86 ]\Iathe\vs, " What are AiisU'alian Petrels?" [,J'T^^ 



Phoebetria palpebrata huttoni (Sooty Albatross). — I cannot find 

 any record of this species in Australian waters, though it appears 

 in New Zealand waters. Until such appears we cannot recognize 

 this species as a constituent of the Australian avifauna. 



Fregetta tropica (Black-bellied Storm-Petrel). — The only speci- 

 men I examined is the one in the Macleay Museum. Gould states : 

 — " It was almost daily observed mitil we arrived at Tasmania on 

 the 19th of Septem])er, (183Q). . . In March, 1840, I again met 

 with it in great abundance between the eastern coast of Australia 

 and New Zealand." Ramsay, therefore, gives it for 7, 10, 12, 13, 

 14, and this time there was a specimen in the Museum, but wlience, 

 of course, is not stated. Campbell addi'd nothing, so tliat further 

 records would be acceptable. 



Procellaria parkinspni (Black Petrel). — The only specimen I 

 have seen is in the same place and recorded at the same time as 

 the preceding. Ramsay added this species, marking it for 10 and 

 13, Campbell elaborating " seas of New South Wales, \'ictoria 

 (probably), and Tasmania." It is possible that this species may 

 occur as a straggler, and a look-out should be kept, but at the 

 present time the only record is the above one. 



Pterodroma inexpectata thompsoni (Mottled Petrel). —The 

 only record is my own, but it is {possible that more specimens 

 would crop up were the shores watched during and after winter 

 gales from the south. 



Diomedea exulans chionoptera was included on account of the 

 record of the Crozet Island specimen supposed to have been picked 

 up at Fremantle, Western Australia. I understand that doubt 

 has now been cast upon that record, so that until confirmation is 

 forthcoming this form must be rejected. I have written " form," 

 as re-investigation has shown that reconsideration of the values 

 is necessary. I described a form as Diomedea exulans rohiti from 

 Sydney, wliich was regarded as very closeh' allied to chionoptera, 

 which I had classed with exulans on account of the bill formation, 

 which noticeably differed from that of " Diomedea regia." I gave 

 cuts of the bills in my " Birds of Australia," and was dubious of 

 the generic identity of these huge birds. Recently, Murphy, 

 meeting with a strange Albatross off the coast of Chile, in- 

 troduced a new sub-genus, Rhothonia, for it, naming it Diomedea 

 sanjordi. Lord Rotlischild, from the description, would have 

 referred it to 1). chioiioplei'a. noting that the latter also came from 

 Sydney. Howevei", the bill of chionoptera is like that of exulans, 

 true Diomedea. whereas the bill of Pianwdea sa)ifoydi is that of 

 " rc'^Kf." t\-en as I figured it. 1 have criticised the birds again, 

 and would now rank chionoptera as specifically distinct, and 

 allow Khothonia generic rank. The xoung of Rhothonia is \-er\- 

 different from the young of Diomedea, so that this st'cms a reason- 

 able course, and will, moreover, lessen tlie sources of error in the 

 fuTure. 



