24 PEOCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAX, MUSEUM, vol.64. 



Family CHARADRIIDAE. 



PLOVERS. 

 34. PLUVIALIS DOMINICUS FULVUS (Gmelin). 



One female, Paleleh, November 12, 1914; two males and one fe- 

 male, Toli Toli, November 28-December 16, 1914 ; one male and two 

 females, Eano Lindoe, March 24 and 25, 1917. 



The male, one of a pair, taken March 25, has begun to acquire a 

 few black feathers of the breeding plumage on the chest and breast. 



35. CHARADRIUS DUBIUS (ScopoU). 



One female in worn plumage, Gimpoe, August 21, 1917. 

 Similar to Luzon specimens (the type locality of duMus). It 

 measures: Wing, 113; tail, 53.5; culmen, 14. 



36. CHARADRIUS PERONI (Bonaparte). 



One immature female, Tamboe, June 13, 1917. 

 This specimen was bred on the island without a doubt, as it is a 

 young bird in juvenal plumage, which is becoming somewhat worn. 



Family RECURVIROSTRIDAE. 



AVOCETS AND STILTS. 

 37. HIMANTOPUS LEUCOCEPHALUS TIMORENSIS Mathews. 



A good series of adults of both sexes and one immature female, 

 Rano Lindoe, March 3-26, 1917. 



Mathews *^ has separated the Timor bird with which he doubt- 

 fully includes that from Celebes. I have no Timor specimens and 

 only one sexed specimen of typical H. I. leucocephaliLS^ but have three 

 males and one female from Mindanao and one male from Java. 

 The two latter fall within the A'ariations of my Celebes series and 

 undoubtedly belong to the same form. My single sexed specimen, a 

 male, from New South Wales also falls within the variations of the 

 males of the Celebes series, except the black hind-neck patch is 

 more extensive; in fact it has some black-tipped feathers on the 

 occiput; this is unusual and no other specimen before me shows 

 anything approaching this condition. The New South Wales bird 

 may be aberrant, as three unsexed specimens (but probably males) 

 from Australia do not seem to have the black hind-neck patch so 

 pronounced. Until a larger series of Australian specimens has 

 been examined, the only logical course is to recognize the northern 

 bird as a distinct form from the southern, though it seems to rest 

 upon rather slender characters. To show the range of variation, 



« Birds Australia, vol. 3, pt. 2, 1913, p. 150. 



