﻿NO. 
  1134. 
  FHlLIPPiyE 
  ORXITHOLOGY—WORCESTEB 
  AND 
  HOUBXS. 
  597 
  

  

  there. 
  Bongao 
  is 
  so 
  small, 
  and 
  is 
  separated 
  from 
  Tawi 
  Tawi 
  by 
  so 
  

   luirrow 
  a 
  stretch 
  of 
  water, 
  that 
  it 
  is 
  almost 
  a 
  pity 
  to 
  give 
  it 
  the 
  dignity 
  

   of 
  a 
  separate 
  island. 
  Since 
  it 
  has 
  appeared 
  as 
  such, 
  in 
  Sharpe's 
  table 
  

   in 
  the 
  Ibis, 
  I 
  shall 
  retain 
  it 
  to 
  avoid 
  confusion. 
  

  

  In 
  this 
  connection 
  I 
  may 
  remark 
  that 
  I 
  have 
  discarded 
  Malamaui 
  

   from 
  the 
  list 
  of 
  islands. 
  I 
  doubt 
  if 
  the 
  channel 
  which 
  separates 
  it 
  

   from 
  Basilan 
  is 
  500 
  yar<ls 
  wide, 
  and 
  I 
  have 
  treated 
  it 
  as 
  a 
  part 
  of 
  that 
  

   island. 
  

  

  There 
  is 
  nothing 
  in 
  the 
  results 
  of 
  Everett's 
  work 
  to 
  indicate 
  that 
  

   Bongao 
  is 
  anything 
  more 
  zoologically 
  than 
  a 
  ])art 
  of 
  Tawi 
  Tawi, 
  and 
  I 
  

   shall 
  so 
  consider 
  it 
  in 
  this 
  paper. 
  

  

  Of 
  the 
  Sulu 
  birds, 
  53 
  are 
  Philippine 
  species, 
  of 
  the 
  Tawi 
  Tawi 
  birds, 
  

   51. 
  

  

  An 
  analysis 
  of 
  these 
  species 
  will, 
  I 
  think, 
  i)rove 
  that 
  Sulu 
  and 
  Tawi 
  

   Tawi 
  should 
  be 
  classed 
  together, 
  and 
  that 
  they 
  can 
  not 
  be 
  added 
  to 
  the 
  

   Basilan-Mindauoa 
  group, 
  but 
  must 
  stand 
  by 
  themselves. 
  

  

  The 
  following 
  species 
  are 
  peculiar 
  to 
  the 
  Sulu-Tawi 
  Tawi 
  group, 
  at 
  

   most 
  ranging 
  to 
  Sibutu: 
  

  

  1. 
  Antlnacoceros 
  montani. 
  7. 
  HijJoierpc 
  liomcyeri. 
  

  

  2. 
  TaniKinaihus 
  hurhklgd. 
  8. 
  Man-on 
  la^ 
  leftlewelU. 
  

   .1. 
  LoricuJus 
  honapartel. 
  9. 
  lolc 
  liaipialdi. 
  

  

  4. 
  IiiixjipicHS 
  ramsayi. 
  10. 
  Ariamides 
  (juiUemard.}. 
  

  

  5. 
  Aelliopyga 
  arolasi. 
  11. 
  Edoliixoma 
  evirclU. 
  

  

  6. 
  DicaeiDit 
  assiniilis. 
  12. 
  Rhiiiomyias 
  ocularis. 
  

  

  In 
  addition 
  to 
  these 
  12 
  exceptionally 
  well-marked 
  species 
  common 
  to 
  

   the 
  two 
  islands 
  we 
  have 
  Nino.rrcyi 
  and 
  FericrocotHs 
  via 
  rchesae 
  recorded 
  

   from 
  Sulu 
  alone, 
  and 
  Phabotreron 
  cimiereiceps, 
  Phlogoenas 
  menaf/ei. 
  

   Prionituriis 
  vertiealis, 
  and 
  Oriolufi 
  cinereogenys 
  recorded 
  from 
  Tawi 
  Tawi 
  

   alone. 
  

  

  In 
  the 
  case 
  of 
  Priomturus 
  we 
  are 
  in 
  all 
  i^robability 
  dealing 
  with 
  a 
  

   real 
  difference, 
  for 
  Frioniturus 
  discunis 
  is 
  certainly 
  abundant 
  enough 
  

   in 
  Suln, 
  and 
  just 
  as 
  certainly 
  not 
  obtainable 
  near 
  Tataiin, 
  in 
  Tawi 
  Tawi. 
  

   There 
  is 
  a 
  bare 
  possibility 
  that 
  P. 
  verticalis 
  has 
  been 
  overlooked 
  in 
  

   Sulu, 
  and 
  P. 
  discKrus 
  in 
  Tawi 
  Tawi, 
  which 
  would 
  give 
  us 
  here 
  two 
  spe- 
  

   cies 
  of 
  the 
  genus 
  in 
  each 
  island, 
  but 
  this 
  is 
  improbable. 
  

  

  The 
  other 
  apparent 
  differences 
  Avill, 
  I 
  think, 
  disappear 
  as 
  the 
  birds 
  

   of 
  the 
  two 
  islands 
  become 
  better 
  known. 
  

  

  The 
  line 
  of 
  demarcation 
  between 
  Basilan 
  and 
  Sulu 
  is 
  on 
  the 
  whole 
  

   quite 
  shar]). 
  A 
  few 
  forms, 
  like 
  Clnnyrisjuliae, 
  range 
  westward 
  through 
  

   the 
  chain, 
  but 
  the 
  absence 
  of 
  such 
  genera 
  as 
  Rydrocorax, 
  Fenelojrides^ 
  

   Harpactes, 
  Chrysocolaptes, 
  Sarcophanops, 
  Dicrurus, 
  Eudrepanis, 
  Aracli- 
  

   notliera^ 
  Orthotonus, 
  Zosterornis, 
  FtUocichla, 
  PoUolophns, 
  Trena, 
  Musei- 
  

   capula.aud 
  Cyanomyias, 
  together 
  with 
  the 
  occurence 
  of 
  Anthracoceros 
  

   and 
  Chibid, 
  indicate 
  a 
  greater 
  degree 
  of 
  distinctness 
  in 
  the 
  avifaunae 
  

   of 
  tlie 
  two 
  areas 
  than 
  I 
  had 
  anticipated. 
  

  

  