430 PROCEEDINGS OP THE ACADEMY. 



sides, less on the thighs, and scarcely showing on the middle of the abdomen ; 

 under tail coverts white ; the feathers of the upper part of the throat appear 

 to be partly white, but they are too much soiled to judge with certainty ; up- 

 per mandible black, the under yellowish-white ; legs dark yellow, claws 

 black. 



Length (skin) about 12 in.; wing 8J ; tail 6|-; tarsi IJ. 



Habitat. — Guatemala. Obtained from Dr. C. H. Van Patten. Type in my 

 collection. 



Remarks. — This specimen, which seems to be fully adult, makes a third spe- 

 cies of the genus Ilarpagus, the other two being H. bidentatvs, Lath., and H. 

 diodon, Temm. The characteristic toothing of the bill is strongly developed, 

 but it otherwise differs so entirely from the above two species in all their 

 stages of plumage, by the broad transverse markings of its under surface, that 

 no comparison with them is requisite. 



JVote on ZONOTRICHIA MELANOTIS. 



This species should be placed in the genus Hcemophila, and much resembles 

 in distribution of its markings, H. riificauda, Bp. That species 1 had not seen 

 at the time I described Z. melanotis. They differ in the tail of my species be- 

 ing liver-brown instead of rufous, and in having the tail feathers edged with 

 whitish. In place of the decided rufous coloring of the sides, abdomen and 

 under tail coverts of H ntjicauda, there is only a wash of that color in mela- 

 notis. The dark stripes on the crown and sides of the head are pure black ; 

 the corresponding ones in rnficauda are dark brown mixed with rufous. In 

 the last named species there is a broad band across the breast, of dark ash : 

 this part in my species has only an ashy suffusion. The smaller wing coverts 

 of H. rnficauda are of an immaculate bright rufous , those of U. melanotis are 

 less bright, with dark brown shaft stripes. The bill of H. rnficauda is larger, 

 and in its general plumage it is the most rufous of the two species. 



Mr. 0. Salvin (Ibis 1868, p. 299) says of my species: "Possibly the same as 

 Ilmmophila humeralis, Cab." It apparently differs in many marked character- 

 istics from the description given of that species. 



