398 Dr. J. Murie on the Motmots and their Affinities. 



t hat of M. amictus), slender palatines and maxillo-palatines, 

 smaller size and forward position of the nostril and other points^ 

 take away from the Momotine type. 



But it is also as patent that there are many osteological rela- 

 tions of proximity. There is posterior breadth of the skull, a 

 transverse beak-hinge, interorbital ossification, rounding of post- 

 palatal plates, short pterygoids, a delicate vomer ; the lachrymal 

 is joined to the prefrontal processes, and, inferiorly, is very de- 

 licate, in some species being replaced by membrane below, as in 

 M. melanura (which also, I find, has a minutely serrate edge to 

 beak, and the tongue-bones as in Eumomota) . The legs are 

 slender; but the construction of the tarsus is nearly as in Mo- 

 motus, though the calcaneal process is more elongate and 

 sideways but with one basal perforation. The f-toed foot is 

 truly syndactyle. 



4. Comparison with the Alcedinidce. — Among the Kingfishers, 

 without taking colour into consideration, there are four genera, 

 at least, which carry exterior resemblances promising affiliation to 

 the Motmots. These are: — the Papuan form Sr/ma ; Tanysiptera, 

 also confined to the neighbourhood of the same region ; Myoceyx 

 and Ispidina, African birds. Syma notably has a serrate mandible. 

 Tanysiptera 1 rectrices, the median pair long and spatulate. The 

 figure of the relatively shallow beak of Myoceyx and Ispidina, and 

 other general characters, in the same way suggest Motmot resem- 

 blances. It is to be regretted that no skeletons of the first three 

 genera exist in this covmtry. I must confine remarks, therefore, 

 to the fourth, while incidentally glancing at points in Dacelo &c. 



The Halcyoninse, and with them Ispidina, possess a skull 

 whose contour and general proportions approximate to Momo- 

 tus and Eumomota, and yet is impressed with a cast peculiarly 

 its own. For instance, the lower mandible is far more acute and 

 bony, its bridge longer — roughly speaking, half the mandibular 

 length in them, and a trifle over one third in the Motmots. 

 The Kingfisher group more immediately under consideration 

 have less curved, more conical prsemaxillse, with a depression ex- 

 isting at the frontal root. The brain-segment of the Motmot 

 skull is decidedly broader, higher, and less rotund than in these 

 Kingfishers. The latter have a large lachrymal, whose inferior 



