( 526 ) 



II. Sitta euTopaea britannica snbsp. nov. 



When Mr. Kleiuschmidt was in England three years ago we shot a few 

 Nntbatches, and it struck ns at once that they were paler below than German 

 examples. Since then, I have collected Nntliatches for Mr. Rothschild's Museum, 

 and I have now before me a very fine series from various countries, besides those 

 in the Brehm collection. Glancing over them as they lie in the trays, it is quite 

 obvious that the British examples are very much paler on the nndersnrface. This 

 is most obvious in freshly moulted autumn specimens. When studying these birds, 

 individuals of the same seasons and sexes must of course be compared, dirty spring 

 birds being of course not so distinct, and the males being larger and of a brighter 

 colour below than the females. In British individuals the beak is generally, though 

 not always, slightly slenderer and more pointed. 



The paler undersnrface of the British form is the more remarkable as German 

 Nuthatches are darkest in the west, and as other British birds, if different from 

 the continental forms, are generally darker than their allies. 



The type of Sitta europaea britannica is a bird shot in Tring Park on 

 October 13th, 1898. 



Prof. Reichenow {Orn. Monatsber. 1895, p. 141) has expressed his opinion that 

 the name of Sitta advena Brehm is to be adopted for the East Prussian form of 

 the Nuthatch, which has been called Sitta caesia homeyeri (cf. Ibis, 1892, p. 364). 

 This is an error. Brehm {Handh. Naturg. Vog. Deittsckl. p. 207, 1831), says that 

 udcena appears sometimes in the forests of Central Germany. The types of his 

 S. advena are pale, worn and young individuals in moult from Thnriugia. Sitta caesia 

 homeyeri, however, does not appear in Central Germany, and looks different. The 

 majority of the East Prussian Nuthatches are very closely allied to Sitta europaea 

 from Scandinavia, but most individuals are less white, and more buff below, though 

 some are not distinguishable from the latter, while also true S. caesia, or at least 

 individuals which I cannot separate from the latter, are occasionally found in East 

 Prussia. The birds in the plumage of the so-called S. c. homeyeri are too frequent 

 to be regarded as hybrids. It is, however, evident that europaea, homeyeri and 

 caesia are merely geographical representatives of one group, and therefore the 

 nomenclature must be as follows : — 



Sitta europaea europaea: Scandinavia, Northern Russia. (Exact geographical 

 limits not yet quite clear to me.) 



Sitta europaea homeyeri: East Prussia, Poland, etc. (In Denmark similar 

 forms are said to occur ! ?) 



Sitta europaea caesia : Western, Central and Southern Europe generally. 

 (Southern examples require attention, as do those from Asia Minor.) 



Sitta europaea britannica : Common in England, rarer in Scotland, unknown 

 in Ireland. 



III. Nucifraga (cf Nov. Zool. 1897). 



I find that I cannot separate any longer Professor Reichenow's N. relicta. 

 Individuals in freshly moulted plumage of N. car. caryocatactes and N. car. relicta 

 are not separable. I have written at length about these forms in the " new edition" 

 of Naumann's "Viigel Deutschlauds," where those who are interested in the various 

 forms of this group can read my most recent views about it. 



