380 REVIEW OF JAPANESE BIRDS. 



least, I should resrard it very unwise to apply any other name to the 

 Hondo form. 



Mr. Seebohm, who in 1879 named a Marsh-tit P. palnstris japonicuSj 

 has determined the very two specimens from Yesso and the Kurils, men- 

 tioned above, as P. palustris brevirostris (Ibis, 1884, p. 37). Without 

 having typical examples of the latter, I cannot deny nor verify this 

 determination; but, judging from the literature, I believe he is right, 

 though, if such be the case, his prior diagnosis of brevirostris (Brit. 

 Birds and Eggs, I, p. 477) is completely misleading, since the tails of 

 the specimens in question are very strongly rounded, and not "nearly 

 even," as in the diagnostic table alluded to. I shall, however, adopt his 

 nomenclature, at least provisionally, and call the two Japanese forms 

 of the Marsh- tit, Parus borealis and Parus brevirostris. 



Mr. Jouy, in July, 1882, collected two young,* though fully grown^ 

 birds at Fuji Yama. They agree pretty well with the autumnal speci- 

 mens from Tate Yama, and I think there is but little danger in refer- 

 ring them to the same form, though their bills are perceptibly larger. 

 This is said with some reserve, however. The dimensions will be found 

 in the table below. 



To which of the two Japanese forms Seebohm's P. japonicns should 

 be referred is impossible to say without comparison of the typical speci- 

 mens. The probability that he based the name upon Blakiston's and 

 Whitely's specimens from Hakodate does not necessarily indicate that 

 it is a synonym of brevirostris, since we know that two forms of Marsh- 

 tits may occur in the same locality, at certain seasons of the year at 

 least. On the contrary, if the measurements which he gives as diag- 

 nostic of P. japonicus are taken from the typical specimens (Br. B. Eggs, 

 T, p. 477), his japoniciis most probably belongs to the form which we have 

 here called borealisA 



The indications are, however, that borealis breeds south of "Blaki- 

 ston's Line," brevirostris north of it, a distribution corresponding to 

 thp relative range of the two forms in other countries. 



It has been observed in Scandinavia, where two forms occur together, 

 that they present considerable difference in their habits and in their 



* In Jouy's paper (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., VI, 1883, p. 286) these specimens are referred 

 to as adults, but that is certainly a mistake, as they show every sign of immaturity. 



tit should be remarked, however, that the name Farus japonicus is preoccupied. 

 It was given by Stephens, in 1817 (Shaw's Gen. Zool., X, i, p. 55), to a bird originally 

 described by Latham as a variety of the Marsh -tit from specimens in Sir Joseph 

 Bank's collection, said to have been taken otf the coast of Japan. A correct identifi- 

 cation is now hardly possible, inasmuch as Latham seems to have had two difterent 

 species, neither of which are described sufficiently to allow recognition, and, besides, 

 the description by Stephens differs radically from that of Latham. The latter had 

 evidently no idea of the true relation of P. ater and palustris, for he suspected the 

 latter of being the female, or only a variety of the former, and the reference of the 

 specimens here in question, which he describes as having light nuchal spot, to the 

 Marsh-tit, does, therefore, not prevent their greater resemblance to P. ater, or to P. 



