168 bulletin: museum of comparative zoology. 



series than that at hand will probably show that birds from the 

 ditVerent ocean areas may be separated as subsptM?ies, but for the 

 present it is tiiought best to use the specific name for the birds in hand 

 without attempt at subdivision. Especially this is the case since no 

 Australian specimens are available for comparison. 



The question of the separation of the Sulidae into genera is one that 

 is subject to individual opinion more or less. There is no ([Uestion 

 that the three species of gannets form a well-characterized genus; 

 but that there are trenchant lines separating the smaller species known 

 as the boobies into groups that may be considered of generic rank, 

 seems at present uncertain. The differences indicated rather signify 

 only subgeneric differences. For the present it is proposed to ignore 

 them and to include all of the smaller Sulidae in Sula, pending further 

 study of available material that may throw light on the subject from 

 another angle. 



Recently Mathews (Birds of Australia, 1915, 4, pt. 3, p. 212) has 

 replaced Pelecanus piscator Linne, the name in common use for the 

 Red-footed booby, by Pelecanus sula Linne, on the grounds that 

 Pelccaiius piscator, as used by Linne, was a name based upon a com- 

 posite species, and that the form to which it properly belonged was 

 indeterminate. The original name, howcAer, must stand, as the fol- 

 lowing will show. 



The name Pelecanus piscator appears in the tenth edition (1758) of 

 Linne's Systema naturae on page 134. The description there is 

 meager, and, as ^Mathews has shown part of the references there given 

 are indeterminate, while a part belong properly to the bird knowm at 

 the present time as Sula leucogastra (Boddaert). This, however, 

 does not hold for all the citations noted. The first reference is, 

 literally transcribed, "Chin. Lagerstr. 8." Mr. ]Mathews cites this 

 but e\idently did not have the work available, and so was forced to 

 base his argument upon the second reference to "Osbeck iter, 85." 

 The paper cited as "Chin. Lagerstr." is an inaugural dissertation 

 entitled Chinensia Lagerstromiana by John L. Odhelius. From Dr. 

 C. W. Richmond it is learned that this was printed first, as a separate 

 publication of 36 pages, in 1754. Later in 1759 it was reprinted as 

 number 4 in a collection of inaugural dissertations known as the 

 Amoenitates academicae. A copy of this reprint is available and on 

 reference it is found that species number 8 is given as "Pelecanus 

 (piscator)." The pertinent portion of this reference is quoted here in 

 full, as the tract in question is rare and not to be found save in large 

 libraries: — 



