64 01V THE GENUS LATHAMUS. 



it differs in the possession of a furcula *. He further says : " It may 

 at first seem very heretical to remove Laihamus from the Loriinee, the 

 brush-tongue being considered characteristic of that subfamily. To the 

 unbiased student, however, the brush-tongue is a character not more im- 

 portant than several of those that have been above considered The 



character of the papillae is somewhat different in Lathamus from what it 

 is in Lorius, they being blunter and shorter in the former genus than in 

 the latter." 



Having undertaken at Prof. Grarrod's suggestion an investigation of 

 the pterylosis of the Parrots, the results of which I hope to communicate 

 to this Society at no distant date, Lathamus was one oc the first forms I 

 examined ; and I at once saw that its pterylosis confirmed the relationship 

 of this form to the Platycercinae already insisted on by Sundevall and 

 Garrod. From this I was led to an examination of some other parts of 

 P. Z. S. 1879, its structure ; and I propose to lay the results of my inquiries before the 

 p. 168. Society to-night, in order to establish the view that Lathamus must be 

 removed from the brush-tongued Trichoglossinse, with which it has been 

 so generally associated, and must be considered a (no doubt aberrant) 

 member of the Platycercine group. 



The pterylosis of this form having first struck my attention, I will 

 describe this in the first instance, the more so as, as far as I know, no 

 description of this part of the structure of the bird in question has yet 

 been published. I may perhaps anticipate part of my paper on the 

 pterylosis of the Psittaci in general, and point out briefly the general 

 characters of the distribution of the feathering in these birds, so as to 

 enable the reader without any further trouble to appreciate the points of 

 distinction in this respect between Lathamus and the other species with 

 which I have compared it. 



As will be evident from the figures (Plate I. figs. 1-6), the tracts of 

 contour-feathers in a Parrot may be arranged as follows : On the upper 

 surface of the body, continuous in front with the feathering of the top 

 and sides of the head, is a long narrow tract, the " superior tract," which 

 divides behind in the interscapular region in a fork-like manner, forming 

 the " scapular fork." Behind this, occupying the hinder part of the back 

 and pelvis, is another, more or less Y-shaped tract, with the " handle " 

 (which is usually short) of the fork placed close to the posterior extremity 

 of the trunk, whilst the more lengthy " arms " of the Y are more anterior 

 and run in, in front, between the corresponding ones of the " scapular 

 fork/' usually becoming very feebly feathered in so doing. This tract 

 may be called the " dorso-lumbar " fork. Scattered more irregularly and 



* M. Blanchard, indeed, says (Compt. Rend. 1857, xliv. p. 521) that Lathamus has 

 no furcula ; but this bone is present, though small and weak, in the specimens I have 

 seen : cf. also Owen, Cat. Ost. Ser. E. C. S. i. p. 279 (1853). 



