Bird-parasites and Birdphylogeny. 263 



material from Pelecanoides is very limited, it, nevertheless, 

 does not support the isolated position usually given to this 

 genus. Considering such a classification as that in Sharpe's 

 ' Hand-list/ my confirmation of Forbes's general position 

 indicates that the small Petrels are quite vrrongly included 

 in a single family ; that such genera as Thalassoeca, Priocella, 

 and Pagodroma are Fulmars, not Shearwaters ; and that 

 Prion is not a Fulmar, but is nearer to the Shearv/aters. 

 I have no material from Fregetta, Bulweria, Halobcena, and 

 one or two other rare genera, so can say nothing about 

 them. 



I think that the illustrations I have put before you will 

 suffice to show that there is something in my ideas, and that, 

 when I have as plentiful a material to argue from in other 

 groups as I have had in the Petrels, I may be able to give 

 you some useful indications. And, in closing, I would take 

 this opportunity of appealing to those ornithologists who 

 may be undertaking expeditions themselves, or who have 

 collectors in the field, to have these insignificant parasites 

 carefully collected, and placed where they may render service 

 to the science of ornithology, a science in which I may claim 

 to be interested as deeply as yourselves. 



[Note. — Since the above was written, I have been able, 

 through the kindness of Mr. W. R. Ogilvie-Grant, to 

 examine for parasites some Petrel skins in the British 

 Museum. The results show that Pelecanoides holds a much 

 more isolated position than I have allowed, but at the 

 base of the Shearwater group, that Buliveria goes with the 

 Shearwaters, and that Halobcena may be bracketed with 

 Prion.— L.n. 31.i.l6.] 



