OCR Text |
Show 1879.] PAPER ON THE FRUIT-PIGEONS. 67 in colour than those from other localities, being blackish-grey, of blackish-brown." But Mr. Elliot disposes very easily of this difference, saying, " this, however, cannot be considered of any specific importance." But the truth is, that, guided by the black colour of the under surface of the tail, any one can pick up a true Megaloprepia puella among hundreds of the other forms. Mr. Elliot, as the habitat of P. puella, besides Mysol, Salwatty, Waigiou, Ghemien, and Dorey, enumerates also Cape York, Jobie, and N e w Ireland, which are wrong or doubtful. As to Cape York, this locality is given on the authority of Mr. Ramsay; but I doubt whether Mr. Ramsay has ever had the opportunity of comparing a specimen from the northern peninsula of N e w Guinea with the supposed M. puella horn Cape York; and I even doubt whether Mr. Ramsay is acquainted with the difference in the under surface of the tail between the true M. puella and M. assimilis. Even Mr. Elliot did not know the difference, as he asked me how I could distinguish M. puella from M. assimilis except by size! Most likely Mr. Ramsay's M. puella is a small, not full-grown M. assimilis. The fact to be shown is that the form with the under surface of the tail black lives at Cape York. For m y own part, I am not disposed to believe it without additional proofs, as all such birds I have seen (and many they are) were from the northern peninsula of New Guinea, from Waigiou, Ghemien, Salwatty, and Batanta. All the birds from Jobi and the south of N e w Guinea (Mount Epa and Fly River) have the under face of the tail dark greyish ; and these I have lately named Megaloprepia poliura, which would be the eastern and southern form representative of M. puella. There is an apparently strong objection against this view. A specimen in the Museum of Paris, marked New Ireland, which I have also seen, has the under surface of the tail black. But are we sure that the locality is exact? The bird was collected by Lesson and Garnot during the voyage of the ' Coquille ;' and it would not he the first instance of a wrong locality given to a bird collected by them. In a recent paper, where I have described M. poliura, I have given what I think satisfactory characters for discriminating the four forms allied to M. magnifica; the principal differences can be tabulated as follows:- 1. Cauda infeme grisea. a. Major: long. tot. circa 0m*420-0m*400, al.0m*240- 0m-220 1. M. magnifica. b. Media: long. tot. circa 0m-360, al.0m*190 2. M. assimilis. c. Minor : long. tot. circa 0ra*330, al. O"1*] 75-0m170 3. M. poliura. 2. Cauda interne nigra: long. tot. C^SSO, al. O ^ ^ O 4. M.puella. The four forms mentioned above occupy different areas:- Megaloprepia puella inhabits the northern peninsula of New Guinea, with the islands of Waigheu, Guebeh, Batanta, Salwatty, and Mysol. M. poliura has been found hitherto only in the island of Jobie and in the south of N e w Guinea (Hall Bav and Flv River). 5* |