OCR Text |
Show BIRDS. 83 trees. Its manners appeared to me to resemble those of Certltia familim·is. I found Coleopterous insects in its stomach. Its range does not appear to be extensive; Chiloe to the south, and some woods near Rancagua (a degree south of Valparaiso) were the extreme points where I met with it. The Dendrodramus is not found in Tierra del Fuego, where the 0. tupinieri is so numerous. Mr. G. R. Gray remarks that this genus is very nearly allied to Dendroplex of Mr. Swainson. FAMILY.-8 y L vI AD JE. SuB-F .AM.-M OTACILL IN JE. 1. MusciSAXICOLA MENTALis. D 'Orb. o/ Lafr. M. mentalis, D'Orb. ~· Lafr. Mag. de Zoo!. 1837, p. GG. Voy. dans l'Amcr. Mer. Ornith. pl. 40, f. 1. I procured specimens of this bird from Bahia Blanca, in Northern Patagonia, from rfierra del Fuego, from Chiloe, and from Central and Northern Chile. It is everywhere common. It frequents open places; so that in the wooded countries it lives entirely on the sea-beaches, or near the summits of mountains, where trees do not grow. In the excessively sterile upper valleys of the Cordillera of Northern Chile I met with this bird, even at a height of little less than ten thousand feet, where the last traces of vegetation occur, and where no other bird lives. It generaUy moves about in very small flocks, and frequents rocky streams and marshy ground : it hops and flies ft·om stone to stone, very much after the manner of our whinchat (Motacilla rubetra), but when alighting it frequently expands its tail like a fan. The sexes are exactly similar in size and plumage. Mr. G. R. Gray observes, that the genus Muscisaxicola is probably synonymous with Lessonia of Mr. Swainson; but the latter name cannot be used, as it has already been twice employed in other branches of Nat ural History. 2. MusciSAXICOLA MACLOVIANA. G. R. Gm!J. Sylvia macloviana, Gam. Voy. de la Coqu. Zool. p. 063. Curruca maclovinno., Less. I brought home only one specimen of this bird; it came from East Falkland Island, whence also those described by Messrs. Lesson and Garnot were pr~cur?d. Mr. Gould considered it a distinct species, but having carefully compared 1t wtth M. mentalis, I can see not the smallest difference in any point, excepting that it |