1882.] DR. W. BLASIUS ON BIRDS FROM CERAM. 707 



fication of these allied species, on account of the great resemblance 

 in tlie markings between M.griseosticta and M. sibirica, which at first 

 occurred to nie, is unlikely, I conclude from the greater length of 

 the bill of the first species in comparison with the last, at least from 

 the comparison of the measurements taken on the specimens before 

 me and those noted by Sharpe. 



Mr. E. F. von Homeyer, too, has had the kindness to compare the 

 specimen in question with his skins of Muscicapa sibirica, and states 

 that M. griseosticta essentially differs from M. sibirica not only 

 in the larger, more elongated bill, which is narrower at its base, but 

 in its wings, which are longer by some millimetres. With this state- 

 ment coincides (with the exception of those of Salvadori, especially 

 with respect to the length of bill of M. griseosticta) the following 

 table of measurements, in which I have reduced the English inches 

 into centimetres: — 



Long. tot. Al. Caud. Culm. Tarsi, 

 cm. cm. em. cm. cm. 



M. griseosticta {^h&T-^e) 13-5 8-3 5-3 1-27 1-27 



(c?,Ceram, Platen). . 12-0 8-5 5-0 1-2 1-25 



(Salvadori) 14-0 8-2 5-3 0-9 1-4 



M. sibirica (Sharpe) 12-5 8-0 5-6 1-02 127 



„ ( cJ, Baikal, Mus.Brunsw.) 12-6 8-1 5 8 1.1 1-3 



It is surprising that Salvadori, evidently by mistake, should give the 

 length of bill of M. griseosticta as only 0'9 cm. (the culmen must 

 be meant), shorter than even the least of those of the culmen of 

 31. sibirica, while Sharpe has even placed the two species, on ac- 

 count of the different shape of the bills, in two different genera 

 {Muscicapa and Hemichelidori). 



Furthermore, it was particularly striking to me to find that the 

 character which Schrenck and Radde, who both have observed 

 great numbers of M. sibirica in Siberia together with the similarly 

 coloured M. latirostris, RafH. (31. ci?wreo-alba, Temra. & Schl.), have 

 remarked as of greatest importance for M. sibirica, in contrast to the 

 last-named species, viz. that the first (spurious) quill has about a 

 line less of length than the upper wing-coverts, is found very clearly 

 marked in the M. griseosticta from Ceram lying before me ; while 

 the species of the genus Muscicapa under which Sharpe has placed M. 

 griseosticta (at least the European kinds M. grisola, M. atricapilla, 

 M. collaris, and M. parva) which I have examined possess a first 

 quill which is much broader and sometimes considerably longer than 

 the upper wing-coverts. 



I have nowhere found recorded any remarks showing how the 

 first quill of the M. griseosticta ought to stand in this respect ; 

 and I owe to a kind communication of Mr. Henry Seebohm (who 

 himself, however, does not possess a specimen of M. griseosticta) the 

 statement that in this species generally the first quill is smaller than 

 the upper wing-coverts. I am almost led to beheve that on account 

 of this similarity of the first wing-feather, M. griseosticta should be 

 classified in the same genus with M. sibirica notwithstanding the 

 different shape of the bill. 



The specimen is in the Brunswick Museum. 



