Till: KINGFISHER -i:,i 



llu matter of coloration cuiinot be summarised thus Metl\. 

 M;iriiii; with birds of sombre colours, like the laughing jackass 

 (Dacvlo), which hare a tinge of verditer-blue on the rump and wing- 

 coverts, or with quaker-likr lun-s of grey and white with a tinge of red, 

 as in Ceryle alcyon, we get groups of species presenting, each, more or 

 less striking combinations of grey, blue, black, and white; //. ykkiri*, 

 grey, blue, black, and red ; //. jMiUuliventrw, black and white the grey 

 intt -n-itied to black, and the red lost as in Ceryle nulis, bronze-green 

 and white black-tinged green ; Ceryle atnazotiim, vivid green and 

 white ; Halcyon cJUorut, blue and white ; //. leucopygut, red and white ; 

 green, blue, and red, Alcaic ispidia ; and all red, red and green, Ceyx 

 euerythra. This is but a bald summary of a most marvellous series of 

 changes of coloration, which must be seen to be properly realised. 

 What are the factors which have determined these colour groupings ? 

 What has determined the vivid hues of our own species ? Why, as in 

 our bird, do the colours of the upper parts change with the incidence 

 of the light, while the under surface of the body presents no such 

 dialler ? How is it tlmt tbr female is as brilliantly coloured as her 

 mate ? What relation do these colours bear to the habits of the 

 birds? This last question was long ago asked by Darwin in his 

 Descent of Man. In his attempt at an answer he pointed out that 

 with the kingfisher, like a number of other species e.y. parrots, 

 bee-eaters, hoopoes, both sexes are practically coloured alike, and are 

 brightly coloured, exceptions apart ; and that in all the nest is made 

 in holes in the ground, or in trees, where the sitting bird is con- 

 cealed from view; and Wallace, in later years, dwelt on the same 

 facts. They argued that the vivid hues of the female were assumed 

 in consequence of this habit of incubating in the dark. That is to 

 say, they have in consequence become enabled to assume the livery 

 of the male, because a dull coloured, protective plumage has ceased 

 to be useful. 



There is certainly much to be said in favour of this view. The 

 case of the sheldrake, among the ducks, may be cited as an illustra- 



VOL. ii. :; M 



