7/93, flock of 14 at Batesford. 12/8/93, flock of several hundreds at Pettavel Road.” Batey’s notes on early Victorian Bird-Life {Emu, Vol. VII., p. 11, 1907) read : “ An irregular visitant, generally in large flocks. Formerly its diet was divers forms of roots, but when tillage commenced and variegated thistles appeared it changed. In agricultural regions, where this bird is persecuted, self-preservation has become the rule, for on thistled and cultivated areas sentries are placed around. These are relieved, one leaving his mates to take the place of the sentry, which returns to the mob. About Sunbury three or four prospectors would come about for a few days, then go away, and before the week was out the main flock appeared. If their roosting places are found shots can be had soon after nightfall. The common and the variegated thistles were quite unknown in the Sunbury district until the latter was noted in 1847 at Mains, now Flemington Bridge ; the former at Redstone Hill in 1850.” G. F. Hill, on p. 21, concerning recent occurrences in the Ararat District, Victoria, added : 44 Numerous throughout the district during winter and spring. The principal food appears to be the larvae of a species of longicorn beetle which bores into the eucalypts after they have been rung, and small tubers which grow in damp localities.” H. L. White gave a note in the Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 101, 1913, as follows : 4 4 These birds {Cacatua galerita) have always been plentiful in the Upper Hunter district of New South Wales {vide North’s Nests and Eggs, Vol. III., page 79,) but the numbers noted during the late winter have exceeded all former records. I never previously noticed the birds in such numbers. Luckily, the invasion occurred after the maize crops had been harvested. To the south-west, and about a mile from the Bell trees homestead, a very sharp-pointed, conical hill rises abruptly from the surrounding country to a height of about 1000 feet ; it is clothed on the eastern (or sheep-camping) VOL. VI. 177 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. side with a dense coat of thistles and weeds, which appear to attract the Cockatoos. During several mornings lately the pointed top of the hill has been covered by thousands of Cockatoos, crowded so closely together that from a distance the mass presents the exact appearance of snow; in fact, several people who witnessed the sight for the first time declared that the hill was capped by snow.” Dr. W. Macgillivray in the Emu , Vol. XIII., p. 156, 1914, under the name Gacatua queenslandica, wrote : “ This bird was also fairly common on the Gulf rivers. One nest was examined on the Leichhardt River on 18th June, 1910, and found to contain two newly hatched young. At Cape York this species is also common, nesting in the early spring months in trees growing in the open pockets. The earliest record of a nest containing eggs was on the 9th August, 1911. This nest was in a hollow in a Moreton Bay ash in which a pair of Owls ( N . peninsularis) had reared a brood in the previous season. In all about thirty nests were noted in August and the early part of September. One note, made on the 7th September, 1911, gives an idea of the difficulties the birds have to contend with in rearing their young : — “ Had a look at nest of White Cockatoo that contained one egg on 27th August. The egg was still there, so also was an 8-foot carpet snake. The Cockatoo was inside the snake. The tree, a Moreton Bay ash, was 2 ft. 6 inches in diameter, and the hollow about 30 feet from the ground.” This bird, unlike its southern variation, does not feed on the ground, and is never seen in flocks. Barnard notes : “ Very common all along the river (M’ Arthur, Northern Territory). They bred freely during September in the hollow spouts of the gum and melalenca trees growing along the river flats ” ( Emu , Vol. XIV., p. 46, 1914). Reporting upon Heartland’s collection in the Trams . Roy. Soc., South Australia, Vol. XXII., Dec., 1898, North wrote (p. 129) : “ Gacatua galerita. One freshly-moulted adult female, some of the quills and tail feathers being not full grown. This specimen is smaller than examples from other parts of Australia. Total length 17 inches; wing 11-8; tail 7. Camp about five miles from the junction of the Fitzroy and Margaret Rivers.” Heartland’s own note quoted is : “ During February a few of these birds visited the Fitzroy River, but they are regarded as rare in that locality. I shot one, which proved to be a female, evidently on the look out for a nest, as the ovaries were well developed. This bird was much smaller in size than any of the species I have seen.” When Broadbent’s notes on the Birds of Cardwell were published ( Emu , Vol. X., 1910, p. 240) it was recorded : “ The specimens of this bird are smaller here than in the south. Common in all the Cardwell district.” 178 WHITE COCKATOO. A curious note appears in the same volume, p. 269, by Hill : “ Cacatua galerita were fairly numerous about the Drysdale River and on Augustus Island. On the island C. galerita and C. gymnopis were in company. I did not notice a perceptible difference in size between the mainland birds of North Kimberley and those of South-west Australia and Victoria, but the small size of the island form is very noticeable.” Apparently, however, he did not collect any specimens, and this species does not occur in South-west Australia, so his note must be reconsidered later. Probably the first indication of subspecies of this bird is that given by Gould in the Introduction to the “ Birds of Australia,” 8vo ed., p. 70, 1848, where he wrote : “ There are evidently several varieties or races of this species in Australia, each possessing a modification in the form of the bill doubtless given for some specific purpose ; the Van Diemen’s Land bird is the largest, and has the upper mandible attenuated, while the Port Essington bird is alto- gether smaller, and has a much more arched bill.” A couple of years later, Bonaparte separated the Tasmanian race as a species with the name licmetorhyncha. In his Handbook in 1865 Gould did not accept this, writing : “If we regard the White Cockatoo of Tasmania and that of the adjacent continent as mere varieties of each other, this species has a very extensive range. On a close examination of specimens from different parts of Australia, a decided variation is observable in the form of the bill, but of too trivial a character, in my opinion, to warrant their being considered as distinct. “ The Tasmanian bird is the largest in every respect, and has the bill, par- ticularly the upper mandible, less abruptly curved, exhibiting a tendency to the form of that organ in the genus Licmetis ; the bill of the north-western bird is much rounder than that of the White Cockatoo of Tasmania.” Ramsay followed Gould in his non-recognition of forms, and in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., p. 116, 1891, Salvadori lumped, writing : “I have not been able to examine specimens from Tasmania, which, on account of some little differences in the shape of the bill, have been specifically separated as C. licmetorhyncha (Bp.) . . .” On p. 118 however, he recognized Cacatua triton as a separate species with the diagnosis : “ Like C. galerita, from which it differs in having the naked skin round the eyes blue, and also in the dimensions, which are generally smaller.” As range of the latter was given : “ The Papuan Islands, New Guinea. . . . Louiciade Isl., ” with a note, “ The specimens from the Western Papuan Islands (Waigiou, Salwatty, and My sol), and especially from the Aru Islands, are generally smaller than those from the mainland, and have even been separated specifically as C. macrolopha, Rosenb. ; but I do not think that we are justified in accepting 179 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. this view, especially when we consider the great range of individual variation. Also the birds from the Trobriand Islands have been separated by Dr. Finsch as Cacatua trobriandi, but he writes to me that now he considers this name only a synonym of C. triton. The specimen procured during the voyage of the ‘ Alert,’ mentioned below, seems to belong to C. triton , but I suspect that it has been imported into Hammond Island (Torres Straits).” In the Novitates Zoologicae, Vol. III., p. 246, 1896, Rothschild and Hartert catalogued “ Cacatua triton trobriandi (?). A female from Fergusson Island, has the wing only 263 mm. ( = 10*4 in.) which is decidedly less than the length of the wing of C. triton Dr. Finsch, in his interesting book Samoafahrten , p. 208, says that the natives in the Trobriand Islands brought to him ‘ lebende Exemplare einer eigenen kleinen Kakaduart mit gelber Haube, Cacatua trobriandi Finsch.’ No description .... has ever appeared. Most likely the Fergusson Island cockatoo belongs to the same form as that from Trobriand. It is still smaller than those from the Western Papuan Islands, Salwatti, Mysol, etc., the wing measuring only 267 mm., while Mysol specimens have the wing 280 mm. long, and the wings of those from Dutch New Guinea in Mr. Rothschild’s Museum measure 320 to 330 mm. The bills differ in proportion. It seems to me, and I have no doubt that a large series with exact localities stated will prove beyond doubt, that the birds from the Western Papuan Islands form a well-marked subspecies, C. triton macrolopha Rosenb., and that the birds from Fergusson, Normanby and Trobriand Islands are separable as another subspecies, to which the name trobriandi might be attached. E.H.” In the Nov. Zool., Vol. VIII., p. 78, 1901, they recognised three sub- species of Cacatua triton writing under the typical form : “ Cacatua triton triton. The only White Cockatoo we know from New Guinea proper is the typical triton .” Then followed a list of localities and the further observation : “ All these birds agree in being very large, with powerful beaks and long wings. It is most peculiar to find typical triton on the South-east Islands. C. galerita of Australia differs at first sight from triton by the more pointed, strongly laterally incurved, and more recurved feathers of the crest. This is a much better character to distinguish dried skins by, than the colour of the naked skin round the eyes, which vanishes when the bird dies. “Cacatua triton macrolopha (Rosenb.). Four adult birds from Mysol and three from Aru agree with each other, and differ from typical triton in being smaller, the wings being at least an inch shorter, the bills less powerful. This form, which inhabits also Salwatty and Waigin, must certainly be recognized, although Count Salvadori and other authorities have denied its validity. “ Cacatua triton trobriandi (Finsch). Athough this form is somewhat larger than C. t. 7nacrolopha, it is so much smaller than typical triton that it must rank 180 WHITE COCKATOO. as a well-defined subspecies, being moreover confined to the islands south-east of New Guinea. See Nov. Zool., III., p. 246, V., p. 531.” Reference to Nov. Zool., V., p. 531, gives the following note : “ The Sudest Island Cockatoo is exactly the same as the one from Fergusson (Nov. Zool., III., p. 246). It differs considerably from G. triton triton in its much smaller size. Another smaller subspecies, intermediate between G. triton triton and G. triton maerolopha or equal to the latter, is the form from the Western Papuan Islands. The Sudest Island birds measure as follows : wings 268-292, tail 150-155, bill from nostril to tip of maxilla 34-35 mm.” Dealing with a collection of North Queensland birds, Messrs. Robinson and Laverock in the Ibis, 1900, p. 642, recorded : Cacatua galerita triton. “ Two specimens from Cooktown and five from Cairns. “ Regarding the specimens from Cairns, Mr. Olive writes : “ Plentiful but very shy ; generally in flocks, but sometimes in pairs and singly. I have counted nearly 200 roosting in the trees close together ; in the morning they separate and go out in small flocks to their feeding grounds and return to their roosting place after sunset. They nip off all the leaves and smaller twigs from the trees on which they roost. Iris brown ; feet and bill black ; bare skin on the face bluish-white ” (Olive). At least five forms of the larger Sulphur-crested Cockatoo have been described at different times, viz. : — C. galerita. Australia. C. licmetorhyncha. Tasmania. Central Dutch New Guinea. Western Papuan Islands and Aru Islands. Louisiades and D’Entrecasteaux Group. “ If all these forms, which are mainly founded on differences in dimensions, and only two of which, C. galerita and C. triton, are generally recognized, are to be maintained, it becomes a question to which of them our specimens yuth the wing 311-330 mm. are to be referred. The colour of the skin round the eye, noted by Mr. Olive as bluish-white, seems to indicate an approach to the race occurring at Port Moresby, C. triton auct., to which species a female col- lected by Dr. Coppinger at Hammond Island, Torres Straits, has been referred by Salvadori. In addition, the yellow tinge on the ear coverts is less marked than in specimens from more southern parts of Australia. There is no doubt that if all the forms cited were inhabitants of one continental area, it would be considered by many unnecessary to distinguish specifically even such markedly different forms as C. trobriandi and C. galerita. If we compare specimens from Northern New Guinea with others from Tasmania or New South Wales the difference in dimensions is sufficiently striking, whilst the bare parts are also differently coloured. According to Salvadori, however (Orn. Pap., I., p. 95), C. triton. C. macrolopha. G . trobriandi. 181 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. specimens fully equal in size to the larger examples from Australia do occur in Hew Guinea, while, on the other hand, specimens from Northern Australia are undoubtedly smaller than many of those from New Guinea. Locality. Wing mm. Culmen mm. Port Moresby ( C . triton {Liver p. Mus.) 324 47 Salwatti [G. macrolopha) „ 289 38 Port Essington $ „ 313 38 “South Australia” (probably Northern Territory) ( Liver p. Mus.) 318 42 Cape York $ {Liver p. Mus.) 309 42 Cooktown $ {Olive Coll.) 327 40*5 330 40 Mt. Sapphiri, Cairns $ {Olive Coll.) 315 39 315 42-5 311 38 Mt. Bellenden Ker, Cairns {Olive Coll.) 322 40 New South Wales {C. galerita) {Liverp. Mus.) 370 52 Launceston, Tasmania 352 52 „ {C. licmetorhyncha) 348 53 “ This table shows that the Northern Australian specimens come near those from New Guinea in size at least ; we have accordingly recorded them as C. triton, regarding all these forms merely as belonging to one very variable species, which may or may not be divided into subspecies according to individual opinion.” The items of interest in the above details are the long bill of the Port Moresby specimen combined with small size, and the wing measurement of the Tasmanian specimens as contrasted with those of New South Wales and the comparatively longer bill. Van Oort, in Nova Guinea, Vol. IX., Zoologie, reporting upon birds from South-western and Southern New Guinea, recorded under the name (p. 70, 1909) Cacatva galeritus triton (Teinminck) : “ Coll. Koch, $, Merauke. . . . Bare space round the eyes white.” A very small specimen, wing 260 mm. The white colour of the bare space round the eye is interesting. “ Coll. Lorentz 4$£’s 2 not sexed, Noord River. “ Mr. Lorentz did not note the colour of the bare skin round the eyes. The birds belong not to the largest ones ; the wings of the four females measure 300, 298, 285, and 297 mm., those of the two not sexed 300 and 305 mm. The type-specimen of Psittacus triton Temminck, a female collected by S. Muller on Aiduma Island near the Triton Bay, measures 310 mm., and specimens in the Leyden Museum from Dore and the Karon District have a 182 WHITE COCKATOO. length of wing of 325 mm., but from Sorong there are specimens which measure 300 mm., and from Sele, south of Sorong, a male that measures 295 mm. From Waigeu, Gebe, Salawati and Misool there are very small examples in the collection of the Leyden Museum, with a length of wing of 260 mm., but from these localities there are also specimens which are even as large as specimens from North-west New Guinea, f.i., a male from Waigeu measures 320 mm. This species varies considerably in size, but the variations are individually ; at the same place we find large and small individuals. The bill is also subject to variation. It seems, however, that birds from the Aru Islands are constantly smaller and never attain a length of wing of 300 mm., and therefore only the form of the Aru Islands must be separated under the name of Cacatua galeritus macrolo'phus von Rosenberg ; twelve examples in the Leyden Museum have a length of wing of 260 to 290 mm., the greater part of about 280 mm.” Berlepsch ( Abhandl . Senckenb. Naturf. Gesellsch. Bd. XXXIV., 1911), writing on the Birds of the Aru Islands under the name Cacatua triton macro - lopha, correctly noted that should these be distinguished from My sol, etc. birds, than which they appeared less, they would require a new name. In my “ Reference List to the Birds of Australia ” (Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 264, January, 1912.) I sub specific ally named this species as follows : “ Cacatoes galerita galerita (Latham). New South Wales, Victoria. Cacatoes galerita licmetorhyncha (Bonaparte). Tasmania. Cacatoes galerita fitzroyi subsp. n. North West Australia. Cacatoes galerita queenslandica subsp. n. North Queensland.” The two new subspecies I diagnosed thus : “ C. g. fitzroyi. Differs from G. g. galerita in having no yellow on the earcoverts, the eye-space bluish, and in having a much more massive bill.” “ C. g. queenslandica. Differs from C. g. galerita in its smaller size. Wing : $ 323 mm. Typ. ar. 350 mm.” It will be noted that the last named was provided for the birds classed by Robinson and Laverock as C. g. triton. I afterwards added two more subspecies thus : Cacatoes galerita rosinae. Kangaroo Island, South Australia. “ Differs from C. g. galerita in its smaller wing (297 mm.) and smaller bill.” Cacatoes galerita melvillensis. Melville Island, Northern Territory,” “ Differs from C. g. fitzroyi in its larger bill and wing.” These six subspecies I maintained when I prepared my “List of the Birds of Australia,” though I re-examined the specimens with a view to reduction. I have again reconsidered my material and now give my latest results. This 183 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. last revision upholds all the above as fairly well-defined sub specific forms though intergradation is not infrequent. However I am compelled to add another and have also included the New Guinea forms, as Robinson and Laverock concluded. I am quite unable to appreciate the crest differences defined by Rothschild and Hartert. North’s remarks on the variation read : “ With a species having so wide a distribution, it is natural that one finds a great difference in size when a large series of skins are brought together and examined. The variation in plumage is small, and is chiefly in the ear-coverts ; in many they are white, or show but a slight tinge of their pale sulphur-yellow bases ; in a few only they are pale sulphur-yellow. . . . The wing-measurement varies in adult specimens obtained even in the same locality. Typically the birds from South-eastern Australia are larger than those from Northern and North-western Australia.” I would then recognise as subspecies the following forms : Kakatoe galerita galerita (Latham). New South Wales. This is undoubtedly a large form, but may not be the largest. I have measured males from 342 to 350 mm. in the wing ; females measure in the wing from 330 to 355 mm. while some unsex ed specimens go up to 375 mm. The average of a dozen birds gives the wing as 344 mm. This form probably ranges into North Victoria as I measure a bird from that locality as 357 mm. in the wing. It also occurs north into South Queensland. Kakatoe galerita inter jecta subsp. nov. Victoria (South?). I introduce this name for the Victorian birds as these are certainly less in their measurements as regards the wing while the bill is certainly larger and approximates to that of the next subspecies. If my name be not approved of these can be referred to as Kakatoe galerita galerita-licmetorhyncha which reads rather harshly. I have noted that the North Victorian birds may be referred to the typical subspecies, in which case the present subspecies averages under 330 mm. in the wing. Kakatoe galerita licmetorhyncha (Bonaparte). Tasmania. This form separated sixty years ago on account of the projecting and long bill which recalled that of the genus Licmetis is still scarce in collections. No long series is available, but the bill characters seem constant and in size it equals the typical form, Gould even considering it to exceed that. Kakatoe galerita rosince (Mathews). South Australia. The Kangaroo Island bird was named by me on account of its small size, and apparently this feature impressed itself upon those who observed it in nature as recorded in the preceding pages. As a matter of fact, the specimens so far handled, few in number it is true, are the smallest I have met with from 184 WHITE COCKATOO. any part of Australia, though North Queensland birds are also small. It seems certain that this subspecies will soon be extinct so that there will be no need for controversy as to its status. KaJcatoe galerita queenslandica (Mathews). North Queensland. The North Queensland subspecies is noticeably smaller than the typical subspecies. I named it from Cooktown, and birds from Cooktown to Cairns measure in the wing 325-335 mm. in the males, a female going less. These average very little less than the Victorian race, but have the bill noticeably smaller and not projecting or “ licmetiform.” Since the form was distinguished I have received a good series from Cape York and these absolutely confirm this race, as the wing measurement of males varies from 318-330 mm., and of females from 310-323 mm., the averages reading £ 323, $ 316 mm., thus inclining to the belief that the female was slightly less. I would again instance this as a case where averages do not show the truth, and I do not believe that there is any appreciable difference between the sexes in this species. As an item of interest the longest wing measurement for all Australia among sexed specimens is marked female. KaJcatoe galerita fitzroyi (Mathews). North-west Australia, Northern Territory. As indicated by Gould this race is smaller than the typical subspecies, and the average of the wing of specimens I have would be 324 mm., varying from 323 to 326 in the females and 323 in the male. This agrees very closely with the preceding, but I uphold the subspecies as I note that the yellow coloration of the crest, under wings and under tail is noticeably paler than that in the Queensland race. The bill of course is not “ licmetiform ” in character and is comparatively small. KaJcatoe galerita melvillensis (Mathews). Melville Island. We have here a well-marked island race, as the birds are as large, or larger, than the typical subspecies, though the mainland adjoining carries a race noticeably less. Thus males from Melville Island vary in the wing from 351-355 mm., averaging 353 mm., while females vary from 335-357 mm., averaging 346 mm. It will be observed that there again the females average less than the males, but such seems fortuitous, as the largest bird is a female. It is not possible for me at this time to deal as completely with the extra limital forms, but it is certain more subspecies must be admitted than has hitherto been the case. Thus accurate workers must acknowledge that the Aru race is separable from the one living on Mysol and Salwatty, while to class all the mainland White Cockatoos as another subspecies clashes with the geography of New Guinea. When Rothschild and Hartert’s results are VOL. VI. 185 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. compared with those of Van Oort and Berlepsch, although the figures differ considerably, we note the same conclusions. I observe, however, that whereas Van Oort’s measurement for his Dutch New Guinea specimens read “ wing of $ 260, 300, 298, 285, 297, not sexed 300-305 mm.” Rothschild and Hartert write 320-330 mm. for the same measurement also for birds from Dutch New Guinea. Again, while classing birds from “ Waigeu, Gebe, Salawati and Misool ” together. Van Oort absolutely separates from these the birds from the Aru Islands as being less. These were incorrectly attached by Rothschild and Hartert. However, Van Oort notes a large .specimen from Waigeu so it is possible this island may support a larger race. I also note that Robinson and Laverock measure the bill of a specimen from Port Moresby as 47 mm., a measurement much larger than North Queensland birds with the same length of wing. I consequently suggest the following as a basis for the elucidation of the forms of this species inhabiting New Guinea and the adjoining islands. It is first necessary to dispose of the names given to these extra-limital forms. The first name given is chrysolophus of Lesson. As, however, this appears to be simply a substitute name for galerita Latham, I would continue its suppression. I note it here, however, as when it was proposed Lesson noted that the bird was very common in New Guinea. Lesson, however, personally visited both New Guinea and New South Wales, and it is certain that he confused both as one species, which I conclude is the truth. The name chrysolophus therefore disappears as a synonym. Temminck distinguished the New Guinea form under the name triton , which has been generally accepted and is here preserved for the Dutch New Guinea race. Blyth, some years afterward, recognised that specimens from New Guinea were smaller than typical Australian birds, and also noted the coloration of the blue eye-space. Not served with a full array of literature, he proposed to name this form Cacatua cyanopis if it were nameless. No definite locality was given and as the New Guinea form had been previously named, Blyth’ s name may be classed as an absolute synonym of the earlier name triton Temminck. In the Journ. fur Orn. 1861 (Jan.), p. 45. Rosenberg gave the name of Plyctolophus macrolophus to the birds of Mysol and Salwatti. Finsch (Ned. Tijdschr. Dier. & Berigt., p. 21, 1863) proposed Cacatua eleonora from unknown locality, but Waigou was afterwards indicated. Should the Waigou birds be separable, as is suggested by Van Oort’s measure- ment, this name must be utilised. In the meanwhile it is ranked as a synonym of macrolophus Rosenberg. 186 WHITE COCKATOO. Hartert took up Finsch’s name trobriandi and fixed this, but there is a Cacatua galericulata Rosenberg (Reis naar de Zuidoostereil, 1867, p. 100), which is a nomen nudum and is corrected on p. 125 to Cacatua triton. It is mentioned as occurring on Goram. The subspecies and names I have determined as : Kakatoe galerita macrolophus (Rosenberg). Mysol, Salwatty, Waigou. Should the Waigou birds prove separable they might bear the name K. g. eleonora Finsch, which otherwise may be cited as a synonym. Kakatoe galerita subsp. indet. Arfak Peninsula. It is improbable that this is identical with the Dutch New Guinea form, but series are not available. They appear from Van Oort’s data to be a little larger than triton and much larger than macrolo'phus. Kakatoe galerita triton (Temminck). Dutch New Guinea. As synonyms may be noted Cacatua cyanopis Blyth, and perhaps C. galericulata Rosenberg. It will be noted from the notes already given that Van Oort’s measurements differ from those of Rothschild and Hartert, but these latter authors give different figures each time they write upon the subject. It is possible that immature birds may have something to do with the dis- crepancies seen. Thus they have written : “ The Fergusson Island bird has the wing measuring only 267 mm. (a few lines above given as 263) while Mysol specimens have the wing 280 mm. long and the wings of those from Dutch New Guinea measure 320-330 mm.” Later. “ The Sudest Island Cockatoo is exactly the same as the one from Fergusson. Another smaller subspecies, intermediate between C. triton triton and C. triton macrolopha (error for C. t. trobriandi) or equal to the latter is the form from the Western Papuan Islands. The Sudest Island birds measure, wings 268-292 mm.” Still later : “ It is most peculiar to\ find typical triton on the South-east Islands. Cacatua triton trobriandi. Although this form is somewhat larger than C. t. macrolopha .” At first they had found it smaller, then it was equal, now it is larger. It must be a very undecided subspecies. Kakatoe galerita aruensis subsp. nov. Aru Islands. It is obvious that this form needs nomination as it is smaller than macrolophus and geographically cannot be associated with it. Van Oort’s series show its validity and it demands recognition. Kakatoe galerita subsp. indet. South East New Guinea. A different race probably inhabits this country. The Port Moresby specimen recorded by Robinson and Laverock does not agree with Dutch New Guinea birds in measurements, but no series are at hand. 187 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. KaJcatoe galerita trobriandi (Rothschild and Hartert). Fergusson Island ; Sudest Islands ; ? Louisiades. The exact status of the forms inhabiting these groups needs re-investigation. The data given by Rothschild and Hartert are perplexing, and seem con- tradictory. It is certain, however, some form is here recognisable, as the birds on account of their geographical isolation cannot be classed with any of the preceding races. Or if the genus Eucacatua (ante, p. 169) be used the names will be — Eucacatua galerita galerita (Latham). Eucacatua galerita interjecta (Mathews). Eucacatua galerita licmetorhyncha (Bonaparte). Eucacatua galerita rosince (Mathews). Eucacatua galerita queenslandica (Mathews). Eucacatua galerita fitzroyi (Mathews). Eucacatua galerita melvillensis (Mathews), for the Australian forms, and Eucacatua galerita macrolo'phus (Rosenberg). Eucacatua galerita triton (Temminck). Eucacatua galerita aruensis (Mathews). Eucacatua galerita trobriandi (Rothschild and Hartert). for the extra limital forms. 188 Genus — L OPHOCHROA. Lophochroa Bonaparte Comptes Rendus Sci. (Paris), Vol. XLIV., p. 537, 1857 . . . . Type L. leadbeateri. Medium-sized Kakatoeine birds with short bills, long wings, long tail, small legs and feet and peculiar coloration. The head is crested with long recurved narrow feathers. r The bill is similarly formed to that of the preceding genus but is shorter, with the tip not projecting, the culmen more rounded. The cere is feathered, the nostrils being hidden. The lores are feathered, but there is a bare space round the eye. The wing is long, the first primary longer than the sixth and shorter than the fifth, but the latter is shorter than the second, third and fourth which are subequal and longest. The first five primaries are scallopped on their inner webs. The tail is long, composed of broad feathers, and just exceeds half the length of the wing. The legs and feet are smaller than those of the preceding genus, but are similarly formed. 189 Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 340. Family KAKATOEIDM. LOPHOCHROA LEADBEATERI. PINK COCKATOO. (Plate 288.) Plyctolophus LEADBEATERI Vigors, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1831, p. 61, New Holland. I selected in 1912, New South Wales. Plyctolophus leadbeateri Vigors, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1831, p. 61 ; Lear, Illus. Psitt. pt. vi., Aug. 1, 1831 ; Selby, Nat. Libr. Parrots, p. 126, pi. 13, 1836 ; Mitchell, Three Exped. East Aust., Vol. II., pi. 50, opp. p. 47, 1838 ; Finsch Die Papage., Vol. I., p. 304, 1867 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 192, 1878. Cacatua leadbeateri Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch, Vol. I., pp. 504, 692, 737, 1832; Gould, Synops. Birds Austr. pi. 65, 1837 ; id., Birds Austr. pt. x. (Vol. V., pi. 2), 1843 ; Sturt, Narr. Exped. Cent. Austr., Vol. II., App. p. 35, 1849 (Cent. A.) ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 5, 1865 ; Diggles, Omith. Austr., Vol. II., pi. 71, 1867 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Birds Austr., p. 15, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 251, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 3, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 123, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 62, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 612, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 47, 1908 ; Whitlock, Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 191, 1909 (W.A.) ; id., ib., IX., p. 192, 1910 (W.A.) ; Macgillivray, ib., X., pp. 32, 94, 1910 (N.S.W.) ; Gee, ib., p. 76, 1910 (N.T.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 81, 1911 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 23, 1913 (S.A.) ; Chandler, ib., p. 36 (Vic.). Plyctolophus erythropterus Swainson, Classif. Birds, Vol. II., p. 302, 1837. New name for P. leadbeateri Lear. Lophochroa leadbeateri Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus Acad. Sci. (Paris), Vol. XLIV., p. 537, 1857 ; Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 125, 1913 ; S. A. White, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr., Vol. XXXVIII., p. 427, 1914 (Cent. A.). Plissolophus leadbeateri Reichenow, Journ. fur Om., 1881, p. 28. Cacatoes leadbeateri leadbeateri Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 264, 1912 (Jan.). Cacatoes leadbeateri mungi Mathews, ib., Mungi, North-west Australia. Cacatoes leadbeateri mollis Mathews, ib., p. 265, Carnamar, West Australia. Cacatua leadbeateri aberrans Soderberg, Omith. Monatsb., March, 1912, No. 3, p. 41 ; Fitzroy River, North-west Australia. Lophochroa leadbeateri leadbeateri Mathews, List Birds, p. 125, 1913. f * Roland. Green.del. Witherby Sc C° 2_ 5 LOPHOCHROA LEADBEATERI . ( PINK COCKATOO). PINK COCKATOO. Lophochroa leadbeateri mollis Mathews, ib. Lophochroa leadbeateri mungi Mathews, ib., p. 126. Distribution. New South Wales ; Victoria ; South Australia ; South-west Australia ; North-west Australia. Northern Territory (?). Adult male. Entire back, wings and tail dull white, the inner webs of the primary and secondary quills and the inner tail-feathers bright red ; hind-neck, sides of face, chin, breast, sides of body, and under wing-coverts salmon-pink, which fades away into dull white on the abdomen, flanks, edge of wing, and under tail-coverts ; base of forehead dull rose-red ; crown of head and occipital crest pink at the base and white at the tips of the feathers ; the elongated nuchal crest deep red at the base and white at the tip ; the four outer primaries incised on their inner webs and the second, third, fourth, and fifth on the outer webs. Iris black, orbits mealy red ; feet and tarsus olive brown ; bill white. Total length 380 mm. ; culmen 30, wing 256, tail 137, tarsus 22. Figured. Collected at Mungi inland from Derby, North-west Australia, on the 7th July, 1911, and is the type of Lophochroa leadbeateri mungi (Mathews). Adult Female. Similar to the adult male. Immature. Like the adult. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, three or four ; white, 35-40 mm. by 26-28. Breeding season. September to November. This most beautiful Cockatoo was not known to science until 1830. This lack was due to its habitat, being a native of the interior, and therefore not occurring to the early voyageurs who touched the coast line and did not travel far inland. Gould wrote : “ This beautiful species of Cockatoo enjoys a wide range over the southern portions of the Australian continent ; it never approaches very near the sea, but evinces a decided preference for the belts of lofty gums and scrubs clothing the sides of the rivers of the interior of the country ; it annually visits the Toodyay district of Western Australia, and breeds at Gawler in South Australia. On reading the works of Sturt and Mitchell \I find that both these travellers met with it in the course of their explorations, particularly on the banks of the Rivers Darling and Murray ; in fact, most of the interior districts between New South Wales and Adelaide are inhabited by it ; but as yet no specimen has been received either from the north or north- west coasts. It must be admitted that this species is the most beautiful and elegant of the genus yet discovered Few birds more enliven the monotonous hues of the Australian forests than this beautiful species whose pink-coloured wings and glowing crest,’ says Sir T. Mitchell, 4 might have embellished the air of a more voluptuous region.’ Its note is more plaintive than that of C. galerita , and does not partake of the harsh grating sound peculiar to that species.” 191 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Mr. Sandland, writing from South Australia, states that they were “ Common}” while Mr. A. G. Campbell noted that : “ Throughout the pine tracts of the western Mallee, Victoria, Cacatua leadbeateri is a common species. It is very fond of locust eggs which it digs up in clusters from the hard ground with its curved bill.” It will be seen that this species must be very local as other observers do not record this bird with any frequency save in the Mallee Country of Victoria and South Australia. Captain S. A. White has written me : “ These birds were once very numerous between Mogan and Overland Corner. I have seen them in thousands there, twenty years ago, but the last time I paid the country a visit I did not see one. We met with this bird in the interior in 1913, but in only one small flock, and the natives gave me to understand that they were not at all common.” Mr. Edwin Ashby notes : “I have never seen this bird near the city of Adelaide or in the Adelaide Hills. Some years ago they used to nest in some stunted Gums near Curramulka, Yorke’s Peninsula.” Mr. Thos. P. Austin’s notes read : “ The only districts in which I have seen this species are the Mallee Country, Victoria, and the Bourke District in New South Wales. At the time of my visit to the latter place they were breeding, but most of the nests contained young, and in every case one of the parent birds was in the nesting hollow with the young, although in two cases the young were just about ready to fly, in fact they could fly, because one got away from me, the others I brought home. This was in November 1910. One lived only a few weeks, the other two were a beautiful pair of birds, so exactly alike that I could never tell one from the other. I kept them in a large aviary, with several Cacatua roseicapillas, and a Phaps chalcoptera. They were continuously eating holes through the wire netting and getting out, but usually came back to me at feeding time. However, one day one of the C. leadbeateri’ s got out and went straight away and I never saw it again ; its mate was so enraged at this that within an hour it killed the Bronze- winged Pigeon, and simply tore it to pieces, in much the same manner as a Hawk would. This bird is still alive, but has never learned to say a word, although it appears to try hard enough, but it just simply cannot, and of the many pet ones I have seen, I only, knew of two that could utter a word, and in both these cases the extent of their talking was extremely limited. This species seldom is found in large flocks, but mostly from a pah to a dozen.” Mr. W. B. Alexander has sent me the following note : c I have only met with these birds at the head of the Australian Bight at a place called Madura, 120 miles west of Eucla. Here a considerable party had their headquarters near a small waterhole at the foot of the Hampden Range. They spent their 192 PINK COCKATOO. time among the mallees which cover the escarpment, coming to the waterhole in the morning and evening to drink. The same waterhole was much frequented by White-eyed Crows and their black plumage contrasted with the lovely pink and white plumage of the Leadb eater’s making the latter appear all the more beautiful, though even without the contrast they are to my mind among the most beautiful of birds. As far as I know, only the Flamingo exhibits such a beautiful rosy flush contrasting with snowy white. The birds seem quire aware of their beauty and spend much of their time showing off to one another. By opening their wings partially they exhibit the pink colour underneath, at the same time spreading the magnificent crest with its bands of yellow and scarlet until it forms a perfect semicircle. If I had not seen it done repeatedly, I could not have believed that the crest could be spread so far forward, the front feathers seeming almost to touch the beak.” Mr. Tom Carter stated : “ Personally I only know of one locality in West Australia where this species used to occur and that was in 1887. It was on some cliffs on the Wooramel River, Mid- west.” Mr. J. P. Rogers reported from the Mary River, North-west Australia, 10th July, 1909 : “ One pair seen ; am told by old residents that these birds have only come to the Mary in the last few years, but that they are fairly numerous on Sturt’s Creek, about 120 miles approximately from here.” Captain S. A. White, reporting upon the birds met with on his trip to the Gawler Ranges {Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 23, 1913), wrote : “ We did not observe these birds {Gacatua leadbeateri ) till we reached the south-western end of the ranges, although we had seen their crests in the head decorations of the natives. They were feeding in large flocks on bare ground, and when alarmed they took flight with great screeching, but alighted again soon. They often alighted on a dead tree, which they covered in such a mass as to give the appearance of cotton wool. Strangely, many of these birds were in the worst possible stage of moulting, yet some birds in fine plumage had paired prior to nesting. One nest was taken in a white gum growing on a flat amidst the mallee belt. The hollow was 40 to 50 feet from the ground, and contained three fresh eggs.” Chandler noted {Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 36, 1913) : “ A bird well distributed (on the Kow Plains, Victoria) and a number of nesting hollows were found. A curious coincidence which we noted about the nesting of this bird was that a nest of Barnardius barnardi was invariably found in the same or an adjacent tree. This bird has keen ears, and will slip off the nest when one is 50 yards or more away.” From the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol III., I quote the following accounts : Mr. K. H. Bennett’s observations chiefly relate to its nesting habits, but he wrote : “ The chief haunt of Cacatua leadbeateri is the thickly timbered VOL. VI. 193 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. or scrubby and arid country situated between the Lachlan and Darling Rivers, where it is extremely numerous in some localities, but generally it is met with in small flocks of eight or ten individuals. Its food consists of various kinds of seeds, some obtained from trees and others from small herbaceous plants ; it also feasts upon the seeds of a small species of wild melon, which grows in large quantities throughout this part of the country. When its hunger is appeased it has a habit of cutting off the smaller branches of the trees or shrubs in which it may be resting. It also tears off the bark of the larger branches, or the trunks of trees, until the ground beneath is strewed with small branches, leaves and fragments of bark. This destruction is particularly noticeable in the vicinity of the trees in which they may be breeding, and I have frequently seen an old male engaged for hours at this pastime in the tree where his mate was engaged in the duties of incubation.” Mr. Robert Grant’s notes read : “ I found Cacatua leadbeateri in scattered pairs in the more thickly timbered parts of the bush around Byrock, Glenariff, and Bourke. In the morning they congregated in small flocks of about eight or nine in number, and went to the tanks to drink, and on one occasion 1 secured five specimens at one shot. I have cut down trees for their nests, and found one inside a hollow limb of the tree about four feet down from the entrance ; this nest contained two fledgelings. One peculiar thing I noticed underneath the nest, which was constructed of decayed wood and leaves, was a layer of smooth waterworn pebbles, about four or five inches in depth. Another tree I felled contained two white eggs, both of which were broken ; this nesting place also had a layer of broken pebbles four or five inches in depth. I think the reason of these pebbles being placed there is to keep the eggs dry, when the rain runs down inside the limb, and that they retain the natural heat of the parent bird. Usually these birds fly together to drink in pairs, for mutual protection against birds of prey, which are numerous in these districts.” Dr. Macgillivray’s report states : “ Cacatua leadbeateri is not found on the Barrier Range, but is common on Scrope’s Range, between Broken Hill and the river to the north-east, and in various places both south and north of Broken Hill ; it is not so widely dispersed as either C. sanguinea or C. rosei- capilla. During September, 1908, 1 found these Cockatoos nesting on Cox Flats, of the Mulga scrub country, and on the creeks which run through it. They usually choose a large roomy hollow, and lay three or four eggs on a bed of decayed wood material, the eggs being usually at a depth of two or three feet. When incubating they come to water morning and evening, and take it in turns to do so, often flying three or four miles to drink ; they fly slowly, and one bird often comes to water nearly an hour after the other. A pair of birds will occupy the same hollow year after year. On the nesting- tree being approached, 194 PINK COCKATOO. the outside bird gives the alarm, and the mate flies screeching from the hollow, unlike the Blood-stained Cockatoo, which usually leaves its nest very quietly.” Mr. G. A. Keartland notes : 44 Cacatua leadb eater i is an inland species, and is found in the most inhospitable portions of the interior, where it is usually seen in pairs, or small flocks consisting of parents and young. Those shot whilst I was on the exploring expeditions had their crops filled with seed, which looked like skinned peas. Each of the wells we sank in the Great Desert of North-western Australia was visited by a pair or more of these birds, which came to drink and then went away. In the Wimmera District of Victoria they are numerous, and assemble in small flocks, when many of them are trapped and brought to Melbourne for sale. If taken young they soon learn to speak, but are very poor talkers compared with other Cockatoos.” The variation in this species is so little that no one had remarked upon it until I prepared my “ Reference List to the Birds of Australia,” published in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., 1912. I then examined my collection and noted that the birds from West Australia as well as from North-west Australia showed differences in coloration, so admitted three subspecies thus : Cacatoes leadbeateri leadbeateri (Vigors). New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia. Cacatoes leadbeateri mungi subsp. n. “ Differs from C. 1. leadbeateri in its paler coloration and smaller size. Mungi, North-west Australia. Interior North-West Australia.” Cacatoes leadbeateri mollis subsp. n. 44 Differs from C. 1. leadbeateri in lacking the yellow coloration of the crest, and in having deeper coloration on the under surface, and on the inner webs of the primaries. West Australia.” Almost simultaneously a Swedish Expedition to North-west Ausfspalia reported the discovery of a new form of Cockatoo, Soderberg describing the form I had two months previously named as C. 1. mungi , giving almost the same separative characters. I have again reviewed the species and would maintain the above three subspecies, which I continued to recognize in my List of the Birds of Australia published at the end of 1913. I find, however, that South Australian birds average less than those from New South Wales and Victoria, and am therefore providing a name for these as they constitute a valid subspecies, according to the standard accepted by workers in connection with Palaearctic and American birds. Out of eleven specimens from New South Wales and Victoria, nine go over 270 mm. in the wing, the other two measuring 266 and 268 mm., the average being 273 mm. 195 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. One only of four South Australian specimens measures over 260 mm. in the wing, the other three going under, and the average reads 259 mm. The variation in colour of plumage seems to be slight but still discernible. I therefore name the South Australian form : Lophochroa leadheateri superfiua subsp. n. the type being from the Gawler Ranges. Collected by Captain S. A. White on the 7th of September, 1912, and is a male. Genus — D UCORPSIUS. Ducorpsius Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus Sci. (Paris) Vol. XLIV., p. 537, 1857 . . . . . . . . Type D. ducorpsi. Also spelt — Diccropsiua Gray, List Spec. Birds Brit. Mus., Part in., Sect. II „ pp. 92-94, 1859. Medium-sized Kakatoeine birds with medium bills, long wings, long tail, and medium legs and feet. The genus is characterised by the nature of the crest, the bare eye space of large extent and feathered cere. The bill is quite like that of Kahatoe with which genus the present one agrees in coloration. It differs in the crest which in this genus is short, the feathers broad and full and not recurved. The wing formula differs slightly, the first primary being longer than the fifth, the intermediates sub equal and longest. I am inclined to suggest that further investigation will compel the suppression of this genus in favour of Licmetis. As osteological characters have been cited in favour of the retention of Licmetis , I have not taken this course at present but anticipate that this will eventually ensue. \\ 197 Order PSITTACIFORMES Family KAKATOEIDM No. 341. DUCORPSIUS SANGUINEUS. BLOODSTAINED COCKATOO. (Plate 289.) Cacatua sanguine a Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1842, p. 138, 1843 ; North coast Australia — Port Essington, Northern Territory. Cacatua sanguinea Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1842, p. 138, 1843; id., Birds Austr., pi. 10 (Vol. V., pi. 3) 1843 ; Sturt, Narr. Exped. Centr. Austr., Vol. II., App. p. 36, 1849 (W. N.S.W.); Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 6, 1865; Diggles, Om. Austr. Vol. II., pi. 72, 1866 ; Masters, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. I., p. 58, 1876 (N.T.); Castelnau & Ramsay, id., p. 383, 1877 (N.T.); Masters, id., II., p. 274, 1878 (N.T.) ; Ramsay, Tab. List. Austr. Birds, p. 15, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 4, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 128, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 62, 1899; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 614, 1901 ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral., p. 47, 1908 ; North Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 84, 1911 ; Witmer Stone, Austral. Av. Rec., Vol. I., p. 148, 1913; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. XHI., p. 157, 1914 (N.Q.). Plyctolophus sanguineus Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus Sci. Paris, Vol. XXX., p. 139, 1850 ; Finsch, Die Papageien., Vol. I., p. 307, 1867 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soo. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 192, 1878. Plictolophus rhodolorus Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. I., p. 307, 1867 : new name for C. sanguinea Gould. Cacatua gymnopis Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1871, p. 493; based on cage bird from unknown locality and type lost : I designate Port Essington, Northern Territory ; Sharpe, Birds New Guinea (Gould), Vol. V., pi. 46, 1885 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 15, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 6, 1891 ; North, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Ser. II., Vol. IX., p. 37, 1894 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 62, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs, Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 613, 1901 ; tb.. Emu, Vol. I., p. 25, 1901 (N.W.A.) ; Lyons, id., p. 136, 1901 (Centr. A.); Hall, id., II., p. 62, 1902 (N.W.A.) ; Le Souef, id., p. 152, 1903 (N.T.) ; Carter, id., III., p. 171, 1904 (N.W.A.) ; Kilgour, id., IV., p. 38, pi. v., 1904 (N.W.A.) ; Hartert, Nov. Zool., Vol. XII., p. 211, 1905 (N.T.) ; Hall, Emu, Vol. VII., p. 25, 1907 (N.W.A.); Mathews, Hand!. Birds Austral., p. 47, 1908; Whitlock, Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 191, 1909 (W.A.) ; Mathews, id., IX., p. 57 (N.W.A.) ; Whitlock, 198 -i,.; | ft'*?* i - t V ■ ■ 5. Roland Green, del. "Witherby & C° 2 5 DUCORPS IU S SANGUINEUS. ( BLOOD -STAINED COCKATOO l DUCORPSIUS GYMNOPIS. (BARE -EYED COCKATOO). BLOODSTAINED COCKATOO. id., p. 192, 1910 (W.A.) ; Macgillivray, id., X., pp. 17, 19, 22, 1910 (N.S.W.) ; Mathews, id., p. 109, 1910 (N.W.A.) ; Hill, id., p. 269, 1911 (N.W.A.). Plictolophus gymnopis Giebel, Thes. Ornith., Vol. III., p. 229, 1877. Plissolophus sanguineus Reichenow, Joum. fur Om., 1881, p. 25. Plissolophus gymnopis Reichenow, ib. Cacatoes sanguinea sanguinea Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 265, 1912. Cacatoes sanguinea gymnopis Mathews, ib. Cacatoes sanguinea distincta Mathews, ib., Alligator River, 60 miles inland, Northern Territory. Cacatoes sanguinea subdistincta Mathews, ib., Parry's Creek, North-west Australia. Cacatoes sanguinea apsleyi Mathews, Austral. Av. Rec., Vol. I., p. 36, 1912 : Melville Island ; Zietz, South Austr. Ornith., Vol. I., p. 14, 1914 (Melville Island). Cacatoes sanguinea ashbyi Mathews, Austral. Av. Rec., Vol. I., p. 36, 1912 ; Yanco, New South Wales. Ducorpsius sanguineus sanguineus Mathews, List Birds Austr. p. 126 1913. Ducorpsius sanguineus ashbyi Mathews, ib. Ducorpsius gymnopis Mathews, ib. Ducorpsius gymnopis gymnopis Mathews, ib. Ducorpsius gymnopis subdistinctus Mathews, ib. Ducorpsius gymnopis distinctus Mathews, ib. Ducorpsius gymnopis apsleyi Mathews, ib. Distribution. Australia (except coastal South-west and South Australia, Victoria, Tasmania, coastal New South Wales, coastal Queensland and Cape York Peninsula). Adult male. General colour above and below white ; the bases of the feathers on the head, hind-neck, sides of face, sides of neck, and throat pink, which colour is also seen superficially in front and below the eye ; inner webs of the primary and secondary quills and tail-feathers sulphur-yellow like the lower aspect of the tail and quill lining. Iris brown ; orbits leaden blue ; feet and tarsus bluish grey ; bill bluish white. Total length 430 mm. ; culmen 30, wing 279, tail 136, tarsus 23. Figured. Collected on Melville Island on the 19th June, 1912. Adult female. Similar to the adult male but smaller. Wing 270. Melville Island, 9th October, 1911. Immature. General colour above and below creamy-white ; the inner webs of the primary and secondary quills and outer tail-feathers sulphur-yellow like the quill lining and lower aspect of the tail ; the feathers on the top of the head, including the crest, sides of the face, hind-neck, sides of neck, and throat have red bases like the feathers in front and below the eye. Figured. Collected at Yanco Glen, New South Wales, on the 6th July, 1906. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, three. White, 37-41 mm. by 29-30. Breeding-season. August to October. Captain S. A. White notes : “ I), gymnopis is a common bird in some localities of the interior of South Australia. They move about the country in large flocks during most of the year, making for the Gum creeks at 199 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. breeding time ; sometimes in the ranges and at others out upon the plains they pair off and scatter along the creeks, taking possession of the hollows of the red gums growing along either bank, nesting during September and October, sometimes November.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has written me : “I have seen this species in pairs in the ranges just beyond Stevens Creek, near Broken Hill, and Mr. Love sent me skins from Leigh’s Creek, saying that at certain seasons they visit that township in great numbers.” Mr. Tom Carter’s observations here follow : “ This is the prevailing Cockatoo of the North-west, and may be seen in flocks of countless thousands before and after the breeding season, about the Gascoyne River right down to the coast and other localities. When at Carnarvon (at the mouth of the Gascoyne River) in August, 1911, enormous flocks were seen close to the Port township feeding on the seeds of that creeping noxious plant known as Double-gees. The Cockatoos crack up and break off the hard spiny outer husks and eat the seeds, for which reason the Gascoyne Road Boards had passed a by-law to protect the birds, but as I pointed out to the Chairman, this might mean the further spreading of the harmful plant (the seeds seriously lame sheep) because whole seeds might probably be voided by the Cockatoos in far distant localities, in a state favourable for germination. Seeds of grasses and trees, and also certain bulbs and roots, are the chief food of the species. The bulbs of a small leek-like annual (much eaten by the aborigines and abundant after rains) are much eaten by the Cockatoos and easily obtained, as they grow a short distance below the surface of the ground. These Cockatoos bred freely in the cavities of the cliffs in the ranges about Point Cloates and the North-west Cape, and also in the trunks of the large Red Mangrove trees on the edges of the Ex mouth Gulf and coasts near the Ash- burton River. I found several clutches of eggs in the broken tops of large white ant-hills that were in thousands on the large area of open treeless and shrubless spinifex ( triodia ) country that extended far to the east of Point Cloates. These Cockatoos increased largely in numbers since the settlement and civilization of the North-west, because when the aborigines came to work on the stations they did not trouble to get the young birds to eat as they had formerly done, young cockatoos being esteemed as very dainty food. The large Lace Lizards or Monitors (commonly known as Iguanas) eat a good many eggs and also young birds as I have often observed. About Point Cloates and Maud’s Landing (thirty-five miles south), where there is no timber growing within thirty miles, large flocks of these Cockatoos used to come down to the coast sandhills almost every year in May. For what reasons these visitations were made could not be ascertained. The birds only did it for a few days 200 BLOODSTAINED COCKATOO. and flew about in a restless, aimless sort of way. Large flocks of these Cockatoos were occasionally seen roosting (not feeding) on the beach of Ex mouth Gulf ; the reason of their doing so I do not know. I might remark that some of the large flocks of Cockatoos, watched by me on the open flats close to the town of Carnarvon while they were feeding on the Double-gee seeds, covered some acres of ground, and it was very curious on a calm day to hear the constant crackling noise caused by the birds breaking up the hard outer coverings of the seeds. The eggs are laid mostly in September, and the breeding season is always about this time, whether the season is wet or dry. Probably because the young birds should have a plentiful supply of grass seeds to eat (?) under ordinary conditions. The clutch of eggs is usually three, but sometimes four, and are generally laid in the cavities of the White Gum trees that grow along- side the river beds and watercourses, usually the only timber available in the North-west. Ant-hills and crevices in cliffs are utilised as nesting sites in treeless districts. The earliest clutch of eggs noted by me was one of three, August 6, 1897. Other dates are September 22, 1889. Eggs on the Minilya River, September 18, 1894. Three eggs, September 13, 1900. Several clutches of eggs taken, August 25, 1891. Two nests, each of three eggs, October 12, 1893. Two young in a crevice of a cliff, October 8, 1894. Two almost fledged young in nest, September 9, 1911. Fledged young noted, young in nests, and also eggs, very dry year , September 16, 1913. Breeding freely on the Gascoyne River ( another dry season ). The young birds make excellent pets in confinement, or with their liberty, and are very hardy and easy to rear.” Mr. J. P. Rogers’ notes forwarded" to me read : “ Feb. 23, 1902. Plain near Eleamurda Swamp, North-west Australia. Last month (Jan. 20) these were in small flocks of from 10 to 30 birds, and were feeding on the fruits of a small bush growing thickly on the ridges at Snake Creek. The fruit is finished and the birds are now feeding on the seeds of the Mitchell grass, acres of which have been beaten down by the birds, which are now in a large flock of many thousands. In the morning and evening it is a strange sight to watch a large flock of these birds when feeding on grass seed. The birds all travel in one direction and the last birds of the flock are continually rising and flying ahead of the leaders. They fly very low and from a distance there appears to be a wall of white which is stationary (by from a distance 1 mean about three-quarters of a mile, the individual birds cannot be seen at this distance) over the flock of feeding birds, which cannot be seen as they are hidden by the grass. Sept. 29, 1908. (Parry’s Creek). Saw two young with feathers still in the sheath, nest in Baobab tree. Oct. 2, 1908. Saw the roosting-place of a flock of these in a gully, about forty trees were used to perch on, and the ground VOL. VI. 201 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA, was white with feathers and their droppings. Many leaves and small twigs were stripped from the trees, giving them a bare appearance. Nov. 28, 1908. A very large flock (many hundreds) came to Parry’s Lagoon to drink, it was nearly dark. Several small flocks scattered about the plains.” Mr. J. P. Rogers’ notes recorded by Hall (Emu, Vol. II., p. 62, 1902) read : “ The Cockatoos (Cacatva gymnopis) have been calling all night (North-west Australia, 9/3/01). The flood waters covered the bases of the trees in which they were roosting, and the rushing of the torrent probably disturbed them. It was moonlight, though cloudy. On 28/9/00 Mr. M’Larty, the Iivuringa station manager, discovered a nest with one featherless young. When feeding upon the cajuput blossoms (24/10/01) it cuts off the flowering twigs, I should say to the same issue as the Black Cockatoo, i.e., when used destroyed, to save time in going ‘ fruitlessly over the same ground.’ ” Mr. Tom Carter gave a note in the Emu , Vol. III., p. 171, 1904, regarding its occurrence at the North-west Cape, West Australia. In the Emu , Vol. IV., p. 38, 1904, a plate V. is given of a flight of Bare-eyed Cockatoos with a note : “ A large flock of Bare-eyed Cockatoos (Cacatua gymno'pis) passed over the hotel (Wyndham) before sundown every night going to their roosting-places in the hills. I estimated the number at between sixty and seventy thousand.” Whitlock, writing of the Pilbarra Goldfield (Emu, VIII., p. 191, 1909), stated : “ Rare. A pair or two on the Upper Coongan. I think I had located a nest in a tall gumtree. The female was not sitting, so I unwillingly had to come away without getting the eggs. I heard several reports as to the abund- ance of white Cockatoos in different localities, but when visited not a bird was to be seen. On the De Grey I only saw a party of four. I think they were reierable to the present species.” In the next volume (p. 192, 1910) he continued in connection with East Murchison birds : “ I saw little of this familiar cage-bird until I went to Milly Pool. Here they were fairly common and breeding in the hollow eucalypts. I located several nests, but, being unprovided with a rope ladder (not anticipating such large timber) I was quite helpless until some Cockatoo- hunters came out from Wiluna.” Dr. W. Macgillivray used the name Cacatua sanguinea, observing (Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 157, 1914) : “ This Cockatoo, which is generally regarded now' as sjmonymous with C. gymnopis is a common bird in the Gulf country, and was noted frequently on the Cloncurry, Leichhardt, and Gregory Rivers. Several nesting hollows were examined in February and March, 1910, con- taining either eggs or young birds. At Sedan, on the Cloncurry, each nest contained either two eggs or young. At Normanton these birds were seen in large flocks in the winter.” 202 BLOODSTAINED COCKATOO. Dr. Macgillivray’s notes published by North in the Austr . Mus. Spec, Cat ., No. 1, Yol. III., p. 85, 1911, read : Cacatua sanguinea is distinctly gregarious (at Cloncurry), the flocks flying on to the downs just after sunrise, where they feed on the ground for two or more hours, then fly in to the creek, and settle on one or more trees, according to the number of birds, and amuse themselves during the rest of the day in stripping every leaf, twig and nearly all the bark off the trees ; in this way they completely destroy many trees, as far as all the upper limbs are concerned. When one tree is fairly bare, they devote their attention to another, and treat it similarly. Towards evening they again fly on to the plains to feed for an hour or two before returning to roost. A small bulbous plant growing in patches on the plains is a favourite article of diet, and it is also relished by the blacks. It breeds during the wet season. ... At Broken Hill it is a very common bird at all seasons. They do not migrate from the district, but congregate in whatever part has the most abundant food supply, and this of course depends upon our autumn and spring rains, which are often very patchy and varable in amount, or often absent altogether ; the class of herbage which comes up depends upon the time when the rain has been most abundant. When the season is ve^ dry few of these birds breed at all. . . . Several hundreds of young birds are taken eveiy year by the bird-catchers, who sell them locally or send them to Adelaide, or even Melbourne. They are favourite pets here, and rightly so, too, as they are more docile and tractable than any of the other Cockatoos, and talk quite as well. They have a decided crest, more marked than that of Licmetis nasica, but have not nearly so much red colouring about the head. In L. nasica this tinting of the bases of the feathers extends often to the upper tail-coverts, whereas in the bird under notice it is much paler, more of an orange, and confined to the lores and slightly to the feathers across the base of the culmen. The naked space round the eyes is never circular, but is extended downward where it widens out. This skin is in all young birds, and most old ones, of a leaden or slaty colour. I have, however, seen a few old birds in which it was quite white. Whether this was an age change, or due to an excessive secretion of powder down, I am not certain.” In the same place, Mr. G. A. Heartland’s observations occur : “ The home of Cacatua sanguinea is in the northern half of the continent, and its range extends across from Broken Hill, in South- western New South Wales, on the east to near Geraldton on the west. These birds assemble in immense flocks, and when preparing to roost three or four trees are often covered with them. When feeding or resting on the ground several acres are sometimes rendered white by the flock. Owing to their fondness for swampy country, where they feed on bulbs, etc., it is almost impossible to find an adult bird with clean plumage. Although I shot a great 203 THE BIRDS OE AUSTRALIA. many for culinary purposes, the only clean ones were the young ones, which depended on their parents for food. At the Fitzroy River, North-west Australia, the natives took several young Galahs from nests of these birds. I ascertained that the Galahs had prepared the nest, lined it with leaves and commenced laying when Cacatua sanguinea drove them away, laid their eggs, and hatched and reared the mixed brood. I heard of the same thing happening at Broken Hill.” The confusion in connection with this species began very early and has continued to the present time. In the Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1842, p. 138, Gould named a Cacatua sanguinea from Northern Australia. In his descrip- tion no mention is made of the size, shape or colour of the bare eye space. In the “ Birds of Australia ” he figured two birds with a note that he had only seen a few specimens. His fuller account I here quote : “ The circumstance of this species never having been characterized until I described it in the ‘ Proceedings of the Zoological Society,’ above quoted, may doubtless be attributed to its being an inhabitant of the north-west coasts, portions of the country where few collections have been formed. With the exception of a specimen brought home by Captain Chambers, R.N., and another in the collection of Mr. Bankier, my own specimens are all that I have seen ; the whole of these were collected at Port Essington ; but, as it was observed by Captain Sturt at the Depot, in Central Australia, we may infer that its range extends over all the intermediate country ; and that no bird is more common on the Victoria (Northern Territory) is certain, for Mr. Elsey informed me that he saw it there in flocks of millions. The Blood-stained Cockatoo inhabits swamps and wet grassy meadows, and is often to be seen in company with its near ally, the Cacatua galerita , but I am informed it is even more shy and difficult of approach than that bird. It is doubtless attracted to the swampy districts by the various species of Orchidaceous plants that grow in such localities, upon the roots of which, at some seasons, it mainly subsists. But little difference occurs either in the size or the colouring of the sexes, and I have young birds, which, although a third less in size, closely assimilate in every respect to the adult ; so much so that an examination of the bill, which during immaturity is soft and yielding to the touch, is necessary to distinguish them. . . . Other species of White Cockatoos nearly allied to this bird occur in the islands immediately to the northward of Australia, some of which extend their range to the Philippines.” In 1871 Sclater, who used to determine birds at the Zoological Gardens, London, with no known history, described a new species Cacatua gymno'pis. He recognised in another bird Gould’s C. sanguinea and saw differences. He gave figures of the heads of the species he had alive under observation 204 BLOODSTAINED COCKATOO. but in each case he had no definite locality attached to his specimens. Examinations of the skins in the British Museum enabled him to add as the habitat of his new species South Australia, simply because he allotted specimens collected by Captain Sturt to his form. This action, by an acknowledged authority, has been fruitful of much misconception. Apparently the chief item in the confusion was the recognition of Gould’s C. sanguined as an Australian bird. Australian ornithologists of that day could not understand Sclater’s action, as we find Masters ( Proc . Linn. Soc., JV./SMB., II., p. 274, 1878) recording Cacatua sanguinea from Port Darwin with the note : “ During the month of July this species was to be seen in flocks of thousands.” Just previously Castelnau and Kamsay {Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. , I., p. 383, 1877) had identified the Northern Territory birds as Cacatua sanguinea , citing doubtfully as a synonym C. gymnopis Sclater and writing : “ This species was obtained in considerable numbers on the Norman River by Mr. Kendal Broadbent in 1875. All the specimens show the same plumage and the peculiarity of having the orbits bare, but to a greater extent below than above the eye, and vary a little in size. This is undoubtedly the true C. sanguinea of Gould. Its range extends from Port Essington, where Mr. Gould’s specimens were obtained, round the Gulf of Carpentaria country as far south as the Palmer River.” However, in 1888, Ramsay admitted both C. sanguinea and C. gymnopis , giving almost coincident distribution. In the Cat. Austr. Psittaci, published in 1891, he again recorded both but listed no specimens of the latter and made a footnote under the name Cacatua goffiii, observing: “Specimens of C. sanguinea from the Gulf of Carpentaria are on the whole smaller than those from Derby and the North-west Coast generally, an average specimen measures as follows:- — Total length 13.5 inches, wing 10.3, tail 6, tarsus \ 0.9, midtoe 1.4, bill from forehead 1.25, from nostril 1, culmen 1.2, lower mandible from angle 0.8, width across the front cutting edge of ditto 0.35, width at gape 0.7. ... If Count Salvadori’s description be correct, then C. goffini is only a smaller variety of C. sanguinea. If Dr. Finsch’s bird has no red on the lores , it may be Dr. Sclater’s C. gymnopis. It is to be hoped that this matter will be finally settled in the coming number of the British Museum Catalogue of the Psittaci .” This appeared the same year and there Salvadori recognised as distinct species Cacatua gy?nnopis, C. sanguinea and C. go-ffini. The Bab. of the first- named is given as “ South Australia (and also Northern and N.W. Australia ?).” Four specimens are listed, one from “ Australia ” and the other three from “ S. Australia. Capt. Sturt.” 