ORNITHOLOGICAL EXPLORATIONS. 225 



feature of my birds, that, altliongh the dark bars underneath are finer 

 and narrower, they are by no means more numerous ; the whitish spots 

 on the rectrices are rather larger^ and are well raarlied, even on the* 

 middle pair, and the subcaudales are not more, but less^ streaJced than in 

 the European specimens. But there is one reason more why I cannot 

 apply the name canorinus to the present form, viz, that the bird thus 

 named is apparently different from the species to which Cabanis in 1862 

 originally applied the name. The canorinus of Museum Heineauum 

 (said to be the same as Miiller's C. canoroides) is described as being 

 somewhat smaller than canorus, besides differing from it by '■'■ suhalaru 

 bus minus crebre fasciolatis mediis fere unicoloribus tanquam fasciam longi- 

 tudinalem albidam formantibusy Now Taczanowski exjiressly states 

 that his birds are of the same size as those from Enrojie, and does not 

 meutiou the peculiar coloration of the under wingcoverts. In my birdSj 

 at least, these feathers certainly are narrowly and uniformly barred^ 

 It vrould almost seem from the description of Taczanowski, quoted above^ 

 that the Siberian bird forms a separate race, the proper name of which 

 ■would be Ci(C2ilus canorus borealis (Pall.).* 



As to the name ai)plied by me to the Kamtscbatkan bird I have to 

 offer the following remarks : In the Ibis for 18(J1 Mr. Swinhoe described 

 a Cuculus from Talien Bay as striatus Drap., stating at the same tim& 

 that his birds were larger, and had a weakc-r bill than the Indian spec- 

 imens. These birds he afterwards recognized as erroneously identified^ 

 referring them then partly to C. canorus {Cf. Ibis, 1863, p. 395). In the 

 mean time Cabanis and Heine had proposed the name C. sicinhoei for 

 the same specimens, under the impression, however, that they belonged 

 to striatus proper, or, at least, striatus of Jerdon and of Cabanis, as a 

 race. But it seems evident from the synonymy (P. Z. S., 1871, p. 395) 

 th'-it Swinhoe, even in 1871, by striatus understood a bird widely differ- 

 ent from that of the two authors quoted above, and partly identical 

 with the so-called G. himalayanus Jerdon and C. kelungensis. Never- 

 theless, it may be safer to reject the name given by Cabanis and 

 Heine, since it is based upon no description or already described species, 

 and also since it seems that the authors insist upon comparing C. sicin- 

 hoei with striatus or micropterus (cf. J. f. Oru., 1868, p. 355). The next 



"The only question is, whether it is admissible to restrict Pallas's name thns, aa 

 it was only partly given to this bird: "Per vnireraam Bossiam et Sibiriaiii,it.am in 

 lorealibvs * * * etiam in Camtuchatca adest, * * * Nitsquam copiosiorem andiviy 

 quam in Damiria." 



15861 Bull. 29 15 



