42 OX TUE EUFOUS-TAJLED SHRIKES. [1867. 



superciliary streak pure white. The upper phimage of both sexes is described as alike, the 

 females being chiefly distinguished from the males by having the white forehead and superciliary 

 streak less strongly marked and less pure, by the ocular band being brown instead of black, and 

 by the sides of the neck, the lower throat, the breast, and flanks being finely and darkly lineated, 

 these parts in the male being immaculate. The discrepancy in the two descriptions raises the 

 doubt whether the two authors refer to the same bird. Pallas's description applies with equal 

 truth to L. lucionerms, Linn. The long tail and intensely rufous uropygium and tail are not 

 sufficient characters to distinguish it ; for, as regards the intensity of colour, specimens of the 

 Philippine species in full breeding-plumage have yet to be procured and described. The 

 rufescent-grey upper plumage is characteristic of L. lucionensis, Linn. ; and we know that that 

 species travels high into Northern China in the early spring to breed. Nor may we presume that 

 Pallas's specimen was in a sexual or seasonal phase of plumage or in that of nonage ; for Schrenck 

 has told us that the upper plumage of the sexes does not differ, and he has further described the 

 nestling bird as ha^ing the entire upper plumage of a rust-brown colour lineated across with 

 black*. From Hakodadi, killed there in June, 1 have received a specimen (PI. V. fig. 2, in orig.) 

 which, in all respects, agrees with Schrcnck's description of his Siberian and North China indi- 

 viduals, and which differs widely from Philippine and China examples of Z. lucionensis, Linn. For 

 the reasons above given, I entertain great doubts as to the identity of Schrenck's specimens with 

 Pallas's species. Should they prove distinct, Schrenck's bird will require a new title. But before 

 Ibis, 1867, we can arrive at a conclusion, the exact limits of the Philippine bird's northern migration must 

 P' ^^®" be discovered, and individuals in full breeding-plumage will have to be obtained. Schrenck's 

 species was obtained on the banks of the Schilka river, and also on the coast of the Sea of 

 Okhotsk. Middendorff procured it only in the latter region, and states that it was the only 

 species of the genus obtained by him. The bird he identified as L. excubitor, Linn., but of which 

 he failed in getting a specimen, was probably L. buccjjhalus, T. &. Sch. Eadde, who, as well as 

 Middendorff, gives no description of his specimens, found L. phoBnicurus, Pall., not uncommon 

 among the morasses along the banks and at the mouths of the larger rivers which f!lll into Lake 

 Baikal. But the winter home of Schrenck's species has yet to be discovered. Mr. Swinhoe did 

 not observe the bird in any of the parts of China visited by him. It would be of some assistance 

 if a description of the specimen killed in Heligoland were to be published. 



The specific distinction between L. jjhanicurus. Pall., and L. colliirio, Linn, (on the hypo- 

 thesis that he possessed specimens of Pallas's species), has been most conclusively demonstrated 

 by Schrenck {I.e.). The specimen described by Sundevall {I.e.), preserved in the Stockholm 

 Museum, must belong either to Schrenck's species, or to Malay L. superciliosus. Lath. 



• It ifl to be regretted that, in his admirable article on L. phoenicurua, Schrenck has not commented on the discre- 

 pancies between his specimens and rallas's description. 



