Vor. II, Pr. IT] LOOMIS—A REVIEW OF THE TUBINARES 57 
It is yet to be demonstrated that strelata oliveri Mathews 
& Iredale,* based upon one specimen, is distinct from P. par- 
virostris. The assumed specific characters belong to a class 
that often proves to be inconstant when a series of speci- 
mens is examined. 
Pterodroma hasitata (Kuhl): CAPPED PETREL 
Cours—4# strelata hesitata, IV, 139, 170. 
SaLvin—Céstrelata hesitata, 398, 402. 
GopMan—Csirelata hesitata, xliv, 184, pl. 49. 
Pterodroma caribbza Carte: CARIBBEAN PETREL 
‘Cours—A [Estrelata] carribei, IV, 171, 159. 
Satvin—CEstrelata jamaicensis, 398, 403. 
GopMan—Cstrelata jamaicensis, xlvii, 187, pl. 50. 
As ornithologists have examined but few specimens of 
Pterodroma hasitata and Pterodroma caribbea, it remains to 
be absolutely determined whether the latter is, or is not, a 
dark phase of the former. Thorough search offshore in 
West Indian waters would likely be rewarded by a compre- 
hensive series of these birds, for it seems improbable that all 
their breeding places could have been invaded by imported 
enemies. 
Dr. Godman has clearly set forth the fact that under the 
rules of nomenclature Procellaria jamaicensis Bancroft is a 
nomen nudum.” 
Recently, Mr. G. K. Noble has revived Procellaria diabolica 
Lafresnaye® on the strength of certain discrepancies in size, 
in the shape of the nasal tubes, and in the dark cap occurring 
in nine specimens, which of late have been referred to Piero- 
droma hasitata (Kuhl). The meager series at Mr. Noble’s 
command does not justify this revival. Extensive series show 
that the range of variation is wide in Tubinarine species. For 
example, in a large series of Pterodroma pheopygia from the 
Se Seon 101s Geo tIGa i og 
2 Mon. Petrels, p. 188. 
3 Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., 1916, v. 60, pp. 370-374. 
