222 



NEW YORK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY 



M-.>l AM) H. 



of the former, the l)arhules will he seen to l)e very minierons. and 

 on most of them vestiges of harl)icels are easilv distinguished. 

 Thus an exact homologv exists hetween an ostrich feather as a 

 whole, and the proximal harbs of the condor's feather, brought 

 about on the one hand b\ the loss of flight, and on the other by 

 the overlapping of the adjacent wing coverts. This latter con- 

 dition in the condor does awav with the need for cohesiveness, 

 which is such a necessity in the barbs of the more distal [)ortion 

 of the feather, where tluv are cx])osed to the impact of the air. 



The body feathers of ilu' l-~meu and ("assowary are alike in 

 being long and tajjcring. narrow-vanrd and with an aftrrsliaft. 

 nearly as large as the rhachis of llu' main fc-allur. A t\pical 

 bodv feather of an l-'nu-u presents several ])oints of interest. A 

 feather that is twelve inclus in length has the proximal half of 

 the barbs denselv covered with soft, down-like barbules. which 

 are destitute of barbicels. Throughout the distal half of thr 

 featlier. barbules are absent and the barbs are broad, llat and 

 horny. The texture of scales is re(U'\cloprd while yv{ \hv feailur 

 form is retained. This portion of the feather brings to mind the 

 much divided leaflets of certain of the acacias. Xo reason has 



