A Catalogue of the Birds found in Costft /i >'■■,/. \ {:] 



Two specimens are in the collection marked as females and 



precisely alike. 



Remarks. This in its general appearance is mnch like /.'. 

 olivaceus from Brazil, but above is a little- more of a yellowish 

 cast of plumage, with the breast much darker and the middle 

 of the abdomen of a brighter and clearer yellow, it is without 

 the fulvous edgings to the wing coverts and lias a larger bill, 

 this being loiigerthan that of R.olivaa '/sand equally as broad. 



From R. brevirostris, Cab., it differs not only in its laracr 

 bill, but by its more grayish chin, darker breast, and having the 

 yellow more restricted to the centre of the abdomen ; /.'. hi 

 rostris has the whole under plnmage more Buffused with yel- 

 low, and the upper more of a yellowish green ; the new ?pecies 

 in its upper coloring is intermediate between R. oliv - and 

 R. brevirostris. 



R. mesorhynt'hus, Cab., from Guatemala is described :>- dif- 

 fering from the Mexican R. brevirostris, though much like it, 

 by its much larger bill, in which it much resembles /,'. olivact ue, 

 but in brightness of coloring it corresponds with brevirostris. 



I have before me a specimen of R. brevirostris from Mexico, 

 labelled by the Messrs. Verreaux, likewise four specimens from 

 Guatemala; one sent to the Smith. Inst, by Mr. Salvin and 

 labelled R. brevirostris, has the bill larger than tin' Mexican 

 specimen; of the others, one has the bill agreeing in Bi'ze with 

 that of the Mexican bird, the remaining two have rery much 

 smaller bills; in plumage the birds from botb countries <•!.. 

 agree; the difference in size of the bills between the two 

 extremes is very marked; in the specimen from Mr. Salvin, 

 the bill is nearly as large as that of R. olivaa us, in whicl 

 agrees with Dr. Cabanis' description of /.'. mesorhynchx -. The 

 size of the bill would therefore Beem pol to be a reliable char 

 acter, as all the Guatemala specimens are clearly one Bpec 



I do not decide that R. brevirostris and /.'. m 101 hy are 



the same, as I have not seen the types, but would 'he 



comparison of a large series from each conntry. 



I APKIL, 1S68. 8 