205 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Regarding C. sanguined , Salvadori remarked : “ This species is easily distinguished from the preceding one by the shape and colour of the naked skin round the eyes.” Two birds were catalogued “ a $ ad. sk. Northern Australia, Dec. 14. Gould Coll. (Type of species), b. Ad. sk. Port Essington. Capt. Chambers.” C. goffini was localised as from Tenimber Islands. This conclusion was accepted as authoritative, but that it was not conclusive was readily remarked. Thus Campbell in his Nests and Eggs in 1901 recorded Cacatua gymnopis with the distribution : “ Interiors of Queens- land, New South Wales, and South Australia,” remarking, however “ Although I have given a somewhat general distribution for the Bare-eyed Cockatoo, the only actual place I know where it exists is the region of the Barrier Range, on the borders of New South Wales and South Australia. But, according to Dr. Sharpe, it was the species found by Captain Sturt, the explorer, in immense flocks at Depot Creek, Central Australia.” As range of Cacatua sanguined Campbell noted : “ Northern Territory, Queensland, New South Wales, South, West(?) and North-west Australia.” North, in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., 1911, only admitted Cacatua sanguinea , ranking Cacatua gymnopis as synonymous, and explaining : “ Were it not that those eminent authorities, Dr. P. L. Sclater, late Secretary of the Zoological Society, London, and Count Salvadori, Director of the Zoological Museum, Turin, Italy, agree in declaring that the naked skin around the eye of Cacatua sanguinea Gould is white, I should have long ago sunk Cacatua gymnopis Sclater into a synonym of C. sanguinea. In his folio edition of the Birds of Australia Gould in referring to C. sanguinea remarks : “ With the exception of a specimen brought home by Captain Chambers, R.N., and another in the collection of Mr. Bankier, my own specimens are all that I have ever seen ; the whole of these were collected at Port Essington.” The old settlement at Port Essington was long ago abandoned in favour of Port Darwin, consequently it is seldom visited by collectors, in fact I know of no one collecting there since the late Mr. Alexander Morton did on behalf of the Trustees of the Australian Museum in 1870. The Northern Territory of South Australia is not, however, the terra incognita of Gould’s day, principally owing to the opening up of the country for pastoral purposes, and by prospecting parties in search of minerals, and the same may be said of North-western Australia, which Gould includes in the habitat of Cacatua sanguinea. Dr. Sclater described C. gymnopis from a living bird, and gives the habitat as South Australia ; he also examined in the British Museum the skins obtained by the late Captain Charles Sturt in South Australia and refers them to C. gymnopis. I have examined a large 206 BLOODSTAINED COCKATOO. number of specimens and more than a thousand living examples during the last quarter of a century, and have made inquiries from bird catchers and dealers, but have failed as yet to discover a bird from any part of Australia with the naked skin around the eye white, as Gould figures Cacatua sanguined, in his Birds of Australia (Vol. V., pi. 3, 1848). From Dr. W. Macgillivray’s notes, however, it will be observed that he has “ seen a few o^d birds, in which it was quite white ; whether this was an age change or due to an excessive secretion of powder down I am not certain.” Gould described the type of Cacatua sanguined in 1842, from a dried skin obtained in Northern Australia, and made no reference to the colour of the naked skin around the eye, but in his figure of this species this part is represented as white. “ . . . . The wing measurement of adult males varies from 10.4 to 11.75 inches.” Simultaneously I examined long series in the preparation of my “ Refer- ence List to the Birds of Australia ” (Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., Jan. 1912) and found that the variation in size noted by North seemed governed by local environment. Consequently I ranged all the birds as subspecies of C. sanguined as follows : “ p. 265. Cacatoes sanguined sanguinea. Northern Territory, New South Wales, South Australia. Cacatoes sanguinea distincta subsp. n. Differs from C. s. sanguinea in its much superior size. The type of C. s. sanguinea has the wing of 259 mm. Birds from Port Essington and also Alexandra agree in this measurement, all unsex ed. The males in this species are larger than the females, and these give in C. s. distincta J wing 310, $ 290. Type : Northern Territory (Alligator River, 60 miles inland). Range. Northern Territory (Interior). Cacatoes sanguinea subdistincta subsp. n. \\ Differs from C. s. distincta in its smaller size, but still absolutely larger than C. s. sanguinea : J 292, $ 269-78. G. s. gymnopis from Interior South Australia gives wing J 264-5, $ 252-4. Type : North-West Australia (Parry’s Creek). Range. North-west Australia. Cacatoes sanguinea gymnopis. Interior South Australia, West Australia.” This scheme and distribution was soon seen to be unsatisfactory and receiving birds from Melville Island I added ( Austral Av. Bee., Vol. I., p. 36, 1912). 207 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. “ Cacatoes sanguined a/psleyi subsp. n. Differs from C. s. distincta in its much larger bill and smaller wing. Range. Melville Island. Cacatoes sanguined ashbyi subsp. n. Differs from C. s. sanguined in its smaller bill and wing, and the bare eye-ring much smaller. Range. New South Wales.” I again reviewed the species for my “ List of the Birds of Australia ” and the erratic distribution of the forms appeared very perplexing. After much consideration I concluded that probably two species were confused, one with a round eye-space ( sanguined ) and one with an irregularly developed eye- space (gymnopis). This arrangement seemed preferable and I so listed the forms, thus : “ Ducorpsius sanguineus. D. s. sanguineus. D. s. ashbyi. Ducorpsius gymnopis . D. g. gtjmnopis D. g. subdistinctus. D. g. distinctus. D. g. apsleyi Northern Territory. New South Wales. Interior South Australia : West Australia. North-west Australia. Northern Territory (Inland). Melville Island.” It may be remarked that when Witmer Stone published “ A List of the Species of Australian Birds described by John Gould,” with the location of the Type-specimens, the type of Gould’s Cacatua sanguined was recorded as being in the collection of the Philadelphia Academy, giving a note ( Austral . Av. Bee., \ ol. L, p. 148, 1913) : “ A specimen in the British Museum is marked type ’ ( Cat. Birds , Vol. XX., p. 128), but the collection sent to Philadelphia was stated to contain all the types of species described by Gould from his own material, up to that tune. In several other cases Gould specimens in the British Museum are erroneously marked ‘ type.' ” The above determinations had been made in connection with the British Museum material and the type there marked had been accepted as such, while a bird received from the Zoological Society had been regarded as the type of Sclaters C. gymnopis. Correspondence with Australian workers had shown that North’s con- clusion was more acceptable to them and that only one species occurred in Australia. Mr. F. L. Berney expressed the opinion that a young bird might show in the skin a somewhat small circular eye space, but that no adult 208 BLOODSTAINED COCKATOO. would. I wrote to Dr. Macgillivray on the subject, as North had quoted him as expressing somewhat the same views, and noted that Berney’s views might explain the matter. Dr. Macgillivray then wrote me from Broken Hill, N.S.W., under date May 14, 1916 : “ I have been here for fifteen years and have examined thousands of these Cockatoos, both adult and young, and all that I have examined have the bare space round the eye bluish and elongate downwards. I have never seen the bird with the bare space round the eye whitish and round. McLennan in his travels through the Gulf of Carpentaria country saw numbers of the same Cockatoo that he knew so well when he lived here, all with the bare space bluish and extended downwards. You told me that your skins of D. sanguineus sanguineus came from Yanko Glen ; well, Yanko Glen is 25 miles from here and I know pretty well every tree bird on it, and also the rest of the Yalcownina Creek of which it is a section, and no such bird exists there. The young of gymnopis when they leave the nest have the bare space round the eye the same as in the adult bird, if anything more bluish as they have less powder on it. I do not think that bird D. sanguineus as Gould described it exists in Australia at all.” With this emphatic declaration I renewed my researches after the truth in the matter and I now fully agree with Dr. Macgillivray. Re-examination of the British Museum specimens catalogued by Salvadori as C. sanguinea gave the following results : The specimen a marked as “ Type of species ” has no locality written by the collector, simply the date ; all the rest on the label has been since added. It does not agree in measurements with Gould’s description and it should be emphasised that in the original description nothing whatever is remarked about the shape or colour of the bare eye-space. Hence we hqve only the coloured figure and it may not be accurate. However, the specimen b from Port Essington, collected by Captain Chambers and considered by Gould himself as conspecific and so listed by Salvadori, has a small bare eye space, being also a small specimen, but the eye space is blue and is of the shape known as gymnopis. Further, C. gymnopis was given to a living bird and no measurements were taken and the type is not in existence : consequently this name can only be] cited as a synonym of G. sanguinea Gould. In view of the variation apparent no other course is open : Sclater’s mention of South Australia was only in connection with the Sturt birds, which might have disagreed in measurements, and as so much confusion has been brought about by the introduction of the name gymnopis , its utter rejection will be very helpful. What Sclater determined to be true G. sanguinea , also from a living VOL. vi. 209 THE BIRDS OP AUSTRALIA. bird, we cannot now determine, but it probably was not an Australian bird The acceptance of Gould’s name for the species name is necessary and the conclusion I have arrived at is that the figure does not portray the actual eye-space of the type specimen. It may be that the skin was badly prepared and also that Gould had seen specimens with bare eye-spaces white and circular from the islands north of Australia, and concluded that such was the case with the Australian specimen. However, Chambers’ specimen, which Gould admitted was his species, has the eye-space of the gyymiopis type and I have no skin which shows the circular white eye-space, such as is seen in the birds of the islands north of Australia. The birds I determined as G. san guinea previously I regard now as immature and the eye space is slightly elongate. Once more I am compelled to put on record what can only be regarded as a tentative arrangement, though records of thousands of buds are freely written about, no long series have been collected. The puzzling item is that the series available still snow constancy in local variation and consequently I cannot easily lump any sub-species. To begin with, no series can be studied from Port Essington, the type locality of C. sanguinea, only one bird being in the British Museum, the specimen collected by Capt. Chambers. This has a short wing but might be immature. However, Ramsay ( Cat. Austr. Psitt., p. 6, 1891) gives the wing measurement of a male and female from Port Darwin as 10.5 and 10.7 inches respectively, while listing the whig measurement of a male from Derby, North-west Australia as 11.8 inches. My own series of Melville Island birds I measure as varying from 270 to 275 mm. in the males, and 263 to 268 mm. in the females. I am regarding these as typical until series are comparable from the mainland and writing my C. s. apsleyi as synonymous. There can be no doubt that the North-west birds are larger, but the largest of all come from the Alligator River, comparatively near to Port Essington. I am inclined to join the two forms I indicated from the North- west and from the Alligator River at the present time, but this means the recognition of the West Australian form as it is smaller in every way. Then the birds from South Australia, New South Wales and Queensland might be lumped as these agree fairly well and only occur in the interior of these provinces. I have, however, a series from Normanton which are all small and it is difficult to decide what to do with them. If the above be accepted until long series are collected, little harm will be done, but it is not clear to me why the variation should be so peculiarly localised. Were the birds coloured it is possible that alteration in colour might have given us the truth, 210 BLOODSTAINED COCKATOO. but the lack of colour makes the accurate discrimination of subspecies difficult. I would rearrange the forms thus : Ducorpsius sanguineus sanguineus (Gould) Northern Territory (Port Essington) and Melville Island. As synonyms C. gymnopis Sclater, and C. s. apsleyi Mathews may be noted. This form is of medium size, wing measurement dd 270-275 mm. and. 263-8 in the females. Ducorpsius sanguineus distinctus (Mathews) Northern Territory (Inland West) and North-west Australia. As a synonym I quote D. s. subdistinctus (Mathews) or perhaps it would be better to call it a secondary subspecies. Under the scale employed by authorities in connection with Palsearctic birds, it would rank as a valid subspecies, but conservatism seems here better employed. The Northern Territory (Daly River and Alligator River inland) specimens measure in the wing d 310, $ 280-292 mm. The Parry’s Creek, North-west Australia, birds measure in the wing, d 294, $ 273-280 mm. It will be noted that these measurements are in agreement with that given by Ramsay for his specimen from Derby, North-west Australia. These are all larger than the Melville Island series and the West Australian birds. For these latter I must propose Ducorpsius sanguineus westralensis , subsp. n. Type from Murchison, Mid-west Australia. The specimens measure d 272-283, $ 2554 — 270 mm. These therefore approach the typical series in measurements and cannot be lumped with the preceding form. It will be noted that the North-west species are intermediate between these and those from the West interior Northern Territory. Consequently, were the North-west form not regarded as sub-specific, yet it was desirable to indicate its peculiarities it could be referred to as Ducorpsius sanguineus distinctus — westralensis. The simple trinomial seems preferable and may later be reverted to. The series from Normanton, Queensland, are the most perplexing as they all measure very small and are constant, thus 3 del’s, 245, 245, 247 ; 3 $$’s 238, 240, 247 mm. These do not correlate with any other form and though I am unwilling it seems necessary to designate these by name. I therefore introduce for them the name Ducorpsius sanguineus normantoni , subsp. n. Specimens from Cloncurry, Queensland, agree with those from the interior of New South Wales and South Australia in size, there apparently beingjpo 211 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. environmental stress capable of modifying this bird in this range. In measurements it is slightly less than the typical series, but no long series are available to discriminate in the region named. The name gymnopis has been applied to this form but I have shown that this is inapplicable. We must therefore call this race Ducorpsius sanguineus ashbyi Mathews. I would here comment upon a criticism in the Ibis, 1916, p. 649, upon my treatment of the forms of Ieracidea. My friendly critic has thus written, “ Of this Hawk innumerable variations seem to occur ; and, as they overlap in places, we should ourselves have refrained from accepting, or giving, Latin appellations to each, while considering them somewhat erratic manifestations of an extremely variable species, or phases not yet sufficiently fixed to warrant nomenclatural distinction.” I had, however, just proved that the phases were “ not somewhat erratic manifestations ” and “ warranted nomenclatural distinction ” to emphasise that fact. The designation by a certain name attracts workers and in that case we arrive sooner at the truth by contradiction or confirmation, and Capt. S. A. White, the most brilliant, experienced and thorough field ornithologist in Australia, has just written (Emu, Vol. XVI., July, 1916, p. 12) : “ Ieracidea berigora occidentalis. Several birds seen on Wedge Island, South Australia. In my opinion this is strictly a coastal form, and Ieracidea b. berigora takes its place inland.” I make this interruption as the critic’s remarks seem more applicable to the present case, and I therefore forestall them, as so far I cannot conclude that the differences observed are only “ somewhat erratic manifestations,” though it may be argued that the “ phases are not . . . fixed ” ; nevertheless it seems most desirable to indicate the presence of these phases, so that their status can be determined, and the only method apparent is the proposal or acceptance of names. As will be seen from the preceding, I am always ready to discard a name when its use seems unnecessary ; and it is certainly the usage of names that express facts ; whether the further study of birds will prove that these facts were only correct in application to the specimens examined or are true for all speci- mens remains to be seen. 212 « Genus- — L ICMETIS. Licmetis Wagler Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch, Vol. I., p. 505, 1832 Type L. tenuirostris. Also spelt — Lycmetia Wagler, ib„ p. 738. Licmetes Heine, Nomenel. Mus. Hein., p. 224, 1890. Licmelis Giebel, Thes. Omith., Vol. III., p. 228, 1877. Limictis Blyth, Jo urn. As. Soc. Beng., Vol. XXV., p. 447 note, 1856. Licmetua Tristram, Cat. Coll. Birds, p. 72, 1889. Medium-sized Kakatoeine birds with long bills, long wings, long tail and medium legs and feet. This genus agrees exactly in every detail in structure and coloration with Ducorpsius, only differing in the longer bill. 213 Order PSITTA 01 FORMES. Family KA KA TO El DM. No. 342, LICMETIS TENUIROSTRIS. LONGBILLED COCKATOO. (Plate 290.) Psittacus TENUIROSTRIS Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 88, 1820 ; Nova Hollandia. I selected in 1912 New South. Wales. Psittacus tenuirostris Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 88, 1820. Psittacus nasicus Temminck, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Loud.), Vol. XIII., p. 115, 1821, Port Phillip, Victoria; Temminck and Laugier, Plan. Color d’Ois., Vol. III., pi. 331, 1825. Plyctolophus tenuirostris Stephens in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., p. 108, 1826. Cacatua nasica Lesson, Traite d’Omith, p. 183, 1830 ; Schlegel, Mus. Pays Bas. Vol. III., Ps'ttaci, p. 146, 1864. Licmetis tenuirostris Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen Munch., Vol. I., pp. 505, 695, 738, 1832 Swainson, Classif. Birds, Vol. II., p. 302, 1837 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 11, 1865 ; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVII., p. 500, 1910 ; (??) Barnard, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 206, 1914 (N.T.). Cacatua nasutus (err. pro nasica) Lesson, Compl. de Buff, Vol. IX., Ois., p. 197, 1837. Licmetis pastinator Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1840, p. 175, 1841 ; West Australia; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 12, 1865; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878 ; Reichenow, Joum. fur Orn., 1881, p. 23 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 10, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 134, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 63, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. H., p. 620, 1901 ; Lawson, Emu, Vol IV., p. 136, 1905 (W.A.) ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral., p. 47, 1908; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. HI., p. 94, 1911 ; Carter, Ibis, 1912, p. 627 (W.A.) ; Orton & Sandland, Emu, Vol. XHI., p. 77, 1913 (W.A.). Licmetis nasicus * Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xxvn. (Vol. V., pi. 5), 1847 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Om., 1881, p. 23 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1S88 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 252, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 9, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 63, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 619, 1901 ; (???) Le Souef, Emu, Vol. II., p. 153, 1903 (N.T.) ; Hill, id., 165 (Vic.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 47, 1908 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 92, 1911. * Also written nasica. 214 Roland Green. del. 7 12 LICMETIS TENUIROSTRIS. fZONG- BILLED COCKATOO J. Witherby Sc C° LONGBILLED COCKATOO. Psittacus piscinator (error pro pastinator ) Thienemann, Fortplanz d. ges. Vogel, p. 79, 1846. Cacatua tenuirostris Schlegel, De Dierentium, p. 82, 1864. Plictolophus nasica Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. I., p. 316, 1867. Plictolophus pastinator Finsch, ib., p. 318. Licmetis tenuirostris tenuirostris Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 266, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 127, 1913. Licmetis tenuirostris pastinator Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 266, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 127, 1913. Licmetis tenuirostris derby i Mathews, Austral Av. Bee., Vol. III., p. 57, 1916, Derby, N.W.A. Distribution. North-west Australia ; South-west Australia ; South Australia ; Victoria ; New South Wales. Adult Male. General colour above and below white, tinged with sulphur yellow, which is most pronounced on the quill-lining and more especially on the lower aspect of the tail ; the bases of the feathers on the entire head, sides of face, throat, neck all round and breast, salmon pink ; base of forehead and a large patch in front of the eye red. The feathers velvety in texture. Bill whitish-horn ; eyes dark hazel, feet mealy. Total length 455 mm. ; culmen 51, wing 287, tail 135, tarsus 22. Figured. Collected on the Murrumbidgee River, New South Wales, in June, 1892. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Immature. Take on the adult plumage from the nest. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Two to four. White. 37 to 40 mm. by 28 to 29. Breeding-season. August to November. This species was one of the discoveries made by Kuhl when he compiled the first Monograph of Parrots. Simultaneously it received a name by Temminck who gave as the locality of his species Port Phillip, Victoria. It was perhaps not killed there but brought to that locality. I had written this when I re- ferred to Robert Brown’s MSS. still preserved in the British Museum “when I found that it was procured at “ Bay XVI., Apl. 27, 1802,” a locality where it does not now occur as far as my records go. Bay XVI. is Port Phillip and on the MSS. is written “ nasutus Temm ” either by Temminck himself, or by Robert Brown at the time. Temminck later altered his name on account of Latham’s use of his first choice. I selected New South Wales as the type locality of Kuhl’s species, as he mentioned as the places where he saw specimens, the Paris Museum and Brooke’s in London but did not refer to the one Temminck described. When Wagler prepared his Monograph he proposed a new generic name for this species on account of the lengthened bill, and this genus has been recognised as valid ever since. I have commented upon this already, and 215 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. would now urge that osteological specimens be procured and studied as this bird is becoming scarce and it seems necessary to have some details about its anatomy at first hand. I have no field notes concerning the Eastern form, though Mr. J. W. Mellor has written me : “ They are to be found in the northern parts of South Australia, but I have never seen them in the southern parts.” Its range appears to be now very restricted, as Captain S. A. White does not record it upon his many expeditions into the central districts, and north its place appears to be taken by the “ sanguined ” bird, whether this be generically, specifically or only sub specifically separable. Under the name Licmetis nasica in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., North has some interesting notes on the habits of this species. Thus K. H. Bennett had written : “ Licmetis nasica is only to be met with in the vicinity of permanent water, and is never, so far as my observations extend, found in the dry back country. I have met with it frequently along the course of the Lachlan and Murrumbidgee Rivers, and I have seen immense flocks feeding on the plains a few miles distant from the latter river. On the approach of evening they leave their feeding ground and take up their quarters for the night in the thick fringe of heavy timber along the river, presenting a most animated and interesting scene. Hundreds of the birds dash here and there with rapid flight through the trees, their white plumage contrasting strongly with the heavy dark green fringe of the towering Eucalyptus, and thrown into stronger relief by the rays of the setting sun. In some of the trees the birds might be observed clinging in all kinds of attitudes, or jumping nimbly from branch to branch, whilst in other places numbers were clinging head downwards at the extreme ends of the branches, the whole flock meanwhile keeping up an incessant and almost deafening noise.” Mr. G. A. Heartland’s notes read : “ Licmetis nasica lives almost exclusively on a small yam which it digs up with its long bill. Of course such a vast amount of digging must wear the upper mandible very rapidly, but this is compensated for by the rapidity of its growth. An old pet bird tried to lever a brick out of a drain with its bill, and split the upper portion from near the point to the base. I mended the break, and in three weeks the split portion had grown down to the point, and before the end of the following week no trace of the injury was visible. It is remarkable that when portions of Riverina near the Murrumbidgee River were used as cattle stations these birds bred there in hundreds, but during the past thirty-five years the cattle have been replaced by sheep, and the Longbilled Cockatoos have deserted the vicinity so completely that a youth from that district could not be persuaded that the Corellas had ever been found there.” 216 LONGBILLED COCKATOO. Gould separated as a distinct species the Western Longbilled Cockatoo, later recording : “ All ornithologists now admit that there are two species of the genus Licmetis ; one inhabiting the western and the other the eastern portions of Australia. Living examples of both have been for some time in the Menagerie of the Zoological Society of London, where their differences are far more apparent than in the skins which have from time to time been sent to this country.” Ramsay in 1891 explained : “ The bills in the genus vary ; in those inhabiting the soft ground in the open plains they are longest, while others of the same species frequenting the stony parts of the country have the tips worn down and the length of the upper mandible shorter. The western form, L. pastinator , is a larger bird than the South Australian and New South Wales species, L. nasicus ; it may also be distinguished by its larger bill and the salmon tint of the basal portion of the feathers of the lores, head, neck and chest ; in A. nasicus there is a distinct frontal band and a large patch, almost scarlet on the lore and over the eye, narrower but distinctly marked in front and behind the eye. A large series of specimens recently examined from South Australia, the central portion of New South Wales, and from South- west and West Australia, tend to prove the distinctness of these two forms, which previously, from insufficient material, were considered only to be local varieties of one and the same species.” Salvadori in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., p. 134, 1890, admitted L. pastinator as a distinct species with the diagnosis : “ Very much like L. nasica, only a little larger, the naked space round the eyes larger and darker, of a blue lead colour,” and the remark : “ I have seen living specimens in the Menagerie of the Zoological Society of London ; they show most clearly those distinctive characters which, according to Gould, are not so apparent in dry skins.” \\ North, in the Aust. ,Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 95, 1911, wrote: “ Licmetis pastinator is undoubtedly a good and distinct species, and even in dried skins the specific characters are apparent. Its larger size, paler and more circumscribed colouring of the head, hind-neck and throat, which does not extend on to the breast, and the rich sulphur-yellow of the inner webs of the quills and most of the tail-feathers will readily serve to distinguish it from the eastern species, Licmetis nasica .” Notwithstanding these opinions I regarded them as only sub specifically distinct when I prepared my “ Reference List to the Birds of Australia ” {Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., 1912). I have ever since continued this usage but recently proposed ( Austral Avian Record, Vol. III., p. 57, Apl. 7, 1910) VOL. VI. 217 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Licmetis tenuirostris derby i, diagnosing “ Differs from L. t. pastinator (Gould) in having a much smaller bill. Type Derby, North-west Australia.” While accepting these there subspecies I am now doubtful of the validity of the genus Licmetis, as recently the consideration of the subspecies of Cacatua sanguinea Gould has caused a further revision of my opinions in connection with these birds. As already noted, osteological examination has granted Licmetis generic rank while denying such to Ducorpsius , Lophochroa, and Eolophus . I am compelled to conclude that the osteological worker is prejudiced by the generic values of the systematist and only rarely can he clearly differentiate bird genera from the osteology of specimens. To elaborate, if specimens of Licmetis, Ducorpsius, Cacatoes and Lophochroa are examined by a student of osteology he could not differentiate the genera without recourse to literature prepared from birdskins. Thus D’Arcy Thompson admits the first as a valid genus, lumping the last three, because such association was given in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. Certainly there is more difference between Lophochroa and Ducorpsius than between Ducorpsius and Licmetis. I have long recognised this, but my latest study tends to prove that the latter will be lumped later. Among the subspecies of Ducorpsius sanguineus is one I differentiated with the name distinctus. 1 proposed this name on account of its superior size, and it has long puzzled me, as its habitat is very close to that of the typical D. sanguineus, than which it is much larger. Again examining it, its projecting bill was noticed ; this induced a close examination of this form with the members of the genus Licmetis. It might be almost as well classed as a subspecies of Licmetis tenuirostris. The bill is shorter and less projecting, but otherwise it agrees in size with L. t. pastinator, and has the huge eye-space associated with that form. Its range is quite discontinuous so that I have left it as a subspecies of D. sanguineus, especially as it lacks the deep reddish coloration of the lores, etc. However, I am not satisfied that all these bare- eyed white Cockatoos are congeneric, and that in the future field work will enable the recognition of one species only. I have already indicated that Licmetis might be considered as an evolution product of Ducorpsius, and it would be interesting to find that the intermediate links still exist in the neighbouring regions. At the present time Ducorpsius sanguineus distinctus is almost the furthest geographical form from the two Licmetis, early so named. Against this we have the fact that D. s. distinctus is least allied to D. s. sanguineus, to which it is the nearest geographical form. If these two forms, Licmetis tenuirostris and Ducorpsius sanguineus , are valid species, not to say valid genera, they might be found occurring together in Australia. 213 LONGBILLED COCKATOO. I have conjectured that this might be the case, but upon re-examination of records and specimens I find no proof, but rather the reverse. I have noted that Ramsay recorded a large specimen of Cacatua sanguined from Derby. This is the type locality of my Licmetis tenuirostris derbyi. Upon criticising Ramsay’s measurements, however, I find his specimen might belong to my form, and this suggests the acceptance of only one species. I here give the ranges of the forms. “ Ducorpsius ” sanguineus sanguineus (Gould). Northern Territory. “ Ducorpsius ” sanguineus distinctus Mathews. Northern Territory (West) Inland. “ Ducorpsius ” sanguineus subdistinctus Mathews. North-west Australia (Parry’s Creek). Licmetis tenuirostris derbyi Mathews. North-west Australia (Derby). “ Ducorpsius ” sanguineus westralensis Mathews. Mid-west Australia. Licmetis tenuirostris pastinator Gould. South-west Australia. Licmetis tenuirostris tenuirostris (Kuhl). South Australia, Victoria, New South Wales. Ducorpsius sanguineus ashbyi Mathews. Inland New South Wales, Northern (Inland) South Australia, Inland South Queensland. Ducorpsius sanguineus normantoni Mathews Normanton, Queensland. The points to note in this are as follows : D. s. distinctus is unlike D. s. sanguineus and is very near to L. t. pastinator. L. t. derbyi is so like D. s . sanguineus that apparently it was recorded under the latter name by Ramsay. If the two species were found inhabiting the same district their validity would be proven, and then we have D. s. westralensis, the next form to L. t. pastinator , but these are very distinct. This is the best argument for the retention of the two species, but the validity of the two genera is still left doubtful. An interesting item I had nearly overlooked must be here commented upon. Writing about the Birds of the Brunette Downs, Northern Territory, in the Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 206, 1914, Barnard has recorded : “ Licmetis tenuirostris. Long-billed Cockatoo (Corella). Seen in flocks of hundreds. A few were found breeding during February and March in hollows in the coolibah trees.” These are probably the birds I call D. s. distinctus , but it is pleasing to have confirmatory independent evidence of their nearness to Licmetis. This record makes it certain that more field work must be done and that this matter is not yet settled. I give the few field notes relative to the Western form hereafter, and point to the confusion between the forms in West Australia as worthy of investigation. 219 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Mr. Tom Carter’s notes are here given : “ Licmetis pastinator. Aboriginal names in the south-west, Mannich, Mennich. This fine species former^ abounded in the south-west of Australia, from Geraldton on the north to the Southern Ocean, but owing to their very destructive habits to the wheat crops — which comprised eating the newly-sown seed, pulling up the young plants to eat the grain at their roots, pulling down and trampling flat the ripening crops, and eating the ripe wheat from the tops of the stooks — the struggling settlers and pioneers systematically poisoned them wholesale with poisoned corn, and shot them to such an extent that one may now travel for hundreds of miles through districts where they previously occurred in countless numbers and never see a single specimen. North of the Swan River there are still one or two localities where considerable numbers breed, but south of that, I believe, there is only one locality where a few hundreds still pay periodical visits and breed. The Cockatoos appear to go there about March, •when wheat crops are usually sown, then go away somewhere, and return for a short time about June, when the winter rains have usually set in. The breeding season commences in September and the young birds hatch out about mid-October, and a month later leave the nest. Apparently they remain in the nesting cavity until strong on the wing, as I was told by settlers that on several occasions, when a tree was being felled in order to obtain young birds known to be in the nests, the young birds emerged just as the tree was falling and flew away to a considerable distance, being quite capable of taking care of themselves. Red gum trees appear to be chosen as nesting sites in preference to jarrah trees, and yet all the south-west forests are mostly composed of these two varieties of timber mingled together. The nesting cavities are usually at a considerable height from the ground, and thirty feet was the lowest site noted by me, and that was unusual. The birds feed largely on bulbs and roots of various plants growing on the open sand-plain country, and while digging up these with their long upper mandibles, the cockatoos get all their under plumage much discoloured and stained with earth and mud, their very short tarsi contributing to this soiling of the feathers. They are very wary in their habits (probably from long persecution) and always post sentinels on lofty trees. They are also very early risers and are on the wing at the earliest dawn, uttering characteristic notes which much resemble those of Gac. sanguined. The male birds are larger than the females, according to the following averages obtained from fifteen birds : — Sex. Length Wing. Tail. Bill. Tarsus In inches, Male 18-4 12-6 6-8 1-98 •98 Female . 18-2 12-2 6*6 1*8 1*00 “ Average weight from eight birds 1 lb. 10 oz. 220 LONGBILLED COCKATOO. “ The young birds are very hardy and long lived, making excellent cage birds, for which they were formerly in great demand. Please refer to Ibis, 1912, p. 627, for fuller account, where the average length of wing of female is wrongly given as 12-8 inches, an obvious error from the details given and which is cor- rected above.'* The notes given in Campbell’s “ Nests and Eggs ” under this species as regards the North-west Cape from Mr. Tom Carter refer to the smaller form as acknowledged by Campbell in the Emu, Vol. I., p. 25, 1901. In the Emu , Vol. XIV., 1915, p. 172, the reverse error seems to have occurred, as E. A. Le Souef records Cacatua gywnopis west of Moora “ using their long bills to dig up yams in a field.” In the next volume, p. 51, Mr. Carter suggests that these must have been Licmetis pastinator as it occurs there, whereas there is no previous record of the other species. D. Le Souef recorded the eggs of Licmetis nasica from Port Darwin, but this seems an obvious error for Cacatua sanguinea. I make these notes as showing the confusion between the two species, commonly recognised as referable to distinct genera, but whose status I have just discussed. Mr. W. B. Alexander has forwarded me the following interesting account of the early history of Licmetis tenuirostris pastinator : “I have never met with this species, which is now a rarity in Western Australia, the recent history of its rapid decrease in numbers having been dealt with by Mr. T. Carter in the Ibis. In compiling a ‘ History of Zoology in Western Australia,’ on which I have been engaged for some years, I have been much struck in reading accounts of the early days of the Swan River settlement with the frequent mention of White Cockatoos, which I presume were of this species. It is evident that in 1829 they were quite as plentiful as Black Cockatoos ; nowadays I believe they are restricted to a district north of Moora and a small isolated colony to the east of the Blackwood River. The changes in the distribution of animals which have taken place since the colonisation of Western Australia are mostly easily accounted for, but the dwindling of these wary forest dwellers is much more difficult to explain. The following are among the early references to White Cockatoos, which I believe to refer to the present form : ‘ T. W. H. (Harvey ?) who accompanied Ensign Dale in an expedition over the Darling Range between Oct. 25 and Nov. 7, 1830, records that they saw ‘ many White Cockatoos ’ and adds : ‘ The White Cockatoo appears to live on what it takes from the ground, whether insects or roots I am not able to say. The black kind live on the buds of large trees and shrubs ” (Stirling, Sir J., Journals of Several Expeditions made in Western Australia, 221 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 1829-32. London, 1833). Bussell, "wilting of a journey that he made from Augusta to the Vasse River says that ‘Cockatoos were in greater multitudes (at the Vasse) than I have ever witnessed before, white and black (Stirling, £.c.)\” G. F. Moore in his Diary of ten years’ eventful life of an early settler in Western Australia (London, 1884) writes, besides numerous other references: “ March, 1831. Guildford. The White Cockatoos are very numerous, and now feed upon the flower of the red gumtree (growing beside his house) which lately came into blossom.” “ The White Cockatoo screams like a clucking hen disturbed from her nest.” April 4, 1832. “ No two birds can be more different in outward appearance than Crows and Cockatoos (obviously white), yet in their habits they are similar ; they go in flocks, call and give the alarm to one another, and fly off with a noise equal to that of a rookery.” Sept. 14, 1832. “ The Cockatoos are gregarious and migratory ; at some periods of the year few are to be seen ; at other times they are seen in large and frequent flocks.” 222 f Genus— EO LOP HUS. Eolophus Bonaparte, Rev. et Mag. de Zool., 1854, p. 155 . . . . . . . . . . Type E. roseicapillus . Also spelt — Eitiophus Gray, Handl. Gen. Sp. Birds, Pt. II., p. 170, 1870. Medium-sized Kakatoeine birds of peculiar coloration with short full crest, small stout bills, long wings, long tails, small legs and feet. The distinct nature of this genus is seen in its coloration, which is emphasized by the different wing formula. The bill is small and stout, comparatively broader than in the preceding genera, the keel of culmen rounded, the tip short, the edges of upper mandible strongly sinuate. The under mandible is more triangular, being narrow at tip, but broad at base, the edges little sinuate. The crest is very short and full with the feathers broad. The cere is feathered as are the lores but there is a small bare space round the eyes. The wing is long with the first primary equal to the fifth, the second, third and fourth being longest and subequal. The secondaries are short. The tail is long, composed of broad feathers and more than half the length of the wing. The legs and feet are small and of normal formation. I have always been puzzled why this form should have been lumped with the White Cockatoos, while Licmetis, which is a White Cockatoo, should have been admitted as a distinct genus, simply on account of its longer bill, a comparatively trivial character. As a matter of fact the wing formation is quite different and this is obviously emphasized by the peculiar coloration, a feature of much more taxonomic value than the mere prolongation of the bill. In the paper on Ptilosis already quoted Miller has a footnote (p. 134) : “ The Rose Cockatoo, Cacatoes roseicapilla, is generically distinct from true Cacatoes , the proper name for the monotypic group being Eolophus Bonaparte {Rev. et Mag. de Zool., 1854, p. 155). The two genera differ conspicuously in the form of the wing and in coloration. In Eolophus the crest is shorter and broader, approached, but I think not equalled, by certain species of Cacatoes. In Cacatoes the secondaries are very ample reaching nearly to the tip of the wing which is broad and truncate, the ninth primary equal to or shorter than the sixth. In Eolophus the secondaries are shorter and smaller, and the 223 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. terminal primaries are elongated, resulting in a more pointed wing, the ninth quill much exceeding the sixth. All the species of Cacatoes are wholly white, the inner webs of the remiges and rectrices always tinged with yellow or red, the crest or parts of the body plumage often marked or tinged with those colours. In Eolophus the back, wings and tail are grey, crest whitish-pink, rump greyish white and underparts raspberry red. According to Garrod (P. Z. S., 1874, p. 588) Eolophus has two carotid arteries, while Cacatoes has but one, but as Beddard records two present in both genera the number is hi doubt. ReichenowT divides the short-tailed Cockatoos into two genera according to the form of the crest, placing the Rose Cockatoo in true Cacatoes characterized by a broad-feathered crest, the species with narrow, recurved crest feathers standing as Lophochroa. As Eolophus stands alone in form of the wing and in coloration, this arrangement is certainly not a natural one. Mathews recognizes five segregates of the old genus Cacatoes, a degree of subdivision that to many will seem quite unnecessary.” I have already commented upon this last sentence. 224 - . I; ■ n ■ * ■ . ■ ■ - \ SB 1 i {. \ ■ . * . , . . v > ■ . . ‘ . ■ ■ Witherby & C° Roland Green, del. EOLOPHUS RO SEICAPI LLU S ( ROSE -BREASTED COCKA TOO J Order PSITTACIFORMES Family KAKATOEIDjE. No. 343. EOLOPHUS ROSEICAPILLUS. ROSEBREASTED COCKATOO. (GALAH.) (Plate 291.) Cacatua roseicapilla Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XVII., p. 12, 1817 : “ Dans les Indes,” errore : I selected in 1912, New South Wales. Cacatua roseicapilla Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XVII., p. 12, 1817 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., pp. 504, 691, 737, 1832 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 8, 1865 ; Masters, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol II., p. 274, 1878 (N.T.) ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat. No. 12, p. 251, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 7, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 132, 1891 ; North, Trans. Roy. Soc. S.A., Vol. XXII., p. 168, 1898 (N.W.A.) ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 63, 1899; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 617, 1901 ; J. A. Hill, Emu, Vol. III., p. 115, 1903 (Viet.) ; Carter, id., 172, 1904 (N.W.A.) ; Hartert, Nov. Zool., Vol. XII., p. 212, 1905 (N.T.) ; Batey, Emu, Vol. VII., p. 11, 1907 (Viet.) ; Hall, ib., p. 25 (N.W.A.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 47, 1908 ; Whitlock, Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 191, 1909 (W.A.) ; Chisholm, id., IX., p. 36, 1909 (Q.) ; Whitlock, id., p. 192, 1910 (W.A.) ; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasm., p. 93, 1910 ; Ogilvie-Grant, Ibis., 1910, p. 164 (W.A.) ; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. X., pp. 17, 26, 1910 (N.S.W.) ; Hill, id., p. 269, 1911, N.W.A. ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 88, 1911 ; Jackson, Emu, Vol. XII., p. 69, 1912 (N.Q.) ; Stori^, ib., 117 (Viet.) ; Chandler, ib., XIII., p. 36, 1913 (Viet.) ; Orton & Sandland, ib., p. 77 (W.A.) ; Macgillivray, ib., p. 157, 1914 (N.Q.) ; Barnard, id., XIV., p. 46, 1914 (N.T.). Psittacus eos Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 88, 1820, “ Nova Hollandia ” = New South Wales ; Temminck & Laugier, Plan. Color. & Ois., Vol. I., pi. 81, 1823. Cacatua rosea Vieillot, Galerie des Ois., Vol. I., pt. n., pi. 25, 1821. New name for C. roseicapilla. Plyctolophus eos Vigors & Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 269, 1827. Cacatua eos Lesson, Manuel d’Ornith., Vol II., p. 143, 1828 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xx. (Vol. V., pi. 4), 1845 ; Sturt, Narr. Exped. Centr. Austr., Vol. II., App. p. 36, 1849 ; Diggles, Omith. Austr., pt. xiv. (Vol. II., pi. 73), 1867. VOL. VI. 225 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Plyctolophus roseicapilhis Selby, Nat. Libr. Parrots, p. 131, 1836 ; Finseh, Die Papageien, Vol. I., p. 318, 1867; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 192, 1878; Finseh, Ibis, 1882, p. 393. Eolophus roseus Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1854, p. 155. Eolophus roseicapillus Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus Sci. Paris, Vol. XLIV., p. 537, 1857 ; Broadbent, Proc. Roy. Soc., Queensland, Vol. III., p. 30, 1886 ; S. A. White, Trans. Roy. Soc., South Austr., Vol. XXXVIII., p. 427, 1914 (Central). Plissolophus roseicapillus Reichenow, Journ. fur Om., 1881, p. 26. Cacatoes roseicapilla roseicapilla Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 265, Jan. 1912. Cacatoes roseicapilla Jcuhli Mathews, id., p. 266 ; South Alligator River, Northern Territory. Cacatoes roseicapilla assimilis Mathews, ib., Laverton, Mid- west Australia. Cacatoes roseicapilla derbyana Mathews, ib., Derby, North-west Australia. Eolophus roseicapillus roseicapillus Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 127, 1913 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 186, 1915 (Centr. Austr.) ; id., ib., XV., p. 158, 1916 (S.A.). Eolophus roseicapillus Jcuhli Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 127, 1913. Eolophus roseicapillus assimilis Mathews, id., ib. Eolophus roseicapillus derby anus Mathews, id., ib. Cacatua derbyana Barnard, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 206, 1914 (N.T.). Distribution. Queensland (not Cape York District) ; New South Wales ; Victoria ; South Australia ; Central Australia ; Mid-west and North-west Australia ; Northern Territory. Not coastal save as a rare vagrant or escapee, as in Tasmania. Adult male. Entire back, wings, and tail hoary-grey like a patch on the sides of the breast, lower flanks, and under tail-coverts, much paler on the lower back, rump, upper tail-coverts, and outer webs of the greater upper wing-coverts and secondary quills, and darker towards the tips of the primary quills and tail-feathers : the second, third, and fourth primaries incised on the outer webs and the first, second, and third on the inner webs ; crown of head, hind-neck, and feathers below the eye pale pink, the feathers of the occipital crest have indistinct wavy bars ; throat, sides of face, breast, abdomen, axillaries and under wing-coverts deep rose-red. Iris brown, orbits red ; feet and tarsi mealy black ; bill white. Total length 375 mm. ; cuhnen 25 ; wing 264, tail 135, tarsus 22. Figured. Collected at Derby, North-west Australia, on the 7th of May, 1911. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Nest. A hole in a tree, lined with leaves pulled when green. Eggs. Clutch, four or five. White, 34-38 mm. by 25-28. Breeding-season. September and November (East). February and March (North-west). This beautiful and now familiar and well-known Cockatoo was not seen by the earliest voyageurs, as it does not frequent the coastal districts. I have not ascertained whence the first specimen was received, but it was first described by Vieillot from a specimen in the Paris Museum, and he gave the locality as “ Dans les Indes.” When Kuhl prepared his Monograph, apparently this was the only specimen known to him in all the museums of Europe, as he named his Psittacus eos from a specimen in the Paris Museum, the same 226 ROSEBREASTED COCKATOO. (GALAH.) bird as had, unknown to Kuhl, been described by Vieillot. It was later figured by Vieillot himself in the “ Galerie des Oiseaux ” when he gave it another name Cacatua rosea. Such an unmistakable form did not receive any more specific names. Immediately travellers pushed inland it was frequently met with, and Gould recorded that in the 1840’s it had become the common cage bird among the Australian Cockatoos. Gould records a letter from Sturt to the effect that “ The Rose-breasted Cockatoo is a bird of the low country entirely, and limited in the extent of its habitat, never being found in any great number on the banks of the Darling, or rising higher than 600 feet above the level of the sea. It feeds on Salsolac , and occupies those vast plains which lie immediately to the westward of the Blue Mountains. It has a peculiar flight, and the whole flock turning together show the rose-colour of the under surface with pretty effect.” The same observation was made by Elsey : “ The country round the Gulf seems to be the favourite resort of this species ; it there feeds on the broad open plains in flocks of from fifty to two hundred. Nothing can exceed the beauty of their appearance as they wheel about over these plains in the light of an early sun.” Gould added that he had seen this sight and many observers have since remarked upon it. Captain S. A. White has written me : “ Eolophus r. roseicapillus is a common bird in most of the inland districts of South Australia and we found it in great numbers in several localities in the heart of the Macdonnell Ranges. They present a beautiful sight when several hundreds are seen moving over the ground in quest of seeds, and when they rise together, showing the beautiful rose breasts, it is a sight never to be forgotten.” Mr. Edwin Ashby’s notes read : “ At Yanco Glen near Broken Hill a few years back, I saw large numbers, the flocks having about fifty birds in a flock. They have a habit of turning in their flight simultaneously, making a glorious mass of colour in the bright sunshine. Some years ago a flock of thirteen was seen by myself in the suburbs of Adelaide several times, and last month (May, 1916) I found there were a good many that had taken up their permanent home at Buckland Park, twenty miles North of Adelaide, attracted there by the thistle seeds.” Mr. Christian, writing from Victoria states : 44 Very noisy bird, and common here. It seems to prefer the drier districts as I see here larger flocks than I have ever seen in the moister south. A flock I saw in 1906 I estimated to be about 400 strong. They were in a large gumtree and the whole flock kept rising out of the tree making a vast pink, screeching cloud of birds. I find them more often in the open plain than in the timber, as in the former place they get plenty to eat in the saffron thistle seeds ; it thus does an 227 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. immense amount of good. In the timber they like to get in a low-lying spot where they eat small bulbous roots out of the ground. If one goes to a feeding ground of this description, he will find the earth full of small holes, where this bird has been digging his beak in, for either roots or bulbs. When feeding together they won’t let any other kind of bird be near them, and I have seen them driving magpies away from their feeding ground.” Dr. J. B. Cleland has noted : “ August 1907. Numerous at Strelley River, Mid-west Australia, coming in flocks in the morning to drink at water holes. Later on in August and September they were pairing and nesting, and then coming singly or in pairs to drink. Aug. 28, 1907. Nest in hollow trunk of gum about 8 ft. from the ground ; two eggs, one hatching, the other addled. Sept, and Oct. Several young birds brought to camp. Sept. 28, 1907. Feeding on seeds of a silvery -leaved acacia growing in spinifex plains, in large flocks. These acacias have dense masses of seed vessels of a light reddish-brown colour near their summits. The plumage, apparently so brilliant, harmonizes wonderfully with this foliage ; the blue-grey of the back with the leaves, the rosy -pink breast (which is modified by the shadows) with the light reddish of the legumes.” Mr. J. P. Rogers’ notes read : “ Wyndham, 20 Apl., 1909. One pair seen. Very rare. May 2, 1909. “ Bend of the Ord ” Camp, thirty miles south of Wyndham. Numerous. May 13, 1909. Sugar Springs, 160 miles South of Wyndham. Have increased in numbers the further back we get from the coast These birds were not numerous at Marngle creek ; a few watered at a spring near my camp. At Mungi a large flock of about 150 birds was seen several times and also an occasional straggler. On the Fitzroy this species gathers in very large flocks after the wet season ; on 18th July, 1911, I saw one flock which I estimated to contain 500 birds, but this was an unusually large flock. At Derby were several small flocks.” Mr. Tom Carter’s observations follow : “ Cacatoes roseicapilla. Mid- west Aborigines : Ku. Lerrit. This bird never came under my notice in South- west Australia, and does not occur, I believe, in the heavily -timbered districts, preferring more open country such as where the Jam (Acacia acuminata) grows. They are common about the Irwin River, eighty miles north of Perth. They nest mostly in cavities in the trunks of the Jam (Acacia) and Gidgea timber (not large trees). The breeding season appears to be usually about September, but I have seen a pair of birds cleaning out a nesting site as early as May 18th, 1887. I think this species breeds according as to whether rain has fallen or not, and has not the regular time that Cac. sanguinea has. Young birds were noted on Oct. 25th, 1887. In very dry seasons they seem to defer laying, or perhaps nesting at all, for on Aug. 19th, ROSEBREASTED COCKATOO. (GALAH.) 1911, they were still in flocks on the Minilya River, and on Sept. 29th a pair shot by me on the Gascoyne River were not breeding then, as proved on dissection. They are usually rather tame and confiding in their habits, and in August, 1911, a flock of some size was observed by me to drink regularly at a raised horse- trough close to the homestead (about 50 yards distant) of Minilya Station, although it was a busy place, as horses constantly were brought to drink, and waggons and other vehicles constantly passing within a few feet, the trough being between the homestead and the stables, stockyard, woolshed, etc., on the other side. They were not observed about Point Cloates as that district is practically devoid of timber.” Mr. W. B. Alexander has sent me the following note : “ The only occasion on which I have met with these birds was in Oct., 1915, when I spent a few days at Waddouring in the Merredin district. A pair of Galahs were apparently nesting in a patch of open timber country near the homestead, as we frequently saw them near the same place. “ Mr. J. M. Drummond, the owner of the property, who is much interested in birds, informed me that they had not been seen in the locality previously, and I heard subsequently that they remained through the summer.” Mr. Thos. P. Austin has written me : “In the inland portion of New South Wales there is no Cockatoo so numerous as the ‘ Galah ’ ; in the Bourke district I have seen enormous flocks ; just after leaving Bourke on my way home, from a railway carriage window, while crossing a large plain, I saw acres and acres of the ground just simply a mass of pink and grey with these birds. On one station I visited in this district these birds were very numerous, but I was informed that there were very few about there at that time to what there usually were, as the harvesting was just over, and the Galahs had been so destructive they had been poisoned and shot in thousands ; in fact I was told that beneath some of the trees around the cultivation paddock, at haryest- ing time, there were enormous heaps of dead Galahs. Even at the time of my visit a great many were being shot to feed the dogs in the rabbit packs. It seems a great pity that these beautiful birds should be so destructive as to necessitate their destruction in such a wholesale manner. They are so numerous in some districts, that it must be quite impossible for them all to find nesting hollows, every hollow appears to be in use ; this can be known by the birds having the habit of gnawing away the bark at the entrance hole. The nesting hollow is usually lined with eucalypt leaves gathered when green.” From the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat, No. 1, Vol. III., I quote the following accounts : Mr. K. H. Bennett’s notes read : “ I found Cacatua roseicapilla very plentiful near the Lachlan River in Southern New South Wales, and about the sandhills for some thirty miles out on the northern side. They 229 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. were in large flocks of some hundreds in number, feeding upon the seeds of a small plant, probably an annual, as all traces of the plant itself had dis- appeared. Just before sunset they congregate in the tops of the Pine trees ( Callistris ) to roost, and their bright-coloured breasts gave one the idea that the tree was crowned with large rose-red blossoms. Tins species breeds during October and November, depositing four or five eggs in a hollow or trunk of some eucalypt,” Dr. W. Macgillivray has written from Broken Hill, South-western New South Wales : “ Cacatua roseicapilla is to be seen through- out the district, but is not found breeding along the creeks in such numbers as C. sanguinea. They assemble in large flocks after the breeding season and gradually begin to pair off in July. They are earlier to nest than G. sanguined , their eggs being often taken at the beginning of August. They choose for this purpose the hollows in the creek Gums, at a height which averages twenty to thirty feet, the eggs being placed at a depth of from one to three feet. The eggs are four or five in number, and repose on a bed of green Gum leaves in every instance. This is the only Cockatoo, or indeed member of the Order, that I know of which lines its nesting hollow, and the same material was used in every nest which I have examined both here, and when I was a boy in Queensland. When watering these birds love to drink clinging to a post or fence or dead tree in the water ; sometimes a whole crowd of them will alight on a post, and then a great screaming and flapping of wings ensues as each tries to get a position near the water. I have seen a partly sub- merged post and wire fence covered with Galahs in this way, the edge of the water in the foreground being at the same time white with C. sanguined. Around our camp on Cawndilla Creek, near Menindie, during the first week in September, 1908, we found Cacatua roseicapilla in numbers, nearly all paired off, and each pair intent upon finding a suitable nesting hollow, and when found in fitting in a bed of green Gum leaves as a resting place for their eggs ; this bed varies in thickness from six inches to a foot or even more. When hollows were getting scarce one pah* was found to have essayed the impossible task of filling a hollow tree from the butt upwards and had put in over two feet of leaves before giving it up. We frequently watched the birds nipping off the leaves, usually small branchlets bearing four or five leaves, and carrying them in their bills to the hollow, both birds helping in the task. Many were the disputes and altercations over hollows within sight of our tent door, both between different pairs of G alahs and between Galahs and other Cockatoos. A pair of Sulphur Crests had taken possession of one hollow, and were treated with the greatest respect ; not so a pair of Bloodstained Cockatoos, whose chosen home was frequently occupied by Galahs during their absence, but usurpers were always rejected on the rightful owners’ return from their feeding 230 ROSEBREASTED COCKATOO. (GALAH.) grounds. On the creeks, owing to droughty conditions, Galahs were not so plentiful, nor were the clutches so full as they are when feed is more plentiful, many of them containing only two eggs when it is usual to find three or four. The young when hatched are covered with pink down, and do not open their eyes for several days after. Both Galahs and Bloodstained Cockatoos have become very fond of the seeds of the domestic pie melon, which has run wild all over this district. They have no doubt been led to this by their fondness for the seeds of the small wild melon and the scarcity of any other food.” Mr. W. M. Thomas wrote from the Lands Office, Orange, New South Wales: “ A singular action of the Galah that I have frequently noted on the Gunningbar Creek and the Macquarie and Castlereagh Rivers, is that it removes the bark from a patch on the trunk of the tree in a hollow of which it has its nest. This removal was always commenced on the south-east side of the tree ; in some instances it extended right round the barrel, but always the larger area of removal was on the south-east side. In one case I noted that the bark had been removed for three or four years in succession, the removal patch being increased every year. I failed to discover any reason for this action.” Mr. G. A. Keartland noted : “ Cacatua roseicapilla is the most widely dispersed species of the family Cacaluidce. It is found from within ten miles of Melbourne to the extreme north of the Continent and from the east to the west coast. Unlike most of the Psittacidce they line their nests with freshly gathered Eucalyptus leaves, and I have often found their selected tree by following the bird with a leafy twig in its bill. They are ground feeders, and live principally on seeds, bulbs, etc., which they find amongst the grass. During the winter they congregate in large flocks, but in the spring are found in pairs. During my travels in Western and North-western Australia with the Calvert Exploring Expedition, I often shot Galahs for the cook, and we made many good meals off them, as they can be eaten more often with a relish than any other game I tried.” Whitlock’s notes from the Pilbarra Goldfield, Western Australia, read {Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 191, 1909) : “ Cacatua roseicapilla was found in scattered pairs throughout the district. I found four nests, one of which contained newly-hatched young. None of the nests was difficult of access. All were in hollow gum-trees, and the bottom of the cavity was in each case plentifully lined with fresh gum-leaves. A clutch appears to be five, and about a fortnight elapses before the last egg is laid.” From East Murchison the same writer recorded {Emu, Vol. IX., p. 192, 1910): These noisy birds were breeding, too, in the eucalypts, but not in anything like the numbers of C. gymnopis . I also saw them in flocks near Bore Well.” 231 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Chisholm has recorded an account of the Galah from the pen of an anonymous Queensland correspondent in the Emu , Vol. IX., p. 36, 1909, which is really worth repeating : “ A large flock of Galahs on a partially dead myall tree has a most wonderful effect at a distance of about a quarter of a mile. The grey and pink clothe the bare branches, and give them the appearance of bursting into blossom, almost the shade of some double peach blossom. The Galah is perhaps the most common bird about here, rarely being altogether absent, and frequently being noticed out on the Downs in flocks of hundreds, their numbers generally being strengthened with a plentiful sprinkling of White and Black Cockatoos. The whole flock feeds amicably together, always keeping a sentinel stationed on some near-by tree or fence, which warns its congeners of the approach of danger, not visible to them in the long grass. At the warning cry, in one moment the air is full of a clamouring shrieking mass, which, as the danger passes, soon settles on the feeding ground again. Have you ever seen a proper flight of Galahs ? Most likely not, unless you have been in the interior, on the well-grassed Downs. It is a most wonderful sight, and once, seen, never to be forgotten. I will endeavour to describe such a scene, but, with the best description, there must be much left to the imagination which words fail to supply. Usually when the weather is broken or unsettled, though often on a windy winter morning, or in thundery weather in March or April, against the grey masses of cloud which bank up, forming a sombre background, it would seem that all the Galahs in the vicinity had gathered into one flock, shrieking and screaming as they circle high in the air, all beating their wings in perfect unison. So, as it were at a given signal, instantaneously the delicate rose- coloured breasts are all turned the one way, making a beautiful glow of colour as the birds veer round ; then, with one beat, the flock seems to have almost disappeared, just a glimpse of silvery -grey flashing as they turn their backs ; then a mere speck where each bird is flying, so small that one would hardly believe it to be a bird, so almost invisible does the grey become ; then a flash of silvery light before the glow of their breasts flashes into view again. The whole time there is an incessant screaming as they beat backwards and forwards in the same place for perhaps half an hour ; then, swooping with a rush of wings cleaving the air, re-forming into flocks — all at a tremendous pace, and flying so closely together that one constantly expects to see a collision, but never does one bird make a mistake ; simultaneously every bird turns and twists in mid-air, until, wearied out, the flock disperses into small groups, which drift away to settle in the grass or trees around. Some- times the Galahs keep this up off and on all day, and for days at a time. Another such flock I saw on the Warrego a few days ago. Judging by 232 •1 ROSEBREASTED COCKATOO. (GALAH.) measurements, it must have been over a quarter of a mile long and one hundred yards wide, inside which space were crowded fluttering, flashing forms, alternating in their rose and silver splashes of splendour as they beat back- wards and forwards.” When Gould dealt with this rather well-coloured Cockatoo he observed : “ This beautiful Cockatoo is abundantly dispersed over a great part of the interior of Australia ; both Oxley and Sturt speak of it as inhabiting the country to the north-west of the Blue Mountains ; in fact, few travellers have visited the interior without having had then attention attracted by its appearance ; and I myself saw it in great numbers on the plains bordering the river Namoi, particularly under the Nundewar range of. Sir Thomas Mitchell ; I possess specimens also from the north coast, procured by the officers of the ‘ Beagle.’ A difference, however, which may hereafter prove to be specific, exists between the birds from New South Wales and those of the north coast. Those from the latter locality are largest in size, and have the bare skin round the eye more extended ; the rosy colour of the breast and the grey colouring of the back are darker than in the specimens I killed on the Namoi. The late Mr. Elsey informed me that £ The country round the Gulf seems to be the favourite resort of this species ; it there feeds on the broad open plains in flocks of from fifty to two hundred. Nothing can exceed the beauty of their appearance as they wheel about over these plains in the light of an early sun.’ ” The indication of subspecies was never acted upon, and North, in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., commented upon Gould’s note regard- ing variation : “ I find just the reverse in the specimens in the Australian Museum Collection, as all the deepest rosj^-red birds were obtained by the late Mr. K. H. Bennett, in South-western New South Wales. There is, however, as Gould points out, a variation in the depths of colour of the up^der parts, as there is also in size, even when procured in the same locality. One of the smallest and richest coloured birds in the Australian Museum is an adult female, obtained by Mr. W. Adams, who accompanied the late Mr. K. H. Bennett, at Moolah, Western New South Wales. The wing measurement of adult males varies from 9*8 to 10-75 inches. Specimens from Derby, North-western Australia, have that faded and washed out appearance common to many species procured in torrid districts.” When I prepared my “ Reference List to the Birds of Australia,” published in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., Jan., 1912, I examined a good series of birds and it was seen that variation was existent, both geographically and individually. Thus, while North’s remarks applied that variation was seen among birds from the same locality, yet when series were laid out in VOL. VI. 233 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. geographical order the variation was diminished or emphasized and conse- quently subspecies were determinable. Three names were available but all these had been given to the same specimen. I separated four subspecies as follows : — “ Cacatoes roseicapilla, roseicapilla (Vieillot). Queensland ; New South Wales, South Australia. Cacatoes roseicapilla kuhli subsp. n. 6 Differs from C. r. roseicapilla in its smaller size, and paler coloration above and below. Wing 255 m.’ Northern Territory. Cacatoes roseicapilla assimilis subsp. n. ‘ Differs from C. r. roseicapilla in its paler coloration above and below, but larger than C. r. kuhli ; wing 262 mm.’ Mid- Westralia. Cacatoes roseicapilla derbyana subsp. n. c Differs from C. r. assimilis in its very light grey coloration above, , and its pale, scarcely pink, coloration below. A very distinct form.’ North-west Australia.” In my List of the Birds of Australia , published at the end of 1913, I maintained the above after re-considering my augmented collection. I have again reviewed the species and maintain the above but add another form. When the above was prepared I had no Victorian series, so that locality was missing from the range of the species. I have since received specimens and I find that the birds inhabiting the Mallee of Victoria and South and Central Australia constitute a recognisable race which I name EolopJms roseicapillus howei subsp. n. These differ from the typical dark New South Wales birds in being much lighter in coloration, the grey of the upper parts having a bluer shade while the under surface coloration is of a paler shade than that of E. r. kuhli. Type from between Claraville and Ruby Gay, Central Australia, and is a male collected by Captain S. A. White in the 12th September. 1913. In my collection. It may be noted that when Barnard reported upon the Rirds of the Brunnette Downs he used the name Cacatua derbyana and the vernacular Pallid Rose Cockatoo for the form there living, as he noted it was different from the typical form. 234 Genus— L EPTOLOPHUS. Leptolophus Swainson, Zool., Ulus. Ser. II., pi. 112, 1832-3. . . . . . . . . . . . . Type L. hollandicus. Calopsitta Lesson, Ulus. Zool., pi. XLIX., 1835. . . Type L. hollandicus. Also spelt — Callipsittacus Agassiz, Nomen. Zool. Ind. Univ., p. 171, 1848. Oalopsittacus Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878. Small Psittaeiform birds with short bill, naked cere, crested head, long wings, very long wedge shaped tails and small feet. I have proposed for this monotypic genus, known sometimes as the “ Cockatoo-Parrakeet,” the family Leptolophidce. It has been constantly associated with the Cockatoos, apparently on account of its crest, but I can see no near relationship to that group. The bill is short with a naked prominent cere, the nostrils circular, placed high up on each side of culmen ridge, so that both apertures are visible from above ; the projecting tip is comparatively narrow, though the base of culmen is broad and the under mandible is short. The head bears a crest of long somewhat recurved narrow feathers ; the lores feathered and no noticeable bare eye-space. The wing is very long, composed of narrow feathers, with the first primary longest, the tips of the first two being only slightly scallopped on their inner webs. The tail is very long, being longer than the wing ; the feathers narrow and sharp-pointed, forming a sharp wedge, the two middle ones continuing much longer and becoming attenuate. The legs and feet are normal but very small. In addition to the above peculiar characters the coloration is unique and shows little resemblance to any of the Cockatoos, nor does it recall any other genus of the Order. I have been much puzzled attempting to account for the association of this genus with the Cockatoos. To my eyes it differs in every detail. It has a crest, it is true, but even that is differently formed from that of the Cockatoos. The bill is as unlike as any of these Psittaeiform bills are, but the cere is quite different from that of the Cockatoos. No prominent bare eye space is to be seen. The wing is composed of long narrow feathers with the 235 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. first primary longest and secondaries very short. It is totally different to the wing of any of the Cockatoos. All the Cockatoos have square tails with very broad feathers. This bird has a very strongly wedge shaped tail of very narrow pointed feathers, the central pair extended beyond the others and much attenuated. I had determined to disassociate the species from the Cockatoos and its affinities appeared to me to lie nearer the Platycercine group. When D’Arcy Thompson examined the cranial osteology of the Parrots he found the skull to be “ similar to that of the Cockatoos in having the orbital bar completed by junction both with postorbital and with squamosal.” However, he at once noticed that notwithstanding this apparent agreement with the “ Cacatuine type,” this was certainly not of import as to its relation- ship, and observed: “It is clear that the skull of Calopsittacus, though at first sight very similar to, is different in several respects from, the true Cacatuine type. It is possible that these differences involve resemblances to the Platycercince, and this question will be further discussed below.” He continued later : “ The case of Calo'psittacus is a little more difficult. . . . On the whole I should say that, so far as cranial osteology goes, the position of Calopsiitacus is an open question, and that it is by no means impossible that it may really deserve to be grouped somewhere near Nympliicus and Melopsittacus He had just discussed Melopsittacus , deciding that although “ we have a complete orbit . . . precisely as in the Cockatoos,” . . . “it agrees in all the other characters mentioned above with the Platycercince , of which I have no doubt it is a real, though a somewhat aberrant member.” Of Calopsittacus he had also written : “ The nostrils are very large and near together as in Melop- sittacus, and are very different from the small, round, and distant nostrils of the Cockatoos.” The above confirmed my own conclusions deduced from examination of superficial features alone, and I have endeavoured to trace the opposite argument, but have been unable to do so, as I find that Salvador i included this species in the family Cacatuidce without stating his reason for so doing. Reichenow, the previous monographer, placed it in the family Platycercidce next to Melopsittacus, as also did Gould. Finsch associated it with the Cockatoos on the ground that the head was crested. I cannot regard this as a valid reason at all, especially as all the other characters are so opposed to the association. I have left my family in juxtaposition to the Cockatoos, but do not think this is correct. I hope that these remarks will incite some Australian Ornithologist to undertake a comparative examination of the osteology of this common bird with Melopsittacus , Platycercus. and the “ Cacatuine ” genera Eolophus, Ducorpsius, etc. Specimens of these could be 236 LEPTOLOPHUS. easily procured and confirmation from several prepared skeletons. The lack of osteological material in the past has often led to incorrect conclusions, but in the present case it would be easy for an Australian student to procure enough to form a very just idea of the value of the data already on record and which might lead to a much more definite classification than we have at present. In the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., 1891, Salvador i called this species Calopsittacus novae hollandice, this combination having commonly been in use. In 1911, I published in the Novitates Zoologicae, a second instalment of corrections of the names of Australian birds and in this case a double change was necessary. The full details are given (Vol. XVIII., p. 12), but I here give an outline of my results. About the same time two generic names were proposed for the species, Calopsitta by Lesson and Leptolophus by Swainson. It became necessary to ascertain which of these authors was the earliest to provide a name. Calopsitta had been commonly accepted, but no definite date was given for either name. It is true Calopsitta was quoted as of Mai, 1832, but even a careless student would have noticed that it was wrong had he referred to Lesson’s work. However, it appears that no one had attempted to seek the truth, and there- fore I carefully investigated the matter. It was a rather complex problem, but I was able to determine that the part of Lesson’s work containing Calopsitta was not published until 1835. Swainson’ s name was published in a serial publication with the same name and on the same plan as Lesson’s, and here again it was necessary to seek out the date of the part. I was enabled to get only a rough idea of the date, but it was certainly before March, 1833, which is of course sufficient to fix the usage of Swainson’ s name Leptolophus as having priority. \ A third name seemed to clash as will be seen by the following quotation : “It may be as well to note that Wagler, in the Abhandl. Ak. W issensch. Miinchen , i., p. 490, proposed Nymphicus. and included thereunder two species, bisms and novoehollandce. This paper is dated 1832, and, as I have shown above, was published about that date. In the List Genera Birds , p. 51, 1840, Gray typifies this genus by novoehollandice, and it would seem that another conflicting element was to be introduced. Reference to Wagler’s paper, however, shows that the genus was based on bisetis ; novoehollandice being included from literature only, Wagler carefully noting, “ Non vidi.” Under these circum- stances I would admit the abrogation of Gray’s type designation and the retention of Nymphicus for the bisetis group.” I may now add that if Nymphicus were to be reconsidered Leptolophus 237 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. would probably still have priority, as the preface of the Munchen volume including Wagler’s paper, is dated December, 1832, and a separate copy of Wagler’s Monograph, preserved in the British Museum (Natural History), has a title page bearing the date 1835. Gmelin’s name Psittacus novcehollandice for this bird was invalid, as he had previously used the same combination, but its usage had persisted until the time when I made the above correction in the generic name. I therefore accepted Leptolophus auricomis Swainson as the name to be used, and I have maintained this up to the present time. Another correction is now necessary, as I find that Kerr in his edition of the Animal Kingdom, published as long ago as 1792, had observed Gmelin’s double usage and had corrected the name (p. 580) to Psittacus hollandicus. This is the first note of this correction and the name I here use will be Leptolophus hollandicus. I 238 . - ■ I ml . . : . . ■ Order PSITTA Cl FORMES No. 344 Family LEPTOLOPHID/E. LEPTOLOPHUS HOLLANDICUS. COCKATOO-PARROT. (Plate 292.) Ps(ittacxjs) hollandicus Kerr, Animal Kingdom, p. 580, 1792 ; new name for P. novce- hollandice Gmelin, p. 328 : New South Wales. Crested Parrakeet Latham, Gen. Synops. Birds, Yol. I., p. 250, 1781. Psittacus novcehollandioe Gmelin, Syst. Nat., p. 328, 1788 (not of p. 316) based on Crested Parrakeet of Latham : New South Wales ; Latham, Index Ornith., Vol. I., p. 102, 1790 ; Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol., Vol. X., p. 100, 1820. Psittacus hollandicus Kerr, Animal Kingdom, p. 580, 1792. Nymphicus novcehollandioe Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch, Vol. I., p. 490, 1832 ; Selby, Nat. Libr. Parrots, p. 186, pi. 30, 1836 ; Gould, Birds Austr., Vol. V., pi. 45, 1842 ; Diggles, Om. Austr., pt. rv., 1866. (Vol. II. pi. 82.) Leptolophus auricomis Swainson, Zool. Illus., 2nd ser., pi. 112, 1832-3: New South Wales ; id., Classif. Birds, Vol. II., p. 305, 1837 ; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 13, 1911. Palceornis novcehollandioe Lear, Illustr. Psittacidse, pi. vm., Oct., 1831. Platycercus novcehollandioe Vigors, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1833, p. 106. Calopsitta guy Lesson, Illus. Zool., pis. 49, 50, 1835 : New South Wales. Calopsitta novcehollandioe Lesson, Compl. de Buff Ois., IX., p. 198, 1837 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 84, 1865. U Calopsitta novcehollandioe Bamsay, Ibis, 1866, p. 332 (N.S.W.) ; Hartert, Nov. Zool. Vol. XII., p. 212, 1905 (N.W.A.) ; Orton & Sandland, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 77, 1913, (W.A.) ; Macgillivray, id., p. 157, 1914 (N.Q.) ; Barnard, id., XIV., p. 46, 1914 (N.T.). Cacatua novcehollandioe Schlegel, Journ. fur Orn., 1861, p. 380. Callipsittacus novcehollandioe Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. I., p. 260, 1867 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 38. Calopsittacus novcehollandioe Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878 ; id., Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 254, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 12, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 135, 1891 ; North, Rep. Horn Sci. Exped. Cent. Austr. Zool. Aves, p. 59, 1896 ; id., Trans. Roy. Soc., South Austr., Vol. XXII., p. 169, 1898 * The plate is lettered Leptolophus auricomis. 239 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. (N.W.A.) ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 63, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 621, 1901 ; H. G. Barnard, Emu, Yol. HI., p. 115, 1903 (Q.) ; Carter, id., p. 172, 1904 (M.W.A.) ; Batey, id., VII., p. 12, 1907 (Vic.) ; Austin, id., p. 75 (N.S.W.) ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral., p. 47, 1908; Whitlock, Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 191, 1909 (W.A.) ; Chisholm, id., IX., p. 168, 1910 ; Whitlock, id., p. 192, 1910 (W.A.) ; Macgillivray, id., X., pp. 19, 32, 1910 (N.S.W.) ; Hall, id., p. 54 (Tas.) ; Ogilvie Grant, Ibis, 1910, p. 164 (W.A.). North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 95, 1911 ; Barnard, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 206, 1914 (N.T.). Galopsitta greyi (error for guy) Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 38. Leptolophus auricomis auricomis Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 267, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 128, 1913. Leptolophus auricomis pallescens Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 267, 1912 : East Murchison, West Australia ; id.. List Birds Austr., p. 128, 1913. Leptolophus auricomis intermedius Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 267, 1912 : Point Torment, North-west Australia ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 128, 1913. Leptolophus auricomis obscurus Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 267, 1912 : Alexandra, Northern Territory ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 128, 1913. Leptolophus auricomis Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 128, 1913 ; S. A. White, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr., Vol. XXXVIII., p. 427, 1914, Cent. A. ; id., Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 187, 1915, Cent. A. Distribution. Queensland (not Cape York District) ; New South Wales ; Victoria ; South Australia ; Mid-west and North-west Australia ; Northern Territory. Interior districts only. Not coastal save as straggler when it has reached Tasmania. Adult male. General colour above and below dusky brown, more greyish-brown on the under-surface and blackish on the shoulders and under wing-coverts ; hind-neck, mantle, upper back, scapulars and innermost secondaries smoke-brown, somewhat darker on the lesser upper wing-coverts, some of which have white on the outer webs like the median and greater coverts and secondary quills which forms a large patch on the wing ; bastard-wing and primary-coverts hoary-grey like the primary- quills and tail, but paler on the two last ; tips of the secondary quills dark brown like the inner webs ; lower back, rump, and upper tail coverts brownish- grey ; fore part of head, sides of face, throat, and crest lemon-yellow — the last becoming brown on the elongated feathers ; ear-coverts bright orange ; sides of crown white, which extends in a line on to the sides of the neck ; quills below glossy dark brown ; tail similar but darker and more glossy black. Bill dark horn, eyes dark brown, feet ashy. Total length 335 mm. ; culmen 15, wing 171, tail 180, tarsus 12. Figured. Collected at Port Augusta, South Australia, on the 5th of September, 1911. Adult female. Nape, hind neck, upper back, scapulars, innermost secondaries, inner and upper wing-coverts pale brown, becoming paler and more greyish brown on the sides of the neck, breast, sides of body, and abdomen, the feathers on the last fringed with yellowish white ; thighs, vent, and under tail-coverts marked with zig-zag bars of yellowish white ; lesser upper wing-coverts like the back, some of them white on the outer webs, like the median and greater coverts and secondary quills, which forms a conspicuous white patch on the wing ; bastard-wing and primary-coverts blackish, primary-quills similar but rather paler with a tinge of 240 COCKATOO-PARROT. hoary-grey on the outer webs and yellowish-white mottlings, blotches or bars on the inner webs these also occur on the outer secondaries, tips of the latter brown like the inner webs ; lower back, rump, upper tail-coverts, and middle tail-feathers greyish-brown speckled with white, the lateral feathers rather darker, and the two outermost pairs, on each side, lemon-yellow mottled and barred with dark brown ; crown of head, crest, sides of face, and chin yellowish-grey ; ear-coverts dull orange ; axillaries like the sides of the body ; under wing-coverts and quill-lining pale brown with white or yellowish white markings ; lower aspect of tail dark brown with obsolete pale markings, the two outer pairs straw-yellow with dark brown bars and mottlings. Wing, 168 mm. Figured. Collected at Fulham, South Australia, in July 1910. Immature. Resemble the female. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, four or five to seven. White. 25 to 27 mm. by 17 to 21. Breeding season. August to December. (East). July to September. (West). The Cockatoo Parrakeet was met with during Cook’s voyage, but the exact locality is not recorded. It was described by Latham in 1781 under the name Crested Parrakeet without any particular information whence it came. Gmelin selected as a Latin equivalent a name he had previously utilised and peculiarly Latham in his Index allowed this, apparently on account of the individuality of the species, the name utilised being 4 4 novoehollandice .” When Kerr drew up his edition of Gmelin’ s work he observed the double usage and corrected the error, but he also attempted to preserve the name and achieved this by dropping the 44 novce ” and forming an adjective 44 hollandicus .” This name has been overlooked up to the present time, but it must now be resumed. Forty years afterward, Swainson proposed a new genus for the species and also gave it a new specific name, while a little later Lesson repeated the double nomination as already dealt with. Gould wrote : 44 It would appear to be more numerous in the eastern division of Australia than in the western. During the summer of 1839 it was breeding in all the appletree (Ango'phora) flats on the Upper Hunter, as well as on all similar districts on the Peel, and other rivers which flow to the North-west. I have seen the ground quite covered by them while engaged in procuring food, and it was not an unusual circumstance to see hundreds together on the dead branches of the gumtrees in the neighbourhood of water, a plentiful supply of which would appear to be essential to their existence. The flight of the Cockatoo Parrakeet is even and easy, and is capable of being long protracted. When it rises from the ground it flies up into the nearest tree, almost invariably selecting a dead branch, upon which it frequently perches lengthwise. It is by no means a shy bird ; and from the circumstance of its being excellent eating, many are killed for this purpose by persons leading a bush life.” VOL. VI. 241 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Mr. Thos. P. Austin has written me from Cobbora, New South Wales : “ At one time these birds were fairly numerous here, and some of them remained throughout the year, but of late years very few of them are to be seen at any time, this is no doubt owing to the dry seasons. All last year I only saw half a dozen birds ; one pair was clearing out a nesting hollow, but they did not lay in it, in fact, I have not known of any breeding here during the last five years, but I have little doubt than when suitable seasons come again, the birds will return, probably as numerous as ever. They appear to seldom perch in a living tree unless it has a number of dead branches on it ; they prefer the dead timber, and when sitting very still upon a dead limb, they are very difficult to see ; being very much the colour of the tree, they harmonize wonderfully well, and they seem to know it. They appear to be very much afraid of Hawks, especially when they come to water for a drink.” Mr. Tom Carter’s notes read : “ Cockatoo Parrot. Aboriginal name M.W. Natives, Point Cloates, wee-aura. Gascoyne wamba. These elegant Parrots were fairly common in the mid-west and occasionally visited the treeless coast about Pt. Cloates, after rain in the winter months from April to July. The breeding season varies somewhat according to the seasons, and eggs were noted in the nests on various dates between July 16/1891 and Sept. 16/1913, when many nests were observed near Carnarvon (W.A.). On Sept. 9/1911 fledged young were seen on the Minilya River. I may mention that a drought was then prevailing in the district, and in the course of a driving tour from the Gascoyne River to Point Cloates and back, when 500 miles were travelled, only six of these birds were seen. These birds are quiet in disposition and make charming cage birds breeding freely in confine- ment, especially if a small hollow branch (spout) is provided for their nesting site. Their food appears to consist entirely of grass seeds. They do not occur in the timber country of the South-west, but in 1911 (dry season) there was a good many a little to the East of Broome Hill, where their occurrence was evidently rare, as several specimens were brought in to me for identification by settlers, as they had not previously seen the birds.” Mr. J. W. Mellor has sent me the following : “ The Cockatoo Parrot is a fairly common bird in South Australia, although not so plentiful on the Adelaide Plains as in the early days of the Colony, when large flocks came south after the nesting season, and travelled along the coast line, usually keeping well behind the sand dunes, and feeding on the grassy flats in their migratory movements, and in these sheltered spots many thousands were annually caught by certain bird catchers, who used to export them to Europe, as they take to captivity well, and can be taught to whistle in a very pleasing manner. I have noted these birds plentifully in the seventies along the coast at Henley 242 COCKATOO-PARROT. Beach on the eastern side of St. Vincent’s Gulf, especially in the summer time. I have also noted them on the River Murray in South Australia, and they are also to be found on Yorkes’ Peninsula. Their note is a loud noise somewhat of a succession of squeaks sounding like crale-e-ek continued not particularly sharp, but with a rather rounded full note. Another note is that of squeek- squeek-squeek-squeek-squeek uttered continuously several times over, the last three notes being uttered quickly and sounding somewhat like the sharpen- ing of a saw : this last call is only uttered while perched, in addition to the perching call, while the first-mentioned notes are oftener made as the birds fly in straight courses through the air.” Mr. Edwin Ashby’s notes read : “ While this parrot is not usually met with this side (West) of the Adelaide Hills, about six or seven years ago a flock of about thirty spent several months of two years in the Blackwood district. About the year 1900 a flock of about half-a-dozen circled round and round for some time over North Adelaide. Evidently they were flying at a great height and were attracted by the cry of a. caged bird ; when first seen they were almost out of sight, attention being called to them by their cry. They had probably travelled from the River Murray district where they are very common ; they were flying in the direction of Yorke’s Peninsula when first seen : in which case they would have to cross the Gulf of St. Vincent. This is certainly an indication that these birds migrate at times to distant localities. At Christmas we usually have seen large numbers of this species evidently only recently out of the nest in the large gums along the River Murray, ten miles above Mannum, South Australia.” Captain S. A. White has written me : “ This was once a numerous bird in the late summer on the Adelaide plains visiting us in great numbers, and I can remember an old bird catcher netting them in hundreds. They are seldom, if ever, seen here now. We met with them in the interior in 1913 coming in to drink at the water holes, but they were far from numerous.” Mr. E. J. Christian writing from northern Victoria states : 44 The neat appearance of this bird is spoilt by its noisy cry. As a rule they come here for the summer only and depart in the autumn or late summer, but last year (1907) they stayed here all the time, the drought causing them to stay as there was nothing for them further North. They seem to prefer the timber to the open plain. One often sees a huge flock of them in one tree all sitting very close together. In their flights they are very often accompanied by Budgerigars : they seem to live strictly on seed.” Mr. J. P. Roger’s notes from North-West Australia record : 44 Parry’s Creek. March 15, 1909. Many small flocks seen to-day ; are numerous now. April 4, 1909. A few pairs seen occasionally. May 13, 1909. 44 Top 243 THE BIRDS OE AUSTRALIA. Crossing ” Behn River 145 miles from Wyndham. The birds are fairly numerous all the way up, but no large flocks seen to date. Derby, Feb. 28, 1911. Many small flocks seen between Point Torment and Derby. Point Torment, April 21, 1911. During the past few weeks (from March 1st) these birds have been seen intermittently, but I have not always made a note of seeing them. ... At Marngle Creek this species was very rare : a few were seen in the same locality on several occasions, so apparently they were the same birds.” I quote the following notes from the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat. , No. I., Vol. III.: Mr. Robert Grant’s observations read: “ I found the Cockatoo- Parrakeets plentiful at Narromine, New South Wales, in November, 1883. They were usually met with in pairs all along the Macquarie River, but some- times in the early morning they would assemble in flocks of about thirty or forty, and when on the wing their evolutions were carried out with such precision, it gave one the impression that each bird knew its place and kept a certain distance from its mate. They never flew very high, sometimes almost sweeping the ground, when they would give one of their graceful side turns, exhibiting their beautiful white shoulders which were further relieved by the dark green foliage of a belt of pine trees in the near distance.” Dr. W. Macgillivray wrote : “ Calopsittacus novcehollandice is not with us (at Broken Hill, Western New South Wales) during the winter, but arrives irregularly in the spring, both as to time and the numbers in which they come. In 1903 and 1904 very few put in an appearance. In 1905 they were very numerous, arriving during the last week in September, and during the next two months nests were to be found at short intervals all along the creeks. In 1906 they arrived very early, being noted during the last week in July. Whereas Barnard’s Parrakeet and the Many coloured Grass Parrakeet usually choose a nesting hollow they can just squeeze into, the Cockatoo Parrakeet almost invariably selects one commodious enough to admit a Cockatoo or even a larger bird. I have found nests at all elevations, sometimes as low as two feet from the ground. The sexes take it in turn to sit on the eggs, differing in this again from the Many coloured and Barnard’s Parrakeet. Five eggs is the usual number, and these are placed on the decayed wood and earthy matter, usually found in nesting hollows. In the Cloncurry District, Northern Queens- land, these birds occur at times in immense numbers, and nest during October and November, sometimes earlier. . . . On our journey out along the creeks North of Broken Hill we met the advance guard of the southern flight of Calopsittacus novcehollandice early in September ; they became more plentiful as we proceeded north, pairs dropping off all along the route where suitable hollows for breeding purposes were met with. When we got to Wyallah 244 COCKATOO-PARROT. Lake, one hundred miles north from Broken Hill, on 19th September, we found them breeding in the dead Box Trees and stumps standing in the water, the eggs being very often in the hollow almost at water level, but of course always dry. At that date there were very few complete sets of five, mostly ones or twos. Galahs were also taking advantage of the protection afforded by the water to breed in the same situation. Later in September, and early in October we found G. novcehollandice nests on Sleepswell and Yalcowinna Creeks containing newly hatched young, curious little objects ; even at such an early age the crest is evident. They are hatched with eyes closed, which open in about four or five days, when some yellow down begins to show itself on the dorsal, femoral and humeral pterylse.” Chisholm writing from Maryborough, Victoria, in the Emu , Vol. IX., p. 168, 1910, notes : “ The Cockatoo-Parr akeet, like the pretty little Shell- Parrot, is, I regret to say, not nearly so plentiful as formerly ; probably the destruction of so much of the big timber is a cause for this. A friend recently told me of a curious practice of the Cockatoo-Parrakeets. Generally during the warmer months, a number of the birds — perhaps about eight or ten — will gather together on the horizontal branch of a tree, and sitting quite closely together, caress each other in a most engaging manner, meanwhile chattering away in a low musical tone.” In 1912 I separated this species into four subspecies, but here do not accept any. The birds from a given locality show only a certain amount of constancy, much variation being observed. I find other workers have met with the same cause and have made no attempt to explain it, but I here suggest that when Australian birds are studied more methodically, we may find several valid subspecies, and that the puzzling forms are migrants to the districts where they have been procured. Thus Macgillivray reports meeting with a migration south. These birds would tend to be dark ones from his account of their habitat. The birds which remained in the drier parts north would be light and when the southern migrants returned we would get dark and light birds mixed in the same locality where only the latter were breeding birds. Again these latter sometimes appear to move coastal, and then we get the reverse, light and dark birds mixed where only the darker ones were breeding birds. Further these suggestions seem to be confirmed by the series examined, a majority of birds agreeing with the locality form at breeding dates. I have long considered this matter and the above seems the most suitable explanation for the variation existent. 245 Genus — L ORIUS. Lorius (errore Larius) Boddaert Tabl. PI. Enlum., p. 42, 1783 . . . . . . . . . . . . Type L. roratus . Eclectus Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., p. 495, 1832 . . . . . . . . . . . . Type L . pectoralis. Not Eclectia Hubner, 1826. Also spelt Electm Selby, Nat. Library, Parrots, p. 112, 1836. Polychlorus Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. (London), 1857, p. 226 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Type L . pectoralis. Also spelt Polychrous Gray, Handl. Gen. Sp. Birds, pt. ii, p. 157, 1870. Large Loriine birds with massive bills, long wings, long square tails and small legs and feet, with the sexes very differently coloured. The bill is large and heavy, broad at base, rather projecting, tip long, succeeded by a prominent notch, edge of upper mandible straight thence sloping up and backwards, but not sinuate. The under mandible is broad and rather shallow, the tip truncate, the edges showing a noticeable gap after the tip. The cere is covered with feathers so that the nostrils are not visible : the lores are also feathered and there is no bare eye space. The wing is long with the first primary a little longer than the fifth, but much shorter than the second, third and fourth, which are longest and subequal. The tail is long and square, composed of broad feathers, and little less than half the length of the wing. The feet are small and normal covered throughout with reticulate scales. These birds have not brush tongues, but otherwise they somewhat recall the TricJioglossine species, though the square tail reminds one of the Kakato'eine birds, from which the absence of a crest and distinct coloration absolutely separate them. In my “ List ” I used the generic name Eclectus as of Wagler, 1832, though I noted a prior Eclectis Hubner, 1826. A discussion concerning the availability as a valid name of the former was obviated by the recognition that the first generic usage (one overlooked) of Lorius was in this connection. In the Austral Avian Record , Vol. III., p. 31 et. seq ., Nov. 19, 1915, a paper, “On the ‘Table des Planches Enlum.’ of Boddaert” was given by Iredale and myself. I here quote the matter relating to this name : “ Larius, recte Lorius.” On p. 42, Larius is introduced thus : “ Psittacus (Larius) ceclanensis milii ” for pi. 683 “ Le grand Lory.” There can be no doubt but that there 246 LORIUS. is purely a typographical error here present and that correction to Lorius is imperative. This view, which is indisputable, has been taken by Sherborn, who in the Index Animalium, p. 519, records : “ Larius err. pro. Lorius, P. Boddsert.” This proposal has, however, been hitherto overlooked, and we have a double complication to face. In the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XX., p. 393, Salvadori has recorded Psittacus ceclanensis as a synonym of Eclectus-roratus Muller, 1776, given to the same plate. This identification necessitates the acceptance of the genus name Lorius in place of Eclectus. We view this alteration with little feeling, as there is a prior Eclectis Hiibner, 1826, which hangs over Eclectus as recorded in the List of the Birds of Australia, p. 26, 1913. For the genus called Lorius in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XX., p. 31 (where a footnote is given : “ The genus Lorius is generally attributed to Brisson, who did not use the name in a generic sense ”), Wagler’s name Domicella is available. As the vernacular Lory is in use for many species, the emendations will cause little confusion.” As the bird is new to Australia the necessary change now made will help to fix its name as it will become familiar under the name here used. Under Salvadori’ s scheme of classification, displayed in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., 1891, this genus falls into his subfamily Palceornithince of the Psittacidce. The genera included in that subfamily were Eclectus, Geoffroyus, Prioniturus, Mascarinus, Tanygnathus, Palceornis, Polytelis, Ptistes, Aprosmictus, Pyrrhulopsis, Psittacella, Psitiinus, BoTbopsittacus, Agapornis and Loriculus. The characters governing this sub- family read rather vaguely : p. 137, “ Left carotid normal, like the right one running in the hypoapophysial canal ; orbital ring always incomplete ; sides of the head feathered, if naked, only immediately round the eyes ; tail feathers frequently acuminate ; bill often very strong, and, especially the upper mandible, frequently red ; females mostly different from the males.” The words “ if ” “ frequently ” “ often ” “ frequently ” and “ mostly ” are so indeterminate as to demand reconstruction of the grouping. Almost immediately, D’Arcy Thompson from a study of the Cranial Osteology separated the Australian genera allied to Aprosmictus and referred these to the neighbourhood of Platycercus, and also removed Agapornis while clearly emphasizing the lack of real evidence of the close relationships of the majority of the other genera. It is possible that careful study of the other parts of the skeleton will help to decide as to the alliances of these Parrots. Here I use the family name Loriidce based on the oldest genus name for Lorius, and am including Geoffroyus though I doubt its close relationship to Lorius, judging from superficial characters alone. 247 Order PSITTA Cl FORME 8 No. 345. Family LORIIDM. LORIUS PECT ORALIS. RED-SIDED PARROT. (Plate 293.)* Psittactjs pectoralis P. L. S. Muller, Syst. Nat. Suppl., p. 78, 1776: “ China ”=New Guinea. Eclectus 'pectoralis macgillivrayi Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol, II., p. 76, Dec. 29, 1913 : Pascoe River, North Queensland. Eclectus pectoralis Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. XIII., pp. 187, 196 note, 1914 : North Queensland ; Mathews, Emu, Vol. XIV., pt. i., pi. 1, 1914. Eclectus pectoralis macgillivrayi Mathews, Austral Av. Rec., Vol. II., p. 75, 1913 ; id ., List Birds Austr., p. xxvr, 1913 ; id.. Ibis, 1915, p. 81. Distribution. North Queensland (Pascoe River District). Adult male. General colour above and below green, brighter and somewhat paler on the head, hind-neck, mantle and sides of the face, duller on the wings and middle tail-feathers ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts, primary and secondary quills deep ultramarine blue, inclining to black on the inner webs of the feathers, the outer edges of some of the feathers paler blue, outer margin of the wing brighter and inclining to cobalt-blue ; the secondary quills green on the greater portion of the outer webs, the green increasing in extent towards the innermost which are almost entirely green ; outermost tail-feathers deep blue, broadly margined with dark brown on the inner webs, the next pair slightly edged with green on the outer webs, which colour increases in extent towards the middle ones, which are entirely green with a tinge of blue towards the tips, all the tips being whitish or dull yellow ; middle of throat blackish ; under wing-coverts, axillaries, and a large patch on the sides of the body bright red ; under tail-coverts yellowish-green at the tips ; greater series of under wing-coverts and quills below glossy-black ; lower aspect of tail glossy-black, yellow at the tips. Bill, upper mandible red with yellowish white tip, lower mandible black, eyes brown, feet mealy black. Total length, 500 mm. ; culmen 45, wing 296, tail 180, tarsus 27. Figured. Collected on the Pascoe River, North Queensland, on the 17th of September, 1913. And is my type of Eclectus pectoralis macgillivrayi. Adult female. General colour above and below red, brighter and more scarlet on the head and neck all round and under tail-coverts duller and inclining to crimson on the back, wings, and basal portion of the tail ; a band of blue across the mantle ; a narrow blue circle round the eye ; abdomen and sides of the body, purplish-blue, brighter on the under wing-coverts, axillaries, and edge of the wing both above and below ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts, outer portions of the primaries and tips of secondaries deep blue, brighter on the outer edges and dark brown on * The plate is lettered Eclectus macgillivrayi. 248 5 .'V«, \ iggSgSmm Witherby & C Roland Green . del 2. 5 ECLECTTJS MACGILLIVRAVl. i RED SI-DUD PARROT J. RED-SIDED PARROT. the inner webs ; upper tail-coverts somewhat brighter than the back ; tail much paler at the tip and more or less blue on the basal portion of the outer feathers ; greater series of the under wing-coverts and quills below dark brown with glossy- reflections, with a slight tinge of red on the outer one of the former ; lower aspect of tail dark brown at the base and orange-red at the tip. Total length, 450 mm. ; culmen 43, wing 282, tail 151, tarsus 27. Bill all black. Figured. Collected at the same time and place as the male. Nest. “ A hole in a tree growing in the scrub seventy feet from the ground ” (Macgillivray). Eggs. “ Clutch two. White, usually nest stained. Oval, smooth, without lustre and pitted. 45 mm. by 35. Average eggs are dumpier and more pointed at the smaller end ” (Macgillivray). Breeding-season. November (Macgillivray). In the Emu for January, 1914, p. 187, appeared a note “ New Parrot for Australia and Description of Eggs,” by Dr. Wm. Macgillivray, as follows : “ Before leaving Broken Hill for a trip at Cape York it was my pleasure to receive from Mr. W. M‘Lennan three fine specimens, a male and two females, of an Eclectus taken on the Claudie River, which runs into Lloyd’s Bay, on the Cape York Peninsula, where these birds are fairly common. So far as I can make out, this bird does not differ specifically from the Papuan bird, E. pectoralis, which is to be seen alive in the Adelaide Zoological Gardens.” On p. 196 was included “ Avium Paradiseum. The following extract is from a letter, dated Cape York, 25/11/13, from Dr. Wm. Macgillivray : “ No rain yet, and there will not be any general breeding until the wet season com- mences. It is unusually dry, and the whole place shows the effects of it, even the scrubs. Birds build their nests only to pull them to pieces again or to desert them. We have taken several nests of Eclectus, but cannot find that of Pseudopsittacus. . . . We have not been into the mountains yet. They are covered with scrub and stretch for forty miles, and are all well watered. It will take a generation of field naturalists to find all their wealth. There is another Parrot near here, but we have not come across it yet — a black one. Pseudopsittacus and Eclectus are calling now — one from the opposite side of the creek, where there is a nesting-tree, the other from a food-tree just below our camp.” In connection with the succeeding species I give most of the history of the discovery of this magnificent addition to the Australian avifauna, certainly the finest bird added since the time of Gould. I might here note as an interesting item for Australian Ornithologists the ancient history of these Lories. It is now well-known that the male bird is practically all green in coloration, the sides, underwing coverts and axiilaries being red ; the edge of the wing blue and the primaries dark blue, edged with green, and the edges of the tail feathers bluish. The uniformity of the green coloration is, however, very noticeable. The females are very boldly parti- VOL. vi. 2-19 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. coloured, the head and neck ancl upper breast being bright red as are the back, rump, upper tail-coverts and tail above : across the breast, abdomen deep blue ; the primaries as in the male. Green is conspicuous by its absence as is red in the male. For one hundred years these sexes were recognised as distinct species and were even separated as distinct genera on account of the different coloration. The first field naturalist to state that these supposed species were male and female of one species met with disbelief and it was quite a long time before this disbelief was dissipated. In view of this interesting history it is very pleasing to bave such a remarkable form on tbe Australian List as an undoubted native. The species has been separated into several subspecies, but these are practically all dependent upon size as the coloration is remarkably constant. It is remarkable that the Australian form should be the largest of all ; thus Rothschild and Hartert (Nov. Zool., Vol. III., 1896, p. 535/6) wrote under the name Eclectus pectoralis aruensis : “ The Aru Island birds are also rather large (263-269 mm. in the wing) : -. V. *>r ■*; rV V* 4 5 PLATYCERCUS ICTEROTIS /'RED -MANTLED JPARROT). PLATYrCERCUS S ALVADORI ( YELL O W- CHEEKED PARR OTJ ,.v ■ Order PSITTACIFORMES No. 355- Family PLATYCERGIDM. PLATYCERCUS ICTEROTIS. YELLOW-CHEEKED PARROT. (Plate 303.) Psittactts ICTEROTIS Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 54, 1820 : “ Nova Hollandia ” : I select Albany, South-West Australia. Shark’s Bay, W.A., was wrongly determined. Psittacus icterotis Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 54, 1820 ; Temminck, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XIII., p. 120, 1821. Platycercus stanleyii Vigors, Zool. Journ., Vol. V., p. 273, June, 1830 : Australia : I select Albany, as Shark’s Bay is incorrect ; Lear, Illustr. Psittacid®, pt. i., Nov., 1830 : pt. xi., 1832 ; Jardine & Selby, Ulus. Ornith., Vol. II., pi. 108, Dec., 1830. Platycercus icterotis Lesson, Traite d’ Ornith., p. 209, 1830 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., pp. 491, 530, 704, 1832 ; Gould, Synops. Birds Austr., pi. 24, 1837 ; id., Birds Austr., pt. xvm. (Vol. V., pi. 29), 1845 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 58, 1865 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 186, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 120 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 259, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 65, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 554, 1891; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 65, 1899; Campbell, Nests Eggs, Austr. Birds., Vol. II., p. 638, 1901 ; Hall, Ibis, 1902, p. 193 (W. A.) ; Milligan, Emu, Vol. II., p. 75, 1902 (W.A.) ; id., Vol. III., p. 19, 1903 (W.A.) ; id., p. 225, 1904 (S.W.A.) ; Nicholls, ib., Vol. V., p. 81, 1905 (W.A.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 49, 1908 ; Crossmann, Emu, Vol. IX., p. 87, 1909 (W.A.) ; Ogilvie- Grant, Ibis, 1910, p. 163 (W.A.) ; Whitlock, Emu, Vol. X., p. 314, 1911 (S.WlA.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 132, 1911 ; Orton & Sandland, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 77, 1913 (S.W.A.). Platycercus xanthogenys Salvadori, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1891, p. 129 : Australia ? I determine inland from York, West Australia. Point Cloates, N.W.A., is erroneous ; id., Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 555, pi. xvi., 1891 ; Campbell, Nests & Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 639, 1901 ; id., Emu, Vol. VII., p. 117, 1907 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 49, 1908 ; Ogilvie-Grant, Ibis 1910, p. 163 ; Carter, ib., p. 655. Platycercus icterotis xanthogenys Hartert, Nov. Zool., Vol. XII., p. 212, 1905 (S.W.A.). Platycercus icterotis icterotis Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 273, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 133, 1913. ft VOL. VI. 329 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Platycercus icterotis salvadori Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 273, 1912, Wilson’s Inlet, South-west Australia ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 133, 1913. Platycercus icterotis whitlocki Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 273, 1912, Lake Dundas, West Australia ; id.. List Birds Austr., p. 133, 1913. Range : Mid- and South-West Australia. Adult male. Upper back, scapulars, inner upper wing-coverts, and innermost secondaries black with green margins to the feathers which are very faintly shown or absent altogether on the lesser upper wing-coverts, some of the margins on the back and scapulars are partially red ; the outer upper wing-coverts, including those round the bend of the wing, blue like the bastard-wing, primary-coverts, and outer aspect of the primary- and secondary-quills, the inner webs of the two latter dark brown with very slight remains of a whitish mark on one or two of the inner primaries, the outer edges of the primaries on the apical portion pale brown ; lower back, rump, and upper tail-coverts green ; central tail-feathers green, the outer ones pale blue with brown on the basal portions and white edges at the tips ; the feathers on the sides of the neck similar to those on the back but the red on the margins more extended ; entire head, hind-neck, sides of neok on the upper portion, and under surface, from the chin to the under tail-coverts, bright red ; ear-coverts and sides of the face lemon-yellow more or less tinged with red in front and below the eye ; under wing- coverts blue, the greater series and quill lining dark brown ; under surface of tail dark brown on the middle portion and pale iridescent blue on the outer feathers. Bill bluish horn, eyes dark brown, feet grey. Total length 290 mm. ; culmen 14, wing 138, tail 150, tarsus 17. Figured. Collected at Wilson’s Inlet, South-west Australia on the 26th of April, 1910, and is the type of P. i. salvadori. Adult female similar to the adult male. Immature. General colour of the upper-surface green with a bronzy tinge and dark brown bases to the feathers of the back and scapulars ; outer aspect of wings greenish-blue, darker on the bastard-wing, primary-coverts, and outer webs of the primary- quills, the latter very narrowly edged with white ; inner webs of the quills dark brown with a yellowish-white spot on some of the feathers ; middle tail-feathers green, the outer ones bluish-green becoming very pale towards the tips which are edged with white — much more broadly towards the middle ones — and dark brown on the inner webs ; crown of head similar to the back, but more bronzy ; base of forehead, abdomen, and under tail-coverts red ; the red on either side of the forehead tinged with yellowish at the base of the bill ; sides of the face dusky bronze-green tinged with red ; fore-neck and breast dull pale green, the feathers margined with red at the tips ; sides of breast and sides of body more uniform green ; under wing-coverts pale bluish-green, the inner series pale yellow, and the greater series and quill lining brown with glossy reflections ; lower aspect of tail dark brown on the middle portion, iridescent blue on the outer feathers and tipped with white. Collected at Albany, South-west Australia, on the 3rd of February, 1910. Adult male. Hind-neck, sides of neck, back, scapulars and wings dark brown with pale reddish edgings to the feathers on the back, scapulars and sides of the neck ; outer upper wing-coverts and outerwebs of the primary- and secondary-quills dark blue the inner webs dark brown somewhat paler on the apical portion of the feathers ; lower back and upper tail-coverts pale bronze-green ; middle tail-feathers dusky bluish-green, the outer ones blue becoming very pale towards the tips which are white, basal portion of inner-webs dark brown ; crown of head, nape, upper sides of neck and entire under-surface scarlet-red ; sides of face yellowish-white ; under wing-coverts blue, the greater series and quills below brown with glossy reflections ; lower aspect of tail dark brown on the middle portion, the outer feathers broadly 330 YELLOW-CHEEKED PARROT. tipped with iridescent blue-and-white tips. Bill bluish- grey, eyes brown, feet hazel. Figured. Collected in the Wongan Hills, West Australia, on the 11th October, 1903. Immature. Entire back, scapulars, inner upper wing-coverts and outer webs of secondary- quills pale green ; marginal upper wing-coverts, bastard-wing, primary-coverts, and outer webs of the primary-quills blue, inner webs of the quills dark brown becoming paler towards the apical portion more especially on the outer webs ; middle tail-feathers bronze-green, the outer ones pale blue with white tips and dark brown on the inner webs ; hinder crown and nape slightly darker than the back, fore part of the head and sides of the crown tinged with red ; sides of neck and hind-neck more or less grey ; sides of the face pale lemon-yellow ; fore-neck, breast, abdomen, and sides of the body green with red margins to the tips of the feathers and more or less tinged with yellow ; under tail-coverts salmon-pink ; under wing-coverts pale blue, the greater series and under-surface of the quills pale brown with glossy reflections ; lower aspect of tail brown on the central portion, iridescent blue on the outer feathers which have white tips. Collected on the Margaret River, South-west Australia, on the 3rd October, 1912. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, three to six or seven. White. 24 mm. by 20 (Gould). Breeding-season. August to November. I can trace no early history of this species ; there is evidence to prove however that it was collected prior to 1820 by some of the French voyageurs, as when Kuhl described it in that year from a specimen in the collection of Temminck, he noted that there were two in the Paris Museum. Mr. Tom Carter has handed me the following note : “ The Yellow- cheeked Parrot is commonly distributed through the South-west. They were never seen by me in the Gascoyne district, and I cannot give their northern (coastal) range. They are abundant 100 miles inland from Perth, about Kellerberin, on the Goldfields Railway, and are also common on the south coast, Albany and Denmark, and about Broome Hill. At my stables and stockyards there they fed about like sparrows, picking out the undigested grains of corn from the horse and cow droppings, and also getting inside the horses’ feed boxes, in order to pick the com out of the chaff put in the boxes for horse feed. They were so tame that at anyone’s approach they would perch on the rails of the yards, and allow one to pass within a few feet, without moving. They occasionally attack fruit in the orchards, but do not system- atically do so. The plumage is very varied, and I think it is probably three years before full plumage is obtained. A good many adult males were procured, and others were seen about Broome Hill with broad scarlet edgings to the whole of the mantle feathers. At Katanning (12 miles distant) a brood of young fledged out, mostly white in plumage with yellow wings. The breeding season commences in September and continues through October and November. Three eggs often seem to form a clutch, but sometimes six and occasionally seven. Sept. 6, 1906, two clutches of three eggs each noted 331 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. (trees felled in clearing land). Dec. 15, 1907, young birds still in nest and many fledged, most of them fledge out in December. This species occurs in much less numbers thirty miles east of Broome Hill.” Gould did not meet with this species personally so that we have nothing of interest in his account. A. W. Milligan in the Emu , Vol. II., p. 75, 1902, giving the results of trips to the Margaret River, South-west Australia, observed : “ This bird is called the ‘ Rosella ’ in Western Australia. I saw many of them on my first visit, principally in the Karri forests. I was fortunate one day in seeing a veritable battle royal between two pairs of birds. One pair had selected a spout in a high karri tree as a suitable place for nesting. Another pair in search of such a place sought to occupy the selected home, which naturally was highly resented by the lawful owners. At a given signal, or apparently so, the male and female bird of each pair flew straight at the other, and, meeting in mid-air, fought with great fury, using beaks, wings, and feet, and clamouring greatly. When exhausted each pair returned to its tree. After a short respite the engagement was renewed with equal fury and noise, but temporary exhaustion resulted in another rest. After a series of these engagements and restful intervals the intending dispossessors drew off, or more correctly speaking, flew off, vanquished, which gave occasion for much more clamour and psittacine thanksgiving by the victors.” In the next volume (p. 225, 1904), the same writer added : “ On a trip to the Wongan Hills, West Australia, we obtained three specimens of Platycercus icterotis. I was in hopes when shooting them they would prove Count Salvadori’s Platycercus xanthogenys , having cherished the notion for many years past that this latter species, which up to the present is only represented in the cabinet by one skin, will be found in one of the dry inland areas where the eucalypts are not found. This notion was founded on the theory of protective coloration. The green colouring on the mantle of P. icterotis (the absence of which establishes P. xanthogenys ) would in such areas make its possessor always conspicuous, and in consequence an easy prey for its enemies, and in time would lead to its extermination. Birds of the same species with- out such colouring and less conspicuous would have an infinitely better chance of surviving. Two of the birds shot were fledgelings. I saw another adult bird entering a hollow in a salmon gum with food in its mouth, evidently for its young.” Whitlock, writing of the birds of the Stirling Ranges, in the Emu, X., p. 314, 1911, commented: “ I also secured a clutch of four eggs of Platycercus icterotis — the local ‘ Rosella.’ The entrance to the nest was on the top of a thick horizontal limb of a white gum, at a height of about 40 feet. The YELLOW-CHEEKED PARROT. Stirling Range birds differ somewhat from onr coastal birds in having the feathers of the mantle edged with red. In the latter, even in old birds, the colour of the mantle is a combination of black and green, with very slight or no trace of red : but further east, in the Lake Dundas district, I secured a fine old male with the edges of the feathers red and with no trace of green at all in the mantle. In our coastal birds the latter colour predominates. Perhaps the extreme eastern form would be Salvadori’s P. xanthogenys .” North in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, VoL III., has only one note, by Mr. Tom Carter, in connection with this species, and absolutely ignores the existence of P. xanthogenys, not mentioning it at all, neither recognising it nor disputing its validity. It is thus seen we know little about this species, and I shall show hereafter, though it has little economic history it has already accumulated quite a long scientific account, mainly through the lack of knowledge, from field observer’s accounts of the variation observed. It is suggested that herein is presented a good field of study for some painstaking field ornithologist in West Australia, to determine definitely the theories here adduced. All the birds from Western Australia were classed under the one name icterotis until 1891, when Salvadori, working through the Collection in the British Museum, separated a bird from the Gould Collection as a new species under the name Platycercus xanthogenys, and moreover in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., 1891, gave a coloured figure of the species with the observations : “ This species differs from P. icterotis, to which it is nearly allied, in being larger, and in having the cheeks of a paler yellow, the feathers of the back edged with red, the rump-feathers and upper tail coverts edged with greyish-olive, and the central tail-feathers blue with no green : there are also other minor differences.” This careful worker gave “ Hob. Unknown, but most probably Australia.” As I have already indicated, the genu^ is absolutely restricted to Australia, so Salvadori meant to err on the right side. It was not again recognised until Hartert in the Nov. Zool., XII., p. 212, 1905, under the name Platycercus icterotis xanthogenys wrote : “ Count Salvadori described his P. xanthogenys from a single old skin (Gould Collection) without locality. The adult males from Beaufort and Cranbrook have the feathers of the upper back broadly edged with red, and the tail feathers, even the central pair on their outer webs, are blue or bluish. They would therefore seem to belong to P. xanthogenys, which may be subspecifically different from P. icterotis. Unfortunately, however, the habitat of the type of xanthogenys is unknown, and so is the distribution of the true icterotis, if that is really distinct. We have specimens which must be true icterotis, but their locality is uncertain. The rump is dull pale green, not greyish.” 333 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Five years later, Ogilvie-Grant (Ibis, 1910, p. 163) included both as species : thus : “ Platycercus icterotis. The series, which includes mostly immature birds exhibits various and somewhat puzzling stages of plumage ; as regards the colouring and pattern of the back specimen “ 1 ” approaches P. xanthogenys. Platycercus xanthogenys. This species was first described by Count Salvadori from a specimen in the British Museum which had formed part of the Gould collection, its origin being otherwise unknown. Subsequently Dr. Hartert recorded examples in the Tring Museum from Beaufort and Cranbrook, which places (according to the Editors of the Emu, VII., p. 117, 1907) are in Western Australia. The discovery by Mr. Shortridge at Southern Cross is therefore of interest. It is very easily distinguished from P. icterotis (Kuhl) by the darker greenish grey (not sap-green) colour of the back and the margins of the innermost secondaries, while the middle pair of tail feathers are mostly dark purplish blue, instead of green.” Mr. Tom Carter observed (ibid. p. 655) : “ P. xanthogenys. It is exceed- ingly interesting to have this species confirmed from a definite locality. I have not seen Dr. Hartert’ s description of the specimens in the Tring Museum, and have often wondered why none had been obtained around Broome Hill, which is situated between Beaufort River and Cranbrook. P. icterotis is very common in that [this] district, and I have observed many birds with feathers on the back, margined broadly with red, and still more so on the rump and and upper tail-coverts.” In a letter quoted by North, Mr. Carter had added : “ They appear to correspond with the description of Platycercus xanthogenys , Salvadori, but to me they seem like well matured birds of P. icterotis .” In the preparation of my “ Reference List,” it was necessary to determine type localities for the forms and I therefore selected Sharks’ Bay, West Australia, as the type locality of P. icterotis. This locality was also fixed for Platycercus Stanley ii of Vigors, an admitted synonym of that name, no locality being known for that species also. For Platycercus xanthogenys Salvadori I recognised Point Cloates, West Australia. All these type fixations prove to be quite erroneous through a misapprehension of the range of the species and also of the facts. At the same time I distinguished two subspecies as follows : “ Platycercus icterotis salvadori subsp. n. Differs from P. i. icterotis in having less red on the mantle. Wilson’s Inlet, South West Australia. Platycercus icterotis whitlochi subsp. n. Differs from P. i. icterotis in its smaller size (wing 134 mm.) and much less blue on the wings, and the red on the head less brilliant. Lake Dundas, South-east of West Australia.” 334 YELLOW-CHEEKED PARROT. My present consideration of the species leads to results somewhat in agreement with the remarks of Milligan and Whitlock, and also explanatory of the diverse opinions hitherto proposed. Kuhl described P. icterotis without locality and attributed the species name to “ Temm. et Kuhl,” and gave as places where he had seen specimens “ In Museo Temminkiano, Parisiensi 2.” The specimen in Temminck’s Museum is obviously the type, and when simultaneously Temminck described the species under the same name, he stated : “Cette espece nouvelle nefait point partie du cabinet de la Societie, elle se trouve dans ma collection. . . . Cette espece est des environs de Port Jackson a la cote orientale de la Nouvelle Hollande.” The latter locality is quite wrong, but in the Cat. Birds Brit. Mus ., Vol. XX., p. 555, 1891, Salvadori catalogued “ d. Ad. sk. Australia ? Linnean Society [P.]. (Type of species).” This blunder, on the part of such an accurate worker as Count Salvadori, has commonly caused the acceptance of the British Museum specimen as the type, which it certainly is not. From the description given by Kuhl the specimen in the Temminck Museum was a coastal bird, and it very probably came from Albany or there- abouts. I therefore determine this as the type-locality of Kuhl’s species especially as normal birds, such as I named P. i. salvadori , from that locality agree well with Kuhl and Temminck’s descriptions. The type locahty of P. xanthogenys Salvadori is also unknown, but as the specimen was from the Gould collection and in 1865 Gould wrote : “ The colony of Swan River in Western Australia being the only locahty in which it has yet been seen in a state of nature,” we can fix that with some degree of certainty. We know that he got birds from the interior beyond York and moreover he wrote “ feathers of the back black, bordered with green, yellow, and in some instances scarlet.” This indicates that he did not separate the scarlet backed birds from the green backed, but considered them simply older birds. There can be little doubt then that the bird which Salvadori called P. xanthogenys was one of the scarlet backed birds received by Gould from beyond York, that is, leading towards the Southern Cross locahty whence Ogilvie-Grant recorded Salvadori’s species. It will be remembered that the variation in P. icterotis was commented upon by that writer, who noted one specimen was varying towards xanthogenys. The series Ogilvie-Grant studied, showed that a bird from Southern Cross very closely agreed in detail with the type of xanthogenys and at the same place had been collected three other specimens showing that the greyish-green coloration was taken on in the nestling phase, and that a very immature bird had the feathers of the back black with grey 335 THE BIRDS OE AUSTRALIA. edgings, these grey edgings being replaced by scarlet with age. Moreover, in this immature phase the central tail-feathers were undoubtedly blue. As Gould and most other observers have noted, i.e., Campbell, the immature of the coastal bird has the back uniform green, the two middle tail-feathers green. Judging from these specimens, Ogilvie-Grant had good grounds for dis- criminating two species, but that he knew his conclusions were not unassailable is seen by the remark that one of his “ icterotis ” came near “ xanthogenys .” I conclude from an examination of many specimens that the interior bird may bear the subspecific name xanthogenys and the coastal one icterotis. It may be, however, that many subspecies may be determined as any series shows differences in accordance with locality, but as they also show variation this cannot be at present decided. It is possible that we have here a dimorphism in the juvenile stages such as has been recorded in connection with elegans and flaveolus, that is, that sometimes the young are uniform green, while at others they have the mottled back of the parents. However, with the birds available, the uniform phase is restricted more to the coast, while the mottled phase is more inland. This would be in accordance with Milligan’s theory quoted above and also in agreement with Whitlock’s suggestion. The matter is not quite so simple as birds are found close to comparatively the coast which seem to come near xanthogenys. Thus the birds recorded by Hartert from Beaufort and Cranbrook would belong to icterotis, and not to xanthogenys as they had green rumps. The interior bird which would be true xanthogenys has the rump grey. Mr. Tom Carter has suggested that at Broome Hill the birds take three years to assume the glorious red colouring, and this may be so, but at Southern Cross it appears that a similar coloration is achieved in much less time. I therefore conclude we can certainly recognise two subspecies at the present time, a coastal and an inland form, but it is possible that more may be hereafter accepted. Platycercus icterotis icterotis Kuhl. Coastal. This form has the back in first plumage uniform green : later the feathers have black bases with green tips, the rump green and the two central tail- feathers green. This is the form named P. stanleyii Vigors and P. i. salvadori by me. According to Whitlock who collected the latter form, this coloration was constant. However, in the Broome Hill district, as recorded by Carter and specimens are now before me, senile birds acquire rufous tips to the back feathers, and the central tail-feathers come blue. These old birds approach typical xanthogenys closely, but are separable by the greener coloration of the rump. In a very old specimen, the rufous tips are worn off, leaving the back almost 336 YELLOW-CHEEKED PARROT. black, the tail-feathers are deep blue, but the rump is still greenish. It may be that a series from the Margaret River or the Coast would never show this red phase, but remain always green as the birds seem to do at Wilson’s Inlet. Platycercus icterotis xcmthogenys Salvadori. Interior. The interior birds apparently from the nest assume a grey coloration on the back, the feathers having black bases, the rump grey and the middle tail-feathers blue. The grey tips of the back soon become red, such red feathers certainly showing in the first or second year. The gradation between this and the green phase is seen in the series available, but it is also probable that more than one subspecies will hereafter be recognised. Thus, the Southern Cross series are purely grey, while the Lake Dundas lot show greenish rumps, though the back feathers are black with red and grey tips intermixed. These were regarded by Whitlock as immature birds of the first year. The evolution of this interior grey phase from a purely green coastal phase is quite novel in the genus ; on the East side of Australia under similar circum- stances a yellow phase has evolved, and it seems that the green immature is more persistent on the West coastal regions than it is in the East coastal. It is somewhat obvious that the species arrived in West Australia via the South Coast in the universal green plumage, apparently even before the blue cheeks were evolved. If this be admitted, it has developed the red coloration more slowly than its Eastern analogue, and the xanthochroistic tendency seen in the yellow cheeks has been otherwise entirely suppressed. Order PSITTACIFORMES Family PLAT Y CERGIDM. No. 356- PLATYCERCUS ADSCITUS. BLUE-CHEEKED PARROT. (Plate 304.)