22 Becently pullished OmitJtological JJ^orJ{.9. 



o-zz 



term " 0/?/*/' usually attributed to Cuvicr ( 1 800), appears 

 to liave been previously used by Peuuant iu 1709*. 



The second edition of the * Indian Zoology' is not so 

 scarce. There is a copy of it at the Zoological Society and 

 another in Scbater's library. 



57. Banrjs on Birds from JVestern Costa Eica. 



[(1) On a Ci lleclion of Birds from Westeru Costa IJica. P>y Outram 

 J3an<rs. Tlie Auk, xxiv. No. .% 1907. 



(2) On certain Costa Rican Birds. By Outram Bangs. Proc New 

 Engl. Zool. Club, iv. p. 23 (1908).] 



In the first paper we have an aecoimt of a large collection 

 of bird-skins, numbering nearly (3000, made in western 

 Costa lliea by a Avell-known taxidermist, ]\Ir. Underwood, 

 for Mr. Bangs, in the spring and summer of 19()C. Mr. G. 

 K. Cherrie, of the National jMusciim of Costa Rica, liad 

 previously made a collection in the same district in 1891-2, 

 and had published a paper on it ; but Mr. Bangs thought 

 there was more to be done there, and he was apparently 

 right. The following seven new species and subs])ecies are 

 described by Mr. Bangs from specimens procured on this 

 trip by Underwood — Micrastiir interstes, Gymnocichia nudi- 

 ceps, Si/77a/l(i.ris albescens lutitubunda, Dendrocolaptes sancti- 

 iJioiiKE hesperius, Leptopogon pileatus famtus, Cyanerpes 

 lucidus islhminis, and Biiarrcmon cosfaricensis. One " over- 

 looked, but well-marked subspecies '' {Glaucis Jdrsuta aneii) 

 is re-instated ; and 12 other known birds are recorded as 

 new to the Costa-Rican Avifauna. 



Mr. Bangs fears that the extensive clearing of the forests 

 in this part of Costa Rica for new banana-plantations which 



* S(,me of our " ultra-prioiitarians" will, no doubt, propose that Oius 

 of Pennant, Ind. Zool. (1769), should supersede Scops of Savigny as the 

 generic name of the Eared Owls ; but as this change would cause great 

 confusion, we trust that it will not be insisted upon. It will be observed 

 that I'ennant gave no sort of description or definition of his name, but 

 merely used it in conjunction with the specific term '' halhamena,^^ wliich 

 is itself quite a doubtful title, although it has been aj plied by Blanford 

 and others to a well-known Indian species. 



