( 252 ) 



ON SOME SPECIES IN A SMALL COLLECTION MADE ON THE OWEN 

 STANLEY MOUNTAINS IN THE KAIARI AND ORIORI DISTRICTS 

 BETWEEN MOUNTS ALEX^VNDER AND NISBET IN JANUARY 1896. 



1. Manucodia orientalis Sahad. 



I have received several Manucodia lioiii S.K. New Guinea, which belong un- 

 doubtedly to M. orientalis. This form has recently {Ann. Mils. Civ. XXXYI. \i. KiS, 

 1890) been separated from M. chahjheata; but Dr. A. B. Jleyer had already, on 

 two occasions, noticed .some differences between North-Westeni and Soutli-Kastern 

 M. chalyheata. 



I am .sorry to say I have no material of the true M. chaiybeata worth speaking of, 

 but have no doubt that M. oi-ientalis is merely a subspecies of it. W. R. 



2. Astrarchia stephaniae Fin.sch. 

 '• Eye dark brown; bill deep lirown ; feet dark grey." Some shot 600U feet high. 

 " Live on fruits and insects." ^^ • R- 



3. Epimaclius meyeri Uinsch. 

 6500 and 6000 feet high. " Iris bright blue in both sexes; bill black ; feet very 

 dark grey." Native name " Dadai." In moult in January. W. R. 



4. Drepanornis albertisii cervinicauda Scl. 

 In moult. 



5. Parotia lawesi Rams. 

 Both sexes, some in moult. " Eye yellow, blue-black ball ; feet and beak black." 



W. R. 



0. Phonygama purpui-eoviolacea Meyer. 

 Partly moulting in January. The iris is described as " pink," and on another 

 label as " "dark yellow." " W. R. 



7. Loria loriae Sahad. 



A magnificent male was procured on the " Sakeytanumu range, Kaiari district," 

 6900 feet high, on January 1st, 1896. The native name is given as " Kunukupaiva," 

 the iris as brown, feet as dark green, bill as black. " Lives on fruit." This male 

 agrees very well with De Vis' description, but less with the figure in the Ibis, which 

 does not show the brilliant colours. 



There is no doubt, I think now, that L. loriae and Cnemophihcs marine are 

 identical. As Salvadori"s name was published first, his name must stand. I also 

 agree with him that Sclater's note in the Ibis, saying that the females of some allied 

 species were very similar, was not justified, since, on the contrary, in several instances, 

 we find the females to differ more obviously than the males. 



As mentioned before (see ante<\, p. LI), I have a skin of this bird which came 

 with other trade-skins, and, to judge from the prei)aration, must have come from some 

 part of North- Western New Guinea. It has the wing slightly more greenish than 

 the type (which Mr. Hartert examined when it was in England for being drawn for 

 the Ibi.f'), but it does not differ at all from the bird now received from the mountains 

 of S.l',. New Guinea. W. R. 