* Psittacus adscitus Latham, Index Omith., Vol. I., p. 126, 1790 : Loc. unknown — I determined 1912 : Cooktown, Queensland. Blue-cheeked Parrot Latham, Gen. Synops. Birds, Suppl. I., p. 64, 1787. Psittacus adscitus Latham, Index Omith., Vol. I., p. 126, 1790. Platycercus palliceps Lear, Illustr. Psittacidse, pt. xn., 1832 : No loc. I designated in 1912 ; New South Wales ; Selby, Nat. Library Parrots, pi. 26, p. 176, 1836 ; Gould, Synops. Birds Austr., pi. 23,1837; id., Birds Austr., pt. v. (Vol. V., pi. 26), 1841; id., Handb. Buds Austr., Vol. II., p. 51, 1865 ; Ramsay, Ibis, 1865, p. 86 ; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt. x., 1866 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 195, 1865. Platycercus coelestis Lesson, Echo du Monde Savant, 11th year, No. 5, July 18, 1844, ool. Ill : New South Wales. Platycercus amathusice t Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus Acad. Sci. Paris, Vol. XXX., p. 133, 1850 : Cape York, Queensl’d ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 197, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn. 1881, p. 119 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 548, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 65, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 634, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 49, 1908 ; Campbell, Emu, Vol. X., p. 339, 1911 (N. Q.) ; Barnard, id., Vol. XI., p. 23, 1911 (N. Q.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 125, 1911. Platycercus cyanogenys Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1855, p. 166 : Cape York, Australia ; id., Birds Austr. Suppl., pt. n. (pi. 63) 1855 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 62, 1865 ; Ramsay, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1875, p. 602 ; Maogillivray, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 157, 1914 (N. Q.). Platycercus pallidus (errore) Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1862, p. 185. Platycercus pallidiceps Sclater, ib., 1873, p. 466 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878; Reichenow, Journ. fur Om., 1881, p. 119; Broadbent, Proc. Roy. Soc. Queensl’d, Vol. II., p. 124, 1885; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 258, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. * The Plate is lettered Platycercus palliceps and P. amathusia . t Generally spelt amathusia. 338 A 5 PLATYCERCUS AMATHUSLE . (NORTHERN BLUE -CHEEKED PARROT J. PLATYCERCUS ( PALE - HEADED PALLICEPS. PARROTJ BLUE-CHEEKED PARROT. Austr. Psittaci, p. 58, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 547, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 65, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 633, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 49, 1908 ; Broadbent, Emu, Vol. X., p. 241, 1910 (N. Q.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 123, 1911. Psittacus adscitus adscitus Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVTIL, p. 271, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 132, 1913. Psittacus adscitus palliceps Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 271, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 132, 1913. Psittacus adscitus amathusioe Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 271, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 132, 1913. Psittacus adscitus elseyi Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 271, 1912 : Gulf of Carpentaria ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 132, 1913. Range. Northern New South Wales : Queensland. Adult male. Entire head, sides of face, and throat pale ochreous-yellow ; mantle and scapulars black, the feathers broadly margined with ochreous-yellow, somewhat paler and tinged blue on the scapulars ; inner upper wing-coverts black edged with blue, those round the bend of the wing, median, and greater series wedgwood-blue, rather darker blue on the outer aspect of the bastard-wing, primary-coverts, primary and secondary quills, the innermost secondaries like the scapulars, inner webs of the bastard-wing, primary-coverts, and flight quills dark brown ; lower back, rump, and upper tail-coverts bluish-green, with a shade of yellow and black bases to the feathers ; tail dark blue with dark brown on the inner webs of the feathers, the lateral feathers very pale blue on the apical portion and broadly tipped with white ; breast, sides of the body and abdomen pale turquoise-blue ; the feathers on the sides of the breast more or less whitish ; under tail-coverts bright salmon pink ; under wing-coverts blue, the greater series and quill-lining pale brown with glossy reflections ; lower aspect of tail dark brown on the central portion, pale iridescent blue on the outer feathers which are tipped with white. Bill white with a bluish tinge. Eyes yellowish-brown ; feet dark grey. Total length 320 mm. ; culmen 17, wing 159, tail 170, tarsus 19. Figured. Collected at Bingara, New South Wales, in May, 1908. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Adult male. Crown of the head, nape, and upper sides of the cheeks straw-yellow ; mantle, upper back, scapulars, and inner upper wing-coverts black with straw- yellow margins to the feathers on the mantle and pale blue to those of the scapulars and innermost secondaries, and darker blue on the edges of the inner upper wing- coverts ; the coverts on the margin and bend of the wing dark blue, the outer median coverts wedgwood-blue ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts and outer webs of the primary- and secondary-quills dark blue becoming paler towards the tips of the primaries, the inner webs dark brown ; lower back, rump and upper tail- coverts yellowish-blue with a black sub-apical spot tinged with dark blue ; tail dark blue, the outer feathers very pale blue on the apical portion, dark brown on the inner webs, and fringed with white at the tips ; the feathers on the sides of the nape have very narrow dark edges which impart a minutely speckled appearance ; lower cheek and throat blue like the under wing-coverts and axillaries ; fore-neck and upper-breast straw-yellow with pale blue fringes to the feathers ; lower breast and abdomen pale turquoise-blue more or less tinged with yellow ; under tail-coverts scarlet-red ; under-surface of the quills and major under wing-coverts dark brown with glossy reflections ; lower aspect of tail dark brown on the middle 339 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. portion, and pale iridescent blue on the outer feathers — the longer ones white at the tips. Bill bluish- white ; eyes and feet black ; wing 154. Figured. Collected at Skull Creek, Cape York, North Queensland, on the 24th of December, 1912. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Nest. In a hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, three to five. White. 25-27 mm. by 21. Breeding-season. At any time of the year after rain. In the Suppl. Gen. Synops Birds, 1787, Latham, p. 64, described “ Blue- cheeked Parrot. Length eleven inches and a half. Bill and crown of the head straw-colour ; cheeks fine light blue ; upper part of the back black, streaked with yellow, the lower pale yellowr ; scapulars black ; wing-coverts and quills rich deep blue, tinged wTith green ; breast and belly green ; vent red ; exterior feathers of the tail blue, tinged with, and marked near the shafts with rows of small dark spots ; the middle ones of a duller green ; legs dusky. Communicated by Mr. Pennant. Native place uncertain.” Pennant had a large number of birds brought back by members of the Cook party and this would seem to be one of them. In confirmation I note in Cook's Journal, p. 294, from “ Cooktown,” “Aug. 1770. The land Fowls we met here, which far from being numerous, were Crows, Kites, Hawkes, Cockadores of 2 sorts, the one white, and the other brown, very beautiful Loryquets of 2 or 3 sorts, Pidgeons, Doves, and a few other sorts of small birds.” In the Index Ornith., 1790, Latham gave the Latin name of Psittacns adscitus to the Blue-cheeked Parrot, and the species was commonly neglected by systematic workers. A bird figured by Lear under the name Platycercus palliceps in 1832, was not recognised as similar to the above description, but as I will later show it can only be classed as a variant, Gould’s notes in connection with the species read : “ This elegant species of Platycercus is a native of the eastern portions of Australia, and is tolerably numerous at Moreton Bay, where all the specimens I have seen were procured. It is known in Sydney by the name of Moreton Bay Rose-bill, an appellation bestowed on it from its near alliance to the Platycercus eximius. The specific name of palliceps has been applied to this bird from the light colouring of the head, which amounts in some specimens to a total absence of colour ; this, however, I think may be attributed to the effects of exposure to light, since, in recently moulted birds, there is always a delicate tinge of j^ellow pervading the crown ; the pale blue of the cheeks also appears to be affected by the same cause, though not to so great an extent.” The life history of the species seems quite unknown as 1 have few observa- tions from any of my correspondents. Broadbent {Emu, Vol. X., p. 241, 1910) recorded: “Herbert River, 340 BLUE-CHEEKED PARROT. North Queensland. One pair seen. This is not an east coast bird ; only a casual visitor to the Cardwell district. Common at Chinchilla and on some of the western rivers — namely, the Alice, near Barcaldine, and at Springsure, Central District.” Campbell (same volume, p. 339), observed : “ Platycercus amafbusia . Amongst the collection of Cape York skins made by Mr. Barnard, and kindly loaned by Mr. White, is a series of this beautiful yellow-headed Parrot. As Gould states, it is nearly allied to the paler-headed P. 'pallidiceps, but differs in “ the greener tone of the colouring of the body, and in the rich blue cheeks.” However, the blue upon the cheeks is variable in the specimens under notice, there being more or less white on the upper part of the cheek. This variableness is apparently due to age, because in two specimens ( Its flight is low, somewhat rapid and zig-zag, seldom farther prolonged than from tree to tree. Specimens of this bird, given me by my friends, Sir George Grey and Mr. Bynoe, from the north-west coast, differ somewhat in plumage from those killed on Cobourg Peninsula ; the concentric bands on the breast are much finer, the extreme margins only of the feathers being black ; I have one specimen also with the whole of the crown of the head a deep blood-red, and others with more or less of this colour. That this kind of plumage is unusual is proved by the fact of numerous specimens from Port Essington not exhibiting it, and had I not seen others from the north-west with black crowns (with the exception of the band across the forehead), I should have regarded as specific what I now look upon as a mere local variety, or possibly a very old bird.” In the Handbook Gould observed : “ Hitherto this bird has been known 348 SMUTTY PARROT. to ornithologists as the Platycercus browni, a specific appellation applied to it in honour of the celebrated botanist ; but which, I regret to say, must give place to the prior one of venustus .” In May, 1909, Mr. J. P. Rogers made a trip to Wild Dog Creek, 170 miles south of Wyndham, and reported that he first met with this species exactly half way and that though several birds were seen they were rare. From Melville Island the same worker wrote : “ Nov. 5, 1911. Cooper’s Camp. These parrots are very numerous here : usually seen in small flocks or in pairs and are scattered through the forest country : they are very tame. Dec. 5, 1911. Are still very common. Jan. 13, 1912. 10 miles S.E. of Snake Bay. These birds are very rare here : by appearances the locality was not suitable for them. Feb. 5, 1912. Cooper’s Camp. Are still numerous here and are now often seen feeding in the mangroves.” Hall in the Emu, Vol. VII., 1907, p. 25, recorded the species from the Robinson River, N.W. Australia, collected by J. P. Rogers, and observed : “ A well-defined red mark across forehead ; cheeks bluish white. Apparently this is a case of dichromatism.” Hill noted {Emu, Vol. X., p. 270, 1911) that at Kimberley, N.W. Australia, it was : “ An uncommon species, generally seen in companies of three, on the eastern side of Napier Broome Bay. Unripe acacia seeds, and the fruit of another tree appear to be the chief articles of diet.” Macgillivray wrote in the Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 157, 1914, that “ When at Burketown, on the Gulf of Carpentaria, Mr. McLennan examined a pair of caged Parrakeets which answered in general to this species, but differed in having a broad red band across the chest. They were young birds, and the owner affirmed that in the adult birds the band was much brighter. They came from the Northern Territory, Queensland border.” In the next volume, p. 46, Barnard recorded the species from t^e M‘ Arthur River, Northern Territory : “ Though rather scarce, birds were generally to be found along the river, feeding on the seeds of the melaleuca trees. They were always seen in pairs.” He does not mention any red chest- band, so apparently there was none and the birds were normal. Practically nothing is therefore on record concerning the life history of this species. Its scientific history is almost as brief as though Gould noted that there were differences between the North-west and Northern Territory specimens, he did not distinguish them by name. Since Gould’s date few specimens were available, save from Port Essington and Port Darwin, until recent years. It might be noted that though Gould, in accordance with the law of priority which he rigorously observed, used in 1865 the correct name venustus, recently 349 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Australian ornithologists, professing to follow Gould in defiance of laws concerning priority, deliberately rejected Gould’s own choice. When I received specimens collected by Hill at Napier Broome Bay, I separated these subspecifically with the name “ Platycercus venustus hilli. Differs from P. venustus Kuhl, in having the white feathers of the face reduced to a narrow line, the blue spreading nearly all the way up to the black below the eyes. The blue on the primary-coverts is also very much more intense.” Campbell added ( Emu X., p. 339, 1911) : “ In some specimens (Hill’s) I have examined, the extent of the white patch is variable, even on the same bird, one skin showing a larger patch of white on one cheek than on the other ; also, like P. amathusia , P. browni has red feathers occasionally on the head.” Later, in the Austral Avian Record, Vol. I., p. 36, 1912, 1 distinguished Platycercus venustus melvillensis subsp. n. : “ Differs from P. v. venustus in its much blacker back, the feathers of the mantle being black with a very faint edge of greenish-yellow. Melville Island.” In my List of the Birds of Australia, p. 132, 1913, I only recognised two subspecies. Platycercus venustus venustus (Kuhl). Northern Territory. Platycercus venustus hilli Mathews. North-west Australia. I placed P. v. melvillensis in the synonymy of the typical form of which the typelocality was Arnhem Land. With accession to Brown’s original manuscript I find the original specimen was procured at Arnhem Bay, so that the M‘ Arthur River specimens are geographically the nearest. I now recognise three sub-species as follows : Platycercus venustus venustus (Kuhl). Arnhem Bay, Northern Territory. This form ranges from the M‘ Arthur River, Northern Territory on the mainland, through Arnhem Land to the Daly River. North quotes : “ North- western Queensland,” in the range of the species, but I have no authentication of that locality. Platycercus venustus melvillensis Mathews. Melville Island, Northern Territory. This is a much darker island form, comparable with the Kangaroo Island form of P. elegans, or the Bass’s Straits forms of P. caledonicus. Platycercus venustus hilli Mathews. North-west Australia. This is a more lightly marked form with bluer cheeks. It is quite comparable with the Cape York form of P. adscitus, which has been commonly recognised as a valid subspecies. The cheeks in that form are more variable than in the present form. The red forehead is quite an inconstant feature 350 SMUTTY PARROT. but nevertheless of great interest, as apparently showing the erythristic tendency recurring. The species appears to have developed from the whole green basic form by means of suppression of the erythristic element and the domination of the xanthochroistic one. Apparently this suppression of the erythrism has allowed a latent melanistic tendency to develop and this is now in a plastic state. Thus on Melville Island the conditions favouring melanism, the bird is becoming blacker exactly as the Kangaroo Island race of P. elegans has developed. In the North-west, however, the conditions have operated in the opposite manner, and the bird shows more of the xanthochroistic phase. That the erythristic tendency was never completely suppressed was seen in the red under tail-coverts, and the North-west conditions are allowing it to recur so that a red forehead band is common and a wholly red head was observed by Gould. As noted already, this bird is common on Melville Island and apparently along the northern coast of Arnhem Land, yet nothing like it is known from the islands north of that locality nor New Guinea. Again the cheeks which were becoming white on the east of its range are becoming more blue again on the western limit. It may be that the bird is retaining its older plumage at the limit of its range and is developing its newer state at the eastern border. It will have been noted that M‘Lennan records two young specimens with a red breast-band, but no confirmation of such a phase is forthcoming, but this aberration would not be a very strange freak in a group so plastic as the present one. 351 Order PSITTA Cl FORM ES. Family PL A T Y CERCI DJE. No. 358. PLATYCERCUS EXIMIUS. ROSELLA. (Plate 306.)* Psittacus eximius Shaw and Nodder, Naturalists’ Miscellany, Vol. III., pi. 93, Feb. 1, 1792: New South Wales. Psittacus eximius Shaw and Nodder, Naturalists’ Miscellany, Vol. III., pi. 93, 1792 ; Shaw, Zool., New Holland, pi. 1, 1794; Latham, Index Ornith. Suppl., p. xxi., 1801; Kuhl, Nova Acta Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 64, 1820. Psittacus nonpareil Perry, Arcana, pi. 9, March, 1810 : New South Wales. Psittacus omnicolor Bechstein, Kurze Uebers Vogel, p. 68, 1811, pi. 2 : New South Wales. Psittacus capitatus Shaw, Gen., Zool., Vol. VIII., Pt. II., p. 466, 1812 : New South Wales ; Kuhl, Nova Acta Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 100, 1820. Platycercus eximius Vigors, Zool. Journ., Vol. I., p. 528, 1825 ; Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 120, 1826; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 281, 1827 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissensch. Munch., Vol. I., pp. 491, 530, 704, 1832 ; Gould, Synops. Birds Austr., pi. 24, 1837 ; id.. Birds Austr., pt. xxn. (Vol. V., pi. 27), 1846 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 55, 1865 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 190, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Ornith., 1881, p. 120 ; Legge, Papers Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasm., 1886, p. 238, 1887 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat. No. 12, p. 258, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 61, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 651, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 65, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 635, 1901 ; Hill, Emu, Vol. II., p. 165, 1903 (Vic.) ; Littler, id., p. 170 (Tas.) ; Fletcher, id., Vol. III., p. 109, 1903 (Tas.) ; Littler, id., p. 215, 1904 (Tas.) ; A. G. Campbell, id., Vol. V., p. 145, 1906 (K’goo I.) ; Morgan, id,, p. 224 (re K’goo I. record) ; Batey, id., Vol. VII., p. 12, 1907 (Vic.) ; Austin, id., p. 75 (N.S.W.) ; Batey, id., p. 95 (N.S.W.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 49, 1908; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasm., p. 95, 1910 (Tas.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec., Cat. No. 1, Vol. III., p. 127, 1911 ; Chandler, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 36, 1913 (Vic.) Platycercus omnicolor Lesson, Compl. de Buff., Vol. IX., Ois., p. 220, 1837. Platycercus splendidus Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1845, p. 105 : Darling Downs “ N.S.W.” = Queensland hodie (not P. splendidus Shaw 1792) ; id., Birds Austr., The plate ia lettered Platycercm aplendidw. 352 PLATYCERCUS SPLENDIDUS ( YELL O IV- MANTLED . PARRAKEET ) . ROSELLA. pt. xxvii. (Vol. V., pi. 28), 1847 ; Zuchold, Jour. fur. Ornith., 1858, p. 39 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 56, 1865 ; Salvador!, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 553, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 65, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs, Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 637, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 49, 1908 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat. No. 1, Vol. III., p. 132, 1911 ; H. L. White, Emu, Vol. XV., p. 169, 1916. Platycercus eximius var. splendidus Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 191, 1868. Platycercus cecilce Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 14, 1911 : New name for P. splendidus Gould. Platycercus diemenensis North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat. No. 1, Vol. III., p. 128, 1911 : Tasmania. Platycercus eximius eximius Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 272, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 133, 1913. Platycercus eximius cecilce Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 272, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 133, 1913. Platycercus eximius diemenensis Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 272, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 133, 1913. Distribution. Queensland ; New South Wales ; Victoria ; South-east South Australia ; Tasmania. Adult male. Entire head, hind-neck, sides of the neck, upper part of the cheeks, including the ear-coverts and breast encroaching more or less on to the middle of the abdomen beautiful red like the undertail-coverts ; back, scapulars, and innermost secondaries black, the feathers broadly margined with yellow becoming greenish on the outer margin of the scapulars and outer margins of the innermost secondaries ; inner, lesser and median upper wing-coverts black, the outer ones and those round the bend of the wing dark wedgwood-blue, becoming paler on the median and greater series like the axillaries and under wing-coverts ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts, and outer aspect of the primary- and secondary-quills dark blue, paler on the outer edges of the primaries ; lower back, upper tail-coverts, flanks, and thighs very pale green ; middle tail-feathers bluish-green, the lateral ones blue at the base on the outer webs, dark brown on the inner ones, pale blue on the apical portion and edged with white at the tips ; lower cheeks and sides of the throat pure white ; a few feathers on the sides of the breast black margined with yellow ; sides of abdomen and sides of the body rich yellow ; under-surface of quills dark brown ; lower aspect of tail dark brown on the central feathers and pale iridescent blue on the later ones. Bill white with a bluish tinge ; eyes brown ; feet and legs dark grey. Total length 330 mm. ; culmen 17, wing 167, tail 171, tarsus 20. Figured. Collected at Tingha, New South Wales in May 1909, and is typical cecilce. Adult female is similar to the adult male. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, 4 to 9. White, 26 to 29 mm. by 20-21. Breeding-season. September to January. The first discoverer of this most beautiful Parrot is not exactly known as it was not apparently Cook’s party. It was figured and named by Shaw and Nodder and the appropriate name of “ eximius ” was selected. VOL. VI. 353 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. It was at once recognised and is not burdened with many names, three others being given about the same time (1810-11) by Perry, Shaw and Bechstein, viz., nonpareil, capitatus and omnicolor respectively. Caley’s notes, reproduced by Vigors and Horsfield, read : “ Rosehill Parrot So-called from the name of the settlement afterwards known by the name of Paramatta. The native name of the bird is Bundullock. The natives inform me it always breeds in dead trees, chiefly on farms, making its nest with feathers in the body of the hollow tree. To whatever depth the tree may be hollow, the bird always descends to the bottom, like an Opossum. Its nest is found by watching the old bird ; and sometimes by hearing the young ones in the hollow of the tree on passing by. It has six young ones : the eggs are white without spots. It may frequently be seen in small flocks along with the King’s Parrot (PI. scapulatus) and the Lory (PI. pennantii) in fields of Indian Corn ; but I never recollect it taking the corn from the stalk like the other two birds, and I suspect it only picks up what the others throw to the ground. I have seen the most of this species on new-sown wheat early in the morning ; but never in large flocks. I do not recollect ever to have seen the King’s Parrot or Lory pulling up the young wheat like this bird. All three species are caught in traps. They are very good eating. The King’s and Rosehill Parrots are the most valuable for selling to ships to take to England. The latter species (eximius) frequents Van Diemen’s Land. I do not know whether the Lory does so, but I remember shooting that species at Western Port, on the opposite side of the strait.” Gould’s observations I also reproduce : “ Although the Rose-hill Parrakeet is one of the commonest birds of New South Wales and Tasmania, it is very local, a river frequently constituting the boundary of its habitat, over which it so rarely passes, that I never saw the bird on the south side of the Derwent ; while in the forests of the opposite shore, not more than a quarter or half a mile distant, it was very numerous. I believe it is never seen in the forests clothing the borders of D’Entrecasteaux’ Channel on the south, or of the River Tamar on the north of the island, those districts being inhabited by the Platycercus flaviventris , whose greater size and olive-green plumage are in beautiful accordance with those vast and but little explored forests of evergreen Eucalypti. The Platycercus eximius resorts to the open parts of the country, undulating grassy hills and plains bordered and studded here and there with large trees or belts of low acacias or banksias, among the branches of which, particularly those of the acacias, this beautiful bird may be seen in small companies, the rich scarlet and yellow of their breasts vieing with the lovely blossoms of the trees ; in a word, districts of a sandy nature, small plains, open spots among the hills, and thinly timbered country where grass abounds, 354 ROSELLA. constitute the peculiar and natural habitat of this bird. Like the Sparrow in England, this beautiful Parrakeet may constantly be seen resorting to the public roads, and upon being disturbed by the passer-by will merely fly off to the nearest tree, or to the rails of the wayside fences. Scenes like this fill the mind with sensations of no ordinary description, and excite the greatest astonishment in those who have recently arrived in the country ; the novelty, however, soon wears off, and a caged lark, linnet, or blackbird from the land of their birth are highly cherished and valued, while the beautiful productions of the island are passed by unheeded, except to deal out destruction among them, with no sparing hand, for some slight injury they may have inflicted upon the rising com. The above remarks refer more particularly to Tasmania, but apply with equal force to New South Wales, where the bird inhabits all the situations similar in character to those above referred to. It is found in great numbers in the district of the Upper Hunter, and was formerly very numerous at Paramatta, particularly in the neighbourhood of Rose Hill, whence its name. It breeds abundantly both in Tasmania and New South Wales, during October and the three following months and lays from seven to ten beautiful white eggs, one inch and an eighth long by seven-eighths of an inch broad, in the hollow of a gum-tree. The natural food of this bird consists of seeds of various kinds, particularly those of different grasses, and occasionally of insects and caterpillars. Its flight is short and undulating, and is rarely extended to a greater distance than a quarter of a mile, as the bird frequently alights on a leafless branch, always flying a little below it and rising again just before it settles. Its note is a somewhat pleasing whistling sound, which is very frequently uttered.” As a distinct species Gould described Platycerc'us splendidus writing: “ The lovely species here described was killed by Gilbert in the newly-located district to the northward of the Darling Downs in New South Wales. In beauty it even exceeds the common Rose-hill Parrakeet, and is consequently one of the finest species of the genus yet discovered. It differs from that bird in having the centre of the breast, only, of a rich scarlet, the sides being gamboge-yellow ; in the lower part of the abdomen and the upper tail-coverts being verditer instead of grass-green, and in the feathers of the back being broadly margined with rich gamboge instead of greenish-yellow. In the youthful state it very much resembles the P. palliceps, from which, however, it differs in having the head yellow instead of pale yellowish white, and the breast yellow instead of pale blue ; the breast also has indications of the rich scarlet of maturity, of which colour no trace is at any time perceptible in the P. palliceps .” Finsch and Ramsay regarded this as simply a varietal form of P. eximins , 355 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. but Salvadori admitted it as a distinct species, though most of his localised specimens of eximius were from Tasmania. Gould recorded : “ Specimens from Tasmania are rather larger in size, and have the markings of the upper surface of a greener yellow, and altogether less brilliant than those from New South Wales.” Campbell noted : “ The Rosella Parrakeet is an abundant species through- out South-eastern Austraha, including Tasmania, where it is a larger bird : the white patches on the cheeks are also conspicuously larger than those on the mainland bird.” North in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III. p. 128, 1911, wrote : “I have previously pointed out ( Town and Country Journal, Sydney, 11th April, 1896), that specimens from the latter island (Tasmania), may be dis- tinguished by the conspicuously larger white cheek patch, and may now add also by the richer and darker scarlet head and breast, the latter of which extends lower down the body than it does in birds from the mainland. Should it be necessary to distinguish this southern race, I would propose for it the name of Platycercus diemenensis .” Mr. T. P. Austin has written me from Cobbora, New South Wales : “ Very numerous here at all times of the year, but like many other species in this district, they are very much duller in colour than those seen in Victoria, or even in other parts of New South Wales ; never have I seen a Rosella here of the brilliant plumage so common elsewhere. They are the most destructive bird we have here in a fruit garden ; it is not so much a matter of what they eat, as the amount of fruit they destroy ; this is more especially the case with peaches, pears and quinces. Great numbers of them nest here, but the contents of many nesting hollows are destroyed by Lace Lizards ( Varanus varius) not only of Rosellas, but many other species : the vast number of eggs and young birds devoured by these repulsive reptiles each year must be enormous.” Mr. E. J. Christian from Victoria has noted : “ This is not a district in which many species of parrots make their homes : this is the commonest and can be seen everywhere in the timber and open plains. It is chiefly a seed- eating bird living on grass seeds and any grain. In summer it does great damage to apples and pears, but the good it does in eating the thistle seed far outweighs the harm it does in the orchard. Their flight is generally low with a dipping tendency and so low that I have known them killed by a top wire of a fence. The note is a screechy one, but when one bird, generally a male I find, is in a tree by himself he makes a note repeated about five times in succession and is answered by others in other trees. They are fond of eating the dried berries of the Pepper tree : these berries when drying have a red shell round them and this shell has a sweetened taste, which the birds come 356 ROSELLA. after. They sometimes eat the inner dried berry, but it is not sweet. In my notes I said that Psephotus hcematonotus was the only parrot which was destructive to blossoming fruit trees. I find that at present (30/8/08) P. eximius is proving himself very destructive to all the trees, whereas generally P. hcematonotus confined itself to almond blossoms alone. For the past month there have been enormous flocks of both these species here. We are having to shoot P. eximius on account of its raids on the blossoms. On July 18th, 1908, I noticed that it was eating the seeds of the Gooseberry cucumber ( Cucumis myriocarpis) , commonly called Chinese melon. This plant is an introduction from the Cape and is a decided pest, especially on cultivated ground. If stock eat too much of it especially in droughts, when there is no grass, they die. So the parrot does good in eating it.” Mr. A. H. Wheelwright forwarded me the following account : “In life the sexes of these birds are not difficult to distinguish as the male looks distinctly larger than his mate although measurements do not justify the appearance. He is also brighter in coloration while the red of the head extends further down the neck. In the female the red is not so bright and the green of the back comes almost to the base of the skull, while the general colour effect all over the body is less pronounced. The iris, bill, cere, feet and claws in both sexes are exactly alike and there is no seasonal change of colour. The young birds in their first plumage strongly resemble the female, but in their case the red of the head is more orange (so that at the moult the new feathers show with a distinctly different colour) and the green of the back and neck extends often to the crown of the head. The cheek feathers also, instead of being white are pale pink. In flight the young show two clear, though narrow, white bars on the under-surface of the wings. These wing-bars extend over both primaries and secondaries, and are not reproduced at the moult. The first feathers to lose the bars are the four outer primaries. The bill of the young birds when they first leave the nest is a clear yellow, but this very soon changes to the steel grey of the adults, the change taking place from the tip and is completed before the first moult. When the young birds begin to move about they of course have perfect tail-feathers, while the adults at this season are getting decidedly ragged, their tail-feathers often looking as if they had had little chips nipped out of them. At all seasons they feed largely upon the ground, living chiefly on small seeds, but they do immense damage among fruit crops, nipping little bits out of the fruit just as it starts ripening, and among apples particularly nipping through the stalks and dropping hundreds to the ground. During autumn and winter they go largely in flocks, but in spring these split up into pairs and separate. When the birds are in pairs, if the cock is shot, the hen displays great concern and returns to find him, but if the hen is shot 357 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. first, the cock goes off with much clatter, at full speed, and does not return. The males when fighting in spring, often flutter, facing each other, into the air, with the tails fully spread and chatter at each other most noisily, but apparently do nothing more serious. In this district (Hollywood, Narrawa, County of King, N.S.W.) the birds are present all the year, but there seems to be a considerable migration taking place during autumn and spring as at that time the numbers of birds about vary enormously.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has written me : “I have found this species common in most of the lightly timbered districts I have visited in Victoria and also in the same class of country in New South Wales. Between Deep Water and Emmaville in the New England district, N.S.W. they were very numerous. In South Australia they are not uncommon in the South-east between Border town and Mt. Gfambier, but they do not, I think, cross the ninety-mile stretch of Mallee country between Bordertown and the River Murray. I have seen odd specimens about Blackwood on several occasions, but conclude that these were escaped birds. I have met with these birds (P. e. diemenensis North) in considerable numbers in South Tasmania on the peninsula which divides the Derwent and Frederick Henry Bay. Also at Bushy Park further up the River Derwent.” Mr. Isaac Batey in the Emut Vol. VII., p. 12, 1907, recorded from North of Melbourne : “ Ever a permanent, but got scarce for a while. They nested on the place. Owing to extension of tillage Rosellas have now greatly increased.” He added to this (p. 95) : “ The Rosella though a bird of exquisite beauty, candidly speaking is a thorough scamp, only excelled in sheer impudence by that orchard pest the Musk Lorikeet ( Glossopsittacus concinnus). This “ cheeky ” species has a large head, seemingly a brain- weight equal to that of a Rosella. Notwithstanding, the Lorikeet has either no sense of danger or will not be educated into it. If a person takes his stand under a richly- blossomed eucalypt, numbers of shots may be fired at them. Not so with Rosellas. They will cut at the first pop, unless a winged bird is made to scream, when his mates flock in to investigate. We will now put Rosellas on trial for damaging crops. In the vicinage of Woodend North (Shire of Newham), a white gum country, with a good amount of dead timber and green, these Parrots are numerous. On the block specified there are several dams, and the land is tilled, hence conditions favour the presence of this bird. It was noted that on certain flats considerable damage was done to grain from the time it became eatable until placed in stack. Alighting on the tops of the sheaves, besides taking their fill, they shelled much, which fell upon the ground. To me this waste appeared considerable, but taken for the whole field the loss would not be serious, because if it had, people would have 358 ROSELLA. tried to cope with the pest. That farmers made no attempt to destroy them is proof that they were not considered a serious nuisance. Since taking up my quarters here (two miles from Drouin) Rosellas have been carefully observed in my sister’s garden — a plantation of upwards of 100 fruit trees of various descriptions. When the fruit season arrives, Rosellas in small parties make frequent raids, with fatal consequences to themselves, because one or two are shot. Concerning these marauders my opinion is, if not molested, others would chum in with them — an increase of invaders means an extension of havoc amongst the fruit. About Drouin there are some extensive orchards. So far, no complaints have reached me to the effect that this bird is a fruit pirate. Since the commencement of this month (June) at this place they have started nipping off the ends of the future fruit spikes of pear trees. Whether this is done to sharpen their bills or to eat the tender buds I am not sure, because the moment they are noticed the gun is brought out. Last year, on two occasions, a few short rows of garden peas were planted ; not being closely watched, as the sprouts appeared “ pretty Joeys ” hooked up every one. More could be said concerning this lovely creature, but it has been dwelt on long enough, so by way of an appropriate ending, the plough with the axe has enlarged its empire to such an extent that extinction is an impossibility.” In the Emu , Vol. XV., p. 169, 1916, are : “ Notes upon the Yellow-mantled Parrot ( Platycercus splendidus Gould) ” by H. L. White. Details of the known distribution are fully given and he writes : “I am inclined to think that Platycercus splendidus is gradually moving south and displacing the Rosella, Platycercus eximius. ... If my observations be correct (the specimens speak for themselves) the whole of that part of New South Wales lying east of the Brisbane — -Sydney railway line, as far south as Scone, is the habitat of Platycercus splendidus, while probably the bird does nbt extend very far west of the line. . . . There is no doubt that the two forms are very closely allied, and many of the less brightly coloured birds are almost identical in shade ; but a comparison of fully adult specimens shows differences which probably justify a subspecific separation. The habits of the two forms are exactly similar, and the eggs are not separable.” From the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 129, I quote the account of Mr. M. Harrison : “ The £ Rosella ’ Parrakeet ( Platycercus eximius) is common throughout Tasmania where the country is fairly open and grassy, but frequently draws an abrupt fine beyond which, for some reason, it is never seen. Gould observed this, and states that he never saw it south of the Derwent, but it is now, and has been as long as I can remember, plentiful on both banks 359 # THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. about Austin’s Ferry, and I have never seen any between that place and Hobart, although plentiful on the opposite side of the river. At Austin’s Ferry it still breeds in fair numbers, although the Starling is gradually taking possession of every nesting-place, to the exclusion of native birds of similar nesting habits. The clutch is generally from six to eight. On one occasion a friend and myself found no less than four nests of this Parrakeet containing eggs, and one of the Tree Martin ( Petrochdidon nigricans) in the same tree, a Eucalypt.” Much of the scientific history of this species appears in the previous notes. In the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 14, 1911, I replaced the invalid name Platycercus splendidus Gould by the new name Platycercus cecilce. When I drew up my “ Reference List to the Birds of Australia” (Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII, 1912), I examined the specimens available, and reduced that species to sub- specific rank, and thus admitted three subspecies : — “ Platycercus eximius eximius (Shaw and Nodder). New South Wales, Victoria. Platycercus eximius diemenensis North. Tasmania. Platycercus eximius cecilce Mathews. South Queensland, New South Wales.” This arrangement was maintained in my List of the Birds of Australia , 1913, but here I have to take into consideration the new facts adduced by H. L. White. It will be noted that he has practically endorsed my conclusions, but has extended the range of the last-named form more to the south. The re-examination of the material now in hand has shown that four forms can be recognised, of which Gould’s splendidus = cecilce is the most doubtful. Thus I find similar coloured specimens right down to Sydney, so that some earlier name might be just as well used. As, however, Mr. H. L. White has proved that there is an ill-marked subspecies in the north-east of New South Wales, we can admit this. When series are criticised, as Mr. White admits, there are many intermediate specimens, but if we now compare a series of Victorian birds, these constitute a much more valid subspecies, as the yellow of the back is missing, the greenish tips being smaller, the rump being of a greenish shade, while underneath the coloration of the abdomen is greener. I propose to name the Victorian subspecies. Platycercus eximius colei subsp. nov. Type from Ballarat Victoria. Collected in May, 1886, a male, No. 343, in my collection. The Tasmanian bird is darker still, with longer white cheeks and also 360 ROSELLA. larger in size. If a snbspeeific name were not granted, to the Victorian form, it might be referred to as — Platycercus eximius eximius — diemenensis. A nomenclatural system I do not recommend. As recorded by Ashby, the Victorian form ranges into the sonth-east of South Australia. A. G. Campbell {Emu, Vol. V., p. 145, 1906) recorded this species from Kangaroo Island, but Morgan (p. 224) threw doubt upon the record, as no specimen was obtained. The subspecies and ranges then appear to be : the brightest coloured subspecies restricted to North-east New South Wales, and the adjoining portion of Queensland : the typical form through New South Wales and probably North Victoria : a greener form in South Victoria and south-east South Australia and the greenest and largest form in Tasmania. The form is peculiarly stable when contrasted with other species of the genus, the parallel form elegans, also quite stable, having a coincident range but more extensive, running into North Queensland to the north, into the Flinders Range on the west and into Kangaroo Island in the south-west. The form elegans is the most strongly developed erythristic phase, and the present species seems to have devolved independently in or about the same regions by means of an equal operation of the xanthochroistic and erythristic elements, while the cyanistic element was being more suppressed. The latter is seen in the white cheeks as all the other species of the genus, save the Western Australian one, have blue cheeks. Though this form is the most stable of all, it hybridises with other species, and aberrations have been recorded, both xanthochroistic and erythristic specimens occurring, the latter more commonly than the former. From H. L. White’s observations that the xanthochroistic subspecies, cecilce ( = splendidus Gould) has apparently extended its range much to the south since the time of Gould, less than one hundred years, it may be suggested that the coloration of the species is still developing and that this xanthochroistic tendency will still further encroach, and the species will assume a brighter colouring still. It will be seen that field naturalists have recorded that this species is a bird of the sunlight, while its congener P. elegans is a bird of the forest. Moreover, it is increasing through the destruction of the heavy bush, and consequently the more sunlight it gets the brighter its coloration will become. We have here a delightful study of sunlight effects. I have just noted that Zuchold recorded Platycercus splendidus from the Lynd River, North Queensland, as long ago as 1858. I have no records VOL. VI. 361 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. from that district in recent years and this suggests that its northern range also needs investigation. PLATYCERGUS IGNITUS. Platycercus ignitus Gould, Synops. Birds Austr., pt. n. (pi. 24), April 1, 1837 : Australia ; Leadbeater, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1837, p. 8; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xxix., (Vol. V., pi. 30), 1847 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194,, 878, id., Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 553, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 65, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 638, 1901 ; ? Batey, Emu, Vol. VII., p. 96, 1907. This form, figured by Gould, and admitted by Salvadori, is now generally admitted simply to be an abnormal colour phase of P. eximius. PLATYCERCUS ERYTHROPEPLUS. Platycercus erythropeplus Salvadori, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1891, p. 130, pi. xii., Living in the Gardens of the Zool. Soc., London ; id., Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 550, 1891 (Id.) ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 65, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 635, 1901 ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral,, p. 49, 1908 ; id., Nov. Zool., Vol. XVni., p. 272, 1911. Salvadori described two living specimens under the above name indicating that they were absolutely intermediate between P. elegans and P. eximius. Campbell wrote : “ Most probably the bird is a hybrid between the two species mentioned,” and I conclude this is the case. 362 Genus. — B ARNARDIUS. Barnardius Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. de Zool., Vol. VI., p. 153, 1854 Type B. barnardi. Larger Platycercine birds with short bill, long wings, long wedge-shaped tails and small feet. The distinctive features of this generic group are its coloration, larger size, and the distinct notching in the cutting edges of the upper mandible, not so pronounced. In all other particulars they agree with typical Platycercus, the tail perhaps comparatively a little longer, the bill stouter. While this genus has apparently evolved from an ancestor of Platycercus the very different coloration shows the divergence to have taken place at an early stage in the evolution of the Platycercine group. The immature still show a green plumage, but it is a different green in the majority of forms. The erythristic element, so strongly marked in the Platycercus series, is missing, but a slight tendency is seen in some forms, the forehead taking on that colour, and a reddish tinge sometimes occurring on the abdomen. The cyanistic element seems to have mostly predominated, but even this has been held in check by the normal green, while a melanistic tendency shows as a governing factor under certain conditions. The peculiar scalloped effect seen on the back of typical Platycercus has never been developed. 363 9 Key to the Species. A. Head not black ... ... ... ... ... ... B. barnardi. B. Head black ... ... ... ... ... ... b. zonarius. * 364 BARNARDIUS MACGILLIVRAYI . (CL ONCURR Y PA RR O Tl BARNARDIUS WHITER (SOUTR A US TP AL LAP MALL EE PA RR OTJ. Order P8ITTAGIF0RMES No. 359. Family PLATYGERCIDJE. BARNARDIUS BARNARDI. MALLEE PARROT. (Plate 307.)* Platycercus barnardi Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Yol. XV., p. 283, 1827 : No locality. I selected in 1912 New South Wales. Barnard’s Parrot, Latham, Gen. Hist. Birds, Vol. II., p. 121, 1822. Platycercus barnardi Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 283, 1827 ; Lear, Illustr. Psittac., pt. v., May 1, 1831 ; Wagler, Ak. Abhandl. Wissen. Munch, Vol. X., pp. 491, 528, 703, 1832 ; Gould, Synops. Birds Austr., pi. 66, 1838 ; id., Birds Austr., pt. xi. (Vol. V., pi. 21), 1843 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 40, 1865 ; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt. in., 1866 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 207, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 123 ; Broadbent, Proc. Roy. Soc., Queensland, Vol. III., p. 30, 1887 ; Ramsay, Tab. List. Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 256, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 45, 1891. Platycercus bernardi (error) Mitchell, Austr. Exped., Vol. I., p. xvm., 1838, Barnardius typicus Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1854, p. 153 : New name for P. barnardi Vigors and Horsfield. Barnardius bernardi (error) Bonaparte, ib. Psittacus barnardi Souance, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1856, p. 211. Barnardius barnardi Finsch, Ned. Tijdschr. Dierk., Vol. I., Berigt, p. xi., 1863 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 558, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr. i\ p. 66, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 640, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 49, 1908 ; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. X., pp. 18, 22, 1910 (N.S.W.) ; Wilson, ib., XII., p. 32, 1912 (Vic.) ; S. A. White, ib., p. 128 (S.A.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 133, 1911 ; Chandler, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 36, 1913 (Vic.) ; Mathews List. Birds Austr., p. 134, 1913. Platycercus macgillivrayi North, Victorian Naturalist, Vol. XVII., p. 91, 1900 : Burke District, North Queensland ; Sclater, Ibis, 1902, p. 610, pi. xv. Barnardius macgillivrayi Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 1083, 1901 ; North, Viet. Nat., Vol. XVII., p. 113, 1901 ; Hall, Key Austr. Birds, 2nd ed., p. 114, 1906 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 50, 1900 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. HI., p. 139, 1911 ; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol XIII., p. 157, 1914 (N.Q.). * The plate is lettered Barnardius macgillivrayi and B. whiiei. 365 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Platycercus barnardi macgillivrayi Mathews, ib., p. 274. Platycercus barnardi whitei Mathews, ib., p. 273, Ulooloo, Flinders Range, S.A, Platycercus barnardi augustus Mathews, ib., p. 273 : Port Augusta, South Australia. Platycercus barnardi barnardi Mathews, Nov. Zool., Yol. XVIII., p. 273, 1912. Barnardius barnardi barnardi Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 134, 1913. Barnardius barnardi whitei Mathews, ib. Barnardius barnardi macgillivrayi Mathews, ib. Barnardius barnardi lindoi S. A. White, South Austr. Ornith., Vol. II., p. 115, 1916: Moolooloo, Flinders Range ; id., Emu, Vol. XII, p. 128, 1912 (id.). Distribution. Interior Queensland ; New South Wales ; Victoria and South Australia, and Flinders Range, South Australia. Adult. Back and scapulars dull dark blue ; lesser upper wing-coverts brighter blue glossed with green, median coverts yellowish green, the inner greater series grass- green, the outer ones verditer blue ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts and quills black with dark blue on the outer webs, the primaries paler towards the tips, especially on the outer webs, secondaries green on the outer webs tinged with blue on the outermost ones ; rump and upper tail-coverts yellowish green, becoming darker green on the long ones ; central tail-feathers dark green, the next pair pearly-blue on the terminal portion and whitish at the tips, the blue increasing in extent on the three outer pairs ; crown of head and nape blackish brown tinged with bluish green ; base of forehead blackish followed by a band of deep red ; a nuchal collar of yellowish-brown followed by a yellow band on the hind-neck on which some of the feathers are tipped with green ; a small dusky patch in front of the eye ; sides of the face and ear-coverts verditer blue ; breast, lower abdomen, thighs, and under tail-coverts pale green ; upper abdomen orange-yellow ; axillaries and under wing- coverts cobalt-blue, the greater series and quill-lining dark brown ; lower aspect of tail blackish with pearly-blue tips to the outer feathers. Bill bluish, tip white ; eyes brown ; feet mealy black. Total length 350 mm. ; culmen 20, wing 174, tail 186, tarsus 18. Figured. Collected at Ulooloo, Flinders Range, South Australia, and is my type of Platycercus barnardi whitei. Immature. Hind-neck, back, and scapulars dark bluish-green like the inner greater upper wing-coverts, outer webs of primary quills, and middle tail-feathers ; lesser upper wing-coverts green tinged with blue, the outer portion of the median series yellowish-green, outer greater coverts pale blue, bastard-wing, primary-coverts, primary and secondary quills dark brown, paler at the terminal portion of the primaries especially on the outer webs, the basal portion of outer webs deep blue like the outer webs of the bastard-wing and primary coverts ; rump and upper tail-coverts yellowish green with a tinge of cobalt-blue like the breast, abdomen, thighs, and under tail-coverts ; outer tail-feathers green at the base on the outer webs, dark brown on the inner ones with the remaining portion pale blue, becoming almost white at the tips ; a collar on the hind-neck lemon-yellow ; crown of head green with a golden tinge becoming dusky on the nape like the space in front of the eye ; cheeks and fore part of face turquoise-blue becoming green on the hinder portion ; base of forehead red ; under wing-coverts and axillaries turquoise blue ; quills below pale brown with a whitish cross-band formed by a spot on the inner webs of the primary and secondary quills ; lower aspect of tail dark brown with iridescent blue tips to the outer feathers. Collected at Budgerum in Victoria, on the 29th of June, 1912. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch four or five. White, 28-31 mm. by 24-25, MALLEE PARROT. Breeding-season. September to December. Adult male. General colour bright bluish-green with an infusion of yellow including the crown of the head, upper wing-coverts, lower back, rump, and upper tail-coverts, sides of the face, throat, breast, lower flanks, under tail-coverts, and under wing- coverts ; lesser upper wing-coverts, and under wing-coverts ; lesser upper wing- coverts and bend of wing turquoise-blue ; the outer, median and greater coverts cobalt-blue ; outer webs of the bastard-wing, primary-coverts and primary-quills deep blue, the inner webs blackish becoming paler at the tips of the last, on which portion the outer webs are bluish-grey including the entire outer web of the first primary ; middle tail-feathers bronze-green, becoming darker and more or less blue at the tips, the outer feathers green at the base, dark brown on the inner webs, followed by dark blue and cobalt-blue on the apical portions ; a collar on the hind-neck lemon-yellow ; nape and behind the eye somewhat darker than the crown ; fore part of cheeks, the feathers on the sides of the throat, axillaries and under wing-coverts turquoise blue ; lower breast, abdomen, and sides of the body bright yellow ; greater series of under wing-coverts and quills below dark brown ; lower aspect of tail dark brown on the middle feathers and pale iridescent blue on the outer ones. Bill bluish white ; eyes dark brown ; feet pale leaden. Total length 250 mm., culmen 18, wing 157, tail 197, tarsus 21. Figured. Collected at Cloncurry, North Queensland, on the 6th of June, 1910, and is Platycercus barnardi macgillivrayi (North). Adult females from the same locality are similar. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch four to six. White. 28-31 mm. by 23-25. Breeding -season. August to December. As this species is not a coastal bird it was not described until 1827, when Vigors and Horsfield named it Platycercus barnardi , taking the name from Latham’s manuscript and acknowledging it as of Latham. The account given is cut short after the description, no record is given from whence the specimen came being attached as was the custom of these authors. We do not know who collected it, as it was not named in honour of its discoverer. As Kuhl and Temminck do not mention it, we may conclude it was presented between 1820 and 1826. Gould’s notes read : “ To see Barnard’s Parrakeet in perfection, and to observe its rich plumage in all its glory, the native country of the bird must be visited, its brooks and streamlets traced ; for it is principally on the banks of the latter, either among the 4 high-flooded gums ’ or the larger shrub-like trees along the edges of the water that this beautiful species is seen, and where the brilliant hues of its expanded wings and tail show very conspicuously as it passes from tree to tree amidst the dark masses of foliage. The range of Barnard’s Parrakeet extends throughout the interior from South Australia to New South Wales, but it seldom appears within the boundary of the latter colony ; I never met with it nearer than the Liverpool Plains, from which northwards towards the interior its numbers increased, and it doubtless inhabits the banks of the Darling and all other rivers which disembogue into 367 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Lake Alexandrina ; and in confirmation of this opinion I may state that I found it abundant in the Great Murray scrub of South Australia. It is generally met with in small companies of from five to ten in number, some- times on the ground among the tall grasses, at others among the high trees, particularly the Eucalypti. The sexes differ but little in colour ; the males, are, however, at all times the largest and finest in plumage.” It still appears to be numerous in the Mallee of Victoria and South Australia, the Broken River District of New South Wales, the Cloncurry District in Mid-Queensland and apparently in the Flinders Range of South Australia. Under the name Barnardius barnardi, Mr. Edwin Ashby wrote me : “ I have collected this bird near Mannum on the Murray, where in common with other parrots it is very fond of feeding on the berries of African Box Thorn ; at Saddleworth, seventy miles north of Adelaide, at Nackara on the Broken Hill line about twenty miles east of Petersburgh. The birds were very tame ; as many as five brightly coloured birds drinking out of a tank of water only a few yards away from the writer at or rather near Broken Hill, while I have received several specimens from Leigh’s Creek, 373 miles north of Adelaide. There is a great variation in the skins ; while most of the skins north of Adelaide are more dingy and darker on the crown than the more southern specimens, yet one I collected at Broken Hill has very bright green on the crown and dark nape and deep orange on the abdomen, but these features occur in some of the others. I conclude that while the Flinders Range and northern forms may have a tendency to be darker than the southern ones there is no fixed type in any one district and therefore none of the variations deserve subspecific rank.” Captain S. A. White has written : “ Barnardius b. barnardi. The bird found upon the lower reaches of the Murray River in South Australia I feel sure belongs to the typical subspecies. They are numerous in the Mallee scrubs all along the river where they breed ; they feed upon the seeds of grasses, gum-seeds, berries, &c. ; they have a quaint way of sitting on a branch and chattering loudly, swaying their outstretched tail rapidly from side to side. Mr. F. E. Howe’s notes read : “ This species was a very common one at Pine Plains, Victoria, where we found them nesting in every available hollow, but at Kow Plains, forty -five miles to the east, it was a fairly rare form, only one pair being noted. This last pair was nesting in the hollow of a mallee bush ( Eucalyptus dumosa) about 10 feet high. The nest contained five eggs, well incubated. The call note and flight of this bird are not unlike that of Platycercus eximius 368 MALLEE PARROT. Dr. Macgillivray ( Emu , Vol. X., pp. 18-22, 1910), writing about the birds of the Barrier Range, New South Wales, notes: “ The two next hollows examined contained well-feathered young of the Mallee Parrakeet ( Barnardius barnardi). These Parrakeets are early spring breeders, and throughout our trip most of the nesting hollows examined contained young.” This was about the 11th September. Mr. F. E. Wilson, in the Eynu, Vol. XII., p. 32, 1912, however, found quite the reverse in the Victorian Mallee about the 26th August, viz. : “ This is a very common bird in the Mallee country, and its handsome plumage never fails to attract the eye. We were somewhat early for eggs, as all the nesting hollows we examined were only being cleared out.” Captain S. A. White [Emu, Vol. XII., p. 128, 1912), in his valuable notes (Field Ornithology in South Australia ) from the Port Augusta District, observed : “ On the other hand, we met with great numbers of the Barnard Parrakeet (. Barnardius barnardi). We first saw them on the foothills of the range, along the creeks, where they emptied out upon the plain — just an odd pair or two ; but on our advancing into the range they became more and more plentiful. We often surprised a small party feeding upon the ground. They would rise with much fuss, but, up to the time of alarming them, there was no intimation of their presence. Where the introduced tobacco-plant ( Nicotiana glauca ) flourished, its seeds seemed to form their chief food.” Later, recording the results of a Trip to the Northern End of Flinders Range, Captain White wrote (Emu, Vol. XV., p. 158, 1916) : “ Barnardius barnardi lindoi S. A. White ( S . A. Ornithologist, Vol. II., part 5). This new subspecies is quite distinct from the Mallee form, the coloration of the entire body differing. In habits and its habitat this bird resembles B. zonarius more than B. barnardi. The female differs very markedly from the male. The yellow band on the first year’s plumage of the young is much mottled with deep red. Found all along the gum creeks, but never any distance away from them. Stomachs were much distended with green acacia seeds.” Mr. J. W. Mellor has written me about a trip he made to the Flinders Ranges : “ Barnardius barnardi lindoi S. A. White. These birds were very plentiful all along the dry sandy creeks, where the red gums were growing ; they were for the most part in pairs and with old young ; when going along a track one would often flush them from the ground, and they seemed to feed principally upon grass seed and the seeds of acacias that were growing adjacent to the creeks ; they also nibbled the seed vessels of the eucalypts. Their call was a loud clear whistle, also a chattering call when together ; when angry, as seen in a fight when one cock bird happened to infringe the rights of place with another of his own sex, they become extremely ‘ talkative,’ vol. vl 369 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. and their clatter and chatter is loud and jerky, at the same time spreading the tail and wagging it from side to side, and ruffling the feathers of the body and head and gesticulating very much with the latter, bobbing it up and down and on one side and the other. They bred in the hollow gum spouts and bowls, fairly high and out of reach of their enemies ; the sombre colour of these birds as compared with the southern (mallee type) was at once noted before we shot specimens for examination ; they seemed also to keep to the large trees and not to dwell in the lower scrub trees.” From the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., I quote the following : Mr. K. H. Bennett of Yandembah Station, New South Wales, wrote : “ Platycercus barnardi is somewhat widely distributed throughout the timbered back country and the belts of timber bordering the rivers, but cannot be termed numerous, and is very rarely met with in the clumps of timber dotted over the plains.” Mr. Robert Grant added : “I found the ‘ Buln Buln ’ Parrakeet ( Platycercus barnardi ) numerous on the Macquarie, Bogan and Castlereagh Rivers, New South Wales. While collecting on Byrock Station in October, 1886, large numbers of these birds used to frequent a tank near the house.” From Broken Hill, Dr. W. Macgillivray wrote : “ This part of New South Wales must be considered one of the strongholds of Barnadius barnardi as no commoner bird exists on all the creeks which traverse it. It is quite an easy matter for anyone to follow one of these creeks down leisurely and find thirty or more nests in a day. It is, however, another thing to get at their contents.” Regarding Barnardius macgiUivrayi North, I received two skins from Dr. Macgillivray, who wrote : “ They are most numerous on the small Creeks that run from the Cloncurry Ranges on either side of the watershed, dividing the headwaters of that river from the Diamantina River. Eighty miles north along the Cloncurry River is their limit in that direction and the Leichhardt River to the North-west. How far south they go along the Diamantina and Georgina is uncertain and it would be interesting to follow them south to see whether they interosculate with B. barnardi which I have traced as far north from here as Cooper’s Creek. Their general economy is similar to other members of the genus.” It will be gathered from the preceding that really we know little of the life history of this species, and it is certain that we do not understand the plumage changes and variation. No subspecies were recognised for many years, but in 1900 North described as a distinct species Platycercus macgiUivrayi from the Burke District, North Queensland : North’s own differential characters were the lack of the 370 MALLEE PARROT. red frontal band, the light green coloration of the back, the yellowish green foreneck and breast and the rich yellow abdomen and lower breast. Specimens were sent by North to Sclater who exhibited it at the meeting of the British Ornithological Club after sending it to Count Salvadori for confirmation and then had it figured in the Ibis. When I prepared my “Reference List to the Birds of Australia,” I reduced inacgillivrayi to subspecific rank and proposed two new subspecies, admitting four subspecies as follows : Platycercus barnardi barnardi Vigors and Horsfield. South Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. Platycercus barnardi whitei, subsp. n. Differs from P. C. barnardi in having the head, from the red forehead band to the yellow collar, uniform dark brown. Ulooloo, Flinders Range, South Australia. Platycercus barnardi augustus , subsp. n. Differs from P. b. whitei in having a green, not blue, back. Port Augusta, South Australia. Platycercus barnardi 'inacgillivrayi North. North Queensland.” I had to review the species for my List of the Birds of Australia , and I suppressed P. b. augustus as being a phase, seasonal or sexual, of P. b. whitei. I reinstated the genus name Barnardius, which I had formerly regarded as based solely on colour and therefore negligible, and recognised three sub- species only, thus : Barnardius barnardi barnardi (Vigors and Horsfield). Queensland : New South Wales, Victoria. Barnardius barnardi whitei Mathews. South Australia. Barnardius barnardi inacgillivrayi (North). Interior of Queensland. Recently my friend, Captain S. A. White, has re-named the Flinders Range form B. b. lindoi, so that this form has now three names. He alludes to its resemblance to the next species and also regards it as having similar habits. I may observe that this resemblance attracted me so much that when I was preparing my “Reference List,” I deliberated along time whether I should amalgamate the two species or not, and decided in favour of the latter view. I might add that the species really represent each other east and west of the Flinders Range which is the habitat of the intermediate form. It will be interesting to work out the range of the interior forms as it is possible they South if Mid- 371 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. may not inosculate, as they appear to be so well differentiated as far as we know them at present. The northernmost form lacks the red frontal band and the dark nape, while the Flinders Range form has the nape coloration of the typical form extending over the top of the head, the frontal red band is retained though paler. It will be noted that the forehead coloration was regarded as of specific value by Salvadori in this genus, but criticism of a long series shows it only to be an individual feature. The back is pale bluish green in the northern form, and a dark bluish back at the other extreme, but the Flinders Range form has a blue green back and rump, the rump in the typical form being paler and contrasting with the back. The undersurface coloration is variable in the typical form, being pale green or blue-green with a narrow band of yellow feathers across the lower breast, sometimes sprinkled with red, while at others altogether missing. The northern form has the upper breast paler, but the lower breast and abdomen orange, the under tail-coverts being, however, green. The under surface coloration of the Flinders Range form is more bluish on the upper breast, and greyish on the abdomen, a broad orange band across the belly. Three subspecies can be thus still recognised. Barnardius barnardi barnardi (Vigors and Horsfield). New South Wales (Interior) : Mallee of Victoria and South Australia. Barnardius barnardi macgillivrayi North. Interior Mid-Queensland. Barnardus barnardi whitei Mathews. Flinders Range, South Australia. Of the last named Platycercus barnardi auyustus Mathews and Barnardius barnardi lindoi S. A. White are synonyms. 