1875.] DR. 0. FINSCH ON THE SPECIES OF CHRYS@NA. 557 
9. Notes on the Fruit-pigeons of the Genus Chrysena. 
By Orto Finscu, C.M.Z.S. 
[Received September 1, 1875.] 
In looking over the last number of the Society’s ‘ Proceedings’ 
(January 1875), my attention was struck by a notice of Mr. Layard, 
P. Z.S. 1875, p.30, relating to some birds of the Viti Islands, in which 
he says :— 
** By the way, Professor von Suhm and I, after going carefully into 
the subject, came to the conclusion that the ‘ Orange Dove’ of Taviuni 
and Lanthala (Chrysena victor, Gould) is a phase of plumage of the 
‘Green Dove’ (Chr. luteovirens).” 
I regret that Mr. Layard did not tell us more particularly by 
what facts he became convinced of the identity of these species, as I, 
being well acquainted with them, do not understand how they can 
be considered to be phases of one and the same species. I have ex- 
amined a good series of specimens of Chrysena luteovirens collected 
by Dr. Graffe at Viti Levu and Ovalau, and have seen all the changes 
of plumage from the uniform green dress of the first year (the so- 
called Pt. felicia, Hombr.) to the full-grown stage of the yellow 
plumage. This latter is, no doubt, that of the very old bird, which 
is likewise distinguished by a peculiarity in the structure of the 
feathers not to be found in any other member of the genus Péilo- 
nopus. The small feathers, with exception of those of the head in 
Chrysceena luteovirens, are remarkable for their narrowed cylindrical 
form, reminding one in some respects of those in Xipholena. But 
this structure is not to be found in Chrysena victor at all; so that 
if one were to take the structure of the feathers solely as a distin- 
guishing generic character of Chrysena, C. victor could not be placed 
in the genus. But, as I have shown already (P. Z.S. 1873, p. 733, 
foot-note), the genus Chryscna differs from Ptilonopus chiefly in 
having no shortened and narrowly pointed first quill. In this charac- 
ter, as well as in the shortness of the wing, C. victor agrees very exactly 
with C. luteovirens; so that of their generic relationship there can 
be no doubt. But C. victor does not possess the peculiar feather- 
structure of C. luteovirens. Instead of the cylindrical structure of 
C. luteovirens, the feathers of C. victor are remarkable for the length 
and laxity of their rhaches, which resemble those of the Parrot-genus 
Coryllis (Loriculus), so that the upper tail-coverts project a little over 
the tail-feathers. Nowif C. luteovirens were only a phase of plumage 
of C. victor, this could be only in relation to age, and consequently 
C. luteovirens would have to be regarded as the younger bird. But 
the structure of its feathers shows a peculiarity which can only be 
attained in the fully adult bird; and there cannot be the slightest 
doubt that C. luteovirens would never lose this extraordinary cha- 
racter of feathers and again assume a structure of feathers which 
comes nearer to that of the young state. I need hardly remark that 
the coloration in the two species is totally different, being in C. Zu- 
teovirens, in mature state, dark yellow, and in C. victor deep orange- 
