beige * 
|| 
‘ : ! 
318 BIRDS FROM YEZO, JAPAN—STEJNEGER. 
versus anum pallidior * * * Remiges nigricantes, margine exte- 
riore lutez, 2 ad 4 exteriore vexillo angustate * * *  tectrices se- 
cundariarum et incumbentes apice exterius late luteew * * * Cauda 
equalis * * *” Jn all these points Pallas’s description agrees with 
Hesperocichla nevia (GM.) which breeds in Kadiak, Alaska. 
Monticola manilla (BoDD.). (256) 
Blue and Red Rock-Thrush. ; Iso hio-dori. 
1776.—Turdus solitarius MULLER, Natursyst., Suppl., p. 142 (nee Lin., 1758).— 
Petrocossyphus 8. DRESSER & SHARPE, B. of Eur., 11, pp. 150, 161 (1872).— 
Monticola s. SWINHOK, Ibis, 1874, p. 157.—W. solitaria BLAKIST. & PRYER, 
Ibis, 1878, p. 240.—Jid., Trans. As. Soc. Jap., vit, 1880, p. 225.—Tid., ibid.,~ 
X, 1882, p. 163.—SrEBOHM, Cat. B. Brit. Mus., v, p. 319 (1881).—Jd., Ibis, 
1887, p. 174.—Buakisr., Chrysanth., 1882, p. 521.—J/d., ibid., 1883, p. 33.— 
Id., Amend. List B. Jap., p. 58 (1884).—STEJNEGER, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 
IX, 1886, p. 646.—Id., ibid., x, 1887, pp. 405, 415, 485.—Id., Zeitschr. Ges. 
Ornith., Iv, p. 174 (1888). 
1776.—? Turdus philippensis MULLER, Natursyst., Suppl., p. 145. 
1783.—Turdus manilla BopDAERT, Tabl. Pl. Enl., p. 39. 
1788.—? Turdus eremita GMELIN, 8. N., 1, p. 833. 
1788.— Turdus manillensis GMELIN, 8. N.,1, p.833.—K1irritz, Mém. Sav. Etr. St.-Pétersb., 
I, p. 246 (1831).—J/d., Denkw., u, p. 186 (1858).—TrMM. & SCHLEGEL, 
Fauna Jap., Aves, p. 67 (1847).—Petrocossyphus m., HARTLAUB, Journ. Orn., 
1854, p. 167.—CassiIn, Proc. Acad. Philada., 1862, p. 314.—Petrocinela m. 
BLAKISTON, Ibis, 1862, p. 319.—WaHIrTnELy, Ibis, 1867, p. 199.—Copsychus 
manilensis MARTENS, Preuss. Exp. Ost-As., Zool., 1, p. 368 (1877). 
1858.— Petrocincla violacea SWINHOH, Zoologist, 1858 (p. 6228). 
1881.—Monticola cyanus solitaria SEEBOUM, Cat. B. Brit. Mus., v, p. 318 (part). 
1890.—Monticola cyanus SrEBouM, B. Jap. Emp., p. 53. 
There has of late been written a great deal in regard to the changes 
of plumage which take place in the present species, and many theories 
have been advanced, but no satisfactory solution has been arrived at 
as yet. 
In an elaborate memoir (B. of Eur., 11, pp. 149-163, 1872) Messrs. 
Sharpeand Dresser attempted to demonstrate thatthe male Blue-and-Red 
Rock-Thrush is only ‘“‘ blue and red” during a comparatively short trans- 
itional period of its life, and that the old birds are entirely blue, like 
the European Blue Rock-Thrush, basing their conclusion upon the fact 
that wholly blue birds are found also in the East, in China and Indo- 
China. Mr. Seebohm, on the other hand, rejects this theory (Cat. B. 
Brit. Mus., v, pp. 319-320, 1881), and in doing so I think he is abso- 
lutely correct. But he solves the mystery of the Eastern blue birds 
by extending the range of M. solitaria (LIN.) (10 ed.=M. eyanus LIN., 
12 ed.), the European bird, eastward into China, and in this [ think he 
is wrong. The eastern bird is smaller, with a comparatively smaller 
bill; its wing formula is different, and the blue color is deeper and 
darker. I have no doubt as to its distinctness, but whether a binom- 
inal or only a trinominal should be used to designate it I am at 
j 
