i88s-] Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica. 339 



Jacana Briss. 



<C 1758. — Fulica Linn., Syst. Nat. 10 ed., I, p. 152. 

 = 1760. — Jacana Briss., Ornith., V, p. 121. 



< 1766. — Parra Linn., Syst. Nat., 12 ed., I, p. 259. 



1766-men will have to register the synonyms as follows: 

 Jacana Schffaer. 



< 1766. — Parra Linn., Syst. Nat., 12 ed., I, p. 259. 



= 1774. — Jacana Schaffer, Elem. Orn., fol. B, 2, pi. vii, figs, i, ii. 



The name Parra should, therefore, be restricted to the genus 

 having for type P. domitiica or P. senegalla, consequently 

 the genus Lobivanellus Strickland, 1S41, or more strictly to 

 the group designated by Gray in his Hand-list (III, p. 11) as 

 " d — ?." Here I may further remark that Lobivanellus 

 Strickl. really belongs to this latter group, being consequently 

 a strict synonym of Parra, while Gray's group c should stand as 

 Sarcograimnus Reichb., thus: 



Sarcogrammus Reichb. 



> 1852. — Sarcogrammus Reichenbach, Syst. Av., p. xviii (Sarco- 



gratnma in Jerdon, B. Ind. Ill, p. 648). 



> 1864. — ' " Vanello-chetusia Brandt" Jerdon, B. India, III, p. 646 



(nee Brandt). 



> 1871. — Lobivanellus Gray, Handl. Ill, p. 11 (nee Strickl. as re- 



stricted). 



Parra Linn. 



> 1766. — Parra Linn., Syst. Nat., 12 ed., I, p. 259. 



]> 1841. — Lobivanellus Strickland, P. Z. S., 1841, p. 33 (as restricted 

 by Reichenbach, 1852). 



In regard to the synonym " Vanello-chetusia Jerdon, nee 

 Brandt," I may remark that I agree completely with Bonaparte in 

 referring 6". inomatus (and cincreus) to the same genus as S. 

 indicus (=zgoensis), as I can detect no structural difference of 

 any consequence. 



Gray has noted the facts concerning Jacana and Parra as 

 specified above, calling the Jacanas : " Parra Lath. 1790, nee 

 Linn. 1766 " ! But he made a strange mistake in placing '''•Parra 

 L., 1766." as a synonym of Sarcogrammus Reichb. 



