128 



it above mentioned ; and I have met with but few others since that period. One of these I 

 subsequently found in the Museum of Neuchatel, labelled '■'■ Lypornix rufa, Wagl.," and marked 

 as one of Tschudi's original specimens. And on referring to Tschudi's description in the ' Fauna 

 Peruana,' it is quite evident that the species described by Tschudi under that name was the 

 present bird, and not the Lypornix rufa of Wagler {i. e. our Malaco'ptila rufa), to which Tschudi 

 referred it. 



I also find by my notes that Malacoptila pyrrholcema, a name published by Bonaparte in 

 his ' Conspectus Volucrum Zygodactylorum ' in 1854, without any description, was based on an 

 example of the present species*. I believe that the specimen at the time I examined it was in 

 the possession of MM. Verreaux freres, the well-known Parisian dealers. 



The only other example of M. fulvigularis which I have met with is in the collection of 

 Messrs. Salvin and Godman, and forms the subject of the accompanying plate (Plate XLIl.). 

 It was obtained at Tilotilo, a group of ranches situated on a spur of the Bolivian Andes which 

 separates the Eio de la Paz and the Rio Coroico, two small upper confluents of the Beni, by 

 Mr. Clarence Buckley in 1876. 



As regards the colour of its upper surface, M. fulvigularis agrees with M. torquata and 

 M. fusca in having the head and upper back longitudinally striated by light shaft-stripes upon 

 a dark ground. But it is readily distinguishable from both these species by its fulvous throat, 

 which extends up to the mentum, and is in fact very distinct from every other member of the 

 genus, except the next following species, M. suhstriata. I shall point out the characters which 

 distinguish these two representative species in my next article. 



* Cf. Bonaparte, " Consp. Vol. Anisodactylorum " in ' Ateneo Italiano,' No. 11, August 1854. 