372 3_ 5 BARNARDIUS OCCIDENTALIS . (NORTHERN YELLOW -BANDER PARROT J. '.3 v* *>r > -AT Witherby & C BARNARDIUS DUN DAS I. Order PSITTACIF0EME8. No. 360. Family PL A T Y CEROID M. BARNARDIUS ZONARIUS. YELLOW-BANDED PARROT. (Plate 308.)* Psittacus ZONARIUS Shaw and Nodder, Naturalists’ Miscellany, Vol. XVI., pi. 657 [658], Feb. 1st, 1805 : Port Lincoln, South Australia. Psittacus zonarius Shaw and Nodder, Nat. Miscel., Vol. XVI., pi. 657 [658], 1805 ; Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 51, 1820. Psittacus viridis (not Perry 1810) Shaw, Gen. Zool., Vol. VIII., pt. n., p. 465, 1812 ; Port Lincoln, South Australia. Psittacus cyanomelas Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 53, 1820 : Memory Cove, South Australia. Psittacus melanocephalus Kuhl, ib. (ex Brown MS., not of Linne 1758). Psittacus baueri Temminok, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XIII., p. 118, 1821 (Memory Cove, S.A., same bird) ; Donovan, Naturalists’ Repository, Vol. II., pi. 64, 1824. Platycercus baueri Vigors, Zool. Journ., Vol. I., p. 528, 1825 ; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 283, 1827 ; Lear, Illustr. Psitt., pt. vi., Aug. 1, 1831 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xi. (Vol. V., pi. 20), 1843. Nanodes ? zonarius Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 119, 1826. Psittacus semitorquatus Quoy & Gaimard, Voy. de l’Astrol. Zool., Vol. I., p. 237, 1830 : King George’s Sound, West Australia. Platycercus zonarius Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., pp. 491, 534, 705, 1832 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 43, 1865 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 212, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878 ; Reichenow, Joum. fur Om. 1881, p. 124 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittac., p. 48, 1891 ; North, Rep. Horn Sci. Exped., pt. n., Zool., p. 63, 1896 (Central). Platycercus semitorquatus Lesson, Compl. de Buff, Vol. IX., Ois, p. 221, 1837 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xi. (Vol. V., pi. 19), 1843 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 42, 1865 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 209, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 193, 1878; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 124; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 16, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 257, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittac., p. 46, 1891. Barnardius baueri Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1854, p. 153. * The Plate is lettered Barnardius occidentalis and B dundasi. VOL. VI. 373 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. JBarnardius zonarius Bonaparte, ib. ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 560, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 66, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 642, 1901 ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral, p. 50, 1908 ; Ogilvie- Grant, Ibis, 1910, p. 162 (W.A.) ; Hall, Emu, Vol. IX., p. 131, 1910 (S.A.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 138, 1911 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XII., p. 7, 1912 (S.A.) ; id., ib., Vol. XIII., p. 23, 1913 (S.A.) ; Orton and Sandland, ib., p. 77, 1913 (W.A.) ; S. A. White, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr., Vol. XXXVIII., p. 427, 1914 (Central) ; id., Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 187, 1915 (Central). Barnardius semitorquatus Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. Zool. 1854, p. 153 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 559, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 66, 1899; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 641, 1901 ; Hall, Ibis, 1902, p. 194 (W.A.) ; Milligan, Emu, Vol. II., p. 75, 1902 (W.A.) ; Lawson, Emu, Vol. IV., p. 136, 1905 (W.A.) ; Nicholls, ib., Vol. V., p. 80, 1905 (W.A.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 50, 1908; Ogilvie-Grant, Ibis, 1910, p. 161 (W.A.); North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 136, 1911 ; Orton and Sandland, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 77, 1913, W.A. Platycercus occidentalis North, Records Austr. Mus., Vol. II., p. 83, 1893 : Roeburne, North-west Australia. Barnardius occidentalis Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 66, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 643, 1901 ; Carter, Emu, Vol. III., p. 172, 1904 (M.W.A.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 50, 1908 ; Whitlock, Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 192, 1909 (M.W.A.) ; id., ib., Vol. IX., p. 192, 1910 (W.A.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 139, 1911. Barnardius zonarius occidentalis Hartert, Nov. Zool., Vol. XII., p. 213, 1905 (N.W.A.) ; Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 135, 1913. Platycercus zonarius zonarius Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVni., p. 274, 1912. Platycercus zonarius occidentalis Mathews, ib., p. 275. Platycercus zonarius semitorquatus Mathews, ib., p. 274. Platycercus zonarius dundasi Mathews, ib., p. 274, Lake Dundas, West Australia. Platycercus zonarius connectens Mathews, ib., East Murchison, West Australia. Barnardius zonarius zonarius Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 134, 1913. Barnardius zonarius dundasi Mathews, ib. Barnardius zonarius semitorquatus Mathews, ib., p. 135. Barnardius zonarius connectens Mathews, ib. Barnardius zonarius occidentalis Mathews, ib. Barnardius zonarius myrtce S. A. White, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr., Vol. XXXIX., p. 745, 1915 : Finke River, Central ; id.. Emu, Vol. XVI., p. 68, pi. 1, 1916. Distribution. South- and Mid-west Australia and South Australia Coastal and Interior : from Roeburne W.A. to Eyre’s Peninsula, S.A. Adult male. General colour pale yellowish green including the back, wings, tail, breast, flanks, and under tail-coverts darker on the mantle, back, and scapulars, paler on the inner upper wing-coverts, rump, upper tail-coverts, flanks, and under tail- coverts ; outer median upper wing-coverts very pale blue ; bastard-wing deep blue, YELLOW-BANDED PARROT. dark brown at the tip and on the inner-web at the base ; primary-coverts and quills dark brown, deep blue on the outer-webs, outer primary-quills paler on the terminal portion and outer edges, secondaries green on the outer-webs and dark brown or blackish on the inner ones ; middle tail-feathers dark green, the outer feathers with more or less green at the base followed by dark blue, with a certain amount of dark brown on the inner-webs, and very pale blue tips ; crown of head and lores dark brown with a tinge of green on the forehead ; nuchal collar lemon- yellow ; sides of face and throat turquoise-blue ; abdomen yellow ; axillaries, under wing-coverts, and edge of wing cobalt-blue ; greater under wing-coverts and quill lining dark brown ; lower aspect of tail dark brown on the middle feathers, outer feathers pale iridescent blue. Bill bluish-white, eyes brown, feet and legs grey. Total length 385 mm. ; culmen 20, wing 176, tail 218, tarsus 22. Figured. Collected on the Coongan River, Mid-west Australia, on the 6th of July, 1908. and is Platycercus zonarius occidentalis (North). Adult females from the same locality are similar. Adult female. Back, scapulars, innermost secondaries, and upper wing-coverts green with dark brown edges and mottlings ; rump, and upper tail-coverts tinged with pale blue ; some of the outer upper wing-coverts yellowish-green, those round the bend of the wing pale blue ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts and quills dark brown, becoming paler at the tips of the primaries, especially on the outer-webs, with deep blue on the outer-webs except the secondaries which are green on the outer webs ; the four middle tail-feathers similar in colour to the back with paler tips, the outer feathers for the most part blue becoming very pale at the tips ; crown of head and nape dark brown with a slight tinge of green on the forehead ; sides of face blue ; a collar which almost encircles the neck lemon-yellow ; breast green with a pale bluish tinge ; under wing-coverts and axillaries inclining to cobalt-blue ; abdomen yellow becoming pale green on the flanks, thighs and under tail-coverts ; lower aspect of quills and tail brown, the outer-feathers of the latter iridescent blue on the terminal portion. Bill bluish-white, eyes deep brown, feet iron-grey. Total length 395 mm. ; culmen 22, wing 172, tail 209, tarsus 20. Figured. Collected at Lake Dundas, South-west Australia, on the 24th of May, 1905, and is my type of Platycercus zonarius dundasi. Adult males from the same locality are similar. Immature are duller all over. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch four or five. White. 29-33 mm. by 23-25. Breeding-season. August to November (but varies according to the rains in different parts). It is rather difficult to deal coherently with this species, as I here consider as one species a series of birds which have been separated into two distinct species, also including a recently described third species. The earliest described form came from Port Lincoln, South Australia, and this received two names : the description not being perfect, this form was re-described from almost the type-locality and again two names were bestowed upon it. From King George’s Sound a different-looking bird was described later, and these two have been commonly regarded as distinct species. The discrimination of the forms belongs more exactly to the technical portion of this article, so I propose to deal with what is known of the habits first, keeping as close as possible to the geographical ranges of the forms. 375 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Under the name Barnardius z. zonarius , Captain S. A. White has written me : “ This bird is confined practically to Eyre’s Peninsula, although of late years there have been instances when this bird has almost reached Port Augusta. These birds nest in September and October, clutch four, laid upon the bare wood.” Mr. J. W. Mellor’s notes read: “ Commonly known as the Port Lincoln Parrot, as that is the place where they were very plentiful in the early days, but now they are not nearly so numerous, but are nevertheless found all over Eyre Peninsula. I have noted them in the Kippis Ranges : I also saw them sparsely in Oleve Ranges inland from Arno Bay, when after the Mallee Fowl for the Kangaroo Island Reserve. Their call is several sharp whistling notes, and also a note somewhat like that of the Rosella parrot : they are very pugilistic, and not more than one pair are able to breed in one place, as they start to fight directly one pair trespasses in the nesting-haunts of another pair : they go for one another with a will, chattering all the time with a harsh noise, fluttering their wings about and spreading their tails in their excitement and fury. I have found their nests in hollow spouts and limbs of the gums, the sugar gum with its gnarled and twisted limbs forming admirable hollows in which they lay four white eggs, starting to breed in October and going on for the next month or two. Its food consists of all kinds of grass seeds and seeds of various plants, while it is very fond of berries and fruits.” In the Emu , Vol. XIII., p. 23, 1913, Captain White wrote as follows : “We were much surprised to meet with these Parrots just after passing through Lincoln Gap (Gawler Ranges, South Australia), for we had no idea that this bird had worked so far north. Reliable old residents assured us that it was only within the last few years that these Parrots had been seen in the district ; yet it has come to my knowledge that Mr. J. W. Mellor procured this bird in the same year, and somewhere about the same time, at Port Germein, showing that the bird must have flown over the Gulf and is pushing northward. We found these birds rare amongst the ranges, but, when we entered the Mallee belt, which extends from the Western Australian border and ends abruptly at the south-western end of the ranges, the birds were seen assembled in numbers amidst the large mallee to nest. We were rather early, and just before we left this interesting piece of country they had started to clean out their nesting hollows, making a great fuss the while. The male would pose in all attitudes — hang head downwards, swing from under the limb (where his mate was busy scraping out decayed wood and bark), his tail oscillating energetically from side to side, and all the while making an outrageous chattering call. On 7th September we took a full clutch of four eggs from a very large mallee, about 2 ft. from the ground, eggs slightly incubated, and laid on 376 YELLOW-BANDED PARROT. the bare wood-dust. On the following day, just before leaving, we visited a nest which we cut open on the 5th (to find the nest ready to lay in) ; this time there were two eggs.” Orton and Sandland, writing on the birds of Moora, West Australia (Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 77, 1913), record : Barnadius semitorquatus. Common west of Moora. None seen within ten miles of the town. Barnardius zonarius. One of the commonest birds. An unmitigated pest in orchards.” Reporting upon the birds collected by the Horn Expedition to Central Australia, North remarked : “ Two specimens marked females are much brighter in colour than others obtained in the southern portion of the colony,” adding Keartland’s notes: “Some surprise was felt at the wide extent of country over which this beautiful Parakeet was found, the first pair being seen at Macumba Creek. They were afterwards found throughout the trip, where- ever water existed. At Stevenson’s Creek two black boys were preparing their supper, which consisted of nestlings of this species, which they had taken from the spouts of the eucalypts along its margin. On 12th May, whilst resting at Adminga Creek, a young bird, with its yellow bill denoting its age, and apparently enjoying its first fiy, fluttered on to a branch close to our party. I then saw, and afterwards confirmed, that many of the young ones are quite as brilliant in plumage as the mature birds. Although generally in pairs, flocks of six or seven are not uncommon, probably being the parent birds and young brood. Their chief food is grass-seed, but they also display great activity in climbing amongst the foliage in search of blossom.” This Central Australian form was named B. z. myrtce by Captain S. A. White, who wrote me : “ This is a larger and more brightly plumaged bird in comparison to B. z. zonarius : it is fairly plentiful on all gum creeks and rivers between Oodnadatta and the MacDonnell Ranges, and between Oodnadatta and the Musgrave and Everard Ranges they were often seen feeding upon the ground, picking up fallen acacia seeds.” In the Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr ., Vol. XXXVIII., 1914, p. 427, Captain White had observed : “ Barnardus zonarius (1). This bird undoubtedly differs greatly in its bright plumage from our southern birds and just as much from Barnardius zonarius occidentals North. We met with this beautiful parrot all through the expedition : where there was water in the gum-fined creeks, so sure this bird would be found.” In the Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 187, 1915, this was emphasized by Captain White: “ Barnardius zonarius subsp.? This is the same subspecies which is found from Oodnadatta to the Macdonnell Ranges.” (That is in the Musgrave and Everard Ranges.) 377 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Under the name Barnardius seynitorquatus, Mr. Tom Carter has written me : “ These birds simply swarm all through the south-west in the neighbour- hood of orchards, especially when the fruit begins to ripen. They are not so much in evidence in the bush, and one wonders at the numbers that can be shot at in an orchard, for weeks together, without apparently reducing their numbers. Thus, while staying at the Warren, on the Warren River, in the extreme south-west corner, for about ten days in February, 1910, Mr. Brockman and myself between us shot from fifty to one hundred every day, but there seemed as many as ever. I may mention that out of some hundreds of dead birds that passed through my hands there, only one had anything in the nature of a yellow ventral band, and that was slight. Birds shot by me about Denmark (on Wilson’s Inlet on south coast) had all green underparts. About Broome Hill and east of there, most of the birds had yellow bands. On the coastal hills, near Cape Naturaliste, these birds were in immense numbers (green bodies) in the summer months (Dec. -January). The birds at Broome Hill are very wary when breeding, and I never found a nest, nor yet had any eggs brought to me, although boys were offered 6d. for each egg, and they tried hard to get some. The earliest fledged young were noted on Sept. 29, 1910, and others on various dates to Nov. 20 in other years at Broome Hill. The young begin to eat fruit in early December. I have often seen the old birds bite off a long shoot, bearing several peaches, from a tree, and then descend to the ground to eat the fruit in greater comfort. Several times have I been picking peaches from one side of a tree (about five years old) and after some minutes discover that some of these Parrots were doing the same on the other side. The only way in which I could save Peaches was by enclosing the trees in wire netting on a frame around them. When the trees were young and peaches few, I tried sewing muslin bags round the fruit, but the Parrots either promptly tore the bags to pieces or bit the branches in two. They ate Quinces when quite hard and green. Even before there is any fruit on the trees, these birds bite through or round the young branches, and so killed them. They are terrible pests. The local name through the south-west generally is “ Ring-necks.” About Kellenberin, 100 miles east of Perth, one of the smaller subspecies occurs, perhaps connectens. They are equally destructive to fruit, especially grapes, which are largely grown in that district. The eggs (about six in number) are placed in cavities high up in the trees.” Mr. W. B. Alexander informs Me : “ B. z. semitorquatus. This is the true ‘ Twenty-eight,’ so called from the considerable resemblance of one of its calls to these syllables. It is very plentiful from Perth round the south-west to Albany, its range appearing to coincide with that of the Jarrah ( Eucalyptus marginata). B. z. dundasi. This smaller form of the ‘ Twenty-eight,’ which 378 YELLOW-BANDED PARROT. lacks the red patch on the forehead, is, as far as my experience goes, an inhabitant of Salmon-gum ( Eucalyptus salmonophloia) country. Its notes are very similar to those of its ally, but are sufficiently distinct to be recognised as those of a different bird. I do not know of any difference in habits. I have met with the subspecies in the type-locality Norseman, as well as in the Merredin district.” These latter would more probably be B. z. connectens. Mr. Edwin Ashby has written me : 44 B. z. semitorquatus . In May, 1889, these birds were very numerous at Eticup, West Australia, and were doing a great deal of harm to the newly sown wheat ; a farmer emptied out a wheat sack more than half full of dead birds of this species which had been killed that morning through eating poisoned wheat. Through that part of West Australia they are called 4 Twenty-eights,’ from their call, which is a whistle of three notes, the last one drawn out, the combination giving some resemblance to the utterance of the aforesaid word.” Mr. A. W. Milligan {Emu, Vol. II., p. 75, 1902), writing on the birds of the Margaret River district, South-west Australia, stated : “ Barnardius semi- torquatus. These birds were very abundant everywhere. They and the Leaden Crow-Shrikes were more in evidence in the coastal hills and scrubs than any other birds. Within an oblong area of, say, three miles by one, there must have been hundreds of thousands of them. Some early birds were just beginning to nest. A lipped hole in a karri tree is usually chosen for the purpose. On the occasion of my second visit the birds had evidently retired into the forests, for they were not nearly so numerous on the coast.” Quoy and Gaimard figured a large green Parrot from King George’s Sound as Psittacus semitorquatus. Though the colouring is bad the name has been accepted, as there is no other bird at all like this one. The coastal birds are very green above, very large, and mostly green below, very little yellow being seen on the lower breast. North has commented on the variation, noting that some specimens do show a yellow band across the lower breast, but concluded this was a senile state. He also gives Masters’ experience regarding the variation, and quotes Carter. In the Ibis , 1910, Ogilvie-Grant, reporting upon a collection of birds made in West Australia, discriminated two species, B. zonarius and B. semitorquatus, recorded ; 44 It is evident at Beverley the ranges of B. semitorquatus and B. zonarius meet, and probably the birds to some extent interbreed, which would account for the intermediate forms to be found there.” The facts suggest that semitorquatus can only be considered a coastal and larger form of zonarius, and I accepted that view in 1911, and all the material since endorses that view. The species, hereafter dealt with, was even suppressed 379 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. altogether, but as Campbell had previously observed it and Carter and Whitlock, both good field observers, admit it, it can be regarded as a good subspecies. It is, however, curious that on the North-west Coast a form should be present which is so very close to the present South Australian coastal form. In connection with no other Parrot do we get such an occurrence. In 1893, North {Rec. Austr. Mus ., V ol. II., p. 83, Sept.) described Platycercus occidentalis from two specimens from Roeburne, North-west Australia, giving as differential characters: “In the disposition of its markings Platycercus occidentals resembles P. zonarius , but it differs from that species in having light blue instead of dark blue cheeks ; in the greater extent of the conspicuous lemon-yellow of the lower portion of the breast and the whole of the abdomen, and which extends as far as the vent , instead of the deep gamboge yellow of the centre of the abdomen only ; in the verditer green of the chest, back, wings, scapulars and interscapular region, instead of dark green and in the absence of the narrow black band, immediately below the collar.” Ogilvie-Grant {Ibis, 1910, p. 162) dismissed this altogether, writing : “ I have no doubt that B. occidentalis, a name given by North to two specimens of Barnardius , procured at Roeburne in the north-western division of West Australia, is synonymous with B. zonarius ; the birds procured by Mr Shortridge on the Gascoyne River agree well enough with Mr. North’s description, being also in worn plumage, but they are most certainly referable to B . zonarius The specimens referred to by Ogilvie-Grant being preserved in the British Museum (Natural History) are “ certainly referable ” to B. zonarius, but they are obviously separable as a variation as regards colour, and as other specimens agree they constitute a recognisable subspecies, but they do not exactly agree with North’s description even as Ogilvie-Grant worded it “ well enough,” but that little difference indicates a subspecific value if constant. The first discoverer of this form seems to have been A. J. Campbell, as he writes {Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 642, 1901) : “ On Boxing Day, 1889, when shooting with Mr. R. H. Cowan, on the Greenough River, Champion Bay district. West Australia, we heard the peculiar chattering voices of Parrots in light metallic tones. We soon shot specimens, which resembled the Yellow-banded, yet by their lighter colour and smaller size, seemed different. However, on sending an example to the British Museum, Court Salvadori classed it with B. zonarius .” Mr. Tom Carter’s notes on this form read : Barnardius occidentalis. This parrot occurs north of Geraldton, West Australia, and through the North- west. They were more numerous in the white gum timber of the Gascoyne River bed than any other place that came under my observation, and I think 380 YELLOW-BANDED PARROT. that they have much increased in numbers of late years in the vicinity of the Port (Carnarvon) very probably having been attracted there by the many fruit orchards now established on the banks of the river about two miles from the township. Against this must be set the fact that the young birds are in much request for cages. The eggs, about five in number, are laid in cavities in the trees, usually some distance from the ground, about September, the middle of that month being about the height of the breeding season. Sept. 16, 1913, Many nests with eggs were noted on the Gascoyne River. On October 5, 1887, I climbed to several nests on the Lower Murchison River, but found they all contained young birds. These birds were not observed at Point Cloates, there being no timber, but were sparingly distributed further north on the North-west Cape peninsula about the Yardie Creek, and in the scattered timber (mostly White Gum) on the west side of the Exmouth Gulf. The centre of the peninsula consists of very rugged ranges (up to 2000 feet), with many deep gorges and short creeks, in the beds of which stunted White Gums grow.” In the Emu , Vol. VIII., p. 192, 1909, Whitlock wrote : “ Native name Pun-bunba. In scattered pairs all along the Coongan and de Grey. This seems rather a secretive species, and will remain sitting in the shade for hours at a time. Except in one instance, when I saw four together, I never observed more than one pair at the same moment. I was greatly puzzled with regard to the breeding of this species. I gave a lot of time to the question, but the solitary case in which any evidence of nesting was apparent was on the lower Coongan. I had a native with me, and after a long search he climbed a tree and chopped out a cavity in which he said he thought there was a nest of the * Pun-bunba.’ The cavity certainly did contain an egg, but this was unfortunately broken by a chip of wood falling upon it during operations. I saw nothing whatever of the birds at the moment. I am strongly of opinion that this Parrakeet was not breeding, and may delay nesting operations until the eucalypts are in full bloom ; or for some special seed to mature, on which to feed the young. On the de Grey the same state of things prevailed, and though I offered the blacks a liberal reward for either eggs or young, none were brought into camp.” In the next volume, curiously the corresponding page, Whitlock relates his experiences with the species on the East Murchison : “ I saw nothing of this species, with the exception of a solitary old female, which I shot, in the intervening tract of country between Lake Violet and the main Lake Way, until I reached Milly Pool. Here it was common, and breeding in the hollow eucalypts. With the aid of ropes brought out by the Cockatoo -hunters, I got several nests, but only one clutch of six eggs. These were in a filthy state, and had to be cleaned with hot soapy water. The eggs were fresh, but two VOL. VX. 381 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. of them were claw-marked. This was on 27th September, and must have been rather a late laying. I seldom have the luck to get a perfect clutch of Parrots’ eggs — one or other is sure to be cracked or to have a small hole pierced in the shell.” Though, as recorded above, variation has been observed, it is comparatively restricted and the species is easily split up into well-marked subspecies. This was observed when I made up my “ Reference List to the Birds of Australia ” (Nov. Zool ., Vol. XVIII., p. 274/5, 1912), when, instead of two or three species, I recognised five subspecies, thus : Platycercus zonarius zonarius (Shaw and Nodder), South Australia. Platycercus zonarius semitorquatus (Quoy and Oaimard), South-west Australia. Platycercus zonarius dundasi. “Differs from P. z. semitorquatus in lacking the red frontal band: and from P . z. zonarius in the deep green on the upper surface. Lake Dundas, West Australia.” Platycercus zonarius connectens. “ Differs from P. z. occidentalis in having the rump uniform with the back ; the yellow band on the abdomen more distinct, but not as bright as in P. 2. zonarius .” East Murchison, Mid-Westralia. Platycercus zonarius occidentalis North. North-west Australia.” After reconsideration these were maintained, the genus name Barnardius being revived, in my List of the Birds of Australia , published in 1913. Since then Captain S. A. White has distinguished the Central Australian form as Barnardius zonarius myrtce , and a coloured plate of this has been given in the Emu. Again reviewing the species, I recognise six subspecies, as when series are laid out these are easily separable, and as a rule single birds are determinable at sight. It is necessary to note that the yellow lower breast band is subject to variation as is also the red forehead : the latter is generally well pronounced in the large green subspecies semitorquatus , but as recorded by Carter and North is sometimes missing : it is commonly absent in the other subspecies, but indications are often seen in those. To recapitulate : Barnardius zonarius zonarius (Shaw & Nodder). Eyre’s Peninsula, South Australia. Barnardius zonarius myrtce S. A. White. Central Australia. To give the author’s own wording : “ Differs in having a much brighter coloration throughout, and, being a somewhat larger bird, the feathers of the 382 YELLOW-BANDED PARROT. chest and back, instead of being a dark green with an olive tinge, are of bright green : the rump and upper tail coverts are a bright yellowish green.” Barnardius zonarius dundasi (Mathews). South-east of West Australia. Instead of being lighter than B. z. zonarius this is a darker green and is smaller than the next form and generally lacks the red frontal band. It has the conspicuous yellow breast band of the former. Barnardius zonarius semitorquatus (Quoy and Gaimard). Coastal districts of South-west Australia. This is much larger than any other subspecies, has a dark green upper-surface, and generally a noticeable red frontal band ; the under-surface has the yellow band much restricted and sometimes almost missing. Barnardius zonarius connectens (Mathews). Mid-west Australia. This form is lighter than typical B. z. zonarius , the back feathers having a blue tinge, while the yellow lower breast band is well marked. It may be that more than one form is here confused, as it appears to have a more extensive range than any other subspecies, and long series from different localities are not available. Ogilvie-Grant records that intermediates between this and the preceding subspecies occur at Beverley, while the birds from Carnarvon he, and also Count Salvadori, would refer to the typical subspecies. Barnardius zonarius occidentals (North). North of Mid- west Australia. This is a paler form than the preceding, and its range is not yet fixed, as this has been confounded by most field observers. \ 383 Genus— P URPUREICEPHALUS. Purpureicephalus Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. de Zool., Vol. VI., p. 153, 1854 . . . . . . . . . . . . Type P. spurius . Porphyreicephalus Reichenow, Vogelbild. Syst. Verz., p. 1, 1883 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Type P. spurius . Also spelt — Porphyrocephalus Heine, Nomencl. Mub. Hein., 241, 1890. Large Platycercine birds with very long projecting bills, long wings, very long wedge-shaped tails, small feet and peculiar coloration. The bill is the distinctive feature of this genus, ‘which is otherwise very similar to Barnardius. The bill is very long and projecting, with the tip very long and sharp : the whole bill very narrow and about three times as long as the depth at the base ; the under edge of the upper mandible bearing a distinct gap succeeding the long tip but thence almost straight to base : the under mandible deep and very narrow, the tip very long and the cutting edge straight ; the sides strongly sinuate. The cere is naked, the nostrils high up and circular in shape. The wing is long with the third primary longest, the second shorter, but longer than the fourth, the first and fifth shorter and about equal. The first primary is not emarginate on the outer web like the succeeding four. The tail is very long and composed of broadly elongate feathers : it is strongly wedge-shaped, but the middle four feathers are about equal, the two centre ones slightly longest. The feet are normal and small, but comparatively long and thin. The genus is monotypic and constitutes one of the very interesting phylogenetic studies in the Australian Psittaciform birds. It is rather obviously from colour pattern, a close ally to the Barnardius group, but with the evolution of few colour changes it has developed a most peculiar bill alteration. This is remarkable, as the bill seems little altered in Barnardius from Platycercus , though the colour change has been very great. It is rather peculiar in showing the dominance of the erythristic element, which is practically missing in Barnardius , while a counterpoise seems to have been reached between the erythristic and cyanistic elements, the latter dominating in Barnardius. Thus the immature is wholly green above with the under-surface tending in the cyanistic direction : the mature has the top of 384 PURPUREICEPHALUS. the head wholly red and the under-surface “ red- blue,” i.e. violet or mauve, with the under tail-coverts scarlet. Another curious item is the loss of the blue cheeks, exactly as in the Platycercus of West Australia. It may be conjectured that Purpureicephalus travelled to West Australia at the same time, and in the corresponding stage of evolution, as Platycercus did, and developed in that country exactly as that genus seems to have done. In the east the birds evolved into Barnardius along parallel lines and then wandered westward. Such a theory would account for the presence of the two forms in West Australia and would also suggest, as I have constantly advocated, that colour pattern is commonly older than structural features. In this case we have an extraordinary (for the family) bill evolution, while the colour change has been inconsiderable and can be easily seen. W 385 Order PSITTAGIFORMES. Family PLATYCERCIDM No. 361. PURPUREICEPHALUS SPURIUS. RED-CAPPED PARROT. (Plate 309.) Psittacus SPURIUS Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 52, 1820 : Nova Hollandia ” = Albany, South-west Australia. Psittacus spurius Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 52, 1820 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., p. 741, 1832 ; Pucheran, Rev. Mag. de ZooL, 1853, p. 158. Platycercus pileatus Vigors, Zool. Journ., Vol. V., p. 274, June, 1830 : Albany ; Lear, Illustr. Psittac., pt. n., Nov. 1, 1830 : pt. xn., 1832 ; Jardine and Selby, Illustr. Omith., Vol. II., pi. 102, Dec., 1830 ; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., pp. 491, 528, 703, 1832 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xix. (Vol. V., pi. 32), 1845. Platycercus rufifrons Lesson, Traite d’Ornith., p. 208, July, 1830 : Albany, South-west Australia ; Pucheran, Rev. Mag. de Zool., 1853, p. 158 ; Hartlaub, Journ. fur Ora., 1855, p. 422. Psittacus purpureocephalus Quoy and Gaimard, Voy. de l’Astrol. Zool., Vol. I., p. 235, pl* xxn., 1830 : King George’s Sound = Albany, South-west Australia. Platycercus purpureocephalus Lesson, Compl. de Buff, Vol. IX., Ois., p. 221, 1837. Pur pur eicephalus pileatus Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1854, p. 153 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 60, 1865 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 259, 1890. Psittacus purpureocapillus Z. Gerbe, Diet. Univ. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. IX., p. 641, 1861 (error for purpureocephalus). Platycercus spurius Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 201, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Dinn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 125; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittac., p. 67, 1891. P or phyr eicephalus spurius Reiohenow, Vogelbild. Syst. Verz., p. 1, 1883. Porphyrocephalus spurius Heine and Reichenow, Nomenel. Mus. Hein, p. 241, 1890 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 556, 1891; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 65, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 639, 1901 ; Hall, Ibis, 1902, p. 194 ; Milligan, Emu, Vol. II., p. 75, 1902 ; id., ib ., Vol. III., p. 19, 1903 ; Nicholls, ib., Vol. V., p. 81, 1905; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 49, 1908; Ogilvie-Grant, Ibis, 1910, p. 163; Whitlock, Emu, Vol. X., p. 313, 1911 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. IV., p. 442, 1914. Purpureicephcdus spurius Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVNL, p. 275, 1912 ; id.. List Birds Austr., p. 135, 1913. 386 Roland. Green, del. PURPUREICEPHALUS SPURIUS /'RED - CAPPED PARROT ) "WitKerby &. tlc RED-CAPPED PARROT. Purpureicephalus spurius carteri Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. II., p. 128, Jan. 28, 1915 : Broome Hill, South-west Australia (Inland). Purpureicephalus spurius spurius Mathews, it. Distribution. South-west Australia. Adult male. Hind neck, back, scapulars, innermost secondaries and upper wing-coverts dull green ; outer edge of wing and under wing-coverts deep blue like the outer webs of the bastard-wing, primary-coverts, and primary- quills, outer-webs of the secondaries paler blue ; inner- webs of the bastard- wing, primary-coverts, primary- and secondary- quills dark brown inclining to blackish at the base ; rump and short upper tail-coverts yellow with a greenish tinge ; long upper tail-coverts and base of tail green which extends to the tips of the two central feathers on the inner- webs, the outer-feathers blackish at the base, blue on the middle portion, and whitish at the tips ; crown of head and nape deep red ; the short feathers in front and over the eye blackish at the base and green at the tips ; sides of the face and sides of throat pale green, becoming golden-green on the sides of the neck ; a few dark feathers on the throat which are tipped with blue ; breast, abdomen and sides of the body dark blue with a pale subterminal bar to the feathers ; vent, thighs, and under tail-coverts red with more or less yellowish-green at the base of the feathers ; lower aspect of quills and middle tail-feathers dark brown, the outer feathers of the latter pale pearl-blue. Bill dark bluish-horn, eyes hazel, feet pinkish-grey. Total length 380 mm. ; culmen 25, wing 162, tail 200, tarsus 22. Figured. Collected at Broome Hill, South-west Australia, on the 3rd of November, 1907, and is the type of P. s. carteri. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Young. General colour above dull dark green including the head, hind-neck, sides of neck, scapulars, upper wing-coverts and outer-webs, and secondary-quills, all the feathers except the secondaries having dark narrow edges ; the outer upper wing- coverts inclining to bluish-green ; bastard- wing, primary-coverts and primary- quills deep blue on the outer-webs and dark brown on the inner ones, like those of the secondaries, the blue becoming very pale and scarcely perceptible on the apical portion of the primaries ; a white spot on the inner-webs of the inner-primaries which commences on the fourth outer one ; rump and short upper tail-coverts greenish-yellow, the long upper tail-coverts dull green like the back ; middle tail- feathers dark bronze-green becoming blackish at the tips, the outer feathers paler green with an ill-defined black bar followed by blue, or greenish-blue, on the apical portion and white at the tips ; sides of the face paler than the crown ; a narrow* , red line on the base of the forehead followed by a small whitish patch on the loral portion ; throat and fore-neck dusky grey with a very slight vinous tinge on the breast, abdomen very pale purplish-blue inclining to green on the sides ; lower flanks and thighs bright apple-green, the feathers margined with red ; under tail- coverts similar but paler and inclining to yellow ; under wing-coverts dull blue, the greater series and quill-lining, glossy pale brown the last irregularly marked with white ; lower aspect of tail blackish with pale iridescent blue on the outer feathers. Collected at Wilson’s Inlet, South-west Australia, on the 23rd of December, 1908. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch five to six. White. About 28 mm. by 22. Breeding-season. August to November. This beautiful bird was first described by Kuhl in 1820, from a specimen brought from New Holland, and then in the Paris Museum. The same specimen was re-named by Lesson without any additional information and was then 387 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. figured by Bourjot St. Hilaire in Ms continuation of Le Vaillant’s Perroquets. The last named gave the fact that it had been collected by Peron when he accompanied Captain Baudin. This fixes the locality whence it was procured as King George’s Sound. From that place the adult was figured and named by Quoy and Gaimard in 1830, the Kuhlian specimen being in immature plumage. Simultaneously the adult was named by Vigors and figured in Lear’s “ Parrots.” This last name was commonly accepted until Finsch in 1868 revived KuM’s name. Wagler had suggested the identity as long ago as 1832, and Pucheran confirmed tMs in 1853. Gould’s notes are reproduced here : “ The Red-capped Parrakeet is an inhabitant of Western Australia, where it is rather numerously dispersed over the country from King George’s Sound to the northern limits of the colony. I have also received specimens from the neighbourhood of Port Essington. It is usually seen in small families feeding on the ground, but upon what kind of food it subsists has not been ascertained. The breeding-season extends over the months of October, November, and December. The hollow dead branch of a gum- or maliogany-tree is the place usually chosen by the female for the reception of her eggs, which are milk-white and from seven to nine in number, about an inch and an eighth long by seven-eighths of an inch broad. The flight of this species, although swift, is not of long duration, nor is it characterised by those undulating sweeps common to the members of the genus Platycercus. Its voice is a sharp clucking note several times repeated, in which respect it also offers a marked difference from these birds.” In this note Gould records the species from Port Essington : this is a very distinct bird so that it would seem impossible for a mistake to have been made, yet since Ms time I have no records from that locality and do not know of the existence of any authenticated specimens. Mr. Tom Carter’s notes on Purpureicephalus spurius are as follows : “ This handsome bird occurs generally through the south-west, and about Broome Hill, but not in great numbers. I have observed them on the Vasse, Margaret, Blackwood and Warren Rivers. They seem to feed a great deal on the ground, especially in the Marlock scrubs about Broome Hill, but what seeds they were eating I could not ascertain. They also eat fruits in orchards, but are not nearly so bold in their habits as semitorquatus. They have a peculiar harsh grating cry. The breeding-season seems to be mostly in August and September, and the nesting cavities usually about thirty feet from ground. Oct. 26, 1908. Nest in hole (4 inches diameter) 30 ft. from ground in White Gum : contained young. Nov. 24, 1908. Same tree cut down : contained one fresh egg, apparently a second laying. On the same date another nest was seen containing half grown young. Sept. 11, 1910. Young birds in nest near Broome Hill.” 388 RED-CAPPED PARROT. Mr. W. B. Alexander writes : “ I have only met with this species at Bremer Bay, 100 miles east of Albany, where small parties, probably families, were to be found amongst the gum-trees in the valleys. This species is invariably known as King Parrot in Western Australia.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has written me : “In May, 1889, I saw a good many of this interesting parrot near Kojoriup, West Australia : they were almost always to be found feeding in the West Australian Red Gums (Eucalyptus calaphylla), which grow chiefly on the ironstone ridges. The strong and unusually long upper mandible of this parrot is an instrument well fitted to extract the seeds out of the large and wooden fruit of this gum.” Mr. A. W. Milligan, in the Emu, Vol. II., p. 75, 1902, writing of the birds of the Margaret River district, South-west Australia, recorded : “ I observed several pairs of these birds, but only in the red gum-trees. Whilst sitting at lunch one day during my first visit, under the grateful shade of a red gum-tree, I was struck on the head by one of its cup-shaped seed capsules. Attributing the falling to natural causes, I paid no further attention to the circumstance until I was struck with a second and third capsule. Examining them I found they had been freshly gnawed close to the stem. After closely scanning the thick foliage at the top of the tree, I could just see through the very thick leaves the form of a bird. A well directed shot secured for me a very handsome male bird of this species.” F. L. Whitlock (Emu, Vol. X., p. 313, 1911) has given an interesting account of the nesting of this species as follows : “ The Red-capped Parrakeet (Pophyrocephalus spurius ) was more in evidence, and I was fortunate enough to locate a nest. I frequently met with pairs, or even small parties, of this species away from the timber on the sand-plains, and think it quite possible they were last year’s progeny, and not breeding. The nest I obtained was found near Lake Balicup and gave me a lot of trouble. Every morning the parent birds fed near my camp. The difficulty was to follow their flight with the eye through the intervening timber to the nesting-tree. After exercising great patience I gradually tracked them down to the point where I usually lost one bird and saw the other fly off to a distance. At length, by hiding in some bushes, I located the tree, which was a large dead white gum, containing more than one likely-looking hole. Next morning I waited till the birds appeared, as usual, to feed, and then hurried down to my lair near the tree. I waited what seemed an interminable time till the birds appeared, and the female immediately popped into a hole in the main stem of the tree. I beat on the trank with my tomahawk, but she refused to budge. I soon had my rope- ladder at work and the sight of the dangling fishing line which must have been visible to her as she sat, caused her to leave her eggs at once. After half an VOL. VL 389 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. hour’s hard chopping, I secured five fine eggs. They were somewhat nest- stained and heavily incubated, but I am glad to say they were eventually blown. They were a little larger than typical eggs of Barnardius. This is a very handsome Parrot, and I think I never saw a finer pair than the proprietors of this nest. The native name is “ Chelyup,” which is, no doubt, a rendering of the call-note.” The range, as at present known, is confined to the extreme South-west Australia, and I recently subspecifically differentiated the more inland form as follows : Purpureicephalus spurius carteri. “ Differs from P. s. spurius in being darker above, the cheeks greener and the under-surface dark purple.” In the present place I am not recognising this form, but when more material is studied I think it will be reinstated. I have noted Gould’s record from Port Essington. I cannot give any explanation of this, as I consider it must be a pure mistake, the nature of the generic form precluding the probability of its existence in that locality. It should be emphasized that, basing the range on this record, Salvador! in the Gat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 557, 1891, gives as “ Hab. Western Australia from King George’s Sound to Port Essington,” and further catalogues a specimen from “ N. W. Australia ( J. T. Cockerell).” I have repeatedly indicated the falsity of the Cockerell localities, as had been pointed out by Sharpe previously, and consequently this record is apparently just as false. I wrote : “ The wickedness of the Cockerell labelling mostly irritates in the fact that Cockerell was a splendid collector and made beautiful bird skins and secured so many rarities, so that it is always possible that some of his novelties were really novel, but owing to his action no reliance can be placed upon any of his records.” 390 Genus — P SEPHOTUS. Psephotus Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xix. (Vol. V., pi. 36), 1845 . . . . . . . . . . Type P. hmnatonotus. Small Platycercine birds with small bills, long wings, very long wedge-tails, and small delicate feet. The bill is small, broad, with the tip spatulate not sharply hooked : the edges of the upper mandible sinuate but no distinct notch. The lower mandible is broad and the edges sinuate, tip bluntly truncate. The cere is peculiar in that it mainly consists of two circular fleshy cones surrounding the small circular nostrils which are placed high up on each side of the culmen, which is rounded. It is recorded that in the immature the cere is soft, and from an examination of skins it is suggested that it is always soft to a great degree. The wing is long with the second primary longest, the third little shorter and scarcely exceeding the fourth which is larger than the first which much exceeds the fifth, these constituting the tip of the wing. The tail is typically platycercine, very long wedge with the middle two feathers slightly the longest : the length of the tail exceeds that of the wing. The feet are normal, very small and delicate. In this genus I also include Psephotus varius Clark, but there are some slight differences as follows : the bill is more projecting with the tip sharper : the wing has a similar formula, but the differences in length are noticeable, thus the second, third and fourth are almost equal, while the first is very little longer than the fifth. The tail is proportionately longer, well exceeding the length of the wing. The style of coloration is different and I suggest that osteological examination will cause the generic separation of these two species. In order to draw attention to this matter I propose to introduce the new subgeneric name . Clarkona for Psephotus varius Clark. A small Platycercine bird was discovered by Robert Brown and placed in the genus Psittacus by Kuhl and Temminck. Vigors and Horsfield classed it in their new genus Platycercus , but when Gould discovered additional species he proposed a new genus Psephotus for the series. Five species were admitted 391 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. by Ramsay and six by Salvadori in 1891. Of course the latter gave no generic diagnosis and his Key to the Genera discloses none : thus (p. 539) : “ b1 Bill deeper than long : upper mandible not notched. a4 A yellow collar round the hind neck. Barnardius. b4 No yellow collar round the hind neck. a5 Bill uniform, with base of upper mandible not lighter. a6 Two central tail-feathers longer than the following pair. Psephotus. b6 Four central tail-feathers about the same length. Neophema.” It might be thought from this Key that Psephotus was quite like Barnardius and even more like Neophema. Yet there are valid differences, both structural and in colour, but the two groups named by Salvadori, Psephotus and Neophenna , contain incongruous elements. In neither case can the associations used by Salvadori be maintained, while the two latter groups are very widely separated from Barnardius by size. All the species referred to Psephotus and Neophevna by Salvadori are absolutely confined to Australia, and constitute with the foregoing genera Platycercus and Barnardius the most remarkable Psittacine group except the Black Cockatoos. When I prepared my “Reference List” (Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., Jan., 1912), I endeavoured to reduce the number of genera to the smallest possible number, and minimising the observed differences, I lumped Salvadori’s Neophema with Gould’s Psephotus. It was the criticism of this series that showed me the error of this lumping process, and in that place I indicated my conversion by suggesting new generic names in connection with these species. I thus wrote (p. 276) in connection with Psephotus hcematogaster : “ Note. For this species can be used the genus name Northiella (nov.) by those who admit the genus name Spathopterus. In both sexes the first five primaries are elongated into a spatulate termination, a feature which is quite missing in the type of Psephotus P. hcematonotus On p. 279 I added : “ Note. I have included in the genus Psephotus the members of the genus Neophema Salvadori. Should it be considered necessary to subdivide the genus I have (ante, p. 276) provided Northiella for the species P. hcematogaster Gould, and propose Neopsephotus for P. bourkii Gould and Neon anodes for P. chrysogaster Latham, as these species differ quite as much from P. pulchellus, the type of Neophema , and from each other, as that species differs from P. hce?natonotus , the type of Psephotus The generic names thus proposed I utilised in my “ Reference List ” and they are mostly maintained in this place. 392 PSEPHOTUS. This group is a purely Australian evolution, and the members of the “ Psephotus ” alliance, if it can be so termed, do not range into Tasmania : the “ Neophema ” alliance have two species in Tasmania, so that we may review the whole under the generic names given above and see if the distribution will help us in the study of the species. Thus Psephotus occurs only from South Queensland in the interior, through New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and across Central Australia to West Australia. Two species have been admitted, but one has a northern and an eastern, the other a more western and southern range, but always confined to the interior districts. The two species are very different in coloration and very possibly are not congeneric. Northiella has only one species which has almost exactly a range coincident with the type of Psephotus, not yet reaching West Australia. Psephotellus has a northern range, quite north of the two preceding and two species are also recognised, well differentiated by means of colour, though occupying separate geographical regions. These species constitute the genus Psephotus of Gould and Salvadori, which is obviously polyphyletic as the form I have called Northiella is very distinct. The range of Psephotellus to the north is remarkable, as is also its coloration, a black cap having been developed under the same environmental stresses that have produced a black head in Platycercus. None of these species range into Tasmania and rarely do any touch the coast. With Neophema Salvadori classed Euphema bourlcii Gould, but a more distinct generic type would be hard to find. This form, for which I proposed N eopsephotus, is purely an interior one ranging across the centre of the continent. In coloration it is the most pleasing to me of all the parrots, the subdued shades making it most attractive. In structure it is quite as peculiar as in coloration. The other members of Neophema Salvadori I separated into two genera. Neophema typical is a more richly coloured form of which two species \ are recognised, both of restricted range and now becoming extinct, if one is not already so. The species of Neonanodes are four in number and these are so closely allied as to be difficult of separation. They occupy coincident ranges and extend into Tasmania and Western Australia. This genus is confined to Central and Southern Australia and constitutes a remarkable group, as will be shown in a more detailed manner hereafter. 393 Key to the Species. A. c? Forehead bluish-green : rump scarlet. $ No red bar on wing -coverts. P. hcematonotus , p B. c? Forehead yellow : rump barred back and blue. $ Red bar on wing-coverts. P. varius , p ' ■ - / B ' ;"l ■ ■ ■ - : '■ / {? J» : V ■ ' - C ' • * . . . . ■ Roland Gte 3 5 P S E P H OTU S ITEM AT ON O T U S . (RED -BACKED PARROT j. Order PS ITT A Cl FORMES. Family PLATYCERCIDIE. No. 362. PSEPHOTUS H2EMATONOTUS. RED-BACKED PARROT. (Plate 310.) Platycercus hcematonotus Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1837, p. 88 : New South Wales. Platycercus hcematonotus Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1837, p. 88 : id., ib., p. 151, 1838 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 219, 1868 ; Reichenow, Joum. fur Om., 1881, p. 115. N anodes hcematonotis Mitchell, Three Exped. East Austr., Vol. I., p. xviii., 1838. Psephotus hcematonotus Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xix. (Vol. V., pi. 36), 1845 ; Sturt, Narr. Exped. Centr. Austr., Vol. II., App., p. 39, 1849; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 69, 1865; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878; Broadbent, Proc. Roy. Soc. Queensl., Vol. III., p. 30, 1886 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 262, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittac., p. 75, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 567, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 67, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 648, 1901 ; id., Emu, Vol. I., p. 74, 1901 ; Hill, Emu, Vol. II., p. 165, 1903 (Vic.) ; Batey, ib., Vol. VII., p. 12, 1907 (Vic.) ; Hill, ib., p. 22 (Vic.) ; Austin, ib., p. 75 (N.S.W.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 50, 1908; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 149, 1911 ; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 277, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 135, 1913. Psephotus hcematonotus virescens Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. II., p. 128, Jan. 28, 1915 : South Australia. Psephotus hcematonotus hcematonotus Mathews, ib. Distribution. Interior South Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. Adult male. General colour, for the most part, turquoise-blue both above and below brighter on the fore part of the head, sides of face, throat, fore-neck, and lesser marginal upper wing-coverts, duller and paler on the back, median and greater upper wing-coverts and outer-webs of the inner secondaries ; outer greater coverts blue ; hind-neck inclining to green ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts and flight-quills deep blue on the outer-webs, becoming greyish on the primaries towards the tips, and dark brown on the inner-webs ; lower back and rump red ; upper tail- coverts green ; central tail-feathers green becoming darker and inclining to blue towards the tips, outer feathers blue with long white tips and dark brown on the inner-webs ; outer median wing-coverts above yellowish-green like the breast and sides of body ; abdomen and thighs yellow, the latter tinged with blue ; vent and 395 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. under tail-coverts dull white, the latter very slightly tinged with blue ; axillaries and under wing-coverts deep ultramarine-blue, the greater series of the latter and quill-lining dark brown ; lower aspect of tail pale brown with long pale tips to the outer feathers. Bill bluish-horn ; eyes light brown ; feet dark grey. Total length 280 mm. ; culmen 13, wing 138, tail 160, tarsus 15. Figured. Collected at Manilla, New South Wales, in September, 1909. Adult female. Differs entirely from the adult male described in having the head, hind- neck, back, scapulars, and inner upper wing-coverts olive-green becoming more grey on the sides of the face, throat, and breast, the last tinged with yellowish- green and fading into very pale blue on the abdomen and under tail-coverts ; the small coverts round the bend of the wing above turquoise-blue ; outer aspect of wing dull blue, inner-webs of flight-quills dark brown with an ovate spot of white ; rump green ; tail-feathers similar to those of the male. Bill horn, eyes hazel, feet slate, wing 120. Figured. Collected at SandmeTe, Victoria, on the 4th of February, 1913. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch 4 to 7. White. 23-26 mm. by 19. Breeding-months. September to November. The small Parrakeets constitute one of the most pleasing series of birds that are accredited to Gould. This one is the largest and was the first to attract Gould by its generic features and hence he constituted the genus Psephotus. His notes are full and are here repeated : “ This species inhabits the interior of the south-eastern division of the Australian continent ; it is abundantly dispersed over the Liverpool Plains, and all the open country to the Northward as far as it has yet been explored ; it also inhabits similar tracts of country in Victoria and South Australia ; on the plains around Adelaide it is seldom seen, but as the traveller advances towards the interior every succeeding mile brings him in contact with it in greater numbers. It is more frequently seen on the ground than among the trees ; and it evidently gives a decided preference to open grassy valleys and the naked crowns of hills, rather than to the wide and almost boundless plain. During winter it associates in flocks, varying from twenty to a hundred in number, which trip nimbly over the ground in search of the seeds of grasses and other plants, with which the crops of many that were shot were found to be distended. In the early morning, and not unfrequently in other parts of the day, I have often seen hundreds perched together on some leafless limb of a Eucalyptus , sitting in close order along the whole length of the branch, until hunger prompted them to descend to the feeding ground, or the approach of a hawk caused them to disperse. Their movements on the ground are characterized by much grace and activity, and although assembled in one great mass running over the ground like Plovers, they are generally mated in pairs, a fact easily ascertained by the difference in the colouring of the sexes ; the rich red mark on the rump of the male appearing, as the bright sun shines upon it, like a spot of fire. 396 RED-BACKED PARROT. This bird has a pleasing whistling note, almost approaching to a song, which is poured forth both while perching on the branches of the trees and while flying over the plains.” Not a great deal has been recorded, and very little information added, since Gould’s day in connection with this species, though it is still regarded as common in a few localities. Captain S. A. White has written me : Psephotus hcematonotus is found plentifully in the coastal belts of South Australia up to two hundred or two hundred and fifty miles inland, when it disappears. They seem to have a preference for open timbered country and spend much of their time upon the ground, over which they move very rapidly in search of grass seeds, etc. They were very numerous at the Reedbeds a few years ago, but have now disappeared : this is owing, I feel sure, to the imported English Starling ( Sturnus vulgaris ) having taken up all their nesting hollows and driven the parrots away. They lay four or five, sometimes six, white eggs upon the decayed wood of a hollow lime : the nesting time is September and October. Their call is a very pleasing one and when a number of these birds are sitting upon a dead tree their chattering to one another is very musical. They are not an aggressive parrot by any means, in fact quite lovable in their ways, which no doubt is the means of their being driven out by the Starling. Some few years ago a skin disease seems to have attacked the birds in the ranges, all the feathers in some instances fell off the birds and they were wiped out in some districts.” Mr. Edwin Ashby’s notes read : “In looking through my collection I see that I have skins of this species from Jamestown and Crystal Brook each about 150 miles north of Adelaide, from Tor Downs, a sheep station on the river Darling and from the district within a twenty mile radius of Adelaide. In 1886, I saw large flocks near Ballarat in Victoria. In the same year they were very numerous on the Adelaide Plains, settling in flocks of a score or more in the large Red Gum trees in the very suburbs of the city. At Mount Barker on the eastern side of the Adelaide Hills it was up to the year 1888 quite common to see flocks of twenty to thirty, but in that year this species was attacked with a strange disease : after moulting the birds were unable to grow their feathers again, and I well remember seeing numbers of naked birds running about in the grass at Mount Barker just like mice. I caught some and found the parrots otherwise in good condition, no doubt they were just as able to get their food, grass seeds and other seeds, as before, but they fell an easy prey to cats and other rapacious animals. The result was that for nearly twenty years throughout the Adelaide Hills and Plains and probably for a radius of a hundred or more miles this bird was almost extinct. I am glad to say now that for several years this species has been steadily increasing : we often see small flocks in the VOL. VI. 397 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. neighbourhood of Blackwood and on visiting Buckland Park, twenty miles north of Adelaide on May 23rd, 1916, I found these birds well established in large numbers.” Mr. T. P. Austin writes from Cobbora, New South Wales : “ In this locality P. hce?natonotus is a very common bird, certainly by far the most numerous of the Parrot tribe. After the breeding season and all through the winter, very large flocks of them are seen feeding upon the ground : in the early morning and towards evening, great numbers are to be seen about my house, but they seem to go further away during the middle of the day. The males are very pugnacious, and are continuously fighting. They breed here wherever they can find a suitable hollow, sometimes they nest in large hollow posts in the stockyards, or even gate posts. Out of a great number of nests I have examined containing eggs, with two exceptions, they have all been during September and October, the other two in November. They usually lay four, five or six eggs, but I have found clutches of seven and eight.” Mr. E. J. Christian, writing from Northern Victoria, states : “ This is a very common bird here and is the third and best of the species which inhabits this district. These birds are chiefly seed eaters, living on grass seeds and ai^ other grain. Wherever there is a stack of hay one always sees the red rumper Parrakeet. They destroy a great many heads of valuable wheaten hay. In spring we have to shoot them as they take the peach and almond blossoms. I have seen this bird often in the Domain near the Botanical Gardens, Melbourne. The cock is a handsome parrakeet and the hen is a dingy greenish grey bird.” From the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., I quote the following : North himself observes : “ I found it very common in August, 1887, on the Bell and Macquarie Rivers, in New South Wales. Later on I met with it on the Namoi River in November 1896, and on the Mehi and Gwydir Rivers in November, 1897, in the northern part of the State. During that time of the year, when it was exceedingly dry and hot, the Mehi River was little more than a chain of waterholes, and small flocks could be seen coming and going throughout the greater part of the day, either to drink or bathe, wading in until the lower half of the body was submerged, before dipping the head in, or beating the water with the wings. It passes most of its time on the ground, feeding on the seeds of various grasses and herbaceous plants, and it is when disturbed, or during flight, that the characteristic red mark on the rump of the adult male shows to advantage.” Mr. Robert Grant’s notes read : “ I found the Red-rumped Parrakeet ( Psephotus hcematonotus) in nearly every locality I visited in the inland portions of New South Wales, and especially common at Sodwalls, Locksley and Cow Flat near Bathurst. These birds RED- BACKED PARROT. are usually met witli in pairs or small flocks feeding on the ground, and when disturbed fly to the nearest fence rail, or the limbs of a dead tree. They seem to prefer ringbarked timber or partly cleared country.” Dr. W. Macgillivray’s notes from Hamilton, Victoria relate : 44 Old residents tell me that Psephotus hcematonotus is not nearly so numerous now as it was twenty to thirty years ago, and this in spite of the fact that its natural enemies, the native cats and hawks, are either almost exterminated or much less numerous than they were. This is no doubt due to its natural food, the seeds of herbage and grasses, being very much curtailed by the land being closely cropped by sheep and cattle. This Parrakeet nests during September and October, a hollow spout, fairly high up in a Gum, very often a dead one, being generally chosen. The eggs, usually six in number, are deposited on a bed of chippings from the trimming of the hollow. The female alone performs the duties of incubation, the male keeping himself in reserve until the young birds demand his attention.” Mr. G. A. Keartland wrote from Melbourne : P. hcematonotus during the early spring is usually found in pairs, but when the young are reared they congregate in flocks. They feed exclusively on the ground on grass seed, etc. Whilst the females are sitting on the eggs the males associate in flocks. During a recent visit to Riverina I saw hundreds of males, but could not see a female until I disturbed one from its nesting-place.” Dr. W. A. Angove, from Teatree Gully, near Adelaide, noted : 44 Twenty years ago P. haematonotus was plentiful here, then became almost extinct, but the last few years it has been much more common. It is found on the plains near Adelaide, through the hills, and all across the flats to the Murray River, where it is a very common bird and is often associated with P. multicolor .” It is pleasing to note that, unlike some of these little Parrakeets, the technical history is quite clear, there being no complications whatever. Recently reviewing the series accumulated, I separated the South Australian form subspecifically under the name Psephotus hoematonotus virescens. 