( :m ) 



ON SOME MELIPHAGIDAE AND OTHEE BIEDS FROM 



NEW GUINEA. 



By ERNST HARTERT. 



AMONG i5ome other birds Mr. Rothscliild has lately received four interesting 

 si)ecies of Mcl/ji/tciffit/ai; collected at elevations of 5000 — 6000 feet between 

 Mounts Blusgrave and Scratchle}-. One, the largest, is Melirrhophetes belfordi 

 de Vis, which we have also received from several other places in the Owen- 

 Stanley range of monutaius. The second in size is almost quite black, or 

 brownish black, the feathers above less, those below more distinctly edged with 

 greyish olive-brown. Under tail-coverts smoky brown, with pale greyish rufous 

 edges. Tips of lateral rectrices pale greyish brown, their inner webs fringed with 

 pale greyish ruCous brown. The feathers of the chin have the tips of their shafts 

 bare and some faiut brown spots. In the skin of the lower eyelid is a small 

 caruncular fold, .and behind and below the hindpart of the eye is a bare patch. 

 These birds are evidently de Vis' 



" Acanthochoera fusca " (//«\s, 1897, p. 3S3). 



In his description, however, it should read " loxler " tail-coverts instead of 

 " upper " tail-coverts. I fail to see why this binl is placed in the genus 

 Acanthoclioera, as Mr. de Vis spells what is generally called Acanthochaera. If 

 M. belfordi is united with ihdirrhopketes I see no reason to separate this bird from 

 that genus, and I shall call it Melirrhophetes fuscus (de Vis). However I do not 

 ■wish to discuss the genera of the Meliphagitlae here, which are not easy to limit. 



The third species before me is 



Ptilotis salvadorii Ilartert, 



described Nov. Zool. III. p. 531 (1890). It seems that Mr. de Vis named this bird 

 again P. lacrimam, as his description on p. 382 of the last Ibis suits it fairly well, 

 if we assume that in line 3 from below the word " orer " should be " beloicy There 

 can be no donbt that tliis must be so, for such penslips (?) are to be fouud in several 

 cases in the same article, and tlie Novitates Zoologicae have not received the 

 necessary attention, as shown by the Editors' note on p. 392, and by the description 

 (on p. 371) of 



Neopsittacus viridiceps 



as a new species, which is clearly uiy Xeops. pallicaiida, described and discussed in 

 several places in onr journal. 



'{'\w foui'th of the Meliplnfjidue before me is unknown to me. It does not seem 

 to be described yet --at least 1 cannot find any diagnosis wliich suits it in the least, 

 and I do not think that I liave overlooked any recent descriptions. I cannot say 

 exactly to which group of Honey-eaters this curious bird belongs, though I am sure 

 it must be rcfiMTed ici the genus Ptilotis in the wide sense as treated in the Cat. B. 



25 



