38° 



Remit Literature. [October 



aiuhur slates that "his work has no claims to be called a monograph, but 

 is simply a catalogue of species and specimens, which it is hoped, how- 

 ever, may tend towards the elucidation of a very difficult subject by future 

 laborers." Its utility will certainly prove almost beyond estimate, even 

 to those who may not be prepared to agree fully to all of the conclusions 

 presented. In such obscure and difficult groups as are here treated, opin- 

 ion must vary on many points, being influenced by the amount of mate- 

 rial in hand and the standpoint from which it is viewed. 



In comparing the present volume with the 'Nomenclator Avium Neo- 

 tropiealium' of Sclater and Salvin, published in 1S74, it isof interest to 

 note that the number of species now recognized for the Tracheophonse 

 has increased about twenty-five percent in sixteen years, there being about 

 120 species added in the present volume that were not included in the 

 'Nomenclator.' Of these about 75 have been described since the publica- 

 tion of the 'Nomenclator'. while nearly 50 then ignored are now given 

 place as probably valid species. The number of genera has propor- 

 tionately increased, and about in the same ratio as regards the recog- 

 nition of generic groups formerly ignored. Of the nearly 90 species 

 referred to only in foot-notes, probably one half to two thirds will prove to 

 be recognizable forms, while many of those now registered as species will 

 doubtless take rank eventually as merely local races or subspecies. 



Species described as new or re-named are the following : (1) Tkamnophi- 

 lus fmncticeps, p. 212; (2) Myrmotherula inornata (Berlepsch, MS.), p. 

 2 43 i (.■?) Cercomacra hypolcena, p. 2f>S ; (4) Myrmeciza pelzelni, p. 283; 

 (5) Grallaria nigro-lineata (Berlepsch, MS.), p. 321; (6) Liosceles fri- 

 th tens, p. 345. A new genus is Thamnocharis (p. 3ro). 



As regards matters of nomenclature, we regret to see that the law of 

 priority is not always respected, as when, in several cases, an earlier 

 name, based on the female sex, is rejected for a later one based on the 

 male ; or when, as in the case of Formicarius cayennensis Bodd. (p. 302). a 

 much used early name is rejected, because indicating "a wrong locality," 

 for an uncurrent later name. 



In conclusion we cannot do less than tender hearty thanks, in behalf of 

 ornithologists at large, to the accomplished author of the volume under 

 notice for the great service he has rendered in marshalling one of the 

 most difficult sub-orders among birds into an orderly array.-— J, A. A. 



Allen on Birds from Quito. — The collection upon which this paper* 

 is based was "made in the immediate vicinity of Quito by M. L. Soder- 

 strom," and "numbers 210 specimens, representing 79 species, one of which 

 proved to be new." A list is given of all the species contained in the col- 

 lection, many of them accompanied by critical remarks having reference 

 to questions of synonymy or relationship, those thus discussed being as 

 follows : — 



♦Notes on a Collection of Birds from Quito, Ecuador. By J. A. Allen. Bull. 

 American Museum Nat. Hist., Vol. II, No. 2, March, 1S89, Art. VI, pp. 69-76. 



