No. 5.] THE AUSTRAL AVIAN RECORD 95 



Range, mid- West Australia. 

 And read — 



EOPSALTRIA GRISEICAPILLA ROSING MathewS, 

 EOPSALTRIA GRISEICAPILLA GULARIS Quoy et 



Gaimard. 



pp. 187-188. There is some confusion in the genus 

 Myiagra through the description by Vieillot of Platy- 

 rhynchos ruficoUis and P. cyanoleucus. The former I 

 synonymised with Todus rubecula Latham, the latter 

 I had omitted as it was described from Timor. 

 Berlepsch, however (Abhandl. Senckenb. Naturfor. 

 Gesellsch. Bd., XXXIV., 1911), dealing with the Birds 

 of the Aru Islands, on p. 66, used Myiagra ruficoUis 

 Vieillot to replace M. latirostris Gould. 



I now find that Pucheran (loc. cit., p. 360) had written 

 " Le type provient de Peron et Lesueur ; il a ete egale- 

 ment decrit par M. Swainson sous le nom de Myiagra 

 latirostris, et nous ne pensons pas que I'espece, que 

 M. Gould a denommee de la meme fa9on que M. Swainson, 

 en soit differente." 



There can therefore be little hesitation in accepting 

 VieiUot's name, save the lack of a suitable type-locality. 

 P6ron et Lesueur did not caU at any place on the 

 Australian Continent where this bird now occurs. 



Of P.. cyanoleucus Pucheran wrote (loc. cit,, p. 358) : 

 " Nos types sont encore jeunes. . . . Je les rattache a 

 Myiagra nitida Gould." Pucheran's identification seems 

 to have been ignored up to the present time. 



P. ruficoUis was described from NouveUe Hollande, 

 but I see that Hellmayr includes it in his Birds of Timor 

 and accepts Timor as the type locality of VieiUot's 

 species. This is a reheving decision, but he has accepted 

 Gould's name for the Austrahan subspecies. Swainson's 

 name was given to a bird from no locahty and he quoted 

 the specimen in the Paris Museum. Pucheran's note 

 implies that Swainson described the Paris bird, and 

 that consequently M. latirostris Swainson is an absolute 

 synonym of P. ruficoUis VieiUot. 