44 Differs from P. h. hoematonotus in having the head darker green and the yellow of the abdomen with a more orange tinge.” This subspecies is recognizable when series are criticised and would be upheld by scientific workers on Palsearctic birds. The evolution of these small Parrakeets is difficult to suggest as they differ among themselves as much as they differ from other groups. A critical examination of their osteological features might give clues as to the origin of the various groups, but their apparent facies is quite Platycercine. D’Arcy Thompson concluded that their skull characters were Platycercine, but gave no detailed account, nor did he name 399 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. the species he had examined, simply writing “ Psephotus From skin features the species P. hminatogaster differs appreciably from P. hcematonotus and a careful osteological comparison of these two alone would be valuable, while P. c. dissimilis should be examined osteologically while specimens are available and before it becomes extinct like its congener P. pulcherrimus. 400 i’i-'tf;: - '■ s', ■S, .t'Vt'l X: ■W , 'r2S ' M. \--u- :=• -XJ'- IllM mm x , Lchild. del. WituerVy £<- C° -T P SEP HO TIT S VAR I U S . (MANY- COL CURED PARROT J Order PSITTACIFORMES. Family PL A T Y CERGI DAS. No. 363. PSEPHOTUS VARIUS. MANY-COLOURED PARROT. (Plate 311.) Psephotus VARIUS Clark, Auk, Vol. XXVII., p. 80, 1910 : New name for P. multicolor Kuhl : Spencer’s Gulf, South Australia (New South Wales was an error). Psittacus multicolor (not of Gmelin 1788) Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 55, 1820 (ex Brown MS.), Nova Hollandia = Spencer’s Gulf, South Australia; Temminck, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XIII., p. 119, 1821. Platycercus multicolor Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 124, 1826 ; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 283, 1827; Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. X., pp. 491, 528, 703, 1832; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 222, 1868; Reichenow, Joum. fur Orn. 1881, p. 115. Psephotus multicolor G ould, Birds Austr., pt. xxvin. (Vol. V.,pl. 35), 1847 ; *d.,Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 68, 1865 ; Diggles, Omith. Austr., pt. i„ 1866 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; id., Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 261, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittac., p. 73, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 566, 1891 ; North, Rep. Horn Sci. Exped. Centr. Zool., p. 63, 1896 (Centr.) ; id., Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr., Vol. XXII., p. 170, 1898 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 67, 1899; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 647, 1901 ; Carter, Emu, Vol. III., p. 172, 1904 (N.W.A.) ; Milligan, ib., p. 225 (S.W;A.) ; S. A. White, ib., Vol. V., p. 182, 1906 (S.A.) ; Hill, ib., Vol. VII., p. 22, 1907 (Vic.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 50, 1908 ; Ogilvie-Grant, Ibis, 1910, p. 160 (W.A.) ; Hall, Emu, Vol. IX., p. 131, 1910 (S.A.) ; Whitlock, ib., p. 192 (W.A.) ; MacgiUivray, ib., Vol. X., pp. 25/95, 1910 (N.S.W.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 146, 1911 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 24, 1913 (S.A.) ; Chandler, ib., p. 36 (Vic.) ; Howe and Tregellas, ib., Vol. XIV., p. 81, 1914 (Vic.). Euphema multicolor Schlegel, Mus. de Pays-Bas. Psitt., p. 100, 1864. Psephotus varius Clark, Auk, Vol. XXVII., p. 80, 1910. Psephotus dulciei Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 14, June, 1911 : New name for P. multicolor Kuhl. Psephotus varius varius Mathews, Nov. Zook, Vol. XVIII., p. 276, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 135, 1913. 401 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Psephotus varius rosince Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 277, 1912 : Yorke’s Peninsula, South Australia ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 136, 1913 ; S. A. White, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr., Vol. XXXVIII., p. 427, 1914 (S.A.) ; id., Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 187, 1915 (Centr.) ; id., Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr., Vol. XXXIX., p. 746, 1915 (Centr.). Psephotus varius exsul Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 277, 1912 : Mt. Magnet, West Australia ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 136, 1913. Clarkona varias Mathews, ante. Distribution. Interior South Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and West Australia. Adult male. Back, scapulars, and outer-webs of innermost secondaries dull bluish-green, the lower back, rump, and short upper tail-coverts rather more blue than the upper back ; a band of yellowish-green across the rump and an ill-defined one across the tail-coverts ; marginal upper wing-coverts bright green inclining to ultramarine blue on the bend of the wing ; an oblique patch of bright yellow across the lesser upper wing-coverts followed by emerald-green on the median series, the greater series more bluish-green ; bastard- wing, primary-coverts, and outer aspect of flight-quills deep blue ; outer edges of the primaries towards the tips greyish-blue, inner-webs of primary- and secondary- quills dark brown ; basal portion of the tail green shaded with blue on the middle feathers towards the tips which are dark brown, the outer feathers crossed by a black band, becoming pale blue towards the tips which are white on the longer ones, the inner-webs of which are more or less brown towards the base ; crown of head, sides of face, throat, fore-neck, and breast bright emerald-green becoming more yellowish-green on the abdomen and lower flanks ; forehead yellow ; nuchal patch cinnamon-red ; lower abdomen and thighs deep scarlet-red intermixed with yellow ; under tail-coverts yellow slightly tinged with red ; axillaries and under wing-coverts bright ultramarine blue, the greater series of the latter and quills below dark brown ; lower aspect of tail dark brown, the outer feathers very pale iridescent blue with white tips to the longer feathers. Bill, bluish-horn ; eyes dark hazel ; feet grey. Total length 290 mm. ; culmen 15, wing 135, tail 152, tarsus 15. Figured. Collected at Underbool, Mallee, Victoria, on the 13th September, 1910. Adult female. Differs from the adult male in the absence of the green on the head, back, throat and breast, and the yellow on the wing and forehead and in having the head, back, throat, and breast dusky-grey tinged with green, an oblique patch of red across the upper wing-coverts, the pale green abdomen and under tail-coverts, the dark green under wing-coverts, and the white spots on the inner-webs of the flight-quills. Figured. Collected at Daytray, Victoria, on the 11th of September, 1912, Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, four to six. White. 22 to 23 mm. by 18-20. Breeding-season. July to December. This beautiful little Parrot has been rather unfortunate in its nomination, so that I will deal with its life history first and then give a connected historical and systematic account. Captain S. A. White has written me : “ This bird is found throughout the mallee country of South Australia and is often known as the Mallee Parrot. 402 MANY-COLOURED PARROT. It is also found all through the interior as far as the MacDonnell Ranges and west to the Musgrave and Everard Ranges : they seem to prefer low scrubby ground and procure their food upon the ground : this consists of grass seeds, berries and the seeds of acacias. Although these birds are found quite close to the coast in the mallee and other low scrub growing on poor ground, they do not frequent the heavily timbered country in the Mount Lofty Ranges and on the alluvial flats.” Mr. Edwin Ashby writes : “I have found this bird very common at Nackara, South Australia, about 160 miles north of Adelaide, in country timbered with tall Mallee and dry saltbush country. I have never met with it near Adelaide, but it is the common parrot the other side of the gulf on Yorkers Peninsula, also in the Mallee just back from the River Murray. I have also specimens from Leigh’s Creek. It appears that this species replaces the former (P. hcematonotus) wherever the rainfall is so reduced that the larger Eucalyptus timber is more or less replaced by Mallee and the herbage by saltbush, which probably means about a twelve-inch rainfall or less. I also found this bird common at Callion in West Australia. This country is on the dry side as salt bush grows in the neighbourhood.” Mr. J. W. Mellor’s notes read : “ This prettily coloured parrot is very plentiful in some parts of South Australia. I noted it was abundant on Yorke Peninsula while I was there in April, 1911, and I got specimens for my collection near Stansbury. The birds were in the more open large tree country, where she-oaks and eucalypts abound with abundance of grass beneath : they were feasting on the grass seeds in all directions and looked extremely pretty as they were flushed, the males showing their bright green bodies and varied bands on the rump to perfection, the sun shining on them and making the colours more brilliant. I noted that the bright reddish colour on the flanks and abdomen varied much in different specimens : in one it was a bright scarlet, while others were deep orange down to a pale orange or reddish colour. I believe thiis is according to age, the colour intensifying as years go by, and when very old the bright scarlet appearing. Their note is a small chattering call or whistle and often repeated. They make their nests in hollow trees, using the decayed wood inside as material upon which to deposit their four or five white eggs. They will often select a hollow fencing post and make their nest and rear their young in this situation. I have not seen them on Eyre’s Peninsula, but have noted them right up the eastern side of Spencer’s Gulf from the south end of Yorke Peninsula right up to Port Germein, where I saw some in the mallee country in August 1911, while tramping along between the Flinders Range and Spencer’s Gulf in the direction of Port Augusta. They were feeding on the seeds of the saltbush ( Atriplex ), and the crop of a male bird disclosed 403 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. quite a quantity of those little seeds. The disposition of this parrot is by no means pugilistic, as it will live perfectly well with other birds, and is not timid or wary while in its native state. I also noted this bird in the Narracoorte district. South Australia, in the timbered parts where it also breeds in August to November.” Mr. F. E. Howe states : “ Very plentiful at Pine Plains, and a few were observed at Kow Plains feeding beneath the pine trees. The flight is undulating and they have the same habit of bustling into a tree as Platycercus eximius. We were much too early (September) for eggs.” Mr. J. W. Mellor later wrote : “ These were fairly numerous near Mannum, River Murray, South Australia, in the open country, especially where the she-oak grows and a plentiful supply of grass seed exists upon which they usually feed : their call, habits, etc., were the same as in the Flinders Range. Also fairly plentiful at Stansbury, Yorke’s Peninsula : during the harvesting time they collect plentifully about the barns and com heaps to secure the wheat that is generally scattered round : they like wheat, especially when it is softened with the rain, and they will also molest it when it has ripened in the ears.” Dr. Wo Macgillivray, writing of the birds of the Barrier Range, West New South Wales (Emu, Vol. X., 1910), stated, p. 25: “We found nests of two species of Cockatoo and of the Many-coloured Parrakeet ( Psephotus multicolor ), containing fully fledged young. These Parrakeets frequent the creeksides, and also the box flats in the scrub country throughout the district ; they are usually seen in pairs, or families after the breeding season ; they never flock like the Red-rumped Grass-Parrakeet (P. hcematonotus), which is not found nearer than Menindie, on the Darling, apparently its northern limit in this direction.” Chandler (Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 36, 1913) wrote : “ This magnificent bird was fairly plentiful (on the Kow Plains, Victoria), and several nests were chopped out, which were ready for eggs. Two nests contained respectively four and five eggs to the clutch. In a hollow stump a brood of five young birds was found a few days before we broke camp. About a foot below the Parrot’s nest in the same hollow, a marsupial mouse had made her nest.” In the Pep. Horn. Sci. Exped. Centr. Austr. Zool., p. 64, 1896, we have Heartland’s note : “ These birds were found near all waterholes passed. Although a number were shot, not one of the males was as brilliant in the scarlet marking on the thighs and abdomen as those found at Murtoa and in the Mallee Scrub near the Murray. They were always in pairs and were never seen in flocks like the Red-rumped Parrakeet (P. hcematonotus) . The females were all of the same modest hue as those found further south.” Captain S. A. White’s published notes read (Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 24, 1913) : “ This bird was met with only in the scrub a few miles from the shores of Lake 404 MANY-COLOURED PARROT. Gairdner. Many larvae of a gall-forming insect, with parts of galls, and two kinds of seeds, found in stomach.” [Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr ., Vol. XXXVIII, p. 427, 1914) : “ We found these birds thinly dispersed over all the country worked ( Oodnadatta to MacDonnell Ranges) : they were often flushed amongst the mulga when they were picking up the fallen seeds from this tree. The plumage of specimens made is much lighter than our southern bird, and shows little or no red on abdomen.” ( Same Journal , Vol. XXXIX,, p. 746, 1915) : “Very plentiful in districts where water was found (between Oodnadatta and the Musgrave and Everard Ranges). They were often flushed from the ground amongst the mulga, where they were searching for the seed of that tree. In several cases the male bird had dark brick-red shoulders in place of the bright yellow. Probably this is not consistent, consequently I am not classing it as a new variety.” A number of interesting notes appear in the Austr. Wins. Spec. Gat., No. 1, Vol. III., from which I quote the following : “ Mr. K. H. Bennett of Yandembah Station, New South Wales, wrote : “ Psephotus multicolor is a very common species throughout the timbered back country, to which it is almost exclusively confined, being very rarely met with in the belts of timber bordering the rivers or in the clumps scattered over the plains. It is mostly seen in flocks of from eight or ten individuals, spending the greater part of its time on the ground in quest of the seeds of the various herbaceous plants on which it feeds. It is by no means shy, and when disturbed merely flies to the low branch of some adjacent tree, returning again to the ground immediately one has passed the spot. The breeding season is during the months of September and October, and the eggs, five in number, are deposited in the hollow trunks or branches, usually of a Eucalyptus or Casuarina. The plumage of the sexes of the young, when leaving the nest, is similar, both having the red stripe on the wing ; but during the first year that of the male changes to yellow, the female retaining the red shade. On this point I can speak with confidence, having repeatedly reared broods of these birds. This species is entirely independent of water.” Dr. W. Macgillivray’s notes are from Broken Hill, South-western New South Wales : “ Psephotus multicolor is one of our commonest birds : it is found along all the water-courses throughout the district, either in pairs or small lots of six or seven after the breeding season ; the parent birds and their young broods. They pair off early and commence nesting operations in July, continuing through- out the three following months in a late season. I have taken eggs in November, the chief breeding months, are, however, September and October. A small hollow is usually chosen in one of the Eucalypts which border our creeks, and the eggs laid on the bare wood or earthy matter natural to the hollow, at a distance of one or two feet from the entrance. The height from the ground VOL. VI. 405 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. varies from eight to eighty feet in actual measurements. The eggs are usually six in number, though one sometimes finds four or five. The female alone performs the task of incubation, and sits very closely when she has small young, or the eggs are on the point of hatching, and I have known several instances when she could have been captured on the nest. They feed on the ground on the seeds of the grasses and various other plants, and when disturbed fly up into the Gums, where the protective colouring of the female renders it very difficult to detect her. The male, however, with his brilliant green and scarlet livery, is a much more conspicuous object. Later he added : “ Psephotus multicolor were breeding much more freely in the spring of 1909, especially in the box trees growing in the scrub country, herbage being more plentiful than it has been for the previous four years, and seeding freely in great variety. Clutches of young varied from four to six, but in one instance a hollow contained seven. Incubation with this Parrakeet commences with the first egg laid. I opened the crop of one young one that Mr. M‘Lennan accidentally dropped when examining a nestful, and found it very full of fine seeds, as fine as gun- powder, and could only wonder at the industry of the parent birds who could find and collect such seeds and fill the crops of seven young birds by 8 o’clock in the morning.” Mr. G. A. Heartland added : “ Psephotus multicolor has a very wide range, being found wherever Mallee, Mulga or Saltbush is met with. These birds seem to remain in pairs throughout the year, as the only occasions on which I saw five or six together was when the old pair were accompanied by their brood. They are most affectionate in disposition, and on several occasions on which I have shot one of a pair the other has flown down to its dead mate, and, although disturbed, returned two or three times to try and entice it away.” Mr. E. H. Lane, of Orange, wrote : “I found Psephotus multicolor nesting at Wambangalang Station, nineteen miles from Dubbo, New South Wales, in October 1882, in the hollow of a White Box tree. It contained merely two fresh eggs, no doubt only part of a set, but which I had to take as I had cut into the hollow. This is the only time I remember seeing this species there, and probably dry weather drove it in.” Mr. Tom Carter’s notes read : “ This species was not uncommon on the lower Gascoyne River in 1887, and many used to come to water at the sheep troughs (it was a dry season). Since that year, none were observed by me, but I was told that they occur further inland, and on the Lyndon River.” Mr. W. B. Alexander has written me : “I have only met with these charming birds on one occasion. When camped at Newman’s Rocks half way between Fraser’s Range and Balladonia, a party of them came round us in the early morning. They seemed to be feeding on seeds, running actively about on the ground and when alarmed flying up into the trees.” 406 MANY-COLOURED PARROT. Mr. A. W. Milligan, writing of the birds of the Wongan Hills, West Australia [Emu, Vol. III., p. 225, 1904), observed : “ When returning one afternoon to camp I flushed a pair of Parrots from the base of a small bush, just on the verge of the lake country. Following them to the trees in which they alighted I shot one, which turned out to be a non-breeding male of Psephotus multicolor , remarkable inasmuch as his bill was pale pink, and that the cere at the base of the upper mandible was quite flexible and soft to the touch. The humeral feathers were very red, and the partially concealed trans- verse black band on the under surface of tail feathers was very clearly defined. In another instance I saw the parent birds and their young flying about.” Mr. F. L. Whitlock {Emu, Vol. IX., p. 192, 1910) wrote : “ Locally ‘ Mulga Parrot.’ This was the most generally distributed of the Parrot family around Wiluna (East Murchison, West Australia). I met with it almost every- where, the exception being amongst the lagoons and sand-hills of Lake Violet. It was breeding commonly at Milly Pool, and I found several nests with young, being too late for eggs. All were in hollow limbs of eucalypts.” Gould did not meet with this species himself and observed that he had no information from the “ travellers who have visited its habitat.” The species was first described by Kuhl in 1820, who used the name Psittacus multicolor of Brown’s Manuscript, though noting it was not P. multicolor of Gmelin. The habitat was given as “ In Nova Hollandia,” the specimen in the Mus. Soc. Linn. Lond. This obviously invalid name was continued in use until 1910, when Clark, in the American journal. The Auk, proposed as a substitute Psephotus varius. Ignorant of this, I simultaneously made the correction, but my name, Psephotus dulciei, was not published until 1911. Both of these names were absolutely based on P. multicolor Kuhl. It is important to note this as the sequel shows. Examining my series in the preparation of my “ Reference List,” it was obvious that subspecies were separable. Guided by Gould’s statement as to its known distribution in his time, I arbitrarily selected New South Wales as the type-locality of the species. I then arranged the sub-species thus : Psephotus varius varius Clark. Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria. Psephotus varius rosince. “ Differs from P. v. varius in having much less red on the abdomen and deeper green on the upper breast.” Yorke’s Peninsula. South Australia. Psephotus varius exsul. “ Differs from P. v. varius in its bluer coloration above and below, especially noticeable on the cheeks, which are blue, not green. Mt. Magnet, West Australia.” 407 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. I maintained these subspecies and nomination in my “ List of the Birds of Australia,” published in 1913, but again emendation is necessary. Collating the synonymy of the species I noted that Vigors and Horsfield observed : “ This bird was procured by Mr. Brown at Spencer’s Gulf, South Coast.” Reference to the Brown Manuscript, preserved in the British Museum (Natural History), confirms this statement, the exact locality and date being given as “ Spencer’s Gulf, Bay XII.,* Mch. 10, 1802.” This fact unfortunately necessitates a readjustment of names as follows : Psephotus varius varius Clark or Glarkona varia varia. South Australia, Yorke and Eyre’s Peninsulas. As Clark’s name was purely a substitute one for P. multicolor (Kuhl), it follows that the type locality must be that of the Kuhlian species, viz. Spencer’s Gulf, South Australia. As a synonjrm also must be added P. dulciei Mathews. Psephotus varius ethelce, subsp. n. or Clarkona varia ethelce; Central Australia. As pointed out by North and Captain White, the central bird is obviously paler in general coloration, with less and paler red on the abdomen. A peculiar feature would be the retention of the female red shoulder coloration in the males, as Captain White has noted. Type, a male collected by Capt. S. A. White, in the Macdonnell Ranges, on the 30th August, 1913. Psephotus varius orientalis, subsp. n. or Glarkona varia orientalis. South-west Queensland ; Interior New South Wales ; Mallee of Victoria ; and east South Australia. Type from Underbool, the figured bird, a male. No. 6268 in my collection. This is generally a brighter-coloured bird than the southern typical form, with deeper and more extreme red coloration on the abdomen. Psephotus varius exsul Mathews or Glarkona varia exsul. West Australia. When Ogilvie-Grant met with this subspecies he wrote (Ibis, 1910, p. 160) : “ Contrary to what has been written by Gould and others, the female is different from the male. The back and breast are greyish brown tinged with olive ; the band across the lesser wing coverts is dull scarlet, instead of yellow, the belly is pale green with scarcely a tinge of red, the under tail-coverts are pale green, instead of pale yellow.” He apparently never thought that the observed varia- tion might have been due to geographical causes, while nearly twenty years previously Ramsay had recorded the dull red shoulder band, etc., of the females. * At the head of the Gulf, on Eyre’s Peninsula. 408 Genus— NORTHIELLA. Northiella Mathews, Nov. Zoo]., Vol. XVIII., p. 276, 1912 . • . . . . . . . . . . Type N . hcematogaster. Small Platyeercine birds with small bills, long wings with spatulate tips to the first five primaries, very long wedge tails and small feet. The bill is similar to that of the preceding genus, but slightly more massive, tip long and rather hooked ; the under edge of upper mandible sinuate with an almost acute notch succeeding the tip. The under mandible almost as that of the preceding genus in every detail. The wing is long and peculiar ; the first five primaries are all attenuated into spatulate tips : the third and fourth are sub-equal and longest, the second longer than the fifth, the first is shorter than the second but is longer than the fifth ; the second, third, fourth and fifth primaries, as in the preceding genus, are scalloped on their outer edges. The tail is very long and strongly wedge-shaped, the two middle feathers noticeably longer than the next two. The feet are normal, small and delicate. The distinct coloration, the spatulate tips to the primaries and the range coincident with the preceding genus indicate the age of this genus. No other Psephotine bird has any indication of such spatulate tipping, and here it is developed on all the first five primaries. It is, however, not an inhabitant of Tasmania but only of the eastern interior of Australia. Gould drew attention in his Introduction to the Birds of Australia (8vo ed., p. 74) to the spatulate tips of the primaries, writing : “ This species differs from all the other members of the genus, as well as from those of all the allied genera, in the pointed form of the tips of its primaries.” Order PSI TTA Cl FORM ES. Family PLATYCERGIDM. No. 364. NORTHIELLA HCEMATOGASTER. CRIMSON-BELLIED PARROT. (Plate 312.) * Platycercus HiEMATOGASTER Gould, Birds Austr. and Adj. Islands, pt. n., pi. 7, Feb., 1838 : Eastern New South Wales (31° 18' S. by 144° 15' E., Darling River). Platycercus hcematogaster Gould, Birds Austr. and Adj. Islands, pt. ii., pi. 7, Feb., 1838 ; id., Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1837, p. 89, Feb. 13, 1838 ; Sturt, Narr. Exped. Centr. Austr., Vol. II., App., p. 38, 1849 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 215, 1868 ; Reichenow, Joum. fur Orn. 1881, p. 117 ; Witmer Stone, Austra. Av. Rec., Vol. I., p. 149, 1913 ; Mathews, South Austr. Ornith., Vol. I., pt. n., p. 15, 1914. Psephotus hcematogaster Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xxix. (Vol. V., pi. 33), 1847 : Bonaparte, Naumannia 1856, Consp. Psitt. n. 197 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn. 1881, p. 117 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 260, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 69, 1891. Psephotus xanthorrhoa t Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus Acad. Sci., Paris, Vol. XXX., p. 133, Feb. 1850 : Eastern New South Wales (given to the type of Gould’s P. hcematogaster ) ; id., Rev. Mag. Zool. 1854, p. 154 ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 63, 1865 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 563, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 66, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 643, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austr., p. 50, 1908 ; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. X., pp. 26/94, 1910 (N.S.W.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 142, 1911. Psephotus hcematorrhous Bonaparte, Naumannia 1856, Consp. Psitt. n. 198, nom. nud. ; Gould, Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 62, 1865 : New name for P. hcematogaster 1847, not P. hcematogaster Gould 1838 : Namoi River, New South Wales ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 561, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 66, 1899; Campbell, Nests and Eggs, Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 644, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 50, 1908 ; Ford, Emu, Vol. VIII., p. 31, 1908 (Vic.) ; Macgillivray, id., Vol. X., p. 95, 1910 (N.S.W.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 140, 1911; Jackson, Emu, Vol. XII., p. 79, 1912 (S.W.Q.) ; S. A. White, ib., p. 124 (S.A.). Euphemia hcematogastra Schlegel, De Dierent., p. 75, 1862. * The plate is lettered Northiella zonda and N. hcematogaster. t Also spelt xanthorrhous. 410 Roland Green. del. NORTH I El, LA ZANDA . ( CRIMSON - BELLIED FARR 0 T ) NORTH I ELL A HrE MATO GAS TER . ( \ RLE 0 W- VENTED PA RR 0 T) . "Wilhertry &. C° CRIMSON-BELLIED PARROT. Platycercus xanthorrhous Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 217, 1868. Platycercus hcematorrhous Reichenow, Vogelbild. Syst. Verz., p. 1, 1883. Psephotus hcematog aster var. xanthorrhous Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 260, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaoi, p. 70, 1891. Psephotus xanthorrhous var. pallescens Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Yol. XX., p. 663, 1891 : Cooper’s Creek, Interior South Australia. Psephotus pallescens Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 66, 1899 ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral, p. 50, 1908 ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 24, 1913 (S.A.). Psephotus hcematogaster hcematogaster Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 275, 1912. Psephotus hcematogaster xanthorrhous Mathews, ib. Psephotus hcematogaster pallescens Mathews, ib ., p. 276. Psephotus hcematogaster alter Mathews, ib., p. 275 : Mutton, Victoria. Northiella hcematogaster hcematogaster Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 136, 1913. Northiella hcematogaster xanthorrhoa Mathews, ib. Northiella hcematogaster alter Mathews, ib. Northiella hcematogaster pallescens Mathews, ib. Northiella hcematogaster zanda Mathews, Austral Avian Record., Vol. II., p. 75, Dec. 29, 1913 : Moree, New South Wales. Distribution. Interior South Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. Adult male. General colour for the most part dusky-grey, including the hinder crown, neck all round and breast, entire back, scapulars, and upper tail-coverts with a very faint wash of green on the upper surface and pale central streaks to the feathers on the ear-coverts, fore-neck, and throat ; upper wing-coverts dark golden-bronze becoming much paler on the greater series and innermost secondaries, the upper tail-coverts are also tinged with the latter colour, the small marginal wing-coverts and bend of wing bright blue ; bastard-wing, outer greater coverts, primary-coverts, primary- and secondary-quills deep blue on the outer aspect and dark brown on the inner-webs, the outer edges of the primaries greyish-blue towards the tips ; middle tail-feathers bronze-green with a bluish shade and becoming dark brown at the tips, the outer feathers blue at the base, broadly tipped with white, and more or less dark brown on the inner-webs ; fore part of head and fore part of face blue becoming much fainter on the chin ; lower breast, sides of body, flanks, and under tail-coverts pale lemon-yellow ; middle of abdomen scarlet-red with pale edges to the feathers ; under wing-coverts ultramarine blue, the greater series and quill-lining dark brown ; lower aspect of tail, middle feathers dark brown, the outer ones for the most part white. Bill horn colour ; eyes brown ; feet blackish. Total length 250 mm. ; culmen 16, wing 143, tail 191, tarsus 20. Figured. Collected at Muttoa, Victoria, in June, 1906, and is the type of Psephotus hcematogaster alter. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Adult male. Hind neck, entire back, scapulars, innermost secondaries, upper tail-coverts, fore-neck, and breast pale earth-brown ; hinder crown of head rust-brown ; marginal upper wing-coverts and bend of wing cobalt-blue ; an oblique patch of crimson-red across the median upper wing- coverts which fades out on the greater coverts and becomes more or less like the back ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts 411 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. and outer aspect of the primary- and secondary-quills deep blue, the outer primaries greyish-blue on the outer edges towards the tips, the inner-webs of the flight-quills blackish-brown ; a tinge of golden-yellow on the upper tail-coverts ; central tail- feathers bronze-green with dark brown tips and a tinge of blue along the outer web near the shaft, the outer feathers blue at the base becoming paler towards the apical portion which is white with more or less brown on the inner-webs towards the base ; fore part of head and sides of face dark blue ; lower breast and sides of the body yellowish-white, abdomen and under tail-coverts bright scarlet, some- what paler on the latter ; axillaries and under wing-coverts bright glossy blue ; the greater series of the latter and under-surface of quills dark brown ; lower aspect of tail dark brown, the outer feathers broadly tipped with white. Figured. Collected at Moree, New South Wales, in October, 1907, and is the type of Northiella hcematogaster zanda. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch three to seven. White. 23-24 mm. by 18-19. Breeding-season. August to December. Again we have a complex technical history without much real knowledge of the life of the bird, as the following few items will show, the technical portion being related afterwards : Gould’s observations may be first quoted : “ Psephotus hcematorrhous. This species of Parrakeet is an inhabitant of the interior of New South Wales, where it frequents the borders of the rivers Namoi and Darling ; and in all probability its range extends far to the northward ; but, so far as is yet known, it has never been found in Southern or Western Australia; I met with it in tolerable abundance in the neighbourhood of the Lower Namoi, where it appeared to give a decided preference to those parts of the plains which were of a loose mouldy character, and with which the colour of the back so closely assimilates as to be scarcely distinguished from it. Like the other members of the family, it is mostly observed in small flocks, feeding upon the seeds of the various grasses abounding on the plains. It is only when the bird, after a short flight, alights on the branches, that the splendid scarlet of the abdomen, relieved by the yellow of the sides, is seen to advantage ; when thus seen, however, it is a truly beautiful object, and is scarcely excelled by any other species of the group. “P. xanthorrhous. On reference to my account of P. hcematorrhous it will be seen that the native habitat of that bird is the interior of New South Wales, while the present ranges more to the westward, having been found in abundance by Captain Sturt at the depot, and by Mr. White, of Adelaide, at Cooper’s Creek. There can be no mistake on this point, for I have specimens from both these gentlemen now before me . Captain Sturt’s are a little darker on the upper surface than those transmitted by Mr. White.” Under the name P. xanthorrhous , Mr. E. J. Christian of Northern Victoria has written me : “ This parrot is the second of three inhabitants of this district, 412 CRIMSON-BELLIED PARROT. and it is only very recently that I have come to regard it so, as three years ago it was very seldom seen, but last and this year it is certainly becoming common. It is generally a very shy bird and goes about in small companies and is recognised by its note, which is reed-like and sounds like : ‘ Pe-Pe-Pe.’ They seem to be chiefly seed-eating birds. They are provided for by the ant in an unconscious way. Small ants gather trefoil and other grass seeds in heaps in the autumn, and I have often watched these parrots making a meal off one of these small mounds.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has written me: “I met with the species at Nackara, South Australia, in May, 1900, and was informed that they nested in that district, but I believe that is the only time this species has come under my notice in the field.” Dr. W. Macgiflivray wrote in the Emu , Vol. X., 1910, p. 95 : 44 We tramped on to strike the Yalcowinna road (West New South Wales) by a circuitous route through box flats and mulga scrub. A nest containing young Blue Bonnets in a hollow black oak interested us, as these birds showed a near approach to the more eastern Psephotus hcematorrhous , in having red under tail-coverts, and the dark red wing patch which, more than anything else, distinguishes P. hcematorrhous from P. xanthorrhous. Some of these nestlings, however, were much more marked than others. On account of the favourable season, and a plentiful and varied supply of seeds, we found both P. xanthorrhous and the Many-coloured Parrakeet nesting more freely than on two previous visits.” Captain S. A. White {Emu, Vol. XII., p. 124, 1912), writing about the attempt to go from Port Augusta to the Gawler Range : 44 We found the Crimson-bellied Parrakeet ( Psephotus hcematorrhous ) plentiful in the clumps of low timber during the heat of the day (and it can be hot in this country). They were amid the thick foliage of the myall trees, where they often perch motion- less, without uttering a sound, for hours, coming out to feed in the late afternoon and in the early morning, when they made up for lost time.” In the next volume Capt. White used (p. 24, 1913) the name Psephotus pallescens , writing : 44 Although we met with this species in numbers round Port Augusta the year before, we saw only an odd pair or two during this trip. Found one nest, with four young slightly covered in dusky brown ; nest was made in the hollow hole of a sandalwood tree nearly on the level of the ground, although the entrance was about twelve feet up.” In the South Australian Ornithologist , Vol. I., April 1914, p. 15, I gave an account of the confusion around the species name and forms. As further research enables the rectification of a few details, I here rewrite the facts anew and do not simply quote that article. In his folio edition, Gould figured a bird VOL. VI. 413 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. under the name Psephotus hcematogaster ; this bird had been first described by him in the Proc. Zool. Soc. ( Lond .), 1837, p. 89. In his Introduction to the Birds of Australia, he commented (8vo ed., p. 74) : “ I think there are two birds confounded under this name, one with yellow and the other with scarlet under tail-coverts ; but it will be necessary to see other examples before deciding that they are distinct. Captain Sturt brought specimens with yellow under tail-coverts from the Depot in the interior of South Australia.” In 1850, Bonaparte separated the yellow- vented form under the name Psepholus xanthorrhoa Gould, the specimens being in the British Museum. In his Conspectus , in 1856, Bonaparte admitted two species thus : “ P. hcematogaster Gould ( xanthorrhous Gould) : hcematorrhous Bp. (hcematog aster ! Gould).” No satisfaction can be got from such an entry, but in the “ Hand- book ” Gould makes explanation as follows : two species are admitted. Psephotus hcematorrhous — P. hcematogaster Gould, Birds of Australia, Vol. V., pi. 33 : Psephotus xanthorrhous Gld = P. hcematogaster Gould, P. Z. S., pt. v., p. 89 : Birds of Australia (cancelled) part n., pi. 7. In connection with the latter he wrote : “In the introduction to the folio edition I remarked that I had reason to believe that the specific term hcematogaster had been in- advertently applied to two distinct species, both of which have the centre of the abdomen red, but differ from each other in the colouring of the centre of the wing and of the under tail-coverts ; a further investigation of the subject having convinced me that this is the case, it becomes necessary to take some steps for the correction of the error. With this view, therefore, I have to state that my description of P. hcematogaster, published in the “ Proceedings of the Zoological Society ” above quoted, and the figure, with the same name attached, which appeared in the second of the two parts of the Birds of Australia, published prior to my visit to that country, and cancelled on my return, have reference to the present species, which has bright yellow under tail-coverts and a lengthened patch of saffron-yellow on the centre of the wing, while the P. hcematogaster of the folio edition (Vol. V., pi. 33) is the other species, with red under tail-coverts, and a patch of red on the wing. The late Prince Charles Bonaparte and myself agreed that it would be well to abolish the term hcematogaster and call the former bird xanthorrhous and the latter hcematorrhous, a course which I here adopt, and trust ornithologists will agree in its propriety.” If Bonaparte agreed, at one time, probably in 1850, to this course, he rectified his error from his nomination in 1856, where he used hcematogaster Gould ( = xanthorrhous ! Gould) and hcematorrhous Bp. (hcemato- gaster ! Gould). These must be considered nomina nuda , but they indicate the correction made in Bonaparte’s mind. Unfortunately Bonaparte died without publishing his views and Gould’s word was accepted. 414 CRIMSON-BELLIED PARROT. Three years ago acquiring the rare second part of the Birds of Australia and the Adjacent Islands , and overlooking the full explanation quoted above, I worked out the synonymy anew and named the red-vented bird. I gave an account as noted above in the South Australian Ornithologist , and here add the gist of it : “ On the seventh plate (of the Birds of Australia and the Adjacent Islands) this species is figured and there described. The bird has no red on the wing-coverts and has the under tail-coverts yellow. In the letterpress Gould states that he had only seen three specimens, two being collected by Major Mitchell on the Darling River. These he diagnosed as males, and his own bird, on account of its duller coloration, he considered a female. He states also that Major Mitchell had presented his specimens to the Linnean Society of London and the British Museum. He also mentions that Major Mitchell has given birds to the Australian Museum at Sydney, New South Wales. These, of course, Gould had not seen, and are only referred to as confirmatory evidence. In Mitchell’s Three Expeditions into the Interior of Australia , Yol. I., p. 236, we find the following account : “ June 20th, 1835. On the low hills which we crossed a new species of parrot was shot, having scarlet feathers on the breast, the head and wings being tinged with a beautiful blue, the back, etc., being of a dark brownish green.” A footnote reads : “ This bird has since been named by Mr. Gould Platycercus hcematogaster .” At this date Mitchell was at a place about 31° 18' S. by 144° 15' E. When Stone drew up his “ List of Australian Birds,” described by John Gould, etc. ( Austral Av. Rec., Vol. I., pp. 129-180, 1913), on p. 149, he wrote : “ Platycercus hcematogaster , Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1837, p. 89, 1838. 22907 (254). New South Wales. — Type. Gould’s original description applies as well to the red-vented form as to the yellow, and by figuring the former he fixed the name definitely upon it, notwithstanding his later remarks in the handbook. All the specimens ear the red- vented bird.” . . . The specimens Gould records as being presented to the Linnean Society of London and the British Museum are the basis of the original plate, and I have searched for these. The former has apparently fallen into decay, as when the Linnean Society’s birds passed into the British Museum, many not regarded as types were rejected. The other bird, however, is still preserved in the British Museum, and was catalogued by Salvadori as a specimen of P. xanthorrhoa. This must nowT be regarded as type of Platycercus hcematogaster Gould, and it agrees very well with Gould’s figure. It should be noted that the Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1837, p. 89, was not published until February 13th, 1838, while the second part of The Birds of Australia and the Adjacent Islands bears the date February, 1838.” 415 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. The only additional item of importance is that the type of Platycercus hcematogaster Gould, as determined above, served as type for P. xanthorrhoa Bonaparte, and this fact Bonaparte endeavoured to rectify by his proposition of hcematorrhous , which name Gould accepted in 1865, but also retained wrongly his xanthorrhous. It is satisfactory that these are only subspecifically separable so that the rectification of the errors will not cause much confusion. When Salvadori catalogued the Birds in the British Museum he accepted two species, P. hcematorrhous and P. xanthorrhous. In connection with the former he noted : “ The last two specimens have little tinge of verditer-green on the bend of the wing, some of the median wing- coverts red, and the under tail-coverts in one specimen have more red on them than in the other. I think they belong to P. hcematorrhous rather than to P. xanthorrhous , although they are intermediate between the two.” Of the latter he wrote : “In this species there is much individual variation, both in size and coloration ; some specimens have the yellow under tail-coverts more or less tinged with red, and the same tinge occasionally covers some of the median wing-coverts. The specimens from Cooper’s Creek, in the interior of South Australia, may be separated as a distinct race, var. 'pallescens . As Mr. Gould has already pointed out, they have the upper surface much paler ; also the breast is much paler, and the olive patch on the median wing-coverts is yellower.” Ramsay, however, in 1888, had used the names Platycercus hcematogaster and var. xanthorrhous, observing : “ P. hcematogaster : this species, originally described bv Gould, has been since divided under the names of P. hcematorrhous and P. xanthorrhous according to their state of plumage in the one individual having been obtained, it will be better to adhere to the original name of P. hcematogaster which embraces both varieties. Notwithstanding which, see Gould, Handb. Bds. Austr., II., pp. 62-64.” North in 1890 and Ramsay in 1891 maintained this view, but the authority of a British Museum Catalogue caused the admission of the two species, so that we find in 1 91 1 North recognising two species but stating : 4 4 Taking the extremes, as given in the above and the preceding description, one can readily recognise two distinct species, but judging from the series of specimens in the Australian Museum Collection one will as frequently find examples combining the characters of the two species as they will to either of the distinct forms P. hcematorrhous or P. xanthorrhous. Thus, while in the Red-vented Parrakeet specimens are to be found with crimson-red under tail-coverts, and the wing-streak more yellowish- olive than chestnut-red, so in the Yellow- vented Parrakeet will specimens be found with the under tail-coverts more or less centred or tipped with crimson- red, or the median upper wing-coverts tipped with chestnut-red.” 416 CRIMSON-BELLIED PARROT. When I ranged my specimens for the purpose of determining subspecies during the preparation of my Reference List it became obvious why so much variation was observed. The majority of specimens came from the junction of the range of the two chief subspecific forms, viz. mid New South Wales. I admitted four subspecies as follows : Psephotus hcematogaster hcematogaster (Gould). South Queensland, New South Wales. Psephotus hcematogaster xanthorrhous (Bonaparte). New South Wales. Psephotus hcematogaster alter. “Differs from P. h. xanthorrhous in its much larger size, and in having the under tail-coverts greenish-yellow.” Northern Victoria. Psephotus hcematogaster pallescens Salvadori. South Australia (Interior). In my “ List of the Birds of Australia” I maintained these four subspecies but accepted the generic name Northiella. There must be a readjustment of names and a reconsideration of range, but the four subspecies can be easily recognised. Thus : — Northiella hcematogaster hcematogaster (Gould). Western New South Wales. Of this P. xanthorrhoa Bonaparte is an absolute synonym, being founded on the type specimen. Captain Sturt’s birds and Broken Hill specimens would be fairly typical. Northiella hcematogaster hcematorrhous (Gould). South Queensland ; East New South Wales. As Gould stated : “It frequents the borders of the rivers Namoi and Darling.” I select the former as the type locality. I wrote : “ Regarding the distribution of these forms, I have not sufficient data to delimit their ranges. My specimens show that 33° S. by 147° E. is the farthest south attained by the red-vented bird, but specimens must be continually collected to fix such range. Plight observations are quite valueless.” Gould’s name of hcematorrhous was proposed for the red-vented bird to replace his own hcenYWbtogaster wrongly applied in the folio edition. It must be maintained and my N. h. zanda must be cited as a synonym. Northiella hcematogaster alter (Mathews). Northern Victoria. This subspecies is better characterized than the preceding. Northiella hcematogaster pallescens (Salvadori). Interior South Australia. 417 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. It may as well be emphasised that we have here only one species with four geographical forms, and that the two first separated as species are the most ill defined. This has been accepted by the workers who admitted the two species, Salvadori and North both indicating the unstable nature of the so-called species. The birds from further north have more red, the shoulders and vent being constantly this colour : those from further south as constantly lack the red on those parts, while it is also lacking in the most western birds ; but the central birds, where the variation is very clearly seen, were the most accessible and commonly the specimens showed their intermediate character. As North says, the extremes are very different, but they cannot on that account be regarded as species. It is an interesting species, as it shows the increase in the red colouring from south to north and in the next genus we have the peculiar dominance of red in the same district ; the southernmost form, if there ever was one, is extinct, but a more northern one still has the yellow in place of red, but has in some places replaced it with black, following the colour phases of Platycercus. Genus— P SEPHOTELLUS. Psephotellus Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. II., p. 57, 1913 . . . - . . . . . . Type P. pulcherrimus. Small Platycercine birds with short bills, long wings, very long tails, and small, delicate feet. The bill is small, well hooked, with a sharp tip and the succeeding notch generally well marked, the edge following sinuate : the under mandible broad, with the edges sinuate. Cere as in the preceding genera. The wing is long, with the primaries rounded at the tip ; the first primary is longer than the fifth but shorter than the fourth, which is a little less than the second and third, which are subequal and longest; the first primary is not scalloped on the outer edge but the four succeeding are. The tail is very long and wedge shaped, the two middle feathers longest, the feathers comparatively broader than in the preceding genera, while the tail itself is comparatively longer. The feet are normal, small and delicate. The two species admitted in this genus are differentiated at sight by their different style of coloration and the longer broad-feathered tails. They have the most northern range of any of the small Parrakeets, but nothing like them occurs in the islands to the North of Australia. \\ 419 Key to the Species. A . <$. Forehead red; shoulder red .. .. . . P. pulcherrimus, p. 421. B. <$. Forehead black or yellow ; shoulder yellow . . P. chrysopterygius , p. 425. Roland. Green. del. PSEPHOTELLUS PULCHERRIMUS . (. BEAUTIFUL , PARROT J. Witherby &. C° Order PSITTACIFORMES. Family PLATYCEROIDM. No. 365. PSEPHOTELLUS PULCHERRIMUS. BEAUTIFUL PARROT. (Plate 313.) Platycercus pulcherrimtjs Gould, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Vol. XV., p. 115, 1845: Darling Downs, Queensland. Platycercus pulcherrimus Gould, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Vol. XV., p. 115, 1845 ; Finsch, Die Papage., Vol. II., p. 226, 1868; Reichenow, Joum. fur Ora. 1881, p. 116; Lumholtz, Among Cannibals, pp. 34, 327, 1887. Psephotus pulcherrimus Gould, Birds Austr., pt. xxh. (Vol. V., pi. 34), 1846 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 67, 1865 ; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt. i., 1866 ; Ramsay, Proe. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; id., Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 261, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psitt., p. 72, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 564, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 66, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. n., p. 645, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 50, 1908 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1., Vol. III., p. 144, 1911 ; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 276, 1912 ; Campbell, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 167, 1915. Euphemia pulcherrima Sehlegel, De Dierent., p. 75, 1862. Psephotellus pulcherrimus Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 137, 1913. Psephotellus pulcherrimus dubius Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. II., p. 128, Jan. 28, 1915 : New South Wales. Psephotellus pulcherrimus pulcherrimus Mathews, ib. Distribution : Interior South Queensland ; Northern New South Wales. [? Extinct. ] Adult male. Crown of head and nape black ; sides of face, sides of hinder crown and sides of neck turquoise blue like the rump and upper tail-coverts, some of the last edged with black at the tips ; back, scapulars, and outer margins of the innermost secondaries earth-brown ; lesser upper wing-coverts vermilion-red ; marginal- coverts, bastard-wing, primary- and greater-coverts blackish-brown ; primary- and secondary-quills also blackish-brown, the former paler towards the tips and greyish-blue along the outer edges ; central tail-feathers bronze green at the base, becoming darker towards the tips, the outer feathers pale blue with a black band, the long ones white on the apical portion ; forehead red ; the short feathers which encircle the eye dull white, minutely dotted with red, fore-neck and breast bright emerald-green, inclining to turquoise blue on the upper abdomen, sides of the body and axillaries ; lower abdomen, thighs and under tail-coverts scarlet with VOL. VI. 421 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. yellowish-white bases and fringes to the feathers ; under wing-coverts blue, the greater series and quill lining dark brown ; lower aspect of tail, central feathers dark brown, outer feathers pale iridescent blue becoming whitish towards the tips of the longer ones. Bill bluish at base, whitish at tip ; eyes brown, feet mealy. Total length 310 mm. ; culmen 14, wing 130, tail 170, tarsus 17. Figured. Collected in New South Wales and is the type of P. p. dubius. Adult female. Lower hind-neck, upper back, scapulars, median and greater upper wing- coverts, and innermost secondaries earth-brown, darker and inclining to blackish- brown on the marginal coverts, bastard-wing, primary-coverts, outer, median and greater coverts, and flight -quills, outer-webs of primary- quills very pale purplish- blue, a patch of white on the inner- webs of the flight-quills which commences on the third outer primary ; lesser upper wing-coverts red ; rump and upper tail-co'verts pale turquoise-blue, the long series of the latter more or less tinged with green ; central tail-feathers bronze green becoming blackish at the tips and more or less blue on the outer-webs, the outer ones blue with a black band across the short ones and white tips to the long ones, which are more or less brown on the inner webs ; crown of head and nape blackish-brown, forehead, a narrow line over the eye, and sides of hinder crown yellowish-white with red tips to the feathers ; sides of face and throat also yellow, the feathers on the hinder face have dark edges ; fore-neck and breast yellowish with minute orange and dusky bars ; abdomen, flanks and under tail-coverts very pale blue with a slight admixture of red and white ; under wing-coverts, axillaries and quills below pale brown, with an irregular band of white across the latter ; tail below dark brown on the middle feathers, pale grey with white tips on the outer ones. Wing 124 mm. Figured. Collected on Mantua Downs, Nogoa River, Queensland, on the 5th of August, 1881. Immature male. Crown of head blackish ; sides of the hinder crown and face turquoise blue inclining to green towards the throat ; lores and a circle round the eye yellowish, minutely dotted with red and intermixed with blue on the upper side ; lower hind- neck, back, scapulars, outer edges of the innermost secondaries, and some of the median and major upper wing-coverts earth-brown, somewhat darker on the lower back and lesser marginal series and becoming blackish on the bastard-wing, primary-coverts, and flight-quills ; outer margins of primaries greyish-blue, a yellowish-white patch on the inner-webs of the primary- and secondary-quills, commencing on the third outer primary- quills ; rump and upper tail-coverts pale turquoise blue ; central tail-feathers bronze-green becoming darker and inclining to blue towards the tips, the outer ones pale blue with a black band, the long ones white on the apical portion and with more or less brown on the inner-webs towards the base ; base of fore-head and an oblique patch across the lesser and median upper wing-coverts rather deep red ; fore-neck and breast yellowish-grey inter- mixed with green, or bluish-green feathers ; abdomen, sides of body, thighs, and under tail-coverts paler and more ash-grey with a wash of blue on the upper abdomen and sides of the body and intermixed with red on the lower abdomen, thighs, and under tail-coverts ; under wing-coverts dull pale blue, the greater series brown like the quill lining, an irregular band of white across the latter ; tail below brown, the short outer feathers iridescent blue at the tips, and the long ones white on the apical portion. Nest. A hollowed-out nest of the white ants (Termites). Eggs. Clutch three to five ; white ; 23 mm. by 18-19. Breeding -season. August and September. It is a matter of deep regret that this “ most beautiful ” Parrot appears to have become extinct without any lasting record of its life history being made known. 422 BEAUTIFUL PARROT. Gould wrote : “ The graceful form of this Parrakeet, combined with the extreme brilliancy of its plumage, renders it one of the most lovely of the Psittacidce yet discovered ; and in whatever light we regard it, whether as a beautiful ornament to our cabinets or a desirable addition to our aviaries, it is still an object of no ordinary interest. Little more is at present known respecting this bird than that it is an inhabitant of the upland grassy plains of Queensland. Specimens were procured by Gilbert on the Darling Downs, where it was observed in small families feeding on the seeds of grasses and other plants growing on the plains ; the stomachs of those examined were fully distended with grass seeds exclusively.” In the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 145, 1911, appears a note by H. G. Barnard of Bimbi, Duaringa, Queensland : “ It is many years since I have seen Psephotus pulcherrimus. These birds were never plentiful in this part, only an odd one or two being procured, but in 1882 my brother Charles and I visited Fairfield Station, one hundred miles south of this, where we found the birds numerous, and here for the first time discovered their breeding habits. The bird drills a hole, resembling that of a Pardalote, in the large round Termite mounds on the ground, but though the entrance is small the egg cavity is large, as much as a foot in diameter. The eggs are deposited on the soft earth, from three to five forming a sitting. It is so long since I have seen Psephotus pulcherrimus I could not describe the female, which is quite unlike the male, being mostly of a brown colour.” Campbell, in the Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 646, pi. opp., 1901, showed the nest of the Beautiful Parrakeet in an ant hillock, writing : “ The eggs, and the first information of the interesting fact that the birds lay in ant hillocks, I received from the late Mr. George Barnard, Coomooboolaroo (Queens- land), where the birds breed. Unfortunately, during my visit to that part of the country a drought existed, and consequently the birds were not laying. However, on a trip subsequently Mr. D. Le Souef was more successful, and was enabled to bring away an excellent photograph of an ant hill, also one showing the position of the eggs in the mound. Dr. Carl Lumholtz observed that the nests were several miles apart, and that those examined in September contained eggs partly incubated. He proceeds to state : 4 There is an irregular entrance, about two inches in diameter and about a foot above the ground. In the interior the Parrot makes an opening about a foot high and two or three feet in diameter. None of the building material is carried away, but all the cells and canals are trampled down, so that there remains simply a wail, one or two inches thick, around the whole nest. Here the female lays five white eggs. ’ ” On account of the position of the nest D. Le Souef recorded {Emu, Vol. II,, 423 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. p. 153, 1903) the eggs of this species from Port Darwin, Northern Territory, where the bird does not occur. In the Emu , Vol. XIV., p. 167, 1915, Campbell concluded : “ This most elegant species was fairly common in Queensland and adjacent portion of New South Wales. All that remain to-day appear to be a few stuffed specimens in collections. Perhaps Mr. Chas. Barnard, Coomooboolaroo (Queensland) could state when these birds were last observed in his district, where they existed and laid their eggs in ant hillocks.” Mr. Barnard has replied : “ We have not seen a bird since the 1902 drought, and from what I can learn they are very scarce on Fairfield, where we first took their eggs. All being well, next September I must try for a run up there to see for myself.” This appears to constitute the history of this species down to the present time. . I separated recently a subspecies, which is not here recognised, as the differences seem to be individual, and accurately localised specimens are scarce. 424 PSEPHOTELLUS DISSIMILIS. fBLACK-EOODED PARROT) . Order PSITTA Cl FORMES. No. 366. Family PLATYCERCIDM. PSEPHOTELLUS CHRYSOPTERYGIUS. GOLDEN-SHOULDERED PARROT. (Plate 314.)* Psephotus chrysopterygius Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1857, p. 220, 1858 (Normanton). Interior Gulf of Carpentaria. Psephotus chrysopterygius Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1857, p. 220, 1858 ; id., Birds Austr. Suppl., pt. in. (pi. 64), 1859 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 65, 1865 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; id., Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 71, 1891 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 565, 1891 ; North, Rec. Austr. Mus., Vol. III., p. 87, 1898 ; Phillipps, Avicult. Mag., Vol. IV., p. 152, 1898 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 66, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 646, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 50, 1908 ; id., Avicult. Mag., Ser. 3, Vol. IV., p. 151, 1913. Platycercus chrysopterygius G. R. Gray, List Specs. Brit. Mus. Psittaci, p. 6, 1859 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 224, 1868 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 116. Psephotus dissimilis Collett, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1898, p. 356 : Mary River, Arnhem Land, North Australia ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 66, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 647, 1901 ; Hartert, Nov. Zool., Vol. XII., p. 214, 1905 (N.T.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 50, 1908 ; North, Viet. Naturalist, Vol. XXV., p. 176, 1909 (N.T.) ; [Editors] Emu, Vol. IX., p. 46, 1909 ; Mathews, BuU. Brit. Orn. Club, Vol. XXXI.’, pp. 55-56, 1913 ; id., Avicult. Mag.^Ser. 3, Vol. IV., p. 152, 1913 ; Barnard, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 46, 1914 (N.T.). Psephotus cucullatus North, Viet. Naturalist, Vol. XXV., p. 176, 1909 : Arnhem Land, Northern Territory ; Mathews, Avicult. Mag., Ser. 3, Vol. IV., p. 153, 1913. Psephotus chrysopterygius blaauwi Van Oort, Notes Leyden Mus., Vol. XXXII., p. 71,' 1910: Arnhem Land, Northern Territory; Mathews, Emu, Vol. X., p. 303, 1911; id. Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, Vol. XXXI., p. 56, 1913; id., Avicult. Mag., Ser. 3, Vol. IV., p. 153, 1913. Psephotus chrysopterygius chrysopterygius Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 276, 1912. Psephotus chrysopterygius dissimilis Mathews, ib. Psephotellus chrysopterygius Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 137, 1913. Psephotellus dissimilis Mathews, ib. * The plate is lettered Psephotellus dissimilis. 