l8 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. I39 



a singularly complete and isolated family of the acromyodian passerine 

 birds and show no special relationship to any other, being sharply 

 marked off by the structure of the skull, the colour-pattern, and the 

 bower-building habit." (It should be noted that the names on Stonor's 

 figs. 6 and 8 have been transposed, fig. 6 being Semioptera wallacei, 

 and fig. 8 Amblyornis sitbalaris, not the reverse as printed on pp. 481 

 and 483.) 



Oberholser (1917, pp. 537-539) has set up a distinct family Irenidae 

 for the fairy bluebirds (Irena), and Delacour (1946b, p. 3) a family 

 Aegithinidae for the leafbirds, which would cover Irena, Aegithina, 

 and Chloropsis. 



The proper allocation of the genus Chamaea for the wrentits, at 

 present accepted by the A. O. U. Committee on Classification and No- 

 menclature as a separate family, the Chamaeidae, is one of consider- 

 able uncertainty. Delacour (1946a, pp. 18, 25, 35) has suggested 

 that the group be located in the family Timaliidae in a special sub- 

 family in which he includes also such diverse genera as Chrysomma 

 (Monpinia), Pannrus, Conostoma, and Paradoxomis (combining un- 

 der this name Suthora, Psittiparus, Neosuthora, and Cholornis) . This 

 is an obviously heterogeneous assemblance, in which Chamaea has 

 slight resemblances to the first only. From Moupinia poecilotis 

 (placed in Chrysomma by Delacour) the wrentit differs definitely in 

 weaker, less arched bill and in differently proportioned feet. It has 

 no close similarity to any of the others that are mentioned. Although 

 the relationships of Chamaea are obviously uncertain, it is retained 

 as a family pending other information. 



In consultation with Herbert Deignan, expert in matters that relate 

 to the birds of eastern Asia, the Campephagidae have been placed 

 near the Pycnonotidae, an arrangement that agrees with that adopted 

 by Charles Vaurie in his recent volume on the palearctic region ( 1959, 

 p. 181), and the Paradoxornithidae are brought nearer the Timeliidae. 



The fossil family Palaeoscinidae, proposed by Hildegarde Howard 

 (1957b, p. 15) for the species Palaeoscinis turdirostris, has been in- 

 serted provisionally near the Pycnonotidae. The specimen on which 

 this name is based is a skeleton found in Santa Barbara County, Calif., 

 compressed in a slab of Miocene limestone of the Monterey forma- 

 tion. The type, in which most of the bones are outlined, is one of those 

 attractive silhouette impressions that delight the eye but that often 

 pose difficulties in classification through lack of clear-cut characters 

 on which to judge relationship. In the present instance Dr. Howard 

 has concluded that "affinities of the Palaeoscinidae lie with the 

 Pycnonotidae, Bombycillidae, Corvidae and Cinclidae" of the suborder 



