OCR Text |
Show 166 MR. P. L. SCLATER ON A RARE ARGENTINE BIRD. [Jan. 17, I have much hesitation in separating this species from C. orientalis, Uljauin, from which it differs chiefly in the proportions of the abdominal segments, in the size of the third free thoracic segment, which is larger than in C. orientalis, and in the size of the fused head and first thoracic segment, which in C. orientalis^ is equal in length to the four free thoracic segments and the first abdominal segment, while in C. africanus it is much shorter. I have not been able to find a female carrying ova, but the specimen from which the description is taken had its ovaries full of ripe ova. The single male specimen I found was apparently mature. It differs markedly in the jointing and in the proportions of the antenna? from Uljanin's figure, which is very probably taken from an immature specimen. EXPLANATION OF PLATE VI. Canthocamptus finni, p. 104. Fig. 1. Lateral view of female. 2. First antenna of female. 3. Second antenna. 4. Mandible. 5. First swimming-foot. 0. Fourtb swimming-foot. 7. Fiftb foot of female. Cyclops africanus, p. 105. Fig. 8. Female, viewed i'rom above. 9. First antenna of female. 10. First antenna of male. 11. Fifth foot. 4. Remarks on a rare Argentine Bird, Xenopsaris albinucha. B y P. L. S C L A T E R , M.A., Ph.D., F.R.S., Secretary to the Society. [Eeceived December 22, 1892.] (Plate VII.) In 1868 our late distinguished Foreign Member, Dr. H. Burmeister, of Buenos Ayres, described, in a communication to this Society on additions to the Argentine Avifauna, a small Passerine bird of which he had obtained specimens in the sedge of the shores of the Rio de la Plata, near Buenos Ayres, under the name of Pachyrhamphus albinucha. N o specimen accompanied this communication, and the subject appears to have been until quite recently overlooked by subsequent writers. Although the title of the paper was given by Mr. Hudson and myself in the Appendix to our ' Argentine Ornithology' (op. cit. ii. p. 222), and it is there recorded that Pachyrhamphus albinucha was described as new, the species was unfortunately forgotten in the body of that work. The same was the case, I regret to say, in the fourteenth volume of the |