iSSs-j Recent Literature. 367 



Magpie and Woodpecker before they were introduced into technical zool- 

 ogy, whatever may have been primarily - — a point doubtless impossible to 

 strictly determine — their etymological affinities. 



Dendrccca domiuica albilora is denied status, even as a subspecies, 

 since in many specimens Mr. Sharpe can "trace a tiny shade of yellow 

 in the eyebrow," even in authentic specimens received from our National 

 Museum : yet the alleged differences pretty constantly characterize the birds 

 of a certain geographical area. The race hyfochryscza of D. falmarum 

 is also not recognized. Peucedramus is admitted as a full genus (by the 

 way, subgenera seem a round in the ladder of classification Mr. Sharpe 

 does not appear to find use for!), while Helincea, a much more distinct 

 form, is referred to Helminthotherus. The substitution of Microligia 

 by Mr. Cory for his Ligea does not appear to be taken note of, even in the 

 'Addenda,' presumably printed nearly a year after the change was 

 published. 



In Geothlypis trichas the male in winter is said to assume the dull 

 garb of the female, losing the black mask, and is thus figured (pi. ix, 

 fig. 1), although in fact the male never loses the black mask after it has 

 once been acquired, and which it obtains at the second moult. Only 

 young males of the first year wear the garb of the female. But Mr. 

 Sharpe should not be too harshly dealt with for this lapse, since the same 

 mistake has been made by several of our own leading authorities, Messrs. 

 Maynard and Cory being apparently the only writers who have escaped 

 this error. This singular mistake seems to have originated with Baird 

 (Birds of N. Am., 185S, p. 241), who says the male in winter is "without 

 the black mask." In the 'History of North American Birds,' by Baird, 

 Brewer, and Ridgway, it is said (I, p. 297) : "Male in winter, and the 

 female, without the black mask." Coues, in 'Birds of the Colorado Valley 

 (p. 311)' says: "The adults, in fall and winter, are similar to each other, 

 .... as at that season the peculiar black and ashy markings of the head 

 are wanting." The same statement is repeated in the second edition of 

 his "Key.' Maynard, however, in 1874, in describing the adult male 

 (Birds of Florida, p. 66) says : "There is no change of plumage in autumn, 

 . . . . " Mr. Cory in his 'Birds of the Bahamas' (1880, p. 72) says, in italics, 

 in describing the winter plumage of the male, "« broad black line passing 

 from the sides of the neck through the eye and over the forehead.'''' The 

 older authors, as Wilson, Nuttall, and Audubon, are not explicit in then- 

 statements on this point, but do not say that the adult male in winter 

 lacks the black mask, while the opposite is inferrible, at least in the case 

 of Nuttall, who, as well as Audubon, was familiar with the species in its 

 winter haunts. To any one who has collected the birds in winter in 

 Florida, or elsewhere in their winter haunts, the perpetuation of such a 

 cross error is almost incomprehensible, especially since the material in at 

 least several of our museums is sufficient to render it evident, even to 

 the -closet' naturalist. 



In the collection of the Museum of Comparative Zoology is a large 

 series of adult males taken in Florida by Messrs:. Maynard. and Henshaw, 



