18.S4.] ON THE ANATOMY OF SCOPUS UMBRETTA. 543 



3. A Contribution to the Anatomy of Scojnis umbretta. 

 By F. E, Beddard, M.A., F.Z.S.^ Prosector to the Society. 



[Eeceiyed November 5, 1884.] 



The dissection of two specimens of Scopus umhretta has enabled 

 me to bring a few notes upon its anatomy before the Society. One 

 of these individuals lived in the Society's Gardens from 1880 to 

 1884, the other was sent to the late Mr. W. A. Forbes from Africa. 

 Both were partially dissected by Mr. Forbes ; and in preparing the 

 following account I have had the advantage of consulting a few MS. 

 notes left by him. 



As but little is known about the structure of Scopus, its exact 

 systematic position is still a matter of doubt ; the facts that are 

 known (and these are confined to the pterylosis and structure of the 

 skeleton) appear to be on the whole in favour of placing Scopus 

 among the Ciconiidse, as has been done by Mr. Sclater in the most 

 recent edition of the ' List of Animals.' 



The arrangement of the feather-tracts in Scopus is described in 

 some detail by Nitzsch, who has pointed out that the powder-down 

 patches distinctive of the true Herons are absent from Scopus ^: in 

 this and in other pterylographical characters Scopus comes nearer 

 to the Storks than to the Herons. 



Our knowledge of the osteology of Scopus is at present entirely 

 due to Prof. Parker, who has described its shonlder-girdle in his 

 'Monograph on the Shoulder-girdle and Sternum", Some scattered 

 remarks on the osteology of Scopus and the affinities which they 

 indicate are also to be found in a memoir by the same writer on Balce- 

 niceps rex ^. Prof. Parker is of opinion that Scopus is truly Cico- 

 niine, and is connected with the true Herons by way of Balceniceps 

 and Cancroma, the latter type being essentially Heron-like, while 

 Balceniceps has " the Heron characters in preponderance." 



It view of these facts, it is rather remarkable to find that Dr. 

 Hartlaub, in his work on the Birds of Madagascar, definitely includes 

 Scopus as a genus of the family Ardeidae, separating it therefore 

 entirely from the Storks ; nevertheless it appears to me that there 

 is in reality quite as much to be said in favour of the Ardeine as of 

 the Ciconiine affinities of the bird, from a studj^, that is to say, of 

 the muscles and viscera. 



With regard to the latter, the only published notes (so far as I 

 am aware) are to be found in Mr. Forbes's Report on the Tubinares 

 collected by H.M.S. ' Challenger '; in that memoir Mr. Forbes has 

 described the partly double condition of the pectoral muscle in 

 Scopus, which I have referred to below. 



Two plates illustrating the osteology of Scopus are to be found 

 in the last published part of the magnificent ' Histoire Naturelle 



1 Pterylographv (English Edition). Ed. Sclater : London, 1867, p. 130. 

 = Eay Soc. Publications (London, 1869), p. 16.5. 



^ Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. iv. p. 347 ct passim. See also Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. t. 

 p. 234. 



