(470) 



32. Graucalus buugurensis Hartert (Nov. Zuoi.. 1. |i. 477). 



A number o^ males fm<\. females corroborate the distinctness of this species. 

 Tiie decidedly greater length of the wing is an obvions character. The more clondy 

 character of the barred abdomen and rnmp is very obvions in most specimens, bnt, 

 after having com])ared more Sumatra specimens than before, I am inclined to attach 

 less importance to this character, because it varies to a certain extent. 



In Ibis, 1895, p. 34, Mr. Everett mentioned that the manners of Graucalus suma- 

 tirnsis on Palawan struck him as ditl'cring from those of the same sjiecies in Borneo. 

 This led me to compare our pair of tlie snjiposed (/. tsumatrensis from Balabac, and I 

 cannot help recognising some differences. The wing of the Balabac pair is longer 

 than that of all the specimens of G. sumatrensis before me, and the under tail-coverts 

 of the JVmale are boldly and fjuite regularly barred, while in the /('nudes from 

 Sumatra and Borneo before me the under tail-coverts have " narrower and less 

 frequent bars of black "' than the abdomen, as most correctly stated in Cat. B. 111. 

 p. 1:.', liy Shaiiie. I therefore think it will be found that the Balabac form is best 

 kept subspecifically distinct as 



Graucalus sumatrensis difficilis subsp. nov. 



This form stands in size between G. sumitrcnsis and G. bungurensis, and the 

 female before me is also ratlicr cloudy on the njiper breast. I have no doubt that 

 the birds from Balabac and Palawan are ipiite the same. 



Since I described G. bum/urensis I have received, in the Tring Jhiseum, a mala 

 of G. enganensis Salvad., Ann. Mus. Civ. XXXII. p. 120, which seems practically 

 indistinguishable from the mnli' of G. bitngiirensis, though th.^ female, according to 

 Salvadori's description, is ipiite different. The/tv/iafe of G. sumafirii.fi.'! {rom Borneo 

 is smaller than those from Sumatra before me. The Tring Museum is in want of 

 ?nales of G. sumatrensis from different localities. 



I think it will be useful to give the length of the wings of the Graucli of this 

 group now in the Tring Museum. 



Graucalus sumatrensis typicus* 



1. '• 6 (?,inn.)." Biudjey, Deli, E. Sumatra, November 4th, 1887. E. llartcrt 

 coll. Wing 151 mm. 



This bird is quite in the plumage of the adult female, but on the label is 

 '■ S (? jun.)," written by m3-self. It will be observed that the wing is rather long. 

 I cannot say whether the sex is right, or whether some mistake occurred. 



2. " <J." Padangsche Bovenlande, W. Sumatra. Wing 144 mm. 



As regards the sex the same may be said as of No. 1. The bird has on the 

 label " cJ," but is in the plumage of the ? . 



3. 4. " ? ?." Same locality. Wings 149, 144 mm. 



5. " ?." Benkoker, Xorth Borneo, October 31st, 1885. J. Whitehead coll. 

 Wing 139 mm. 



Graucalus sumatrensis difficilis. 



1. " S." Balabac, Deceniber 24th, IsVili. A. Everett coll. Wing 155 mm. 



2. " ?." Same date and locality. A. E. Wing 156 mm. 



• Shaipu, Cat. H. IV. p. 12, gives the Iwigtli of the wing o£ the male of IJl ram., of i\\a female of 

 115 mm. (5'95 in. and 5'7). 



