Vol! 1X Eleventh Supplement to A. O. U. Check-List. 333 
1902 
287. Hzematopus bachmani vs. //. niger (PALLAS). 
If Pallas’s Zoogr. Rosso-Asiat. be taken at 1826, as has uni- 
formly been the case in the Check-List, there is no reason for the 
proposed change. 
317. Genaida zenaida vs. Zenaida meridionalis (ff. Forbes & 
Ropinson, Bull. Liverpool Mus. I, 1899, 36). 
It is evident that the birds identified by Forbes and Robinson 
as Zenaida meridionalis, cannot be the types of Latham’s Columba 
meridionalis. (Cf. ALLEN, Auk, XIX, July, 1902, 286.) 
320, Columbigallina passerina terrestris vs. C. p. pur- 
purea (of. W. PaLMeEr, Osprey, V, 1gor, 148). 
The reasons for the proposed change are not considered to be 
well founded. 
341, Buteo albicaudatus sennetti vs. 2. abicaudatus (f, 
Gopman, Biol. Cent.-Am, Aves, III, 1900, 58). 
There is nothing to show that the Committee was in error in 
accepting sennetti as a subspecies of a/bicaudatus. 
398. Falco richardsoni vs. / columbarius richardsoni (of. 
BisHop, N. Am. Fauna, No. 19, Oct. 1900, 75). 
The status of the form is admittedly in doubt, but on the basis 
of present evidence no change is deemed advisable, 
403. Sphyrapicus ruber vs. S. varius ruber (Cf. GRINNELL, 
Condor, III, Jan, 1901, 12) 
Intergradation not satisfactorily proved. 
Sphyrapicus ruber flaviventris (ff Oscoop, N. Am. Fauna, 
No. 21, 1901, 45). 
Picus flaviventris Vie... proves to be a synonym of Picus 
ruber notkensis Suckow. (Cf. antea, Pp. 319, under Sphyrapicus 
ruber notkensis.) 
