202 bulletin: museum of comparative zoology. 



a following part of this same work on page 656 (published in 1831) 

 the name Muscylva occurs in italics, this typography indicating that 

 the author used it as a technical or Latin name, his intention in regard 

 to this usage being outlined on page 651. Muscylva is therefore to 

 be quoted from this second reference. Seven species are included in 

 it by Lesson (p. 386) as follows : 



Mvscicapa leiicogaster, Mus. de Paris. Cayenne. (Poiteau). 



Muscicapa rvfiventer, Mus. de Paris. Nouvelle-Hollande (Peron). 



Muscicapa alhogularis Mus. de Paris. Bengale. (Mace). 



Muscicapa aurocapiUus, Mus. de Paris. 



Muscicapa caendca, Gm.; le Petit azur; Enl., 666, fig. 1. Des 

 lies Philippines, du Bengale. 



Muscicapa luzoniensis Gm.; Levaill., pi. 151, fig. 1. De Mada- 

 gascar. 



Muscicapa rufiventer Gm.; I'Oranor, Levaill., pi. 155, fig. 1. 

 De Batavia. (Diard.) 



The first four of these names as listed above are nomina nuda at this 

 place, although Pucheran (Arch. Mus. hist, nat., 1855, 7, p. 333) found 

 that the first is equi^•alent to Rhipidura pcctoralis (Jerdon) and the 

 second to Rhipidura rufivenlris (Vieillot). The third was described 

 later by Lesson (Belanger's Voyage In des Orientales^ 1831, pi. 264) as 

 Muscicapa {Muscylva) albogularis, which equals Rhipidura cdbicoUis 

 (Vieillot). Pucheran states that he was unable to find the type of 

 Muscicapa auricapillus. 



On examining the remaining species in turn it is found that Musci- 

 capa caerulea Gmelin is now placed in the genus H^^pothymis, while 

 Muscicapa luzoniensis Gmelin is in the genus Penthornis. The 

 seventh species, Muscicapa rufiventris Gmelin, is apparently still 

 unidentified, although "I'Oranor" of Levaillant is considered to be 

 Pericrocotiis pcrcgrinus (Linne). From this consideration it appears 

 that of the seven names mentioned by Lesson under the genus Mus- 

 cylva, only the last three are at all recognizable at the place of original 

 publication, as the first four are nomina nuda. From this it appears 

 therefore that G. R. Gray, (Handlist of birds, 1869, 1, p. 349) was in 

 error when he restricted Muscylva to the first species given by Lesson, 

 Muscicapa leucogastcr. On the page cited he adopted Muscylva as a 

 subgenus of Todirostrum, and under it listed M. Icucogaster "Less, 

 ex Mus. Par." from " Cayenne." On page 332 of the same volume of 

 this publication he had already included Muscylva " Homb. & J." 

 as a subgenus of Rhipidura. 



