OCR Text |
Show 1882.] DR. W. BLASIUS ON BIRDS FROM CERAM. 707 fication of these allied species, on account of the great resemblance in the markings between M. griseosticta and M. sibirica, which at first occurred to me, is unlikely, I conclude from the greater length of the bill of the first species in comparison with the last, at least from the comparison of the measurements taken on the specimens before me and those noted by Sharpe. Mr. E. F. von Homeyer, too, has had the kindness to compare the specimen in question with his skins of Muscicapa sibirica, and states that M. griseosticta essentially differs from M. sibirica not only in the larger, more elongated bill, which is narrower at its base, but in its wings, which are longer by some millimetres. With this statement coincides (with the exception of those of Salvadori, especially with respect to the length of bill of M. griseosticta) the following table of measurements, in which I have reduced the English inches into centimetres: - Long. tot. Al. Caud. Culm. Tarsi. cm. cm. cm. cm. cm. M. griseosticta (Sharpe) 13*5 8*3 5*3 1*27 1*27 (8,Ceram, Platen).. 12*0 8*5 5*0 1*2 1*25 (Salvadori) 140 8*2 5*3 09 1*4 M. sibirica (Sharpe) 12*5 8*0 5*6 1*02 1*27 „ (8, Baikal, Mus. Brunsw.) 12*6 8*1 58 1.1 1*3 It is surprising that Salvadori, evidently by mistake, should give the length of bill of M. griseosticta as only 0*9 cm. (the culmen must be meant), shorter than even the least of those of the culmen of M. sibirica, while Sharpe has even placed the two species, on account of the different shape of the bills, in two different genera (Muscicapa and Hemichelidon). Furthermore, it was particularly striking to me to find that the character which Schrenck and Radde, who both have observed great numbers of M. sibirica in Siberia together with the similarly coloured M. latirostris, Raffl. (M. cinereo-alba, Temm. & Schl.), have remarked as of greatest importance for M. sibirica, in contrast to the last-named species, viz. that the first (spurious) quill has about a line less of length than the upper wing-coverts, is found very clearly marked in the M. griseosticta from Ceram lying before m e ; while the species of the genus Muscicapa under which Sharpe has placed M. griseosticta (at least the European kinds M. grisola, M. atricapilla, M. collaris, and M. parva) which I have examined possess a first quill which is much broader and sometimes considerably longer than the upper wing-coverts. I have nowhere found recorded any remarks showing how the first quill of the M. griseosticta ought to stand in this respect; and I owe to a kind communication of Mr. Henry Seebohm (who himself, however, does not possess a specimen of M. griseosticta) the statement that in this species generally the first quill is smaller than the upper wing-coverts. I am almost led to believe that on account of this similarity of the first wing-feather, M. griseosticta should be classified in the same genus with M. sibirica notwithstanding the different shape of the bill. The specimen is in the Brunswick Museum. |