425 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Psephotellus chrysopterygius dorothece Mathews, Austral Av. Rec., Vol. II., p. 128, Jan. 28, 1915 : McArthur River, Northern Territory. Psephotellus chrysopterygius chrysopterygius Mathews, ib. Distribution. Northern Territory ; Mid -Queensland (Gulf of Carpentaria), Adult male. Rack, scapulars and innermost secondaries dark earth-brown ; upper wing- coverts yellow ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts, primary- and secondary-quills blackish brown, paler towards the tips of the primaries, which are edged with green on the outer-webs ; rump, short upper tail-coverts, hinder face, sides of neck, throat, breast, abdomen, sides of body, and under wing-coverts turquoise-blue ; long upper tail-coverts green edged with black at the tips ; middle tail-feathers bronze-green becoming blackish at the tips, the outer feathers bluish-green with a black band on the basal portion, fringed with dark brown on the inner-webs, and the longer ones tipped with white ; crown of head, lores, forehead and fore part of cheeks black ; under tail-coverts salmon-pink margined with white ; greater series of the under wing-coverts and quill-lining dark brown ; under-surface of tail dark brown on the central feathers, iridescent bluish-green on the outer feathers with white tips to the longer ones. Bill greyish-white, eyes dark brown, feet light brown. Total length 305 mm.; culmen 13, wing 123, tail 170, tarsus 14. Figured. Collected at Borroloola on the McArthur River, Gulf of Carpentaria, Northern Territory, on the 5th of December, 1913, and is the type P. c. dorothece. Adult female. General colour above and below, for the most part, yellowish olive-green including the head, back, wings, fore-neck and breast ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts, primary- and secondary-quills edged with green on the outer-webs, the remaining portion of the feathers dark brown with a large patch of white on the inner-webs of some of the primary- and secondary-quills ; rump and upper tail-coverts emerald- green ; middle tail-feathers dark bronze-green, blackish towards the tips on the central pair ; the outer ones paler green and broadly tipped with white ; fore part of head, lores, fore part of face and throat paler than the back and inclining to grey ; hinder part of face emerald -green, fore-neck and breast rather paler than the back and more or less tinged with blue : abdomen and flanks turquoise-blue with a tinge of pink on the middle of the former ; under tail-coverts pale salmon-pink with somewhat pale edges to the feathers ; under wing-coverts similar to the back, the greater • series and quill-lining pale brown with glossy reflections and an oblique white patch on the latter ; lower aspect of tail dark brown on the middle portion and pale green on the outer feathers — the longer ones white on the apical portion. Figured. Collected at Borroloola, on the McArthur River, Gulf of Carpentaria, Northern Territory, on the 5th of December, 1913, and is the mate of the male above described. Nest. In a Termites’ nest (White Ants). These white ants’ nests are very large in some parts of the Northern Territory. Eggs. Probably very similar to those of P. pulcherrimus. Breeding-season. December ? Gould wrote as follows under the name Psephotus chrysopterygius : “ One of the greatest pleasures enjoyed by the late celebrated botanist, Robert Brown, during the last thirty years of his life, was now and then to show me the drawing of a Parrakeet made by one of the brothers Bauer, from a specimen procured somewhere on the north coast of Australia, but of which no specimen was preserved at the time, and none had been sent to England, until several 420 GOLDEN-SHOULDERED PARROT. were brought home by Mr. Elsey, a year or two prior to Mr. Brown’s death. On comparing these with the drawing made at least forty years before, no doubt remained in my mind as to its having been made from an example of this species. This, then, is one of the novelties for which we are indebted to the explorations of A. C. Gregory, Esq. ; and I trust it may not be the last I shall have to characterize through the researches of this intrepid traveller, Mr. Elsey, who, as is well known, accompanied the expedition to the Victoria River, obtained three examples — a male, a female, and a young bird — all of which are now in our national collection. In the notes accompanying the specimens, Mr. Elsey states that they were procured on the 14th of September, 1856, in lat. 18° S. and long. 141° 33' E., and that their crops contained some monocotyledonous seeds.” Since Elsey’s time no specimens of the particular form procured by him have been preserved. The localitj?- is very close to the settlement of Normanton, and Kemp, on my behalf, made especial search in that locality without result. At the present time Elsey’s form may have become extinct or it was an aberration, the former being the more probable. The drawing Gould referred to as made by Bauer is preserved in the British Museum (Natural History) and is not of Gould’s form but is of the bird since met with not uncommonly to the westward of Elsey’s locality and whose complex history here follows. When Ramsay drew up his Catalogue of the Psittaci in the Australian Museum, in 1891, he had no specimens, and at the same time the original Elsey specimens were all that were in the British Museum. In 1898, however, Collett described in the Proc. Zool. Soc. ( Lond .) a similar bird he had received from Mary River, Northern Territory, collected by Dahl. He called it Psephotus dissimilis, and wrote : “Nearest to Psephotus chrysopterygius but lacks the yellow band across the forehead ; forehead, lores and crown dark chestnut. This Parrot was met with here and there in small flocks in Arnhem Land, particularly between Pine Creek and Catherine River, but did not appear to be common. It was seen only during the dry season. It possesses a singular jarring cry and, like all Parrots, is reluctant to forsake a wounded companion.” Simultaneously North stated in the Pec. Austr. Mus., Vol. III., p. 87, 1898, that he had secured in Sydney a living example of P. chrysopterygius obtained near Port Darwin, the first noted since Elsey’s time. As a footnote he added that in the Proc. Zool. Soc. {Lond.), just received, he observed that the Society had purchased a pair the previous March (1897). He was, of course, unaware that Collett had distinguished the form he was examining, and apparently did not observe or emphasise the differences between the living bird and Gould’s figures. 427 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. In 1905 Hartert recorded Collett’s species, noting : “ These two valuable specimens agree with Professor Collett’s description, except that the crown of the male is dark brown, not at all chestnut, and that the verditer blue does not meet in a ring across the nape. The description of the female agrees perfectly. It is not Psephotus chrysopterygius Gould, because it lacks the yellow band across the forehead.” In the Victorian Naturalist , Vol. XXV., p. 175, 1909, North wrote a “ Note on some living examples of Psephotus dissimilis. Although differing in several respects from Professor Collett’s description of Psephotus dissimilis , I had little hesitation in referring them to that species, particularly as they were obtained in the same locality — Pine Creek, 200 miles south-east of Port Darwin. . . . What I regard as the chief point of difference is that not only are the lores, forehead and crown of the head of the adult male black , but that this colour extends down the anterior portion of the cheeks to the sides of the base of the lower mandible. Viewed in front, the bird appears to wear a black mask, or cowl. Should it prove to be distinct, I propose to distinguish it under the name of Psephotus cucullatusN Still further confusion attended the species as, when the living birds reached Europe, ignorant of North’s action, Van Oort distinguished the form as Psephotus chrysopterygius blaauwi , giving the same differential characters as North had done. I indicated this synonymy and the living bird became comparatively well known under North’s name. Later, however, Collett presented me with the types of his P. dissimilis and I was able to show that these were identical, Collett’s description being incorrect. I gave an account in the Avicult. Mag. for 1913 and put this synonymy in my “ Reference List ” when I ranked Collett’s form as a subspecies only of Gould’s species. In my “List of the Birds of Australia” I, however, ranked them as specifically distinct, but I have now concluded that rank cannot hold. The chief differences are the yellow band across the forehead of the first discovered form (Elsey’s), and in this family a red frontal band is proven to be only varietal or even individual — the black commonly eliminating it in the genus Barnardius. Unfortunately the Gouldian form appears to be extinct, or Elsey’s specimens were individual aberrations. I recently differentiated a subspecies P. c. dorothece from the McArthur River, which, however, agrees with P. c. dissimilis in the dark forehead. It should be emphasized that the bird Robert Brown shot, and which was painted by Ferdinand Bauer, has the black forehead and is the dissimilis bird, not the true chrysopterygius. Since the preceding was written a complication has been noted, as I find in the Avicultural Magazine, Vol. IV., p. 152, 1898, a paper entitled “ The Golden-shouldered Parrakeet ( Psephotus chrysopterygius ),” by Reginald 428 GOLDEN-SHOULDERED PARROT. Phillipps. A coloured plate drawn by P. J. Smit from living specimens in the London Zoological Gardens accompanies this, and the birds figured are the Gouldian form. Phillipps had two specimens himself and gives a detailed description of the species, male and female, and wrote, “A light yellow band across the forehead, frontal band and wash around the eyes yellowish white.” There can be no hesitation in concluding that these were true chrysopterygius , but we have not the least clue to the locality whence these came, and apparently ail the later consignments were from Pine Creek or thereabouts, and these have been just as certainly dissimilis. We are still without knowledge as to the existence of Gould’s form, but it was apparently still living twenty years ago. Barnard, in the Emu, Yol. XIV., p. 46, 1914, has pointed out that he was the first to re-discover the species, writing as follows under the name Psephotus dissimilis : “ Skins of these birds were first obtained by me at Pine Creek, N. T., in September, 1896. They were supposed to be Psephotus chrysopterygius. This, however, was wrong, and two years later the Pine Creek bird was named as above from further skins obtained from that place. I thus missed the honour of being the first to describe this bird, though I was the first to obtain the skins. P. chrysopterygius was obtained somewhere in the Normanton district, and does not appear to have been found since it was described by Gould. P. dissimilis was fairly plentiful on the dry spinifex and stringy bark ridges of the lower McArthur. A series of skins was obtained.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has written me : “ Psephotellus dissimilis Collett. I received two pairs of this lovely grass parrot in January 1914, collected by Mr. C. E. May at Union Bore, near Pine Creek, Northern Territory.” He informed me that they nested in White Ants’ nests (Termites). These strange nests are fully the height of a man : the parrots make a hole in the side of the ants’ structure and lay their eggs there. This note explains the “ breeding of P. pulcherrimus ” in this district^ as quoted by Le Souef. The descriptions of eggs given in those papers are worthless, as in the present instance he described both the eggs of P. pulcherrimus and P. chrysopterygius from localities where the birds do not occur, and we can now see that neither record is of any value, as the first is very probably based on the present one while the second is not referable to anything I can guess. Again I have to deplore North’s work in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No, 1, Vol. III., where he omits this bird without any explanation, not even referring to his own cucullatus. It is remarkable that such blemishes should mar a supposedly authoritative work, as even if the writer disputed the records he should have noted their existence. In the Avicultural Magazine for February, 1914, p. 133, G. A. Heumann VOL. VI. 429 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. wrote : “ Something about Hooded Parrakeets and other birds of the Northern Territory.” At a place called Granite Rocks inland from Pine Creek he camped near two waterholes. “ The sun rose (July) about 7 a.m., but already, at about 6.30 the common Parrakeets flew past, screeching as they always do ; after them came the Hawks, waiting for the flocks of Doves and Finches to feast on. I shot as many as six to ten every morning, amongst them the beautiful white variety. The first of the smaller birds to arrive were the Blue-eyed Doves, in countless numbers. When a hawk would swoop down on them whilst drinking, the whirr of their wings would remind us of the roar of the incoming waves on the ocean beach. Then appeared the Parrakeets, the Browns and the Hooded, and here I may mention that those I handled all had the hood coloured black ; the younger males, only half coloured, showed a more dirty sooty colour. All the specimens I handled — speaking of males, of course — showed either the black or sooty coloration. None, either from this part or those from the Maiy River or Driffield way, had a hood that one might call brown, even with a certain amount of imagination. Of course the Northern Territory is a vast country and other forms may exist elsewhere, but within 300 miles south of Port Darwin, they are all alike.” I have already stated that I have concluded Gould’s species should include Collett’s as being subspecifically distinct. The range of the two forms apparently did not overlap, because we have no evidence as to the extent of Gould’s form and it is doubtful whether we ever shall now. At the present time I admit two subspecies as Psepliotellus chrysopterygius chrysopterygius (Gould). Interior Mid- Queensland. Psephotellus chrysopterygius dissimilis (Collett). Northern Territory. Differing in having the forehead black, not yellow. As synonyms may be cited P. cucuUatus North, P. c. blaauwi Van Oort and P. c. dorothece Mathews. I might note that the type of P. dissimilis Collett is in my collection. This form was first procured on the north-east of Arnhem Land by Robert Brown, so that extends all over that country from Pine Creek to the McArthur River. It is necessary to trace it more eastward still in order to decide the exact status of the Gouldian form. As, however, the species has not been met with at Alexandra, Normanton or Cloncurry there does not seem much hope of its continued existence. 430 Genus — N EOPSEPHOTUS. Neopsephotus Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 279, 1912 Type N. bourlcii. Small Platycercine birds with very small bills, long wings with the primaries unscalloped, medium wedge-tails and small feet. The peculiar coloration differentiates this genus at sight, and when critically examined its structure is just as peculiar. It was placed by Gould and Salvadori with the succeeding species where it is absolutely incorrectly associated. The bill is very small, not projecting, but rapidly descending, the tip blunt and spatulate, the edges of the upper mandible sinuate but no notch present : the nostrils as small circular holes surrounded by swollen cere and placed close together opening upwards : under mandible small and blunt tipped. The wing has the second and third primaries longest and equal, the first attenuate and pointed and longer than the fourth : none of the primaries are scalloped either on the outer or inner web. The tail is medium for this group, being exceeded by the length of the wing : the feathers are broad, the middle four equal and the others slightly graduated. It recalls true Platycercus in many respects only divided these Parrots into Platycercus species in the former genus. 431 Order PS1TTA Cl FORM ES. Family PL A T Y CEFCIDM, No. 367. NEOPSEPHOTUS BOURKII. BLUE- VENTED P All EOT. (Plate 315.) Euphema bourkii Gould, Birds Austr., pt. v. (Vol. V., pi. 43), 1841 : River Bogan, Interior New South Wales. N anodes bourkii Mitchell, Three Exped. East Austr., p. xviii., 1838. Nom. nud. Euphema bourkii Gould, Birds Austr., pt. v. (Vol. V., pi. 43), 1841 ; Sturt, Narr. Exped. Centr. Austr., App., p. 39, 1849; Gould Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 80, 1865; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878; Reichenow, Journ. fiir Orn. 1881, p. 46 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 264, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 85, 1891. Platycercus bourki Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 227, 1868. Neophema bourkei Salvador!, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 570, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 67, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 649, 1901 ; North, Rec. Austr. Mus., Vol. V., p. 268, 1904 (W.A.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral., p. 50, 1908; Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. X., p. 96, 1910 (N.S.W.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 153, 1911. Psephotus bourkii Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 277, 1912. Neopsephotus bourkii Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 137, 1913; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 187, 1915 (Centr.) ; id ., Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr., Vol. XXXIX., p. 746, 1915. Neopsephotus bourkii pallida Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. III., p. 57, 1916 : Musgrave Ranges, Central Australia. Neopsephotus bourkii bourkii Mathews, ib. Distribution. Interior New South Wales and South Australia adjoining. Interior West Australia. Adult male. General colour above earth-brown including the head, hind-neck, entire back, scapulars, innermost secondaries, and upper tail-coverts, head and hind-neck slightly tinged with vinous and dark edgings to the feathers, scapulars and innermost secondaries obscurely edged with greenish -yellow ; rump and upper tail-coverts darker than the back and intermixed with pale blue ; median and greater upper wing-coverts darker than the back and margined with yellowish -white, the lesser coverts edged with dull blue; marginal coverts round the bend of the wing and under wing-coverts pale blue ; primary-coverts somewhat darker blue, paler and more greenish-blue on the outer-webs of the primary- and secondary-quills, the inner-webs dark brown ; middle tail-feathers pale dusky blue brighter on the 432 H Goodchild.de! 3 4 NEOPSEPHOTUS BOlTRKIi. Witherbjr & Cc ( BL UE - VENTED PARROT) . BLUE- VENTED PARROT. lateral ones which are dark brown on the inner-webs ; fore part of head slightly tinged with blue ; lores, space round the eye and fore-part of cheeks dull white becoming darker and tinged with vinous on the hinder face and sides of neck where the feathers have dark edges; throat and fore-neck vinous barred with brown; sides of breast more uniform brown ; middle of breast and abdomen rose-pink rather brighter on the latter ; flanks, thighs, and under tail-coverts pale blue ; greater under wing-coverts and quills below dark brown ; lower aspect of tail dark brown with white tips to the outer feathers. Bill dark horn, eyes brown, feet brown. Total length 240 mm. ; culmen 11, wing 127, tail 124, tarsus 12. Figured. Collected at Broken Hill, New South Wales, on the 21st September, 1909. Adult female. Similar in plumage to that of the adult male, but slightly smaller in measurement. Figured. Collected in New South Wales. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch four to five. White. 23 mm. by 18 (Campbell). Breeding-season. August to October (November?). Birds from Flat Rock hole, East of Musgrave Ranges, Central Australia, are lighter above and have the vent-feathers lighter blue. The first mention of this delightful little Parrakeet is in Mitchell’s Three Exped. East Australia, Vol. I., p. xviii, 1838, where, however, the bare name Nanodes bourkii appears. Three years later Gould figured it in his work but could give no information as to its habits, merely stating that it had been discovered by Major Mitchell on the banks of the River Bogan, in the interior of New South Wales. In 1865 he suggested : “In the interior ... it will doubtless prove to be widely spread, for Captain Sturt found it in abundance at the Depot in Central Australia.” Captain Sturt wrote : “ Euphema bourkii was a visitant at the Depot, and remained throughout the winter, keeping in the daytime in the barren bushes behind the camp, and coming only to water. The approach of this little bird was intimated by a sharp cutting noise in passing rapidly through the air, when it was so dark that no object could be seen distinctly, and they frequently struck against the tent cords in consequence.” Since then it has not commonly been met with as it is confined to the central districts and is rare even there. Captain S. A. White has written me: “ The note is a beautiful soft warble and the flight remarkably swift. The crops of the specimens taken were much distended with very small grass seeds. It is remarkable the lateness these birds come in to water up to 9 p.m. I only met with these birds in two localities in the far North of South Australia.” From the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1., Vol. III., I quote : “ Mr. Robert Grant stated : ‘ I have only once met with Bourke’s Grass Parrakeet, and this was in November, 1892, about a mile below the wool wash at Bourke, on the Darling River. A pair were feeding on the ground, and I fired and shot both 433 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. of them, and secured the male, but the female fell down the steep bank of the river, and I lost it amongst some roots and driftwood left by the floods.’ ” Mr. K. H. Bennett wrote : “ j Euphema bourkii frequents the timbered back country of the south-western portions of New South Wales, and although widely dis- tributed there it is by no means plentiful. It is usually met with in pairs or in small flocks of five or six in number, probably the adults accompanied by their young, and passes most of its time on the ground searching for the seeds of various grasses and herbaceous plants, which constitute its sole food. It resorts to water daily for the purpose of drinking. The breeding season is August to October, and the eggs, four in number, are deposited in the hollow trunk of a small Eucalyptus or Casuarine (Belar), more frequently the latter.” Dr. Macgillivray’s notes are very important : “ Neophema bourkei is nowhere plentiful in the district. It is not found nearer than about sixty miles north from here, on Langawirra Station ; its distribution is patchy, and it does not seem to wander far from the localities which favour its habits of living. It usually frequents open and sandy country, interspersed with small clumps of prickly Acacia, Neelia or other small bushy trees, which usually grow in groups ; during the day it fives in these and feeds under the shade of them on various seeds, the small, hard, black seeds of the Neelia tree being the favourite food. They are rarely in flocks of more than six or eight, though I have heard of as many as fifteen being seen. It was, however, a dry time, water was scarce, and they had probably come together on that account. They have the peculiar habit, no doubt a protective one, of coming to water after dark or before dawn, which has earned for them the name of ‘ Night Parrots,’ by which they are known to all bird trappers and dealers in five birds. The bird trappers tell me that it is often so dark when the birds come to water, usually about 9 o’clock at night, that in pulling their nets they have more often to be guided by the chirruping little note of the birds than by sight. They are quiet, unobtrusive little birds in captivity, and are awake long before any of the other birds in my aviary, and may often be seen feeding after all the other birds have gone to roost. However , it is doorned to early extinction. The export and sale of this interesting Parrakeet ought to be prohibited. It is so shy and retiring that one seldom sees it ; the bird catchers net it as it comes to water after dark, and usually manage to get all that come.” Then follows an account of the finding of the nest, which contained four eggs and a hatched young one. North gives the measurement of an average egg taken by Mr. K. H. Bennett as 0‘ 9 inches in length by O' 7 inches in breadth. Mr. J. W. Mellor has sent me a note stating that eggs laid in captivity measured 0'78-0'82 X 0'65-0'68, and that he regarded larger specimens pm-porting to be those of N. bourkii as doubtful. This is a matter for systematic egg-students to take hold of, but I here note it on account of the variety of the species. 434 BLUE-VENTED PARROT, In the Records of the Australian Museum , Vol. V., p. 268, 1904, North re- corded : “ M. Octave Le Bon informed me that he netted eight living examples of Neophema bourkei at a soak near Melville on the Murchison Goldfield, Western Australia. I believe this species has not been previously recorded from Western Australia.” In the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 155, 1911, he added : “From Wiluna, Western Australia, Mr. C. G. Gibson sent me a specimen for identification and wrote as follows : “ I am forwarding a skin of a Parrakeet I obtained on the track a few days ago, and would be glad if you would let me know what it is. I have never seen one before. There were about six of them, three appeared similar to the one shot, and three appeared to have little or no white about them.” The specimen sent is a male, and I had to shoot it with a bullet, and could only get the one, as the others flew away. They were noticed near Gum Creek, half-way between there and Nannine.” These are the only instances on record of its Western range. Captain S. A. White (Trans. Roy. Soc. S.A., Vol. NXXIX., p. 746, 1915) wrote : “ This beautiful little parrot was first met with at Flat Rock Hole, where it came to drink up to nine o’clock at night. Flying round several times in small parties of four or five birds, they uttered a plaintive little whistle, at times almost warbling. They alighted on the bare rock and walked to the water’s edge. It is quite possible these birds have made it a practice to come to water late owing to birds of prey as a rule watching watering places both morning and evening. Later on a small covey of these birds was flushed from amongst the dry grass, when the camels were passing through some open mulga country. They rose quickly, alighted on a dead mulga for a few seconds, then flew away swiftly out of sight. The crops of the specimen procured were very distended with small grass seeds.” I differentiated the Central bird on account of its generally paler colour and I would here maintain this subspecies. However, in the British Musehm (Natural History) are preserved birds from Gregory’s Expedition with no further data. Apparently these would extend the range of the species much to the northward. 435 Genus — N EONANODES. Neonanodes Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 279, 1912 . . . . . . . . . . . . Type N. chrysogaster. Smallest Platycercine birds with small bills, long wings, long wedge-shaped tails and small feet. The bill is very small, a little projecting, the tip moderately sharp, the under edge of mandible not notched : the under mandible small and broad. The cere consists of two circular fleshy excrescences on each side the culmen ridge, close together, the circular minute openings showing from above. The wing has the first primary longest, but little exceeding the second, the third not much less, the remainder rapidly decreasing. The outer primaries scarcely scalloped, only showing on second and third and very slightly on first on outer edge of webs only. The tail is slightly longer than the wing, wedge shaped, the feathers narrow and attenuate ; the middle four are longest and equal, the next two decidedly shorter and rest decreasing regularly. The legs are small and delicate. This and the succeeding genus show six species very closely allied and the smallest Parrakeets in Australia. They constitute a very well-marked character of the Australian Avifauna, being confined to the Southern portion of the continent, members of the next genus reaching, however, into South Queensland. They appear to be Platycercine birds, but they are well differen- tiated in colour and structure from all the others as well as in their small size. They appear to be rapidly decreasing, so that while members of the present genus still exist in small numbers, the succeeding genus seems to have already become extinct. This is the more remarkable as one of the latter was fifty years ago the commonest species. 436 Key to the Species. A. Lores blue B. Lores yellow * a. Orange patch on abdomen very b. Wing-coverts all dark blue c. Upper wing-coverts light blue. . N. petrophilus. pronounced • • N. chrysogaster. . . . . . . N. chrysostomus, . . . . . . N. elegans* \ * The lores in chrysogaster never seem to be as yellow as those of the other two species ; being more greenish yellow. VOL. VI. 437 Order PSITTACIFORMES. No. 368. Family PLA T Y CERCIDM. NEONANODES CHRYSOGASTER. ORANGE-BELLIED PARROT. (Plate 316, upper figure.) Psittacus CHRYSOGASTER Latham, Index Ornith., Vol. I., p. 97, 1790 : Hab. ? = Tasmania. Orange-bellied Parrot Latham, Gen. Synops. Birds, Suppl. I., p. 62, 1787. Psittacus chrysogaster Latham, Index Ornith., Vol. I., p. 97, 1790. Euph&ma aurantia Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1840, p. 148, 1841 : Tasmania ; id., Birds Austr., pt. n. (Vol. V., pi. 39), 1841 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 75, 1865 ; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt. vn., 1866. Nanodes gouldii Ewing, Tasm. Jour. Nat. Sci., Vol. I., pt. l, p. 54, 1841, n.n. Euphema * chrysogaster f Bonaparte, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1854, p. 154; Einseh, Die Papage., Vol. II., p. 168, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 47 ; Legge, Papers Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasm., 1886, p. 238, 1887 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 82, 1891. Neophema chrysogastra Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 573, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 67, 1899 : Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 652, 1901 ; Mathews, Handb Birds Austral, p. 50, 1908 ; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasm., p. 97, 1910 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 159, 1911. Psephotus chrysogaster chrysogaster Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 278, 1912. Psephotus chrysogaster mab Mathews, ib., Port Adelaide, South Australia. Neonanodes chrysogaster chrysogaster Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 137, 1913. Neonanodes chrysogaster rmb Mathews, ib., p. 138. Distribution. Tasmania ; Victoria ; New South Wales ; South Australia. Adult male. General colour of the upper-surface grass green : lesser upper wing-coverts round the bend of the wing, bastard-wing, primary-coverts, outer greater coverts, and outer aspect of the primary- and secondary-quills ultramarine blue becoming paler on the outer margins of the primaries towards the tips, the remaining portion of the quills blackish-brown, the outer-webs and tips of the innermost secondaries green like the back ; middle tail-feathers green at the base with pale blue on the margins and at the tips, the outer feathers yellow on the terminal portions, which increases in extent till the outer pair are almost all yellow ; crown of head somewhat paler than the back with a narrow frontal band of blue which extends to above the eye, where it is much paler and inclining to green ; hinder face and sides of the * Also spelt Euphemia, | Also spelt chrysogqftlra. 438 Roland Green. del. 'WitKerby & C° g 3 NEONANODES CHRYSOGASTER . f ORANGE - BELLIED PARROl^J. NEO NAN ODES CHRYS O S TOMUS . ( BLUE -WINGED EARROT). <• \ < ■ ' ORANGE-BELLIED PARROT. neck like the top of the head ; throat, breast, sides of the body, and abdomen yellowish-green ; vent orange ; thighs, under tail-coverts, and lower aspect of tail bright yellow ; under wing-coverts ultramarine blue ; quill-lining dark brown. Iris brown, feet mealy-grey, bill blue-horn. Total length 220 mm. ; culmen 10, wing 104, tail 103, tarsus 14. Figured. Collected in New South Wales. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Collected at Geelong, Victoria, on the 16th June, 1912. Immature. Have the frontal band only faintly indicated ; the under-surface being grass green. They also have the orange vent. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, four to five ; white ; 21-23 mm. by 17-18. Breeding-season. November to January. In his first Supplement to the General Synopsis of Birds , 1787, p. 62, Latham described the 44 Orangebellied Parrakeet. Length seven inches and a half : breadth twelve. Bill yellowish-green, head, breast, upper part of the body, and lesser wing-coverts, dull green ; greater coverts rich blue on the exterior sides ; the interior dusky marked with a white spot ; lower belly orange ; tail green ; ends of the four outmost feathers fine yellow ; legs greenish. Native place uncertain. Communicated by Mr. Pennant.” For this species in the Index Ornith., 1790, p. 97, he proposed the name Psittacus chrysogaster. We know now that Pennant secured many specimens brought back by the members of Cook’s Expeditions, so that probably this was a bird obtained in Tasmania on Cook’s Third voyage. The description, on account of the lack of locality, was not recognised at once, and when Gould received the species he distinguished it as new, naming it Euphema aurantia. He wrote of it as follows : 44 Although the present bird is not so elegant in form, nor graced with so brilliant a frontal band as several others of the group, it has received ample compensation in the rich orange mark that adorns the under surface, a character by which it may be distin- guished from every other known species. Like the Euphema chrysostoma, it is a summer visitant to Tasmania. I observed it sparingly dispersed in the neighbourhood of Hobart Town and New Norfolk, but found it in far greater abundance on the Actseon Islands, at the entrance of D’Entrecasteaux Channel. These small and uninhabited islands are covered with grasses and scrub, intermingled with a species of Barilla, nearly allied to Atriplex halimus ; and almost the only landbird that enlivens these solitary spots is the present beautiful Parrakeet ; I frequently flushed small flocks from among the grass, when they almost immediately alighted on the Barilla bushes around me, their sparkling orange bellies forming a striking contrast with the green of the other parts of their plumage and the silvery foliage of the plant upon which they rested. I made many unsuccessful attempts to discover their breeding 439 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. places ; as, however, these islands are destitute of large trees, I am induced to believe that they lay eggs in holes on the ground, or among the stones on the shore.” From the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., I extract the following notes : Mr. Malcolm Harrison wrote from Hobart : “ The Orangebellied Grass Parrakeet arrives about the same time as the Blue-banded Grass Parrakeet, but in my experience not in the same numbers, and the same class of country is apparently congenial to both, although each species seems to prefer its own particular area in which to carry on nesting operations. Messrs. A. C. Butler, A. W. Swindells and I noticed this in the Both well District, and Mr. Brent found the same thing occurring at Melton in 1889, when both species were so plentiful. For several years past very few of these birds have visited their usual haunts, nor can I hear of them as frequenting other parts. Mr. Brent and I, during the latter part of 1908, devoted a week entirely in pursuit of the Parrakeets ( Euphema venusta and E. chrysogastra) and succeeded in finding one solitary bird of the latter species in a tree on the Dennistown Estate at Bothwell. I have had several sets of the eggs, in each case consisting of four, and I am inclined to think that number, and occasionally five, is the complement.” Dr. Holden added : “ On the 24th May, 1887, 1 fired into a flock of Orangebelhed Grass Parrakeets ( Euphema chrysogastra) at Long Beach, Circular Head, killing three birds. None of them had the orange spot on the centre of the abdomen so well developed as a specimen procured on Circular Head Peninsula in May, 1886. In one of the specimens the upper aspect of the tail-feathers is much bluer than in the other two. On the 9th September, 1887, I saw one on a rough, stony, uncultivated patch on top of Green Hills, Circular Head, and in June, 1888, I saw a flock about the same place.” North wrote : “ It is exceedingly rare in New South Wales, the northern limit of its range. The late Mr. J. A. Thorpe obtained a male and female at Middle Head, Sidney Harbour, where he found them breeding in a hollow stump, also a specimen at Long Bay, where . . . Masters also procured an adult male and female. These are the only specimens I know to have been procured in New South Wales.” It is rare also in Victoria, so that it must now be a very rare bird every- where and becoming gradually extinct. It is to be hoped some measures will be taken in Tasmania for its preservation before it becomes too late. Mr. Edwin Ashby has written me : “In the spring of 1886 I found this lovely little Grass Parrot very numerous in the Pine wood ( Callitris ) : un- fortunately this wood was only a mile or so from Port Adelaide, in fact it extended almost to the Port, with the result that every boy that was able to raise a firearm was shooting these little birds. I obtained two skins at that time : one is in the South Australian Museum and Mr. G. M. Mathews has the 440 ORANGE-BELLIED PARROT. other. No skins have been taken by ornithologists in S. A. since that date. The old pine wood is now almost cleared away, as is the pine forest on Lefevre Peninsula. Whether this bird is now extinct in S. A. or has betaken itself to some other locality I do not know.” I contrast this with Gould’s statement : “ On visiting South Australia in winter, I there found it equally abundant on the flat, marshy grounds bordering the coast, especially between the Port of Adelaide and Holdfast Bay.” Mr. F. Littler has written : “ The southern portion of Tasmania appears to be the stronghold of this species : however, I have seen fairly large flocks in some of the midland districts.” I separated the South Australian form subspecifically, noting that it differed from P. c. chrysogaster in having the band on the forehead wider and more pro- nounced.” These characters I can still perceive, but no more material has been received to confirm the form or otherwise. I am therefore maintaining it at present but it seems that this form will soon be extinct, if not already so. It is really urgent that these small Parrots should be studied as earnestly and quickly as possible, as they all seem to be very rapidly dying out. In a few more years there will be no chance of learning anything whatever about them, even if there be any now. It will be seen Gould found them very abundant where there are none now, and the same tale is read of all the species. Order PSITTACIFORMES. No. 369. Family PLATYCERCIDJE. NEONANODES CHRYSOSTOMUS. BLUE-WINGED PARROT. (Plate 316, lower figure.) Psittacus CHRYSOSTOMUS Kuhl, Nova Acta Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 50, 1820 : In Nova Hollandia = Tasmania (New South Wales is quite wrong). Psittacus chrysostomus Kuhl, Nova Acta Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 50, 1820. Psittacus venustus (not Kuhl 1820) Temminck, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XIII. , p. 121, 1821 : “ King George’s Sound ” error = Tasmania (New South Wales is wrong). Nanodes venustus Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 278, 1827 ; Swainson, Zool. Illustr., 2nd Ser., Vol. I., pi. 21, 1829 ; Selby, Nat. Library Parrots, p. 177, pi. xxvri, 1836. Euphema chrysostoma Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissensch. Munch., Vol. I., pp. 493, 544, 707, 1832 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. i. (Vol. V., pi. 37), 1840 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 71, 1865 ; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt. xni., 1867 ; Howe and Tregellas, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 81, 1914 (Vic.). Lathamus venustus Lesson, Compl. de Buff, VoL IX., Ois., p. 216, 1837. Euphema venusta Einsch, Die Papage., Vol. II., p. 163, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Om. 1881, p. 46 ; Legge, Papers and Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasm. 1886, p. 238, 1887 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 262, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 77, 1891. Platycercus venustus Forbes, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1879, p. 166. Euphema elegans (nec Gould) Sclater, ib., p. 828. Neophema venusta Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 570, 1891 ; Hall, Viet. Naturalist, Vol. XXV., p. 64, 1898 ; id., Key Birds Austr., p. 67, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs, Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 649, 1901 ; A. G. Campbell, Emu, Vol. II., p. 208, 1903 (King Island) ; Batey, ib., Vol. VII., p. 12, 1907 (Vic.) ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral, p. 51, 1908 ; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasm., p. 96, 1910 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 156, 1911. Neophema chrysostoma Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVII., p. 500, 1910. Psephotus chrysostomus Mathews, ib., Vol. XVIII., p. 277, 1912. 442 BLUE-WINGED PARROT. Neonanodes chrysostomus Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 138, 1913. Neonanodes chrysostomus tasmanica Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. II., p. 128, Jan. 28, 1915 : Tasmania. Neonanodes chrysostomus chrysostomus Mathews, ib. Distribution. Tasmania ; Victoria ; New South Wales. Adult male. Entire back, scapulars, innermost secondaries, rump, and upper tail-coverts pale yellowish-green ; upper wing-coverts bright ultramarine blue ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts, and quills blackish-brown, the outer edges of some of the outer primary-quills pale blue ; central pair of tail-feathers pale blue, the next pair pale blue on the outer-webs, dark brown on the inner ones with an inclination to yellow on the outer margin at the tips, the remainder of the lateral feathers tipped with yellow : the yellow increasing in extent towards the outermost pair which are almost entirely yellow ; crown of head golden yellow, a frontal band of dark ultramarine blue which is fringed on the posterior portion with green ; lores and a circle round the eye yellow ; cheeks, sides of neck, throat, and breast pale green ; abdomen, flanks, thighs, under tail-coverts and lower aspect of tail yellow ; under wing-coverts deep ultramarine blue ; lower aspect of quills dark brown. Iris brown, feet mealy-grey, bill bluey-horn. Total length 225 mm ; culmen 9, wing 113, tail 1 10, tarsus 14. Figured. Collected at Melton, Victoria, and is the type of N. c. cyanopterus. Adult female. Differs from the adult male in lacking the golden yellow on the head, in having the frontal band not so pronounced and in being more green on the under- surface. There is only a faint tinge of yellow on the abdomen. Immature. Have the wing-coverts not so blue, and the frontal band is only indicated, and more resembles the female. Nest. A hole in a tree, stump or log. Eggs. Clutch five to seven ; white ; 22-23 mm. by 19-20. Breeding -season. October to January. This species was described by Kuhl and Temminck under different names: the circumstances of the confusion have been already detailed. While Kuhl did not particularise any locality, simply stating “ In Nova Hollandia frequens,” Temminck definitely noted King George’s Sound. The species does not occur in the latter locality. When I drew up my “ List of the Birds of Australia ” I selected New South Wales as the type locality, but here again monographic study has solved the trouble. Kuhl described the male and female, noting “In Museo Societ. Linneanas Londinensis, in Bullokiano multi, in Laugeriano.” It appears that the figured male is undoubtedly the Tasmanian bird, but the female may not have been. Vigors and Horsfield give the clue, as they wrote : “ Mr. Caley informs us that this bird is called by the settlers Hobart Ground Parrot. The native name he has not ascertained. Our male specimen was brought by that gentlemen from Van Diemen’s Land; the female was procured by Mr. Brown at King George’s Sound.” 443 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Reference to Robert Brown’s Manuscript shows that the latter was obtained at King George’s Sound, “ Coll, by D. Bell, Surgeon,” and that it is the female of Gould’s elegans. Gould’s notes are still of interest : “ This bird is a summer resident in Tasmania, arriving in September, and departing again in February and March. During its sojourn it takes up its abode in such open and thinly timbered localities as are favourable for the growth of various kinds of grasses, upon the seeds of which it almost solely subsists. Among the places in which I observed it to be most abundant were Bruni Island, Sandby Bay, immediately adjoining Hobart Town, New Norfolk, Spring Hill in the interior, the banks of the Tamar, and on Flinders Island in Bass’s Straits. As a matter of course it is also found in Victoria, that country being in the direct line of its migration. The Bluebanded Grass Parrakeet is one of the most beautiful and interesting of the Psittacidce ; for whether perched on the small dead branches of a low bush, or resting upon the stronger grasses, there is grace and elegance in all its actions. It runs over the ground and threads its way among the grasses with the greatest facility, and the little flocks are usually so intent upon gathering the seeds, as to admit of your walking close up to them before they will rise ; the whole will then get up simultaneously, uttering a feeble cry and settling again at a short distance, or flying off to some thickly foliaged tree, where they sit for a time and again descend to the ground. The breeding season is at its height in October and November.” Mr. J. W. Mellor wrote me : “ I have seen this parrot in Tasmania in 1906 when I went to the Great Lake District, and on Dec. 10th I came across some of these birds at the foot of the Great Western Tiers in North-west Tasmania, and on the following day I shot several birds for my collection ; they were amongst the dead timber country and flying down on to a field of wheat and oats that were just coming into ear and eating the soft unripe grain from the husks.” Mr. Isaac Batey, on the birds of Victoria, twenty miles N.W. of Melbourne, stated (. Emu , Vol. VII., p. 12, 1907) : “ Generally to be found in a small party. This Parrakeet might be counted rare ; saw a few quite recently. Never knew it to nest in my part.” A long and careful account of the breeding of this species appeared in the Victorian Naturalist , Vol. XV., p. 64, 1898, which may be here given : “ This Parrakeet is very regular in timing its visit, from 14th to 21st September. Its first concern upon arrival is to find a suitable stump for nesting, the kind preferred being that about one foot in diameter and ten to twenty-two feet high, per- pendicular, and two to three feet of the top part hollow. This season (1897) I watched the operations of two pairs, and as their times of action were identical, a description of one will suffice : On 28th September, bird No. 1 commenced 444 BLUE- WINGED PARROT. preparing hole by throwing overboard every particle of charcoal and charred wood from bottom and sides of hole. After the coarser matter was removed, the fine, dry decayed matter was carefully scraped from every hole and crevice around the inside and allowed to fall to the bottom of hole. This work continued until 22nd October. I visited it each day and always found a bird at work, but whether male or female, as you ask, I cannot say — perhaps both, and it is a question for further research. From 22nd to 28th October one bird sat continually, and I got alarmed lest the eggs should be laid during this period, for although I visited it often five times during each day, and remained watching till after dark, during these six days I did not find the bird from the nest. However, on the 28th, the bird had flown and left one egg. A second was laid on 30th October, and from then until 19th November I had no opportunity of seeing what was taking place beneath the sitter, as it could not be persuaded to leave the nest ; rough measures would not do. On this 19th day, broken eggshells pointed to full incubation of one or more eggs. On 21st and 23rd November more shells, while bird still keeping close on nest. On 24th November appeared five young birds, with a yellowish downy appearance, and old birds keeping close on nest until 27th November after which two young birds opened their eyes on 1st December. On 4th December two young birds appeared, covered with grey, yellowish about head and tail-feathers, the latter being one inch long. By 10th December two had developed green over body and wings, with a little grey still remaining about the head. The remaining three, being less advanced, were partly coloured green and grey. By 19th December traces of grey had disappeared from all. The first young bird left nest on 20th December. A second left on the following day, 21st, No. 3 left on the 22nd. No. 4 and 5 left on the 23rd. Towards the end of January, and occasionally as late as the middle of February, one may see the adult birds flying from place to place, followed closely by young birds, which receive their food from the parent birds’ bills. A field of standing oats is much appreciated by this species ; failing this, milk thistle and flat weed (Hypocharis, sp.) seed comes next in favour. Immigration to warmer parts begins during March, and continues to mid- April, after which no more are seen until the following spring.” From the Aust. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1., Vol. III., I quote Mr. G. A. Heartland’s notes : “ The Melton District (of Victoria) appears to have some special attraction for this species, as during the months of September and October hundreds of them may be seen feeding in the grass paddocks or perched on the fences. By November they are generally paired, and select the hollow branches of fallen timber for their nesting places. By January they have disappeared.” Mr. L. Holden, of Circular Head, Tasmania, wrote : “ About the end of October, 1886, I saw a pair about some fallen tree trunks in a VOL. VI. 445 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. potato field at Montagu, and they were possibly breeding, but, not knowing their habits of nesting in logs, made no search.” Dr. Malcolm Harrison, from Glenorchy, near Hobart, Tasmania, stated : “ The Bluebanded Grass Parrakeet visits us in the spring, arriving generally in September, and breeding for the most part in November and in early December. The grass flats, comparatively sparsely timbered, of the Midland portions of the State, appear to be mostly affected by them, and in no parts have I known them more numerous than in the Greenponds and Bothwell Districts, where food is generally abundant and the timber is not large and contains numerous holes and spouts suitable for nesting purposes.” Then follow accounts of egg-taking, indicating that in 1907 they were missing from places where they had been commonly met with in 1899, and concluding : “ The introduced Starling has taken possession of nearly every available hole and spout in the country, formerly found so suitable for breeding purposes apparently by this Parrakeet, and it appears to me quite possible this may account, at least to some extent, for the absence of the latter from those particular localities.” I recently separated the Tasmanian form subspecifically, but this turns out to be the typical subspecies. I had doubted whether I should maintain the subspecies under the circumstances, but I find North, who is no splitter, has recorded : “ The series of skins in the Australian Museum Collection is a small one, but the skin of an adult male labelled ‘ Adelaide 1862,’ and of another labelled ‘ Murray River 1867,’ may be easily distinguished from an adult procured by Mr. George Masters, at the Ouse River, Tasmania, in March 1867, by having the centre of the abdomen rich jonquil-yellow.” It seems, therefore, Lest to continue the two subspecies : Neonanodes chrysostomus chrysostomus (Kuhl). Tasmania. As synonyms must be noted P. venustus Temminck, 1821 (not of Kuhl 1820), and Neonanodes chrysostomus tasmanica Mathews. Neonanodes chrysostomus cyanopterus , subsp. n. This is the figured and described male, from Melton in Victoria. 446 Roland Green. del. vV: therby &. C° 3 NEO NAN ODES ELE GAN S . f GRASS - PARROT). NEONANODES CARTERI. f. ALLIED GRASS -PARROTS. T Order PSITTACIFORMES. No. 370. Family PLATY CERGI DjE. NEONANODES ELEGANS. GRASS PARROT. (Plate 317.) Nanodes elegans Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1837, p. 25 ; “ Tasmania ” error = South Australia. Nanodes elegans Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1837, p. 25. Euphema elegans Gould, Birds Austr. pt. ii. (Vol. V., pi. 38), 1841 ; id. Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 73, 1865 ; Diggles, Omith. Austr., pi. vil, 1866 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 165, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 46 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 263, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 80, 1891. Neophema elegans Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 572, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 67, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 651, 1901 ; Carter, Emu, Vol. III., p. 172, 1904 (M.W.A.) ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 51, 1908 ; Whitlock, Emu, Vol. X., p. 313, 1911 (S.W.A.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 157, 1911. Psephotus elegans elegans Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 277, 1912. Peepholes elegans carteri Mathews, ib., p. 278 : Broome Hill, West Australia. Neonanodes elegans elegans Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 138, 1913. Neonanodes elegans carteri Mathews, ib. Distribution. New South Wales ; Victoria ; South Australia ; West Australia. Adult male. General colour above and below yellow, strongly tinged with green on the head, hind-neck, rump, upper tail-coverts, and breast, being much more intensified on the back, scapulars, inner upper wing-coverts and innermost secondaries ; lesser marginal upper wing-coverts dark blue tipped with paler blue like some of the outer median and greater series, bastard-wing, primary-coverts, primary and secondary quills black with more or less deep blue on the outer aspect, the outer edges of the primaries towards the tips inclining to greenish-blue ; the two middle tail-feathers greenish-blue becoming darker and more blue towards the tips, the outer ones yellow with more or less blue at the base — the blue increasing in extent towards the central feathers ; a narrow band of deep blue across the forehead edged with bright blue on the hinder margin and extending in a very narrow line over and terminating at the base of the eye ; lores, fore-part of cheeks, throat, abdomen, and thighs golden yellow, under tail-coverts and lower aspect of tail bright yellow, the central feathers of the latter pale brown ; sides of the body like the breast ; axillaries and under wing-coverts deep dark blue, the greater series of the latter 447 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. and quill lining blackish. Bill bluish-horn. Eyes hazel ; feet grey. Total length 260 mm.; culmen 11; wing 114; tail 128; tarsus 15. Figured. Collected at Melton, Victoria. Adult female. Similar but not so rich in coloration. Adult male. Crown of head, hind-neck, entire back, scapulars, inner upper wing-coverts, innermost secondaries, sides of face, throat, breast, and sides of the body olive-green, shaded with yellow ; lesser marginal upper wing-coverts pale blue like some of the outer median and greater series ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts, and flight quills blackish with deep dark blue on the outer aspect much paler on the outer margins of the primaries ; middle tail-feathers peacock-blue the outer ones yellow at the tips and more or less brown on the inner-webs — the yellow increasing in extent towards the outermost which is almost uniform yellow ; a deep dark blue band across the forehead fringed on the posterior portion with pale blue and extended in a very narrow line over the eye ; abdomen and short under tail-coverts dull yellow with a greenish tinge — the long series of the latter paler yellow, like the lower aspect of the outer tail-feathers, the central feathers brown ; middle of abdomen and thighs pale orange-red ; axillaries dark brown ; under wing-coverts blackish like the quills below, the former tinged with deep dark blue. Figured. Collected at Broome Hill, South-west Australia, on the 13th of October, 1905. And is the type of P. e. carter i. Adult female. Similar but not so rich in coloration. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, four to five. White. 20-21 mm. by 17-18. Breeding-season. August to October. Although this bird was first described by Gould it had been brought to England long before but had been confused with the preceding species. Gould described it as from Tasmania but he later discovered his error. His notes read : “Although closely resembling in size and form the Blue-banded Grass-Parrakeet, this species differs from it in several minor particulars. The green colouring of its plumage is of a more golden hue, and the blue frontal band extends behind the eye, while in the former it reaches no farther than the front ; the difference in the colouring of the wing of the two species is also strongly marked, being wholly blue in one, while in the other the shoulders and the part near the scapularies are green. As far as I could learn, the present species is never seen in Tasmania, while the Blue-banded is a constant summer visitant to that island ; neither is it common in New South Wales, its visits to that country being apparently accidental. Its proper home is Western Australia, over which country it is generally dispersed. It appears to prefer the barren and sandy belts bordering the coast, but occasionally resorts to the more distant interior. Flocks were constantly rising before me while traversing the salt marshes, which stretch along the coast from Holdfast Bay to the Port of Adelaide ; they were feeding upon the seeds of grasses and various other plants, which were there abundant ; in the middle of the day, or when disturbed, they retreated to the thick Banfcsias that grow on the sandy ridges in the immediate neighbourhood, and in such numbers, that I have 448 GRASS PARROT. seen these trees literally covered with them, intermingled with the orange- breasted species (E. aurantia) which, however, was far less numerous. When they rise, they spread out and display their beautiful yellow tail-feathers to the greatest advantage. Gilbert informed me that, in Western Australia, “ the elegant Grass-Parrakeet inhabits every variety of situation, but particularly where there is an abundance of grass, the seeds of which are its favourite food ; it may be generally observed in small families, but at Kojenup, where there are several pools, and no other water for many miles round, I saw these birds in myriads ; but although I shot a great many they were nearly all young birds. Its flight is rapid and even, and frequently at considerable altitudes.” Captain S. A. White’s notes read : “ Neonanodes elegcms is fairly plentiful in the country adjacent to Lakes Alexandrina and Albert and also in the Coorong. I have met with this bird in small flocks in the vicinity of Lake Albert, South Australia, feeding on burnt ground, a fire having passed over it some few days previously, and later saw some small parties amongst the sand dunes situated between the Coorong and the sea: they fly fast and often utter a soft note when upon the wing.” Mr. Edwin Ashby’s observations follow : “In February 1900 I saw a flock of this bird in the township of Elliston in the Great Bight : the only other occasion I remember seeing this species was in a wheat paddock near Murray Bridge, so as far as this state is concerned I think they cannot be considered common. In 1886 considerable numbers of this parrot used to fly over the township of Ascot near Ballarat, Victoria, both morning and evening. I found out that they visited a paddock near by that was full of seeding thistles and the birds were feeding on the thistle seeds. I only saw them pick the seeds off the ground. The upper plumage so exactly accorded with the colour of the semi-dried grass that it was almost impossible to distinguish them except when they moved. I obtained several specimens, one a remarkably highly coloured male. As far as I could judge by their flight the birds roosted in a low range of hills a few miles to the North West.” Mr. Tom Carter has written me : “ Not uncommon about Broome Hill, and apparently rather a late breeder. Fledged young noted Dec. 11, 1908 and Dec. 2, 1912. One specimen only was noticed in the Mid-West. It was found dead on the ground at Point Cloates, March 31, 1900, and was in immature plumage.” Mr. J. W. Mellor states : “ I have seen them along the large red gum creeks in the North of South Australia, especially on the eastern slopes of the Flinders Range, where they take to the hollows in the boles of the large trees, and the nests are pretty well inaccessible. In a trip to Port Augusta 449 A THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. in 1896 I saw these birds at Saltia on the top of the Flinders Ranges ; on the 5th September these birds had fully fledged young in the hollows, as the season was an exceptionally dry one, and so they had started to breed very early : their call is a pleasing little whistle repeated with a sharp little call as the birds fly through the air.” From the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. HI., I quote Mr. K. H. Bennett’s notes from the Mossgiel district. New South Wales : “ Eupheina elegans I have met with only on the borders of the large cane-swamps, in the open plains far from timber, and either in pairs or small flocks of from five to six in number. It is an extremely shy species, and when flushed flies with a peculiar zig-zag flight, sometimes pitching to the ground within a short distance, but more frequently ascending to a greater altitude and flying off until lost to sight. I have never known of an instance of it breeding here.” Dr. A. M. Morgan wrote : “ I have met with Neophema elegans from the Finniss River in the south, to Yultacowie (South Australia) in the north, and also about thirty miles west of Port Augusta. In the latter situation they appeared to be migrating westward.” The subspecies are two in number, an eastern and western form, and both are easily distinguished. When I differentiated the western race I wrote : “Differs from P. e. elegans in its darker coloration above, especially on the head and rump, its greener coloration below, the small amount of yellow on the tail-feathers, and by the almost black frontal line.” These characters hold good and I therefore here admit Neonanodes elegans elegans (Gould). New South Wales ; Victoria : South Australia. Neonanodes elegans carter i Mathews. West Australia. 450 R, 3 NEONANODES PETROPHILUS. (WESJ'ERN ROCK-PARROT). Order PSITTACIFORMES. No. 371. Family PLA T Y CERC1 DAS. NEONANODES PETROPHILUS. ROCK PARROT. (Plate 318.) Euphema petrophila Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1840, p. 148, 1841 : Western Australia. Euphema petrophila Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1840, p. 148, 1841 ; id., Birds Austr., pt. xiv. (Vol. V., pi. 40), 1844; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 76, 1865; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 170, 1868; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 47 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 83, 1891. Neophema petrophila Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 574, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 67, 1899 ; Campbell, Xests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 652, 1901 ; Lawson, Emu, Vol. IV., p. 131, 1905 (W.A.) ; Mathews, Hand! Birds Austral, p. 51, 1908 ; Hall, Emu, Vol. IX., p. 131, 1910 (S.A.) ; Barrett, ib., pp. 133-5, pi. xil, 1910 (S.A.) ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 161, 1911. Psephotus petrophilus petrophilus Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 278, 1912. Psephotus petrophilus zietzi Mathews, ib. : Sir J. Banks Group, Spencer Gulf, S.A. Neonanodes petrophilus petrophilus Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 138, 1913. Neonanodes petrophilus zietzi Mathews, ib. ; S. A. White, Emu, Vol. XVI., p. 13, 1916 (S.A.). Distribution. Coasts of South Australia and West Australia. Adult male. General colour above and below yellowish olive-brown including the head, entire back, upper wing-coverts, scapulars, innermost secondaries, upper \tail- coverts, sides of face, throat, and breast, becoming paler and inclining to yellow on the abdomen and under tail-coverts ; outer upper wing-coverts pale blue ; bastard-wing, primary-coverts, primary and secondary quills blackish with a white spot on the inner-webs of some of the inner primaries and paler towards the tips of the latter which have also pale narrow edges ; tail bluish-green with dark brown on the inner-webs, the outer-feathers yellow on the apical portion — the yellow increasing in extent towards the outermost which are almost uniform yellow ; base of forehead deep dark blue fringed with pale blue on the posterior margin which is continued in a very narrow line over the eye ; lores and fore part of face also pale greenish-blue ; under wing-coverts dark blue, narrowly edged with paler blue, the greater series and quills below dark brown ; lower aspect of tail dark brown on the central feathers and yellow on the outer ones. Bill brown ; eyes dark brown; feet brown. Total length 223mm. ; culmen 11, wing 113, tail 110, tarsus 16. Figured. Collected at Port Adelaide, South Australia, in March, 1898. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. 451 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Immature. Distinguished by the absence of the blue frontal band at the base of the forehead. Nest. A crevice in a rock. Eggs. Clutch four to five. White. 24 to 26 mm. by 19-20. Breeding-season. September to December. This beautiful little species with its peculiar habits was described by Gould from West Australia, and later he wrote : “I have received specimens of this bird from Port Lincoln, in South Australia, but its principal habitat appears to be the western coast, where it occurs in great numbers on Rottnest and other islands near Swan River : * Here,’ says Gilbert, ‘ it breeds in the holes of the most precipitous cliffs, choosing in preference those facing the water, and most difficult of access ; and hence it required no slight degree of exertion to procure examples of the eggs, which, according to the testimony of the natives, are white, and seven or eight in number. Its flight is extremely rapid, and at times it mounts to a great height in the air.’” Mr. Tom Carter has noted : “ This species appears to be confined to the south-west coast. They used to breed rather commonly under the great slabs of rock thrown up by heavy storms above ordinary high-water mark on the beach near the Margaret River, but were scarce there in 1903. Some ten years ago they were not uncommon about Albany, and a pair or two of them could often be seen on the edge of the beach of the large Princess Royal Harbour, but of late years I have been unable to find any about there. Probably domestic cats have killed them.” Captain S. A. White writes : “ These birds were very numerous once upon Lefevre Peninsula, South Australia, and I have seen large flocks where the Outer Harbour is now situated, but they have long since disappeared from that locality. I found them plentiful on the low sandy island upon which Troubridge Lighthouse is situated. They were in large parties feeding upon a small grass seed, which was then ripe : they would rise quickly and with erratic flight fly round a few times and then drop more than alight among the bushes. An odd bird or two was met with upon the islands visited in Spencer’s Gulf during the same trip : their main breeding-ground is on an island of the Sir Joseph Banks Group in Spencer’s Gulf. I have seen these birds’ nesting -place on Goat Island in Coffin’s Bay, west coast of S.A. They lay their three or four white eggs on the bare decomposed rock in small holes.” Mr. J. W. Mellor’s notes confirm this : “ These parrots are the most sombre in appearance of all the Neophema family, their dull olive-green coats being very inconspicuous as they feed on the green flats about the swampy mouths of salt creeks and such like places. I have seen them at the mouth of the 452 ROCK PARROT Port Adelaide River, feeding amongst the samfire and saltweed, and have here shot specimens for my collection : they eat the seed of the saltbush and also grass seeds found just behind the mangrove swamps on the sandy rises. I saw those little parrots one morning in numbers on Reevesley Island, one of the Sir Joseph Banks Group in Spencer’s Gulf. My notes read : ‘ Jan 17, 1907. We landed in the ship’s boat early in the morning before breakfast. I noted small flocks of the Rock Parrots flying from the seaward and settling among the sand dunes which line the coast of this low island, and upon investigation I found that they were settling on the Myoporium bushes, the small purple berries of which they were eating for their breakfast, and then flying to a “ soak ” between the hillocks to quench their thirst, for although it was barely daylight it was summer time, and the day registered considerably over 100° in the shade.’ I got several specimens. These in all probability had young on one of the adjacent islets of the group and were just feeding and watering on this island in the cool of the morning. The birds were seen breeding on a small island in Coffin’s Bay on the western side of Eyre Peninsula, in October 1909. The parrots made their nests on the earth, amongst the heap of rocks on the shore, but for the most part the young were hatched and fledged. It is remarkable that such a small delicately built little Parrot should select such bleak and stormy situations, in which to breed, when there are ideal and sheltered places within easy reach of their flight on the mainland near by.” Mr. F. Lawson (in the Emu, Vol. IV., p. 131, 1905) gave a good account of this species on Rottnest Islands, West Australia, as follows : “ This pretty little species is fairly common, but seems to favour the western side of the island, where it breeds on several small islets, but occasionally on the most precipitous slopes of the mainland cliffs. For a nesting site it takes advantage of any natural hollow in the limestone rock. I examined half a dozen or more nests. All of these were on the summits or slopes of islets, not in the face of the cliffs. The favourite situation appeared to be under a large slab of rock overhung by a profuse growth of vegetation ( Mesembryanthemum ). In one instance I found young in down in a slight hollow in the sandy soil, simply concealed by vegetation, and without other shelter. The eggs vary from four to six ; they are inclined to be spherical, and of the usual white colour. When a nest is being examined the old birds fly round with great rapidity, or perch on a neighbouring rock, whence they exhibit great anxiety. Young in first plumage lack the blue forehead band. In traversing the island I often disturbed pairs or small parties of this Parrakeet, generally in the more open parts. Their chief food seems to be small round seeds, but I could not identify of what species of plant.” VOL. VI. 453 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Hall, writing on the Birds of Eyre Peninsula {Emu, Vol. IX., p. 131, 1910), wrote : “ On a small, flat, treeless islet, made of dune limestone and covered with Mesembryanthemum, Brassica, etc., the bird was nesting in numbers. Among the rocks on the flat, and in the face of the very low cliff, there were a dozen nests. We examined a few : a, two young in grey down ; b, one fresh egg ; c, five young in pale grey down ; d, ditto ; e, three eggs well incubated. The nests were from three inches to three feet within the piles of stone or in the cliff facing the bay (further remarks see p. 133). Loc. Kellidie Bay.” Then followed a long account : “ Notes on the Rock-Parrakeet, by Charles Barrett, with a plate showing the nest and nesting -place of the species.” Barrett wrote : “It was during the camp out of the A.O.U. on Eyre Peninsula in October last. A small party . . . drove to Lake Wangary on the west coast. On one occasion we were taken to Kellidie Bay, a lovely little inlet of the sea, tranquil as a lake when we saw it. Driving along the rough road which girdles the Bay, we flushed from the long grass beyond the wheel-tracks flocks of the beautiful Neophema petrophila. Hundreds of the graceful little birds rose, almost from beneath the horses’ hoofs, and flew a few yards to settle on the branches of the nearest eucalypt or she-oak. They were easy to approach, and one of our gunners soon obtained a brace for purposes of identification — for on the wing the birds closely resembled N. elegans. On reaching the homestead, the owner, Mr. Mortlock, informed us that there were many birds breeding on an islet about a quarter of a mile from the shore near the outlet to the sea. Boats were kindly placed at our disposal. As the boats drew near Goat Island, a gun was fired by some too eager hand, and immediately the air was filled with winged forms. From behind the green curtains of Mesembryanthemum which draped the rock-ledges from water-line to summit of the island, Rock Parrakeets flew, screaming, out of the darkness of their nesting holes into the sunlight, which made their golden-green plumage shimmer like satin. The flat summit is strewn with limestone boulders. Several cairns were, for some purpose, long ago built of those stones, but they are now tumbled down, and the Parrakeets nest in the interstices. At every step, almost, we flushed a bird, and by pulling away the stones found its nest. Along the cliff face the nests were difficult to locate, and still harder to reach, for several which I examined were placed at the end of burrows from three to four feet in length. On the summit, however, the eggs often lay under a flat stone, raised a few inches from the ground by fragments of rock. One nest, just above the water’s edge, and containing five young, was between two vertical rocks, a situation in which the eggs of the Oyster catcher are often found.” Captain S. A. White wrote {Emu, Vol. XVI., p. 13, 1916) : “ Seen in 454 ROCK PARROT. small parties upon Beatrice Spit, Little Althorpe, Wedge Island and Troubridge Island. At the first and last localities there are no rocks, but they evidently frequent the low bush in search of food, and repair to the rocky islands to nest.” Mr. W. B. Alexander has written me : “I have only met with these birds twice, once at Cape Leeuwin and on the other occasion on the Hampden Range about 120 miles west of Eucla, at a point where the cliffs are several miles inland.” The range of this species extends from St. Vincent’s Gulf, South Australia, along the south coast and round the west up to Freycinet’s Harbour, Shark’s Bay. I separated the South Australian form as differing in having the blue frontal band darker, generally less brilliant coloration, paler blue and browner primaries. This form was upheld in my List of the Birds of Australia and here it seems expedient to accept it. I 455 Genus — N EOPHEMA. Neophema Salvador!, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 569, 1891 . . . . . . . . . . . . Type N. pulchella. Smallest Platycercine birds with very small bills, long wings, long wedge- shaped tails and small feet. This genus generally agrees with the foregoing, but the bill is more depressed with a broader spatulate tip, the wing has the first three primaries subequal, the second usually the longest, while the tail-feathers are broader, the six middle feathers being almost equal. The brilliant coloration is more striking. The exact relationship of this and the preceding group is obscure. Salvadori classed them as congeneric, but that does not seem to define their alliance. The present genus is extinct, or nearly so, so that osteological criticism is scarcely possible, however desirable it may be. The present forms have the bill more like Platycercus than the preceding, and their broader feathers of the tail also suggest that genus, but that these genera are certainly as old as Platycercus can scarcely be disputed. The evolution of Neophema is difficult to suggest, as the two species seem to have had a more northern range than Neonanodes while being also recorded from West Australia. The brilliant coloration is also remarkable, as, though four species comprise the genus Neonanodes, of which two are Tasmanian and the other two range into West Australia, all the four have maintained a uniformity of coloration quite unequalled in the whole Order in Australia. The two species of Neophema agree in their colour-pattern and we cannot trace their direct evolution from Neonanodes , but the fact rather indicates parallel evolution from the parent stock. 456 Key to the Species. A. Chest orange : forehead and cheeks pale blue: bend of wing dark blue . . . . . . $ N. pulchella , p. 458. B. Chest scarlet : forehead and cheeks dark blue : bend of wing paler blue . . . . . . N. splendida , p. 462. a. Lores whitish . . . . . . . . $ N. pulchella, p. 458. h. Lores blue : wing patch lighter . . . . 9 N. splendida, p, 462. 457 Order PS ITT A Cl FOR MISS. No. 372. Family PLATTCERGIDJE. NEOPHEMA PULCHELLA. RED-SHOULDERED GRASS PARROT. (Plate 319.) Psittacfs pulchellus Shaw and Nodder, Naturalists’ Miscellany, Vol. III., pi. 96, March 1st, 1792 : New South Wales. Psittacus 'pulchellus Shaw and Nodder, Nat. Miscell., Vol. III., pi. 96, 1792 ; Latham, Index Ornith. Suppl., p. xxi., 1801 ; Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 50, 1820 ; Temminck, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XIII., p. 122, 1821, Psittacus edwardsii Bechstein, Kurze Uebers. Vogel, p. 74, 1811 : New South Wales. Nanodes pulchellus Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 118, 1826 ; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 277, 1827. Lathamus azureus Lesson, Traite d’ Ornith, p. 205, 1830 : New South Wales. Euphema pulchella Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissensch. Munch., Vol. I., pp. 493, 542, 706, 1832 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. ix. (Vol. V., pi. 41), 1844 ; id ., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 77, 1865 ; Ramsay, Ibis, 1866, p. 332 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 161, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 48 ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 : North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 263, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 78, 1891 ; Campbell, Emu, Vol. XIV., p. 167, 1915. Lathamus pulchellus Lesson, Compl. de Buff, Vol. IX., Ois., p. 216, 1837. Psephotus pulchellus Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1860, p. 243 ; Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 278, 1912. Neophema pulchella Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 575, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 67, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 654, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 51, 1908; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 163, 1911 ; Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 138, 1913. Neophema pulchella dombraini Mathews, Austral Av. Rec., Vol. II., p. 128, Jan. 28, 1915 : Southern Victoria. Neophema pulchella pulchella Mathews, ib. Distribution. New South Wales ; Victoria ; South Australia. Adult male. General colour above dull green including the nape, hind-neck, entire back, scapulars, innermost secondaries, upper tail-coverts, and middle tail-feathers, the bases of the feathers on the hind-neck are white, which forms an obscured patch ; fore-head, sides of crown, lores, sides of face, lesser and outer median upper wing- 458 3 NEOPHEMA PULCHELLA. (RED -SHOULDERED GRASS -PARROT). RED-SHOULDERED GRASS PARROT. coverts bright turquoise-blue, outer greater coverts, bastard-wing, primary-coverts, primary- and secondary-quills dark blue on the outer aspect, paler and inclining to greenish on the margins of the primary- and secondary-quills, inner-webs dark brown ; a patch of red on the inner portion of the wing-coverts ; the lateral tail-feathers next to the middle pair are tipped with yellow and brown on the inner- webs, the yellow increasing and the brown decreasing in extent towards the outer- most pair which are almost entirely yellow ; hinder face, sides of neck, sides of breast and sides of the body yellowish-green ; fore-neck, breast, and abdomen old gold-yellow ; under tail-coverts and outer tail-feathers below yellow, the middle feathers brown ; axillaries pale greenish-blue ; under wing-coverts dark blue, the greater series and quill-lining dark brown. Bill horn colour, eyes brown, feet grey. Total length 210 mm. ; culmen 11, wing 112, tail 107, tarsus 13. Figured. Collected on the Riverina, New South Wales, on the 3rd of April, 1873. Adult female. Differs from the adult male in the absence of the red patch on the inner upper wing-coverts, the bright blue on the fore-head, sides of crown, and sides of the face, in having the fore-neck and breast dull pale green and a large white spot on the inner-webs of most of the primary- and secondary-quills, and in having white lores. Figured. Collected at Randwick, New South Wales, in June, 1881. Immature. Differs from the adult male in having the sides of the face much less brilliant blue, in having an admixture of green on the fore-neck and breast, and in having a yellowish spot on the inner-webs of some of the primary- and secondary-quills. Collected at Bathurst, New South Wales, in July, 1891. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, four or five. White. 20 to 23 mm. by 18-19. Breeding-season. August to December. “All those who have traversed the ‘bush’ in New South Wales will recognise in this lovely species an old favourite, for if must have often come under their notice.” Thus wrote Gould. At the present time it is probably extinct, and of its life history we do not know much, yet it was apparently a common bird at the settlement of Sydney. It was described by Shaw and Nodder in 1792 and appears among the Watling drawings, where, however, it is called a rare bird, but this rarity only applied to the non-observant settlers, as many other common birds are also termed “ rare.” Its beauty strongly appealed to the artist Watling, so that, contrary to his usual practice, he gave a long descrip- tive note : “ The two centre tail-feathers are entirely green, the two next have a little yellow on the tips or points, which increases in all the tail-feathers, until the two outer ones on each side are perfectly yellow ; from the centre, or two green feathers, the five others on each side regularly decrease in length. This is a rare bird in N.S. Wales, is of short flight, never seen in more than pairs, and oftener seen on the ground than perched on trees. The feathers of the head and shoulder of the wing are of the most brilliant lightest azure. The strongest quill -feathers are equal as to clearness of colour, but of a middling deep mazarine -blue, tipped with black. The whole of the bird’s colours are delightful, but these most especially the best artist must ever despair of equalling.” 459 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. It was figured by other early writers, and Kuhl, in 1820, records it as being in all the museums. Vigors and Horsfield give the following account : “ The bills of this species and the next ( chrysostomus Kuhl) are in a slight degree more rounded at the culmen than that of the typical species N. discolor , the wings are also somewhat less acuminated, and the tail flatter and more rounded at the apex. In these particulars it evinces a gradual approach to the next genus, Platycercus. The birds of this latter genus are observed to feed upon the ground ; and the two species now before us are generally found in a similar situation as we are informed by Mr. Caley. But they are not equally well adapted to the ground as the species of Platycercus , not having an equal length of tarsus , or the same shortness and roundness of wing. The gradual approach, however, of the two genera, both in characters and habits, is singularly conspicuous. Mr. Caley says of this species : “ The native name I have forgotten. The settlers call it Ground Parrot. It feeds upon the ground. Great care is required in taking off the skin, from its being particularly fine and thin, and readily torn. The crop is generally full of small grass-seeds ; and should it be cut or torn, so as to let these seeds out among the feathers, it is with difficulty they are got off again, from their having become glutinous in the stomach. The natives tell me it chiefly breeds in a stump of a small White Gum-tree , making no other nest than of the decayed parts of the tree. It has eight young ones. The eggs are white without spots.” Gould wrote : “ During my own rambles in that country (N.S.W.) my attention was constantly attracted by its beautiful outspread tail and wings as it rose before me. Its sole food being the seeds of grasses and of the smaller annuals, it spends much of its time on the ground and appears to evince a greater partiality for stony ridges than for the rich alluvial flats. When flushed it flies off to a short distance between the trees, perches on some dead branch and remains there until hunger impels it to return to the ground. I have never seen this bird congregated in large flocks like the Euphema chrysostoma and E. elegans , but usually met with it in small companies of six or eight in number.” North, in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 163, 1911, wrote: “In former years this Grass Parrakeet was very common in the neighbourhood of Sydney, but the last specimen received by the Trustees of the Australian Museum was that of a young bird, procured by the late Mr. J. A. Thorpe, at Hornsby, in June, 1886. . . . It is a matter for regret that this Grass-Parrakeet has for many years past entirely disappeared from the neighbourhood of Sydney, for it is one of the most beautiful species of the genus Neophema , nor can I gain information of it occurring elsewhere in any numbers in other parts of the State.” Mr, Robert Grant’s note reads : “ The Chestnut- 460 RED-SHOULDERED GRASS PARROT. shouldered Grass-Parrakeet I almost invariably met with in pairs, on different parts of the Blue Mountains, New South Wales, and have shot them on the road between Wallerawang and Wolgan, also at Sodwalls on the western line. The only place I ever found a small community together was on the margins of a swamp, on the late Mr. Mumford’s estate on the top of the Zig- zag near Mount Edgecumbe. They were feeding on the pine-like seed-cones of a small shrub that grew plentifully on the higher ground, and I found about six or seven pairs nesting in the hollow branches of the Gum trees around the swamp. This was in December, 1885, and a young bird obtained was sub- sequently sent to the Australian Museum. The female has less blue on the face, and usually has not the red shoulder spot, but in some specimens, probably very old birds, I have seen traces of it on lifting up the scapular. It is many years ago since I saw an example of this species.” Mr. E. H. Lane recorded the nesting in October, 1882, of a pair at Wambangalang, near Dubbo, New South Wales, adding : “ This is the only nest I have found of this species, and have observed it only on this occasion. Probably its appearance there was due to dry weather, for in the same month and year I obtained a set of the eggs of Psephotus multicolor , the first and only time I have observed this species in that locality.” When Campbell wrote the Nests and Eggs, in 1901, he stated : “ This exquisite species is found in the more thickly timbered tracts of South- eastern Australia.” The late Mr. T. A. Forbes-Leith stated : “ This lovely Grass-Parrakeet wanders to Gippsland in spring, when it is generally seen in pairs or perhaps three or four together. I think it was this species we used to flush from the rich alluvial flats at the foothills of the Danderongs. . . . The eggs in my collection, taken at Berwick, Victoria, are larger in the dimensions than the Macquarie Fields set (N.S.W., taken by Mr. Percy Ramsay in 1889) and were identified by the wing of the bird shot by the same person who took the eggs. However, the finding of another authenticated clutch of these scarce eggs will be welcomed with interest.” Apparently the species is now extinct in both Victoria and New South Wales, but as it was a resident it is probable that the eggs might differ in size. I separated the Victorian form subspecifically, but in view of its extinction there cannot be much interest in this item, as so few specimens are preserved that we cannot exactly determine the differences observed. These were detailed : “ N. p. dombraini. Differs from N. p. pulchella in having the red scapulars much more pronounced and the blue on the wing not so noticeable. Southern Victoria.” VOL. VI- 461 Order PSITTAC1F0RMES. No. 373. Family PLATYGEROIDM. NEOPHEMA SPLENDIDA. SCARLET-CHESTED GRASS PARROT. (Plate 320.) Euphema SPLENDIDA Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1840, p. 147, 1841 : West Australia. Euphema splendida Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1840, p. 147, 1841 ; id ., Birds Austr., pt. n. (Vol. V., pi. 42), 1841 ; id ., pt. xxix. (Vol. V., pi. 42a), 1847 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 79, 1865; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt. xm., 1867 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 159, 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878; Reichenow, Journ. fur Orn., 1881, p. 48; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; id., Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 84, 1891. Neophema, splendida Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 576, 1891 ; North, Ibis, 1894, p. 260 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 68, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., pp. 654, 1081, 1901 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 51, 1908; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 164, 1911; Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 139, 1913. Psephotus splendidus Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 279, 1912. Neophema splendida halli Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. III., p. 57, Apl. 7, 1916 : South Australia. Neophema splendida splendida Mathews, ib. Distribution. New South Wales ; Victoria ; South Australia ; West Australia. Adult male. Entire back, rump, upper tail-coverts, scapulars, inner greater upper wing- coverts, innermost secondaries, on the upper surface, and the sides of the breast and sides of the body, below, grass-green ; lesser, median, and outer greater upper wing-coverts pale blue ; bastard-wing blackish tinged with blue on the outer- webs ; edge of the wing rather palei blue ; primary-coverts, primary- and secondary- quills blackish with the outer edges of the primaries and outer- webs of the secondaries greenish-blue ; middle tail-feathers green, the outer one for the most part yellow with dark shaft-lines and dark brown on the inner-webs ; crown of head and sides of the face bright cobalt-blue becoming deeper in colour on the cheeks and throat ; fore-neck and middle of breast deep red ; abdomen, thighs, lower flanks, and under tail-coverts orange-yellow ; under wing-coverts dark blue paler on the outer margins, the greater series and quills below blackish ; lower aspect of tail yellow on the lateral feathers and dark brown on the central ones. Bill blackish-horn, eyes brown, feet flesh. Total length 225 mm. ; culmen 11 wing 115, tail 100, tarsus 13. Figured. Collected in South-west Australia. Adult female. Differs from the male in having the red patch on the fore-neck and middle of breast replaced by green and the other colours duller. The female of this bird is very similar to that of pulchella, but differs in having blue lores and the blue wing-patch lighter. 462 Roland Green. del. Witherby _2_ 3 NEOPHEMA SPLENDIDA . (SCARLET - CHESTED GRASS PARROT) . SCARLET-CHESTED GRASS PARROT. Immature (almost adult) male has the fore-neck and breast green with the deep red feathers showing through. The rest of the colours even duller than in the female. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, four. White. Nearly round in form, the texture of the shell being very fine, and nearly lustreless. 23 mm. by 19 (North). Breeding-season. September (White). Still more sorrowful is the story of this “ splendid ” little Parrakeet. Gould’s history : “ It is a source of much regret to me, that I am unable to give more than a very slight notice of this beautiful bird. The specimen from which my description was taken came into my possession in 1840, unfortunately without any other information accompanying it than that it was a native of Swan River ; from that period no other example occurred until 1845, when several were transmitted to me by the late Johnson Drummond, who had killed them near Moore’s River in Western Australia. Captain Sturt obtained a male during one of his journeys into the interior of South Australia. Mr. J. Gardner informs me that he has procured examples in the Murray scrub near the north-west band of that river, and has been told that it is found in the country bordering the head of St. Vincent’s Gulf ; he adds that it is of a very shy disposition and nowhere very numerous.” In the Appendix to the Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds , Vol. II., p. 1081, 1901, Campbell described the eggs of the species, writing : “ During a recent trip to Adelaide, when looking over the collection of my venerable friend, Mr. William White, the pair of eggs (above described) dated 29th September 1863 attracted my attention. As they are now the type eggs, as far as I am aware, their history, given to me by their discoverer, may be interesting. Mr. White was in the company of Mr. J. Taylor, of Pudnookna Station, River Murray, South Australia, and when stock hunting to the north-east of the station, flushed a splendid Scarlet -chested Grass Parrakeet from a hole in a mallee-tree. Mr. White being desirous of securing one of the parents as well as the eggs, he left, and returned again when the bird was sitting. Binding his handkerchief to the end of a long stick, he placed it over the hole. Then his companion held the stick while he ascended the smooth tree by the aid of a notched stick placed against it and secured the bird (a female) and two eggs. There were four eggs in the nesting hole but unfortunately two were broken while Mr. White was awkwardly clinging to the smooth stem taking them. The bird lived in Mr. White’s aviary for several years, but was always solitary and shy. Mr. White says this was also his experience of the bird in the bush. They were seen singly or in pairs in the most scrubby localities, often far from water. Like the rest of the family, the male has a very feeble, rippling call.” 463 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. These are undoubtedly the “ type ” eggs as they had been described some six years before by North (Ibis, 1894, p. 260), and apparently they are unique. North, in the Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 165, 1911, records that none of his correspondents in Western Australia had been able to procure or even see this bird in that State in recent years. Mr. Robert Grant gave a note : “In November 1892 I flushed a beautiful male Neophema splendida out of some Polygonum, near Bourke, on the Darling River, Western New South Wales, and it flew into a low tree. This bird I shot, and afterwards carefully searched all around for the female but did not find it. This is the only instance I have ever seen this species alive in the bush.” There appears little else to record about this species save that it seems to be absolutely extinct both in the east and west. It was described from West Australia and I separated the eastern form subspecifically. While this may be maintained the same remarks apply as in the preceding case, no series being available, and little interest can be taken in the subspecific variation of these little birds. Judging from analogy, which is a dangerous thing to do, the subspecies would be better marked than the odd specimens show. It is worthy of note that this species seems to have had a western range denied to its congener. Both appear to be more complex evolutionary products than the preceding genus, and yet both appear to have died out before any of the four species of that genus, a rather extraordinary procedure. It is possible that this elimination is due to the progress of civilization, but it certainly cannot be put down to the scientific bird-collector. It may be that it was only able to survive before the complex changes wrought by cultivation, etc., were brought into being, and the species was not able to adapt itself quickly enough to these changes to benefit thereby. As we have no records of its habits we can only guess at any reason for its decrease. 464 Gentjs — L ATHAMUS. Lathamus Lesson, Traite d’Ornith., p. 205, 1830 . . • - Type L. discolor. Nanodes (Not of Schoenherr 1825) Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool, Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 118, 1826 Type L. discolor. Euphema Wagler, Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch, Vol. I., p. 492, 1832 Type L. discolor. Also spelt — Euphemia Schlegel, De Dierent., p. 75, 1864. Small Platycercine (?) birds with projecting bills, long wings, long wedge-shape tails of narrow feathers and small feet. The bill projects with long tip, fairly sharp, succeeding by distinct notch whence the edge straightly recedes in a rather upward direction : the under mandible is broad, the tip broadly truncate, the lateral edges sinuate. The nostrils are small circular holes surrounded by a globular cere. The wing has the first primary longest, the primaries not scalloped to any extent on either web. The tail is equal to the wing in length and the feathers are narrow : it is, as usual, wedgeshaped, the two middle feathers very long and narrowly attenuated. The feet are small, but comparatively large for the family, the claws long. This anomalous monotypic genus is not well known as to its essential features. In 1865 Gould placed it between Geopsittacus and Trichoglossus, writing : “ Having had ample opportunities of observing the bird in a state of nature, I concur in the propriety of separating it into a distinct genus : in its whole economy it is most closely allied to the Trichoglossi, and in no \ degree related to the Euphemce. ... In its actions and manners it is closely allied to the Trichoglossi , but differs from them in some few particulars which are more perceptible in captivity than in a state of nature ; it has neither the musky smell nor the jumping motions of the Trichoglossi. I have never observed it to alight upon the ground, or elsewhere than among the branches.” Forbes, in 1879, from a study of the osteology of the species demon- strated a Platycercine affinity and its distinction from the Trichoglossine forms. At that time not a great deal was known about Psittacine osteology, so that it is very possible that a re-examination of the skeletal characters would necessitate a readjustment. It does not seem to have direct relationship 465 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. with the preceding species and as noted in its habits it is certainly not Platycercine. D’Arcy Thompson stated he examined a skull of this species but gives no further comment whatever. In view of Forbes’ results this is somewhat astonishing, as Forbes only showed that it generally seemed Platycercine. Salvadori, in his diagnosis of the sub-family Platy- cercinse wrote : “ Tongue simple, except in N anodes, which has a brush tongue. . . . Furcule wanting, except in N anodes. ” It would be advan- tageous to osteologically contrast Lathamus with Platycercus ( S . str.) and Glossopsitta, and compare the balance of characters. It is interesting to note that Gould used the generic name here accepted, though his statement of the case is inaccurate. He wrote : “ The single species known of this form has been assigned to a different genus by almost every writer in ornithology, Vigors and Horsfield placing it in their genus N anodes, Wagler in his genus Euphema ; but Lesson, perceiving that it did not belong to either of these forms, made it the type of his genus Lathamus.” The facts are : Vigors and Horsfield proposed Nanodes for a series of small Parrots, including this and the small ground-parrots : they designated this species as the type and noted the others were more or less aberrant. Wagler noted that Nanodes had been used for a generic name before Vigors and Horsfield selected it, and therefore introduced Euphema as absolutely a substitute. The two names are exactly co-equal. Simultaneously Lesson proposed Lathamus as a substitute for Nanodes, having also observed that name was invalid. Gould’s selection was unanimously accepted until Salvadori prepared the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., 1891, when he rejected it, reinstating Nanodes. This illegal and incorrect action was, of course, accepted by all writers who were unable to criticise the facts. However, Oberholser pointed out that this was untenable and, noting that Euphema and Lathamus had been introduced about the same time, concluded that the former had priority and advocated its usage. However, upon my looking up Oberholser’s statements I found the matter much more complicated than was superficially observed, and much research was necessary to accurately determine the exact truth. The facts were detailed in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 14, June, 1911, when I showed that Lesson had published his name Lathamus in 1830, while Euphema was not published until 1832. I also noted that Nanodes published by Vigors and Horsfield was clearly antedated by Nanodes Schoenherr, published in 1825 (Isis, col. 587). I accepted the date of publication of Vigors and Horsfield’s Nanodes as 1826, but since 1911 I have discovered that 1827 is the correct date, but that Stephens published the name in 1826. Moreover, Wagler’s paper was probably not published until 1833 or later, 466 LATHAMUS. * as the paper itself includes a reference on p. 747 to the Philos. Mag., 1832, p. 387, and the preface to the volume in which it is published is dated December, 1832. When I published the facts regarding Lathamus, in 1911, a satirical comment was made regarding the disagreement between Oberholser and myself : “ two ultra-prioritarians.” I would note that there was no dis- agreement whatever, but simply a matter of access to more complete material for determining intricate facts concerning date of publication, and that no one would agree more readily with my conclusions than Oberholser himself. 467 0 Order PSITTACIFORMES. No. 374. Family PLATYGERCIDM. LATHAMUS DISCOLOR. SWIFT-PARROT. (Plate 321.) Psittacus discolor White, Journal Voy. New South Wales, p. 263, and pi. opposite, 1790 : New South Wales. Red-shouldered Parrakeet Phillips, Voy. Botany Bay, p. 269 and plate, 1789. Psittacus discolor White, Journ. Voy. New South Wales, p. 263 and plate, 1790 ; Latham, Index Ornith. Suppl., p. xxi., 1801 ; Bechstein, Kurze Uebers. Vogel, p. 82, 1811 ; Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XXV., p. 346, 1818 ; Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 48, 1820 ; Swainson, Zool. Illustr., Ser. I., pi. 62, 1821. Psittacus sanguinolentus Kerr, Animal Kingdom, p. 585, 1792 (based on Phillips, plate opposite p. 269) : New South Wales. Psittacus lathami (not Temminck 1807) Bechstein, Kurze Uebers. Vogel, p. 81, pi. 8 (based on pi. 62, Levaill, Perroq.) : New South Wales. Psittacus humeralis Bechstein, Kurze Uebers. Vogel, p. 85, pi. 12 (based on pi. 50, Levaill’s Perroq.) : New South Wales; Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 47, 1820. Psittacus bariksianus Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XXV., p. 342, 1818 : (based on Levaill, pi. 50) : New South Wales. Psittacus australis Kuhl, Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol, Vol. X., p. 48, 1820 ; ex. Brown MS. (not of Gmelin 1788 nor Latham 1790), Tasmania (New South Wales is incorrect). Nanodes discolor Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i., p. 118, 1826; Vigors and Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV., p. 276, 1827 ; Lesson, Manuel d’ Ornith., Vol. II., p. 147, 1828; Selby, Naturalist’s Library Parrots, pp. 170, 177, 1836 ; Reichenow, Journ. fiir Orn., 1881, p. 39 ; Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 592, 1891 ; Hall, Key Birds Austr., p. 68, 1899 ; Campbell, Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, Vol. II., p. 655, 1901 ; Littler, Emu, Vol. II., p. 170, 1903 (Tas.) ; Batey, ib., Vol. VII., p. 13, 1907 (Tas.) ; Littler, Handb. Birds Tasm., p. 99, 1910 ; North, Austr. Mus. Spec. Cat., No. 1, Vol. III., p. 166, 1911. Trichoglossus .? australis Stephens, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., pt. i, p. 130, 1826. Laihamus rubrifrons Lesson, Traite d’Ornith., p. 205, 1830 : New name for Nanodes discolor V. & H. 468 V Roland Green, del. Witherby & C° j) 3 LATH AM US DISCOLOR. I SWIFT - PARR OT ). . ' 4 SWIFT-PARROT. Euphema discolor Wagler, Abkandl. Ak. Wissen. Munch., Vol. I., pp. 493, 545, 707, 1832 ; Oberholser, Smiths. Quarterly Inst. Publ., Vol. 8, p. 61, 1905 ; Mathews, Handl. Birds Austral, p. 51, 1908. Lathamus discolor Lesson, Compl. de Buffon, Vol. IX., Ois, p. 217, 1837 ; Gould, Birds Austr., pt. i. (Vol. V., pi. 47), 1840 ; id., Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. II., p. 90, 1865 ; Diggles, Ornith. Austr., pt. xvm., 1868 ; Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 194, 1878 ; Legge, Papers Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasm., 1886, p. 238, 1887 (Tas.) ; Ramsay, Tab. List Austr. Birds, p. 17, 1888 ; North, Austr. Mus. Cat., No. 12, p. 266, 1890 ; Ramsay, Cat. Austr. Psittaci, p. 92, 1891 ; Mathews, List Birds Austr., p. 139, 1913; Mellor & White, Emu, Vol. XII., p. 161, 1913 (Flinders Island) ; Chandler, ib., Vol. XIII., p. 37, 1913 (Vic.). Trichoglossus discolor G. R. Gray, List Spec. Birds B. M., pt. m., p. 63, 1859 ; Finsch, Die Papageien, Vol. II., p. 864, 1868. Qoriphilus discolor, Schlegel, De Dierent, p. 78, 1864. Lathamus discolor discolor Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 279, 1912 ; id., List Birds Austr., p. 139, 1913. Lathamus discolor tregellasi Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 279, 1912 : Mulgrave, Victoria; id., List Birds Austr., p. 139, 1913; South Austr. Ornith., Vol. I., pt. m., p. 17, 1914 : Ashby, id., pt. iv., p. 21 ; id., ib., Vol. III., p. 62, 1917 (Tasm.). Distribution. New South Wales ; Victoria ; Tasmania ; South Australia. Adult male,. General colour for the most part green, both above and below ; entire back, rump, upper tail-coverts, scapulars, and inner upper wing-coverts and outer-webs of the inner secondary-quills grass-green tinged with blue on the outer median and greater upper wing-coverts and long upper tail-coverts ; the coverts on the shoulder of the wing crimson-red ; bastard-wing and primary-coverts bluish-black ; primary-quills similar but paler, especially on the inner-webs, the outer-webs edged with yellow except the outer one which is uniform ; secondaries blackish edged with bluish-green on the outer- webs of the outer ones, the inner- webs of some of the innermost secondaries pale red ; tail for the most part pale blue tinged with dull red on the outer-webs of the central feathers on the basal portion ; middle of crown dark blue ; occiput, hind-neck, sides of neck, and sides of face green with a strong wash of turquoise-blue ; lores yellow ; forehead and fore part of cheeks scarlet, as are also some of the feathers on the middle and sides of the breast, thighs, and under tail-coverts ; axillaries and under wing-coverts similar but deeper in colour ; fore-neck, breast, and abdomen pale green with yellowish bases to the feathers ; some of the marginal wing-coverts below green ; greater under wing-coverts and quill-lining pale brown ; lower aspect of tail greyish-brown with rusty edges to the inner-webs. Bill reddish, eyes dark brown, feet grey. Total length 260 mm. ; culmen 12, wing 124, tail 118, tarsus 12. Figured. Collected in Tasmania. Adult female. Similar to the adult male. Nest. A hole in a tree. Eggs. Clutch, two. White. 25 mm. by 19. Breeding-season. November to January. In Phillips’s Voyage to Botany Bay, 1789, a plate was given opposite page 269 of the Red-shouldered Parrakeet, which was described : “ This bird is about VOL. VI. £69 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. the size of the Guinea Parrakeet. Total length, ten inches and a half ; the general colour of the plumage is green, inclining to yellow on the under-parts ; the top of the head, the outer edge of the wing and some parts of the middle of the same are deep blue ; all round the base of the bill crimson, with a mixture of the same on the fore part of the neck, but between the bill and eye is a mixture of yellow : the shoulders and under-parts of the wings are blood red : two or three of the inner quills, and the vent pale red ; the greater quills dusky, fringed outwardly with yellow ; the tail is greatly wedged in shape, the feathers at the base chestnut, towards the end dull blue ; the bill and legs are brown. “This species inhabits New South Wales, and we believe it to be hitherto non-descript .” Simultaneously, but published the succeeding year, White, in the Journal Voyage New South Wales , also gave a plate opposite p. 263 and also selected the same vernacular name, but added a Latin diagnosis and gave a Latin name, Psittacus discolor, which name it now bears. It also appears among the paintings made by Watling, so that apparently it was not uncommon about Sydney at the time of settlement. I have indicated the confusion in connection with the generic names applied to this interesting species, but it is noteworthy that no fewer than six specific names were later bestowed on this bird. The first, hitherto unrecorded, is Psittacus sanguinolentus, given by Kerr in his Animal Kingdom, in 1792, p. 585, to the “ Redshouldered Parrakeet, Phill. Bot. Bay, t. 269.” Then Bechstein, in 1811, named two plates given by Levaillant, not recognising they referred to the same bird : Psittacus lathami (pi. 26) and P. humeralis (pi. 50). The former name I have shown to be anticipated by Temminck for a different species. Vieillot added another name for the second plate (50), proposing P. banksianus. Kuhl used Brown’s MS. name P. australis for a specimen in the Museum Linnean Society, not recognising the identity of the bird, while Lesson added Lathamus rubrifrons simply as a new name when proposing the new generic term. Gould’s notes are fuller than those of any succeeding writer : “ This elegant Lorikeet is a migratory species, passing the summer and breeding- season only in the more southern parts of the Australian continent and Tasmania and retiring northwards for the remainder of the year. During September and the four following months it is not only abundant in all the gum forests of Tasmania, but is very common in the shrubberies and gardens at Hobart Town. It is frequently to be seen on the gum trees bordering the streets, within a few feet of the heads of the passing inhabitants, and so intent upon gathering the honey from the fresh-blown flowers which daily expand as almost entirely to disregard their presence. The tree to which it is so eagerly 470 SWIFT-PARROT. attracted is the Eucalyptus gibbosus , cultivated specimens of which appear to have finer blossoms than those in their native forests. It is certainly the finest of the Eucalypti I have ever seen, and when its pendent branches are covered with thick clusters of pale yellow blossoms presents a most beautiful appearance ; these blossoms are so charged with saccharine matter that the birds soon fill themselves with honey even to their very throats ; several of those I shot, upon being held up by the feet, discharged from their mouths a stream of this liquid to the amount of a dessert-spoonful. Small flocks of from four to twenty in number are also frequently to be seen passing over the town, chasing each other, like the Swift of Europe, whence in all probability has arisen its colonial name. Sometimes these flights appear to be taken for the sake of exercise or in the mere playfulness of disposition, while at others the birds are passing from one garden to another, or proceeding from the town to the forests at the foot of Mount Wellington or vice versa. Their plumage so closely assimilates in colour to the leaves of the trees they frequent, and they moreover creep so quietly yet actively from branch to branch, clinging in every possible position, that were it not for their movements and the trembling of the leaves it would be difficult to perceive them without a minute examination of the tree upon which they have alighted. . . . The only part of New South Wales in which I have observed this bird was the district of the Upper Hunter, through which it periodically passes during the months of February and March.” Captain S. A. White has written me : “ This bird visits South Australia at long intervals and always when the Eucalypts are in flower. I have a specimen taken by my father and his brother in I860, and they both record that these birds were very numerous, for a short time, at the Reedbeds in that year. They have appeared every ten or fifteen years since then. Two or three years ago they appeared in great numbers in certain parts of the Mount Lofty Ranges, but did not remain very long in the district, nor did they come on to the plains. They are remarkably swift-flying birds and their note is much softer in its tone in comparison to that of most parrots.” Mr. Edwin Ashby has added : “ In June 1914 I first saw this parrot in the neighbourhood of Blackwood, South Australia (I believe the previous record for this state was in 1882, before I came to Australia) : they stayed with us till the middle of September and then absolutely disappeared. My first identification was on seeing the brilliant red of the underside of the wing as a pair flew over, and a few days later we got a few specimens out of a flock of about thirty. Subsequently I found that they roosted at night in some trees just opposite my house and they continued to do so during the few months they remained here. In the afternoon they were feeding in the tops 471 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. of the Peppermint Gums, which were in flower. I secured two pair for the South Australian Museum and a pair for myself, and my son got another pair. When getting these I saw fully fifty birds within a quarter of a mile of my house. The crops and stomachs examined showed that, while all had been feeding on honey, insects and seeds formed a considerable portion of their diet. While at times they uttered a somewhat pleasing warbling note, the common call was a whistle, closely resembling the cry of the common Tree- Creeper ( Glimacteris scandens), for which it might be easily mistaken. The following are the measurements I took : Total length, 10*6 inches, 9 10'2 inches ; wing, <£ and 9 5 inches ; tail, banksi, 101, 117, 118, 119, 122. magnificus, Psittacus, 100, 104, 106, 127. major, Kakadoe sulfureus, 156. , Microglossus aterrimus, 85, 92. Mallee Parrot, 365. Malurus leucopterus, Preface, xi. textilis. Preface, xi. Manopsitta, 61, 64. coxeni, 67. Mantellornis, 484. Many-coloured Parrot, 401. Mascarinus, 247, 252. master sianus, Platycercus, 344. matoni, Trichoglossus, 33, 34. Megapodius, 113. Megastrix, 152. melanocephalus, Psittacus, 373. melanogenys, Nannopsittacus, 65. melanoptera, Platycercus, 305. melanopterus, Platycercus elegans, 305, 315, Preface, xvi. melanotus, Psittacus, 279, 281. melanura, Paiceornis, 263, 266, 268. , Polytelis, 266, 268, 269, 273. melanurus, Barrabandius, 266. , Platycercus, 266. , Psittacus, 266. mellori, Psitteuteles versicolor, 38. , Trichoglossus versicolor, 38, 41. Melopsittacus, 474, 5, 6, 7, 8, 97, 166, 235, 259, 298, 485. undulatus, 475, 474, 478, 480. intermedins, 4:75. pallidiceps, 476. undulatus, 475. melvillensis, Aprosmictus erythropterus, 280, 284, 286. , Cacatoes galerita, 171, 183. , Eucacatua galerita, 188. , Kakatoe galerita, 185. , Platycercus venustus, 346, 350. , Trichoglossus rubritorquis, 27. mentalis, Cr adieus, 255. Microdactylus, 14r. Microglossa, 73, 77. Microglossus, 5, 7, 73, 74, 75. aterrimus, 74, 77, 84, 85, 86, 89. aterrimus, 86. alecto, 86, 89. intermedia, 85, 89. major, 85, 92. minor, 85. stenolophus, 88, 89, 90, 93. goliath, 86. \ salvadori, 89, 92, 93. Microglossum, 73, 74, 77. ater, 83. aterrimum, 84, 85. nigerrimum, 83. minor, Alisterus cyanopygius, 292, 296. , scapidaris, 297. , Aprosmictus cyanopgius, 292. — - — , Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota, 34. , Microglossus aterrimus, 85. mollis, Cacatoes leadbeateri, 190. , Lophochroa leadbeateri, 190. moluccanus, Psittacus, 14, 16. } hcematotus, 17. — — , Trichoglossus, 14, 9, 12, 13, 28. — — , moluccanus, 25. — — , septentrionalis, 26. moluccensis, Cacatua, 169. — - — , Psittacus, 169. 507 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. multicolor, Euphema, 401. , Platycercus, 401. , Psephotus, 399, 401, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 461. , Psittacus, 347, 401, 407. , Trichoglossus, 15, 18, 29, 35, 54. mungi, Cacatoes leadbeateri, 190, 195. , Lophochroa leadbeateri , 190. Musk Lorikeet, 46. Myiop-sitta, 166. myrtce, Barnardius zonarius, 374, 377, 382. Nannopsittaca , Correction, Preface, six. Nannopsittacus, 65, Correction, Preface, xix. guglielmi, 65. melanogenys , 65. nigrifrons, 65. Nanodes, 3, 5, 8, 10, 258, 465, 466. australis, 46. bourlcii, 432, 433. discolor, 468, elegans, 447. gouldii, 438. hcematonotus, 395. porphyrocephalus, 53. pulchellus, 458, 488. pusillus, 58. undulatus, 475. venustus, 442. versicolor, 38. zonarius, 373. nasica, Cacatua, 214. , Licmetis, 176, 203, 216, 217. , Plictolophus, 214. nasicus, Licmetis, 214, 217. , Psittacus, 214. naso, Cacatua, 101. , Calyptorhynchus, 101, 113, 115, 122. , — — banksii, 120. nasutus, Cacatua, 214. neglecta, Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota, 34. neglecius, Alisterus cyanopygius, 292. , scapularis, 297. , Aprosmictus cyanopygius, 292. , PsitteuteJ.es, 33, 36. , Psitteutes, 36. , chlorolepidotus, 33, , Trichoglossm chlorolepidotus, 34. Neochmia phaeton, 41. Neonanodes, 436, 8, 392, 456. chrysogaster, 438, 436, 437. mab, 438. chrysostomus, 442, 437, 443. chrysostomus, 443, 446. cyanopterus, 443, 446. tasmanica, 443, 446. elegans, 447, 437, 449. carteri, 447, 450. elegans, 447, 450. petrophilus, 451, 437. Neonanodes petrophilus petrophilus, 451. — zietzi, 451. Neophema, 456, 5, 8, 258, 392, 452. bourkei , 432, 435. chrysogaster, 438. chrysostoma, 442. elegans, 447, 450, 454. petrophila, 451, 454. pulchella, 458, 456, 457, 462. dombraini, 458, 468. pulchella, 458, 461. — — splendida, 462, 457, 464 halli, 462. spendida , 462. venusta, 442. Neopsephotus, 431, 8, 392. bourkii, 432, 431. bourkii, 432. pallida, 432. N eopsittacus , 5, 254. versicolor, 38. Nestor, 6, 166. niger, Psittacus, 82. nigerrimum, Microglossum, 83. Night Parrot, 495. nigrescens, Platycercus, 304, 305, Preface, xvi. . elegans, 305, 315. , pennantii, 305, 313, 314. nigricans, Petrocheliclon, 360. nigrifrons, Nannopsittacus, 65. nobbsi, Platycercus elegans, 316. nonpareil, Psittacus, 352, 354. normantoni, Ducorpsius sanguineus, 211, 219. norlhi, Calyptorhynchus banksii, 102, 118, 123. Northiella, 409, 8, 392. hcematogaster, 410, 409. alter, 411. hcematogaster, 411, 417. hcematorrhous, 417. pallescens, 411, 417. xanthorrhoa, 411. zanda, 411, 412 , 417. Northipsitta, 270, 8. Alexandras, 271, 270. novcehollandice, Australasia, 15. , Cacatua, 239. , CalUpsitlacus, 239. , Calopsitta, 239. , Calopsittacus, 237, 239, 244, 245, 274. , Nymphicus, 237, 239. , Palceornis, 239. , Platycercus, 239. , Psittasus, 12, 14, 16, 238, 241. , hcematotus, 17. , Trichoglossus, 15, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26. , Novcehollandice, 15, 24. nuchalis, Psittacus, 58. Nymphicus, 7, 235, 258. bisetis , 237. novcehollandice, 237, 239. 508 INDEX. obscurus, Leptolophus auricomis, 240. occidentalis, Barnarclius, 373, 374, 380. , zonarius, 374, 377, 383. , Cyclopsittacus, 64, 65. , Geopsittacus, 495, 494. , occidentalis, 495, 498. , Ieracidea berigora, 212. , Pezoporus, 495. , Platycercus , 374, 380. , zonarius, 374, 382. omnicolor, Platycercus, 352. , Psittacus, 352, 354. oorti, Probosciger aterrimus, 94. Opopsitta, 61, 8, 44, 62, 63, 64. coxeni, 67, 61, 64, 66. desmaresti, 63. diophthalma, 61, 62. boweri, 69. leadbeateri, 69. leadbeateri, 69, 64, 66, 68. Orange-bellied Parrot, 438. breasted Parrot, 14, 16. orientalis, Glarkona varia, 408. , Psephotus varius, 408. Ornatus, Psittacus, 12, 15. Pacific Parroquet, 46, 47. Palceornis, 10, 166, 169, 247. anthopeplus, 266. melamira, 263, 266, 268. novceJiollandice, 239. swainsonii, 261. pallescens, Leptolophus auricomis, 240. , Northiella hcematogaster, 411, 417. , Psephotus, 411, 412, 417. , — — hcematogaster, 411. , xanthorrhous, 411, 416. palliceps, Platycercus, 338, 340, 342, 355. , adscitus, 343. , Psittacus adscitus, 339. pallida, Neopsephotus bourkii, 432. pallidiceps, Melopsittacus undulatus, 476. , Platycercus, 300, 338, 341, 342, 344. pallidus, Platycercus, 338. paradiseus, Platycercus, 316. Parrakeet, Black-spotted, 486. , Blue-banded Grass, 446. , Cockatoo-, 235. , Crested, 239. , Guinea, 470. , Red-shouldered, 468. Parrot, Alexandra, 271. — , Barnard’s, 365. , Beautiful, 421. , Lory, 304. , Black-tailed, 266. , Blue-checked, 338. , Mountain, 17, 19. , -vented, 432. , winged, 442. Parrot, Caledonian, 322. , Cockatoo-, 239. , Crimson, 304. , bellied, 410. , winged, 279. , Golden-shouldered, 425. , Grass, 447. , Green, 322. , Ground, 486. , King, 291. • , Mallee, 365. , Many-coloured, 401. , Night, 495. , Orange-bellied, 438. , breasted, 14, 16. , Pennantian, 304. , Rainbow, 19. , Red-backed, 395. , capped, 386. , cheeked, 253. , — — — crowned, 153. , shouldered Grass, 458. , sided, 248. , winged, 279. , Rock, 451. , Scarlet and Green, 291. • — - — , chested, 462. , Smutty, 345. , Spinifex, 495. -, Sulphur -headed, 317. , Swift, 468. , Tabuan, 291. , Yellow, 317. , banded, 373. , cheeked, 329. — — -, White collared, 14, 17. Parroquet, Pacific, 46, 47. parryensis, Aprosmictus , 279. , erythropterus, 280, 284, 286. Parvipsitta, 43. pastinator, Licmetis, 214, 217, 220, 221. , tenuirostris, 215, 218, 219, 221. , Plictolophus, 215. , Psittacus, 215. Pebbler, Rock, 266. pectoralis, Eclectus, 248, 249. , Lorius, 248, 246. Pennantian Parrot, 304. pennantii, Platycercus, 304, 308, 311, 314, 319, 320, 354. , Psittacus, 304, 307. per sonata, Prosopeia, 289. , Pyrrhulopsis, 288. personatus, Geoffroyus, 254. , Psittacus, 256. Petrochelidon nigricans, 360. petrophila, Euphema, 451. , Neophema, 451, 454. petrophilus, Neonanodes, 451, 437. , petrophilus, 451. 509 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. ♦ petrophilus, Psephotus petrophilus, 451. Pezophorus, 484. Pezoporus, 484, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 97, 98, 166, 259, 298, 474, 485, 494, 496. flaviventris, 487, 492. form,osus, 486, 490, 496. occidentalis, 495. terrestris, 486, 492. dombraini, 487, 492. — — flaviventris, 487, 492. 1 leachi, 487, 492. terrestris, 487, 492. wallicus, 486. dombraini, 492. flaviventris, 493. leachi, 493. wallicus, 492. phaeton, Neochmia, 41. Phaps chalcoptera, 192. phillippi, Psittacus pennantii, 304, 307. phcenicocephalus, Psittacus, 153, 155, 158. Phycloptolophus, 160. pileatus, Platycercus, 386. , Purpureicephalus, 386. Pink Cockatoo, 190. P ionites, 166. Pionus, 166. piscinator, Psittacus, 215. placens, Psitteuteles, 32. Platicercus, 298. scapullaris, 291. Platycerc'us, 298, 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 166, 247, 258, 363, 384, 388, 392, 418, 431, 456, 460, 466. adelaidce, 304, 309, 310, 311, 312, 315, 316, and addendum. adelaidensis, 305, 308, 310. adscitus, 338, 300, 303, 342, 350. adscitus, 343. amathusice, 343. — — elseyi, 343. palliceps, 343. alexandrce, 271. amathusia, 300, 338, 341, 342, 343, 350. amathusice, 338. barnardi, 365, 367, 370. augustus , 366, 371, 372. — barnardi, 366, 371. — — macgillivrayi, 366, 367, 371. — whitei, 366, 371. barrabandi, 261. baueri, 373. bernardi, 365. bourldi, 432. brownii, 322, 345, 349, 350. cceruleus, 291. caledonicus, 322, 299, 301, 303, 324, 350. caledonicus , 323. flindersi, 328. henriettce, 323, 328. Platycercus coelestis, 338. cyanogenys, 338. cyanopygius, 292. diemenensis, 353, 356. elegans, 304, 298, 299, 300, 301, 303, 309, 310, 313, 314, 316, 321, 327, 350, 351, 361, 362, Preface, xv. adelaidce, 305, 315. — elegans, 305, 315. fleurieuensis , Preface, xvi. melanopterus, 305, 315, Preface, xvi. nigrescens, 305, 315, Preface, xvi. — nobbsi, 316. — — : subadelaidce, 305, 315, 321. victories, 305, 309, 315. elseyi, 300. erythropeplus, 362. erythropterus, 278, 279. eximius, 352, 301, 303, 316, 325, 340, 354, 355, 359, 362, 368, 404. cecilce, 353. 360. — — colei, 360. diemenensis, 353, 358 360. eximius, 353, 360, 361. — splendidus, 353, 355. ■ flaveolus, 317, 299, 300, 301, 303, 311, 312, 316, 320, Preface, xv. flaveolus, 317, 319, 320. innominatus, 317, 318, 319, 320. — — flavigaster, 322. flaviventris, 319, 320, 322, 324, 326, 327, 354, fleurieuensis, Preface, xvii. hcematog aster, 410, 415, 416. hrematonotus, 395. hcematorrhous, 411. — icterotis 329, 299, 303, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336. icterotis, 329, 334, 336. — salvadori, 330, 334, 336. whitlocki, 330, 334. xanthogenys, 329, 337. ignitus, 362. macgillivmyi, 365, 370. master sianus, 344. melanoptera, 305. melanurus, 266. multicolor, 401. nigrescens, 304, 305. — — novoehollandice, 239. occidentalis, 374, 380. omnicolor, 352. palliceps, 338, 340, 342, 355. pallidiceps, 300, 338, 341, 342, 344. pallidus, 338. paradiseus, 316. pennantii, 304, 308, 311, 314, 319, 320, 354. nigrescens, 305, 313, 314. pileatus, 386. 510 INDEX. Platycercus, pulcherrimus, 421. purpureocephalus, 386. rosaceus, 261. rufifrons, 368. scapularis, 291. scapulatus, 278, 291, 308, 354. semitorquatus , 373. splendidus, 353, 359, 360, 361. spurius, 386. stanleyii, 329, 334, 336. — — venustus, 345, 300, 303, 349, 350, 442. hilli, 345, 350. • melvillensis, 346, 350. venustus, 346, 350. xanthogaster, 322. xanthogenys, 329, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336. xanthorrhous, 411. zonarius, 373, 380. connectens, 374, 382. dundasi, 374, 375, 382. ■ — — occidentalis, 374, 375, 382. semitorquatus, 374, 382. zonarius, 374, 382. Plectolophus , 160. Plictolophus, 160, 168. — - — galeritus, 171. gymnopis, 199. leadbeateri, 190. nasica, 215. pastinator, 215. rhodolorus, 98. roseicapillus, 266. sanguineus, 199. Pluctolophus , 160. Plyctolophus, 160, 163, 164, 168, 169. banksii, 125. baudinii, 134. coolcii, 101. eos, 225. erythropterus, 190. funeralis, 139. galeatus, 153. galeritus, 170. leadbeateri, 190. licmetorhynchus, 171. macrolophus, 186. roseicapillus, 226. sanguineus, 198. solandri, 125. tenuirostris, 214. Pceocephalus, 6. Polychlorus, 246. Polychrous, 246. Polyteles, 258, 261. alexandrce, 271. barrabandi, 261. rosaceus, 261. Polytelis, 258, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 247, 258, 259, 271. Polytelis alexandrce, 268, 271, 272, 275, anthopeplus, 266, 260 268. anthopeplus, 266. westralis, 266. barrabandi, 261, 263, 272, 273. melanura, 266, 268, 269, 273. swainsonii, 261, 258, 260, 263. swainsonii, 262, whitei, 262. Porcephalus, 166. Porphyreicephalus spurius, 386. porphyreocephalus, N anodes, 53. Porphyrio, 484. porphyrocephala, Glossopsitta, 53, 45, 48. — — •, porphyrocephala, 53, 57. Porphyrocephalus, 5, 384. spurius, 268, 386, 389. porphyrocephalus, Coriphilus, 53. , Glossopsittacus, 53, 56. , Trichoglossus, 53. Prioniturus, 63, 247. Prionodura, 255. Probosciger, 73, 2, 7, 8, 74, 75, 76. aterrimus, 77, 73, 76, 255. alecto, 92. aterrimus, 92. griseus, 93. intermedins, 92. macgillivrayi, 93. — — ■ oorti, 94. stenolophus, 93. goliath, 76. Prosopeia, 289. — — personata, 289. Psephotellus, 419, 8, 393. chrysopterygius, 425, 420, Preface, xi. chrysopterygius, 426, 430. dissimilis, 430. dorothece, 426. dissimilis, 425. pulcherrimus, 421, 419, 420. dubius, 421, 422. pulcherrimus, 421. w Psephotus, 391, 5, 8, 166, 258, 396. bourkii, 392, 432. chrysog aster, 392. chrysogaster , 438, 441. mab, 438. chrysopterygius, 425, 427, 428, 429. • blaawwi, 425, 428. chrysopterygius, 425. dissimilis, 400, 425. chrysostomus, 442. cucullatus, 425, 428. 429. dissimilis, 425, 427, 428, 429, 430. dulciei, 401, 407, 408. elegans carteri, 447, 448. elegans, 447, 450. hcematog aster, 392, 400, 410, 414, 415. alter, 411, 417. 511 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. Psephotus hcematogasier hrew.alogaster, 411, 417. pallescens , 411, 417. xanihorrhous, 411, 417. hcematcmotus, 395, 357, 391, 392. 394, 397, 398, 400, 402, 404. hcematcmotus, 395, 399. virescens, 395, 399. hcematorrhous, 410, 412, 413. — multicolor, 399, 401, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 461. pallescens, 411, 413. petrophilus, 451. petrophilus, 451. zietzi, 451. pulchellus, 392, 458. pulcherrimus, 400, 421, 423, 426, 429. spendidus , 462. varius, 401, 391, 394, 407. ethelce, 408. exsul , 402, 407, 408. rosince, 402, 407. varius, 401, 407, 408. xanthorrhoa, 410, 414, 416. xanthorrhous, 410, 412, 413, 415, 416. pallescens, 411, 416. P'seudopsiUacus, 249, 251, 254. maclennani, 253, 254. Psittacella, 247. Psittacula, 2, 76, 162, 166, 169. coxeni, 67. Psittcicus, 2, 6, 76, 161, 162, 166. adscitus, 338, 340. adscitus, 339. amathusice, 339. elseyi, 339. palliceps, 339. alecto, 83, 84. aterrimus. 77, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90. australis, 46, 47, 468, 470. banksianus, 468, 470. banksii, 100, 103, 104, 106, 125, 127, 128, 138. flavicollo, 100, 104. fusc-us, 104, 125. barnardi, 365. barrabandii, 261 . baueri, 373. brownii, 322, 324, 345, 347, 348. caledonicus, 322, 324. capistratus, 12. capitatus, 352, 354. ceclanensis, 246, 247. chlorolepidotus, 32, 33, 34. chrysogaster, 438, 439. chrysostomus, 348, 442. coccineus, 291, 293. concinnus, 46, 48. cookii, 106, 125, 128. cristatus, 82, 168, 170, 171, 172. Psittacus cyanogaster, 12, 14. cyanomelas, 373. cyanopygius, 278, 291, 293, 294. discolor, 468, 470. edwardsii, 458. elegans, 304, 307. viridis, 304, 307. eos, 225, 226. erythropterus, 279. eximius, 352. fieldii, 257. fimbriatus, 152, 153, 155. flavigaster, 322, 324, 327, 348. flaviventris, 322. formosus, 486, 492. funereus, 106, 13S. galeatus, 152, 153, 154, 159. cristatus, 152. - galeritus, 162, 168, 169, 170, 172. geoffroyi, 253, 256. gigas, 82, 83. gloriosus, 304, 307. — goliath, 83, 84, 85, 88, 91, 92, 93. griseus, 82, 83, 85, 91, 92, 93. hcematodes, 12. hcematodus, 12, 14. hcematotus daviesianus, 17. moluccamis, 17. novcehollandias, 17. hcematopus, 12, 14. hollandicus, 238, 239, 241. humeralis, 468, 470. hysginus, 289. icier otis, 329. lathami, 125, 127, 468, 470. leachii, 100, 106, 128. lumdatus, 62. magnijicus, 100, 104, 106, 127, 138. melanocephalus, 373. melanotus,' 279, 281. melanurus, 266. moluccamis, 14, 16. mohiccensis , 169. multicolor, 14, 17, 347, 401, 407. nasicus, 214. niger, 82. nonpareil, 352, 354. novcehottandice, 12, 14, 16, 238, 239, 241. michalis, 58. omnicolor, 352, 354. ornalus, 12, 15. pacificus, 46. pastinator, 215. pectoralis, 248. pennantii, 304, 307. phillippi, 304, 307. personatus, 256. phcenicocephalus, 153, 155, 158. piscinator, 215. pulchellus, 458. 512 INDEX. Psittacus purpurea, 53, 54. purpureocapillus, 386. purpureocephalus, 386. — — pusillus, 43, 58, 59. rubrifrons, 46, 48. • sanguinolentus, 468, 470. scapularis, 291, 294. scapulatus, 291, 294. semicollaris, 14, 17. semitorquatus , 373, 379. solandri, 106, 107, 125, 128. splendidus, 304, 307. spurius, 386. sulphur eus, 152. swainsonii, 261. tabuanus, 291, 293. tabuensis, 289, 291, 293. coccineus, 291, 293. temminkii, 106, 125, 128. tenuirostris, 214. terrestris, 486, 492. triton, 182. undulatus, 475. velatus, 46, 48. venustus, 345, 347, 348, 442, 446. — — viridis, 373, 486, 492. wallicus, 486, 492. zonarius, 373. Psitteuteles, 37, 5, 8, 31, 32. chlorolepidotus, 33. euteles, 31, 32. iris, 31. neglectus, 33, 36. placens, 32. versicolor, 38, 31, 37. Psitteutes chlorolepidotus neglectus, 33. neglectus, 36. Psittinus, 247. Ptilosclera, 5, 31, 32. versicolor, 32, 37, 38, 40, 41. Ptistes, 4, 5, 7, 166, 247, 259, 287. coccineopterus, 279, 283, 285. erythropterus, 278, 279, 282, 283, 284, 285, 297. coccineopterus, 280, 285, 286. pulchella, Euphema, 458. , Neophema, 458, 456, 457, 462. , pulchella, 458, 461. pulchellus, Lathamus, 458. , Nanodes, 458, 488. , Psephotus, 392, 458. , Psittacus, 458. pulcherrima, Euphemia, 421. pulcherrimus, Platycercus, 421. , Psephotellus, 421, 419, 420. , pulcherrimus, 421. , Psephotus, 400, 421, 423, 426, 429. Purple-crowned Lorikeet, 53. purpuratus, Pyrrhulopsis, 289. purpurea, Psittacus, 53, 54. Purpureicephalus, 384, 8. pileatus, 386. spurius, 386, 384, 388. carteri, 387, 390. spurius, 387, 390. purpureocapillus, Psittacus, 386. purpureocephalus, Platycercus, 386. , Psittacus, 386. purpureus, Trichoglossus, 53. pusilla, Glossopsitta, 58, 18, 44, 45, 54. pusillus, Coriphilus, 58. , Glossopsittacus, 49, 58. , Lathamus, 58. , Nanodes, 58. , Psittacus, 58, 59. , Trichoglossus, 58. Pyrrhulopsis, 4, 7, 247, 259, 287, 289. hueti, 289. — — — koroensis, 288. personata, 288. purpuratus, 289. splendens, 288. tabuensis, 288. taviunensis, 288. queenslandica, Cacatoes galerita, 171, 183. , Cacatua, 171, 178. , Eucacatua galerita, 188. , Kakatoe galerita, 185. Rainbow Parrot, 19. Red-backed Parrot, 395. — — -capped Parrot, 386. checked Parrot, 253. collared Lorikeet, 27. crowned Parrot, 153. faced Lorilet, 67. shouldered Parrakeet, 468 sided Parrot, 248. tailed Cockatoo, 109. \ winged Parrot, 279. Phodocephalus, 250. 9eoffr°yh 252. geoffroyi, 252. — — — — maclennani, 252. rhodolorus, Plictolophus, 198. rhodops, Geoffroyus, 257. Rhynchopsitta, 166. Rock Parrot, 451. Pebbler, 266. rogersi, Spathopterus alexandrce, 271. roratus, Lorius, 246. rosacea, Kakatoe, 160, 169. rosaceus, Barrabandius, 261. , Palceornis, 261. , Platycercus, 261. , Polyteles, 261. Rose-breasted Cockatoo, 225. - — - Cockatoo, 223. 513 THE BIRDS OP AUSTRALIA. rosea, Cacatua, 225, 227. roseicapilla, Cacatoes, 223, 228. roseicapilla, 226, 234. , Cacatua, 161, 192, 194, 225, 229, 230. roseicapillus, Eolophus, 225, 165, 223, 226. , Eolophus roseicapillus, 226, 227. ,' Plyctolophus, 226. Rosella, 352, Preface, xvi. roseus, Eolophus, 226. rosince, Cacatoes, 171. , galerita, 171, 183. , Eucacatua galerita, 188. , Kakatoe galerita, 184. , Psephotus varius, 402, 407. ruhrifrons, Lathamus, 468, 470. , Psittacus, 46, 48. rubritorquatus, Trichoglossus, 27. rubritorques, Trichoglossus, 27, 29. rubritorquis, Trichoglossus, 27, 13, 29. , hcematodus, 27. , rubritorquis, 27. rubrogaleatus, Kakadoe, 156. rufifrons, Platycercus, 386. Sagittifer, 2. Salvador ii, Cyclopsittacus, 65. , Microglossus, 89, 92, 93. , Platycercus icterotis, 330, 334, 336. samueli, Calyptorhynchus banksii, 120. sanguinea, Cacatoes sanguinea, 199, 207. , Cacatua, 198, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 216, 219, 220, 221, 228, 230. sanguineus, Ducorpsius, 198, 165, 208, 209, 218. — — -, sanguineus, 199, 208, 209, 219. , Plissolophus, 199. , Plyctolophus, 198. sanguinolenhis, Psittacus, 468, 470. Scaly-breasted Lorikeet, 33. scandens, Climacteris, 472. scapularis, Alisterus, 291. , scapularis, 297. , Platicercus, 291. , Platycercus, 291. — — , Psittacus, 291,294. scapulatus, Aprosmictus, 278, 291, 297. — — , Platycercus, 278, 291, 308, 354. , Psittacus, 291,294. Scarlet-chested Parrot, 462. and Green Parrot, 291 . Scenopceetes, 255. semitorquatus , Barnardius, 374, 377, 378, 379. ■, zonarius, 374, 378, 379, 383. Platycercus, 373. , zonarius, 374, 382. , Psittacus, 373, 379. septentrionalis, Trichoglossus, 15, 21, 22, 23. novcehollandice, 15, 24. Smutty Parrot, 345. solandri, Calyptorhynchus, 107, 125, 129. solandri, Plyctolophus, 125. , Psittacus, 106, 107, 125, 128. Solenoglossus, 73, 74, 75, 83. aterrimus, 87, 88, 89. alecto, 87, 88. aterrimus, 89, 93. goliath, 88, 93, 94. macgillivrayi, 77, 87, 88, 89. macgillivrayi, 77. zelanicus, 83, 85. Spathoptera, 270. Spathopterus, 270, 273, 392. alexandrce, 271, 274, 275. alexandrce, 271. — rogersi, 271. Spinifex Parrot, 495. splendens, Pyrrhulopsis, 288. splendida, Euphema, 462. , Neophema, 462, 464. - — — splendida, 462. splendidus, Platycercus, 352, 355, 359, 360, 361. , eximnis, 353. , Psephotus, 462. , Psittacus, 304, 307. spurius, Platycercus, 386. , Porhyreicephalus, 386. , Porphyrocephalus, 268, 386, 389. , Psittacus, 386. , Purpureicephalus, 386, 384, 388, 390. , spurius, 387. stanleyii, Platycercus, 329, 334, 336. stellatus, Calyptorhynchus, 101, 108, 109, 110, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 125. , banksii, 102, 108, 109, 119. stenolophus, Microglossus aterrimus, 88, 89, 90, 93. — — -, Probosciger aterrimus, 93. Strigops, 7, 97, 259, 484, 494, 496. Stringops, 5, 6, 166. Sturnus vulgaris, 397. Suavipsitta, Correction, xix. suavissima, Cyclopsitta, 65, Correction, xix. subadelaidce, Platycercus elegans, 305, 315, 321. subdistincta, Cacatoes sanguinea, 199, 207. subdistinctus , Ducorpsius gymnopis, 199, 208. , sanguineus, 211, 219. sulaensis, Alisterus, 288. sulphurea, Cacatua, 152. sulphur eus, Psittacus, 152. Sulphur-headed Parrot, 317. superflua, Lophochroa leadbeateri, 195. superior, Callocorydon fimbriatus, 158. swainsonii, Polytelis, 261, 258, 260, 263. , s wains oni, 262. , Psittacus, 261. , Trichoglossus, 12, 15. Swift Parrot, 468. Tabuan Parrot, 291. tabuanus, Psittacus, 291, 293. 514 INDEX. tabuensis, Aprosmictus, 289. , Psittacus, 289, 291, 293. , Pyrrhulopsis, 288. Tallegallus, 113. Tanygnaihus, 166, 247. tasmanica, Neonanodes chrysostomus, 443, 446. tasmanicum, Callocephalon galeatum, 154. , Callocorydon fimbriatus, 158,- taviunensis, Pyrrhulopsis, 288. temminckii, Banksianus, 125. , Calyptoryhnchus, 96, 107, 121, 125, 128. temminkii, Psittacus, 106, 125, 128. tenuirostris, Gacatua, 215. , Calyptorhynchus baudinii, 134. , Licmetis, 214, 165, 213, 215, 218. , tenuirostris, 215, 219. , Psittacus, 214. , Zanda baudinii, 134. terrestris, Pezoporus, 486. , terrestris, 487. , Psittacus, 487. textilis, Malurus, Preface, xi. tregallasi, Lathamus discolor, 468. Trichoglossus, 9, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 23, 26, 31, 95, 166, 465. • australis, 46, 468. capistratus, 12, 18. chlorolepidotus, 18, 33, 35. chlorolepidotus, 34. neglectus, 34. colesi, 15, 24. concinnus, 46. discolor, 469. hcematodes, 12, 29. hcematodus, 14, 17, 28. rubritorquis, 27. hcematopus, 12, 14. matoni, 33, 34. moluccanus, 14, 9, 12, 13, 28. colesi, 26. eyrei, 26. multicolor, 15, 18, 29, 35, 54. novcehollandice, 15, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26. colesi, 15, 24. eyrei, 15, 24. novcehollandice, 15, 24. — septentrionalis, 15, 24. porphyrocephalus, 53. purpureus, 53. pusillus, 58. rubritorquatus, 27. — — rubritorques, 27, 29. rubritorquis, 27, 13. rubritorquis, 27. melvillensis, 27. septentrionalis, 15, 21, 22, 23. — — swainsoni, 12, 15. verreauxi, 26. — verreauxius, 26. Trichoglossus versicolor, 38, 62. goldiei, 44. mellori, 38, 41, 42. — versicolor, 38. whitei, 38, 41. triton, Cacatua, 180, 181, 182, 187. , galerita, 181, 182, 183. , galeritus, 182. , triton, 86, 181, 187. ■, Eucacatua galerita, 188. , Kakatoe galerita, 187. , Psittacus, 182. trobriandi, Cacatua, 180, 181, 187. , triton, 180. , Eucacatua galerita, 188. , Kakatoi galerita, 188. typicus, Barnardius, 365. undulata, Euphema, 475. undulatus, Melopsittacus, 475, 474, 478, 480. , undulatus, 475. , Nanodes, 475. Psittacus, 475. , eyrei, 26. varia, Clarkona varia, 408. varias, Clarkona, 402. Varied Lorikeet, 38. varius, Psephotus, 400, 391, 394, 407. , varius, 401, 407, 408. velatus, Psittacus, 46, 48. venusta, Euphema, 440, 442. — — , Neophema, 442. venustus, Lathamus, 442. , Nanodes, 442. venustus, Platycercus, 345, 300, 303, 349, 350, 442. — , venustus, 346, 350. versicolor, Corphilus, 38. , Nanodes, 38. , Neopsittacus, 38. Psitteuteles, 38, 31, 37. \' , versicolor, 38. — — , Ptilosclera, 32, 37, 38, 40, 41. , Trichoglossus, 38, 62. s versicolor, 38. victories, Platycercus elegans, 305, 309, 315. Vini, 166. virescens, Psephotus hcematonotus, 395. viridis, Australasia, 33, 34. , Cacatua, 107, 125, 128, 129. , Calyptorhynchus, 125, 126, 127, 129, 130. , — - — viridis, 126. , Harrisornis, 126. , viridis, 126. , Psittacus, 373, 486. elegans, 304, 307. vulgaris, Sturnus, 397. 515 THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. t wallicus, Pezoporus , 486. , wallicus, 492. , Psittacus, 486. westralis, Polytdis anthopeplus, 266. westralensis, Ducorpsius sanguineus, 211, 219. wetter ensis, Aprosmictus, 288. White Cockatoo, 170. collared Parrot, 14, 17. tailed Black Cockatoo, 134. Cockatoo, 109. whitei, Barnardius barnardi, 366, 372. , Calyptorhynchus, 139. , — - — funereus, 139, 140, 147. , Geopsittacus occidentalis, 495, 498. , Platycercus barnardi, 366, 371. , Polytelis swainsonii, 262. , Trichoglossus versicolor, 38, 41, 42. , Zanda funerea, 147. whitlocki, Glossopsilta porphyrocephala, 53, 57. , Platycercus icterotis, 330, 334. wilhelmince, Alisterus, 288. xanthanota, Zanda funerea, 147. xanthogaster, Platycercus, 322. xanthogenys, Platycercus, 329, 332 k 333, 334, 335, 336. , icterotis, 329, 337. xanthonotus, Gacatua, 139. - — — , Calyptorhynchus, 96, 135, 139, 142, 145, 146, 147, 148. , funereus, 139, 141. xanthorrhoa, Psephotus, 410, 414, 416. xanthorrhous, Platycercus, 411. , Psephotus, 410, 412, 413, 414, 416. , Hcematogaster, 411, 417. Yellow-banded Parrot, 373. cheeked Parrot, 329. Parrot, 317. yorlci, Aprosmictus erythropterus, 280, 284, 286. Zanda, 133, 8, 74, 97, 98. baudinii, 130, 133, 140. — - baudinii, 134. tenuirostris, 134. funerea, 138, 133, 150. — funerea, 147. whitece, 147. xanthanota, 147. Northiella hcematogaster, 411, 412. zelanicus, Bolenoglossus, 83, 85. zietzi, Neonanodes petrophilus, 457. , Psephotus petrophilus, 441. zonarivbs, Barnardius, 373, 364, 369, 374, 377, 379, 380. — — , zonarius, 374, 376, 377, 382, 383 , N anodes, 373. , Platycercus, 373, 380. , zonarius, 374, 382. , Psittacus, 373. 510 Ik*