﻿HuTTON. — Oil a Species o/* Megapodius. 165 



II. — ZOOLOGY. 



Art. XIX. — On Megapodius Pfitchardi, Gray. Megapodius Huttoni, Buller. 

 By Captain F. W. Hutton, F.G.S. 



[Read before the AucJcland Institute, Z\st July, 1871]. 



In the thii^d volume of the Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, p. 14, 

 Mr. Buller has described a bird in the Auckland Museum as Megapodius 

 Huttoni. This bird was presented to the Museum by Oapcain Rough, of 

 Nelson, who brought it from the island of Nuifo (not Nuipo), and gave me the 

 following information concerning it. 



]Sru.ifo is one of the Friendly Island group, and is under the Government 

 of Tonga ; it lies 100 miles west of Keppel's Island, and about 300 miles 

 south-west of the Navigator Islands. It consists of a ring of high land which 

 is the summit of a volcano, the interior crater of which is occupied by a lake 

 of brackish water, studded with two or three islands. It is on these islands 

 that the Megapode, called Malau (not Malan) by the natives, lives. 



At the breeding season the bird scratches a hole in the ground, in which it 

 lays several (about six) eggs, and then covers them up with earth. The young 

 bird comes out of the egg fully fledged and able to fly. 



The specimen now under notice was brought to the Museiim in spirits, but 

 was afterwards skinned and set up by order of the Council of the Auckland 

 Institute ; the body, however, is still preserved in spirits in the Museum. 



There can, I think, be little doubt but that Nuifo of Captain Rough is 

 identical with Niafu, or Niufii of Dr. Finsch ; and Mr. Buller, in his descrip- 

 tion of M. Huttoni, has omitted to mention that the tail feathers are whitish 

 at the base, and that a ring round the neck is almost bare of feathers. With 

 the exception of the tail, the general plumage of the bird corresponds exactly 

 with the descrijDtion of M. Pritchardi, as quoted by Mr. Buller, but no mention 

 is there made of the quill feathers. The bill and feet certainly do not quite 

 correspond, which may be owing to the Auckland Museum specimen having 

 been kept for some time in spirits, but I can see no difference between the two 

 sufficiently great to warrant the establishment of a new species, and think, 

 therefore, that this bird must be referred to M. Pritchardi, Gray. 



