NOVITATES ZOOLOGICAE XXIV. 1917. 32 J 



SOME FURTHER NOTES ON ANTHREPTES MALACCENSIS. 

 By ERNST HARTERT, Ph.D. 



IN NoviTATES ZooLOGiCAE, ix. (1902), p. 209, I gave a review of the forms 

 of Anthreptes malaccensis. Though it hold.s good in the main, it requires 

 some supplementary notes. I suggested that specimens from Palawan might 

 belong to A. malaccensis cJilorigaster, the form from the Southern Philippines. 

 In NoviTATES ZooLOGiCAE, XX. p. 369,* Mr. Stresemann has pointed out some 

 differences, and came to the conclusion, from comparing one $ from Cagayan 

 Sulu, that it was not separable from the Palawan males, and therefore called 

 the latter A. malaccensis cagayanensis Mearns. I agree with this, though I 

 would like to compare a series of females from both places. 



In my review I have not considered the females, and most authors have 

 neglected them. This is a mistake, as the females, in most cases, also show 

 differences, and sometimes more striking ones than the males. 



The ? of A. m. chlorigaster differs from that of A. m. malaccensis in being 

 much darker greenish on the underside, only a line along the middle being yellow. 



The $ of yl. m. griseigularis is similar, but the crown is darker, the back 

 less greenish. 



The ? of A. m. iviglesworthi is distinguished from that of chlorigaster by 

 the more whitish throat, paler breast and abdomen, and more grejdsh crown. 



The ? of A. m. celehensis is almost indistinguishable above from that of 

 wiglesworthi, but the throat is still more whitish and the whole rest of the under- 

 side very much paler. 



The ^ oi A. m. cagayanensis (accepting that the Palawan form is the same) 

 is very near to that of A. m. cJilorigaster, but brighter yellow along the middle 

 of the underside, thus approaching typical malaccensis. 



A great puzzle are the birds from the Lesser Sunda Islands. In my review 

 I kept them under a separate number, but did not provide them with a name, 

 as they seemed to agree with chlorigaster, and partly with celebensis. I cannot 

 now confirm that the Sumba males are Like those of celebensis, for they are more 

 yellowisli underneath, but I cannot say how they differ from chlorigaster. The 

 females, on the other hand, are distinctly paler underneath, especiaUy on the 

 throat, than those of A. m. chlorigaster, but seem to be indistinguishable from 

 the females of wiglesworthi. Geographically it is almost impossible that they 

 belong to either of these forms, but until I have seen more fresh material of all, 

 I do not care to take the risk of providing them with a name. 



