^°9o^^] Recent Literature. yC) 



direct examination of tlie original text. A fuller synonymy has been 

 given for the thirty or more birds which appear to be either peculiar to 

 the region under consideration or especially prominent members of the 

 fauna .... The synonymy is intended to serve, at least primarily, merely 

 as an index to what has been published on the characteristic birds of the 

 Cape Region, and on the local history only of those which visit it during 

 migration or in winter, or which breed but casually or very sparingly 

 within its confines." 



The number of species recorded for the region is 167, with 88 additional 

 subspecies, or a total of 255 forms. Of these four ai-e described as new, 

 and 36 are recorded for the first time as occurring in the Cape Region. 

 The new forms are : Totanus melanoleucus frazari^ Megascops xatitusi, 

 Bubo virginianus elachistu^, and Tachycineta thalassina hrachyptera. 

 The latter is mentioned as " an interesting illustration of the recognized 

 fact that isolated, non-migratory birds are given to having shorter wings 

 than those which regularly perform extended journeys." Mr. Brewster 

 had previously described three new species and nine new subspecies from 

 this same collection, which mrfkes sixteen new forms characterized by 

 him from the Cape Region, or one half of those recognized as peculiar 

 to it. 



" Among the noteworthy points in the present admirable paper is a dis- 

 cussion of the relationship oi Brac/tyr/tavip/iuscraveri a.n6 B. iiypoleucus, 

 Mr. Brewster reaching the conclusion that the doubts that have been 

 expressed as to their specific distinctness are without foundation. The 

 conclusion is also reached, after the comparison of a large amount of 

 material, that Buteo borealis lucasanus is not separable from B. b. cal- 

 urus. Specimens from the Cape St. Lucas region are slightly smaller 

 than more northern examples of caltirtis^ as would be expected, but " so 

 far as color and markings are concerned they cannot be separated from 

 calurus.'''' Alelanerpes formicivorus angustifrons is considered as " speci- 

 fically'''' distinct " from its nearest allies," but no reasons for this opinion 

 are here stated. The Cape form of Myiarchus ciuerascens is believed to be 

 worthy of subspecific recognition, under the name pertiuax applied to it 

 by Baird in 1859, but it has not of late been considered as separable fiom 

 cinerascens. On the other hand, Mr. Brewster finds that the characters 

 ascribed to Sayornis nigricans semiatra, as distinguished from nigricans., 

 are " too trifling and inconstant to deserve anything more than passing 

 notice." He agrees with Mr. Ridgway that the so-called Astragalinus 

 psaltria arizoncE is " scarcely a definite form." Ammodramus halopJiilus 

 is considered as not separable from A. rostratus guttafus^ or at least, that 

 it is premature to give it recognition till we know more about it. Vireo 

 gilvus szvainsoni is believed to be " a good subspecies." The case of 

 Hylocichla guttata nana (Aud.) is discussed at length, and the reasons 

 fully given for the revival of the name nana for the small Hermit Thrush 

 of the Pacific coast region. 



The ' Cape Region ' of Lower California has long been of special interest, 



