18 BULLETIN 50, UNITED STATPZS NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



hensive ))}' tho inclu.sion of forms so ''aberrant" as to complicate any 

 diagnosis of the group and obscure its true characters. 



Excepting the Hirundinida? and Alaudidaj, both of which are sharplj- 

 cut off from all otlier Oscines by most obvious external characters, no 

 group of Oscines can be considered as very trenchant unless such rad- 

 ical treatment as is here given be applied. Allowed their commonly 

 accepted limits, their intelligible definition is in some cases (e. g., the 

 Fringillid{\?, Tanagridje, C(erebida% Mniotiltidie, and "Ampelidte" ■ 

 ( = Ampelidje + Ptiliogonatidi\^ + Dulidfe) simply impossible; but by 

 reconstructing the limits of these groups a fairly rational diagnosis of 

 each may be accomplished. It is not unlikely that several genera may 

 yet have to be withdrawn from the families in which they are now 

 placed and raised to independent family rank,^ examples being Phai- 

 nn/>f!J(i (here, as heretofore, associated with PflUogonys and Phainope- 

 j?/a), FoUoptila (usually placed in the Sylviida?, where it certainly does 

 not ))elong, and here provisionally referred to the Mimidye), Cah/pto- 

 pjulus, and Rhodhocichla, the last being here provisionally referred 

 to the Mniotiltidse. ' 



KEY TO THK FAMILIES OF OSCIXES. 



«. Tarsus sharply ridged posteriorly, the ridge coinciding with the posterior median 

 line, or else outside the latter; inner posterior (?dge of acrotarsium coinciding 

 with the lateral median line or anterior to it, and at least as far separated 

 from the posterior ridge of the jilanta tarsi as is the outer posterior edge of the 

 acrotarsium; planta tarsi usually undivided/^ {Acutiplantar Oscines.^) 



1 It is of course to he understood that by family rank the Oscinine standard only is 

 meant. 



^ Calyptopliilm has been considered a member of the Tanagrid?e, and placed next to 

 PhcTnicophilus, but being a " ten-primaried " bird it certainly does not belong there. 

 Rhodinocichla was first described as a member of the Clamatorial family Furnariidse, 

 but, after its Oscinine character had been demonstrated, was placed by some author- 

 ities among the Mimida?, by others among the Troglodytid?e; both these groups, how'- 

 ever, belong to the "ten-primaried" .-iection of the Oscines, while Ehodinocichla is 

 typically "nine-primarie(i," and therefore, being obviously out of place in either of 

 these groups, must ])e otherwise disposed of. 



•^ A notable exception to the usual undivided planta tarsi in this section is seen in 

 the genus Salpinctes (Troglodytid;i?), in which the planta tarsi are more or less dis- 

 tinctly divided into transverse segments. Something of the same sort is seen in 

 most Corvida?, in which also the lateral plates of the planta tarsi are usually more or 

 less distinctly separated along the posterior ridge. In all these exceptional cases, 

 however, the posterior ridge of the planta tarsi is well defined and the tarsal envel- 

 ope as a whole very distinct in its charA(>ter from that of the group {Latiplantar 

 Os^cines) containing the Alaudid;c. 



*The terms Laminiplantar and Scutelliplantar, commonly adopted from Sundevall, 

 are rejected by me because these terms are misleading, some " Laiiiiniplantares" 

 (e. g., Salpinctes, Corvidfe, part) having scutellate planta tarsi, while the Alaudidc^e 

 (forming part of Sundevall's Scntelliplioitures) sometimes (in very old birds) have 

 the planta tarsi entire or "booted;" furthermore, the latter group included, besides 

 the Alaudidfe, the superfamily Clamatores. 



